|
-porches and swimming pool
<br />-.38 acre lot, interior canal exposure, with better than average view (PA $765,000)
<br />Sale Price $1,760,000 ($487/sfla)
<br />Just Value $1,285,437 ($356/sfla) (73% of sale price)
<br />PA Sale 3, 246 Spring Line Drive
<br />-Single Story, construction SC2
<br />-4,038.5 s.f. Assessed $168/s.f.
<br />-Built 2004, upgrades in 2012
<br />-Attached garage 676 s.f.
<br />-Porches and swimming pool
<br />-.39 acre lot, interior canal exposure, lower than average view (PA lot value $765,000)
<br />Sale Price $1,775,000 ($439/sfla)
<br />Just Value $1,597,312 (%355/sfla) (90% of sale price)
<br />PA Sale 4, 145 Anchor Drive
<br />-2 Story, 3,576 s.ilst floor ($126/sfla) 1,336 s.f. 2nd floor ($83/s.£), plus 440 s.f. 2nd ($83/s.f.)
<br />-Built in 1992
<br />-Attached Garage 701 s.f.
<br />-Porches and swimming pool
<br />.44 acre lot, expansive western river view (lot value $1,332,375)
<br />Sale Price $2,550,000 ($471/sfla)
<br />Just Value $2,091,989 (386/sfla) (79% of sale price)
<br />The PA chart presentation and analysis of commingling 100% selling price and Just Value is misleading and is
<br />therefore analyzed by the Magistrate based on comparing Just Value of the subject to Just Value of the market sales and
<br />using a cost of sale adjustment of 15% for consistency.
<br />Sales 1 and 4 have significantly superior river frontage or view. Sale 2 has similar land amenity, but has been upgraded
<br />and is significantly smaller in size. Sale 3 has inferior canal location/view, smaller living area size and significantly
<br />newer construction. None of the PA sales are highly comparable to the subject. The PA land value appears to be
<br />similarly valued as the surrounding properties, but the contributory value of the living area of the subject appears to be
<br />overvalued based on the size, quality, and condition of the evidence provided for the PA sales and the PET condition of
<br />the subject.
<br />The PA reported at the hearing that they are willing to lower the subject Just Value to $1,500,000, which would support
<br />$/sfla of $224.
<br />Magistrate analysis of Petitioner information -
<br />The petitioner provided background for three market sales, including the subject. These sales are outlined previously,
<br />with the following information provided:
<br />Subject Sale Price $1,300,000; $/sfla sale price $194; $/sfla, (.55 ac), 6,701 s.f. 1984, canal view
<br />Petitioner Sale 2; Sale Price $1,230,000; $298/sfla, large lot (.72 ac), canal view, 4,128 s.f. 1995
<br />Petitioner Sale 3; Sale Price $1,427,500, $350, good river view 4,074 s.f. 1988
<br />The PA cards for the Petitioner sales (other than the subject) were not available to the Magistrate.
<br />Other than the subject, the Petitioner sales also lack high comparability with the subject. Both are smaller residences,
<br />with sale 3 similar in age, but with superior river view and higher lot value. The Petitioner sales do support lower
<br />priced residences in the subject area and lower 100% sale price values. An appropriate 100% sale price for the subject
<br />would be lower than any of the $/sfla market sales other than the sale of the subject.
<br />2020-019 Page 6 of 7
<br />-10-
<br />
|