FIRE STATION SITE

Evening Post, Volume CXIV, Issue 97, 21 October 1932, Page 9

FIRE STATION SITE

MORE DISCUSSION

BUT LITTLE PROGRESS

DEFINITE TERMS WANTED

Tho fire station site question has now'become one of Wellington's hardiest perennials; it conies up month after month, year rfter year; it makes some growth and then the top is knocked off again. Some day it will bear good fruit, but there is no sign of that just yet. To-day tho Fire Board again discussed the City Council's reoffer of a site in the- angle of Jervois quay and Wakefield street, but made- no progress beyond deciding to ask for more- details of the council's offer, particularly as regards compensation for buildings erected when the 56 years 5 lease offered expires, a point not dealt with in the council's letter. Mr. S. S. Dean said he thought the council had not been altogether fair in. the negotiations; before the board could begin to consider the site it must have "a definite figure from the council. Councillor F. Meadowcroft: At a price to be arranged. That would not do, said Mr. Dean. The board wanted a £ s. d. statement so that it. could compare the terms with those for other sites available. The chairman, Mr. N. W. Nelson, said ho did not think the Minister would give permission for tho erection of a lire station on tho site proposed unless compensation would be granted in the event of the lease not being renewed. The council would 'not be likely to resume the property, said Councillor Meadowcroi't; a renewal would probably be griiiiteil. . * The board could not possibly commit itself to the erection of a station without a definite undertaking, said the chairman. In tho ensuing discussion members generally were of tho opinion that little progress could be expected, for the council would simply conio back with the offer already made. Replying to Mr. Meadowcroft, Mr. Marcus Marks said that no doubt the board could hold on where it was, but it could not build. . s The Chairman: The council has made up its mind, and that is the end of it, but we have to consider the question of a new building, and the sooner wo do it tho better. THE COUNCIL'S OFFER. There was further discussion as to what tho council's offer really meant. Tho letter was read aud the chief conditions stated: a 56 years' lease at £2200 per year. Tliere- was no mention of compensation for buildings at the end 'of the term. Mr. Dean: We could get a bigger site within a couple of hundred yards or so at one-third that annual rental, and we must consider that. The- discussion returned to the advisability of building on a 56 years' lease basis, the chairman suggesting that tho council should be asked to say definitely whether compensation would bo paid in respect of buildings on. the expiry of the lease, or whether a renewal would be guaranteed. KENTAL MUCH TOO HIGH. "In my opinion," said Mr. Marks, referring to tho council's suggestion as to the fixing of the site value, " £2200 X)er annum represents a very much higher valuation-than would bo arrived at by the Government and City Valuers. It is an enormous rental." Mr, Nelson: At 5 per cent, it represents a valuation of £44,000. Councillor Meadowcroft: Is it worth £44,000? ■ ' ' ' Mr. Marks: No, most indubitably no. Councillor Meadowcroft: If the council meant to give us compensation, then compensation would have been mentioned in the letter; it is not. Finally it was decided to ask the council for a definite reply upon the compensation and lease renewal aspects.