Callanan v The Valuer-General [1991] QLC 195

Re: Determination of Unimproved Value - City of Townsville AV91-407 D Callanan v. The Valuer-General DECISION LAND COURT, BRISBANE. 11th December, 1991 . Doreen Callanan has appealed against the determination by the Valuer-General of an unimproved value of $215,000 ($34/m 2) for Lots 14 and 15 on RP 747167, Parish of Coonambelah containing an area of 6264 m 2 • These parcels are zoned "General Industry" under the City of Townsville Town Planning Scheme. They are situated at the corner of Greg Jabs Court and Bayswater Road, Garbutt. The relevant date for the determination of the unimproved value is 31st March, 1990. Mr Callanan contends for an unimproved value of $170,000 which is considerably below the price she paid for the land. Lot 14 was purchased by her on 17th November, 1989 for $85,000 and Lot 15 was bought on 20th June, 1989 for $185,700. At the time of purchase, Mrs Callanan was of the opinion that her land would have been accessed from Bayswater Road with a service road, but she subsequently learnt that access was limited to Greg Jabs Court. As a result Mrs [1991] QLC 195 -- 1 of 4 -- - Page 2 - Callanan says she overpaid for the land as there is also restricted exposure from the arterial Bayswater Road since the City Council has planted trees along that frontage. In addition Mrs Callanan says that the market for land in Tciwnsville peaked about the time of her purchase and has since declined. She points to the sale of a site at 358 Bayswater Road with about two and a half times the area of her land on 31st August, 1990 for $255 ,000 or $18/m 2 • Mrs Callanan says that this illustrates the fall in land value. Another factor of influence with Mrs Callanan when she decided to buy the land was that the estate within which it is located was promoted to be an industrial park but no plans for this style of development have been put in place. Mrs Callanan produced several photographs illustrating service roads on other sections on Bayswater Road. She claims that her land should not be valued higher than other lots in the estate at $30/m 2 • She also pointed to the valuation by the Valuer-General of $240,000 ($36/m 2) for Lot 3 on RP 738404 with an area of 6683 m 2 • This site is across Bayswater Road from the subject land. Lot 5 on RP 738404 containing 6750 m2 is also valued at $240,000 ($35/m 2 ). Lot 2 on RP 724673 containing 1.238 hectares adjoins the subject land and is valued at $295,000 ($24/m 2 ). This site has Bayswater Road frontage and Mrs Callanan says it has direct access and exposure. Lot 1 on RP 724673 containing 8916m 2 is valued at $265,000 ($35/m 2 ). This site also has direct access to Bayswater Road. The valuation under appeal was made by registered valuer Stephen Lyle Lagerroth who describes the subject site as being near level and slightly above road height with adequate drainage. Mr Lagerroth says it is located in the popular industrial subdivision of Garbutt and has advertising exposure being located on -- 2 of 4 -- - Page 3 - Bayswater Road. Mr Lagerroth values the land as follows:- ·· Lot 15 =3715 m2 at $4b/m2 Lot 14 - 2549 m2 at $32/m2 Less allowance for drainage easement and manhole Less 5% bulk allowance $81,568 $3,000 $148,600 Adopt $149,000 $78,568 Adopt $79,000 $228,000 $ 11.400 $216,600 Adopt $215,000 Mr Lagerroth basis his valuation on four sales details of which are included within his tendered valuation report. Two of the sales relied upon by him are of the subject property but Mr Lagerroth points out that the valuation ·under appeal is quite a deal below the price paid for the subject lots. Mr Lagerroth agrees that the council planted trees in front of the subject land does constitute a disability and he says that Bayswater Road is designed to have landscaping all along its southern side. He considers the sale of the subject property was high and out of line with other market evidence and for this reason he did not apply the sale price in full when valuing the land. Mr Lagerroth does not feel that the subject land is valued out of line with the valuations referred to by Mrs Callanan. He says size plays an important part in the valuation process and the blocks referred to by Mrs Callanan are generally much larger than is either of the subject lots. It is well recognised that -- 3 of 4 -- ( - Page 4 - size is an important factor-in the valuation process. The evfdence leaves me in no doubt that Mrs Callanan bought her land at the top of the market and that she has overpaid for it. Mr Lagerroth acknowledges· this and has valued it at about $56,000 below the combined sale price. · Aside from this, he has relied upon other sales evidence to support his valuation. I cannot see that his valuation is in error notwithstanding that there is some lack of exposure to Bayswater Road due to the council planted trees. Further, the evidence of the sale of the land at 358 Bayswater 8oad does not help to establish value as at 31st March, 1990 as it took place after the relevant date and it is a much larger site. In all the circumstances I cannot hold that the onus resting on the appellant has been discharged. It follows that the appeal be dismissed and that the unimproved value as determined by the Valuer-General in the sum of $215,000 for Lots 14 and 15 on RP 747167, Parish of Coonambelah be affirmed. (C.H. Carter) Member of the Land Court. -- 4 of 4 --