HomeMy WebLinkAboutM120500
1820 Jefferson Street
P.O. Box 1220
Port Townsend, W A 98368
James A. DeLeo
William S. Marlow
Richard A. Broders
William S. Marlow
Richard A. Broders
James A. DeLeo
Chairman
Vice-Chairman
Member
Chairman William S. Marlow called the meeting to order at 10:00 a.m. in the presence of Vice-Chairman Richard A.
Broders and Member James A. DeLeo.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Vice-Chairman Broders moved to approve the minutes of November 7, 2000 as presented. Member DeLeo
seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote.
ASSESSMENT CORRECTIONS
Vice-Chairman Broders moved to accept the assessment corrections for the following petitioners. Member DeLeo
seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote.
APPELLANT
Kathy Wilson/Wayne Anderson
Michael Scheren
APPEAL NO.
BOE 00-96-R
BOE 00-99-R
PARCEL NO.
990 600 207
995 700 011
HEARINGS
Bruce & Magdalena Henricus
23 Raeburn Ct.
Port Ludlow, W A 98365
BOE: 00-100-LO
PN: 995 700 011
Mr. and Mrs. Henricus were not present. Assessor Jack Westerman represented the Assessor's office and was sworn
in by Chairman Marlow. The property under appeal consists of a lot located off of Raeburn Court, Port Ludlow.
The appellants explained in their petition that they purchased this parcel for $14,000 in September 2000 which is
substantially less than the assessed value of $53,000. They believe the sale price was based on the excessive slope of
the property and the new rules that require 20' set backs which make it very expensive and difficult, if not
impossible, to build on. The appellant's residence is located on an adjacent parcel. They purchased this parcel as an
extension of their property and have no intentions of building on it. The appellants estimate the value to be the
amount of the purchase price.
Phone (360)385-9100 / 1-800-831-2678 Fax (360)385-9382 jellbocc@co.jefferson.wa.us
BOARD OF EQUALIZATION MINUTES - DECEMBER 5, 2000
Page 2
Mr. Westerman stated that this property was revalued in 1999. At that time this parcel was listed for sale at $64,350.
He noted that the property sold 20 years prior for $37,000. He agrees that the lot is very steep which he also noted
on the field sheet during his inspection. The property value was given a 25% reduction due to the topography and
site view. If the property is ever developed this adjustment will be removed. The current assessment of $53,000 was
based on all the factors stated above.
Hearing no further testimony Chairman Marlow closed the hearing. The Board will review all the information
submitted, conduct a physical inspection of the property and make a determination at a later date.
Philip & Star Fleckman
5041 Ivanhoe Pl. NE
Seattle, W A 98105
BOE: 00-98-R
PN: 701344015
Mr. Fleckman was present. Appraiser Peter Schuck represented the Assessor's office. After explaining the hearing
process Chairman Marlow swore them in. The property under appeal is located in the Dabob Cove Tracts at 626
Beach Drive, Quilcene. The recent revaluation indicates a surprising increase of approximately $60,000 which Mr.
Fleckman feels is overrated. This area and his property suffered severe damage due to land slides over the past few
years. The appellants have spent approximately $100,000 to move their house back a few hundred feet from the
sloping slide area. They were told by a geotechnical engineer that if they moved their house it would be less likely
to sustain damage in the event of future land slides. Mr. Fleckman presented an appraisal of the property which
indicates a value of $95,000 based on the house being moved. The adjacent property recently sold for $65,000 and it
consists of approximately twice as much acreage as the appellant's property which has a land value of $73,750. Mr.
Fleckman believes the current total assessment of $153,850 ($73,750 for the land and $80,100 for the improvements)
is too high and should be reduced to reflect the appraisal value of $95,000.
Mr. Schuck stated that this property was equalized last year by the Board with other properties in the Dabob Cove
Tracts. The revaluation of this property was initiated when Mr. Fleckman got a permit to move the house. He noted
that in addition to moving the house, a very large deck had been added. Mr. Schuck explained that since the house
was relocated on the property, the reduction in value previously given for the effects of the land slide was removed.
The valuation increase reflects the removal of that adjustment as well as the value of the deck which was added.
Mr. Schuck stated that appraisals are subjective. The main comparable properties listed in the appraisal submitted
by the appellant are located on Bainbridge Island. Mr. Schuck then reviewed and discussed sales of other properties
affected by land slides which he used in support of the current assessment. The appellants purchased the property
prior to the land slides for $235,000 in 1994. Mr. Schuck noted that even given the stigma of the property due to the
land slides, the current assessment is still considerably less than the appellant's purchase price.
Mr. Fleckman stated that the comparable sales used by the Assessor to determine the valuation are mostly waterfront
properties. His property is not waterfront and he does not believe that he can sell his property for the current
assessment.
Hearing no further testimony Chairman Marlow closed the hearing. The Board will review all the information
submitted, conduct a physical inspection of the property and make a determination at a later date.
BOARD OF EQUALIZATION MINUTES - DECEMBER 5, 2000
Page 3
Philip Irvin/Michael Z. Irvin
7704 Mary Avenue NW
Seattle, WA 98117
BOE: 00-77-LO
00- 78-LO
00-79-LO
00-80-LO
00-81-LO
00-82-LO
00-83-LO
00-84-LO
00-85-LO
00-86-LO
00-87-LO
00-88-LO
00-89-LO
00-90-LO
00-91-LO
00-92-LO
00-93-LO
00-94-LO
PN: 802024001
995 400 024
995 400 026
995 400 027
995 400 034
995 400 036
995 400 038
995 400 039
995400041
995 400 043
995400047
995 400 048
995 400 050
995 400 051
995 400 052
995 400 053
995 400 054
995 400 056
Mr. Irvin was present. Appraiser Robert Shold represented the Assessor's office. After explaining the hearing
process Chairman Marlow swore them in. The property under appeal is located at the Snow Creek Ranch
development off of Highway 101, Quilcene. Mr. Irvin explained that David Phinizy, the developer of Snow Creek
Ranch, created a number of problems with these parcels before filing bankruptcy. For example, Mr. Irvin's father
Michael Irvin, loaned Mr. Phinizy money to build a house on one of the lots and Mr. Phinizy was to provide a deed
of trust for that lot. Mr. Phinizy was going to install a septic system on the adjacent lot with an easement to the lot
with the house on it. However, Mr. Phinizy actually provided a deed of trust for the lot with the septic system, so
when Michael Irvin foreclosed on the property he was foreclosing on a vacant lot that had no value because the
house was built on the adjacent lot. Fortunately, this was discovered before a trustees sale was completed for the
property and they were able to correct the problem. In another instance, Michael Irvin's wife had loaned Mr.
Phinizy money to build a house on another lot. Mr. Phinizy went through the boundary line adjustment process to
change the lot lines so that the house he was building was located on the revised lot while the deed of trust covered
only the remaining lot. This way if foreclosure was sought by Mrs. Irvin, she would only get the vacant lot and not
the lot with the house. Mr. Phinizy did a number ofthings like this which has resulted in a great deal of animosity
toward Mr. Phinizyand a strong bias toward the Snow Creek Ranch development itself.
Philip Irvin believes that the assessment should be based on what a willing buyer and a willing seller agree to
transact. The value of these parcels is far different now than what they were before Mr. Phinizy's involvement.
When Mr. Phinizy was initially loaned the money for developing these properties there was representation that there
was water available to all of the lots. It has since been discovered that water is not available to all the lots, thereby
decreasing the market value of those lots which lack water. A letter from PUD No.1 was presented as evidence of
the unavailability of water connections.
Overall, Michael Irvin loaned Mr. Phinizy approximately $250,000. Now that Mr. Phinizy is out of the picture,
Michael Irvin is left to sort out the problems created by Mr. Phinizy. Philip Irvin stated that his father is not
appealing the value of all the lots involved. He presented a method of valuing the property by taking the total
BOARD OF EQUALIZATION MINUTES - DECEMBER 5, 2000
Page 4
current assessed value ($142,000) of "the best" lots they are not appealing, and subtracting that amount from the
purchase price (loan amount) $250,000. The remaining value of $1 08,000 would then be distributed among the lots
they are appealing. If the value is not distributed in this manner than it is considered that the property is worth
considerably more than Michael Irvin paid. Philip Irvin noted that his father did not want to purchase the property.
The property had gone down in value considerably due to Mr. Phinizy filing bankruptcy, the stigma of Snow Creek
Ranch, and the lack of water connections.
Philip Irvin discussed parcel number 802 024 00 I which is an unplatted parcel consisting of approximately 61.74
acres. He questions the acreage amount because the boundaries of a number of the adjacent lots were adjusted or
enlarged to include land from parcel number 802 024 00 I. He would like the Assessor's office to verify the size of
this parcel before and after the boundary line adjustment to insure it is reflected correctly. He noted that this parcel
has a creek running through it which is a nice amenity, however, where the creek is located there is flooding and
wetlands. There is almost no usability for this parcel because ofthe way adjacent lots have been reconfigured, and
the roads that run through it. The lots in this area were not platted properly. No surveys were conducted for the lots
that border this parcel. There are many individual lots with no property lines which causes adverse possession
problems resulting in the hassle of several lawsuits.
Philip Irvin stated that in addition to the lack of water, most of the lots do not perk and are not buildable. A
community septic system is not economically viable or possible without water. The lots which are not buildable are
only good as camping lots, however, the County will be adopting new regulations in the near future restricting the
use of the lots for camping. Mr. Irvin stated that there is an old railroad maintenance shop/bam at Snow Creek
which has been more recently used as a sanitary facility which may be an option for the camping lots. However, the
barn is in bad shape, the septic system is failing and the drainfield is non-functioning. All would require expensive
repairs. The future of the barn was discussed at a meeting of the homeowners association. There is growing
consensus to tear the barn down so as to not have to pay taxes on it and there is no money to repair it.
Photographs of property in the area were then presented by Mr. Irvin.
There is another investor who has a deed of trust for other lots in the area, however, he has not proceeded with his
legal right to foreclose on Mr. Phinizy. Mr. Irvin stated that Mr. Phinizy was out of bankruptcy as of June 2000,
and this other investor has not even had a trustees sale. Those lots may end up going for taxes, because the investor
does not see enough potential in the property to spend the money on foreclosure and go through the grief of trying to
solve the problems.
Mr. Irvin stated that his father would sell all the parcels of property for $250,000 ifhe could get that amount.
Mr. Shold stated that this property was revalued in 1998 at which time Mr. Phinizy was still in control of the
property. There were a few lot sales in the area which supported the current assessment of the parcels at that time.
Since then a lot ofthings have occurred which put those values in doubt. He noted that there have not been many
sales within the plat of Snow Creek which is most likely due to the issues brought up by Mr. Irvin.
Discussion ensued regarding the configuration and usability of these lots.
Mr. Irvin stated that Mr. Phinizy's boundary line adjustments caused several ownership problems with the lots and
unless those problems are resolved, some of the lots will be let go for tax sale.
BOARD OF EQUALIZATION MINUTES - DECEMBER 5, 2000
Page 5
In answer to a question from Vice-Chairman Broders, Mr. Irvin reviewed which lots perk and which he believes do
not.
Hearing no further testimony Chairman Marlow closed the hearing. The Board will review all the information
submitted, conduct a physical inspection of the property and make a determination at a later date.
Meeting adjourned.
Attest:
IJic/LJcf). ~jiLtLJ
E~' K. Lundgren, Clerk of the Bo~d
JEFFERSON COUNTY
BOARD OF EQUALIZATION
1--"
William S. Marlow, Chairman
~A0~
Richard A. Broders, Vice-Chairman
(}~ t2 ,@ ~
(Jiffies A. DeLeo, Member