SUNSHINE

Evening Star, Issue 15293, 19 September 1913, Page 3

SUNSHINE

AND THE PORTOBELLO ROAD BOARD.

' The Portobello Road Board, at a special meeting yesterday afternoon, at winch there were present Messrs J. M. Dickson (chairman), W. B. Taverner. N. Allan. J. H. Seaton, S. Hmkley, and J. Bacon, discussed a previous resolution embodying the board’s objection to the proposed separation from the Portobello Road Board district of that portion of the township of Sunshine at present controlled by the board. Tho separated portion is proposed to be included in the municipality of St. Kilda. The road board’s objection to the proposal was that the amount of rates lost to the hoard, if Sunshine were transferred, wai not sufficiently proportionate to tho extent of those public roads, for the upkeep of which tho board arc responsible, which would also be passed over to St. Kilda under the transfer.

Tho Chairman explained that the board had at their previous meeting upheld his objection to the transfer to St. Kilda of the township of Sunshine until such time as tho matter had been considered by tho board. Sine® that meeting further information had come to hand, and Air A. H. Tonkinson was present on behalf of the committee of electors of Taimii-and Sunshine, who had in hand tho movement to transfer Sunshine from its present control to that of the borough of St. Kilda, and he would fully explain the position to members of the hoard. After hearing Mr Tonkinson the members would then consider what further action, if any, they would take in the matter.

.Mr Tonkinson then proceeded to explain the position with tiro aid of a plan of the area, in question. The objection lodged by tho Portobello Road Board wan unexpected, and he thought that the objection would he withdrawn when members of the board were made better acquainted with the position. Two other objections had been lodged —ono by St. Kilda and the other by tho Drainage Board. The, Drainage Boards objection rested on technical considerations, and it was in respect to their technical objections in relation to drainage that St. Kilda, which vvas otherwise sympathetic, objected. Mr Tonkinson had written a letter on the subject, but it did not roach the road board in time to be considered at their last meeting. Referring to the plan, Mr Tonkinson pointed out that the proposed boundary line started from the. Bay View Hotel, followed the Portobello Road' Board boundary as far as the approach to the Anderson Bay bridge, then struck into the bay, and after going a short distance, went across the road and proceeded to join the St. Kilda boundary. The trouble was that Sunshine was not wholly situated in the Portobello Road Board district, and that the proposed boundary, which would admittedly improve the present arrangement, traversed portions of the Peninsula Road Board and Tomahawk Road Board districts, ns well as part of the Bay Town Board’s area of control. About 22 acres would be taken from the Portobello Road Board. It was not proposed to take over the Anderson Bay bridge, which should really be in charge, of the Public Works Department. A difficulty that would be solved by the proposed transfer of Sunshine was that the township was cut up into building sections, which were being rapidly taken up for residential buildmg purposes, and tho road board did not possess the statutory power to deal with tho drainage on the_scale required. Hence the desire to bring it under the municipal control of St. Kilda. After reading the statutory provisions relating to transfers such as that proposed. Mr Tonkinson said that the matter was reaJlv one for the residents of the affected district to decide. The bulk of the Portobello Road Board district residents—of. those eoncerncd had signed the petition addnz tor inclusion in St. Kilda. If the Porto cello Load Board persisted in their obiecl}on;•.a Commission would be appointed by the Government; to inquire into the matter and hear objections. Mr Tonkinson could not see any valid reasons for the Portobcllo Load Board objecting. Neither the Kay Town Board, the Peninsula Road Board, nor the Tomahawk Road Board objected. He hoped it would not bo necessary to appoint a Commission \ll the roads within the area to lie transferred would be taken over. In conclusion, lie asked the road board to withdraw their objection, and he considered that was a reasonable request, in view of the number of ratepayers favorable to tho proposal.

The Chairman said that although the board could not deal extensively with drainage, they had nevertheless „ot found themselves circumscribed in the matter of dealing successfully with a number of larger townships than Sunshine. There was no evidence before the board that the ratepayers in question (the clerk said they numbered s°) desired to be taken over by St. Kilaa. He then read from a letter in which one ot those ratepayers protested against the proposed transfer, as the benefits alleged to be realisable thereby were not evident Personally he (the chairman) would not be averse if a fair proportion ot the roads were also transferred, and if the ratepayers concerned signified their desire for inclusion in St. Kilda. The board, however, had also to consider the position of the whole of the ratepayers of the district, for although the proposed transfer only meant a loss of £6O in rates to the board, even that sum was not a negligible amount. The ratepayers who objected to transfer could senu a counterpetition to the board.

After a considerable amount of further discussion. .Mr Hinldey moved, Mr Taverner seconded, and it was resolved—" That in the event of the majority of the ratepayers concerned signifying their willingness to bo transferred to St. Kilda, the board withdraw their objection.” Further consideration of the matter was then adjourned until the next monthly meeting of the board, in order that the Sunshine ratepayers might meanwhile submit tc the board their withes in respect