ASSESSMENT COURT.

Southland Times, Issue 16746, 27 May 1911, Page 2

ASSESSMENT COURT.

FRIDAY, MAY 26. (Before Mr G. Crulckshank, S.M., and Messrs J. Stead and J. E. Hannah.) The Court opened at 9.30 a.m. Mr Thos. Lyons O.swin and Mr Varcoe represented the Valuation Department. At the commencement Mr Oswln commented On the fact that, although there were 3909 assessments on the roll the total number of objections was only 47 made by 27 owners, less than one and a quarter per cent. This was a smaller percentage than had ever been the case before. It might also be mentioned, he said, that no objector was supported by the evidence of his neighbours, and that no more than one objector was to be found in the same block. B. A. Ekensteen objected to the valuation of £220 placed on a section in Deveron street, upon which he had paid £4O for filling up. The £4O spent by Mr Ekensteen was added to the Improved value, and the unimproved value reduced by that amount. B. A. Ekensteen objected to the capital valuation of £3O5 —£175 unimproved and £l3O improved —■ on part of section 11. block 79. town of Invercargill. The Court passed reduction offered by the Department, viz., £175 unimproved, and £l2O improved. The Court sustained the offer of the Department to reduce the unimproved value to £4380, and the improved to £3350 In the case of section 20, part section 21. block 9 (Smith and Lalng's) to which Mr B. A. Ekensteen also objected. The same objector took exception to the valuation of part section 14, block 3 (H. and J. Smith's) without tfvall. The Department's valuation of £2250 unimproved, and £3SOQ Improved was sustaln-

cd, but £SOO was placed in the lessee's name with regard to the improved value. The Court sustained the Department s valuation in respect of section 4, block 10, Don street, of £l7O unimproved and £SOO improved, to which B. A. Ekensteen objected. Sarah Hatch objected to £2OO unimproved and £5 improved, section 20, block 17. —Valuation sustained. Esther Harper objected to both unimproved £515 and improved £39n with regard to sections 2 to 6, block 7. Enwood, area 2'i acres. —The unimproved value was reduced by £2O and the improved value sustained by consent of the objector. , After lunch the following objections were heard:— T. Patteson, section 9, block 62. Unimproved, £290; Improved, £530. Valuation sustained. 1. U. Petrie, lot 6, block 1. Strathearn, unimproved. £95. —Valuation sustained. 1, L. Petrie, sections 2 and 3, block 11. —Valuation sustained. T. L. Petrie. lots 2 and 3, of section 22, block 19, EtU-ick street.. £l6O unimproved value. —Reduced to £l2O. I, L. Petrie, sections S and 9, block 19. Annan street. £220 valuation. Reduced to £2OO. i I. U. Petrie, section 9, block 17, Annan‘street (Corporation leasehold), valuation £lls. ■ — Sustained. I. U. Potrle, section 11. block 20. corner of Crinan and Llddol streets (Corporation lease), valuation £l7O. To stand at Department's offered reduction I. 1,. Petrie, section 7, block 21.—Department’s valuation of £135 on unimproved value sustained. I. L. Petrie, section 1, block 23, Earn street and Clyde street corner, valuation £2lO. Department’s offer of £lB5 sustained. I. L. Petrie, sections 21 and 22. block 23. Biggar street, valuation on unimproved vakte £llO and £l3O respectively.— Valuation sustained. I, L. Petrie, lot 1, sections 19 and 20, block 23, Biggar street. —Reduced from £IOO to £9O on unimproved value. I. L. Petrie, parts sections 14. 15. 16, block 41. Teviot street, All valuations sustained. I. L. Petrie, part 13 and 14, block 31, capital valuation £415. Valuation sustained.