Commercial property protests are a different animal than residential ones. The appraisal district has more data, more valuation methodologies to hide behind, and appraisers who specialize in exactly this type of property. When my client came to me with a Travis County warehouse assessed at $1,400,000 for the 2025 tax year, I knew a generic protest wasn't going to move the needle. We needed to build an airtight case — and we did. Final value after the ARB hearing: $1,080,000. A reduction of $320,000, saving the client roughly $8,000 in annual property taxes.
Here's exactly how the case came together.
Step 1 — Understanding Why the District Valued It at $1.4M
Before you can argue against a value, you have to understand how the district arrived at it. I pulled the property's appraisal card from TCAD's public portal and requested the property record file, which includes the methodology and any income or cost data the district used. For this warehouse, TCAD had relied primarily on the cost approach — replacement cost of the structure, depreciated over time, plus land value. The problem: their depreciation schedule was conservative, they had used a land value derived from a 2022 sale in a different submarket, and they had made no adjustment for the building's functional limitations.
That gave me three separate angles to attack.
Step 2 — Physical Inspection and Condition Documentation
I visited the property before filing a single page of evidence. A drive-by isn't enough for commercial work. I walked the site with the owner and documented:
- Clear height: 18 feet at the eave — below the 24–28 foot clear height that modern logistics tenants require. This is functional obsolescence that meaningfully limits the tenant pool and rental rate.
- Dock configuration: Two grade-level doors and one dock-high door. For a building of this square footage, the dock ratio is below market standard, reducing desirability for distribution users.
- HVAC and electrical: The office portion — roughly 12% of total area — had aging HVAC that the owner had deferred replacing. I photographed the units and got a replacement estimate from a contractor.
- Parking and yard depth: Limited truck court depth restricted semi trailer maneuverability. Photographed and measured.
- Roof: Original roof membrane, approximately 22 years old. No active leaks, but well past typical replacement cycle. I obtained a roof assessment letter from a roofing contractor.
Every one of these items went into the evidence packet with photos, measurements, and third-party documentation where available. The district's cost-approach model had applied standard depreciation — none of these functional deficiencies were specifically accounted for.
Step 3 — Building the Income Approach
For income-producing commercial property, the income approach often carries the most weight with ARB panels. It answers the question the market actually asks: what would a rational investor pay for this cash flow?
I pulled lease comps from CoStar for comparable industrial buildings in the same Austin submarket — same vintage, similar clear height, similar dock ratios. Market asking rents for this subtype were running $9.50–$11.00 per square foot (NNN) for well-configured space. Given the functional limitations documented above, I supported a market rent of $8.75/sf NNN — at the bottom of the range, with reasoning tied directly to each deficiency.
I then applied:
- Vacancy and credit loss: 8%, in line with Austin industrial vacancy at the time of valuation (CBRE Q4 2024 Austin Industrial report)
- Operating expenses: Management fee (4%), insurance (estimated), reserves for replacement (based on roof and HVAC condition)
- Cap rate: 6.75%, derived from three verified industrial sales in Travis County with disclosed cap rates
The income approach produced a value of $1,060,000 — well below the district's $1,400,000 assessment.
Step 4 — Comparable Sales
I never rely on a single valuation approach alone. I pulled six comparable industrial sales from the prior 18 months in Travis and adjacent counties — all within a reasonable drive time, all with similar age and configuration. I adjusted each comp for size, clear height, and dock ratio using a grid format the ARB panel could follow at a glance.
The adjusted sales ranged from $68–$82 per square foot. The district had implicitly valued the subject at $97/sf. Even at the top of the comp range, the indicated value was approximately $1,190,000. At the midpoint, about $1,090,000.
The three approaches — cost (adjusted for physical and functional depreciation), income, and sales comparison — were telling the same story. The district's value was materially above what the evidence supported.
Step 5 — The Informal Review
I brought the full packet to the informal review: tabbed, numbered, with an executive summary on page one so the appraiser didn't have to dig to understand our position. I explained the functional obsolescence items in plain language — not as a list of complaints, but as specific factors that reduce what a willing buyer would pay.
The TCAD appraiser acknowledged the clear-height issue and the dock ratio, but held firm on the land value component and questioned one of my comparable sales (a property that had sold partially vacant). We discussed it. I conceded that one comp and narrowed to the remaining five. The appraiser offered $1,220,000.
I told my client. We agreed it wasn't enough given what the evidence showed. We proceeded to the ARB hearing.
Step 6 — The ARB Hearing
The ARB hearing was scheduled for 45 minutes. I presented the three-approach analysis, walked the panel through the condition photos, and spent extra time on the income approach because two of the three panel members had commercial real estate backgrounds and understood cap rate math.
The district's appraiser defended the informal offer of $1,220,000. I asked directly: what cap rate is embedded in your cost-approach conclusion? The appraiser couldn't answer — because the cost approach doesn't use a cap rate. That moment illustrated the core problem: the district's methodology didn't reflect how the market prices industrial assets.
The panel deliberated for about ten minutes. They came back with $1,080,000.
What This Protest Required That a Volume Company Can't Deliver
This case took roughly 14 hours of work spread across three weeks: the site visit, the records request, the lease comp research, building the income model, pulling and adjusting the sales comps, writing the evidence packet, attending the informal review, and preparing and attending the ARB hearing. No algorithm produces that. No one handling 5,000 cases a year has time to do it for a single property.
The $8,000 in annual tax savings represents real money for a small business owner. It also compounds — a lower assessed value this year is the baseline for next year's assessment. The fight was worth it.
If you own commercial property in Travis, Williamson, or Hays County and believe your assessment is too high, reach out. I'll tell you honestly whether I think there's a case, and what building one would look like.