Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
DocuSign Envelope ID:9A676531-F35E-4E66-B48C-3107043DBD2E <br /> Yes: 3 <br /> Noes: 0 <br /> Mr. Beattie made a motion to recess the meeting until 3:30 PM. <br /> Mr. Beattie called the meeting back to order at 3:29 PM. <br /> Mill House Capital Holdings LLC PIN 9788276637 <br /> Adam Jones appeared before the Board on behalf of Mill House Capital Holdings LLC to appeal the <br /> value of the property located at 301 Pritchard Avenue, Chapel Hill. The current assessed value of the <br /> property is $520,600. A list of evidence follows: <br /> APPELLANT COUNTY <br /> 9788276637 Appeal 9788276637 County <br /> The appellant is requesting that the Board reduce the valuation to $385,000. The appellant stated that <br /> along with the subject property,he also owns 209 Pritchard Avenue and 211 Pritchard Avenue but is only <br /> appealing 301 Pritchard Avenue. The appellant stated that the increase in value for the subject parcel was <br /> higher than expected and not consistent with the increases of the other two parcels. Mr. Jones complaint is <br /> there should not be a disparity of a 4%, 5%, and 33%increases in value when all homes are similar in <br /> style. <br /> Kelly Wells represented the County and stated that the subject property is a duplex built in 1922 with <br /> 1,984 finished square feet and is located in the Northside Conservation District in Chapel Hill. Ms. Wells <br /> stated that the properties the appellant used for comparison are single-family homes, and research by the <br /> County indicates that lots utilized for Two-to-four Family residences or Rooming Houses should be <br /> valued from 10%to 70%higher than lots utilized for Single Family residences. Ms. Wells stated that after <br /> conducting a site visit on October 7,2021,the County recommends correcting the sketch by adding a 5x8 <br /> patio with roof that is not on record and adding air conditioning at 100% for the residence. These changes <br /> would result in an increase of the valuation from$520,600 to $525,700. <br /> The appellant stated the patio has been there since 1950, and the home is a single family home,not a <br /> duplex. The appellant stated that the initial 2021 valuation was $385,600,which he still feels is high but <br /> more appropriate than the current valuation and the studio apartment was part of the original construction. <br /> The appellant stated he bought the three parcels in 2020, and he has seen major increases in their <br /> valuations,well over what he paid for the three properties. <br /> Ms. Wells stated there is two separate dwelling units within the house, one being a studio apartment <br /> attached to the house making this a two-to-four family property. <br /> Mr. Meyers stated that he was familiar with the Northside Conservation District restrictions and the <br /> subject property was best classified as a single family residence with an efficiency studio. <br /> Mr. Gunn stated that if the County changes the property type from a two-to-four family residence to a <br /> single-family residence and removes the market adjustment on the property,the land value would be <br /> reduced to $225,000(the value for a non-conforming lot in the subject neighborhood) and the building <br />