Orange County NC Website
DocuSign Envelope ID:5E26B84F-340A-4CF0-8353-5E4F9FC6CB88 <br /> Property Identification: <br /> Property Owner Kaye de Kruif Appellant if different <br /> Property Address 131 Providence Glen Parcel ID or Abstract 9890605507.010 <br /> Drive <br /> Statement of Appeal: Request a value reduction based on the value of comparable properties in the same <br /> neighborhood. <br /> Current Assessed Value $221,900 County Opinion $203,300 <br /> Time of Hearin 1:01 PM Appellant Opinion $196,300 <br /> County Representative Scott Zeman Board Decision $203,300 <br /> Evidence submitted by the appellant: <br /> • The appellant is formally appealing the tax value on her 2 bedroom/2 bathroom 1,216 sf condo. <br /> She is unsure of why this unit is assessed higher than four other 2 bedroom/2 bathroom 1,216 <br /> sf units with the exact layout(Units 112, 121, 122, and 132 Providence Glen Drive). The <br /> comparable units are all assessed at$196,300. The appellant also states the subject property <br /> has not been renovated. <br /> Evidence submitted by the county representative: <br /> • The subject property is currently assessed higher than the four comparable units mentioned in <br /> the appeal because of a difference in effective year built(EYB). The EYB of the subject <br /> property is 2018 while the EYB of all four comparables is 2002. <br /> • In December 2020,the subject property sold for$220,000. For the 2021 revaluation,the EYB <br /> was adjusted to 2018 to bring the property up to the market value established by this sale. A <br /> further analysis of condo sales within the same complex shows a median sale price per square <br /> foot of$184, or$223,744 for a 1,216-square-foot unit.From a sales perspective,the current <br /> assessed value is justifiable. <br /> • However,the extent to which the subject property has been renovated should also be <br /> considered. The MLS listing for the 2020 sale describes the property as having corian <br /> countertops,new carpets and new paint. These upgrades are not significant enough to justify a <br /> 16-year adjustment in effective year built.A 5-year adjustment would be more appropriate for <br /> these upgrades. <br /> • Therefore,the county proposes changing the effective year built for the subject property to <br /> 2007. The new adjusted value would be $203,300. <br /> • Photos: Front and overhead <br /> • Subject current and recommended property record cards <br /> • MLS#2339245 printout <br /> • Sales and equity reports <br /> • Property record cards for sales comparables, equity comparables, and appellant's comparables. <br /> Motion of the Board Accept the County's revised value of$203,300 <br /> Made the motion Tony Blake <br /> Seconded the motion Shannon Julian <br /> Voted For Barbara Levine <br /> Voted Against <br />