|
Appeal No. VA96/3/036 AN BINSE LUACHÁLA Lee (Ireland) Ltd APPELLANT RE: Factory and Land at Lot No. 2A, Town of Ardee (pt.
of), B E F O R E JUDGMENT OF THE VALUATION TRIBUNAL By Notice of Appeal dated 26th July 1996 the appellant appealed against the determination of the Commissioner of Valuation in fixing a rateable valuation of £580 on the above described hereditament. The grounds of appeal as set out in the Notice of Appeal were that 1. "The valuation is excessive and inequitable The Property The factory was constructed in two stages with the original structure being completed in 1979 and extended in 1994. The building is of steel portal frame construction with a low pitched roof of galvanised steel decking with an average eaves height of about 5 metres (say 16ft). The infill walls are of concrete block construction with insulated metal cladding over. It would appear that whilst the factory is occupied and used as a single entity the original section is not fully intercommunicating with the 1994 extension. Offices, toilets and staff facilities are provided in the original building and additional toilets and staff facilities are also provided in the extension. All the usual mains services are connected to the property which also has the benefit of oil fired central heating and a sprinkler system. Accommodation Original Building Extension The Oral Hearing The Appellant's Evidence: Mr. McMillan further contended that as Ardee is a small town it could
not compete with the rival attractions of nearby larger towns such as
Drogheda and Dundalk which were successful in attracting high-tech industries.
As further proof of the difficulties faced by the town Mr. McMillan pointed
out that the IDA have been singularly unsuccessful in attracting new industry
into Ardee over the past 20 years notwithstanding the fact that it had
a land bank available for development purposes adjoining the subject property. Offices/Staff Area 9,699 sq.ft. @ £2.25 = £21,823 Rateable Valuation at .05% = £400 In support of the above valuation Mr. McMillan submitted 10 comparisons as set out in Appendix 1 attached to this judgment. The Respondent's Evidence Main Offices 6,539 sq.ft. @ £3.00 psf = £ 19,617 RV @ .05% = £601 In additional oral evidence Mr. Oakes said he considered the Chilton Electric premises (i.e. his comparison No 2) to be the best comparison available as it too was located in a small town reasonably close to Ardee. He pointed out that whilst the subject was much smaller nonetheless he had applied the same rate psf to the manufacturing area. When questioned about the Wellman premises at Ardee (Mr. McMillan's comparison No 1) he said that he did not consider this property to be comparable as the structure was in very poor repair. He agreed that the Farrell premises (his comparison No 1) was much smaller than the subject but other than that he could make no further comment as he had not inspected the property. Determination 1. Ardee is a small town and not unexpectedly there would be a limited demand for industrial premises with an area of 5,300 sq.m. 2. Of all the comparisons submitted the Tribunal attaches most weight to that in relation to the Chilton Electric premises in Dunleer. 3. The Tribunal considers the Farrell Brothers premises in Ardee to be also helpful notwithstanding the fact that it is less than half the size of the subject. The evidence in relation to the Wellman premises is of little assistance in that both valuers expressed the opinion that it was a dated warehouse premises in poor condition. 4. Mr. McMillan's comparisons 2 to 6 are situated throughout the country
in different rating areas but nonetheless they do give a broad picture
of typical rental levels for industrial premises which in several instances
are somewhat similar in size to the appeal hereditament. The remainder
of Mr. McMillan's comparisons are of no 5. The Tribunal accepts Mr. McMillan's evidence that Ardee does not appear to be an attractive location for industry and that there had been little new investment of this nature in the town for several years. In many ways it is not dissimilar to the town of Dunleer but on balance Dunleer is more convenient to Drogheda and Dundalk and is more accessible by road and rail to Dublin. Accordingly therefore whilst the Tribunal attaches considerable weight to the Chilton Electric evidence it has come to the conclusion that some allowance must be made for the difference in location between the two properties. The Chilton Electric premises is of course much larger than the appeal hereditament and this too is a factor to be taken into account. The Tribunal does not accept Mr. Oakes analysis of the Tribunal's decision in relation to Chilton Electric. In the Tribunal's opinion a more accurate analysis of the rateable valuation of £920 is as follows: Offices 11,927 sq.ft. @£2.88 = £ 34,350 Determination Offices 9,699 sq.ft. @£2.65 = £25,702 Net Annual Value Say: £104,000 |