The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutbocc.res.042.2010Af''~ ~ R V~E Q~Y ~i2lKIQ ~C/NDAJytZ Q e.r•~~,~iCe -~e~s ~- Fl~r+~~L~~'~N ~. ~ ~ ~ ~ --,Z, ~ 1 O REC~IVED ~ FOR ASSESS0~2S ~bT~MMISSIONERS USE ONLY FEB 16 2010 . (Section 111 or Section IV must be completed) Every petition for abatement or refund filed pursuant to section 39-10-114 shall be acted upon pursuant to the provisions of this se~t M,, board of county commissioners or the assessor, as appropriate, within six months of the date of filing such petition, § 39-1-113(1.~, C~~ a,"`~ section ttl: Written Mutual Agreement of Assessor and Petitioner , (Only for abatements up to $1,000) The commissioners of County authorize the assessor by Resolution No. to review petitions for abatement or refund and to settle by written mutual agreement any such petition for abatement or refund in an amount of one thousand dollars or less per tract, parcel, or lot of land or per schedule of personal property, in accordance with § 39-1=113(1.5), C.R.S. The assessor and petitioner mutually agree to the values and tax abatement/refund of: Tax Year Tax Year Actual Assessed Tax Actual Assessed Tax Original Corrected Abate/Refund Note: The total tax amount does not include accrued interest, penalties, and fees associated with late and/or delinquent tax payments, if applicabte. Please contact the county treasurer for full payment information. PetitlonePs Slgnature Assessor's or Deputy AssessoPs Signature Date Date Section iv: Decision of the County Commissioners (Must be complet~d if Section III does not apply) WHEREAS, The County Commissioners of /l~ County, State of Colorado, at.a duly and lawfully called regular meeting held on ~1~~11Q_, at which meeting there were Rresent the following members: ~~ NMonth Day .xear /f /~ ll /~ A ~ ~., /f with noticeGdf such meeting and an opportunity to be present having been given to t. r and the Assessor of said County and Assessor eing present- not present) and ~ /~~~~ Name petitionerL~-,~~~l~_~IIL(~ST (being present ot prese , HEREAS, The said Name County Commissioners have carefully considered the within petition, and are fully advised in relation thereto, NOW BE IT RESOLV~`E~t.he Board grees oes not agree) with the recommendation of the assessor and the petition be approved approved in part--denied) with an abatement/refund as follows: ~_ ~ ~ ~ ~ Year Assesse Value Taxe Abate/Refund ear Assessed V e Taxes Abate/Refund ~ { f ~~~.. ~ ` Chairperson of th Board of C nty Commissioners' Slgnature ~, ~ County Clerk and Ex-officio Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners in a d the aforementione county, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing order is truly copied~ e record i the proceedings of the Board of Cout~ty Commissioners. -;,,~5'~.t a,~"~, IN WITNES~,yVHEREOF, I have her~unto set my hand and affixed the seal of said County f v`~ c'-=~~ day of ~ 1 L , 0/~ . n tn~s ~ ~ ~ ~/D~ Month Year ~ OD Note: Abatements greater than $1,000 per schedule, per year, must be submitted in duplicate to the Property Tax Administrator for review. section v: Action of the Properly Tax Administrafior (For all abatements greater than $1,000) The action of the Board of County Commissioners, relative to the within petition, is hereby ^ Approved ^ Approved in part $ ^ Denied for the following reason(s): Secretary's Signature Property Tax Administrator's Signature Date 15-DPT-AR No PETITION FOR ABATEMENT OR REFUND OF TAXES County: Section I: Petitioner, please compiete Section i oniy. Date: ~a ' 05 -~ a20 J p Month Day Year Petitioner's Name: ~R ~ ~~" ~~ N 1DNEFZ ~~-("(LVt.s-~'~E Petitioner's Mailing Address: ~o ~~c G ~~ ~(~~~~ S GT T~~*ND ~ ~ "7~01 City or Town State Zip Code SCHEDULE OR PARCEL NUMBER(S) Ra~~as~ REC~iVED FEB 16 2010 P~esn_ wC_o-u-r-~tY '~`O~ PROPERTY ADDRESS OR LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY SU~~' ~i S~D,~ : c ~~ A~J D TnwN 5 ~~ o~F- A-5~ ~~vcrc : ~S ~ ~-~i': .4 TH~ ~JoRTN~2~ ~~ O r ~oT ~- Petitioner states that the taxes assessed against the above property for the property tax year '7..0 0°I are incorrect for the following reasons: (Briefly describe the circumstances surrounding the incorrect value or tax. Attach additional shee if ecessary.) ~,e~C oa~a~,e~ ~ Petitioner's estimate of value: $~,aDD,~Df~ •( o`Z00~)°1 5E~ P~'fT"~~ value Year ~P~..~ ta~, ~ Petitioner requests an abatement or refund of the appropriate taxes. I declare, under penalty of perjury in the second degree, that this petition, together with any accompanying exhibits or statements, has been prepared or examined by me, and to the best of my knowledge, information and belief, is true, correct, and complete. ~n~~ ~~~~ Petitioner's Signature BY. AgenPs Signature* Daytime Phone Number ( ~'1 ) ~ IZ-' ~~OS Daytime Phone Number. ( ) "'Letter of agency must be attached when petition is submitted by an agent If the board of county commissioners, pursuant to section 39-10-114(1), or the property tax administrator, pursuant to section 39-2-116, denies the petition for refund or abatement of taxes in whole or in part, the petitioner may appeal to the board of assessment appeals pursuant to the provisions of section 39-2-125 within thirty days of the entry of any such decision, § 39-10-114.5(1), C.R.S. Section II: Assessor's Recommendation (For Assessor's Use Only) Tax Year Zb o ~j ~ Actual Assessed Tax Original ~~1 ~ ~ ~~~~ r,~~ 77 ~Z~. ~ Corrected ~. ~b~0 000 ~ 10 Z 000 ~`~2g.`60 AbatelRefund ~ ~~ Z~ ~ Z~~ .~1 0 'S~ .~6 0 Assessor recommends approval as outlined above. No protest was filed for the year: ~,~_ (If a protest was filed, please attach a copy of the NOD.) ^ Assessor recommends denial for~the following reason(s): Assessor's or Deputy Assessor's Signature _qR Nn a~n_aamF Date Received (Use Assessors or Commissioners' Date Stamp) v PITKIN COUNTY ASSESSOR 506 E MAIN ST STE 202 ASPEN CO 81611 ~~~~~V,E~ PHONE: (970) 920-5960 FAX: (970) 920-5174 MAR 15 201Q Pidcht County p n ~eMar PETITIONER: h;, ~_ ;v~~lllneN 'K , ~M,~S~ SCHEDULE #: Q (~ \Z~~ The Pitkin County Assessor and the above mentioned petitioner, stipulate to the terms and values listed below: A.BATEME~lT STlPI~LATION AGREEMENT For the tax year of ZdO~ ~ The Assessor and petitioner mutually agree to an actual value of $ 3~Ov Da0 , for a total tax amount of $_ ~.~ ~~'~.`~ ,~~ , resulting in an abatement/refund of $ S, °l°IR • 36 For the tax year of ~-~ The Assessor and petitioner mutually agree to an actual value of $ l~ -(~ , for a total tax amount of $ ~t- ~ , resulting in an abatement/refund of $ N-1~ PLEASE NOTE: THE TOTAL TAX AMOUNT DOES NOT INCLUDE ACCRUED INTEREST, PENALTIES, AND/OR FEES, IF APPLICABLE, AS THESE ITEMS CAN NOT BE ABATED/REFUNDED. PLEASE CONTACT YOUR COUNTY TREASURER FOR FULL PAYMENT INFORMATION. ~ ~~ ~~~ i~ ~ Petitioner 3- 9-/~ Date ~ Asses r's Office 3 ~ t Date ~ K '~"""~~'~ Date ~~„~.~~.~- - -~ Initials -~ Prepared By _ - -- --~ ~ _~ ~-~ ---~__---~' ppProved By - -- ~--~- ~ -- -~_~'~ 3 4 2 _---- ----- ~2oaauFF 1 - - G~ZUr, GREEN -` ~ WILSON JONES `_____~ 1 ~; 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 2 i ' ~ ! I 'C, I l 3 i '; ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ti ~ ~ 5 j ~ I i ' ~~~ i I ~ + c 2 ~ ~1 / fr.~ ~ 1! y \ ~Q ~ i t '~i 7 3 lr ir+t'C `.. ~ ', ) ~ ~ 4 , ~ 'I ~ ~ , i '' , ~ $ j i ~ t I t i I ~ i i, 9 5 ~ '~ I ~ I ~ . '~ t ' i ~ 1 19 6 ~~ i ~ ~ I~ 1 I , 1 ~ , ~, ~ t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ 11 g ~ ~ ~'~1 ~ , ~ ~ ~'' ~~~ ~~ 12 ' j ` ~j 13 g ~ ~ ~ ~ ,1 ~ ~ ~ ~B ~ i ~ 14 10 ~I ~i ~ 1 ~ ; ~ I 15 ~ ; I Z- i6 12 s I~ ~~~. ~I ~ 1 I ~ "~ ~ 13 ~~-------- -~'~ i ~ I ~ I 1 ~ ~ j 17 i ` ` ~ I ` ~ l~ - 'i 18 ~, ,a i ~ 4 i '~~ 1 ~= ~ ~ '~ -, ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ is ~5 , t ' ~ + ~ t ~ < < ~ ~ , ~ - '- ~` t6 ' ~~I I ` 1 I 4~ s , ~'i 20 ~; , I , ~ `i a 1 Zt 17 _~ ~ ~ ~' t 1 ~ ~ ~ ' 1S -------"'_"__....---__.--------"_~. , j ,I i k ~ ~I ~ . , I 22 ~ ~~~ ~ '~ ~~'~ ~~ ' i , ~----,--;. 23 ts i ~ ~ ~, ~~ . ~, ~ ' I I ~-- ~ti ~ 24 20 ~ I ~ ~ ~{''~ i 21 VJ\ ~ ~~ ti , ~~ ~ i I ~ ~I ~ ^- ~ ' 25 ' ~ ~ ~ 4 r"~ ~I 1 ~ ~ l 26 22 ~~ I', ~, t' f~ `~ i~ 23 ~ Z~~.-"'~ ' I ; i ` ` ` . ~ ~~ ~Ti`i "", 27 ' , ~i •~ ~ ~~~r - . 28 24 ~ ,~ \ ' ' --t r 1 ~i ~^ ~~`_---' ~ z~ ~ t~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~i V~ ~ [ 2~ ~ , ~ ~ ~ ~~~,~ ~ ~ ~, ~ 1'~ ~ = , i 1' i , `w 2a ~ ; 4~ p ~ ~; ~ i 29 ~` ~ ~~ ` 1 ~ ~~ 'ti ~ `~~ i - ~ 30 ~ 4 ~ , '; ~ ` ~ at ~ wr rn~ ~ 1 ~~ ~'~~ '~ c_~! -- ~ ~ _ -- , `, 4 t 32 ~ _ ~,i i ~ F` ¢ !. i, s , , ~~-~-_`', 33 ~' ~ I, ~ ( ~ ~ 3h ~ ~ I ~ , ~ ~ ~~~ 3 _ ~~_~. ~ ''~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ y ~ j , ~~ --- ~~--k--~_ _;-- 36 ~ ~ ~ ' ~i , 1~ 37 ~ ~ '- ~'; ~ ~' -~`-~ ~ r i _ - --r--~---y+ -~ 1 38 ~~ ~` 39 ~~~ ~f t 40 Wheeler Opera House INapner Park $ Attive layert none ~~ ~`~`~ ~ ~3 Actions and Tools ~ ;" ~- ;~ ~ ~°' (~ 1 Layers ~ ~o ~~~~~' ~A~ ~ Z 20 A Summary Appraisal Report ~~ ~ Estimating the Fair Market Value of ~~or Original City & Townsite of Aspen Block 89 Northerly 66 Feet of Lot A Located on the Southeastern Corner of East Hyman Street Avenue& South Mill Street Art Tee Gallery Aspen 401 East Hyman Avenue Aspen, CO 81611 & Portion of Ute Mountaineering 308 South Mill Street Aspen, CO 81611 Prepared at the Request of The Estate of Fritz Lindner c/o Erika L Lindner 66966 Ten Peaks Court Bend, OR 97701-9277 Effect Date of Appraisal August 19th, 2008 Date of Appraisal Report January 26th, 2009 Appraised By Dave Ritter, MSA The Appraisal Office - Aspen Ltd 210 So Galena, Suite 29 Aspen, CO 81611 ~ ~ After considering all the information and analyses in this report, I arrived at a final estimate of fair market value for the subject property. As of July 19, 2008, date of death of Fritz Lindner which is the effective date of this appraisal, I concluded that the fair market value of the property, as is, was: Three Million Two Hundred Thousand Dollars ($3,200,000.00) The value estimate is subject to the Certification and Contingent and Limiting Conditions and to the Scope of Assignment contained herein. Because of the down-turn in the economy becoming more apparent in the spring of 2008 there is not sufficient market data on which on can base an estimate of marketing time for the subject property. However, at the appraised value, it is my opinion that the subject would be likely to sell within a twelve to twenty-four months assuming no additional downward trend in market conditions in the Aspen marketplace and assuming no substantial change in tenancy and income. Respectfully submitted, Dave ' , SA I Table of Contents CERTIFICATIOIY ..................................................................................................................................................................o CONTiNGENT, LIMiTiNG CONDITIONS A1vD GENERAL UNDERLYING ASSUMPTIONS ................................7 .... .8 ABBREViATIONS ............................................................................................................................................................ CLIENT RELATIONSHIP ....................................................................................................................................................8 PURPOSE OF APPRAISAL ..................................................................................................................................................8 USE OR FUNCTION OF APPRAISAL ................................................................................................................................8 PROPERTY RIGHTS APPRAISED .....................................................................................................................................9 EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE APPRAISAL ........................................................................................................................9 DATE OE THE REPORT ......................................................................................................................................................9 SCOPE OF THE ASStG1YMENT ..........................................................................................................................................9 IDENTIFICATION OF SUBJECT PR~PERTY .................................................................................................................9 OwN~KS or RcCOKU . ................................................................................................................................................9 ADnR~ss. .. . . . ............................................................................................................................................9 LCGAL DESCRIP'i'ION . . .............................................................................................................................................9 ACCOUNT NUMBER ...............................................................................................................................................................9 PARCEL NUMBLR .. . . .. ......................................................................................................................................... 1 O MAP NUMBER ...... . . . . . . ....................................................................................................................................... 1 O CGNSIJS TftAC"I' NUMI3ER . . ................................................................................................................................... 10 SALES HiSTORY ....................................................................................................:............................................................ 10 LISTING FOR SALE HISTORY ........................................................................................................................................ 10 LEASE HISTORY ................................................................................................................................................................ lU ASSESSED VALUE TAXES AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS ...................................................................................... 12 PERSONAL PROPERTY .................................................................................................................................................... 12 AREA ANALYSIS - THE ASPEN REGION ...................................................................................................................... 13 OVERALL MARKET CONDIT10N5 OF REGION ........................................................................................................ 16 ASPEN'S COMMERCIAL ECONOMIC NEIGHBORHOOD ....................................................................................... 18 MARKET CONDITIOIYS iN SUB-ECOIYOMIC 1~tEiGHBORHOOD ........................................................................... 20 S1TE ANALYSIS ................................................................................................................................................................... 20 ZON 1NG .................................................................................................................................................................................21 HISTOR[C PRESERVATION ENCUMBRANCE ............................................................................................................22 MARKET COMPETITION .................................................................................................................................................L~ ~ Ui~ITS OF COMPARISON .................................................................................................................................................23 REVIEW OF EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS ...................................................................................................................23 HiCHEST ANll BEST USE - CC ZONE DISTRICT ........................................................................................................25 CC)NCLUSION HIGHES"I'AND $ES'C USE .................................. . .. .. . ..?6 THE APPRAISAL PROCESS .............................................................................................................................................26 TfIE COST APPRUACII .................................................................................................................. ... , . . .. .27 Cost Annrouch - Conclusion of Fair ,~larket ~alue 27 TIIG 1NCOME APPROACI-I TO VALUE ...................................... ..... . . , , , , , ,2'] Income Approach - Conclusion ~f~Fair Mar•ket G'alue ~~ SALES COMPAR[SON APPROACH ............................................ .... .. . .4~ Sales Comparison Approach - Conclusion r~f Fair Market Yulue 49 RECONCILIATION OF THF APPROACHES .................................................................................................................49 FIIYAL ESTIMATE OF FAIR MARKET VALUE ...........................................................................................................49 PERTINENT DEFINITIONS ..............................................................................................................................................50 ADDENDUM Certification I hereby certify that: 1. The statements of fact contained in this report axe assumed to be true and correct. 2. The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions are limited only by the assumptions and limiting conditions contained herein and are my personal, unbiased, professional analyses, opinions, and conclusions. 3. I have no present or prospective interest in the property that is the subject of this report and I have no personal interest or bias with respect to the parties involved. 4. My engagement has not been contingent upon an action or event resulting from the analyses, opinions, or conclusions in, or the use of, this report. 5. My compensation has not been contingent upon the reporting of a predetermined value or direction in value that favors the cause of the client, the amount of the value estimate, the attainment of a stipulated result, or the occurrence of a subsequent event. 6. My analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed and this report has been prepared in conformity with the requirements of the Code of Professional Ethics of the AI, the IAAO, the NAMA and the IRWA and the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. 7. This appraisal assignment was not based on a requested minimum valuation, a specific valuation, or the approval of a loan. 8. I have made a personal inspection of the property that is the subject of this report and all of the comparable sales and rental properties. 9. The use of this report is subject to the requirements of the AI, the NAMA, the IRWA and the IAAO relating to review by its duly authorized representatives. 10. Dave Ritter, MSA is experienced in the appraisal of this type of property and in this market, thereby meeting USPAP competency requirements. 11. No one provided significant professional assistance to the appraiser signing this report. 1 Dave Ri ter, MSA I~ Contingent, Limiting Conditions and General Underlying Assumptions • The property located on the southeastern Corner of East Hyman Avenue & South Mill Street - 401 East Hyman Street Avenue & 308 South Mill Street Aspen, Colorado is assumed to be the subj ect property. • The appraiser has made no survey of the property and no responsibility is assumed in connection with such matters. Sketches in this report are included only to assist the reader in visualizing the property. • No responsibility is assumed for matters of a legal nature affecting title to the property nor is an opinion of title rendered. The title is assumed to be good and marketable. • Information furnished by others is assumed to be true, correct, and reliable. A reasonable effort has been made to verify such information; however, the appraiser assumes no responsibility for its accuracy. • All mortgages, liens, encumbrances, leases, and servitudes have been disregarded unless so specified within the report. The property is appraised as though under responsible ownership and competent management. • It is assumed that there are no hidden or unapparent conditions of the property, subsoil or structures, which would render it more or less valuable. No responsibility is assumed for such conditions or for engineering, which a competent survey may be required to discover such factors. • Full compliance with all applicable federal, state, and local environmental regulations and laws is assumed unless noncompliance is stated, defined and considered in the appraisal report. • Full compliance with all applicable zoning and use regulations and restriction is assumed unless nonconformity has been stated, defined and considered in the appraisal report. • It is assumed that all required licenses, consents, or other legislative or administrative authority from any local, state, or national governmental, private entity or organization have been or can be obtained or renewed for any use on which the value estimate contained in this report is based. • It is assumed that the utilization of the land and improvements is within the boundaries of the property lines of the property described and that there is no encroachment or trespass unless noted within the report. • The appraiser will not be required to give testimony or appear in court because of having made this appraisal, with reference to the property in question, unless arrangements have been previously made. • Possession of this report, or a copy thereof, does not carry with it the right of publicatior~. It may not be used for any purpose by any person other than the party to whom it is addressed without the written consent of the appraiser, and in any event only with proper written qualification and only in its entirety. • The distribution of the total valuation in this report between land and improvements applies only under the reported highest and best use of the property. The allocations of values for land and improvements must not be used in conjunction with any other appraisal and are invalid if so used. • Neither all nor any part of the contents of this report, or a copy thereof, shall be conveyed to the public through advertising, public relations, news, sales or any other media without written consent and approval of the appraiser. Nor shall the appraiser's firm or professional organization that the appraiser is a member of use or convey any portion of this appraisal without written consent of the appraiser. • Environmental Disclaimer: The value estimated in this report is based on the assumption that the property is not negatively affected by the existence of hazardous substances or detrimental environmental conditions. The appraiser is not an expert in the identification of hazardous substances or detrimental environmental conditions. While the appraiser's routine inspection of and inquiries about the subject property did not develop any information that indicated any apparent significant hazardous substances or detrimental environmental conditions which would affect the property negatively, it is possible that tests and inspections made by a qualified hazardous substance and environmental expert would reveal the existence of hazardous materials and environmental conditions on or around the property that would negatively affect its value. Thus, if the client wishes to be certain as to the condition of the subject property with respect to environmental hazards, he should have an expert in the field inspect the property. It should thus be noted that this appraisal does not constitute an expert inspection of the property with regard to hazardous substances or detrimental environmental conditions and it should not be relied upon as to whether or not environmental hazards actually exist on the subject property. • ADA Disclaimer as property exists at time of appraisal: The subject property was built prior to the enactment of ADA and appears not to meet all ADA requirements. Since I am not an expert in this field, it is my recommendation that an expert be retained to determine if the subject property meets all ADA requirements. The cost of compliance with ADA could be substantial at some point in the future. The valuation herein does not take into account any such contingent liability. Abbreviations CBD Central Business District CC Commercial Core Zone District FAR Floor Area Ratio FF&E Furnishing, Fixtures and Equipment USPAP Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice Client Relationship This appraisal report has been prepared for the exclusive benefit of the Estate of Fritz Lindner. It may not be used or relied upon by any other party, regardless of whether that other party pays the appraisal fee, either directly or indirectly. Any party who uses or relies upon any information in this report without the preparer's written consent does so at his or her own risk. Purpose of Appraisal The purpose of this appraisal is to estimate the fair market value of the subject property. Use or Function of Appraisal The function of the report is to assist the client in evaluating the subject property for federal and state estate taxation. ~~ Property Rights Appraised Since the subject property's current leases are below current market rental rates, the leased fee estate interest and the fee simple estate interest are not equivalent. As a result in this appraisal report will estimate the Fair Market Value of both leased fee and fee simple estate interests in the subject property Effective Date of the Appraisal The effective date of this report is August 19, 2008, date of death of Fritz Lindner. Date of the Report The date of this report is January 26, 2009. Scope of the Assignment The Scope of this appraisal is to estimate the Market Value (as defined above) of the Leased Fee and the Fee Simple Estate interests in the subject property described herein, utilizing - as applicable - Cost Approach, Market Approach, and Income Approach all according to the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice, as the property exists at the time of appraisal. The valuation of the subject has been based on a physical inspection of the interior and exterior of the subject property and a physical inspection of the interior and exterior of all comparable sales and rentals cited herein located in Aspen. Sales data and Lease Rental information for properties located in Aspen has been developed primarily from data from the Pitkin County Assessor's Office, the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder's Office, the Aspen MLS and the three lending commercial real estate brokers in the Aspen marketplace, prior appraisals of commercial property completed by myself and other appraisers as well as interviews with knowledgeable parties involved in the transactions or managing of comparable properties. The standard appraisal process considers all three approaches to value: the Cost Approach, the Direct Sales Comparison (or Market) Approach, and the Income Approach. However, since the subject property's improvement was originally built in 1960 and is in the City of Aspen's Commercial Core Historic District, only the Direct Sales Comparison Approach and the Income Approach were deemed applicable approaches in estimating the Fair Market Value of the subject property. Identification of Subject Property Owners of Record Erika L Lindner Trust - 50% Lindner Family Trust - 50% Address 401 East Hyman Avenue Aspen, CO 81611 - Art Tee Gallery Aspen 308 South Mill Street Aspen, CO 81611 - Ute Mountaineering Legal Description Original City & Townsite of Aspen Block 89 Northerly 66 feet of Lot O Account Number R001256 I~ Parcel Number 2737 182 16 001 Map Number Not Mapped Census Tract Number 08 097 0004.00 Sales History According to Pitkin County public records, the subject property has not sold over the past five years. Listing for Sale History According to the Aspen MLS, the subject property has not been offered for sale over the past five years. However, since many commercial properties sell without being listed in the Aspen MLS, one cannot be certain if the property has been offered for sale. This appraisal is based upon the assumption that it has not been offered for sale during the past five years. Lease History On effective date of appraisal the subject property was encumbered with two leases. 401 East Hyman Avenue The first lease is between Fritz Lindner and Erika Lindner and Shandling Enterprises, Inc., d/b/a Art Tee Gallery Aspen. The term of the lease is from May l st, 2001 to Apri130, 2011 with the tenant having the right to extend the lease another five years, to Apri130, 2016. On May l, 2004, May l, 2007, May 1, 2007, May l, 2010 and May l, 2013 there is a renewal where the annua.l rental shall be adjusted based upon increase (if any) in the cost of living during the preceding 36 months using the Denver CPI-U Price Index. However the adjustment shall not exceed a 4% per year upward adjustment of rent. Therefore the tota136 month adjustment can not be~reater than 12%. The base rent for the firstmonthis$7,900.00. ~.lZ = ~~1~~D - ~~~~~ 1~] = (.,5.`~~ ~t~ For each Lease Year, the Tenant shall pay to the Landlord all the Landlord's actual cost of building maintenance, (COM's) which shall be payable upon billing by the Landlord as and when incurred. The Phase (COM) shall mean the following: All amounts paid by the Landlord as actual net cost for maintaining and repairing the Building and other improvements constituting the Leased Premises including, without limitation, interior surfaces and fixtures; maintenance and repair; snow and ice removal; water and sewer charges; maintenance and repair of utility systems; lighting, heating and air conditioning; if any sale and use taxes on material, equipment, supplies and service purchased for maintenance; reasonable rental of movable equipment used in the maintenance of the Leased Premises; other similar direct costs property chargeable to such operation and painting, repair and replacement of signage. Far each Lease Year the Landlord shall pay the Landlord's general property t~es on the Leased Premises. The Landlord shall insure the Building for fire and casualty and shall name the Tenant as an additional insured. The Tenant shall pay 56% of the insurance premiums. io 1~ The Tenant shall be responsible for and agrees to promptly pay for all charges for electricity, natural gas, telephone and any other utilities furnished to the Leased Premises. The Tenant further agrees not to install any equipment which will exceed or overload the capacity of any utility facilities. The Tenant shall use the Leased Premises only for the purpose of operating a retail clothing store. The Tenant has a 30 day first right of refusal to purchase 401 East Hyman during the term of the lease. Based upon my analysis of the lease, it is my conclusion that the lease is somewhat below current market rental rates. However since the lease term can be extended to Apri130, 2016, almost exactly eight years subsequent to the effective date of appraisal it is my conclusion that the subject property's Fair Market Value, derived by the income approach would be virtually the same the fee simple estate interest. 301 South Mill Street The second lease is between Fritz Lindner and Erika Lindner and Ute Mountaineer, Ltd. The term of the lease is from May ls`, 2001 to Apri130, 2006 with the tenant having the right to extend the lease another five years, to Apri130, 2011. On May 1, 2004, May 1, 2007, May 1, 2007 and May 1, 2010 there is a renewal where the annual rental shall be adjusted based upon increase (if any) in the cost of Iiving during the preceding 36 months using the Denver CPI-U Price Index. The base rent for the first month is $4,990.00. ~ 1Z = ~~i ~`6~ =; ~5~~ ~ :'~'~1, ~~ ~C~ For each Lease Year the Tenant shall pay to the Landlord all the Landlord's actual cost of maintenance of the Building, (COM's) which shall be payable upon billing by the Landlora as and when incurred. The Tenant shall be responsible for a 44% share of such COMs which is a pro rata square footage of the building leased by the tenant. The Phase (COM) shall mean the following: All amounts paid by the Landlord as actual net cost for maintaining and repairing the Building and other improvements constituting the Leased Premises including, without limitation, interior surfaces and fixtures; maintenance and repair; snow and ice removal; water and sewer charges; maintenance and repair of utility systems; lighting, heating and air conditioning; if any sale and use taxes on material, equipment, suppiies and service purchased for maintenance; reasonable rental of movable equipment used in the maintenance of the Leased Fremises; other similar direct costs property chargeable to such operation and painting, repair and replacement of signage. For each Lease Year the Landlord shall pay the Landlord's general property t~es on the Leased Premises. The Landlord sha11 insure the Building for fire and casualty and shall name the Tenant as an additional insured. The Tenant shall pay 44% of the insurance premiums. The Tenant shall be responsible for and agrees to promptly pay for all charges for electricity, natural gas, telephone and any other utilities furnished to the Leased Premises. The Tenant further agrees not to install any equipment which will exceed or overload the capacity if any utility facilities. ii 1~ The Tenant shall use the Leased Premises only for the purpose of operating a retail clothing, footwear and sporting goods store. The Tenant has a 30 day first right of refusal to purchase 308 South Mill Street during the term of the lease. Based upon my analysis of the lease, it is my conclusion that the lease is somewhat below current market rental rates. Therefore because the lease term can be extended to Apri130, 2011, only approximately three years subsequent to the effective date of appraisal it is my conclusion that we must review if the subject property's current Fair Market Value, derived by the income approach would be the same as its fee simple estate interest. Assessed Value, Taxes and Special Assessments In the state of Colorado, the method of valuation and the ratio of assessed value to actual value to be applied to the various property types are both determined by State Statute. By definition within the statute, the property value, which the assessor determines as the actual value, will reflect a base year level of value. The base year is a procedure to freeze values at a particular level for a specified period of time. The 2007 and 2008 values are based on a June 30, 2006, level of value. In determining the actual value of a commercial property, the assessor considers the Cost Approach, Market Approach, and the Income Approach, but places primary emphasis on the Market and Income Approaches. According to Colorado Statute, the assessed value of Residential Real Property (home and land) is 7.96% of its actual value. The t~ years 2005 and 2006 (payable 2006 and 2007) will be based upon June 30, 20041evels of value. The 2007 and 2008 tax years (payable 2008 and 2009) will be based upon June 30, 20061evels of value. The assessed value of all non-residential properties (including vacant land) is 29% of its actual value. The mill levy for 2007 taxes (payable in 2008} has been reduced from 32.99 to 29.317. However it is my understanding that the reduction is in the form of a ta~c credit rather than actually reducing the mill levy. The reason the City of Aspen gave a tax credit rather than reducing the levy is that the City would have had to go to the voters in order to get the levy raised back to 32.99. 2007 Real Estate Taxes Payable 2008 The Pitkin County public records indicate that the Pitkin County Assessor classifies a portion of the subject property improved residential. Actual Value (Based on June 30, 2006 Assessed Value Assessment Ratio - 25.92 % 2007 Property Tax (payable 2008) Mill Le 29.317 $3,421,400 $866,810 $12,706.14 Personal Property The estimating the fair market value of the subject property the value of the furnishing, fixtures, and equipment (FF&E), located in the subject property were not taken into consideration in this appraisal report. 12 ~~ Area Analysis - The Aspen Region Brief Historical Background of the Aspen Archaeologists recently discovered that ancient people made their homes in the mountains near Aspen, Colorado 8,000 years ago. Ute Indian tradition says that these Shining Mountains have always been their homeland. First silver and later near perfect snow conditions enticed more recent settters to the Roaring Fork Valley. Leadville was the second largest city in Colorado in 1879, when prospectors from Gothic and Leadville crossed the Continental Divide into the Ute's summer hunting territory to discover one of the richest silver lodes the world had ever known. They named their Camp Ute City, but by spring the name had been changed to Aspen. Many mining camps were temporary settlements; however Aspen had the winning combination of rich silver ores, two competing railroads and ample investment from wealthy Victorian capitalists such as Jerome B. Wheeler, President of Macy's department store and Cincinnati lawyer and businessman David Hyman. Aspen quickly became an urban, industrialized community with impressive architecture, leaving Independence, Ashcroft, Ruby and other camps to become ghost towns. By 1891 the production of Aspen's silver fields had surpassed even rival Leadville, making it the nation's largest single silver producing mining district. By 1893 Aspen's 12,000 residents had six newspapers, two theaters, an opera house and a very small brothel district. Aspen's fortunes fell with the U.S. Government's repeal of the Sherman Silver Act and the return of the gold standard in 1893. Ironically, one if the largest nuggets of native silver ever found was mined in 1894 in Aspen weighting in at almost 2,200 pounds. As mining declined, Aspen survived as a rural county seat and ranching center Just 700 people called Aspen home in 1935 when international outdoorsmen came to the Roaring Fork Valley in search of the ideal location for a ski resort. They hired the famous Swiss avalanche expert Andre Roch to develop a ski area based in the ghost town of Ashcroft but had to cancel their plans with the outbreak of World War II. Meanwhile, Mr. Roch and the enthusiastic Aspen Ski Club cut a race course on Aspen Mountain served by a"boat tow" - two massive sleds pulled up the hill by an old mine hoist and a gas motor. While plans for a ski resort were delayed by WWII, later ski development was actually enhanced by the presence of the Army's 10~' Mountain Division training in nearby Camp Hale. Many soldiers skied in Aspen while on leave. Some, including Austrian Friedl Pfeifer, planned to return in peace time. Pfeifer teamed up with Chicago industrialist Walter Paepcke and his art patron wife Elizabeth. The Paepckes were interested in the community's potential as a summertime cultural center; Pfeifer hoped to build a ski resort on a par with Europe's best. In 1947 Aspen Mountain opened with the world's longest ski lift. In 1949 Paepcke with the University of Chicago masterminded the Goethe Bicentennial Convocation in Aspen celebrating the great humanist's 200th birthday with international leaders, artists and musicians. Aspen's role as a cultural center was consumed by the music, art, dance, theater and international studies program which 13 developed for the Convocation. Shortly after this, Aspen became the first ski resort in America to host an international competition, precursor to today's World Cup Races. Three more mountains - Buttermilk (1958), Aspen Highlands (1958) and Snowmass (1968) - added to Aspen's reputation as a premiere international resort and Aspen flourished in summertime with the combination of climate, recreation, history and culture. The unanticipated growth of an appealing community based on world class skiing and culture spurred a concerned local population to turn to zoning and later to adopt controversial growth control measures. From hunting territory to mining city through the "Quiet Years" as an agricultural center to the present, the history of Aspen is a story of a town with a changing economy with a distinct mix of locals and visitors, recreation and culture, landscape and sport. (Source: Aspen Historical Society, September 6, 2006) Regional Data Local and regional factors play important roles in any real estate market, so they need to be addressed. Geographic Location Aspen is the commercial and governmental center of the eastern Roaring Fork River Valley, which embraces most of Pitkin County (of which Aspen is the county seat} and portions of Eagle and G~eld Counties. It is approximately 160 miles southwest of Denver and 130 zniles southeast of Grand Junction. It is just west of the continental divide (at Independence Pass). Commercially, Aspen either serves or affects an economic base area extending west approximately seventy miles to Rifle, an area that houses many of the people who work in Aspen on a year-round basis. Transportation Links Access to Aspen by road is limited to two main routes, one of which, Independence Pass, the easterly approach, is open only in the summer months. The westerly approach, State Route 82 from Glenwood Springs, 42 miles northwest, provides year-round access and is itself accessed from Interstate 70 between Denver and Grand Junction. Access by air is possible through the Pitkin County Airport (Sardy Field), which is served by several commuter airlines and is readily accessible to general aviation. Passenger Rail transportation is limited to Amtrak daily service at Glenwood Springs. Economic Bases, Population Growth and Governmental Factars The economy of Aspen today is clearly based upon tourism - skiing in the winter and a mixture of cultural events, conferences, and mountain scenery in the summers. To support this primary industry (tourism) the Aspen area has developed a bed count, or, more technically, a pillow count, base totaling approxiniately 13,300 (7,300 in Aspen and 6,000 in Snowmass). The limited growth control policies in force in Aspen and Pitkin County have severely limited additions to this base. This factor has assured higher occupancy and average daily room rate (ADR) figures than might occur in less- controlled situations, such as those found in other resort communities across the country. The growth of tourism in the Aspen area has, of course, led to conesponding increases in population, especially since 1960. However, since the 1980s, the restrictive growth policies of the City of Aspen and Pitkin County have limited growth over the past 3 decades. 14 ~~ Population Pitkin County 1970 Census 6,185 ~ ~~~~~-~ ~ ~ _. . w , i ' ' ~~~€~~ ~ ~ ; ~. ... ~.. .,~ r. , ... ,,. .. 1990 Census 12,661 ,~~~~~~ '~~t~'~ : ~~,~~~~ ` !' 2000 Census ~ . 14,872 City of Aspen 2,43 Z ,~ ~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~ ~ - ~; ... ~.~, ._.. ~.. ~~ ,, .... 5,049 5,914 While it needs to be pointed out that commercial expansion and building permit figures were both limited by the costly, stringent, complex, subjective, highly discretionary and political growth control policies established by the City of Aspen and Pitkin County in the mid 1970s, the significance of all of these statistics is that the growth of population and economic activity in the Aspen area has fax exceeded what might be attributed solely to increased skier visits and inflation. This is not to deny the importance of skiing to the Aspen economy, but only to say that other factors are increasing in the Aspen marketplace and they are serving to give the economy some greater measure of stabiliiy than is typically found in totally skiing-based economies. Finally, Aspen is developing as a financial center for the entire inter-mountain region of Colorado. Its banks have all experienced very strong deposit and asset growth while maintaining strong profits as well, and its mortgage Ienders typically are providing financing not only for the Aspen and Snowmass Village localities, but also for other ski communities such as Breckenridge, Steamboat Springs, and Telluride as well as other communities in the Roaring Fork River Valley such as Basalt, Carbondale, El Jebel, and Glenwood Springs. Aspen has thus developed a base population of professionals such as attorneys, bankers, and mortgage brokers whose livelihood - while certainly tied indirectly to tourism and skiing - is not directly dependent on skier days or occupancy of tourist beds. Summary Comments Clearly, the Aspen economy has undergone significant growth during the last 15 to 25 years and has reached a level of economic activity and stability that very few ski towns enjoy. Some measure of Aspen's success in this regard may be seen in the fact that even when there is 3 decline in skier visit days to the area, sales tax collections actually show an increase. Also, given the types of custom homes now being built in the area; the investment in modern l~ury hotel facilities; the extensive resort amenities the area now offers, other than alpine skiing; and the area's growing professional population; it can only be expected that this trend away from dependence on alpine skiing will continue and probably accelerate into the foreseeable future. Perhaps the only negative economic force affecting Aspen is the lack of affordable housing for its employees. Very simply put, the normal worker (even doctors and lawyers) in the area cannot afford a home in Aspen and there are not enough affordable housing units available in the area for the number of employees needed to service the more affluent visitor. It appears that Pitkin County and City of 15 Aspen need to see a wholesale construction of housing units that truly are affordable for its workers to keep the area fully competitive with other international resorts. Overall Market Conditions of Region Residential The limited growth policies in the area since the mid 1970s and the increased demand for real estate in the area have forced real estate prices to rise during the 1980s and 1990s. However, the real estate marketplace in the Roaring Fork Valley and Aspen areas saw a period of stabilization of sales prices and lower sales volume from early 2001 until about mid 2003 when the demand for real estate in the area increased sharply resulting in sharply increasing sales prices. In some cases real estate prices increased at a rate of 30% or more per year. It is in my opinion that the increase in real estate price is a result of the Irrational Exuberance and Nonrational Behavior in the marketplace which lead to the real estate orgies in 2006 and 2007 in the Aspen real estate marketplace. It has been my observation that in the summer of 2007 the real estate marketplace started slow-down and since mid summer of 2008 the real estate marketplace has for all intents and purposes came to a screeching halt especially in the Mid- Valley areas of Basalt, El Jebel and Carbondale. However, unlike most real estate marketplaces, the values in Aspen proper have not yet declined rather they have stabilized to a slight increase in 2008 over 2007. Nevertheless, one cannot say with any level of certainty that real estate prices in Aspen will not weaken in the future since the current recession is worsening, world wide and affecting almost every sector of the economy. According to the MLS Zone 1, the typical marketing time for single-family residences in the economic neighborhood in 2008 was just short of one year, 323 days, and sales prices were approximately 90% of listing prices (2007 sales price ratio was approximately 95%) with an average sales price in the area of $7,000,000 however the median sales price in the area of $6,100,000. The typical real sales transaction of the part decade or so has been all cash, (approximately 65% +/-) however many of the all-cash transactions were later financed. Conventional loans, assumptions of existing loans, and owner financing are common in the marketplace. The type of financing (or lack of financing) used appears to have little effect, if any, on sales price. Commercial The Iimited growth policies in the area since the mid 1970s and the increased demand for commercial real estate in the area have forced real estate prices to rise. This is mainly due to Aspen's costly, stringent, complex, subjective, highly discretionary and political use code and related approval system, which imposes strict growth management guidelines on new development of any kind. Even expansion of an existing building to the maximum building size allowed under the land use code is not guaranteed by right, but may be allowed only upon review of the application in relation to growth management guidelines. In addition, the cost of development has been increased by the land use code requirements that new commercial developments pay mitigation fees to the City's employee housing, parking and open space reserves. This equates to approximately $175 to $200 per square foot of building in mitigation fees or more, according to the developer. With such high front-end development and building costs, the risk of new development is great, and existing, developed structures, especially those developed to or near maximum densities, sell for a premium. As a result of the limited growth policies, the City of Aspen Council saw that many of the commercial buildings in and around the commercial core area were deteriorating and only a few commercial 16 ~~ properties being redeveloped and no commercial building razed completely and new commercial buildings built. Consequently, the City Council conceived a plan to encourage the redevelopment of deteriorating commercial properties, especially under-utilized properties, known as The Infill Program. The Infill Program led to several projects, like the subject project, gaining approvals for development or redevelopment thought this process in 2003, 2004, 2005 and the four months of 2006 when, in May of 2006, the City of Aspen Council approved a six month moratorium on accepting new Infill Program applications and brought to a standstill the approval of existing Infill applications. The reason for the moratorium was largely due to a great deal of disagreement regarding the size and or change of use of properties that qualified for redevelopment under the Infill Program (i.e. the subjective, highly discretionary and political portions of the City of Aspen's land use code and related approval system). The six month moratorium lasted over two years and was recently lifted and the new land use code appears to be in opposition to the original concept of the Infill Program for some mysterious reason. As of date of appraisal, since the economy is in a recession and no one has successfully gone through the new approval process, the effect it will have is, to say the least, uncertain. General Market Observation One of the more interesting phenomenons in the real estate marketplace in Aspen is that residential use demands a higher dollar per square foot than commercial use, i.e. residential use is a higher and better use than commercial use. For example the top two residential condominium units sold in 2006 sold for $1,728 and $1,981 per square foot while the top two commercial condominium units sold during the same time period sold for $1,038 and $1,213 per square foot. Another example is even though the commercial rental rates are rather high; one must have a substantial residential component to make a project economically feasible. Also between 1995 and 2005, the City of Aspen has lost over 25% of their hotel pillow count and over 30% of their lodges with all of the lodges lost being replaced with high-end residential townhomes, condominiums projects or and time-share factional ownership lodges. Summary Comments Given the sense that both the City of Aspen and Pitkin County are, by policy, preventing development of satellite commercial districts to compete with Aspen's commercial business districts, the onerous requirement to obtain approvals for development of any new commercial properties, the apparent questioning of the Infill Program which encourages redevelopment of under-improved commercial properties, coupled with the extremely high demand for residential penthouse suites in the commercial core area of Aspen, I question if the City really knows what they want to see happen in Aspen's commercial marketplace into the future. Residential The primary negative economic force affecting Aspen is the lack of affordable housing for its employees. With the average single-family dwelling in 2008 selling in the area of $6,500,000, very simply put, the normal worker (not even doctors, lawyers or bankers) in Aspen cannot afford $6,500,000 for a home and there are not enough truly affordable housing units available in the Aspen area for the number of employees needed to service the more affluent visitor who is coming to Aspen. It appears that Aspen needs to see wholesale construction of housing units that truly are affordable for its workers to keep the area fully competitive with other international resorts. Commercial While the commercial vacancies in Aspen's CBD is almost non existent the vacancy rate the periphery area to the CBD is seeing some vacancies especially office spaces. A couple of the more interesting things that is pointing to a slow-down in Aspen's CBD as well as in the Peripheral areas is that many i~ ~~ landlords are not increasing their asking rents for new tenants and are waving this year's, 2009, CPI adjustment for extending tenants. Summary Comments Clearly, the Aspen economy has undergone significant growth during the last 15 to 25 years and has reached a level of economic activity and stability that very few ski towns enjoy. Some measure of Aspen's success in this regard may be seen in the fact that even when there is a decline in skier visit days to the area, sales tax collections have show an increase. Also, given the types of custom homes now being built in the area; the investment in modern Iw~ury hotel facilities; the extensive resort amenities the area now offers, other than alpine skiing, and the area's growing professional population, it can only be expected that this trend away from dependence on alpine skiing will continue and probably accelerate into the foreseeable future. However ali of my analysis many be moot if the world wide economy does not recover from the current recession it is in. Aspen's Commercial Economic Neighborhood The subject property is located on the southwest corner East Hyman Avenue and 5outh MiII Street in the Heart of Aspen's Pedestrian Mall and Aspen's Central Business District (CBD). The CBD is an area consisting of approximately 20 city blocks located south of Main Street and north of Durant between Aspen Street on the west and Original Street on the east. The heart of the CBD is generally between Mill Street on the west, Galena Street on the east, Main Street on the north and Durant Avenue on the south. While there is a limited amount of additional commercial development north of Main Street on Mill and going west from the central business district along Main Street, the uses permitted by zoning in these areas are limited in great extent and do not compete directly with the CBD. There is no~other commercial zoning within Aspen's city limits. Pitkin County zoning does not allow retail shopping areas outside of City of Aspen or The Town of Snowmass Village, consequently the potential for development of any competing commercial centers in an outlying area in Pitkin County can be considered next to impossible without a monumental change in the Pitkin County's land use code. Thus, the only commercial district that competes with Aspen's in any sense at a11 is the Snowmass Village Mall, which is located approximately 8 rniles west by road. The Snowmass Village Mall (an outdoor area) is much smaller than Aspen's central business district and has fewer stores and restaurants; however, a new base area in Snowmass Village has been approved and is in the process of being built. The total cost of Snowmass Village's redeveloprnent is projected to be in the area of $2.8 billion. Thus, Aspen's CBD may be seeing some actual competition, for a change, in the near future. The CBD as defined above is a mix of historic commercial buildings built in Aspen's boomtown days from about 1888 to 1900 and new buildings built since the development of the ski area from about 196S to the early 1980s when it became economically unfeasible to build new commercial buildings in the City of Aspen. The majority of the buildings are one to three stories with brick or wood-frame construction. The newer buildings generally blend architecturally with the old as a result of Aspen's architectural review process required under the land use code. The typical multi-storied building consists of restaurants in the basement or subterranean level, street level retail space, second floor limited retail and office space, and third floor (if any) apartment or condorninium penthouse units. However, over the past year or twv, several of the first floor spaces have been converted from retail into sales offices 18 ~~ for Timeshare - Fractional Ownership projects. The majority of the buildings have been built to the full width of their lots. Almost without exception, the newer buildings built in the area maximize their lot coverage and gross buildable building areas, while many older buildings have excess land in the sense that they often were not built to maximum allowable heights. There are only a couple of vacant building sites remaining in the entire CBD. With demand for commercial space having been strong over the past several years and little new development to satisfy the demand, rental rates have increased. The City of Aspen was considering a plan that would encourage redevelopment of under-improved sites to their ma~cimum allowable densities locally known as Infill. However, the City of Aspen has shelved the Infill scheme at the present time due to significant disagreement regarding the form of the Infill scheme (i.e. the subjective, highly discretionary and political portion of the land use code and related approval system). In May of 2007, the City Council passed Ordinance 11 that amended the land use code for the CC, C-1, NC and MU zone districts. The result of the amendments to the land use code was to take a giant step back from encouraging redevelopment of under-improved sites. Only time will tell if redevelopment of existing underutilized sites will be economically feasibility under Ordinance 11. The area is serviced by City of Aspen for electricity, water and sewage; Source Gas for natural gas, Qwest for telephone and Comcast for cable TV. All commercial neighborhoods are served by these same utilities, and thus all are subject to the same rate structures. Hence, the availability and/or cost of utilities have no effect on the values in this neighborhood in relation to other, possibly competing neighborhoods. Summary Comments Clearly, the Aspen economy has undergone significant growth during the last 15 to 25 years and has reached a Ievei of economic activity and stability that very few ski towns enjoy. Some measure of Aspen's success in this regard may be seen in the fact that even when there is a decline in skier visit days to the area, sales t~ collections have show an increase. Also, given the types of custom homes now being built in the area; the investment in modern luxury hotel facilities; the extensive resort amenities the area now offers, other than alpine skiing, and the area's growing professional population, it can only be expected that this trend away from dependence on alpine skiing will continue and probably accelerate into the foreseeable future. To reiterate and expand upon the negative economic forces affecting Aspen's commercial core area regarding the lack of affordable comrnercial property for traditional commercial business in the commercial core area of the City of Aspen, most small (mom & pop) business well as larger national or international corporations business which are traditional retail and restaurant businesses simply cannot afford the rental rate no matter how much business (volume) they generate and are being replaced by various forms of real estate sales offices. Timeshare - Fractional Ownership projects, and general real estate offices, do not generate sales tax revenues and have eroded the revenues that went into the general funds of Pitkin Couniy and the City of Aspen. However, it is my opinion that the City of Aspen took a giant step in revitalizing the commercial core area of Aspen by passing District Ordinance No. 28a (Series of 2004) which limits the use of ground floor spaces in the commercial core zone district of Aspen to retail, restaurant and night clubs only by stating "Retail and restaurant uses are appropriate for ground floors of buildings while residential and office uses are not permitted on ground floors..." v~ 19 , ~s._-~~.»,.«,,~....~..,.. ~ W. _, ~ .W._,.., . ~. ,...,. ..,~~~~~,~ _....-, It appears to me that the change in allowable uses in the Commercial Core Zone District will help the City regain its traditional competitive edge over other international resorts by increasing retail shopping, restaurants and nightlife and eliminating or reducing the number of offices and residential units from the ground floor space. However, this change may possibly reduce rental rates in the CC, while increasing rental rates in surrounding commercial zone districts. Market Conditions in Sub-Economic Neighborhood The subject's sub-economic neighborhood is the CBD adjacent to Aspen's pedestrian mall and is one of Aspen's maturing areas with several redeveTopment projects that have been recently completed, or soon to be completed, of older, low quality, under-utiiized properties. In addition there are several other planned redevelopment projects that were in various stages of approval through the City of Aspen's costly, stringent, complex, subjective, highly discretionary and political land use code when the moratorium was imposed. Hence their redevelopment approval process has been come to a standstill. As a result, there were no observed factors in the neighborhood that would have a negative impact on values of fully developed properties but may have negatively impacted under-developed properties. Site Analysis Location The subject property is located on the southeastern corner of East Hyman Avenue and South Galena Street Avenue on Aspen's pedestrian mall in the heart of Aspen's CBD. Size, Shape and Topography The subject site is approximately 1,980 square feet according to the Pitkin County public records. It is rectangular in shape, is basically level and appears to have adequate drainage. Parkittg The subject property lacks off street parking which is typical for Aspen's CBD. Soil, Subsoil Conditions/Drainage and Flood Hazards There are no known adverse soil or subsoil conditions on the subject site. According to FEMA Flood Hazard Map the subject site is not within any designated flood hazard area. At the time of appraisal, the drainage appears adequate for the area. Hazards and/or Nuisances There are no known or observed hazards or nuisances near the subject as of the time of appraisal. Easements Since I was not provided with a recent survey, I cannot determine if there are any adverse easements. This appraisal is based upon the assumption that there are not adverse easements encumbering the subject property. Utilities and Services The subject site is serviced by all public utilities (Electric, Water and Sewer: City of Aspen; Natural Gas: Source Gas; Telephone: Qwest; Cable TV: Comcast). ~~ z o Zoning The subject properiy is in the Commercial Core (CC) zone district. (Source: Part 700 Zoning Districts Section 26.710.140 and Ordinance No. 11, Series of 2007). The purpose of the Commercial Core (CC) zone district is to allow the use of land for retail, service commercial, recreation, and institutional purposes within mixed-use buildings to support and enhance the business and service character in the historic central business core of the City. The district permits a mix of retail, office, lodging, affordable housing, and free market housing uses oriented to both local and tourist populations to encourage a high level of vitality. Retail and restaurant uses are appronriate for Qround floors of buildings while residential and ofrce uses are not permitted on ~round floors. Permitted uses by right ~ Uses allowed on basement floors: retail and restaurant, office, and uses and building elements necessary and incidental to uses on other floors. Uses allowed on the ground floor: retail and restaurant, and uses and building elements necessary and incidental to uses on other floors. Office uses are prohibited on the ground floor except within spaces set back a minimum of 40 feet from a street and recessed behind the front- most street-facing fa~ade. This prohibition shall not apply to split-level buildings (see definition). Parking shall not be allowed as the sole use of the ground floor. • Uses allowed on upper floors: retail and restaurant, office, lodging, timeshare lodge, affordable multi-family housing, free-market multi-family housing, home occupations. Uses allowed on all building levels: retail and restaurant, neighborhood commercial uses, service, arts, cultural, civic, public, recreational, and academic uses, child care center, accessory uses and structures, storage accessory to a permitted use, uses and building elements necessary and incidental to uses on other floors including parking accessory to a permitted use, farmers' market provided a vending agreement is obtained pursuant to Section 15.04.350(B). Conditional uses The following uses are permitted as conditional uses in the Commercial Core (CC) zone district, subject to the standards and procedures established in Chapter 26.425: ~ Gasoline service station • Commercial parking facility, pursuant to Section 26.515 Dimensional requirements The following dimensional requirements shall apply to all permitted and conditional uses in the Commercial Core (CC) zone district: • Minimum lot size (square feet): No requirement. • Minimum lot area per dwelling unit (square feet): No requirement. • Minimum lot width (feet): No requirement. • Minimum front yard setback (feet): No requirement. • Minimum side yard setback (feet): No requirement. • Minimum rear yard setback (feet): No requirement. • Minimum utility/trash/recycle area: Pursuant to Section 26.575.060. ~ zi ~ ~ Maximum height (feet): 28 feet for two-story elements of a building; 38 feet for three-story elements of a building, this may be increased to 42 feet through Commercial Design Review. See Chapter 26.41. • Minimum distance between buildings on the lot (feet): No requirement. • Public Amenity Space: Pursuant to Section 26.575.030. • Floor Area Ratio (FAR): The following FAR schedule applies to uses cumulatively up to a total m~imum FAR of 2.75:1. Achieving the m~imum floor area ratio is subject to compliance with applicable design standards, view plane requirements, public amenity requirements, and other dimensional standards. Accordingly, the ma~cimum FAR is not an entitlement and is not achievable in all situations. Commercial Uses: 2:1. • Arts, cultural and civic uses, public uses, recreational uses, academic uses, child care center, and similax uses: 2.75:1. • Affordable Multi-Family Housing: No limitation. • Lodging: .5:1; which may be increased to 1.5:1 if the individual lodge units on the parcel average 500 net livable square feet or less, which may be comprised of lock-off units. M~imum Lodge Unit Size (square feet): 1,500. When units are comprised of lock-off units, this maximum shall apply to the largest possible combination of units. • Free-Market Multi-Family Housing: .5:1, which may be increased to .75:1 if affordable housing equal to 100% of the free-market residential floor area is developed on the same parcel. Multi-family Residential Dwelling Unit 2,000 square feet of net livable area. The property owner may increase individual multi-family unit size by extinguishing Historic Transferable Development Right Certificates ("certificate" or "certificates"), subject to the following: (1) The transfer ratio is 500 sq. ft. of net livable area for each certificate that is extinguished. (2) The additional square footage accrued may be applied to multiple units. However, the maximum individual unit size attainable by transferring development rights is 2,500 sq. ft. of net livable area (i.e., no more than 500 additional square feet may be applied per unit). (3) This incentive applies only to individual unit size. Transferring development rights does not allow an increase in the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of the lot. Commentary: Refer to Chapter 26.535 for the procedures for extinguishing certificates. Commercial / Residential Ratio The total lodging and free-market residential net livable area shall be no greater than the total a'~ove grade floor area associated with the uses (describecl in Section 26.710.140.D.11. a and b) combined on the same parcel. Historic Preservation Encumbrance According to the City of Aspen Community Development Department's website, January 22, 2009, neither of the subject properties appears on Aspen's Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures - Commercial Core Historic District (Established in 1974 via Ordinance #49). However since the subject properties are located on the southeastern corner of East Hyman Avenue and South Galena Street they are both in the Commercial Core Historic Overlay District. 22 v~ Application to Assignment Based upon the subject properly being in the Commercial Core Historic District any redevelopment of the site must go through both the City's and the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission's approval systems, which are costly, stringent, complex, subjective, highly discretionary and political at best. Therefore it would be speculative at best, for me to base this appraisal upon an extraordinary assumption regarding the redevelopment of the subject site. Market Competition There are virtually no remaining sites for new construction of commercial property in Aspen today. Further limiting any additional market completion is the moratorium on redevelopment of under- developed sites which has been extended several times. Only time will tell what, if any, changes to the City of Aspen's costly, stringent, complex, subjective, highly discretionary and political land use code will take place. As a result, the likelihood of ruinous competition in the marketplace in Aspen is nonexistent - basically nil. Units of Comparison In the commercial marketplace the most common unit of comparison is net leaseable square footage. In the residential marketplace the most common unit of comparison is gross living area. Review of Existing Improvements The structure located on the subject property is for all intents and purposes two commercial buildings that were built in 1960 according to Pitkin County public records and have been remodeled over the years. 401 East Hyman Avenue Aspen, CO 81611- Art Tee Gallery Aspen 401 East Hyman Avenue is a one story concrete block and brick building with flat roof. The interior of the Art Tee Gallery Aspen has minimal interior finish which is common for tee shirt shops in the area. Since the appraiser is not a structural engineer and cannot determine if there are any structural problems with the building, this appraisal is based upon the assumption that there are no structural problems. 308 South Mill Street Aspen, CO 81611 - Ute Mountaineering 308 South Mill is a two story concrete brick building with full basement and the buildings has flat roof. The basement of this buidling is being used by the 401 East Hyman Avenue tenant - Art Tee Galley of Aspen. The Ute Mountaineering shop is part of three different buildings which are owned by three separate parties. The interior of 401 East Hyman Avenue which is the subject of this appraisal report interior finish is also minimal drywall walls and carpeted floors which are common for outfitters and real sport shops in the area. Since the appraiser is not a structural engineer and cannot determine if there are any structural problems with the building, this appraisal is based upon the assumption that there are no structural problems. The heating and the electrical systems in both buildings appear adequate at time of inspection. Since the appraiser is not a mechanical or electrical engineer he cannot determine if there are any mechanical or electrical problems or deficiencies in with the building, this appraisal is based upon the assumption that there are no mechanical or electrical problems or deficiencies. 23 ~~ Improvement Size Dimension Calculations Floor Area Floor Above Total Floor % of Total Area Grade Area +/- sf 4Q1:.Eas~:k~ A~!etttie .. Y~: , ;. . . ; , . . ~... _ . Art Tee Gallery Aspen ; , . ...; . . . S~e~~I:~~eI., ~ :. ~., 1:8', , :: : 2(~ ~: 1:. 0'. 64:. , ; 17 30 1.0 510 870 $613t~; : ~~t.Q~`Ut8 ~<3lttlf~R1112~T3~'S' ~~E~1~ " ,. " ~~ ::' , " "~Q' ~:~` ~~Q^::: ; : . {" J~~d' :: ,• ; ,_`...: .~~~~a , ,. 348°: Sci~,~i€1~: Street ,: . .. _ , ,: ,.. ;;:;; ; - . . Ute Mountaineering ss~~~ L~~~ z~: `~~ i.~ ~zu 2nd Level 24 30 1.0 720 1,440 1,440 48% Total 3,030 Blazing Adventures (May-Aug) Sidewalk . , . Only Due to the configuration of the subjec t improvements and heavy snow I could not measure it. This appraisal is based upon the extraordinary assumption that the street level of Ute Mountaineering is 720 square feet and the second level is also 720 square feet or a total of 1,440 square feet. This appraisal is based upon the extraordinary assumption that the street level of Art Tee Gallery of Aspen is 870 square feet and its subterranean basement level is 720 square feet or a total of 1,590 square feet. Condition, Effective Age, and Estimate of Remaining Economic Life Generally, the improvements are in very good condition for this market. The "actual age" of a structure is its physical age. The effective age of a structure is a comparative concept and considers the structure in relation to "the age of a similar structure of equivalent utility, condition, and remaining life expectancy as distinct from chronological age; the years of age indicated by the condition and utility of the structure." Thus, if "a building has had better than average maintenance, its effective age may be less than the actual age; if there has been inadequate maintenance, it may be greater." (Society of Real Estate Appraisers, Real Estate Appraisal Terminology, Revised Edition, Compiled and Edited by Byrl N. Boyce, Ballinger, 1984, pages 87-88). According to Pitkin County records, both of the subject buildings were built in 1960 and have seen various interior and exteriar remodeling projects over the years. In estimating the effective age and remaining economic life of the subject, it is important to keep in mind the fact that effective age is a function of maintenance and continuing functional utility and remaining economic life is primarily a function of continuing utility. The subject has been maintained and still provides adequate return on 24 ~~ investment. The most important factor is that the subject property has been placed on Aspen's Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures which regulates any structural changes including not allowing the improvements ta be razed. Consequently, based upon an effective age of 40 years, its remaining economic life is estimated to be 40 years against a totai economic Iife of 80. The subject has such a long economic life forecast due to the listing of the subject improvement on Aspen's Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures and cannot be razed. Current Standards of Functional Adequacy In a market where many of the buildings are 90 to 100 years old, functional adequacy is certainly a relative concept, especially when current law protects these buildings from being razed for more modern, larger buildings that might have greater functional utitity. Thus, when discussing functional utility in Aspen, it is often important to compare historic buildings to other historic buildings and modern buildings to modern buildings. The subject compares favorably with other modern buildings in terms of the efficiency and utility of its design and is superior to many older buildings. The improvements are adequate in relation to current market standards and are unlikely to be razed in the near future. Highest and Best Use - CC Zone District Legally Permissible - By Right Street Level U er & Basement Levels X Restaurant X Restaurant X Retail X Retail Office X Office Nei hborhood Commercial X Nei hborhood Commercial Service X Service Arts, Cultural and Civic X Arts, Cultural and Civic Recreational X Recreational Academic X Academic Child Care Center X Child Care Center Physically Possible - By Right Street Level U er & Basement Levels X Restaurant X Restaurant X Retail X Retail Office X Office Nei hborhood Commercial X Nei hborhood Commercial Service X Service Arts, Cultural and Civic X Arts, Cultural and Civic Recreational X Recreational Academic X Academic Child Care Center X Child Care Center ~ 25 Financially Feasible - Street Level U er & Basement Levels X Restaurant X Restaurant X Retail X Retail Office X Office Nei hborhood Commercial X Nei borhood Commercial Service Service Arts, Cultural and Civic Arts, Cultural and Civic Recreational Recreational Academic Academic Child Care Center Child Care Center Conclusion Highest and Best Use The City of Aspen's CC Zoning District limits various allowable uses for the subject property's street level to restaurant or retail uses only. Based upon the subject property's design layout and leasehold improvement it is my conclusion that its current use as retail is its highest and best use. The Appraisal Process The process of estimating the Market Value of real property is a systematic process in which the appraisal problem is defined, the work necessary to solve the problem is planned, and the data necessary to solve the appraisal problem is assembled and analyzed to the end of producing an estimate of Market Value. Sound and accepted appraisal practice calls for this process to employ three methods of estimating value: the Cost Approach, the Income Approach and the Market Approach. The Cost Approach is based on the concept that the informed purchaser of a property would pay no more for it than the cost of producing a substitute property with the same utility as the subject property. In the Cost Approach, the Direct Sales Comparison Method first values the subject site. Then, the cost of replacing or creating the improvements is calculated, and from this cost is deducted any necessary amounts for physical, fiinctional, or economic depreciation. The total value of the subject as determined by the Cost Approach is then the sum of the cost of the land and the depreciated cost of the improvements. The Income Approach is based on the concept that the value of the property can be expressed as being the present worth of anticipated benefits (dollar income and or amenities) to be derived from the ownership of the subject property. Anticipated future income and/or reversions are discounted to a present worth figure through the capitalization process (See Byrl Boyce, Real Estate Appraisal Terminodogy, page 112). The Market or Sales Comparison Approach is based on the concept that an informed purchaser would pay no more for a property than the cost to him of acquiring an existing property with the same utility. This approach is applicable when an active market provides sufficient authoritative sources. The Market Approach is relatively unreliable in an inactive market or in estimating the value of properties for which no real comparable sales data are available. (See Byrl Boyce, Real Estate Appraisal Terminology, page 67). ~O 2 6 In the Reconciliation and Final Value Estimate section of the report, the three approaches are analyzed and evaluated as to their pertinence and reliability to the appraisal problem at hand. This analysis results in the Final Value Estimate. The Cost Approach Due to the subject property's age and listing on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures - Commercial Core Historic District, the cost approach is deemed not applicable. Cost Approach - Conclusion of Fair Market Value The cost approach is deemed not an applicable approach. The Income Approach to Vatue The Income Approach ta Value can be viewed as consisting of three steps. In the first step, stabilized market rent and vacancy and credit losses are estimated. Market Rent is defined as "the rental income that a property would most probably command in the open market; indicated by current rent paid and asked for comparable space as of the date of the appraisal" (The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers, Chicago, Illinois: AIREA, 1984, page 194). The total estimated market rent, or Potential Gross Income, net of the estimated stabilized vacancy a.~d rent loss factor, is the Effective Gross Income. Secondly, applicable expenses are estimated. Like the estimate of vacancy and credit losses, the estimated expenses represent stabilized or rypical amounts adjusted to represent normal operations. Applicable categories of expenses are determined through market analysis. Non-cash accounting expenses such as depreciation are not considered. Only thase expenses pertaining directly to the operations of the property are used. The Effective Gross Income less the Estimated Expenses is called the Net Operating Income. Proper appraisal technique requires also that the appraisal report "contain a summary of actual income and expenses experienced by the subject property where it is an existing income or revenue producing property. In addition, all such appraisals must contain a complete reconciliation of all deviations projected by the appraiser in his forecast of future financial performance from those historically realized by the property." The Income Approach to Value arrives at an estimate of value through the capitalization of the Net Operating Income th~t a property produces. Capitalization is the process of ~onverting an income stream into a value estimate or restating the value of the income stream in terms of net present values rather than gross sums. Income Approach Analysis The subject property is encumbered with two long-term leases. Both of the leases contain rental adjustment clauses based upon Denver CPI-U with a maximum annual rental rate increase of 4%. A limitation of rental rate adjustments of 3% and 4% are common in the Aspen marketplace. Also the leases include some but not all of the normal pass-through costs. The first portion of the leased fee estate analysis is based upon income statements provided to me by the owner of the subject property for the past several years. The expenses are based upon information 2~ 3~ provided to me by the landlord as well as typical expenses derived from appraisals of neighboring properties I have completed over the years. The 2009 analysis will be based upon 2008 income adjusted by 3% and projected operating expenses. The fee simple analysis will be based upon typical market rental rates and operating costs in the CBD of Aspen. 2005 Size Annual Yncome $/SF , ,~: ~ " " I:~i~di~+~~ ~~e~:B~~, " „ , , ;-.; : . ;.: _ , , Art Tee Gallery Aspen 1,440 $99,540 $69.13 .: y.r ~ , , , . , . '.'.;'~i;.'~r' .. , ~ :,.. ~Typ ~/[~~~{ . CJ 4W l.l'1~L11i~~~~, , ~ , ~ ,. „ , ,;, s , lsg~~ . Y14~'y ~yt~/~ ~w . ;. , ;,; . ' ., ~'lw~.cFV~ ~YV~J ~~i:/;, , :., .z~ - . :.., , . , „ Blazing Adventures (May thru August) Sidewalk $8,400 , . , , - . . ~ . . Tatal ` .. . 3,F}'~t~. ; , Crross Income $170,820 Vac~c~> ~' ~red~t.~.iiss , c~.o~~~- ~4> Effective Gross Ineome $170,820 , _ ....., Exp~ns~s I~~¢a~e~~~. - ~.~MS~ - _. ; Utilities 0.00% , . ... I~i~ia~ ~e~~ a~ ~,~p~~c~~s :: :~. } ~a~ . . .. . ' . Property Taxes 2004 Payable 2005 7.85% $13,407 ,.; , ...:. ,;. . . :: . :. : .: . ::. ... , `~~z~d: ~s~a~t~e. ~s~~e~ " ~ „ ~, - ; ~~ ~ ~ " ~ , : %. ` ~3;Z~t~° ,. , . , . . . 1Vliscellaneous 0 04% r ~Q~ - „ ;,' „ ~~~~~o ,., . ', '° ~~~,;6~"~ Loss Due to V& C 100.00% .. , ,.., Tntai ~t~cc~~ee~~b~~,1~~ R~ca~erer~ , . ,. ~:~ fi}6.~7 . ; Y , Non Recoverable . , ~~ .i~j ~./:~yf^' p, ' 4 }< . ' ~ ., , ~'t. :',}~. ' 1~'yN~W ~Y~~~ ~~~2W,M~*LFAY'I~W .. . (~. ,.~,~ ,;~ 1-fW'~~Y!~~V . , ,. I~/y/~(~ . . ' ~ ~ . , ~ l~/'~LtV~/ : i~ " ~.~ •. ~ ., " Management Estimated @ Market 5.00% $8,541 , ;~ , , -. . v, ., Prc~fes~~~a~:.~~.~~±~~~cct~~~~ Est ,, ::..:, °~ ; ~5~ ~ , Capitol Reserve Fund $0.50 per sf 0.89% $1,515 ; ~ , , . , .,;. , ;, s: ,. iV~sc~l~~o~s -:~: L=:c~c~~~~ ~ c~s , 1;'~ . _. ....:. . .. .. Total Non Recoverable Ezpenses 9.71% $16,583 , ;.. _. .z.:. ;: . -;; - . Tn~~ ~~ ~n~3 ~ > ` . . ~" . .. ' 1;~:~3%a -r :. ; ~ ~~~~~ '". Net Operating Income 80.57% $137,630 28 ~~ 2006 ~i'irc~~~ ~ip.±euu°~~~i~g' : .:; Art Tee Gallery Aspen , . . ,. ~,. ;.;.. ....: LT~=~c~~ueer.~g. . .,, Blazing Adventures (May thru August) ,T~~ata1:;: Gross Income ~~~~i~' i~ ~L~`t`~1.~ ~ ,"~"a . ` . " Effective Gross Income - .<. ~~ei~~e~ I~a~~era~e - ~~NIS Utilities ,. Mi~or°F~~pa~~-.c~~ ~p~ements Property Taxes 2005 Payable 2006 ~~ d' ~~u~~e~ ~st~~ed. . Miscellaneous , `~Q~; ' ` Loss Due to V& C - ; ;.. . .. . ~ :. .. `~qLa~"rl~.t~v,+~~~1~~- ~i~e+~v~r~ct Non Recoverable . . . ~ . ..-::, :: : ... 11~a~~i~ ~e~a~ :~a~: ~~~~~ne~.~s Management Estimated @ Maxket Prafe~i~~= ~ ~:~~~ =c~ ~~~ai~.~~g Es~ Capitol Reserve Fund $0.50 per sf .. . ... .. .. . :. ; ..:;: ~i.sc~~~t~s~' : ` : : ;; ~ ;. . Total Non Recoverable Expenses T~ta~~~aie~- :: .: ` ; . Net Operating Income Size Annual Tncome : ~~~~" 1,440 $99,540 $69.13 : ' .~:1;~90 ,;. ;. .: ~:~2;~~~. :. .. .". ,:;~~~55 Sidewalk $8,400 .: ~_ ;:3,#~3;~ . ; ,. , ;, : . . ;. . ;. $170,820 `-~.~~~fQ ~A~'' , „ $170,820 0.00% U.(~4Afa: . 8.24% $14,074 : . ..1.~9~/0:: , , ,~'~,Z~~' ; . ,<:: ; 0.00% ` .''~~«~~A~ . t~ ,.. - ' ~1~~~~~^ ~;:~:c ,,~:`:., 100.00% - . . : ~-I 7,~~~ : ~:Ut?°~~r: . 5.00% , 1.E}5%o 0.89% > ,;' 1:.~3f}°ln 7.94% `' ~$.Q'1%s 81.93% 3~ 29 2007 Size AnnualIncome ~ii~i~a~A~~ert~B~d~= . ~~~~ Art Tee Gallery Aspen 1,440 $102,194 $70.97 :. :::..... .. ..:.~. ;::> . . . ~t~:l~~t~i~a~ea~~g.~.;. :: , : ° :.: ; " ,: : ; : ~-~9a ` ;$'fE~;4Qb: '. :~ $%~4~t~~. Blazing Adventures (May thru August) Sidewalk $9,408 F...., ...., ,- i.. . .: .. t~:. ... '~?t~ .;~.:::..`"''~.°:.;:. `` ~ ...._ . . ,. . ..: .y; ,.... ... .. , 3;~3 0 , . . , : Gross Income $181,608 " ~. ..-:- :. ~~~t~~ c~; ~±~~~ ~"C~$~- ;'; . ~ U4°/ ~ ° ~t~ , . Effective Gross Income $181,608 . . ~~~~~a~e~~bX~- ~~~'.... , ~... ... Utilities 0.00% ;.... . .. , ,. '~~~~ ~~~~>~~~~~~~~~~ - p o.c~a i4 , , ,_ . . , Property Taxes 2006 Payable 2007 8.08% $14,673 : . . .. . ~~d~~~~~' ~sti~a~~d . ..:~`'._, . .,. : .. . ~:, ,. .78%~ ~ .. '~ ~ ~`~~ . Miscellaneous 0.00% , '~~1~ ` ' ' .:::.. . _ : .. ~ .,. . .. . . ; ` ; 9:~6°la ~7,9(~~; : ' ' : Loss Due to V& C o 100.00 /o ,: . ;., , .. .:-..~~a:.~ .:,. ~ ~ '~'a~=~~~~~~"c~'~i~Re~eav~~i~ .' ° , f ~;Z,9~3 - . : ,: ? : : : Non Recoverable , , . ,.. . :. : i~. ~:Ys . .. :;.~... . ' ~. ."..'~ ': . ,~,~~~~~~~~, ;, .: "':~~!~~:~rita~:: „ ";, ; Management Estimated @ Market ,.,. - ... . P~~a~~:~:~~~.cS'~;-~cce~ii~tiu~ ~s~ . .. , .. . , ~ : Capitol Reserve Fund $0.50 per sf ~, , ; l~i~e~~ia~~~s::'~ ; r ~.. ~::..., n; Total Non Recoverable Expenses '~ i~~[~T~~;euu~~;r. ` . ~' Net Operating Income 0.(}E~°~a 5.00% 1.,~2¢/0 0.83% 1:00% 7.86% ] ~.?1°fo 82.29% ,9 30 l1 3~~~ 2008 Size AnnualIncome ,: :: ~ ~` : ` . .` ; ~.in~dner ~~'d , . ,, : ,; ..:. . . 440 1 ~ ,;; ~- . ;:. 074 $82.00 $118 Art Tee Gallery Aspen , , ~ ,. ::: .. ;..,. .: ;... - ~. Ute l~lount~ri~ ;-.'~-~°,: ~ s~ ~?~: . : . _ `:`~`. :`'~~~:~2: ~~~'7`'~~ Blazing Adventures (May thru August) Sidewalk $9,408 ,. , ; , ,:.. ; :: Tc~tal. .., ' - E ~ . . : ,, , ~;(~30"` _ _- _ °. ;. :. ..:: .,. ..' : Gross Income $217,196 . .:. ,, _: . - :. ... ..: :..... , ; ,. , ; Vacan~ . c~;:~i~d~~ ~c~s~-. . . ; ' , ; ~~' ~ ... . . . . ... ..:. ; ... '; t~~4~(?°f `- . ~ ° . ~~1~, , . Effective Gross Income $217,196 W. . : ... : ~~pens,~~' ~~~~ve~#I~`~. ~.~~-° ; ` Utilities 0.00% " „ ", , Miniar ~ep~ ~~~~ala~emen#,~ , ` ~. 0.(~0:°!0. ' ° Property Taxes 2007 Payable 2008 11.70% $25,412 ~azard;~si~~e~~~"a~ed: : .: :; ," ;. -, ; . : , , °/fl. ~ ~~ ~~:y2~:C~= ,.. Miscellaneous 0.00% , . : ~ F ' .,c ~~1[' _,' i`.'~~.s ~', TUYW~ '.. .: , , ~.~ ~~ , a .,.: ., - . ,.: ": ~ .i . '' > . .... . . ~,~{ 4 { {~Q~n -y! 1'~ ' Ys ' : S . ~ .. .. , .. . . (]~~//~'~ , . , ~V ,Y~~' . .. . .. , i ,3, ~ ~ ' . . :. ' . , , Loss Due to V& C 100.00% . ...: ,... . '~'at~l: Re~a~~t~~~c~~~rt~~~: : ,. /*~ p M1 ~1`+G~s~~G.' , : ' Non Recoverable . ...:-.~ Maje-r ~:~a~'~='~~~eu~~i:~s~s. . . ,. . . : ~ , 4.78%0. ~~#~~75. _. . .. Management Estimated @ Maxket 5.00% $10,860 ~.~ : , .~TQ~~S~I4~""'~~~:~ ~C~4t~T~~.~~ : . ~},~',~~fo: :..:,..$i;9~.~. ~ _n: ~ z Capitol Reserve Fund $0.50 per sf 0.70% $1,515 ;. . ~ ,; ;. .;,: ; . ,.,. . _ ~ :. ;` .. , , : ; I~~Iiscell~c~t~_ : ; l..Of}°f~; ; . `~ ~2;1'7~ , . : Total Non Recoverable Expenses 1235% $26,834 ,. :.. . . - ~~:~ . Tot~l E~~~~~ , ::' ` . ; ~3:~~~f4 , ° ~5~5,4'7f ; Net Operating Income 74.46% $161,720 Survey of Commercial Market Leases ~ In the process of preparing commercial appraisal reports, I interview the three primary commercial brokerage firms in Aspen with the specific goal of obtaining information on new leasing activity and on current trends in commercial leasing as well as using information from other commercial properties in the marketplace that I have appraised. The consensus of the three is that leasing activity has continued to be steady to relatively strong in all types of spaces: restaurant, retail, and office. While rents can be and are high as$285 per square foot for small boutique spaces in a few prime locations, all of the rental agents confirm that the majority of new leases being written for Hyman Avenue or Cooper Street Mall spaces (or the equivalent) are at $70 to $125 per square foot. Off the malls and in less prime retail locations, rents are going from $35 to $75 31 3~ per square foot. All rents are quoted at either triple net or absolute net. Specific leases are identified in my files; however, at the request of the leasing agents to preserve confidentiality they are not referenced in the report. The subject's location is prime commercial space since it is located adjacent to the pedestrian mall in the center of downtown, the Aspen City Hall and Pitkin County Courthouse. The following grid summarizes market rental rates for the purpose of comparison with actual rents. Aspen Commercial Core Area - Pedestrian Mall Market Rantal Rate Range Fair Mkt Rent ; ; Qt~era~~.:, .. „ , ' , -;. ~. %~~.~~~-:: ~24&-04 4, : :: , : .: .:.. . Location within Building , ,,.; ; Subt~rra~~ ~~s~en~: ' ~1'S,:C~Q _ . $4~.~Q " ~~fl:AQ Garden Level Basement $26.00 -$45.00 $40.00 x'" f S}"'"" , ,.; .: . . , , , , Street .. , , ~7f~.53 = ~2~4$:(~t? ~:1~~:tiQ ~- ~ 2nd & Above $24.40 - $80.00 $40.00 Mutti L~vel =;:1-~.~.Zn~.ar 1S~ & Bsz~at ' . ~~4~&~ ~ ~°T1.(14~ ' " $:65:40 Aspen Close-in Commercial Core - Periphery Market Rental Rate Range Fair Mkt Rent ~v~~'., `',.. ... ~~~S;~f.= ~~~:42 Location within Building ,.... .. ..... . , . ~ubtert~ne~r~. ~3a~em~n~ : , . . ,. ,:. ~ ~=~~i:~~" ~ , ; ~ 2~-:Qt~ ; °:: . . Garden Level Basement $25.00 - $42.76 $30.00 . ~,ty ~ {. ' ~< . : ' .. . ~ . ~" .. , - ~ ' :ti7L~r~L .. .. < . ~ -- . ~ , ~ , ' {~+~ ~V -'t~7k~:~t~~ Wr~~,:~.Grx - ~ . , .. .. _ . ,,~"«7CI.Vti7 ~, 2nd & Above $12.55 - $73.80 $35.00 , . .. .. ~1!~u~fi~ ~eueT .~ 1.~ & ~~seinent : ~ ' : `: $~~i.U~= ~ "- , ~4~':'~~w" , a ,. ~ : : ~44tl:~il; Outside Core Area - West Main - North Mill Market Rental Rate Range Fair Mkt Rent ; ;, , : . h . (~veraiL . Location within Building . . ... . , ~u~teir~~~~lasemen~ " ~~ S:U~=-: , ~30.8~:: , ; :,. , ~2S.t30 Garden Level Basement $25.00 - $42.76 $30.00 , , .. , Streec~.: . . ; ;; ; : ~: ~.36 - ~~5;56 , ; ; , 4{~:#~~ 2nd & Above $12.55 - $40.00 $35.00 Due to confidentiality requests, I can only supply Rental Range as an array of recent leasing activity within the economic area. Fair Market Rent is the typical rental rent for the recent leasing activity. Calculation is based upon newer leases, is on a Triple Net Basis and has been rounded to the nearest dollar. Vacancy and Credit Loss, Management Fees and Capitol Reserves still must be deducted to arrive at an estimate of Net Operating Income. 32 ~~ Projection @ Market ,.;:. : .. ~: , ~-~~~~° `~~i~~r Y , _ , ~:~g ° ; " - '~ize ' ~4~t . . ~c-me . Art Tee Gallery Aspen 1,440 $70.42 $101,400 _.. „; ~' I~t~"'~oun~tee~ng r '1,~3~ ~63;~F(1r ;:~1°~,~€~0 Tota1 3,030 $66.73 $202,200 , B~~l~l't1~,.~C~'f~'~~L~1:+E`S:~'~fil~`;~ 1~11~5~~ ~iC~.t:"Wr'~k '~~~~~; p, ' . .A~y~~~ ~A~ V q~.)J 5.00% $10,548 ~~t#~},4~7 ~ :3~°l0 `$2;6f~ . 0.25% $500 ..~ ~~.~~ ~fl ~~~a~;~.~ ' . 1.62% $3,250 , t~:2~"Dl~ ;. '~5~.t~ . . ` , ; . . 16.10% $32,262 ~:'t~~°,~o. . ~-1i~1~'` : , `'' 0.80% $1,613 1.53% $3,069 'a:G~:~°~~ $~°fl;{1~fl 1.00% $2,00~ ~~:Q4°lo ;~~.,~~.~... '.... ,;. =: „ . :. , ; 1.00°10 $2,004 9.~9°~fl `$1.8,~~3 10.09% $20,226 ~ .97.~~~ft1 ~ . . ~ ,~+P~~4.~Jp~'30,~r $161,720 1t~.2~°1~ 33 ~~ Selection of Overall Capitalization Rate Capitalization is the process of estimating the present value of anticipated future income by discounting this income. The factor utilized in the discounting process is generally called the Overall Capitalization Rate, which is simply defined as "the direct ratio between Annual Net Operating Income ... and Value or Sales Price." (Source: Boyce, Real Estate Appraisal Terminology, page 179). Deveiopment of Overatl Capitalization Rate Market Extraction of Overall Capitalization Rate Commercial Below you will find a historic summary of income producing properties sold in Aspen marketplace from which one can extract an overall market driven capitalization rate for the past two clecades or so. As you will see there are a limited number of sales and we fortunate are fortunate enough to have multiple sales in every year. Sale 1 520 East H man As en, CO Sale Date November, 1988 Sale Price Includin R.E. Commission) $2,700,000 Desi n of Buildin Two Sto Quali of Buildin Ve Good Tenant Mix Retail / Office NOI @ Time of Sale $260,000 Ca Rate Time of Sale 9.63% sa 9.6% Sale 2 605 West Main Street As en, CO Sale Date December, 1992 Sale Price $465,000 Desi n of Buildin Two Sto Quali of Buildin and Material Good / Wood Frame Tenant Mix 100% Office NOI Time of Sale $39,885 Ca Rate Time of Sale 8.58% sa 8.6% Sale 3 Centre Buildin As en, CO Sale Date A ril, 1994 Sale Price Includin RE Commission $5,250,000 Desi n of Buildin Two Sto Quali of Buildin and Material Ve Good / Wood Frame Tenant Mix Retail, Restaurant, Stora e NOI Time of Sale $473,952 Ca Rate Time of Sale 9.39% sa 9.4% 34 ~~ Sale 4 Pitkin Title Buildin As en, CO Sale Date Se tember, 1994 Sale Price $2,150,000 Desi n of Buildin Two Sto uali of Buildin and Material Ve Good / Maso Tenant Mix Retail, Rstrnt & Office NOI Time of Sale $183,158 Ca Rate Time of Sale 8.52% sa 8.5% Sale 5 As enhof Condominium Unit R-B -1 As en, CO Sale Date December, 1996 Sale Price $975,000 Desi n of Buildin Garden Level Condominium Unit Quali of Buildin and Material Ve Good / Maso Tenant Mix Sin le Tenant NOI Time of Sale $89,600 Ca Rate Time of Sale 9.19% sa 9.2% This property was encumbered with a long-term lease at time of sale with minimal ($1.00 per square foot) annual increases in rental rate. Sale 6 121 South Galena Street As en, CO Sale Date Ma , 1998 Sale Price (1 $2,150,000 - $2,216,494 Desi of Buildin Two Sto with full basement Quali of Buildin and Material Ve Good / Brick Tenant Mix Rstrnt, Office, Retail NOI Time of Sale $123,000 Ca Rate Time of Sale S.SS% -5.72% sa 5.7% (1) The buyers paid a 3% sales commission to the selling brokerage rather than the seller paying the typical 6% sales commission. Also, the buyer of the property owns the adjacent commercial building. Also, there were several leases, which are far below marke* rental rate, which were, to expire shortly after the sale. Sale 7 210 AABC As en, CO Sale Date June 1998 Sale Price 1 $2,975,000 - $3,164,894 Desi n of Buildin Two Sto Quali of Buildin and Material Good / Wood Frame Tenant Mix Office / Warehouse - Sho NOI Time of Sale $264,271 Ca Rate Time of Sale 8.35% -8.88% sa 8.9% 35 3~ (1) The buyers paid a 6% sales commission to the selling brokerage rather than the seller Sale 8 0233 West Main - Innsbruck Inn As en, CO Sale Date June 1998 Sale Price $3,100,000 Desi of Buildin 2 sto Quali of Buildin and Material Good / Stucco & Wood Frame Tenant Mix 30 Unit Lod e 1 Em lo ee Unit NOI Time of Sale $256,300 Ca Rate Time of Sale 8.27% sa 8.3% Sale 9 Timbermill Buildin Snowmass Villa e, CO Sale Date October 1998 Sale Price $9,125,000 Desi n of Buildin Bld s Quaii of Buildin and Material Good / VVood Frame Tenant Mix Reta.il / Restaurant / Conference Center NOI Time of Sale $784,760 Ca Rate Time of Sale 8.6% Sale 10 113 & 304 AABC As en, CO Sale Date December 1998 Sale Price $1,900,000 Desi n of Buildin 2 Bld s Quali of Bnildin and Material Good / Wood Frame Tenant Mix Retail / Office / Deed Restricted A ts NOI Time of Sale $160,367 Ca Rate Time of Sale 8.44% sa 8.4% Prior Sale - October 24, 1997 $1,500,000 - prior to October's sale was KN Energy complex - Buyer rehab and converted KN's space to three retail stores, was require to maintained the four residential deed restricted employee housing apartments prior to re-sale in December of 1998. Sale 11 Wheeler S uare Units 105, 106, 301 As en, CO Sale Date October 1999 Sale Price $600,000 Design of Building 105 & 106 Bsmt Stg & Prep Kitchen 301 Street Level Rstrnt Quali of Buildin and Material Ve Good Brick Tenant Mix Sin le Tenant NOI Time of Sale $42,100 Ca Rate Time of Sale 7.02% sa 7.0% 36 ~~ This comparable sale was encumbered with a long-term lease due to expire on September 30, 2003. Buyer owns adjacent commercial office condo units. The motivation of purchaser was to insure expansion capabilities in future. Sale 12 411 East Main Street Chitwood Plaza Bld As en, CO Sale Date A ril, 2000 Sale Price $8,700,000 Desi n of Buildin Two sto artial basement Quali of Buildin and Material Ve Good Brick Tenant Mix Multi Tenant Mixed Use Rstrnt & Office Est. NOI Time of Sale $583,000 Ca Rate Time of Sale 6.70% sa 6.7% Sale 13 Golden Horn Buildin Units 1, 2, 3& 4 400 East Coo er Ave As en Sa1e Date Au ust 2003 Sale Price $4,400,000 Desi of Buildin Two sto + basement Quali of Buildin and Material Ve Good Brick Tenant Mix Multi Tenant Mixed Use Retail, Rstrnt & Office Est. NOI Time of Sale $300,000.00 Ca Rate Time of Sale 6.82% sa 6.8% Sale 14 Aspen Highland Village - Trailhead Lodge Aspen Highland Village - Maroon Creek Station 113 Prospector Rd 115 Boomerang Rd Sale Date Se tember 15, 2005 Sale Price $5,650,000 Desi of Buildin 3 Sto Mixed Use Cornmercial - Residential Quali of Construction Good Tenant - Use - Subject Property 18 Deed Restricted Affordable Employee Housing - 5 Long-term Condominium Units & 13 Seasonal Dormitory Style Condominium Units Zonin PUD Approximate Size -+/- Square Feet Rent Rol] Assessor Rental Agreement 18,792 18,904 20,167 $/S uare Foot $300.66 $298.88 $280. ] 6 2006 Est NOI Time of Sale $224,717 Ca Rate Time of Sale 4.0% Redevelo ment Potential None Motivation Income Production 37 -1 ` Sale 15 Name Red Onion Condominium Le al Unit 4 Location 414 416 East Coo er Ave As en Im rovement Size 4,329 Buildin T e Street Level Use Retail Land Size Common Element Zonin CC Year Built 1880 Sale Date March 31, 2006 Sale Price $4,495,000 $/S . Ft. of Im rovement $1,03835 NOI Time of Sale $307,032 Ca Rate Time of Sale 6.83% sa 6.8% Verification Broker Sale 16 Polar Revolution 312 South Hunter Street Sale Date June 2006 Sale Price $4,040,000 Desi n of Buildin One Sto Quali of Construction Avera e Tenant - Unit Sin le Tenant - Retail Zonin Commercial Core A roximate Size - S uare Feet +/- 2,275 $/S uare Foot $1,776 Est. NOI Time of Sale $182,000.00 Est. Ca Rate Time of Sale 4.5% Redevelo ment Potential Ex ansion 2° Floor Office - Residential Motivation Owner User Retail - Lon -term Redevelo ment Sales 17 Delice Buildin 409 East H man Avenue Sale Date June 2006 Sale Price $4,800,000 Desi n of Buildin Two sto + basement Quali of Construction Ve Good Brick Tenant - Use Multi Tenant Mixed Use Retail, Rstrnt & Office Zonin Commercial Core A roximate Size - S uare Feet +/- 3,920 $/S uare Foot $1,224 Est. NOI Time of Sale $240,000.00 Est. Ca Rate Time of Sale 5.0% Redevelo ment Potential Conversion of 2° Level into Residential Motivation Lon -term Redevelo ment 38 ~v Sale 18 Holtz Plaza - Cantina Buildin 411 East Main Street Sale Date June 2006 Sale Price $16,000,000 Desi n of Buildin Two sto + Partial Basement Quali af Construction Good Tenant Mix 1 st & Bsmt Rstrnt 2nd Offices Zonin Commercial Core - Historic A roximate Size - S uare Feet +/- 23,720 $/S uare Foot $675 Est. NOI Time of Sa1e $800,000.00 Ca Rate Time of Sale 5.0% Redevelopment Potential Add 3rd Level - Residential Penthouse - Questionable A roval at Present Time Motivation Income Production Lon -term Redevelo ment Sale 19 As enhof Buildin C-7 520 East Coo er Avenue Sale Date Se tember, 2006 Sale Price $2,300,000 Desi n of Buildin Four sto + basement Quali of Construction Good Tenant Mix 2" Level 19 Offices Zonin Commercial Core A roximate Size - S uare Feet +/- 3,674 $/S uare Foot $626 Est. NOI Time of Sale $118,000.00 Ca Rate Time of Sale 5.1 % Redevelo ment Potential No Additional S uare Foota e Motivation Income Production Sale ZO Reide Ci Buildin 413 East H man Avenue Sale Date Au ust 2007 Sale Price $3,000,000 Desi n of Buildin Two sto Quali of Construction Good Brick Tenant Mix Sin le Tenant Retail - Small A artment Zonin Commercial Core A roximate Size - S uare Feet +/- 1,580 +/- $/S uare Foot $1,899 Est. NOI Time of Sale $150,000.00 Est Ca Rate Time of Sale 5.0% Redevelo ment Potential U radin of A artment - No Additional SF Motivation Income Production - Lon term A t U rade 39 ~~ Sale 21 As en S uare Commercial Unit B 413 East H an Avenue Sale Date Jan 2008 Sale Price $7,000,000 Desi n of Buildin Three sto Quali of Construction Good Brick Tenant Mix Sin le Tenant Retail Zonin Commercial Lod e A roximate Size - S uare Feet +/- 3,309 sf Above - 763 sf Below 4,072 sf $/S uare Foot $1,719 NOI Time of Sale $208,710 Est Ca Rate Time of Sale 3.0% Redevelo ment Potential No Additional S uare Foota e- Motivation Tenant Purchase - Owner User Retail Sale 22 Name La Fave Buildin Le al COA Bk 96 Parts of Lots G, H& I Location 531 & 535 East Coo er Improvement Size 9,725 sf 5,403 sf Retail 4,322 sf Free Mkt Resident Buildin T e 3- 2 sto Histo Bldin s Use Retail - Office Land Size 6,500 +/- sf Zonin CC Year Built 1888 Sale Date Febru 20, 2008 Sale Price $14,600,000 $/S . Ft. of Im rovement $1,501.29 NOI Time of Sale $656,000 Est Ca Rate Time of Sale 4.49% sa 4.5% Redevelopment Potential Upgrading of Apartment - No Additional S uare Foota e Motivation Income Production - Lon term Bld U rade 40 ~ ~ Analysis & Conclusion of Mkt Extraction Overall Capitalization Rate Sale 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1~c~nt~ '. ° `~~v. J~, ; :~.p~>~~3,9~ . , ~~t . w~~c: : ; ~~ '~ 9~8 3une, ~.~9$ :~i~se '~ear ~~8 ~ ;~.93Z . ' ~'~94 1=~~ 1 ~8 . Use - Retail & Office Retail, Retail Rstrnt Retail, OfFice Lodge Tenant Office Rstrnt & Rstrnt Rstrnt Shop Stg Office Office Whs ;: C~v~r~Il .,-,: .~ : . o ~~ ;~:~f~.,. . ~3.6/fl _ . 9.~°~!o , :$;5°~n 9.2°~4 . ~:"7'~~0. . $;9°l~ ` : :: "5::~`%'~ _ Cap ~,ate Sale 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 l~on~h ; ~~'~ v D~c i9~8 'C?ct .,~il Aug2~lU3 , , ,S~pt 11~~~ :Tux~e ~t~Q6 ~eat' ,: 1~~~ : , ', ; „ 1999 ' ' 2~t~U ~QO~ , ~~f~~ = , s Use - Retail & Retail Rstrnt Rstrnt Retail Deed Retail Retail Tenant Rstrnt Office Office Rstrnt Restrict Owner Deed Office Apt User Restrict Apt `~~~',T~~;:: ;. > , ;%:'~.~~/o:;. '..:r','~:~~~o':' ; : ,'~.~~lf~ , '; ;~3.~~~A , .. ,.., ~f.~~~o. •~,~~' ~:~~U, :, . , -' , .~,~~fq „ ~~~~~ '': ,. ,, Sale 17 18 19 20 21 22 ;. , ~Soa~ ~'~ _ .: , ~`~e~~6:. :~'t~ ~4~~6:; . r ~a~t ' , .Aug ~~7 .~'~.:Zfl~$ ; : , ~~b 2fl~38 ,; . ' 7 . s.. _,,, 5 . ,. ~'~'.:,. . . ~ ,. . : ,. ., ~~~~v~ ~.~ . ; : „ .. i , ,. , V . ',,. . ' , , . . , . . . . Use - Tenant Retail Rstrnt Rstrnt Office Retail Free Retail Owner Retail Free Office Office Mkt Apt User Mkt Apt Q~'ez`~l ~p , . ... . ;, .~.~~'l0 5:~°l~u " - : ~:~°lo ,5:~~/0 ~ ~:~?°lu: 4:5 ~~ . Sales which occurred in the years 1988 thru 1999 ranges overall capitalization rate ranged from a low of 5.7% to high of 9.4%. I believe that it would seem reasonable to conclude the market extracted overall capitalization rate for the years 1988 thru 1999 of 8.5% reasonable. Sales which occurred in the years 2000 thru 2006 ranges ove~all capitalization rate ranged from a low of 4.0% to high of 6.8%. Since the majority of sales with lower capitalization rates were redevelopment sales an overall rate of 6.5% is realistic for the years 2000 thru 2006. Since we have only two sales which occurred in 2007 (5.0%) and 2008 (4.5%) I believe that it would be sensible to conclude that an overall capitalization rate of 5.0% is appropriate since the 4.5% sale was a redevelopment sale. 41 ~ ~ Income Approach Indication of Fair Market Value 2006 2007 2005 ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~~ ~~ y~ : 3 ~~ ~'F ~ a~ ~~ ~~~~~ :,'::' ~~ a. „s ,,,~ „ . r '~1, . '., ' `., y~~~~~ ~ . /i: a1~ P~,. , '3- . ~ ~:, .~, ~ , '~' ~ . . „ ,,.. .. .~ma.~ ,,, . . .uf ~....._, '~ . .,..... .« - 1 \ ~ ~, , ,... ~. ., , 6 50% ...,,.._„ . . Cap Rate 6 50% Cap Rate 5 00% Cap Rate ~~~ ~- a ~'~~' ~~~'~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ,~' ~~~~,~~~~~ ~ 3 .,~ e3Y ~ ~~~ ~~~~`~~~~&. ~ .d~c~.te ~ : "~ -: k r g , ;~ *~ 'SE ': v x" l~ ~~.+.p .~ 4' ~Y~4' ~ :'~ ~ r£ i :: l p~,y~'~i ~. ~4~ 3~ « . tv... ~~ ~.. ~ .. ~"Mi`i' ~ ., , .: "'~. 'f ~ n " ~ '~ k.. n a : , " ~ ~.~.,,, E ~~ ..., ..il......k:~,' ,. C„-: k ~ .S_;.~. „ .. ..~ r ~.,;. 00 150 $2 . .. ,,..,, , ... ~x.. . . . . , . R - $25,k $3,000,00 R - $25,k $2,125,000 R - $25, , , ^(~( ~ ~~ ~ ~ C ~' .~ /-'- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~-~ ~ ~ ~- . ~ ~E . '~. ~. '*C ,'.. "'~ k'~ : X '~~"}"'~€yq ~ ~ : ~ ~: ~ ~ J~ '.~ ~ ~ : ,,. v1 ~ ~ _ '~~. ~~ " 3' LF .. ~ ' '":. £ ~ ~ ' ' , ,,, ~„ ~ " :' .. ,... , .,...z.. . .~..~ , , .~;., i,,,;..:,, , . ,..,,,a, x ..... :. x„ . , . ..;;~-° ~. :. €. , NOI .., „ ,. .. ,... $161,720 NOI $169,870 W , ~ ~~a ~~e , a:'~ ~ ~`~ ~ ' ~`~~~~ '~ ~_ , nx ~~~~~~..~ ~.,~.. ~.~. ~~~~'~f,~"~. : _.. .~ r_. _ ~ , . Indicated Value ,_. ~.. '$3,234,399 Indicated Value $3,39'7,400 ; ~ ~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~ ~ Y,. r~ ~~~~ ~~~~, ~qy~ -~~ g (~(~ ~. ~'I~T~U.~d' a . ~~. . , ,,if ~ , .~ J . . Income Approach - Conclusion of Fair Market Value Based upon the foregoing analysis, and the remaining lease terms, it is my opinion that the indicated Fair Market Value range of subject via the Income Approach range was $3,000,000 to $3,225,000 42 ~ ~ Sales Comparison Approach The traditional Sales Comparison Approach to Va~ue estimates the subject's value by direct comparison with similar properties, which have been purchased or are offered for sale. It is based upon the principle of substitution by recognizing the availability of substitute properties in the market. That is, it addresses the question of what a well-informed purchaser would pay for the subject property after comparing it specifically both with other properties like it that had sold recently and with existing properties currently offered for sale. This approach to valuation, then, attempts to simulate the thought process of the prospective buyer who looks at a number of like properties in contemplation of purchase, and who on the basis of experience and judgment obtained in the marketplace, arrives at a conclusion as to what each property is worth based on a feature by feature comparison of them. Accordingly, the basis of this approach is the direct comparison of properties as similar to the subject as possible which have recently sold. After a search of the public record for sales that have recently occurred in the subject's neighborhood and that are similar to the subject in location, quality, utility, and other features, those most similar to the subject are selected for further analysis and use as "Comparable Sales." Each of these comparables is then compared directly with the subject with each item of similarity and dissimilarity being noted and items of dissimilarity being assigned a dollar value, or percentage adjustment, based on data derived from the market. Having gone through this process of analysis, it is then possible to adjust the sale price of each comparable sale to indicate what each would have sold for it had exactly the same features as the subject. It is important to recognize that in this process, the subject serves as the norm or standard and all comparable sales are adjusted to this norm. If a comparable is superior to the subject in any respect, the adjustment for this difference will be negative and, if it is inferior, the adjustment will be positive, thereby indicating that the comparable would have sold for less or more (depending on the situation) had it been exactly like the subject. The net adjustment of a comparable, which is the sum of all the adjustments made (positive and negative), is applied to the actual sales price of that comparable to arrive at an indication of the subject's market value. 43 v4~ Commercial Sales Central Business District Commercial Sales The following pages depict and summarize the most recent sales of commercial properties in the commercial core area of Aspen. As stated above, the unit of ineasurement calculation is based on price paid per square foot of area, as this appears to be the market norm. Name As enhof Condominium Le al Unit RB-1 Location 520 East Coo er Ave Im rovement Size 3,726/- S Ft Buildin T e G/L Condominium Unit Use Restaurant Land Size Common Element Zonin CC Year Built 1970 Sale Date A ril 16, 2008 Sale Price $2,500,000 S/P $/S . Ft of Im rovement $670.96 Grantor Chan LLC Grantee 520 East Coo er Partners LLC Prior Sale Date Se tember 1, 2006 Prior Sales Price 1,999,000 Prior S/P $/S . Ft of Im rovement $536.50 Grantor Charlene Ro ce Grantee Chan LLC Financin Cash to Seller Prior Sale Date December 11, 1996 Prior Sales Price $975,000 Prior S/P $/S . Ft of Im rovement $261.67 Prior Sale Date November 2, 1981 Prior Sales Price $425,000 Prior S/P $/S . Ft of Im rovement $114.06 44 ~g w., .n..~.~~~.~~ ~.~~... ,~ _r ~_~~.~~~ ~ ~ .. .. Name As en S uare Le al Unit B Location 607 East Coo er Ave Im rovement Size 3,309 sf Above - 763 sf Below 4,072 sf Buildin T e 3 stories lus Partial Basement Use 1 commercial unit and 96 residential units Land Size Common Element Zonin CC Year Built 1970 Sale Date Febru 15, 2008 Sale Price $7,000,000 $/S . Ft. ofIm rovement $1,719.06 Grantor As en B Commercial Pro e Grantee Anderson Commercial Pro e LLC etal Financin Conventional Loan Ca Rate of Time of Sale 2.9% Prior Sales Sale Date December 1, 1977 Prior Sales Price $500,000 Prior S/P $/S . Ft of Im rovement $122.79 Name La Fave Buildin Le a1 COA Bk 9b Parts of Lots G, H& I Location 531 & 535 East Coo er Irn rovement Size 9,725 sf 5,403 sf Retai14,322 sf Free Mkt Resident Buildin T e 3- 2 sto Histo Bldin s Use Retail - Office Land Size 6,500 +/- sf Zonin CC Year Built 1888 Sale Date Februa 20, 2008 Sale Price $14,600,000 $/S . Ft. of Im rovement $1,501.29 Grantor Stein Eriksen Famil PT LLLP Grantee O al Holdin s LLC etal Financin Cash to Seller Adjustments Required Time - Values in Aspen where stabilizing in 2008 no time adjustment was required Location - Based on Rental Rate Configuration - Based on Rental Rate Age - Based on Effective Age Use - Based on Size On Site Parking - Based on Sales of Condominiumized Parking Spaces 45 ~'~ Comparable Sales Analysis Sales Grid Subject Comparable Sale 1 , ~. : Cu~,~~~u~rt ~ ~e~al CC1A Bic ~9.:: :. . Asp~~f ~»adc~ . ~1sij Unit(s) - Lots North 60' of Lot 0 Unit RB-1 , _ , , Adt~t~s .~ , 3~ 6;Eas~~T~sg~s'St ~U,'1'E~sC H~a~ A~r.e , S~(~ E~ti`~per. , Proximity _ . ,, Sc-urce :'~ : " ;-: : ' ° . ;~~1alic ~co~ds ~s~ae~1~~~ ;,, , ; ; , : ~i~s~ ~c~s ;: : . , -, , I~1s riai ` ,. _ - ~ ~ - , , Sale Price $2,500,000 . ... . . ,. , . ., , Lr~p~ ~ave~~t~e ;, . Configuration - Effective Size ~ , ..; . : . . .: ~Effe+~~iv~ ,~"~,~~s ~c+e. Sales Price $/Sq Ft .; _ r: . . , F~i~anci~g ~i~essi~a ~, ; . ` Effective Date & Date of Sale ~, , , ?Esfiat~e;~rest, Location - ~~~~ 2,670 3,'~6 , . 1,863 $~~tl(t;~IOQ $1,341.92 ~issur~e ~a -~uivatent . ~as~ ~a ~~~er 19-Apr-08 16-Apr-08 0.00% . :.: . ..:. : ::. -... ;F~e~i~a,ple; - , .,:~~- a~r~pl~e ``-_ .. 7~~i3i~g , . r; ~~ : ; , Present Use ~. ,,.; . , ... ..,.. ,:..~..:: . ~g~t~'i~sf~e :;' , Quality of Construction & Finish ;r~e„~~~+~t~u~ ~; " - Unit Con~guration ,. .. , ... Burlic~ale":''' ; ` . Condition ~mc~tin~t.~t~Ittty ~` ~ Energy Ef~ciencies Items ~eic~*~r~r~~p:~~ ~.~~n~l Site Size +/- Sq Ft F~r~n~~ty-;.' .. Net Adjustments 'N.st ~,.A~ jr~st~-ents Indicated Value without Parking Cu~p~t'~~bn'~Iti~>~'a~rkfn~ . Indicated Value R~.~~~~ tQ~IA~lr~f~VV, , _., . , ~0.., . ,, -: ~~ . ,;. ~35:U4%o 2 Retail Stores 1 Rstrnt 0.00% . , ' %~t~ ~c~ ~. ~ , ". Good Similar ' , {:~~ :; , ~~~,, ~ . To Code? To Code? ,:.,: ,: ~ , °' '~;~Sir~tpls- ; , , . : : .: . ,.,::. ;~~~.. . ~~ , , ?~ : ~ 1,980 Common Element ,. ~c-ne .' `'' . ra~e; . ~ ;U -7.00% '~1,~~17,99 $3,332,125.60 ~4:~0 $3,332,125.60 ~ ,t-.JS~+~~~fJV~~ViI 96 ~ o Sales Grid , . .. ~Cc~ndQ~i~tium ~=I~a1 ' Unit(s) - Lots A+~d~.ss . : : Proximity S~iur,ee , ` . . Sale Price _ . .. ;- ~ia~tnr'~~~~aa~t'a~ixe. . Configuration - Effective Size „ , ~'+s~'~BC~'~~ ~~YE1S °~!fi*~~C Sales Price $/Sq Ft .. , .; . . ~ii~anc~;g µ~c~ssi~~ , . ` Effective Date & Date of Sale , ,;,<.,:..,_,..._ ~ _.,.. . ~i~~?~~st'.:: . ;.:: .. . . .. , . Location I'ulilic;Records i~nspectic~n Fublic.Recc~rds~:~n~pect~c~i~ ' $7,000,000 , ~... 3;~3~:, ~s~'7~. . `-' 2,670 3,690 ,. , ..; . , ,...`:. ;~~y{~~}~Q ,. , $1,897.02 As~~ Ca~at ~quivalent ; ~a,&~' ~c? ~`a~ll~z`; . " 19-Apr-08 15-Feb-08 0.00% ,. ,; . ; ;:;r < . ...;~e:e ~~ple. .. _ ;: F . +~;~~:_;.,' ' ' .: CBD on Pedestrian Mall CBD adjacent to 28.00% ~~wl~g ,. ,. C~ . Present Use Retail :>:~ ..;;.. ,... :.:, ,. ' `~~;~~-`~~ , ;;'; ....:. . .:.. ~. . . - .-. ~ : . ,;:., . :.. , . ,::.:.: .~; : Quality of Construction & Good Finish ~ .: . . : . . : .. ':: =~ge=l~~~iv~e;:~e:; " ~,-~ Unit Configuration 2 Retail Store ,.. -..s..,., . , . ~adik~~~ee'~=:. , , ~. .--~ : ."?Nv ,. :. . . .. ..„.. - ., Condition Good ~. . . Far~i~at1'~~Uty ' , -,~OpCI Energy Efficiencies Items To Code? .,. Fees~~q~n~r~~~.;t.i~t' Lacnd : ~~e ~imple Site Size +/- Sq Ft 1,980 P+~~o~a~~:y : , ; None Net Adjustments J~ ~(~~~p~,~:y.p ~~ ~, ~jM~~1Tli.i~[Y~G7,;. '. ' ' " , .. ~ , ,..,,. . ..~i ...~.. .. . ~ , , , ' , - . . Indicated Value without Parking , ,: , :iC~~C~-ai°~i~t+e~r~i~g - ,; ;~ , Indicated Value : '';~a;:;i' ;:.: ' ' -35:4~°/a 1 Retail Store 0.00% ~~ Tenant Purchased Unit -25.00% ~`7~YE1C' . To Code? FeE ~~ple : - : .: Common Element ;; , 'N+a~s -32.00% $1~89.97 S $3,444,227.64 ;. -~ : `;_::;..'; ~ ~~~~,tli!t14:l-q,. $3,344,227.64 , ,; , ; ,: ;~~ta~md$d~~Ec~'~S-2a~00~ , ,; ,~~~~UAQ:40 97 Sales Grid Subject Comparable Sale 3 ,.: ... ,: -.;. . ,. .: ~ ' L~~ ~ve~Blt~ig :.. , ~c~l ; ., " : . ~c-~nndc-i~~ni~i =:1~ega1. ; .. 'G01~:;8~=~: %, Unit(s) - Lots North 60' of Lot 0 . - Add~r~ss ; 3~~i ~S~t: H~kins .~t~:l East I~~ ~+~ S~ 3,~ :53a Esst° Gi~r : Proximity 5~nree, Sale Price ;,- :..; Innp~ea~a~t`~i~e , ; Configuration - Effective Size ;., ., ., :. ;:: E~'fec~ve`f~~i~s:~?rice .. .: Sales Price $/Sq Ft F~n~~iig'~aa+~ssit~rn Effective Date & Date of Sale Estate'~~ite~~st.: ;:. , : Location .. . ,. , Assilm8 ~ash=~q~alent .. : :. , CBSh.tti: Sell+~' : °. 19-Apr-08 20-Feb-08 0:00% ,~ <- ; . ~~ee~~~Ie.. ~ ~ .. : : . ~.:. ::: :.- : ~~;e ~ te , , . CBD on Pedestrian Mall CBD adjacent to 28.00% Pedestrian Mall ; H. ,., , ;, ,, ~ ~ _ . - ~G ,. ; Retail Retail & Free Mkt Apt , :. . s , ;. '~~`~, . '.. . -~ ;: „ , , , t ~ :, ,, Good Similar _:. : , ; .., _ ~.: : ., ; .~p.:;,. - :~.:. ,,:~ , , 2 Retail Stores 56% Retail 44% Free Mkt Apts 'O.tlfl°la -44.00% Age;~~e~e ~?'~ge ~.. .~. .~: ; . .::. .... . Unit Configuration ~u1k;~~, ; Condition , . . ; ._~ ,,.. ~, ... Fr~tt~tta~~~1-~t~:. :; .. . .: Energy Efficiencies Items F~aegC#~w~ership of ~;;aricl .. . Site Size +/- Sq Ft Per~+o~iaity ":., , Net Adjustments , . ;.... ,. I~1~et;~:A;t1~~s~mcnts ~:, , ' Indicated Value without Parldng ,.,. ~.,. Good Similar _. ; ;; ~ ; .: ~`i'aft~d - , ':.: ~1~~~X' >~ , , To Code? To Code? ~ee ~~irnple - . 'Fee S~np~e : ,. 1,980 Common Element ` ,,' -' l'~4~i4 ; - ~~~., < ~ . .. ° -16.00% ;:`' =~1~261:4$ $3,367,082.78 ;.:.. ,: - ; , -; 'C~r~:p1~t~7-~a =~~'~'~r~ng. Indicated Value :: :.. . . ...: .. .: . . ., -., ~cru~~+ed~v'~25;~~p . . . , ,:, -.:;.,. .. _ . , ~ °:; ,' , : = SU~q $3,367,082.78 . ,....,, .. ;~ .::. :.: :.. .: . .:~;~7~,~ft1(1:Q0 48 ~~ Sales Comparison Approach - Conclusion of Fair Market Value Based upon the foregoing analysis, the Estimated Market Value via the Sales Comparison Approach is $3,325,000 to $3,375,000 Reconciliation of the Approaches Rarely do all of the approaches used in an appraisal give the same results. By way of review, the applicable approaches I used in this appraisal gave the following indications: Approach Indicated Fair Market Value ' ~ ~ , ~ ;~ ~ ~ ~'~~. j ~ ~t~~ ~ ~ ~~ , ~ e ~ , ~ r~~ , ~ E~~ , ~~ ~ :~ v ~;~ ~ i3 ... ~, . ~ " f ,,, r ~. _ ~~ , ..:, , ,.. e., ;> ,. ': , . ...,o.._.. ,.,.. Income $3,0OO,OUO to $3,225,000 ~~.es - ~~~t ~ ~~~~~~~~~}ta'~~~`~~~~ y' ~ ~ , ~ ~z. , . .~;~~~ ~. ~ . :~ _ , ~.~ The reconciliation process is often seen as nothing more than an averaging calculation: add the numbers and divide. That is hardly an accurate representation. In order for the reconciliation to be meaningful, the appraiser must consider the data and support for each of the approaches. How good is the documentation? How applicable is it to the property type? How well does it reflect the motivations of buyers and sellers? In this case, the total variation between the two approaches was about 11 %, which is well within the acceptable range for the Aspen marketplace. I could justifiably select any value in this range; however, it is important to find the best indicator. We look to buyer motivation in this case: Since Comparable Sales 1 and 2 where owner user and Comparable sale 3 was redevelopment of residential units it is my conclusion that a point near the midpoint of the array is a reasonable conclusion of market value for the subject property. Final Estimate of Fair Market Value After considering all the information and analyses in this report, I arrived at a final estimate of fair market value for the subject property. As of July 19, 2008, date of death of Fritz Lindner which is the effective date of this appraisal, I concluded that the fair market value of the property, as is, was: Three Million Two Hundred Thousand Dollars ($3,200,000.00) The value estimate is subject to the Certification and Contingent and Limiting Conditions and to the Scope of Assignment contained herein. Because of the down-turn in the economy becoming more apparent in the spring of 2008 there is not sufficient market data on which on can base an estimate of marketing time for the subject property. However, at the appraised value, it is my opinion that the subject would be likely to sell within a twelve to twenty-four months assuming no additional downward trend in market conditions in the Aspen marketplace and assuming no substantial change in tenancy and income. 49 5~ Pertinent Definitions Arm's Length Transaction A transaction between unrelated parties under no duress (Source: The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, Fourth Edition, Appraisal Institute, 2002, page 18). Assumption That which is taken to be true (Source: USPAP, 2005, page 2). Capitalization The conversion of income into value (Source: The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, Fourth Edition, Appraisal Institute, 2002 page 41). Estate Interest "A right or interest in property" (Source: The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, Fourth Edition, Appraisal Institute, 2002, p. 101). Fee Simple Estate Interest: Absolute ownership unencumbered by any other interest or estate subject only to the limitations imposed by governmental powers of t~ation, eminent domain, police powers, and escheat (Source: The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, Fourth Edition, Appraisal Institute, 2002, page 113). Leased Fee Interest: An ownership interest held by a landlord with the right of use and occupancy conveyed by lease to others; the rights of lessor (the leased fee owner) and the leased fee are specified by contract terms contained within the lease (Source: The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, Fourth Edition, Appraisal Institute, 2002, page 161). External Obsolescence An element of depreciation; a defect, usually incurable, caused by negative influences outside a site and generally incurable on the part of the owner, landlord or tenant (Source: The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, Fourth Edition, Appraisal Institute, 2002, page 106). Extraordinary Assumption An assumption, directly related to a specific assignment, which if found to be false could alter the appraiser's opinions or conclusions. Comment: Extraordinary assumptions presume as fact otherwise uncertain information about physical, legal or economic character of the subject property such as market conditions or trends; or about the integrity of data used in an analysis (Source: USPAP, 2006, page 3). Fair Market Value The Internal Revenue Service requires that the appraisal shall indicate the appraised Fair Market Value of the subject property. Fair Market Value is defined by Treasury Regulation § 1.170A(c) (2), which states: 50 ./ ~ "Fair Market Value is the price at which the property would change hands between a willing buyer and a willing seller, neither being under any compulsion to buy or sell and both having knowledge of the facts." Floor Area Ratio The relationship between the above-ground floor area of a building, as described by the building code and tl~e area of the plot on which it stands, often expressed as a decimal (e.g., a ratio of 2.Q indicates that the permissible floor area of a building is twice the total land area) (Source: The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, Fourth~Edition, Appraisal Institute, 2002, page 117). Highest and Best Use The reasonably probable and legal use of vacant land or improved property, which is physically possible, appropriately supported, financially feasible, and results in the highest value. The four criteria the highest and best use must meet are legal permissibility, physical possibility, financial feasibility and maximal productivity (Source: The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, Fourth Edition, Appraisal Institute, 2002, page 135). Income Approach The Income Approach is based on the concept that the value af the property can be expressed as being the present worth of anticipated benefits (dollar income and or amenities} to be derived from the ownership of the subject properly. Anticipated future income and/or reversions are discounted to a present worth figure through the capitalization process (see Byrl Boyce, Real Estate Appraisal Terminology, page 112). Market or Sales Comparison Approach The Market or Sales Comparison Approach is based on the concept that an informed purchaser would pay no more for a property than the cost to him of acquiring an existing property with the same utility. This approach is applicable when an active market provides sufficient authoritative sources. The Market Approach is relatively unreliable in an inactive market or in estimating the value of properties for which no real comparable sales data axe available (see Byrl Boyce, Real Estate Appraisal Terminology, page 67). Zoning The public regulation of the character and extent of real estate use through police power; accompiished by establishing districts or areas with uniform restrictions relating to improvements; structural height, area and bulk; density of population; and other aspects of the use and development of private property (Source: The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, Fourth Edition, Appraisal Institute, 2002, page 36). 51 / ~ The Appraisal Office - Aspen Ltd. Qualifications of Appraiser File No Case No Properry Address 401 East HYman Avenue & 308 South Mil! Street Ciry Aspen Counry Pitkin State Colorado Zip Code 81611 LenderlC{ient The Estate of Fritz Lindner Address 66966 Ten Peals Ct Bend OR 97701 i Dave Ritter, MSA The Appraisal Office - Aspen, Ltd 210 South Galena St Suite 29 Aspen, CO 81611 Federal Tax ID Number: 84-1459914 ;Phone: (970) 920-1002 Fax: (970) 925-3603 ~E-mail: appraisaloffice~,sopris.net : Real Estate Appraiser since 1978 al Estate Appraisal Licensing: Certified General Appraiser - CG0131 ~907 piration Date: 12/31/2007 jReal Estate & Appraisal Experience: j 1994- Fee Appraisal and Consultation, Aspen, CO ~ 1991-93 Chief Appraiser Pitkin County Assessors Office, Aspen, CO 1986-90 Appraiser ?~ i Pitkin C ~unty Assessors Office, Aspen, CO ~1984-86 Appraiser II Eagle County Assessors Office. Eagle, CO j1982-84 Fee Appraiser, Grand Junc:ion, CO '~ 1978-82 Fee Appraiser, Cedar Falls, IA j 1976-78 Norman W. Ritter Realtors, Marketing Real Estate. Cedar Falls, IA Real Estate Appraisal Experience: ,Single-Family, Townhouses, Condominiums, Income Properties, Vacant Land, IDevelopment Properties, Hotel and Mote(s, Commercial Industrial, Office. Warehouse, 'Retail Properties, Conservation Easements, Condemnation & Eminent Domain, Estate& ;Tax Planning, Percent Complete Inspections and General Consultation Regarding Real '~Estate matters ~Expert Witness: State Board of Equalization (Colorado) I State Board of Assessment (Colarado) ilCounty Board of Equalization (Eagle, San Miguel & Pitkin Counties, Coiorado) ~iState District Court - Varies Districts in Colorado United States District Court - District of Colorado ~ Federal Bankruptcy Court - District of Colorado IValuation Trial to Jury Commission - CDOT - State of Colorado 'Superior Court of California County of San Obispo & County of Venture Past and Present Appointments: jPanel of Binding Arbitrators - Eagle, Garfield, Pitkin & Summit Counties, Colorado 'Condemnation of Right of Way - Colorado Department of Transportation iHearing Officer, County Board of Equalization - Eagle & Pitkin Counties, Colorado CIiCkFORMS Appralsal Software 800-622-9727 rage 1 u oi 16 ~~