Yorktown Domain Case

[Gobears81]

Define 'remaining issues'.

Hard to describe in depth here without showing in person, but it is a sidewalk project and they are having to rebuild the brick wall. The office is on a busy street, so the wall helps act as a sound barrier and also keep the sunlight out of the offices. When we spoke with him on how the wall would be rebuilt, we mentioned that we wanted to keep the upper rows of brick for the aforementioned reasons, to which he replied the beer comment. He mentioned that on another occasion also.

 

[djd09]

City Stopped from Using Eminent Domain for Speculative ‘Economic Development’

‘Increasingly, government officials are using the power of eminent domain to turn themselves into real estate speculators…’

https://www.libertyheadlines.com/appellate-restricts-eminent-domain/

Looks like i am not the only one on a "soapbox tirade".

 

[TRESinc]

LOL! Yeah, I've noticed that.

Sometimes its interesting to probe the depths of that rabbit-hole of absurdity.

most times we don't even have to ask for it, it just comes out naturally. take a look at this thread:

https://appraisersforum.com/forums/threads/bank-of-america.222192/page-2#post-2889918

 

[JTip]

Hard to describe in depth here without showing in person, but it is a sidewalk project and they are having to rebuild the brick wall. The office is on a busy street, so the wall helps act as a sound barrier and also keep the sunlight out of the offices. When we spoke with him on how the wall would be rebuilt, we mentioned that we wanted to keep the upper rows of brick for the aforementioned reasons, to which he replied the beer comment. He mentioned that on another occasion also.

If the brick wall is on private property and the easement (sidewalk project) affected this wall, there should be compensation. Typically with improvements, they are not rebuilt by the project contractors but paid for directly to the property owner to replace.

If the brick wall is on the state/city/town property, then it will be rebuilt to current standards regardless of neighboring properties opinion. Like having a tree in your neighbor's yard that shields your house from the sun; if they decide to cut it down and now your house gets hot, too bad.

 

[Elliott]

GB said, "...they are having to rebuild the brick wall. The office is on a busy street, so the wall helps act as a sound barrier and also keep the sunlight out of the offices."

Sounds like a 'grade change' which should mean its a partial taking. I only play a lawyer on tv and this site, I'm not really one.

 

[Gobears81]

If the brick wall is on private property and the easement (sidewalk project) affected this wall, there should be compensation. Typically with improvements, they are not rebuilt by the project contractors but paid for directly to the property owner to replace.

If the brick wall is on the state/city/town property, then it will be rebuilt to current standards regardless of neighboring properties opinion. Like having a tree in your neighbor's yard that shields your house from the sun; if they decide to cut it down and now your house gets hot, too bad.

GB said, "...they are having to rebuild the brick wall. The office is on a busy street, so the wall helps act as a sound barrier and also keep the sunlight out of the offices."

Sounds like a 'grade change' which should mean its a partial taking. I only play a lawyer on tv and this site, I'm not really one.

I probably misspoke in the last post by saying that they are having to rebuild the brick wall. It is not on public property now. The appraisal was completed and the compensation was certainly not just for that tiny ROW, but including the cost to rebuild. It SEEMS that the appraisal included sufficient compensation to rebuild the wall to the height that it is now, but construction costs are almost always incredibly high (particularly for this type of work), so without getting our own bid, we don't know with certainty. The appraiser was talking about the wall being rebuilt at a staggered height to reflect the adjoining slope, which is when we mentioned the other items (in post 71) and he thought that a case of Miller might account for the rest . We're still not entirely sure if he incorporated compensation based on a staggered height or similar to what is there now.
Moral of the story - don't say stupid stuff to the public, even if they are also appraisers because they might drill down on items that might not have been drilled down on otherwise.

 

[JTip]

I probably misspoke in the last post by saying that they are having to rebuild the brick wall. It is not on public property now. The appraisal was completed and the compensation was certainly not just for that tiny ROW, but including the cost to rebuild. It SEEMS that the appraisal included sufficient compensation to rebuild the wall to the height that it is now, but construction costs are almost always incredibly high (particularly for this type of work), so without getting our own bid, we don't know with certainty. The appraiser was talking about the wall being rebuilt at a staggered height to reflect the adjoining slope, which is when we mentioned the other items (in post 71) and he thought that a case of Miller might account for the rest . We're still not entirely sure if he incorporated compensation based on a staggered height or similar to what is there now.
Moral of the story - don't say stupid stuff to the public, even if they are also appraisers because they might drill down on items that might not have been drilled down on otherwise.

I would suggest an independent estimate by a professional mason. The main goal of the acquisition, along with completing the project, is to make the property owner whole and satisfied with the results. The cost tools used are the exact same tools fee appraisers use (M&S), so 'real life' costs need support from local contractors and pros. There is no reason not to present your own estimate as there is plenty of money to make things right. Do not feel intimidated if the cost is high, they are there to help get things fixed properly.

As for the appraiser making brewery promises, it's really not their place to discuss such matters. It ends up being a mess that I have to take care of.

 

[huntercharlie]

As is everyone for infrastructure development (or are the Dems against it? ). Road, bridges, etc. but no useless, pointless wall.

How about trains?

"When you lie about money in the private sector, it's called fraud; when you lie about money in the public sector, it's called politics or "public policy." California's bullet train is a perfect example of this.

Early on, planners warned that the cost would be more than $100 billion. But Jerry Brown, California's governor, didn't like that estimate. So, like Canute commanding the tide to recede, he sought new estimates. He sold those lower estimates to a gullible, and frankly foolish, public.

The original promise, made in a proposition voted on in 2008, called for the entire "high-speed" rail system to be built at a cost of just $37 billion and to be finished by 2020. It would carry 120,000 riders a day at a cost of $55 a ticket — far less than it costs on average to fly. And it would zip riders to their destinations in just a few hours. Nice."

https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/californias-bullet-train-to-fiscal-oblivion/