Laserfiche WebLink
- i - - ---- ----_- --_----- - � <br /> i i <br /> � SUM,'�IP_;2Y O� CO'.�IT''ARABY,E SAL�� � <br /> �� � <br /> � .�ot Bldc� *La� f,�st <br /> i Effecti�ve Size Si_z� Cov Year Fmr SF <br /> �i Sale Date Cost SF SF RatAo Built Qf Bldg <br /> i; <br /> I� subi . 5/90 ---- 26, 211 7, 2n0 �7� 1949 --- ` <br /> �� <br /> �I 1 10/89 $�9, 500 12, 400 4, 241 34$ 1956 511. 67 <br /> i; <br /> li <br /> I� 2 9/89 95, 000 42, 295 19, 0.43 45$ 1920 4.99 � <br /> (' 3 10/87 97, 500 36, 445 17, 852 49� 1939 5.46 ( <br /> ,� <br /> i 4 7/£39 50, 00� 3�, 500 15, 500 �2$ 1�'31-43 3.23 <br /> �! <br /> � 5 3/89 82, 500 11 , 25C� 7, 500 67$ 1�71 51. 00 � <br /> i <br /> i� *Lot coverage ratio refers to the percentage of the L^,t j <br /> I covered by tY►e building/s. � <br /> jl I <br /> These sales range in cost from $3 . 23 to 511 . 67 pe.r SP c�f II <br /> ;i buiiding area. More buy�r.s �.�r� financi��.l_ly � ble to �urc:�.� i' <br /> �'' smaller properties thus generally as t.he siz�.� inr.reases, �2 � <br /> unit value decreases. <br /> �. <br /> Sale #1 is a smaller .building, more functienal `in desee}m, � I; <br /> and more office space. Gverall unit c��st would be adj�:�ri �' <br /> �� <br /> down. � i� <br /> '�; <br /> � Salp #2 is an older property, considerabl� larger, but �ss I� <br /> ii furzctional in design. Unit cost would be adjust�d up. �� <br /> �; <br /> Sale #3 has a stronger location on Eldorado Street 'bat <br /> considerably larger, less lot storage arAa, and functi��i �i <br /> problems due to design. Overall unit cost ���ould be adjus�i � <br /> �� up. �� . <br /> . jl <br /> Sale #4 has a slightly better locati�n but a considara�Ip �� <br /> larger property, badly cut-up design, and n�t as good ca�- �; <br /> tior,. Unit cost would be adjusted up. !; <br /> �i <br /> Sale #5 is very similar in size, has less storage area, �t ;� <br /> np��er and much more furictional design for war�house s�A li <br /> and high ceiling heights. ilnit cost would be adjusted d�. !� <br /> � <br /> ��' After adjustments, a unit cost of $7. 50 per SF of buil� <br /> area would be in line. Applying this: <br /> � <br /> �: <br /> 7 200 Sr ;� <br /> , @ 57. �0 or <br /> i I; <br /> Indi.cat-F�3 Value bY the <br /> Mark�t D�La Approach . . . . . . . . . . . $54,Q�. <br /> � <br /> 22 jj <br /> �� <br /> �� ii <br /> r����F��,�� _ �,�,�� f+�^�:�.�����c <br />