A BC Supreme Court judge has ordered the Property Assessment Appeal Board to review an assessment made in Tofino after finding several legal errors in the property’s assessment.
In a decision released May 11th, Justice Karrie Anne Wolfe ruled in favour of 1180268 B.C. Ltd., the owner of a nearly 99-acre vacant property located at 1482 Pacific Rim Highway.
The company had challenged a dramatic increase in the property’s 2023 assessment value, which rose from $732,000 to more than $2.3 million.
The court case stemmed from a long-running disagreement over how much of the property can realistically be developed and whether the land has practical vehicular access.
According to the ruling, the property is located about 7.4 kilometres from the centre of Tofino and includes creeks, mudflats and tidal inlet frontage. The land is also subject to several environmental development permit restrictions and rural zoning regulations.
A major issue in the case involved a bridge on the property that was destroyed in 2010 and later demolished. The owner argued there is currently no practical vehicular access to the portions of the land most suitable for development and rebuilding access would cost more than $1.5 million.
BC Assessment argued there could be several alternative access points from Pacific Rim Highway or from an undeveloped road allowance along the northern edge of the property.
The appeal board ultimately concluded the property’s “highest and best use” remained residential use and valued the land at $47,500 per acre across what it determined was 50% usable land area.
Justice Wolfe found the appeal board made errors in how it handled evidence about possible access routes.
“In my view, this represents a clear rejection of both the Assessor’s assertion of possible alternative access points along the highway and the evidence on which the Assessor relied,” Wolfe wrote.
The judge also ruled the board improperly shifted the burden of proof onto the property owner.
“The Numbered Company was effectively required to fully disprove the possibility of unknown access points,” the ruling states.
Wolfe further found the board failed to properly consider the financial implications of creating access to the property when determining its potential use and market value.
“In the unique circumstances of this case, I accept that it was an error for the Board not to address the evidence of the costs of creating access before determining the highest and best use,” the judge wrote.
The judge answered three of the legal questions raised by the company in the affirmative and ordered the matter sent back to the Property Assessment Appeal Board for reconsideration.
The court did not determine a new value for the property itself. Instead, the board will now have to reconsider the assessment in light of the court’s findings.
💬 Join the conversation
1 person is talking about this
