►
From YouTube: Board of Equalization Hearing - May 17, 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
Today
is
tuesday
may
17
2022,
and
this
is
the
first
hearing
of
the
2022
arlington
county
board
of
equalization.
We
have
six
cases
on
the
agenda.
The
first
case
is
rpc
0401,
one
four,
nine
eight
and
it's
property
located
on
north
nelson
street.
We
have
mr
peter
broda
here
to
represent
he's
the
owner
and
mr
boyd.
You
can
start
with
your
eight
minutes
and
tell
us
about
your
property,
sir.
B
B
Thank
you
good
morning,
everybody!
Well,
you
know
I
I
feel,
like
I'm
talking
to
my
neighbors
here,
I'm
trying
to
figure
out
where
you
all
are
by
by
your
videos,
unsuccessfully
I
thank
you
for
your
time.
I
had
not
actually
intended
to
participate
in
this,
except
by
absentee
ballot,
so
to
speak,
but
then
I
saw
the
notice
from
the
board
saying
that
the
cases
were
assessed
on
the
basis
of
preponderant
evidence.
I
thought
maybe
I
should
say
something
here
that
might
be
considered
evidence.
B
So
my
wife
and
I
have
had
this
home
in
north
arlington
since
about
1997
and
the
home
is
basically
one
large
property
and
then
there's
this
little
outlet
which
sits
in
the
back.
There's
no
improvement
on
it.
It's
just
you
know
a
grassy
weedy
area,
it's
a
pleasant
few
trees
and
I'm
delighted
to
pay
taxes
on
this
and
have
been
doing
that
for
quite
a
while.
B
But
what
I
wasn't
so
delighted
about
was
seeing
the
large
jump
in
the
tax
rate
on
it
when
the
basic
property
went
up,
perhaps
three
or
four
percent
in
the
assessment
and
the
the
little
ad
lock
when
a
atwat
went
up
so
much
more,
and
I
I
couldn't
quite
figure
this,
because
nothing
has
changed.
B
I
looked
at
the
comparators
that
were
suggested
by
the
appraiser
and
they
made
no
sense
to
me.
There
were
in
other
sections
of
arlington
the
uses
of
the
comparable
properties
are
unknown
to
me.
I
did
not
hire
somebody
to
go
and
figure
it
out.
I
didn't
check
out
the
properties
myself,
but
I
I
see
no
basic
reason
for
the
large
increase
in
the
assessment
of
the
outlook
compared
to
the
basic
property,
which
only
went
up
a
few
percent,
which
was
itself
comparable
to
the
basic
assessment
rise
in
the
arlington
area.
B
So
the
best
I
can
do
my
friends
is:
ask
you,
as
experts
in
the
field
and
citizens
of
arlington,
to
fairly
assess
this
and
whatever
your
assessment.
Well,
then,
you
know
I'll
accept
that,
and
I
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
be
here
today.
That's
all
I've
got
to
say
and
if
you've
got
any
question,
I'm
here
to
answer
any
question
or
any
questions.
Thank
you
very
much.
A
Okay,
thank
you,
sir,
and
for
the
county
we
have
mr
andrew
king.
C
Good
morning
board,
this
is
a
7
226
square
foot,
vacant,
parcel
of
land
adjacent
to
the
owner's
home
site
parcel
of
zero
four
zero
one,
zero
three:
two:
it's
what
the
department
calls
an
attached
outlet.
We
do
have
a
detach
out
locks,
but
this
is
an
attached
outlet,
because
it's
attached
to
the
parcel
where
their
home
is,
the
department
looks
at
land
values
every
year
and
adjusts
them,
which
are
reflected
in
the
assessments
for
the
county
outlet.
C
Land
is
reviewed
less
often,
but
we
do
try
and
take
a
look
at
to
see
if
the
values
are
in
line
with
what
we're
doing
with
buildable
lots
in
the
county.
So
the
buildable
land
goes
up
in
value
every
year.
It
makes
sense
for
the
vacant
land
to
increase
as
well,
there's
only
a
finite
amount
of
it
and
we
were
able
to
find
a
few
sales
of
it
over
the
past
few
years.
C
So
these
do
come
through.
Occasionally
we
don't
see
them
often,
but
of
the
for
sales.
I
was
able
to
find
the
average
of
the
per
square
foot
rates,
for
these
outlets
was
about
26
dollars,
a
square
foot
and
that's
compared
to
the
subject's
current
assessment
of
ten
dollars
a
square
foot.
Additionally,
the
excess
land
for
home
sites
in
this
neighborhood
is
valued
at
12
a
square
foot,
so
there
is
a
bit
of
a
discount
given
to
these
vacant
parcels
these
vacant
outlet
parcels
as
well.
C
So
for
those
reasons,
the
county
recommends
a
confirmation
of
the
2022
assessment
of
72
300.
Thank
you.
A
Okay,
thank
you,
questions
from
board
members,
mr
yates.
D
To
the
to
the
county,
this
parcel
is
landlocked:
correct
are
the
comps
all
land
locked?
I
did
not
look
all
of
them
up,
or
are
they
road
access
and
actually
buildable
some
the.
C
The
listed
the
sales
comps,
I
do
not
believe,
are
landlocked.
The
assessment
comps
are
landlocked,
so
comp,
4
and
5.
Those
are
just
parcels
behind
other
houses
which
we
normally
see.
The
other
ones
are
not,
but
most
of
them.
I
think
almost
all
of
them
are
sub
zoning
wise
for
being
able
to
build
a
lot
on
it
being
able
to
build
a
house
site
on
it.
C
So
if
you
look
at
comp,
you
know
one
two
and
three
they're
three
thousand
square
feet:
four
thousand
square
feet
and
twenty
four
hundred
square
feet
so
they're
below
zoning.
E
Yeah
I
saw
in
the
package
of
I
guess:
riverwood
neighborhood
sales
are
up
5.7
percent
year
every
year.
That's
total
sale
price.
Do
you
have
the
land
assessment
increase
year
over
year
for
the
neighborhood,
so.
C
Land
land
for
this
neighborhood
went
up
six
percent
last
year.
Okay,.
F
Yes,
this
is
to
mr
king.
I
noticed
on
the
comparables
most
of
the
outlets
that
are
listed.
They
went
up
in
value
from
last
year
to
this
year,
some
except
one
of
them,
so
most
of
them
stayed
within
the
range
of
the
previous
value.
C
No,
so
it's
adjusted
based
on
within
the
county,
so
northern
outlaws
are
gonna,
be
usually
worth
more
valuable.
Land
more
are
going
to
be
more
valuable
than
parcels
in
the
south
and
then
again,
as
I
spoke
to,
there's
also
attached
to
outlook
values
and
detached
outlaw
values.
So
we
value
detaching
a
lot,
we're
just
floating
parcels
that
aren't
owned
by
an
adjacent
home
site
as
less
than
what
an
attached
outlet
would
be
worth.
F
I
think
prompt
number
three
is
the
one
that
went
down
in
value
from
last
year
for
what
I
looked
at.
You
know,
because
I
tried
to
look
at
all
of
them,
but
I
think
that's
the
one
that
went
down.
F
C
I
think
it
had
been
miscalculated
a
previous
appraiser
caught
this
one
in
february
of
this
year
and
changed
it
from
detached
outlet
to
attached
outlet.
I
think
it
must
have
just
gotten
switched
by
a
priest
appraiser,
and
they
had
made
an
error
from
attached
outlot
to
detach
or
something,
but
it
was
corrected
for
2023.
C
Sure
so
we
see
increases
every
year
or
changes.
I
would
I
should
say
in
in
land
value
every
year
for
houses
across
the
county.
Our
lots
are
no
different.
There's
only
a
finite
amount
of
land
in
the
county,
we're
always
trying
to
take
into
account
what
people
will
buy
and
sell
these
for
in
the
open
market.
C
I
think
the
properties
we
found
are
pretty
good
indication
of
where
these
parcels
are
are
ending
up
on
the
open
market,
and
ten
dollars
is
still
again
below
the
twelve
dollars
per
square
foot
that
the
excess
land
is
valued
at
in
the
neighborhood.
So
for
those
reasons
the
county
recommends
a
confirmation
of
the
2020
assessment
of
70
300..
A
B
Yes,
thank
you
just
a
moment
what
I
had
not
mentioned
and
I'm
happy
that
one
of
the
board
members
did
was
that
this
lot
is
you
call
it
landlocked,
it
can't
be
built
on
well,
I
guess
I
could
build
on
it,
but
nobody
can
build
a
separate
house
there.
So
far,
as
I
know,
there's
nobody
interested
in
buying
it,
except
maybe
our
next
door
neighbor,
will
become
an
outlaw
for
them.
If
I
wanted
to
sell
it,
which
I
don't
so
again,
it's
its
value
is
limited
to.
B
In
my
estimation
of
the
property
owner,
which
is
us
we're
happy
to
have
it
we're
not
going
to
sell
it,
there's
no
plans
now
to
improve
on
it
and
if
we
did,
I'm
sure
the
county
would
pick
that
up
in
time.
So
again,
thank
you
for
your
time.
Trust
in
your
judgment
for
the
assessment.
I
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
be
here.
E
E
At
it,
in
the
context
of
it's
essentially
as
if
it
was
part
of
his
single-family
lot,
which
he
has
right
now,
so
if
you
loaded
it
into
that
lot,
it
would
be
a
huge
increase
compared
to
what
the
rest
of
the
neighborhood
land
values
went
up.
You
know
40
plus
percent
and
the
neighborhood
we're
talking
about
six
percent,
so
it
doesn't
really
make
sense
to
me
to
increase
it.
This
much.
D
A
F
Well,
there
has
to
be
a
point.
You
know
where
I
think
the
county
is
doing
a
good
job
as
far
as
establishing
a
rate
for
all
these
our
lives.
But
you
know
it's,
I
guess
the
disadvantage
of
this
is
oh.
This
outline
is
large,
you
know
and
I'm
a
little
bit
torn,
because
I
looked
at
all
the
outlets
that
I
could
see
as
far
as
the
sales
and
the
values
and
that's
what
I
was
asking.
You
know
why
some
of
them
are
going
to
happen.
F
They
did
actually
all
go,
went
out,
but
except
the
one
that
I
was
asking
about,
but
and
the
rate
that
they
went
up
it's
about
the
same,
except
that
they
are
smaller.
So
you
see
the
difference
in
value
not
being
very
noticeable
as
this
one
I
I
mean
there
has
to
be
a
rate
that
all
of
them
are
assessed
equally,
so
you
know
my
initial
reaction
before
looking
at
all
the
values
and
all
the
other
outlets
is
the
same
as
you
guys.
F
I
think
this
is
a
large
increase
and
I
think
you
know
to
be
fair
because
there's
not
a
lot
of
outlets
in
the
county,
so
you
know
I
was
thinking
of
just
keeping
it
at
last
year's
value
because
there's
really
no
not
much
to
compare
to
except
some.
You
know
we,
we
have
two
assessment
comparables,
but
you
know
if
there
are
all
three
are
bad.
D
D
G
H
D
Well,
you
know,
and
if
you
look
at
the
past
assessments
for
this
slide,
you're
going
in
2000
yeah
2013,
it
was
almost
80
000
somewhere
in
that
following
year
it
dropped
in
14
to
43
and
then
it's
you
know.
This
is
a
big
jump
back
up.
D
E
Yeah,
I
mean
essentially,
if
you,
if
you,
if
you
take
that
out
lot,
you
put
it
on
mr
barda's
property.
He's
got
some
a
lot.
That's
a
little
bit
smaller
than
his
neighbor's
house.
His
neighbor's
r20
lot
is
32
dollars.
A
square
foot
he's
currently
35
a
square
foot
with
the
current
assessment.
So
it's.
E
E
Kind
of
feel
like
just
going
with
the
land
increase
in
the
neighborhood
over
the
previous
year.
It's
probably
the
fairest
way
to
look
at
this
thing.
A
Okay
yeah,
I
leaned
more
towards
ten
percent
on
it
and
it
was
an
arbitrary
number,
but
I
mean
you're,
it's
not
really
that
much
of
a
difference,
but
you
know
I
I
could
live
with
that.
D
I'll
make
a
motion
to
do
a
six
percent
increase
as
the
rest
of
the
land
values
have
changed,
based
on
the
21
2021
number,
that
was
fifty
thousand
six
hundred
with
a
six
percent.
I
didn't
run
that
number,
which.
A
Okay,
second,
okay:
we
have
a
motion
in
a
second
by
mr
hoffman,
all
in
favor
aye,
okay,
it's
unanimous
four
to
zero.
The
assessment's
been
reduced
to
fifty
three
thousand
six
hundred
dollars.
B
A
Much
appreciate
it.
Okay,
I
believe
I
saw
mr
edimati
join
us.
A
J
Sir,
thank
you
very
much
and
thank
you
for
your
time
and
for
this
opportunity
I
could
share
a
spreadsheet
I've
put
together.
J
I
will,
but
I
you
know,
really
comes
down
to
looking
at
you
know
my
neighboring,
my
neighbors
frankly
and
their
properties
and
looking
at
the
significant
increase
in
my
2022
tax
assessment
relative
to
2021,
and
it
was
nearly
an
eight
percent
increase,
taking
a
look
at
three
properties
which
I
included
in
my
you
know,
initial
appeal:
you
know
those
increases
were
ranging
from
you
know,
six
point
three
four
percent
to
six
point:
eight
percent
and
those
houses
specifically
were
were
all
newer
homes.
J
They
were
all
larger
homes.
They
were
all
on
larger
lots
except
for
one.
So
I'm
really
just
struggling
with
understanding
why
my
property
experienced
a
disproportionately
larger
increase.
Those
houses
also
are
on,
have
have
attached
garages
and
two
of
the
homes
are
on
significantly
quieter
quieter
streets,
since
we
are
on
teams.
I
don't
know
if
this
is
appropriate,
but
am
I
able
to
share
my
screen
just
so?
It
makes
a
little
bit
more
sense
rather
than
talking
about
abstract.
J
Yes,
you
are
sure
thanks,
so
you
can
see
my
screen
and
I
put
this
together
pretty
quickly,
so
I
apologize
but
1805
north
monroe's
is
my
house.
I
took
these
square
footages
off
of
the
tax
record.
They
don't
necessarily
match
when
you
look
at
like
redfin
or
zillow,
but
I
took
it
off
of
the
the
arlington
county
tax
site.
J
I've
got
land
square
footages
the
year.
They
were
built,
bedrooms
bathroom,
whether
the
garages
are
attached,
finished,
basements,
and
then
I
compared
you
know
the
2022
assessment
versus
the
2021.
J
So
I
think
the
best
comp-
and
I
included
this
in
my
initial
appeal-
is
1801,
north
nelson,
which
is
directly
behind
me
on
nelson
street.
That
house
is
larger,
albeit
the
lot
is
smaller.
The
house
is
two
years
newer.
J
It's
got
one
extra
full
bathroom,
it's
got
an
attached
garage
versus
a
detached
garage
and
you
can
see
that
the
assessment
for
2022
is
approximately
seven
percent
below
my
assessment
and
his
assessment
increased
by
6.82
percent,
while
mine
went
up
nearly
100
basis
points
higher
than
that.
J
I
also
broke
out
the
improvement
value
versus
the
land
value
and
I
thought
a
couple.
Other
points
were
interesting.
Looking
at
1814
north
lincoln
street,
which
is
on
the
other
side
of
me,
I'm
also
on
a
it's
on
a
dead
end
street.
A
significantly
larger
house
and
this
column
here
shows
the
increase.
J
The
larger
lot
and
size
of
the
house
relative
to
mine,
but
then
also
compares
his
assessment
relative
to
mine,
and
I
think,
what's
interesting
here-
is
that,
while
his
improvement
value
on
a
per
square
foot
basis
was
similar
to
mine
at
two
hundred
dollars,
a
square
foot,
the
land
value
you
can
see
giving.
He
has
a
significantly
larger
lot,
is
about
eighty
five
dollars
per
land
square
foot
and
and
that's
consistent
with
1809
north
monroe,
which
is
my
direct
neighbor
again.
J
Similarly
sized
lot
again,
he
was
at
85
dollars
a
square
foot
so
and-
and
I
I
included
1903
north
monroe
as
well,
which
is
a
brand
new
construction
really
modern,
similarly
sized
interior
and
similarly
sized
land
lot.
So
I
thought
that
was
actually
a
good
comp
and
you
can
see
based
on
the
improvement
and
the
land
value
per
square
foot,
it's
very
consistent
with
mine,
but
I
think
you
know
what's
interesting:
there
is
that
house
has
one
extra
at
least
half
bathroom
and
it
just
delivered
at
the
end
of
20
20
21.
J
So
it's
brand
new
versus
1805
north
monroe,
which
is
you
know
now
a
seven-year-old
home.
So
I
guess
you
know
not.
I
know,
there's
a
lot
of
numbers
and,
but
I
think
what's
interesting
is
and-
and
this
increase
here
is
not
a
good
one,
because
obviously
it
was
it
was
a
tear
down
and
he
just
got
assessed
at
the
new
value
1903
north
monroe.
So
I
think
you
know
the
reality
is
I
I
just
it
comes
down
to.
I
think,
a
nearly
eight
percent
or
seven
point.
J
Seven,
two
percent
increase
relative
to
the
immediately
surrounding
properties
looking
at
their
21
versus
22
assessments.
J
Just
seems
a
little
bit
aggressive
to
me
and,
and,
and
you
know,
given
the
the
fact
that
you
know
these
homes
are
are
all
at
least
the
same
vintage
or
newer
and
are
certainly
not
inferior
in
any
way
to
to
my
home.
But
that's
it.
So
I
appreciate
your
time
and
look
forward
to
your
your
ruling.
A
Okay,
thank
you.
If
you
could
take
your
shared
screen
down,
please.
F
C
Good
morning
board,
so
this
is
a
two-story
single
family,
home
five
bedrooms.
Four
and
a
half
baths
finished
basement
detached
garage
was
built
in
2015,
the
subject's
property
selling
properties,
neighborhood
increased
7.2
percent
due
to
sales
that
occurred
from
september
2020
to
august
2021,
there's
a
range
of
variables
and
different
kinds
of
sales
in
there,
but
we
did
take
a
look
at
the
appellants
comparables
that
they
included,
some
of
which
have
been
input
by
previous
appraisers
in
the
pr
past
year.
C
So
I
did
update
a
few
of
those
I
updated
1809
monroe
in
1801
nelson.
You
know
I
didn't
think
they
were
correct
with
how
we're
working
in
the
county
this
year,
so
I
updated
those
so
they'll.
They
will
have
reflect
higher
assessments
next
year
for
those
properties,
they'll
take
effect
in
2023,
but
they
should
better
reflect
the
improvements
on
the
on
those
parcels
for
next
year.
The
department's
comp
sheet
does
show
that
some
of
these
larger
and
newer
renovated
homes
are
selling
between.
C
You
know
about
1.65
and
1.8
million
we're
still
seeing
prices
going
higher
and
higher
into
2022.
So
we
feel
pretty
confident
in
the
assessment
on
the
subject:
property
just
to
speak
to
the
land
for
a
minute
that
the
appellant
brought
up
land
does
go
down
in
person
in
price
per
square
foot.
As
the
size
of
the
parcel
goes
up.
There
are
diminishing
returns,
we
see
as
land
gets
larger
and
larger.
That's
why
it's
valued
that
way!
C
You'll
see
that
across
the
county
in
terms
of
land
valuation,
but
again
no
inspection
was
made
for
this
property.
No
changes
were
made.
We
think
the
comps
and
the
the
appellants
own
sales
price
of
one
million
six
hundred.
Ninety
five
thousand
back
at
the
end
of
2018
lead
us
to
have
a
confirmation
of
the
assessment
at
one
million,
seven
hundred
and
eighteen
thousand
six
hundred
dollars.
Based
on
the
analysis.
Thank
you.
A
C
No
just
that
the
com
sheet
shows
that
you
know
a
lot
of
these
newer
properties
over
the
past
few
years
are
selling
you
know
for
1.7,
1.8
million
dollars
and
higher,
and
that
we
did
take
the
appellant's
comparables
into
account
when
we
tried
to
address
the
issues
on
some
of
the
errors
that
were
there
for
those
properties,
and
we
did
correct
them
for
2023.
A
J
No,
I
mean,
I
guess
you
know,
are
we
I'm
not
sure
we
should
be
looking
at
sales
prices?
You
know
individual
sales
prices,
as
opposed
to
you,
know
comparable
properties
that
are
directly
adjacent,
so
I
you
know
again.
I
would
point
to
1801
north
nelson,
you
know
putting
aside
sales
price,
I
mean
when
you
look
at
the
actual
comparison
of
the
of
the
properties.
J
It
really
makes
no
sense
to
me
as
to
why
that
house
would
be
assessed
at
you
know:
seven
percent
less
than
than
my
house,
and
I'm
not
asking
for
anybody
else's
house
to
be
increased.
I'm
only
asking
for
you
know
for
2022
and
I'm
not
asking
for
2023
we're
talking
about
2022,
and
you
know,
regardless
of
what
changes
are
made
in
2023,
I
would
ask
that
you
know
out
of
fairness,
that
comparable
property
should
be
should
be
assessed
comparably.
E
It
looks
pretty
thorough
all
the
comps
and
everything
so
and
I
mean
going
back
to
the
sale,
the
property
in
2018
we're
only
talking
about
one
like
1.4
increase
since
the
2018
sale.
F
Well,
I
agree,
I
think,
the
sales
that
are
happening
there
are
more
reflective
than
you
know,
comparing
specifically
house
by
house,
but
I
think
the
property
was
you
know
like
to
be
put
on.
The
market
would
get
more
than
that,
but
no
I'm,
okay
with
it.
Okay,.
A
Okay,
it's
unanimous
the
county's
confirmed
at
one
million
seven
eighteen,
six
hundred.
A
Do
we
have
mr
andrews.
A
We
can
yes,
sir
okay.
The
third
case
is
rpc05060021
at
2322,
north
fillmore
street
and
mr
andrews,
you
can
start
with
your
eight
minutes
and
tell
us
about
your
property,
sir
great.
I
Thank
you
very
much,
my
wife
and
I
feel
blessed
to
be
in
our
in
our
home,
and
we
just
welcomed
our
first
child
in
march
and
we're
thrilled
to
have
her
grow
up
in
the
neighborhood.
So
we're
we're
happy
where
we
are
we're
blessed
to
be
here.
We
just
think
that
the
the
assessment
this
year
does
not
reflect
reality
and,
as
as
our
brief
to
the
board
said,
it
was.
You
know,
434
percent
of
last
year's
increase
in
228
of
the
last
two
years
increases
combined,
which
is
just
astonishing.
I
I
do
want
to
go
into.
Hopefully,
you've
had
the
chance
to
read
my
written
submission,
but
just
did
want
to
note
a
few
things.
Three
points
really
in
regard
to
to
our
submission
and
in
the
county's
written
submissions.
I
The
county's
map
on
page
five
of
its
memo
shows
the
addresses
of
five
homes,
and
it
says
that
the
page
displays
the
map
of
your
subject
comparables,
and
I
understand
it's
referring
to
the
county's
comparables,
but
I
do
just
want
to
level
set
here,
because
it
includes
three
of
the
counties
previously
previously
cited
comps
in
its
letter
denying
our
direct
appeal.
I
One
of
the
comps
I
submitted
in
my
direct
appeal
and
again
in
my
appeal
to
the
board
and
then
a
house
that
hadn't
yet
been
previously
cited
in
any
communication
thus
far,
and
that
new
address
is
the
2915
north
22nd
street
and
again
that's
showing
up
for
the
first
time
in
either
parties
listening
as
a
comp.
So
just
I
just
want
to
level
set
that
there's
a
little
bit
of
sandbagging
here
and
that
I
hadn't
seen
this
house
previously
as
a
comp.
So
didn't
have
the
opportunity
to
address
it
here.
I
But
in
all
events,
as
the
map
shows
the
three
homes
the
county
cited
in
its
january
27th
letter
homes,
one
two
and
three
on
page
five
of
the
memo,
or
at
least
a
mile
away
from
our
house
and
significantly
on
the
other
side
of
langston
boulevard,
and
they
may
technically
still
be
in
neighborhood
506.036.
I
I
To
note
the
county
as
a
abandoned
as
a
comp,
the
only
maywood
house
that
it's
cited
in
its
january
27th
letter
that
was
it
2158
north
oakland,
despite
my
addressing
it
in
my
appeal
brief.
That
house
has
the
same
number
of
bedrooms
and
same
number
of
bathrooms
as
my
house,
and
the
assessment
is
more
than
a
hundred
thousand
dollars.
I
The
county
also
abandoned
as
a
comp,
its
house
at
2146
north
pollard,
which
the
assessor
mr
king
and
I
specifically
discussed,
as
I
noted
in
page
22
of
my
submission,
so
the
county
seems
to
move
in
the
goal
post
a
bit
in
terms
of
what
it
views
as
a
comp
here
and
just
to
recap,
between
the
january
27th
letter
from
the
county,
denying
my
direct
appeal
and
the
memo
to
the
board.
I
I
want
to
also
talk
briefly
about
the
neighborhoods.
Maywood
is
extremely
unique
in
light
of
its
historic
building
requirements,
and
so
that
needs
to
be
taken
into
account
the
county
states
on
page
three,
the
memo,
the
maywood
historic
district
also
imposes
certain
restrictions
on
the
materials
used
in
construction
that
are
not
considered
for
the
county's
valuation.
I
So,
while
there's
no
criterion
related
to
quote
restrictions
on
building
materials,
the
factor
is
implicit
in
another
one,
and
I
don't
think
anyone
can
dispute
that
wooden
windows
wooden
trim
wooden
railings
and,
as
required
of
our
house,
a
an
extra
garage
door
with
swinging
doors
to
hide
the
traditional
vertical
garage
door
require
more
upkeep
than
21st
century
materials,
metal,
vinyl,
windows,
composite
railings
and
not.
I
I
It
states
on
page
three
that
appellant
uses
improvement
data
from
zillow,
but
the
department
does
not
use
a
reference
zillow,
and
I
just
want
to
note
that
for
four
out
of
the
five
comps
that
we
submitted,
the
county
square
footage
is
actually
larger
than
what
we
submitted.
In
our
brief,
that's
the
case
for
north
24th
street
north
fillmore,
north
26th
street
and
north
27th
street.
I
So
if
anything,
the
county's
memo
highlighting
the
differences
actually
supports
our
position
on
the
assessment,
because
the
comps
reportedly
are
even
larger
than
we
said
that
they
are,
to
the
extent
that
some
of
the
cops
that
are
older
homes,
as
you
can
see
in
the
photos
and
the
submissions,
a
lot
of
these
homes
have
been
renovated.
They
are
new
on
the
inside
one
of
them.
I
The
one
on
27th
street
has
a
lot
that
is
to
the
square
foot
twice
as
large
as
ours
and
sold
for
significantly
less
recently
than
the
assessment.
In
our
case,
and
I
I
also
want
to
note
that
our
lot
shares
a
boundary
with
seven
other
houses.
I
They
share
a
boundary
with
one
two
or
maybe
three
houses,
not
seven,
and
I
think
that
you
know
I'm
not
sure
how
that
factors
into
any
algorithm,
but
if
it
weren't
a
source
of
value,
then
the
most
recent
listings
for
each
of
those
houses
wouldn't
have
noted
it
in
the
listing,
and
I
don't
think
the
board
should
check
for
common
sense
at
the
door
that
all
else
being
equal.
Would
you
rather
have
a
house
with
seven
direct
neighbors
or
two
neighbors
and
a
nature
preserve
across
the
street,
so
I'll
I'll
reserve.
C
Great
board,
so
this
is
a
two-story
single
family,
home
constructed
in
2018,
five
bedrooms.
Four
and
a
half
bathrooms
finished
basement.
We
have
36
10
square
feet,
finished
above
ground
and
a
1245
square
foot
basement
rec
room.
This
neighborhood
alone
saw
an
increase
on
average
of
about
six
percent
using
open
market
sales
from
september
2020
to
august
2021
yeah.
I.
C
As
I
wrote
up
in
the
write-up
that
there's
a
discrepancy
between
using
zillow
data
and
our
data
referencing
the
numbers
from
zillow,
we
rely
on
our
own
internal
records.
These
are
all
available
for
public
review
on
the
department's
website.
So
we
try
to
put
that
up
all
for
everybody
to
look
at
our
write-up
shows
the
discrepancies
between
the
appellant
square
footage
numbers
and
the
department's
square
footage
numbers
for
many
of
these
comparables.
The
subject.
Property
is
larger
and
or
newer.
C
I'm
not
going
to
run
through
all
of
them,
but
you
know
just
the
first
one
that
pops
out
25
22
24th
street
north.
We
have
that
property
at
2729
square
feet
above
ground
compared
to
the
appellant's
3
600
above
ground.
So
you
know
that's
a
large
difference
there
that
maybe
just
looking
at
the
zillow
records
might
not
take
into
account,
but
we
have
to
in
terms
of
in
terms
of
improvement
assessments.
C
Our
comp
sheet,
I
think,
is
good.
It
shows
the
sales
prices
of
again
1.7
1.8
million
dollars
for
larger
houses
built
or
updated
within
the
past
few
years.
You
know
we
do.
We
do
wish
that
there
might
be
more
of
a
land
evaluation
adjustment
in
terms
of
being
located
near
parks
or
anything
that
like
that,
but
we
don't
really
usually
see
that
that
shakes
out
in
the
sales
analysis.
C
So
every
few
years
we
do
take
into
account,
try
and
look
at
some
of
these
adjustments
on
land
and
seeing
how
that
seeing
how
that
plays
out
in
terms
of
sale
prices,
it's
not
as
much
as
as
homeowners,
usually
think
and
then
even
going
the
other
way
negative
valuations.
You
know
in
terms
of
being
on
roads
or
being
located
near
other.
You
know
just
undesirable
places.
You
know
it
usually
doesn't
come
out
in
the
sales
as
much
as
we
would
see.
C
I
do
want
to
make
one
correction
on
the
comp
sheet
was
that
comp
number
two
zero:
six:
zero,
zero,
nine
zero.
Two
three
has
full
four
full
bathrooms
and
one
half
bathroom,
so
that
was
just
an
air
on
our
part,
pulling
that
data,
but
again
combined
with
the
appellant's
own
purchase
price
of
one
million
six
hundred
fifty
thousand
pre-covered.
C
So
you
know
two
years
before
the
2022
assessment
and
the
changes
we've
seen
since
then
the
department
recommends
a
confirmation
of
the
2022
assessment
at
one
million,
seven
hundred
and
thirty
thousand
one
hundred.
Thank
you.
A
Okay,
thank
you.
Questions
from
the
board
members.
C
No
again,
I
think
the
comparable
sheet
is
adequate
in
terms
of
valuation
and
showing
what
these
newer
and
larger
properties
are
worth
in
the
county
and
again
we
recommend
a
confirmation
of
one
million,
seven
hundred
three
thousand
one
hundred
dollars.
Thank
you.
I
I
do
thanks.
I
I
do
wanna
flag
that
I
can't
really
dispute
the
the
listed
purchase
price
in
in
in
the
database.
It's
1.65,
but
we
did
pay
1.633.
As
I
noted
in
footnote
17
of
my
submission,
there
was
a
17
dollar
credit
from
the
seller
for
us
not
using
a
realtor
so
again.
I
A
separate
contract
that
is
1.633
and
we
got
the
credit,
but
just
in
the
closing
here
I
understand
that
we
have
the
burden,
but
preponderance
isn't
isn't
a
super
high
standard
under
the
law.
I
think
we've
carried
it
here.
We've
submitted
five
columns
with
recent
sales
that
are
significantly
less
than
the
assessment
for
our
house,
and
we've
explained
how
each
of
the
comps
are
similar
to
our
house.
Each
of
those
is
less
than
a
hundred
thousand
dollars
less
in
the
relevant
period.
I
Some
with
larger
lots,
some
smaller
lots,
but
overall
they're
comps
and
haven't
heard
the
county
dispute
that
they're
comps
they've
just
decided
to
provide
their
own
data,
but
haven't
actually
said
no.
These
aren't
comps.
We've
addressed
each
of
the
counties
comps
at
least
the
ones
that
we're
aware
of
in
our
written
submission
and
explain
why
those
comps
are
different
and
might
merit
a
different
assessment
of
the
detailed
explanations
satisfy
our
burden
and
shifted
the
burden
of
the
county
and
in
response
I've
seen
the
county
do
two
things:
one.
I
It
went
out
and
found
another
house
that
it
hadn't
cited
previously,
and
this
is
the
one
on
north
22nd
street
and
that
house,
however,
has
an
assessment,
two
hundred
and
thirty
dollars
less
than
ours
sold
in
the
relevant
window
for
a
hundred
and
thirty
thousand
dollars
less
and
again,
this
is
the
county
going
out
and
looking
for
this
house
after
we'd
already
exchanged
in
the
direct
appeal
and
it's
a
couple
hundred
thousand
dollars
less
than
assessment.
I
The
county
also
merely
summarized
my
arguments
in
its
memo
and
pointed
out
purported
errors
in
square
footage.
It
didn't
offer
anything
that
a
database
couldn't,
and
so
it
didn't
really
put
the
burden
back
to
us
or
rebut
what
we
submitted
to
the
county
in
terms
of
the
actual
explanations
for
why
so?
For
those
reasons,
we
we
ask
that
the
board
vacate
the
country's
assessment,
an
award,
a
lower
value
of
1.652.
F
Yeah,
I
think
mr
andrews
did
a
good
job.
You
know
compiling
all
this
comparables
and
information,
but
again
I'm
trying
to
look
at
each
specific
property,
each
individual
property
and
compare
you
know
what
the
features
are
and
the
year
that
he
was
built
and,
of
course
this
is
newer
than
some
of
the
other
comparables
that
we're
looking
at.
F
And
that's
really
to
me,
I
know
some
of
the
other
comparables
are
renovated,
but
you
know
we
do
have
consideration
with
renovated
properties
that
look
new
compared
to
properties
that
are,
you
know,
brand
new
built
from
the
bottom.
So
I'm
I'm
okay
with
the
assessment.
The
way
it
is
based
on
the
sales
comparables-
and
you
know
I
really
don't
see
much
room
to
make
any
adjustment.
To
be
honest,.
E
Yeah
I
mean
I
don't
see
anything
particularly
wrong
with
this
house
from
a
marketing
standpoint.
I
mean
just
looking
at
it.
It's
a
great
house.
The
appellant
was
kind
of
talking
about
that
in
the
beginning,
so
I'm
trying
to
pull
up
some
of
the
lower
comps
and
looking
at
them
and
there's
always
you
know,
there's
it
might
be
within
a
hundred
thousand,
but
there's
something
weird
about
it.
It's
a
kind
of
a
tortured
addition
to
an
older
house
or
something
you.
G
E
Where
you
get
something
that's
a
little
bit
lower
and
and
that
kind
of
explains
it
in
my
mind,
so
I'm
really
okay,
I
mean
I,
I
think
this
is
kind
of
in
this
in
the
range
of
where
this
property
would
trade
today
or
even
on
january,
1st.
D
D
A
K
L
F
A
Okay,
we
now
have
just
have
the
minutes
to
reflect
that
mr
maskin
has
joined
us
so
now
there
will
be
five
members
for
the
following
three
cases:
okay
and
we've
got
miss
churchill.
Do
we
have
miss
gupta?
I
think
we
saw
her
come
on
earlier.
A
Okay,
so
next
case
on
the
agenda
is
one
zero:
five
at
fifteen
fifty
north
danville
street,
mr
gupta,
you
can
start
with
your
eight
minutes
and
tell
us
about
this
property.
Sir.
K
Great,
thank
you
so
much
for
your
time.
This
morning
I
have
a
couple
of
slides
just
to
help
articulate
my
points
again.
We're
talking
about
1550
north
danville
street,
and
the
appeal
is
based
on
the
property
not
being
assessed
equitably
with
similar
properties
and
we're
requesting
an
assessment
change
to
2.525
million.
K
And
what
we've
noticed
with
the
comps
that
we've
submitted
in
the
comps
that
the
county
submitted
back
to
us
is
that
homes
that
are
traded
are
assessed
differently
than
homes
that
are
custom
built
owner
built
and
owner-occupied
custom-built
homes.
This
leads
to
spec
homes
to
be
accessed
much
higher
than
their
comparable
homes
or
custom
built
by
owners.
K
It
is
to
maximize
the
return
on
investment
in
a
short
amount
of
time,
which
is
where
you
get
the
builder
great
quality
materials
that
you
often
hear
of
in
spec,
homes,
custom-built
homes,
homes
built
by
owners
who
live
in
those
homes.
They
have
very
different
incentives
not
to
maximize
the
return
on
investment
upon
the
initial
sale
very
shortly,
but
they're
living
in
them.
K
So
the
quality
of
the
materials
is
very
different,
so
the
concert
we
had
provided
showed
that
there
are
no
a
number
of
features
that
make
those
other
comp
homes
much
more
desirable
in
the
marketplace.
That
would
lead
to
a
higher
assessment
than
auto.
That's
not
the
case.
Some
of
those
features
just
to
highlight
what
I,
what
I
had
written
about
in
my
appeal,
was
zoning.
They
are,
many
of
them
are
in
zone
for
a
well-known
school
arlington
science
focus.
K
We
were
zoned
for
that,
but
then,
shortly
after
buying
the
home,
we
got
zoned
to
a
school
that
doesn't
have
the
same
brand
and
it's
also
new.
So
there
isn't
any
history
behind
the
school
that
changes.
The
demand
who
looks
to
buy
the
home
a
fit
and
finish
I
mentioned
ours-
is
a
spec
home
built
by
builder
respect
builder,
great
quality.
The
the
comps
are
all
custom
home
that
come
with
custom
grade
finishes
a
higher
quality
products.
K
And
they
all
have
attached
garages
the
comps
ours
of
the
detach.
Not
only
do
they
have
attached
garage,
many
of
them
have
a
two
park
attached
garage.
You
have
a
one
car
detached
location,
we're
all
in
the
same
neighborhood,
but
even
within
the
same
neighborhood,
there
are
more
desirable
parts
of
the
neighborhood
those
comp
homes
that
I,
that
I'd
written
about
are
often
talked
about.
K
Our
homes
near
them
are
often
talked
about
by
real
estate
agents
as
heart
of
lion
village,
which
talks
about
you,
they're
being
in
the
part
of
the
of
the
neighborhood
that
is
generally
more
desirable,
quieter,
bigger
streets
where
on
the
outskirts,
you
know,
so
that
is
a
feature
that
doesn't
matter
to
to
real
estate
agents,
one
of
those
homes.
That's
on
the
corner.
A
lot
gives
you
more
privacy.
The
lot
is
not
only
40
bigger,
it's
only
assessed
to
7.7
higher,
you
know,
so
it
gives
you
so
are
a
lot.
K
Smaller
makes
our
home
tall
and
skinny
these
other
homes
are
complex.
K
Homes
are
bigger
lots
that
have
more
usable
space
in
the
first
and
second
levels
of
their
homes.
Ours
is
tall,
which
you
know
we
have
a
decent
amount
of
square
footage,
but
number
of
that
is
up
on
the
third
level,
which
is
not
as
usable
as
being
on
the
main
and
second
floor.
K
In
the
write-up,
I
showed
that
we
had
the
highest
22
2022
assessments
relative
to
our
comps,
the
highest
percentage
increase
for
the
last
two
years
year
over
year,
relative
to
our
comps,
as
you
can
see,
we're
at
2.7
million
for
2022
and
the
other
comps
that
we
provided
are
below
that
amount
amount,
they're
all
built
relatively
in
the
same
time,
frame,
2020
or
2021.
K
they're,
all
similar
in
location,
agent,
size.
They
differ
on
those
other
desirable
features
and
the
fact
that
they
were
custom
built
by
their
owners
who
are
living
in
them.
The
comps
that
those
that
the
county
provided
were
a
number
of
comps.
The
first
three
of
those
comps
are
relative
to
our
size
in
terms
of
the
lot
and
they
and
those
are
assessed
between
2.4
and
2.5
million.
The
last
three
that
the
county
had
provided
are
much
bigger
lots,
40,
50,
bigger
lots,
wider
homes
and
more
usable
space.
K
In
the
first
couple
of
levels
and
those
were
assessed
relative
to
our
homes,
but
they
have
much
more
desirable
features
associated
with
them,
as
I
previously
mentioned,
so
just
to
wrap
up
we're
asking
that
the
adjustment
be
changed
back
to
2.525
million.
We
have
where
we're
spec
home,
we're
being
assessed
differently
than
custom
built
homes,
but
those
custom
build
homes
are
very
comparable.
I
mean
they're
being
assessed
lower,
even
though
they
have
more
desirable
features,
and
I
will
pause
there.
Thank
you
for
your
time.
A
Okay,
thank
you,
sir
okay,
and
for
the
county,
miss
nicole
churchill.
Mr
cho,
you
can
tell
us
about.
H
A
Sorry,
excuse
me
one
second,
mr
gupta,
can
you
take
down
your
shared?
You
know
this
screen
share.
Please.
Yes,.
H
So
again,
this
was
virtually
inspected
on
february
9th
of
2022.
It
is
a
two
and
three-quarter
cement,
fiber
siding
home
with
seven
bedrooms,
one
half
bath
five
full
bathrooms
the
year
built
in
effective
age
are
20
20
and
the
quality
is
iv
minus.
I
did
want
to
touch
on
a
few
things
in
when
he
talked
about
the
spec
home
in
regards
to
the
ml
the
mls
listing
it's.
There
are
extra
features
in
regards
to
why
we
did
the
quality
as
ib
minus,
with
intricate
details.
H
Top
quality
designed
elements
of
high
ceilings,
hand,
milled,
wide
plank
white
oak
floors,
the
windows,
library
with
custom,
built-ins,
gourmet,
chef's,
kitchen
outdoor
fireplace
with
indoor
outdoor
entertaining
and
then
another
thing
that
I
want
to
touch
on
is
they
had
added
features
pre-wiring
for
generator
installed
audio
speakers,
clad
windows,
pre-wire
for
electric
drop
down
screens
on
porch
as
well.
So
there
were
a
lot
of
extra
details
that
we
saw
in
in
regards
to
the
sale
and
based
on
the
quality
as
well.
H
So
the
appellant
feels
that
the
value
is
too
high
due
to
the
market
and
comparable
new
construction
sales
in
the
neighborhood.
So
I
did,
I
want
to
touch
on
the
comps
that
he
did
provide
in
his
powerpoint
as
well.
So
156710
is
the
new
construction
sale,
but
it
was
a
late
sale.
In
january
7th
of
2022
the
sale
price
was
2.9.
H
The
assessment
value
is
2761
200.,
it
is
less
square
footage,
it
has
one
additional
half
bath
and
it
actually
has
a
higher
quality
of
iv.
Plus
15496
is
a
2019
new
construction
home,
but
it
was
an
off-market
sale.
The
assessment
value
on
that
is
two
million
six
hundred
and
ninety
seven
thousand
three
hundred.
It
is
less
square
footage
and
less
quality
than
the
subject
being
at
excellent,
plus
eighteen,
zero.
Two:
four:
zero:
zero
six
is
a
2021
new
construction
sale
on
october,
18
2021,
with
a
sale
price
of
two
million.
H
Seven
hundred
and
fifty
thousand
assessment
value
is
two
point:
five,
two
million
five
hundred
and
thirty
two
thousand
nine
hundred.
It
is
less
square
footage,
no
half
bathrooms
and
has
higher
quality
than
the
subject,
but
has,
but
it
has
a
smaller
lot
size
than
the
subject.
H
The
comparables
provided
by
the
homeowner
differ
than
the
subject
and
the
ver
their
values
reflect
the
differences.
There
are
notable
differences
in
the
improvements
for
each
property,
which
include
quality
square
footages,
ages
and
lot
sizes,
and
after
reviewing
the
comparables
provided
by
the
appellant
and
comparables
provided
from
within
the
neighborhood,
we
determine
the
subjects.
Quality
and
effective
age
appear
in
line
the
appellant's
neighborhood
increased
on
average
5.1
percent
due
to
sales
that
occurred
within
the
analysis
period
and
within
the
neighborhood.
H
The
properties
grade
and
effective
age
appear
in
line
with
the
neighborhood
and
current
condition.
This
is
a
new
construction
home
that
was
purchased
on
july,
2nd
2020
for
2
million
675
000
no
changes
were
made
to
the
property
and
it
is
recommended
that
you
confirm
the
value
of
two
million
seven
hundred
and
one
thousand
two
hundred.
Thank
you.
M
Further
excuse
me
for
the
department
spec
versus
custom
built
home.
You
were
you
mentioned
a
lot
of
details
that
was
on
the
appellant's
home
that
you
were
mentioning.
Okay,
that's
one
two
just
make
sure
and
two
have
you
found
a
major
contention
of
the
appellant
is
that
a
custom-built
home
is
just
worth
more
because
it's
you
know
so
detailed
in
some
ways.
Have
you
found
that
do
you?
Do
you
make
those
decisions,
those
differentiations
when
you're
assessing
homes.
H
When,
when
we're
looking
at
the
custom
built
and
the
features
and
they're
used
most
of
the
time
they
are
in
the
listing,
and
so
that
would
go
into
what
we
would
dictate
the
quality
being
on
the
property,
so
we
do
take
into
consideration
what
we
know
about
the
details.
We
look
at
the
plans
and
then
the
quality
of
the
materials
as
well,
so
the
features
and
materials
we
consider
that,
whether
it's
spec
or
not
or.
M
H
H
One
second
was
an
all
cash
cash
purchase
for
two
million,
seven
hundred
and
sorry
one
second,
two
million
six
hundred
and
seventy
five
thousand.
It
was
an
all
cash
purchase
and
we
recommend
that
you
confirm
the
value,
the
2022
value
of
2
million
700
and
I'm
sorry
my
thing
keeps
going
away.
I
apologize.
K
Thank
you.
One
quick
point
around
the
custom
versus
is
spec.
I
I'd
say
the
department
uses
the
mls
listings
when
they're
traded
in
the
flowery
language.
That
is
often
in
those
listings
to
help
describe
and
define
their
quality,
which
the
custom-built
homes
won't
have
anything
equivalent
to
that
flowery
language
used
by
real
estate
agents.
I
will
say
the
biggest
driver
that
determines
the
cost,
is
you
can
all
the
comps
were
if
it
was
custom-built,
they
were
ranked
lower
than
if
they
were
traded.
K
So
I
have
neighbors
very
close
neighbors
within
a
couple
of
block
radius
if
they
are
in
a
custom-built
home
with
more
desirables
that
would
be
valued
higher
in
the
market.
They
are
assessed
lower
than
I
am,
but
if
there
are
a
neighbor
that
have
that
were
traded
with
smaller
lots,
they
were
assessed
higher.
K
So
I,
my
assessment
of
request
of
2.525
million,
is
right
in
line
with
the
comps
that
the
county
provided
between
two
to
2.4
to
2.5
million
for
lots
that
are
equivalent
to
mine,
so
I'm
going
higher
than
those
but
less
than
the
custom-built
homes
that
are
starting
around
2.6
and
going
up.
M
Guess
I'm
the
least
shy
so
early
in
the
season.
My
comment
is
that,
fortunately,
for
all
parties,
we
separate
improvements
from
land
value,
so
whether
somebody
has
a
larger
lot.
Smaller
lot
doesn't
matter.
We
just
get
best
just
wanted
to
go
on
record
for
that,
something
that
we
all
know.
I'm
looking
at
two
things,
the
the
appellant's
comps
were.
M
Two
of
them
were
not
appropriate,
comps
wrong
time,
wrong
kind
of
trade,
and
so
I'm
just
counting
them
a
lot
and
focusing
therefore
again
and
and
continually
on
the
department's
comps,
and
I
see
that
some
of
these
improvements,
knowing
that
they're
not
all
identical.
M
It
occurs
to
me
that
the
the
appellant's
improvement
is
higher
than
it
ought
to
be,
based
on
the
comps
that
the
the
county
had
provided
with
us,
because
although
the
finish
above
grade
is
larger
than
the
rest,
there's
still
I
mean
these
are
houses
where
below
graders
is
not.
You
know
a
spider-infested
six-foot
high
ceiling
space
and
of
the
comps,
the
the
what's
it
called
the
quality
is,
is
lesser
equal
to
or
lesser,
and
but
yet
it's
you
know,
300
or
so
thousand
dollars
more
than
these.
M
Others-
and
I
would
not
certainly
not
bring
it
suggests,
to
bring
it
down
to
exactly
this
300
000
that
I've
mentioned,
but
to
some
meaningful
lesser
amount,
perhaps
100
000,
because
again
of
and
I
didn't
mention
it,
a
bathroom
count,
it's
equal
to
or
less
than
the
others
and
and
again
the
quality
is
equal
to
or
less
than,
the
others.
M
It
doesn't
have
basement
at
all,
and
there
certainly
is
our
real
value
to
basements,
to
a
lot
of
families
and
and
and
so
that
that
that
that's
what
I'm
putting
out
there
for
the
the
first
shot.
A
Okay,
I
I
would
just
say
I
think,
the
with
the
burden
of
proof
on
the
appellant.
I
don't
agree
with
the
appellant's
argument.
I
think
the
whole
spec
versus
custom,
I'm
in
it's
a
standard
appraisal
practice
I
mean
when
there's
a
house
on
the
market
and
a
builder's
building
and
a
spec.
I
would
think
many
builders
would
disagree
that
they're
using
you
know
builder
grade
at
this
price
range
and
the
description
of
it.
Certainly,
you
know
more
than
supported
the
county's
position
on
that.
A
You
know
you
don't
go
and
use
builders,
you
know
custom
homes
as
comps
until
they
resell.
I
mean
that's
just
a
standard
appraisal
practice.
So
that's
not
necessarily.
I
mean
that
mr
gupta
is
trying
to
make
an
argument
that
you
know
he's
been
unfairly
assessed.
Based
on
that,
that's
that's
a
standard
practice
until
that
property
resells
and
then
you
would
go
look
at
the
mls.
You
know
unless
there
was
a
physical
inspection
of
the
property,
but
you
know
by
the
county.
You
know
I
look
at
what
was
provided
by
the
appellant.
A
I
I
don't
have
a
problem
with
what
the
county
did
on
this.
I
certainly
don't
think
that
the
property
has
gone
down
lower
than
last
year's
assessment.
Despite
covet.
Despite
everything
I
mean,
the
market
tells
us
that
prices
have
gone
up,
so
I'm
totally
fine
with
where
the
county's
assessment
is
on
this,
but
interested
in
what
other
folks
have
to
say.
F
I
agree
with
the
comments
you
made
mary,
I
mean
as
far
as
the
spec
and
you
know,
custom
bill
holmes.
Once
we
the
properties
on
the
market,
it
really
comes
to
what
the
buyers
willing
to
pay
and
what
the
sellers
wanted
to
sell
it.
For
you
know
whether
you
pay
cash
or
finances,
it's
really.
F
D
You
know
I
was
one
of
things
I
noticed
is
looking
at
the
value,
the
other
assessments
in
the
comps
compared
to
where
they
sold
at
that's
not
quite
the
same.
I
do
think
his
house
is
is
worth
what
the
assessment
is
and
more,
but
as
far
as
equalization
of
it,
I
think
he's
higher
than
compared
to
the
others.
I
also
married
with
what
you
said
concerning
sp
spec
homes
and
so
forth.
You
can't
build
a
spec
home
in
this
area
and
lower
the
quality
of
the
product
in
it.
D
People
want
this
market
is
drives
me
nuts,
it's
hard
to
build
something
and
not
put
the
better
quality
products
in
I'm
torn
oi.
I
do
think
comparatively.
He
is
a
little
bit
higher
than
he
should
be,
but
I
also
do
agree
that
if
he
put
this
house
in
the
market,
he's
gonna
he's
gonna
make
money
yeah
over
the
assessment.
E
Yeah,
the
only
thing
is
it's
just
it's
unfortunate
when
you
buy
something
in
july
and
then
by
january,
you've
got
an
assessment
higher
than
you
paid
for,
but
it's
within
one
percent
and
that's
kind
of
consistent
with
everything
in
arlington
residentially.
So
I'm,
okay
with
the
assessment.
A
A
Okay,
christian
teach.
N
Teached,
yes,
good
morning,
that's
correct
is.
A
Okay,
the
next
property
on
the
agenda
is
case:
five
rpc
one;
eight,
zero,
zero;
three,
five,
four
seven
at
twenty
two,
eleven
north
south
court.
Mr
teach,
you
can
start
with
your
eight
minutes
and
tell
us
about
your
property,
sir.
N
Yes,
good
morning,
thank
you
for
being
here,
so
I
think
my
case
is
fairly
simple.
My
house
is
one
of
four
attached:
townhouses
2205.0709
and
11
on
12
quart
north.
H
Okay,
good
morning
board,
this
property
was
virtually
inspected
on
march
24th
of
2022.
It
is
a
three-story,
brick,
veneer
home
town
home
with
three
bedrooms:
one
half
bath,
two
full
baths
and
partially
finished
basement
the
year
built,
is
2008
and
effective
ages.
2008
the
quality
is
excellent,
plus
the
appellant
feels
the
increase
is
unfair
due
to
the
market
and
the
fact
that
no
changes
have
been
made
to
the
property.
I
will
talk
about
the
comparables
that
were
submitted
by
the
homeowner
2209
12th
court
and
north,
which
is
15
3
548..
H
This
property
is
a
three-story,
brick
veneer
home
with
three
bedrooms:
one
half
bath,
two
full
baths
and
partially
finished
basement
with
a
year
built
of
2008
an
effective
age
of
2008
as
well
with
the
same
quality
of
excellent
plus
and
the
most
recent
sale
is
from
2020.
But
it
was
a
zero
dollar,
no
cat.
No,
there
was
no
exchange,
so
it
was
a
non-market
sale.
The
second
one
is
two:
two:
zero
seven
twelfth
court
north.
H
This
property
also
same
as
a
three-story
brick
veneer
townhome
with
three
bedrooms:
one
half
bath,
two
full
baths
and
partially
finished
basement.
This
is
a
year
built
of
2008,
but
has
an
effective
age
of
2013,
with
a
quality
of
excellent
plus
and
then
the
third
comparable
is
2205
12th
court
north.
This
property
is
the
same
with
a
three-story
brick
veneer
townhome
with
four
bedrooms:
one
half
bath,
two
full
baths
and
partially
finished
basement
this
year.
Built
is
2008
and
effective.
Ages
2013
as
well
with
the
quality,
is
excellent.
H
Plus
the
recent
sale
of
this
property
was
may
1st
of
2019
at
1
107
500.,
the
appellants
neighborhood.
Excuse
me:
the
appellant's
neighborhood
506
702
increased
on
average
10.8
percent
due
to
sales
that
occurred
within
the
analysis
period
and
within
the
neighborhood.
The
property
is
great
in
the
second
base,
you're
in
line
with
the
neighborhood
and
current
condition.
H
H
E
Yeah,
I
just
want
to
confirm
kind
of
what
I
was
hearing
from
the
county,
which
is
that
there's
a
difference
in
the
price
of
the
improv
or
the
assessment
on
the
improvements
between
the
center
units
and
the
end
units
and
that's
kind
of
what.
What
he's
brought
to
our
attention
as
well.
H
It
is
actually
we've
seen
in
the
past
couple
of
years
that
there
is
a
significant
about
50
to
60
000
different
in
sale,
difference
in
sales
prices
between
center
units
and
end
units.
E
M
L
H
Okay,
again,
you
know
the
the
increase
overall,
the
neighborhood
was
10.8
due
to
sales
that
occurred
within
the
neighborhood
and
the
average
center
units.
Increased
5.7
and
the
end
units
increase
on
average
seven
point:
eight
percent.
As
a
result
of
the
review,
the
virtual
inspection
and
the
information
submitted,
we
did
determine
the
assessment
to
be
fair
and
equitable,
and
we
do
ask
that
we
recommend
that
you
confirm
the
2022
value
of
1
million
267
600..
N
I
really
don't
have
anything
else.
I
just
wanted
the
same
assessment
as
my
neighbors,
but
I'd
see
the
connie's
point.
A
Do
you
have
a
second
okay?
Mr
matskin
is
a
second
all
in
favor
aye
proposed,
okay,
janine,
miss
county's,
confirmed
at
one
million
two
six,
seven.
Six
hundred.
Thank
you,
mr
teach
thanks.
Okay,
in
our
final
case,
do
we
have
what
we
got
to
change,
miss
shuttle's,
worth
okay
and
then
also
satomi.
O
H
A
O
Good
morning,
thank
you
for
the
the
opportunity
to
present
this
morning
and
my
name
is
satomi
talimizu
from
69
18
30
street
knows
last
year
I
appeal
and
the
board
member
approved
to
lower
my
overvalued
property
assessment
by
15
000.,
and
this
year
my
property
is
increased
by
6.3
percent,
which
is
54.1
thousand.
When
I
asked
I
was
told
that
your
increase
was
higher
as
compared
to
the
other
properties.
O
O
O
O
O
O
As
you
can
see
in
this
slide,
I
would
say
one
fifth
is
quick.
It
is
unusable
and,
as
I
mentioned
last
year,
the
creek
has
been
eroding
severely
whenever
it
rains.
I'm
always
concerned
about
the
creek.
In
addition
to
my
basement,
my
basement
got
flooded
a
couple
times
since
I
lived
here.
My
house
is
located
in
the
down
a
bit
downhill,
so
the
basement
wall
gets
wet,
always
whenever
it
rains
and
the
fireplace
is
not
usable
at
all.
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
A
Okay,
thank
you,
miss
shuttlesworth
for
the
county
please
good
morning.
L
A
L
Both
interior
and
exterior
inspections
were
conducted
on
2020
and
2021
reviews.
The
issues
are
that
the
appellant
is
contesting
her
assessment
due
to
the
close
proximity
to
the
creek,
that
her
property
has
high
risk
factor
which
is
nine
out
of
ten,
and
the
homeowner
also
states
that
her
2022
increase
is
the
highest
among
the
neighborhood.
L
All
four
comparables
provided
by
the
thailand
are
either
inferior
to
the
subject
in
terms
of
effective
age
and
finished
living
area,
or
they
have
negative
adjustments
for
busy
streets.
The
subject's
annual
increase
was
was
six
point.
Two
nine
percent,
due
to
a
one-time
fifteen
thousand
dollar
decrease
in
her
prior
year.
L
If
the
subject's
improvement
wasn't
decreased
last
year,
her
the
2022
assessment
increase
would
have
been
4.6.
L
The
9
out
of
10
flat
risk
factor
provided
by
flood
factor.com
does
not
adjust.
The
risk
factor
does
not
adjust
the
risk
factors
to
reflect
any
flood
prevention.
The
homeowner's
stake.
They
don't
have
any
way
to
keep
track
on.
Who
has
done
any
work
to
prevent
flooding
such
as
waterproofing
like
in
the
appellant's
case.
She
did
waterproof
her
basement
and
her
9
out
of
10
risk
factor
does
not
reflect
that.
The
subject
property
did
not
experience
flooding
due
to
the
presence
of
the
creek.
L
None
of
the
comparables
provided
by
the
appellant
have
similar
exposure.
The
appellant's
reasoning
is
that
her
four
selected
comparables,
which
are
assessed
lower
than
the
subject,
don't
have
a
creek.
Therefore,
her
assessment
should
be
lower.
She
did
not
prove
any
market
reaction,
as
none
of
her
comparables
bracketed
such
exposure.
L
She
made
an
assumption
that
that
is
not
supported,
but
in
the
sales
data
and
the
burden
of
proof
falls
on
the
appellant
and
the
appellant
did
not
provide
any
market
data
nor
steady
to
support
her
suggested
adjustment
of
50
000.
We
don't
use
averaging
in
our
evaluation.
This
is
this
is
way
that
is
prohibited
in
the
appraisal
and
assessment.
Ward.
Recently,
our
department
has
performed
a
comprehensive
study
on
potential
impact
of
fair
market
value
of
the
properties
located
within
the
rpa
rpa
and
flood
zones.
L
L
E
All
right
so
for
the
department
and
I've
got
my
notes
from
last
year,
because
I
know
we
did
some
calculations
and
stuff,
so
you
you've
done
comparables.
Did
you
make
the
adjustment
based
on
the
easement
in
the
rear
of
the
property,
or
did
you
make
any
kind
of
adjustment
for
that.
L
G
M
For
the
appellant,
the
flooding
in
your
basement,
the
non-usability
of
your
fireplace
and
so
forth-
is
that
from
the
creek
rising
up
periodically
I
mean
it's
a
creek.
I
mean
I
couldn't
look
in
your
backyard,
but
it
seems
a
bit
quite
a
bit
higher
than
the
creek.
M
A
And
I
have
a
question
for
the
appellant
on
the
the
pictures
that
you
have
are
those
from
this
year
or
from
last
year.
A
L
So
we
asked
the
board
to
consider
the
market
data.
Our
department
has
provided
to
support
the
assessed
value
of
the
subject,
and
we
also
ask
the
board
to
consider
the
fact
that
our
department
does
not
apply
adjustments
unless
we
can
support
them,
regardless
of
whether
we
deal
with
the
busy
street
pipe
stem
creek
or
close
proximity
for
the
commercial
property.
We
also
don't
use
averaging
per
square
footage
method
in
our
valuation,
so
we
asked
the
board
to
confirm
the
2022
assessment.
Thank
you
so
much.
A
Okay,
thank
you
and
miss
tiramisu.
If
you
take
a
minute
to
wrap
up,
please.
O
A
Okay,
thank
you.
Okay,
it's
just
among
the
board
members.
I
will
address
that
last
question
or
point
from
the
appellant
that
you
know
when
the
board
makes
a
decision.
It
is
only
for
that
current
year
and
does
not
carry
forward
year
to
year.
It's
based
on
the
sales
of
that
year
and
also
based
on
the
information
that's
provided
in
the
presentations
from
both
sides
that
decision,
so
that
would
be
the
reason
why
that
does
not
carry
from
year
to
year.
E
Yeah
I
mean
I
was
lucky
enough
to
find
my
notes
from
last
year,
so
if
I
could
just
kind
of
frame
the
conversation
sure,
because
it
wasn't
really
laid
out
what
we
did
last
year
was
a
6-0
vote.
E
We
we
reduced
15,
000
and
the
calculation
for
that
was
that
I
guess
we
determined
that
there
was
a
20-foot
storm
water
easement
through
the
rear
of
the
lot,
which
is
probably
where
the
stream
is
or
next
to
the
stream,
and
we
took
a
10
reduction
on
the
land
on
that
two
thousand
square
foot
easement
to
equalize
it
with
other
properties
that
do
not
have
that
easement.
So
that
was
our
calculation.
It
was
a.
It
was
a
fifteen
thousand
dollar
reduction
in
land.
E
I
I
would
love
it
if
we
didn't
have
to
hear
this
case
every
single
year
and
go
through
the
same
calculation.
So
you
know.
Hopefully
we
can
come
off
of
this
case
and
if
it's,
if
it
goes
in
the
same
direction,
then
maybe
that
that
deduction
could
be
added
to
the
property
card
somewhere
or
or
somehow
and
just
be
considered
going
forward.
A
Okay,
you
know
thanks
for
that,
for
having
the
the
notes
on
that.
My
only
concern
is,
I
think,
last
year
they
didn't
have
any
comparable
sales
coming
from
that.
So
I'm
you
know
now
with
looking
at
comp.
I
think
it's
number
five
from
the
same
flood
risk.
I
mean
it
doesn't
necessarily
impact
it.
I
part
of
my
concern:
is
it's
a
10
000
square
foot
lot.
You
know
there
is
the
eastman
on
the
back.
The
easement
was
there
when
we
purchased
it.
A
You
know,
I
guess
part
of
me,
I'm
not
sure
whether
I
feel
the
same
way
as
I
did
last
year.
You
know
it's
back
on
the
back
of
the
property,
the
utility
of
the
lot,
I'm
not
necessarily
convinced
that
you
know
the
whole
lot
is
not
able
to
be
used.
I
think
the
part
that's
in
the
stream
certainly
has
some
issues,
but
you
know
it's.
The
stream
was
there,
so
I'm
not
feeling
quite
as
strongly
as
I
did
last
year,
I'm
making
adjustments
when
I
look
at
that
sale
of
900
and
basically
50
000.
A
M
D
I
I
guess
you're
looking,
you
know
with
comp
5,
I
there's
a
big
difference
in
location.
I
think
quality
or
grade
of
the
house.
I
think
there's
some
differences.
It
would
cause
and
given
the
area
that
house
is
in
a
little
more
cause
a
better
selling
price,
so
I'm
not
sure
that
that's
as
good
a
cop
as
you
think.
A
A
You
know,
and
since
the
major
drive
of
this
case
is
the
impact
of
the
flood
risk,
here's
the
com
showing
that
it
did
in
fact
sell
in
the
same
flood
zone,
same
flood
risk
factor,
you
know
and
it
did
not
impact
the
sale.
So
that's
that's
where
I'm
going
from,
I
mean,
in
addition,
I
think
we're
all
in
agreement
that
everything
being
equal,
the
other
comps
support
it.
You
know
the
issue
being
the
back
portion
and
the
risk
of
the
flooding
that
the
other
comps
don't
have.
You
know
now.
A
E
Yeah
I
mean
I'm
trying
to
see
how
that
has
the
same
land.
It's
the
the
creek
doesn't
run
through
the
property.
It's
two
houses
over
there's,
not
a
storm
water
easement
in
the
backyard
and
and
the
stormwater
easement
was
really
my
justification
for
the
reduction.
Last
year
I
mean
that's
an
impairment
on
your
property,
so
I'm
I
look
at
the
comp
5
that
everybody's
talking
about
and
there's
no
creek
running
through
the
backyard
and
there's
no
easement.
So
so
as
a
buyer,
I
would
look
at
that
as
a
superior,
lock.
E
E
E
Looking
at
it
as
a
cop,
it's
a
great
comp
except
for
that
stormwater
issue.
That's
the
only
difference
and
that's
where
we
had
a
fifteen
thousand
dollar
deduction
last
year.
D
A
F
I
think
a
lot
of
times
you
know.
Throughout
the
years
we
made
changes
based
on
new
information
that
we
have
like
we
did
last
year,
but
we
didn't
have
a
specific
information
as
far
as
that
affecting
the
sales
and
this
year
you
know
the
county
took
an
extra
step
to
make
an
additional
study
to
see
if
it
would
affect
or
not
to
me,
that's
more
valuable
than
you
know,
having
more
just
a
feeling
that
yeah
that
affects,
and
we
should
change
it,
I
don't
really
see
any
other
information
that
the
appellant
provided.
F
That
would
justify
an
opposition
to
that
point.
So,
based
on
what
the
county
has
this
year,
I'm
okay
with
it.
I
know
we
made
the
change
last
year
based
on
you
know
the
feeling
that
yeah
well,
that
should
be
lower
because
it
affects
market
value.
But
if
we
don't
have
any
information
that
you
actually
does,
then
you
know
the
burden
of
proof
really
is
on
the
appellant.
So
I'm,
okay
with
it.
M
Finally,
the
com5
is
in
a
different
neighborhood
and
exacerbated
by
the
statement.
I've
already
made
that
there's
no
creek
in
their
backyard,
whether
it's
a
danger
or
not.
So
this.
What
I'm
getting
to
is
the
study
we
don't
know
which
of
those
houses
stu
those
properties
studied
have
are
in
flood
zones
or
creek
zones
or
creek
areas
versus
a
creek
on
board
right
there.
So
I
I
haven't,
read
the
study,
I
don't
know
when
it
was
done.
M
I
don't
know
the
constituents,
so
I
I
would
like
to
take
jose's
side
on
this,
but
I'm
not
sure
that
I'm
finding
the
study
as
compelling
as
he
does
for
those
reasons.
M
But
my
bottom
line
is,
though,
that
the
it
doesn't
threaten
the
house.
Some
people
would
like
some
running
water
back
there,
given
the
annoyance
of
fences
falling
down
which
aren't
necessary,
but
I
think
the
improvement
value
assessment
is
really
legitimate
based
on
the
county
relative
to
the
the
comparables.
So
I'm
I'm
good
with
the
county's
assessment.
E
E
A
different
world
up
there
I
mean
you
might
as
well
pull
a
comp
from
you
know
the
case
before
last
right
off
of
the
clarendon
metro
and
tell
me
that
it's
the
same
neighborhood
I
mean.
G
E
Kind
of
I
feel
like
we
had
a
good
rationale
last
year,
and
I
haven't
really
been
my
mind-
has
not
been
changed
by
the
sale
of
a
property
several
miles
away
for
the
high
nines.
D
A
Okay,
well
I'm
going
to
do
a
total
flip
here
and
say
I
originally
said
I
wasn't
prepared
to
keep
the
15
000
adjustment
from
last
year,
but
I
believe
now
based
on
the
discussion
and
looking
at
con
5,
the
location
and
the
fact
that
it's
same
square
footage
and
assess
for
less.
I
would
go
with
the
15
000
reduction.
A
H
E
The
motion
is
to
reduce
total
assessment
to
898
700,
with
the
15
000
reduction
coming
out
of
the
land,
and
that
would
be
the
total.
A
Okay
motion
I'll,
second,
that
all
in
favor
aye
opposed.
A
Okay,
it's
three
to
two:
the
assessment
is
reduced,
the
fifteen
thousand
to
eight
ninety
eight
seven
hundred
for
this
year.
Only
again
next
year
will
be
you
know
it
stands
on
its
own.
Every
year,.
O
A
A
A
Thank
you
all
right.
Thank
you.
That
concludes
the
cases
for
today.
Does
anybody
have
any
other
business
county
or
board
members?