8. Range of Value for Schreiner OfferingIt 0 CIS 2
Incorporated 1892
Planning, Economic &
Community Development Department
P.O. Box 1997
Kalispell, MT 59903-1997
TO: Bruce Williams, City Manager
FROM: Lawrence Gallagher, PECDD, Director
DATE: March 13, 1995
248 Third Avenue East
(406) 758-7740
(406) 758-7739 (office fax)
(406) 758-7758 (City Hall fax)
SUBJECT: "Range -of -value" recommendation for Parcel C of Tract 5DL in Section 18,
T28N, R21W - (Schreiner Request to Purchase). See Plat/preliminary survey
attached
You have asked me to inspect Parcel C of Tract 5DL in Section 18, T28N,
R21W; and, to determine if there is (i) an existing public use or a need to retain it for public
use and if not, (ii) to suggest the highest and best use, and finally, (iv) to suggest a range of
value for the highest and best use so the land may be offered for sale.
I understand that the City Council may use the information to determine if it
should offer the land for sale to the adjacent property owner(s) or others who may wish to bid
on it if it is publicly offered for sale. I also understand that this Memorandum is not to be
considered an appraisal of the property but merely a discussion of land use and value
considerations which may be considered by the City Council to aid it in making a policy
decision. Glenn Neier, City Attorney, has advised the Council that it may exercise its legislative
authority to establish a market value for the property without a formal appraisal should it decide
to do so.
Ownership - History and Description of the Property:
Brian J. Wood, Zoning Administrator, provided a description of the property, the
Schreiner's request, and his observations in a MEMORANDUM dated February, 22, 1995. It
is attached. To summarize: The Schreiner's own Parcel 5DLB which is improved with a single
family rental property and a large free standing garage. They desire to purchase the triangular
shaped (Parcel C) piece of property, approximately 1,651 square feet, owned by the City of
Kalispell so that they my build another (attached) single family dwelling on the site. Parcel C
of Tract 5DL abuts the Schreiner's northerly property line and the existing garage. The garage
is used by the Schreiner's for storage of business property. A Duplex is a permitted use in the
R-4 District, however, there is a maximum lot coverage of 40 percent and the Schreiner's need
more land.
Parcel C of Tract 5DL
Valuation Memorandum
March 13, 1995
Parcel C, the subject property is shaped like a triangle with 4.95 feet on Meridian
Road, its westerly boundary; its northerly boundary is formed by 113.26' abutting
Parcel "B" which is a 20' wide undedicated public alley providing access to
multiple private garages, car ports and residential dwelling units which front on
Fourth Street East and also Tenth Avenue. Peterson School and the PeeWee
baseball fields are adjacent to and north of the alley. The property's 24.01'
easterly boundary abuts Tract SDM, owned by Francis Wall, 113 4th Street West,
who has constructed a fence into the right-of-way forming a drive -way and access
to a double car garage. The southerly property line is 116' abutting Parcel
5DLB, an L shaped parcel owned by Schreiner's. The Schreiner's garage is
accessed from Meridian Road and the public alley. It appears that the Francis
Wall's garage is also accessed via the public alley and Parcel C. There is another
single family dwelling located on the Northeast corner of Meridian Road and 4th
Street West.
Highest and best use:
Page 2
According to Public Works Director, Bob Babb, the 20' wide alley is adequate to serve
the neighborhood; thus, Parcel C is not necessary to enable the alley to function. He did not
know why the alley has never been dedicated as a public alley and suggested that the city should
do so. Once the alley is dedicated there is no reason why the parcel should be held by the City.
Because the alley separates Parcel C from Parcel A the Peterson School/PeeWee ball
fields, it is not necessary to improve or enhance the function or utility of the park. Also, the
Park is fenced so there is no direct or free access directly from the alley. The site is obviously
not part of the schools park maintenance or landscaping management plan.
Parcel C does provide a wide alley corridor enhancing both access and visibility for the
Park, alley, the Francis Wall property and the Schreiner property (51)LB). However, the alley
right-of-way is unimproved, unlighted, and unlandscaped and is not paved. If the City sold the
property, it could restrict a building on the site and therefore visibility would be maintained the
major benefit to the public.
If the Schreiner's obtained ownership to the property they would be able to construct an
additional single family dwelling on Parcel 5DLB. City policy has been to encourage both
density and the construction residential units ---The highest and best use of all properly zoned
residential within the City. The current zoning of the subject property is R-4 residential as is
the adjacent property to the north. A duplex is a permitted use in the R-4 district provided the
40 % maximum lot coverage can be adhered to. If Parcel C were purchase by the adjacent
property owner (Parcel 5DLB) with restrictions to prohibit construction of improvements which
Parcel C of Tract 5DL
Valuation Memorandum
March 13, 1995
Page 3
would impede access or visibility and to require alley paving and/or landscaping of Parcel C,
the Highest -and -best -use would be to sell the property to the Schreiners.
The City does not have the ability to negotiate the sale of the land and must first publicly
offer it for sale through legal publication of a Notice of Intent to Sell. The City must consider
a bid from anyone interested in submitting a bid which meets minimum requirements.
Value:
There are three methods of determining the fair market value for the land. The
comparable sales method may be considered the most valid unless one wants to get into a
complex land residual valuation to determine how Parcel 5DLB would benefit if Parcel C's
annexation enabled the construction of a duplex and thus, enhanced the income potential of the
Parcel 5DLB when and if a second dwelling unit was constructed. On the other hand, If the
City needed to acquire Parcel C for public right-of-way it would no doubt use the "partial
takings --before and after" method of determining value. If Parcel C was being severed from
Parcel 5DLB, limiting rather than enhancing value, visibility and access, it could easily be
appraised at the highest square foot value for any R-4 residential comparable or the land impact
on the present value of an income stream potential to be derived from a 2nd residential rental
on the Parcel 5DLB.
Another method would be to determine the value of the alley with and without Parcel C
and thus establish the value of Parcel C. This would be difficult to do because the market data
is a little scarce. The City hasn't purchased many alley's lately
Having said all that, I recommend a simple market comparable approach to value
utilizing a range of land values extrapolated from the sale of older residential properties and a
few vacant land sales in similar residential neighborhoods.
I did not have the time to investigate the market or independently verify market
comparable sales. Instead, I reviewed recent acquisition appraisals, estimates of value offered
by competent real estate appraisers, and I extrapolated a range of value for the land. This
method of establishing value of a buildable lot could be supported by a reasonable vacant lot
comparison of the Flathead Industries For The Handicapped acquisition of 21,120 square feet
to be resubdivided into 3 multifamily lots at a purchase price of $2.37 per square foot. Other
R-4 residential lots in new subdivisions range as high as $3.00 per square foot but not along a
major arterial with a PeeWee Baseball field/school playground in the backyard. Both factors
which limit rather than enhance a residential lot value.
I was able to look at the data on Ten (10) residential properties used as market comps
in recent appraisals done for the city. The average house had 1449 square feet of area and
occupied an R-4 zoned lot of 7,941 square feet. If the average dwelling was valued at $30 - $35
Parcel C of Tract 5DL
Valuation Memorandum
March 13, 1995
Page 4
per square foot a value range of $44,070 to $51,415 for improvement value the land residual
range of value for a 7,941 square foot lot would be from $13,325 to $20,670 or $1.68 to $2.60
per square foot.
There are other comparable sales and other methods of arriving at value. If one was to
explore them all I am confident the range of value would still bounce in the $2.00 to $2.50/SF.
Therefore I would recommend that the City consider offering the property for the minimum
range of value ($2.00) or approximately $3,302 (1,651 X $2.00 = $3,302). Or, the City could
consider offering the property for a lesser amount, say $1.00 per square foot and require that
the successful bidder pave the alley along the entire length of the parcel and landscape the lot
so that it improves the neighborhood. In other words, provide some incentives to improve the
neighborhood and increase the inventory of residential dwelling units in the area.
The City of Kalispell
Building Department
Brian J. Wood
Zoning Administrator
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
Incorporated 1892
Telephone (406) 758-7730
248 3rd Avenue East
PO Box 1997
Zip 59903
Fax (406) 758-7739
Larry Gallagher, PECDD Director
Brian J. Wood, Zoning Administrator BY
February 22, 1995
Schreiner Request - Appraisal
At the February 13th city council workshop this department was
directed to establish a range of values for Parcel C of Tract 5DL
in Section 18, T28N, R21W (see attached drawing) in order to
facilitate a possible sale of that property by the city. To
assist you in establishing this range, the following information
is provided:
- The party interested in acquiring the subject property, the
Schreiners, own Tract 5DLB. Existing improvements on 5DLB include
a single-family dwelling and a large garage with an attached
carport. It is their stated intent to add a second dwelling unit
to the existing home on 5DLB.
- The current zoning of the property is R-4 residential. A duplex
is a permitted use in the R-4 district, and the Schreiners could
add a second dwelling unit to the existing structure if all
development standards of the R-4 district (attached) are met.
- Maximum lot coverage in the R-4 district is 40%. This is a
limiting factor for the Schreiners, given the existing
improvements on the property. By acquiring Parcel "C" of Tract
5DL, the Schreiners would add approximately 1,650 square feet of
land to their present.holdings and be allowed to construct a
larger dwelling unit.
- According to County records, Tract 5DL is owned by the City of
Kalispell (Assessor's # E028550). Parcel "A" of this tract is
parkland, Parcel "B" is an alley segment (though not an
established alley of record), and the subject parcel, Parcel "C"
is vacant and unused. Automobiles associated with the adjacent
PeeWee baseball fields do occassionally park on Parcel "C" during
the baseball season.
- Documentation provided by the Schreiners indicate the size of
Parcel "C" to be 1,651 square feet. If the City advertises and
sells the property, it will be the responsibility of the
purchaser to have the property surveyed and recorded.
- Staff is unable to identify a "need" for the City to retain
ownership of the property. The width and integrity of the
existing alleyway will not be compromised by disposing Parcel
Fr C "
- It appears that the subject property would b.e of benefit to no
party other than the Schreiners, the sole adjacent property
owners.
R-4 Residential - Page 13
R-4 RESIDENTIAL
Sections:
27.07.010 Intent
27.07.020 Permitted uses
27.07.030 Uses Which May Be Permitted By Conditional
Use Permit
27.07.040 Property Development Standards
27.07.010: Intent. A residential district with minimum lot areas. Development
within the district will require all public utilities, and all community facilities. Two-family
dwellings are permitted in this district.
27.07.020: Permitted uses.
(1). Boarding house, incidental (see definition).
(2). Day care (family or group day-care homes).
(3). Dwelling, duplex.
(4). Dwelling, single family.
(5). Parks.
27.07.030: Uses which May Be Permitted By Conditional use Permit.
(1).
Bed and breakfast.
(2).
Church/worship/parish/sunday school buildings.
(3).
Community center/gym/swim pools -operated by
public/quasi-public.
(4).
Community residential facility for eight (8) or fewer persons.
(5).
Day care center.
(6).
Dwellings, cluster development.
(7).
Electrical distribution Station.
(8).
Foster or group homes serving eight (8) or fewer persons.
(9).
Golf courses.
(10).
Law enforcement/fire stations.
(11).
Railroad rights -of -way.
(12).
Recreational area, non-commercial.
(13).
Schools, public/private, grades 1-12.
(14).
Temporary building/structure.
(15).
Water storage facilities.
,Page 14 - Kalispell Zoning Ordnance
27.07.040:
Property Development Standards
(1).
Minimum Lot Area: 6000 square feet
(2).
Minimum Lot Width (FT): 50
(3)•
Minimum Yards (FT):
Front Yard - 15
Side Yard - 5
Rear Yard -10
Side corner -15
(4)•
Maximum Building Height (FT)- 30
(5).
Permitted Lot Coverage (%): 40
(6)•
Off -Street Parking: Refer to Section 27.26.
(7)•
Maximum Fence Heights (FT):
As per 27.22.090.
C
AIN
�D I NFC,
VITH AftPORT
C"I
It
Q0
WEISSMANs
SE ,y
Eg;R� 5
e'
s
F
s� sG GA
B a2
®
0® 6
a
a2 a
oaf ®• W
5R
E
6
14 b �
SpEp 8
s•gZ,Rf ��
� IZ
K
5®E y0
`6
1 R g
5po 6
a
5pog
' 1t
•
spoA
. g -T 'E
., 5ppg
,Z
5 coN`0. 1
•o► a
6
'a
5044
1Z
•
� 5p�,•
g t R
•
6
1
A
IZ
-
A �
p s®H • • 6
� , Iz .
155 p
sat- S ¢® p p B
a D
K
C
..
tZ
9 IA
Lc p„ M C D CA•155
p D•
t� p MO° 6.
5
�+ IL H
FtFS
t3
® s® 39
•Z tZ
.3e s e 0
s sap
aZ
t
=
• ..
A O A �
A C_
p
a
�
®�
'
5 p p px %
a
MA �A
C S.�A
A
4
�
�
•
!i W 8
8 Xc
0 pv
O
g®
1 t�•
s
t
dOWO ¢3 4 b $
N
x s 0
t4
S.
Mae