BOMA/measuring furred walls

[Caligirl]

I am measuring retail space, looking for NRA, and have furred interior walls.

So according to BOMA, as I understand it, Net Rentable Area is taken from the central point of partition walls, whereas 'Usable Area' is interior area.

How are people dealing with furred walls, for example, where you can't easily tell where the central point of the support or partition wall is? Would you measure inside the unit, making note of the furred wall portion, or from exterior wall (estimated central point) to wall?

I know this is splitting frog hairs to a fine point but I'm really curious as to how others deal with this situation.

 

[beaufl]

insist on getting the building plans and go from there. you are getting paid to evaluate the value of the space not the size of it. everyone wants to pass the buck and too often it falls on the appraiser who is the least paid. if xyz wants a .... dollar loan, then it would be appropriate for them to supply what ever info you deem necessary to complete the appraisal. after all they are the ones asking for the money (loan)

 

[Stephen J. Vertin MAI]

Caligirl:

Is the space built-out or is being constructed?

 

[Caligirl]

Built-out, older space. Odd configurations, some furred walls hiding HVAC and interior demisements make measuring difficult. No plans.

 

[Stephen J. Vertin MAI]

Are the clients requesting you use NRA as defined by BOMA? Typically usable area is measured for regenerated or exiting space. Especially if you do not have plans. I typically take a no nonsense approach to these issues. What I am about to say is not written in any text or article. It is just a practical method. So taken for what it is. These comments are geared towards general retail and office. It does not take into consideration unusual circumstances.

With existing vacant space (if the property is not totally vacant) I use what you have termed usable space. If you do not have building plans anything else is simply a guess. With existing occupied space I use the amount of space indicated in the lease (even if the space is bigger or smaller than provided plans). I explain any difference (if one exist between the two sources) and indicate the lease is a binding legal document and simply use its indication (or indicated size). This saves considerable head aches in the DCF. I am not about to change per square foot dollar amounts and fuse with all its repercussions. If the tenant and landlord want to fight it out so be it. Both at a meeting of the minds with the size indicated in the lease. An appraiser has to make the choice and through the years I have found that going with the square footage on the lease is without a doubt more practical. Further, if a difference exist it is rarely substantial significant. If it is than I refer the issue back to the client.

If the space is being built. I typical comparable usable area ratios with other comparable buildings (typically my sales comps). I apply it to the subject and divide space accordingly. In these cases where construction is in progress or the project is proposed I may consider NRA (as you define) but this is only if brokers are using it in the market. However, I have not seen it used since the 1980's. Most simply measure inside wall to inside wall. I never guess at how thick the walls are and what is the half way point. It leaves you open to criticism and gives the appearance of trying to fudge larger numbers.

 

[Caligirl]

Stephen that was pretty much the direction I figured I would go in. Thank you so much for your response and thanks also beaufl.

Jodie

 

[MNRural]

I also use the no nonsense approach. However, I pay attention that my tenant space measurements plus common areas equal my total gross building area. That means guessing where the middle of the wall is. Most, if not all leases are off a bit on older properties and I will sometimes use my measurements if they are off substantially.

Most landlords have never measured and you see copies and plans that have been copied over and over and over for years and show up in lease documents. I have seen handwritten sketches in leases.

Any small discrepency will not result in a significant difference in value anyway.

However, if your numbers dont add up between your sketch, description of the improvements, and the income approach, it will reflect your overall credibility. They hire us to figure out these small details.

In our market, net rentable area is the amount of tenant space a landlord can lease within a building, not including common areas and mechanicals.

We use an efficiency ratio in income properties. A strip mall that is 100% rentable with no common areas is more valuable per square foot than an office with common corridors, underground parking, and mechanical areas that a landlord has to pay expenses for and not rent. This can be an item of adjustment in the SC approach.

 

[Caligirl]

Follow up

BOMA is a little unclear about the furred wall issue, or perhaps I missed something. It does state that the NRA is gross floor area minus 'floor penetrations' minus common areas. I was really curious to see if others were using BOMA as a standard, like the residential people use ANSI. Personally I think it's a great idea. I like having standardized measuring systems, especially in a case like this where everyone-broker, appraiser, property owners-are all measuring differently. It gives the appraiser credibility and consistency in their work.

I had some walls that ranged from +/-6' thick to +/-4' thick. They take away a sizable amt' of floor area. Some were functional (ie., hiding common mechanical systems) while others were merely decorative for certain units.

This always happens-the jobs that appear to be easy initially turn out to have some weird fluke.

 

[MNRural]

There is never a commercial assignment that doesnt have some type of weird fluke.