AUCKLAND VALUATIONS

Hokitika Guardian, 10 August 1926, Page 3

AUCKLAND VALUATIONS

APPEALS BY PROPERTY OWNERS. AUCKLAND,August 7. The price that could profitably he paid for land required to keen one cow was raised in the AsessmenfrCourt yesterday. The land was valued at £55 10s nn~acre, and it would carry only one cow to two acres. Opinions differed as to a reasonable price for land needed for a cow. hut £lll was far too high. The President (Mr J. G. L. Hewitt. S. M. j : We have heard a good many estimates in different parts, ranging all the way from £l2 upwards. Counsel said that it was generally agreed that from £6O to £BO was reasonable. Anyone who paid more than £BO could not make it pay.

“The question is why the valuation ns raised from £290 to £450. slid Ge(|‘ge Tansley. who objected to the valuation of a property in the famnki Road District. Tlie applicant admitted that he had priced the land at £->OO when asked by thg Department, but slid that was his selling price, and was not the value of the land for rating. He would accept £450.

Tlie President: On your own evidence, the valuation must- he sustain-

Applicant: I did not say it was worth £SOO. L The President: But you wanted •-> sell it at £SOO. Applicant: It is not worth that. Tlie valuation was sustained. Rates nniomiing to £4 a week on properties comprising 270 acres were stated to he the chief difficulty of Varelia Wilson and H. M- Wilson, whose farms are situated on Ruawai Flat, in Otamatea County. H. M. Wilson said that the properties were rated by the county and the

Ra.upo Drainage Board, and the rates were the highest in New Zealand. On 270 acres they were equivalent to a capital value of £SCOO. A big flood some years ago Had resulted in fescue springing up on the property, and it would cost £lB an acre to clear it. The valuation was sustained to enable the applicant to offer the property to tho Government;