►
From YouTube: Board of Equalization Hearing - June 17, 2020
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
Good
morning
this
is
the
Arlington
County
Board
of
Equalization
hearing
for
June
17th
2020,
the
first
property.
That's
on
our
docket
is
our
PC
zero
one,
zero,
five,
four
zero
one:
six,
twenty
six,
twenty
five
John
Marshall
Drive
mr.
Foley
is
here
presenting
for
his
property.
You
can
begin,
sir,
and
tell
us
in
8
minutes
about
your
appeal.
Is.
C
D
A
A
C
E
Thank
you,
sorry
about
that.
I
haven't
used
this
particular
videoconferencing,
we're
all
using
multiple
conferencing
systems.
So,
okay,
so
we
own
625,
John
Marshall
drives
and,
as
you
can
see
from
our
appeal,
it's
a
very
simple
issue
that
we're
raising.
So
our
life
is
a
very
unique
shaped
lot.
It
is
shaped
like
an
isosceles
triangle.
It
is
an
exterior
lot
with
one
of
the
long
sides
of
the
isosceles
streetside,
so
his
exterior
and
it
has
very
low
depth
previously
the
nation
on
our
home.
E
So
my
position
is
that
look
we
are
being
taxed
simply
based
on
the
square
footage
of
our
lot,
without
taking
into
account
the
shape
of
our
lot,
which
affects
the
value
in
this
case
now
the
Assessor
assessor
for
this
hearing
is
provided
several
comps
I
think
three
of
them,
and
if
you
look
at
those
comps,
while
they
are
corner
Lots
now
our
lot
is
it's.
Well,
it's
not
technically
a
court
a
lot
practically.
It
is
a
corner
lot.
E
Our
lot
is
significantly
less
developed
than
just
about
any
lot
you
can
look
at,
but
certainly
the
ones
that
are
provided
for
these
comps
and
our
position
is
that
it's
not
fair
that,
on
the
one
hand,
the
zoning
ordinances
will
not
permit
us
to
obtain
a
variance
to
build.
Additionally,
as
most
people
could
do
without
a
variance
I'd
say,
probably
90%,
but
at
the
same
time
we're
being
taxed
at
the
same
rate
simply
based
on
the
square
footage
of
her
a
lot.
It's
not
a
fair
way
to
assess
us
for
a
tax.
E
It's
not
equitable
and
you
know
I'm,
not
an
expert
in
property
law,
but
when
I've
looked
around
in
other
jurisdictions,
often
what
is
taken
into
consideration
is
the
depth
of
the
lot
and
the
frontage
when
it
comes
to
development,
because
that
affects
the
value
of
the
land
and
I.
Think
when
one
simply
takes
a
look
at
the
picture
of
our
land,
I
mean
it
I
think
it's
immediately
apparent.
Well.
E
This
is
an
unusually
shaped
lot
and
when
one
sees
that
that
when
our
architect
had
applied
for
the
variance,
he
noted
that
we
actually
our
house,
as
was
before
we
even
had
the
initial
variance-
was
grandfathered
in
because
it
had
a
rear
setback
that
was
too
close
to
a
property
line.
So
so
we
have
a
very
unusual
lot.
We
have
a
very
unique
situation.
E
A
G
The
properties
located
in
neighborhood
501
to
zero
for
a
base
value
for
the
land
of
a
buildable
lot.
A
$700,000
track
corresponds
to
a
average
size
lot
of
7580
square
feet.
We
have
determined
that
that's
a
point
of
violence
that
actually
shows
the
support
a
so
about
about
7580
eighty
square
feet,
the
property
that
we're
looking
today
is
actually
much
larger
larger
than
that
it's
eleven
thousand.
G
Two
hundred
eighty
six
square
feet,
which
is
significantly
much
larger
yeah
on
based
on
that,
is
value
accordingly,
using
the
current
land
valuation
method,
as
here
mr.
Foley's
concerned
about
the
way
we
value
properties
in
Irvington,
and
this
neighborhood
and
I
understand
that
our
current
valuation
method
actually
is
addressing
the
issue
of
being
a
larger
lot.
That
is
already.
D
G
G
G
We
don't
have
any
particular
adjustment
for
different
types
of
different
and
uncontrolled
different
shapes
of
the
Lots.
We
don't
have
any
particular
methodology
that
address
the
issue
of
the
the
shape
of
the
lot.
We
basically
use
the
actual
square
footage
to
calculate
the
value
of
the
lot
and
I
think,
or
we
believe
that
the
current
valuation
already
is
a
tracing
cause.
Issues
for
Lots
are
larger
than
the
average.
G
H
G
The
increase
in
the
neighborhood
for
the
yes
last
year,
the
land
value
was
six
hundred.
Sixty
five
thousand
in
the
year
went
up
to
700,000,
and
all
of
this
is
reported
by
recent
sales
in
the
neighborhood
and
that
approximately
five
five
percent
increase
in
the
land
value.
Mr.
Foley
actually
have
seen
6.2
percent.
A
I
I
was
just
looking
at
the
map
and
that
it's
not
exactly
the
same.
Obviously
gonna
be
fine
hard
to
find
it
a
lot,
the
same
size
and
shape,
but
right
on
the
other
corner,
RP
Co,
105,
400,
3
on
Nottingham
and
27th.
It's
kind
of
a
similar
I
think
the
frontage
is
on
27th
Street
and
it's
coming
not
very
deep,
but
a
wide
lot.
I
was
just
curious
if
you
had
to
land
value
on
hand
for
that.
If
that
was
similar.
G
Yes,
actually,
there
is
a
map
of
green
that
shows
all
the
land
values
and
most
of
the
properties
on
this
neighborhood
are
around
the
$700,000
mark.
That
would
be
the
point
of
violence
for
a
build
of
a
lot
$700,000.
Some
of
them
are
smaller.
Some
of
there
are
larger,
but
most
of
them
they
learn.
Valuation
is
$700,000
all
around
that
number
yeah
yeah.
I
G
I
G
A
G
Well,
this
property
has
been
improved
and
has
acted
access
to
utilities,
since
1954
I
mean
the
house
was
built
in
1954,
so
this
property
is
improved.
A
house
has
been
there
since
1954,
it's
buildable
I
mean
the
the
excess
land.
Additional
square
footage
is
so
really
being
value
a
lower
rate.
It's
only
ten
dollars
per
division.
That
is
called
food
about
the
average.
No
ties
and
I
think
our
our
method
is
already
addressing
the
concern
of
the
appellant.
He
is
receiving
a
much
lower
per
school
per
square
foot
rate
compared
to
a
smaller
Lots.
G
You
can
see
a
lot
that
is
right
next
to
him.
Oh
one,
two,
fifty
forty
or
fifty
it's
at
least
half
of
the
size
of
this
lot
and
he's
paying
six
hundred
eighty
five
thousand
eight
hundred
dollars
project
for
the
land.
Only
so
you
can
see
the
difference
between
the
two
lot
tended
much
smaller,
similar
restrictions
to
to
increase
the
footprint
of
the
house,
and
the
evaluation
is
not
that
different
that
different.
A
I
I
had
one
for
the
appellant
about
that
variance
request,
because
there
was
a
there's,
a
plan
in
the
package
that
we
received.
That
shows
that
something
was
approved.
I
guess
that
was
the
original
home
and
then
there's
a
stamped
plan
with
the
proposed
addition
and
a
carport
is
that
the
in-law
suite
that
you're
talking
about,
and
so
was
that
rejected
formally
or
is
that
kind
of
still
in
the
process?
Right
now,
no.
E
We've
been
informed
that
we
cannot
build
on
top
of
the
carport
or
the
addition,
which
is
the
family
room.
Basically,
the
original
footprint
of
the
house
can
be
built
up,
so
I
think
when
one
focuses-
and
one
says
well,
this
is
a
much
larger
lot,
for
example
in
the
adjacent
so
forth.
On
our
issue
is
not
it's
not
the
size
of
the
lot.
It's
the
shape
of
the
lot,
because
that
materially
affects
our
ability
to
improve
the
lot,
and
it
affects
the
value
of
the
lot
moving
forward.
E
F
E
We
had
and
actually
I
believe,
that's
what
we
had
inquired
about
when
I
had
come
across
that
we'd
reached
out
by
email
to
inquire
about
it.
This
is
a
little
over
a
year
ago
or
so,
and
that's
when
we
had
a
little
back
and
forth
on
the
email
and
I
think
I
referenced
that
it's
in
your
package,
the
individual
that
I
spoke
with,
who
seemed
to
be
pretty
high
up
in
the
in
the
agency
and
had
consulted
with
other
people
in
his
in
his
in
the
agency,
the
Zoning
Department
about
that
via
an
email
link.
E
A
G
E
You
very
much
for
hearing
our
appeal
today
and
again:
I'm
gonna,
reiterate
that
the
model
that's
used
by
the
county
to
assess
the
value
of
our
land
doesn't
take
into
consideration
the
shape
of
our
land.
It
doesn't
take
into
consideration
the
low
depth
and
the
high
street
frontage
and
the
fact
that
it
is
not
buildable
like
comparably
shaped
lots
of
similar
similar
or
the
same
square
footage.
In
essence,
our
square
footage
is
being
taxed
for
our
land
at
the
same
rate
as
those
who
can
build
a
significant
amount
of
improvement
on
our
land.
E
F
I'm
sorry
I
think
you
should
see
mr.
Ricci
in
the
zoning
office.
I
do
think
that
this
is
exactly
why
BCA
exists
is
for
awkward
situations
like
this,
and
so
the
difference
between
this
lot
and
some
of
the
other
lots
that
were
pointed
to
is
nothing
can
be
done
by
right
and
so
I
think.
The
value
of
this
lot
should
be
decreased
by
what
it
would
take
to
go
through
a
bze
action
in
order
to
get
relief
from
these
owner
setbacks.
F
But
it
could
be
that
an
accessory
dwelling
unit
might
be
able
to
be
done
by
right,
I'm,
not
sure,
because
of
the
I'm,
not
sure
what
the
setbacks
are
with
respect
to
the
new
Adu
requirements.
I'd
have
to
look
at
it
and
and
have
it
looked
at
by
mr.
mr.
Ricci,
but
I
do
think
it
would
take
about
five
grand
to
go
through
the
process
and
so
I
think
the
value
of
the
lot
should
go
down,
probably
by
approximately
five
grand.
H
A
I
would
say
that
I
mean
they
look
at
the
utility.
I
mean
we've
seen
lots
of
other
cases
where
you've
got
a
very
large
lot,
but
it
slopes
down
in
the
back
and
you
can't
build
on
it
and
there
are
adjustments
there
to
the
assessments
you
know
for
the
lack
of
utility
to
the
property.
So
I
would
say
yes,
no
to
your
question
and
I
think
that's
kind
of
part
of
why
we're
here.
A
Right
when
I
first
looked
at
this
I
mean
I,
initially
thought
yeah
I
think
it
needs
to
come
down
just
because
of
the
lack
of
utility
and
the
lack
of
ability
to
use
the
property.
You
know
I'm
troubled
with
the
property
right
next
door,
that
is,
you
know,
6,000
square
feet
and
it's
assessed
at
685
and
I.
Don't
know
how
much
of
the
house
takes
up
the
original
11
thousand,
but
this
these
are
not
comparable.
I
mean
you
can't
build
out.
A
L
L
Body
could
be
down
with
the
property
until
there's
actually
an
application
or
something
that
is
in
process
that,
based
on
you,
know,
speculating
what
will
be
done
or
what
may
be
done
in
the
future.
I,
don't
envision,
adjustments
that
we've
made
and
the
property
that
Greg
was
asking
about
from
the
corners
I
looked
it
up
and
that
actually
has
100.
L
A
L
M
If
he
was
denied,
I
would
agree
that
there
there's
a
there's
a
mission
here
of
that
level.
But
at
this
point
it's
not
a
tear
down
house,
it's
a
unique
situation
because
he
wants
to
simply
add
more
room
for
his
existing
and
that's
a
restriction
but
I
think
if
he
went
through
bza
and
they
said
no,
it's
not
going
to
happen.
Then
I
think
it
comes
back
to
us
and
we
say
the
values
not
there.
M
On
a
teardown
you
buy,
it
buy
a
teardown
for
the
full
price,
and
then
you
have
to
cost
the
tear
downs
and
all
the
other
kinds
of
permitting
is
I
mean
so
you're,
not
discounting
values
based
on
those
kind
of
things
either.
You
know,
that's
the
price
of
doing
business
and
price
of
is
a
new
addition.
If
that's
what
you'd
like
to
get
I.
F
I
They're
still
used
I
mean.
There's
you
stand
in
gentlemen
of
that
property,
which
is
his
it's
a
very
nice
property
right.
Yeah
I
mean
just
like
every
neighbor.
Every
every
lot
has
the
yard
that
doesn't
have
a
building
on
it.
So
there's
euston
enjoyment
there
there's
some
value
to
that
I
think
the
department
put
a
good
exhibit
together,
showing
that
that
first
worth,
but
he's
kind
of
in
the
lowest
30%
of
the
per
square
foot
charge
at
$65
a
square
foot
versus
being
in
the
highest.
You
know
I
think
it
would
be
very
unfair.
I
The
full
lot
size
was
being
was
used
in
the
$90
rate
right.
So
that's
kind
of
I
mean
that's
pushing
me
to
think.
It's
not
there's
not
a
huge
adjustment
to
be
made
here,
I
kind
of
like
Barnes's
approach,
which
is
they
to
give
some
acknowledgment
to
lot
size
and
and
and
the
difficulties
that
he
would
have
to
get
anything
done
there,
because
a
fair
estimate
of
what
it
takes
to
get
through
bza
on
the
low-end.
A
F
L
D
C
A
F
E
E
A
C
A
K
K
Make
it
the
basis
of
the
properties,
is
that
more
than
a
fair
market
value
or
the
appellant
may
appeal
on
the
basis
that
the
property
was
not
assessed
equitably
with
similar
properties.
This
appeal
is
made
based
on
the
latter
alternative,
that
the
property
is
not
assessed
equitably
with
similar
properties
for
2020.
K
The
department
has
assessed
the
value
at
eight
hundred
three
thousand
dollars,
which
we
believe
is
an
inequitable
assessment
as
compared
to
comparable
properties
compared
to
a
group
of
comparable
properties.
In
my
neighborhood
and
in
surrounding
neighborhoods
that
were
sold
last
year,
my
property
had
in
2019
an
assessed
and
proven
value
that
was
higher
than
the
average
of
these
comparable
houses
and
in
2020
became
even
higher
than
that
with
the
department's
increased
assessment.
K
With
the
2020
assessment,
my
properties
and
proven
value
is
now
higher
than
these
copper
oil
houses
by
50%
an
increase
from
a
40
percent
differential
in
2019.
There
was
no
improvement
to
my
property
during
this
time
period
beyond
some
cosmetic
changes
that
we
feel
can
justify
this
increase
as
compared
to
the
comparable
properties
based
on
the
information
we
received.
As
part
of
this
appeal,
the
Department
of
real
estate
evaluated
the
property
as
part
of
our
purchase
of
the
property
in
2019.
K
The
department
updated
based
on
this
information
that
we
see
the
department
updated
my
property's
record
to
account
for
updates
and
improvements
that
were
found
during
this
evaluation
by
the
department.
It
is
my
understanding
that
the
last
time
the
department
conducting
the
evaluation
was
in
2013,
while
this
might
be
the
case,
the
department
did,
during
this
time
period
increase
the
assessed
value
of
the
property.
In
fact,
the
department
increase
it
by
greater
amount
than
it
did
the
comparable
houses
between
2014
and
2019.
K
The
improvement
value
of
our
property
increased
by
28%,
a
much
higher
rate
of
increase
than
the
average
12
percent
increase
assessed
to
the
comparable
houses.
During
the
same
time
period,
even
if
there
is
evidence
that
my
property
is
of
a
higher
quality
or
grade
than
some
of
the
comparable
properties,
this
should
have
reflected
in
the
higher
improvement
value
assessed
over
the
past
five
years
to
2019,
as
I
said
before,
the
improvement
value
of
my
property
in
2019
is
40%
higher
to
further
increase
in
2020.
K
What
are
the
copybook
properties
with
our
PC
number
4
4
2
0,
0
1
down
to
0
5
0
as
having
had
its
assessed
value
increased
in
March
2020,
but
the
situation
with
this
property
is
different
from
our
property.
The
other
property
underwent.
Last
year,
a
major
renovation,
the
department
increased
the
assessed
value
to
reflect,
improve
miss
resulting
from
this
renovation.
K
K
In
conclusion,
that
we
feel
the
department
is
not
assessing
in
2020
our
property
equitably
in
2019,
the
assessed
value
was
already
higher
than
comparable
properties.
If
the
department
poses
proposing
crews
such
that
properties
assessed,
value
was
even
higher
than
comparable
properties.
Despite
no
improvements,
then
our
property
would
not
be
treated
equitably
with
comparable
properties.
N
County's
perspective,
yes,
ma'am
so
good
morning,
my
name
is
Nicole
Churchill
I'm,
a
residential
appraiser
with
the
Department
of
real
estate
assessments,
an
exterior
inspection
of
the
home
and
the
surrounding
comparables
was
performed,
but
an
interior
inspection
of
the
home
was
denied
by
the
homeowner.
This
property
is
a
1
in
3/4
story,
vinyl,
siding
home.
It
has
3
bedrooms
and
3
bathrooms
a
finished
basement
a
year
built
of
1944
and
an
effective
age
of
2010.
The
quality
is
very
good.
N
The
appellant
feels
that
the
increase
of
this
property
is
unjustified
due
to
the
surrounding
properties
not
experiencing
the
same
increase.
The
comparables
that
the
appellant
did
submit.
Four
of
the
five
have
lower
quality,
lower,
effective
age,
lesser
square
feet,
and
these
differences
accounts
for
assessment
values
not
being
the
same.
The
comparable
properties
provided
did
not
increase
the
same
as
the
subject
due
to
the
subject,
having
errors
and
adjustments
that
were
adjustments
needing
needed
to
be
made
to
the
record.
N
N
These
adjustments
were
made
due
to
the
updates
and
renovations
that
were
not
previously
accounted
for.
In
the
assessment,
the
average
total
increase
to
the
neighborhood
was
8%.
The
subject
did
see
a
20%
increase
overall,
due
to
these
Corrections
to
the
record.
The
current
value
of
the
property,
even
with
the
20%
increase,
is
still
17,000
dollars
less
than
the
purchase
price
of
eight
hundred
and
twenty
thousand
five
hundred.
After
reviewing
the
submitted
information
and
assessment
and
sales
of
comparable
properties,
it
was
determined
that
the
assessment
was
fair
and
equitable
and
should
not
be
changed.
Thank
you.
A
N
Just
like
to
reiterate
the
fact
that
these
were
Corrections
that
were
made
to
the
record
so
items
that
were
not
there
in
the
previous
assessment
and
the
fact
that
we
are
still
you
know,
roughly
seventeen
thousand
dollars
less
than
the
purchase
price
in
May
or
in
April
of
2019.
So
I
do
ask
that
you
confirm
the
current
assessment.
Thank
you.
Okay,.
A
B
L
L
L
I
I
mean
I
didn't
really
hear
that
there
was
any
objection
to
the
fair
market
value
of
the
property.
I
think
it
was
just
on
the
basis
of
equalization.
He
probably
was
feeling
that
his
neighbors
should
be
paying
more
tax,
and
you
know
just
looking
at
the
surrounding
properties
and
and
here
in
the
department's
review.
I
It
sounds
like
the
the
level
of
build
on
they
on
you
know,
there's
a
string
of
houses
that
are
all
very
similar
original
construction
and
some
of
them
have
been
renovated,
some
of
popped,
the
top
and
put
in
an
extra
room
upstairs
and
and
then
some
are
closer
to
the
original,
so
I
think
there's
a
big
difference
in
the
in
the
houses
on
that
block.
That's
being
accounted
for
in
the
in
you
know
the
more
or
less
$200,000
swing
in
assessments,
so
I
yeah
I
mean
I'm
with
Jose
I.
M
A
M
F
A
A
C
K
C
L
A
A
A
P
P
And
what
he
said
was
what
some
of
those
comps
are
look
like:
they
were
transfer
ownership
between
family
members,
so
they
couldn't
consider
those
comps
and
another
time
was
it's
not
quite
like
yours,
so,
based
on
the
conversation,
I
didn't
appeal
last
year,
they
said
so.
My
comps
I
would
usually
would
not
be
incredible
that
this
year,
I'm
2019,
we
had
our
property
appraised.
Well,
it
wasn't
by
arguing
for
residential
Fraser
was
Spacey
for
a
commercial
lending
appraisal
with
a
very
reputable
company.
P
So
when
we
looked
at
it,
he
came
forward
in
the
Thompson.
He
came
up
with
a
number
of
380
and
I
was
shocked
that
there
was
a
much
more
than
what
the
county
had
originally
projected
our
bag
to
be.
Yet
he
gave
up
four
comps
to
review
and
through
their
hearing
of
the
writing,
that
I
got
one
of
the
comps
were
disallowed
saying
was
not
close
by
I'm
in
the
Corrina
correctly
and
all
the
four
comparables
are
within
a
mile
of
my
property.
P
So
that's
how
sure
that
one
was
this,
but
there's
two
on
Monroe
Street
and
the
one
look
like
one
on
Oh
mom.
She
had
a
higher
value
was
used
and
the
one
on
mono
Street,
with
the
lower
value
of
was
Miss
regarding
so
I,
wanted
that
one
considering
the
annihilation
as
well
as
far
as
cops
for
surrounding
properties,
technique,
I
also
look
at
the
square
footage
of
the
basement
area
of
my
home
and
it's
a
farce,
finished
area
and
when
our
bread
did,
it
was
like
four
hundred
square
feet
of
a
finished
area.
P
It
just
rural
red
flag
in
my
mind,
because
I've
been
done
several
years
and
it's
really
a
very
small
base,
malaria
and
when
I
did
actually
did
actual
measurements
for
that
property.
This
footage
is
three
hundred
nineteen
twenty
thirty
three
square
feet,
not
good,
not
too,
for
seven
in
this
area
that
was
recommended
and
if
I
include
the
utility
area.
That
would
only
add
number
thirty
point:
six,
eight
square
it
being
a
square
space
to
enough
I
believe
that
is
not
included
in
the
evaluation.
P
So
the
max
forty
with
the
utility
room
area
is
300
Figgy
square
feet
and
not
the
407
finished
area
that
we
that
I
received
in
the
tops
and
those
are
like,
send
appraisal
sort
of
crops.
The
county
recommends
that
would
be
compared
with
for
common
problems
that
were
required
and
really
upgraded
with
major
improvements
to
them
from
granite
to
scintillator
and
I.
P
Don't
have
any
of
those
things
and
I,
probably
and
other
cops
that
were
lower,
that
my
appraiser
found
out
also
didn't
have
those
right
I
today
I
went
to
a
realtor
to
verify
if
I
work
I
started
for
and
they
recommend
it
as
the
most.
You
can
started
that
three
study
problems
might
get
a
price
war,
something
like
that,
but
she
wasn't
recommending
they
had
a
three
second
full
stock
price
for
that
property.
N
Sorry
one
second,
okay!
Thank
you
again.
My
name
is
Nicole
Churchill
and
I
am
a
residential
crisis
with
the
Department
of
real
estate
assessments,
an
interior
and
exterior
inspection
was
completed
on
February,
2nd
2020
with
fellow
appraiser
Tressa
finest.
This
property
is
a
two-story,
brick
veneer
side-by-side
home
with
a
finished
basement
year,
built
of
1945
an
effective
age
from
1976,
the
quality
being
average
Potter.
N
The
appellant
feels
that
the
ink
is
unfair.
These
are
the
market
and
diminutive
privacy
appraisal.
The
theater
is
all
from
859
to
2019
created
a
recommended
value
of
200.
Maybe
thousands
based
on
the
comparable
properties
listed
three
of
these
four
properties
listed,
are
within
the
neighborhood
and
their
analysis
period
before
comparable
was
not
within
the
subject.
Neighborhood
the
third
comparable
within
the
theaters
was
also
provided
as
the
county
be
careful.
N
The
C
appraisal
makes
a
deduction
of
42,000
and
adjustments
for
upgrades
condition.
Central
air
and
I'm
sorry
for
upgrades
condition,
one
central
air
conditioning
the
county,
assessors
comparable
at
four
hundred
and
thirty
thousand
three
hundred,
which
recognizes
the
upgrades
and
feel
that
the
sale
price
of
434
supports
it.
N
H
To
for
the
department,
first
ones
a
real
easy
one,
I'm
comparable
to
grade
out,
it
shows
a
lesser
land
value,
and
my
second
question
is
going
to
be
about
land
value
as
well.
Is
that
because
it's
four
mile
run
drive
or
is
it
just
on?
You
know
it's
much
lower
than,
for
instance,
comparable
one?
Why
is
that
off.
H
H
N
So
the
increase
to
land
for
that
neighborhood
went
from
it
depended
on.
There
were
two
different
land
values
in
that
neighborhood,
but
either
at
345
to
385
or
265
to
305,
so
the
property
itself
hold
on
one
second
I'm,
sorry,
but
yes,
the
overall
the
whole
neighborhood
saw
a
significant
increase.
That
neighborhood
in
the
south
side
was
seeing
a
ace,
a
lot
of
sales
for
this
past
year.
So
there
was
a
lot
of
information
to
work
with
and
it
did
it
did
go.
It
was
a
three
hundred
and
ten
thousand
yeah.
A
N
O
N
L
P
Yes,
thank
you.
When
I
look
at
some
of
the
comparables
in
and
get
on
ours
on
kipper
roads,
I
wanted
to
be
reiterate
that
Monroe
Street
is
at
the
table.
Kimberly
Kim
general
she
later
crosses
and
it
should
be
considered
within
the
mile,
is
an
unable
court.
So
I'll
multiply
those
available
sales
and
cobble.
P
I'll
keep
that
my
feet
are
less
than
a
mile
square
foot.
It's
a
mile
apiece
on
these
older
homes
that
haven't
been
renovated,
I'm
just
passing
on
their
father's
value
star.
You
know
much
much
more
aligned
with
Maya.
What
praise
that
we
got
and
again
this
was
a
commercial
appraisal
not
for
me
did
have
my
personal
residential
use
or
personal
funds
myself,
and
it
was
being
used
to
back
up
commercial
business.
P
P
A
D
L
A
A
So
that's
another
reason
why
you
know
it's
much
lower
I
mean
if
you
look
at
his
cost
of
a
hundred
and
five
for
the
house,
if
you
add
that
to
the
310,
which
is
certainly
equalized
in
the
neighborhood,
that
actually
puts
the
value
up
to
415,
which
is
higher
than
the
assessment.
So
you
know
I
think
a
lot
of
the
issue
with
the
the
appraisal
that
was
done
for
lending
is
that
the
land
value
is
too
low
in
it.
A
M
Well,
I
do
feel
for
the
individual
that
2017
his
taxes
have
gone
or
his
valuations
going
on
ninety
thousand
dollars
and
that
that's
a
lot-
and
it
is
you
know,
but
I,
don't
see
any
reason
for
adjustment
either
the
there
the
appraiser
came
in
with
alone
land
value,
as
you
said,
and
the
cops
I
think
are
showing
it
it's
a
house.
It
needs
work,
but
that's
the
market.
I
I
was
gonna
point
out
that
I
thought
that
independent,
or
rather
that
commercial
appraisal
was
it
seemed
to
be
pretty
good
until
Mary
I
see
your
point.
I
didn't
recognize
the
land
value
that
they're
kind
of
out
of
whack
with
the
rest
of
the
land
by
using
the
neighborhood,
and
that's
that's
difficult
to
argue
this
point.
So
you
know,
I
was
leaning
towards
a
further
reduction,
but
I
think
I
could
probably
get
off
get
on
with
the
403
reduced
number
that
the
department
is
put
forward.
L
B
A
L
A
A
J
You
thank
you
for
everyone's
time
today.
I'll
keep
it
relatively
brief.
I
did
and
by
way
of
background
I
had
up
investments
in
capital
markets
over
at
Monday
properties.
We
own
about
5
million
square
feet
of
office,
retail
and
multi-family
in
the
area.
So
reviewing
assessments
is
not
is
not
foreign
to
me,
so
what
I
did
is
I
took
effectively.
J
What
I
viewed
is
the
comparable
homes
in
my
area,
because
my
block
obviously
does
back
in
to
Blue
Mountain
National
Park,
so
I
took
from
South
Illinois
Street
and
I
did
from
3rd
to
5th
Street
all
the
homes
from
South
Illinois
to
the
park
in
between
those
streets
and
I
looked
at
the
average
assessments
of
all
those
homes.
Now,
if
you
look
at
the
percent
increase
over
the
last
two
years
of
all
of
those
homes,
mine
has
gone
up
by
ten
point.
Oh
eight
percent.
J
Over
the
last
two
years,
there
are
three
other
homes
that
are
that
are
slightly
higher,
that
the
the
north
end
of
the
range
is
eleven
point.
Six
five
percent:
all
of
these
homes
are
on
4th
Street
I,
don't
know
if
anyone's
been
to
my
neighborhood,
but
I
would
argue
that
4th
Street
is
the
least
appealing
Street
in
Glen
carlin,
between
3rd
and
5th
and
2nd
and
1st.
So
nonetheless,
what
what
the
average
increase
amongst
all
these
homes,
though
over
the
last
two
years,
was
six
point:
nine
five
percent.
J
If
you
then
go
to
fair
market
value
of
the
home,
I
purchased
the
home
for
six
hundred
and
nineteen
thousand
dollars
four
years
ago.
Today,
fair
market
value
is
approximately
seven
hundred
thousand.
That's
an
increase
of
three
point:
two
seven
percent
annually,
which
again
is
a
normalized
general
inflation
rate,
so
I'm
just
struggling
to
understand,
and
if
you
look
at
the
appraisal
for
2020,
my
improvement
value
actually
went
down.
So
the
majority,
actually
all
of
the
increase
that
shir
was
based
on
the
land.
J
J
You
know
my
experience
with
my
appraiser
thus
far.
Mr.
mr.
King
I
believe
it
is,
has
been
less
than
favorable
and
pleasurable.
Quite
frankly,
I
found
his
conduct
to
be
slightly
unprofessional
when
he
visited
my
home,
which
I've
denied
him
subsequent
visits,
he
brought
another
gentleman.
They
were
what
I
would
call
intrusive
quite
frankly.
Well,
the
other
gentleman
went
so
far
as
to
open
one
of
the
drawers
in
my
built-in
closet,
which
I
found
to
be
egregious
and
I've
had
nothing
but
bad
experiences.
J
Q
Morning
board
it
was
Andrew,
King
I'll
be
representing
the
county.
In
this
case
the
owner
denied
the
inspection
for
2020,
but
the
property
was
inspected
back
in
2018,
so
we
feel
fairly
confident
in
our
records
information.
The
property
was
totally
renovated
back
in
2007,
so
that's
reflected
in
the
county's
record.
So
no
changes
were
made
to
the
county's
record
on
the
property
since
2018
and
for
2020
all
the
same
neighborhood
changes
were
applied
to
the
subject
property
as
we're
applied
to
the
other
properties
in
the
neighborhood,
so
land
and
improvement
changes
that
were
made.
Q
The
county
also
values
each
property
annually.
So
there's
no
weight
put
on
previously
resort
changes.
You
look
at
every
sales
analysis
every
year
and
apply
those
changes
to
each
property.
Every
year
the
property
is
still
assessed
below
its
2016
sale
price
and
as
I
wrote
in
the
write-up,
you
can
see
that
the
comparables
that
the
appellant
brought
up
those
properties
were
all
visited
in
recent
years
to
update
the
records
for
various
renovations.
We
go
out
and
visit
every
property
that
has
a
permit
done
and
when
that
permits
final
update
the
records.
Q
H
It
seems
that
just
I
don't
do
much
residential
real
estate,
but
I
work
with
people
who
do
that.
The
northern
part
of
South
Arlington
is
again
last
couple
of
years
fairly
hot
and
we've
seen
in
some
other
appellant
discussions
today.
Even
this
the
sales.
This
is
a
question
for
the
department,
it
appears
to
me
and
then
one
confirmation
or
rejection
seems
to
me
that
the
sales
are
hotter
in
this
area
and
a
lot
of
the
increased
value
assessed.
Value
is
going
to
land
and
that's
what's
reflected.
So
my
question
is:
is
that
what?
H
H
Q
You
sure
so
there
were
a
couple
and
new
constructions
in
the
neighborhood,
so
that
gives
us
a
good
idea
of
what
the
land
should
be
valued
at
the
other
component
of
that,
with
the
improvement
falling.
The
appellant
brought
that
up
what
we
try
and
always
do
is
get
about
a
hundred
percent
for
our
cost
to
rebuild
the
property
when
we're
running
our
software.
Q
So
in
this
neighborhood,
if
you,
if
you
look
at
the
right
side
of
the
worksheet,
you
just
fit
the
LM
for
that
neighbor
114,
we're
always
trying
to
bring
that
closer
to
a
hundred
to
represent
just
a
hundred
percent
value,
rebuilding
the
property.
So
any
changes.
You
know
we
try
and
put
more
on
the
land
to
accurately
reflect
that
cost
to
rebuild.
C
I
J
No
I'm
disputing
the
escalation
at
which
it's
been.
It's
been
escalated
over
the
years.
The
fair
money
you
and
the
and
look
I
understand
that
the
assessed
value
is
less
than
the
purchase
price,
but
that's
the
case
for
every
property
that
I've
ever
looked
at
in
Arlington,
County
or
in
the
region
as
I've
evaluated
investment
opportunities.
The
appraised
value
is
never
the
same
as
what
the
purchase
price
is.
It's
always
approximately
90
percent.
J
Q
So
no
changes
are
made
to
the
record
this
year
and
in
terms
of
Equalization,
the
same
changes
were
applied
to
the
neighborhood
as
were
applied
to
the
subject:
property
and
the
subject.
Property
is
again
still
below,
is
2016
sale,
price,
getting
a
strong
indication
of
fair
market
value,
and
so,
for
those
reasons,
the
county
determined
the
2020
assessment
was
fair
and
equitable.
Thank
you.
Okay,.
A
J
To
be
clear
on
the
the
appraised,
value
and
sale
value
of
my
home
I
closed
on
December
of
2016
in
the
middle
of
so
I
would
argue.
You
could
say
that
as
2017,
so
let's
not
overemphasize
the
time
period
here
and
again,
I,
just
in
all
of
my
years
of
doing
commercial,
real
estate
and
multi-family
real
estate.
I've,
never
seen
assessments
of
properties
that
haven't
had
improvements
go
up
here
over
a
year
by
approximately
5%.
It's
just
egregious
in
my
mind.
So
that's
the
end
of
my
just
okay.
H
To
me
that
it's
it's
all
about
the
cops
and
what
I
heard
mr.
King
say
that
there,
and
in
this
case
it's
the
cops
of
the
land
and
if
we
have
tear
downs
scraped
land
and
going
for
increasing
values
than
everybody
in
the
neighborhood's
land
is
increased
in
value.
So
I
I
mean
that's
how
equalization
works
at
its
heart,
so
I,
that's
I'm,
following
a
very
direct
chain
of
probabilities,
facts
in
in
conclusions.
H
I
Yeah
I'm,
just
on
the
basis
of
the
appeal,
which
is
at
least
the
paperwork
we
have
is
a
dispute
of
the
fair
market
value.
I.
Think
the
fair
market
value
is
pretty
well
established
by
the
department
and
I
think
the
appellant
is
confirming
that
they've
not
really
got
that
off.
It's
more
of
an
issue
with
the
process
and
and
and
the
process
is
in
Virginia
at
least-
is
consistent
and
applied
with
Arlington
County,
where
we
they
assess
it.
I
C
L
A
A
A
A
F
A
F
A
A
A
A
Q
Look
at
the
appellant,
comparables
I
think
a
lot
of
them
are
smaller,
older
or
less
recently
renovated
in
a
subject
property,
which
was
fully
renovated
back
in
2013,
as
shown
in
the
email
exchange
with
the
appellant.
Some
of
the
information
to
the
felon
is
referencing,
for
certain
properties
seems
incorrect
and
maybe
influencing
their
ideas.
Evaluation.
We
inspected
all
of
this
data,
all
of
the
sales
that
we
use
for
the
analysis.
Q
I
person
inspected
all
of
them,
so
we
are
very
confident
in
the
data
and
the
size
and
information
on
those
records
compared
to
what
perhaps
already
fit
in
or
Zillow
or
some
of
these
other
commercial
websites
might
might
have
on
their
records.
There
was,
however,
a
very
strong
sale
in
the
20/20
analysis.
You
can
see
that
in
comparable
number
one
on
the
con
sheet
at
39
18,
8th,
Street
South,
which
was
nearby
the
subject
property.
This
was
a
renovated
and
expanded
19
points
property.
Just
the
same
as
the
subject
property.
Q
This
property
equality
was
very
good,
which
indicated
us
that
the
subject
property
should
also
be
changed
from
very
good,
very
good.
So
as
a
result
of
the
review
and
the
information
submitted
and
this
similar
comparable
property
that
we
looked
at
Department
determined
that
a
revision
of
the
assessment
from
948
thousand
nine
hundred
and
twenty
two
thousand
four
hundred
was
fair
and
equitable.
Thank
you.
Q
Q
L
C
L
C
A
Q
You
mr.
property
was
inspected
in
2019
for
a
dormer
addition,
a
rear
door
audition
on
the
roof
the
owner
called
in,
and
we
spoke
about
the
issues
with
the
property
in
the
permit.
So
the
upper
level
is
unfinished
currently
there's
no
eating
no
drywall,
it's
not
paying
anything
like
that.
So
what
I
did
is,
while
I
added
the
dormer
and
the
square
footage
to
the
base.
Where
footage
of
the
record,
we
took
out
the
finish
on
that
upper
level
to
set
that
at
zero.
Q
Q
Also
brings
up
an
issue
of
whether
the
property
sold
as
a
teardown.
You
can't
value
properties
that
tear
downs,
there's
no
way
for
us
to
take
that
into
account.
Looking
at
a
property
and
additionally
in
both
tear
downs,
will
already
have
an
average
press,
quality
or
you're
gonna
need
quality
of
some
of
the
tenants
comparable
show.
Q
The
appellant
also
brings
up
a
lot
of
sales
that
were
foreclosures
or
short
sales,
so
those
aren't
included
in
our
analysis,
we're
looking
at
fair
market
value,
property
property.
Sorry
sale,
deter
fair
market
value
again,
the
unfinished
nature
of
the
second
level
is
taken
into
account
by
removing
the
finished
square
footage
from
the
total,
as
seen
on
the
1.75
for
line
on
the
worksheet
which
shows
zero.
This
is
the
same
process
applied
to
homes,
with
fixed
air,
to
unfinished
attics
for
properties
out
of
unfinished
basements.
Q
A
A
A
Q
Q
H
H
Pretty,
of
course,
the
department
I
got
in
your
presentation,
I
didn't
hear
the
first.
There
was
a
couple
senses
that
you
got
garbled,
so
you
might
have
answered
this
you're,
not
including
yet
that
additional
square
footage,
because
it's
not
at
all
usable
but
yet,
at
the
same
time,
you
significantly
increase
from
2019
to
this
year
the
building
value,
the
improvement
value,
including
the
construction.
What
are
you,
including
that
makes
this,
relatively
speaking,
a
huge
increase
so.
Q
There's
a
couple
different
aspects
here,
so
one
is
the
dormer
build-out,
just
a
draw
square
footage
to
rebuild
the
property.
So
even
though
it's
unfinished,
you
know,
there's
two
components:
there's
base
square
footage
and
there's
finished
square
footage,
so
the
dormer
blowout
adds
the
base
where
I
put
it
just
rebuilding
those
walls
is
gonna
cost
more
now
than
a
year
ago.
The
other
component
of
that
is.
We
changed
the
quality
from
average
to
average
plus
and
the
condition
from
fair
to
average.
Q
So,
as
I've
shown
the
write
out,
those
are
qualities
and
conditions
that
we
reserved
mainly
for
completely
substandard
properties,
almost
unlivable
properties,
we
rarely
use
them.
So
what
I
was
trying
to
capture
was
that
the
appellant
lives
in
the
house,
so
the
square,
the
finished
square,
footage
that
is
there.
It
is
average
quality.
It's
it's
typical
of
what
would
be
a
regular
out
and
then
by
putting
the
upper
level
of
zero
or
knowledge.
There's
no
square
footage
up
there.
Now
I
the
appellant,
writes
yeah.
Q
You
know
there's
some
issues
with
the
interior
of
the
home,
but
we
would
deny
do
your
inspection
and
there
were
no
photos
provided
of
the
interior,
except
for
the
upper
level.
So
I
mean
I.
Think
for
us
we're
just
going
to
assume
that
it's
an
average
livable
house
on
the
green
level
with
an
unfinished
upper
level.
I
Q
From
the
write-up
you
said
they
just
kind
of
fell
off
when
we
were
working
you're,
putting
the
dormer
on.
Maybe
the
crew
I
mean
you
can
see
in
the
photos.
Just
there's
just
a
couple
pieces
missing
again,
that's
an
issue
of
maintenance.
I
mean
you
can
be
replace
on
the
faux,
especially
as
it
you
want,
or
do
whatever
I
mean
just
we're,
not
gonna.
Take
too
much
of
that
into
account
on
a
property.
A
Q
So
the
wall,
the
upper
level,
is
currently
unfinished.
This
is
taken
into
account
with
the
county's
assessment
on
the
property,
taking
into
account
the
large
base
square
footage
that
the
permit
added
the
55
years
of
depreciation
currently
on
the
property
in
the
base
level
of
average,
plus
in
an
average
condition.
The
county
feels
that
the
assessment
of
683
200
to
spare
and
equitable.
Thank
you.
Okay,.
L
F
Yes
and
the
appellant
remarks,
I
read
a
sentence
that
says,
however,
I
believe
the
intent
of
this
evaluation
is
to
have
Arlington
residents,
pay
taxes
on
what
they'd
be
able
to
sell
their
property
for
I.
Think
that's
exactly
what
it
is.
We're
trying
to
do.
That
I
would
call
that
statement
against
interest
on
admission
against
interest.
A
You
know
I
would
agree
with
all
the
comments.
I
think
it's
difficult
I
mean
just
from
what
we
saw.
It
does
look
like
there's
a
lot
of
deferred
maintenance,
very
slow
progress
of
what
he's
trying
to
do,
and
that's
a
you
know,
a
personal
decision
to
do
that.
It
could
be
a
financial
decision.
I
don't
know,
but
it
seems
to
be
longer
than
the
usual
you
know,
but
with
no
interior
inspection
or
no
photos
even
submitting
the
rest
of
the
house.
I
think
it's
very
difficult
to
argue
against
the
county.
A
H
I'm,
just
because
we've
got
a
little
time,
I
have
a
tough
time,
almost
doubling
the
value
of
the
improvement.
Getting
given
how
little
value
the
Department
has
given
to
the
increased
size.
It's
just
a
percentage
increase
based
on
unfinished
continually
unfinished
work
makes
me
uncomfortable
and
if
I
vote
against
the
status
quo,
it's
only
because.
A
I
I
mean
just
I
found
the
picture
of
the
asbestos
that
I
was
looking
for,
and
you
know
I'm
familiar
with
this
neighborhood
and
you've
got
kind
of,
maybe
historically
one
out
of
every
eight
houses.
Has
this
siding
on
it,
and
everybody
knows
that
it's
a
discount.
If
you
were
to
sell
the
house,
you
know
you're,
not
you're,
either
gonna.
If
somebody
bought
it
in
this
condition.
They're
gonna
the
first
thing
that
dude
try
to
market
the
house
would
be
the
Ripley
asbestos
siding
off
and
replace
it,
and
that
can
be
costly.
I
So
you
know
I
I'm
kind
of
siding
with
Ken.
This
is
a
huge
increase
in
an
improvement
value,
and
with
that
in
mind
you
know
a
reduction
based
on
the
mission
of
the
siding.
I
would
be
supportive
of
I.
Don't
know
that
I
had
the
votes,
but
you
know
something
like
that:
could
be
upwards
of
$25,000
to
just
to
replace
the
asbestos
and
get
this
in
some
sort
of
marketable
condition.
I'm.
B
I
Would
I
would
take
it,
take
it
to
take
the
improvements
value
down
by
25,000,
just
to
account
for
that.
This
is
kind
of
like
one
of
the
last
houses
in
the
neighborhood
that
still
has
that
siding
on
it
and
so
from
an
equalization
standpoint.
I
think
that
the
justification
there,
it's
not
a
maintenance
issue,
it's
just
a
it's
a
condition
of
the
actual.
You
know,
structure
of
the
property.
A
Right,
I
guess
my
my
only
question
there
is,
if
we
reduce
it
it's
obviously
just
for
this
year.
It's
a
25
thousand
dollar
reduction
based
on
the
history
of
the
improvements
and
whatnot
I
mean
I.
Don't
foresee
that
this
would
be
something
that
the
homeowner
is
even
going
to
do
so
it
I'm
not
sure
that
it's
a
remedy
to
the
situation,
but
okay,
mr.
Lawson,
here,
to
come.
F
H
H
A
Think
for
the
lack
of
interior
photos.
I
mean
the
county's
assumed
to
be
correct
from
a
standpoint
of
they're,
using
a
methodical
system
to
come
up
with
what
the
value
would
be
and
then
they're
not
giving
any
credit
to
the
upstairs
so
without
any
further
documentation
of
that
I
would
struggle
just
to
adjust
the
outside
to
feel
good.
I
Looking
at
the
picture,
that's,
like
you
know,
twenty
ten
percent
of
one
side
of
the
entire
building
it's
like
all
gone,
but
to
try
to
get
a
contractor
to
come
and
patch
that
there's
no
way
you're
gonna
have
a
breach
side
that
so
that's
my
concern
is
that
you
couldn't
occupy
this
building
with
any
movies
fine
move
into
this
building.
The
way
it
is
you're
gonna
have
to
do
something
to
that
siding.
That
would
be
the
difference.
I
see
between
this
and
some
of
the
other
buildings
that
have
asbestos
siding
in
it
and.
A
D
M
C
H
Said
that,
of
course,
I
go
back
to
Mary's
initial
comment
that
the
county's
pursuing
the
department's
assumed
correct
until
unless
the
appellant
can
make
a
case
against
the
call.
It
didn't
make
any
case
that
that
we,
who
think
asbestos
is
a
negative
factor
as
many
just
at
all.
The
comps
in
the
neighborhood
himself
or
less
in
mind,
should
be
valued
at
less
and
it
pains
me
to
say
it,
but
the
appellant
didn't
make
his
or
their
own
case
we're
making
it
for
the
appellant.
No,
no.
I
In
the
appellant
remarks
on
page
46
or
47,
depending
on
how
you
look
at
it
on
the
page,
it
says
page
46,
but
it
does
say
the
siding
has
been
ripped
off
the
side.
Asbestos
siding
needs
a
specialist
to
remove
it,
which
is
quite
costly.
It
ripped
off
the
side
for
years.
The
condition
of
entire
floor
of
the
house
doesn't
include
drywall
or
finished
floors.
I
I
mean
reading
between
the
lines
I
could
I
can
sympathize.
I
can
see
what
happened
this.
They
started
a
renovation
they're
getting
into
some
costly
conditions
that
they
probably
weren't,
ready
for
and
they're
dealing
with
that
reality,
and
you
know
you're
not
going
to
finish
out
the
top
floor
until
your
siding
is
done.
You're
not
going
to
get
that
done
until
you
can
afford
to
get
the
asbestos
removed
legally.
B
A
M
H
A
We
don't
we
could.
If
we're
all
in
agreement,
we
could
ask
the
appraiser
they're
pretty
an
agreement
to
asset
sure.
Mr.
king
did
you
let
can
you
give
us
an
idea
that
if
it
would
drop
them
because
it's
it's
showing
as
let's
make
sure
I
have
this
correct
here,
it's
showing
on
the
grid
to
be
average
plus?
So
what
would
be
the
next
step
down?
Would.
A
Because
I
don't
believe
Thank
You,
mr.
king
I,
don't
believe
the
property
has
gotten
any
better.
It
might
be
bigger
because
of
what
they're
trying
to
do,
but
the
bigger
isn't
usable
which
is
supposedly
discounted
in
this
I
mean
I
could
certainly
be
comfortable
with
that
I.
Don't
know
how
the
rest
of
the
group
is,
I
mean
if
you
want
to
go
higher.
I
just
would
like
to
hear
the
conversation
of
how
to
get
to
it,
but.
A
I
I
I
would
argue
for
out
have
an
easier
time
arguing
for
more
if
the
appellant
we're
on
the
call
right
now,
I
agree
with
the
thing
you
know.
It's
like
I'm
gonna
make
somebody's
case
only
to
a
certain
extent
that
it's
that
they've
started
to
make
that
case.
If
they're,
not
here
so
I
could
I.
Could
that
could
go
with
that?
They.