Alldridge & Anor v The Valuer ::General [1991] QLC 251

Re: Determination of Unimproved Value - Shire of Redland. (AV90-319) R.N. and O.A. Alldridge v. The Valuer::General DECISION LAND COURT, BRISBANE. 17th May, 1991 . This appeal lies against the determination of an unimproved value of $190,000 for Lots 1 and 2 on RP 222420, Parish of Capalaba containing an area of 1916 square metres. This is a "Residential B" zoned site situated at 114 Main Road, Wellington Point and about 1.5 kilometres from the Wellington Point Shopping Centre. The valuation has been made under the provisions of Section 11 (1) (vii) of the Valuation of Land Act as a single site being used for single dwelling house purposes and as a result the subdivision into two lots has been ignored. The relevant date for the determination of the unimproved value is 31st March, 1989. One of the appellants is Rodney Noel Alldridge, who is a Barrister-at- Law and a Registered Valuer. Mr Alldridge has prepared a valuation report which is in evidence. He values his land at $100,000 and describes it as being relatively flat with the exception of the rear 15 metres, or 590 m 2 , which falls steeply to the rear [1991] QLC 251 -- 1 of 8 -- - Page 2 - boundary where it abuts a reserve along the foreshores of Moreton Bay. Mr Alldridge says that the most outstanding feature of his land is its water views. · It enjoys a reasonably good view to the west and southwest across the water to Manly and Lota. He says the view is obstructed by trees, most of which are located on the adjoining Crown land, and by other properties to the northwest, and by trees on the adjacent properties to the north. Mr Alldridge describes the site as being situated in a pleasant bayside environment with easy access to all facilities. Factors which tend to depreciate the value of the land include high levels of traffic noise along the busy Wellington Point Road, especially at weekends and public holidays, and the generally older style dwelling houses in the neighbourhood which are mainly rented. The neighbouring house, which is less than one metre from the side boundary of the subject land, is one of the rented houses, and Mr Alldridge suggested its close proximity devalues the value of the subject land because of resultant lack of privacy. Mr Alldridge submits that the size of the subject land is a secondary factor in terms of value. Although it is a relatively large parcel, he says that the market pays for the view rather than for any extra area and he sees any area over 1000 m 2 as being surplus land. Mr Alldridge does not believe there is anything special about land being located on the Wellington Point itself since proximity to and views of the water are enjoyed by bayside properties generally. He submits that sales of land on Wellington Point really reflect a scarcity value rather that an intrinsic value. Now Mr Alldridge bases his valuation on two sales (one unimproved and one improved) together with a valuation comparison with what he calls superior properties in the Wellington Point area. The vacant sale is of Lot 134 on RP -- 2 of 8 -- - Page 3 - 210955, Parish of Capalaba containing an area of 1003 m 2 which sold after the relevant date for valuation on 10th June, 1989 for $130,000. This site is located at-3 Cronin Drive, Wellington Point. Mr Alldridge sees the sale site as being situated in a superior environment due to it being located in a new dwelling estate, having relatively no traffic noise, having a comparable to slightly superior and much more expansive view and outlook over the water, having a slightly smaller area but being situated closer to shops and railway. Mr Alldridge submits that 3 Cronin Drive as a site is slightly superior to the subject land. The second sale referred to by Mr Afldridge is that of Lot 57 on RP 14172, Parish of Capalaba containing an area of 1518 m 2 on 26th August, 1989 for $207,000. This property adjoins the subject land and was sold again after the relevant date for valuation at auction. It is improved with a large lowset timber dwelling of historical significance. Mr Alldridge does not analyse this sale to reflect unimproved value - a process which he describes as a difficult and unreliable valuation exercise. Turning to the matter of relativity comparison, Mr Alldridge referred the Court to the 1989 valuation of $140,000 for Lot 135 on RP 210955 Parish of Capalaba with an area of 1770 m2• This site is at the corner of Cronin Drive and Douro Road, Wellington Point and Mr Alldridge suggests it has vastly superior views to the subject land, again with vastly surrounding development (this site adjoins Mr Alldridge's vacant land sale) again comparatively no traffic noise, and like his vacant sale land, is closer to shops and the railway station. It is a slightly smaller block but Mr Alldridge is adamant that it is overall vastly superior to the subject land. The second relativity comparison made by Mr Alldridge is between the subject land and Lot 1 on RP 201893 containing an area of 5200 m2 with a -- 3 of 8 -- - Page 4 - valuation of $116,000. This block is also in Douro Road, Wellington Point and has good views to the east and west with no traffic noise and a high degree of prNacy- due to its greater size. Another 2572 m 2 site in Gordon Street, Ormiston is valued at $182,000. It is Lot 3 on RP 216890 and Mr Alldridge suggests it has vastly superior views and surrounding development with virtually no traffic noise. it is a hatchet shaped block and again Mr Alldridge considers it to be vastly superior to the subject land. The final comparison made by Mr Alldridge is between the subject land and Lot 1 on RP 164426 containing 2071 m 2 situated on 167 Main Road, Wellington Point. Again Mr Alldridge suggests this site, has vastly superior views to the subject land, slightly superior surrounding development, a direct water frontage and is larger in area. Again Mr Alldridge suggests this site is superior to the subject land. Registered Departmental Valuer John Reginald Dewar made the valuation assessment under appeal. Mr Dewar describes the nature of the subject land as being mainly of high elevation with good views across Waterloo Bay to the Manly Boat Harbour and to the mouth of the Brisbane River. Mr Alldridge suggests the view is not as extensive as described by Mr Dewar since he claims the mouth of the Brisbane River cannot be seen from his property. Mr Dewar also says the subject land is almost level except at the rear where is falls very steeply down to sea level. Now Mr Dewar has had regard to three sales as a basis for his valuation. The first is of a vacant site situated in Main Road, Wellington Point being Lot 2 on RP 14172, Parish of Capalaba with an area of 1476 m 2. It sold on 23rd -- 4 of 8 -- - Page 5 - May, 1989 for $165,000 - analysed unimproved value $164,000. This sale is after the relevant date for valuation. Mr Dewar sees this sale site as being far inferfor to the subject land. It has a high elevation at street level initially then levelling and then falling approximately 10 metres almost vertically to sea level. The site is triangular in shape with only about 600 m2 of useable land along the road frontage. When building setbacks are considered, Mr Dewar says there would only be a fairly minimal area left upon which to build. Mr Dewar expressed the opinion that at sale date the market was still rising and for that reason he applied the sale conservatively when valuing the sale site at $139,000 as at the relevant date of 31st March, 1989. The second of Mr Dewar's sales is Lot 1 on RP 43282, Parish of Capalaba containing an area of 1373 m2 which sold on 20th August, 1988 for $183,000. This is an improved property also located in Main Road, Wellington Point. Mr Dewar values the house on the property at $30,000 and deduced an unimproved value of $152,000 from his sale analysis. Mr Dewar sees this sale site as being inferior to the subject land since it has only about 550 m2 of high level land at the front of the lot, with the balance falling steeply at the rear to sea level. There is legal access to the sea at the rear but mangroves make it almost unusable. Good bay views are available from the high land. Although he gave the dwelling house an added value of $30,000 in his sale analysis, Mr Dewar points out that the dwelling house since sold and has been removed from the site. The thjrd sale referred to by Mr Dewar is that of the subject property to the appellants on 7th April, 1988 for $200,000. The dwelling house on the land is valued by Mr Dewar at $39,000, and after allowing $1,000 for the value of clearing of the site, he analyses the sale to show an unimproved value of $160,000. Mr -- 5 of 8 -- - Page 6 - Dewar points out that this sale took place almost 12 months prior to the date of valuation when the real estate market was rising rapidly, and he illustrates this market trend with a reference to an earlier sale of his first vacant land sale in April, 1988 for $110,000. Mr Dewar sees land on the point at Wellington Point as commanding a premium in the market place. He sees Mr Alldridge's vacant land sale in Cronin Drive as being in a different location with a different market and supports this opinion with reference to the sales he has used. Indeed, it seems to me that there is a different market on the Point itself, especially if the views and advantages of the Cronin Drive site are as favourable as suggested by Mr Alldridge. I have considered all the evidence available to me and I must favour the sales evidence furnished by Mr Dewar. Certainly the use of improved sales as a basis of valuation when the task is to assess unimproved value is not to be preferred to vacant land sales evidence but really both of Mr Dewar's sales in essence are vacant land sales since the dwelling house of his second sale has been removed since sale. It may have been sold for a nominal sum (Mr Dewar could not establish this) but even so the sale reflects an unimproved value above the value of $148,000 applied to it at relevant date. It is to be noted that both of the valuers' vacant land sales took place after the relevant date for valuation. It well could be that there is, as suggested by Mr Alldridge, a scarcity value for vacant land on the Point. Be that as it may, I can only be lead by the sales evidence and if premium prices an~ paid for land on the point due to scarcity value; then this special value would surely be applicable to the subject land in the market place given that at relevant date we are obliged to assume for valuation purposes that the improvements on the land did not exist - vide Section 12 (1) (b) of the Valuation of -- 6 of 8 -- - Page 7 - Land Act, 1947 - 1987. I cannot agree with Mr Alldridge and with his submission that size is not an important factor when valuing a homesite if it larger than say 1000 m2• The size of the subject site is quite an attraction and would reflect in the market value of the land in the market place, along with other features such as views, access and situation on the Point. Mr Dewar disagrees that the site at 167 Main Road is superior to the subject land. It is certainly larger that is the subject property, and has excellent views, but it appears from a plan put in evidence within the Valuer-General's valuation brief that it has less land available for building before it falls to sea level. For the reasons discussed earlier I gain no assistance from the relativity comparisons made between the subject land and Lot 135 on RP 210955. This is situated adjoining Mr Alldridge's sale No. 1 and in a different area from Wellington Point itself. His comparison with the Douro Road property again is not helpful. It is much larger and it adjoins farming land. It could be, but I have no evidence on the point, that it has been protectively valued under the provisions of Section 11 (1) (vii) of the Valuation of Land Act as land used for the business of primary production. In any case it is just not comparable to the subject land due to its much larger area. Again the comparison property at Gordon Street Ormiston is well removed from the subject area and I am not influenced in my decision with the evidence as to the comparison between it and the subject land. Taking_ an overview of all the evidence, I cannot find that the subject land, if vacant and unimproved, would not command a price of $190,000 in the market place as one residential site to be used for a single unit dwelling house as at 31st March, 1989. Certainly a valuation of $100,000 as placed before the Court by -- 7 of 8 -- \. . - Page 8 - Mr Alldridge would appear to be well below market value and I cannot prefer his ,-·- - -- valuation to the valuation of Mr Dewar. This being so I cannot uphold the appeal. It is dismissed and the unimproved value of Lots 1 and 2 on RP 222420, Parish of Capalaba as determined by the Valuer-General in the sum of One hundred and ninety thousand ($190,000) dollars is affirmed. (C.H. Carter) Member of the Land Court. -- 8 of 8 --