Reply on Bexley land

Press, 8 December 1978, Page 12

Reply on Bexley land

“While generally agreeing with your comments, 1 fe?l that there are two matters which should be clarified,” says Councillor Mollie Clark, chairman of the housing and property committee of the Christchurch City Council in reply to an editorial which appeared on December 6 about the Bexley development. “In Paragraph 3 you state that few potential users have shown interest in taking up industrial land at Bexley. In the initial stages of planning for the industrial development, there was considerable

interest from a number of industrial concerns which recognised the advantageous siting of the land in relation to its proximity to a potential labour force, loading access to public utilities and other industrial location factors. With the downturn in the economic situation experienced more recently, this interest has waned considerably and it is apparent that under the present economic climate there is little demand for the area. This could not, of course, have been anticipated by the Council lien the change of use from residential to industrial was contemplated. “In Paragraph 4 you state that the Council has resisted suggestion that land should

be leased rather than sold. This is not quite correct in that the matter has not yet been finally decided. It is possible that Stage 1 of the development, involving approximately 15 acres, will be sold with a view of the Council’s capital outlay. The leasing of sites in later stages may receive more favourable consideration to provide long-term investment income for the financing of other facilities. However, a final decision is unlikely to be made until the development can proceed. This does not preclude the possibility of leasehold sites being made available in Stage 1 if this is shown to be advantageous at the time,” she concludes.