CORRESPONDENCE.
TO CORRESPONDENTS. Subscriber.—Please sec article on Christmas puddings, published in another column. A SUMNER RESERVE. TO THE EOJTOK. Sir.—A few chains south of the Trainway Bridge at Sumner there is a block of vacant laud fronting on (he Esplanade and Grafton Street. It has occurred to me that now is an opportune time to secure this piece of ground as a reserve for the use of the public. If it were laid cut'as a garden, with seats and a. shelter or two, it would prove a . great been both to visitors and residents. Besides this, it would ad 4 to tho beauty and attractiveness of tho placo, and in years to come, when our population increases and the holiday crowds get larger tenfold, the advantage of such a spot would he incalculable. There is hardly need for me to refer to precedent for such action. Everywhere now it lias como to bo recognised that outlay of this nature is in every way beneficial and worth while. One has only to mention Caroline Bay Timaru, as an instance in point. Just now other calls are so insistent that it may seem out of place to advocate this, hut later tho present opportunity may he gone. All Christchurch, ancl indeed (the whole of North Canterbury, aro interested in this proposal, so that the financial burden would ho light. Ido not know whether the local Borough Council or the Beautifying Association should take the matter in hand. Perhaps it is best to put the suggestion before the wholo of the public through your widelv read columns.—l am, e'e, ‘ S UMNER R ATE PAYER. TUT CITY COUNCIL’S HOARDING FEES. TO THE EDITOR. Sir.—l notice at the last meeting of tho City Council tho By-laws Committee presented their report in answer to tho deputation of architects and buildders, who protested against the imposition of hoarding fees, as per new bylaw. First, let me explain the Builders' Association’s reasons for protesting. It is a well-known fact that during recent years the cost of budding has increase© very considerably, and we consider this must to some extent retard the building progress. Why. thou, should the council, whose interest it is lo encourage building operations, add further burdens to the costs of building ? Every new building that is erected means extra revenue to tho council, in general rates, water rates and electric power and lighting charges. The extra fees do not affect the builder, only as it may further retard building operations. As a matter of course the builder will include them in his estimate of the cost of building. Now, sir, to deal with the committee’s report. The Auckland City Council charges 5s per calendar month, no matter wliat the area granted, a deposit being made as surety for making good anv damage to the corporation, s property. Dunedin charges os per calendar month for Oft wide, with an extra 2s per foot for every extra foot in width. Christchurch charges Id jcr foot super for the whole area enclosed.
The committee gives a comparison as between Dunedin and Christchurch as follows:—2oft by 10ft in Christchurch at Id .per foot, 16s 8d per calendar month, while in Dunedin it would ho £1 13s. Flow they make the Dunediii charges £1 13s is beyond my comprehension, as I make it as follows: 6ft wide at ss, plus 4ft at 2s per foot, Ss. totals 13s per calendar month. Now, sir, let us extend this to a reasonable length, instead of 2Qfl, and :ee how it works out. £ s. d.
Dunedin, 100 ft by lOrt at* 13s per calendar month, for a contract that takes, say, nine months to build, total cost • • o 1/ 0 Christchurch, 100 ft by 10ft . ut Id per foot super, £4 3s -Id por calendar month, say nine months building . • • . 3i 10 0 Take the street frontage of the Dominion Buildings, 350 ft, in Dunedin, the charges would be for twelve months . • < lo d In Christchurch for twelve months . • • • l<o 0 0 1" mav sav, besides those fees, the builder has "to make a deposit as a guarantee that any damage to the council’s property will be mado good. I think these particulars will convince the public (if not tho By-laws Committee) that, the architects land builders are quite justified in protesting against this now imposition. I am, etc., JOHN H. MAYN ARD, Secretary, Builders and Contractors’ Association of Canterbury. Christchurch, September 20. TRAMWAY EMPLOYEES AND BELGIAN RELIEF. TO THE EDITOR. Sir,—“ The Director of the American Commission reports an alarming increase of tuberculosis, particularly among Belgian children, because or their lessened power of resistance owing to inadequate diet. There is great mortality among children.” —(Cable m “ Lyttelton Times ” of to-day.) “The tramway employees refuse to contribute to tho Belgian Fund as a protest against tho high cost of liviug.” —(A recent report in daily papers.) Now, sir, placing on one side the sickening humbug of this latter state-
ment hv public servants in good and safe billets, would the public not expect their (Common humanity to rise above the paltry subterfuges of their loaders? Ido not believe the great majority of the men agree with the decision to stand out (alone among ihc many large number of employees who have been approached), and I should think after reading of flic pitiful plight of the children of those who risked everything for humanity that the womankind of the tramway men. thinking of their own little ones, wo aid take a hand in the matter and induce tho men to ignore their so-called lcc.ders.-I am, etc., September 20.
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/LT19160921.2.28
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Lyttelton Times, Volume CXVII, Issue 17279, 21 September 1916, Page 5
Word count
Tapeke kupu
934CORRESPONDENCE. Lyttelton Times, Volume CXVII, Issue 17279, 21 September 1916, Page 5
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
See our copyright guide for information on how you may use this title.