Sacramento Appraisal Blog | Real Estate Appraiser

Real estate appraisals for divorce, estate settlement, loans, property tax appeal, pre-listing and more. We cover Sacramento, Placer and Yolo County. We're professional, courteous and timely.

Appraisal Stuff

The myth of dollar for dollar in real estate

By 17 Comments

I’m in the middle of a bathroom remodel, so things have been hectic in my world. But beyond the noise and dirty house, how much value is this going to add? If I spend $15,000, my home will be worth $15,000 more, right? Let’s talk about it.

Dollar for dollar: It’s rare in real estate to spend a dollar and get a dollar back in value. It seems like it should be easy to increase value like it is on HGTV, but even if you look at the Remodeling 2018 Cost vs. Value Report, hardly any items on the list give close to a 100% return compared to the cost. For instance, a bathroom remodel is said to only add 68.2% of the cost to the value, and an upscale kitchen remodel is said to only recoup 46.5% of the cost in the resale market. Yikes. That’s pretty far from 100%.

Tub example: Here’s an example about cost vs value. Tubs like this can easily run $3,000 to $5,000 for just the tub alone, and based on conversations I’ve had with owners it’s not uncommon for someone to have spent $6,000 to $15,000 for a set-up like this. The tub is wonderful for someone who needs it, but in terms of value it might add very little if anything (classic functional obsolescence). In fact, many buyers might count it as a negative because it’s something they’ll likely tear out. Thanks Gail Robards for the photo.

Big point: I’m actually not a huge fan of published cost vs value lists because I wonder where the data comes from. Also, do the numbers make sense in every neighborhood and price range? Probably not. Yet I find these lists are still useful in conversations. An owner might say, “I spent $22,000 on a bathroom remodel, so my home is worth $22,000 more now.” Well, firstly let’s realize the remodeling lists don’t even give you $22,000 in value, so it’s probably a good idea to lower expectations (before the appraiser gets out there especially). Most of all, let’s look to the comps with similar features. Are they selling for $22,000 more? That’s what matters most because real estate value is about what buyers are willing to pay for something – not the cost. Thus an owner might have spent $70,000 on a remodel, but what are buyers paying for similar remodeled homes in the neighborhood? That’s the most relevant question, and one which appraisers will focus on when coming up with a value.

My bathroom remodel: Here are some progress shots for my bathroom remodel. We went with a tile floor that looks like wood, subway tile in the shower (classic look in my mind), and a white quartz counter. This bathroom only had a stand-up 1950s shower, so part of the remodel involves moving the shower to the existing tub. This left a huge space, so I’m building out shelves in the old shower. Eventually these shelves will be stained a darker brown to match everything. And this is Ollie, our rescue dog.

I hope that was interesting or helpful.

Questions: What types of conversations do you tend to have about cost vs value? Have you ever used actual cost vs value figures like this to help conversation flow? I’d love to hear your take or any stories. 

If you liked this post, subscribe by email (or RSS). Thanks for being here.

Will it be an appraisal issue if there is pot growing at a house?

By 12 Comments

Is it going to be a problem for a loan if the appraiser sees pot growing at a house? Well, it depends. Like many things in real estate, it’s not always a simple answer. Here are some things to consider.

Different opinions: There isn’t one definitive opinion appraisers have on how to handle cannabis, so seeing pot growing at a home can potentially be dealt with in different ways depending on the appraiser and the lender.

Not an agricultural specialist: Many appraisers don’t want to be put in the position of identifying plants, so some say, “I can’t tell if it’s Ficus or cannabis. I’m not an agricultural specialist. I don’t need to mention roses or peaches, so why would I call attention to a different plant?” Of course to be fair, roses and peaches aren’t federally illegal, so this might not be a perfect comparison.

It’s personal property: Some appraisers say, “It’s personal property, and it’s not my job to discuss personal items belonging to a seller or Borrower. I wouldn’t mention cottage cheese in the fridge or a Lambo‘ in the garage, so why would I mention a specific plant?”

Not a code enforcement officer: An appraiser in residential real estate shouldn’t be expected to confirm legality or count plants. Appraisers are not there to tattle, judge, or explain code.

One plant vs. farm: Let’s be real. There’s a difference between having a few plants for personal use and a full-fledged cartel “grow house.” Remember, it is never legal to use a residential house for a commercial cannabis operation. Yet here’s an honest question. How many plants are acceptable for a federally-backed loan? Is one too many? How about five, ten, or fifty? Ask a loan officer and see if you can get a definitive answer.

Bouncing the ball: When seeing “alternative agriculture,” an appraiser might email a photo to a lender client and say, “Hey, I saw some plants at the property. How would you like for me to handle this?” The appraiser in this case is bouncing the ball of liability to the client and allowing the lender to give direction. It is the lender’s decision and loan anyway, right? Some lenders might choose not to do the loan and other times appraisers might be asked to blur photos that clearly show a certain type of plant growing. In other cases lenders have asked for plants to be removed, so they might instruct the appraiser to make the value subject to removal of plants. The reality is most lenders have been silent about cannabis so far, but some smaller banks have been clear they won’t do loans with cannabis on site.

Would the loan have closed?: Here’s a question running through my mind. If I would have included a photo in my appraisal of cannabis growing somewhere on the parcel or in the house, would the loan have closed? Even if I personally think it’s no big deal to grow, if a loan only closes because I chose to ignore something that I knew would (or could) be an issue for a client, is that more liability for me as an appraiser? I know, it sounds like I’m overthinking the issue, but I’m actually doing critical thinking. This isn’t a statement on how appraisers should think. I’m only saying it’s a viable question to ponder in the midst of an emerging market. 

Closing Thoughts: Will it be an issue for the loan if there is cannabis growing? Honestly, there are many moving parts. I’m not trying to be frustrating, but it probably depends on the lender, how the appraiser handles it, and maybe even the number of plants. In short, this green issue is not black and white (sorry). Of course if there is obvious moisture or electrical damage associated with growing, then we can all agree that’s going to be a problem. The truth is some escrows with cannabis simply aren’t going to close since it’s an ambiguous world right now in lending due to the disconnect between federal and state law. Yet to be fair lots of people grow cannabis and they’re still getting loans. So clearly a few plants isn’t killing deals all the time either.

I hope that was interesting or helpful.

Questions: Did I miss something? Appraisers, how do you handle this? Lenders and Realtors, anything to add? I’d love to hear your take.

If you liked this post, subscribe by email (or RSS). Thanks for being here.

The danger of overpricing & chasing real estate unicorns

By 22 Comments

Overpricing. It happens all the time in real estate – especially in today’s market. I get where sellers are coming from because we’ve had so much glowing real estate news for more than five years. But that doesn’t mean we’re in a market where you can command whatever price you want. 

Chasing the unicorn: Many sellers are pricing their properties too high. It’s as if they expect record-breaking prices and multiple offers every time because of how “hot” the market is. Homeowners get so fixated on the idea of a fiery market that they price for that one unicorn buyer who’s going to mysteriously pay more than anyone else. This “unicorn” will ignore all recent sales and listings and magically offer 10% higher than anything. In Sacramento the idea is a Bay Area “unicorn” will swoop in with fat stacks of cash and totally ignore similar comps that are selling for less. It’s nice when sellers get lucky like that, but in today’s market buyers are actually much more finicky about price. Despite a legitimate housing shortage we don’t have a market where buyers are willing to pay crazy prices that are totally disconnected from reality. In other words, we don’t have a market where pricing for the “unicorn” makes good sense (unless you want to sit on the market instead of sell). Take a look at the image below that shows price reductions over the past 24 hours in the Sacramento region. These 78 properties have been priced too high for the market.

My advice? Price for the real market instead of the unicorn. Give the most weight to similar sales and similar listings that are actually getting into contract.

Aspirational pricing: If you aren’t familiar with the term aspirational pricing, Jonathan Miller coined this phrase. It’s a great way to describe the phenomenon of sellers fixating on prices that are simply disconnected from the real market.

10 reasons why sellers overprice:

1) Hot headlines are imposed on the price instead of looking at comps. 

2) Dissimilar sales are used as “comps” to price the home.

3) Too much emphasis is put on price per sq ft instead of actual comps.

4) A property is priced like it doesn’t have a busy street or adverse location.

5) Sales from a higher-priced area are “cherry-picked” to price the property.

6) The seller is too subjective and feels “my house is better.”

7) The owner believes the cost of any upgrades should be paid for by buyers.

8) A more aggressive trend from a lower price range is assumed to be present at a higher price range.

9) It’s a tricky property and not easy to come up with a price.

10) What else?

My article in Comstock’s: By the way, I wrote an article in Comstock’s Magazine this month on the value of upgrades. Check it out if you want.

I hope this was interesting or helpful.

Questions: Are you seeing sellers price for “unicorns”? What reasons do you think sellers overprice? Did I miss something?

If you liked this post, subscribe by email (or RSS). Thanks for being here.

That place where fame & real estate meet

By 12 Comments

How does fame impact a home? Does it matter for value if a famous person lived there? What if something notorious happened at the property? Let’s talk about this and consider a few examples. Please note there are entire books written on this subject, so don’t expect an exhaustive dissertation here. Any thoughts? I’d love to hear your take in the comments.

Here are a few examples:

Breaking Bad: The house where the TV series Breaking Bad was filmed was all over the news last month because the owner is building a 6′ front yard fence to keep people out of her yard. According to Albuquerque KOB4 there is a constant stream of visitors and fans have even thrown pizzas on the roof to reenact the main character Walter White doing so in an episode. The owner is clearly not thrilled, and I can’t imagine neighbors are either unless they can somehow monetize the situation.

Kurt Cobain’s Baby House: Brandon Turner at Bigger Pockets is an investor and he accidentally bought a home where Kurt Cobain lived as a baby. The duplex was purchased as an investment without any knowledge of the lead singer of Nirvana’s connection to the property. But tenants began complaining about photos being taken of the front of the house, and that’s how the connection was discovered.

The Almost Governor’s Mansion in California: The State of California built a Governor’s mansion in the 1970s in Carmichael, which is about 10 miles from Downtown Sacramento. This mansion began construction under Governor Ronald Reagan’s leadership, but it was not completed until Jerry Brown took office. Brown actually refused to live in this house, which he dubbed “The Taj Mahal”. This home sold for 4.1M in 2004 and has 8 bedrooms, 8 bathrooms and is 11,984 sq ft. The mansion is still there today, but some of the site has been subdivided for a few custom homes. This is literally one of a few residential homes EVER in Sacramento County that sold above $4M.

Reagan House in the Fab 40s Neighborhood: Governor Ronald Reagan and his family chose not to live in the old Governor’s mansion in Downtown Sacramento back in the 70s, so they moved to East Sacramento on 45th Street to lease a home in the “Fabulous 40s” neighborhood. The home boasted over 6,000 square feet with six bedrooms and four bathrooms (according to Tax Records). The home last recorded for $1,765,000 in May 2000. Not everyone can say, “The future President used to live here when he was Governor”. Do you think that matters for value?

Here’s a look at the price point of the Reagan house. What do you see?

Homicidal Handyman House: There is a property in Oak Park where a serial killer dubbed “The Homicidal Handyman” murdered someone in the later 80s. This property was purchased last year by an investor and I’m waiting to see if it comes on the market (it has a choice location). This murder occurred about 30 years ago though, and the reality is that stigma associated with gruesome crimes fades over time. In other words, it might be a big deal for value to buy a property right after a murder, but much less of an issue if the crime occurred 30 years ago. I observed a recent murder property in the Sacramento market and in this case there was a 5-10% hit on value, though it might not have been an issue at all had the murder taken place 30 years ago instead of recently. Architectural Digest actually did a great piece on stigma recently and I was pleased to see they interviewed Jonathan Miller.

Dorothea Puente Murder House: Seven bodies were discovered at a duplex on F St in Sacramento in the late 80s compliments of Dorothea Puente. She lured victims to her “boarding” home, drugged and buried them, and then cashed their social security checks. This Victorian duplex has some charm as you can see, but it definitely has a dark history too. There was a documentary made about this house in 2015 and the owner has even given tours through the years too. This just goes to show it may be possible to monetize a famous house. Though in this case the owner has donated tour proceeds toward organizations working to alleviate homelessness (way to go).

Here’s a sales history of the Puente duplex. What do you see?

Lady Bird House: A recent movie called Lady Bird is set in Sacramento and had some filming done in the city too. Here is the front of one of the home’s shown in the movie (located in Fab 40s). This was not the main character’s dwelling, so it may not attract much of a following, though it’ll be interesting to see if people snap selfies here. For reference, the San Francisco Chronicle shared Lady Bird filming locations so fans can visit. In this case the owner probably has some bragging rights to say, “My home was in Lady Bird”, and I’d imagine any future listing would mention this fact. But will the market as a whole pay more for a house like this because it had a minor role in a movie? I’ll give you my opinion in the comments if you give me yours.
 
And here’s my Lady Bird selfie.  🙂
 
Closing thoughts: It seems like fame can either be good or bad when it comes to real estate values. If a house is famous for something gruesome, it could easily harm value (duh). But part of it depends on how long ago a crime occurred. On the other hand if a home is historically important, it could be a huge bonus for value (duh again). Yet fame can come at a cost too by increasing foot traffic and looky-loos. Would an owner have to disclose the stream of unwanted visitors to potential buyers? Could this potentially limit marketability? Could it impact rental value if there were camera flashes happening at night? Would tenants get fed up over time? These are important questions to ask. Lastly, we would be wise to not overthink a property’s value that had “15 minutes of fame” so to speak. Thus just because a home had a cameo in a movie or was previously owned by someone famous does not mean at the end of the day the market is going to pay anything more for the property. It’s true certain fans might offer more for a particular home owned by a celebrity or athlete, but what would the market as a whole pay? That’s always the bigger question. 
 

Think Like an Appraiser Class (I’m teaching): By the way, I’m doing my favorite class on Dec 7 from 9am-12pm called How to Think Like an Appraiser. We’ll talk through comp selection, making adjustments, tips for talking about value, and what to do in various scenarios. Details here.

Questions: Would you buy a house that was famous in a movie or owned by someone famous? Why or why not? Have you seen any measurable impact to value for a celebrity property? I’d love to hear your take.

If you liked this post, subscribe by email (or RSS). Thanks for being here.