HomeMy WebLinkAbout951524.tiffRESOLUTION
RE: THE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, 1995, WELD COUNTY, COLORADO
PETITION OF:
SIXTEEN -23 CO (1623 CO)
8050 S YARROW ST
LITTLETON, CO 80123
DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY: PIN: R 2120086 PARCEL: 095912100001 - GR 17535 -TALL
THAT PT SE4 12 5 66 WGA N OF COUNTY RD AS RELOCATED IN BK1498 PG211 & PT NE4
12 5 66 BEG AT SE COR NE4 S89D55'W 50' TO TRUE BEG S89D55'W 840' N0D11'E 270'
N89D55'E 540' ARC OF L CURVE RADIUS OF 60' 94.25'
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, organized as
the Board of Equalization for the purpose of adjusting, equalizing, raising or lowering the
assessment and valuation of real and personal property within Weld County, fixed and made by
the County Assessor for the year 1995, and
WHEREAS, said petition has been heard before the County Assessor and due Notice of
Determination thereon has been given to the taxpayer(s), and
WHEREAS, the taxpayer(s) presented a petition of appeal of the County Assessor's
valuation for the year 1995, claiming that the property described in such petition was assessed too
high, as more specifically stated in said petition, and
WHEREAS, said petitioner being represented by Virginia Remberhelm, and
WHEREAS, the Board has made its findings on the evidence, testimony and remonstrances
and is now fully informed.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of Weld
County, acting as the Board of Equalization, that the evidence presented at the hearing clearly
supported the value placed upon the Petitioner's property by the Weld County Assessor. Such
evidence indicated the value was reasonable, equitable, and derived according to the
methodologies, percentages, figures and formulas dictated to the Weld County Assessor by law.
The assessment and valuation of the Weld County Assessor shall be, and hereby is, affirmed as
follows:
951524
AS0032
AS , r Q-5 i
RE: BOE - SIXTEEN -23 CO (1623 CO)
Page 2
ORIGINAL
Land $ 415,326
Improvements OR
Personal Property 4,781,798
TOTAL ACTUAL VALUE $ 5.197.124
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a denial of a petition, in whole or in part, by the Board of
Equalization may be appealed by selecting one of the following three options:
1. Board of Assessment Appeals: You have the right to appeal the County
Board of Equalization's (CBOE's) decision to the Board of Assessment Appeals
(BAA). Such hearing is the final hearing at which testimony, exhibits, or any
other evidence may be introduced. If the decision of the BAA is further
appealed to the Court of Appeals, only the record created at the BAA hearing
shall be the basis for the Court's decision. No new evidence can be introduced
at the Court of Appeals. (Section 39-8-108(10), CRS)
Appeals to the BAA must be made on forms furnished by the BAA, and
should be mailed or delivered within thirty (30) days of denial by the
CBOE to:
Board of Assessment Appeals
1313 Sherman Street, Room 523
Denver, CO 80203
Phone: 866-5880
OR
2. District Court: You have the right to appeal the CBOE's decision to the District
Court of the county wherein your property is located. New testimony, exhibits
or any other evidence may be introduced at the District Court hearing. For filing
requirements, please contact your attorney or the Clerk of the District Court.
Further appeal of the District Court's decision is made to the Court of Appeals
for a review of the record. (Section 39-8-108(1), CRS)
OR
3. Binding Arbitration: You have the right to submit your case to arbitration. If
you choose this option the arbitrator's decision is final and your right to appeal
your current valuation ends. (Section 39-8-108.5, CRS)
951524
AS0032
RE: BOE - SIXTEEN -23 CO (1623 CO)
Page 3
Selecting the Arbitrator: In order to pursue arbitration, you must notify the
CBOE of your intent. You and the OBOE select an arbitrator from the official list
of qualified people. If you cannot agree on an arbitrator, the District Court of the
county in which the property is located will make the selection.
Arbitration Hearing Procedure: Arbitration hearings are held within sixty days
from the date the arbitrator is selected. Both you and the CBOE are entitled to
participate. The hearings are informal. The arbitrator has the authority to issue
subpoenas for witnesses, books, records, documents and other evidence. He
also has the power to administer oaths, and all questions of law and fact shall
be determined by him.
The arbitration hearing may be confidential and closed to the public, upon
mutual agreement. The arbitrator's written decision must be delivered to both
parties personally or by registered mail within ten (10) days of the hearing.
Such decision is final and not subject to review.
Fees and Expenses: The arbitrator's fees and expenses are agreed upon by
you and the OBOE. In the case of residential real property, such fees and
expenses cannot exceed $150.00 per case. The arbitrator's fees and expenses,
not including counsel fees, are to be paid as provided in the decision.
The above and foregoing Resolution was, on motion duly made and seconded, adopted by
the following vote on the 31st day of July, A.D., 1995.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
/Ott
Weld County Clerk to the Board
BY.
eput97i9ler.i
`r(
APPROVED AS;rOft :
'EY`mug14 4 l
my Attrney
COUNTY, COL,RAD
Dale K. Hall, Chairman 6�
arbara J. Kirkmeyer, ro-Temp
eorge E. =axter
_
Constance fri W€4eat
11 / ( ,7,> C1; 1
W. H. Webster
951524
AS0032
ifl
'on -
BOE DECISION SHEET
PIN #: R 2120086 PARCEL #: 095912100001
SIXTEEN -23 CO (1623 CO)
8050 S YARROW ST
LITTLETON, CO 80123
HEARING DATE: July 31, 1995 TIME: 3:45 P.M.
HEARING ATTENDED? ON) NAME 1 -e o) i�kr'-t- .2l ..1 14,12-' -s-,
AGENT NAME: SIXTEEN -23 CO (1623 CO) JOSEPH D MONZON TERRITORY MGR �"-
APPRAISER NAME o�L-cam_. 1F�o2
DECISION:
DECREASE IN VALUATION
INCREASE IN VALUATION
NO CHANGE IN VALUATION
ASSESSMENT RATIO
ACTUAL VALUATION
ORIGINAL SET BY BOARD
Land
Improvements OR
Personal Property
Total Actual Value
$ 415;126
4,781,798
$ 5,197,124
$ -5'is .3r,
ter,
$
/— ~/
COMMENTS:
MOTION BY Oil TO ,---fyi ��Q ,P.Q j- �-te_ et- ad
® / y )�cr�‘
SECONDED BY �T� Baxter -- �'i )
�' �� �� Hall - )
Failed to prove appropriate value '(Z aYii) 5 8e, Harbert - )
No comparables given Kirkmeyer --`i7 N)
Other: Webster - i h )
RESOLUTION NO._ c s i t <4
M)tt.
WID€.
COLORADO
July 18, 1995
SIXTEEN -23 CO (1623 CO)
8050 S YARROW ST
LITTLETON, CO 80123
Dear Petitioner(s):
CLERK TO THE BOARD
PHONE (303) 356-4000 EXT.4218
FAX: (303) 352-0242
915 10TH STREET
P.O. BOX 758
GREELEY, COLORADO 80632
Parcel No.: 095912100001 PIN No.: R 2120086
The Weld County Board of Equalization has set a date of Monday, July 31, 1995, at or about the
hour of 3:45 P.M., to hold a hearing on your valuation for assessment. This hearing will be held
at the Weld County Centennial Center, 915 10th Street, Greeley, Colorado, in the First Floor
Hearing Room.
You have a right to attend this hearing and present evidence in support of your petition. The Weld
County Assessor will be present before the Board. The Board will make their decision on the basis
of the record made at the aforementioned hearing, as well as your petition, so it would be in your
interest to have a representative present. If you plan to be represented by an agent or an attorney
at your hearing, prior to the hearing you shall provide, in writing to the Clerk to the Board's Office,
an authorization for the agent or attorney to represent you. If you do not choose to attend this
hearing, a decision will still be made by the Board by the close of business on August 10, 1995, and
mailed to you on or before August 16, 1995.
Because of the volume of cases before the Board of Equalization, all cases shall be limited to 15
minutes. Also due to volume, cases cannot be rescheduled. It is imperative that you provide
evidence to support your position. This may include evidence that similar homes in your area are
valued less than yours or you are being assessed on improvements you do not have. Please note:
The fact that your valuation has increased cannot be your sole basis of appeal. Without
documented evidence as indicated above, the Board will have no choice but to deny your appeal.
At least two (2) working days prior to your hearing the Assessor will have available, at your request,
the data supporting his valuation of your property.
SIXTEEN -23 CO (1623 CO) - R 2120086
Page 2
Please advise me if you decide not to keep your appointment as scheduled. If you need any
additional information, please call me at your convenience.
Very truly yours,
BOARD OF EQUALIZATION
Donald D. Warden,
Clerk to the Board
BY:
C• rol A. Harding, Deputy
cc: Warren Lasell, Assessor
SIXTEEN -23 CO (1623 CO) JOSEPH D MONZON TERRITORY MGR
NOTICE OF ADJUSTMENT
1400 NORTH 17th AVE.
GREELEY. COLORADO 80631
PHONE (970) 353-3845, EXT. 3656
WIIlk
COLORADO
SA I 19°�
OR 17535-T ALL THAT PT SE4 12 5 66 WGA N Of:
COUNTY RD AS RELOCATED IN BK1498 PG211 1: PT
NE4 12 5 66 BEG AT SE COP NE4 589O559W 50' TO
TRUE BEG 589O559W 84O• NOD11'E 270' N89D55'`
54O' ARC OF L CURVE RADIUS OF 60' 94.25'
2345 W 16 ST GREELEY
OWNER SIXTEEN -23 CO (1623 CO)
XT; -:.:t4-2.3 CC (1 523 CO)
J t '•:_P'- ") Si ON Z0ra TERP IT ORY MGR
V I ri POF ;1 I: CO
1� O 7TH ST 11'4b0
`:V .: CO 8O2O2
05/31/19.5
PARCEL
PIN
YEAR
LOG
O'951121 OOOO1
P 21 2'30 86
1995
34O23
The appraised value of property is based on the appropriate consideration of the approaches to value required by law. The Assessor has determined
that your property should be included in the following category(ies):
i )A.,4TIAL PROPERTY IS VALUED BY CONSIDERING THE MARKET APPROACH.
•rli:.ULTU-/RL LAND VALUE IS DETERMINED SOLELY BY THE EARNING OR PRODUCTIVE
.; +"q:ITY 1F THz: LAND, CAPITALIZED AT A RATE SET BY LAW.
L _ .:T:it:'>? OP.=F TY, INCLUDING VACANT LANG, IS VALUED BY CONStD RING THE COST,
;+ T, .a .to.) INCOME APPROACHES•
If your concern is the amount of your property tax, local taxing authorities (county, city, fire protection, and other special districts) hold
budget hearings in the fall. Please refer to your tax bill or ask your Assessor for a listing of these districts, and plan to attend these budget hearings.
The Assessor has carefully studied all available information, giving particular attention to the specifics included on your protest and has deter-
mined the valuation(s) assigned to your property. The reasons for this determination of value are:
.• —^::U.AL UAT TION OF THIS PROPERTY HAS INDICATED THE
i1JU ;'1`_: -1T Liw:
L- iti)
i.,12 _.
PROPERTY CLASSIFICATION
TOTALS $
PETITIONER'S
ESTIMATE
OF VALUE
ASSESSORS§ VALIfATION
I
ACTUAL VALUE
PRIOR TO REVIEW
415,326
11,341,249
ACTUAL VALUE
AFTER REVIEW
415, 326
4, 781 , ►7A
$ 8r756,575$ 5,197,124
If you disagree with the Assessor's decision, you have the right to appeal to the County Board of Equalization for further consideration,
39-8-106(1)(a), C.R.S. Please see the back of this form for detailed information on filing your appeal.
By:
15-DPT-AR
Form PR -207-87/94
WARREN L. LASELL
WELD COUNTY ASSESSOR
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON REVERSE SIDE
c6/13/4 =i
DATE
139
YOU HAVE I HE "iIGH HJHAL i Hh )1HS
DURFB,
9 it) 9J1 ,.. 6Yn'i:'.
GCeele
NTY BOARD OF EQUAL9ZA1 IOir , D . t: Hr:'1NP,.
`n? County Board of Equalittatom
R RIGHTS FOR FUHT..H
not satisfied with the Ceu Ot?
Lard C t r Gualizati'r) S •tt.en
NOTIFICATION OF HEARING,
District Court:
9th Avenue and 9th Stiact. Puhex t;
Greeley. Colorado F0632
ielephnnf,r {970i LOU ludo F nt. 4`520
Arh,rrates
WELD riOIINT7
9t 17trt ihiro '., P ; Loot /55
t ..rles t,� i,,,a hr, Rl,i53
If you do not receive a determination from the
Assessment Appeals by September 18.
.'O PRESERVE YOUR APPEAL
THEREFORE, WE RECOMMEND ALL C r)
PE7%7ION
711/(414 ?lira/1h
C 3
MARVIN F. POER & COMPANY
1200 r `''.rite 950
Deaver, WIinu'3J 80202
WELD COUNTY
COLORADO
OFFICE OF WELD COUNTY ASSESSOR
1400 17TH AVENUE
GREELEY, COLORADO 80631
SIXTEEN -23 CO. (1623 CO)
PIN NO: R 2120086
R 2120186
R 2290586
ADDRESS: 2313-2327-2345 16TH STREET
GREELEY, COLORADO 80631
MARKET REPORT: JUNE 30, 1994
1995 PROPERTY VALUATION
$ 8,456,030
OFFICE OF WELD COUNTY ASSESSOR
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table of Contents 1
Property Identification 2
Assessed Valuation 4
Sales Comparison Approach (Square Foot) 5
Sales Comparison Approach (Per Unit) 6
Summary and Final Estimate of Value 7
Location Map 8
Subject Photographs 9
Comparable Sale No. 1 11
Comparable Sale No. 2 12
Comparable Sale No. 3 13
-1-
PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION
Type of Property:
The subject property is classified as residential. Subject
property consists of a 245 unit apartment complex. Complex
contains 5 - 47 unit medium rise apartment buildings, 1 - 6 unit
and 1 - 4 unit townhouse type buildings. Structures were
constructed from 1972 through 1980, with an overall effective
year built of 1977. Total gross area of subject buildings is
258,760 square feet. The improvements are situated on 388,830
square foot site zoned primarily R-3 , under a City of Greeley
zoning ordinance.
Street Address:
The subject property is located at 2311 - 2327 - 2345 16th
Street, in Greeley, Colorado
Legal Description:
The subject is legally identified as:
Parcel: 095912100001
GR 17535-T ALL THAT PT SE4 12 5 66 WGA N OF COUNTY RD AS
RELOCATED IN BK1498 PG211 & PT NE4 12 5 66 BEG AT SE COR NE4
S89D55'W 50TO TRUE BEG S89D55'W 840' NOD11'E 270' N89D55'E
540' ARC OF L CURVE RADIUS OF 60' 94.25' N89D55'E 240'
SOD11'W 330' TO TRUE BEG 9.61A M/L EXC BLD B (1.499A M/L)
ALSO EXC BLDG C (1.916A M/L) %2345 16 ST%
Parcel: 095912100002
GR 17535-T2 PT E2 12 5 66 WGA (BLDG C) BEG SE COR NE4
SOD11'W 224.95' N89D30'W 50' N0D11'E 78.42' TO TRUE POB
NOD1l'E 426.36 N89D55'W 80' SOD11'W 215' S89D55'W 228.41'
S32D40'W 121.60' THENCE S57D35'W 203.72' N89D48'E 201.39' TO
TRUE POB (1.916A M/L) %2311 16 ST%
Parcel: 095912400002
GR 17535-T1 PT E2 12 5 66 WGA (BLDG B) BEG SE COR NE4
SOD11'W 224.95' N89D30'W 50' TO TRUE POB NOD11'E 78.42'
S89D48'W 201.39' N57D35'W 203.72' S32D40'W 199.36' THENCE
ALONG ARC CURVE LONG CHORD BEARS S76D44'E 294.13' S89D30'E
144.28' N45D20'E 70.51' TO TRUE POB (1.499A MIL) %2327 16
ST%
-2-
Ownership:
According to records dept in the office of the Weld County
Assessor, the owner of the subject property is:
SIXTEEN -23 CO (1623 CO)
8050 S. YARROW STREET
LITTLETON, COLORADO 80123
Amenities:
Complex includes secure buildings and an individual manger per 47
unit building, elevators, a 1767 square foot clubhouse with an
indoor swimming pool, handball and tennis courts, off-street
covered and enclose parking, and laundry facilities.
-3-
ASSESSED VALUATION
For property tax purposes the subject property is assessed by the
Weld county Assessor's Office under parcel numbers 095912100001.
.095912100002 and 09591240001. The valuation for tax year 1995 by
the assessor is detailed as follows:
Assessed Land Value
Assessed Improvements Value
Total Actual Value
Land Value:
1995
$ 672,676
$ 7,783,354
$ 8,456,030
The subject is located in zoned residential area. Subject land
consists of 388,830 square feet. Market indicates value of land
in this neighborhood to $2.00 per per square foot. A 13.5%
adjustment was given for land size.
388,830 * $2.00 * .865 = $672,676.
Improvements Value:
Subject improvements cosists of 258,760 square feet. Based on
sales and time trending by the assessor's office indicates an
overall value of $30.07943 per square foot for improvements of
this type.
258,760 * $30.07943 = $7,783,354
Total Actual Value:
Total actual value according to the assessor's office is
calculated at $672,676 for land and $7,783,354 for improvements,
for atotal actual value of $8,456,030.
$672,676 + $7,783,354 = $8,456,030
Support of Values:
Presented on the succeeding pages is the sales comparison
(market) approach to value, which is used to support the value
assigned by the county assessor's office. The market approach to
value is the only method allowed under State of Colorado law for
residential property. Two types of units of comparison are used
in the sales comparison approach, the per unit method and the
square foot method.
-4-
WELD COUNTY ASSESSOR'S OFFICE
COMPARABLE MATRIX GRID
(SQUARE FOOT METHOD)
PIN NO.
ADDRESS
CITY
SCHEDULE NO.
SALE DATE
SALE PRICE
TIME ADJUST.
TIME ADJ. S/PRICE
LAND VALUE
IMPS VALUE
SUBJECT 1
2120086
2313 16 St
Greeley
095912100001
CHARACTERISTICS:
YEAR BUILT
IMPS SF
CONSTRUCTION
QUALITY
STYLE
$672,676
$7,783,354
1977
258,760
Frm/Msn
AMENITIES (Parking,
garage, pools, etc.)
ADJUSTMENTS:
TOTA
ADJU
SUBJI
Goo
9 & Above uni
Apartmen
$332,308
COMP. 1
2459786
2601 23 Av
Greeley
095913412012
COMP. 2
COMP. 3
0085287
3750 W 24 St
1779886
706 27 Av
9/92
$3,225,000
$623,376
$3,848,376
$522,842
$3,325,534
1973
125,238
Frm/Hdbn
Av'
9 & Above uni
_ Apartmen
$136,444
Greeley
095914400004
Greeley
095901415034
10/91
$6,000,000
$1,108,408
$7,108,408
$259,170
$6,849,238
1987
186,652
Frrn/Hdbr,
Goo
9 & Above uni
Apartmen
$302,366
12/92
$1,697,500
$327,617
$2,025,117
$152,550
$1,872,567
1971
61,875
Frm/Msn
Av
9 & Above uni
Apartmen
$126,425
$66,511
($684,924°
$56,177
SIZE
$3,338,050
$166'277
_ $1,802,700
$4,922,125
QUALITY
$0
$93,628
CONSTRUCTION
$166,277
$342,462
$0
AMENITIES
$195,864
$29,942
$205,883
L. ADJUSTMENTS:
$3,932,978
$1,490,180
$5,277,813
IMPS VALUE
$3,325,534
$6,849,238
$1,872,567
MPSED
SALE PRICE:
$7,454,376
$8,369,360
$7,356,263
B
SUJECT IMPS SF
SU JECTE
258760
258760
258760
PER SF
$28.81
$32.34
$28.43
CALCULATED SALES PRICE
-5-
$29.86 X 258,760 = IMPS
LAND
OTHER
TOTAL
$7,726,667
$672,676
$8,399,343
WELD COUNTY ASSESSOR'S OFFICE
COMPARABLE MATRIX GRID
(PER UNIT METHOD)
SUBJECT
COMP. 1
COMP.2
COMP. 3
1779886
PIN NO.
__
2120086
2459786
008528
ADDRESS
2313 16 S
2601 23 A
3750 W 24 S
706 27 A
CITY
Greele
Greele
Greele
Greele
SCHEDULE NO.
095912100001
09591341201
09591440000
09590141503
SALE DATE
9/9
10/91
12/92
SALE PRICE
$3,225,000
$6,000,000
$1,697,500
TIME ADJUST.
-_
$623,376
$1,108,408
$327,617
TIME ADJ. S/PRICE
$3,848,376
$7,108,408
$2,025,117
LAND VALUE
$672,676
$522,842
$259,170
$152,550
IMPS VALUE
$7,782,354
$3,325,534
$6,849,238
$1,872,567
NO. OF UNITS 245
156
210
72
SALE PER UNIT- IMPS
$21,318
$32,615
$26,008
CHARACTERISTICS:
YEAR BUILT
1977
1973
1987
1971
IMPS SF
1056
803
889
859
CONSTRUCTION
Frm/Msnry
Frm/Hdbrd
FmVHdbrd
Frrn/Msr
QUALITY
Good
Avg
Good
Avg
STYLE
9
& Above unit
Apartment
9
& Above unit
Apartment
9
& Above unit
Apartment
9
& Above unit
Apartment
AMENITIES (Parking,
arage, pools, etc.)
$1,356
$875
$1,440
$1,756
ADJUSTMENTS:
TOTA
ADJU
/;lit
$426
($,7;
$44,11$05
$780
$4,305
SIZE
$6,325
QUALITY
$1,066
$0
$1,300
CONSTRUCTION
$1,066
$1,631
$ $p
AMENITIES
$481
$481
($8$8 4)
($400)
L ADJUSTMENTS:
$9,364
$4,091
6,606
IMPS VALUE
$21,318
$32,615
$26,008
STED SALE PRICE:
$31,163
$36,622
$32,214
CALCULATED SALES PRICE
$33,332.91 X 245 = IMPS
LAND
OTHER
TOTAL $8,839,239
-6-
$8,166,563
$672,676
CORRELATION AND FINAL ESTIMATE OF VALUE
The sales comparison (market) approach to value has been
extensively detailed in this market report using both the square
foot and per unit methods. This is the only value approach
allowable in the State of Colorado for residential property.
Square Foot Method
Per Unit Method
SUMMARY
1995
$8,399,343
$8,839,239
Based on the strength of supportable data that was presented in
this market report, it is the conclusion of the Weld County
Assessor's Office that the market value of the subject property
as January 1, 1995 is:
EIGHT MILLION SIX HUNDRED NINETEEN THOUSAND
THREE HUNDRED DOLLARS
$8,619,300
-7-
COMPARABLE SALE NO. 1
ADDRESS: 2601 23RD AVE, GREELEY
SALE DATE: 9/92
SALE PRICE: $3,225,000
ADJUSTED SALE PRICE $3,848,376
-11-
IMPS SF: 125,238
YEAR BUILT: 1973
LAND: $522,842
COMPARABLE SALE NO. 2
ADDRESS: 3750 W 24TH ST., GREELEY
SALE DATE: 10/91
SALE PRICE: $6,000,000
ADJUSTED SALE PRICE $7,108,408
-12-
IMPS SF: 186,652
YEAR BUILT: 1987
LAND: $259,170
COMPARABLE SALE NO. 3
ADDRESS: 706 27TH AVE., GREELEY
SALE DATE: 12/92
SALE PRICE: $1,697,500
ADJUSTED SALE PRICE $2,025,117
-13-
IMPS SF: 61,875
YEAR BUILT: 1971
LAND: $152,567
July 26, 1995
Weld County Board of Equalization
915 10th Street
Greeley, CO 80631
RE: Longmeadow Apts.
2311 16th St.
Greeley
Parcel #(s): 2290586, 2120086, 2120186
To Whom it May Concern:
We represent the owner of the above -referenced property. Please consider this correspondence as an
official appeal of the Tax Year 1995 actual value for the subject property.
For Tax Year 1995, the Assessor has assigned to the parcels listed above an actual value of
$14,146,705.00. Based upon the reasons listed below and the attached information, we believe a more
suitable actual value for assessment purposes for Tax Year 1995 would be approximately $7,000,000.00.
We respectfully ask that you review your records for the subject property and examine the attached
information. We believe that the following deserves specific consideration:
* Market Sales Comparables Support a Lower Value
We appreciate your prompt attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
MARVIN F. POER & COMPANY
D.
Josh D. Monzon
Territory Manager, Certified General Appraiser #CG01317134
Marvin F. Poer & Company
1200 17th Street #960
Denver, CO 80202
(303) 571-1800
11629/152734
Page 1
CONSULTING ASSIGNMENT
FOR ASSESSMENT PURPOSES &
RESTRICTED REPORT
OF:
Longmeadow Apts.
2311 16th St.
WELD COUNTY
Prepared For:
1623 COMPANY
Prepared By:
MARVIN F. POER & COMPANY
1200 17th Street, Suite 960
Denver, CO 80202
(303) 571-1800
Effective Date of Value for Assessment Purposes:
June 30, 1994
11629/152734
Page 2
May 21, 1995
Mr. Walter B Read
Owner
1623 COMPANY
8050 S. Yarrow
Littleton,CO 80123
RE: Longmeadow Apts.
2311 16th St.
Greeley
Parcel #(s): 2290586, 2120086, 2120186
Dear Mr. Read:
In accordance with your request and authorization, this writing transmits our analysis, opinions and
conclusions regarding theactualvalue for tax assessment purposes of the above referenced property.
The purpose of this report is to provide you with our opinion of the appropriate actual value to be used by
the assessing jurisdiction within which your property is located. Unless otherwise stated, the effective
date of value is June 30, 1994 and the property interest valued is the fee simple estate. This report
conforms to the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP). As your consultant in ad
valorem tax matters, our firm and the undersigned are considered agent advocates under USPAP.
Consequently, this report should not be in any manner considered a complete written appraisal of your
property.
As a result of our analyses and based upon our experience in the ad valorem tax field, the undersigned has
formed the opinion that the suitable actual value of the subject property for assessment purposes as of
June 30, 1994 and contingent to the attached Certification, Assumptions and Limiting Conditions is:
$7,000,000.00
The following restricted report contains the analyses upon which the expressed opinions were predicated.
Thank you for the opportunity to serve you with this consulting assignment.
Sincerely,
MARVIN F. POER & COMPANY
Joseph D. Monzon
Territory Manager, Certified General Appraiser #CG013 17134
11629/152734
Page 3
CERTIFICATION
I certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:
• the statements of fact contained in this report are true and correct and the reported analyses, opinions,
and conclusions are limited only by the reported assumptions and limiting conditions, and are my
personal, unbiased professional analyses, opinions, and conclusions.
• I have no present or prospective interest in the property that is the subject of this report, and I have no
personal interest or bias with respect to the parties involved.
• as a property tax consultant for Marvin F. Poer & Company, my compensation is not directly
contingent on an action or event resulting from the analysis, opinions, or conclusions in, or the use of
this report. Marvin F. Poer & Company may receive as part of its compensation a contingency fee
based upon the eventual real estate tax savings as a result of the analysis, opinions, and conclusions
contained herein.
• my analysis, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared, in
conformity with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice.
• I HAVE made a personal inspection of the property that is the subject of this report.
• No one provided significant professional assistance to the person signing this report.
Jh D'Monzon
Certified General Appraiser #CG01317134
11629/152734
Date Signed
Page 4
ASSUMPTIONS & LIMITING CONDITIONS
The consultant's certification that appears in the report is subject to the following conditions:
This report whether written or oral is intended to be used for ad valorem assessment purposes at meetings
with assessor(s), assessor staff, Boards of Equalization, hearing officers, referees and County
Commissioners. The consultant has determined that the client's request for something less than or
different from a Complete Report would not result in a misleading analysis and report. This report has
been prepared by the signed agent advocate representing Marvin F. Poer & Company's client. This report
shall not be used for any other purpose except for assessment or ad valorem taxation purposes.
The highest level of reliability is a Complete Appraisal performed without invoking the Departure
Provision. Limited Appraisals and thus Restricted Reports performed under and resulting from invoking
the Departure Provision have varying levels of reliability. The Restricted Report offers minimal
presentation of information. As a consultant advocate, the consultant does his or her work under USPAP
Standards 4 and 5 rather than Standards 1 and 2. Standards 4 and 5 address consulting assignments. In
addition, outlined, permitted departures in Standard 1 are listed below.
Both consultants and users of report services must realize that, as the degree of departure increases, the
corresponding level of reliability of the Restricted Report decreases and the user of the report service
accepts a higher level of risk. The restricted report has limited utility. Users of this report are warned that
this type of report cannot be understood properly without additional information in the work file of the
consultant.
The consultant herein, by reason of this report, may be required to give further consultation, testimony, or
attendance within courts, hearings, or tribunals with reference to the property and its analyses or
conclusions in question.
The following numbered statements identify any permitted departures from the requirements of Standard
1. Other important Departure Provisions are attached:
1) Unless otherwise stated, the consultant has not considered any or all easements, restrictions,
encumbrances, reservations, covenants, contracts, declarations, special assessments, ordinances, or other
items of a similar nature. Leases or contracts written during the base period of valuation have been
considered in the valuation.
2) Unless otherwise stated, the consultant has not considered whether an appraised fractional interest,
physical segment, or partial holding contributes pro rata to the value of the whole.
3) Unless otherwise stated, the consultant has not identified and considered the effect on value of any
personal property, trade fixtures or other intangibles. This report, written or oral, shall be considered a
Limited Report written as a restricted report as fixtures or intangible items that are not real property but
are included in the report.
4) Unless otherwise stated, the consultant has not considered the effect on use and value of the following
factors: existing land use regulations, reasonably probable modifications of such land use regulations,
11629/152734
Page 5
ASSUMPTIONS & LIMITING CONDITIONS (Continued)
economic demand, the physical adaptability of the real estate, neighborhood trends, and the highest and
best use of the real estate. Unless otherwise outlined, the highest and best use is its current use. It is not
necessary to present a highest and best use analysis in this report.
5) Unless otherwise stated, the consultant has not appraised the land as though vacant and available for
development to its highest and best use and that the report of improvements is based on their actual
contribution to the site. In various legal and practical situations, a site may have a contributory value that
differs from the value as if vacant.
The consultant has considered and reconciled the quality and quantity of data available and analyzed
within the approaches used and the applicability or suitability of the approaches used.
Any resulting value may be expressed as a single point estimate of value, a range in value, or a value in
relationship (e.g. not less than, not more than) from a previous value estimate or established benchmark
(e.g. assessed value, collateral value).
If either known or stated, the consultant has considered easements, restrictions, encumbrances, leases,
reservations, covenants, contracts, declarations, special assessments, ordinances, or other items of a similar
nature.
The distribution, if any, of the total valuation in this report between land and improvements applies only
under the stated program of utilization. The separate allocations for land and buildings must not be used
in conjunction with any other report and are invalid if so used.
Possession of this report, or a copy thereof, does not carry with it the right of publication. It may not be
used for any other purpose by and other person other than the party to who it is addressed without the
written consent of the consultant, and in any event only with the proper written qualification and only in
its entirety. Acceptance of, and/or any use of this report by the client or any third party, constitutes
acceptance of all limiting conditions and assumptions noted in this report.
Neither all nor any part of this report shall be disseminated to the public through advertising, public
relations, news sales, or other media without the prior written consent and approval of the consultant.
Client and any third party users agree that this report consists of "trade secrets and commercial or financial
information" which is privileged and confidential and exempt from disclosure under 5 U.S.C. 522(b)(4).
The analyses and statements contained herein are statements of opinion only and do not necessarily
represent the only analysis or indication of value that might be otherwise obtained on the property interest
being appraised. Value opinions of qualified consultants differ. No warrant, express or implied, is made
by the consultant indicating that his opinion will represent the only opinion of dollar value that might be
obtained by the client as of the date of the valuation.
11629/152734
Page 6
ASSUMPTIONS & LIMITING CONDITIONS (Continued)
The consultant will not be responsible for matters of a legal nature that affect either the property being
appraised or the title to it. The consultant assumes that the title is good and marketable and, therefore, will
not render any opinions about the title unless otherwise stated herein. The property is appraised on the
basis of it being under responsible ownership.
The information furnished by others is believed to be reliable; however, no warranty is given for it
accuracy.
All engineering is assumed to be correct. The plot plans and illustrative material, if any shown in this
report are included only to assist the reader in visualizing the property, and should not be considered
surveys.
It is assumed that there is full compliance with all applicable federal, state, and local environmental
regulations and laws unless noncompliance is stated, defined, and considered in this report.
It isassumedthat all applicable zoning and use regulations and restrictions have been complied with
unless a nonconformity has been stated, defined, and considered in this report.
It is assumed that there are no hidden or apparent conditions of the property, subsoil, or structures unless
otherwise stated within the report that render it more or less valuable. No responsibility is assumed for
such conditions or for arranging for engineering studies that may be required to discover them.
It is assumed that the utilization of the land and improvements is within the boundaries or property lines of
the property described in that there is no encroachment or trespass unless noted in this report.
Unless otherwise stated, to the best of the consultant's knowledge, the consultant is not aware of any prior
sales, agreements of sale, options or listings of the subject property that occurred three years prior to June
30, 1994.
Unless otherwise stated in this report, the existence of hazardous substances, including without limitation
asbestos, polychlorinated biphenyl's, petroleum leakage, or agricultural chemicals, which may or may not
be present on the property, or other environmental conditions, were not called to the attention of nor did
the consultant become aware of such during the consultant's inspection. The consultant has no knowledge
of the existence of such materials on or in the property unless otherwise stated. The consultant is not
qualified to test such substances or conditions. If the presence of such substances, such as asbestos, urea
formaldehyde foam insulation, or other hazardous substancesorenvironmental conditions may affect the
value of the property, the value estimated is predicated on the assumption that there is no such condition
on or in the property or in such proximity thereto that it would cause a loss in value. No responsibility is
assumed for any such conditions, nor for any expertise or engineering knowledge required to discover
them.
11629/152734
Page 7
ASSUMPTIONS & LIMITING CONDITIONS (Continued)
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) became effective January 26, 1992. I have not made a
specific compliance survey to determine whether or not it is conformity with the various detailed
requirements of the ADA. It is possible that a compliance survey of the property, together with a detailed
analysis of the requirements of ADA, could reveal that the property is not in compliance with one, or more
of the requirements of the act. If so, this fact could have a negative effect upon the value of the property.
Unless otherwise stated, it assumed that the subject conforms to ADA standards.
A limited discussion is included regarding the consideration and reconciliation of the quality and quantity
of data available and the analysis within the approaches used and the applicability or suitability of the
approaches used.
DEPARTURES FROM STANDARDS
EXPLANATION OF REPORT TECHNIQUES USED
The following departure provisions have been invoked. Additional explanations of report techniques
considered are outlined below:
Income Capitalization Approach
If applicable to the valuation of the subject property for assessment purposes, the consultant has collected,
analyzed and reconciled the following:
• such comparable rental data as are available to estimate the market rental of the property being
appraised;
• such comparable operating expense data as are available to estimate the operating expenses of the
property being appraised;
• such comparable data as are available to estimate rates of capitalization and/or rates of discount.
11629/152734
Page 8
DEPARTURES FROM STANDARDS (Continued)
The verification of such data above has been limited to reliance upon general publications rent surveys,
property owners, or assessor's data.
If provided, Direct Capitalization of either actual operating information or market information has been
used to provide an indication of value for the subject property. Unless otherwise specifically indicated,
this report does not provide projections of future rent and expenses. The information specifically used in
this report pertains to the data collection period from January 1, 1993 through June 30, 1994.
If an income capitalization approach is not provided in this report, then this approach is not appropriate for
the analysis of the subject property for assessment purposes, because the subject is either a special purpose
property or rental data was not available.
Sales Comparison Approach (Market Approach)
If a sales comparison analysis is provided, the use of the sales comparison approach has been limited to
general analysis of such comparable data necessary to support a value . Unless otherwise stated, the
comparable data has not been fully confirmed with either the buyer or seller. The comparable data has
been discovered using Dresco/Roddy Report services, information provided by the property owner or
provided by the county assessor's office. If there is no sales adjustment grid in this report, then the sales
indicated in this report have not been adjusted to the subject property. These sales are shown to provide
sale price parameters for similar properties and to provide support for other approaches or methodologies
used in this report. Unless otherwise stated, the consultant has not included listing prices or marketing
time for the comparables.
If comparable sales are not provided, then the sales comparison approach is not applicable in this report
for assessment purposes. This is due to the lack of appropriate sale comparables truly similar to the
subject property in terms of all factors to consider.
Cost Approach
Unless otherwise stated, the value of the site has not been independently valued and such comparable cost
data of the improvements has not been analyzed. The departure provision is invoked for use of the cost
approach. The cost approach is excluded from this report due to the difficulty in estimating accrued
depreciation for existing properties.
If the subject property is partially complete or improved, unless excluded from this report, cost estimates
and a independent land valuation is provided. If no independent land valuation is provided, then it is
assumed that the county assessor's land value is correct.
Any cost estimates have been obtained through actual costs provided by the owners, Marshall and Swift
cost estimating program(s), or analysis of assessor's cost data. Estimates of depreciation or deterioration,
if provided, have been developed through Marshall/Swift depreciation tables, market analysis, or from
assessor's data, when applicable.
11629/152734
Page 9
DEPARTURES FROM STANDARDS (Continued)
Other Explanations
If the value indicated is referred in the report as market value, and the actual leases are used for that
valuation, for assessment purposes, we have considered and analyzed the conditions of the lease and
provided that information in the report. For assessment purposes, the leased fee estate is often considered
as the actual value for the property.
Unless otherwise stated, there is no analysis or consideration on the effect on value, if any, of anticipated
public or private improvements, located on or off the site, to the extent that market actions reflect such
anticipated improvements as of the effective report date.
Other data, including the specific components of the assessor's cost, market and income information may
be used in conjunction with this analysis to derive an actual value for the subject property.
If provided, assessment or tax comparables may also be used to provide an indication of actual value for
the subject property.
If contamination or other environmental issues have been addressed, then consideration on their overall
effect on value may be presented by the consultant, recognizing that the consultant is not an expert in the
field of estimating cleanup costs, remediation, etc.
Unless otherwise stated, the real property interest being appraised is the fee simple interest; the purpose
and intended use of the report is for ad valorem tax purposes or assessment purposes in challenging the
validity of actual values set by the county assessor.
The effective date of this report is the valuation date of June 30, 1994; with reference to the existence and
use of the subject property on January 1, 1995. The report date is the signed date on the Certification
page.
The consultant has not developed a feasibility or complete market analysis. However, the results of this
report are appropriate for the course of action to achieve the client's objectives. The client's objective is to
seek a reduction in the actual value of his/her property and eventually reduce the tax liability.
11629/152734
Page 10
DEFINITIONS
Limited Appraisal: The act or process of estimating value or an estimate of value performed under and
resulting from invoking the Departure Provision. The use of the term Limited Appraisal or Restricted
Report makes it clear that the assignment involved something less than, or different from the work
required by the specific guidelines.
Restricted Report: A written report of minimal presentation of information prepared under Standards
Rule 2-2(c) and performed under Standard 1 passed by the Appraisal Standards board of the Appraisal
Foundation March 22, 1994 to be effective July 1,1994. Consultant advocates are required to conform to
Standards 4 & 5 under USPAP.
Fee Simple Estate: absolute ownership unencumbered by any other interest or estate; subject only to the
four powers of government.
Actual Value: Synonymous with Market Value
Market Value: The most probable price which a property should bring in a competitive and open market
under all conditions requisite to a fair sale, the buyer and seller each acting prudently and knowledgeably,
and assuming the price is not affected by undue stimulus. Implicit in this definition is the consummation
of a sale as of a specified date and the passing of title from seller to buyer under conditions whereby:
1. buyer and seller are typically motivated;
2. both parties are well informed or well advised, and acting in what they consider their best
interest;
3. a reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open market;
4. payment is made in terms of cash in United States dollars or in terms of financial arrangements
comparable thereto; and
5. the price represents the normal consideration for the property sold unaffected by special or
creative financing or sales concessions granted by anyone associated with the sale.
Important: The value indicated in this report is referred to as market value or actual value.
Because this definition of market value or actual value may be used at meetings with assessors,
County and State Board hearings and other arenas of litigation, it is important to recognize that the
interpretation of market value or actual value for assessment purposes in the State of Colorado may
differ from the traditional definition of market value for mortgage, condemnation, or insurance
purposes, etc.
11629/152734
Page 11
VALUATION SUMMARY FOR ASSESSMENT PURPOSES
Property Name:
Property Address:
Improvements/Description:
Number of Units/Rooms:
Gross Building Area/SF:
Rentable Area/SF:
Land Area:
Year Built:
Longmeadow Apts.
2311 16th St.
APT
245
260,527.00
0.00
388,816.56 Square Feet, 8.93 Acres
77
Additional Comments (if applicable):
Value Indications:
Cost Approach:
Sales Comparison (Market) Approach:
Income Capitalization Approach:
Equity Comparison Approach:
Departure Invoked
$7,000,000.00
Departure Invoked
Not Applicable
Reconciliation Comments: Sales comparables support requested value.
Final Estimate of Value:
11629/152734
$7,000,000.00
Page 12
Hello