Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTKSOFTIIK <br />OROINO I.OCAI. BOARD OF APPKAFS AND EgUAU/ATION MEETING <br />Wednesday, April 21, 2004 <br />7:00 o'clock p.m. <br />Davy responded dial lie hoped lltal adjiislnients on property values were made every year the way <br />(hey should have been, but he cannot guarantee that there would be no large increases because, if <br />sales ratios dictate, they will be faced with making higher adjustments than the average. <br />Ms. Torkel.son stated that in comparison to their neighbors’ property values, with their many <br />improvements, the value has not been raised (per the Internet) which also lists it as being built in <br />1047. <br />Davy explained that 1047 is the original construction dale and that there is an effective age which is <br />more rcllective of the building with improvements. He olVered to provide the effective age to the <br />Torkel.son's. Davy indicated that, if building permits were issued and if viewed by the assessors and <br />added for improvements, the amounts should be shown on the Internet. <br />Mayor Peterson encouraged Ms. 'I'orkelson to contact the city stall'to get information about what can <br />and cannot be built on their 50 ’ lot. <br />Mayor Peterson confinned that Davy would contact the Torkelsons to get answers to their questions. <br />Muqihy ailded that they need to understand that 50 ’ lots are selling for S500.000 in the current <br />market. I le concurred with Mayor Peterson that the city is not interested in hircing people out of <br />town due to the increasing property values. <br />Mr. Torkeh on concluded by repealing his position that their smaller lot is less valuable because of <br />the site improvement limitations on it. Mayor Peterson encouraged them to contact the city staff and <br />perhaps find there is more that can be done on their lot than they assume. <br />Mayor Peterson thanked the Torkelsons for presenting their infonnation. <br />Mr. and Ms. Torkelsim expressed their thanks to the Board. <br />6) Gerald and Valeric Walsh, 180 Big Island, 23-117-23 23 0036 <br />Mr. Walsh questioned why their property is classified as residential when it actualK is a seasonal <br />property. Davy questioned if it had ever been residential before they purchased the property. Mr. <br />Walsh replial it had not been a residence and that the city has it classified as seasonal. <br />Mr. Walsh asked at what point an improvement is added to the property valuation, noting an SS.tHK) <br />impim ement is on the property statement and woiulered if it w as a \ alue from the septic system <br />installation. <br />Mr. Walsh further asked that if the cabin shell is not included in the value, there still was more than a <br />4()'!i) property value inerease on top of last year’s over 40% increase. He expressed a conceni about <br />what the end value of the cabin w ill be w hen it is done and tally on the property statement. <br />.Murphy asked if the property was on the interior of Big Island. Mr. Walsh replied that the property <br />was a lake.sluire parcel with about 1(H)’ of lakeshore, with a SI‘)4,000 residential value on an angle lot <br />about 2<M)’ at it deepest point. <br />Page 9 of 11