►
From YouTube: Board of Equalization Hearing - May 31, 2022
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
B
I'm
sorry,
yes,
this
is
the
first
time
that
we
attend
any
of
that.
So
you
know
we
didn't
know
quite
the
proceedings,
but
so
our
property
is
at
356
north
edison,
as
you
mentioned,
and
we
had
renovation
done
finished
a
couple
of
years
ago
and
we
added
an
addition
to
the
back
of
the
house.
We
removed
the
the
garage
and-
and
that's
that's
pretty
much
in
a
nutshell,
so
I
against
that
would
ask
questions.
B
So
what
is
it
that
you
you're
looking
for
from
us?
In
addition
to
what
we
indicated
in
our
appeals.
A
B
Okay,
so
so
we
feel
that
the
the
taxes
were.
The
assessment
is
not
fair
and
not
equitable,
compared
to
the
to
the
properties
in
the
neighborhood,
and
we
stated
that
in
the
in
in
our
letters
we
did
receive
responses
and
we
respectfully
disagree
with
that.
With
that
assessment,
the
properties
that
were
used
in
that
comparison
are
not
quite
comparable
to
ours.
B
From
the
standpoint
of
the
of
the
size
of
the
lot
and
the
top
of
the
house,
and
one
and
and
when
the
house
was
remodeled,
so
the
the
properties
that
we
provided
is
comparable
were
immediately
in
our
neighborhood
and
the
the
assessment
that
there
was
that
is
on
their
houses
are
are
much
slower
than
than
on
ours.
So
we
do
not
object
to
the
assessment
of
the
of
the
land,
because
that
appears
to
be
fair
and
equitable
between
all
the
neighbors.
B
Given
that
the
the
assessment
on
the
way
and
for
the
same
size
of
the
of
the
lot
is,
is
about
the
same.
So
what
we
do
assessment
on
the
on
the
building
itself,
so.
B
So
we
we
looked
at
those
houses
in
our
immediate
neighborhood
that
were
renovated
recently
and
are
at
about
the
same
same
size
and
oh
actually,
the
the
land
also
kind
of
matches
ours
and
the
type
or
the
location
of
the
of
the
law
is
similar
with
the
neighbors
facing
on
three
sides
rather
than
on
some
of
those
properties
that
were
compared
by
county,
they
don't
have
neighbors
in
the
back,
so
so
our
so
our
our
building
assessment
is
is
quite
high.
Comparing
to
those
others.
B
Also.
What
we
noted
is
that
the
county
did
not
had
accurate
information
about
the
our
property.
So
we
we
didn't,
have
we
don't
have
hundred
percent
liquidate
on
the
outside?
We
have
barely
40.
We.
B
Have
40
percent?
As
far
as
the
the
basement
floor,
the
floor
is
finished
in
in
hundreds,
not
even
two
hundred
square
feet
of
the
of
the
of
the
basement.
B
So
I
I
I
don't
know
if
I
should
go
through
the
numbers.
I
don't
know
if
that
there
will
be
of
any
value
onto
the
board.
If,
if
you,
if
you
read
if
you
read
the
case
so.
B
That's
that's
the
only
thing
that
I
could
add
within
homeowners
for
more
than
20
years,
and
this
is
the
first
time
that
any
and
several
municipalities
across
the
country
and
yeah.
This
is
the
first
time
that
we
are
appealing
a
tax
assessment.
B
So
if
I
I
don't,
I
don't
know
what
the
further
proceedings
are,
and
you
know
there
will
be
a
conversation
about
the
numbers
and
so
on.
I
I
don't
know
that
so
I
would
ask
if
you
could
explain
if
there
would
be
any
discussion.
A
A
Then
each
side
gets
a
minute
to
wrap
up
to
tell
us
any
final
comments,
and
then
the
board
will
deliberate
right
now
today,
but
neither
you
nor
the
county
will
be
able
to
speak
when
we're
doing
that
part.
Okay.
So
now
we
will
move
to
the
county.
Mr
mills,
you
have
eight
minutes
to
tell
us
about
this
property.
D
Good
morning
board,
for
this
case
we
have
rpc.
Oh
no,
your
computer
went
out.
D
We
have
rpc
13
5024
at
356,
north
edison
street,
a
two-story
brick
veneer
cement,
fiber
house,
with
the
two-story
edition
that
was
added
in
2020
that
doubled
the
square
foot
of
the
home.
The
build
year
was
1941.,
the
effective
age
was
2010
and
it's
got
three
bedrooms
three
and
a
half
baths.
The
quality
is
set
at
very
good.
The
above
ground
finish.
D
We
have
set
as
2242
square
feet
and
the
basement
finish
at
500
square
feet
in
neighborhood,
50,
40
62.,
the
appellant
feels
that
their
property
is
not
assessed
equitably
with
similar
property.
Appellant
believes
that
the
assessment
value
should
be
nine
hundred
seventy
thousand
three
hundred,
rather
than
one
million.
Seventy
nine
thousand
six
hundred
appellant
believes
the
building
value
should
be
assessed
at
285
000..
On
august
11
2020,
the
county
picked
up
permit
b.
D
1901395,
a
two-story
edition
in
which
updates
to
the
sketch
bathroom
bedroom
count
were
corrected
and
we
changed
the
quality
from
average
plus
to
very
good
and
the
effective
age
from
1996
to
2010..
D
After
the
review
submitted
by
the
appellant
for
the
2022
assessment,
the
county
confirmed
the
assessment
based
on
the
support
of
comparable
sales
at
167,
north
columbus
street
5101,
first
street
and
eight
181
north
columbus
street,
as
well
as
the
assessment
of
116
north
columbus
street.
The
appellant
submitted
comparable
properties
which
were
reviewed
and
adjusted
due
to
inequalities
and
assessments
to
equalize
the
similar
seminar
to
equalize
with
similar
property
additions
within
the
neighborhood.
D
These
adjustments
and
the
subjects
descriptive
factors
such
as
quality
and
effective
age
were
confirmed
by
more
recent
sales
information
used
in
the
recent
ratio.
Analysis
studies,
we
reviewed
the
homeowners
assessment
against
comps
and
plans
which
which
have
similar
improvements
and
sales
to
determine
these
adjustments.
A
Okay,
thank
you.
Questions
from
board
members.
E
I
have
a
question
for
the
appellant
you
in
your
appeal,
as
you
just
heard,
the
average
property
excuse
me
in
your
neighborhood
went
up
seven
plus
percent,
but
you
think
that
your
property
devalued
went
down
depreciated
about
five
and
a
half
percent.
Why
do
you
think
that
it
is
less
valuable
this
year
than
last.
B
I
was
out
of
the
country,
I
had
a
family
emergency
and
I
was
on
our
country
during
that
the
spring
of
last
year
and
did
not
have
a
chance
to
to
appeal.
So
what
we
believe
is
that
the
property
should
have
not
been
assessed
last
year
as
what
it
was.
So
you
know
I
I'm
not
saying
that
the
value
should
have
been
decreased
relative
to
the
previous
year.
It
should
have
not.
B
Last
year,
the
way,
the
way
it
was
assessed.
E
B
Yeah
I
was
overseas
and
for
extended.
E
I'm
sorry
I
turned
the
page
and
found
another
one
for
the
department
on
page
3
of
42.
E
You
took
a
second
look
at
the
comparables
that
the
appellant
brought
in
on
greenbrier
columbus
and
made
some
changes
you
caught
up
on
some
finishings
that
you
didn't
know
about
it
in
my
two
and
and
there
were
positive
additions
to
these
properties.
So
am
I
to
assume
that
nothing
was
changed
in
for
the
2021.
D
Yes,
that's
correct
and
please
excuse
my
video.
My
power
went
out,
but
yeah
they
will
be
corrected
for
2023
assessments,
but
yeah.
These
changes
were
made
to
improve.
D
D
In
closing
the
appellant's
neighborhood
50
40
62
increased
on
average,
as
I
said
previously
at
7.4
percent.
Due
to
the
sales
that
occurred
within
the
analyst
period
and
within
the
neighborhood,
the
property's
great
and
effective
age
appeared
in
line
with
the
neighborhood
in
current
condition
the
comparable
properties
at
the
rpcs
13046094.
D
B
Yes,
if
I
understood
correctly,
basically,
the
county
is
saying
that
the
properties
that
we
use
as
comparables
their
taxes
will
go
up
based
on
our
appeal.
So
I
guess
I
I
don't
think
that's
fair
to
to
the
residents.
Also
we
found
we
just
looked
at
five
there,
many
more
properties.
So
that
being
said,
it
seems
that
you
know
whoever
will
find
to
compare
with
us.
B
B
I
would
say
to
us
to
our
property
and
they're,
basically
paying
131
dollars
per
square
foot,
which
is
significantly
lower
per
square
foot
than
than
what
we
are
assessed
at
1a.
B
The
other
appropriate
is
that
we
compare
they're
very
comparable
to
us.
It's
just
down
the
street
also
very
similar
is
at
less
than
160
dollars
per
square
foot,
and
so
on
I
mean
again
further
down
the
road.
B
Also,
a
larger
dish
was,
was
added
and
they're
paying
at
foot
145
dollars
per
square
foot
again
significantly
lower
than
ours
note
to
mention
212
greenbrier,
the
north
greenbrier,
that
was
changed
and
that
was
renovated
in
2019
about
the
same
time,
they're
paying
less
than
120
dollars
per
square
foot.
B
So
you
know
the
tax
assessment
that
was
assessed
on
on
our
property
in
in
our
view
is,
is
not
equitable
and
it's
not
fair
and
again.
We
believe
it's
not
fair
to
all
the
other
residents
based
on
our
complaint
that
they
will
be
paying
more.
So
thank
you.
F
Okay,
I'm
sorry,
I
had
under
a
different
setting
yeah
one
of
the
questions
that
ken
asked
is
one
of
the
main
concerns
that
I
had
as
far
as
the
other
properties,
but
I
looked
at
all
the
other
properties
that
the
appellant
provided,
and
you
know
the
increases
that
they've
had
from
last
year
to
this
year.
F
They
vary.
You
know,
some
of
them
are
go
from
more
than
200
000
to
the
assessment
that
it
is
now,
but
I
think
overall
compared
to
all
the
properties.
I
know
some
of
them
had
different
increases
because
of
the
improvements
they
made.
But
overall
I
think
the
assessment
is
fair.
I
think
last
year's
assessment
that,
on
his
property
may
have
been
a
little
bit
higher
than
some
of
the
other
homes
there,
but
as
far
as
this
year,
I
don't
see
any
any
way
or
any
reason
why
it
should
be
lower.
G
I
did
not
see
anything
that
the
county
was
incorrect
in
in
their
assessment.
I
think
the
appellant
has
feelings
for
his
assessment,
but
I
don't
think
he's
shown
and
given
the
comp
see
listed
too,
that
that
they're
completely
applicable
as
they
are
and
after
after
the
county
checked
them
out.
I'm
I'm
agreeing
with
the
county.
F
A
B
I
apologize
just
to
interrupt
so
what
are
the?
What
are
the
next
steps
for
us.
A
You
can
go
to
the
the
county
court.
A
All
right,
then,
we
will
hear
the
case
without
him
did
he
say
he
was
coming,
though.
A
H
Good
morning
board
on
april
20th
2022
a
field
visit
was
performed
on
the
home.
An
exterior
inspection
only
was
conducted.
There
was
no
interior
inspection,
as
the
owner
was
not
contesting
his
improvement
value.
The
subject
property
is
a
one
and
a
half
story:
brick
house,
three
bedroom
two
and
a
half
bath
with
unfinished
basement
year,
built
of
1938,
effective
age
of
1960
quality
of
very
good
minus
and
has
a
rear
brick
patio
with
a
gazebo.
The
appellant's
concerns
for
their
property
is
a
wide
disparity
seen
in
assessing
our
owns
and
land
values.
H
They
believe
their
land
values
should
be
recalculated
at
their
neighbors
per
square
foot
rate
of
their
lot
at
64.77
per
square
foot,
putting
their
lot
down
from
738
200
to
445,
300
inspection
analysis
performed
in
the
subjects:
property,
neighborhood,
511,
92
oak
crest,
increased
on
average,
seven
percent
based
on
sales
in
the
neighborhood
and
within
analysis
period.
The
subject's
assessment
increased
7.1
percent
due
to
open
market
sales
and
analysis
period.
The
subject's
property
quality,
effective
age
appear
in
line
with
the
neighborhood.
H
H
H
You'll
notice
that
every
lots,
value
and
square
footage
sits
in
line
with
the
next
largest
and
smallest
lot
in
the
neighborhood.
This
is
a
result
of
the
county's
land
valuation
methodology
in
arlington.
County
land
is
assessed
once
a
year.
The
adjustments
to
the
base
value
for
the
neighborhood
are
due
to
the
land
sales
analysis
completed
each
fall
and
winner.
The
base
value
is
then
applied
to
the
average
lot
size
based
on
total
square
foot
in
the
neighborhood.
H
H
The
base
land
value
for
the
neighborhood
represents
the
value
of
an
average
size,
buildable
home
site
in
that
neighborhood.
If
you
look
at
the
subject's
lot
in
neighborhood,
for
example,
the
subject's
lot
is
6875
square
feet.
The
average
lot
size
for
the
neighborhood
is
9
105
square
feet.
The
base
value
for
their
neighborhood
is
765
000..
H
What
we
do
is
we
take
the
average
lot
size
and
subtract
the
appellant's
lot
size
and
get
a
delta
of
two
thousand
two
hundred
and
thirty
square
feet.
We
take
this
delta,
which
is
less
than
so.
It
will
be
a
reduction
and
we
multiply
that
delta
against
negative
twelve
dollars,
which
is
the
per
square
foot
rate
for
the
excess
land
and
that
equals
a
reduction
of
twenty
six
thousand
seven
hundred
and
sixty
dollars
to
the
base
value.
When
we
add
this
reduction
to
the
base
value,
we
will
get
the
appellant's
2022
value
of
738
200.
H
The
county
does
not
value
land
based
on
potential
use.
This
means
that
a
larger
lot
that
could
be
subdividable
is
not
considered
to
be
valued
for
multiple
home
sites.
Until
that
lot
is
legally
subdivided
a
builder
or
homeowner
would
have
to
go
through
a
subdivision
process
before
it
is
legally
subdivided.
H
Furthermore,
smaller
lots,
especially
those
smaller
than
the
average
lot
size,
as
mentioned
before,
will
always
have
a
higher
per
square
rate
compared
to
those
with
larger
square
foot.
Lots
in
the
neighborhood,
the
county
does
not
use
a
per
square
foot
rate
to
assess
home
site
values
as
far
as
the
base
value
in
each
neighborhood
as
mentioned
prior,
the
county
does
not
use
a
per
square
foot
rate
to
assess.
H
It
does
use
a
per
square
foot
rate
to
ex
to
account
for
excess
land
over
the
average
lot
size
for
the
neighborhood
in
the
landf
value
methodology,
the
county
also
uses
the
per
square
foot
rate
data
to
make
sure
all
the
lots
are
equalized
linearly.
In
each
verification
report.
After
applying
the
land
methodology,
it
is
recommended
that
2022
assessment
be
confirmed
at
956
000.
That
amount
can
be
confirmed
as
fair
inequality
based
on
the
sales
analysis
done
for
the
property.
Thank
you
very
much.
H
E
Do
you
see
me
mary?
Yes,
okay,
great,
an
easy
question
for
the
department.
You
said
about
plus
or
minus
lot
sizes.
You
know
adjustments
on
the
average
lot
size.
This
is
a
logistical
question.
I
thought
it
was
plus
or
minus
the
zoning.
You
know
r6
66
000
square
feet
as
an
example.
H
H
A
Okay,
any
other
questions,
mr
penranda,
no
okay,
mr
shelton,
if
you
take
a
minute
to
wrap
up
sir.
H
Absolutely
the
county
would
like
to
note
that
we
don't
use
potential
use
to
value
land.
We'd
also
like
to
note
that
to
revalue
this
person's,
this
subject's
property
at
a
different
per
square
foot
rate,
which
is
something
we
don't
use,
would
put
them
out
of
line
with
all
the
other
properties
in
their
neighborhood.
E
The
appellant
contends
that
the
larger
each
additional
square
foot
is
more
valuable
than
the
one
before
it,
and
not
less
valuable
and
common
sense
and
economics.
101
says
that
the
way
the
county
assesses
these
things,
namely
the
larger
it,
gets
the
the
less
valuable
each
additional
square
foot
or
cubic
meter.
However,
you
measure
it
so
I
the
the
basis
of
the
appellant's
appeal,
is
not
logical,
let
alone
follow
normal
appraisal
practices,
so
I
couldn't
possibly
agree
with
it.
F
Well,
I
didn't
see
anything
that
would
you
know,
catch
my
attention
as
far
as
making
any
adjustments.
You
know
the
land
has
been
valued
for
years,
the
same
way
and
one
of
the
things
that
the
owners
said
is
that
the
assessments
are
a
basis
for
market
values,
which
you
know.
We
know
that
really
has
nothing
to
do
with
it,
because
market
values
are
going
to
fluctuate
more
quicker
than
you
know,
assessments.
A
All
right,
then,
I
will
move
to
confirm
the
county
at
9
56.
Even
do
I
have
a
second.
F
A
Okay,
a
second
mr
panoranda,
all
in
favor,
aye,
okay,
it's
unanimous
the
county's
confirmed
at
956
000.
A
J
I
would
like
to
express
my
thanks
to
the
board
for
giving
me
the
opportunity
to
present
my
unit
is
a
three
bedroom
and
a
ten
with
a
three
and
a
half
bath
slightly
larger
than
three
thousand
square
foot,
so
called
aj
unit,
which
is
the
smallest
three
bedroom
type
in
the
building,
and
it
is
located
on
the
25th
floor
and
the
highest
floor
is
26th
floor.
J
This
assessment
of
my
unit
was
almost
3.2
million
three
3.187
billion
to
be
exact
and
which
is
equivalent
to
1042
dollars
for
square
foot.
I
appeal
to
the
board,
based
on
two
evidences
one.
My
unit
is
assessed
more
than
its
fair
market
value,
reflected
in
the
sales
data
of
comparable
three
bedroom
units.
J
J
J
J
And
this,
as
this
table
shows
the
on
average,
the
three
bedroom
units
sold
and
the
reference
period
was
on
average
300
836
dollars
for
square
foot.
Even
if
we
applied
this,
this
average
include
the
ph
o2,
which
was
sold
at
the
historically
high
price
of
a
thousand
dollars
and
76
for
square
foot,
which
was
a
non-market
deal.
So
even
if
we
apply
this
average
price
of
836
dollars
for
square
foot,
my
unit
is
assessed
at
the
2.54
million,
which
is
645
000
lower
than
the
2022
assessment.
J
If
we
remove
the
non-market
deal,
which
was
exceptionally
high
price,
then
the
average
price
is
only
717
dollars
for
square
foot
and
the
equivalent
assessment
of
my
unit
would
be
2.18
million
dollars.
So,
given
these
sales
data,
my
own
assessment,
2.426
million,
is
proved
to
be
fair
and
consistent
with
the
evidences
from
the
comparable
three-bedroom
unit
sales
data.
J
J
Nevertheless,
if
one
insists
that
pho2
is
a
comparable
unit,
I
want
to
bring
the
ball's
attention
that
such
a
luxurious
pho2
was
even
assessed
at
the
dollar,
two
hundred
ten
thousand
dollars
less
or
seven
point
two
percent
less
than
my
unit
at
the
two
point,
nine
seven
million,
but
the
fact
is
pho2
is
the
top
luxury
unit.
Above
and
beyond
my
unit.
Therefore,
my
unit
must
be
assessed
at
the
far
less
value
than
pho2,
instead
of
being
assessed
more
than
7
more
than
7
higher
than
that
unit.
J
J
J
J
All
these
three
bedroom
unit
types
are
located
on
the
so-called
penthouse
levels,
from
19
to
26
floors
in
terms
of
dollar
for
square
foot.
K
units
were
originally
sold
at
up
to
20
premium
against
my
unit,
but
the
county's
assessment
for
k
units
were
25
to
35
lower
than
my
unit.
10
units
assessment
in
terms
of
dollar
for
square
foot
ranged
from
682
dollars
to
792
dollar
per
square
foot,
whereas
mine
was
assessed
at
one
thousand
and
forty
two
dollar
square
foot.
J
Additionally,
if
we
compare
these
assessments
to
the
first
sales
price
prices,
assessment
for
pay
units
are
now
only
80
to
85
percent
of
the
first
purchase
prices,
in
other
words
15
to
20
value
reduction
for
the
original
purchase
prices
for
k
units.
In
contrast,
the
assessment
of
my
unit
is
26
of
of
the
first
purchase
price.
J
J
Similarly,
let's
look
at
the
assessment
of
the
unique
gigantic
three
bedroom
unit
with
a
5300
square
foot
ts
10
unit
in
terms
of
dollar
for
square
foot.
Ts
10
was
sold
at
the
22
premium
against
my
unit,
but
the
county's
2022
assessment
values
tears
tens
dollar
for
square
foot
as
the
same
as
mine,
one
thousand
and
forty
nine
dollars
for
square
foot
compared
to
the
first
purchase
prices.
His
tens
assessment
is
only
three
percent
above
its
original
purchase
price.
J
J
These
evidences
also
show
that
the
mass
appraisal
methods
cannot
produce
reliable
assessments
for
large
three
bedroom
units
at
the
tomberry,
probably
because
there
are
not
enough
market
sales
data
to
ensure
the
reliability
of
assessments,
as
these
large
units
are
rare
on
the
market
and
the
county's
parameter
calibration
process
is
building
specific
for
tom
berry.
Thank
you.
I
The
subject
is
a
penthouse
unit
at
the
turnberry
condo.
It
is
3036
square
feet,
three
bedroom
and
three
and
a
half
bathrooms.
I
It
has
a
dense
space
as
well,
which
is
being
used
as
a
home
office.
Currently,
the
subject
has
a
private
elevator,
as
well
as
a
balcony
that
faces
east.
When
the
subject
was
purchased,
it
was
sold
with
no
flooring
or
trim,
basically,
just
a
shell
with
finished
walls
and
the
standard
turnberry
kitchen
and
bathroom,
which
the
subject
and
most
units
have.
I
Following
the
review
of
the
analysis,
the
smallest
sized
units
saw
a
seven
percent
decrease
to
their
improvement
base
values.
The
mid-size
units,
which
ranged
from
eighteen
hundred
square
feet
to
two
thousand
square
feet,
saw
a
six
percent
increase
to
their
model
base
value
and
most
other
units
saw
no
change.
The
largest
k
tier,
which
was
mentioned
by
the
appellant,
did
originally
sell
at
a
premium,
but
recent
sales
have
shown
us
that
the
value
difference
between
the
subject's
model
and
the
largest
k-tier
have
decreased.
I
The
subject's
assessment
has
not
changed
since
2020
and
has
only
increased
a
little
under
five
percent
in
the
last
five
years,
although
there
were
no
sales
of
the
subject's
model
or
tier.
In
the
analysis,
there
were
a
couple
sales
that
stood
out
and
that
demonstrated
that
our
current
assessment
value
was
spot
on
all
the
comps
provided
on
the
comp
sheet.
Have
a
private
elevator
have
the
standard,
turnberry
kitchen
cabinets,
tile
flooring
and
standard
bathrooms?
I
When
the
department
inspected
the
subject
about
a
week
ago,
these
items
were
noted
and
the
photographs
submitted
by
the
appellant
are
accurate,
but
we
do
not
believe
that
any
of
these
small
maintenance
issues
weren't
a
significant
reduction
away
from
what
we
typically
see
for
market
value
at
the
turnberry,
especially
for
a
northeast
facing
top
floor.
Penthouse
unit
of
this
square
footage.
I
A
G
Yates
to
the
county,
the
I
was
making
some
notes,
as
you
were
speaking,
the
unit
that
sold
two
floors
below
was
that,
having
the
same
view,
direction.
F
A
Okay,
mr
metzken.
E
This
is,
I
don't
know
who
it's
for.
Whoever
knows
the
answer
to
this
typically
penthouses
in
in
the
nicer
condos,
have
taller
ceilings
and
and
usually
larger
windows
to
either
depend
on
the
department.
Is
that
true
in
this
case,
but
then
then
comparable
units
on
lower
floors,
penthouses
are
just
taller.
Is
that
right
wrong
either
of
you
know.
I
It
it
really
depends
on
the
building
at
the
turnberry.
I
don't
believe
so.
I
believe
all
the
the
units
had
the
same
ceiling
height
and
at
turnberry
they
when
they
originally
marketed
the
building
it
they
didn't
call
the
uppermost
floor.
The
penthouse,
the
penthouse
units
were
a
range
of
floors,
so
it
wasn't
just
the
25th
floor.
The
24th
23rd,
I
believe,
down
to
the
19th
they're
all
called
penthouse
units.
J
I
Sure
the
department
has
no
information
to
add.
We
just
asked
that
you
please
take
into
consideration
the
original
sale
price
of
the
unit,
which
was
for
a
basically
a
shell
of
a
unit.
I
The
homeowners
had
to
supply
their
own
flooring,
trim
finishes
and
then
also
to
take
into
consideration
the
the
most
recent
sales
that
were
shown
in
the
analysis.
Thank
you.
J
J
I
I
hope
the
board
considered
that
fact
as
well.
Also,
I
want
to
remind
again
those
k
units
used
to
be
sold
at
the
premium,
20
percent
or
so
against
my
unit,
and
then
those
are
now
valued
similar
to
my
unit.
So
in
summary,
the
account
is,
for
example,
on
the
same
unit.
K
unit
is
4
400
square
feet
now
says
at
the
3.5
million
dollars,
which
used
to
be
4.2
million,
1.7
million
more
expensive
than
mine.
J
If
I
can
sell
my
unit
at
the
3.2
million
as
account
county
assessed
and
then
buy
this
4
400
square
foot
luxurious
unit
on
the
same
floor
at
the
3.5
million
only
300
difference,
I
will
be
happy
to
sell
my
unit
at
the
price
that
a
county
assessed
and
buy
the
4
400
square
foot
unit
with
just
paying
300
000
dollars
more.
I
don't
believe
this
assessment
is
fair
and
equitable.
Some
of
the
the
northeast
units
they
had
reconfigured
extremely
luxury
ways.
A
E
I
thought
both
presentations
were
extremely
good,
especially
the
appellants
relative.
It's
this
is
very
difficult
on
residential
owners
to
know
the
ins
and
outs
I
didn't
agree
with,
with
as
an
example
using
initial
12
to
13
year
old
sales
to
ratios
among
the
various
units
to
today's
sales.
I
certainly
am
on
the
side
of
the
department's.
E
Current
sales
and
yk
units
are
less
valuable
now,
for
whatever
the
reason
based
on
modern
data,
but
but
one
thing
that
the
appel-
and
so
I
was
perfectly
fine
with
all
of
this
until
the
appellants
made
it
clear
to
me
in
her
wrap
up
that-
and
it
was
stated
and
confirmed
by
the
department
that
a
lot
of
the
finishings
were
done
by
the
original
owners
and
subsequent
owners
and
that
the
and
so
there
can
be
greater
discrepancies
in
turnberry
tower
than
most
condos,
where
you
know
the
the
builder
finishes
it
all
initially
and
some
get
upgraded,
some
don't
this
was
barely
finished,
and
so
the
discrepancy
between
this
appellant's
unit
versus
the
the
typical
unit
could
be
much
more
significant.
E
I'm
not
talking
about
deferred
maintenance,
I'm
talking
about
the
actual
finishings,
the
equivalent
of
you
know
in
a
single
family
house
or
a
townhouse
the
effective
year.
So
I
would
favor
a
modest
decrease
because
unusually
this
appellant
didn't
finish
it
off
like
again,
as
I
said,
the
prototypical,
I
guess
stereotypical
owner,
so
I
I
I
put
that
out
for
some
modest
decrease,
otherwise
everything
the
department
said.
I
I
fully
endorse.
F
F
The
only
thing
that
I
know,
mr
carvajal
brought
up
a
unit
that
just
sold
this
year,
which
is
two
floors
down
for
three
and
175,
but
I
also
noticed
that
there
was
another
unit
that
sold
in
july
of
last
year
for
the
same
price,
even
though
the
square
footage
is
like
1400
square
feet
high,
I
mean
more
than
the
unit
that
we
were
looking
at.
F
We
had
4
47
square
feet,
so
you
know,
I
think
the
value
is
there,
but
I
I
agree
with
ken
I
think,
there's
based
on
the
condition
and
the
of
the
unit
itself.
I
think
it
seems
higher
than
it
should
be.
F
I
know
that,
like
I
said,
the
assessments
haven't
changed,
but
I
think
the
value
is
not
there
as
far
as
the
assessment
amount.
That
is
so
I'm
not
sure
where
they
how
we
can
make
the
reduction
but
yeah
overall.
I
think
it
seems
a
little
bit
high.
A
F
It's
unit
2011.
E
It's
pretty
good
yeah,
I
mean
here
the
the.
If
you
you
see
from
the
what
they
call
comparable
sheet
that
floor
and
view
really
matters
much
more
than
we
typically
see.
I
mean
50,
000,
floor
and
so
forth.
So
a
lot
of
the
assessment
for
the
appellant
is
on
view
and
floor
they're
always
relevant,
but
these
are
big
numbers.
E
G
Our
standard,
looking
at
the
pictures,
most
of
the
things
that
we're
lacking
I
mean
you-
can
see
corner
molding
and
stuff
or
corner.
You
know
the
drywall
and
I
mean
baseboards
shoe
molding
crown
molding
a
couple
things,
maybe
even
redo
the
kitchens
or
even
step
up
the
bathrooms.
You
spend
fifty
thousand
dollars
on
this.
That's
it
and
that'd
be
a
big
fix
up.
F
F
A
Mr
meth
can
just
you
know,
give
you
an
alternative
to
your
50
000,
which
is
just
a
you
know.
A
rough
number
two
percent
of
the
building
value
is
58
384..
A
A
F
E
82
of
the
the
the
appellant's
valuation
is
what
you're
saying
right:
mary.
A
No,
no,
no
two
percent
of
the
county's
building
of
two
nine
one,
nine
two
hundred
is
fifty
eight
thousand
three.
Eighty
four.
A
E
Yeah,
no,
it's
it's
in
the
ballpark.
We
couldn't
possibly
fine
tune,
it
eight
thousand
dollars
one
way,
the
other
and
if
you
like,
that
rationale,
better
a
percentage
versus
approximate
cost
of
shoe
and
crown,
but
I'm
good
with
that.
A
A
All
right:
well,
then,
I
will
move
to
reduce
the
building
assessment
by
two
percent,
which
is
fifty
eight
thousand
three,
eighty
four,
giving
a
a
total
assessment
of
three
million
one,
twenty
four
nine
hundred
do.
I
have
a
second.
J
A
K
Good
morning
my
name
is
eric
friesenheim.
I
am
the
owner
and
occupant
of
apartment
419
at
4141,
north
henderson,
and
obviously
you
know
I'm
appealing
the
assessment
stating
that
it's
too
high
there's
two
factors
primarily
driving.
My
appeal:
one
is
the
condition
of
the
unit
itself,
the
internal
condition
and
the
other
would
be
the
construction.
That's
going
on
right
across
my
balcony
at
the
harris
teeter
redevelopment
center.
K
So
as
far
as
the
internal
condition
goes,
it's
my
understanding.
You
have
access
to
the
mls
photos.
I've
attached
some
of
them
in
my
supplemental
material,
so
there's
some
duplication
there,
but
it
does
show
the
overall
condition
of
the
unit
where
the
carpet,
for
example,
is
extremely
worn
out.
You
can
see
the
traffic
patterns
a
lot
of
staining
spills
that
sort
of
thing
marks
on
the
carpet.
K
In
addition
to
that,
if
you
were
to
look
at
the
bathrooms,
I
did
include
a
supplemental
photo,
but
again
that's
in
the
mls.
You
can
see
the
vanities
are
basically
deteriorating.
They
are
intact.
But
if
you
look
closely
at
the
edges,
they're
starting
to
buckle
and
corrode
away,
there's
a
lot
of
heavy
staining
there.
K
The
mirrors
are
starting
to
deteriorate
well,
at
least
in
the
guest
bathroom
I
did
put
in
a
supplemental
photo
of
the
bathtub
showing
the
the
bath
drain
didn't
work,
so
you
know
that's
some
deferred
maintenance
there
that
hasn't
been
taken
care
of
lighting
fixtures
and
such
all
need
updating.
You
know
it's
a
very
it's
like
from
a
different
era,
so
to
speak.
The
kitchen
is
very
much
out
of
date.
The
appliances
do
function,
but
they're
very
old
and
teetering,
I
would
say
the
cabinetry.
K
K
K
Now
he
compared
it
to
two
units
that
were
recently
sold
prior
to
mine
in
the
same
building,
323
and
unit
423,
roughly
the
same
size,
but
they
face
to
the
south
east.
I
face
to
the
northwest
more
or
less,
and
what,
if
I
want
to
call
it
your
attention
to
page
three
of
that
document,
because
that's
where
he
makes
the
comparison
between
these
two
units.
I
do
believe
that
those
are
two
of
the
units
that
the
county
used
in
their
assessment.
K
When
you
look
at
that,
he
had
two
deductions
and
the
overall
condition
he
marked
down
my
unit
for
fifty
thousand
dollars
for
overall
condition.
I
assume
that's
things
such
as
the
carpeting,
the
lighting
in
the
kitchen
he
took
off
thirty
thousand
dollars
for,
and
that
was
for
the
more
antiquated
equipment
and
the
condition
of
the
cabinets.
So
that's
the
internal
condition,
then
you
know
basically
well
worn
unit
that
I
moved
into.
The
other
thing
I
would
mention
to.
K
You
is
a
construction
and
that's
going
on
at
the
harris
teeter
redevelopment
site
because
those
two
units
he
compared
it
to
323
and
423
they
face
to
the
southeast,
I'm
on
the
opposite
side
of
the
building.
So
they
have
a
nice
unobstructed
view
which
is
great.
But
for
me
the
view
is
going
away.
I
did
put
in
in
my
supplemental
package
a
photo
from
my
balcony.
K
K
They're
going
to
take
away
the
harris
tier
where
it
exists
and
put
in
a
building
even
closer
to
me,
so
that's
the
photograph,
but
what
that
the
photo
doesn't
capture
is
the
noise
pollution.
So
I'm
constantly
hearing
the
banging
the
sound
that
even
goes
on
at
night
in
some
cases
where
they're
doing
some
road
work
there
right
out
in
the
immediate
area
of
harris
teeter
then
so
that's
basically
the
basis
of
my
appeal
is
the
internal
condition
of
my
unit,
which
is
documented
by
the
photos
and
then
also
strengthened
by
that
va
inspection.
K
K
K
K
A
I
I
The
information
that
the
appellant
submitted
in
his
documents
to
the
board
about
the
listing
price
and
the
listing
time
frame
of
his
property
are
correct.
The
unit
was
originally
listed
in
mid-september
2021
after
the
end
of
our
analysis
period
for
525
000,
which
was
actually
close
to
our
current
assessed
value
of
530
400..
I
Something
that
we've
been
observing
at
hyde
park
is
a
significant
and
rapid
decrease
in
market
value
occurring.
Coincidentally,
after
september
2021.,
the
2022
analysis,
which
considered
late
considered
sales
from
september
2020
to
the
end
of
august
2021,
showed
12
open
market
transactions,
all
of
which
sold
under
their
assessed
values.
The
assessment
to
sale
ratio
for
all
of
these
units
was
fairly
tight
around
their
bedroom
count.
For
this
year,
the
improvement
base
value
for
efficiencies
was
increased,
twelve
percent,
the
base
value
for
one
bedrooms
was
increased.
I
Two
percent
and
the
base
value
for
two
bedrooms
was
increased.
Eight
percent
after
applying
these
changes,
the
new
2022
assessment
value
for
all
12
units
that
sold
in
the
2022
analysis
were
still
below
their
purchase
price.
This
was
a
clear
indicator
to
us
that
market
value
was
still
increasing
during
this
time
period.
This
can
also
be
seen
in
the
comp
sheet
on
page
4,
which
shows
what
comparable
homes
sold
for
and
what
they
are
currently
assessed
at
when
the
new
assessment
notices
were
sent
out.
I
In
january,
I
received
a
couple
phone
calls
from
homeowners
at
hyde
park
that
were
concerned
about
their
market
value
being
affected
by
recent
changes
to
their
condo
fee.
One
appellant
mentioned
condo
fees,
increasing
seven
percent
recently,
as
well
as
an
increase
to
parking
spaces
unit
owners
do
not
have
deeded
parking
spaces
at
hyde
park.
Rather,
they
pay
for
parking.
For
my
conversations
with
multiple
homeowners,
parking
fees
have
increased
over
150
percent.
I
We
are
not
able
to
tell
yet
what
is
having
a
negative
effect
on
market
value
in
sales
that
occur
post
september
2021.
But
since
then
there
have
been
eight
sales,
five
of
which
sold
lower
than
their
assessed
value.
Contrary
to
what
we
saw
in
the
2022
analysis,
the
subject
is
one
of
these
sales
at
hyde
park.
We
typically
see
two
or
three
percent
turnover
of
units
in
a
12
month
period.
We
saw
that
same
turnover
rate
in
the
last
four
months
of
2021
the
time
period
directly
after
the
analysis.
I
The
homeowner
was
kind
enough
to
provide
us
contact
information
for
his
condo
association,
which
the
department
will
for
sure
follow
up
with
before
the
2023
analysis,
to
better
understand
what
changes
have
occurred
to
any
amenity
fees
that
are
associated
with
the
ownership
of
one
of
these
units.
The
subject's
original
list
price
of
525
000,
is
more
in
line
with
the
department's
2022
assessed
value
for
this
unit,
and
it
is
in
line
with
the
comps
observed
in
the
analysis
period
and
those
shown
on
the
comp
sheet
provided
to
the
board.
I
There
are
still
three
months
left
in
the
2023
analysis
period.
If
we
see
a
trend
of
market
values
decreasing
at
hyde
park,
as
we
always
do,
we
will
try
to
determine
whether
that
has
been
affected
by
level
of
renovation
side.
The
unit
faces
level
of
available
inventory
or
any
other
factor
we
might
be
able
to
identify.
I
In
the
end,
we
don't
necessarily
need
a
reason
to
justify
lowering
assessment
values.
If
we
see
that
the
values
are
decreasing
within
that
time
period,
we
will
make
the
appropriate
changes.
The
subject's
assessed
value
is
in
line
with
comparable
sales
observed,
and
the
department
again
recommends
that
the
board,
please
confirm
the
2022
assessment.
I
I
I'm
sure
the
department
has
no
other
information
to
add.
I
did
when
speaking
to
the
homeowner
mentioned
to
him,
that
we
have
our
methodology
that
we
have
to
stick
to.
We
do
recognize
his
unit
as
being
an
original
condition.
We
don't
get
as
detailed
as
a
fee
appraiser
would
when
they
can
look
at
adjustments.
You
know
chipped
paint,
stained
carpet
those
kind
of
things
we
just
kind
of
look
at
the
unit.
Overall,
we
acknowledge
that
it's
near
original
condition
and
have
based
our
assessment
appropriately.
Thank
you.
A
K
K
That's,
what's
really
confirmed
by
the
va
inspector
who
was
boots
on
the
ground
inside
my
unit,
taking
a
careful
look
at
everything
that
was
there
and
he
did
compare
to
other
sales
for
comparably
sized
units
323
and
423,
as
I
noted,
and
those
deductions
that
he
made
eighty
thousand
dollars
worth
are
noted
on
page
three
of
his
report
and
again
I
do
think
there
is
a
difference
between
the
direction
we
face
here,
either
north
west,
in
my
case
or
southeast,
for
the
two
two
bedroom
units,
I'm
speaking
to,
but
that's
the
gist
of
it.
E
Mr
masking
something
I
I
I
am
sympathetic
to
the
appellant,
this
isn't
the
first
similar
case
we've
heard
in
this
neighborhood
this
condominium,
building
the
the
the
the
and
I'm
expecting
most
likely,
based
on
what
the
department
just
said,
and
and
in
earlier
cases
with
again
similar
properties
that
there's
gonna
be
a
big
change
at
hyde
park.
E
This
current
year,
I
thought
the
department
said
all
absolutely
the
right
things.
The
the
the
assessment
period
lags
the
analysis
period.
I'm
sorry
lags
relative
to
the
announcement
on
january
1st
of
assessed
value
and
that's
going
to
catch
up
next
year.
You
know
appellants
when
the
market's
increasing
get
a
benefit
from
the
lag.
In
this
case,
this
appellant
is
is
has
not.
Finally,
it
must
be
said
that
fee
appraisals
are
not
the
same
they're
similar,
but
not
the
same
as
mass
appraisals.
The
time
frames
are
different.
The
specifics
are
different.
E
So,
although
I
certainly
sympathetic
with
with
the
balanced
reliance
on
is
the
appraisal-
it's
it's
it's
not
relevant
here,
nor
is
it
relevant
anywhere
else
in
these
meetings,
so
knowing
that
next
year
is
probably
going
to
be
a
very
big
difference
from
this
year.
I
support
this
year's
assessment.
A
Yeah,
I
would
agree
and
just
to
follow
up
on
the
the
fee
appraisal,
especially
under
va.
I
mean
there's
no
reason
that
the
appraiser
would
go
any
higher
than
the
sales
price
just
because
why
would
they
he
or
she
want
to
defend
it
and
what
not
to
an
underwriter?
So
you
know
as
long
as
it
ended
up
appraising
for
the
purchase
price
they're
in
business.
So
you
know
you've
all
heard
me
say
that
before,
but
that
that
is
in
fact
you
know
the
reality
of
it.
So,
mr
yates,
you
had
your
hand
up.
G
Yeah,
I
I
am
sympathetic
to
the
appellant,
but
I
do
see
where
the
county's
coming
from
in
their
assessment
and
even
right
down
to
what
the
house
was
originally
marketed
at
for
the
condo
deferred
maintenance
drives
the
appeal
for
the
for
a
buyer
and
the
market
price,
but
it
doesn't
really
set
the
value
of
that
unit
from
an
assessment
standpoint.
G
F
I
mean
we'll
have
to
see
what
you
know
what
happens
this
coming
up
here,
because
it
is
true,
the
unit
that
is
two
levels
down
is.
It
is
listed
for
500
and
the
condition
it
is
much
better
than
you
know.
The
subject-
property
at
least
the
bathrooms
seem
to
be
renovated.
You
know
the
floors,
the
kitchen
new
appliances
and
all
that,
but
it's
still,
you
know
open
to
be
sold,
so
we
can't
really
kind
of
count
that
as
a
comparable
or
anything
so
for
this
year
yeah.
E
Mr
metzken
just
20
seconds
as
the
years
go
on
the
views
now
between
northwest
and
southeast
are
fairly
much
the
same.
A
lot
of
low-rise
stuff
see
a
lot
of
trees,
some
nice
townhouses,
but
as
the
years
go
on,
the
northwest
view
is
going
to
get
impaired.
There's
no
question
about
it,
and
but
that's
then,
and
we
we
can't
reduce
the
the
assessment
based
on
what's
going
most
likely
going
to
happen
in
the
future,
and
it's
not
next
year's
future,
it's
several
years.
So
I
just
wanted
that
to
be
said.
Thanks.
Okay,.
A
F
A
A
C
E
A
A
F
A
All
right,
then
we,
as
I
mentioned-
we
do
not
have
a
hearing
tomorrow
june
1st,
so
we
will
stand
adjourned
at
10,
16
and
re-adjourn
next
tuesday
morning
june
7th,
and
I
believe
we
will
have
a
full
slate
then
with
everybody
at
9.
00
am
okay.