Laserfiche WebLink
on --the average sale price of $:3.70 SF : the PA: concluded at preliminary. value: : <br />(marketvalue) for. the 11:55 acres at $33QSF or. $_1,861:,536. (A:15% deduction <br />for the cost of sale. (COS) was not applied to the estimate of market value by'th ..... <br />PA:to indicate a just:value.:Applying a 15%: COS adjustment to::the preliminary: <br />value: would result in a just value of $1,582,306:.) The PA testified that, considering <br />a. COS'deduction, the Witent. .assessmentfor the'subjectof $1.,091,062 or $2.17.SF <br />is well below the value estimate of:$1:;861,53:6: <br />The'PA provided. the:property` record cards. for the subject and the comparable sales <br />along with the location map'showing that three: of the:sales were loedted along. US <br />Hwy 1: and I :of.the sales;was located just west of -US Highway 1: off of 41st: Street., <br />Summary of evidence presented by:the petitioner:::: <br />The::petitioner requested a. Just:Value of $736,3°12 or.$l,A6 SF.($63,7.50.per acre).: <br />at the beginning of the testimony. <br />The petitioner presented 5. comparable° sales.from CoStar: The.cornparable sales.:: <br />sold between $45;208 per acre to $157,368 per: acre or between:$1.04:SF to $3'.6:1 <br />SF. The sales ranged in :size from'9.91 acres to 37 acres: The comparable sales <br />were zoned a variety of different zonings. The. different zonings: included IG- <br />Industrial:General; RS -3 a:residential'zoning a combination of both Commercial: <br />and Multifamily; zonings;: CG General Commercial and a:combihatiion of :CH - <br />Commercial Heavy- Arid CL- Commercial Light. (Ii is noted that::Sale- 5 -at $3.61- SF <br />was: the PA's Sale =2. It is also noted that Sale: A, at $1.97 SF, was an auction sale:: <br />and resold just over one. year later_ for $3:65 SF; the PA's: Sale 1.) <br />There was rib discussion of the sales iii the. evidence: submitted.-- he petitioner: <br />estifiedahat the:subject property was botli:irregular in shape and was transacted by <br />US .Hwy 1. As a result, it is not two contiguous parcels..: In addition, there is a.. - <br />parcel cut: out of the back.of the west side property., This resulted in physical and <br />:functional issues: for the developriient of the subject property, including issues with <br />. <br />the setbacks :(legal issues). (The petitioner did riot provide a tax inap or. survey. <br />demonstrating the shapes ,of the subject parcels. The petitioner did not value the <br />:property as two -separate parcels:) <br />:..:. Re uttal Testimony: <br />ThePA testified that -the parcel may have some setback'issues. However; the west <br />side parcel is approximately five acres and.is a substantial piece (of adequate.,size) <br />.Z. <br />2024-107::.: ..... ... ... .... ' Page 3 -of 4 <br />..39- <br />