HomeMy WebLinkAbout041111_ca06
Consent Agenda
~ON --ro
~~;i~i JEFFERSON COUNTY PUBLIC HEALTH
. 't;r:!yV1' 615 Sheridan Street. Port Townsend' Washington' 98368
"lJ'.O www.Jeffersoncountypubllchealth.org
JEFFERSON COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AGENDA REQUEST
TO:
Board of County Commissioners
Philip Morley, County Administrator
FROM:
Jean Baldwin, Director
Tam! Pokorny, Environmental Specialist II
)yyn \ \ \ I '2-0\ ,
DATE:
SUBJECT: Dosewalllps Roodplain Acquisition Project Phase II and Mid
Hood Canal Acquisition Project: Concurrence and
Authorization for Coone and Crowell Properties
STATEMENT OF ISSUE:
Water Quality staff requests concurrence on Just Compensation values and authorization
to initiate negotiations on two of the proposed acquisitions of the Dosewallips Roodplain
Acquisition Project Phase II and Mid Hood Canal Acquisition Project. Match has been
met previously through the acquisition of other floodplain properties using Secure Rural
Schools TItle ill funds. The purpose of the projects is the support of salmon recovery in
the Dosewallips RIver.
ANALYSIS/STRATEGIC GOALS/PRO'S and CON'S:
Just Compensation values for the portions of the Coone and Crowell properties identified
for acquisition are presented in the Review Appraiser's Certificates and listed below.
Both properties indude floodplain and shorelines associated with the Dosewalllps RIver.
The original appraisals and appraiser's reviewer certificates are provided.
Staff requests concurrence with the Just Compensation values per acre and further
requests authorization to begin negotiations for these properties. Rnal acreages will be
determined through the survey process and presented to the BoCC with the Purchase &
Sale Agreement(s).
COMMUNITY HEALTH
DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES
MAIN: 360385-9400
FAX: 36G385-9401
PUBLIC HEALTH
liWAYS WORKING FOR A SAFER AND
HEALTHIER COMMUNITY
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
WATER QUALITY
MAIN: 360385-9444
FAX: 36G3794487
Consent agenda
Property SRFB Grant Acreage Assessor's Appraisal Review
Owner Parcel Number Value and
Conclusion
Coone Dosewalllps n 10.2 mil acres Portion of $5,500 per acre
(Final acreage to 602344015 (totaling
be determined approximately
by survey) $56,100)
Crowell Mid Hood 15 mil acres Portion of $5,500 per acre
Canal (Final acreage to 602341005 (totaling
be determined approximately
bv survey) $82.500)
The SRFB agreement for the Dosewalllps Aoodplain Acquisition Project Phase n (IAC#06-
2288A) was approved by the Board of County Commissioners on March 12, 2007. The
SRFB Agreement for the Mid Hood Canal Project (lAC #07-191IA) was approved by the
Board of County Commissioners on August 4, 2008.
FISCAL IMPACT/COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS:
Funding for these acquisitions is being provided by the two Salmon Recovery Funding
Board grants listed above. Match obligation has been met through the use of Secure
Rural Schools Title ill funds in acquiring the Fulton and Larson properties.
RECOMMENDATION:
JCPH Management recommends the BoCC sign the concurrence and authorization
documents.
y/c;{;
Date
COMMUNITY HEALTH
DEVELOPMENTAL DlsABIUTIEs
MAIN: 360-385-9400
FAX: 360-385-9401
PUBLIC HEALTH
~(r~~~Gt~PpAMD~I~
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
NATURAL RESOURCES
MAl N: 360-385-9444
FAX: 350-385-9401
AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEED WITH
FLOODPLAINISALMON RECOVERY ACQUISmON
DOSEWALLIPS FLOODPLAIN ACQUISmON PROJECT PHASE n
COONE PROPERTY
:Based on the Review Appraiser's Certificate from Joseph H. Granger dated March 9, 2011 for fee-simple
acquisition of a portion of the Coone Property near Brlnnon,. W A, the Board of County Commissioners of
Jefferson County does hereby indicate its concurrence and give authorization to Water Quality Division to
begin negotiations for the designated property.
We understand that the total Just Compensation value will be calculated from the results of a
professional survey of the portion of the property to be acquired, and this figure will be reflected in a
Purchase and Sale Agreement to be considered by the Commissioners at a future date. In addition, we
understand that the proposed land division is allowable under JCC 18.35.040(4).
Parcel Just Compensation (Offer)
Larger contiguons portion S5,soo per acre for 10.2 mil acres
of Assessor Parcel
#602344015 located south
of the DosewalIips River .
Dated this
day of
.2011
JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
John Austin, Chairman
Approved as tJ. form only:
J~<A~t!"~"
SEAL:
ATIEST:
Lorna Delaney
CIeri;: of the Board
Date
.
AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEED WITH
FLOODPLAIN/SALMON RECOVERY ACQUlSmON
MID HOOD CANAL ACQUlSmON PROJECT
CROWELL PROPERTY
Based on the Review Appraiser's Certificate dated March 9, 2011 for fue.-simple acquisition of a
portion of the Crowell Ptopelty near Brinnon, the Board of County Commissioners of Jefferson
County does hereby indicate its concurrence and give anthorization to Water Quality Division to
begin negotiations for the designated property.
We understand that the total Just Compensation value will be calculated from the results of a
professional survey of the portion of the property to be acquired, and this figure will be reflected
in a Purchase and Sale Agreement to be considered by the Commissioners at a future date. In
addition, we understand that the proposed land division is allowable under JCC 18.35.040(4).
Parcel Just Compensation (Offer)
Portion of Assessor $5,500 per acre for 15 mil acres
Parcel # 602341005 to
include predominantly
floodnlaln and slone.
Dated this
day of
.2011
JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
John Austin, Chairman
Approved as 1.,) form only:
(). 3 J3 1 001/
kfferson Co. Prosecutor OffkJ
SEAL:
ATTEST:
Lorna Delaney
Clerk of the Board
Date
;j
-
~ . ....
REVIEW APPRAISER CERTIFICATE
Project: ilosewaDips River Floodplain Acquisition n
Mid-Hood Canal Acquisition Project
Property Owner: UerJa G. Coone
Owner's Address: 575 DosewaDips RoBd, Brinnon, W A. 98320
Property AddresslLocation: 575 DosewaDips Road, Brinnon, W A 98320.
Parcel Tax Nos. 60Z344009, 010, 015, 023 in
Jefferson County, WA
Thefo/lowing appraisal has been made on the subjectproperty t111d is the subject ojt/ris review:
APPRAISER VALUEDA'lll JIEFllRBVALUE AFlERVALUE VALUE DIFFERENCI!
AfT lY"ATION
L G.L. Goocb\mD
1-10-2011
$280,000
$244,000
$36.000
TAKING DAMAGES SPIlCJlENEFITS
$56,100 NA $20,100
1, the review appmiser, certify to the following:
1. The above appraisal report bas been reviewed by the umletsigned and waS found to have followed accepted "I'1".m..J principles
. and techniques In the valuation of real property In accordance with existing Slate law.
2. That the clelermination of vaItie wblch is setforth below bas been independently reacI100 based on appmisals and other faciuat
data of record without collaboratlon or direction. The analyses, opinions. and conclusions In !his review report are Umited .
Only by the assumptions and limiting conditions stated in !his review report, and are my personal, unbiased professional
analyses, oplniOJIS, and conclusions.
3. I have no direct or indirect pti:sent or contempJated futon: pi:monaI Interest In such property or In any benefit from !be
acquisition of such property appraised, and I have no personaI Interest or bias with respect to the parties Involved.
4. I did personally Inspect the subject property to be acquired and a '''I''..s..illlItive sample of the """'l""..bIe lI3ies appllcable
thereto on Man:h 4, 2011.
5 My compensa1ion Is not contingent on an aclIon or event resulting from the analyses, opinions. or conclusions m.. or the nse
of, tbis review report.
6. Appraisal fJl and my analyses, opinions. and conclusions were developed and !his review report was l""jAt...! In conformity
with the UrdformStandartls ojProfessionalAppraisal Pracdce and with the UtdfonnAppraislll Standards For Federal lm1d
AcquIsitions.
7. Any fads andIordata 1".......dOO by the review appraiser and used In the review proc.ess are true and correct.
8. No one provided significant professional "'lIri$mCe to the peISOIl signing !his review report.
9. I further certify that if !his certificate is to be used In coqjunctlon with a FedeI1li aid proj~ all of the approved jast
compensation is eligible for Fedeta1 reimbursement.
Just Compensation Is:
Land Taken in Fee: 10.2 mil acres @ $5.500 per acre
Taken Timber Contribution (in land value):
T~tal Just Compensation for this larger parcel
=
$ 56,100 (R)
$ 0
$ 56,100.
=
=
. W A Slate Certified General realeslale appraiser number.
General fJ 1100549
osephH. Granger, Review Appmiser
Date Signed: March 9, 2011
J.H. Gnmger, RsvIeWer
Page 1 of 4 Pages
Pame1:Coone
. .
/
"
APPRAISAL REVIEW CONCLUSIONS
The subject larger parcel is correctly determined in the appraisal as a 50.87 mil acre tract of Dosewallips River
front land encumbered with steep topography, river setbacks, flood plains, a majorpowerline easement, and
wetlandslbuffers. h is cw..",t1y improved with two homes, one of which is a manufactured home. The land's
highest and best.use is supported in the appmis8.1 as to hold for eventual residential development per zoning,
demand. physical features, and trends. Thns, all of its existing improvements fully contribute value to the land.
The appmisal problem is a partial taking of 10.20 acres in fee simple title of the part of the ownership lying south
of its river frontllge. Located within the taking are a few merchantable trees (timber stumpage). All of the major
improvements are located a significant distance from the proposed taking and are.thus unaffected by the
taking/project.
The pmpose of the taking is for water quality enhancement/protection and salmon enhancement/protection. Since
tllt; project will benefit the public and the environment in genei'al, there are only general benefits caused by the
project, and thus there are no special benefits to the larger parcel remaindei caused by the proposed project. There
are also no ascertainable severance damages caused by the taking/project.
Appmisal II is a complete appraisal assignment i1i a self-contained report utTlizing the Before and After appraisal
procedure. While this assignment, report, and procedure follow USP AP, federal, and state standards for partial
land acquisitions, the Before and After procedure can rarely result.in general benefits incorrectly being part of just
compensation (only special benefits can be part of just compensation per W A stste and federal rules).
Appraisal #1 processes a. Sales Comparison Approach to value the land as vacant in the Before situation; no other
approach is appropriate or typicaL h analyzes and compares 6 large land sales and one listing in the
vicinity/neighborhood, concluding raw land value at $5,500 per acre overall, or $280,000 (R) for the subject's
50.87 acres; this is reasonable and supported.
In the After situation, Appmisal #1 processes a Sales Comparison Approach to value the land as vacant; no other
approach is appropriate or typical. It analyzes and compares the same 61arge land sales and one listing in the
vicinity/neighborhood used in the Before situation, but concludes raw land value at $6,000 per acre overall, or
$244,000 (R) for the subject remainder's 4{).67acres, due primarily to a change in size. While this $500 increase
in the per acre land value is supportable in the market as Fair Market Value, itestsblishes special benefits that are
cansed by the taking, which is not allowed per WA State v Templermin and per the Uniform Appraisal Standards
For Federal LandAcquisitions.
Appraisal #1 's consultation with a professional forester concludes that the take contains no merchan1Bble timber
beyond aesthetic contnllUtion to (mc1uded in) the iaw land value; this is reasonable and supported.
There are several typographical errors in the appraisal but their correction would not alter the value conclusions
reached, The reviewer removes the unlawful special benefits and rounds all calculations per the prudent market
There are no personalty (chattel) items or tenant-owned realty items takenlatfected.
The appraisal and this re~ use the correct methods and techniques. The market data in the
appraisal are adI!qnate and appropriate to solve the appraisal problem. The value conc1nslons in this
re-riew are reasonable and fit the market evidence.
J.H. Granger, RevIewer
Page 2 at 4 Psges
Pan;eJ, Coone
;I'
,,,;
~ '. .
APPRAISAL REVIEW SALIENT INFORMATION
Property .Rights A{lp~. th .h...... ~........;....l . the"" . l' "
Unless specified otherwIse m UJJS reVIew," e property DC'""" "1:'1:"""-' constitute .ee stmple interest.
Date of Value
The effective date of the value opinion for the property in this review is 1-10-2011.
Competency of Reviewer
The reviewer has both the knowledge and experience required to cOmpetently perform this review; a detailed
resUme is available upon request. The reviewer is approved by the Federal Highway Administration, Washington
State TrdUl>pUll..tion Department, and the lAC to perform fee appraisal reviews for public agencies in Washington
State. The reviewer is a state eert:itiedappraiserwith theGeneml da...mcation (expires 1-13-12). .
Purpose of this Review ."
OveraII, the purpose is to emmate the Just Compensation due the larger parcel owner for a partial taking as of
1-10-2011. " "
" This is done by: P.!<timating the Fair Market Value Of the larger parcel in the Before situation; estimating the Fair
Marlret Value of the larger parcel remainder in the After situation; Subtracting the latter from the former; and
removing any unlawful just compensation items th"..alUllJ.
Use of this Review
It is und",lltuud that this Reviewer's Certificate will be used for acquisition I funding pm:poses by the client,
Jefferson County.
Scope of this Review
Those commonly recognized valuation methods and techniques most al1l'Joj.>l1ate for valuing the subject properties
were dime in this review. This review involved a reasonably detailed inspection of the subject property, the subject "
neighborhood, and surrounding/cori1peting neighborhoods. Sales and listings of competing properties were
investigated before any conclusions of value were made.
The Income and CostApproaches to value were not employed for land valuation in this review because said
approaches are not market typical forthe subject's type ofland, and because the Sales Comparison Approach is
sufficient to solve the subject land value appraisal problem.
Definition of Fair Market Value
"Fair Market Value" is the amount"in cash which a well-informed buyer, willing bnt not obliged to bnythe
1'.c,per1y, would pay, and which a well-informed seller, willing but not obligated to sell it would accept, taking into
considerntion all uses to which the property is adapted and might in reason be applied. (Washington Pattern
Instruction 150.0S). "
J.H. Gnmger, Reviewer
Page 3 014 Pages
pan:eI:Coone
~. . . ..
/
,
~
APPRAISAL REVIEW ASSUMPTIONS & LIMITING CONDmONS
1. The property descriptions supplied to the reviewer are assumed to be correct;
2. No surveys of the properties have been made by the reviewer and no responsibility is assumed in connection
with such matters. Maps in the appraisal are included only to assist the reader in viol1"li7.ing the properties.
Property dimensions and sizes shonld be considered approximate;
3. No responsibility is assumed for matters of a legal nature affecting title to the property, noris any opinion of
title rendered. Property title is assumed to be good and merchantable and vested as noted;
4. Information fumisIied by others is assumed to be true, correct ,and I'!iliable. A reasonable effort has been made
to verify such information; however, no responsibility for its accuracy is a."",.rne(J by the reviewer;
5. All mortgages, liens, encumbrances, leases, and servitudes have been disregarded noless so specified in review.
The ProPerties are assumed to be under responsible ownership and competent management; .
6. It is assumed that there are no hidden or unapparent conditions of the properties, their subsoil, or their
structures which wonld render them more or less valuable. No responsibility is assumed for such conditions orfor
engineering ortesting which may be required to discover them;
7. Unless otherwise stated. the existence of hazardous material, which mayor may not be present in or on the
properties, was not observed by the reviewer. The reviewer has no knowledge of the existence of such materials on
or in the properties. The reviewer, however, is not qualified to detect such substances. The presence of any
potentially hazardous materials may affect the value of the properties. The value estimates in this review are
predicated on the assumption that there is no such material on or in the I'lUjlI;>rties that would cause a loss in value.
No responsibility is assumed for any such conditions, or for the expertise or engineering knowledge required to
discover them. The client is urged to retain an expert in this field if desired.
8. Unless otherwise stated, no environmental impact studies were either requested or made in conjunction with
this review, and the reviewer hereby reserves the right to alter, amend, revise, or rescind any of the value opinions
based upon any Slibsequent environmental impact studies, research, or investigation;
9. It is assumed that there is full compliance with all applicable federal, state, and local environmental regulations
and laws noless.noncompJiance is specified, defined, and considered in this review;
10. It is assumed that all applicable zoning and use regulations and restrictions have been complied with. noless
nonconformity has been specified, defined, and considered in this review;
11. It is aOOl.""", that all required licenses, consents, or other legislative or administrative authority from any local,
state, or nations! governmental or private entity or organization have been or can be obtained or renewed for any
useon~chthevalueestimatescontainedinthisrevieware~
12. The reviewer will not be required to give te<VlJlnny or appear in court because of having made this review
unless arrangements have been previously made therefor;
13. Possession of this review or a copy thereof, does not carry with it the right of publication. It may not be used
for any purpose by any person other than the client without the writtl:n cousent of the reviewer and in any event,
only with properly written qualification and only in its entirety; . . .
14. Neither all nor any part of the contents of this review, or copy thereof, shall be conveyed to the public through
advertising, public relations, uews, sales, or any other media without written consent and approval of the reviewer.
Nor shall the reviewer, client, firm. or professional org;mi7>lnon of which the reviewer is a member be identified
without the written consent of the reviewer;
15. The liability of the reviewer, ell1ployees, and subcontrsctors is limited to the client only. There is no
accountability, obligation, or liability to any third party. If this review is placed in the bands of anyone other than
the client, the client shall make such party aware of all limiting conditions and assumptions of the assignment and
related discussions. The reviewer is in no way responsible for any costs incurred to discover or correct any
deficiencies in the properties; .
16. Acceptance andlor use of this review constitutes acceptance of the foregoing assumptions and limjting
conditions.
J.H. Granger, Reviewer
Page 4 at 4 Pages
ParceJ:Coone
"
..
REVIEW APPRAISER CERTIFICATE
Project DosewaDips River Floodplain Ac:quIsition n
Mid-Hood Canal AcqBisition Project
Property Owner: J!JplJnnl'Mae Crowell
Owner's Address: 1131 Dosewal1ipS Road, Drinnon, W A' 98320
Property AddresslLocatioo: 1131 DosewaDips Road, Briimon, W A 98320,
Parcel TaX No. 602341005 in
. Jefferson County, WA
The jolJowfng apf1TfliJJ(I11w been matl8 on the 31IhJed property tmd is the 31IhJed ojrlds review:
APPRAISER . VALUBDATE JIEIlORBVALUB APlt!R VALUB vALllil D!FFIllIIlNCB
TAI!JNG
Al1.twA'T'fnN'
DAMAGES
NA
SPEC.BENIlF1TS
$10,500
L G.L. (;oodm....l.lG-2011
,
$197,000
$125,000
$72,000
$82,500
1. the review appraiser, certify to the following:
. 1.' The above appndsal reporthas been reviewed by the under.dgned and was found to bave folloWed accepted apprnisaI principles
and techniques In the valuation of real property In ,.....".:Lul.ce with existing Stale Jaw.
2. That the MP.ntllmrtion of value wblch Is set forth below has been independently reached based on appraisa1s and other factual
data of record withontcollaboration ordirection. The analyses, opinions, and conclusions In this review report are Iimlted
only by the assumptions and Ilmitiog conditions sIaIed In thi,s review report. and are my personal. unbiased professional
aDaiyses, opinions. and conclusions.
3. I bave no direct or Indirect present or contemplated fuIun: persona1lnterest iri such property or In any beneIit from the
acq1Iim1ion of such property appralsed. and I have no persona1lnterest or bias with respect to the parties Involved. .
4. I did persona11y lnspect the subject property to be acquired and a represenlalive sample of the <;UWJ!'Uable sales appIlcable
thereto on MOrch 4, 2011.
5 My lX>u1jloillSl11ion is not conIIngent on an action or event resulting from the analyses, opinions. or conclusions in, or the use
of, thi,s revlew report.
6. Appmisal #1 and my analyses, opinions. and conclusions were deVeloped and thi,s review report was prepared In conformity
with the Unifimn Stantlmds of Projessiono1 Appraisal Proctice and with the UniformAppraisal Sttmrlords For FederuJ.lond
Acquisitions. . .
7. Any facts andIordala I"~ by the review. appraiser and used In the revieW process are !rue and correct. .
8. No one provided slgJilficant professional -"""'co to the person signing thi,s review report.
9. I further c:ertirY that if thi,s certificare Is to be used in COJlium:1ion with a FedemI aid ptqjec:t, aD of the approved just
compensation Is eligible for Federa1 reimbursement.
Just Compensation is:
Land Taken in Fee: 15.0 mil acres @ $5,500 per acre
Taken TImber Contribution (in land value):
Total Just Compensation for' this larger parcel
W A Slate Cerllfied General real estate appraiser number.
Geneml # 1100549
= $ 82,500
= $ 0
= $ 82,500.
,(
b II. Gmnger, Review Apprnlser
Date Signed: March 9, 2011
J.N. Gnmget; Re\f<,......
Page 1 at 4 Pages
Psn:eI: Crowell
~
APPRAISAL REVIEW CONCLUSIONS
The subject ~ parcel is correctly determined in the appraisal as a 35.77 Dill acre tract ofland encumbered with
steep topography, river ovedlow channel, and wetIandslbuffers. It is currently improved with an older home,
several outbuildings, and some fence. The land's highest and best use is supported in the appraisal as to hold for
eventual residential development per zoning, demand, physical features, and trends. Thus,;tI1 of its existing
inqirov"wcrd:lo fully contribute value to the land.
The appraisal problem is a partial taking of 15.0 acres in fee simple title off its southew. end Located within the
taking are some merchantable trees (timber stumpage ). All of the nuyor improvements are located a significant
distance from the proposed taking and are thus unaffected by the takingfproject.
The pmpose of the taking is for water quality enhancement/protection and salmon enhancement/protection. Since
the project will benefit the public and the environment in general, there are only general benefits cansed by the
project, and thus there are no special benefitS to the larger parcel remain"e~ Caused by the proposed project. There
are also no ascertainable severance damages cansed by the taking/project..
Appraisal #1 is a complete appraisal assignment in a self-contained ~ utilizing the Before and After.appraisal
procedure. While this assienment, report, and procedure follow USPAP, federal, and state standards for partial
land acquisitions, the Before and After procedure can rarely result in general benefits incorrectly being part of just
compeusation (only special benefits can be part of just compeusation per W A state and federal rules).
Appraisal #1 processes a Sales Comparison Approach to value the land as vacant in the Before situation; no other
approach is appropriate or typical. It analyzes and compares 6 large land sales and one listing in the
vicinity/neighborhood, concluding mw land value at $5,500 per acre overall, or $197,000 (R) for the subject's
30.77 acres; this is reasonable and supported.
In the.After situation. Appraisal #1 processes a Sales Comparison Approach to value the land as vacant; no other
approach is appropriate or typical. It analyzes and compares the same 6 large land sales and one listing in the
vicinity/neighborhood used in the Before situation, but concludes mw land value at $6,000 per acre overall, or
$125,000 (R) for the subject remain~s 20.77 acres, due prhnariIy to a change in size. While this $500 increase
in the per acre land value is supportable in the market as Fair Market Value, it establishes special benefits that are
caused by the taking, which is not allowed per WA StaJe v Templemcin and per the Unifurm APpraisal Standards
For Federal Land Acquisitions.
Appraisal #1 's consnItation with a professional forester concludes that the take contains no merchantable timber
beyond aesthetic contribution to (mcluded iD) the mw land value; this is reasonable and supported.
There are sevem! typogmphical errors in the appraisal but their correction would not alter the value conclosious
reached. The reviewer removes the unlawful special benefits and rounds all calcnlations per the prudent m;rrket
There are no personalty (chattel) items or tenant-owned realty iteJtts taken/affected.
The appraisal ~d this review use the correct methods and techniques. The market data in the
appraisal are adequate and appropriate to solve the appraisal problem.: The value concJnsions in this
re~ew are rell""....hle and fit the market evidence.
J.H. GI'IBI!ier, Rev/ewer
Page 2 014 Pages
Pan:el: Crowell
.
./ .
APPRAISAL REVIEW SALIENT INFORMATION
Prope~~thts A{Jp~~ . th -.ghts 'sed . th'" . l'
Unless .,t""'~ed o. erwISe m """ reVIew, e property n apprm constitute e.ee sunp.e interest.
Date of Value
The effective date of the value opinion for the property in this review is 1-10-2011.
Competency of Reviewer .
The reviewer has both the knowledge and experience required to competently pelform this review; a detailed
resume is available upon request. The reviewer is approved by the Fedeml JIighway Adminimmon, Washington
State TranspuJlld:ion Department, and the lAC to p<>rfutlll fee appmisal reviews for public agencies in Washington
State. The reviewer is a state certified appmiser with the General clAl<qjfj.....tion (expIreS 1-13-12). -
Purpose ofihis Review
Overnll, the purpose is to estimate the Just Compensation due the larger parcel owner for a partial taking as of
1-10-2011.
This is done by: estimating the Fair Market Value of the larger parcel in the Before situation; estimAting the Fair
Market Value of the larger parcel remainder in the Aftl;r situation; subtIacting the latter from the fonner; and
removing any unlawful just compensation items therefrom.
Use oftbis Review
It is understood that this Reviewer's Certificate will be used for acquisition I funding purposes by the clieJ).t,
Jefferson County.
Seope oftbis Review
Those commonly recognized valuatiO!1 methods and teclmiques most ap!>w(>liate for valuing the subject properties
were done in this review. This review involved a reasonably detailed inspection of the subject property, the subject
neighborhood, and surrounding/competing neighborhoods. Sales and listings of competing properties were
investigated before any conclusions of value were made. -
The Income and Cost Approaches to value were not employed for land valuation in this review bec;mse said
approaches are not mar.ket typical for the subject's type of land, and ~pse the SaIes Comparison Approach is
sufficient to solve the subject land value appraisaI problem.
Definition of Fair- Market Value
"Fair Market Value" is the amount in cash which a well-informed buyer, willing but not obliged to buy the
fnoperty, would pay, and which a well-informed seller, willing but not obligated to sell it would accept, taking into
consideration all uses to which the property is adapted and might in reason be applied. (Washington Pattern
Instruction 150.08).
- J.H. Granger, RevIewer
Page 3 of 4 Pages
Ptm:el: Crowell
~
,
."
APPRAISAL REVIEW ASSUMPTIONS & LIMITING CONDmONS
1. The property descriptions supplied to the reviewer are assumed to be correct;
2. No surveys of the ploperties have been made by the reviewer and no responsibility is assumed in connection
with such matters. Maps in the appraisal are included only to assist the reader in visualizing the properties.
Property dimensions and sizes shonld be considered approximate;
3. No responsibility is assumed for matters of a legal nature affecting title to the property, nor is any opinion of
title rendered. Property title is assumed to be good and merchantable and vested as noted;
4. Information furnished by others is assumed to be true, correct , and reliable. A reasonable effort has been made
to verify such information; however, no responsibility for its accuracy is assumed by the reviewer; .
S. AIl mortgages, liens, encumbrances, leases, and servitudes have been disregarded unless so specified in review.
The properties are assumed to be under responsible ownership and competent management;
6. It is as","ried that there are no hidden or unappllIeJlt conditions of the properties, their subsoil, or their
structures whic;h would render them more or less valuable. No responsibility is assumed for such conditions or for
engineering or testing which may be required to discover them;
7. Unless otherwise stated, the existence ofbazardous material, which may or may not be present in or on the
properties, was not observed by the reviewer. The reviewer has no knowledge of the existence of such materials on
or in the properties. The reviewer, however, is not qualified to detect such substances. The presence of any
potentially hazardous materials may affect the value of the properties. The valueP.RfimatAA in this review are
predicated on the assumption that there is no such material on or in the properties that would cause a loss in value.
No responsibility is assumed for any such conditions, or for the expertise or engin\lllring knowledge required to
discover them. The client is urged to retain an expert in this field if desired. .
8. Unless otherwise stated, no environmental impact studies were either requested or made in conjunction with
this review, and the reviewer hereby reserves the right to alter, amend, revise, or reScind any of the value opinions
based upon any subsequent environmental impact studies, research, or investigation;
9. It is lL~ that there is full compliance with all applicable federal, state, and local environmental regulations
and laws unless noncompliance is specified, defined, and considered in this review;
10. It is assumed that all applicable zoning and use regulations and restrictions have been complied with, unless
nonconformity has been specified, defined, and considered in this review; .
11. It is assumed that all required licenses, consents, or other legislative or administrative authOrity from any local,
state, or national governmental or private entity ot organization have been or can be obtained or renewed for any
use on which the value e>dimAfp.g contained in this review are based;
12. The reviewer will not be required to give testimony or appear in court because of having made this review
unless arrangements have been previously made therefor; .
13. Possession of this review or a copy thereof, does not cany with it the right of publication. It may not be used
for any purpose by any person other than the client without the written consent of the reviewer and in any event,
only with properly written qualification and only in its entirety;
14. Neither all nor any part of the contents of this review, or copy thereof, shaIl be conveyed to the public through
advertising, public relations, news, sales, or any other media without written consent and approval of the reviewer.
Nor shall the reviewer, client, firm, or professional organization of which the reviewer is a member be ideatified
without the written consent of the reviewer;
15. The liability of the reviewer, employees, and subcontractors is limited to the clieut only. There is no
accountability, obligation, or liability to any third pm1y.1f this review is placed in the hands of anyone other than
the client, the client ShaII make such party aware of all limiting conditions and assumptions of the assignment and
related discussions. The reviewer is in no way responsible for any costs incurred to discover or correct any
deficiencies in the pmperties; . .
16. Acceptance and/or use of this review constitutes acceptance of the foregoing assumptions and limiting
conditions.
J.H. Grrmger, Rsviewer
Page 4 of 4 Pages
PsrceI:Crowell