ASSESSMENT COURT.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXVII, Issue 5603, 1 June 1905, Page 3

ASSESSMENT COURT.

ITUTT AND PETONE LAND VALUATIONS.

An Asvcsimcut Court sat at the Loner Hurt yesterday, to hear objections to Government valuations on properties in tlio borough of Potoae, and the Mungaroa and Epuni ridings of the Hurt County. Hr A. McArthur, S.M., presided, and he had associated with him Messrs W. A. Fitzhorbort and J. Cud by, as assessors. Messrs J. V. Dugdalc, Inspecting Valuer, and T. W. C.werhiU, District Valuer, represented tho Government. Frederick Wostbnry objected to a valuation of i'll I'l2s (kl per aero, placed on two sections, his property, comprising twelve acres, on tho eastern side of Waiwctu road. Mr A. G. Hunt appeared for the objector who, ho stated, had purchased tho land at £4O per acre. 'The present valuation, ho pointed out, amounted, to an increase of 270 per cent, over the department's valuations for 1003 and 1003. Mr Wostbury had purchased tho land six years ago, when it was practically a swamp, covered with tnree feet of water. He had drained it. and expended about £3GO in improvements. The popular opinion seemed to be that tho department went to one extreme with the valuation, the objector to the other extreme, and that the Court struck an intermediate valuation. The chairman interjected that tho assessors went very carefully into every case that came before them, and almost invariably found that the valuations of the department wore fair- He would nob have such statements made, and Mr Hunt’s had better bo withdrawn. Air Hunt said ho was sorry. He had not said that such was tho case, but that it was tho popular opinion*. Tho chairman: Well, tho sooner the popular opinion is changed the better. , , Air Hunt then withdrew tho observation. . . , Evidence was called in support of the objection. Air Cavcrhill argued that the valuation was fair, and oa the same scale as in regard to adjoining laud. After consultation, the chairman said tho assessors knew th© land, and ■were of opinion that it was not as valuable as tho adjoining properties. Tho capital value would ho reduced from £l3-10 to £I2OO, the unimproved value from £1320 to £IOOO, -whilst £2OO -would be allowed for improvements instead of £2O. _ Robert James "Wilson, Taita, opposed. the valuation placed on twentytwo acres of ills land. The capital value was £2300, the unimproved value £2IOO, and the value of improvements £4OO. ’ Tho objector stated that ho purchased the land six years ago at £59 2s per acre, and that tire present valuation was over £lll per acre. After hearing the representatives of tho department, tho Court considered that tho valuation was reasonable, and consistent with other valuations in tho locality, and sustained it. John . Barton, Upper Hutt, sought a reduction of tho valuation of two sections, comprising 197 acres, block 1, Kimutaka survey district. The capital value was £10,206, unimproved value £9265, and value of improvements £941. Two acres wore allowed for tho river-bed.

After hearing evidence, tho Court disallowed tho objection. The same owner opposed tho valuation on 181 acres 0 roods 20 perches, same block and survey district. The capital value was £9060, unimproved value £8505, and value of improvements £555. In this case the capital value was increased to £9255, the unimproved value left as it was, and tho value of improvements increased , to £750.

Christina Baokstrom, Treatham, sought a reduction of tho valuation on 40 acres 3 roods 2 perches, block 1, Rimutaka survey district. Tho capital value was £l9lO, unimproved value £1446, and value of improvements £464. The objection was disallowed. Christina Hagan, Trentham, objected to a valuation of £35 an acre placed upon 33 acres 2 roods 3 perches of her land at Trentham. The capital value was £1675, unimproved value £1457, and value of improvements £2lB. The objection was disallowed. The chairman asked Mrs Hagan how she managed to get £6O an acre from the Wellington Racing Club for some of her land.

" Because X got a fool to buy it,” waa tho reply, which evoked considerable laughter. She did not say so, though, until slio got them te buy it,” remarked his Worship. The Wellington Racing Club, represented by Mr A. B. Whyte, secretary, objected to a valuation of £SO per acre placed upon 44 acres 3 roods of its land at Trentham. It was stated that the land resembled adjoining property, which was valued at £35 per acre. The capital value was £2240, unimproved value £1916, and value of improvements £324. The Court reduced the valuation to £35 per acre. Russell and Swanson, Silverstream, objected to a valuation on section 70, block 1, Rimutaka survey district. Tho capital value was £614, unimproved value £204, value of improvements £SO by the owner, and lessee’s' interest in improvements £360. The Court reduced the capital value to £560, the unimproved value to £l5O, and left tho value of improvements as they were, at £4lO.

The same firm objected to a valuation placed on 167 acres 3 roods in the same survey district. In this case the capital value was reduced from £BSO to £7BO, the unimproved value from £470 to £4OO, and the improvements left unchanged at £3BO. J. B. Jackson, Petone, opposed a valuation of £3 per foot on 130 ft of his property facing the Esplanade, and £5 per foot on 50ft having a frontage to Richmond street. The Court disallowed tho objection. John Wakeham objected to a valuation of £6 per foot on two sections with 50ft of frontage each in Nelson street, Petone. He said the assessment ought not to be more than £5 per foot, but called no evidence in support. Evidence in support of the department’s valuation was given by E. W. Woodhouse (commission agent), M. Findlay (builder, and member of the Borough Council}. The Court allowed the valuation to stand.

F. Cooper objected to a valuation of £750 an acre placed upon ten acres at Cuba street, Petone. He said the land had been sold to a_ syndicate some little time ago for £350 an acre. He had tho largest interest in the syndicate. It was bought in 1904 for £350 per acre, and had not improved in value since. It was subject to inundations. and the drainage was not yet complete. The valuation now was £4 10s per foot.

The unimproved value placed on the land by tho department was £7320. The objector did not call evidence. Having heard Messrs Woodhouse and Findlay’s testimony in support of the

department's valuation., the Court sustained the valuation. The Wellington Woollen Company, represented by Mr Ernest Donne, secretary, objected to an unimproved valuation of* £SOOO on 12 acres 2 roods 31 perches of land at Pctonc. Mr Donne pointed out that the land was of a very peculiar shape, and a quantity of it was wash-out land. The company had been offered an adjoining section for £-5 IQs per foot frontage, while the land in question was assessed at £l2 10s per foot. There were GOOft frontage. Mr Dngdalc pointed out that at £l2 10h per foot the value of this property would bo £7500. John Morrison, land called on behalf of the Woollen Company, stated that there were eight acres worth £4OO per acre, one aero only worth £SO, being only lulls, and tho balance, 3V acres, being wash-out land, which ho valued at £550. The total valuation was £3BOO. Mr DugdaLe suggested that tho Court should visit tho property, as there could he no really satisfactory settlement until it did. Mr Cavcrhill valued the land at £4OO per acre. He was quite sure that if placed in the market it would realise more than £SOOO. If the frontage was as stated by Mr Donne, his valuation would amount to more than that figure. Evidence in support of the department’s valuation was givci} by Messrs Woodhouse and Findlay. Tho Court having visited the property, fixed the unimproved value at £4550, and left tho improvements undisturbed. Mr Fitzherbert did not adjudicate in tho case. A number of objections were withdrawn or not proceeded with.