Lake Elsinore: One parcel / Two locations ?

[ZZGAMAZZ]

Possibly not as weird as it seems although I have never previously encountered this scenario: The subject is a SFR in Lake Elsinore, CA, about one mile removed from the lake with numerous residential and commercial improvements between the subject and the lakefront. Per the Listing Agent, the property also includes a small, distinct, lakefront lot in additional to the improved lot where the SFR is located. I'm waiting on the prelim to view the legal description; and I presume that I should include two parcel maps while looking for similar properties, although I might also need to determine the market reaction to similar small lakefront lots even if they are not linked to a larger, non-contiguous parcel.

 

[George Hatch]

I just appraised a property on Main St in Elsinore last week. Actually 2 adjacent parcels, one with improvements and the other is vacant. I did them on 2 separate appraisals (land +commercial).

By your description what you have is two parcels with 2 parcel numbers and 2 locations, but being conveyed in a single transaction. A couple years back I appraised a commercial property on Grand Ave on the south side of the lake. One of the sales I came across was a 5-parcel assemblage with 2 on the lake side and 3 on the inland side. I didn't use it in my appraisal but it did come up in my research.

 

[ZZGAMAZZ]

I just appraised a property on Main St in Elsinore last week. Actually 2 adjacent parcels, one with improvements and the other is vacant. I did them on 2 separate appraisals (land +commercial).

By your description what you have is two parcels with 2 parcel numbers and 2 locations, but being conveyed in a single transaction. A couple years back I appraised a commercial property on Grand Ave on the south side of the lake. One of the sales I came across was a 5-parcel assemblage with 2 on the lake side and 3 on the inland side. I didn't use it in my appraisal but it did come up in my research.

That would make sense, although the listing agent says it is both the "same property." It's also interesting that the SFR is located in a HOA with an annual fee of $100 although there is absolutely nothing that visibly suggests a PUD in which this 40-year-old SFR exists. {knda sorta seems like I experienced this same PUD a long long time ago...]

 

[George Hatch]

So what's the first 6 digits of the apn?

 

[Mike Ault]

Possibly not as weird as it seems although I have never previously encountered this scenario: The subject is a SFR in Lake Elsinore, CA, about one mile removed from the lake with numerous residential and commercial improvements between the subject and the lakefront. Per the Listing Agent, the property also includes a small, distinct, lakefront lot in additional to the improved lot where the SFR is located. I'm waiting on the prelim to view the legal description; and I presume that I should include two parcel maps while looking for similar properties, although I might also need to determine the market reaction to similar small lakefront lots even if they are not linked to a larger, non-contiguous parcel.

If it's a GSE/secondary market bound appraisal, the below would seem to be applicable to your situation. From the selling guide –

Multiple Parcels​

The table below provides the requirements when the security property consists of more than one parcel of real estate.

✓	Multiple Parcels Requirements
	Each parcel must be conveyed in its entirety.
	Parcels must be adjoined to the other, unless they comply with the following exception. Parcels that otherwise would be adjoined, but are divided by a road, are acceptable if the parcel without a residence is a non-buildable lot (for example, waterfront properties where the parcel without the residence provides access to the water). Evidence that the lot is non-buildable must be included in the loan file.
	Each parcel must have the same basic zoning (for example, residential, agricultural).
	The entire property may contain only one dwelling unit. Limited additional non-residential improvements, such as a garage, are acceptable. For example, the adjoining parcel may not have an additional dwelling unit. An improvement that has been built across lot lines is acceptable. For example, a home built across both parcels where the lot line runs under the home is acceptable.
	The mortgage must be a valid first lien that covers each parcel.

https://selling-guide.fanniemae.com...siderations-12-16-2020.htm#Multiple.20Parcels​

 

[ZZGAMAZZ]

If it's a GSE/secondary market bound appraisal, the below would seem to be applicable to your situation. From the selling guide –

Multiple Parcels​

The table below provides the requirements when the security property consists of more than one parcel of real estate.

✓	Multiple Parcels Requirements
	Each parcel must be conveyed in its entirety.
	Parcels must be adjoined to the other, unless they comply with the following exception. Parcels that otherwise would be adjoined, but are divided by a road, are acceptable if the parcel without a residence is a non-buildable lot (for example, waterfront properties where the parcel without the residence provides access to the water). Evidence that the lot is non-buildable must be included in the loan file.
	Each parcel must have the same basic zoning (for example, residential, agricultural).
	The entire property may contain only one dwelling unit. Limited additional non-residential improvements, such as a garage, are acceptable. For example, the adjoining parcel may not have an additional dwelling unit. An improvement that has been built across lot lines is acceptable. For example, a home built across both parcels where the lot line runs under the home is acceptable.
	The mortgage must be a valid first lien that covers each parcel.

https://selling-guide.fanniemae.com...siderations-12-16-2020.htm#Multiple.20Parcels​

The reference is greatly appreciated. I'm wondering if the title "Multiple Parcels" is defined by multiple parcels with distinct parcel definitions, or possibly the existece of multiple, non-contiguous parcels all with the same parcel number--if that is even possible?

 

[Mike Ault]

The reference is greatly appreciated. I'm wondering if the title "Multiple Parcels" is defined by multiple parcels with distinct parcel definitions, or possibly the existece of multiple, non-contiguous parcels all with the same parcel number--if that is even possible?

I believe that "the non-contiguous part" is the detail that you need to worry about, not how many parcel numbers the property consists of.

 

[ZZGAMAZZ]

I believe that "the non-contiguous part" is the detail that you need to worry about, not how many parcel numbers the property consists of.

Presumably jurisdiction-specific; however, can a single parcel exist in multiple locations (other than a parcel separated by a road); although the 2nd line item exception in the "Multiple Parcel Requirements" referenced above defines the subject of my assignment almost exactly--although it doesn't do so because the SFR isn't located on the lakeside property, which presumably can't be improved upon, which I will better understand when I find out exacty what it is....

 

[ZZGAMAZZ]

I just received an email from the AF (which I immediately lost) asking for parcel info including first 6 digits of the parcel#:

LOT 259 MB 013/086 VISTA DEL LAGO TR UNIT 2

383-033

 

[nstanbru]

That would make sense, although the listing agent says it is both the "same property." It's also interesting that the SFR is located in a HOA with an annual fee of $100 although there is absolutely nothing that visibly suggests a PUD in which this 40-year-old SFR exists. {knda sorta seems like I experienced this same PUD a long long time ago...]

Double check this to make sure. I believe the $100 fee is annual and is for private lake access.