B26_SQA_24Q0498-A1_Q_A_0001.pdf
PDF 120 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- 140D0424Q0498
About this file
This document is a set of Questions and Answers (Q&A) regarding Solicitation 140D0424Q0498 for appraisal services related to the Upchurch Hunting Grounds Acquisition. The 27-acre parcel to be acquired may require a larger parcel analysis that could include an adjacent 70-acre parcel with a conservation easement. The Q&A clarifies that the 70-acre parcel is not under consideration for acquisition, and the appraiser should analyze the properties as they legally and physically exist. The other parcels owned by the landowner are provided for informational purposes only to be considered in the larger parcel determination. The Statement of Work indicates the acquisition is for the 27-acre parcel, and an easement over the 70-acre parcel is not an option. The appraiser is responsible for making the larger parcel determination as part of the assignment.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Sol_140D0424Q0498_Amd_0001.pdf | ||
| Sol_140D0424Q0498.pdf |
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
RFQ Attachment #1 Questions and Answers
Solicitation – 140D0424Q0498
Question No. Question Government Response
1 I am very interested in submitting a quote, but first need to better understand the larger parcel for this assignment.
It makes a big difference if just the 27 acres needs to be appraised, or the 70 acres with a conservation easement does as well.
It seems the valuation analysis is complicated by the apparent lack of legal access to the subject parcel from any public road. Why wouldn’t the landowner simply provide an easement along the existing roadway over the adjacent 70 acres as part of the acquisition? This would maximize the value of his 27 acres.
If this is not an option, then the subject parcel could be appraised as a stand-alone tract without vehicular access.
There is adequate sales data available to determine this value without including any other land in the larger parcel analysis. I did this a few years ago for AVSO with the Meridian Junction parcel.
The Statement of Work indicates that the 70 acres may need to be acquired as well to cure the lack of access to the 27 acres. Wouldn’t it be much more cost effective to just acquire a road easement instead of this conserved property in fee simple?
I am also confused why the other parcels owned by Baird are relevant if they are not available as part of the potential acquisition.
The appraiser should assume that two or more parcels may need to be appraised as part of the larger parcel and bid the assignment accordingly.
It is the appraiser’s responsibility to make a larger parcel determination.
An easement over the 70-acre parcel is not under consideration. The property/properties need to be appraised as they physically and legally exist in their current condition.
The Statement of Work does not indicate that the 70-acre parcel may need to be acquired. As stated on page 2, the acquisition is 27.00+ acres.
The other parcels owned by Baird are included for informational purposes for potential consideration in the larger parcel analysis. APN 2969-313-00-487 (8.5 acres) is contiguous to the adjacent 70-acre parcel. The six other parcels are adjacent to each other and are approximately
0.5 mile northwest of the 27-acre parcel to be acquired.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .