Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBoard of Appeals and Equalization - 04/23/2009 APPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE BOARD OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION THURSDAY,APRIL 23, 2009 7:00 P.M., CITY CENTER Council Chambers 8080 Mitchell Road BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Patricia Pidcock, Chair; Jim Johnson, Lyndon Moquist and Annette O'Connor BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: Brian Duoos, Vice-Chair CITY STAFF PRESENT: City Assessor Steve Sinell; Staff Appraisers: Dave Buswell, Jody Carlson, Barb Cook, John Sams and Colin Schmidt; Assessing Technician Lisa Ramsey and Recording Secretary Carol Pelzel I. CALL MEETING TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chair Pidcock at 7:00 p.m. II. PROCEDURAL INFORMATION BY STEVE SINELL City Assessor Sinell presented an overview of the process and explained that the Board is appointed by the City Council to hear appeals on value classification for the January 2, 2009 assessment. The sales used to determine values for January 2, 2009 occurred primarily in 2008. Sinell reminded the Board that all values the Board and City Assessor are determining will be as of January 2, 2009, approximately four months ago, and are based on sales approximately 12 months prior to that. Pidcock reviewed the procedures that would be followed this evening in hearing the various appeals. They will review 61 appeals and the status of those appeals. The Board members introduced themselves presenting a brief background of their experience. III. ORDER OF BUSINESS A. Review Appeals#1 through#61 as Appear on April 23, 2009 BOAE List and Status of Appeals Appeal No. 1 —Resolved prior to Board of Appeal and Equalization meeting. BOARD OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION MINUTES April 23, 2009 Page 2 Appeal No. 2— Shravan Pargal, 16997 New Market Dr. Sinell reported staff needs to schedule an appraisal inspection and once they complete the review appraisal and talk with the applicant they will provide this information to the Board. MOTION: Motion was made by O'Connor, seconded by Johnson, in Appeal No. 2 to refer this item to the Assessor to inspect and complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 3 —Todd Gruenig, 8684 Black Maple Dr. Gruenig explained that his property is valued at$377,000 and a more appropriate market value would be in the area of$320,000 based on a strong comparable in his neighborhood. There have been no sales in 2008 on Black Maple Drive with the exception of a bank foreclosure. A house comparable to Gruenig's closed in early 2009 for$369,900, $82,000 less than the assessed value, and had been on the market for most of 2008. This property was formally purchased around the same time as he purchased his home in the latter half of 2004. Gruenig took the sale price of the comparable and took 88 percent of the value as a base line for their house. They also deducted $5,000 for a pool that was removed over the summer and that is how he arrived at the $320,000 market value. The comparable he used was located on his street and the comparables City staff provided were for homes sold in early 2008. The home that sold very early in 2009 is a very strong indicator for establishing their value. O'Connor asked if the City would consider a comparable that was on the market in 2008 and sold in 2009. Sinell responded that it is the Board's job to consider all of the information and everything has to be referenced to the January, 2009 assessment. Homes that have sold today will determine how much the market has changed since January and should be adjusted back to that date. Buswell explained that one of the reasons they have not used the comparable presented by Gruenig is because they have not gotten a copy of the certificate on that particular property. The house is a different style and they believe it is a relocation sale. The terms of the sale are unknown at this time and they need to verify the sale information. MOTION: Motion was made by Johnson, seconded by O'Connor, in Appeal No. 3 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 4 —Dipak Shah, 7993 Lismore Circle MOTION: Motion was made by O'Connor, seconded by Moquist, in Appeal No. 4 to refer this item to the Assessor to inspect and complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. BOARD OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION MINUTES April 23, 2009 Page 3 Appeal No. 5 —Matt Dorsey, 7341 Moonlight Lane MOTION: Motion was made by O'Connor, seconded by Johnson, in Appeal No. 5 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 6 —Cory Watkins, 7014 Willow Creek Rd. Watkins stated his property should be valued $300,000 less than what the estimated market value is. His house is 4,400 square feet and a comparable house at 7240 Willow Creek Rd. is 5,200 square feet on one and a quarter acres while his house is situated on two-thirds of an acre. The comparable house was listed in March of last year for just under $2 million and at the end of June last year the price was lowered to $1.8 million. On the first of October they took the house off of the market and relisted it at the end of February for $1.5 million. If the comparable is worth $1.4 million at the beginning of the year, 95 percent of that puts the value of his house at$1.3 million instead of$1.6 million. MOTION: Motion was made by O'Connor, seconded by Johnson, in Appeal No. 6 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 7 —Mary Stoecker, 12107 Cartway Curve MOTION: Motion was made by O'Connor, seconded by Johnson, in Appeal No. 7 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 8 —Bruce Lacoe, 9876 Windsor Ter MOTION: Motion was made by O'Connor, seconded by Moquist, in Appeal No. 8 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 9 —William and Ruth Travis, 8601 Coachmans La MOTION: Motion was made by O'Connor, seconded by Moquist, in Appeal No. 9 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 10—Michael Muston, 11321 Riverview Rd. MOTION: Motion was made by O'Connor, seconded by Moquist, in Appeal No. 10 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. BOARD OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION MINUTES April 23, 2009 Page 4 Appeal No. 11 —Forest& Mattie Lowe, 6278 Sequoia Cir MOTION: Motion was made by O'Connor, seconded by Moquist, in Appeal No. 11 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 12— Samuel Levine, 12213 Orchard Hill Levine explained his home is located across from the dog park that was built near Bryant Lake and the park has adversely affected the value of his property. He had an assessment done by a representative of Edina Realty and his home was valued between $750,000 and $800,000. The home is located on a very busy road and has gotten busier and there is an odor from the dog park. Sams reported staff has not completed their appraisal of this property. He has inspected the property and will ultimately get back to the property owner. Moquist asked how close the dog park was to this property. Levine said his property is located approximately 50 to 60 feet from the dog park entry. He and his neighbors appeared before the City Council opposing the dog park feeling that it would diminish the value of their property. The park is heavily utilized at interesting hours. There are people in the park at 6 a.m. with dogs barking. MOTION: Motion was made by O'Connor, seconded by Moquist, in Appeal No. 12 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 13 —Andrew & Cynthia Ekedahl, 14805 Village Woods Dr. MOTION: Motion was made by Johnson, seconded by Moquist, in Appeal No. 13 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 14 —W. Jacques Gibbs, 6921 Beach Rd. Gibbs said his estimated market value is $1,832,900. His house was built in 1967 and was one of the first houses built on Beach Road. The houses on either side of his property were rebuilt in 2005 and 2007. Gibbs' concern is that someone who is going to spend $1.9 million for a house is not going to purchase a 42-year old home. Pidcock said that is not necessarily true. Homes built earlier than that have sold. She asked Gibbs if he has made any updates to the house. He responded that he has not. In response to a question from Pidcock, Gibbs explained that he has 165 feet of lake frontage and the lot is one acre in size. There is a lot for sale in the neighborhood for $1.3 million. O'Connor pointed out that the lot has been for sale for quite some time. Gibbs said he cannot imagine that someone would spend $1.9 million for a tear down BOARD OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION MINUTES April 23, 2009 Page 5 and believes his property is only worth $900,000. There is nothing unique about the home. It is a five bedroom rambler. O'Connor asked if the estimated market value is a big increase from previous years. Sinell said the value being appealed is $1,832,900 and last year's value was $1,909,000. Gibbs said he should have appealed the previous year's value but did not do so. MOTION: Motion was made by Johnson, seconded by Moquist, in Appeal No. 14 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 15 —Resolved prior to Board of Appeal and Equalization meeting Appeal No. 16—Hong Wu/Yong Yang, 9184 Gateway La MOTION: Motion was made by Johnson, seconded by O'Connor, in Appeal No. 16 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 17 —Resolved prior to Board of Appeal and Equalization meeting. Appeal No. 18 —Mark & Susan Halverson, 10860 Purde MOTION: Motion was made by O'Connor, seconded by Johnson, in Appeal No. 18 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 19—Ron Sorensen, 9203 Gateway La MOTION: Motion was made by Johnson, seconded by Moquist, in Appeal No. 19 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 20—Gary Hokkanen, 8598 French Curve MOTION: Motion was made by O'Connor, seconded by Moquist, in Appeal No. 20 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 21 —Doug Stansbury, 9439 OlyMpia Dr. MOTION: Motion was made by O'Connor, seconded by Moquist, in Appeal No. 21 to refer this item to the Assessor to inspect and complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. BOARD OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION MINUTES April 23, 2009 Page 6 Appeal No. 22 —Marc Bouchard, 19091 Voizel Farm Tr MOTION: Motion was made by O'Connor, seconded by Moquist, in Appeal No. 22 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 23 —Kenneth & Elizabeth Holec, 18434 Bearpath Tr MOTION: Motion was made by Johnson, seconded by Moquist, in Appeal No. 23 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 24—Linda Sicheneder, 9360 Hennepin Town Rd Motion was made by O'Connor, seconded by Moquist, in Appeal No. 24 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 25 —R. A. Buckland, 9868 Purgatory Rd MOTION: Motion was made by Johnson, seconded by Moquist, in Appeal No. 25 to refer this item to the Assessor to inspect and complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 26 —Mary Brenner, 16640 Luther Way MOTION: Motion was made by O'Connor, seconded by Moquist, in Appeal No. 26 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 27 —Resolved prior to Board of Appeal and Equalization meetinIz. Appeal No. 28 —Resolved prior to Board of Appeal and Equalization meetinIz. Appeal No. 29 —Andrzej Peczalski, 9873 Balmoral La MOTION: Motion was made by O'Connor, seconded by Moquist, in Appeal No. 29 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 30—John Goodrich, 17431 Evener Way MOTION: Motion was made by O'Connor, seconded by Moquist, in Appeal No. 30 to refer this item to the Assessor to inspect and complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. BOARD OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION MINUTES April 23, 2009 Page 7 Appeal No. 31 —Robert Adomaitis, 9503 Highview Dr. Adomaitis explained that he is working with the City Assessor's office and provided them with the information he used to base his argument on for a reduction in value from$776,900 to $725,000. He lives on the south side of Lake Riley and presented an aerial view of his property from both the front and the back. His home is perched on the top of a hill and drops 40 feet from the back to the lake and the lot is heavily covered with trees. Adomaitis presented the Board with the tax history for his property showing that the estimated market value for this property has gone up 50 percent in value from 2007 to 2009 and in 2010 it is proposed to go up an additional eight percent of the 2009 valuation. Adomaitis compared the value of his land with other properties in the area explaining that his property is .36 acres with a land value of$545,900 in 2009 resulting in a land value of$1,516,388 per acre. Other properties in his neighborhood that have more acreage are valued at one-third of his value. There are definite detriments with this lot compared to other lots. The biggest detriment is the 40 foot drop and steep slope. He has to traverse 68 steps to get to the lake. There have been other homes in the area for sale for two years and have not sold because they are on top of the bluff. The footprint of the house is long and narrow and there is no back yard. MOTION: Motion was made by Johnson, seconded by O'Connor, in Appeal No. 31 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 32 —Adele Peterson, 18074 Bearpath Tr MOTION: Motion was made by O'Connor, seconded by Moquist, in Appeal No. 32 to refer this item to the Assessor to inspect and complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 33 —B. U. Uhlig, 16370 N Hillcrest Ct. Uhlig explained that he is appealing the market value of his property that remains the same as last year. The formation of this Board raises substantial issues with him regarding objectivity. The Board is appointed by the City and the City receives the tax dollars based on the properties' market value. He is only going through this process to appeal it at the State level that has no allegiance to the City. The neighbor across the street from this property attempted to sell their home last year for$20,000, 8.2 percent less than the City's market value and were unable to sell. The City's estimate of market value in his immediate neighborhood is eight percent above market value. That is the market in his neighborhood and that is not a market estimate but it is the real market. A friend who is a real estate agent told him he would be lucky to sell his house for$245,000. There have been no improvements made to his home or changes in the neighborhood. Uhlig believes the basis for the City's estimate is statistical analysis. City administration has come to the conclusion that his house BOARD OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION MINUTES April 23, 2009 Page 8 did not lose a penny in value. Four weeks after City administration published the definitive market estimate; a City appraiser desired a walk through his property. He was informed that he could address this Board this evening but Staff is not ready to defend their value determination which was published four weeks ago. He was told they need more information. Any reasonable person would take it for granted that all of these steps should have been accomplished by the City before they issue its estimate of market value. Pidcock said in defense of the City Assessor's office, they do have a lot of properties to review. There are 66,000 people in the City and it takes a long time to review those properties. The purpose of him being able to come forward this evening is to be fair to the citizens of Eden Prairie. This Board provides citizens with a vehicle in which they can express their disagreement and ask for redress. This Board is here to listen and to decide how the property should be valued. Uhlig pointed out that State law requires that a professional definitive assessment be made four weeks ago and requires that this assessment is final. If he had not appealed that assessment, it would be final. He does not expect any material relief at this level. MOTION: Motion was made by Johnson in Appeal No. 33 that the estimated market value be lowered to $245,000. Pidcock said in fairness to the other people that have appealed to the Board this evening, she would like to follow the process and refer this case to the City Assessor for further review. O'Connor said she does not feel they have enough information on this property to make a decision at this time. Johnson withdrew his motion. Motion was made by Johnson, seconded by Moquist, in Appeal No. 33 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 34—Leah Nordquist, 8816 Knollwood Dr. MOTION: Motion was made by Johnson, seconded by O'Connor, in Appeal No. 34 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 35 —David Thompson, 9280 Hearthstead La MOTION: Motion was made by O'Connor, seconded by Johnson, in Appeal No. 35 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 36 —Kathleen Tillotson, 17963 Bearpath Tr MOTION: Motion was made by Johnson, seconded by Moquist, in Appeal No. 36 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. BOARD OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION MINUTES April 23, 2009 Page 9 Appeal No. 37 —Resolved prior to Board of Appeal and Equalization meeting. Appeal No. 38 —Kailash Mariappan & Poonguzhali Kailash, 15581 Crabapple Lane Mariappan said he is here to appeal the market value for two properties; 15581 Crabapple Lane and 9586 Grey Widgeon Place. The Crabapple Lane home was purchased in October 2008 for$267,750. Prior to that the list price by the seller was $295,000 and was subsequently reduced to $290,000 and a purchase price of $265,000 was offered for this property by another buyer. There is a huge difference from the purchase price and the City's estimated market value. O'Connor asked what the City's assessed value was for this house in 2008. Sinell responded that it was valued at$394,000 in 2007, $342,000 in 2008 and $325,000 in 2009. MOTION: Motion was made by Johnson, seconded by O'Connor, in Appeal No. 38 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 39 —Kailash Mariappan & Poonguzhali Kailash, 9586 Grey Widgeon Place Mariappan said this is his previous residence and he lived there for four years. Every year the estimated market value has gone up and for the last 18 months to two years the market has been going down. This is a low income neighborhood and he is in the process of trying to sell this property. The highest price he could sell the property for today is $148,000. MOTION: Motion was made by Johnson, seconded by O'Connor, in Appeal No. 39 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 40—Michael & Paula Brabeck, 10563 Bluff Rd. MOTION: Motion was made by Johnson, seconded by Moquist, in Appeal No. 40 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 41 —Resolved prior to Board of Appeal and Equalization meeting. Appeal No. 42 —John Higgins, 9755 Gable Dr. MOTION: Motion was made by Johnson, seconded by O'Connor, in Appeal No. 42 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. BOARD OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION MINUTES April 23, 2009 Page 10 Appeal No. 43 —David Florenzano, 9470 Lakeland Terrace MOTION: Motion was made by O'Connor, seconded by Moquist, in Appeal No. 43 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 44—Ramin Hakimi, 15476 Village Woods Dr. MOTION: Motion was made by O'Connor, seconded by Moquist, in Appeal No. 44 to refer this item to the Assessor to inspect and complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 45 —Nancy Ahlquist, 6521 Beach Rd. MOTION: Motion was made by Johnson, seconded by Moquist, in Appeal No. 45 to refer this item to the Assessor to inspect and complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 46— Glennis Anderson, 8064 Curtis La MOTION: Motion was made by O'Connor, seconded by Johnson, in Appeal No. 46 to refer this item to the Assessor to inspect and complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 47 —Craig & Susan Blixrud, 9576 OlyMpia Dr. MOTION: Motion was made by O'Connor, seconded by Moquist, in Appeal No. 47 to refer this item to the Assessor to inspect and complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 48 —Jon & Jean Schorgl, 18453 St. Mellion Place MOTION: Motion was made by Johnson, seconded by Moquist, in Appeal No. 48 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 49 —Carl Adams, 9475 Olympia Dr. Adams said he has been working with a City appraiser and is not opposed to referring this to the Assessor for additional information. He has been in the home for 19 years and there have been no additions or remodeling done to the home. The general condition of the house is not extraordinary for this area. The problem is declining property values. He looked at some current for-sale properties in the general area to base his property value on. There is no detailed way to look at comparables. In looking at some of the properties that are for sale today a reasonable value for his BOARD OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION MINUTES April 23, 2009 Page 11 home should be between $600,000 and $650,000. There are some very nice homes in his area that are at that price level. Based on the size, quality and location the value of his home should be $600,000. MOTION: Motion was made by Johnson, seconded by Moquist, in Appeal No. 49 to refer this item to the Assessor to inspect and complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 50—Appeal dropped on April 23 Appeal No. 51 —Tami Massee, 15571 Michele La MOTION: Motion was made by Johnson, seconded by Moquist, in Appeal No. 51 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 52—Paul Bridges, 9509 Highview Dr MOTION: Motion was made by Johnson, seconded by Moquist, in Appeal No. 52 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 53 —Donald Nickels, 19036 Magenta Bay MOTION: Motion was made by Johnson, seconded by Moquist, in Appeal No. 53 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 54—Rosemount, Inc., 12005 Technology Dr MOTION: Motion was made by Johnson, seconded by Moquist, in Appeal No. 54 to refer this item to the Assessor to inspect and complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 55 —NAP Southwest Station, 13560, 13570, 13580 Technology Dr Anne Wardleworth, representing NAP Southwest Station, explained that she has been working with the City's Assessing Division. There were no condos in this development that sold in 2008 and they have since rented some of the units. When they talked to the City Assessor the values were reduced by about$300,000 but feel that they are still off by about$1.8 million. She asked that the City take another look at the estimated market value. They can look at replacement cost or re-sales but no units were sold in 2008 and any that were sold were forced sales. Wardleworth also suggested that they look at the value of Water Tower Apartments which have similar floor plans. They are valued at$33,971,000 or about$148,995 per unit. This property is being assessed approximately $160,000 per unit and they do not feel that is equitable. If they took the worst case scenario and valued each unit at$148,995 that would put their value at about$12,366,000. BOARD OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION MINUTES April 23, 2009 Page 12 Johnson asked how many total units are in this development. Wardleworth said there are 237 total properties and 154 units have been sold. They own 83 units with four of those units being models. Johnson asked what has been the historical price range for these units. Wardleworth stated that in 2004 a studio sold between $130,000 to $149,900; one bedrooms for$169,900; and, two bedrooms sold between $199,000 and $245,900. O'Connor asked what the studio units are being sold for now. Wardleworth explained that there is currently one on the market for $99,000 and has been on the market for 245 days. She said they are not willing to put their units on the market now. The one bedroom units have been closing in the $139,900 price range and are resells. MOTION: Motion was made by Johnson, seconded by O'Connor, in Appeal No. 55 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 56 —Resolved prior to Board of Appeal and Equalization meeting. Appeal No. 57 —Resolved prior to Board of Appeal and Equalization meeting. Appeal No. 58 —Resolved prior to Board of Appeal and Equalization meeting. Appeal No. 59 —Philip & Vail Parsons, 10475 Spyglass Dr MOTION: Motion was made by O'Connor, seconded by Moquist, in Appeal No. 59 to refer this item to the Assessor to inspect and complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 60—Resolved prior to Board of Appeal and Equalization meeting. Appeal No. 61 —Karen Kirchoff, 18560 Farmstead Cir. MOTION: Motion was made by Johnson, seconded by O'Connor, in Appeal No. 61 to refer this item to the Assessor to inspect and complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. Recess A five minute recess was called after which the meeting was reconvened at 8:30 p.m. BOARD OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION MINUTES April 23, 2009 Page 13 B. Hear Other Personal and Written Appeals Appeal No. 62—Brad Schreier, 18466 Nicklaus Way MOTION: Motion was made by O'Connor, seconded by Moquist, in Appeal No. 62 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 63 —Robert Manning, 16960 S. Shore Ln Manning said his home is a 1959 three-bedroom, two-bath rambler. The property is currently assessed at$374,400, a three percent increase from last year. He had thought about putting the property up for sale this year and came up with comparables. A very similar home to his property on Kurtz Lane closed in December 2008 for$335,000. That home had a much bigger lot and a remodeled kitchen. This home was on Birch Island Lake and is considered lake shore. The petitioner's home is on Duck Lake and his home is worth less. A home across the street from this property went on the market for$275,000 and is a 1960's rambler and is almost identical to this property but includes an in-ground pool and updated kitchen. MOTION: Motion was made by O'Connor, seconded by Johnson, in Appeal No. 63 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 64 —Rich Muller, 14343 Golf View Dr. Muller stated that he has lived at this location for the last six years and has been a real estate agent since 1974. It is a challenge to find comparable property because there have been no recent sales in this area. Last year he started looking at selling his house and they took the City's market value of$309,000 and added a five percent mark up to list the house at$324,000. They purchased the house for $297,500 six years ago. If they took Eden Prairie's 5.3 percent property value deduction and applied it to his house the value would be at$299,000. MOTION: Motion was made by Johnson, seconded by Moquist, in Appeal No. 64 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 65 —Robert& Deborah Wasson, 17586 Belfast Cove MOTION: Motion was made by Johnson, seconded by Moquist, in Appeal No. 65 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 4-0. BOARD OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION MINUTES April 23, 2009 Page 14 C. Schedule Next Meeting The next meeting of the Board of Appeal and Equalization is scheduled for Tuesday, May 12, 2009, at 7:00 p.m. D. Close the Board of Appeal and Equalization Meeting to Additional Appeals MOTION: Motion O'Connor, seconded by Moquist, to close the Board of Appeal and Equalization meeting to additional appeals. The motion carried 4-0. IV. CONTINUE THE BOARD OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION MEETING MOTION: Motion was made by Johnson, seconded by O'Connor, to continue the Board of Appeal and Equalization meeting to May 12, 2009. The motion carried 4-0 and the meeting was continued at 8:55 p.m.