REBUILDING I OF HOTEL

Press, Volume XCVI, Issue 28451, 4 December 1957, Page 10

REBUILDING I OF HOTEL

Plea For Review Of Requisition A review of the requisition for the rebuilding of McKendry si i hotel was sought before the 1 , Licensing Control Commission at a sitting in Christchurch. Plans : for building alterations of £lO,OOO ' and refurnishing and plumbing of J £1750 were submitted. The Com- j mission reserved its decision. [ The Commission was:—Mr A. M. i' Goulding, S.M. ‘chairman>. Major- i J General W. G. Gentry and Mr F. ; 'J. Kelly. Mr J. G Leggat ap- ! peared for the trustees of the ■ ’ estate of James McKendry and I the licensee, and Inspector J C. | Fletcher lor the police. Events subsequent to the Com-1 mission's issue of an order for ; renewal of the hotel were a matter of some embarrassment to relate • said Mr Leggat. It was decided [ that the affairs of the estate! should • be looked into somewhat i closely. It was quite clear that from the death of Mr C. A .' Stringer, a lawyer, and a ftustee. i' the widow, who had a life tenancy ‘ anl was also a trustee, nad no i concern in the estate or its prin-|' cipal asset, the hotel. It was made ~ clear that rhe estate should not; be continued as in the past. The ' result was rhar. after a lot off) difficulty, the otner trustee had lagreed to resign unreservedly. • Upon his resignation. The way t would be open for the replace-; 1 jment of trustees by a new •rustee I a company being willing to under- | take the trust. “It would be quite beyond the natural capacity of the estate tn undertake the rebuilding of the hotel in the manner in which the Commission has directed." said Mr Leggat. ‘lf the scheme were to be undertaken, it would mean I • the sale of the hotel and. burdened 'as it is with this substantial re(quisition, one can envisage a sale at a substantial discount or loss. lAs the estate cannot face rebuild |ing in the city, so it cannot face . rebuilding in a suburb m where transfer of the licence might be sought.’ Alternative Plan By the expenditure of £11.750 the hotel. Mi- Leggat submitted I ■could be brought tn » »*ondition • where it would be not only ar- . ceptable to the Commission, but ■ Ibe capable nf economic manage;ment for rhe benefit of the life ' • tenant and rhe performance of irs i .useful function. | The hotel bad a bed occupancy irate of 12 a night and was fully • booked out for Christmas and the i [following three months, said Mr ; i Leggat. It was looking after the [house side of The hotel business t The Government valuation of the [hotel was £39.000 and £50,000, was the limit of the assets of the . estate. Mortgage? to breweries totalled £15,000. •The Commission may have < been impressed unfavourably , that between 1951 and 1957 there ba~ been no material change, which I have to admit,” said Mr Leggat. The trusfess and the ; licensee were asking for the Com- ■ mission’s indulgence. The ad- t ministration of the affairs of the ‘ estate had left a good deal to be , desired. The blame for that did > not attach to the widow. The owners and the licensee had done their best in rhe latest proposal tn see that the plans complied not onlv with he spirit but the j letter of the Coffnmission’s require- | ments