Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025_11_13 BOER Minutes Docusign Envelope ID:614DC766-A81A-44A6-92ED-C23292EB4270 MINUTES Orange County Board of Equalization and Review Meeting held on November 13, 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 Office Assistant Jennifer Rigsbee Deputy Tax Assessor Chad Phillips Real Property Appraisal Manager Roger Gunn Chief Appraiser Kelly Wells Temporary Appraiser Assistant Rob Teachout Appraiser Bill Hiltbold Appraiser Louise Benson-Lochner Appraiser Scott Zeman Staff Attorney Martha Bordogna Meeting Schedule: No. Time Appellant PIN or Abstract Appeared Appeal Type 1 9:OOAM Eric Boesch 9880620973 No Value-Real 2 9:10AM Betsy J. Rhodes 9835129681 No Value-Real 3 9:20AM Jihui Zhang 9880048688 No Value-Real 4 9:27AM Jianbin Zhao 9874202080 No Value-Real 5 9:35AM Land Marks Henderson Street 9788480518 No Value-Real LLC 6 9:45AM Land Marks Cobb Terrace LLC 9788388589 No Value-Real 7 9:59AM John Jeffrey Frost 9880724960 Yes Value-Real 8 10:11AM Hua Zhang 9890418985 Yes Value-Real 9 1 10:52AM I Clyde Thompson Heirs 9786196724 Yes Value-Real 10 1 11:05AM I Clyde Thompson Heirs 9786099541 Yes Value-Real Time B Meeting called to order 9:00 AM Leon Meyers Meeting adjourned 11:13 AM Richal Vanhook Docusign Envelope ID:614DC766-A81A-44A6-92ED-C23292EB4270 Motion Time By Second To move into recess 10:37 AM, 11:20 AM Leon Meyers Saru Salvi To return to order 10:52 AM Leon Meyers Richal Vanhook Consent Agenda: Motion of the Board Accept Proposed Consent Agenda?: Yes Made the motion Saru Salvi Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against ... Notes: Property Identification: Property Owner Eric Boesch Appellant(if different) Property Address 167 Kingston Drive Parcel ID or Abstract 19880620973 Statement of Appeal: Request reduction in value based on comparable properties. Current Assessed Value $588,900 ounty Opinion $581,100 Time of Hearin 9:00 AM Appellant Opinion $530,000 County Representative Bill Hiltbold Board Decision $581,100 Evidence submitted by the appellant: • Our house with 2,069 square feet has 3 bedrooms 2 baths whereas these houses all have 3 baths, and one has 4 bedrooms. • These houses all have a garage, our house has no garage. • I therefore feel that an appraised value of$530,000 rather than the $588,900 which the Orange County Tax Office has determined would be more accurate and fairer. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • Properties for comparison presented by the appellant are shown in blue rows at the top of the analysis report. Two are multistory and are valued lower per square foot than single-story homes. Some are too large or small to compare to the 2,069 square feet of the subject. Others are not graded B-10 as is the subject. • Properties in the close comparison section are near the subject in size, are all 1-story and have a B-10 grade. Land value of all is $310,000, as is that of the subject. Docusign Envelope ID:614DC766-A81A-44A6-92ED-C23292EB4270 • The total value per square foot of the subject is$285 as is the median of the close comparisons. It is also well below the mean($305)and median($306) sale price per square foot. These numbers indicate the subject is valued correctly for the neighborhood. • I measured the building and found it a foot less in length and width. Corrections to the sketch change living area to 2,003 square feet. The storage building is actually a 10 x 12 and I changed the grade from C to D removing$100 from its value. • The county recommends reducing the building by$7,700,the yard item by$100 and the total property by$7,800. If the Board accepts these changes,the total assessed value would be $581,100. 1. Photo 2. GIS Map 2. Analysis report 3. Current property record card 4. Proposed property record card Motion of the Board Accept Count 's Proposed Value: $581,100 Made the motion Richal Vanhook Seconded the motion Saru Salvi Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against Property Identification: FP-roper FP—roperty Owner Betsy J. Rhodes A ellant if different Property Address 418 Mace Road I Parcel ID or Abstract 19835129681 Statement of Appeal: Request reduction in value based on comparable properties and condition of house. Current Assessed Value $431,000 ounty Opinion $398,000 Time of Hearin 9:10 AM Appellant Opinion $329,000 County Representative Kelly Wells Board Decision $398,000 Evidence submitted by the appellant: • Comparable sales and condition of house-sustained some water damage and caused sagging floors in laundry area and half bath. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • The subject parcel is a manufactured home with 1,876 square feet, 3 bedrooms, and 2& 1/2 baths built in 2000, located in Mebane. • The sales submitted were not comparable due to the size of the land. The condition was addressed in the informal appeal by lowering the grade to C-10. Docusign Envelope ID:614DC766-A81A-44A6-92ED-C23292EB4270 • After review, The County recommends correcting the year built of the home to 1999 and adding a-10%adjustment to the land for floodplain resulting in a reduction of value from $431,000 to $398,000. • Photo of subject • GIS Map • Equity Analysis • Current Property Record Card • Proposed Property Record Card Motion of the Board Accept Count 's Proposed Value: $398,000 Made the motion Saru Salvi Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against ... Property Identification: Property Owner Jihui Zhang JAppeHant(if different) Property Address 102 Rowe Road I Parcel ID or Abstract 19880048688 Statement of Appeal: Request reduction in value based on comparable properties. Current Assessed Value $730,900 ounty Opinion $729,600 Time of Hearin 9:20 AM Appellant Opinion $710,500 County Representative Bill Hiltbold Board Decision $729,600 Evidence submitted by the appellant: • Neighborhood average home price(sale price) $680,000; neighborhood median home rice assessed value $710,500. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • The subject property presently has a$30,000 reduction in land value for an easement. • Please see the analysis report. I have not seen comparisons closer than in this neighborhood. 2023 and 2024 sales are listed at the top of the report. The subject is presently$25/square foot below the mean and median sale price/square foot and $25,000 below the mean and median of total value. If it were not for the land reduction, this property would align very close to comparisons. • I visited the property and corrected the sketch with a shorter garage, slightly larger deck, and front bay windows. These changes reduce living area to 3,099 square feet and building value to $459,600. • If the board accepts these changes the total property value would decrease from $730,900 to $729,600. 1. Photo Docusign Envelope ID:614DC766-A81A-44A6-92ED-C23292EB4270 2. GIS Map 2. Analysis report 3. Current property record card 4. Proposed property record card Motion of the Board Accept County's Proposed Value: $729,600 Made the motion Leon Meyers Seconded the motion Saru Salvi Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against ... Property Identification: Property Owner Jianbin Zhao Appellant(if different) Property Address 1202 Maywood Way Parcel ID or Abstract 9874202080 Statement of Appeal: Request reduction in value based on comparable sale and current real estate market. Current Assessed Value $348,100 ounty Opinion $348,100 Time of Hearin 9:27 AM Appellant Opinion $330,000 County Representative Scott Zeman Board Decision $348,100 No change in value Evidence submitted by the appellant: • Comparable Sale: 506 Flat Ford Road sold for$330,000 in 2024 with exactly the same floor plan and square footage. • The subject property was bought in 2024 for$334,000.This year,the real estate value is actually lower than last year. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • A county appraiser performed a site review on 11/5/2025. The appraiser was able to access the exterior of the of the property to take photographs and verify characteristics. No interior photographs were provided. • Appraiser observations and recommendations: 1. GRADE: The residence has a grade of 13+10 which is consistent with townhomes in Collins Ridge.No change to grade is recommended. 2. AGE: The residence was built in 2023 and has an effective year built of 2023. 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 subject property sold in March 2024 and the appellant's comparable sold in February 2024. There were more recent sales of similar units occurring Docusign Envelope ID:614DC766-A81A-44A6-92ED-C23292EB4270 later in 2024. The subject's value is based on the more recent sales rather than the purchase price earlier in the year. • An analysis of five sales shows an average sale price of$206 per finished square foot and a median of$203. The subject property is currently assessed at$205 per finished square foot. • Based on the sales analysis,no change in value is recommended. 1. Overhead and exterior photos 2. County's sales analysis 3. Property record card Motion of the Board Accept County's Proposed Value: $348,100 No change in value Made the motion Saru Salvi Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against Property Identification: Property Owner Land Marks Henderson Appellant(if different) Street LLC Property Address 1306 Henderson Street Parcel ID or Abstract 9788480518 Statement of Appeal: Request reduction in value based on perceived incorrect land value/utility. Current Assessed Value $954,400 County Opinion $954,400 Time of Hearin 9:35 AM Appellant Opinion $550,000 County Representative Roger Gunn Board Decision $954,400 No change in value Evidence submitted by the appellant: • The appellant states that he strongly feels the land value of this property is not correct as it cannot be torn down to be used for commercial benefit. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • The subject is Two-to Four Unit property built in 1892 containing 2,434 square feet and situated on a .2-acre lot. Lots in the subject neighborhood NBC 7172 (Franklin Rosemary Historic Area)have a base pricing of$700,000 per lot,which is the lot value for the subject. • As the appellant provided no evidence that the value established by the County is incorrect, the County recommends no change in value for this property. • Location Map of Subject • Current Property Record Card Docusign Envelope ID:614DC766-A81A-44A6-92ED-C23292EB4270 Motion of the Board Accept County's Proposed Value: $954,400 No change in value Made the motion Saru Salvi Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against Property Identification: Property Owner Land Marks Cobb Terrace Appellant(if different) LLC Property Address 2 Cobb Terrace Parcel ID or Abstract 9788388589 Statement of Appeal: Request reduction in value based on perceived incorrect land value/utility. Current Assessed Value $1,003,900 ounty Opinion $1,003,900 Time of Hearin 9:45 AM Appellant Opinion $650,000 County Representative Roger Gunn Board Decision $1,003,900 No change in value Evidence submitted by the appellant: • The appellant states that he strongly feels the land value of this property is not correct as it cannot be torn down to be used for commercial benefit. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • The subject is a single-family residence built in 1916 containing 3,405 square feet and situated on a .22-acre lot. Lots in the subject neighborhood NBC 7172 (Franklin Rosemary Historic Area)have a base pricing of$700,000 per lot, which is the lot value for the subject. • As the appellant provided no evidence that the value established by the County is incorrect, the County recommends no change in value for this property. • Location Map of Subject • Current Property Record Card Motion of the Board Accept Count 's Proposed Value: $1,003,900 No change in value Made the motion Saru Salvi Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against Property Identification: Property Owner John Jeffrey Frost Appellant(if different) Property Address 1 102 Cedar Hills Circle Parcel ID or Abstract 19880724960 Statement of Appeal: Request reduction in value based on condition and comparable properties. Docusign Envelope ID:614DC766-A81A-44A6-92ED-C23292EB4270 Current Assessed Value $704,100 County Opinion $655,200 Time of Hearin 9:59 AM Appellant Opinion $603,800 County Representative Bill Hiltbold Board Decision $655,200 Evidence submitted by the appellant: • We have included pictures of our property in this formal appeal as proof of condition and finishing materials. We have also provided the pictures of the other 4 comparable properties we used to determine square footage of finishing materials. These other pictures are also available online through several realty company websites such as Zillow,Redfin and Dubois Property Group just to name a few. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • I measured the house and corrected the sketch adjusting the finished living area from 3,209 square feet to 3,293 square feet. Please see the back photo of the house and the rotted deck now unsafe to walk on. The appellant has sent many more photos of the interior,windows, etc. showing water damage and mold. The county recommends reducing the effective year built to the actual year built of 1977 and changing condition from Average to Fair. 1. Photo 2. GIS Map 3. Current property record card 4. Proposed property record card Motion of the Board Accept County's Proposed Value: $655,200 Made the motion Saru Salvi Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against Property Identification: Property Owner Hua Zhang Appellant(if different) Property Address 204 Covington Drive Parcel ID or Abstract 19890418985 Statement of Appeal: Request reduction in value based on lot size and home condition. Current Assessed Value $440,400 County Opinion $405,600 Time of Hearin 10:11 AM Appellant Opinion $330,000 County Representative Louise Benson- Board Decision $393,200(change Condition to Lochner Fair Evidence submitted by the appellant: • The Appellant filed a formal appeal on 7/13/2025. • The Appellant stated: 1. Subject lot size is 0.12 acres, one of the smallest in the neighborhood. Docusign Envelope ID:614DC766-A81A-44A6-92ED-C23292EB4270 2. Explanation concerning the condition and lack of upgrades of the home. • Interior photos were provided as evidence. • Repair quotes were referenced but were not provided. • No comparable sales were provided. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • This Formal Appeal is being filed after an Informal Appeal that was reviewed by a different County appraiser with no value change deemed at that time. That appraiser stated, "EFF YEAR BUILT 1995,YEAR BUILT 1990,ALREADY DEPRECIATED." • On October 31, a drive-by visit of the subject was performed by this appraiser. A drive-by evaluation is considered a sufficient review due to the evidence provided by the Appellant. The grade, condition/maintenance, and construction standards were observed. An exterior photo was taken of the residence. • Appraiser recommendations and observations: 1. Age-Due to the evidence concerning condition supplied by the Appellant,it is recommended the current Effective Year Built be reduced from 1995 to the Actual Year Built of 1990. This takes into consideration the lack of updates and deferred maintenance for 35 years. 2. Condition-The Appellant has noted and provided photos of structural problems with the home. Repair costs were quoted but written bids were not provided. It is recommended to apply 15%functional depreciation for these deficiencies. 3. Grade-The Grade of C+10 is consistent with the subject neighborhood 7450. 4. Land-Homesites in NBC 7450 are assessed at$250,000 per lot. This value is based on the utility of providing a homesite,not on size variation. All sites are consistently valued throughout this neighborhood. 5. A Comper Report is attached. The 3 qualified comps have a sales range of value of $418,000 to $476,000. Their assessed values range from $441,700 to$477,600; The Subject is a 2-Story home vs all the comps being 1-Story. • The recommended adjustments would reduce the subject's value from$440,400 to$405,600. This is an adjustment of$34,800, yielding the depreciated value of the home to $155,600. 1. Current Property Record Card 2. Proposed Property Record Card 3. Photos of Improvements 4. Maps -Location& GIS for Subject and NBC 5. Comper report and MLS photos 6. Sales Analysis Report Motion of the Board Value Changed as Follows: $393,200(change condition to Fair) Made the motion Saru Salvi Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against Docusign Envelope ID:614DC766-A81A-44A6-92ED-C23292EB4270 Property Identification: Property Owner Clyde Thompson Heirs A ellant(if different) Property Address 1634 Old Lystra Road I Parcel ID or Abstract 19786196724 Statement of Appeal: Request reduction in value based on condition of the house and outbuildings. Current Assessed Value $802,800 ounty Opinion $574,100 Time of Hearin 10:52 AM Appellant Opinion $352,400 County Representative Kelly Wells Board Decision $574,100 Evidence submitted by the appellant: • Condition of the house and outbuildings: The house was built in 1930 and is in need of several repairs. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • The subject parcel is a single-family home built in 1930 with 2 bedrooms, 1 & 1/2 baths and contains 1,200 square feet on 12.9 acres of land located on Old Lystra Rd in Chapel Hill. • The house has an additional 10%depreciation for deferred maintenance and needed repairs. Upon review and a site visit, The County found a screened in porch,a deck, and a barn not on record. It is also noted that the parcel is split by Old Lystra Rd. • Based on this review, The County recommends: *Correcting the open porch on the front to a screened porch *Adding the deck on the back of the house not on record *Adding the barn not on record *Adding carport not on record *Adding detached deck not on record *Reducing effective year built by 10 years from 1960 to 1950 *Adding a-35%land adjustment for the road splitting the property and for topography • These changes would result in a revised value from$802,800 to $574,100. • Photo of subject • GIS Map • Sales and Equity Analysis • Current property record card • Proposed property record card Motion of the Board Accept Count 's Proposed Value: $574,100 Made the motion Saru Salvi Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against Docusign Envelope ID:614DC766-A81A-44A6-92ED-C23292EB4270 Property Identification: Property Owner Clyde Thompson Heirs =Appellant(if different) Property Address 1 1723 Old Lystra Road I Parcel ID or Abstract 19786099541 Statement of Appeal: Request reduction in value based on land vacancy, easement, and topography. Current Assessed Value $218,400 County Opinion $218,400 Time of Hearin 11:05 AM Appellant Opinion $87,400 County Representative Kelly Wells Board Decision $204,800(-25%total adjustment Evidence submitted by the appellant: • This is vacant land, no changes. • Easement: Allows others to use road to access their properties • There is a significant slope on the property Evidence submitted by the county representative: • The subject property is a 2-acre parcel, vacant land located on Old Lystra Rd. in Chapel Hill. • The parcel currently has a-20%adjustment for the road and utility easements. • Based on sales of similar size vacant parcels, The County recommends no change. • GIS Map- Subject • Plat • Sales and Equity Analysis • GIS Map of comp#1 • Current Property Record Card Motion of the Board Value Changed as Follows: $204,800(-25%total adjustment) Made the motion Saru Salvi Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against Docusign Envelope ID:614DC766-A81A-44A6-92ED-C23292EB4270 Consent Agenda Parcel ID Owner Name Current Recommended Reason forchange Date Value Value Signed 9788073625 Stephanie $349,000 $349,000 Value was changed from $429,600 during BOER ordered 10/29/25 Bryant neighborhood review 9860094009 James G. $691,200 $600,700 Square footage correction, condition Avg to Fair, add 11/7/25 Stefanadis 10% physical depreciation due to faulty piping Chair of theRWAIFd4signed by: Leon Meyers *NFEM" ... 12/6/2025 Recording Sec WUNB by: Rob Teachout 12/6/2025 Docusign Envelope ID:614DC766-A81A-44A6-92ED-C23292EB4270 Docusign Envelope ID:ADDFB1EB-BBE4-4481-9F18-1365FOBA00KE MINUTES Orange County Board of Equalization and Review Meeting held on November 13, 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 Office Assistant Jennifer Rigsbee Deputy Tax Assessor Chad Phillips Real Property Appraisal Manager Roger Gunn Chief Appraiser Kelly Wells Temporary Appraiser Assistant Rob Teachout Appraiser Jimmy Milliken Appraiser Scott Zeman Appraiser Bill Hiltbold Appraiser C le Anderson Meeting Schedule: No. Time Appellant PIN or Abstract Appeared Appeal Type 1 1:08PM Ying K. Lau 9890007684 No Value-Real 2 1:51M Andy Fox 9880758121 Yes Value-Real 3 2:24PM Nicole Basile 9799763760 Yes Value-Real 4 2:52PM Jill Ann McArdle 9757451001 No Value-Real 5 3:OOPM Jaime Kozlowski 9883345764 Remote Value-Real 6 3:20PM Jaime F. Kozlowski 9883346573 Remote Value-Real 7 3:40PM Bruce G. Fenn 9890620990 Yes Value-Real Time B Meeting called to order 1:08 PM Leon Meyers Meeting adjourned 4:18 PM Richal Vanhook Motion Time By I Second Docusign Envelope ID:ADDFB1EB-BBE4-4481-9F18-1365FOBA00KE To move into recess 1:11 PM,2:45 PM Saru Salvi Richal Vanhook To return to order 1:51 PM,2:53 PM Leon Meyers Saru Salvi Related meeting notes: Leon Myers recused himself from 9883345764 and 9883346573 due to the appellant being his neighbor. Richal Vanhook chaired for these two appeals only. Property Identification: Property Owner I Ying K. Lau Appellant(if different) Property Address 501 Lakeshore Lane Parcel ID or Abstract 19890007684 Statement of Appeal: Request reduction in value based on condition of house and calculations from comparable properties. Current Assessed Value $740,300 1 ounty Opinion 1 $614,000 Time of Hearin 1:08 PM I Appellant Opinion $560,000 County Representative Jimmy Milliken I Board Decision $614,000 Evidence submitted by the appellant: • It's challenging to find comparable sale of a house in the property's neighborhood that was in comparable dilapidated condition. 2152 Lakeshore Court(about 90 yards from the property), was sold at$210.83/square foot on 8/15/2023 and did not have the structural/foundational problems the property has, came close. Multiplying $210.83 by the 2,837 square-feet at 501 Lakeshore Lane("property")results in an estimated value of$598,125. The need to fix the property's foundational and structural problems renders any attempt to renovate impractical and too costly. To completely rebuild, after fixing the settling foundation, consequently,is the sensible and most cost-effective thing to do for the property. This necessarily makes the estimated value higher than the Owner Opinion Value of$560,000,considering the escalating cost to rebuild. • The condition of the building as described in the Property's 'BUILDING(1)' as "Fair." It should have been"Worse than Poor" as stated in the 2021 Appeal. After Ms.Heidi Whetzel's review of the 2021 Appeal,the Property's Total Market Value ("TMV")was reduced from $523,100 to $459,400. It was the third consecutive reduction. The 2017 Appeal reduced the TMV from $491,000 to $477,000 and the 2009 Appeal, for which Mr. Ray Jordan came on 4/27/2009 to appraise the Property, reduced the TMV from$569,416 to $478,466.And the condition of the building has been deteriorating relentlessly. Prolonged settling caused 1.5-inch crack in the foundation and large fissures in exterior walls. Leaking roof,termite infestation, dry rots in the attic and sidings,rotten fascia, and soffit,torn and broken gutter,broken and cracked windows,not to mention peeling paint,make the Property extremely dilapidated. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • The subject property is located at 501 Lakeshore Lane. It was constructed in 1970 and contains approximately 2,837 square feet of living area. Docusign Envelope ID:ADDFB1EB-BBE4-4481-9F18-1365FOBA00KE • A site visit was conducted to observe the property exterior; no one was present at the time of inspection, so the interior condition could not be verified. • A sales analysis was developed referencing properties that recently sold within NBC 7492, which demonstrates that the subject property's current assessment remains aligned with neighborhood market trends. • The property's effective year built remains 1970, consistent with the original construction date, to reflect age and condition. Based on the site observations, a 20% special physical depreciation was applied to account for visible deterioration,including foundation issues and rotting eaves (as documented and highlighted in photos). In addition, a-15%land adjustment for floodplain influence has been applied. • These combined adjustments result in a revised total property value of$614,000, which represents the County's recommended value. • Analysis • Current Property Record Card • Proposed Property Record Card • Photos Motion of the Board Accept Count 's Proposed Value: $614,000 Made the motion Saru Salvi Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against Property Identification: Property Owner Andy Fox A ellant if different Property AddressT 112 Silo Drive I Parcel ID or Abstract 19880758121 Statement of Appeal: Request reduction in value based on comparable sales. Current Assessed Value $808,100 ounty Opinion $774,500 Time of Hearin 1:51 PM Appellant Opinion $735,000 County Representative Bill Hiltbold Board Decision $774,500 Evidence submitted by the appellant: • My appeal is substantiated by recent comparable sales data from properties in close proximity to 112 Silo Drive. Evidence submitted by the county representative: Docusign Envelope ID:ADDFB1 EB-BBE4-4481-9F1 8-B65FOBAOOB7E • Please see the analysis report. The 3 comparable properties presented by the appellant are listed as blue rows in the top section along with qualified sales during 2023 and 2024. I filtered out all but A-10 grades, story height greater than 1 story, and living area between 2,700 to 3,700 square feet. The total value of the subject is$247/square foot which is$14-21 below the mean and median of the sale prices/square foot, and the total appraised value of the subject is presently$2,000-10,000 below the mean and median sales price of very similar properties. • These numbers indicate the property is appraised correctly for the neighborhood,but the photos show the deck and door frames rotting in several locations. The roof was damaged after a storm felled big trees in the back yard onto the house. The county recommends changing the effective year built from 2001 to 1992. This change reduces the building value $33,600. • A storage building should be removed from the property. • If the Board accepts these changes,the building value would decrease from$505,700 to $474,500, yard items would decrease from$2,400 to $0 and total property value would decrease from$808,100 to $774,500. 1. Photo 2. GIS Map 2. Analysis report 3. Current property record card 4. Proposed property record card Motion of the Board Accept Count 's Proposed Value: $774,500 Made the motion Saru Salvi Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against Property Identification: Property Owner Nicole Basile Appellant if different &Diego Gomez Property Address 218 Standish Drive Parcel ID or Abstract 19799763760 Statement of Appeal: Request reduction in value based on: Recent Comparable Sales, Condition of Property, Discrepancy from Prior Valuation, and Equity and Fairness. Current Assessed Value $308,200 County Opinion $301,500 Time of Hearin 2:24 PM Appellant Opinion $258,000 County Representative Scott Zeman Board Decision $301,500 Evidence submitted by the appellant: • (See attached letter) • Recent Comparable Sales: Homes of similar size, age, style, and condition within our immediate area have recently sold for significantly less than the proposed assessment: 142 St. Andrews Lane, 312 Standish Drive,43 Crystal Oaks Court, 105 Sir Richard Lane. Docusign Envelope ID:ADDFB1EB-BBE4-4481-9F18-1365FOBA00KE • Condition of Property: • Roof. Original shingle roof is 20 years old and needs replacement. • Interior Finishes: All finishes, casework, and millwork are original from 1989(36 years old). • Environmental Concern: The lake behind our home contains toxic algae,which has not been addressed by the HOA. It emits unpleasant odors and poses health risks to the community. • Plumbing: Fixtures and piping are original and nearing failure. Several neighbors have experienced water damage due to similar issues. • Discrepancy from Prior Valuation: The proposed valuation reflects a 62.3%increase from the 2021 assessment of$189,900. While we acknowledge market appreciation,this rate far exceeds typical trends in our neighborhood. Based on the comparable sales listed above,the average appreciation from 2021 to 2024 is approximately 36%,which supports our suggested valuation of$258,000. • Equity and Fairness: Our property has been compared with larger,remodeled single-family and duplex homes, which skews the valuation and results in an inequitable tax burden. We respectfully request that our home be assessed in line with similar townhomes in our HOA and surrounding area. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • A county appraiser conducted a site review on 11/5/2025. The appellant was at home and allowed the appraiser to access the exterior and interior of the property for photographs and verification of property characteristics. • Appraiser observations and recommendations: 1. GRADE: The residence has a grade of B which is consistent with other Colony Lake townhomes.No change to grade is recommended. 2. AGE: The residence was built in 1989 and has an effective year built of 2010. Based on the interior finishes of the residence, the county recommends changing the effective year built to 2005. 3. CONDITION: The residence is currently in Average condition.No change to condition is recommended. 4. SALES ANALYSIS: The subject property sold for$325,000 in August 2022. The appellant has provided four comparable sales ranging from$212,000 to$269,000. In the county's opinion, these sales do not represent the market value of the subject property as of January 1, 2025. • A county analysis of five sales indicates a median sale price of$249 per finished square foot. With the recommended change to effective year built, the subject property would be assessed at$228 per finished square foot. • With the change in effective year built, the county recommends a value of$301,500 for the subject property. 1. Appellant letter to the board 2. Photos of subject property Docusign Envelope ID:ADDFB1EB-BBE4-4481-9F18-1365FOBA00KE 3. County sales analysis 4. Current property record 5. Proposed property record Motion of the Board Accept Count 's Proposed Value: $301,500 Made the motion Saru Salvi Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against Property Identification: Property Owner Jill Ann McArdle Appellant(if different) Property Address 416 Ferguson Road Parcel ID or Abstract 19757451001 Statement of Appeal: Request reduction in value based on condition(no remodeling or upgrades). Current Assessed Value $412,600 County Opinion $412,600 Time of Hearin 2:52 PM Appellant Opinion $380,000 County Representative C le Anderson Board Decision $412,600 No change in value Evidence submitted by the appellant: • The appellant states that the dwelling has not been remodeled or updated in several years. No supporting documentation was provided with this appeal. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • Subject Property: The subject property is a 2.35-acre tract improved with a 1,578-square-foot single-family dwelling located at 416 Ferguson Road in Chapel Hill. • Appellant's Statement: The appellant contends that the interior of the dwelling is dated and that the kitchen and bathrooms have not been updated in several years. Based on these factors, the appellant believes the current assessment is excessive.No supporting evidence was provided. • County Review: County staff conducted a sales analysis of properties within the subject neighborhood that sold between January 2022 and December 2024. Seven sales were identified, six of which involved dwellings significantly larger than the subject property. One comparable sale at 3515 Moonlight Circle was similar in size to the subject dwelling. The price per square foot of that sale was consistent with the subject's current assessment. • Conclusion: After review, the County finds that the appellant has not provided sufficient evidence to support a reduction in value. Additionally,the comparable sale most similar in size to the subject supports the current assessment. Therefore,the County recommends no change to the assessed value of$412,600. • Subject Photo • GIS Map • Sales Analysis Docusign Envelope ID:ADDFB1EB-BBE4-4481-9F18-1365FOBA00KE • Property Record Card Motion of the Board Accept Count 's Proposed Value: $412,600 No change in value Made the motion Saru Salvi Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against Property Identification: Property Owner Jaime Kozlowski Appellant(if different) Propefty Address 3205 Carriage Trail I Parcel ID or Abstract 19883345764 Statement of Appeal: Request reduction in value based on recent appraisal. Leon recused(see Related meeting notes). Current Assessed Value $662,800 ounty Opinion $662,800 Time of Hearin 3:00 PM Appellant Opinion 1 $637,000 County Representative C le Anderson Board Decision 1 $662,800 No change in value Evidence submitted by the appellant: • The appellant states that this appeal was filed based on the opinion of value of a recent re- appraisal via Penny Mac. The appellant provided this report as supporting documentation. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • The subject property is a 3.56-acre waterfront lot with an 1,800 square foot single-family dwelling located at 3205 Carriage Trail in Hillsborough. The appellant's opinion of value is based on a Broker Price Opinion(BPO)with an effective date of May 27,2025, and an indicated"probable sales price" of$637,000. • County staff reviewed the submitted BPO in detail. While a BPO can provide a general market estimate, it is not equivalent to a certified appraisal,as it does not include a full physical inspection or adhere to Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP). Therefore, the County gives limited weight to the BPO in determining market value. Nevertheless, the three comparable sales from 2024 included in the BPO were reviewed in detail by County staff.None of the comparables are located within the subject's neighborhood, which has a land base rate of$100,000 per acre using AC-9 pricing. The subject tract,being a waterfront lot with a private dock,has a+50%waterfront adjustment applied to the land value. • Comparable 1: 2516 Wyndemere Court—located 0.45 miles from the subject in Neighborhood Code 5610, which has a land base rate of$95,000 per acre using AC-9 pricing. This property is not waterfront. • Comparable 2: 3032 Yates Road—located 2.46 miles from the subject in Neighborhood Code 5006, which has a land base rate of$65,000 per acre using AC-9 pricing. This property is not waterfront. Docusign Envelope ID:ADDFB1EB-BBE4-4481-9F18-1365FOBA00KE • Comparable 3: 2710 White Cross Road—located 11.55 miles from the subject in Neighborhood Code 6005,which has a land base rate of$54,000 per acre using AC-9 pricing. This property is not waterfront. • The broker applied land adjustments of$25,000 to the three comparable sales in the BPO—an unrealistically low adjustment when comparing a waterfront lot with a private dock in a superior neighborhood to non-waterfront tracts in inferior locations. Furthermore,the comparables are located significant distances from the subject and within less desirable neighborhoods. • After review, the County concludes that the BPO's indicated "probable sales price" is not reflective of market value for the subject property for the reasons stated above. Because the appellant's opinion of value is based solely on the BPO,the County finds that the appellant has not met the burden of proof necessary to warrant a reduction in assessed value. Therefore, the County recommends no change to the current assessed value of$662,800. • Subject Photo • GIS Map • Broker Price Opinion(BPO)Vs. Fee Appraisal • Property Record Card Motion of the Board Accept Count 's Proposed Value: $662,800 No change in value Made the motion Saru Salvi Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against Property Identification: Prove Provertv Owner Jaime F. Kozlowski Appellant if different Property Address 3221 Carriage Trail Parcel ID or Abstract 19883346573 Statement of Appeal: Request reduction in value based on condition of land. Leon recused(see Related meeting notes). Current Assessed Value $39,500 ounty Opinion $15,800 Time of Hearin 3:20 PM Appellant Opinion $3,950 County Representative C le Anderson Board Decision $15,800 Evidence submitted by the appellant: • The appellant requested a site visit to observe the large drainage pipe on the property. The appellant states that the lot serves as a drainage area, has experienced significant erosion, and does not perc. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • 3221 Carriage Trail—Hillsborough • Appellant States: Docusign Envelope ID:ADDFB1 EB-BBE4-4481-9F1 8-B65FOBAOOB7E • The appellant requested that County staff visit the property to observe the large drainage pipe located on-site. The appellant states that the lot serves as a drainage area,has experienced significant erosion, and does not perc. • County Staff Review: County staff visited the subject property for physical verification and photos, and reviewed the Property Record Card. The land currently includes a-75% adjustment to account for the non-perking condition, as well as a+50%waterfront adjustment. It is also noted that the property sold in June 2022 for$40,000. • Recommendation: After review and site inspection, County staff recommends the following changes: - Remove the+50%Waterfront adjustment, as the property lacks a private dock and has limited water frontage compared to other waterfront lots in the neighborhood. - Increase the-75%Land(No Perc) adjustment to -85%to reflect additional market impact from drainage and erosion issues. • Although the property sold for$40,000 in 2022,these recommended adjustments better reflect the physical limitations of the site. The proposed changes would reduce the total assessed value from$39,500 to $15,800. • Subject Photos#1 Through#3 • GIS Map • Current Property Record Card • Proposed Property Record Card Motion of the Board Accept Count 's Proposed Value: $15,800 Made the motion Saru Salvi Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against Property Identification: Property Owner Bruce G. Fenn Appellant if different Property Address 104 Woodmark Court Parcel ID or Abstract 19890620990 Statement of Appeal: Request reduction in value based on comparable properties and perceived inconsistencies and omissions. Current Assessed Value $809,600 ounty Opinion $800,700 Time of Hearin 3:40 PM Appellant Opinion 1 $637,073 County Representative Jimmy Milliken Board Decision 1 $800,700 Evidence submitted by the appellant: • Dear Sir/Madam, I am writing to address inconsistencies and omissions that I observed while reviewing the recent Orange County Tax Revaluation of my propertyand similarly situated Docusign Envelope ID:ADDFB1EB-BBE4-4481-9F18-1365FOBA00KE properties located in the Englewood subdivision. One of the bases for this preliminary appeal is data derived from the website https://property.spatialest.com/nc/orange/#/property/xxxxxxxxxx. The inconsistencies and omissions detailed below warrant further examination and a lower valuation of both my house and the land on which it is located to ensure an equitable and accurate assessment. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • The subject property is located in NBC 7452 at 104 Woodmark Court. It was constructed in 1998 and contains approximately 3,930 square feet of living area. • The property was previously reviewed during the informal appeal process, at which time the land value was adjusted down by 50%to account for floodplain influence and Resource Conservation District(RCD) limitations. The effective year built was also revised to the actual year built(1998). • The appellant's appeal references market data based on a sale from NBC 7426, which carries a land base rate of$300,000 and is valued through the AC-9 pricing table with a-10%access adjustment(totaling$374,900). This property sold for$275,000,with a County total value of $544,100. However, as there is no record of this property having been actively listed or marketed, it is considered an unqualified sale and is not a reliable indicator of market value. • During the formal review, the open porch located beneath the living area(LQ)was identified for removal from the valuation model,resulting in an updated total value of$800,700. • Further analysis identified two recent sales within the market area that exhibit similar land characteristics. Based on these transactions,the floodplain and RCD conditions appear to have minimal measurable impact on market value. • A sales analysis of NBC 7452 was completed, and after consideration of all data and the correction for the porch area, the County recommends a revised total property value of $800,700. • Sales Analysis • Sales Map • Plat • Current Property Record Card • Proposed Property Record Card • GIS Map • Photo Motion of the Board Accept Count 's Proposed Value: $800,700 Made the motion Saru Salvi Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against Chair of the Board: Docusign Envelope ID:ADDFB1EB-BBE4-4481-91`18-B65FOBAOOB7E Signed by: Leon Meyers Docu 12/9/2025 Recording Se tAgy;y: Rob Teachou Oulf 1-"4 12/9/2025