Land owner’s win bittersweet
When Charles Cadwallader decided to subdivide his section along the path of a stream that flowed through it he really didn’t think it would be asking much.
That was a year and $50,000 ago and now the place he wanted to call home is going to have to be sold to cover costs.
Cadwallader bought a 2.64-hectare piece of land at Haumoana in 2012. It had two houses on it. One house was on 0.39ha on one side of the stream. The other was on 2.25ha, on the other side.
In September last year he applied to Hastings District Council for resource consent to subdivide the land. He needed resource consent for a non-complying activity because the land is in the Plains Production Zone, a zone protected due to the lifesupporting capacity of its soil, and subdividing titles to less than 12ha was not permitted under the district plan.
Cadwallader argued that the property was unique in that it had a stream running between two entirely separate houses, with their own services. The stream ran along a 6m-wide channel that was 3m below the surrounding ground level and effectively meant the two blocks of land were completely separate.
The fact there was a house in the middle of the 0.39ha block also meant the land was of questionable commercial productive use, he told the council.
He said subdividing the site would not have any adverse effects on anyone.
But the council thought otherwise. In December the council’s hearings committee declined Cadwallader’s application. It said subdivision would likely result in reduced potential for land on the larger site to be used in a productive manner and that the application was contrary to policy.
Cadwallader appealed to the Environment Court, but the matter was resolved at court-ordered mediation, and in June the court cancelled the council’s decision and allowed the subdivision.
The only proviso was that no further buildings can be built on the larger section.
The new title was issued last month. It came as cold comfort to Cadwallader, now working in Western Australia.
‘‘It’s been a bloody awful experience, to be honest. I wanted to live in the small house, but I can’t now because the council’s cost me $50,000 to get this far,’’ he said.
‘‘I absolutely see the logic in protecting valuable productive land, but in this case the council should have applied commonsense and seen the unique situation presented by the stream and a small parcel of land,’’ Cadwallader said.
He said he had planned to return to live on the land, but could not afford that now, so had put the properties on the market.
A council spokeswoman said the council followed due process in regards to the application.