Each one of these code combinations is tied to a specific table of value for that code. These tables are referred to by the District as
“improvement schedules”. Each schedule contains a value per square foot of living area for individual stratum of square footage. In
this manner, the District is able to modify only schedules for a select group of properties if desired. The downside to this approach is
that the District must track and maintain several hundred different schedules.
In addition to the base residential schedules, there are also separate schedules for features and amenities for residential property. These
would include items such as porches, decks, attached and detached garages or carports, fireplaces or central heat/air. In most of these
cases, the schedule calls for a percentage of base approach to value. For example, the square footage in a porch would be calculated as
20% of the base schedule square footage price. So if a 1,200 square foot F3-D15 called for $48.09, porches for that improvement
would be based on 20% of $48.09 or $9.62 per square foot. However, for fireplaces, central heat/air or swimming pools, the schedules
call for flat pricing. Fireplaces are set at a certain total dollar amount as is swimming pools, while central heat/air is set at a set price per
square foot of living area. Both fireplaces and central/heat air systems are categorized by the same quality grade as the base
improvement.
Description of Land Model
Land modeling for the District’s residential and rural areas can be divided into categories similar to the neighborhood profiling shown
above. Land is coded for municipal, rural subdivision, lake lots and for rural land in general. Land is valued primarily based upon
acreage or square footage of the lot or tract. However, there are cases in the model where front footage or flat value per lot is utilized.
For municipal residential property, land is coded to in the same manner as the neighborhood extension on the improvement code.
Neighborhoods are classified Low, Fair, Average and Good with the respective classification preceded by the alpha code for the
particular city. For example, “JF” would indicate a lot, under one acre, in a fair neighborhood in the City of Jacksonville. As was
discussed earlier, adding an “A” to the end of that code would denote a schedule for municipal lots over one acre. For the same
example, “JFA” would indicate a lot over one acre located in a fair neighborhood in the City of Jacksonville.
Rural subdivisions follow the same naming convention discussed in the improvement section. The land table for a rural subdivision
would begin with the alpha code for the school, followed by “RS” for rural subdivision followed by the alpha code for low, fair, average
or good. For example, “BRSG” would indicate a land schedule for a good quality rural subdivision in Bullard ISD.
Lake lots are somewhat different in style than their improvement counterparts. Most lake lots are valued based upon the amount of
usable water front. When we consider “usable” we are trying to exclude narrow insets and outcroppings that tend to come with water
front lots. This exclusion can also be used in the upper ends of inlets in the lake that never have usable water. We do not consider
“usable” in instances where water levels are seasonally low. In other words, a lot that has usable water front when lake levels are
normal will be considered water front regardless of low water level. For these schedules, the coding begins with “WF” for ‘water front’
followed by the lake code as shown previously. These two codes are separated by a dash (-). For example, “WF-L2” means a water
frontage schedule for a lot on Lake Striker. This method of coding in similar for Lake Jacksonville, but differs in that the lots are
divided into good, average and fair lots. The first letters of the grading is appended to the standard code structure to make: “WF-L1G”,
“WF-L1A” and “WF-L1F”. Furthermore, there are some lots on Lake Jacksonville that do not have good water unless the lake is full.
These lots are to the north and are classified as water view lots. In these cases, the “WF” is replaced with “WV” in the code structure.
Rural land follows the style of the rural improvement neighborhood extension. The type of access available to the property is coded
first (Land Locked, Dirt, Paved or Highway) followed by the numerical code for the school district. The same exception exists here as
in the improvement codes for property not in the City of Jacksonville but immediately adjacent to. This area is numerically coded “76”.
Some examples of these codes would be “P23” for land on a paved road in Bullard ISD or “H76” for land on a highway in the buffer
zone surrounding the City of Jacksonville.
Finally, all land is valued based upon the total size of all contiguously controlled tracts of a particular owner. In other words, a person
who owns three pieces of property that touch each other is valued on each individual tract as though it were one tract of the combined
size. Consider a person who owns a 5-acre, 15 acre and 10-acre tracts. That person would be valued as though all contiguous tracts
were combined into one for valuation purposes. In the example, each tract would be valued per unit as though it were one thirty-acre
tract. This is known as “pricing acres” or “pricing square footage.