05-10-2004 Board of Appeal and Equalization Reconvened Packet

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO LOCAL BOARD OF APPEALS AND EQUALIZATION MEETING Wednesday, April 21,2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. in selling the property but wanted to continue to live there. Mr. Adair concluded by requesting some consideration for a reduction in value Kunik confimied the assessors would call Mr. Adair to further discuss the valuation. Mayor Peterson thanked Mr. Adair for his frank comments and concerns. 5) George and Mary Torkelson, 670 Tonkawa, PID #05-117-23 33-0009 Mary Torkelson advised that last year they did not do anything about the valuation increases because of personal/family matters that were occurring then. Ms. Torkelson acknowledged that Jensen did visit the property and the house value is as low as possible. George Torkelson asked why the valuation is so high on a 50’ lot that has building restrictions, lie stated they have lived in the house since 1958 hut it is in need of substantial repairs. Ms. Torkelson acknowledged she spoke with Davy and conducted some realtor and Internet research of neighboring property values. She presented information about the house ne.xt door that she believed has been underv'alued for many years. She stated that 100 ’ lakefronts or larger a-'e worth more per foot than a oO’ lakcshore lot. Next door to the Torkclsons is a lot that has 101-103 ’ of lakeshore, and Ms. Torkelson reported that the value of the lot is S7,356.40/foot of lakeshorc compared to the Torkclson’s at about $‘),()()()/foot of lakcshore on a 50’ lot which she believed is not as valuable as a 100 ’ lot. She referred to realtor comments about the restricting impacts of Orono rules and regulations on smaller lots. Ms. Torkelson concluded they arc fighting the over 38% rise in land value. Ms. Torkelson advised that computer infonnation about the adjacent property is incorrect, noting that the record indicates 1947 as the year of construction. There has been substantial remodeling and it is now 4-5 times larger with huge decks and other site improvements. She repeated infonnation she received from the assessor that its estimated market value is $783,000 and the taxable market value is $521,200. She emphasized there is a difference in what can be built on a smaller 50’ lot when compared to a 100 ’ lot. She pointed out their position is that they should not be paying over $9,000/ lakeshore front footage compared to about $7,000/lakeshore front footage. Mr. And .Mrs. Torkelson stressed the smaller lot is less valuable because the property owner is limited to what improvements may be done on the property. Murphy conveyed that the C it> Couneil has struggled with the 50’ lot situation with the lakeshore setback requirement and side yard setbacks and acknowledged improvements on the 50' lots are challenging. White asked what was the last year’s percentage increase on the Torkelson property. Ms. Torkelson did not have the exact percentage and due to the poor condition of the house, they Jid not express any comments about last year’s increase. But with the huge, over 38%, increase for 2005, they had to present their objection. Mr. Torkelson indicated they probably would have to sell the property as the house has to have immediate work and docs not know what they w til be allowed to do. Page 7 of 11