[TowerTalk] Re: Tower and property values

[Mel]

>, I have heard this line (or more properly, lie) for so long and it wasn't
until I had
> received training and licensure as a real estate appraiser that I fully
understood
> just how false that line is!

I wish it wasn't so, but there appears to be case law that indicates this is
not the case...

Trouble is, it's a tautology: if neighbours/people THINK the property value
is less, then the value IS less. (Unless you sell it to a ham who
appreciates the aesthetic beauty of a tower.)

>From a law site:

http://www.hklaw.com/Publications/Newsletters.asp?ID=206&Article=1155

Property Value Diminution

Myriad cases support that substantial evidence of possible adjacent property
value diminution can form a valid basis for denial. The U.S. Court of
Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, in upholding a permit denial, found a
mortgage banker's testimony that the tower would lower residential property
values to be substantial, despite a study by a real estate appraiser, that
the plaintiff submitted, which concluded the tower would not affect
neighbourhood real estate prices. Local governments, with seemingly little
effort, can procure substantial evidence to rebut a provider's claims that
no diminution in property value will result.

>From an Illinois case:

http://www.state.il.us/court/Opinions/AppellateCourt/2001/2ndDistrict/April/
Html/2000368.htm

The evidence established that there was a diminution in the value of
plaintiffs' properties due to the construction of the cellular tower.
However, the degree of diminution ranged from 2% to 30%, depending on the
particular parcel of land and the method of calculation utilized by the
expert witness.

-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.5 - Release Date: 2005-02-03