|
1050 S Plymouth Ave:
(3) Family: Apt 1: 2 bed/1 bath Apt 2: 1 bed/ 1 bath Apt 3: 2 bed/ 1 bath Total Monthly Rents: $2150 Separate Utilites Distance from UofR: 3 Blocks Appraised at: $80,000 |
1058 S Plymouth Ave:
(2) Family: Apt 1: 2 bed/1 bath Apt 2: 2 bed/ 1 bath Total Monthly Rents: $1700 Separate Utilites Distance from UofR: 3 Blocks Appraised at: $53,000 |
|
|
I believe the values that were assigned to both properties are significantly inaccurate. To follow is my evaluation of the appraisal and my suggested adjustments to arrive at an accurate value.
Pictured above is 1069 S Plymouth Ave, a duplex located directly across the street from the appraised properties. This property was pending at the time of the appraisal. It was listed by Nothnagle. The following information pertains to that property, all of which can be confirmed:
-It was listed for $84,900
-It sold in a weekend close to asking.
-It has (2) two bedroom apartments
-It has not had any updates in at least 20 years.
-One apartment is vacant.
-One apartment is rented for $500 per month.
The two properties being evaluated are in far better shape and bring in much more revenue, yet are valued lower than this property across the street. I understand that the sale had not closed at the time of the appraisal, however it certainly is a very strong indicator of relative value. A 3 family that generates $2150 and a duplex that generates $1700 should be valued notably higher than the above property.
-It was listed for $84,900
-It sold in a weekend close to asking.
-It has (2) two bedroom apartments
-It has not had any updates in at least 20 years.
-One apartment is vacant.
-One apartment is rented for $500 per month.
The two properties being evaluated are in far better shape and bring in much more revenue, yet are valued lower than this property across the street. I understand that the sale had not closed at the time of the appraisal, however it certainly is a very strong indicator of relative value. A 3 family that generates $2150 and a duplex that generates $1700 should be valued notably higher than the above property.
There were some mistakes that were made in evaluating the information contained in the chosen comps, but rather than spend time on those, I think it is better to focus on the much more significant issue, which is the comps that were chosen. The wrong comps were chosen.
The following comps were used for 1058 S Plymouth Ave:
Rental Comps: Sales Comps: Symbol on Map:
(not used as rental comp) 95 Kirkland Ave AC1 (appraiser comp 1)
632 Thurston 632 Thurston AC2 213 Magnolia Ave 213 Magnolia Ave AC3
172 Bartlett St (not used as sales comp) AC4
I am not sure why 95 Kirkland was used as a rental comp and not used as a sale comp as it did sell recently, for a price that is higher than the 172 Bartlett St sale comp that replaced it in the report.
The following comps were used for 1050 S Plymouth Ave:
Rental Comps: Sales Comps: Symbol on Map:
4 Willowbank Place 4 Willowbank Place AC5
317 Reynolds St 317 Reynolds St AC6
(not used as rental comp) 101 Warwick Ave AC7
128 Genesee Park Blvd (not used as sales comp) AC8
It is noteworthy that 128 Genesee Park Blvd was included as a rental comp but not a sales comp. 128 Genesee Park could be an appropriate sales comp , but excluding it as a sales comp does not allow a rent multiplier to be created because the sale price is not included. 128 Genesee Park Blvd sold in Feb of 2017 for $120,000 and both properties we are having appraised generate more income than that property, are in better condition and are closer to the UofR. 128 Genesee Park Blvd was not included as a sale comp for 1058 S Plymouth Ave because the appraiser capped his search for comp sales at $100,000. That is why none of the many much more appropriate comps that I will provide shortly were never included.
Below is a map that shows the locations of the comps that were used (AC) and a few of the comps that should have been used (GC).
Rental Comps: Sales Comps: Symbol on Map:
(not used as rental comp) 95 Kirkland Ave AC1 (appraiser comp 1)
632 Thurston 632 Thurston AC2 213 Magnolia Ave 213 Magnolia Ave AC3
172 Bartlett St (not used as sales comp) AC4
I am not sure why 95 Kirkland was used as a rental comp and not used as a sale comp as it did sell recently, for a price that is higher than the 172 Bartlett St sale comp that replaced it in the report.
The following comps were used for 1050 S Plymouth Ave:
Rental Comps: Sales Comps: Symbol on Map:
4 Willowbank Place 4 Willowbank Place AC5
317 Reynolds St 317 Reynolds St AC6
(not used as rental comp) 101 Warwick Ave AC7
128 Genesee Park Blvd (not used as sales comp) AC8
It is noteworthy that 128 Genesee Park Blvd was included as a rental comp but not a sales comp. 128 Genesee Park could be an appropriate sales comp , but excluding it as a sales comp does not allow a rent multiplier to be created because the sale price is not included. 128 Genesee Park Blvd sold in Feb of 2017 for $120,000 and both properties we are having appraised generate more income than that property, are in better condition and are closer to the UofR. 128 Genesee Park Blvd was not included as a sale comp for 1058 S Plymouth Ave because the appraiser capped his search for comp sales at $100,000. That is why none of the many much more appropriate comps that I will provide shortly were never included.
Below is a map that shows the locations of the comps that were used (AC) and a few of the comps that should have been used (GC).
It is clear from the map that values of properties in close proximity to the UofR and Strong Memorial Hospital are notably higher that those that are not. Below I provide a screen shot from a realtor showing nearby sale prices via the MLS. Please note that both properties being appraised generate more income and are in better condition that every property on the list below. It is not clear why comps that are obviously in a different rental market would be used. Why go so far to look for comps when there are so many very close by??
At the time of the appraisal I did not provide the long list of MLS comps, but I did provide the two below which I was aware of that were not on the MLS as I assumed the appraiser would look at all the available comps in the MLS system.
1212-1214 S Plymouth Ave (3 blocks down the road): Duplex. (2) three bed apts. Sold in Dec 2016 for $190,000. (GC2 on the map)
1206-1208 S Plymouth Ave (3 Blocks down the road): Duplex. (2) three bed apts. Sold in March 2017 for $205,000. (GC3 on the map)
Below are the deeds as proof of the sales mentioned above
1212-1214 S Plymouth Ave (3 blocks down the road): Duplex. (2) three bed apts. Sold in Dec 2016 for $190,000. (GC2 on the map)
1206-1208 S Plymouth Ave (3 Blocks down the road): Duplex. (2) three bed apts. Sold in March 2017 for $205,000. (GC3 on the map)
Below are the deeds as proof of the sales mentioned above
|
|
To drive home the point that the comps used are not comparing apples to apples, I have provided some pictures of the comps that the appraiser used and some pictures of the properties that are being appraised. It is clear that they are very different. I was emailed the MLS link by a realtor to the comps that were used so I could see the interior pictures. Our units cater to graduate students and medical residents,as do many of the housing units along S Plymouth Ave. The comp properties do not cater to the same market and or not of similar quality.
Pictures of comparables used.
Pictures of properties being appraised.
Below I applied the techniques that were used in the appraisal on the comps that should have been used to determine an accurate value for the subject properties.
