Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Easement Valuation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Owner disputes $36,000 assessment for easement parcel near Brighton Ave, says parcel is unusable
Summary
A property owner told the Syracuse assessment board an assessed jump from roughly $4,600 to $36,000 for a narrow parcel used as driveway easement is unjustified because the strip is not developable and only supports access for adjacent businesses.
An owner of a small parcel at 565 East Seneca Turnpike told the Syracuse Board of Assessment Review on Feb. 21 that a recent assessment increase — from roughly $4,600 to $36,000 — is excessive because the lot is functionally an easement used only for driveway access by adjacent businesses and cannot be developed.
The owner said the narrow strip was conveyed with access rights for a nearby Taco Bell and a gas station (Sunoco) and that it effectively provides driveway access to those businesses. The petitioner's position is that the parcel has no standalone market value because it cannot be built upon or sold separately for development.
City staff acknowledged the parcel provides valuable access and also noted an option: combining the easement parcel with the owner’s adjacent gas station parcel or negotiating a sale of a portion to the neighboring Taco Bell. Staff advised that combining parcels or selling a portion could alter assessment treatment and special-district charges. The owner said he had discussed options but had not pursued a subdivision or sale because of costs and uncertainty about how Taco Bell (a corporate buyer) would respond.
The board asked questions about prior ownership and confirmed the owner sold the parcel underlying the Taco Bell to the restaurant owner in roughly the past five years for about $440,000; the assessor said the new $36,000 figure reflected a recent citywide review of vacant land in that neighborhood. City staff said they would consider whether combining the parcel with adjacent land would better reflect market reality and look for any documentation of prior conveyances or special-district changes before issuing the formal notice in April.
Ending: The board accepted the owner’s presentation and said staff would review the parcel’s role as an access easement and whether a lot combination or other adjustment is warranted before the April notice.
