<PAGE>
Exhibit (c)(1)(I)
SUMMARY COMPLETE
REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL REPORT
285-Space Denali Park Estates and Apache East Estates
Manufactured Housing Community
3405 and 3500 South Tomahawk Road
Apache Junction, Pinal County, Arizona
PREPARED FOR
Mr. Steve Waite
Windsor Corporation
6160 South Syracuse Way
Greenwood Village, Colorado 80111
AS OF
May 1, 2000
PREPARED BY
WHITCOMB REAL ESTATE
<PAGE>
[LETTERHEAD OF WHITCOMB REAL ESTATE]
June 1, 2000
Steve Waite
Windsor Corporation
6160 South Syracuse Way
Greenwood Village, Colorado 80111
RE: 285-Space Denali Park Estates and Apache East Estates
Manufactured Housing Community
3505 and 3500 South Tomahawk Road
Apache Junction, Pinal County, Arizona
Dear Mr. Waite:
At your request, we have inspected and appraised the above captioned
property. We estimate the "as is" market value of the property rights outlined
herein, as of May 1, 2000, based on an exposure period of six months, to be:
- FIVE MILLION NINE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS -
($5,900,000)
Our value estimate applies to the land as physically constituted, to the
improvements actually in existence and reflects prevailing trends in the local
real estate market. We have made a careful inspection, study, and analysis of
the property, and have considered all factors which, in our opinion, would tend
to influence the market value of the subject.
Denali Park Estates and Apache East Estates are fully developed adult
manufactured housing communities containing a total of 285 spaces, with two
clubhouses, a laundry, two pools with spas, and eight shuffleboard courts. In
addition there is approximately 10 acres of excess land currently utilized as a
desert golf course at Denali Park Estates. The parks have no sewer and are on
septic tank systems.
<PAGE>
Mr. Steve Waite
June 1, 2000
Page Two
The rental rate at Denali Park is currently $232.00 plus water, sewer and
trash. The rental rate at Apache East Estates is $242.00 per month, which
includes sewer and trash. The residents at Denali Park Estates are charged
additionally $16.31 per month for utility service. The physical occupancy of
the subject is currently 96.5%.
Our conclusion is premised on the Assumptions and Limiting Conditions as
cited in our attached report, as well as the facts and circumstances as of the
valuation date. This appraisal has been prepared in accordance with the
"Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice" (USPAP) as published by
the Appraisal Standard Board of the Appraisal Foundation.
This appraisal assignment was not based on a requested minimum value,
specific value, or the approval of a loan.
We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you. If you have any
questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.
This is a Summary Appraisal, 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 Summary Appraisal Reports. This report
represents only summary discussions of the data, reasoning, and analyses
employed in the appraisal process toward the development of our opinion of
value. Supporting documentation has been retained in our files.
Very truly yours,
WHITCOMB REAL ESTATE
/s/ John H. Whitcomb JAG
-------------------------
John H. Whitcomb, MAI, CCIM
/s/ L. Drake Moore JAG
-------------------------
L. Drake Moore, MAI, CCIM
St. Cert. Gen. REA #TP40569
<PAGE>
4
TABLE OF CONTENTS
-----------------
<TABLE>
<S> <C>
Table Of Contents.......................................................... 4
Photographs Of The Subject................................................. 5
Summary Of Facts And Conclusions........................................... 6
Extent Of Confirming, Collecting And Reporting Data........................ 7
Purpose, Function And Date Of The Appraisal................................ 7
Area/Neighborhood Description.............................................. 8
Manufactured Home Community Market Overview................................ 9
Land And Site Improvements................................................. 10
Improvement Description.................................................... 12
Ownership And Property History............................................. 12
Occupancy.................................................................. 12
Zoning And Other Land Use Controls......................................... 13
Real Estate Assessment And Taxes........................................... 13
Marketability And Marketing Period......................................... 14
Highest And Best Use....................................................... 15
Valuation Process.......................................................... 15
Income Capitalization Approach............................................. 16
Sales Comparison Approach.................................................. 28
Final Estimate Of Value.................................................... 32
Certification.............................................................. 33
Assumptions And Limiting Conditions........................................ 34
</TABLE>
Addenda
Legal Description
Maps
Profile Of Appraiser
<PAGE>
PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE SUBJECT (taken May 4, 2000) 5
[PICTURE APPEARS HERE]
1. Entrance to Apache
[PICTURE APPEARS HERE]
2. Entrance to Denali
<PAGE>
6
SUMMARY OF FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS
--------------------------------
Property Appraised: 285-Space Denali Park Estates and Apache East
-------------------
Estates Manufactured Home Community
3405 and 3500 South Tomahawk Road
Apache Junction, Pinal County, Arizona
Property Rights
---------------
Appraised: Fee Simple Interest, subject to tenant leases
----------
Land Area: Denali Park - 32.9 acres, or 1,433,124 square feet
----------
Apache East - 16.03 acres, or 698,267 square feet
Improvements: 285-manufactured home spaces, two clubhouses with
-------------
office and recreation area.
Owner: Windsor Park Properties 345
------
Zoning: MH, Manufactured/Mobile Home Zone
-------
Highest and Best Use: As Improved -- Current Use
---------------------
Value Indications: Income Approach $5,900,000
------------------
Sales Comparison Approach $5,800,000
Final Estimate of Value: $5,900,000
------------------------
Date of Appraisal: May 1, 2000
------------------
Date of Inspection: May 4, 2000
-------------------
<PAGE>
7
EXTENT OF CONFIRMING, COLLECTING AND REPORTING DATA
---------------------------------------------------
This assignment encompasses providing an "as is" market value of the fee
simple title of the property and improvements, as of the specified date. This
investigation included an overview of the area and local manufactured home
market. We have inspected the subject and its environs, collected and analyzed
market data, inspected the comparable and competitive properties, considered and
applied the appropriate valuation methods and reconciled the final value
estimate.
The real estate interest appraised is that of ownership in fee simple
interest, subject to the existing tenant leases. The property is appraised as
if free and clear of mortgages, liens, servitude's and encumbrances, except
those noted in the body of this appraisal.
PURPOSE, FUNCTION AND DATE OF THE APPRAISAL
-------------------------------------------
The purpose of the appraisal is to express our opinion of the "as is"
market value of the fee simple interest, subject to existing tenant leases, of
the real estate, as of May 1, 2000. The information, opinions, and conclusions
contained in this report have been prepared as a basis for portfolio valuation.
The subject was physically inspected on May 4, 2000, and the date of this
appraisal is May 1, 2000.
Market Value is defined as: 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, 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:
. Buyer and Seller are typically motivated;
. Both parties are well informed or well advised, and each acting in
what he considers his own best interest;
. A reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open market;
. Payment is made in terms of cash in U.S. dollars or in terms of
financial arrangements comparable thereto; and
. 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./1/
____________________
/1/ The Office of the Thrift Supervision, 12 CFR 564.2(f).
<PAGE>
8
AREA/NEIGHBORHOOD DESCRIPTION
-----------------------------
Location/Access
---------------
The property is located approximately two miles east of the boundary line
of Pinal and Maricopa County in Apache Junction, Arizona. Apache Junction is
located approximately 30 miles west of the central business district of Phoenix.
The property is accessible from U.S. Highway 60, the Superstition Freeway.
Apache Junction is located at the junction of U.S. Highway 60 and 89 and
State Highway 88. Apache Junction lies primarily in Pinal County, and was
incorporated in 1978. U.S. Highways 60 and 89 and State Highway 88 connect the
City of Phoenix and Apache Junction to all areas in the west and mid-western
United States. Superstition Freeway is a major freeway that serves the East
Valley, especially the cities of Mesa, Tempe, Chandler, Gilbert and Apache
Junction.
The subject is located on the east and west sides of Tomahawk Road, south
of the Superstition Freeway. Access to the neighborhood is excellent, offering
all amenities, shopping, schools, churches, medical facilities and entertainment
and recreation. Ingress and egress of the subject is rated adequate.
The neighborhood is rural in nature. Development has taken the form of
mixed-use residential, commercial and light industrial type properties located
along the major road frontages, typical of rural areas. Land use in the
immediate vicinity of the subject is characteristic of the entire neighborhood.
Existing uses along South Tomahawk Road are typical of residential and
manufactured housing types of development. The neighborhood is estimated to be
50% developed. There remain large contiguous tracts of land available for in-
fill development.
Population
----------
According to the 1990 census, the population for Apache Junction was 18,100
and the population of Pinal County was 116,379, representing respectively a
82.2% and 28% increase from 1980. The most recent population figure for Apache
Junction as of 1995 was 19,525, representing a population increase of
approximately 7.9%. The population of Pinal County also increased approximately
19.5% from 1990 to 1995 to 139,050. Future projections indicate a similar trend
of continued population growth. The 1995 population of Metro Phoenix was
2,551,765, which represented a 17% increase from 1990.
<PAGE>
Area / Neighborhood Description 9
Employment
----------
The economy of Apache Junction is based almost exclusively on recreation
and retirement. Most commercial services in the area cater to tourist and
recreation seekers on their way to Arizona's central lakes and forests. Apache
Junction attracts upwards of 35,000 winter visitors and retirees annually due to
its climate and proximity to many of Arizona's outstanding recreational and
historical areas. The civilian labor force is approximately 8,444 and the
unemployment rate is less than 4%. The Phoenix-Mesa Metropolitan Area (which
includes Maricopa and Pinal counties) represents 67% of the Arizona Labor
Market. Maricopa County job market had a total of 1,467,700 jobs at the end of
September 1997. Unemployment in September 1997 was 2.9%, compared to 4.2% for
Arizona.
Transportation
--------------
Sky Harbor International Airport, the world's 18/th/ largest, provides
service via twenty-six domestic and international airlines. Sky Harbor handles
approximately 27 million passengers a year and is projected to have over 40
million passengers by the year 2007. Cheyenne was formed as a result of the
transcontinental railroad in 1867. Southern Pacific Railway, and the Atchison,
Topeka and Santa Fe Railways provide freight rail transportation from
transcontinental origins from and to the Metro area. Amtrak provides passenger
rail service to the area. Greyhound and seven other charter bus services serve
the city as well. Interstate and intrastate truck lines, household good
carrier, United Parcel Service and Air Couriers International provide other
transportation.
Summary and Conclusion
----------------------
The subject is located in Pinal County just outside the southern
incorporated city limits of Apache Junction, Arizona. The subject's location in
regard to the local amenities in the form of shopping, recreational and activity
centers is considered excellent due to the proximity of Apache Junction and to
other cities in the East Valley including Tempe, Chandler and Gilbert. General
real estate values have been static over the last three to four year period.
MANUFACTURED HOME COMMUNITY MARKET OVERVIEW
-------------------------------------------
According to the 1998 U.S. Housing Market Map, Arizona ranked 13/th/ among
states in the number of homes shipped in 1998. As shown on the following table,
manufactured home shipments in Arizona have varied annually since 1996.
<PAGE>
Manufactured Home Community Market Overview 10
Manufactured
Home Shipments
================================================
Year Shipments
------------------------------------------------
1996 8,095
------------------------------------------------
1997 9,315
------------------------------------------------
1998 8,611
================================================
Source: Arizona Manufactured Housing Association
New communities are not being developed in the urban areas due to
restrictive zoning ordinances. There is a wide range of rental rates in the
marketplace. Generally speaking, lot rent ranges between $230.00 per month to
$263.00 per month, although several communities are offering 1/2 rent for up a
limited time. Rates varied within some of the communities as lots on a corner,
lots for multi-section homes and larger lots leased for higher than standard
amounts. Typically, services included in the rental rate vary. Overall
occupancy for the eastern portion of the Phoenix Metropolitan area is relatively
stable at approximately 95%; however, approximately 1,900 pads have been added
to the market since 1995. There are approximately 52,200 existing mobile home
site in the Valley and 8,200 sites in the Apache Junction area where recently
three new parks were developed with a total of 550 mobile home pad sites near
the subject south of Highway 60.
LAND AND SITE IMPROVEMENTS
--------------------------
Both sites are irregularly shaped. Denali Park Estates contains
approximately 32.9 acres, or approximately 1,433,124 square feet of gross area.
Apache East Estates contains approximately 16.03 acres or 698,266 square feet.
The tracts are generally level and at grade with the South Tomahawk Road.
Drainage of the tract appears adequate and no adverse soil or subsoil conditions
were observed during the physical inspection of the site. Utility services
connected and in service on the date of valuation include water, electricity and
telephone. Sewer is provided by a septic system.
Roadways arranged to maximize the use of the land access the individual
lots in the community. Roadway improvements include:
Street-bed: South Tomahawk Road is an asphalt paved, two-lane
----------
roadway. The subject streets are asphalt paved 25-foot
wide roadways.
Sidewalks/Curb: There are no sidewalks or curbs along the public
--------------
streets or in the subject.
Street Lights: South Tomahawk Road does not have streetlights. The
-------------
subject park has pole mounted overhead streetlights
along the right of way.
<PAGE>
Land and Site Improvements 11
Landscaping: Sodded and planted areas extend along the entire
-----------
perimeter and throughout the site.
Encumbrances: None Noted
-------------
Easements: Standard utility easements are assumed to exist.
----------
Encroachments: None Noted
--------------
Our review of the deed and county property records did not reveal any
adverse or potentially adverse interests that would affect the utility of the
subject property. Specifically, there are no recorded, or otherwise known
liens, defects in title or adverse easements. There are no rent controls in
effect in Pinal County.
Functional Utility
------------------
The sites, which are irregular in shape and contain approximately 32.9 and
16.03 acres, respectively are large enough to accommodate building improvements
and roadways as well recreational amenities and green areas. The sites are
considered functional for various residential development scenarios. The
current development equates to an overall density of approximately 5.8 units per
acre, which is above current development standards that tend toward larger lot
sizes, wider streets and more green areas.
<PAGE>
12
IMPROVEMENT DESCRIPTION
-----------------------
The subject is improved with 285 manufactured housing community pads,
arranged along streets configured to maximize the available lot spaces. All of
the lots vary slightly in size and the density of the park is equal to 5.8
spaces per acre.
The common area amenities include two clubhouses, two pools and spa,
laundry building, and eight shuffleboard courts. We have not estimated a
separate value for these amenities, or equipment, as they are standard items
found at most manufactured home communities. These amenities are typical,
adequate and functional in use.
Both communities and site improvements were built in 1989. The common
areas, streets, amenities and individual mobile homes were observed to be in
excellent overall condition, having been originally constructed of quality
materials and having been maintained over the years. No significant item of
deferred maintenance was noted and the current maintenance level is rated good.
OWNERSHIP AND PROPERTY HISTORY
------------------------------
The ownership of the subject property is in the name of Windsor Park
Properties 345. The Windsor Corporation purchased the subject property in
February 1997. Prior to the purchase, Denali Park Estates was owned by Denali
Park Estates MHP and Apache East Estates was owned by Apache East Estates MHP.
There have been no other sales or other transfers of the property of which the
appraisers are aware. The subject is currently not listed for sale nor is there
pending offers or current contracts for the sale of the property.
OCCUPANCY
---------
Two fully developed manufactured home communities with 285 total spaces
occupy the property. According to the manager, there are currently 10 vacant
lots and the physical and economic occupancy is 96.5%.
<PAGE>
13
ZONING AND OTHER LAND USE CONTROLS
----------------------------------
The property is zoned MH, Manufactured Housing/Mobile Home. It is our
opinion that the subject property is in conformance with the zoning code.
Flood Hazard
------------
According to Flood Map Community Number 040077, Panel 0125D, dated March 5,
1990, the subject is located in Zone "C", which indicates areas of minimal
flooding.
Environmental
-------------
We observed no obvious areas of contamination on or about the site. We
noted that there is an on-site waster water treatment plant and we have
previously mentioned the spaces that have individual septic systems. We have no
qualifications in environmental hazards and recommend an environmental audit be
performed.
REAL ESTATE ASSESSMENT AND TAXES
--------------------------------
The subject property is identified in the Pinal County records under tax
parcel numbers: 103-22-011C (Denali Park) and 102-20-004F (Apache East). The
Full Cash Value (FCV) of the subject totals $2,350,185 and the Limited Primary
Value (LPV) is $2,350,185. It is our opinion that the subject is under
assessed. This not uncommon for manufactured housing communities since large
parts of the value can be attributed to the entrepreneurial skill in acquiring
the land and filling the community.
Assessed values, for purposes of property taxation are determined on
January 1, of each year. In the state of Arizona, manufactured housing
communities are assessed at 10% of the Full Cash Value and Limited Primary
Value. Properties are reassessed annually and equitability of assessments is
not a basis for assessment in the state of Arizona. Based upon the 1999 levy of
$12.061 per $100 of assessed value for the FCV and $5.9875 for the LPV the
current taxes total $42,419.
In the State of Arizona, property taxes are paid in arrears. Taxes are due
and payable on or before December 31/st/.
<PAGE>
14
MARKETABILITY AND MARKETING PERIOD
----------------------------------
The subject is competitive with other properties in the marketplace and is
marketable, although not considered a candidate for a resident purchase.
Discussions with large institutional manufactured home community investor
representatives and local area realtors, indicated that "properly priced",
stable, well kept manufactured home communities should "be under contract"
within a six month period in today's market.
Our discussions also indicated overall capitalization rates were higher for
all-age communities and dependent upon occupancy and condition. Pricing is
established by processing gross income, reduced by a vacancy and credit loss
factor, operating expenses and an additional capital charge based on overall
condition, is deducted to arrive at a net operating income (NOI). Those surveyed
indicated that at properties not operating at stabilized occupancy, they were
unwilling to compensate a seller for any of the upside to be gained in filling
the property.
Interest rates are low and financial institutions are again willing to lend
money for real estate projects with good occupancies. There has also been
significant institutional investor interest in manufactured home community
investments. In our opinion, the marketing period for the property would be
within the range indicated by the industry participants or six months.
<PAGE>
15
HIGHEST AND BEST USE
--------------------
Highest and Best Use may be defined as: The reasonably probable and legal
use of vacant land or an improved property, which is physically possible,
appropriately supported, financially feasible and which results in the highest
value."/2/
Although the market is relatively stable, approximately 1,900 pads have
been added since 1995 and there are concessions available, therefore, it would
be prudent to develop the 10 acres of excess land with approximately 60
manufactured housing spaces when the economics of development are warranted. We
have considered all of the potential uses to which the subject is legally and
physically adaptable. It is our opinion that the current use of the subject, as
a 285-space, manufactured home community, represents the highest and best use of
the subject.
VALUATION PROCESS
-----------------
There are three recognized approaches to the valuation of real property:
Cost; Income; and, Direct Sales Comparison. The appropriateness of each
approach varies with the type and age of the property under examination, as well
as the quantity and quality of applicable market data as of the appraisal date.
In the analyses and appraisal of the subject, we have considered the positive
and negative aspects of each approach for this specific assignment.
The Cost Approach provides a value indication based on the depreciated cost
of the improvements added to land value. The Income Approach produce an
estimate of value through an economic analysis of the net income derived from
the property and is converted to a capital sum at an appropriate rate. The
Sales Comparison Approach produces an estimate of value through a comparison of
similar properties, which have been transferred in the local market.
In the analysis of a fully occupied manufactured home community, investors
are primarily concerned with cash flow to service any debt and the equity
position. While development costs are important for developing communities,
investors assume that these costs are adequately accounted for in rental levels.
In communities where developers have made money on the sale of mobile homes by
offering low space rental rates, an investor would not be willing to compensate
a seller for any more than the income to be received. The subject is fully
developed with no expansion possibilities, therefore a potential investor would
be primarily interested in the cash flow and equity return and we have excluded
the Cost Approach.
____________________
/2/The Appraisal Institute, The Appraisal of Real Estate, 10th Ed. Chicago: The
----------------------------
Appraisal Institute, 1992, page 275.
<PAGE>
16
INCOME CAPITALIZATION APPROACH
------------------------------
As an introduction to the analysis of the subject it is helpful to identify
the goals and objectives of both buyers and sellers of properties such as the
subject.
From the standpoint of a seller, maximum price is, of course, an initial
goal. Tempered by capital gains considerations and the potential for recapture
of book depreciation accruals, a seller is often forced to consider a negotiated
price that may include such concessions as interim or permanent financing.
Dictated by market forces, the rate, term, and amount of financing may be
favorable, neutral, or unfavorable with respect to the ultimate selling price.
The purchasers of investment realty naturally prefer to pay a minimum price
subject to terms, and within the goal of price minimization seek:
1. Cash flow relative to capital investment measured either on a pre-
income tax or post-income tax basis.
2. Minimal capital investment to permit leverage.
3. Equity build-up through mortgage amortization.
4. Sheltered income through accumulation of book depreciation.
5. Capital accumulation through market appreciation.
The relative importance of the above factors to an investor's formula is
difficult to quantify. Institutional investors, speculators, developers,
financial institutions, and syndicators do not uniformly apply the same
investment strategies. Location, property size, tenant mix, age of the
facility, absence or presence of long term leases, assignability of existing
debt, condition of the facility, level of occupancy, quality of management, and
other related factors are among the criteria that affect the marketability of an
income-producing property in the market.
The first step in the Income Approach to value involves the estimate of
future net operating income to be generated by the subject property. The
estimate of net operating income is derived through the process of estimating
the total potential gross income (PGI from rentals and other sources, less any
vacancy and credit loss producing an effective gross income (EGI) estimate. All
expenses associated with the operation of the property are then deducted to
yield a stabilized net operating income (NOI) estimate.
A survey of the competitive properties is presented in summary form on the
following page.
<PAGE>
RENT COMPARABLE SUMMARY
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
===================================================================================================================================
No. Name Total Monthly Rental Services Amenities
Address Spaces/ Rate Included In
% Occ. Concession Rent
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
1 Coral Sands Home Park 151/ $252.00 to None. Clubhouse, pool with
11425 E. University Drive 96.7% $262.00 spa, laundry and
Apache Junction, Arizona (3 mos. plus shuffleboard.
1,000)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2 Pueblo Mobile Manor MHP 180/ $262.00 to None Clubhouse, pool with
834 S. Meridian 98.3% $274.00 spa, and laundry.
Apache Junction, Arizona (1/2 rent 6 mos.)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3 Quail Run Mobile Home Park 104/ $160.00 None Clubhouse and pool.
S. Tomahawk Road 100%
Apache Junction, Arizona
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4 Silverado Estates Mobile Home Park 129/ $243.55 to Sewer and trash Clubhouse, pool,
2900 W. Superstition 100% $253.55 pick-up. laundry and
Apache Junction, Arizona shuffleboard.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subj. Denali Park Estates and Apache East Estates MHP 285/ $232.00 to Sewer included Clubhouse, pool with
3405 and 3500 S. Tomahawk Road 96.5% $242.00 at Apache East spa, laundry and
Apache Junction, Arizona shuffleboard.
===================================================================================================================================
</TABLE>
<PAGE>
Income Capitalization Approach 18
Income Analysis
---------------
The general market practice is on a base lot rent charged on a monthly
basis. The lot rent in our survey ranged from $160.00 to $274.00 per month, as
indicated by the rent comparables recited in this report. Due to the move-in
special of 1/2 rent for two years there is a wide variance. As shown by our
survey, the subject's lot rents are within the market range. In our forecast of
total rental income, we have projected 12 months at the current rent levels.
Based on the current rent roll, the total monthly rent amounts to $67,350 and
the average monthly rental rate for the 285 units is equivalent to $236.32. The
potential gross income from rentals is $808,200 per year.
Vacancy and Credit Loss
-----------------------
The subject is an all-age community currently 96.5% physically occupied
with 10 of the 285 sites vacant. The market currently ranges from 96.7% to 100%.
We have estimated vacancy at 5.0% of total potential gross income, or $40,410.
RV Income
---------
Denali Park will rent any vacant space to seasonal RV renters while Apache
East does not rent vacant spaces to seasonal renters. RV rent has ranged from
$46.01 per space in 1999 to $120.23 per space in 1998. We have estimated RV
rental income at $50.00 per space, or $14,250 annually.
Utility Income
--------------
Denali Park Estates receives $16.31 for sewer, trash pick-up and for
billing water. All of the utilities are passed through except sewer, which is
included in the rent for Apache East Estates residents. Utility income ranged
from $122.15 per space in 1997 to $148.24 for 1999. We have estimated utility
income at $150.00 per space or $45,600 annually.
Other Income
------------
Additional income is typically derived from sources such as storage fees,
labor charges to the tenants, commissions on sales and rentals of the units.
Historically, the subject has generated from $19.74 per space in 1999 to $32.80
per space in 1997, in other income. We have based our estimate of other income
on the historical levels, estimating this income at $25.00 per space or $7,125
annually.
Effective Gross Income (EGI)
----------------------------
Effective Gross Income is derived from income based upon the current
economic rent less a vacancy and credit loss allowance for present and
anticipated losses due to tenant changes, plus any additional income. Thus
potential gross rental income of $808,200 less a vacancy and credit loss
allowance in the amount of $40,410 or 5.0 produces an effective gross income
from rentals estimate
<PAGE>
Income Capitalization Approach 19
of $767,790. To this we add income derived from other sources, which totals
$64,125, arriving at an effective gross income estimate of $831,915.
=========================================================================
Apache East Estates and Denali Manufactured Housing Community
Effective Gross Income
==========================================================================
Gross Potential Rental Income:
Monthly Monthly
Spaces Rent Total Annualized
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
123 $ 242.00 $ 29,766 $ 357,192
162 232.00 37,584 451,008
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
285 $ 67,350 $ 808,200
Less:
Vacancy & Credit Loss 5.0% (40,410)
----------
Effective Gross Income From Lot Rentals $ 767,790
RV Rent $ 50.00 $ 14,250
Utility Income $ 150.00 42,750
Other Income $ 25.00 7,125
----------
Effective Gross Income $ 831,915
==========================================================================
<PAGE>
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
====================================================================================================================================
Denali Park and Apache East Manufactured Housing Summary of Historical Operations Combined
Pct. of $ Per Pct. of $ Per Pct. of $ Per
1997 Income Space 1998 Income Space 1999 Income Space
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C>
Income:
Rents $ 479,486 90.46% $ 1,682.41 $ 606,686 93.66% $ 2,128.72 $ 704,379 100.78% $ 2,471.51
Free Rent -13,133 -2.48% -46.08 -39,612 -6.12% -138.99 -66,456 -9.51% -233.18
RV Rent 19,512 3.68% 68.46 34,266 5.29% 120.23 13,113 1.88% 46.01
Utility Income 34,814 6.57% 122.15 39,310 6.07% 137.93 42,249 6.04% 148.24
Miscellaneous/Other 9,349 1.76% 32.80 7,070 1.09% 24.81 5,625 0.80% 19.74
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Income $ 530,028 100.00% 1,859.75 $ 647,720 100.00% $ 2,272.70 $ 698,910 100.00% $ 2,452.32
Expenses:
Insurance 3,239 0.61% 11.36 3,804 0.59% 13.35 5,850 0.84% 20.53
Office 38,327 7.23% 134.48 57,758 8.92% 202.66 50,427 7.22% 176.94
Maintenance & Supplies 26,533 5.01% 93.10 30,610 4.73% 107.40 31,913 4.57% 111.98
Management Expense 25,900 4.89% 90.88 31,819 4.91% 111.65 34,945 5.00% 122.61
Wages & Benefits 62,174 11.73% 218.15 85,708 13.23% 300.73 65,029 9.30% 228.17
Property Taxes 41,140 7.76% 144.35 41,564 6.42% 145.84 41,395 5.92% 145.25
Utilities 77,581 14.64% 272.21 86,870 13.41% 304.81 83,588 11.96% 293.29
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Expenses $ 274,894 51.86% $ 964.54 $ 338,133 52.20% $ 1,186.43 $ 313,147 44.81% $ 1,098.76
Net Operating Income $ 255,134 48.14% $ 895.21 $ 309,587 47.80% $ 1,086.27 $ 385,763 55.19% $ 1,353.55
====================================================================================================================================
</TABLE>
<PAGE>
Income Capitalization Approach 21
Operating Expense Analysis
--------------------------
Insurance: Historically, this expense has exhibited a increasing trend. Our
---------
estimate of this expense has been stabilized based on the historical amounts, or
$20.00 per space per year. This is equal to $5,700 annually or approximately
0.69% of the effective gross income.
Administrative/Office: Historically, this expense has varied since 1997. In the
---------------------
financial statements, this expense does include some corporate expense items,
which we have not considered. We have stabilized our estimate of this expense at
$175.00 per space per year, which is equal to $49,875 or approximately 6.00% of
the estimated effective gross income.
Maintenance and Repair: Historically, this expense has increased slightly. We
----------------------
have based our estimate on the indicated historical trend at $110.00 per space
per year or $31,350 annually, believed adequate to properly maintain the
community. This amount is equal to approximately 3.77% of the estimated
effective gross income.
Management Fees: This expense typically includes off-site management, the
---------------
oversight of the on-site manager and monthly bookkeeping functions. We used a
rate of 5% of the effective gross income estimate, typical in the market place,
equal to $41,596 or $145.95 per space per year.
Wages and Benefits: Historically, this expense has varied. We have based our
------------------
estimate on the historical data at $250.00 per space per year or $71,250, which
is equal to 8.56% of the estimated effective gross income.
Property Taxes: This category is project specific due to location. Based on our
--------------
analysis of the historical tax trends, we have estimated the tax liability to be
$45,000. This equates to $157.89 per space per year or approximately 5.41% of
the estimated effective gross income.
Utilities: The residents are billed for water and trash pick-up at Denali Park,
---------
but all of the utilities are passed through at Apache East Estates. Historically
this expense has varied since 1997. We have estimated the utility expense at
$300.00 per space per year. The expense is expected to cover the cost of water,
trash pick-up and the utility expense related to the common area. This is equal
to $85,500, or approximately 10.28% of the estimated effective gross income.
Reserves: This expense category represents the inclusion of set-asides for
--------
major recurring or capital type expenditures experienced periodically by any
property. We have used $25.00 per space per year, believed adequate to cover
future capital costs. This equates to $7,125 annually or 0.86% of (EGI).
Total Expenses: To summarize, we have stabilized total operating expenses for
--------------
the subject property at $337,396. This estimate is equal to 40.56% of the
Effective Gross Income (EGI) estimate or $1183.84 per space per year. As shown,
expenses have historically ranged between 44.81% (1999) and 52.20% (1998).
<PAGE>
Income Capitalization Approach 22
================================================================================
Apache East Estates and Denali Manufactured Housing Community
Stabilized Operating Statement
% of $ per
Amount EGI Space
================================================================================
Total Effective Gross Income $ 831,915 100.00% $ 2,919.00
Expenses
Insurance $ 5,700 0.69% 20.00
Office 49,875 6.00% 175.00
Maintenance & Repairs 31,350 3.77% 110.00
Management Expense 41,596 5.00% 145.95
Wages & Benefits 71,250 8.56% 250.00
Property Taxes 45,000 5.41% 157.89
Utilities 85,500 10.28% 300.00
Reserves 7,125 0.86% 25.00
----------------------------------
Total Expenses $ 337,396 40.56% $ 1,183.84
Net Operating Income $ 494,519 59.44% $ 1,735.16
================================================================================
<PAGE>
Income Capitalization Approach 23
Selection of a Capitalization Rate
----------------------------------
Direct capitalization of terminal net operating income by an overall
capitalization rate extracted from the market provides an excellent indication
of market value. Purchasers of manufactured home communities most often utilize
this method. This method is easily understood, closely related to the market,
and convincing if the overall rates abstracted from recent sales are from
comparable sale properties and accurate income data are available.
Market Data
-----------
The comparable sale data indicated an overall capitalization rate between
8.22% and 10.30%. The data indicates a narrow range in overall capitalization
rates, which tend to be influenced by the size of the community, its occupancy,
expense ratio, age and condition, amenity package and location.
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
===============================================================================================
Sale Sale Date Vacancy Rate Expense Ratio Overall Rate
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
1 February 1999 3.0% 32.2% 9.78%
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2 February 1999 7.0% 35.0% 9.00%
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3 December 1998 1.0% 29.5% 10.30%
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4 June 1998 1.96% 35.6% 8.22%
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5 January 1998 5.0% 25.6% 9.00%
===============================================================================================
</TABLE>
The subject has a market vacancy and expense ratio. Sale Comparable 1, 4
and 5 are located near the subject in Mesa, however, Sale 1 is an older
property. Sales 2 and 3 were located in Tucson and inferior in location, quality
and amenities. Comparable 4 and 5 are similar in condition. These properties
had a slightly higher rental rate and Mesa is considered superior in location to
Apache Junction due to its proximity to Phoenix. Based on these considerations,
we have concluded an overall capitalization rate of 9.0%.
Debt Coverage Ratio Method
--------------------------
We have also developed an overall rate through the Debt Coverage Ratio
analysis. Current commercial lending policies indicate a mortgage loan of 75%
of market value, based on a 20-year amortization schedule at an annual interest
rate of 8.00%, which yields an annual mortgage constant of 10.037%. A minimum
debt coverage ratio (DCR) of 1.25 to 1.00 would likely be required for a
property similar to the subject. Based on these assumptions an overall
capitalization rate has been developed, as presented below:
<PAGE>
Income Capitalization Approach 24
<TABLE>
<S> <C> <C> <C>
=================================================================================================
M F DCR OAR
X X =
Loan to Value Ratio Mortgage Constant Debt Coverage Ratio Overall Rate
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0.75 0.10037 1.20 0.09033
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rounded 9.0%
=================================================================================================
</TABLE>
The Debt Coverage Ratio method indicated a capitalization rate based upon
financing by local banks. However, as the popularity of manufactured home
community investments has increased, alternate sources of financing have become
available through insurance companies and conduit programs.
The rate via the debt coverage ratio is supportive of the rate concluded
from the market data. Our estimate of the market value of the subject, indicated
by the Income Capitalization Approach, is calculated as follows:
Net Operating Income Overall Capitalization Rate Market Value
$494,519 divided by 0.09 $5,494,658
Excess Land Valuation
---------------------
As discussed in the Highest Best Use Analysis, the present density of the
subject is 5.8 units per acre and there is approximately 10 acres of excess
land. The manager indicated approximately 60 spaces could be developed.
Although we were unable to confirm with Pinal County the number of additional
spaces that would be allowed, we have gathered two recent land sales in order to
estimate the value of the excess land. So that a conclusion from the analysis of
the sales data can be drawn, a unit of comparison is commonly selected.
Calculation of a unit of comparison provides a common denominator by which the
market sales can be related to each other and to the subject property. The
commonly accepted unit of comparison in the valuation of manufactured housing
tracts of vacant land is the sale price per space; however, when the density is
not defined, the sale price per square foot is utilized.
The sales selected for direct comparison should be those transactions that
are most similar to the subject. Adjustments are made to the comparables for
any dissimilar features, leading to an indication of the price at which the
property appraised could be expected to sell. In this analysis, all relevant
factors were considered, including:
1. Locational dissimilarities and the nature of surrounding development.
<PAGE>
Income Capitalization Approach 25
2. Availability of competing sites.
3. Physical features such as frontage, shape, depth, access, topography,
water and tree coverage, and plot size.
4. Availability of utilities and site preparation costs.
5. Effect of time on selling prices.
6. Zoning.
Numerous sales of vacant land were investigated. Our investigation
revealed two recent transactions for mobile home development or related
residential development in the East Valley. Demand for development land
subsided and few manufactured housing community land sales occurred. Therefore,
we utilized local development land with similar locational and use
characteristics. Two land sales have been identified on the following pages.
Based on our investigation these are considered the most significant
transactions.
<PAGE>
SUMMARY OF LAND SALES
---------------------
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Land
Sale No. Location Grantor/ Sale Sale Area/ Sale Price/
Grantee Date Price Acres SqFt
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C>
1 56/th/ Street, South of Main Street Pueblo Seco (LLC)/ Saxton 5/98 $850,000 13.972 $1.40
Mesa, Maricopa County, Arizona Incorporated
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2 71 MHP Sites Piedmont Investments/ AMT 5/97 $660,000 16.066 $0.94
NW of Southern & Crimson Rd. Development Co. LLC
Mesa, Maricopa County, Arizona
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
</TABLE>
<PAGE>
Income Capitalization Approach 27
Comparable Sale Number One is the May 1998 sale of a 13.972-acre tract of
land for $850,000. This property is located on 56th Street, south of Main in
Mesa, Arizona. The property is zoned PAD and is classified as residential. The
sale price is equivalent to $1.40 per foot. A downward adjustment was made to
this sale for location. The indicated price per square foot for the subject was
$0.98.
Comparable Sale Number Two is the May 1997 sale of a 16.066-acre tract of
land for $660,000. This property is within a couple of miles west of the
subject. The property is to be developed with 71 manufactured housing spaces.
The sale price is equivalent to $9,296 per available space, or $0.94 per square
foot. A slight downward adjustment was made for location. No other adjustments
were appropriate. The indicated price per square foot for the subject was $0.89.
Based on the indicated value produced through the adjustment of the three
land sales, it is our opinion that the "as is" market value of the subject land
is equivalent to $0.90 per square foot, as indicated by the available sale data
which ranged between $0.89 and $0.98 per space after adjustments. Our estimate
is further supported by our discussions with those knowledgeable with
manufactured housing development. Based on the total development potential of
10 acres, we have estimated the value of the excess land at $0.90 per square
foot, or $390,000, rounded.
The value conclusion of the subject property with excess land via the
direct capitalization method is summarized as follows:
$5,494,658 + $390,000 = $5,884,658
Rounded $5,900,000
<PAGE>
SALES COMPARISON APPROACH
-------------------------
The fundamental premise of the Sales Comparison Approach is the concept
that the analysis of sales of reasonably similar properties provides an
appraiser with empirical data from which observations and conclusions about the
property being appraised can be made. Proper application of the approach
requires that:
1. Only market transactions be weighed, and the data of each transaction
be confirmed to the greatest extent possible.
2. The degree of comparability of each sale to the subject be considered;
differences in physical, functional, and economic characteristics be
noted; and adjustments for the differences be made.
3. The value conclusion is consistent with the analysis of the sales
data.
So that a conclusion from the analysis of the sales data can be drawn, a
unit of comparison has been selected. Calculation of a unit of comparison
provides a common denominator by which the market sales can be related to each
other and to the subject property. The commonly accepted unit of comparison in
the valuation of manufactured home communities is the selling price per space.
While a diverse array of transactions was initially considered, the sales
selected for direct comparison to the subject are those transactions that are
most similar to the subject. For dissimilar features adjustments are made
indicating the price at which the subject could be expected to sell. In making
adjustments, all relevant factors were considered including:
1. Nature of surrounding development.
2. Size.
3. Availability of competing properties.
4. Effect of time on selling prices.
5. Age and condition of the improvements.
Based on our investigation, the following sales are of adult and all age
communities are the most significant transactions for direct comparison with the
subject.
<PAGE>
Summary of Sale Comparables
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
===================================================================================================================================
No. Name Sale Price/ Total Price/ Average E.G.I.M./ O.A.R.
Address Sale Date Spaces/ Space Lot Rent Expense %
(Adj. For Cash Occupancy
Equivalency)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C>
1 Mesa Dunes Mobile Home Park $9,500,000 451/ $21,064 $235.00 6.94/ 9.78%
7807 E. Main Street February 1999 97.0% 32.16%
Mesa, Maricopa County, Arizona
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2 Cactus Garden Mobile Home Park $1,685,000 75/ $22,467 $200.00 7.22/ 9.0%
2333 W. Irvington Place May 1999 93.0% 35.0%
Tucson, Pima County, Arizona
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3 El Molina Mobile Home Park $1,675,000 103/ $16,262 $200.00 6.84/ 10.3%
1552 W. Miracle Mile May 1999 99.0% 29.02%
Tucson, Pima County, Arizona
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4 Sierra Mobile Manor Park $5,100,000 203/ $25,123 $233.00 7.83/ 8.22%
9431 E. Coralbel Avenue June 1998 98.04% 35.62%
Mesa, Pima County, Arizona
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5 Silver Spur Mobile Home Park $5,600,000 185/ $30,270 $278.00 8.27/ 9.0%
9333 E. University Drive January 1998 95.0% 25.55%
Mesa, Pima County, Arizona
==================================================================================================================================
</TABLE>
<PAGE>
Sales Comparison Approach 30
As previously stated, the Sales Comparison Approach involves investigating
recent transfers of properties similar to the subject. The properties, which
have been compared to the subject, have been discussed below:
Sale Comparable Number One is a 451-space adult community is located in
Mesa, Arizona. The property sold for $9,500,000 in May 1999. The price equates
to a sale price per space of $16,981. Based on an effective gross income of
$1,368,869, the EGIM was 6.94. The expenses represented 32.16% of the effective
gross income and the indicated overall capitalization rate was 9.78%, based on a
net operating income of $928,665. This pro forma was estimated utilizing 97.0%
occupancy. The comparable is superior in location to the subject, but older.
Sale Comparable Number Two is Cactus Garden Mobile Home Park located in
Tucson, Arizona. This 75-space all age community sold for $1,685,000 in May
1999, which resulted in a sale price per space of $22,467. Based on an
effective gross income of $233,308, the EGIM was 7.22. The overall rate was
9.0%. The average lot rent at the time of sale was approximately $200.00.
Sale Comparable Number Three, El Molina Mobile Home Park, is located in
Tucson, Arizona. The all age property sold for $1,675,000 in May 1999. This
price equates to a sale price per space of $16,262. Based on an effective gross
income of $244,728, the EGIM was 6.84. The overall rate was 10.3%. The average
lot rent at the time of sale was approximately $200.00.
Sale Comparable Number Four is Sierra Mobile Home Park located in Mesa,
Arizona. This 203-space adult community sold for $5,100,000 in June 1998. This
resulted in a sale price per space of $25,123. Based on an effective gross
income of $651,306, the EGIM was 7.83. The overall rate was 8.22%. Six lots
were vacant at sale, but pro forma utilized a 1.96-% vacancy factor. The average
lot rent at the time of sale was approximately $233.00.
Sale Comparable Number Five, Silver Spur Mobile Home Park, is located in
Mesa, Arizona. The property contains 185 spaces and the sale price was
$5,600,000. The price equates to a sale price per space of $30,270. Based on
the buyer's Pro-forma, the effective gross income of $677,000 indicated an EGIM
was 8.27. The expenses were estimated at 25.55% of the effective gross income
and the indicated overall capitalization rate was 10.6%, based on a net
operating income of $175,096. This community was 100% occupied at the date of
sale, but a 5% vacancy factor was applied. The average rent was $278.00 per
month plus $5.00 for trash collection.
All of the sales were fee simple transactions, with no abnormal financing.
There were no abnormal sale conditions known to have occurred and all of the
sales represent transactions that have taken place over the last nine months,
having traded under similar market conditions.
Other adjustments, typically considered, are location, amenities, age and
condition, occupancy, etc., and are reflected in the average lot rent. A tenant
is typically willing, absent other factors, to pay more lot rent for a better
located, newer community. This also holds true for
<PAGE>
Sales Comparison Approach 31
amenities, age and other factors. The average lot rent reflects, in most cases,
the market perception of a property's position in the marketplace. It is also
typical that lot rent increases contribute to increases in net operating income.
Alternatively, we have employed the Effective Gross Income Multiplier (EGIM), in
this analysis.
The Effective Gross Income Multiplier for the comparable sale properties
ranged between 6.84 and 8.27. As previously discussed, the EGIM is essentially
a function of the average lot rent. The average lot rent is a function of the
physical aspects of the property, such as age and condition, location and
amenities. EGIM's also reflect the market's perception of the potential for
future rent increases.
The subject is an adult community with a 3.5% physical vacancy. The
subject was observed to be in excellent condition and has a good location in
near Superstition Freeway in Apache Junction, Arizona. The comparables all had
a much higher occupancy rate than at the subject and the expense ratios are
lower, ranging from 25.55% to 35.62%. By comparison, the subject has a forecast
expense ratio of 40.56%. Based on these considerations, we have concluded an
EGIM slightly below the indicated range, processing the subject's Effective
Gross Income of $831,915 with an EGIM of 6.50.
Thus $831,915 x 6.5 is $5,406,798
On a per space basis, this is equivalent to $18,971.
The value conclusion of the subject property with excess land via the sales
comparison method is summarized as follows:
$5,406,798 + $390,000 = $5,796,798
Rounded $5,800,000
<PAGE>
32
FINAL ESTIMATE OF VALUE
-----------------------
The two approaches to value applied in the subject analysis yielded these
conclusions:
Income Capitalization Approach $5,800,000
Sales Comparison Approach $5,900,000
Depending on the circumstances of an appraisal, the two approaches to value
apply to various degrees. The income capitalization approach indicates the
amount at which a prudent investor might be interested in acquiring the
property. The sales comparison approach reflects demand and reasonable selling
price expectancy as evidenced by sales of similar properties.
In the reconciliation, we reviewed each approach to value (a) to ascertain
the reliability of the data and (b) to weight the approach that best represented
the actions of typical users and investors in the marketplace.
The income capitalization approach depends on the principles of
substitution and anticipation. This approach postulates that the value of a
property derives from the net income the property will produce during its
economic life. Investors in the market predicate their decisions on economic
factors oriented to the market and concern themselves with net income and its
durability. The income capitalization approach synthesizes the capitalized
return to and of the improvements and to the land. In the current instance, the
availability of sufficient reliable and supportable historical data for the
subject, made the income capitalization approach a reliable gage of the market
value of the subject.
The sales comparison approach uses a number of value indicators, both
physical and economic, including investors' strategies and attitudes reflected
in documented market transactions. The principle of substitution is the basis of
this approach, which states that a prudent investor will pay no more to buy a
property than the cost to buy a comparable substitute property. In the valuation
of the subject property, the sales comparison approach was considered reliable.
The two approaches reflect a narrow range of value. Our opinion of value
is based on the Income Approach, as buyers are most concerned with cash flow to
service debt. Our opinion of the market value of the subject, based on a
reasonable exposure period of six months, as of May 1, 2000 was:
- FIVE MILLION NINE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS -
($5,900,000)
<PAGE>
33
CERTIFICATION
-------------
I certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:
. The statements of fact in this report are true and correct.
. The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions are limited only by
the reported assumptions and limiting conditions and is 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 on 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.
. To the best of my knowledge and belief, the reported analyses,
opinions, and conclusions were developed and this report was prepared
in conformity with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal
Practice of the Appraisal Foundation, the Code of Professional Ethics,
and the Standards of Professional Practice of the Appraisal Institute.
. The use of this report is subject to the requirements of the Appraisal
Institute relating to review by its duly authorized representatives.
. As of the date of this report, L. Drake Moore, MAI, CCIM has completed
the requirements under the continuing education program of the
Appraisal Institute.
. L. Drake Moore, MAI, CCIM has made a personal inspection of the
property that is the subject of this report.
. John H. Whitcomb, MAI, CCIM provided significant professional
assistance to the person signing this report.
. I am in compliance with the competency provisions of the Uniform
Standards of professional Appraisal Practice of the Appraisal
Foundation.
. This appraisal assignment was not based on a requested minimum value,
specific value, or the approval of a loan.
/s/ L. Drake Moore JAG
L. Drake Moore, MAI, CCIM
St. Cert. Gen. REA #TP40569
<PAGE>
34
ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS
-----------------------------------
The primary assumptions and limiting conditions pertaining to the conclusion in
this report are summarized below.
To the best of our knowledge and belief, the statements of facts contained in
the appraisal report, upon which the analysis and conclusion expressed are
based, are true and correct. Information, estimates and opinions furnished to
us and contained in the report or utilized in the formation of the value
conclusion were obtained from sources considered reliable and believed to be
true and correct. However, no representation, liability or warranty for the
accuracy of such items is assumed by or imposed on us, and is subject to
corrections, errors, omissions and withdrawal without notice.
The legal description of the appraised property, as exhibited in the report is
assumed correct.
The valuation may not be used in conjunction with any other appraisal or study.
The value conclusion stated in this appraisal is based on the program of
utilization described in the report, and may not be separated into parts. The
appraisal was prepared solely for the purpose and party so identified in the
Purpose and Function of the Report. The appraisal report may not be reproduced,
in whole or in part, and the findings of the report may not be utilized by a
third party for any purpose, without the written consent of Whitcomb Real
Estate.
No change of any item in any of the appraisal report shall be made by anyone
other than Whitcomb Real Estate and we shall have no responsibility for any such
unauthorized change.
The property has been appraised as though free and clear of mortgages, liens,
leases, servitudes and encumbrances, except as may be described in the
appraisal.
We are not required to give testimony or to be in attendance at any court or
administrative proceeding with reference to the property appraised unless
additional compensation is agreed to and prior arrangements have been made.
Unless specifically stated, the value conclusion contained in the appraisal
applies to the real estate only, and does not include personal property,
machinery and equipment, trade fixtures, business value, goodwill or other non-
realty items. Income tax considerations have not been included or valued unless
so specified in the appraisal. We make no representations as to the value
changes which may be attributed to such considerations.
Neither all nor any part of the contents of the report shall be disseminated or
referred to the public through advertising, public relations, news or sales
media, or any other public means of communication or referenced in any
publication, including any private or public offerings including buy not limited
to those filed with Securities and Exchange Commission or other governmental
agency, without the prior written consent and approval of and review by Whitcomb
Real Estate.
<PAGE>
Assumptions and Limiting Conditions 35
In completing the appraisal, it is understood and agreed that the report are not
now intended, and will not be used in connection with a real estate syndication.
Good and marketable title to the interest being appraised is assumed. We are
not qualified to render an "opinion of title," and no responsibility is assumed
or accepted for matters of a legal nature affecting the property being
appraised. No formal investigation of legal title was made, and we render no
opinion as to ownership of the property or condition of its title.
Unless otherwise noted in the appraisal, it is assumed that there are no
encroachments, zoning, building, fire or safety code violations, or restrictions
of any type affecting the subject property. It is assumed that the property is
in full compliance with all applicable federal, state, local and private codes,
laws, consents, licenses and regulations, and that all licenses, permits,
certificates, approvals, franchises, etc. have been secured and can be freely
renewed and/or transferred to a purchaser.
It is assumed that the utilization of the land and any improvements are within
the boundaries or property lines of the property described, and that there are
no encroachments, easements, trespass, etc., unless noted within the report. We
have not made a survey of the property, and no responsibility is assumed
concerning any matter that may be disclosed by a proper survey. If a subsequent
survey should reflect a differing land area and/or frontages, we reserve the
right to review our final value estimate.
All maps, plats, building diagrams, site plans, floor plans, photographs, etc.
incorporated into the appraisal are for illustrative purposes only, to assist
the reader in visualizing the property, but are not guaranteed to be exact.
Dimensions and descriptions are based on public records and/or information
furnished by others, and is not meant for use as a reference in legal matters of
survey.
Management is assumed to be competent, and the ownership to be in responsible
hands. The quality of property management can have a direct effect on a
property's economic viability and value. The financial projection contained in
the appraisal assumes responsible ownership and competent management. Any
variance from this assumption could have a significant impact on the final value
estimate.
We assume that there are no hidden or unapparent conditions of the property's
soil, subsoil or structures, which would render them more or less valuable. No
responsibility is assumed for such conditions, or for engineering which might be
required to discover such factors. Detailed soil studies were not made
available to us, so statements regarding soil qualities, if made in the report,
are not conclusive but have been considered consistent with information
available to us and provided by others. In addition, unless stated otherwise in
the appraisal, the land and soil of the area under appraisement appears firm and
solid, but the appraisal does not warrant this condition.
The appraisal report covering the subject is limited to surface rights only, and
does not include any inherent subsurface or mineral rights.
The appraisal is made for valuation purposes only. It is not intended nor to be
construed to be an engineering report. We are not qualified as structural or
environmental engineers and we are not qualified to judge the structural and
environmental integrity of the improvements, if any. Consequently, no warranty,
representations or liability are assumed for the structural soundness, quality,
adequacy or capacities of said improvements and utility services, including the
construction materials, particularly the roof, foundations, and equipment,
including the HVAC systems, if applicable. Should there be any question
concerning them, it is strongly recommended that an Engineering, Construction,
and/or Environmental inspection be obtained.
<PAGE>
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
I. DENALI ESTATES LEGAL DESCRIPTION
-----------------------------------
PARCEL NO. 1:
The South half of the Northwest quarter of the Southwest quarter of Section 34,
Township 1 North, Range 8 East, Gila and Salt River Base and Meridian, Pinal
County, Arizona.
TOGETHER WITH a right of reasonable access to Tomahawk Drive as shown on the
maps and plans of Project F-028-1 in the office of the State Engineer, Phoenix,
Arizona.
EXCEPTING all coal, oil, gas and other mineral deposits, as reserved unto the
United State of America in the Patent of said land.
PARCEL NO. 2:
The North half of the Northwest quarter of the Southwest quarter of Section 34,
Township 1 North, Range 8 East, Gila and Salt River Base and Meridian, Pinal
County, Arizona.
EXCEPT the following described parcels:
BEGINNING at the Northwest corner of said Northwest quarter of the Southwest
quarter of Section 34,
THENCE run Easterly along the North line, a distance of 558.5 feet;
THENCE Southerly, parallel to the West line 234 feet;
THENCE Westerly parallel to the North line, 558.5 feet;
THENCE Northerly, parallel to the West line, to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
ALSO EXCEPT, BEGINNING 234 feet South of the Northwest corner of said Northwest
quarter of the Southwest quarter of Section 34;
THENCE South 200.00 feet along the West section line;
THENCE East parallel to the North line 435.6 feet;
THENCE North 200 feet parallel to the West section line;
THENCE West 435.6 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING.
ALSO EXCEPT, BEGINNING at the Northwest corner of said Northwest quarter of the
Southwest quarter of Section 34,
THENCE run Easterly along the North line of said Northwest quarter of the
Southwest quarter a distance of 558.5 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING;
13
<PAGE>
THENCE Westerly parallel to the North line a distance of 186.1 feet;
THENCE Northerly, along the East line, to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
ALSO EXCEPTING:
TRACT 1:
-------
That portion of the Northwest quarter of the Southwest quarter of Section 34,
Township 1 North, Range 8 East, Gila and Salt River Base and Meridian, Pinal
County, Arizona, which lies Northerly of the following described line:
BEGINNING at a point on the West line of said Section 34, which point bears
South 0 degrees 06 minutes 00 seconds East 434.00 feet from the West quarter
corner of said Section 34;
THENCE North 89 degrees 54 minutes 00 seconds East 56.99 feet;
THENCE North 7 degrees 01 minutes 37 seconds East 346.63 feet;
THENCE North 86 degrees 16 minutes 50 seconds East 1103.58 feet to the POINT
OF ENDING on the North line of said Northwest quarter of the Southwest quarter
of Section 34.
TRACT 2:
-------
That portion of the Northwest quarter of the Southwest quarter of Section 34,
Township 1 North, Range 8 East, Gila and Salt River Base and Meridian, Pinal
County, Arizona, which lies within the following described tract of land;
BEGINNING at the West quarter corner of said Section 34;
THENCE South 0 degrees 06 minutes 00 seconds East along the West line thereof, a
distance of 434.00 feet;
THENCE North 89 degrees 54 minutes 00 seconds East 50.00 feet to the TRUE POINT
OF BEGINNING on the existing Easterly right of way line of Tomahawk Drive;
THENCE continuing North 89 degrees 57 minutes 30 seconds East 360.00 feet;
THENCE North 0 degrees 06 minutes 00 seconds West 200.00 feet;
THENCE North 89 degrees 57 minutes 30 seconds East 197.90 feet;
THENCE South 0 degrees 06 minutes 00 seconds East 50.00 feet;
THENCE South 89 degrees 57 minutes 30 seconds West 147.90 feet;
THENCE South 0 degrees 06 minutes 00 seconds East 200.00 feet;
14
<PAGE>
THENCE South 89 degrees 57 minutes 30 seconds West 410.60 feet to the aforesaid
existing Easterly right of way line;
THENCE North 0 degrees 06 minutes 00 seconds West along said existing Easterly
right of way line, a distance of 50.00 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
EXCEPTING all coal, oil, gas and other mineral deposits, as reserved unto the
United States of America in the Patent of said land.
II. APACHE ESTATES LEGAL DESCRIPTION
--------------------------------
The South 594 feet of the Northeast quarter of the Southeast quarter of Section
33 Township 1 North, Range 8 East, Gila and Salt River Base and Meridian, Pinal
County, Arizona.
EXCEPT the South 30 feet and the West 30 feet thereof.
15
<PAGE>
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
<PAGE>
[AREA MAP APPEARS HERE]
<PAGE>
[NEIGHBORHOOD MAP APPEARS HERE]
<PAGE>
[RENT COMPARABLE LOCATION MAP APPEARS HERE]
<PAGE>
[SALE COMPARABLE LOCATION MAP APPEARS HERE]
<PAGE>
PROFILE OF APPRAISER
<PAGE>
PROFILE OF APPRAISER
L. DRAKE MOORE, MAI
St.Cert. Gen. REA #1321098-G
REAL ESTATE EXPERIENCE
----------------------
Appraiser
Whitcomb Real Estate
Tampa, FL
Specialize in complex real estate valuations and consulting projects.
Property types include manufactured home communities, recreational vehicle
parks, self-storage facilities, hotels, manufacturing plants, office
buildings, retail buildings and other types of commercial establishments as
well as special use facilities. Mr. Moore has also owned and operated the
L.D. Moore Company, a commercial appraisal firm in Dallas, Texas since
1991.
Senior Appraiser/Manager
Marshall and Stevens, Inc.
Dallas, TX and Tampa, FL
Specialized in preparing appraisals for land and buildings in industrial,
commercial and residential uses. Performed appraisals for purposes of
sale/purchase, property tax appeals, syndication, financing and allocation
of purchase price. December 1988 to September 1990.
Appraiser
Appraisal & Acquisition, Inc.
Lakeworth, Florida
Prepared appraisals on hotels and other commercial properties for purposes
of sale/purchase, property tax appeals, financing and allocation of
purchase price. September 1987 to December 1988.
Appraiser
Laventhol & Horwath
Dallas, Texas
Specialized in preparation of appraisals on hotel and commercial
properties. Performed appraisals for purposes of sale/purchase, financing
and allocation of purchase price. September 1985 to September 1987.
<PAGE>
Profile of the Appraiser
BANKING EXPERIENCE
------------------
Vice President
BF Saul Mortgage Company
Arlington, Texas
Managed branch office and originated non-conforming single-family mortgages
in addition to investor and commercial mortgages loans for BF Saul and
Chevy Chase Savings. March 1983 to 1985.
PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS
-------------------------
MAI, Member Appraisal Institute
State Certified General Real Estate Appraiser
Florida #0002401
Georgia #004008
Texas #1321098-G
Real Estate Broker License
Florida #0512812
Texas #0283892
PARTIAL LIST OF CLIENTS AND PROPERTIES
--------------------------------------
Apartments
----------
Candlelight Lenexa, KS Oaktree Square Grandview, MS
Cedars Irving, Texas Pineridge Arlington, TX
Claridge Dallas, TX Regency Cove Tampa, FL
Elmwood West Palm Beach, FL Parkwood Broken Arrow, OK
Hunters Glen Kansas City, KS Santa Fe Village Kansas City, MS
Monticeto Austin, TX Towne Oaks Austin, TX
Manufactured Home Communities and Recreational Vehicle Parks
------------------------------------------------------------
Aberdeen Ormond Beach, FL Oak Hills Kyle, TX
Aztec Kyle, Texas Ramblewood Barnwell, SC
Boulevard Estates Pasadena, TX Regency Cove Tampa, FL
Casa del Monte West Palm Beach, FL Rolling Meadows Columbia, SC
Carolina Village Concorde, NC Rose Bay Port Orange, FL
Denton West Denton, TX Tropic Isles Palmetto, FL
Dessau Austin, TX Victoria Lakes Lexington, SC
<PAGE>
Profile of Appraiser
Hacienda Village New Port Richey, FL Villa del Sol Bradenton, FL
Hermitage Farms Camden, SC Windsor City Sumter, SC
Self-Storage Facilities
-----------------------
American Self Storage Charlotte, NC American Self Storage Ocala, FL
American Self Storage Monroe, NC Extra Closet Ft Lauderdale, FL
American Self Storage Newel, NC
American Self Storage Stallings, NC
Hotels/Resorts
--------------
114-Room Ambassador Plaza, Dallas, TX
420-Room Excelsior Hotel, Little Rock, AR
121-Room Lexington Park Suites, Memphis, TN
160-Room Ramada Inn, Kingsland, GA
71-Room Best Western, Guymon, OK
Office Buildings
----------------
AMI Medical Houston, TX Medical Park Hope, AR
Barnett Bank North Palm Beach, FL Okeechobee Commerce W Palm Beach, FL
Carteret Savings Del Ray Beach, FL United Bank Roswell, NM
Enron Houston, TX Schindler Corporate Morris, NJ
Harolds Dallas, TX Texarkana Medical Arts Texarkana, TX
First South Little Rock, AR QVC Network Plymounth, MN
First Union Atlanta, GA
Industrial
----------
American Lantern McKenzie, TN Falcco Lime Boca Raton, FL
American Lantern Newport, AR High Ridge Commerce Boynton Beach, FL
Campbell Soup Paris, TX John Rust Albuquerque, NM
Carrington Irving, TX Lake Pointe Centre Boca Raton, FL
<PAGE>
Profile of Appraiser
Clients List
------------
Bank of America Heller Financial
Barnett Bank Heron Financial
Belgravia Capital Hewlett Packard
Circuit City Internal Revenue Service
Citicorp Real Estate Lexington Hotel
Collateral Mortgage Lincoln Property
CoreStates Financial Corporation NationsBank
Credit Suisse First Boston Nomura Securities
FINOVA Capital Meyers Group (The)
First Union Corporation National Realty Advisors
GE Capital PA Holdings/Whitman Corporation
Goldman Sachs QVC
Greentree Financial Sullivan Development
EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND
----------------------
University of Texas, B.A.
American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers
The Appraisal Institute
Commercial Investment Real Estate Institute
<PAGE>
State of Arizona
Board of Appraisal
BE IT KNOWN THAT
LAWRENCE D. MOORE
HAS MET ALL THE REQUIREMENTS AS A
TEMPORARY
Certified General Real Estate Appraiser
In accordance with Arizona Revised In witness whereof the Arizona Board
Statutes and on authority of the Board of Appraisal caused to be signed by
of Appraisal, State of Arizona. the Chair of the Board and the
Executive Director
This certificate shall remain evidence
thereof unless or until the same is
suspended, revoked or expires in
accordance with the provisions of law. /s/ [ILLEGIBLE] 9-8-99
--------------------------------------
Chair, Board of Appraisal Date
CERTIFICATE NUMBER
TP40569 /s/ [ILLEGIBLE] 9-8-99
EXPIRATION DATE --------------------------------------
SEPTEMBER 8, 2000 Executive Director of the Date
Board of Appraisal
SHALL REMAIN PROPERTY OF ARIZONA BOARD OF APPRAISAL
<PAGE>
PROFILE OF APPRAISER
JOHN H. WHITCOMB, MAI, CCIM
St. Cert. Gen. REA #0001234
REAL ESTATE EXPERIENCE
----------------------
Owner
Whitcomb Real Estate
Tampa, FL
Specialize in complex real estate valuations and consulting projects.
Property types include manufactured home communities, recreational vehicle
parks, self-storage facilities, hotels, manufacturing plants, office
buildings, retail buildings and other types of commercial establishments
as well as special use facilities. Mr. Whitcomb is active in the ownership
and management of seven manufactured home communities throughout Florida.
January 1996 to present.
Partner
Chartwell Advisory Group, Ltd.
Tampa, FL
Supervised complex real estate valuations and property tax consulting
projects. Responsibilities included management of all technical staff
members throughout the country. Property types included manufactured home
communities, recreational vehicle parks, hotels, large manufacturing
plants, office buildings and retail buildings. April 1993 to January 1996.
Senior Appraiser
Marshall and Stevens, Inc.
Philadelphia, PA and Tampa, FL
Specialized in preparing appraisals for land and buildings in industrial,
commercial and residential uses. Performed appraisals for purposes of
sale/purchase, property tax appeals, syndication, financing and allocation
of purchase price. September 1985 to March 1990, and June 1992 to April
1993.
Vice President
Strategis Asset Valuation & Management, Inc.
Tampa, FL
Prepared appraisals and feasibility studies on complex commercial
properties. Performed appraisals for purposes of sale/purchase, property
tax appeals, financing and allocation of purchase price. March 1990 to May
1992.
<PAGE>
2
Profile of Appraiser
PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS
-------------------------
MAI, Member Appraisal Institute
CCIM, Certified Commercial Investment Member Commercial Investment Real Estate
Institute
State Certified General Real Estate Appraiser
Florida #0001234
PARTIAL LIST OF CLIENTS AND PROPERTIES
--------------------------------------
Manufactured Home Communities
-----------------------------
<TABLE>
<S> <C> <C> <C>
Akers Away West Palm Beach, FL Lakeside Douglasville, GA
Alafia Riverfront Gibsonton, FL Lakewood Denton, TX
Alpine Village Sebring, FL Lantana Cascade Lantana, FL
Arbor Oaks Zephyrhills, FL Long Lake Village West Palm Beach, FL
Blue Heron Clearwater, FL Marlboro Court West Palm Beach, FL
Bradenton Trailer Park Bradenton, FL MH Country Club Oakland Park, FL
Carefree Village Tampa, FL Mission El Paso, TX
Carolina Village Concord, Nc Moultrie Oaks St. Augustine, FL
Casa del Monte West Palm Beach, FL Oak Point Titusville, FL
Chateau Forest Seffner, FL Orange Manor East Winter Haven, FL
Chateau Village Bradenton, FL Palm Breezes Club Lantana, FL
Cloverleaf Brooksville, FL Palm Ridge Leesburg, FL
Colonial Coach Greenacres City, FL Panama City Estates Panama City, FL
Coquina Crossing St. Augustine, FL Plantation Estates Seffner, FL
Coral Lake Coconut Creek, FL Portside Jacksonville, FL
County Club Estates Venice, FL Ridgecrest Fort Pierce, FL
Dessau Austin, TX San Souci North Fort Myers, FL
Foxcroft Village Loch Sheldrake, NY Scenic View Lakeland, FL
Foxwood Estates Lakeland, FL Seminole St. Petersburg, FL
Franklin Estates Murfreesboro, TN Shangri La Largo, FL
Gardens of Manatee Parrish, FL Southwinds Lakeland, FL
A Garden Walk West Palm Beach, FL St. Lucie Village Okeechobee, FL
The Groves Orlando, FL Sunrise Village Cocoa Beach, FL
Gwinnett Estates Snellville, GA Sunshine Lake Worth, FL
Harmony Ranch Thonotosassa, FL Tall Pines Fort Pierce, FL
Holiday Ranch West Palm Beach, FL Tara Jonesboro, GA
Holiday Plaza West Palm Beach, FL Twin Shores Longboat Key, FL
Holland Fort Lauderdale, FL Valley Pines El Paso, TX
Kings and Queens Lakeland, FL Village Glen Melbourne, FL
</TABLE>
<PAGE>
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
Profile of Appraiser 3
Recreational Vehicle Parks
---------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C>
Avalon RV Park Clearwater, FL Pioneer Creek Bowling Green, FL
Camp Inn Frostproof, FL Rainbow Village Clearwater, FL
Forest Lake Village Zephyrhills, FL Space Coast RV Resort Rockledge, FL
Hide Away Ruskin, FL Sunshine RV Vero Beach, FL
Holiday RV Resort Leesburg, FL Topics Hudson, FL
Horizon RV Park Davenport, FL Twelve Oaks Sanford, FL
Key RV Park Marathon, FL Village Park Orange City, FL
Self-Storage Facilities
-----------------------
Affordable Self Storage Loganville, GA Orange Avenue Tallahassee, FL
Alpine Self Storage Rockford, IL Plantation Xtra Storage Plantation, FL
Baytree Self Storage Valdosta, GA St. Augustine Self Storage St. Augustine, FL
Budget Self Storage Sterling, VA Southern Self Storage Riviera Beach, FL
Delray Mini Storage Delray Beach, FL Storage Express Lauderhill, FL
Edison Lock Up Edison, NJ Valdosta Self Storage Valdosta, GA
Extra Space Lauderhill, FL Xtra Space Orlando, FL
Howell Self Storage Howell, NJ Your Extra Attic Duluth, GA
Hyde Park Storage Tampa, FL Your Extra Attic Norcross, GA
Jacksonville Storage Jacksonville, FL Your Extra Attic Stockbridge, GA
Okeechobee Storage Hialeah Gardens, FL Your Extra Attic Winters Chapel, GA
Hotels/Resorts
--------------
Canyon Ranch in the Berkshires Howard Johnson Maingate
Comfort Inn Kissimmee Hyatt On Union Square
Comfort Suites Asheville Hyatt Orlando
Embassy Suites Boca Raton Hyatt Wilshire
Hotel Nikko San Francisco Hyatt Regency Houston
Hilton Southwest Freeway Houston La Samanna
Hollywood Beach Hilton Ramada Resort Maingate
Holiday Inn Gainesville Westin Washington, D.C.
</TABLE>
<PAGE>
Profile of Appraiser 4
Financial
---------
Belgravia Capital Heller Financial
Bloomfield Acceptance Company Household Finance Corporation
Chase Manhattan Bank Irving Leasing Corporation
Chrysler Capital Corporation Mfd. Housing Community Bankers
Citicorp Real Estate Mellon Bank
Collateral Mortgage Morgan Stanley
CoreStates Financial Corporation NationsBank
Credit Suisse First Boston Nomura Securities
FINOVA Capital Pacificorp Financial Services
First Union Corporation PACTEL Finance
GE Capital Society National Bank
Goldman Sachs Sun America Insurance
Greentree Financial Union Capital
Real Estate/Real Estate Investment
----------------------------------
W.P. Carey & Company, Inc. LaSalle Partners
Chateau Communities Las Colinas Corporation
Continental Communities Metropolitan Life
Delaware North Companies MHC
Dillon Read Real Estate Inc. National Home Communities
Drexel Burnham Lambert Realty, Inc. Pitney Bowes Credit Corp.
First Boston Corporation Salomon Brothers, Inc.
EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND
----------------------
University of Florida, B.A.
College of William and Mary, M.B.A.
American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers
The Appraisal Institute
Commercial Investment Real Estate Institute
PUBLICATIONS
------------
Mr. Whitcomb has authored an article on ad valorem taxes and cogeneration
facilities for Cogeneration and Resource Recovery magazine.
----------------------------------
TESTIMONY
---------
Mr. Whitcomb has presented expert testimony in United States Tax Court.
<PAGE>
===============================================================================
Apache East Estates and Denali Manufactured Housing Community
Stabilized Operating Statement
% of $ per
Amount EGI Space
===============================================================================
Total Effective Gross Income $ 831,915 100.00% $ 2,919.00
Expenses $ 5,700 0.69% $ 20.00
Insurance 49,875 6.00% 175.00
Office 31,350 3.77% 110.00
Maintenance & Repairs 41,596 5.00% 145.95
Management Expense 71,250 8.56% 250.00
Wages & Benefits 45,000 5.41% 157.89
Property Taxes 85,500 10.28% 300.00
Utilities 7,125 0.86% 25.00
Reserves ----------------------------------
Total Expenses $ 337,396 40.56% $ 1,183.84
Net Operating Income $ 494,519 59.44% $ 1,735.16
==============================================================================
