HomeMy WebLinkAbout920787.tiff l
..BOARD OF ASSESSMENT APPEALS
STATE OF COLORADO
Docket Number 18218
ORDER
GILA AVIDAR,
Petitioner,
vs.
WELD COUNTY BOARD OF EQUALIZATION,
Respondent.
THIS MATTER was heard by the Board of Assessment Appeals on
January 27, 1992 , Ramon G. Le Duke and Don A. Holmes presiding.
Mr. Ray Roth, husband of Petitioner, appeared, via telephone, on
her behalf. Respondent was represented by Jan Allison, Esq.
FINDINGS OF FACT:
1. Subject property is described as follows:
LOT 52 ROTH SUB FLG 1 (Weld County Schedule
Number 0742086)
2. Petitioner is protesting the 1991 actual value of the
subject property, a 1, 764 square foot, one-story brick veneer
residence with an 80% basement partially finished and a two-car
attached garage, situated on a .96 acre tract of land.
3 . Petitioner contends that the Assessor classified the
subject improvements as "fair +" when they should be "fair. "
Petitioner's witness also pointed out that the finish in the
basement is very minimum and that the property is adversely
affected by a trap shooting range nearby.
4. Petitioner presented the following indicator of value:
Cost: $77, 560.00
1
/45-0-6011
920787
C\/>— cc_
1AS2 CA
5. Petitioner presented two comparable sales ranging in
sales price from $81, 000. 00 to $98,700. 00 and in size from 1, 469 to
1,764 square feet.
6. Petitioner contends that the Respondent used four
comparable sales that are located in the town of Windsor, a better
location than the subject, with paved roads and curb and gutter.
7. Petitioner contends that the 1991 actual value of the
subject property should be $77, 560. 00, based on a Marshall & Swift
1987 cost manual.
8. Respondent presented the following indicators of value:
Market: $84 , 665. 00
Cost: $84, 491. 00
9. Respondent presented five comparable sales ranging in
sales price from $75, 000. 00 to $98,700. 00 and in size from 1, 344 to
1, 764 square feet to derive a market approach value for the subject
property of $84 , 665. 00 . After adjustments were made, the indicated
range was $71, 962 . 00 to $84,729 . 00.
10. The witness pointed out that two of the comparables are
in the same subdivision as the subject and the other three are 8 . 5
miles away in the town of Windsor.
11. Respondent noted that the Assessor's Office did reinspect
the subject property and reduced the actual value from $89,964 . 00
to $84 , 491. 00 due to moderate basement finish, the deletion of air
conditioning and one full bath.
12 . Respondent used a state-approved cost estimating service
to derive a market-adjusted cost approach value for the subject
property of $84 , 491. 00.
13 . Respondent assigned an actual value of $84, 491. 00 to the
subject property for tax year 1991.
CONCLUSIONS:
1. Petitioner presented sufficient probative evidence and
testimony to prove that the subject property was incorrectly valued
for tax year 1991.
2 . It appears to the Board that the Respondent made a proper
adjustment of the actual value of the subject property after the
reinspection, based on the items corrected and listed in paragraph
#11 above.
TS/F18218
2
q:0787
3 . It is, however, the Board's opinion that a further
adjustment should have been made for the subject's close proximity
to the trap shooting range.
4. The 1991 actual value of the subject property should be
reduced to $82, 035. 00, with $14 , 400. 00 allocated to land and
$67, 635.00 allocated to improvements.
ORDER:
Respondent is ordered to reduce the 1991 actual value of the
subject property to $82, 035. 00, with $14,400. 00 allocated to land
and $67, 635. 00 allocated to improvements.
The Weld County Assessor is directed to change his records
accordingly.
DATED this o5d day of February, 1992 .
BOAR ESS P S
o . Le Duke
Don A. Holmes
This decision was put on the record
FEB 2 4 1992
50
TS/F18218 5:' .O
-Wi SEAL •y=
Sr'
I hereby certify that this is a true '% •%LC--
and correct copy of the decision of ��i�s''••.....••'SQ.��
the Board of Assessment Appeals. Oii�SSESSEa��`a
Ai�%uiJ (�f nt6e /9
Mary mis
3
(1-,071) 7
Hello