• About
    • Justin Hodge
    • Luke Ellis
  • Contact Us
  • Eminent Domain FAQs
  • Resources
    • Fair Market Value Considerations
    • Highest and Best Use
    • Highway Expansions
    • Pipelines
    • Power Lines
    • Water Rights
    • What is Eminent Domain?
  • Sitemap
  • Thank You

Texas Condemnation

~ Texas Eminent Domain Explained

Texas Condemnation

Tag Archives: Landowner Compensation

Mitigation Credits as “Highest and Best Use”

22 Friday Jul 2016

Posted by texascondemnation in Highest and Best Use, Landowner Rights, texas condemnation

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

California Tiger Salamander, condemnor, County of Santa Barbara, Double H Properties, Eminent Domain, entitlements, environmental impact, financially feasible, Highest and Best Use, King County WA, Landowner Compensation, legally permissible, maximally productive, mitigation bank, mitigation credit theory, mitigation credits, physically possible, rural farmland, sensitive or protected habitat

In Eminent Domain cases, the acquiring entity or condemnor, must compensate the landowner for the property they are taking. Fulfilling this requirement typically raises two questions:

             1) How much should the landowner receive for their land?

             2) How should we determine that amount?

Under Texas law, a landowner is entitled to compensation for an amount to be determined by an application of the “Highest and Best Use” (HBU) principle. The principle requires that the value of the land be established, not merely by evaluating the current use, but by analyzing four factors. Thus, a landowner may receive an amount derived from a potential highest and best use, rather than the current one. Therefore, an application of the HBU principle must operate within the boundaries established by these four limiting conditions. The purported HBU must be:

             1) Legally permissible

             2) Physically possible

             3) Financially feasible

             4) Maximally productive

In short, the HBU attempts to hold the condemnor responsible for the greatest compensation amount that can be sustained by an objective analysis of a respective property.

An interesting application of the principle was attempted recently in the California case of County of Santa Barbara (Plaintiff and Respondent) v. Double H Properties, LLC (Defendant and Appellant). This case was initiated by the County for the purposes of obtaining an easement to serve as a habitat for the endangered California Tiger Salamander. In valuing the land, the owner’s appraiser submitted two theories, one which analyzed the property as rural farmland, and one which calculated the value of the property when used for mitigation credits.

Mitigation credits are a way that a developer can obtain entitlements when a project is likely to impact an environmentally sensitive or protected habitat. To earn these entitlements, the developer can purchase mitigation credits with a mitigation bank. The bank then purchases and preserves another property to offset the environmental impact of the original construction.

The owner’s appraiser argued that, only when the land was valued as mitigation credits, did it fulfill its highest and best use, and obtain the greatest value. Their assessment also exceeded in value the one put forth by the County’s appraiser, who valued the property as farmland. The County moved to exclude the landowner’s valuation, a motion which the Trial Court granted.

The owner took the case on appeal. In reviewing the Trial Court’s dismissal of the owner’s mitigation credit theory, it became apparent to the Appeals Court that the appraiser had never provided any evidence that the land could be entitled for mitigation credits. In other words, the appraiser had failed to show that the use of the land for mitigation credits was affirmatively permissible in the law. The Appellate Court held that the Trial Court did not abuse its discretion in excluding the mitigation credit appraisal.

This will likely not be the last time we see this argument made in regards to a highest and best use analysis in California or elsewhere.

Share this:

  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Twitter

Like this:

Like Loading...

Stay up to date with Justin and Luke

texascondemnation

texascondemnation

Luke Ellis and Justin Hodge are partners with Marrs Ellis & Hodge LLP. Justin heads the firm's eminent domain practice in the Houston office. Luke heads the firm's eminent domain practice in the Austin office. Luke Ellis is widely recognized as one of Texas’s top young lawyers—and one of the top lawyers of any age practicing in the area of eminent domain. Mr. Ellis has broad experience and has enjoyed success in many types of civil litigation. Justin Hodge is a trial lawyer who represents Texas landowners in condemnation, eminent-domain, and real-estate lawsuits. He represents landowners in condemnation proceedings, not the governmental authorities or private companies taking property. Mr. Hodge has handled complex condemnation and eminent-domain cases throughout the State of Texas. If you have questions about any of the issues raised in this blog, we invite you to discuss them with us at jhodge@mehlaw.com or lellis@mehlaw.com.

Personal Links

  • Marrs Ellis & Hodge LLP

View Full Profile →

RSS TexasCondemnation

  • DART “Silver Line” May Damage Businesses in Dallas – Fox News 4 Features Justin Hodge September 28, 2019
    Dallas Fox 4 discusses the impact of the DART “Silver Line” on business owners and interviews Marrs Ellis & Hodge, …Continue reading →
    texascondemnation
  • Kinder Morgan Obtains Courtroom Victory, Can Proceed with Construction of Permian Highway Pipeline, Judge says. September 6, 2019
    In an end to a court room battle that will surely set back landowners, a Travis County District court recently …Continue reading →
    texascondemnation
  • Trump Administration Joins Chorus of Voices Calling for Criminalization of Pipeline Protests September 3, 2019
    The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (“PHMSA”), a regulatory agency under the Transportation Department, released a recommendation this month …Continue reading →
    texascondemnation
  • $1 Billion of Border Wall Funding Blocked by Federal Judge June 5, 2019
    Judge Haywood Gilliam, a U.S. District Court Judge based in Oakland, California put a stopper in the President’s border wall …Continue reading →
    texascondemnation
  • New Executive Orders Seek to Shorten Pipeline Approval Process May 28, 2019
    President Trump issued two executive orders last month with the intent of speeding up the pipeline permitting process. The orders …Continue reading →
    texascondemnation
  • Texas Central Partner’s Houston to Dallas High-Speed Rail Project Derailed by a Leon County Judge? April 26, 2019
    As has been widely reported, Texas Central Partners (“TCP”), a privately owned, Dallas based company, has announced ambitious plans to …Continue reading →
    texascondemnation
  • New Session, New Bills – The 2019 Legislature’s Push for Eminent Domain Reform April 3, 2019
    Texas landowner advocacy groups are working with State politicians to reform eminent domain. Eminent domain, though a deeply concerning issue …Continue reading →
    texascondemnation
  • Air Force Pollution Forces Farm to Liquidate March 15, 2019
    The owners of Highland Dairy Farm (“Highland”) in Clovis, New Mexico are being forced to close down due to chemical …Continue reading →
    texascondemnation
  • Tragedy: Deadly Explosion Highlights Dangers of Pipeline Sabotage March 4, 2019
    A community in Mexico is reeling after the deadliest pipeline explosion in recent memory claimed over a hundred lives and …Continue reading →
    texascondemnation
  • Advances in Pipeline Technology Give Rise to New Threat: Cyberattacks February 22, 2019
    There are currently some 2.7 million miles of pipeline transporting hazardous substances across the United States. These pipelines often run …Continue reading →
    texascondemnation

Follow Our Blog via Email

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Twitter Updates

Error: Twitter did not respond. Please wait a few minutes and refresh this page.

Twitter Updates

  • With the #Keystone decision looming, will the President propose a quid pro quo? wp.me/p2D4PK-3i via @JustinAHodge #Obama #Pipelines 6 years ago
  • City of #Austin may pay Whittington $14.1 million for downtown block wp.me/p2D4PK-3f via @JustinAHodge #TexasSupremeCourt 6 years ago
  • Court rules #EPA can withdraw mining permits wp.me/s2D4PK-196 via @JustinAHodge #Coal #Pollution 6 years ago
Follow @TXCondemnation

Twitter Updates

  • With the #Keystone decision looming, will the President propose a quid pro quo? wp.me/p2D4PK-3i via @JustinAHodge #Obama #Pipelines 6 years ago
  • City of #Austin may pay Whittington $14.1 million for downtown block wp.me/p2D4PK-3f via @JustinAHodge #TexasSupremeCourt 6 years ago
  • Court rules #EPA can withdraw mining permits wp.me/s2D4PK-196 via @JustinAHodge #Coal #Pollution 6 years ago
Follow @JMEHLaw

TexasCondemnation

  • RSS - Posts
  • RSS - Comments

Pages

  • About
    • Justin Hodge
    • Luke Ellis
  • Contact Us
  • Eminent Domain FAQs
  • Resources
    • Fair Market Value Considerations
    • Highest and Best Use
    • Highway Expansions
    • Pipelines
    • Power Lines
    • Water Rights
    • What is Eminent Domain?
  • Sitemap
  • Thank You

Powered by WordPress.com.

loading Cancel
Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
Email check failed, please try again
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.
%d bloggers like this: