Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Valuation Coding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Homeowner questions large land-value gap after assessor coding shows different location adjustment
Summary
A Pine Creek Avenue homeowner asked the board why a property in the same neighborhood received a much higher land valuation, pointing to a location-code difference (PC5 vs PC8) that appears to multiply the land value; staff directed the homeowner to the assessor to check coding and to provide sold comps from the base valuation period.
Wendy Levine told the Board of Assessment Appeals on March 5 she found a large discrepancy in land valuation among otherwise similar Pine Creek Avenue lots and asked the board and assessor how her parcel ended up with a higher location adjustment code.
The concern: Levine provided a comparison of nearby property cards and said properties with similar acreage and obstructed waterfront views were coded differently. She noted one comparable on unobstructed waterfront sold on Oct. 23, 2020, for $2.1 million while several creek-front properties with similar acreage and condition appeared on the field card with substantially lower land values. Levine asked the board to explain why her parcel was coded PC5 with an adjustment factor of 3.2 while adjacent properties carried PC8 and smaller adjustment factors.
Assessor guidance: Board members explained that location and neighborhood codes feed into the assessor’s valuation model and that different codes (PC5, PC8, etc.) produce large multiplier differences for land value. Staff recommended the homeowner request an explanation from the assessor’s office — specifically to ask whether the PC designation is accurate and to request the assessor to generate a comparison that removes the PC5 adjustment to show the effect on the land value. Board members also told Levine to submit sold comparables from the assessor’s valuation base period (Oct. 1, 2019–Oct. 1, 2020) so the panel can review comparable sales within the required window.
Next steps: The board encouraged the homeowner to contact the deputy assessor (or appraiser assigned to the beach area) immediately and to email any corrected material and sold comps to the assessor’s office; the staff said they will circulate any response to the board before deliberation.
Ending: Levine was told to return with either corrected coding information from the assessor or with sold comps for the valuation period; the board will deliberate with the updated material and send a formal decision in writing.
