HomeMy Public PortalAbout1984.09.26 Sewer & Power Line Easement- Keith D. SteinSANITARY SEWER AND UNDERGROUND ELECTRICAL
UTILITY EASEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this �67 day of
September, 1984, by and between KEITH D . STEIN, a married man, dealing with
his sole and separate property (hereinafter "Grantor") , and THE CITY OF
McCALL, an Idaho municipality (hereinafter "Grantee") .
W I T N E S S E T H:
WHEREAS, Grantee is engaged in the construction of a sanitary sewer
transmission project generally known as the Eastside Interceptor, as designed
by Smith & Kangas Engineers, Inc., P.O. Box 326, Donnelly, Idaho (hereinafter
"Engineers") ; and
WHEREAS, Grantee desires an easement and certain other appurtenant
rights for the construction and maintenance of the sanitary sewer line and
related facilities through the property owned by Grantor; and
WHEREAS, Grantor has agreed to, and hereby does grant to Grantee
an easement across Grantor's property for the purpose of construction and
maintenance of the sanitary sewer transmission system and auxiliary facilities,
including an underground utility easement, subject to and in accordance with
the specific terms and agreements of Grantee as set forth herein;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and
covenants herein contained, together with acknowledgment of the donative,
charitable intent of Grantor in granting this easement to Grantee, the parties
agx- ee as ollp ,Y s :
Grantor does, by these presents, remise, release and quitclaim unto
Grantee the following easements, subject to the specific terms applicable to each
easement:
1. Pump Station Easement: An easement for the construction,
operation and maintenance of a sewer line and pump station on, through and
across the property set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 of Exhibit A attached
hereto. The easement hereby granted is for the purpose of construction and
operation of a sanitary sewer line and pump station, together with auxiliary
facilities (hereinafter sometimes "pump station easement"), provided that:
(a) " It is located as set forth on Plan/Profile - City of McCall
Eastside Interceptor, Job No. 8333, on Sheet 4 of 15 pertaining to Stations
21+08.16 to 31+09.67, prepared by Engineers (hereinafter "Plan/Profile") ;
(b) The improvements are located and constructed specifically as
depicted on Pump Station Plan No. 9A, City of McCall Eastside Interceptor, Job
No. 8333, on Sheet 12 of 15 prepared by Engineers, dated November 4, 1983
(hereinafter "Pump Station Plan") .
2. Sanitary Sewer Line Easement: An easement for the
construction, operation and maintenance of a sanitary sewer line under, through
and across the property set forth in paragraphs 3 and 4 of Exhibit A attached
hereto (hereinafter sometimes "sanitary sewer line easement") .
3. Generator House Easement: An easement for the construction,
operation and maintenance of a generator house located as set forth on the
Plan/Profile, over and across the property described on Exhibit B attached
hereto (hereinafter sometimes "generator house easement") . The improvements
on the generator house easement must be constructed in accordance with
Generator House Plan, for the City of McCall Eastside Interceptor, Job No. 8333, .
on Sheet 15 of 15, prepared by Engineers, dated August 16, 1984 (hereinafter
"Generator House Plan") .
4. Underground Utility Easement: An easement for the
construction and -maintenance of - an underground electrical_ -utility - power
transmission system under and across the property described in Exhibit C,
together with an easement for construction and maintenance of said underground
utility power transmission system under and across the pump station easement
and sanitary sewer line easement (hereinafter "underground utility easement") .
The four above described easements shall sometimes hereinafter be
collectively referred to as the "easement premises."
This grant of easement is given subject to Grantee's agreements and
covenants as follows:
1. Completion of Construction: Grantee agrees that within two
years from the date hereof, all work, construction of improvements and
restoration of property shall be completed. The property must be restored to a
condition equal or superior to that existing prior to Grantee's exercising its
rights under this easement.
2. Generator House Easement: With respect to the generator house
to be constructed on the generator house easement, Grantee agrees that it shall
not, during the normal operation of the generator to be placed in the generator
house, allow the decibel level from generator noise to exceed 92 decibels,
measured at any point on or beyond a 100-foot radius from the generator house.
In addition, Grantee agrees to cause to be planted around the generator house a
sufficient number of red or white fir, spruce or comparable species of trees at
least six feet in height to result in appropriate esthetic, scenic and sound -
screening barriers around the proposed generator house.
3. Access Easement: Grantee and its employees and agents shall
have the right to enter upon and cross the property owned by Grantor through
which the easement premises run. The right to enter upon the property shall
be for the specific purpose of completing the initial construction of the
improvements, and thereafter to maintain the sanitary sewer system and allied
facilities located within those easements. At any time, and from time to time,
Grantor may designate, with specificity, the route or routes that Grantee must
cross in order to reach the easement premises, so long as the-redesignation
access does not unreasonably interfere with the ability of Grantee to maintain
the improvements located upon the easement premises. Grantee shall be liable
for any damage or destruction to Grantor's property which may result from
Grantee's exercise of its access rights herein granted. Grantee agrees to
indemnify and hold Grantor harmless from any claims, costs, damage or liability
of any kind that may result in the use, maintenance or operation of the rights
and interests granted to Grantee herein.
4. Restoration: Upon completion of the work allowed hereunder,
Grantee agrees to promptly restore the easement premises used therefor to a
condition equal or superior to that existing prior to exercising its rights under
this easement. If and when it makes any future repairs to the sewer line or
allied facilities located on the easement premises, Grantee shall expediently
replace and restore any affected portion of the premises to a condition equal or
superior to that existing prior to the undertaking of such construction, repairs
and replacements. In the event Grantee should fail to complete installation of
such sewer pipeline and allied facilities and the required restoration of the
easement premises through, over and across said easements within two years of
the date hereof, as aforesaid, in the manner contemplated and required by the
Pump Station Plan, Plan/Profile, and Generator House Plan, or Grantee breaches
any of the covenants and conditions herein contained, this easement and right
of way and all rights conferred hereunder shall terminate and be at an end,
without Grantor being liable for compensating Grantee for any costs which may
be incurred in the removal and/or relocation of Grantee's improvements. In the
event that the use of the sewer line and allied facilities constructed or installed
upon the easement premises should be discontinued through a period of seven
consecutive years, this easement shall terminate and be of no further force and
effect.
5, Further Assurances: It is further understood and agreed by
and between the parties that Grantee's utilization of said easements shall be
considerate of and subject to Grantor's lawful use and convenience as titled
owner of said -lands across which the easements are located, -arid -that- Grantee --
shall make every reasonable effort to minimize the disruption during the course
of construction of Grantor's ability to use and enjoy its property. It is
specifically acknowledged that Grantor reserves the right to make use of such
lands, including the air rights and surface rights above such easements,
subject to Grantee's rights to construct above -ground improvements as depicted
in the Pump Station Plan and Generator House Plan.
6. Successors and Assigns: This agreement shall be binding upon
the successors and assigns, the personal representatives, heirs,
administrators, executors, legatees and devisees of the parties hereto.
7. Attorney's Fees: If one of the parties hereto defaults in any
manner or failsto fulfill any and all provisions of this agreement, and if the
nondefaulting party places this agreement with an attorney toexercise any of
the rights of the nondefaulting party upon such default or failure, or if suit be
instituted or defended by the nondefaulting party by reason of, under or
pertaining to such default or failure, , then the nondefaulting party shall be
entitled to recover reasonable attorney's fees, costs and expenses from the
defaulting party.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Grantor and Grantee have executed this
agreement the day and year first above written.
GRANTOR:
GRANTEE:
STATE OF IDAHO
ss.
County of Ada
EITH D. STEIN
THE CITY OF McCALL
By
Title: j77/•'
On this ,(RA day of September, 1984, before me, the undersigned
Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared KEITH D. STEIN, a
married man, known or identified to me to be the person whose name is
subscribed to the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged :to -me-- that -he- -- -----
executed the same.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set y hand and affixed my
official seal the day and year in this cer ificate first ave written.
NOTAR PUB C, State of Tdah
Residi _ at Boise, Idaho
STATE OF IDAHO
SS.
County of Valley
On this d e-1%day of September, 1984, before me, the undersigned
Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared
�y�,�. Z 0,e - , known or identified to me to be the
1-777--yy Qom/ for THE CITY OF McCALL, an Idaho municipality, or the
person who executed the foregoing instrument on behalf of said municipality,
and acknowledged to me that THE CITY OF McCALL executed the same.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixedmy
official seal the day and year first above written. -
NOTARY PUBLIC, State of Idah_ o _
Residing at McCall, Idaho
PUMP
STATION
EASEMENT
.SANITARY
SEWER LINE
EASEMENT
STEIN PROPERTY
( 1) Beginning at a point 644.45 feet N 89° 20' 44" E (Formerly East)
( of the center of Section 17, T.18N., R.3E., B.M., Valley County,
( Idaho;
( Thence N 48° E 100.00 feet to a point on the west bank of the North
( Fork of the Payette River, said point being the southeast property
( corner described by Instrument No. 112650, said point being the
( True Point of Beginning of easement; thence S 89 20' 44" W
( 39.16 feet to a point; thence N 40° 27' 57" W 51.89 feet to a
( point; thence N 49° 32' 03" E 100.00 feet to a point; thence
( S 40° 27' 57" E 88.02 feet more or less where said.easement
( intersects the property line of said property; thence along said
( property line S 56u 28' 48" W 72.53 feet more or less to the True
( Point of Beginning. Said easement being a construction easement.
(
(
( 2) Beginning at the True Point of Beginning described above; thence
( N 400 27' 57" W 40.00 feet to a point; thence N 49° 32' 03" E
( 44.00 feet to a point; thence S 40° 27' 57" E 45.36 feet more or
( less where said line intersects the property line of said property;
( thence along said property line S 56u 28' 48" W 44.32 feet more or
( less to the True Point of Beginning. Said easement being a
( permanent easement.
( 3) Beginning at a point 644.45 feet N 89° 20' 44" E of the center of
( said Section 17; thence N 48° E 100.00 feet; thence N 9° 14' 06"
( E 38.68 feet to the_True Point of Beginning of easement; thence
( along the centerline of sewer, with a permanent easement of 10 feet
( left and 10 feet right and a construction easement of 25 feet left
( and 25 feet right of said centerline, N 82° 14' 45" W 202.12 feet
( more or less where said easement intersects the property line of said
( property.
(
(
( 4) Beginning at a point on the north -south 4 section line of said Section
( 17, said point being 216.56 feet N 00° 20' 15" W from the center of
( said Section 17, said point being the True Point of Beginning of
( easement; thence along said north -south 4 section line N 00u 20' 15"
( W 19.67 feet to a point; thence S 89° 14' 45" E 438.66 feet more
( or less where said line intersects the property line of said property;
( thence along said property line S 80° 00' W 16.90 feet to a property
( corner; thence along the property line N 84° 12' W 420.05 feet more
( or less to the True Point of Beginning. Said easement being a
( construction easement.
flAMTDTT A F.. CAATTMADV CVIATED Amn mmnripe'Dnmmn
SMITH & KANGAS ENGINEERS, INC..
CONSULTING ENGINEERS & PLANNERS
1707 Linda Vista Lane
Boise, Idaho 83704
Ph. (208) 376.8751
STEIN PROPERTY
EASEMENT FOR GENERATOR BUILDING
P. O. Box 626
Donnelly, Idaho 83615
Ph. (208) 325.8755
Beginning at the center of Section 17,.T.18N., R.3E., B.M., Valley County,
Idaho; thence N 89°20' 44" E 644.45 feet to a point; thence N 48°E 100.00
feet to a point on the west bank of the North Fork of the Payette River;
thence S 89°20' 44" W 200.00 feet to a point; thence N 00°20' 15" W 120.00
feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence S 82°14' 45" E 54.00 feet;
thence S 7°45' 15" W 41.25 feet; thence N 82°14' 45" W 48.63 feet more -
or -less where said line intersects the property line; thence aiong said
property line N 00°20' 15" W 41.59 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
Said easement being a permanent easement.
J
STEIN PROPERTY
EASEMENT FOR POWER LINE (Underground)
Beginning at the center of Section 17, T.18N., R.3E., B.M., Valley County,
Idaho; Thence N 89° 20' 44" E 644.45 feet; Thence N 48° E 100.00 feet;
Thence N 9° 21' 35" W 37.68 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; Thence
along the centerline of trench, with a permanent easement of 10 feet left
and 10 feet right and a construction easement of 25 feet left and 25 feet
right of said centerline, N 48° 19' 50" E 300.00 feet to the end of said
easement.
o N
0. w � a yt
0 --',, m `� r* ti
n
O - O
\P) o co D" U
� v
_� =I; ,G
o.. ...-,
� �, s
ro w
. `-' �
0 I� - � cn
T,
! i�
0
=n
0
�g., ro
:Ts
Tr
N
62
9/14/84
City Of McCall
OFFICE OF THE CLERK
BOX 1065
MCCALL, IDAHO 83638
OCT 2 2 1984
STEIN McMURRAY INS -
October 16, 1984
William J. McKlveen
Eberle, Berlin, Kading, Turnbou u Gillespie, Chartered
Capitol Park Plaza
300 North Sixth Street
P.O. Box 1368
Boise, Idaho 83701
Re: Appraisal of Stein Property
Dear Bill:
Enclosed is a copy of the appraisal for Stein's property which the City's
interceptor line crosses.
The appraisal amount is very small in respect to your earlier letter. I
would suggest that you contact Dave Pifori and review it with him.
I will wait your response before proceeding further..
mith �
ty Administator
rariN to g i le:IT
APPRAISAL OF
Eastside Interceptor
Keith Stein Property
MC CALL, IDAHO
For
Mr. James Smith
Administrator
City of McCall
McCall, Idaho
Prepared by:
Intermountain Appraisal Service, Inc.
Boise, Idaho
IAS-117-84
1
INTRODUCTION
INTER- MOUNTAIN APPRAISAL SERVICE, INC.
P.O. BOX 8354, BOISE, IDAHO 83707
PHONE 344-1120
David S. Pifari, M.A.I. Ralph A. Pifari, M.A.I.
October 4, 1984
Mr. James Smith, Administrator
City of McCall
McCall, Idaho 83638
Re: Eastside Interceptor, Keith Stein
property, McCall, Idaho IAS-117-84
Dear Mr. Smith:
In accordance with your request and for the purpose of estimating
loss in value to the above captioned property caused by an easement for
construction of an underground sewer line, a generator house, a pump
station, and an underground power line, I have inspected the property and
have made investigations and analysis of matters believed to be pertinent
to the estimation of its value in a before condition, an after condition,
and the value of the property where the easement will be.
Subject to the assumptions and limiting conditions included herein and
based on the information and analysis contained in this report and in my
files the following values have been estimated:
Value Before
Value After
Value of the Easement
$ 61,400
$115,000
$ 1,532
Thank you for this opportunity to have been of assistance. If we may
be of additional assistance or if clarification is needed on any piiint in
this appraisal report, please do not hesitate to call me.
Respectfully submitted,
David S. Pifari, M.A.
INTERMOUNTAIN APPRAIS
cb
SERVICE, INC.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction
Letter of Transmittal i
Table of Contents
Summary of Salient Facts and Conclusions
Assumptions and Limiting Conditions iv
Description, Analyses and Conclusions
Statement of the Problem
Identification of the Property 1
Legal Description 1
Purpose of the Appraisal 1
Market Value Defined 1
Definition_ of Easement 2
Statement of Ownership 3
Date of Value Estimate 3
Regional and City Data 4
Subject's Neighborhood Data 5
Zoning and Taxes 5
Property Evaluation
The Appraisal Process 7
Appraisal Methods Used 8
Developer's Analysis 9
Summary and Conclusion 9
The Easement 11
After The Easement 12
Identification of the Property 13
Legal Description 13
Purpose of the Appraisal 13
Market Value Defined 13
Definition of Easement 13
Statement of Ownership 13
Date of Value Estimate 13
Regional Data 13
Subject's Neighborhood Data 13
Site Description 14
Zoning 14
Highest and Best Use Analysis 14
Summary and Conclusions 16
Certification 17
Addenda
Legal Description A-1
Plat Map A-2 .
Idaho Code for Assessment of Damage A-3
McCall Location Map A-4
Qualifications for David Pifari A-5
11
SUMMARY OF SALIENT FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS
Identification of the Property: The property to be appraised is located
approximately one to two miles southerly
of the city of McCall on the westerly
side of the Payette River.
Site:
Improvements:
Highest and Best Use:
The site is a very irregular shaped
parcel containing a total of 7.68 acres.
It lies along the westerly side of the
Payette River and incorporates somewhat
level ground immediately adjacent to the
river and quite steep hillside rising up
from the River Plain.
At the time of my inspection there were
no improvements to the property except
for an underground sewer line which
intersects the property approximately at
its midpoint.
The highest and best use of the site is
estimated to be hold for speculation for
future development.
Estimated Market Value of the
Site: Before the Easement, Rounded, $ 61,400
After the Easement, Rounded $115,000
Estimated Loss in Value due
to the Easement: $ 1,532
Date of Value Estimate: September 10, 1984.
iii
" "
A S S U M P T I O N S A N D L I M I T I N G C O N D I T I O N S
T h i s a p p r a i s a l w a s m a d e a c c o r d i n g t o t h e f o l l o w i n g a s s u m p t i o n s a n d
l i m i t i n g c o n d i t i o n s :
1 . N o l e g a l q u e s t i o n s a r e c o n s i d e r e d , s u c h a s t i t l e , e n c u m b r a n c e s , e t c .
T h e p r o p e r t y i s a p p r a i s e d a s t h o u g h f r e e a n d c l e a r e x c e p t a s
s p e c i f i c a l l y n o t e d w i t h i n t h i s r e p o r t .
2 . A l l d i m e n s i o n s a n d l e g a l d e s c r i p t i o n s f o u n d t h r o u g h a v a i l a b l e r e c o r d s
o r o n - t h e - g r o u n d i n s p e c t i o n a r e a s s u m e d t o b e c o r r e c t .
3 . T h e s u b j e c t p r o p e r t y w i l l b e u n d e r m a n a g e m e n t t h a t i s c o m p e t e n t a n d
o w n e r s h i p t h a t i s r e s p o n s i b l e .
4 . A l l i n f o r m a t i o n a s f o u n d i n d a t a f u r n i s h e d i s d e e m e d t o b e r e l i a b l e ;
i f a n y e r r o r s a r e f o u n d , t h e r i g h t i s r e s e r v e d t o m o d i f y t h e
c o n c l u s i o n s r e a c h e d .
5 . T h e s k e t c h i n t h i s r e p o r t i s i n c l u d e d t o a s s i s t t h e r e a d e r i n
v i s u a l i z i n g t h e p r o p e r t y . T h e a p p r a i s e r h a s m a d e n o s u r v e y o f t h e
p r o p e r t y a n d a s s u m e s n o r e s p o n s i b i l i t y i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h s u c h
m a t t e r s .
6 . T h e v a r i o u s a p p r o a c h e s t o v a l u e a n d m a t h e m a t i c a l c a l c u l a t i o n s u s e d i n
e s t i m a t i n g v a l u e a r e m e r e l y a i d s t o t h e f o r m u l a t i o n o f t h e o p i n i o n o f
v a l u e e x p r e s s e d b y t h e a p p r a i s e r i n t h i s r e p o r t . I n t h e s e
c a l c u l a t i o n s , c e r t a i n a r i t h m e t i c a l f i g u r e s a r e r o u n d e d o f f t o t h e
n e a r e s t s i g n i f i c a n t a m o u n t .
7 . T h e d a t a a n d c o n c l u s i o n s e m b o d i e d i n t h i s a p p r a i s a l a r e a p a r t o f t h e
w h o l e v a l u a t i o n . N o p a r t o f t h i s a p p r a i s a l i s t o b e u s e d o u t o f
c o n t e x t ; a n d , b y i t s e l f a l o n e , n o p a r t o f t h i s a p p r a i s a l i s
n e c e s s a r i l y c o r r e c t i n t h a t i t r e p r e s e n t s o n l y p a r t o f t h e e v i d e n c e
u p o n w h i c h t h e f i n a l j u d g m e n t o f v a l u e i s b a s e d .
8 . E m p l o y m e n t t o m a k e t h i s a p p r a i s a l d o e s n o t r e q u i r e t e s t i m o n y i n c o u r t
u n l e s s m u t u a l l y s a t i s f a c t o r y a r r a n g e m e n t s a r e m a d e i n a d v a n c e . T h e
r e p o r t , a n d t h e w o r k p r o d u c t r e q u i r e d t o p r e p a r e i t , i s c o n s i d e r a b l y
l e s s t h a n t h a t r e q u i r e d f o r a c o m p l e t e l y d o c u m e n t e d a p p r a i s a l r e p o r t .
I f c o u r t t e s t i m o n y i s r e q u i r e d b y t h e a p p r a i s e r , i t w i l l b e n e c e s s a r y
t o p r e p a r e a c o m p l e t e l y d o c u m e n t e d a p p r a i s a l r e p o r t b e f o r e s u c h
t e s t i m o n y i s g i v e n .
9 . F a i r m a r k e t v a l u e a s i n d i c a t e d h e r e i n i s d e f i n e d a s t h e m o s t p r o b -
a b l e s e l l i n g p r i c e i n t e r m s o f m o n e y w h i c h a p r o p e r t y w o u l d b r i n g i n a
c o m p e t i t i v e a n d o p e n m a r k e t u n d e r a l l c o n d i t i o n s r e q u i s i t e t o a f a i r
s a l e w i t h t h e b u y e r a n d s e l l e r e a c h a c t i n g p r u d e n t l y a n d k n o w l e d g e a b l y
a n d a s s u m i n g t h e p r i c e i s n o t a f f e c t e d b y u n d u e s t i m u l u s .
1 0 . D i s c l o s u r e o f t h e c o n t e n t s o f t h i s a p p r a i s a l r e p o r t i s g o v e r n e d b y t h e
b y l a w s a n d r e g u l a t i o n s o f t h e A m e r i c a n I n s t i t u t e o f R e a l E s t a t e
A p p r a i s e r s o f t h e N a t i o n a l A s s o c i a t i o n o f R e a l t o r s .
i v
ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS Continued
11. Neither all nor any part of the contents of this report (especially
any conclusions as to value, the identity of the appraiser or the firm
with which he is connected, or any reference to the American Institute
of Real Estate Appraisers or to the M.A.I. or R.M. designations) shall
be disseminated to the public through advertising media, public
relations media, news media, sales media or any other public means of
communication without the prior written consent and approval of the
appraiser.
12. No study has been made to determine whether structures may have an
infestation such as termites or dry rot. In the absence of such a
study, it is assumed the property is free from such problems.
13. The appraiser assumes that there are no hidden or unapparent
conditions of the property, subsoil, or structures, which would render
it more or less valuable. The appraiser assumes no responsibility for
such conditions, or for engineering which might be required to
discover such factors.
14. The appraiser assumes no responsibility for any structural or
equipment defects hidden or unapparent, or conditions such as
substandard insulation, plumbing or wiring, water leaks, defective
roof condition, settlement, or structure problems; or for engineering
which might be required to discover such conditions or factors.
15. The appraisers do not warranty the value or the condition of the
property. The client and/or purchaser should satisfy himself/herself
that the price and the condition of the property are acceptable.
16. It is further assumed that the property which is under consideration
as the whole parcel could be subdivided in its as -is condition with
septic tanks and drain fields which would meet central district health
department standards as set forth in this report.
v
DESCRIPTION, ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
IDENTIFICATION OF THE PROBLEM
The real estate under appraisal is a 7.68 acre site located along the
westerly bank of the Payette River approximately one to two miles south of
the city of McCall.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
The legal description of the larger parcel and the easements are
contained in the addenda section of this report as Page A-1.
PURPOSE OF THE APPRAISAL
The purpose of this appraisal is to estimate the loss in value caused
by an easement across a portion of the larger parcel which will be used for
an underground sewer line, an underground power line, an underground pump
station, and a generator house which reportedly will be partially above
ground and partially below ground. It is understood that this appraisal
will be used to value the easement for income tax purposes.
MARKET VALUE DEFINED*
The most probable price in terms of money which a property should
bring in competitive and open market under all conditions requisite to a
fair sale, the buyer and seller, each acting prudently, knowledgeably and
assuming the price is not affected by undue stimulus.
*American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers, Real Estate Appraisal
Terminology, Rev. Ed. (Ballinger Publishing Co., 1982) Pg. 160.
1
MARKET VALUE DEFINED Continued
Implicit in this definition is the consummation of a sale as of a specified
date and the passing of title from seller to buyer under conditions
whereby:
1. buyer and seller are typically motivated.
2. both parties are well informed or well advised, and each acting in
what they consider their own best interest.
3. a reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open market.
4. payment is made in cash or its equivalent.
5. financing, if any, is on terms generally available in the
community at the specified date and typical for the property type in its
locale.
6. the price represents a normal consideration for the property sold
unaffected by special financing amounts and/or terms, services, fees,
costs, or credits incurred in the transaction.
DEFINITION OF EASEMENT*
A non -possessing interest held by one person in the land of another
person whereby the first person is accorded partial use of such land for a
specific purpose. An easement restricts, but does not abridge, the rights
of the fee owner to the use and enjoyment of the easement holder's rights.
Easements fall into three broad classifications: surface easements,
subsurface easements, and overhead easements.
*American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers, Real Estate Appraisal
Terminology, Rev. Ed. (Ballinger PDblishing Co., 1982, Pg. 86).
2
STATEMENT OF OWNERSHIP
The subject property is currently owned by Mr. Keith Stein of Boise,
Idaho.
DATE OF VALUE ESTIMATE
The date of value estimated for the subject is September 10, 1984.
REGIONAL AND CITY DATA
The city of McCall is located approximately 112 miles north of Idaho's
capitol city, Boise. The population of McCall is approximately 2,188.
Valley County population is reported at approximately 5,600. During the
summer months these figures raise substantially due to the influx of summer
residents. McCall is a recreational oriented community with year around
L activity. Summer activities include fishing, hiking, water skiing,
swimming, and back packing in the surrounding mountains. Fall activities
center around hunting while winter activities include downhill skiing,
cross country skiing, snowmobiling and the well known, McCall Winter
Festival. A large portion of the developments in McCall have centered
around recreational homes including both condominiums and privately owned
cabins.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
The long range outlook for the McCall area is for controlled continued
growth in recreational and tourist oriented developments, second homes and
condominiums, and commercial business uses.
4
L-
SUBJECT'S NEIGHBORHOOD
The subject is located approximately one to two miles south of the
city of McCall on the westerly bank of the Payette River. Immediately
north of the subject is an area which has been developed with single family
residential dwellings in a moderate to light density. Homes in this area
are average to good quality, predominately year around residential
dwellings. Some second home, or recreational home, uses may be
interspersed. The area is developed with all utilities including central
sanitary sewer and water. To the east of the subject, on the opposite side
of the Payette River is predominately undeveloped land which is currently
being used as pasture or other agricultural uses. Approximately
one -quarter mile to the east of the subject lies the McCall Municipal
Airport. To the south of the subject along the river plain, is
predominately undeveloped and currently unused except for some limited
pasture and other agricultural uses.
ZONING
The property is currently outside the city limits of McCall but is
within the impact area of the city of McCall. It is zoned for agricultural
use in the McCall city impact area. This zone allows four units per acre
if central sanitary sewer is available, without sanitary sewer a maximum of
one unit per acre is allowed if all other requirements by Central District
Health can be met.
HIGHEST AND BEST USE*
That reasonable and probable use that supports the highest present
- value, as defined, as of the effective date of the appraisal.
Alternatively, that use, from among reasonably probable and legal
alternative uses, found to be physically possible, appropriately supported,
financially feasible, and which results in highest land value.
*American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers, Real Estate Appraisal
Terminology, Rev. Ed. (Ballinger Publishing Co., 1982) Pg. 126.
5
HIGHEST AND BEST USE Continued
The definition immediately above applies specifically to the highest
and best use of land. It is to be recognized that in cases where a site
has existing improvements on it, the highest and best use may very well be
determined to be different from the existing use. The existing use will
continue, however, unless and until land value in its highest and best use
exceeds the total value of the property in its existing use.
Implied within these definitions is recognition of the contribution of
that specific use to community environment or to community development
goals in addition to wealth maximization of individual property owners.
Also implied is that the determination of highest and best use results from
the appraiser's judgment and analytical skill, i.e., that the use
determined from analysis represents an opinion, not a fact to be found. In
appraisal practice, the concept of highest and best use represents the
premise upon which value is based. In the context of most probable selling
price (market value) another appropriate term to reflect highest and best
use would be most probable use. In the context of investment value an
alternative term would be most profitable use.
Central District Health requirements include the following. A
separation between the bottom of a drain field and the spring high-water
table of a minimum of four feet; enough level ground space to provide room
:J
for an original drainfield and a backup drain field in case the original
field fails; both primary and backup areas for drain fields should be in
excess of 300 feet from any river, stream, or lake, but in no case can be
closer than 200 feet to said river, stream, or lake. A general review of
>the subject's larger parcel indicates that all ground which is level and
would be acceptable to Central District Health in terms of grade appears to
lie within 200 feet of the Payette River. Additionally, some of this
ground has either perched water or a very high water table with at least
some water collecting on the surface. The remainder of the site which is
in excess of 300 feet from the Payette River is comprised predominately.of
a steep hillside which would be unacceptable to Central District Health for
use as a drain field location.
6
HIGHEST. AND BEST USE Continued
Approximately mid way of the subject's larger parcel there is a pump
station currently owned by the Payette Lakes Water and Sewer District.
Investigation into this pump station indicated that the subject larger
parcel does not fall within the Payette Lakes Water and Sewer District and
therefore does not have access to this existing sewer line.
Without access to a sewer line the subject property cannot be
developed until central sewer becomes available. In the before condition
the subject does not have access to a central sewer line and therefore its
highest and best use is estimated to be to hold for speculation until such
time as a sewer line becomes available and demand indicates the feasibility
of developing the property in some manner.
6a
PROPERTY EVALUATION
THE APPRAISAL PROCESS
There are three basic approaches that may be used by appraisers in the
estimation of market value. These three approaches provide data from the
market from three different sources when all are available, as explained
below.
The Cost Approach involves the valuation of the site by comparing it
_i to other sites in the area that have sold in the recent past and making
adjustments for differences. To the indicated site value is added the
estimated cost to reproduce or replace the improvements, less any loss of
value (depreciation) that may have occurred.
The Income Approach is a process of developing the net income from a
property into an .indication of value. This is accomplished by analyzing
the relationship of net income from similar properties to their selling
prices in the market. The relationship between net income and selling
price is called a capitalization rate. The net income is divided by the
capitalization rate to give an indication of value.
The Market Data Approach (or the Direct Sales Comparison Approach)
involves a comparison of the subject property with properties of a similar
use, design, and utility that have sold in the recent past. Adjustments
are made to the comparables for differences to indicate a value for the
subject property.
Normally, these three approaches will each indicate a different value.
A final value estimate is derived by carefully weighing the various factors
considered in each approach and correlating the value indications.
If any one of the three approaches is not applicable in estimating
market value, an explanation will be given for its exclusion.
7
APPRAISAL METHODS USED
A thorough search of market sales in the McCall area revealed no
recent sales of large parcels similar to the subject for which information
could be obtained to make a direct comparison to the subject. Therefore a
developer's analysis will be used to estimate value of the land to a
potential purchaser.
As no projections have been made by the owner, engineers, or other
persons involved with the property as to how it might possibly be developed
The appraiser will have to make certain assumptions with respect to the
number of potential lots, development expenses, including sales expense and
holding expense, and profit to the developer.
8
1J
DEVELOPER'S ANALYSIS
In the before condition the greatest number of lots possible for the
subject larger parcel is one per acre or seven lots. In reality this is
probably higher than what could feasibly be developed on the site without
central sewer but it is recognized that a developer who might be willing to
speculate on the property may be willing to make a similar assumption.
Research in the McCall area indicated the following developed sites
have recently sold.
A two acre site located in Carefree Estates, approximately one to two
miles south of the subject recently sold for $25,000. This property has
frontage on Lake Fork Creek, has a domestic water supply, but does not have
central sewer. This sale indicates a selling price per square foot of
$.29.
In June of.1984 one and one-half acres sold to a single purchaser in
Valley View Heights. Total purchase price was $41,613 for approximately
65,340 square feet of site. This indicates a selling price per square foot
of site area of $.64. This site was purchased as two separate parcels and
assembled into one. It does not have frontage on a stream.
In November of 1982 Lot 17, Lake Fork Estates, sold for of $25,000.
The site was 1.6 acres in size and had approximately 200 front feet along
Lake Fork Creek. Selling price per square foot was $.36.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
The 1.5 acre site located in Valley View Heights is considered to be a
superior location, closer to McCall and, while it did not have frontage
directly on the Payette River, it reportedly did have a view of the river.
The sale in Lake Fork Estates and Carefree Estates not only have an
inferior location, but have less utilities than the Valley View Estates
site. In comparing to the subject, the Valley View Estates site is
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
considered somewhat superior in terms of its utilities. The second two
comparables are considered to be inferior in terms of their location but
more similar in terms of having frontage on a stream and available
utilities.
It is unfortunate that better comparable data could not be located to
give some additional support in valuing the subject, and that a conclusion
must be drawn from three sales with widely varying characteristics,
locations, and dates of sale. After giving consideration to each of these
factors it is the appraiser's opinion that the market value of the proposed
seven, approximately 1.1 acre sites which are assumed to be developable on
the subject's larger parcel can be estimated at approximately $.50 per
square foot per site or $23,895 rounded to $24,000 per site.
A general rule of thumb when developing property is the final selling
price of the finished product can be approximately divided into thirds.
That is one-third of the selling price going to the developer for his
profit and overhead, one-third of the selling price allocated to
development and selling expenses, and one-third of the sales price
allocated to raw land valuation. This would indicate a raw land value of
$8,000 per acre, or $.18 per square foot. Total value of the property in
the before condition, therefore is estimated to be
7.68 acres @ $8,000 per acre $61,440, Rounded to $61,400
10
f
[
3-4A/
L�
L
iJ
THE EASEMENT
The easement proposed for taking,is very irregular in shape, lies
at the approximatemiddle of the subject site and is predominately an .
underground easement. (See facing page) The majority of the easement is
shown in the dark unbroken lines in the drawing. A small portion not shown
on the drawing exists to the west of that portion which is shown. Portion
AB of the easement is for an underground power line running between an
underground pump station (at Point A) and the proposed underground pump
station (Point B). The portions marked C on the drawing are reported to be
the only above -ground appurtances in the easement. The balance of the
easement is an underground easement with approximate dimensions as shown.
Additionally an access easement will have to be provided which will allow
occasional access to both pump station and the generator house. The
location of this access easement is flexible and can be worked in with a
possible plan for development. For purposes of use almost the entire
easement can be landscaped, walked over, will have no view obstructions
(appurtances from the pump station are reportedly planned to be at ground
level), and with the exception of the generator house are anticipated to
have very low visibility once construction is complete and natural
vegetation has had an opportunity to reestablish itself. The legal
description of the easement is contained in the addenda section of this
report as Page A-1. Total size of the easement is reported by the engineer
to the appraiser as being .322 acres or 14,026 square feet.
11
AFTER THE EASEMENT
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
IDENTIFICATION OF THE PROBLEM
Same as before the easement.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
Same as before the easement.
PURPOSE OF THE APPRAISAL
Same as before the easement.
MARKET VALUE DEFINED
Same as before the easement.
STATEMENT OF OWNERSHIP
Same as before the easement.
DATE OF VALUE ESTIMATE
Same.as before the easement.
REGIONAL DATA
Same as before the easement.
SUBJECT'S NEIGHBORHOOD
Same as before the easement.
PROPERTY DATA
SITE DESCRIPTION
Same as before the easement.
ZONING
Same as before the easement.
HIGHEST AND BEST USE ANALYSIS*
That reasonable and probable use that supports the highest present
value, as defined, as of the effective date of the appraisal.
Alternatively, that use, from among reasonably probable and legal
alternative uses, found to be physically possible, appropriately supported,
financially feasible, and which results in highest land value.
The definition immediately above applies specifically to the highest
and best use of land. It is to be recognized that in cases where a site
has existing improvements on it, the highest and best use may very well be
determined to be different from the existing use. The existing use will
continue, however, unless and until land value in its highest and best use
exceeds the total value of the property in its existing use.
Implied within these definitions is recognition of the contribution of
that specific use to community environment or to community development
goals in addition to wealth maximization of individual property owners.
Also implied is that the determination of highest and best use results from
the appraiser's judgment and analytical skill, i.e., that the use
determined from analysis represents an opinion, not a fact to be found. In
appraisal practice, the concept of highest and best use represents the
premise upon which value is based. In the context of most probable selling
14
HIGHEST AND BEST USE ANALYSIS Continued
price (market value) another appropriate term to reflect highest and best
use would be most probable use. In the context of investment value an
alternative term would be most profitable use.
After the easement the subject will have access to a wet sewer line
which will enable the property to be developed to its highest possible
density given the existing topography and drainage problems in some areas
of the site. Some restrictions may be placed on the number of lots which
could be developed in the area of the easement. Principally where the
power station is to be located because of the topography of the hill to the
north of the station and the wetness to the south of the station it is
highly unlikely that this area could be used as a building site without
substantial drainage work and fill dirt. The remainder of the property,
although having a utility easement across it, in all likelihood could be
utilized and developed with individual sites substantially smaller than an
acre in size, or with a planned unit development which would incorporate
the concept of density transfer.
Again no study has been provided to the appraiser to indicate the
number of feasible sites which could be developed on a site as irregular in
shape and topography, and with ground water characteristics as the subject
has. However, it is without doubt that once a sewer line has been
installed the subject site could be developed with substantially more sites
than it could be in the before condition. It is questionable as to whether
or not the site could be developed with four units per acre due to its
steepness. Some density transfer could conceivably take place which would
allow a substantially higher density than one unit per acre. Therefore,
assuming that at least three units per acre could be developed the
resulting density would be a total of 23 units. The highest and best use of
the larger parcel after the easement would be for development with a
residential development containing approximately 23 units.
15
DEVELOPMENT ANALYSIS SUMMARY
Each potential lot would have a total size of approximately 14,545
square feet before allowing for roads. Obviously these sites are going to
have a somewhat lesser value on a per site basis than the larger 1.1 acre
site. Of the three comparables previously used, the second comparable,
which was located in Valley View Estates and is quite close to the subject,
was the sale of a one acre lot and a one-half acre lot to a single buyer.
These were adjacent parcels and where combined into a single parcel. The
half -acre lot sold for a reported $17,613. Adjusting this down slightly
for the smaller size of the proposed 23 lots it is reasonable to estimate a
market value for the 23 lots at $15,000 each. Again, using the one-third
rule and allocating one-third of the selling price of each lot as raw land
value, the indicated market value for the larger parcel with the easement
would be $5,000 x 23 or $115,000.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
It can be readily seen by the two analyses presented that the subject
property can be expected to benefit substantially by the installation of
the proposed sewer line. Therefore, it is the appraiser's conclusions that
no damages accrue to the subject parcel due to the easement which is
proposed for the subject. Therefore, according to Idaho Code, the only
compensation allowable to the land owner is for the use of the easement
over his property. In the before condition the land was estimated to have
a value of $8,000 per acre or $.18 per square foot. Total size of the
easement is 14,026 square feet which indicates a total value for the
easement land of $2,575. The easement holder would almost have exclusive
rights to approximately 3000 square feet. The remainder of the easement
would be approximately shared by both land owner and the easement holder.
The value of the easement is calculated as follows.
3,000 sq. ft. @ $.18/sq. ft. = $ 540
1/2 interest in 11,026 sq. ft. @ $.18/s.f. = $ 992
Total $1,532
16
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Therefore, subject to the assumptions and limiting conditions attached
and based on the analysis and conclusions contained in the attached
appraisal, fair market value of the proposed easement is estimated to be
*** ONE THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED THIRTY-TWO DOLLARS ***
*** $1,532 ***
17
CERTIFICATION
I, David S. Pifari, M.A.I., do hereby certify that except as otherwise
noted in this report:
1. I have personally inspected the subject property.
2. I have no present or contemplated future interest in the real estate
- that is the subject of this appraisal report.
3. I have no personal interest or bias with respect to the subject matter
of this appraisal report or the parties involved.
_. 4. The fee for this assignment is in no way contingent upon the value
reported.
5. To the best of my knowledge and belief, the statements of .fact con-
tained in this appraisal report, upon which the analyses, opinions,
-, and, conclusions expressed herein are based, are true and correct.
- 6. This appraisal report sets forth all of the limiting conditions im-
posed by the terms of my assignment or by the undersigned affecting
the analyses, opinions, and conclusions in this report.
7. This appraisal report has been made in conformity with and is subject
to the Code of Professional Ethics and Standards of Professional Con-
duct of the American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers of the
National Association of Real Estate,Boards.
8. No one other than the undersigned prepared the analyses, opinions, and
conclusions concerning real estate that are set forth in this appraisal
report.
9. The American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers conducts a voluntary
program of continuing education for its designated members. M.A.I.'s
and R.M.'s who meet the minimum standards of this program are_awarded
periodic educational certification. I am certified under this progrO,
through September 15, 1986.
David S. Pifari,
--
" - , J .
_ '
. .
'
ADDENDA
A parcel of land situate in the NE1/4, Section _, Township 18 North,
R. 3 E, B.M. Valley County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows:
Commencing at the C 1/4 corner, Section 17, Township 18 North, R.3 E,
B.M. Valley County, Idaho, thence N 89° 57' 20" E, 644.45 feet to a meander
corner on the Westerly Bank of the North Fork of the Payette River; thence
N 48° 00' E, 100 feet along said bank to the real point of beginning:
Thence West 200.00 feet
Thence North 120.00 feet
Thence S 80° 00' W, 102.97 feet
Thence N 84° 12' W, 420.23 feet to the Westerly line of the NE 1/4 of
said Section 17,
Thence N 0° 11' 40" W, 125.00 feet to the South West corner of Rio
Vista Subdivision No. 4.
Thence along the Southerly boundary of Rio Vista Subdivision No.4;
N 89° 48' 18" E, 70.00 feet
Thence on a non tangent curve to the left whose radius point bears
N 89° 48' 18" E. 46.26 feet, a delta angle of 63° 12' 36", 51.04 feet,
Thence on a curve to the left whose radius is 76.33 feet and delta
angle is 51° 30' 00" 68.61 feet
Thence N 65° 05' 42" E, 50.65 feet,
Thence on a curve to the right whose radius is 140.90 feet and delta
angle is 50° 32' 48" 124.30 feet
Thence S 54° 21' 30" E., 38.65 feet
Thence on a curve to the left whose radius is 95.98 feet and delta
angle is.41° 47' 12" 70.00 feet
Thence "N 73 .51' 18" E, 127:.8.0 feet
Thence on a curve to the right whose radius is 176.01 feet and delta
angle is 16° 08' 42", 49.60 feet
Thence East 150.00 feet
Thence.;.on a- curve to : the left whose
angl"e. is 10° 42' 48" 33.34 feet
Thence N 79.°.17' 12" E, 98.28 feet
Thence on a curve to the left whose
angle is 47 11' 12", 103.17 feet
Thence N 32° .06' 00" E, 573.93 feet
Rio Vista Subdivision No.4
Thence N 54° 17' 48" E, 102.49 feet
Rio Vista Subdivision No. 3,
Thence S 69° 14' 45" E, 71.00 feet along said Northerly line to the
right bank of the North Fork of the .Payette River
Thence S 1° 00' E, 105.90 feet along said right bank
Thence N 70° 22' 49" W,.82.43 feet
Thence on a curve to the left whose radius is 20.0 feet and delta
angle is 77° 31' 11", 27.06 feet
Thence 32° 06' W, 65.88 feet
Thence S 70° 22' 49" E, 146.30 feet to the right bank of the North
Fork of the Payette River
Thence S 1° 00' E, 78.62 feet along said right bank
Thence S 16° 00' W, 180.00 feet along said right bank •
Thence S 37° 00' W, 75.00 feet along said right bank
Thence S 57° 30' W, 200.00 feet along said right bank
Thence S. 66° 00' W, 180.00 feet along said right bank
Thence S 56° 28' 48" W, 332.22 feet along said right bank
To the point of beginning
SUBJECT to existing, reserved or granted easements, restrictions,
or rights of way. - ---
radius is 178.30 feet and delta
radius is 125.27 feet and delta
to the Northeast corner of Lot 1,
to the Northerly line of Lot 26,
Legal Description
Larger Parcel
A -la
t--
ti. oy ,
u
�10
,.
(Si.iE-11,) LA •
R.
R
c .SA- ,, `yr �:_ ,
-iT 1 k4:Cc1�,
tRAVf .'S. Wn�` Cfs;?/a m fi
$Jrtio1-k
=} �e J.
v./A 6.1C �-
,
o'
L 7-. 3!
;VD •IoD
(••
rQ4c V
I(
�/aSE�nEni
3S. ,2A-, f
�. i
I
f sec,{
M 1 }{ E,A coc
n eA cdc l; } _.
•
to
C� j3 UC?' �0 \• r
r�Q, ,
v �OF`aM arse„.
I y
• .,� A 1 h
5f i ; .
Plat Map
A-2a
I�
7-707 SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS 98
(2) The state of Idaho or any political subdivision thereof shall be entitled
to escrow the funds for the acquisition of the omitted lands until a letter of
acquiescence or other documentation is received from the federal govern-
ment, at which time all of the funds shall be remitted to the landholder. [I.C.,
§ 7-704A, as added by 1982, ch. 125, § 1, p. 361.]
Compiler's notes. Section 2 of S.L. 1982,
ch. 125 is compiled as § 40-705.
Cross ref. Condemnation of rights -of -way,
§ 40-705.
7-707. Complaint.
ANALYSIS
Burden of proof.
Evidence.
Offer to purchase.
Burden of Proof.
Where landowners specifically alleged that
the condemnors had alternative means of
access and produced evidence of such alterna-
tive means of access, including one road then
in use by the condemnors pursuant to a
license agreement it was then incumbent
upon the condemnors to prove that the alter-
native means of access were not available to
them or that such means of access were not
reasonably adequate or sufficient for their
purposes. Erickson v. Amoth, 99 Idaho 907,
591 P.2d 1074 (1978).
Evidence.
The fact that the plaintiffs' existing access
was by way of a license, rather than an ease-
ment across the land of other adjoining prop-
erty owners does not destroy either the
evidence or the finding of the court that alter-
native access routes existed nor the trial
court's holding based thereon that necessity
Sec. to sec. ref. This section is referred to
in § 40-705.
for condemnation did not exist. Erickson v.
Amoth, 99 Idaho 907, 591 P.2d 1074 (1978).
Offer to Purchase.
Where the evidence showed that plaintiff
power company was building a 230 kv high
tension power transmission line and needed a
three-quarters of a mile right-of-way across
defendants' land to erect three self-supporting
double circuit steel towers in connection with
that project, that plaintiff made some 20
contacts over a period of 13 months in an
attempt to purchase the right-of-way, that
plaintiff had two independent appraisals of
the land made in addition to its own, and
referred defendants to two other appraisers,
that plaintiffs offered the defendants the top
appraisal figure after making several upward
adjustments based upon possible future com-
mercial potential, and that defendants consis-
tently refused while failing to offer any other
appraisal in support of their position, the trial
court correctly held that plaintiff had
satisfied the requirement of subsection (6) of
this section. Idaho .Power Co. v. Lettunich,
100 Idaho 582, 602 P.2d 540 (1979).
7-711. Assessment of damages. — The court, jury or referee must hear
such legal testimony as may be offered by any of the parties to the pro-
ceedings, and thereupon must ascertain and assess:
1. The value of the property sought to be condemned, and all improve-
ments thereon pertaining to the realty, and of each and every separate
estate or interest therein; if it consists of different parcels, the value of each
parcel and each estate or interest therein shall be separately assessed.
2. If the property sought to be condemned constitutes only a part of a
larger parcel, the damages which will accrue to the portion not sought to be
condemned, by reason of its severance from the portion sought to be
condemned, and the construction of the improvement in the manner
proposed by the plaintiff.
3. Separately, how much the portion not sought to be condemned, and
each estate or interest therein, will be specially and directly benefited, if at
all, by the construction of the improvement proposed by the, plaintiff; and if
IdaPto Code
A-3a
99 EMINENT DOMAIN 7-718
the benefit shall be equal to the damages assessed, under subdivision 2, the
owner of the parcel shall be allowed no compensation except the value of the
portion taken; but if the benefit shall be less than the damages so assessed,
the former shall be deducted from the latter, and the remainder shall be the
only damages allowed in addition to the value.
4. If the property sought to be condemned be for a railroad, the cost of
good and sufficient fences along the line of such railroad, and the cost of
cattle guards where fences may cross the line of such railroad.
5. As far as practicable, compensation must be assessed for each source
of damages separately.
6. If the property sought to be condemned is private real property
actively devoted to agriculture, the damages which will accrue because of
the costs, if any, of farming around electrical transmission line structure(s)
for a transmission line with a capacity in excess of two hundred thirty (230)
KV (kilovolts). If the property sought to be condemned has been the subject
of a previous condemnation proceeding or proceedings for electrical
transmission line structure(s) and at the time of condemnation the field
holds other electrical transmission line structure(s), such evidence of costs
referred to above may also include the cumulative effects, if any, of con-
ducting farming operations around other electrical transmission line struc-
tures) in the same field, whether such structure(s) are of the condemnor or
not. [C.C.P. 1881, § 861; R.S., R.C., & C.L., § 5220; C.S., § 7414; I.C.A.,
§ 13-711; am. 1983, ch. 115, § 2, p. 246.]
•
Compiler's notes. Section 1 of S.L. 1983,
ch. 115 is compiled as § 7-704.
ANALYSIS
Prospective future interference.
Special verdict.
Prospective Future Interference.
When an easement owner loses the exclu-
sive right to use his easement, he may well be
damaged by the prospective future interfer-
ence with his use, even if such interference
does not prevent or seriously impair his enjoy-
ment of the easement. Canyon View Irriga-
tion Co. v. Twin Falls Canal Co., 101 Idaho
604, 619 P.2d 122 (1980), cert. denied, 451
U.S. 912. 101 S. Ct. 1983, 68 L. Ed. 2d 301
(1981).
Special Verdict.
In an eminent domain action, special
verdict which conformed with this section but
also contained a space for the jury to indicate
its total award, which corresponded with the
total of the compensation due for the property
plus the damage caused by severance, was not
erroneous. State ex rel. Moore v. Bastian, 98
Idaho 888, 575 P.2d 486 (1978).
7-712. Damages — Date of accrual.
Date for Valuation.
In eminent domain action, if error occurred
in the admission of evidence regarding cap-
italization of annual rentals accruing after
the time of the taking, it was cured by instruc-
7-718. Costs.
Attorney's Fees.
An award of reasonable attorneys' fees to
the condemnee in an eminent domain pro-
ceeding is a matter for the trial court's guided
tions explicitly directing the jury to deter-
mine value as of the date of the taking. State
ex rel. Moore v. Bastian, 98 Idaho 888, 575
P.2d 486 (1978).
discretion and, as in other areas of the law,
such award will be overturned only upon a
showing of abuse; the condemnee's costs may
be awarded under I.R.C.P. 54(d)(1)(C) or
Idaho Code
A-36
,/
F
[
s,
cr
The Easement
STEIN PROPERTY
1) Beginning at a point 644.45 feet N 89° 20' 44" E (Formerly East)
of the center of Section 17, T.18N., R.3E., B.M., Valley County,
Idaho;
Thence N 48° E 100.00 feet to a point on the west bank of the North
Fork of the Payette River, said point being the southeast property
corner described by Instrument No. 112650, said point being the
True Point of Beginning of easement; thence S 89 20' 44" W
39.16 feet to a point; thence N 40° 27' 57" W 51.89 feet to a
point; thence N 49° 32' 03" E 100.00 feet to a point; thence
S 40° 27' 57" E 88.02 feet more or less where said easement
intersects the property line of said property; thence along said
property line S 56 28'.48" W 72.53 feet more or less to the True
Point of Beginning. Said easement being a construction easement.
2) Beginning at the True Point of Beginning described above; thence
N 400 27' 57" W 40.00 feet to a point; thence N 49° 32' 03" E
44.00 feet to a point; thence S 40° 27' 57" E 45.36 feet more or
less where said line intersects the property line of said property;
thence along said property line S 56 28' 48" W 44.32 feet more or
less to the True Point of Beginning. Said easement being a
permanent easement.
3) Beginning at a point 644.45 feet N 89° 20' 44" E of the center of
said Section 17; thence N 48° E 100.00 feet; thence N 9° 14' 06"
E 38.68 feet to the :True Point of Beginning of easement; thence.
along the centerline of sewer, with a permanent easement of 10 feet
left and 10 feet right and a construction easement of 25 feet left
and 25 feet right of said centerline, N 829 14' 45" W 202.12 feet,
more or less where said easement intersects the property line of said
property.
4) Beginning at a point on the north -south 4 section line of said Section
17, said point being 216.56 feet N 00° 20' 15" W from the center of
said Section 17, said point being the True Point of Beginning of
easement; thence along said north -south 4 section line N 00 20' 15"
W 19.67 feet to a point; thence S 89° 14' 45" E 438.66 feet more
or less where said line intersects the property line of said property;
thence along said property line S 80° 00' W 16.90 feet to a property
corner; thence along the property line N 84° 12' W 420.05 feet more
or less to the True Point of Beginning. Said easement being a
construction easement.
Legal Description
Easement
A -lb
STEIN PROPERTY
EASEMENT FOR GENERATOR BUILDING
Beginning at the .center of Section 17, T.18N., R.3E., B.M., Valley County,
Idaho; thence N 89°20$ 44" E•644.45 feet to a point; thence N 48°E 100.00
feet to a point on the west bank of the North Fork of the Payette River;
thence S 89° 20' 44" W 200.00 feet to a point; thence N 00° 20' 15" 1: 120.00
feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence S 82°14' 45" E 54.00 feet;
thence S 7°45' 15" W 41.25 feet; thence N 82° 14' 45" W 48.63 feet more -
or -less where said line intersects the property line; thence along said
property line N 00°20' 15" 1 41.59 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
Said easement being a permanent easement.
Legal Description For
Generator Building
A -lc
'-
I I
•••-• =
E
LAKE SIDE AVE.
PINE.DALE ST.
osE TERRACE
/9 20
q-
A e
RIO VISTA BLVD.
•••••
••••••••
•••••
•••••
Public
Beach
FisH
HATCFERY
.300' 67,7' ,
C'EtE WAY
«,
••••••
•••••
••••••••
=Z.
moo' 240d 3000'
-
Location Map
Ci
E LAKE ST
u
PARK SfilEE1
g!DANE)
School
CEMETERY
A-4
STIBNITE
A
QUALIFICATIONS OF DAVID S. PIFARI, M.A.I.
Educational Background
B.B.A. Finance, Boise State University
Real Estate Courses Completed:
Fundamentals of Real Estate, Boise State University, 1971
Appraisal of Real Estate, Boise State University, 1971
Real Estate Finance, Boise State University, 1972.
American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers, Course VIII, 1975
American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers, Exam 1-A, March, 1979
Income Capitalization Seminar, 1979
Capitalization Theory & Techniques, 1979, challenged 1-B exam, March,
1980
Condominium Valuation Seminar, 1979
Case Studies in Real Estate Valuation, 1980
Litigation/Valuation, 1981
Standards of Professional Practice, 1981
Related Work Experience
- Two years construction with Hardee Construction
- Eight months as cost estimator for Boise Cascade Corporation
- Three years with United First Federal Savings & Loan Association
of Boise as loan officer, chief appraiser, and branch manager
- Fee appraiser since April, 1978
Professional Designation
M.A.I. - Member of the American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers,
December, 1982.
Court Testimony
Qualified as expert witness, Fourth Judicial Court, State of Idaho, 1978,
1980
The American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers conducts a voluntary
program of continuing education for its designated members. M.A.I.'s and
R.M.'s who meet the minimum standards of this program are awarded periodic
educational certification. I am certified under this program through
December 31, 1985.
A-5