09-28-15 Agenda, Packet & Committee Meeting Notice

Home Browse Search

CORRELATION AND CONCLUSION 1 COST APPROACH NOT DEVELOPED INCOME APPROACH $254,000.00 DIRECT SALES COMPARISON APPROACH $244,000.00 Due to the age of the subject property and the difficulty in attempting to estimate depreciation, the Cost Approach was not developed. Realistically speaking, no i sophisticated buyer would consider buying the subject building based on the cost of reproduction less depreciation to arrive at a purchase price. In developing the Income Approach, I attempted to be very realistic of all aspects of the subject property in establishing an income producing potential. I took into consideration, the size of the building, the locational aspects, and the limited potential of fmding a renter who would lease this entire facility. I concluded that in all likelihood, the only potential renter for this entire property would be an Hispanic Fraternal Group with similarities to the existing PNA group I also concluded that the number of potential renters for this property would be extremely limited. I also felt my projection of Vacancy and Rent Loss and Expenses were very realistic. Any knowledgeable investor would tend to give strong emphasis to this approach. In developing the Direct Sales Comparison Approach I was very frank to admit that existing market data was virtually nonexistent, and I made a very thorough search of the market and found three sales that I felt did have applicability to-the subject property. I felt my analysis and adjustments for these properties were realistic, and my Value Indication from this approach was valid. After considering both the Income Approach and the Direct Sales Comparison Approach that were very close Value Indications, I have correlated between the two and arrived at a conclusion that the Indicated Value as of the date of this Appraisal, July 7, 2015 is $250,000. 3 INDICATED VALUE $250,000.00 32 9