HomeMy WebLinkAboutM0629150.�
ft
as
ok
Dave Garing
Henry Krist
Mike Smith
1820 Jefferson Street
P.O. Box 1220
Port Townsend, WA 98368
Dave Garing Henry Krist Michael smith
MINUTES
June 29, 2015
Chairman
Vice -Chairman
Member
Chairman Dave Garing called the meeting to order at 9:30 a.m. in the presence of Vice -Chairman Henry
Krist and Member Michael Smith.
EQUALIZATION
Member Smith moved to equalize an unimproved parcel that was inadvertently left out of the
equalization located in the North Bay area of Port Ludlow as follows:
Parcel # Property Owner Name Current Assessed Value Equalized Value
990 600 113 Melvin Smith $56,063 $40,250
Vice -Chairman Krist seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote.
HEARINGS
F&P Durbin Family Trust BOE: 14-35-R PN: 957 306 704
Pat Durbin, Trustee
1932 Washington Street
Port Townsend, WA 98368
Pat Durbin was present. Appraiser Robert Shold represented the Assessor's Office. After explaining
the hearing process, Chairman Garing swore in both parties. Under appeal is the land and
improvement value of property located at 1932 Washington Street, Port Townsend.
The property was assessed as of January 1, 2014 and is currently valued at $617,776 ($311,262 for the
land and $306,514 for the improvements). The appellant estimates the value to be $588,358 ($296,440
for the land and $291,918 for the improvements).
Vice -Chairman Krist informed the other members that he is acquainted with the appellant and he would
recuse himself if either party felt he was unable to make an unbiased decision. Neither party had any
objection to him hearing and making a decision on this appeal.
Phone (360)385-9100 Fax (360)385-9382 jeftbocc@co.jefferson.wa.us
Board of Equalization Minutes — June 29, 2015 Page: 2
The appellant stated that even though her physical address is Washington Street, there is no vehicle
access to the home from Washington Street. Within the last year an appraisal was performed on the
property and home. She was surprised that the value established by the appraisal was so low, however
her Realtor told her that because of the condition of the neighboring property her home was given a
lower value. She asked that she be given a reduction until the neighbor's property is cleaned up.
Appraiser Shold asked if the appellant submitted a copy of her appraisal as evidence? The appellant
responded that she did not provide a copy of the appraisal.
Appraiser Shold stated that the condition of the neighbor's property has an impact on the appellant's
value. He would like to know how much of a reduction the independent appraiser gave the appellant's
property. He said the appellant is receiving a reduction for the limited access to the property. Discussion
ensued regarding properties that sold in the neighborhood.
The appellant volunteered to provide a copy of her appraisal to the Board and the Assessor's Office.
Chairman Garing stated that the hearing will be continued pending receipt of the appraisal.
Helm Living Trust BOE: 14-11-R PN: 601 074 023
Frederic Helm, Trustee
9202 NW 27th Avenue
Vancouver, WA 98665
Frederic Helm and Eric Helm were present. Appraiser John Pray represented the Assessor's Office.
After explaining the hearing process, Chairman Garing swore in all parties. Under appeal is the value
of property located at 500 Point Whitney Road, Brinnon.
The property was assessed as of January 1, 2014 and is currently valued at $213,300 ($135,400 for the
land and $77,900 for the improvements). The appellant estimates the value to be $160,600 ($145,400 for
the land and $15,200 for the improvements).
The appellant stated that he requested the information the Assessor used in valuing his property and
when he received the information it was unreadable. Without the Assessor's information he stated he
was unable to determine how his property was valued.
Appraiser Pray stated he visited the appellant's property and was told that he was not allowed on the
property unless the owner was present. He then left the premises. He later contacted the appellant and
requested a meeting at the property so he could perform a physical inspection. The appellant informed
him that he is only available on weekends. The structure is described as a garage on the field sheet.
However, when Appraiser Pray was at the property he observed that the garage doors have been
removed and replaced with wooden walls and windows. The woman who greeted him came out of the
`garage' and was dressed in pajamas. Appraiser Pray concluded that the `garage' was turned into a
living space and valued it at $75 per square foot.
The appellant stated the space is used as a recreational area. The garage doors are still intact in the open
position with the opening framed in to ensure a tighter seal.
Chairman Garing asked the appellant if he and Appraiser Pray could agree on a mutual time to visit the
Board of Equalization Minutes - June 29, 2015 Page: 3
property? The appellant responded that he is only available on the weekends. Chairman Garing then
asked if Appraiser Pray could perform a site visit to look at the property without entering the structure?
The appellant stated that in the past, the Assessor's Office have made errors when assessing other
property owned by him. He stated he is unwilling to allow the Assessor's representative to visit the
property when he is not present.
Member Smith asked if the structure is used as living space? The appellant responded that it is used as a
garage/hobby area. There is a recreational vehicle (RV) adjacent to the garage that is used as the living
area. There is and always has been a bathroom in the garage.
In response to a question about how the appellant determined his estimate of value, the appellant stated
he used the values from the previous assessment because he feels that is the correct value.
Chairman Garing asked the appellant what his estimate would be to replace the structure? The appellant
replied that he has not built a garage in quite some time and is not sure how much it would cost. In
response to a question about how much the structure is insured for, the appellant said he did not have the
figures in front of him but he thought it was around $20,000.
Vice -Chairman Krist asked what rate per square foot is usually given to value a garage? Appraiser Pray
replied that a garage is typically valued at $25-$50 per square foot.
Appraiser Pray stated that when he drove up to the structure he noticed that the garage doors were gone,
the walls were framed, and there were nice windows which led him to believe that it had been turned
into a living space. He valued it at $75.00 per square foot and he said he could be wrong, but without
seeing the inside he had to assume the condition of the structure.
Chairman Garing stated that without evidence from the appellant such as photos of the living area, the
Board must presume the Assessor's value to be correct.
The appellant reiterated that no improvements, other than the plugs in the garage doors have been made
to the structure.
Appraiser Pray stated that the structure was valued as a garage and it is obviously not being used as a
garage.
The appellant stated he parks his motorcycle in the structure.
Discussion ensued regarding solar panels that are installed on the structure. The appellant stated that the
power from the solar panels serves two parcels. When asked the cost of installing the panels, the
appellant replied he spent approximately $30,000. Appraiser Pray stated the Assessor's Office has
established a flat value of $5,000 for solar panels. However, they are aware that the cost to install solar
panels is much higher.
Member Smith asked what type of fixtures are in the bathroom? The appellant responded that the
bathroom has a toilet and a sink. Member Smith then asked if there is a shower? The appellant replied,
no. When asked if there is a kitchen in the structure, the appellant responded no.
Board of Equalization Minutes — June 29, 2015 Page: 4
Hearing no further testimony, Chairman Garing closed the hearing. The Board will make a
determination at a later date.
Karl & Sandra Jacobsen BOE: 14-68-R PN: 001 321 012
4372 S. Discovery Road
Port Townsend, WA 98368
14 -69 -LO 001324 058
14 -70 -LO 001 324 061
Karl Jacobsen was present. Appraiser John Pray represented the Assessor's Office. After explaining
the hearing process, Chairman Garing swore in both parties. Under appeal is the value of property
located at 4372 S. Discovery Road, Port Townsend.
The property was assessed as of January 1, 2014 and the following is the current assessment and the
appellants' estimate of value for the parcels under appeal:
Parcel No. Current Assessed Value Appellant's Estimate of Value
001 321 012 $818,994 ($254,760 Land/$564,234 imp.) $677,097 ($231,600 land/$445,497 imp.)
001 324 058 $616 (Land Only) $560 (Land Only)
001 324 061 $1,870 (Land Only) $1,700 (Land Only)
The appellant stated he just received the Assessor's information and did not have time to review the
documents.
Chairman Garing asked Appraiser Pray his reason for not providing the appellant the requested
information prior to the deadline? Appraiser Pray apologized for not meeting the deadline.
Chairman Garing offered to reschedule the hearing in order for the appellant to have sufficient time to
review the Assessor's information. The appellant stated he would like to proceed with the hearing as
scheduled.
The appellant said he did not agree with the Assessor's comparable property sale #1. Although, both are
considered waterfront, the Assessor's comparable property sale is a custom architectural design and his
home is a rambler. He feels the property listed for sale at 480 Adelma Beach Road, Port Townsend is a
better comparable property. It is the same size, style and fronts the water. As of January 1, 2014 the
current assessed value of the appellant's comparable property listing is $480,950. It has been listed for
sale below assessed value for almost 650 days and has not sold. He discussed a recent sale of
comparable property that sold in June 2015 for $700,000. The current assessed value is $700,680. He
argued that his property is comparable and is assessed at $818,994. The appellant stated that he does not
feel he should be assessed on waterfront that he is unable to do anything with. Values have increased
10% and he does not agree with that increase.
Appraiser Pray stated that he visited the appellant's property in 2011 when construction of the home
began. Schweizer Construction was the contractor and is known to use high quality materials. He
discussed the following adjustments listed on the field sheet: 15% market adjustment; 1% depreciation;
and an increase of 10% for the statistical update. Discussion ensued regarding the value per square foot
of the appellant's home. He noted that the appellant indicated on his appeal form that the home has been
Board of Equalization Minutes — June 29, 2015 Page: 5
remodeled, but neglected to include the cost of the remodel.
The appellant agreed that Schweizer Construction built his home in 2011. He disputes the quality of
craftsmanship of his home and informed the Board that he will be filing a lawsuit in the amount of
$50,000 against the builder. When asked to provide an example of poor quality, the appellant stated that
1,500 feet of hardwood floors have to be replaced; the roof leaks; the roof above the garage door sags;
and the fireplace is unfinished and unusable. The home is structurally sound, but the contractor did not
provide the quality of construction he promised. He estimated the cost to cure to be $35,000-$50,000.
The appellant's home was valued at 100% complete as of January 1, 2014.
Appraiser Pray stated the appellant is also appealing two bare land parcels which consist of tidelands.
He stated that tidelands are valued at a standard rate of $20 per foot and have been at that rate for over
10 years. Discussion ensued regarding the sale of tidelands.
Based on the appellant's testimony regarding the poor quality of construction, Chairman Garing
recommended that the hearing be continued to allow Appraiser Pray time to visit the property and
document the problems alleged by the appellant. It is possible that the appellant and the Assessor's
representative will come to a mutual agreement on the value of the property and make a
recommendation to the Board.
The Board concurred to continue the hearing pending the receipt of additional information.
Karl & Sandra Jacobsen BOE: 14 -71 -LO PN: 977 100 802
4372 S. Discovery Road
Port Townsend, WA 98368
14 -72 -LO
977100 811
Karl Jacobsen was present. Appraiser Charley Hough represented the Assessor's Office. After
explaining the hearing process, Chairman Garing swore in both parties. Under appeal is the value of
two bare land parcels located in Ocean Grove Estates, Port Townsend.
The property was assessed as of January 1, 2014 and the following is the current assessment and the
appellants' estimate of value for the parcels under appeal:
Parcel No. Current Assessed Value Appellant's Estimate of Value
977 100 802 $15,400 (Land Only) $14,000 (Land Only)
977 100 811 $38,500 (Land Only) $28,000 (Land Only)
The appellant stated that the value of one parcel has increased by 10% and the value of the other
parcel has increase by 37.5%. Based on current septic regulations, each individual parcel is
unbuildable. He is unable to connect to the community septic system. The lots were purchased in
order to have beach access. He testified that a power vault is located on one parcel which requires
substantial setbacks. Both parcels are needed for a building site and to install a septic system. The
appellant discussed his 2012 Board of Equalization appeal and decision.
Board of Equalization Minutes — June 29, 2015 Page: 6
Appraiser Hough stated that Ocean Grove Estates has a community drainfield that is monitored by the
Public Utility District (PUD) # 1. The PUD only allows a certain number of licenses for `bedrooms' in
the development in order to limit over usage of the community drainfield. If the system is operating
sufficiently, the PUD can allow additional licenses to hook up to the community drainfield. In 2012,
Appraiser Hough talked with the Ocean Grove President who informed him that the PUD had issued
additional licenses. Property owners who have not used their allotted number of licenses can trade,
sell or keep them for future use. It is difficult to keep track of which properties have licenses. The
Assessor's Office performed a statistical update in this area. The appellants' parcels increased 10%.
Appraiser Hough provided the following documents for review:
• Area map of appellants' property;
• Field sheet for appellants' property;
• Excise Tax Affidavit of the appellants' property; and
• Sales Chart Listing Ratio (Neighborhood Code #5560)
Appraiser Hough stated that there seems to be a discrepancy on the value of parcel #977 100 811. The
land base value should be $28,000 with a 10% increase for the statistical update for a total of
$30,800. Discussion ensued concerning the process for acquiring a license for `bedrooms.'
The appellant stated that there is a waiting list for licenses to be able to connect to the community
drainfield. The cost to install a septic system on your property is very costly. Based on the fact that a
potential buyer would factor the cost of installing a septic system, the appellant feels his current value
should be reduced.
In response to a question about whether the appellants' parcels are buildable, Appraiser Hough stated
there is no evidence to show that they are unbuildable.
Discussion ensued concerning the size of the electrical vault located on the property and the required
setbacks. The appellant stated he believes the vault is 10 x 10' in size and there is a 10 foot setback.
He said he can plant grass right up to the vault, however a driveway, trees, any structures, etc. are
required to setback 10 feet.
Hearing no further testimony, Chairman Garing closed the hearing. The Board will make a
determination at a later date.
DISCUSSION re: Port Ludlow Associates - Ludlow Cove II: Assessor Jeff Chapman stated that in
late 2014, the Jefferson County Assessor's Office set up the plat of Ludlow Cove Division II. At that
time all of the lots were assumed to have the same excellent, unobstructed water view and were
valued as such. He stated that upon development not all of the lots will have the same excellent water
view, nor the same market value. He has requested permission from the Washington State
Department of Revenue for the Jefferson County Board of Equalization to reconvene in order to
equalize 29 parcels located in Ludlow Cove Division II. The Assessor is recommending certain
parcels be reduced from their 2014 value of $200,000 to a range of $40,000 to $100,000. Assessor
Chapman will keep the Board informed of this issue.
Board of Equalization Minutes — June 29, 2015 Page: 7
NOTICE OF ADJOURNMENT
Vice -Chairman Krist moved to adjourn the meeting at 12:30 p.m. Member Smith seconded the
motion which carried by a unanimous vote.
ATTEST:.
/�e�rk
she R. Lock, the Board
JEFFERSON COUNTY
BOARD OF EQUALIZATION
Dave Gan Charman
Henry Krist, V
Mi Smith, Member