John and Mary Hayes appealed the 2025 valuation on two adjoining 10-acre parcels, telling the Union County Board of Equalization and Review that steep topography, septic/perk limitations, deed restrictions limiting subdivision to one house per 10 acres and the routing of a proposed Waxhaw Parkway should reduce the county’s assessed values.

At the hearing the Hayeses described past on-site reviews and said county staff previously applied a 45% discount to roughly 3 acres they identified as nonbuildable. John Hayes said the parcels border active railroad tracks, contain a sliver of land between the road and track that cannot be developed, and that one neighbor must run septic lines across his property because their ground would not perk. "I have to disclose . . . there's a proposed bypass on a map that involves the construction of a viaduct that goes over the railroad track," Hayes said, describing how that uncertainty affects buyer interest.

County appraiser Nick Parker told the board the Waxhaw Parkway is a planning line that is not funded and that the county’s analysis already reflected topography and site limitations by taking 3 acres at a 45% topo discount, which puts the parcel near the lower end of neighborhood values. Parker said the county used vacant-land sales in the surrounding rural area to set per-acre values and adjusted for topography and other site conditions.

Board members questioned whether the county treated adjoining parcels equitably, whether neighboring comparables were subdividable and how the 45% discount was being applied going forward. Parker said the discount was placed on the record and could be revisited in future reappraisals if market sales indicated a change.

Action taken: The board applied an additional, separate 25% topography adjustment on the remaining acreage the county had not already discounted (the board’s motion and second were recorded and carried by voice vote). The board separately accepted the county’s valuation for the taxpayer’s dwelling parcel above the vacant tract.

Why it matters: The Hayes case reflects recurring issues in Union County revaluations—how to weigh intrinsic site limitations (topography, perkability, railroad adjacency) and the impact of possible but unfunded infrastructure projects on property marketability and tax assessments. The board’s incremental topo adjustment reduces the effective assessed value for 2025 but also left open future reappraisal changes tied to sales evidence.

What’s next: County staff will calculate the exact numeric change and notify the Hayeses in writing as directed by the board. The county also noted homeowners may pursue other remedies such as combining lots or applying programmatically for use-value treatment, where applicable.