- 32 -
stated, we do not believe that the income approach was an
appropriate way to value the property at issue in this case.
In his report, Mr. Cantrell set forth various problems
inherent in the development approach including that (1) the large
number of variables involved that makes this method susceptible
to error; (2) it is impossible to accurately predict when lots
will sell, and the best anyone can do is to make a "reasonable"
guess; (3) the expenses incurred in developing the property are
unknown and must be estimated; and (4) the discount factor
applied to the estimated cash-flows must be estimated and is
subject to disagreement. Additionally, Mr. Cantrell's report
states that the sales comparison method is generally recognized
as being the best method for valuing land as if vacant and ready
for improvement to its highest and best use. Furthermore, as we
have found that the highest and best use of the parcel of 30.3
acres was as agricultural land, and because Mr. Cantrell's
development analysis was based upon developing the parcel of 30.3
acres into an industrial subdivision, Mr. Cantrell's report is
not helpful to our determination of the value of the parcel of
30.3 acres.
Under the sales comparison method, Dr. Friedman determined
the fair market value of the parcel of 30.3 acres on December 17,
1992, to be $91,000 based on a value of $3,000 per acre. Dr.
Friedman compared the parcel of 30.3 acres to six other
comparables which were as follows:
Page: Previous 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011