|
Appeal No. VA09/4/025, 026 & 027
AN BINSE LUACHÁLA Conor Ó Cléirigh & Co Ltd (VA09/4/025) and Commissioner of Valuation RESPONDENT RE: Property No. 2199312 (Unit G5), Property No. 2199311 (Unit G2) and B E F O R E JUDGMENT OF THE VALUATION TRIBUNAL By Notices of Appeal dated the 23rd December, 2009, the appellants appealed against the determination of the Commissioner of Valuation in fixing valuations of €49 (VA09/4/025), €93.00 (VA09/4/026) and €45 (VA09/4/027) on the above-described relevant properties. The grounds of appeal as set out in the Notices of Appeal are: These appeals proceeded by way of an oral hearing held in the offices of the Tribunal, Ormond House, Ormond Quay Upper, Dublin 7 on the 26th day of February 2010. By agreement, the three appeals were heard together and at the hearing the appellants were represented by Mr. Conor Ó Cléirigh, ARICS, ASCS, FIAVI, who is the occupier of the subject property in appeal VA09/4/025. The respondent was represented by Ms. Jacqui McKinnell, BSc, MSCS, MRICS, a District Valuer in the Valuation Office. Location The Steelworks is a new mixed-use development comprising of 4 multi-storey blocks providing office and apartment space over a basement car park, arranged around a central landscaped courtyard. The subject properties are located in the block known as “The Stockyard”. The Properties Concerned VA09/4/025 – The property concerned (Unit G5) is situated on the north east corner of the development and has two parking spaces within the basement parking area. Total agreed accommodation is 82.78 sq. metres. VA09/4/026 – This property (Unit G2) is situated to the north west of the development, close to Foley Park. It also has two basement parking spaces and total agreed accommodation is 168 sq. metres. VA09/4/027 – This property (Unit G1) is located beside property VA09/4/026 and has one basement parking space. Total agreed accommodation is 81 sq. metres. Tenure Rating History The Issue The Appellant’s Evidence Unit G1 – 81 sq. metres with 1 car space; Finally, as a result of the amendments to the areas, Mr. Ó Cléirigh made amendments to the rateable valuations he contended for at page 8 of his précis. His amended RV’s are as follows: VA09/4/027 – 81 sq. metres @ €60 per sq. metre = €4,860 VA09/4/026 - 168 sq. metres @ €70 per sq. metre = €11,760 VA09/4/025 - 82.78 sq. metres @ €70 per sq. metre = €5,794 Mr. Ó Cléirigh set out a number of factors, which he contended should affect the net annual value (NAV) of the properties concerned. Firstly, he stated that although the area had experienced considerable inward investment arising from tax designation under the North East Integration Area Plan, it was unable to shake off its legacy and continued to experience anti-social problems. He said that these factors were relevant to the office market and that demand for these properties was mainly from people seeking to buy the units to avail of the tax incentives, but that the rental demand was quite weak. He stated that there were a number of units which had been available to let for quite some time. In Mr. Ó Cléirigh’s view the fact that the development was a mixed-use development also had a bearing on the NAV. He stated that the development was not equivalent to an office complex and that there were issues with litter due to the presence of apartments. Furthermore, as a result of the large number of apartments overhead, there were plumbing issues with water dripping down through the ceilings into the subject properties. Mr. Ó Cléirigh stated that as a result of these issues with leaks, insurers of the properties would not cover flood damage. Finally, Mr. Ó Cléirigh added that the occupiers of the subject properties had to contribute to additional costs within the service charge, arising out of the large concentration of apartments in the complex, such as the cost of a night porter. Mr. Ó Cléirigh contended for a valuation rate of €70 per sq. metre in respect of properties VA09/4/025 and VA09/4/026 and a rate of €60 per sq. metre in respect of property VA09/4/027. He stated that property VA09/4/027 occupied the unit at the end of the complex, right beside an unsightly derelict area and that there was a problem with stones being thrown at the office, which resulted in the occupier having to replace the windows. Therefore, in Mr. Ó Cléirigh’s view, this property should be assessed at a lower rate than the other properties. In support of his contentions of RV, Mr. Ó Cléirigh referred to a number of comparisons. The first comparison Bord Gáis Éireann Tribunal appeal (VA02/2/065 - Bord Gáis Éireann) was valued at a rate of €68.34 per sq. metre by the Valuation Tribunal. The second comparison, Ulysses House, was valued at €82 per sq. metre and his final comparison, other units in The Steelworks complex, were also valued at €82 per sq. metre. Mr. Ó Cléirigh accepted that the valuations in respect of the other units in The Steelworks development appeared on the Valuation List, but notwithstanding this, he was of the view that the subject properties should be valued at a lower rate, having regard to the factors that he had set out. Cross-Examination Mr. Ó Cléirigh contended that the view of the adjacent unsightly area was worse from property VA09/4/027 than from any other unit within the development, as this was the closest unit to that area and directly overlooked it, and that a potential tenant would take this into account in determining how much rent he would be prepared to pay for this unit. He accepted that the risk of anti-social behaviour was in common with all the occupiers in The Steelworks building, given its location, and that the issues in relation to plumbing, the inability to obtain insurance cover in respect of flood damage and the increased service charges were in common with the occupiers of the respondent’s comparisons and with the other occupiers of the complex. However, Mr. Ó Cléirigh contended that the plumbing issues only came to light during the latter stages of the assessment of the complex and that the other units had been assessed earlier on, when these issues had not been fully appreciated. Mr. Ó Cléirigh accepted that Bord Gáis Éireann was the first building in the area to be valued and that this valuation underpinned the tone of the list and he further accepted that the Tribunal’s decision in that case (VA02/2/065 – Bord Gáis Éireann) made reference to specific anti-social behaviour in the area and that this had therefore been built into the tone of the list for Foley Street and the surrounding area. It was put to him that the established tone of €82 per sq. metre for properties in The Steelworks already included the risk of anti-social activity. Whilst accepting that generally speaking the best comparison is the closest, Mr. Ó Cléirigh refused to accept that in these cases the best comparisons would be the other units within The Steelworks complex, contending that the Tribunal was entitled to take a fresh look at the valuations of the units within the complex. Respondent’s Evidence Ms. McKinnell contended for RVs as follows in respect of the three properties as follows : VA09/4/025 VA09/4/026 In support of her contention of RVs, Ms. McKinnell referred to the same five comparisons in respect of the three properties. All five comparisons are offices located within The Steelworks development and they are valued at a rate of €82 per sq. metre. There are two car parking spaces with Comparison 3, Ó Briain, Beary, Dorman Architects, which are valued at a rate of €500 per space, similar to the subject properties. Ms. McKinnell also referred to Ulysses House, located on Foley Street across from The Steelworks, where car parking spaces are also valued at the same rate. Ms. McKinnell stated that the accommodation, which was modern, purpose-built and of good specification, was reasonably similar for all three properties, with some minor amendments. She stated that the valuation of the subject properties was made by reference to the values of comparable properties appearing on the Valuation List for Dublin City Council and further that the car parking spaces were also valued in line with the tone of the list. Ms. McKinnell stated that her comparisons were all situated within the same development as the subject properties and were of a similar standard and were all recently established. Ms. McKinnell argued that a clearly defined tone of the list existed within the locality and that the subject properties were valued in line with that tone. Cross-Examination Ms. McKinnell denied that the history of leaks in the ceilings of the subject properties would necessarily have a bearing on the rent that a prospective tenant would be prepared to pay, stating that one had to look at the leaks in context and that the leaks had not been addressed in a timely fashion. She agreed that there would be a higher service charge for a mixed-use development as opposed to a solely commercial development. It was put to her that demand from tenants for units in The Steelworks was fairly weak. She replied that this was dependent on the economic climate. It was put to Ms. McKinnell that the locality was dogged by on-street drinking and drug dealing. She stated that she did not dispute the anti-social activities, but that it was not specific to this particular area. Ms. McKinnell agreed that when establishing the tone of the list, more weight would be attached to those valuations which had been challenged through the appeal system. She acknowledged that none of the valuations in The Steelworks had been challenged through the appeal system, but stated that professionals had been involved in the valuation process for these properties and that a tone had been established. Summary by Appellant Summary by Respondent Findings
Determination And the Tribunal so determines. |