Exhibit 99.3
575 Lexington Avenue, New York, New York 10022
Tel: 212.906.9400 Fax: 212.935.5935
Tel: 212.906.9400 Fax: 212.935.5935
Appraisal of
Cedar Rim Apartments
7920 110th Avenue SE
Newcastle, Washington 98056
7920 110th Avenue SE
Newcastle, Washington 98056
June 8, 2011
Mr. Trent Johnson
Vice President
CONCAP EQUITIES, INC.
4582 South Ulster Street, Suite 1100
Denver, CO 80237
Vice President
CONCAP EQUITIES, INC.
4582 South Ulster Street, Suite 1100
Denver, CO 80237
Re: | Appraisal of Cedar Rim Apartments 7920 110th Avenue SE Newcastle, Washington 98056 KTR No. 11-1-00129 |
Dear Mr. Johnson:
KTR Real Estate Advisors LLC (“KTR”) has completed a self contained appraisal of the above-referenced property as requested by our May 18, 2011 engagement letter. The purpose of this assignment is to estimate the Market Value of the Leased Fee Interest in the subject property as of June 1, 2011. The property was inspected by a staff member of KTR on March 4, 2011, when the property was last appraised by KTR. The report has been prepared for CONCAP EQUITIES, INC. for client’s use in asset valuation and financial reporting purposes.
Situated as noted above, the subject property consists of a 4.37-acre site improved with a 104-unit, garden-style apartment complex. The subject was developed in 1981 and contains 109,824 square feet of rentable area. The property is operating at stabilized occupancy and is in good physical condition. The subject property is more fully described, legally and physically, within the attached report.
Based on the analysis contained in the attached report, the Market Value of the Leased Fee Interest in the subject property, as of June 1, 2011 is:
ELEVEN MILLION SEVEN HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS
($11,700,000)
($11,700,000)
EXTRAORDINARY ASSUMPTION
KTR previously inspected the subject property on March 4, 2011. The scope of work of this appraisal did not include a physical inspection of the subject property. The values derived herein are based on the extraordinary assumption that the physical condition of the subject property has not materially changed since the date of our last inspection. Should this assumption be incorrect, the values reported herein may be materially impacted.
The attached report, in its entirety, including all assumptions and limiting conditions, which is an integral part of, and inseparable from, this transmittal letter, contains the data, information, analyses and calculations upon which the value conclusion indicated herein are based. The report was prepared in compliance with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) as set forth by the Appraisal Foundation and in accordance with the Code of Professional Ethics and Standards of Professional Practice of the Appraisal Institute.
575 Lexington Avenue, New York, NY 10022
TEL 212.906.9400• FAX 212.935.5935
CONCAP EQUITIES, INC. Cedar Rim Apartments June 8, 2011 Page 2 |
It has been a pleasure to be of service to you. Please do not hesitate to call either Terence Tener at (212) 906-9403 or Thomas Tener at (212) 906-9499 with any questions you may have regarding our assumptions, observations or conclusions.
Respectfully submitted,
KTR REAL ESTATE ADVISORS LLC
By: | Terence Tener, MAI, ASA | By: | Thomas J. Tener | |||||
Managing Partner | Managing Partner | |||||||
By: | Shaun Kest Appraiser |
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page i |
INTRODUCTION
Title Page | ||||
Letter of Transmittal | ||||
Table of Contents | i | |||
Certificate of Appraisal | ii | |||
Basic Assumptions and Limiting Conditions | iii | |||
Subject Property Photographs & Maps | v | |||
PREMISES OF THE APPRAISAL | ||||
Summary of Salient Facts and Conclusions | 1 | |||
Property Identification | 2 | |||
Sales History | 2 | |||
Purpose and Scope of the Appraisal | 2 | |||
Definition of Market Value | 3 | |||
Property Rights Appraised | 3 | |||
Intended Use and User | 3 | |||
Exposure Time | 4 | |||
PRESENTATION OF DATA | ||||
Regional and Area Analysis | 5 | |||
Neighborhood Analysis | 7 | |||
Site Analysis | 8 | |||
Improvement Analysis | 10 | |||
Zoning Analysis | 13 | |||
Real Estate Assessments and Taxes | 15 | |||
Apartment Market Analysis | 16 | |||
ANALYSIS OF DATA AND CONCLUSIONS | ||||
Highest and Best Use | 22 | |||
Valuation Process | 23 | |||
Income Capitalization Approach | 25 | |||
Sales Comparison Approach | 34 | |||
Reconciliation and Final Value Conclusion | 43 | |||
ADDENDA | ||||
Additional Subject Property Photographs | ||||
Submitted Information | ||||
Qualifications of the Appraiser |
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page ii |
CERTIFICATE OF APPRAISAL
We, Terence Tener, MAI, ASA, Thomas J. Tener and Shaun Kest certify that to the best of our knowledge and belief:
The statements of fact contained in this report are true and correct.
The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions are limited only by the reported assumptions and limiting conditions, and are our personal, unbiased professional analyses, opinions, and conclusions.
We have no present or prospective interest in the property that is the subject of this report, and we have no personal interest or bias with respect to the parties involved.
Our compensation is not contingent upon the reporting of a predetermined value or direction in value that favors the cause of the client, the value estimate, the attainment of a stipulated result, or the occurrence of a subsequent event.
Our analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared, in conformity with theUniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice.
Shaun Kest has made a personal inspection of the property that is the subject of this report.
Terence Tener, MAI, ASA and Thomas J. Tener have not made a personal inspection of the property that is the subject of this report.
This appraisal was not prepared in conjunction with a request for a specific value or a value within a given range or predicated upon loan approval.
The reported analyses, opinions and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared, in conformity with the requirements of the Code of Professional Ethics and the Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice of the Appraisal Institute.
The use of this report is subject to the requirements of the Appraisal Institute relating to review by its duly authorized representatives.
As of the date of this report, Terence Tener, MAI, ASA has completed the continuing education program of the Appraisal Institute.
Shaun Kest has been temporarily certified to transact business as a Real Estate General Appraiser (License No. 9101922).
Terence Tener, MAI, ASA, Thomas Tener and Shaun Kest have extensive experience in the appraisal of similar properties.
We have appraised or provided any other services relative to the subject property in the past three years.
KTR REAL ESTATE ADVISORS LLC
By: | Terence Tener, MAI, ASA | By: | Thomas J. Tener | By: | Shaun Kest | |||||||||
Managing Partner | Managing Partner | Appraiser |
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page iii |
BASIC ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS
This appraisal report is subject to the following assumptions and limiting conditions:
1. | No responsibility is assumed for the legal description or for matters including legal or title considerations. Title to the property is assumed to be good and marketable unless otherwise stated. | |
2. | The property is appraised free and clear of any or all liens or encumbrances unless otherwise stated. | |
3. | Responsible ownership and competent property management are assumed. | |
4. | The information furnished by others is believed to be reliable. However, no warranty is given for its accuracy. | |
5. | All engineering is assumed to be correct. The plot plans and illustrative material in this report are included only to assist the reader in visualizing the property. | |
6. | It is assumed that there are no hidden or unapparent conditions of the property, subsoil, or structures that render it more or less valuable. No responsibility is assumed for such conditions or for arranging for engineering studies that may be required to discover them. | |
7. | It is assumed that there is full compliance with all applicable federal, state, and local environmental regulations and laws unless noncompliance is stated, defined, and considered in the appraisal report. | |
8. | It is assumed that all applicable zoning and use regulations and restrictions have been complied with, unless nonconformity has been stated, defined, and considered in the appraisal report. | |
9. | It is assumed that all required licenses, certificates of occupancy, consents, or other legislative or administrative authority from any local, state, or national government or 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. | |
10. | It is assumed that the utilization of the land and improvements is within the boundaries or property lines of the property described and that there is no encroachment or trespass unless noted in the report. | |
11. | The distribution, if any, of the total valuation in this report between land and improvements applies only under the stated program of utilization. The separate allocations for land and buildings must not be used in conjunction with any other appraisal and are invalid if so used. | |
12. | Unless otherwise stated, possession of this report, or a copy thereof, does not carry with it the right of publication. | |
13. | The appraiser, by reason of this appraisal, is not required to give further consultation, testimony, or be in attendance in court with reference to the property in question unless arrangements have been previously made. | |
14. | Unless otherwise stated, neither all nor any part of the contents of this report (especially any conclusions as to value, the identity of the appraiser, or the firm with which the appraiser is connected) shall be disseminated to the public through advertising, public relations, news, sales, or other media without prior written consent and approval of the appraisers. |
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page iv |
15. | Unless otherwise stated in this report, the existence of hazardous substances, including without limitation asbestos, polychlorinated biphenyls, petroleum leakage, or agricultural chemicals, which may or may not be present on the property, or other environmental conditions, were not called to the attention of nor did the appraiser become aware of such during the appraiser’s inspection. The appraiser has no knowledge of the existence of such materials on or in the property unless otherwise stated. The appraiser, however, is not qualified to test such substances or conditions. If the presence of such substances, such as asbestos, urea formaldehyde foam insulation, or other hazardous substances or environmental conditions, may affect the value of the property, the value is predicated on the assumption that there is no such condition on or in the property or in such proximity thereto that it would cause a loss in value. No responsibility is assumed for any such conditions, or for any expertise or engineering knowledge required to discover them. The client is urged to retain an expert in this field, if desired. | |
16. | The Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) became effective January 26, 1992. The appraiser has not made a specific compliance survey and analysis of this property to determine whether or not it is in conformity with the various detailed requirements of the ADA. It is possible that a compliance survey of the property, together with a detailed analysis of the requirements of the ADA, could reveal that the property is not in compliance with one or more of the requirements of the Act. If so, this fact could have a negative effect upon the value of the property. Since the appraiser has no direct evidence relating to this issue, he did not consider possible non-compliance with the requirements of the ADA in estimating the value of the property. | |
17. | Former personal property items such as kitchen and bathroom appliances are now either permanently affixed to the real estate or are implicitly part of the real estate in that tenants expect the use of such items in exchange for rent and never gain any of the rights of ownership. Furthermore, the intention of the owners is not to remove the articles which are required under the implied or express Warranty of Habitability. The accounting for the short-lived nature of such items is reflected in a reserves for replacement expense category. |
EXTRAORDINARY ASSUMPTION
KTR previously inspected the subject property on March 4, 2011. The scope of work of this appraisal did not include a physical inspection of the subject property. The values derived herein are based on the extraordinary assumption that the physical condition of the subject property has not materially changed since the date of our last inspection. Should this assumption be incorrect, the values reported herein may be materially impacted.
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page v |
SUBJECT PROPERTY PHOTOGRAPHS
View of typical building
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page vi |
REGIONAL MAP
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page vii |
NEIGHBORHOOD MAP
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page 1 |
SUMMARY OF SALIENT FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS | ||
Date of Value | June 1, 2011 | |
Date of Inspection | March 4, 2011 | |
Property Name | Cedar Rim Apartments | |
Property Address | 7920 110th Avenue SE | |
Newcastle, Washington 98056 | ||
Property Location | East side of 110th Avenue SE, in Newcastle, Washington. | |
Tax Identification | 3343300800. | |
Purpose of the Appraisal | To estimate the Market Value of the Leased Fee Interest in the subject property, free and clear of financing. | |
Site Size | Irregular shaped site that contains a total of 4.37 acres | |
Zoning | R – 24 (Urban Residential) | |
Improvements | A 104-unit garden apartment complex completed in 1981 with 13 apartment buildings, hot tub, barbeque area and mature landscaping. The property is operating at stabilized occupancy and is in good physical condition. | |
2011 Assessed Value | $14,861,000 | |
Highest and Best Use | ||
As If Vacant | Residential development. | |
As Improved | Continued use of the existing improvements. | |
VALUATION INDICATIONS | ||
Income Capitalization | $11,700,000 | |
Stabilized NOI | $643,862 | |
Cap Rate | 5.5% | |
Value per Unit | $112,500 | |
Value per Sq Ft | $106.53 | |
Sales Comparison | $12,000,000 | |
Value per Unit | $115,385 | |
Value per Sq Ft | $109.27 | |
Cost Approach | N/A | |
APPRAISED VALUE | $11,700,000 | |
Value per Unit | $112,500 | |
Value per Sq Ft | $106.53 |
EXTRAORDINARY ASSUMPTION
KTR previously inspected the subject property on March 4, 2011. The scope of work of this appraisal did not include a physical inspection of the subject property. The values derived herein are based on the extraordinary assumption that the physical condition of the subject property has not materially changed since the date of our last inspection. Should this assumption be incorrect, the values reported herein may be materially impacted.
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page 2 |
PREMISES OF THE APPRAISAL | ||
Identification | The subject property consists of the land and improvements at 7920 110th Avenue SE within Newcastle, King County, Washington. The King County Assessor identifies the property as Tax Parcel Identification Number 3343300800. The property consists of a 4.37-acre site improved with 104- unit garden apartment complex known as Cedar Rim Apartments. | |
Sales History of the Subject Property | According to public records, the current owner of the subject property is Cedar Rim Apartments LLC, who has owned the property since April 2009, when it was transferred by Consolidated Capital Institutional Properties/3 LP a related party. We are not aware of any transfers of ownership within the three-year period prior to the effective date of value. It is our understanding that the subject property is not being listed for sale and we are not aware of any contracts of sale pending as of the date this report was prepared. | |
Purpose and Scope of the Appraisal | The purpose of the appraisal is to estimate the market value of the subject property as of the date of value. It is the intent of the appraisers that the analysis, opinions and conclusions of this report be considered an unbiased, objective investigation performed by a disinterested third party with complete objectivity as to the outcome of the analysis. | |
According to the Appraisal Institute’s Code of Professional Ethics and Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice, the scope of the appraisal is cited as “the extent of the process of collecting, confirming, and reporting data” included in an appraisal report. All appropriate data deemed pertinent to the solution of the appraisal problem has been collected and confirmed. In our appraisal of the subject property, we have: | ||
1. Inspected the subject property and its environs. | ||
2. Reviewed demographic and other socioeconomic trends pertaining to the city and region. | ||
3. Examined regional apartment market conditions, with special emphasis on the subject property’s apartment submarket. | ||
4. Investigated lease and sale transactions involving comparable properties in the influencing market. | ||
5. Reviewed the existing rent roll and discussed the leasing status with the building manager and leasing agent. In addition, we have reviewed the subject property’s recent operating history and those of competing properties. | ||
6. Utilized appropriate appraisal methodology to derive estimates of value. | ||
7. Reconciled the estimates of value into a single value conclusion. |
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page 3 |
Definition of Market Value | The definition of Market Value used in this appraisal report is taken from the Appraisal Institute’s The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, Fifth Edition, Chicago, Illinois, Appraisal Institute, 2010, which states: | |
“The most probable price that a property should bring in a competitive and open market under all conditions requisite to a fair sales, the buyer and seller each acting prudently and knowledgeably, and assuming the price is not affected by undue stimulus. Implicit in this definition is the consummation of a sale as of a specified date and the passing of title from seller to buyer under conditions whereby: | ||
1. Buyer and seller are typically motivated; | ||
2. Both parties are well informed or well advised, and acting in what they consider their best interests; | ||
3. A reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open market; | ||
4. Payment is made in terms of cash in U.S. dollars or in terms of financial arrangements comparable thereto; and | ||
5. The price represents the normal consideration for the property sold unaffected by special or creative financing or sales concessions granted by anyone associated with the sale.” | ||
Property Rights Appraised | The interest being appraised is the Leased Fee Interest. Leased Fee Interest is defined in The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, Fifth Edition, Chicago, Illinois, Appraisal Institute, 2010, as: | |
An ownership interest where the possessory interest has been granted to another party by creation of a contractual landlord tenant relationship, i.e. a lease. The rights of the lessor (the leased fee owner) and the leased fee are specified by contract terms contained within the lease. | ||
Intended Use and Intended User | The intended user of this report is CONCAP EQUITIES INC. It is understood that this appraisal will be utilized by the intended user as an aid in asset evaluation and financial reporting. All others reading or relying on this appraisal report are considered unintended users of this appraisal. The appraisal cannot be used for any other reason than that stated above. The appraisers are not responsible for unauthorized use of this report. | |
This appraisal has been prepared in compliance with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) as promulgated by the Appraisal Standards Board of the Appraisal Foundation as well as the Code of Professional Ethics and Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice of the Appraisal Institute. The presentation of data and results of our analysis are presented in a Self-contained Report format as set forth under Standards Rule 2-2 of the USPAP. |
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page 4 |
Exposure Time | According to the previously stated definition of Market Value, the property must be allowed a reasonable time to be exposed in the open market to achieve the appraised value. Exposure is defined by the Appraisal Institute, The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, Fifth Edition, Chicago, Illinois, Appraisal Institute, 2010, as: | |
“1. The time a property remains on the market. | ||
2. The estimated length of time the property interest being appraised would have been offered on the market prior to the hypothetical consummation of a sale at market value on the effective date of the appraisal; a retrospective estimate based upon an analysis of past events assuming a competitive and open market.” | ||
Exposure time is always presumed to occur prior to the effective date of the appraisal. The overall concept of reasonable exposure encompasses not only adequate, sufficient and reasonable time but also adequate, sufficient and reasonable effort. Exposure time is different for various types of real estate and value ranges and under various market conditions. | ||
Review of transfer records suggests that there is an active investor market for good quality apartment properties; however, conventional sources of capital is somewhat limited and mortgage underwriting has remained conservative with a greater level of equity required to obtain financing in comparison to the period leading up to September 2008. These factors have impacted sales activity for most types of investment grade real estate. | ||
We believe that if the subject property were exposed to the market for a reasonable period of time prior to the effective date of this appraisal, which we consider to be a period of up to 12 months, the subject property would transfer at an appropriate price, that is to say, the appraised value. Support for this exposure period is provided by the PwCReal Estate Investor Survey First Quarter 2011,which indicates that marketing times for apartment properties in the national market range from none to 18 months. The average marketing time equates to 6.00 months, down from 8.06 months reported one year ago. This marketing period is supported by data in the local market. | ||
We acknowledge that in appraising the property to sell after the aforementioned exposure period, we must place most emphasis on the buyer’s expectations and yield requirements. The value conclusion rendered for the property through implementation of the Income Capitalization Approach has been accorded most significance as this technique most closely emulates buyer’s expectations and yield requirements. The market value estimate concluded herein assumes an exposure and marketing period of up to 12 months has occurred. |
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page 5 |
REGIONAL ANALYSIS | ||
Overview | The subject is located in King County which is part of the Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). The MSA is comprised of three counties including King, Pierce and Snohomish. The Seattle metropolitan area is located in north western portion of the state. | |
Population | According to the U.S Census Bureau King County, the MSA and State all experienced positive population growth from 2000 to 2010. These trends are expected to continue through 2015. The following table illustrates the population statistics for the County, MSA and the State from 2000 through 2015. |
HISTORICAL POPULATION AND PROJECTIONS
2000 | 2010 | 2015 | % Change | % Change | ||||||||||||||||
Census | Estimate | Forecast | 2000-2010 | 2009-2015 | ||||||||||||||||
King County | 1,737,034 | 1,911,496 | 2,031,374 | 10.0 | % | 6.3 | % | |||||||||||||
Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue MSA | 3,043,877 | 3,412,918 | 3,639,858 | 12.1 | % | 6.7 | % | |||||||||||||
Washington | 5,894,121 | 6,690,746 | 7,162,483 | 1.4 | % | 7.1 | % |
Source: U.S. Census Bureau |
Economic Overview | According to the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, the MSA’s total civilian labor force was 1,459,800 as of April 2011. The non-farm labor force as of April 2011 was 1,387,800. The unemployment rate stood at 8.3 percent as of April 2011, lower than the State as a whole and the National unemployment rate of 9.1 and 9.0 percent, respectively. | |
A majority of the MSA’s work force is employed in the Trade, Transportation and Utilities, Services, and Government sectors. Total employment in the MSA has increased by 1.7 percent over the past year. The largest increase was in the Mining and Logging sector, which had an increase over 14.3 percent over the prior year. The Construction sector has been hit the hardest over the past year with a decrease of 5.5 percent. The following table illustrates the diversification of the MSA’s work force as of April 2011, the most recent information available at the time of the report. |
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page 6 |
SEATTLE-TACOMA-BELLEVUE MSA
WORK FORCE BY INDUSTRY — AS OF APRIL 2011
WORK FORCE BY INDUSTRY — AS OF APRIL 2011
Number Employed | 12-Month | |||||||
Industry Category | (In Thousands) | Percent Change | ||||||
Mining and Logging | 0.8 | 14.3 | % | |||||
Construction | 60.3 | -5.5 | % | |||||
Manufacturing | 154.3 | 3.3 | % | |||||
Trade, Transportation and Utilities | 252.5 | 3.1 | % | |||||
Information | 85.3 | 2.2 | % | |||||
Financial Activities | 76.5 | 0.3 | % | |||||
Professional and Business Services | 207.6 | 6.1 | % | |||||
Educational and Health Services | 167.8 | 2.1 | % | |||||
Leisure and Hospitality | 129.6 | 0.9 | % | |||||
Other Services | 48.7 | -1.8 | % | |||||
Government | 204.4 | -1.7 | % | |||||
Total | 1,387.80 | 1.7 | % |
Notes: Seasonally Adjusted | ||
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics; Compiled by KTR |
Transportation | Primary access in the County is provided by Interstates 5, 90 and 405. In addition, there are numerous state roads which provide access to the area. The Port of Seattle is a port district that runs Seattle’s seaport and airport. Among its facilities are the Seattle-Tacoma International Airport in SeaTac, the Shilshole Bay Marina, the Maritime Industrial Center and Fishermen’s Terminal on Salmon Bay. In addition it operates cargo terminals and a grain elevators on Smith Cove and numerous cargo terminals on Elliott Bay, Harbor Island and the Duwamish Waterway. The Port of Seattle also controls recreational and commercial moorage facilities and two cruise ship terminals. | |
Conclusions | The outlook for the area is relatively stable. The MSA has experienced slight employment increases over the past year. The transportation network in the MSA provides good access to the surrounding areas. Given the current state of the national economy, projecting the near term outlook remains uncertain. Considering the diversity within the MSA’s workforce, the proximity to large cities and a transportation network with good access to surrounding areas, the long-term outlook for the region remains positive. |
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page 7 |
NEIGHBORHOOD ANALYSIS | ||
Overview | The subject property is located in Newcastle an eastern suburb of Seattle. Newcastle is bordered by Bellevue to the north, Renton to the south, Issaquah to the east and Lake Washington to the west. Newcastle was one of the region’s earliest coal mining areas and its railroad link to Seattle was the first in King County. Coal delivered by rail from Newcastle’s mines to Seattle fueled the growth of the Port of Seattle and attracted railroads to the area, most notably the Great Northern Railway. Coal mining in the area stopped in the 1960s and the area is now a suburban community with most residents working in Seattle, Bellevue or Renton. | |
Population | The population in Newcastle grew by 28.4 percent from 2000 to 2010, greater than the growth rate of King County and the State of Washington. DemographicsNow.com projects that the growth in Newcastle will continue at a slower rate through 2015. The following table illustrates the population statistics for Newcastle, King County and the State of Washington from 2000 through 2015. |
HISTORICAL POPULATION AND PROJECTIONS
2000 | 2010 | 2015 | % Change | % Change | ||||||||||||||||
Census | Estimate | Projection | 2000-2010 | 2010-2015 | ||||||||||||||||
Newcastle | 7,701 | 9,890 | 10,545 | 28.4 | % | 6.6 | % | |||||||||||||
King County | 1,737,034 | 1,911,496 | 2,031,374 | 10.0 | % | 6.3 | % | |||||||||||||
State of Washington | 5,894,121 | 6,690,746 | 7,162,483 | 13.5 | % | 7.1 | % |
Source: DemographicsNow |
Transportation | The subject neighborhood is well served by an extensive highway system including I- 405. Several secondary thoroughfares also traverse the immediate area and include the Coal Creek Parkway. Public transportation is provided by Sound Transit and King County Metro Transit. | |
Surrounding Improvements | Surrounding improvements consist of garden style apartment complexes, vacant land and commercial uses. | |
Conclusion | The subject neighborhood is considered to be an attractive residential location because of its excellent highway access and proximity to Seattle’s Central Business District. |
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page 8 |
SITE ANALYSIS | ||
Location | East side of 110th Avenue SE, in Newcastle, Washington. The physical address of the property is 7920 110th Avenue SE. | |
Site Area | 4.37 acres, which equates to 190,300 square feet. | |
Street Frontage | The subject has frontage along the east side of 110th Avenue SE. | |
Topography | The site has a steep upward slope from the 110th Avenue SE frontage. | |
Shape | The parcel is irregularly shaped. | |
Excess/Surplus Land | Traffic circulation throughout the property and an adequate number of parking spaces is provided on concrete paved drives and surface lots. The building setbacks allow for landscaped buffers, similar to surrounding properties. There does not appear to be excess or surplus land. | |
Utilities | All customary municipal services and utility hookups are provided. | |
Soil Information | No adverse conditions were readily apparent. | |
Flood Hazard | According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the subject property is not in a flood zone. The corresponding map number is 53033C0675F which is a non-printed panel. | |
Easements andEncroachments | No title report or survey showing the location of easements was provided in connection with this assignment. Thus, it is not possible to make a definitive conclusion regarding any potential impacts on value of the location of any such easements or encroachments. Visual observations of the site revealed no adverse easements or encroachments. It appears as though the site is encumbered by utility and access easements typical of a developed site. It is specifically assumed that any easements, restrictions or encroachments that might appear against the title would have no adverse impact on marketability or value. | |
Environmental | No readily observable adverse environmental site conditions were noted. No environmental reports were provided for review. | |
Accessibility/Visibility | Ingress and egress to the property is via the 110th Avenue SE frontage. Accessibility of the site is good. | |
Improvements | A 104-unit garden apartment complex completed in 1981 with 13 apartment buildings, hot tub, barbeque area and mature landscaping. The property is operating at stabilized occupancy and is in good physical condition. | |
Conclusions | The physical attributes of the site are well suited for the existing development and use. |
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page 9 |
SITE MAP
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page 10 |
IMPROVEMENT ANALYSIS | ||
Year Built/Renovated | The facility was completed in 1981 as a garden-style apartment complex. There was a major renovation of all of units within the last three years. | |
Layout & Configuration | The complex consists of 13 four-story garden apartment buildings containing 104 apartments with a rentable area of 109,824 square feet. The buildings are sited along internal drives that are integrated with the parking lots. | |
Leasable Area/Unit Mix | The following chart summarizes the unit mix and sizes of the various floor plans at the subject property as indicated by a review of client provided rent roll data and floor plans. |
UNIT MIX AND FLOOR AREAS
Type | Mix | Size | Total Area | |||||||||
2 Bed/1 Bath | 5 | 1,056 | 5,280 | |||||||||
2 Bed/2 Bath | 99 | 1,056 | 104,544 | |||||||||
Totals/Averages | 104 | * | 1,056 | 109,824 |
* | Includes Office Unit | |
Source: Client provided rent roll data and floor plans; compiled by KTR |
Floor Plans | As indicated, the property offers predominately two-bedroom floor plans with two bathrooms. Some units have one bathroom; however, they are all the same size. Each floor plan provides a living room off a small entry foyer and dining room off the kitchen area. Washer and dryers are provided in all of the units. In addition each unit has a fire place and private balconies. | |
EXTERIOR | ||
Structure | The foundations consist of reinforced concrete slabs, poured on grade. Structural framing is wood stud walls with interior gypsum-clad drywall. | |
Floors | The floors are constructed of engineered wood trusses. The ceiling heights are approximately 8 to 10 feet. | |
Walls | The exterior of the buildings are vinyl siding. | |
Windows | Individual unit windows are single pane glass set in aluminum frames. Entry doors are metal set in wood frames. Sliding glass doors provide access to the balconies. | |
Roof | The buildings have pitched roofs with composition shingles. | |
INTERIOR FINISHES | ||
Walls and Ceilings | Textured and painted drywall. | |
Flooring | Flooring consists of carpeting, wood and tile. |
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page 11 |
Kitchens | Typical appliance package consisting of a refrigerator/freezer, full-size electric range with oven, microwave and dishwasher. Cabinets are wood and countertops are laminate. | |
Bathrooms | Shower/tub, toilet, vanity with sink and mirrored medicine cabinet. Tubs have a ceramic tile wainscoting. | |
Unit Amenities | The units have washer/dryer, fireplace, walk-in closets and balconies. | |
MECHANICAL SYSTEMSHVAC | Air and heat is provided by individual split systems with exterior condensers. The system is similar to competing properties. | |
Electric Service | Adequate electric service is provided. Each apartment has a separate panel. | |
Plumbing | Apartment-grade plumbing systems are installed. Each unit is serviced by an electric water heater. | |
Fire Protection | The subject property is not equipped with a fire sprinkler system. The apartments are fit with smoke detectors. | |
ANCILLARY AREAS | ||
Landscaping | Landscaping is of mature vegetation. Native trees and shrubs are plentiful throughout the common areas and between buildings. Seasonal color is provided in beds along the main entrance points and near the pool and office area. | |
Parking | The internal drive incorporates the surface parking lots. There are approximately 300 parking spaces provided. The drives and parking lots are macadam paved. | |
Recreational Amenities | A hot tub, barbeque area and mature landscaping. | |
FF&EPersonal Property | The subject property has office furnishings and equipment for the staff in the office and various chairs and tables for the barbeque area. Kitchen appliances are also part of personal property. The FF&E are similar to competitive properties. | |
CONDITION/MAINTENANCE | ||
Exterior | Good condition. Overall maintenance appears adequate. | |
Roof | Good condition. | |
Interiors | Good condition. Overall maintenance appears adequate. | |
Common Area Amenities | Good condition. Overall maintenance appears adequate. | |
Sidewalks & Paving | Good condition. Overall maintenance appears adequate. | |
Landscaping | Good condition. Overall maintenance appears adequate. |
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page 12 |
Environmental Conditions | No readily observable adverse conditions were noted during the site visit. | |
ELEMENTS OF DEPRECIATION | Based on our field inspection, we note that some elements of depreciation are present at the subject property. | |
Physical Deterioration | The overall physical condition is good with adequate maintenance levels. Physical deterioration is primarily limited to general aging and normal wear and tear. No material elements of deferred maintenance were noted during the appraiser’s inspection of the property. Carpet and mechanical equipment in the individual units are updated and/or replaced on an as-needed basis. According to Marshall Valuation Service, buildings similar to the subject property have an economic life of approximately 50 years. The actual chronological age of the property is 30 years. As a result of on-going maintenance, the effective age is estimated to be less than the actual age of the improvements. The effective age is estimated at 10 years. | |
Capital Improvements | No major capital improvements are planned in the near term. | |
Functional Obsolescence | The subject property’s design, systems and floor plans are consistent with traditional garden style apartment complexes. The property has operated at rental rates and occupancy levels that are consistent with that of other similar properties within the influencing market, attesting to its functional adequacy and market acceptance. Considering these factors, no adjustment for functional obsolescence is required. | |
External Obsolescence | External obsolescence is a loss in value resulting from conditions that are present outside the subject property and is usually incurable. No site-specific external obsolescence was noted. | |
Conclusions | The subject improvements have adequate functional utility, conform well to the general character of the neighborhood and are generally similar to competitors. |
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page 13 |
ZONING ANALYSIS | ||
Introduction | According to King County, the subject property is situated in an R – 24 Urban Residential District. The purpose of the urban residential zone (R) is to implement comprehensive plan goals and policies for housing quality, diversity, affordability and to efficiently use urban residential land, public services and energy. More specifically, the R – 24 District is intended to provide a mix of predominantly apartment and townhouse dwelling units, mixed-use and other development types, with a variety of densities and sizes in locations appropriate for urban densities. | |
The bulk restrictions in the R – 24 – Urban Residential District are summarized in the following table. |
R – 24 – URBAN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
RESTRICTION | SIZE | |
Minimum lot area | None | |
Minimum lot width | 30 Feet | |
Minimum street setback | 10 Feet | |
Minimum interior setback | 5 Feet | |
Maximum height | 60 Feet | |
Maximum Units Per Acre | 24 | |
Minimum Parking | ||
Multifamily Uses (2-Bedroom Units) | 1.7 spaces per unit |
Source: King County Code of Ordinances; Compiled by KTR. |
Conclusions | The subject is built to a density of 23.8 units per acre, within the maximum of 24 units per acre. According to management, there are approximately 300 parking spaces at the site, which is above the minimum requirement set forth by the zoning code. The subject property appears to represent a legal and conforming use with a legal and non-complying density. |
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page 14 |
ZONING MAP
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page 15 |
REAL ESTATE ASSESSMENTS AND TAXES | ||
Overview | According to the King County tax record, the subject property is identified as Parcel Number 3343300800. The taxes are billed annually in May and are paid in November. The taxable value is multiplied by the current tax rate to calculate the taxes payable. Revaluations occur every year. The subject’s 2011 assessment is shown below. |
SUBJECT PROPERTY ASSESSMENT
Land Value | Building Value | Taxable Value | ||||
$2,854,500 | $12,006,500 | $14,861,000 |
Source: King County Auditor’s Office |
Comparable Assessments | Similar properties within the area were surveyed to ascertain the reasonableness of the subject’s current assessment. The subject’s current assessment is $142,894 per unit. The comparables range between $122,792 and $173,896 per unit. The subject’s assessment is within the comparable range, based on discussions with the County Assessor, the assessment appears reasonable and has been processed. |
TAX COMPARABLES
Taxable | Year | Assessed | Assessment | |||||||||||||||||
Property Name | Tax ID | Value | Built | Units | Per Unit | |||||||||||||||
Cedar Rim (Subject Property) | 3343300800 | $ | 14,861,000 | 1981 | 104 | $ | 142,894 | |||||||||||||
Marina Landing | 3344500315 | $ | 23,000,000 | 1986 | 186 | $ | 123,656 | |||||||||||||
Bella Vista | 2296500200 | $ | 31,649,000 | 2000 | 182 | $ | 173,896 | |||||||||||||
Newport Crossing | 2824059026 | $ | 23,576,000 | 1990 | 192 | $ | 122,792 |
Source: King County Assessor, compiled by KTR |
Mill Rate | Mill rates have remained relatively stable over the past several years. The 2011 total mill rate applicable for all taxing authorities with jurisdiction over the subject property equates to $11.57147 per $1,000 of assessed value. | |
Real Estate Tax Projection | Future increases in reassessments are expected to reflect annual increases near the anticipated inflation rate during the same period. Tax rates are expected to remain relatively stable. The total amount is anticipated to increase at a rate near the long-term average inflation rate | |
Tax Calculation | The subject’s real estate tax liability is calculated utilizing the current assessment and the current tax rate, which equates to $171,963.61. It is noted that there are additional taxes for Surface Water, Noxious Weeds and Conservation which have been billed and processed at approximately $8,100 for the 2011 tax year. Combining the taxes payable and additional taxes equates to $180,064, which has been processed in the valuation. |
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page 16 |
APARTMENT MARKET ANALYSIS | ||
Area Housing Market | According to a market study performed by the O’Connor Consulting Group, LLC (OCGP), the subject is located in the South End submarket. The immediate area is comprised of garden style apartment complexes, vacant land and commercial uses. OCGP indicates that as of the August 2010, the most recent data available, the vacancy rate in the submarket was 5.5 percent, lower than the previous year vacancy rate of 7.5 percent. The comparables have one-, two- and three-bedroom units. As the subject consists solely of two-bedroom units, only the two-bedroom units from the comparables have been analyzed. | |
Subject Property | The subject units have average sizes and finishes consistent with that of the market. According to the April 25, 2011 rent roll, the subject’s current contract rents average $1,275.48 per month. The two-bedroom/one bathroom apartments range between $1,114.00 and $1,352.00 per month and the two-bedroom/two bathroom units range between $980.20 and $1,667.00 per month. | |
Per the rent roll, there were two units reported to be vacant; however, these units are both pre-leased. The asking rents for the two-bedroom/one bathroom apartments is $1,159 per month and the two-bedroom/two bathroom units range between $1,109 and $1,439 per month. | ||
Competitive Set | In order to determine the reasonableness of the subject’s asking rents, a survey of comparable apartment complexes in the market was conducted. The subject competes with a number of properties in the area. All of the properties are in close proximity of the subject and define the range of property, unit types and rental rates available in the market. The information regarding the rent comparables was obtained through physical inspections and direct interviews of rental agents and property managers. The following map illustrates the location of the comparable properties in relation to the subject. Data sheets summarizing details of the comparable properties follow the map. |
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page 17 |
COMPARABLE RENTAL MAP
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page 18 |
COMPARABLE RENTAL 1 | Marina Landing | |
1300 North 20th Street | ||
Renton, WA 98056 | ||
Units | 186 | |
Year Built | 1986 | |
Occupancy | 96% | |
Amenities | Washer/dryer, walk-in closets, patio or balcony, fireplaces and kitchens with standard appliances. Complex amenities include a swimming pool, spa, sauna, fitness center and some covered parking spaces. | |
Concessions | Prices change often and rents for individual floor plans are reduced as needed to help bolster occupancy. There are currently no concessions being offered at this comparable. |
RENTAL DATA
Type | Size | Rent | Rent/SF | ||||||||||||
2 Bed/1 Bath | 889 | $ | 1,135-$1,285 | $ | 1.28-$1.45 | ||||||||||
2 Bed/2 Bath | 974 | $ | 1,205-$1,355 | $ | 1.24-$1.39 |
Comments | Property is located approximately 1.6 miles south of the subject property. This property is in similar condition; however, it has superior views and amenities. |
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page 19 |
COMPARABLE RENTAL 2 | Newport Crossing | |
Coal Creek Parkway SE | ||
Newcastle, WA 98059 | ||
Units | 192 | |
Year Built | 1990 | |
Occupancy | 97% | |
Amenities | Washer/dryer, vaulted ceilings, walk-in closets, fireplaces, garages, deck/balcony and kitchens with standard appliances. Complex amenities include a swimming pool, spa/hot tub and fitness center. | |
Concessions | Prices change often and rents for individual floor plans are reduced as needed to help bolster occupancy. There are currently no concessions being offered at this comparable. |
RENTAL DATA
Type | Size | Rent | Rent/SF | |||||||||
2 Bed/1 Bath | 884-928 | $ | 1,030-$1,150 | $ | 1.11-$1.24 | |||||||
2 Bed/2 Bath | 1,191-1,385 | $ | 1,170-$1,295 | $ | 0.94-$0.98 |
Comments | Property is located approximately 1.3 miles west of the subject property. This property is in similar condition; however, it has superior amenities. |
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page 20 | |
COMPARABLE RENTAL 3 | Bella Vista Lake Washington | |
2100 Lake Washington Boulevard North | ||
Renton, WA 98056 | ||
Units | 182 | |
Year Built | 2000 | |
Occupancy | 98% | |
Amenities | Washer/dryer, vaulted ceilings, walk-in closets, fireplaces, garages and kitchens with standard appliances. Complex amenities include a swimming pool, spa/hot tub, playground and fitness center. | |
Concessions | Prices change often and rents for individual floor plans are reduced as needed to help bolster occupancy. There are currently no concessions being offered at this comparable. |
RENTAL DATA
Type | Size | Rent | Rent/SF | |||||||||
2 Bed/2 Bath | 1,151-1,482 | $ | 1,395-$1,795 | $ | 0.94-$1.21 |
Comments | Property is located approximately 1.6 miles south of the subject property. This property is in similar condition; however, it has superior views and amenities. |
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page 21 |
ANALYSIS | The comparable rental properties are all in the vicinity of the subject property. The comparable properties were constructed between 1986 and 2000. The units and complex amenities are similar to the subject. Based on the recent renovation of the subject property, the subject property’s earlier date of construction is not a significant marketing deficiency. The rental rates illustrated by the comparable properties provide a good indication as to the appropriate market rent of the subject property. | |
Two-Bedroom Units | The subject property offers two variations of two-bedroom unit floor plans, both of which are 1,056 square feet in size with asking rents ranging between $1,159 and $1,269 per month or $1.10 to $1.20 per square foot. The comparable two-bedroom units range in size from 884 to 1,482 square feet and have monthly asking rents ranging from $1,030 to $1,795 per month or $0.94 to $1.45 per square foot. |
TWO-BEDROOM FLOOR PLANS
Unit Size | Rent/Month | Rent/SF | Comment | |||||
Subject | 1,056 | $1,159 | $1.10 | Subject | ||||
1,056 | $1,269 | $1.20 | Subject | |||||
Marina Landing | 889 | $1,135-$1,285 | $1.28-$1.45 | Superior | ||||
974 | $1,205-$1,355 | $1.24-$1.39 | ||||||
Newport Crossing | 884-928 | $1,030-$1,150 | $1.11-$1.24 | Similar | ||||
1,191-1,385 | $1,170-$1,295 | $0.94-$0.98 | ||||||
Bella Vista | 1,151-1,482 | $1,395-$1,795 | $0.94-$1.21 | Superior | ||||
Subject Range | 1,056 | $1,159-$1,269 | $1.10-$1.20 | |||||
Comparable Range | 884-1,482 | $1,030-$1,795 | $0.94-$1.45 | |||||
The subject’s asking rents are bracketed by the competing properties. After considering variances for unit size and amenity package, the subject’s asking rents for the two-bedroom/one bathroom floor plans appear to be slightly below market rent and the two-bedroom/two bathroom floor plans appear to be slightly above market. Newport Crossing is considered most similar and the subject would likely achieve monthly rents similar to this range. Accordingly, monthly rents of $1,200 have been processed for the two-bedroom/one bathroom units and $1,250 per month has been processed for the two-bedroom/two bathroom units. Based on such, the subject’s gross potential rent is detailed as follows: |
SUMMARY OF ECONOMIC RENT POTENTIAL
Type | Mix | Size | Total Area | Rent | Rent/SF | Total Rent | ||||||||||||||||||
2 Bed/1 Bath | 5 | 1,056 | 5,280 | $ | 1,200 | $ | 1.14 | $ | 6,000 | |||||||||||||||
2 Bed/2 Bath | 99 | 1,056 | 104,544 | $ | 1,250 | $ | 1.18 | $ | 123,750 | |||||||||||||||
Totals/Averages | 104 | 1,056 | 109,824 | $ | 1,248 | $ | 1.18 | $ | 129,750 | |||||||||||||||
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page 22 |
HIGHEST AND BEST USE
Introduction | Highest and Best Use is defined by the Appraisal Institute in TheDictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, Fifth Edition, Chicago, Illinois, Appraisal Institute, 2010, which states: | |
That reasonably probable and legal use of vacant land or an improved property, which is physically possible, appropriately supported, financially feasible and that results in the highest value. The four criteria the highest and best use must meet are legal permissibility, physical possibility, financial feasibility and maximum productivity. | ||
There are typically two Highest and Best Use scenarios: the Highest and Best Use of the property as vacant and the Highest and Best Use of the site as if improved. | ||
HIGHEST AND BEST USE AS VACANT | ||
Definition | Highest and Best Use As Vacant is defined as “among all reasonable, alternative uses, the use that yields the highest present land value, after payments are made for labor, capital, and coordination. The use of a property based on the assumption that the parcel of land is vacant or can be made vacant by demolishing any improvements.” | |
The site is zoned within the R-24 Urban Residential Zoning District that allows for a variety of residential uses. The maximum value of a property is typically realized when a reasonable degree of homogeneity is present. Thus, conformity in use is usually a highly desirable aspect of real property, since it creates and/or maintains value. The immediate area is primarily developed with garden style apartment complexes, vacant land and commercial uses. Based on the principal of conformity and the subject’s zoning, the highest and best use of the property, if vacant, is residential development. | ||
HIGHEST AND BEST USE AS IMPROVED | ||
Definition | Highest and Best Use As Improved is defined as “the use that should be made of a property as it exists. An existing property should be renovated or retained as is so long as it continues to contribute to the total market value of the property, or until the return from a new improvement would more than offset the cost of demolishing the existing building and constructing a new one". | |
The subject represents a legal, conforming improvement relative to current zoning restrictions. No redevelopment of the site would provide a greater return to the land. Based on the fact that the potential income associated with the existing improvements provides a fair return to the land with residual income to the improvements, the highest and best use of the subject, as improved, is its current use. |
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page 23 |
VALUATION PROCESS
Introduction | There are three traditional approaches that can be employed in establishing the market value of the subject property. In practice, an approach to value is included or omitted based on the property type and the quality and quantity of information available in the marketplace. These approaches and their applicability to the valuation of the subject are summarized as follows. | |
Income Approach | The Income Capitalization Approach is based on the premise that value is derived by converting anticipated benefits into property value. Anticipated benefits include the present value of the net income and the present value of the net proceeds resulting from the re-sale of the property. | |
There are two methods of accomplishing this: (1) direct capitalization of a single year’s income by an overall capitalization rate and; (2) the discounted cash flow in which the annual cash flows and reversionary value are discounted to a present value for the remainder of the property’s productive life or over a reasonable holding (ownership) period. | ||
The subject property has an adequate operations history to determine the income-producing capabilities over the near future. In addition, performance levels of competitive properties serve as an adequate check as to the reasonableness of the subject property’s actual performance. As such, the income capitalization approach is utilized in this appraisal. | ||
Sales Comparison | The sales comparison approach is an estimate of value based upon a process of comparing recent sales of similar properties in the surrounding or competing areas to the subject property. Inherent in and central to this approach is the principle of substitution. This comparative process involves judgment as to the similarity of the subject property and the comparable sales with respect to many value factors such as location, contract rent levels, quality of construction, reputation and prestige, age and condition and the interest transferred, among others. The value estimated through this approach represents the probable price at which the subject property would be sold by a willing seller to a willing and knowledgeable buyer as of the date of value. | |
The reliability of this technique is dependent upon the availability of comparable sales data, the verification of the sales data, the degree of comparability and extent of adjustment necessary for differences and the absence of atypical conditions affecting the individual sales prices. Research revealed adequate sales activity to form a reasonable estimation of value via this approach. |
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page 24 |
The Cost Approach | The application of the cost approach is based on the principle of substitution. This principle may be stated as follows: no one is justified in paying more for a property than the cost to develop a substitute property of equivalent desirability and utility. In the case of a new building, no deficiencies in the building should exist. The Cost Approach is typically only a reliable indicator of value for (a) new properties; (b) special use properties; and (c) where the cost of reproducing the improvements is easily and accurately quantified and there is no external obsolescence. In all instances, the issue of an appropriate entrepreneurial profit — the reward for undertaking the risk of construction — remains a highly subjective factor. | |
Investors are generally not buying, selling, or lending with reliance placed on the methodology of the Cost Approach to establish value. Furthermore, based on the age of the improvements, the Cost Approach would lend little insight into the market value of the property. Accordingly, the Cost Approach has been excluded from the scope of this appraisal. | ||
Reconciliation | The final step in the appraisal process is to reconcile the various value indications into a single final estimate. Each approach is reviewed in order to determine its appropriateness relative to the subject. The accuracy of the data available and the quantity of evidence are weighted in each approach. The resulting estimate represents the subject property’s market value as defined in the appraisal. |
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page 25 |
INCOME CAPITALIZATION APPROACH
Introduction | The Income Capitalization Approach is based on the theory that value is the present worth of future benefits. The future benefits of ownership consist of the present worth of the net income which will accrue to the owner of the property, plus the present value of the net proceeds resulting from the eventual disposition of the property. The two most commonly used techniques of converting net income into value in the Income Capitalization Approach are Direct Capitalization and the Discounted Cash Flow Analysis. | |
The Direct Capitalization method is considered most relevant and has been processed. Direct Capitalization is a method utilized to convert a single year’s estimate of net income (before debt service) into an indication of value by the use of an Overall Capitalization Rate. | ||
Revenue Analysis | ||
Potential Gross Income | The potential gross income from the apartment unit rent has been calculated to be $129,750 per month or $1,557,000 for the appraised year based on the analysis and conclusions derived in the Apartment Market Analysis section. | |
Loss to Lease | Loss to lease considers a loss in income due to leases in effect, whereby effective rental rates are lower than asking, or market, rental rates. | |
The operating statements under review indicate a historical loss to lease was negative 4.5 percent of gross potential rent in 2008, positive 0.2 percent in 2009 and positive 0.8 percent in 2010. In 2009 and 2010, the los to lease suggests that contractual income was above market. Loss to lease was not budgeted for 2011. The submitted April 25, 2011 rent roll indicated a loss to lease of approximately positive 1.0 percent. Considerate of the historical data, a loss to lease of negative 3.0 percent of gross rent potential has been processed. | ||
Concessions | Concessions within the subject’s influencing area are common. Each of the properties surveyed as rent comparables offer some form of rent concession. The concessions consist of reduced rent or free rent over a portion of the lease term. | |
According to operating statements under review, concessions were 5.6 percent in 2008, 9.0 percent in 2009 and 3.3 percent in 2010. The fluctuation between 2008 and 2009 is attributed to the completion of the renovation and added incentives to prospective tenants in order to lease the property. As occupancy rates at the subject property stabilized in 2010, concessions decreased. Considerate of such, concessions of 4.0 percent have been processed in this analysis. |
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page 26 |
Vacancy/Credit Loss | The subject was reportedly 74.6 percent occupied in 2008, 93.4 percent occupied in 2009, 92.0 percent occupied in 2010 and is budgeted at 96.0 percent in 2011. As of the April 25, 2011 rent roll, the property was 100.0 percent leased. The high vacancy in 2008 is attributed to lease up following the renovation of the subject. The 2010 and current occupancy levels are consistent with the range of occupancy levels reported by competitors in the immediate vicinity. Occupancy levels for the competing properties in the influencing market area are outlined as follows: |
OVERVIEW OF COMPETITIVE OCCUPANCY LEVELS
Name | Year Built | Total Units | Occupancy | |||||||||
Marina Landing | 1986 | 186 | 96.0 | % | ||||||||
Newport Crossing | 1990 | 192 | 97.0 | % | ||||||||
Bella Vista Lake Washington | 2000 | 182 | 98.0 | % | ||||||||
Since the completion of the renovation, the subject occupancy has increased dramatically and is currently operating at stabilized occupancy. The subject should reasonably maintain this level into the foreseeable future. In addition to vacancy, the 2011 budget include a 0.5 percent allowance for bad debt. A stabilized vacancy and credit loss of 5.0 percent has been utilized in this appraisal. | ||
Administrative Units | There is one unit being utilized as the office and a deduction from potential gross income was applied in 2008, 2009 and 2010. This line item was not budgeted in 2011; however, the office is expected to be maintained at the property. Accordingly, market rent has been applied to this unit and deducted from the gross potential income equating to $15,000 for the appraised fiscal year. | |
Other Income | Typically, apartment projects receive additional revenue from sources such as utility reimbursements, vending, application fees, late fees, bad check charges and deposit forfeitures. Other income receipts at the subject property were $1,046 per unit in 2008, $1,107 per unit in 2009, $1,323 per unit in 2010 and are budgeted at $1,330 per unit in 2011. It is noted that the majority of the other income is from water and sewer reimbursements. As other income is based largely on occupancy, the budget appears reasonable and has been processed at $1,330 per unit. | |
OPERATING EXPENSES | In order to estimate expenses for the subject property, we have analyzed the subject’s operating expenses for 2008, 2009 and 2010 as well as the budget for 2011. These historical and budgeted amounts have been compared to the median dollar amount per unit reported by IREM for garden apartments in the Seattle Metropolitan Area. The subject’s operating statements under review have been reconstructed and summarized in the table on the following page. |
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page 27 |
RECONSTRUCTED OPERATING STATEMENTS
104 | 104 | 104 | 104 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 Budget | 2010 IREM | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
No. of Units | Percent | Percent | Percent | Percent | Median $/Unit | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Year | Actual | Per Unit | % of GRP | Actual | Per Unit | % of GRP | Actual | Per Unit | % of GRP | Budget | Per Unit | % of GRP | Seattle MSA | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
INCOME | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gross Rent Potential (Market Rent) | $ | 1,907,272 | $ | 18,339 | 100.0 | % | $ | 1,831,982 | $ | 17,615 | 100.0 | % | $ | 1,655,852 | $ | 15,922 | 100.0 | % | $ | 1,552,908 | $ | 14,932 | 100.0 | % | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Loss to Lease | $ | (85,392 | ) | $ | (821 | ) | -4.5 | % | $ | 4,304 | $ | 41 | 0.2 | % | $ | 12,927 | $ | 124 | 0.8 | % | $ | 0 | $ | 0 | 0.0 | % | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Concessions | $ | (106,631 | ) | $ | (1,025 | ) | -5.6 | % | $ | (165,787 | ) | $ | (1,594 | ) | -9.0 | % | $ | (54,552 | ) | $ | (525 | ) | -3.3 | % | $ | 0 | $ | 0 | 0.0 | % | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Vacancy/Credit/Non-revenue Units | $ | (484,255 | ) | $ | (4,656 | ) | -25.4 | % | $ | (120,614 | ) | $ | (1,160 | ) | -6.6 | % | $ | (131,927 | ) | $ | (1,269 | ) | -8.0 | % | $ | (61,770 | ) | $ | (594 | ) | -4.0 | % | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net Rental Income (NRI) | $ | 1,230,994 | $ | 11,836 | 64.5 | % | $ | 1,549,885 | $ | 14,903 | 84.6 | % | $ | 1,482,300 | $ | 14,253 | 89.5 | % | $ | 1,491,138 | $ | 14,338 | 96.0 | % | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Administrative Units | $ | (34,597 | ) | $ | (333 | ) | -1.8 | % | $ | (35,596 | ) | $ | (342 | ) | -1.9 | % | $ | (18,456 | ) | $ | (177 | ) | -1.1 | % | $ | 0 | $ | 0 | 0.0 | % | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other Income | $ | 108,753 | $ | 1,046 | 5.7 | % | $ | 115,096 | $ | 1,107 | 6.3 | % | $ | 137,565 | $ | 1,323 | 8.3 | % | $ | 138,348 | $ | 1,330 | 8.9 | % | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total Property Income (EGI) | $ | 1,305,150 | $ | 12,550 | 68.4 | % | $ | 1,629,385 | $ | 15,667 | 88.9 | % | $ | 1,601,409 | $ | 15,398 | 96.7 | % | $ | 1,629,486 | $ | 15,668 | 104.9 | % | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
EXPENSES | % of EGI | % of EGI | % of EGI | % of EGI | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Utilities | $ | 145,688 | $ | 1,401 | 11.2 | % | $ | 123,089 | $ | 1,184 | 7.6 | % | $ | 130,976 | $ | 1,259 | 8.2 | % | $ | 132,609 | $ | 1,275 | 8.1 | % | $ | 814 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Maintenance & Repairs | $ | 64,967 | $ | 625 | 5.0 | % | $ | 85,913 | $ | 826 | 5.3 | % | $ | 80,200 | $ | 771 | 5.0 | % | $ | 86,658 | $ | 833 | 5.3 | % | $ | 1,125 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Payroll | $ | 166,559 | $ | 1,602 | 12.8 | % | $ | 258,619 | $ | 2,487 | 15.9 | % | $ | 233,811 | $ | 2,248 | 14.6 | % | $ | 214,151 | $ | 2,059 | 13.1 | % | $ | 941 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Marketing | $ | 130,045 | $ | 1,250 | 10.0 | % | $ | 93,124 | $ | 895 | 5.7 | % | $ | 42,133 | $ | 405 | 2.6 | % | $ | 33,362 | $ | 321 | 2.0 | % | $ | 0 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Administration/Office | $ | 64,449 | $ | 620 | 4.9 | % | $ | 57,916 | $ | 557 | 3.6 | % | $ | 49,794 | $ | 479 | 3.1 | % | $ | 66,007 | $ | 635 | 4.1 | % | $ | 954 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Management Fee | $ | 63,166 | $ | 607 | 4.8 | % | $ | 79,332 | $ | 763 | 4.9 | % | $ | 77,895 | $ | 749 | 4.9 | % | $ | 81,474 | $ | 783 | 5.0 | % | $ | 394 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Insurance | $ | 36,927 | $ | 355 | 2.8 | % | $ | 28,531 | $ | 274 | 1.7 | % | $ | 30,871 | $ | 297 | 1.9 | % | $ | 31,003 | $ | 298 | 1.9 | % | $ | 178 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Real Estate Taxes | $ | 113,635 | $ | 1,093 | 8.7 | % | $ | 179,728 | $ | 1,728 | 11.0 | % | $ | 209,668 | $ | 2,016 | 13.1 | % | $ | 177,454 | $ | 1,706 | 10.9 | % | $ | 1,047 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Reserves | $ | 0 | $ | 0 | 0.0 | % | $ | 0 | $ | 0 | 0.0 | % | $ | 0 | $ | 0 | 0.0 | % | $ | 0 | $ | 0 | 0.0 | % | $ | 0 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
TOTAL EXPENSES | $ | 785,436 | $ | 7,552 | 60.2 | % | $ | 906,252 | $ | 8,714 | 55.6 | % | $ | 855,348 | $ | 8,225 | 53.4 | % | $ | 822,718 | $ | 7,911 | 50.5 | % | $ | 5,453 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NET OPERATING INCOME | $ | 519,714 | $ | 4,997 | 39.8 | % | $ | 723,133 | $ | 6,953 | 44.4 | % | $ | 746,061 | $ | 7,174 | 46.6 | % | $ | 806,768 | $ | 7,757 | 49.5 | % |
Source: Client Submitted Information; compiled by KTR |
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page 28 |
Overview | Due to the lease up subsequent to the renovations at the subject property, the expenses have fluctuated during the past couple of years. In general, 2010 and 2011 budgeted expenses are consistent with market data and reflect stabilized operations. No major changes in operations are expected or appear to be required. Expenses are expected to grow at the average annual inflation rate. Each of the expense items is discussed separately below. | |
Utilities | This expense line item includes charges for common area and individual unit gas, electricity, water/sewer and trash collection. Utility charges are offset by applicable tenant reimbursements. At the subject property, tenants reimburse the landlord for water/sewer and trash pick-up. | |
Utility expenses fluctuate with occupancy, weather and changes in supply costs. The utility expenses at the subject property were $1,401 per unit in 2008, $1,184 per unit in 2009, $1,259 per unit in 2010 and are budgeted at $1,275 per unit in 2011. The IREM survey indicated that the median for garden complexes in the area is $814 per unit, below the historical and budgeted amounts. Based on the historical expenses, the budgeted expense appears reasonable and has been used as a basis for projecting utilities expenses of $1,275 per unit or $132,600. | ||
Repairs & Maintenance | This expense line item includes charges for general maintenance and repairs, alarm monitoring and protection services, landscaping and make-ready/turnover. The property appears adequately maintained with no noticeable items of deferred maintenance observed during the walk-thru. | |
The repairs and maintenance expense at the subject property were $625 per unit in 2008, $826 per unit in 2009, $771 per unit in 2010 and are budgeted at $833 per unit in 2011. The IREM survey indicated that the median for garden complexes in the area is $1,125 per unit, above the historical and budgeted amounts. As repairs and maintenance vary from property to property and considering the extent of renovations recently completed, the budget appears reasonable based on the historical expenses. Accordingly, a repairs and maintenance expense of $86,840, rounded, or $835 per unit has been processed. A separate Reserves category has been processed in this analysis. | ||
Payroll | This expense includes payroll and benefits for the property manager, leasing agent(s), housekeeping and maintenance personnel. The payroll expense were $1,602 per unit in 2008, $2,487 per unit in 2009, $2,248 per unit in 2010 and are budgeted at $2,059 per unit in 2011. The IREM survey indicated that the median for garden complexes in the area is $941 per unit, below the historical and budgeted amounts. Based on the subject’s historical expense data, the budgeted payroll expense, while somewhat above average for the area, has been processed at $2,100 per unit or $218,400. | |
Marketing | This expense includes advertising, the cost of resident and locator referrals, internal leasing commissions, brochures, newsletters and resident activities. The historical marketing charges at the subject property were $1,250 per unit in 2008, $895 per unit in 2009, $405 per unit |
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page 29 |
in 2010 and are budgeted at $321 per unit in 2011. The IREM survey did not report a marketing expense. The large decrease between 2008 and 2010 is attributed to the completion of the renovation and extra marketing efforts needed to bolster occupancy. Based on the historical data and the subject’s current occupancy, the budget appears reasonable and has been rounded to $325 per unit or $33,800 annually. | ||
Administration/Office | This category includes administrative charges and costs associated with the running of the management/leasing office including telephone service, office supplies equipment rental, computers, etc. The administrative expenses at the subject property were $620 per unit in 2008, $557 per unit in 2009, $479 per unit in 2010 and are budgeted at $635 per unit in 2011. The IREM survey indicated that the median for garden complexes in the area is $954 per unit, above the historical and budgeted amounts, however, some of this expense may be considered part of the payroll expense. Based on the historical and budgeted data, an administrative expense of $635 per unit or $66,040 is processed. | |
Management Fee | In the local market management services are typically a function of the revenues produced by the property, usually between 3.0 and 5.0 percent of collections. Based on historical operating statements under review, the subject property was managed for a fee that is equivalent to approximately 5.0 percent of collected income at the high end of the market range. Management fees of 5.0 percent of the effective gross income has been processed in this analysis. | |
Insurance | Insurance includes fire, liability, theft, and boiler, exclusive of the premiums paid to employee benefit plans. The historical insurance expenses at the subject property were $355 per unit in 2008, $274 per unit in 2009, $297 per unit in 2010 and are budgeted at $298 per unit in 2011. The IREM survey indicated that the median for garden complexes in the area is $178 per unit, below the historical and budgeted amounts. Based on the historical data, the budgeted insurance expense has been rounded to $300 per unit or $31,200 annually. | |
Real Estate Taxes | Real estate taxes are processed as discussed within the Real Estate Assessment and Tax Analysis section of this appraisal. The real estate tax projection is $180,064. | |
Reserves | Prudent management budgets a certain amount each year in a sinking fund to replace short-lived items, including kitchen appliances and cabinets, bathroom fixtures and tiling, flooring repairs, HVAC replacement and common elements such as the roof, exterior wood and parking areas. Reserves for replacement, while typically not found in submitted operating statements, are necessary in estimating a realistic operating budget so as to maintain the habitability of the apartments. | |
Reserves for replacement for a property of this vintage typically range from $200 to $300 per unit. In order to remain competitive, a reserve of $250 per unit is forecast. This amounts to $26,000. |
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page 30 |
Total Expenses | On a stabilized basis, the subject’s projected expenses including reserves are projected at $849,618, or $8,169 per unit. The indicated operating expense ratio is 56.9 percent when including reserves and 55.2 percent without reserves. The IREM survey indicated total operating expenses below the projected amounts; however, based on the historical data, these expenses are considered reasonable and have been processed. | |
VALUATION PRO FORMA | The following valuation pro forma summarizes the stabilized income and expenses described above for the appraised fiscal year. |
STABILIZED PRO FORMA
Appraised Fiscal Year-ending | 5/31/2012 |
Total | Per Unit | Percent | ||||||||||
INCOME | % of GPI | |||||||||||
Gross Rent Potential (Market Rent) | $ | 1,557,000 | $ | 14,971 | 100.0 | % | ||||||
Loss to Lease | $ | (46,710 | ) | $ | (449 | ) | -3.0 | % | ||||
Concessions | $ | (62,280 | ) | $ | (599 | ) | -4.0 | % | ||||
Vacancy/Credit/Non-revenue Units | $ | (77,850 | ) | $ | (749 | ) | -5.0 | % | ||||
Net Rental Income (NRI) | $ | 1,370,160 | $ | 13,175 | 88.0 | % | ||||||
Administrative Units | $ | (15,000 | ) | $ | (144 | ) | 0.0 | % | ||||
Other Income | $ | 138,320 | $ | 1,330 | 8.9 | % | ||||||
Total Property Income (EGI) | $ | 1,493,480 | $ | 14,360 | 95.9 | % | ||||||
EXPENSES | % of EGI | |||||||||||
Utilities | $ | 132,600 | $ | 1,275 | 8.9 | % | ||||||
Maintenance & Repairs | $ | 86,840 | $ | 835 | 5.8 | % | ||||||
Payroll | $ | 218,400 | $ | 2,100 | 14.6 | % | ||||||
Marketing | $ | 33,800 | $ | 325 | 2.3 | % | ||||||
Administration/Office | $ | 66,040 | $ | 635 | 4.4 | % | ||||||
Management Fee | $ | 74,674 | $ | 718 | 5.0 | % | ||||||
Insurance | $ | 31,200 | $ | 300 | 3.0 | % | ||||||
Real Estate Taxes | $ | 180,064 | $ | 1,731 | 12.1 | % | ||||||
Reserves | $ | 26,000 | $ | 250 | 1.7 | % | ||||||
TOTAL EXPENSES | $ | 849,618 | $ | 8,169 | 56.9 | % | ||||||
NET OPERATING INCOME | $ | 643,862 | $ | 6,191 | 43.1 | % |
Derivation Of Overall Capitalization Rate | This appraisal will consider the following techniques; (a) derivation from comparable sales and (b) investor surveys. | |
Derivation from Sales | The following table summarizes 11 sales of garden apartment complexes in the Seattle market that closed between June 2010 and May 2011. The overall capitalization rates range from 4.6 to 6.8 percent. The low end of the range is a June 2010 sale of 26 unit property in Bellevue, this sale has an additional 25 units that can be constructed. This data is directly supportive of the range indicated by the PwC Investor Survey for apartments in the Pacific Region. |
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page 31 |
SEATTLE AREA CAPITALIZATION RATES
Property Name | Date of Sale | Year Built | Number of Units | Overall Rate | ||||||||||||
Patagonia Village | 5/13/2011 | 1989 | 42 | 5.0 | % | |||||||||||
Beardslee Cove Apartments | 4/29/2011 | 1986 | 90 | 5.6 | % | |||||||||||
Creekside Apartments | 3/31/2011 | 1967 | 63 | 5.3 | % | |||||||||||
Sunset Vista Apartments | 1/31/2011 | 1967 | 124 | 5.5 | % | |||||||||||
Sound Crest Apartments | 12/30/2010 | 1979 | 24 | 5.2 | % | |||||||||||
The Aspens at Ridgeview | 12/21/2010 | 2010 | 168 | 6.0 | % | |||||||||||
Pyramid Pointe | 12/17/2010 | 1966 | 104 | 6.3 | % | |||||||||||
Fairway Lanai | 10/29/2010 | 1968 | 43 | 5.5 | % | |||||||||||
Royal Arms Villa | 9/30/2010 | 1968 | 23 | 6.5 | % | |||||||||||
Springfield | 8/13/2010 | 1986 | 64 | 6.8 | % | |||||||||||
Willowbrook Apartments | 6/30/2010 | 1958 | 26 | 4.6 | % |
The capitalization rates produced by these sales are a reliable indication as to an appropriate rate for the subject property. The surveyed rates in the influencing market range from 4.6 to 6.8 percent. The four most recent sales illustrate overall rates of 5.0 to 5.6 percent. The most similar size and recent sales illustrate OARs of 5.5 to 5.6 percent. The subject property would likely trade within this range. | ||
Investor Surveys | According to thePwC Real Estate Investor Survey, First Quarter 2011rates for apartments reported by survey participants active in the market presently range as shown. |
PACIFIC REGION APARTMENT MARKET SURVEY
Overall Capitalization Rate | 4.00% - 7.50% | Range | ||
5.85% | Average | |||
Annual Rent Growth Rate | 0.00% - 5.00% | Range | ||
1.92% | Average | |||
Annual Expense Growth Rate | 2.00% - 3.00% | Range | ||
2.71% | Average |
Source: PwC Real Estate Investor Survey, First Quarter 2011 |
As indicated below, overall rates in the National Apartment Market began to increase in the Third Quarter 2008 and continued this trend through the Fourth Quarter of 2009. However, during 2010 and the First Quarter of 2011, average overall rates have decreased by an average of 34.8 basis points per quarter. This data seems to support the overall perception that multi-family housing has passed its nadir and is attracting significant investor interest resulting in appreciation over 2009 levels. |
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page 32 |
OVERALL CAPITALIZATION RATE TRENDS
Quarter | Average | Basis Point Change | ||||||
1Q11 | 6.29 | % | -22 | |||||
4Q10 | 6.51 | % | -61 | |||||
3Q10 | 7.12 | % | -56 | |||||
2Q10 | 7.68 | % | -17 | |||||
1Q10 | 7.85 | % | -18 | |||||
4Q09 | 8.03 | % | 19 | |||||
3Q09 | 7.84 | % | 35 | |||||
2Q09 | 7.49 | % | 61 | |||||
1Q09 | 6.88 | % | 75 | |||||
4Q08 | 6.13 | % | 27 | |||||
3Q08 | 5.86 | % | 11 | |||||
2Q08 | 5.75 | % | -4 | |||||
1Q08 | 5.79 | % | 4 | |||||
4Q07 | 5.75 | % | -1 | |||||
3Q07 | 5.76 | % | -4 | |||||
2Q07 | 5.80 | % | -9 | |||||
1Q07 | 5.89 | % | -8 |
Source: PwC Real Estate Investor Survey |
Conclusion of OAR | The subject is a good quality apartment complex situated in an established residential neighborhood with good access. The property is proximate to employment centers, shopping and neighborhood support facilities. The subject has unit sizes that reflect market parameters. The amenity package is considered below average when compared to properties in the competitive market. Subsequent to completion of renovations in 2008, the subject property has leased up in difficult economic times and has achieved a stabilized occupancy of 100.0 percent based on the submitted rent roll. | |
An OAR ranging of 4.6 to 6.8 percent was indicated from comparable sales with the most similar properties suggesting an overall rate between 5.0 and 5.6 percent. The PwC survey indicates an average rate for the national apartment market of 6.29 percent and an average rate for the pacific region apartment market of 5.85 percent. The most recent PwC survey data is from the First Quarter 2011. The date of value is nearly one full quarter removed from this survey. Given the significant declines in return requirements documented in the survey over the last four quarters, further rate reductions would be expected. The subject property is a better than average property and should trade at an overall rate below the survey averages. In consideration of the preceding data, with primary emphasis placed on the rates extracted from sales data, a rate of 5.5 percent has been processed. | ||
VALUE BY DIRECT CAPITALIZATION | ||
Stabilized Cash Flow | The stabilized cash flow is based on the previous income and expense discussion. |
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page 33 |
Valuation | Value is calculated by dividing the stabilized net operating income (including an allowance for Reserves) by the concluded overall capitalization rate. Thus the market value of the leased fee interest is calculated as follows: |
$643,862¸ 5.5% = $11,706,582
Direct Capitalization Value | ||
Conclusion | The Market Value of the Leased Fee Interest in the subject property, free and clear of financing, by the Direct Capitalization method of the Income Capitalization Approach, as of June 1, 2011, is rounded to: |
ELEVEN MILLION SEVEN HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS
($11,700,000)
($11,700,000)
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page 34 |
SALES COMPARISON APPROACH
VALUATION METHODOLOGY | The basic steps in processing the sales comparison approach are outlined as follows: |
1. | Research the market for recent sales transactions, listings, and offers to purchase or sell of properties similar to the subject property. | ||
2. | Select a relevant unit of comparison and develop a comparative analysis. | ||
3. | Compare comparable sale properties with the subject property using the elements of comparison and adjust the price of each comparable to the subject property. | ||
4. | Reconcile the various value indications produced by the analysis of the comparables. |
REGIONAL SALES MARKET | The local market has been active in terms of investment sales of similar properties. Adequate sales exist to formulate a defensible value for the subject property via sales comparison. | |
PRESENTATION OF COMPARABLE SALES | To estimate the property value by the sales comparison approach, comparable sales from the influencing market that are most similar to the subject property in terms of age, size, tenant profile and location have been analyzed. The sales are compared on a price-per-unit basis, as this is a common method of comparison for such properties. | |
The comparable sales summarized in the table below and plotted on the following map, range in price from $91,992 to $169,889 per unit. While these unit prices implicitly contain both the physical and economic factors affecting real estate, these statistics do not explicitly convey many of the details surrounding a specific property. Thus, this single index to the valuation of the subject property has some limitations. |
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page 35 |
PRESENTATION OF COMPARABLE SALES DATA
Sale No. | Subject | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |||||||||||||||
Name | Cedar Rim Apartments | Creekside Apartments | The Aspens @ Ridgeview | Del Mar Village Apartments | Springfield | |||||||||||||||
Location | 7920 110th Ave SE | 220 Newport Way | 20453 Orillia Road | 12824 SE 69th Way | 18414 108th Ave SE | |||||||||||||||
Newcastle, WA | Issaquah, WA | Kent, WA | Newcastle, WA | Renton, WA | ||||||||||||||||
Grantor | Creekside Alliance Investments LLC | Ridgeview Apartments LLC | Delmar Village Enterprises LLC | Springfield, LLC | ||||||||||||||||
Grantee | Mitsumaru Estate Company LTD | Aspens Ridgeview LLC | Del Mar Apartments LLC | Reinvest Springfield, LLC | ||||||||||||||||
Sales Price | $7,206,100 | $28,541,400 | $3,046,500 | $5,887,500 | ||||||||||||||||
Sale Date | 3/31/2011 | 12/21/2010 | 12/17/2010 | 8/13/2010 | ||||||||||||||||
Year Built | 1981 | 1967 | 2010 | 1983 | 1986 | |||||||||||||||
No. of Units | 104 | 63 | 168 | 30 | 64 | |||||||||||||||
Net Rentable Area (SF) | 109,824 | 61,460 | 161,610 | 30,890 | 54,240 | |||||||||||||||
Avg. Unit Size (SF) | 1,056 | 976 | 962 | 1,030 | 848 | |||||||||||||||
Occuapncy | 98.1% | 97.0% | 95.0% | N/A | 93.0% | |||||||||||||||
Price/SF | $117.25 | $176.61 | $98.62 | $108.55 | ||||||||||||||||
Price/Unit | $114,383 | $169,889 | $101,550 | $91,992 | ||||||||||||||||
Net Income | $381,923 | $1,712,484 | N/A | $397,406 | ||||||||||||||||
NOI/SF | $6.21 | $10.60 | N/A | $7.33 | ||||||||||||||||
NOI/Unit | $6,062 | $10,193 | N/A | $6,209 | ||||||||||||||||
Cap Rate (OAR) | 5.30% | 6.00% | N/A | 6.75% | ||||||||||||||||
EGIM | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | ||||||||||||||||
Expense Ratio (OER) | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A |
COMPARABLE SALES MAP
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page 36 |
ANALYSIS OF SALES | The comparables are examined by considering the following adjustment factors. | |
Ownership Interest | No adjustments are necessary, since all of the sales reflect a 100 percent transfer of ownership interest. | |
Financing Terms | The comparable sales were either all cash transactions or were financed by primary lenders at market-oriented rates. Considerate of such, no adjustments for any unusual or atypical financing is required. | |
Conditions of Sale | Adjustments for conditions of sale usually reflect the motivations of the buyer and the seller. We are not aware of any atypical circumstances regarding any of the comparable sales. Personal property is included as all facilities have similar unit appliance requirements and miscellaneous office and common area FF&E. | |
Expenditures Made Immediately | ||
After Sale | Any required major capital costs incurred by the buyer immediately after the sale is appropriately added to the purchase price. None of the sales required any specific sale price adjustment other than what is included in general comparisons based on condition. | |
Market Conditions | Comparable sales that occurred under different market conditions than those applicable to the subject property as of the effective date of appraisal require adjustment for any differences that affect their values. The comparable sales occurred between August 2010 and March 2011. Although overall rates continue to drop, these rate declines have been offset somewhat by rental rate reductions and expense inflation. Accordingly, only moderate appreciation is noted. As all of the sales occurred in the second half or 2010 or the First Quarter of 2011, no adjustments for market conditions have been processed. | |
Location | An adjustment for location is appropriate when the location characteristics of a comparable property are different from those of the subject. Adjustments have been made on an individual basis. | |
Physical Characteristics | Physical differences include differences in building size, quality of construction, building materials, age, condition, functional utility and appearance. Typically significantly larger complexes trade for less on a per unit basis. Adjustments to the comparables have been applied on an individual basis. | |
Average Unit Size | The unit of comparison is processed herein is price per unit. The subject has an average unit size of 1,056 square feet. Properties with larger average unit sizes tend to trade at higher prices, all other factors being equal. Conversely, properties with smaller average unit sizes tend to trade at a lower price per unit. The average unit size of each comparable property is compared to the subject and applicable adjustments are applied when warranted. |
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page 37 |
Amenities | The subject offers a limited amenity package consisting of a hot tub and barbeque area. Adjustments for amenities have been made on an individual basis to account for amenities offered. | |
Economic Characteristics | Economic characteristics include all the attributes of a property that affect its income. The subject’s average market rent is $1,248 per unit per month. Adjustments to the comparables have been made on an individual basis. | |
The following is a brief description of the relevant building sales considered pertinent in the valuation of the subject property. |
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page 38 |
Comparable Sale No. 1
Property Name: | Creekside Apartments | |
Location: | 220 Newport Way SW | |
Neighborhood: | Issaquah, WA | |
Parcel ID: | 3324069468 | |
Date of Sale: | March 31, 2011 | |
Grantor: | Creekside Alliance Investments LLC | |
Grantee: | Mitsumaru Estate Company LTD | |
Consideration: | $7,206,100 | |
Number of Units: | 63 | |
Size (Sq. Ft.): | 61,460 square feet | |
Occupancy: | 97.0% | |
Price per Unit: | $114,383 per unit | |
Price per Square Foot: | $117.25 per square foot | |
OAR: | 5.3% | |
Analysis: | No adjustment for market conditions has been processed. The comparable is located in Issaquah, which is considered a similar location to that of the subject and accordingly no adjustment has been applied for location. Age, condition and quality are considered inferior to the subject, requiring a slight upward adjustment. The number of units at this comparable is considered similar and no complex size adjustment has been processed. This comparable’s average unit size is 976 square feet which is considered similar to the subject’s average unit size of 1,056 square feet and therefore no adjustment has been applied for average unit size. This complex has a pool; therefore, amenities at the comparable are considered superior and a slight downward adjustment has been applied. The average rent for this comparable is $912 per unit per month. The subject’s average rent is $1,248, superior to the comparable and a moderate upward adjustment has been processed for economics. Overall, a moderate upward adjustment to the market adjusted unit price is warranted. |
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page 39 |
Comparable Sale No. 2
Property Name: | The Aspens at Ridgeview | |
Location: | 20453 Orillia Road | |
Neighborhood: | Kent, WA | |
Parcel ID: | 0322049103, 0322049053 & 1022049044 | |
Date of Sale: | December 21, 2010 | |
Grantor: | Ridgeview Apartments LLC | |
Grantee: | Aspens Ridgeview LLC | |
Consideration: | $28,541,400 | |
Number of Units: | 168 | |
Size (Sq. Ft.): | 161,610 square feet | |
Occupancy: | 95.0% | |
Price per Unit: | $169,889 per unit | |
Price per Square Foot: | $176.61 per square foot | |
OAR: | 6.0% | |
Analysis: | No adjustment for market conditions has been processed. The comparable is located in Kent, which is considered an inferior location to that of the subject and accordingly a slight upward adjustment has been applied for location. Age, condition and quality are considered superior as the comparable was recently completed requiring a significant downward adjustment. The number of units at this comparable is considered similar and no complex size adjustment has been processed. This comparable’s average unit size is 962 square feet which is considered similar to the subject’s average unit size of 1,056 square feet and therefore no adjustment has been applied for average unit size. The primary amenity at the comparable is garages; therefore, amenities at the comparable are considered similar and no adjustment has been applied. The average rent for this comparable is $1,327 per unit per month. The subject’s average rent is $1,248, inferior to the comparable and a slight downward adjustment has been processed for economics. Overall, a significant downward adjustment to the market adjusted unit price is warranted. | |
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page 40 |
Comparable Sale No. 3 | ||
Property Name: | Del Mar Village Apartments | |
Location: | 12824 SE 69thWay | |
Neighborhood: | Newcastle, WA | |
Parcel ID: | 2824059136 | |
Date of Sale: | December 17, 2010 | |
Grantor: | Delmar Village Enterprises LLC | |
Grantee: | Del Mar Apartments LLC | |
Consideration: | $3,046,500 | |
Number of Units: | 30 | |
Size (Sq. Ft.): | 30,890 square feet | |
Occupancy: | N/A | |
Price per Unit: | $101,550 per unit | |
Price per Square Foot: | $98.62 per square foot | |
OAR: | N/A |
Analysis: | No adjustment for market conditions has been processed. The comparable is located in a slightly inferior section of Newcastle and a slight upward adjustment was applied for location. Age, condition and quality are considered inferior to the subject, requiring a slight upward adjustment. This complex has 30 units, as smaller properties typically trade at a higher price per unit a slight downward adjustment is required for complex size. This comparable’s average unit size is 1,030 square feet which is considered similar to the subject’s average unit size of 1,056 square feet and therefore no adjustment has been applied for average unit size. The comparable does not offer amenities, which is inferior to the subject and a slight upward adjustment has been applied. The average rent for this comparable was not reported; therefore, no adjustment has been processed for economics. Overall, a moderate upward adjustment to the market adjusted unit price is warranted. |
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page 41 |
Comparable Sale No. 4 | ||
Property Name: | Springfield | |
Location: | 18414 108thAvenue SE | |
Neighborhood: | Renton, WA | |
Parcel ID: | 3223059082 | |
Date of Sale: | August 13, 2010 | |
Grantor: | Springfield, LLC | |
Grantee: | Reinvest Springfield, LLC | |
Consideration: | $5,887,500 | |
Number of Units: | 64 | |
Size (Sq. Ft.): | 54,240 square feet | |
Occupancy: | 93.0% | |
Price per Unit: | $91,992 per unit | |
Price per Square Foot: | $108.55 per square foot | |
OAR: | 6.75% |
Analysis: | No adjustment for market conditions has been processed. The comparable is located in Renton, which is considered inferior to the subject and accordingly a slight upward adjustment has been applied for location. Age, condition and quality are considered inferior to the subject, requiring a slight upward adjustment. The number of units at this comparable is considered similar and no complex size adjustment has been processed. This comparable’s average unit size is 848 square feet which is considered inferior to the subject’s average unit size of 1,056 square feet and therefore a slight upward adjustment has been applied for average unit size. This complex has a pool; therefore, amenities at the comparable are considered superior and a slight downward adjustment has been applied. The average rent for this comparable is $971 per unit per month. The subject’s average rent is $1,248, superior to the comparable and a moderate upward adjustment has been processed for economics. Overall, a significant upward adjustment to the market adjusted unit price is warranted. |
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page 42 |
COMPARABLE SALES ADJUSTMENT GRID
Sale No. | Subject | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |||||||||||||||
Name | Cedar Rim Apartments | Creekside Apartments | The Aspens @ Ridgeview | Del Mar Village Apartments | Springfield | |||||||||||||||
Address | 7920 110th Ave SE | 220 Newport Way | 20453 Orillia Road | 12824 SE 69th Way | 18414 108th Ave SE | |||||||||||||||
Newcastle, WA | Issaquah, WA | Kent, WA | Newcastle, WA | Renton, WA | ||||||||||||||||
Sale Date | 3/31/2011 | 12/21/2010 | 12/17/2010 | 8/13/2010 | ||||||||||||||||
Price per Unit | $ | 114,383 | $ | 169,889 | $ | 101,550 | $ | 91,992 | ||||||||||||
ADJUSTMENTS | ||||||||||||||||||||
Financing Adjustment | $ | 0 | $ | 0 | $ | 0 | $ | 0 | ||||||||||||
Adjusted for Financing per Unit | $ | 114,383 | $ | 169,889 | $ | 101,550 | $ | 91,992 | ||||||||||||
Conditions of Sale Adjustment | $ | 0 | $ | 0 | $ | 0 | $ | 0 | ||||||||||||
Adjusted for Special Conditions | $ | 114,383 | $ | 169,889 | $ | 101,550 | $ | 91,992 | ||||||||||||
Time | 0.0 | % | 0.0 | % | 0.0 | % | 0.0 | % | ||||||||||||
Time Adjusted Price per Unit | $ | 114,383 | $ | 169,889 | $ | 101,550 | $ | 91,992 | ||||||||||||
Location | 0 | % | 5 | % | 5 | % | 5 | % | ||||||||||||
Age/Condition/Quality | 5 | % | -25 | % | 5 | % | 5 | % | ||||||||||||
Complex Size | 0 | % | 0 | % | -5 | % | 0 | % | ||||||||||||
Average Unit Size | 0 | % | 0 | % | 0 | % | 5 | % | ||||||||||||
Amenities | -5 | % | 0 | % | 5 | % | -5 | % | ||||||||||||
Economics | 10 | % | -5 | % | 0 | % | 10 | % | ||||||||||||
Total Adjustments (%) | 10 | % | -25 | % | 10 | % | 20 | % | ||||||||||||
Adjusted Price per Unit | $ | 125,821 | $ | 127,417 | $ | 111,705 | $ | 110,390 |
VALUE CONCLUSION | After analysis and adjustments, a value range of $110,390 to $127,417 per unit is indicated. Greatest reliance is given to Sales No. 1 and 3 as they required the least aggregate and net adjustments. Sale No. 3 is also the most proximate to the subject. These sales indicated a value between $111,705 and $125,821 per unit. Accordingly, a unit value of $115,000 per unit is concluded for the subject property. | |
104 units x $115,000 per unit = $11,960,000 | ||
Accordingly, the Market Value of the Leased Fee interest in the subject property as of June 1, 2011, free and clear of financing, via the Sales Comparison Approach, is rounded to: |
TWELVE MILLION DOLLARS
($12,000,000)
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Page 43 |
RECONCILIATION AND FINAL ESTIMATE OF VALUE
Review | The purpose of this appraisal is to provide an estimate of the market value of the leased fee interest in the subject property, free and clear of financing. The date of value is June 1, 2011. The indicated market value estimates for the real property interest appraised are: |
Income Capitalization Approach | $11,700,000 | |
Sales Comparison Approach | $12,000,000 |
Income Approach | The Income Capitalization Approach seeks to view the subject property’s value from the perspective of the typical investor. This approach reflects the relationship between the income a property is capable of generating and its true value in the marketplace. Typical investors judge the value of a property based upon the quality and quantity of the income generated, as well as the likely impact of market conditions on future income generation. The Income Capitalization Approach, by considering these factors provides a good measure of value for this type of property and has been utilized as the primary approach in concluding to value. | |
Sales Approach | This approach provides an estimate of value based upon the recent activities of buyers and sellers in the marketplace. This approach is generally considered to be reliable in active markets where the motivations of buyers and sellers are known and the operating characteristics of the properties being transferred are available for scrutiny. Market research revealed adequate sales of properties that are considered comparable to the subject property. The value conclusion derived via this approach is considered directly supportive of that concluded via the Income Approach. | |
The Cost Approach | The Cost Approach was excluded from the scope of this assignment. | |
Conclusions | Both the Income Capitalization and Sales Comparison Approaches to value have been processed and suggest a market value between $11,700,000 and $12,000,000. Each approach has merit and similar limitations. As noted above, greatest reliance has been placed on the Income Capitalization Approach. Based on the data, analyses and conclusions contained within this appraisal report, the Market Value of the Leased Fee Interest in the subject property, free and clear of financing, as of June 1, 2011 is: |
ELEVEN MILLION SEVEN HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS
($11,700,000)
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Addenda |
ADDENDA
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Addenda |
ADDITIONAL SUBJECT PROPERTY PHOTOGRAPHS
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Addenda |
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Addenda |
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Addenda |
SUBMITTED INFORMATION
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Addenda |
Report Name: P_OS_BudDet_Stnd Application: _FinRep | Standard Property Operating Statement Budget Detail | User: DMcclure | ||
Run Date: January 25, 2011 10:11:09 | Scenario: Budget Ledger: Actual Ledger | |||
Entity: Entity Dept: NODEPT — No Dept | ||||
Prop005763 — Cedar Rim | ||||
For the 12 Months January — December Y2011 |
January | February | March | April | May | June | July | August | September | October | November | December | Annual Total | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
INCOME | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p500000 - Market Rent | 131,472 | 131,137 | 131,530 | 126,590 | 127,007 | 127,169 | 127,607 | 128,047 | 129,914 | 129,788 | 130,813 | 131,833 | 1,552,908 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Non-Subsidized Rental Income | 131,472 | 131,137 | 131,530 | 126,590 | 127,007 | 127,169 | 127,607 | 128,047 | 129,914 | 129,788 | 130,813 | 131,833 | 1,552,908 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gross Potential Rent | 131,472 | 131,137 | 131,530 | 126,590 | 127,007 | 127,169 | 127,607 | 128,047 | 129,914 | 129,788 | 130,813 | 131,833 | 1,552,908 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p522000 - Vacancy Loss | (6,574 | ) | (5,901 | ) | (5,919 | ) | (5,697 | ) | (5,080 | ) | (5,087 | ) | (4,211 | ) | (4,225 | ) | (4,287 | ) | (4,283 | ) | (5,233 | ) | (5,273 | ) | (61,770 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Vacancy Loss | (6,574 | ) | (5,901 | ) | (5,919 | ) | (5,697 | ) | (5,080 | ) | (5,087 | ) | (4,211 | ) | (4,225 | ) | (4,287 | ) | (4,283 | ) | (5,233 | ) | (5,273 | ) | (61,770 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rental Losses | (6,574 | ) | (5,901 | ) | (5,919 | ) | (5,697 | ) | (5,080 | ) | (5,087 | ) | (4,211 | ) | (4,225 | ) | (4,287 | ) | (4,283 | ) | (5,233 | ) | (5,273 | ) | (61,770 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net Rental Income | 124,898 | 125,236 | 125,611 | 120,894 | 121,927 | 122,082 | 123,396 | 123,822 | 125,627 | 125,505 | 125,580 | 126,560 | 1,491,138 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p592001 - Late Charges | 786 | 489 | 456 | 640 | 611 | 562 | 703 | 676 | 642 | 659 | 580 | 546 | 7,350 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Late Charges | 786 | 489 | 456 | 640 | 611 | 562 | 703 | 676 | 642 | 659 | 530 | 546 | 7,350 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p599004 - Lease Cancellation Fees | 1,715 | 1,488 | 1,142 | 1,756 | 1,834 | 1,511 | 1,381 | 1,687 | 1,425 | 1,805 | 1,588 | 1,714 | 19,046 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p599014 - Contra Lease Cancellation Fees | (537 | ) | (466 | ) | (358 | ) | (550 | ) | (575 | ) | (474 | ) | (433 | ) | (529 | ) | (447 | ) | (566 | ) | (498 | ) | (537 | ) | (5,969 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lease Cancellation Fees | 1,177 | 1,022 | 784 | 1,206 | 1,259 | 1,037 | 948 | 1,158 | 978 | 1,239 | 1,090 | 1,177 | 13,077 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p500005 - Month to Month Fee | 12 | 129 | 153 | 224 | 219 | 181 | 151 | 105 | 90 | 68 | 27 | 12 | 1,371 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p517000 - Parking Income | 678 | 678 | 678 | 678 | 678 | 678 | 678 | 678 | 678 | 678 | 678 | 678 | 3,131 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p592002 - Nsf Charges | 122 | 67 | 201 | (73 | ) | 65 | 68 | 70 | 101 | 78 | 72 | 37 | 82 | 950 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p592007- Transfer Fee | 31 | 22 | 21 | 24 | 22 | 25 | 21 | 27 | 24 | 30 | 45 | 16 | 309 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p592010 - Non Refundable Admin Fees | 347 | 418 | 413 | 452 | 518 | 737 | 772 | 887 | 561 | 408 | 383 | 300 | 6,200 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p593000 - Cleaning & Damage Fees | 264 | 661 | 661 | 1,064 | 1,196 | 932 | 1,330 | 669 | 1,461 | 1,064 | 801 | 801 | 10,904 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p593002 - Pet Damage Charges | 78 | 150 | 149 | 213 | 265 | 167 | 219 | 238 | 189 | 119 | 154 | 68 | 2,009 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p593003 - Contra Cleaning and Damage | (221 | ) | (555 | ) | (555 | ) | (789 | ) | (900 | ) | (679 | ) | (1,012 | ) | (457 | ) | (1,123 | ) | (789 | ) | (568 | ) | (568 | ) | (8,216 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p599003 - Non-refundable Pet Fees | 286 | 286 | 286 | 286 | 286 | 286 | 286 | 286 | 286 | 286 | 286 | 286 | 3,429 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p599005 - Application Fees | 340 | 642 | 491 | 868 | 377 | 453 | 491 | 340 | 151 | 604 | 151 | 151 | 5,058 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p599013 - Monthly Pet Rent | 577 | 600 | 639 | 656 | 658 | 666 | 684 | 713 | 737 | 549 | 550 | 564 | 7,592 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p599026 - Renters Insurance Service Fee | 42 | 48 | 60 | 109 | 85 | 73 | 109 | 60 | 91 | 42 | 30 | 18 | 768 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p625007 - Resident Relations Concessions | (778 | ) | (778 | ) | (778 | ) | (778 | ) | (778 | ) | (778 | ) | (778 | ) | (778 | ) | (778 | ) | (778 | ) | (778 | ) | (778 | ) | (9,333 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other Misc Income | 1,777 | 2,368 | 2,418 | 2,933 | 2,692 | 2,808 | 3,020 | 2,867 | 2,446 | 2,353 | 1,859 | 1,629 | 29,170 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Miscellaneous Income | 3,740 | 3,879 | 3,658 | 4,779 | 4,562 | 4,407 | 4,671 | 4,701 | 4,066 | 4,251 | 3,529 | 3,352 | 49,597 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p590509 - Resident Util Pymts: Water/Swr | 5,016 | 5,523 | 6,144 | 4,925 | 5,755 | 7,423 | 6,599 | 6,894 | 9,984 | 7,126 | 7,318 | 10,637 | 83,343 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p590513 - Resident Util Pymts: Trash | 483 | 483 | 483 | 483 | 483 | 483 | 483 | 483 | 433 | 483 | 483 | 483 | 5,799 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p590514 - Resident Util Pymnts: Misc | 425 | 468 | 521 | 417 | 488 | 629 | 559 | 584 | 846 | 604 | 620 | 902 | 7,064 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p590530 - Resid Util Pymts: Accr Adjs | 0 | 0 | (397 | ) | 0 | 0 | 2,640 | 0 | 0 | (2,221 | ) | 0 | 0 | (22 | ) | 0 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Utility Reimbursement | 5,924 | 6,474 | 6,751 | 5,826 | 6,726 | 11,175 | 7,641 | 7,962 | 9,092 | 8,213 | 8,421 | 12,000 | 96,206 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p591008 - AS-Local Telephone | 0 | 217 | 0 | 0 | 217 | 0 | 0 | 217 | 0 | 0 | 217 | 0 | 867 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p591015 - Other Ancillary Programs | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 8 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 77 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p599006 - Individual Washer/Dryer Income | 20 | 20 | 20 | 20 | 20 | 20 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 120 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ancillary Services Income | 26 | 243 | 26 | 26 | 243 | 26 | 6 | 223 | 6 | 6 | 223 | 6 | 1,063 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other Rental Income | 9,691 | 10,596 | 10,436 | 10,632 | 11,531 | 15,609 | 12,319 | 12,886 | 13,165 | 12,471 | 12,173 | 15,359 | 146,866 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p637000 - Bad Debt Expense | (700 | ) | (706 | ) | (707 | ) | (684 | ) | (694 | ) | (716 | ) | (706 | ) | (711 | ) | (722 | ) | (717 | ) | (716 | ) | (738 | ) | (8,518 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bad Debt Expense | (700 | ) | (706 | ) | (707 | ) | (684 | ) | (694 | ) | (716 | ) | (706 | ) | (711 | ) | (722 | ) | (717 | ) | (716 | ) | (738 | ) | (8,518 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Effective Gross Income | 133,889 | 135,125 | 135,340 | 130,842 | 132,764 | 136,975 | 135,009 | 135,997 | 138,070 | 137,258 | 137,037 | 141,181 | 1,629,487 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
OPERATING EXPENSES | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p633000 - Salaries — Manager | 4,112 | 3,714 | 4,112 | 4,019 | 4,153 | 4,019 | 4,230 | 4,230 | 4,093 | 4,188 | 4,053 | 4,188 | 49,111 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Salaries - Managers | 4,112 | 3,714 | 4,112 | 4,019 | 4,153 | 4,019 | 4,230 | 4,230 | 4,093 | 4,188 | 4,053 | 4,188 | 49,111 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p654000 - Salaries — Maintenance | 6,673 | 6,027 | 6,673 | 6,647 | 6,869 | 6,647 | 6,996 | 6,996 | 6,770 | 6,796 | 6,577 | 6,796 | 80,466 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p659500 - Outsourced Services | 153 | 163 | 165 | 151 | 152 | 170 | 152 | 155 | 169 | 153 | 148 | 162 | 1,893 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p659800 - Payroll Adjustment | (433 | ) | (433 | ) | (433 | ) | (439 | ) | (439 | ) | (439 | ) | (439 | ) | (439 | ) | (439 | ) | (439 | ) | (439 | ) | (439 | ) | (5,248 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Salaries Other | 6,392 | 5,756 | 6,404 | 6,360 | 6,532 | 6,379 | 6,709 | 6,712 | 6,501 | 6,510 | 6,286 | 6,520 | 77,111 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Salaries | 10,504 | 9,470 | 10,516 | 10,379 | 10,735 | 10,393 | 10,939 | 10,942 | 10,594 | 10,698 | 10,339 | 10,708 | 126,222 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p612501 - Employee Benefits | 204 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 204 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p659814 - Payroll Tax Expense Adj | (45 | ) | (45 | ) | (45 | ) | (46 | ) | (46 | ) | (46 | ) | (46 | ) | (46 | ) | (46 | ) | (46 | ) | (46 | ) | (46 | ) | (546 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p671100 - Payroll Taxes | 1,520 | 1,363 | 1,204 | 1,179 | 1,218 | 1,179 | 1,240 | 1,240 | 1,200 | 1,030 | 965 | 997 | 14,335 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p671101 - Office Payroll Tax | 290 | 0 | 0 | 290 | 0 | 0 | 290 | 0 | 0 | 290 | 0 | 0 | 1,161 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p672200 - Workers Compensation | 518 | 468 | 518 | 512 | 529 | 512 | 539 | 539 | 522 | 528 | 511 | 528 | 6,225 |
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Page 1 of 6
Cedar Rim Apartments Newcastle, Washington | June 8, 2011 Addenda |
Report Name: P_OS_BudDet_Stnd Application: _FinRep RunDate: January 26, 2011 10:11:09 | Standard Property Operating Statement Budget Detail Scenario: Budget Ledger: Actual Ledger Entity Entity Dept: NODEPT — No Dept Prop005763 — Cedar Rim For the 12 Months January — December Y2011 | User: Dmoolure |
January | February | March | April | May | June | July | August | September | October | November | December | Annual Total | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p672300 - Health Ins.&Oth Benefits | 2,091 | 2,068 | 2,091 | 2,088 | 2,096 | 2,086 | 2,100 | 2,100 | 2,092 | 2,095 | 2,087 | 2,095 | 25,090 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p672301 - Benefits Expense Adjustment | (59 | ) | (59 | ) | (59 | ) | (59 | ) | (59 | ) | (59 | ) | (59 | ) | (59 | ) | (59 | ) | (59 | ) | (59 | ) | (59 | ) | (708 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Payroll Taxes & Benefits - Property | 4,520 | 3,795 | 3,709 | 3,964 | 3,738 | 3,674 | 4,065 | 3,775 | 3,709 | 3,837 | 3,458 | 3,515 | 45,760 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p627700 - Leasing Comrn - Amortizable | 386 | 387 | 388 | 374 | 377 | 378 | 382 | 383 | 389 | 388 | 388 | 391 | 4,611 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Leasing Commissions Comp | 386 | 387 | 388 | 374 | 377 | 378 | 382 | 383 | 389 | 388 | 388 | 391 | 4,611 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p831001 - Ranking Bonus | 1,348 | 1,217 | 1,348 | 1,331 | 1,375 | 1,331 | 1,401 | 1,401 | 1,356 | 1,373 | 1,328 | 1,373 | 16,182 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p831002 - Ranking Bonus - Adjust | (571 | ) | (515 | ) | (571 | ) | (564 | ) | (582 | ) | (564 | ) | (593 | ) | (593 | ) | (574 | ) | (581 | ) | (562 | ) | (581 | ) | (6,850 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bonus -Property | 777 | 702 | 777 | 768 | 793 | 768 | 808 | 808 | 782 | 792 | 766 | 792 | 9,332 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p659900 - Repairs Payroll Capitalized | (932 | ) | (827 | ) | (875 | ) | (860 | ) | (868 | ) | (848 | ) | (893 | ) | (880 | ) | (860 | ) | (890 | ) | (854 | ) | (876 | ) | (10,463 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Capitalized Payroll - Property | (932 | ) | (827 | ) | (875 | ) | (860 | ) | (868 | ) | (848 | ) | (893 | ) | (880 | ) | (860 | ) | (890 | ) | (854 | ) | (876 | ) | (10,463 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p627600 - Quarterly Special Incentive | 73 | 82 | 79 | 68 | 68 | 79 | 69 | 69 | 80 | 69 | 69 | 81 | 888 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p633100 - Employee Apartments | 3,150 | 3,150 | 3,150 | 3,150 | 3,150 | 3,150 | 3,150 | 3,150 | 3,150 | 3,150 | 3,150 | 3,150 | 37,800 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other Personnel Costs - Property | 3,223 | 3,232 | 3,229 | 3,218 | 3,218 | 3,229 | 3,219 | 3,219 | 3,230 | 3,219 | 3,219 | 3,231 | 38,688 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Payroll Expense | 18,479 | 16,760 | 17,745 | 17,842 | 17,994 | 17,597 | 18,520 | 18,247 | 17,843 | 18,045 | 17,317 | 17,761 | 214,151 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Personnel Exp - Property | 18,479 | 16,760 | 17,745 | 17,842 | 17,994 | 17,597 | 18,520 | 18,247 | 17,843 | 18,045 | 17,317 | 17,761 | 214,151 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p645203 - Gas - List Bills | 1,527 | 1,644 | 1,580 | 1,347 | 1,586 | 1,294 | 1,191 | 970 | 771 | 290 | 1,277 | 1,321 | 15,797 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Utilities - Gas | 1,527 | 1,644 | 1,580 | 1,347 | 1,586 | 1,294 | 1,191 | 970 | 771 | 1,290 | 1,277 | 1,321 | 15,797 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p645001 - Electricity - Vacant | 661 | 1,389 | 653 | 658 | 741 | 414 | 646 | 359 | 734 | 1,184 | 1,056 | 1,021 | 9,514 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p645003 - Etectricity - List Bills | 723 | 713 | 608 | 422 | 669 | 634 | 868 | 532 | 928 | 691 | 672 | 723 | 8,181 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Utilities - Elec | 1,383 | 2,101 | 1,261 | 1,079 | 1,409 | 1,048 | 1,514 | 891 | 1,661 | 1,874 | 1,728 | 1,745 | 17,695 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p645100 - Water | 2,199 | 2,088 | 2,133 | 2,003 | 2,175 | 2,510 | 2,898 | 2,786 | 2,981 | 2,345 | 2,283 | 2,207 | 28,614 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p645300 - Sewer | 4,819 | 5,212 | 5,280 | 5,202 | 4,104 | 6,561 | 5,488 | 5,606 | 5,582 | 5,723 | 5,723 | 5,723 | 65,024 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Utilities - Water/Sewer | 7,018 | 7,300 | 7,413 | 7,210 | 6,279 | 9,071 | 8,386 | 8,392 | 8,562 | 3,068 | 8,007 | 7,930 | 93,637 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p647001 - Utility Processing Fees | 375 | 381 | 400 | 393 | 387 | 405 | 394 | (137 | ) | 377 | 361 | 361 | 361 | 4,058 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p649000 - Misc Utility Charges | 115 | 135 | 126 | 111 | 139 | 83 | 111 | 73 | 98 | 144 | 144 | 144 | 1,421 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Utilities - Other | 490 | 515 | 526 | 503 | 526 | 488 | 505 | (64 | ) | 475 | 505 | 505 | 505 | 5,480 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Utilities Expenses | 10,418 | 11,561 | 10,780 | 10,140 | 9,800 | 11,901 | 11,596 | 10,189 | 11,469 | 11,738 | 11,517 | 11,501 | 132,609 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p626003 - Appliance Rental Expanse | 0 | 0 | 0 | (84 | ) | (84 | ) | (84 | ) | (84 | ) | (84 | ) | (84 | ) | (84 | ) | (84 | ) | (84 | ) | (758 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p646000 - Contract Cable TV | 77 | 77 | 77 | 77 | 77 | 77 | 77 | 77 | 77 | 77 | 77 | 77 | 918 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p651900 - Contract Exterminating | 206 | 206 | 206 | 206 | 206 | 206 | 206 | 206 | 206 | 206 | 206 | 206 | 2,475 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p652500 - Contract Trash Removal | 999 | 999 | 999 | 999 | 999 | 999 | 999 | 999 | 999 | 999 | 999 | 999 | 11,990 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p653004 - Contract Alarm System | 132 | 132 | 132 | 132 | 132 | 132 | 132 | 132 | 132 | 132 | 132 | 132 | 1,589 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p653700 - Contract Yards And Grounds | 1,904 | 1,904 | 1,904 | 1,904 | 1,904 | 1,904 | 1,904 | 1,904 | 1,904 | 1,904 | 1,904 | 1,904 | 22,845 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p654200 - Contract Repairs | 92 | 92 | 92 | 92 | 92 | 92 | 92 | 92 | 92 | 92 | 92 | 92 | 1,108 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p654402 - Plumbing Contract | 127 | 127 | 127 | 127 | 127 | 127 | 127 | 127 | 127 | 127 | 127 | 127 | 1,528 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p654703 - Spa-Contract & Cleaning | 42 | 42 | 42 | 42 | 42 | 42 | 42 | 42 | 42 | 42 | 42 | 42 | 507 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p669900 - Other Contracts | 235 | 235 | 235 | 235 | 235 | 235 | 235 | 235 | 235 | 235 | 235 | 235 | 2,814 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Contract Services | 3,814 | 3,814 | 3,814 | 3,730 | 3,730 | 3,730 | 3,730 | 3,730 | 3,730 | 3,730 | 3,730 | 3,730 | 45,015 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p651700 - Contract Cleaning | 306 | 765 | 765 | 918 | 1,071 | 765 | 1,224 | 459 | 918 | 765 | 612 | 459 | 9,028 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p65G002 - Contract Carpet Cleaning & Dye | 170 | 424 | 424 | 508 | 593 | 424 | 678 | 254 | 508 | 424 | 339 | 254 | 5,000 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p656003 - Contract Painting-Interior | 214 | 535 | 535 | 641 | 748 | 535 | 855 | 321 | 641 | 535 | 428 | 321 | 6,307 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p656099 - Decorating - Contract Other | 7 | 7 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 24 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p656101 - Drapery/Miniblinds Repairs | 8 | 21 | 21 | 25 | 29 | 21 | 34 | 13 | 39 | 25 | 17 | 17 | 270 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p656102 - Painting Supplies | 106 | 265 | 265 | 318 | 371 | 265 | 424 | 159 | 318 | 265 | 212 | 159 | 3,129 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Turnover Expense | 811 | 2,017 | 2,013 | 2,412 | 2,814 | 2,010 | 3,216 | 1,206 | 2,425 | 2,015 | 1,609 | 1,211 | 23,758 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p651500 - Cleaning Supplies | 162 | 162 | 162 | 162 | 162 | 162 | 162 | 162 | 162 | 162 | 162 | 162 | 1,938 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p653600 - Landscaping Supplies | 0 | 450 | 0 | 0 | 650 | 0 | 0 | 450 | 0 | 200 | 450 | 0 | 2,200 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p654101 - Etectrical Supplies | 52 | 52 | 52 | 52 | 52 | 52 | 52 | 52 | 52 | 52 | 52 | 52 | 621 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p654102- Plumbing Supplies | 101 | 101 | 101 | 101 | 101 | 101 | 101 | 101 | 101 | 101 | 101 | 101 | 1,214 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p654103 - Appliance Parts | 150 | 150 | 150 | 150 | 150 | 150 | 150 | 150 | 150 | 150 | 150 | 150 | 1,796 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Repairs & Maint - Supplies | 464 | 914 | 464 | 464 | 1,114 | 464 | 464 | 914 | 464 | 664 | 914 | 464 | 7,770 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p632924 - Recreation Equipment Maint | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 123 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p654601 - Hvac Parts & Supplies | 35 | 35 | 35 | 35 | 35 | 35 | 35 | 35 | 35 | 35 | 35 | 35 | 414 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p657000 - Equipment/Vehicle Expense | 29 | 29 | 29 | 29 | 29 | 29 | 29 | 29 | 29 | 29 | 29 | 29 | 353 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p559001 - Fire Protection Equip Maint | 15 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 180 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Repairs & Maint - Equipment | 89 | 89 | 89 | 89 | 89 | 89 | 89 | 89 | 89 | 89 | 89 | 89 | 1,070 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p654100 - Repairs/Maint Materials | 91 | 91 | 91 | 91 | 91 | 91 | 91 | 91 | 01 | 91 | 91 | 91 | 1,086 |
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Page 2 of 6
Cedar Rim Apartments Newcastle, Washington | June 8, 2011 Addenda |
Report Name: P_OS_BudDet_Stnd | Standard Property Operating Statement Budget Detail | User DMcclure | ||
Application: _FinRep | Scenario: Budget Ledger: Actual Ledger | |||
Run Date: January 25, 2011 10:11:09 | Entity: Entity Dept: NODEPT — No Dept | |||
Prop005763 — Cedar Rim | ||||
For the 12 Months January — December Y2011 |
January | February | March | April | May | June | July | August | September | October | November | December | Annual Total | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p654199 - Other Maintenance Materials | 185 | 185 | 185 | 185 | 185 | 185 | 185 | 185 | 185 | 185 | 185 | 185 | 2,223 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
�� | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Repairs & Maint - Materials | 276 | 276 | 276 | 276 | 276 | 275 | 276 | 276 | 276 | 276 | 276 | 275 | 3,309 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p654205 - Interior Building Improvements | 34 | 34 | 34 | 34 | 34 | 34 | 34 | 34 | 34 | 34 | 34 | 34 | 407 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p654206 - Extenor Building Improvements | 26 | 26 | 26 | 26 | 26 | 26 | 26 | 26 | 26 | 26 | 26 | 26 | 316 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p656000 - Parking Lot Cleaning & Maint | 16 | 16 | 16 | 16 | 16 | 16 | 16 | 16 | 16 | 16 | 16 | 16 | 192 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Repairs & Maint - Building | 76 | 76 | 76 | 76 | 76 | 76 | 76 | 76 | 75 | 76 | 76 | 76 | 915 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p654125 - Water Extraction | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 24 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p612800 - Irrigation Maint | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 121 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p651800 - Recoverable Expenses | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 30 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p652300 - Gas/Oil/Mileage | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 69 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p652501 - Dumpster Expense | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 104 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p654105 - Plumbing Fixtures/Repairs | 35 | 35 | 35 | 35 | 35 | 35 | 35 | 35 | 35 | 35 | 35 | 35 | 420 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p654109 - Window Replacement | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 24 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p654120 - Keys and Lochs | 60 | 60 | 60 | 60 | 60 | 60 | 60 | 60 | 60 | 60 | 60 | 60 | 725 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p654201 - Roof Repairs | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 13 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p654209 - Sewer Repairs | 11 | 11 | 11 | 11 | 11 | 11 | 11 | 11 | 11 | 11 | 11 | 11 | 133 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p654801 - Housekeeping Expense | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 48 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p654903 - Doors | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 50 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p655200 - R&M Rebate - MRO | (30 | ) | (30 | ) | (30 | ) | (30 | ) | (30 | ) | (30 | ) | (30 | ) | (30 | ) | (30 | ) | (30 | ) | (30 | ) | (30 | ) | (360 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p655201 - R&M Rebate - Other | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p656005 - Light Bulbs | 93 | 93 | 93 | 93 | 93 | 93 | 93 | 93 | 93 | 93 | 93 | 93 | 1,116 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p656300 - Misc. | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 54 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Repairs & Maint - Other | 214 | 214 | 214 | 214 | 214 | 214 | 214 | 214 | 214 | 214 | 214 | 214 | 2,573 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p654115 - Spa-Arnenities | 33 | 33 | 33 | 33 | 33 | 33 | 33 | 33 | 33 | 33 | 33 | 33 | 398 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p654700 - Pool Expense | 62 | 62 | 62 | 62 | 62 | 62 | 62 | 62 | 62 | 62 | 62 | 62 | 746 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p654704 - Spa-Repairs & Maintenance | 34 | 34 | 34 | 34 | 34 | 34 | 34 | 34 | 34 | 34 | 34 | 34 | 404 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Repairs & Maint -Spa | 129 | 129 | 129 | 129 | 129 | 129 | 129 | 129 | 129 | 129 | 129 | 129 | 1,548 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Repairs & Maintenance | 1,249 | 1,699 | 1,249 | 1,249 | 1,899 | 1,249 | 1,249 | 1,699 | 1,249 | 1,449 | 1,699 | 1,249 | 17,185 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p615600 - Fire Protection | 0 | 700 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 700 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Common Area Expense | 0 | 700 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 700 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p621020 - National Web Advertising | 1,194 | 1,194 | 1,194 | 1,194 | 1,194 | 1,194 | 1,194 | 1,194 | 1,194 | 1,194 | 1,194 | 1,194 | 14,333 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p621021 - AIMCO Web) Site | 207 | 215 | 225 | 178 | 178 | 217 | 197 | 197 | 218 | 181 | 212 | 209 | 2,434 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p621025 - Contact Center Web Sales | 268 | 268 | 268 | 268 | 268 | 268 | 268 | 268 | 268 | 268 | 268 | 268 | 3,213 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MKts - Advertising | 1,669 | 1,678 | 1,687 | 1,640 | 1,640 | 1,679 | 1,659 | 1,659 | 1,681 | 1,643 | 1,674 | 1,671 | 19,980 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p625001 - Referral Fees | 25 | 25 | 25 | 25 | 25 | 25 | 25 | 25 | 25 | 25 | 25 | 25 | 299 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p25008 - Resident Referral Concessions | 63 | 63 | 63 | 63 | 63 | 63 | 63 | 63 | 63 | 63 | 63 | 63 | 750 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p625010 - Resident Referral Amortization | 94 | 94 | 94 | 94 | 94 | 94 | 94 | 94 | 94 | 94 | 94 | 94 | 1,125 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p625012 - Referral Fee Amortization | (13 | ) | (13 | ) | (13 | ) | (13 | ) | (13 | ) | (13 | ) | (13 | ) | (13 | ) | (13 | ) | (13 | ) | (13 | ) | (13 | ) | (154 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p25025 - Local Locator Fees | 174 | 174 | 174 | 174 | 174 | 174 | 174 | 174 | 174 | 174 | 174 | 174 | 2,092 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mktg - Apart Brokers | 343 | 343 | 343 | 343 | 343 | 343 | 343 | 343 | 343 | 343 | 343 | 343 | 4,112 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p611100 - Marketing Phone Services | 90 | 133 | 0 | 90 | 0 | 0 | 90 | 0 | 0 | 90 | 0 | 0 | 493 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p621007 - Brochures — New Leases | 0 | 1,046 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 128 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 1,273 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p621011 - Flags/Banners | 55 | 55 | 55 | 55 | 55 | 55 | 55 | 55 | 55 | 55 | 55 | 55 | 665 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p621013 - Leasing Promotions | 31 | 31 | 31 | 31 | 31 | 31 | 31 | 31 | 31 | 31 | 31 | 31 | 374 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p625000 - Signage | 8 | 8 | 8 | 1,308 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 1,400 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p626001- Furniture — Models | 21 | 21 | 21 | 21 | 21 | 21 | 21 | 21 | 21 | 21 | 21 | 21 | 248 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MKtg - Point of Sale | 206 | 1,294 | 116 | 1,506 | 116 | 243 | 206 | 116 | 116 | 306 | 116 | 116 | 4,453 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p621015 - Resident Relations | 253 | 253 | 253 | 253 | 253 | 253 | 253 | 253 | 253 | 253 | 253 | 253 | 3,036 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p625101 - Resident Functions | 148 | 148 | 148 | 148 | 148 | 148 | 148 | 148 | 148 | 148 | 148 | 148 | 1,781 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mktg - Retention | 401 | 401 | 401 | 401 | 401 | 401 | 401 | 401 | 401 | 401 | 401 | 401 | 4,817 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Marketing Expenses | 2,619 | 3,716 | 2,547 | 3,890 | 2,499 | 2,666 | 2,609 | 2,519 | 2,540 | 2,693 | 2,534 | 2,531 | 33,362 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p629002 - Phone Sales | 706 | 638 | 705 | 656 | 724 | 787 | 747 | 723 | 726 | 627 | 607 | 657 | 8,303 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p36000 - Wired Telco Services | 643 | 643 | 643 | 643 | 643 | 643 | 643 | 643 | 643 | 643 | 643 | 643 | 7,722 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Telephone Expense | 1,349 | 1,282 | 1,349 | 1,299 | 1,367 | 1,431 | 1,391 | 1,366 | 1,369 | 1,271 | 1,251 | 1,300 | 16,024 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p631100 - Office Supplies | 354 | 354 | 354 | 354 | 354 | 354 | 354 | 354 | 354 | 354 | 354 | 354 | 4,250 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p631101 - Office Equipment | 46 | 46 | 46 | 46 | 46 | 46 | 46 | 49 | 46 | 46 | 46 | 46 | 555 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Office Exp - Property | 400 | 400 | 400 | 400 | 400 | 400 | 400 | 400 | 400 | 400 | 400 | 400 | 4,805 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p631104 - Applicant Screening | 259 | 259 | 259 | 259 | 259 | 259 | 259 | 259 | 259 | 259 | 259 | 259 | 3,103 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p631108 - Credit Card Service Fees | 93 | 93 | 93 | 93 | 93 | 93 | 93 | 93 | 93 | 93 | 93 | 93 | 1,119 |
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Page 3 of 6
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Addenda |
Report Name: P_ OS_ BudDet_Stnd Application: _FinRep Run Date: January 25, 2011 10:11:09 | Standard Property Operating Statement Budget Detail Scenario: Budget Ledger: Actual Ledger Entity: Entity Dept: NODEPT — No Dept | User: DMcclure | ||
Prop005763 - Cedar Rim | ||||
For the 12 Months January — December Y2011 |
January | February | March | April | May | June | July | August | September | October | November | December | Annual Total | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Credit Expense | 352 | 352 | 352 | 352 | 352 | 352 | 352 | 352 | 352 | 352 | 352 | 352 | 4,222 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p632500 - Professional Fees | 98 | 98 | 98 | 98 | 98 | 98 | 98 | 98 | 98 | 98 | 98 | 98 | 1,173 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p632800 - Administrative Support - Fees | 25 | 28 | 28 | 24 | 24 | 27 | 24 | 24 | 28 | 24 | 24 | 28 | 308 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p634000 - Legal Fees | 189 | 189 | 439 | 189 | 189 | 439 | 189 | 189 | 439 | 189 | 189 | 439 | 3,263 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Professional Fees | 312 | 315 | 564 | 310 | 310 | 564 | 310 | 310 | 564 | 310 | 310 | 564 | 4,745 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p639004 - Computer Maint & Supplies | 150 | 280 | 280 | 280 | 295 | 295 | 880 | 880 | 880 | 880 | 880 | 880 | 6,860 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p655007 - Compliance Fees | 26 | 26 | 26 | 26 | 26 | 26 | 26 | 26 | 26 | 26 | 26 | 26 | 316 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Computer Expense | 176 | 306 | 306 | 306 | 322 | 322 | 907 | 907 | 907 | 907 | 907 | 907 | 7,176 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p639011 - Training Materials | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 99 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p639015 - Corporate L & OD Charges | 108 | 108 | 108 | 108 | 108 | 108 | 108 | 108 | 108 | 108 | 108 | 108 | 1,300 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p639020 - Meeting Costs | 93 | 93 | 93 | 93 | 93 | 93 | 93 | 93 | 93 | 93 | 93 | 93 | 1,110 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p639030 - Travel Costs - Training | 348 | 536 | 536 | 528 | 528 | 528 | 528 | 528 | 528 | 528 | 528 | 528 | 6,174 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p639031 - Travel Costs - Other | 569 | 569 | 569 | 569 | 569 | 569 | 569 | 569 | 569 | 569 | 569 | 569 | 6,822 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Training and Travel | 1,126 | 1,314 | 1,314 | 1,306 | 1,306 | 1,306 | 1,306 | 1,306 | 1,306 | 1,306 | 1,306 | 1,306 | 15,505 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p617104 - Radios/Pagers | 73 | 73 | 73 | 73 | 73 | 73 | 73 | 73 | 73 | 73 | 73 | 73 | 870 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p629001 - Dues And Subscriptions | 17 | 17 | 17 | 17 | 17 | 17 | 17 | 17 | 17 | 17 | 17 | 17 | 200 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p631102 - Bank Charges | 106 | 106 | 106 | 106 | 106 | 106 | 106 | 106 | 106 | 106 | 106 | 106 | 1,275 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p631105 - Uniforms | 179 | 179 | 179 | 179 | 179 | 179 | 179 | 179 | 179 | 179 | 179 | 179 | 2,149 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p631106 - Express Mail, Stamps | 40 | 40 | 40 | 40 | 40 | 40 | 40 | 40 | 40 | 40 | 40 | 40 | 485 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p632525 - H/R-Personnel Costs | 72 | 48 | 145 | 289 | 289 | 289 | 241 | 241 | 241 | 193 | 193 | 169 | 2,410 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p632918 - Answering Service | 25 | 25 | 25 | 25 | 25 | 25 | 25 | 25 | 25 | 25 | 25 | 25 | 299 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p639099 - Miscellaneous Administrative | 70 | 70 | 70 | 70 | 70 | 70 | 70 | 70 | 70 | 70 | 70 | 70 | 840 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p652400 - Plant Rental | 391 | 391 | 391 | 391 | 391 | 391 | 391 | 391 | 391 | 391 | 391 | 391 | 4,694 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p655100 - Residnt Pmt Platform | 47 | 47 | 47 | 47 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 189 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p655006 - Clbhse Equip/Suppl | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 119 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Admin Exp -Other | 1,030 | 1,006 | 1,103 | 1,247 | 1,200 | 1,200 | 1,152 | 1,152 | 1,152 | 1,104 | 1104 | 1,080 | 13,529 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Admin Expenses | 4,745 | 4,975 | 5,387 | 5,220 | 5,257 | 5,574 | 5,818 | 5,793 | 6,050 | 5,649 | 5,629 | 5,909 | 66,007 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Controllable Operating Expenses | 42,135 | 45,242 | 43,536 | 44,483 | 43,994 | 44,727 | 46,736 | 43,383 | 45,306 | 45,319 | 44,035 | 43,892 | 532,787 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Controllable Net Op Inc | 91,754 | 89,884 | 91,804 | 86,359 | 88,770 | 92,247 | 88,273 | 92,614 | 92,764 | 91,939 | 93,002 | 97,289 | 1,096,699 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PROP OPS EXP - TAKES & INSURANCE | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p671001 - Real Estate Taxes | 14,595 | 14,595 | 14,595 | 14,595 | 14,595 | 14,595 | 14,595 | 14,595 | 14,595 | 14,595 | 14,595 | 14,595 | 175,140 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p671002 - Personal Property Tax | 0 | 0 | 164 | 0 | 71 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 235 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Real Estate & Pers Prop Tax | 14,595 | 14,595 | 14,759 | 14,595 | 14,666 | 14,595 | 14,595 | 14,595 | 14,595 | 14,595 | 14,595 | 14,595 | 175,375 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p671900 - Business Licenses & Permits | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 530 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 530 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p671902 - Sales And Use Tax | 432 | 0 | 0 | 374 | 0 | 0 | 316 | 0 | 0 | 426 | 0 | 0 | 1,549 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other Taxes 4 Fees - Prop | 432 | 0 | 0 | 374 | 0 | 0 | 847 | 0 | 0 | 426 | 0 | 0 | 2,079 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p67200 - Hazard Insurance | 2,089 | 2,089 | 2,036 | 2,036 | 2,036 | 2,036 | 2,036 | 2,036 | 2,036 | 2,036 | 2,036 | 2,036 | 24,542 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p672500 - General Liability Insurance | 401 | 401 | 401 | 401 | 401 | 401 | 401 | 401 | 401 | 421 | 421 | 421 | 4,670 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net Hazard & GL Ins Premium | 2,490 | 2,490 | 2,437 | 2,437 | 2,437 | 2,437 | 2,437 | 2,437 | 2,437 | 2,457 | 2,457 | 2,457 | 29,412 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p672100 - Crime/Fidelity Insurance | 51 | 51 | 51 | 51 | 51 | 51 | 51 | 51 | 51 | 54 | 54 | 54 | 624 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p672900 - Umbrella Auto Flood & Other | 80 | 80 | 80 | 80 | 80 | 80 | 80 | 80 | 80 | 84 | 84 | 84 | 967 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Insurance - Prop | 131 | 131 | 131 | 131 | 131 | 131 | 131 | 131 | 131 | 137 | 137 | 137 | 1,591 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taxes & Insurance | 17,647 | 17,215 | 17,327 | 17,538 | 17,235 | 17,163 | 18,011 | 17,163 | 17,163 | 17,615 | 17,190 | 17,190 | 208,457 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
OTH NON-CONTROLLABLE OPERATING EXP | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p632000 - Management Fees | 6,694 | 6,756 | 6,767 | 6,542 | 6,638 | 6,849 | 6,750 | 6,800 | 6,904 | 6,863 | 6,852 | 7,059 | 81,474 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
420 Prop Mgmt Exp - Consol | 6,694 | 6,756 | 6,767 | 6,542 | 6,638 | 6,849 | 6,750 | 6,800 | 6,904 | 6,863 | 6,852 | 7,059 | 81,474 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p615700 - Environmental Expenses | 667 | 667 | 667 | 667 | 667 | 667 | 667 | 667 | 667 | 667 | 667 | 667 | 8,000 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Noncontrollable - Property Upgrades | 667 | 667 | 667 | 667 | 667 | 667 | 667 | 667 | 667 | 667 | 667 | 667 | 8,000 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Management, Acctg & Oth Fees | 7,361 | 7,423 | 7,434 | 7,209 | 7,305 | 7,515 | 7,417 | 7,467 | 7,570 | 7,530 | 7,519 | 7,726 | 89,474 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Property Net Operating Income | 66,746 | 65,245 | 67,044 | 61,612 | 64,231 | 67,569 | 62,845 | 67,984 | 68,031 | 66,794 | 68,294 | 72,373 | 798,768 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Page 4 of 6
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Addenda |
Report Name: P_ OS_ BudDet_Stnd Application: _FinRep Run Date: January 25, 2011 10:11:09 | Standard Property Operating Statement Budget Detail Scenario: Budget Ledger: Actual Ledger Entity: Entity Dept: NODEPT- No Dept | User: DMcclure | ||
Prop005763 — Cedar Rim | ||||
For the 12 Months January — December Y2011 |
January | February | March | April | May | June | July | August | September | October | November | December | Annual Total | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p834000 - Legal | 111 | 111 | 111 | 111 | 111 | 111 | 111 | 111 | 111 | 111 | 111 | 111 | 1,333 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
480 - Pship Legal & Prof | 111 | 111 | 111 | 111 | 111 | 111 | 111 | 111 | 111 | 111 | 111 | 111 | 1,333 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p831600 - Txs Fees & Lic | 0 | 0 | 0 | 110 | 260 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 370 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pship Other Exp | 0 | 0 | 0 | 110 | 260 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 370 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Specific Pship Expenses | 111 | 111 | 111 | 221 | 371 | 111 | 111 | 111 | 111 | 111 | 111 | 111 | 1,703 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p662000 - Deprec -Buildings | 27,768 | 27,768 | 27,768 | 27,754 | 27,740 | 27,739 | 27,395 | 27,395 | 27,409 | 27,423 | 27,423 | 27,424 | 331 007 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p666000 - Deprec. - Furnishings | 177,580 | 177,522 | 177,370 | 177,204 | 177,033 | 176,912 | 176,789 | 176,777 | 176,706 | 176,641 | 176,651 | 176,667 | 2,123,853 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Property Depr & Amortization | 205,348 | 205,290 | 205,138 | 204,958 | 204,773 | 204,651 | 204,184 | 204,173 | 204,115 | 204,064 | 204,074 | 204,092 | 2,454,860 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p669510 - Deprec. - Non RE Assets | 59 | 67 | 58 | 49 | 49 | 48 | 46 | 46 | 46 | 46 | 46 | 46 | 605 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Prop Depr Exp-Non RE Assets | 59 | 67 | 58 | 49 | 49 | 48 | 46 | 46 | 46 | 46 | 46 | 46 | 605 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Noncontrollable Operating Exp | 230,526 | 230,106 | 230,067 | 229,975 | 229,733 | 229,488 | 229,769 | 228,959 | 229,006 | 229,366 | 228,940 | 229,164 | 2,755,099 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total Operating Expenses | 272,662 | 275,348 | 273,603 | 274,457 | 273,726 | 274,216 | 276,505 | 272,342 | 274,312 | 274,685 | 272,974 | 273,056 | 3,287,887 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Operating Income | (138,772 | ) | (140,223 | ) | (138,263 | ) | (143,616 | ) | (140,963 | ) | (137,241 | ) | (141,496 | ) | (136,345 | ) | (136,242 | ) | (137,427 | ) | (135,937 | ) | (131,875 | ) | (1,658,400 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NON-OPERATING INCOME (EXPENSES) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p549001 - Security Deposit Interest | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 8 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
720 - Prop Interest Inc | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 8 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p682001 - Int. Exp. Secured Fixed 1st | (23,841 | ) | (23,821 | ) | (23,801 | ) | (23,780 | ) | (23,759 | ) | (23,739 | ) | (23,718 | ) | (23,697 | ) | (23,675 | ) | (23,654 | ) | (23,633 | ) | (23,611 | ) | (284,729 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p682002 - Int. Exp. Secured Fixed 2nd | (21,245 | ) | (21,223 | ) | (21,201 | ) | (21,179 | ) | (21,157 | ) | (21,135 | ) | (21,112 | ) | (21,089 | ) | (21,067 | ) | (21,044 | ) | (21,021 | ) | (20,998 | ) | (253,471 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
800 - Prop Interest Exp - Mortgages | (45,086 | ) | (45,044 | ) | (45,002 | ) | (44,959 | ) | (44,916 | ) | (44,873 | ) | (44,830 | ) | (44,786 | ) | (44,742 | ) | (44,698 | ) | (44,654 | ) | (44,609 | ) | (538,200 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p839017 - Interest Expense - OTEF Loan | 723 | 723 | 723 | 723 | 723 | 723 | 723 | 723 | 723 | 723 | 723 | 723 | 8,673 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p916003-Amort DLC 1st | (723 | ) | (723 | ) | (723 | ) | (723 | ) | (723 | ) | (723 | ) | (723 | ) | (723 | ) | (723 | ) | (723: | (723 | ) | (723 | ) | (8,673 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p916023- Amort DLC - Other | (524 | ) | (524 | ) | (524 | ) | (524 | ) | (524 | ) | (524 | ) | (524 | ) | (524 | ) | (524 | ) | (524 | ) | (524 | ) | (524 | ) | (6,287 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
805 Prop Interest Exp - Amort of Def Loan Costs | (524 | ) | (524 | ) | (524 | ) | (524 | ) | (524 | ) | (524 | ) | (524 | ) | (524 | ) | (524 | ) | (524 | ) | (524 | ) | (524 | ) | (6,287 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Prop Int. Exp, Net of Cap Int | (45,610 | ) | (45,568 | ) | (45,526 | ) | (45,483 | ) | (45,440 | ) | (45,397 | ) | (45,354 | ) | (45,310 | ) | (45,266 | ) | (45,222 | ) | (45,178 | ) | (45,133 | ) | (544,487 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total Non-Operating Inc(Exp) | (45,610 | ) | (45,567 | ) | (45,525 | ) | (45,482 | ) | (45,440 | ) | (45,396 | ) | (45,353 | ) | (45,309 | ) | (45,265 | ) | (45,221 | ) | (45,177 | ) | (45,132 | ) | (544,479 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Property Net Income (Loss) | (184,382 | ) | (185,790 | ) | (183,788 | ) | (189,098 | ) | (186,402 | ) | (182,637 | ) | (186,849 | ) | (181,655 | ) | (181,507 | ) | (182,648 | ) | (181,114 | ) | (177,008 | ) | (2,202,879 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
CHANGE IN ASSETS | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p149425- Cl GP Supervision Fees | 13 | (23 | ) | (23 | ) | (26 | ) | (31 | ) | (153 | ) | (156 | ) | (152 | ) | (32 | ) | (30 | ) | (12 | ) | (9 | ) | (660 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GP Fees Cl | 13 | (23 | ) | (23 | ) | (26 | ) | (31 | ) | (153 | ) | (156 | ) | (152 | ) | (32 | ) | (30 | ) | (12 | ) | (9 | ) | (660 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p179999 -Capital Improvement Allocation | (189 | ) | (219 | ) | (230 | ) | (240 | ) | (276 | ) | (1,225 | ) | (1,214 | ) | (1,255 | ) | (293 | ) | (284 | ) | (125 | ) | (109 | ) | (5,660 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Allocations Cl | (189 | ) | (219 | ) | (230 | ) | (240 | ) | (276 | ) | (1,225 | ) | (1,214 | ) | (1,255 | ) | (293 | ) | (284 | ) | (125 | ) | (109 | ) | (5,660 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Capital Improve Alloc | (202 | ) | (242 | ) | (254 | ) | (266 | ) | (307 | ) | (1,378 | ) | (1,370 | ) | (1,408 | ) | (325 | ) | (314 | ) | (137 | ) | (118 | ) | (6,320 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p146503 -Refrigerators | (130 | ) | (306 | ) | (306 | ) | (367 | ) | (429 | ) | (306 | ) | (490 | ) | (184 | ) | (367 | ) | (306 | ) | (245 | ) | (184 | ) | (3,621 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p146601 - Carpet - Unit | (441 | ) | (1,102 | ) | (1,102 | ) | (1,323 | ) | (1,543 | ) | (1,102 | ) | (1,764 | ) | (661 | ) | (1,323 | ) | (1,102 | ) | (882 | ) | (661 | ) | (13,007 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p149599- Wall Covering | (129 | ) | (322 | ) | (322 | ) | (386 | ) | (451 | ) | (322 | ) | (515 | ) | (193 | ) | (386 | ) | (322 | ) | (258 | ) | (193 | ) | (3,799 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Turn Capital | (700 | ) | (1,730 | ) | (1,730 | ) | (2,077 | ) | (2,423 | ) | (1,730 | ) | (2,769 | ) | (1,038 | ) | (2,077 | ) | (1,730 | ) | (1,384 | ) | (1,038 | ) | (20,427 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p149998 - Cl Allocation - Turns | 48 | 112 | 108 | 126 | 142 | 98 | 151 | 54 | 105 | 84 | 64 | 46 | 1,136 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Turn CI Alloc | 48 | 112 | 108 | 126 | 142 | 98 | 151 | 54 | 105 | 84 | 64 | 46 | 1,136 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tum CR | (655 | ) | (1,619 | ) | (1,622 | ) | (1,951 | ) | (2,281 | ) | (1,633 | ) | (2,618 | ) | (984 | ) | (1,972 | ) | (1,647 | ) | (1,320 | ) | (992 | ) | (19,291 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p142419 -Stair Treads & Handrails - Oth | (103 | ) | (102 | ) | (127 | ) | (125 | ) | (175 | ) | (2,519 | ) | (2,444 | ) | (2,681 | ) | (312 | ) | (327 | ) | (41 | ) | (42 | ) | (8,999 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Project Capital | (103 | ) | (102 | ) | (127 | ) | (125 | ) | (175 | ) | (2,519 | ) | (2,444 | ) | (2,681 | ) | (312 | ) | (327 | ) | (41 | ) | (42 | ) | (8,999 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p149999- Capital Rep-CI allocation acct | 40 | 39 | 48 | 47 | 65 | 924 | 886 | 961 | 110 | 115 | 14 | 14 | 3,263 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Project Cl Alloc | 40 | 39 | 48 | 47 | 65 | 924 | 886 | 961 | 110 | 115 | 14 | 14 | 3,263 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Project CR | (83 | ) | (63 | ) | (79 | ) | (78 | ) | (110 | ) | (1,595 | ) | (1,558 | ) | (1,720 | ) | (201 | ) | (213 | ) | (27 | ) | (27 | ) | (5,736 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p149901 - CapX -Cap Payroll | (932 | ) | (827 | ) | (675 | ) | (860 | ) | (868 | ) | (848 | ) | (883 | ) | (880 | ) | (860 | ) | (890 | ) | (854 | ) | (876 | ) | (10,463 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Payroll Capital | (932 | ) | (827 | ) | (875 | ) | (860 | ) | (868 | ) | (848 | ) | (893 | ) | (880 | ) | (860 | ) | (890 | ) | (854 | ) | (876 | ) | (10,463 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p149997- Cl Allocation - Labor | 101 | 68 | 74 | 67 | 69 | 204 | 178 | 240 | 77 | 86 | 47 | 49 | 1,260 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Payroll Cl Alloc | 101 | 68 | 74 | 67 | 69 | 204 | 178 | 240 | 77 | 86 | 47 | 49 | 1,260 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
CR Cap Payroll | (830 | ) | (759 | ) | (801 | ) | (793 | ) | (799 | ) | (645 | ) | (715 | ) | (640 | ) | (783 | ) | (804 | ) | (807 | ) | (827 | ) | (9,203 | ) |
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Page 5 of 6
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Addenda |
Report Name: P_ OS_ BudDet Stnd Application: _FinRep Run Date: January 25, 2011 10:11:09 | Standard Property Operating Statement Budget Detail Scenario: Budget Ledger: Actual Ledger Entity: Entity Dept: NODEPT — No Dept | User: DMcclure | ||
Prop005763 — Cedar Rim | ||||
For the 12 Months January — December Y2011 |
January | February | March | April | May | June | July | August | September | October | November | December | Annual Total | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total Turn and Project CR | (1,548 | ) | (2,440 | ) | (2,503 | ) | (2,822 | ) | (3,190 | ) | (3,873 | ) | (4,892 | ) | (3,344 | ) | (2,956 | ) | (2,664 | ) | (2,154 | ) | (1,847 | ) | (34,229 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p144100 - Office Computers | 0 | (470 | ) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | (470 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Non RE Depreciable Assets | 0 | (470 | ) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | (470 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
CHANGE IN LIABILITIES | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p232001 - Principal 1st Mortgage | (3,268 | ) | (3,289 | ) | (3,309 | ) | (3,330 | ) | (3,351 | ) | (3,372 | ) | (3,393 | ) | (3,414 | ) | (3,435 | ) | (3,457 | ) | (3,478 | ) | (3,500 | ) | (40,596 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p232101 - Principal 2nd Mortgage | (4,095 | ) | (4,117 | ) | (4,139 | ) | (4,161 | ) | (4,184 | ) | (4,206 | ) | (4,229 | ) | (4,252 | ) | (4,274 | ) | (4,297 | ) | (4,321 | ) | (4,344 | ) | (50,619 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
205 - Secured Notes Payable | (7,363 | ) | (7,406 | ) | (7,448 | ) | (7,491 | ) | (7,535 | ) | (7,578 | ) | (7,622 | ) | (7,666 | ) | (7,709 | ) | (7,754 | ) | (7,799 | ) | (7,844 | ) | (91,215 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
CHANGE IN EQUITY |
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Page 6 of 6
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Addenda |
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Addenda |
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Addenda |
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Addenda |
QUALIFICATIONS OF THE APPRAISER
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Addenda |
PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS
TERENCE TENER , MAI , ASA
MANAGING PARTNER
MANAGING PARTNER
EXPERIENCE | Mr. Tener is a founding principal of KTR Real Estate Advisors LLC. Over the course of his career, Mr. Tener has appraised many prominent commercial properties, including the GM Building, 101 Park Avenue, 500 Park Avenue, 410 Park Avenue, 437 Madison Avenue, 475 Fifth Avenue, the Seagrams Building, 900 Third Avenue, Park Avenue Plaza and the Lever House. In addition, Mr. Tener has served as an expert witness in various federal and state courts including New York, New Jersey, Connecticut and Delaware. He has also valued such notable residential and mixed-use properties as CitiSpire, Metropolitan Tower and River Tower. He has been responsible for the valuation of hotels throughout the United States, including the New York Hilton, Washington Hilton, Pittsburgh Hilton, the American Stanhope and a chain of hotels located in Mexico, owned by Groupo Situr. In addition, Mr. Tener has consulted on the valuation of numerous retail properties, including the Smithaven Mall, Herald Center, Sony Entertainment Center in San Francisco and 730 North Michigan Avenue. | |
LICENSES | Connecticut Certified General Appraiser | |
Massachusetts Certified General Appraiser | ||
Missouri Certified General Appraiser | ||
New Hampshire Certified General Appraiser | ||
New Jersey Certified General Appraiser | ||
New York Certified General Appraiser | ||
Vermont Certified General Appraiser | ||
Wyoming Certified General Appraiser | ||
New York Real Estate Broker | ||
MEMBERSHIPS | Appraisal Institute — MAI Designation since 1978 | |
American Society of Appraisers (ASA) — Senior Member and former member of | ||
the Board of Governors for the NY Chapter | ||
MBA of New York — Board of Governors | ||
Real Estate Board of New York — Appraisal Committee | ||
National Association of Real Estate Fiduciaries | ||
Long Island Board of Realtors | ||
International Council of Shopping Centers (ICSC) | ||
Mortgage Bankers Association of America | ||
Young Mortgage Bankers Association | ||
Appraisal Institute Metropolitan New York Chapter — Admissions Committee | ||
and Ethics Committee | ||
Appraisal Journal Review Committee | ||
New York’s East Side Association — Former director | ||
Cardinal’s Committee of the Archdiocese of New York |
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Addenda |
PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS
THOMAS J. TENER
MANAGING PARTNER
MANAGING PARTNER
EXPERIENCE | Mr. Tener is a founding principal of KTR Real Estate Advisors LLC. He has more than 20 years of broad based experience as a real estate professional, including appraisal, physical condition assessments, environmental site assessments, construction, development, brokerage, property management and receivership. Prior to forming KTR, Mr. Tener was the Chief Operating Officer of a national full service commercial due diligence firm. Under his direction, this firm provided appraisal, environmental, engineering and construction consultation on thousands for investment grade properties annually. Mr. Tener has extensive experience in appraisal, including such unique properties as the former Shoreham Nuclear power plant, the Perimeter Center in Atlanta, GA and numerous trophy office buildings. Mr. Tener has been a guest lecturer and panel member on various appraisal and due diligence topics. | |
LICENSES | New York Certified General Appraiser #46000033225 | |
New York Real Estate Broker | ||
USCG — Third Assistant Engineer | ||
Receiver NYS Supreme Court | ||
MEMBERSHIPS | Appraisal Institute — Associate Member | |
Association of Real Estate Women | ||
MBA of New York | ||
National Association of Real Estate Fiduciaries | ||
Mortgage Bankers Association of America | ||
Young Mortgage Bankers Association | ||
ASTM International | ||
EDUCATION | United States Merchant Marine Academy, Kings Point, NY |
• | BS Marine Engineering | ||
• | BS Mechanical Engineering and Thermal Systems Design |
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC
Cedar Rim Apartments | June 8, 2011 | |
Newcastle, Washington | Addenda |
PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS
SHAUN KEST
APPRAISER
APPRAISER
EXPERIENCE | Shaun Kest is an Appraiser with KTR Real Estate Advisors LLC. He has five years of commercial appraisal experience. Mr. Kest is actively pursuing designation as a member of the Appraisal Institute. | |
Prior to joining the firm, Mr. Kest worked for the Chatham at North Hills where he assisted in the development of a townhouse community development and for East End Properties where he assisted in the development of a shopping center. | ||
LICENSES | New York Certified General Appraiser #46000049297 | |
MEMBERSHIPS | Appraisal Institute — Associate Member since 2007 | |
EDUCATION | University of Miami, Miami, Florida — BBA (Finance) | |
Appraisal Institute: |
• | Introduction to Real Estate Appraisal (R-1) | ||
• | Basic Valuation Principles & Procedures (R-2) | ||
• | Appraisal Fair Housing (AQ-1) | ||
• | National USPAP Appraisal Course (15-Hour) | ||
• | Introduction to Income Property Valuation (G-1) | ||
• | Principles of Income Property (G-2) | ||
• | Applied Income Property Valuation (G-3) |
KTR Real Estate Advisors, LLC