Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutM112895 Jefferson County Board of Equalization TELEPHONE: 385.9100 COURTHOUSE P.O. BOX 1220 PORT TOWNSEND, WASHINGTON 98368 r--r~< ::.; '=~. .~.. ~r , ~::,>+r~ E:.;_-__-.--l2c~ _--:rj. .""-J /,:,.J'..' - /---._" .. .. III. ' ..Ar.--:?...., , '., . '.',' 'J~:,..'........, fA ^,.., ,,,...' f ';+-;."'0;':$ ~.. .. .. .. c ,r:~', "'"4). '....~..!!.,i." .~,... ;'.....',tS1!..... "i"" ~~ ....d~ ,;,ri) ...~,~.'~;J\ .....&J '1:/.. "._,:c '_ '~h,' I. ~~, --~',t-~t k.',~,,,,, '.'.~. .~...;~'...":~,. ..........lU.'. ~.:;-.m: __I',~,i!___~-'-'_:' ._ ,,'Ji? of r~,,;', ,'... .. '1ll., ; ,~... \i ~- < :<'-- ," "'- -;:!JJ : L lw .. .. ---'\h",,'~ ~c.. '~1ii~&~\c],QIl j\;;~'i j~~-----:;~~~::"'-~- :..~;--=-~~ JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF EQUALIZA nON MINUTES NOVEMBER 28, 1995 William S. Marlow Richard A. Broders James A. DeLeo Chairman Vice-Chairman Member Chairman William S. Marlow called the meeting to order at 9:30 a.m. in the presence of Vice- Chairman Richard A. Broders. Member James A. DeLeo was not present. HEARINGS David Garing 30 Phinney Lane Port Ludlow, W A 98365 BOE: 95-153-R PN: 977700038 Mr. Garing was present. Robert Kingsley was present on behalf of the Assessor's office. Chairman Marlow explained the hearing process and swore them in. The appellant's property is located on Marrowstone Island. Mr. Garing stated that he realizes hardship is not an issue which is considered by the Board, however, his salary increase was only 3% as compared to the increase in property value of 56%. He spoke with the Assessor's office regarding the method used in valuing the property and Mr. Kingsley was very helpful in explaining it to him. It is Mr. Garing's understanding that smaller waterfront parcels sell for more than larger parcels and therefore, are valued more than larger parcels. He disputes the method used in valuing his property, stating that it is arbitrary. He owns 330 feet of waterfront property which is approximately 2,400 feet deep. Even though it is one parcel, the Assessor's office distributed the total value of the property over two separate halves. The waterfront portion was valued based on the number of waterfront feet, while the back portion was valued on an acreage basis. The property is not subdivided and should not be valued as though it is. Additionally, there is a platted road easement which runs through his property as well as the other properties in that area. According to State law he should not be taxed for that easement. Mr. Garing is requesting the Board reduce the current assessment from $527,695 ($335,700 for the land and $191,995 for the improvements) to $431,000 (a breakdown between land and improvements was not provided). .. \,.1 100% Recycled Paper BOARD OF EQUALIZATION MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 28, 1995 Page 2 Mr. Kingsley stated that in preparing for this case he discovered an inequity in the assessment of a neighboring parcel and requested it be equalized by the Board of Equalization. He explained that property is valued based on market sales. Valuations of waterfront parcels vary according to the neighborhood. Each neighborhood is assigned a standard property depth. A value is given for that depth and if the property is larger than the standard depth, the remaining property is valued separately. The Assessor's office realizes the appellant only owns one parcel. While he agrees the method may be subjective, the ultimate goal is to reach market value of the property. The depth of most of the properties in this area are the same, so an excess depth adjustment was not made. Mr. Kingsley added that there were no sales of330 feet of waterfront property. The largest waterfront parcel to sell in this area was 220 feet. There have been no property sales which compare exactly to the appellant's property, however, that doesn't mean that it is not worth the assessed value. Discussion ensued regarding the method of valuation used by the Assessor's office. After hearing the testimony of both parties the Board concurred to conduct an inspection of the property and make a determination at a later date. D. & G. Heinzinger Family Trust 85 Heinzinger Road Nordland, WA 98358 BOE: 95-168-LO PN: 953 700 436 Mr. Heinzinger was present. Robert Kingsley was present on behalf of the Assessor's office. Chairman Marlow explained the hearing process and swore them in. The appellant's property is located on Marrowstone Island. Mr. Heinzinger stated that his waterfront property has an erosion problem and shoreline regulations prohibit the installation of bulkheads to cure the problem. The property is exposed to severe winds, causing heavy waves, which erode the property more and more each year. The erosion has caused access problems to the tidelands which are used to collect clams and oysters. Additionally, during the winter, the condition of the property becomes swampy. This could cause drainage problems and may prevent development of this property in the future. There is also a road easement across his property which reduces the usability of it. He believes that the odor which originates from the paper mill, also detracts from the value of his property. For these reasons and the known water problems on Marrowstone Island, he feels he would not be able to sell his property for the assessed valuation. The current assessment of the property is $156,980. Mr. Heinzinger is requesting the Board reduce the value to $75,490. Mr. Kingsley stated that all of the issues brought up by Mr. Heinzinger are not unique to his property. Most waterfront properties have the same problems. He believes that the sales which have occurred on Marrowstone Island, take into account the odor from the paper mill. He researched the sales on Marrowstone Island and reported that since August of 1991 there have been 23 sales of bare land waterfront property, and 12 sales of improved waterfront property. Sales do not indicate that property on Marrowstone Island is undesirable. The number of sales in 1995 are equal to those which occurred in 1994 and higher than 1993 & 1992 sales. Discussion ensued regarding contract sales. BOARD OF EQUALIZATION MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 28, 1995 Page 3 After hearing the testimony of both parties the Board concurred to conduct an inspection of the property and make a determination at a later date. Linda Goodman 15516 SE 326th Street Auburn, W A 98092 BOE: 95-125-LO PN: 921 092 020 Ms. Goodman was not present. Robert Kingsley represented the Assessor's office and was sworn in by Chairman Marlow. The appellant's property is located on Marrowstone Island. Attached to the appellant's petition is letter that states the following reasons for her appeal: "First of all, I would like to protest that the jump in valuation from $22,500 to $35,800 is quite a large increase all at once. I want it noted that the increase in the value of my property was improperly compared to an adjoining piece of property that was up for sale, 3 years ago, as having a partial view, through Windamere Realty. This was a misprint or mistake that the appraiser, Mr. Kingsley, used to come up with the new market price. I would like to say that my property has no valuable trees, It has not been perked, has no electricity or phone to the property or easements for them. The access to the property is overgrown and almost inaccessible by car. Most important is the horrendous and ongoing problems with the water table on the island. I wonder if the appraiser took into consideration the problems with bad water and water shortages that have been plaguing the island for years. It is all documented and common knowledge, and a big concern to us land owners. It is a big concern to those who are selling, too, as a lack of water is a big deterrent to prospective land buyers. My property is on a steep slope. Drilling would be very expensive. Anyway, I wanted to take the time to state a few factors that maybe should be taken into consideration when appraising my piece of property at it's "true and fair" market value." The appellant is requesting the Board reduce the current assessed value from $35,800 to $28,000. Mr. Kingsley presented and discussed comparable sales in the area. During his assessment of the appellant's property he did not observe that it was significantly steep. The factors of concern to the appellant were taken into consideration during the assessment. At the close of the hearing the Board concurred to conduct an inspection of the property and make a determination at a later date. Brian & Wendy Troost 16001 Market Street Snohomish, W A 98290 BOE: 95-177-R PN: 975901203 Mr. and Mrs. Troost were present. Robert Kingsley was present on behalf of the Assessor's office. Chairman Marlow explained the hearing process and swore them in. The appellant's property is located on Marrowstone Island. Mr. Troost stated that the basis of their appeal is that they do not feel a 33% increase in value is reflective of the issues concerning their property. A cabin and garage is located on their property and a community well is located on the adjacent lot, which services their cabin. The water is not drinkable due to salt water intrusion so they bring their own water when they stay there. They believe the deed states that if they were to sell the property, the use of the well would not be considered part of the property and would not be transferable. Their lot is only 50' x 200' and does not contain an adequate site for a well to be drilled. The sales of property considered comparable by the Assessor's office, are twice the size BOARD OF EQUALIZATION MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 28, 1995 Page 4 of their lot and have adequate land to install a well and septic system. Their present septic system was never recorded with the County. Mrs. Troost's grandfather installed the system many years ago, and he does not know where it drains and no documentation could be found at the Health Department. Additionally, they have been informed that banks will not approve loans for developing property on Marrowstone Island due to the water quality problems. They believe that all of these issues affect the value of their property. They are requesting the Board reduce the current assessment from $113,005 ($61,000 for the land and $52,005 for the improvements) to $78,945 ($35,000 for the land and $43,945 for the improvements). Mr. Kingsley stated that no one was home at the time of his inspection so he used the information that was available in the file. He then explained how the property was valued and read a legal description of the property. According to the legal description, he believes that the well rights go with the land. So if the property were to be sold, there would not be a problem with the use of the community well. In regard to the septic system, it is fairly standard for the Health Department not to have any record of septic systems for older homes, since they were not required to keep records. If the present septic system does fail, it could pose a problem due to the small size of the appellant's lot. In closing, Mr. Kingsley stated that he has not seen any evidence indicating that the current assessment is not correct. After hearing the testimony of both parties the Board concurred to conduct an inspection of the property and make a determination at a later date. Member DeLeo was present for the following hearings. Albert & Phyllis Dyke 3640 Oak Bay Road Port Hadlock, W A 98339 BOE: 95-128-R PN: 921 194064 Mr. and Mrs. Dyke were present. Robert Kingsley was present on behalf of the Assessor's office. Chairman Marlow explained the hearing process and swore them in. The appellant's property is located in Port Hadlock. Mrs. Dyke stated that they are only appealing the improvement value. They feel an increase of approximately 33% is excessive since the house is old. Their property was listed for sale in 1990 for $249,000. Later they tried to sell it for $289,000 and then lowered their asking price to $269,000. She stated that over the last year they have been looking to buy another house and have seen a great reduction in the price of real estate. They do not feel the property value is reflective of the current market. In speaking with the Assessor's office she was informed that the value was based on their 1992 listing price. In addition, the small land clearing business located across the street from them, has grown to a much larger operation, with nine R.V. sites, a bark and top soil business, trucks and tractors and other equipment necessary for this type of work. The noise from this business is very annoying and when prospective buyers looked at their house, they saw this. The Dyke's feel that the business detracts from the value of their property and are requesting the Board reduce it from $177,025 ($33,500 for the land and $143,525 for the improvements) to $149,253 ($33,500 for the land and $115,753 for the improvements). Mr. Kingsley stated it is obvious from the current assessment of $177,025 that he did not base the value of the appellant's property on the listing price. He presented comparable sales which occurred in the area. In closing, he stated that the appellants have not provided any evidence BOARD OF EQUALIZATION MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 28, 1995 Page 5 proving that the market is down. While he agrees that the commercial business located across the street may have an impact on the value of the property, the business is currently for sale, so it is unknown how long it will remain in that location. After hearing the testimony of both parties the Board concurred to conduct an inspection of the property and make a determination at a later date. James Stone & Dorothy Galloway 354 Sentinel Firs Road Port Hadlock, W A 98339 BOE: 95-131-LO 95-132-LO 95-133-LO 95-134-LO 95-135-LO 95-136-R PN: 921193 003 921 194 036 921 193 006 921 194 038 921 193 004 921 194 062 Mr. Stone and Ms. Galloway were not present. Mr. Kingsley represented the Assessor's office and was sworn in by Chairman Marlow. The property under appeal is located in Port Hadlock and consists offive bare land parcels and one improved parcel. The petitions appealing the bare land parcels state that the property does not support a septic system. They only have value as open space and would need municipal water and sewer in order to support something more than a trailer. Three of the five bare land lots have severe wet conditions due to drainage. The lots were purchased for $400 each, due to the inability to develop them. The petition appealing the improved parcel states that the cabin has no electricity and it would be very expensive to hook up to power. The well does not support full time residents. The windows were surplus and do not match. There is no landscaping for added value. It would cost $5,000 to cover the road with gravel for full time use. The cabin only has propane heat. For the reasons stated, the appellants are requesting the Board reduce the value of the improved parcel from $53,280 ($14,000 for the land and $39,280 for the improvements) to $36,000 ($6,000 for the land and $30,000 for the improvements) and reduce the value of the bare land parcels as follows: two bare land parcels from $5,000 to $2,000; two bare land parcels from $5,000 to $1,000; and one bare land parcel from $7,500 to $2,000. Mr. Kingsley stated he tried unsuccessfully to contact the appellant to discuss the issues brought up in the petitions. He explained how he valued the improved parcel and stated that an adjustment in value can be made to the five bare land parcels as long as the appellant can provide evidence that the property will not support a septic system. At the close of the hearing the Board concurred to conduct an inspection of the property and make a determination at a later date. Rodney Knudson 20200 21st Place NW Seattle, WA 98177-2318 BOE: 95-84-R PN: 931500106 Mr. Knudson was present. Robert Kingsley was present on behalf of the Assessor's office. Chairman Marlow explained the hearing process and swore them in. The property under appeal is located near Mats Mats Bay in Port Ludlow. Mr. Knudson stated he feels the rock quarry devalues his property. With the change in ownership, the operation of the new company is more BOARD OF EQUALIZATION MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 28, 1995 Page 6 aggressive. The dust and dirt is so bad at times you can smell and taste it and the noise levels exceed those permitted by law. Aggregate stock piles which used to be located in the mined out area, are now located on the beach. Even when the barges are not being loaded, the trucks are still transporting rock down to the beach area. The quarry is also used as a construction storage yard for various pieces of equipment. There are large piles of concrete, pipe, and steel remnants offerry terminals which had been worked on. Maybe these things will be of some use in the future, however, he doesn't believe that the Department of Natural Resources ever intended the quarry to be used in this manner. Mr. Knudson stated he spoke to the Olympic Air Pollution Control Authority about the dust and dirt originating from the quarry. A field inspector visited the quarry in October and found no problems. Mr. Knudson stated that during the winter there are steady rains which keep the dust down. In the past, the Assessor Jack Westerman valued the parcels in this area himself and he made an adjustment in value due to the affects of the rock quarry. Mr. Knudson hopes that he will be able to sell his property for the assessed amount. The current assessment is $229,520 ($128,440 for the land and $101,080 for the improvements). The appellant did not provide his estimated value. Mr. Kingsley stated that he does not dispute the issues brought up by Mr. Knudson, however, the property value is based on market sales. He explained to Mr. Knudson that the Assessor's office tracks all the sales in the area and uses that information to value property. He believes the sale prices take into account the effects of the quarry. If the quarry was quiet and didn't create dust and all these other problems, then property in this area would be selling at higher prices and property values would be higher than the current assessed valuation. Property in this area is still selling in spite of all the issues brought up by the appellant. Mr. Kingsley presented comparable sales in the area which indicate his assessments are under market value. It is true that an adjustment is made to properties along the channel, however, the adjustment is market driven and sales indicate that the property is valued correctly. After hearing the testimony of both parties the Board concurred to conduct an inspection of the property and make a determination at a later date. Margaret Davis 2103 SW 174th Seattle, WA 98166 BOE: 95-175-LO PN: 970800504 Ms. Davis was not present. Robert Kingsley represented the Assessor's office and was sworn in by Chairman Marlow. The property is located near Mats Mats Bay in Port Ludlow. A reason for appealing this property was not provided. The appellant is requesting the Board reduce the current assessment from $54,330 to $15,000. Mr. Kingsley stated the property under appeal consists of three 50' waterfront lots. A reduction has been given for mud flats and additional wet areas on the property. He has been unable to contact the owner to discuss whether or not the property will perk. In talking with an employee from the Health Department about this area, it was mentioned that the property is presumably unbuildable. He feels a further reduction is warranted and will let the Board determine the amount. At the close of the hearing the Board concurred to conduct an inspection of the property and make a determination at a later date. BOARD OF EQUALIZATION MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 28, 1995 Page 7 At this time Chairman Marlow excused himself from the meeting. He was not present for the following hearing. Betty Thomas 500 Olympus Blvd. Port Ludlow, WA 98365 BOE: 95-149-LO PN: 978900013 Ms. Thomas was present. Robert Kingsley was present on behalf of the Assessor's office. Acting Chairman Broders explained the hearing process and swore them in. The property under appeal is located in Port Ludlow. Ms. Thomas stated that the adjacent property is currently being developed, which has altered the land and water runoff, causing water accumulation on her property. At her expense she installed a large culvert on her property to remove as much of the water as she could. The property has problems of its own as well. A soil analysis was done on her property proving that it would not support a septic system and that it is unbuildable. She does not believe that the property has doubled in value. For these reasons she is requesting the Board reduce the current assessment from $41,000 to $27,000. Mr. Kingsley presented and discussed comparable sales in the area. He explained how he valued the property. A reduction for the cost ofa mound system ($10,000) was made due to the septic problem. Discussion ensued regarding information submitted by the appellant. After hearing the testimony of both parties the Board concurred to conduct an inspection of the property and make a determination at a later date. Meeting adjourned. Attest: r; ul L..~ ft C.1'l,L<''L r;, _ ,PL .-(..41... Erin K. Lundgren, CI rk of e Board JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARp OF EQUALIZATION j/' ~il,lia s.MarlOW,Chairrn,an L '4 '~~ J ('~~''--- Richard A. Broders, Vice-Chairman ~~',enU~ \.../