Would you include this in the GLA starting 4/1/22

[Basically Rectangular]

If for Exam Question: No
If for Real World: Measure again and realize that it is indeed 50% of the total area.

Good luck getting the proper comparable dimensions for similar spaces for a separate line item. That right there will mess you up more than if you just called it 50% of the total area (it looks close anyway).

 

[TruJa]

If for Exam Question: No
If for Real World: Measure again and realize that it is indeed 50% of the total area.

Good luck getting the proper comparable dimensions for similar spaces for a separate line item. That right there will mess you up more than if you just called it 50% of the total area (it looks close anyway).

As far as the subject goes: If we put it on the same line, then we ARE NOT complying with the ANSI standard. If we put it on a different line, then we ARE complying with the ANSI standard.

As far as the comps go....
1) If you adjust at the same rate for all "living space" regardless of whether it is GLA per ANSI, then nothing really changes in the net valuation problem regardless of where their information is listed in the grid (we don't have to list comps in the grid to ANSI standards because likely we can't and don't measure them (describe where your data comes from in the addendum (i.e. boilerplate if possible)).

2) If you do need to adjust for functional differences for the differences in the "living areas" for your market, then nothing really changes except possibly where adjustments are made in the grid. You should already be doing this somewhere and somehow to produce a credible result. How do you test for this and do it now?

That seems to be the standard regardless of what the market values or calls "living area".

 

[Carnivore]

Well that will be an issue in the grid. When you segregate your areas, how will you know to do that with your comparable. Remember the Realtors are not locked into this ANSI System of breakdown. In NC they are encouraged by the NC RealEstate Commission to use ANSI but are not actually required to do so. The reasons they are not locked into it is because they segregate and or identify areas based on the market, not what ansi says. The point of the RE Commision to them is to be careful in what or how they represent something in their listings. So they are not immune from civil litigation by a buyer or seller.

 

[TruJa]

Well that will be an issue in the grid. When you segregate your areas, how will you know to do that with your comparable. Remember the Realtors are not locked into this ANSI System of breakdown. In NC they are encouraged by the NC RealEstate Commission to use ANSI but are not actually required to do so. The reasons they are not locked into it is because they segregate and or identify areas based on the market, not what ansi says. The point of the RE Commision to them is to be careful in what or how they represent something in their listings. So they are not immune from civil litigation by a buyer or seller.

But how do you do it now?? Is there anything new here other than how the grid will be segregating things most people haven't segregated before? It will appear that there are across the board adjustments on a new line, but the net result should be zero change on the final adjusted values compared to what they are now.

 

[Carnivore]

But how do you do it now?? Is there anything new here other than how the grid will be segregating things most people haven't segregated before? It will appear that there are across the board adjustments on a new line, but the net result should be zero change on the final adjusted values compared to what they are now.

I am not talking about how I do it, I am pointing out how Realtor often or not so often do it. Yes, your correct if the market recognizes there is no difference then it's a wash. The consumer/homeowner may not see it that way. Even though they are not in most cases a client or intended user they often get a copy of the appraisal. We may very well gets some criticism from the owners. The Realtors are getting better about actually segregating those areas in the MLS. Some still don't. They lump it all together because they're lazy.

I have a 2003 ANSI 765 and have been using it up to 2013 ANSI up to until now 2022(2021 (ver)

 

[RCA]

This ANSI thing is making me crazy. I think it is the dumbest idea ever and can't believe it's moving forward. Who is responsible for this ****show. This makes UAD look lame. There are a lot of old homes built before the turn of the century that do not have any ceilings that reach 7 feet. There are also homes built in the late 60s early 70's that also have ceiling heights under 6 feet. I feel like that emogi with it's head exploding. I swore I would not do desktops but if thing gets too difficult (lenders, brokers, buyers, sellers), I may change my mind. I know I can explain explain explain in my reports but it won't matter. Someone, somewhere in the chain is going to have issues and that becomes my issue. I think I am going to put an addendum page together and copy and paste the ANSI rules front and center and put it in my report before the first page. Maybe someone will actually read it. We really should try and get a petition going with appraisers who object to these new measuring rules.

I want to emphasize, that I personally do not see a problem with measuring the subject according to the ANSI standard. I have never had a problem with that. The result is "GLA per ANSI". Most of the post on this forum against the adoption of the ANSI standard relate to disagreements about what should be considered GLA. As far as I can see that is not the problem.

However, there absolutely is a problem if we are required to use that value for adjustment purposes, - because we simply cannot get the data or anything close to it for many neighborhoods - such as here in the San Francisco Bay area. Now the GSEs did have an exception for partially below grade areas for homes that back into a hill. Finished areas that for all practical purposes were treated as above grade finished areas could be treated as GLA in the sales grid.

Someone messed up at FNMA and removed that exception.

Many of the more expensive or unusual homes often have no good comps for the past year. I have to go back 10 years to get reasonable adjustments. I simply cannot comply with any requirement that essentially requires getting a partially below grade area for my comps. It is impossible.

I might add, that for attic spaces, FNMA could have come up with some simple formula to make it possible to get a fairly accurate value for attic space in even complex attics. They failed to do this.

They also have apparently failed to even consider the other associated problems such as creating adjustments off of where old data is based on different measurement criteria.

Appraisers will really have, in many cases, no option but to not comply with the standard with respect to creating adjustments in the sales grid.

 

[Carnivore]

Bert, I get where you're going and I think all of the regulars here are in tune with the nuances of ANSI Z765 2022. I looked at two prior 765 I have and they have some similarities to the current 2021 ANSI.

The Major point is FNMA 800lb Gorilla needs all Res Appraisers to be on the same sheet of music to further speed up their long-range goals. Pay attention to my tag Line and you will understand why I am not all wound up and upset about change.

 

[DTB]

When it comes to my local market. In Cape Cods. ANSI is not typically a consideration. Seems this particular situation is up to interpretation. What is or what isn't GLA. If you have two identical homes. One has a 5' knee wall with 50% of the width at 7' (use an 10' wide room with 5'of ceiling at 7') But then you have one with a 4' knee wall. But the same 7' tall 5' width measurement. But the total room width at knee wall is 12'. Using your method. the first one is GLA, the second one has no GLA. Please explain how that interpretation makes any sense at all.

Thank goodness people buying and selling houses don't know ANSI from ALDI.

Back when I started, we were supposed to apply criteria that market participants used. Participants in the story and a half market notice BIG variances between upstairs areas not minutia.

This is all too Rube Goldberg to make sense.

 

[Basically Rectangular]

As far as the subject goes: If we put it on the same line, then we ARE NOT complying with the ANSI standard. If we put it on a different line, then we ARE complying with the ANSI standard.

As far as the comps go....
1) If you adjust at the same rate for all "living space" regardless of whether it is GLA per ANSI, then nothing really changes in the net valuation problem regardless of where their information is listed in the grid (we don't have to list comps in the grid to ANSI standards because likely we can't and don't measure them (describe where your data comes from in the addendum (i.e. boilerplate if possible)).

2) If you do need to adjust for functional differences for the differences in the "living areas" for your market, then nothing really changes except possibly where adjustments are made in the grid. You should already be doing this somewhere and somehow to produce a credible result. How do you test for this and do it now?

That seems to be the standard regardless of what the market values or calls "living area".

We need to report to the standard, if we are certifying that we used the ANSI standard. However, the appraisal development is going to be difficult because we are going to be stating a GLA for our subject based on the ANSI measuring standard, and then using comparables which have a GLA that may not be based on the ANSI standard. So we are going to somehow have to verify the comparable GLA, similar to how we do for below grade areas. And just like comparable below grade areas, the new comparable "above ground second floor not GLA area" is most likely going to be included in the comparable listing as GLA.

So what are you going to do with a comparable cape COD that has an assessed GLA of 1950 sqft and whose listing states a GLA of 2000 sqft? How do we know that the second floor conforms to the 5'-7' 50% rule? Adjusting at the same rate for all "living space" is appropriate if that is what the market says, but we need to have that data from the comparable sales.