Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: TUESDAY, June 14, 1994 TAG: 9406170001
SECTION: VIRGINIA PAGE: VIRGINIA EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: By JAN VERTEFEUILLE STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: LENGTH: Long
The bulldozers and front-end loaders are already carving roads into the pasture, outlining in the grass the first phase of The Gardens of Cotton Hill, a 147-lot subdivision by Strauss Construction next to the Blue Ridge Parkway.
Recent discussions about putting a four-lane Bent Mountain Road across Steven Strauss' land could threaten the development, his ambitious project in Southwest Roanoke County.
But plans for an improved U.S. 221 are too new to affect the land's tax value, which tripled this year.
Developer Strauss thought that was too high. While dozens of county residents do no more than grumble about the assessments on their property, Strauss did something about it.
Strauss Construction bought the property last month for $1.34 million, or $17,500 per acre. The same day, Strauss persuaded the Board of Equalization, which hears appeals of real estate assessments, to lower the county's assessment of the land to $561,000.
Since Roanoke County is supposed to assess property at 100 percent of its fair market value, the reduced assessment puzzles some in the county administration building.
In a highly unusual move, the Board of Equalization has delayed signing its order lowering the assessment - which would make the decision official - so the county can make its case against the action.
"This is the first time the county's ever been involved in it," said Board of Equalization Chairman Jack Metcalf. He said the board may allow Strauss to make a case again, but "he's had his day." He declined to comment further until after the board meets today at noon.
"I wish they hadn't changed it," said John Birckhead, director of real estate assessments for the county. "It wasn't something where we just drove by [the property] and threw some figures in the air."
Birckhead's department assessed the property at $938,800, about $12,000 per acre, which Strauss argued was too high, even though it's less than what he paid for it. That's when the board decided to lower it to $561,000, about $7,100 per acre.
Either County Administrator Elmer Hodge or County Attorney Paul Mahoney will address the Equalization Board today "to clear up some of the questions raised by Mr. Strauss in his presentation to the board," Hodge said.
Strauss' property is now assessed at less than the adjoining acreage Len Boone has planned to build on, which the county says is less valuable. Unlike Strauss' land, the property Boone is interested in has no road frontage and more restrictions because it's more visible from the parkway and fewer homes can be built in the "critical viewshed."
Assessments are supposed to be based on condition of a property on Jan. 1 of each year. Strauss said lawsuits - real and threatened - hung over the property in January, and sewer and water hadn't been extended to the site.
But Mahoney is expected to tell the Equalization Board that the Cotton Hill property was free of lawsuits as of Jan. 1, and that the county had guaranteed water and sewer lines to the property, although they weren't yet there.
A comparison of his land with other properties in Southwest Roanoke County shows that his tract was not "assessed in conformity with other, similar properties," Strauss said. County officials plan to compare the property with parcels in other parts of the county that Birckhead said are similar.
Strauss says the county assessed it as though it had an R-1 residential zoning with no conditions and as though water and sewer already were extended to the site. But as part of a consent order with the county, Strauss is limited to building 2.5 homes per acre on the property, which lies next to the Blue Ridge Parkway; R-1 land normally allows up to six houses per acre.
A check of assessments for surrounding properties on Cotton Hill Road showed land values from $6,000 an acre to $21,000 an acre.
"All of it's different out there," Birckhead said. Strauss' property is zoned residential, while the land across the road is zoned agricultural. Other property is in the Parkway "viewshed," which limits the number of houses that can be built on it.
"We just can't go out there and decide everything is the same," Birckhead said, "because it's not."
One of the reasons the county's and the Equalization Board's assessments vary so much from what Strauss paid is that the land's market value was not recorded until after the original assessment and the lowered one were made. Strauss didn't close on the property until after the board's May 16 hearing, and the price was recorded three days later.
He said the timing of the sale was "purely coincidence," and that the price he paid is irrelevant to this year's assessment, anyway.
"It doesn't matter if the property sold for $1 million an acre on May 28," he said - at least not until next year's assessment.
Property owners who disagree with an assessment can appeal to Birckhead. If they're not satisfied with his response, they can appeal to the Equalization Board, a five-member panel appointed by a Circuit Court judge.
"It wouldn't be a fair process if the board agreed with everything we did," Birckhead said. "Citizens wouldn't have much of a fighting chance."
Not counting the Strauss case, the Board of Equalization so far this year has heard 57 appeals by property owners who disagreed with their assessments: 29 were changed by the board, and 28 were not. The changes lowered the 29 assessments by a total of $151,000.
Last year, the Strauss property - which was owned by Norma Jean Sigmon - was assessed at $306,600, less than a third of this year's proposed assessment. But last year the property was zoned agricultural, not its current R-1, and water and sewer had not been promised by the county. Birckhead said without water and sewer, the land would not be as valuable, because soil problems would limit septic tanks.
"You have to determine the highest and best use" when appraising, said Charles Vaden, assistant director of real estate assessments for the county. "You have to look at the best legal use for the property. That piece of property is absolutely beautiful. I've admired it for years."
And the Cotton Hill Road property's highest and best use with its new zoning and utilities is for a subdivision, he said.
by CNB