HomeMy WebLinkAbout930739.tiff RESOLUTION
RE: THE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, 1993, WELD COUNTY, COLORADO
PETITION OF:
STARPAK INTERNATIONAL CORP
100 GARFIELD ST 11400
DENVER, CO 80206
DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY: PIN: R 3462186 PARCEL: 096117102002 - GR IPI-1
L1-2-10 TO 14 BLK1 GREELEY INDUSTRIAL PARK%237 22ND ST%
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 Marvin F. Poer and Company,
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 fully supported the value placed upon the property by the Assessor; and
furthermore, that the assessment and valuation of the Weld County Assessor shall
be, and hereby is, adjusted as follows:
930739
Aso0a7
Page 2
RE: BOE - STARPAK INTERNATIONAL CORP
ORIGINAL ADJUSTED
Land $ 172, 123 $ 172, 123
Improvements OR
Personal Property 127,877 410,877
TOTAL ACTUAL VALUE $ 300,000 $ 583, 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)
930739
Page 3
RE: BOE - STARPAK INTERNATIONAL CORP
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.
930739
Page 4
RE: BOE - STARPAK INTERNATIONAL CORP
The above and foregoing Resolution was, on motion duly made and seconded,
adopted by the following vote on the 3rd day of August, A.D. , 1993.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ATTEST: SILL
WELD OUNTY, COLORADO
Weld County Clerk to the Board .-0.77;57-72;171.•
//�/ � Cons nceL. Harbe hairman
BY: � /�/"�� C�' / .O�l�//971
Deputy C erk to the Boa W. Webster, Pro-Tem
APP D AS TO FORM: /
eorge Baxt r
ty Attorney a e--K. Hall
arbara J. Kirkmeye 4
930739
93 - y
BOE DECISION SHEET g gD
PIN U: R 3462186 PARCEL 4: 096117102002
STARPAK INTERNATIONAL CORP
100 GARFIELD ST #400
DENVER, CO 80206
HEARING DATE: August 3, 1993 TIME: 2:00 P.M.
HEARING ATTENDED? g N) NAME: -Pe 4-cri F ( �
m i n
AGENT NAME: MARVIN F POER & COMPANY TABOR CENTER k \i
APPRAISER NAME: (1 h u 6_k/ T2
DECISION:
DECREASE IN VALUATION
INCREASE IN VALUATION
NO CHANGE IN VALUATION
ASSESSMENT RATIO
ACTUAL VALUATION
ORIGINAL ADJUSTED
Land $ 172, 123 $ /7n) Je` 3
Improvements OR
Personal Property 127,877 /D) g
Total Actual Value $ 300, 000 $ 4--S31 DOD
COMMENTS:
MOTION BY -j3Q TO n )(// (i)A, oIc c4 fen JµJc -f—
SECONDED BY , fJ Baxter -- �N)
Hall --(19/N)
Failed to meet burden of proof Harbert / N)
Ai Comparables ima.4equatse Kirkmeyer /N)
X Other: Webster -- /N)
RESOLUTION NO.
SZC739
-
1400 NORTH 17th AVE.
GREELEY, COLORADO 80631
NOTICE O= DENIAL PHONE (303) 353-3845, EXT. 3656
wal - GR IP1-1 Ll -2-10 TO 14 BLK1 GREELEY INDUSTRIAL
e. PARK*237 22ND S 1%
COLORADO
• 237 22 .._ ST `�^ . ' LGREELEY
\\*\
OWNER STARPAK INTERNATIONAL CORP : y
r t
MARVIN F POER 6 COMPANY PARCEL 3961171! *2032
TABOR CENTER 1, , PIN R ,346'211 ,6
01/41
1200 17TH STREET SUITE 960 R 1993
DENVER CO 80202 LOG 02559
06/01/1993
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 fall. 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:
WE HAVE REVIEWED YOUR PROPERTY VALUE AND IT IS CORRECT. STATE LAW
REQUIRES THAT 1991 /1992 COST, MARKET AND INCOME INFORMATION BE USED TO
ESTABLISH CURRENT VALUES.
THE BASE YEAR SALE ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WAS TAKEN INTO
CONSIDERATION IN DETERMINING THE 1993 VALUE. MARKET/INCOME/
S COST SUPPORT A MUCH HIGHER VALUE. (SEE MAI FEE APPRAISAL
DATED A/93.
PETITIONER'S ASSESSOR'S VALUATION
PROPERTY CLASSIFICATION ESTIMATE ACTUAL VALUE ACTUAL VALUE
OF VALUE PRIOR TO REVIEW AFTER REVIEW
LAND - __`.l 1729 123 1729123
!'1F lit f li
IMPS !!l\ JUN 1 1J:�3 f'1i �i 127, 877 127„877
TOTALS $ $ 3039000 $ 3009000
If you disagree with the Assessor's decision,you have the right to appeal to the County Board of Equalization for further consideration,
39-8-106(1)(a),C.R.S. Please see the back of this form for detailed information on filing your appeal.
WARREN L. LASELL 05/07/93
13y:
WELD COUNTY ASSESSOR DA1c )Ov 39 326
15-DPT AR
Form PR-207-87/93 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON REVERSE SIDE
r . u HAVE' HE hf .H r APPEAg fE4E_ ASSE SAOF S Of'. =3,
:, . .,. BBoaru (4t'Equalization will-sit to hear appeals begirminy Juiy.# rant cur:tinging through August 10 for
- pi A.u- ''and and buildings) and personal property (rurnisbingb, .1iar.hitlery, and r 4,,_inlnersh. 39-8-104 and
39..8. 10021,
APPEAL PROCEDURES:
It you .,hoo'sl to gppeal the Assessor's decision, mad ordeliver one copy of tins COrttptet :rd form to the. County
Board of Equalization. To preserve your right to appeal, your appeal must he POSTMARKED OR DEl 1'/FRED ON
)f 8E1. tRE JULY 15 FOP REAL PROPERTY, .AND JULY 20 FOR PERSONAL PROPERTY.
WELD COUNTY BOARD OF EQUALIZATION
915 10th Street, P.O. Box 758
Greeley, Colorado 80632
Telephone (303) 356-4000, Ext. 4225
, .
NOTIFICATION OF HEARING: ,
You wi;, be notified of the time and plat•: set for the nearing of your appeal.
COUNTY BOARD OF EQUALIZATION'S DETERMINATION:
The County Board of Equalization must make a decision on your appeal and mail you a determination within live
business days, The County Board must conclude their hearings by August 10,
TAXPAYER RIGHTS FOR' FURTHER APPEALS:
It you are not satisfied with the County Board of Egyaaiiza;ion.S decision, you must tile withiq thity day;s.of.the -
C)ounty ar a! of Equali4atioq's wtitten dacisjonwith ONE,of.the following:, , , ,
Board of Assessment Appeals 4BAA►
Contact the BAA at 1313 Sherman, Room 316, Denver, Colorado 80203, (3 )31 866-5830
District Court:
Oth Avenue and 9th Street, P.O, t3ox C
Greeley, Colo.ado 80632
Teiepnorno (303) 356 4000 E t. �15ZL c - ,•
- i. ., . Arbitration: .
WELL? cc-uN"I Y BOAB[. OF E•QUAL rZ) iJON -
` O ri 3-,)i `rs Ede. L� '.!. .�'r a 7r1 t$, . . . _..
c dfliOy '.()lnrdtin 80632
Te er+ 'n . firir3 4:00 r:rd. 42.21, .. 1
•
Rtyon , stl r ?.fn/ti a determination from heCon; s , i,•-. ut . , aiSt ti is .you I Fst aeon peroRR the Boom
of Assessment Appeals by September C,
TO PRESERVE YOUR APPEAL RIGHTS, YOGI MUST PROVE VO?.i HAVE FILED A T!MELY APPEAL;
THEREFORE, WE RECOMMEND ALL CORRESPONDENCE HE MAILED y'tl s`H PROOF Of, MAiLiNii,
PETIT?ON TO THE COUNTY .Oran OF FOUALtt f- f .. ..
n tte.t space '.below, preast explain why you disagree with the Assessor's valuaeon. !tti ALPER-DANCE PATH
39 t3 10641.Es -L.H;S„'YOU MUST STATE YOUR OPINION OF VALUE IN TERMS Q A SPECIFIC DOLLAti
AMOUNT, Attach additional documents as necessary.
One or more of the approaches to value indicate that the value assigned to the
economic unit, of which this parcel is a part, is excessive. The petitioner's
opinion of total actual valu is•
$S�,6o)
Documentation will be furnished at hearing.
Please sendnoti,ce of hearing to: John F. Oberly
Marvin F. Poer & Company
1200 17th Street, Ste 960
Denver, CO 80202
303/571-1800 7/14/93
Kit(ixrti
CLERK TO THE BOARD
P.O. BOX 758
1 GREELEY,COLORADO 80832
(303)358 E 4000 XT.4225
O
COLORADO
July 22, 1993
Parcel No. : 096117102002 PIN No. : R 3462186
STARPAK INTERNATIONAL CORP
100 GARFIELD ST #400
DENVER, CO 80206
Dear Petitioner(s) :
The Weld County Board of Equalization has set a date of Tuesday, August
3, 1993, at or about the hour of 2:00 P.M. , to hold a hearing on your
valuation for assessment. This hearing will be held at the Weld County !llppp[
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 hearing, a decision will still be made by the Board by the
close of busine§s 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.
f
9.113.139
STARPAK INTERNATIONAL CORP - R 3462186
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,
BOARD OF EQUALIZATION
Donald all7ra/J
Clerk to th Board
BY: �� &7/7
Linda M. Dodge, Deputy)
cc: Warren Lasell, Assessor
MARVIN F POER & COMPANY, TABOR CENTER
914)
EXJ1# IT
^ {�R 1 3 q(�l R
WELD COUNTY ASSESSOR
1400 N 17th AVENUE
GREELEY, COLORADO, 80631
Hearing Date :
08/03/93
1993 Property Valuation
SUBJECT PROPERTY:
Starpak
237 22nd Street, Greeley, Co
OWNER: Starpak International Corp.
Parcel Number :
0961-17-1-02-002
Appraisal Date as of :
June 30 , 1992
830,39
LAND SALES'
LEGAL SALE DATE SALE PRICE SIZE PRICE/SF LOCATION
SUBJECT:
096117102002 ASSESSORS 237 22nd
VALUE 266,858 sqft $0.65 Street
Starpak $ 172,123
Greeley
COMPARABLES:
COMP#1 2435 2nd
04/09/91 $ 150,000 217,800 sqft $0.69 Avenue
096117402008 Greeley
COMP#2
222 22nd
04/10/90
$ 85,000 103,534 sqft $0.82 Street
096117113002 Greeley
COMP#3 1st Ave &
12/05/89 $ 190,000 186,916 sqft $1.02 31st St
096120101020 Greeley
COMP/k4 1602 2nd
05/12/89 $ 165,000 85,529 sqft $1.93 Avenue
096108401025 Greeley
COMMIS 410 22nd
Street
096117112010 01/01/87 $ 65,000 56,865 sqft $1.14 Greeley
2
I30'739
S WEST"red 199'' MAPS AND TRANSPORTATION EZ 19 •V 1 IT5 o st r Rd 64 Q 9
v. Q
Poudre
m LEGEND
< 6 Schools
19.North Colorado Medical Center
H c l V( 20.Monlview Park
Comparable Land Sales 21.UNC Corms
22.Glenmere Park
La Park c 23.University of Northern Colorado
m r l v U v .. �.wine,...4,,, 0 24.Jackson Field
! > m `�v t < 6.BILL— �o. '
q > ¢ a 25.Wlldlile Park
m t < m b 7.Sherwood Park 26.University Center A
H0� 0>S V 15 ,_ S t a -. j 8.Aims Community Col le e
9 27.UNC West Campus
7n U _ �C S t C g S t 9.Woodbriar Park I 25.Farr Park
_ K� �I .Cottonwood Park I SI I SS Rd C n t y Rd 2
es C -S — rr COcn
t3'o S t > —e S t c 11.Highland Hills Municipal
U z A c S3 m Golf Course
•
Z m 12.Gateway Park
IU > 0 �1 14]> t 13.Weld Co.Library•
•m << ^� rid St ' E 14.Brentwood Park
2nd t•> 2nd St Z Z �°
;., 0 r _ 15.Island Grove Park
�4,hm >,•>m ` r• `t a 16.City Complex
a m 17.Lincoln Park
d
SI —
m a 5 41 h S t 18.Sunrise Park a
5nd St > 5 h m <> 01 m < St •
. - ,
a < m a m
4' 6th S <U .th < m• •t < U
8 _ i m <16 >
h t < m
..� SI 17 t�,1 < efh B
th St C�� - 9th �t ` ' 5. m St
4
S'f 5 - t St < m
1 r h S t - > > Padre
. stt S < r� La
tth St t
` 12th ES m - - m 12th St 18 m V
12th 't < - q , ,
�r 131 _ St < �
14th .. St 't c •
D
141 S Rd 'St R .411. - . ..St m
15th' 51 St o' 1. 4 SI v 10 m a
-Si 41 19 Y `¢ - 0
a < m1.t m -� r St N 6th m St C
f� c > < 0 : < n IcT) > 00_171h<SI S m m t�th, z SI COrI'1• < _3QN _ A ti 1 r t m m
18th S1 - m -18 h- St r a m > y _ O
-. m yr 21 —{4 1 8th < r,� S t
Glen•F I D 31 u Cranto(d Pr 23 c 1:th t SI N m o �Li dale w /"--
is i r:n :r, 91, n kestde - 6 _�> — o�
79th t `° S 19th m< St qS bin •
> •:22 _" = 24 I9 h ,,I m e c
mSR" r • r r03
StRe9 m!a 1 O o
St -d u ...5.
., St „� 20th �}G m< o St
I 2 st..� 25,k /26 < g.
<' eGt y "�a m Orn St Rd D
a 21st -1 bs m _
2' � S � cul
a'''.3
`te. 27 < 22nd S1 SO l c m 22nd m St
7 ti` m �]A
23 tlo ' 3Lrd 111E ' 3 5.2 J`} m
t - Dr ■I
24th St 1
St r1 - 1-.
^ 24th r St E
td - 24 a' U > ;�� > m lLio
Sr s t 5 < . < <1U 25 h e' �St
ro
osr m < <v < o Sl
< 2 t m
St 26th St
L p > 2•t r 6 t t R• River E .
th _ .c r..
S t A 7 m •'^ ;28 a`^ 2't h St B""' 70 Kerse
_""" z 7
26th It St
2@th St
34 Y--�'
28th SI Rd '-----------------
St ^ �m >1 29th S �e
-< r 9th 5t<R ,9 413 AI
130th SI St vU .1 m
≥ mSt,f-3i th St Rd ^< m'„ � 3077. St Stree: Desigrations
M<st a l,, ,t .d 30th .f.1.1..±._
t j mro
R1m, Streets No Streets
�df s t '= J Designated Labels Designated
> ■>
< N " 0. W m E
a G r0 <
N ' O �- _N
85 N _.
A1ey West- wy
.//
COST APPROACH
Subject: Starpak Pin #3462186
237 22nd Street Parcel #096117102002
Greeley, Co
ITEM SQUARE FEET BASE COST TOTAL
(per sq ft)
Base Cost per Sq Ft 94 , 669 $12 .61 $1 , 193 , 776
Area multiplier . 9053
Refined base cost per sq ft 1 ,080, 725
Additional Improvements
Concrete 12 , 800 1 .60 20,480
Asphalt 20,000 . 90 18 , 000
Replacement Cost New ( RCN) 1 , 119 , 205
* Less depreciation (Accrued)
Replacement Cost New Less Depr. ( RCNLD) ( 626 , 755)
492 ,450
Add Land Value ( from the market) 172 , 123
Total Value by the Cost Approach 664, 573
* Total economic life 50 yrs
Remaining economic life 25 yrs
Effective age 28 yrs
28 yrs / 50 yrs = 56% depr .
4
930139
5
1 le
N
a . - ,
.
3.- 3,.y. H
ci
.91
t I
i4r ♦ F� W I 1 t ..
P U
t! 1i
9t
itY n
/
Et
3v I .
ker I.�
I
. I •
Y41,,! CO'fir. I 1 %1I'l
^ I
li
' _ . . . . .
.1 . . . . . . . . . `\m . . . 1>y�Tlr r I 7 r
x i t I -
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I . . .,9 . . . . . . $
7.2 •I . . .
I
m
� Z I
OIL I
P Al
zc . . . . . � . . . I . . . . 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1. . . . . . . . . . . . .
.tu m I I
�
k tQ. . . 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . tn.1
1 y
i .S r, — I I 01
2
7. fd l I
1
ll
t f N I J 9 a
1 0! 1
1
Q, . . . . . . . . . . . .
PI _ t- 1 ¢
tl0
, ..9 m . . . . . 1 . . . . J
.
a 3o I 5 i co. S . . . .I . . "f.
' sS 1 9 1 N ,
I
I
r
o I
I 9
I -9
30 l ,r
s . . . . . : . . . . . :
o t° t -
0
- t 0
. . . . .
I 'a
y 1 e9 I.
` 3�. . , �. . . . . . . i. 3P y
9 m
f, . J n'
_ ' N
ye' a �
: 1 r, 4 rte .` 1i
.'x ,4 r r
rglll J`• r
fk
V 008
?11' p
'". t }"s !� ,h,,t..tt',4- ..iyX �1 ' j ._I E s s F "� ' 3 I' ,4.rlel
4.
J r xt
_fi gpi r
[ it F < 'i:ir�,.' v J\ h,� IT �R:ft. •6"'
, i x t., s \ a .\ 1we
I! •
v' F g •.t,". f'"P •fir ., • T/F �}iI. •'� s ♦n Y�+6. • R rn-.Fr 7�t.?, - s . ._
_ i < 2 �� 1 MI . 1R r a 1'!" Y '
I �, ¢' tar ` ° + ., } fly Mt''',v rR+� p
14 di
T' fl L tnn 1
iP , +;- *,4 , t
I;,
tei
R T
• • sr?
I
( 'k' P is`?�� � - �- � i < 'Y <
•
P Pi
i ; E 4,a
iir. ��w yi ; 1,
•
i\•,
x •j :h
• -
' ` fit a •: la. a+
1 { .v.y' P4., R I `'�' t- I y ti
•
9+ I
ti_ I "•
F
r,
FF.FEFI FF= _ El_ i a 1F;
$rb . try :..� 6 7:, �' . �, 3, �IS .
.7
.�,, k ir.. «Z-...Y .. - 3,,,,, ,-..Y . .„ lama. bto... ±1,tit X J. - --. r - - 1\ . '" '.
L
0
3 En
p '0 .0 N p
y o b V
0
3 « a a H O
w
o
ti 0 o ^ o
el N N.
co
3 w a --en N p
a
a a H
a
F T..R.' W Z'W^ £ N N £W
C Co yK Coen
ww
yOo H W U N N U O K U O K W N co W Co K
£. O'� W V y Ni O y !-� u1.p H O y W CO H
b
O ON p -. ON 0 .t
0. V
0 o p N
W O p `0
cr.. 0 V N N V coCo
N
H
N.
Co
N
.£
H
to '0 P
0 P '0N. o en
b ^ O
0N.
a. m m 0'
H+
CID O
W F.
I41 Ri Co in CO N ✓1
V Q N h N C'1
0 N co N.
0
W 0
I
W
[y en N 0' N N .y
o
6a ry N T
N N 0'
_ co to N V O^
ill
o a a a a
p
a a
W coLn in
0' o m
N Co h E M co co
cn S b • in P
O 01
N N ^ CO - 0
N N
0 0
EW., a' m m 0 m
Co W
0 O
I --- en .Ny 0 .V-
N N
0 0cn
a3O 0 .0
O
O
0 O
U yf�]0 0 0 o o O O
H 0.'❑ O^ O^ O o 0
O
w y> en r, N O p
Co W ^ m m
W h ti
6 `9 `9 a a a w
0
U
. PCH
N H
El•N 'VZI. T W
en o
y c. pp��g6o Cw o 0¢0 0v0i0 CO PL
pW5el
� W y N KKFHO w o
o0 o W o
{Ty"'�� a4 3..p o 3O
E0 N
H.� aCO el
l Ln10�. aO �P 230b EN.---.o V to pHy' H
0.
F .MONO W.T.NO W W.DO 0 Np ��00' YR 0 00
6 NN O'
O £ l e'1 K.V O �N y eat O
r-1 Co Co CoN '0- 0
9:0,39
SUBJECT
ar
0/10:.t.
flea
Star Pak
237 22nd Street
Greeley, Co
8 S'TQ39
COMPARABLE SALE #1
er .'y �.-.< .
., a yyatY,w�r.". 3
`Y ^^ ddCC'C� �e1KY Y ..kr+r ►..' yy
1 ti t
X. G w >.o M
PIN: 3561086 PARCEL #: 96117402001
OCCUPANCY: MANUFACTURING
ADDRESS: 2401 2 AV
GREELEY
SALE DATE: 03/08/90
SALE PRICE: $1 , 300 , 000
GRANTOR: E & M EISENMAN
GRANTEE: PHELPS-TOINTON INC
CONSTRUCTION-QUAL: 0
PR/SF(IMPS) : $10 .01 BLDG SIZE: 101 , 584
PR/SQ FT: $12 . 80 YEAR BLT: 1966
LAND SIZE: 562 , 585 CLASS: S
LAND VALUE: $282 , 699 WALL HEIGHT: 28
LAND/BLDG RATIO: 5 .54 BSMT SIZE: 0
REMARKS: MFG 89 , 236 , OFFICE 4 , 576 , SER GAR 6 ,048 .
NET RENT $108 ,000 AT SALE. CAP RATE 11 . 2%
9 9913139
COMPARABLE SALE #2
' � 4
-
11 ...+ '
77;7te:- ' '.v ...��
4404011.°
PIN: 0124987 PARCEL #: 96120308009
OCCUPANCY: WHSE DISTR
ADDRESS: 600 31 ST
EVANS
SALE DATE: 05/30/90
SALE PRICE: $350,000
GRANTOR: INTER PAPER LAMINATES
GRANTEE: PAWNEE TRANSPORTATION INC
CONSTRUCTION-QUAL: AVG
PR/SF(IMPS) : $6. 60 BLDG SIZE: 44,000
PR/SQ FT: $7.95 YEAR BLT: 1979
LAND SIZE: 79, 509 CLASS: S
LAND VALUE: $59,632 WALL HEIGHT: 20
LAND/BLDG RATIO: 1. 81 BSMT SIZE: 0
REMARKS: OFFICE 2100 SF ( 5%) WHSE 41780 (95%) COMPLETE
INTERIOR REMODEL AFTER SALE
10
COMPARABLE SALE #3
iii. •: ....
t
PIN: 3564686 PARCEL # : 96117403006
OCCUPANCY: WHSE STOR
ADDRESS: 4 AV 2414
GREELEY
SALE DATE: 10/12/88
SALE PRICE: $375 ,000
GRANTOR: WEICKER INVESTMENT CO
GRANTEE: WARDE, TIMOTHY BLDG SIZE: 28 ,750
CONSTRUCTION-QUAL: AVG YEAR BLT: 1960
PR/SF(IMPS) : $11. 16 CLASS: C
PR/SQ FT: $13 .04 WALL HEIGHT: 19 FT
LAND SIZE: 72, 390
LAND VALUE: $54 , 292
LAND/BLDG RATIO: 2.52
REMARKS:
97.0739
11
COMPARABLE SALE #4
}
TM
g"k a .te
PIN: 3312886 PARCEL # : 96108403002
OCCUPANCY: MANUFACTURING
ADDRESS: 401 17 ST
GREELEY
SALE DATE: 09/07/89
SALE PRICE: $370 , 000
GRANTOR: INTRAWEST BANK OF GREELEY
GRANTEE: R & R CUSTOM WOODWORKING
CONSTRUCTION-QUAL: 0
PR/SF( IMPS) : $11. 20 BLDG SIZE: 29 ,025
PR/SQ FT: $12 . 75 YEAR BLT: 1973
LAND SIZE: 239 , 580 CLASS: S
LAND VALUE: $44 ,921 WALL HEIGHT: 14
LAND/BLDG RATIO: 8 . 25
REMARKS: OFFICE MEZZANINE 2250 SF( 7 . 8%) FIRE SPRINKLER
29025 SF. STORAGE LEAN-TO 3200 SF ADDN'L
AFTER SALE $110 ,000 INTERIOR REMODEL
930739
12
COMPARABLE SALE #5
-.u"'_ - ,.
It
PIN: 3881086 PARCEL # : 96120306001
OCCUPANCY: WHSE STOR
ADDRESS: 3201 W SERVICE RD
EVANS
SALE DATE: 06/14/88
SALE PRICE: $300 , 000
GRANTOR: HUNTER, EDWIN J.
GRANTEE: BREWSTER, WILLIAM C
CONSTRUCTION-QUAL: LOW
PR/SF( IMPS) : $5 . 40 BLDG SIZE: 27 , 676
PR/SQ FT: $10 . 84 YEAR BLT: 1970
LAND SIZE: 203 , 980 CLASS: S
LAND VALUE: $150, 590 WALL HEIGHT: 14
LAND/BLDG RATIO: 7 . 37 BSMT SIZE: 0
REMARKS: WOL # 3881886 OFFICE 4428 SF (16%) WHSE 23248
SF (84%)
930"739
13
6 i
.
Pcudre
LEGEND •
•
• < - i Schools 19.North Colorado Mec •
H S t 1.Pheasant Run Park 20.Montview Park
n 2.Epple Park 21.UNC Dorms
3,Franklin Park 22.Glenmere Park
4.Broadview Park 23.University of Northe
La Park PI gS _ e 5.Luther Park > 24.Jackson Field
I m a 6.Bittersweet Park < 25.Wildlife Park
¢ > p¢p 7.Sherwood Park 26.University Center
Sr m c ¢ a -05 8.Aims Community College 27.UNC'Nest Campus
,yo D>S 1$ — ) S t < C 9.'NoodColton riar Park 28.Farr Park
_ r�h. UJ C S t o B S t 10.Cottonwood Park Bliss F
aas C S \ — L B 51 a 11.Highland Hills Municipal
6'° S 1 < _ Gait Course
.1? ti ; A — CIS St,-Fl °' t 12.Gateway Park
%13.Weld Co.Library
S — m m
a Comparable Building Sales 14.Brentwood Park
15.Island Grove Park
fy 2nd St > 2nd SI •016.City Complex
.I > >—' r - 17.Lincoln Park
L 044 h L' -- >O ■ •
S .
5l — 4 h .. S I 18.Sunrise Park
m
\ m —m > m "
End St > Slh m ¢ 1 +. < St u
h 5. <_ —� to > a `t 'C `-
'1thf m 8 I > th -U St <16 a 8th
- a it - st 17
9th ' St 9th SY > �_ m St
¢
5 - - t, rth St m PDudi -
a a
� 1. h S1 - a 11th I S $' La.
,,St n S I _ _ m IC • G •
��ry'12th St m - -• 12th 1St
112th 5t •. a - - a < a
1 6 J 131 St
14Th St 4t a 4th - co St
L of St a.' i L St ? <R1 t m c =
N °t .:a m9e ¢ � - - sI N 16th St
\ a t6t f_' - - - tm
-17 th<St S, . u m I tr .c St 171 St « ° m
18th St E' a ._ m m t.- .t 21 St ..¢ 18th a < m St -
m3•�LL 12th _ „ m > O 9L1 dale m
el en-F. i D 31 keCr anfo-d PI 23 t a - °`
91 .kes ldL m 19th a<• StS bin
i en er- -N24 '�0 =m- St °kmc>IeinF
.. St" ,° . :. OIY 9tal 20th 'K �¢ m - ..
of St •d o 25 m a _ I a a •0th sr
t d '--2 st ..� 26 21st t " ° m >h `1 m o a 22nd o St
2'n• e�te- 27 0, 22nd St a Subject " 0 3. •
13 2'o P
•e 3rd St 3 3
RU S Dr 24th / St -
4 e •-_ 24 t h C S t , R'_.- E L5
Itc Rat mat° os C9 .. . >c> >-. a>3 2 C9m Y " I►Bi me 1 h
,Ds, , 5 < < s
r l ! I -
n S 'd S, s > < > c 2 t St - 2Fth St Rive
a St
14 . .. io
2 t y 61 't R•
hayou
A7 > m ;28^ 2r th St 34
St °1NN r 2 to — — s
28th St 281h SI\
St _c= 28th St Rd
29th S Ptytle
m
-to 129 tlh B1a d
kh : yt :;
Sttree3otoA Laed
mE
; a
L /
O a
O
N
CO a
" N
N
C
III w
�O
1 4 93,0739
Si
i 'et c40 a; 4,
L
Iir
a
c
3 'o s co
Z tc
wa
W '
0' u c
'�
m c a W _o /
52w
4 eny ISI. ,J .- N o, !
iil soel
i
10 osed 13
pep u111
co N co
•
a v o cleric
c
.a .r CO 81 I oLL3
co co
1 _ -
.osej O Cl)N m C7. UePi °9¢ co
JO nog
� •. N t vy V - L _ ..C
° eS co e CO ,C
lenueC < —
op i S9)191 In
•• ,. L (73
co 19AU0o
elleS al
1 N N CO Ave o
W 1131 CO- v °
i. o ',�_�,Ave _
�� CO— 's
uoileo � Ave IS uosle0 �„ co v�
GA UOWISA F .. I„ lc^ wi� ton " 1:3 Trail: SA
7 a env 41St �""' eny uo I6ul ling CO Cl)
L
CO \v� L
L Can 19ouleg.. J •^,a"CUL �' CO.-- \7 any � v &...).
{ .�Svlll°� c�i,�� •o in y L1sul I lo"J v°tule
B
env uol nl !° sul I lo0—= = m m oc.1 v
co.
b .�.�.a � �. °' v 4ILI
ID
i !S es *' a
L "'flu
o
n e
s eIld W
Ilou W
'4:: J IS en
w l 3
a PEIS w I1e
I /
a/ 4eQ
1
OU Scion i 00r,
F• eny PJEZ
77: [rT�,1 rl� C
INCOME APPROACH
Comp # Sq Ft Year Blt Annual NNN Lease (psf)
Monfort Fab 101 , 584 1966 . 97
County Crisp 38 , 827 1955 1 .08
Whse/stor 17 ,474 1984 1 . 90
Whse/stor 18 , 380 1953 2 . 29
Pluswood 44 , 000 1978 1 .44
Economic NNN Lease (psf/adjusted) . 80
Subject square footage 94, 669
Net Operating income 75 ,735
Capitalization rate . 13
Indicated Value by the Income Approach. . . . $582 , 578
Reportedly, the subject property was being leased (with
option to purchase for $700,000) by Starpak for . 96 psf
gross . The estimated NNN lease is . 50 psf ( after deducting
vacancy/loss and allowed expenses .) This would equate to
the following:
Actual ( former) NNN lease . 50
Subject sq ft 94 , 669
NOI 47 , 334
Cap rate . 13
Indicated Value $364, 112 *
* Former lease is considered well below Economic Rent.
16
CORRELATION AND FINAL ESTIMATE OF VALUE
COST APPROACH $664, 500
SALES COMPARISON $615 ,300
INCOME APPROACH $582 , 500
ESTIMATED MARKET VALUE of the SUBJECT
PROPERTY:
$583 ,000
i
/ 7c-,
/a) 6 `77
1 SS o- -0
1 9:0739
The Assessor ' s Office has obtained two copies of fee
appraisals on the subject property, prepared by Robert
Mitchell , MAI dated May 1st, 1988 and August 1st 1990 .
The conclusion of the appraisal dated May 1st 1988 , a
result of the three approaches to value, are as follows :
Cost Approach. . . $614, 000
Sales Approach. . $650, 000
Income Approach. $613 , 000
The final estimate of value was estimated to be $625 ,000
The conclusion of the appraial dated August 1st 1990, are
as follows :
Cost Approach. . . $540 , 000
Sales Approach. . $565 , 000
Income Approach. $544 , 000
The final estimate of value was estimated to be $550,000
92.0739
18
n gWI
wYS �
•
r `
y M
Updated Appraisal of
CENTRAL HOMES
PROPERTY
2"37 - 22nd Sheet
Greeley,Colorado
•
•
For
United Bank of.Greeley`
ry ,,. and f- ,•
-,„ - _ , ,. ..M
• First Interstate Bark of Denver
Date of Value: August 1, 1990 -
Date of Report: August 15 1990
By
Robert J Mitchell, MAI
• 1129.- loth Street
c. Greeley, Colorado
T l l 1 t 5 rf K L
w �.>t \ x:ax > " s -v 4-. r°` n r.�-.fit' Q 3+ ..;e ^< +_ • S>r,�
1 -I'{> a'��r1e�.,J.T..5 -0 r'>.a. u s 1., C.45`1-1-&-`.r.J a' x Kra r+arvdi ` 1'° °."` `""'
� - r rw y ..4 r } ,K s. ...rot 4-4--^ �.3. H'.ra
4.4
Y' s? r.t M � ' 1 1 c 1rot,
rt lh r w.>w f. '4ri :^Y r_ , x nA i ri"ra t wr r^in^r- t ..�
.444'44 ' R-.4 4t tr
1 J Y $ .� h te— ...r�'m fj
va
.1
1129 10th Street•Greeley.Colorado 80631
303/352.1114
l^l
Robert J.Mitchell.MAI. August 15, 1989
Mr. Jack L. Hinton
Credit Administration
United Bank of Greeley, N.A.
P. O. Box 1058
( Greeley, Colorado 80632
and
Mr. Larry L. Lucero
( Vice President 1
First Interstate Bank of Denver, N.A.
633 Seventeenth Street
Denver, Colorado 80270
Gentlemen: •
Pursuant to your requests by letters dated June 1, 1990 and July 15, 1990, I submit,
herewith, a supplement or updated appraisal of the property owned by your banks and
situated at 237 - 22nd Street, City of Greeley, Weld County, Colorado.
The appraisal is an estimate of the Fair Value of this property as of August 1, 1990
and is of the fee simple ownership.
Please refer to my complete narrative report dated May 1, 1986 for details and
descriptive data, explanations of value factors and analysis, and general data for background
to this updating including qualifications of the appraiser. The definition of Fair Value has
been included as an exhibit in previous reports.
The May, 1986 appraisal included Parcels A and B. Since that time, Parcel A (vacant
land) has been sold and a small pole shed has been razed from Parcel B. Therefore, this
updating includes only Parcel B, which is 266,073 square feet of land and a 94,092 square
foot manufacturing building, plus a perimeter chain link security fence, pavement and one
( large open pole shelter.
I have again made a cursory inspection of Parcel B and find it to be essentially as
( existed one year ago and as described in my previous report, except the exterior continues
to show some weathering, the roof continues to show more leaks and the manufacturing area
heaters reportedly are in need of more repair. The Greeley community and neighborhood
have changed very little during this past year.
•
l�
• r , ' ' ' ! Real Estate Appraisers
and Consultants
- 2 -
I submit, herewith, three copies of my updated report which attempts to describe
methods of valuation used and sets forth the analysis of data and reasoning involved in
deriving my conclusions.
Therefore, as a result of all considerations, I estimate the Fair Value of the subject
property, as of August 1, 1990, and with a selling period of less than one year, to be:
FIVE HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS
($550,000.00)
Respectfully submitted,
" 1,rd&v /
Robert J. Mitchell, MM
•
f_
.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
it
Title Page
Letter of Transmittal
Table of Contents
Page
General Market Situation - Industrial Properties 1
3
Cost Approach 3
Market Data Approach 10
7
Income Approach
Reconciliation and Final Value Estimate 13
Assumptions and Limiting Conditions 16
15
Certification of Value
Addendum •
Exhibit
Copy of Assignment Letter from United Bank and First Interstate Bank A
Robert.1 Mitchell&Associates
930739
GENERAL MARKET SITUATION
INDUSTRIAL PROPERTIES
• The Farmhand Industries building mentioned in the previous reports was leased in
1989 for a five year term involving the entire 98,800 square foot facility. An option at
$1,300,000 was a part of the transaction. As of March, 1990, the ownership changed hands
on the basis of the $1,300,000 price - subject to the lease and option. The sale will be
discussed more in the updated Market Approach which follows, however, it is significant that
this large area is occupied - probably indefinitely.
See the tabulation of industrial type facilities on the following page which are either
vacant, for sale or on short term leases. This represents a total of 194,646 square feet in 12
buildings, a drop of about one-third from one year ago. Also, these numbers include subject
space of nearly 100,000 square feet - which is occupied, but for sale.
A three year history of industrial vacancies throughout Greeley and Evans indicates
a decline in the total square feet unoccupied. Based on the eight recent transactions
combined with the above, it is apparent that demand for industrial properties is stabilizing,
however, there is very little new construction.
Hobert J.Mitchell&Associates
y0
w m i r. .0 r 6 0 • Y
JLm i.
. 0 3 N-. L • 1.. L J
.N N r C y Np p N ••.
NEECO
U L • V O
L q N C L Y
VI • 0 °4 C Y V N V M d N Lm E Y
a
yNj « > > ° q NO w 3 �I ` ^a OY L
L X 3 V E y �j V O i s J
L yy T �1 • _ OC . _
'1. O Y .,� L U� J[ .C•11 1S Np yOy V�p V 'O E 71 w " V • V Li sa H 1.� J[y1 L }�j L y a ✓ _p U p yC Y W Y
y •E " Y Y Nor O Y Y C O..U. T C
p yy u r. m 0 V- L
cc 9 L 8 Y C •
L • A Y Y > .. N Y VIE J °yE O . 1
p, �—••^ • C a U Y..- Y U Y C °m O Y i I
9 a L
q 1 V Vl L 4 L V m� U L'V > 2.2
yO Z •
a • •+ t9tqq C O (4 Y- CO '•••-I. C la Y. Y yO a L yO [Q
pM 42 1,9 NN� O. V > HO JO. JOO > JO NJ r'V •+ E
•
Y W p �p
< m 1` d a0 N V
M ,44-,
N . N
j NO • . <I V cMp 101
N
10 O.
r ° ry •i •N H N N Yi N N
Y •� N M N
ba0
0 00 O0 $ g
a •p1 • 0 0 0 0 0 O O O
a O C 6 O 0 NIII • N & • •O O O IR P
a V • ,O N N N N N
vl 6 H Y
� •4 J 4 N N N N N N N N N M
L i
° L Y
N JO 0
• Y dy.05 V .{ .} p Cpp .} o
co `• by 's N u Mf .N.p W .O •Ol1 .,°t — .O.pp 0 •O •O o
> Y CC. •Y^ Cr 0 `O M J N ^ •ON J M M N
a L C -i
V N
L
M
1 Co
Ni-'
'9 VI •Vi O 8 vmi 8 0 •`1 S y4 M
O N• 0 N u
U▪V V P •O P v N N N P P • •
U •n a m
C—• N
N •
f 41
L•
42
J L S V
C =
d8 g E o 1i
>• N E - L Y U
�' y S 4 0. Ia • 9 Nu.
J • KG J U A CO • N O • W
I
V
A a
H Y Y Y •
•
N H >•
> t S L N K <le a
0 N
42
5 L
92
b • 42 L •
W N OP a
hI s W `O < I • • • U
Y O N v •
0
S O lei N P. 0 N
< 0 •O N00
N N N
Roberti.Mitchell&Associates
COST APPROACH
Land Value Estimate
A current investigation was made regarding the sales activity of vacant industrial land
in Greeley during the past year. Emphasis was placed on those areas along the eastern
fringes of the city. Ten new transactions are included on the following page. Facing that
is a map depicting their location in relation to that of the site being appraised.
The sales vary in size from 6,464 to 529,385 square feet and unit prices are $0.32 to
$1.74 per square foot for land adaptable to industrial development. The high sale ($1.74)
is the earlier 1985 transaction and the smallest sale took place in December, 1989 at $1.70
per square foot. Sales 5 and 6 at $0.32 and $0.36 per square foot can be compared with
adjoining Sale 2 of last year's report (October, 1988, 445,601 square feet at $0.43 per square
foot) to further document the slightly downward trend. The recent sales show a distinct
difference in unit prices due to size.
It is determined that industrial land values are below the level of last year, decreasing
in the range of 10 percent.
3 - Robert J.Mitchell&Associates
i
f
Table II
Industrial Land Sales
CENTRAL NCMES
Greeley. Colorado 8/90 R. J, Mitchell & Assoc.
Sale Grantor/ Date of Sates Land Size Land Size Sales Price
No, Grantee Sate Price in Sc. Ft. in Acres per Sc. Ft.
1 Neatly/Delleo 8/85 $ 76,000 43,581 1.00 S 1.74
is Dellco/Dickson 12/88 S 20,000 43,581 1.00 $ 0.46
2 Schneidar/Frizzetl 2/67 5 60,000 119,382 2.74 S 0.50
3 Schneider/Larimore 8/88 $ 21,000 12,926 0.30 S 1.62
3a Larimore/Bogart 8/89 S 19,400 12,926 0.30 $ 1.50
4 Schneider/Karges 9/89 $ 37,500 28,765 0.66 S 1.30
5 Valley Nat'l. Bank/ 10/89 $100,000 310,400 7.13 $ 0.32
Nor-Colo
6 Valley Nat'l. Bank/ 11/89 $190,000 529,385 12.15 S 0.36
Norwest Pub.
7 Schneider/Sharpe 12/69 $ 11,000 6,464 0.15 S 1.70
8 Scheirmen/Warren 4/90 $ 85,000 103,534 2.35 $ 0.82
9 Schneider/DWD Jnt. 7/90 $ 40,000 110,033 2.53 $ 0.36
Venture
(1) After allocation for improvements.
1
- 4 - Q (.y Robert J.Mitchell&Associates
1' ,
•
"t"ri [ {x qc .ii,-:a� sx' i' es i .r v' ri'ti111>���.yyy:e�11:��s •�f('tl'r! r i'^�1....e ai ft./I
z� It Idn:. k : I {II
i—.. ..,�₹IJF�_ i. , wY 111 IC II
• I - I
cm. r„y- I, r .� -r." ^... � 1..11 ..
,y,„, ' 1as•J�1 ' I' 1 l:.,;,1 ' \f. ` • A1 11 1I
ynl t...J, ,
.-.-ti . ,\ ,. ... firrair." .
..gel- �::��-- '^�—' •--T9= __ =C = � t�' � u� ,^I� ®�
,� �� ' r h . ter - ,� = ... ' :
1 "I
I I C' 11 •^ - ,f I I p r tid.J SNC.i h dx�•] 'i I I"
- • ,^•• f 1 ( ` �._ —�
, •
�J r r •�.I 41 , I�"Iv • ` �'III PM �..
�- el �3 a �� x —.�
d •
�I —+�5IW/�/� � { �lIn ! : 1 �- �: • I
4.dgc 1-7 i '.III 1 .
i 1 u
.r -I l 1 --If / •_:,../,':20.:,..i : ... ` ..-A '— r . 1 i t o �r.�l
_ j
J C -it
•'.tom°--'iz �...S\ I �.1, 1. 1 c . • r .. I • ' 2
_ =AIL--
� .1 r1 - . 4.t.' 1 ., I T1II -p.111 r 43 t�. ..,�`I 'I ,. II • = �A2_
y I
II 1 "I ��AI.l. ,,e::'
1 1 II PI I1I.I I:Cr: , • I `. I
�C7 ���. ?�I� I'�I.�� fl ��•��}[M1.I}'I C� — I iI' � - 12 - II I=
T'f'.]1T7` 11'11•
.�
c+ ^ •� Ss IIILLLGGCYYY^^' •'1 �• .r s
1pf ---///��" �j ice`.-Y
I
i
6
— N cI �J I vl _ nl �-�. Ca-
. Ji
CJ nJ P ItE * +..1 /AM / /4
C) 1.
}
7
Comparable Land Sales ) 4:7 0 39
•
Direct Comparison
Subject is a relatively large site at 266,073 square feet, or 6.11 acres, therefore it is
best compared with the larger sales such as Sales 5 and 6. Sale 8 is also significant due to
the proximity of location, only one block southeast from subject. As a matter of fact, in the
May, 1986 appraisal of subject current Sale 8 was included as Sale 1 (May, 1983 sale date,
at $0.98 per square foot). The sale site has corner influence, although it has no direct access
to its frontage along U. S. Highway 85 By-pass, the north perimeter is formed by accessible
22nd Street. Visual exposure to the high traffic Highway 85 By-pass is excellent. Thus,
requiring a downward adjustment for location, as well as for size.
As a result of this analysis, value of the subject land is considered to
be $0.50 per square foot.
266,073 sq. ft @ $0.50 psf - $133,037
Rounded to - $133,000
Replacement Cost New
I
Study has again been made to determine if any change in Replacement Cost New of
the improvements would have occurred during the ensuing year.
The Hensel-Phelps Construction Company published Building Cost Index shows costs
of non-residential buildings to have increased about one percent during the past year and
projects an increase of 2.5 percent for 1991. Marshall Valuation Service Comparative Cost
Multiplier Index indicates costs have increased approximately 1.5 percent from July, 1989
to July, 1990. Local steel building contractors estimate costs are up slightly due mostly to
the Workman Compensation Insurance costs. These figures indicate that Cost New of the
subject improvements has increased two to three percent over the past year.
,to,tij,�I+trchell&Associates
- 5 - �VJ�77
Depreciation
The building being appraised is a combination of average quality open
warehouse/manufacturing space,some slightly better quality warehouse/manufacturing space
and some fair quality office space. Average age is slightly over 20 years and exterior
( maintenance (trim and paint) is fair to poor for the warehouse area, however, the exterior
siding of the office area was painted in early 1989. There is considerable roof leakage in the
warehouse area and some in the office areas. Functional obsolescence is mentioned in the
previous description of the improvements and is measured by low sale prices of similar
buildings, suggesting unit values considerably below the figure resulting from cost new less
physical deterioration only.
In the May, 1988 appraisal two sales were analyzed to determine the total accrued
depreciation. These examples utilizing smaller, newer buildings in better condition than
subject showed accrued depreciation at 44 and 36 percent with a final determination of 60
percent for the subject building.
The sale of the "Farmhand building" (Sale I, Table III) in March, 1990, is analyzed
to provide a further indication of the degree of accrued depreciation assignable to properties
of this type. An appraisal in 1987 assigned cost new for the buildings involved with the sale
property to be $2,289,900. After subtracting current land values and contributory value of
the site improvements from the recent sale, those buildings contributed an estimated
$940,000 to the total purchase price, or suffered a total accrued depreciation of 59 percent.
Subject building is in poorer physical condition than the comparable and thus accrued
depreciation is now estimated to be 65 percent.- 6 - yl, cAssociates
•
Summary - Cost Approach
Office Building (5,782 sq. ft. @ $38.00 p.s.f.) = $ 219,716
Factory Building (88,310 sq. ft. @ $10.00 p.s.f.) = $ 883,100
Pole Shed (5,840 sq. ft. @ $3.20 p.s.f.) = $ 18,688
Total Building Cost New $1,121,504
Less Accrued Depreciation (65%) - $ 728,978
Total Depreciated Reproduction
Cost New of Improvements $ 392,526
Add Site Improvements, Fencing & Pavement
(Contributory Value) $ 15,000
Add Land Value $ 133,000
Total Estimate of Value by the Cost Approach $ 540,526
Rounded to - $ 540,000
MARKET DATA APPROACH
Most of the ten sales shown on Table III represent transactions involving much
smaller buildings. The range and size of the buildings is from 2,814 to 98,800 square feet.
The overall sales price per square foot, including land and improvements,ranges from $7.93
to $35.23 per square foot. The highest per unit price was for one of the smallest buildings
and the three lowest prices ($7.93, $12.01 and $13.16 per square foot) were for the largest
buildings.
- 7 - RobertJ.Mitchell&Associates
92O 39
The larger sales (Sales H, I, and J) at $7.93 to $13.16 per square foot not only require
a heavy downward adjustment for quality, but Sales H and J still require a downward
adjustment for size.
The Market Data is better for this year's update due to the three recent sales of
larger properties.
Sale H, at $7.93 per square foot - land and improvements, in May, 1990, is located
in Evans about nine blocks south of subject. It involved a 44,109 square feet, 20 foot high
sidewall, metal building in fairly good condition. The $7.93 unit price is adjusted up for
location, land to building ratio and office to warehouse ratio, but down for size, age and
condition and quality of construction, resulting in an indication of $6.35 per square foot.
Sale I, in March, 1990 at the rate of $13.16 per square foot - overall, and included
land and three buildings, is adjusted down for location on the highway by-pass, age and
condition, quality of construction and land to building ratio, resulting in an indication of
$6.00 per square foot.
- Roberti Mitch
9
.
;.,-'KM.q �•..di. }v >IIs;.:T• at3:ve _
____ _____ ' u H. ,.\
I
.
i'e 1.Y'.
I l'E --)�f� I
I e+i a
I
•
f It I OPCCLLY, COIOM�DO
p_ �..._+,—J . . o „`,. c,„,Cgl PPOPCRrY um,
(' r:` N
\• \ • a yr. @
) 4 1-
fv1, -� -` r •*
,tJ -C7 , _I._-
I:±1;_ ' 7�7' q[�- I
••T ' r _
-,
'K b.1 }} ` i'---� 1 '
L..x� X16.1 tit!,
jL'��.�'LLyLJiL� ��=1�� � — ' r"`Ys'�^�i `Tf�' .r. ���fllt_ .-i lr+�•t ;IL;lII'•/ �/r -._
'� II"�'tE_ � . �J h�,l ^ \'IIIit- --•:i '2�' 2I Iitic, • �—•
.
} :1:4‘`%--15.1.67-c-----L.
-_ fl �I ill_ .-,
S I aP � I
,
�1 F1a_yn et{ I• .z!%.a G ,�TT• i s 1 L I_.. I __
t 1 yl!-We "r >•.,.z S,. LT- II., '.I., I W ,rf
�I h •
H — �, 1•� l • f .• Ir Imm� ry
t f i,.---;-.14...,- .—y • T1: KN I ~, _
i-/rJ 24 r•r ' 1. t T II e i t , rte_ `_'—'•�.
P c y. h. \I ' 1Litt T ' I ` 1rn ,r ,•r •1 • .....7.--;h, 1. 11 I!f ;l I ..� - 1
y'1 .� r r /-'1- 2,47_2-4 I ��:: •j { I I J III
�Fq �r'tc-_:1.1? KZ i �i1 'I •Y :It ,r12,-
. T I I,I I(��il, P� I t
V \ V` • • tt -r: 4 ."`... "+ •.', i. : 11 r "'y r
1
r
a4 ) TT
.....,...\.,,,,..../.` __i'I—, „.),3- 1;1. 1 , —yl��..a I �� 1 — ---- .�rf•r -.
� i ='_1/11- i--� :5;7. I 1 r ..-* •I .� 1 ' '__4 �
` r "T'sc - i i i IP LIy - '\..(// r .� t 1 r S : fr
t- I I , Y LI
l ., 11, 1
Comparable Sales ' '� 3
C
,
Table III
INDUSTRIAL BUILDING SALES
CENTRAL HOMES
Greeley, Colorado
8/90 R.J. Mitchell 5 Assoc.
Allocation
Sate Grantor/ Date of Sale Site (So. Ft.) Land to $.Pr. D.s.f. Overall
_ No. Grantee Sale Price Land alga,. Bldg. Ratio Img Btd5.(1) S.Pr. D.s.f.(2)
A Log Cabin/ 4/89 $ 68,000 52,300 2,814 18.6:1 $0.55 $22.50 $24.16
Lang $12.92
B UC8/ 7/89 $115,000 81,760 3,264 25:1 $0.75 $20.00 $35.23
Jay $ 7.79
C Shupe/ 8/89 $201,539 274,201 10,296 26.6:1 $0.45 $25.00 $19.57
Tri-State $ 7.16
D Fletcher/ 8/89 $113,500 36,250 4,950 7.3:1 $1.00 $25.00 $22.93
Sutton $14.78
E Elan-Charles/ 8/89 $155,000 19,493 6,000 3.2:1 $0.90 $35.00 $25.83
Osborn $19.05
F Univ. Nat'l./ 3/90 S 98,000 37,386 6,000 6.2:1 $0.80 $20.00 $16.33
Smith Assoc. $ 8.62
G KEJO/Brewer 6/90 $400,000 137,897 12,982 9.1:1 $1.00 $28.78(3) $30.81
$ 8,50
H Intn'l Paper/ 5/90 $350,000 72,384 44,109 1.6:1 $0.50 $15.00 S 7.93
Todd $ 6.72
I Eiserman/ 3/90 $1,300,000 555,159 98,800 5.6:1 $0.54 $20.00 $13:16
Tointon $ 8.95
J United Bank/ 9/89 $370,000 293,580 30,800 7.8:1 $0.50 $20.00 $12.01
R 8 R Wood. $ 7.19
(1) Top number is office, bottom is warehouse.
(2) Total price for land and improvements divided by building size.
(3) Allocated based on two-story office area.
Roe(d4., �t{ y-,,�p+��a�sates
- 9 - �f 1nNGJ�V;
L
Sale J, at $12.01 per square foot approximately one year ago, involved the somewhat
smaller but still relatively large 30,800 square foot manufacturing type building, which is
adjusted down for size, age and condition, quality of construction and land to building ratio
and indicates $6.00 per square foot for subject land and improvements.
As a result of this analysis, value of subject is estimated to be $6.00 per square foot.
The Market Approach, therefore, suggests a value as follows:
94,092 sq. ft. @ $6.00 psf = $564,552
Rounded to - $565,000
There is an option pending on the subject property. The lease and option dated
February 10, 1989 provides for the tenant to purchase the total premises for$700,000 at any
time during the lease term and any renewal periods.. The tenant also had the right of first
refusal until June 15, 1990.
As a result of this market study, value of the subject total property is now estimated
to be $565,000.
INCOME APPROACH
Reportedly, the property being appraised is subject to a lease, which basically
provides the rental to June 15, 1991 and allows the full use of the subject property at a
rental of $7,500 per month or $0.96 per square foot per annum (based on 94,092 sq. ft.,
office and factory buildings). One year ago the lease called for an increased rental of$8,400
per month for the period of June, 1990 to June, 1991, however, that figure was apparently
43�
-
10 -
Robert J.Mitchell&Associates
renegotiated and the rate remains at $7,500 per month. Tenant pays all utilities except
water and sewer, as well as ordinary maintenance. Landlord pays basic insurance and taxes.
The assessed value continues to decrease from $213,530 in 1989 to a current
$181,230. The 1989 taxes payable in 1990 are $15,770.
The lease of the former Farmhand building, or Eisenman property (now Sale I), at
a net/net/net of $0.97 per square foot, was discussed in detail in last year's appraisal. The
sale at $1,300,000 therefore provides a comparable overall capitalization rate of 7.6 percent.
The comparable is generally of superior quality to the subject. In the Reconstructed Income
Statement which follows, a net/net/net rental for subject is about $0.50 per square foot. The
Eisenman building net rental increased by about 40 percent for taxes, insurance,
maintenance, management, and vacancy and credit losses, is $1.36 per square foot.
Due to the relatively soft market and history of the subject property, as well as the
existing lease and recent downward negotiation of that lease, an appropriate current gross
rental is estimated to be $1.00 per square foot.
An appropriate capitalization rate is 8 percent.
93139
Robert J.Mitchell&Associates
- 11 -
I I
Reconstructed Income Statement
Gross Potential Income
94,092 sq. ft. @ $1.00 psf = $ 94,092
Less Vacancy and Credit Losses (10%) = $ 9.409
Effective Gross Income $ 84,683
Deduct Expenses:
Fixed Expenses:
R.E. Taxes $15,770
Insurance $20,000
$35,770
Operating Expenses:
Maintcnance &
Repairs $ 2,000
Management (4%) $ 3,387
$ 5,387
Total Expenses - $ 41,157
Net Income Before Recapture $ 43,526
$43,526 + .080 = $544,075
Indicated Value by the Income Approach - Rounded $544,000.
20739
- 12 - RobertJ.Mitchell 9 Associates
RECONCILIATION AND FINAL VALUE ESTIMATE
Cost Approach $540,000
Market Date Approach $565,000
Income Approach $544,000
The Cost Approach is commonly considered the best indicator of value of a semi-
special purpose facility. The measure of accrued depreciation, including obsolescence,
develops a large figure, however, it is fairly well documented by the market. In the final
analysis, a total of 65 percent accrued depreciation has been applied to the Replacement
Cost New of the existing facility. This large degree of depreciation tends to weaken the
indicated value by the Cost Approach.
The Market Data Approach, which is usually the best indicator of value, is
strengthened in this situation due to the sales of existing properties which are adequately
similar to reflect prices being paid, especially for large factory/office space. History reveals
the sale of special purpose buildings, especially large facilities, have a limited market and
therefore usually suffer severe degrees of obsolescence, even though physically the
improvements are fair. A factor overcoming part of the usual obsolescence is the
1 adaptability of this facility to warehouse, or factory users, and a fairly good balance of office
area.
Purchasers of income producing properties give most consideration to anticipated
returns in terms of future benefits of ownership. This approach is also strengthened due to
the one sale of a large facility which was rented.
Q:30",39
Robert J.Mitchell&Associates
- 13 -
As a result of these considerations, the approaches are estimated to be about equal
indicators of value. Therefore, the value of the total property, including site improvements,
is estimated to be:
FIVE HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS
($550,000.00) •
• 939139
- 14 - Robert J.Mitchell&Associates
ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS
This Update Appraisal is subject to the following assumptions and limiting
conditions:
1. The maps and pictures are included with this update to assist the
reader in visualizing the property. Any legal description contained
herein is approximate for identification purposes, no survey has been
made by this appraiser.
2. I assume no responsibility for matters of a legal character nor do I
render any opinion as to the title.
3. It is assumed that the title is merchantable, the property free and clear
of liens and encumbrances, except noted leases, under responsible
ownership and competent management.
4. The information furnished me by others is believed to be reliable, but
I assume no responsibility for its accuracy.
5. Appearance in or giving testimony in court in connection with the
update will be furnished on request subject to adequate advance notice
being given to the appraiser in order that required preparation and
scheduling may be arranged. Charges in connection with pretrial
hearings, conferences, and court testimony will be made in accordance
with the usual charges as specified by the appraiser.
6. No portion of the contents of this update (especially any conclusions
as to value or any reference to the American Institute of Real Estate
Appraisers or to the MAI designation) shall be disseminated to the
news media, sales media, or any other public means of communication
without the prior written consent and approval of the appraiser.
7. Unless otherwise stated in this update, the existence of hazardous material,
which may or may not be present on the property, was not observed by the
appraiser. The appraiser has no knowledge of the existence of such materials
on or in the property. The appraiser, however, is not qualified to detect such
substances. The presence of substances such as asbestos, urea-formaldehyde
foam insulation, or other potentially hazardous materials may affect the value
of the property. The value estimated is predicated on the assumption that
there is no such material on or in the property that would cause a loss in
value. No responsibility is assumed for any such conditions, or for any
expertise or engineering knowledge required to discover them. The client is
urged to retain an expert in this field, if desired.
•
+
Robert J.Mitchell&Associates
- 15 -
CERTIFICATION OF VALUE
I certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief,
' the statements of fact contained in this updated report are true and correct.
• the reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions are limited only by the
reported assumptions and limiting conditions,and are my personal,unbiased
professional analyses, opinions, and conclusions.
• I have no present or prospective interest in the property that is the subject
of this updated report, and I have no interest or bias with respect to the
parties involved.
F ' my compensation is not contingent on an action or event resulting from the
analyses, opinions, or conclusions in, or the use of, this updated report.
' my analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this updated
report has been prepared, in conformity with the requirements of the Code
of Professional Ethics and the Standards of Professional Practice of the
American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers.
• the use of this updated report is subject to the requirements of the
American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers relating to review by its duly
authorized representatives.
• As of the date of this updated report, I, Robert J. Mitchell, have completed
the requirements under the continuing education program of the American
Institute of Real Estate Appraisers.
• I have made a personal inspection of the property that is the subject of this
updated report.
• no one provided significant professional assistance to the person signing this
updated report.
After consideration of all the foregoing, I have formed an opinion that Market Value of the subject
property, as of August 1, 1990, with ordinary financing or terms equivalent to cash, to be:
FIVE HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS
($550,000.00)
£44Robert hel , MAI
''®''39
1 r Robert J.Mitchell Associates
- 1 6
\.
Exhibit A
1i
iI
1
United Bank of Greeley.:rlional Association
1025 Ninth Avenue
P.O. Box 1058
Greeley.Colorado 80632
Telephone:(303)356-1000
United Bank
July 15, 1990
Robert J. Mitchell, MAI
1129 10 Street
Greeley, CO 80631
Dear Bob:
RE: Central Homes
237 22 Street, Greeley, CO
This correspondence will confirm our telephone conversation of
{ requesting an appraisal update on the above captioned property. As
discussed the fee for this appraisal will be about $1,250.00. The
appraisal must reflect a date of value between July 15, 1990 and
August 1, 1990, and the report may not be dated later than August
15, 1990. Please send me three copies of the appraisal.
If you feel the fair value of the subject property is substantially
unchanged from your last appraisal dated August 7, 1989, then
please so state in a separate letter. If you feel the value has
changed significantly, please provide a more detailed analysis,
including comparables. If you feel a complete reappraisal is
necessary, please contact me for the authorization.
12 U.S.C. 29 sets forth certain appraisal requirements that must be
followed by national banks when dealing with Other Real Estate
Owned. In order for the bank to comply with its regulatory
requirements, you are required to include in your appraisal
criteria the instructions set out below. Also, these instructions
are to be recited in the appraisal, and.a cop
y py of this letter is to
be attached as an appraisal exhibit.
— You should estimate the fair value of the property, which
• has been defined as a cash price that might reasonably
anticipated in a current sale where the buyer and seller are
each acting prudently, knowledgeably, and under no necessity
to buy or sell.
— You should estimate the cash price that might be received
upon exposure to the open market for a reasonable period of
time, considering property type and local market conditions.
— If you believe that more than 12 months will be necessary
for a fair sale, you must discount all cash flows generated
by the property to obtain an estimate of fair value.
Non-income producing property which will be held for longer
than 12 months must also be discounted for the estimated
holding period. Any discount rate you apply must reflect
`�:. x'73`)
•
Robert J. Mitchell, MAI
Central Homes
Page 2
your 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. In your appraisal,
you must state and justify the estimated time it will take
to sell the property and must state the annual discount rate
applied.
If you have any questions about this request, please call me.
Sincerely,
Jack L. Hinton
Credit Administration
JLH/jm
The "fair value" of the described property is $ -515-0 E O O. 6c
� .yn • ')lam 8/z3/ya
Signed / Date
90739
First Interstate Bank
of Denver, N.A.
63 First 633 Seventeenth Street
Denver, Colorado 80270
Interstate 303 293-2211
Bank
June 1, 1990
Mr. Robert J. Mitchell
1129 Tenth Street
Greeley, CO 80631
Dear Mr. Mitchell:
First Interstate Bank of Denver, N.A. requests that you provide an updated
appraisal, as stipulated below, on the real estate located at 237 22nd Street,
Greeley, Colorado described as the Central Homes property.
Please provide us with the market value of the described property under the
following definition (as previously defined by FHLBB R41c) :
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 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 he considers his own best interest;
c. a reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open market;
d. payment is made in terms of cash in U.S. dollars or in terms
of financial arrangements comparable thereto; and
e. the price represents the normal consideration for the property
sold unaffected by special or creative financing or sales
concessions granted by anyone associated with the sale.
We require a discounted cash flow analysis with support for assumptions relating
to absorption, lease rates, capitalization rates and discount rates. The value
conclusion (net realizable value) must reflect the impact of rental and other
concessions, including the costs associated with tenant improvements. In
addition, we require a value for the property at such time as it will reach
stabilization (stabilized value) .
_9_:, 739
This assignment must be completed by August 1, 1990. We require an original and
three copies of the bound narrative report. Should you agree to the terms
outlined above, please return your contract to my attention at your earliest
convenience.
Sincerely,
Lar L. Lucero
Vice President
Special Assets
LLL/tl
o O 39
• 4,'"Ej ? REALTY CO.
1212 0rh AVENUE GHEE LEY,COLORADO 00631 t
1111101) TELEPHONE (303, 3521212 DENVER METRO 6)3.1672
The pi lilted pot lens of ads form approved by the R E All012
Colorado Real Esme Commission.(LCIIJ-86)
•
71115 IS A LE:GAI.INSTRUMENT.IF NO UNDERSTOOD,I.h:11A1.,'rAX OR(in1ER C(IUNSEI.Si milli)RE CONSUCI EU BEFORE SIGNING.
Compensation charged by real estate brokers Is nnl set by law-Such charges are eslablisled by each real estate broker.
EXCLUSIVE RIGA')-TO-SELL LISTING CONTRACT
(COMMERCIAL)
Greeley ,Colorado ALUMS 13 19 90
United Bank of Greeley. N.A. and First Interstate Bank of Denver, N.A.
INanet,l of nwnernn.
(here tastier referred to as"Seller')hereby irrevocably appoint(s) Sco LI. Realty Co.
1212 8th Avenue. Greeley, Colorad(L8QGz31
I lhate,',Nane arvl A.Lbn.l
the.cilia(icr referred to as"Broker")as Seller's exclusive agent for the purposes and under the lams specified herein or under other terms acceptable Io
Seller.and lie parties agree:
Section I. I'Ii posc of Agency.'Ehe purpose of this agency conuaet("Lisping Cunir:ei)is la engage the best a(forts of Broker to accomplish the sale
of the real property legally described as: Lots 1, 2, and 10 through 14, Block 1, Greeley
Industrial Park, City of Greeley, County of
Weld, City of Colorado.
also known as 237 22nd Street Greeley, Colorado 80631
Isom,'lain.) t('Iq l IZIpI
together with any Items of personal property to be conveyed pursuant to Section 7(herein collectively referred to as tie"Property').
Section 2. Sole."Sole of the Property"or"Sale"means We voluntary Irailsfer or exchange of any interest in the Property or the voluntary creation of
the right to acquire any interest In the Property(including a contract or lease),
Section d. Effect of Ibis l.Istt g Conti-net.By appointing Broker ors Seller's exclusive agent,Seller agrees to conduct all negotiations for the Sate of
the Properly only Ihrouglr Ilroker,and to refer to Ilniker all inquiries received in any form hen)tad esinle brokers,salespersons,prospective purchasers,
tenants or any oiler source during the lime this Listing Connnet is in el feet.Seller authorizes Broker in disclose any facts about the Properly.In addition,
Seller agrees I hat any Broker compensation which is conditioned upon Ire Sale of the Property shall be canned by Broker as Scl forth herein without any
discount or allowance for any efforts made by Seller or by any represen'alive of Seller in connection with such Sale of the Properly.
Section 4. he Listing Period. Broker's authority shall begin August 13 19 90 , and shall continue through
I'ebniary 13 , 19 91 .'nos is referred 11 as the"Listing Peril S' nin"—e)
Section 5. I'rlce and lhnns. Price: U.S. Ant) 'ibrins: Cash, cash via new loan, or
other te7Trts which may be acceptab e to Seller.
(am. AEI-)
Minimum amount of earnest money deposit U.S.S 10.000.00 in the fern)of to be determined
•
• Section 6. Deposits.The Broker is authorized to accept.earnest money deposits pursuant to proposed Sale contracts and Broker shall retain same
Unlit the closing of,or defeat of,the Sale.
Section 7. Price to Include Price to Include the following items: all on site except personal property of
current tenants.
all in(heir present condition,ordinary wear and tea excepted,conveyed free and clear of all'axes,liens and encumbrances unless assumed by purchaser;
provided,however,that telephone instruments and the following fixtures of a permanent nature are excluded tronr any proposed Sale:
•
Personal properly shall be conveyed by bill of sale. '
Section R. Title and Encum brnnees.Seller represents to Broker that lille lathe Property is solely in Seller's name.Seller shall deliver to Broker true
copies of all relevant title materials,lease(s)and survey(s)in Seller's possession and shall disclose to Broker all easements,liens or other encumbrances,if
any,on the Property of which Seller tins knowledge.Seller authorizes the holder of any obligation secured by an encumbrance on the Property to disclose
In Broker the amount owing on said encumbrance and the perms th'I n ' t ) �-7- +�
Incase of Sale.Seller agrees to convey.by a 1 VC it only that title Seller has in the Property.A
monetary encumbrances(such as mortgages,deeds of trust,liens,financing statements)shall be paid by Seller and released except as Seller and purchaser
may otherwise agree. Existing monetary encumbrances are as follows: NONE
The Property is subject to the following leases and tenancies: current lease to Star Pak, Inc. expires
June 15, 1991. 'Leased at $7,500.00 per month. No renewal option.
If the Property has been or will he assessed for lord lnlprovements installed al the lion of signing a Sale contract,Seller will Ire responsible for payment of
sane unless otherwise agreed. Broker may terminate This Listing Contract upon written notice to Seller that title Is not satisfactory In Broker.
Section 9. Es hlenet of Tulle. Seller agrees to furnish to purchaser. ul Seller's expense. Seller's choice of an abstract of title to the Property or a
commitment fur and a policy of title insurance in the amount specified in any Sale contract.
Section 10. Apportionments. General real property taxes for year of closing, based on the most recent levy and assessment, prepaid rents,
water rents, sewer rents, current regular Condominium or Owners' Association assessments, and interest on continuing encumbrances, if any, and
shall he apportioned to the date of delivery of deed.
No. LCIIJ-86, EXCLUSIVE RIGIIT TO SELL LISTING CONTRACT(Commercial) 97d , 'Bradknd Publishing.SRt3 W nib Ave.,! Arwood,('O R1ROM (31111233(Xx1 v •
•
Section Il. Possession. Possession of the Properly shall be delivered In purchaser us follows: date of closing
.
,subject to the leases and tenancies as described in Section 8.
•
Section 12. Material Defects—Broker Disclosures.Seller agrees that any defects of a material nature(including,but nor limited to,structural
defects,soil condil ions,violations of health,'Doing or building laws,and noneonlhruing uses or zoning variances)actually known by Broker must be
disclosed by linker to any prospective purchaser. Property is to be sold "as is", "where is" with no warrant`
expressed or implied.
Section 13. Compensation of Broker.
(a) Commission'll'pe(s) and Amount(s). In consideration of services lo be performed by Broker,Seller agrees to pay Broker as follows:
(1) Sale C Isla,,.(i)(1.S. S ,m00 • 7** %of the gross sales price in U.S. dollars,or
liifl except that the commission shall be. reduced to 3.5% if Seller .or Seller's
representative procures purchaser.
(2) Lease Commission. (i) U.S. S ,or(ii) (6 of the gross rental under any lease aeceplable la the
Seller,or(iii)
(b) 1Vhen Commission Earned.Such commission shall he earned upon the happening of any of the following:
(I) The Sale of the Properly within the Listing Pet iud by the Seller,by the Broker or by airy other person;or
(2) The Broker's finding a purchaser Willi is ready, willing am!able to complerc the Sale as specified herein by Seller;or
•
(3) The Sale of the Property within j9"<'
pe y —calendar days subsequent to the expiral ion of the Listing Period 1"I IaWover Perio(")to anyone with
whom the Broker neguliaied and whose halite was submitted. in Krling,to the Seller by the Broker during the Listing Period(including any
ex tension thereof);provided,however,that the Seller shall owe no commission to the Bother under this subsection(31 if a aumnaission is earned by
and tiller licensed real estate broker acting pmrsra11110 all exclusive right-to-sell if sling eoot rael id all exclusive agency listing moonier ier eructed into
during the I loldover Period.
(c) When Applicable and Payable.The commission obligation shall apply to a Sale made during the original Tent,of this Listing Conned it made
dining any extension of such orig inal ur extended mrul.The commission described in suhscet ion(a)I I)shall be payable al the time of the dosing of to
Sale as contemplated by subseciou(EMI)Of(b)(3),or upon kin llmcnl of subsettion 0)112).
(d) 1_ease and Lease Opl inn Commissions.If the iraisaerion consists of a lease or a lease and a right to purchase the Property,the commission shall he
payable as follows:(I)The commission rehiring ro the lease stall he as provided in subsection(well 2), payable as billows; to De
negotiated
(2) 'fire elnnunission relating In,the Sale shall be as provided in subseeliuu OBI),payable upon it:aisles of ride,provided dim credit shall he given for
any commission paid for any unexpired pinion of the lease.
(e) Sale blade to Purelinser Represented by Another Broker.II a Sale is made to a purchaser who is obligated to pay another balker a commission in
conncnion with the transaction, Boiler's commission shall be adjusted us billows;
Seclinn 14. limitation on Broker's Compensation. Broker smell nut accepl cumpensadon from the purchaser,the purchaser's agent,or any entity
• participating in or providing services for the Sale without the wrine,,consent of'he Seller.
Section 15. h lnlllple Llsling Sen'ke=Cooperating Broker. Broker ishall/shall not)submit the Property m a local multiple baling service in
which Broker participants. Broker may accept the assislauce mud cooperation of other boilers.
Section 16. Forfeiture of I'apnenls. In the event rf lilt(chore of payments mute by a prospective purchaser,the sums received shall be divided
between the Broker and are Seller,one-hall thereof in die Birder,hm Ill lo exceed the commisswn agreed upon herein,and the balance to the Seller.
Section 17. Cost of Services, (Thiess otherwise provided in Section 25, Broker shall beau all expenses incurred by Broker, if any,to market'he
Property and to conpensale euuperahing brokers,if any.Broker will nut obtain or order any railer products or services unless Seller agrees ill Willing'u pay
for them promptly when payment is due. Unless otherwise agreed, Broker shall nil be obligaici in advance funds tier the benehl of Seller in order to
complete a closing. IExamllples: surveys,soil feats,hale reports,engineering studies)
Section 18. sl alntenmice of the Properly.The Seller agrees that the Broker shall not he responsible liar maintenance of the Property nor shall the
Broker be liable pier damage of any kind occurring In ihr Property,unless such damage shill be caused by Inct negligence of the Broker.
Section 19. Indemnification of Broker.If Broker is not a'lied(mud if i,third parry asserts a claim against the Broker arising on,of any act pursuant to
this Lining Contrua, Seller agrees Ins indemnity and forever depend Boiler, paying all costs, including reasonable attorney fees, and no hold llruker
harmless on account of any and all losses,judgments Jilt]damages.In addition,Seller agrees to ri iy albltnie)•lees and ussociatel cords reaso nabl) incurred
by Broker 10 enforce this indemnity.
Section 20. Nondiscrimination. 'fire undersigned Seller and Broker acknowledge, by their respective signalores hereon, That the law prohibits
diseriminmion for or against any person because if race,creed,color,sex,national origin, IUW Ind slams,or pliysrc'al handicap.
Seclinn 21. I,egul Counsel.The Broker recommends that de Seller obtain legal,lax or oiler counsel rehiring to ibis Listing Cornet and relating lo
the proposed Sale of the Property.
Seclinn 22. Attorney Fees, it ease of litigation or arbitration ieIweei Seller and Ilniker pursuant ho this Listing Conrad, the pal Iles agree that
reasonable attorney fees shall be awarded to the prevailing pm ly.
Section 23. Mudllicallnn of Ills 1_dslhng Coolr aid.No subsegnenl,nodilirnion of any of the icons of(his Listing Contract shall be valid,binding
upon die parries,or enforceable unless made in writing and signed by the panics.
Section 24. Entire Agreement.This I.ls ring roomier comai'tiles the entire coal raft act weeil tine parties relating to the subject hereof,and anty prior
agreements pertaining thereto,whether oral or written,have been merged and integrated into this Listing Cumtue.
Section 25. Additional Provisions. •
4*In the event Star Pak, Inc. is the eventual buyer, because of a previous
commission agreement, Austin & Austin shall receive a cammission of eff'"
and Scott Realty Co. shall receive a commission of h'— r.
Section 26. Copies of Agreement.This t,isl lnig Contract is executed in multiple copies and Seller acknowledges receipt of a copy of this Listing
Conlraci signed by the Broker.
Section 27. Counterparts.If more than one person is nand as a Seller herein,this Listing Contract may he executed by each Seller,individually,
and when each Seller has executed a copy of this Listing Connect,such copies liken weedier shall be deemed to be a Iron and complete ciuuaa belweeu
the panics.
United Bank of Greeley, N.A.
Accepted Scott Realty Co. BY; � � .�A ,—i At'?
Milker First I to •state s`I'`r Banl of Denver, N.A.
By r > ,-bA��(-r: BY: �'_� .—„> a-ig
Ray L. Speaker scads
Address: 1212 Rth Avenue Address: 1025 9th Avenue
Greeley, al 80631 Greeley, CO 80631
Phone: (303)152-1212 Phone; (303)356-1000
•
a 30739
O941- 17- I - oz.- oaz
Updated Appraisal of
CENTRAL HOMES
PROPERTY
237 -22nd Street
Greeley, Colorado
For
United Bank of Greeley
and
( United Bank of Denver
too
1
Date of Value: May 1, 1988
Date of Report: May 23, 1988
BY
1 Robert J. Mitchell, MAI
1129 - 10th Street
Greeley, Colorado
1
1 9y 0739
I 1129- 10th Street• Greeley. Colorado 80631
303/352 1114
r. n
El
Robert J.Mitchell.Li: May 23, 1988
Mr. Dennis Mulholland
Vice President
United Bank of Greeley, N.A.
P. O. Box 1058
Greeley, Colorado 80632
Dear Mr. Mulholland:
Pursuant to request by letter dated February 17, 1988, I submit
herewith a supplement or updated appraisal of the property owned by
your bank and situated at 237 - 22nd Street, City of Greeley, Weld
County, Colorado.
The appraisal is an estimate of the Fair Market Value of this
property as of May 1, 1988 and is of the fee simple ownership.
Please refer to my complete narrative report dated May 1, 1986 for
details and descriptive data, explanations of value factors and analysis,
and general data for background to this updating including qualifications
of the appraiser. The definition of Fair Market Value included at Page 2
of my previous report is again applicable.
The May, 1986 appraisal included Parcels A and B. Since that time,
Parcel A (vacant land) has been sold and a small pole shed has been
razed from Parcel B. Therefore, this updating includes only Parcel B,
which is 266,073 square feet of land and a 94,092 square foot
manufacturing building, plus a perimeter chain link security fence,
pavement and one large open pole shelter.
I have again made a cursory inspection of Parcel B and find it to be
essentially as existed one year ago and as described in my previous
report. The property "shows" better now because it is occupied and
cleaned up, however, deferred maintenance and physical wear and tear
remain high. The Greeley community and neighborhood have changed
very little during this past year.
I submit, herewith, three copies of my updated report which
attempts to describe methods of valuation used and sets forth the analysis
of data and reasoning involved in deriving my conclusions.
Therefore, as a result of all considerations, I estimate the Fair
Market Value of the subject property, as of May 1, 1988, to be $125,000
less than one year ago, or:
SIX HUNDRED TWENTY FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS
($625,000.00)
Respectfully submitted,
�,,.Jam/ (y�l�/q. /'De�e�
Real Estate Appraisers ea 6, B' ' "/N'��°`"eff
I. and Consultants
Robert .1. Mitchell, MAI 920''39
GENERAL MARKET SITUATION
INDUSTRIAL PROPERTIES
One of the largest facilities, previously occupied by Farmhand
Industries (1/2 block south of subject), was vacant during 1978, sold to
an owner/user in 1979, and sold again in 1981 for $1,900,000 and has been
only partially leased for the past few years. In has been openly
marketed by several of the leading industrial real estate brokers for
several years at asking prices ranging from $2,500,000 to $1,600,000. The
latter lower price being the current asking price.
Two other large industrial facilities located in northern Colorado
which were optioned or under contract in the first half of 1987 have
apparently fallen through and are sitting vacant. One is the "Pierce"
factory in Fort Lupton, containing 71,550 square feet, and the Marathon
Steel building in Fort Collins, containing 135,000 square feet. These
coupled with a number of other vacant industrial properties leads to a
conclusion that currently there is only a fair to weak demand for
industrial facilities along the eastern edge of the City of Greeley or in
northern Colorado.
See the tabulation of 17 vacant and "For Sale" facilities on the
following page representing a total of 321,627 square feet of industrial
space. This figure is about the same as one year ago if the subject is
not considered a part of the study.
Discussion regarding the industrial land value situation is presented
under the subheading "Trends" located under the heading "Land Value
Estimate" later in this report. Also, under the heading of "Accrued
Depreciation" the obsolescence inherent with many of the larger industrial
properties will be noted.
O*aa-j
39
Robert J.Mitchell&Associates
INLUSIRIAL LAND SALES
(,Feeley. Colorado 5/88 R. J. Mitchell . [VIAI
Sale Grantor/ Date of Sale Land Size Sales Price
Ng,. Grantee Sale Price in Sq. Ft . per Sd. Ft .
1 N1^1\' han/Folkrran 10/87 $ 20,000 35,790 $ 0.56
2 Gr1y. Nat'l . Bank/ 12/87 $ 47,500 (1) 70,437 $ 0.21
Eichenburger , et al 70,436 $ 0,46
3 Nordell/Balcom 8/87 $ 55,000 (1) 55,290 $ 1.00
Chemical
4 Farr/Western Sugar 5/88 $360,000 (1) 476,111 $ 0 .40
1,057,201 $ 0.09
L Wheeler Realty 5/88 $ 67,500 (1) 57,575 $ 1.17
L-13 ANT Equip. , Inc . 5/88 $155,000 154,400 $ 1.00
(1) After allocation for inprovernents.
9__A0731
Adjusting down for size and up for railroad availability, this sale suggests
$0.55 per square foot for subject.
Sale 2 is complicated by the fact that the site lies within the flood
zone of the Cache la Poudre River. The sale is located about 14 blocks
north of subject at the northwest quadrant of the intersection of 8th
Street and the Highway 85 Bypass. It is adjusted down for size and
location but up rather heavily for the flood hazard and results in an
indication of $.60 per square foot.
Sale 3, at $1.00 per square foot, involved an old warehouse building
and a residential duplex which have been allocated to have contributed
only $7,500 to the total purchase price of $62,500. The land adjoins the
purchaser's existing operation and was therefore bought for assemblage or
to eliminate a nuisance. The location along the south side of 18th Street
in the 400 block is nearer the Central Business District but has fairly
ae poor visual exposure. The shape is rather long and narrow with the
narrow dimension as frontage on the access street. Adjusting down
rather heavily for circumstances of the sale, as well as size, suggests
$0.70 per square foot for subject.
Sale 4 is much larger than subject but again emphasizes the soft
market. It included fairly good industrial land along the north side of
16th Street and just east of 1st Avenue allocated at only $0.40 per square
foot. This property had been openly marketed by various real estate
agents for over three years.
Value of the land for Parcel B reported in the appraisal of May,
1986 was $0.75 per square foot and again in the update of May, 1987.
The previous remarks regarding general industrial land values in the
eastern portions of Greeley suggest the current value would be
R ert J.Mitchell&Associates
0737
approximately 13 percent less. Value of subject land is therefore
considered to be about $0.10 per square foot less than that reported one
year ago, or $0.65 per square foot.
266,073 sq. ft. @ $0.65 p.s.f. = $172,947
Rounded to - $173,000
Replacement Cost New
Study has again been made to determine if any change in
Replacement Cost New of the improvements would have occurred during
the ensuing year.
Although the Hensel-Phelps Construction Company published Building
Cost Index anticipated costs of non-residential buildings to increase 0.5
percent for 1987, subsequent research and reports showed a decrease of
1,8 percent. Some checks of recently constructed metal warehouse type
structures denote costs are down from one to two years ago. These
figures suggest that Cost New of the subject improvements would be
slightly less than reported in May 1987.
Depreciation
The building being appraised is a combination of basic quality open
warehouse/manufacturing space, some slightly better quality
warehouse/manufacturing space and some fair quality office space.
Average age is nearly 20 years and exterior maintenance (trim and paint)
is fair to poor. There is some roof leakage in both the warehouse and
office areas. Functional obsolescence is mentioned in the previous
description of the improvements and is measured by low sale prices of
similar buildings, suggesting unit values considerably below the figure
resulting from cost new less physical deterioration only.
0 ") a3�
Summary - Cost Approach
Office Building (5,782 sq. ft. @ $36.00 p.s.f.) = $ 208,152
Factory Building (88,310 sq. ft. @ $9.50 p.s.f.) = $ 838,945
Pole Shed (5,840 sq. ft. @ $3.00 p.s.f.) = $ 17.520
Total Building Cost New $1,064,617
Less Accrued Depreciation (60%) - $ 638.770
Total Depreciated Reproduction
Cost New of Improvements $ 425,847
Add Site Improvements, Fencing & Pavement
(Contributory Value) $ 15,000
Add Land Value $ 173,000
Total Estimate of Value by the Cost Approach $ 613,847
Rounded to - $ 614,000
MARKET DATA APPROACH
There have been no sales of properties considered really comparable
to subject in the east Greeley community during the past year.
Sale A was discussed and compared in the update of May, 1987 when
the transaction was merely a pending contract. The sale would now
suggest a value near the bottom of the bracket mentioned one year ago,
or say $750,000.
Sale B was also discussed and compared one year ago as a potential
sale at $600,000. The eventual sale price was $565,000, or about six
percent less, which would lower the overall value from about $6.60 per
square foot to $6.20 per square foot.
94,092 sq. ft. @ $6.20 p.s.f. = $583,370
Add land value - $173.000
Total (Rounded to) $756,000
Rerc ltriy *jssoaates
- 8 '�j
N
L.
O
w
.--c •C M C' Vr V' O) CO 0
O O) N OO N M 0O) N N d'
' N
O to t0 N in to C' •••4 r-i O) r."
r-1 .-I .--1 r.4 N H .--1 N ti
V1 (H 4/} 49- V! 49- 49- d4 44 ha
4.
L
O O M O tb O O Cr O T c0 O O M O O
O N O C) O N O r--1 O 1 O ti M O O N O to
C
.n •O Cc.:, O o CO 4 0, to V) O O) to Cr) M O O of to rD
49 ti .-i M r-i .-1 M .-1 M H 03
Y V4 Fg V}49- 49-49- 6R VI 44 4P 4'!44 VY V-} tq 44 4/T Vi N
4
O to 0 O O 0 .-i t. it) O 0
'06 to Cr N C' O) to ri N 0
C • . CU
CQ O 0 O O O 0 0 r1 r••1 C.)n-7 W 49- 49. ,Pr 44 4R iPr 49- {R
w
4r
. O
O I l r4 .-I r-1 4-4 .••1 .-1 .-4 .•i Cm'
Y O
60 r-I O) N N CO N O) CO ~'
C CO N CO 'T O) CO in r--1 N M .
[C 'O r-1 N .ti 4-4 4U
N .N•
4 N
.4 W N .-1 O O O O O to O 0 b0 by
C c. M O O O N .--1 N O 0 C
O Y O N O O) O C) O N w
8 ^ ^ ^ ^
N N C to to N 0 Vr CO
EP-0 O
Cu
a) T
O la) • (0rno0 000 ,oa) 'ptoN .-i O .--I 0 O) tOto
v ... 4-4 1O
COO CC') t-- CO U) .N-1 0))CO N : m
N .-i .-i .H .-i CD U >
o
In
O 0 0 o O O O O °'�CD a 0 0 CO 0 0 0 0 C
0000 C
CU 0
N to to O Co O N O
N CO CO in 0 in
CO M .0
N to N .-1 to 4-4O
4t 4p 49- 49- 49 49. 49 +f} L.
03 n�•�•'
N G
L
o O
.W N N N N N N N CO • 1O
40-� 03 \03 03 \ \ \ \ \03 CO 03 CO 03 CO to 0
N _ a 01
t/a CO N N 0 .-1 .-1 .-1 C4
H .-1 .y Y 2. 'O
7 , C
a co
T ...
\ cc \ \ C rr O s.
s. C C ••. �' .+ O
O a) .p O a) c, w
•
C CO \ C \ s. C a 8 U ..... )
0 Cs i \ I T-4 Q --4 a) \ Y 1A57 a 'D C L bD p\ b0 us L
C.1 c� v� ,� aa3 a •6 . E° � 'tea C7 yin :o a
_ a) m
4 Y
Xi
a)
4) �r Qtr al Q w k-1 w ,-t N
4.4.4v
i
i
01'3';/?).tart J.Mitchell A Associates
- V
The other sale of some significance due to size is Sale 7 which
involved nearly 46,000 square feet of building at allocated prices of $13.38
per square foot for office and $9.00 per square foot for warehouse. The
sale included a one-story 20 foot high side wall insulated cinder block
structure constructed in 1975 and 1976. There are elevated mechanically
adjusted loading docks and the building is quite functional and in good
condition. Adjusting down for size, quality of construction and condition,
both the office and warehouse areas are considered to indicate figures at
one-half those of the sale, or $6.70 and $4.50 per square foot.
5,782 sq. ft. @ $6.70 p.s.f. = $ 38,739
88,310 sq. ft. @ $4.50 p.s.f. = $397,395
$173'000
Add Land -
Total $609,134
(Rounded to) $609,000
<rt lb
The other sales within the past year represent much smaller
buildings or those in the 4,000 to 7,000 square foot bracket and therefore
generally unit sale prices are considerably higher than for the larger
buildings.
The following page provides information on sales or options and
contracts involving four larger properties where the main buildings range
in size from 44,000 to 104,000 square feet and sale prices contributing
value of the buildings range from $5.79 to $11.02 per square foot. Since
a similar study of larger manufacturing building sales conducted in
August, 1987, two have fallen through and the option on subject building
is reportedly not intended to be exercised. The overall sale price per
square foot including land and buildings ranges from $10.19 to $14.68.
930739
square foot if 80,000 square feet is occupied. Tenant pays all utilities
except water and sewer, as well as ordinary maintenance. Landlord pays
basic insurance and taxes.
It is notable that the real estate taxes decreased from $21,353 in
1986 to a current $17,730. At a time when assessed values have been
raised on many properties, the county assessor apparently recognized the
accrued depreciation applicable to this facility which resulted in the 17
percent reduction in taxes.
The Income Approach conducted in the appraisal of 1986 resulted in
a value indication of $685,000 based on $1.25 per square foot rental and
an overall capitalization rate of 8.5 percent and vacancy and credit losses
of 10 percent. Due to the apparent economic conditions affecting this
type property, an investor - especially if other than a owner/user, would
now require at least a 9.5 percent rate which would lower the indicated
value to approximately $613,000.
Robert J.Mitchell&Associates
- 13 - R30739
RECONCILIATION AND FINAL VALUE ESTIMATE
Cost Approach $614,000
Market Data Approach $650,000
Income Approach $613,000
The remarks and reconciliation presented in the previous 1986 report
are again applicable.
Therefore the value of the total property, including buildings and
site improvements, is now estimated to be:
SIX HUNDRED TWENTY FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS
($625,000.00)
9?O '3`)
Robert J.Mitchell&Associates
Y
ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS
This Updated Report is subject to the following assumptions and
limiting conditions:
1. The maps and pictures are included with this report to assist
the reader in visualizing the property. Any legal description
contained herein is approximate for identification purposes, no
survey has been made by this appraiser.
2. I assume no responsibility for matters of a legal character nor
do I render any opinion as to the title.
3. It is assumed that any title to any properties involved is
merchantable, the property free and clear of liens and
encumbrances, except noted leases, under responsible ownership
and competent management.
4. The information furnished me by others is believed to be
reliable, but I assume no responsibility for its accuracy.
5. I am not required to give testimony or attendance in court by
reason of this appraisal, with reference to the properties in
question, unless arrangements have been previously made
therefore.
6. Neither all nor any part of the contents of this report shall be
conveyed to the public through advertising, public relations,
news, sales, or other media, without the written consent and
approval of the author, particularly as to valuation conclusions,
the identity of the appraiser or firm with which he is
connected, or any reference to the American Institute of Real
Estate Appraisers, or to the MAI designation.
Robert J.Mitchell&Associates
- 1 f,
QUALIFICATIONS OF ROBERT J. MITCHELL
Greeley, Colorado
Fducatioa
B.S. Degree in Civil Engineering, Colorado State University, 1949.
Several Real Estate Certificate Courses, University of Colorado Extension Div.,
Numerous and Continuing Appraisal Seminars.
Instructed: American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers Rural Properties
Appraisal Course III, and Grazing Lands and Ranches Course V; Introduction
to Real Estate Appraisal & Advanced Appraisal, Univ. of Colo. Extension
Division.
Memberships
American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers (MAI), Past President of Colo.
Chapter.
American Right of Way Association.
Greeley Board of Realtors (Past President), Colo. and National Association of
Realtors.
American Society of Farm Managers and Rural Appraisers - Colo. and National.
Professional Exnerienoe
Licensed Real Estate Appraiser, State of Nebr.; Real Estate Broker, Colo.
Nine years as an Engineer Appraiser for Federal Land Bank of Wichita.
Since 1958 - Independent Appraiser in general real estate appraisal practice,
making appraisals throughout Colorado, and portions of Nebraska, Utah,
New Mexico and Wyoming.
Reviewer (1984), Fair Market Rental Value on Public Lands (USES & BLM)
Tyoical Clients
Individuals, Attorneys, Banks: All major banks of Greeley,
Institutions & Corporations, Colo. Nat'l. of Denver, United
Churches, School Districts, Bank of Denver, Bank of Tulsa
Real Estate Developers, State Agencies: Colo., Wyo., Utah
University of Northern Colorado, & Nebr. Dept's. of Hwys.,
Mortgage Guaranty Insurance Corp., Colo. Game & Fish
Public Service Company of Colo., Federal Agencies: Veterans Adminis-
Great Western United Company, tration, General Services
Mountain States Telephone Co., Administration, Nat'l. Bureau
Eastman Kodak Co. John Hancock of Standards, Forest Serv.,
Mutual Life Ins. Co., Oil Companies Army Corps of Eng'rs., Dept.
(Texaco, Humble, Conoco), Northern of Justice, Nat'l. Park
Colo. Water Conservancy District, Serv., Bureau of Land Mang.,
Upland Industries Bureau of Sport Fisheries &
Municipalities: Greeley, Loveland, Wildlife, Internal Revenue
Brush, Fort Collins, and others Service
Qualified as an expert witness in several Federal, State and District Courts.
30"139
Robert J.Mitchell a Associates
— 17 —
Hello