Fischer & Anor v The Valuer-General [1990] QLC 112

Re: An appeal against the determination of the Valuer-General. Gold Coast City - A V90-223 W.M. and T J. Fischer -v- The Valuer-General DECISION LAND COURT, BRISBANE. 21st December, 1990. In the annual valuation of lands within the Gold Coast City Council local authority area, as at 31st March, 1989 the Valuer-General assessed the unimproved value of land described as Lot 119 on Registered Plan 21864 Parish of Gilston, County of Ward, containing an area of 405 square metres, in the sum of $93,000. The land is situated at 12 Petrel Avenue, Nobbys Beach about 250 metres west of Nobbys Beach Surf Lifesaving Club and 120 metres east of the Nobbys Beach Shopping Centre. The site is zoned "Residential C" and is described as being fairly level to 1 metre below street level. An objection against the valu-ation was disallowed and this appeal is against that decision. The owners' estimate of the _unimproved value of the land is $84,500. Mr W M Fischer attended the hearing and gave evidence in support of the [1990] QLC 112 -- 1 of 4 -- - Page 2 - appeal. He has carried out some extensive research into the movement of values as applied by the Valuer-General (from as far back as 1980 then the annual valuations from 1986 through to 1989) on various properties in the local area. Using as a base for comparative purposes, Victoria Avenue at Broadbeach, the location of which he sees as being the dominant influence on values over the years in question, he has calculated the distance to each of the properties forming the study area. He tabulates in a series of schedules of comparisons, the factorised movement in values from the various valuation dates, identifying the position on the table, in each case, of the subject property relative to the valuation appealed against, then his own estimate. The result gives Mr Fischer some comfort in his claim that the forces which he sees as affecting values have not been properly identified over the years. Mr Fischer also felt that the closure of Magic Mountain, the once local tourist landmark has had a deleterious effect on the residential character of the area. The information submitted by Mr Fischer is mathematically orientated and may have some arguable base but only if theoretical assumptions were acceptable. During the course of the hearing, the witness for the Valuer-General, Mr C Cuffe, was able to demonstrate that the mathematical base had in some cases relied on changes related to use and consequent legislative requirements, rather than changes to relativity and was too finely tuned, ignoring a "rounding" process in the valuation figures. An important principle in determination of unimproved value was discussed in the matter W,M, and T.J, Fischer (the same appellants as in this case) v. The Valuer-General (Q.L.C.R. 1983 (9) 44)-where the Land Appeal Court said - "It Is indeed a fundamental principle of valuation that the best basis for assessment of unimproved value Is the use- of sales of vacant or lightly Improved parcels. Wh ilst maintenance of correct relativity Is also of considerable Importance for rating or revenue type valuations, ..........................• -- 2 of 4 -- - Page 3 - The evidence of Mr Cuffe, AAIV, registered valuer, who is presently the Valuation Manager, Division of Valuations, Gold Coast and who has been actively engaged in making valuations in the City of Gold Coast since 1971, is that, apart from the change of use of properties requiring legislative attention, relativity for the various uses has been maintained in the area of the subject over the period investigated by Mr Fischer. In fact, most of Mr Cuffe's evidence in this regard is supported by the information in Mr Fischer's schedules. -· Mr Cuffe explained that the subject site is developed with a single unit dwelling. There is a three storey height limit on multi-unit development in the locality, but the minimum site area for Residential Multi-Unit development is 600 square metres. The maximum development possible on a 405 square metre "Residential C" zoned site as is the subject, would be a duplex dwelling with a total of eight bedrooms. Mr Cuffe agrees that relativity is important but any changing patterns of value would need to be identified from sales evidence. He provided in his report, a copy of which was made available to Mr Fischer, details of the sales on which he relied to support a factorised increase in this locality. His evidence is convincing. He says that while it was becoming difficult to define, on the sales evidence, whether a premium is paid for sites purchased for duplex development as opposed to sites purchased specifically for single unit dwellings, the benefit of doubt was given to the latter situation and land so used, had been valued at a discounted level. This provided the intended benefit under Section 11 (1) (vii) of the Valuation of Land Act of 1944 (as amended). The subject land had been valued with the benefit applied accordingly. The appellants have not carried the burden of proving that the subject -- 3 of 4 -- - Page 4 - valuation is wrong or unreasonable as would be necessary for the appeal to be successful. The appeal is dismissed and the determination of the Valuer-General affirmed. (R.E. Wenck) Member of the I ;md Court. -- 4 of 4 --