How do you price a legal nonconforming park with no automatic rebuild right after a casualty

Question

Say a zoning verification letter comes back on a 44-lot community. The park predates the current ordinance, so the use is legal nonconforming, and the letter says in plain language that if a casualty takes out more than half the units the use does not automatically come back. Nonconforming and rebuild language is written differently in every state and usually differently again in every county ordinance, so read the code section the letter cites instead of trusting the summary. Two honest ways to look at it. One is that the tail is real and cheap. A park-wide loss on a land-lease community where residents own their own homes is a strange event to underwrite, the insurable basis is roads and utilities rather than dwellings, and every buyer after this one inherits the same letter, so it is not a new problem at resale. The other is that the letter is exactly what caps the exit. Lenders read it and appraisers footnote it, and a buyer three or four years out with tighter credit will discount the same paragraph harder than a buyer would today. There is a third path where the letter is treated as a project rather than a risk: apply for a conditional use permit or a rezone into a district that lists manufactured housing as permitted, and pay the entitlement cost out of early cash flow. That means a public hearing in front of neighbors, and those hearings can go badly for reasons that have nothing to do with the application. Curious where the room actually lands on this, because experienced operators say both things with total confidence.

stephen_ok9 · Answer

The part I'd chase first is what your lender does with it, because that determines your price more than your own risk tolerance does. Some credit committees treat limited rebuild rights as an insurance question and want an ordinance or law endorsement plus a longer loss of rents period. Others knock the term down or drop proceeds. Get that answer in writing before you spend money on diligence, and confirm the current terms with the lender rather than a broker's recollection of last year's deal.

On resale, the discount isn't fixed. It shows up as a smaller buyer pool, which mostly means fewer bidders willing to do agency debt on it.

laurenkim53 · Answer

Plenty of rural counties will not even write a letter like that. You get a phone call from a part-time planner who says it has been there since the seventies and nobody has ever asked. That reads friendlier and it is worse, because you are holding an opinion instead of a document. At least parcel knows what he owns.

tylerbrooks9 · Answer

Most people come to this asset class because the failure modes are supposed to be a water line and a slow payer rather than a hearing room. A letter that says the use might not come back is the kind of thing an owner is still thinking about at 2am three years later. So the discount would have to be very large before that tail stopped being a risk the buyer never signed up for. That is a temperament answer more than a math one, and temperament is part of pricing.

brandonlee36 · Answer

Consider a 38-lot nonconforming park where the owner takes the rezone route in year two on the theory that the entitlement adds value on paper. A typical run looks like six months and about $14k in engineering and legal, with the planning commission tabling it twice before the applicant next door poisons the room over traffic. The owner withdraws. The lesson from cases like that is that the park operates exactly the same before and after. Lot rent gets collected and occupancy holds, and nothing changes except the $14k. The better play is to take parcel's discount at closing and never open the file, and hollow is right that the written letter is the good version of this problem.

How do you price a legal nonconforming park with no automatic rebuild right after a casualty

4 replies