LAND FOE RESERVES

Evening Post, Volume CVIII, Issue 27, 31 July 1924, Page 8

LAND FOE RESERVES

TAKEN ON SUBDIVISIONS

HARDSHIP OF S PER CENT. QUOTA

DEPUTATION TO MINISTER.

The enforcement of a provision in the Land Act for the taking of 5 per cent, of areas under sub-division for public reserves was the subject of a deputation to the Minister of Lands (Hon. A. D. M'Leod) this morning. The deputation consisted chiefly of representatives of public bodies in Christchurch.

The question at issue was briefly explained by Mr. D. J. Sullivan, M.P., in introducing the deputation, as being the provision in sub-division'that 5 per cent, should be set aside for public reserves. Mr. C. Hastings Bridge, representing the Dominion Institute of Surveyors, said that the land in question was both town and country land, and the provision for 5 per cent, contribution to reserves was felt to press very hard. It was never contemplated, he believed, that the reserves should be demanded in the wholesale way that had characterised present procedure. The provision came into the Act of 1892, but it was not until three or four years ago, when the present Surveyor-General was appointed, that reserves were asked for at all. The rule at present was that no area under 4 acres should be asked to furnish a reserve. The reserves should be of some real public utility, and the Institute had no objection to reserves being taken from large areas on sub-division. The area reserved should be of real benefit to the community. The speaker quoted instances of hardship on property owners on proposed sub-division and asked that a more reasonable interpretation should' be given. The Christchurch City Council was taking an extreme view of the present provf sions.

Mr. 11. J. Beswick, representing the Canterbury Law Society, said that the provision as to reserves was beinc enforced on quite small sub-divisions Tn an absurd way. These little areas were quite useless to local bodies, and spoilt subdivisions. Local bodies would prefer in most cases to get the value of the reserve in money in order to accumulate a sufficient fund to acquire a reserve of a respectable area. '

MONETARY CONTRIBUTIONS.

Mr. G. Witty, M.P., urged that the o per cent, should be levied in money in all cases of subdivision. Mr.J. M'Combs, M.P., supported the requests of the deputation for a 5 per cent, monetary contribution. The Department was to be congratulated on the steps.it had taken to enforce the law -Uie principle had a Dominion significance. He hoped the law would be altered only so far as to allow a monetary contribution in lieu of a contribution in land alone.

Mr. H. T. Armstrong, M.P., speakin" as. a member of the Chi-istchurch Cit? Council, said that that in no case had the council taken a reserve from a subdivision which was not of any community value. He would have no objection to the contribution of land being commuted into a sum of money, but there were cases where the community ought to have the land rather than the money JSo land had been confiscated that was not of public utility. MINISTER'S REPLY. The Minister, in reply, said that, no doubt, tho subdivision of land in country districts was hampered by adherence to the strict letter of the law. Anything that hampered reasonable subdivision was not good for the community. He would like to say that many public bodies were protesting against any interferenee_ with the law, but probably this was in ignorance of the suggestion of a 5 per cent, monetary contribution in lieu of land. If they could get a' better system whereby subdivision would be encouraged, he was quite sure that some of the pastoral land now in large areas would come into subdivision more quickly, and that was desirable. If anything were done during the present session, it should be done in a general town-plan-ning Bill. (Hear, hear.)