complete-summary appraisal report · santa clarita, california 91321 . subject: the subject...

APPRAISAL REPORT PROPOSED FOOTHILL VILLAS

13530 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD SYLMAR, CALIFORNIA

ABSTRACT The subject property consists of a proposed 10-unit, detached, two-building, townhouse style development. The units will be 3 stories with ground level 2 car garages. Each building will be located in a 5-unit building. The proposed development is located in the community of Sylmar in the San Fernando Valley region of the city of Los Angeles. There are 4 essentially identical floorplans ranging in size from 1,871 to 1,883 square feet with 3 bedrooms with optional den/4th bedroom and 3 and ½ bathrooms. The units will be of average quality construction and will compete well in the competitive market area. The properties were appraised under the hypothetical condition that they were completed as of the date of value.

Scott Voltz, MAI, AI-GRS, MBA VOLTZ COMMERCIAL REALTY ADVISORS, INC.

25350 Magic Mountain Parkway., #300 11700 W. Charleston Blvd, #170 [email protected] Valencia, California 91355 Las Vegas, Nevada 89135 www.voltzrealestate.com

661-259-8009 702-749-5968 800-520-1654

1

December 5, 2018 Mr. Ed Poulin Foothill Villas 10, LLC 24868 Apple Street, #102 Santa Clarita, California 91321

Re: Appraisal Report-Foothill Villas Proposed 10 Unit Multifamily Development

13530 Foothill Boulevard Sylmar, CA 91348

Dear Mr. Poulin, In accordance with your request and authorization, we have prepared this appraisal report pertaining to the above referenced proposed multifamily development for the purpose of estimating the prospective market value of the fee simple interest in the subject development under the following hypothetical scenarios:

Assuming completion and stabilized occupancy as a 10-unit apartment development;

Estimated Retail Value as individual condominium units. No other valuation scenarios were considered. It is intended to be used by the client for asset management considerations. The subject property consists of a proposed 10-unit, detached, two-building, townhouse style development. The units will be 3 stories with ground level 2 car garages. Each building will be located in a 5-unit building. The proposed development is located in the community of Sylmar in the San Fernando Valley region of the city of Los Angeles. There are 4 essentially identical floorplans ranging in size from 1,871 to 1,883 square feet with 3 bedrooms with optional den/4th bedroom and 3 and ½ bathrooms. The units will be of average quality construction and will compete well in the competitive market area. The purpose of this letter is to transmit the following appraisal report. Your attention is now directed to the assumptions and limiting conditions found in the Addendum. The market values as estimated herein are subject to the said assumptions and limiting conditions. The appraisal has been prepared in conformity with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) set forth by FIRREA, and this appraisal is in compliance with the Standards of Professional Practice and Code of Ethics of the Appraisal Institute.

2

Based upon independent research and analysis, the estimated market value of the fee simple interest in the subject property as of November 16, 2018 is represented as follows:

• Aggregate Retail Value Under the Hypothetical Condition Assuming Completion as Individual Units: $5,140,000

• Hypothetical Condition Assuming Completion as Multi-Family Rental Development:

$5,500,000 Furniture, fixtures, and equipment or any other personal property has not been appraised. It has been a pleasure to work with you on this assignment. We look forward to working with you again soon. Respectfully submitted, VOLTZ COMMERCIAL REALTY ADVISORS, INC.

P. Scott Voltz, MAI, AI-GRS, MBA President California Certified General Real Estate Appraiser AG002465

3

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Letter of Transmittal 1

Table of Contents 3

Summary of Salient Facts 4 Intended Use of the Report 4 Definition of Market Value 5 Scope of the Report 5

Description of Real Estate Appraised 6

Regional Description 6 Los Angeles County Area Description 7 San Fernando Valley Description 10 Neighborhood Description 12 Apartment Market Overview 13 Property Description 18 Highest and Best Use 23 Indicated Exposure and Marketing Time 23

Summary of Analysis and Valuation 24 Scenario 1: Hypothetical Value-Aggregate Retail Value As Condominium Units 24 Scenario 2: Hypothetical Value-As A Rental Property 27 Value Summary 38

Addendum 39 Subject Property Photographs and Information

Rent Comparable Information Multifamily Sale Comparable Information

Assumptions and Limiting Conditions Certification Qualifications of the Appraisers

4

SUMMARY OF SALIENT FACTS This is an Appraisal Report which is intended to comply with the reporting requirements set forth under Standards Rule 2-2(c) of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice for an Appraisal Report. As such, it presents only summary discussions of the data, reasoning, and analyses that were used in the appraisal process to develop the appraiser's opinion of value. Supporting documentation concerning the data, reasoning, and analyses is retained in the appraiser's file. The depth of discussion contained in this report is specific to the needs of the client and for the intended use stated below. The appraisers are not responsible for unauthorized use of this report. CLIENT: Mr. Ed Poulin

Foothill Villas 10, LLC 24868 Apple Street, #102 Santa Clarita, California 91321

SUBJECT: The subject property consists of a proposed 10-unit, detached, two-

building, townhouse style development. The units will be 3 stories with ground level 2 car garages. Each building will be located in a 5-unit building. There are 4 essentially identical floorplans ranging in size from 1,871 to 1,883 square feet with 3 bedrooms with optional den/4th bedroom and 3 and ½ bathrooms. The units will be of average quality construction and will compete well in the competitive market area. The proposed development is located at 13530 Foothill Boulevard, in the community of Sylmar in the San Fernando Valley region of the city of Los Angeles.

CONCLUDED VALUE: $5,140,000 Aggregate Retail Value of Individual Units $5,500,000 As Rental Property HYPOTHETICAL

CONDITIONS: As a rental property, this appraisal is made under the Hypothetical Condition that the subject units have received their Certificate of Occupancy and are at stabilized occupancy as of the date of value. As individual detached condominium units, this appraisal is made with the Hypothetical Condition that the units have received their Certificate of Occupancy as of the date of value.

INTENDED USE: This appraisal is for the exclusive use by the client, Ed Poulin and

PWP Development. It is intended to be used by the client for asset management considerations.

INTEREST VALUED: Fee simple interest DATE OF VALUE: November 16, 2018 DATE OF REPORT: December 5, 2018

5

PURPOSE OF THE APPRAISAL: The purpose of this appraisal is to provide an estimate of the market value of the subject real property as of the effective date. Market value is defined by the federal financial institutions regulatory agencies as follows: Market Value - The most probable price which a property should bring in a competitive and open market under

all conditions requisite to a fair sale, the buyer and seller, each acting prudently, knowledgeably and assuming the price is not affected by undue stimulus. Implicit in this definition is the consummation of a sale as of a specified date and the passing of title from seller to buyer under conditions whereby:

a. buyer and seller are typically motivated; b. both parties are well informed or well advised, and each acting in what they consider their own best

interest; c. a reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open market; d. payment is made in cash in U.S. dollars, or in terms of financial arrangements comparable thereto; and e. the price represents a normal consideration for the property sold unaffected by special or creative

financing or sale concessions granted by anyone associated with the sale.1/ SCOPE OF WORK: The scope of work of this appraisal is defined by the complexity of this appraisal assignment and the reporting requirements of this appraisal report, including the definition of market value set forth in this report, statement of assumptions and limiting conditions, and certifications. The scope of work is typically developed before and during the appraisal process with the input of the client, however the appraiser has the responsibility for the production of a credible appraisal report. The scope of the appraisal included the non-invasive inspection of the subject property, discussions with the developer/client, a review of information provided by the client including a site plan and floorplans, a cost estimate, an investigation of the locational characteristics affecting the subject property, interviews with knowledgeable real estate professionals, a search of comparable land, apartment development sales and rentals, and individual condominium sales, and verification of the sales with a party to the transaction where possible. The Sales and Income Approaches were used in this report. The Cost Approach was not used however the costs and feasibility are discussed in the highest and best use section of this report. This Appraisal Report is a brief recapitulation of the appraiser's data, analyses, and conclusions. Supporting documentation is retained in the appraiser's file.

1/Office of the Comptroller of the Currency under 12 CFR, Part 34, Subpart C-Appraisals, 34.42 Definitions

6

DESCRIPTION OF REAL ESTATE APPRAISED Regional Description: Southern California is generally considered to consist of the 11 southernmost counties in the state. These counties are linked together by infrastructure and have very interrelated property economics. This “mega-region” includes some of the densest urban areas in America and represents about 60% of the state’s population.

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA 50-MILE CIRCLE MAP

According to the Southern California Association of Governments, the southern California economy would be the 10th largest economy in the world. Southern California is forecasted to add 5.8 million residents, 70% of which will be natural, prior to 2025, representing two cities the size of Chicago2. The 50-mile circle has over 17 million residents and is larger than all states except California, Texas, and New York. This area is projected to add more than 5 million residents between 2000 and 2020, roughly equal to the combined population of the cities of Los Angeles and San Diego. Much of this growth is internally generated and has major implications for the area’s infrastructure and will occur in northern Los Angeles County because of the abundance of affordable land, affordable housing, and improving employment situation. The State of California has experienced economic sluggishness comparable to the nation, with unemployment in September 2018 at 4.1% consistent with the national rate of 3.7%. The ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach combined are the busiest in the nature and the third busiest in the world. Los Angeles International Airport ranks first in the world in passenger origin and destination. Quality of life implications for region are a concern. Congestion is and will continue to be a major problem across all modes, affordable housing will become even more scarce, competition for land will intensity and finally water supply and pollution issues will continue to require attention.

2 Lynn Harris, Southern California Association of Governments, August 15, 2003

7

Los Angeles County Description: The subject property is located in Los Angeles County in the San Fernando Valley.

AREA MAP

Los Angeles is a coastal county within the southern California mega-region. The county had a 2017 population of just over 10 million per the California Department of Finance, which is an increase from about 9.9 million in 2013. Between 2011 and 2016, population increased an average of 0.7% per year and was entirely due to new births as net migration was negative. For the period 2017 to 2022, population growth is expected to average 0.5% by the California Department of Transportation and is will be entirely natural as migration will remain negative. Geographically, the county is considered to have coastal, valley and high desert portions, divided by low hills and mountains. The coastal portion of the county is more developed and built-up, as are most of the valley areas. The high desert portion is lightly developed overall, and rural to vacant in character. Los Angeles County has been recovering from the recession. The October 2018 unemployment rate reported is at 4.7% out of a total workforce of approximately 5.11 million, per the California Employment Development Department. This unemployment rate is down significantly from the great recession peak of 13.4% in July 2010. The counties top job growth categories between 2012-2022 are reported by the California Employment Development Department (EDD) as follows; 1st Personal Aides with a growth rate of 61.5% over this time period. Brickmassons and Blockmasons at 56.8%; Telecommunication Line Repairers and installers at 54.3%; Helpers, Bricksman and Tile Setters at 52.2% and Orthodontist and Prothetists at 50.0%.

8

Between 2014 and 2019, the economy is expected to add 322,000 new jobs in nonfarm industries across Los Angeles County, and 126,000 new jobs in the City of Los Angeles. Overall, Los Angeles County has been showing an increasingly strong economy with unemployment lessening each year and more stable higher paying jobs being created. The housing market has continued to rise with this same trend continuing in the future albeit at a slower pace.

9

Concluding, Los Angeles is a growing and dynamic location. Though migration has been negative, a sufficient amount of natural population growth is forecasted for the next 5 years. The subject will bode well in Los Angeles County.

10

San Fernando Valley Area Description: The San Fernando Valley is bound roughly by the Santa Susana Mountains to the north and west, the Santa Monica Mountains to the south, and the San Gabriel Mountains to the east. It is a geographic area, not a political one, and lacks clearly demarcated political boundaries. It lies in Los Angeles County and includes all or portions of six cities: Burbank, Calabasas, Glendale, Hidden Hills, Los Angeles and San Fernando. Universal City, home to Universal Studios Hollywood, is also in the San Fernando Valley. A portion of Universal City lies within Los Angeles City, and the remainder lies on unincorporated land in Los Angeles County. The largest part of the Valley, both in area and population, belongs to the city of Los Angeles. It is known as the Los Angeles portion of the Valley. Forty-seven percent of the land area and 36% of the population of the city of Los Angeles are in the San Fernando Valley. The Los Angeles portion of the Valley is nearly 20 miles across at its widest point (from Chatsworth to Tujunga) and 14 miles north to south (from Sylmar to Sherman Oaks). For planning purposes, Los Angeles is divided into 36 community plan areas. Fourteen are located in the San Fernando Valley, and one of these is Studio City. The Los Angeles portion of the Valley dominates the San Fernando Valley, accounting for 80% of the Valley's population and 77% of its land area. However, the Los Angeles portion is not the fastest growing area in the Valley, in fact it is the slowest, estimated to have grown only 0.6% since the 2000 consensus. The newer cities of Hidden Hills and Calabasas grew the fastest, but the established cities of Burbank, Glendale, and San Fernando all grew at between 2.5% and 3%. At present 27 "named" communities make up the Los Angeles portion of the Valley. None of these communities are legal entities; all are part of the City of Los Angeles. The power to name a particular area rests with the Los Angeles City Council. In recent years, three new areas have been carved out and named -- West Hills, Valley Village and Valley Glen. Most of what used to be called Sepulveda is now North Hills.

11

Originally comprising independent communities, portions of the Valley were annexed to the city of Los Angeles between 1915 and 1923 to gain access to city water rights. The small city of San Fernando remained independent and is now totally surrounded by the Los Angeles portion of the Valley. Two major airports, the Burbank Airport, which accommodates commercial flights, and the Van Nuys Airport, a general aviation airport, serve the Valley. The Van Nuys airport, despite its general aviation orientation, has the capacity to land even the most sophisticated military aircraft. Two principal rail lines traverse the Valley. One lies along the Valley's eastern border moving goods northwest from the Los Angeles civic center. The second runs diagonally across the Valley, also entering at its southeast corner, running west, and then north across the Valley, leaving the Valley at its northwest corner in Chatsworth. The latter line offers Amtrak service and both lines offer commuter rail service. A Metropolitan Transportation Authority light rail and subway system serves the Valley through its North Hollywood station. Several major freeways also serve the Valley's transportation needs. Commuters are very familiar with the 5, 101, 405, 134, 210, 118, 170, and Glendale's 2. The Metropolitan Transportation Authority also offers a full complement of bus services on Valley arterial routes.

12

Neighborhood Description: The subject property is located in the community of Sylmar in the San Fernando Valley.

NEIGHBORHOOD MAP

The subject’s neighborhood is in the stable to redevelopment stage of its lifecycle with little new construction occurring owing to its infill location as vacant land is scarce. The subject’s neighborhood is primarily multi-family residential with single family homes located on side streets. The neighborhood has very good access. The Foothill Freeway is located one block northeast of the subject property with access points at Hubbard Street and connects the northwest San Fernando Valley to Pasadena, the San Gabriel Valley, and the Inland Empire. The Golden State Freeway and the San Diego Freeway are located approximately 3 miles to the south and provide travel between north and southern California. The Ronald Reagan/Simi Valley Freeway terminates at the 210 Freeway approximately 2 miles east of the subject property and traverses west into Simi Valley and Ventura County. Primary east/west traffic streets include Foothill Boulevard and Glenoaks Boulevard while primary north/south traffic streets include Polk Street and Hubbard Street. The subject has good proximity to employment and shopping centers. Neighborhood shopping is found on Foothill Boulevard approximately ¼ mile north of the subject property. Employment centers are located in the nearby cities/communities of Burbank, North Hills, Woodland Hills, Sherman Oaks, Encino, and Universal City. Overall, the subject property’s neighborhood is stable and well located within a neighborhood of multi-family development. The subject property should bode well in this neighborhood.

13

Apartment Market Overview: The following information is from Marcus & Millichap Fourth Quarter 2018 Los Angeles Apartment Market Report www.marcusmillichap.com. Out-of-reach mortgage payments, population growth support stout rental absorption. An expanding employment base and wage growth over the past two years have supported an increased rate of households seeking a home in Los Angeles County, namely rentals. For most residents, the growing disparity between a monthly mortgage payment and average monthly rent has made leasing an apartment their best option. Spanning the last 24 months, the local affordability gap expanded by $630, reaching a difference of more than $1,100 per month in September. A lack of viable living choices for many households fueled a four-year-strong rate of apartments being leased over the last year, reducing vacancy below 4 percent in nearly every submarket. Tight vacancy positions metro to handle new supply. Developers complete 9,700 rentals in 2018, a year-over-year increase of more than 4,000 apartments, yet this influx of units will not halt vacancy compression. Instead, year-end availability falls to 3.4 percent, matching this cycle’s previous low. The metro’s ability to absorb these luxury dwellings is reassuring considering its current development pipeline. Greater Downtown Los Angeles is home to more than half of this year’s new apartments, with Westside Cities welcoming nearly 2,000 additional rentals. Notable fourth quarter deliveries include a trio of conversion projects in Downtown Los Angeles and the 585-unit AMLI Marina del Rey. Multifamily Forecasts – Los Angeles County Employment: Employers added 54,800 workers over the past 12 months after filling 60,500 positions during the prior period. The slight drop in job creation allowed the metro’s unemployment rate to rise 10 basis points to 4.6 percent. Leisure and hospitality-related hiring was robust over the past year, with the sector expanding by 26,900 workers. Construction: Developers finalized 3,300 units during the third quarter of this year, supporting the completion of 7,150 rentals over the past 12 months. More than 60 percent of new supply was concentrated in Greater Downtown Los Angeles. Construction is underway on 28,400 units, with most projects finalized by late 2020. Roughly 3,500 of these rentals will come online during the fourth quarter of 2018. Vacancy: Over the past year, net absorption of 9,870 units lowered the metro’s vacancy rate 40 basis points to 3.4 percent. Leasing velocity was notably strong during the third quarter, with 3,950 rentals absorbed. Renter demand for higher-quality units rose during the last 12 months, reducing Class A vacancy by 60 basis points to 4.1 percent.

14

Rents: The average effective rent rose by more than 4 percent for a second straight year, reaching $2,221 per month. Above-average rate gains within the metro’s more affordable submarkets drove overall rent growth. South Los Angeles and East Los Angeles recorded increases of 8.3 percent and 6.9 percent, respectively, with rent in Long Beach up 5.9 percent annually. Investment Trends

• Entering the fourth quarter, Los Angeles County ranked as California’s fourth most expensive metro for multifamily investment, aided by a large volume of recent Class C transactions. Because of its size, the metro continues to provide investors with a variety of price points in a collection of submarkets where recent renter demand has translated to strong absorption.

• Class C sales activity spiked by 50 percent over the past year, supported by increased deal flow in the San Fernando and San Gabriel valleys. In these locales, sub-$300,000 per unit pricing and initial returns in the 4 percent range are common. The same can be said for Koreatown and South Bay.

• Average pricing for Class B assets rests below $400,000 per unit, attracting a mix of buyers

to the sector. The metro’s four primary regions are equally targeted, providing low-3 percent to 4 percent first-year returns for post-1980-built properties.

San Fernando Valley Apartment Market Construction and Vacancy

• Driven by completions in the Tri-Cities submarket, regional delivery volume totaled 1,380 rentals during the past four quarters. The Griffith, a 220-unit project in Glendale, represented the largest project finalized. During the previous 12-month period, 1,200 units were delivered. The region welcomes 375 new apartments during the fourth quarter, including the 180-unit Vestalia in Glendale.

• The absorption of 1,275 units during the last 12 months held the region’s vacancy rate at 3.0 percent in September. Demand was strongest in Burbank/Glendale/Pasadena, where the absorption of 1,400 rentals lowered availability 30 basis points to 3.1 percent. Entering the fourth quarter, vacancy is tightest in the Van Nuys/Northeast San Fernando Valley submarket at 2.5 percent.

15

Rents

• After increasing 4.9 percent during the prior year, the average effective rent climbed 3 percent over the past 12 months reaching $2,068 per month.

• Supported by above-average rent growth at

higher-quality complexes, the effective rates in Burbank/Glendale/ Pasadena and Woodland Hills elevated to $2,345 and $2,283 per month, respectively.

Investment Highlights

• Relative affordability and the proximity to employment hubs attract renters to the Tri-Cities/San Fernando Valley region, translating to a limited supply of vacant apartments. Recent leasing activity has been consistent across the board, warranting steady rent growth, yet reductions in submarkets’ Class A availability suggest a need for new units exists. This demand prompts a moderate year-over-year uptick in deliveries this year, with nearly 1,300 units completed in the Tri-Cities submarket. The majority of these rentals are in Glendale. Just two properties will be brought online in the San Fernando Valley this year.

• Class C vacancy rests below 2 percent in several Valley submarkets, including Van Nuys, piquing the interest of local, upside-seeking buyers that target midsize complexes. Dependent on locale, 1960s- to 1980s-built properties typically provide investors with 3 to low-4 percent initial yields and sub-$300,000 per unit pricing. In Pasadena and Glendale similar cap rates are obtainable, yet asset values routinely exceed $350,000 per door. • Out-of-state investors that deploy more than $50 million per deal pursue newly built, Class A properties throughout the region. Pricing for these complexes starts at $450,000 per unit in the Tri-Cities, with discounted values available in the Valley. Outlook: Recently strong demand for newly built units has the potential to increase the number of projects that

trade prior to reaching stabilization.

16

North San Fernando Valley The following information is from CoStar Analytics 2018 Los Angeles Multi-Family Submarket Report

Vacancy Vacancies have historically averaged around 3.5% in the submarket and have held at or below 3% for several years. This is good news for area landlords, and vacancies can be expected to remain low in the near term given the lack of new construction. Demographic factors limit the development appeal of North San Fernando Valley, despite the healthy vacancy picture. Both population and employment growth also trail the wider metro. There is a scarcity of potential renters, as well. While the greater LA population is evenly split between renters and homeowners, only about 35% of submarket residents rent. The median household income of $60,000 is in line with the LA median. However, incomes are highest in the areas of the submarket where single-family housing is predominant and average below $50,000 in neighborhoods where multifamily inventory is concentrated. This is primarily a residential area, and while a few commercial corridors exist, no major employers call the submarket home. LA Metro is exploring options for improvements to the Orange Line, which runs to the Sylmar/San Fernando Metrolink Station and facilitates north-south travel in the Valley. Proposals include enhanced bus lanes and the extension of light-rail service to the submarket. Construction would likely take place outside of the forecast time frame, but an approved plan could spur investment and development activity in the area

17

Construction There are only about 5,500 units in the North San Fernando Valley, making this one of the smallest submarkets in LA. Most supply is concentrated in its eastern half, between the 5 Freeway and Foothill Boulevard. Mid-tier complexes make up nearly 40% of inventory; metro-wide, they account for only about 25% of supply. Communities are designed with large families in mind, with two- and three-bedroom units making up more than 50% of inventory compared to just 35% in the metro. A handful of developments containing several hundred units delivered in the late 2000s, resulting in newer inventory than in many Valley submarkets. About 15% of supply was built in the last decade, versus about 5% in the wider metro. Zoning and height restrictions prohibit vertical development in much of the San Fernando Valley, so units are predominantly in low-rise, garden-style communities. The submarket historically averages about 60 new units annually, although that average is inflated by a supply boom of hundreds of units delivered in the late 2000s. The Cosmo Residential, a 61-unit complex delivered in May 2015, is the largest development built in the North San Fernando Valley since 2010. Encino-based Gelb Group recently filed plans for a large mixed-use complex at the corner of San Fernando Mission Boulevard and Woodley Avenue. Proposals for the project, which would replace an existing retail center, call for 440 units and around 65,000 SF of ground-floor commercial space. It will be the largest new multifamily development built here in at least a decade if it materializes. Shapell Properties also has plans for a 266-unit complex at their The Village at Porter Ranch mixed-use project. Overall, the North San Fernando Valley is undersupplied, however given current construction proposals, limited commercial linkages and limited development appeal, the occupancy rates should remain stable.

18

Property Description: The following description is based on a physical inspection of the subject property, a review of information and building plans provided by the client, interviews with the property client, and public information. Site Description The subject site consists of a rectangular parcel totaling 20,473 square feet. The reader’s attention is directed to the addendum for pictures of the subject property and to the plat map on the following page.

Access to the site is currently and, upon completion will be from, a single driveway on Foothill Boulevard. The site is essentially level at street grade and is finished with all utilities and off-site improvements. The subject has approximately 96 feet of frontage on Foothill Boulevard and is approximately 213 feet deep. Development of the site will require the dedication of approximately 20 feet of depth, reducing the net site area to 18,528 square feet. There is currently an approximate 1,000 square foot home built in 1941 on the site that has reached the end of its useful economic life. Surrounding Influences: The immediate neighborhood is improved with multi-family housing consisting of apartments and condominiums. There are no surrounding land uses that are significantly detrimental to the appeal of the subject property development.

20

Zoning: The subject site is zoned RD 1.5 a residential designation under the City of Los Angeles’ zoning jurisdiction. The planned improvements are assumed to be code conforming because of approval required. Legal Description: A title report dated March 10, 2017 was provided for review. No easements are noted on the title report. No dedications are noted either, however, the parcel extends into Foothill Boulevard beyond the adjacent, newer properties, therefore, we have made an Extraordinary Assumption that 20 feet of depth will require dedication. No encroachments were noted during the site inspection. A legal description is found in the addendum to this report. Ownership history: According to public records, ownership is currently vested in the PWP Properties, Inc. The last arm’s length transfer of the property was in May 2011 for approximately $335,000 in a cash equivalent transaction. The subject property is not currently listed for sale and has not had any other arm’s length transfers within the prior three years. Property Tax Information: The following information was obtained from the Los Angeles County Tax Assessor’s office for the 2017/2018 tax year:

The property will be re-assessed upon completion. The effective tax rate is 1.193%. It appears that there are direct assessments of approximately $365 currently on the property. We have assumed that upon completion that the direct assessment will be per unit. Utilities: Electricity, water, gas, sewer, and telephone/cable are to the site currently.

Drainage: Drainage is assumed to be adequate with runoff to the street engineered into the finished site. Development Status: The subject property has been approved for development as proposed.

21

Improvement Description: The proposed 10-unit development will consist of 2 buildings; The units will be of wood frame and stucco construction. The development will have a security gated entrance. Copies of the pertinent plans are located in the addendum to this report. The development will have the following unit mix:

Each unit will be three-stories with an attached two-car garage and bedroom and bathroom on the ground floor. The 2nd floor will contain the main living area, with the top floor containing 3 bedrooms and 2 bathrooms. The project is summarized as follows:

Plan # of Units Bed/Bath SF1A 2 4/3.5 1,871 1B 2 4/3.5 1,871 1C 4 4/3.5 1,880 1D 2 4/3.5 1,883

Total 10 Average 1,877

22

Unit sizes range from 1,871 square feet to 1,883 square feet. They will be 4 bedrooms with 3.5 baths, with the ½ bath located on the main floor (2nd floor).

The roof will be flat tar and gravel material with gutters and down spouts. There will be concrete foundations. The units will be individually metered for electricity, gas, and water. Interiors: The units appear to be functional in their design with ground level entrances that will lead to an optional den/4th bedroom adjacent to the garage. Stairs will lead to the main level where the living and dining areas are located along with the kitchen and ½ bathroom. There are a sufficient number of bathrooms for each unit and functionally the units will compete well in the market. Each unit will have a laundry room located on the 3rd floor. Each unit will have central air conditioning and heating in a roof mounted FAU unit and will come pre-wired for phone and cable television. Units are assumed to have adequate sound proofing and to contain Title 24 compliant insulation. Finishes include granite Pullman counters in the bathrooms, drywall walls and ceilings, base and upper cabinets, baseboards,

fully shelved closets. Bathrooms will contain pre-fabricated shower/tub combinations. Floors will consist of Pergo wood flooring downstairs and carpeting in the upstairs bedrooms and stairways. The wet areas will have linoleum. The units will have Delta or Price Pfister equivalent plumbing fixtures. Light fixtures include exterior lighting, interior LED kitchen and bath lighting, dining room ceiling lighting and bathroom vent fan/light combination. Appliances will be Whirlpool stainless steel gas range and oven combination, microwave ovens, and dishwashers. Unit will contain a garbage disposal. If sold individually, the Homeowner’s Association Fee is forecasted by the developer at $126 per month, however the budget was not provided for review. The Association fee is assumed to include property insurance and common area

maintenance.

23

Marshall and Swift estimates similar quality construction buildings to have a total economic life of 45 years. The subject improvements will be new. Overall, the subject is estimated to have a remaining economic life of 45 years. Highest and Best Use: The highest and best use is the foundation for the valuation of the subject property. This analysis seeks to answer four questions: which uses are legally permissible; which uses are physically possible; of the physically and legally possible uses, which uses are financially feasible; and from the financially feasible uses, which use is the maximally productive use of the subject property. Demand for residential properties in the San Fernando Valley and in Los Angeles County overall has increased dramatically over the past few years. New construction is occurring where possible and demand outpaces supply. Given the subject’s location and surrounding uses, as well as proximity of the site to major arterials, the subject site is desirable for residential development. Financial feasibility, maximal productivity, marketability, legal, and physical factors have been considered and the highest and best use of the subject site assuming the site is vacant is residential development consistent with the proposed plans. The owner has provided an estimate to construct the subject units, indicating $1,648,351 and includes direct costs. These were not itemized nor were they from an independent contractor, therefore, they were not reviewed for reasonableness. However, this estimate is lower than other proposed apartment buildings recently appraised at $164,835 per unit. The most recent proposed apartment building appraised indicated a total cost of approximately $210,000 per unit, however, this project had subterranean parking and interior hallways. For purposes of this analysis, we have assumed a cost of approximately $200,000 per unit, or $2,000,000 in direct construction costs. Indirect costs are not included and would include plans, permits, financing fees, sales commissions and closing costs. These costs are estimated at 15% of direct construction costs and land costs for a total of $3,363,750. Considering the Aggregate Retail Value of $5,140,000, an entrepreneurial profit of nearly 50% is indicated, well above the typical entrepreneurial profit targeted by developers, which usually ranges from 15% to 25%. The Aggregate Retail Value conclusion as estimated in this report of $5,140,000 is 7.0% less than the estimated market value as a rental property, concluded at $5,500,000. In conclusion, the highest and best use of the subject property is the redevelopment of the subject site with the planned Foothill Villas project. The subject will be valued based on this highest and best use conclusion. Indicated Exposure and Marketing Time: The exposure time (the length of time the subject property would have been exposed for sale in the market had it sold at the market value concluded in this analysis as of the date of this valuation) and the estimated marketing time (the amount of time it would probably take to sell the subject property if exposed in the market beginning on the date of this valuation) is estimated at less than 12 months in its As-Is condition and upon completion as either a rental property or as individual units, based on a review of comparable sales of each.

24

SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS AND VALUATION: The subject property is valued under the two hypothetical assumptions that they are rental properties and that they are sold individually. To value the subject as a rental property, the Income and Sales Comparison Approaches are used. To value the subject property as a condominium unit sold individually, the Sales Comparison Approach is used. The Cost Approach is not used, however, pro-forma construction costs as developed by the client have been reviewed and analyzed and indicates that the subject property could be developed with an entrepreneurial profit under each hypothetical assumption. Scenario 1: Hypothetical Retail Value As Individual Condominium Units To estimate the Retail Value of the units individually, the Sales Comparison Approach was used. The comparable sales are located on the grids on the following pages, with more information included in the addendum to this report. The concluded value for all plans, prior to location premium is $510,000.

25

Five of the six comparables are located in a community that is currently selling out, known as Tovara. The units are very similar to the subject property but are adjacent to the 210 Freeway and have a park. They are similar in size and bedroom count. The comparables would compete well with the subject property. Location Premium Typically, premiums are commanded for location premiums within condominium developments, especially for end-unit location. There are 4 end-unit locations. We have estimated a $10,000 location premium for these units based on discussions with sales personnel at the comparable properties.

26

Value Summary-Retail Value as Condominium Units

The concluded estimated Aggregate Retail Value for the subject units is $5,140,000 subject to the Extraordinary Assumptions and Hypothetical Conditions set forth in this report.

Plan # of Units Bed/Bath SF Individual Total1A 2 4/3.5 1,871 $510,000 $1,020,0001B 2 4/3.5 1,871 $510,000 $1,020,0001C 4 4/3.5 1,880 $510,000 $2,040,0001D 2 4/3.5 1,883 $510,000 $1,020,000

Total 10 Average 1,877 $510,000 $5,100,000End-Units 4 $10,000 $40,000

Total $5,140,000

27

Scenario 2-Hypothetical Value as a Rental Property The next scenario is the hypothetical value of the subject property as a rental property. The Income Approach and the Sales Comparison Approach are used in this valuation scenario. Income Approach: The income approach is an attempt to simulate an investor’s purchasing decision. The approach involves estimating the rental income and deducting vacancy and expenses to arrive at a net operating income estimate. This estimate is converted to a value estimate using a variety of methods. We have used the direct capitalization method as this method is most readily used by investors when purchasing investment properties similar to the subject. To estimate the market rent for the vacant units, a market survey was completed. The subject property type is a unique type of development built to condominium specifications and because 4-bedroom apartment units are rare. We have expanded the geographical search area beyond Sylmar due to the lack of 4-bedroom units there. The comparables are summarized in the addendum to this report.

COMPARABLE RENTAL MAP

28

Comparables 1 and 2 are newer apartment complexes located in Sylmar but have only 3-bedroom units. These units range from $2,254 to $3,119. These units have superior amenities including a pool and secured subterranean parking. Once adjusted for bedroom count, they support a range of $2,700 to $3,000 per month for the subject’s 4-bedroom units. The remaining comparables range from $2,895 to $5,547 per month with most between $2,900 and $4,000 per month. Some comparables are inferior in effective age but have superior amenities and with comparables 3 through 7 being in superior locations. Tenants pay their own utilities at each of the comparable properties, similar to the subject property. Conclusion of Market Rents and Potential Gross Rental Income Estimate: Based on our review of the market comparables, the developer’s pro-forma rent estimate of $2,750 per month appears to be lower than market. The market rent for interior units is estimated at $2,850 and $2,950 for the exterior units. The market rent and potential gross rental income are estimated as follows:

Vacancy and Collection Loss: The subject units will have good appeal and will compete well in the neighborhood, which exhibited stable occupancy. As reported in the market overview section, the average vacancy rate for the area is declining with little to no new construction occurring. Overall, a long-term stabilized vacancy and collection loss rate of 5% is well supported by expectations of the market participants as evidenced by the sales comparisons. Operating Expenses: Pro-forma forecasted operating expenses for the subject property were not provided. The following operating expense forecast is based on operating expense histories reviewed over decades of multifamily property analyses. Real Estate Taxes: Real estate taxes are based on the subject’s base tax rate of 1% of assessed value plus the bonded indebtedness and any direct assessments at the value by the income approach. The effective tax rate is 1.206%. Direct assessments of $365 per unit are estimated. Property Insurance: Insurance is estimated at $475 per unit per year for a total insurance estimate of $4,750 per year, rounded. Repairs and Maintenance: This category includes property maintenance, trash, and landscaping. A total of $500 per unit per year is forecasted for these costs.

Unit Type Rent Forecast # of Units Total Monthly Total AnnuallyInterior Units $2,850 6 $17,100 $205,200

End-Units $2,950 4 $11,800 $141,60010 Total $346,800

29

Utilities: The units are individually metered, however ownership will be responsible for common area electricity and water (landscaping). These costs should be minimal and are estimated at $500 per month. On-site management is not required. Off-site management is estimated at 3% of effective gross income, consistent with similar multifamily properties in the area. Reserves for Replacement: We have estimated reserves at 1% of effective gross income. Expenses are estimated at $100,962, equivalent to $10,096 per unit. Expenses are 30% of effective gross income. Capitalization Rate: The next step in estimating the value of the subject property is to capitalize this first year forecasted income stream into a value estimate. Ideally, the capitalization rates are extracted from the comparable sales. The following capitalization rates are from buildings between 5 and 8 units in size and completed in 2008 or after, and that are listed or have sold in the past 12 months from the date of value in Los Angeles County:

CAPITALIZATION RATE SUMMARY TABLE

The capitalization rates found range from 2.33% to 5.25% and average 3.82%. Generally, the North Hollywood location is considered superior to Sylmar. Sylmar is most similar to Tujunga. The multifamily rental market is strong regionally and given the subject’s location, new age, and detached condominium appeal, a rate near the lower end of the range is appropriate. Five of the 8 indicators are below 4.00%. A rate of 4.00% reflects the expectations of market participants as evidenced by the comparable sales and reflects the subject’s location, age, and market appeal.

Sale Status Property Address Property City Sale DateSale/Asking

Price Bldg SF Actual Cap Rate Price Per Unit GRMUnder Contract 6829 Simpson Ave North Hollywood Escrow $1,795,000 6,000 3.88 $359,000 15.87Sold 6910 Hinds Ave North Hollywood 5/21/2018 $1,665,000 5,635 3.40 $333,000 NASold 6824 Ben Ave North Hollywood 9/21/2018 $2,000,000 5,500 5.25 $400,000 NASold 10214 Fernglen Ave Tujunga 10/4/2018 $2,880,000 9,120 5.00 $480,000 NASold 11835 Vanowen St North Hollywood 9/28/2018 $3,655,000 15,514 4.15 $365,500 15.60Sold 12132 Hart St North Hollywood 7/31/2018 $3,912,000 8,035 3.35 $434,667 19.03Sold 11312 Huston St North Hollywood 1/26/2018 $9,000,000 21,250 2.33 $642,857 22.78Active 6844 Woodman Ave Van Nuys Active $6,955,000 15,720 3.23 $463,667 NA

Averages 3.82 $434,836 18.32Minimum 2.33 $333,000 15.60Maximum 5.25 $642,857 22.78

30

Value Conclusion The estimated market value of the subject property by the Income Approach is concluded at $5,500,000, or $550,000 per unit, calculated below:

INCOME APPROACH SUMMARY Total $/UnitPotential Gross Rental Income $352,800 $8,018Other Operating Income $0 $0Potential Gross Income $352,800 $8,018Less Vacancy & Collection Loss -$17,640 -$401Effective Gross Income $335,160 $7,617

ExpensesReal Estate Taxes $67,800 $6,780City License Fee/Direct Assessments $4,005 $401Insurance $4,750 $475Repairs and Maintenance $5,000 $500Common Area Utilities $6,000 $600On-Site Management/Gen & Admin. $0 $0Off-Site Management $10,055 $1,005Reserves $3,352 $335Total Expenses $100,962 $10,096

Net Operating Income $234,198 $23,420

Capitalization Rate 4.25%

Capitalized Value $5,510,551 $551,055Rounded: $5,500,000 $550,000

31

Sales Comparison Approach: The competitive market area was searched for comparable sales of multifamily properties completed since 2010 between 5 and 15 units in size. The search went back 12 months from the date of value and also included current listings. A summary of the sales data is summarized below:

SALES APPROACH SUMMARY TABLE

The sales comparables are similar to superior in location to the subject and have good market appeal. The comparables have smaller average unit sizes. The subject has a superior unit mix to all of the comparables due to the entire complex consisting of 4-Bedroom units. Only one comparable sold as new (comparable 1) with the majority being completed between 2011 and 2014. Comparable 1 is the sale of a new 5-unit two-story building. This property has smaller average unit sizes as they are all 3-bedroom units. Rents vary from $2,800-$3,200 per unit. Each unit is assigned 2 parking units. This property sold for a 5.25% capitalization rate and for $400,000 per unit. Upward consideration is required for the inferior unit mix, and a downward adjustment is required for its superior location. Comparable 2 is the sale of a two-story 6-unit townhome style building in Tujunga, an area similar to the subject’s location. This property is older as it completed in 2012. This property has smaller average unit sizes as they are all 3-bedroom units. Rents vary from $2,450-$2,625 per unit. These were built to be sold as individual townhomes but due to market conditions at completion, the property has been operated as an apartment complex. There is gated parking. This property sold for a 5.00% capitalization rate and for $480,000 per unit. Upward consideration is required for the inferior unit mix and inferior effective age.

32

SALES COMPARABLE MAP

Comparable 3 is the sale of a two-story over covered parking 9-unit elevator style building in North Hollywood, an area superior to the subject’s location. This property was completed in 2017. This property has smaller average unit sizes as they are all 1 or 2-bedroom units. There is gated parking. This property sold for a 3.35% capitalization rate and for $434,667 per unit. Upward consideration is required for the inferior unit mix and a downward adjustment for its superior location. Comparable 4 is the sale of a two-story 5-unit garden style building in North Hollywood, an area superior to the subject’s location. This property is older as it was completed in 2012. This property has smaller average unit sizes as they are all 3-bedroom units. Rents vary from $1,600-$1,900 per unit. There is gated parking. This property sold for a 3.40% capitalization rate and for $333,000 per unit. Upward consideration is required for the inferior unit mix and inferior effective age and a downward adjustment is required for its superior location.

33

Comparable 5 is the sale of a three-story over subterranean garage 14-unit elevator style building in North Hollywood, an area superior to the subject’s location. This property is older as it was completed in 2011. This property has smaller average unit sizes as they are all 3-bedroom units. This building was developed as a condominium project but due to market conditions at completion, it has been operated as an apartment building. There is gated parking. This property sold for a 4.02% capitalization rate and for $542,857 per unit. Upward consideration is required for the inferior unit mix and inferior effective age and downward adjustments are required for its superior location and quality of construction. Comparable 6 is the sale of a 9-unit building in North Hollywood, an area superior to the subject’s location. This property is older as it was completed in 2013. This property has smaller average unit sizes as they are all studio units. This property sold for $366,111 per unit. Upward consideration is required for the inferior unit mix and inferior effective age while downward adjustments are required for its superior location. Comparable 7 is the sale of a two-story 5-unit garden style building in North Hollywood, an area superior to the subject’s location. This property is older as it was completed in 2014. This property has smaller average unit sizes. There is gated parking. This property is under contract and was for sale for $359,000 per unit. Upward consideration is required for the inferior unit mix and inferior effective age and a downward adjustment is required for its superior location. Comparable 8 is the sale of a three-story over subterranean parking 10-unit elevator style building in North Hollywood, an area superior to the subject’s location. This property is older as it was completed in 2011. This property has smaller average unit sizes as they are all 2 or 3-bedroom units. There is gated parking. This property sold for a 4.15% capitalization rate and for $365,500 per unit. Upward consideration is required for the inferior unit mix and inferior effective age and downward adjustments for its superior location and construction quality. Comparable 9 is the current listing of a three-story 15-unit building in Van Nuys, an area superior to the subject’s location. This property has a similar effective age as it was completed in 2017. This property has smaller average unit sizes. There is gated parking. This property is listed for $463,667 per unit. Upward consideration is required for the inferior unit mix and downward adjustments for its superior location. Explanation of Adjustments Adjustments can be applied in terms of dollars or percentages; the appropriate methodology is determined by the market. Adjustments are partly empirical and partly judgmental. As stated in the Ninth Edition of The Appraisal of Real Estate, "Note that rigid statements on the ̀ proper' way to make adjustments should be avoided. The calculations that an appraiser uses to make an adjustment are based on a rationale, but the mathematics should not control an appraiser's judgment. A market value estimate is not determined by a set of precise calculations. Appraisal has an art aspect in that appraisers use their judgment to analyze and interpret quantitative data."

34

Each property surveyed was analyzed in terms of a number of selected property characteristics. All of the properties are similar to the subject in one or more characteristics, and together, serve as a reasonable comparison pool for establishing an indication of value for the subject property. Due to numerous simultaneous differences among the comparable sales, it was not possible to precisely extract specific adjustments for each noted difference. However, it was possible to reasonably quantify the adjustments through paired sales analysis and the sale verification process, although these opinions were not available for each item in all cases. Technical analysis and personal judgment result in the selected adjustments. A precise matched pair’s analysis ideally considers differences between the subject property and the comparable properties. However, due to the various differences, precise adjustments based on matched pair’s analyses are not possible. The comparables did not require adjustments for conditions of sale or for financing. Adjustments for size, location, and physical features were based on discussions with real estate professionals but are somewhat subjective. Market Conditions: The closed sale comparables occurred within the past 12 months from the date of value making the sales very reliable indicators of value. Though the market has been stable, there is a lack of sufficient data to quantify a rate of appreciation. The strong market conditions will be considered in the final value conclusion. Location: With the exception of comparable 2, all of the comparables are in superior locations in North Hollywood. Downward adjustments are required. Effective Age: With the exception of Comparables 1, 3, and 9, the sale comparables have an inferior effective age and are adjusted upward. Unit Mix: All of the comparables are of smaller average unit size and warrant an upward adjustment. Value Per Unit Conclusion These comparables range from $366,300 to $597,143 per unit. The average is $458,995 per unit.

ADJUSTMENT GRID

Comparable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9Price/Unit $400,000 $480,000 $434,667 $333,000 $542,857 $366,111 $359,000 $365,500 $463,667Listing Status $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 -$23,183Market Conditions $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Subtotal $400,000 $480,000 $434,667 $333,000 $542,857 $366,111 $359,000 $365,500 $440,484Location -$40,000 $0 -$43,467 -$33,300 -$54,286 -$36,611 -$35,900 -$36,550 -$44,048Effective Age $0 $48,000 $0 $33,300 $54,286 $36,611 $35,900 $36,550 $0Unit Mix/Unit Size $40,000 $48,000 $86,933 $33,300 $54,286 $109,833 $35,900 $36,550 $44,048Adjusted Value $400,000 $576,000 $478,134 $366,300 $597,143 $475,944 $394,900 $402,050 $440,484

35

This range is quite wide. Most weight is given to the comparables with the most similar unit mixes, which would be comparables 1, 2, 4, and 5, which also include the low and high ends of the range. Comparable 2 had the most similar location and is at the upper end of the value range. Overall, a value of $550,000 per unit is reasonably supported. NOI/Unit Analysis The NOI Per Unit is correlated with the Value Per Unit (adjusted for market conditions and listing status) and adjusted to the subject’s reconciled NOI Per Unit and Unit Value.

Comparables 2 and 5 required the smallest adjustment and therefore had the most similar NOI stream. The adjusted values indicated a much narrower range at $446,092 to $782,279 with the two comparables requiring the least adjustment ranging from $468,397 to $543,553 per unit. Considering the subject’s age and large unit sizes, a value near the upper end of the range is well supported at $530,000 per unit. Effective Gross Income Multiplier (EGIM) Analysis Four of the 9 comparables reported Effective Gross Income Multipliers that ranged from 15.60 to 22.78 with 3 of the 4 ranging from 15.6 to 19.03. Considering the subject’s new construction and unit mix, an EGIM range above the average is reasonable. Considering the subject’s effective gross income, the EGIM analysis is estimated as follows:

Sales Comparison Approach Reconciliation The analyses yielded results that were similar to one another, indicating the following values:

Method $/Unit Value Quantitative Adjustment Grid: $550,000 $5,500,000 NOI/Unit Analysis: $530,000 $5,300,000 EGIM Analysis: $553,014 $5,530,000

COMP 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9NOI/UNIT $21,000 $24,000 $14,561 $11,322 $22,800 LOWER LOWER $15,534 LOWERSUBJECT NOI/UNIT $23,420 $23,420 $23,420 $23,420 $23,420 $23,420 $23,420 $23,420 $23,420ADJUSTMENT RATIO 1.12 0.98 1.61 2.07 1.03 NA NA 1.51 NASALE PRICE/UNIT $400,000 $480,000 $434,667 $378,182 $529,167 $366,111 $359,000 $365,500 $440,484ADJUSTED PRICE/UNIT $446,092 $468,397 $699,100 $782,279 $543,553 HIGHER HIGHER $551,055 HIGHER

EGIM ANALYSISRANGE 15.6 $5,228,496 $522,850

22.78 $7,634,945 $763,494Conclusion 16.50 $5,530,140 $553,014

36

The NOI/Unit analysis and the EGIM analysis bracket the adjustment grid conclusion of $5,500,000 per unit. The most useful indicators are the NOI/Unit analysis and the EGIM analysis as income properties are typically evaluated based on their income potential. Overall, a value conclusion of $5,500,000 is well supported and reasonable.

37

ECONCILIATION AND VALUE CONCLUSION: The Sales Comparison and the Income Approach methods were used to estimate the market value of the subject property assuming completion and stabilized occupancy and indicated similar results. The Income Approach conclusion was $5,500,000 while the Sales Comparison Approach conclusion was $5,500,000. The Income Approach is the most reliable indicator of value because apartment building values are driven by rent levels, unit mix, and capitalization rates, and typical market participants rely on this approach primarily for making investment decisions. The data from this approach is well supported, however expenses are only projected as an operating history is not available. The Sales Comparison Approach is reliable, however there were very few comparable sales of new multi-family properties in the competitive market area. Nevertheless, the data is reliable and this approach is given significant consideration. Based on independent research and analysis, the estimated market value of the fee simple interest in the subject property, with the hypothetical condition that the development is completed and at stabilized occupancy as of the date of value, is as follows:

$5,500,000

FIVE MILLION FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS

38

VALUE SUMMARY The value of the subject property development was estimated as follows:

• Aggregate Retail Value Under the Hypothetical Condition Assuming Completion as Individual Units: $5,140,000

• Hypothetical Condition Assuming Completion as Multi-Family Rental Development:

$5,500,000

39

ADDENDUM

40

SUBJECT PROPERTY PHOTOGRAPHS, PLANS, AND INFORMATION

41

Front of subject property looking west across Foothill Boulevard

Foothill Boulevard looking east

42

Foothill Boulevard looking west

43

ANALYSIS OF UNITS IF SOLD INDIVIDUALLY

Individual Condominium Unit Appraisal Report File No.

The purpose of this summary appraisal report is to provide the lender/client with an accurate, and adequately supported, opinion of the market value of the subject property.

Property Address Unit # City State Zip Code

Borrower Owner of Public Record County

Legal Description

Assessor's Parcel # Tax Year R.E. Taxes $

Project Name Phase # Map Reference Census Tract

Occupant Owner Tenant Vacant Special Assessments $ HOA $ per year per month

Property Rights Appraised Fee Simple Leasehold Other (describe)

Assignment Type Purchase Transaction Refinance Transaction Other (describe)

Lender/Client Address

Is the subject property currently offered for sale or has it been offered for sale in the twelve months prior to the effective date of this appraisal? Yes No

Report data source(s) used, offering price(s), and date(s).

SU

BJE

CT

I did did not analyze the contract for sale for the subject purchase transaction. Explain the results of the analysis of the contract for sale or why the analysis was not performed.

Contract Price $ Date of Contract Is the property seller the owner of public record? Yes No Data Source(s)

Is there any financial assistance (loan charges, sale concessions, gift or downpayment assistance, etc.) to be paid by any party on behalf of the borrower? Yes No

If Yes, report the total dollar amount and describe the items to be paid.CO

NT

RA

CT

Neighborhood Characteristics Condominium Unit Housing Trends Condominium Housing Present Land Use %

Note: Race and the racial composition of the neighborhood are not appraisal factors.

Location Urban Suburban Rural Property Values Increasing Stable Declining PRICE AGE One-Unit %

Built-Up Over 75% 25-75% Under 25% Demand/Supply Shortage In Balance Over Supply $(000) (yrs) 2-4 Unit %

Growth Rapid Stable Slow Marketing Time Under 3 mths 3-6 mths Over 6 mths Low Multi-Family %

Neighborhood Boundaries High Commercial %

Pred. Other %

Neighborhood Description

Market Conditions (including support for the above conclusions)

NE

IGH

BO

RH

OO

D

Topography Size Density View

Specific Zoning Classification Zoning Description

Zoning Compliance Legal Legal Nonconforming – Do the zoning regulations permit rebuilding to current density? Yes No

No Zoning Illegal (describe)

Is the highest and best use of the subject property as improved (or as proposed per plans and specifications) the present use? Yes No If No, describe.

Utilities Public Other (describe) Public Other (describe) Off-site Improvements—Type Public Private

Electricity Water Street

Gas Sanitary Sewer Alley

FEMA Special Flood Hazard Area Yes No FEMA Flood Zone FEMA Map # FEMA Map Date

Are the utilities and off-site improvements typical for the market area? Yes No If No, describe.

Are there any adverse site conditions or external factors (easements, encroachments, environmental conditions, land uses, etc.)? Yes No If Yes, describe.

PR

OJE

CT

SIT

E

General Description General Description Subject Phase If Project Completed If Project Incomplete

Data source(s) for project information

Project Description Detached Row or Townhouse Garden Mid-Rise High-Rise Other(describe)

# of Stories

# of Elevators

Existing Proposed

Under Construction

Year Built

Effective Age

Exterior Walls

Roof Surface

Total # Parking

Ratio (spaces/units)

Type

Guest Parking

# of Units

# of Units Completed

# of Units For Sale

# of Units Sold

# of Units Rented

# of Owner Occupied Units

# of Phases

# of Units

# of Units for Sale

# of Units Sold

# of Units Rented


# of Planned Phases

# of Planned Units

# of Units for Sale

# of Units Sold

# of Units Rented


Project Primary Occupancy Principal Residence Second Home or Recreational Tenant

Is the developer/builder in control of the Homeowners’ Association (HOA)? Yes No

Management Group – Homeowners’ Association Developer Management Agent – Provide name of management company.

Does any single entity (the same individual, investor group, corporation, etc.) own more than 10% of the total units in the project? Yes No If Yes, describe

Was the project created by the conversion of an existing building(s) into a condominium? Yes No If Yes, describe the original use and the date of conversion.

Are the units, common elements, and recreation facilities complete (including any planned rehabilitation for a condominium conversion)? Yes No If No, describe

Is there any commercial space in the project? Yes No If Yes, describe and indicate the overall percentage of the commercial space.

PR

OJE

CT

INF

OR

MA

TIO

N

Page 1 of 6Freddie Mac Form 465 March 2005 Fannie Mae Form 1073 March 2005Produced using ACI software, 800.234.8727 www.aciweb.com

1073_05A 090909

135301118FOOTHILL

VOLTZ COMMERCIAL REALTY ADVISORS

N/A

PROPOSED CONSTRUCTIONXX

N/AN/AX1061.14482/C41VALLEY STREET VILLAS4,777.0520182513-007-031

THE MACLAY RANCHO 0.47 AC NW 95.71 FT OF SE 913 FT OF NE 213.41 FT OFLOS ANGELESFOOTHILL VILLAS 10 LLCN/A

91342CASYLMARN/A13530 FOOTHILL BLVD

N/AN/A

N/AN/AN/A

N/A

CONVENTIONAL LOANS PREVALENT BUT DIFFICULT TO OBTAIN. INVENTORY OF AVAILABLE HOMES INCREASING, DEMAND GOOD. CONDO PROPERTY VALUES PER CORELOGIC INCREASED +1.6% FROM 09/2017-09/2018. ZILLOW +4.9%. MARKETING TIMES HAVE DECREASED. INTEREST RATES LOW, APPEAR TO BE RISING. *(AVERAGE +0.27 PER MONTH INCREASE)

SUBJECT IS IN THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES, IN THE AREA KNOWN AS SYLMAR. N/E SAN FERNANDO VALLEY SUBURB, AT THE WESTERN FOOTHILLS OF THE SAN GABRIEL MTNS, APPROX 20 MI N/E OF DOWNTOWN. ROLLING HILL AREA, SOME VIEW LOTS TYPICAL. AVERAGE OVERALL MARKET APPEAL, TYPICAL SUBURBAN AMENITIES.

231

94

31451

395793170

NORTH: FOOTHILL FREEWAY, SOUTH: GOLDEN STATE FREEWAY, EAST: SAN FERANADO, WEST: FOOTHILL BOULEVARD

XXX

XX

X

EXTERNAL OBSOLESCENCE NOTED, DUE TO TRAFFIC

XX

09/26/200806037C1075FXXNONE

XASPHALTXX

XX

X

XRESIDENTIALLARA

NO VIEWTYPICALTYPICAL FOR AREABASICALLY LEVEL

X

X

X

X

N/A

X

X0

3

XN.D.C. DATA, COUNTY ASSESSOR, CRMLS, DEVELOPER


Describe the condition of the project and quality of construction.

Describe the common elements and recreational facilities.

Are any common elements leased to or by the Homeowners’ Association? Yes No If Yes, describe the rental terms and options.

Is the project subject to a ground rent? Yes No If Yes, $ per year (describe terms and conditions)

Are the parking facilities adequate for the project size and type? Yes No If No, describe and comment on the effect on value and marketability.

PR

OJE

CT

INF

OR

MA

TIO

N

I did did not analyze the condominium project budget for the current year. Explain the results of the analysis of the budget (adequacy of fees, reserves, etc.), or why the analysis

was not performed.

Are there any other fees (other than regular HOA charges) for the use of the project facilities? Yes No If Yes, report the monthly facility charges and describe.

Compared to other competitive projects of similar quality and design, the subject unit charge appears High Average Low If High or Low, describe.

Are there any special or unusual characteristics of the project (based on the condominium documents, HOA meetings, or other information) known to the appraiser?

Yes No If Yes, describe and explain the effect on value and marketability.

PR

OJE

CT

AN

AL

YS

IS

GENERAL DESCRIPTION AMENITIES Appliances CAR STORAGE

Unit Charge $ per month X 12 = $ per year Annual assessment charge per year per square feet of gross living area = $

Utilities included in the unit monthly assessment None Heat Air Conditioning Electricity Gas Water Sewer Cable Other (describe)

INTERIOR materials/condition

Floor #

# of Levels

Heating Type Fuel

Central AC Individual AC

Other (describe)

Floors

Walls

Trim/Finish

Bath Wainscot

Doors

Fireplace(s) #

Woodstove(s) #

Deck/Patio

Porch/Balcony

Other

Refrigerator

Range/Oven

Disp Microwave

Dishwasher

Washer/Dryer

None

Garage Covered Open

# of Cars

Assigned Owned

Parking Space #

Finished area above grade contains: Rooms Bedrooms Bath(s) Square Feet of Gross Living Area Above Grade

Are the heating and cooling for the individual units separately metered? Yes No If No, describe and comment on compatibility to other projects in the market area.

Additional features (special energy efficient items, etc.).

Describe the condition of the property (including needed repairs, deterioration, renovations, remodeling, etc.).

Are there any physical deficiencies or adverse conditions that affect the livability, soundness, or structural integrity of the property? Yes No If Yes, describe

Does the property generally conform to the neighborhood (functional utility, style, condition, use, construction, etc.)? Yes No If No, describe.

UN

IT D

ES

CR

IPT

ION

I did did not research the sale or transfer history of the subject property and comparable sales. If not, explain

My research did did not reveal any prior sales or transfers of the subject property for the three years prior to the effective date of this appraisal.

Data source(s)

My research did did not reveal any prior sales or transfers of the comparable sales for the year prior to the date of sale of the comparable sale.

Data source(s)

Report the results of the research and analysis of the prior sale or transfer history of the subject property and comparable sales (report additional prior sales on page 3).

ITEM SUBJECT

Date of Prior Sale/Transfer

Price of Prior Sale/Transfer

Data Source(s)

Effective Date of Data Source(s)

COMPARABLE SALE NO. 1 COMPARABLE SALE NO. 2 COMPARABLE SALE NO. 3

Analysis of prior sale or transfer history of the subject property and comparable salesPR

IOR

SA

LE

HIS

TO

RY


1073_05A 090909

135301118FOOTHILL


X

X

X

NO DOCUMENTS WERE PROVIDED OR DISCUSSED WITH APPRAISER.X

X

X

X

X

X

PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION

PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION

X1,8803.547

GAS

X0.00

N.D.C. DATA, COUNTY ASSESSOR, CRMLS

N.D.C. DATA, COUNTY ASSESSOR, CRMLSX

X

11/19/2018N.D.C. DATA$925,00005/19/2017

12/21/2017N.D.C. DATAN/ANONE 1 YEAR




There are comparable properties currently offered for sale in the subject neighborhood ranging in price from $ to $ .

There are comparable sales in the subject neighborhood within the past twelve months ranging in sale price from $ to $ .

FEATURE SUBJECT

Address and

Unit #

Project Name and

Phase

Proximity to Subject

Sale Price $

Sale Price/Gross Liv. Area $ sq. ft.

Data Source(s)

Verification Source(s)

VALUE ADJUSTMENTS DESCRIPTION

Sale or Financing

Concessions

Date of Sale/Time

Location

Leasehold/Fee Simple

HOA Mo. Assessment

Common Elements

and Rec. Facilities

Floor Location

View

Design (Style)

Quality of Construction

Actual Age

Condition

Above Grade Total Bdrms. Baths

Room Count

Gross Living Area sq. ft.

Basement & Finished

Rooms Below Grade

Functional Utility

Heating/Cooling

Energy Efficient Items

Garage/Carport

Porch/Patio/Deck

Net Adjustment (Total)

Adjusted Sale Price

of Comparables

COMPARABLE SALE NO. 1

$

$ sq. ft.

DESCRIPTION +(-) $ Adjustment

Total Bdrms. Baths

sq. ft.

+ - $

Net Adj. %

Gross Adj. % $


$

$ sq. ft.


Total Bdrms. Baths

sq. ft.

+ - $

Net Adj. %

Gross Adj. % $


$

$ sq. ft.


Total Bdrms. Baths

sq. ft.

+ - $

Net Adj. %

Gross Adj. % $

Summary of Sales Comparison Approach

Indicated Value by Sales Comparison Approach $

SA

LE

S C

OM

PA

RIS

ON

AP

PR

OA

CH

INCOME APPROACH TO VALUE (not required by Fannie Mae)

Estimated Monthly Market Rent $ X Gross Rent Multiplier = $ Indicated Value by Income Approach

Summary of Income Approach (including support for market rent and GRM)

INC

OM

E

Indicated Value by: Sales Comparison Approach $ Income Approach (if developed) $

This appraisal is made "as is," subject to completion per plans and specifications on the basis of a hypothetical condition that the improvements have been completed,

subject to the following repairs or alterations on the basis of a hypothetical condition that the repairs or alterations have been completed, or subject to the following required

inspection based on the extraordinary assumption that the condition or deficiency does not require alteration or repair:

Based on a complete visual inspection of the interior and exterior areas of the subject property, defined scope of work, statement of assumptions and limiting

conditions, and appraiser’s certification, my (our) opinion of the market value, as defined, of the real property that is the subject of this report is $

as of , which is the date of inspection and the effective date of this appraisal.

RE

CO

NC

ILIA

TIO

N


1073_05A 090909

135301118FOOTHILL


N/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/A

N/ACONTRACT DATE

PATIO2-GARAGESTANDARDFWA / C/AIRAVERAGEAPN:NONE

1,88050.003.547

NEWNEWAVERAGEDetached CondoNO VIEWN/ANONELANDSCAPEN/AFEE SIMPLETRAFFICN/A

N/A

0.00N/A

1VALLEY STREET VILLAS

N/A13530 FOOTHILL BLVD

511,1342.72.7

13,561X+8,06105/01/18(+1.62%)

PATIO2-GARAGESTANDARDFWA / C/AIRAVERAGEUNKNOWNNONE

+5,5001,7743.547

NEWNEWAVERAGEDetached CondoNO VIEWN/ANONELANDSCAPEN/AFEE SIMPLEGATED / TRAFFIC07/22/2018NO REPORTFHA

MLS:SR18070151CRMLS, DOM:35

280.48497,573

0.45 miles SE1TOVARASYLMAR, CA 9134213254 WARNICK WAY

511,4643.03.0

14,885X+9,38504/22/18(+1.89%)

PATIO2-GARAGESTANDARDFWA / C/AIRAVERAGEUNKNOWNNONE

+5,5001,7743.547


MLS:SR18080123CRMLS, DOM:26

279.92496,579

0.45 miles SE1TOVARASYLMAR, CA 9134213258 WARNICK WAY

487,9453.63.6

16,945X+11,44502/20/18(+2.43%)

PATIO2-GARAGESTANDARDFWA / C/AIRAVERAGE2513-027-076NONE

+5,5001,7743.547


DOC#:446411 / MLS:SR18029944NDC, CRMLS, DOM: 13

265.50471,000

0.51 miles SE1TOVARASYLMAR, CA 9134213219 SHAW LANE

510,000

ADJUSTMENTS ARE MADE TO THE COMPARABLES WHICH DIFFER FROM THE ABOVE CHARACTERISTICS, BY MEANS OF COMPARABLE MARKET DATA. ANY DIFFERENCE IN BEDROOM COUNT IS ADJUSTED FOR IN THE GROSS LIVING AREA, UNLESS THE APPRAISER FEELS THE "TYPICAL PURCHASER" MAY BE INFLUENCED BY THAT COUNT. GLA IS ADJUSTED AT APPROX $50 / SQ FT (ROUNDED). NO SQ FT ADJUSTMENT MADE UNDER 100 SQ FT. ADJUSTMENTS TO THE COMPARABLE SALES ARE MADE THROUGH ABSTRACTION, WHEN POSSIBLE. COMPARABLES WERE SELECTED THAT MOST CONFORM TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY CHARACTERISTICS.

THE INCOME APPROACH WAS NOT USED IN THIS PREDOMINANTLY OWNER OCCUPIED AREA.

N/AN/AN/A

11/16/2018510,000

X

VALUE REPORTED IS BASED COMPLETELY ON THE SALES COMPARISON APPROACH. COST APPROACH WAS NOT INDICATED FOR THIS ASSIGNMENT, AS THE SUBJECT IS A CONDOMINIUM UNIT, WITH COMMON AREAS WHICH CAN NOT BE ACCURATELY INCLUDED INTO THIS APPROACH. THE INCOME APPROACH WAS NOT INDICATED IN THIS PREDOMINANTLY OWNER OCCUPIED NEIGHBORHOOD. OF THE COMPARABLES UTILIZED, COMPARABLE SALE #1 IS CONSIDERED TO BE THE MOST COMPARABLE & THE BEST INDICATOR OF VALUE. IT REQUIRED FEWER ADJUSTMENTS, AND IS MOST SIMILAR TO SUBJECT. QUALITY ADJUSTMENTS ARE BASED ON OVERALL QUALITY AND NORMALLY NOT A SINGULAR ITEM, UNLESS EXPLAINED. ALL ADJUSTMENTS ARE MADE THROUGH ABSTRACTION, WHEN POSSIBLE. ALL COMPARABLES PROVIDE A RANGE OF VALUES AND SIZES TO THE SUBJECT. WHEN ADJUSTED TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, ALL COMPARABLES SUPPORT THE INDICATED VALUE OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.

N/A510,000

Alex Stewart


This report form is designed to report an appraisal of a unit in a condominium project or a condominium unit in a planned unitdevelopment (PUD). This report form is not designed to report an appraisal of a manufactured home or a unit in a cooperativeproject.

This appraisal report is subject to the following scope of work, intended use, intended user, definition of market value, statement ofassumptions and limiting conditions, and certifications. Modifications, additions, or deletions to the intended use, intended user,definition of market value, or assumptions and limiting conditions are not permitted. The appraiser may expand the scope of workto include any additional research or analysis necessary based on the complexity of this appraisal assignment. Modifications ordeletions to the certifications are also not permitted. However, additional certifications that do not constitute material alterationsto this appraisal report, such as those required by law or those related to the appraiser’s continuing education or membership in anappraisal organization, are permitted.

SCOPE OF WORK: The scope of work for this appraisal is defined by the complexity of this appraisal assignment and thereporting requirements of this appraisal report form, including the following definition of market value, statement of assumptionsand limiting conditions, and certifications. The appraiser must, at a minimum: (1) perform a complete visual inspection of theinterior and exterior areas of the subject unit, (2) inspect and analyze the condominium project, (3) inspect the neighborhood,(4) inspect each of the comparable sales from at least the street, (5) research, verify, and analyze data from reliable public and/orprivate sources, and (6) report his or her analysis, opinions, and conclusions in this appraisal report.

INTENDED USE: The intended use of this appraisal report is for the lender/client to evaluate the property that is the subject ofthis appraisal for a mortgage finance transaction.

INTENDED USER: The intended user of this appraisal report is the lender/client.

MARKET VALUE: The most probable price which a property should bring in a competitive and open market under all conditionsrequisite to a fair sale, the buyer and seller, each acting prudently, knowledgeably and assuming the price is not affected by unduestimulus. Implicit in this definition is the consummation of a sale as of a specified date and the passing of title from seller to buyerunder conditions whereby: (1) buyer and seller are typically motivated; (2) both parties are well informed or well advised, and eachacting in what he or she considers his or her own best interest; (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; and (5) the pricerepresents the normal consideration for the property sold unaffected by special or creative financing or sales concessions* grantedby anyone associated with the sale.

*Adjustments to the comparables must be made for special or creative financing or sales concessions. No adjustments arenecessary for those costs which are normally paid by sellers as a result of tradition or law in a market area; these costs are readilyidentifiable since the seller pays these costs in virtually all sales transactions. Special or creative financing adjustments can bemade to the comparable property by comparisons to financing terms offered by a third party institutional lender that is not alreadyinvolved in the property or transaction. Any adjustment should not be calculated on a mechanical dollar for dollar cost of thefinancing or concession but the dollar amount of any adjustment should approximate the market's reaction to the financing orconcessions based on the appraiser's judgment.

STATEMENT OF ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS: The appraiser’s certification in this report is subject to thefollowing assumptions and limiting conditions:

1. The appraiser will not be responsible for matters of a legal nature that affect either the property being appraised or the titleto it, except for information that he or she became aware of during the research involved in performing this appraisal. Theappraiser assumes that the title is good and marketable and will not render any opinions about the title.

2. The appraiser has provided a sketch in this appraisal report to show the approximate dimensions of the improvements. Thesketch is included only to assist the reader in visualizing the property and understanding the appraiser’s determination of its size.

3. The appraiser has examined the available flood maps that are provided by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (orother data sources) and has noted in this appraisal report whether any portion of the subject site is located in an identified SpecialFlood Hazard Area. Because the appraiser is not a surveyor, he or she makes no guarantees, express or implied, regarding thisdetermination.

4. The appraiser will not give testimony or appear in court because he or she made an appraisal of the property in question,unless specific arrangements to do so have been made beforehand, or as otherwise required by law.

5. The appraiser has noted in this appraisal report any adverse conditions (such as needed repairs, deterioration, the presence ofhazardous wastes, toxic substances, etc.) observed during the inspection of the subject property or that he or she became aware ofduring the research involved in performing this appraisal. Unless otherwise stated in this appraisal report, the appraiser has noknowledge of any hidden or unapparent physical deficiencies or adverse conditions of the property (such as, but not limited to,needed repairs, deterioration, the presence of hazardous wastes, toxic substances, adverse environmental conditions, etc.) thatwould make the property less valuable, and has assumed that there are no such conditions and makes no guarantees orwarranties, express or implied. The appraiser will not be responsible for any such conditions that do exist or for any engineering ortesting that might be required to discover whether such conditions exist. Because the appraiser is not an expert in the field ofenvironmental hazards, this appraisal report must not be considered as an environmental assessment of the property.

6. The appraiser has based his or her appraisal report and valuation conclusion for an appraisal that is subject to satisfactorycompletion, repairs, or alterations on the assumption that the completion, repairs, or alterations of the subject property will beperformed in a professional manner.


1073_05A 090909

135301118FOOTHILL



APPRAISER'S CERTIFICATION: The Appraiser certifies and agrees that:

1. I have, at a minimum, developed and reported this appraisal in accordance with the scope of work requirements stated in thisappraisal report.

2. I performed a complete visual inspection of the interior and exterior areas of the subject property. I reported the condition ofthe improvements in factual, specific terms. I identified and reported the physical deficiencies that could affect the livability,soundness, or structural integrity of the property.

3. I performed this appraisal in accordance with the requirements of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practicethat were adopted and promulgated by the Appraisal Standards Board of The Appraisal Foundation and that were in place at thetime this appraisal report was prepared.

4. I developed my opinion of the market value of the real property that is the subject of this report based on the sales comparisonapproach to value. I have adequate comparable market data to develop a reliable sales comparison approach for this appraisalassignment. I further certify that I considered the cost and income approaches to value but did not develop them, unless otherwiseindicated in this report.

5. I researched, verified, analyzed, and reported on any current agreement for sale for the subject property, any offering for saleof the subject property in the twelve months prior to the effective date of this appraisal, and the prior sales of the subject propertyfor a minimum of three years prior to the effective date of this appraisal, unless otherwise indicated in this report.

6. I researched, verified, analyzed, and reported on the prior sales of the comparable sales for a minimum of one year prior to thedate of sale of the comparable sale, unless otherwise indicated in this report.

7. I selected and used comparable sales that are locationally, physically, and functionally the most similar to the subject property.

8. I have not used comparable sales that were the result of combining a land sale with the contract purchase price of a homethat has been built or will be built on the land.

9. I have reported adjustments to the comparable sales that reflect the market's reaction to the differences between the subjectproperty and the comparable sales.

10. I verified, from a disinterested source, all information in this report that was provided by parties who have a financial interest inthe sale or financing of the subject property.

11. I have knowledge and experience in appraising this type of property in this market area.

12. I am aware of, and have access to, the necessary and appropriate public and private data sources, such as multiple listingservices, tax assessment records, public land records and other such data sources for the area in which the property is located.

13. I obtained the information, estimates, and opinions furnished by other parties and expressed in this appraisal report fromreliable sources that I believe to be true and correct.

14. I have taken into consideration the factors that have an impact on value with respect to the subject neighborhood, subjectproperty, and the proximity of the subject property to adverse influences in the development of my opinion of market value. I havenoted in this appraisal report any adverse conditions (such as, but not limited to, needed repairs, deterioration, the presence ofhazardous wastes, toxic substances, adverse environmental conditions, etc.) observed during the inspection of the subject propertyor that I became aware of during the research involved in performing this appraisal. I have considered these adverse conditions inmy analysis of the property value, and have reported on the effect of the conditions on the value and marketability of the subjectproperty.

15. I have not knowingly withheld any significant information from this appraisal report and, to the best of my knowledge, allstatements and information in this appraisal report are true and correct.

16. I stated in this appraisal report my own personal, unbiased, and professional analysis, opinions, and conclusions, which aresubject only to the assumptions and limiting conditions in this appraisal report.

17. I have no present or prospective interest in the property that is the subject of this report, and I have no present or prospectivepersonal interest or bias with respect to the participants in the transaction. I did not base, either partially or completely, myanalysis and/or opinion of market value in this appraisal report on the race, color, religion, sex, age, marital status, handicap,familial status, or national origin of either the prospective owners or occupants of the subject property or of the present owners oroccupants of the properties in the vicinity of the subject property or on any other basis prohibited by law.

18. My employment and/or compensation for performing this appraisal or any future or anticipated appraisals was not conditionedon any agreement or understanding, written or otherwise, that I would report (or present analysis supporting) a predeterminedspecific value, a predetermined minimum value, a range or direction in value, a value that favors the cause of any party, or theattainment of a specific result or occurrence of a specific subsequent event (such as approval of a pending mortgage loanapplication).

19. I personally prepared all conclusions and opinions about the real estate that were set forth in this appraisal report. If I relied onsignificant real property appraisal assistance from any individual or individuals in the performance of this appraisal or thepreparation of this appraisal report, I have named such individual(s) and disclosed the specific tasks performed in this appraisalreport. I certify that any individual so named is qualified to perform the tasks. I have not authorized anyone to make a change toany item in this appraisal report; therefore, any change made to this appraisal is unauthorized and I will take no responsibility for it.

20. I identified the lender/client in this appraisal report who is the individual, organization, or agent for the organization that orderedand will receive this appraisal report.

21. The lender/client may disclose or distribute this appraisal report to: the borrower; another lender at the request of the borrower;the mortgagee or its successors and assigns; mortgage insurers; government sponsored enterprises; other secondary marketparticipants; data collection or reporting services; professional appraisal organizations; any department, agency, or instrumentalityof the United States; and any state, the District of Columbia, or other jurisdictions; without having to obtain the appraiser’s orsupervisory appraiser’s (if applicable) consent. Such consent must be obtained before this appraisal report may be disclosed ordistributed to any other party (including, but not limited to, the public through advertising, public relations, news, sales, or othermedia).


1073_05A 090909

135301118FOOTHILL



22. I am aware that any disclosure or distribution of this appraisal report by me or the lender/client may be subject to certain lawsand regulations. Further, I am also subject to the provisions of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice thatpertain to disclosure or distribution by me.

23. The borrower, another lender at the request of the borrower, the mortgagee or its successors and assigns, mortgage insurers,government sponsored enterprises, and other secondary market participants may rely on this appraisal report as part of anymortgage finance transaction that involves any one or more of these parties.

24. If this appraisal report was transmitted as an “electronic record” containing my “electronic signature,” as those terms aredefined in applicable federal and/or state laws (excluding audio and video recordings), or a facsimile transmission of this appraisalreport containing a copy or representation of my signature, the appraisal report shall be as effective, enforceable and valid as if apaper version of this appraisal report were delivered containing my original hand written signature.

25. Any intentional or negligent misrepresentation(s) contained in this appraisal report may result in civil liability and/or criminalpenalties including, but not limited to, fine or imprisonment or both under the provisions of Title 18, United States Code, Section1001, et seq., or similar state laws.

SUPERVISORY APPRAISER'S CERTIFICATION: The Supervisory Appraiser certifies and agrees that:

1. I directly supervised the appraiser for this appraisal assignment, have read the appraisal report, and agree with the appraiser’sanalysis, opinions, statements, conclusions, and the appraiser’s certification.

2. I accept full responsibility for the contents of this appraisal report including, but not limited to, the appraiser’s analysis,opinions, statements, conclusions, and the appraiser’s certification.

3. The appraiser identified in this appraisal report is either a sub-contractor or an employee of the supervisory appraiser (or theappraisal firm), is qualified to perform this appraisal, and is acceptable to perform this appraisal under the applicable state law.

4. This appraisal report complies with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice that were adopted andpromulgated by the Appraisal Standards Board of The Appraisal Foundation and that were in place at the time this appraisalreport was prepared.

5. If this appraisal report was transmitted as an “electronic record” containing my “electronic signature,” as those terms aredefined in applicable federal and/or state laws (excluding audio and video recordings), or a facsimile transmission of this appraisalreport containing a copy or representation of my signature, the appraisal report shall be as effective, enforceable and valid as if apaper version of this appraisal report were delivered containing my original hand written signature.

APPRAISER

SignatureNameCompany NameCompany Address

Telephone NumberEmail AddressDate of Signature and ReportEffective Date of AppraisalState Certification #or State License #or Other (describe) State #StateExpiration Date of Certification or License

ADDRESS OF PROPERTY APPRAISEDUnit #

APPRAISED VALUE OF SUBJECT PROPERTY $

LENDER/CLIENTNameCompany NameCompany Address

Email Address

SUPERVISORY APPRAISER (ONLY IF REQUIRED)

SignatureNameCompany NameCompany Address

Telephone NumberEmail AddressDate of SignatureState Certification #or State License #StateExpiration Date of Certification or License

SUBJECT PROPERTYDid not inspect subject propertyDid inspect exterior of subject property from streetDate of InspectionDid inspect interior and exterior of subject propertyDate of Inspection

COMPARABLE SALESDid not inspect exterior of comparable sales from streetDid inspect exterior of comparable sales from streetDate of Inspection


1073_05A 090909

135301118FOOTHILL


X

X

05/11/2020CA

AG00246511/19/2018

[email protected]

LAS VEGAS, NV 891341930 VILLAGE CENTER CIRCLE, #3622

VOLTZ COMMERCIAL REALTY ADVISORSP. SCOTT VOLTZ, MAI/AI-GRS

510,000

SYLMAR, CA 91342N/A13530 FOOTHILL BLVD

02/18/2019CA

AR02655911/16/2018

11/19/[email protected]

800-520-1654LAS VEGAS, NV 89134

1930 VILLAGE CENTER CIRCLE, #3622VOLTZ COMMERCIAL REALTY ADVISORS

ALEXANDER G. STEWART

Alex Stewart


FEATURE SUBJECT

Address and

Unit #

Project Name and

Phase

Proximity to Subject

Sale Price $

Sale Price/Gross Liv. Area $ sq. ft.

Data Source(s)

Verification Source(s)

VALUE ADJUSTMENTS DESCRIPTION

Sale or Financing

Concessions

Date of Sale/Time

Location

Leasehold/Fee Simple

HOA Mo. Assessment

Common Elements

and Rec. Facilities

Floor Location

View

Design (Style)

Quality of Construction

Actual Age

Condition

Above Grade Total Bdrms. Baths

Room Count

Gross Living Area sq. ft.

Basement & Finished

Rooms Below Grade

Functional Utility

Heating/Cooling

Energy Efficient Items

Garage/Carport

Porch/Patio/Deck

Net Adjustment (Total)

Adjusted Sale Price

of Comparables


$

$ sq. ft.


Total Bdrms. Baths

sq. ft.

+ - $

Net Adj. %

Gross Adj. % $


$

$ sq. ft.


Total Bdrms. Baths

sq. ft.

+ - $

Net Adj. %

Gross Adj. % $


$

$ sq. ft.


Total Bdrms. Baths

sq. ft.

+ - $

Net Adj. %

Gross Adj. % $

ITEM SUBJECT

Date of Prior Sale/Transfer

Price of Prior Sale/Transfer

Data Source(s)

Effective Date of Data Source(s)

COMPARABLE SALE NO. 4 COMPARABLE SALE NO. 5 COMPARABLE SALE NO. 6

Summary of Sales Comparison Approach

SA

LE

S C

OM

PA

RIS

ON

AP

PR

OA

CH

Freddie Mac Form 465 March 2005 Fannie Mae Form 1073 March 2005Produced using ACI software, 800.234.8727 www.aciweb.com1073_05A 090909

135301118FOOTHILL


N/ACONTRACT DATE

PATIO2-GARAGESTANDARDFWA / C/AIRAVERAGEAPN:NONE

1,88050.003.547

NEWNEWAVERAGEDetached CondoNO VIEWN/ANONELANDSCAPEN/AFEE SIMPLETRAFFICN/A

N/A

0.00N/A

1VALLEY STREET VILLAS

N/A13530 FOOTHILL BLVD

517,56611.13.1

15,566X+4,06608/23/18(+0.81%)


+5,5001,766+6,0002.547

+15,000GOOD+5,0008 YEARS

AVERAGEDetached CondoNO VIEWN/ANONELANDSCAPEN/AFEE SIMPLE

-20,000GATED / AVG09/13/2018NO REPORTCONVENTIONAL

DOC#:939486 / MLS:18364644NDC, CRMLS, DOM:39

284.26502,000

1.21 miles NW1DE LUKA COURTSYLMAR, CA 9134213318 SENDA DE HANNAH

470,2660.30.3

1,266X+1,26610/25/18(+0.27%)


1,7903.547

NEW1 YEARAVERAGEDetached CondoNO VIEWN/ANONELANDSCAPEN/AFEE SIMPLEGATED / TRAFFICPENDINGN/AN/A

PENDING / MLS: SR18247154CRMLS, DOM:15

262.01469,000

0.52 miles SE1TOVARASYLMAR, CA 9134213221 SHAW LANE

469,9001.11.1

5,000X


+5,0001,7803.547

NEWNEWAVERAGEDetached CondoNO VIEWN/ANONELANDSCAPEN/AFEE SIMPLEGATED / TRAFFICLISTINGN/AN/A

LISTING / MLS:218012530CRMLS, DOM:42

261.18464,900

0.47 miles SE1TOVARASYLMAR, CA 9134213248 BETZ BLVD

11/19/2018N.D.C. DATA$925,00005/19/2017




COMP-1: NEW 3 STORY DETACHED CONDO, LESS GLA, 4+3.5, AVERAGE QUALITY, NEW CONDITION



COMP-4: DETACHED CONDO, LESS GLA, 4+3, AVERAGE QUALITY, GOOD CONDITION

COMP-5: PENDING, NEW 3 STORY DETACHED CONDO, SIMILAR GLA, 4+3.5, AVERAGE QUALITY, NEW CONDITION

COMP-6: LISTING, NEW 3 STORY DETACHED CONDO, LESS GLA, 4+3.5, AVERAGE QUALITY, NEW CONDITION

NOTE:

DIFFERENCES IN SALES PRICES TYPICALLY REFLECT A DIFFERENCE IN UPGRADES SELECTED, AS WELL AS SIZE, BED/BATH COUNT. UPGRADES HAVE BEEN ADJUSTED FOR UNDER QUALITY IF SUFFICIENT DATA WAS AVAILABLE, AS ALL HOMES ARE NEW IN CONDITION IF SO NOTED.

TIME ADJUSTMENT:

AS NOTED ON PAGE-1 OF THIS REPORT THE SUBJECT AREA PER THE MOST RECENT NUMBERS FROM CORELOGIC, FOR THE SUBJECT ZIP CODE AS OF THE EFFECTIVE DATE SHOWED THE AREA EXPERIENCED AN INCREASE IN CONDOMINIUM RESIDENTIAL VALUES OVER THE LAST 12 MONTHS FROM 09/2017 TO 09/2018 OF +1.6%. ZILLOW +4.9% THEREFORE AN AVERAGE UPWARD ADJUSTMENT OF +0.27% PER MONTH WAS APPLIED TO ALL CLOSED SALE COMPARABLES CONTRACT DATE PER MLS. IT IS THE OPINION OF THE APPRAISER THAT THIS ADJUSTMENT REFLECTS THE MOST ACCURATE MARKETING CONDITIONS FOR THE SUBJECT AREA.

ADDENDUMBorrower: N/A File No.: 135301118Property Address: 13530 FOOTHILL BLVD Case No.: FOOTHILLCity: SYLMAR State: CA Zip: 91342Lender:

Addendum Page 1 of 1

USPAP PREVIOUS APPRAISAL DISCLOSURE:

I HAVE PERFORMED AN APPRAISAL ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WITHIN THE PAST THREE YEARSOF THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS REPORT. AS REQUIRED BY THE CONDUCT SECTION OF THEETHICS RULE OF USPAP, I HAVE DISCLOSED THE PREVIOUS PERFORMANCE OF AN APPRAISAL ONTHE SUBJECT PROPERTY TO THE CLIENT UPON DISCOVERY AND WAS INSTRUCTED BY THE CLIENTTO PROCEED WITH PERFORMING THIS NEW APPRAISAL ASSIGNMENT. THIS & THE PREVIOUSASSIGNMENT WERE PERFORMED FOR THE SAME CLIENT.

THE SIGNATURES ON THIS APPRAISAL REPORT, ARE DIGITALLY REPRODUCED COPIES, WHICH ARESECURED BY PASSWORD, VIA POLAROID DIGITAL SOLUTIONS,(ACI)& MAY NOT BE ALTERED ORATTACHED BY ANYONE OTHER THAN THE APPRAISER. THE DIGITAL SIGNATURES ADHERE TO USPAPSTANDARDS ASSOCIATED WITH DIGITAL SIGNATURES.

Borrower: File No.:Property Address: Case No.:City: State: Zip:Lender:

91342CASYLMARFOOTHILL13530 FOOTHILL BLVD135301118N/A

SUBJECT SITUS

PLAT MAP



FLOOD MAP



LOCATION MAP



AERIAL MAP



SUBJECT PROPERTY PHOTO ADDENDUM


FRONT VIEW OFSUBJECT PROPERTY

Appraised Date:Appraised Value: $

REAR VIEW OFSUBJECT PROPERTY

STREET SCENE


510,000November 16, 2018


Produced using ACI software, 800.234.8727 www.aciweb.com PHT3 05212013


SUBJECT ADDITIONAL PHOTOS

OPPOSITE DIRECTIONSTREET VIEW

COMPARABLE PROPERTY PHOTO ADDENDUM


COMPARABLE SALE #1

Sale Date:Sale Price: $

COMPARABLE SALE #2


COMPARABLE SALE #3



497,57307/22/2018

SYLMAR, CA 9134213254 WARNICK WAY

496,57907/22/2018

SYLMAR, CA 9134213258 WARNICK WAY

471,00005/07/2018

SYLMAR, CA 9134213219 SHAW LANE

COMPARABLE PROPERTY PHOTO ADDENDUM


COMPARABLE SALE #4


COMPARABLE SALE #5


COMPARABLE SALE #6



502,00009/13/2018

SYLMAR, CA 9134213318 SENDA DE HANNAH

469,000PENDING

SYLMAR, CA 9134213221 SHAW LANE

464,900LISTING

SYLMAR, CA 9134213248 BETZ BLVD

44

RENT COMPARABLE INFORMATION

45

APARTMENT SALE COMPARABLE INFORMATION

6824 Ben Ave

North Hollywood, CA 91605

Class B Apartments Building 0 Units of 5,500 SF Sold on9/21/2018 for $2,000,000 - Research Complete

buyer

Mgdesyan Law Firm15260 Ventura BlvdSherman Oaks, CA 91403(818) 386-0277

Yaniv Alex Kahaner18622 Rocoso PlTarzana, CA 91356(310) 886-9545

seller

vital data

Sale Date: 9/21/2018

Days on Market: -

Exchange: No

Conditions: -

0 Bedroom: 0

1 Bedroom: 0

2 Bedroom: 0

3 Bedroom: 5/100% (3 + 2)

Other: 0

Land Area SF: 7,989

Acres: 0.18

$/SF Land Gross: $250.35

Year Built, Age: 2018

Parking Spaces: 10

Parking Ratio: 2.00/Unit

FAR 0.69

Lot Dimensions: -

Frontage: -

Comp ID: 4535795

Sale Price: $2,000,000

Status: Confirmed

Building SF: 5,500 SF

Price/SF: $363.64

Pro Forma Cap Rate: -

Actual Cap Rate: 5.25%

Price/Unit: $400,000

No Units: 0

Down Pmnt: $500,000

Pct Down: 25.0%

Doc No: 0969178

Trans Tax: -

Corner: No

Zoning: LARD1.5

Percent Improved: -

Submarket: North Hollywood MF

Property Type: Multi-Family

Parcel No: 2321-023-014

Map Page: -

Escrow/Contract: 60 days

income expense data

Cash Flow

$105,000

- Capital Expenditure

- Debt Service

Net Operating IncomeNet Income

Listing Broker

Pinnacle Estate Properties17327 Ventura BlvdEncino, CA 91316(818) 933-3100Dian Perez

Buyer Broker

Keller Williams Beverly Hills439 N Canon DrBeverly Hills, CA 90210(310) 432-6400Timothy Gavin

financing

Copyrighted report licensed to Voltz Commercial Realty Advisors - 20529. 12/4/2018

Page 1

10214 Fernglen Ave

Fernglen TownhomesTujunga, CA 91042


buyer

Kevin Sarkisyan519 Palm DrGlendale, CA 91202(818) 696-1335

M&O Partners LP5505 Cancha De GolfRancho Santa Fe, CA 92091(858) 755-0216

seller

vital data


Days on Market: 135 days

Exchange: No

Conditions: -

0 Bedroom: 0

1 Bedroom: 0

2 Bedroom: 0

3 Bedroom: 6/100% (3 + 2)

Other: 0

Land Area SF: 9,583

Acres: 0.22


Year Built, Age: 2012 Age: 6

Parking Spaces: 15


FAR 0.95

Lot Dimensions: -

Frontage: -

Comp ID: 4534799


Status: Confirmed


Price/SF: $315.79




No Units: 6

Down Pmnt: -

Pct Down: -

Doc No: 1011579

Trans Tax: -

Corner: No

Zoning: RD1.5

Percent Improved: 34.8%

Submarket: Tujunga MF


Parcel No: 2558-024-041

Map Page: -


income expense data

$184,680

Effective Gross Income

- Vacancy Allowance

+ Other Income

Gross Scheduled IncomeIncome

$40,680Total Expenses

- Operating Expenses

- TaxesExpenses

Cash Flow

$144,000


- Debt Service


Listing Broker

Pacifica Real Estate Services, Inc.5505 Cancha De GolfRancho Santa Fe, CA 92091(858) 755-0216Karen Richardson

Buyer Broker

Dilbeck Real Estate Real Living600 N Brand BlvdGlendale, CA 91203(818) 240-8100Manvel Solakian

prior sale

Date/Doc No:

Sale Price:

CompID:

4/12/2013

-

2727708

financing

UNIT MIX AT TIME OF SALECopyrighted report licensed to Voltz Commercial Realty Advisors - 20529. 12/4/2018

Page 2

Bed/Bath # % Avg SF Vacant Min/Unit Max/Unit Min/SF Max/SF Min/Unit Max/Unit Min/SF Max/SF %

UNIT MIX AT TIME OF SALE

Units Asking Rent Effective Rent Concessions

3/2.5 2 33.3 1,640 - $2,625 $2,700 $1.60 $1.65 - - - - -

3/2.5 4 66.7 1,450 - $2,450 $2,570 $1.69 $1.77 - - - - -


Page 3

12132 Hart St

Hart Street ApartmentsNorth Hollywood, CA 91605


buyer

Hassan Ghaffarinia21301 Erwin StWoodland Hills, CA 91367(818) 914-5158

Alphons Ibrahim7256 W Sunset BlvdLos Angeles, CA 90046(323) 874-2507

seller

vital data



Exchange: No

Conditions: -

0 Bedroom: 0

1 Bedroom: 3/33% (1 + 2)(1 + 1)

2 Bedroom: 6/67% (2 + 2)

3 Bedroom: 0

Other: 0

Land Area SF: 8,817

Acres: 0.2



Parking Spaces: 18


FAR 0.91

Lot Dimensions: -

Frontage: -

Comp ID: 4458148


Status: Confirmed


Price/SF: $486.87




No Units: 0

GRM: 19.03

Down Pmnt: $3,912,000

Pct Down: 100.0%

Doc No: 0765324

Trans Tax: $4,303.20

Corner: No

Zoning: LAR2




Parcel No: 2321-009-039

Map Page: -


income expense data

Cash Flow

$131,200


- Debt Service


Listing Broker

Matthews Real Estate InvestmentServices16501 Ventura BlvdEncino, CA 91436(866) 889-0550Daniel Withers

Matthews Real Estate InvestmentServices841 Apollo StEl Segundo, CA 90245(866) 889-0550Julia Dardick

Buyer Broker

Coldwell Banker Commercial11661 San Vicente BlvdLos Angeles, CA 90049(310) 820-6651Elham Khani

financing


Page 4

6910 Hinds Ave


Class C Apartments Building 5 Units of 5,635 SF Sold on5/21/2018 for $1,665,000 - Research Complete

buyer

Modesto & Theresa Gonzalez18140 Superior StNorthridge, CA 91325

Wyman Dunford5198 Colt StVentura, CA 93003(805) 650-0990

seller

vital data



Exchange: No

Conditions: -

0 Bedroom: 0

1 Bedroom: 0

2 Bedroom: 0

3 Bedroom: 5/100% (3 + 2)

Other: 0

Land Area SF: 7,841

Acres: 0.18



Parking Spaces: 10


FAR 0.72

Lot Dimensions: -

Frontage: -

Comp ID: 4269538


Status: Confirmed


Price/SF: $295.47




No Units: 5

Down Pmnt: $900,000

Pct Down: 54.1%

Doc No: 0497223


Corner: No

Zoning: LARD1.5




Parcel No: 2321-015-014

Map Page: -

Escrow/Contract: -

income expense data

$104,165


- Vacancy Allowance

+ Other Income


$46,088

$25,812

$20,276

Total Expenses


- TaxesExpenses

Cash Flow

$58,077


- Debt Service


Listing Broker

Matthews Real Estate Investment Services841 Apollo StEl Segundo, CA 90245(866) 889-0550Brandon Dicker, Daniel Withers

Buyer Broker

Centennial Advisers5508 E Britton DrLong Beach, CA 90815(562) 269-4844Edan Gross

financing

1st Broadway Federal Bank

Bal/Pmt: $765,000


Page 5




3/2.0 5 100.0 1,107 - $1,600 $1,950 $1.45 $1.76 - - - - -


Page 6

11312 Huston St

Eleven312@NOHONorth Hollywood, CA 91601


buyer

Sam Jenkalac/o Micro Property Management, Inc.7154 Reseda BlvdReseda, CA 91335(818) 342-5151

Vahe & Shake Vartanian Family TrustPO Box 571191Tarzana, CA 91357(818) 966-5151

seller

vital data



Exchange: No

Conditions: -

0 Bedroom: 0

1 Bedroom: 0

2 Bedroom: 0

3 Bedroom: 14/100% (3 + 2)

Other: 0

Land Area SF: 13,809

Acres: 0.32



Parking Spaces: 35


FAR 1.54

Lot Dimensions: -

Frontage: -

Comp ID: 4127743


Status: Confirmed


Price/SF: $423.53

Pro Forma Cap Rate: 4.02%



No Units: 14

GRM: 22.78

Down Pmnt: $3,850,000

Pct Down: 42.8%

Doc No: 0086920

Trans Tax: $9,900

Corner: No

Zoning: LAR3




Parcel No: 2353-023-060 [Partial List]

Map Page: -

Escrow/Contract: -

income expense data

$395,083


- Vacancy Allowance

+ Other Income


$185,383Total Expenses


- TaxesExpenses

Cash Flow

$209,700


- Debt Service


Listing Broker

Marcus & Millichap Inc515 S Flower StLos Angeles, CA 90071(213) 943-1800Rick Raymundo

Buyer Broker

Marcus & Millichap Inc515 S Flower StLos Angeles, CA 90071(213) 943-1800Rick Raymundo

prior sale

Date/Doc No:

Sale Price:

CompID:

1/23/2015

$6,250,500

3223602

financing

1st First Foundation Bank

Bal/Pmt: $5,150,000


Page 7




3/2.5 14 100.0 1,500 - - - - - - - - - -


Page 8

6900 Laurel Canyon Blvd


Class C Apartments Building 9 Units of 10,329 SF Sold on1/12/2018 for $3,295,000 - Research Complete

buyer

Daniel & Noemi E Dunkelman6631 Drexel AveLos Angeles, CA 90048(310) 678-0338

Limited California Properties LLCc/o Limited California Properties LLC210 S Vista StLos Angeles, CA 90036

seller

vital data


Days on Market: -

Exchange: No

Conditions: -

0 Bedroom: 9/100% (0 + 0)

1 Bedroom: 0

2 Bedroom: 0

3 Bedroom: 0

Other: 0

Land Area SF: 7,449

Acres: 0.17



Parking Spaces: -

Parking Ratio: -

FAR 1.39

Lot Dimensions: -

Frontage: -

Comp ID: 4111579


Status: Confirmed


Price/SF: $319.00


Actual Cap Rate: -


No Units: 9

Down Pmnt: $3,295,000

Pct Down: 100.0%

Doc No: 0039837


Corner: No

Zoning: LAR3

Percent Improved: -



Parcel No: 2321-011-035

Map Page: -

Escrow/Contract: -

income expense data Listing Broker

KW Commercial4061 Laurel Canyon BlvdStudio City, CA 91604(818) 432-1500Adam Zunder, Rich Johns

Buyer Broker

KW Commercial4061 Laurel Canyon BlvdStudio City, CA 91604(818) 432-1500Adam Zunder, Rich Johns

financing


Page 9




Studio/0.0 9 100.0 - - - - - - - - - - -


Page 10

6829 Simpson Ave


6,000 SF Multi-Family Building Built in 2014Property is for sale at $1,795,000 ($359,000/Unit)

buyer

For Sale

-

seller

vital data


Conditions: -

Land Area SF: -

Acres: -

$/SF Land Gross: -


Parking Spaces: -

Parking Ratio: -

FAR -

Lot Dimensions: -

Frontage: -

Asking Price: $1,795,000

Status: For Sale


Price/SF: $299.17

Pct Office: -


Price/Unit:

No Units: 5

GRM: 15.87

Corner: No

Zoning: -



Map Page: -

2321-019-006Parcel No:


Matthews Real Estate Investment Services16501 Ventura BlvdEncino, CA 91436(866) 889-0550Brandon Dicker, Daniel Withers

Buyer Broker


Page 11

11835 Vanowen St


Class B Apartments Building 10 Units of 15,514 SF Sold on9/28/2018 for $3,655,000 - In Progress

buyer

seller

vital data



Exchange: No

Conditions: -

0 Bedroom: 0

1 Bedroom: 0

2 Bedroom: 6/60% (2 + 2)

3 Bedroom: 4/40% (3 + 2)

Other: 0

Land Area SF: 8,276

Acres: 0.19



Parking Spaces: 22


FAR 1.87

Lot Dimensions: -

Frontage: -

Comp ID: 4542548


Status: -


Price/SF: $235.59




No Units: 10

GRM: 15.60

Down Pmnt: -

Pct Down: -

Doc No: 0991999

Trans Tax: -

Corner: No

Zoning: LAR3

No Tenants: 1




Parcel No: 2321-021-006

Map Page: -

Escrow/Contract: -


Marcus & Millichap16830 Ventura BlvdEncino, CA 91436(818) 212-2700Katherine Bergh

Buyer Broker

prior sale

Date/Doc No:

Sale Price:

CompID:

11/18/2016

$3,325,000

3759780

financing


Page 12




2/2.0 6 60.0 1,005 - - - - - - - - - -

3/2.0 4 40.0 1,300 - - - - - - - - - -


Page 13

6844 Woodman Ave

Van Nuys, CA 91405

15,720 SF Apartments Building Built in 2017Property is for sale at $6,955,000 ($463,666.67/Unit)

buyer

For Sale

-

seller

vital data


Conditions: -

Land Area SF: 15,721 SF

Acres: 0.36 AC

$/SF Land Gross: -


Parking Spaces: 24


FAR 1.00

Lot Dimensions: -

Frontage: -

Asking Price: $6,955,000

Status: For Sale


Price/SF: $442.43

Pct Office: -


Price/Unit:

No Units: 15

Corner: No

Zoning: Medium Residential

Submarket: Valley Glen MF


Map Page: -

2328-012-046Parcel No:


Sapphire Investment Properties12400-12404 Ventura BlvdStudio City, CA 91604(818) 509-0900Liat Rabin

Buyer Broker


Page 14

46

ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS: The following limiting conditions are statements used for the appraisers’ protection and for the information and protection of the client and others using the report. This appraisal report has been made with the following general assumptions. 1. This is a narrative Appraisal Report which is intended to comply with the reporting

requirements set forth under Standards Rule 2-2 of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice for an Appraisal Report. As such, it does not present discussions of the data, reasoning, and analyses that were used in the appraisal process to develop the appraisers’ opinion of value. Supporting documentation concerning the data, reasoning, and analyses is retained in the appraisers’ file. The depth of discussion contained in this report is specific needs of the client and for the intended use stated below. The appraisers are not responsible for unauthorized use of this report.

2. No responsibility is assumed for the legal description or for matters including legal or

title considerations. Title to the property is assumed to be good and marketable unless otherwise stated. We were not provided a legal description to the subject property.

3. The property is appraised free and clear of any or all liens or encumbrances unless

otherwise stated. 4. Measurements which pertain to the land where taken from information obtained from

public records (assessor’s plat map). No responsibility is assumed for the accuracy of the building area estimates.

5. Responsible ownership and competent property management are assumed. 6. The information furnished by others is believed to be reliable. No warranty is expressed

or implied as to its accuracy. 7. All engineering is assumed to be correct. The plot plans and illustrative material in this

report are included only to assist the reader in visualizing the property. 8. It is assumed that there are no hidden or unapparent condition of the property, subsoil,

or structures that render it more or less valuable. No responsibility is assumed for such conditions or for arranging for engineering studies that may be required to discover them.

47

9. It is assumed that there is full compliance with all applicable, federal, state, and local environmental regulations and laws unless noncompliance is stated, defined, and considered in the appraisal report.

10. It is assumed that all applicable zoning and use regulations and restrictions have been

complied with, unless a nonconformity has been stated, defined, and considered in the appraisal report.

11. It is assumed that all required licenses, certificates of occupancy, consents, or other

legislative or administrative authority from any local, state, or national government or private entity or organization have been or can be obtained or renewed for any use on which the value estimate contained in this report is based.

12. It is assumed that the utilization of the land and improvements is within the boundaries

of property lines of the property described and that there is no encroachment or trespass unless noted in the report.

13. The appraisers are not qualified to detect hazardous waste and/or toxic materials. Any

comment by the appraisers that might suggest the possibility of the presence of such substances should not be taken as confirmation of the presence of hazardous waste and/or toxic materials. Such determination would require investigation by a qualified expert in the field of environmental assessment. The presence of substances such as asbestos, urea-formaldehyde foam insulation, or other potentially hazardous materials may affect the value of the property. The appraisers’ 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 unless otherwise stated in this report. No responsibility is assumed for any environmental conditions, or for any expertise or engineering knowledge required to discover them. The appraisers’ descriptions and resulting comments are the result of the routine observations made during the appraisal process.

14. Statement of Policy: The following statement represents official policy of the Appraisal Institute with respect

to neighborhood analysis and the appraisal of residential real estate: a. It is improper to base a conclusion or opinion of value upon the

premise that the racial, ethnic, or religious homogeneity of the inhabitants of an area or of a property is necessary for maximum value.

b. Racial, religious, and ethnic factors are deemed unreliable predictors

of value trends or price variance.

48

c. It is improper to base a conclusion or opinion of value, or a conclusion with respect to neighborhood trends, upon stereotyped or biased presumptions relating to race, color, religion, sex, or national origin or upon unsupported presumptions relating to the effective age or remaining life of the property or the life expectancy of the neighborhood in which it is located.

This appraisal report has been made with the following general limiting conditions: 1. The distribution, if any, of the total valuation in this report between land and

improvements applies only under the stated program of utilization. The separate allocations for land and buildings must not be used in conjunction with any other appraisal and are invalid if so used.

2. Possession of this report, or a copy thereof, does not carry with it the right of publication.

It may not be used for any purpose by any person other than the party to whom it is addressed without consent of the appraiser, and in any event only with proper written qualification and only in its entirety.

3. The appraisers herein by reason of this appraisal are not required to give further

consultation, testimony, or be in attendance in court with reference to the property in question unless arrangements have been previously made.

4. Neither all nor any part of the contents of this report (especially any conclusions as to

value, the identity of the appraisers, or the firm with which the appraisers are connected) shall be disseminated to the public through advertising, public relations, news, sales, or other media without the prior written consent and approval of the appraisers.

EXTRAORDINARY ASSUMPTION: None HYPOTHETICAL CONDITION: This appraisal is made under the hypothetical condition that the planned subject property development is completed as of the date of value under the scenario that the units are sold individually; it is also made under the hypothetical condition that the subject property is completed and at stabilized occupancy as of the date of value.

49

CERTIFICATION We certify that to the best of our 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 our personal, unbiased professional analyses, opinions, and conclusions. We certify that we are competent to appraise the subject property.

We have no present or prospective interest in the property that is the subject of this report, and

we have no personal interest or bias with respect to the parties involved. The appraiser has provided appraisal services pertaining to the subject property in December 2017.

Our compensation is not contingent on an action or event resulting from the analysis, opinions,

or conclusions in, or the use, of this report. Further, this appraisal assignment was not based on a requested minimum valuation, a specific valuation, or the approval of a loan.

The use of this report is subject to the requirements of the Appraisal Institute relating to review

by its duly authorized representatives. P. Scott Voltz, MAI, AI-GRS inspected the subject property. Alex Stewart inspected the

property and provided professional assistance. The appraisal analysis and opinions were developed, and this appraisal report has been

prepared in conformance with the standards of professional practice and the code of ethics of the Appraisal Institute and the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice.

The Appraisal Institute conducts a voluntary program of continuing education for its

designated members. As of the date of this report, P. Scott Voltz, MAI, AI-GRS has completed the requirements under the continuing education program of the Appraisal Institute.

P. Scott Voltz, MAI/AI-GRS, MBA California Certified General Real Estate Appraiser AG002465

25350 Magic Mountain Parkway, Suite 300 11700 W. Charleston Blvd., #170-517 [email protected] Valencia, California 91355 Las Vegas, Nevada 89135 www.voltzrealestate.com 661-259-8009 702-749-5968 800-520-1654

QUALIFICATIONS OF P. SCOTT VOLTZ, MAI, AI-GRS, MBA California Certified General Real Estate Appraiser AG002465 Nevada Certified General Real Estate Appraiser A.0205762-CG PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE P. Scott Voltz, MAI, AI-GRS, MBA is principal of Voltz Commercial Realty Advisors (formerly Southern California Real Estate Counselors, Inc.), a firm dedicated to providing its clients with high quality real estate appraisals, appraisal reviews, and obtaining commercial real estate financing since 1989. Mr. Voltz has been actively involved in the appraisal, analysis, acquisition, disposition, and financing of commercial real estate for more than 30 years. Highlights include the following:

• Visiting Fellow at the Hoag Center for Real Estate & Finance at Chapman University • Chief Appraiser at the Resolution Trust Corporation (RTC) for Gibraltar Savings & Loan Assoc. • Testified as an expert witness in California and Arizona courts in Bankruptcy and Superior Courts

and the American Arbitration Association for Eminent Domain, Attorney Malpractice, and Damages

• Launched a hedge fund specializing in real estate related securities • Adjunct College Professor in the subject of Real Estate Appraisal • Arranged over $13,000,000 in commercial real estate financing • Interviewed by local newspapers and television station regarding valuation trends

PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS Mr. Voltz earned the MAI and AI-GRS (General Review Specialist) designations from the Appraisal Institute and is a Certified General Real Estate Appraiser in California and Nevada. Mr. Voltz is a past President of two homeowners’ associations. Mr. Voltz has also served as a member of the Admissions, Governmental Relations, Experience Review, and Ethics Committees of the Appraisal Institute. EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITIES MBA - Pepperdine University, Malibu, California 1987 BS - Finance and Real Estate, California State University at Northridge 1984 Exams/Courses sponsored by the Appraisal Institute-All necessary courses to obtain the MAI and AI-GRS designations. The Appraisal Institute conducts a voluntary program of continuing education for its designated members. Mr. Voltz has completed the requirements under the continuing education program of the Appraisal Institute. EXPERIENCE Over the past 33 years, Mr. Voltz has analyzed or appraised most every property type including the Los Angeles Equestrian Center, various hotels and going-concerns, gas stations, airplane hangars, proposed subdivisions, environmentally contaminated properties, and private lakes. CLIENTS Since opening his practice in 1989, Mr. Voltz’ clients have included various cities in southern California, dozens of financial institutions, attorneys, CPA’s, the Castaic Lake Water Agency, Southern California Edison, Newhall Land & Farming, D.R. Horton, the FDIC, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA), various school district, and the YMCA of Metropolitan Los Angeles.

http://www.voltzrealestate.com/

complete-summary appraisal report · santa clarita, california 91321 . subject: the subject...

Documents