The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20040170.tiff A PROPERTY VALUATION REPORT: AFFECT OF SAND AND GRAVEL MINES ON PROPERTY VALUES Submitted By: Lafarge West, Inc. 1800 North Taft Hill Road PO Box 2187 Fort Collins, CO 80522 Prepared By: Banks and Gesso, LLC 720 Kipling Street, Suite 117 Lakewood, CO 80215 October 2002 Wan 2004-0170 tli Table of Contents Introduction 1 Background 1 Prior Studies 1 Methodology 4 Sand and Gravel Mines and Their Adjacent Subdivisions 6 Home Office Operation 6 Rigden Sand and Gravel Mine 7 Kyger Pit 8 Larimer County and the Northern Front Range 8 Mine Area Subdvisions Compared to Fort Collins and Northern Front Range 10 Home Office Operation 10 Kyger Sand and Gravel Mine 12 Rigden Sand and Gravel Mine 13 Summary 14 Conclusion 18 Appendices Appendix A: Data Tables 20 Appendix B: Other Studies 25 Banks and Gesso, LLC Introduction Background Lafarge West, a construction materials producer with operations throughout Colorado and the United States, is proposing the Overland Pond Sand and Gravel Mine in order to sustain their current Home Office operation that is currently permitted and operating in the Fort Collins area. This proposal has raised questions by neighbors residing in subdivisions located nearby and adjacent to the areas Lafarge has identified for future excavation. One of the main concerns is that expansion of the mining limits at Overland Pond will decrease property values in surrounding neighborhoods. Since most people consider their homes the biggest investment they will ever make, this is a very real concern that Lafarge wishes to address. This report, at Lafarge's request, will examine the effects that sand and gravel mining operations have on surrounding residential property values. Prior Studies Research has indicated that work has been previously done in regards to assessing the impacts mining operations may have on property values at various locations throughout the United States. These previous studies concentrated on construction aggregate rock quarries, which can be more impactive than sand and gravel operations due to their operational methods that include blasting of rock. These studies provide some insight as to what can be expected near the Overland Pond sight. Colorado has seen remarkable growth in the last ten to fifteen years as people have been moving into the state in high rates. As population increases, there is an increased need for construction materials. Whether in the form of new and/or improved roadways, or in the form of office, commercial, or residential buildings, this construction is dependent on sand and gravel. As an example, the average new home requires 112 tons of sand and gravel to construct. In Colorado, the average per capita consumption of sand and gravel is 11.5 tons on an annualized basis. Historically, mining of sand and gravel has been a rural business, with mine sites typically located in agriculturally zoned areas and away from population centers. However, to satisfy housing needs for the State's incoming population, homebuilders have been forced to move farther away from the population centers for development opportunities, creating an increasingly fuzzy line Overland Ponds Valuation Report 02022.WD Lafarge North America 1 October 2002 Banks and Gesso, LLC between what is considered urban and rural. This situation has created a "double-edged sword" of sorts. Residential users and aggregate producers are being forced to coexist more often than in the past, with many mining operations located near residential land uses, and new residential subdivisions being built near existing mining operations. This relationship between residential land uses and sand and gravel mining has created enough data where we can now adequately assess any impacts mines may have on surrounding property values. With the above in mind, we want to first present conclusions from the following three studies: • "Social, Economic, and Legal Consequences of Blasting in Strip Mines and Quarries"(U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Mines, 1981); • "Impact of Rock Quarry Operations on Value of Nearby Housing"(prepared by two Real Estate Professors from the University of Georgia for Davidson Mineral Properties in 1987); and • "Impacts of Rock Quarries on Residential Property Values—Jefferson County, Colorado— Rail Line Quarry"(prepared by Banks and Gesso, LLC for Asphalt Paving Company in 1998). While each of these studies was prepared with the effects of rock quarries in mind, the premise of the studies was similar in nature to what will be presented in this report. It should be noted that the three studies were prepared by three different types of researchers over a rather large and varied geographic base. The three research entities were the federal government, a noted university, and finally a consulting firm with extensive experience in construction aggregates mining. The first study examined quarries and their surrounding neighborhoods in six metropolitan areas throughout the United States (Kansas City, MO; Louisville, KY; Rockford, IL; Dupo, IL; Chicago, IL; and Philadelphia, PA). It compared assessed values of similarly styled homes (i.e. ranch, split-level, two-story, etc.) in locations both near and away from the rock quarries. For example, the assessed value of a brick ranch near the quarry would be compared to that of a brick ranch located in another part of the area but away from and not subject to the influences of the quarry. The report found that Overland Ponds Valuation Report 02022.WD Lafarge North America 2 October 2002 Banks and Gesso, LLC home values of properties located away from a quarry did not vary significantly from those of similarly styled homes located near a quarry. The second study looked at three quarries and their surrounding neighborhoods in three separate Georgia counties. This study compared tendencies of both assessed value and resale value (when available) within each quarry neighborhood to those of non- quarry influenced developments with similar characteristics (i.e., architectural styles, access roads, lot sizes, etc.). This report found there to be no significant differences in either assessed values or resale values between homes located near quarries and those located away from quarries. The third study examined three rock quarries in the Jefferson County area. The study looked at resale values of homes in the area around the quarries and compared those to resale values of homes in Jefferson County as a whole, and the Denver Metropolitan area as well. As with the earlier studies, the conclusion found there to be no apparent affects of rock quarries on property values. Another significant finding of the Jefferson County study was that since the three quarries were established in the early 1970's, residential construction in all price ranges continued to be built, sold, and resold on properties nearby these very large operations. The differences between crushed stone rock quarries, such as those in the referenced studies, and sand and gravel operations are significant. Crushed stone quarries are usually much larger in terms of production capabilities, generating much greater truck traffic on the surrounding road systems. Also, in rock quarries the material must be blasted from the formation where it exists, creating the potential for higher noise levels, increased dust and air pollution, and the potential for ground motion and vibration. Sand and gravel operations are alluvial deposits in and adjacent to streams and rivers. The materials are unconsolidated sand and gravel that does not require the same operational methods used in rock quarries. There is no blasting whatsoever. Also, water is generally more available, making dust control easier to accomplish. Large, fixed crushing operations are needed in rock quarries as almost all of the material needs to be Overland Ponds Valuation Report 02022.WD Lafarge North America 3 October 2002 Banks and Gesso, LLC sized and processed. Crushing operations in sand and gravel mines are smaller in scale and are mobile. Methodology Each of the three aforementioned studies can stand on their own merits. However, more credence should be placed on the findings from the Jefferson County study for the simple reason that it focuses more on resale values than on tax assessor values. While assessor values may be more readily available for use, they are not really an adequate measure of the true value. The true measure of property value is more precisely defined by what dollar figure a property owner might expect someone else to pay for their property in an open market environment. This report will take a similar approach to that of the Jefferson County study and place its emphasis on market values determined by actual sales. This report examines the resale figures for homes in subdivisions that have been developed adjacent to three sand and gravel mines that are currently operated by Lafarge West and are located in the Fort Collins area (the Home Office operation, the Kyger Sand and Gravel Mine, and the Rigden Sand and Gravel Mine). This was accomplished by obtaining purchase prices for randomly selected properties from each subdivision by using warranty deed information, which is readily available at the Larimer County Clerk and Recorder's Office. Home sale prices can be obtained by observing the Document Fee cost and multiplying this figure by 10,000. For example, a Warranty Deed with a Document Fee of$19.50 would indicate that the property was sold for $195,000.00. Records for each property were researched for as far back as possible. For example, an empty lot may have been purchased in 1985 and house constructed on the lot by the owner in 1986. Then the home may have been sold by the original owner in 1990 and then again in 1998. Because the first sale price for the property with the house included was in 1990, that is the first transaction that can be used in determining the home's value. We can't include the 1985 sale price because the house was not built at that time. Once sale prices were obtained, a cumulative change in dollar value and percentage increase over a given time frame was determined by subtracting the earliest sale price from the most current sale price and then dividing that total by the earliest sale price Overland Ponds Valuation Report 02022.WD Lafarge North America 4 October 2002 Banks and Gesso, LLC figure. By then dividing these figures by the total number of years for which data was obtained on each home, a compounded yearly percentage change in home value can be determined. The compounded percentage changes for each sampled home were then averaged to reach a figure that represents each individual subdivision. Finally, these average compounded yearly changes for each subdivision were averaged to obtain an overall percentage change for each mine area. We tried to select homes in each subdivision that were closest to the mining operations. However, many of these homes did not have enough historic sales data to be used. For instance, some homes have had only one single owner and had no transaction history from which to determine a value increase. This was especially true where the subdivisions were more recently built (approximately 1995 and later). Once data for each mine area was determined, these figures were compared to regional information for the Fort Collins and Larimer County areas, and then to the entire Northern Front Range area (generally defined from Denver to the Colorado-Wyoming border). For this comparison, regional resale information was obtained from IRES (Information and Real Estate Services) databases for the years 1997-2001 (the database does not include information for earlier years). Average sale prices for each year were obtained for the eleven sub-areas (including the Fort Collins area) that make up the Northern Front Range. A total percentage change in average sale prices over that five year period was derived for each sub-area by subtracting the 1997 average from the 2001 average and then dividing that total by the 1997 average. Dividing the total percentage change by 5 (representing the 5 years of data we have) gives us the compounded yearly percentage change in average resale prices for each sub-area. Finally, by placing data from the subdivisions next to that of the Fort Collins, Larimer County, and Northern Front Range areas, we are able to see if trends in resale values of homes near sand and gravel mines deviate significantly from the regional figures. If indeed sand and gravel mines have an impact on property values, it can be reasonably assumed that with all other things being equal, subdivisions located adjacent to sand and gravel mines will yield significantly lower yearly average percentage changes in value than those located away from sand and gravel mines. If the mines have little to no significant impact, these value percentage changes will be very close to all other data for other areas. Overland Ponds Valuation Report 02022.WD Lafarge North America 5 October 2002 Banks and Gesso, LLC In examining the data, we also looked for data that did not fit the norm and we tried to determine why through field visits to the site and closer examination of the data. As referenced above, the three sand and gravel mines that we will look at as part of this report are the Home Office operation (located on Taft Hill Road), the Kyger Sand and Gravel Mine, and the Rigden Sand and Gravel Mine. All three are located in Larimer County in the Fort Collins area and are operated by Lafarge North America. The Home Office operation has been in existence since the 1950s. The Ridgen operation has been in operation since the late 1970s. The Kyger operation has only been in operation since January of 2001. Sand and Gravel Mines and Their Adiacent Subdivisions Home Office Operation The Home Office site is located between Taft Hill Road and North Overland Trail in Fort Collins. The operation began in the 1950s, under Sterling Paving, as a small area of mining adjacent to the Poudre River. The pit was then known as the Taft Hill Pits. This area was expanded by 120 acres in 1969. By 1970, there were three homes built in the vicinity of the mine. In 1977, Sterling received State of Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Board (MLRB) permits in compliance with the 1976 Act that established the Mined Land Reclamation Board. At this time there were two MLRB permits issued which covered mining on four properties in the area. Two additional MLRB permits were issued to Sterling in 1978 and 1986. In 1987, Sterling incorporated all of the MLRB permits under one permit, number M-77-439. It should be noted that at the same time MLRB permits were being sought and approved, Sterling gained approval from Larimer County for local land use permits allowing mining of the properties. There are three subdivisions that have been developed in the area surrounding the Home Office mine. All three were constructed after mining had begun in the area. These subdivisions are: Stagecoach, Saddleback, and Solar Ridge. According to Larimer County Assessor's data, homes were being built in the Stagecoach subdivision by as early as 1975. Saddleback began being developed in 1978. Construction in the Solar Ridge subdivision began around 1995. Approximately 200 lots have been platted within the three subdivisions combined. Housing styles range from single-story ranches, Overland Ponds Valuation Report 02022.WD Lafarge North America 6 October 2002 Banks and Gesso, LLC to traditional two-story homes, to split level houses. Lot sizes range from approximately one-tenth of an acre to approximately one-half of an acre, with the larger lots generally located in the Solar Ridge and Saddleback areas. The closest lot to the existing mine area within the three subdivisions is approximately 1050' from the current mining boundary. The current mine boundary is approximately 3700' from the farthest away lots within the subdivisions. For the analysis of properties located around the Home Office operation, sixteen total properties from the three subdivisions were chosen at random. The average year built for the homes was 1983. The number of times each home was sold ranged from one to six changes in ownership, with the turnover rate for the 16 properties averaging 2.5 times sold. Re-sale figures for the three subdivisions combined indicate that home values increased an average of approximately$12,000.00 per year. Also according to the data, home values within the three subdivisions increased, on average, 8.7% per year (please see Table 1 in Appendix A for more complete data). Rigden Sand and Gravel Mine The Rigden pit received their MLRB permit in 1979 and has been in operation since about that time. The pit is located between East Drake Road and East Horsetooth Road on the east side of Larimer County Road 9 in the southeast Forth Collins area. There are two subdivisions located in the area around the Rigden Pit: the Dakota Ridge subdivision and the Stone Ridge subdivision. A third subdivision, known as Rigden Farms, is now being developed in the area as well. However, with construction on these homes beginning in 2000, there is not enough resale data for this subdivision for it to be considered in this analysis. In the two subdivisions we will be concentrating on, there have been approximately 350 platted lots since 1993. For the analysis of properties located around the Rigden Pit property, fifteen total properties from the two subdivisions were chosen at random. The average year built for the homes was 1994. The number of times each home was sold ranged from two to three changes in ownership, with the turnover rate for the 15 properties averaging 2.5 times sold. Re-sale figures for the two subdivisions combined indicate that home values increased an average of approximately $21,000.00 per year. Also according to the data, Overland Ponds Valuation Report 02022.WD Lafarge North America 7 October 2002 Banks and Gesso, LLC home values within the two subdivisions appreciated, on average, by 7.2% per year. (Please see Table 2 in Appendix A for more complete data) Kyger Pit The Kyger Pit received their MLRB permit in 1999. However, mining did not commence on the site until January of 2001.The pit is located on the north side of State Highway 392, immediately west of the Larimer County/Weld County borderline. There are several subdivisions located in the area around the Kyger Pit. The four nearest subdivisions were sampled for this analysis and include the Ptarmigan, Highland Hills, Ridge West, and River West subdivisions. Ptarmigan appears to be the oldest area, with development beginning in or around 1992. The remaining three areas didn't see development begin until at least 1998. There are over 900 lots platted between the four subdivisions. For the analysis of properties located around the Kyger Pit operation, twenty-three total properties from the four subdivisions were chosen at random. The average year built for the homes was 1998. The number of times each home was sold ranged from two to six changes in ownership, with the turnover rate for the 23 properties averaging 2.5 times sold. Re-sale figures for the four subdivisions combined indicate that home values increased an average of approximately $26,000.00 per year. Also according to the data, home values within the four subdivisions increased, on average, 13.1% per year. (Please see Table 3 in Appendix A for more complete data) Compound Yearly Subdivision Avg. Year Built p Yearly Compound Change ($) Change (%) Home Office 1983 $12,000 8.7% Kyger Pit 1998 $26,000 13.1% Rigden Pit 1994 $21,000 7.2% Larimer County and the Northern Front Range Data for the Fort Collins area and the Northern Front Range was collected from the IRES on-line database. IRES is a listing and information service that provides historic Overland Ponds Valuation Report 02022.WD Lafarge North America 8 October 2002 Banks and Gesso, LLC data to members of the real estate community who pay their yearly subscription/service fee. While no staff member of Banks and Gesso, LLC is a paying subscriber, we were able to locate a real estate broker from the Fort Collins area who was willing to let us use their access to the database to obtain information. The on-line database includes data only for the years 1997 through the present. More historic data from IRES is available in the form of publications, which were published yearly and included summary information for given areas. However we were unable to find any real estate brokers who have kept the older records and had them available for research purposes. For the purposes of this analysis, the Northern Front Range has been defined by a group of eleven sub-areas. These sub-areas are: Louisville, Lafayette, Longmont, Suburban Plains, Suburban Mountains, Superior, Loveland/Berthoud, Fort Collins, Greeley/Weld County, Estes Park, and a final area referred to as "Out of Area". The Out of Area classification refers to all other properties that are not located within the municipal boundaries of the named areas listed above but are near enough to still be considered a part of the Northern Front Range. Average sale prices for the years 1997 through 2001 for each of the eleven sub-areas of the Northern Front Range were obtained. A total percentage change in average sale prices over that five year period was derived for each sub-area by subtracting the 1997 average from the 2001 average and then dividing that total by the 1997 figure. Dividing the total percentage change by 5 (representing the 5 years of percentage change data we have) gives us the compounded yearly percentage change in average sale prices for each sub-area. The compound changes for all sub-areas were then totaled and divided by eleven to obtain an average of the compounded yearly percentage change for the entire Northern Front Range region. Sub-area Nine represents the Fort Collins metropolitan area and this data set by itself can be used to identify trends in the Fort Collins area. Sub-areas Eight (Loveland/Berthoud), Nine (Fort Collins), and Eleven (Estes Park) can be combined to give a picture of how the Larimer County area has performed. According to the data collected, home sale prices in the Fort Collins area increased by an average of$13,800 per year between 1997 and 2001. The compounded yearly percentage change (appreciation rate)for the Fort Collins area was approximately 8.3% Overland Ponds Valuation Report 02022.WD Lafarge North America 9 October 2002 Banks and Gesso, LLC per year between 1997 and 2001. For the Larimer County area, average home sale prices increased by approximately $13,400 per year between 1997 and 2001 and had appreciation rates of 7.8% per year. For the Northern Front Range region, average home sale prices increased by approximately $18,700 per year for the same time period. The average yearly percentage change for the Northern Front Range was approximately 9.7% per year between 1997 and 2001. (Please see Table 4 in Appendix A for more complete data) Area Compounded Yearly Compounded Yearly Increase ($) Increase (%) Fort Collins 13,800 8.3 Larimer County 13,400 7.8 Northern Front Range 18,700 9.7 Mine Area Subdivisions Compared to Fort Collins and Northern Front Range Home Office Operation The three subdivisions located around the Home Office site yielded various results. Homes in the Stagecoach subdivision have seen their value increase by an average appreciation rate of 11.4%. For the Saddleback subdivision, home values increased by an average appreciation rate of 9.9%. Homes in the Solar Ridge subdivision had an average appreciation rate of 4.0%. Combined, the three subdivisions had an average appreciation rate of 8.7% per year. When looking at the initial data, the 4.0% appreciation rate for the Solar Ridge subdivision caught our eye as being substantially different from the other two developments. The difference was enough to warrant a second visual inspection of the neighborhood to determine if there were any outstanding differences between the homes we had randomly selected compared to what would be considered a typical Solar Ridge home. Upon inspection, we found that all of the homes we had chosen were indeed representative of the typical home found in Solar Ridge. Also, two of the homes we had selected had "For Sale" signs in front of them. After researching available homes for sale in the Fort Collins area through the Realtor.com website, we were able to obtain the Overland Ponds Valuation Report 02022.WD Lafarge North America 10 October 2002 Banks and Gesso, LLC asking price for these two homes. Assuming that the asking price represents what could reasonably be expected as a purchase price, we can take these prices and use them in the analysis for more complete information. After plugging in the two new home prices, the average appreciation rate within Solar Ridge jumps to 6.6% and the rate for the three subdivisions combined jumps to 10.2% per year. Both of these figures compare favorably to the regional areas. Compared to regional numbers, the Stagecoach figures are higher than those for the Fort Collins, Larimer County, and Northern Front Range areas. Figures for the Saddleback subdivision are also comparable to those for the three larger comparison areas. The Solar Ridge subdivision, which is more isolated and distanced from the Overland Ponds Mine, saw yearly dollar increases and appreciation rates that fell slightly short of the Fort Collins, Larimer County, and Northern Front Range areas in all categories. The reason for this is puzzling, especially considering that these homes are newer and farther from the mine than those found in both Saddleback and Stagecoach subdivisions. We have since learned that all of the homes within the subdivision are solar powered, which may mean that they appeal to a smaller market of buyers, which in turn may affect the appreciation rates of the homes. Or perhaps the relative newness of the subdivision and its relatively small size combined to create a sample size that really isn't representative of the whole. Home Office Compound Yearly Change ($) Compound Yearly Change (%) Subdivisions Stagecoach 5,169 11.4 Saddleback 12,083 9.9 Solar Ridge 13,287 6.6 Total 9,448 10.5 Home Office Summary When compared to data for the Fort Collins and Larimer County areas over the last 5 years, the average increase in dollar figure amounts in the three Home Office subdivisions combined are statistically equivalent. The average appreciation rates, Overland Ponds Valuation Report 02022.WD Lafarge North America 11 October 2002 Banks and Gesso, LLC however, area almost a full percentage point higher than those two areas. When compared with the Northern Front Range region, the results are similar, with appreciation rates for the overall Home Office area approximately 0.8 percentage points higher than that of the Northern Front Range region. Kyger Sand and Gravel Mine The subdivisions surrounding the Kyger Sand and Gravel Mine yielded a wide range of results as well. Home values experienced an average compounded appreciation rate of 20.3% within the River West subdivision. Home values for the River Ridge subdivision had an average appreciation rate of 7.4% per year (Note: River Ridge and Ridge West subdivisions are geographically equivalent and are singularly referred to as "River Ridge"for purposes of this study). Samples from the Ptarmigan subdivision produced an average appreciation rate of 8.4%. Lastly, average home values in the Highland Hills subdivision had an average appreciation rate of 6.6% per year. The four subdivisions combined saw a yearly increases in home values that followed an average appreciation rate of 13.1%. Kyger Compound Yearly Change ($) Compound Yearly Change (%) Subdivisions Ridge West 24,442 7.4 River West 32,240 20.3 Highland Hills 24,874 6.6 Ptarmigan 25,183 8.4 River Ridge 22,507 7.3 Total 28,018 13.1 Values and appreciation rates for the River Wesi subdivision saw much greater average increases than for the Fort Collins, Larimer County, and the Northern Front Range areas. For the River Ridge and Ptarmigan subdivisions, average appreciation rates were statistically equivalent to the regional averages. Highland Hills subdivision experienced lower rates of appreciation than all three regional areas. However, the homes in this development are typically of the custom variety, on large lots, with homes generally in the half-million dollar range and up. These types of homes typically cater to Overland Ponds Valuation Report 02022.WD Lafarge North America 12 October 2002 Banks and Gesso, LLC a much smaller market than the homes in the other subdivisions examined. With a much smaller market for, and thus demand on those properties, it would follow that perhaps these homes would not experience the same appreciation rates as the smaller, less expensive homes which more people can afford. Kyger Sand and Gravel Operation Summary When information for the four subdivisions is combined, the yearly increase of home values is greater than those figures for the Northern Front Range, Larimer County, and Fort Collins area. The appreciation rate for the four subdivisions is greater than all three of the larger comparison areas, with appreciation rates almost 5 whole percentage points higher than the County and Fort Collins. Rigden Sand and Gravel Mine Data for the Dakota Ridge subdivision indicates that homes in this development saw average compounded yearly appreciation rates of 8.3% per year. The homes in the Stone Ridge subdivision had appreciation rates of approximately 5.4% per year. The subdivisions combined had yearly increases in home value that followed an average appreciation rate of 7.2% per year. When compared to the Fort Collins and Larmier County areas, both subdivisions had higher average increases in home values. Appreciation rates in Dakota Ridge were slightly above those of Fort Collins and Larimer County, while Stone Ridge rates were lower than both of these areas. Comparing the data to the Northern Front Range area indicates that the average increase in home values was essentially the same, while the appreciation rates were much lower for the Dakota Ridge and Stone Ridge subdivisions. Rigden Sand and Gravel Mine Summary As a whole, the two subdivisions combined to yield a yearly average increase in home values that was slightly higher than the Fort Collins, Larimer County, and the Northern Front Range areas. However, while the average appreciation rates were statistically equivalent to those of Fort Collins and Larimer County, they were somewhat lower than those for the Northern Front Range. Overland Ponds Valuation Report 02022.WD Lafarge North America 13 October 2002 Banks and Gesso, LLC Ridgen Compound Yearly Change ($) Compound Yearly Change (%) Subdivisions Dakota Ridge 21,765 8.3 Stone Ridge 20,186 5.8 Total 21,028 7.2 Summary The subdivisions chosen for examination in this report created a diverse range of results. Three of the ten individual subdivisions experienced appreciation rates that were somewhat lower than those of the Fort Collins, Larimer County, and/or Northern Front Range regions. However, the remaining seven subdivisions were at or above the regional averages, with the River West development more than doubling all of the regional averages. Closer examination of each subdivisions location in context to the data yielded some very interesting observations that ought to be considered if any reasonable conclusion is to be reached regarding a sand and gravel mining operations affect on home values. Of the three subdivisions within the vicinity of the Home Office operation, Stagecoach and Saddleback were closer to the mine, with Solar Ridge being more isolated from the noise and visual impacts that might be experienced. Several of the homes sampled from the Stagecoach and Saddleback subdivisions turned out to be located with their back yards facing the mine and in some instances having direct view of the mining operation. No houses sampled within the Solar Ridge subdivision had either a direct view of the mine or was located along the proposed boundary of the expanded mining limits. With this in mind, one would expect that if sand and gravel mines had a negative influence on property values, homes in the Solar Ridge subdivision would retain or increase their values at a higher rate than those in both Saddleback and Stagecoach. However, the exact opposite appears to be the case near the Home Office operation. Appreciation rates tend to be higher the closer one gets to the existing mining operation. Overland Ponds Valuation Report 02022.WD Lafarge North America 14 October 2002 Banks and Gesso, LLC For the Kyger Sand and Gravel Operation, 4 subdivisions were examined. The River West subdivision was the nearest development to the mine, with a distance of approximately 1800 feet south of the mine limits. There is a second mining operation, run by Hall-Irwin, located approximately 1000 feet to the west of the River West area. Both operations are in plain view of many of the homes within the subdivision. The River Ridge subdivision is located to the east and south of River West. Six of the homes chosen for the River Ridge development have no backdoor neighbors and back to open- space areas One of the homes was located on lakefront property. None of the River Ridge homes had direct views of either mining operation. All homes within both the River West and River Ridge developments were semi-custom homes. The Ptarmigan and Highland Hills subdivisions are located approximately three-quarters of a mile from the Kyger operation, with Ptarmigan being due east of the pit and Highland Hills located southeasterly from the pit. Both subdivisions are located on higher ground than the River West and River Ridge subdivisions. The Ptarmigan subdivision is a golf-course community, complete with 18-hole course and clubhouse, and is screened from view of the Hall-Irwin and Kyger operations, but has a direct view of a third mining operation located approximately one-half of a mile to the north. Homes in this subdivision are a mix of semi-custom, single-family detached and "cookie-cutter" (three to five home plans to choose from), attached, patio homes. The Highland Hills development is situated on a hilltop, with panoramic views to the east, south, west, and northwest. The Hall-Irwin and Kyger operations are both visible from homes along the western edge of the subdivision. All homes in this subdivision were of the custom variety. Given the proximity to two mines, both readily visible from many homes within the subdivisions, one would assume that home values in the River West and River Ridge developments would suffer from lower appreciation rates than those in the Ptarmigan and Highland Hills developments. However, as with the Overland Ponds analysis, the subdivision that has the greatest distance between itself and an operating sand and gravel mine had the lowest appreciation rates while the development nearest the mines experienced the greatest rates of appreciation in home values. For the Rigden Pit, two subdivisions were examined. Dakota Ridge is generally located on the north side of Stone Ridge. Both developments are on the north side of Horsetooth Road. Mapping of the houses sampled shows that in reality, the two subdivisions can be considered one, as there is no discernible boundary that separates Overland Ponds Valuation Report 02022.WD Lafarge North America 15 October 2002 Banks and Gesso, LLC the two. A home labeled as Stone Ridge can be found on the same block as one labeled as belonging to Dakota Ridge. Generally speaking though, portions of what would be considered Stone Ridge are approximately 400 feet closer to the Rigden operation than Dakota Ridge. However, more homes within what is generally thought of as Dakota Ridge have a much clearer view of the mine than those in Stone Ridge. Home styles within each subdivision are very similar, falling into "cookie cutter" category, with most streets of the cul-de-sac variety. None of the homes we originally selected for analysis were located along the outer fringes of the development with views of the mining operation. To ensure an accurate assessment of the neighborhoods home values and how they related to sand and gravel influences, we went back and selected four homes that were located along edges and were closer to the mining operation than the others. If proximity to a sand and gravel mine has detrimental affects on home values, these properties should demonstrate lower appreciation rates than the others. This was not the case. The four homes selected for verification of the data were all within 0.3 percentage points of the combined average for the rest of the homes. When looking at the subdivisions as wholes, grouped by the mines they surround, we find that the average appreciation rates do not deviate significantly from those of Larimer County or Fort Collins. In the case of two of the mines, the appreciation rates were higher than those of Larimer County and Fort Collins. Areas Compound Yearly Change ($) Compound Yearly Change (%) Overland Ponds 12,077 8.7 Kyger 26,183 13.1 Rigden 21,028 7.2 Fort Collins 13,828 8.3 Larimer CO. 13,483 7.8 Northern Front Range 22,387 9.7 While subdivisions around two of the three mine areas had lower appreciation rates than that of the area defined as the Northern Front Range, it is important to note that the average appreciation rates for the Fort Collins and Larimer County areas were lower as Overland Ponds Valuation Report 02022.WD Lafarge North America 16 October 2002 Banks and Gesso, LLC well. This could be attributed to the fact that of the eleven sub-areas used in this analysis, four were located in Boulder County (Louisville, Lafayette, Longmont, and Superior). Boulder County has long been known as one of the most expensive places in the state to live. This tag is not placed on the County by accident. Progressive, or what some might call "oppressive", land-use planning within the County has reduced the amount of land available for development by employing such zoning practices as designating large expanses of land for open space preservation. Boulder County's land-use practices have created a real estate market that has experienced an artificial inflation of property values because the market has seen the supply of land for residential development dwindle while the demand for that property has remained steady and/or increased. If we were to remove the figures for localities located in Boulder County, based on the assumption that home values and appreciation rates in these locales have been artificially inflated and are not quite in line with the remainder of the Northern Front Range communities, the average appreciate rate would drop to 8.6% per year. Based on these adjusted numbers, one could argue that appreciation rates around the three mines are statistically equivalent to those of the Northern Front Range too. Compound Percentage Change (1997-2001) 14.0% I 13.1% 12.0% r� 9-7% 'red. 10.0% /I 8.3% 7.8% S • 8.7% � .r -r- - o ` ' � 6 7.2/o 8.0% / s) '. - •+ m 6.0% Z! rJ 4.0% `" � x 2.0% Ft. Collins All Areas Larimer County Rigden Kyger Overland Overland Ponds Valuation Report 02022.WD Lafarge North America 17 October 2002 Banks and Gesso, LLC Conclusion While some of the subdivisions examined for this report did in fact lag behind the regional averages for yearly appreciation rates, there were enough variations within each mine area to conclude that there really is no significant statistical difference in the data that would suggest location near a sand and gravel mine harms property values. This can be supported by the fact that for two of the mines, the subdivisions nearest the operations had the highest rates of appreciation for home values while the subdivisions located the farthest away had the lowest rates of appreciation. Additional indicators can also point to the conclusion that sand and gravel mines have no significant affect on property values. Appreciation rates for the oldest subdivision examined (and therefore the one with the most data available), Stagecoach, were equivalent to or slightly higher than the regional averages and were topped only by one other subdivision for highest rates of appreciation (River West). Further, the fact that a new subdivision is currently being built around the Rigden pit with sale prices over $200,000 suggests that homebuyers are willing to purchase homes located near sand and gravel mines. One would expect that if sand and gravel mines did have detrimental affects on property values, no developer would try to build homes adjacent to them. In fact, many sand and gravel mines are seen as a temporary and transitional use of land. Many are planned with subdivisions as the end use surrounding the lakes. Waterfront properties demand fairly high "Lot Premiums" around these finished sites. It has also been our experience in public hearings that many existing residents recognize the temporary nature of the mining. They generally feel that the mines with reclamation as water storage reservoirs, wildlife areas, or home sites around water amenities will be a benefit even while the mining is going on. The reason for this last statement is that many of these people would rather see that the land remains open than being turned into more urbanized sprawl. There is a saying within the real estate market that three most important things that determine a property's value are location, location, and location. However, these findings suggest that there is more at work in determining how well a home retains or increases its value than simply location. For example, a well maintained yard, up-to- Overland Ponds Valuation Report 02022.WD Lafarge North America 18 October 2002 Banks and Gesso, LLC date appliances, lot size, construction materials, and amenities within a neighborhood can, and often do, offset and/or outweigh the preconceived notion that proximity to an open mine site might detract from a property's value. A homebuyer might be able to overlook the nuisances often perceived to be associated with sand and gravel mines for a relatively short period of time if the home has all of the other attributes being sought. Sand and gravel mines are temporary land uses with state mandated reclamation procedures that often times leave nicer amenities than what was there before mining, such as lakes, recreation opportunities, or wildlife habitat. Based on available data, we cannot conclude that homes near the proposed expansion will suffer a loss in value. This study reflects similar results obtained in the three rock-quarry studies referenced in the beginning of this report. Our final conclusion is that there is no statistically significant evidence that demonstrates negative impacts on residential property values near or adjacent to sand and gravel mines. Overland Ponds Valuation Report 02022.WD Lafarge North America 19 October 2002 Banks and Gesso, LLC Appendix A: Data Tables Overland Ponds Valuation Report 02022.WD Lafarge North America 20 October 2002 Banks and Gesso, LLC • Table 'I -Analysis of Home Office Operation and Surrounding Subdivisions Property 8 #times sold Sale Dates Price Increase$ Increase% Cumulative$ Cumulative% Compound$ Compound% year built Stagecoach 20 4 1/6/86 $ 58,900 1977 8/1/92 $ 59,900 $ 1,000 1.7% 1/1/95 $ 79,000 $ 19,100 31.9% 3/28/01 $ 124,900 $ 45,900 58.1% $ 66,000 112.1% $ 4,400 7.5% 25 3 5/3/89 $ 58,800 1977 11/1/92 S 68.800 $ 10.000 17.0% 10/2/99 $ 122,400 $ 53,600 77.9% $ 63.600 108.2% $ 6,057 10.3% 13 4 8/11/78 $ 33,900 1978 1/25/84 $ 56,500 $ 22,600 66.7% - - - - _ - -- 10/1/98 $ 107,000 $ 50,500 89.4% 2/14/01 $ 135,000 $ 28,000 26.2% $ 101,100 298.2% $ 4,493 13.3% 14 3 4/5/77 $ 27.300 1977 5/1/93 $ 69,500 $ 42,200 154.6% ___ 5/26/00 $ 131,900 $ 62,400 89.8% $ 104.600 383.2% $ 4,548 16.7% 32 6 5/17/79 $ 37,000 1979 10/27/80 E 42.000 $ 5.000 13.5% 2/14/85 $ 42,000 $ - 0.0% 2/1/93 $ 67.900 $ 25,900 61.7% - - 9/1/95 $ 94,000 $ 26.100 38.4% 10/1/98 $ 110,000 $ 16,000 17.0% $ 73,000 197.3% $ 3.744 10.1% 7 3 12/21/89 $ 59,900 1975 6/1/93 $ 77,000 $ 17,100 28.5% 1/30/01 $ 149,000 $ 72,000 93.5% $ 89,100 148.7%, $ 8,100 13.5% 22 4 5/9/84 $ 59,500 1975 6/6/86 $ 69,800 $ 10300 17.3% 9/1/97 $ 123000 $ 53,200 76.2% 8/1/98 $ 131,500 $ 8,500 6.9% $ 72.000 121.0% $ 5,053 8.5% Sub Avg's $ 81.343 195.5% $ 5,199 11.4% Solar Ridge 5 3 4/1/94 $ 212,300 1994 6/11/99 $ 268,500 $ 56,200 26.5% 10/31/00 $ 294,900 $ 26,400 9.8% $ 82,600 38.9% $ 12,708 6.0% 11 _ _1 11/1/94 $ 174,000 1994 8/31/99 $ 235,000 $ 61,000 35.1% $ 61,000 35.1% $ 13,556 7.8% 12 1 11/1/94 $ 212,000 1994 4/29/99 $ 237,000 $ 25,000 11.8% $ 25,000 11.8% $ 11,720 2.6% 15 1 5/1/97 $ 208,000 1996 5/14/99 $ 219,900 $ 11,900 5.7% $ 11,900 5.7% $ 26,952 2.9% 19 1 7/1/98 $ 192,000 1996 5/19/00 $ 195,000 $ 3,000 1.6% $ 3,000 1.6% $ 1,500 0.8% Sub Avg's $ 36,700 18.6% $ 13,287 4.0% Saddleback 1 4 2/9/81 109000 1979 4/3/84 120000 $ 11,000 10.1% 6/15/88 115000 $ (5,000) -4.2% -- - - _-- 11/1/93 170000 $ 55,000 47.8% $ 61,000 56.0% $ 4,784 4.4% 2 3 8/11/88 142000 1987 7/27/99 305000 $ 163,000 114.8% 4/29/02 345000 E 40,000 13.1% $ 203,000 143.0% $ 14,500 10.2% -- - - - - 3 ---2 8/21/79 96600 1979 7/14/00 414900 $318,300 329.5% $ 318,300 329.5% $ 15,157 15.7% 4 2 12/1/92 150000 1978 4/30/01 275000 $ 125,000 83.3% $_ 125,000 83.3% $ 13,889 9.3% Sub Avg's $ 176,825 152.9% $ 12,083 9.9% (Total Avg's 2.6 $ 91,263 129.6% $ 9,448 8.7% 1983 Overland Ponds Valuation Report 02022.W() Lafarge North America 21 October 2002 Banks and Gesso, LLC Table 2 -Analysis of Rigden Pit and Surrounding Subdivisions Property M ',times sold Sale Dates Price Increase$ Increase% Cumulative$ Cumulative%,Compound$ Compound% Year Built Stone Ridge 2 3 7/1/96 $ 372,800 1996 8/30/99 $ 385,000 $ 12,200 3.3% 8/28/00 $ 399,000 $ 14,000 3.6% $ 26.200 7.0% $ 6,550 1.8% 7 2 6/1/95 $ 277,100 1995 5/8/01 $ 351.600 $ 74,500 26.9% $ 74,500 26.9% $ 74,500 4.5% 16 3 4/1/96 $ 225,100 1995 9/1/98 $ 248,000 $ 22,900 10.2% 9/29/00 $ 284,000 $ 36,000 14.5% $ 58,900 26.2% $ 13,089 5.8% 8 3 9/1/94 $ 239.500 1994 7/1/97 $ 255,000 $ 15,500 6.5% 6/4/02 $ 330,000 $ 75,000 29.4% $ 90,500 37.8% $ 11,677 4.9% 42 2 10/1/93 $ 144,500 1993 2/28/01 $ 229,000 $ 84,500 58.5% $ 84,500 58.5% $ 11,528 8.0%, 35 3 12/1/93 $ 137,000 1994 10/1/94 $ 195,000 $ 58.000 42.3% 8/31/00 $ 251,000 $ 56.000 28.7% $ 114,000 83.2% $ 17,117 12.5% 34 2 12/1/93 $ 198,700 1993 5/31/01 $ 250,000 $ 51.300 25.8%, $ 51,300 25.8% $ 6.840 3.4% Sub Avg's $ 71,414 37.9% $ 20,186 5.8% Dakota Ridge 22 3 10/1/93 $ 154,300 1993 7/3/00 $ 224,900 $ 70,600 45.8% 9/13/01 $ 255.000 $ 30,100 13.4% $ 100,700 65.3% $ 12,588 8.2% 37 2 1211/93 $ 145,000 1991 8/28/00 $ 235,000 $ 90,000 62.1% $ 90,000 62.1% $ 13,333 9.2% 60 3 3/1/94 $ 144.900 1993 1/1/98 $ 169,000 $ 24,100 16.6% 4/27/00 $ 209,200 $ 40,200 23.8% $ 64,300 44.4% $ 10,717 7A% 2 2 1/1/94 $ 155,800 1993 6/18/01 $ 277,900 $ 122,100 78.4% $ 277,900 78.4% $ 42,754 12.1% 16 2 9/1/93 $ 149,500 1993 10/3/00 $ 238,000 $ 88,500 59.2% $ 238,000 59.2% $ 34,000 8.5% 19 3 5/1/94 $ 167,900 1994 4/30/99 $ 189,900 $ 22,000 13.1% 4/23/02 $ 257,500 $ 67,600 35.6% $ 89,600 53.4% $ 11,200 6.7% 13 3 7/1/94 $ 174,900 1994 8/9/99 $ 221.500 $ 46,600 26.6% 8/20/01 $ 285,500 $ 44,000 19.9% $ 90,600 51.8% $ 12,943 7.4% 51 2 11/1/93 $ 152,400 1993 12/30/99 $ 219.500 $ 67,100 44.0%.$ 219,500 44.0% $ 36,583 7.3% Sub Avg's $ 146,325 57.3% $ 21,765 8.3% Total Avg's 2.5 $ 111,367 48.3% $ 21,028 7.2% 1994 Overland Ponds Valuation Report 02022.WD Lafarge North America 22 October 2002 Banks and Gesso, LLC , Table 3-Analysis of Kyger Pit and Surrounding Subdivisions Property 9 0 times sold Sale Dates Pdce Incrnse f Increase% Cumulative f Cumulative% Compound$ Compound% Yr.Built River West 62 _ 2 11/1/98 S 250,000 1998 7/1229 1 266,500 $ 16,500 6.6% $ 16,500 6.6% S 16,500 6.6% 13 2 .5/5/00 $ 283,300 2000 " -- 4/301024/30102 S 307,000 S 23.700 8.4% $ 23,700 8.4% $ 11,850 4.2% 22 2 6/14/99 $ 262,300 1999 _ 4 - 390)01 S 300,000 $ 3],]00 8/.1% $ 3"!,]00 11.1% $ 21,,513 8.2% 10 2 10129/99 $ 258,500 1999 _ ._ 3/16/01 $ 314,000 S 55,500 21.5% $ 55,500 21.5% $ 37,000 14.3% 38 2 8/15/00 $ 250,200 2000 _.. . __. 5/24/02 $ 289,500 $ 39.300 15.7% $$ 39,300 15.7% 22,457 9.0% 1 2 8/13/99 $ 285,900 1999 _ _. . 822/00 $ 320,000 S 34,100 11.9% E 34,100 11.9% S 34,100 11.9% 60 3 7/1/98 S 150,000 _ 1999 62999 S 214,700 S 64,700 43.1% 6/10/02 $ 270,000 f 55,300 25.8% $ 120,000 80.0% $ 30,000 20.0% 92 3 10/8/99 $ 111,300 2000 5/17)01 $ 219500 5/.92,300 88.0% 5/17)01 S 211,500 $ 2,300 1.1% S 100,200 90.0% $ 66,800 ---80.0% 87 __. 3 10/1/98 f 149.500 1998 /4/01 E 177,100 27,600 23.0% 9/14/01 $$ 217,900 40,800 23.0% $ 68,400 45.8% $ 22,800 15.3% _-- 94 3 1/18/00 $ 111,300 2000 11/19/01 $ 230000 19_600 89.0% 11/19/01 $S 230000 19,600 9.3% $ 118,700 106.6% $ 593511 53.3% Sub Avg's E 61,410 40.1% $ 32240 20.3% River Ridge 1 2 3/30/99 E 289,900 1998 6/13/01 f 350,200 S 60,300 20.8% $ 60,300 20.8% $ 34,457 11.9% 4 2 11/1/98 $ 348,500 1998 2/19100 f 363,900 5 15,400 4.4% S 15,400 4.4% S 12,320 3.5% 2 3 1/1/99 $ 324,600 - 1998 00 0/11/00 S36064900 $ 29.400 1.9% -- -� -- - --- - 10/11)0 $0 360,900 S 6.900 1.9% $ 36,300 11.2% $ 20,743 6.4% Sub Avg's $ 37,333 12.1% $ 22.507 7.3% , Ptarmigan 13 2 6/1/94 5 276,400 __ 1994 8/1/98 5 310,000 5 33,600 12.2% $ 33,600 12.2% 5 8,400 3.0% 2 2.__8/1999 $ 329,000 1994 8/16/00 $ 355,000 5 26,000 7.9% 5 26,000 7.9% 5 26,000 7.9% 5 2 1/1/99 5 325,400 1998 - - - - 10114/99 f 352,500 $ 27,100 _ -8.3% $ 27,100 8.3% $ 27,100 8.3% . -14 _ 4 3/1/97 $ 270,000 1996 121198 5/ 290,000 $ 20_000. 7.4% 6/16/00 $ 312,500 $ 22,500 7.8% 6/16/00 5 39],500 $ 85,000 27.2% $ 127,500 47.2% $ 39.231 11.5% Sub Avg's 1 53,550 18.9% $ 25,183 8.4% Highland Hill. 17 2 10/4100 $ 400,000 2000 8/27/01 $ 434,400 $ 34,400 8.6% $ 34,400 8.6% $ 34,400 8.8% 22 ?2__ 7/1/98 $ 354,000 1998 - 11/30401 $ 430,000 $ 76,000 21.5% $ 76,000, 21.5% $ 22,823 6.4% 30 2 7/14/00 $ 368,900 1999 -- - _ _- - - - 1/30/02 S 395,000 $ 26,100 7.1% f 26,100 7.1% E 17,400 4.7% Sub Avg's $ 45,500 12.4% $ 24,874 6.6% Ridge West 23 2 928/99 5 351,000 1999 _- - -- - -_-- 10/27/00 S 393,000 $ 42,000 12.0% 5 42,000 12.0% 5 42,000 12.0% 28 2 9/1/98 $ 335,700 1998 -- --- - ---- 12/6100 $ 390,000, $ 54,300 16.2% $ 54,300 16.2% $ 24,133 7.2% 31 2 8/1/98 $ 378,000 1990 i...—_-- - -- 6/15/01 f 417,000 $ 39,000 10.3% $ 39,100 10.3% $ 13,000 3.4% Sub Avg's $ 45,100 12.8% $ 24,442 7.4% Total Avg's 2.3 $ 52,700 25.8% $ 28,018 13.1% 1998 Overland Ponds Valuation Report 02022.WD Lafarge North America 23 October 2002 Banks and Gesso, LLC Table 4-Analysis of Average Prices Per Year By Area Yearly E_ _ Yearly_ _. Cumulative Cumulative Cmpound Compound Year Average Change %Change Changee$ Change% Change$ Change% Area Two Louisville) 1997 $ 208.542 1998 $ 221,802 $ 13,260 6.4% 1999 $ 244,346 $ 22,544 102% _ 2000 $ 288,786 $ 44,440 18.2% _. . 2001 $ 311,601 $ 22,814 7.9% $ 103,058 49.4% $ 20,612 9.9% Area Three(Lafayette) 1997 $ 211,314 1998 $ 235.469 $ 24,155 1-1.4% 1999 $ 306,061 $ 70,592 30.0% 2000 $ 317,874 $ 11.812 3.9% _ 2001 $ 326,329 $ 8,455 2.7% $ 115,015 54.4% $ 23,003 10.9% Area Four(Longmont) 1997 $ 162,964 1998 $ 171,369 $ 8,405 5.2% 1999 $ 196494 $ 25125 14.7% 2000 $ 219,684 $ 23,191 11.8% 2001 $ 249,578 $ 29,894 13.6% $ 86,614 53.1% $ 17,323 10.6% Area_Five Suburban Plains) 1997 $ 314,738 1998 $ 388.062 $ 51,324 16.3% 1999 $ 412.459 $ 46.397 12.7% 2000 $ 477,875 $ 65,416 159% 2001 $ 482,493 $ 4,618 1.0% $ 167,754 53.3% $ 33,551 10.7% Area Six(Suburban Mountains) 1997 $ 231,462 1998 $ _273511 $ 42,049 18.2% 1999 $ 302,107 $ 28,596 10.5% 2000 $ 356,498 $ 54,390 18.0% 2001 $ 358,141 $ 1,644 0.5% $ 126,479 54.7% $ 25,336 10.9% Area Seven(Superior)_ 1998 $ 248,024 1998 E 263,881 $ 15,857 6.4% 1999 $ 279337 $ 15,456 5.9% _ 2000 $ 355,541 $ 76,204 27.3% 2001 $ 359,915 $ 4,374 1.2% $ 111,891 45.1% $ 22,378 9.0% Area Eight LLovelandlBerthoudl_ 1997 $ 153,882 1998 $ 161,679 $ 7,797 5.1% 1999 $ 181,156 $ 19,477 12.0% _ 2000 $ 213,272 $ 32,116 17.7% 2001 $ 214,121 $ 849 0.4% $ 60,239 39.1% $ 12,048 7.8% Area Nine Fort Collins) 1997 $ 166,371 1998 S 174,520 $ 8,149 4.9% _ 1999 S 197,155 $ 22,636 13.0% 2000 S 219,836 $ 22,680 11.5% 2001 S 235,509 $ 15,673 7.1% $ 69,138 41.6% S 13,828 8.3% Area Ten(Greeley/Weld County)._ - 1997 $ 130,702 1998 $ 140,547 $ 9,845 7.5% 1999 $ 152,068 $ 11,521 8.2% 2000 $ 169,233 $ 17,165 11.3% 20001 01 $E 174,087 $ 4,854 2.9% $ 43,385 33.2% $ 8,677 6.6% Area Eleven(Estes Parks 1997 $ 202,057 1998 $ 211,873 $ 9816 _ 4.9% 1999 $ 233,355 $ 21,482 10.1% _ 2000 $ 265,913 $ 32,557 14.0% 2001 $ 274924 $ 9011 3.4%'$ 72,867 36.1% $ 14,573 7.2% Area Thirteen(Out of Area) _ 1997 $ 99,480 1998 $ 160,800 $ 61,320 61.6% 1999 $ 203,488 $ 42,688 26.5% 2000 $ 253,436 $ 49,948 24.5% 2001 $ 173,480 $ (79,956) -31.5% $ 74,000 74.4% $ 14,800 14.9% LarlmerAverages $ 67,415 38.9% $ 13,483 7.8% ) Total Averages $ 93,695 48.6% S 18,739 9.7% Overland Ponds Valuation Report 02022.WD Lafarge North America 24 October 2002 Banks and Gesso, LLC • Appendix B: Other Studies Overland Ponds Valuation Report 02022.WD Lafarge North America 25 October 2002 IMPACTS OF ROCK QUARRIES ON RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY VALUES JEFFERSON COUNTY, COLORADO RAIL LINE QUARRY Prepared for Asphalt Paving Company Prepared by Banks and Gesso, LLC EXHIBIT May 8, 1998 ra CASK . 1 7 REPORT INDEX Page INTRODUCTION 4 1.0 History of Jefferson County Quarries 5 and Surrounding Subdivision 1.1 Cooley Gravel Company Morrison Quarry and the 5 Willowbrook Willow Springs Subdivisions 1.1.1 The Cooley Gravel Company Morrison Quarry 5 1.1.2 Willowbrook and Willow Springs Subdivisions 5 1.1.3 Relationships between the Quarry and the 7 subdivisions 1.1.4 Other residences near the Quarry 8 1.2 Western Mobile Company Heidelberg Quarry and the 8 Heritage Dells Subdivision Area 1.2.1 The Western Mobile Company Heidelberg Quarry 8 1.2.2 The Hertitage Dells Subdivision 8 1.2.3 Other Residential Units near the Quarry 9 1.2.4 Relationship between the Quarry and Residences 9 1.3 Asphalt Paving Company Ralston Dike Quarry and the 10 Apple Meadows Subdivision Area 1.3.1 The Asphalt Paving Ralston Dike Quarry 10 1.3.2 The Apple Meadows Subdivision 10 1.3.3 Other Residential Units near the Quarry 11 1.3.4 Relationship between the Quarry and the 11 Subdivision 1.4 Other Quarry Rezoning Applications 11 1.4 Quarry Companies Relations with Local Regulatory 12 Agencies 1.6 References Used for this Section 12 2.0 History of the Subdivisions in and Surrounding Park 13 3.0 Number of Platted Lots in each Subdivision Area 15 4.0 Distances between Subdivisions and Quarries 15 5.0 Number of Residential Units Over Time 16 6.0 Residential Sales by Area 19 6.1 Background Data and Methods Used 19 6.2 Number of Units Sold and average Selling Price 20 6.3 Analysis of Valuations 22 6.4 Developments 22 REPORT CONCLUSIONS 23 TABLES Table 1 PLATTED LOTS IN CRESENT PARK AREA 14 Table 2 PLATTED LOTS BY SUBDIVISION 15 Table 3 DISTANCES BETWEEN ACTIVE QUARRIES AND 15 SUBDIVISIONS Table 4 EXISTING HOUSING UNITS BY SUBDIVISION AREA 17 AND YEAR Table 5 NUMBER OF UNITS SOLD BY DISTANCE AND YEAR 18 Table 6 TOTAL UNITS SOLD BY YEAR 21 r. Table 7 AVERAGE SELLIN PRICE 21 Table 8 PERCENT INCREASE IN VALUES 22 Table 9 CHART OF RATES OF INCREASE IN VALUES 22 EXHIBITS EXHIBIT "A" MORRISON QUARRY AND NEARBY SUBDIVISIONS 26 EXHIBIT "B" HEILDBERG QUARRY AND NEARBY SUBDIVISIONS 27 EXHIBIT "C" RALSTON DIKE QUARRY AND NEARBY SUBDIVISIONS 28 EXHIBIT "D" PROPOSED RAIL LINE QUARRY AND SURROUNDING 29 SUBDIVISIONS EXHIBIT "E" RALSTON DIKE QUARRY AND BEAR TOOTH 30 INTRODUCTION: During any rezoning case before a Planning Commission or Board of County Commissioners that involves heavy industrial uses such as a new quarry proposal, property values become an issue. This is a very real financial issue that needs to be addressed. To the decision-making Boards, the issue of impacts on property values can be somewhat confusing issue because adequate information is generally not available. In Jefferson County we are now in a unique situation. There are three major construction aggregate quarries in the County, which have been in operation for 25 years or more. Over the years and within close proximity to each of these quarries, subdivisions have been constructed, new homes have been sold, and homes have been subject to resale. This provides us with a solid set of data to determine if rock quarries really do or do not have an impact on values of these residences when compared to residential properties that are not in proximity to rock quarries. The following report will look at the historical data concerning construction and values near these three quarries. We will then compare the results to values for the Denver Metro area, values for the entirety of Jefferson County, and values for the area and subdivisions in the Crescent Park area. (The Crescent Park area is included because of proximity to the proposed quarry.) 4 1.0 HISTORY OF JEFFERSON COUNTY QUARRIES AND SURROUNDING SUBDIVISIONS 1.1 Cooley Gravel Company Morrison Quarry and the Willowbrook and Willow Springs Subdivisions Area 1.1.1 The Cooley Gravel Company Morrison Quarry This quarry was purchased from the Sanger Estate in 1970 and consists of 585 acres. The Morison Quarry development began in 1971 with Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Board permits first obtained in 1973 (the CMLRB and Division was established in the early 1970's and no State permits were required before this.) The initial operational portion of the quarry was permitted by the Jefferson County Board of Adjustment for a small portion of the 585 acres and then later expanded in the mid-1980's by this author. The quarry was subsequently annexed to the Town of Morrison with an after-use of water storage reservoirs for the Town. The quarry expanded over the years in total production reaching 1 million tons per year in the late 70's and early 80's to over 2 million tons per year currently. 1.1.2 Willowbrook and Willow Springs Subdivisions The first plat for Willowbrook was approved by the County and recorded on June 19, 1962 with a total of 193 residential lots. There were many subsequent revisions to the plat. The first plat for Willow Springs was approved by the County and recorded on February 19, 1974 with a total of 129 5 residential lots. There were also some subsequent filings for Willow Springs which added 30 more lots as late as November 28, 1980. It is important to note that many of the lots in the area (193) were platted and put on the market for sale prior to the establishment of the Morrison Quarry and 159 lots were platted and put on the market for sale after the establishment of the Morrison Quarry. The distance from the active quarry (not the property boundary) to the nearest home in the Willowbrookllow Springs area is approximately 7,600 feet or 1.44 miles. The furthest home is approximately 14,000 feet or 2.65 miles from the active quarry. The center of these subdivisions, and therefore the majority of the homes, is approximately 12,000 feet or 2.27 miles from the active quarry. Exhibit"A" is a map showing the quarry and the subdivisions. There is very little in the way of natural features that separate these subdivisions from the quarry. This means that the quarry is visible to some of the residents and there are few natural features, such as a mountain, to obstruct views or to deflect noise. This quarry is served exclusively by trucks to deliver aggregates to market. In the mid-80's permitting process and subsequent annexation to Morrison, Cooley promised the Town of Morison that all trucks would travel south to Highway 285 and then to market with only local delivery trucks allowed north to Morrison. Highway 285 is also utilized as a major access to the rest of the metro area by residents of the Willowbrookllow Springs subdivisions. 6 1.1.3 Relationship Between the Quarry and the Subdivision It is important to note that a small minority of the residents (not all) of Willowbrook and Willow Springs have been very active in fighting every proposal for expansion that Cooley Gravel Company has ever proposed to regulators. The objections have centered on issues of visual impact, noise impact, blasting impact, dust and air quality, truck traffic, and other environmental concerns that would "decrease our property values". It is also important that Cooley has been very concerned about these issues and has worked diligently to address them. During this authors eight-year tenure with Cooley Gravel Company as Real Estate Manager from 1982 through 1989, no complaints were received from Willowbrookllow Springs residences. One or two complaints were received annually about trucks and material falling off of a truck and causing windshield damage from motorists on Highway 285. The only time complaints were generally received was when a rezoning or expansion was requested, and then the complaints were from a small minority and generally the same people who claimed to "represent"the neighborhood. On-going complaints were simply not a factor. Recent complaints have been nearly non-existent. We checked with the Town of Morrison to inquire about such complaints. The most recent complaints were several for 1995 and 1996 and all of these concerned dust. Cooley Gravel Company addressed the problem and the Town of Morrison has not received any complaints since. 7 1.1.4 Other Residences Near the Quarry The only other residences near the Morrison Quarry are a few scattered homes on large lots in the hogback valley. The entire Town of Morrison is between %:and 1 and %: miles to the northeast. 1.2 Western Mobile Company Heidelberg Quarry and the Heritage Dells Subdivision Area 1.2.1 The Western Mobile Company Hiedelberg Quarry This quany was established in the early to mid-60's to provide minor amounts of aggregates for Highway 40 which is now the frontage road for Interstate 70. The first major job to be supplied from this quarry in the early 1970's was to supply all of the rock used to face the Chatfield Dam. The quarry was purchased in 1979 by Western Mobile and full production was started in competition with Cooley Gravel Company's Morrison Quarry. This quarry also produces approximately 2 million tons annually. The quarry is within the corporate limits of the City of Golden. 1.2.2 The Heritage Dells Subdivision The first plat for Heritage Dells was approved by the County and recorded on December 18, 1978 with a total of 178 residential lots. The last filing was approved on May 14, 1982 with a total of 28 additional lots. All filings for Heritage Dells were approved after the Heidelberg Quarry was established and in full operation. 8 The distance from the active portion of the Heidelberg Quarry to the nearest home in the Heritage Dells area is approximately 2,750 feet or 0.52 miles. The distance to the furthest home is approximately 6,100 feet or 1.16 miles. The distance to the center of the subdivision from the active quarry is approximately 3,500 feet or 0.66 miles. Exhibit"B" is a map showing the proximity of the quarry and subdivision to each other. There is nothing of any significance between the quarry and the subdivision that would act as a physical buffer other than Heritage Square. This quarry is served totally by trucks with traffic leaving the quarry and heading in either direction to 6th Avenue, Colfax Avenue, and to Interstate 70. The same roads are utilized by residents of the Heritage Dells Subdivision. 1.2.3 Other Residential Units Near the Quarry There is a large mobile home park to the northeast of the quarry that contains approximately 675 residential mobile home units. This was in existence in the early 1970's. This mobile home park is approximately 4,500 feet from the quarry. There are also approximately 39 apartment buildings within 1.5 miles of the quarry. 1.2.4 Relationship Between the Quarry and the Residences In the early years, there were quite a few complaints to the City of Golden about truck traffic, dust, and noise from blasting. Western Mobile took the initiative to contact the neighborhood about their complaints and told them that if they feel or hear anything, Western Mobile would change the 9 changes to the operation and through some amendments to truck traffic routes, the problems that did exist have been taken care of. Western Mobile did most of this on their own. According to City of Golden Planning Department officials, everything has "Turned out O.K.". During the last several amendments to the Planned Unit Development, neighbors were notified and there was no opposition at the public hearings". 1.3 Asphalt Paving Company Ralston Dike Quarry and the Apple Meadows Subdivision Area 1.3.1 The Asphalt Paving Ralston Dike Quarry This quarry contains a total of 160 acres permitted under the official development plan (more acreage is owned by Asphalt Paving Company). It began operations in 1974. Annual output of the quarry is approximately 800,00 tons per year. The quarry is served by trucks which travel both north and south on Highway 93 with the majority travelling south. 1.3.2 The Apple Meadows Subdivision The first plat for this subdivision was approved by the County and recorded on June 8, 1971 with a total of 180 residential lots. On September 27, 1971, the second filing was approved and recorded for 271 lots. Total lots were then 452 which were being marketed and sold after this date. The distance from the active quarry to the nearest home in Apple Meadows is approximately 6,000 feet or 1.14 miles. The distance to the furthest home is approximately 9,500 10 feet or 1.80 miles. The distance to the majority of homes is approximately 7,500 feet or 1.42 miles. Exhibit 'C' shows the relationship of the quarry to the subdivision. There is some minor topographic relief between this quarry and the subdivision. 1.3.3 Other Residential Units Near the Quarry Approximately 24 townhouse structures have been built and occupied just south of Apple Meadows. There are several residential units within % mile of the quarry. 1.3.4 Relationship Between the Quarry and the Subdivision Some residents (not all) of Apple Meadows have fought the Ralston Dike Quarry over the years to include the initial zoning and subsequent expansions. The full range of impact arguments were used in hearings by these opponents that were used against Cooley's Morrison Quarry with the bottom line being that the impacts would have an adverse impact on property values. Beyond the traditional arguments about noise, dust, blasting, truck traffic, impacts on wildlife, etc., the opposition claimed that blasting would damage the dam at the Ralston Reservoir and this would lead to catastrophic dam failure. Again, this supposed potential calamity, along with all of the others, would have an adverse affect on property values. 1.4 Other Quarry Rezoning Applications Jefferson County, over the years, has been subject to many other aggregate quarry proposals that were very contentious, heated, and resulted in denial. These included the Cooley Gravel proposal in Deer Creek Canyon, a second proposal in_Deepereek-eanye.'by the 11 Denver Tech Center, several attempts by the group of Coors, Bradley, Johnson (together or individually in multiple cases) on South Table Mountain, an attempt by Brannan Sand and Gravel at the mouth of Clear Creek Canyon, the Flatiron proposal at South Draw, and the Goltra proposal in Clear Creek Canyon. In looking back at these failed proposals, the property value issue was an important part of the County Commissioner's decisions. 1.5 Quarry Companies Relations With Local Regulatory Agencies It would be logical to assume that if the three quarries were a nuisance to residential property owners that the various local jurisdictions, the planning offices in particular, would have records of both complaints and zoning violations. We contacted the Town of Morrison, the City of Golden, and Jefferson County for such records. None of the three jurisdictions had on file any formal complaints or records of zoning violations for"at least"the past five years. We were told by the zoning enforcement officer for Jefferson County that we "would be wasting our time looking for such complaints or violations". It must be recognized that there is a difference between formal complaints and informal complaints. All three jurisdictions said they receive phone calls "once in awhile"from someone complaining about trucks mostly, and occasionally about noise or dust ("but not often"). Jefferson County may receive two or three such calls in a given year and maybe not that often. 1.6 References Used for this Section a History of the three operational quarries—first hand experience by the author and discussions with company representatives 12 o Subdivision data—Jefferson County Clerk and Recorders Office, Building Department, and recorded plats o Comments concerning hearing testimony and reports addressing valuation —first hand experience by the author as a County Planner reviewing mining cases, first hand experience by the author working for Cooley Gravel Company, first hand experience working on several cases as a consultant, attending many hearings and reviewing transcripts of cases o Comments Concerning Relationships Between Quarries and Subdivisions—Operators and County and City Planning Offices plus first hand experience o Distance figures— USGS mappings and air photos 2.0 History of the Subdivisions In and Surrounding Crescent Park Because of the proposed Rail Line Quarry,it is important to look at the subdivisions that might be impacted by the operation. The greatest concentration of residential units are in the area we will refer to as the Crescent Park area. The following is a listing of the subdivisions, date of original plat recordation, and number of lots. (The total number of lots varies between the original platted lots as recorded and the number of lots shown on the County Assessor's maps because some lots have been combined with adjacent lots.) The number of lots presented is the number allowed under the recorded plat and does not reflect the actual number of residential structures that have been built on those lots. 13 Table 1 PLATTED LOTS IN CRESCENT PARK AREA Subdivision Date Originally Platted Number of Lots Ranch Elsie March 15, 1948 22 Hilltop August 3, 1948 59 Georgian Woods December 23, 1952 60 Sylvan Heights September 30, 1952 24 Lillis Lane August 4, 1953 48 Vonnie Claire Hts October 14, 1953 59 Brook Ridge June 1, 1954 76 Burland Ranch Acres August 30, 1955 120 Truitt View May 7, 1956 18 Crescent Park September 1, 1965 97 Blue Mountain View (no date) 32* Total Number of Lots 615 • Incomplete Data for Blue Mountain View only. Exhibit"D' is a map showing these subdivisions in the Crescent Park area in relationship to the proposed quarry site. The distance from the westernmost portion of the proposed quarry to the nearest home in the Crescent Park area is approximately 2600 feet or 0.50 miles. The distance to the furthest home is approximately 17,000 feet or 3.22 miles. The distance to the majority of homes (measured from the proposed quarry to Coal Creek School) is approximately 11,000 feet or 2.08 miles. There is also a cabin 14 th ' south and west o calc ted. 3.0 Number of Platted Lots in Each Subdivision Area The following is a comparative table of the number of platted lots according to recorded plats (this does not reflect number of residential units) Table 2 PLATTED LOTS BY SUBDIVISION Willowbrook and Willow Springs 322 Heritage Dells 206 Apple Meadows 452 Crescent Park area 583 4.0 Distances Between Subdivisions and Quarries The following is a comparative table of distances between the "active" quarry boundaries and the residential units in the subdivisions. The"center is the approximate geographical center of the subdivision area in each case. The Crescent Park area is included to show the situation should the current quarry proposal be approved versus the three existing quarries and the nearby subdivisions. Table 3 DISTANCES BETWEEN ACTIVE QUARRIES AND SUBDIVISIONS (In Miles) Subdivision Quarry Nearest Furthest Center Home Home Willowbrook/ Cooley Willow Spgs. Morrison 1.44 2.65 2.27 Heritage Dells Mobile. • 15 Heidelberg 0.52 1.16 0.66 Apple Meadows Asphalt Ralston Dike 1.14 1.80 1.42 Crescent Park Proposed 0.80 3.22 2.08 Source of data for this section was recorded plats, assessors maps, and USGS maps, and air photos. 5.0 Number of Residential Units Over Time The next item that needs to be examined is the number of residential units built over a period of time in each of the areas under study. We tried to get this information from the Jefferson County Building Department. We asked the Building Department for permits issued by subdivision by year. They said that it was impossible to collect the data in this manner, especially from as far back as 1970. The altemative was to obtain aerial photographs and count the houses in each subdivision by the given year. If quarries had any substantial impact on surrounding property, it would be logical to assume that new subdivisions would not be built near them and, if they were, residential units would not sell in these areas. Following are the results of counts taken near these quarries over the years: 16 r-. Table 4 EXISTING HOUSING UNITS BY SUBDIVISION AREA AND YEAR Willowbrook/ Willow Springs Single family units in 1972 were 73 and adjacent area Single family units in 1996 were 1,059 An increase of 986 units Heritage Dells and Single family units in 1973 were 5 adjacent area Single family units in 1996 were 430 An increase of 425 units Apartment buildings in 1973 were—0- Apartment buildings in 1996 were 22 An increase of 22 buildings Mobile Homes in 1973 were 645 Mobile Homes in 1996 were 675 An increase of 30 mobile homes Apple Meadows and Single family units in 1973 were 482 adjacent area Single family units in 1996 were 572 An increase of 90 units Apartment/Townhomes in 1973 were—0- Apartmentlfownhomes in 1996 were 24 An increase of 24 buildings The conclusion that one can draw from this data is that substantial residential construction took place over the 23 years and the quarries did not deter development or sales. 17 It is also helpful to look at the number of residential units that fall within specific distances from active quarries over time. These figures are in Table 5. Table 5 NUMBER OF UNITS BY DISTANCE AND YEAR (Distance to Active Quarry) Subdivision Area Distance 1973 1973 1996 1996 Cumulative Cumulative Willowbrook/ Willow Spgs 1.5 Miles 5 units 5 units 5 units 5 units 2.0 5 10 310(1) 315(1) 2.5 47 57 183 498 3.0 26 83 284 782 (1) This includes approximately 95 Townhouses Heritage Dells 1.0 26 26 245 245 1.5 622 648 842(2) 1117 (2) There are an additional 39 apartments Apple Meadows 1.5 234 234 234 234 2.0 229 463 237(3) 470 (3) There are an additional 24 apartment buildings Adding residential units from these areas together reveals that, within Jefferson County we had the following: Within 1.0 miles of quarries there were 26 units in 1973 Within 1.0 miles of quarries there were 245 units in 1996 An increase of 219 units within 1 mile Within 1.5 miles of quarries there were 887 units in 1973 Within 1.5 miles of quarries there were 1,356 units in 1996 18 An increase of 469 units within 1.5 miles Within 2.0 miles of quarries there were 1,121 units in 1973 Within 2.0 miles of quarries there were 1,902 units in 1996 An increase of 781 units within 2.0 miles The above figures do not include the Town of Morrison which is within 1.0 to 1.5 miles from the Morrison Quarry. The above figures indicate that the quarries did not deter construction or sales of residential units within a two mile radius of the existing quarries. 6.0 Residential Sales by Area 6.1 Background Data and Methods Used This section of the report addresses both the number of sales (new and re- sales) and average selling price within each subdivision area during given years. It also examines the same data for Jefferson County as a whole and the Denver Metro area as a whole. This will give us the amount of activity by subdivision area and also a measure of change in value from one period to the next. The rate of change in values can be compared from one subdivision area to another and also to Jefferson County and Denver Metro area statistics. As mentioned in the introduction, we now have the ability to measure these changes in areas next to quarries over the past 27 years. We will be able to tell if the quarries had any impact on the rate of change in values as compared to areas where there are no quarries. We researched data from 1971 through 1996. The data was not collected for each year but was collected at 5-year intervals for 1971, 1976, 1981, 1986, 1991, and 1996. Since the three quarries began production in earnest in the early to late 1970's, the time frames should give us a complete picture of the quarry impacts on residential values in the nearby 19 subdivisions over this period. The approximate 25-year period also gives a good mix of already existing subdivisions, new subdivisions, new sales and re-sales of homes within the subdivisions. The data source utilized to compile the information needed was the METROLIST Metro Denver Sold Properties. METROLIST compiles all sold properties by month each year and lists such information as asking price, sold price (from recorded deeds), address, subdivision, and quite a bit of other information about each sale. We searched the data for all 12 months for each year selected. Specific sales were then screened in order to delete any sales that were not typical of the subdivision. As an example, in Willow Brook there was one sale of a 4,500 square foot home on a double lot that sold for almost twice the average selling price of the typical home on a single lot. In another example, in the Crescent Park area, there was a sale of a 500 square foot cabin on a small lot that was not typical of the average year around residence. These were not considered. The METROLIST data was not available for 1971. Complete statistical information begins later and was available for 1976 and the rest of the years under consideration. We were, however, able to obtain information for 1971 for all of Jefferson County and the Denver Metro area. 6.2 Number of Units Sold and Average Selling Price The only data available for 1971 was the average selling price for all residential properties sold in Jefferson County and for the Denver Metro area. These figures were: o Jefferson County $28,553 o Denver Metro $26,672 20 The number of units sold and average selling prices for the selected years are as follows: Table 6 TOTAL UNITS SOLD BY YEAR LOCATION 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 Jeffco 5,865 5,675 6,776 6,780 8,344 Metro Area 20,978 16,782 20,340 19,315 25,004 WillowBrook & Willow Springs 0 9 18 28 31 Heritage Dells 0 7 14 8 3 Apple Meadows 65 41 29 .31 29 Crescent Park 5 3 21 16 24 The statistics for years 1976 and later are for single family residences only— prior years included all residences. Table 7 AVERAGE SELLING PRICES LOCATION 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 Jeffco $43,553 $89,870 $100,692 $111,676 $171,160 Metro Area $39,381 $87,400 $100,961 $107,228 $154,436 Willowbrook/ Willow Spgs. 0 $148,161 $201,500 $234,990 $395,929 Heritage Dells 0 $91,014 $102,846 $108,438 $166,967 Apple Meadows $32,169 $63,878 $74,961 $71,787 $117,313 21 169,858 6.3 Analysis of Valuations The above figures need to be expressed in a method that shows percentages of difference for the five year periods. One cannot compare the dollar value of a home in Apple Meadows to a home in Willowbrook for example. The two subdivisions are very different. By changing the absolute dollar figures to percentages, we can compare both the increase in value as a percent and the rate of increase as a percent. Table 8 shows the percent in value (increase or decrease) between each 5 year period by subdivision. The chart in Table 9 expresses the same data as a rate of increase. These figures are: Table 8 PERCENT INCREASE IN VALUES LOCATION 1971 to 1976 to 1981 to 1986 to 1991 1976 1981 1986 1991 to 1996 Jeffco 52.5% 106.3% 12.0% 10.9% 53.3% Metro 47.6 121.9 15.5 6.2 44.0 Willowbrook/ Willow Spgs 00.0 00.0 36.0 16.6 68.5 Heritage Dells 00.0 00:0 13.0 5.4 54.0 Apple Meadows 00.0 98.6 17.4 (4.2) 63.4 Crescent Park 00.0 61.3 12.5 9.5 66.3 6.4 Developments Landompany near Mt hoer existingsnuar quarrieser isi fairly welln thy G C Mrio Qry the s petial tobuilt developout. Near the "HogeCoole Back Valley'ravel south from the Town of Morrison to U.S. Highway 285. We are not, at this time, 22 ) ) ) Table 9 Increase In Home Values �40 gb°, �in1 re:, (^"<l wmer 4 ryY Y> f; c t9 .: i r �P 72 v, . 6 ter Yr s � r "$yx�' 'x' r �e '� F`x`�' �h ,hy°y�1 . l ri f A S1 r Lf 'y i rty 1 < , gdit,� i 7 1� f 1 < t r F 1 tY , 1 ri ,t r 1 �ti r S ri � it k u,r t a ' , "" 's t j 120 3 K Sy 1. 1 ),u a 1 I -r ` *S4) a Y i �Y Yf � x 4 - .J 100 ' i't -1r - J r 1 V� 0 y ct ix tr ° r 1 x r '..:!,`,',:',.1.:,:';,-,‘'..-::::)14 80 ' %; 1 4; 11 Ex 1ST ;4'ria£ 4 F t� 44 rR ry p S qy T ..n.�i. a Sr : Ar - 41 xr y y1• t s�y4 N r 5 44"1.6-44 —J@ffC0 '� r4 a � � i k t £� t q J . ., m� �� re ,�v • kaM1 h'^"3' Y„ r d_rf x l v Sx f�f r 4 4 ! t r ',U $M1s�A 5G''' r r 5, r� OI F.>^�' i₹. f� rQE� ry a.. of ₹� r ✓ a 1 �;t ik[ t k� r11 'r E.r ��. r _e_-metro `xbr r .- 1 crn n ° x) r f t 1 AA x 1 s t, `,l , "z '> f'e ' f2 ). -a r P s f'` a c Y 1 e c s Y c 80 �F gtrxf < s�r � � � , f Fes; Willowbrook/Willow Springs U �. a ₹ ty5� y �'J�J111 l 'fir i tF'+� 1 �(' T^r`,lA'�fa 3 n. T 4 `}:_ 11 d Y i . �a a tl rM x '; r CrY�d f JC : tL � 4 �t3P 4 1m'�',SS�� g {� Y� L :4.,. --If--Hed18QeDells o. v; .'_ wx�r a nz vs 3a¢ ri E t s ruz q }₹4 Fv �e R Y r 5�1 x y ! xx' t 1,: ,-�, J: ,v'' a i ° "' ,r NA k i' r a� , �2 ...*_.Apple Meadows J i Y � s a � t � Y n � `hG z>: r � H� r i `�� r� f/ '�4& 't ' a'3 irk YS 1 �, - i, yr ''.L4_ '1u mt 1. 66r fiY " ��CreSC@n1 Park 40 ( 4 E F !> x C t .xx. [S,AV /F f 1k v'' �'r6�u z1 u� is i`-i"Yk FFy," ' s' �n r }�, i� r ,a-'C3' 't? R� S r . ' ' r �� 5 �}i r , A f F': � r '1 i 11 �° f�,P§,- r�r�[r��r�k� ��ir� aQ n j1r , y� 1 I^' , a sr' � � i < r.+ U �✓ 'f xr� r G Y 1 r 4 A e {y t L,,, r ,� d r v 20Ntj4 r r � L... t rz `V b � Fl 4 r S f � d E ) }Y fA 4N1 I t Y 48r O.4 A r r T ° E -:4'4 1 v Y 50 . r r,� YF. 'tL { ,\f rr₹� r.,i � 4 < � r �. c t ern r" �ssR �7 t L'$f''7. -rfr`�SN1 r r4V n i1 irrd Y : -r i 7"^^,„ry,--, it ! } , y t%.1. I 0 �hr >ti :iYt r 4 % r x r r ✓ 4 r di 0 6 .- 4�' C hV i F <t�Pav�- f� 0 1 >' r • J r E a' � �'C' r+t r qI k 'F;c;bF �. r:, S r t / �•tl��{ r f�� trx h u ) Z `i 5S�'& •v 9; 'tl xlf 'nW,V" 4r? 4i. 1i r bl` i�` t r Y ) �, 4"Q,F�r �' I4,� 3`f).<� v �S. 49z1'� �,�Ni'p,� F '+'"- rtn. rr£.� .�..,+ Y.rtan+ .ti'�r. ,4 x41en" ,.J+a: .�, wr, . ,by.z?SL-lt�jN.6&.-.� C� Rr� wY69 'f lS{.C.a� aY; Time Period aware of any immediate development plans. Near the Western Mobile Hiedelberg Quarry, the area is near full development. There is development potential near the Asphalt Paving Ralston Dike Quarry and one development under way. This development is called "Bear Tooth" and is owned by Golden Equities, the land subsidiary of Adolph Coors. Bear Tooth provides some interesting insights into raw land property values near a major quarry. Bear Tooth is immediately adjacent to the Ralston Reservoir and within one half mile of the Asphalt Paving Company Ralston Dike Quarry. The subdivision contains 20 lots, each in excess of 35 acres with building envelops of 1.12 to 14.2 acres on these lots. According to Esther Kettering of Golden Equities, these lots were put on the market in mid-November of 1997 and as of January 28, 1998, four had been sold. The lot only prices were: Sale#1 $302,000 Sale#2 $359,000 Sale#3 $378,000 Sale#4 $347,750 Ms. Kettering did not feel that the quarry had any impact on the sales prices and on the ability to sell these undeveloped lots. She expects the lots to be developed with rather expensive, "up-scale" homes. Exhibit"E" shows Bear Tooth in relation to the Asphalt Paving Ralston Dike Quarry. REPORT CONCLUSIONS: 1. Residential subdivisions were approved by Jefferson County both before and after the establishment of the three active quarries and in close proximity to them 2. Residential lots, both developed and undeveloped, were sold (and some resold) in these subdivisions before and after the establishment of the three quarries 23 3. The opposition to these three quarries have always used the same arguments before the Jefferson County Boards with an emphasis on the devaluation of surrounding residential properties and a related decline in quality of life 4. Few, if any, of the claims made by the opponents regarding potential adverse valuation impacts were substantiated during the hearing process 5. The quarry applicants did not adequately address the legitimate concern of the opponents and did not provide sound historical data to support their position that there would be no adverse impacts 6. Other impacts revolving around quality of life (which are indirectly related to property values) have been addressed by the quarry operators over time and there currently exists a stable, if not good, relationship between the local residents and the existing quarries. 7. There also exists a relatively stable, if not good, relationship between the quarry operators and the local governments. No formal complaints and few informal complaints have been filed over the past five years with any of the three jurisdictions. 8. Construction of new units, sales of new units, and re-sales of units have taken place in all of the subdivisions examined despite their distances from the existing quarries 9. Mine operators have been sensitive to and have responded to issues important to surrounding subdivisions. Potential impacts have been mitigated 10.Examination of all of the data shows little difference, if any, between existing and developing subdivisions near active quarries 11.Subdivisions in Jefferson County, and those near active quarries, consistently maintained values and rates of increase in values, at or above the Denver Metro area and the Jefferson County averages 12.Examination of Table 8 indicates that the percent increase for subdivisions near quarries were near or above both the Jefferson County and Denver Metro area in almost every case. The only exceptions were Heritage Dells and Apple Meadows during the 1986 — 1991 time frames. Both subdivisions 24 recovered between 1991 — 1996 with Heritage Dells at the County average and Apple Meadows 10% higher than the County average 13.Examination of Table 9 shows that all subdivisions were performing substantially the same and generally better than the County increase and Denver Metro area increase in value and in the ability to resell at market rates. 14.There is no evidence to support the notion that impacts in the Crescent Park area will be any different from the subdivisions near the three active quarries 15.There is no basis in the figures compiled that support the contention that quarries devalue residential properties. Values for various subdivisions were examined prior to establishment of the nearby quarries and these values maintained a pace of increase equal to or greater than Jefferson County or the Metro area as a whole. 25 EXHIBIT "A" MORRISON QUARRY AND NEARBY SUBDIVISIONS 26 .jw V.i' ./ ' - - i'c'1`P1 -- - \ \„�\` \'.. \\\.� •.\� - - •.er .1 �: •• "-/; �r1 _ - ,�' i°�eq�E' �At9�i iii/ �� '\ `r- `�\ t.;; ••a • iv \\� \ - - �-T' •�`�� YS 3 %►Jr r 1515 ,.`=_ % rrk • S� 1 ---- cl ✓� �% /% , (•— ' +� r �\ \ l O `. / \ .• J • 14,6 0,25 ' I �" .\ �" G` I \ • •tl . VJ ►�i�\. �iO�iaoLAti 1 �.C G� Aa ' I i� :/4, A // .s � L�II �V s.y. �A.�/IIOi�Iri_r .��i \. 1' ..�✓v.�, ; ` �� `"• / � ice' �! i' ' '�9 \ „r +. (/ ��`...,1'♦7 w��•p i� ��,�a� �iIA / ,1 Jv : 'Q�i !�- i � V oII• `�� .. 795•. 1 �. ) w0{ 0�1p .�C C iIi1�0 �j� i ��) � s r. •.♦r� .rd,J . z G c . i ,� . t / • WW// 1 i� Olrh ►,I� !} A \�i. �;> rJ�i/4 '=�� ii J11•\R v� r r.•�•I G/i�c�1/�1'"T �_ '' ,11�� 'C�/ '1�.:.� � ti. . - •, •.tO I 't�/� r ♦. 1 �. _ ( r ��►!4 11 � ��O�J 4,G ^v A�J a\:_l� i /��►«' ♦ rIJ I�� I : \ �•. . ry r o . \�♦ ��O I �rrioi -.c.��G ?... C�� __-- , t��►� ;• / ♦11,�-, �!}��!//; 1 . � J /�( Ire oi��1� ��,. ii- <G�pf6��-G.�s��0•G�j%!� ( n�� +V,_� ,v IJ�1��' • • n 'a HL,.. ' 111. ♦ I a0 V1 � . i!i J/i�T, /��..•�II /`// .a— 1 ,/ /' ' •\ `�-',L�rl'►^�,�` IAA`^�Lr�/// 4,,F Gh�w��$�� ✓J �� . ►' ..]14, E��A�� -IIi!�♦�,/i�I��,//� `{�� I 1 \ � '• - '!��.-� `-i^,,`c 4p/�i�-�� /_ �• G 4j^�� r. �� :I' ,°7 I r !YCft • o �a �� .>� � - � � �� .�1l / Is 1v, i,:2\3 1 it, � r � _ ��i' � . .!,=.• o{�. .1 \ �.`_. �i. •�4 \ r, ` Jay _ %7f- / � � wl I �� r_...'/'/rf.�I !Lfi�.� ;1�1\ULf�•�I Ot6 �eowics'� \ L, ,� S\ � � \ 1 > y Ir o.;� Pi. ��i► • r 1 Oa�/•i r \ \ I - I— — — -- --� • !I. ��i�i�,-,�♦I'\ � ��I, r4, \ ' � 744,- � , l .t • l� , / .,•,.��.I/%�i��/,, . �i �, •, I / r.F •__,I) \ 0.. \ \ . .. . . r- , : e ___> , - __ .., - ✓ 1,•n��6�`�� I`��"•�? III -Z.� 'i;:. \ - • 1�'` � ` v w r lI ^�kTh - dfi �� • /�� p �_ i elf ' ..".IlV�✓//// /All'!/ / � ��.l�ilfiY i : .i .�O/Y/� 1A AA � ' .erg (\' Subdivision Area • -�` ` �� ,��, I Quarry Area �S //// �) )),%� •��1/ • � �� 1 . _�r � 1 ry "�:� ark � • -41,0• •�-��i,� � � ��-- _ % 1 �i, ° iditL 111 4,)I " i�6t.? �� / Sr�• ' �•I�I �►`'� � C O// LLC Exhibit A 1� I 11 a \ (` Banks and Gesso, L '`) C` ` / �3 • \ Cooley Gravel Company • � � U ° 720 Ki lin Suite 117 Proximity of Morrison Quarry to ( �+ I i �, r (\-- a Lakewood, Colorado 80215 N Willowbrookllowsprings Area \`� ( �i @ l r/� mm., /\ I --\•\ ti Scale: 1" =2,000' EXHIBIT "B" HEIDLEBERG QUARRY AND NEARBY SUBDIVISIONS 27 Lr jr:v`- I� aYate{Tanks !I V� _ ti A ---- ---4,7„),, n • '/, 8 L _ /� lava tv ' s n • �I /. �\ �` .1 ,Golden M/leaa Reoe•00 1 - 41 1_ Park + wr DDLE ',Sunsta � ;\\ V \ G vet , C< a h Sc Subsb \Ifs ad ,�.— FV .oad,o Cemelervr �r � o /% �I /i , C.� � o Cemetery $1' e, " 10 "i, 1, /t' ♦ ' a >re 5 ,iir/4 ) 1 ;,., Jr/1.Th- ,' I) �G��,j .ii iii � / I 1 1) : sao L / �� Par V. ', ti/ asf { +I ��, I W . u 1 /', l 1 I I i : - I t�� w �. -) ,rte f j / V�� L`_'lt�j ► <�+ � s !� ...5:') 60115 /,, \ \ { l* 7� 1��\�•�� .:. if 77' / / / V 1 1, L__.....' 1y I1 y 7��J��►O��Q�� _ //� 4 u� { ni\FaE r ` , 10 t¢l�v. ° ��i 1'f1dO�0U�� r �Y��+.1 tom/ AI 1 iACr eID1��I�II�•► a r ��I , l ' Ic C `\SQ �i` tit♦ +,y-. +i��O�i.� . e o hdt ��Gtt: 1 ) _ , Spring �,..\--S.�4��4gi�t� 1�1� ,v �G J� I 1 � , i a� - o e ��♦A[6. 1 6 0 G c a 1 J! •s.1♦�,I� \ — _. \\ � / —/\\\. , �.?.�i; Vii_ .o _ t • d \ •Mine - 1 / ' ppL„ x (\��J 1 Gla,'atl Rh';r; /// Subdivision Area jll� � hI' \' g g i _ \ 9, ..,..: Quarry Area, \\'\ l� �� \1 ' � ' �9 I ,\ Pi Exhibit B Banks and Gesso, LLC Western Mobile Company Proximity of Heidelberg Quarry to 720 Kipling, Suite 117 4 Heritage Dells Area Lakewood, Colorado 80215 N Scale: 1" = 2,000' EXHIBIT "C" RALSTON DIKE QUARRY AND NEARBY SUBDIVISIONS 28 �0 I < 1 4'5 t �U � � 5150 .. A '� 5� a /�;I, n ,� � ' �t �\ Ati� �� ' � • \� ��'1°Yr�`� `��ul �-" �1�'t �� ,A �` ` l� i I � � aeon —� ' �� -A ,�� Ie r i �. �5 r�� \\ , ..�i1 � ies air j� � ,.- slPo_ \ EE _ o Bra P' T O l r �i � �� \ \ 6° �� ( >Rr t \ oat 'am w.r l P %� n` Id' �i 3908 r keJ �� e LEVEE • W •i t n 3 BC( i '1 1 Q Qh .III A r r Il .� �( .tea A X C1� - -- �Y�� -1 i1� �C O 9P �b Y `..'4.b a L. V i I t ♦O c9♦• `� \ '�//� �/ S nd' ` C ill ay n 'I� �( 11 � \.:� - ��_— �� -- -]_—I— , j�O�p��`s �CA a� • _ �� c ��1\ . )� �\ I 8 • �� \ 1v\ 1. I \ ) ' Slaa �. i I wEa Y \- 1547; ' N AVE � //i/�T�� '--__,../' (I� 11 `/1�/ � l •��J*1\ 1 1 \�` 1\ Po' a 41/4O �.A lr rWfl4 a Aar V 1� I // /' �" `�� ®� .� Iti� t\` uWi 1 5050 7 ' I I 1�;� A � / �� \ O ' . r-It t, 1 ��11 V SE iV �� H O —`v ' 4 OO� r ��p �.. •V� '\" I ‘� /I"" I,�� i�7 �'�t�F �� O� 'C.,` J 5a 1 _ ..� ��j j i ✓ ''� J � r'fi,., ` 'i*1� :, �i � • i ��, \ \__, e \ \ )in Ah � /I ' �w� �c� . _ 3159°\�.� ,� / it c r ! w Y SY► w� \ cfE sold • A4119 •,, s Ke lasy vla (� �v � p 0 �i.l '`, of,. ,. „„Quarry'Area / / �J/ r _/__-_-:' ��/ /�/�i��r J� -� �\ � y) Y kl•II •I . . �// Subdivision Area V 5" - - * Exhibit C Banks and Gesso, LLC N Asphalt Paving Company Proximity of Ralston Dike Quarry to 720 Kipling, Suite 117 Scale: 1" = 2,000' Apple Meadows Area Lakewood, Colorado 80215 EXHIBIT "D" PROPOSED RAIL LINE QUARRY AND SURROUNDING SUBDIVISIONS 29 • VCIC s ,. _ _ , • ... . • 1 0 . ‘e �' '„ % � ((Is in ----./,/ / 4.7 ��" `C �� )lil�l' t��►II�O�cj� ! /m oi�L • • \Thr .,p-' • .I . . • .• . • . 1 // • . � \� \ l .e...•.oQ ;/ire \ i� ` \ tr,_____ ___ _A i \et% ____.) ' • :?? I ' )?-cc 1 �� r , 10 i , . ,poi ,:k-L:c03,:!///15' )5� ��' �� .�/i g. ;', ' // .._:_d_._,.Th,,_________\ , _ ,...,.. ! 7 _ . ._ AA *• Exhibit D Banks and Gesso, LLC N Asphalt Paving Company Rail Line Quarry 720 Kipling, Suite 117 Scale: 1" = 2,000' Lakewood, Colorado 80215 Proximity to Crescent Park Area EXHIBIT "E" RALSTON DIKE QUARRY AND BEAR TOOTH 30 ok t;i0o T • \A, , �J , , 1\ k A 11 / . .... „,,,, \\ , '44 7 __/ , I J i I I \,\ \ I (r:'/'_ i li �) )) 'F1 . 44 ',,c' \\` ' \ ` t /f s (�rl \�• E,nli,l III �11�� 1►`g�, >. - ' ,� 1 � ' „I Ill � �' �� -- \(1vIlk\i:\i'‘ 5/ 1 './ b r li I(i II� r-. � � � �� I ! n l 'I Illli� iyl ' x n y'� ///��jj � •Lover �;,�— ) Ralston Res Vv.6r lll ssoe La A � 11; /� vtea J Rt I! , � ;\111\ �n� , 11,,93 �I/ � 6 DI ea • ;4 j> _ I ss / 1 5976 well ) 4 ��D�0►nj1 i ��\\\\ /sue- \\y� ��qa 0 I O> 4$i r l II V"lam ��_ �� \� „ --- �i / .J. � \ �r C �II r • 0 .` _ /5950 iv 1 /// Subdivision Area � v"V� �� i � w`" 11 \ _ i % , L ` Quarry Area...•. �� 'e�\\ `, �� Banks and Gesso, LLC Exhibit E Asphalt Paving Company Ralston Dike Quarry 72O Kipling, Suite 117 t Proximity to Bear Tooth Subdivision Lakewood, Colorado 80215 N Scale: 1" =2,000' Impact of Rock Quarry Operations on Value of Nearby Housing Prepared for DAVIDSON MINERAL PROPERTIES by DR. JOSEPH RABIANSKI DR. NEIL CARN Department of Real Estate Georgia State University Atlanta, GA 30303 August 24, 1987 . - .a. • • • • Impact of Rock Quarry Operations on Value of Nearby Housing Prepared for DAVIDSON MINERAL PROPERTIES �• by Dr. Joseph Rabianski Dr. Neil Carn Faculty Members of The Department of Real Estate* Georgia State University Atlanta, Georgia August 24, 1987 *This study was conducted by Dr. Rabianski and Dr. Carn as independent contractors. Any statements, conclusions, and opinions contained in the report represent only the views of the authors and does not necessarily reflect the position of Georgia State University. • Impact of Rock Quarry Operations on • Value of Nearby Housing • The establishment of a new rock quarry operation off U.S. Highway 41 near Bolingbroke, Georgia, in the south part of Monroe County, has raised some question about the quarry 's impact on adjacent properties. This report was authorized to determine if a significant discernable adverse impact should be anticipated on the value of housing units existing or those that might be built in close proximity to the new quarry . On the basis of the methodology and data employed in the research (described in ,.subsequent parts of the report), there does not appear to be any significant difference in changes of housing values over time, between housing units located in subdivisions immediately adjacent to properties that contain a rock quarry within one-half mile of the subdivision, and housing units located in subdivisions in the same general area but several miles away from and not subject potential adverse influences of the rock quarry operation. In simpler terms, the research indicates that a properly developed and operated rock quarry operation should not have a significant effect, either positively or negatively, on the value of housing units adjacent to the quarry property . It should be noted that this conclusion is premised on the assumption that factors associated with the rock quarry activity that could cause adverse impacts on nearby residential areas are controlled, as required by 1 law and by normal operating procedures of newly established crushed stone operations. The factors that could cause such adverse impact are identified as: 1) air pollution resulting from crushing and blasting operations; (2) traffic hazards and congestion associated with the transport of materials and personnel to and from the quarry facility; (3) noise pollution associated with blasting, crushing, and other industrial operations on the site; (4) vibration from blasting and crushing; and (5) visual unattractiveness of open pit mining, complimentary industrial operations and storage of mined materials and spoil. tethods Used to Examine Changes in Housing Values The basic question addressed by this report is if the presence of a new rock quarry and crushed stone operation, operated using the latest technology available, would have significantly adverse affects on housing values for properties located adjacent to and nearby the industrial property containing the rock quarry. To examine the question, this analysis used a comparison technique in which changes in housing values were observed for housing units located in developments immediately adjacent to industrial properties containing a rock quarry. Then housing value changes were observed for housing units located in comparable developments in the same market area 2 as the quarry-influenced development but located several miles from the quarry itself. Since both quarry-influenced developments and the non-quarry influenced developments would be situated in an area experiencing the same market conditions, any differences in the rate of change in housing values between the comparable developments would be attributed to differences in the developments themselves (size and type of units, age of units, quality and amenity of units) and/or to the presence of negative externalities imposed by the rock quarry operation. In selecting comparable non-quarry influenced developments, housing units as similar as possible to those in quarry-infulenced subdivisions were used, so that the value changes observed could be primarily attributed to factors associated with the rock quarry. Any differences or dissimilarities in the comparables are noted. To conduct the analysis, four basic steps were taken to gather and compare data on housing value changes in comparable developments (one adjacent to a quarry, one away from a quarry) in two different Georgia counties. The four steps were: 1. Select two areas where there was a rock quarry operation using the latest technology and an adjacent housing development as comparable as possible to housing development adjacent to the proposed quarry in Monroe County. The two areas selected are: (1) in Newton County, near the Oxford quarry operated by Georgia Marble (near Covington, Georgia), and (2) in DeKalb County, near the Rock Chapel quarry operated by Georgia Marble (near Lithonia, Georgia). These two locations were selected after 3 • the analyst inspected twenty-one quarries in the Macon and Atlanta vicinity to ascertain if housing units comparable to those in Monroe County were present. Most potential comparables were not used because adjacent development comprised other industrial uses , substantial mobile home development, or no development except one or two farms. The two areas selected were the only two which had only stick-built housing adjacent to the quarry property, similar in size and quality to adjacent housing Monroe County. 2. Census data, containing median housing values and other data indicative of housing market conditions; for each of the two comparable areas and for Monroe County were used to compare average annual changes in median housing values between 1960 and 1970 and between 1970 and 1980. This analysis simply shows the expected rate of change of housing values for the county or market area as a whole for those base years. For Newton County and Monroe County, census data for the whole county were included, since census tracts werp not delineated in an earlier census. For DeRalb County, only selected census tracts for the southeastern portion of the county were used, since DeRalb is a much more heavily populated county and contains a large and varied housing market. 3. Data on assessed values for housing units in quarry influenced and non-quarry influenced developments were collected and analyzed for the years 1982 to 1986 or 1987 in Newton and DeRalb Counties. The average annual rate of change in the assessed values of the comparable developments for those base years were observed. Quarry influenced developments were subdivided into Zone 1 and Zone 2 to distinguish between those units directly exposed to quarry-related operations and those buffered by other housing from such operations. Zone 1 contains the first two tiers of lots abutting the boundaries of rock quarry property. The area between these lots and the edge of the quarry itself is one-fourth to one-half mile and contains only open space and wooded area. Zone 2 is the remainder of the development buffered from the open space and wooded area by Zone 1. It exists about one-half to one-mile away from the edge of the rock quarry . 4 4. Data on actual sales of houses in quarry -influenced developments and non-quarry influenced developments were collected and analyzed. Average annual rate of change of sales values of units were then compared. • Unfortunately the only sale in the Newton County quarry -influenced development was a foreclosure, so the only sales data available were for DeRalb County . It was extremely difficult to find data which provided both a current sale price and a prior sale price, so that annual changes in sales values could be tracked. A second group of values were subsequently developed which tracked a prior sales price to the 1986 assessed value, for which ample data could be obtained. So long as the comparison of annual average rates of change between quarry -influenced and non-quarry influenced developments are calculated on the same basis, the results were useable. The data and price for a prior sale was obtained on a consistent basis, as was the 1986 assessed value. While the resultant average annual rate of change does not track two sales, it is a consistent comparison of valde change over time between an actual sale price and current value reflected in the assessment. It will therefore, reflect actual market conditions from the standpoint of the sales price. Conditions in the Comnarable Areas Exhibit 1 shows the location of the comparable quarry influenced developments in ne^,alb, newton and Monroe Counties. It also shows the location and access points of traffic arteries serving both the quarry operations and adjacent housing developments as well as the approximate location of the actual quarry . Modern value theory indicates that prices housing consumers are willing to pay for a dwelling unit is dependent upon the amount of satisfaction the consumer can obtain by occup/ ing and using the dwelling unit. In other 5 words, a house is viewed as a consumer product vis a vis a productive asset used in business. Besides conditions on the housing site itself (controlled by the owner and/or occupants of the property), the occupant's satisfaction (consequently the price he is willing to pay) is affected by those conditions that originate off the site but affect conditions on the site itself. Impacting conditions originating off-site are called externalities. Thus, consumer satisfaction and resultant housing values are strongly affected by positive and negative externalities. The influence of a rock quarry and attendant crushed rock operations on housing values nearby is a direct result of the adverse or negative externalities such an activity imposes on its surrounding environment. The major potential adverse impacts a rock quarry operation would potentially have on nearby housing are as follows: 1. Air Pollution - The principal sources of air pollution in a rock quarry are dust and emissions from heavy equipment. Dust, the major pollutant here, would originate from the points where blasting occurs, where rock-crushing operations occur, and in areas nearby where dust has settled and is disturbed by equipment. Emissions from heavy equipment occur at the same points where rock is gathered, crushed and hauled. Modern rock mining technology seeks to control potential air pollution in several ways. First, the design of the pit (site location, depth, orientation to prevailing winds, size and access points) helps to minimize the drift of dust off the site. Second, the location of primary crushing operations is placed as deeply as possible in the pit to trap as much airborne dust as possible inside. Crushing operations to obtain finished product are placed at points where truck access and loading is possible but well within property boundaries. Third, dust is contained, 6 To minimize adverse impacts from excessive noise, several actions can be taken. First, regulatory measures permit blasting only during certain 'daylight hours of the day, with a limited number of blasts per day. Regulatory standards for blasting as well as for noise, vibration and dust are contained in the Georgia Blasting Standards Act of 1978. These usually occur only during work days when many housing occupants are at work or at school. Blasting is also usually located at a depth so that much of the noise is contained in the walls of the quarry. Second, newly established quarries are normally surrounded by space and wooded areas sufficient to create an aural buffer from adjacent properties. In many areas, noise levels (decibels) are measured at the boundaries of a site to determine if allowable maximums are exceeded. Rock quarries, along with other industrial operations, must conform to noiselevels permitted by industrial performance standards. 4. Vibration - Vibration is also caused primarily from blasting and crushing operations. Most vibration is normally associated with blasting. Like noise, vibration is controlled through regulatory measures limiting the potential impact to certain hours of the day and to a limited number of times per day. Spatial separation (distance) from point of impact to adjacent properties and performance standards are also primary controls. 5. Visual Pollution - Visually unattractive aspects of the quarry operation can have an adverse impact on adjacent properties when the unattractive elements are in clear view. Some of the major visual pollutants include storage of mined materials, crushing and processing operations, spoil, and the quarry itself. The principal method of overcoming potential visual pollution is to contain all unattractive visual elements on the site itself and to conceal them from view from the perimeter of the property to the maximum extent possible. Locating the quarry with wide undisturbed perimeters (spatial buffer), creating visual( buffers such as wooded areas or earthen berms, maintaining all storage and spoil behind visual buffers, and taking other actions to conceal unattractive features from view are the principal actions to minimize visual pollution. 8 piled, stored or otherwise treated as spoil in areas on the quarry property itself. Fourth, areas in the pit and access points and routes leading to the pit are watered several times daily to prevent airborne pollution. Stockpiles of finished product, a principal source of dust, are watered with . a separate sprinkler system. Finally, emission control devices and other measures as required by law and custom are used to prevent excessive pollutants from being emitted. 2 Traffic Hazards and Congestion — Industrial traffic associated with a quarry consists of trucks hauling crushed stone, commuting employees and other . business and delivery traffic. The major potential hazards are traffic congestion at rush hour, the presence of too many loaded trucks which block traffic, improperly loaded trucks, and roadway damage caused by improperly loaded trucks. When traffic problems result from quarry operations, the two primary culprits are underdesigned roadways and failure to observe legal and operational requirements for loading and hauling crushed stone. To minimize these problems, quarry locations can be placed on access roads of adequate design (both for traffic capacity and load capacity) and as close as possible to major transportation corridors carrying other industrial and truck traffic. Access points for the quarry property to public roads can be placed to avoid undue traffic friction and congestion caused by turning and entering movements. A rock quarry does not employ a large number of employees, so congestion caused by commuting is minimal. Loaded trucks are usually spaced several minutes apart, often an hour or more apart, so do not contribute significantly to congestion. So long as legal load limits are observed and loaded trucks are properly contained, hazards such as flying rocks, roadway damage or roadways clogged by very slow moving trucks in areas where passing is prohibited can be minimized. 3. Noise Pollution - Excessive noise crossing boundaries of quarry property can arise from two principal sources, blasting and crushing operations. Other noises, such as truck or equipment engines, are normal for any industrial operation and do not cause excessive noise across property lines. 7 These items represent the major operating charac— teristics of a rock quarry operation that can have an adverse impact on nearby properties and, consequently, diminish property values. It should be noted that some of these factors--particularly traffic congestion, visual pollution and noise pollution--are potential externalities associated with many other types of industrial operations as well. These industrial operating characteristics are incompatible with residential development only when they are uncontrolled and allowed to exert their negative influence. A compatible characteristic is one that does not disrupt or disturb the functions or enjoyment of adjacent properties. The absence or control of these factors would disallow any such actual disruption so that, when controlled, these characteristics are not considered incompatible. Exhibit 2 compares the characteristics of the two comparable areas to those of the proposed quarry in Monroe County. Both the DeKalb County and Newton County sites are closer to town and other urban development than the Monroe County site, but all three sites are similarly situated on two lane roads in good condition, used by area homeowners and rock quarry traffic as principal access to town and to the interstate. The Monroe County site has the least traffic congestion, and the distance to the interstate from the quarry is the shortest. Housing in all three areas is roughly similar, but the Monroe County vicinity is the least densely developed. 9 A comparison of quarry operating conditions in Monroe County could be compared only for access capability and planned visual buffers. From the standpoint of spatial separation and visual buffers, the Monroe County site will be much better buffered than either the DeKalb or Newton County quarry. Both the DeKalb and Newton County quarries appear to be relatively well controlled and exert no significant negative influence on housing development nearby. If all other things were equal, most housing consumers would probably prefer non-quarry developments over those near a quarry simply to avoid the risk of uncontrolled nuisances. But when the potential nuisances are properly controlled, nearby housing developments do not appear more affected by rock quarry operations than by any other nearby non-residential activity. Some DeKalb residents suggested there could be a benefit being next to a rock quarry property in that the open space and wooded areas adjacent to them would remain open and provide an undisturbed wooded area next to them that would not he built upon. Some home buyers apparently feel there can be a beneficial trade-off of a minor amount of noise and vibration during working hours for adjacent open space. 10 Comparison of Historic .iarket Conditions • General indicators of market conditions in the three • areas are compared with the use of certain census data. Exhibit 3 shows census data for 1960, 1970 and 1980 in each of the three areas. The factors included in this analysis are: 1. Median price of a housing unit at the time of the census, and the average annual percentage change in value over the 10 year period. 2. The average annual percentage of occupants in owner occupied units that moved in to their house each year during the last two years before the e census, and the average annual three year percentagethat moved in each year of the period (three to five years before the census). These statistics are rough approximations of turnover rates in owner occupied housing units. 3. Tenure occupied status,housing showing un is tae i the owner/renter ratio county or area census tracts. 4. The percentage of total units reported as vacant at the time of the census, and the percentage of vacant units reported as seasonal or second homes (not normally available for occupancy by full time residents). The following observations were made based on an inspection of the data: 1. Median Price of Housing Unit - All three areas showed significant inflation of housing prices which was much more pronounced in the 1970 to 1980 period than the 1960 to 1970 period. DeKalb's values increased most rapidly, but started from a lower median value in 1960 than either Newton or Monroe. Both the median price and the average annual increase in median price was very simir for Newton and Monroe Counties, particularly during the 1970 to 1980 period. The data indicate there was no unusual market conditions in any of the three areas that would cause the housing to exhibit abnormal fluctuations, except that DeKalb's area was growing more rapidly than the other areas. 11 • 2. An u 1 P c n f Own —Occ o • d R sid n +t �ntO Unit (Turn OV r F f v * na ^ - The data indicate that the average annual percentage of residents moving into their unit occurred at curredat a much more rapid rate in the DeKalb area than in the other two areas, reflecting its more rapid growth rate. Newton County's turnover rate was fairly steady at about 9 percent annually (in most recent periods prior to the census), while Monroe County's turnover rate was at a steady 6+ % during the same period. Newton County's slightly higher turnover rate reflected a somewhat larger market and probably a higher turnover of second homes in the Lake Jackson area of the county. 3. Tenure S a ,s - All three areas reflected a fairly consistent owner/renter ratio (70 to 75 percent owner-occupied units) by 1980, a sign of normally increasing home ownership rates and, in the case of Newton and Monroe Counties, growth out of a rural housing market. Both Newton and Monroe Counties had nearly 50/50 owner/renter splits in 1960, but changed to closer to a 75/25 split by 1980. DeKalb, longer part of an urban market, had a fairly consistent 70/30 owner/renter split, with only a slight increase in owner occupied units, throughout the three census periods. Median prices of houses would be expected to be more "normal" when owner/renter ratios are stable. 4. Vac-- �ant Unitg - Vacancy levels fluctuate depending on market dynamics and number of new units being built. The trend of vacancies over time help to substantiate if the housing market is functioning adequately. DeKalb's vacancy rate increased from the two percent level to the five percent level, representing an increase in new building to meet market demand as the area experienced fairly rapid growth, especially from 1970 to 1980. Newton's vacancy rates fluctuated and was higher than the comparable areas. Two conditions help to explain this. First Newton has a considerable second home market near Lake Jackson which experiences higher vacancies than a permanent home market. Second, Newton also has experienced considerable new building in its permanent home market as the local and regional economy grew around it. Monroe County's vacancy rate dropped considerably to a fairly normal 5.2 percent in 1980 (compared to DeKalb's 5.6 percent in 1980), indicating that Monroe's housing supply and demand forces are maintaining a better balance as growth occurs. 12 5. Growth Rates on Housing - All three areas experienced nominal to slow growth between 1960 and 1970. Between 1970 and 1980, DeKalb's growth rate was about twice the level of Newton and Monroe County. Both Newton and Monroe, however, experienced an increased growth rate at about a 5 percent annual level. Monroe County's increase, from less than 1 percent in the 1960-70 period to over 5 percent in the 1970-80 period, was by far the most dramatic increase in growth rate. While Monroe County remains the smallest of the three areas, its increase in growth rate indicates it is experiencing some spillover of growth from the Macon metropolitan area and could achieve a much higher volume of new housing units over the next few years. Comparison of Value Changes in Ouarrv-Influenced and Non-Quarry Influenced Housing Develonments To compare differences in value changes between • quarry-influenced and non-quarry influenced developments, three types of value change data were collected. First, assessed values were taken from tax records at the local court house (a sample from each development used in the analysis). Assessed values for 1982 and 1987 were obtained for the DeKalb area and assessed values for 1982 and 1986 were obtained for Newton County. The difference in total value for each unit in the sample was calculated and divided by the number of years over which the change occurred. That number was then divided by the 1982 value to obtain the average annual percent change in assessed value. This was performed separately for Zone 1 and Zone 2 13 • of quarry-influenced developments and for the non-quarry comparables. A second set of data were developed to compare changes in sale prices over time. However, Newton County's quarry-influenced development had no recorded sales except a foreclosure, so sales data were available only for the DeKalb area. Two data sets for DeKalb had to be developed because a current sales price and a prior sales price for the same unit could be found only for three units in the quarry-influenced development and four units in the non-quarry comparable. For this small sample, the difference in the two sales prices (current minus prior) was divided by the number of years to obtain the difference in sales value. Then the difference was divided by the prior sales price to obtain the average annual percent change in sales price. The second data set using sales prices found a prior sales price and the 1986 assessed value for a unit. The difference between these two values was divided by the number of years between the sale and 1986. That result was then divided by the prior sales price to obtain the average annual change in value, using the 1986 assessed value in lieu of an actual sale. While the result does not give an accurate rate of change of sales price, it is comparing a rate of change in values that are consistently measure for both quarry-influenced developments and non-quarry comparables. If a difference • in the rate of change occurs, it would be attributable to 14 either differences in the comparables and/or quarry • factors. This measured was used to obtain average annual rates of change for a sample of 17 units from the quarry -influenced development and 13 units from the non-quarry comparable. Exhibit 4 is a summary of the average annual percent change for the three sets of data used. Exhibits 5 and 6 give detailed assessed value data for observations in Del:alb Count/ and Newton County , respectively . Exhibits 7 and C show the detail of changes in prior sale price to 1986 assessed values for the DeKalb quarry -influenced development and non-quarry comparable, respectively . Exhibits 9 and 10 show the detail of changes in value from prior sales price to current sales price for the DeKalb quarry -influenced development and the non-quarry comparable, respectively . Following are observations about value changes based on an inspection of the above identified exhibits: 1. Changes in Assessed Values Between 1982 and 1486 or 1987: - In the Delalb area, the non-quarry comparable increased at a slightly faster rate than the quarry -influenced development; however, there was little difference in the rates for Zone 1 and Zone 2 for those units near a quarry . Subsequent data sets did not indicate a differential. A probable explanation for this is that the non-quarry comparable was somewhat younger than the quarry -influenced development and there was a larger number of units and thus a more active market in the non-quarry comparable. The quarry area subdivision sampled has about 70 units primarily built between 1971 and 9174. The comparable had about 175 units with some built about 1974 and 1976 and man/ more added during the later / ears. The original assessed values were 15 • established by the initial sales price, which would tend to be higher for younger units. In Newton County average annual change in assessed value was much higher than in DeKalb but as virtually the same for quarry-influenced and non-quarry influenced developments. The higher average annual increase in assessed value for Newton was expected because the value increase began from a much lower value per unit with the 1982 base. 2. Changes in Value from Prior Sale to Current Sale - Data tracking changes in actual sales prices were sparse, but average rates of change were calculated . Here the quarry -influenced development also had a higher rate of increase than the non -quarry comparable, with a differential of about 3 percent. Value changes in the quarry-influenced area were very consistent, ranging from 8.8 to 9.5 percent per year. For the non-quarry area, rates varied a great deal, ranging from a 4.6% loss to 12.2% gain, with other values very close to those found in the quarry-influenced area. Again, no data were available for Newton County. 3. . Changes in Value from Prior Sale to 1986 Assessed Value - These rates of change indicate a consistent change between DeKalb's quarry area and the non-quarry comparable. (There are no data for Newton County.) Here the quarry-influenced development had a higher average annual increase in value than the non-quarry comparable. Also Zone 1 had a lower rate of increase than Zone 2, but even Zone l's rate was higher than the rate of the non-quarry comparable. However the difference in the rates was only about 2 1/2 percent between the quarry and non-quarry areas, while the assessed value rate differential was about 1/2 percent. On the basis of an examination of all three data sets comparing value changes in quarry-influenced developments to non-quarry influenced developments, there is no evidence to indicate the presence of a properly operated rock quarry nearby has a significant adverse impact on housing values. A slight indication of such an adverse impact was present 16 in comparing DeKalb's 1982 to 1967 rates of change in assessed values, but this was not confirmed by the Newton County data on assessed values. When sales data were used for DeKalb County, an opposite trend was noted--values in the non-quarry area increased more slowly than values in the quarry-influenced area. It should be noted that the areas examined are close to rock quarries where the potential adverse externalities appear to be fairly well controlled, typical of the way a newly established quarry would be operated. However, the Rock Chapel quarry in DeKalb is not a new quarry, and some of its operating characteristics are problematic, but still adequately controlled. If control measures were not properly taken and negative externalities were permitted to occur, it is very likely adverse impacts on values of surrounding properties would be experienced. On balance, the variance in rates of value change between quarry and non-quarry areas are slight. There is some evidence (based primarily on interviews with occupants and real estate agents) that homebuyers are concerned about potential problems associated with crushed stone operations and may, on occasion, react accordingly. But when faced with better information and hard choices, those who bought in quarry -influenced areas have not experienced a loss or even a much slower increase in housing value. 17 ••' , fr'' 1..a....•••• . ...--n• s ;" DEKALB COUNTY ROCK CHAPEL QUARRY VICINITY • "le. • ....u......— - • SO C .�_/ t4 mow' «•., C P. •s'' ,rte\ ex •. 4.. •• ` _� I • t• .. +-- �. ...�ruu. I . a •, ss �. Non-Quarr) t.,0,Sre I M.ehw.i. • -,7•i •,�',7tr %• ,e_� Comparable I '; `'- ; s" "t\ regal .4.1 .# ' " •- �� _` 4 _ _._ 0. - 4. G.M.D. .y ! en 7� •wxx.�. 41, St u.. .. !! % 139'- •.. t' ,•! ! „_ t i •� .s a` ej. �i N ' • t, ... 2 y . .a ! 563 I •... I -N+•I •• . if e moo t ` • \,• —y��S,r/ . 4 ' " , n.oa�- ♦4:_,.t ; s ti a_ T I A .N " Quarry Mr `y`' :. ••" �' j 4 St Y' 4 0. J .r , /pa(` I . 11 MME le w, : . ti s'I • e a Quarry t ••�1 ,e-• . .... � •0 a 'Influenced •w • -„,1,s r x, Development-r) 4 •i 44 •1 i .. r-,`V ,47 ,- '.9_•tY z . s,M> 7 r I; - LITHONIAT 4 ' t rv. ` #.'ate \ •• / "' 7" irk .:, �, • % • R P 0 .� • � i w tatL. ♦ f tall I/ I —.., TM " •:... :, .9 " lRx a ``, / r �.,- ��, DELIMITED AREA ( In gym? ; L,� +�33 L ` ter°tate • ` 'W- i�rlLI o ' S • Z _ E , 4 . \ / a VII lx.JwJ ,. S r' •: . . t •J i` •i. •., i 11.x+ 6 a .f , • • a I o � ` 8 • 4 ern' EXHIBIT 1-B NEWTON COUNTY - OXFORD QUARRY VICINITY•. \ \.\ arse' ' r I , 'a (c \ 4 \ 1-..„ .--- l 11 e y, i_!o) t� . e O • ly^ Ti. l4.' 'e \' so re k.. ; n I ± \ • Ck s.N.,..... ':;17� n _ 0, �1 i It �,� / ,p s E C • ti �.n y j tta+• f E . 0 ; -i ',a i s F S . 1 •--—er W00 / t r 1� °' I. ''qfr• b- w ,I.C., •, Wile Caeca NNE Y d-....... N. r an .. kv. . t as .� r • A �nI. a ow i _ .. ., 8 t\ M t tya••••'s t• °.cep° L •••�.a.W• il W Wf - efl R ("4111.. �� , °° L 1.°,rttWl mats Y vrr 4e. 1.. • N reaeeaw ; JN "TO- Cu. ! awe,• 0 .. 6F M L r :- A N I N '• Y 10.0"4WO \ •t 7r S. °OaM 1 ' M Fs" — Cwt•' °ie'Cres •. ' 1 ,..•e, .es e waita n1 . c» �cis .ae, f.L�a C • •;. ti° • :it•s 3 a..r. .��... °1•Ce .. .,Fo 1 i • eQuarry •ou'.m° _\ z� � : -----' " err ',� " •�;1/44.....--44.,.at Site ___ � ,`s.•. I ', : wa ,0 o. ----- --- OXFORD , ,`; ° C••NI : { � '°+q A — •� w 444 o 4, i Oa 1,0 1,`�NOn-Quarry• >�� •. - ,�. I. Pr...... �So .rd a. b fg ...... '.Comparable Of ys.- 4 ?eoe t,O • .� sa' 'l '., , as / %�4 �.:u _ V� �' a .. luarry ° ✓ � � '� Maio 1aFd `Influenced '��7 _�� % ��ewet flats � --------- ---'. - -I fe-. - °D�ZO alllent _ ',�Y✓�) r"6'dL"Li- t.F � -•_..°., ..1 yewto / ;, e / je •er P y0...we �j'y 11.11___.&•-•-•1 +I ., �S to to ".f .0 ."40. e:: , t,- 41 t- a - Interct,t ��' _ _ ii, lb`•`t �,` 4 • �"M �. .........'..:' / 1t a I � •y f 4l7'' J ., ` /�. rfa LAKE ..li tkeni ` EXHIBIT 1-C ::� + MONROE COUNTY "' " "� PROPOSED QUARRY VICINITY t � i e ,:`.' ' ,, N`t I}+ rr> t /-. -' �� 1 A Lr T • �7-___ • �y r t r�4 . • • \ tb • S. I 3:fit. a•r.q 0. so., `:ice+ Y t.• _ I a NS!` : t•y � '• I ♦ shy, IEW 1•L' }` _ r _ .1 -as-7-r• �'•�tit. ,`,��` �•~�-�..�, -ate, • �•�S �� ,k``sue"` ♦,1sFq �. `q` q4 , , ' -"•-•- ••• '-�. le •� \\\ cots 'Ant .•.• e .." h SliCk 1 /,_ .) r .: • • • MA I re • • • �, c` s. \. 554; s ' s...: .; •` . . .w•.s T.• • St 1../ \Owe. IM L` thee le / Q4.. j. `---- `• %• I • t j o i It• • It s IS Pte, s'. b••• •%,...t _�r 4 aa_. t. ila. - -` z - If l r• :lei �4... Site tie r J` Jr 7 -I.` _ ` ' It G AIL .�a• �c�£a as ,• w , ,. 4 .,et' •pto� `ace it f el IOTA '_ -._ 7 s/ El to ,..•R-OKE q Influenced k g{Cs , .ir e e r_- 0 x n'_ Development: \, \ e)b.: k 1 .."1/4—••--as, `;.,, .-- \,r. + • 1 % .SSI M 71's �•,l \ a EXHIBIT 2 - COMPARISON OF CONDITIONS In )te Area De Kalb County ) Newton County Monroe Count, General Features Number of Houses Nearby t 100 t 50 ± 25 Proximity of Closest Houses to Property Abutting 1200' Across Highway E Railroad Proximity of Closest House to Quarry 1200' 1800' 1500' Distance to Nearest Town 3 miles (Lithonia) 2 1/2 miles (Covington) 8 1/2 miles (Forsyth) Distance to Shared Highway Abutting 1/4 mile Abutting Distance to Interstate 3 1/2 miles (i-20) 2 miles (1-20) 1 3/4 miles (i-475) Type of Housing Medium to large sized Medium sized Medium to large sized Single family-stick built Single family-stick built Single family-stick built Other Types of Uses Vacant - Developing Vancant with some rural housing Vacant with some rural housing areas nearby nearby housing nearby Quarry Conditions Air Pollution None noted or reported. None Noted. Crushing Ops. in Pit; NA Crushing ops. t 1/2 mile from units. .•1/2 mile from units. Traffic Congestion Minor - Rock Chapel Rd. to Lithonia Minor - Cook rd./01d Atlanta Rd. None now. Extremely light is 2 lanes, good condition. to 1-20 is 2 lanes, good condition. traffic on US 41 - 2 lanes good condition. Noise Pollution Some residents occasionally hear faint None noted. NA Blasts. No other noted or reported. Vibration Minor amount noted at noon blasting None noted. NA in closest unit. Visual Pollution Quarry buffered with heavy woods. Quarry buffered with wooded areas Proposed quarry to be buffered One view down a ravine from Rock and open space. No view from with berms and wood areas. Chapel Road visible. houses. I ) EXHIBIT 3 - CEN )DATA COMPARISON Area Census Tracts - Newton County Monroe County Factor De Kalb County S • Average Annual Percent Change 1960 n% 1970 d% 1980 11% 1960 4% 1970 4% 1980 A% 1960 .6% 1970 A % 1980 d % Median Price of Housing Unit 6000 - 13800 13.0 46825 29.3 7200 - 11300 5.7 32800 19.0 7600 - 10400 3.7 28951 17.8 Annual % - New Occupants Owner Occupied Last 2 Years 15.2 13.6 9.8 9.3 12.1 8.9 6.8 NA 7.5 Previous 3 Years 7.6 5.2 3.9 6.8 5.4 1.9 5.0 NA 7.5 Tenure Statis S % S % % % % S x Owner Occupied 1244 69.5 1648 69.8 3548 70.7 2875 50.7 4992 65.7 8199 75.0 1334 50.8 1862 62.8 3350 71.8 Renter Occupied 547 30.5 712 30.2 1467 29.3 2792 49.3 2611 34.3 2777 25.3 1292 49.2 1105 37.2 1317 28.2 Vacant Units Total 39 2.1 65 2.8 279 5.6 681 12.0 522 6:7 1068 9.7 339 12.9 248 8.4 241 5.2 Seasonal (S of Total) 1 2.6 2 3.1 4 1.4 329 48.3 139 26.6 232 21.7 59 17.4 0 0.0 88 3.7 Increase in Total Housing Units 1895 - 2427 2.8 5298 11.8 6348 - 8125 2.8 12044 4.8 2965 - 3215 .8 4996 5.5 1 , es EXHIBIT 5 - DEKALB COUNTY ASSESSED VALUES Average Annual Lone 1 1982 1987 Q Value 11 % 1 a 51100 59300 1640 3.2 1 b 53000 61600 1720 3.3 1 c 66300 77100 2160 3.3 1 d 55700 64700 1800 3.2 1 e 67100 77900 2160 3.2 1 f 66300 77000 1980 3.0 v 62400 72500 2020 3.2 1 h 56600 65700 1820 3.2 1 i 57000 66300 1860 3.3 1 j 74300 74800 2100 3.3 Average Zone 1 3.2 Zone 2 2 a 56000 65100 , 1820 3.3 2 b 60600 70500 . 1980 3.3 2 c 55600 64700 1820 3.3 2 d 65200 75800 2120 3.3 2 e 58900 68500 1920 3.3 2 f 74800 87000 2440 3.3 2 g 64500 75000 2100 3.3 - 2 h 55400 64400 2000 3.6 . 2 i 54300 63100 1760 3.2 2 j 53900 62600 1740 3.2 - 2 k 43400 50400 1400 3.2 2 1 62900 73100 2040 3.2 2 m 57900 67300 1880 3.3 2 n 63700 74000 2060 3.2 2 o 60900 70800 1980 3.3 2 p 56000 69400 2680 4.8 2 q 53600 62200 1720 3.2 2 r 55500 64500 1800 3.2 2 s 62700 72900 2040 3.3 2 t 50800 63600 2560 5.0 Average Zone 2 3.4 (s = com. sample) s 1 54900 65600 2140 3.9 s 2 60100 71900 2360 3.9 s 3 58500 69900 2280 3.9 s 4 56000 67000 2200 3.9 Average Comparable 3.9 EXHIBIT 4 VALUES ISON OF VALUE CHANGES Average Annual Dekalb County Newton County Average Annual Average Annual 9.3 % Change % Change 9.4 8.1 8.1 8.6 3.3 9.0 8.7 3.2 8.7 3.4 9.0 3.9 8.6 8.5 8.1 8.0 7.9 7.9 13.6 9.0 N/A 9.1 6.9 N/A 9.0 9.5 9.0 9.0 9.5 6.0 N/A 9.1 4.9 N/A 10.8 5.4 6.9 N/A 9.1 8.9 3.5 N/A 8.6 s EXHIBIT 7 flue Thompson Terrace for Sales to 1986 Total Assessed Value % Annual 2.7 Assessed 7 3.2 Total Value 1 2.7 Amount @ ±7/86 Value % Annual 13 4.5 44,500 63,200 18700/9.58 4.4 7 7 46850 71,300 24450/9.5 5.5 • 43,900 74,300 30400/9.42 7.4 ;7 3.6 38,500 52,700 14200/8.33 4.4 2 7 41,800 55,800 14000/9.17 3.7 62,100 73,200 11100/5.42 3.3 7 10.2 43,900 62,700 . 18800/9.33 4.6 36,000 57,200 • 21200/10 5.9 6 39.2 58,600 67,600 9000/5.58 2.8 1.3 48,500 82,900 34400/8.42 8.4 .4 59,000 = 69,700 10700/1.33 13.6 1.8 51,000 62,000 11000/2.92 7.4 3.8 35,000 68,500 33500/7.33 13.1 45.3 4,'-'00 60,200 18400/10.33 4.3 5b,�O0 67,500 12500/7.08 2.6 49,5C0 71,500 22000/7.83 5.7 59,700 70,600 10900/4.08 4.5 17.1 r-- EXHIBIT 9 - Sales Prices - Quarry Influenced Development DeKalb County - Rock Chapel Area • Unit Prior Sale Current Sale Average Annual ID Date Price Date Price % Change 1. 02039 1/77 46850 9/80 62000 8.8 2. 02040 11/77 38500 4/84 62000 9.5 3. 02042 2/81 62100 6/82 69400 8.8 EXHIBIT 10 Sales Prices - Non-Quarry Influenced Developments DeKalb County - Rock Chapel Area U Prior Sale Current Sale Average Annual ID Date Price Date Price % Change 1. 6807 4/78 42500 12/82 61950 9.8 2. 6857 12/78 43000 6/81 56083 12.2 3. 1076 1/78 36500 1/79 40200 10.1 4. 6819 6/85 63000 5/86 60500 - 4.6 .—, I .A•In rerals research contract report May 1981 • t /'- .C:•SOCIAL+ECONOMIC: AND cLEGAL CONSEQUENCES . .OF~^BLASTING � • IN STRiPMINES ANIJIQUARRIES 1. • • Michael Radnor Durward Holler Catherine Aimone Dimitrios Atmatzidis • Richard Lamm Sumanlra Mukherji Elizabeth Olmsted • Regan Romei Contract JO 285036 .Jorlhwestern University Center for the Interdisciplinary Study of Science and Technology H►BR 3. EAU OF MINES * UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Minerals Environmental Technology PART FOUR • • ANALYSIS,OF BLASTING IMPACTS ON PROPERTY VALUES AROUND A SELECTED SAMPLE OF QUARRIES C -175- -175a— • Aems- ' I. INTRODUCTION The purpose of this analysis is to investigate the impact of quarry blasting on neighboring. residences. Most economists agree that the best indicator of locational desirability is property value. With property value as an indicator, locational desirability can be trans- lated into dollar terms. Property value will reflect any annoyance, risk, or general quality of living in its price tag. If there is a negative impact from quarry blasting, it should be evident in a decline in property values as the plots of land get closer to the quarry. The characteristics making property values ideal indicators of desir- ability also cause the greatest hinderance to their implementation in research. "Prices and rents do not exist in a vacuum. They .are determined by the fluctuations in virtually every other element that influences demand and supply. The influence of these various elements varies from time to time and from community." 1 All other market forces are incorporated into property values. The critical task of this analysis is to try to isolate the impact of the quarry on property values and control for all other possible effects. Quarries were selected because sites could be chosen which would have a relatively high residential density and would have long term site operations, characteristics needed for proper& value analysis. The analysis was designed to control potential non-blasting causes ov variation in market value of homes. Homes were classified according to type of home, dollar value, and interval distances from the quarry sites. The quarries chosen represent differences in geographical loca- tion and size of urban popuation. II. VARIABLES TO CONTROL Table 1 is a list of possible influences on property values. The table is divided into two categories: structural variables and loca— tional variables. Structural variables include: house size (floor area), age, construction material, occupancy, garage size, and lot size. These variables can be controlled by selecting a data scmple that includes only single family residences and then developing housing categories that account for fluctuations in each variable (e.g. : recently built frame ranch with two—car garage) . To control for lot size, houses such as the category above were chosen on only lots of k acre and 11 acre. In a given residential area surrounding a quarry, approximately four to six categories were developed for evaluation, based on site observations. Control for internal structural improvements (such as improved basements, panelling, modern appliances, etc) was not seen as a major requirement, nor would it have been possible within the constraints of this study. Structural variables were controlled -176- TABLE 1 CONDITIONS AFFECTING HOUSING 'COST A. Structural Variables 1. Housing size 2. Age of home 3. Occupancy 4. Lot size 5. ' Construction materials 6. darage B. Locational Variables 1. Neighborhood characteristics a. Terrain b. Street conditions c. Racial mix d. City limits 2. Environmental conditions a. Pollution b. Quarry c. Railroad d. Manufacturing 3. Accessibility a. Central business district b. Schools c. Public transportation d. Major highways 4. Position in neighborhood a. Ne*t to busy street b. Corner lot c. Parks -177- ^ by using housing categories based on a combination of observation and realtors' multiple listings division. Locational variables can be controlled in two ways: 1) by omitting values that are influenced by other variables, and 2) by measuring the effect through the same process used to measure quarry impact, thereby identifying and separating them from the quarry impact. Many locational variables are inherently controlled due to the small sample area from which the data is obtained. The residential area surrounding a quarry is rarely more than a mile in diameter; most homes are the same distance (on any significant level) to the central business district or major highway, etc. The method by which each variable was controlled will be described in the specific quarry data analysis. This process of isolating the quarry impact from other influences was done independently for each quarry location. The study itself was. conducted in a case by case analysis. III. SITE SELECTION The counties and quarry locations were chosen from the Martin-Marrietta report on quarries (1974) which includes a map illustrating population and ,quarry densities by county. Most of the needed information is classified in tax assessment records, by county. Only counties with both a high concentration of quarries and population were considered as sites. Within this listing of high concentration counties, the selection was also based on geographic distribution and town.size, The exact location of the quarries in each county was determined from U.S.G.S. relief maps produced by state governments which are updated regularly. These indicate locations of towns, residential areas, manu- facturing areas, railroads, highways, and quarries. Locating the quarries on these maps provides the information needed for town size, and residential proximity to Quarries. The locations chosen are: Kansas City (Jackson County) , Louisville (Jefferson County) , Rockford (Winnebago County), Dupo (St. Clair County), Chicago (Cook County), and Philadelphia (Bucks County). This sample gives a wide range of town size and geo- graphical distribution. The map findings were validated by vibration consultants who monitor quarry blasting and therefore are familiar with exact locations of both active and inactive quarries, or by quarry companies in the region. When no consulting service was available in a region, a listing of mining companies by state was located in a commercial atlas or Pit and Quarry Directory. Contact with any mining company in the region produced information on location, ownership and activity of all quarries in that region. IV. METHODOLOGY If quarries are to have an impact on property values, homes in close proximity to a quarry should have a lower dollar value than homes of -178- similar structure at a greater distance, given that all other influences are controlled. The method used to test this hypothesis imposes a grid of equal distant gradients upon the U.S.G.S. map of a quarry, thus delineating the residences within each distance interval. These inter- vals are 500 feet, drawn to U.S.C.S. scale, which is approximately the width of a city block. As U.S.G.S. maps show sources of extraneous influences such as manufacturing, railroads and schools, their use is essential. With the aid of a city map, the names of the streets within each interval can be obtained. Three sources of property value information in a community are: 1) tax assessments of property, 2) mortgage values of property obtained from community savings and loan companies, and 3) real estate listings from the multiple listing service. However, there are problems associated with each source. Multiple listing services are officially confidential and not for public use except for purchasing a home. Also, they are renewed either weekly, bi-weekly, or monthly depending on the service, and obsolete listings are disposed of. However, a realtor that carries multiple listings usually has a comparative price listing as well. This is a bi-yearly listing of homes sold, addresses, and prices from the beginning of the calendar year. From these two journals, currently sold homes, addresses, and descriptions can be obtained. This usually yields a fair amount of value if the region investigated is active in the market. A less reliable source of property values is a mortgage bank. In a densely populated area there will often be many savings and loans institutions. Mortgages are confidential and addresses cannot be released, making it difficult to determine the grid in which the house lies. The value becomes even less reliable when entrusting the mortgage officer to place the home in one of the housing structure categories already formulated, ' Therefore, this source was omitted for all but one quarry site. The most consistently reliable and abundant source of property values is from tax assessments. Given the U.S.G.S. map and the plotted grid of the quarry, the same area can be located on a tax assessor's index map. The index map shows an area as it is subdividided with lot sizes and street names. From these maps, index numbers for the individual residences surrounding the quarry at each distance interval can be obtained. These index numbers are listed numerically in the assessor's Platte books along with the corresponding value assessment. These assessments are usually a designated percentage of the market value. Once the specific addresses, their values and locations in the gradient are determined, an additional value source such as a realtor listing is needed. Homes are categorized by addresses in multiple listing services, and can therefore be easily placed in their respective gradient and compared to the assessed valuation of similar property. -179- Once the two sets of values have been obtained, they can be fit into housing categories. Using the divisions given in retail descriptions, categories of property can be formulated by a visual examination of the region. The appearance of the home is judged, accounting for structural ' • variables such as construction, size, age, and garage. Each property value, across all distance intervals, can be categorized in this manner. With the completion of this final step, the value, distance from quarry and house structury category for each plot of land can be determined. V. DATA ANALYSIS Initially property values and all housing variables must be averaged by housing category in all distance intervals. An average by category will show if similar types of homes change in value as the distance from the quarry increases. Also, it will lend information to the correlation of homes' prices and the effect of quarries (e.g. : Whether lower rent houses are less suspect to quarry impact than higher' priced houses). An average of the total number of values across housing categories within distance intervals will indicate whether proximity 'to a quarry has any effect on the type of housing that is built (e.g. : similar housing may not increase or decrease in value as distance from the quarry increases; but the type of home built closer to the quarry may be of lower quality). The values used in the data analysis will be the tax assessments only. As can be seen from Table 2, assessed valuations were found to be far from the list or selling price in many instances. This clearly inii- cates that the assessed value is not an accurate indicator of list price. However, this study concentrates on examining the price dif- ferentials of similar homes in different locations which is a relative analysis. Since tax assessments are a more consistent and extensive data source than real estate listings, they are a more accurate indicator of relative changes. To combine realtor values in the average would distort the figures. The following detailed composites provide the data compiled at each quarry site. CASE 1: St. Clair County, Dupo, Illinois Dupo wad chosen as a sample of a small town. Two quarries were selected for analysis: Columbia and East St. Louis. The quarries are active and in close proximity to the residential centers. A. Structural Variables The housing categories formulated for both the Columbia quarry and East St. Louis quarry are as follows: • TABLE 2 A COMPARISON OF TAX ASSESSMENTS AND REALTOR SALE PRICES House Assessment Realtor Sale Price 1 $39,242 • S63,900 2 ' $41,166 S59,900 3 $58,000 S73,900 4 $17,600 $42,500 5 $15,600 S36,500 6 $16,400 $33,000 7 $15,600 $37,300 -180- -181- (a) Bungalow - older frame structure (older than 5-10 years), no garage. (b) Slightly larger one story frame cottage (older than 5-10 years). (c) Frame or frame and brick one story ranch with carport or no garage, recently built. (d) Recently built (within 5-10 years) brick and frame ranch with enclosed garage. (e) Split level with attached enclosed garage, recently built. All homes are on approximately the same sized plot of land. B. Locational Variables Locational variables were controlled in several ways. Neighborhood characteristics were controlled by the fact that conditions were the same for all residences. Street conditions, terrain, and racial mix were constant throughout the sample. The residences surrounding the Columbia quarry were all within the city limits and the residences surrounding the East St. Louis quarry were all outside the city limits (they do, however, receive city water). Therefore, there is no need for controlling the city limits effect on value; it would not be significant. Since there is no manufacturing, the impact of the railroad was the only environmental condition assessed. A railroad line running north-south lies east of the Columbia quarry. Adjacent to both the railroad and the quarry is the residential area; To measure the rail- road's impact, values of the homes between the railroad and the quarry were plotted by housing category as measured distance from the quarry. The homes adjacent to the railroad yet outside of the range of the quarry and independent of other variables were measured by distance from the railroad (Graph 1). Measured independently, the railroad had no consistent effect on the increase or decrease of property values. For the homes between the railroad and the quarry, it might be hypothesized that those most centralized between the two would have the highest pro- perty value. This was evident only in the case of the (c) type home. From the graph, it can be determined that the railroad has no significant impact on property values. Accessibility to the central business district, schools, or public transportation was not a factor in property values due to the proximity of all homes to any destination listed above. There was only one school and all residences tested were within walking distance. No plots of land chosen for sample were on a busy street or corner lot so as to eliminate those possible effects. -182- With all other potential impacts controlled, the effect of the quarry itself could be independently measured (Graph 2, Graph 3). If these graphs can be taken literally it seems as though lower rent housing such as categories (a) and (b) experience very little impact from the quarry as evidenced by fairly straight lines. However, in categories (c) and (d) there is evidence that the values increase as distance increases. It is not conclusive because category (c) 's slope drops at the last value, but the general slope could be significant. This is further warranted by Graph 3 which exhibits a declining home average value as distance increases from the quarry. We do note that the number of upper category homes is small. CASE 2: Street Road Quarry: Bucks County, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Street Road quarry is located in a suburb of Philadelphia called Lower Southhampton. The quarry is located on the Philadelphia city limits, thereby classifying it as being in a densely populated metropolitan area. A. Structural Variables The housing categories at this site were categorized as follows: • (a) Small frame medium aged cottage with no garage. (b) Frame ranch with carport. (c) Split level frame and brick construction with enclosed one car garage. (d) Raised ranch, frame and brick construction with enclosed two car garage. (e) Bi-level larger two story, mostly brick construction with two car garage. B. Locational Variables Other potential influences in the area were practically non-existent. All the homes were in a quiet wooded area, with equal accessibility to main thoroughfares, schools, and public transportation. All homes were within Lower Southhampton city limits. The highwayrunning north- south adjacent to the quarry could have an impact, so the sample was restricted to homes off the road. Hence, all homes selected were subject to similar levels of highway noise. A comparison of property values for homes at increasing distant intervals from streets indicated no increase in cost. This further substantiates the minimal effect of the highway on values (Graph 5). • The quarry's effect independent of other influences had no consistent impact on the surrounding property values (Graph 4, Graph 5). • • I • -183- v-� CASE 3: Materials Service Quarry: Cook County, Lyons, Illinois The Materials Service quarry in Lyons (a suburb of Chicago) is another example of a quarry in a densely populated urban setting. A. tStructural Variables The following housing categories were devised to control structural variables in this suburb of Chicago: (a) One story frame bungalow, no garage, aged. (b) One story frame ranch, carport, built within the last 20 years. (c) One story frame and brick larger sized ranch, carport-one car garage. (d) Split level frame and brick, one car garage. (e) Bi-level, larger sized frame and brick, two car garage. With exception of category (a), all homes were built in relatively the same time period. B. Locational Variables All the homes are in the same neighborhood and share similar facilities (e.g.: streets, terrain, city limits).. Heavy manufacturing exists south of the sample but all properties chosen (east and west) are parallel to that manufacturing area. None of the plots in the data sample rest on corner lots or busy streets, thereby eliminating that influence. ' Accessibility to schools and central business district are significantly equal. As the distance increases from the quarry in a western direction, the property values show no increase (Graph 6), but 4n the eastern direction the property values increase slightly. Since they do not increase west- wardly but do easterly, the increase is probably due to the forest preserve that lies 4500' to the east of the quarry. The closer the homes are to the preserve and its border river, the more desirable the homes become. This may show that a moderating variable such as a river bank or preserve has a greater effect on property values than a quarry. The average value of the homes decreases up to 1500' in both directions and begins an upward slope in costs as the property approaches a distance of 250U'; this is inexplainable. CASE 4: Martin-Marietta Quarry: Jefferson County, Louisville, Kentucky The quarry is located on the outskirts of Louisville in the suburb of Anchorage. The residences around the quarry consists of large plantation type homes ranging from 14 acre plots to 10 acre plots. They are older, • -184- • ^ larger homes, more-so than the average sample. This adds diversity to the sample but presents problems of consistency. There are not a large number of one, two, or five acre plots to compare by distance. The best results in the sample came from 1f acre plots. In the h acre category there is no indication of any consistent correlation between distance and values (Graph 8). There does seem to be a correlation between types of homes built and proximity to the quarry (Graph 9). No other significant variables existed in the sample. The terrain was constant and it was an area of minimal development. CASE 5: Blacktop Quarry: Winnebago County, Rockford, Illinois The Blacktop Quarry is within the Rockford city limits. This constitutes a quarry location in a medium level of population and in a small urban center. However, the residences surrounding the quarry were in fairly close proximity to each other. A. Structural Variables The following housing categories were devised to control structural variables for the Blacktop Quarry: (a) One story frame bungalow, no garage, aged. (b) Two story bungalow, separate garage. (c) Recently built (within 10 years) ranch, frame and brick. (d) Ranch, mostly brick construction, attached two car garage. (e) Bi-level, two car garage. B. Locational Variables All of the neighborhood characteristics had a consistent effect on the home values; so they would have no relative effect on prices except for the terrain of the northern sample which was wooded. This may have increased the homes' values relative to the western or eastern homes as indicated on Graph 10. In general, however, property values in all three /directions consistently increase as distance from the quarry increases. The high cost homes (categories (c) and (d)) exhibit more of an increase than the lower cost home (b) . This was also evident in the Dupo quarries. CASE 6: 63rd and Route 50 Quarry, Jackson County, Kansas City, Missouri • The 63rd and Route 50 quarry is located in the metropolitan area of Kansas City just outside of the city limits. It could be classified as a fairly densely populated suburb. A. Structural Variables The housing categories at this site were figured as follows: -185- (a) Small frame ranch with no garage. • (b) Larger ranch, frame and brick, carport'or separate garage. (c) Split level, frame with one-two car garage. (d) Larger split level, brick and frame, two car garage. (e) Large two story, mostly brick, two car garage, built within last 5 years. ' B. Locational Variables The neighborhood terrain and street conditions were constant for all homes. The neighborhood is mixed racially which would affect the resale value of the homes only relatively in respect to other areas, not in respect to other homes within the neighborhood. The accessibility to the central business district and major highways are equal and no lots on a busy street or corner lot were chosen. Graph 12 indicates that all categories of homes east of the quarry increased in cost as distance increased. High cost residences to the north of the quarry rose in value while lower cost homes declined in value. East of the quarry, the average cost of all the homes rose as the distance from the quarry increased. This may be due to the fact that the expressway runs north-south adjacent to the quarry. The homes north of the quarry run parallel to the expressway. The highway impact could be greater than the quarry impact thereby causing the inconsistent and horizontal results in Graph 12 for the northern homes. The homes east of the quarry exhibit very conclusive findings to support the hypothesis that quarries have an effect on property values. CASE 7: Holmes and Bannister Quarry: Jackson County, Kansas City, Ho. - This quarry is inside the Kansas City limits in a densely populated urban area. A. Structural Variables (a) Frame ranch, aged, no garage. (b) Recently built (within 10 years), ranch, no garage. (c) Split level, brick and frame, two car garage. (d) Bi-level, recently built (within 10 years), brick and frame, two car garage. (e) Large new bi-level, recently built (within 5 years), brick and frame, two car garage. B. Locational Variables No manufacturing exists in the area and all the homes are within Kansas • -186- City limits and schools. No values were chosen from busy streets or corner lots. Graphs 14 and 15 exhibit the most conclusive findings of the entire quarry sample. Averaged by category, almost all values increased as distance from the quarry increased. Categories (a) and (b) to the west of the quarry decline from 1000' - 1500', but this could be due to the proximity of the divided highway 2500' to the west or the creek that runs next to it. The average value of all homes in both directions increases as distance from the quarry increases. VI. CONCLUSIONS The market for housing is by nature a local market. Competition for homes occurs strictly within towns or metropolitan areas, and because . of this, broad conclusions or national averages about a quarry's. impact are difficult to make. Influences will have varying effects from community to community. In the findings given, this seems to be the case. For example, at the Kansas City site the findings suggest a possible impact of quarries on property values, while at the Phila— delphia site property values were inversely related to distance from the quarry. If a conclusion can be reached from the graphs, it would have to be that blasting quarries do not have a significant effect on property values. Even when housing costs increased over distance, the slope vas very gradual on the average. The presence of a quarry in a community, given the findings of this analysis, does not represent much of a cost to the community. When analyzed from the perspective • of cost of homes in relation to the distance from a quarry, average cost of homes 500' away was not significantly different from homes 2500' away (Graph 16). In summary, this analysis finds no consistent relationship between quarries and property values, a finding which suggests that other variables tend to be the dominant determinants of property values.. It may be noted that local realtors interviewed during the field research tended to reach the same basic conclusion, i.e. , that "quarries may have an impact_on housing costs, but if they do, it is,minimal com- pared to all other influences that affect the desirability of a home." isREDL Clean Air Campaign Page 1 of 1 Home Campaigns Alerts News Chapters Links About Search BLUE RIDGE ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE LEAGUE Clean Air ASPHALT PLANTS PINEOLA PROPERTY STUDY SHOWS ADVERSE IMPACTS FROM ASPHALT PLANT The Blue Ridge Environmental Defense released a study showing the adverse impacts on property values and quality of life around an asphalt plant in Pineola, North Carolina. The study shows reductions in property values near the plant of up to 56%. Avery County tax adjustment officials used distance from Maymead Materials, Inc. asphalt plant and noxious odorous emissions as the bases for property value devaluation. The largest percentage drop was recorded on property located directly across the road from the plant. The largest dollar loss of$45,300 was at a church adjacent to the plant. The study documents property value losses up to 3,200 feet from the plant. Pineola resident Dale Thompson and many of his neighbors sought tax relief when the asphalt plant effectively reduced their use and enjoyment of their homes and land. Mr. Thompson cited particulate pollution, reduced visibility and vile odors as reasons why he and his family can no longer spend time outdoors comfortably at either recreation or work. Many asphalt plant neighbors blame Maymead and the state for the onset of asthma and other respiratory problems. Other adverse health impacts include frequent nausea and psychological distress. The Pineola experience with property devaluation give us only a small part of the picture. Before any more permits are given to asphalt plants, states' health officials must conduct epidemiological studies around such facilities. It's simply absurd to say that asphalt plants have no impact. List of property values around Maymead Materials asphalt plant Map of properties surrounding MaymeadMatcrials asphalt plant (posted:3/8/2002) Asphalt Plants EXHIBIT htto://www.bredl.ore/air/mavmead propertvstudv.htm 11/6/03 r;REDL Asphalt Plants Page 1 of 1 BLUE RIDGE ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE LE PO Box 88 Glendale Springs,Borth Carolina 28629 www.bredl.org Phone 336-982-2691—Fax 336-982-2954—Email bred) Properties Devalued Around Pineola Asphalt PI From Avery County Tax Department Data January 26, valuation valuation dollar percent Parcel ID No. before after difference drop notes 184400500955 31,800 30,800 1,000 3 95 BER ADJ for location and odor 184400512610 121,400 76,100 45,300 37 1996 BER ADJ plant location 184400513659 50,900 34,900 16,000 31 1996 BER ADJplant loc, BER 97 ADS 184400501543 32,600 25,700 6,900 21 1996 BER ADJ Plant loc, BER 97 no change 184400406450 76,800 69,100 7,700 10 1996 BER ADJ plant loc 184400406450 23,800 16,900 6,900 29 1996 BER ADJ plant loc 184400406450 34,000 24,800 9,200 27 1996 BER ADJ plant loc 184400418234 40,600 26,200 14,400 35 1996 BER ADJ plant loc 184400418349 9,900 4,400 5,500 56 1996 BER ADJ plant loc 184400417089 32,300 24,700 7,600 24 1996 BER ADJ PLANT LOC 184400502356 12,300 9,300 3,000 24 1996 BER ADJ PLANT LOC. 184400406243 20,800 14,500 6,300 30 1996 BER ADJ PLANT LOC. 184300596581 71,400 53,200 18,200 25 94 PUV All parcels total $148,000 loss 27% drop Asphalt production increased after Maymead Materials, Inc. acquired and expanded an existing plant January 24, 1995 150 tons/hour and 378,000 tons/year, new state air permit (R6) issued for change in March 29, 1996 325 tons/hour and 650,000 tons/year, new state air permit (R8) issued for expansion Chart compiled from NC DAQ permit files and Avery County Board of Equalization Review(HER)appraisal da htty://www.bredl.org/air/flyers/Pineola/index.html 11/6/03 Page 1 of 1 — r. � _ ' , r' r i' , 1 - l ,( j1 N � �, Ci� % l / v� i ! ``` �C / ��Y�/ it i`�/�1�` 7---` J �i 1` tt ti r---, et a i Ci /irk. / 4: hSr e ,.> Q F. p / �1 C-4"�4 11� /'[ � /f4 r A {. 1 Vicy f 1111 r ` \ r// y ,/ ( -/ rf \ _c). , _C r (.,t �v©��, . 1 \1rAr • .r- 4:,-.5k li tit t.frcr.:4k' l44 !' r 1 ' r _ , , I ./,‘ � wi. II(' !f: : httn-//www bredl.nra/images3/Pinenlaman.in¢ 11/6/03 Hello