Summary Appraisal Report - Government of New York

Telephone (914) 244-3400 Fax (914) 244-3450

H U D S O N

PROPERTY

ADVISORS, LLC 10 South Moger Avenue

Mt. Kisco, NY 10549

Jonathan A. Bernz, MAI Advanced Real Estate Appraisal and Consulting

APPRAISAL OF REAL PROPERTY Summary Appraisal Report

Property of

Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc.

Windmill Road Town of North Castle

Westchester County, New York (Our file # 2014.06007)

Submitted Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc.

4 Irving Place New York, NY 10003

Date of Appraisal July 29, 2014

Date of Report August 8, 2014

2

HUDSON

PROPERTY ADVISORS, LLC

H U D S O N

PROPERTY 10 South Moger Avenue

Mt. Kisco, NY 10549

ADVISORS, LLC Tel. (914) 244-3400

Fax (914) 244-3450

Jonathan A. Bernz, MAI Advanced Real Estate Appraisal and Consulting

August 8, 2014

Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. 4 Irving Place New York, NY 10003

Attention: Scott Sanders, Vice President and Treasurer

Re: Windmill Road Vacant Land Parcel (Tax Map ID No. 102.03-1-7) Town of North Castle, Westchester County, NY (Our file no. 2014.06007) Gentlemen:

In accordance with your request, we inspected the captioned property, consisting of approximately a 0.267 acre (11,630 sq. ft.) vacant parcel of land, for the purpose of providing you with our estimate of “as-is” market value of the fee simple interest. The market value estimate is rendered as of the date of our physical inspection, July 29, 2014. The summary report attached hereto represents the results of our complete appraisal process. As indicated in the statement of underlying assumptions and contingent conditions appearing at the end of this report, this appraisal is predicated on the assumption that the subject property is free of asbestos and is not contaminated by any other noxious or dangerous materials. We do not have the expertise to recognize such conditions. It is the responsibility of the client to retain other experts who have training and experience in ascertaining the existence of these substances. Recent U.S. financial market turmoil and ensuing events have impacted the U.S. economy in a variety of ways, including an increased level of uncertainty. In analyzing market conditions for this assignment, the appraiser applied the best available means to measure the effects of these events, however, limited information is available at this time. As a result, because of these circumstances, the client and intended user (or users) of this

3

HUDSON


appraisal are cautioned of the following:

1. The ability to rely on the conclusion(s) reached within this appraisal may be more limited than usual.

2. The conclusion(s) reached within this appraisal may be subject to more fluctuation than usual in the short term.

The summary appraisal report that follows sets forth the definition of market value, identification of the property, assumptions and limiting conditions, summary of pertinent facts relative to the area and the subject property, summary of comparable data, the results of our investigations and analyses, and the reasoning leading to our conclusions. This appraisal has been prepared in conformance with our interpretation of the guidelines and recommendations set forth in the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) as adopted by the Appraisal Foundation, the requirements of the Code of Professional Ethics and Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice of the Appraisal Institute, and in accordance with the regulations established by the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989 (FIRREA). We believe the content of this report covers the scope of our assignment. If you have any questions, or if you should require clarification, please do not hesitate to call. Thank you for providing us with the opportunity to assist you with this matter. Very truly yours, ________________________________________ JONATHAN BERNZ, MAI, President NY State Certified General Real Estate Appraiser #46-26085

4

HUDSON


Table of Contents

Executive Summary .......................................................................................................................... 5

Location Map .................................................................................................................................... 6

Subject Identification ........................................................................................................................ 7

Date of Appraisal .............................................................................................................................. 7

Identification of Client and Submittee ............................................................................................... 7

Intended Use (Function) of Appraisal ............................................................................................... 7

Intended User of Appraisal ............................................................................................................... 7

Extraordinary Assumptions ............................................................................................................... 7

Hypothetical Conditions .................................................................................................................... 8

Appraisal Foundation Standards and Definition of Market Value ..................................................... 9

Exposure Time ................................................................................................................................ 11

Property Rights and/or Interest Appraised ..................................................................................... 12

Current Ownership, Sales and Property History ............................................................................ 14

Property Inspection ......................................................................................................................... 14

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) ............................................................................................ 14

Competency Provision .................................................................................................................... 14

Scope of Work ................................................................................................................................ 15

Location Data .................................................................................................................................. 17

Trend Analysis and Marketing Period (Marketing Time) ................................................................ 22

Site Data ......................................................................................................................................... 24

Photographic Log............................................................................................................................ 29



Assessment And Tax Data ............................................................................................................. 32

Zoning Data .................................................................................................................................... 36

Highest & Best Use ........................................................................................................................ 39

Sales Comparison Approach .......................................................................................................... 44

Indicated Preliminary Land Value (as though buildable) ................................................................ 60

Scenario 2 (Market Value “as-is”) ................................................................................................... 61

Underlying Assumptions and Contingent Conditions ..................................................................... 87

Appraiser’s Certification .................................................................................................................. 92

Addendum ...................................................................................................................................... 93

Professional Qualifications ............................................................................................................. 94

5

HUDSON


Executive Summary

Date of Appraisal: July 29, 2014.

Type of Report: Summary report; complete appraisal process.

Type of Property: Vacant land; limited utility property.

Location: East side of Windmill Road (no number), located at the corner of Long Pond Road, Town of North Castle, Westchester County, NY.

Tax ID No.: 102.03-1-7.

Land Area: 0.267 acre (11,630 sq. ft.).

Principal Improvements: None.

Property Rights Appraised: Fee simple.

Assessed Valuation: $3,000.

Real Estate Taxes: $2,957.

Zoning District: "R-1.5A , One-Family Residence District (1 ½ acres)."

Highest and Best Use: Sale to adjacent property owner or limited recreational use.

“As-is” Market Value of Subject Property $18,500

6

HUDSON


Location Map

Subject: Windmill Road Town of North Castle, Westchester County, NY Tax Map ID No. 102.03-1-7

SUBJECT

7

HUDSON


Subject Identification The property that is the subject of this appraisal is a vacant parcel of land containing

approximately 0.267 acre (11,630 sq. ft.) owned by Consolidated Edison Company of

New York, Inc., located on the east side of Windmill Road (no number) at the corner of

Long Pond Road, Town of North Castle, Westchester County, New York.

Tax Map ID No.: 102.03-1-7

Date of Appraisal July 29, 2014.

Identification of Client and Submittee The client is “the party or parties who engage, by employment or contract, an appraiser in

a specific assignment. The client may be an individual, group or entity, and may engage

and communicate with the appraiser directly or through an agent.”1 The client for this

appraisal assignment is Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc., 4 Irving Place,

New York, NY 10003. The submittee is Scott Sanders, Vice President and Treasurer,

Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc., 4 Irving Place, New York, NY 10003.

Intended Use (Function) of Appraisal The function of this appraisal is to demonstrate, through the use of professionally

recognized and commonly accepted appraisal practice and procedure, the market value of

the fee simple interest in the subject property in its “as-is” physical condition, for use in

connection with our client’s objectives. The intended use of the appraiser’s opinions and

conclusions is to assist Client for internal decision-making purposes.

Intended User of Appraisal The intended users of this report are Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc.

and the new York State Public Service Commission. There are no other intended users.

Extraordinary Assumptions An extraordinary assumption is “an assumption directly related to a specific assignment,

as of the effective date of the assignment results, which, if found to be false, could alter

1 Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP), 2012-2013 Edition, The Appraisal Standards Board, The Appraisal Foundation, p. u-2.

8

HUDSON


the appraiser’s opinions or conclusions.”2 “Extraordinary assumptions presume as fact

otherwise uncertain information about physical, legal, or economic characteristics of the

subject property; or about conditions external to the property such as market conditions

or trends; or about the integrity of data used in an analysis.”3 Since the property had

formerly been used as an electrical sub-station, the appraisal will be made subject to the

extraordinary assumption that the property is unaffected by contamination or

contamination-related issues. This appraisal will also be subject to the extraordinary

assumption that the property may only be used for limited recreational purposes and that

it can not be further developed for a typical single-family use.

This appraisal contains no other extraordinary assumptions.

Hypothetical Conditions A hypothetical condition is defined as “a condition, directly related to a specific

assignment, which is contrary to what is known by the appraiser to exist on the effective

date of the assignment results, but is used for the purpose of analysis.”4 Hypothetical

conditions are contrary to known facts. “Hypothetical conditions assume conditions

contrary to known facts about physical, legal, or economic characteristics of the subject

property; or about conditions external to the property, such as market conditions or

trends; or about the integrity of data used in an analysis.”5 The difference between

whether a particular condition is an extraordinary assumption or a hypothetical condition

depends upon what the appraiser knows about the particular condition in question. “If an

appraiser cannot verify a certain condition that is critical to the valuation but which he

believes is true and has no reason to doubt is true, then the condition is an extraordinary

assumption . . . If, on the other hand, an appraiser is asked to use a condition which he

knows to be false but which is necessary for the analysis, then two things are required;

the appraiser can use the condition as long as it meets the criteria in USPAP (Uniform

Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice) and the appraiser must not confuse the

information with the known facts. The appraiser must clearly distinguish ‘false

2 Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP), 2012-2013 Edition, The Appraisal Standards Board, The Appraisal Foundation, p. u-3. 3 Appraisal Institute, The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 5th ed. (Chicago: Appraisal Institute), 2010, p. 73. 4 Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP), 2012-2013 Edition, The Appraisal Standards Board, The Appraisal Foundation, p. u-3. 5 Appraisal Institute, The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 5th ed. (Chicago: Appraisal Institute), 2010, p. 97.

9

HUDSON


conditions’ from those other assumptions or conditions which are believed or taken to be

true.”6 This appraisal contains no hypothetical conditions.

Appraisal Foundation Standards and Definition of Market Value This appraisal has been prepared to conform to the Uniform Standards of Professional

Appraisal Practice (USPAP), adopted by the Appraisal Foundation.

The definition of market value which follows is taken from Uniform Standards of

Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) instructions, adopted by the Appraisal

Standards Board of the Appraisal Foundation.

“The most probable price which a property should bring in a competitive and open market under all conditions requisite to a fair sale, the buyer and seller each acting prudently and knowledgeably, and assuming the price is not affected by undue stimulus. Implicit in this definition is the consummation of a sale as of a date and the passing of title from seller to buyer under conditions whereby-

1. Buyer and seller are typically motivated. 2. Both parties are well informed or well advised, and acting in what they consider their

own best interests. 3. A reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open market. 4. Payment is made in terms of cash in U.S. dollars or in terms of financial

arrangements comparable thereto. 5. The price represents the normal consideration for the property sold unaffected by

special or creative financing or sales concessions granted by anyone associated with the sale.”

According to The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, Fifth Edition, a publication of the

Appraisal Institute, “The most widely accepted components of market value are

incorporated in the following definition:

The most probable price that the specified property interest should sell for in a competitive market after a reasonable exposure time, as of a specified date, in cash, or in terms equivalent to cash, under all conditions requisite to a fair sale, with the buyer and seller each acting prudently, knowledgeably, for self-interest, and assuming that neither is under duress.”

6 Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) Frequently Asked Questions, 2000 Edition, Appraisal Standards Board, The Appraisal Foundation, 2000, p. 41-42.

10

HUDSON


The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, Fifth Edition, also indicates that market

value is described in the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice

(USPAP) as follows:

“A type of value, stated as an opinion, that presumes the transfer of a property (i.e., a right of ownership or a bundle of such rights), as of a certain date, under specific conditions set forth in the definition of the term identified by the appraiser as applicable in an appraisal. (USPAP, 2010-2011 ed.).”

11

HUDSON


Exposure Time Exposure time is considered to precede the effective date of appraisal. It is defined in

The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 5th ed. as follows:

“Exposure Time

1. The time a property remains on the market.

2. The estimated length of time the property interest being appraised would have

been offered on the market prior to the hypothetical consummation of a sale at

market value on the effective date of the appraisal; a retrospective estimate based

on an analysis of past events assuming a competitive and open market.”7

Exposure Time is defined by USPAP as “[the] estimated length of time that the property

interest being appraised would have been offered on the market prior to the hypothetical

consummation of a sale at market value on the effective date of the appraisal.”8 Exposure

time is a retrospective estimate based upon an analysis of past events, assuming a

competitive and open market. In arriving at an estimate of reasonable exposure time, the

appraiser assumes an adequate, sufficient and reasonable effort to sell the real property.

Owing to market conditions, preceding the effective date of this valuation, that were

similar to present market conditions, i.e., similar supply and demand factors, stable local

and regional economic conditions, similar availability and cost of financing, etc., and

based upon information gathered through sales verification, our daily activity in the real

estate market and interviews with market participants, it is our opinion that a reasonable

exposure time for the subject real property, would have been 12 to 18 months.

7 Appraisal Institute, The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 5th ed. (Chicago: Appraisal Institute), 2010, p. 73 8 Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP), 2012-2013 Edition, The Appraisal Standards Board, The Appraisal Foundation, p. U-3.

12

HUDSON


Property Rights and/or Interest Appraised Real Estate is commonly defined as physical land and appurtenances affixed to the land,

e.g., structures. Real Property consists of all interests, benefits, and rights inherent in the

ownership of physical real estate.

Real property does not necessarily include the complete bundle of rights, i.e., “fee

simple” rights or interests. For example, when a property is subject to a lease, different

interests are created, the “leased fee” interest and the “leasehold” interest.

We have been informed by the property owner’s representative that the subject property

is unencumbered by lease. Within this appraisal, therefore, we will primarily be

concerned with the valuation of the fee simple interest.

The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, Fifth Edition, 2010, provides the following

definitions.

“Fee Simple (Estate)”

Absolute ownership subject only to limitations imposed by the State.

“Leased Fee Interest”

A freehold (ownership interest) where the possessory interest has been granted to another

party by creation of a contractual landlord-tenant relationship (i.e., a lease).

“Leasehold Interest”

The tenant’s possessory interest created by a lease.9

Development Restrictions

We are not engineers or land planners and do not have the expertise to determine the

developability of the property. This type of determination is beyond the scope of this

assignment and would require the services of such experts. However, in order to provide

guidance concerning the potential developability of the property we contacted Michael

Cromwell, Assistant Building Inspector for the Town of North Castle, NY on June 2,

2014. During our conversation with Mr. Cromwell, he indicated the following:

9 Note: A leasehold interest may be a negative leasehold or positive leasehold.

13

HUDSON


1. When the lot was created, it was never intended to be a single-family building lot (it

was created for utility purposes).

2. The property is sub-standard with respect to the minimum lot size required by zoning

(the minimum lot size required is one and one-half acres, with the subject containing

substantially less).

3. Other zoning variances would also be necessary.

4. Although a public water system is nearby, in order for the property to be buildable, an

individual septic system would be required.

Mr. Cromwell also indicated that given the size of the property, along with the required

setbacks and other requirements, an insufficient amount of land area exists on this

property to accommodate a septic system and that the property is unbuildable. Mr.

Cromwell stated that “in its present configuration, I will go on record as saying that the

property is unbuildable.”

Again, while we do not have the expertise to determine the developability of the property,

given the preceding, the property is considered to have no significant development

potential on its own and may only have utility to an adjacent property owner, potential for

a low-utility land use, or for long term speculation.

Personal Property Fixtures and Intangible Items

The value conclusion within this appraisal is of the real estate only; unless specifically

stated otherwise, it excludes the value of any personal property, fixtures and intangible

items, if any.

14

HUDSON


Current Ownership, Sales and Property History The present owner of record is Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc.

There have been no arm’s length transfers of ownership recorded within the past three

years.

Property Inspection The subject was physically inspected for the purpose of this appraisal report by Jonathan

Bernz on July 29, 2014. It was subsequently revisited for further review and analysis.

The appraiser(s) have not performed services regarding this property within the past three

years.

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) We have not made a specific compliance survey to determine if the improvements on

subject property (if any), which were built prior to enactment of the ADA, conform with

its requirements. Any non-compliance could have a negative effect upon value.

Competency Provision The appraiser has accepted this appraisal assignment having the knowledge, training and

experience necessary to complete the assignment competently. We are aware of the

competency provision of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice

(USPAP) and the author of this report meets these standards. Jonathan Bernz, MAI has

inspected the property and its surrounding environs and prepared this report.

Additionally, the appraiser has extensive appraisal experience in the appraisal of similar

properties. Thus, it is our opinion that we are fully competent to perform this appraisal,

due to the fact that:

1. We have full knowledge and experience in the nature of this assignment;

2. All necessary and appropriate steps have been taken in order to complete the

assignment competently; and

3. We do not lack any knowledge or experience that would prohibit this

assignment to be completed in a professional, competent manner, or where a

biased or misleading opinion of value would be rendered

15

HUDSON


Scope of Work The Scope of Work is “the type and extent of research and analysis in an assignment.”10

The scope of the appraisal process encompasses the research and the extent of the

analyses required to prepare an appraisal in accordance with the intended use of the

report, and in compliance with the Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice of the

Appraisal Institute, and the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice

(USPAP) of the Appraisal Foundation. The Scope of Work generally includes, but is not

necessarily limited to the following:

1. The extent to which the property is identified.

2. The extent to which tangible property is inspected.

3. The type of and extent of data researched.

4. The type and extent of analysis applied to arrive at opinions or conclusions.

The Scope of this assignment included the following:

1. The property that is the subject of this appraisal was specifically identified earlier

in this report.

2. The subject property was physically inspected on July 29, 2014, by Jonathan Bernz.

At this time the property was photographed, measured and visually inspected for

the purpose of obtaining general physical characteristics as reported herein.

3. County, municipal and neighborhood data are based upon our inspection and prior

knowledge of the area, and information available in Hudson Property Advisors’

library, consisting of various documents and periodicals.

4. Lot area, dimensions and physical characteristics were based upon our review of 1)

a survey of the subject property, 2) the metes and bounds description contained in

deed Liber 5572, Page 302, 3) a site location map prepared by Bureau Veritas, 4) a

site plan entitled “Windmill Farm 46 Former Unit Substation” dated 11/27/12

prepared by Bureau Veritas, 5) various soil sampling location maps prepared by

Bureau Veritas dated 5/30/12, 10/25/12 and 11/27/12, 6) USGS Topographic

Quadrangle Maps (15” Series), 7) the subject's municipal tax assessment map and

8) direct on-site physical inspection.

10 Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP), 2012-2013 Edition, The Appraisal Standards Board, The Appraisal Foundation, p. u-4.

16

HUDSON


5. Real estate tax and assessment data were obtained from the municipal Receiver of

Taxes and Assessment Offices.

6. Zoning data was obtained from the municipal Zoning Ordinance.

7. An opinion with regard to the potential developability of the property was obtained

from Michael Cromwell, Assistant Building Inspector for the Town of North

Castle, NY on June 2, 2014.

8. In developing the approaches to value, the appraisers analyzed market data

collected from company files, various proprietary databases, the commercial real

estate brokerage community, the Empire Access Multiple Listing Service (formerly

the Westchester-Putnam Multiple Listing Service) and CID Division, the NY State

Office of Real Property Tax Services (ORPTS), other appraisers, developers,

investors and other persons knowledgeable of, and experienced in, the subject

market. If sufficient comparables were unavailable from within the immediate

community, we expanded our geographic search to include comparables in other

locations.

9. Within this report, we utilized the Sales Comparison Approach to estimate a

preliminary value (as though buildable.) We then researched and analyzed

additional market data which enabled us to estimate an appropriate deduction

reflecting the limited utility of the property and its, likely, lack of developability.

Once an appropriate deduction for its limited utility was subtracted from the

developable value, an estimate of “as is” (limited) value is indicated. After

assembling and analyzing the data defined in this scope of the appraisal, we

concluded at a final value estimate of the subject property’s fee simple interest,

subject to it’s limited use.

17

HUDSON


Location Data The subject is located in the Town of North Castle in central Westchester County, New

York. North Castle comprises approximately 27 square miles and is located at the

approximate geographic mid-point of Westchester County, some 30 miles north of

Manhattan, the nation’s business and financial center. North Castle is bounded on the

north by the Towns of New Castle and Bedford, on the east by the Town of Pound Ridge,

on the west by the Town of Mount

Pleasant, and on the south by the

Town of Harrison, the City of

White Plains and Fairfield County,

Connecticut. According to US

Census Bureau figures, North

Castle’s population in 2010 was

11,841, representing an increase of

9.1% over the 2000 level of

10,849. This rate of increase is

higher than the 7.8% rate of

increase over the 1990 level.

North Castle has no villages within

its boundaries; it is divided into

three main unincorporated areas:

North White Plains, Armonk, and

Banksville-Middle Patent.

North White Plains is situated in

the southern end of the town

approximately 1½ miles north of downtown White Plains, the center of commerce and

government in the county; White Plains also contains the most significant amount of

office development in the county. North White Plains is comprised primarily of older,

stable, middle-income residential neighborhoods; there is commercial development along

Route 22, a four-lane non-divided roadway that functions as the primary artery through

this hamlet. Route 22 leads south directly into the White Plains central business district.

Armonk, known for its fine homes, schools and proximity to Westchester County

SUBJECT

18

HUDSON


Airport, is also the location of IBM World Headquarters and contains other commercial

office development as well as the Town’s municipal offices. Route 22 and Interstate 684

run north/south through Armonk.

Banksville-Middle Patent is a residential area situated in the eastern section of the Town

that borders exclusive neighborhoods in Pound Ridge and Bedford; it, like the

neighboring communities, contains some of the finest and most expensive residences in

the county.

Major highway access in North Castle is good. Both Route 22 and Interstate 684 link

North Castle with other major roads and highways in the county, by virtue of their direct

access to Interstate 287, approximately one and one-half miles south of the southernmost

point of the town. Interstate 287, which runs east/west through the City of White Plains,

links with the New York (Interstate 87) and New England Thruways (Interstate 95).

Construction of Interstate 684 was the catalyst for both residential and commercial

development in the town. Over the previous two decades, numerous luxury homes on

multi-acre lots, and several multi-tenant office and semi-industrial buildings in Armonk

were constructed.

A modern office park known as Westchester Business Park is located just south of

Armonk, off of Route 22; the park contains several modern office and office/light

industrial uses. In addition, there is a modern La Quinta Inn with an accessory restaurant.

In 1997±, Swiss RE completed construction of its 320,000-square-foot U.S. headquarters

on 127 acres on King Street in Armonk. Also in 1997, IBM completed and took

occupancy of its new world headquarters in Armonk.

According to information obtained from the Town Building Department, “there have

been 282 new dwelling units constructed in the Town of North Castle since the 2000

Census, offset by approximately 30 to 35 teardowns. This yields a net increase of

approximately 250 homes and results in an estimated current total of 3,956 dwelling

units. The substantial difference between the number of new lots created and the number

of new homes built is explained in large part by the earlier subdivision approval of the

Whippoorwill Hills and Whippoorwill Ridge developments. Based upon the nature of

the new units, i.e. a combination of one-family, two-family and townhouse

19

HUDSON


dwellings, it is estimated that the current population of North Castle has grown to

approximately 11,500 people. This represents an increase of approximately 650 people

living in North Castle during the past five years, almost as much as the increase during

the entire decade of 1990-2000 (788 people).”

In summary, North Castle is a sought-after and desirable location enriched with a

balanced mix of commercial, mid to high end residential, light industrial and commercial

uses. There are no apparent negative influences on value.

20

HUDSON


Area Map


SUBJECT

21

HUDSON


Neighborhood Data

A neighborhood, from an appraisal perspective is defined as “A group of complementary

land uses; a congruous grouping of inhabitants, buildings, or business enterprises.”11

The subject is located within the Windmill Lake/Windmill Farm section of the Town of

North Castle approximately 3.5 miles northeast of Armonk’s central retail district. This

section of the Town of North Castle contains mostly affluent single-family residences,

the Windmill Club (holding local community events), Cat Rocks Park, Brynwood Golf

and Country Club and the Armonk Tennis Club. The subject’s neighborhood is served by

the Byram Hills School District. The Byram Hills High School is located approximately

two miles southwest of the subject.

Pleasantville’s Metro-North station provides daily commuter service to and from Grand

Central Terminal and is located approximately 20 minutes from the subject. Interstate-

684 is the main north/south throughway with both north and southbound entrance ramps

accessible within approximately 2.5+ miles south of the subject at the intersection of

NYS Route 22. Approximately seven miles south of the subject is Westchester County

Airport (HPN) providing a limited number of domestic flights.

Overall, this section of the Town of North Castle benefits from being a quiet residential

neighborhood, however, it’s limited public transportation and access to larger retail

districts such as White Plains and Mount Kisco result in a lack of convenience for local

residents. Nevertheless, the area continues to be a highly sought-after location and

successfully commands relatively high pricing levels.

11 Appraisal Institute, The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 5th ed. (Chicago: Appraisal Institute), 2010

22

HUDSON


Trend Analysis and Marketing Period (Marketing Time) The term “marketing time” typically takes into consideration current and anticipated

market conditions. It is defined as “an opinion of the amount of time it might take to sell

a real or personal property interest at the concluded market value level during the period

immediately after the effective date of an appraisal. In essence, estimated marketing

period is the amount of time elapsed starting from the date a property is listed for sale

(usually the effective date of this appraisal) and ending on the date that a contract is

executed for purchase and sale of the property. Marketing time differs from exposure

time, which is always presumed to precede the effective date of an appraisal.”12 Implicit

in the definitions of marketing time are the following assumptions:

- The property will be actively exposed and aggressively marketed to potential purchasers through marketing channels commonly used by buyers and sellers of similar type properties. - The property will be offered at a price reflecting the most probable mark-up, over market value, used by sellers of similar type properties. - A sale will be consummated under terms and conditions of the definition of market value.

In order to estimate a marketing time that could reasonably be expected for the subject,

we conducted interviews with market participants, brokers and other professionals who

are actively involved in the purchase and / or sale of the type of property represented by

the subject. Based upon the results of our survey, and considering current and anticipated

supply and demand factors, we formed the opinion that in this particular sub-market, a

period of approximately twelve (12) months should be sufficient to successfully market a

property such as the subject. Our conclusion is made subject to the assumption of

realistic pricing and assuming professional marketing efforts.

12 Appraisal Institute, The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 5th ed. (Chicago: Appraisal Institute), 2010, p. 121.

23

HUDSON


Tax Map


24

HUDSON


Site Data

Location: East side Windmill Road (no number) at the corner of Long Pond

Road, Town of North Castle, Westchester County, NY.

Tax Map ID No.: 102.03-1-7.

Size: 0.267 acre (11,630 sq. ft.)

Shape: Irregular.

Road Frontage: 186.32+ feet of frontage along the east side of Windmill Road.

Depth: 117 to 150+ feet (easterly and northerly property line respectively).

Topography: Much of the property is below the grade of Windmill Road. Land

gently slopes up in a generally northerly direction. The northeast

corner contains steeper land.

Terrain: Wooded.

Drainage: Appears adequate.

Soil Conditions: No soils report was provided to the appraiser; we assume that the

subject’s soils are adequate to support development.

Utilities: Public utilities include telephone and electric.

Fronting Roads: Windmill Road and Long Pond Road, in the vicinity of the subject,

are both two-way paved public streets. Street parking appears to be

permitted along both sides of the street.

Visibility: Good road visibility.

Access: Vehicular access to the subject is provided by Windmill Road.

While there is no driveway on the subject from the road,

25

HUDSON


there is a small paved driveway which leads into town property on

the south (the town property forms an extension of Long Pond

Road). And, owing to topographic conditions, access to the

property from Windmill Road may be difficult.

Easements/ Encroachments: No apparent adverse easements or encroachments noted.

Flood Zone: According to Flood Hazard Map #36119C0168F, effective

9/28/07, the subject is not situated within a designated flood hazard

zone (“Zone X, Areas determined to be outside the 0.2% annual

chance floodplain.”)

Environmental

Hazards: Unless otherwise stated in this report, the existence of hazardous

material, which may or may not be present on the property, was

not observed by the appraiser. The appraiser has no knowledge of

the existence of such materials on or in the property. The appraiser,

however, is not qualified to detect such substances. The presence

of substances such as asbestos, urea-formaldehyde foam insulation,

or other potentially hazardous materials may affect the value of the

property. The value estimate is predicated on the assumption that

there is no such material on or in the property that would cause a

loss in value. No responsibility is assumed for any such conditions,

or for any expertise or engineering knowledge required to discover

them. The client is urged to retain an expert in this field, if desired.

Natural, Cultural Recreational or

Scientific Value: Our inspection of the real estate revealed that the subject property

apparently has no significant natural, cultural, recreational or

scientific factors affecting its market value.

Legal Description: See addendum.

Improvement Data: Driveway leading to adjacent town property and a concrete slab.

26

HUDSON


Aerial Map


SUBJECT

27

HUDSON


Wetlands and Steep Slopes Map


28

HUDSON


Site Plan


29

HUDSON


Photographic Log

Client Name: Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc.

Site Location: Windmill Road North Castle, NY Tax Map ID No.: 102.03-1-7

Project No.: 2014.06007

Photo No.: 1

Date: 7/29/14

Direction Photo Taken: Northeast

Description: View of concrete pad on property.

Photo No.: 2

Date: 7/29/14

Direction Photo Taken: N./A.

Description: Remnants of asphalt on property

30

HUDSON


Photographic Log



Project No.: 2014.06007

Photo No.: 3

Date: 7/29/14

Direction Photo Taken: Northwest

Description: View northwest from central portion of property.

Photo No.: 4

Date: 7/29/14

Direction Photo Taken: West

Description: View west facing Long Pond Road.

31

HUDSON


Photographic Log



Project No.: 2014.06007

Photo No.: 5

Date: 7/29/14

Direction Photo Taken: North

Description: Windmill Road from subject facing north.

Photo No.: 6

Date: 7/29/14

Direction Photo Taken: South

Description: Windmill Road from subject facing south.

32

HUDSON


Assessment And Tax Data

Section 102.03, Block 1, Lot 7

Assessment

Land $3,000

Improvements $0

Total $3,000

Assessment Comments

Most property owners throughout the New York metropolitan area routinely protest their

assessments. None of these protests involve the comparison of property assessments.

Comparison of a property’s assessment to the assessment of another similar property is

no proof that the property in question has an inequitable assessment. The law recognizes

that the assessments of other properties may be wrong also. The only proof accepted by

the courts is a valuation of the subject property. Therefore, if the comparison of the

subject’s assessment with the assessment of other similar properties indicates disparities,

it does not indicate that the subject assessment is wrong, it merely indicates that the

assessments differ. Therefore, this appraisal does not include so-called assessment

comparables.

33

HUDSON


Equalization Rate

The New York State Office of Real Property Tax Services (ORPTS) is statutorily

obligated to administer an equalization program in order to assure equitable property tax

allocation among nearly 4,000 taxing jurisdictions in New York State, and to insure the

proper allocation of State Aid to Education funds, among other purposes. Equalization

seeks to measure the relationship of locally assessed values to an ever-changing real

estate market. Each year, ORPTS calculates equalization rates for each of the state’s

more than 1,200 assessing units…. … Equalization is necessary in New York State

because:

(1) there is no fixed percentage at which property must be assessed;

(2) not all municipalities assess property at the same percentage of market value; and

(3) taxing jurisdictions, such as most school districts, do not share the same taxing

boundaries as the cities and towns that are responsible for assessing properties. Most of the state’s more than 700 school districts distribute their taxes among segments of several municipalities, many of which have different levels of assessment. The number of municipal segments in a school district can range from one to fifteen or more.”13 An equalization rate, at its simplest “is the state’s measure of a municipality's level of assessment (LOA). This is the ratio of total assessed value (AV) to the municipality's total market value (MV). The municipality determines the AV; the MV is estimated by the state. The equalization rate formula is:

Total Assessed Value (AV)

= Equalization Rate

Total Market Value (MV)

Equalization rates do not indicate the degree of uniformity among assessments within a municipality.”14 An equalization rate is computed by dividing the total assessed value of taxable real property by an estimated total market value of the property in accordance with a complex model promulgated by the New York State Office of Real Property Tax Services for each city, town or village in the state as of a specified date. Thus, an equalization rate can be used to convert the assessed value of a property into the indicated assessor’s full market value of the property. The 2013 New York State Equalization Rate for the Town of North Castle is: 2.36%.

13 Understanding the Equalization Rate, NY State Office of Real Property Tax Services. 14 Ibid.

34

HUDSON


Assessment Analysis Using the equalization rate, the assessed value can be converted into an imputed market value of the property as follows:

Assessed Value Equalization Rate = Purported (imputed) Market Value

The subject’s purported market value is calculated below:

Assessed Value $3,000

Equalization Rate 2.36%Purported Market Value $127,119

The purported market value is above our conclusion of market value for the subject property; thus, we have concluded that the subject’s assessment is excessive, which results in excessive real estate taxes. Moreover, as a result of the property’s over assessment, the inequitable real estate taxes have a negative effect on the market value of the property.

35

HUDSON


Real Estate Taxes The subject’s current real estate taxes are as follows: District TaxesTown and County $995.63School (Byram Hills) $1,960.92Total $2,956.55

The mill rate indicated by the total real estate taxes is $985.52 in real estate taxes per $1,000 of assessed value.

36

HUDSON


Zoning Data The subject property is situated in a district designated "R-1.5A , One-Family Residence

District (1 ½ acres)" by the Zoning Ordinance of the Town of North Castle, as amended

to the date of appraisal.

The "R-1.5A" zone permits the following principal uses:

A use marked with an asterisk (*) is subject to conformance to additional standards as set forth in Article

VII. All uses are subject to site plan approval and performance standards in accordance with Articles VIII

and X. Except as specifically permitted, all uses, including storage of materials and equipment, shall be

within enclosed structures. Standards shown are minimum requirements, unless otherwise indicated. Any

use not specifically listed shall be deemed to be prohibited. Dimensions are in feet, unless otherwise noted

37

HUDSON


The "R-1.5A" zone area and bulk schedule is as follows:

Minimum Lot Area: 1 ½ acres

Maximum Lot Coverage: 10%

Minimum Yards

Front Yard: 50 feet

Rear Yard: 40 feet

Side Yards: 30 feet

Building Height Limit: 30 feet

Minimum Lot Width: 150 feet

Minimum Lot Depth: 150 feet

Minimum Frontage 150 feet

Parking Requirements: Two spaces.

Zoning Comments

The subject property does not conform to the minimum lot size required by zoning. The

property may be sub-standard with respect to other zoning requirements (see discussion

regarding lack of developability).

38

HUDSON


Zoning Map


Subject

39

HUDSON


Highest & Best Use Highest and best use may be defined as: Highest and Best Use “The reasonably probable and legal use of vacant land or an improved property that is physically possible, appropriately supported, financially feasible, and that results in the highest value. The four criteria the highest and best use must meet are legal permissibility, physical possibility, financial feasibility, and maximum productivity. Alternatively, the probable use of land or improved property—specific with respect to the user and timing of the use—that is adequately supported and results in the highest present value.”15 Highest and Best Use of Land or a Site as Though Vacant “Among all reasonable, alternative uses, the use that yields the highest present land value, after payments are made for labor, capital, and coordination. The use of a property based on the assumption that the parcel of land is vacant or can be made vacant by demolishing any improvements.”16 Highest and Best Use of Property as Improved “The use that should be made of a property as it exists. An existing improvement should be renovated or retained as is so long as it continues to contribute to the total market value of the property, or until the return from a new improvement would more than offset the cost of demolishing the existing building and constructing a new one.”17

Both the site and an improved property have a highest and best use; highest and best use

of an improved property may differ from that of the site.

The site is valued as though vacant and available to be put to its highest and best use. The

value of an improved property is also estimated in terms of its highest and best use taking

into consideration such contribution, if any, the improvements are making to the value of

the total property.

Estimating highest and best use typically requires application of the following criteria:

1. Legal (Permissible) Use

15 Appraisal Institute, The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 5th ed. (Chicago: Appraisal Institute), 2010., p. 93. 16 IBID. 17 IBID., p. 94.

40

HUDSON


What uses are legally permitted by zoning regulations and not

prohibited by deed restrictions or covenants?

2. Possible Use

What uses are physically possible, considering the site's size,

configuration, topography, availability of utilities, etc.?

3. Financially Feasible Use

Which uses, being both possible and legally permitted, will produce

any net return to the site?

4. Highest and Best Use (Maximally Productive Use)

Among the feasible uses, which use will produce the highest net

return?

In analyzing the subject property’s highest and best use, we considered the four criteria

above on an individual basis as they pertain to the subject property, as follows:

Highest and Best Use - As Though Vacant

Highest and best use as though vacant assumes that a parcel of land is vacant or can be

made vacant by demolishing any improvements.

Legally Permissible

The subject is situated within a zoning district designated R-1.5A which restricts use of

the site to any of the uses summarized earlier. According to the Town of North Castle’s

zoning ordinance, the subject appears as though it can not be developed with a residential

use. We are not engineers or land planners and do not have the expertise to determine the

developability of the property. This type of determination is beyond the scope of this

assignment and would require the services of such experts. However, in order to provide

guidance concerning the potential developability of the property we contacted Michael

Cromwell, Assistant Building Inspector for the Town of North Castle, NY on June 2,

2014. During our conversation with Mr. Cromwell, he indicated the following:

1. When the lot was created, it was never intended to be a single-family building lot (it

was created for utility purposes).

41

HUDSON


2. The property is sub-standard with respect to the minimum lot size required by zoning

(the minimum lot size required is one and one-half acres, with the subject containing

substantially less).

3. Other zoning variances would also be necessary.

4. Although a public water system is nearby, in order for the property to be buildable, an

individual septic system would be required.

Mr. Cromwell also indicated that given the size of the property, along with the required

setbacks and other requirements, an insufficient amount of land area exists on this

property to accommodate a septic system and that the property is unbuildable. Mr.

Cromwell stated that “in its present configuration, I will go on record as saying that the

property is unbuildable.”

Again, while we do not have the expertise to determine the developability of the property,

given the preceding, the property is considered to have no significant development

potential on its own and may only have utility to an adjacent property owner for

additional buffer, potential for a low-utility land use, or for long term speculation.

Physically Possible

The subject site has adequate size, shape, frontage, drainage, utilities, ingress/egress and

topography that allows for a variety of land uses, including a residential use. However,

as mentioned previously, it would not conform to zoning.

Financially Feasible

Which uses, being both possible and legally permitted, will produce any net return to the

site. All uses that are expected to produce a positive return are regarded as financially

feasible.

Maximally Productive/Highest and Best Use

The use that will produce the greatest gain to the property owner, that is both possible

and legally permissible will be the highest and best use. It is our opinion, therefore, that

as of the date of appraisal, the highest and best use (optimal use) of the subject property,

as though vacant, is for either sale to adjacent property owner for expansion/buffer, for a

limited utility land use or for long term speculation.

42

HUDSON


Appraisal Objective and Methodology

The objective of this appraisal is to estimate the “as-is” market value of the herein

described property as of July 29, 2014.

In arriving at the estimate of market value of a given property, an established and

systematic procedure is followed. The steps required include definition of the problem,

the accumulation of data in the analysis, and interpretation of the data based upon the

three approaches to value. Finally, the results of each applicable approach are correlated

into a final estimate of value. In the case of the subject (because of its limited utility), our

analysis involved a --- step process:

Step 1 – Estimate market value assuming that the property is developable.

Step 2 – Estimate the appropriate discount applicable to the property reflecting its lack of

developability.

Step 3 – Apply the abovementioned discount to the step 1 (developable) value to arrive at

an as-is market value estimate.

In the appraisal process three recognized approaches to value are considered:

- Sales Comparison Approach

- Income Capitalization Approach

- Cost Approach

Following is a brief description of each of the three valuation approaches, along with an

explanation of their applicability and relevance to the valuation of the subject.

The Sales Comparison Approach

The sales comparison approach is a process of comparison of similar properties which

have recently sold with various items of similarity or dissimilarity noted; the sale prices

of the comparable properties are then adjusted to the subject in order to indicate a range

of value for the property being appraised. Since sufficient sales of similar properties were

available for comparison, we employed the Sales Comparison Approach to estimate

market value of the subject.

43

HUDSON


The Income Capitalization Approach

The income capitalization approach is a process in which a value indication is estimated

by calculating the present worth of future income through a capitalization process. This

process capitalizes annual net income before debt service and uses capitalization

techniques commensurate with quality and durability of the income stream. In order to

use this approach, an estimate of potential gross income is made by analyzing actual

income or comparing income from similar or competitive properties. Reasonable

expenses, including an allowance for vacancy and credit loss, are estimated and are then

subtracted from gross income in order to arrive at net income. Net income is then

capitalized using market-derived rates to arrive at an estimate of value. The income

capitalization approach is not commonly relied upon by market participants for this type

of property. Additionally, sufficient data was not available for our review and analysis.

The Income Capitalization Approach will, therefore, not be used to estimate the subject

property’s market value.

The Cost Approach

The cost approach is based on the proposition that a knowledgeable purchaser would pay

no more than the vacant land value plus construction cost, less physical, functional and

external (economic) depreciation reflected in substitute property with the same utility as

the subject property. This approach may be relevant when the property being appraised

involves new or nearly new improvements which represent the highest and best use of the

land, when unique or specialized improvements are located on the site, and when there

are recent comparable land sales available to estimate underlying land value.

The Cost Approach has not been developed for the valuation of the subject property for

the following reasons.

1. The subject is not improved with a new, or nearly new, building,

2. The improvement is not a specialty structure,

3. This type of property is typically bought and sold on the open market,

4. The levels of accrued depreciation that would need to be approximated would render

this approach less reliable than would be desired.

The Cost Approach is not considered especially relevant for the valuation of the subject

property, and, has therefore, been omitted.

44

HUDSON


Sales Comparison Approach The sales comparison approach is an appraisal technique in which the appraiser estimates

the subject's market value based on prices paid in actual market transactions. It is a

process of analyzing recently sold properties that are similar to and have the same or

similar highest and best use as the subject.

The reliability of this technique depends on (a) the degree of comparability of the

property appraised with each sale, (b) the length of time since the sale, (c) the accuracy of

the sales data, and (d) the absence of unusual conditions affecting the sale.

The steps of the Sales Comparison Approach are as follows:

1. Research the market to obtain sales of properties comparable to the subject property;

this step includes the verification of all relevant factual sales data.

2. Analyze the comparable sales to derive market supported adjustments that reflect the

significant differences between the comparable sales and the subject; general

adjustment categories include buyer expenditures, property rights conveyed, finance

terms, conditions of sale, market conditions, location and physical characteristics.

3. Formulate an opinion of the price or unit price for which each comparable property

would have sold had it possessed all of the important attributes of the subject

property, by applying the market derived adjustments to the comparable sales.

4. Reconcile the adjusted sale or unit prices into an indication of value for the subject

property.

Collection and Analysis of Sale Data

Comparable sales were researched through leads found on SalesWeb, published by the

NYS Office of Real Property Tax Services (ORPTS), or a variety of market data reports.

SalesWeb compiles transfers of real estate within the county through deeds recorded at

the Westchester County Clerk’s Office, Division of Land Records located in the City of

White Plains. Leads were then analyzed based on a physical inspection of the property,

information at the office of the Assessor and/or Building Department, and a review of the

recorded deeds and mortgages. The respective grantor, grantee, real estate

45

HUDSON


broker, or attorney of the grantor or grantee verified each of the sales used in this

analysis.

The research yielded recent sales of comparable properties in the market area of the

subject property; the properties that were considered most comparable to the subject have

been used as the basis of this analysis. Consideration is given to the following

characteristics and elements of comparison:

Real Property Rights Conveyed A transaction price is always predicated on the real property interest conveyed. Many types of real estate, particularly income-producing properties, are sold subject to existing leases. The revenue-generating potential of a property is often fixed or limited by the terms of existing leases. Therefore, in the valuation process, if possible, adjustments must be made to reflect the difference between contract rent and market rent and how this difference affects property price. However, in most cases, such rental data for comparable sale properties is difficult to obtain, often precluding the ability to make appropriate adjustments. Finance Terms The transaction price of one property may differ from that of an identical property owing to different financing arrangements. Conditions of Sale Adjustments of conditions of sale usually reflect the motivations of the buyer and the seller. A sale may be transacted at a below-market price if the seller needs cash in a hurry. A financial, business, or family relationship between the parties may also affect the price of property. When non-market conditions of a sale are detected in a transaction, the sale can be used as a comparable only with care. The circumstances of the sale must be thoroughly researched before an adjustment is made. Expenditures Made Immediately After Purchase A knowledgeable purchaser will typically consider expenditures that will be necessary upon purchase of a property because these costs will affect the price a buyer agrees to pay and the price a seller is willing to accept. Such expenditures may include the costs to demolish or remove buildings, costs to obtain a zone change, or costs to remediate environmental contamination. These expenditures (or planned expenditures) must be researched in order to accurately derive a proper adjustment. Market Conditions (Time Adjustment) Market conditions generally change over time, but the date of an appraisal is a specific time. Therefore, past sales must be examined in light of the

46

HUDSON


direction of change between the sale date of the comparable and valuation date of the subject property. Although the adjustment for market conditions is often referred to as a "time adjustment," time is not the cause of the adjustment. Market conditions shift over time; therefore, market conditions, not time, create the need for an adjustment. If market conditions have not changed, no adjustment is required, even though considerable time may have elapsed. Location An adjustment for location may be required when the location characteristics of a comparable property are different from those of the subject property. Location adjustments are usually expressed as percentages that reflect the increase or decrease in value attributable to the property's location or neighborhood. Physical Characteristics If the physical characteristics of a comparable property and the subject differ in many ways, each of these differences may require comparison and adjustment to the comparable. For vacant land properties, physical characteristics may include such factors as zoning, land size (area/unit), frontage, shape/configuration, topography, wetlands, and other physical features. For improved properties, physical differences may include such factors as building size, quality of construction, architectural style, building materials, age, condition, functional utility, site size, attractiveness and amenities. Furthermore, on site environmental conditions are adjusted when deemed necessary.

After analysis, an estimate is made of the price for which each comparable sale property would have sold had it possessed all of the same attributes and/or disabilities of the property being appraised. These opinions are then reconciled into an estimate of market value for the subject property.

Because Westchester County is extensively developed, there are a limited number of

comparable land sales to choose from; therefore, the land sales analyzed in this report

include sales that differ in size from the subject and that required expenditures by the

grantee (for demolition, extensive site work or development approvals). However, these

sales collectively provide a reliable preliminary indication of value for the subject’s

underlying land.

The following sales are used to estimate the subject property’s market value. Later in this

report we will demonstrate an appropriate deduction reflecting the subject’s limited

utility.

47

HUDSON


Sale 1

Location: Eastern terminus (#15) of Briggs Lane, Armonk, Town of North Castle, Westchester County, NY.

Tax ID: 107.02‐4‐66.2.Grantor: 15 Briggs, LLC., 15 Rosehill Drive, Armonk, NY 10504.Grantee: Splinter Construction Corp., 4 East Brook Farm, Bedford, NY 10506. Land Area: 2.282 acres.Land Data: Irregular shaped inside parcel with approximately 175.82’ of frontage along the east

side of Briggs Lane, located at the eastern end of a cul‐de‐sac. Land slopes up from road grade then becomes gently rolling in main region of property. Additionally, the land slopes up at far eastern portion easterly. The entire property is heavily wooded. Utilities include telephone and electric.

Improvements: None. Zoning: “R‐3/4A, One Family Residence District (3/4 Acre).”Sale Date: 7/18/13, Recorded 8/9/13, Control No. 531993170.Sale Price: $450,000 (MLS indicates a price of $426,000; actual deed indicates $450,000).Comments: The property was listed for sale for $525,000; marketing time was 154 days.Base Value: $450,000.

48

HUDSON


Sale 2

Location: North side (#16) of Cider Mill Circle, approximately 556+ feet west of Old Post Road, located on the north side of a cul‐de‐sac, Armonk, Town of North Castle, Westchester County, NY.

Tax ID: 2/11/9‐17. Grantor: Cider Mill Main Street LLC., 199 Main Street, Suite 205, White Plains, NY 10601.Grantee: Christopher and Tamara Arcamone, 5 Schultz Way, Armonk, NY 10504. Land Area: 0.264 acre. Land Data: Irregular shaped inside parcel with approximately 39.28’ of frontage along the north

side of Cider Mill Circle. Land steeply slopes up from east to west exceeding a 25% grade in center portion of property. The entire property is cleared. All utilities.

Improvements: None. Zoning: “R‐MF‐A, Multi Family Residence A District.”Sale Date: 12/17/12, Recorded 1/2/13, Control No. 523483550.Sale Price: $499,000. Base Value: $499,000.

49

HUDSON


Sale 3

Location: South side (#34) of Hardscrabble Hill Road, approximately 1,470’ east of Hardscrabble Road, Town of Mount Pleasant, Westchester County, NY.

Tax ID: 99.10‐2‐3.9.Grantor: Zappico Morning View Heights, LLC., 194 Brady Avenue, Hawthorne, NY 10532.Grantee: R. Todd Constable, 187 West 89th Street, 10D, New York, NY 10029. Land Area: 1.091 acres.Land Data: Irregular shaped inside parcel with approximately 163.99’ of frontage along the

south side of Hardscrabble Hill Road. The property is generally rolling, slightly sloping from west to east, and begins sloping down steeper at far southwestern portion; heavily wooded throughout. Utilities include telephone and electric.

Improvements: None. Zoning: “R‐40, One‐Family Residential District.”Sale Date: 5/15/14, Recorded 5/30/14, Control No. 541323180.Sale Price: $500,000. Comments: The property was subsequently developed with a house.Base Value: $500,000

50

HUDSON


Sale 4

Location: East side (#16) of Windmill Place, approximately 1,260+ feet north of Windmill Road, Town of North Castle, Westchester County, NY.

Tax ID: 1/04/10‐407.Grantor: Mary Ruth Kilpatrick, 16 Windmill Place, Armonk, NY 10504 as 50% tenant in

common, and Candace Flanagan, 62 Fleming Court, Palm Coast, Florida 32137 as 50% tenant in common.

Grantee: Savyon Development Inc., 3 Sniffen Road, Armonk, NY 10504. Land Area: 1.502 acres.Land Data: Nearly rectangular shaped inside parcel with approximately 178.46’ of frontage

along the east side of Windmill Place. Land is gently sloping throughout. Western portion is mostly cleared for residence and eastern portion is wooded. Utilities include telephone and electric.

Improvements: At time of sale a one‐story single‐family house containing existed on the property containing 1,822 sq. ft. built in 1960 but was demolished. Estimated demolition cost is $40,000.

Zoning: “R‐1.5A, One Family Residence District (1‐½ Acres).”Sale Date: 2/7/13, Recorded 2/28/13, Control No. 530293214.Sale Price: $690,000. Effective acquisition cost (including estimated cost of demolition) is

$730,000. Comments: The property was listed for sale for $725,000 on 12/4/2012; marketing time was 65

days. Base Value: $730,000 (effective).

51

HUDSON


Sale 5

Location: West side (#1513) of Old Orchard Street, approximately 174+ feet north of Johnson Place, Town of North Castle, Westchester County, NY.

Tax ID: 123.05‐1‐1. Grantor: Kazimierz Czoch, 1513 Old Orchard Street, White Plains, NY 10604. Grantee: Gaetano and Elise DiMatteo, 4 Forest Lake Drive, West Harrison, NY 10604.Land Area: 0.478 acre. Land Data: Irregular shaped inside parcel with approximately 80.00’ of frontage along the west

side of Old Orchard Street. The majority of property is at road grade and gently slopes up westerly; most of the lot is cleared. Utilities include telephone and electric.

Improvements: At time of sale a one‐story single‐family house existed on the property containing 640 sq. ft. constructed in 1915. Property was sold with approvals for demolition to build 3,000 sq. ft. home. Estimated cost for demolition/removal is $25,000.

Zoning: “R‐1.5A, One Family Residence District (1‐½ Acres).”Sale Date: 10/2/13, Recorded 12/16/13, Control No. 531163601.Sale Price: $305,000. Effective acquisition cost (including estimated demolition cost) is

$330,000. Comments: The property was listed for sale for $350,000 on March 21, 2013; marketing time

was 200 days. Base Value: $330,000.

52

HUDSON


Comparable Sales Location Map


SUBJECT

4

1

2

3

5

53

HUDSON


Adjustment Grid Process

In the following grid(s), the numerical adjustment factors with respect to each of the

individual categories for which adjustments are made are applied as follows:

0 denotes a degree of similarity, equality, or parity as between the comparable sale (or

lease) and the subject property sufficient to justify no numerical adjustment.

A positive (+) adjustment indicates a relative degree of inferiority of the comparable sale

(or lease) compared to the subject property for the particular adjustment category.

A negative (-) adjustment indicates a relative degree of superiority of the comparable sale

(or lease) compared to the subject property for the particular adjustment category.

In accordance with the suggestion of the Appraisal Institute, preliminary adjustments for

economic factors are made sequentially for property rights, financing, motivation, and

market conditions, where warranted. Individual adjustments are then made for various

physical characteristics of the sales on a cumulative basis. The net cumulative adjustment

indicated is the total addition of each individual positive or negative numerical

adjustment in the respective comparable column. The net adjustment is applied to a 1.00

factor (for multiplication purposes), and the adjusted factor is subsequently applied to the

preliminary adjusted base unit value of the comparable sale (or lease).

In making the various computations herein, the appraiser has adopted typical and

reasonable methods of rounding in order to retain, wherever possible, the convenience

and utility of whole numbers. In no case does the rounding process materially affect the

results obtained.

The Summary of Comparable Sales and Adjustment Grid is presented on the following page and is followed by our conclusion of value for the subject property.

54

HUDSON


Sales Summary & Adjustment Grid

Sale No. 1 2 3 4 5 SubjectLocation #15 #16 #34 #16 #1513

Briggs Lane Cider Mill Circle Hardscrabble Hill Rd Windmill Place Old Orchard Street Windmill RoadMunicipality North Castle North Castle Mount Pleasant North Castle North Castle North CastlePO Armonk Armonk Chappaqua Armonk No. White Plains ArmonkSchool District Byram Hills Byram Hills Chappaqua Byram Hills Valhalla Byram HillsCounty Westchester Westchester Westchester Westchester Westchester Westchester

Grantor 15 Briggs, LLC Cider Mill Main St LLC

Zappico Morning View Heights, LLC

Mary Kilpatrick & Candace Flanagan

Kazimierz Czoch n./a.

Grantee Splinter Construction Corp.

Christopher & Tamara Arcamone

R. Todd Constable Savyon Development Inc

Gaetano & Elise Dematteo

n./a.

Tax Map ID No. 107.02-4-66.2 2/11/9-17 99.10-2-3.9 1/04/10-407 123.05-1-1 102.03-1-7Deed Reference 531993170 523483550 541323180 530293214 531163601 n./a.Sale Date 7/18/2013 12/17/2012 5/15/2014 2/7/2013 10/2/2013 n./a.Effect. Sale Price $450,000 $499,000 $500,000 $730,000 $330,000 n./a.Property Rights Fee Simple Fee Simple Fee Simple Fee Simple Fee Simple Fee SimpleAtypical Financing None Known None Known None Known None Known None Known None KnownConditions of Sale Arm's Length Arm's Length Arm's Length Arm's Length Arm's Length Arm's LengthMarket Conditions Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar n./a.Land Area (Acres) 2.280 0.260 1.091 1.502 0.478 0.267Road Frontage (usable) 175.82 39.28 163.99 178.46 80.00 186.32Frontage/Acre (ft./ac.) 77 151 150 119 167 698Configuration Irregular Irregular Irregular Nearly regular Irregular IrregularTopography Gently sloping Sloping Generally rolling Gently sloping Rolling Gently slopes up

Utilities All All T, E T, E T, E T, EZoning R-3/4A R-MF-A R-40 R-1.5A R-MF-A R-1.5ABOHA Yes Yes Yes Yes No

Amenities None None None None None NoneEncumbrances None known None known None known None known None known None knownComments Approvals to build

3,000 sq. ft houseImprovements None None None One-story 1,822 sq. ft.

house built in 1960 One-story 640 sq. ft.

house built in 1915None

Effective Sale Price $450,000 $499,000 $500,000 $730,000 $330,000

AdjustmentsProperty Rights 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%Adjusted Price $450,000 $499,000 $500,000 $730,000 $330,000Financing 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%Adjusted Price $450,000 $499,000 $500,000 $730,000 $330,000Conditions of Sale 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%Adjusted Price $450,000 $499,000 $500,000 $730,000 $330,000Market Conditions 0% 5% 0% 0% 0%Adjusted Price $450,000 $523,950 $500,000 $730,000 $330,000Expenditures after Sale 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Adjusted Price $450,000 $523,950 $500,000 $730,000 $330,000Zoning/Utility/BOHA -10% -10% -10% -10% -10%Size -30% 0% -20% -25% -5%Topography -5% -5% -5% -5% -5%Configuration/access 15% 0% 0% 0% 15%Location 5% -5% 10% 0% 25%Improvements 0% 0% 0% -5% 0%Amenities 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%Utilities 0% -20% 0% 0% 0%

Net Adjustment -25% -40% -25% -45% 20%Value Indication $337,500 $314,370 $375,000 $401,500 $396,000

55

HUDSON


Adjustment Factors

Within the Sales Comparison Approach, comparables are analyzed and compared to the

subject property, and adjustments are applied to reflect the differences between each sale

property and the subject. The various factors considered in making such adjustments

include the following:

Real Property Rights Conveyed - A transactions price is always predicated on the real

property interest conveyed. Many types of real estate, particularly income-producing

properties, are sold subject to existing leases. The revenue-generating potential of a

property is often fixed or limited by the terms of existing leases. Therefore, in the

valuation process, if possible, adjustments must be made to reflect the difference between

contract rent and market rent and how this difference affects property price. However, in

most cases, such rental data for comparable sale properties is very difficult to obtain,

often precluding the ability to make appropriate adjustments. Properties may also be

encumbered by easements, covenants or restrictions which represent various property

rights that may influence value. Therefore, in the valuation process, if possible, an

analysis must be made with respect to the differences in property rights and how these

differences affect property price.

Finance Terms - The transaction price of one property may differ from that of an

identical property owing to different financing arrangements.

Conditions of Sale - Adjustments of conditions of sale usually reflect the motivations of

the buyer and the seller. A sale may be transacted at a below-market price if the seller

needs cash in a hurry. A financial, business, or family relationship between the parties

may also affect the price of property. When non-market conditions of a sale are detected

in a transaction, the sale can be used as a comparable only with great care. The

circumstances of the sale must be thoroughly researched before an adjustment is made.

Expenditures Made Immediately After Purchase - A knowledgeable purchaser will

typically consider expenditures that will be necessary upon purchase of a property

because these costs will affect the price a buyer agrees to pay and the price a seller is

willing to accept. Such expenditures may include the costs to demolish or remove

buildings, costs to obtain a zone change, or costs to remediate environmental

contamination. These expenditures (or planned expenditures) must be thoroughly

researched in order to accurately derive a proper adjustment.

56

HUDSON


Time - The price of each comparable sale was adjusted to reflect the effect of the passage

of time on the value of real property in the market. The factor includes an allowance

reflecting the increment in real value (related to supply and demand), as well as that

portion of increasing value attributable to inflation. The adjustment made is referred to in

terms of percent increase or decrease annually.

Following a period of market deterioration (2007/2008), prices for many property types

are believed to have subsequently stabilized with recent signs of increases in response to

renewed demand stimulated by improving economic conditions (nationally, regionally

and locally).

Owing to the diverse and fragmented nature of Westchester County’s real estate market

segments, prices for various property types have not changed uniformly, but, rather, have

changed at varying levels that, to a large part, reflect the relative advantages and

desirability of specific geographic locations.

With regard to the residential market segment, we reviewed statistical information

gathered by the Hudson Gateway Association of Realtors, Inc. “The region’s surge in

real estate sales since early 2013 continued stronger still in the first quarter of 2014.

Realtors participating in the Hudson Gateway Multiple Listing Service, Inc. reported a

grand total of 2,552 closed residential transactions in the MLS’s core four county service

territory in January through March, an increase of 10.8% over the 2,304 closings in the

same period last year. The increase from 2012 to 2013 was 8.8%, and compared to the

recessionary performance of only 1,582 closings in 2009, the 2014 volume was 61.3%

higher… …The first quarter closings resulted largely from properties that were listed

and marketed during the late autumn and winter months of 2013. Westchester, which

accounts for about 60% of the region’s real estate sales, led the way with a powerful

19.4% sales increase in its single family house sector, and 21.0% in its cooperative unit

sector. Westchester condominium sales did not follow suit, however, declining by 15.2%

from last year…

… In a high sales rate and tight inventory environment, prices could be expected to

increase and they did. The first quarter median1 sale price of a single family house in

Westchester was $600,000, an increase of $85,000 or 16.5% over last year’s median. Not

all of the increase derived from competitive market pressure, however. Some reflected

the addition of more high end properties to the real estate market basket. Such

57

HUDSON


properties (defined in this report as single family houses selling for $1,000,000 or more)

constituted 23% of house sales in the first quarter of 2014, a level that was more

characteristic of prerecession markets. Last year’s first quarter ratio of high end

properties was just 16%.”18 The following chart indicates first quarter median sale prices

in Westchester, Putnam, Rockland and Orange County Counties:

Source: Hudson Gateway Association of Realtors

The chart on the following page indicates second quarter and year-to-date 2013 market

activity in Westchester County including:

Number of Sales Median Sale Price Mean Sale Price Inventory

18 2143 First Quarter Residential Real Estate Sales Report, Westchester, Putnam, Rockland and Orange Counties, New York, Hudson Gateway Association of Realtors, April 11, 2014.

58

HUDSON


Source: Hudson Gateway Association of Realtors, 1st Quarter 2014 Sales Report

Considering both the positive and negative aspects of the subject’s immediate and

surrounding neighborhood, it is our opinion that this particular sub-market has undergone

a modest rate of growth over the past two years or so. Accordingly, within this report,

comparable sale prices have been adjusted for time in order to reflect market conditions

in effect for this property type over the past several years.

Zoning/Utility - An analysis of uses permitted in differing zoning district classifications,

yield potentials, building regulations and/or applicable restrictions and limitations.

59

HUDSON


Size- An analysis of the relationship that exists between overall area, or size, and unit

value, based on the proposition established in the real estate market wherein, generally,

other factors being equal, the larger the property size, the higher the price, or value, and

vice versa.

Topography - An analysis of topographical features, as they relate to optimum site

utilization.

Configuration - An analysis of the effect of plot shape, street frontage, and perimeter

outline, as they would affect optimum property development.

Location/Desirability - An analysis of various location factors (transportation facilities,

highway accessibility, population density, patterns of existing improvements and uses,

labor supply, availability, convenience, and adequacy of shopping and municipal

services, vehicular traffic patterns and volume, etc.).

Improvements - An analysis and evaluation of the age, size, type, quality, condition, and

functional utility of all structural and site improvements which enhance the land.

Amenity/View- An analysis of the differences in site amenities such as a view, water

frontage, or other enhancement, as a factor affecting the value of vacant land.

Utilities - An analysis of the availability of municipal utilities (water, sanitary and storm

sewer, natural gas, electricity, telephone, paved street, etc.).

60

HUDSON


Indicated Preliminary Land Value (as though buildable)

We researched and analyzed the most similar and recent sales in the area of the subject

property. The sales cited are the best available, and after appropriate adjustments they

represent a reliable range of value per unit for the subject property as though it can be

developed. We applied appropriate adjustments to each of the comparable sales offered

herein to reflect the differences between each sale and the subject.

Adjustments to the sale prices of the comparables were based on information provided by

the grantor or grantee and estimated based on the appraiser’s experience and knowledge

of the local market. Considering the analyses, the sales are reconciled into an estimate of

market value that is best supported by the market data. The adjusted unit values for the

comparable sales were as follows:

Sale No. 1 2 4 5 6

AdjustedValue Indication $396,000 $337,500 $314,370 $375,000 $401,500

After adjustments, the comparables demonstrate a range in value from a low of $314,370

to a high of $401,500. The average adjusted value indication is $364,874 and the median

is $375,000.

Substantially equal weight is given to each of the comparables since each of these

properties have characteristics closely resembling the subject property. Utilizing the

comparable sales, it is our opinion that the market value of the subject property as though

it can be developed, as of the date of appraisal, was:

Three Hundred Seventy Thousand ($370,000) Dollars

Note: The above preliminary value estimate is made under the hypothetical

condition assuming that the property is not subject to development limitations.

It is required for, and is the basis of, the Scenario 2 portion (“as-is”) of this

analysis.

61

HUDSON


Scenario 2 (Market Value “as-is”) In order to derive the adjustment reflecting the decrement in value attributable to lack

of developability (the inability to develop the subject), we utilized four matched-pair

analyses. Because developability at the subject site is non-existent (pursuant to

current zoning restrictions the property cannot be developed) this added adjustment is

necessary.

The first non-developable parcel analyzed, Paired sale A (located in the Town of

Somers, NY), was sold by Lincoln Hall to New York State. John F. Gabriel, Assistant

Secretary of Lincoln Hall oversaw the transaction; Mr. Gabriel reported that because

of topographic conditions, the parcel is non-developable. Most of the lot is 6’ to 8’

below street grade and acts as a water catch basin for the area. This sale property is

compared to other sales of building lots in Somers. Once all differences, excepting

the sought variable, are adjusted, a non-development adjustment is extracted.

Adjustments for topography are omitted from the analysis because site topography is

the feature that rendered the parcel undevelopable (the sought variable). Paired Sale

A, the sales used in its analysis, and the adjustment grid are shown on the following

pages.

62

HUDSON


Paired Sale A (Undevelopable Land Sale)

Location

Address : Southeast corner of Lovell Road and Primrose Street,

Town of Somers, Westchester County, New York

Tax I.D. # : Section 16.20, Block 2, Lots 10 - 13, p/o 7, 8, 14 - 21.

Deed and Mortgage Data

Grantor : Lincoln Hall

Grantee : The People of the State of New York

Sale Dated : 10/13/94

Sale Recorded : 12/27/94, Liber 11045, Page 51

Revenue Stamps : $0 (exempt)

Sales Price : $24,000

Physical Data

Area : 1.39 acres

Frontage : Sufficient frontage on Lovell Road and Primrose Street

Configuration : Irregular, corner parcel

Topography : Most of the lot is 6’ to 8’ below street grade and acts as

a catch basin for the area.

Utilities : Electric and telephone

Encumbrances : None known

Zoning

District : “R-40, Single-Family Residential”

Sale Analysis

Price per Lot : $24,000

Verification : Particulars of sale confirmed

Comments : Because of site topography the grantor believed the site

was undevelopable. According to Mr. Gabriel, prior to

the sale to New York State, a contractor approached

Lincoln Hall with the intention of purchasing the lot for

development. However, after conferring with town

officials who indicated that the likelihood of

development was virtually nonexistent, the contractor

withdrew his offer.

63

HUDSON


Paired Sale AA

Location

Address : East side of Sunderland Lane, Town of Somers,

Westchester County, New York

Tax I.D. # : Section 28.13, Block 1, Lot 4


Grantor : Tip Top Group

Grantee : Thomas and Valerie Pascale



Revenue Stamps : $672


Physical Data

Area : 3.63 acres

Frontage : Sufficient frontage on Sunderland Lane

Configuration : Generally rectangular, inside parcel

Topography : Drops below grade and is generally level



Zoning


Sale Analysis



64

HUDSON


Paired Sale AB

Location

Address : East side of Sunderland Lane, Town of Somers,





Grantee : Joseph M. Malzo





Physical Data

Area : 4.27 acres

Frontage : Sufficient frontage on Sunderland Lane

Configuration : Irregular, inside parcel

Topography : Land slopes down from north to south



Zoning


Sale Analysis



65

HUDSON


Paired Sale AC

Location

Address : Southeast terminus of Teed Court, Town of Somers,





Grantee : Ambuj Goyal and Barbara L. Goyal





Physical Data

Area : 1.98 acres

Frontage : Sufficient frontage on Teed Court


Topography : Land rises from north to south



Zoning


Sale Analysis



66

HUDSON


ANALYSIS OF NON-DEVELOPMENT VARIABLE

Sale AA Sale AB Sale AC Paired Sale A

Date of Sale 11-Jan-93 24-Jun-92 29-May-92 13-Oct-94

Address Sunderland Ln Sunderland Ln Teed Ct Primrose St

Town Somers Somers Somers Somers

Area (Acres) 3.63 4.27 1.98 1.39

Zoning R-80 R-80 R-80 R-40

Topography Drops/Level Slopes Rises gradually Below Grade

Frontage Adequate Adequate Adequate Adequate

Configuration Gen rectangular Irregular Irregular Irregular

Utilities E,T E,T E,T E,T

Motivation No No No No

Sale Price $168,000 $180,000 $172,000 $24,000

Property Rights 0% 0% 0%

Adjusted Price $168,000 $180,000 $172,000

Finance Terms 0% 0% 0%

Adjusted Price $168,000 $180,000 $172,000

Motivation 0% 0% 0%

Adjusted Price $168,000 $180,000 $172,000

Market Conditions 0% 0% 0%

Adjusted Price $168,000 $180,000 $172,000

Physical Characteristic Adjustments

Location 0% 0% 0%

Size -10% -10% -5%

Topography n/a n/a n/a

Frontage 0% 0% 0%

Utilities 0% 0% 0%

Net Adjustment -10% -10% -5%

Grid Adjusted Price $151,200 $162,000 $163,400

Adjusted % Difference 15.87% 14.81% 14.69%

As the above grid demonstrates, once the comparables are adjusted, the value of the

non-developable parcel represents roughly 15% of the value of its developable

67

HUDSON


comparables. From this analysis, it is indicated that 85% of the value is in the

developability of the parcel.

The second non-developable parcel analyzed, Paired Sale B, because of its

subdivision configuration, lacks road frontage and also is not developable. It was

purchased by an adjoining property owner from the subdivision developers to

increase the grantees’ privacy. Like the previous non-developable parcel, it is

compared to similar, but buildable, lots. The feature that makes the parcel non-

developable, frontage, is omitted from the analysis in order to derive a non-

development adjustment. Paired Sale B, the sales used in its analysis, and the

adjustment grid are shown on the following pages.

68

HUDSON


Paired Sale B (Undevelopable Land Sale)

Location

Address : Off Lakeview Road, Town of Yorktown, Westchester

County, New York



Grantor : Pinesbridge Estates

Grantee : Lawrence David Swift & Sally C. Swift





Physical Data

Area : 2.10 acres

Frontage : None


Topography : Rolling



Zoning

District : “R1-80, Single-Family Residential”

Sale Analysis



Comments : This parcel layout lacks road frontage and is

surrounded by other parcels of the subdivision. It was

purchased by an adjoining property owner from the

subdivision developers to increase the grantees’

privacy. At the time of sale both parties knew the

parcel was undevelopable.

69

HUDSON


Paired Sale BA

Location

Address : Northeast corner of Hog Hill Road and Wooded Hill

Court, Town of Yorktown, Westchester County, New

York

Tax I.D. # : Section 19.3, Parcel 21, Lot 3


Grantor : Wooded Hill Associates

Grantee : Corrado and Marie Ragazzo





Physical Data

Area : 1.85 acres

Frontage : Sufficient frontage on Hog Hill Road and Wooded

Hill Court


Topography : Rolling



Zoning


Sale Analysis



70

HUDSON


Paired Sale BB

Location

Address : Northwest corner of Vine and Wall Streets, Town of

Yorktown, Westchester County, New York



Grantor : Raymond A. and Bridget M. Cardonne

Grantee : Arthur R. and Joanne C. Bartosch

Sale Dated : 3/5/90




Physical Data

Area : 1.12 acres

Frontage : Sufficient frontage on Vine and Wall Streets


Topography : Generally level



Zoning


Sale Analysis



71

HUDSON


Paired Sale BC

Location

Address : Southeast side of Spring Hill Lane, Town of

Yorktown, Westchester County, New York

Tax I.D. # : Section 19.05, Parcel 18.1, Lot 24


Grantor : 22-24 Spring Development Corp.

Grantee : Robert P. Zimmel and Jean M. Zimmel





Physical Data

Area : 1.98 acres

Frontage : Sufficient frontage on Spring Hill Lane

Configuration : Generally rectangular, inside parcel

Topography : Slopes up



Zoning


Sale Analysis



72

HUDSON



Sale BA Sale BB Sale BC Paired Sale B

Date of Sale 14-Oct-94 5-Mar-90 3-Nov-94 20-Dec-91

Address Hog Hill Rd Vine St Spring Hill Ln Off Lakeview Rd

Town Yorktown Yorktown Yorktown Yorktown

Area (Acres) 1.85 1.12 1.98 2.10

Zoning R1-80 R1-40 R1-80 R1-80

Topography Rolling Gen level Slopes Rolling

Frontage Adequate Adequate Adequate None

Configuration Irregular Rectangular Rectangular Irregular



Sale Price $137,000 $120,000 $140,800 $10,000


Adjusted Price $137,000 $120,000 $140,800


Adjusted Price $137,000 $120,000 $140,800

Motivation 0% 0% 0%

Adjusted Price $137,000 $120,000 $140,800


Adjusted Price $150,700 $120,000 $154,880


Location 0% 0% 0%

Size 0% 5% 0%

Topography 0% 0% 0%

Frontage n/a n/a n/a

Utilities 0% 0% 0%

Net Adjustment 0% 5% 0%




non-developable parcel represents roughly 7% of the value of its developable

73

HUDSON


comparables. From this analysis, it is indicated that 93% of the value is in the


The third non-developable parcel analyzed, Paired Sale C, because of its extremely

narrow configuration (it lacks sufficient depth after accounting for zoning setbacks)

and its relatively steep topography, the property is, in all likelihood not developable.

It was purchased by a group of three adjoining property owners from the municipality

(Town of Yorktown) to increase the grantees’ privacy and control over the site. Like

the previous non-developable parcels, it is compared to similar, but buildable, lots in

its market area. The features that make Parcel C non-developable (configuration and

topography) are omitted from the analysis in order to isolate a non-development

adjustment. Paired Sale C, the sales used in its analysis, and the adjustment grid are

shown on the following pages.

74

HUDSON


Paired Sale C (Undevelopable Land Sale)

Location

Address : Northeast corner of McKeel Street and Spring Drive,

Town of Yorktown, Westchester County, New York.

Tax I.D. # : Section 15.3, Block 10, Lot 99.


Grantor : Town of Yorktown.

Grantee : Nancy Sherwood-Truitt, Jonathan and Jane Bernz and

Scott Sanger and Joy Dallenegra.

Sale Dated : 12/23/97.

Sale Recorded : 4/28/98, Liber 11984, Page 53.

Revenue Stamps : $0 (exempt)

Sales Price : $400.00.

Physical Data

Area : 1.0± acre.

Frontage : 487’ on McKeel Street and 231’ on Spring Drive.

Configuration : Irregular, corner parcel with limited lot depth.

Topography : Land slopes up sharply from the grade of McKeel

Street to Spring Drive.

Utilities : Electric, telephone and water.


Zoning

District : “R1-40, Residential.”

Sale Analysis

Price per Lot : $400.00.

Verification : Particulars of sale confirmed.

Comments : Because of site topography and insufficient lot depth to

meet zoning requirements, a strong likelihood exists

that the lot was undevelopable. The property was

purchased by a group of three adjacent property owners

at a widely publicized public auction with numerous

bidders present.

75

HUDSON


Paired Sale CA

Location

Address : West side of McKeel Street, 500± feet north of Croton

Heights Road, Town of Yorktown, Westchester

County, New York

Tax I.D. # : Section 15.3, Block 10, Lot 19.


Grantor. : Anthony De Vito.

Grantee : Eric Di Bartolo.

Sale Dated : 11/30/94.


Revenue Stamps : $300.00


Physical Data

Area : 0.662± acre.

Frontage : 122’ on McKeel Street.

Configuration : Irregular, inside parcel with ample lot depth.

Topography : Land slopes gradually down from the grade of McKeel

Street.

Utilities : Electric, telephone and water.


Zoning

District : “R1-40, Residential”

Sale Analysis

Price per Lot : $75,000.


Comments : Subsequent to the sale, the property was improved with

a single-family residence.

76

HUDSON


Paired Sale CB

Location: Old Logging Road, Town of Yorktown, Westchester County, NY.

Tax ID: 11.2-7-7.2.

Grantor: Roger Goodfriend (undivided 55% interest), and Lewis A. Goodfriend (undivided 45% interest), c/o Goodfriend, 11 Riverdale Avenue Port Chester, New York.

Grantee: Christopher and Amy Malisse, 1155 Warburton Avenue, Apt. 3R, Yonkers, NY.

Land Area: 1.847 acres.

Land Data: Irregular shaped parcel. Paved street.

Frontage: 127.07’

Topography: Slightly sloping to a low area; some rock outcroppings; owing to the topographical features, the septic system design will require use of an ejector pump.

Utilities: Electric and telephone.

Zoning: “R1-80” (changed to “R1-160”).

Deed Dated: 12/12/96, Recorded: 12/31/96, Liber 11623 Page 71.

Sale Price: $78,500; Revenue Stamps: $314.00

Financing: Typical.

Comments: 1. After 285 days on the market, the property achieved 72% of its original listing price of $109,500.

2. The southerly 50’ is encumbered by a tree buffer.

Base Unit Value: $78,500.

77

HUDSON


Paired Sale CC

Location: South side of Spring Drive, 140’ west of Croton Heights Road, Town of Yorktown, Westchester County, NY.

Tax ID: 15.4-10-92.

Grantor: Peter D. Welch, 85 Croton Avenue, Mount Kisco, NY.

Grantee: Rene Bloch, Rochambeau Drive, Yorktown Heights, NY.

Land Area: 1.025 acres.

Land Data: Irregular shaped inside parcel. Unpaved (dirt surface) street.

Frontage: 295’

Topography: Gradually sloping down from east to west; front portion s at road grade and generally level. Some rock outcroppings were evident and the site required some rock removal.

Utilities: Public utilities include electric, telephone and water.

Zoning: “R1-40, Residential” (40,000 sq. ft. min. lot size).

Deed Dated: 1/31/97, Recorded: 3/12/97, Liber 11680 Page 4.

Sale Price: $60,000; Revenue Stamps: $240.00

Financing: Seller provided a $48,000 short-term (1-year) mortgage; undisclosed terms.

Comments: 1. After 270 days on the market, the property achieved 75% of its original listing price of $89,500.

2. Subsequent to the sale, the grantee constructed a single-family residence on this site.

Base Unit Value: $60,000.

78

HUDSON



Sale CA Sale CB Sale CC Paired Sale C

Date of Sale 30-Nov-94 12-Dec-96 31-Jan-97 23-Dec-97

Address McKeel St. Old Logging Rd. Croton Heights

Rd.

McKeel St.

Town Yorktown Yorktown Yorktown Yorktown

Area (Acres) 0.662 1.847 1.025 1

Zoning R1-40 R1-80 R1-40 R1-40

Topography Moderate Moderate Moderate Steep

Frontage Adequate Adequate Adequate Adequate

Configuration Irregular Irregular Irregular Narrow

Utilities E, T, W E,T E, T, W E, T, W


Sale Price $75,000 $78,500 $60,000 $400


Adjusted Price $75,000 $78,500 $60,000


Adjusted Price $75,000 $78,500 $60,000

Motivation 0% 0% 0%

Adjusted Price $75,000 $78,500 $60,000


Adjusted Price $82,500 $78,500 $66,000


Location 0% 0% 0%

Size 5% -5% 0%

Topography n/a n/a n/a

Frontage n/a n/a n/a

Utilities 0% 5% 0%

Net Adjustment 5% 0% 0%



79

HUDSON



non-developable parcel represents roughly 0.5% of the value of its developable

comparables. From this analysis, it is indicated that 99.5% of the value is in the


The fourth non-developable parcel analyzed, Paired Sale D, is a 2.30 acre parcel in

the Town of Bedford, NY. Owing to non-compliance with zoning (insufficient lot

size) and topographic conditions, the property was not developable. It was purchased

by an adjoining property owner from grantor. Like the previous non-developable

parcel, it is compared to similar, but buildable, lots. The main feature that makes the

parcel non-developable, topography, is omitted from the analysis in order to derive a

non-development adjustment. Paired Sale D, the sales used in its analysis, and the

adjustment grid are shown on the following pages.

80

HUDSON


Paired Sale D

Location

Address : Southeast end (#48) of Christopher Road, Town of

Bedford, Westchester County, New York



Grantor : Androse LLC

Grantee : George Retsinas

Sale Dated : 12/16/2010



Physical Data

Area : 2.30 acres

Frontage : Minimal


Topography : Slopes down sharply in an easterly direction from

road grade.



Zoning

District : “R-4A, Residence Four-Acre District”

Sale Analysis



Comments : Grantor tried to sell previously but could not find a

buyer. Property was then sold to an adjacent property

owner.

81

HUDSON


Paired Sale DA

Location

Address : South side (#36) of Barrett Road, Town of Bedford,




Grantor : Michael S. Cashel

Grantee : Evonne Watanabe




Physical Data

Area : 1.30 acres

Frontage : Frontage on the south side of Barrett Road.


Topography : Generally rolling


Improvements : In-ground pool, pool house in deteriorated condition;

nominal contributory value to underlying site.


Zoning

District : “R-1A, Residence One-Acre District”

Sale Analysis



82

HUDSON


Paired Sale DB

Location

Address : East side (#32) of Hickory Lane, Town of Bedford,




Grantor : Anne H. Cocke

Grantee : 32 Hickory Lane LLC




Physical Data

Area : 2.30 acres

Frontage : Sufficient frontage on Hickory Lane

Configuration : Irregular

Topography : Gradually slopes



Zoning

District : “R-1A, Residence One-Acre District”

Sale Analysis



83

HUDSON


Paired Sale DC

Location

Address : West side of (#17) of Whitlockville Road, Town of

Bedford, Westchester County, New York



Grantor : Anthony Executor Sporborg

Grantee : Julia Voster




Physical Data

Area : 2.10acres

Frontage : Sufficient frontage on Whitlockville Road


Topography : Steeply slopes



Zoning

District : “R-2A, Residence Two-Acre District”

Sale Analysis



84

HUDSON



Sale DA Sale DB Sale DC Paired Sale D

Date of Sale 23-Jul-09 29-Nov-11 12-Jun-09 6-Dec-10

Address Barrett Rd Hickory Ln Whitlockville Rd Christopher Rd

Town Bedford Bedford Bedford Bedford

Area (Acres) 1.3 2.3 2.1 2.3

Zoning R-1A R-1A R-2A R-4A

Topography Gradually slopes Gradually slopes Steeply slopes Slopes down

Frontage Adequate Adequate Adequate Limited

Configuration Irregular Irregular Irregular Irregular



Sale Price $398,000 $405,000 $250,000 $5,000

Property Rights 0% 0% 0% Adjusted Price $398,000 $405,000 $250,000 Finance Terms 0% 0% 0% Adjusted Price $398,000 $405,000 $250,000 Motivation 0% 0% 0% Adjusted Price $398,000 $405,000 $250,000 Market Conditions 0% 0% 0% Adjusted Price $398,000 $405,000 $250,000 Physical Characteristic Adjustments

Location -5% -10% -10% Size 10% 0% 0% Topography n/a n/a n/a Frontage -5% -5% -5% Utilities 0% 0% 0% Net Adjustment 0% -15% -15% Grid Adjusted Price $398,000 $344,250 $212,500 Adjusted % Difference 1.26% 1.45% 2.35%

As the above grid demonstrates, once the comparables are adjusted, the indicated

value of the non-developable parcel represents roughly 2% of the value of its

developable comparables. From this analysis, it is indicated that 98% of the value is

in the developability of the parcel.

85

HUDSON


Summary of Isolated Non-Development Adjustments

In order to isolate a variable which would indicate an appropriate adjustment for lack of

developability, we researched four sets of paired sales. Each paired sale set consisted of a

non-developable sale parcel and three comparable sales which were similar in virtually all

characteristics but were developable. After adjustments are applied we were able to

isolate the percentage of value attributable to developability (or lack thereof).

The percent of value attributable to developability is expressed as an “indicated % of

value.” This figure is achieved by a fraction where the numerator is the sale price of the

non-developable sale and the denominator is the adjusted value of the developable sale.

For each paired sale set, four indicators were calculated (one from each comparable).

These indicators provided a range in “percent of value” attributable to lack of

developability. And, for each set, we concluded at a “percent of value” for this variable.

The indicators range from 0.05% to 15% of value which translates to negative adjustments

ranging from -85% to -99.5% of value.

Our research and analysis yielded the following results:

Paired Sale

Indicated % of Value (A)

Indicated % of Value (B)

Indicated % of Value (C)

Concluded % of Value

Concluded Adjustment

A 15.87% 14.81% 14.69%

15% -85.0%

B 6.64% 7.94% 6.46%

7% -93.0%

C 0.46% 0.51% 0.61%

.05% -99.5%

D 1.26% 1.45% 2.35%

2% -98.0%

We have been informed by Mr. Michael Cromwell, Assistant Building Inspector for the

Town of North Castle, NY on June 2, 2014, that “in its present configuration, I will go on

record as saying that the property is unbuildable.” This factor is likely incurable (and

would presumably run in perpetuity). As a result, the adjustment applicable to reflect the

subject’s non-developability should fall toward the extreme end of the indicated range.

The paired sales analyses demonstrate negative adjustments ranging from -85% to -

99.5% of unimpaired value. Based on the foregoing, we concluded that an appropriate

downward adjustment for the subject’s non-developability factor is 95%. This

adjustment is necessary to reflect the non-developability encumbrance on the subject site

86

HUDSON


attributable to the aforementioned factors.

The Scenario 2 value is therefore calculated as follows:

Scenario 1 Value

(Assuming property is developable) $370,000

Less

Discount for non-developability @ 95% $351,500

Scenario 2 Value Indication (“as-is”) $18,500 (As restricted by the Town of North Castle)

87

HUDSON


Underlying Assumptions and Contingent Conditions This appraisal, made as of July 29, 2014, is made subject to the following assumptions

and limiting conditions.

1. No responsibility is assumed for matters of a legal nature, or require legal

expertise or specialized knowledge beyond that of a real estate appraiser nor has

an opinion been rendered on title, good and clear title being assumed, free of any

encumbrances and/or defects or liens.

2. No opinion is intended to be expressed and no responsibility is assumed for the

legal description of the property. Although a legal description may be included

herein, it is included as a matter of courtesy and no responsibility is assumed for

its accuracy or completeness.

3. The distribution of values estimated herein for land and/or improvements where

separately scheduled are values applicable to each such respective element of the

subject property under the program(s) of utilization defined herein by virtue of the

definition and description of highest and best use. Such individual values may not

be applicable under other alternative use programs, and are invalid in conjunction

with any other appraisal.

4. If this appraisal report contains a valuation relating to an estate that is less than

the whole fee simple estate, then (i) the value reported for such estate relates to a

fractional interest only in the real estate involved, and (ii) the value of this

fractional interest plus the value of all other fractional interests may or may not

equal the value of the entire fee simple estate considered as a whole.

5. If this appraisal report contains a valuation relating to a geographical portion of a

larger parcel or tract of real estate, then (i) the value reported for such

geographical portion relates to such portion only and should not be construed as

applying with equal validity to other portions of the larger parcel or tract, and (ii)

the value reported for such geographical portion plus the value of all other

geographical portions may or may not equal the value of the entire parcel or tract

considered as an entity.

6. The subject property is assumed to have been held under responsible ownership

and competent management, unless otherwise specifically stated. In the absence

of a statement herein to the contrary, it is assumed that such quality

88

HUDSON


ownership and management will continue for the remaining economic and useful

life estimated therefor.

7. It is assumed that there are no hidden or unapparent conditions of the Property,

subsoil or structures that render the Property more or less valuable. No

responsibility is assumed for such conditions or for arranging for engineering

studies that may be required to discover them.

8. It is assumed that the property is in full compliance with all applicable federal,

state and local zoning and environmental regulations and laws, unless

noncompliance is stated, defined and considered in the Report

9. It is assumed that all required licenses, certificates of occupancy and other

governmental consents have been or can be obtained and renewed for any use on

which the value opinion contained in the Report is based.

10. Any representation, indication, and/or description herein as to the physical

condition and/or content of the unseen, underlying land or the indiscernible

improvements included in this report is intended solely as an expression of the

general visual impression gained by the appraiser upon inspection of the property.

No representation is made as to any technical and/or engineering expertise of such

observations, and no technical and/or engineering professional responsibility is

assumed therefor, or for any conditions not observable or specifically mentioned

herein.

11. The physical condition of the improvements, if any, considered by the Report is

based on visual inspection by the Appraiser or other person identified in the

Report. Hudson Property Advisors, LLC assumes no responsibility for the

soundness of structural members of the improvements, or for the condition of

mechanical equipment, plumbing or electrical components. The appraiser is not

an expert in the field of structural integrity of the improvements or of mechanical

equipment, plumbing or electrical components.

12. Unless otherwise stated in this report, the existence of hazardous material and/or

chemical or other contamination, which may or may not be present on the

property, was not observed by the appraiser. The appraiser has no knowledge of

the existence of such materials or contamination on or in the property. The

appraiser, however, is not qualified to detect such substances. The

89

HUDSON


presence of substances such as asbestos, urea-formaldehyde foam insulation,

radon gas, or other potentially hazardous materials or contamination may affect

the value of the property. The value estimate provided herein is predicated on the

assumption that there is no such material or contamination on or in the property

that would cause a loss in value. No responsibility is assumed for any such

conditions, or for any expertise or engineering knowledge required for their

discovery. The client is urged to retain an appropriate expert if desired.

13. Any sketch(s), map(s), drawing(s), and/or diagram(s) prepared by the appraiser

and included in this report have been offered only for the purpose of providing

visual assistance. No engineering survey or analysis of the property has been

made by the appraiser, and no responsibility is assumed in connection therewith.

14. To the extent, if any, that information, estimates, and/or opinions have been

obtained from others, and to the extent, if any, that such information, estimates,

and/or opinions have been utilized and/or included herein, the source(s) of such

information, estimates, and/or opinions may be deemed to have been sound,

responsible, and reliable. However, no responsibility or liability therefor is

assumed by the appraiser.

15. The projected financial information (such as, but not necessarily limited to

potential gross income and expenses) referred to in the Report may be based on

lease summaries, lease abstracts or other financial information provided by the

owner, client or third parties. Hudson Property Advisors, LLC assumes no

responsibility for the authenticity or completeness of such information provided

by others and recommends that legal and/or accounting advice be obtained

regarding the interpretation of financial statements, lease provisions and the

contractual rights of parties.

16. Possession of this report, or a copy thereof, does not confer any right of disclosure

as to the value conclusions, identity of the appraiser, or any part of the contents

hereof, or of publication, nor may it be used for any purpose by anyone other than

the submittee without the prior written consent of the appraiser or the submittee,

and then only subject to such qualification(s) as may be imposed in connection

therewith. Exception to this condition is granted for appraisal reports submitted to

any court of competent jurisdiction, or other duly constituted official body by, or

on behalf of the submittee, pursuant to duly instituted legal proceedings.

90

HUDSON


17. Any authorized user(s) of this Report who provides a copy to, or permits reliance

thereon by, any person or entity not authorized by Hudson Property Advisors,

LLC, in writing to use or rely thereon, hereby agrees to indemnify and hold

Hudson Property Advisors, LLC, its affiliates and their respective shareholders,

directors, officers and employees, harmless from and against all damages,

expenses, claims and costs, including attorney’s fees, incurred in investigating

and defending any claim arising from or in any way connected to the use of, or

reliance upon, the Report by any such unauthorized person(s) or entity or entities.

18. All values rendered within this report assume marketing times of twelve months

or less unless otherwise indicated.

19. In arriving at the value set forth in this appraisal no consideration has been given

to the effect of state, local or federal income and gains taxes, or of occupancy,

hotel, capital levy, gift, estate, succession, inheritance, or similar taxes, which

may be imposed upon any owner, lessee or mortgagee, by reason of any sale,

conveyance, transfer, leasing, hypothecation, mortgage, pledge or other

disposition of the appraised property.

20. This appraisal expresses an opinion as of the date of appraisal. It is supplied at

the request of the submittee and, unless otherwise stated, is for the submittee’s

exclusive use. It is not a guarantee. Neither Hudson Property Advisors, LLC, nor

any of its officers or employees has made any representation or warranty

regarding this report. Since real estate appraising is not an exact science, this

report constitutes only the best professional opinion of this company and the

appraiser(s) who signed this report. Hudson Property Advisors, LLC is under no

circumstances responsible for differences in value conclusion(s) which could

occur as the result of repeated expertise and/or the use of standards, norms,

methods or criteria other than those employed by Hudson Property Advisors,

LLC.

21. The opinions and or conclusions reached herein are only effective as of the date

stated in the Report. Changes either before or after the effective date in external

and market factors or in the Property itself can significantly affect the

conclusions.

22. In the event of a claim against Hudson Property Advisors, LLC, or its affiliates or

91

HUDSON


their respective officers, owner(s) or employees or the Appraisers in connection

with or in any way relating to this Report or this engagement, the maximum

damages recoverable shall be limited to the amount of the fee actually collected

by Hudson Property Advisors, LLC or its affiliates for this Report and under no

circumstances shall any claim for consequential damages be made.

23. The Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA") became effective January 26, 1992.

We have not made a specific compliance survey and analysis of this property to

determine whether or not it is in conformity with the various detailed

requirements of the ADA. It is possible that a compliance survey of the property,

together with a detailed analysis of the requirements of the ADA, could reveal

that the property is not in compliance with one or more of the requirements of the

Act. If so, this fact could have a negative effect upon the value of the property.

Since we have no direct evidence relating to this issue, we did not consider

possible noncompliance with the requirements of the ADA in estimating the value

of the subject.

24. The liability of Hudson Property Advisors, LLC, Jonathan Bernz and all signers,

is limited to the client only and limited to the amount of fee actually received by

the appraiser. Further, there is no accountability, obligation or liability expressed

or implied to any third party.

25. By use of this Report each party that uses this Report agrees to be bound by all of

the Assumptions and Limiting Conditions, Hypothetical Conditions and

Extraordinary Assumptions stated herein.

92

HUDSON


Appraiser’s Certification I certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:

The statements of fact contained in this report are true and correct. The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions are limited only by the reported

assumptions and limiting conditions and are my personal, impartial, and unbiased professional analyses, opinions, and conclusions.

I have no present or prospective interest in the property that is the subject of this report and no personal interest with respect to the parties involved.

I have performed no services, as an appraiser or in any other capacity, regarding the property that is the subject of this report within the three-year

period immediately preceding acceptance of this assignment.

I have no bias with respect to the property that is the subject of this report or to the parties involved with this assignment.

My engagement in this assignment was not contingent upon developing or reporting predetermined results.

My compensation for completing this assignment is not contingent upon the development or reporting of a predetermined value or direction in value that favors the cause of the client, the amount of the value opinion, the attainment of a stipulated result, or the occurrence of a subsequent event directly related to the intended use of this appraisal.

My analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared, in conformity with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice.

I have made a personal inspection of the property that is the subject of this report. No one provided significant real property appraisal assistance to the person signing this certification.

The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared, in conformity with the Code of Professional Ethics and Standards of Professional Appraisal 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, I have completed the continuing education program for Designated Members of the Appraisal Institute.

Dated: August 8, 2014 ________________________________________ JONATHAN BERNZ, MAI, President NY State Certified General Real Estate Appraiser #46-26085

93

HUDSON


Addendum

94

HUDSON


Professional Qualifications Jonathan A. Bernz, MAI President, Hudson Property Advisors, LLC

10 South Moger Avenue

Mt. Kisco, NY 10549 USA Tel. (914) 244-3400 email [email protected] Fax (914) 244-3450

Certification/Affiliations - Member of the Appraisal Institute (MAI). Mr. Bernz began his affiliation in 1985

when he was admitted as a candidate member with the predecessor organization, then known as the American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers (AIREA).

- Former President of the Mid-Hudson Chapter of the Appraisal Institute, Mr. Bernz has served on the Board of Directors for many years and is presently a chapter member.

- Former member, Metropolitan New York Chapter of the Appraisal Institute.

- Former member Southern California Chapter of the Appraisal Institute.

- New York State Certified General Real Estate Appraiser, #46-26085 (Current license expires October 23, 2013)

- Connecticut State Certified General Real Estate Appraiser, Lic. #RCG.0001165 (Current License expires April 30, 2012).

- Former California State Certified General Real Estate Appraiser License #AG 018482 (1993-1997)

- Temporary Massachusetts Certified General Real Estate Appraiser, Temporary Practice Permit #253 (1998)

- Temporary US Virgin Islands (US V.I.) Certified Appraiser, Temporary Practice Permit License #2-2033298-2007 (2007).

Formal Education - State University of New York at Albany, Bachelor of Science Degree in Economics,

Combined Minor, Math and Computer Science. - Over 500 hours of real estate appraisal, general real estate and related courses and

seminars (see following summary). Professional Real Estate Appraisal and Consulting Experience Since 1983, engaged exclusively in the appraisal, consultation and analysis of commercial, industrial, large scale residential, special purpose properties, and vacant land, for purposes of tax certiorari proceedings; appropriation and/or severance damage; mortgage security, utility easement; urban renewal acquisition; assessment review; condemnation by public authority; estate, DEIS submission, transfer and gift tax; partial interests, sale, acquisition, disposition, investment analysis; tax basis; economic and/or location feasibility; leasehold interest; leased fee interests; equity yield; cash flow analysis; construction financing, development, rehabilitation; zoning constitutionality, assessment ratio analysis; lease vs. purchase analysis, co-operative and condominium conversion; tax revenue impact, value impact analyses and easement valuation. Assisted in coordination, research, and analysis of tax ratio studies in several municipalities in Westchester County.

95

HUDSON


Professional Real Estate Appraisal Experience (Continued) Primary professional territory in the greater New York metropolitan area includes Westchester, Putnam, Rockland, Dutchess, and Orange Counties in New York. Assignments also completed in New York City, NY, Fairfield County, Connecticut, Nantucket County Massachusetts, St. Croix, USVI, Franklin County, Ohio, Palm Beach County, Florida, Richmond City, Virginia, Bergen County, New Jersey, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside and San Bernardino Counties, California. Professional Appraisal Employment 2007-Current President, Hudson Property Advisors, LLC

10 South Moger Avenue, Mt. Kisco, NY 10549

1995 - 2007: Senior Vice President, Albert Valuation Group, Inc. 100 White Plains Road, Tarrytown, NY 10591

1993 – 1995 McGrath Basciani & Associates 141 North State Road, Briarcliff Manor, NY

1992 – 1993 Ryon Associates, Inc. 865 Manhattan Beach Boulevard, Manhattan Beach, California Independent Appraiser, assignments completed for:

Curtis, Rosenthal & Associates, Inc. 8939 So. Sepulveda Boulevard, Suite 401, Los Angeles, California

The Research Group, Inc. 865 Manhattan Beach Boulevard, Manhattan Beach, California

1987 - 1992: Vice President, McGrath Basciani & Associates 141 North State Road, Briarcliff Manor, NY

1984 – 1987 Senior Commercial Appraiser, The Albert Appraisal Company, Inc. 383 So. Riverside Avenue, Croton-on-Hudson, NY

1983 – 1984 Residential Appraiser, The Albert Appraisal Company, Inc. 383 So. Riverside Avenue, Croton-on-Hudson, NY

96

HUDSON


Appraisal and consultation assignments have been completed on a wide variety of property types including: Vacant land - small to extremely large tracts (over 15,000 acres), land assemblages, commercial and retail developments, residential subdivision developments, beachfront property, condominium development sites; sub-surface easements, conservation easements; single-family, multi-family apartment complexes, condominium and cooperative properties; historic estates and landmark properties golf courses; country clubs horse farms; contaminated properties and inactive hazardous

waste sites; industrial factories and plants, warehouse, mill, refrigeration, distribution, flex, office and medical office properties, complexes and parks; automotive dealerships, auto service facilities, gasoline service stations and garages; mini/self-storage facilities; parking facilities; mobile home trailer parks; lumber yards; retail buildings, banks, department stores, big box discount warehouses, strip shopping centers, neighborhood, community, regional and super regional

shopping centers; restaurants and fast food establishments; mixed-use residential and commercial properties; corporate headquarters; retirement homes and complexes, independent, assisted and nursing facilities; subsidized and low-income properties; hotel and motel properties; airport related properties; churches and education facilities; public utilities, substations and telephone exchange properties; rock and gravel quarries; coastal, river waterfront and wetlands properties.

97

HUDSON


Since 1983, Mr. Bernz has completed assignments for a wide variety of clientele and properties including:

Developers, Construction & Real Estate Industry and Related Companies 37 Croton Dam Road Corp. Annie K. Harper Awdeh & Co. Bourke & Matthews Briar Contracting Corp. Briarcliff Associates Brycon Development #2, Inc. Carra Construction Corp. Castagna and Son Construction Management Group Edgemont Development Co., Inc. Fareri Companies Finklestein-Morgan Real Estate Forest City Ratner Forest Charolais Farm Garden Homes Management Generation Building Corp. Corporation George Comfort & Sons, Inc. Garden Homes, Inc. Ginsburg Development Co. (GDC)

Henry George Greene, AIA Heritage Development Group, Inc. Jesselson Capital Corporation JFE Associates John A. Dodson Kurt Wittek Laramie-Dawson Corp. Mack-Cali Realty National Patent Development Corp. RHNB Realty Company, Inc. Robert Martin Co. Samson Management Schulweiss Realty Sullivan Data Summit Development Thalle Construction Company, Inc. The Sturman Organization The Trump Organization Victor Weingarten Willow Development Corp. Yonkers Contracting Co.

Fortune 500, General Commercial and Industrial

Aerotech Holding Co., Inc. Algonquin Gas Transmission Co. Bell Atlantic Breakthrough Publications Champion International Coastal Distribution, Inc. Columbus Construction Corp. Condon Lumber Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. Corbin Co. Cortlandt Animal Hospital Dairy Conveyor Corp. Farrand Realty Corp. INSL-X Products Corp. Jilco Corp. Katonah Professional Associates LaFarge, NA

Lederle Laboratories McDonalds Michael Anthony Jewelers, Inc. New York Telephone Company NYNEX Pawling Rubber Corp. Pizza Hut, Inc. Putnam Valley Properties Company Richmar Controls, Inc. SEMX Corporation Shell Oil Company Sunoco, Inc. The Stop & Shop Supermarket Company Universal Voltronics Van Wyck Assoc. Verizon Services Corp. Weinstein Enterprises, Inc. Zwilling J.A. Henckels, Inc.

98

HUDSON


Financial Institutions, Mortgage Related & Insurance Companies American Savings Bank, FSB Aristar Mortgage Corp. Associated Financial Services Bache Funding Bankers Trust Company Barclays Bank of New York Beverly Hills Savings Bank BLS Funding C.I.T. Financial Services Capital Resources Corp. Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A. Chase NBW Chemical Bank Citibank Citibank Home Equity Center Citicorp Citicorp Real Estate, Inc. CitiTrust City Federal Savings Bank CNA Insurance Companies Collateral Mortgage, Ltd. Commerce Bank Connecticut Bank and Trust Connecticut National Bank and Trust Co. Corporate Transfer Service Delta Funding Dime Savings Bank of New York Dreyfuss Consumer Bank East New York Savings Bank Emigrant Savings Bank Empbankque Capital Corp Enseign Bank, FSB Equitable Life Assurance Co. Equitable Relocation Service Exposure Consultants Family Financial Services Federal Financial Fund First Fidelity Bank First New Hampshire Bank Gateway Asset Management Co. Golddome Realty Credit Corp. Grand Pacific Finance Corp.

Home Mortgagee Corp. Household Finance Corp. HSBC Hudson Valley Bank Inspectus/Mortgageramp Investors Mortgage Insurance Company J.P. Morgan Investment Management, Inc. Kennedy Funding Key Bank Lincoln First Bank-NBW Division Lincoln Savings Bank M&T Bank Marine Midland Bank Merrill Lynch Mid-Hudson Savings Bank Mid-Lantic Home Mortgage Corp. MONY Relocation Center National Westminster Bank U.S.A. New York Surety Company Northern Funding Peoples United Bank Peoples Westchester Savings Bank Poritzky Funding Porter Capital Putnam County Savings Bank RECOLL Management Corporation Resource Funding Group Ridgewood Savings Bank San Paolo Bank Seacoast Mortgage Co. Sibley Corp. The Yonkers Savings & Loan Association TransAmerica Equity Corp. U.S. Trust Union State Bank Williamsburg Savings Bank Yonkers Savings & Loan Association Yorkville Federal Savings & Loan Association

99

HUDSON


Farms, Estates Subdivisions, Land Tracts, Condominiums/Coops Astor Rhinebeck Property Baltic Estates Beaverkill Conservancy, Inc. Bedford Lake Blue Lake Brookside Boulder Ridge Briarcliff Acres Subdivision Buckingham Towers Buxton Gorge Cameo House Camrose Associates Cannon Hill Castlebrook Estates Cedar Pond Chiselhurst Co. Copley Court Corbin Hill Eagle Bay Condominium Galway Farm Garden Homes, Woodlands Estate of Laurance S. Rockefeller East Boyds Conservation, LLC Half Moon Bay Haverstraw Road Lands Co. Hilltop Hanover Farm Hillpoint Hudson Courts Hudson Pines Hudson Pointe Indian Hill Lake Meahagh Woods Subdivision Lakeland Acres, Inc. Lakepointe Woods Lily Pond Stables Little Whaley Lake

Madison Development Group Marble Heights Mariners Pointe Maintop Oak Ridge Condominium Old Salem Farm Park Lane Reserve Perkins III Pennybridge Manor Primrose Farm Prickly Pear Hill Quarry Lake Random Farms Red Brook Glen Ridgeview Rye Brook Estates Tara Close The River Club Thornbrooke Farm Squire Green The David Rockefeller Fund, Inc. The Woods at King Pond Three Ponds Sterling Forest Stonewall Farm Stoneybrook Farm Stoneyvreek Farm Villas Lucania Wampus Lakes Estates Watch Hill Homeowners Association, Inc. Watch Hill Manor White Willow Willow Farm Winterburn Farm Zoey Estates

Golf Courses & Recreational

Apawamis Club Bonnie Briar Country Club Brae Burn Country Club Bronxville Field Club Centennial Golf Club Century Country Club Dellwood Country Club GlenArbor Golf Club Hampshire Country Club Hampshire Country Club Julius Petersen, Inc. Lake Isle Country Club

Leewood Golf Club New York Country Club Orienta Beach Club Pelham Country Club Pleasantville Golf Course Corp. Shenorock Shore Club Siwanoy Country Club Sleepy Hollow Country Club The Sedgewood Club Westchester Country Club Westchester Hills Golf Club, Inc.

100

HUDSON


Institutional, Not-for-Profits, Schools and Religious

American Committee for the Weizmann Institute of Science, Inc. Anderson School Archdiocese of New York Catholic Health Care Systems Camp Cummings Camp Salomon Children’s Hospital Foundation at WMC, Inc. Children’s Village Church of the Holy Spirit Cross Cultural Solutions, Inc. Delmar Properties Group, Ltd. East Boyd’s Conservation, LLC The Educational Alliance, Inc. Franciscan Sisters Guideposts Associates, Inc. Hawthorne Foundation, Inc. Missionary Sisters of the Third Order St. Francis New York Medical College Northern Westchester Hospital Center

NY Medical College Open Space Institute, Inc. Pace University Purchase Environmental Protection Association S.O.U.N.D. Scenic Hudson Land Trust Sound Shore Medical Center St. Hilda’s and St. Hugh’s School Stony Lodge Hospital SUNY at Purchase Surprise Lake Camp The Margaret Chapman School The Trust for Public Land The Trustees of St. Patrick's Cathedral UJA-Federation of New York Westchester County Medical Society Westhab, Inc. Westchester Medical Center White Plains Hospital Medical Center YMCA of Greater NY YMYWHA of Southern Westchester

Municipal Entities and Governmental Agencies

City of Newburgh City of Rye City of White Plains County of Orange County of Putnam County of Rockland County of Westchester National Park Service NY State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation Town of Eastchester Town of Clarkstown Town of Cortlandt Town of Eastchester

Town of Greenburgh Town of Kent Town of Mamaroneck Town of New Castle Town of Orangetown Town of Ossining Town of Patterson Town of Ramapo Town of Rye Town of Southeast Town of Yorktown Town/Village of Mount Kisco Village of Croton-on-Hudson Village of Scarsdale

101

HUDSON


Attorneys, Law Firms and Legal Related

Andrew J. Fiore, Esq. Berger Stern & Webb, LLP Biggerstaff Law Firm Bleakley Platt & Schmidt Campbell, McMillan, Bosco, Penzel, Danzig & Maker Charles K. Pietrow, Esq. Charles Martabano, Esq. Charles T. Bistany, Esq. Cleary, Gottlieb, Steen & Hamilton Constantine B. Filardi, Esq. Cuddy, Feder & Worby Danziger Markhoff DelBello Donnellan Weingarten & Tartaglia, LLP Dewey Ballantine, LLP Farley Jutkowitz Balint and Wiederkehr Greenburg & Schulman Griffin Coogan & Veneruso Hahn & Hessen LLP Hocherman Tortorella & Wekstein J. Bruce Gilman, Esq. John E. Watkins, Jr. Keane & Beane Kirkpatrick & Lockhart Nicholson & Graham, LLP Kittay, Gold & Gershfeld Lasky & Douglas, CPA’s Law Firm of Steven J. Small Law Offices of David N. Namm, Esq. Lawrence Blumberg, Esq. Leahy, Nyberg, Curto & D’Apice Luskin & Stern McCullough Goldberger McGovern Connelley & Davidson Milbank Tweed Hadley & McCloy Milton Berner, Esq. Morgan, Lewis & Bockius O’Connor Davies Munns & Dobbins, LLP

Patterson Belknap, Webb & Tyler Paul Epstein, Esq. Paul S. Richmond, Esq. Phillips Nizer Benjamin Krim and Ballon LLP Ponzini, Spencer & Geis, L.L.P. Richard Goldsand, Esq. Richard M. Sussman, P.C. Robert J. McGoey, Esq. Robert J. Reger, Esq. Robert Littman, Esq. Robinson Silverman Pearce Aronsohn & Berman LLP Roosevent & Arfa Rosenman & Colin LLP Rossi & Smith Rothschild, Himmelfarb, Sher, Pearl & Giacomo Richard Sporn, Esq. Saretsky Katz Dranoff & Glass, LLP Shamberg Marwell Hocherman & Davis Shapiro & Goodfriend, P.C. Sidley & Austin Sills Cummins Zuckerman Radin Tischman Epstein & Gross Sirlin & Sirlin Stephens and Charbonneau Stern, Keiser, Panken & Wohl Teahan & Constantino Thatcher Profit Townley & Updike Vincent A. DeIorio, Esq. Westchester Supreme and County Courts William A. Miller, Esq. Willis Stephens, Esq. Wilson, Elser, Moskowitz, Edelman & Dicker Young Conway Stargatt & Taylor, LLP Zarin & Steinmetz

102

HUDSON


Professional Appraisal Education, Seminars and Courses

Course/Seminar Name Organization Location

Basic Valuation Procedures Appraisal Institute (f/k/a AIREA) New York City, NY

New Industrial Valuation Appraisal Institute, Mid-Hudson Chapter Fishkill, NY

Real Estate Appraisal Principles Appraisal Institute (f/k/a AIREA) New York City, NY NY State Real Estate Salesperson’s Licensing Course Westchester County Board of Realtors White Plains, NY

Capitalization Theory and Techniques - Part A Appraisal Institute (f/k/a AIREA) New York City, NY

Capitalization Theory and Techniques - Part B Appraisal Institute (f/k/a AIREA) New York City, NY

NY State Real Estate Broker’s Licensing Course Westchester County Board of Realtors White Plains, NY

Valuation Analysis and Report Writing Appraisal Institute (f/k/a AIREA) Boston, MA

Standards of Professional Practice Appraisal Institute (f/k/a AIREA) New York City, NY

Appraisal Procedures Appraisal Institute (f/k/a AIREA) Irvine, CA

Valuation By Subdivision Analysis Appraisal Institute, Mid-Hudson Chapter Fishkill, NY Litigation Appraising - Part 1- Current Issues in Tax Certiorari Appraisal Institute, Mid-Hudson Chapter Fishkill, NY

Current Issues in Tax Certiorari Appraisal Institute, Mid-Hudson Chapter Fishkill, NY

Advanced Applications (Case Studies) Appraisal Institute (f/k/a AIREA) New York City, NY Course 410, Standards of Professional Practice, Part A Appraisal Institute, Mid-Hudson Chapter Poughkeepsie, NY Course 420, Standards of Professional Practice, Part B Appraisal Institute, Mid-Hudson Chapter Poughkeepsie, NY

Golf Course Valuation NY State Assessor’s Association Mount Kisco, NY

Preserving Family Lands Teatown Lake Reservation Ossining, NY Special-purpose Properties; Appraising in Limited Markets Appraisal Institute, Mid-Hudson Chapter Fishkill, NY

Appraising High Value & Historic Homes Appraisal Institute, Mid-Hudson Chapter Bear Mountain, NY

Case Studies in Special Purpose Properties Appraisal Institute, Mid-Hudson Chapter Wappingers Falls, NY Planning Board, Land Use Control and Zoning Board of Appeals Appraisal Institute, Mid-Hudson Chapter Wappingers Falls, NY

Current Issues in Tax Certiorari Appraisal Institute, Mid-Hudson Chapter Fishkill, NY

The New York City Watershed Protection Plan Sive, Paget & Riesel, P.C. Brewster, NY

Internet Search Strategies Appraisal Institute, Mid-Hudson Chapter Fishkill, NY

Development Projects and Urban Theory and the Cities of Westchester and Fairfield Counties

Urban Land Institute (Westchester/Fairfield District Council, ULI) Rye Brook, NY

Proposed USPAP Changes Appraisal Institute, Mid-Hudson Chapter Fishkill, NY

Litigation Case Studies Appraisal Institute, Mid-Hudson Chapter Fishkill, NY Course 430, Standards of Professional Practice, Part C Appraisal Institute, Mid-Hudson Chapter Poughkeepsie, NY

Business Valuation Seminar Appraisal Institute, Mid-Hudson Chapter Fishkill, NY Non-residential Demonstration Appraisal Report Preparation Seminar NY Metro District Chapter of the Appraisal Institute New York, NY Case Studies in Special Purpose Properties Seminar Appraisal Institute, Mid-Hudson Chapter Wappingers Falls, NY

Mass Appraisal in Mid-Hudson Area Appraisal Institute, Mid-Hudson Chapter Wappingers Falls, NY

State of the Appraisal Profession Appraisal Institute, Mid-Hudson Chapter Wappingers Falls, NY Court Testimony: Preparing for Rebuttal and Cross Examination Appraisal Institute, Mid-Hudson Chapter Fishkill, NY

Appraisal of Local Retail Properties Appraisal Institute, Mid-Hudson Chapter Fishkill, NY

Dynamics of Office Building Valuation Appraisal Institute, Mid-Hudson Chapter Fishkill, NY

Appraising Vacant Land Appraisal Institute, Mid-Hudson Chapter Fishkill, NY

103

HUDSON


Professional Appraisal Education, Seminars and Courses (continued)

Course/Seminar Name Organization Location

Real Property Tax Issues in Real Estate Contracts Westchester County Bar Association Yonkers, NY

The Use of Appraisals in Tax Certiorari Proceedings Westchester County Bar Association Yonkers, NY Recent Developments Regarding real Property Tax Law §727 Westchester County Bar Association Yonkers, NY

Litigation Skills for the Appraiser Appraisal Institute, Mid-Hudson Chapter Fishkill, NY Feasibility Analysis, Market Value & Investment Timing Appraisal Institute, Mid-Hudson Chapter Fishkill, NY

Scope of Work: Expanding Range of Services Appraisal Institute, Mid-Hudson Chapter Fishkill, NY

Builders, Brokers, Banks & the Big Apple Metropolitan New York Chapter, Appraisal Institute New York, NY

USPAP Update Appraisal Institute, Mid-Hudson Chapter Fishkill, NY

Appraisal Consulting Appraisal Institute, Mid-Hudson Chapter Fishkill, NY

Subdivision Valuation Appraisal Institute, Mid-Hudson Chapter Fishkill, NY

2006 Changes to USPAP Appraisal Institute, Mid-Hudson Chapter Fishkill, NY

Analyzing Commercial Lease Clauses Appraisal Institute, Mid-Hudson Chapter Fishkill, NY

Business Practices & Ethics Appraisal Institute, Chicago, Ill On-line

USPAP Update Appraisal Institute, Mid-Hudson Chapter Fishkill, NY

Case Studies in Commercial Highest and Best Use Appraisal Institute, Mid-Hudson Chapter Fishkill, NY

On-line Valuation Resources for the NY Appraiser Appraisal Institute, Mid-Hudson Chapter Tarrytown, NY

Evaluating Commercial Construction Appraisal Institute, Mid-Hudson Chapter Goshen, NY

Declining Markets and Sales Concessions Appraisal Institute, Mid-Hudson Chapter Goshen, NY Land Trusts, Landowners and Appraisers: Working in Tandem Toward Successful Conservation Land Trust Alliance West Point, NY

Appraisal Curriculum Overview (Two-day, General) Appraisal Institute, Mid-Hudson Chapter Goshen, NY Updates in Eminent Domain Westchester County Bar Association White Plains, NY Understanding Blueprints and Specifications in New Home Construction

Westchester County Society of Real Estate Appraisers

White Plains, NY

Sales Verification: Principles, Procedures, & Case Studies McKissock Mt. Kisco, NY

Mandatory CT R.E. Appraisal Law Update Appraisal Institute, CT Chapter Berlin, CT Hotel Appraising-New Techniques for Today’s Uncertain Times

Appraisal Institute, Mid-Hudson Chapter Goshen, NY

Summary Appraisal Report - Government of New York

Documents

Transcript of Summary Appraisal Report - Government of New York