The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2025_10_30 BOER Minutes Docusign Envelope ID:5E70BEDB-1C5C-4D06-AFFC-C88435F8F715 MINUTES Orange County Board of Equalization and Review Meeting held on October 30, 2025 Board Members in attendance: Chair of the Board Leon Meyers Yes Regular Member Saru Salvi Yes Regular Member Richal Vanhook Yes Alternate Member Shareese Alston No Alternate Member Hunter Beattie No Alternate Member Tony Blake No Alternate Member Vaughn Co m ton No Alternate Member Shannon Julian No Alternate Member Barbara Levine No Orange County Staff in attendance: Tax Administrator Nancy Freeman Deputy Tax Assessor Chad Phillips Real Property Appraisal Manager Roger Gunn Chief Appraiser Kelly Wells Temporary Appraiser Assistant Rob Teachout Appraiser C le Anderson Appraiser Scott Zeman Appraiser Jimmy Milliken PUV Compliance Review Appraiser Dana Hall Meeting Schedule: No. Time Appellant PIN or Abstract Appeared Appeal Type 1 9:20AM Beverly Walton 9865926150 No Value-Real 2 9:30AM Alfred Udah 9893286995 No Value-Real 3 9:43AM Li Wang 9799137408.004 Yes Value-Real 4 9:57AM Carl D.Atkins Trustee 9829616436 No Value-Real 5 10:03AM Qing Cheng 9799137408.081 No Value-Real 6 10:07AM Paul Smith 9749890447 No Value-Real 7 10:15AM Altangla M.Johnson 0900454155 No Value-Real 8 10:22AM John D. Hughes HRS 9920606235 No Value-Real 9 10:32AM Katherine Tumlinson 9778846275.001 No Value-Real 10 10:45AM Kevin Hooker 9779825838 Yes Value-Real 11 11:15AM Dolores H. Clark 9778754952 Yes Value-Real 12 11:30AM Lorie Clark 9778753950 Yes Value-Real 13 11:45AM Elizabeth Harden 9779229663 Yes Value-Real 14 11:00AM Leroy C. Hutto 9777736705 No Value-Real Time B Docusign Envelope ID:5E70BEDB-1C5C-4D06-AFFC-C88435F8F715 9:20 AM Leon Meyers Meeting adjourned 12:19 PM Richal Vanhook Related meeting notes: • Chad discussed Ryan LLC's request to reschedule November commercial appeal dates to December and potential of adding additional full-day BOER meetings. • 9779229663 (2218 Pathway Drive): Vote nullified in 10/30/25 PM BOER hearing and continued for further study as with other Fair Oaks PM hearing appeals. (Motion: Leon Meyers, Second: Barbara Levine, none opposed) Property Identification: Property Owner I Beverly Walton Appellant(if different) Property Address I 119 Rencher Street I Parcel ID or Abstract 19865926150 Statement of Appeal: Request reduction in value based on condition and comparable sales. Current Assessed Value $255,500 ounty Opinion $136,000 Time of Hearin 9:20 AM Appellant Opinion $145,000 County Representative C le Anderson Board Decision $136,000 Evidence submitted by the appellant: • The appellant contends that the subject property differs significantly from the comparable sales and therefore should not be compared to them. The appellant further states that the dwelling was constructed over three separate decades by unskilled laborers who were neighbors and friends. The appellant cites the overall poor condition of the house as the primary reason for the appeal. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • The subject property is a 0.34-acre tract with a 2,312-square-foot single-family dwelling located at 119 Rencher Street in Hillsborough. The appellant contends that the subject property is not comparable to nearby homes that have recently sold due to differences in construction quality and overall condition. • County staff visited the property for physical verification and photos and were able to inspect both the exterior and interior of the dwelling. • After inspection and review,the County recommends the following adjustments: - Reduce the Effective Year Built from 1981 to 1956 - Reduce the Quality Grade from C to D - Change the Condition rating from Average to Fair - Apply an additional 15%Physical Depreciation to the dwelling • These changes are recommended based on the observed quality of construction and the property's overall condition during the field inspection. The proposed adjustments result in a revised assessed value of$136,000 for the subject property. • Subject Photo Docusign Envelope ID:5E70BEDB-1C5C-4D06-AFFC-C88435F8F715 • GIS Map • Interior Photos(1-12) • Current Property Record Card • Proposed Property Record Card Motion of the Board Accept Count 's Proposed Value: $136,000 No Change Made the motion Richal Vanhook Seconded the motion Leon Meyers Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against ... Property Identification: Property Owner Alfred Udah Appellant(if different) Property Address 14114 Linden Road Parcel ID or Abstract 19893286995 Statement of Appeal: Request reduction in value based on comparable property. Current Assessed Value $435,300 ounty Opinion $435,300 Time of Hearin 9:30 AM Appellant Opinion $300,000 County Representative C le Anderson Board Decision $435,300 No Change Evidence submitted by the appellant: • The appellant submitted the sale of 4720 Brigadoon Drive as supporting documentation. This property sold on January 6, 2025 for$260,000. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • Property Review Summary—4114 Linden Drive,Mebane • The subject property consists of a 1.84-acre tract improved with two single-family dwellings. The primary residence is a 1,479-square-foot brick ranch built in 1983. • The secondary dwelling is a 470-square-foot garage apartment, also constructed in 1983. County staff conducted a site visit for physical verification and photos. The County also reviewed the appellant's appeal and supporting evidence. The appellant provided one comparable sale located at 4720 Brigadoon Drive,which sold on January 6,2025, for $260,000. Because this transaction occurred so close to the revaluation date of January 1, 2025, it was reviewed in detail. • Upon review, the County determined that 4720 Brigadoon Drive is not a comparable property. This parcel is significantly smaller at 0.46 acres, compared to the subject's 1.84 acres. Additionally, despite being classified as a single-family dwelling in County records,MLS data confirms that it is actually a modular home. The same property is now actively listed for $399,775. • It is also noted that the subject property sold for$399,000 in December 2021. Since that time, the local real estate market has experienced substantial appreciation,which supports the current assessed value being approximately 9%higher,reflecting market conditions as of January 2025. Docusign Envelope ID:5E70BEDB-1C5C-4D06-AFFC-C88435F8F715 • Based on the available data,the County finds that the appellant has not provided sufficient credible evidence to warrant an adjustment. Therefore, the County recommends no change to the current assessed value of$435,300. • Subject Photo • GIS Map • Property Record Card Motion of the Board Accept County's Proposed Value: $435,300 No Change Made the motion Richal Vanhook Seconded the motion Saru Salvi Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against ... Property Identification: Property Owner Li Wang Appellant(if different Property Address 1002 Willow Drive,Unit 4 Parcel ID or Abstract 9799137408.004 Statement of Appeal: Request reduction in value based on comparable properties. Current Assessed Value $272,300 ounty Opinion $259,900 Time of Hearin 9:43 AM Appellant Opinion $270,000 County Representative C le Anderson Board Decision $259,900 Evidence submitted by the appellant: The appellant states: • "The properties I selected are all located within the same subdivision,built by the same builder, and share a similar layout and structure. Based on the average sold price per square foot of$295.57,my home's estimated value is $272,300. Given that my home remains in its original condition with no upgrades since construction,I respectfully request a reassessment of my property's market value at$270,000 to more accurately reflect local market trends and comparable sales." • As supporting documentation,the appellant included three comparable sales from the subject's condominium project. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • The subject property is a 918-square-foot condominium located at 1002 Willow Drive,Unit 4, in Chapel Hill. The appellant provided three comparable sales from within the subject's neighborhood. Two of these comparables were not considered by the County, as both sold after the January 1,2025, appraisal date. The third comparable,which sold in 2024, was included in the County's sales analysis. • County staff visited the subject property for physical verification and photographs. The County also reviewed a sales analysis of recently sold condominiums within the subject's neighborhood. • After review, the County recommends reducing the subject's Effective Year Built from 2012 to 2007. This adjustment aligns the subject's price per square foot with the 2024 comparable sales in the neighborhood. Docusign Envelope ID:5E70BEDB-1C5C-4D06-AFFC-C88435F8F715 • The County recommends a revised assessed value of$259,900 for the subject property. • Subject Photo • GIS Map • Sales Analysis • Current Property Record Card • Proposed Property Record Card Motion of the Board Accept Count 's Proposed Value: $259,900 Made the motion Saru Salvi Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against ... Property Identification: Property Owner I Carl D. Atkins Trustee Appellant(if different) Property Address 16526 NC 49 Parcel ID or Abstract 19829616436 Statement of Appeal: Request reduction in value based on perceived excessive increase, condition, proximity to road, and comparable properties. Current Assessed Value $131,600 ounty Opinion $111,600 Time of Hearin 9:57 AM Appellant Opinion $93,225 County Representative C le Anderson Board Decision $111,600 Evidence submitted by the appellant: • The appellant contends that the 65%increase in the assessed value of the subject property is excessive, citing that the property is in below-average condition. The appellant also notes that the dwelling is situated approximately 22 feet from the Highway 49 right-of-way,which they believe negatively impacts the property's value. To support their opinion of value,the appellant submitted two comparable sales for consideration. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • Property Information: The subject property is a 1.21-acre tract with a 798-square-foot single- family dwelling, located at 6526 NC Highway 49 in Mebane. • Appellant's Statement: The appellant contends that the 65% increase in assessed value is excessive given the issues associated with the property. Two comparable properties were submitted as supporting documentation. • County Review: County staff conducted a physical inspection of the property. The appellant's submittal was reviewed in detail. The two comparables provided by the appellant-7275 Atkins Road and 7284 Highway 49—were both active listings and therefore could not be considered as valid sales for valuation purposes. • In addition,the County analyzed recent land sales within the subject neighborhood. These sales involved significantly larger tracts than the subject property,resulting in substantially lower prices per acre and limited comparability. • Following the physical inspection and review of the appeal,the County recommends the following adjustments to better reflect the property's characteristics and market position: - Change GP Glazed Porch to EP Enclosed Porch Docusign Envelope ID:5E70BEDB-1C5C-4D06-AFFC-C88435F8F715 - Reduce Quality Grade from D+10 to D - Reduce Effective Year Built from 1979 to 1949 - Change Story Height from 1.5 stories to 1 story with attic - Remove the prior 15%downward adjustment to dwelling depreciation,as no justification was found for its application - Apply a-25%land adjustment to account for the dwelling's proximity to Highway 49 • Conclusion: Implementation of these adjustments results in a revised total assessed value of $111,600 for the subject property. • Subject Photo • GIS Map • Analysis of Land Sales • Current Property Record Card • Proposed Property Record Card Motion of the Board Accept County's Proposed Value: $111,600 Made the motion Saru Salvi Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against Property Identification: Pro a Owner ing Cheng Appellant if different Property Address 1002 Willow Drive,Unit Parcel ID or Abstract 9799137408.081 81 Statement of Appeal: Request reduction in value based on condition and comparable sales. Current Assessed Value $272,300 ounty Opinion $244,400 Time of Hearin 10:03 AM Appellant Opinion $240,000 County Representative C le Anderson Board Decision $244,400 Evidence submitted by the appellant: • The appellant states that recently sold comparable properties in the neighborhood have sold for less than the subject's current assessed value. The appellant further indicates that the unit's central air system is not functioning and that the interior is outdated. • As supporting evidence,the appellant submitted three comparable sales from within the subject's neighborhood, along with interior photographs illustrating the unit's condition. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • The subject property is a 918 square foot condo, located at 1002 Willow Drive,Unit 81, in Chapel Hill. The appellant states that recently sold comparable units and condition issues are the reasons for this appeal. The appellant provided three comparable sales from the subject's condominium complex,two of which were from 2023. The appellant also provided a 2024 sale, which is in the County's sales analysis. The appellant also provided interior photos of the kitchen,bathroom,thermostat, and air intake to support the claim that this unit has not been updated. Docusign Envelope ID:5E70BEDB-1C5C-4D06-AFFC-C88435F8F715 • County staff visited the property for physical verification purposes and photos. The County also reviewed the appellant's supporting documentation. A sales analysis of comparable units was also reviewed,using sales that occurred in 2024 as they are more representative of market conditions as of January 1,2025. • After review, the County recommends reducing the Effective Year Built from 2021 to 1997. This adjustment will account for the lack of updates associated with this unit. The County recommends a revised value of$244,400 for the subject property. • Subject Photo • Subject Photo#2 • GIS Map • Subject Plat • Subject Permit • Property Record Card Motion of the Board Accept Count 's Proposed Value: $244,400 Made the motion Richal Vanhook Seconded the motion Saru Salvi Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against Provertv Identification: Property Owner Paul Smith Appellant(if different Property Address 3160 Forest Knolls Road Parcel ID or Abstract 19749890447 Statement of Appeal: Request reduction in value based on easement, creek, and riparian buffer. Current Assessed Value $761,600 ounty Opinion $761,600 Time of Hearin 10:07 AM Appellant Opinion $600,000 County Representative C le Anderson Board Decision $761,600 No Change Evidence submitted by the appellant: • The appellant states: • "Please take into account: -This is a private road and there is easement access -The land the property sits on has a creek nearby and a riparian buffer is maintained." • No supporting documentation was provided with this appeal. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • Property Review Summary—3160 Forest Knoll Drive,Chapel Hill • The subject property consists of a 7.22-acre tract improved with a 2,477-square-foot single-family dwelling. The appellant states that the property is located on a private road with easement access and that a nearby creek includes a maintained riparian buffer. • County staff conducted a site visit for physical verification and photographs. The County also reviewed the appellant's statements and available documentation. While the appellant noted concerns regarding private road access and riparian buffer restrictions, no supporting evidence or documentation was submitted to substantiate these claims. The County reviewed the recorded plat associated with the property and did not identify any issues that would warrant an adjustment to the land value. Docusign Envelope ID:5E70BEDB-1C5C-4D06-AFFC-C88435F8F715 • The County also reviewed historical sales and permit data. The subject property sold in November 2020 for$591,000. Following a field inspection and a review of interior photographs from that sale, the County finds that the Quality Grade and Effective Year Built currently applied to the subject dwelling are appropriate. Additionally, a building permit issued in April 2023 for an addition or renovation project listed a construction cost of$200,000,which further supports the accuracy of the current valuation. • Given these findings,the County concludes that the current assessed value accurately reflects market conditions as of January 1,2025. The appellant has not met the burden of proof or provided credible evidence to justify a reduction in value. • Recommendation: The County recommends no change to the current assessed value of $761,600. • Subject Photo • Subject Photo#2 • GIS Map • Subject Plat • Subject Permit • Property Record Card Motion of the Board Accept Count 's Proposed Value: $761,600 No Change Made the motion Saru Salvi Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against Property Identification: Property Owner Altangla M.Johnson Appellant(if different) Property Address F9900 Babe Cates Road I Parcel ID or Abstract 10900454155 Statement of Appeal: Appealing the decision of removal from PUV do to being unaware of listing period. Current Assessed Value Late PUV ounty Opinion Accept late application Time of Hearin 10:15 AM Appellant Opinion Accept late application County Representative Dana Hall Board Decision Accept late application Evidence submitted by the appellant: • Unaware of the January listing period ending on 1/31/2025 and the program until recently. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • The subject property is located on Babe Cates Road in Timberlake. The nature of the appeal is the untimely filing of a Present Use Value application submitted on August 25, 2025. • On August 25,2025, Excell Carrington's wife 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. Docusign Envelope ID:5E70BEDB-1C5C-4D06-AFFC-C88435F8F715 • A review of the untimely application indicates that the property would otherwise qualify for the Present Use Value program for agriculture. The County recommends approval of the untimely application if the Board determines good cause was demonstrated. • Good Cause Form • AV-5 Application • Attending Farmer Income Statement • GIS Map Motion of the Board Other: Accept late application Made the motion Richal Vanhook Seconded the motion Leon Meyers Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against ... Property Identification: Property Owner John D. Hughes HRS Appellant(if different) Property Address 2.54-acre parcel on Parcel ID or Abstract 9920606235 3 FAtkins Road Statement of Appeal: Appealing the decision of removal from PUV on July 18,2025 based on inability to locate who was farming the land. Current Assessed Value PUV Removal County Opinion Accept late application Time of Hearin 10:22 AM Appellant Opinion Accept late application County Representative Dana Hall Board Decision Accept late application Evidence submitted by the appellant: • Appealing the decision of removal from PUV on July 18, 2025 • Requesting the re-establishment of Present-Use Value (PUV)program enrollment for tax year 2025 for my property identified as parcel 9920606235. • I was unable to locate who was farming the land before I paid the taxes. After doing some more searching, I found the farmer who had been farming the land. He signed the associated forms, and I wish to appeal the previous finding to get the back to agricultural use. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • The subject property is 32.54 acres located on Atkins Road. • On June 6, 2025, land records notified our office of the passing of Mr. John D. Hughes,the owner of the subject property. Mr. Hughes' son,Ronald Hughes,was identified as the point of contact and only heir. • A letter requesting an updated Present-Use Value(PUV)application was mailed on July 10, 2025. Shortly after, Mr. Ronald Hughes contacted me and stated that he was unsure who currently farmed the property. I explained that the land appeared to be maintained and that I would reach out to local farmers to inquire about any possible lease or income arrangements. • 1 contacted a family member of the previously listed farmer from 2003, Mr. Carver Roberts, who informed me that they no longer farm the property and were unsure when Mr. Roberts,his uncle, had stopped. Docusign Envelope ID:5E70BEDB-1C5C-4D06-AFFC-C88435F8F715 • On July 16,2025,Mr. Roger Tate notified me that he would be assisting Mr. Ronald Hughes with the property going forward and that Mr. Cody Johnson could meet the necessary income requirements beginning in the 2025 tax year. • I informed Mr. Hughes of my conversations with Mr. Roberts and Mr. Tate and explained that if he was unable to provide documentation or a signed income statement from the current farmer, the property would have to be removed from the PUV program. I also explained that reinstatement could be requested as early as January 2028. • On July 18,2025, due to the absence of supporting income documentation,the property was removed from the PUV program, and a letter was mailed explaining the reason for removal. • Subsequently, on August 26, 2025,Mr. Ronald Hughes provided an income statement from Mr. Stephen Rogers, documenting hay income from the property for the previous three years. With this information,I assisted Mr. Hughes in completing an updated AV-5 PUV application and explained the appeal process to present his case before the Board of Equalization and Review. • A site visit was conducted on August 27,2025,to verify the property's current use and review the appeal application. Based on the new income documentation and site verification,the property now meets the minimum income requirements for continued agricultural classification under the PUV program. Therefore, the continued-use application would otherwise be recommended for approval. The County recommends reinstating the Present Use Value Enrollment for 2025 tax year going forward. • Per G.S. 105-277.4(b1), (b1)Notice and Appeal. If the assessor determines that the property loses its eligibility for present use value classification for a reason other than failure to file a timely application required due to transfer of the land,the assessor shall provide written notice of the decision as required by G.S. 105-296(i). The notice shall include the property's tax identification number,the specific reason for the disqualification, and the date of the decision. Decisions of the assessor regarding the qualification or appraisal of property under this section may be appealed to the county board of equalization and review or,if that board is not in session,to the board of county commissioners.An appeal must be made within 60 days after date of the written notice of the decision of the assessor. If an owner submits additional information to the assessor pursuant to G.S. 105-2960),the appeal must be made within 60 days after the assessor's decision based on the additional information. • Appeal Statement • AV-5 Application • Attending Farmer's Income Statement • GIS Map • Pictures • July 10, 2025,Letter for requested updated application. • July 18, 2025,Removal Letter and Bills • 2003 AV-5 Application on file Motion of the Board Other: Accept late application Made the motion Saru Salvi Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against ... Property Identification: Request reduction in value based on comparable properties. Property Owner Katherine Tumlinson A ellant if different Docusign Envelope ID:5E70BEDB-1C5C-4D06-AFFC-C88435F8F715 Property Address 1457 S Greensboro Street Parcel ID or Abstract 19778846275.001 Statement of Appeal: Current Assessed Value $804,000 ounty Opinion 1 $804,000 Time of Hearin 10:32 AM Appellant Opinion $725,000 County Representative Scott Zeman Board Decision $804,000 No Change Evidence submitted by the appellant: • 443 S Greensboro St sold 6/30/2023 for$765,000. • 463 S Greensboro St sold 1/11/2024 for$750,000. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • A county appraiser conducted a site review on 10/23/2025. The appellant was not at home,but the appraiser was able to access to the exterior of the property. Photographs were taken by the appraiser. No interior photographs were provided. • Appraiser observations and recommendations: 1. GRADE: The residence has a grade of A+65. The grade is consistent with other Park Slope Condominiums. No change to grade is recommended. 2. AGE: The residence was built in 2015 and has a current effective year built of 2017.No change to effective year built is recommended. 3. CONDITION: The residence is currently in Average condition.No change to condition is recommended. 4. SALES AND EQUITY ANALYSIS: The subject property is located in Park Slope Condominiums in Carrboro. These residences are constructed in the style of detached single family and declared as condominiums. • Comparable sales data is difficult to find, as detached single family condominiums with similar ages and grades to Park Slope are uncommon in the Carrboro area. Only sales within Park Slope could be considered in the county's analysis. • One of the appellant's comparable sales is considered unqualified. 463 S Greensboro Street was sold between relatives. • Comparable 443 S Greensboro Street sold for$765,000 on 6/30/2023 and has a 2025 assessed value of$775,400 ($342 per finished square foot). The subject property is assessed with the same grade and effective age as the comparable. However, the subject property has a masonry foundation while the comparable has slab. The difference in foundation type results in the subject being assessed at$804,400($363 per finished square foot). Aside from the foundation, the properties are assessed with the same grade and condition and have similar layouts and square footage. • Based on a sales and equity comparison with 443 S Greensboro Street,the county recommends no change to the subject's valuation. • Overhead and exterior photos • Sales analysis • Deed book 6836/1088 -Unqualified sale of 463 S Greensboro St • Comparable property record: 443 S Greensboro St • Subject current property record(proposed) Motion of the Board Accept Count 's Proposed Value: $804,000 No Change Made the motion Richal Vanhook Seconded the motion Leon Meyers Docusign Envelope ID:5E70BEDB-1C5C-4D06-AFFC-C88435F8F715 Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against ProiDerty Identification: Pro a Owner I Kevin Hooker Appellant(if different) Property Address 1 125 Ironwoods Dr Parcel ID or Abstract 19779825838 Statement of Appeal: Request reduction in value based on condition of house. Current Assessed Value $862,600 County Opinion $800,700 Time of Hearin 10:45 AM Appellant Opinion $730,000 County Representative Jimmy Milliken Board Decision $774,200(condition&comp value/SF Evidence submitted by the appellant: • The home was used as a rental property for approximately 10 years prior to my purchase, which contributed to additional interior wear and deferred maintenance. Although, as of January 2025, I had replaced the windows and siding(completed before the March 2022 appraisal), the interior remained largely original. This includes all bathrooms dating back to 1990, an HVAC unit from around 2000, a partially updated kitchen from over 15 years ago, hardwood floors in need of refinishing, carpet showing significant wear, and walls poorly painted by the rental company. Additional issues include an outdoor deck at the end of its life, a currently unusable chimney, and a roof installed in 2014 that is at or near the midpoint of its expected lifespan. These condition factors were reflected in the appraised value of$730,000, and no significant interior upgrades were made between the appraisal and the January 1, 2025, assessment date. As such,the county's assessed value of$862,600 does not accurately reflect the property's condition. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • Property Review Summary— 125 Ironwoods Drive(NBC 7438) • The subject property is located in NBC 7438 at 125 Ironwoods Drive. It was constructed in 1990 and contains approximately 3,776 square feet of living area per County records. • The submitted appraisal was reviewed in detail, including the corrected sketch and the breakdown of finished and non-living areas. Adjustments were made to properly account for living area that was originally identified as garage space. The appraisal reports the property's condition as good, with some kitchen upgrades noted. Based on this,the County recommends lowering the effective year built from 1999 to 1995 to better reflect the overall level of modernization and maintenance. • The appellant also noted the presence of a land easement. The recorded plat confirms a sewer easement on the property. To account for this encumbrance,the County recommends a-10% land adjustment. • An analysis of 2024 sales of similarly sized properties within NBC 7438 was completed to ensure that the subject's assessment aligns with the current market. The results indicate that the adjusted valuation remains consistent with neighborhood trends. • Based on the appraisal review, site analysis, and comparable sales data,the County recommends a revised total property value of$800,700. • Summary • Current Property Record Card • Proposed Property Record Card Docusign Envelope ID:5E70BEDB-1C5C-4D06-AFFC-C88435F8F715 • Maps • GIS Map • Photo Motion of the Board Value Changed as Follows: $774,200(condition&comp value/SF Made the motion Leon Meyers Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against ... Provertv Identification: Property Owner Dolores H. Clark Appellant(if different) Property Address 109 Jones Ferry Road Parcel ID or Abstract 19778754952 Statement of Appeal: Request reduction in value based on condition, historic home, comparable properties, and age of appellant. Current Assessed Value $404,700 ounty Opinion $385,100 Time of Hearin 11:16 AM Appellant Opinion $196,700 County Representative Kelly Wells Board Decision $355,300 condition Evidence submitted by the appellant: • This is an older house in need of repair. • Comparison to recently built, larger homes is unfair. • A person over 90 should be exempt from paying taxes/hardship due to taxes Evidence submitted by the county representative: • The subject property is a 1,876-sf single family home with 3 bedrooms, 1 bath built in 1879, located on Jones Ferry Rd. in Carrboro. • Based on the lack of updates and repairs needed, The County recommends reducing the effective age of the home from 1980 to 1964 resulting in a revised valuation from$404,700 to $385,100. • Photo of subject • GIS Map • Sales and Equity Analysis • Current Property Record Card • Proposed Property Record Card Motion of the Board Value Changed as Follows: $355,300 condition Made the motion Saru Salvi Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against Property Identification: Property Owner I Lorie Clark Appellant(if different) Docusign Envelope ID:5E70BEDB-1C5C-4D06-AFFC-C88435F8F715 Property Address I I I I Jones FerryRoad Parcel ID or Abstract 9778753950 Statement of Appeal: Current Assessed Value $408,500 ounty Opinion 1 $389,000 Time of Hearin 11:31 AM Appellant Opinion $275,000 County Representative Kelly Wells Board Decision $389,000 No Change Evidence submitted by the appellant: • This is an older house compared to the million-dollar homes adjacent to my property. They have more square footage and modern amenities compared to my home. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • The subject property is a 1,320-sf brick ranch with 3 bedrooms and 1 & 1/2 baths built in 1963 on an average size lot located on Jones Ferry Rd, Carrboro. • Based on review, The County recommends reducing the grade of the home from C to C-05 and the effective year built from 1978 to 1963 resulting in a revised value from$408,500 to $389,000. • Photo of subject • GIS Map • Sales and Equity Analysis • Current Property Record Card • Proposed Property Record Card Motion of the Board Accept Coun 's Proposed Value: $389,000 No Change Made the motion Saru Salvi Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against Property Identification: Request reduction in value based on comparable property listing price and time on market. Property Owner Elizabeth Harden Appellant if different Property Address 2218 Pathway Drive Parcel ID or Abstract 9779229663 Statement of Appeal: Current Assessed Value $432,000 ounty Opinion $418,500 Time of Hearin 11:40 AM Appellant Opinion $419,000 County Representative Kelly Wells Board Decision Continued Evidence submitted by the appellant: • There is a duplex adjacent to mine that has been sitting on the market at 425K and isn't selling so clearly 432K would be far overpriced. Also,this duplex is more updated than mine and has a field right next to it which could be seen as a yard. Another, much nicer duplex than mine and a few down,just sold for 425K. I believe you came up with this value of 432K at the peak of the market which has been falling since. That feels really unfair to me. I bought at 407K two ears ago and assumed that would be the new property tax value. This steep and unfair Docusign Envelope ID:5E70BEDB-1C5C-4D06-AFFC-C88435F8F715 increase,plus inflation,has me strongly considering moving out of the town that I love so much. It's simply unaffordable for middle and low income families to thrive here. Please at least revise my tax value to be reflective of the market now,not at its peak back in January. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • The subject property is a 1,502-sf townhome with 2 bedrooms and 2 baths built in 1987 located in the Fairoaks subdivision in Chapel Hill. This unit sold in June of 2023 for$407,000. • Based on recent sales of this property and similar units,The County recommends increasing the land adjustment from -10%to -15%resulting in a reduced value from $432,000 to $418,500. • Photo of subject • GIS Map • Sales and Equity Analysis • Current Property Record Card • Proposed Property Record Card Motion of the Board Continue to a Future Date/Time: Reassess all active Fair Oaks appealed properties Made the motion Leon Meyers Seconded the motion Barbara Levine (in PM 10/30 meeting) Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against Property Identification: Property Owner Leroy C. Hutto Appellant(if different) Property Address 25 South Circle Drive I Parcel ID or Abstract 19777736705 Statement of Appeal: Request reduction in value based on bedroom sizes, square footage, and deck utility/description. Current Assessed Value $504,800 ounty Opinion $436,000 Time of Hearin 12:06 AM Appellant Opinion $408,000 County Representative Kelly Wells Board Decision $436,000 Evidence submitted by the appellant: • One bedroom is small,the other two are moderate with no attached master bathroom. The overall square footage is 2547. The front deck is not a deck because it cannot seat any individual so therefore it is an entryway. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • The subject property is a 2,684-sf single family home with 3 bedrooms, 2 baths, a basement garage and finished basement area built in 1960 located at 25 S Circle Dr. in Chapel Hill. • Due to the lack of upgrades and deferred maintenance, The County recommends reducing the effective year built from 1995 to 1965 and adding a 5%layout depreciation for no master bath resulting in a reduction in value from$504,800 to$436,000. • Photo of subject • GIS Map Docusign Envelope ID:5E70BEDB-1C5C-4D06-AFFC-C88435F8F715 • Sales and Equity Analysis • Current Property Record Card • Proposed Property Record Card Motion of the Board Accept Count 's Proposed Value: $436,000 No Change Made the motion Saru Salvi Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against Chair of the lydiysigned by: Leon Meyers 11/12/2025 Recording Se at�B by: 96ati -r"4 Rob Teachout yes 11/12/2025 Docusign Envelope ID:A845A664-1 FD8-47D6-8435-6C2FDECBEA46 MINUTES Orange County Board of Equalization and Review Meeting held on October 30, 2025 Board Members in attendance: Chair of the Board Leon Meyers Yes Regular Member Saru Salvi Yes Regular Member Richal Vanhook No Alternate Member Shareese 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 Yes Orange County Staff in attendance: Tax Administrator Nancy Freeman Deputy Tax Assessor Chad Phillips Real Property Appraisal Manager Roger Gunn Chief Appraiser Kelly Wells Temporary Appraiser Assistant Rob Teachout Appraiser Bill Hiltbold Appraiser Jimmy Milliken Appraiser Scott Zeman Meeting Schedule: No. Time Appellant PIN or Abstract Appeared Appeal Type 1 12:58PM Kira McGovern 9779228679 Yes Value-Real 2 1:28PM Alessandro Travaglia 9779323576 Yes Value-Real 3 2:05PM Paul Mihas 9779321555 Yes Value-Real 4 2:10PM Samuel Schilis 9860910507 Yes Value-Real 5 2:24PM Sandra P. Bell 9778486964 No Value-Real 6 2:25PM Sandra P. Bell 9778487928 No Value-Real 7 2:27PM Sandra P. Bell 9778487848 No Value-Real 8 3:27PM Xiajuan Yin 9880141766 Yes Value-Real 9 3:53PM Chunyang Fan 9880054477 Yes Value-Real 10 4:29PM Hiram Chicurel Bayard 9779827574 Yes Value-Real 11 4:58PM Norbert M. Lechner 9779904260 Yes Value-Real Time B Meeting called to order 12:58 PM Leon Meyers Meeting adjourned 5:13 PM Leon Meyers Docusign Envelope ID:A845A664-1 FD8-47D6-8435-6C2FDECBEA46 Motion Time By Second To move into recess 2:34 PM Leon Meyers Barbara Levine To return to order 3:27 PM Saru Salvi Barbara Levine Related meeting notes: Vote on 9779228679 nullified in favor of continuance for reassessment of group. (Motion: Leon Meyers, Second: Barbara Levine, none opposed) 2218 Pathway—Vote nullified in 10/30/25 PM meeting and continued as with other Fair Oaks PM hearing appeals. (Motion: Leon Meyers, Second: Barbara Levine,none opposed) Property Identification: Property Owner Kira McGovern Appellant(if different) Property Address 2224 Pathway Drive I Parcel ID or Abstract 19779228679 Statement of Appeal: Request reduction in value based on comparison to single-family homes vs. townhomes (owner/neighbor"group"maintenance/decisions, etc.) and a potentially questionable comparable property. Current Assessed Value $420,800 ounty Opinion 1 $402,800 Time of Hearin 12:58 PM Appellant Opinion $355,800 County Representative Kelly Wells Board Decision Continued Evidence submitted by the appellant: • My understanding is that the value of my townhouse is based on the value of the single-family homes in the Fair Oaks neighborhood using a similar construction grade and land value. What was not taken into consideration is that the townhomes,which share a wall, are required to make all decisions regarding maintenance with their townhouse neighbor—decisions around siding, roofing, termite,rodent and insect control. • The sale of the 2218 Pathway Drive townhome in 2023 at$407,000 is the closest comparable to my townhome at 2224 Pathway. The Orange County records indicate this is a 1500 sq ft townhome so that would bring the townhouse price per sq ft to $271. So based on that comp, my 1250 sq ft townhouse would have an approx. value of$339,000. Given that was two years ago, I've estimated that a more accurate assessed value for my town home would be about $355,800 Evidence submitted by the county representative: • The subject property is a townhome with 1,252 A, 2 bedrooms and 2 baths located in Fair Oaks Subdivision in Chapel Hill. • This property sold in April of 2022 for$391,500. • Based on the sale of this property and recent sales of similar units, The County recommends *Correcting the bath count to 2 full and 1 half bath *Reducing the grade from B to B-10 *Increasing the effective year built from 1995 to 2000 for updates and renovations Docusign Envelope ID:A845A664-1 FD8-47D6-8435-6C2FDECBEA46 *Increasing the adjustment on the land from -10%to -15% • Resulting in a reduction in value from$420,800 to$402,800 • Photo of subject • Pictures from 2022 listing • GIS Map • Sales and Equity Analysis • Current Property Record Card • Proposed Property Record Card Motion of the Board Continue to a Future Date/Time: Reassess all active Fair Oaks Tappealed properties Made the motion Leon Meyers Seconded the motion Saru Salvi Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against Property Identification: Property Owner Alessandro Travaglia Appellant(if different) Property Address 2204 Pathway Drive Parcel ID or Abstract 9779323576 Statement of Appeal: Request reduction in value based on comparison to single-family homes vs. townhomes and a potentially questionable comparable property. Current Assessed Value $407,600 ounty Opinion $392,000 Time of Hearin 1:28 PM Appellant Opinion $309,000 County Representative Kelly Wells Board Decision Continued Evidence submitted by the appellant: • This request is based on comparison of my property to the following property,which is located just a few houses down the road, was sold in July 2025 for$440,000($268 per sq. .), has 3 bedrooms while mine has 2, an appraised square footage of 1,640 sq. . while mine is 1,152 sq. and 3 full bathrooms while mine has 2. • My home should have a different value than single family homes beyond just construction and land value. Single family homes have full control over their home maintenance, we do not. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • The subject property is a town home with 1,152 square feet 2 bedroom and 2& 1/2 baths built in 1988 located in the Fair Oaks subdivision in Chapel Hill. • Based on sales of similar units, The County recommends *Reducing the effective year built from 1995 to 1993 *Increasing the land adjustment from-10%to -15% • Resulting in a revised value from$407,600 to$392,000 • Photo of subject Docusign Envelope ID:A845A664-1 FD8-47D6-8435-6C2FDECBEA46 • GIS Map • Sales and Equity Analysis • Current Property Record Card • Proposed Property Record Card Motion of the Board Continue to a Future Date/Time: Reassess all active Fair Oaks Tappealed properties Made the motion Leon Meyers Seconded the motion Barbara Levine Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against ... Property Identification: Property Owner Paul Mihas Appellant(if different) Property Address 12206 Pathway Drive Parcel ID or Abstract 19779321555 Statement of Appeal: Request reduction in value based on comparison to single-family homes vs.town homes and a potentially questionable comparable property. Current Assessed Value $405,300 ounty Opinion $389,700 Time of Hearin 2:05 PM Appellant Opinion $356,100 County Representative Kelly Wells Board Decision Continued Evidence submitted by the appellant: • This request is based on comparison of my property to 2208 Pathway Drive,which is located directly across the street, and which was sold on July 17, 2025, for$440,000($268 per sqft.), an appraised square footage of 1,642 sq. ft. while mine is 1,152 sq. ft. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • The subject property is a 1,1 52-sf townhome with 2 bedrooms,2 and 1/2 baths built in 1988 located in the Fair Oaks Subdivision in Chapel Hill. • Based on recent sales of similar units,The County recommends: *Increasing the land adjustment from-10%to -15% *Reducing the effective year built from 1995 to 1993 • Resulting in a reduction in value from$405,300 to$389,700 • Photo of subject • GIS Map • Sales and Equity Analysis • Current Property Record Card • Proposed Property Record Card Motion of the Board Continue to a Future Date/Time: Reassess all active Fair Oaks appealed properties Docusign Envelope ID:A845A664-1 FD8-47D6-8435-6C2FDECBEA46 Made the motion Saru Salvi Seconded the motion Barbara Levine Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against ... Property Identification: Property Owner Samuel Schilis Appellant(if different) Property Address 1100 Dairy Court Parcel ID or Abstract 9860910507 Statement of Appeal: Request reduction in value based on the values of comparable properties. Current Assessed Value $813,900 County Opinion $813,900 Time of Hearin 2:10 PM Appellant Opinion $700,000 County Representative Jimmy Milliken Board Decision $783,300 EYB lowered Evidence submitted by the appellant: • "Recent activity involving comparable homes on my street and in the surrounding neighborhood shows that similar properties are listing and not selling at the higher 700K range, well below the present assessment. Because comparable sales or length of time on market provide the most reliable measure of fair market value,I request that my assessment be adjusted to reflect this evidence. Several RE Agents have advised this to be the current value supported by the market." Evidence submitted by the county representative: • Subject property is located at 100 Dairy Court,was built in 1999, and contains 2,914 square feet. • Comparables time on the market were approximately one month. • 102/104 Bay View was listed in March and sold in April. • 112 Hogan Ridge was listed in May and sold in June. • After reviewing the submitted documents I created an analysis using sold properties in NBC 7766. The analysis supports the County's suggestion of no change in valuation. • Analysis • Current Property Record Card • Map • Photo Motion of the Board Value Changed as Follows: $783,300 EYB lowered Made the motion Leon Meyers Seconded the motion Barbara Levine Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against Docusign Envelope ID:A845A664-1 FD8-47D6-8435-6C2FDECBEA46 Property Identification: Property Owner Sandra P. Bell Appellant(if different) Property Address 1111 Dillard Street I Parcel ID or Abstract 19778486964 Statement of Appeal: Request reduction in value based on perceived excessive increase in valuation. Current Assessed Value $883,400 ounty Opinion 1 $883,400 Time of Hearin 2:24 PM Appellant Opinion $600,000 County Representative Jimmy Milliken Board Decision $883,400 No Change Evidence submitted by the appellant: • Appraised at too much. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • Property Review Summary— I I I Dillard Street(NBC 7203) • The subject property is located in NBC 7203 at I I I Dillard Street. It was constructed in 2006 and contains approximately 4,272 square feet of building area. • The appellant did not submit any supporting documentation to justify the requested change in value. An email was sent to the appellant requesting additional information regarding the building's characteristics and use; however,no response was received. • In the absence of supporting evidence or documentation and based on the County's verified property data and valuation model,the County recommends no change to the current assessed value. • Current Property Record Card • Email • Aerial Photo • Photo Motion of the Board Accept Count 's Proposed Value: $883,400 No Change Made the motion Saru Salvi Seconded the motion Barbara Levine Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against Property Identification: Property Owner Sandra P. Bell Appellant(if different) Property Address 109 Dillard Street Parcel ID or Abstract 9778487928 Statement of Appeal: Request reduction in value based on perceived errant valuation. Current Assessed Value $883,400 County Opinion $883,400 Time of Hearin 2:25 PM Appellant Opinion $600,000 County Representative Jimmy Milliken Board Decision $883,400 No Change Docusign Envelope ID:A845A664-1 FD8-47D6-8435-6C2FDECBEA46 Evidence submitted by the appellant: • Incorrect appraised value. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • Property Review Summary— 109 Dillard Street(NBC 7203) • The subject property is located in NBC 7203 at 109 Dillard Street. It was constructed in 2006 and contains approximately 4,272 square feet of building area. • The appellant did not submit any supporting documentation to justify the requested change in value. An email was sent to the appellant requesting additional information regarding the building's characteristics and use; however,no response was received. • In the absence of supporting evidence or documentation and based on the County's verified property data and valuation model,the County recommends no change to the current assessed value. • Current Property Record Card • Email • Aerial Photo • Photo Motion of the Board Accept Count 's Proposed Value: $883,400 No Change Made the motion Saru Salvi Seconded the motion Barbara Levine Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against Property Identification: Property Owner Sandra P. Bell Appellant(if different) Property Address 1109-A Dillard Street I Parcel ID or Abstract 19778487848 Statement of Appeal: Request reduction in value based on perceived errant valuation. Current Assessed Value $845,300 ounty Opinion 1 $845,300 Time of Hearin 2:27 PM Appellant Opinion $600,000 County Representative Jimmy Milliken Board Decision $845,300 No Change Evidence submitted by the appellant: • Incorrect appraised value. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • Property Review Summary— 109-A Dillard Street(NBC 7203) • The subject property is located in NBC 7203 at 109-A Dillard Street. It was constructed in 2007 and contains approximately 4,237 square feet of building area. Docusign Envelope ID:A845A664-1 FD8-47D6-8435-6C2FDECBEA46 • The appellant did not submit any supporting documentation to justify the requested change in value. An email was sent to the appellant requesting additional information regarding the building's characteristics and use. However, no response was received. • In the absence of any supporting evidence or documentation and based on the County's verified property data and valuation model,the County recommends no change to the current assessed value. • Current Property Record Card • Aerial Photo • Photo Motion of the Board Accept Count 's Proposed Value: $845,300 No Change Made the motion Saru Salvi Seconded the motion Barbara Levine Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against ... Property Identification: Property Owner Xiajuan Yin Appellant(if different) Property Address 315 Palafox Drive Parcel ID or Abstract 19880141766 Statement of Appeal: Request reduction in value based on condition of house. Current Assessed Value $943,500 ounty Opinion $921,800 Time of Hearin 3:27 PM Appellant Opinion $843,225 County Representative Bill Hiltbold Board Decision $856,000($/SF ad'.per comps) Evidence submitted by the appellant: • Condition of my house: While my home has larger square footage, its market value is impacted by the absence of upgrades. In this area,buyers place significant value on updated kitchens, bathrooms, and energy efficient systems,the features my 12 years old home does not have. Relying on square footage alone categorizes my home alongside fully renovated properties, which is not an accurate comparison. Please see the enclosed photos for reference. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • Only three of the comparable sales presented by the appellant may be considered. 115 Glenmore Road(above the gray line on the analysis report) is in a different neighborhood, Its land value is less than $300,000, its finished area is 1069 square feet above that of the subject, and its grade is B whereas the subject's grade is A-15.The three comps below the gray line calculate a mean value per square foot of$241 just as the subject,but the subject's building value per square foot is $18 higher than the mean of the comps. Docusign Envelope ID:A845A664-1 FD8-47D6-8435-6C2FDECBEA46 • To address the condition disparity between the subject and sales,the county recommends changing the physical condition of the building from Average to Fair as the subject's effective year built is already equal to its 2013 actual year built. 1. Photo 2. GIS Map 2. Analysis report 3. Current Property Record Card 4. Proposed Property Record Card Motion of the Board Value Changed as Follows: $856,000($/SF ad'.per comps) Made the motion Leon Meyers Seconded the motion Saru Salvi Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against ... Property Identification: Property Owner Chunyang Fan Appellant(if different) Property Address 110 Camille Court I Parcel ID or Abstract 19880054477 Statement of Appeal: Request reduction in value based on comparable properties. Current Assessed Value $637,200 ounty Opinion 1 $637,200 Time of Hearin 3:53 PM Appellant Opinion $600,000 revised at meeting) County Representative Bill Hiltbold Board Decision $612,000 $270/SF Evidence submitted by the appellant: • Example-1 300 New Parkside Drive Sold: 2024 Price: $530,000 Size: —2,567 sq. ft.Year built: 1999 Example-2: 36 Birnamwood Drive, Chapel Hill NC 27516 Sale Price: $585,000 Example-3 1506 Ephesus Church Road, Chapel Hill NC 27517 Sale Price: $520,000 Size: —2,339 sq. ft. Built: mid-1990s Example-4 604 Eden Lane, Chapel Hill NC 27517 Sale Price: $420,000 Size: —2,301 sq. ft. Built: —1995 Evidence submitted by the county representative: • The comparable properties presented are not from this neighborhood and one is in Durham County. They are listed at the top of the analysis report. I found 3 sales in 2023 and 2024 in the subject neighborhood within 400 square feet of the subject's size. The total value per square foot of the subject is $4 and$3/square foot below the mean and median of the comparables, respectively. Likewise, for the subject's building value only,the value per square foot is $6 and $7 below the mean and median of the comparables,respectively. • There is also a 100-foot-wide wooded buffer between the subject property and Weaver Dairy Road extension. • As a result of these facts,no change in value is recommended. Docusign Envelope ID:A845A664-1 FD8-47D6-8435-6C2FDECBEA46 1. Photo 2. GIS Map 2. Analysis report 3. Current Property Record Card Motion of the Board Value Changed as Follows: $612,000 $270/SF Made the motion Barbara Levine Seconded the motion Saru Salvi Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against ... Property Identification: Property Owner Hiram Chicurel Bayard Appellant(if different) Property Address 116 Hampshire Place Parcel ID or Abstract 19779827574 Statement of Appeal: Request reduction in value based on comparable sale. Current Assessed Value $740,300 County Opinion $740,300 Time of Hearin 4:29 PM Appellant Opinion $590,000 County Representative Scott Zeman Board Decision $699,000(updated county ro osal Evidence submitted by the appellant: • The appellant has provided 117 Cardiff Place as a comparable sale. This property sold for $675,000 on 2/27/2024 at$241 per finished square foot. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • A county appraiser conducted a site review of the property on 10/23/2025. The appellant was not at home,but the appraiser could access the exterior of the property.A photograph was taken by the appraiser. No interior photographs were provided. • Appraiser observations and recommendations: 1. GRADE: The residence has a grade of A. The grade is consistent with most properties in the Ironwoods subdivision. No change to grade is recommended. 2. AGE: The residence was built in 1986 and has a current effective year built of 1996.No change to effective year built is recommended. 3. CONDITION: The residence is currently in Average condition.No change to condition is recommended. 4. SALES ANALYSIS: The county conducted an analysis of five sales in the Ironwoods subdivision in 2024. 117 Cardiff Place was included in the analysis. The median sale price per square foot of the five sales was$292. The subject is currently assessed at$271. This difference accounts for the fact that properties that sold in 2024 likely have more upgrades than the subject property. Docusign Envelope ID:A845A664-1 FD8-47D6-8435-6C2FDECBEA46 • No change to value is supported based on comparable sales analysis. 1. Overhead and exterior photographs 2. Appellant's comparable analysis 3. County's comparable analysis 4. Subject current also recommended)property record card Motion of the Board Accept Count 's Proposed Value: 1 $699,000(updated county proposal) Made the motion Barbara Levine Seconded the motion Saru Salvi Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against ... Property Identification: Property Owner Norbert M. Lechner Appellant(if different) Property Address 3110akland Lane I Parcel ID or Abstract 19779904260 Statement of Appeal: Request reduction in value based on land valuation. Current Assessed Value $327,300 ounty Opinion 1 $327,300 Time of Hearin 4:58 PM Appellant Opinion Not provided County Representative Scott Zeman Board Decision Continued Evidence submitted by the appellant: • The appellant states the land value is too high.No opinion of value has been stated. • The RCE puts the value of our house at$237,000. Since the latest assessed value is $327,300, the land must be $100,300. Because we are part of a condominium,our land area is exceedingly small(just slightly larger than the house footprint). Thus, we do not believe that our land is worth$100,300. • Notes from county appraiser: • The $237,000 indicates Replacement Cost New without depreciation. After depreciation is applied, the building value is $187,300. The current land value is$140,000. • The subject property is a townhouse rather than a condominium. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • A county appraiser conducted a site review on 10/23/2025. The appellant was at home and allowed access to the exterior of the property. Photographs were taken by the appraiser.No interior photographs were provided. • Appraiser observations and recommendations: 1. GRADE: The residence has a grade of B-10. The grade is consistent with other townhouses in Village West. No change to grade is recommended. Docusign Envelope ID:A845A664-1 FD8-47D6-8435-6C2FDECBEA46 2. AGE: The residence was built in 1979 and has a current effective year built of 1995.No change to effective year built is recommended. 3. CONDITION: The residence is currently in Average condition.No change to condition is recommended. 4. LAND VALUE ANALYSIS: The county performed an analysis of five recent sales in Village West. • Land values were extracted from the sale prices. The average land value by extraction was $146,740 and the median was $138,600. • The current land value of$140,000 is supported by the analysis.No change is recommended. 1. Overhead and exterior photographs 2. Land value analysis 3. Current also recommended)property record Motion of the Board Continue to a Future Date/Time: Determine whether property is classified as Townhome or Condominium Made the motion Leon Meyers Seconded the motion Barbara Levine Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against Chair of the "'Signed by: Leon Meyers 11/6/2025 Recording Sec ^* by: Rob Teachout �� fit 4 �F-4-&99"eg 11/6/2025