[{"_1":2,"_110":-5,"_111":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,74,86,98],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":44,"_46":47,"_48":49,"_50":51,"_52":53,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":59,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":65,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":72,"_73":72},"mediaId",6184798,"mediaKeyId","5086467-7a50fc1868cbe4c48f2bed9f6460d77c","parentId",5086467,"title","Union County BOE accepts staff recommendations; board notes large adjustment after loss of Highway 74 frontage","audioSeconds",0,"startMs",2573234,"endMs","viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5086467-7a50fc1868cbe4c48f2bed9f6460d77c&start=2573&end=2573","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5086467-7a50fc1868cbe4c48f2bed9f6460d77c/thumbnail_2573234.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6184798/Union-County/North-Carolina/Union-County-BOE-accepts-staff-recommendations-board-notes-large-adjustment-after-loss-of-Highway-74-frontage","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6184798-9e283afa158c291e485416134ad7e833/orig.mp4?Expires=1771199320&Signature=f2QApJMn8HZo2v4WwrHr8AJMS8H1AejPKmS23fWSs4kyeNYhe-cY2OTkaYZAJhRB4BtJQBBFwOqtPEHd6gaQCG5A0i~SwAnc4uMCLUss1bJVBJeYBIUmbh31AhzOeQTbcp5EpRg1v5212h-cQs12BbSwiEf5-KhlGGLeBCJQcfFXS2tf0CR0RgIfhppLBQYmHVxHbQgS4zpuDGdCnfpqHw3147DyyLcWIQElC3qYxqiGPaQdokY7ch0m1~mStWeXQQAFeO2i5Qh~iicTksLO9SCqzvplRsLXWhDASIfQ8-QVT6SUj62M1Ndgl4A58sqro7CB9caCBOZxpjc6Eqvg~A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Union County, NC","date","2025-06-27T09:20:08Z","article","Union County's Board of Equalization and Review voted to accept staff recommendations and the consent agenda during the meeting's deliberation phase, adopting the assessor's proposed settlements and concluding several appeals where appellants did not timely respond.

During deliberations staff presented a spreadsheet of settled items and the board discussed one large, staff-supported adjustment for a parcel owned by Cherry 5 LLC. Staff explained the property\u0000lost direct frontage and a curb cut to Highway 74 when an expressway bypass and new frontage road were constructed; losing vehicular access to the highway materially reduced the property's market utility and prompted a reclassification that lowered the value from about $3.1 million to $2.0 million.

After review the board approved the staff recommendations as presented. The chair called for a motion and, after a second, the board carried the motion to accept the recommendations. The board also approved consent-agenda items consisting of settled appeals and appeals where the appellant had not replied in the required timeframe; staff noted those cases were concluded unless an appellant sought reinstatement under the county's procedures.

The board recessed briefly and then returned to continue deliberations on individual cases that had been heard earlier in the session. No item discussed during deliberations was reported as subject to an immediate change in county-wide tax policy; actions taken were limited to case-level settlements and processing of concluded appeals.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Board of Equalization and Review | June 26, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","The Board of Equalization accepted staff recommendations and consent agenda items. Members flagged a notable reduction for a property (Cherry 5 LLC) where frontage and access changed after highway construction, and the board approved staff\u0000settlements and items concluded for lack of timely appellant response.","taxTitle","Union County, North Carolina","taxId",14197,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":75,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":76,"_41":77,"_43":78,"_45":79,"_46":80,"_48":81,"_50":82,"_52":83,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":84,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":85,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":72,"_73":72},6184803,"County staff says medical office appraisal appears lower than past sale; requests further QA",68,2067070,2135588,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5086467-7a50fc1868cbe4c48f2bed9f6460d77c&start=2067&end=2135","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5086467-7a50fc1868cbe4c48f2bed9f6460d77c/thumbnail_2067070.jpg","/articles/6184803/Union-County/North-Carolina/County-staff-says-medical-office-appraisal-appears-lower-than-past-sale-requests-further-QA","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6184803-71c61538815283b67ce0d8a5610f1986/orig.mp4?Expires=1771199320&Signature=YHVpsF1s4Y~iW-Nf4BmTtB3cBhdGBAjZhJQRFJm-EAi7UcfMH-DS~UmAx~-3EscD3SZ1IInQrJoHo4QTVJRQ53xHzMwxu~KHG~PFC7Vkj5aPhq-dPOaqf2uHK59OPzpX1ZQyggxuXzEMcpcceMmPiNIl7baiATDbRRtzq68UTf6pmd7RycnS5iF30dJiKQNIPgfWJJR9MxyTOZ2HqhA~L9pbhRKbhFMgyavpTSuof3~i0x4YK7KtuMrQ1a4USlsEmlyNf6vfKtefbwNWwOZQt-5Xf9~WScJp0vki6XRlPnphi4fiqE-yKT8j7Qq5zBJh~430ak8lXvlBHm75Mcv6nA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","County appraisal staff told the Board of Equalization and Review that a medical-office property on South Providence Road in Waxhaw appears appraised below what past sales and market comparables would suggest and recommended a quality-assurance review.

County presenter Joe Hunter said the subject property, listed to the board as PM AK Waxhaw LLC, sold in 2016 for $6.6 million; the county currently values it at $6,364,700 (about $246 per square foot). Hunter said comparable medical-office sales show medians near $296 per square foot and a median sale price around $10.3 million, indicating the county\u0000cost-based estimate is \"significantly lower than market indicates\" and that staff likely should perform a full QA to determine whether an income approach or other adjustments are warranted.

Hunter told the board the appellant had not submitted an income approach, cap rate, or similar pro forma evidence before the hearing. Board members noted that for income-producing properties the income-capitalization approach often better reflects market value than cost-based measures; Hunter agreed, saying cost is \"almost always\" lower than sales when income drives price.

The board recorded the presentation and indicated the matter would be subject to further internal review to confirm whether the current appraisal record should be adjusted or a different valuation approach applied. No formal vote on the property's assessment was taken during the public hearing.

The county flagged that absent taxpayer-submitted income documentation, staff used available sales and cost data and advised the board that any future evidence from the taxpayer would be reviewed as part of quality assurance and possible reassessment.","Union County appraisers told the board they have the medical office in Waxhaw appraised below a 2016 sale price and below medians of comparable medical-office sales, and recommended a quality-assurance review; the appellant did not submit income documentation to offset the county\u0000analysis.",{"_33":87,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":88,"_41":89,"_43":90,"_45":91,"_46":92,"_48":93,"_50":94,"_52":95,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":96,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":97,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":72,"_73":72},6184808,"Union County staff defends 2025 valuation for partially completed mini-warehouse in Waxhaw",118,1774480,1892983,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5086467-7a50fc1868cbe4c48f2bed9f6460d77c&start=1774&end=1892","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5086467-7a50fc1868cbe4c48f2bed9f6460d77c/thumbnail_1774480.jpg","/articles/6184808/Union-County/North-Carolina/Union-County-staff-defends-2025-valuation-for-partially-completed-mini-warehouse-in-Waxhaw","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6184808-a6faa6bb4a5ada50d3989b8bad4d7dfe/orig.mp4?Expires=1771199320&Signature=VCp4Aspk1bXb6U-0EqrnRLUQhm2wTNQKlBSAg-ujpEPlaU2RwvWlFTReaOUJ7cpadASjGaTPUKMfA~MfmZ6DqwxrcMWfb~d8RzVBvX9Tvra1VqW8-K~fHzrU0fTTU2aVW3tmfprt1-21hbCJyvR~wLqCqcNWmvczyt3gW69v2DC~ghguQXdxd4cG7c7qllwe1ex9YMyPvsCE-N-RbiwPGqpWiQvXTdLoHyPMJrNRM9lBghdgleTXmmSxNm3ThheZc3NiVC8h4N1DWovRb9FxC2RASdW5CTMLDhb4uRYMu8u-ZVuswo3Au-sXRv2YFoCkQ03GzsMtFOxttr~ZYxXI3g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Union County appraisers told the county Board of Equalization and Review that a partially completed mini-warehouse development near South Providence Road and Highway 16 in Waxhaw was assessed lower than comparable market sales when projected to 100% completion, and they recommended no upward adjustment for the 2025 valuation date.

County presenter Joe Hunter described the property for the taxpayer listed as GSI Providence Waxhaw Owner LLC as approximately 75% complete on Jan. 1, 2025, with a building area of 122,816 square feet. Hunter said the county's 100%-complete estimate would value the property at $8,372,200 (about $68 per square foot). Comparable sales for completed similar properties showed prices nearer $125 per square foot and median sale prices around $13.1 million.

Hunter told the board the county therefore believed the assessed cost-based value for the partially complete building was \"significantly lower than what the market is,\" and that staff saw no immediate need to adjust the 2025 assessment upward. He also said the appellant had indicated they would submit additional evidence (income approach, cap rate, pro forma) later, but none had been received prior to the hearing; the appellant declined to attend the hearing and asked that the case be made so they could pursue a later Pretrial Conference (PTC) if desired.

Board members questioned how partial completion is treated. County staff explained the office typically places properties on the tax roll using cost-based methods while construction is incomplete and does not apply an income approach until a property is producing income. Hunter confirmed the county's 75% completion calculation produced a total assessed value of about $5,739,900 for the land and building at Jan. 1, 2025.

The board recorded the presentation and moved the case to deliberation; no formal change to the assessment was made at the hearing pending any additional evidence the appellant provides.

The county warned that because the site was not yet income-producing at the valuation date, the office did not rely on an income-capitalization approach for 2025 and would update the record in the next valuation cycle if the property reached completion and produced income.","County appraisers told the Board of Equalization that a new mini-warehouse near Providence Road was assessed below market on a 100% complete basis and that partial completion at Jan. 1, 2025, produced a reduced assessed value; the appellant declined to attend but requested the record be made for potential further review.",{"_33":99,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":100,"_41":101,"_43":102,"_45":103,"_46":104,"_48":105,"_50":106,"_52":107,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":108,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":109,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":72,"_73":72},6184813,"Union County board hears resident's appeal alleging overvaluation of rural Waxhaw home",1453,205100,1659003,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5086467-7a50fc1868cbe4c48f2bed9f6460d77c&start=205&end=1659","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5086467-7a50fc1868cbe4c48f2bed9f6460d77c/thumbnail_205100.jpg","/articles/6184813/Union-County/North-Carolina/Union-County-board-hears-residents-appeal-alleging-overvaluation-of-rural-Waxhaw-home","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6184813-7b3be40601e1a7f196477671ad7f88f5/orig.mp4?Expires=1771199320&Signature=oc48HbU7REKnBp75iAPOV2ZIeO4sFw-2s6rseeLW7~hFBlcuBLW4IwKHavY3CX8Br4RCa0QUmABrWoTHWdcIJYR4oWW2Z7S6BFjF-o9gZ2wo5dveecr8gsiyLJpJi0kE5vFakbQ9DsF-MOzFbh4sSmRqR~Px6LJgXXkeWergL887QiwVRtCWhIoXOjArjoefv7DySX4SW8iaT1hDCSvqCA-eD2VBNUpDsCSJ7NcG4F~gKlXMtXMsEc3OaOs3xZTYzR5-ErXmqb2DSq3dk1GCc4wv50TZdmUXeoM9djCzXDE6SPNfl1XCkLO2iEwHBEM7Keo9Er-Q5DeXdcHM7K6qtg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","A homeowner representing the taxpayer listed as \"Bridal Illini\" appealed her property's 2025 assessed value to the Union County Board of Equalization and Review, saying the assessment treats her rural Waxhaw subdivision home as if it were located near Weddington-style amenities and is therefore \"way too high.\" The hearing chair and county appraisers said they will review the materials before the board's deliberation and notify the taxpayer in writing of the decision.

The homeowner, Irene Ilonitzky, addressed the board and said the county\u0000assessment priced her house above neighboring sales despite her home lacking amenities such as a pool or outbuildings. \"We just think that the our property is, valued way too high,\" Ilonitzky said. She asked the board to consider multiple comparables she provided, including listings that spent lengthy time on the market and one she said sold for about $840,000 in March.

County appraiser testimony said staff initially carried a quality grade of \"good\" for the house, but after a field visit adjusted the grade to \"good minus,\" which reduced the assessed value from $1,078,600 to about $900,002. The appraiser told the board they were only able to pull three comparables inside the neighborhood because it is a small, custom-built enclave, and that the county typically limits comparable sales to those on or before the statutory valuation date of Jan. 1, 2025.

Ilonitzky said she believed a fair value would be around $700,000, noting market conditions and homes in her subdivision that sold below earlier asking prices. She also told the board that her home was built during the COVID period and that certain expected amenities were omitted during construction, which she said should affect grade and value.

Board members asked questions about which specific comps were used and how adjustments (for features such as pools and outbuildings) were applied. A county appraiser confirmed the office applies dollar adjustments for those features in the sales analysis and that sales after Jan. 1, 2025, could not be used in establishing the valuation date.

No final decision on the appeal was made in the hearing. The board moved to a deliberation phase after the scheduled cases; staff told the taxpayer the board would review the additional documents and the county's adjustments during deliberations and that a written outcome is normally mailed within about 30 days per statute.

Ilonitzky closed by asking the board to consider the local market dynamics and her neighborhood's rural location when reviewing the assessment. \"Please understand us as well as taxpayers,\" she said, adding that household incomes had not increased to match the higher taxes she fears the assessment will create.

The board did not vote on this single case on the record during the public portion; the county staff indicated the case and submitted materials would be considered in the closed deliberation phase and the taxpayer would be notified in writing.","A homeowner representing 'Bridal Illini' told the Board of Equalization and Review that her Waxhaw-area house was assessed far above comparable neighborhood sales; county staff said they adjusted the property\u0000grade and will review the comps during deliberations.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Union County BOE accepts staff recommendations; board notes large adjustment after loss of Highway 74 frontage

County staff says medical office appraisal appears lower than past sale; requests further QA

Union County staff defends 2025 valuation for partially completed mini-warehouse in Waxhaw

Union County board hears resident's appeal alleging overvaluation of rural Waxhaw home