Laserfiche WebLink
~U~I i5 '94 16:38 PARKER POE Ar, AMS 919 828 0564 P.11 <br /> <br /> burden of proof regarding additional capitalized interest as an <br /> element of cost. <br /> <br /> 8. The values assigned by t~he County Board for data ~roc. essi~g <br /> <br /> equipment are affirmed. <br /> <br /> 9. ' The Taxpayer's real property, as of 'l January 1991, was not <br /> affected by economic obsolescence. The Taxpayer's argument. <br /> that industry capacity utilization automatically creates <br /> obsolescence in th~ Taxpayer's real property is rejected. <br /> <br />'10. In .the appeal designated 92 PTC 31, the true value in mooey of <br /> the Taxpayer's real property on 1 January 1991 was <br /> $188,041,000, computed as follows: <br /> <br />Total Cost of Reproduction New <br /> (Taxpayer Exhibit W at l:~:]e 71) <br /> <br />Total Cost of Replacement <br /> (Commission found no obsolescence <br /> in the existing boiler system) <br /> <br />Less Incurable Physical Depreciation <br />(Taxpayer Exhibit W at page 71) <br /> <br /> Subtotal <br /> <br />Note: no deduction for economic <br />obsolescence; see Finding of Fact <br />paragraph 9 above. <br /> <br />Less Curable Physical Depreciation <br />Depreciated Value of Improvements <br /> <br />Plus Land Value <br />(Taxpayer Exhibit W) <br /> <br /> Total' Value of Real Property <br /> <br />$208,104,000. <br /> <br />6208,104,000 <br /> <br />_ (43,,~63~000) <br />$164,241,000 <br /> <br />_~($i,400,00~) <br />$162,841,000 <br /> <br /> $2 ,2_o0,ooo <br /> <br />$188,041,000 <br /> <br />-10- <br /> <br />/C./O <br /> <br /> <br />