Condo Comps For A Townhouse

[CindyR]

Yes

Why would an Association be called the Happy Sun Condo Association if the property is not actually a condominium. In those case, are you really sure that there is not condominium ownership within a master PUD? I would do pretty darn extensive research into the title/deed of a property in which the HOA name included the word "Condo" or Condominium" before I concluded that was actually not a condominium.

Yes i am absolutely positive. These are Sun City Condos that were built long before Arizona legally defined condominiums. The legal descriptions have no condominium language. Condo was just used as a fancy marketing name for attached townhomes.

 

[challenger]

The townhouse is a attached dwelling with ownership of the land underneath it. A condo unit doesn't own anything outside of the paint on the walls. Even if you are going to use condo's as comps the report should be on a URAR 1004 not a condo form. There is one comp that is over 6 months that he could have used that is a attached unit in the same building and the same sqft. Could go outside the project and get comps. It wouldn't own the land if it was a site condo would it? There are about 2 sentences in the summary of the Sales comparison and nothing about the differences in ownership of the condo's.

 

[Deleted member 134708]

It wouldn't own the land if it was a site condo would it? There are about 2 sentences in the summary of the Sal

Site condos own the land.

I know you said your review subject is attached. I still bet it isn't a SFR but condo ownership.

You have to 1st go get the declaration of ownership to see what you have. Then you can start the review. Until then you are on step 1 of 1,000.

 

[Howard Klahr]

I still bet it isn't a SFR but condo ownership.

I'll take that bet

 

[timd354]

Yes

Yes i am absolutely positive. These are Sun City Condos that were built long before Arizona legally defined condominiums. The legal descriptions have no condominium language. Condo was just used as a fancy marketing name for attached townhomes.

The first condominium statute in Arizona was adopted on March 22, 1962 (which was originally known as the Arizona Horizontal Property Regime Act) and at least 95% of Sun City was built after that date. Additionally, condo type language does not always show up in the individual deed restriction...what matters is whether there is a declaration filed that establishes a condominium or a "Horizontal Property Regime" (note: the declarations for older projects often do not include the term condominium at all and instead refer to a Horizontal Property Regime).

You may be right that these are not condos, but be careful out there as that determination may not be quite as easy as it seems.

Please note that the AZ staute defines a Condominium as follows (see sec. 33-1202 of the A.R.S)):
10. "Condominium" means real estate, portions of which are designated for separate ownership and the remainder of which is designated for common ownership solely by the owners of the separate portions. Real estate is not a condominium unless the undivided interests in the common elements are vested in the unit owners.

Thus if a property includes an undivided interest in the Common areas, it is a condo under AZ law....here is a legal description of a Sun City property that appears to indicate that the property is a condo as defined by the AZ law even though the legal description does not include any reference to the term condominium and does not reference a condo declaration:

 

[Digger88]

No, actually you cannot without being misleading.

I don't care how much explanation an appraisal report has but including a gas as a comp for a doublewide residential property would be inherently misleading since the market and value of gas stations has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with with the market and value of a residential property and by including the gas station comp, the report would certainly imply that the market/value for gas stations is some how related to or indicative of the market/value for residential doublewides

this brings up a memory from long ago while training i used the white house as comp 1 a corvette as comp 2 and a row of 5 townhouses as comp 3. mentor got a chuckle out of it.

 

[timd354]

this brings up a memory from long ago while training i used the white house as comp 1 a corvette as comp 2 and a row of 5 townhouses as comp 3. mentor got a chuckle out of it.

That is actually pretty darn funny....If I were your mentor I would have had a real good laugh over that

 

[challenger]

Legal description is meets and bounds. HOA manager says they are not a condo. They are stand alone within the project and pay a fee to utilize amenities. They have no hoa for the attached townhouses. They are responsible for maintenance insurance and any other related fee for each unit.

 

[Phil Snyder]

Logged in today to ask if anyone has HAD to do this.

Not to hijack (rather not start a new thread for the exact same thing). I've got a Condo (Townhouse style) that has literally zero amenities, open space, common area, etc. They don't even cover exterior building maintenance, not sure how this place is even a condo at this point.
5 year old place in a very small (30 units maybe) complex without a single stitch of open space for community use. Condo fee is $125 per month (half or slightly less than half that of actual Condo communities), only thing included in the fee is grass cutting and trash (you carry it to the dumpster).

ZERO sales in the past 365, only two in 730 days, I'm using one, almost 2 years old, the rest are going to have to come from very nearby (fee simple/PUD) communities. The HOA fees nearby are $50 to $75 a month and include the same almost nothing as the subject.

I don't think I have a choice here, the subject compares terribly to the actual Condo's within a few miles of it (think, pool, tennis, community center, water/sewer included, dog parks, etc) and actually VERY well to the PUD Town home communities (not much in the way of open space, include almost no amenities or perks in the HOA fee).

 

[timd354]

Logged in today to ask if anyone has HAD to do this.

Not to hijack (rather not start a new thread for the exact same thing). I've got a Condo (Townhouse style) that has literally zero amenities, open space, common area, etc. They don't even cover exterior building maintenance, not sure how this place is even a condo at this point.
5 year old place in a very small (30 units maybe) complex without a single stitch of open space for community use. Condo fee is $125 per month (half or slightly less than half that of actual Condo communities), only thing included in the fee is grass cutting and trash (you carry it to the dumpster).

ZERO sales in the past 365, only two in 730 days, I'm using one, almost 2 years old, the rest are going to have to come from very nearby (fee simple/PUD) communities. The HOA fees nearby are $50 to $75 a month and include the same almost nothing as the subject.

I don't think I have a choice here, the subject compares terribly to the actual Condo's within a few miles of it (think, pool, tennis, community center, water/sewer included, dog parks, etc) and actually VERY well to the PUD Town home communities (not much in the way of open space, include almost no amenities or perks in the HOA fee).

In the situation you describe, using non-condo TH's as comparable sales in your appraisal report seems appropriate as long as these properties appeal to the same buyer and you disclose and explain what you did and make any appropriate adjustments. By the way, I am from Maryland and used to appraise townhouses quite often in an area where some of the TH's were in a PUD and others were in a condo (but all were built by the same builder and were physically exactly the same) and I never saw any difference in value or market acceptance between the PUD TH's and the Condo TH's in that particular area