The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About890332.tiff .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. igeL-'Chi 7.S VACL. de 74/M- i Cl/ 3/t a o C/n ,L Alf r CIS 6� /0->x, /)7) cr: ' As 'J (14. 40 -1-: /az c a ini ' I 4, WL.,_ TJ Aci de g, t 1 /,?(..- Y�k--) 3 ,x ))/972 ili alpi.., ..-)ra ( s S. e/19 r I gt-- , r 1 S aorreI - 4,- L- L1614cl� s - eln O_ L1a t.6? Ic . 6 (-- AL7. - `fir. �r ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO. EASTMAN KODAK COMPANY WELD COUNTY BOARD OF EQUALIZATION APPRAISAL REAL ESTATE WINDSOR, COLORADO 89r332 CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS 489 DEVON PARK DRIVE WAYNE, PENNSYLVANIA 19087 ENTERPRISE Phone: (215) 687-5855 FAX: (215) 971-0760 APPRAISAL CO. February 15 , 1989 Mr. David Finnman Property Tax Accountant Corporate Tax Department Eastman Kodak Company 343 State Street Rochester, NY 14650 Dear Mr. Finnman: In accordance with your request, we are pleased to submit our appraisal of the real estate of the Kodak Colorado Division located in Windsor, Colorado. It is our professional sional opinion that the Fair Market Value of the subject prop- erty as of June 30, 1988 is as follows: Sixty-Four Million Dollars ( $64,000,000) This appraisal is subject to the Limiting Conditions set forth within the report. To the best of our knowledge or be- lief, all statements and information contained in this report are true and correct, and no important facts have knowingly been withheld. This analysis was made by the use of methods and procedures conforming to ethical standards of practice. Neither the employment to make, nor the compensation for the appraisal is contingent upon values reported. Enterprise Appraisal Co. has no present, prospective, direct or indirect interest in the property herein appraised. Respectfully submitted, ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO. f�, r J. k C. Eme - , ASA, CA-C, CMI esid= t DIRECT COMMUNICATION LINES IN THE EO11.OWING CITIES NEW YORK I:HILADELPHIA 9C5RIN .l ,J .fiC" - 'LI.YLi.4h .. 9 CHIC4G0 CINCINNA'� I R,Lq: J CIf35 41:_u5 IYPIii ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL co.j TABLE OF CONTENTS 0 PAGE GENERAL INFORMATION Purpose of Appraisal 1 Definition of Fair Market Value 1 Limiting Conditions of Appraisal 2 Summary of Salient Facts & Conclusions 3 Sales History, Ownership & Occupancy 4- 5 DESCRIPTION Subject Photographs 6-19 Subject Plot Plan 20 Description of Land 21 Description of Improvements 22-25 VALUATION Highest & Best Use & Appraisal Procedure 26 Land Valuation 27 Cost Approach 28-41 Income Approach 42-45 Market Data Approach 46-56 Correlation & Conclusion of Value 57 ADDENDA Professional Qualifications Market Support Data Economic Depreciation Study ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO. 0 GENERAL INFORMATION 1 1 ENTERPRISE APPRAIBALCUJ PURPOSE OF APPRAISAL ® The purpose of this appraisal is to estimate the Fair Market Value of the subject property. The Fair Mar- ket Value conclusions of the appraisal provide a basis for determining an equitable Ad Valorem tax assessment. DEFINITION OF FAIR MARKET VALUE Fair Market Value is hereby defined and qualified as the most probable price in terms of money which a property should bring in a competitive and open market under all conditions requisite to a fair sale, the buyer and seller, each acting prudently, knowledgeably, and assuming the price is not affected by undue stimulus. Implicit in this definition is the consummation of a sale as of a specified date and the passing of title from seller to buyer under conditions whereby: (a) buyer and seller are typically motivated. (b) both parties are well informed or well advised, and each acting in what they consider their own best interest. (c) a reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open market. (d) payment is made in cash or its equivalent. (e) financing, if any, is on terms generally avail- able in the community at the specified date and typical for the property type in its locale. (f) the price represents a normal consideration for the property sold unaffected by special financing amounts and/or terms, services, fees, costs, or credits incurred in the transaction. 1 2 ENTERPRISE APPRAMALCa I LIMITING CONDITIONS OF APPRAISAL ( 1) The values exhibited in this appraisal report are considered free and clear of all title defects and encum- brances, and no responsibility is assumed in respect to ownership. ( 2) We have not made any engineering, OSHA, or environ- mental surveys of the property, and the value exhibited assumes no liability related to same; and no responsi- bility is assumed in respect to these matters. ( 3) This appraisal was made with the aid of data pro- vided by representatives of the subject company and other outside sources which are believed to be correct, but no responsibility is assumed for the content or accuracy of data furnished or omitted by others. ( 4) No responsibility is assumed for matters of a legal nature or character. ( 5) We have made a physical inspection of the subject property. Physical changes occurring after the date of valuation are not reflected in this report. ( 6) The purpose and/or function of this appraisal and the value conclusions at a given date have been described within this report. The appraisal content or conclusions should not be considered applicable to alternate purposes, functions, types of values, or different dates. ( 7) This appraisal was made in accordance with our con- tract for appraisal services. We will keep all supporting notes on file for a period of five years. Conferences and/or expert testimony to support the valuations is guaranteed, but it is available only after the initiation of a separate contract for such services at our then cur- rent per diem rates plus expenses. ( 8) We have exhibited in our Addenda the professional qualifications of the officers or managers either signing and/or reviewing this report. The qualifications of individual participating appraisers are available upon request. ( 9) The findings expressed in this report are prohibited from being used in a solvency or fairness opinion by others or in a proxy or other statements without written consent by the designated officers of Enterprise Appraisal Co. either signing or included in the qualifications with- in the appraisal report. 6/88Y lift 1 ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO. Jo SUMMARY OF SALIENT FACTS & CONCLUSIONS Location: County Road 66, Windsor, Colorado Present Use of Property: Manufacturing Facility Present Zoning of Property: I-1, Industrial Conforming: Yes Land Area: 329 Acres or 14,331,240 Square Feet Land to Building Ratio: 4 . 63/1 Building Area: Ground 2, 126,790 Square Feet Other Levels 965,770 Square Feet Total 3, 092, 560 Square Feet Average Number of Building Stories: 1 . 45 Building Construction: Metal Clad, Steel Frame; Masonry & Steel Frame; Reinforced Concrete Area Allocation: 13% Office, 70% Manufacturing, 17% Warehouse Vintage: 1971/77 Effective Age: 15 Years Building Condition: Good Assessed & Equalized Values: Assessed 100% Equalized Value Value Land $ 209, 900 $ 723 , 800 Buildings & Improvements 27 , 672,750 95,425, 285 Totals $27, 882,650 $96, 149, 085 1988 Total Annual Taxes : $1,870 , 842 or 1. 9% of Equalized Value Summary of Value Conclusions: Land $ 725, 000 Buildings & Improvements 63 , 275, 000 Total $64 , 000, 000 ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL°QJ SALES HISTORY, OWNERSHIP & OCCUPANCY O Kodak Colorado is the Company' s primary manufac- turing center for medical x-ray film and aluminum litho- graph printing plates. It also engages in some of the stages of manufacturing a variety of other photographic films and papers. Established in 1968, it is the Com- pany' s only sensitized goods manufacturing facility in the United States outside of Rochester, New York. While the Rochester operations have continued to grow, diversify, and keep abreast of the latest tech- nologies, studies in the 1960 ' s showed that Kodak would have to expand its manufacturing capacity for photographic films and papers to better serve customer needs. The selection of the current site near Windsor, Colorado was the culmination of an exhaustive three-year search through much of the mid and far west. The loca- tion offered an abundance of attractive features: the availability of a large parcel of land providing room for growth, an adequate water supply, a good transportation and distribution network, an excellent labor market, nearby universities and vocational schools, and a variety of attractive residential communities offering culture, recreation, and scenic beauty. Of the 2, 800 acres owned by Kodak Colorado, some 600 acres have been developed industrially. Nine major build- ings and numerous smaller service structures provide more 5 ENTERPRISE APPBAIBALCQ I SALES HISTORY, OWNERSHIP & OCCUPANCY J than three million square feet of area for manufacturing operations, administrative offices, support facilities, distribution, and storage. Most of the remaining land is used for agricultural purposes or held aside for wildlife. ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CQ ♦® DESCRIPTION " l ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CQ ♦ I� AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH .' e r • J' a • ; l !4y*. I II ('Y'({ 1 j a dryf i F 'i y 1 If 'P ,. 9 It,' j " i r Y' r - R tiriW ". 41 g ii` a '� .� �- III ( 9r �F i ( f gg Y ~ L yy G� III - a. IR { .^" ':1 .; '',1;ti -)d Ir.4. • t . ,! ! " E r Y '. . it p 7' -• ----- { kk. I fi:'.<, fur �.-rs, ti 't r .i I I) • I, ijja v.4 . .,.. • 1, , , . a • ₹ "'� ., r ' ,! dSt" T � Itf{y4 n ktto �.t k .. if t ' , -t l ,$ Mkt }'4 14'1,4F ,tf EAi k § "Jr e ;§,T+', sQ' i • al.:, a { "I., r m ;., 7 f � ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO. SUBJECT PHOTOGRAPHS Jo a - e- .��:. .. Building C-06, Fire Station f t$6 I � 3 L:* I:4 1' - _ - a- rik r View of North End of Building C-06, Fire Station 8 ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CQ SUBJECT PHOTOGRAPHS v Building C-11, Administration 444 --_- Building C-13, Finishing 9 ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL ca SUBJECT PHOTOGRAPHS Building C-16, Finishing tl .. ? - s Building C-17, Refrigeration Complex 10 [ . ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO. SUBJECT PHOTOGRAPHS --ma. Building C-20, Distribution Warehouse A , • M - ...* Building C-20, Distribution Warehouse 11 6 .r v ENTERPRISE YAPPRAISALco.J SUBJECT PHOTOGRAPHS - - F J y. f Buildings C-20, C-28, & C-29, Distribution Warehouse, Refrigeration Building, & Plastics Molding cria. r_ .„.„, R I C Building C-29, Plastics Molding 12 _ `. ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO. SUBJECT PHOTOGRAPHS ' I Building C-30, Utility IMMINIM I I _wme 4 . ... Bulding C-32, Pump House & Tanks 13 ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL Ca SUBJECT PHOTOGRAPHS .J • • eO MGM e - v i l •fl. S.gjj, .-w' �v�YY\�• _. r.� _ Building C-33, Power Station R• - . _3• ,tom -.6 tom, Buildings C-41, C-42, & C-43, Emulsion Manufacturing, Sensitizing-Technical Services, Warehouse 14 r, 'vim ENTERPRISE APPPAIBALCQ SUBJECT PHOTOGRAPHS • iStn iRer C • . Building C-42, Sensitizing-Technical Services • Building C-48, Utilties 15 1 74, ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO.] SUBJECT PHOTOGRAPHS Jo gll 4 NC .>.. ^03 .. f • yam Building C-50, Support Manufacturing I. is Ili _ 1 iUE IIINiI� -Building C-50, Support Manufacturing 16 ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO. SUBJECT PHOTOGRAPHS co?r x tea.aa•• " • y J.-•. • .,r - .' %•'' Building C-50, Support Manufacturing . , I - f " - - Building C-60, Lithographic Plate Manufacturing 17 0 ',r� .,' Ai t ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL caJ SUBJECT PHOTOGRAPHS " --,Y� '. < S Building C-60 Lithographic Plate Manufacturing 18 _ ,,, „4V ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL co. SUBJECT PHOTOGRAPHS • / • I ; Building C-70, Power House T 19 ENTERPRISE errn&cev.co. SUBJECT PHOTOGRAPHS arm- 4 y. Oil Storage Tanks (Not being Used) •74 I ttt41;1 I ENTE RPRISE APPRAISAL CO. .O SUBJECT PLOT PLAN 20 KODAK COLORADO SITE MAP if , , •;:r• ‘,..,. ••••;;:„ I D a OD• ., < �� h\ ;, O0 ,5 6 r -- ) 1` � III .. I, . �( I A Lei .. � Ij .o, — 4 \ \ 1 II • 1 21 Ms N. ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO DESCRIPTION OF LAND , I® The subject site is located on County Road 66, a paved road in the Windsor section of Weld County, Colorado. The immediate neighborhood is rural in nature and 25 percent built up. A significant amenity to the site is its proximity to Interstate Highway 25. The zoning classification for the property is I-1, Industrial, and the subject has a conforming use. The land is irregular in shape and covers a total area of 329 acres. It has frontages along County Road 66 and Colorado State Highway 257 . The topography is level and is at surrounding road grades. The utilities available to the site are telephone, electric, water, sewer, and gas. The present coverage of the land may be summa- rized as 100 percent buildings, related yard area, parking and driveways. 22 ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO. DESCRIPTION OF IMPROVEMENTS The subject plant was erected from 1971 to 1977 and has an effective age of 15 years. The buildings are pre- dominately of masonry and steel frame, metal clad, steel frame, and reinforced concrete construction. They range from one to five stories with an effective level of 1 . 45 stories. The clear heights in the plant are 9 feet to 42 feet, and bay sizes are varied. The allocation of floor space is 70 percent manufacturing, 17 percent warehouse, and 13 percent office. The buildings have four 150,000 pounds per hour oil- fired heating plants, and they are heated by steam. The buildings have ample washrooms and plumbing fixtures, in- cluding water heaters and water coolers. There are sani- tary connections to public sewer lines. The buildings have a wet type sprinkler system that serves 100 percent of the building floor area with water supplied via two 1 ,000, 000 gallon capacity aboveground tanks. The buildings have ten freight elevators, three passenger elevators, and four sections of escalators . There are 45 hydraulic dockboards, 105 feet of craneway, and forty-five truck doors at dock height. The lighting system includes fluorescent, incandescent, mercury vapor, and sodium vapor fixtures. The buildings are serviced by a 100, 000 to 125, 000 VA power system, air, water, and gas piping. The yard area is improved by paving, railroad sidings, and a lighting system. µ 23 1_ .44 `,T ' ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO. DESCRIPTION OF IMPROVEMENTS t The buildings, containing a total gross floor area of 3 , 092 , 560 square feet, are summarized below and on the following page. Bldg. Effective SF of Floor Area No. Designation Vintage Age - Yrs Ground Gross C-02 Plant 1977 11 4, 000 4, 000 Services C-04 Truck Shop 1977 11 4, 000 4, 000 Building C-05 Shop Building 1977 11 5, 250 5, 250 C-06 Fire Station 1971 17 20 , 509 20,509 C-07 Storage- 1977 11 3 , 200 3 ,200 Warehouse C-il Administration 1971 17 78 , 345 154, 330 Building C-13 Finishing 1971 17 274, 389 274 , 389 Building C-15 Finishing 1977 11 251,019 502 ,038 Building C-16 Finishing 1971 17 254,027 254 ,027 Building C-17 Refrigeration 1971 17 32, 273 32,273 Complex C-20 Distribution 1971 17 399, 000 399 ,000 Center C-28 Refrigeration 1971 17 22 , 500 37 , 500 Building C-29 Plastics 1971 17 175 , 500 211, 500 Molding C-30 Utility 1971 17 12 , 973 12, 973 Building C-32 Pump House 1971 17 4 , 600 4 , 600 C-33 Power Station 1971 17 3 , 819 3 , 819 C-34 Gas House 1971 17 288 288 C-40 Sensitizing 1973 15 49 , 500 204 ,600 C-41 Emulsion 1975 13 31 , 825 160 , 073 Manufacturing 24 , - " 4 v ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CC I DESCRIPTION OF IMPROVEMENTS /IT Bldg. Effective SF of Floor Area No. Designation Vintage Age - Yrs Ground Gross C-42 Sensitizing- 1973 15 36, 250 108,750 Technical Services C-43 Warehouse 1975 13 126 ,709 126,709 C-46 Silver 1975 13 12, 000 12,000 Recovery C-48 Utilities 1975 13 21 ,725 21,725 C-50 Support 1974 14 60, 492 196,628 Manufacturing C-60 Lithographic 1971 17 202, 500 276, 240 Plate Manufacturing C-61 Refrigeration 1971 17 17 , 555 17 ,555 Building C-70 Power House 1976 12 22,042 44,084 C-73 Fire Training 1976 12 500 500 Shed 2,126,790 3 , 092, 560 25 DESCRIPTION OF IMPROVEMENTS ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO. COMPOSITE AGE SCHEDULE I® Composite Age SF Gross % of Age in of Whole Vintage Floor Area Whole Years in Years 1977 4, 000 0. 13 11 0. 01 1977 4, 000 0. 13 11 0. 01 1977 5,250 0 . 17 11 0 . 02 1971 20,509 0 . 66 17 0 . 11 1977 3 , 200 0. 10 11 0. 01 1971 154, 330 4. 99 17 0. 85 1971 274, 389 8. 87 17 1. 51 1977 502, 038 16. 23 11 1.79 1971 254,027 8 . 21 17 1 . 40 1971 32,273 1 . 04 17 0. 18 1971 399 , 000 12 . 90 17 2. 19 1971 37, 500 1 . 21 17 0 . 21 1971 211, 500 6. 84 17 1 .16 1971 12, 973 0. 42 17 0. 07 1971 4,600 0. 15 17 0. 03 1971 3 ,819 0. 12 17 0 . 02 1971 288 0 . 01 17 0 . 00 1973 204,600 6 . 62 15 0. 99 1975 160, 073 5 . 18 13 0 . 67 1973 108 ,750 3 . 52 15 0 . 53 1975 126,709 4 . 10 13 0 . 53 1975 12 , 000 0. 39 13 0 . 05 1975 21 ,725 0. 70 13 0. 09 1974 196 , 628 6. 36 14 0 . 89 1971 276 , 240 8 . 93 17 1 . 52 1971 17, 555 0 . 57 17 0. 10 1976 44, 084 1 . 43 12 0. 17 1976 500 0 . 02 12 0. 00 3 , 092 , 560 100 . 00 15. 11 or 15 Years ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL Caj VALUATION 26 ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL Ca HIGHEST & BEST USE & APPRAISAL PROCEDURE "The reasonable and probable legal use that supports the highest present value of vacant land or improved prop- erty, as defined, as of the date of appraisal. " (Page 152, Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, by the American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers 1984) . "That use which at the time of appraisal is most likely to produce the greatest net return to the land and/or improvements over a given period of time. " (Page 29, The Appraisal of Real Estate, by the American Insti- tute of Real Estate Appraisers 1967) . In accordance with the preceding definitions, the subject ' s use as a a maufacturing facility for films, plates, photographic papers, and emulsion-sensitized chemicals is the highest and best use. The subject real estate, in accordance with its highest and best use, is best valued via all three standard approaches to value. 27 ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO. LAND VALUATION J0 Following a market search of recent sales of vacant land in the area comparable to the subject, and after adjustments for location, size, zoning, utilities, topog- raphy, shape and other relative factors, the value of the land has been stipulated at $2, 200 per acre based upon agreed market values between the Weld County assessor and Kodak. The total value of the land may be demonstrated as follows: $2,200/Acre x 329 Acres = $723 ,800 or Total Indicated Value (Rounded) $725, 000 7 Y ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO. AS COST APPROACH 28 ?Cal ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO] COST APPROACH The cost approach considers the sum of the land value and the depreciated value of the improvements as they contribute to the whole. We are not valuing indi- vidual buildings but a total facility. The land value is based on a study of recent sales within the subject and similar areas as stipulated between the assessor and Eastman Kodak. The depreciated value of the improvements is based on the replacement cost new of the buildings and land improvements less observed depreciation. Replace- ment cost new considers replacing the designated building areas with equal quality and utility at today' s costs and is supported in our individual building cost summary. The replacement cost new is derived from the Marshall & Swift building cost manual as well as our knowledge of actual construction costs for similar facilities. Depreciation is determined by inspection of the physical condition, plus allowances for observed obsolescence, utility, and present local economic conditions. The basic elements of depreciation are more fully explained as follows: Physical Depreciation is the adverse effect on value caused by deterioration or impairment of condition as a result of wear and tear and disintegration. It may be curable or incurable. The word "curable" , as used here, relates to the principle of contribution and implies that the effect can be corrected at a cost not in excess of the 29 ENTERPRISE APPRAISALco. COST APPROACH value of the contribution of the correction or addition to the property. "Incurable" implies that to repair or otherwise cure the condition is not economically feasible or profitable as of the date of valuation. The combined total physical depreciation for a 15-year composite age with a 40-year life expectancy is estimated at 20 percent by Marshall & Swift. We concur with same. Functional Obsolescence is the adverse effect on value resulting from defects in design that impair util- ity. It considers the loss in value via poor layout, tight height and bay clearances, and other detrimental influences within the property. Functional obsolescence may be less obvious to the casual observer than physical depreciation, but its effect on value is no less real. The defect may be curable or incurable, and either clas- sification may be caused by a deficiency or an excess over-adequacy. Major Functional Obsolescence (A) Overcapacity and Excess Construction Many of the buildings were constructed to support additional floors which were never needed. The layout of the plant was with the idea that additions would be made to the buildings and, therefore, the buildings were constructed far apart. These additions never took place, and more than likely, will not in the future. A good 30 ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL ca COST APPROACH portion of the excess construction cost problem was cor- rected in the use of replacement costs versus reproduction costs. (B) Transportation The present distance between buildings only causes problems such as transportation costs to move the prod- ucts from manufacturing to the warehouse or distribution center which requires additional manpower. The plant was designed to use rail transportation which is not used. Train dock areas have no functional value. (C) Unused/Inefficient Storage Areas The large manufacturing areas where disk film and Super 8 film were manufactured (which have been discon- tinued) are now either unused areas or used as ineffi- cient storage areas. The preceding functional deficiencies and others in individual buildings are as follows with the esti- mated dollar amounts in brackets: Building C-6 - Central Security Control-Fire Station ( 20, 509 SF) ( $85,000) The construction quality of the building represents an excess over-adequacy. One example is wall tile over masonry walls. Also, the building is much larger than needed and would be smaller if constructed today. 31 ^:ar 1\ IlkS xt r 4441 ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CQ COST APPROACH I® Building C-11 - Administration & Finishing Building ( 154,330 SF) ( $2, 100,000) The foundation of this building was erected to sup- port a future third floor which was never constructed. There is unused building area capacity in regard to the elevators. Buildings C-11, C-13 , C-15 and C-16, which are attached buildings and contain a total building area of 1 ,184 ,784 square feet, have excessive fluorescent lighting. This facility is considered a large plant for Colorado industry. It can be divided, but the mechanical systems cannot stand alone. Under current usage, they are over-designed and not fully utilized. Much of the space, approximately 40 percent, is taken up with storage of materials which are not temperature sensitive and there- fore, it would be possible to reduce the size of the facility and replace the lost square footage of storage with a lesser structure. Building C-13 - Finishing Building ( 274 , 389 SF) ( $785,000) Approximately 35 ,000 square feet of building area in this building is unused. Building C-15 - Paper & Film Finishing ( 502 ,038 SF) ( $930 , 000) The building contains five vacuum pumps, but only two are needed. There are floor cracks throughout this build- ing. Two main air conditioning fans in the building are not necessary but are not removable . Unused smoke 32 a v ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO] COST APPROACH ® ventilation systems (twelve fan rooms) have been re- placed with a manual system. Storage and retrieval rooms are too narrow for practical use. A former disc film manufacturing area on the second floor ( 42, 000 SF) is now used for miscellaneous storage. Building C-16 - Movie and Roll Film Finishing ( 254 ,027 SF) ( $375, 000) A one-story building constructed in 1971 with per- imeter service and office areas. The interior of the building is utilized in the manufacture of 110 film and micro-film. Because of the discontinued manufacture of Super 8 film, 6 percent of the building has been shut down. The old Super 8 packing, spooling and molding areas are now used for miscellaneous storage ( 16, 920 SF) . Building C-17 - Refrigeration Complex ( 32,273 SF) ( $200, 000 ) Constructed in 1971, this structure is in close proximity to Buildings C-11 through C-16 . It is separated only because it serves special purposes . It is a support facility that would not be rentable in and of itself. Of the total square footage, 25 percent of this building is not used. Building C-20 - Distribution Center ( 399 , 000 SF) ( $2,065, 000) Constructed in 1971 with 26 foot high ceilings . The total square footage includes 80,000 square feet of 55° cold storage area. There is a handicap entrance. The 33 ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL Co. COST APPROACH I© office area has under-floor electric and telephone wiring which limits use of some areas (desks can only be over floor-mounted outlets) . The "L"-shaped warehouse building is functionally poor and product handling is inefficient. The area for elevator shafts is not used, and a proposed additional floor was not constructed. The building con- tains two fan rooms, but only needs one. Fire walls between all rooms are four hours (ten rooms, 200 feet by 200 feet each) . The heating unit for the computer room is not used. The building contains floor warts (holes in concrete) . The dragline to Building C-29, the manufac- turing/servicing area, is not used. The truck bays are too small. There is interior cracking due to improperly installed rebar, and the cost to cure is estimated at $200, 000 . The enclosed train dock area, 500 lineal feet of rail or 8 ,000 square feet of building area, is not used. Access to this building from Building C-60, the lithographic plant manufacturing building, adds to costs of transportation, manpower, and material production. Building C-28 - Refrigeration Building ( 37 , 500 SF) ( $475, 000 ) Provides chilled water for Building C-20 , the Dis- tribution Center, and Building C-29, the Plastics and Chemicals Building. Sixty percent of the building area is not used at present. 34 ,r ' ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL.CG COST APPROACH Building C-29 - Plastics Molding ( 211, 500 SF) ( $1, 530 , 000) This is a one and part two-story building con- structed in 1971. Because of discontinued Super 8 film manufacturing, 4 percent or 8 ,460 square feet of building area has been shut down. There is excessive fluorescent lighting. The box manufacturing area ( 17, 535 SF) is used for miscellaneous storage. Only 10 percent of the roof- mounted electrical load center is utilized. The blow-out wall in the storage area is not needed. The area between this building and Building C-20 , the Distribution Center ( 22,500 SF) , is not used. Building C-30 - Utility Building ( 12,973 SF) ( $460 ,000) The building houses two 100 ,000 pounds per hour boilers which are not used. The building is not neces- sary to the plant operation. Building C-33 - Power Station ( 3, 819 SF) ( $70, 000 ) The building was constructed in 1971 and has very little value if separated from the entire development. Building C-40 - Sensitizing ( 204 ,600 SF) ( $2, 660 , 000) This is a five-story, fireproof Class A building. There is a large amount of dark area, and 500 square feet of area is not used. The distance between this building and Building C-20, Distribution/Warehouse, requires extra cost and manpower involved in the transportation and 35 � iv ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL as j COST APPROACH T protection of goods between the two buildings . There is no elevator which results in functional inefficiencies and added costs. There is also a 20 foot by 200 foot train dock, or 4, 000 square feet of area not used which could be used for storage now. Buildings C-40, C-41, C-42, and C-43 - Sensitizing, Emul- sion Manufacturing, Sensitizing-Technical Services, and Warehouse respectively ( $675,000) These are attached buildings totalling 600 ,132 square feet. The buildings could be used separately but some ad- justments would be necessary. There is a problem getting motors to air handling units on the roof. Building C-48 - Utilities ( 21,725 SF) ( $150,000) This is a one-story building constructed in 1975 and 20 percent of the building area is not used. Building C-50 - Support Manufacturing ( 196,628 SF) ( $1, 600,000) The HVAC system is inadequate and should be increased in size. It would be more feasible to relocate the office area to the second floor over the cafeteria, and to also relocate the wind-up machine to the first floor from the second floor. The blow-out panels in the wall are not needed. The north and south walls are not properly insu- lated. Twenty-five percent of the bulding area is wasted as it is too far from the manufacturing area. The "L" shape of the building is inefficient and the building 36 r y bm ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL co. COST APPROACH would be better utilized if it were one story. All piping and utilities for the fourth floor acid tanks with exterior polymer plant are twice as large as needed. One large mixing room would be better than three small mixing rooms, and mixing area could have higher ceilings and should be on the manufacturing floor. The fourth floor has no east to west access without going outside and across the third floor roof . Building C-60 - Lithographic Plant Mfg. ( 276, 240 SF) ( $7, 400 ,000) Approximately 80 percent of the lighting is not necessary and has been shut down. This building could be separated and stand on its own. However, the expansion wall faces the wrong way. The floor is cracked on the mezzanine area above the high bay. The high bay for the second coater is not used. Machine 22 is being scrapped, but the cost to remove is prohibitive and the area is therefore wasted. Building C-61 - Refrigeration Building ( 17 , 555 SF) ( $400 ,000) Steam supply for Building C-61 is five times that needed. Building C-70 - Power Plant ( 44, 084 SF) ( $550 , 000) This two-story building replaced Building C-30 and is twice as large as needed. 37 1 ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO.l COST APPROACH J0 All of the preceding totals $22 . 5 million, and this is equal to 15 percent of the $151 million replacement cost new. The individual estimates were made from the described inadequacies, and limited to a 60 percent im- pact, excluding the 20 percent physical depreciation already taken and the 20 percent economic obsolescence anticipated, to avoid any duplication. Economic Obsolescence is created outside the prop- erty by specific detrimental influences or from the real estate market' s lack of value recognition for this type of property. Proof of its existence can be found by market extraction. This may be accomplished by estimating the replacement cost new of the improvements in a sale and de- ducting the sale price of improvements exclusive of land. This result is all three categories of depreciation, and after reducing same for typical physical and functional depreciation, the residual amount is economic obsoles- cence. This amount divided by the replacement cost new may be expressed as a percentage. (See our Economic Depreciation Study Extracted from the eight ( 8) largest sales in our Market Data exhibited in the Addenda of this report) In estimating the extent of accrued depreciation attributable to each of these components of the breakdown procedure, we examined the physical property and analyzed existing elements of functional obsolescence from within, 38 ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL Ca COST APPROACH .® as well as factors creating economic obsolescence from without. The problem of translating observed deficien- cies into a mathematical estimate of accrued depreciation requires judgement and the application of techniques that vary with the cause of the loss in value. The described valuation procedure is illustrated following our replacement cost new schedule of buildings and site improvements exhibited next. 39 lCOST APPROACH " REPLACEMENT COSTS NEW ENTERPRISE APPRAISAI.00l BUILDINGS & IMPROVEMENTS BUILDINGS Bldg. Designation SF Area Unit RCN C-02 Plant 4,000 $21.92 $ 87,674 Services C-04 Truck Shop 4,000 $21.92 87,674 Building C-05 Shop Building 5,250 $22.42 117,682 C-06 Fire Station 20,509 $65.23 1,337,816 C-07 Storage/ 3,200 $25.43 81,377 Warehouse C-11 Administration 154,330 $53.91 8,319,563 C-13 Finishing Bldg. 274,389 $37.78 10,365,976 C-15 Finishing Bldg. 502,038 $36.89 18,520,587 C-16 Finishing Bldg. 254,027 $38.91 9,883,265 C-17 Refrigeration 32,273 $38.37 1,238,317 Complex C-20 Distribution 399,000 $37.34 14,898,046 Center C-28 Refrigeration 37,500 $33.02 1,238,139 C-29 Plastics 211,500 $45.93 9,715,075 Molding C-30 Utility Bldg. 12,973 $55.97 726,046 C-32 Pump House 4,600 $37.20 171,118 C-33 Power Station 3,819 $60.13 229,649 C-34 Gas House 288 $35.56 10,242 C-40 Sensitizing 204,600 $68.86 14,088,894 C-41 Emulsion 160,073 $57.47 9,199,893 Manufacturing C-42 Sensitizing- 108,750 $63.22 6,875,142 Technical Services C-43 Warehouse 126,709 $41.98 5,319,039 C-46 Silver 12,000 $55.22 662,659 Recovery C-48 Utilities 21,725 $55.99 1,216,348 40 t[ F COST APPROACH � °` REPLACEMENT COSTS NEW ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL Ca BUILDINGS & IMPROVEMENTS e® BUILDINGS Bldg. Designation SF Area Unit RCN C-50 Support 196,628 $51.36 $ 10,097,853 Manufacturing C-60 Lithographic 276,240 $53.27 14,715,968 Plate Mfg. C-61 Refrigeration 17,555 $44.20 775,949 C-70 Power House 44,084 $40.39 1,780,455 C-73 Fire Training 500 $37.83 18,914 Shed 3,092,560 $45.85 $141,779,359 SITE IMPROVEMENTS Item Life Age Quantity Unit RCN Asphalt Road 20 71 469,440 SF $ 0.93 $ 434,976 (3 inch) Asphalt Road 20 71 851,952 SF $ 1.46 1,240,497 (7 inch) Parking Lots 20 71 1,427,994 SF $ 1.46 2,079,251 Curb & Gutter 20 71 35,498 LF $ 6.27 222,654 Water Line 30 71 90,816 LF $ 20.10 1,825,384 (8 inch) Sewer Line 30 71 11,140 LF $ 12.26 136,571 (10 inch) Sewer Line 30 71 9,790 LF $ 21.25 208,041 ( 15 inch) Storm Sewer 30 71 17,470 LF $ 20.06 350,432 ( 18 inch) Street Lights 30 71 280 $ 1,439.77 762,448 Water Tank 40 71 1 762,448 (3M gallons) Water Tank 40 77 1 762,448 (3M gallons) Railroad Spur 40 71 13,200 LF $ 59.78 789,097 $9,214,936 41 4V sat 1 ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL Ca i COST APPROACH ® 3,092,560 SF Gross Bldg. Floor Area ($45.85/SF) $141,779,359 Land Improvements 9,214,936 Grand Total ($48.83/SF) $150,994,295 or Total Replacement Cost New (Rounded) $150,995,000 Physical Depreciation 20% Functional Obsolescence 15% Economic Obsolescence 20% Less Total Depreciation 55% Net Depreciated Value of Improvements (Rounded) $ 67,950,000 Plus Land Value 725,000 Total Indicated Value ($22.21/SF) $ 68,675,000 q.. J, Y t� v ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO. INCOME APPROACH 42 i. A ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO. INCOME APPROACH .® The income approach considers the capital sum ex- pressed in terms of money which a purchaser, for invest- ment would be justified in paying for the property. The value is determined by capitalization of expected net fu- ture income that a property is capable of producing. This value also indicates the influence of comparable rentals and normal expenses, and thus, takes pertinent economic conditions into consideration. The typical current gross rental for comparable prop- erties is $3 . 50 per square foot. The normal vacancy allowance that would be experienced over the remaining useful life of the property is estimated at 10 percent. The normal expenses to a lessor are management fees, taxes, insurance, exterior and structural maintenance and repairs. Management of this type of real estate is gener- ally estimated at 3 to 6 percent of the effective gross rental. The management fee is considered a proper deduc- tion whether the property is managed by a professional manager or by the owner. The current charges are an ap- plicable expense over the remaining useful economic life of the property as the gross rentals should increase di- rectly to increases in expenses. 43 ty, ENTERPRISE APPRMSALCa INCOME APPROACH The reduction of gross rentals by the appropriate vacancy allowance, management fee and other expenses, re- sults in a net rental. The capitalization rate divided into this net rental income is what yields an indication of value. Overall rates are obtained from the market via property sales and subsequent net rentals. Inherent in this rate are the return on the investment and a provision for recapture. Overall rates obtained from the market in- dicate the action of buyers and investors of a particular class of real estate and, therefore, reflect a valid rate to apply to like properties. Although individual philoso- phies concerning return and recapture may vary, the col- lective action creates a discernible pattern in the market. We have researched comparable sales for market evi- dence of overall rates appropriate to the subject prop- erty. In addition, we have consulted with major lenders and investors in determining overall rates for similar properties. Based upon this analysis, we have selected an overall capitalization rate of 10 . 5 percent. An effec- tive tax rate, expressed as a percent, is then added to allow for Ad Valorem real estate taxes and completes the capitalization rate. The capitalization of the pretax income to the property indicates the total value via the income approach. The application of the previously developed factors is illustrated in the income valuation on the following page. 44 r id ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL Co. INCOME APPROACH Annual Gross Income 3,092,560 SF Gross Floor Area @ $3.50/SF $10,823.960 Less a Vacancy Allowance 10% Effective Annual Gross Income ($3.15/SF) $ 9,741,564 Expenses to Lessor: Management Fee $ 292,247 Insurance on Buildings 354,500 Exterior & Structural Main- tenance & Repairs 1,510,600 2,157,347 Annual Net Pretax Income to Lessor ($2.45/SF) $ 7,584,217 Capitalization Rate (See Note Below) 10.5% Effective Tax Rate 1.9% Total Capitalization Rate 12.4% $61,163,040 or Total Indicated Value (Rounded) $61,200,000 Note: See 2nd Quarter 1988 Property Tax Yield IRR grid exhibited on the following page. 45 FINANCIAL INDICATORS Lender Average Rate Average Term Loan-to- Debt Coverage Sample Rate 1%) Range I%) Term(yrs) Range(yrs) Points Value Ratio Ratio Conventional Loans Long-term (15-30 vearsl Office building 7 10.58 10.25-11.0 19.64 15-30 1.14 75.7% 1.17 Shopping center 5 10.55 10.25-10.75 20.41 15-30 1.14 75.7% 1.17 Industrial 5 10.52 10.25-11.0 20.41 15-30 1.14 75.7% 1.18 Multifamily 5 10.67 10.37-11.0 17.91 15-25 1.14 75.0% 1.18 Hotel/motel 6 10.90 10.62-11.12 17.85 15-25 1.17 75.0% 1.29 Medium-term (5-15 vrsl Office building 11 10.56 10.0-11.75 8.31 5-15 1.13 75.9% 1.16 Shopping center 11 10.56 10.0-11.75 8.31 5-15 1.13 76.0% 1.16 Industrial 11 10.60 10.0-12.0 7.86 5-10 1.15 75.9% 1.18 Multifamily 11 10.64 10.0-12.0 8.0 5-10 1.15 75.9% 1.17 Hotel/motel 8 10.84 10.0-12.25 7.78 5-10 1.18 75.0% 1.29 Short-term (0-5 vrs) Office building 13 10.40 9.5-11.5 3.96 1-5 1.14 75.6% 1.16 Shopping center 13 10.39 9.5-11.5 3.80 1-5 1.12 75.6% 1.16 Industrial 12 10.42 9.5-11.5 3.87 1-5 1.11 75.6% 1.17 Multifamily 12 10.41 9.5-11.5 3.95 1-5 1.11 75.6% 1.17 Hotel/motel 8 10.78 9.75-12.5 4.0 1-5 1.13 75.0% 1.27 Nonconventional Loans Construction,Open-end 5 12.1 11.5-12.5 2.0 1-3 1.5 75 1.14 . Source:AIREA Research Department.Figures are derived from a survey of lenders in various geographic regions conducted during the first business week of December,1988.Data quoted are averages and do not reflect conditions in all markets.Readers are encouraged to contact local lenders for rates and terms applicable in local markets.For further information,contact the Research Department,(312)329-8515. Real Estate Investment Criteria: Fourth Quarter, 1988* 4th Qtr. '88 3rd Qtr. '88 2nd Qtr. '88 1st Qtr. '88 Pre-tax yield(IRR)(%) 10.5-12.5 10.5-12.5 10.5-12.5 10.5-12.5 Going-in cap rate(%) 6-9 6.5-9.5 6.5-9.5 6.5-9.5 Income/expense growth rate(%) 4-5 4-5 4-5 4-5 Terminal cap rate(%) 6.5-9.5 7-10 7-10 7-10 I *The investment survey probes expectations and goals of major investors for the current quarter. Respon- dents are asked about their property preferences, geographic targets, and the return criteria they use to qualify acquisitions. Fourth quarter 1988 interviews were conducted in October. There was virtually no change in investment criteria during 1988.The erosion of real estate yields and cap I rates is noticeable only when viewed over a longer time horizon. Abstracted from"Real Estate Investment Survey:Fourth Quarter 1988,- published in Real Estate Research Corporation's Real Estate Report. Definitions Yield (IRR) Growth Rate Expected—or required—time-weighted return on real Annual compounded rate of increase in revenue and estate investment. "Yield"is used interchangeably with expenses over current—year levels.Future expenses are the phrases"discount rate"and"internal rate of return" typically forecast on a line-by-line basis. (IRR).Yield equates the present value of future receipts Terminal Rate with the cost of the invesment. A capitalization ("cap") rate used to estimate resale or Going—In Cap Rate reversion value at the end of the holding period. First—year NOI divided by present value (or purchase For further information, contact: Real Estate Re- price). The rule of thumb is the lower the cap rate, the search Corporation;72 W.Adams St.;Chicago,IL 60603. higher the price;the higher the rate,the greater the risk. 14 The Appraiser, January 1989 tl ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO. le MARKET DATA APPROACH 46 ENTERPRISE npntA1Snl.Co. I MARKET DATA APPROACH h The market data approach reflects the present market price of similar properties, and after adjustment to the subject property, the common price level provides a useful indicator of market value. We have researched the subject and parallel areas for meaningful comparable sales or offerings of similarly improved facilities. The following grid summarizes the most comparable recent sales that were considered in this market data valuation. The total sale prices less land, or the net improve- ment value, divided by the square feet of building area of the sales offer an expression of the individual sale price per square foot of buildings, excluding land. This im- provement contribution to the sale price is then adjusted for time in accordance with the sales' construction and geographical area. The time adjusted sale value of im- provements is then increased by the subject land value per square foot of its building area. This effectively places the improvements of the sale on the subject land. This process of removing the contribution of land value from the sale and adding the subject land value eliminates the need to adjust for location, land to building ratio, and any other land value differentials between the sale and the subject property. The format relates this price per square foot and the specifications of the sale to the 47 ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL co. MARKET DATA APPROACH . .O" subject, and via the exhibited additional adjustments, provides separate indications of the subject property value per square foot for each of the sales or offerings. The separate conclusions offered are discussed and then interpreted into a final determination of value. The adjustments used within this grid valuation are explained immediately preceding the grid. The sale data supporting the grid valuation is exhibited in the Addenda of this report. 1 ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO. 0. MARKET DATA APPROACH EXPLANATION OF ADJUSTMENTS 48 • MARKET DATA APPROACH ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL co. EXPLANATION OF ADJUSTMENTS Location and Land to Building Ratio This adjustment is accomplished by removing the land value contribution from the sale price of a comparable, and after adjusting it for time, adding back the current land value of the subject land expressed as a value per square foot of its building area. This two-step adjust- ment effectively equalizes all comparables with the sub- ject' s location and land to building ratio. It may also be said to offer a time adjusted value per square foot of the sale as if it were on the subject land. Time or Offering The time adjustment considers the increases or decreases in value that are evident in the subject geo- graphical area, including former and now eroded tax benefits, from the date of a sale to the date of the ap- praisal. Potential sales or offerings usually sell for less, and when this is the case, the percentage indicated is our estimate of the reduction required to equal the eventual sale price. 49 i7: it+i �� / '.. MARKET DATA APPROACH ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL Ca EXPLANATION OF ADJUSTMENTS Quality of Construction The quality of construction differs with alternate facilities, and this adjustment measures the differences between the subject property and the comparable sale. The superior or inferior geographical differentials are also reflected based upon their geographical indexes in cost manuals. Office Area The adjustment for percentage differences in office area is taken against a contributory value for the sub- ject office area. This is based on the average extra new cost of office area above plant area, adjusted for the effective age of the subject plant. Age and Condition The effective age and condition of improvements typically will account for a major portion of total value loss . This is measured by applying a square foot adjust- ment for each year of age differential that considers typical physical condition. Any specific curable deferred maintenance problem or condition, beyond the typical ex- pected for a given age, with the subject or comparable is also reflected here. I 50 r "r MARKET DATA APPROACH ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO EXPLANATION OF ADJUSTMENTS . .0 Functional Obsolescence The functional obsolescence adjustment measures the differentials of multistory construction versus one story construction, inferior or superior layouts or clear heights, and similar differences between the subject and the comparable sale. Other Other adjustments include an allowance for unusual sale conditions, advantageous or disadvantageous utility or other contracts or financing, preferential tax sub- sidies, plottage, etc. , that are related to a comparable. This may also include plus or minus attributes of the subject compared to the comparables not covered above. Size Marketability Size marketability recognizes that large plants sell for a lesser unit square foot price than smaller plants. The discount applied is extracted from our observations of same in the marketplace. When the subject is the larger plant, this is a negative adjustment. When the subject is the smaller plant in a given comparison, it is a plus adjustment. 51 r. MARKET DATA APPROACH ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO. EXPLANATION OF ADJUSTMENTS Validity of Adjustments Adjustments are never all inclusive, but with all the major bases covered, they provide useful indications of the subject value. The validity of the adjustments are not found in the individual amounts within any comparable being adjusted, but on the overall indications of adjusted values from all the comparables. A tight range of compa- rable value conclusions tends to emphasize the credibility of the illustrated adjustment analysis. 52 x: ENTERPRISE MARKET DATA APPROACH APPRAISAL CO. Subject Sale #1 Sale #2 Sale #3 Sale #4 Code #80551 #610008 #443004 #432025 #601136 Location Windsor, Sterling, Akron, Columbus, Northlake, CO IL OH OH IL Land Acreage 329.00 594.00 291.44 268.95 129.31 Land/Bldg. Ratio 4.63/1 7.65/1 3.97/1 4.52/1 2.94/1 SF Building Area 3,092,560 3,383,323 3,198,800 2,589,708 1,915,526 Average # Stories 1.45 1.24 1.34 1 & 2 1.13 % Office Area 13% 1% 23% 3% 24% Effective Age 15 Years 35 Years 22 Years 30 Years 20 Years Condition of Imprs. Good Fair Good Fair/Good Good Date of Sale 9/88 3/87 12/86 11/88 Price/SF of Land $5.91 $24.97 $12.30 $21.93 & Improvements Total Purchase Price $20,000,000 $79,865,000 $31,850,000 $42,000,000 Land Value 1,970,000 9,035,000 8,068,500 13,575,000 Net Improvement Value $18,030,000 $70,830,000 $23,781,500 $28,425,000 Price/SF of Buildings Excluding Land $ 5.33 $ 22.14 $ 9.18 $ 14.84 Time Adjustment 100% 102% 100% 100% Time Adjusted Price/SF $ 5.33 $ 22.58 $ 9.18 $ 14.84 Subject Land Value/SF of Buildings 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 SF Time Adjusted Value with Subject Land $ 5.56 $ 22.81 $ 9.41 $ 15.07 Adjustments ($/SF) Construction Quality $ (4.40) $ (1.00) $ (1.40) 4.80 % Office Area 3.35 (2.80) 2.80 (3.08) Age & Condition 10.00 3.50 7.50 2.50 Functional Obsolescence 5.00 (1.50) -0- 1.25 Total Adjustments/SF $ 13.95 $ (1.80) $ 11.70 $ 5.47 Primary Subject Value/SF $ 19.51 $ 21.01 $ 21. 11 $ 20.54 Size Marketability 101% 100% 99% 97% Indicated Subject Value/SF $ 19.71 $ 21.01 $ 20.90 $ 19.92 53 t rit r ,mow �Y ENTERPRISE MARKET DATA APPROACH APPRAISAL CO. OO Subject Sale #5 Sale #6 Sale #7 Sale #8 Code #80551 #296011 #600126 #464005 #194088 Location Windsor, Greenville, Skokie, Gary, Lansdale, CO SC IL IN PA Land Acreage 329.00 285.00 62.40 136.94 127.00 Land/Bldg. Ratio 4.63/1 7.55/1 2.09/1 4.94/1 4.63/1 SF Building Area 3,092,560 1,643,633 1,303,200 1,207,000 1,196,951 Average # Stories 1.45 1.00 1.20 1.00 1.06 % Office Area 13% 1% 27% 3% 7% Effective Age 15 Years 16 Years 20 Years 25 Years 25 Years Condition of Imprs. Good Good Fair Good Good Date of Sale/Agrt. 9/88 10/87 9/86 10/88 Price/SF of Land $15.21 $19.95 $13.67 $23.77 & Improvements Total Purchase Price $25,000,000 26,000,000 $16,500,000 $28.430,000 Land Value 5,700,000 8,150,000 2,750,000 3,810,000 Net Improvement Value $19,300,000 $17,850,000 $13,750,000 $24,620,000 Price/SF of Buildings Excluding Land $ 11.74 $ 13.70 $ 11.39 $ 20.58 Time Adjustment 100% 106% 105% 100% Time Adjusted Price/SF $ 11.74 $ 14.52 $ 11.96 $ 20.58 Subject Land Value/SF of Buildings 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 SF Time Adjusted Value with Subject Land $ 11.97 $ 14.75 $ 12. 19 $ 20.81 Adjustments ($/SF) Construction Quality $ 6.00 $ 4.00 $ (1.80) $ 1.20 % Office Area 3.35 (3.90) 2.80 1.70 Age & Condition 0.50 2.50 5.00 5.00 Functional Obsolescence -0- 2.50 3.50 (5.50) Total Adjustments/SF $ 9.85 $ 5. 10 $ 9.50 $ 2.40 Primary Subject Value/SF $ 21.82 $ 19.85 $ 21.69 $ 23.21 Size Marketability 96% 93% 92% 92% Indicated Subject Value/SF $ 20.95 $ 18.46 $ 19.95 $ 21.35 54 ENTERPRISE MARKET DATA APPROACH APPRAISAL co. OO Subject Sale #9 Sale #10 Sale #11 Sale #12 Code #80551 #452054 #853005 #088019 #672012 Location Windsor, Sharon- Litchfield, Edison, Wichita, CO ville, OH AZ NJ KS Land Acreage 329.00 75.00 163.73 43.00 77.04 Land/Bldg. Ratio 4.63/1 2.96/1 6.62/1 1.87/1 4.81/1 SF Building Area 3,092,560 1,105,412 1,077,544 1,000,000 697,202 Average # Stories 1.45 1.00 1.06 1.00 1.40 % Office Area 13% 4% 35% 15% 50% Effective Age 15 Years 7 Years 20 Years 11 Years 15 Years Condition of Imprs. Good Very Good Good Good Good Date of Sale 10/87 3/87 12/85 10/87 Price/SF of Land $12.67 $31.41 $22.75 $22.95 & Improvements Total Purchase Price $14,000,000 $33,850,000 $22,750,000 $16,000,000 Land Value 2,250,000 9,800,000 9,460,000 3,100,000 Net Improvement Value $11,750,000 $24,050,000 $13,290,000 $12,900,000 Price/SF of Buildings Excluding Land $ 10.63 $ 22.32 $ 13.29 $ 18.50 Time Adjustment 115% 104% 120% 100% Time Adjusted Price/SF $ 12.22 $ 23.21 $ 15.95 $ 18.50 Subject Land Value/SF of Buildings 0.23' 0.23 0.23 0.23 SF Time Adjusted Value with Subject Land $ 12.45 $ 23.44 $ 16.18 $ 18.73 Adjustments ($/SF) Construction Quality $ 6.75 $ 5.60 $ 6.40 $ 6.40 % Office Area 2.50 (6.15) (0.55) (10.35) Age & Condition (4.00) 2.50 (2.00) -0- Functional Obsolescence 1.25 -0- 1.50 8.00 Total Adjustments/SF $ 6.50 $ 1.95 $ 5.35 $ 4.05 Primary Subject Value/SF $ 18.95 $ 25.39 $ 21.53 $ 22.78 Size Marketability 91% 91% 90% 83% Indicated Subject Value/SF $ 17.24 $ 23.10 $ 19.38 $ 18.91 55 ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO j MARKET DATA APPROACH 4 o The preceding sales indicate a given square foot price range from $17 . 24 to $23 . 10. The four smallest sales with 1, 105, 412 to 697,202 square feet indicate adjusted values from $17. 24 to $23 . 10 per square foot, and a mathematical average of $19. 66 per square foot. The eight larger sales with 3 ,383 , 223 to 1,196, 951 square feet indicate adjusted values of $19.71 to $21. 01 per square foot, and a mathematical average of $20. 39 per square foot. The six sales with the least dollar per square foot overall adjustments are Sales #2, #4, #6, #8, #11, and #12 that average $19 . 84 per square foot. Considering the comparability of the sales to the subject, based upon this market data evidence, it is our professional opinion that the subject property has a value of: 3 ,092,560 SF x $20. 00/SF = $61, 851, 200 or Total Indicated Value (Rounded) $61, 900, 000 The grid on the following page summarizes large in- dustrial plant sales we did not use because of their lack of comparability or illusive facts and circumstances . 56 r ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO. MARKET DATA APPROACH 4 Subject Sale A Sale B Sale C Sale D Code #80551 #770142 #840003 #377007 #606228 Location Windsor, Houston, Orem, Lowland, Cicero, CO TX UT TN IL Grantor Armco Steel USX American AT&T Corporation Corporation Enka Co. Technologie Grantee Former Basic Mfg. BASF Cambridge Offering* & Tech. of Corporation Equities Utah, Inc. Land Acreage 329.00 761.34 1,828.07 367.40 110.00 Land/Bldg. Ratio 4.63/1 7.86/1 20.01/1 4.42/1 1.70/1 SF Building Area 3,092,560 4,217,174 3,978,866 3,620,039 2,815,225 Average # Stories 1.45 1.00 1.03 1.36 1,90 Office Area 13% 2% 4% 1% 5% Effective Age 15 Years 26 Years 30 Years 30 Years 55 Years Condition of Imprs. Good Fair Fair Fair Fair/Poor Date of Sale See Note 9/87 12/85 6/86 Price/SF of Land $15.41 $4.52 $5.15 $3.55 & Improvements Total Price $65,000,000 $18,000,000 $18,652,000 $10,000,000 Land Value 27,800,000 5,500,000 752,000 9,000,000 Net Improvement Value $37,200,000 $12,500,000 $17,900,000 $ 1,000,000 Price/SF of Buildings Excluding Land $8.82 $3. 14 $4.94 $0.35 Time Adjustment 100% 105% 115% 110% Time Adjusted Price/SF $8.82 $3.30 $5.68 $0.40 Subject Land Value/SF of Buildings 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 SF Time Adjusted Value with Subject Land $9.05 $3.53 $5.91 $0.63 Note: Currently under contract, but not finalized, is a sale involving 182 acres of land and 890,000 square feet of building area. Other smaller sections are also in the negotiation stage according to the broker. Based upon the sales currently in negotiation, they fully anticipate reaching the initial goal of $65,000,000 for the total package. ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO. ♦ I® CORRELATION & CONCLUSION 57 I CORRELATION & CONCLUSION OF ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CU REAL ESTATE VALUE Market Cost Income Data Approach Approach Approach Land $ 725, 000 $ 725, 000 $ 725, 000 Improvements 67, 950,000 60, 475, 000 61,175, 000 $68, 675,000 $61,200,000 $61, 900,000 The approaches followed offer a typical range in value. They are in themselves merely tools to be used in exercising a professional judgement of value. Considering all of the evidence and affording the greatest weight to the Market Data Approach because it offers the most com- prehensive support, the concluded Fair Market Value of the subject property is: Sixty-Four Million Dollars ( $64,000, 000) The total conclusion of value for real estate may be allocated as follows: Land $ 725,000 Buildings & Improvements 63,275, 000 Total $64, 000, 000 ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL Ca ADDENDA t. rte, ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL Co. IO^ PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO. JACK C. EMERY, ASA, CRA, CA-C, SCV, CMI APPRAISAL EXPERIENCE (A) President and Director of the Technical Staff of Enterprise Appraisal Co. (1971 to present) (B) Twenty-one years with another national appraisal company (1950- 1971); Former position was Vice President and Chief Appraiser PROFESSIONAL SOCIETY MEMBERSHIPS, LICENSE & DESIGNATIONS (A) Qualified in 1964 as a Senior Member of the American Society of Appraisers and awarded the (ASA) professional designation. Hav- ing met more than required credits of Continuing Education for Recertification before July, 1984, on January 12, 1984 became recertified through 1989. (B) Qualified by written examination as a Real Estate Appraiser for the New York State Department of Transportation and other State agencies (1965) . (C) Licensed Real Estate Broker (#26946) , Commonwealth of Pennsyl- vania (1974) . (D) Qualified in 1975 as a Charter Member of the National Association of Review Appraisers and Mortgage Underwriters, and received the designation of Certified Review Appraiser (CRA) . (E) Qualified in 1977 as a Charter Member of the American Association of Certified Appraisers, and awarded the designation of Certified Appraiser/Consultant (CA-C) (#233), after submitting an accept- able consultant paper. (F) Qualified in 1981 with the International Institute of Valuers and was registered as a Senior Certified Valuer (SCV) . (G) National Tax Association - Tax Institute of America (1972) . (H) International Association of Assessing Officers (1972) . (I) Institute of Property Taxation, Charter Member (1976) and, after meeting all educational, experience, and exam requirements, was designated as a Certified Member, of the Institute (CMI) (#28) (1980) . Having met more than required credits of Continuing Education for Recertification in 1985, was recertified through 1990. Elected to a three-year term on the Board of Governors (1984) . Received the "Distinguished Service Award" in 1986. EXPERT WITNESS TESTIMONY The sum total of all testimony given as a qualified expert valu- ation witness includes 158 appearances before 79 different courts or boards in 19 states. The appearances include a mix of testimony for either a public authority or taxpayer/condemnee. The types of courts or boards and their locations are as follows: (A) United States Courts: Tax - Honolulu, Hawaii and Miami, Florida; District - Scranton, Pennsylvania and Columbia, South Carolina; Bankruptcy - Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. (B) IRS Appellate Conferees - Cincinnati and Cleveland, Ohio; Hartford and New Haven, Connecticut; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. (C) Superior Courts - Boston, Massachusetts; Hartford, Connecticut; Jersey City, New Jersey; Wilmington, Delaware. 6/88 PAGE 1 OF 3 PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO. JACK C. EMERY, ASA, CRA, CA-C, SCV, CHI I® EXPERT WITNESS TESTIMONY (D) Common Pleas Courts: Covington, Kentucky; Detroit, Michigan; Cambridge, Cincinnati, Dayton, Elyria, New Philadelphia and Norwalk, Ohio; Media, Pennsylvania. (E) New York State Courts: Supreme - Albany and Syracuse; Claims- Albany, Binghamton, Carmel, Elmira, Rochester, Rome, Syracuse and Utica. (F) Eminent Domain Boards of View - Camden, New Jersey; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; New Rochelle and Syracuse, New York. (G) Boards or Courts of Tax Revision or Appeal - Los Angeles and Riverside, California; Washington, Iowa; Frankfort, Henderson and Louisville, Kentucky; Concord, New Hampshire; Battle Creek, Mich- igan; Albany, Lancaster, Jamestown, North Tonawanda and Scriba, New York; Camden, East Orange, Freehold, Newark, New Brunswick and Trenton, New Jersey; Raleigh, North Carolina; Cambridge, Cincinnati, Columbus and Dayton, Ohio; Allentown, Butler, Easton, Ebensburg, Erie, Kittanning, Lancaster, Lebanon, Media, New Castle, West Chester and Williamsport, Pennsylvania; Anahvac, Cameron, Palestine, and Port Lavaca, Texas; Salt Lake City, Utah; Olympia, Washington. APPROVED BY THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC AGENCIES FOR APPRAISAL SERVICES • (A) United States Department of Justice (1972 & 1983) (B) Internal Revenue Service (1975 & Prior) (C) Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers (1972) (D) Federal Aviation Administration (1975) (E) General Services Administration (1974) (F) State Departments of Transportation: Delaware (1976) ; Maryland (1972) ; New York (1965) ; Ohio (1972) ; Pennsylvania (1972) ; Vermont (1982) ; and Virginia (1984) APPRAISAL SPECIALTIES & BACKGROUND (A) Authored or participated in more than 3,900 appraisals in 45 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Canada, Mexico, Australia, Bahama Islands, Belgium, Brazil, Brunei, England, France, Hong Kong, Ireland, Malaysia, the Netherlands, Norway, Philippines, Samoa, Scotland, Singapore, Spain, Switzerland and West Germany. (B) These appraisals were of Real Estate, Natural Resources, Machin- ery and Equipment, and Intangible Assets, covering either a portion or all of the assets of an enterprise. (C) The purposes were for allocation of purchase or sale price in acquisition or divestiture, condemnation, estate planning or settlement, gifts, insurance, financing, determining property tax equitability, making lease decisions, proposed sale or purchase, current cost accounting, stock plans and transfers, et al. (D) The clients using these appraisal services include corporations, individuals, financial institutions, public agencies, or util- ities. • 6/88 PAGE 2 OF 3 s * y.,. y PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO. JACK C. EMERY, ASA, CRA, CA-C, SCV, CHI J® APPRAISAL SPECIALTIES AND BACKGROUND (E) The scope of appraisal services performed over the last two decades has had special emphasis in the area of: large indus- trial plants, offices, or retail complexes; utility projects; the communcations media; intangible assets; business valuations; and in the solution of unusual appraisal problems. FORMAL EDUCATION & APPRAISAL INSTRUCTION (A) Engineering and Business Majors at University of Cincinnati, Xavier University and North Georgia College (1945-50) . (B) Appraisal I and II and six other Real Estate related courses at Pennsylvania State University (1972-74) , each covering a 16-week period. (C) Attended twenty-six IPT and IAAO Tax Conferences and Symposiums (1972-1987) covering 540 hours of valuation instruction. (D) Lectured on Real Estate, Machinery and Equipment, and Intangible Asset appraisal subjects before the University of Hartford Tax Institute, the Institute of Property Taxation, the National Asso- ciation of Accountants, the National Association of Insurance Managers, and various other professional groups. (E) Conducted 35 seminars on Real Estate, Machinery and Equipment, and Intangible Asset subjects, and trained a total of 67 ap- praisers at two appraisal companies. (F) Authored 55 published articles in the Enterprise Valuation Reporter with two requested reprints in the Broadcast Financial Journal; co-authored an article on patents published by the American Society of Appraisers; authored instruction manuals on valuations and specific appraisal problems for two appraisal firms. 6/88 PAGE 3 OF 3 . `A4 _, PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL co. WILLIAM E. BENBOW, CA-S, S/CRPA, CRA, SCV APPRAISAL EXPERIENCE (A) Vice President of Enterprise Appraisal Co. (1982 to present) (B) Member of the Technical Staff of Enterprise Appraisal Co. (1977-1982) (C) Financial Analyst & Administrator at various colleges (1967-1977) PROFESSIONAL SOCIETY MEMBERSHIPS & DESIGNATIONS (A) Qualified in 1982 as a Senior Member of the American Association of Certified Appraisers and awarded the designation of Certified Appraiser-Senior (CA-S) (#3408). (B) Qualified in 1982 as a Senior Member of the National Association of Certified Real Property Appraisers and awarded the designation of (S/CRPA) (#0937) . (C) Qualified in 1982 as a member of the National Association of Re- view Appraisers and Mortgage Underwriters and received the desig- nation of Certified Review Appraiser (CRA) . (D) Qualified in 1982 with the International Institute of Valuers and registered as a Senior Certified Valuer (SCV) . (E) Associate Member of the Institute of Property Taxation (1978) , and Chairman of the Sales Data Bank Committee (1985-1988) . (F) Candidate for Senior Member in the American Society of Appraisers (1984) . EXPERT WITNESS TESTIMONY The sum total of all testimony given as a qualified expert valuation witness includes 32 appearances before 14 different courts or boards in eight states. The appearances include a mix of testimony for either a public authority, taxpayer or corporation. The types of courts or boards and their locations are as follows: (A) United States Courts: District - Dallas, Texas; Bankruptcy- Newark, New Jersey. (B) Common Pleas Court: Columbus, Ohio. (C) Boards of Tax Revision or Appeal: Greenville, South Carolina; Edwardsville, Illinois; Depew, New York; Wilson, Asheville and Lincolnton, North Carolina; Longview, Richmond, Houston and Waller, Texas; Charleston and Huntington, West Virginia. 6/88 PAGE 1 OF 2 4 PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL ca I WILLIAM E. BENBOW, CA-S, S/CRPA, CRA, SCV APPRAISAL SPECIALTIES & BACKGROUND (A) Authored or participated in over 1,100 appraisals of tangible property or intangible assets located in 35 states, Puerto Rico, Canada, Mexico, Brunei, Singapore, Malaysia, Australia, England, Scotland, Ireland, Norway, and The Netherlands. (B) These appraisals were of Real Estate, Machinery and Equipment, and Intangible Assets covering either a portion or all the assets of an enterprise. (C) The purposes were for acquisition, Ad Valorem taxes, allocation of purchase or sale price, condemnation, estate planning or settlement, gifts, insurance, financing, proposed sale, stock option plans and transfers. (D) The scope of appraisal services has had special emphasis in the area of the communications media, large industrial plants, intangible assets, business valuations, stock transfers, and in the solution of unusual appraisal problems. FORMAL EDUCATION & APPRAISAL INSTRUCTION (A) B. A. Degree - Guilford College, Greensboro, North Carolina (1967) . (B) Graduate Studies - University of North Carolina (1968) . (C) Penn State University courses: Real Estate Fundamentals & Practice; Real Estate Law; Real Estate Appraisal I; Advanced Real Estate Appraisal (1981-1983) . (D) Attended seminars concerning software programs (1972-1976) . (E) Attended Institute of Property Taxation (IPT) : advance sym- posiums and preconference school in Houston (1977 and 1978) ; Property Tax Seminar, Michigan State University (1983) ; Chicago Assessment/Tax Ratio Symposium (1983) ; Boca Raton Conference School (1984) ; Dallas Real Estate Symposium (1984) ; Boston Appeals Symposium (1984) ; Orlando Conference School (1986) ; Houston Real Estate School (1987) . (F) Guest Lecturer at: National Association of Accountants and National Association of Railway Tax Commissioners ( 1979) ; IPT Property Tax School, Michigan State University (1984 & 1987) ; National Association of Credit Management (1984) ; IPT School at Boca Raton Conference (1984); IPT Orlando Conference and at local IPT luncheons, Cleveland, Ohio and Charlotte, North Carolina ( 1986) ; Houston Conference School ( 1987) ; TRW, Inc. on preacquisition planning (1986) . (G) Authored four articles for Enterprise Valuation Reporter (1977- 1984) . (H) Intra-company seminars on Real Estate, Machinery and Equipment, and Intangible Assets (1977 to present) . 6/88 PAGE 2 OF 2 ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO. • .J MARKET SUPPORT DATA ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CU 10 Market Approach Exhibits ii .,.,.4., _r • ENTERPRISE erraniRei � IMPROVED SALES LOCATION MAP 0 I ;-- in • i i rn • I l °, • � I N. - • A I I d N ti • W • O I I A" ENTERPRISE P "'�" °OJ IMPROVED SALES KEY Sale Code #1 #610008 #2 #443004 #3 #432025 #4 #601136 #5 #296011 #6 #600126 #7 #464005 #8 #194088 #9 #452054 #10 #853005 #11 #088019 #12 #672012 A #770142 B #840003 C #377007 D #606228 (I) 799-2 .111CL,14 Int e! ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO IMPROVED SALE #610008 .o LOCATION: 121 Wallace Street, Sterling, Illinois GRANTOR: Northwestern Steel & Wire Co. GRANTEE: NW Acquisition Corp. LAND AREA: 594. 00 Acres BLDG. AREA: 2,737, 382 SF Ground 3 , 383 , 323 SF Gross LAND/BLDG. RATIO: 7. 65/1 AVERAGE # STORIES: 1. 24 UTILITIES: All CONSTRUCTION: Metal Clad, Steel Frame; Brick Mill, Wood Frame ZONING: Heavy Industrial % OFFICE AREA: 1 DATE INSPECTED: 12/87 VINTAGE: 1898/87 VERIFIED WITH: Grantor EFFECTIVE AGE: 35 Years PURCHASE DATE: 9/2/88 CONDITION: Fair LAND VALUE: $ 1, 970,000 or $3, 316/Acre (Sale Date) IMPROVEMENT VALUE: 18, 030, 000 or $5. 33/Square Foot TOTAL PURCHASE PRICE: $20, 000, 000 or $5. 91/SF of Buildings COMMENTS: The above was the Illinois real estate portion of the leveraged buyout totalling $188 million. This was $30 million above the book net worth, or almost a 20 percent premium over the $170 million net book value of all prop- erty. This same property had an original cost of $374 million at July 31, 1987. NW Acquisition was formed by a newly established employee stock ownership plan covering salaried employees of the company other than senior management, and employees represented by the United Steelworkers of America, certain members of the company's senior management, and outside investors comprised of persons associated with M. J. Rosenthal & Associates, persons associated with McLarnon Enterprises, Inc. , and Ampco-Pittsburgh Corp. The building area allocation includes 1% office, 85% manufacturing, and 14% warehouse. ENTERPRISE AFPBAMSAL CO. IMPROVED SALE #610008 .o • I IF r • nnnuununniimi -. • • } si .„...��_ 1 ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO. IMPROVED SALE #610008 0 • ai - C4 IIII A .r Ate.,.__ A- tir.me #: 1 ENTERPRISE APPRArnLLCn IMPROVED SALE *610008 I® grr 0. la API IPP eilP '444. µ <ay00.-PmA(, .-t,it .., ',.wL •_ '�,�.,.aF•M" �. 14 t;, ,Aar e . ;00, n- _ 1 7.."1. r 41 M - `—_ !,._ ' - - •.�► - [ -^-4.• __- we nig to , . _ - .. . _mil_ .. v r _ , A ...a..:17 .-__ • • s..• • - • _ ...4. ' a __...`-y Li" • ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO] IMPROVED SALE #610008 ® mot _ I ► ,pi _,,, \. ., ' y � „, ..._ , ...stailtm,/ , -=ate. ,—.--,.......0,_,, i.. I� 47 ENTERPRISE APPAAIBAL CO. IMPROVED SALE #610008 ill ai 771, \ _ rl fill J-2W .\.` �✓ice V II L dff,r ,i h.if 0 s��\Cap i I ?i I�.�I ,i,i�' ux� 11 1 iiii p,I-�� 11 I ,i �rl8 �d� _, cl II ,?iII- II+V�IjJa J e e — l l ;; `flit ; I5 j( Fir —, � � !i1/4.77-----;---71 �l II Cy 1 LI I 02 3 Z iii / -47 ; N r—y N c, z a \ I ( .1. , n '' I�� 111===iii• � ' of �- F .. ;`_ • (1) 754-2/2A ENTERPRISE APPRAISALC0. IMPROVED SALE #443004 • LOCATION: 1210 Massillon Road, Akron, Ohio GRANTOR: Loral Corporation GRANTEE: Goodyear Tire & Rubber LAND AREA: 291. 443 Acres BLDG. AREA: 2, 391,079 SF Ground 3 ,198,800 SF Gross LAND/BLDG. RATIO: 3 . 97/1 AVERAGE # STORIES: 1. 34 UTILITIES: All CONSTRUCTION: Metal Clad, Steel Frame; Masonry & Steel Frame ZONING: Industrial % OFFICE AREA: 23 DATE INSPECTED: 4/87 VINTAGE: 1929/84 VERIFIED WITH: Grantor EFFECTIVE AGE: 22 Years PURCHASE DATE: 3/13/87 CONDITION: Good LAND VALUE: $ 9, 035, 000 or $31,000/SF (Sale Date) IMPROVEMENT VALUE: 70,830,000 or $22. 14/Square Foot TOTAL PURCHASE PRICE: $79,865, 000 or $24. 97/SF of Buildings COMMENTS: This parcel of real estate was part of a much larger acquisition in excess of $500 million that included real estate at other locations, personal property, intangible assets, and working capital. The total annual 1986 taxes was $641 ,121, and the 100% assessed equalized value was $29,736, 640. The build- ing area allocation includes 23% office, 54% manufacturing, and 23% warehouse. ENTERPRISE APPRA ALCti IMPROVED SALE %443004 .® . • A F ■ • L Y d IW y 11/4 aalls . '■1t .. v' .. • ENTERPRISE APPRAIRAI. IMPROVED SALE #443004 I • 1 Li • • or ` - - U Z K y „ �(.� I Y csseee • ENTERPRISE APPPAIRALCaJ IMPROVED SALE #443004 • 0 ,Y :-,2':is m t •4 , 44 ,1 :.•“,; ', • 4 i �ry a uyi 4.4 tt •aya'^w e t u yi Eti•atia. haaiF Y YyEllvw>; • n.: r pi t t ifEY4 at nxwYutraa�° . .y x IE11 N➢.Y eikoPi�sw ; 1 Y 9EEEM •Y******Yu 4C0.ix* stamina Lt: inn NL'. ow ea sit • • . , OP,. r. \, ,, , / 440 00 , , , i ....... 2., , , /,,,, .„0,0i,„,, , ........ :,r . , 0 ,;..,:siiii , ° r,�. mg p {{I��I��µµ1I1g1g�IIII tlii 11 w ,. n �� , I L +a Y ENTERPRISE APPIWSALCQ I IMPROVED SALE #443004 -! _ t •. / / Al at a itrine '.1 ENTERPRISE IMPROVED SALE #443004 APPRAISAL CO.pi _is j),____YL—r-_:___------7 Ic\SC .,---\ \ • C :. . , \� '•1 ; D ,s .A Ir c • — __. _ L. B \ \\\a• .umpew9as.- .. G Les :iii , , � \1/407"..\ 1O. )) \-------- ,,\ r\ \ •:, f . .%" '4, \ - Vole GOODYEAR AEROSPACE CORP. AKRON, OHIO PLOT PLAN NOT TO SCALE DATE: January, 1987 (I) 903-2 RPM ENTERPRISE APPRAIBAI.CO.j IMPROVED SALE #432025 LOCATION: 300 Phillipi Road, Columbus, Ohio GRANTOR: White Consolidated Industries GRANTEE: Consolidated Stores DEED BOOK: 8778; PAGE: 1-17 LAND AREA: 268. 95 Acres BLDG. AREA: 2, 589,708 SF LAND/BLDG. RATIO: 4 . 52/1 AVERAGE # STORIES: 1 & 2 UTILITIES: All CONSTRUCTION: Masonry & Metal Clad, Steel Frame ZONING: Industrial % OFFICE AREA: 3 DATE INSPECTED: 1/89 VINTAGE: 1952/59 VERIFIED WITH: Grantor EFFECTIVE AGE: 30 Years PURCHASE DATE: 12/86 CONDITION: Fair/Good LAND VALUE: $ 8,068,500 or $30,000/Acre (Sale Date) IMPROVEMENT VALUE: 23 ,781, 500 or $9. 18/Square Foot TOTAL PURCHASE PRICE: $31 ,850,000 or $12 . 30/SF of Buildings COMMENTS: The property has extensive frontage along the west side of Wilson Road. This a manufacturing facility with ceiling heights of 19 ' - 53 ' and varied bay sizes. It is rail-served and 75 percent sprinklered. Loading facilities consist of adequate tailgate and drive-in truck doors. µ,. i ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CQ IMPROVED SALE #432025 > 6 r v Nal ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO. IMPROVED SALE #432025 1 (I) 650-94,1 ENTERPRISE AFPRMSAL0O. IMPROVED SALE #601136 LOCATION: 400 North Wolf Road, Northlake, Illinois GRANTOR: GTE GRANTEE: AT&T LAND AREA: 129 . 314 Acres BLDG. AREA: 1,691,750 SF Ground 1, 915,526 SF Gross LAND/BLDG. RATIO: 2 . 94/1 AVERAGE # STORIES: 1.13 UTILITIES: All CONSTRUCTION: Masonry & Steel Frame ZONING: Industrial % OFFICE AREA: 24 DATE INSPECTED: 9/88 VINTAGE: 1956/66 VERIFIED WITH: Grantor EFFECTIVE AGE: 20 Years & Grantee PURCHASE DATE: 11/1/88 CONDITION: Good LAND VALUE: $13 ,575,000 or $104, 977/Acre (Sale Date) IMPROVEMENT VALUE: 28,425,000 or $14. 84/Square Foot TOTAL PURCHASE PRICE: $42,000,000 or $21 .93/SF of Buildings COMMENTS: The sale price reflects a negotiated value which is the result of two independent appraisals performed for both the grantor and grantee. The Enterprise Appraisal Co. value was $35 , 950, 000. Significant amenities to the site include its proximity to the Tri-State Tollway and Eisenhower Expressway. The land is irregular in shape and the topography is level and at surrounding road grades. It has frontage along North Wolf Road. : u ':l ENTE:FtPRIAPPRAISALnI IMPROVED SALE 4601136 ,® FFr4,y -' - :'1•! - I. ,* -, .fir • • - 3 r TT K . UM lit It it,e) ENTERPRISE aPPRAISALCa IMPROVED SALE #601136 o r - _ I L __...ice , 4 .. sismeweaswk. ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO. IMPROVED SALE #601136 .o . .4 ,. Ji " � hl�'l' d�i ' ,.a Vi IT I' Fig IIAI',i 'moo a y 4 �n. Q I I ra } ..1 41 }'�' Y�ny2�{A�}: bb{g' '+ B G .,.i..•- T t2VYIA hof t ----,VAR- P r.:,,,V. j a-- 1 MTV I ENTERPRISE APPRAllata.COL IMPROVED SALE #601136 1 II11;'i or /_ - iat _ war ra mar Mgt rf\s 's1 '114 111:1 II � I I ,I I ( r t- !._... (I) 650-9 a 6 4. r ENTERPRISE IMPROVED SALE #601136 • APPRAISAL Ca ,) NORTHLAKE PROPERTY iL i „0kF ROAO �_, 1. y.. {rn� O.4O6 I'■sj.m AGRE5 4;0.•4 V ' r— \ c Is Ft �.`■ 6.884 ACRES ^o^ w..• ww /� L ■ w'Ti _-- 1 �j a n -/1'/ I,843 •.. X ACRES ■ ; 5.685 :\‘......._......./ ■ e ■ F ACRES a ti ,t e� 1 i i gym.: ,gym■ -y■iii■�i � J. i I \ .f. 11, ARKIN G L. •4ORnl I F"F I I iAIIIWIG I 1. i ----, LOT ! '. 11 II II MAIN MANUFACTURING I 8.824 PLANT AND OFFICES ACRES El _I ,I p 1. I E _ it Y r —_-r—. ° j l ° 1J �. ; cH1 I LI ' i1 / I , - - _ - -.. GTE NORTHLAKE, ILLINOIS PLOT PLAN NOT TO SCALE DATE: October, 1988 (I) 759-3 ENTERPRISEI APPRAISAL CO IMPROVED SALE #296011 LOCATION: Interstate Highway 85 and Woodrift Road, Greenville, South Carolina GRANTOR: Celanese Fibers GRANTEE: N/A LAND AREA: 285. 00 Acres BLDG. AREA: 1,643 , 633 SF LAND/BLDG. RATIO: 7 . 55/1 AVERAGE # STORIES: One UTILITIES: All CONSTRUCTION: Concrete Block & Steel Frame ZONING: Industrial % OFFICE AREA: 1 DATE INSPECTED: 1/86, 2/87 VINTAGE: 1964/79 & 9/88 VERIFIED WITH: Agent EFFECTIVE AGE: 16 Years AGREEMENT DATE: 9/88 CONDITION: Good LAND VALUE: $ 5,700, 000 or $20,000/Acre (Sale Date) IMPROVEMENT VALUE: 19, 300,000 or $11.74/Square Foot TOTAL OFFERING PRICE: $25, 000, 000 or $15. 21/SF of Buildings COMMENTS: This is a current offering of a manufacturing plant for synthetic, non-cellulosic polyester yarns; no manufacturing equipment is included in sale price; located at the Interstate Highway exchange. As of September 1988 there is an agreement on the property with settlement expected within 180 days. The purchase price is still confidential but is estimated to be close to asking price. SA1V1 ENTERPRISE uPr AIRILLcaJ IMPROVED SALE #296011 • 1 *6i 4 ft ‘`•• j .. .0 . sr A t .it ENTERPffiRE arAAIR&L M IMPROVED SALE #296011 L?VGT, J • • ;gib' A Ty khet ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO IMPROVED SALE #296011 • "Mt j Y • (I) l 650-9 ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO IMPROVED SALE #600126 op® LOCATION: 5555 West Touhy Avenue, Skokie, Illinois GRANTOR: AT&T GRANTEE: Trammell Crow and Taxman Corp. LAND AREA: 62. 40 Acres BLDG. AREA: 1,086 ,000 SF Ground 1, 303 ,200 SF Gross LAND/BLDG. RATIO: 2. 09/1 AVERAGE # STORIES: 1. 20 UTILITIES: All CONSTRUCTION: Masonry ZONING: Industrial % OFFICE AREA: 27 DATE INSPECTED: 9/88 VINTAGE: 1958/63 VERIFIED WITH: Agent EFFECTIVE AGE: 20 Years PURCHASE DATE: 10/87 CONDITION: Fair LAND VALUE: $ 8,150 ,000 or $130,609/Acre (Sale Date) IMPROVEMENT VALUE: 17, 850,000 or $13 .70/Square Foot TOTAL PURCHASE PRICE: $26, 000,000 or $19 . 95/SF of Buildings COMMENTS: The property was purchased for construction of a commercial retail mall to be constructed by a joint venture of Trammell Crow and Taxman Corp. Both Skokie and Niles, Illinois, have approved a tax increment financing district for the complex which falls within the jurisdiction of both municipalities, enabling Trammell Crow to seek tax-exempt bonds to help underwrite development costs should such finan- cial assistance be desired. The site will be improved with a shopping center containing approximately 800 ,000 square feet to be known as Village Crossings . Montgomery Ward will be located in a store containing approximately 112 , 000 square feet. An additional 300 ,000 square feet of retail space will also be constructed in the first phase, a portion of which will be occupied Jewel Osco. An existing two-story building will be renovated into 900 covered parking spaces , and another por- tion of the existing building area for retail space. One base- ment area will be utilized as a storm water detention pool. 1 J: ' g. ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL cai IMPROVED SALE #600126 r _ N' - S' ENTERPRISE wPPnusncea IMPROVED SALE %600126 a':' `� ' 6 - v ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL C° IMPROVED SALE #600126 444 r, rr ass;air gl • • ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO. .® IMPROVED SALE #464005 LOCATION: 700 Chase Street, Gary, Indiana GRANTOR: The Budd Company GRANTEE: Chase Street Partners LAND AREA: 136. 94 Acres BLDG. AREA: 1,207 ,000 SF LAND/BLDG. RATIO: 4 . 94/1 AVERAGE # STORIES: One UTILITIES: All CONSTRUCTION: Masonry & Steel Frame ZONING: Industrial % OFFICE AREA: 3 DATE INSPECTED: 9/88 & 1/89 VINTAGE: 1950/73 VERIFIED WITH: Agent EFFECTIVE AGE: 25 Years PURCHASE DATE: 9/86 CONDITION: Good LAND VALUE: $ 2,750,000 or $20 ,082/Acre (Sale Date) IMPROVEMENT VALUE: 13,750,000 or $11 . 39/Square Foot TOTAL PURCHASE PRICE: $16,500,000 or $13 . 67/SF of Buildings COMMENTS: This is a manufacturing complex comprised of three buildings in good condition, built in 1950 , 1960 and 1973 . The facility is located close to Interstate Highways 80 and 90, approximately 15 miles east of Chicago. The buildings include 33 ,000 square feet of air conditioned offices, 18 ' ceilings, 10 loading docks, interior and exterior rail spur, several drive-in doors, 100% sprinklers, and adequate park- ing. The site was used as an automotive stamping plant. The buyer intends to use it as a multi-tenant industrial complex. Financing for the transaction was all cash to the seller. The sale price could not be positively confirmed since the buyer insisted that a non-disclosure agreement be signed by all parties. Different sources have reported sale prices ranging between $10 , 000 , 000 and $16 , 500, 000 . However, public records reflect a first mortgage amount of $12 , 125 ,000 which is approximately 73 . 5 of $16 , 500 ,000 . h `? t�✓'`.jT�jy' °� ENTERPRISE APPRAISALcal IMPROVED SALE #464005 1© U .: 4 5'` ---se // / ___ y 621.14 W W. r'Jt w 1 '1 4, ..-...,*iii, - t ay ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO. IMPROVED SALE #4 6 4 0 0 5 • 3b{ 9Sk',< cot nor.. e , .._Yy Al tp+P • vj irnM----Salt'4%0,441%1 •,'Y'dif 1Yle. • Ly 'Q �...c - 1: a " "`. r _ (I) 4 1 921-1 A subj . loc. ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL Co. l IMPROVED SALE #194088 LOCATION: 1000 North Cannon Avenue, Hatfield Township, Lansdale Borough, Pennsylvania GRANTOR: Armstrong World Industries , Inc. GRANTEE: American Olean Tile Co. (a subsidiary of National Gypsum) LAND AREA: 127 . 00 Acres BLDG. AREA: 1,133 ,452 SF Ground 1 ,196,951 SF Gross LAND/BLDG. RATIO: 4 .63/1 AVERAGE # STORIES: 1. 06 UTILITIES: All CONSTRUCTION: Metal Clad, Steel Frame; Masonry & Steel Frame ZONING: Industrial/ % OFFICE AREA: 7 Residential DATE INSPECTED: 10/88 VINTAGE: 1929/88 VERIFIED WITH: Grantor EFFECTIVE AGE: 25 Years & Grantee PURCHASE DATE: 10/3/88 CONDITION: Good LAND VALUE: $ 3 , 810,000 or $30 ,000/Acre (Sale Date) IMPROVEMENT VALUE: 24, 620,000 or $20. 58/Square Foot TOTAL PURCHASE PRICE: $28, 430,000 or $23 .77/SF of Buildings COMMENTS: The above purchase price of this parcel of real estate is an allocation from a total acquisition in excess of $300 mil- lion. This acquisition includes a number of properties in various states with personal property, intangible assets and working capital. The 1988 total annual taxes were $351, 028 , and the 100% assessed equalized value was $33 ,034 ,782. The buildings contain 7% office area, 78% manufacturing, 8% warehouse, 4% R&D, and 3% storage. The minimal portion of the property zoned residential represents some frontage on Moyer Street and 8th and Moyer. Std ENTERPRISE APPRA79AL CO. i IMPROVED SALE #194088 J� • .t,,,. ,y . 1 S7 I:b ' 1 ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CQ IMPROVED SALE #194088 • .i�. ,_ Jl y�x x ,y .:.:;.-7:-... • s tJ w.,. . I i 1',. . � ,�. r�. 1 rat' --t- -..e...- pv 3/47,-,7 41 l ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO. IMPROVED SALE #194088 s"aj 'rM'�NfMe eu�we. x "y , • ni R A ■ gic r x• a (1) . i 921-1 `, •L 'v�• A subj . ENTERPRISE 1r^r APPRAISAL cu W O ,p Z W d z 0 z Z\\ I d U \ii _4._ I. CO p02 co cr. A J ^+ 14 a N �7 I N 1 I O 1 m Li I H = 1 G I I q H d •rl Re- 1/4., N 7co RA ri WI IO H nfl / SI 1 li co W z a a W w on H a El -[i G F H •N O b ^ O b u'1 I Z W rl .y H ; i 6 .-1 W W d 7 co a Ca co 'O O u) H z L. w Z Q d a U H �� rd W c Fill tul I W O N W i cu I d i I 1 ri a I v 0 F E-4 0 (I) 903-2 RPM ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO. IMPROVED SALE #452054 LOCATION: 2101 East Kemper Road, Sharonville, Ohio GRANTOR: Montgomery Ward GRANTEE: Federated Department Stores LAND AREA: 75. 00 Acres BLDG. AREA: 1, 105 ,412 SF LAND/BLDG. RATIO: 2 . 96/1 AVERAGE # STORIES: One UTILITIES: All CONSTRUCTION: Metal Clad, Steel Frame ZONING: Industrial % OFFICE AREA: 4 DATE INSPECTED: VINTAGE: 1980 VERIFIED WITH: EFFECTIVE AGE: 7 Years PURCHASE DATE: 10/1/87 CONDITION: Very Good LAND VALUE: $ 2, 250,000 or $30, 000/Acre (Sale Date) IMPROVEMENT VALUE: 11,750,000 or $10 . 63/Square Foot TOTAL PURCHASE PRICE: $14, 000,000 or $12. 67/SF of Buildings COMMENTS: This is a well-maintained one-story distribution build- ing constructed in 1980. It is of steel frame construction with insulated metal panel walls and reinforced concrete floors. It includes 41, 478 square feet of air conditioned office area plus another 147 , 000± square feet of air condi- tioned retail space, 100% sprinklered, 26 ' - 30 ' ceiling heights, all public utilities including heavy electric power, a 2-car rail siding, 76 truck docks, and adequate parking. Sharonville is a suburb of Cincinnati with good highway access. The purchaser intends to occupy the entire building and utilize it for the same purpose as the seller. r ' > 6 v v ENTERPRISE arenareaLca IMPROVED SALE #452054 • ■ ••_ 1 ;s ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO. IMPROVED SALE #452054 I® z. ENTERPRISE APPRAISAICOI IMPROVED SALE #853005 LOCATION: 100 South Litchfield Road, Litchfield Park, Arizona GRANTOR: Loral Corporation GRANTEE: Goodyear Tire & Rubber LAND AREA: 163 .73 Acres BLDG. AREA: 1,016 ,188 SF Ground 1,077 , 544 SF Gross LAND/BLDG. RATIO: 6 .62/1 AVERAGE # STORIES: 1. 06 UTILITIES: All CONSTRUCTION: Metal-Transite & Wood or Steel Frame ZONING: Commercial % OFFICE AREA: 35 & Residential DATE INSPECTED: 4/87 VINTAGE: 1942/86 VERIFIED WITH: Grantor EFFECTIVE AGE: 20 Years PURCHASE DATE: 3/13/87 CONDITION: Good LAND VALUE: $ 9 ,800 ,000 or $59 ,855/Acre (Sale Date) IMPROVEMENT VALUE: 24,050,000 or $22 . 32/Square Foot TOTAL PURCHASE PRICE: $33 ,850 ,000 or $31 . 41/SF of Buildings COMMENTS: This parcel of real estate was part of a much larger acquisition in excess of $500 million that included real estate at other locations, personal property, intangible assets, and working capital. The industrial use of this facility represents a non- conforming, pre-existing use . The total 1987 annual taxes were $394 , 985, and the 100% assessed equalized value was $15, 511 ,621 . The building area allocation includes 35% office and laboratory, 51% manufacturing, and 14% warehouse and service. ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO IMPROVED SALE #853005 •. _ ^.5r • "',yam► -�\ ENTESE APPRAISAL co. IMPROVED SALE #853005 nrrxaiau.co. .c z I a_JN- . Na-CO _ S. - CC I-_ w 0 • I <C-I D Q J N I ig�g }cez . W I ii °Z, • O W a ry Is _ ._'_— c,a 1 00 ti- a tl 5 . a w • YY ify, I o nl 3fa o o o I ' I I _ I i I I .0i u i , 9 I ,a - "a I tit' I YE i N si W w Y5 1 K C U V Q Q OF 11 WN F F N en ON CO / . . <Q< J DO G C C ti I— .7.: -J W J W W r_ 0 0 Wt U �J LL j o LL co O �a =W GOODYEAR AEROSPACE CORP. LITCHFIELD PARK, ARIZONA PLOT PLAN NOT TO SCALE DATE: JANUARY, 1987 (I) ) 598-1A I.ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO. IMPROVED SALE #088019 10 LOCATION: Woodbridge Avenue, Edison, New Jersey GRANTOR: Fedders Corporation GRANTEE: Zirinsky Associates LAND AREA: 43 . 00 Acres BLDG. AREA: 1,000,000 SF LAND/BLDG. RATIO: 1 . 87/1 AVERAGE # STORIES: One UTILITIES: All CONSTRUCTION: Reinforced Concrete; Masonry & Steel Frame ZONING: Industrial % OFFICE AREA: 15 DATE INSPECTED: 2/86 VINTAGE: 1965 VERIFIED WITH: Agent EFFECTIVE AGE: 11 Years PURCHASE DATE: 12/31/85 CONDITION: Good LAND VALUE: $ 9 ,460 ,000 or $220,000/Acre (Sale Date) IMPROVEMENT VALUE: 13 ,290,000 or $13 . 29/Square Foot TOTAL PURCHASE PRICE: $22 ,750 ,000 or $22.75/SF of Buildings COMMENTS: This sale was part of a larger facility that had been offered for sale since 1983 for $39,000, 000, and had con- tained 86 acres of land and 1,381, 000 square feet of building area. Subsequently it was sold off in parcels as follows: 18 acres of land with 381, 000 square feet of building area was offered at $8 ,000 , 000 and sold in March of 1985 for a reported $5, 500 ,000 ; 25 acres of vacant land was offered at $7 ,000, 000 and sold for $5 ,000 ,000 . The balance of the property as de- tailed above had been offered for sale for $24 , 000 , 000 and sub- sequently sold for $22,750 ,000. It is presently offered for lease at $4 . 50 per square foot. I 598-1A ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO. IMPROVED SALE #088019 I® 4 fi 5. I 598-1A ` ENTERPRISE arrarasancal IMPROVED SALE *088019 10 I s_ . -• 1. (I) 1 677-4 A subj . ENTERPRISE 1r tornn's/a.m.] IMPROVED SALE #672012 10 LOCATION: West Harry Street, Wichita, Kansas GRANTOR: Gates Learjet Corporation GRANTEE: Integrated Resources LAND AREA: 77 . 04 Acres BLDG. AREA: 497 , 487 SF Ground 697,202 SF Gross LAND/BLDG. RATIO: 4. 81/1 AVERAGE # STORIES: 1. 40 UTILITIES: All CONSTRUCTION: Metal Clad, Steel Frame ZONING: Light Industrial % OFFICE AREA: 50 DATE INSPECTED: 9/86 VINTAGE: 1963/82 VERIFIED WITH: Grantor EFFECTIVE AGE: 15 Years PURCHASE DATE: 10/5/87 CONDITION: Good LAND VALUE: $ 3 ,100 ,000 or $40,239/Acre (Sale Date) IMPROVEMENT VALUE: 12 ,900 ,000 or $18 . 50/Square Foot TOTAL PURCHASE PRICE: $16,000,000 or $22 . 95/SF of Buildings COMMENTS: The above purchase price of this parcel of real estate is an allocation from a total acquisition in excess of $60 million including personal property for this and another location in Arizona. The facility is located next to the airport and has frontages along West Harry Street and Tyler Road. The buildings contain 17% office area, 69% manufacturing, and 14% warehouse. The facility is fully sprinklered, has six truck doors , and is rail served. lift^i ENTERPRISE APPRnI99I.Cal IMPROVED SALE #672012 Jo 14P7 . 1114.111 r. ill 1 ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO.J l IMPROVED SALE #672012 ® \. r0MAD 6+N. 4 ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO. IMPROVED SALE #672012 •• • • ----- =v+� ....� 1 m¢ im • J I .._ e_ca. s. • JJ - I —_- —_ — _ r /=_ L // -- = = o r a.'.. . //A _ _ _ 1 Ul0 5 ///o ! 1 =' . _ _ :_ = 3 N J = _1 c _ _ • aw E _ __ !LOG. B [ . West Harry Ell II _ I. �;°.,,,..,� .1 . �mm IIt,I„ „11,1.t11.,,11„ _II.1,,,,,,i. ; Ie — = Street ern:. o. � • c v.�,,.i,..L c 0:!:il:i;:57171;irirfQ .J , acllit'.!=.'!r,T!!IIiHiWQ r— e. N]. G„r.,!7rnu17 fJ a z!, P s j ii GATES LEARJET CORPORATION WICHITA, KANSAS PLOT PLAN NOT TO SCALE DATE: September , 1987 ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO. I® ECONOMIC DEPRECIATION STUDY EXTRACTED FROM MARKET DATA "' l ECONOMIC DEPRECIATION STUDY EXTRACTED FROM MARKET DATA ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL CO OF THE EIGHT (8) LARGEST SALES IO. Composite Age 24 Years RCN $/SF of Sale $44.89 Less Physical Depreciation 31% Physical Depreciated Value/SF $30.97 Less Time Adjusted Sale Price/SF 13.84 Functional & Economic Value Loss/SF $17.13 Functional & Economic Value Loss as % of RCN 38% Less Functional Depreciation 17% Economic Depreciation 21% Note: The above supports the depreciations used in our Cost Approach. ECONOMIC DEPRECIATION STUDY ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL cuJ EXTRACTED FROM MARKET DATA Subject Sale #1 Sale #2 Sale #3 Sale #4 Code #80551 #610008 #443004 #432025 #601136 Location Windsor, Sterling, Akron, Columbus, Northlake, CO IL OH OH IL Land Acreage 329.00 594.00 291.44 268.95 129.31 Land/Bldg. Ratio 4.63/1 7.65/1 3.97/1 4.52/1 2.94/1 SF Building Area 3,092,560 3,383,323 3,198,800 2,589,708 1,915,526 Average # Stories 1.45 1.24 1.34 1 & 2 1.13 % Office Area 13% 1% 23% 3% 24% Effective Age 15 Years 35 Years 22 Years 30 Years 20 Years Condition of Imprs. Good Fair Good Fair/Good Good Date of Sale 9/88 3/87 12/86 11/88 Price/SF of Land $5.91 $24.97 $12.30 $21.93 & Improvements Total Purchase Price $20,000,000 $79,865,000 $31,850,000 $42,000,000 Land Value 1,970,000 9,035,000 8,068,500 13,575,000 Net Improvement Value $18,030,000 $70,830,000 $23,781,500 $28,425,000 Price/SF of Buildings Excluding Land $ 5.33 $22.14 $ 9.18 $14.84 Time Adjustment 100% 102% 100% 100% Time Adjusted Price/SF $ 5.33 $22.58 $ 9.18 $14.84 RCN $/SF Sale $60.02 $51.56 $45.50 $36.88 Physical Depreciation 45% 25% 40% 25% Physical Depreciated Value $33.01 $38.67 $27.30 $27.66 Time Adjusted Sale Price/SF of Buildings 5.33 22.58 9.18 14.84 Functional & Economic Value Loss/SF $27.68 $16.09 $18.12 $12.82 Functional & Economic Value Loss as % of RCN 46% 31% 40% 35% Functional Depreciation 25% 12% 15% 18% Economic Depreciation 21% 19% 25% 17% -C" ECONOMIC DEPRECIATION STUDY ENTERPRISE APPRAISAL co. I EXTRACTED FROM MARKET DATA • J® Subject Sale #5 Sale #6 Sale #7 Sale #8 Code #80551 #296011 #600126 #464005 #194088 Location Windsor, Greenville, Skokie, Gary, Lansdale, CO SC IL IA PA Land Acreage 329.00 285.00 62.40 136.94 127.00 Land/Bldg. Ratio 4.63/1 7.55/1 2.09/1 F 4.94/1 4.63/1 SF Building Area 3,092,560 1,643,633 1,303,200 1,207,000 1,196,951 Average # Stories 1.45 1.00 1.20 1.00 1.06 % Office Area 13% 1% 27% 3% 7% Effective Age 15 Years 16 Years 20 Years 25 Years 25 Years Condition of Imprs. Good Good Fair Good Good Date of Sale/Agrt. 9/88 10/87 9/86 10/88 Price/SF of Land $15.21 $19.95 $13.67 $23.77 & Improvements Total Purchase Price $25,000,000 26,000,000 $16,500,000 $28.430,000 Land Value 5,700,000 8,150,000 2,750,000 3,810,000 Net Improvement Value $19,300,000 $17,850,000 $13,750,000 $24,620,000 Price/SF of Buildings Excluding Land $11.74 $13.70 $11.39 $20.58 Time Adjustment 100% 106% 105% 100% Time Adjusted Price/SF $11.74 $14.52 $11.96 $20.58 RCN $/SF Sale $26.40 $38.95 $53.60 $46.10 Physical' Depreciation 20% 25% 30% 30% Physical Depreciated Value $21.12 $29.21 $37.52 $32.27 Time Adjusted Sale Price/SF of Buildings 11.74 14.52 11.96 20.58 Functional & Economic Value Loss/SF $ 9.38 $14.69 $25.56 $11.69 Functional & Economic Value Loss as % of RCN 36% 38% 48% 25% Functional Depreciation 15% 20% 22% 5% Economic Depreciation 21% 18% 26% 20% Hello