- 27 -
modestly high indicator of value; it had superior location and
exposure, but inferior configuration and access. Mr. Pio
concluded:
The preceding sales show a range in prices from $3.93
to $7.72. Sale Nos. 1 and 2 ($7.72 and $6.60) are high
indicators. Sale Nos. 3 and 5 ($3.93 and $4.58) are
low indicators. Therefore, the subject value should be
between these two price ranges, the mid-range of which
is $5.64 per square foot. The remaining sales are
$5.87 and 6.09 per square foot, suggesting a value
conclusion closer to the upper end of the range. Based
on the preceding, the value opinion is modestly above
the mid-range, at $5.75 per square foot. After applied
to the total land area, the final value opinion for
Subject Parcel Phase 2 is:
108,029 square feet x $5.75 = $621,167, Rounded
$620,000.
3. Fair Market Value of Phase 2
We accept Mr. Pio’s valuation of Phase 2. Mr. Kelley did
not offer a detailed analysis of his comparables and did not
further elaborate at trial. On the other hand, Mr. Pio offered a
detailed and reasonable comparison of each comparable to Phase 2.
We do not find that all of Mr. Pio’s comparables are reliable
indicators of value, particularly those not located in Sherwood.
However, the elimination of those comparables would not have a
significant impact on the final value determination because $5.75
per square foot was in the range of the sales prices for the
comparables located in Sherwood. Therefore, we find that the
fair market value of Phase 2 on the date of death was $620,000.
Page: Previous 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011