HomeMy WebLinkAboutCS 95-05PICKERING
REPORT TO
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
Report Number: CS 95-05
Date: December 7, 2005
From:
Gillis A. Paterson
Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer
Subject: Petition from Residents Surrounding 185 White Pine Crescent
Recommendation:
That Report CS 95-05 from the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be
received for information.
Executive Summary: Not applicable
Financial Implications: Not applicable
Background: At the November 7th Council meeting, Council referred Correspondence
2-05, (which is the petition from the residents surrounding 185 White Pine Crescent) to
the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer. In reviewing the petition there appears to
be two issues which are:
1. The residents surrounding 185 White Pine Crescent are asking for property tax relief
for 2005.
2. The residents are concerned about the vacant property and are wondering if
anything will be done.
Present Condition 185 White Pine Crescent
On or around December 19th, 2002, the home located at 185 White Pine Crescent was
substantially damaged by fire. An Order under the Building Code Act was issued by a
City inspector in order to remedy unsafe conditions the remaining damaged structure
represented. The owner complied with the Order and demolished the above grade
portions of the building and capped the foundation in June 2003. The remaining
foundation structure is now covered by a blue tarp. The owner applied for and obtained
a building permit to rebuild on October 10, 2003, but did not undertake any
construction. As a result, the building permit has now been revoked.
During the past year, City By-law staff monitored the property periodically to verify that
grass and weeds were kept under control in accordance with City By-laws. The City
Report CS 95-05 Date: December 7, 2005
Subject: Petition from Residents Surrounding 185 White Pine Crescent Page 2
has no means to compel the owner to commence and complete construction on this
property.
Property Tax Relief
The residents near this property (185 White Pine Crescent) have complained that due
to its current condition this property has potentially reduced the surrounding property
values in this neighborhood. Consequently, they are asking for property tax relief for
their 2005 taxes.
Paragraph two of the petition states the following: "This decreases the values of the
market for the re-sale or sale of properties in this area." In other words, the petitioners
are arguing that the current condition of 185 White Pine Crescent has decreased their
property values. Taxation staff contacted Municipal Property Assessment Corporation
(MPAC) and asked them to revisit the assessment values for this neighborhood for the
years 2005 and up coming 2006. MPAC staff reviewed housing sales transactions for
this area and found no evidence from "market information" to indicate that these homes
are over assessed. To put another way, current objective empirical evidence does not
sug.qest a decrease in property values and therefore there is no negative impact on
the surrounding property values.
Many residents throughout Ontario do not agree with their property assessment values.
Fortunately, the Assessment Act provides two tools for property owners who disagree
with the assessment value of their property which are Request for Reconsideration
(RFR) and filing a complaint to the Assessment Review Board. For the RFR process
there is no fee and the residents would have until December 31,2005 for this year and
December 31, 2006 for next year. Although the residents do have this option they may
have limited success due to the fact the City has already asked MPAC to review its
assessment values for these properties and the results of their review did not support a
reduction.
Another option is for these residents to file a formal notice of complaint with the
Assessment Review Board (ARB) by March 31, 2006 for the 2006 taxation year. The
ARB is an independent tribunal of the Province of Ontario. ARB hearings are like going
to court and the property owners and MPAC will be asked to attend the hearing and to
provide evidence to support their arguments.
The Municipal Act provides for several tax tools to assist in the administration of
property taxes. Sections 357 and 358 of the Municipal Act provide relief for property
taxes under specific circumstatances such as demolition. Under the circumstance
described in the petition we cannot apply Sections 357 or 358 to provide property tax
relief to the petitioners. In addition, as part of the 357/358 process MPAC is required to
provide a reduction in assessment value. Therefore, it appears based on the City's
earlier request for MPAC to review these property values, MPAC would probably not
reduce the corresponding assessment values for these owners.
Report CS 95-05 Date: December 7, 2005
Subject: Petition from Residents Surrounding 185 White Pine Crescent Page 3
This report has been reviewed by the City's Chief Building Official and the Manager, By-
law Enforcement Services.
Attachments:
1. Petition
Prepared By:
Approved / Endorsed By:
Stan Karwowski
Manager, Finance & Taxation
Gillis A. Paterson
Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer
GAP:vw
Attachment
Copy: Chief Administrative Officer
Recommended for the consideration of
Pickering City Council
;2' ., ~; /
7,f~mas J. O~,/nn, Chef Admin~ve O'f~cer
j...,.-
PETITION
· CORR. 2-05
,<TTACHMENT #_L__TO REPORT#
We the undersigned residents in Ward 3. in the CiD~ of Picketing, on
on Valley Ridge Crescent, are protesting the increase in house taxes
for the year 2005, due to the fact of the circumstances of the house
which sits directly in close proximi~' to our properties on Valley Ridge
Crescent ancVor White Pine Crescent. This house fire occurred on December 19,
2002 and as of this date, there seems to be no attempt by a builder for it to be
re-built.
This greatly decreases the values of the market for the re-sale or sale of properties
in this area. It also esthetically does not present a good impression to people wanting
to purchase an&'or move into the area v,4th young families.
We moved into this area from many different regions of Ontario hoping to have a quiet
peaceful neighborhood free from crime and break-ins which have increased substantially
this last year. We have heard no feedback from proper authorities as to what is being
done in this regards.
9
Name
Address Si
NalTle
Address Signatures