1 / 23

Enhancing CTLA Tree Valuation: A Critique and Proposal for Urban Forestry Contributions

This presentation by Dan Young critiques the Council of Tree and Landscape Appraisers (CTLA) tree valuation method, detailing its shortcomings and proposing improvements. Young argues that tree valuation should not only compensate owners but also consider the broader community benefits. Key suggestions include adding a 35% urban forest levy to reflect shared ownership and consulting real estate appraisers to incorporate additional property values influenced by trees. An example case study of Jeff Beck's tree demonstrates the potential for increased compensation, totaling nearly $82,000.

lyndon
Download Presentation

Enhancing CTLA Tree Valuation: A Critique and Proposal for Urban Forestry Contributions

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Dan Young’s Presentation Additions to the CTLA Tree Valuation Protocol

  2. Thank You Prof. Kenneyfor the Extension!

  3. Please Note: This is my First Power Point Presentation!

  4. Presentation Outline • Short Comings of Council of Tree and Landscapers Appraisers (CTLA) guide to Tree Valuation. • Suggestions to change the method of the CTLA Tree Valuation.

  5. Critique #1The CTLA Method Under Values Trees! Not only should the owner be compensated but some how the Larger community!

  6. Critique #2: The value of the tree should be reflected in the additional property values it creates over and above the tree’s value as an object into itself.

  7. Solution #1 • The values of the tree should be be responsive to its membership in the larger urban forest. • Solution: add an additional 35% of value to each tree to be ‘owned’ by the city’s urban forestry dept.

  8. 35% as ‘owned' by the Urban Forestry Dept. This money is to go into general revenue for the Forestry Dept. as to benefit the urban forest as a whole.

  9. Solution #2 • The value of the tree should be reflected in the additional property values it creates over and above the tree’s value as an object into itself. • Consult a Real Estate appraiser!

  10. Working Example! • A Malicious person chopped down a tree from Jeff Beck’s front yard. • Jeff in order to sue for damages needs to get a value for the tree.

  11. Using the CTLA Trunk Formula Method • Tree trunk size 500 CM • Diameter 159 CM • Area 19,884 CM squared • Basic Price 6.51 CND • Diameter of Adjusted Trunk Size 125 CM • Adjusted Trunk Area 12,266 CM squared

  12. Area adjusted for difference between Transplant and Apprised Tree 12,202 CM squared • Basic Price $79,434 • Adjusted for Species: White Fir Rating = 76 • Adjusted for Condition: .90 • Site: .80 • Placement: .90 • Contribution: .80 • Location Total .83 • Adjusted for location $45,877 • Rounded to the nearest $100: $45,900 • The CTLA method’s tree value: $45,900

  13. The Dan Young Additions! • CTLA Value $45,900 • 35% Urban Forest Levy: $16,065 • Over and above additional property value determined by a Real Estate Appraiser: $20,000 • Total: $81,965

  14. The End Result • Jeff Beck is compensated $65,900 for the loss of his tree. • The Urban Forestry Department is paid $16,065

More Related