SUMMARY
APPRAISAL REPORT
PROPERTY OF
YRC, Inc. – Under Contract of Purchase to
Mad Acquisitions, LLC
Truck Terminal Facility
Located at 1665 Seibel Drive, NE
City of Roanoke, VA
Tax ID 7190501
Effective Date – April 6, 2009
Milton-May
Appraisal Company
Milton-May
P.O. Box 4288 - Lynchburg, VA 24502
Appraisal Company
Phone 434-455-2300
Fax 434-455-0304
REAL ESTATE VALUATION AND CONSULTING
April 14, 2009
StellarOne
Attn: Mr. Charles Persico
590 Peter Jefferson Parkway, Ste. 250
Charlottesville, VA 22911
Re:
Summary Appraisal Report
Property of YRC, Inc. – Under Contract of
Purchase to Mad Acquisitions, LLC
Truck Terminal Facility
Located at 1665 Seibel Drive, NE
City of Roanoke, Virginia
Tax ID 7190501
Dear Mr. Persico:
In accordance with your request, I have appraised the property
captioned above.
I have inspected the property and analyzed all
discoverable facts that are believed to index the market value of the leased
fee interest in the property. The accompanying report sets forth my
appraisal methods and techniques and contains data gathered in my
investigation.
This summary appraisal report has been compiled in strict conformity
to the Code of Professional Ethics and Standards of Professional Practice of
the Appraisal Institute and the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal
Practice of the Appraisal Foundation. Per our agreement, this report
presents summary discussions of pertinent facts; additional supporting
documentation is retained in my file.
Sharon H. May, MAI
Jean M. Rote
StellarOne
April 14, 2009
Page 2
Based on my inspection, investigation, and analysis of pertinent
market data, it is my opinion that as of April 6, 2009, the market value of the
leased fee interest in the subject property was:
SIX HUNDRED TWENTY-FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS
($625,000)
This indicated value is based on the assumption that the proposed
lease agreement will be executed at the closing of the sale, in accordance
with the terms detailed in the accompanying report.
I have no interest, present or contemplated, in the appraised property
and neither the commission to make this appraisal nor the compensation is
contingent upon the value reported.
Respectfully submitted,
Sharon H. May, MAI
Certified General Real Estate Appraiser
License No. 4001 000184
SHM
1
SUMMARY APPRAISAL REPORT
This is a Summary Appraisal Report which is intended to comply with
the reporting requirements set forth under Standards Rule 2-2(b) of the
Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice for a Summary
Appraisal Report. As such, this report presents only summary discussions of
the data, reasoning, and analyses that were used in the appraisal process to
develop my opinion of value. Supporting documentation concerning the
data, reasoning, and analyses is retained in my file. The depth of discussion
contained in this report is specific to the needs of the client and for the
intended use stated below. The appraiser is not responsible for any
unauthorized use of this report.
Client:
StellarOne
Attn: Mr. Charles Persico
590 Peter Jefferson Parkway, Ste. 250
Charlottesville, VA 22911
Appraiser:
Mrs. Sharon H. May, MAI
Milton-May Appraisal Company
P. O. Box 4288
Lynchburg, VA 24502
Subject:
Property of YRC, Inc. – Under Contract of
Purchase to Mad Acquisitions, LLC
Truck Terminal Facility
Located at 1665 Seibel Drive, NE
City of Roanoke, Virginia 24012
Tax ID 7190501
Purpose of the Appraisal:

To estimate the “as-is” market value of the leased fee interest in
the subject property as of April 6, 2009, which represents the
date the property was inspected.
The term "market value" is defined in Chapter 12, Code of Federal
Regulation, Part 34.42 (f), as follows:
Milton-May Appraisal Company
2
The most probable price which a property should bring in a
competitive and open market under all conditions requisite to a
fair sale, 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) The buyer and seller are typically motivated;
2) Both parties are well informed or well advised, and acting in
what they consider their own 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.
The term “leased fee interest” is defined in The Dictionary of Real
Estate Appraisal, Fourth Edition, published by the Appraisal Institute, as
follows:
An ownership interest held by a landlord with the rights of use
and occupancy conveyed by lease to others. The rights of the
lessor (the leased fee owner) and the lessee are specified by
contract terms contained within the lease.
Intended Use of the Report: This appraisal is intended to provide
the client, StellarOne, or other authorized agent, with an estimate of the
market value of the leased fee interest in the subject property, which value
estimate is to be used as an aid in proper underwriting, loan classification
and/or disposition of the subject property by the Bank or its assigns.
Interest Valued: Leased fee.
Milton-May Appraisal Company
3
Effective Date of Value: April 6, 2009.
Date of Report: April 14, 2009.
Scope of Work: In preparing this report, the appraiser:







inspected the site and the interior and exterior of the
improvements on April 6, 2009;
gathered and analyzed information on the area and
neighborhood;
reviewed the proposed sales contract and proposed lease
agreement for the property;
gathered information on comparable improved sales, rents,
operating expenses, and capitalization rates;
confirmed and analyzed data;
developed the sales comparison and income capitalization
approaches into value indications; and
correlated a final value estimate for the subject property.
This Summary Appraisal Report is a brief recapitulation of pertinent
data, analyses, and conclusions. Supporting documentation is retained in my
files.
Special Limiting Conditions: The purpose of this appraisal is to
estimate the market value of the leased fee interest in the property. The
leased fee interest will be created by the long-term lease which will be
executed at the closing of the sale, with the seller leasing back the property
for a ten-year term with additional renewal options. A copy of the proposed
lease has been furnished and is included in the addenda. As such, this
appraisal expressly assumes that the lease will be executed at the closing of
the sale and all terms will be as detailed herein.
It is recognized that the subject property has operated as a truck
terminal since the 1970’s. The property contains underground diesel fuel
storage tanks which are utilized as a part of the operation. No environmental
studies have been furnished, and this appraisal expressly assumes that no site
contamination exists as a result of the fuel pumping facilities or any other
facilities related to the existing use.
Milton-May Appraisal Company
4
Description of Real Estate Appraised:
Neighborhood Description - The subject property is located fronting
on the east side of Seibel Drive, at the southeast quadrant of its intersection
with Mary Linda Avenue in the Statesman Industrial Park in the northeast
section of the City of Roanoke, Virginia. This park is located extending to
the north of US Route 460 (Orange Avenue), which is one of the primary
traffic arteries serving the Roanoke area. Route 460 is a major east-west
highway, connecting Roanoke to Lynchburg and other points to the east,
terminating at Virginia Beach, and extending westward to the West Virginia
border, towards Princeton, West Virginia. Route 460 intersects with
Interstate Route 581, several miles to the west of the subject, and I-581
provides direct access to Interstate Route 81, which extends through the
western part of the state. As such, the subject property benefits from a
location at the eastern section of the city, but proximate to major highways
which serve the entire region.
Statesman Industrial Park was one of the first large industrial parks
developed in the Roanoke area and was developed over 30 years ago.
Developments within this park include a variety of light manufacturing and
warehousing uses. Even though a large number of facilities are older
structures, properties have been well maintained and overall occupancy in
the park remains relatively high. Vacancy was observed to be minimal; an
Milton-May Appraisal Company
5
approximate 30,000 square foot warehouse building is currently offered for
sale or lease, and space is available for lease in two other smaller buildings.
Public water and sewer are accessible throughout the neighborhood.
Properties within Statesman Industrial Park are zoned I-1, Light Industrial
District. This zoning classification is intended to provide for a range of
wholesale, warehousing, distribution, storage, repair and service, assembly
or processing, fabrication or manufacturing uses, etc.
In summary, the subject’s immediate neighborhood is within an
established light industrial park located in the eastern section of Roanoke
City. This location is just north of US Route 460 and is readily accessible to
the Roanoke market, as well as the major traffic arteries extending through
the area. Although Statesman is an older industrial park, demand for
facilities in this area has been strong, with only marginal vacancy noted.
Overall, property values are considered to be stable. No development trends
are currently noted which would indicate a change in the existing
neighboring land uses.
Source of Title - Title to the subject property is indicated to be in
the name of YRC, Inc., successor in interest to Yellow Properties, Inc.
Yellow Properties or a predecessor entity is indicated to have acquired the
property in the 1970’s. At the time of acquisition, the property was located
in Roanoke County, but was annexed into the City of Roanoke in 1976.
The subject property is under contract to be sold to Mad Acquisitions,
LLC, and is to be leased-back to the seller. Copies of the sales contract and
proposed lease agreement are included in the addenda.
Milton-May Appraisal Company
6
Property Description - The subject property consists of a generally
rectangular shaped site containing 5.00 acres, improved with a one-story
masonry and metal truck terminal facility, together with related site
improvements.
An aerial map, taken from the city’s GIS site is included below,
followed by a copy of an older site plan sketch partially detailing a metes
and bounds description. Additional physical details of the site and
improvements follow.
Milton-May Appraisal Company
7
SITE PLAT OF SUBJECT PROPERTY
Milton-May Appraisal Company
8
DESCRIPTION OF SITE
Site Size:
5.00 acres – per tax records
Shape:
Generally rectangular - see preceding plat
Frontage:
386’ effective on east side of Seibel Drive –
495’ effective on south side of Mary Linda
Ave.
Access:
Non-controlled from frontage streets. However,
the sole entrance onto the site has been extended
from Seibel Drive, entering near the site’s
southwest margin.
Topography:
Rises slightly above street grade, but interior has
been graded level to lightly rolling to
accommodate the existing improvements. Tract is
mostly open throughout.
Drainage:
Overall drainage appears to be adequate on site; no
problems noted. Site is indicated to be within
Zone X, areas outside a designated flood plain, per
FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map Number
51161C0167G, dated September 28, 2007.
Utilities:
Electricity, telephone, water, sewer.
Zoning:
I-1, Light Industrial District.
The subject tract is sufficient in size, shape, and topography to support
a variety of uses. No adverse topographic features were noted which would
impair its overall development.
The principal improvement located on the above described site is a
one-story masonry and metal truck terminal facility. Related site
improvements include gravel surfaced parking and access areas, concrete
aprons at the dock and scale areas, etc. A building sketch is included on the
next page, followed by additional physical descriptions.
Milton-May Appraisal Company
9
BUILDING FLOOR PLAN SKETCH
Milton-May Appraisal Company
10
STRUCTURAL DETAILS OF BUILDING
Building Size:
1,350 square feet – Office Area
5,300 square feet – Truck Terminal
6,650 square feet – Total Building Area
2,250 square feet – Covered loading dock attached
to east end of the building
Year Built:
1976 – based on tax records
Foundation:
Reinforced concrete slab – 5” thick concrete dock
slab
Construction:
Steel frame
Exterior Walls:
Corrugated metal exterior walls, with brick base
along office area.
Roof:
Low pitch gable, metal
Metal gutters and downspouts
5’ overhang along dock sides
Heating/Cooling:
Office – gas furnace with air conditioning
No HVAC in terminal area
Office Finish:
Divided into front entry/lounge/check-in area,
men’s rest room, dispatch area, general office,
manager’s office, and women’s rest room. Finish
consists of a mix of carpet and AVT floor
coverings, painted sheetrock and paneled walls,
painted sheetrock and acoustical tile ceilings.
Truck Terminal:
Open interior – reinforced concrete slab flooring,
insulated walls and ceiling.
22 overhead doors (9 along north and south sides,
4 along east end)
An attached covered loading area has been built
along the east end of the terminal area, measuring
45’ x 50’ to provide for additional truck docking.
Milton-May Appraisal Company
11
Inclusive of this covered area, the facility can
accommodate 30 docking stations.
Clear ceiling height of about 9 feet.
High pressure sodium lighting
22 manual overhead doors.
RELATED SITE IMPROVEMENTS
Related site improvements include gravel-surfaced access drives and
parking areas, reinforced concrete aprons along each side of the dock areas,
a concrete loading ramp at dock door No. 1, a metal storage shed (8’ x 12’),
a diesel pumping station with 10,000 gallon underground storage tank, etc.
The building is an older structure, but has been adequately maintained
and provides a functional facility for its use as a trucking terminal. The site
is adequate to accommodate truck maneuverability and also provides area
for future expansion, if needed.
For further description of the subject property, reference is made to
the sketches, photographs, etc., included throughout the report and in the
addenda.
Real Estate Taxes - The subject property is identified for assessment
purposes by the City of Roanoke in the name of Yellow Properties, Inc. The
current assessed value is as follows:
2009 REAL ESTATE TAX ASSESSMENT
Parcel No.
Land
Imprv.
Total
7190501
$401,600
$168,500
$570,100
Real estate in Roanoke is assessed at 100% of assessed value, and the
tax rate for the 2008-09 fiscal year was $1.19 per $100 of assessed value.
The tax rate for the upcoming year 2009-10 will be approved within the next
30 days, or so. Assuming no change in the tax rate, taxes can be estimated at
$6,784.19.
The current assessment for the subject property is believed to be
reasonable and generally consistent with assessments of other area
properties.
Milton-May Appraisal Company
12
HIGHEST AND BEST USE:
Highest and Best Use, As Though Vacant: The subject consists of a
5.00 acre site located in an established industrial park in the northeast
section of the City of Roanoke. The location of this park is to the north
margin of US Route 460 (Orange Avenue), just a couple miles east of its
intersection with Interstate Route 581, which provides access directly to
Interstate Route 81. As such, the location of the subject is within a readily
accessible area of the city. The site is sufficient in overall size, shape, and
topography to accommodate its development. All public utilities are
accessible, and the site is zoned I-1, Light Industrial District, which zoning
is consistent within the immediate neighborhood.
Accordingly, it is my opinion that the highest and best use of the site,
considered as though vacant, would be for light industrial use, such as a
manufacturing or assembly facility, warehouse facility, etc. These type uses
would be consistent with other uses in the immediate neighborhood.
Highest and Best Use, As Improved: The subject site is improved
with a 6,650 square foot truck terminal facility and related site
improvements. The building was constructed in 1976 and includes a front
office area comprising about 20% of the total building area. The building is
a basic structure, with only the office areas heated and cooled; however, the
terminal area is functional for its current use.
The building is an older structure, but has been adequately maintained
and provides a functional facility for its intended use. The improvements are
physically suited to the site and reflect a legally permissible use. Adequate
site area is available to support the existing improvements.
Accordingly, it is my opinion that the highest and best use of the
property, as improved, is for continued use of the property as a truck
terminal facility. It is recognized that the property reflects a high land to
building ratio, however, this is necessary for the functional utility of the
property as a truck terminal.
Milton-May Appraisal Company
13
SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS AND VALUATION:
The purpose of this appraisal is to estimate the market value of the
leased fee interest in the property, which interest will be created by a 10-year
lease agreement to be placed into effect upon the sale/leaseback of the
property. Considering this purpose, the income capitalization approach is
believed to provide the best indication of value. However, the sales
comparison approach will also be considered to provide added support to the
leased fee value indication. Due to the overall age of the improvements and
the difficulty of accurately estimating replacement costs and depreciation for
an industrial building dating from the 1970’s, the cost approach is not
considered to offer a reliable indication of value.
Milton-May Appraisal Company
14
Income Capitalization Approach: Because the subject property is
being sold and leased-back under a long term lease agreement, the terms of
the lease will provide the basis for development of the income approach.
This approach will be developed into a value indication for the subject by
estimating the gross annual rent to be derived, based on the indicated
contract rent; deducting allowances for vacancy and rental loss, and fixed
and operating expenses; and capitalizing the residual net income into a value
indication by use of the direct capitalization technique.
Accordingly, the first step in this analysis involves estimating the
gross annual rent (contract rent) which is anticipated to be derived, based on
the terms of the proposed lease agreement. A copy of the lease is included
in the addenda, with a brief summary of the terms noted as follows:
Terms of Proposed Lease Agreement
Landlord:
Mad Acquisitions, LLC
Tenant:
YRC, Inc.
Lease Term:
10 years
With two 5-year renewal options
Commencement: Execution of lease at closing of property sale from YRC,
Inc., to Mad Acquisitions, LLC
Rent:
Primary 10-year term: $4,956.00/month
1st renewal option: $5,454/month
2nd renewal option: $5,724/month
Landlord pays:
Structural maintenance
Tenant pays:
Reimbursement for real estate taxes, property and
liability insurance, utilities, building and site
maintenance
and repairs
Comments:
Lease provides for expansion (Section 29) with rent to be
adjusted upon completion, based on costs of construction.
Consideration of any expansion is beyond the scope of
this appraisal; this appraisal reflects only the “as-is”
value of the property.
Accordingly, based on the terms of the lease, gross annual income
(contract rent) is indicated to total $59,472, as is detailed on the schedule
which follows this section.
The indicated rental rate of $4,956 per month equates to a rental rate
of $225 per door, which is a unit of comparison recognized in the trucking
Milton-May Appraisal Company
15
terminal industrial. In order to determine if the subject’s proposed rental
rate is reflective of market rent, rental rates for similar type properties were
researched. Although the specific details of the leases cannot be divulged in
order to protect the confidentiality of the parties, all pertinent details are
contained in my office files and would be available for your inspection, if
needed. The rentals are referenced on the following table.
SUMMARY OF RENTAL DATA – TRUCK TERMINALS
Rental #
Bldg. Area
# of Doors
Rent/Mo.
Rent/Door
Rent/SF
Lease Type
Subject
6,650 SF
22
$4,956
$225
$8.94
NNN
1
18,874 SF
37
$11,100
$300
$7.06
NNN
2
15,789 SF
44
$16,067
$365
$12.21
NNN
3
9,215 SF
26
$8,190
$315
$10.67
NNN
4
8,784 SF
20
$6,300
$315
$8.61
NNN
In comparing the rental data cited above to the subject, it is noted that
the subject reflects the smallest facility, and its average terminal area
allocated per door is also smaller. Rental 1 is an older facility in the
Roanoke area; however, this is a larger facility (in total building size and in
number of doors) and also includes a detached garage area. Rental 2 is also
in the Roanoke area, but is a larger facility and reflects a more visible and
accessible location. As such, this sale is believed to set the upper limit for
rental rates. Rental 3 is also in the Roanoke area, reflects an older building,
but is slightly larger than the subject. Rental 4 is located outside the
Roanoke area, but is more similar in overall size details to the subject;
however, this property also reflects a more visible and accessible location.
When considered on a per door rental basis, the subject reflects a
much lower rent than any of the rents cited above. However, this is believed
partly attributable to the fact that it is a smaller facility, with a much smaller
terminal area, and also reflects a somewhat secondary location within an
industrial area. When considered on a square foot basis, the subject
compares best with Rentals 3 and 4 due to their overall size (building and
number of doors). Accordingly, the contract rent for the subject property is
believed to be reasonable and supportable by the market rent data cited
above.
From the gross annual income, only minimal deductions are indicated.
Vacancy and rent loss is estimated at a minimal 2% to account primarily for
any delays in payment of rent. The lease reflects a triple net lease
arrangement, with the tenant responsible for most fixed and operating
expenses. The only expenses anticipated to be borne by the landlord are for
Milton-May Appraisal Company
16
management, legal and accounting expenses, and a modest expense to cover
structural maintenance repairs (roof, etc.). From reference to the schedule
which follows this section, expenses applicable to the landlord are estimated
at $4,997, which calculates to 9% of effective income and is believed
adequate based on the anticipated lease terms.
Deduction of all applicable expenses provides an indicated net
operating income of $53,286. This net operating income is anticipated to
remain stable throughout the ten-year lease term and is capitalized at an
appropriate capitalization rate to provide an indication of property value. A
discount rate of 8.5% is believed reasonable to apply to the subject NOI.
In support of the 8.5% capitalization rate, two sales of industrial
facilities are referenced as follows:
SUMMARY OF SALES DATA – FOR CAPITALIZATION RATES
No. Location/Use
1
Roanoke
Off/Whse-Mfr
2
Martinsville
Off/Mfr
Sale Date
8/07
Price
$3,400,000
Bldg SF
105,000
NOI
$280,000
Cap Rate
8.2%
10/06
$1,350,000
50,108
$126,000
9.3%
Sale 1 reflects the sale of a sizable building in the Roanoke market
which was acquired by one of the two tenants in the building. Sale 2 is in
the Martinsville area and reflects the sale of an industrial property under a
long-term lease to an operating manufacturing concern. The subject is a
much smaller facility than the sales noted and reflects the anticipated saleleaseback to a tenant who has occupied the property since the late 1970’s. It
is recognized that interest rates have remained low over the past couple
years, which has also correlated to low capitalization rates. Also, the lease
agreement for the subject reflects a rental rate at the low end of the market,
which indicates less risk to the investment. Thus, the overall rate at 8.5%
applied to the subject is believed reasonable and supported by local market
activity.
Capitalizing the subject’s net operating income of $53,286 by the
8.5% capitalization rate provides an indication of value of $626,889, which
is rounded to $625,000. This income approach is exemplified on the
following schedule.
Milton-May Appraisal Company
17
INCOME ANALYSIS
PROPERTY:
LOCATION:
Truck Terminal Facility
1665 Seibel Drive NE, Roanoke, Virginia
Projected Operating Statement
GROSS RENT SCHEDULE:
Rental Space
Area # 1
Tenant (Occupant)
Mo. Rent
Truck Terminal
4,956.00
GROSS ANNUAL RENT CALCULATION:
Less Vacancy/Rent Loss
59,472
2.00%
1,189
EFFECTIVE GROSS ANN. INCOME
58,283
FIXED & OPERATING EXPENSES:
Real Estate Taxes
Insurance Premiums
Management @
6%
Building Maintenance (Structural)
Legal, Accounting, Miscellaneous Expenses
0
0
3,497
1,000
500
TOTAL EXPENSES
4,997
NET OPERATING INCOME
53,286
Capitalization Process
NET OPERATING INCOME
53,286
CAPITALIZATION RATE
8.5%
INCOME DIVIDED BY CAPITALIZATION RATE EQUALS
INDICATED PROPERTY VALUE OF ---------------------------------
626,889
ROUNDED -------------------------
625,000
Milton-May Appraisal Company
9%
18
Sales Comparison Approach – The sales comparison approach is
typically developed into a value indication by comparing sales of similar
type properties to the subject. My research of the central and southwestern
areas of the state provided only a limited number of sales of truck terminal
facilities. The sales cited on the following pages are believed significantly
applicable to the subject and offer a sound basis for comparison. The
locations of the sales are shown on the map below, followed by description
of the sales, an analysis grid, and further narrative discussion.
Milton-May Appraisal Company
19
Improved Sale No. 1
Property Identification
Property Type
Address
Tax ID
Truck Terminal
1924 Plantation Road NE, Roanoke, Virginia
3111309
Sale Data
Grantor
Grantee
Sale Date
Deed Book/Page
Property Rights
Conditions of Sale
Verification
Preston Trucking Company, Inc.
Estes Express Lines, Inc.
January 10, 2000
00-0000934
Fee
Arm's length
Third Party; Other sources: Public records
Sale Price
$1,000,000
Land Data
Land Size
Zoning
Topography
Utilities
Shape
7.025 Acres
I-1
Level to lightly rolling
Electricity, telephone, water, sewer
Generally rectangular
General Physical Data
Building Type
SF
No. of Doors
Construction Type
Roof Type
Foundation
HVAC
Year Built
Condition
Single Tenant
15,717 SF plus 3,293 SF basement
35
Masonry & metal
Built-up
Concrete slab
HVAC in office only
1962
Average
Indicators
Sale Price/ SF
Sale Price/Door
$63.63
$28,571
Remarks
This is the sale of a truck terminal facility located on Plantation Road, just a short distance north of US 460
(Orange Avenue) in the City of Roanoke. The building included a front office area of 3,293 SF with a full
basement, and terminal area of 12,424 SF. The property continues to be used as a truck terminal.
Improved Sale No. 2
Milton-May Appraisal Company
20
Property Identification
Property Type
Address
Tax ID
Truck Terminal
249 Expo Road, Fishersville (Augusta Co.), Virginia
066D 2 28
Sale Data
Grantor
Grantee
Sale Date
Deed Book/Page
Property Rights
Conditions of Sale
Verification
E. Wayne Brockenbrough
A.H.O.C., LLC
June 2, 2003
20030008302
Fee
Arm's length
Third Party; Other sources: Public records
Sale Price
$475,000
Land Data
Land Size
Zoning
Topography
Utilities
Shape
3.00 Acres
GI
Level to lightly rolling
Electricity, telephone, water, sewer
Generally rectangular
General Physical Data
Building Type
SF
No. of Doors
Construction Type
Roof Type
Foundation
HVAC
Year Built
Condition
Single Tenant
4,800 SF
16
Masonry & metal
Low pitch metal
Concrete slab
HVAC in office only
1990
Average
Indicators
Sale Price/ SF
Sale Price/Door
$98.96
$29,688
Remarks
This is the sale of a truck terminal facility located on Expo Road, just off I-64 in the Fishersville area, a
short distance east of Staunton and the I-81/I-64 intersection. The building included a front office area of
1,400 SF and a terminal area of 3,400 SF. The property continues to be used as a truck terminal.
Milton-May Appraisal Company
21
Summary of Comparable Sales Data
No.
Location
Date
Sale Price
Bldg SF
1
2
Roanoke
Fishersville
Subject Prop.
Roanoke
1/00
6/03
Contract
$1,000,000
$475,000
$625,000
15,717
4,800
6,650
#
Doors
35
16
22
$/SF
$/Door
$63.63
$98.96
$93.99
$28,571
$29,688
$28,409
It is recognized that limited sales exist of truck terminal facilities. The
two cited herein reflect the most recent sales of properties which could be
offered as comparison to the subject. The sales are older transactions,
however, they are the most recent transfers known. Sale 1 is the oldest sale,
but is in the Roanoke area. This facility is larger than the subject and, thus,
indicates a lower price per square foot. Sale 2 is the more recent sale, is
slightly smaller in size than the subject, but as such, is believed to offer a
better comparison. On an overall basis, when considered on a price per door
basis, the sales are believed to offer a significantly similar comparison.
In addition to the sales cited herein, I am aware of an additional sale in
the Roanoke market which occurred in August, 2003. The truck terminal
facility was indicated to contain 14 doors and was formerly operated as a
Consolidated Freight terminal. The property sold for $320,000 ($22,857 per
door), but the building was removed, and the site was re-developed with a
39,000 square foot light industrial facility. Also, I am aware of the
November, 2006, sale of a truck terminal facility located on Commerce Road
in the City of Richmond. The property consisted of two buildings
containing a total of 10,740 square feet, built in 1951. The main building
contains a front two-story office area with a rear terminal area providing for
20 dock doors. A separate building accommodates a drive-thru shop facility.
The property sold for $645,000, indicating unit prices of $60.06 per square
foot of total building area, and $32,250 per door. The price per door is
slightly higher than the sales cited herein, but reflects the fact that the
property contains a separate garage/service facility.
Accordingly, based on my analysis of all pertinent data, it is my
opinion that the sales comparison approach supports the indicated contract
price for the subject property at $625,000.
Milton-May Appraisal Company
22
Reconciliation and Final Value Conclusion: Development of the
income capitalization and sales comparison approaches provided the
following possible value indications for the subject property:
Income Capitalization Approach -
$625,000
Sales Comparison Approach -
$625,000
The two approaches provided the same indications of value for the
subject property. However, the income approach is believed to offer the
better indication of value because it reflects the value of the leased fee
interest in the property which will be created by the long-term lease. The
sales comparison approach was developed based on limited sales data, but
offers additional support to the income approach value.
Accordingly, it is my opinion that the market value of the leased fee
interest in the subject property, as of April 6, 2009, was:
SIX HUNDRED TWENTY-FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS
($625,000)
Estimate of Marketing Period: It is my opinion that a marketing
period of about 12 months would be reasonable for the subject property.
The subject is an older truck terminal facility, but reflects a leased fee
interest with a long-term lease to be placed in effect with a tenant who has
operated at the property since its original construction in 1976. The triple
net, long-term lease would be attractive to a wide segment of the market, and
the property reflects an affordable investment.
Milton-May Appraisal Company
23
Assumption and Limiting Conditions:
1.
This is a Summary Appraisal Report which is intended to comply with
the reporting requirements set forth under Standard Rule 2-2(b) of the
Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice for a Summary
Appraisal Report. As such, it might not include full discussions of the data,
reasoning, and analyses that were used in the appraisal process to develop
the appraiser's opinion of value. Supporting documentation concerning the
data, reasoning, and analyses is retained in the appraiser's file. The
information contained in this report is specific to the needs of the client and
for the intended use stated in this report. The appraiser is not responsible for
unauthorized use of this report.
2.
No responsibility is assumed for legal or title considerations. Title to
the property is assumed to be good and marketable unless otherwise stated in
this report.
3.
The property is appraised free and clear of any or all liens and
encumbrances unless otherwise stated in this report.
4.
Responsible ownership and competent property management are
assumed unless otherwise stated in this report.
5.
The information furnished by others is believed to be reliable.
However, no warranty is given for its accuracy.
6.
All engineering is assumed to be correct. Any plot plans and
illustrative material in this report are included only to assist the reader in
visualizing the property.
7.
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.
8.
It is assumed that there is full compliance with all applicable federal,
state, and local environmental regulations and laws unless otherwise stated
in this report.
9.
It is assumed that all applicable zoning and use regulations and
Milton-May Appraisal Company
24
restrictions have been complied with, unless a nonconformity has been
stated, defined, and considered in this appraisal report.
10. It is assumed that all required licenses, certificates of occupancy or
other legislative or administrative authority from any local, state, or national
governmental or private entity or organization have been or can be obtained
or renewed for any use on which the value estimates contained in this report
are based.
11. Any sketch in this report may show approximate dimensions and is
included to assist the reader in visualizing the property. Maps and exhibits
found in this report are provided for reader reference purposes only. No
guarantee as to accuracy is expressed or implied unless otherwise stated in
this report. No survey has been made for the purpose of this report.
12. 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 otherwise stated in this report.
13. The appraiser is not qualified to detect hazardous waste and/or toxic
materials. Any comment by the appraiser that might suggest the possibility
of the presence of such substances should not be taken as confirmation of the
presence of hazardous waste and/or toxic materials. Such determination
would require investigation by a qualified expert in the field of
environmental assessment. The presence of substances such as asbestos,
urea-formaldehyde foam insulation, or other potentially hazardous materials
may affect the value of the property. The appraiser's value estimate is
predicated on the assumption that there is no such material on or in the
property that would cause a loss in value unless otherwise stated in this
report. No responsibility is assumed for any environmental conditions, or for
any expertise or engineering knowledge required to discover them. The
appraiser's descriptions and resulting comments are the result of the routine
observations made during the appraisal process.
14. Unless otherwise stated in this report, the subject property is appraised
without a specific compliance survey having been conducted to determine if
the property is or is not in conformance with the requirements of the
Americans with Disabilities Act. The presence of architectural and
communications barriers that are structural in nature that would restrict
access by disabled individuals may adversely affect the property's value,
marketability, or utility.
Milton-May Appraisal Company
25
15. Any proposed improvements are assumed to be completed in a good
workmanlike manner in accordance with the submitted plans and
specifications.
16. 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.
17. Possession of this report, or a copy thereof, does not carry with it the
right of publication. It may not be used for any purpose by any person other
than the party to whom it is addressed without the written consent of the
appraiser, and in any event, only with proper written qualification and only
in its entirety.
18. 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 appraiser.
Milton-May Appraisal Company
26
Certification:
I certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:
The statements of fact contained in this Summary Appraisal Report
are true and correct.
The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions are limited only by
the reported assumptions and limiting conditions, and are my personal,
unbiased professional analyses, opinions, and conclusions.
I have no present or prospective interest in the property that is the
subject of this report, and I have no personal interest or bias with respect to
the parties involved.
My compensation is not contingent upon the reporting of a
predetermined value or direction in value that favors the cause of the client,
the amount of the value estimate, the attainment of a stipulated result, or the
occurrence of a subsequent event.
My reported analyses, opinions and conclusions were developed, and
this report has been prepared in conformity with the Uniform Standards of
Professional Appraisal Practice, as well as the requirements of the Code of
Professional Ethics and the Standards of Professional Practice of the
Appraisal Institute.
I have made a personal inspection of the property that is the subject of
this report.
No one has provided significant professional assistance to the person
signing this report.
The appraiser has performed within the context of the competency
provision of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice.
This report was not based on a requested minimum valuation, a
specific valuation, or the approval of a loan.
I currently hold an appropriate state certification allowing the
performance of real estate appraisals in connection with federally related
transactions in the state in which the subject property is located.
Milton-May Appraisal Company
27
The use of this report is subject to the requirements of the Appraisal
Institute relating to review by its duly authorized representatives. In
particular, 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 she is connected, or any reference to the Appraisal Institute or the
MAI designation) shall be disseminated to the public through advertising
media, public relations media, news media, sales media, or any other public
means of communication without the prior written consent and approval of
the undersigned.
The Appraisal Institute conducts voluntary programs of continuing
education for its designated members. Those designated members who meet
the standards of these programs are awarded periodic educational credits
towards re-certification. As of the date of this report, I, Sharon H. May,
have completed the requirements of the continuing education program of the
Appraisal Institute and hereby attest that I have been certified as a MAI.
I hereby certify that, as of April 6, 2009, the market value of the
leased fee interest in the subject property, assuming the lease is executed at
the time of the sale closing, is indicated at $625,000.
Sharon H. May, MAI
Certified General Real Estate Appraiser
License No. 4001 000184
Milton-May Appraisal Company
PHOTOGRAPHS OF SUBJECT PROPERTY
Front View of Subject Building
South Side View of Subject Building
Rear View of Subject Building
North Side View of Subject Building
West End View of Building & Fuel Pumping Station
Storage Shed at Northwest Area of Site
Street Scene – Looking Southeast along Seibel Drive
Street Scene – Looking Northwest along Seibel Drive