HIGH STREET WIDENING.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LIX, Issue 18131, 1 July 1922, Page 12

HIGH STREET WIDENING.

Sir,—l have read the report of the Works Committee of the City Council and the special valuation report of Messrs. Vaile and Sons. Have the members of the Works Committee handled this matter in a businesslike manner? Because £3750 was asked for the 12ft 6in. of 25ft. front age, there is no reason why this sum should be paid. I submit that a reasonable offer should have been made to the owners oi the property, and if they had refused it then the council had the right to take the land under the Publio Works Act. Now for the special report of Messrs. Vafle and Sons. It is quite beyond my comprehension how a firm could submit such an absurd valuation. For the benefit of your readers I will give the actual amount of compensation already paid for the purchase of 73ft. by 6ft. in front of the Auckland Safe Deposit' Buildings. The first purchase of 50ft. cost the council £1500. For the remaining 23fU by 6im, £600, making a total of £2100. To widen High Street from Shortland Street to Vulcan Lauo ■would necessitate the purchase of about 200 ft. of frontage. Now, on the basis of the last transaction the council should pay something like £6000. To this might bo added special compensation in regard to the hotel property, perhaps another £4000 would be a reasonable amount to suggest, making a total of £10,000, as against Messrs. Vaile and Sons' excessive estimate of £35,000 to £40,000. Why Messrs. Vaile and Sons should go out ot their way to express their opinion, that the money might be spent much better for the general benefit of v the is too extraordinary for comment. Their knowledge of the congestion that occurs daily in this street must be very limited, otherwise they would never have made such a statement. Regarding the suggestion that the property owners should give a portion of their property to the council, I think that this is a very unfair attitude to take up. How many owners of piroperry would agree to this? When works of a progressive nature are required for the convenience of the public, I maintain that the council should bear a fair share of the expense of acquiring the land, and by so doing they receive a greater revenue in i rates. In one case I can quote, the rates before improvements amounted to about £50 per annum, but fine© the improvements are now nearly £600 per annum. Although no legal document was prepared at the time of the iirst purchase of the land for widening purposes in High Street it was understood by myself and many others that the street would be -widened as occasion offered from Shortland Street to Chancery Street. I sincerely trust that in the interest of all concerned a fair and equitable arrangement will bo made at il'Jbe meeting convened by the Mayor, Abthtjb Clbavk.