Parkland Appraisals
Your article regarding land speculator Ty Sisson and his role in the acquisition of national parkland (“Park Critic Makes Fortune on Land Sales,” Times Valley Edition, March 15) prompts a few observations.
As a civil engineering consultant retained on several occasions by National Park Service appraisers, I have been appalled by the slipshod and unprofessional aspects of the acquisition process.
It should be recognized that most of the properties being purchased are located in an area fraught with geological hazards and geotechnical problems which would have to be overcome or mitigated to allow the properties to be developed for residential subdivisions--the “highest and best use” generally assigned to them for appraisal purposes.
It is irresponsible to use only recent sales comparables to determine land values in the Santa Monica Mountains. Two land parcels could appear comparable in many respects such as area, topography, accessibility, availability of utilities and view potential. Whereas one parcel might be free of geological and engineering problems and might command a relatively high price in an open-market transaction, the other parcel might be burdened with hazards not apparent to an appraiser--such as latent landslides, faults, adverse bedding planes, uncompacted fill and drainage problems--which would diminish its market value to a fraction of the first parcel.
Most of the properties being purchased cannot be properly appraised without engineering and geology studies and mitigation cost estimates predicated on a schematic development plan. Such studies would reveal that many properties have zero or even negative value and could be bypassed in the acquisition process. After all, the primary use for most of these properties is permanent open space.
Once a fair market value has been determined based on engineering and geologic input as well as market considerations, the National Park Service should offer the property owner this amount--no more, no less. If the property owner does not accept the price, legal condemnation proceedings should be instigated. Negotiations should be eliminated.
In principle, the overpayment to land speculators resulting from the present policy can be likened to that engendered by our military procurement procedures.
GERARD SHUIRMAN
Westlake Village
