Expert types
Planning evidence: what the land could have become
Highest and best use decides the valuation, and highest and best use is a planning judgement. Whether a rezoning was reasonably probable, and whether the remainder can still be developed, are the two questions planners answer.
Scope
The questions this expert answers
Was a higher use realistic
The difference between agricultural and development value is often the whole case. The test is reasonable probability, evidenced, not possibility.
What would the authority have approved
Entitlement history on comparable parcels is the strongest available evidence of what was achievable.
Does the remainder still work
A parcel reduced below a minimum threshold changes category rather than merely size, and that is where the damage usually is.
Is the existing use still compliant
Setbacks, parking ratios and coverage can fail after a taking, leaving a non conforming use with restricted rights.
What yield is lost
Where development was the highest and best use, the loss is often measured in lots or units rather than acres.
How long and how likely
Entitlement takes time and carries risk, and both have to be reflected rather than assumed away.
Selection
Qualifications and what to check
| Criterion | What to look for |
|---|---|
| Credentials | AICP certification or equivalent, with current practice in this jurisdiction |
| Local knowledge | Familiar with this authority’s plan, ordinances and how it actually decides |
| Entitlement record | Has taken applications through this process, not only studied it |
| Evidence discipline | Works from approvals and the record rather than from general expectation |
| Testimony | Able to explain probability without overstating it, which is where planners get hurt on cross |
In practice
Reasonably probable, and the trap on both sides
Owners overstate this and agencies understate it, and both are vulnerable. An owner claiming development value for land with agricultural zoning, no services and no application history is asking a fact finder to pay for a hope. An agency valuing land inside an urban growth boundary, adjoining two recent approvals, with services at the boundary, as pasture is ignoring what any buyer would have paid.
The planner’s job is to land between them on evidence: the plan designation, the approvals granted nearby, the applications filed and determined, the services available, the time and cost of getting consent and the risk of not getting it.
The remainder deserves its own planning conclusion. A report that analyses the before condition and assumes the after condition is unchanged has skipped the question that usually carries the damages.
Questions about this expert
Is a planner needed if the zoning already permits the use
Less so. Planning evidence matters most where the argument is that a different use was probable, or where the remainder’s compliance has changed.
Can the appraiser do this
An experienced appraiser can read a zoning ordinance. What they cannot credibly do is give an opinion on the probability of an approval, which is where cross examination goes.
What is the strongest planning evidence
Approvals granted to comparable parcels by the same authority in the same period. It is specific, it is documented and it is hard to argue with.
The expert decides the number more often than the argument does
In condemnation the facts in dispute are technical. Who presents them, and how well, is usually what the case turns on.