Latimer Sq. plan 'illegal’

Press, 16 April 1981, Page 6

Latimer Sq. plan 'illegal’

Hearing objections to a realignment of Madras Street was a waste of time because the proposal was illegal, a Christchurch City Council district planning scheme hearings panel was told yesterday. Mr G. H. Gould, for the Christchurch club, said the realignment would encroach upon Latimer Square and would be illegal under the Christchurch City Reserves (Empowering) Act, 1971. Under, the proposal, Madras Street would be realigned to form a crescent through the north-eastern and southeastern corners of Latimer Square. At the moment the street runs rourid the square and cars must turn four sharp corners before continuing on the straight one-way system. The proposed realignment was intended to smooth traffic flow and accommodate future traffic numbers.

Yesterday was the final day on which objections to the proposal could be heard by the hearings panel, which began hearing objections last Tuesday. The procedure of hearing objections was “a nullity,” said Mr Gould, because the proposal could not yet be incorporated in the district scheme for Christchurch City. “It is contrary to the 1971 (Christchurch City Reserve) Act and cannot be incorporated in your district scheme until that act is amended,” said Mr Gould.

An objection lodged by the Canterbury regional committee of the Historic Places Trust backed up Mr Gould’s assertion. Latimer and Cranmer Squares had been singled out by the act as pieces of land reserved for certain purposes, said Mr Deryk Morse, on behalf of the trust.

Section 7 of the act says that Cranmer Square and Latimer Square were vested in the city corporation “as reserves for the use of the inhabitants .■ . .for the purpose of lawns, ornamental gardens, and ornamental buildings.”: In response to those objections, the chairman of the panel, Cr G. Stone, said he was aware that the proposal was illegal under the act, but the council had wanted to start a public debate over the issue before it approached Parliament for an amendment to the act.

The City Planner (Mr W. T. Williams) said the proposal was included in the district scheme to serve as a basis for public discussion.“I think you should have approached Parliament first and that is what we demand,” said Mr Morse. Mr Robert Lamb, Dr Steven Eldred-Grigg, and Mr Jon-

athan Mane were called as witnesses by the trust in its objection. They said Latimer Square was a historic place, and its) present character would be destroyed by using one-third of it for roading purposes. A total of 511 objections were lodged with the panel; 19 were heard at the hearing, and the rest were tabled.