- 29 -
operation), revd. on other grounds sub nom. Wyatt v. United
States, 221 F.3d 1090 (Fed. Cir. 2001); Cloverport, 6 Cl. Ct. at
200 (5% over Treasury rate; existing operation).
5. Other Factors
Moritz raised a parade of improbable specters that might
also diminish the value of the property. For example, he
included in his report the possibility of the property’s being
subject to wetland regulation, cited social pressure as a factor
for lowering the value, and noted other regulatory risks that
might dampen the appraised value. We take none of these claims
seriously. It was well established in the record that property
all along the San Jacinto River was being mined for sand and
gravel in the late 1990s.
6. Residual Value
After the mining operations have ended, the property will
have some remaining value, even if it is just a pool of stagnant
water surrounded by a fringe of dry land. Ebanks did not address
this issue in his report. Moritz came up with a future value of
$1,000/acre for the property.15 We accept his figure.
15 Moritz calculated this figure by first using Harris
County’s appraisal value of $157,100, which came to $4,600 per
acre. He then adapted his comparable-sales approach. Sales #2
and #4 were sold after being depleted of sand and gravel
resources; Sale #4 sold at a price 67% less than its original
value as vacant floodplain land. In reviewing county records,
Moritz saw an appraisal range of between $500 and $1,500 per acre
for depleted mining property. By extrapolating the pit-discount
figure, Moritz concluded that the subject property could
reasonably be expected to fetch $1,000 per acre once the deposits
(continued...)
Page: Previous 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007