I'd like some opinions on a tree appraisal situation. I am surprised that the issue is not addressed in the 8th ed., since I'm sure this is not an uncommon scenario.

I've been asked to appraise five trees on a heavily wooded hillside lot. The lot is to be a homesite, and in fact groundbreaking just began the day I was hired to produce an appraisal. My question is, should the appraisal be based on the land's present use, or on its intended use, for which there is good evidence that this will soon come to fruition?

I'm thinking that based on the fact that this will soon be a homesite, that I should appraise these trees that way, adding the caveat that the value is based on that use occurring.

Reply to post by Guy LeBlanc, on March 21, 2000 at 23:46:16:

You can appraise for either use, I think, as long as you indicate the assumption. In your particular case it seems like the "future" use is the actual intended use, evidenced by actual work, not merely a hypothetical or possible use.

But it all goes back to your assignment and the definition of the appraisal problem. What was the appraisal for? What question was it intended to answer?

Now, also recognize that while it might seem counter-intuitive at first, some of the trees might actually have higher value in the old "woodland" use than the new or future residence use. All the trees might have a lower site rating as woodland but have a positive value. The residential use might assign a higher site rating but some of those trees will be be in building footprint, lawn, driveway or utility space. They will have to be removed, have a Contribution rating of 0% and so 0 value.

An exception to that would be if a development approval or private agreement requires compensation for those trees to be removed "as if" they had a positive contribution. See the recent thread posted by Jan Scow.

Reply to post by Scott Cullen, on March 21, 2000 at 23:46:16:

Scott:

Muchas gracias. Appreciate your input.