►
From YouTube: Board of Equalization Hearing July 13, 2021
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
Tuesday
july
13
2021
there,
this
is
the
arlington
county
board
of
equalization
hearing.
There
are
three
cases
on
the
agenda.
The
first
case
is
zero.
Six,
the
property
is
located
at
one
zero,
seven,
five
south
jefferson
street,
mr
blake
warren-
is
here
to
speak
on
behalf
of
the
owners.
Mr
warren,
you
can
start
with
your
eight
minutes
and
tell
us
about
the
property.
Sir.
B
Good
morning
and
thank
you
very
much
board
I'll
direct
the
board
to
page
41
of
112
of
our
packet.
It's
the
summary
of
fax.
This
is
the
wildwood
towers.
It's
a
ditmar
owned
property.
It's
currently
assessed
at
32,
582
400..
B
The
requested
value
that
we're
asking
for
the
board
today
is
28
million.
661
900.
the
county
is
requesting
to
affirm
the
original
assessment.
The
property
is
an
older
property.
It
was
originally
constructed
in
1965
renovated
in
2003.,
it's
134
total
units,
a
multi-family,
high-rise,
building,
10
stories
tall
in
south
arlington.
B
I
will
redirect
you
to
again,
I
guess
it's
page
three,
which
is
the
apartment,
income
and
expense
summary,
and
just
a
couple
things
to
note
and
some
things
regarding
the
the
methodology
specifically
for
apartments
that
we
spoke
about
last
week
for
the
first
cases
that
I
presented
for
the
board
is
with
regard
to
the
pandemic
and
the
the
county's
decision
to
essentially
not
make
any
considerations
for
at
least
the
apartment
type
properties
in
the
county.
For
instance,
vacancy
actually
decreased
in
their
overall
method
methodology
from
2020
to
2021..
B
Last
year,
this
property
was
being
assessed
using
a
six
percent
market
vacancy
rate,
and
this
year's
2021
assessment
model
uses
a
five
percent
vacancy
rate
for
the
year
immediately
following
code
in
independent
pandemic,
and
what
I
think
you'll
find
is
most
of
our
clients,
who
are
apartment
owners
in
the
counties
are
going
to
tell
you
that
that
that
should
not
be
the
case.
Vacancy
and
collection
loss
was
much
higher
for
obvious
reasons
during
that
year.
B
The
the
second
main
thing
and
really
we're
fairly
close
and
in
line
with
a
lot
of
the
the
assessment
assumptions
with
regard
to
the
gross
potential
income
and
the
effective
gross
income
in
the
assessor's
current
methodology
compared
to
the
actuals
that
were
mostly
reported
in
2020.
But
it's
with
regard
to
the
expenses.
So
expenses
for
this
property
have
been
stabilized,
it's
a
stabilized
property.
Now
they
have
been
trending
upward
in
recent
years.
B
In
2017,
the
expenses
were
at
33.66
percent,
954
thousand
increased
to
34
969
000
in
2018,
in
2019,
increased
again
to
1
million
19
000
302,
which
is
34
and
then
fairly
stable,
but
again,
a
little
elevated
just
most
recent
prior
year.
To
1
million
25
three,
which
is
thirty
four
and
a
half
percent,
the
county
appears
to
basically
taking
a
three
year
average
of
the
2017
to
2019
expenses.
B
Not
considering
that
there
is
an
upward
trend
for
those
three
years
and
continuing
into
2020
but
they're,
using
the
current
operating
expenses
of
975
076.
So
we
would
ask
the
the
board
for
some
consideration
to
the
actual
operating
expenses.
The
trend
that
we've
seen
the
property
in
prior
to
to
cover
last
year
and
continuing
into
the
most
recent
reporting
year
of
2020.
B
The
final
thing
we
want
to
bring
attention
to
to
the
board
is
with
regard
to
the
cap
rate.
It's
something
we
again.
I
discussed
a
little
bit
in
length
last
week
is,
with
regard
to
the
county,
did
give
consideration
to
certain
property
types
for
consideration
of
the
pandemic
and
the
impact
that
that
caused
on
total
revenue.
B
You
know
vacancy
and
the
the
risk
profile
of
those
property
types
with
regard
to
the
cap
rate,
so
the
county
has
made
adjustments
of
30
basis
points,
an
increase
of
30
basis
points
from
the
prior
year
to
property
types
such
as
retail,
they've,
increased
all
hotel
cap
rates
by
100
basis
points,
but
they've
made
no
consideration
for
any
increase
in
the
cap
rate
to
apartments
again.
B
This
is
an
apartment
in
in
south
arlington,
which
we
would
argue
should
not
be
assessed
at
a
same
high-rise
tower
cap
rate,
that's
not
within
the
distance
of
the
metro
as
one
that
would
be
in
that
ballston
corridor,
boston,
roslin
corridor.
So
again
our
cap
rate
and
we've
provided
evidence
from
rerc
investor
survey,
cap
rate
from
2019
to
2020,
showing
basically
a
median
and
average.
B
Change
from
2019
to
2020
of
approximately
28
basis
points,
and
so
we've
added
that
as
well
as
30
basis
points
for
its
location
in
south
arlington,
and
we
hope
the
board
considers
those
changes.
Jeremy,
I
don't
know
if
there's
anything
else
would
like
to
add.
C
Just
that
the
current
assessment
of
the
property
is
the
highest,
the
property
has
ever
been
assessed.
It's
all
at
three
percent.
Three
million
dollar
increase
last
year
about
ten
percent,
which
was
no
change.
So
then
it's
it's
just
seen
a
slight
increase,
since
it
was
reduced
in
15,
16,
17,
18
and
19
as
part
of
the
apo
process.
C
So
last
year
like,
like,
I
said
last
year,
we
heard
well
look.
The
pandemic
happened
after
the
first
of
the
year,
we'll
talk
about
it
next
year,
and
then
we
talked
about
it
this
year
and
the
only
thing
that's
changed
is
apparently
vacancy
and
collection
has
been
less
than
it's
been
in
the
last
four
years,
which
is
surprising
to
say
the
least.
D
Good
morning
board
members
good
morning,
mr
warren
one
mr
chet,
like
so
again
we're
talking
about
wildwood
towers,
as
the
board
is
very
familiar
by
now,
we'll
be
running
heavily
upon
the
three-year
summary
sheet.
D
D
Property
has
a
three-year
average
of
about
one
and
a
half
percent
that
did
go
up
approximately
one-tenth
of
one
percent
in
2020.
due
to
that.
Obviously,
the
effect
of
gross
has
gone
up
four
years
in
a
row
as
well
up
about
a
third
of
a
percent
in
2020..
D
As
mr
warren
noted,
the
operating
expenses
are
stabilized
as
well.
We
did
in
fact
note
the
increase
the
trend
of
increases
year
over
year,
approximately
one
and
a
half
percent
eighteen
about
five
percent
and
nineteen,
and
just
shy
of
six
tenths
of
one
percent
and
twenty
twenty.
D
As
mr
warren
noted,
we
did
fall
in
line
with
that
average
of
17
through
19.
In
fact,
our
progression
projection
for
2021
was
higher
than
2017
and
2018's
number.
D
We
saw
an
increase
in
net
operating
income
in
2020.
Again,
these
are
all
things
that
happen
in
a
pandemic
year.
The
property
is
operating
well,
one
thing
the
opponents
didn't
talk
about
and,
and
we're
happy
to
see
that,
hopefully,
this
is
a
settled
issue
is
that
the
building
went
through
extensive
renovations
years
ago.
I
think
we
we
won
that
point
last
year
in
the
sense
that
these
renovations
clearly
led
to
improved
rents.
D
We
saw
this
a
lot
last
year.
This
is
the
first
time
we're
seeing
it
this
year.
We
didn't
test
this
because,
obviously
we're
so
far
below
what
the
property
achieved,
not
only
gross
potential
but
specifically
an
effective
gross,
were
over
125
000
below
what
they
achieved
at
the
property.
That's
obviously
due
to
the
extreme
stabilization
of
the
property
and
very
low
vacancy.
D
I
think
the
idea
was
the
penalties
want
there
to
be
consideration
by
the
board
members
to
adjust
the
operating
expenses,
but
I
didn't
hear
any
recommendation
to
adjust
the
effective
gross
so,
as
we
saw
last
year
again,
if
one
were
to
make
it
a
change
to
operating
expenses.
Clearly
we
want
to
be
in
a
tighter
realm
of
what
the
achievable
gross
potential
was
at
the
property
and
not
so
far
behind,
given
that
we're
77
000
below
the
net
operating
income,
in
fact
we're
below
2019's
net
operating
income
as
well.
F
F
A
lot
of
consideration
was
given
to
all
the
bankruptcies
that
occurred
last
year
and
the
lack
of
sales
we
did
reliance
on
the
publication,
also
with
hotels.
We
are
all
aware
how
devastated
hotels
were
a
lot
of
them
closed
in
the
beginning
of
the
year
last
year
and
even
remained
closed
during
the
summer.
Due
to
this
impact,
and
also
with
the
information
we
have
from
tlt
to
see
how
their
revenue
was
impacted,
we
rely
on
publications
to
make
adjustments
to
our
hotel.
F
We
didn't
have
any
hotel
sales
as
far
as
the
hotel
argument,
though,
all
hotels
were
not
all
hotel.
Cap
rates
were
not
increased
by
100
basis
points.
I
think
chris
has
talked
about
how
we
looked
at
each
individual,
hotel
type,
limited
service,
selector
service,
full
service
and
residential
suite,
and
those
were
what
full
service
was
increased
by
50
basis
points.
I
think
another
property
type
was
increased
by
75
basis
points
and
then
the
remainder
were
increased
by
100
basis
points.
F
So
all
hotels
were
not
increased
by
100
basis
points,
so
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
is
clear
office
properties.
We
did
not
increase
the
cap
rates
on
office
properties.
F
F
We
looked
at.
The
information
did
our
analysis
as
we
do
every
year
and
we
were
actually
very
conservative
and
we
rounded
up
the
best
we
could
based
off
the
information
we
had.
So
that's
why
high-rise
vacancy
came
down
to
five
percent,
but
mid-rise
vacancy.
I
believe
either
increase
or
stay
the
same,
and
I
know
garden
vacancy
increased
as
well.
F
A
Okay,
thank
you.
Both
questions
from
board
members.
G
Going
through
the
appellant's
request,
it
looks
like
you're
you're
performing
for
2021.
You've
got
noi
down
to
1
million
828
037
and
we
haven't
seen
an
ny
that
low,
since
I
guess
prior
to
2017.
So
can
you
expand
on
you
know?
What's
driving
that
you've
got
you've
got
the
same
operating
expenses
as
2020,
but
a
much
lower
revenue?
So
are
you
lowering
rents
in
the
building
or
is
the
owner
lowering
rents
in
the
building?
Are
they
experiencing
a
lot
of
move
outs
this
year
or
expecting
a
lot
of
move
outs?
C
I'll
take
that
if
you
compare
column
e
to
column,
f
e
is
the
actuals
and
f
is
their
the
appellant's
pro
forma
you'll
notice
that
our
gpi
is
the
actual
gpi
achieved,
so
we're
using
three
million
twenty
four
thousand
five.
C
Thirty
six
we're
using
a
five
percent
market
vacancy,
which
is
the
market
vacancy
that
the
the
county
has
applied
to
every
single
high-rise
apartment
that
we've
seen
so
we're
stabilizing
that
one
number
so
we're
taking
column
e
and
stabilizing
the
one
number
that's
stabilized
for
every
single
property
and
then
applying
the
actual
operating
expenses.
C
So
that's
the
difference.
That's
the
only
difference
is
column
10
or
eight,
which
is
why
our
effective
gross
is
less
than
actual,
because
the
property
only
reported
a
one
percent
vacancy.
C
The
majority
of
that
has
to
do
with
the
fact
that
the
building
was
occupied
at
the
beginning
of
the
year,
and
people
didn't
move
out
in
march
april
may
june
because
they
didn't
go
out
looking
for
apartments.
So
in
some
places.
What
we're
seeing
is
that
yes,
vacancy
is
much
lower
than
it
was
in
past,
but
that's
because
nobody
left
the
building
to
go
release.
C
A
new
space
and
now
that
we're
seeing
a
lot
more
turnover
at
the
start
of
this
year,
which
obviously
we'll
see
in
next
year's
assessment,
hopefully
we're
seeing
a
lot
of
turnover
because
people
said
okay,
I've
been
stuck
in
this
box
for
first
12
months
I
haven't
left.
I
haven't
been
able
to
look
for
something
else
now.
It's
time
I
can
start
looking
for
something
else.
So
vacancy
is
down
in
some
places,
but
it's
not
down
necessarily
by
choice.
C
C
So
the
property
sits
on
the
line,
so
there's
a
part
of
the
parking
lot
that
sits
in
fairfax
so
which.
C
Yeah,
so
it's
actually
access
so
and
sophie
is
on
with
the
ownership.
I
don't
know
if
you
want
to
expand
exactly
what
it
is
sophie,
but
it's
the
entrance
to
the
parking
lot
sits
in
fairfax,
county
and
part
of
the
parking
is
in
fairfax
coming.
It
also
gives
you
good
understanding
how
far
this
actually
is
from
the
metro,
you're.
B
It's
it's
the
adjustment.
They
basically
deduct
the
actual
fairfax
county
evaluation,
so
the
fairfax
county
values
that
that
strip
of
land
at
918
000,
the
county,
just
deducts
it
from
their
overall
assessment.
D
Yes,
ma'am
so
again,
metric
filled
four
years
in
a
row
of
apartment
revenue,
growth,
four
years
in
a
row
of
gross
potential
income
growth,
four
years
in
a
row
of
effective
gross
income
growth.
This
property
is
well
stabilized,
regardless
of
projections
or
speculation
made
by
the
palance.
What
we've
seen
in
the
history
of
the
project
is
is
historically
well
under
four
percent
vacancy.
D
So
to
pick
and
choose
which
lines
benefit,
the
appellant
seems
to
not
necessarily
make
a
very
genuine
opinion
of
value,
given
that
all
the
metrics
are
up,
given
that
we
are
fifty
thousand
dollars
below
the
net
operating.
D
Excuse
me
the
total
operating
expenditures
in
2020,
but
that
we
are
some
77
thousand
dollars
below
the
net
operating
income
and
again
below
what
was
achieved
in
2019
as
well.
We
do
believe
that
this
makes
for
a
strong
confirmation
at
32,
582
400..
Thank
you.
B
Yes
again,
as
jeremy
stated,
you
know,
this
property
has
historically
not
had
a
lot
of
vacancy
issues
over
the
last
couple
years,
but
again
with
that
compaction
and
and
with
covid,
and
now
what
you're
seeing
is
with
the
releasing
that
you
are
starting
to
see
a
lot
more
vacancy
and
a
lot
more
collection
loss,
which
will
definitely
be
felt
over
the
last
year,
which
is
why
we
use
that
five
percent
market
vacancy
that
every
other
high-rise
apartment
gets.
B
You
know
it's
crystal
stating
you
know
four-year
averages
or
trends
again.
The
three-year
averages
for
expenses
or
the
three
year
trend
for
expenses
have
been
going
up
each
year.
However,
that
trend
was
not
realized
in
their
current
assessment
of
the
property
they're,
just
using
that
three
year
average
and
closer
to
the
2017-2018
expenses
than
the
the
most
recent
two
years
in
2019
and
2020,
which
is
it's
been
about
the
same
at
1
million
20
000.
B
So
again,
we
would
ask
consideration
for
the
actual
expenses
what
those
expenses
have
been
realized
over
the
most
the
two
most
recent
years
of
the
property
and
the
cap
rate.
We've
always
had
issues
with
the
cap
rate.
You
know
at
5.6
right
now,
20
basis
points
of
that
is
reserves,
another
one
percent
for
the
tax
rate.
B
This
property
is
being
valued
at
a
4.2
percent
cap
rate,
which
we've
always
had
issues
with
for
property
being
again
on
the
edge
of
fairfax
county
right
on
that
line,
but
between
fairfax,
county
and
arlington
in
south
arlington
being
assessed
at
4.2
percent
cap
rate
and
given
no
consideration
for
for
coven
the
pandemic
last
year.
A
G
I
mean
it's
super
stable
property,
at
least
in
the
time
frame,
we're
looking
at
for
the
last
four
years.
I
I
I
can
kind
of
go
with
the
argument
that
there
there
might
be
some
pent-up
move-outs
and
concessions
and
stuff
that
are
related
to
that,
but
I
don't
see
how
that
you
can
apply
a
cap
rate
to
that
cost
because
it's
not.
This
is
a
that's
a
one-year
thing.
That's
not
a
recurring
annual
expense,
so
I
mean
I
don't
know
what
that
number
is.
G
Maybe
it's
a
hundred
thousand
dollars
worth
of
concessions,
but
you
know
something
like
that:
would
have
to
go
below
the
line
it
doesn't.
It
doesn't
really
affect
noise
on
a
going
forward
basis.
J
I
wanted
to
when
reading
this
originally
wanted
to
lower
the
assessment,
a
couple
of
percent,
because
that's
what
we're
seeing
legitimately
throughout
the
county
in
apartment
buildings,
but
particularly
looking
at
the
ine
and
listening,
of
course,
to
the
appellant's
arguments.
I
can't
make
that
case
to
me
to
say:
well,
okay,
in
2021
the
vacancies
going
to
go
up.
There's
pen
up
demand
well,
but
there
wasn't
any
in
2020,
because
everybody
was
locked
in
their
box.
J
We
have
seen
a
downturn
in
2020,
which
is
why
the
assessments
were
going
down
two
three
four
five
percent,
but
I
certainly
buy
that
they
project
it's
going
up
relatively
speaking,
a
lot
vacancy
and
collection
for
2021,
it's
still
sensible,
but
then
the
operating
expenses
don't
go
down.
J
If
you
have
fewer
people
turning
on
lights-
and
you
know
banging
stuff,
you
got
to
have
lesser
expenses
so,
and
I
too,
I'm
loathed
to
full
with
the
cap
rate
like
we
all
are
something
we
revisit
weekly
twice
a
week
so
as
much
as
I'd
like
to
to
perhaps
just
cap
their
noi
at
the
department's
cap
rate.
I
I
I
can't
really-
and
I
would
like
to-
I
can't
really
justify
it.
So
I'm
I'm
fine
where
we
are
right
now.
H
Yeah,
I
agree
with
kane.
I
think
the
income
that
we're
going
to
see
in
a
lot
of
apartment
buildings
is
not
going
to
be
reflected
from
last
year,
because
I
know
from
talking
to
you
know:
people
are
looking
for
apartments
and
management
companies.
A
lot
of
management
companies
were
proactive.
I
think
last
year
giving
seminars
or
giving
people
information.
You
know
if
they
were
in
the
fall
that
they
could
apply
for
assistance
if
you
used
to
call
it.
H
So
there
were
things
that
you
know
prevented
from
the
reduction
in
income,
but
looking
at
the
incoming
numbers
in
this
particular
building,
I
don't
see
where
we
can
make
any
adjustments.
I
think
it's
pretty
stable.
I
think
the
expenses
that
the
county
used
are
a
little
bit
higher
than
the
either
three
or
four
year
average.
So
yeah,
I'm
okay
with
it.
A
H
I'll
go
ahead
and
move
that
we
confirmed
the
assessment
at
32
million
582
400.
H
E
A
B
Okay,
I'll
direct
the
board
again
to
this
this
time,
page
42
of
117
of
the
board
response
packet
you'll
find
our
summary
of
facts.
This
is
the
wildwood
park
apartments
located
at
5550
columbia,
pike.
B
B
And
some
of
the
issues
of
note
that
we
would
like
to
point
out
to
the
board
is
number
one
with
regard
to
the
gross
potential
income.
The
county's
combined
gross
potential
income
is
approximately
nine
million
four
hundred
and
twenty
five
thousand
or
twenty
thousand,
which
is
almost
two
hundred
thousand
dollars
above
the
total
reported
gross
potential
income
of
nine
million.
B
Two
hundred
fifty
five
thousand,
oh
one,
four,
the
county
used
a
five
percent
vacancy
rate,
which
again
is
a
overall
decrease
in
their
methodology
for
high-rise
apartments
from
six
percent
that
was
used
in
2019
to
assess
the
assess
all
apartment
properties
in
the
county
to
five
percent
this
year.
Following
again,
the
pandemic.
B
B
Actual
effect
of
gross
income
is
eight
million
eight
hundred
seventy
four
thousand
eight,
eighty
nine,
which
is
about
50
000
below
the
gross
potential
or
the
effective
gross
income
that
the
the
county
is
using
and
then
again
with
regard
to
to
the
cap
rate.
B
Again
on
page
44
of
117,
we've
provided
our
cap
rate
support,
which
is
a
side-by-side
comparison
from
2019
to
2020
of
rerc
for
apartments
in
the
the
eastern
region,
first
and
second
tier
properties
as
well
as
pwc.
Fourth
quarter
from
19
to
20,
which
shows
a
mean
difference
of
26
or
26
basis,
point
increase
and
a
median
30
percent
a
30
basis,
point
increase
from
apartments
from
19
to
20..
We
took
the
the
average
of
that
at
28
basis
points
and
increased
our
cap
rate.
B
B
That
includes
20,
that's
loaded
for
replacement
reserves
and
then
another
one
percent
for
the
for
the
effective
tax
rate.
So
this
property
is
effectively
being
assessed
based
on
a
4.5
overall
cap
rate
for
a
1963
build
in.
In
south
arlington,
so
our
cap
rate
takes
into
consideration
the
inferior
location
and
adds
30
basis
points
as
well
as
28
basis
points
for
an
effective
covert
adjustment
which
other
property
types
have
seen
in
the
county
and
we're
hoping
that
the
board
gives
consideration
to
that
fact.
C
Yes,
the
difference.
The
difference
here
is
that
they
overshot
the
income.
As
you
as
blake
stated,
and
I
I
tried
to
figure
out
where
they
overshot
the
income.
The
easiest
line
to
look
is
the
very
first.
The
apartment,
incomes,
they're
they're,
assuming
the
apartment
income,
would
be
nine
million.
Seventy
five
thousand.
It's
never
been
that
number
and
then
further
down
to
gpi.
It's
been
eight
seven,
eight,
nine,
nine,
two
nine
two
and
when
you
add
the
two
together
they're
over
nine
point,
four,
the
the
place
they
miss.
C
C
That
number
is
just
not
it's
not
supported
now
again,
when
you,
when
you
kind
of
flow
down,
so
they
overshoot
the
gross
potential.
They
give
you
a
little
bit
more
than
vacancy
than
you
actually
got.
That
vacancy
again
is
is
a
a
little
bit
low
because
of
the
compression
we
talked
about
next
year.
It's
going
to
shoot
up
because
the
turn
and
then
give
the
market
expenses.
C
So
the
the
miss
here,
unlike
the
other
cases
and
almost
all
the
other
cases,
is
that
they're
using
rents
that
just
can't
be
achieved
at
the
property-
and
I
know
we've
we've
looked
at
rent
grades
before
to
figure
that
out,
but
you
can
get
a
two
bedroom
today
for
17.95
you
can
get
the
largest
two
bedroom
for
19.95
and
they're,
applying
21.50
to
every
two
bedroom.
C
So
that's
why
they're
overshooting
and
saying
right
now
the
property
can
achieve
apartment
rents
higher
than
it's
ever
achieved,
and
the
thought
that
I
know
that
the
we
see
the
income
we
see
the
trends,
but
the
simple
common
sense
test
is:
is
a
property
worth
a
million
dollars
more
after
the
pandemic
started
than
before
the
pandemic?
The
answer
is
no.
No
there's
no
metric
anywhere.
That
says
this
property's
worth
more,
none
of
the
sales
that
they
have,
the
only
sale
they
have
on
columbia.
Pike
was
at
125
of
the
assessment
assessment
ratio.
C
There
are
no
non-metro
sales
of
older
buildings
of
this
size
that
took
place
in
the
county
last
year
and
their
sale
list.
That
would
support
a
number
anywhere
near
this.
So
again
the
19
number
was
93
million.
The
18
number
was
89
million,
the
17
number
was
88
million
and
now
we're
at
10
million
higher
than
that
at
98
million,
and
it's
because
they
overshot
how
much
money
a
two
bedroom
can.
F
C
The
property
and
although
it's
just
one
property
type,
that
if
you
look
at
the
the
assessor
worksheet,
that's
the
majority,
the
majority
of
the
property,
the
well.
The
two
bedrooms
are
off
by
a
lot,
but
then
also
the
one
bedrooms
as
well.
So,
overall
they
overshot
the
income
pretty
dramatically.
D
Yes,
ma'am:
this
isn't
rocket
science.
If
you're
looking
at
the
stabilized
history,
you'll
see
increases
of
two
percent
of
apartment
revenue,
growth
in
2018,
3.4
percent
in
2019
and
again,
even
in
a
pandemic
year,
tenth
of
a
percent
in
2020..
D
The
reason
why
these
properties
go
up
every
year
is
because
each
year
they're
achieving
new
highs
that
they've
never
achieved
before
again,
that's
not
a
surprise.
A
well
operated
property,
that's
well
maintained
and
stabilized
is
generally
going
to
have
increases
year-over-year.
That's
what
we
saw
with
this
property,
four-year
increases
of
apartment
revenue.
D
There
was
a
slight
decrease
in
gross
potential,
but
really
we're
talking
about
essentially
staying
the
same
as
within
seventeen
thousand
dollars
of
what
was
achieved
in
2019
again,
a
property
that
did
see
a
modest
increase
in
vacancy
in
2020,
but
really
is
a
drive
in
concessions
which
we
did
see
and
makes
more
sense
across
the
board,
thereby
giving
amenity,
wave
fees
or
parking
fees,
etc.
D
D
D
D
D
Excuse
me
just
the
gross
potential
over
projection.
We'd
obviously
want
to
be
more
in
line
with,
what's
actually
being
occurred
at
the
property
in
regards
to
operating
expenses,
so
would
make
an
adjustment
there
as
well,
regardless
we
were
over.
A
hundred
thousand
dollars
below
what
was
achieved
at
the
property
for
net
operated
income
and
again,
like
last
case,
we're
actually
below
last
year's
net
operating
income.
So,
two
years
in
a
row
where
we
were
below
what
was
achieved
at
the
property
and
then
this
again
is
in
a
pandemic
year.
D
So
in
a
covered
year
they
increased
their
net
operating
income
by
over
one
percent
and
that's
again
due
to
the
fact
that
their
apartment
revenues
achieve
more
income
year
over
year
over
year
every
year.
D
We
do
believe
that
the
county
should
be
confirmed
at
the
value
of
98
98
running
217
300,
and
I
believe
irving
would
like
a
word.
F
Yeah,
I
just
wanted
to
correct
one
thing
that
was
stated:
the
sale
that
we
had
in
the
county
on
columbia.
Pike
was
pike,
3400,
that
property
sold
august
11
2020
407
million
eight
hundred
thousand.
That's
an
assessment
of
sales
ratio,
91.63,
not
125,
so
I
just
want
to
put
that
out
there
and
those
were
some
of
the
sales
that
we
actually
discussed
earlier
this
year
when
we
had
our
boe
briefing
that
we
saw
coming
to
the
county.
F
F
One
thing
that
we
pointed
out
is
that
we're
using
the
third
quarter
2019
compared
to
the
third
quarter
of
2020,
because
that's
what
we
had
during
our
analysis
period,
we
did
not
receive
fourth
quarter,
which
the
appellant
is
using
in
their
documents
until
well.
After
the
assessments
were
done,
I
think
re-rc
came
in
around
the
mid-december,
so
again,
assessments
were
done
in
pwc.
We
did
not
receive
until
after
january,
1
2021..
I
Yes,
ma'am,
I
have
two
questions
for
the
owner:
retail
went
from
33
763
or
it
went
from.
Oh,
I'm
sorry
went
from
31
down
to
24..
Why
is
that.
C
Sophie
is
on
and
she
might
be
able
to
explain
the
actual
details.
The
real
detail
is
that
not
to
sound
like
a
not
to
sound
condescending,
but
there
was
a
global
pandemic
and
retail
was
just
decimated.
They
were
forced
to
close
and
when
they
were
forced
to
close,
they
don't
pay
rent.
So.
C
Tenant
so
we
did
the
tenant
actually
leave,
or
did
they
just
not
pay
for
a
couple
months?.
L
I
believe
they
didn't
pay
for
a
couple
months.
They
they
could
just
they
could
not
afford
to
pay
during
the
pandemic,
and
we've
been
seeing
that
trend
with
a
lot
of
our
commercial
tenants.
I
Okay
got
a
second
quick
question:
is
this
on
our
ground
lease.
B
I
Okay,
that's
it.
A
Okay,
mr
matkin.
J
My
question,
I
don't
think,
was
answered
or
addressed
in
the
last
case
by
irving.
If
it
was,
I
apologize
and
I'd
like
a
quicker
answer,
and
but
it
came
up
in
both
cases
this
and
last,
and
that
is
the
county,
reducing
the
the
metric
for
vacancies
and
collection
from
six
to
five
percent
from
last
year.
To
this,
could
the
department
comment
on
the
rationale
for
that.
F
Oh
yes,
as
the
board
and
the
agents
are
aware,
we
look
at
income,
expense
information,
that's
provided
last
year,
so
that'll
be
the
2019
information.
We
did
ask
for
covet
19
ine
again
due
to
the
randomness
of
the
accounting
period
reported.
As
we
stated,
some
people
reported
six
months,
eight
months
or
nine
months.
It
was
hard
for
us
to
try
to
analyze
all
of
the
properties
that
we
received
together,
consistently
or
because
of
that
time
frame.
F
So
we
did
look
at
the
2019
inds
reported
and
then
based
off
of
our
analysis.
We
took
a
conservative
approach,
so
if
the
average
or
median
vacancy
collection
loss
was,
you
know
four
percent
or
4.25,
we
rounded
up
to
5
percent
to
give
some
consideration
for
what
is
going
on
in
the
market.
If
that
five
percent
was
below
the
six
percent
from
the
previous
year,
I
mean
we
still
had
to
make
that
adjustment.
D
In
mr
mitsken,
you
can
actually
see
that
echoed
on
the
forms
if
you're
looking
at
the
history
from
2018
to
2019
the
vacancy
dropped
by
almost
two
percent
same
thing
in
last
case,
so
in
other
words
as
you're
familiar
we're
using
information.
That's
essentially
one
year
old,
the
2020
information
that
we
received
will
be
using
for
the
next
year's
assessment.
But
in
this
case
the
2019
ines
indicated
that
it
should
not
have
gone
up.
In
fact,
it
should
have
gone
down.
C
Well,
correct
and
that's
correct
in
2019
from
2018
to
2019
collection
losses
were
down
the
last
year.
We
came
here
and
we
said:
look
we
can't
talk
about
covid,
because
covet
happened
started.
We
knew
about
it
after
the
valuation
date,
we'll
talk
about
it
next
year
and
then
now
we're
next
year
and
they
said
yeah,
but
all
we
had
was
19
and
actually
collection
loss
is
down.
Well,
everybody
here
knows
that
collection
loss
in
2020
was
not
down.
It
was
higher.
C
It
was
record
highs
in
some
cases,
maybe
not
in
this
individual
case,
but
for
the
county
to
go
universally
and
say
you
know
what
collection
loss
is
actually
down
from
the
ines
we
received
from
18
to
19,
with
no
adjustment.
Every
other
jurisdiction
made
a
covet
type
adjustment.
You
did
the
same
thing
on
hotels,
you
somehow
retail
retail
vacancy
was
four
percent.
Before
and
after
the
pandemic,.
D
Ma'am
so
again,
very
much
an
echoing
of
last
case,
but
in
reverse
income
is
up
four
years
in
a
row
gross
potential.
It
was
essentially
flat
in
2020.
D
We
did
see
an
increase
over
projections
by
the
county
on
the
income
side,
but
again
over
180
000
over
projection
on
the
operating
expenses
for
to
adjust
the
income.
We
should
be
allowed
to
adjust
the
operating
expenses
to
a
stabilized
number,
either
way
we're
over
a
hundred
thousand
dollars
below
what
was
achieved
at
the
property
net
operating
income
in
2020,
as
well
as
below
what
was
achieved
in
2019
those
things
being
said.
We
believe
the
assessment
should
be
confirmed
at
98
million
217
300..
Thank
you.
B
Yes,
so
again,
really
the
main
issue
here
is
we're
asking
for
consideration
of
what
the
property
was
was
actually
able
to
achieve
in
the
gross
potential,
which
is
approximately
two
hundred
thousand
dollars
higher
in
the
county's
current
assessment
to
quickly
respond
to
irving's
response.
Regarding
the
cap
rate,
we
understand
that
the
county
uses
third
quarter
information
and
cap
rate
studies.
B
However,
we
use
fourth
quarter
because
that's
the
that's
prior
to
the
the
lean
date,
the
1
1
20
21
valuation
mean
date
similar
to
how
the
county
only
has
2019
ine
and
financial
information
to
work
on.
When
setting
the
original
assessment,
they
do
consider
the
2020
financials
when
we
provide
that
to
them
in
our
appeal
packages,
so
that
it's
really
no
different
than
using
a
fourth
quarter.
B
Information
for
cap
rate
studies
as
well
it's
prior
to
the
the
lean
date
prior
to
evaluation
date
and
and
that
information
should
be
giving
consideration
as
well,
and
you
can
see
the
the
difference
clearly
and
the
change
in
cap
rates
from
year
to
year
and
then
that
increase
caused
primarily
from
coven.
So
again,
we're
asking
for
consideration
of
the
gross
potential
incomes,
as
well
as
the
cap
rate
in
this,
in
this
case,.
H
I
guess
I'll
go
ahead
and
start
in
this
case.
The
I
think
this
case
is
pretty
much
what
mr
chitlik
summarized
it
at
the
beginning.
I
think
the
income
on
the
the
county
has
is
a
bit
higher
than
what
we
we've
seen,
but
you
know
looking
at
what
indicated
that
the
two-bedroom
rents
were
higher.
H
I
kind
of
have
to
disagree
with
that.
I
think
there's
three
types
of
two-bedroom
units
in
this
for
what
it's
advertised,
the
two
bedrooms
that
I
don't
have
any
balcony
or
patio
are
advertised
at
about
19.95
the
there
is
the
two
bedrooms,
two
bathroom
with
a
patio:
it's
a
2200
and
the
one
with
the
balcony
is
the
2100,
the
only
two
that
are
coming
up
available
for
you
know
rent
this
month.
H
So
you
know,
I
don't
think
that
the
income
there
on
that
two
bedroom
is
overstated
and
I
have
to
agree
with
the
county.
I
think
they're.
Looking
at
the
expenses
again,
you
know
the
three-year
average
that
I
get
it's
35.9
for
your
average
35.88
and
the
county
is
using
a
combined
average.
I
mean
combined
expense
of
37.5,
so
I'm
you
know
I
have
to
agree.
One
is
pretty
much
covering
the
other,
so
I'm
okay
with
the
assessment.
The
way
it
is.
I
Yes,
ma'am.
Thank
you
jose.
I
agree
with
you
with
one
exception,
and
that
is
last
case
we
went
with
the
actual
you
know
the
actual
vacancy,
which
was
like
one
percent
and
on
this
one
we
have
a
drop
in
the
retail
and
I
think
we
should
go
with
the
actual
retail,
because
I
think
we
got
to
be
consistent
and
when
we
do
that
it
lowers
the
assessed
value
by
103
300..
I
I
know
it's
not
a
whole
lot,
but
I
think
that's
a
more
accurate
presentation
of
the
retail
I'll
share
one
other
thing,
and
this
is
not
for
this
year,
but
the
ownership
might
want
to
look
into
the
groundless
situation
because
we
have
a
income
stream
that
it
looks
like
might
die
in
16
years.
I
H
Let
me
you
seen
in
the
previous
case.
We
only
had
one
percent
of
vacancy,
I
think
it
was.
I
think
it
was
five
percent
the
same
position.
I
A
J
What
about,
though,
again
we
missed
this
last
case,
and
these
are
very,
very
similar.
The
reduction
this
seems
to
be
the
only
property
type
we've
ever
seen,
where
the
reduction
for
vacancy
there's
a
reduction
for
vacancy
in
collections
as
the
standard,
not
not
vis-a-vis,
what
they
achieved
in
an
odd
year
last
year,
but
it's
a
standard
across
the
board
that
the
guidelines
standard.
Do
we
not
do
we
just
accept
that
wholesale?
This
is
the
only
property
type
where
things
got
better
in
this
regard
in
the
county.
K
A
J
J
A
Well,
and
just
I'll
just
follow
up
too,
if,
if
these
are
two
properties
that
set
the
policy
for
all
of
these
buildings,
I
mean
to
me
to
go
in
and
say:
okay.
Well,
this
is
certainly
supporting
that
there.
You
know
there
wasn't
an
increase
in
it,
but
we'll
make
an
adjustment
to
these
two
that
you
know
made
the
adjustments
and
all
the
other
properties
that
that
logic
just
doesn't.
Oh,
no,
let
me
go.
J
H
B
K
F
F
So
mr
casto
works
for
altar's
group.
Now
I
think
that's
why
blake
and
jeremy
sent
in
he
at
one
point
he
was
employed
with
a
different
company,
but
I
think
he's
under
jeremy's
wing.
C
Yeah
he's
been
here
for
a
year
and
a
half
and
the
loas
are
all
altus
group.
Everything
is
all
descriptive.
A
All
right,
perfect,
okay,
so
the
last
case
on
the
agenda
is
rpc13018058,
the
property
located
at
600
north
glead.
So,
mr
warren,
you
can
start
with
your
eight
minutes
and
tell
us
about
this
property.
B
Thank
you
so
again,
I'll
first
direct
you
to
our
summary
of
facts
which
can
be
located
on
the
county's
memo
response,
starting
at
page
37
of
102..
This
is
the
672
flats
apartment
located
in
ballston.
It
is
currently
or
excuse
me.
The
original
assessment
was
million.
Eight
hundred
nineteen
thousand
two
hundred
the
county
is
making
a
recommendation
to
revise
the
value
down
to
eighty
four
million
one.
B
B
B
So
if
you
turn
to
page
three
and
you
take
a
look
at
the
summary
income
and
expense
for
the
property,
you'll
see
dating
back
to
2018
when
it
completed
construction,
it
was
in
the
very
early
stages
of
lease
up
which
continued
through
to
2019,
where
you
can
see
that
there
was
total
vacancy
and
collections
reported
in
2019
of
21,
and
that
has
as
a
really
a
direct
result
of
covid
has
really
impacted
the
lease
up
of
the
subject
property.
B
It's
still
well
above
market
vacancy,
as
of
the
valuation
date
and
reported
in
2020,
a
vacancy
of
13
main
issues
here
to
discuss
the
the
revised
columns
h
of
the
county.
Initially
gross
potential
income
was
a
concern.
They
have
revised
that
to
make
it
much
closer,
although
it's
still
above
the
actuals
for
2020.,
the
actual
reported
gross
potential
income
was
5
million
nine
hundred
eighty
seven
thousand
eight.
Eighty
four,
that
revision
made
by
the
county
is
six
million.
B
Twenty
four
thousand
three
sixty
five,
which
is
still
thirty
six
thousand
dollars
above
what
was
actually
reported.
B
B
again
those
figures.
Initial
figures
have
been
revised
slightly
to
more
closely
aligned
with
the
actuals
again.
The
vacancy
is
an
issue
21
in
2019.
It's
dropped
down
to
13
in
2020,
but
the
county
made
no
change
and
are
using
six
percent
vacancy
in
in
their
model,
no
change
from
the
prior
year
or
no
adjustment
made
to
to
covet.
This
is
a
property
that
again
because
of
covetous
trouble
struggled
with
lease
up
to
get
to
to
market
levels
of
occupancy.
B
So
we
would
ask
for
consideration
for
that
fact:
effective
gross
income,
actuals
of
five
million
four
hundred
twenty
thousand
six
thirty
two,
which
was
reported,
which
is
after
the
county,
revised
that
their
combined
effective
gross
income
is
five
million
six
hundred
and
seventy
thousand
six
forty
three.
So
that's
over
two
hundred
and
fifty
thousand
dollars
above
what
the
property
actually
reported
in
the
most
recent
year
in
2020..
B
B
B
So
again,
we're
asking
for
consideration
that
this
is
a
property,
because
it's
still
in
lease
up,
you
know
I
believe
it's
very
important
to
look
at
the
actual
figures
until
this
property
is
stabilized
and
because,
as
we've
talked
about
vacancy
and
collections,
are
only
going
to
increase
most
likely
throughout
2021,
as
this
property
continues
to
have
to
offer
concessions
to
to
lease
that
property
back
up
to
market
stabilization,
and
then
the
collections
and
issues
with
vacancy
that
coven
has
caused
the
cap
rate
again.
B
There's
no
consideration
for
the
cap
rate.
The
I
believe
the
the
overall
cap
rate
that's
being
applied
is
5.85.
B
Excuse
me,
5.15
for
the
market
rent
units
which
again
you're
talking
about
a
take
away,
20
basis
points
for
the
replacement
reserves,
puts
it
at
4.95,
another
1
for
the
tax
rate.
This
property
is
essentially
being
assessed
at
a
3.9
percent
overall
cap
rate
a
year
after
a
global
pandemic
that
basically
shut
everything
down.
So.
B
C
C
We
in
the
first
case
they
undershot
expenses,
but
it
didn't
matter
because
the
noi
it
didn't
matter
on
the
grand
scheme
for
the
assessment
change,
because
the
noi
was
in
line
with
actual.
In
the
second
case
they
overshot
income.
But
again
it
didn't
really
play
because
the
noi
was
in
line
here:
they've
overshot
the
noi
by
originally
by
400
thousand
dollars,
and
then
said.
Okay,
let
me
revise
that,
and
now
it's
only
overshot
by
250
thousand
dollars,
the
vacancy
that's
reported
at
the
9.47
seems
a
little
bit
higher
than
market.
C
But
when
you
actually
look
at
it,
it's
not.
The
actual
vacancy
is
5.7
the
property
stabilized,
but
then
there's
a
rent
loss
of
0.6,
which
is
completely
normal
in
the
middle
of
a
pandemic
year.
And
then
the
concessions
is
just
three
point:
two
percent,
which
is
again
normal
in
a
concession
in
a
pandemic
year
with
concessions.
If
you're
saying
that
the
entire
property
is
six
percent
vacancy
collection
loss
and
concessions,
if
you
take
a
if
you
offer
a
month
free
for
new
leases,
that's
just
in
itself
eight
percent
of
revenue.
C
So
if
you
say
the
building
is
completely
free,
but
everybody
got
a
free
month,
then
the
vacancy
zero,
but
the
concession
is
eight
percent
and
they're
stabilizing
that
down
to
six
and
that's
with
zero
collection
loss.
The
thing
that
should
drive
this,
especially
in
support
of
ls2
cases,
is
that
final
noi
number
they've
overshot
the
they've
overshot
all
the
way
kind
of
through
this.
In
the
end,
the
total
number
is,
I
think,
blake's
at
245
000
higher
on
the
noi
than
can
actually
be
achieved.
D
Yes,
ma'am,
so
the
unlike
the
others
and
I
believe,
has
been
echoed
by
mr
warren.
This
is
a
true
projection.
This
is
a
new
property.
It's
extremely
well
positioned
across
the
street
from
the
newly
designed
boston
quarter.
It's
a
seven
minute
walk
from
the
metro.
It
is
in
stabilization,
it's
in
its
growth
cycle.
I
believe
it's
been
open
just
over
two
and
a
half
years
or
so,
and
as
mr
chitlik
said,
it
is
stabilizing
itself.
D
You
can
see
that
in
the
numbers
2019
and
2020
vacancy
dropped
by
over
9,
that's
true
vacancy
and
concessions
went
down
by
50.
Now
I
would
argue.
Obviously
it's
it's
a
bit
more
akin
to
new
properties
and
that
again,
concessions
are
what's
used
to
build
up
the
occupancy
and
that's
why
it's
not
a
surprise
to
see
a
drop
in
apartment
revenue
as
it
gets
stabilized.
The
revenue
will
drop
a
little
bit
as
the
occupancy
fills
up
and
then,
of
course,
that
cycle
change.
D
L
D
Off
the
last
two
years,
I
would
note
I'm
not
sure
why
mr
chitlik
argues
with
the
retail
projection
made
by
the
county
as
it's
echoed
by
the
appellant,
as
you
can
see
in
column
i2.
D
So
it's
really,
I
think,
more,
a
matter
of
what
the
apartments
are
going
to
do.
But
again,
given
the
huge
increase,
we
saw
and
that's
part
of
again
a
growth
cycle
of
a
new
property
even
in
a
pandemic
year,
even
with
apartments
revenue
dropping
by
four
percent.
D
The
effect
of
gross
rose
by
almost
13
again
in
a
pandemic
year-
and
this
is
with
all
the
concessions
in
the
vacancy,
so
the
projection
would
be
again
a
well-stabilized
property.
Well-Positioned
property
is
going
to
increase
all
of
these
numbers
into
2021..
D
When
you
look
at
the
appellant's
numbers,
he
actually
projects
a
loss
of
almost
4
percent
on
the
income
side,
but
a
increase
of
almost
10
percent
on
the
operating
expenses
that
essentially
is
going
to
depress
his
operating
net
operating
income
projection.
To
a
point,
that's
lower
than
what
was
achieved
in
a
pandemic
year.
That
just
doesn't
seem
like
a
reliable
opinion
of
valuable
value.
Given
that
again,
the
property
is
increasing,
it's
effective,
gross
and
stabilizing
its
operating
expenses.
D
So
it's
really
just
a
matter
of
the
projection
made
for
the
net
operating
income,
which
is
fairly
modest
at
the
growth
of
six
percent.
After
last
year's
growth
of
almost
17
percent
and
again,
the
appellant
projecting
a
growth
of
negative
three
percent.
We
do
believe
that
again.
This
is
based
on
projections,
but
projections
off
of
the
last
two
years
indicate
that
again
in
the
growth
cycle
of
a
new
well-positioned
property,
well,
amenitized,
the
operating
expenses
look
stable,
effective
gross
is
climbing
by
over
double
digits.
D
F
F
Chris
also
provided
a
rent
roll,
but
this
rent
roll
gives
you
information,
such
as
when
the
leases
were
signed
or
the
start
date.
So
there's
two
tenants
retail
tenants
in
this
property,
one
of
the
tenants
actually
signed
or
started
at
least
may
13
2020..
F
So
that
also
would
provide
some
insight
as
to
why
the
2020
numbers
reported
were
lower
than
what
chris
used
in
the
test
and
also
with
the
agent
using
their
pro
forma,
and
we
just
want.
I
just
want
to
speak
to
that,
to
make
sure
there's
no
confusion
about
why
the
initial
retail
rent
projection
was
increased
from
the
original
assessment
to
the
2021
test
or
revised
column
that
chris
provided
the
details
right
there
in
the
packet
as
to
where
we
got
all
our
information
from
for
the
rent
roll.
F
D
A
Okay,
thank
you.
Questions
from
board
members.
I
D
I
believe
that's
going
to
be
due
to
the
the
affordable
guidelines,
so,
in
other
words,
there's
going
to
be
a
difference
between
the
market
and
then
the
committed
affordables.
F
Affordable
guidelines
are
three
percent.
I
think
it
might
be
an
increase
on
some
of
the
property
types.
As
you
are
aware,
when
we
have
a
property
that
has
affordable
units
and
market
units,
we
value
the
affordable
units
based
off,
affordable
rents,
affordable
vacancies
and
affordable.
J
Yeah,
I
would
add
two
seconds
that
it
makes
sense
to
me.
There
would
be
a
greater
demand
for
committed,
affordable
units
in
a
a
new
well-positioned
building
than
there
would
be
for
market
rate,
just
by
definition,
what
the
percentage
is.
I
don't
know,
but
there's
clearly
a
better
demand,
therefore
lower
vacancy
question
for
the
the
department
you
state
that
you
had
a
a
hearing
with
the
appellant
of
the
appellant's
representatives
in
april,
and
also,
of
course,
you
take
a
long
look
at
a
variety
of
variables
in
this
building.
J
D
J
D
So
so,
to
be
clear,
mr
warner
and
I
actually
met
june
9th,
I'm
not
sure
where
the
april
date
came
from
age.
J
E
D
Yeah
we
give
the
the
department
hearing
is
not
only
for
the
ability
for
the
appellants
to
sort
of
talk
to
us
about
things.
They
want
to
highlight
it's
really
to
reiterate
the
packet
that
we
get
so
the
appellant's
packet,
the
bui
packet,
that
we
got.
It
really
was
had
the
information
we
desired,
so
it
had
the
2020
information
and
the
rent
roll.
So
that
is
really
what
changed
our
mind.
All
right.
D
It
was
applied
to
the
retail.
That's
that's
why
it's
at
seven
point
three
four
feet.
G
D
G
Okay,
I
just
want
to
make
sure
we're
doing
it
equitably
because
I'm
looking
at
and
that
leads
into
my
next
question-
is
650.
You
know
next
door,
north
lead
the
maxwell.
We
looked
at
that
case
last
year
and
that's
right
very
similar
building.
But
it's
it's
only
assessed
at
like
360
000
a
unit.
G
Yeah
so
I
mean-
and
we
reviewed
that
case-
it's
still
assessed
kind
of
much
lower
on
a
per
unit
basis.
But
when
I
look
at
both
buildings,
you
know
I
don't
see
a
drastic
difference.
I
don't
know
if
maybe
the
department
wants
to
explain
that,
is
it
all
just
higher
rents
in
one
building
versus
the
other?
G
C
G
And
I
mean
age
yeah,
the
only
difference.
I
know
that
maybe
you
can
expand
on
this
jeremy.
Is
I've
been
in
672.?
I
toured
it
at
one
point
a
couple
years
ago
and
it
seemed
like
it
was
very
underparked.
C
I
mean
the
the
thought
is
when
it
was
built.
Is
that
you
don't
really
need
a
car,
because
you
have
the
metro
across
the
street.
Now
that
was
before.
You
can
walk
on
a
metro
without
a
mask
and
everybody
was
happy
about
it.
It's
a
little
different
now
than
it
was
then
for
sure.
But
people
are
still
some
people
do
park
at
the
mall
across
the
street,
for
I
know
that
for
sure
for
the
maxwell.
C
G
G
Okay,
I
guess
the
other
thing
I'd
ask
about,
because
I
don't
I
didn't
hear
you
mention
it,
but
is
it
the
vacancy
that
said
13
is
I
mean
a
lot
of
that's
got
to
be
due
to
bridge
street
bankruptcy
in
december.
C
Well,
I
mean
the
the
thought
of
the
the
time
of
the
chris
made
is
how
nice
it
is
to
be
across
the
mall.
Everybody
want
to
be
across
the
mall.
I
mean
yeah
in
five
years,
it'd
be
great
to
live
across
the
mall,
but
when
you're
signing
a
one-year
lease,
it's
not
necessarily
like
hey
here's,
an
amazing
thing
to
be
next
to
this,
this
construction
site
for
the
next.
However
long
so
it's
not
quite
a
direct
correlation.
J
D
D
So
I
believe
we're
correct
on
applying
it
just
to
the
commercial
looking
at
the
maxwell
versus
the
six
on
two
one
of
the
things
that
obviously
stands
out
is
even
in
the
maxwell
has
been
around
a
bit
longer
two
three,
three
years
longer,
they
actually
achieved
a
net
operating
income
well
over
a
million
dollars
less
last
year,
so
even
in
a
state,
a
building,
that's
still
achieving
stabilization
in
672
they're,
achieving
more
money
at
quite
a
bit
of
a
rate
than
the
maxwell.
D
D
It
could
be
due
to
a
lot
of
things.
I
mean
it's
essentially.
The
bottom
line
is
that
they're
achieving
more
money
and
with
only
10
more
units,
so
the
the
retail
is
approximately
the
same.
It's
about
18
1600
square
feet,
more
retail,
but
again
that's
in
its
ascendancy
as
well
at
672
as
their
newly
signed
tenants,
but
I
don't
think
they're
quite
as
comparable
as
other
than
the
fact
that
they're
nearby
each
other.
C
I
I'm
confused
chris
keeps
saying
the
lease
up.
The
lease
up,
the
property's
been
open
for
two
and
a
half
years,
and
the
county
only
gives
one
year
of
lease
up
deduction.
So
there
is
no,
he
keeps
saying
we're
we're
in
lease
up
or
get
there,
but
there
is
no
lease-up
deduction
and
the
cost
associated
with
getting
there.
They
only
give
that
for
one
year
and
again,
this
has
been
open
for
two
and
a
half
years.
F
Can
I
respond
to
that
because
that's
incorrect,
we
initially
start
with
a
one-year
lease
up,
but
when
a
property
is
appealed
or
revisited
the
following
year,
we
do
take
a
look
at
their
vacancy
to
see
if
there
is
a
need
to
add
more
lease
up
deduction.
This
is
done
on
several
properties
before
the
reason
chris
he's
referring
to
the
lisa,
because
the
property
was
starting
leasing
up
in
2018
about
half
the
year,
I
believe
is
what
the
irony
reported.
F
2019
was
the
first
full
year
and
then
2020
is
the
second
full
year.
He
pointed
out
how
the
vacancy
in
those
years
have
declined,
and
that's
why
he
keeps
referring
to
the
lisa.
The
property
has
performed
pretty
consistent
with
other
new
properties.
We
look
at
2019,
they
reported
21
vacancy
collection
and
rent
loss,
and
then
here
we
are
in
2020
they're
down
to
9.47.
F
A
Okay,
I
have
a
question
for
the
county,
I'm
just
trying
to.
As
you
know,
mr
bailey
just
said,
you
know
it's
it's
approaching
stabilization,
but
certainly
not
there.
A
You
know
when
I
look
at
the
operating
year,
columns,
f
and
g,
I'm
going
to
try
and
not
talk
numbers,
and
then
I
look
at
the
totals
of
h1,
2
and
3..
It
seems
like,
while
you
came
back
and
revisited
some
of
the
numbers
and
you
reduced
them.
You
know
on
the
revision,
but
it
just
seems
like
I
mean.
Ideally,
I
think
h1
is
really
more
indicative
of
what
the
property
has
been
doing
without
the
additional
income
of
two
and
three.
A
You
know
if
you're
going
to
split
that
out.
It
just
seems
that
for
what's
reported
in
the
upper
trend
towards
stabilization
that,
if
you're
going
to
split
out
the
affordable
units
and
the
retail
that
the
market
apartments
is
projected
too
high,
and
so
I'm
curious
as
to
your
comment
on
that,
I
mean
I
think
you
brought
it
down,
but.
D
Yeah,
I
would
obviously
disagree
if
you're
looking
again
at
the
columns,
h1,
h2
and
h3
you're
you're,
looking
at
a
point,
six
percent
of
growth
in
2021.
So
less
than
or
just
over
half
a
percent
of
growth
you're
going
to
see
the
the.
D
From
what
was
reported
in
2020,
so
if
you
see
that
the
the
total
there
is
6
million
and
change
and
then
it's
0.61
percent
increase,
so
that's
indicative
of
that's
a
fairly
prudent
approach
and
again
we're
playing
catch-up
to
the
idea
of
that.
They
grew
by
13
in
2020
again
in
a
pandemic
year
and
again
in
a
lease
up
stabilization
period.
So
we
again
believe
that
it's
fairly
modest
to
project
that
they'll
grow
by
4.6
on
the
effective
growth
side,
we're
still
allowing
for
an
increase.
A
D
Absolutely
it
grew
by
17
percent
in
2020.
So
again,
we
believe
that
5.9
growth
in
the
next
year
is
is
modest,
so
if
it
does
a
third
of
as
well
as
it
did
in
2020
they'll
achieve
what
we
project
a
third
if
it
does
even
better
than
that,
then
we'll
be
low.
D
What
we
know
is
that
it's
not
going
to
go
down
by
three
percent
as
the
appellant
suggests,
so
we
believe
that
our
projection,
based
on
at
least
that
the
two
years
that
we
have
19
and
20
suggest
that
it's
going
to
be
an
upper
trend
again.
13
growth
and
effect
are
gross
and
17
growth
and
net
operating
income.
These
aren't
coincidences
they're
trend
up.
It's.
A
F
Okay,
well
one
of
the
things
and
I
want
to
make
sure
I'm
clear.
First:
are
you
excluding
the
commercial
evaluation
from
what
you're
stating
there,
because
in
the
information
they
report,
they
combine
the
commercial
with
the
apartment?
So,
as
chris
pointed
out,.
F
Yes,
they
include
retail
in
that
in
that
information
right
there
and,
as
we
just
stated,
one
of
the
tenants
signed
in
2020,
so
naturally
that
income
is
going
to
increase
as
well
so
they're
reporting
in
column,
g,
they're
reporting
less
than
100
000
and
column
f,
they're
reporting
slightly
over
100
000
for
retail,
but
they
signed
a
tenant
in
2020.
F
F
Well,
what
is
it
well
above
30
some
dollars
a
square
foot?
If
you
look
at
the
information
provided
to
chris
by
chris
sorry,
on
page
six,
I
mean
he
lays
out
the
square
footage
of
this
retail
space.
The
rents
that
they're
paying-
and
these
are
base
rents
that
they're
paying
he
provides
the
average
rent
rate
for
the
total
occupied
with
a
total
retail
space,
because
all
the
retail
space,
as
of
may
2020,
is
100
occupied.
D
And
they're
coming
to
fruition
in
the
sense
that
retail's
up
over
30
percent
parking's
up
over
45
percent
passengers
are
up.
43
percent
rubs
is
up
28,
so
everything
is
up
at
the
property
except
for
rents,
which
I
we
agree
makes
sense
in
a
stabilized
period
as
concessions
lean
off
those
rents
will
increase
gross.
D
Yes
ma'am
so
again,
as
we've
talked
about,
this
is
purely
based
on
projections.
The
projections
that
we
have
show
increases
again
almost
across
the
board.
Every
metric
apartments
are
down
by
four
percent,
but
again
that
makes
sense
in
a
stabilized
year
in
which
concessions
are
been
halved,
as
those
concessions
burn
off,
rents
will
increase
and
join
the
double-digit
increases
in
retail
parking,
pass-throughs
and
rubs.
D
Effective
gross
is
up
again
over
13,
almost
13
percent
operating
expenses
appear
to
be
stabilized
and
they're
only
up
to
less
than
two
percent
net
operating
income
again
is
up
almost
17,
so
even
in
our
revisions,
we're
calling
for
projections
that
increase
it
by
less
than
six
percent,
as
opposed
to
the
appellants
that
call
for
a
decrease
of
over
almost
three
percent.
D
We
know
that
the
appellant's
opinion
of
value
doesn't
quite
stand
the
test
in
the
sense
that
it's
already
showing
a
net
operating
income
less
than
what
was
achieved
last
year
and
again,
a
stabilized
period.
So
we
do
believe
that,
based
on
the
information
we
have
for
19
and
20
that
the
2021
revision
should
be
confirmed
at
84
million
150
2
300..
Thank
you.
C
Let
me,
if
I'll
take
the
minute,
if,
if
you
don't
mind
so
a
question
that
was
asked
by
mr
hoffman
earlier
about
comparing
this
to
maxwell
to
the
flats
maxwell's
average
asking
around
is
three
dollars
and
nine
cents,
a
square
foot
and
the
subject's
three
dollars
and
sixteen
cents
a
square
foot
right
on
top
of
each
other
and
that
comes
directly
from
costar.
C
The
in
the
p
l
chris
is
saying:
yeah
the
apartment
dropped
by
two
200
or
4,
which
makes
sense,
but
that's
because
the
concessions,
well,
the
concessions
aren't
included
in
that
concessions
are
down
in
line
16.
they're
taken
out
at
another
time
completely
unrelated.
C
The
property
is,
if
he's
saying,
that
it's
taking
two
and
a
half
years
to
stabilize-
and
it's
still
going
through
stabilization.
That's
why
he's
taking
it
up?
He
needs
to
give
a
lease
up
deduction,
but
they
only
give
a
lease
up
reduction
in
year.
One
and
early
said
that's
not
always
the
case.
Sometimes
we
give
it
an
additional
years.
C
Well,
if
you're
going
to
take
the
noise
so
much
higher
than
it's
actually
achieved
in
this
case,
250
000
higher,
then
you
would
need
to
take
a
lease
up
deduction
in
order
to
get
there
in
an
annual
reassessment
basis.
The
income
that's
supported
in
column,
f
and
g
are
the
actual
incomes
of
the
property
and
the
property
now
going
through
two
and
a
half
years
is
now
stabilized
to
the
point
where
the
actual
vacancy
they're
saying
market
six
percent
we're
at
six
point
we're
at
five
point:
seven
percent
we're
right
there.
A
G
Hoffman
yeah,
I
mean
I
was
initially
in
support
of
a
reduction
further
reduction
from
what
the
counties
offered
I
still
am.
I
don't
think
the
appellance
number
is
is
quite
high
enough.
I
think
that's
a
little
bit
below
market,
but
I
the
the
way
I'm
looking
at
it
now
is,
is
using
the
the
appellant's
pro
forma
for
apartments
and
applying
the
county's
cap
rate.
G
And
I
want
to,
I
want
to
further
justify
that.
I
think
they're
they're
dealing
with
some
sort
of
issue
with
the
with
the
vacancy
rate
that
that
maybe
they
went
a
little
too
hot,
too
heavy
up
front
on
the
raid.
And
now
it's
kind
of
stabilizing
and
it's
not
a
brand
new
building.
And-
and
I
really.
E
G
See
a
dramatic
difference
between
the
building
next
door
and
this
building
that
would
justify
a
premium
of
you
know:
200
000
a
unit
on
the
assessment,
so
I
think
it
needs
to
come
down
closer
to
the
maxwell.
I
don't
think
that's.
It's
still
a
newer
building,
it's
probably
better
amenitized,
but
I
think
you
know
something
under
500.
000
a
unit
would
make
more
sense.
In
my
mind,.
G
A
A
You
know
I
just
very
simply
went
to
the
the
test
in
column
h1
and
if
I'm
going
to
assume
that
the
h2
and
h3
are
correct,
I
reduce
the
noise
of
h1
of
those
other
two
portions
and
then
just
applied
the
cap
rate
to
what
was
remaining,
and
I
end
up
at
79,
371
or
372.
It
would
average
out
to
me
which
you
know
like
I
said.
I
just
think
it's
a
little
too
aggressive
objection
based
on
what
it
reported
I
mean
if
it
continues.
A
H
H
Okay,
I
particularly
would
like
to
keep
the
other
two
columns
separate.
I
think
it's
proper
to
do
it.
On
the
other,
you
know,
and
in
reference
to
what
greg
brought
about
the
maxwell,
I
would
love
to
make
adjustments
based
on
other
properties,
but
I
think
you
know
we
we
don't
have
enough
information,
we
don't
know
what
amenities,
but
you
know
everything
seems
to
be
similar,
but
we
don't
normally
con
are
going
to
compare
one
building
to
another
to
make
changes.
H
I
looked
at
a
couple
different
ways
because
I
think
the
assessment
is
yeah
a
little
bit
higher
than
it's
supposed
to
be.
I
was
what
I'm
willing
and
I
think
you
know
my
suggestion
would
be
to
consider
some
of
the
actual
numbers
that
they
had.
I
know
that
it's
going
to
be
better
probably
for
next
year,
but
if
I
make
changes
just
to
the
apartment
side,
which
would
be
on
h1
by
increasing
the
vacancy
for
this
year
to
nine
percent
and
the
expenses
to
25
living
h2
and
h3
the
same.
H
I
come
up
with
a
value
which
is
about
a
little
bit
lower
than
yours,
mary,
but
it's
close
to
it.
It's
79
million
64
900.
A
H
A
That's
fine.
I
mean
it's
essentially
what
I
do
I
mean
I
ended
up
with
an
noi
of
3.903,
which
you're
probably
a
little
bit
lower,
just
because
you
made
those
other
adjustments,
but
I
mean
we're
coming
out
to
essentially
the
same
thing
so
yeah.
H
We're
coming
up,
but
the
reason
I'm
doing
that
is
to
try
to
keep
it
a
little
bit
more.
I
guess
in
a
cleaner
way
to
make
adjustments
based
on
numbers,
and
you
know
on
the
orders
and
all
that
stuff
that
we
would
that
would
be
affected.
J
Quickly,
I
wanted
to
support
jose
on
the
comparison,
because
the
the
appellant
said
that
the
dollars
per
square
foot
in
rent
are
very,
very,
very
close
between
these
two
properties,
just
another
reason
to
to
shy
away
from
maxwell.
Now
I
I
very
much
appreciate
the
detail
that
the
two
or
three
of
you
have
gotten
into,
and
I
like
to
do
that
a
lot
but
in
the
mac
and
therefore
I'm
going
to
take
the
macro
level.
The
non-detail
and
just
the
bottom
line,
and
the
numbers
that
we're
talking
about
are.
I
J
More
than
10
lower
than
last
year,
which
was
not
appealed
by
the
owner,
apparently
the
owner,
didn't
have
major
angst
last
year
and
we
haven't
seen-
and
this
is
a
quality
building,
of
course
under
strange
times,
and
I'm
having
a
tough
time
understanding
why
we
would
lower
this
so
much
more
than
any
other
comparable
building
that
we've
seen.
Oh,
my
god
and
my
battery
is
running
low.
I
don't
know
how
much
longer
I'll
be
on.
G
Ken,
I
think
everybody
was
comfortable
with
the
you
know.
We
don't
say
the
county's
chasing
the
sale,
but
this
thing
sold
for
90
million
dollars
on
the
headline.
It
sounds
like
wow
there's
a
new
high
watermark
for
apartments
in
arlington
and
then
you
dig
into
it
and
you
start
to
look
at
the
actual
performance.
So
that's
what
we're
starting
to
see
right
now,
what
looks
like
either
you
know.
The
buyer
took
a
very
long
term
approach
and
obviously
there
are
tax
reasons
for
making
the
transfer.
G
But
90
million
is
not
the
market
value
of
the
property,
and
I
think
now,
what's
playing
out
is
we're
seeing
it's
it's
kind
of
converging
back
towards
where
the
market
would
be,
and
so
we're
catching
up
with
that.
So
I
could
see
where
you
you
know,
if
you're
one
or
two
years
away
from
a
big
sale,
you
don't
want
to
appeal
it
at
a
number.
That's
could
potentially
drive
it
up,
but
now
they've
got
enough
data
to
support
their
case.
A
Right
and
additionally
I'll
just
say,
I
don't
think
we
can
make
a
decision
based
on
whether
somebody
appealed
it
last
year
or
not.
I
mean
the
numbers
are
the
numbers
and
we're
looking
at
this
year.
We
always
say
you
know
we
assess
for
one
year.
We
don't
go
forward,
we
don't
go
back,
so
it's
really
for
this
year.
Mr
panorana,
could
you
just
repeat
so?
You
were
increasing
expenses
to
nine
percent
or
I'm
sorry
vacancy
to
nine
percent.
And
what
did
you
increase
expenses
to.
I
Yes,
ma'am.
Thank
you,
madam
chairman.
I
just
wanted
to
share
for
next
year.
This
isn't
really
applicable
this
year,
but
on
the
low
mod
units,
this
is
a
different
animal
than
ahc
or
the
arlington
partnership
for
affordable
housing.
This
is
a
for-profit
developer,
who
is
obligated
to
provide
seven
units
and
they're
really
no
value
to
these
units.
I
The
the
vacancy
of
three
percent
seems
to
me
to
be
really
low,
because
if
you
do
have
a
vacancy
you've
got
to
go
through
a
whole
ordeal
with
arlington
county
under
your
covenant
and
your
requirements
and
so
forth.
So
you
know
I'm
good
with
what
jose
has
suggested,
but
I
think
in
in
years
to
come
perhaps
the
affordable.
A
A
Right
and
it
also
provided
the
ability
to
get
you
know,
other
density,
so
there's
value
there
and
it
certainly
will
have
income
on
it.
It's
probably
more
stabilized,
but
again
that's
a
discussion
for
next
year.
Okay,
I
jose.
I
like
your
number.
I
don't
know
whether
everybody
else
is.
Okay
with
that.
H
Yeah
I
mean
in
reference
to
the
why
last
year
it
was
an
appeal.
You
know
it's
hard
to
tell,
but
when
we
re
visited
this
case
in
2019,
we
put
a
number
of
total
value,
I
think
was
78
million
209.
K
H
A
Okay.
That
concludes
the
agenda.
For
today,
does
anybody
have
any
other
business
either
board
member
or
county.
D
Just
quickly,
jose
was
that
nine
percent
on
25
on
the
market
side
or
for
both
market
and
commission.
A
Yes,
that
left
the
just
on
the
breakout
for
rosa
that
left,
the
affordable
and
the
retail
alone,
the
adjustments
only
on
the
market,
okay,
all
right.
Well,
if
nobody
else
has
any
additional
business,
then
we
will
stand
adjourned
at
10,
34
and
re-adjourn
next
tuesday
july
20th
9am
thanks
everybody.