Vincent J. O'Brien, Trustee, 21 Claybrook Realty Trust v. Board of Assessors of the Town of Dover (September 23, 2013)

 COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
APPELLATE TAX BOARD

VINCENT J. O'BRIEN, TRUSTEE       v.	    	  BOARD OF ASSESSORS OF 
21 CLAYBROOK REALTY TRUST	    		   THE TOWN OF DOVER
			

Docket Nos. F305824 & F310677		    	   Promulgated: 					             September 23, 2013
             				  
       				 							
	These are appeals under the formal procedure, pursuant to G.L. c. 58A, § 7 and G.L. c. 59, §§ 64 and 65, from the refusal of the Board of Assessors of the Town of Dover ("assessors" or "appellee"), to abate real estate taxes assessed on certain real property located in Dover and assessed to Vincent J. O'Brien, Trustee of 21 Claybrook Realty Trust ("appellant" or "Trust"), under G.L. c. 59, §§ 11 and 38, for fiscal years 2010 and 2011 ("fiscal years at issue").  
	Commissioner Chmielinski heard these appeals.  Chairman Hammond and Commissioners Scharaffa, Rose, and Mulhern joined him in a decision for the appellee in Docket Number F305824 (FY 2010) and a decision for the appellant in Docket Number F310677 (FY 2011).
	These findings of fact and report are made pursuant to a request by the appellant under G.L. c. 58A, § 13 and 831 CMR 1.32.

	Paul N. Barbadoro, Esq. and Susan M. Molinari, Esq. for the appellant. 
 
	Kevin D. Batt, Esq. for the appellee. 

	
FINDINGS OF FACT AND REPORT
On the basis of testimony and exhibits offered into evidence at the hearing of these appeals, the Appellate Tax Board ("Board") made the following findings of fact.
Introduction & Jurisdiction
	On January 1, 2009 and on January 1, 2010, the assessment dates for the fiscal years at issue, the appellant was the assessed owner of an 11.3-acre parcel of real estate located at 21 Claybrook Road, Dover ("subject property").  For assessment purposes, the subject property is identified on the assessors' Map 6 as Block 41, Lot 0.  The subject property is improved with a single-family dwelling ("subject dwelling"), which is occupied by Kenneth Rendell and Shirley McNerney Rendell ("Mr. and Mrs. Rendell"). 	
	For fiscal year 2010, the assessors valued the subject property at $6,456,900 and assessed a tax thereon at the rate of $10.92 per thousand, in the amount of $70,509.35.  Pursuant to G.L. c. 59, § 57C, the appellant timely paid the tax due without incurring interest.  On January 26, 2010, the appellant timely filed an Application for Abatement with the assessors.  The assessors denied the appellant's abatement application on March 26, 2010, and on May 6, 2010, in accordance with G.L. c. 59, §§ 64 and 65, the appellant seasonably filed an appeal with the Board.  	
	For fiscal year 2011, the assessors valued the subject property at $6,862,400 and assessed a tax thereon at the rate of $11.70 per thousand, in the amount of $80,290.08.   Pursuant to G.L. c. 59, § 57C, the appellant paid the tax due without incurring interest.  On January 28, 2011, in accordance with G.L. c. 59, § 59, the appellant timely filed an Application for Abatement, which the assessors denied on February 8, 2011.  The appellant seasonably filed an appeal with the Board on March 29, 2011.  
	On the basis of these facts, the Board found and ruled that it had jurisdiction to hear and decide these appeals.
	The appellant presented his case-in-chief predominantly through the testimony of Mr. Rendell, a beneficiary of the Trust and an occupant of the subject property, and Peter C. Murphy, a certified real estate appraiser whom the Board qualified as an expert witness in the field of residential real estate valuation.  The appellant also submitted into evidence Mr. Murphy's summary appraisal reports for the fiscal years at issue, photographs of the subject property, and several Multiple Listing Service ("MLS") listing sheets for properties cited in Mr. Murphy's appraisal reports.  
	In support of their assessments, the assessors relied primarily on the testimony of Karen MacTavish, Town Assessor, and the testimony and appraisal reports of Phyllis DeChristoforo, a licensed real estate appraiser whom the Board qualified as a residential real estate valuation expert.  The assessors also introduced into evidence the requisite jurisdictional documentation, the deed for the sale of the subject property, and the subject property's property record cards for the fiscal years at issue.
Mr. Rendell has been a dealer and appraiser in historical letters, documents and artifacts for more than fifty years.  He is considered the country's leading historical appraiser and has appraised numerous documents and antiquities, including: the Nixon papers; 4,500 hours of Watergate tapes; 200,000 Frederick Law Olmstead landscape plans; General Patton's pistols; Louis Pasture's microscope; Charles Lindenburg's cross-Atlantic map; and Martin Luther King's papers and library.  Mr. Rendell has worked for the Internal Revenue Service, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and has received the Justice Department's Distinguished Service Award.

Mr. and Mrs. Rendell purchased the subject property in 2001 and on September 23, 2008 transferred the subject property to the appellant for $1.  At the time of purchase, the subject property was improved with a circa 1702 Colonial-style, historic structure that was originally built in Portsmouth, New Hampshire and moved to Dover sometime in the 1930s.  Mr. Rendell testified that after the Rendells purchased the subject property, they donated the historical structure to a charitable organization and it was moved to its original location in New Hampshire, where it became the Governor's mansion and currently operates as a museum.    
Description
	The Town of Dover consists of 15.4 square miles and had a population of 5,589 in 2010.  Dover is located approximately 15 miles southwest of Boston, abutting the Charles River ("River"), and is bordered by Medfield, Needham, Natick, Sherborn, Walpole and Westwood.  There are miles of shady trails and woods for walking, cross-country skiing, birding, and horseback riding, as well as access to the River.
The subject property is located on a winding country road in one of the most desirable neighborhoods in Dover, abutting the River.  Mr. Rendell testified that the panoramic views of the River, visible from the back of the house, are "fantastic."  The house is set back from the road and there is a stone wall that runs along the street.  There is a gravel driveway accessible from two gated entrances that lead to a four-car attached garage and also a rear garage, which houses the Rendells' boat.  Mr. Rendell began construction of the subject property in 2006.  He testified that he designed and built the subject dwelling to showcase his collection of sculptures, paintings and antiques.  All interior hallways are extra wide, to better display the Rendells' artwork and tapestries, and the ceilings are twelve feet high to accommodate the eight-foot tall antique European doors.   
The subject dwelling contains a total of eighteen rooms, including 3 bedrooms, as well as three full bathrooms and three half-bathrooms, with a total living area of 13,973 square feet.  The kitchen has high-grade appliances, granite countertops, and several pantries.  Also located on the first floor is the "Western room," which is 1,800 square feet with thirty- to thirty-five-foot ceilings.  The interior of this room is log construction with steel beams to support the large size.  The floorboards were milled as they would have been in the American west.  There is a floor-to-ceiling stone fireplace, a full-size stagecoach, Indian costumes, and many other artifacts associated with the old-style American west.  The first floor also contains the "Renaissance Library," which was built to replicate Michelangelo's work in Florence, Italy and displays Mr. Rendell's collection of book bindings from the Renaissance period, and the "Ancient Room" which has a second century A.D. Roman mosaic built into the wall.  The first floor has floor-to-ceiling windows.  The three half-bathrooms are all located on the first floor.  
The second floor includes the master bedroom with his and her bathrooms, a second bedroom with an attached full bathroom ("daughter's bedroom"), and a third bedroom.  The third bedroom has no access to a bathroom without passing through either the master bedroom or the daughter's bedroom.  
The basement is approximately eighty percent finished and includes an exercise room with a drop-tile ceiling, and two recreation rooms that have plastered ceilings; all three rooms have carpet.  There are two utility rooms, a laundry room, and also Mr. Rendell's workshop, which has a tile floor, plastered walls and no ceiling.  There is also a boat-storage area which has a fireproof plaster ceiling and cement floor that is accessible from a single-car garage door located at the rear of the dwelling.  The basement hallways are also extra wide, in keeping with the design and construction of the upper two floors. 
The dwelling is heated by propane and a hydro-air heating system.  The house has central air conditioning using a special HVAC system designed to keep humidity low for the preservation of Mr. Rendell's antiquities.  The exterior of the house is stucco with Styrofoam trim and an acrylic, slate-like roof.   Additional amenities include: three walk-in, fire-proof  vaults -- one located in the basement, which is 50 feet by 25 feet, and two smaller ones located on the first floor, which are stacked on top of one another; a four-car attached garage; an elevator; three fireplaces; an enclosed porch; and several patios.  The property record card rated the dwelling as in "Excellent" condition with a grade of "AA+ superb." 
Valuation 
The appellant argued that the subject property was overvalued by the assessors for both of the fiscal years at issue.  To arrive at his estimates of value for the fiscal years at issue, the appellant's real estate valuation witness, Mr. Murphy, relied on the sales-comparison approach.
Fiscal Year 2010
Mr. Murphy first inspected both the exterior and interior of the property.  He reviewed sales in Dover and, based on the date of sale, conditions of the properties sold, the quality of their construction, views and other influences, Mr. Murphy then chose what he deemed to be the most comparable sales.  
For fiscal year 2010, Mr. Murphy relied on three sales of purportedly comparable properties in Dover that sold between June and November of 2008.  His first sales-comparison property, 24 Snow Hill Lane, was a 4.21-acre parcel improved with a single-family dwelling with eighteen rooms, including six bedrooms, as well as five full bathrooms and one half-bathroom, containing a gross living area of 10,371 square feet.  This property sold on October 21, 2008 for $4,825,000.  
Mr. Murphy's second sale was 143 Dedham Street, which sold on September 11, 2008 for $3,625,000.  This comparable sale is a 5.8-acre parcel improved with a thirteen-room dwelling, including five bedrooms, as well as six full bathrooms and two half-bathrooms, containing a gross living area of 10,752 square feet.  
Mr. Murphy's third sale was 41 Claybrook Road, which sold on June 10, 2008 for $4,250,000.  This comparable sale is a 5.9-acre parcel, which is located adjacent to the subject property, improved with a single-family dwelling with a gross living area of 8,000 square feet.  The dwelling has thirteen rooms, including five bedrooms, as well as five full bathrooms and two half-bathrooms.

Based on data contained in MLS, Mr. Murphy determined that single-family residential property values in Dover decreased 4.96% from 2007 through 2008, or 0.0041 per month.  He therefore made downward time adjustments to all three of his comparable sale properties to account for the properties' sale dates, which occurred prior to the relevant assessment date of January 1, 2009.  
Mr. Murphy made an upward adjustment of $200,000 to all three of his chosen comparable properties to account for their smaller lot sizes in comparison to the subject property.  He testified that although the subject property has in excess of eleven acres, only part of the land has "functional utility."  Using the assessors' excess land value of $75,000 per acre stated on the property record card, Mr. Murphy "took two-and-a-half to three acres for the seventy-five thousand dollars to get to the two hundred thousand dollars," which he uniformly applied to all three of his chosen comparable properties, regardless of size.  
Mr. Murphy made upward adjustments to all three of his purportedly comparable properties to account for their smaller gross living area in comparison to the subject property.  He testified that in the review appraisals that he has completed, typically for the mortgage lending industry, the range for the size adjustment is $25 per square foot to $40 per square foot.  Mr. Murphy testified that he used the more conservative $25 per square foot, believing that it was more appropriate for a large super-sized home, like the subject property, to account for the diminishing returns on larger properties.  
Mr. Murphy also made adjustments to each of his chosen comparable properties specific to their view, condition and amenities.  Comparable sale number one was adjusted upward for its lack of view and smaller garage, and adjusted downward to account for a deck, an additional fireplace, and a pool and tennis court.  Comparable sale number two was also adjusted upward for its lack of view and adjusted downward to account for its larger garage, additional fireplaces, and a pool.  Lastly, comparable sale number three was adjusted upward for its inferior quality of construction, incomplete construction at the time of sale, unfinished basement, fewer number of fireplaces, and less extensive patios and adjusted downward for the larger garage. 

Mr. Murphy's comparable-sales analysis for fiscal year 2010 is reproduced in the following table. 
		Sale #1	Sale #2	Sale #3	

	Subject Property	24 Snow Hill Lane	143 Dedham
Street	41 Claybrook Road	
Sale Date		10/21/2008	9/11/2008	6/10/2008	
Sale Price		$4,825,000	$3,625,000	$4,250,000	
Land Size (sq. ft.)	492,228	183,465	254,390	257,004	
Gross Living Area
(sq. ft.)	13,973	10,371	10,752	8,000	
Adjustments ($)					
Date of Sale		-39,565	-52,019	-95,838	
Location		Similar	Similar	Similar	
Site		+200,000	+200,000	+200,000	
View	Riverfront	+100,000	+100,000		
Quality of
Construction	Superior			+100,000	
Condition	Good			+200,000	
Room Count		-15,000	-25,000	-15,000	
Gross Living
Area (@$25 psf)		+90,050	+80,525	+149,325	
Basement
Rooms Below Grade	
Finished			
+50,000	
Garage	4 Car	+10,000	-10,000	-10,000	
Patio	EncPchPatio	-2,000		+4,500	
Fireplaces	3 Fireplaces	-10,000	-30,000	+10,000	
Pool/Tennis Ct.		-50,000	-25,000		
Net Adjustments		283,485	238,506	592,987	
Adjusted Sale
Price		
$5,108,485	
$3,863,506	
$4,842,987	

Mr. Murphy's sales-comparison analysis yielded adjusted sale prices that ranged from $3,863,506 to $5,108,458.  In conclusion, Mr. Murphy estimated the subject property's fair cash value for fiscal year 2010 was $4,857,000.
In support of the assessment, the assessors relied on Ms. DeChristoforo's comparable-sale analysis.  For fiscal year 2010, Ms. DeChristoforo relied on five purportedly comparable properties.  Three of her comparable properties were also included in Mr. Murphy's appraisal report: comparable sale number one, located at 41 Claybrook Road; comparable sale number two, located at 24 Snow Hill Lane; and comparable sale number five, located at 143 Dedham Street.  Their relevant descriptions and sales' data is detailed above.  
Ms. DeChristoforo's comparable sale number three is 134 Farm Road, Sherborn, which is a 12.23-acre parcel improved with a single-family dwelling with a gross living area of 7,888 square feet.  The dwelling has eleven rooms, including five bedrooms, as well as four full bathrooms and two half-bathrooms.  Additional features include a three-car garage, two fireplaces, an enclosed porch, and an in-ground pool and barn.  This property sold on August 1, 2008 for $7,500,000.  Although located in the neighboring town of Sherborn, Ms. DeChristoforo selected this property based on its date of sale, the age of the property, its size, and overall condition. 
Lastly, her comparable sale number four, located at 192 Claybrook Road, is a 5.2-acre parcel improved with a single-family dwelling with a gross living area of 12,881 square feet.  The dwelling has thirteen rooms, including five bedrooms, as well as six full bathrooms and two half-bathrooms, and also features a four-car garage, five fireplaces and a guest house.  This property sold on October 3, 2007 for $6,500,000.  Ms. DeChristoforo noted that although the sale was slightly older than her other comparable properties, she determined that it was a useful comparable given its location on the same street as the subject property. 
Ms. DeChristoforo testified that the real estate market in Dover for high-end homes like the subject property remained stable during the period October, 2007 through August, 2011, and therefore she made no adjustments for timing. With the exception of sale number three, Ms. DeChristoforo made upward adjustments to account for the comparable properties' smaller lot sizes in comparison to the subject property, at the rate of $70,000 per acre. With respect to differences in living area, Ms. DeChristoforo adjusted only those properties with less than 10,000 square feet of gross living area, comparable sales number one and number three, at the rate of $150 per square foot.  All properties were adjusted for the number of bathrooms at the rate of $20,000 per full bathroom and $10,000 per half bathroom.
With the exception of sale number five, Ms. DeChristoforo considered the subject property and her chosen comparables to be in a very good location.  She considered sale number five, which is located on a busy street, to be in an inferior location and therefore made an upward adjustment of 20%. 
Next, Ms. DeChristoforo made adjustments to account for the subject property's fantastic and unobstructed panoramic views of the River.  Ms. DeChristoforo testified that in the mid-1980s she conducted a survey of homes located in Massachusetts and southern New Hampshire and analyzed the effect of "waterfront" compared to "waterview" and the impact on the value of real estate.  She then determined that "waterview" properties warranted a 10% adjustment whereas "waterfront" properties -- including properties fronting on the ocean, large lakes, and rivers -- justified a 20% adjustment.  Based on her analysis, Ms. DeChristoforo made an upward adjustment of 10% to 41 Claybrook to account for its distant views of the River and an upward adjustment of 20% to 24 Snow Hill and 143 Dedham Street to account for their lack of any River views.  Ms. DeChristoforo noted that although 192 Claybrook Road has no River views, it sits high up and has great views of Dover and, therefore, she made a 10% upward adjustment.  Finally, she made a downward adjustment of 10% to 134 Farm Road to account for its location and access to a lake.  
She made a lump sum upward adjustment to sale number one to account for its unfinished condition and a 10% upward adjustment to sale number five to account for its age.  Sales number one, number two and number five were adjusted upward, at the rate of $50 per square feet, to account for their unfinished basement.  Ms. DeChristoforo also made adjustments to her chosen comparables to account for the size of the garage, number of fireplaces, and additional amenities, or lack thereof, in comparison to the subject property. 

Ms. DeChristoforo's sales-comparison analysis for fiscal year 2010 is summarized in the following table.

		Sale #1	Sale #2	Sale $3	Sale #4	Sale #5		

	Subject Property	41 Claybrook Road	24 Snow Hill Lane	134 Farm Road
Sherborn	192 Claybrook Road	143 Dedham
Street		Sale Date		6/10/2008	10/21/2008	8/1/2008	10/3/2007	9/11/2008		Sale Price		$4,250,000	$4,825,000	$7,500,000	$6,500,000	$3,625,000		Land Size (acres)		5.90	4.21	12.23	2.52	5.84		Gross Living
Area (sq. ft.)	13,950	8,000	10,371	7,888	12,881	10,752		Adjustments ($)								Date of Sale								Site		378,000	496,300	Equiv	614,600	382,200		Location						725,000		View	Charles River	425,000	+857,000	-750,000	+650,000	+725,000		Condition	Very Good	200,000						Room Count/Bath			+10,000	+20,000	-20,000	-20,000		Gross Living
Area (@$150 psf)		
892,500		
909,300				Basement
Rooms Below Grade	
Finished	
340,000	
+340,000		
+164,200			Garage	4 Car	-10,000	+10,000	+10,000		-10,000		Porch/Patio/Deck	Encl Porch
Patio				
-25,000	
		Fireplaces	3 F/P	10,000	-10,000	+10,000	-20,000	-30,000		Other	Elevator	50,000	Equiv	Equiv		+50,000					-25,000	-100,000	-100,000	-25,000		Net Adjustments		2,285,500	1,678,300	99,300	1,099,600	2,323,900		Adjusted Sale
Price		
$6,535,500	
$6,503,300	
$7,599,300	
$7,599,600	
$5,948,900		
Ms. DeChristoforo's sales-comparison analysis yielded adjusted sale prices that ranged from $5,948,900 to $7,599,600.  Ms. DeChristoforo's appraisal report reflects in her final reconciliation that all sales were given consideration but that the most weight was given to sale number one, given its newer construction, close proximity to the subject property, and its River frontage, and also sale number two given its similar quality of construction and age.  Ms. DeChristoforo's final opinion of value for fiscal year 2010 was $6,500,000.

Fiscal Year 2011
For fiscal year 2011, Mr. Murphy used two of the same sales he used in his fiscal year 2010 comparable-sale analysis, 24 Snow Hill Lane and 41 Claybrook Road.  His third comparable sale is 72 Farm Street, which is an 11.95-acre parcel improved with a single-family dwelling with fourteen rooms, including seven bedrooms, as well as five full bathrooms and two half-bathrooms, containing a gross living area of 7,218 square feet.  This property sold on June 30, 2009 for $4,420,000.
Relying on data contained in Bankers and Tradesman and also MLS, Mr. Murphy determined that single-family residential property values in Dover continued to decline by 6.22% from 2008 through 2009, or 0.0051% per month.  Using his calculated time adjustment factors of 0.0041% per month for calendar year 2008 and 0.0051% per month for calendar year 2009, Mr. Murphy made downward time adjustments to all three of his comparable sale properties to account for the properties' sale dates, which occurred prior to the relevant assessment date of January 1, 2010.  Mr. Murphy testified that he made the same adjustments to 24 Snow Hill Lane and 41 Claybrook Road that he made in his
fiscal year 2010 appraisal.
For his comparable sale property located at 72 Farm Street, Mr. Murphy made upward adjustments for the smaller living area, unfinished basement, and inferior patios and decks.  He also made downward adjustments to account for the number of bathrooms, the property's larger garage, the greater number of fireplaces, and an in-ground pool.
Mr. Murphy's sales-comparison analysis for fiscal year 2011 is reproduced in the following table.
	Sale #1	Sale #2	Sale #3	Sale #4	

	Subject Property	24 Snow Hill Lane	72 Farm 
Street	41 Claybrook Road	
Sale Date		10/21/2008	6/30/2009	6/10/2008	
Sale Price		$4,825,000	$4,420,000	$4,250,000	
Land Size (sq. ft.)	492,228	183,465	520,324	257,004	
Gross Living Area
(sq. ft.)	
13,973	
10,371	
7,218	
8,000	
Adjustments ($)					
Date of Sale		 -261,033	-135,252	-364,650	
Site		+200,000		+200,000	
View	Riverfront	+100,000			
Quality of
Construction	Superior			+100,000	
Condition	Good			+200,000	
Room Count		-10,000	-15,000	-15,000	
Gross Living
Area (@$25 psf)		
+90,050	
+168,875	
+149,325	
Basement
Rooms Below Grade	
Finished	`	
+50,000	
+50,000	
Garage	4 Car	+10,000	-10,000	-10,000	
Patio	EncPchPatio	-2,000	+3,500	+4,500	
Fireplaces	3 Fireplaces	-10,000	-50,000	+10,000	
Pool/Tennis Ct.		-50,000	-50,000		
Net Adjustments		+67,017	-37,877	+324,175	
Adjusted Sale
Price		
$4,892,017	
$4,382,123	
$4,574,175	

Mr. Murphy's sales-comparison analysis yielded adjusted sale prices that ranged from $4,382,123 to $4,892,017.  In conclusion, Mr. Murphy estimated the subject property's fair cash value for fiscal year 2011 was $4,570,000.
In support of the assessment, the assessors relied primarily on Ms. DeChristoforo's comparable-sale analysis, which presented four purportedly comparable properties.  Comparable sale number one, located at 143 Dedham Street, Dover, is a 5.84-acre parcel improved with a single-family dwelling with thirteen-rooms, including five bedrooms, as well as six full bathrooms and two half-bathrooms, with a gross living area of 10,752 square feet.  This property sold on September 11, 2008 for $3,625,000.  Ms. DeChristoforo made positive adjustments to account for: the property's inferior location on a busy street and its lack of view, both calculated at 20%; smaller lot size; smaller gross living area; inferior condition; minimally finished basement; and lack of an elevator.  She made negative adjustments to account for the additional bathrooms, larger garage, additional fireplaces, and an in-ground pool.
Ms. DeChristoforo also relied on the sale of 203 Dedham Street, Dover, which is a 3.18-acre parcel improved with a thirteen-room single-family dwelling, including five bedrooms, as well as five full bathrooms and one half bathroom, with a gross living area of 8,631 square feet.  This property sold on August 1, 2011 for $3,799,000.  This property is located on the same busy road as comparable sale number one and, therefore, Ms. DeChristoforo made the same 20% upward adjustments for both location and view.  She also made positive adjustments to account for the property's smaller lot size, smaller gross living area, fewer numbers of bathrooms, minimally finished basement, and also the lack of an elevator.  She made negative adjustments to account for the additional fireplaces and an in-ground pool.
The third sale Ms. DeChristoforo cited is 121 Livingston Road, Wellesley.  This comparable sale is a 1.69-acre parcel improved with a twelve-room, single-family dwelling, including six bedrooms, as well as six full bathrooms and three half bathrooms, with a gross living area of 10,216 square feet.  This property sold for $5,600,000 on March 18, 2011.  Because it is also located on the River, no adjustments were made for either location or view.  Ms. DeChristoforo did make upward adjustments to account for:  the property's significantly smaller lot size, approximately one-seventh the size of the subject property; the property's smaller gross living area; the partially finished basement; the smaller garage; and the lack of an elevator.  She made negative adjustments to account for the additional bathrooms and fireplace.  

Ms. DeChristoforo's last comparable sale is 30 Greylock Road, Wellesley, which sold on March 15, 2010 for $4,825,000.  This is a 0.73-acre parcel improved with an eighteen-room single family dwelling, including seven bedrooms, as well as seven full bathrooms and two half bathrooms, with a gross living area of 11,780 square feet.  She made positive adjustments to account for the property's substantially smaller lot size, its lack of views of the River, the partially finished basement, smaller garage, fewer patios, and lack of an elevator.  She made negative adjustments to account for the property's additional bathrooms and fireplace.
Ms. DeChristoforo's sales-comparison analysis for fiscal year 2011 is summarized in the following table.
		Sale #1	Sale #2	Sale #3	Sale #4	

	Subject Property	143 Dedham St, Dover	203 Dedham St, Dover	121 Livingston Rd, Wellesley	80 Greylock Rd, Wellesley	
Sale Date		9/11/2008	8/1/2011	3/18/2011	3/15/2010	
Sale Price		$3,625,000	$3,799,000	$5,600,000	$4,825,000	
Land Size (acres)	11.30	5.84	3.18	1.69	0.73	
Gross Living
Area (sq. ft.)	13,950	10,752	8,631	10,216	11,780	
Adjustments ($)						
Date of Sale						
Location		+725,000	+759,800			
Site 
($70,000 per acre)		
+382,200	
+568,400	
+672,700	
+739,900	
View	Charles River	
+725,000	
+759,800		
+965,000	
Condition	Very Good	+362,500				
Room Count/Bath		-20,000	+10,000	-30,000	-40,000	
Gross Living
Area ($150 psf)		
+479,700	
+797,850	
+560,100	
+253,500	
Basement ($50 psf)
Rooms Below Grade	
Finished	
+164,200	
+401,200	
+250,000		
Garage	4 Car	-10,000		+10,000	+10,000	
Porch/Patio/Deck	EnclPorch
Patio	EnclPorch Patio	Patio/Cabana	EncloPorch 
Patio	
+5,000	
Fireplaces	3 F/P	-30,000	-40,000	-10,000	-20,000	
Other	Elevator	+50,000	+50,000	+50,000	+50,000	
		-25,000	-25,000			
Net Adjustments		2,803,600	3,282,050	1,502,800	1,963,400	
Adjusted Sale
Price		
$6,428,600	
$7,081,050	
$7,102,800	
$6,788,400	
Ms. DeChristoforo's sales-comparison analysis yielded adjusted sale prices that ranged from $6,428,600 to $7,102,800.  Ms. DeChristoforo analyzed and weighed her various comparable-sale prices and determined a fair market value for the subject property of $6,900,000 for fiscal year 2011.
Conclusion
	Based on all of the evidence, and to the extent it is a finding of fact, the Board found that the appellant failed to meet his burden of proving that the subject property was overvalued for fiscal year 2010.  
The Board found several flaws and unsubstantiated assumptions in Mr. Murphy's comparable-sales analyses for both fiscal years at issue which, therefore, negatively impacted their probative value.  First, Mr. Murphy made downward time adjustments to all of his purportedly comparable properties based on his determination that there was a declining market.  His conclusions, however, were based on sales analyses of all single-family homes in Dover and did not specifically analyze the sub-market of high-end homes like the subject property.  To the contrary, both Ms. DeChristoforo and Ms. MacTavish testified that while sales of lower-end homes may have experienced a decline in value during the years preceding the relevant dates of assessment, sales of high-end homes like the subject property remained stable during the same time period.  The Board found their testimony to be credible.  The Board therefore found that Mr. Murphy's timing adjustments were unwarranted and erroneous.   
	The Board also found that Mr. Murphy's site adjustments were flawed for several reasons.  First, the Board found that Mr. Murphy lacked any independent knowledge of land values in Dover, as evidenced by his sole reliance on the subject property's property record card to determine a per-acre value for excess land.  Other than this evidence, Mr. Murphy offered no market data to verify his land size adjustments.  The Board further found that Mr. Murphy's lump sum site adjustments of $200,000, uniformly applied to all of his chosen comparable properties, regardless of the comparable property's actual size, were unsubstantiated, imprecise and suspect.  Therefore, the Board rejected Ms. Murphy's land adjustments.
	The Board further found that Mr. Murphy's $25-per-square-foot adjustment for gross living area, which was at the bottom end of his suggested range derived from his prior bank work, were unsubstantiated, not market derived, improper, and therefore not credible.  Finally, the Board found that Mr. Murphy's $100,000 lump-sum view adjustment lacked market support and its unvarying application to all of his chosen comparable properties was suspect and not credible.   
Based on these subsidiary findings of fact, the Board found that Mr. Murphy's testimony and appraisal reports were not persuasive in proving a value for the subject property that was lower than its assessed value for fiscal year 2010.  Accordingly, the Board issued a decision for the appellee in Docket Number F305824 for fiscal year 2010. 
The Board further found, however, that the increase in the subject property's assessed value from fiscal year 2010 to fiscal year 2011 was not warranted.  Both Ms. DeChristoforo and Ms. MacTavish testified that the real estate market for higher-end homes, like the subject property, was stable during the fiscal years at issue, which the Board found credible.  Based on these findings, the Board determined that the subject property's fair cash value for fiscal year 2011 was $6,456,900, the same as fiscal year 2010 and issued a decision for the appellant in Docket Number F310677 and granted abatement in the amount of $4,744.35 for fiscal year 2011.

OPINION
Assessors are required to assess real estate at its fair cash value as of the first day of January preceding the fiscal year at issue.  G.L. c. 59, §§ 11 and 38.  The fair cash value of a property is defined as the price upon which a willing buyer and a willing seller would agree if both are fully informed and under no compulsion. Boston Gas. Co. v. Assessors of Boston, 334 Mass. 549, 566 (1956).	 
The burden of proof is upon the taxpayer to make out a right to an abatement.  Schlaiker v. Assessors of Great Barrington, 365 Mass. 243, 245 (1974).  The assessment is presumed to be valid unless the taxpayer meets its burden of proving otherwise.  Id.  A right to an abatement can be proven by either introducing evidence of fair cash value, or by proving that the assessors erred in their method of valuation.  General Electric Co. v. Assessors of Lynn, 393 Mass. 591, 600 (1984).
"[S]ales of property usually furnish strong evidence of market value, provided they are arm's-length transactions and thus fairly represent what a buyer has been willing to pay for the property to a willing seller."  Foxboro Associates v. Board of Assessors of Foxborough, 385 Mass. 679, 682 (1982).  Sales of comparable realty in the same geographic area and within a reasonable time of the assessment date generally contain probative evidence for determining the value of the property at issue.  Graham v. Assessors of West Tisbury, Mass. ATB Findings of Fact and Reports 2007-321, 400 (citing McCabe v. Chelsea, 265 Mass. 494, 496 (1929)), aff'd, Graham v. Assessors of West Tisbury, 73 Mass. App. Ct. 1107 (2008).  When comparable sales are used, however, allowances must be made for various factors which would otherwise cause disparities in the comparable property's sale prices. See Pembroke Industrial Park Co., Inc. v. Assessors of Pembroke, Mass. ATB Findings of Fact and Reports 1998-1072, 1082.  "Adjustments for differences in the elements of comparison are made to the price of each comparable property . . . . The magnitude of the adjustment made for each element of comparison depends on how much that characteristic of the comparable property differs from the subject property."  Appraisal Institute, the Appraisal of Real Estate 322 (13th ed., 2008).
In the present appeals, the Board found that the appellant did not provide credible evidence that the subject property was overvalued for fiscal year 2010.  The Board found that the appellant's real estate valuation expert's comparable-sales analyses for both fiscal years at issue contained numerous flaws and unsubstantiated assumptions, which negatively impacted their probative value.  In particular, the Board found that Mr. Murphy's adjustments, including: date of sale, derived from sales of all homes in Dover; the $200,000 lump-sum site adjustment, regardless of the comparable property's actual size; the $25-per-square-foot adjustment for gross living area; and the $100,000 lump-sum view adjustment, were unsubstantiated and therefore negatively impacted the credibility of Mr. Murphy's analyses.  
 "The board [is] not required to believe the testimony of any particular witness but [may] accept such portions of the evidence as appear to have the more convincing weight."  Assessors of Quincy v. Boston Consol. Gas Co., 309 Mass. 60, 72 (1941).  "The credibility of witnesses, the weight of evidence, and inferences to be drawn from the evidence are matters for the board."  Cummington School of the Arts, Inc. v. Assessors of Cummington, 373 Mass. 597, 605 (1977).
Based on all of the evidence presented, the Board found and ruled that the appellant failed to his meet his burden of proving that the subject property was overvalued for fiscal year 2010.  Accordingly, the Board issued a decision for the appellee in Docket Number F305824.
The Board further found and ruled that the assessors' increase in the subject property's assessed value for fiscal year 2011 was not warranted.  Accordingly, the Board determined that the subject property's fair cash value for fiscal year 2011 was $6,456,900, the same as fiscal year 2010, and granted an abatement in the amount of $4,744.35 in Docket Number F310677.

					   THE APPELLATE TAX BOARD


				    By: ___________________________________
				        Thomas W. Hammond, Jr., Chairman

A true copy,

Attest: ____________________________
	   Clerk of the Board

 At the time of sale, the subject property was part of an estate consisting of three parcels of land -- the subject property and two parcels located across the street -- totaling approximately 45 acres.  Mr. and Mrs. Rendell, however, were interested in purchasing only the subject property. Mr. Rendell testified that he entered into an agreement with a business associate, Douglas Hornung, whereby Mr. and Mrs. Rendell would pay $1.5 million for the subject property and Mr. Hornung would pay $3.5 million for the two additional parcels, totaling approximately 34.3 acres, located across the street.  Mr. Rendell further testified that subsequent to the sale, the two parcels located across the street from the subject property were transferred to Mr. Hornung.     
 The Board noted that there were several minor mathematical errors in Mr. Murphy's calculations of the adjusted sale prices.
 The Board noted that Ms. DeChristoforo made mathematical errors in her calculation of the net adjustments for both 192 Claybrook Road and 143 Dedham Street. 
 Contrary to Mr. Murphy's assertion that the adjustments to 24 Snow Hill Lane, except for timing, were the same in both appraisal reports, the fiscal year 2011 appraisal report lists a smaller adjustment for the number of bathrooms yet provides no explanation for the difference. 
 This is the actual number included in Mr. Murphy's report, which does not compute when using Mr. Murphy's purported time adjustment factors. 
 Mr. Murphy's FY 2011 room count adjustment was $5,000 less than his FY 2010 adjustment; however, he did not offer any explanation for the difference.

ATB 2013-933