05/26/2021 - Laserfiche WebLink

Metadata

Thumbnails

Annotations

A sales comparison analysis is generally the most useful technique for analyzing a single family residence. The Property Appraiser and the Petitioner information provided comparable sales located in the subject neighborhood. All of the documents and testimony admitted into evidence are carefully reviewed by the Magistrate. Persuasive evidence was provided by both parties. The PA provided two informational documents that were not discussed at the hearing. These documents include "Methodology and Considerations by the Property Appraiser" and 193.011 "factors to consider in deriving just valuation:. The methodology document indicates that the PA considers all and uses some of the factors of 193.011. This document also reports that "there is no legal requirement in Florida that cost of sale be deducted from the market value in order to arrive at just valuation". The PET provided a document regarding use of the 8th Criterion and legal support for its use and DR -493. The 8th Criterion document supports "since 1967 Florida "has assessed property based on the net amount received by the seller in a hypothetical closing". Additionally, based on PTO 11-01 and the VAB training Manual "the 8th criterion must by' utilized by the Value Adjustment Boards and their Special Magistrates when setting values in cases appearing before them." The sales presented by the PA provide an adjustment between 1006/o Sale Price and Just Value of 83%, 73%, 90%, and 79%. Based on the documents presented to the Magistrate by the Petitioner it is appropriate under the 8th criterion to utilize a cost of sale adjustment of 15% for consistency in the analysis of the subject Just Value. Additionally, the adjustments utilized by the PA for the market sales will be considered. On the PA chart, the PA Market/Just Value for the subject is compared to 100% sale prices of the market sales. The PA commingling of the $/sfla of 100% Sale Prices (sales) and Just Value (subject) on the chart is misleading. The PA reconciliation of a Just Value for the subject is lower than any of the sales used by a significant amount. This conclusion appears to be arbitrary. It is unclear of the reasoning for the subject Just Value assessment significantly lower than the 100% sale price; or the sales Just Value indications is to include a cost of sale adjustment or adjustment for other factors. PA evidence reviewed by the Magistrate: The PA field review card provided the following information for the subject - -2 story SC2 construction -6,701 s.f. residence, 5,008.5 s.f. 1st floor (Assessed at $141/s.f) 1,692 s.f. 2nd Floor ($94/s.f) -1,518 s.f. attached garage -numerous porches, swimming pool -Built in 1984 with effective age of 1984 -.55 ac lot, aerial indicates interior canal exposure, with better than average view (PA lot Assessed at $765,000) Sale Price $1,300,000 ($194/sfla) PA Just Value $1,819,138 ($271/sfla) (140% of Sale Price) The PA presented four sales from the subject neighborhood - PA Sale 1, 1840 Cutlass Cove Drive -Single Story, construction SC2 -3,233 s.f. residence living area (Assessed at $156/s.f.) -812 s.f. attached garages. -Residence constructed in 1998, new roof in 2016, remodeled after 2019 purchase ($665,000 permit) -porches and swimming pool Good Condition .69 ac lot, aerial indicates expansive pie shaped water front cove to river view. (PA lot value $1,105,553) Sale Price $2,20,000 ($680/sfla) Just Value $1,818,003, ($562/sfla) (83% of sale price) PA Sale 2, 246 Spring Line Drive -Single Story, construction SC 1 -3,612 s.f. residence living area (Assessed at $123/s.f.) -Built in 1982, additions and alterations in 2006, and in 2019 after the sale. -Attached 576 s.f. garage 2020-019 Page 5 of 7 -9-