Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: SATURDAY, June 18, 1994 TAG: 9406270146
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-11 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE:
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
The issue is an assessment, for tax purposes, of 77 acres bought by Steven Strauss for development of a subdivision adjacent to the Blue Ridge Parkway. Strauss appealed and won a drastic reduction in the county's initial assessment, and the county came back with an appeal of its own. The adjusted assessment was, after all, more than $10,000 an acre less than what Strauss actually had paid for the land.
The county Board of Equalization has put off a decision on the county's appeal till later this month, and the issue isn't cut-and-dried. Real estate assessments must be made on the condition of the property on Jan. 1 of each year. As of Jan. 1, water and sewer lines hadn't been extended to the property in question, the developer argues. But they were guaranteed within 30 days of completing final development plans, the county parries. But they weren't assured unless Strauss exercised his option to buy the land, and he hadn't by Jan. 1, is the counterthrust.
Common sense argues for a higher assessment, but we are perfectly content to let the Board of Equalization split the legal hairs. County officials' insistence that the board take a second look, to ensure fairness to the remainder of the county's taxpaying property owners, is commendable.
It may also be illustrative of an ever-so-slightly perceptible shift - we hope there's a shift, anyway - in the relationship between localities, Roanoke County among them, and the developers who would profit from the provision of subdivisions, strip malls and the like.
A more challenging relationship would be a good thing.
The stated business of government, after all, is to serve the people - developers included, of course, but no single interest over the general. Yet most local governments, granted crucial powers and responsibilities in land-use planning, seem stalled in an era that automatically equated any kind of development with progress and prosperity.
All too often, local governments defer too much to developers, in effect seeing themselves as facilitators of private construction. They have unquestioningly extended, at developers' request, the infrastructure to allow development to take place, paving the way for building of varying benefit to the public. To be fair, developers often share the costs, and in some cases pick up the tab entirely for, say, extension of a road or water line.
But even when that is the case, localities typically fail to look closely or critically enough at what the bill is likely to total eventually. The cost of development doesn't end with the completion of construction. There are services to be provided, infrastructure to be maintained, all at taxpayer expense. With residential development, that is sure to include the expense of education. (In Roanoke County, for example, taxes paid on a $100,000 house and two $10,000 cars will pay the cost of schooling just one child a year.)
Commercial and industrial development more than pays its way in terms of taxes paid for services received, but it can exact a price of its own on a community, whether by congestion or pollution or the proliferation of eyesores.
Growth is good and necessary, but it can be sustained only if it is managed. Smart developers know that wise land-management will enhance rather than threaten the value of their properties. Those localities wise enough to have zoning ordinances have the tools needed to guide growth.
The tools do nothing but grow rusty, however, if they are not used, and used skillfully, to implement another essential foundation for any growing locality's future: a comprehensive plan.
In places such as Roanoke County, special care must be taken to preserve distinctive assets and open spaces, and to lay out a vision for the future that will not be abandoned the first time a developer clears his throat.
by CNB