Anthony LaRegina

The appellant appealed the property assessment of an industrial property for the 2017 to 2022 taxation years, arguing the current value assessment of $3,090,000 was too high.

The appellant failed to appear at the hearing.

The Municipal Property Assessment Corporation requested an increase to $3,515,000 based on a direct sales comparison approach.

The Assessment Review Board rejected the requested increase, finding that the returned value of $3,090,000 was reasonable based on the best comparable property sale.

The Board also found no equity reduction was required and confirmed the assessment.

The Appellant sought tax relief for the 2020 and 2021 taxation years under s. 357(1)(a) of the Municipal Act, arguing that a 2019 zoning by-law amendment permitting multi-residential development constituted a 'change event' that made the property eligible for reclassification from Commercial to Multi-Residential.

The Assessment Review Board dismissed the appeals, finding that a change in zoning does not constitute a change in use.

As the property remained vacant until construction commenced in 2021, there was no change event during the applicable taxation years.

The property owners appealed the current value assessment of their waterfront property for the 2017 to 2022 taxation years.

The Assessment Review Board determined the base current value using the direct comparison approach, preferring the respondent's comparable sales data.

The Board applied a 17.4% negative adjustment to account for poor lot conditions, including significant year-round flooding and a weedy shoreline, consistent with a prior Board decision.

The Board declined to apply a further negative adjustment for proximity to an alleged commercial property due to insufficient evidence.

The final assessed value was reduced to $404,800.

The appellants appealed the property assessment of their single-family detached home for the 2020, 2021, and 2022 taxation years.

MPAC originally assessed the property at $433,000 but requested a reduction to $425,000 at the hearing.

The appellants argued for a value of $306,152, citing unbuildable hazard land and steep topography.

The Assessment Review Board analyzed comparable sales and determined the correct current value to be $377,000, applying a time-adjusted sale value per square foot from the best comparable property and adjusting for the steep topography.

The Board found no further equity adjustment was required.

The appellant sought tax relief for the 2020 and 2021 taxation years under s. 357(1)(a) of the Municipal Act, arguing that a zoning by-law amendment permitting multi-residential development constituted a 'change event' that made the property eligible for reclassification from Commercial to Multi-Residential.

The Assessment Review Board denied the appeals, finding that a change in zoning does not equate to a change in use.

Because the property remained vacant until construction commenced in 2021, no change event occurred during the applicable taxation years.

The appellant appealed the property assessment of a vacant, unbuildable waterfront lot for the 2019 to 2022 taxation years, arguing the current value should be zero due to zoning changes.

The Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) presented expert evidence of comparable sales, suggesting a value of $19,500 but requesting the assessment be confirmed at $5,300.

The Assessment Review Board rejected the appellant's argument that the property had no market value, relying on MPAC's comparable sales data.

The Board applied time-adjusted sale values of the most similar comparable properties and ordered the assessment increased from $5,300 to $13,400.

The appellant appealed the property assessment of a vacant commercial lot in Toronto for the 2021 and 2022 taxation years, arguing the current value assessment of $1,539,000 was too high and seeking a reduction to $949,048.

The appellant claimed he overpaid for the property when he purchased it for $3,338,888.

The Assessment Review Board found the purchase price unreliable but upheld MPAC's assessment based on comparable vacant land sales.

The Board also dismissed the appellant's request for an equity reduction, finding MPAC's equity study demonstrated the assessment was equitable with similar properties in the vicinity.

The appellant appealed the property tax classification of its property, arguing it should be classified as Commercial Vacant Land CX rather than Commercial Full CT.

The property was paved with parking lines but the appellant claimed it was not used as a parking lot.

The Assessment Review Board found that the appellant failed to meet its burden of proof to establish that the property had never been used as a parking lot, as required to qualify for the vacant land subclass.

The appeal was dismissed and the Commercial Full CT classification was confirmed.

The appellants appealed the property assessment of their single-family home for the 2020 and 2021 taxation years, arguing the current value assessment of $634,000 was too high due to the installation of two large Rogers 5G utility boxes on their front lawn.

The Assessment Review Board agreed that the boxes constituted a nuisance and an eyesore, applying a 3.5% negative adjustment to the current value, along with a 2% reduction for the property being a corner lot with light traffic.

The Board also granted a 7% equity reduction based on the assessment to sales ratio of similar properties in the vicinity, ultimately reducing the assessment value to $587,000.

The Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) brought a motion for disclosure of documents related to the 2012 sale and appraisal of the subject property, a surface parking lot.

The appellant, who sought a reduction in the 2016 current value assessment based on the income approach, did not respond to the motion.

The Assessment Review Board granted the motion, finding that the requested documents, including the Purchase and Sale Agreement, appraisal, and financial feasibility studies, were relevant to determining the property's highest and best use and current value, and that the request was proportionate.

The appellants appealed the property assessment of their single-family detached home for the 2020 and 2021 taxation years, arguing the current value assessment of $484,000 was too high and should be reduced to $384,000.

The Assessment Review Board reviewed comparable property sales and equity analyses provided by both the appellants and the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC).

The Board found that the best evidence supported MPAC's valuation and that no equity reduction was warranted.

The assessment was confirmed at $484,000.

The appellant appealed the current value assessment of her residential property for the 2020 and 2021 taxation years.

MPAC assessed the property at $455,000, while the appellant argued for a value between $435,000 and $444,000.

The Assessment Review Board determined the correct current value to be $451,000 based on time-adjusted builder sales of comparable properties in the same development.

The Board declined to make an equitable reduction under s. 44(3)(b) of the Assessment Act, finding that the assessment to sales ratio of similar properties in the vicinity was within acceptable parameters.

The assessment was ordered reduced to $451,000.

The appellant appealed the property assessment of a vacant, unbuildable waterfront lot on Methodist Island for the 2020 and 2021 taxation years.

The Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) had assessed the property at $17,900 for 2020 and $14,500 for 2021, while the appellant argued the value should be $10,000.

The Assessment Review Board found that MPAC's comparable sales data supported a current value of $14,500.

The Board also determined that no equitable reduction was required under section 44(3)(b) of the Assessment Act, as the assessment-to-sales ratio of similar properties in the vicinity was within acceptable parameters.

The assessment was reduced to $14,500 for 2020 and confirmed at $14,500 for 2021.

The appellants appealed the property assessment of their single-family detached home for the 2020 and 2021 taxation years, arguing the returned value of $926,000 was too high.

The Assessment Review Board determined the current value to be $952,673 based on comparable sales provided by the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation.

However, applying an equity analysis, the Board found a 5% reduction was warranted to align with similar properties in the vicinity.

The Board ordered the assessment reduced to $905,000.

The appellants appealed the property assessments of nine newly built townhouse condominiums located on Circle Lake in North Bay for the 2019, 2020, and 2021 taxation years.

MPAC had assessed the properties between $520,000 and $521,000.

The appellants argued the values should be reduced to $350,000 due to environmental restrictions protecting Blanding's Turtle habitat, which prevented any waterfront development.

The Assessment Review Board found that the subject properties were substantially inferior to MPAC's best comparable property due to the environmental restrictions, lack of basements, and obstructed views.

The Board reduced the current value assessments to $419,000 for the section 40 appeals and $321,000 for the section 33 appeals.

The appellant property owner appealed the 2020 and 2021 property assessments of his residential condominium unit, arguing the current value assessment of $352,000 was too high due to unfinished common elements in the building following the builder's insolvency.

The Assessment Review Board found the correct current value to be $367,000 based on the 2014 purchase price adjusted for the unfinished elements.

As MPAC did not request an increase, the Board confirmed the returned assessment of $352,000 and found no equitable reduction was warranted.

The appellant appealed the property assessment of her single-family detached home for the 2020 taxation year, arguing the current value assessment of $394,000 was too high and should be reduced to $340,000.

MPAC requested the returned value be confirmed.

The Assessment Review Board found the best evidence of current value was the unadjusted sale price of the subject property in May 2015 for $425,000.

The Board also found that no equitable reduction was warranted based on MPAC's equity study of 30 property sales in the vicinity.

As MPAC did not request an increase, the Board confirmed the assessment at $394,000.

The appellant appealed the property assessment of her single-family detached residence for the 2020 taxation year, arguing the current value assessment of $394,000 was too high and should be reduced to $340,000.

MPAC requested the returned value be confirmed.

The Board found the best evidence of current value was the unadjusted sale of the subject property in May 2015 for $425,000.

The Board also found that based on MPAC's equity study, no equitable reduction was warranted.

Since MPAC did not request an increase, the Board confirmed the assessment at $394,000.

The appellant appealed the property assessment of their single-family detached residence for the 2020 taxation year, arguing the current value assessment of $1,789,000 was too high and should be reduced to $1,515,000.

The Assessment Review Board reviewed comparable property sales and found the correct current value to be $1,846,000.

The Board also found that no equitable reduction was required based on the assessment-to-sales ratio of similar properties in the vicinity.

Since the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation did not request an increase, the Board confirmed the returned assessment of $1,789,000.

The appellants appealed the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation's (MPAC) current value assessment of their newly built residential property for the 2019 and 2020 taxation years.

The appellants argued for a lower valuation based on lot frontage differences and a cost approach, while MPAC relied on a direct comparison approach using time-adjusted sales of similar properties.

The Assessment Review Board preferred the direct comparison approach, selecting a highly comparable property and making a downward adjustment for the lack of a finished basement in the subject property.

The Board determined the current value to be $2,463,000 and found no equitable reduction was warranted.