RETAIL BU IL DINGSRETAIL BU IL DINGSAPARTMENTSAPARTMENTS OFFICE BU IL DINGSOFFICE BU IL DINGS

Apar tm ents, Office Build ings, Retail Build ings & W ar ehouses in Har r is CountyApar tm ents, Office Build ings, Retail Build ings & W ar ehouses in Har r is CountyLITIGATION OF 2012 COMMERCIAL PROPERTIESLITIGATION OF 2012 COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES

LITIGATIONDENSITY

LITIGATION AT HCADEver y year the Har ris County Appr aisal Distr ict (HCAD) is involved in litigating alarge num b er of lawsuits. Par t of the reason for the large num b er is the sheer size ofHar r is County, Texas, which, in ter m s of num b er of par cels of proper ty, is the secondlargest county in the U nited States. The appraisal d istr ict of Har r is County values over1.7 m illion parcels annually, and m any of these valuations are pr otested . If proper tyowner s d isagree with HCAD’s d eter m ined appraised value, they can sched ule an infor m alm eeting with an appraiser. If there is no agr eem ent at this level, the next step is a for m alhear ing with the Har r is County Appr aisal Review Boar d (ARB).If a proper ty owner still d isagrees with the ARB’s d ecision, it is his or her right und er theTexas Proper ty Tax Cod e to appeal the d ecision to the state d istrict cour t in Har ris County. Ifthe d istrict cour t agrees to hear the case, the d ecision is litigated b etween the appr aisal d istrictand the proper ty owner.HCAD’s L itigation Depar tm ent asked the GIS team at the d istrict to provid e analytical m aps in aneffor t to prepare for upcom ing cases. The GIS group was asked to stud y four specific types ofcom m ercial pr oper ty: apar tm ent com plexes, office b uild ings, r etail b uild ings, and war ehouses for thetax year 2012.The m ain m ap shows the d ensity of com m ercial proper ties that went to litigation in 2012. SouthwestHar r is County had the d ensest region for com m ercial litigation. This m ap also shows a percentage b r eakd own of com m ercial proper ties that went to litigation b y school d istrict. Only three school d istr icts hadover 10% of com m ercial pr oper ties going to litigation; Spr ing ISD, Spring Branch ISD & Clear Creek ISD.HCAD appraisers value each proper ty accor d ing to its assigned class. The Com m ercial Pr oper ty Class Stud ychar t reflects the percentage of pr oper ty in litigation b y class categor y. Categor ized from “A” to “E”, the gr ad e“A” is the m ost expensive in ter m s of pr ice per sq uar e foot and “E” is the least in price per sq uar e foot.

W AREHOU SESW AREHOU SES

* Com m erc ial Proper ty V alues as of August 19, 2013

Legen

d School Bound ar y

Highway

W ater

Har ris County

Low

HighGeospatial or m ap d ata m aintained b y the Har ris County Appraisal Distric t is for infor m ational pur poses andm ay not have b een prepared for or b e suitab le for legal, engineering, or sur veying purposes. It d oes not representan on-the-ground sur vey and only represents the approxim ate loc ation of proper ty b ound aries.

Apar tm ent

Offic e Build ing

Retail Build ing

W ar ehouse

Map Key

W ar ehousein L itigation

W ar ehouseMap Key

Retail Build ingin L itigation

Retail Build ingMap Key

Office Build ingOffice Build ingin L itigation

Map Key

Apar tm entin L itigation

Apar tm ent

Total Office Buildings

Litigation

Settled

U nsettled7.44%

92.56% 4.22%3.23%

Total Warehouses

Litigation

Settled

U nsettled3.62%

96.38% 2.06%1.56%

BRIA

RGRO

VE D

RIVE

W INSOME L ANE

N PARK AT FAIRDALE

W PA

RK AT

FAIR

DALE

BRIA

RHUR

ST PA

RK (P

VT)

FALL

S AT F

AIRD

ALE

E PAR

K AT F

AIRDA

LE

RICHMOND AV E

BRIA

RHUR

ST D

RIVE

FAIRDAL E L ANE

GREE

NRID

GE D

RIVE

DDEETTAAIILL MMAAPP

TotalRetail Buildings

Litigation

Settled

U nsettled7.51%

92.49% 4.09%

3.43%

Har ris County Appraisal DistrictInfor m ation & Assistance Division - GIS Departm ent

ÚScale: N.T. S.

KATY ISD9.53% SPRING BRANCH ISD

10.07%

ALIEF ISD9.53%

CYPRESS-FAIRBANKS ISD8.71%

KLIEN ISD6.4%

WALLER ISD0%

NEW CANEY ISD0%

HUFFMAN ISD1.09%

DAYTON ISD0%

HUMBLE ISD7.96%

SHELDON ISD2.27%

CROSBY ISD1.61%

GALENA PARK ISD4.4%

CHANNELVIEW ISD1.26%

DEER PARK ISD2.12%

GOOSE CREEK3.13%

LA PORTE ISD4.63%

PASADENA ISD6.18%

CLEAR CREEK ISD10.47%

PEARLAND ISD0%

HOUSTON ISD6%

SPRING ISD10.06%

ALDINE ISD7.29%

TOMBALL ISD3.54%

Total Apartments

Litigation

Settled

U nsettled10.50%

89.50% 6.80%3.69%

4,0003,5003,0002,5002,0001,5001,000

5000

936

881

667

706

832

1265

747

891

776

1038

637

782

948

1045

586

770

584

936

536

598

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Commercial Properties in Litigation Tax Years 2008 - 2012

Commerical Properties Class StudyClass Percentage

A 20.27%B 37.24%C 37.09%D 3.45%E 1.95%

TOTAL 100.00%

Class PercentageA 26.12%B 17.05%C 10.45%D 2.02%E 44.36%

TOTAL 100.00%

Class PercentageA 14.88%B 33.52%C 12.62%D 0.19%E 38.79%

TOTAL 100.00%

Class PercentageA 17.81%B 13.88%C 5.75%D 7.29%E 55.26%

TOTAL 100.00%Retail Stores

Apar tm ents

W arehouses

Offices

2012 Commercial Properties in Litigation

W arehouses Apartm ents

OfficesRetail Stores

23%

18%36%

23%