Developing An Opinion Of "site Value"

[CANative]

When developing a stand alone opinion of site value for an improved property you are appraising, what are you including in this hypothetical parcel?

Just the dirt?

A site with utility hook up fees, impact fees, permits, development fees (and the time it took to get them) already paid for?

Access to the property, encroachments and easeements already developed, etc., etc.?

I have some more questions, but I want to read some of your input before I ask them. Thank you very much for any insight.

 

[xm39hnu]

Greg,
In your market, when is a site ready for development to its highest and best use? Would such a site have utilities on-site? Would any of the other fees be paid on it? My conclusion is that none of these would be present.

How about access? If the HBU as vacant is "to improve," then access should be present, and accounted for in your site value. Easements and encroachments should also be dealt with, since those might impact any improvement.

You'd have a bit of a problem with an improved site which is too small for present zoning, but which is grandfathered. The indicated functional obsolescence should be accounted for in the site value.

Take heart, Greg. If if were easy, Skippy could do it.

 

[Elliott]

Greg,
The same things that are included in those vacant land sale
purchases. Or in the case of a land residual, those things
that are left after estimating the depreciated replacement
cost of the improvement....ya know, those things that
are there.

elliott

 

[Joker]

Whatever it takes to make the numbers work. :twisted:

I consider site Value to be site value (land only). Site improvements are site improvements.

If you are asking a new form question, you know I can't help you.

 

[Richard Carlsen]

I use exactly the same analysis that is used for the H&BU: "as vacant".

No improvements period. Land (dirt) only. Nothing that is a wasting asset.

Such things are site prep, permits, drive, well, septic are covered in the Cost Approach as "As-is value of site improvements."

 

[wyecoyote]

Dirt only. Site improvements are site improvements.

 

[CANative]

Then why is the question phrased "estimate of site value" instead of raw land value or land value or unimproved land value? Are we sure it is not a value minus structures?

 

[Joker]

I told you I couldn't help you with those #$@^& forms!

I understand your confusion. I have 2 different dictionaries in this office with different definitions.

The American Heritage Dictionary "site - the place or plot of land where something was, is, or is to be located"

Harrison's Dictionary of Real Estate "Site- A parcel of land that is improved with grading, utilities, driveways, and utility hookups and is suitable for building purposes"

I agree with the first definition. The second definition (imo) includes the site and the site improvements, two distinctly separate items.

You and I may choose the same site for a house. It is priced (assume price = value) at $50,000. Your plans call for a crawl space and a garage in the rear. My plans include a basement garage. My house is total electric. Yours is heated with gas. Our utilites, driveways and our grading would be completely different even though it is the same site. The site value either way is $50,000. The site improvements, however, are different.

 

[CANative]

You're just chosing the civilian dictionary definition because then the problem is easier to deal with.

 

[Joker]

Yep! So?

That's the whole point. Why make an easy task difficult by using non standard definitions? Who is the intended user of your report? What does your client understand the definition of "site" to be? My clients understand that word to be definition #1. If yours consider it to be definition #2, then use #2.