THE PROPOSED RAILWAY STATION SITE.

Wanganui Herald, Volume LIII, Issue 160737, 25 August 1920, Page 5

THE PROPOSED RAILWAY STATION SITE.

To the Editor. Sir, —Can anyone imagine a greater amount of balderdash than was talked at the meeting of representatives of local bodies on Friday evening last, and reported in Saturday’s “Herald?” A meeting of representatives of local bodies, a matter vitally urgent in the interests of the town, and nothing done! Not a step further forward! Now take a few of the things said at this meeting seriatim, and imagine how a Judge or a Magistrate or any man accustomed to looking at both sides of a question with a sense of right and justice, would view them. Mr BignelT, “Immediate relief ponld not be given by the Department on the foreshore.” Why in all conscience can it not? It only means deciding on the most suitable site for a' railway station and marshalling yards. “The Railway Department were of the opinion that neither the St. John’s site nor Aramoho were suitable.” Very well, find some site that is suitable. There must be one somewhere. “The Racecourse site was suggested as the most suitable, as it could be worked in conjunction with the wharf.” The recent public meeting, however, which was representative of a very large body of citizens, and which, I am convinced, expressed the views of the majority of the people, said it was not. 4nother site suggested has been Springvale, Tawhero, vacant Borcugh land the other side of London Street Extension cr thereabouts. Now what difference is there from a railway point of view between this site and the Racecourse site? It is only a few handled yards away, and yet to the citizens of Castiecliff, Gonville, and Wanganui, it means all the difference in the world, as it is not imposing a barrier ’ between them. Of course a public meeting “does not carry any mandate,” and it is absurd to say that “with the same amount of interest and help the station could be put on the top of Durie Hill.” Such a suggestion is a reflection upon the people, and it- only shows what a disgraceful thing the meeting of “representatives” was, in that it did not give a mandate and get on with the business in hand, instead of imposing unnecessary delays in the hope that the people will tire, and take the site elect of about three or four men with their minds already made up. For what reason, time will perhaps show. The town is most anxious the Harbour Board should get immediate relief, the business interests are suffering all the time, and it is not ' 1 difficult to imagine how the progress , of the town is being delayed, and 1 that is of concern to every resident . of the town, or should be. Are the advocates of the Racecourse site really honestly acting in the interests of the town, when they ardently advocate the taking of “only” the 15 acres of the Racecourse reserve? Would not that just be a beginning, notwithstanding what the General Manager of Railways says? Could not the 15 acres be equally well taken on the other side of London Street Extension and less injury and disfigurement done the town? Have they gone into this thoroughly, and if not will they do so? Then we will know that they are really trying to find a site for a station, etc., and to give the Harbour Board immediate relief, and that no ulterior motives stand in the way. Compensation to the Jockey Club, £50,000 for new wharves, destruction of our greatest open space, and disfigurement of our town would not come in, were the London Street Extension site decided upon. Why should it mean “half a mile additional cartage?” The goods line will still run to the wharf for shipping goods only. No sane man at this time wants to be a “destructive critic,” as Mr Bigthat”; but it is not quite fair for U:o Mayor and the chairman of the Herb our Board to say that nothing has been suggested in place of the Racecourse. The Government are evidently prepared to look at expenditure for the new station, etc. That is all immediately required. What we have to see to is that it now goes where it will fit in with the' wants of the future, and “the Government need not look at any expenditure in other directions at the present time.” Why this five years? Why cannot the site be decided on and the matter gone on with at once? We do not want our business done by Mr McVilly. a keen business man, jn the interests of the Railway Department, as against the best interests of the town and the adjoining country as a whole; and if that is the attitude of the General Manager of Puulways, then in the interests of the country he is not the man for the position, I agree with Mr Bassett; “If Wanganui stands firm they will get relief notwithstanding the pessimism of the chairman of the Harbour Board.” Why does the Borough Council burke Captain Holm’s and Mr Sigley’s proposals? Why do they not pass a resolution and give a lead? They, with the Harbour Board, are the most interested parties, and they are our chosen “representatives,” and there for that purpose. As the Mayor said; “The Racecourse site is not a municipal reserve,” but if Wanganui stands firm and the Mayor acts in its interests it soon should be. Only onetenth of the traffic may at the present time come via Jackson Street, but has the Mayor no prophetic vision? The same advantages as the 'Mayor pointed out can. he given. e£-

feet to by choosing a site the other side of London Street Extension, a few hundred yards further on. As for Mr Caiman’s suggestion to go ahead with new wharves at the present time, it is ridiculous. The station has to go sooner or later, why not now? It is only a question -of saying to the Railway; Department, “This is the chosen site of the people of Wanganui, this is the site that will give earliest possible relief at the waterfront, the site that will answer future requirements, will fit in with any deviations or alterations that may be later decided upon, and will place Wanganui on the main line eventually.”—l am, etc., AMICUS CERTDS.