STREET-WIDENING

Dominion, Volume 21, Issue 302, 21 September 1928, Page 3

STREET-WIDENING

THE NEWTOWN SCHEME WORKS COMMITTEE DEFENDED STATEMENT BY COUNCILLOR J. BURNS The action of the City Council in calling a halt in connection with the street deviation and widening plan at Rintoul and Luxford Streets and Adelaide Road is evidently not by any means the last word on The e col-respondence which had appeared in retard to the proposals for the widening of Rintoul Street and Adelaide Road, with a deviation via Wa n P°n and Luxford Streets, said Councillor J. Ruins vesterday, rather conveyed a wron ß im pression to the public, and, t 0 f reflected upon the chairman of the woras Councillor H D. Bennett who he thought had been rather harshly treat ed bv certain councillors, perhaps unwit tingly “I can only say,” he continued, “that I have sat under Councillor Bennett since he was appointed chairman of the committee four years ago, and I certainly have seen no evidence ot intimi dation, as stated by the Mayor. inc chairman of any committee is tbe mouthpiece of that committee, and in the cas If the Works Committee, is the channel through which the recommendations of the engineering and town planning staff are conveyed to the council. Ihe •ils for the deviation at Luxford Stieet came from the department in the usual way, and were subjected to critical exam ination at various stages, ihe recon mendations were Previously before the Tramways Committee as well, and xiere there tentatively approved, subject to cost figures being supplied and cousideicd. Not a New Scheme. “The scheme,” continued Councillor Burns, “is not a new widening proposal at •ill It is a modification of a scheme previously approved by the council, and that scheme was to cost more than the later one when completed, and witho t the deviation at that. Tins aspect of the subject has not been brought out suffici ently to my mind. In other uoids, it means that the present ProPo^ ls ’. eluding the deviation from M ar qion to Luxford Street and from Luxford street to Britomart Street, would be less costly than the proposal that was agreed to by the council earlier.” Actually a Saving. The widening of Lnxford Street, continued Councillor Burns, had been provided for under the loan of 11L0, a PProx‘mutely £<>ooo being available, most or which could go towards the new scheme. It was rather peculiar that the proposal to widen Rintoul Street and Adelaide Road had been adopted by the council without one councillor, or the Mayor, having recorded his vote against it, ami now the Mayor had “sounded a note of wailining” iind had advised the. council to “call a halt” when actually a saving was proposed. “The SO-foot widening scheme as adopted was to cost ibO.b'JO for the land alone. The new 00-foot proposal was to cost approximately the same sum—£6o,so4. to be exact—but this was Io include all the land and buddings iu the new deviation. If you add to

these .figures the cost of completion in each case, it must seem clear that the 80foot scheme would not be less costly than the 60-foot scheme. A Wrong Impression. “It is not correct or fair to allow an impression to go abroad that the proposals meant a new loan of £70,000 or £BO,OOO, as had been stated. The scheme would not have gone through the Works Committee had that been the ease. It was specifically reported in the last report from that committee, that ‘only the land for the portion of such deviation as lies between Luxford and Britomart Streets, and upon which there are practically no buildings, be acquired at present.’ The rest of the deviation from Waripori Street to Luxford Street, was to be carried out when expedient. That portion of land on which practically no buildings stand was estimated to cost £12,700, towards which the £6OOO of the Luxford Street authorisation unexpended would have been available. On the other portion the deviation would have been set out by setting out a new building line, a method of procedure which has proved sound and economical, as the history of the widening of Willis Street, for one, will prove. A Thing of the Past. “The matter of allowing officers to dictate the policy, as was in evidence some years ago, is to-day a thing of the past, as far as the Works Committee is concerned, at any rate. That committee has always developed the policy as set out by the council, but at all times has cheerfully received any suggestions from the engineering staff, as instanced in the case of this deviation. . When the matter was being discussed in committee the Mayor stated that the tramways manager considered that a parking place for curs could be provided at a lesser cost, but that report was never before the Works Committee, and the chairman, in my opinion, did the right thing, when that evidence was furnished, iu agreeing to take back the committee's recommendation for further consideration. I cannot agree with Councillor Hislop in forcing a division. It was an unprecedented action as fat as my experience of the council goes. It has always been a recognised thing that when the chairman of a committee asks leave to take a report back for further consideration such request is granted.” Idle Lands to be Sold. The Works Committee, and the chairman in particular, said Councillor Burns, were as anxious as any other councillors to keep expenditure upon street widening down. Two years ago, when similar works were being discussed, remark was made upon the great amount of council land lying idle and unproductive, and an officer was detailed to compile a property list. He believed that that list was now about complete, and the council would very soon have to deal with the question of disposing of some of those very valuable lands ns .an offset against street-widening expenditure. “As far as the Works Committee is concerned,” he concluded, “we are behind Councillor Bennett, and the members of the committee are men of the wrong calibre to follow a lead blindly, ns is suggested by the Mayor and by Councillor Aston, without thought or consideration in any suggestion made by the chairman. It is one of the most harmonious committees of the four on which 1 serve, ami, although at times there arc differences of opinion, we consider that Councillor H. D. Bennett makes a capable and sound chairman, m which councillors and citizens may place full confidence.”