The Station Site

Taranaki Central Press, Volume IV, Issue 381, 12 March 1937, Page 4

The Station Site

WHY IT SHOULD REMAIN.

EFFECT ON BUSINESS LIFE Further Views of Correspondents. (To the Editor.) Sir, —The thanks of Stratford residents are due to you for the excellent manner in which you have drawn the public’s attention to several important matters relating to the advancement of Stratford. From the remarks made by prominent citizens during the past few days, it is obvious that the Mayor’s statement that the residents of Stratford desire the removal of the railway passenger station to some position a mile or more from its present situation is incorrect and conveys the views of himself, Mr. J. B. Richards, and very few others. Mr. Richards’ reported statements, made at the last two meetings of the Stratford Chamber of Commerce, are, firstly, that “we must take the long view of this matter” and “we do not wish to make the business area any longer.” If the station is shifted to Warwick Road, would not the tendency be to make the business area extend towards it? Surely the long view suggests that all progressive towns and the large cities of the world desire the most modern facilities for bringing passengers to the centre of the business area.

Millions of pounds have been spent to provide overhead or underground railways to carry passengers and parcels to the business centres of the great cities of the world, and at the same time eliminate the railway crossings at ground level which were the ! cause of so many deaths. As stated in your recent leader, we have concrete evidence in Wellington of the long view in building the new passenger station as near as possible to the shopping centre the Railway ! Department having no doubt profited ( by the evidence of disastrous results i-in lower Queen Street, Auckland, when 1 the passenger station was shifted. I It is apparently left to our worthy I Mayor and Mr. Richards to champion j the suggestion that Stratford is so different from any other business I centre that it prefers to cause disas- | ter to our business interests and shift | the station from its present site. Surej ly these worthy citizens are not serious in their spoken views on this subject. Surely common sense dictates that the long view is that the rail-car will soon be here to increase passenger traffic to shopping centres; that electrification of railways will come in time and that the smoke nuisance to which Mr. Richards refers will be worse if the lines were lowered and the smoke belched from the funnels of the engines at street level, than it is to-day. I would suggest that most residents of Stratford are proud of the fact that

the town has progressed and that the facilities at the railway yards are insufficient to cope with the huge increase in railway traffic since the line to the Main Trunk was opened; but, as businesses have been built up near the Railway Station over a period of some 50 years, not one person who gives the question any reasonable consideration would allow these businesses to crash by supporting such an obviously-absurd proposal as the removal of the Railway Station to a site over a mile away. Might I suggest that it would be a simple matter to leave the station where it is, eliminate the Fenton Street crossing, extend the yards southwards, widen the bridge over the Patea river and provide a subway unI der the line on the north bank of the Patea River for all road traffic, and thus provide access from Broadway via Juliet Street to the school, factory, residences, etc., without inconvenience to anyone? This suggestion may mean the removal of the buildings between Fenton Street and the Patea River, but compensation for these and the land would surely amount to less than some of the prop’osals suggested by the Mayor and Mr. Richards. Although not so important, another factor would be the further improvement to Windsor Park by the making of a road on the northern side, giving easy access from Broadway; and we can visualise what a beauty-spot this area would then become. I ask all residents to visit Fenton Street and consider this proposal from all angles. I trust that, as president of the Cham- ' her of Commerce, representing the j business interests of this town. Mr. | Hale will take a firm stand, obtain the views of all business interests or, if necessary, call a meeting of business people and others who would be affected by the removal of the station. | and see that their views are conveyed 1 to the right quarter. Again thanking you for your interest in this matter. —I am etc., “THE LONGER VIEW.” ‘

HANDY AND ACCESSIBLE

I Tendency of Town Northward. (To the Editor). i Sir, — I have followed with interest the discussion in the Stratford Bor- . Council, and more recently tho j mention in the executive meeting of : the Stratford Chamber of Commerce, in regard to the question of the future location of the Stratford railway station. l a m fully aware that a number of well-intentioned people are of opinion that the plan formulated many years jago, but never carried into effect, the object of which was to shift the Stratford station to Warwick Road, should be gone on withnow. However, Sir, I think the Stratford authorities would be well advised to go more deeply into the matter before they make any move. There is no question that the general treno of the town it in a northerly direction; therefore, it seems particularly inappropriate to shift th station in tho I other direction from that in which I the town is growing. It must, be re I membered, too, that private railway 'companies in America and in Great j Britain have paid huge amounts to | secure properties and rights ot way i which will allow them to bring their 1 termini right to the centre 61 the populatlai. In New Zealand we see the same thing—Wellington’s new station is considerably closer to the city than its old one. In Auckland, wßere the station lias been shifted further out I the change of location has proved fb i be a most unpopular one. ten- ’ dency to-day isi to adopt every por-

! sible labour-saving devio?, and no i station could be handier to its to. •.i then 1 that of Stratford. J It is not the question of the amount of trade going into the town per medium of the railwayf, although that : is not inconsiderable—it is the quesI lion of handiness and accessibility I versus remoteness and in-ccessibiltty. i I feel sure, Sir. that if those interested will press the Railway D-apart- ■ ment for a compromise, it will be ' found that the department its'H is ! not wishful to hiavinr its station at ! Stratford, which, after all, is an imj portant junction, at a distance from ■the torn.—l anr, etc., I “LOOK BEFORE YOU LEAP.”