Double Dipping?

[Mike Boyd]

Inspected a home in a rural location yesterday with few sales.
A comparable I have in question is located on waterfront, and
obviously a 'superior' view. Would it be considered double
dipping if I made udjustments for 'location' and 'view'?? It's
not the best comparable, but there ain't nothing out there!

Why do you suppose people will pay more for a waterfront property than a non waterfront property? In my market area it would be the advantage of direct access to the body of water. Period. Location is another issue. I put the adjustment for waterfrontage under the view in the grid. I do not make a location adjustment unless there is something about the area that is inferior or superior to the subject.

 

[RSW]

When I saw the header "Double Dipping", I thought this was a thread about dipping a chip into the salsa twice. Sorry! Wrong thread!

 

[John Hassler]

I would tend to look at the adjustment in aggregate. Just because the form separates site and view doesn't mean you have to. In fact the old-old residential for had site/view as a single line. I would be more concerned about getting the total adjustment correct than worrying about apportioning it in the Fannie form.

(Edit) And to answer your question I would not consider this a case of double dipping.

 

[Mike Boyd]

In fact the old-old residential for had site/view as a single line.

.........BUT, LOCATION was and is on a line of its own. I can think of at least one area in your market area, John, with waterfront on one side of the street and water view on the other side. Same locational value, but the waterfront property is a million dollars more than the other, given otherwise similar characteristics. This was 2 or 3 years ago but I am presuming similar values still apply.

 

[John Hassler]

In fact the old-old residential for had site/view as a single line.

.........BUT, LOCATION was and is on a line of its own. I can think of at least one area in your market area, John, with waterfront on one side of the street and water view on the other side. Same locational value, but the waterfront property is a million dollars more than the other, given otherwise similar characteristics. This was 2 or 3 years ago but I am presuming similar values still apply.

Perhaps this is "form" over function issue. :new_smile-l:


If the Subject's location/frontage/view is worth $100k more than a particular Comparable's, I would expect the adjustment summation of location, frontage, and view to equal $100k. In this case a single location/frontage/view adjustment may the best way to handle the situation. It seems like a lot of excess work to portion the $100k into its components only to add them back together in the final net adjustment. All I'm saying is there's more than one way to skin a cat and not double dip at the same time.

 

[CANative]

Yep. Today I had comps all over the Channel Islands Harbor, some with views of the main channel while others had views of their little cul-de-sack. Both comps had similar access to the outlet, in fact the one off the channel was actually closer, so I knew the value difference wasn't location. But I do feel your pain. In the beach neighborhoods, values go up almost $1Mil just crossing the street to be ON THE SAND. It wasn't until last year that I could actually prove with comps that the value difference was about 50/50 view/location. I had a comp across the street from the sand with a wide open, dedicated public access lot in front of it giving the comp unobstructed panoramic ocean views, but the sales on the sand were still about $500K more.

We used to live on Ocean Drive. On the sand. Between the Seabee base and the harbor.

 

[EVAUSA]

We used to live on Ocean Drive. On the sand. Between the Seabee base and the harbor.

Aww, too bad you moved.
We could have had margi's on your deck! :new_all_coholic:I live in the hazardous waste dump across the street, The Dunes. Do you remember the skull and cross bones? They built about 30 new houses in here, it's shaping up!

 

[Mike Boyd]

We lived there in the mid 1960s. Puchased a lease option for $25,000 but could not afford to pick up the option at that time. The house was torn down a few years later. I was selling, or attempting to sell, lots up the road a few miles. Can't remember the tract.

Captain Jack's was the big restaurant over the water in those days.

 

[CANative]

I seem to remember a place where there were a lot of sand dunes and mom and dad were working a tract of new construction homes. My brothers and I had to keep ourselves busy and far away from the sales office so we'd play in the dunes shooting BB guns and bows and arrows. We also used the cabinetry in the garages to hide out in and eat Cheese-it crackers and drink Coca-Colas.

 

[Mike Garrett RAA]

Dip away....it is what it is!