Separate methodology + potential flags for 212s

[dfsnow]

Class 212 buildings are mixed residential and commercial space, prototypically a multi-family small apartment building with ground floor commercial. These buildings are incredibly tough to value and have historically been used to game the assessment system (adding a residential unit to your grocery store and calling it a 212 in order to get the lower 10% residential assessment rather the 25% commercial assessment). That ends this year.

We need to come up with a new, potentially separate valuation method for these properties. That could be additional 212-specific features or an entirely separate model. Either way, this issue should be used as a parent issue to track work on 212s.

This year (2023), we added flags for abnormally large 212s and recommended them for additional desk review. However, there are not many 212s in the south triad. For the city triad, we should take an extra look at the valuation methodology of 212s and perhaps consider a combined income-based valuation approach.

[stevevance]

Could it be a matter of changing the assessment rules that 212 is this...[1-3 floors of apartments above and behind a small corner store, bar, or funeral home]

and not this? [a building on a very large lot, 10,000 s.f., with indoor car parking and a laundromat and only two apartments]

[dfsnow]

People add residential units to places like the latter specifically to make them 212s. We flag all these super large properties by their square footage and they usually get manually reviewed/valued.