|
Appeal No. VA09/3/025
AN BINSE LUACHÁLA Miele APPELLANT RE: Property No. 5002049, Office at 2024 Bianconi Avenue, Citywest Business Campus, County Dublin. B E F O R E JUDGMENT OF THE VALUATION TRIBUNAL By Notice of Appeal dated the 30th day of July, 2009, the appellant appealed against the determination of the Commissioner of Valuation in fixing a valuation of €344,000 on the above-described relevant property. The Grounds of Appeal are in a letter attached to the Notice of Appeal, a copy of which is attached at Appendix 1 to this judgment The appeal proceeded by the way of an oral hearing held in offices of the Tribunal, Ormond House, Ormond Quay Upper, Dublin 7 on the 11th day of November 2009. At the oral hearing the appellant was represented by Mr. Brian Bagnall, ARICS, ASCS, FAIVI, a Director of Brian Bagnall & Associates. Mr. Francis Twomey, a Valuer in the Valuation Office appeared on behalf of the respondent, the Commissioner of Valuation. Prior to the oral hearing each valuer submitted and exchanged their précis of evidence which were subsequently received into evidence under oath at the oral hearing. At the hearing the valuers gave additional oral evidence and were subjected to examination on the evidence so tendered. From the evidence so tendered the following material facts were agreed or are so found: The property which is the subject of this appeal forms part of the premises previously occupied by MJ Flood and is located within the Citywest Business Campus on the southside of the Naas Road about nine miles from the city centre. The MJ Flood premises comprised a distribution warehouse, showroom and office accommodation. The design of the premises was such that the office accommodation was contained in a two-storey structure linked to the warehouse. The entire premises are accessed from the Citywest Campus, occupy a prominent location and have a high profile to the Naas Road dual carriageway. As part of the South Dublin revaluation the MJ Flood premises were valued as a single unit occupation at a net annual value of €473,000 calculated as set out below: Offices: 1,947 sq. metres @ €107.60 per sq. metre = €209,497 Note: the areas quoted above have been measured on a gross external area basis. It is common case that when valuing warehouse premises at revaluation it was the accepted practice of the Valuation Office to value the office accommodation and storage space at a uniformed rate per sq. metre. In pursuing this practice no allowance was made to reflect the percentage of space dedicated to office use. In recent times MJ Flood relocated their business elsewhere and in due course the premises where offered to let on the open-market. A tenant was obtained for the two-storey office accommodation whilst the warehouse remains unoccupied. The office accommodation is now occupied under a 25 year lease from the 2nd of May, 2008 at an initial yearly rent of €410,000 per annum. The lease provides for rent reviews at five-yearly intervals and contains a break clause at the end of the tenth year. Following the letting of the office accommodation the owners requested a revision of valuation under section 27 of the Valuation Act, 2001 to reflect the fact that the premises as valued now consists of two separate units of occupation - the office accommodation occupied by Miele and the warehouse accommodation which was vacant and to let. The revision carried out in accordance with section 28 of the Valuation Act resulted in the following outcome: A) Offices (occupied by Miele) net annual value €344,000, Warehouse vacant €264,000. An appeal against the valuation of the office building was lodged under section 30 of the Valuation Act, 2001. No appeal was lodged against the Valuation of the warehouse building. No change to the valuation as determined was made on foot of an appeal to the Commissioner of Valuation and in due course the appellant lodged an appeal to this Tribunal under section 34 of the Valuation Act. The Appellant’s Contention It is the appellant’s contention that the only alteration to the property concerned as valued at revaluation is the physical separation of the warehouse and office accommodation. In such circumstances, the existing valuation of €473,000 should have been apportioned as follows: Offices (Miele): €209,000 In Mr. Bagnall’s précis he valued the offices at €195,000, but in the course of the hearing he amended this figure because of a mis-measurement. In Mr. Bagnall’s opinion the valuation of €473,000 was representative of the tone of the list for a premises of a type and scale as those originally occupied by MJ Flood. The fact that the premises were subdivided did not warrant upward valuation in the magnitude contended for by the Valuation Office. In his evidence Mr. Bagnall made reference to a premises in Greenogue Industrial Estate comprising of a warehouse with a two-storey office section. At revaluation the upper floor of the office accommodation was vacant and valued separately at €145 per sq. metre. Following an unsuccessful first appeal, the matter was referred to the Valuation Tribunal, but ultimately settled at a net annual value of €14,230, which is the equivalent to €125 per sq. metre on a gross internal area basis, or €118 per sq. metre on a gross external basis. In this instance the office accommodation at ground level and the warehouse were valued at a uniform level of €110 per sq. metres. Respondent’s Contention The respondent’s contention is that the premises were originally occupied as a single unit of occupation and valued as a detached warehouse facility with ancillary office and showroom accommodation. In accordance with the scheme of valuation for revaluation purposes, all of the accommodation, irrespective of their use, were valued at a single uniform rate per sq. metre. At revision it was found that the premises now consisted of two separate units of occupation and had to be valued accordingly. In such circumstances each unit of occupation had to be independently assessed in accordance with the facts, having regard to section 49(1) of Valuation Act, 2001. In other words, the valuation of the offices occupied by the appellant were to be valued “by reference to the values, as appearing on the valuation list relating to the same rating authority areas as that property is situate in, of other property’s comparable to that property” i.e. other offices. On this basis, the valuation of the office accommodation occupied by the appellant was assessed at €344,000 calculated as follows: Offices: 1,812 sq. metres @ €190 per sq. metre = €344,280 Notes: The area has been calculated on a gross internal area. In support of his opinion of net annual value, Mr. Twomey introduced three comparisons, details of which are to be found in Appendix 2 attached to this judgment. Findings
Determination Offices: 1,812 sq. metres @ €160 per sq. metre = €289,920 And the Tribunal so determines. |