THE TOWN HALL SITE.

Press, Volume LVI, Issue 16856, 9 June 1920, Page 7

THE TOWN HALL SITE.

to the EDiTon of "tils press.'' Sir, —I notice in tlio report in your issue of thismorning that Cr. FlJsher states the City Council would have to pay from £'55.u00 for the site, and that the site would really cn>t £7-j,OOO. 1 do not know where Cr. Fleshcr obtained his sum of £o.j,GQO, but- I do know that_ the valuation which tlie Council obtained from its valuer in connexion with this nuvtter was nothing in the region of £60,C00. As, however, that valuation was shown to mo confidentially, I am not at libtrtv, oven if it wero desirable, to disclose the figures lof such valuation. It may not bo : known to the public that the GovernI incnt valuation of the lard in question j is only £23.010 capital value, and £S(i2<3 I unimproved value. Allowing for the , valuation being somewhat j low, it is difficult to see how it could ; jump no from £!23,GC0 to £00, COO. I This question, however, lias not to be j looked at merely from the point of J view of £s. d. The question is: Do we ; reouiro a Town Hail, and, if so, arc we fmiTlrr "fr* »si-» £ i A ',±-**.o

going to have one worthy of the city? i . There are a number of people in the I pity who apparent'}- have no confidence | in its future. This spirit, I am afraid, j has been instrumental in keening back the city. We have not that public spirit which is such a distinguishing ! feature so far as Auckland is concerni ed, and so long as we are actuated by timidity and a complete lack of con- ( lidence in the city's future, so long will j .that public spirit bo absent. If the stirring up of the people in connexion] , with this matter of the erection of a. I Town Hall only served to inculcate a j I greater civic pnde and n stronger pnblio spirit, these alrne would be well worth the cost of a Town Hill.—Yours, etc., IT. HOLLAND, President Canterbury Progress League. Junc Bth. TO THE EDITOR 05" 'TIE THESS." Sir, —I see by this day's "Press'' that a deputation from the Christcliurch Progress League waited on the City Council to support the proposal to purchase the block of land on Cambridge terrace fronting Victoria square. As j a large ratepayer, I think tho Council I will be very badly advised if they have ! anything to do with this block, and incur a debt of £50,000 to £60,000, when there is already land owned by the Council equally suitable. Would the Government, in view of the fact that houses are badly required for the peo-

pie, grant the 00-uneil permission to build a Town Hall? It is scarcelv likely ; indeed, it is to bo hoped not. In | view of present prices for building, it j would nob.be a fair business proposi-j tion to ask the ratepanyers to raise • money for this purpose at this time. In j spite of what the deputation may have said, I should be glad to know who are tho ratepayers who are so anxious to be rated to erect a building which to-day would cost double the price it would have cost at any time during the past fifty years. The present price of building is abnormal, and while I am anxious to see this city with a good and suitable building for a Town Hall, yet I thiink that as we have waited so' long we can well wait for normal times. Then, again, the Council have the Canterbury Hall site, for the interest and j sinking fund of which they have justo j struck a rate; further, they have to j take a poll of the ratepayers to obtain I the money for a building to aecommo- | date the office staff, Mayor's room, hall, I etc., on this site. I consider that be-! fore the Council have finished with this, j a sum approximately £40,0C0 will bo; involved. I think the Council would | be wise to get the money for the new j offices before they upset' the minds of j tho ratepayers with new proposals, as it might cause tho borrowing for the j now building to be thrown out. The; Council will bo unwise in theso matters i to rely too much on the votes of largo ratepayers, as the small ratepayers are in the majority, and are not at the present time looking for an increase in their rates. —Yours, etc., RATEPAYER. June Bth.

TO TTTit EDITOR OF "TTTE PRKS.S." Sir, —This controversy is still unsettled so far as any official pronouncement goes, and I am not desirous of reopening it, or trying to, in view of the j extreme value of newspaper space just j now, supposing you were willing to ■ grant it, but the question is so important that a permanent decision is desirable as noon as possible. I would like to give the result of a fully- • | matured opinion after a 20 years' con-! I tinued residence within, the city. In the first place, the City Hall being the most important official building, is entitled to the very best and most central site available, and the msst convenient for the greatest number. There aro other considerations, such as openness of space all round it, aspect, and freedom from undue noise. I would hero point out that the north side of the river in Victoria square fails to stand this test regarding the first four of ( those essentials. It is not the best and | most control, and therefore the most j convenient: it lacks the openness of; space to the north; it has the wrong aspect (facing south instead of north); j and only in its freedom from noise does: it succeed in meeting requirements, I though on a quiet night at a concert it is possible the trams along Colombo j • and Victoria streets will be found to j be quite near enough to be pleasant— j that is, a shade too near. Well, Sir, I under these circumstances, I am going r to propose a site which is absolutely the | only possible place for such a building. ! Search where one may, tho city has I only one worthy site, and I hope there : | will be no hysterics when I pronounce this site to bo none other than the south half of Latimer square. The building would not require probably; more than half this plot, so that less than one-eighth of tne entire square; would be occupied, leaving the rest as' a slightly impaired "lung/' no doubt, j but still capable of holding a lot of, fresh air, and capable of beautifieation j beyond all recognition of its present i appearance. It is not just a question j of saving money. This site is so absolutely good that it would pay the citizens to lice it for the ;:br;ve purple, even if they had to purchase an equal: amount cf land in the vicinity to make! up for what was token away, for use as: a_ small "lung" if it was seriously in-j

■sistcd on, but I hold that Oxford and j Cambridge terrace, if preserved as at present, provide a luii£ already that is sufficient to prevent the city from he- ] ing absolutely stifled, even without further addition. I invite all interested to look closely at the map of the ■ city and see' if they can find a more : convenient pUrco in every way, and where the near vicinitv could be more ! appropriately improved in the future with such statuary, etc., as from timo to time it may be desirous of erecting. • Anyone with any vision at all can picture it for himself. I have only finally to point out that the commercial part of the city, at all events, is moving south-east,' and to all appearance wiil leave the north and west high and dry as the years go on. The particular sito which finds, favour with" some (i.e., Moore's terrace and the "Limes" hospital) has not sufficient depth from the river to Kilmore street without taking up the whole of the roadway, and even if this is done, the aspect to the north is not pleasant. Seen from Victoria square, the building will appear gloomy any time after the early forenoon, owing to its wrong aspect.* In Latimer square the teeming thousands of South Christchurch and Woolston will bo placcd on an equally favourable footing with the north nnd north-west, and this is as it should Be—Yours, etc.. CIYIS. ;