With 2.76 hectares of her land in Howard Street Hastings re-zoned residential in 2019, Karen Cooper was entitled to compensation at residential value for that part of the land compulsorily taken for roading and stormwater. Hastings Council said compensation should be less, assessed on its former rural zoning.
When private land is taken for public works, the Public Works Act requires payment of ‘full and fair’ compensation. Hastings Council said since the land taken for subdivision infrastructure was previously zoned for cropping, viticulture and orchards it should be valued as such.
In the High Court, Justice Cooke ruled the zone change was independent of subsequent roading and stormwater requirements. By changing land use zoning to residential, Council was enabling private developers to carry out a residential subdivision. Public works involving roading and stormwater did follow re-zoning but were not ‘caused’ by re-zoning. Compensation for land taken should be assessed on residential value, being its value at the time taken. The difference in value was not disclosed.
Separately, Hastings Council argued without success that no compensation should be paid at all; the increased value accruing to Dr Cooper’s land after being re-zoned residential more than offset the value of that part of the land taken for public works. She had suffered no loss, Council said.
Re-zoning land, by itself, is not a ‘public work,’ Justice Cooke ruled. Any increase in value arising from re-zoning could not be set off against compensation due for taking part of that land for public works.
Cooper v. Hastings District Council – High Court (24.03.24 & 3.05.23)
23.037