Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout920230.tiff `, 1.5-DPZ FORM ESCRIBED BY THE PROPERTY TAX ADMINISTRATOR 1 • .FORM 920 1/66-6/90 PETI• FOR ABATEMENT OR REFUN?OF TAXES-c. E.KEL CO, DENSERt%an rnt'NTY ASSESSOR • Petitioners: Use this side only. r L. 7 O.1 GREELEY L ; aiorkdo, ' NOV 12 , N0V19.d .. 1 3 19 City or Town [l� ri To The Honorable Board of County Commisgiohets of WELD ct M&COLO Gentlemen: The petition of WINQ$.QR..C.NNTER..INC whose mailing address is. 1200 CAROUSEL DR, STE 100 WINDSOR CO 80550 N City or Town State Zip Code lr'1 SCH: DJI LE NUMBER DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY AS LISTED ON TAX ROLL !15886 c WIN VC—B LOT B VALLEY CENTER SUB - if. cn (1300 CAROUSEL DR) J LIJ U I 0i t4 respectfully requests that the taxes assessed against the above property for the years A. D. 1989 , 1990 , are erroneous, illegal, or due to error in valuation for the following reasons: (Completely describe the circumstances surrounding the incorrect value or tax.) SUBJECT PROPERTY WAS OVERVALUED IN TAX YEARS 1989 & 1990 . THE OVERVALUATION IS VERIFIED BY THE ASSESSMENT REDUCTION THE PROPERTY RECEIVED IN 1991 AND IS FURTHER VERIFIED BY THE ATTACHED VALUATION REPORT. IN ACCORDANCE WITH SENATE BILL 91-231 , PETITIONER REQUESTS THE 1989 & 1990 VALUATIONS BE ADJUSTED TO THE SAME LEVEL AS THE 1991 VALUATION. PLEASE SEE THE ATTACHED VALUATION REPORT FOR OVER • - ASSESSMENT VERIFICATION. 1989 1990 Value Tax Value Tax Orig. 84,240 7,871.14 / 84,240 7,770.14 / Abate. 63,940 5,974.36 63,940 5,897.70 v BaL 20,300 1 ,896.78 20,300 1,872.44 The taxes (have) Qftavexaa6) been paid. Wherefore your petitioner prays that the taxes may be a lox refunded in the sum of $ 11,872.06 I declare, under penalty of perjury in the second degree that this petition, together with any accompanying exhibits or statements, has been examined by me and to the best of my knowledge, information and belief is true, correct and complete. Petitioner -- By teleaceAgent J ea R&N PROPERTY CONSULT NTS 413 MAIN STREET Address WIN.DSO.R.,....CO....80.55.0 303-686-7447 • f}- • / 5003 92O23U /� C_ C (�:, t1F. • RESOLUTION OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WHEREAS, The County Commissioners of Weld County, State of Colorado, at a duly and lawfully called regular meeting held on the llth day of March , A . 19.....9.2., at which meeting there were present the following members. Chairman...Gearge Kennedy.,. .and Comics.i.onex.s..Gorastanc.e..L.....Harbert, C. W, Kirby,_.Gordon..E,...Lacy.,...and W. H. Webster notice of such meeting and an opportunity to be present having been given to the taxpayer and the Assessor of said County and said Assessor represented by Mike Sampson and taxpayer represented by Chris Ruff, R&N, being present; and (name) (name) WHEREAS, The said County Commissioners have carefully considered the within applica- tion, and are fully advised in relation thereto, NOW BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board........cancur.s with the recommendation of (concurs or does not concur) the assessor and the petition be...app.roxe.d......., and an abatement/refund....b.e...aliowed (approved or denied) (be allowed or not be allowed) (1989)$63,940 (1989)$5974.36 on an assessed valuation of$.(19.90).$&3,9411for $(199.0.) 589.7...ZD.total tax for c the th ear(s) 193.9.&99•. �/2�� 0� ` �lif Chairman of Board of County Commissioners. STATE OF COLORADO, i Pro tern ss. County of Weld I, Donald D• Warden , aCiRiMetatiaaratEciefICIN Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners in and for the County of ldeld State of Colorado, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing order is truly copied from the records of the proceedings of the Board of County Commissioners for said Weld County, now in my office. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of said County, at Greeley, Colorado this 11th y of M4;.ch, , A. D. 19 92 141111/i� . I ��jj 1tBaGYti'6y Clerk. By.......E •-/..s..`.. . .. . . ilk.-- Depu . ACTION OF THE PROPERTY TAX ADMINISTRATOR / Denver, Colorado, .... Z L /d , 19. : tion of the Board of County Commissioners, relative to the within petition, is hereby approyeskti approved in part $ ❑ denied for the following reason(s) ATTEST: cretary. ¢ Property Tax Administrator. J Cl r 9 ,0230 Stn ww > _ Ce 3 I— ww 3 tti Z O .. O O z F Q x 011 .cj JO I— 41 o o . y4. '-' w W 3 u) N ... O d .0. a. 2 Z _J E N d yy O O w OJ F- N N V) O. g 'C 8 'O o c5 0 to O O OC Q aen i p a “ O GO u ~O W Q I- r" aTi N T ., V > .-) E a mo = = ° . "E a c ` o O Z ti y y ZI— ( v E p,° +° o e o o O Q rn o o E ° '2 W a x o >° X ¢ ow=- 0.7 ygy 0 = 0� - 0 0' N E .O w 9 2 T p '0 s Q 0 . , •��yy 0 C ~ u, • g - p -c a d Z Q 1-' w o z 3 C N 0 z z . O C ..- O 7 ; 'n n t. O z 0 i O 0 • I'd el E (53 a; t `� "O^ ystl g oU � C+ '^ O .� �d o, C tl .- W W Cr) co \ "` N y . ,�'t'-' a. c0 a, i am aI4 ` N Qr., .c t ' , , 7.. t7 aS 'O 0.m CD tN Z Z \ \ • 'C 'm Q A x p O. tA, a. ' c' rxX❑❑ ° Qa .� v o 9 E . ,,;y M1 • 0 • e • • a+. L'i �/�7. :' r H . • HL iJ i O • C.. . • • . :1 H • r� .J - C i 1 . . . • t•. cr.) ti c� '' CO P'3 i. W N' •`{ ...--I (1 i3'• i • to t,' -, r-: i ti CC: Cr; i i-• • 0% v-1 E;i • - e,: • s +J r.r 0• i`• i••. i'i r• .'4 Th r, +O f_) i r•1 '' 0 " — • ia.. L .. Q , • JW aii ,,_ W >- : ^a U • I J 4 • 0 _ i-- C3 . r. :::it ti, t:i • :i.. Li. �1 (Y. .(_ tr: t" .•: • ,{ • • i' --i i—i 4 C.4 N 4Z r . i • i i N — O - a ' • is r`: • ••t — Y1. : • Q t V.' . ,: =r 1,r. 0). C.,3 cc Ca C0 *-0 s Wa f1 N t. LU E i . r .t•�i -- O W ' U L =,:W C� _ L: • , -- -- a ,.I • c,.. 'j.. 0 N. LU - r: �Lt�.t ••'T' _i o0 f�i(i i' i,E .mss •_ W: :.c7 r: 4i.•.r i+.i in V.i _ :W _. �.i i : Li 't� •r c i. U) ;i u a 0••• J z r.r Q' - _ �, .•nom n' - n O L ::Q 7 rirr Lill . , iiiu 0iIi •\ to • .....i .:-..1- I " f1:' �i • ••43,i F ;i3 L~3 .J.>r yi t t•--i ;_r; 0. f it: _ c " LC (.3.•' v as :� - Z G •- ; :: -_ ;:-1• I- -- w i, i.,: ; . i mioT.n •a1 -Jo ......... .............. ..... .... ......... .. .......... ........ ...- ICI.— .iar . , iN R� N PROPERTY CONSULTANTS PROPERTY TAX CONSULTANT/AGENT AUTHORIZATION Prop Owner/Rep : Windsor Center Inc/ Robert Ehrlich Property Address: 1300 Carousel Dr ; 1200 Carousel Dr City: Windsor County: Weld • PIN(s) : 1584386 • , 1584286 I/we OL-CJ. , agree with R&N Property Consultants (hence/PI R&A) at, fdr the real estate assessment years 1989 and 1990, as to the property referred to above, R&N is hereby engaged and authorized to act as agent and consultant for the undersigned, in the preparation of a real estate assessment appeal for the undersigned to the County Assessor, the County Board of Equalization (CBOE), and any required higher levels of appeal. Further, we also expressly authorize R&N to appear before any and all related hearings of the property tax appeal system, to act as our sole representative before such hearings and to make such presentations and decisions as necessary to effect a settlement of the real estate valuation issue at hand. This agreement further authorizes R&N, as agent of the undersigned, to execute and cause to be filed on behalf of the undersigned, in the name of the undersigned, any and all documents relating to an appeal of the said assessments before the County Assessor, the CBOE, and higher levels of appeal. Agre d: C Own /ag t/lessee date 1 R&N ropert Consul is 92'0230 413 MAIN STREET • P.O. BOX 99 • WINDSOR, COLORADO 80550 •(303)686-7447 FAX(303)686-7492 (.RI•.EI.1.Y,((tk{)RAIN) e t I -. ..' NOTIC OF` ADJUSTMENT PHONE(303)356-0000, I:X'I.d≥56 ,.,•fie., .» .#. —. • '•:` -.''''HI:' WIN VC-B B VALLEY'' LOT CENTER SUB 4a+ye0 't %130Q CAROUSEL% OLORADO -. 1300. CAROUSEL DR WINDSOR OWNER WINDSOR CENTER INC WINDSOR CENTER INC PARCEL 000722001003 PIN R 15843236 1200. CAROUSEL DRS SUITE 100• YEAR 1991 WINDSOR CO 80550 LOG 02100 05/20/1991 ie appraised value of property is based on the appropriate consideration of the approaches to value required by hen. f!rrrAs•,es snr•.r;a determined at your property should be included in the following category(ies): ._.._Residential property is valued by considering the cost and market approaches. .___ Agricultural land value is determined solely by the earning or productive capacity of the land, calhlali/':d at a;ate set by I,.r,. Producing mines are assessed at 25%of the gross proceeds or 100%of the net proceeds,whichr:vei is greater. ._.—Oil and gas leaseholds and lands are assessed at 87.5% of the gross value of the oil and/or gas :,old nr tiair i oried :rum the piemises on primary production;secondary production is valued at 75%. _..All other property, including vacant land,is valued by considering the cost, market,and income .ggwroaehes. your concern is the amount of your property tax, local taxing authorities (county, city, fire prat ction, and other special districts) "cold dget hearings in the fall.Please refer to your tax bill or ask your Assessor for a listing of these districts,and!:!;iii toattenrt these f::t(:•;:(hearings. ,- Assessor has carefully studied all available information, giving particular attention to the specific,. inck.•`rsi on voile.!from :aid has deter- ried the valuations) assigned to your property.The reasons for this determination of value are: THE ACTUAL VALUATION OF YOUR PROPERTY HAS BEEN ADJUSTED BASED UPON THE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION YOU HAVE PROVIDED, I PETITIONER'S l AS:�':SsOli'. '/A_LUAI ltJt -_ PROPERTY CLASSIFICATION ESTIMATE AC:irU L VALUE I Al:'i L'A.V,.LUE OF VALUE . I'tilCI{ i U i2LV II W I Ai 5 it riEVlEW I I LAND 2711374 ' 27a874i IMPS 263; 64d ; 39:327 TOTALS $ 291 , 522::; 67,201 /oil disagree with the Assessor's decision,you have the right to appeal to the County Board of Equ.rii.ration fur further runsidi::i- ,in, 3-1O6(1)(a),C.R.S. Please see the back of this form for detailed information on filing your appeal. WARREN L. LASELL Ot;/2v/v19 30 WELD cdvNty A.v.tek5aon. - i iA l l 86 ; !�U i•r• 1 I'DD3T)ONA1._ io.1,--;)l7:MA li.)N i:3N REVEAL_ . OPINION OF VALUE Owner's Name Windsor Center Inc Property Address . 1200 Carousel Dr; 1300 Carousel Dr City Windsor County Weld Property Type Commercial (Retail) Schedule Number(s) : 1584286, 1584386 PETITIONER'S VALUE-RETAIL PART(1584286) : $300,000 ($87,000 ASSESSED) PETITIONER'S VALUE-RESTAURANT (1584386) : $ 70,000 ($20,300 ASSESSED) Summary of Key Facts Subject is a retail/restaurant complex located east of Windsor. It was developed in 1974, in anticipation of Windsor growing to 15,000 to 20,000 people with the building of the Kodak Plant. Unfortunately, Windsor only grew to 5,000 people, and the growth did not extend out to subject's location. It has suffered from relatively high vacancy for most of its existence. The retail/office portion (1584286) has had significant vacancies, and still today is over 23% empty. It's central foyer design causes an abnormally large common area in both ends of the building, which decreases potential leasable space to 75% of gross area and increases utility costs. Because of its odd design, 51% of the total leasable space is in the basement, where rents are naturally lowest. Subject's upstairs rents average S5.58/sf gross, while the basement rents average $2.63/sf gross. The restaurant building (1584386) has had multiple tenants, including local stalwart Farmers Inn. None could survive the combination of a bad location and INCREDIBLE energy inefficient (ie. high utility bills) construction. The utility bills for this building alone averages $1,800 to $2,000 per month. Protest was missed in 1989, and owners were unaware of the protest period in 1990. Subject's valuation was protested in 1991, and was reduced substantially. In accordance with Senate Bill 231, petitioner now requests review of the two years' values they missed appealing. The 1991 valuation was essentially the same as 1989 and 1990. As the following case will show, there was little difference in the property's condition, both financial and physical, from 1987 to present. Therefore, given the information presented below, petitioner requests a reduction in the 1989 and 1990 valuations to approximately the same level established for 1991. 940230 VALUATION SUMMATION PIN '89 '90 '91 REQUESTED '89/'90 ASSESSED ASSESSED ASSESSED ASSESSMENT 1584286 134,710 134,710 62,070 87,000 1584386 84,240 84,240 19,490 20,300 As the above chart shows, both properties were significantly over-assessed in both 1989 and 1990. Petitioner seeks an adjustment down to $87,000 (assessed) for the retail portion, as sufficient market rents and actual income exists to support that valuation (higher than the '91 value) . Petitioner seeks an adjustment down to 520,300 (assessed) for the restaurant portion, approximately the same as the new '91 valuation. It is considered the same as '91 because subject has sat vacant for FIVE (5) years straight (except for a four month period in 1990. 920230 INCOME APPROACH Income and expenses for the entire property (retail and restaurant) for the last four years is presented below. We then present a market rent analysis of each part of the property separately. RETAIL PORTION (1584286) It must be noted that, in the retail portion, subject has a very low efficiency factor (75%) in terms of net leasable area. It has 20,821 SF of leasable area versus 27,600 SF total area. The inefficiency is due to the central foyer design--the bldg originally had an open atrium surrounded by the stores/offices. The two atriums were eventually enclosed, which increased the total bldg area by approximately 6,700 SF but did not add one square foot of leasable space. The large common area in both ends of the building also contributes to higher utility costs to serve the increased area. Through October of 1991, the retail/office portion (1584286) is still only 77% occupied ( 23% vacant) , with 18% incorrectly used as storage or management offices simply to occupy the space. Because of its odd design, 51% of the total leasable space is in the basement, where rents are naturally lowest. Subject's upstairs is only 9% vacant and averages $5.58/sf gross (including 12% of the prime space used for simple storage) . The basement is 44% vacant (only because management occupies 23% of the basement) and arms-length rents average $2.64/sf gross (management's $1.00/SF rent was NOT considered in the average) . A market income analysis would consider market rents based on retail and office space in downtown Windsor area, coupled with a look at subject's actual rent. We have included two sets of Windsor lease data, with the 1987 Foster lease data being the most germane to this property. Actual rents in that survey ranged from $1.65/SF to $4.06/SF gross, with a median rent of $2.88/SF and an average of $2.97/SF. Note also that all comps are located on Main St (combination HWY 392 and 257), while subject is set back approximately 1/4 mile off HWY 257. Accordingly, the market rent analysis for the retail portion shall use $3.00/SF average, and an optimistic vacancy and expense rates of 15% and 25%, respectively. The result is an extremely optimistic (ie., note utilities now consume 25% of the gross rent by themselves) indication of subject's true value from an income perspective. RESTAURANT PORTION (1584386) The restaurant portion is a disaster. Its location behind the strip center gives it absolutely no visibility. Its construction and digi4E make it extremely energy inefficient, so the tenants utility bills average between $2.60 and $3.00 per square foot--a tremendous burden for a restaurant operation with low margins. The combination--bad location, poor visibility, and high utility costs, make this a dinosaur. Local restaurant giant Farmer's Inn was the tenant for two years (1985 and 1986) and couldn't make it work. It sat empty from early 1987 to mid 1990, when the Dominguez Family Restaurant opened. It closed three months later, and the bldg has been vacant since. Its vacancy rate over the last 7 years is 67% ! ! ! 920230 RECONSTRUCTED INCOME AND EXPENSES (for the ENTIRE complex) 1987 1988 1989 1990 INCOME: ACTUAL RENTS 86,901 85,874 69,357 68,087 EXPENSES: ACCOUNTING 370 1,072 1,258 1,082 INSURANCE 4,074 3,622 3,785 3,785 JANITORIAL 831 302 0 2,303 MAINT & REPAIR 8,930 4,932 9,584 6,898 RESERVES 2,000 2,000 1,000 1,000 SALARIES 10,119 9,282 4,512 7,647 TRASH & GROUNDS 1,221 1,504 1,268 1,723 UTILITIES 22,797 21,810 22,509 20,795 TOTAL EXPENSES 50,342 44,524 43,916 45,233 NET OPERATING 36,559 41,350 25,441 22,854 INCOME INCOME VALUE 281,223 318,076 195,700 175,800 CAPPED AT 13% MARKET RENT ANALYSIS -- RETAIL INCOME Potential Gross: 20,821 net leasable SF @ $3.00/SF = $62,463 Vacancy Rate 15% 9,370 Adjusted Gross Income $53,093 EXPENSES Expenses as percentage of income--25% $13,273 NET OPERATING INCOME $39,820 CAP RATE (INCLUDING EFFECTIVE TAX RATE) .13 INCOME INDICATION OF VALUE (MARKET RENTS) $306,307 MARKET RENT ANALYSIS -- RESTAURANT INCOME Potential Gross: 8,080 net leasable SF @ $3.00/SF = $24,240 Vacancy Rate 50% 12,120 Adjusted Gross Income $12,120 EXPENSES Expenses as percentage of income--25% $ 3,030 NET OPERATING INCOME $ 9,090 CAP RATE (INCLUDING EFFECTIVE TAX RATE) .13 INCOME INDICATION OF VALUE (MARKET RENTS) $ 69,923 920230 Hello