QUKKN-STREET BUILDINGS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLVII, Issue 14531, 19 November 1910, Page 8

QUKKN-STREET BUILDINGS.

ALLEGED ENCROACHMENT^.?I A TOPIC OP INTEREST, -.'Si *f|j The statement regarding the alleged -J '*£ croachment of buildings in Queen-sW M for a considerable distance bevond th» V ',i street line, which was made at the H .ng ot .h. citv <*„»« on I night, created a great, deal of disraaji ' . m commercial circles yesterday. ThTtT S nounceraent, which was news to mn«fa M people, including many of those occupy '''I* ing buildings, which it is alleged are eL % crouching on the street, was reUTwitt M a great deal of surprise, and much specula- it tion as to the outcome of the situation M was indulged in. • °* The Mayor (Mr. L. J. Bagnall) on bo-' ' 1 ing eeen on the subject, said the reported ' M encroachment, was the outcome 'of SI ffil standard survey of the citv riu i~j lately been ' carried sif jg. Langmuir, Government surveyor for th»' purpose of accurately and definitely mining the street alignments. When it ! ?' was shown by Mr. Land's report that S the buildings m question encroached npoa : 1 the street as stated, the matter was J lerred to the city solicitor (Mr T Cot- ' *'»j to). The latter advised that the Council V'l should proceed to obtain evidence („ th® : |1 purpose of clearly defining the proper line rl in such a way as to satisfy the Court, and that when that was done, the Council : should enforce its right to the portion of the street encroached upon. Thig was the matter that was now engaging. ti, a attention of the Works Committee.. ."If the Council obtain evidence to subtarn the surveyor's report, will the owners of the buildings be required to set them v back to the correct line?" the Mayor was asked. ...

"The Council hag not considered that question yet/; replied the Mayor, "but ' I should certainly say that in the case of the erection of new and expensive buildings, the owners would be required to set - them back to the proper line Then if i jwe compel one man to thus set back his ' building, say to the extent of Bft— ; [ the case of Mr. Sraeeton for insU»uce—it - I would be very unfair that adjoining build' I ings should be permitted to remain on I the present line. My feeling is that all buildings should be treated alike," •. . . I Mr. H. M. Smeeton, who was seen in - regard to his firm's proposed new build- f&S ing. said he knew nothing of the matter ''-J beyond what liad appeared in yesterday ' M morning's Herald. He considered, how- ; '-1 ever, that it would be a great detriment " ,~ : J to his firm's business if they were cam- 1 pelled to set back the building Bft • and ' J if other buildings were allowed to*w>n>m . Ipl in their present position. Moreover, he pointed out, it was not intended to erect ' '"M a new building on the street, as th? pre- '" j sent aide walls and a portion of the front } v-Sj wall were being retained in new pre-r "•'H mises. He also pointed out that r when t£(i: H present building was built, eight or, nil)* i J years ago, it was erected under a permit 'v;| granted by the City Council. It waa not \ proposed, however, to commence worker f| the front portion of the new premises astj | the new year, and he anticipated • iff matter would be settled in the interval/!. % A prominent solicitor, who was aski|S. '« for his opinion 011 the subject, said it wasin£| .impossible to say now what the upshot of * : -?I the discovery will be. The whole f hinged cpon the making of an accurate : | survey, and an infallible surveyor; wm Jb; "'I hard to find as an infallible lawyer. fS|f> | survey now quoted was the "standi" | survey, but he questioned . whether-w® s*j fact that the Government and the City i Council recognised that survey as "staa-;.;v dard," constituted it a final appeaL i seemed an impossibility,, with tit?'iniro- p|g 'duction of the personal . element | | mechanical errors, to make a survey ' could be accepted as absolutely right,, thought, perhaps, a properly authorised i ; board might fix boundaries that v.6nld be p satisfactory. The position 5 that womd:- ; arise after the boundary of the road V .y<, fixed would be that certain persons might '-1 be found occupying land that was part of I". 1 a highway. In his opinion, land, once »', ] highway, was always a highway, and"any-: "V , one who built upon it did so at hu risk. Hie owners of such properties would, therefore, have no claim for, com- ||gl|s pensation, and if the .Council ordered them to get off the road they would havelv/; / to do so, whether they liked it or noy|,being simply trespassers. '' There is an assurance fim3 to recoup pens© those who, on account of the reqtik|jl|r';s fication of mistakes in : surveying, compelled to give up parts of land held ;h£ under land transfer titles. The sqliciw,| iffe who was interviewed, stated it as his opin- Jjjlgfe ion that those who held land under efteh titles in Queen-street would - receive no l|||| benefit from that fund. " Their title was for land fronting upon Queeh-fitrest, ana rg|p| if the buildings were set back to the' line ||||| of Queen-street they would net be los. •. jfe in"* anv of the land fronting on Qoeen^ street- * The portion they wrongly oocn- ggg pied was not, lie considered, -covered by their title at all. . -" : 'lIP The Waitemata Hotel property, which is affected to the greatest extent by the . alleged encroachment, is owned by w«« ,||| Dilwcrth trust. . - •