Schematic Floor Plans vs Appraisal Assessment?19274
Pages:
1
|
leeverdon private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Hello all, I recently had a reputable appraiser visit one of my clients' houses to conduct an appraisal. The appraiser was very thorough and meticulously measured each room. Based on his assessment, the house was determined to be a total of 3,508 square feet. I did a Matterport scan of the house and ordered the schematic floor plans. However, when the schematics came in, they showed the house to be 3,228 square feet, which is 280 square feet smaller than the appraiser's assessment. This difference is quite significant. Given this discrepancy, I decided to question the appraiser about it. I personally believe that the schematic floor plans generated by Matterport are quite accurate, with only a relatively small margin for error. However, the appraiser seemed dismissive of Matterport and its capabilities. See his comments below. "The schematics that I have reviewed are always inaccurate. They're all being done from the inside and don't adequately take into consideration exterior measurements which is the way we do it many builders and architects use interior or center wall to center wall which is not the way square footage is calculated in our industry. I'm very familiar with Matterport and tested against it many times and it is always wrong and it's always low. Those programs are not to be used for determining gross living area - they should only be used to create an illustrated floor plan." I find it frustrating that he did not acknowledge the potential accuracy of the schematic floor plans. Many of my clients use these plans as a basic guide, but to be off by 9.2% is a significant discrepancy. Thoughts? |
||
| Post 1 • IP flag post | ||
Regina, Saskatchewan Canada |
Queen_City_3D private msg quote post Address this user | |
| The appraiser explained the difference in his response... With Matterport you are measuring interior dimensions. He is measuring outside. Those are wildly different measurements. If the property is 2x4 construction that's an extra 8" right there. If it's 2x6 construction you have an extra foot. Add that to the perimeter of the house and you have a huge size difference. Here's an article where Matterport states the factors that affect accuracy and where they stand against different scanners: https://support.matterport.com/s/article/How-accurate-are-dimensions-in-Matterport-Spaces?language=en_US |
||
| Post 2 • IP flag post | ||
 WGANStandard Member Bon Secour, Alabama |
Chemistrydoc private msg quote post Address this user | |
| That’s exactly the point - appraiser is comparing apples and bowling balls. Appraisers generally do not use the ASTM / ISO norm for figuring sq ft. As @Queen_City_3D correctly points out, including or excluding the exterior walls alone can often account for the “discrepancy”. | ||
| Post 3 • IP flag post | ||
|
|
leeverdon private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Okay got it. Thanks. | ||
| Post 4 • IP flag post | ||
 US Building Survey, LLC Olathe, Kansas |
rhelling private msg quote post Address this user | |
| …just to add We scan for developers and architects. We’re scanning for BOMA standards. We’ll grab the MatterPak and/or E57 files for greater accuracy and draw over them in our CAD software. We have to observe the existing building conditions of the exterior and demising walls in order for us to accurately input that into CAD. You’ll get a much different square footage number if you’re assuming a 6” exterior wall and it’s really 14”. Matterport is accurate. Some people just need to understand why it’s accurate. (ie if you set a laser on the inside of a wall - common sense tells us you have no way of knowing what’s on the outside) |
||
| Post 5 • IP flag post | ||
Pages:
1This topic is archived. Start new topic?