The Star. THURSDAY, DECEMBER 6, 1923. SHRUBS, RESERVES AND PUBLIC RIGHTS.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 17216, 6 December 1923, Page 6

The Star. THURSDAY, DECEMBER 6, 1923. SHRUBS, RESERVES AND PUBLIC RIGHTS.

The letter in the “ Star ” yesterday in which- Mr R. R. Owen defended his proposals in regard to Helmore’s Road and the river bank reserve, complained that there were some “glaring inaccuracies ”, in previous articles and correspondence appearing in this journal. Mr Owen submitted his version of the facts, but substantially they were not in conflict with those which have been put forward in

our correspondence and editorial columns. We are aware that many people believed that a towpatli existed along the river bank, and that the public had been illegally excluded from its use. It is not established that there recently existed any legal reservation of a towpath or road above Rossall Street. Mr Owen contends that the Helmore family could have given the five per cent, reservation required under the Sub-divisions Act at the dead end of a blind street, instead of giving a most valuable river frontage. Seeing that the family has acted so generously, Mr Owen asks, why should the public play the part of a Shylock ? There is a good, deal of loose thinking in regard to reserves, and the processes under which they are secured are not generally understood. When a considerable subdivision is planned the Crown is entitled to demand that ■five per cent, of the land be reserved for public purposes, apart from the amount required for roads and road widening. It was in compliance with this demand that an area of two roods twenty-eight perches was set aside in the Milbrook sub-division. A scrutiny of the plan must reveal lo any intelligent person that the sub-division adopted was planned to secure the best results from the sale of the sections. If the interests of the public had been a guiding principle the reservation would have been made along the river bank on both sides of Helmore's Road. It should be clearly understood that the Crown is not obliged to accept any reservation which the owner may propose. The Commissioner must be satisfied that the public interest will be secured by the reservation. The position of the reserve now is that the Beautifying Association is a temporary trustee for the public. It is a Crown reserve, and may at any time ho used for public purposes. Fencing on it is illegal, and we believe that the fence erected is in direct contravention of the terms on which the reserve was entrusted to the association.