THE BEACH SECTIONS.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXXI, Issue 463, 29 June 1909, Page 3

THE BEACH SECTIONS.

lessees wait on the HARBOUR BOARD. COMMITTEE APPOINTED TC DRAW UP CONDITIONS OF SALE. At last night’s meeting of the Harbour Board a deputation from the lessees of the sections at the beach was introduced by Mr J. A. Nash. Mr Holbeu, who acted as spokesman, said that the deputation was the outcome of a meeting held at Palmerston recently, on account of the rumours afloat as the method in which the sections at the beach were to be submitted for lease. Of course when the sections were taken up they knew that it was only a monthly tenancy, but at that lime they never expected that the land would be vested in a Harbour Board and that the present position would arise. In reply to Mr Wilsou, Mr Holbeu said tha; they had the power to shift the buildings that they had erected on the sections. Mr Holbeu continuing, said that at the meeting it had been decided to ask the Board to assist them in any way they possibly could. He asked that in offering the sections for lease, that they, be loaded with the value of their improvements. They understood that this could be done. At present the value of the buildings erected was betweeu ,£4,000 and ,£5,000, and if none of the present lessees were successful in securing the leases it would be a big job to shift all the buildings. He would also like to know whether it was the intention of the Board to offer the sections in % or y 2 acre lots, also in the event of a person leasing a section what is the value of buildings be is expected to erect. Mr Walker said that from a business point of view the benefit to Foxtou from visitors to the beach was from £ISOO to £2OOO per year. He felt sure that the members of the Board would deal honestly and justly with present lessees. Mr Dahl said that it was r 6 years ago since he had first visited the beach and since then he and his family had always spent the Christmas holidays there. At that time there were no houses erected at all, and the settlement had grown year by year. He considered that the people had enhanced the value ot the sections by erecting the buildings, and he thought that the Board might extend some preference or consideration to them.

Mr Holben then thanked the Board for hearing them, and the deputation withdrew. Mr Nash said this question had been hung up for some lime. It had been held over from the last meeting in order to get the solicitor’s opinion, which was to the effect that the leases must be submitted by public auction or tender. Since the meeting he had been in communication with Mr Moore and now learnt that the trouble in connection with the present lessees buildings could be obviated by the fixing of a valuation on the buildings, with the provision that if the present owner did not secure the lease, he would be entitled to receive the value of the house (as fixed) from the incoming tenant. The present position is that the house does not belong to the Board, because the tenant has the right to remove it. There is no legal objection to the present tenant arranging with the Board to sell the house to the incoming tenant. He said he was in sympathy with the owners of the houses who were all Boston and and Palmerston people. He thought that leases for ix years with two renewals for the same period would be satisfactory. He would withdraw his notice of motion and moved thaPthe Board arrange with the respective owners of buildings on the Marine Reserve, a fixed valuation on each building, so that all leases may be put up to auction at an upset rental upon the following terms; —■ That in cases where the present tenant is not the highest bidder the incoming tenant shall pay to the outgoing tenant the value of the buildings as fixed, before taking possession, and that Messrs Wood, Nash and Stiles be a committee to draw up conditions of sale of the leases and assess the upset rentals of the above and all other sections, and submit to the Board at its next meeting. Mr Wilson, in seconding the motion, said that he would ask the committee to deal favourably with the tenants. They had put the value on the land by erecting buildings and he thought that as far as possible their valuation should be taken.

Mr Gardener said the object of the motion appeared to be, to get a report, and they would not be pledging themselves by voting for it. This was a question that required a great deal of consideration. If they were going to load the buildings too heavily, the question was, whether it would be beneficial to the Board. He had intended to say a great deal on this question but was prepared to wait until the committee’s report was Brought down. Of course he must be guided by the solicitor, but at the same time he was surprised to hear that they can get .behind the Harbour Act. He had studied the Acts and could find

nothing to say that sections' could be loaded. Harbour Boards bad very small leasing powers, and it was news to him that they had the power to load these sections. The members of the Board were only the trustees of the public purse and they must deal with this question without fear or favour. Personally his sympathy was with these men who had no doubt foolishly erected buildings on sections over which they had no security of tenure and he would do all he could to assist them, provided it could be done without any evasion ot the Act. If this could not be done they must conform to the law. Mr Tolley said that in fixing a valuation on the buildings he did not think that they should take the owners values altogether. He was also of opinion that a seven years lease with two renewals of similar periods would be more satisfactory than 11 yearly periods. Mr Nash said that personally he had a good knowledge of the cost of the erection of the buildings at the beach, and would be able to judge if the valuation placed on same by the owners were fair and reasonable. The Chairman said that there was no doubt that the value of tiie sections at the beach were due almost entirely to those who had built there, and if the Board gave thou the consideration asked for, it would be treating them in a fair way. In reply to Mr Gardener, Mr Moore said that the Act does not prohibit loading and therefore it could be done. Mr Gardener questioned the solicitor at some length. The motion on being put was carried.