c. Abatement applications-Deboer; Bernard

.. ." . . ANALYSIS OF DATA AND CONCLUSIONS reasonable to assume that a cost to cure would be greater than the market value of the property as unimpaired, In summary, the preceding highest and best use analysis reveals that the subject as improved and in its current state, is neither financially feasible nor maximally productive. This conclusion will have a significant impact on the valuation process, I II. Valuation Process The purpose of this valuation process is to estimate the market value ofthe fee simple estate in the after state; i,e" as impaired. Given the preceding, both the cost approach to value and sales comparison approach were used in the analysis. No departures from USP AP were cited. ~ ~ ! Ill. Cost Approach The cost approach is based on the premise that a prudent purchaser will not pay more for a property than the cost to acquire the land plus construct an equally desirable substitute. The intent is to estimate the probable cost of replacing the subject on a similar site, rather than the cost to duplicate the subject exactly. The definitions and methodology as applied to the subject in its unimpaired condition are appropriate to the subject in its impaired condition. A. Replacement Cost New In this instance, the appraisal is made for estimating the market value of the fee simple estate of a single- family dwelling; no departures from USP AP were cited. The cost calculations used in the before section of the appraisal continue to be appropriate for this after section of the appraisal. The indicated replacement cost new ofthe subject including appliances and site improvements is as follows and is considered reasonable and in line with the market. Marshall & Swift Residential Handbook Floor Area I 2 story 2.769,0 SF @ Energy JExtreme Climate 2.769,0 SF @ Foundation IExtreme Climate 1.385.0 SF @ Basement 1.385.0 SF @ Floor Cover I Allowance 2,769,0 SF @ Plumbing 12,0 Fx @ Fireplaces 1.0 Unit @ Heating & Cooling 4,154.0 SF@ Outside Entrance (basement stairwell) 1.0 Unit @ Garage 988,5 SF @ Subtotal $53,60 $1.38 = $2.94 $29.75 $3,91 = $845.00 = $2,750.00 $2.01 S 1,525.00 = $17.13 = Multipliers for Area Height Adjusted for Area and Height Subtotal Multipliers for Current Cost J Central Fargo Combined Adjustment Adjusted to Local Markel Indirect Costs excluded by Marshall & Swift (3%) Subtotal Entrepreneurial Profit (10%) Total Building Cost $148.418 $3.821 $4,072 $41,204 $10.827 $10.140 $2.750 $8.350 $1,525 $16.933 $248,040 0.9830 1.0000 0,9830 $243.823 1,0500 1,0000 1,0500 $256.014 $7,680 $263,694 $26.369 $290,063 RM HOEFS & ASSOCIATES, INC. 96