Lacey v Chief Executive, Department of Natural Resources

[1999] QLC 50

[1999] QLC 50

 

LAND COURT,

BRISBANE

26 May 1999

Re:     Determination of unimproved values –

City of Brisbane – Division of Brisbane –
  (Refs. AV98-898, AV98-899 and AV98-900).

CE, FA and LJ Lacey

v.

Chief Executive, Department of Natural Resources

D E C I S I O N

Three appeals have been filed against the determinations of 1 October 1997 relevant date valuations for three “Residential B – R3” zoned sites situated in Lockerbie Street, Kangaroo Point.  Details are:
           AV98-898 – an unimproved value of $73,000 for a 354m² site situated at 38 Lockerbie Street and which is more particularly described as Lot 41 on RP 11160, Parish of South Brisbane – appellants’ unimproved value as contained within the notice of appeal $50,000 – appellants CE, FA and LJ Lacey.
           AV98-899 – an unimproved value of $82,000 for a 531m² site situated at 23 Lockerbie Street and which is more particularly described as Lot 1 on RP 11161, Parish of South Brisbane – appellant’s unimproved value as contained within the notice of appeal $65,000 – appellant CE Lacey.
           AV98-900 – an unimproved value of $73,000 for a 354m² site situated at 42 Lockerbie Street and which is more particularly described as Lot 40 on RP 11160, Parish of South Brisbane – appellant’s unimproved value as contained within the notice of appeal $50,000 – appellant CE Lacey.
           Evidence in support of the rather limited ground of appeal in each notice of appeal was furnished by Cheryl Ellen Lacey.  Mrs Lacey resides in the dwelling house at 42 Lockerbie Street.  She rents out the houses at 23 and 38 Lockerbie Street.  Mrs Lacey believes the increase in the unimproved values for the 1 October 1997 valuations is not justified since real estate agents have advised her that they would not list the properties at 38 Lockerbie Street (which was purchased in December 1996) and 23 Lockerbie Street (which was purchased in April 1995) for any more than she paid for them.  In addition Mrs Lacey says that a large block of 92 units has been erected in River Terrace near her properties and the residential use of the units has exacerbated traffic and parking problems in the area.  Further Mrs Lacey told us that parking problems are increased with the use of the nearby Woolloongabba Cricket Ground.  Another disability raised by Mrs Lacey is that there is a high incidence of  breaking and entering in the suburb of Kangaroo Point.
           The valuations under appeal were made by Registered Valuer David Robert McKinnon who is in the employ of the respondent Chief Executive.  Mr McKinnon describes the nature of the land on each of the sites as falling gently across the blocks from the western boundaries to the eastern boundaries.  He has valued each of the properties on the basis of the following sales evidence:
           Sale No 1 – Lot 8 on RP 900643 – 364m² - Jackson to Scott and Gray on 16 August 1996 for $92,500 – analysed unimproved value $91,600 – applied unimproved value $69,000 – situation 106 Toohey Street, Kangaroo Point – zoning “Residential B – R3”.
           Mr McKinnon told us that this site is currently developed with a removal dwelling which was placed upon the land post sale date.  He regards the situation of this sale land to be inferior to each of the subject properties due to the proximity to the Gabba Sports Ground and the deleterious effect on it from the sports ground lighting.  Mr McKinnon considers the price paid for this site to be somewhat higher than the general level of values in the area and this is why he has applied an unimproved value of $69,000 to it in comparison with his analysed unimproved value.
           Sale No 2 – Lot 7 on RP 898844 – 308² - Mielnik & Cahill Qld Pty Ltd to Mackenzie on 6 December 1996 for $79,000 – analysed unimproved value $78,200 – applied unimproved value $75,000 – situation 2A Didsbury Street, East Brisbane – zoning “Inner Residential”.
           Mr McKinnon describes this site as being a gently to moderately sloping elevated lot with a southerly outlook.  It is close to a busy road (Vulture Street).
           Sale No 3 – Lot 22 on RP 11255 – 405m² - Cronin to Gamewick Pty Ltd on 18 June 1996 for $97,500 – analysed unimproved value $96,500 – applied unimproved value $90,000 – situation 20 Barker Street, East Brisbane – zoning “Inner Residential”.
           Mr McKinnon describes this site as being a gently sloping lot falling to the east to the road frontage.  It is located opposite church school buildings.
           Really the only evidence furnished by Mrs Lacey in support of the appeals which can be considered by the Court is her reference to the advice of the real estate agents as the appeal is limited to this sole ground of appeal.  But this evidence relates to the improved value of properties and the Court is only concerned with the determination of the unimproved value of the parcels.
           It has often been said in this jurisdiction when the task at hand is to determine unimproved value that the best basis of valuation is the use of vacant or lightly improved sales evidence.  In this regard, the only evidence before the Court is that provided by Mr McKinnon, and no real attack was made against it by the appellants.  Further, it is self evident that this sales evidence was used to determine the unimproved values as at 1 October 1997, and it is well established that references to relative increases in valuations upon the revaluation of lands within a local authority area is not a worthwhile ground of appeal.  Further Mr McKinnon says that the disabilities outlined by Mrs Lacey have been taken into account and reflected in the sales evidence particularly his Sale No 1 which is also located in the suburb of Kangaroo Point and closer to the Brisbane Cricket Ground than any of the subject sites.
In these circumstances it cannot be that the onus resting upon the appellants under the provisions of section 45(4) of the Valuation of Land Act 1944 has been discharged. Each appeal is dismissed and the following determinations are made:
           Ref AV98-898 – The determination by the respondent Chief Executive of an unimproved value of $73,000 for Lot 41 on RP 11160, Parish of South Brisbane, is affirmed;
           Ref AV98-899 – The determination by the respondent Chief Executive of an unimproved value of $82,000 for Lot 1 on RP 11161, Parish of South Brisbane, is affirmed; and
           Ref AV98-900 – The determination by the respondent Chief Executive of an unimproved value of $73,000 for Lot 40 on RP 11160, Parish of South Brisbane, is affirmed.

(CH Carter)

Member of the Land Court