The URL can be used to link to this page

06/01/1981 BOR CONT - 5292CONTINUATION OF 1981 BOARD OF REVIEW June 1, 1981 � , ' Page ] itlC MI6lUif S 01 T11E. I.OAitD Of ftt:VtFW Mi-.ET1iJi'� Oi llll. CITY COUiICtL UF h1�Y 11, 19 � 1 The City Cuuncil nu�t as the Qoard of Revicar and the mecting v�as called to order at 7:32 p. m, by htayor P�ee. PLEDGF OF AI.LEGIA�JC[: Mayor Nee led the Council and audience in tiie Pledge of Alle9iance to the � Flag. ROLL GALL: MEMQERS PR[SENT: Mayor �lee, Council�uan Fitzpatrick, Cou�cilwon�an Floses, Councilman Schneicier and Councilman Qarnette MEh1QERS AaS[t�T : None ' Ptayor t�ee stated the purpose of the Goard of Reviev� is to examine the equity of the llssessor's establishuient of mar4:et value on a person's proper-ty. tle stated the Council has some ability to adju,t a proPosed market value, either up or doa�n, as a result of these proceedings. ' f4ayor Nee stated any questions raised this evenirg may not be able to be resolved to Lhe o�•,ners satisfactien and, tfierefore, it may be necessary to refer the item to the Assessor to give him a chance to examir.e the issue. � �•tayor Nee stated it is important a proG��r•i:y o�•mcr make his appeal kna�n at these proceedings in order to protect his fur-ther r•ights of appeal to other bodies. hlr. Mervin Herrmann, City Assessor, stated the Council has the right to raise or la•�er any particular property, as thcy scc fit, after revie�ving the facts. fte pointed out they cannot ►•educe the ag9r•eg�te assessirent more than 1°:. Mr. Herrnann stated there are representatives from th� County also present here this evening to answer any questioiis. F1r. Herruiann explained any appeals will be recorded and the property a•rner will then protect his right to appeal turther to �he County or State, if they so desire. Fle statzd, if the issue isn't settled �•rith the City, County, or State, the owner can appeal further to the courts. Fir Larrv Voc�t 1357 Fireside �rive, appeared before the Council and stated . he felt the City's market value of 573,i00 on his home�r�a5 roughly 510,000 to 512,000 hi9her than what is reflected in two a;:praisals he received, one from an appraisal consulting firm and one from.a local real estate appraiser. Mayor Nee asked when the other tti•ro appraisals were done on his home. t�r. Vogt stated one was done on April 21, 19�1 and the other on ;•1arch 14, 19�1. Mr. Mervin Ne►-rinann stated the appraiser did go out last v�eek, and at that time, could see no reason to change the value of 573.7t10 placed on flr. Vogt's ho�r�e. F1r. Herrmann feit, in this case, he would like this appeal to go to the � County for an outside appraisal of ttie property. Dir. Herrmann r,ave the Council furthcr informa±ior, on the year the home was i of the ara e and hon�:. built and the s zc 9 9 Mr. Vogt statedtc�.tianpraisals he has give comparable sales figures of hon�s located in the close vicinity. I � r � � � � � � ' ' � f_I � � r � � Page 2 BOARD OI' REVICW MEETIWG OF MAY 11, 19£31 Councilman Schneider asked the value placed on the home last year, and Mr. Herrniann stated it v,as 562,000, t•tr. Herrmann pointed out the biggest portion of increase was on the land value in that area. Mr. Vogt stated directly to the west of his home is a doubte bungalow and across the street from his lot is a smatl conurercial building. Mr. Herrmann stated he r�ould like to see the appraisals F1r. Vogt•has in his possession and he viould be mostly interested in comparable sales figures regarding the year in which these ho��ies o-rcre sold. htr. Vogt stated the comparable figures are for homes that have bcen sold in the last year, and he could provide the information this evening. Mayor Nee stated he felt staff should review this property and pointed out the Council was aware of hir. Vogt's argument and felt he had quite a convincing case. Mr. George Wicklund, 101 6ibralter Road, stated last year his home was assesseJ at 543,'•�0 and tnis year it is at 550,500 �•�hich is over a 16-1/2" increase and que�cioned how they arrived at this figure. Mr. Herrmann, City Assessor, stated the value on Mr. Wicklund's home v�ent up 6% this year and tne land value �vent up 50`,. He stated the previous value on the land was 510,400 and it is now 515,600. Mr. Wicklund asked if all similar properties were raised the same percent. Mr� Herrmann stated each particular lot was taken into c ar�sideration as its size and the area to come up with a uniform assessment. He stated, in certain areas, things have changed so the land fiad to be revalued. Mr. Wicklund asked r�hen these increases were going to end. Mr. Herrmann .;tated it depended on what people will pay for real estate in the future. Mr. Herrmann also explained the tax credit received for those persons who are 65 or older, based on their income. Mayor Nee stated the requirement of the Council is to establish what they feel the house would sell for, if it was on the market. He stated the Assessor arrives at the value by reviewing �vhat comparable homes sold for in the area. Mr. Wicklund stated he didn't doubt it would sell for the value placed on his home, but didn't think it was fair to charge these prices for homes. He questioned if values would go up next year. Mr. Herrmann stated he had Lo admit that cities like Fridley, within close proximity of Minneapolis and St. Paul, have greater value because, rrith the price of gas, people do not want to drive long distances to their place of er�loyment. Mr. Albin hiyslajek, 6430 Riverview Terrace, requested his taxes be frozen a va ue o�, 00 �nstea o ra�sing it to 593,000. Flayor �dee asked t•ir. D1yslajek if he felt the home would sell for 593,000 and he stated he paid this for the property, but_wanted it valued at only 573,000. Councilr�an Schneider explained, by la�r, tiie Council can only make sure the value the Assessor has placed on the pr•operty represents the true market value and felt if he purchased the hor�e for 593,000, then it must be �vorth this a��ount unless son�ething has happened that causes the value to be laver. Pir. Dtyslajek stated hc wanted the value frozen at 57°.000 Cecause he is retired and ►�on't have the moncy to pay the ta:«•s. htayor Nce stated the Council does not have thc authority to leave the value at 51;,000, if they feel the market value is 593,000. J � , � � � � ' � � � � � , 1 1 Page 3 BOARD OF R[VICW MCCTING OF M11Y 11, 19a1 Mr. Myslajek felt. when a person is retired, they shouid reccive a break in taxes and stated he �•,ould be satisfied if the tar.es don't 90 up. Ptayor PJee Stated they cannot 9uarantee the taxes wouldn't increase because of all the taxing districis. He pointed out there were nwny other a�t�ncies, besides the City, involved in determining a�hat taxes would be collected. Mr. Lief flenrik;en, 643n Rivervie�v Terrace, stated in 1973, his home was valued at $31,000 and today the value is at 5120,0(10. He pointed out he will not be able to afford to live in his home when he retires. Mayor Nee asked f:r. Henriksen if he would sell his hon�e for 5120,000. He stated the point is that you cannot sell homes r�ith the interest rates as they arp today. He stated when the Assessor came to his home, even though he hasn't had any changes since he first moved into it, it was pointed out to him that ttie laundry room and furnance room were finished and the increase in value wouldn't hurt him as it would only be a few more dollars. Mr. Henriksen's concern is what the value will be when he retires and if he can afford to live in his home. Councilman Schneider pointed out the Council can only determine if the value placed on the home is a fair value, based on comparable sales. Mrs. He1en Argue, 6648 Channel Road, asked why the value of her home was raised 8,900 from $41,�00 to 550,700. Mr. Nerrmann, Ci•ty Assessor, stated part of the increase was because the breesewdY hadbeen finished vi�ichraised the value by 51,574 and the biggest increase was in the value of the land from y16,200 to 522,000. Mrs. Argue stated the br�.�sway cannot be used all year around. Mr. Herrmann stated this was true anu was taken into consideration in figuring the value. Mr. Herrmann then f�irther explained hav the value was placed on this lot since it is an unusually large lot. Mayor Nee asked �4rs. Argue ifshe felt the property would sell for the value placed�on it. Mrs. Argue stated she didn't know until she talks to a re��1r•. Mayor Nee stated staff woulc! revie�a the value placed on her home ind �it rrill come again before the Cou��..il on June 1, 1SII1. Mrs. Argue also questioned what could be done about the condition of her neighbar's property. Dtr. Flora stated this property owner has been contac�ed and the City was 9iven a date when corrective action would be taken and the area improved. Mr. Ralph Truax 7830-1884 Elm Street, asked Mr. Herrmann to have his name recorded as having appealed as he a�ants more time to investigate the value ptaced on this property. hlr�Jos�h Valtinson, 5215 Pierce Street, stated the value placed on his hon�e in 1979 4�as 572,860 and this year the value as of January 2, 1981 is 5101,400. hir. Valtinson stated what he is concerned about is the value placed on the improvements. Ne pointed out 'there is another house in his area that cost about 5225,000 and the value placed on this property is �I29,OU0. tle stated other homes in his area are valued at 569,000. Councilwoman t•toses asked if houses in thc area valucd at 569,000 ��r.re similar to his home. hir. Valtinson stated he has about 1,450 square feet anJ most of the homes are about 1,250 square feet. t4r. Valtinson felt the value placed on his home �•�as high, and it should be lor�er. Mayor Nee stated the staff would check into this further and eome back with a report to the Council atthe�June I, 1981 mceting. ' ' � �� ' , �� , � �� , � Page 4 BOARO OF REVICW MCCTItIG OF MAY 11, 19t31 Mr. Richard Ilarris,_ 6200 Riverview Terrace, ap�eared br_fure the Council regardi ny the va l ues �pl aced un ►iis pro{ierY ics i n thc C i ty. Ile stated Lhe property at 6200 f;ivErview Terrace had a value of 59G,700 placed on it for last year and the r�ew value is 5117,2C0 which is a 21'.. ur $20,500 increase. Mr. Har►•is felt this was a little high. Mr. Herrm�nn pointed out this is a rivcr lot and the lot value went from b17,200 to 532,9U0. Mayor Nee asked t•ir. Harris if he felt they had the wrong market value. Mr. Harris stated he honestly doesn't think the property is worth that and could see about S101,000, but not 5117,000. ' htr.'flarris felt the problem is all the papers filed in Anoka Gounty show about a 12� to 15°S additional charge because of the morte•age company's Charge to the-otivner. 1ie pointed out if a tiome sold for 5200.000, it would also show another y30,000, which represents 15°; of the selling price for the points and this appears as part of the mortgage. Mr. Narris further stated the value of the property at 6210 Riverview Terrace has been raised by $18,000 from 586,000 to 5104,000, and felt this value was also high. Mr. Harris raised the question of the value of his property at 7765-7795 Main Street. He stated the:value this year was $206,500 which is an increase of $40,000 or 19.4a in a one year period. Mr. Herrmann stated, basically, it was the land that rose in value and the value placed on the land is 577,600. Mr. Harris pointed out there is about 60,000 square feet in each of those parcels, and felt land of this nature was going.for about 80 cents a square foot. Mr. Harris stated the property at7701-1-7703 Main Street also received an increase and questioned what percent of the new addition is put on this year's taxes. Mr. Nerrmann, City Assessor, stated 50°� or $71,ti00 is for the new addition. Mr. Harris questioned if the balance was for the land to which Mr. Herrmann answered in the affirmative. Mr. Harris stated the property at 7710-7720 Main Street had an 11.6" increase in value from S30B,600 to S344,300. He pointed out, however, the land across the street had a 19�� increase in value. Mayor Nee stated staff would review the items brought up by Mr. Harris with a report back to Council at the June 1, 1981 meeting. Mr. Harris stated he would like a ruling on the matter of points as he honestly feels the valuation, because of this system, are probalby inflated 10"� to 15;•. Mr. Edward Froaale, 64;�0 Rivervietv_ Terrace, stated his lot is assessed at • � 27,000 and his front yard has ten inches of blacltop bcla� the grass as it was once a street. Fie stated tlie vatue last year ►aas 75,000 and it has nrnv gone to S91,900. ' � ' Mr. Frogale stated he could not see a value of 527,200 placed on fiis lot because of the situation in his front yard and his home is not on the river. Page 1 To the Board of Review, City Manager and Director of Central Services. The Assessor's office has sent a letter to every party that presented a complaint to the Board of Review on May 11, 1981,telling them of our recomnendation. A more detailed presentation is outlined in the fol7owing pages. If you have a question, please feel free to call us. The Staff of the Assessor's Office. � #1 Ward 2 � Larr� Vogt 1357 Fireside Drive Part of Lot 14, Aud Sub #129 , Descriptive Da ta Address Styl e Lot Size House Area Garage Year Buil� Bsmt Finish Fireplace Extra Baths Deck Sale Date Sale Price Adjusted Sale Price (at 1� per Month) Subject 1357 Fireside Drive Rambler 99 X 132 1270 Sq Ft 654 Sq Ft 1978 562 Sq Ft 1 1/2 None Saie #1 1183 Regis Lane Rambler 85 X 130 1248 Sq Ft 528 Sq Ft 1961 564 Sq Ft 2 ' 3/4 192 Sq Ft 11/80 $87,528 $88,400 Sale #2 24 - 66 2 Way Rambler 80 X 125 1200 Sq Ft 396 Sq Ft 1963 608 Sq Ft Metal 3/4 I 288 Sq F 7/80 $76,450 $80,3U0 Page 2 Sale #3 71 - 66th Way Rambler 75 X 125 1120 Sq Ft I 520 Sq Ft 1972 988 Sq Ft None 3/4 None 5/80 $72,900 $78,000 The three sales described above have all sold in 1980. They all have smaller lots, smaller houses, smaTler garages and are older than the subject property. Yet they all sold for considerably more than the value we have on the subject. Therefore, the Assessor's office recommends no reduction in �alue .of $73,700. � - �_�..._.,.__.._____._..__.�.__._ ,.�,_�.,��.. _ _ _ ___._ �_._ � #1 � Page 3 The property owner had a market value appraisal made for divorce settlement. This means that no Real Estate commission or points are involved. If the couple had sold the home for $75,000 and paid 7% in commission and 7 points it would have brought the net return down to $64,500. This would not have included other costs so it really should have a market value of more than $75,000 to net $64,500 if the comnission and points are right. The comparable homes, used in the appraisal, all brought more money than the property in question and size of the three were smaller as fol7ows Property in Question #1 #2 #3 Size ]278 sq ft ]040 sq ft 7032 Sq Ft 1120 sq ft Sa]es Price $65,000 $65,000 $72,900 Price per sq. ft. $ 62.50 $ 62.98 $65.08 At $62.50 per sq. ft. X 1278 sq. ft. _$79,875 62.98 per sq. ft. X 1278 sq. ft. _$80,488 65.08 per sq. ft. X 1278 sq. ft. $83,172 tt � / ,:) . a 7 - .F .'r` �� :1. � N � J .�` /a• jx �" i CC3i�.�i�'.�fr.r:�' - L-�:CL`• L::� ��C�,'�. _._._�_�, ___ r�� niW� �,iniE. n��r�F+nisE i�s -- c.r�ro:Ui Tnrs75 � _._ , _ � ` - - -- 11Jl:►�C�I��AI_F,'� ((1,_ff':,}?I`�c;': Ai'1'�:�V�.CH This approach is the apja]ic.iti.on of Che principles of substitution; and what conpe- tiCive prc�perties tiave so],d for rec��nt]y, c-�n the loc.al market. Thruu�h an appro- ��ri.�te .�d.justrar_>nt j�rocess, th�y reflucC what: the�y ��ould tiavc so].d for, if L'hey had possessed all ttie basic and pertinent p1iy:,ic�1 and loc:�tional characteristics of the subject �ro� erty. '1'hcsc indi�ati.ons fa.11. into a pattern and provide an indi- catioii oi: mar�cet value for ttie subject property, as of- the date of appraisal. Descriptive Data Desi�n Address Sa2es Price Price PSF Asking Price Date of Sale Location Site View Est. Size Age/Cond. Total P.00r�s Eedrooms Baths Bs�!t Finish Air Cond. �, Gara�e Fireplace Kitchen Siding nays on r�; t . RE Taxes Financing Sub j_ect RambJ.er 135 7 Fireside Drive Below avera;e Above ave, size Non-residential Est. 1,278 SF 3 years-{'air S + partial 3 + partial 1 + partial Partially finished \one Double att. Partial F.P. Average �fascni te $b21+.12 C3S }1 Sa le 411 Rambler 6I6 Glencoe $65,000 $62.50 565,900 June - 1930 Better Smaller Better Est, 1,040 SF 11 years better S + basement 1 3 1 + basement 1 Recreati.on room, bath None Double Franklin F.P. Less riasoni te 48 days $402 Assurced $57,000 FHA . Sale 4l2 Rambler 1523 73� Avenue h.E. $65,0�0 $62.98 $G5,900 October - 1980 Better Competitive Better Est. 1,032 SF 6 years - better S + partial 3 1 Partially f inished Central air Double None Less Stucco 22 days $633 C/D and assump- tion of VA $31,400 CO*^ST:\TS AND CORRI:LATiO�] OF SAI.�.S DATA Sale 73 Rambler 71 - 66 Way N.E. $72,900 $65.08 $74,900 May 1980 Better • Smaller Better Est. 1,120 SF 9 years - better 5 + base�ent 2 3 + basement 1 1 + basenent 1 Bedroom, rec. room, bath, �d.0. None Doub le 21ore Less Masonite 41 days $643 F13A �Several proi�crti.es were reviec�ed before sclectin�; these three, c,hich best represent, in my ol�inion, thc estir�.;t:ed marl;eC value of tl�e subject property. None fiave �i'E'il adjusted for i-e��l estate bt-oker:�;e fees �;;�ic}� are n,enc�r:�lly 7 percent of sales pi-iee. rlcijustr.:eite.s �;ere m.i�ie for iter�s of. diffcrenc� includinb locr�tion, lot siz�y, � vie�v, C011(!1CtOIt� ;;i•�e or Gc�uarc. foota;;e, b.�senent finisli, fencins;, �aar�s;��;e ar iinancin;; c�s�:,, �-entr:il air con��it ionint�, sidinn, eCC. R.ased u��on these Gc�l�s, L�F,cthct �.it:;i tli.• ��Chci• ii�forr.i:iCi��i i�lclucl��ci in this r�}�ort, ii. i.s my ui>i.nion tti:it � L'hc csli►nate<i :;uz�k��C v.ilu.� hy�ri�r_ 1)� rect Sale�; Cc�iut,�risc�n AI,Proach is $64,50U. f�? �f k ��.s�0 = %1, g7S t '' X � �. 9 � � �"' `'� � �' , �� X �S�D�: �f3� 17� , . . .. U � � � o f tt� W � � q � � ��i � � L � 4' .y � �. �� M � 0 �, a a a � � � " o �l1 -` , � �V �) '`- O o � � �h �" � �Y �, �� P�qe 5 � U � � t� Z �� '' I � v `� � � �� O V rJ u p :� , G O � �� V � U � � � O � � � �\ �` �\ ` �` � � J � � � � � � i � � V � � � � a � �� $j � � -F! �; I +� � � `r �� + + � 3 � .� � . ° . . I-- -#. ' � ,i � i -� .E. J � W � � 3. � � W � � � I il �� i Z � �-� I q ) � 1 � Q e � � t� 1 l� I� !I � 3 Q .� � j j Z W �., � Z �� 1. Il ll 11 J � aD J• � � � ; ; � � � � � � � �� ` �I i� ' - ' j ` � � � � � . Z ►I i� �r ; r� II � � c�n v.� � ' � � �' o�': � � �i �� i , n 11 ,� ��-. � � � Z q. i p � ° (h t I � t !I ; tt I I Z � � U� v,. � �' � � u � l � � � � + :'!- I! q � � � � I � w �� "w • � t= �� w rtE f� I I �� O � � � . C � � 4 � .� W , � z � l t� I�� i� � w fl. °� £ ' `r � C �' � u u t �� L - i � Q W Z� i- � 4i z�' ��1 o � �� .>o �; ,� � � � � � � ¢ �� 1� . �' '. � � � �� h � � J W ¢ ± �� o �b F M y W � � a� J � x � . �+' ,� 0 4 ° � � �� '= �hz � a V Page � #2 Ward 3 George Wicklund 101 Gibralter Road Lot 16, Block 2 � Carlson's Summit Manor South Add. I called Mr. Wicklund and he stated he was satisfied when he saw the records of his neighbors and realized he was treated equally with them. Mr. Wicklund gets a refund from the �tate, due to the "Property Tax Refund" and has a long way to go before his limitation of benefits is used up. Therefore, if Mis income does not go up his net property tax will remain the same even if his property tax goes up. Page 7 � a3 Ward 1 � lilbin t�lyslajek 6430 Riverview Terrace � lot 4, Block l, . Veits Addition �', � This property was inadvertently valued as river property when in fact it is not. The Assessor's office recommends that the board reduce the total value by �6,000 as follows: � Land Structure Total From $27,000 $66,100 $93,100 � To $21,000 $66,100 $87,100 � � � � � � � ' � . i ' � � , - � e��., � ��.� � ' � #4 Ward 3 Lief Henrikson 6434 Riverview Terrace Lot 3 and Pt of Lot 4(Ex S 22') Viet Addition Descriptive Data Address Sale Subject #1 6434 6336 Riverview Riverview Terrace Terrace Sale #2 7120 Riverview Terrace Lot Size 110 X 168 97 X 233 84 X 295 � House Area 1986 Sq Ft 1092 Sq Ft 1312 Sq Ft , Garage 25 X 24 22 X 22 1 car T.U. Year Built 1974 1964 1949 � Walkout yes yes no Bsmt Finish 1158 Sq Ft 836 Sq Ft 490 Sq Ft ' Fireplaces 1 down 2 1 up � Central Air no no n° Extra Baths 2 1 no ' Finished Porches Deck Deck 10 X 24 Sale Date 7/79 11/79 � Sale Price $103,000 $113,000 Adjusted Sale Price $120,500 $127,700 � (Add 1% per month from sale date to January 2, 1981) Page 8 0 Sale #3 169 Hartman Circle 100 X 200 1530 Sq Ft 22 X 23 1957 walk-up 405 Sq Ft 2 yes 1 No 8/80 $120,000 $124,800 Sale #4 177 Hartman Circle 110 X 250 1754 Sq Ft 24X24 1957 yes 726 Sq Ft 1 up no 1 Deck 8/80 $157,000 $163,300 ' The above comparison information on houses sold along the river wouid indicate that the property at 6434 Riverview Terrace is reasonably valued. Although we found that the owner had deeded 2z feet off tFie south of his property to his ' neighbor, due to a patio over the lot line, which we had not recognized. Therefore the assessor's office recommends the following reduction: , Land Structure Total From $31,700 $89,100 $120,800 �, To $31,100 $89,100 $120,200 ' � ' Page g ' #5 Ward 2 Helen Argue 6648 Channel Road tLot 2F, Brookview Addition . This property was reappraised May 14, 1981 and although the property was , built in 1937 it has had good care and proper maintenance. The basic house is of average construction with some exceptions which would include not having enough closet space, no entry closets and bath directly off the kitchen. Also the recently added screen porch is of poor construction as is the garage. ' Thw Assessor's office recommends the board reduce the structure value b Y $23,00, as follows: ' Land Structure Total , From $22,000 $28,700 $50,700 To $22,000 $26,400 $48,400 � ' � � Page 10 �� Wa rd 3 Joseph 0. Valtenson 5215 Pierce St. Lot 15, Block 1, Marian Hills This approach is to assemble and analyze recent sales of similar properties to the subject to obtain a reasonable estimete of value. Of course, no two properties are exactly alike and so adjustments must be made. Dollar adjust- ments are made to the sale property to make it more comparable to the subject. If the sale property has an item that the subject does not have, the appraiser must subtract the value of that particular item from ihe sale. The reverse of this is also true. If the sale property does not have an item or feature that the subject does, a plus factor must be added to the sale. The end result should be a fairly close estimate of value of the subject property. In this appraisal only two sale properties were used because of their c7ose proximity to the subject. They are the same age and quality as the subject. They are ]ocated on either side of the subject property. The sales took place in April and May of 1980 and no adjustment was made for time to January 2, 1981. After all the adjustments were made an indicated market value of the subject property would be between $110,400 and $114,100. By applying the individual sales ratio (dividing the Assessor's Market Value by the Sales Price) to the adjusted value, would indicate an assessor's P+larket Value of betwe2n $100,000 and $102,000. This compares with the $101,400 value of the subject. Therefore, the Assessor's office wou]d recomnend no change be made. � � #$ ' Descriptive Data � � Design Address rBui l.der Subject Rambler 5215 Pierce Joseph Valtinson � Date of Sale Sales Price ' Price per Sq. Ft. � �q. Ft. Size 1,442 Sq Ft Bsmt. Finish 884 Sq Ft Central Air Yes Extra Bath 2 � Sauna Yes Fireplace No Deck 384 Sq Ft , Garage 676 Sq Ft Gar. Bsmt. Yes Lot 5ize 85 X 133 rAdjustments Sales Price � Adj. Sales Price Assessor's Ratio , Subject's Indicated Assessor's � � � � r 0 �� Sale #1 Rambler 5211 Pierce Bob Johnson Construct. April ]980 $95,000 $ 72.41 1,312 Sq Ft 640+480 Sq Ft Yes No No Yes 240 Sq Ft 528 SQ Ft No 70 X 121 ►rket Value Dollar Adjust. A + 5200 + 468 None + 3200 } 400 - 900 + 585 + 1118 + 3583 + 1700 $15,354 $95,000 $110,354 X .926 $102,200 _. Page 11 Sale #2 Rambler 5214 Pierce Bob Johnson Construct� May 1980 $100,000 $ 77.54 1 ,28t3 Sq F 820 Sq F No 2 No Yes No 484 Sq F No 85X133 to Do13ar Adjust. + 6180 + 468 ± }085 None + 400 - 800 j + 1425 + 1735 + 3583 None $14,076 $100,000 $1]4,076 X .876 $ 99,900 II ' I � r #11 Ward 3 Richard H Harris 6200 Riverview Terrace Lot 2, Block 3, Juli-Ann Add. Descriptive Data Address Lot Si ze House Area Garage Year Built Walkout Bsmt. Finish Fireplace Centr.al Ai r Extra Baths Porches Subject 6200 Riverview Terrace 108 X 238 1625 Sq Ft 23 X 23 1966 Yes 789 Sq Ft 2 No 2 Deck Sale #1 6336 Riverview Terrace 97 X 233 1092 Sq Ft 20 X 22 1964 Yes 836 Sq Ft 2 No 1 Deck Sale #2 7120 Riverview Terrace 84 X 295 1312 Sq Ft 1 car T. U. 1949 No 490 Sq Ft 1 up No No Finished 10 X 24 Page 12 Sa1e #3 169 Hartman Circle 100 X 200 1530 Sq Ft 22 X 23 1957 Walk-up 405 Sq F 2 Yes 1 No Sale #4 177 Hartman Circle 110 X 250 1754 Sq Ft 24 X 24 ] 957 Yes t 726 Sq Ft 1 up No 1 Deck Sale Date 7/79 11/79 8/80 . 8/80 Sale Price $103,000 $173,000 $120,000 $157,000 Adjusted Sale Price $120,500 $127,700 $124,800 $163,300 (Add 1% per month from sale date to January 2, 1981) The above comparison information on houses sold along the river would indicate that the property at 6200 Riverview 7errace is not overvalued. We have the above property valued at $117,200. Therefore, the Assessor's office recommends no reduction in value. #11 Harold Harris (Deceased) 6210 Riverview Terrace Lot 1, Block 3 Juli-Ann Add Page 13 0 We have viewed the above mentioned property and found a considerable amount af deferred maintenance. Also an extraordinary amount of physical deterioration and abuse. Therefore, we recommend the value be lowered as follows: Land Structure Total From $32,800 $71,200 $104,000 To $32,800 $48,200 $ 81,000 � #11 � 1981 Values � � ' , ' � ' 7765-95 Main St N E 55754-150 Page l4 Lot 6,Block 3, East Ranch Est 2nd LAND-------62,055 sq. ft. @$1.25 per sq. ft. _$77,600 BUILDING�=-10,900 sq. ft. @$15.49 per sq. ft. _$168,900 ' TOTAL 246,500 = 10,900 sq. ft. buiZding = 2.61 per sq. ft.of building. 7701-03 Main St N E 55754-140 Lot 5, Block 3, East Ranch Est 2nd LAND-------62,055 sq. ft. @$1.25 per sq. ft. _$77,600 BUILDING�--9,000 sq. ft. warehouse + 1200 sq. ft. office = 10,200 sq. ft. @ $17.44 per sq. ft. _ $157,000 Plus: 9,000 sq. ft. new addn. @ 50q completion =$71,400 TOTAL------$234,600 : 10,200 sq. ft. bldg. _$23.00 per sq. ft. of bui�ciing Plus: Addition @ $71,400 (If addition were 100%, overall value per sq. ft. of building would be $19.65 per sq. ft.) 7710-20 & 7780-90 Main St N E 57189-1830 Lots 7-10, Block 8, Onaway LAND-------57,936 sq. ft. @$1.25 per sq. ft. _$72,400 BUILDINGS--1 building @ 8,000 sq. ft. warehouse +,200 sq. ft. office = 9,200 sq. ft. @$15.46 per sq. ft. _$142,300 1 building @ 8,000 sq. ft. total @$16.20 per sq. ft. _$129,600 TOTAL------$344,300 =$17,200 per sq. ft. _$20.01 per sq. ft. , These 3 properties all contain land in excess of the required amount to provide a 40% building to land ratio maximum. Therefore, the overall values per sq. ft. of buildingsare stated high. By setting-up each of subject properties hypothetically ' with only minim�m land to maintain a 40% ratio we can establish our effective value on that basis and then add-in the excess land. 7765 Main------Building = 10,900 sq. ft. @ 40% = 27,250 sq. ft. � Land @ $1.25 per sq. ft. _ $34,100. $34,100 land value +$168,900 building =$203,000 effective value. $203,000 = 10,900 sq. ft. building =$18.62 per sq. ft. overall � effective value. Excess Land of 34,805 sq. ft. 7701 Main------Building = 10,200 sq. ft. (exc. addn) @ 40� = 25,500 sq. ft. ' land @ $1.25 per sq. ft. _ $31,900 $31,900 land value +$157,000 building =$18.51 per s4 ft plus addition Excess Land of 14,055 sq. ft. 7710 Main------Building = 9,200 sq. ft. @ 40% = 23,000 sq. ft. Land @ $1.25 per sq. ft. _ $28,700 $28,700 land value +$142,300 building =$171,000 effective value. $171,000 = 9,200 sq. ft. building =$T8.58 per sq. ft. 7780 P1ain------Buidling = 8,000 sq. ft. @ 40% = 20,000 per sq. ft. � Land @ $1.25 per sq. ft. _ $25,000 $25,000 land +$129,600 building =$19.32 per sq. ft. Excess land for parcel #1830 = 14,936 sq. ft. �_J ' #11 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Pa9e 15 In support of our 1981 values of the 3 subject properties, the following is submitted: Land Value 1981 land value for subject is based on $1.25 per square foot. Following is a study of raw land sales of properties in the generai area of SUBJECT: Out- Total Price Adj. Plus Sq. Ft. Sale standing Sales Per Sale '�1 15� Address Area Price Specials Consid. Sq.Ft. Date @ 5% Imp. 7800 Main St 5,360 7840 Elm St 16,080 7760 Beech St 19,080 7751 Elm 5t 17,040 7702 Rancher Rd 62,055 7773 Rancher Rd 68,355 7855 Rancher Rd 137,795 $ 9,400 12,000 10,000 11,000 54,000 51,266 102,904 8. 250 Corrmerce Cr 69,480 62,532 9. 7180 Comm Cr. 122,611 78,000 10. 7290 Comm Cir. 142,158 121,000 ll. 72$1 Comm Cir. 136,308 115,800 $ 495 $ 4,340 3,377 2,544 11,900 11,729 12,205 265 25,890 352 +40,500 (80) 44,300 +57,337 (80) 9,895 $ 1.84 10/79 16,340 1.02 2/76 13,377 .70 5�77 13,544 .79 6/76 65,900 1.06 12�77 62,995 .92 10/77 115,709• .84 8/77 (62,797) ( .90) 88,422 1.27 3/79 (78,352) ( .64) 118.852 .97 7j79 165,300 1.16 (.85)�1/80 173,137 1.27 1/79 $ 1.95 $2.24 1.26 1.45 .82 .94 .96 1.10 1.21 1.39 1.06 1.22 .98 1.13 (1.38) 1.58 (1.04) 1.19 1.22 1.40 (1.40) 1.60 In an analysis of these sa1es, the number one would be eliminated for purposes of arriving at a market value of open land for development. This is because this sale was for expansion by the owner of adjacent lots, and indicates the premium paid for such use. This premium is indicative of the value of excess land of developed parcels such as the subjects have. - The total sale price shown for each sale is the consideration at the time of sale plus outstanding special assessments assumed by the buyer. Each sale was reduced to a comnon denominator of price per square foot. For purposes of adjusting these sale prices to an indicated value as of January 2, 1981, the date of the assessment, an annual inflation rate of 59� was assumed. An assumption of this rate was necessary because there were no repeat sales of the same tracts to get a reliable indication of inflation. We do, however, feel the 5� annual rate used as being conservative. The result of adding the date of sale factor was an average indicated raw land value of $1.13 er sc�. ft. An additional 15% factor was then added to the 1.13 to adjust t�ie-raw land value to an indicated improved land value. This produced a value of $1.30 for improved land. The 15% factor adjusts for normal land preparation, hook-up of utilities and final grading. It is known that a number of the land sale comparables in this study, required remedial subsoil work to various degrees. It is felt, however, that the averaging process of the study should even out sale price differences for these conditions. ' - ' ' ' ' l. 2. 3. ' 4. 5. 6. 7. ' 8. 9. ' , � ' #�i Page 16 Following is a study of sales of improved properties in the general area of the SUBJECT: � Sq. Sq. Price land Adj Ft. Ft. per to to tir Land Bldg. Sale Plus Total Sq.Ft. Sale Bidg. of Address Area Area Price Spec. Sale Bldg. Date Ratio Aqe Sale 7840 7891 7871 7890 7760 7701 7751 7751 7751 Elm St Hickory St Hickory St Hickory St Beech St Beech St Elm St Elm St Elm St 16,080 22,512 16,080 96 , 558 19,080 8,775 17,040 17,040 17,040 8,400 9,271 6,497 10,440 6,930 7 , 995 6;237 6,237 6,237 $158,000 193,00 185,300 225,500 225,000 65,000 125,000 158 , 902 185,000 $ -0- 2,016 5,125 38,271 2,680 2,199 3,170 2,829 2,488 $158,000 195,016 190,425 263,771 227,680 67,199 128,170 161,731 187,488 $18.81 21.03 29.31 25.26 57.93 33.68 20.55 25.93 30.06 11/76 8/78 11/78 8/78 3/80 6/78 3/77 7J79 9/80 52 41 40 10.8 36 22.7 36.6 36.6. 36.6 New $28.0: New 29.4� New 36.6� New 32.3� 2 yr 63.1 � 5 yr 43. 7� New 29.�� 1 yr 30. 3: 2 yr 30. 9c In the analysis of these sales, number 5& 6 would not be used because of certain conditions. Sale #5 was to the adjoining property owner to be used for expansion of their previous facility. This sale was included in this listing only to show the premium some buyers will pay for certain situations. Sale #6 is of a significantly smaller building than subject and reflects a much higher per square foot price than applies to them. Sales #7, #8 and #9 are consecutive sales of the same property. They not only give a gpod indication of value, but a7so provide a measurement of inflation from 1977 to 1981 or approximately �% per month. In the process of analysis, as with the land sales, the assumed upaid specials ' were added to the sale price to get a tota7 sale price. These adjusted sale prices were reduced to a common denominator of sale price per square foot of building area. These values were adjusted at the 1% per month sin�e the sale date,to get an indicated value as of January 2, 1981, the assessment date. Excluding Sales #5 and #6, a ' range of $28 -$36 per square foot of building is indicated. We have not been able to identify the reason for Sale #3 to be so much higher than the rest. Therefore, by eliminating that sale, the range becomes $28 to $32. Subject properties range from ' $20 to $23 (with addition) including excess land, and $18.51 to $19.32 excluding excess land. ' ' , �� , ' Page 17 #12 Ward 3 Edward Fragale 6480 Riverview Terrace Lot 1, Block 1 Batterson Add. - This property also was valued as river property when, in fact, it is not. 7he Assessor's office recommends that the board reduce the total value by $5,800 as follows: Land Structure Total From $27,200 $64,700 $91,900 To $21,400 $64,700 $86,100 ' Page 18 The following people had their questions answered by staff during the meeting , but their names have been added in case they change their minds and would want to appear at the county meeting. ' #6 Ward 2 . l.awrence Larson, Jr. 517 - 532 Ave ' lot 13, Block 1, Temple Terrace � #9 Ward 2 ' John Evans 1565 South Bavarian Pass . ' lot 12, Block 1, Innsbruck North Townhouses Plat 4 #10 Ward 3 ' Henry Zimmer 402] California St. � Lot 3, Block 1, Wilson Addition , #7 Ward 1 Ralph Truax 7880 -7884 Elm St. Lots 1- 5, Block 2, Onaway Mr. Truax wanted to go on record of having appeared. He would like a little more time to investigate. The Assessor's office recommends no change at this time. , ' ...o, f �, .�� _�.,,.��._�, �,..,. �.�--.�,m.