ISLAND BAY REST PARK

Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 12, 9 October 1919, Page 5

ISLAND BAY REST PARK

NO BUILDINGS WANTED THERE A DEPUTATION'S PROTEST A. deputation from the Island Bay Ratepayers' Association waited on the Reserves Committee (if tho City Council yesterday afternoon to strongly protest against the erection of any structure on the Rest Park r.t Island Bay, as suggested at the last meeting of the City Council. Mr. Vj. J. Colley said that the deputation was the advance guard of an indignation meeting that was to bo held in commotion with the proposed erection of a houso on the Rest I'ark. S-ome little time ago a delegation of the City Council had visited the bay, and had definitely promised that the park would not bo interfered with; now they learned through the Press of the intention of the council to place a house on thn park, and could scarcely conceive that the council intended to so back on its word. They thought it a deplorable thing that the council should act in such a manner, and before calling an indignation meeting had called on the committee to see what it had to say in defence. Counciller Frost (chairman): So we're on trial, are we? Sir. C. Odlin said that they did not want any houses b.iilt on the paA. There was eurely any amount of land at Island Bay to build houses upon— plenty of places that could be bought— hut to suggest that an old house should be put on their little Best Park 'had knocked them flat. Counoillor Frost cr-lled on his fellow councillors to. wilnesn that' he was surprised at tho report being brought down embodying that" intention, and it was through his efforts'- that it had been referred back to' the for reconsideration. The house was intended for the use of an ofiicinl who must veside at Island Bay. They could not ren* a place or build, and it intended that a coupln of rooms should be added to the old place to make it into a residence for tho man temporarily, and to be used by the custodian of the beach when such an official was appointed at a later date.

Mr. TVilloujrhby said that Wellington had the reputation of being the ii?licst and dirtiest citv in ?>'ew Zealand. (Murmurs of dissent.) /I'lint was what most peonle thought of Wellington. The chairman: I think we omrht to pive that a flat contradiction! (Laughter.) Continuing, Mr. Willon'liby said that, putting it another way, Wellington lacked beauty spots—attractions. Th» one possible assei it hod in that direction were i':s beaches. The council should, he thought, eo in for i>. policy of making it? benches attrpclive. nnd if gone about in tho proper spirit, 'he believed that the beaches could be rande revenueproducing. Il> did not wish that his remarks should anplv to Island Bay only, lmt to the whole of the,benches— they should all bo made as nttrnetive ns possible. He* would advocate the pur. ohasc of a good ilenl of property round the foreshore. What had been doi'o was only the thin end of tho wedge. Tie was not at all satisfifd with what the council had done—it , had not stone far enough with the purchase of land, and would renliep j| Inter on. They should ?et in whilst prices were still reasonable.

Councillor L. M'Konzio fijii'l the City Council hnd dnno all it possibly! could in speurinp the foreshore. Tiipy Im<| purchased Innd from ilis .Tosw. , ! Jlsbte nt Island Bay, had the rpereation ground as a foreshore in Evans Bnv. and had the whole of Day's Tinv. Tho council had done a very prrent deal in acquiring the foreshore, nnd that was its nnlicy. The Citv Solicitor Hit. John O'Shea) stated that the citv owned the foreshore from the Hctaitai Estate (near the Patent Slip) down to South TCilbirnio. had jurisdiction over the whoin of Mm foreshore if Lynll Bay (within the boundary), and with the exception of two small gnns, the foreshore <roins; west nfl far as Happy Valley. The chnivmnti.nron'ippi! t'mt Uip noiuf at stake would be carefully considered by the committee.