Burton & Anor v The Valuer-General [1990] QLC 208

---·- ·- .., ____ _ Re: Appeal against valuation of the Valuer-General , Shire of Pine Rivers (V89-325) D,A and CJ, Burton -v- The Valuer-General - DECISION - I.AND COURT, BRISBANE. 21st March, 1990. Mr. and Mrs. Burton are the owners of Lot 25 and 27 on Registered Plan 115700, Parish of Warner. Each allotment has an area of 607 sq. metres making a total area of 1,214 sq. metres. In the revaluation of the lands in the Shire of Pine Rivers as at 31st March, 1988 the Valuer-General has valued this parcel at $64,000. The appellants in the Notice of Appeal contend to a value of $20,000. The subject land is an "L" Shaped parcel with Lot 25 situated at 4 Harvey Street, Strathpine and Lot 27 at 9 Dorothy Street, Strathpine with one (1) allotment separating the total parcel from the corner of those streets. Harvey Street is a full width carriage way with concrete kerbing and channelling and Dorothy Street is a "No Through" road with bitumen carriage way and concrete kerbing and channelling. The land has erected upon it a building comprising eight (8) flats. Access to the flats is obtained from Dorothy Street. The subject land is zoned "Residential A" under the town plan gazetted on 14th May, 1988. Evidence was given by Mr. D.A. Burton in support of the grounds of appeal. He complains that the average increase in the valuations in the Shire between the previous valuation and the current valuation was about 14% while the subject land has been increased from $35,500 to $64,000 (over 80% ). He stresses that the land is not zoned "Residential B" and the flats are on the land by special consent only. They can only be sold as one (1) complete unit. He says that part of the land was reclaimed from [1990] QLC 208 -- 1 of 4 -- - Page 2 - Coulthardt's Gully. He estimates the value of that fill would be in excess of $10,000. He comments that an allowance of $7,000 was made at the time of the previous valuation. He says that the _property has flooding problems with flooding from the gully building up on Dorothy Street making vehicular access difficult. This occurred on 25th April, 1989. He says that the worst flood before that was in 1974, but it is only the driveway which is flooded. He relies in his case on relativity with valuations placed by the Valuer-General on other parcels of land. First is an area of 2,732 sq. metres of Lot 1 on RP123985, Parish of Warner, located at Samsonvale Road, Strathpine. He says this works out to $15.74 per sq. metre compared to $52.72 per sq. metre on his property. He says it is a far superior piece of land. It is zoned "Residential B". Another property of Lot 2 on RP132730, Parish of Warner has an area of 2079 sq. metres and is valued at $87,500 ($42.09 per sq. metre). It is located at 505 Gympie Road, Strathpine. It has a block of twelve (12) flats upon it. He says it is in a better location, but he believes this valuation is excessive in any event because it was sold shortly before the date of valuation for a very poor price. His other two comparison blocks are parcels of "Residential A" zoned land and form no basis to value the subject land in the circumstances here. In cross-examination he says that he was not aware that his first comparison was valued under the concessional valuation because there was a home upon it at that time. He agrees that his second "Residential B" comparison is situated on Gympie Road subject to more traffic disabilities and noise. As to the basic sales used by the Valuer-General as a basis of valuation, he says that they are not in Strathpine and sales in another area should not be used. Evidence for the Valuer-General was given by Valuation Manager, Mr. G.J. Dunn who says that in previous valuations this land was described as Lot 1 on RP137635. A more recent search at the Titles Office has shown that that description was in error and the subjects are two (2) separate allotments and not one (1) lot as previously thought. -- 2 of 4 -- - Page3 - Mr. Dunn says that he has valued the subject land under the provisions of Section 12 (1) (A) of the Valuation of Land Act as land despite its "Residential A" zoning having erected upon it eight (~) flats as a non-conforming use under that zone. He has made an -allowance for 840 cu metres of fill. He arrives at his valuation in the following method: 1214 sq. metres x $60 per sq. metre = $72,840 Less fill 840 cu metres @ $11 per cu metre = $ 9,240 Total $63,600 Adopt - $64,000 As a basis of valuation he has looked at the sales of two (2) parcels of land in the suburb of Petrie both zoned "Residential B". Having regard to those sales and for the reasons set out in his written valuation he adopts the rate of $60 per sq. metre for the subject land. His allowance for filling is the quantity agreed upon between the parties when this matter was canvassed in the Land Court on a previous occasion and his rate for filling is a rate at the relevant date obtained from a company who undertakes this work. With reference to the properties used by Mr. Burton for relativity he says that the first comparison was originally valued under the concessional valuation as land with a residence upon it. It has subsequently been ascertained that the information was not correct and the valuation has been amended to $95,000 ($35 per sq. metre). He does not agree that this is superior to the subject land. It is situated on a busy street severed by a median strip and in close proximity to the overbridge from Samsonvale Road to Gympie Road. It is larger in area and in the market place larger parcels will sell for a lower rate per sq. metre than a smaller parcel. The property at 505 Gympie Road is larger in area. It is a long narrow allotment. It has inferior access and has the noise problem from the busy highway. He agrees with Mr. Burton that the area in which the subject land is located has a clay soil which creates problems requiring special attention in the building of foundations and this is a problem common to the area. Mr. Burton had given some -- 3 of 4 -- , . - Page4 - evidence of subsidence of adjoining land following the building of a new sewer main ·,. which has caused some cracking in the walls of the subject flats. Mr. Dunn says his task is to look at the land in its unimproved state and a prudent purchaser would take account of any problem of this nature at the time of purchasing it. Counsel for the Valuer-General advises that the question of the unimproved value of this parcel of land was canvassed in the Land Court following the revaluation as at the 31st March, 1983. On that occasion much of the same material now before me was canvassed. This is apparent from the decision of the Court handed down on 17th July, 1985. As was said on that occasion the land falls to be valued under the provisions of Section 12 (l)(A) of the Valuation of Land Act which provides that it shall be assumed that the land may continue to be used for the purpose for which it was being used at the date to which the valuation relation. Mr. Dunn correctly values the land in accordance with this provision and this will continue while the flats remain upon the land. Mr. Dunn was aware of the problems associated with his land and has made allowance for them. I find on the evidence that the subject land is superior to the parcels used by Mr. Burton as a basis of relativity. I further find that the sales evidence supports the valuation contended for by the Valuer-General and it follows that the appellants have failed to discharge the onus to show that the Valuer-General has erred in the valuation and the appeal fails. Accordingly the appeal is dismissed and the valuation of the Valuer-General is affirmed. (Signed: D.J. Barry) President of the Land Court -- 4 of 4 --