Focus: Hamilton City Council says a "betterment" of $282,500 will apply to Dr Scott Robinson's land when they take 5000sqm to widen a road. Video / Alan Gibson
At work, two sets of doctors fight against Covid-19. At home, they're battling the council which is acquiring parts of their properties with no compensation.
On the outskirts of Hamilton, on a quiet country road flanked by prime farmland and sought-after lifestyle blocks, a battle is brewing.
As trees are cut down and surveyors mark the land where the narrow Peacockes Rd will be widened, some of the residents prepare to go to court.
On one of the blocks are doctors Scott Robinson and Cat Chang and their 7-year-old daughter, Maia Robinson.
The 2.4 ha property they bought in 2009 is an escape from their busy jobs at Waikato Hospital. Robinson, an anaesthetist and Chang, a respiratory specialist at Waikato Hospital, are on the frontline of Waikato District Health Board's response to the Covid-19 pandemic.
Dr Scott Robinson has been offered $1 compensation by Hamilton City Council for 5000 square metres of his land. Photo / Alan Gibson
While Chang led the DHB's critical incident management team set up to deal with the virus, Minister for Land Information Eugenie Sage and Governor-General Dame Patsy Reddy signed a land proclamation approving Hamilton City Council's acquisition of almost 5000sq m of the couple's land.
The council needs it to widen the road to make way for an 8000-house subdivision in the area, a 30-year project granted a $180 million, 10-year interest-free loan under the Government's Housing Infrastructure Fund and supported by $110 million in NZ Transport Agency subsidies.
The new road will be a major arterial route in the Southern Links project - which includes a $150m bridge joining the southern end of the city to the suburb.
The council has now acquired land on 23 of the 39 properties affected by the road designation and expects two more properties to be settled by agreement within the next few days.
But the residents' argument is not about the medium-density subdivision planned for their quiet country road - there's no doubting the need for affordable housing. It's the fact vast chunks of private land are being taken by authorities without payment - or for little payment - a concept New Zealanders have been paying to right for decades.
Dr Scott Robinson in full PPE at work. Photo / Supplied
Robinson and Chang have been offered $1 by the council for a portion of their land big enough to be a lifestyle block on its own and despite the land's potential worth of half a million dollars on the open market.
The case is so unusual that Sage has instructed officials to review the law that applies to compulsory acquisition next time the Public Works Act is renewed.
Robinson and Chang are preparing to fight for compensation in the Land Valuation Tribunal.
Robinson acknowledges the need for the subdivision but says the $1 compensation for his land is shocking and distressing, saying it came out of the blue when the widened road was designated to cut across their property.
"We had to pay money to buy the land. We had to pay rates on it and we've farmed it. Suddenly someone can just take it off you and not pay anything at all and that's fair and legal?"
He says it is insulting and alarming that a council can "get away" with taking land for almost nothing.
A valuation done for the council estimates Robinson's remaining land would be worth $282,500 more than it is now, due to betterment, an increase in value thanks to the water and sewerage infrastructure to be built with the new road, and the increased subdivision potential.
But the couple would have to sell the entire property or subdivide at a cost of $130,000 per lot, neither of which they want to do, to realise the value of the betterment.
Dr Scott Robinson, his partner Dr Cat Chang and their daughter Maia Robinson understand the need for affordable housing but believe they are not being treated fairly. Photo / Alan Gibson
Council strategic development manager Andrew Parsons says the council has worked with expert planners and lawyers to ensure the Public Works Act 1981 has been followed.
The Act provides for the payment of compensation for losses arising from the acquisition of land by the Crown and its authorities.
Parsons says what the landowner chose to do with the property in the future is not a matter for the council and outside the scope of the Act.
He added that the cost of subdivision was factored into the valuation.
"The valuation shows the landowner has benefited from an increase in the value as a result of the public works.
"In this case, that independent valuation has determined the owners will receive an increase in their asset value of $282,500 due to the works done by the council, regardless of what they choose to do in the future.
"It is this value that has been used to assess betterment."
He says the basic premise of the Act is that the landowner is not financially worse off through the land acquisition process.
"In this instance the information the council has received indicates the landowners are substantially better off."
The $1 offer, made on behalf of the council by The Property Group, is a nominal amount required by law to make any contractual arrangements binding.
He says the council has not received a valuation from the trust that owns Robinson and Chang's property but the council has paid more than $30,000 toward independent, professional advice to ensure the owners are properly informed, as is required under the Act.
"In determining how much to pay for this land, council is mindful of its obligation to spend ratepayer funds sensibly, and in accordance with its legal obligations," Parsons says.
Zero compensation
Down the road, Cam and Margot Buchanan's sloping section looks out over a pool, a small vineyard planted by the previous owners, trees they have planted and stockyards their children played on as youngsters.
Below that is the road which, when widened, will eat into almost a quarter of that space.
Dr Margot Buchanan on Peacockes Rd. She and husband Dr Cam Buchanan are also having part of their land compulsorily acquired by Hamilton City Council. Photo / Alan Gibson
The couple are also fighting the council's compulsory acquisition.
The Buchanans, both anaesthetists at Waikato Hospital and also involved in the Covid-19 response, say the council's zero-compensation offer is farcical.
It initially wanted 1279sq m but has since offered to take less of the land and retain a play tree of significance to the family.
"It feels like theft," Margot says. "All landowners should be worried about this approach by our council. Who knows where they will attempt it next."
The pair bought the 6605sqm block in 2005 and planted, landscaped, mowed, maintained and paid rates on it.
They believe the land in question is worth several hundred thousand dollars but the council maintains the road widening and infrastructure for the subdivision adds value to the property, also giving them a betterment.
"They say reticulated water and sewerage infrastructure means we will be able to subdivide our property which makes it more valuable," Margot says.
"But we've already got a road and we've already got water."
Even if subdivision is allowed in the future, which is not guaranteed, the house sits in the middle of the property making development potential minimal, she says.
But the Buchanans' lawyer, Thomas Gibbons - who is also acting on behalf of Robinson and other affected landowners - believes the council has failed to show the connection between the works and any betterment, which is required under the act.
Gibbons describes planning advice the council used to refuse compensation as vague, flawed and fundamentally unfair and said the case could warrant judicial review.
A valuation done for the council, dated July 1, 2019, made a betterment assessment on the Buchanans' property of $50,000 and gave before and after works valuations as $1.3m and $1.45m respectively.
Gibbons says it appears council intended to acquire the whole of the roading corridor designated, even though not all of it was needed.
Any surplus land could later be sold back to land owners at market value.
"This allows a rather concerning inference that council intends to compulsorily acquire land from you for zero compensation, knowing that the infrastructure is of no real benefit to you, that you will suffer significant loss of amenity, that the council does not need all of the land and then intends to offer the land back to you at market value.