AN BINSE LUACHÁLA
VALUATION TRIBUNAL
AN tACHT LUACHÁLA, 1988
VALUATION ACT, 1988

Bank of Ireland, Navan Road APPELLANT
and
Commissioner of Valuation RESPONDENT

RE: Bank at Lot No. 22a Navan Road, Blanchardstown, Co. Dublin

B E F O R E
Paul Butler Barrister (Acting Chairman)
Mary Devins Solicitor
Padraig Connellan Solicitor

JUDGMENT OF THE VALUATION TRIBUNAL
ISSUED ON THE 15TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 1990

By notice of appeal dated 9th day of July 1990, the appellants appealed against the determination of the Commissioner of Valuation fixing a rateable valuation of £330 on the above described hereditaments.

The grounds of appeal as set out in the notice of appeal are that the valuation of £330 is excessive and inequitable having regard to the provisions of the Valuation Act, and on other grounds also.

The subject property is located on the Main Street in Blanchardstown about seven miles from the city centre. It consists of a two storey detached building with single storey extensions to the front and rear together with a small concreted yard at the rear. It was built around 1970 and is constructed with concrete block walls, brick faced to the front elevation, concrete floor with carpet tiles, plastered and painted walls and ceilings, timber frame casement windows on the rear elevation and a flat asphalt covered concrete roof incorporating sky lights. The single storey rear extension was built about six years ago and is constructed with concrete block walls, brick faced externally, concrete floor with carpet tiles, aluminium framed windows and flat asphalt covered roof. There is a front extension which incorporates the entrance lobby, Pass lobby and interview room and it is constructed with an aluminium frame and incorporates glass panels throughout. The entire building is set back abut 40 feet from the edge of the road. There are seven car parking spaces at the rear of the building.

The subject premises are set out as a banking hall with strong room, managers office and interview room on the ground floor, canteen and storage facilities on the first floor.

The following is a brief agreed description of the accommodation provided;

Ground Floor
Entrance Lobby/Pass Lobby/Interview Room 412 sq. ft
Banking Hall/Staff area 2,684 sq. ft.
Managers Office 153 sq. ft.
Strong room 198 sq. ft.

Total floor area at ground floor level is 3,447 sq. ft.

First Floor
Canteen 267 sq. ft.
Documents room 250 sq. ft.
Disused office 192 sq. ft.
Stationary store 151 sq. ft.
Cleaners store 45 sq. ft.

Total floor area at first floor level is 905 sq. ft.

Valuation History
The property was first valued as a bank in 1972 at £300. At first appeal this valuation was reduced to £230. In 1987 following the extension of the bank the valuation was revised and increased to £380. At first appeal stage this was reduced to £330. Dublin County Council listed the premises for revision in 1989 and as no structural alterations had taken place the valuation remained unchanged. This was subsequently appealed to the Commissioner of Valuation at which no change was made at first appeal stage. It is against this determination that the appellants now appeal to the Tribunal.

Written Submissions
Written submissions were received from both parties on the 12th September, 1990. Mr Thomas F. Davenport ARICS, a Chartered Surveyor in general practice with Lisney, 24 St. Stephen's Green, Dublin 2 on behalf of the appellant said that Main Street Blanchardstown comprises a combination of commercial and residential properties interspersed and immediately adjoining occupiers include Rocca Tiles, Macari's Takeaway, Molloy's Betting Office and O'Reilly's Butchers. He said that Main Street, Blanchardstown is an extremely busy thoroughfare and that on street parking facilities are severely restricted in the immediate area. Mr Davenport said that all principal services including mains water and drainage, electricity and telephone are supplied and connected to the premises. He said that heating is by means of oil fired central heating system. He said that in accordance with the 1983 Dublin County Development Plan, these premises are situated in an area zoned Objective A i.e. "to protect and/or to improve residential amenities".

Mr Davenport said that in his opinion the property suffers from disabilities as follows:-
Inadequate car parking,

Its location adjoining a takeaway shop and a betting office,

Its design and layout in that it is set 40 feet back from the roadway and that it has poor visual impact and suffers from a lack of natural lighting,

Poor access to the first floor, and

Limited alternative use.

Mr Davenport quoted five comparisons as follows:-
1. Rocca Tiles, 22 Main Street, Blanchardstown
2. Peter Mark Limited, Unit 6, Superquinn Shopping Centre, Main Street, Blanchardstown.
3. M.W. Wallpaper, Unit 4, Superquinn Shopping Centre, Blanchardstown.
4. Irish Permanent Building Society, Unit 12a, Superquinn Shopping Centre, Main Street Blanchardstown.
5. Peter Creation, Unit E, Roselawn Shopping Centre, Blanchardstown.

These comparisons are attached as Appendix "A".

Mr Davenport said, in the absence of actual rent and having regard to the comparisons quoted, that he estimated the net annual value to be as follows:-

Ground Floor
Banking Hall (front section) 1,642 sq. ft. @ £10 p.s.f. = £16,420
Banking Hall (rear section) 1,607 sq. ft. @ £5 p.s.f. = £8,035
Strong Room 198 sq. ft. @ £4 p.s.f. = £ 792

First Floor
Canteen/stores 905 sq. ft. @ £2 p.s.f. = £1,810
Total £27,057
Say £27,000

On this basis he estimated the rateable valuation should be £170.

Mr John Colfer ARICS, an Associate Member of the Society of Chartered Surveyors with 11 years experience in the field of property valuation on behalf of the Commissioner of Valuation said that the rateable valuation is in line with other recently revised properties in the area in that the valuation is approximately 0.63% of the net annual value. He said that in determining the net annual value of the subject property he had regard to rents of comparable properties in the locality which were leased in the open market around November, 1988 which is the base date for assessment. Mr Colfer outlined how the net annual value was calculated as follows:-

Zone A 793 sq. ft. @ £28 p.s.f. £22,204
Zone B 758 sq. ft. @ £14 p.s.f. £10,612
Ground floor remainder 1896 sq. ft. @ £ 7 p.s.f. £13,272
£46,088
First floor £ 6,335
£52,423

Estimated net annual value £52,000 p.a. @ .0063 = £327.60
Say £330.00

Or alternatively
Ground floor area 3447 sq. ft. @ £13.50 £46,534
First floor area 905 sq. ft. @ £ 7.00 £ 6,335
£52,869
Say £52,000

Estimated net annual value £52,000 p.a. @ .0063 = £327.60
Say £330.00

Mr Colfer used the following comparisons:-
1. Allied Irish Bank Ltd., 20/17a Navan Road, Blanchardstown,
2. Electricity Supply Board, Unit 2, Deanstown House, Navan Road,
3. Xtra Vision, Unit 1, Deanstown House, Navan Road,
4. H.C.R., Unit AB Roselawn Shopping Centre,
5. Stanlane Enterprises Ltd., Unit 9, Blanchardstown Shopping Centre and
6. Rocca Tiles Ltd, 22b Navan Road, Blanchardstown (although in this case Mr Colfer pointed out that the current valuation of £140 on this comparison does not conform with the general relationship between rateable valuation and net annual value of recently revised properties).

Details of these comparisons are attached at Appendix "B".

Oral Hearing
At the oral hearing which took place on 17th September, 1990 Mr Thomas F Davenport ARICS, a Chartered Surveyor in general practice with Lisney gave evidence on behalf of the appellant and Mr John Colfer, an associate member of the Society of Chartered Surveyors in the Republic of Ireland with 11 years experience in the field of property valuations gave evidence on behalf of the respondent.

Mr Davenport's evidence was largely in terms of his written submission. He laid great emphasis on his first comparison. This was the premises of Rocca Tiles immediately adjoining the subject premises. In that case net annual value was based on an actual rent in the sum of £14,000 which had last been reviewed on the 9th August 1985. He further emphasised what he said was the bad parking situation of the premises.

Mr Colfer gave evidence in regard to his written submission. In regard to the adjoining premises above referred to, Mr Colfer accepted that the net annual value was comparatively very low and referred to his first comparison which was the Allied Irish Bank premises which was situated quite close to the subject premises. Its area was quite close to that of the subject premises and its valuation was £270. Cross-examined by Mr Davenport he agreed that the subject was somewhat better in that it was a purpose built bank but he thought the comparison a better building.

Determination
While the Tribunal has had regard to the written submissions and all the evidence given it is particularly impressed that the premises was first valued in 1972 at £300 that the same was reduced to £230 on 1st appeal. It was only after the premises were further extended in 1987 that the valuation was increased to £380 and that at 1987 1st appeal current valuation of £330 was agreed. The Tribunal would be inclined to the view that the valuation should remain unchanged at £330. However some regard must be had for the comparison of the immediate adjoining premises above referred to. Taking the same into consideration together with the other comparison mentioned above (Allied Irish Bank Ltd) the Tribunal determines that, in all the circumstances, the rateable valuation should be reduced from £330 to £300.