Laserfiche WebLink
Didthehypotheticalappraisalsconclusivelyshowtherewasareductioninpropertyvalue? <br />th <br />Asstatedabove,thehypotheticalappraisalsincorrectlyassumedthatthestructureat1777E.30 <br />AvenuecouldhavebeenalegalSDUpriortotheR1codechanges.ThiserrorinvalidatestheͻĬĻŅƚƩĻͼ <br />appraisalsthatstatethemarketvaluewas$470,000. <br />Thereareseveralotherconcernswiththehypotheticalappraisalsthatcastdoubtontheiraccuracy. <br />Hereisdetailrelatingtotheseproblems: <br />Thefirstsetofhypotheticalappraisalsusedincorrectappraisaldates.TheCityrequestedthat <br />theappraisalsberesubmittedusingthecorrectdates.Theywereresubmittedwiththedates <br />changedbyayear,yettheappraisedvalueswereidentical.Fewchangeshadbeenmadeand <br />therewasnoexplanationwhythemarketvalueswerethesamefromoneyeartothenext. <br />Aftercodechangeappraisals,3/12/2014changedto3/12/2015,appraisedvaluefor <br />o <br />both$410,000. <br />Beforecodechangeappraisals,3/12/2012changedto3/12/2013.Appraisedvaluefor <br />o <br />both$470,000. <br />Fivehomesallresidingonthesameshortprivateroadweresoldrecently.Eventhoughnoneof <br />thesehomeshadSDUsnonewereusedforcomparisons.Onlyonewassoldduringtheperiod <br />2013to2015.Itisaveryclosematchtothe‘źƌƭƚƓ͸ƭhypotheticalappraisalaftercodechanges. <br />th <br />1781E.30,built2004,.6acres,2732sq.ft.,5bdrm,3ba,Sold06/13/14for$465,000, <br />o <br />$170/sq.ft.,Previoussales2005$419,900and2004$90,000 <br />Onepropertywasusedtojustifythelowpropertyvalue(3/12/2014)andlaterusedtojustify <br />thehighpropertyvalue(3/12/2013).However,inoneappraisal(3/12/2014)theƦƩƚƦĻƩƷǤ͸ƭ <br />ͻ/ƚƓķźƷźƚƓͼwasconsideredͻDƚƚķͼandnodollaradjustmentwasmade,butinanother <br />appraisal(3/12/2013)theͻ/ƚƓķźƷźƚƓͼwaschangedtoͻ!ǝĻƩğŭĻDƚƚķͼand$41,500wasadded <br />totheprice.Noexplanationwasgivenforthechange. <br />ThereducedpropertyvaluewasentirelyattributedtoimplementationoftheR1changes <br />limitingSDUs.Theeffectofthehousingcrisis,followedbytherecessionandsubsequent <br />recovery,onmarketvalueswasnotexplainedorconsidered.Anarrayoffactorsthataffected <br />propertyvaluesshouldhavebeenpartoftheappraisals. <br />ORS195.332,states:"Thefairmarketvalueofpropertydoesnotincludeanyprospectivevalue, <br />speculativevalueorpossiblevaluebaseduponfutureexpendituresandimprovements." <br />ThismeanstheappraisercannotspeculateontheƦƩƚƦĻƩƷǤ͸ƭvaluebyaddingahypotheticalnewhome <br />totheappraisal.Thisfurtherinvalidatestheappraisals. <br />ORS195.305(1)specifiesthattheregulationmust"restricttheresidentialuse." <br />InalettertoBillKloos,datedApril20,2016,regardingͻ/ƚƒƦƌĻƷĻƓĻƭƭReviewforMeasure49Claim, <br />ChadandKatie‘źƌƭƚƓͼͲAnneC.Davies,AssistantCityAttorneynotedtheaboveregulationandstated: <br />ͻ <br />ƓķĻƩ{ƷğŅŅ͸ƭreview,itappearsthataprimaryresidentialuseandasecondarydwellingwere <br />allowedunderthepreviousregulation,andthatthesameusesareallowedunderOrdinanceNo. <br />ЋЉЎЋЏ͵ͼ\[theR1codechanges\] <br />InaresponsetotheabovestatementfromBillKloos,inamemodatedJuly25,2016,hestated: <br />βЌβ <br /> <br />