Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutM101090 JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF EQUALIZATION A. C. DALGLEISH DAVID G. DOUGLAS ARCHIE BARBER, JR. JAMES A. DE LEO CHAIRMAN VICE-CHAIRMAN MEMBER ALTERNATE M I N U T E s OCT 0 B E R 1 0, 1 9 9 0 The Board of Equalization convened at 9:00 a.m. with Chairman A.C. Dalgleish, Vice-Chairman David G. Douglas, Member Archie Barber, Jr. and Clerk Dierdrei Keegan present. The Board dispensed with the reading of the Minutes of previous meetings at this time. HEARINGS DISCUSSION REGARDING BOWDISH PETITIONS: Jeff Chapman was present on behalf of the Assessor's Office. Chairman Dalgleish noted that the Clerk tried to reach Mr. and Mrs. Bowdish on October 4, 1990 after receiving a message that Mrs. Bowdish had called to say Mr. Bowdish couldn't leave Montana for medical reasons and that they wanted to reschedule. Clerk Keegan left a message on the Bowdish' s answering machine stating that they need not be present, that the hearing could be conducted with their written testimony, and that they should call back. The Bowdishs did not return the call. On October 9, 1990 Clerk Keegan spoke with the appraiser, Jeff Chapman, who stated he was prepared for the hearing and that he hoped it would be held. The Board members concurred that the four Bowdish hearings should take place as scheduled (BOE: 90-067-LO, BOE: 90-068-R, BOE: 90-069- R, and BOE: 90-070-LO). The hearings follow. Board of Equalization Exhibits: Exhibit A: Phone message from Secretary to Clerk dated October 4, 1990. Exhibit B: Clerk Keegan's note dated October 10, 1990 regarding attempt to reach Mr. and Mrs. Bowdish, interaction with Jeff Chapman, and Board decision to hear petition. Board of Equalization: Minutes of October 10, 1990 Page: 2 BOWDISH, Thomas G. 422 Zanzibar Place Billings, Montana 59105 BOE: 90-067-LO PN: 993 500 009 Jeff Chapman was present on behalf of the Assessor's Chairman Dalgleish read the petition into the Minutes meeting in the absence of Mr. and Mrs. Bowdish. Office. of the Leqal Description: This improved property is described as Seamount Estates Division #4, Lot 9 sited at 174 cirque Drive, Brinnon and listed as Tax District 441, Land Use Code 9800 and Neighborhood Code 1285. The topography of the land is clear and sloping and the lot is rated at $12,000 plus $500 in site improvements. The building improvements, which are not being contested as they are considered "reasonable", consist of a "small swimming pool 75% complete". The petitioner noted that the pool cannot be completed before a home is built. The home will be built around the swimming pool. The property was purchased June 25, 1976. Assessed Valuation: Land Only: Improvements: Total Valuation: $ 12,500 5.000 17,500 Petitioner ReQUest: Land Only: Improvements: Total Valuation: $ 9,000 5.000 14,000 Petitioner's Testimony: Mr. Bowdish stated in his petition that this is the first time he felt the valuation to be "unfair enough to file" a petition. He stated: "[The] Land evaluation jumping from 8,500 to 12,500 is very unreasonable. I thought [the] 1989 Assessment for [the] 1990 Taxes of 12,680 was unreasonable for buildings but revaluation to 5,000 is reasonable. Should get a refund from 1990 because of this over valuation. Land comparable to Parcel #993-500- 001". Petitioner's Comparable: Comparable #1: Parcel Number 993-500-011 sold for $10,000 on March 24, 1988. The property is described as Lot 11, replat of Seamount Estates Division 4, Vol 6, page 63. Purchased by Mr. and Mrs. Bowdish. Board of Equalization: Minutes of October 10, 1990 Page: 3 Petitioner's Exhibits: Exhibit #1: Exhibit #2: Exhibit #3: Exhibit #4: Exhibit #5: Change of Value Notice for subject parcel: 1990 Assessment for 1991 Taxes. Change of Value Notice for subject parcel: 1989 Assessment for 1990 Taxes. Jefferson Title Company document titled "Jefferson Title Escrow Schedule A" with an Agent Order No. E#2 8 6 6. The property description for the comparable PN: 993-500-011 is highlighted and an escrow Owner's Policy is presented in the amount of $10,000. Title Officer, Jane Swanson. Plat Map of Seamount Estates showing the subject parcel and the comparable. Real Estate Purchase and Sale Agreement with Earnest Money provision showing Mr. and Mrs. Bowdish as the purchasers of the comparable at the price of $10,000. Assessor's Testimony: Jeff Chapman noted that the property was purchased in November 1977. He confirmed that the comparable listed, Lot 11, was purchased by Mr. and Mrs. Bowdish for $10,000 in April of 1988. He explained that the petitioners aren't appealing the improvement value and clarified the difference between the Change of Value Notice and the actual assessed valua- tion listed on the Computer Fieldsheet (Assessor's Exhibit II). The Assessor's Office had mistakenly valued this parcel with a garage for the improvements, when in actuality the garage was on a different parcel. The confusion occurred because Mr. Bowdish owns Lots 9, 10, and 11. The garage is on Lot 10 and the swimming pool is on Lot 9. The previous assessor thought both the pool and garage were on Lot 9, and therefore assessed it at $12,680. That value has now been split between the two lots ($5,000 for the pool and $7,680 for the garage). The value wasn't lowered, it was just reallocated to the correct lots. Mr. Chapman feels that Mr. Bowdish has been confused by these changes. Assessor's Exhibits: Exhibit I: Exhibit II: Map of subject parcel and adjacent parcels showing improvements as correctly allocated. Computer Fieldsheet for subject parcel, Lot 9, showing correct valuation with a pool on this lot. Board of Equalization: Minutes of October 10, 1990 Page: 4 Exhibit III: Computer Fieldsheet for Lot 10, showing correct valuation with a garage on this lot. computer Fieldsheet for Lot 11, showing land valuation without improvements. Mr. Bowdish is using this lot as a comparable for all his petitions (above). Parcel Number 993-500-011 sold for $10,000 on March 24, 1988. Jeff Chapman explained that there have been four sales in the last four years between 1986 and 1988 in the area of the subject property. Exhibit IV: Assessor's Comparables: comparable #1: March 24, 1988, Lot 11 sold to Mr. and Mrs. Bowdish for $10,0000. Comparable #2: 1986, Lot 6 sold for $10,000. Comparable #3: July 1988, Lot 16 sold for $15,000. Comparable #4: March 1987, Lot 21 sold for $16,100. Mr. Chapman explained that in evaluating these properties the Assessor's Office used a three tier system: $10,000 for non-view lots back on the hill; $12,000 for lots with some kind of view in preferable areas; and $12,000 for lots with additional adjustments for site improvements and for topography or view problems. He noted that there were current sales in other divisions that were not in the subject property area. He also stated that: Adjustments were not made for view or topography problems on lots 9, 10, or 11. Each lot has a base value of $12,000. Lot 9 has an additional $500 added for site improvements as a result of the swimming pool. Lot 10 has an additional $500 added for site improvements for the electricity hook-up for the garage. Lot 11, which is being used as the comparable, is considered an inferior lot to Lots 9 and 10 as it is situated in a "hole". He noted that Lot 11 should have been given a downward adjustment, as it is considered the "worst" lot in the area, but this was not done. He explained that the sales of the area justify the valuations on Lots 9 and 10 and that Lot 9 is definitely worth the $12,500 it is currently valued at. The site is clear and level with a water view better than the "fair water" view it is currently classified as having. There is a view of the Hood Canal. Board Action: The Board took this petition under advisement and will conduct an on-site inspection before a determination is made. Board of Equalization: Minutes of October 10, 1990 Page: 5 BOWDISH, Thomas G. 422 Zanzibar Place Billings, Montana 59105 Jeff Chapman was present on behalf of the Assessor's Office. Chairman Dalgleish read the petition into the Minutes of the meeting in the absence of Mr. and Mrs. Bowdish. BOE: 90-068-R PN: 993 500 010 Leqal Description: This property is described as Seamount Estates Division #4, Lot 10 within Tax District 441, with Land Use Code 9800, and Neighborhood Code 1285. This improved lot is valued at $12,000 with a $500 site improvement value of $500 for electrical connections to the garage (which is valued at $7,680). The garage is not under appeal. The total value of this parcel is $20,180. Assessed Valuation: Land Only: Improvements: Total Valuation: $ 12,500 7.680 20,180 Petitioner ReQUest: Land Only: Improvements: Total Valuation: $ 9,000 7.680 16,680 Petitioner's Testimony: Mr. Bowman stated on his petition that the property is zoned residential and has an unfinished garage on the land. He purchased the property on June 25, 1976. He noted that this is the first time he thought the valuation to be unfair enough to file an appeal and that: "(The] Land evaluation jumping from 8,500 to 12,500 is very unreasonable. [The] Building may be a little high but [I] will not question it at this time. Land comparable to Parcel #993- 500-011 stated above {same comparable used on Lot 9}." Petitioner's Comparable: Comparable #1: Parcel Number 993-500-011 sold for $10,000 on March 24, 1988. The property is described as Lot 11, replat of Seamount Estates Division 4, Vol 6, page 63. Purchased by Mr. and Mrs. Bowdish. Petitioner's Exhibits: Exhibit #1: Change of Value Notice for subject parcel: 1990 Assessment for 1991 Taxes. Board of Equalization: Minutes of October 10, 1990 Page: 6 Exhibit #2: Exhibit #3: Exhibit #4: Jefferson Title Company document titled "Jefferson Title Escrow Schedule A" with an Agent Order No. E#2866. The property description for the comparable PN: 993-500-011 is highlighted and an escrow Owner's policy is presented in the amount of $10,000. Title Officer, Jane Swanson. Real Estate Purchase and Sale Agreement with Earnest Money provision showing Mr. and Mrs. Bowdish as the purchasers of the comparable at the price of $10,000. Plat Map of Seamount Estates showing the subject parcel and the comparable. Assessor's Testimony: Jeff Chapman explained that the Assessor's argument is similar to the previous case (BOE: 90-067-LO) and that he does not believe Lot 11 is comparable as it has inferior topography to Lots 9 and 10. He believes that Lot 10 was worth what it is valued at when it was unimproved, and that it was considered a buildable, separate lot. Now it appears that the garage was built (on the only home site on Lot 10) to serve a home to be built on Lot 9. It may still be possible to build a home on Lot 10, but it would not be easy. Mr. Chapman now considers this to be a "utility lot to serve Lot 9". Board Comment: Chairman Dalgleish noted that it would be to the peti tioners' advantage to combine Lot 9 and 10 into one parcel number, thereby creating one building site. Assessor's Testimony continued: Jeff Chapman agreed that combining the two lots would be to the advantage of Mr. and Mrs. Bowdish. Mr. Chapman stated that he would support a reduction on Lot 10 for the lack of buildable space, as it is mainly serving Lot 9 as a utility lot. He believes the lot may have the same value as Lot 9, but it has obsolescence as a result of the location of the garage. A reduction of 15% is recommended, which brings the value of the lot down to $10,200. Assessor's Exhibits: Exhibit I: Exhibit II: Map of subject parcel and adjacent parcels showing improvements as correctly allocated. Computer Fieldsheet for subject parcel Lot 10, showing correct valuation with a garage on this lot. Board of Equalization: Minutes of October 10, 1990 Page: 7 Exhibit III: Computer Fieldsheet for Lot 9, showing correct valuation with a pool on this lot. Exhibit IV: Computer Fieldsheet for Lot 11, showing land valuation without improvements. Mr. Bowdish is using this lot as a comparable for all his petitions (above). Parcel Number 993-500-011 sold for $10,000 on March 24, 1988. Jeff Chapman explained that there have been four sales in the last four years between 1986 and 1988 in the area of the subject property. Assessor's Comparables: Comparable #1: March 24, 1988, Lot 11 sold to Mr. and Mrs. Bowdish for $10,0000. Comparable #2: 1986, Lot 6 sold for $10,000. Comparable #3: July 1988, Lot 16 sold for $15,000. Comparable #4: March 1987, Lot 21 sold for $16,100. Mr. Chapman explained that in evaluating these properties the Assessor's Office used a three tier system: $10,000 for non-view lots back on the hill; $12,000 for lots with some kind of view in preferable areas; and $12,000 for lots with additional adjustments for site improvements and for topography or view problems. He noted that there were current sales in other divisions that were not in the subject property area. He also stated that: Adjustments were not made for view or topography problems on lots 9, 10, or 11. Each lot has a base value of $12,000. Lot 9 has an additional $500 added for site improvements as a result of the swimming pool. Lot 10 has an additional $500 added for site improvements for the electricity hook-up for the garage. Lot 11, which is being used as the comparable, is considered an inferior lot to Lots 9 and 10 as it is situated in a "hole". He noted that Lot 11 should have been given a downward adjustment, as it is considered the "worst" lot in the area, but this was not done. He explained that the sales of the area justify the base valuations on Lots 9 and 10. His recommendation on Lot 10 was to reduce it by 15% for obsolescence due to the placement of the garage on the main buildable site. Board Action: The Board took this petition under advisement and will conduct an on-site inspection before a determination is made. Board of Equalization: Minutes of October 10, 1990 Page: 8 BOWDISH, Thomas G. 422 Zanzibar Place Billings, Montana 59105 Jeff Chapman was present on behalf of the Assessor's Office. Chairman Dalgleish read the petition into the Minutes of the meeting in the absence of Mr. and Mrs. Bowdish. BOE: 90-070-LO PN: 993 500 011 Leqal Description: This property is described as Seamount Estates Division #4, Lot 11. The land consists of one unimproved site valued at $12,000. Assessed Valuation: Land Only: Improvements: Total Valuation: $ 12,000 NONE 12,000 Petitioner ReQUest: Land Only: Improvements: Total Valuation: $ 9,000 NONE 9,000 Petitioner's Testimony: Mr. Bowdish reported he purchased the property in 1988 for $10,000. comparab1es but he stated that: in his petition that He did not list any "[The] Land evaluation jumping from 8,500 to 12,000 is unreasonable - I purchased this lot March 24, 1988 for 10,000." Petitioner's Exhibits: Exhibit #1: Plat Map of Seamount Estates showing the subject parcel. Exhibit #2: Jefferson Title Company document titled "Jefferson Title Escrow Schedule A" with an Agent Order No. E#2866. The property description for the comparable PN: 993-500-011 is highlighted and an escrow Owner's Policy is presented in the amount of $10,000. Title Officer, Jane Swanson. Exhibit #3: Real Estate Purchase and Sale Agreement with Earnest Money provision showing Mr. and Mrs. Bowdish as the purchasers of the comparable at the price of $10,000. Board of Equalization: Minutes of October 10, 1990 Page: 9 Assessor's Testimony: Jeff Chapman reported that he doesn't have any problem reducing the valuation of this property by 25% for lack of view and poor topography. The reduction would give Lot 11 a valuation of $9,000 as requested by Mr. Bowdish. He did note that if a buyer wanted a buffer, the property could be sold for more than $9,000. Assessor's Exhibits: Exhibit I: Map of subject parcel and adjacent parcels showing improvements as correctly allocated. Exhibit II: Computer Fieldsheet for subject parcel Lot 11, showing correct valuation without improvements. Exhibit III: Computer Fieldsheet for Lot 9, showing correct valuation with a pool on this lot. Exhibit IV: computer Fieldsheet for Lot 10, showing correct valuation with a garage on this lot. Mr. Chapman explained that in evaluating the Seamount Estates properties the Assessor's Office used a three tier system: $10,000 for non-view lots back on the hill; $12,000 for lots with some kind of view in preferable areas; and $12,000 for lots with additional adjustments for site improvements and for topography or view problems. He also stated that: Adjustments were not made for view or topography problems on lots 9, 10, or 11. Each lot has a base value of $12,000. Lot 9 has an additional $500 added for site improvements as a result of the swimming pool. Lot 10 has an additional $500 added for site improvements for the electricity hook-up for the garage. Lot 11, which is being used as the comparable, is considered an inferior lot to Lots 9 and 10 as it is situated in a "hole". He noted that Lot 11 should have been given a downward adjustment, as it is considered the "worst" lot in the area, but this was not done. He explained that the sales of the area justify the base valuations on Lots 9 and 10. His recommendation on Lot 11 is to reduce it by 25% for poor topography and view. Board Action: The Board took this petition under advisement and will conduct an on-site inspection before a determination is made. Board of Equalization: Minutes of October 10, 1990 Page: 10 BOWDISH, Thomas G. 422 Zanzibar Place Billings, Montana 59105 Jeff Chapman was present on behalf of the Assessor's Off ice. Chairman Dalgleish read the petition into the Minutes of the meeting in the absence of Mr. and Mrs. Bowdish. BOE: 90-069-R PN: 993 200 017 Leqal Description: This improved property is described as Seamount Estates, Division #2, Lot 17 and includes a one story 20' x 20' "shed" (cabin) constructed of cement block with a metal roof and of average quality and condition with a physical depreciation of 32% (not under appeal). The land is situated at 71 Chinook Drive in Brinnon and consists of one non-view lot with clear, level topography valued at $10,000. The parcel has one improved site valued at $1,500. The property includes beach rights. Assessed Valuation: Land Only: Improvements: Total Valuation: $ 11,500 7.025 18,525 Petitioner ReQUest: Land Only: Improvements: Total Valuation: $ 8,000 7,025 15,025 Petitioner's Testimonv: Mr. Bowdish reported on his petition that he purchased the property on July 1, 1973 and that this is the first time he felt the valuation to be unfair enough to file. He stated that he is supplying one comparable from Seamount Estates Division #4, Lot 11, as it is from the same vicinity. He also stated: "[The] Land evaluation jumping from 8,500 to 11,500 is very unreasonable. I have no problem with the building evaluation. This lot does not compare in value to parcel number 993-500-011 (above). This lot has been over valued in comparison." Petitioner's comparable: Comparable #1: Parcel Number 993-500-011 sold for $10,000 on March 24, 1988. The property is described as Lot 11, replat of Seamount Estates Division 4, Vol 6, page 63. Purchased by Mr. and Mrs. Bowdish. Board of Equalization: Minutes of October 10, 1990 Petitioner's Exhibits: Page: 11 Exhibit #1: Exhibit #2: Exhibit #3: Exhibit #4: Jefferson Title Company document titled "Jefferson Title Escrow Schedule A" with an Agent Order No. E#2866. The property description for the comparable PN: 993-500-011 is highlighted and an escrow Owner's Policy is presented in the amount of $10,000. Title Officer, Jane Swanson. Plat Map of Seamount Estates showing the subject parcel. Plat Map of Seamount Estates showing the comparable, Lot 11 of Division #4. Change of Value Notice for subject parcel: 1990 Assessment for 1991 Taxes. Assessor's Testimony: Jeff Chapman explained that he does not believe that Mr. Bowdish's comparable, Lot 11 Division #4, is comparable to Lot 17, Division #2. Mr. Chapman stated that the subject parcel is more desirable than Lot 11 and less desirable than Lots 9 and 10. He emphasized that the comparable is in a different area of the Seamount Estates. He explained that the subject property consists of flat land which is well developed with small cabins and mobiles, and that the land has nice park-type sites in a pleasant vacation-home setting. There is water. Assessor's Comparable Sales: Jeff Chapman noted that he used two sales set at $10,000 each in his valuation, and he explained that neither of the sales has a water or territorial view. Comparable Sale #1: Same size lot as sUbject property, Lot 65, Division #1, sold January 1989 for $14,000. The sale included septic, water, and electricity. Affidavit 58030, currently valued at $11,500 with site improvements. The property includes beach rights. Comparable Sale #2: Lot 71, Division #2, sold September 1989 for $10,000 without utilities. Affidavit 60090. Currently this site is valued at $11,500 with utilities as they were installed after the sale. The property includes beach rights. Board of Equalization: Minutes of October 10, 1990 Page: 12 Jeff Chapman noted that these two sales have been used to show the valuation between having utilities installed and not having utilities. The subject property is valued at $10,000 for land and $1,500 for utilities, which is the same method used for valuing the whole area. He pointed out that utilities seemed under-valued in the area. In some areas $2,500 is used as the maximum value for utilities, although to have utilities installed under current regulations, with designers and permitting fees, the cost can run $3,000 to $4,000. A buyer is willing to pay $4,000 more for a site with utilities in. since the previous appraiser was consistent with the $1,500 to $2,500 valuations in the area, Mr. Chapman stated he would have to keep these values. Assessor's Comparable Sales - continued: Jeff Chapman explained that since the appraisal date, January 1, 1990, there have been two sales. Comparable Sale #3: This lot is two lots away from the subj ect property. Lot 15, Division #2 sold July 1990 for $24,000. Affidavit 63091. Currently valued at $11,500 for improved land with improvements consisting of a mobile home valued at $6,835 for a total of $18,335. The property includes beach rights. comparable Sale #4: This lot is adjacent to the subject property. Lot 18, Division #2 sold August 1990 for $24,000. Affidavit 63555. Currently valued at $11,500 for improved land with improvements consisting of a mobile home valued at $2,685 for a total of $14,185. The property includes beach rights. Assessor's Exhibits: Exhibit #I: Computer Fieldsheet of subject property. Small plat map showing subject parcel and comparable sales as presented by the Assessor. Exhibit #II: Exhibit #III: Large map of Seamount development, with the Divisions indicated. Board Action: The Board took this petition under advisement and will conduct an on-site inspection before making a determination. Board of Equalization: Minutes of October 10, 1990 Page: 13 GRISWOLD, Norman R. 32905 3rd Place South Federal Way, WA 98003 BOE: 90-071-R PN: 936 000 114 Jeff Chapman was present on behalf of the Assessor's Office. Vice-Chairman Douglas was not present at this hearing. Chairman Dalgleish explained the hearing process to Mr. Griswold and swore him in for testimony. Mr. Griswold stated that he did not have any objections to the Assessor's presence at an on-site inspection. Land Description: This property is described as Brinnonwold Block #1, Lot 14 and is in Tax District 441 with Land Use Code 1100 and Neighborhood Code 1345. This improved land is sited at 121 Tog Road, Brinnon. It consists of one improved lot valued at $17,500 with a -10% adjustment for size ($17,500 x 90% = $15,750) plus site improvements of $1,500 for a total land value of $17,250. The improvements consist of a two story house of average(-) quality in good condition with a physical depreciation of 3%. The first floor is 760 square feet and the second floor is 360 square feet for a total of 1,120 square feet plus a 650 square foot deck. This "summer" house is valued at $46,920 including the new construction value of $4,690. Both the house and land are under appeal. 1986 Assessed Valuation: Land Only: $ 15,000 Improvements: 34,600 Total Valuation: 49,600 Land Only: $ 17,250 Improvements: 46.920 Total Valuation: 64,170 Land Only: $ 15,000 Improvements: 30,000 Total Valuation: 45,000 1990 Assessed Valuation: Petitioner ReQUest: Petitioner's Testimonv: Mr. Griswold stated that the house on the property is a summer home. He stated that he believes the land is "registered on the basis of previous or current sales, relatively recent sales". Mr. Griswold said that although there isn't a lot of activity, there is one recent sale of a comparable to his Lot 14. His Lot does have community beach rights (not purchased beach rights) : Board of Equalization: Minutes of October 10, 1990 Page: 14 Petitioner's Comparable: Lot 16 recently Jeff Chapman). rights. Comparable #2: Not confirmed sale; Block 2, Lot 1 sold for $9,800 (Jeff Chapman did not try to confirm either) . sold for $12,000 (confirmed by There are community beach comparable #1: Comparable #3: Not confirmed sale; Block 2, Lot 2 sold for $9,800 (Jeff Chapman did not try to confirm either) . Mr. Griswold explained that his home is not a two story house and that the roof joists are within three feet of the "second" floor. One side of the upper level is used for a storage room. He considers the building a 1 1/2 story residence, not two story. He remarked that he cannot walk up to the walls of the second floor and that his plans reflected a 20 x 30 structure, or 600 square feet, which is not the square footage the Assessor's Office has. Mr. Griswold reported that the floor of the residence is 100% vinyl and he uses throw rugs instead of carpeting, there are electric baseboards and a wood stove, there is only one bathroom with a shower stall, there isn't a dishwasher hook-up, the range plugs in, there is a filter in the stove, there is a garbage disposal, the water comes from a community well, and there is a septic tank. Mr. Griswold stated that the house is complete now, and that he understands the necessity for the appraiser to make assumptions on some of the improvements. He also stated that he feels he could more than adequately replace the residence with the $31,000 insurance he has on the home. Assessor's Testimony: Jeff Chapman agreed that the sale of Lot 12 is the most comparable to the subject property. It was noted that some lots have purchased beach rights, but all lots have community beach rights of approximately 400 feet, as does Mr. Griswold's lot. He also reported that Lot 13 listed for $16,000 in August (lowered from the asking price of $17,000). He explained that in 1986 the land was valued at $14,000 with $1,000 in site improvements for a total of $15,000 and that the raise in valuation on the land is due to the improvements added to the land. Board of Equalization: Minutes of October 10, 1990 Page: 15 BLOCK #1. 1986 BLOCK #1. 1990 Lot 13 $14,500 (no. imps.) Lot 13 $16,625 (no imps.) Lot 14 $15,000 wI site imps. Lot 14 $17,250 w/site imps. Lot 15 $14,000 (no imps. ) Lot 15 $15,750 (no imps.) Lot 16 $14,000 (no imps. ) Lot 16 $15,750 (no imps. ) Lot 17 $14,000 (no imps. ) Lot 17 $15,750 (no imps. ) Lot 18 $14,000 (no imps. ) Lot 18 $15,750 (no imps. ) Mr. Chapman found that the problem with the lots (listed above) is that the land is steep from the road down to the highway, and in order to provide building sites, grading would need to be done. The difference between the rest of these lots and the appellant's lot (above - bold) is that the grading of a road, the installation of a septic system, and a building site have already been completed and that this work is intrinsic in the land value of the assessed valuation. He noted that a vacant lot may sell for $12,000 while a lot that has these improvements in it is worth more. Jeff Chapman found that the only other lot with a road into it is Lot 13, which is listed for $16,000. Although Jeff Chapman searched the records for the appraiser's justification for raising the subject property value, he could not find any justification. Based on the recent sale and real estate listings, he doesn't believe there was justification for raising the value on the lots. He noted that some lots with good water views didn't get raised. Mr. Chapman explained that the appraisers have not been in Mr. Griswold's residence. He noted that the Assessor's Office has 20 x 36 as the size of the residence. He stated that this is one of the situations where an inspection may be needed as the Assessor's Office may have incorrect information. He stated that the possible changes in interior fixtures and cosmetics would lower the value, but not substantially. Jeff Chapman reported that one of the major reasons for the in- crease in valuation of the improvements is that the home went from 90% complete in 1986 to 100% complete. He maintained that the main issue is what the market value of the property and home is as there aren't any comparables available. The view from the appellant's lot is a "filtered view" through the trees on the highway right- of-way. Board of Equalization: Minutes of October 10, 1990 Page: 16 Jeff Chapman recommended sustaining the appellant's request for $15,000 on Lot 14 with the additional recommendation that Lots 13, 15, 16, 17, and 18 be reduced to $13,500 (including $1,500 each for site improvements), based on equity. He noted that he does believe that Mr. Griswold should be on at $16,000 or $17,000 (because of his site improvements) and the other lots should be reduced to $12,000. Jeff Chapman had no recommendation on the house valuation as he stated that he needs to work on the value based on the updated information presented at this hearing. Assessor's Exhibits: Exhibit #1: Exhibit #2: Exhibit #J: Exhibit #4: Exhibit #5: Exhibit #6: Plat Map of Brinnonwold with listing of land values and subject property marked. Computer Fieldsheet for subject property, Lot 14. Computer Fieldsheet for Lot 13. Computer Fieldsheet for Lot 15. Computer Fieldsheet for Lot 16. Computer Fieldsheet for Lot 17. Board Action: will not make conducted. The Board took this petition under advisement and a determination until an on-site inspection has been Board of Equalization: Minutes of October 10, 1990 Page: 17 OTHER BUSINESS OF THE BOARD There being no further business before the Board, the meeting adjourned until October 17, 1990 at which time the Board will conduct scheduled hearings. APPROVED BY: DATE APPROVED l..-G."Wh"rf 3;-f.31if l1i~fiCHAIRMAN ~ A=rED BYI{~~ DIERDREI EGAN ~ j.,CU~OA' DAVID " UG .' VICE CHAIRMAN ~B!/~~