Property Valuations: When is a second opinion right for you?

It isn’t uncommon to feel pressure from the buying agent and their attorneys, pushing for businesses and individuals to quickly accept an initial financial offer for their property taking. But how do landowners know if the compensation amount is fair? Additionally, it’s important remember that property owners have just one opportunity for eminent domain compensation. Once you settle with the government or taking agency, no modifications can be made.

Most times there is no upfront cost to seek legal guidance or representation when you are faced with an eminent domain action to take your property.

Case Study: Access Pipeline

COURTS ASKED TO EVALUATE HOW POTENTIAL FUTURE VALUE WAS CALCULATED

The Dakota Access Pipeline is a major case where undeveloped land in the Midwest was taken by eminent domain for a utility project. In this case, farmland and undeveloped rural land were condemned to create a pathway for the pipeline.

Farmers and landowners argued that the undeveloped land was worth more due to its future potential for agriculture, while the pipeline company claimed it was typical rural land with limited use. Severance damages were a significant issue, as landowners claimed that the pipeline would reduce the value of the remaining land.

Ultimately, landowners received compensation, but many cases ended up in court due to disputes over how the land’s potential future uses were calculated and how severance damages were handled. (Iowa, Illinois, 2017)

Case Study: Toll Road Expansion

AGRICULTURAL & UNDEVELOPED LAND: VALUE OF HIGHEST, BEST USE DISPUTED

When the Indiana Department of Transportation (INDOT) expanded the Indiana Toll Road, it took parts of undeveloped land through eminent domain. Property owners received compensation based on appraisals, but there were significant disputes over whether proximity to the toll road decreased or increased the value of their remaining land.

Much of this land was rural, used for farming, or was entirely undeveloped, raising complex questions about fair market value. As such, compensation to property owners was related to determining the highest and best use of the undeveloped land. For some tracts, the land was considered to have future commercial development potential due to its proximity to highways, while others were deemed only suitable for agriculture. (Indiana, 2013)

Case Study: Highway Expansions

DID GOVERNMENT APPRAISALS CONSISTENTLY UNDERVALUE PROPERTY?

Illinois has seen several highway expansion projects where undeveloped land was taken for public use. For instance, the construction of new interchanges on I-57, I-294 and I-90 required acquiring undeveloped land along rural sections of the highway.

Many landowners argued that their rural land was undervalued, especially considering future commercial or residential development potential. There were also concerns about severance damages, as new highway infrastructure often divided tracts of farmland, affecting access and utility.

A number of property owners affected by these highway expansions have secured legal representation and gone to trial to fight for higher compensation. (Illinois, current/2024)

Case Study: Farmland, Undeveloped Parcels Taken for Wind Farms

LANDOWNERS: TURBINES, INFRASTRUCTURE IRREPARABLY HARM LANDSCAPE

As wind farms expanded across the Midwest, Iowa residents experienced significant takings of agricultural and undeveloped land. Disputes over severance damages were widely reported. Many protested not only purpose of the eminent domain seizure, but also the accuracy and fairness of the taking agency’s valuation.

Landowners argued that their undeveloped land had higher value due to the potential for agriculture or development. Others claimed that the construction of turbines, and the related infrastructure necessary to harness power, would permanently and infinitely alter the landscape and reduce the desirability of the surrounding property. (Iowa, 2010s)