2025_10_14 BOER Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Docusign Envelope ID:40462423-CB48-41E6-989B-17C70C3813D3 • Proposed Property Record Card • Photos of Subject Motion of the Board Value Changed as Follows: $877,000 Made the motion Richal Vanhook Seconded the motion Saru Salvi Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against ... Property Identification: Property Owner Victoria L. Shields Appellant(if different) Property Address 20 Banbury Lane Parcel ID or Abstract 9799447715.016 Statement of Appeal: Request a reduction in value based on the condition of the home and comparable sales. Current Assessed Value $268,200 ounty Opinion $268,200 Time of Hearin 3:26PM Appellant Opinion $245,000 County Representative C le Anderson Board Decision $268,200 Evidence submitted by the appellant: • The appellant states that condition issues are one reason for this appeal. The appellant states that the unit is dated, with an old roof, and has foundation and plumbing issues. The appellant also states that these units have flooding issues. • The appellant submitted 22 Banbury Lane as a comparable sale and provided the MLS data from this sale. The appellant submitted 4, 14 and 19 Banbury Lane as equity comparable properties. The appellant states that similar condos from different neighborhoods have sold,or are currently for sale, for lower prices compared to the subject property. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • The subject property is a two-story condominium with 1,652 square feet, located at 16 Banbury Lane, in Chapel Hill. The appellant states that condition issues are one reason for this appeal. The appellant states that the unit is dated,with an old roof, and also has foundation and plumbing issues. The appellant also states that these units have flooding issues. However, no photos or cost to cure estimates were provided to support these claims. The appellant mentions one comparable sale, 22 Banbury Lane,which sold in 2023 at"very close to my assessed value," with extensive renovations. The County reviewed this sale as part of its sales analysis. This property sold for$301,000,which was much higher than what the subject property is assessed for($268,200), and has an effective year built of 2015, compared to 1995 for the subject. The higher effective year built for this comparable sale accounts for the renovations to this property. The County performed a sales analysis of the three recent comparable sales in the subject's neighborhood. The County also performed an equity analysis using the comparable properties provided by the appellant. After review,the County recommends no change to the subject property's assessment of$268,200. • GIS Ma