VALUING THE CITY

Dominion, Volume 8, Issue 2378, 6 February 1915, Page 8

VALUING THE CITY

THE RENTS QUESTION IMPORTANT STATEMENT VIEWS OF MR. MORISON, K.G. Last evening the City Council had placed before it a copy of an important lettor from Mr. C. 15. Moirson, K. 0., to tho other arbitrators engaged in the cases in which awards have just been made fixing the rents of a number of Wellington reclaimed land properties. Mr. A. Gray, counsel for the Corporation in tho cases, who forwarded tho letter, drew attention to the fact that in every case the award made was that of the lessee's arbitrator and tho iiijrd arbitrator (tho chairman), and that tho Corporation's arbitrators dissented. Mr. Morison said that in the course of "hearing various modes of assessment wero suggested:— 1. Tho decision in previous arbitrations were suggested as the basis. 2. A percentage varying from 4 per cent, to 5 per cent, on the unimproved value of the land. 3. A rent assessed by reference to rents agreed to between landlords and tenants of adjoining or neighbouring sections. rent based on the actual or hypothetical results of sub-letting. Discussing Bases. "The parties," continued Mr. Morison "havo now agreed that tie arbitrators may proceed on any of these bases. Thus the ovidcnce under all heads most he considered. A subsidiary question was raised as to the fairness of ascertaining the rental at per square foot of the area comprised in tho lease. It seems to me that this is simply another way of assessing the rent according to the frontage and depth of the sootion, and, plainly, no hard and fast rule can bo laid down, because the \ alue per square foot must depend on (inter alia) the proportion which the effective advertising or business frontage bears to the total superficial area and u. is immaterial whether this area be considered m „ nits 0 f feet, yards or otiwnriw. • - . 'Another bo fnn a -7 q T ti Tl and °" 6 must tapes nf tl ' relat ? S J" disadvantages of the present form of leaso. m ,;;i 11 mad » 1-y.the tenants rests -mainly on the conclusions to be derived statements hSi +T, y Harcourt ' and placed before tho arbitrators. These statements purport to show the results of an actual or hypothetical sub-letting of the various properties, and the arbitrators are invited to conclude from the figures given that in some cases, at afl events, the future rents should reduced and in every case that the rent should be fixed at a very . much lower rate than that claimed by tho Corporation.

Mr. Morieon proceeds to argne that the figures put forward by Mr. Harcourt are entirely fallacious, and that the rents suggested 1 by. him are absurdly low. Atter endeavouring to demonstrate • that the capital' value and ■ r «ntal value have some relation to each other, he deals with certain arbitrations 111 which Mr. Justice Sim and Mr. A. bray were third arbitrators. From the results of these arbitrations he fixes the rental values of those properties generally as follows:—

~ Per foot. ranama Street £0 lirandoa Street £g Johnston Street J.........." £5 Waring Taylor Street £3 How Opinions Differ. Mr. Morison then deals generally with tte assessments, and his tigifres and those of the other arbitrators are set out: Morison. Award. I?-- i in ' £ s. d. £ s. d. Kirkcajdie's 510 0 3 5 0 S. Brown, Ltd 5 0 0 3 0 0 D.I.C 6 0 0 313 6 bkerrett and Go. ... 310 0 111 0 Skerrett and Co. ... 6 0 0 8 4 0 J. B. MacEwan ...... 6 0 0 312 6 Murray Roberts 610 0 4 0 0 Union Company 6 0 0 412 6 Union Company ...... 510 0 4 0 0 Union Company o 0 0, 215 6 Irvine and Stevenson 410 0 217 6 Houth's Corner 6 5 0 3 9 0 Mr. Morison. states 'that the Tentals arrived at by him amount to from 4 per cent: to 4| per cent, on a low eatimato ,of the capital value. Members of the City Council consider ■ Mr. Morison's statement to be of great .value and importance..