- 30 -
the comparables LB2, LB3, and LB4, respectively, which were
smaller than the Litton building. We are convinced that these
adjustments are reasonable and shall use them in order to
determine the value of the Litton building.
Mr. Cantrell also adjusted the comparables for condition
(age). He applied negative adjustments of 10 percent, 25
percent, 5 percent, and 10 percent to the LB2, LB3, LB4, and LB5,
respectively. Dr. Friedman also applied a negative adjustment of
20 percent to LB4 due to its age. We are convinced by Mr.
Cantrell's condition adjustments and shall use them in order to
determine the value of the Litton building.
Mr. Cantrell adjusted the comparables under "other" as
follows: (1) LB1 positive 10 percent for inferior features, (2)
LB3 negative 10 percent for lease influence, and (3) LB4 positive
10 percent for motivation of the seller. Dr. Friedman also
adjusted LB5 positively 10 percent under "other" for motivation
of the seller.
Based on the record, we fail to understand why Mr. Cantrell
adjusted LB1 for inferior features under "other". He already
applied a positive 30-percent adjustment under quality noting
that LB1 was inferior. We are unconvinced by Mr. Cantrell's
unexplained additional quality adjustment to LB1 under "other"
and shall not apply this adjustment to LB1 in order to determine
the value of the Litton building.
Page: Previous 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011