Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutM011096 Jefferson County Board of Equalization TELEPHONE: 385.9100 COURTHOUSE P.O. BOX 1220 PORT TOWNSEND, WASHINGTON 98368 r'c" .:;."S', '-:' r-:J.r " ::-"">~ ~ ",,-<:' ,,' "', 1 " '.' , ,'/ .;ii, '\ "/--~;, ~-': l~~-, '. ,-'f;~~.4) It l.. ::", t;j~ ,,;,-1'1, 'I.~ ,~~~~:.&< ,:101 (I:' ' :,~'~"'" i~.D"!" . ~'.'i!!! h ",- ' '. ..""'.' to-'. - . ,,~'Hl'" ~::-:'" _,' I' ,Jl ;~, '" ~-,,~'.' i,,' _:,~?.-. IIL,tnti~"/' "~); _ ,;j~ 7k~<j~~!:''''~i~~~~ JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF EQUALIZATION MINUTES JANUARY 10, 1996 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 and Member James A. DeLeo. HEARINGS Robert & Margery Helander 150 Condon Lane Port Ludlow, W A 98365 BOE: 95-52-R PN: 990 400 243 Mr. and Mrs. Helander were present. Dennis Pownall 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 in Port Ludlow, Mr. Helander stated that the value of their property has not increased since the date of purchase in 1993. In fact, they believe that property values have significantly decreased since that time. This belief is based on the fact that property for sale in the area is not selling, even when listing prices have been reduced. The Helander's own another home in the area that they also have been unable to sell. They presented comparable sales of property that they feel support a reduction of the current assessment from $316,875 ($81,000 for the land and $235,875 for the improvements) to $235,000 ($60,000 for the land and $175,000). He stated that their estimate of value is arbitrary and the experience of the Board may produce a more realistic figure upon review of the property. Mr. Pownall stated the appellants purchased the property in March of 1993 for $331,000. The 1995 assessment is lower than 1993 sale price. Originally, the assessment of the land had been $101,000 and after the appellants filed their appeal the land value was reduced to $81,000. The adjusted assessment was noted on the petition. He explained that for equity purposes a reduction was made to all of the lots south of Pope Way and west of Condon Lane. He then addressed the comparable sales that were listed on the appellant's petition. After hearing the testimony of both parties the Board concurred to conduct an inspection of the property and make a determination atA later date, \..1 100% Recycled Paper BOARD OF EQUALIZA nON MEETING MINUTES - JANUARY 10, 1996 Page 2 Lyle & Marcia Phillips 20 Rainier Court Port Ludlow, WA 98365 BOE: 95-181-R PN: 990 400 456 The appellant's son Bart Phillips, who is authorized to represent them on all matters pertaining to this appeal, was present. Dennis Pownall 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 in Port Ludlow. Mr. Phillips stated that his parents purchased this property in 1991. They believe that the current assessment of$141,415 ($46,000 for the land and $95,415 for the improvements) is too high and they are requesting the Board reduce the value to $105,000 ($20,000 for the land and $85,000 for the improvements). Their appeal is based on three issues. His parents do not live in the State of Washington and are not familiar with the tax system or the valuation methods used to assess property values. The adjacent lot which is slightly different in topography, was listed for sale for $36,000. His parents were interested in purchasing it to increase the size of their property and offered $20,000 for it. The offer was declined and the lot was subsequently taken off the market. The first issue is that they have no control over the territorial view for which they are being assessed. Pope Resources has proposed further development directly below his parent's property which could block their view. Additionally, the view can only be maintained to the extent that Pope Resources will continue to allow vegetation management. The trees below his parent's property must be continuously pruned. This is done at the discretion of Pope Resources and can be discontinued at any time. The second issue is regarding the valuation of the house, They do not feel that the assessment of the house is supported by recent sales in the area or by the improvements they made to the house. Under the circumstances in which they purchased the property they recognize that they may have paid too much. The only improvements they have made to the property was to replace the roof, fix the bathroom, remodel the kitchen, build a new deck and build a single car, detached garage. Thirdly, Mr. Phillips presented sales of property that they feel are comparable and yet are valued less than his parent's property. Mr. Pownall stated that the appellant's property is very different from the property they feel is comparable. It is significantly smaller and does not have a detached garage. The view is territorial and that is reflected in the valuation. The adjacent lot which was temporarily for sale, is significantly less desirable than the appellant's lot which is why it has a lesser value, Mr. Pownall presented and discussed comparable sales which support his valuation. The house which has been completely remodeled is in very good condition and is obviously worth the assessed value. 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. Leslie & Elizabeth Leuzinger 41 Montgomery Lane Port Ludlow, WA 98365 HOE: 95-183-LO PN: 990600 162 Mr. and Mrs. Leuzinger were not present. Dennis Pownall represented the Assessor's office and was sworn in by Chairman Marlow. The property under appeal is located in Port Ludlow. The appellant's reasons for appealing his property assessment are attached to the petition and state that "Before explaining my reasons for requesting a lowering of assessed value (land only) several points should be noted: a. Most of the evaluation is not being contended because all buildings have been sited in accordance with the building setback code. The land west from the seaside of BOARD OF EQUALIZATION MEETING MINUTES - JANUARY 10, 1996 Page 3 the buildings to Montgomery Lane or Court is essentially alike, except for width. b. Tape measurements were made from existing corner stakes or sight lines and these are the basis for requested adjustment. These might be subject to a few inches of error. c. Some reasons why lot 64-2-1 (41 Montgomery Lane) should have the assessed value reduced: 1. Parcel 990 900 018 (10 Montgomery Court) is 91.5 feet wide not 74.4 as assumed. Parcel 990 600162 (41 Montgomery Lane) is 74.4 feet wide, 2. The two subject lots have a common boundary for 254, but on the plat maps, lot 64 extends in mid-air for another 118 feet. It would seem that since there is no land to seaward, only a cliff, the surveying was done in the confines of an office. We shouldn't be taxed for what is usually carried as green belt. 3. Based on verifiable measurements, lot 64 contains 0.44 acres and lot 18, 0.50 acres so the assessed land value of the former should be reduced by $28,000 ($174,000 less $146,000). You might also consider a reduction covering the airborne parcel. Fair market value for the entire parcel probably should be around $360,000." He is requesting the Board reduce the current assessment from $396,040 ($174,000 for the land and $222,040 for the improvements) to $368,040 ($146,000 for the land and $222,040 for the improvements). Mr. Pownall stated he had inadvertently made a discrepancy during his appraisal of certain property values in this area. The valuation offour other parcels will need to be adjusted in addition to the appellant's property. He recommends that the Board reduce the land value of the appellant's property from $174,000 to $160,000 for a new total value of $382,040. For purposes of equity he requested that the Board equalize the other four parcels, At the close of the hearing the Board concurred to conduct an inspection of the appellant's property and make a determination on the assessment as well as equalize the other properties at a later date, Kunio Yarita 6-40-31 Yokadai Isogo-Ku, Yokohama, Japan 235 BOE: 95-180-R PN: 990 600 246 Mr. Yarita was not present. Dennis Pownall represented the Assessor's office and was sworn in by Chairman Marlow. The property under appeal is located in Port Ludlow. Mr. Yarita submitted a letter which states "During my stay in Port Ludlow this summer I checked the houses for sale around that area. There are many on the market for sale for long time whose price is ranging from $135,000 to $145,000. They are bigger, newer and nicer than the house you valued $137,440 for taxation. I am willing to pay the increased amount of tax if! can get more than $137,000 by selling that house. Can you guarantee? Also, it's no meaning to relate to the building cost of new house, nobody can make less"comfortable old house at any price, so the old house should be far less value than a new house. Please do not mis-understand that I'm insisting on the reduction of house value, I'm opposing on the increase of the value of old house from a few points." The current assessment is $137,440 ($26,000 for the land and $111,440 for the improvements). The appellant did not provide his estimate of value, Mr. Pownall presented a map outlining comparable land sales in the area which indicate the land is valued correctly. He then explained how the house was valued. The appellant purchased this property in 1988 for $132,500. At the close of the hearing the Board concurred to conduct an inspection ofthe property and make a determination at a later date. BOARD OF EQUALIZATION MEETING MINUTES - JANUARY 10, 1996 Page 4 Ronald Towery 355 ClilTside Drive Danville, CA 94526 BOE: 95-115-R PN: 969300001 Mr. Towery was not present. Dennis Pownall represented the Assessor's office and was sworn in by Chairman Marlow. The property under appeal is located in Port Ludlow. Mr. Towery submitted supplemental information for the Board's review. Although it was not submitted seven days prior to the hearing, Mr. Pownall agreed to allow the submition of the information as long as he would have time to review it for rebuttal purposes. The current assessment is $443,325 ($351,000 for the land and $92,325 for the improvements). A reduction to $372,588 ($306,000 for the land and $66,588 for the improvements) is being requested. Mr. Pownall stated that he reviewed the lengthy information submitted by the appellant, however, since it was not timely filed he is not prepared to address all the issues. He explained how the lots in this area were valued. One of the concerns of the appellant is that the Yacht Club located to the east of his property creates a lot of noise during the weekends which he feels negatively affects the value of his property, The appellant feels that his house is considerably under built for the area and has no significant value. Mr. Pownall stated the land has temporarily been reduced 15% due to slide areas on the property. This adjustment is not reflected on the Assessor's worksheet and will be removed once the slide is repaired. Mr. Pownall believes the property is correctly valued. At the close of the hearing the Board concurred to conduct an inspection of the property and make a determination at a later date. Leonard & Audrey Pedersen 413 South Bay Lane Port Ludlow, W A 98365 BOE: 95-72-LO PN: 969300008 Mrs. Pedersen was present. Dennis Pownall 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 in Port Ludlow. Mrs. Pedersen stated that they purchased the two lots as one building site and it should be assessed accordingly. The lots cannot be divided and built upon separately. Also stated in her petition is that their property is not part of the Port Ludlow development. They do not have amenities such as a clubhouse, swimming pools, tennis courts, security patrol, golf course, marina etc. If they put their home on the market, they could not offer these amenities to a buyer. Comparable sales were also presented on the petition. They are requesting the current assessment of$471,680 ($323,250 for the land and $148,430 for the improvements) be reduced to $373,430 ($225,000 for the land and $148,430 for the improvements). Mr. Pownall presented a map outlining comparable sales. The base value oflots in this area is $230,000. The appellant's property was valued as one site. One lot was valued at $230,000 and the second lot was assessed half that value ($115,000). The property was reduced by 10% for size. 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. BOARD OF EQUALIZA nON MEETING MINUTES - JANUARY 10, 1996 Page 5 Darby Langdon & Fredric Krause 15735 38th Avenue NE Seattle, WA 98155 BOE: 95-77-LO PN: 969 400 007 Ms. Langdon and Mr. Krause were not present. Dennis Pownall represented the Assessor's office and was sworn in by Chairman Marlow. The property under appeal is located in Port Ludlow. Comparable sales were presented on the petition. Also in the petition it states that "The above sales were much larger homes with partial or full views. Our home is small, only two bedrooms, with no view. This increase is 34%, compared with a rise in the C.P,!. of only 4%." A letter was also submitted seven days prior to the hearing which states" I. We do not have a view of the water from our property and never will because Pope Resources owns the property in front of ours and refuses to cut the trees obstructing our view. 2, We could not sell our property at this assessed value because of the lack of a view and because of the small size of our home (only two bedrooms). They are requesting the Board reduce the current assessment from $205,005 ($92,000 for the land and $113,005 for the improvements) to $173,000 ($60,000 for the land and $113,000 for the improvements). Mr. Pownall explained how the property was valued, After reviewing his assessment he recommends that the Board reduce the value an additional 25% due to topography. At the close of the hearing the Board concurred to conduct an inspection of the property and make a determination at a later date. Jerry D'Ambrosio D' Ambrosio Enterprises 11019 SE 60th Bellevue, W A 98006 BOE: 95-185-LO 95-186-LO PN: 969400014 969 400 015 Mr. D' Ambrosio was not present. Dennis Pownall represented the Assessor's office and was sworn in by Chairman Marlow. The property under appeal is located in Port Ludlow. Both petitions list the same comparable sales and state that" 1. Sale oflot 13 with house did not make lot worth $177,000. Lot $15,000 - house $335,000 divided by 2600 = $128 a foot. 2. Lot 35- real waterfront lot 14 or 15 sold for $350,000 - on market for $450,000 for two years - can't sell. Better indicator ofland value that lot 14 or present. 2. Lot 14 on market for $498,000 to $535,000 for two years no offer. Offered house for $450,000 no takers. 4. Lot 15 - bought lot for $114,000 - put $265,000 in it and can't get an offer between $400,000 and $450,000 for 1 Y2 years. Even though we spent $110 to $120 a foot to build. It looks like we'll have to go down to $100 foot plus $115,000 on lots, to sell them. 5. Lot 12 - Bought August 92' after lot 13 sold- paid $70,000. How can Jot 13 be worth $177,000. I haven't been able to sell it for $85,000 to $100,000 for last three years. View is actually better than Jot 13. Please consider these values when fixing value for 1996 for lot 14 and lot 15, I believe Pope has over saturated the market with lots. That has brought values down. I hope it turns around." He is requesting the Board reduce parcel number 969 400 014 from $434,845 ($154,000 for the land and $280,845 for the improvements) to $390,845 ($110,000 for the land and $280,845 for the improvements) and reduce parcel number 969 400 015 from $410,810 ($154,000 for the land and $256,810 for the improvements) to $361,810 ($115,000 for the land and $256,810 for the improvements). BOARD OF EQUALIZATION MEETING MINUTES - JANUARY 10, 1996 Page 6 Mr. Pownall stated that this was a very difficult area to assess. He was unable to come up with an assessment that he thought satisfactorily reached his interpretation of market value. The Assessor Jack Westerman valued all the parcels in this area. He explained how the property was valued. Based on comparable sales, the parcels are valued correctly. At the close of the hearing the Board concurred to conduct an inspection of the property and make a determination at a later date. Meeting adjourned. Attest: t{/G~~C~' :4~~~~ Erin K. Lundgren, Clerk of the Board JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF EQUALIZATION 1/---/-- ~:Lrm~ a;rd_~. :o;s~ce-Chairman F DeLeo, Member