Appeal of Forsyth County Tax Supervisor Regarding Certain Property Owned by Wake Forest University, 8010PTC844
| Citation | 51 N.C.App. 516,277 S.E.2d 91 |
| Decision Date | 21 April 1981 |
| Docket Number | No. 8010PTC844,8010PTC844 |
| Court | Court of Appeal of North Carolina (US) |
| Parties | In the Matter of Appeal of the FORSYTH COUNTY TAX SUPERVISOR REGARDING CERTAIN PROPERTY OWNED BY WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY. |
County Atty. P. Eugene Price, Jr. and Asst. County Atty. Jonathan V. Maxwell, Winston-Salem, for Forsyth County Tax Supervisor, appellant.
Hudson, Petree, Stockton, Stockton & Robinson by W. F. Maready and Grover G. Wilson, Winston-Salem, for R. J. Reynolds Industries, Inc., appellee.
The basic question before us on this appeal is whether any portion of the Grove's Stadium parking lot qualifies under the "split exemption" statute, G.S. 105-278.4(c). The applicable statute, in pertinent part, is as follows:
§ 105-278.4. Real and personal property used for educational purposes. (a) Buildings, the land they actually occupy, and additional land reasonably necessary for the convenient use of any such building shall be exempted from taxation if:
(1) Owned by an educational institution ...;
(b) Land (exclusive of improvements); and improvements other than buildings, the land actually occupied by such improvements, and additional land reasonably necessary for the convenient use of any such improvements shall be exempted from taxation if:
(1) Owned by an educational institution that owns real property entitled to exemption under the provisions of subsection (a), above;
(2) Of a kind commonly employed in the performance of those activities naturally and properly incident to the operation of an educational institution such as the owner; and
(3) Wholly and exclusively used for educational purposes by the owner or occupied gratuitiously (sic ) by another nonprofit educational institution (as defined herein) and wholly and exclusively used by the occupant for nonprofit educational purposes.
(c) Notwithstanding the exclusive-use requirements of subsections (a) and (b), above, if part of a property that otherwise meets the requirements of one of those subsections is used for a purpose that would require exemption if the entire property were so used, the valuation of the part so used shall be exempted from taxation.
....
The order of the Property Tax Commission included the following pertinent findings of fact:
(2) Approximately 80% (38.65 acres) of the subject 48.65 acre tract is improved as a parking lot with 2,887 marked parking spaces.
(3) The remaining 20% (10 acres) of the property, which is covered with trees and gullies, is fenced off from the parking lot and is not used by either Reynolds or the University.
....
(6) The subject parking lot is used by the University to provide parking for persons attending Wake Forest football games and certain other University functions, such as concerts.
(7) Reynolds' employees and visitors use 1,036 (36%) of the 2,887 parking spaces each working day Monday through Friday.
Respondent Forsyth County assigns as error those findings of fact included in paragraph numbered (7), contending that these findings are not supported by the evidence. The evidence before the Commission on this aspect of the case consisted of exhibits (maps) showing the vicinity, location, and configuration of the property; and the testimony of James T. Barg, the manager of Property Tax Administration for Reynolds and W. Harvey Pardue, Forsyth County Tax Supervisor. Barg, using the exhibits, testified that the area of the paved portion of the property where Reynolds' employees regularly park consists of 1,036 parking spaces, and that this constitutes approximately thirty-six percent of the paved area which includes a total of 2,887 spaces. Pardue testified that the parking lot is used five days a week by Reynolds for employee and visitor parking and for general access to Reynolds' headquarters building, and that on football weekends, the lot is filled with Wake Forest football traffic. This evidence clearly supports the disputed finding of fact, and the finding is therefore binding upon us on review. In re Appeal of Amp, Inc., 287 N.C. 547, 215 S.E.2d 752 (1975).
The heart of respondent's argument is that the Commission's findings of fact and the evidence do not support the Commission's conclusion that the taxable value of the property should be reduced to $501,171.00. For clarity, we quote the conclusionary portion of the Commission's order in its entirety:
CONCLUSION, DECISION AND ORDER
From our review of the applicable law, the evidence and our findings of fact, we conclude and so decide that all of the subject property except the portion actually used by Reynolds is exempt from taxes under the provisions of G.S. 105-278.4.
The parking lot is owned by the University a qualifying owner and used by it in connection with its athletic program. An athletic program is an integral and important part of the educational program of practically every college or university. As is the case with most other football facilities, also, the subject parking lot is actually used by the university only a limited number of times each year. This limited use, however, does not in any way diminish the need for the facility on those occasions. Thus, the parking lot would be required by the University for its purposes whether or not Reynolds also made use of it.
Since Reynolds' use of a portion of the parking facility cannot be construed as incidental, we further conclude that this portion is not wholly and exclusively used by the owner for educational purposes.
Accordingly, we hold that 36% of the 38.65 acres improved as a parking lot and of the improvements thereon is subject to property taxes. The amount of the taxable property is $501,171.$363,658 for the land and $137,513 for the improvements.
WHEREFORE, IT IS...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
IN RE MAHARISHI SPIRITUAL CENTER OF AMERICA
... ... 269 In Matter of the Appeal of the MAHARISHI SPIRITUAL CENTER of AMERICA 639 ... and taxation of the herein described property by Watauga County for 1999 ... No. COA01-644 ... that pertinent real and personal property owned by the Spiritual Center is not entitled to an ... with professors from the Maharishi University of Management, a fully accredited university; ... a narrow or stingy construction." In re Wake Forest Univ., 51 N.C.App. 516, 521, 277 S.E.2d ... institution, an organization must meet certain formalities such as a degree or certification, or ... received conflicting expert testimony regarding whether the practice of meditation eight hours a ... ...
-
IN RE SOUTHEASTERN BAPTIST THEO. SEMINARY
... ... 247 In the Matter of the Appeal of SOUTHEASTERN BAPTIST THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY, ... from the denials of exemption of the 1996 Wake County Board of Equalization and Review ... educational institution located in Wake Forest, North Carolina. The Seminary owns approximately ... Assembly to exempt from taxation "property held for educational, scientific, literary, ... (1) Owned by an educational institution (including a ... See In re Wake Forest University, 51 N.C.App. 516, 277 S.E.2d 91 (1981) (parking ... ...
-
In re Appalachian Student Housing Corp.
... ... 379In the Matter The Appeal of APPALACHIAN STUDENT HOUSING CORPORATION from he decisions of the Watauga County Board of Equalization and Review concerning tion of certain real and personal property for tax years ... in trust by ASHC for Appalachian State University (ASU) was not exempt from ad valorem taxation by ... "the subject student housing facility is not owned by Appalachian State University[.]" As a result, ... 80,000 acres of land known as the Hoffman Forest, located in Onslow and Jones County. Forestry, ... we reverse the Commission's decision regarding the requested exemptions for 2001 and 2002 ... (1993), and a stadium parking lot, see In re Wake Forest University, 51 N.C.App. 516, 277 S.E.2d ... ...
-
State v. Snowden
... ... to this rule, however, and, under certain circumstances, a police officer not aided by ... were riding was lawful, and the property in plain view within the vehicle was lawfully ... ...