Caskey v The Valuer-General [1992] QLC 322

Re: Determination of unimproved value - City of Brisbane - Division of Stephens AV91-853 Marjorie H. Caskey v. The Valuer-General DECISION LAND COURT, BRISBANE. 26th June, 1992. This appeal lies against the determination by the Valuer-General of an unimproved value of $120,000 for Lots 36 and 37 on RP 37265, Parish of Yeerongpilly containing an area of 809 m 2 • This site is situated on the southern side of Kadumba Street, (No. 180) Yeronga and is zoned "Residential A" under the provisions of the City of Brisbane Town Planning Scheme. The relevant date for the determination of the unimproved value is 31st March, 1990. The appellant contend within the notice of appeal for an unimproved value of $73,500. Michael Lionel Tighe appeared as agent for the appellant. Mr Tighe informed the Court that there is a drainage manhole cover on the western boundary near the rear of the site. Mr Tighe referred in this case, as he did in other cases, to the relativity in values between sites on the southern side of Kadumba Street and those on the northern side. He points to a valuation of a series of sites on the northern site of Kadumba Street between Dalton Street and [1992] QLC 322 -- 1 of 3 -- - Page 2 - Rome Street of in the order of $80,000. These valuations reflect increases over the previously subsisting values of a factor in the order of 40%. The valuation of the subject land increased during the same period by a factor of 96%. Mr Tighe submitted on behalf of the appellant that nothing has happened physically to the properties on the southern side of Kadumba Street which has not happened to properties on the northern side of Kadumba Street. He also contends that the fall in the contour of the sites on the northern side of the street are not as great as they are on the subject property. A report and valuation prepared by registered valuer Ian Geoffrey Savage was tendered in evidence. Mr Savage describes the nature of the subject land as being elevated with the frontage (the ridge top) being one metre above road level. Tlie land then falls to the rear starting with an easy slope and then getting progressively steeper to the rear. Mr Savage says that the house has a restricted outlook to the north to the Central Business District and to the south to the border ranges. Mr Savage has valued the subject land on the basis of three sales. Lot 2 on RP 115205, Parish of Yeerongpilly, (Matthews to Wikman) - analysed unimproved value $77,350 - applied unimproved value $65,000 - is considered by Mr Savage to be an inferior site because of its smaller area and inferior outlook in comparison with the subject land. Lot 3 on RP 107692 Parish of Yeerongpilly (Weinglass to Griffin) - analysed unimproved value $118 ,000 - applied unimproved $100,000 - is again regarded by Mr Savage to be an inferior site to the subject land because of its lower elevation and inferior outlook. Lots 26 and 27 on RP 37281, Parish of Yeerongpilly (Vance to Maxon) - analysed unimproved value $146,000 - applied .J -- 2 of 3 -- - Page 3 - unimproved value $100,000 - is considered by Mr Savage to be also inferior to the subject land because of its lower elevation, inferior outlook and inferior location, although it is larger. In this case no sworn evidence by given by either party. Mr Tighe made statements from the bar table and Mr Grennan, who had the conduct of the appeal for the respondent Valuer-General presented Mr Savage's statement. This i~----so because of the considerable volume of evidence having been given in other cases and it is mutually agreed that the evidence in all cases shall be considered in each individual appeal. This decision is to be read with the attached general comments and observations. Since I have indicated a preference for the use of analysed sales evidence as a basis of valuation then the evidence of Mr Savage in this case must prevail. I cannot see that a valuation of $120,000 for the subject land as at the relevant date is excessive or unreasonable in relation to the sale evidence. It may well be that this valuation is slightly anomalous when compared with the valuations of $80,000 placed upon the sites across Kadumba Street, but as I have already found I base my findings on sales evidence. Accordingly the appeal is dismissed, and the unimproved value of lots 36 and 37 on RP 37265, Parish of Yeerongpilly as determined by the Valuer-General in the sum of $120,000 is affirmed. (C.H. Carter) Member of the Land Court. -- 3 of 3 --