BOROUGH BOUNDARIES.

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume XXXV, Issue 4685, 9 April 1924, Page 2

BOROUGH BOUNDARIES.

COMMISSION AT PAEROA. CONCLUSION OF EVIDENCE. On resuming the sitting >f the Borough Boundaries Commission at the Courthouse on Monday morning the chairman, Mr J. G, L. Hewitt, S.M., intimated that one of its niembei.. Mr W. F. Marsh, had been taken ill during tlie week-end and could not be present. AU parties agreed to the evidence being typewritten and submitted to Mr Marsh at a later date. The evidence of Mi’ E. W. Pori iL was proceeded with. Witness in his statement contended that the rating on the unimproved value on mam street sections was too high. He knew of sections on the main street that had been offered at less than the Government unimproved value without a 'ale being effected, lie thought it w:ic sound business for Messrs Couper and Vincent to apply for exclusion from tlie borough.

To Mr O’Neill witness s'ated that he had been president of the Paeroa Chamber of Commerce for 14 years, and liad endeavoured to forward the progress of Paeroa on every occasion. Tl.e formation, of the borough, and, later, the loan proposals, had bee i fu'ly discussed at the Chamber meetings, and in his position as president lie liad done his utmost to assist 'n carrying them to a successful issue. He th< light the borough too unwieldy, as it had a legacy of miles of unformed streets, which burden could only be shaken off at the expense of the ratepayers. Experience in other places had shown that a small and compact borough was more easily ad ministered and progressed more ranidly than a scattered area comprising only a small population. His reason for applying for exclusion <>f the small area was because It pre--vented him from financing sufficient capital to work the balance of his property. Exclusion from the borough meant a big matter to him and only a very small matter to the Borougn Council.

BOROUGH COUNCIL EVIDENCE. Tn opening for the Borough Council Mi Hanna produced two letters from persons who signed the petition praying for exclusion stating that they had signed under a misapprehension, and mow wished to withdraw. The petition for exclusion was grossiy exaggerated. WilLam Marshall, .Mayor of Paeroa. was the first witness called. He stated that of the 44 petitioners asking for exclusion 28 were not ratepayers. That left 16 petitioners, and four of them had since withdrawn from the petition. Of the 12 remaining ratepayers who now wished to be excluded from the borough six only held lands which were actually being formed, and of these there wore only four families getting their living on farms entirely within the borough. Twenty-two signatories were relations of petitioners or with properties held jointly, and six were electors, three of whom had already left the town and knew at the time they signed the petition that they were leaving. In the area proposed to be’ excluded there were 13 ratepayers who did not desire to be excluded, namely, L. Cassrels (.Maori land, but pays rates), Mary Lawrence, Edith Moresby, Jane Coote, A. G. Cock. T. P. Vuglar, John Hu milton (Maori land, but pays rates), James Hamilton, Ohinemuri Jockey Club, Angus Duff, George Davidson, Ellen Hargreaves, Roman Catholic Trustees.

The ratepayers in the borougn whose valuations exceed those who sc"k to be excluded and whose lands were used exclusively for farming were J. Handley, Mrs Wilson, Rihitot.•) M’itaia (Opatito), St. John’s College, Hi’iiraki A. and P. Association. Others simila’- to petitioners were Messrs Charlesworth, Wells, Poland, ami Davidson. The ratepayers in the area pronosed to be excluded were : Kennedy, Bayliss, Buchanan, Barren, Porritt, Goonau, and Mrs Nicholls. If the petitioners were entitled to exclusion by reason of the burden *l} rates being too great, then by tlie same process of reasoning Handley, ClmrJcsworth and others must go out, and so on ad infinitum, until the borough was reduced to an inoperative area.

If the expenditure for sewerage work was not necessary in the intei - ests of public health, said Mr Marshall, ’-t need Mot be incurred. Some of it certainly would not be incurred in the n<”>’ flit"'’’', but a comprehensive .scheme was necessary, and provision had been made for all that was cxnsidered likely to be required for some years and authority obtained from the ratepayers to do the work as it was required. It would not be possible to have #5OOO if the bounda’ ie > were altered as requested. Tlie estimated cost of No. 6 area was £2154. that of No. 3 area £2171. anl 12 chains saved in No. 5 area would cost '.238. making a total of £4863 : but part of No. 3 area was not in the area proposed to be excluded, and tin. engineer had found it necessary *o drain chat area through tl’.e portion proposed to be excluded.

The area contained the following unformed roads, which the borough wmild be saved from forming and metalling : Half Norwood Road, ’> chains; half Ainslie Road, after deducting the piece which must be taken over by the Railway Department, 12 chains ; Logan Road, 13 chains ; a total of 31 chains. Tlie burden of unformed roads in the borough was great, said Mr Marshall, but it was not in the area proposed to be excluded but in areas adjacent to some of the petitioners’ land, an 1 the making of those roads would very considerably benefit petitioners, particularly Mr Buchanan. With the exception of Mr Gobnan and the Aorangi Block owners all the petitioners enjoyed main metal roads —many borough ratepayers were not nearly so fortunate. In his opinion it could not be proved that the lands were more suitable for agricultural purposes tb i’i residential. Mrs Nicholls’ land where the Chinamen’s gardens were and Mi Vuglar’s, on the opposite side of tlie road, were very suitable for residential purposes, and they were almost entirely within a half mile radius of the proposed new post office.

The block which included Mr Goonan’s property had considerbale prospective value. Access could be . obtained by purchasing a piece of th*.*/ Rawhitiroa Block fronting a road, and when protected by the stop-banks it could be very easily cut up, Mr Kennedy admitted that approximately 10 acres <jf his land would be suitable for cu'ting up, said Mr Marshall, anl most of it was near the railway end, where it had access by a borough strict, adjoined part of the site of the new station yards, and was 25 chains at most from tlie proposed new Paeroa station buildings. The Thames Road portion, and Mr Bayliss’ property. were so .suited for residential purposes that one acre had already been .sold for £2OO. Mr Kennedy had admitted advising the purchaser co buy at that price. Mr Kennedy’s unimproved value was £2lOO, or £2O per acre. Ten and a half acres sold at £2OO would give Mr Kennedy his unimproved value and leave him with about 90 acres after allowing three acres for roading. In his opinion the speculative value of the bank. portion of Mr Kennedy’s property was such that sections would sell readily to-day at a price sufficiently above £5O for a ([darter acre to pay for roading. Mr Bavliss' property was in a similar position. The Ohinemuri Jockey Club property, which was opposite that of Mr Bayliss’ had 17 chains frontage to Th lines Road, and must also be worth £°oo an acre, which was town sit? value. The heavy traffic on race days to the Paeroa station would still be over • bo v ough roads, said Mr Mat shall, and the damage it did was very considerable. There was every indication that close settlement was certain in the Aorangi Block, and he had been assured that it was the intention of the ra’lway settlement commissioners to erect 60 houses and lay out recreation grounds, etc. bn January he had received word from Mr Troup tliat lie hoped to commence building operations shortly. The whole area was su'table for residential sites, and was inside a three-quarter mile radius from the new post office site and the nearest point was 22 chains from the public school by borough streets. Mr Troup, the railway commissioner, ha I said that the owners asked £75 per ace. With regard to Mr Buchanan's hi'l property, in his opinion as Paerond grew the population would extend towards the high land, as it was now doing. To ills own knowledge, continued Mr Marshall, three property owners were -ecently approached in rega ..1 to vacant sites on Bennett Street. Two refused to sell or put a price e;. th.-m because they thought it WOU’d pay to hold on, and the other asked more than double the Government valuation. These sites had no metal road access, and two were near the top of the hill. The more the town grew the stronger would be the call to the hills, and the roads that were being formed now must help in that di'-eet on. Dealing with the other proposed boundary, sections in Willoughby Street were selling at £lOO for 18 perches or £9OO per acre, and £l5O had been asked for a section cf 24 porches, or nearly £llOO per acr?. This section was two chains away from ihe proposed boundary. Mr Marshall said that in his opinion the burden to be borne was not out of proportion to benefits received. It was not even much greater than other farm lands paid in some portions of the district. Mr Marshall produced a statement prepared anJ forwarded by the clerk of the Hauraki Plain.-, County Council showing varioii.” iato.s > on farms of an unimproved value "of £2o'. They were as high as 6s 13jd per acre, to which in many cares must be added a drainage rate of 3d in the £ or 5s per acre on land of .-in unimproved value of £2O, making a total of Ils I%<l per acre. In the Tuma roading loan area it was probable that on a £2O valuation the rates next year would be Ils B%d, plus 5s drainage rate, making a. total of 16s 9%d. Mr Buchanan’s rates on his 103-acre homestead worked put at approximately 9s 4d per acre. Witness would expect farms to be rated heavier in the borough than on the Plains. Witness produced a table that hal been prepared to show the total rates . collected on all properties in the area to be excluded on the Waihi Road, and including all Mr Buchanan’s laud right back to Aorangi. The statement showed that the grand total of rates paid since the borough was formed amounted to £362 5s 4d. less Hospital and Charitable Aid rates-£5O 5,s 6d. le :ving a total to the Borough fund of £3ll 19s Hid. The amount available for general purposes was £252 4 s 3d. and the amount spent in the area was t 466 9s Bd. Mr Marshall said tiiat Mr Couper. the owner of a house that unfortunately was flooded week, signed a petition which said that the burden to be borne was out of all proportion to the benefits rereivid. In 1921 Mr Couper pa.J raTs totalling 17$ 3d : in 1922, £1 0s 5d : in 1923. £1 3s Id : in 1f24. £1 10* 3d. The total in rates for lour yea’s j was £4 Ils 3d, including hospital ra’es. Mr Couper used the borough roads daily with a motor-car and cnjoved all the advantages of the town’ for about £1 a year, and wished to be excluded. If he wore in the county, this iear his rates would be £8 4s 7d, or nearly twice what he had paid to the borough for four years. Mrs' Beattie’.s, Mrs Vincent’s and Mrs Cootc’s figures were similar. This proves that in reference to this land over which the river breaks the low valuat.on made on that account protected the owners from excessive rates. Tlie fact was, however, as admitted to him by Mi- Couper, that Mr Couper knew he must vacate his prope>’ty and the Government compensate him, and he was not concerned at all. and merely signed the petition to assist Mr Buchanan ; otherwise Mr Conner would not wish to pay six times as much in rates to the county. Witness thought that these signatures did not count at all. Their rates were nearly double in 1915 what they—were to-day. The petitioners said that the area * of the borough was too large to be efficiently and economically maintain’ ed, continued Mr Marshall. The 1919

statistics show To Arolia to have a population about 100 more than Paeroa, with an area of 2965 acres, or nearly half as large again as Mr Porritt said the area of Paeroa was. In considering the size of the borough full allowance should be made for future developments. The borough was in its infancy. The last census disclosed an increase of 20 per cent, in the population since the borough wa.s formed, and the growth is still being maintained. Building permits were issued last week totalling nearly £5OOO. A new post office was to be erected, for which a sum of £lO,OOO on account appeared on last year's estimates, and the Department had acquired nearly seven-eighths of an acre in the centre of the town for this purpose—jprobably as much land as was occupied by the Wellington Post Office. The Education Department had purchased 14 acres for a technical high school. The Railway Department was taking about 30 acres for a railway station and approxi mately 25 acrefe for'railway workers’ homes on which it was*'ultimately intended to erect 60 This indicated that Paeroa must become an important railway centre. For a borough only -nine years old he considered the< maintenance-was efficient. Mr Marshall agreed that there were miles of unformed .streets which were a legacy from the county and theGovernment, and were a big burden and a problem, but they were not in the area proposed to be excluded. His fear was that if these lands were excluded they might immediately be cut up without town reading restrictions, and with the lure of cheap section-, attracting settlement a repetition pF the present conditions would occur and the whole policy of town improvements and sanitation be injuriously affected. Probably it would pay the borough to agree to the petitioners* request—provided it did not moan that another petition would be lodged —especially in view of the figures produced for the Waihi Road area. Witness said that consideration of the future welfare of the citizens, the development of the town, and the general policy of the council made it essential that the areas should be under municipal control. As an instance he quoted the Catholic church, school, and convent property, on which 16 persons resided permanently and where 85 children attended daily. It this area was cut out of the boroiign and the sewers not installed in No. 6 urea, as suggested by the petition, then. because the remainder of the town was sewered there would be no night-roil service and it would ! - e permissible for all the night-soil w be buried on the property, and this within a quarter of a, mile of the post office and right, against what was fast becoming a thickly populated area with sections only 18 perches in size. The removal of the nightisoil from that property alone cost 21s a month, and indicates how important the samtary aspect was.

Mr Marshall thought that the petitioners' complaint about the cost of the water supply reticulation was not sound. Not a penny was collected bj' was of rate for water supply, he said, and a small flat charge to water consumers only, covered all charges and provided a surplus which would supply interest and sinking fund bn a loan for water improvements of £BOOO to £lO 000. He thought that almost every borough dwelling was connected with '.he water supply. Tn answer to the petitioners’ concern that the future rates would be too great for them to bear, Mr Marshall said that in his judgment th? total rates that would be collected while their lands were used for farming purposes would never exceed the rates’ for which the lands were liable even if they were excluded. Even if the petitioners' lands were excluded they would continue to be subject to the full rate for the whole of the authorised loan of £55,000. Mr Marshall considered that the boundaries should not be redefined as the petitioners must enjoy considerable increase in land values by reason of the expenditure of public mmiey and the progress of the town, and their lands should be amenable to municipal control. To Mr Hanna witness stated that Raroa Road had been formed and metalled by Mr Porritt, but the cost was subsequently paid by the Borough Council.

Cross-examined by Mr Porritt witfness raid' it was expected that th-3 borough rates would be less on the unimproved values. With reference to gold duty, witness said ' that no portion of it had been expended on giving Goonan access to his property. With >e fere nee to Raroa Road, there was an exchange of roads in that area. Mr Porritt had beep the vendor of the land to the Jockey Club, and it had been a condition of sale that lie should effect the exchange of roads, but. whoever received the benefit, the borough had had to pay. Witness contended that Mr Porritt’s land was hot used for farming. He had no knowledge of the titles of the land occupied by the thirteen ratepayers who had not prayed for exclusion, but I hoy r. 11 paid rates to the borough with I he exception of the Roman Catholic trustees, who paid water charges only. With reference to the sewerage expenditure, witness said that the money would not all be rais. cd until it was actually required. In a rising country town it was impossible to sewer the whole town at once. It wa,s proposed to expend the sewerage money according to the allocation for which it was made, a.nd it was impossible to deny that the areas were not receiving benefit. There was a sum of £2OOO to. he expended on Buchanan’s area when it was :e--qilired, and also Kennedy’s. The heavy traffic to the racecourse v.i Thames Road was not compensated for by car license fees. There was certainly a demand for good building sections within the borough at the present time. The general rate in the borough was now at its maximum. Loans had already been raised for further improvements, and there was no prospect of raising money for further works by additional authorisation, which would Increase the rating

liulnlity. There would certainly be a railway settlement on Aorangi Block, which would give the su>’-. rounding land town site value. The bo-ough loans were sufficient for present purposes. SECOND PETITION. The evidence in the second petition was then taken. Mr J. L. Hanna appeared for the Borough Council, Mr C. N. O’Neill fo • tb.o Ohijncmuri County Council, and Mr E. W. Porritt for Mr Buchanan and pleaded his own case. The petition stated that it was the opinion of the Paeroa Borough Council that the boundaries should be altered so as to include in the borougi an ana adjacent to it which no-,' formed part of the Ohinemuri County. The area was bounded by a point commencing at a point on the present boundary of the borough on the southern boundary of that part of the southern portion of Hararalii No. 1, shown on land transfer plan No. 2720 a, • 2700 links from the TbamesPaeroa road ; by a straight line i mining in an easterly direction 700 links along the southern boundary, thence by a straight line running in a south-, erly direction to the north-east corner of Aorangi B No. .1 ; thence by a straight line, being the eastern boundary of Aorangi B No. .1, running '.o the south-east corner of that block. Also that portion of the area purchased by the Railway Department for the purposes of a railway settle-' ment.

The petition set out that the Borough Council had undertaken to: (a) Reticulate the whole area with water for domestic purposes; (b) carry a sewer to the boundary of the proposed settlement; (c) form and metal a road to give access to the said area.

William Marshall, for the petition, said chat his evidence given in the previous petition in sb far as it related to the property which it was sought to have included in the borough would be the same. The railway settlement land was in the centre of the area asked to be included. The farthest point of the boundary of* the proposed area to be included was about three-quarters of? a mile from the centre of the borough, and half a mile from the school. The expenditure on the access would materially benefit the lands proposed to be included because they had no other ac'-ess ; nor would the land cost the County Council' any expenditure for access.

To Mr O’Neill witness said he considered that the area adjpining the proposed railway settlement would be used for building purposes. To Mr Porritt witness slated that the Borough Council would undertake to reticulate the whole of the railway settlement area. The necessity for inclusion of the area was because of the demand of the public-through the Borough Council. It was not a scheme for bringing Mr Buchanam into the borough, but the Council was desirous of participating in the enhanced values. There was access to the block by several roads. George Buchanan, one of the opponents to inclusion, stated that his previous evidence also applied to this petition, with the additional grounds of objection that there was no access to his land except by Aorangi Road Wi'ness stated that it would be impossible to subdivide the land off Aorangi Road on account of a deco gully two to three chains wide. It was essentially farming land, and he failed to see how the area could be cut up advantageously for building purposes.

To Mr Hanna witness stated that the- portion in question was about 30 acres.

To Mr Porritt witness said that it would be impossible to cut his land up at a price that would pay. ■Edmund W. Porritt, the ether petitioner opposed to inclusion, produced plans showing the grades and the height, and stated that there was no road access whatever to Aorangi Block except through Government land. Witness'stated that no arrangement had been made by the Council for the reticulation of the area, as stated in the petition, other than the railway settlement. The area sought to be included was totally unsuitabls for subdivision purposes, and could not be sewered without great cost because it was intersected by two deep gullies He had been informed by a surveyqr that a portion bf the railway arm could not be served by sewerage, and the Department would have to provide septic tanks, and that also applied to the balance of the property. Witness stated that he had no intention of selling any part of his property. and when approached .by the Mayor to sell part of it for a railway settlement he had refused. But when the Mayor asked him to consider the matter in the interests of the town ne had done so and sold a portion. The result was that instead of the residue being increased in value, a.s th? Ma'yor had suggested it would, it had d->prcc : ated considerably. This concluded the evidence. The chairman -said that the Commission did not desire to hear ad dresses from counsel, as the Commission had full facts and sufficient data before it to enable a recommendation to he made to the Governor-General. The sitting lasted three days.