Estate of Ethel Josephine Spowart Hinz - Page 14




                                       - 14 -                                         
          gutters, street lights, and sidewalks.  The Mathew Street                   
          frontage was partially improved with concrete curbs and gutters.            
               Building improvements on the Lafayette Property included an            
          industrial metal building on a concrete slab foundation.7  The              
          building included 11 grade-level metal rollup truck doors and a             
          23-foot-wide metal canopy over a concrete apron.  The building              
          was used primarily for vehicle and equipment maintenance, but it            
          also had office space.8  The building was of an overall low-cost            
          to average construction quality with low-cost interior office               
          build-out.  The building was built in 1978 and, at decedent’s               
          death, was in average condition with no significant problems.               
          There was also a 450-square-foot concrete block building suitable           
          only for storage located on the Lafayette Property.  This                   
          concrete building was in a state of substantial disrepair and did           
          not contribute any net value to the overall value of the                    
          Lafayette Property.                                                         
               At decedent’s death, both parcels of the Lafayette Property            
          were occupied by one tenant, Nelson Brothers Trucking Co.,                  


          7    We assumed that the parties could agree on such matters as             
          the size of the building.  However, petitioner’s expert shows the           
          building’s site area variously as 13,200 sq. ft., 12,800 sq. ft.,           
          and 12,866 sq. ft., while respondent’s expert shows it as 10,800            
          sq. ft.  Neither side has explained the difference.                         
          8    Petitioner’s expert states that “Office and restroom area”             
          was 1,638 sq. ft.  Respondent’s expert states that “Office build-           
          out within the structure is estimated at 2,250 square feet”.                
          Neither side has explained the difference.                                  





Page:  Previous  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011