TARANAKI STREET

Evening Post, Volume CV, Issue 17, 21 January 1928, Page 15

TARANAKI STREET

... .-: » —H —.. .: . Referring, to .-.a; recent statement made by the Mayor in-regard; to, the widening -of. jTaranaki street, the chairman of the Vigilance Colntnittee (Calotte! T. W. MDonald), in a letter to' !'The Post,"' states that no ratepayer, to. whom he has spoken hag agreed withthe Mayor and council that the position is' "mdfct satisfactory..". At the. time the report was made the cost to the ratepayers amounted to £34;308, and there were several other claims to-be, settled. The; writer maintains that a lamentable absence of policy, a lack of; system, and a decided want of vision have been disclosed. In March, 1927, the council decided to widen lower Taranaki street to a width, of 100 feet, whereas it had some months previously issued a permit to build a steel-framed building on part of the land to be taken. The trustees of the said property specially inquired whether-the council intended taking any of the land, and the council decided to take only a small piece to round off the Manners street corner; Either the council then had no policy of street widening, or was negligent in not taking the land before permitting the building to go on. ■He then points out that instead*- pi considering the financial position before deciding upon a width of 100 feet, the council took' the land required by proclamation, and then found that the cost of the full widening would be so great as not to'be justified. The Mayor, the writer continues, had stated that the widening of the full 100 feet would have a detrimental effect upon the street insomuch-as only paltry buildings could be erected on the area* Why then was the land taken if it was to produce such a detrimental effect? How did the Mayor lit that statement' in- with the council's action in setting.back the. building line at the corner of Wakefield street and Taranaki: street to 100' feet? The Mayor suggested, the writer states, that if in future widening to 100. feet was necessary it could be - carried out without losing: betterment and destroying a business at present. Colonel M'Donald considers that this will be repeating the former, blunder. He had been given to understand the council was giving to the Levy trustees as part of the settlement all the additional land fronting Taranaki street between the present; ; Levy estate and Luke^s lane. .If {hat; was so; when the taking occurred in .the'future the council would have :to take' not;.only the full Taranaki street frontage 'of' the Levy estate, but the addition.of some 30 feet, with the building which would be put on it as well. ... ■The ratepayer had no say in the matter for under the provisions of an Empowering Act the council could.raise money for such purposes without a poll. Under that Act £150,000 had been raised 'within the last few months. , For the expenditure in Jaranaki street the ratepayers, continues the writer, would receive a botched piece of work, the "widest part of the street further widened, but with one building projecting about 16 feet beyond the remainder of the widened portion, while the narrow portion of the street remained untouched. The only possible use which the council could find for some of the costly land was that of a parking-place for motor-cars.