04/29/2025 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

The PA presented the history of the subject's assessed value starting back from 2001 and going through 2024. It is noted that the assessed value in 2023 was $187,314 and was increased in 2024 to $320,138. (The increase appears to be based solely on the February 2023 sale of comparable Sale 1.) The PA also presented a summary of condominium sales between 2016 and 2023. The chart indicated the total sales volume, the number of sales, the average sale price of the condominium units and a percent increase from one year to another. The PA testified that the information was provided to show the increase in value over the time frame. (However, no time adjustment was applied to the comparable sales used by the PA.) Summary of evidence presented by the petitioner: The petitioner did not request a market (just) value for the property. The petitioner testified that the value of the" lot is (based on) what you can build on it and that they overpaid for the lot in 2006. The petitioner testified that the recent increase in the assessed value (from $187,315 to $320,13 8) was a 71 % increase. The petitioner testified that while looking for comparable listings and sales for the hearing, they discovered that the lot was listed with Coldwell Banker and was done without their knowledge. They noted that according to the agent with Coldwell Banker, that was listed on the MLS sheet, the listing was done electronically. i The petitioner presented the survey and the -architectural criteria for building in their subdivision. The petitioner noted that the usable depth of the lot is only approximately 151 feet. As a result, the buildable area is much smaller. They noted that the minimum square footage requirements,' including the two car garage, would require the construction of a two story house, due to the size of the lot (width and length) along with the irregular shape. The petitioner noted that the PA's Sale 1 was a much more developable lot due to the 66 FF. The petitioner presented an analysis of the buildable footprint of each lot which takes into account all of the setback requirements. The petitioner indicated that the buildable footprint for their lot was 1,979 SF and the buildable footprint for the PA's 4 sales ranged from 4,131 SF to.7,239 SF. The petitioner noted that the PA's Sale 2 is a two story house and would cost more than $180 SF to build and using $180 SF resulted in a higher land value. Sale 4 would be similar to what they would have to build and the owner paid over $300 Page 3 2024-140 Page 4 of 7 -57-