Dingle & Anor v The Valuer-General [1992] QLC 313

Re: Determination of Unimproved Value - City of Brisbane - Division of Stephens AV91-855 PJ and A Din gle V. The Valuer-General DECISION LAND COURT, BRISBANE. 26th June, 1992. This appeal is against the determination by the Valuer-General of an unimproved value of $100,000 for Lot 1 on RP 120071, Parish of Yeerongpilly containing an area of 964 m 2 . The relevant date for the determination of the unimproved value is 31st March, 1990. The site is zoned "Residential A" under the provisions of the City of Brisbane Town Planning Scheme and it is situated at 159 Kadumba Street, Yeronga. The appellants contend within the notice of ·appeal for an unimproved value of $73,200. The appellants were represented in the matter by Michael Lionel Tighe as authorised agent. Mr Tighe did not elect to give sworn evidence in the matter and for that matter neither did Ian Geoffrey Savage who is the registered departmental valuer responsible for the valuation under appeal. This is understandable in view of the agreement reached earlier between the parties in another case that the general nature of the evidence in all cases would be considered by the Court in reaching a [1992] QLC 313 -- 1 of 3 -- - Page 2 - decision in respect of each case. Mr Tighe tendered in evidence a statement which he signed as agent for the appellants. This statement was prepared by the owners. The appellants say that the property does not have city, river or mountain views. They complain that Kadumba Street is a major thoroughfare for the residents of Yeronga. The noise and exhaust fumes emitted from the vehicles have an adverse effect on the subject property. In addition, it is located on a very sharp bend in Kadumba Street. This means increased traffic noise due to gear changes and squealing brakes, Headlights at night from cars coming up Kadumba street, and an actual threat of automobile accidents and well as many near accident misses. In addition the subject property is located on a busy route which is used by Council Buses. This increases the effect of exhaust fumes and noise. The bus stop is adjacent to the property and this has resulted in reduced privacy. The appellants also submit that the subject land is situated opposite St Sebastian Primary School with its attendant problem with vehicular parking. The appellants compare the subject valuation with that of $87,000 for the land at 165 Kadumba Street which valuation reflected an increase of 40% over and above the 1989 relevant date valuation. By comparison, the valuation of the subject property increased by a factor of 64%. The property at 165 Kadumba Street contains an area of 1282 m 2 and is almost unaffected by traffic noise as it is situated down an easement. Mr Savage describes the nature of the subject land as being an elevated corner block, slightly below road level with a gentle fall to the rear north west corner. It is situated on a bend in Kadumba Street which gives the block an east -- 2 of 3 -- - Page 3 - and south road frontage. Mr Savage says that the valuation under appeal was made on the basis of three sales - Lot 2 on RP 115205, Parish of Yeerongpilly (Matthews to Wikman) - analysed unimproved $77,350 - applied unimproved value $65,000 - is considered by Mr Savage to be inferior to the subject land because of it is smaller in area. He says that the sale land is also lower in elevation. Lot 3 on RP 107692, Parish of Yeerongpilly, (Weinglass to Griffin) - analysed unimproved value $118,000 - applied unimproved value $100,000 - is considered by Mr Savage to be comparable to the subject land because of its similar size although slightly larger than the subject site. The sale property has inferior elevation, topography and shape. Although the sale property is larger and has better topography, the subject land has a larger street frontage. 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 prevails. It is difficult to see in relation to that sales evidence that a valuation of $100,000 for the subject property is excessive or unreasonable. It follows that the appeal fails, and that the determination made by the Valuer-General of an unimproved value of $100,000 for Lot 1 on RP 120071, Parish of Yeerongpilly be affirmed. (C.H. Carter) Member of the Land Court. -- 3 of 3 --