I think I found a solution - tell me if you think this sounds reasonable - I found a property on the same island which backed to a lake on a golf course.
Property which backed to lake and golf course (call it Property A)
- sold 07/16/2007 for $565,000 with $5,000 in concessions (effective sale price $560,000)
- 1,616 SF, 4 bedroom, 2.5 bath, built in 1994
- Effective Price Per SF = $346.53/SF
Property which backed to golf course but not to the lake (call it Property B)
- sold 08/15/2007 for $545,000 with no concessions
- 1,813 SF, 4 bedroom, 2.5 bath, built in 1994
- Effective Price Per SF = $300.61/SF
I then applied the Price Per SF of Property B to Property A to determine how much Property A would effectively have sold for had it not backed to the lake.
1,616 SF X $300.61 = $486,000 (rounded to nearest thousand)
Application of this theory - The difference between when Property A would have sold for if it did not back to the lake and the amount that it did sell for because it backed to the lake would represent the value of backing to the lake.
$560,000 - $486,000 = $74,000 or approximately 13% of its sale price was attributed to the lake feature.