dissenting.
I respectfully dissent from the majority’s decision reversing the trial court and concluding that the five parcels owned by Eagle Lake Community Association (Association) and the one parcel owned by Eagle Lake Community Association Development Corporation (Development Corporation), a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Association, are exempt from separate assessment and taxation because by definition under the Uniform Planned Community Act (Act),1 they are convertible and withdrawa-ble real estate and subject to taxation.
The Association owns five parcels of property in Lackawanna County located in the Eagle Lake Community. The five parcels include land that is described as a greenbelt area near the entrance to the development with no improvements, a reserved area primarily used for a park and ball field, a reserved area for future construction, land described as undeveloped clean and green, and land that is all forest area. The Development Corporation owns one parcel in that same area which consists of 60 acres of land generally used as a hiking park and cross-county ski area. Each of the parcels was taxed separately for tax year 1998.
Both -the Association and the Development Corporation appealed the assessments to the Lackawanna County Board for the Assessment and Revision of Taxes (Board) arguing that the parcels were exempt because they were either controlled or common facilities within the meaning of the Act for which no separate assessed value could be imposed.2 The Board denied the appeals and the Association and Development Corporation filed appeals with the Court of Common Pleas of Lacka-wanna County (trial court). The trial court affirmed the Board finding that the Development Corporation’s parcel was convertible and withdrawable real estate because it was set up to be subdivided and could be at any time annexed to the Association’s other parcels contiguous, adjacent or in the vicinity of this land. Similarly, the trial court found that all of the Association’s parcels were both convertible and withdrawable real estate and, therefore, taxable because they could eventually be subdivided to create additional units.
On appeal to this Court, the majority reverses the trial court rejecting the argument that the parcels are convertible and withdrawable real estate that can be sold at any time because “the classifications of convertible and withdrawable real estate cannot apply to real estate that has been converted to common area by conveyance to the Community Association or to real estate owned by the Development Corporation, but maintained, improved, and insured by the Community Association and made available for the common use of the members.” The majority further states that if any parcel is sold or developed in *471the future, it may be separately assessed and taxed at that time. I dissent from the majority’s decision because regardless of whether the parcels are currently being used as a common area, by definition, under the Act, they are withdrawable and convertible and, therefore, taxable.
Pursuant to 68 Pa.C.S. § 5105(b)(1) and (2), no separate assessed value can be imposed against common facilities or controlled facilities, but only against convertible or withdrawable real estate. 68 Pa. C.S. § 5105(b)(1) and (2). A “common facility” is defined as any real estate within a planned community which is owned by the Association or leased to the Association. A “controlled facility” is defined as any real estate with a planned community, whether or not a part of a unit, that is not a common facility but is maintained, improved, repaired, replaced, regulated, managed, insured or controlled by the association. “Withdrawable real estate” is defined as any -real estate that may be withdrawn from a flexible planned community. “Convertible real estate” is defined as a portion of a flexible planned community not within a building containing a unit within which additional units, limited common facilities or limited controlled facilities or any combination thereof may be created.
Here, because all of the parcels owned by the Development Corporation and the Association may be subdivided and, therefore, may create additional units, they are convertible real estate and separately taxable. Additionally, because they are also reserved areas that allow the Development Corporation and the Association to use the land in the manner they choose, enabling them to withdraw the parcels from the planned community, they are withdrawable real estate and also separately taxable.
Accordingly, I dissent and would affirm the trial court.
Judge LEADBETTER joins.. Act of December 19, 1996, P.L. 1336, 68 Pa.C.S. § 5103.
. 68 Pa.C.S. §§ 5101-5414.