LOWER HUTT VALUATIONS

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 7851, 13 July 1911, Page 8

LOWER HUTT VALUATIONS

'ASSESSMENT COURT’S DECISIONS. A sitting of the Lower Hutt Assessment Court was held yesterday, Dr McArthur presiding. Messrs Cudby (department’s nominee) and Harder (Lower Hutt Borough Council’s) were also on the bench. Mr 3?. N. Martin, valuer, Topresented the Valuation Department. G. London objected to the valuation of <£1370 placed on one and three-quarter acres of land on White's Line, lie said he would b© glad to take <£9oo for the section. It was true that it had a frontage of some 13G0 feet to ‘White’s Line, but this, even with the additional depth that would be obtained by including the section at the rear, would not be worth 25s per foot.—-The valuation was sustained.

Messrs McEwan and Carter, for whom Mr E. P. Bunny appeared, objected to the valuation of a section of 15 a-cres (the To Momi estate), which had bpon raised from .£3OOO to .£6OOO. Mr Martin disputed the lessees* right to object to the capital value of their holding, bud after hearing argument the bench held otherwise. Mr Bunny held that the valuation had been made on a basis of future possible, subdivision, but he contended that’ the land in question was unsuitable at pro sent for subdivision, and he called evi denco to show that the land was wet, one witness remarking that no sensible man would live on it in winter.—The court reduced the valuation to the former amount oi .£3006.

The Boothby Estate trustees objected to a valuation of .£235 per acre on r block of land fronting Waiwetn and Waterloo roads. Mr Martin stated that the adjoining section Jiad been recently sold at £2SO per acre, and the court sustained the valuation.

Valuations were also upheld on the following properties:—James Patten, in Bloomfield terrace, .£825; T. W. TymoM, Bellevue road, £295 and .£310; AV. S. Judd. .£500; H. M. Hayward (native leasehold). The Rev. Lane objected to the valuation of a section adjoining the Presbytery, on the main road opposite the Lower Hutt Post Office. Three years ago the valuation had been increased from £SOO to £750, and now to £1320. Mi Bunny, for objector, quoted a former judgment of Dr McArthur's to the effect that land which was subject to the restrictions placed upon church lands should not be valued on the same basis as if it were unrestricted land.

Mr Martin contended that th© restrictions had been taken into account in arriving at Dio value. The section had a frontage of 132 feet to the main road-' Adjoining sections were worth .£3O per foot, and on a commercial basis Father Lane's land would be valued at JRS. An equitable reduction to allow for Die restrictions would be 2o per cent:., so that the recorded valuation of JJIO per foot was very reasonable.—The court reduced the valuation to <£7so.

The following entered formal objections in order that their properties might be offered to the Government under secDon 31 of the Land Valuation Act:—H. M. Hayward, Egglington Bros., and D. Connelly. The hearing of further objections was adjourned to 2.15 p.m. on Monday next, at Wellington.