HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025_08_26 BOER Minutes Docusign Envelope ID:7FE57725-9FEA-4FD3-99AA-DE6B4DB9B62E
MINUTES
Orange County Board of Equalization and Review
Meeting held on August 26, 2025
Board Members in attendance:
Chair of the Board Leon Meyers Yes
Regular Member Saru Salvi Yes
Regular Member Richal Vanhook Yes
Alternate Member Shereese Alston No
Alternate Member Hunter Beattie No
Alternate Member Tony Blake No
Alternate Member Vaughn Compton No
Alternate Member Shannon Julian No
Alternate Member Barbara Levine No
Orange County Staff in attendance:
Tax Administrator Nancy Freeman
Office Assistant Jennifer Rigsbee
Deputy Tax Assessor Chad Phillips
Real Property Appraisal Manager Roger Gunn
Temporary Appraiser Assistant Rob Teachout
PUV Compliance Review Appraiser Dana Hall
Appraiser Cyle Anderson
Appraiser Bill Hiltbold
Meeting Schedule:
Time PIN or Abstract Appellant Appeared Appeal Type
1:00 PM 9890605507.045 Sora Shin No Cyle Anderson
1:08 PM 9865604391 Henry Thomas Pope Jr. No Dana Hall
1:11 PM 9728438513 Bryan Kempter No Dana Hall
1:11 PM 9728533879 Bryan Kempter No Dana Hall
1:18 PM 9856111683 William Atherton No Dana Hall
1:25 PM 9799616953 Hongliang Liu No Bill Hiltbold
1:36 PM 9788197475 Mark R. Patmore No Bill Hiltbold
1:41 PM 9767710011 Sharon Poythress House Yes Bill Hiltbold
1:56 PM 9759901250 Anthony L.Webb Heirs No Bill Hiltbold
2:01 PM 9787483813 Connole Elizabeth L. Read No Bill Hiltbold
2:11 PM 9890113679 Mohsen Hajirahim Yes Bill Hiltbold
Time By
Meeting called to order 1:OOPM Leon Meyers
Meeting adjourned 2:26PM Leon Meyers
Docusign Envelope ID:7FE57725-9FEA-4FD3-99AA-DE6B4DB9B62E
Property Identification:
Property Owner Sora Shin Appellant(if different)
Property Address 432 Glencrest Place Parcel H)or Abstract 9890605507.045
Statement of Appeal: Request a reduction in value based on a discrepancy in square footage on the
current property record card and on comparable sales.
Current Assessed Value $362,400 County Opinion $325,800
Time of Hearin 1:OOPM Appellant Opinion $302,533
County Representative C le Anderson Board Decision $325,800
Evidence submitted by the appellant:
• The appellant states that this unit's square footage is incorrectly stated at 1398. The appellant
provided supporting documentation to substantiate this claim. The appellant also provided two
recently sold units comparable to the subject property.
Evidence submitted by the county representative:
• The subject property is located at 432 Glencrest Place,in the Providence Glen Condominium
project, in Chapel Hill. The County physically inspected the property for verification and
photos. The plat and sketch for this unit were reviewed after looking over the appellant's
supporting documentation. MLS data from the 2008 sale of this unit was also reviewed to help
determine the correct square footage.After review,the County recommends correcting the
sketch/square footage of the subject property to match the plat and unit 431,which is a mirror
of the subject. The County also reviewed a sales analysis of similar sized units from this
neighborhood that sold in 2024. After reviewing these four sales,the County recommends
reducing the effective year built of the subject property from 2007 to 2002. These
recommended changes would bring the subject's price per square foot in line with the 2024
comparable sales by reducing the assessment from$362,400 to $325,800. The County
recommends a revised value of$325,800 for the subject property.
• Photo of Subject
• GIS map
• Plat Showing 3'Floor Units 431-434
• Duplicate Plat with Labels
• MLS Data From 2008 Sale Of Subject
• Sales Analysis
• Current Property Record Card of Subject
• Proposed Property Record Card of Subject
• Property Record Card of Unit 431
Motion of the Board Accept the Coun 's revised value of$325,800
Made the motion Saru Salvi
Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook
Voted For Leon Meyers
Voted Against
Docusign Envelope ID:7FE57725-9FEA-4FD3-99AA-DE6B4DB9B62E
Property Identification:
Property Owner Henry Thomas Pope Jr. Appellant(if different)
Property Address 515 Revere Road Parcel ID or Abstract 19865604391
Statement of Appeal: Request a reduction in value based on the condition of the home and land
restrictions that exist on the property.
Current Assessed Value $206,100 County Opinion $174,300
Time of Hearin 1:08PM Appellant Opinion $125,000
County Representative Dana Hall Board Decision $174,300
Evidence submitted by the appellant:
• The Appellant filed a formal appeal on July 11,2025. The Appellant states the condition of the
house, and the land restrictions affect the value negatively with limited rental income.
Evidence submitted by the county representative:
• The subject property is located at 515 Revere Road. The parcel is under appeal due to the
incorrect bathroom count, condition of the house,and negative land influences of
traffic/shape/size.
• After a field inspection on July 25,2025,the house only has one bathroom and there are very
few renovations to the property. The shape and size of the lot is affected by the Town of
Hillsborough eminent domain recorded in 1999. The lot currently sits at the corner of a major
highway intersection with US 70 and Revere Road. We currently have two bathrooms with an
effective year built of 1981. Our-15%negative influence on the lot only reflects the size of the
lot.
• Corrections to assessed records include:
1. Removed one bathroom count.
2. Effective year built from 1981 to 1966, due to condition.
3. Change land adjustment to -30%to reflect shape/size/intersection traffic.
• These changes would reduce the current assessed value of the property from$206,100 to
$174,300.
• Current Property Record Card of Subject
• Proposed Property Record Card of Subject
• Photos of Subject
• GIS map
Motion of the Board Accept the Coun 's revised value of$174,300
Made the motion Richal Vanhook
Seconded the motion Sam Salvi
Voted For Leon Meyers
Voted Against
Property Identification:
Docusign Envelope ID:7FE57725-9FEA-4FD3-99AA-DE6B4DB9B62E
Property Owner Bryan Kempter Appellant(if different)
Property Address 10.01 acres parcel on Parcel ID or Abstract 9728438513
Millikan Road
Statement of Appeal: Request the acceptance of the untimely filed PUV application submitted on June
25,2025 for the assessor to apply Present Use Value enrollment for the 2025 calendar year.
Current Assessed Value N/A County Opinion Accept untimely application for
Present Use Value
Time of Hearing 1:11PM Appellant Opinion Accept untimely application for
Present Use Value
County Representative Dana Hall Board Decision Accept untimely application for
Present Use Value
Evidence submitted by the appellant:
• With the recent approval/acceptance of the qualifying tract(9841280035)in PUV,I would
now like to apply for two parcels in forestry, 97284388513 and 9728533879.
Evidence submitted by the county representative:
• The subject property is 10.01 wooded acres on Millikan Road. The nature of the appeal is the
untimely filing of a Present Use Value application submitted on June 25,2025.
• On June 25,2025,Bryan and Elizabeth Kempter completed a Present Use Value application in
the assessor's office and was made aware of the January 31 st listing period deadline for all new
applicants into the Present Use Value Program.
• Per G.S. 105-277.4(al),an applicant may submit a late application upon showing of good
cause by the appellant for failure to make a timely application,which may be approved by the
Board of Equalization and Review.
• A review of the untimely application indicates that the property would otherwise qualify for
the Present Use Value program for forestry.
• Good Cause Form
• AV-5 Application
• Forestry Management Plan
• GIS Map
Motion of the Board Accept untimely application for Present Use Value
Made the motion Saru Salvi
Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook
Voted For Leon Meyers
Voted Against
Property Identification:
Property Owner Bryan Kempter Appellant(if different)
Property Address 13.26 acres on Millikan Parcel ID or Abstract 9728533879
Road
Docusign Envelope ID:7FE57725-9FEA-4FD3-99AA-DE6B4DB9B62E
Statement of Appeal: Request the acceptance of the untimely filed PUV application submitted on June
25,2025 for the assessor to apply Present Use Value enrollment for the 2025 calendar year.
Current Assessed Value N/A County Opinion Accept untimely application for
Present Use Value
Time of Hearing 1:11PM Appellant Opinion Accept untimely application for
Present Use Value
County Representative Dana Hall Board Decision Accept untimely application for
Present Use Value
Evidence submitted by the appellant:
• With the recent approval/acceptance of the qualifying tract(9841280035)in PUV,I would
now like to apply for two parcels in forestry, 97284388513 and 9728533879.
Evidence submitted by the county representative:
• The subject property is 13.26 wooded acres on Millikan Road. The nature of the appeal is the
untimely filing of a Present Use Value application submitted on June 25,2025.
• On June 25,2025,Bryan and Elizabeth Kempter completed a Present Use Value application in
the assessor's office and was made aware of the January 31 st listing period deadline for all new
applicants into the Present Use Value Program.
• Per G.S. 105-277.4(al),an applicant may submit a late application upon showing of good
cause by the appellant for failure to make a timely application,which may be approved by the
Board of Equalization and Review.
• A review of the untimely application indicates that the property would otherwise qualify for
the Present Use Value program for forestry.
• Good Cause Form
• AV-5 Application
• Forestry Management Plan
• GIS Map
Motion of the Board Accept untimely application for Present Use Value
Made the motion Saru Salvi
Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook
Voted For Leon Meyers
Voted Against
Property Identification:
Property Owner William Atherton Appellant(if different)
Property Address 13.73 acres on Parcel H)or Abstract 9856111683
Brookhollow Road
Statement of Appeal: Request the acceptance of the untimely filed Present Use Value application
submitted on August 5,2025 for the assessor to apply the enrollment for 2025 calendar year.
Docusign Envelope ID:7FE57725-9FEA-4FD3-99AA-DE6B4DB9B62E
Current Assessed Value N/A County Opinion Accept untimely application for
Present Use Value
Time of Hearing 1:18PM Appellant Opinion Accept untimely application for
Present Use Value
County Representative Dana Hall Board Decision Accept untimely application for
Present Use Value
Evidence submitted by the appellant:
• I was unaware of the present use value program until this past weekend.
Evidence submitted by the coun representative:
• The subject property is located on Brookhollow Road near Efland Cedar Grove Road. The
nature of the appeal is the untimely filing of a Present Use Value application submitted on
August 5,2025.
• On August 5,2025,William and Allyson Atherton completed a Present Use Value application
in the assessor's office and was made aware of the January 31 st listing period deadline for all
new applicants into the Present Use Value Program.
• Per G.S. 105-277.4(al),an applicant may submit a late application upon showing of good
cause by the appellant for failure to make a timely application,which may be approved by the
Board of Equalization and Review.
• A review of the untimely application indicates that the property would otherwise qualify for
the Present Use Value program for agriculture.
• Good Cause Form
• AV-5 Application
• 2025 Attending Farmer Income Statement
• GIS Map
Motion of the Board Accept untimely application for Present Use Value
Made the motion Sara Salvi
Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook
Voted For Leon Meyers
Voted Against
Property Identification:
Property Owner Hongliang Liu Appellant(if different)
Property Address 1801 Tinkerbell Road Parcel H)or Abstract 19799616953
Statement of Appeal: Request a reduction in value based on the condition of home due to flood damage.
Current Assessed Value $427,600 County Opinion $399,300
Time of Hearin 1:25PM Appellant Opinion $400,000
County Representative Bill Hiltbold Board Decision $385,800
Evidence submitted by the appellant:
0 Severe flood damage Chantal .AC in crawls ace is damaged; floor joists need to be replaced.
Docusign Envelope ID:7FE57725-9FEA-4FD3-99AA-DE6B4DB9B62E
L
Evidence submitted by the county representative:
• The property is in a flood zone and has significant damage from floodwater during tropical
storm Chantal which occurred during 2025. The subject's value cannot be updated for
catastrophic events occurring during 2025 but can be updated for 2026 based on the subject's
condition as of January 1,2026.
• Approximately half of the property around the house and back yard are in a flood plain. I
propose adjusting the reduction in land value for flooding from-20%to-30%.
• The patio extends across the back of the addition as shown on the corrected sketch.
• The storage building has an earth floor and rot where the walls contact the ground. I propose
adjusting its grade from C to E.
• Photos of Subject Property
• Flood map
• Current Property Record Card
• Proposed Property Record Card of Subject
• Correspondence
Motion of the Board Adjust the reduction in land value for flooding to-35%resulting in a revised
value of$385,800
Made the motion Saru Salvi
Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook
Voted For Leon Meyers
Voted Against
Property Identification:
Property Owner Mark R. Patmore Appellant(if different)
Property Address 102A McMasters Street Parcel ID or Abstract 9788197475
Statement of Appeal: Request a reduction in value based on the fact that this is a single family property
not a duplex.
Current Assessed Value $844,600 County Opinion $802,900
Time of Hearin 1:36PM Appellant Opinion $644,600
County Representative Bill Hiltbold Board Decision $802,900
Evidence submitted by the appellant:
• This property is a single-family home,but it looks like the Countyhas it listed as a duplex
multifamily as the PIN number brings up an A and a B unit. Again,the is a single family and
the land value should reflect that.
Evidence submitted by the county representative:
• This building is designed to rent single family residence. Please see the attached rental listing
with the for rent sign on the front of the building. It has 1 electric meter, 1 kitchen, "4 full
bedrooms, 3 living rooms,and 2 bonus rooms. All appliances included with plenty of off and
Docusign Envelope ID:7FE57725-9FEA-4FD3-99AA-DE6B4DB9B62E
on street parking". It does not have separate apartments, and the tenants share a common
kitchen and living rooms. These dwellings used to be called boarding houses. I propose
changing the type of building from 2 to 4 family(separate rental units)to "designed rental
single family".
• I measured the outside of the building and corrected the sketch which changed living area from
3,116 to 3,105 square feet,I propose changing the grade from B+10 to B-10,half baths from 0
to 1 and a market adjustment on the land from 70 to 47 in keeping with the Board's directive to
review properties in Neighborhood 7104 and make necessary changes.
• Photos of Subject Property
• Current Property Record Card
• Proposed Property Record Card of Subject
• Correspondence
Motion of the Board Accept the Coun 's revised value of$802,900
Made the motion Richal Vanhook
Seconded the motion Saru Salvi
Voted For Leon Meyers
Voted Against
Property Identification:
Property Owner Sharon Poythress House Appellant(if different)
Property Address 1712 Damascus Church Parcel ID or Abstract 9767710011
Road
Statement of Appeal: Request a reduction in value specifically to the land due to an electrical right of
way, older well and septic system and stream buffers located on the property.
Current Assessed Value $679,900 County Opinion $679,900
Time of Hearin 1:41PM Appellant Opinion $506,300
County Representative Bill Hiltbold Board Decision Continued to a later date
Evidence submitted by the appellant:
• 1 dispute the land value only.
1. There is a Piedmont electric right of way through the property.
2. Well and septic from 1979,reserve field area preserved.
3. Stream buffers both sides of the property.
4. Road access very dangerous,routine wrecks.
5. Lack of comparable properties. Most sales occurred in subdivisions,we are rural.
Evidence submitted by the county representative:
• Issue 1 and 3,1 did not find stream buffers or electric easements on the Orange County GIS
map or the recorded plat.
• Issue 2, functionality of the well and septic system are monitored by the Orange County Health
Department. There is no mention of a problem with either at this time.
Docusign Envelope ID:7FE57725-9FEA-4FD3-99AA-DE6B4DB9B62E
• Issue 4,While the line of sight is not optimal at the driveway,there is no evidence to suggest it
significantly impacts the value of the property.
• Issue 5. Please see the equity analysis. These are properties in the subject neighborhood
descending from the largest acreage at the top. The subject property is shown in orange. The
land adjustment column"LAdj" list factors that influence land value, 'PUV'present use value
(farmland), 'Flood'floodplain, 'Shape'Irregular shape'Topo'Topography.Notice the land
value increasing as the acreage increases. $348K for 12 acres, $387K for the subject property
at 14 acres, $432K for 16 acres and proportional to the top with the exception of 1820 Price
Creek Road which is discounted for being in a flood zone.
• Photo of Subject
• GIS Map
• Recorded Plat
• Zoning Report
• Equity Analysis
• Current Property Record Card of Subject
• Correspondence
Motion of the Board Continued to a later date
Made the motion Leon Meyer
Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook
Voted For Saru Salvi
Voted Against
Property Identification:
Property Owner Anthony L. Webb Heirs Appellant(if different)
Property Address 1112 McCauley Lane J Parcel ID or Abstract 9759901250
Statement of Appeal: Request a reduction in value based on the condition of the home.
Current Assessed Value $89,700 County Opinion $81,400
Time of Hearin 1:56 PM ellant Opinion $46,000
Count old Re Representative Bill Hiltb +BA!ard
Decision $81,000
Evidence submitted by the appellant:
• The house has no value. It's been vacant for 17 years and is taken over by nature. There is no
electric connection,water, sewer,heat or air.
Evidence submitted by the county representative:
• This 1957 home has rotted to the point of collapse. I propose increasing physical depreciation
from 60 to 98,this added to the poor physical condition of 65%depreciation calculates to
99.3%total depreciation.
• I propose reducing the small storage building value from$200 to $0.
• Photos of Subject Property
• Current Property Record Card
0 Proposed Property Record Card of Subject
Docusign Envelope ID:7FE57725-9FEA-4FD3-99AA-DE6B4DB9B62E
• Correspondence
Motion of the Board Adjust the value of the home to $0 resulting in a revised value of$81,000
Made the motion Saru Salvi
Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook
Voted For Leon Meyers
Voted Against
Property Identification:
Property Owner Connole Elizabeth L. Read Appellant(if different)
Property Address 323 Azalea Drive Parcel ID or Abstract 19787483813
Statement of Appeal: Request a reduction in value based on the condition of the home.
Current Assessed Value $578,800 County Opinion $577,300
Time of Hearin 2:O1PM Appellant Opinion $450,000
County Representative Bill Hiltbold Board Decision $577,300
Evidence submitted by the appellant:
• The newest real property valuation of my house at 323 Azalea Drive in Chapel Hill after my
appeal this spring is $320,000 for the land and$258,800 for the structure. At best,I consider
this structure to be in fair condition. The estimated cost of repairs and maintenance to the house
plus the estimated costs of repairs and renovations from my earlier estimate when deducted
from the structure value you indicated on the newest valuation leave structure values of
between$63,800 and$33,800 respectively Obviously,the structure is worth more than
$63,800 but I honestly believe it is not worth more than$180,000-$190,000 and it does add
value to the property. This area has not attracted many developers paying large sums of money
for a parcel to raze the existing house and build much larger structures, so I still consider this
as a house with some value rather than a liability. An estimate was prepared by another
licensed building contractor,Jacqueline A. Smith. Her estimate was $60,985.A copy is
attached. It includes only repairs to the exterior and interior. Renovation of the interior is
limited to cosmetics like interior paint,new carpeting,new vinyl floors and refinishing the
hardwood floors. Please note,this new estimate includes no upgrades or remodeling to a 53-
year-old kitchen or any of the baths that have the original cabinets that were built in what is
now the living room. Most of the bath fixtures are original and the newest appliance in the
kitchen is a refrigerator from 2009. . It has come to my attention in the past couple days that it
may need some structural repair to the floor joists on the first floor. When I was still an active
contractor, I frequently did structural repairs to house framing and foundations,and I plan to
crawl through the crawl space this weekend to assess possible damage from water damage.
This is not included in any of the estimated repair work listed above. The nearby comparable
properties listed on the Orange County Real Property site show a house that was built in 2022
and is of similar size to this one. The other comparable properties really didn't seem
comparable to me. Since this house was built in 1972 it is,in my opinion,not a comparison of
equals. So many aspects of building codes,materials,manufactured systems and materials have
changed radically since 1972 the comparisons are moot. The prevailing code in use when this
house was built was the 1968 edition. We now use the 2018 N.C. Residential Code. This house
Docusign Envelope ID:7FE57725-9FEA-4FD3-99AA-DE6B4DB9B62E
was not required to have insulation or insulated glazing when it was built but are now required
by code. Termite treatment was not required when this house was built in 1972.Most of the
materials used today are different than they were in 1972 except for foundations and roof
coverings. Additionally,houses in this neighborhood have recently undergone extensive
remodeling and renovations, including houses that were built by the same builder as this house.
And, as stated earlier,this house has had no renovations since it was built. To reiterate, I feel
the value of the house at 323 Azalea Drive is worth between$180,0004190,000. Thank you. "
Evidence submitted by the county representative:
• The screen porch is 27 feet long(not 28)and the end of the deck has been squared. The grade
of B+05 is in line with other homes in the neighborhood. The year built and effective year built
are 1970 so the effective age is 55 years without improvement. Physical condition was changed
from Average to Fair with the informal appeal. I see no reason for further reduction of value.
• Photos of Subject Property
• Current Property Record Card
• Proposed Property Record Card of Subject
• Correspondence
Motion of the Board Accept the Coun 's revised value of$577,300
Made the motion Saru Salvi
Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook
Voted For Leon Meyers
Voted Against
Property Identification:
Property Owner Mohsen Hajirahim Appellant(if different)
Property Address 2401 Honeysuckle Road Parcel ID or Abstract 9890113679
Statement of Appeal: Request a reduction in value based on the condition of the home.
Current Assessed Value $619,000 County Opinion $617,100
Time of Hearin 2:11PM Appellant Opinion $450,000
County Representative Bill Hiltbold Board Decision $617,100
Evidence submitted by the appellant:
• Please see the photos of peeling paint and gaps around window frames and cracks in the
exterior brick.
Evidence submitted by the county representative:
• 1 measured the outside of the home and found it to be 1 foot shorter than the 2024 sketch. This
reduced the living area from 2,535 to 2,490 square feet. The building has an effective year built
equal to the year built of 1969. Physical condition is already reduced to Fair with 20%physical
depreciation added from the prior informal appeal. I see no need for further adjustment.
0 Photos of Subject Property
Docusign Envelope ID:7FE57725-9FEA-4FD3-99AA-DE6B4DB9B62E
• Current Property Record Card
• Proposed Property Record Card of Subject
• Correspondence
Motion of the Board Accept the County's revised value of$617,100
Made the motion Saru Salvi
Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook
Voted For Leon Myers
Voted Against
Chair of the dignea by:
Leon Meyers
�tsasea
9/15/2025
Recording Secre ^^&� usigned by:
Jennifer Rigsbee JUWA(�
Esz4 9/15/2025