ANSI Measuring Standard Required in 2022

Thomas Baldwin says:

What does the ceiling height have to do with it? You lost me.

chris says:

What does a 2 story open to the 2nd floor and ceiling height have anything to do with measuring a houses’ floor plan for GLA, or a 2 story open foyer???

Steve says:

ANSI = “Walkable Square Footage”

Thus the rule about 2 story foyers and ceilings with <5' clearance.

Thomas Baldwin says:

“FYI Fannie is in the mist of retracting the use of the new standard because they realize it’s wrong.”

That would be a smart move on their part.

chris says:

LOL…if there is not floor to stand on, its not GLA…I can not even believe we are having to talk about this…..its a design adjustment…… You are putting the value of a 2 story family room, under gla, not design….LOL OK i get it now why they are freaking out over ANSI…. Now I get it…..LOl So what you are saying, if I build a 2 story 40′ x 30′ with 20 foot ceilings and only 1 floor, the GLA is not 1,200sqft, its 2,400 sqft house ?

chris says:

I was taught by an office who was doing 300-700 appraisals a week. we had 50 appraisers, I have done reviews for 5 years….My7 office was going 30-50 appraisals a week in 3 states. I have never seen anyone count a 2 story family room as additional gross living area because its not gross living area, its open to below area, it is a design adjustment, not GLA, you are giving value as GLA without the ability of USING it as GLA. And once again I say to you…no wonder the appraisal gods want a standard of measuring for appraisers. So stick to your guns, let me know what the GSE do to you when the time comes. And I am not the only one telling you are wrong.”

chris says:

I am still baffled that some appraiser actually include 400 sqft of “living area” (or more) when there is in fact no “living area” on a 2 story family room or open foyers How much “additional” work is their really when an appraiser has to measure a 2 story family room or foyer and deduct it from the sketch??? What does inflation or a lack of appraisers have anything to do with measuring a house accurately??? The reason “they” are coming out with a standard is in fact because some appraisers are NOT reporting accurate GLA and instead are report Gross Building Area on the 1004. What do you guys do when there is a 2nd floor with that 400 sqft??? Do you add 400 sqft to the comp so you can make the adjustment for larger GLA ??? Again, I am baffled by this situation with so many appraisers acting like the world is coming to an end and all the hardship will occur is the ANSI is utilized.

Baggins says:

Well, fight back with meme’s I suppose. Attached.

Baggins says:

Doug, isn’t that something. Signs, shoes, and now in real estate pretending half of all the state licensed senior assessors in this country are doing it wrong. There is always someone whom in their arrogance and hubris thinks they’re smarter than people with decades of experience. Hey doctor, prescribe this instead. Yo plumber, wrong method. You, window cleaner, missed a spot. Listen here lawyer, that’s not the right course of action, I’ll represent myself instead. Hey assessors, your measurement methods and size reporting for 200 million housing units in the United States of America are incorrect and now must be reported OUR WAY INSTEAD! But this falsification of data presentation rule only applies to appraisers working with fannie, every single other market participant down to the dog and cat can still recognize a garden level as above grade area.

https://www.mysafetysign.com/ansi-safety-signs

E J says:

Plus I wouldn’t have to get a ladder to change the light bulbs

Tom Baldwin says:

In your scenario where you have bi-Level, a tri-Level, a bi-level , a two story on slab. All 1800sf. the market says hey we honestly don’t care. Different strokes for different folks.

Subject = 900 up / 900 down
Tri-Level = 1200 up / 600 down
Bi-level = 900 up / 900 down
2Sty = 1800 up / 0 down

So since you know the market does not care where the finished living area is the $ adj is the same up or down.

In your case the Bi-Level is at $400K and maybe an adjustment for a deck or porch. But comps 1 and 3 up and down adjustments should put them at $400K as well.

I wouldn’t worry about what kind of errors are going to be generated. Just put a disclaimer that high adjustments are due to ANSI reporting and lack of similar comps due to market conditions.

You really don’t have a choice starting tomorrow what you do with the subject. That being said and even with very few comps at least try to align them to the subject in some manner that also reflects the market. Like let’s say your tri-level above is really above grade. So put it all above. You still have that one bi-Level that matches your subject and everyone can see the other styles are bringing the same $$ for same overall Sq. Ft. of living space.

It’s FNMAs problem what adjustments look like if you follow their rules. I had a really nice ranch a few years ago. It was built to have the lower level as a major aspect but it turned the first floor to a 2BR home which for comps was unheard of in that neighborhood. But it was walkout basement. So the agent called me up said I had done it wrong and that she had been selling real estate for 40 years.

I took my subject’s rear photo and put it in photoshop. Drew a line at the grade for the first level. Wrote the word basement under the line, sent it to her and told her maybe she should consider retirement. Never heard another word.

Yes, I use the EO tool. That will again be FNMAs problem starting tomorrow. %s, bracketing GLA, etc.. My comment will be that issues in these categories are brought about by the ANSI system and specific available comparable data. BUT… I have pretty good data here. I know what has been measured, where it’s located, etc.. So I’ve been dealing with that forever. I really have to have a tough situation and if that happens, hey, you get a lot of those errors. Hopefully I was smart enough to charge more up front so the pages of trying to explain the comparisons is worth it.

“Or how about a ranch w/ unfin bas vs a bi level. They’ll read the same on the grid even though the bi level has twice the livable space and tracks a much higher price and value.”

A ranch with unfinished basement will not read the same on grid as a Bi-Level with finished up and down. If I’m reading you correctly. the Bi_Level will show finished rooms in basement. The ranch will not.

PJTMC says:

I totally agree with your assessment. In particular, the retirement aspect. I have been a believer from the very beginning that it is not about ANCI or 7′ ceilings heights; it is about eliminating the appraiser all together. Everyone is caught up in the particulars when the issue here is very simple, elimination of the appraiser. They have tried for years with no success, so they have reinvented how to approach this using our own “tools of the trade” (so to speak) to drive us out. There is a conspiracy taking place in that they are hoping to get appraisers to leave voluntarily and those that don’t will find themselves in front of disciplinary agencies, thrown off the FNMA approved list or worse, in court. It is as clear as the nose on my face, they are creating an intolerable, toxic work environment and, as I said, appraiser elimination is the end game. Look it, everyone knows all appraisers are all talk and no action. This is especially true of the ones plying the politicians with PAC money. That is our history, there is no unity, and why we get walked on. If the appraisers could only take all the energy and effort spent on complaining and pontificating and channel it to organizing together, we might actually be able to fight this. But, alas, I have no faith in that happening. There certainly needs to be a federal investigation to find out who the players are and expose what is really going on. I have come to the conclusion that complaining does nothing more than it has always done, nothing. The facts some appraisers are complaining and pontificating about their greatness tells me they have already lied down and are going to take it. It doesn’t have to be that way if we are ALL willing to make it our mission to expose what is happening. I am certainly not a conspiracy theorist however if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck it’s a dick. One gentleman sent in a great observation to this or one of the other blogs about the money trail that is, if accurate, factual. Good place to start.

Baggins says:

Yes, fully understood. And I get that you’re an experienced pro who is entirely credible. But you don’t appraise in Colorado. Sometimes I’ll have to comp a bi vs a 2 story with a finished basement (so then the 2 has that third fin bas level and needs adjusted down and that basement adjust tracks half the adjustment value of comparative agla areas.) Sometimes I’ll have to comp a bi against a 2 story with an unfinished basement. (so then the basement adjusts at an even lower amount than it would for finished bas areas.) All garden and ‘above grade’ (which agla is a garden level in CO), all garden levels adjusts equivalent to a 2 story at a higher adjustment basis.

Basements in CO often drive half of what the qualifying agla areas drive in terms of price and value, sometimes even a third or less. There are a lot of homes without basements because the water tables are too high, they compete laterally with units with basements, less a little cut for the actual basement minimized value. It’s easy to cross comp bas vs no bas, because of a diminished basement value factor. If that basement is finished or not, it does not matter, the adjustment basis of basements are not normally equivalent to that of garden level and all other qualifiable AGLA areas.

Having a basement in CO is a chore, foundation fault issues are common. Let your gutter fail for a year or two, don’t keep up with drainage, you’ve got a foundation crack that costs $25k+ to repair or more. That is not as common with bi’s and tri’s, which is why builders turned to that design factor for a myriad of reasons. It is why we get the best of both worlds with a bi level or tri level which acts as a heat sink or cooling factor and helps retain heat in the winter. Entirely different living factors than actual fully dug in basements. Hence the difference in market reactions to their value. Builders always finish garden levels with similar quality, where as basements are often items owners have to finish themselves so the basements have wildly varying cost and value factors compared to the standard garden level. Rules of thumb for CO appraising; the garden level tracks with all other AGLA as being equivalent in value. The basements have a reduced value factor even if they are finished (except for aforementioned luxury stock). Those are good rules of thumb in CO.

Adhering to ANSI is going to take 4 adjustment lines in many scenarios. The qualifying AGLA which until today included garden level but now means only above earth, the unfinished basement area, the finished basement area if present. And now the new line which is finished market recognized AGLA, which due to ANSI technicality can no longer be included in AGLA lines, the dreaded garden level which can not be included in the top agla line even though it is market recognized as having equivalent value.

Because that is exactly what ANSI is defining here, a third type of living area. By technicality because nobody in the real world perceives it that way, not around here at least. In CO many people including myself may prefer a bi or tri level because it’s just cool and comfy with less energy resource use to be in the garden level. An entirely different feel then being relegated to some dungeon basement which stays cold never gets sun, no egress unless you spend a fortune on a big new window well, musty, prone to flooding, spiders always trying to get in your business, need an escape ladder and a well cover so nobody falls in, the occasional bunny whom hops in and perishes with no way out, leafs and trash. None of that is present with garden levels partially below partially above grade. In the real world these two living environments are not interchangeable and are nothing at all similar. Buyers prove it too, they don’t distinguish very much between a bi, tri, or 2, if they’re all in the same market area. Luck of the draw, whatever is available.

Shall we dive into the occasional scenario where due to sales scarcity, locational factors, where the appraiser has no other choice but to comp ranches w/ a mix of fin bas, non fin bas vs a bi level or tri level… Sometimes that tri level has a partial basement too if it’s on slope and may be only partially above grade. Toss a 2 story with or without a basement in the grid scenario. How’s that going to work when I’m comping a ranch w/ bas vs a bi level? I’ll have to draw up a special individual line item for the second half of the bi and will not be able to put the garden level lower half of the bi into the basement line, because it does not adjust at an equivalent amount to that ranches basement.

None of this answers the logic question of how can I have half the finished space attributable to ANSI qualified fin sq ft, the other half to non qualified finished sq ft, and all of the room counts are in the above grade line? It is literally impossible under every real world scenario imaginable to have an entire half of a homes space, which has zero attributable room count. This is a fictitious reporting strategy. If there is a finished space, there MUST be a room count attributable to that.

Now I do certainly understand the concept of scooting the data. Sometimes that is unfortunately necessary but we should not do that on purpose if avoidable. The vast majority of report readers do not understand the concept of technicalities in appraisal development. It’s like purposefully trying to confuse readers and users of appraisal reports. Our duty legally extends beyond the client and stated users. People need and deserve to be able to read an appraisal and even if it’s their very first time reading an appraisal grid, they should be able to understand what the appraiser did and comprehend the methods. If the purpose is maintaining the public trust in the real estate profession, adopting fictitious reporting methods contrary to what every other licensed and qualified person in the region operates with, that’s not cutting it. We’re going to look like fools.

We already have a standardized measurement approach in this state. It works, and it works well. Garden level is qualifiable AGLA space. When I run agla for ritzy areas with high quality finishes, sometimes the basement can match the agla adjustment amount but that is rare, reserved for luxury areas usually. The predominant finish quality for most regular houses simply does not have as high of a finish in the basement as they would have in above grade areas, or garden levels. And if they do they still don’t sell for as much. In the above long post I highlighted the ppsf factors realtors enter. When you get into stock with basements there is always variance. The units with fin basements will almost certainly have a higher above grade ppsf factor, and a lower below grade ppsf factor. It’s the rule of thumb because it’s true. The market reaction to basements is simply not equivalent to above grade areas, finished or unfinished, the basements still track for less. Therefore the basements need adjusted at a different value basis.

For one example (but this number keeps climbing in hot CO markets), I’ll run agla at $55 and then tag basements at 10/14, fin/unfin, slide the scale sometimes if needed. And I can identify that sliding the scale is needed by examining net/gross ratios as I apply adjustments, because all else being equal, the net gross indicator will illustrate to me if I’m applying excess or not enough adjustments. Not all adjustments need to come from mass data extraction. The use of the net/gross line to be an honest indicator of an appraisers finger on the pulse of the market or not, is essential. Take a 2 second look at an appraisal, cut to net gross, and that’s an expression of similarity or dissimilarity, regarding the homes comparative valuation balance. Not anymore!

And how do you handle all bi levels, do you cut all the comps in half and scoot all to the basements? Do you guess at that if the assessor does not give garden level figures? Am I to purposefully jump the net gross indicators so substantially by subtracting then adding back an identical adjustment resulting in a 0% net and 50% gross adjustment indicator before I’ve even started with other meaningful applied adjustments? That is so nonsensical. How do you comp a bi vs a tri? I get the concept of scooting data but why would an appraiser purposefully drive net gross higher and butcher the comprehensive nature of net/gross indicators, by cutting a subject home in half, reporting all others as the market reports them, adjusting down on the agla only to adjust up again on the basement. That’s ficitcious reporting because all the space has equivalent market value as agla area, therefore no adjustment should be applied in the first place!

Then you’ll have this false indicator of the tri needing 1/3 more adjustment gross volume, even though in the real world both the tri and the bi homes have equivalent size and value. It makes no sense to fictitiously push half of that market recognized agla area into a basement line for the sake of standardization. When in fact, the data had comprehensive standardization in the first place which the entirety of the entire realty community recognizes and adheres to, except for a few rare apprasiers whom adhere to ANSI even though nobody else does.

Are bi’s and tri’s prolific in your area or are you running theoretical understanding of this past me? I can see how this may work in areas where garden levels are not common or where garden levels may drive diminished value similar to an actual basement. Where garden level value simply may not drive as much as truly above grade housing. But in locations like CO the garden level is just as good as a two story for all practical purposes. Even Marshall and Swift identifies a bi level as a two story property type.

There is no amount of theoretical explanation which can over ride the local market. The market has spoken. The basement drives lower value factors than the garden levels routinely. Therefore intermingling the garden and the basement in the same adjustment line will result in skewed adjustments one way or the other. If I drive the adjustment basis figure high, the basements will adjust up too much. If I drive the figure, low the garden levels will adjust too little. I can not run a variable adjustment basis amount on the same line or I’ll lose my software assistance, be back to punching everything individually on a calculator, reviewers won’t understand, auto review alerts will fire non stop. I’ll never be able to come up with innovative comp solutions in scarce comparable selection scenarios again. I’ll have to laboriously work time on everything because I won’t be able to mix and match the most recent sales selections if they are variable types of builds.

I don’t care what anyone says. This is a disaster in the making. It is evident by the exception allowances. This applies to one type of assignment but not the other? What!?!?! Previously before this ANSI mandate, in CO at least, we enjoy comprehensive alignment of reporting expression of size regardless of the assignment type. Not anymore. And whatever for this excuse of appraisers coming in at wildly varied size measurements. That does not happen around here very frequently because we do not have weirding home stock like a lot of 1.5’s or cape cods or castle curves or whatever. Colorado enjoys standardized building strategies for the most part (changes every decade or two but that’s to be expected, you don’t notice it if you’re comping in the same age class). It’s because of the weather, the cold, the heat, the snow, we don’t get quite as much design variance in regular housing stock. It’s actually really hard to mess up a sketch for most of these houses, I only run across mention of sketching drawing variance rarely, about once a year or so. All these years later I still use a 100 ft metal tape and find this just the most reliable tool possible. It fits in my pocket. Only had to buy it once. No E-Waste! It holds up when I track through thorny roses and bushes, leap over wells, slip around mud and rocks, etc.

I don’t know, GXX001. What makes me more of an authority on local housing size recognition than my local assessor and all the builders whom operate here? Certainly not FNMA, or ANSI, they’re half a country away and are not local. If FNMA wants this ANSI thing, they’ll have to get the assessor to retroactively change all this recognition. Then MLS will have to retroactively alter all sizing records, change their data mapping completely. And then when all the agents use this method, I can too without much ado. What is the deal with appraiser exceptionalism like we know more than all the other licensed professionals? No, it’s a team effort and you don’t win trust by running the wrong direction on the field. My priorities is not pleasing the ANSI group or GSE people. My priority is maintaining a perfect claims and complaints free record so I can make it out of this god forsaken industry alive with my license intact and find something better, hopefully soon.

I’m not going to have a stroke, don’t worry about that. Ha! If the tone is harsh, it’s directed at the bureaucrats not my fellow appraiser peers whom have so boldly been here with me. Thank you for reading. I’ll find some workaround like working the grid twice with image captures or something and doubling up on the sketch effort. So much for increased efficiency. And the CU database is going to take a hit like starting completely over, everything from the peer model basis of adjust amount to the actual size records starts fresh from today. The sketch was the only easy part about it. That and photos. Looks like they don’t trust me with a camera anymore either, want someone else to do that part. As bbk says; the thrill is gone.

chris says:

Fred….I am not sure what your MLS are like, But if you can not figure out the comps, above grade or below grade, you should not be appraising real estate.

Van Wolslagel says:

I have been doing appraisal jobs for over 40 years, and If you’re trying to make sense of why FNMA does what it does, don’t even try, because FNMA doesn’t even know.

Chris says:

You are supposed to be comparing to Comparable houses, Split to Split, Ranch to Ranch etc.. So whats the problem? Assessor data, market experience, MLS and other pictures of front, back and interior should be enough. How is this suddenly a problem? It has always been up to you to determine if your GLA source is accurate. If the assessor is basically the same as your sketch then it is a good chance they are correct for the sales you use. You know, the sales that should be the same or VERY close to the same as the subject. It has always been your job to determine if they are the same or if now how they are different and ADJUST from that. ANSI didnt suddenly make houses different.

Baggins says:

See Fred, this is the rub. In other locations the sort of ansi approach is the standard.

What some of these yahoo’s can’t even comprehend, is that there is no way to know or verify the below grade portion when quite literally the below grade portion had been counted in the above grade line since the beginning.

Over time some assessors have tried to parse this data out but many have not and probably never will either.

It’s called due process. And these people in their hubris and arrogance are not respecting the principals of volunteerism and due process.

a course of formal proceedings (such as legal proceedings) carried out regularly and in accordance with established rules and principles

— called also procedural due process
2 : a judicial requirement that enacted laws may not contain provisions that result in the unfair, arbitrary, or unreasonable treatment of an individual

— called also substantive due process

The way assessors report housing is just one aspect of a due process example. There are already legal mechanisms and building codes on the books which clearly define what is and what is not qualifiable agla space. This is well documented for taxation, permitting, etc, etc.

FNMA is asking every assessor for every county which does not use ANSI to rewrite their entire zoning coding allowance catalogues, retool all their data mapping, go back through a century of building permitting and retroactively adjust everything upward to this new standard.

If the assessors do this, it will be easy for the appraisers to follow. Because we will then have a source of verification. Without this source of verification we are running in the blind to comply with an arbitrary standard which only exists in the appraisers mind and no where else. Fannie put the cart before the horse to think they can change the entire industry for the sake of their own proprietary data records. The CU system data actually belongs to the appraiser group collectively anyways, btw.

Tom B says:

Here are the declarations for free. They were sent to me and I assume many other appraisers across the country by a client.

Examples of acceptable declarations include: — These are for when you did not measure the dwelling outside and inside.

If you measure the dwelling per ANSI… Just state something like. Finished Square Footage was measured per ANSI Z765-2021.

This is for when you can not get inside but measured outside.

“Finished square footage calculations for this house were made based on measured dimensions only and may include unfinished areas, openings in floors not associated with stairs, or openings in floors exceeding the area of associated stairs.”

Plans and specs

“Finished square footage calculations for this house were made based on plan dimensions only and may vary from the finished square footage of the house as built.”

When you can’t get to dwelling and can’t trust plans, etc.. So you use the best info you have.

“Finished square footage calculations for this house were made based on estimated dimensions only and may include unfinished areas, or openings in floors not associated with stairs, or openings in floors exceeding the area of associated stairs.”