HomeMy WebLinkAbout930726.tiff RESOLUTION
RE: THE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, 1993, WELD COUNTY, COLORADO
PETITION OF:
GATEWAY PARTNERS
P 0 BOX 402
GREELEY, CO 80632
DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY: PIN: R 2815186 PARCEL: 096105323001 - GR 4981 L11
TO 16 BLK58 2800 8 AVE%
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado,
organized as the Board of Equalization for the purpose of adjusting, equalizing,
raising or lowering the assessment and valuation of real and personal property
within Weld County, fixed and made by the County Assessor for the year 1993, and
WHEREAS, said petition has been heard before the County Assessor and due
Notice of Determination thereon has been given to the taxpayer(s) , and
WHEREAS, the taxpayer(s) presented a petition of appeal of the County
Assessor's valuation for the year 1993, claiming that the property described in
such petition was assessed too high, as more specifically stated in said
petition, and
WHEREAS, said petitioner being represented by Jack Jerome, Partner, and
WHEREAS, the Board has made its findings on the evidence, testimony and
remonstrances and is now fully informed.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of Weld
County, acting as the Board of Equalization, that the evidence presented at the
hearing supported, in part, the value placed upon the property by the petitioner.
The assessment and valuation of the Weld County Assessor shall be, and hereby is,
adjusted as follows:
930726
4soo27
Page 2
RE: BOE - GATEWAY PARTNERS
ORIGINAL ADJUSTED
Land $ 69,000 $ 69, 000
Improvements OR
Personal Property 1,281, 000 1, 125,000
TOTAL ACTUAL VALUE $ 1,350, 000 $ 1, 194,000
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a denial of a petition, in whole or in part, by
the Board of Equalization may be appealed by selecting one of the following three
options:
1. Board of Assessment Appeals: You have the right to appeal the
County Board of Equalization's (CBOE's) decision to the Board of
Assessment Appeals (BAA) . Such hearing is the final hearing at
which testimony, exhibits, or any other evidence may be
introduced. If the decision of the BAA is further appealed to
the Court of Appeals, only the record created at the BAA hearing
shall be the basis for the Court's decision. No new evidence can
be introduced at the Court of Appeals. (Section 39-8-108(10) ,
CRS)
Appeals to the BAA must be made on forms furnished by the
BAA, and should be mailed or delivered within thirty (30)
days of denial by the CBOE to:
Board of Assessment Appeals
1313 Sherman Street, Room 523
Denver, CO 80203
Phone: 866-5880
OR
2. District Court: You have the right to appeal the CBOE's decision
to the District Court of the county wherein your property is
located. New testimony, exhibits or any other evidence may be
introduced at the District Court hearing. For filing
requirements, please contact your attorney or the Clerk of the
District Court. Further appeal of the District Court's decision
is made to the Court of Appeals for a review of the record.
(Section 39-8-108(1) , CRS)
930726
Page 3
RE: BOE - GATEWAY PARTNERS
OR
3. Binding Arbitration: You have the right to submit your case to
arbitration. If you choose this option the arbitrator's decision
is final and your right to appeal your current valuation ends.
(Section 39-8-108.5, CRS)
Selecting the Arbitrator: In order to pursue arbitration, you
must notify the CBOE of your intent. You and the CBOE select an
arbitrator from the official list of qualified people. If you
cannot agree on an arbitrator., the District Court of the county
in which the property is located will make the selection.
Arbitration Hearing Procedure: Arbitration hearings are held
within sixty days from the date the arbitrator is selected. Both
you and the CBOE are entitled to participate. The hearings are
informal. The arbitrator has the authority to issue subpoenas
for witnesses, books, records, documents and other evidence. He
also has the power to administer oaths, and all questions of law
and fact shall be determined by him.
The arbitration hearing may be confidential and closed to the
public, upon mutual agreement. The arbitrator's written decision
must be delivered to both parties personally or by registered
mail within ten (10) days of the hearing. Such decision is final
and not subject to review.
Fees and Expenses: The arbitrator's fees and expenses are agreed
upon by you and the CBOE. In the case of residential real
property, such fees and expenses cannot exceed $150.00 per case.
The arbitrator's fees and expenses, not including counsel fees,
are to be paid as provided in the decision.
930726
Page 4
RE: BOE - GATEWAY PARTNERS
The above and foregoing Resolution was, on motion duly made and seconded,
adopted by the
following voteon the 30th day of July, A.D. , 1993.
ATTEST: L//G BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
WEL// COUNTY, COLORADO
Weld County Clerk to the Board G� �--
/�7-G1/[�i';<� (AYE)
Cons ance L. Harbert, Chairman
a-4—lie
pp (AYE)
Deputy Cler o the Bgar W. H. We ster,Did
BY: 42,_sge.../ Pr T
APPROVE S TO FORM: - < - (AYE)
eo Ba t r
1 \ `__
t z- (AYE)
Y Attorney Dale K. Hall �� ,;
/,li I /,1ti u,yULi(NAY)
Barbara J. Kirkm er J
930726
fir,+
BOE DECISION SHEET
PIN It: R 2815186 PARCEL #: 096105323001
GATEWAY PARTNERS
P 0 BOX 402
GREELEY, CO 80632
HEARING DATE: July 30, 1993 TIME: 1:30 P.M.
HEARING ATTENDED? ON) NAME: Ti
AGENT NAME:
APPRAISER NAME: l j
DECISION:
DECREASE IN VALUATION
INCREASE IN VALUATION
NO CHANGE IN VALUATION
ASSESSMENT RATIO
ACTUAL VALUATION
ORIGINAL ADJUSTED
Land $ 69,000 $ 4 Cj fir ti
Improvements OR
Personal Property 1,281, 000 f {JS) si f ?i
Total Actual Value $ 1,350, 000 $/1 /9,ii (ir"fj
COMMENTS:
MOTION BY 7 q.c- TO -1.-4?-1,t-Lt
SECONDED BY O 77-) Baxter -- 'liN)
Hall - N)
Failed to meet burden of proof Harbert -- IN)
Comparables inadequate Kirkmeyer -- Y s(� 5
Other: Webster -- 1 ,��
RESOLUTION NO._930726
1:114 e' (1 rf F. C4
( >
r'C
\ OFFICE1400 OFNORTH COUNTY17th ASSESSORAVE.
(
\
1J NOTICE OF A OJUS TMENT GREELEY, COLORADO 80631
PHONE (303) 353-3845, EXT. 3656
• -GR 4981 L11 TO 16 Bt.K58 %800 8 AVE%
COLORADO
• . 0
800 • 8 ST GREELEY
OWNER GATEWAY PARTNERS
GATEWAY PARTNERS PARCEL 096105323001
PIN R 2815186
P O BOX 402 YEAR 1993
GREELEY CO 80632 LOG 00419
05/01/1993
The appraised value of property is based on the appropriate consideration of the approaches to value required by law.The Assessor has determined
that your property should be included in the following category(ies):
RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY IS VALUED BY CONSIDERING THE MARKET APPROACH*
AGRICULTURAL LAND VALUE IS DETERMINED SOLELY BY THE EARNING OR PRODUCTIVE
CAPACITY OF THE LAND, CAPITALIZED AT A RATE SET BY LAW.
ALL OTHER PROPERTY, INCLUDING VACANT LAND, IS VALUED BY CONSIDERING THE COST,
MARKET, AND INCOME APPROACHES•
If your concern is the amount of your property tax, local taxing authorities (county, city, fire protection, and other special districts) hold
budget hearings in the fail. Please refer to your tax bill or ask your Assessor for a listing of these districts,and plan to attend these budget hearings.
The Assessor has carefully studied all available information, giving particular attention to the specifics included on your protest and has deter-
mined the valuation(s) assigned to your property. The reasons for this determination of value are:
THE ACTUAL VALUATION OF YOUR PROPERTY HAS BEEN ADJUSTED BASED UPON
THE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION YOU HAVE PROVIDED,
AVERAGING YOUR INCOME FOR THE PREVIOUS YEARS THE VALUE IS
1 ,350,000 OR 18.88 PER SQUARE FOOT USING GROSS SQUARE FEET,
PROPERTY CLASSIFICATION PETITIONER'S ASSESSOR'S VALUATION
ESTIMATE ACTUAL VALUE ACTUAL VALUE
OF VALUE PRIOR TO REVIEW AFTER REVIEW
LAND
691000 69,000
IMPS
1g893,694 1 , 281 ,000
TOTALS $ $ 1, 962, 694 $ 1 ,350,000
if you disagree with the Assessor's decision,you have the right to appeal to the County Board of Equalization for further consideration,
39-B-106(1)(a), C.R.S. Please see the back of this form for detailed information on filing your appeal.
By: WARREN L. LASELL 06/22/93
• WELD COUNTY ASSESSOR dGr s /1 4 DATE 31
15-DPT AR As, C /7
Form PR-2O7-87/93 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON REVERSE SIDE
YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO APPEAL THE ASSESSORS D C ' ;O ,
;'he r:.. rho,hd of huoalization will sit to hear appeals beginning,tuiy 1,and ontinuinotthrough August 10 for
roe .. ,. i,.r;41 ;_fc, buildings) and peru,ni,a; „r ,a:;rty ituorusPlirge =•tac 'inept anti t „m: ,t's. 3eJ-Li-1tY4 and
9-r 3 rr.
APPEAL !FROG E S,
if you tame to appeo.i the Assessor'i decision, mail oC dearer one copy of this completed form to he . t p
r st .t." rtl so.tali/anon T0 preserve your right to appeal, your aupeal must be I' t STMAP, .t.. RE RED}Pt s . :
Ott . GAR 15 FOR REAL PROPERTY, AN L) JULY. 0 FOR PERSONAL.R."TONAL, PROPEPIP
WELD CD PS A BOARD OS ECAt ON
L}1", tlos Gram, P +') Fort. 75/
; (Wow Artootio SMOG
ri oN s {SOS 753-1,}Cit), Etl
,
rmanHCATRIA OF CLEARING:
You MU tte notified of the time and place set for the hearing of your appeal
r
.< .r : a , HOARD _." E`.IUdh.'d..tZAT tie'. M`7,'RDAMNC„.''! Irr'N:
The County :Gard o₹ E quailzation must make a decision on your appeal and mail you a determination within five
boammat dams t,,±• {;o S"n y Board moot conclude c hearings by August 10.
7 r, , t S7 FOR?tURTHER /APPEALS ;
,s lah the Couri' G(,a.I , M.f-qu dpi.:a$i` ri':s deci86on, GctGa, u'.trtdo Vat°Ytiti 't.+"i iy „asti,s,oi:the -
t li'_t,aG, c. iii i '_.du nat4:tolt. 'eo;te'n Je s,:o j 3:'q DN (..l41e' � (1t(b"3w,nc, � - 'f ' 1:
Board of Assessment Appeals €RAA):.
the BAA e 1313 Sherman. Room 315, Denver, Colorado 80203, r30a, DE6DDP,36.
District Court:
r
: ti AvenueAvenue �.an,cs )t!i Street, P.O., Box C
{areelley, Colorado 80632
, Telephone p03),356-4,000,,Extl4620-, - -
' Arb6tra16Oa2:
COUNTY BOAI1D OF,SQUALI A'! ION, ,,, •
r
915 10th Street, P.O. Box 758
Greeley, Colorado 80632
Telephon = (303) 3564000, Ext, 4225
`yon do not . `ste a determination from the oun` Board of _g,u'f9iization,you must file an nappedabbeat with the Roam
Uf /oar :unit 9 , Appeals by September 20,
TO PRESERVE YOUR APPEAL RIGHTS, YOU MUST PROVE YOU HAVE FILED A TIMELY APPEAL;
THEREFORE, WE RECOMMEND ALL CORRESPONDENCE BE MAILED WITH PROOF OF MAILING,
PETITION TO THE COUNTY BOARD OF EQUALIZATION
€n the space below, please explain why you disagree with the Assessor's valuation. iN ACCORDANCE WITH
39-8-106(7.54, C.R.S., YOU MUST STATE YOUR OPINION OF VALUE IN TERMS OF A SPECIFIC. DOLLAR
AMOUNT. Attach additional documents as necessary.
4
�1:5'Sts Ott', S Pf1 AIL d 000 OE4
=ra4wa^�
,�
30726
March 5, 1993
Ms. Susan Tilton
Assistant Vice President
Bank One, Denver, N.A.
Post Office Box 321
Littleton, Colorado 80120-0321
RE: ARIX Office Building, 800 8th Street, Greeley, CO
Dear Ms. Tilton:
As requested, I have prepared three copies of an appraisal of the above-referenced
property located in Greeley Colorado. The appraisal report conforms to the instructions
provided in your November 26, 1992, letter, a copy of which is shown in the Addendum
as Exhibit A. The appraisal contains a total of 102 pages and is subject to the assumptions
and limiting conditions set forth on pages 100 and 101.
Property rights appraised are of the leased fee estate. Date of value is February 1,
1993, which corresponds with information from the lease analysis. The purpose of the
appraisal is to estimate Market Value "as is" and Fair Value, which are defined on pages 3
and 4 of this report. It is noted that Market Value "as is" takes into consideration the
subject's current vacancy, which stands at 39 percent.
I have inspected the property and have endeavored to consider all factors that affect
value. The narrative report that follows describes the methods of valuation used and sets
forth the analysis of data and reasoning involved in deriving my conclusions.
Based on the inspection of the property and the investigation and analysis undertaken,
I estimate the Market Value "as is" and Fair Value of the subject property, as of
February 1, 1993, to be as follows:
Market Value "As Is" of Leased Fee Estate $1,025,000
Fair Value of Leased Fee Estate $1,025,000
Respectfully submitted,
Sue Anne Foster, MAI, SRA
Colo. Certification #CG01313586
930'72S
SUMMARY OF SALIENT FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS
Property Type: Office Building
Location: 800 8th Avenue, Greeley, CO
Property Rights Appraised: Leased fee estate
Owner of Record: Gateway Partners
Land Area: 17,503 square feet (0.40 acres)
Improvements: Three-story (plus basement) multi-
tenant office building built in 1965
and extensively renovated in 1983.
Gross building area totals 71,498
square feet; and usable area, 57,130
square feet.
Zoning: C-4 (Service Business)
Highest and Best Use: As improved
Estimated Marketing Time: Two years
Date of Value: February 1, 1993
Date of Report: March 5, 1993
Estimated Land Value: $87,500
Value Indications
Cost Approach: $3,005,000
Sales Comparison Approach: $930,000
Income Approach: $1,025,000
Final Market Value Estimate "As Is": $1,025,000
Fair Value Estimate: $1,025,000
- 1 - 930726
CLERK TO THE BOARD
(/ '\\
P.O. BOX 758
GREELEY,COLORADO 80632
P (303)356-4000 EXT.4225
Ape
COLORADO
July 15, 1993
Parcel No. : 096105323001 PIN No. : R 2815186
GATEWAY PARTNERS
P 0 BOX 402
GREELEY, CO 80632
Dear Petitioner(s) :
The Weld County Board of Equalization has set a date of Friday, July 30,
1993, at or about the hour of 1:30 P.M. , to hold a hearing on your
valuation for assessment. This hearing will be held at the Weld County
Centennial Center, 915 10th Street, Greeley, Colorado, in the First Floor
Hearing Room.
You have a right to attend this hearing and present evidence in support of
your petition. The Weld County Assessor will be present before the Board.
The Board will make their decision on the basis of the record made at the
aforementioned hearing, as well as your petition, so it would be in your
interest to have a representative present. If you plan to be represented
by an agent or an attorney at your hearing, prior to the hearing you shall
provide, in writing to the Clerk to the Board's Office, an authorization
for the agent or attorney to represent you. If you do not choose to
attend this heating, a decision will still be made by the Board by the
close of business on August 10, 1992, and mailed to you on or before
August 16, 1992.
Because of the volume of cases before the Board of Equalization, all cases
shall be limited to 15 minutes. Also due to volume, cases cannot be
rescheduled. It is imperative that you provide evidence to support your
position. This may include evidence that similar homes in your area are
valued less than yours or you are being assessed on improvements you do
not have. Please note: The fact that your valuation has increased cannot
be your sole basis of appeal. Without documented evidence as indicated
above, the Board will have no choice but to deny your appeal.
930726
GATEWAY PARTNERS - R 2815186
Page 2
At least two (2) working days prior to your hearing the Assessor will have
available, at your request, the data supporting his valuation of your
property.
Please advise me if you decide not to keep your appointment as scheduled.
If you need any additional information, please call me at your
convenience.
Very truly yours,
BO D OF EQUALIIZZ�AA ION
4.4
Donald D. Warden,
Clerk to the Board
BY: Cf/f dy
Carol A. Harding, Deputy�L
cc: Warren Lasell, Assessor
A
930726
J
EXHIBIT
g/eall471$
ACfrccars
C - 13 _ O _ E _ HEAR=NG
DATE: JULY 30, 1993
TIME: 1:30 P.M.
SUBJECT: ARIX OFFICE BUILDING
ADDRESS: 800 8TH STREET, GREELEY
PINK: 2815186
930726
iyts-:
fit
\11iu l 5, 1993
Ms. Susan Tilton
Assistant Vice President
Bank One, Denver, N.A.
Post Office Box 321
Littleton, Colorado 80120-0321
Office Building, 800 8th Street, Greeley, CO RE: ARIX I
Dear Ms. Tilton:
As requested, I have prepared three copies of an appraisal of the above-referenced
'
property located in Greeley Colorado. The appraisal report conforms to the instructions
provided in your November 26, 1992, letter, a copy of which is shown in the Addendum
as Exhibit A. The appraisal contains a total of 102 pages and is subject to the assumptions j
and linutinv conditions set forth on pages 100 and 101.
Property rights appraised are of the leased fee estate. Date of value is February 1,
1993, which corresponds with information from the lease analysis. The purpose of the
appraisal is to estimate Market Value "as is" and Fair Value, which are defined on pages 3
and 4 of this report. It is noted that Market Value "as is" takes into consideration the
subject's current vacancy, which stands at 39 percent.
I ,r
I have inspected the property and have endeavored to consider all factors that affect
value. The narrative report that follows describes the methods of valuation used and sets
forth the analysis of data and reasoning involved in deriving my conclusions.
Based on the inspection of the property and the investigation and analysis undertaken,
I estimate the Market Value "as is" and Fair Value of the subject property, as of
February 1, 1993, to be as follows:
Market Value "As Is" of Leased Fee Estate $1,025,000
Fair Value of Leased Fee Estate $1,025,000
Respectfully submitted,
Sue Anne Foster, MAI, SRA
Colo. Certification #CG013 13586
Q ;(u 2f
•
IDENTIFICATION OF THE PROPERTY
The property being appraised is located at 800 8th Avenue, Greeley, Colorado.
The property is identified by the Weld County assessor's office as Parcel Number
0961-05-3-23-001.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
The legal description of the subject property is as follows:
Lots 11 through 16, Block 58, City of Greeley, Weld County,
Colorado.
it
• I!I
PURPOSE OF THE APPRAISAL
The purpose of this appraisal is to estimate the Market Value "as is" and Fair
Value of the leased fee interest in an office building located at 800 8th Avenue,
Greeley, Colorado.
In compliance with the engagement letter dated November 24, 1992, and
included in the Addendum as Exhibit A, Market Value and Fair Value are defined
as follows.
2 93072r
I
Market Value'.
The most probable price 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 I I ,
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:
1. Buyer and seller are typically motivated;
2. Both parties are well informed or well advised and acting in what they
considers their own best interests;
3. A reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open market;
4. Payment is made in terms of cash in U.S. dollars or in terms of
financial arrangements comparable thereto;
5. The price represents the normal consideration for the property sold
• I
unaffected by special or creative financing or sales concessions granted
by anyone associated with the sale.
Fair Value2
Fair Value is the cash price that might reasonably be anticipated in a current sale
under all conditions requisite to a fair sale. A fair sale means that buyer and seller
are each acting prudently, knowledgeably, and under no necessity to buy or sell, i.e.,
other than in a forced or liquidation sale. The appraiser should estimate the cash
price that might be received upon exposure to the open market for a reasonable time,
considering the property type and local market conditions. When a current sale is
unlikely, i.e., when it is unlikely that the sale can be completed within 12 months,
the appraiser must discount all cash flows generated by the property to obtain the
estimate of fair value. These cash flows include, but are not limited to, those arising
from ownership, development, operation, and sale of the property. The discount
'Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC's) Final Rule, 12 CFR Part 34,
Subpart C-Appraisals, Section 34.42(f), effective August 24, 1990, and revised
November 1992.
2Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC's) Final Rule 12 CFR 7.3025.
- 3 - 230'72t3
If;
applied shall reflect the appraiser's judgment of what a prudent, knowledgeable
purchaser under no necessity to buy would be willing to pay to purchase the
property in a current sale.
PROPERTY RIGHTS APPRAISED
The property rights appraised are those of the leased fee estate, defined as "an
ownership interest held by a landlord with the right of use and occupancy conveyed
by lease to others; the rights of lessor or the leased fee owner and leased fee are
specified by contract terms contained within the lease."3
i
SCOPE OF THE APPRAISAL
I
This assignment is to prepare a full narrative real estate appraisal and report the ,
findings and analysis to support the value estimate. The scope of the appraisal has
not been limited in any manner nor has any departure been made from the Uniform
Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) guidelines adopted by the I"
Appraisal Standards Board of the Appraisal Foundation. Additionally, this report is
in compliance with the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery and Enforcement Act !Fit
of 1989 (FIRREA) and implementing regulations (12 CFR Part 34).
is
The methodology involved an inspection of the subject property and consid-
eration of all relevant market influences in order to develop the value estimate. On
the basis of this research, the Highest and Best Use was determined, which formed
the basis of the value estimate. A thorough investigation and analysis of comparable
market data has taken place, and all appropriate valuation techniques were employed.
In the reconciliation, their relative significance was analyzed; and a final estimate
of value was presented.
'American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers, The Dictionary of Real Estate
Appraisal. (Chicago: American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers, 1989), p. 177.
- 4 - 230726
I '
�
iii;
I
Highest and Best Use "As If Vacant"
Physically Possible Uses - Site dimensions and level topography allow for I fi
efficient land utilization. There are no known soil problems that would limit
construction. Access and visibility are good. Physically, the site is suitable for a
variety of types of construction. ::
Legally Permissible Uses - Any use the site might be put to must be legally
permissible. Present zoning permits a fairly broad spectrum of commercial uses. '
Therefore, there are legally many types of corrunercial uses to consider. I
Financially Feasible and Maximally Productive Uses - The principle of
conformity must be considered. It holds that maximum value is realized when a
reasonable degree of economic homogeneity is present. This also implies a r,
reasonable degree of homogeneity in building sizes and types of businesses. With i
this in mind, the most obvious use of the subject site would be for an office or retail
building, or perhaps a government building. However, at the present time, rental C
rates do not support new commercial construction in the downtown area. Until f
occupancy levels improve, rents are anticipated to remain depressed. Therefore, the
Highest and Best Use As If Vacant is either construction of a building for owner k,• 1
occupancy or a government building. Assuming that premature office construction
does not take place that would further upset the balance between supply and demand,
office occupancy is anticipated to slowly improve. The potential for retail to
rebound in the downtown area is not as great. I
Highest and Best Use As Improved
I
The site being appraised is improved with a 71,498 square foot, multi-tenant,
office building that contributes considerable value to the total property. The building
had a respectable occupancy level until August 1992 when a major tenant vacated.
Since adequate nearby parking is available in the city parking lot adjacent to the
subject, the subject has something to offer that some of the competing downtown
office buildings cannot provide. This is an important consideration for many tenants.
As a result, with an aggressive leasing program, it is anticipated that the subject will
lease back up to acceptable levels within a reasonable amount of time. As a result,
the Highest and Best Use As Improved is its present use, subject to curing items of
deferred maintenance.
3
MARKETING TIME
Typically, two variables have a significant bearing on the length of time a
property is exposed for sale prior to culminating the transaction: price in relation
to value and competent brokerage personnel who are marketing the property. If
either is out of sync, the marketing period may be lengthy. For instance, a property
might be on the market for an extended period of time at a price above market. The
price is then reduced, and the property sells almost immediately. As a result,
analyzing marketing time strictly on the basis of the time it took to consummate
sales of similar properties is not necessarily accurate.
There is not strong buyer participation in the current Greeley office market. On
the other hand, there has not been an abundance of office properties for sale over the
past several years. Therefore, selection is limited. The sales utilized in the report
are fairly representative of the activity that has taken place. It is noted that most of
the purchasers planned to occupy a portion of the building they bought. Therefore,
there were motivations involved that were not strictly related to income potential.
In addition to owner-occupants looking to purchase office property, there are
buyers in the general area searching for strictly investment property. In most cases,
they are looking for a steal. They will purchase properties because they can be
bought at a price significantly less than replacement cost. The sellers of these
properties, in most cases the former lender, are extremely motivated to sell.
Reportedly, obtaining new financing is one of the main hurdles to consummating
these transactions.
Were the subject building for sale, the most logical purchaser would be the
University of Northern Colorado. If the building works well for them in regard to
their newly leased space, there is a strong possibility that they will increase their
presence in the building and eventually purchase it. The only other obvious users
would be the city and county, and it is doubtful that there is any interest at the
present time on their part. If a user cannot be located, a sale could take a fairly long
time to consummate. There is a large supply of office buildings on the market in
the Fort Collins, Denver, and Colorado Springs areas. These would be competing
with the subject property. As a result, a marketing period of two years would not
be unrealistic for the property being appraised.
¢ : 7,
February 27, 1992
Mr. Phillip Myers
M ers
Senior Vice President
Affiliated National Bank-Greeley
Post Office Box 1098
Greeley, Colorado 80632
RE: ARIX Office Building, 800 8th Street, Greeley, CO
Dear Mr. Myers:
As requested, I have prepared three copies of an appraisal of the above-referenced
property located in Greeley Colorado. The appraisal report conforms to the instructions
provided in your November 25, 1991, letter, a copy of which is shown in the Addendum
as Exhibit 1. Additionally, two values were requested: (1) considering the property with
its existing leases and (2) considering the value of the property if Versar vacates the
building.
Property rights appraised are of the leased fee estate. Date of value is February 1,
1992, which corresponds with information from the lease analysis. The purpose of the
appraisal is to estimate Fair Value, which is defined on pages 2 and 3 of this report.
I have inspected the property and have endeavored to consider all factors that affect
value. The narrative report that follows describes the methods of valuation used and sets
forth the analysis of data and reasoning involved in deriving my conclusions.
Based on the inspection of the property and the investigation and analysis undertaken,
I estimate the Fair Value of the subject property, as of February 1, 1992, subject to the
assumptions and limiting conditions set forth in this report, to be as follows:
Fair Value of Leased Fee Estate
Under Current Versar Lease Agreement $1,425,000
Fair Value of Leased Fee Estate
Assuming Versar Vacates $935,000
Respectfully submitted,
11
Sue Anne Foster, MAI, RM
W. West Foster, MAI, CRE
Sue Anne Foster, MAI, RM
Real Estate Appraisers&Counselors
Cottonwood Commons Offices• 1750 25th Avenue, Suite 303 • Greeley, Colorado 80631
(303)352-1117
•
a .
1 As a result, the Fair Value of the subject property, as of February 1, 1992, is
estimated to be as follows:
Fair Value of Leased Fee Estate
Under Current Versar Lease Agreement $1,425,000
Fair Value of Leased Fee Estate
Assuming Versar Vacates $935,000
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
FOSTER VALUATION COMPANY
23072,5
33� /
relied upon heavily. The fact that the value indicated by application of the Cost
Approach is substantially higher than the values developed by the other two
approaches indicates that external obsolescence is also present. This is caused by
a generally weak downtown office market.
The Sales Comparison Approach has been developed with transactions involving
office properties. While utility was similar, the properties were not highly
comparable to the subject from a physical standpoint. Even more important, most
were purchased for owner, or partial owner, occupancy. If a user can be located
who is in need of additional space, such as a governmental entity or the university,
it is estimated that the subject is capable of commanding a premium. In such a case,
based upon the comparable sales, a price around $2,145,000 would not be unreason-
able. However, because finding a motivated user is highly speculative, this is not
a true representation of Fair Value. On the other hand, one of the sales utilized in
the Sales Comparison Approach has some validity in terms of the value to an
investor assuming Versar vacates. It experienced high vacancy during its marketing
period, similar to that anticipated for the ARIX Building under this type of scenario.
However, the value indicated by this sale is weakened by the fact that only one such
sale could be located.
The Income Capitalization Approach is based on the premise that value is
dependent upon the present worth of all rights to future benefits in the ownership of
a given property. Here, the anticipated future income that an informed investor is
justified in assuming is compared to return requirements of similar investment
properties. The strengths and weaknesses of the Income Capitalization Approach
evolve primarily around the amount and reliability of data available. The techniques
employed were those that best fit the quality and durability of the subject income
stream.
Overall, the data available for use in the Income Approach has the greatest
degree of reliability. Furthermore, the Income Approach is generally given the
greatest consideration by investors in income producing properties because it focuses
on probable return on equity, which becomes the critical factor and common
denominator when comparing anticipated yields on alternate investment
opportunities. Most rental properties are sold on the basis of income derived from
tenants. Therefore, the Income Approach is given primary consideration.
I
I
• FOSTER VALUATION COMPANY
y 2O72'i
FAIR VALUE
Per the definition of Fair Value, when a current sale is unlikely, i.e., when it is
unlikely that the sale can be completed within 12 months, the appraiser must
discount all cash flows generated by the property to obtain the estimate of Fair
Value. This procedure has been preformed in the discounted cash flow analysis
undertaken. Therefore, value reported is Fair Value.
I
RECONCILIATION AND FINAL VALUE ESTIMATE
The last step in the appraisal process is to conclude a final estimate of value for
the subject property. This is done after analyzing the quantity, quality, and
reliability of the data utilized, strengths and weaknesses of the different methods of
valuation, and applicability of each approach to the type of property being
appraised. The final estimate of value approximates that which an informed,rational
investor would pay for the subject property if it were available for sale on the open
market at the date of appraisal, given the data used in this report.
A review of the value indications derived from the three approaches employed
is as follows:
COST APPROACH $2,985,000
SALES COMPARISON APPROACH
Value to an Owner-Occupant $2,145,000
Value to an Investor Assuming Versar Vacates $930,000
INCOME APPROACH
Value to An Investor Under Existing Contract Rents . . . . $1,425,000
Value to an Investor Assuming Versar Vacates $935,000
The Cost Approach is most applicable when improvements are new and
represent the highest and best use of the site. Because the subject building is 27
years old and was renovated 9 years ago, physical deterioration is extremely difficult
to estimate. In addition to physical deterioration, some functional obsolescence,
primarily due to the floor plan, was observed and included in the estimate of accrued
depreciation. It also was difficult to estimate. Therefore, this approach is not being
FOSTER VALUATION COMPANY
Rk _ /0
r.- X G m O .- N P N O N O N m m ` :y
q m S CO CI CD la 07 CO O V K T N- N CO N ^ m m HO Iii ir
sr oi
tD n N (9 O N t9 • m Ot is E:;::;.
w 2 ds yH y w w i9 w ,' 'sins
s4 ate:
Y bS ppp s a:
3s.:
Fist m 0 N 1- c0')_ tp'). tN') 1 N N CO :$?•".;
N F— Ci. O0) r N VC
O N W 0 N N CN') mn 0 '4 2v4;
fit Z %iY a w H 69 19 69 CO xib. i:3;u
an la it:a w w to ^i2
ii_::S o
a W N o n m N O to O Ot 0C400 O O to N `l" +5'Y
N. W ::T..a N S 0 S 0) co N a
O' N la P c0')� P) .Eta i
N ¢ ... •ccc N co V k.'�::
m O Is
1`, N • CD
0 n 7- N - Omi N in
W N n N >!;"c
igj
u.. W o>K: Is pa. >`
en in a X N N N Ot 0 0 N C) 0 0 N n ?:ta.
`V O) Ot O m n ^ m n N m . N N.
al WZit O V CO n N CO m N CO C) N CO C)
io N c0 n O V O N a N N N !� N (0 n E9F.f :::.�:
J `l: N .- co m n f9 N IA a n N bi N N t0 :.oi:r
a W < t9 19 (A S W 1A c7 ant t I
Q '3ta.i f9 W F:i '.Y
F= ii::.. O; X t0 en N V 0 CO N CO O Ol O n) 0 al;*: << F
"j O O) N n N N 0; V N N 'M'04 MO 0 al*:
Qj�..'i
'`: . N O m n N CO I IoIOn N c7 N 0a a O ?:fiN :Y;,_:.
Ng
tN') N or CO H H N t9 00' n N O S (CO `?i.i. .'..C:
F— Ng p w w w w.w TA;x '`
Z :R.'.` i9 W H i.. 5 5::R
CC :M r2 X m CO to n m CO r CO CO O CO N N is ::..O
�c i. ''F:i9:
a' iYq';M c0 0 O ^ IR n CO N flu'
N N N_ N O O }fr if:Gyi
iL:t> La.
' N to Y ai a W O C) N IC O t^t�� p S:n i `
V a t0 CO Y N to f9 N c9 m N N t9 0 V :o'R ?,wgi
W t;vs. IA IA 69 CO 69
aofa gm
"'i"u 'O X m co t0 N m t� m n N V n n .2;7^ :
Z :$:;C< n o
to n n m m N m ' N CO co : 6 ,.p,
O N PIN N N N < O to b7- N I� n kri"^ `yq H.`va: s�4'R t:
.T:.a O N .- < < or n Ni m to ';Lo' 1574«,U.
Z e in
R CD to t9 NM N N N N 0 NY'Mo'L3`t j:t)3k
O «. S h ` e
k:2a:.: fH H N N:.4ii..`<
2n LR
ri
U its.R a X �^�f���JJJ m OI N CO N N O O O to m K.R6 5 g
W "r`::o:2 CON O ON P .--
(o.m N O m c0') m 0) N. N N N t,F.g'k: C F;:a
WC J>.. J;f.;.>:
O :e ( V r n V O O id CYp CO GO O N: V C.
.;�� V CD fA f9 IA H Vi W 6 69 N 0 N m�
CC ia'..i>...,
0. toiA f9 1A (9 :f„ ''
0O4 I
co
CO X v n N N m 0 0 0 t0 0 O "
dayItU
] mSNONnIOONNN0) 0, d.1� CO b a 19 N a mm t0 N W m cco i .a f9 p t9 H t9 N t9 N VK M h �. •
__11 0 . ..
Z r m e m O) N O O O O O 0 0 Y O < mj
W --r"�?:'� W S N N N N aN'J O O O W "N- x 0 N a
�L ,,4 - vi o is v t4 c o y r tc vi of a •• •Y.�:
—LLI O:: a 19 R'.'fi �:.
I-
49 Z071 R,Ris ryg
t::t.: 6 ¢ X X X X X X X X X maxen 'Y
0 ? X w } 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a+:
Z ?:"R ¢ W anoof is, ciofofuio ��`'$mt�y';x ri,et �`°t Q N N b m m V CO N C007 C) CO N O sai;
W t;;o W Lutes, N W Q • O n CO N 0 P :351:2: i"`g`ov
kay>.f N N W O O 0 O C) . O • n I°.
Yi2�'y` <tixy
G, �SiI Q a m to Q a r 0 o o 0 r r o o v t 'cR` s:
0 ;?} ¢ 0 m ¢ p �tk''`.: ...Ns
+ii`s
F.W., '�<<':'E Xa:ci ° X XXXXX XXXX X X ;{'�,'m"'� ii
LA cyoo o S o {y co 01 CO N O CO N CD O N. OI Oeti W '
U .„₹ } Ooo vi ° LLQ Onto ocmov, m N `k``jyA�.
n,; 006
cc Y N X o a X W CC - O .- b r (O Iri r co co
�v6'
2 y:ff rr
o a W �'.
W 421€R O w W
9.
CC ZN en—
W c z in O W _ W W 01
m W
O Z a p
i' QF c- w y ' X 7' U C N m.
f N J CO N m N LL Z
Nu W o o O (7 02 o l�J w C7 y 2 O ,00.
(ev�a a .G ~QQ m u� C m Co5 o 7 Faa- w 2 _ • J
Ili O C1 j W fl 6 9 2 LL m Z 2 X V m •
iff
o Was F •an
0in W LL W ¢ CO 7 J Q ~O in I- It
a J . W J l- Z O ° °' 920726
it ..
...__ ....... .. .
11-1
Pc
0 o ] CO I_ O ^ N Q N O 60 (O N N t.
O
Q O N O di CD N N -- O o
co O O O N N O] (D N
O^ C‘t 01co N- 0 N 00 0 CO N Q r-Co
t--
0 69 69 69 49 494 H3 69 69 60 E9 I;
00
01 I
��-I N o Vl OJ ,- O w m Q N O N C� ON. U, I
N O `1 w, C449; N f0 N CO. O f'YN�li 0 N 0)
O) O N N IN O CO ('1 CO O N M O)
0 N V (O N
1.0. O O ^ N.N O N f9 O N N O) N N ICI
6009 0 fA fA Ui 49 W 49 01 6.9 M
0
CC
- a N 9) O Q CO O 0 N 0 01 Q N N
^ O 111NNN1����yyyy N OV f9 N ! W Q ^ (fly 0 N
O CO N Q ^ co O 1"0971 N N N
0 co' co of Q O Q co' CO O Q Q N N
9 69
Q ^ v CA 63 44 69 69 0 0 m N N
N
w 19 69
0 o N O N 0 Q C1 N N CO C]
- o rn - °) o, N (c °) 0 CO 0
o m
05 N Q 0 M N N I-- C) O C Q
IN N Col N N fA H N 0 O N N
LO -9 ffN494 69 CO f9 69 M W
iA 19 fR Ni
N0 CO W H N co CO Q N 0 Q O O
O0 O " w C) I� N N m `�N (13 CV CI INO1 Cl) Q
N. N N N O V O) N. (1 N N or N Cn N N
Z N ^ Q 69 Yi di f9 fAI C10 CO C)
O - 69 69 w 69 »
U CO o O� (0 O ^ fw C) N ^ 9 ^ G{ N N `�
•
W 1O O f(u¢NJ�i1911 N CO N N N Q N to
Q N N
'I N O O O ^ 0 Q CO O Q N CO N l
0 I` N a ID Q CO- N O CO- O 0 0
Q N 0 ^ N 0 f9 69 N e9 O 9- N 0 N N
a n u 69 0 69 19 69 M
9 w w
WN- e 0 00.100494031"-- 03 N Co b
Y N.
O CO H ID
0 ^ N (r0 Y Q O CCOO CO N r:
(] 0 CV N (O 9r O O N N O H N I.
Q N 19 69 N 19 O N N YbYYYNMMMMMI 0) ^
69 9 69 69 69 69 69 CV M 69
Z
2 N a Cl) Pc- ^ CO CO N N O N -9 I
0 O N IN CO 0 IN N CO N 0 N C
W N O 1- O ^ O CO CO CO O C] N Q Q
Q Co H N N Q 9 01 O to Q co' O N1 C C) (7 m
"` N tlf C9 N1 19 CO CO 609 iiH9A��HAAAAIIII N N O
^ 69 69 6969 N
W
0
0
Z Q o ^ ^ ^ 0 , 000 ,U, c‘., 0 0
H
0 . Q N ^ P- ON) — 4 ON)L. CQD V V 0
Q N CO N a N Q 0 n N N N ^ ^ ce
0 O] U
W N t9 M ^9 M 00 0 69 N 64 69
co 69 4.9 d
a
0
Q e C(„ O O N O O O O O O r` N 0 N 0
CZ n O N O ) H 0 0 O ^ 0 0 0 0
W 0 904 Q
U N < 1`(`011 a O 6 9 (C 6 O N ([1 N O N N
^ co C) N N W 19 ^ 19 N N ^ N N C) N H
W 69 Fq 69 W 69 i9 NV fA (A Hi 1L
CC
Z - ci ¢ e o e o o e o < o 0
•
O - o w } 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O ' Q LL N C) O C) 9 Ol C) co N6
LLI O.
> O
CC Q CO
N 0 Q r N O N N 0 CO N N Co
W ¢ •F' 0 CO CO w W 0 0 ^ N O Q N N O
QW
d LL co N N a a W - 06 ,0_ 000000 Q ^
CO Q O m ¢ 0
w } N 49 U, "
0 0 0 o a v o o s o o e o o
W 0 a O O LL • 0 r co co O N co co O co N co
} O O O < t0 O ILL- O N ^ N N ^ Q O 96 Co 0 W
ct o cc O CO N o w CC ^ N 0 N Q W
0
Z1
w
W W
O 0 W W m
m 0 z
Z a 0 a W Z Z a al
u -J,.
J x c o W U m G
(n W d E N x z N c 3 w
Z 0 J (n Z % N 0 w (} N C a
W O O Z F, m m 0 0 J Z Z q LL w.,
>CC III U 0 Q 0 0 0 m co m F- w 5 = J
a � m E CO LL m Z a o
N F-
m ¢ x
r OC m > 0 ca. w 95 A A c m I . ) 0 ¢ - w m 0 z
I O > U = m m m Q O W m Q Q
4 F- W COA lwi. N C CO C 5 Q D 2 J 5 F- I- o I- 1- 131;210,244‘
w o w II-w w /i— I- Z It-
H H 1.1....t AG ')
3- a J W J
RECONSTRUCTED INCOME APPROACH
Income From February 27, 1992 Appraisal
Gross 511,998 @ 8.69 psf
Vacancy 12%
Expenses 277,844
NET 172, 714 / .12 = 1,439,283
Income From March 5, 1993 Appraisal
Gross 488,574 @ 8.55 psf
Vacancy 12%
Expenses 262,407
NET 167,538 / .13 = 1,288,753
2,728,036
Median of value from 1992 & 1993 appraisal to obtain Market Value as of
June 30, 1992 2, 728,036 /2 = 1,364,018. Rounded to 1,350,000.
The reason I used both incomes is to account for the change in Gross Income
over this period. The gross was 8.69 per sq. ft. for 1992 and decreased to 8.55
per sq. ft. for 1993.
O r nge
Rin
3 .:u
Hello