Key Case Study Questions Flashcards
When was the instruction given?
13th May
When did you provide advice to your client?
3rd July
How many units does the Project comprise?
599
How many BTR units does the Project comprise?
423
How many AH units does the Project comprise?
176
When will the Project SOS?
March 2026
Who did you engage with in Key Issue 1 to start with?
Residential Agents
What were the target tenants?
High-earning single persons and aspirational sharers / couples who work in finance, insurance, law and tech (likely in Canary Wharf)
Talk me through Key Issue 1 - Option 1?
No amenity / limited amenity
- Fizzy East 16 (co-working)
- Opportunity: Additional resi units and revenue
- Risk: No differentiation
- Agents advised that tenant and investor preference is for onsite amenity (ease of access / aid future exit deals)
- Not meet objectives
Talk me through Key Issue 1 - Option 2?
Standard amenity
- Riverstone Heights, Anchor’s Point, Millet Place, 8 Water Street, Nautilus
- 24-hour concierge, lounge/co-working/gym
- Opportunity: Convenience of onsite amenity for tenants
- Risk: No risk as operational costs would not be too high
- Met objectives as attractive and affordable
Talk me through Key Issue 1 - Option 3?
Premium amenity
- Sailmakers, No. 4 Upper Riverside, Newfoundland, Phase 3 Royal Wharf, Phase 1 Coppermaker Square
- Screening room, games room, bar, pool, studio, spa, play area
- Opportunity: Attractive to tenant market if pay for additional amenities
- Risks: Additional operational costs
- Did not meet objective
What was the solution for Key Issue 1?
Option 2 - Standard Amenity (attractive and affordable)
What RICS Guidance did you refer to in Key Issue 2?
Comparable Evidence in Real Estate Valuation (1st Ed., 2019)
- Comparable method
- Hierarchy of Evidence
What can you tell me about the Comparable Evidence in Real Estate Valuation (1st Ed., 2019)?
- Principles of comparable evidence
- Sources of comparable evidence
- Recording of comparable evidence
- Recording comparable evidence
- Analysis of comparable evidence
- Dealing with a shortage of comparable evidence
Talk me through Key Issue 2 - Option 1?
Achieved rents within 2 miles of the Project (category A)
- Royal Wharf: £34-41psqft (comparable location, but older, Project command higher)
- Fizzy East 16: £37-52psqft (less comparable location, also older, Project command lower as not in Canning Town)
- Insufficient to base off two sources
- Consider in line with Option 2
Talk me through Key Issue 2 - Option 2?
Achieved and asking rents within 2 miles of the Project (category A)
- Utilise achieved rents from Option 1, in addition to asking rents for Millet Place
- Millet Place: £26-33 psqft (comparable location and specification, but older, Project commanded higher)
- Nautilus and Phase 2B Gallions Quarter were discounted due to insufficient evidence to calculate the £psqft
- Sufficient evidence by using all three sources
Talk me through Key Issue 2 - Option 3?
Expand search area and utilise achieved rents within 5 miles (category B)
- In Canary Wharf: 8 Water Street, Newfoundland and Sailmakers
- Bromley-by-Bow: Riverstone Heights
- North Greenwich: No. 4 Upper Riverside
- Stratford: Phase 1 Coppermaker Square
- All discounted due to less comparable locations
ERV of studios?
£1,670
£40 psqft
ERV of 1B2P?
£1,975
£35psqft
ERV of 2B3P and 2B4P?
£2,457
£32 psqft
£2,675
£35 psqft
ERV of 3B5P and 3B6P?
£3,150
£33 psqft
£3,350
£32 psqft
What yield did you apply to the rents?
4.5% yield
What void periods did you apply to the rents?
2% voids
What purchaser’s costs did you apply to the rents?
1.8% purchaser’s costs