Condominium Conundrum

[Deleted member 128537]

We have many site condos in my area. Each has its own distinct site. They have minimal HOA fees to simply cover the cost of road maintenance. We typically appraise them as SFR's on the 1004. But once in awhile they want these on a 1073. In your situation you could actually use townhouses as comparable sales since it may pretty much be the same market appeal.

 

[Webbed Feet]

It's good to see that after a decade or more that nothing has changed on this forum. Half the forum members couldn't figure out how to identify condominium form of ownership way back then, couldn't carry on a condo thread discourse without constantly confusing form of ownership with building styles, and it looks like pretty much still can't do so.

 

[Carnivore]

OK well if you insist ... Condo is a form of ownership and NOT an architectural style. Now once again, what EXACTLY does the complete legal description state?

Brother Klahr I bet your looking for something like this from the OP:

Single Family Semi-detached(see pix) Lot 644, Block 94, Map Book 54 Map Page 954 FNMA Form 1004

Condo(pix) semi-detaached Unit 22, Building 5, U/F 358 FNMA Form 1073

Pix could be interchanged(I did not take time to label them) and it makes no difference Legal descriptions above says it all.

 

[bnmappraisal]

Brother Klahr I bet your looking for something like this:

Single Family Semi-detached(see pix) Lot 644, Block 94, Map Book 54 Map Page 954 FNMA Form 1004

Condo(pix) semi-detaached Unit 22, Building 5, U/F 358 FNMA Form 1073

Pix could be interchanged(I did not take time to label them) and it makes no difference Legal descriptions above says it all.

I won't speak for Howard, but yes, I think that is what may determine the difference
I run into similar in my market(s)
Legal description (1 has Lot/Block and the other Condo) has everything to do with it.
I have "townhouse" style condos and I have condo buildings with 500+ units ... Legal Description has everything to do with it

 

[CindyR]

Well just a reminder about those locational differences i am always bringing up. The only time something is a condo in AZ is if the legal description specifically mentions 'according to the Declaration of Condominium'. Without a Declaration of Condominium it is NOT a condominium no matter what other language is used to describe the lot or unit or building or whatever it may be.

 

[Carnivore]

Well just a reminder about those locational differences i am always bringing up. The only time something is a condo in AZ is if the legal description specifically mentions 'according to the Declaration of Condominium'. Without a Declaration of Condominium it is NOT a condominium no matter what other language is used to describe the lot or unit or building or whatever it may be.

Well I should have stated this also, but the example above I gave for condo will give you the Declaration of Condominium. The other will never give you that Declaration.

 

[Basically Rectangular]

If you indeed find that the legal form of ownership is a condo, and there are no condo ownership comparables in the marketing area, could you use fee simple townhomes that are similar in build, design, etc., or would you expand the boundaries, or would you be forced to use poor comparable condos that are less similar than fee simple ones?

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

If you indeed find that the legal form of ownership is a condo, and there are no condo ownership comparables in the marketing area, could you use fee simple townhomes that are similar in build, design, etc., or would you expand the boundaries, or would you be forced to use poor comparable condos that are less similar than fee simple ones?

Call them proxies and emphasize the lack of comps.

 

[Mr Rex]

How the heck can you have 4 units in one building and have no shared walls between them???

4 individual wells?

 

[Mr Rex]

It's good to see that after a decade or more that nothing has changed on this forum. Half the forum members couldn't figure out how to identify condominium form of ownership way back then, couldn't carry on a condo thread discourse without constantly confusing form of ownership with building styles, and it looks like pretty much still can't do so.

Glad to see you are still here assisting in the process. Pat yourself on the back and fade away. What a help you have been...