HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991 03-11 EDAP Regular Session EDA AGENDA
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
MARCH 11, 1991
(following adjournment of City Council meeting)
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Minutes:
a. January 2, 1991 - Special Session
b. February 12, 1991 - Special Session
4. Discussion Item:
a. Consideration of Acquisition of the Single- Family
Property Located at 5538 Colfax Avenue North
5. Adjournment
MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN
CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE
OF MINNESOTA
SPECIAL SESSION
JANUARY 2, 1991
CITY HALL
CALL TO ORDER
The Brooklyn Center Economic Development Authority met in special session and was
called to order by President Todd Paulson at 9:21 p.m.
ROLL CALL
President Todd Paulson, Commissioners Celia Scott, Jerry Pedlar, and Dave Rosene.
Also present were EDA Director Gerald Splinter, Finance Director Paul Holmlund,
City Attorney Charlie LeFevere, EDA Coordinator Brad Hoffman, Fire Chief Ron
Boman, and Deputy City Clerk Patti Page.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - DECEMBER 18 1990 - SPECIAL SESSION
There was a motion by Commissioner Scott and seconded by Commissioner Pedlar to
approve the minutes of the December 18, 1990, EDA meeting. The motion passed
unanimously.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - DECEMBER 18 1990 - SPECIAL SESSION - HRA
There was a motion by Commissioner Pedlar and seconded by Commissioner Scott to
approve the minutes of the December 18, 1990, HRA meeting. The motion passed
unanimously.
DISCUSSION ITEM
ESTABLISHING THE BUDGET FOR TENANT IMPROVEMENTS TO D BARN AND AUTHORIZING THE
TAKING OF QUOTES FOR WORK
The EDA Director stated the satellite dish which will be on the water 'tower is
• two foot dish, and staff has been assured it will not be noticeable. There was
• brief discussion regarding the clause for the right of first refusal on the G
Barn lease. The EDA Coordinator stated a period of time for refusal should be
added if the clause is to be left in the contract. He noted it can be removed
from the lease completely. Commissioner Pedlar stated he has problems with the
right of refusal and would prefer to have it removed completely.
There was a motion by Commissioner Pedlar and seconded by Commissioner Scott to
approve the lease with the deletion of the right of refusal clause. The motion
passed unanimously.
ADJOURNMENT
There was a motion by Commissioner Scott and seconded by Commissioner Rosene to
adjourn the meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The Brooklyn Center
Economic Development Authority adjourned at 9:29 p.m.
President Pro to m
1/2/91 -1-
MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN
CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE
OF MINNESOTA
SPECIAL SESSION
FEBRUARY 12, 1991
CITY HALL
CALL TO ORDER
The Brooklyn Center Economic Development Authority met in special session and was
called to order by President Todd Paulson at 12:11 a.m.
ROLL CALL
President Todd Paulson, Commissioners Jerry Pedlar, Dave Rosene, and Philip Cohen.
Also present were EDA Director Gerald Splinter, Director of Public Works Sy Knapp,
Finance Director Paul Holmlund, Director of Planning and Inspection Ron Warren, City
Attorney Charlie LeFevere, EDA Coordinator Brad Hoffman, Assistant EDA Coordinator
Tom Bublitz, City Engineer Mark Maloney, Assistant Finance Director Charlie Hansen,
Personnel Coordinator Geralyn Barone, and Council Secretary Ann Odden. Commissioner
Scott was absent due to illness.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
NOVEMBER 19, 1990
There was a motion by Commissioner Pedlar and seconded by Commissioner Cohen for
approval of the minutes of the November 19, 1990 EDA meeting. Vote: Three ayes.
The motion passed. Commissioner Rosene abstained.
DECEMBER 3. 1990
There was a motion by Commissioner Cohen and seconded by President Paulson for
approval of the minutes of the December 3, 1990 EDA meeting. Vote: Two ayes. The
motion passed. Commissioners Rosene and Pedlar abstained.
JANUARY 14, 1991
There was a motion by Commissioner Pedlar and seconded by Commissioner Rosene for
approval of the minutes of the January 14, 1991 EDA meeting. Vote: Three ayes. The
motion passed. Commissioner Cohen abstained.
2/12/91 - 1 -
RESOLUTIONS
APPROVAL OF QUOTATIONS FOR TENANT IMPROVEMENTS TO THE D BARN
(DAVID C. BELL LEASE)
The EDA Coordinator reviewed the staff report on this item. He noted the term of the
proposed lease would be five years and would result in a negative cash flow of $55,000.
He indicated the tenant planned to make improvements to the structure, which would be
subject to approval by the EDA.
RESOLUTION NO. 91 -02
Commissioner Jerry Pedlar introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SIGNING OF A LEASE FOR THE "D" BARN
AT THE EARLE BROWN HERITAGE CENTER AND ACCEPTING WRITTEN
QUOTATION FOR WORK
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by
Commissioner Philip Cohen. Vote: Three ayes and one nay. The motion passed.
President Paulson voted nay.
RESOLUTION NO. 91 -03
Commissioner Philip Cohen introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION APPROVING A MODIFIED TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN
FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 02
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by
Commissioner Jerry Pedlar and the motion passed unanimously.
ADJOURNMENT
There was a motion by Commissioner Cohen and seconded by Commissioner Pedlar to
adjourn the meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The Brooklyn Center Economic
Development Authority adjourned at 12:26 a.m.
President Pro tem
Recorded and transcribed by:
Ann J. Odden
Northern Counties Secretarial Service
2/12/91 .2-
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 3 -11 -91
Agenda Item Number
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
ITEM DESCRIPTION:
Consideration of Acquisition of the Single - Family Property Located at 5538 Colfax Avenue North in Brooklyn Center.
DEPT. APPROVAL:
i
Assistant EDA Coordinator
Signature - title
MANAGERS REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION:
No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached
«««««««««««««««««««««««««««««««««««««««««««««««««««««« « « « « « « « « « « « « « « « « « « « « « « « « « « « « « ««
SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached Yes )
Staff is proposing the Brooklyn Center Economic Development Authority acquire the single - family property located
at 5538 Colfax Avenue North and described in the appraisal report included with this request. The purpose of the
acquisition would be to acquire the property, demolish the home currently occupying the lot and sell the lot for
construction of a new single - family home.
Proposed funding for the acquisition would be from current Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds. The
use of CDBG funds for this acquisition would require an amendment of the City's Year XVI Community Development
Block Grant Program.
Since the property at 5538 Colfax is not occupied, relocation assistance is not a factor in this acquisition. The
estimated cost of the acquisition including demolition, legal expenses and administration is $57,000.
If the Economic Development Authority concurs with the staff proposal to acquire the property using CDBG funds,
the following items would be accomplished:
1. The City Council would hold a public hearing on March 25, 1991, to consider the
amendment reallocating Year XVI funds from rehabilitation to scattered site
acquisition.
2. The Economic Development Authority would be required to adopt a resolution
establishing an offer of just compensation for the property and to authorize City staff
to make a written offer on the property. The offer of just compensation would be
based on the appraisal.
The only action required this evening for the project to continue is a motion from the Economic Development
• Authority to direct staff to proceed with all necessary actions required to acquire the property using Community
Development Block Grant funds.
J. Scott Renne, MAI
Real Estate Appraiser . Consultant . REALTOR
S617 CHOWEN AVENUE SOUTH EOINA, MINNESOTA 55410 (612) 926-3948
rr t:
1
February 24, 1991
I Brad Hoffman
EDA Coordinator
City of Brooklyn Center
6301 Shingle Creek Parkway
Brooklyn Center, MN 55430
Subject: Market Value Appraisal on Lindbloom property. 5538
Colfax Avenue North, Brooklyn Center, Minnesota.
Dear Mr. Hoffman:
Pursuant to your request, I have completed a Market Value
Appraisal Report on the above referenced property.
The PP ose ur of the appraisal is to arrive at an estimate of
P P
market value of the fee simple interest of the property. Market
value is defined within the definitions section of this report.
The definition of market value and the other contents of the
report comply with the Standards of Professional Practice of the
Appraisal Foundation. This report is subject to the assumptions
and limiting conditions contained herein.
It is my opinion that as of February 15, 1991, the market value
of the property is:
FORTY FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS
($45,000.00)
This conclusion is based upon my personal inspection and review
of the property, comparable sales, and application of the
appraisal process.
Respectfully Submitted,
J. Scott Renne, MAI, CAE
-I-
I
L
MARKET VALUE
APPRAISAL
OF THE
PROPERTY LOCATED AT
5538 COLFAX AVENUE NORTH
BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA
FOR
BRAD HOFFMAN
EDA COORDINATOR
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY
BROOKLYN CENTER MINNESOTA 55430
BY
J. SCOTT RENNE, MAI
r
i'
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION PAGE
Letter of Transmittal .............................. I
Summary of Important Facts and Conclusions ......... II
Certification ............................... III
Reference ........... ............................... IV
Definitions ............................... V
DESCRIPTION, ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS
Purposeof Report ... ............................... 1
Function of the Report ............................. 1
LegalDescription ..................... 1
Ownership ........... ............................... 1
SalesHistory ........ ............................... 1
RealEstate Taxes ... ............................... 1
Area Analysis ....... ............................... 2
City /Neighborhood Analysis .......................... 4
SiteAnalysis ....... ............................... 6
ImprovementsAnalysis ............................. 7
_ Highest and Best Use .............................. 8
Appraisal Methodology 9
IncomeApproach ..... ............................... 10
ComparableSales ... ............................... 11
MarketApproach ..... ............................... 14
Cost Approach ............ 15
Reconciliation and Value Conclusion ................. 16
Contingent and Limiting Conditions .................. 17
L Qualifications of J. Scott Renne, MAI, CAE 18
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS continued
ADDENDA
Photographs ...............................
PlatMap ............................................
ZoningMap ........... ...............................
Building Sketch .............
ComplianceOrder ...... ...............................
Transfer Disclosure Statement .......................
t
s'
d
SUMMARY OF IMPORTANT FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS
Property Appraised: Wood frame single family home with 720
square feet of area located on a 6090 square foot lot.
Address: 5538 Colfax Avenue North, Brooklyn Center, Minnesota
Owner: Robert Lindbloom
Appraisal Date: February 15, 1991
Appraisal Purpose: Estimate fair market value of the fee simple
title.
Zoning: R1, Single Family Residential
Highest and Best Use: Current use
Estimate of Value: 45 000
$ .00
-II-
i
CERTIFICATION
I certify that I have personally inspected the subject property.
To the best of my knowledge and belief the statements contained
in this report and upon which the opinions are based, are true
and correct subject to the "Limiting Conditions" herein set
forth; also that this report conforms with and is subject to
requirements of the Code of Ethics and Standards of Professional
Conduct of the American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers.
Employment in and compensation for making this appraisal are in
no way contingent upon the value reported. I certify that I have
�J no interest, either present or contemplated, in the subject
property.
The American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers conducts a
voluntary program of continuing education for its designated
members. MAIs and RMs who meet the minimum standards of this
program are awarded periodic educational certification. J. Scott
Renne is certified under this program through September 15, 1993.
I- I Sc,�A-T?z
J. Scott Renne, MAI, CAE
-III -
r
REFERENCES
s
The methods, facts and conclusions used in the preparation of
this appraisal were obtained from my experience in real estate
and the real estate appraisal field; discussions with lending
an
institutions; insurance companies; real estate brokers;
discussions with City and County Assessors and Appraisers and
from seminars and courses attended. The following sources were
referenced in the preparation of this report:
Zoning Ordinance: City of Brooklyn Center
Brooklyn Park, Minnesota
Taxes and Special Assessments: Hennepin County
Minneapolis, Minnesota
Cost Approach: Marshall & Swift
Publication
1617 Beverly Boulevard
Los Angeles, California
90026
Market Information: Hennepin County
Various Realtors
Multiple Listing Service
Appraisal Terms and Methodology: Appraisal of Real Estate,
9th Edition 1987
Copyright, American
Institute of Real Estate
j Appraisers
Uniform Appraisal
Standards
for Federal
Land Acquisitions
,
Intraa enc Land
g Y
Acquisition Conference,
1973
-IV-
t
DEFINITIONS
�
This appraisal uses definitions from several sources. The
{ sources are specified in the reference section of the appraisal
and they will be abbreviated within this section.
Fair Market Value (From UASFFLA)
Fair Market Value is defined as the amount in cash, or on terms
reasonably equivalent to cash, for which in probability the
property will be sold be a knowledgeable owner willing but not
obligated to sell to knowledgeable purchaser who desired but is
not obligated to buy. In ascertaining that figure, consideration
should be given to all matters that might be brought forward and
reasonably be given substantial weight in bargaining by persons
of ordinary prudence, but no consideration whatever should be
given to matters not affecting market value. The cash, or on
terms reasonably equivalent to cash, requirement is important
and numerous courts have noted this factor.
An alternative definition from the Dictionary of Real Estate
Appraisal is, "the most probable price in cash, terms equivalent
to cash, or in other precisely revealed terms, for which the
appraised property will sell in a competitive market under all
conditions requisite to a fair sale, with the buyer and seller
each acting prudently, knowledgeably, and for self interest, and
assuming that neither is under undue stress."
Fundamental assumptions and conditions presumed in this
definition are:
1. Buyer and seller are motivated by self interest.
y 2. Buyer and seller are well informed and are acting
prudently.
3. The property is exposed for a reasonable time ime on the
open market.
4. Payment is made in cash, its equivalent, or in specified
financing terms.
5. Specified financing, if any, may be the financing
actually in place or on terms generally available for the
property type in its locale on the effective appraisal date.
6. The effect, if any, on the amount of market value of
atypical financing, services, or fees, shall be clearly and
precisely revealed in the appraisal report.
-V-
DEFINITIONS (continued)
Fee Simple Estate
Absolute ownership unencumbered by any other interest or estate;
r subject only to the limitations of eminent domain, escheat,
police power, and taxation.
Easement
A nonpossessing interest held by one person in land of another
person whereby the first person is accorded partial use of such
land for specific purpose. An easement restricts but does not
abridge the rights of the fee owner to the use and enjoyment of
the easement holder's rights. Easements fall into three broad
classifications: surface easements, subsurface easements,
overhead easements.
Temporary Easement
An easement granted for a specific purpose an a specific time
period, e.g., a construction easement is terminated after the
construction of the improvement and the unincumbered fee interest
in the land reverts to the owner.
_Permanent or Perpetual Easement
An easement in perpetuity; one that lasts forever.
Just Compensation
Just compensation includes all elements of value that are
inherent in the property, but does not exceed market value fairly
determined. The sum required to be paid to the owner does not
depend upon the uses to which he has devoted his land, but is to
be arrived at upon just compensation of all the uses for which it
is suitable. The highest and profitable use for which the
property is adaptable and needed or likely to be used in the
reasonably near future is to be considered, but not necessarily
as the measure of value, but to the full extent that the prospect
of demand for such use affects the market value while the
property is privately held.
Highest and Best Use
' The reasonable and probable use that supports the highest present
_ value of vacant land or improved property, as defined, as of the
date of the appraisal. The reasonably probable and legal use of
land or sites as though vacant, found to be physically possible,
appropriately supported, financially feasibly, and that results
�- in the highest present land value. Alternatively, the most
probable use.
Implied in these definitions is that the determination of highest
and best use takes into account the contribution of a specific
use to the community and community development goals as well as the benefit of that use to individual property owners. Hence, in
certain situations, the highest and best use of land may be for
parks, green belts, preservation, conservation, wild life
habitats, and the like.
-VI-
PURPOSE OF THE APPRAISAL
The purpose of this appraisal is to estimate the fair market
value of the fee simple interest of the subject property as of
February 15, 1991. The definitions of market value and fee
simple interest are included in the definitions section of this
appraisal.
FUNCTION OF THE REPORT
The function of this report is to serve as the basis for
negotiating a purchase price by the City of Brooklyn Center's
Economic Development Authority and the owner of the property.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
N1 12 of w1 /2 of Lot 45, Gracleyn's Addition
PID 01- 118 -21 -31 -0059
OWNERSHIP
According to Heenepin County records, fee owner is Terry Charles
Leslie; vendee under a contract for deed is Robert Lindbloom.
SALES HISTORY
According to City records, Mr. Linbloom purchased the property in
December 1978 for $ 34,900.
REAL ESTATE TAXES
Non homestead real estate taxes payable in 1990 are $ 1467.00.
-1-
c
AREA ANALYSIS
Minneapolis_- St Paul Metropolitan Area
The seven county metro area, Anoka, Carver, Dakota, Hennepin,
Ramsey, Scott, and Washington Counties, constitute the region
influencing the subject property. It is located in south central
Minnesota and is the major metropolitan focal point of the Upper
Midwest.
The cities of Minneapolis, population 365,000, and St. Paul,
population 220,000 are dominant cities for the area. However,
the suburban and peripheral suburban areas of the Twin Cities
have a population exceeding the central cities. The metro area
comprises almost exactly half of the state of Minnesota's
population.
The metro area population was estimated as 2,118,000 in 1986
which is up from 1,874,000 in 1970. This makes the area 16th in
total population among US cities. Growth has been consistent and
the population stable.
The area is partially governed by the Metropolitan Council, a
form of regional government with responsibility for common area
services such as public transit, utilities distribution, waste
management, etc.
The metropolitan area has a strong and well diversified
industrial base. There are over 2,500 manufacturers base in the
area including:
- Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing
- General Mills
- Pillsbury
- Cargill
- Control Data Corporation
- Northwest Airlines
- Land O Lakes
- Unisys
- West Publishing
Other major manufacturers include Ford Motors Truck Division,
General Motors Parts Division, General Electric, and a cross
section of many other national firms.
1
-2-
1 -
AREA ANALYSIS (continued)
The industrial growth in Minnesota, and primarily in the Twin
Cities, usually out paces the average growth rate for the United
States. The Twin Cities metropolitan area has traditionally
enjoyed a low unemployment rate, which is currently about three
percent.
The Twin Cities are the financial center of the Upper Midwest.
The largest commercial banks are the First National Bank of
Minneapolis, and the Norwest Bank of Minneapolis. Minneapolis is
the headquarters for the ninth Federal Reserve District.
Other financial service organizations include Prudential
Insurance Companies regional office, St. Paul Companies, Lutheran
Brother Hood, and many other financial /insurance companies.
The Twin Cities have an excellent educational system including
the University of Minnesota, with enrollment of over 50,000 full
> time students on four campuses. Other private colleges include
McCallister College, Augsburg College, College of St. Thomas,
Hamline University, and the College of St. Catherine.
Culturally, the Twin Cities supports two museums, a science
museum, two zoos, the Minnesota Symphony Orchestra, many civic
theaters, and the nationally renowned Guthrie Theater.
Downtown areas of both Minneapolis and St. Paul as well as the
suburbs, specifically the southwest suburban area, have a
reputation for vitality and growth. In recent years there has
been extensive growth of commercial and to a lesser extent
industrial property. The Central Business Districts of the Twin
Cities have experienced a great deal of redevelopment..
In conclusion, the economic climate for the Twin Cities is
excellent. The area experiences a broad and healthy growth
pattern based upon a diversified economy. The negative economic
experiences of Minnesota agricultural economy and mining have by
passed the area. Additionally, the Twin Cities have a reputation
for an enlightened public and governmental climate which
contributes to the quality of life.
'- -3-
CITY /NEIGHBORHOOD ANALYSIS
Brooklyn Center is a first tier suburb located on the north side
�- of Minneapolis. It was first settled in the 1850's and
incorporated as a village in 1911. Brooklyn Center's residential
areas are almost fully developed and its commercial industrial
P commercial/
industrial
which boasts a regional shopping center and a variety of
commercial, technical and light manufacturing industrial uses is
also well developed.
Demographics for the city reveal a relatively stable population
since 1970. Population estimates are:
- 1960: 24,356
- 1970: 35,173
- 1980: 31
30
- 1990: 33,500 (projected)
The median family income in 1983 was $27,960, which compares with
the state median of $23,230 and Hennepin County's median of
$31,000.
Major employ in the area are.
j - Brookdale shopping center employing 1700 people in a
number of retail outlets
- Promeon, division of Medtronics manufacturing medical
components employing 450 people
- Ault Inc. manufacturing electronic components and
employing 270
- Hoffman Engineering manufacturing electrical
enclosures and employing 175
- And a number of other manufacturing and service
businesses within
the area
A 1983 survey of the business community indicates that out of 556
total businesses there are 148 service 122 retail 41
manufacturing, 39 medical facilities, 33 restaurants and many
others.
Major transportation routes in the city includes Interstate
94/694, U.S. Highway 169 and State ,
Highways 100 152 and 252.
Since the completion of Interstate 94 to downtown Minneapolis the
rush hour commute
time for
a person living in Brooklyn Center and
working in downtown Minneapolis has been reduced significantly.
-4-
s
CITY NEIGHBORHOOD ANALYSIS
_ CITY/NEIGHBORHOOD (continued)
i
Multiple Listing Service statistics for the sub area in which the
subject property lies (area 571; sub area 3) for the past six
months reveals:
39 homes on the market; average list price $80,092;
- average market time 60 days
33 homes sold; 38% of properties on the market, average
sale price $79,895; average market time 73 days
For two bedroom homes, such as the subject property in the same
sub area, the statistics reveal:
I - 4 homes on the market; average list price $62,650;
average market time 72 days
- 3 homes sold; 25% of those listed; average sale price
$66,266; average market time 103 days
The subject property is located in the southern portion of the
city. 53rd Avenue North is the city boundary between Brooklyn
Center on the north and Minneapolis on the south. The
neighborhood is developed primarily with single family homes with
an average age of about 30 to 40 years.
�- -5-
SITE ANALYSIS
The subject's site is rectangular in shape with a frontage on
Colfax Avenue of 72 feet. The total area is 9,756 square feet.
The dimensions are 72 b 13 .
y 5 5 (average depth).
Land Area: 9,756 sq. ft.
Shape: Rectangular
Frontage: 72 feet on Colfax Avenue North
Topography: Level
Drainage: Adequate, to the east
Soils: No soil tests were made and they are assumed to be good
Landscaping: Trees, shrubs, and grass
Easements: No apparent easements were observed.
Utilities: Electricity, natural gas, telephone and cable
television, sanitary sewer, storm sewer and water.
Sidewalks: None
Curb and Gutter: Concrete
Street Surface: Colfax Avenue is a two lane bituminous surface
street.
-6-
IMPROVEMENTS ANALYSIS
Type: Wood frame single family residential
Style: One Story with full basement with hip roof
Size: 36 feet X 20 feet for a round floor area of 720 s . ft.
g q
Age: 1941
Exterior: Wood shakes
Roof Cover: Asphalt shingles; Hip frame; Reroofed in January 1991
per disclosure statement in addendum.
Garage: None
Windows: Double hung and glider with aluminum combination storms
and screens.
Plumbing: One full bath; one laundry tub in basement; kitchen
sink; 50 gallon electric hot water heater
Electrical: 100 amphere capacity with cicuit breakers; the
. kitchen has a ceiling fan /light fixture
Heating: Gas forced air heat; 76,00 BTU capacity; Mayflower brand
Interior Finishing: she interior is finished into two bedrooms,
living room, bathroom and kitchen area. Interior floor cover is
carpet and linoleum, wall cover is painted sheetrock and
fiberboard with some paneling. There is some acoustic tile on the
ceiling.
Other features: The floor joists are 2 x 8 both 18" and 24" on
centers. Basement walls are nine courses of concrete block. The
kitchen cabinets are plywood.
Condition/ repairs: The addendum has a letter stating work orders
required by the City. Some have been done such as the reroofan
drear door but some have not such as the soffit and fascia
repair. The interior has had cosmetic updating with paint carpet
etc. The bedrooms are off the living room rather than a hallway
thus causing some functional obsolescence.
-7-
i
HIGHEST AND BEST USE
The definition of highest and best use is contained within the
definitions section of this appraisal. The highest and best use
of the subject property will be analyzed both of the site as if
vacant and the site as improved.
The subject property is zoned R -1, one family residence. The site
is 72 x 135 which complys with the minimum zoning requirements.
R -1 zoning provides for single family residential propertyies
exclusively.
Based on application of the four tests of highest and best use of
the site as if vacant, the highest and best use of the subject
site as if vacant is for a single family residential development.
Applicatition of the highest and best use of the subject site if
improved reveals a single family residence which is in
comformance with the balance of the neighborhood and the zoning
ordinance. Based on this analysis, the highest and best use of
the subject property as improved is its current use.
i
-8-
APPRAISAL METHODOLOGY
GENERAL APPRAISAL
The valuation of a typical parcel of real estate is derived
principally through three basic approaches to value: The
Replacement Cost Approach, the Market Data Approach, and the
Income Approach. From the indication of these analyses and the
weight accorded each, an opinion of value is reached based upon
expert judgement within the outline of the appraisal process.
More specifically, the approaches to value are described as
follows:
Replacement Cost Approach
This approach requires that a current estimate of the cost
of replacing the improvements be made, from which must be
deducted accrued depreciation in terms of physical
` deterioration, functional obsolescence, and economic
obsolescence, if any, and to which is added the estimated
value of the land, as if vacant.
Market Data Approach
PP h
The Market Data Approach or Sales Comparison Approach is
based upon the principle of substitution, that is, when a
t property is placed on the market, its value tends to be set
at the cost of acquiring an equally desirable substitute
property, assuming no costly delay in making the
substitution. Since no two properties are ever truly
identical, adjustments to the comparable are necessary for
differences in location, quality, condition, size, market
appeal, and other matters. These considerations are a
function of the appraiser's experience and judgement.
Income Approach
The Income Approach involves an analysis of the property in
terms of its ability to provide a net annual income in
dollars over a given economic life. The estimated net
annual income is then capitalized at a rate commensurate
with the relative certainty of its continuance and the risk
involved in ownership of the property, by utilization of the
formula: Net Income, divided by Capitalization Rate, equals
Value. For residential ro e then four units a
rt of less it
P P Y
gross rent multiplier plier is developed b dividing the sale
P Y g
price of comparables by the unadjusted monthly rent. This
factor is multiplied by the economic rent for the subject
property to derive a value estimate.
-9-
1
s
,# r
INCOME APPROACH
The income approach was considered not applied for the subject
property. Single family residences are typically not rented for
several factors including:
Lack of economies of scale for management purposes
- Very high non - homestead taxes in the State of
Minnesota, approximately $1,200 to $1,700 higher than
homestead taxes
Negative cash flow under typical circumstances
To properly apply the income approach, an appraiser needs rental
sales and market rentals to derive a gross rent multiplier and
estimate an economic rent for the subject. These types of
comparables are very infrequent both in the neighborhood of the
4 subject property as well as the entire metro area. Because of
these factors, the income approach to value or specifically
application of a gross rent multiplier and economic rent for the
subject property was considered but not applied.
-10-
{
COMPARABLE SALE #1
i -
i
i
1
LOCATION: 5322 Morgan Ave. No., Brooklyn Center, MN.
r i
SALE PRICE: $33,000
SALE DATE: 6 -90
*_ TERMS: Market rates
SITE: 52 x 118
ZONING: R -1
BUILDING: 1 story single family dwelling
YEAR BUILT: 1942
SIZE: 550 square feet
GARAGE: 1 car detached
T CONDITION: Fair
COMMENTS: Located one mile southwest; Partial basement; one
bedroom.
-11-
F'i► a s I.+ ♦ if s @ ♦ f e:� r ��e.
.per- f
rt ' t 3 � � i 'g • �� r
ms's _..K +, wL � } �aY�e�. Yi 'Y _ � ��� `� � •'d
mw
RJAWFA
- °°� g. �,� "�sa � ,�,,,,•�. •.�'.�..,.`> � t Tc.g. �,ar.:. .,y h.� °s`45SS� '{n.'af:::.:
COMPARABLE SALE #3
to
t
- 1 -- •. - r - .-
Z � -
LOCATION: 5741 Bryant Ave. No., Brooklyn Center, MN.
SALE PRICE: $50,000
SALE DATE: 9 -90
TERMS: Contract for Deed
SITE: 75 x 100
ZONING: R -1
BUILDING: 1 story single family dwelling
YEAR BUILT: 1940
SIZE: 700 square feet
GARAGE: 1 car detached
CONDITION: Fair
COMMENTS: Located one half mile northeast; Partial basement; one
bedroom.
-13-
MARKET ANALYSIS OF COMPARABLE SALES
The method of estimating value by the use of the market data
technique is a method where sales of similar improved property are
compared with the subject. In the following chart, I have applied
a dollar amount either plus of minus to the comparable properties
to adjust them to the subject. The time adjustments were taken from
a recent market study.
SUBJECT COMP #1 COMP #2 COMP #3
ADDRESS 5538 Colfax 5322 Morgan 5339 Emerson 5741 Bryant
Brkn Ctr Brkn Ctr Brkn Ctr Brkn Ctr
SALE PRICE NA $33,000 $47,000 $50,000
DATE ADJ 2 -15 -91 6 -90 3 -90 9 -90
AGE ADJ Blt 1941 Blt 1942 Blt 1930 Blt 1940
FIN BSMT Full Bsmt Part Bsmt Full /Fin Bmt Part Bsmt
2,500 (1,500) 2,500
REPAIRS Def. Mtce. (1,500) (1,500) (1,500)
i NECESSARY
GARAGE None Single Double Single
(1,500) (2,000) (1,500)
BATH 1 Same Same Same
BEDROOMS 2 1 2,000 1 2,000 1 2,000
HEATING GFA GFA GFA GGravity
(700)
LDSC /IMPS Fair Same Same Same
LIVING S.F. 720sf 550sf 788sf 700sf
5,950 (2,380) 700
LAND SIZE 72 X 136 52 x 118 40 x 120 75 x 100
2,500 3,000
TERMS OF SALE NA NO ADJ FHA(1,610pts) C /D(1,500)
NET ADJ NA $9,950 ($3,990) 0
INDICATED VALUE OF SALE $42,950 $43,010 $50,000
Greatest weight is given to sales two and three as they required
the least adjustment. The repairs are estimates as described in the
t narrative of the appraisal. A reconciled value via the market
'- approach is $45,000.
-14-
J
COST APPROACH TO VALUE
The method of estimating value by cost is a valuation technique
whereby summation, the cost of reproduction of the improvements
to the land are estimated based on current costs. From this
total cost of reproduction, the depreciation or lessening of
value due to all causes is deducted. The remaining depreciated
value of the improvements is added to the current Market Value of
the site. The resulting total is the "Estimate of Value by the
Cost Approach ". Depreciation and site values were taken from the
market.
House 1 story 720 sq. ft. @ $ 55.22 = $ 39,758
Extras Features 0
Replacement Cost New $ 39,758
Depreciation
Physical 40% $15,900
Functional 1,000
Economic 0 $(15,000)
Landscaping 1,500
Land $ 18,500
$ 42,858
Rounded To $ 42,900
'' -15-
t
RECONCILIATION AND VALUE CONCLUSIONS
}}
i
The value estimate developed by the applicable approaches:
Estimate of Value - Income Approach NA
Estimate of Value - Cost Approach $42,900
Estimate of Value - Market Approach $45,000
It is the appraiser's belief that the cost approach tends to set
the upper limit of value, since by the principle of substitution,
a buyer would not pay more for a property than the cost of
reproducing the structure, less depreciation plus the market
value of a similar site. The repairs necessary on the subject
property make it difficult to properly assign a level of
depreciation therefore in this application the cost approach does
reflect a lower value than the market approach.
The market comparison approach is the most reliable technique
when adequate comparable sales are available. Three properties
within the same neighborhood were compared and contrasted to the
subject property. This approach receives the greatest weight in
the final value estimate.
The Income Approach was considered but not applied for reasons
stated in this report.
It is my opinion, that the most probable indication of market
value for the subject property as of February 15, 1991 is:
FORTY FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS
($45,000)
i
r
3
-16-
CONTINGENT AND LIMITING CONDITIONS
The certification of the appraiser appearing in this appraisal
report is subject to the following conditions and to such other
specific and limiting conditions as set forth by the appraiser in
this report.
The appraiser assumes no responsibility for matters of a legal
nature affecting the property appraised or the title thereto, nor
does the Appraiser render any opinion as to the title, which is
assumed to be marketable. The property is appraised as though
under responsible ownership.
The sketches in this report are to assist the reader in
visualizing the property, and the appraiser assumes no
responsibility for its accuracy. The appraiser has made no survey
of the property.
The appraiser is not required to give testimony or appear in
court because of having made this appraisal, with reference to
the property in question, unless arrangements have been made
previously therefore.
~ The distribution of the total in this report between land and
improvements applies only under the existing program of
utilization. The separate valuations for land and building must
not be used in conjunction with any other appraisal and are valid
if so used.
The appraiser assumes that there are no hidden or unapparent
conditions of the property, subsoil or structures which would
render it more or less valuable. The appraiser assumes no
responsibility for such conditions as for engineering which might
be required to discover such factors.
Information, estimates and opinions furnished to the appraiser
and contained in this report were obtained from sources
considered reliable and believed to be true and correct. However,
no responsibility for accuracy of such items furnished the
appraiser can be assumed by the appraiser.
Disclosure by the appraiser of the content of this appraisal
report is subject to review in accordance with the by -laws and
regulations of the professional appraisal organizations with
which the appraiser is affiliated.
• -17-
APPRAISAL QUALIFICATIONS OF
J. SCOTT RENNE, MAI, CAE
WORK EXPERIENCE:
1978 - Present - Independent Fee Appraiser /Consultant /Realtor on
a part time basis
1988 - Present - Washington County Assessor, Stillwater, MN
1981 - 1988 - City Clerk /Assessor, City of Hopkins, MN
1978 - 1981 - Assistant Assessor, City of Hopkins, MN
1974 - 1978 - Property Appraiser, City of St. Louis Park, MN
1973 - 1974 - Property Assessment Specialist, Wisconsin
Department of Revenue, Madison, Wisconsin
EDUCATION:
Graduated from the University of Minnesota School of Business
Administration in 1973 with a Bachelor of Science Degree in
Business Administration.
REAL ESTATE EDUCATION:
AIREA Courses -
Urban Properties; Real Estate Investment Analysis;
Litigation Valuation; Industrial Valuation; Market Analysis;
Highest and Best Use; Business Valuation; Hotel Valuation;
Standards of Professional Practice.
IAAO Courses -
Appraisal of Income Producing Property; Techniques of Mass
Appraisal; Assessment Administration; Instructor Workshops;
Computer Assisted Mass Appraisal.
SREA Courses -
Introduction to Appraising Real Property; Principles of
Income Property Appraising; Narrative Report Writing.
University of Minnesota Continuing Education Courses -
Computer Aided Assessment; Narrative Report Writing;
g,
Residential Appraisal, Apartment Appraisal, Assessment Laws;
History nd Procedures; dures Property Valuation Short C
p y al i nurses;
Business Site Selection and Analysis.
PROFESSIONAL DESIGNATIONS:
Member, Appraisal Institute; Senior Accredited Minnesota
Assessor; Certified Assessment Evaluator; Residential Evaluation
Specialist.
L
PROFESSIONAL AWARDS:
1984 IAAO Member of the Year; 1984 Top Pen Award for best
selected article in "Equal Eyes "; Primary author and coordinator
of "Property Assessment" slide presentation, winner of 1985 IAAO
Public Information Award; 1989 and 1990 IAAO Presidential
Citations.
'- -18-
i
T
QUALIFICATIONS OF J. SCOTT RENNE (continued)
i
. REAL ESTATE EDUCATOR EXPERIENCE:
Developed and taught courses and seminars for the University of
Minnesota, International Association of Assessing Officers,
Minnesota Association of Assessing Officers and Minnesota School
of Real Estate.
CURRENT PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES:
IAAO Executive Board; IAAO Narrative Report Grading Committee;
State Board of Assessors Narrative Report Grading Committee;
Author of "Real Estate Financial Indicators" column in "Equal
Eyes "; IAAO Property Assessment Valuation Global Editor; AIREA
Chapter 35 Admissions Committee; AIREA Regional Ethics and
Counseling Panel.
PROFESSIONAL MEMBERSHIPS:
Minnesota Association of Assessing Officers; Minnesota Chapter of
International Association of Assessing Officer; International
Association of Assessing Officers; American Institute of Real
Estate Appraisers; Citizen's League; International Right of Way
Association; Minneapolis Board of Realtors; Minnesota Association
of Realtors; National Association of Realtors.
- Qualified as an Expert Witness in Minnesota Tax Court and
Condemnation Commissioner's Hearings
- Licensed Minnesota Real Estate Broker #07545920.
- Licensed Real Estate Appraiser #4000733
t
-19-
P hoto g ra p h
�`'nx � � �� ��,,�r � ��:: - • 'h.+T' `^ b • 4 .� �' ,b� rr� ���q� � �' f4;�'�, a�_t t� ;i�4'� ��
� '� j /���4'� �,. Rt r t3'• id,Cy �� ri ��� t.
.+w'�^^ I { .,a. • -t '+ 'b�� :" c 4 y 'fig ^ -:
ILW
, W-W
ARAM
L
r
5
�
s
.,a - �t� s r � �� . w ,r r � ki *+ f �?` ," �� •,:.; p �r �'�'Z' + �
�r
� � ,'►�, to � T � ��, a-# � ��� �
E
i
E
r L
2 t .
All
g q
y
ftw VA 1 +F
L-4 1�
cy
r � -
�L
w .
•►
*Apo WNW
w —
i
- c
t
t
'z; 3
O
t
r
t �
G
ro
Nri
CL
tw
I o ►
r
' (30) t
(25) (27)
N i 34
33 ------------------------------------- ---- -- -
------------
(33) (34)
(22) ; (28) i
---- - - - - --
i -- ---------------- - - - - -- ' QUQN
N
(23) (29) (32)
(35) 1
-- - --
$ 56TH AVE
(83) (68) (48) (52)
135 135.57
------------ -- ------- ---- --- ----- -- - - -- --- ,
15
i
- I N � t•
(82) (69) (47) (51)
I
135 55 135. SS i 42 _ - --
1
I
14 3
13 I I - -- --- -- -------- -- ---- - --- - -- z
Z z �
A DN
4 4 (49) j
j (80) (71) ? ( 5)
' a
Q 135. 5.
135
X z
1— Q z
12 Q
� Z 5 n LL / (5J9f)j/�lJ/�JJ � /J 54fj) }-
(79) (72) I J Ltf/1S UI%UU 'i - - - - -- ( m
t3 48 135.48 O
I
11 n 6 (58) (53)
(78) (73) 4s i
- --- ---- ----- --- -- - - -� N89 4•E 30
135.4 135.46 -- -------------------- 5.5
N
7
' •_
7
o ( 116) I
(77) ^ (74) I (56) n Q�QE ,
r
i3 43
135.43 -------------------- 135.55
Z LEi91
2
9
13S
p 30 1 1 30 34 EAST
L
�� Awl �wM� YirllllA K OCO►rwali 1M
at Map
■W - :. M .... • N!U :► yn �xr^i+_�„ °1lFN� g
� w■ w tl � M N .. �� = � t: .
-S � • � `..,. •� w Lt Kf _- � „nnNM Otl � C� w'J ._� �'M � as .■! #. ..
_= w •� • ' • �'i t ii iw w , tJ,,1137]7/ !!!
r iii -a— M �!„wlnw ° -- ,p W . ♦. .��e w =j a
�� Ca : ♦ ����'• � ■. N N �� �,efiPSal7, __C
iii � � �11 �y ♦ ♦� a a_ � Nt . � • f. �. ��� cs,.,,.�,
�� �- w '°� • iii = wMJ
Mg .EI/n�h � �r �� -- L' � � •. ii
NEW
_ � M � :; w � • � L• 4 _p � J
�� IIINt►��ii / h, .—�+ � .• � ® � ?. ..., .x ita a =� 1 + +� d ° � r}
• Vii: � tom= Iwtl . .rr” s e_ � �� M N � o �� � O� � ' i
1 �1�1 n
0 � • atlnuw,www n,n,wwn . '`� ,.. � w � _ — __ � - �
Y
° Itllw�hy �n !llw�1 Ii�iZ � Y�q • •, 15�jr�. � �, � M ,'•'�; ,
11,6l: 7tt�'f�'! h♦ �� �'C:r " ye' a .... � � w•.�� qt
ww � M � fv M w•�.a � T' '
g • 1 � N �4 ° '�"! N N max`} � � . s -- fa. M If L�� ,? f � •r x „:�e1 �
Mam
:.11111 +; j M '� :Y /` � w .:. • .•...• -� .� .i w � N ttMl -mow � . , � i - ..•r��� ,�i'i.•
- •. !7 I.� ww•� °� w -.. r w o — s N w��: f ' F �.,�7✓'e'' c•a.�._
i ■■ i ' ^' +•. :+ R; .�i :� ~ I ' .��� d ',�1��r � w = ql �.' � =p — — � i a � ysr .:;� $..
� ON -1
N �t,111 !I� * i ^+, !mile �VNM N= = =� �� - __� • t
f „ Intl \i i ►il; , Vim■!• i rii W r w �� �_ - = CC �• _ — ---� \ ro
1, 10111�K • ... / �� ' "i f �. .i - - .. C- C=
H N. N :_
mg ZIS
1 �� ~ � 1 � � S S . ry x _. '`• k�, ..> � ■ M nl ■i■1��M4■■■■!� \ K' S �s�a
'Y �.� w � �� / `3; x 3�' '°•.+� `wY E r: r 9+.`� € i esg"F S 5. s t k •K sm� .�
N, « _— O % �. € S,•' >.,� x l a y i K - !` z tom` r' .�
a � t �- S:.nt,s -.:" '�' �'S� t v S 'IP` s � - `' }�. 3 t y '• 3 S . 4 8� �: �t a 'Z '3
��r - ! W t Exrrgs a rsxfe'�^ro ,awi♦,, "> i y e"{ ;s'` ..c•~, S id
s. � t'> h».x #r ''� s i. _:•`, ;t `,
:P•'"�Y*c F'"`.f ..... o•a, k
_ ®� ..1s�E,� �!fl �� � t �.. �. z - - '� r .F 1fn+ -£yt .'ij`> } A •.� F' t i�a t��. ac
lN,l/ �= .... M «fis�l 4 � >� raY,ws !k` r.. -w- w.. �r f 'J' •`vF$"�t`.4�y- 37.�.z•h^e 7F' _ N c 3! i s -. fi �� '� � ,�
.ice � w_� =� a �' yss 7' n rg. .. 4 y, g r N r ( „a s i.. q ♦ a: �'d
`—�� fir' IQS01 � � E i . � }• x. a ^'x+'r � f > �'"'�. 't t � `°' tt � h4
_ ��' `� \�yt:�r+ss,��,,r� �'^� � `l %ar � �i n • �y. �-C� t Y � �. � i tea r
U /i7 � '°. �;'J,..i�'h,'� �' �.Y,.y'"nf.y :•e " , a " c'a sx�. -.a. X, ��Cf�. `"&.irg r�•S.a a x . c� a �32' i ,�f
11 �"�!'._ �'� x 3° j� . '• r? . •,+•� : - � r '•3� -- ��Y���,A^�•� � ?t - v '.S�'T� y cv. �• �Xe 7 ! + '.
L I f € t 4 s e 3 rr a.s i� t r: ^ms r �
will
9 i e � . a ^ R r � �f } � S3
• ®® • • 1 1 �i+�b..* ee,a -Lw } $S� r`S °x'yfi ''Y-,i`y',..'�+.,..axa'4} °z xi
? �, ;x ' ilk '',t' i ''4 °€ ' t a. •=`�
— si
_ CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND INSPECTION
(612) 569 -3344 FAX (612) 561 -0717
HOUSING MAINTENANCE COMPLIANCE ORDER
DATE: August 8, 1990 COMPLIANCE DATE: September 7, 1990
TO: Robert Lindbloom
11429 65th Place North
Maple Grove, MN 55369
cc: Current Resident
LOCATION: 5538 Colfax Avenue North SECOND Notice
COMPLIANCE OFFICIAL: Karen Barton
The following violations of the Housing Maintenance and Occupancy
Ordinance were cited during a recent inspection of the above premises.
You are hereby informed that these violations must be corrected on or
3 before the COMPLIANCE DATE indicated.
Failure to correct or to make satisfactory arrangements to correct
violations may result in suspension or revocation of a rental dwelling
license, if applicable, and, in any case, may result in issuance of a
citation which, upon conviction, is punishable by fine and/or
imprisonment.
Section 12 -1202 of the Ordinance provides for Right of Appeal, when it
is alleged that a Compliance Order is based upon erroneous
interpretation of the Ordinance. The Appeal must be submitted to the
Inspection Department, in writing, specifying the grounds for Appeal,
within five (5) business days after service of the order, and must be
accompanied by filing fee of $15.00 in cash or cashier's check.
DESCRIPTION OF VIOLATIONS AND ORDINANCE SECTION
Failure to make corrections by compliance date may result in a citation.
1. Control weeds and seed or sod bare patches in yard. (12 -317)
2. Replace missing window lock in right and left bedroom and living
room. (State Code, 12 -703)
3. Replace gasket on refrigerator. (12- 402 -3)
4. Repair rear entrance door. (12 -703)
5. Add grippable handrail to basement stairs. (12 -406)
6. Repair duct work to humidifier on furnace or remove humidifier.
(12 -709)
7. Seal crack in step between house and step. (12 -406)
8. Replace rotted wood around threshold by south steps. (12 -406)
9. Repair screen and provide window for rear storm door. (12 -307)
10. Repair roof on east side of house. (12 -703)
il. Replace rotted fascia and soffit on east side of house. (12 -707)
F
Ae
REAL ESTATE TRANSFER
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
# This form approved by the Minnesota Association of
REALTORS: Minnesota Association of REALTORSa
disclaims any liability arising out of use or misuse of this form.
1. Date J " 5 ' __/ /
i 2. Page / of 2 Pages
3. This disclosure statement concerns the real property located in the City of
4. County of q,Jro� ✓ State of Minnesota, described as 55 3 .� L'n /�'r� x It e, ✓.
' 5. This disclosure is not a warranty of any kind by the Seller(s) or any Agents)
6. representing any Party(s) in this transaction, and is not a substitute for any inspections or warranties the Party(s) may wish to obtain.
7. BUYER(S) AND SELLER(S) MAY WISH TO OBTAIN PROFESSIONAL ADVICE AND /OR INSPECTIONS
8. OF THE PROPERTY AND TO PROVIDE FOR APPROPRIATE PROVISIONS IN A CONTRACT BETWEEN
9. BUYER(S) AND SELLER(S) WITH RESPECT TO ANY ADVICE/INSPECTIONS/DEFECTS.
10. SELLERS INFORMATION: The Seller discloses the following information with the knowledge that even though this is not
11. a warranty, prospective buyers may rely on this information in deciding whether and on what terms to purchase the subject
12. property. The Seller(s) authorizes any Agent(s) representing any party(s) in this transaction to provide a copy of this statement
s 13. to any person or entity in connection with any actual or anticipated sale of the property.
15.is a disclosure =.c! is
3 16. A. GENERAL INFORMATION:
17. (1) When did you purchase or build the home? A,'bL !�7
18. (2) Have you lived in this home for the past 12 months? Yes No >C
19. (3) Has there been any flood or other disaster(s) at the property? Yes No X
20. If yes, give details of what happened and when:
1 21.
22.
23. (4) Has the structure ever been altered? (For example, additions, altered roof lines, changes to load bearing walls.)
24. -Yes No If yes, please specify what was done, when and by whom (owner or contractor):
25.
26.
27. (5) Is the property suitable for year round use? X Yes No
28. B. STRUCTURAL SYSTEMS: Do any of the following conditions currently exist or have they previously existed?
29. t C :ve details to
30. (1) THE BASEMENT
31. (a) Foundation problem Yes No _X (e) Drain tiling problem Yes No X
32. (b) Flooding Yes No (f) Cracked floors/wails Yes No
33. (c) Wet Walls Yes _k No (g) Sewer backup Yes No -X
34. (d) Leakage /seepage Yes_ No _ (h) Other Yes No
35. Give details to any question answered "yes ": c (Je %AJeL!�S C-- ' Lvg //s V
36.
37.
38. (2) THE ROOF?
39. (a) What is the age of the roofing material? Z I Comments: 214" -
40. (b) Has there ever been interior damage from ice buildup? Yes X No
41. (c) Has there ever been any leakage or other problems? Yes X No
42. (d) Have there ever been any repairs or replacement made to the roof? Yes X No
43. Give details to any question answered "yes ":
44. fee
45.
46.C. SPECIAL COMMENTS ON HEATING. PLUMBING. ELECTRICAL AND MECHANICAL SYSTEMS:
47. The following are in working order and shall be at time of closing unless otherwise stated in comments below. All items listed
48. below are not necessarily part of this sale.
49. YES NO YES NO YES NO
50. Range y _ Intercom Central Heating System
51. Oven X _ Garage Door Openers _ Central Air Conditioning
52. Hood and all controls Wall Air Conditioners)
53. Refrigerator Ventilating FanslFixtures _ Furnace Humidifier
54. Microwave Oven Security System Electronic Air Purifier
55. Dishwasher Smoke Detectors _�_X Supplemental Heater
56. Freezer Central Vacuum _X_ Solar Collectors X
57. Washer _ Door Bells Fireplace Equipment
58. Dryer , _ Window Treatments Fireplace and/or Inserts _
59. Trash Compactor Water Heater Woodburning Stove
60. Garbage Disposal Sump Pump _Y Incinerator
61. Plumbing Systems Drain Tiling _ X Water Softener
t 62. Toilet Mechanisms y _
t � � Private Sewer System Sprinkler System
63 Private Well Attached Antenna and
R4
REAL ESTATE TRANSFER
-
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
66. Address
67. Page 2
68. Unused Well: Is there a well on the property which is no longer in use? []Yes fl�Vo
69. If yes, has it been sealed according to State Regulations MSA 156A? []Yes ENO
70. Comments:
71. Contaminated Well: Is there a well on the property containing contaminated water? Yes_ No AJ!"
72. Date well water last tested for contaminants Comments:
73. D. LAND USE AND PROPERTY CONDITION:
74. Are you aware of any of the following existing:
75. Encroachments? Yes_ No Soil proolems? Yes_ No-.Z-
76. Diseased Trees? Yes_ Nom Rodent Infestation? Yes_ NoX- insect Infestation? Yes_ NoZ-
77. Restrictions or Reservations on the use of the property? Yes No x
78. Easements other than utility or drainage easements which do not interfere with present improvements? Yes No Y_
79. Is the property located in a designated flood plain? Yes No X
80. Comments: 11 r) / l4 740- 7-5
( 81.
I 82.
83. E. INSULATION DISCLOSURE:
84. Does the insulation in the property contain urea formaidehvde foam? Yes No Unknown
85. Date insulation installed: Lon 16 (, L.� pj - Type: Company:
86, Comments:
87. F. OTHER KNOWN DEFECTS:
88. Are there any other known defects in or on the property? Yes No X If yes, explain below:
89. �� f '•,
�• G
� J T' g l S , ry r I J S 7""C •�
j 90. /2,2 ✓e 1>Tc
I
91.
92. �1�/�
93. G. SELLER'S STATEMENT:
94. We /I, owner(s) of the property at S5 3 Ccs W^ J?vC
95. ac kn owleage the above Real Estate Transfer Disclosure Statement and give permission to Listing Broker to disclose
96. t It s , information to the Prospective buyers.
98. H. BUYER'S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:
( 99. We /I, the Buyer(s) of the property at
i 100. do acknowledge receipt of the Real Estate Transfer Disclosure Statement and agree that no representations
101. regarding the condition of the property have been made, other than those made above. LISTING BROKER AND
102. AGENTS MAKE NO REPRESENTATIONS AND ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY CONDITIONS EXISTING IN
103. THE PROPERTY.
104.
f8W✓1 OV.I IBuy.ri D..1
105.1. SELLER'S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:
106. AS OF THE DATE OF THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE PURCHASE AGREEMENT, We /I, the Seller(s) of the above
107. property, agree that the condition of the property is the same as noted above and will be in proper working order
108. on date of closing, except for th
9 p e changes indicated above and dated:
109.
is-) (S-) (o..l
110. MN:RETDS (5/88) ORIGINAL COPY TO LISTING BROKER; COPIES TO SELLER, BUYER, SELLING BROKER. 12)
i
s -
x