HomeMy WebLinkAboutbocc.res.061.2016 FOR ASSESSORS AND COUNTY COMMISSIONERS USE ONLY
(Section III or Section IV must be completed)
Every petition for abatement or refund filed pursuant to§39-10-114,C.R.S.shall be acted upon pursuant to the provisions of this section by the
Board of County Commissioners or the Assessor,as appropriate,within six months of the date of filing such petition,§39-1-113(1.7),C.R.S.
Section III: Written Mutual Agreement of Assessor and Petitioner
(Only for abatements up to$10,000)
The Commissioners of County authorize the Assessor by Resolution No.
to review petitions for abatement or refund and to settle by written mutual agreement any such petition for
abatement or refund in an amount of$10,000 or less per tract,parcel,or lot of land or per schedule of personal
property,in accordance with§39-1-113(1.5),C.R.S.
The Assessor and Petitioner mutually agree to the values and tax abatement/refund of:
Tax Year
Actual Assessed Tax
Original
Corrected
Abate/Refund
Note:The total tax amount does not include accrued interest,penalties,and fees associated with late and/or delinquent tax payments,if
applicable. Please contact the County Treasurer for full payment information.
Petitioner's Signature Date
Assessor's or Deputy Assessor's Signature Date
Section IV: Decision of the County Commissioners (► /(
(Must be completed if Section 111 does not apply) O i u -i 01C �ar . v`r`1-26,/L
WHEREAS,the County Commissioners of Yt r«/ "Lw County,State of Colorado,at a duly and lawfully
called regular meeting held on to / 4 at which meeting there were present the following members:
/� Month Day Year (L .SLY �f e i
!L"(ittitlytt5si teYs'' yy` c�i�l��Srl ���f-E+ � yp
with notice of such etidg and an opportCfiity to be .resent.-ving been given to the Pe'toner and the Assessor
of said County and Assessor Ct!'J' -1 — (being present not present)and
/ � /
Petitioners r/V�+ d f� .) S (Nabe/ng presentt not present),and WHEREAS,the said
Name a
County Commissioners have carefully considered the within petition,and are fully advised in relation thereto,
NOW BE IT RESOLVED that the Board(agrees-does not agree)with the recommendation of the Assessor,
and that the petition be(approved-approved in part-denied)with an abatement/refund as follows:
00.1IIii
Year Assessed Vale T x Abate/Refund '
"514,e_ f- �7 Vitus
\ Chai non of the Board of County Comm -loners'Signature
r\Yl)-'EG- County Clerk and Ex-Officio Clerk of the Board of Coun ommissioners
in and for the aforementioned county,do hereby certify that the above and foregoing order is truly copied from the
record of the proceedings of the Board of County Commissioners.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF,I hav hereunto set my hand and affixed the se I of said County
this �Utel" day of U ( '9-0/6
Month Year ////fYl,'/" '1,1
Co Clerks or' puty Coun Cleric's Signature
i
Note: Abatements greater than$10,000 per schedule,per year,must be submitted in 41 licate to the Property Tax dministrator for review.
Section V: Action of the Property Tax Administrator
(For all abatements greater than$10,000)
The action of the Board of County Commissioners,relative to this petition,is hereby
❑Approved ❑Approved in part$ 0 Denied for the following reason(s):
Secretary's Signature Property Tax Administrator's Signature Date
15-DPT-AR No.920-66/15
PETITION FOR ABATEMENT OR REFUND OF TAXES
County:Pitkin Date Received
(Use Assessor's or Commissioners (g,$tttgrl�'���
Section I: Petitioner,please complete Section I only. EECCE
Date: 3/8/2016 MAR 10 2016
Month Day Year
Petitioner's Name: Residences at the Little Nell Condo Asso C/O Duff&Phelps PITKIN COUNTY
Petitioner's Mailing Address: 1200 17th St.Suite 990 ASSESSOR
Denver CO 80202
City or Town State Zip Code
SCHEDULE OR PARCEL NUMBER(S) PROPERTY ADDRESS OR LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY
R019625 RESIDENCES AT THE LITTLE NELL
CONDO Unit:F-307
Petitioner requests an abatement or refund of the appropriate taxes and states that the taxes assessed against the
above property for the property tax year 2015 are incorrect for the following reasons: (Briefly describe why
the taxes have been levied erroneously or illegally,whether due to erroneous valuation,irregularity in levying,
clerical error,or overvaluation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.)
The sales comparison approach supports a lower valuation for the subject property.
Petitioner's estimate of value: $ 6,078,900 ( 2015 )
Value Year
I declare,under penalty of perjury in the second degree,that this petition,together with any accompanying exhibits
or statements,has been prepared or examined by me,and to the best of my knowledge,information,and belief,is
true,correct,and complete.
Daytime Phone Number(
Petitioner's Signature
Email
By Daytime Phone Number(303 ) 749.9025
a Signatures
Email jodi.sullivan@duffandphelps.com
*Letter of agency must be attached when petition is submitted by an agent
If the Board of County Commissioners,pursuant to§39-10-114(1),C.R.S.,or the Property Tax Administrator,pursuant to§39-2-116,C.R.S.,
denies the petition for refund or abatement of taxes in whole or in part,the Petitioner may appeal to the Board of Assessment Appeals pursuant
to the provisions of§39-2-125,C.R.S.,within thirty days of the entry of any such decision,§39-10-114.5(1),C.R.S.
Section II: Assessor's Recommendation
(For Assessor's Use Only)
Tax Year
Actual Assessed Tax
Original
Corrected
Abate/Refund
❑Assessor recommends approval as outlined above.
If the request for abatement is based upon the grounds of overvaluation,no abatement or refund of taxes shall be made if an objection or
protest to such valuation has been filed and a Notice of Determination has been mailed to the taxpayer,§39-10-114(1)(a)(I)(D),C.R.S.
Tax year: Protest? 0 No 0 Yes (If a protest was filed,please attach a copy of the NOD.)
❑Assessor recommends denial for the following reason(s):
Assessor's or Deputy Assessor's Signature
15-DPT-AR No.920-66/15
Appointment of Agency for Property Tax Matters
Duff& Phelps, LLC is authorized to represent Residences at the Little Nell Condo Association
with the assessment of property tax for the fractional interest condos located at 501 E. Dean
Street in Aspen, CO regarding the real estate assessment matters in Pitkin County. Any and all
previous authorizations are hereby revoked. Duff&Phelps, LLC is authorized to act on our
behalf in obtaining and providing information, negotiating, settling and assessing for all real estate
matters related to the property owned, possessed, or controlled by the undersigned at the above-
referenced address.This agent is delegated full authority to act on the owner's behalf for all real
estate matters relative to assessments and to represent us,with the assistance of legal counsel,
if necessary, in the appeal process.
This appointment of agency remains in effect for tax years 2015&2016 or until revoked in writing
by Residences at the Little Nell Condo Association or Duff&Phelps, LLC.
All correspondence should be directed to the following:
Agent Name: Jodi Sullivan
Agent Company: Duff&Phelps, LLC
Agent Address: 1200 17'"Street,Suite 990
Denver, Colorado 80202
Agent Phone Number: (303) 749-9025
Agent Email: jodi.sullivan@duffandphelps.com
Signed Na
Printed Name: Aton 65I'
Signatory Title: G trot aAAa
/} Notary Public:
State of lAlW4a , County of ?Ik-le-t.vt--
The foregoing letter of authorization and signatory was acknowledged before me on 25 day
of itb , zap
Witness my hand and official seal.
Notary Signature: d OFFICIAL SEAL(stamp)
KRISTEN MCCASKEY
Notary Public
' State of Colorado
KRISTTEgNyMCCASKEY
NoPublic
State of Colorado
Notary ID 20154042559
M Commission 4. ss Nov 3, 2019
2015 Residences at Little Nell Fractional condo Abatement Summary
Current assessed original 2015 abatement revised 2015 revised 2015 Abatement
sch# Unit# 2015/16 value Value taxes determination assessed value taxes refund
R019615 Unit: F-200 $8,214,500 $653,870 $20,959.15 $7,746,300 $616,610 $19,764.82 $1,194.33
R019616 Unit: F-203 $9,276,900 $738,440 $23,669.96 $8,350,500 $664,700 $21,306.29 $2,363.67
R019617 Unit: F-204 $7,311,000 $581,960 $18,654.15 $7,239,000 $576,220 $18,470.16 $183.99
R019618 Unit: F-207 $7,633,400 $607,620 $19,476.65 $7,558,200 $601,630 $19,284.65 $192.00
R019619 Unit: F-208 $6,735,300 $536,130 $17,185.11 $6,669,000 $530,850 $17,015.87 $169.24
R019620 Unit: F-211 $6,994,400 $556,750 $17,846.06 $6,925,500 $551,270 $17,670.41 $175.65
R019621 Unit: F-212 $7,472,200 $594,790 $19,065.40 $7,398,600 $588,930 $18,877.56 $187.84
R019622 Unit: F-300 $8,643,700 $688,040 $22,054.43 $7,743,500 $616,380 $19,757.44 $2,296.99
R019623 Unit: F-303 $9,881,800 $786,590 $25,213.36 $8,450,300 $672,640 $21,560.80 $3,652.56
R019624 Unit: F-304 $7,710,900 $613,790 $19,674.42 $7,253,300 $577,360 $18,506.70 $1,167.72
R019625 Unit: F-307 $8,007,900 $637,430 $20,432.18 $7,532,600 $599,590 $19,219.26 $1,212.92
R019626 Unit: F-308 $9,197,200 $732,100 $23,466.73 $8,239,400 $655,860 $21,022.94 $2,443.79
R019627 Unit: F-309 $7,111,000 $566,040 $18,143.85 $6,689,000 $532,440 $17,066.83 $1,077.02
R019628 Unit: F-312 $7,398,900 $588,950 $18,878.20 $6,959,700 $553,990 $17,757.60 $1,120.60
R019629 Unit: F-313 $7,862,400 $625,850 $20,061.00 $7,395,800 $588,710 $18,870.51 $1,190.49
R019630 Unit: F-400 $8,586,400 $683,480 $21,908.27 $7,692,200 $612,300 $19,626.66 $2,281.61
R019631 Unit: F-402 $8,835,300 $703,290 $22,543.26 $7,555,400 $601,410 $19,277.60 $3,265.66
R019632 Unit: F-403 $9,380,400 $746,680 $23,934.08 $8,823,600 $702,360 $22,513.45 $1,420.63
R019633 Unit: F-406 $7,986,700 $635,740 $20,378.01 $7,512,600 $598,000 $19,168.29 $1,209.72
R019634 Unit: F-407 $10,507,900 $836,430 $26,810.93 $9,413,600 $749,320 $24,018.70 $2,792.23
R019635 Unit: F-409 $8,725,900 $694,580 $22,264.07 $8,208,000 $653,360 $20,942.80 $1,321.27
R019636 Unit: F-410 $7,726,100 $615,000 $19,713.21 $7,267,500 $578,490 $18,542.92 $1,170.29
R019637 Unit: F-500 $10,959,700 $872,390 $27,963.59 $9,818,300 $781,540 $25,051.48 $2,912.11
R019638 Unit: F-501 $11,824,700 $941,250 $30,170.83 $9,630,200 $766,560 $24,571.31 $5,599.52
R019639 Unit: F-502 $14,396,800 $1,145,990 $36,733.56 $11,724,900 $933,300 $29,916.00 $6,817.56
R019640 Unit: F-600 $13,357,500 $1,063,260 $34,081.74 $10,878,500 $865,930 $27,756.52 $6,325.22
�1 / /it
Sch#-Multiple - 26 residential Condos in The Residences at Little Nell
Condominiums
The condominium association for the Residences at Little Nell is appealing the valuation
of all 26 fractional interest condominiums on behalf of the owners. Although fractional
interest condominiums have multiple owners, a single value is assigned to each unit
based on the"unit assessment" rule established by the Division of Property Taxation.
The Assessor's office has used extrapolated sales prices from the fractional sales as
the basis of value for the subject properties. This methodology mirrors a Board of
Assessment Appeals decision from a similar appeal filed in regards to the Snowmass
Club fractional interest condos. The assessor's office is recommending a value for each
unit that is set at$3,000/sq ft of heated living area based on their analysis. Based on a
revised analysis pertaining to the Assessor's computer model, the assessor is
recommending new values per unit with a net reduction for the complex overall. The
petitioner is requesting a value reduction based on the sales of single owner
comparable sales with the value set at$2,300/sq ft for the 3 bedroom units and
$2,600/sq ft for the 4 bedroom units.
al
e summary for the properties in question is
attached with the supporting documentation.
If approved as requested, the refund would be: varies by unit
Recommended action: Uphold the assessor's recommendation for revised
values for 2015 tax year; or, recommend a different reduction in value with the
value set at
Hearing Officer Recommendation:
PLEASE SEE ATTACHED FOR HEARING OFFICER RECOMMENDATIONS.
26 Residential Condos in The Residences at Little Nell various schedule numbers and
owners. Represented by Jodi Sullivan of Duff&Phelps as the Petitioner.
Petitioner believes that no sales have occurred that represent values of$3000.00/sf as established
by the Assessor. Several whole sale fee simple luxury condominium sales were adjusted by the
Petitioner to obtain a price per square foot average of less than the Assessor's value. I have not
done a detailed analysis of the comparable sales or the adjustments. However,maybe no
location in town is comparable to the subject's location. I believe there is not adequate
adjustment for the location. Although no furnishings were declared,I don't believe that it is
reasonable to assume that the subject units were sold unfurnished. They were advertised as fully
furnished,the buyer did not have to furnish,and probably could not have furnished,the unit after
the sale. I believe we can assume that the units were fully furnished. Although paired sales
analysis is a valid technique for establishing market appreciation,only a small sampling was
used and no detailed information about the sales or changes to the improvements was considered
in the petitioner's analysis. These were also fee simple individual unit sales and may not reflect
the subset of fractional ownership sales.
Although I believe fee simple sales are appropriate comparable sales, I believe for the reasons
stated above that the petitioner's analysis may have understated the value. Due to the nature of
fractional ownership only purchasing as much time that they need I believe that purchasers are
willing to pay more for the time they need rather than the entire year of use and expense.
Therefore comparable fractional interest should be strongly considered.
The Assessor has also adjusted the same comparable sales used by the Petitioner which resulted
in a higher price per square foot. The Assessor time adjusted value resulted in a higher time
adjusted value using a rate calculations approved by the state board of appraisal. Adjustments
for location were higher which I agree is appropriate as noted above. Amenities and age/quality
of the comparable projects was also addressed which I also believe is required. These however
are more subjective adjustments. The assessor also assumed that the sales were not furnished
which based on the advertising is not likely the case as noted above.
In conclusion I recommend that the assessor's revised value recommendation be reduced from
the adjusted values offered at the hearing by an additional 5%. This is to address that the values
established likely include quality furnishings and in many cases seller concessions for initial
assessments or other considerations. Fractional ownership situations such as the subject offer the
highest level of amenities and services that are hard to compare to fee simple ownership projects.
My recommendations are summarized on a separate attached sheet.
‘A7/b
Stephen C. Hach
Hearing Officer