DAY'S BAY & CITY

Evening Post, Volume CXXXIX, Issue 31, 6 February 1945, Page 7

DAY'S BAY & CITY

AMALGAMATION MOVE

DEPUTATION TO COUNCIL

The case for amalgamation of Day's Bay with the City was stated by a deputation representing ratepayers of the Bay to the City Council yesterday afternoon, based upon the views, given at a public meeting and also in answer to a questionnaire, of the great majority of the ratepayers in favour of joining up. The ratepayers of the Bay recognise that amalgamation would mean an increase over the rates they now pay as property owners of Hutt County. The proposal is to be examined by officers of the City Council, and will later be discussed by the council.

The prepared statement of the views of Day's Bay ratepayers set out that the area is owned by 174 ratepayers, jof whom 100 reside at the Bay. Fiftyone had attended a meeting held last November, and after the proposed joining up with the city had been discussed a motion in favour of amalgamation was carried by 48 votes to three. After the meeting, a letter was sent to all ratepayers not present at the meeting asking them to indicate their wishes; of a total of 93 replies 90 were in favour of amalgamation. FOUR POINTS. "You will be aware," continued the statement, "that Williams Park, comprising 645 acres, completely surrounds the some 65 acres privately owned. It is desired to stress the following points:—l. It is highly desirable for the benefit of both the city and Day's Bay that the whole area should be administered by one authority. 2. The interests of residents and ratepayers lie much more with the city than any other body. 3. Most residents derive their living through their occupations in the city and desire to be part of it. 4. The City Council already controls the beach, and owns Williams Park, the bathing sheds, the pavilion, tennis courts, and putting green, which provide recreation facilities for thousands of Wellington citizens and also maintains the present inadequate water supply." The deputation asked the council to take the initiative and present the petition required by law to the proper authority. As signed requests had been made by a majority of the ratepayers it was contended that a poll was unnecessary. "The deputation realises that on joining the city there will be an increase in rates, and would like to feel I that there would be no undue delay in I installing water and drainage ser-! vices,"- the statement continued. "Fin- \ I ally, the deputation feels that Day's I Bay, probably the most naturally picturesque seaside area in New Zealand, is destined to become the principal health giving playground for a still greater Wellington." Replying to questions from councillors, Mr. W. T. Richards said that apart from the main highway, the--e were three and a half miles of bitumenised roadway, of which 50 per cent, were kerbed and channelled. At present the bay depended upon individual septic tanks and burial for the disposal of sewage. A water and sewerage scheme, estimated to cost £11,000, had been approved by the ratepayers, Public Works, and also by the City Council, but no work had been done because of war conditions, and no money had been raised. There were no loans and no debts. DAY'S BAY AND EASTBOURNE. Questioned about the advisability of joining with Eastbourne, Mr. Richards said that they were hopeful that at no very distant time, the whole of the eastern harbour would become part of Wellington City. They had not approached Eastbourne in the present instance, but had concerned themselves with their own area. Apart from the, particular consideration of water and1 drainage, the residents considered that il would be in the interests of the community generally if smaller local bodies were amalgamated with the larger, and particularly so in the case of Day's Bay and the city, whose associations were already very close. York and Lowry Bays were not included in the present proposal.

Councillor Macalister asked whether they would be prepared to have Day's Bay made a special rating area to provide for rates and drainage services. Mr. Richards said that had not been considered. They were really now a special rating area of the Hutt County, but they thought it would be a wrong principle for a great city to introduce special rating in certain districts; they realised that if they were to join the city they would pay higher rates for city services. They were a settled area in the area of a county council whose interests were rural, not city, interests. "

Councillor Fraser remarked that the security for the water and drainage loan would be the rateable value of private property in the Bay. The Mayor (Mr. Appleton) said that in effect that would be the position, but the additional rates which properly owners would pay would more than meet interest on the loan.

"Why had not Day's Bay joined in the scheme which supplied Eastbourne with water, running through mains past their front doors?" asked Councillor Fraser.

There had been long discussion upon that point, said Mr. Richards. It had been found that a supply for Day's Bay would have required- a larger main and the cost would have been prohibitive; they could not come to an agreement with Eastbourne upon cost. Councillor Gilmer asked whether, in view of the benefits received by Day's Bay in the use of buses and ferries, overtures should not have been made to Eastbourne. No, replied Mr. Richards, and, in fact, they were not very satisfied about the bus transport. They thought that Eastbourne should take the long view and take steps also to join in with the city. The Mayor assured the deputation that the proposals would be given full consideration. »