LANDS TRIBUNAL FOR NORTHERN IRELAND
LANDS TRIBUNAL AND COMPENSATION ACT (NORTHERN IRELAND) 1964
IN THE MATTER OF AN APPEAL AGAINST VALUATION FOR RATING PURPOSES
VR/6/1978
BETWEEN
MRS S McKEE - APPELLANT
AND
THE COMMISSIONER OF VALUATION FOR NORTHERN IRELAND - RESPONDENT
Lands Tribunal for Northern Ireland - Mr F Malcolm McKibbin MA (Cantab) FRICS
Belfast - 26th April 1978
This was an appeal against the valuation for rating purposes of a detached dwelling house,
out-buildings and garden, situated at 303 Shore Road, Newtownabbey, Co Antrim. The NAV
was fixed at £500 by the Respondent on first appeal on 13 th January 1978. The Appellant was
dissatisfied and appealed to the Lands Tribunal on 1 st February 1978.
The subject hereditament comprised a detached house and garage situated in its garden of
about 0.62 acre just off the Shore Road near its junction with the Doagh Road. Entrance to the
subject is along a short drive from Shore Road, shared with the adjoining house, 301 Shore
Road. Shore Road at this point is a busy road carrying heavy traffic at peak hours and the exit
from the subject is not a particularly desirable or safe feature.
The garden of the subject hereditament is rectangular and is bounded to the north by the
grounds of a Roman Catholic Chapel and Presbytery; to the east by a main railway line
running in a cutting; to the south by the grounds of an extensive builder's yard; and to the
west by the grounds of the adjoining house, 301 Shore Road.
The accommodation of the subject dwelling house in two main floors and attic comprises; on
ground floor, entrance porch, hall, drawing room, dining room, morning room, cloakroom with
WC, working kitchen, glass covered yard; on first floor, five bedrooms and bathroom; and
three rooms in the attic. There is oil fired central heating on the ground and first floor, and
main services are connected.
The garden is attractively laid out and drops down to a
-1-
vegetable garden on a lower level at the southern end. The out-buildings comprise a garage,
stores and summerhouse.
The Appellant appeared in person, and the Respondent was represented by Mr R B Sparkes
ARICS, an officer of the Valuation Division of the Department of Finance.
The Appellant stated that she considered that the valuation was excessive for a house as
poorly situated as the subject. The outlook to the south from the main windows was over a
builder's yard which was an eyesore, and alongside the east side of the house there was a
main railway line. The noise of traffic along the Shore Road never seemed to stop, and
frequently, especially at night, the sirens of police cars and ambulances were very disturbing.
The lights at night from Shore Road and the traffic lights at the Doagh Road junction together
with illuminated signs at Wilton's funeral parlour at that junction were very annoying. There
were two public houses very close, and the Chapel and Presbytery next door had been
frequently attacked and a window in the subject broken by a nearby bomb. The location was
in an area becoming increasingly non-residential, and lay between the Rush Park and
Rathcoole Housing Estates. The Rathcoole Estate, she said, was one of the largest in Europe
and had become notorious over the last nine years for vandalism and violence. Because of
this the Northern Ireland Housing Executive could not find tenants willing to live in the
Rathcoole Estate. Two people had recently been murdered there.
The only attractive residential development in the immediate neighbourhood was Whitehouse
Park, pleasantly insulated across the railway line and looking over Belfast Lough.
Mr Sparkes did not question a number of these contentions but suggested that a high hedge
screened the builder's yard from the subject, and that the adjoining house, 301 Shore Road,
acted as a buffer against the effects of traffic and lights on Shore Road. He also pointed out
that the railway to the east was in a cutting along the boundary, and that the Chapel to the
north was also an advantage to the situation, which was quite private and set well back from
the Shore Road.
Mr Sparkes offered eight comparables, and the Appellant relied on five. All of these were dealt
with in considerable detail by the parties in their evidence, and Mr Sparkes gave details of how
the assessments of all these thirteen comparables were built up. The Tribunal has viewed all
these comparables, and while some were so unlike the subject as to be of limited assistance,
-2-
they do show the pattern of basic assessments in this general area. One of the Appellant's
comparables was state in error to be 436 Shore Road, which was a small detached bungalow,
but the Appellant stated in her evidence that she had meant to refer to the adjoining 438 Shore
Road, which Mr Sparkes had included amongst his comparables. There were therefore twelve
comparables, and the basic rate per square metre for their house areas varied from £1.10 psm
to £1.80 psm.
The computation of the NAV of the subject hereditament was as follows:House
272 sq metres @ £1.50 psm
Attics
32 sq metres
say
Central Heating
£408
30
35
Garage
25 sq metres
15
Out-buildings
36 sq metres
10
say
£500
Alternatively
House including
attics
304 sq metres @ £1.45 psm
£441
Central heating
35
Garage
15
Out-buildings
10
say
£500
DECISION
Having inspected the subject and viewed all the comparables externally, the Tribunal
considers that apart from their internal and external characteristics the location of each is of
prime importance.
The hereditament, 301 Shore Road, immediately adjoining the subject appears to be almost an
exact replica externally and is valued at £1.50 psm. However the Tribunal discovered on
inspection - though this was not mentioned at the hearing - that these premises are occupied
by a doctor, whose name plate is exhibited at the entrance on Shore Road. This suggests that
-3-
it may be a doctor's house and surgery, rather than simply a private residence, and so the
Tribunal feels that this cannot be relied on as a comparable.
Two comparables offered by Mr Sparkes, 735/7 Shore Road on the north edge of Jordanstown
Loughshore Park and lying between Shore Road and the sea and with a sea frontage, and 1
Old Manse Road on the Jordanstown side of Whiteabbey and in an elevated position with
excellent outlook across the Lough are each valued at £1.50 psm, the same rate as the
subject. They are much more attractive and better located houses than the subject, are on two
floors, and are a considerable distance away in a better and more peaceful area. It their
assessments are correct, that of the subject would not appear to be in line.
The Appellant's comparables at 7 Church Avenue, Jordanstown and 55 Old Manse Road are
also at a considerable distance and are quite unlike the subject.
Comparables at 466 Shore Road and 486 Shore Road are affected by road widening at
present proceeding.
This also was not mentioned at the hearing, and as the Tribunal is
unaware of the precise position regarding the physical circumstances in which their valuations
were assessed, these must be rejected.
No 440/442 Shore Road and 436 Shore Road are valued at £1.60 psm and £1.80 psm
respectively. These are in a better location than the subject, and 438 Shore Road is an
attractive old two storied house, sitting well back from the road in pleasant gardens. No
440/442 is beside a Post Office service depot and is not very attractive, the house being close
to the security fence at the depot and to the main road.
Neither however are of much
assistance in the present case.
The Tribunal finally comes to the three houses in the immediate vicinity of the subject. No 309
is a substantial old cement rendered house, larger than the subject but without attics. It lies
between the road and railway line, but looks over the railway cutting towards park land and
sea. It is valued at £1.30 psm. The two other houses are 1 Doagh Road, Whiteabbey, a
detached house which appears to be some 40-50 years old, also well back from the road, and
69 Whitehouse Park close to the subject but in a better situation looking towards Belfast Lough
and away from Shore Road and the railway. It is a modern detached house with attics. 1
Doagh Road is assessed at £1.40 psm for 199 sq metres, while 69 Whitehouse Park is
assessed at £1.60 psm for 179 sq metres plus £15 for 22 sq metres of attic space.
-4-
The Tribunal accepts that smaller houses, in general, are assessed at slightly higher rates than
larger houses, other things being equal. It also agrees to a large extent with the Appellant's
opinion of the location of the subject, many of the disadvantages of which are shared by the
houses in the same vicinity. The hypothetical tenant would be loath to pay as high a rent for
the subject, with a Chapel which has been under attack on one side, (and indeed the
Presbytery appears to have been vacated), a railway along another boundary, a rather
unpleasant view of a large builder's yard in front of the upstairs' windows, and a distressing
proximity to Rathcoole, as for houses such as 1 Old Manse Road and 735/7 Shore Road,
Jordanstown not having such disadvantages.
The Tribunal has considered this matter very carefully and has come to the conclusion that a
basic rate of assessment of £1.40 psm for the subject would maintain the tone of the list. The
attics are more of a liability than an asset and cannot be worth much more than £25 for storage
space. This appears to be in line with the assessment of the attics at 69 Whitehouse Park.
Central heating, on the evidence, is allowed for at about 8% of the value assessed on the area
served, while the assessments of garage and out-buildings is in line with the assessments of
similar accommodation.
Accordingly the Tribunal arrives at the following computation:House
272 sq metres @ £1.40 psm
£381
Attics
25
Central Heating
30
Garage and out-buildings
25
say
£460
The Tribunal allows this appeal to that extent and directs the Respondent to pay the measured
sum of £10 towards the Appellant's costs of and incidental to this appeal.
ORDERS ACCORDINGLY
F MALCOLM McKIBBIN
17th May 1978
LANDS TRIBUNAL FOR NORTHERN IRELAND
-5-
Appearances:Appellant -
In person.
Respondent - Mr R B Sparkes ARICS.
-6-