NEW STREET PLANNED

Bay of Plenty Beacon, Volume 11, Issue 40, 13 June 1947, Page 4

NEW STREET PLANNED

COUNCIL’S APPROVAL WILL PAY QUARTER OF COST Agreement has been reached in the proposal to share the estimated cost of £ISOO of constructing a new street in the Borough of Whakatane from Stewart Street near the Hospital to Bi-idge Street. The Borough Council on Monday gave formal approval to an agreement made by its representatives who recently met members of the Hospital Board and Mr Thomas, of the Housing Department. The Borough Council and the Hospital Board, under this proposal, are each to pay a quarter share of the cost of constructing ten chains of completed road, footpaths, water channels, water supply, etc. This amounts to £375 for each local body. The Housing Department has agreed to pay half-share of the cost, namely £750. When he met representatives of the council and board Mr Thomas had stated that the Housing Department had intended to run a cul-de-sac from Stewart Street, • and so overcome the necessity of constructing the Hospital Road extension. He explained however, that he had persuaded his department that in the interests of the Hospital Board and the Borough Council, it would he desirable to run the Hospital Road eventually through to Bridge Street. His department had consented to this suggestion providing some assistance in the cost of construction was given by the Hospital Board and the Borough Council.

The estimated cost of fourteen chains was submitted by the Borough Foreman-Engineer at £2160. The distance from Stewart Street to the rear boundary of the Hospital Board was ten chains, and the estimated cost of the construction for ten chains was £ISOO.

BENEFIT TO HOSPITAL BOARD TO CONTRIBUTE The Hospital Board at its meeting yesterday confirmed the agreement made by its representatives and expressed its willingness to contribute to the cost of this new portion of the street, with the exception of the cost of the water reticulation. This arrangement is subject to the formal approval of the Health Department. The chairman, Mr J. Mullins, explained this was an unusual expenditure, but he had-been convinced that it would be to the ultimate benefit of the board. It was a reasonable request to the board from the council and the Housing Department. There was, however, the question of whether the board should contribute to the cost of water re-, ticulation seeing that it had its own water system. The'board had always had trouble about keeping its private road in repair. Mr A. Mitchell spoke in favour of agreeing to share the cost of the road.

Mr H. C. McCready said he objected to the scheme on account of the cost, which was £12,000 a mile. He would vote against it because of the cost.

The chairman replied that the estimate submitted by the Borough foreman was a lower figure than the Housing Department’s own. Mr L. Buddie favoured the proposal. The board was making this road its main entrance. If the board did not take advantage of getting the road legalised it would have to bear all maintenance costs in future. The value of the board’s property would be increased. The new road would be of the same standard as that adopted in all State Housing areas. He thought the road drainage system would take all storm water from the board’s property. Mr C. A. Suckling said that taking the long view it would be cheaper to contribute now rather than decline, in which case the road might not be built. It might be wise to reply that the water main would be of no benefit and to decline liability for that part of the cost. Mr J. Caulfield supported the proposal, saying he thought it would cost as much to maintain the present road. It was important to get rid of storm water from the road. Motorists visiting the hospital had cause to complain about the rough state of the entrance road. On the motion of Messrs. Suckling and McGougan the report of the works committee recommending the proposal was adopted with an amendment decining to share in the cost of water reticulation for the new street. Mr McCready asked that his vote be recorded against the proposal to contribute to the cost of the road. He remarked that it was a matter of principle.