THE NEW RAILWAY STATION SITE.

Evening Star, Issue 11454, 23 January 1901, Page 8

THE NEW RAILWAY STATION SITE.

* g THE MINISTER AND THE CITY | COUNCIL. I A deputation from the City Council waited j upon the Hon. J, G. Ward, Minister of Rail- j ways, at the Grand Hotel yesterday after- j rnnn with reference to the new railway st.v j t i'>n site, but more particularly the question I «l (be providing of a level crossing at the j foot of St. Andrew street. There werelj present—The Mayor (Mr R. Chisholm) and| C'rs Crust, Scott, Muir, Carroll, Denniston.S Park, Howlison, and Christie. Messrs J.II A. Millar and J. F. Arnold, M-H.R.s, andH Messrs Gaw (traffic manager) and M'Lean« (district railway, engineer) were also present.*! The Mayor explained that the object f-fjj the deputation was to finally decide, if pos-fj sible, the matter of the site for the new|j railway station. The Hon. Minister's tele-g gram regarding the attitude that would havej to be adopted if the Council persisted inK stipulating for a level crossing at St. Andrews street had been published, and they were» present as a deputation to talk over thcK matter. On receipt of Mr Ward's firstE definite wire intimating that the Stuart!! street site bad been adopted, the City Coun-K cil passed a resolution expressing gratifica-tt tion at the Minister's determination to pro-K ceed with the erection of the new stations on that site, and their willingness to co-S operate and give every assistance. Subse-p quently the Council made to tho Minister by resolution and then 'iy|f deputation that a level crossing should beK made over tho railway at the foot of £t.i Andrew street. Afterwards, on being depu-I tat ionised by a few residents in the northffi end of the town, the Council passed a reso-| lotion endorsing the previous one referring!! to the crossing. Those resolutions wereß doubtless what had warranted Mr Ward in| forwarding the telegram published on Mon-| day. Ho (Mr Chisbolm) was not there ic| speak for the Council; the councillors wereS present, and would speak for His own opinion was that if the departments say. as they practically do, after careful! consideration, that it is impossible to have| a crossing at St. Andrew street, then asf mayor he unhesitatingly said that the Coun-1 cil ousrht to afford the Government every!' facility for going on with the station on| the site settled on.—(Chorus of Councillors J " Hear, hear.") Every member of the| Council would have been pleased iff the. Government saw their way to make! a level crossing at St. Andrew street, but| "i view of the department's assurance that! that was impossible they as a CouncilE outjht to accept the position, and co-operate"? with the Government in having the railway! station erected, and that as quickly as pos-R siVe.—(Hear, hear.) k Cr Carroll agreed with what the mayor| had said, and stated further that the Minis-f ter would understand that when was brought to bear upon them by residents*; in the north end of the town, to whom al> crossing at St. Andrew street would be a| convenience, the Council must pay someg deference to their wishes. The Council! from the first had never intended any ob-if Rtruction. B Cr Scott said he was just as strongly in»| favor of having the railway station at Stuart| street as any member of the Council, and!? he had opposed the station being placedpj at St. Andrew street; but all the same bet • bought it was a serious matter for the CityE if no opening to the foreshore was made atg St. Andrew street. The business people* not only in the north end and about St.l Andrew street, but also those up in the| centre of the town and along towards Rat-i tray street, would be affected. Not onlyj that, but in time to come, with the progress? made by the Harbor Board, it would be a| serious matter to have the whole of thel? foreshore blocked up between Hanover andfi Rattray streets. He admitted that there* were objections to the opening of St. An-£ drew street, hut he cnu!d not see where there* were any serious ones. r Mr Ward said that he would just like tog recall what the position was previous to thef last, resolution of the Council. When he| last met the representatives of the Council! here that very point had been fully dis-ft cussed. He showed them from the plans that* it would be impossible to have a crossings at St. Andrew street, and suggested that the! Government should provide a road at a cost! of £5,000 from Hanover street down to|. Stuart street, to take the place of St. An-| drew street, and thus give an outlet to the! wharves. If it could possibly be done, hep would have readily given effect to their re-| quest. If councillors would look at thef plan they would see that there were five,sets! of rails across the particular street where! they wanted a level crossing. If they at-M trmpted to put a level crossing there one off two things would happen: Either the rail-| way traffic would have frequently to bel suspended, or the vehicular traffic would! often have to he stopped entirely. If hel were weak enough to do what they asked itjf would seriously disorganise the traffic, and* it was no use attempting to carry out a bigg work such as the one before them and to? make the error of trying to have a workable! crossing over five lines of rails. There was* only one way to get across, and that was byl an overbridge. This would ruin the adja-l cent property and the. streets on either sidel of it, as well as being a very unworkable busi-| ncss altogether. He had no feeling on thef matter, and if it were possible to give theml the facilities they wanted no one would bel more ready to do so than Be would be. Itf was to meet the difficulty that he suggested! that the Government should provide* a toad at a cost of £3,000. It would be as delusion to the people as well as to council-2 lors to tell them that even if the department! were to consent to put a level crossing ati St. Andrew street that they could use it.R Almost every half-hour the wliolo traffics would he stopped, and they would be at wart with the Railway Department and the Go-g vernment. The resolution received from§ the Council made it impossible to go on withi the station until the matter was settled.S The Government recognised that it was the! business of the Council to conserve the inte-M rests of citizens as far as the streets wereg concerned, and ii they were fixed in the! opinion that they must have a level crossing* at St. Andrew street, then the department* could not put the new station at Stuartf street. It was not a matter of choice; itfj was a matter of necessity. The Govern-K ruent would require to go further north inp order to get additional accommodation, andjf it must, be remembered that they had tof provide for the requirements of the nextl fifteen or twenty years. Any obstacles! must be removed before the work bcgan,| and everything was ready to go ahead. § Cr Scott pointed out that the making ofl the new street by the Government would bel no saving to tho Council, inasmuch as other-! wise it would have to be made by the Har-1 bor Board before the Council could take its over. I Cr Christie asked if what the Hon. Mrj Ward had said about the sidings and points! at St. Andrew street would have applied! .with equal force to Stuart street if the! station had been erected at St. Andrew! street. I The Hon. Mr Ward said that there would!

Knot have been a level crossing at Stuart streetJgT Kin any case, and bS M Mr M'Lean said that if the station' hadaj Sheen at St. Andrew street the sidings atgjj iStuart street would have had to be minimised*! Hto a large extent. W m Cr Christie said that for the sake of gain-|j Hing a few hundred yards they were putting® Sthe department to a much greater expensed Sthan if the station was to bo placed at St.|| SAndrew street. He thought that the inletsgj |jto the wharves ought to be carefully con-Si sjjsidered, and not shut up half a mile of tbe|| »most important part of tho foreshore. fe* m The Mayor said that ho did not intend tog ||discuss the merits of the two sites, bccanse§| ifjthat was not the proper place. If the mere& were submitted to tho Council there|| w|wouM_be a substantial majority in favor|| |!of tho Stuart street site.—(Hear, hear.) Kefe Bjwanted to disabuse the mind of tho Son the point, if the remarks of Cr Christies whad led him to think that the Council had|| Sjany leanings toward the St. Andrew street;| j&site. As far as tho foreshore was concerned,|| [jgthere was more sentiment than anything else** ain what had been said, and to talk aboutjsji jjathere being no access to the foreshore wasp'' Sdowuright nonsense. The City extended?™ gfrom Anderson Bay to the Water of Leith,|n Wand the bulk of the traffic to the wharves was&H |jin the south end of the town. There was anjjj |j!>verbridge there, and it was used about oncegd ma day. His Worship characterised the pleaM jafor " access to the wharves " from the north|J Send as merely raising factious opposition tafiA iSthc station. [;; | Cr Muir said that if the Council had had n$ gjdefmite and explicit statement by tho Min-Kj pster regarding the impossibility of having M |:cross:ng at St. Andrew street he believed QieM isresolution would not have been carried. \A m Cr Denniston thought, that the Mhad now made it abundantly clear that sM at St. Andrew street was not|f and therefore, so far as the Council's|| was concerned, they must givefrj |jway. He agreed with what the mayor and§| pothers said : that there was an overwhelrmngjpj of public opinion in favor of pi |£the Stuart street site, and he hoped that tke|| Upublic would s-ee that it was for the good ofgi* jsjthe City that the promise of a new stat:on|)l jj&should be carried out, and that the handsomef/| which had been designed should be|i jjsjerected as soon as possible. M |jj Before the deputation withdrew, f% m Tho Mayor asked if they were to under-R$ ||stand that if the Council saw their way toffil •Jrescind the resolution asking for a levelgf at St. Andrew street then the matter&j M would proceed without delay. ' M || The Hon. Mr Ward : Yes, certainly. ||