EVANS BAY LAND.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1002, 17 December 1910, Page 6

EVANS BAY LAND.

TAKEN FOR SPOIL,

CLAIM AGAINST THE HARBOUR

BOARD,

THE DROP IN VALUES,

Two compensation claims arising out of the taking of land by Board for reclamation . purposes at Miramar, came before a Compensation Court yesterday morning. , Mr. Justice Cooper presided, and- the assessors were Mr. A\'; M. Hannay (for the bqard), and Mr.' A.' li.' AVilson (for the claimants). • Samuel Morrell, of College Street,. Wellington; bricklayer, claimed £650, and the board had. offered him £475. Isabella .Stout .Cresswell Meredith, of Christohurch, and Otto Neugent Newman, of Wellington, claimed £475, and the board's offer to them was £280.

Ifc was agreed that evidence of a genoral character; should' lie held ■to apply to both cases, the sections being close together. .

. Mr. C.P. Skerrett, .K.C., with him Mr. H. Buddie, appeared for. .the claimants in both cases,, and Mr. T. S. Weston for the respondent board.

Claimant's Position. ' . Mr.: Skerrett, opening Morrell's case, said the section contained 1 rood 17 perches, and was situated on the top of., a/cliff, , but. not at the edge of the cliff.- It, lay within a short walk of the tramway "line at the city boundary, and was close to the Miramar. Wharf, which could be reached by a footpath. The first official (though not legally effective) notice of tlie'.'board's intention to; take the-land, was given on January 7, '1908.„,The,,.actual'./proclamation • was : dated February 2i; 1910, ,but was riot to take effect until April-2, 1910. From •the time of tho .first notice the section necessarily--lay useless on the claimant's hands'. The board gave similar notices in regard to other.land in the vicinity, and • this had practically stopped dealings in the lands, so that tho Harbour Board was the sole purchaser of land in the vicinity," and'had made various compromises with owners,'who doubtless wanted to avoid the costs of Compensation Court-proceedings. The estimates- of thevalue of .Morrell's section, which would be.submitted for the claimant, ranged from £520 to £560. The ; latter amount was * £85 less than the board's offer. It seemed curious that an arrangement could ■ not have been come to-before the costs of an inquiry had.been incurred, but the costs having now been incurred, an , arrangement would doubtless be impossible. The Court went out. to View .- the ground before taking evidence.

Francis Edward East, of the firm of 'East-and East, .said there was no finer building sito than the ridge. on which the section lay.. Judging by sales in .the vicinity, ha would value it at-£560. . . Several other valuers ' were .called, among,whom Morris William. Bell valued the section at £525; Herbert .William Shortt £557.

Caso for the Board. . : Mr. Weston, . in ' opening for-'the respondent: board,, pointed oiit that /'the claimant Morrell bought the .'section in 1905, and the. preliminary -notice' of the board's intention to take-tho landwas not received until 1908. Ho, therefore, had-' had three years' in' which' to build,, and had. not done so. Jt was purely.vacant Jand.v, The pries at-.which Morrell purchased- his- land' was adittitted j-tith iyidj,.,this included'.all legal costs. - The hoard's offer of £475 would".thus give him a :profit of £25. . ■ ' .. ~ " Fall In Values. , . Findlay;' N.:'.'Martin, : ;. Government Valuer, said that the drop in Wellington suburban land values since three Jor; four yearsVago'averaged 20.per cent., and. in some "'instances''-it''-Was: 40 . per. oent. 'He had been offered that day the remaining unsold sections of one estate at Miramar. at '£1 a foot, under tho Government valuation to realise. It was absolutely flat land, convenient : to •the tram-

, Cross-examined, by Mr. Skerrett as to the effect of 'the steep contour of certain' sections ~upon -their 'value;. witness said, "I never saw a section that would beat a Wellington : builder.""'" '/"His"Honour:' W® all' kridwTwhat a Wellington builder can."do..'r. ' 1 "Never mind the "Wellington builder," said Mr. ' Skerrett, and - recalled the witness to the desired track. . Departmental-Methods., Witness,' further -cross-examined, said that -;the 0 Miraihar district had depreciated 10 to' 15 per cent, below his last valuation.. It was not his duty to report,, a general, drop ill. values to his Department.'The Department was aware of" such things, and the taxpayer had the-rightVof appeal. The lending Department was compelled to havo "snecial'valuations.'

Witness,' further -cross-examined, said that -;the 0 Miraihar district had depreciated 10 to' 15 per cent, below his last valuation.. It was not his duty to report,, a general, drop ill. values to his Department.'The Department was aware of" such things, and the taxpayer had the'right ;,of appeal. The lending Department was compelled to havo "snecial valuations.'.

' / William Hamilton . Turnbull, of the firm of W. H. Turnbull and Co., auctioneers and, land : valuers,.. -said he vhlued Morrell's' 'Section''at ' £450 in 190S, 'and at' £360 or. £350.1a5t February. The Hataitai Company, in which lie was'.'interested, had .to'.jeduce by 20 per cent, the prices,at which it was selling in 1908.'before it could make sales this year.

Alexander Gellatly, a member of the firm of J. H; Bethune and Co., said he valued , the land in 'March;, 1905,. at ,£o per foot, or. £396. On'..'.February, .1910, ho, would take ..'off 10s.' a, foot, making about £360. The- drop in suburban values was general, and included tho Hutt. Very few suburban sales had taken'place,'but judging by the prices sellers were prepared to take now as compared with those they put on their lands two or three years ago, he would say there was a drop of 10s. to 15s. a- foot. ; .

"Mr. Bush, of Taranaki." Joseph Henry Helliwell, secretary to the Gas Company, said the company purchased East's section at Miramar in 190" : for £1450. Ho thounht. £1300 would have been a >fair price if tho land had been wanted as an investment and not for a special purposo which no other land would serve, as was tho ease in that instance.

To Mr. Skerrett: Ho did not know that the agent who acted in' the. matter on behalf of tho Gas Company told East that tho prospective purchaser was -a gentleman from Taranaki. He. thought that sort, of practice .was ■ common among lawyers. (Amusement.) . Mr.,Skerrett said perhaps tho agent meant Taranaki , Street.

His Honour remarked that Mr. East had said that the agent told him tho intending-purchaser, was-a. Mr. Bush, of Taranaki. - "People Went Mad." James Ames, City Valuer, said ho valued Morrell's property at the request of tho Harbour Board in March, 1908. His valuation then was £5 a foot. There had since been a big drop, and one would not bo ablo to find a purchaser at £4 a foot. There were now many empty houses in Wellington and much vacant land in the suburbs. He did. not think ail. the vacant land would be digested for many years to come; At Island Bay he had, bought land at '£10 a foot for the city—tho cheapest that could ... bo got: . Land alongside it had since'been sold at £5 a foot. ' ■ . , ■ ■ Mr. Weston: In fact, people all went mad about land in Wellington about three years ago, and they are now reaping the reward, of their folly. : Witnfiss: I think ; they , are. . ■

. . Evidence in the second case —Meredith and Newman v. Harbour Board— was then taken,. most of the same witnesses being called to give their opinions of tlio value of the ground. Otto Ncugent Nowman, one of the claimants, said the claimants bought tlio section in December, IDOS, for £30J. Interest, rates, and expenses brought the cost up to a total of £383 7s. Sd. They bought with the intention of building there, and never tried to sell it. His Honour said the Court would give its award on Monday.