My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CC BOARD OF REVIEW MINUTES 04141987
StAnthony
>
City Council
>
City Council Minutes
>
1987
>
CC BOARD OF REVIEW MINUTES 04141987
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/30/2015 5:48:54 PM
Creation date
12/30/2015 5:48:52 PM
Metadata
Fields
SP Box #
21
SP Folder Name
CC MINUTES AND AGENDAS 1987
SP Name
CC MINUTES 04141987
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
-4- <br /> Mr. Hanscom told Councilmember Ranallo the reason there had been a <br /> deviation between the raises the two ramblers experienced could have been <br /> because of different characteristics of the two properties. He said the <br /> assessors had looked at the Parade of Homes last year to see how costs <br /> of various aspects of properties like decks, finished basements, <br /> fireplaces, etc. had escalated and that information had been fed into the <br /> computers. Therefore, one of the ramblers might have received a higher <br /> valuation because of a fireplace or something else the other didn' t have, <br /> he added. <br /> Mr. Childs pointed out that Mr. Mazurko had said one of the rambler' s <br /> owners had finished off his basement since the last physical examination <br /> of the property in 1984 and those improvements had probably not yet been <br /> included in the valuation assessment. Mr. Hanscom agreed that the only <br /> way the assessors can know about such improvements without inspections is <br /> if a building permit is issued by the City. This would be remedied when <br /> that quadrant is inspected by the assessors in 1988. <br /> Mr. Mazurko reported the interior of his previous home across from St. <br /> Charles Church had never been physically inspected while he lived there <br /> between 1973 and 1983 . He also denied ever receiving a notice that the <br /> assessor had attempted such an inspection during that period. <br /> LaVonne Fritz, 3105 Croft Drive, who was also present to protest her <br /> assessed valuation, told the assessors that "never in the 26 years I 've <br /> lived in my home had I had a physical inspection of my property by the <br /> County Assessors. " No action was deemed necessary related to Mr. <br /> Mazurko' s property. <br /> On-site Inspection of Office Condo in Northgate Office Park Requested <br /> by Tim Tromiczak <br /> Mr. Tromiczak told the Councilmembers: <br /> -commercial evaluations had been explained to him by Mr. Holmes who <br /> had said his valuation was based on comparables for recently sold <br /> condos in this and similar office complexes; <br /> -his own valuation had gone from $81, 300 to $81,400 which sounded <br /> fair to him since the last condo sale in the office park had been <br /> for $94 ,000 until he had gotten appraisals from three different <br /> realtors which had been for much less than his assessed valuations; <br /> -Thorpe Realty had told him the best he could hope to sell his condo <br /> would be between $68,100 and $71,000 because the new tax laws made <br /> such investments less desirable. Calhoun Realty had suggested the <br /> property would sell for around $70, 500 and a local realtor, Dave <br /> Forsythe, had estimated the condo would probably only sell for <br /> $69,000 ; <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.