Opinion of site value based on analysis of sales, listings and expired listings of similar lots located nearby. Remote and somewhat unique area and there are no reasonably comparable competing markets. Very little activity north of Westport and the quality and quanity of data is sparse. The data analyzed and the analysis is summarized below.
The subject is a 20+- acre tract of woodland located along a mountains ridge north of the small community of Westport. Accessed by a private dirt and gravel easement road. There is no public electrical power to the site, water source is an existing drilled and cased well with no pumping equipment at this time. Mixed zoning which will not allow the lot to be further subdivided. Portions of the lot are located in the coastal zone and the portion where the improvements are to be sited is located outside of the coastal zone (this is a favorable feature because it is not subject to the development requirements imposed by the California Coastal Commission.) Mixed topography with a small portion gentle lands surrounding the homesite. The majority of the lot is severaly sloping. Heavily wooded with mixed species of native trees, mostly second and third growth redwood, some madrone, some varied species of fir and some mature oak trees. View to the west are of the Pacific Ocean from a high elevation and partially blocked by trees in the foreground, some of which may be on a continguous lot. Views to the south and southwest are for the most part blocked by tall redwood trees. Views to the north and northwest are blocked by the surrounding hlls and trees. The view to the west could be improved by removal of the smaller pine trees. The lot percs for a two bedroom residence (4 persons full time). The last sale of the subject was in 1994 and the purchase price was $182,500.
The most recent and proximate lot sale on Pacific Heights Drive is the continguous property. 24250 Pacific Heights Dr. sold in August 2004 at $552,250. The property was listed in CMAR MLS as listing #18762. 26.5 acre wooded lot with similar topography. The property had two drilled wells, a septic permit, electrical power at the boundary line and two out-buildings (not described). The ocean views from the buildings site are superior to the subject's views.
24500 Hillshore Dr. is located about a mile from the subject property. Sale closed in February 2001 at $321,000. 20 acre site with similar topography, no electrical power, wells or septic permit. Ocean views are superior to the subject. CMAR MLS#16128.
24910 Ponderose Dr. located about 2 miles south of the subject.21.25 acres, heavily wooded, somewhat superior views of the ocean from a lower elevation. This is an expired listing. Offered at $435,000 in June 2005 and expired in November 2005 with 70 days on market. CMAR MLS#19492.
41251 Seascape Dr. Located about 1 mile south of the subject. 20 acre tract with mixed topography, lightly wooded. Excellent ocean views. Property has an approved Coastal Development permit. This is an active listings (CMAR MLS#20775) Listing date is 6-14-2007, 111 days on market. Offered at $539,000.
Little difference in sales price versus listing price between of the Pacific Heights closed sale in 2004 and the Seascape Drive listing currently listed. These two property tend to represent the high range of value for the subject but are superior properties. The expired listing on Ponderosa has a reasonably similar view and parcel size but the data is more than two years old. The Hillside Drive sale is similar except for the superior view but is a 6 year old sale. This data represents the low range. Adjusting the Seascape listing downward $50,000 for view and downward 5% for the estimated ratio of sales price to list price the value indicator for the subject property is about $465,000.
Cost data:
Nationally published cost services are based on national averages with state and local modifiers taken from major metropolitan centers. This data is not accurate for remote areas on the Mendocino Coast and costs are substantially higher due to distance from material distribution centers and sources of skilled labor. I have reviewed the contractor bids supplied by the client and the borrower as well as the bids for subcontracted services and owner supplied items. These appear to be competitive bids and compare well with other bids the appraiser has examined during similar assignments in this market. The appraiser has used this data in estimating the reproduction cost new of the proposed improvements. The description of the proposed improvements and the opinion of value and marketability of the subject property, as proposed, is based on the plans and specifications provided by the contractor, the appraiser's client and the borrower. The opinion of value is subject to completion of the improvements. Based on survey of builders and contractors as well as personal observation of the market, the appraiser estimates time to complete this project, as proposed, at about 12 to 18 months.
Cost breakdown based on the information provided is:
General Contractor (Rosenthall Const.) $1,120,986. A signficant cost is for drilling, engineering and concrete work for the foundation and site preparations. Subcontractors (Appliances, audio-communications, alternative power systems with back up generator, hardwood flooring, heating system, custom lighting, plumbing and jacuzzi) $206,248.07 Existing drilled and cased well (550 feet per owner) $22,000 (based on survey of well drillers) Estimated cost for installing pumping equipment, pressure tank, 5,000 gallon holding tank and connection to residence is about $15,000 (Total $37,000) Site value estimate: $465,000. Total cost of project as proposed: $1,829,234
Market data is extremely limited but the data that is available appears to indicate that, as proposed, functional obsolesence would be present and caused by superadequacy. Because there is such a lack of market data which can be used to isolate the specific element of superadequacy the appraiser must assume that the cause is the costs associated with the scope of the project including the overall size of the improvements, the quality of construction, features and appointments and the complicated design and foundation requirements. If the improvements were existing rather than proposed, this would be treated as incurable functional obsolesence. While residences approaching or exceeding 4,000 square feet are not considered atypical in the coastal region of Mendocino County, they are usually found on oceanfront lots. As proposed, the land value is about 26% of the total and this is not typical. A more common ratio in this market is about 40% to 50% land value. At this ratio the improvement value for the subject's lot value would need to be closer to $1,000,000 to be considered the ideal improvement in the higest and best use analysis.
