Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutM090903 1820 Jefferson Street P.O. Box 1220 Port Townsend, WA 98368 James A. DeLeo William S. Marlow Richard A. Broders MINUTES SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 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 Broders and Member James A. DeLeo. HEARINGS Mark A. Wyse 6044 E. Hollyhock Street Phoenix, AZ 85018 BOE: 03-05-R PN: 961601102 Mr. Wyse was not present. Appraiser Dennis Pownall represented the Assessor's office and was sworn in by Chairman Marlow. The property under appeal is one of four condominium units located in two separate duplex buildings (see also appeal hearings previously held on September 8, 2003 for BOE 03-06-R, BOE 03-07-R and BOE 03-47-R). Mr. Wyse's condominium unit is located at 70-B South Chandler Court, Port Ludlow. He states on his petition that "The house has no value due to a serious structural defect in the roof. This problem is due to gross negligence on behalf of the builder. I cannot sell or rent, or borrow on my mortgage. This is not income property." Currently the property is assessed at $195,760 ($31,500 for the land and $164,260 for the improvements). Mr. Wyse estimates the value to be $95,000 ($25,000 for the land and $70,000 for the improvements). Mr. Pownall explained that the appellant is appealing the value based on structural roof damage inherent since the construction of the building. The current assessment is less than the appellant's purchase price of$196,600 on December 26,2000. Currently the appellant has the property listed for sale for $226,500. It is difficult to determine the impact the structural damage has on the market value and how much of an adjustment should be made to the assessment when the damage is currently being repaired and the owners are not paying the repair costs. During hearings held yesterday on appeals from other condominium unit owners in the duplex buildings, information was presented indicating the repair costs will be $70,000 per unit (total of four units involved). Vice-Chairman Broders asked if Mr. Pownall thinks there is any future impact on the market value of this property due to the structural problems? Mr. Pownall replied that initially he said that the problem would not have a lasting impact on the property, but, as one of the appellants pointed out, it is probably a Phone (360)385-9100 Fax (360)385-9382 jeffbocc@co.jefferson.wa.us Board of Equalization Minutes - September 9, 2003 Pajte: 2 negotiable item. While he doesn't think that the impact on the value will be significantly substantial, it could impact the value by approximately $10,000. This amount is subjective and the true impact on the market value will not be known until the property sells. After reviewing all the information submitted and hearing the testimony of the Assessor's representative, Chairman Marlow closed the hearing. The Board will conduct a physical inspection of the property and make a determination at a later date. Robert Hopkins P.O. Box 725 Quilcene, W A 98376 BOE: 03-44-R 03-45-LO PN: 701213 005 701 205 015 Mr. Hopkins was present. Appraiser Robert Kingsley represented the Assessor's office. After explaining the hearing process, Chairman Marlow swore them in. The property under appeal consists of waterfront property and a house located at 596 Broadspit Road, Quilcene. Mr. Hopkins appealed the assessment of this property four years ago and much of the information presented at that time is pertinent to this appeal. He explained that he feels the value of his property is too high because it was based on the sale amount shown on the excise tax affidavit at the time he purchased the property. The final sale amount of $475,000 as shown on the excise tax affidavit included the interest he would be paying over the term of the contract. It did not reflect the actual sale price. This was done by the seller's attorney in order to reflect more income which would somehow benefit the seller for tax purposes. In an effort to value the property at the sale amount, the appraiser who initially conducted the assessment distributed that value between the parcels, thereby, overinflating their value. His previous appeal resulted in the Board lowering the valuation by $120,000, however, the value was still $44,000 higher than the actual sale price. With this appeal he has researched sales of comparable properties in the area and has provided that information to the Board. He feels the 861 sq. ft. cabin is overvalued based on inadequate features and uncompleted finish work. There is no legal access to his property which will be even more of an issue if he tries to sell. He also disputes the percentage of property valued as "no-bank" waterfront. His 100 feet of waterfront property does not have any "no-bank" waterfront. It has approximately five feet of "low-bank" waterfront, and then ascends from a five foot high bank up to 45 feet. The appraiser has also valued the property as having a marine and territorial view which he disagrees with. Currently parcel number 701 213 005 is assessed at $165,200 ($90,245 for the land and $74,955 for the improvements) and parcel number 701205 015 is assessed at $131,250 (land only). Mr. Hopkins believes parcel number 701213 005 should be valued at $130,000 ($80,000 for the land and $50,000 for the improvements) and parcel number 701 205 015 should be valued at $90,000 (land only). Mr. Kingsley questioned what the actual sale price was? Mr. Hopkins replied $311,000 (for 4 parcels), not including the interest. Currently the 4 parcels are assessed at $355,085 according to Mr. Kingsley. He discussed sales of comparable properties in the area which support the current assessed value. After reviewing all the information submitted and hearing the testimony of both parties, Chairman Marlow closed the hearing. The Board will conduct a physical inspection of the property and make a determination at a later date. Board of Equalization Minutes - September 9, 2003 Pajte: 3 Saburo & Lillian SakolRobert & Bettie Okura BOE: 03-11-LO 2496 South Edmunds Street Seattle, VVll 98108 PN: 998 200 303 Mr. and Mrs. Sako and Mr. and Mrs. Okura were present. Appraiser Robert Kingsley represented the Assessor's office. After explaining the hearing process Chairman Marlow administered an oath to all parties. The property under appeal is Y, an acre of bare land located in the plat of Tala Shores #3. Mrs. Sako stated that according to the Jefferson County Department of Community Development, their property must go through a feasibility study in order to determine whether or not it is buildable. They do not dispute the current assessed value of $90,000. They just don't want the value to increase until they find out if the property can be developed. Mr. Kingsley explained that the property will not be assessed again for another 4 years, so the appellants have time for a feasibility study to be conducted. Chairman Marlow added that if it is determined by the Department of Community Development that the property is not buildable, the appellants can obtain written documentation to that effect and take it to the Assessor's office to be considered for an adjustment to their property value. After reviewing all the information submitted and hearing the testimony of all parties, Chairman Marlow closed the hearing. The Board does not feel it is necessary to conduct a physical inspection of this property. A determination will be made at a later date. Lois Lowery 12343 Hiram Place NE Seattle, WA 98125 BOE: 03-01-R PN: 502022012 Ms. Lowery was present. Appraiser Robert Kingsley represented the Assessor's office. Chairman Marlow explained the hearing process and swore them in. The property under appeal is a mobile home located on approximately 3 Y, acres at 91 Syloplash Lane, Brinnon. Ms. Lowery stated that her main contention is the problem she is having with the elk in the area. The elk are tearing down fences, eating all her plants, shrubs and trees, and manuring allover the yard. She is unable to have a garden. The herds run through the yard so fast that there is a danger of being stampeded. She worries for the safety of children. The way the elk make use of her property decreases its value. The Assessor's office says that property is assessed at its current and best use, however, the current and best use of her property is a pasture for elk. Nothing against elk, it's just that they're a problem for the property. Mr. Kingsley stated that the elk are a problem for all the properties in the area. Ms. Lowery stated that the only solution is to put up a real high fence to keep the elk out. That can be very expensive. Chairman Marlow suggested she contact the State Game Department about the problem. After reviewing all the information submitted and hearing the testimony of both parties, Chairman Marlow closed the hearing. The Board will conduct a physical inspection of the property and make a determination at a later date. Board of Equalization Minutes - September 9, 2003 Pajte: 4 Philip IrvinlMichael Z. Irvin, Trust 7704 Mary Avenue NW Seattle, WA 98117 BOE: 03-13-LO Through 03-41-LO PN: Various The hearing was held via teleconference as Philip Irvin was unable to appear in person. Appraiser Dennis Pownall was present representing the Assessor's office. Chairman Marlow explained the hearing process and swore them in. The property under appeal is located at the Snow Creek Ranch development off of Highway 101, Quilcene. Mr. Irvin explained that initially the plat of Snow Creek was going to be set up as vacation lots with an air strip to bring owners to and from their property. The lots were originally intended as camping lots when the platting process was less stringent. The plat includes some lots with houses, but, much of it was left dormant for quite a number of years. The developer David Phinizy who was previously in control of Snow Creek, spent an inordinate amount of money on his grandiose ideas for the property and subsequently went bankrupt. Mr. Irvin explained that his father (Michael Irvin) loaned Mr. Phinizy money on the property as a Deed of Trust and then was forced to foreclose on the loan, ending up with the Snow Creek property. Included in the information he provided for the hearing there is map of the entire Snow Creek plat. He explained that David Phinizy got the County to allow him to do a radical lot line revision where he moved a number of lots to different locations within the plat. This caused numerous problems, among them the lack of legal access for many of the lots. David Phinizy knew the soils of the lots in the plat were bad so he had planned on installing a community septic system. Based on research conducted by Mr. Irvin recently, the septic system possibilities in the plat are very limited. As of the date of the assessment there were no possibilities for septic system installations due to very poor soil conditions. In addition to these problems, water is not available to all the lots. Mr. Irvin continued to discuss the many problems with these parcels which decrease their market value. He explained that since the first of the year he paid $15,600 for a Deed of Trust that covered approximately 22 acres, six lots located above Skidder Hill road within the plat, and portions of some lots below Skidder Hill road. As part of the purchase he also obtained the right to f1le a claim against the County for allowing the lot line revision to occur. He was paid $13,500 in damages by the County. Mr. Pownall stated that he is present on behalf of Robert Shold who is the appraiser that assessed this property. According to the Assessor's records the value of these parcels have not been changed much from the value set by the Board of Equalization in 2000 when the appellant filed various appeals. He asked Mr. Irvin if he is saying that all of these parcels are only worth $15,000? Mr. Irvin explained that his incentive for purchasing the property was not because he wanted it, but, because he was able to use it to clear up problems with many other properties. This property potentially made some other lots more valuable. The purchase price of $15,600 is the maximum value for this property with all of the problems. Mr. Pownall stated that a foreclosure is not considered an open market transaction. Mr. Irvin stated that it wasn't a foreclosure. He bought the Deed of Trust which had approximately $80,000 to $100,000 owing on it The previous owner of the Deed of Trust was willing to sell it "as is" for $15,600. Clearly it was not a trustees sale. Both parties reasoned the value of the property with plenty of time to draft documents and raise capital similar to any other Real Estate purchase. In answer to a question from Chairman Marlow regarding the statutory warranty Deed on this property, Mr. Irvin explained how he obtained the Deed and foreclosed on Mr. Phinizy as a result of his bankruptcy. Board of Equalization Minutes - September 9, 2003 Pajte: 5 Mr. Pownall asked Mr. Irvin what amount he would accept ifhe were to sell the property? Mr. Irvin said if he were to put the property on the market as camping lots for $1,000 to $2,000 each, all the fees involved in selling the lots would exceed any profits. It would also preclude the possibility of selling a potentially buildable lot. He would like to sell them as buildable lots, however, there are many issues to deal with. In terms of what he would sell the whole mess for, he doesn't know. After reviewing all the information submitted and hearing the testimony of both parties, Chairman Marlow closed the hearing. The Board will conduct a physical inspection of the property and make a determination at a later date. Meeting adjourned. Att~. J&v~l~<' JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF EQUALIZATION o William S. Marlow, Chairman ~~~ Richard A. Broders, Vice-Chairman ~__" /J /A~, JrJEs A. IJeLeo, Member