Kenmore Avenue at Niagara Falls Boulevard (Amherst, NY).

[speaker]

You're right, grump. Properties are assessed for what they are, not what they could be. My bad.

[gorja]

Originally posted by Mike M:
Again, the most disturbing part of this is that the TOA Assessor claims that they do not know how the $15k was developed

Next week, Dave Marrano takes over as the new Amherst assessor. Before going to the Tonawandas, he was Lancaster's assessor. He always was very personable. Willing to answer questions. Never gave anyone the brush off. He was always willing to provide as much info as possible.

[Mike M]

No doubt I agree with most everything in y'all's recent comments. As always, thanks for the input.

In the event that the property - which, by the way, is cited as 83'x90' (7,470 sq ft) - is essentially "useless" in it's present state (size, configuration, zoning, potential contamination, etc), isn't the $15,000 assessment excessive? Are people paying for $15,000 for unusable property? Maybe.

[speaker]

One of the ways the owner could make it more valuable is to do the same as the big guys---buy the adjoining homes and property. And that really costs. So I guess we look at this eyesore for another while.

[Mike M]

One of the ways the owner could make it more valuable is to do the same as the big guys---buy the adjoining homes and property. And that really costs. So I guess we look at this eyesore for another while.

Though I have little doubt that the "eyesore" may remain for a while, I still do not buy into the "nothing we can do" concession. The owner - United Refining - and the TOA will benefit by understanding what the condition means.

Also, I found this interesting... from the TOA (http://www.amherst.ny.us/govt/it/cpi/cpi_instruct_a.asp).

How Property Is Assessed [ http://www.tax.ny.gov/pit/property/learn/howassess.htm ]


"A property's value can be estimated in three different ways:

Market approach
assessor compares property to similar properties that have recently sold
typically used to value residential, vacant, and farm properties

Cost approach
assessor calculates the cost to replace a structure with a similar one using today's labor and material prices
subtract depreciation
add the market value of the land
used to value industrial, special purpose and utility properties

Income approach
assessor analyzes how much income a property (such as an apartment building) will produce if rented
takes into account:
operating expenses
insurance
maintenance costs
financing terms
amount expected to be earned

Assessors also use Computer Assisted Mass Appraisal techniques to analyze property sales and estimate values for multiple properties simultaneously.

From market value to assessment
Once the assessor estimates the market value of a property, its assessment is calculated.
In a city or town assessing at 100% of market value, the market value becomes the assessment."


I found the "Income approach" to be of interest (though maybe not applicable in the case of 159 NFB). Apparently, this approach shatters the "value-as-it-presently-stands" comments.

QUESTION: Which of these approaches do you think applies to 159 Niagara Falls Boulevard? Thanks in advance!

[grump]

No doubt I agree with most everything in y'all's recent comments. As always, thanks for the input.

In the event that the property - which, by the way, is cited as 83'x90' (7,470 sq ft) - is essentially "useless" in it's present state (size, configuration, zoning, potential contamination, etc), isn't the $15,000 assessment excessive? Are people paying for $15,000 for unusable property? Maybe.

Just for the record no one said the property was unusable. All anyone said is that assessments are based on the value of property as currently used. There is a difference. I don't know whether $15000 valuation of a vacant lot of that sixe in that type of zoning district in Amherst is high or not and I frankly don't give a sh*t.

[grump]

And I forgot to ask earlier...just what is "potential contamination"? Is BO's EPA gonna visit the site? Either it's contaminated or it isn't.

[Mike M]

Like it or not property is assessed based on value at its current use. It's not supposed to be assessed based on a speculative "value" for some other use, even if that use is allowed by the current zoning of the property. Otherwise the town could assess your house for 5 times its value because you could build a 5 times more valuable house on the lot if you wanted to. As for the other properties you mentioned maybe they're over assessed.

I was thinking about the comment above and its relationship to the assessment processes outline by the Town:

Income approach
assessor analyzes how much income a property (such as an apartment building) will produce if rented
takes into account:
operating expenses
insurance
maintenance costs
financing terms
amount expected to be earned

So, actually, there are times when a property would be assessed not at its current use, but at its so-called potential. Hmmmm. I do not know if that would apply in the case of 159 NFB, but it cannot be simply cast aside, IMO.

[Mike M]

And I forgot to ask earlier...just what is "potential contamination"? Is BO's EPA gonna visit the site? Either it's contaminated or it isn't.

I agree, the site is either contaminated or it isn't. Do you happen to know if the site is indeed contaminated?