PETONE BOROUGH COUNCIL

Dominion, Volume 22, Issue 54, 27 November 1928, Page 12

PETONE BOROUGH COUNCIL

POLLUTION OF FORESHORE. - The fortnightly meeting of the Petona Borough Council was held last ’ night, the Mayor (Mr. D. McKenzie) presiding. The council took objection to the wording of a letter received from the Petone Woollen Mills in connection with-:the pollution of the. foreshore. The council had written to various business firms asking that the foreshore be kept clean, one of the firms being the Petone Woollen Mills, which in reply stated that it'was in no way responsible for the pollution of the foreshore. “In the first place,” stated the letter, ‘‘we do not admit that -our-works- discharge deleterious matter into the. bar; bout. We have screens at all drains, and any waste'is'caught by them. _ We are in sympathy-with the council in its desire to keep the beach clean for bathers and we wish to assure it that nothing of an offensive kind leaves the mill. We do not think the council is wise in attempting to handicap us iu the competitive struggle by putting us to heavy expenses, as have been suggested, to .correct a more or less imaginary complaint. Councillors were 'of the opinion that the wording of the letter was objectionable. After discussion it was decided to hold the matter over until replies were received from all firms Concerned.. The Rast-End Cricket Club wrote, asking the council if it could reconsider the fee of £3 35., fixed for the use of the pitch. After discussion, it was decided to reduce the fee by one guinea. . : A petition was forwarded to the council from residents of Graham Street, ob< jecting to the number of dwellings on one section in that thoroughfare. The petition, bearing four signatures, stated that there were two dwellings and two garages' on the section, and that the owner had recently converted one of the garages into another dwelling. It was. thought, that this had. a detrimental, effect on the neighbouring properties. •; The sanitary inspector (Mr. W. Gough), stated that the owner of the section had permits, for twft dwellings and two garages. That being so, he would not be allowed to convert - one of the garages into a dwelling. Proceedings would- be taken against him for infringing the borough by-law.. . -