Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutbocc.res.068.2016 FOR ASSESSORS MID COUNTY COMMISSIONERS USE ONLY (section lily,Secion iv must be completed) Board of County�mmoren orrefund ve Assseesmrer,pursuant toproprie�w,m e.moC RS nths el the div of filing such tmuant le the oon§39-�31��by Section III Written Mutual Agreement of Assessor and Petitioner (ONy for abatements up to$10,000) The Commissioners of County authorize the Assessor by Resotution 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),CR S The Assessor and Petitioner mutually agree to the values and tax abatement/refund of: Tax Year Actual Messed TM Original Corrected AaahM.NM Note The tots tax amount does nal Inc/adoacvued imer.t,penalbee,and roes associated xtta late endlor dellmuenttex payments,d applicable Please contact the County Treasurer for fuA paymenl Inlmmation FMnonere slsnalur. Date Mneore or Deputy Meeesc•a Signature Dab Section IV: Decision of the CountymisslonersI (Must be completed na.raan 111 does not.ppt) •2S0(Ur/dw °(-). O(, - 2o//. WHEREAS,the County Commissioners of Ve Iv<! SC- County,State of Colorado,at a duly and lawfully called regular meeting held on t de /1--/ v4 at which meeting there were present the following members YeR 0OIMNt155/ sen Ileal�.el fiLe,kuvas Rd-u. &icy1,+Y ,Sf'fve lc .✓ c J th notice of such meetl•g and an oppo Ito to be•resent•.vino been given to the P‘ •ner and the Assessor of said County and Assessor 1 G-YY -! _ rreotpreseny and Petitioner OI)'t'-d• ,I�t 31 ,s of present),and WHEREAS,the said Name County Commissioners have carefully considered the in pe ition,and are hely advised In relation thereto, NOW BE IT RESOLVED that the Board(agrees-does not awe.)with the recommendation of the Assessor, and that the petition be(approved-approvedInpart-deied) itthhJan abatement/refund as toll• • Yew jt. 'gdY�'4[ieda GlfRefurd J, (1 J�M- \\ t/ Chat . son of the Send or Courcy Com tonin'Signature 1,4-Ce�Yve.1{re >VJYL•cL County Clerk and Ex-Offi to Clerk of the Board of Coun ammissioners in and for the aforementioned county,do hereby certify that the above and foregoing order is truly copied from the record at the proceedings of the Board of County Corn r.z.‘ • �vN IN WITNESS WHEREOF,I hay- hereunto set Ir.- ;eno:. . •Itis seal (said County this 90U- day of a u t ; • /L , ' , 'l/s��f�a1 ) Clel� month • Y SEAL , reY NM'.or 6 CWl�Cl)1( Signature Nab Mtements greater than$10,000 per schedule,pa t -egfottieµWh 'upll I the PrcceM Tv birato kr renew slnQ tip Section V: Action of the Property Tax Administrator (For all abatements greater men$10,000) The action of the Board of County Commissioners,relative to this petition,Is hereby 0 Approved ❑Approved in part$ 0 Denied for the following reason(s)' Secretary's S natr. Properly Tax Administrator's Signature Date 15OPT-AR No 920€&15 / PETITION FOR ABATEMENT OR REFUND OF TAXES County:Pitkin Date Received ! '�a� p��D (Use Assessor's or Commi si1l Section I: Petitioner,please complete Section I only. MAR 1 O 2016 Date: 3/8/2016 Montthh Day Year PITKIN COUNTY Petitioner's Name: Residences at the Little Nell Condo Asso CIO Duff&Phelps ASSESSOR Petitioner's Mailing Address: 1200 17th St.Suite 990 Denver CO 80202 City or Town State Zip Code SCHEDULE OR PARCEL NUMBER(S) PROPERTY ADDRESS OR LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY R019617 RESIDENCES AT THE LITTLE NELL CONDO Unit:F-204 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: $ 5,842,000 ( 2015 j 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 • s Signature` 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? ❑No ❑Yes (If a protest was filed,please attach a copy of the NOD.) 0 Assessor recommends denial for the following reason(s): Assessor's or Deputy Assessor's Signature 15-DPT-AR No.920-66115 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 li 1 i�11�.� Signed Na • Printed Name: titjj SOn 65I Signatory Title: Galticed tA1 y Notary Public: State of (OlWa.4O , County of i71}"V-t.vt-- The foregoing letter of authorization and signatory was acknowledged before me on 25 day of FGb , ZDllo . Witness my hand and official seal. /c'm 4--esLA/\ -- Notary Signature: OFFICIAL SEAL(stamp) KRISTEN MCCASKEY Notary Public State of Colorado KRISTEN MCCASKEY Stab of Colorado ts Notary Ip 20154042115a M Commission rim 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 $6,325.22 'SNOIIVCINgNIWODa2i 2i3DI3d0 NIRIVaH 2103 QHHDVIIV lHS 3SVTrld :uogepuawwooab JeoWO RulaeaH • 3e 40$amen et{3 trill alien ul uoi}anpea welei Ip e pueuiwooei `ao :aeaA xe}g60Z Jo}senjen peslnea ao}uol;epuewtuooaa s1aossesse 043 plogdfl :uopoe pepuawtuooaa 3lun Aq seven :eq Room pun}ea 041`pa3senbea SB pe oadde}l •uo13e1uawnoop 6uppoddns ay3 yflM pa pe33e sl uogsenb ui saniadoid ay3 Jo}tiewwns amen v •s31un wooapaq v ay3 Jo}3}bs/008'Z$ pue s31un wooapaq £04310}3}bs/0QE'Z$3e les amen 04;1.11iM sates algeiedwoo JauMo al6uls}o sales an uo paseq uol4onpaa amen e 6uysenbei sl aauol)fad 841 •lleman°xaldwoo ay%Jo}uolgonpaa;au a ;non 31un Jed semen MaU 6ulpuewulooaa sl aossesse ay3 'lapow ie1ndwoo s,aossessy ay3 03 6ulu!epad slsIleue pasha.' e uo paseg •sls(leue J(a43 uo paseq eeae 6u0ll papa!p 3}bs/000'£$3e las sl 3ey3 Alun goes Jo}alien a 6ulpuawwooaa sl 00(}40 s,iossasse ayl •sopuoo;swamui leuol%oea}gnla ssewMOuS eq;o3 spae6ai ut peg leedde iellwls e woa}uolsloep sieeddy 3uewssessY p wog e sioiJlw A6olopo43aw situ •segiedoid%oafgns a43 ao}amen}o slseq 043 se sales leuol3oea}eq;woi seoud sales pa3elodoi xe pesn se4 eol3}o s,JOSS uo paseq •uollexel ApadoJd p uolslnla ay3 Aq pegsllgeisa alum „3uawssasse 3iun„ 3lun 4oea o3 pau6lsse sl alien el6uls a `siaumo e(dl}lnw anal swnluluiopuoo 3maww leuol4oeJ}g6no431`d 'sJaumo an}o}legaq uo swnlulwopuoo;maw!leuol1oea}gZ lie p uollenlen ay3 6u feadde sl 113N al33ll 3e saouaplsab a43 Jo}uol%eloosse wnlulwopuoo ell swnlulwopuoa UeN e1331l 3e seouaplsab 041 ul sopuoO lelueplsaa gZ -eld!3lnW-#4os 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. _,e144) 664.47 ‘/7//b Stephen C. Hach Hearing Officer