AG19860915 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

In November of 1982 the church employed the archit~ural firm of Wilbur, KendriCk, Workman and Warren to assist it in planning its relocation. The church's building committee directed the architectural firm to concentrate its prelimlnary studies on the subject property. Followlng a topigraphical survey of the site and the architect's preliminary report that the site would meet the church's relocation needs, the church formerly voted on January 30, 1983 to relocate from the Spring Street site to the Branchview site. Thereafter, the architects began drawing Plans for new facilities for the church and the church entered into a fund raising program. The ~rchitect's plans were put out for bid and finally in Februaryqof 1984 a contract was signed and construction began on the site. The church building committee accepted the new building as substantially completed on June 28, 1985 and the church held its first formal worship service in the completed facility on SUnday, July 7, 1985. In the years prior to 1982'the site was used by the church exclusively for religous purposes. Most noticably, during the Christmas Season for several years the church erected a creche facing Branchview -~ Drive .and-members~:of: the: church -presented a live nativity--for--.the-e~joyment.-p~-all-~asse=s--by .... In addition~i..L..~. various. SundayLi:Schoot3~classes~r~h~ -scout..-troop,-,-the Royal ~ A~assasdors, . and other ~-organization spbnsored by the church' made use of--the property-from ~ime to time.for outdoor:' meetings and activitie's.:~ '. ~ The pertinent portion of North.Carolina General Statute 105, ..'~ 278.3 reads as follows: (a} Buildings, the land they actually occupy, and additional adjacent land reasonably necessary for the convenient use of any such building shall be exempted from taxation if wholly owned by ... (a church} and if: 1. Wholly owned and exclusively used by it's owner for religous purposes .... The term "adjacent" used in the exemption statute does not require that the property adjoin the property on which the building exists. Under the exemption Statute as interpreted by the North Carolina Supreme Court the subject property was at all times "adjacent" to its buildings located at the corner of Spring and Grove Streets. In the-case of Harrison v. Guilford County, 218 NC 719 (1940} the Supreme Court held that a six acre lot 'owned by the First Baptist Church of Greensboro, located 4 or 5 blocks away from its existing buildings was "adjacent" to those ' ~uildings within the meaning of the statute even though definite plans for the location of the new church building on the lot had lI-