• Welcome to AppraisersForum.com, the premier online  community for the discussion of real estate appraisal. Register a free account to be able to post and unlock additional forums and features.

Remaining Economic Life

Status
Not open for further replies.
How can you estimate the effective age of the property if you don't have a "remaining economic age"? The lender wants to know if you THINK the improvement will be economically feasible for the term of the loan. It should be part of a complete appraisal regardless of whether is it a government guarantee or insured or sold into the secondary conventional market.
 
Sorry, "if you don't have a "remaining economic life (not age)".
 
George Dodd,

Maybe you can enlighten me in my ignorance........

Here is the scenario......

Two ranch style dwellings equal physical age...lets say 20 years old

Ranch #1 perfectly (and I mean perfectly) maintained by its original owner, not a scratch on any wood work and the cabinets look as good as the day they were installed, and the carpeting...perfect.... avacado green shag. No new roof, No new windows.

Ranch #2 occupied by a family of five with 3 big dogs, and 6 cats who use the living room carpeting for their litter box, however, ranch #2 has new windows and a new roof.

Based on your post the differences in the above scenario would be handeled with a single adjustment because "they go hand in hand" (effective age and condition). Somehow my ignorance does not allow me to see that in the scenario posted above...Please enlighten me.

Ida


I am waiting to be enlightened George Dodd.

Ida
 
Dick said
cost approach becomes quite unreliable as the effective age increases as it is sometimes too difficult to defend depreciation estimates, from all causes.

My question is why in an older house is it more difficult to estimate effective age in the Cost Approach than to estimate condition/Effective age in the Sales Approach? Short answer it isn't. These are judgment calls made by the appraiser. Depending upon how you apply your Total Life and Age calls, the Cost Approach simply allows one big "adjustment" to your estimate of Replacement Cost New.

We are supposed to mimic the marketplace. And it is common for people purchasing property to A-estimate the land value; B-estimate the value of the house after determining how much they think a new dwelling would cost; C-estimate the cost of changes or repairs they need to make. I would aver more buyers think in those terms than in comparison of prices of a specific house as "comparables".

Likewise, Functional and Economic (External or environmental) obsolescences have to be factored in...extracting that value from the market evidence is equally applicable to the Cost Approach as the Sales Approach. If I have a SFR in a commercially developing area, I must monitor the value of that property via the land value as if vacant. When land values exceed comparable house/lot values the HBU has changed. Often the transition is not clean. But when Lots are $20,000 and Commercial Lots $40,000; that example SFR has $20,000 of External obsolescence. And your address to that condition in the Sales Approach should not consist of merely making a $20,000 site adjustment to the comparables w/o explaining the property is in transition. Finding transitional SFR's might be hard to do, and even so, to identify and find transitional SFR's is predicated on that condition.

The old saw about the Cost Approach not being applicable in older homes always comes from the residential appraisers. I don't know any Commercial or farm appraisers who ignore the cost approach regardless the age of the improvements. And we are talking 100 year old barns originally designed for a far different agriculture than exists today here, folks. They still have value.

ter

P.S.- on the question of effective age being lower than actual age, the discount is different according to how you use the books...and even what cost books you rely on. I use Boeckh Res. Val. Software when analyzing sales and using their age vs condition adjustment often "nail" the DCN (as represented by subtracting the land value as if vacant from the sales price) very closely. Inverting the residual yields the years (total life) and I find those are often 50 / 55years for your garden variety house just like M & S says. (Boeckh does not list a total life table for classes of property but their residuals are leading you to much the same conclusion)
 
Some posters seem to have the idea that economic life is an estimate of the appraiser and I think that is the source of the fog. Economic life is the reciprocal of the annualized rate of depreciation on a straight-line assumption as extracted from the market. So if you take three sales, subtract the land value (which if the H & BU is different and it almost always is really screws things up) then take the replacement cost new and subtract the depreciated improvement value and estimate the average annual rate of depreciation, then take the reciprocal of that you have the economic life. For example, if the annual rate of depreciation is 1% then the economic life is 100 years. If the rate is 3% then the economic life if 33.3 years.
Then you have to make a judgment call as to the effective age, which is complicated by the economic life cycle of the neighborhood or district. That is what I was trying to get across in my original post on this subject. I have never seen an appraiser do it this way. They just take a guess at economic life, estimate effective age, and you end up with all unsupported estimates and no market input. Basically what they do is reverse engineer the equation. They extract total depreciation from the sales comparison approach, and then pick economic life and effective age to reconcile the approaches by making the cost approach estimate approximate the sales comparison estimate just to satisfy the form filling function. Just a perfunctory form filling exercise.
Has any one of you guys ever use the procedure I just described to extract the annual rate of depreciation from the market and then estimated the economic life using this method? Five will get you ten not one single one has.

Terrel:
I took the students manual from the American Farm and Ranch Associations or whatever their name is did a regression analysis using their comparable sales for the sample solutions. Farmland was the H & BU but there were dwellings, old barns, sheds, etc. The regression gave almost perfect results and the gravity of the data indicated that these old buildings were washed completely out by the random variance factor from the land factors. They spent pages doing the cost approach and depreciating these old structures and they didn’t amount to a hill of beans. My results had much less variance their final solution did and took about one half hour vs. god knows how long their method would have taken.
 
Ida, I had originally thought I might plagarize your quote,and so I cut and pasted it to my word processor. However, the more I thought about it, the more it seemed to be not quite right, or more speciffically, not quite complete. Taking your original thought, I reworked it, and here's what I came up with:

"Incurable physical depreciation is based on the estimated effective age of the subject, which takes into consideration the actual age and expected remaining life of the improvements. The percentage of physical, incurable, depreciation applied is based on the estimated effective age of the structure divided by its most probable economic life when new. Although, generally considered incurable, replacement of major component items such as roof structure, windows, siding, heating and cooling systems, wiring, or plumbing may extend a property's expected life and lower its effective age.

Condition adjustments are generally based on curable physical depreciation issues and take into consideration the general overall condition and maintenance of the improvements. Replaceable items such as paint surfaces, roof cover, floor coverings and similar parts of the structure considered to be maintenance items can affect the condition. If there is curable physical depreciation, it is estimated at the cost required to correct the deficiency. Properties that have been maintained with care may be in better condition than properties that have not been well maintained, regardless of effective age.

Effective age and condition are separate issues in the appraisal process. Improvements that are the same actual age and approximately the same effective age, may still differ in condition based on appearance and function of maintenance items.

Functional obsolescence can be curable or incurable and it accrues from factors or features within the property that affect the property value in a negative way. Included in the factors or features that affect the property negatively are poor design, either inadequate or super-adequate construction, and numerous other possibilities. When possible, curable functional obsolescence is measured by the cost to cure the deficiency; incurable functional inutility is measured by the rental loss that accrues by reason of the deficiency.

External obsolescence, if any, is caused by factors outside the property and is usually not curable. When possible, it is measured by the loss in rents accruing from the presence of the depreciating factor or condition."


Mr. Henry, in fact it is quite possible to get accurate depreciation from the market for almost any property regardless of age. If you calculate cost new (reproduction) on any property that is a sale you can easily calculate total depreciation for that specific property. (Don't forget that land doesn't depreciate when doing the calculations.) That is the math. Getting out the part of the total depreciation that is due to effective age from what is attributable to other causes; well, that is the art. (Hint: Doing a replacement cost calculation can sometimes help with this.) But, here's the point: If you do it time after time, assignment after assignment, you will eventually gain a pretty clear insight as to what to attribute to physical depreciation on almost any property. Or, you could just do it by the book, like Ter. I have found Marshall & Swift to be incredibly accurate when used correctly.
 
How long would an appraiser have to live to have a database of comps that indicates a certain type of house will generate economic utility for another 50 years? For example, say there is someone who has been a piano instructor for 20 years. If you ask that person how much progress the average student who lasts one year will make, at least you are getting an opinion from a person who has seen hundreds of "comps." Are remaining ecoomic life numbers bounded by any known reality?

If we were to apply the same "standards" of development to the cost approach that we apply to sales comparison, what levels of data about that actual economic lives of properties would be required in order to characterize remaining economic life figures as:
1) estimates,
2) opinions,
3) assumptions, or
4) speculation?
 
Steven:
We finally agree on something. What is driving all of this hocus pocus economic life, effective age, etc., crap is nothing short of a CYA smoke screen to keep regulators off your butt. In the other thread we had about square footage adjustments I told you guys about an article in “The Appraisal Journal” about how to make size adjustments. The author explained up front that the whole scheme was just to make it look like there was some market justification or support for the size adjustment to cover the appraisers butt. Then he goes into this complicated process of separating land and buildings, then comes up with a $/sf number to make a size adjustment, then puts it all back together and comes up with the same answer he had before he ever started. It is a case of the tail wagging the dog. The bottom line is appraisal regulation took a poor situation and turned it into an abortion. Speaking of abortion; that may damn well be the way out of this crap. Appraisers are more concerned with CYA-ing than serving the needs of the client. Purpose of appraisal: To make money for appraiser. Intended user:State Appraisal Board. Unintended user: Client. Scope: Whatever it takes to keep the appraisal police off my butt.
 
Austin said
depreciating these old structures and they didn't amount to a hill of beans

In truly agricultural property involving, say, an old house and shacky barns, I do see that. But I work in an area where there are two kinds of rural property. One is purely residential..and those old barns that can be modified for "character" are valuable. In fact, I know two built within the last year that were steel truss replicas of the old style loft barns, 1 even to the dog house hanging over the front...seriously doubt anyone contemplates stacking loose hay in it, but I could sell the hay forks out of my own old barn for as much as the barn is worth. Secondly, about 50% of them build a modern steel truss or pole barn, colored tin, roll up doors, etc. from 2,400 SF to 6,000 or more. They clearly add value to the property, and number of outbuildings affects value as much as the type of barn. Type two is an economic farm...4 broiler houses or 2 hen houses, about $600,000 worth new. Often these are 40 acres to maybe 200. Some as small as 5 acres. The land value is a fraction of the total value. Even when they lose a contract, the value of the barns often plunges, but the buyers often pay for the barns provided they can obtain a contract from another poultry integrator. Random variance is not going to account for building values under those circumstance. This conflict between large tract residential uses and agriculture uses has had the effect of sending agriculture into Oklahoma and driving out farming near the Hwy. 71/540 cooridor in the East side of the county. Now environmental legislation in Okla. has run it back into Arkansas along the state line and south towards Ft. Smith and north into Missouri.

I am appraising a 108 ac. place with an old 880 SF house needing remodeling, a garage, and 2 old sheds. Selling for $130,000. Area vacant land sales vary from $1,050 to $1,400 per acre...exactly what you are saying.
 
Ter, I know exactly what you're talking about. I've seen a few of those like Austin is talking about too. They are basically land appraisals because there is nothing else there that contributes. But, you'd better check the market before you jump to that conclusion; some of these old things have value to segments of the market you would never guess unless you did your homework.

How long would an appraiser have to live to have a database of comps that indicates a certain type of house will generate economic utility for another 50 years?

I had the basic information on depreciation in most areas of my market within my first three years of appraising. Using exactly the method I laid out. I'm working in a area where there are a lot of fairly contiguous neighborhoods and sub-neighborhoods, and that might make a difference.

We finally agree on something. What is driving all of this hocus pocus economic life, effective age, etc., crap is nothing short of a CYA smoke screen to keep regulators off your butt.

From the king of scientific method, nonetheless! You apparently didn't read my post - this can be verified over and over again by as many third parties as you want. And, it doesn't take all that much data; after you do five or six appraisals from a particular sub-neighborhood you just about have it down. From there on, as you do more, the data just becomes better and better (marginally). Movement (at least in my market) towards higher depreciation is a very slow process as properties do both - they appreciate at the same time they depreciate.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Find a Real Estate Appraiser - Enter Zip Code

Copyright © 2000-, AppraisersForum.com, All Rights Reserved
AppraisersForum.com is proudly hosted by the folks at
AppraiserSites.com
Back
Top