$565k for 34 spaces by a hospital only pencils as income if the rate claims can actually be tested
Consider a paved surface lot with 34 marked spaces half a block from a regional hospital's employee entrance, priced at $565,000 by a retiring owner who has held it since the nineties. The stated income: 26 monthly permits at $95 for $2,470 a month, plus eight daily spaces at $6 that the owner estimates average $340 a month, collected through an honor box with no gate and no attendant, which is a number worth discounting given there is no way to verify it. Running the numbers as given: gross around $33,700 a year, taxes $7,400, insurance $1,900, a snow contract $2,800, and a $1,500 annual sealcoat and restripe reserve that likely understates what resurfacing will cost in five or six years. With no management line because the owner self-manages, NOI lands near $19,500, a 3.4% cap on the asking price. The seller's pitch is that $95 a permit is under market, that the hospital garage charges more, and that a new patient tower is coming, with $130 a permit said to be available immediately, which would bring NOI to roughly $29,000, still only about 5.2% on ask. The real question is whether this is an income purchase or a land purchase. If it is land, the income math is close to beside the point, and the number that matters is what a paved parcel of that size across from a hospital is worth to someone who wants to build on it, which requires a land comp, not a cap rate. Testing the seller's rate claims directly with permit holders is usually not possible without the seller knowing, so that number should be treated as unverified until proven otherwise, and the offer priced accordingly.