----- Original Message -----
From: "Lyle E. Browning" <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 8:24 PM
Subject: Land Tax Records

EXCERPTS:
> I've a question about the Land Tax Records. I
> have been under the perhaps mistaken
> assumption that all buildings on a property
> constituted the real tax base.

> However, the 1850 Agricultural Census shows
> the same owner with 3 monster parcels,

> What does the LTR actually tax? Main owner
> house or all buildings?

REPLY:
I do not have knowledge of the historical basis, but I can put the issue
into a contemporary framework - and that may fit.  In terms of realty
valuation, you need to consider factors such as "contributing value,"
condition, scale, etc.

Just because building improvements exist does not mean that they contribute
value to the land.  For example, in today's suburban environment, if a
single-family residence sits on a commercially-zoned parcel of land that is
surrounded by fast-food restaurants and strip shopping centers, the
residence not only has no contributing value, but it is a burden to the land
because it will cost money to demolish it in order to put the land to a
future commercial use.  In this case, the value of the underlying commercial
land outstrips the value of the home and land for residential use.  However,
I doubt that this enters into your scenario.

If those 19th century farm structures were in poor condition, they may have
been ignored in terms of value.  My understanding is that the LTR is a basis
for taxation, and it is not intended to be a complete inventory.  Today,
assessors strive to be as complete as possible in listing building
improvements on their records.  Nonetheless, they may opt to ignore minor
out-buildings as a buyer would not likely pay anything extra for them.

Considering that you dealing with a large amount of land, I suspect that the
omission of certain buildings probably had more to do with the scale of the
property.  If the value of building improvements was such a small percentage
of the whole, and their value would likely just be "lost" in rounding off
the numbers, there may have been no point in including them.

A census may have included all buildings (because a census "counts"), but
the LTR may have intentionally omitted the buildings (because an LTR
"values").  It all boils down to the judgment of the assessor.

_________________________________
H. Glenn James, MAI
Commercial First Appraisers, LLC
101 Granby Street at Main, Suite 200
Norfolk, Virginia  23510-1603
Voice +1 (757) 623-2800
Fax +1 (757) 623-2900
Business e-mail [log in to unmask]
Personal e-mail [log in to unmask]

To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions
at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html