Prepared Exclusively for 2500 N Naomi LLC
August 2026
| Address | Units | Sale Price | $/Unit | Distance | Closed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1213 North Screenland Drive | 6 | $1,800,000 | $300,000 | 1.88 mi | 2017 |
| 2501 North Glenoaks Boulevard | 6 | $1,530,000 | $255,000 | 0.54 mi | 2015 |
| 328 E Providencia Ave | 11 | $5,175,000 | $470,455 | 2.51 mi | 2023 |
Published team performance, laaa.com/track-record, as of September 2, 2026.
2500 N Naomi is the gold marker. Navy markers are the 10 apartment buildings the LAAA Team has closed in Burbank; lighter markers are 3 other LAAA closings in the same area. Repeat sales at one building share a marker. Source: laaa.com/track-record, as of August 27, 2026.
Volume matters on this assignment for one reason: it is where the buyer comes from. Five of the eight units convey vacant, which narrows the buyer pool to people who can underwrite a lease-up and close without a rent roll to lean on. That is a list, not a portal audience, and it is the list this team has spent 494 closings and $1.56B in volume building across 21 states and Washington, D.C..
Our public, continuously maintained reach combines active email subscribers, owner and investor contacts, a building-owner database, and targeted direct buyer calls for each listing.
The campaign opens with calls, not clicks. We work a Burbank and East Valley owner list directly, starting with the buyers who have already bid on comparable product in this submarket and the 1031 exchange buyers currently under a deadline. A property delivering vacant rewards a buyer who can move quickly, so the first two weeks are spent finding those people rather than waiting for them.
Every LAAA listing is advertised across the same ten platforms: TheMLS, CoStar and LoopNet, Crexi, Brevitas, Zillow, Redfin, ApartmentBuildings.com, DuxRE, MarcusMillichap.com and laaa.com. Syndication is source-stamped so we can tell you which platform produced each inquiry rather than reporting undifferentiated view counts.
The property goes out to 23500 active email subscribers across an owner and investor database of 23500 contacts, then to targeted re-sends built from who opened and who did not. Campaign statistics are reported to you in full, including the misses.
Marcus & Millichap's national agent network puts the listing in front of brokers whose own clients are looking for Los Angeles County multifamily, which reaches capital that never searches a listing portal at all.
Our team built the 16-database research system that develops a property-specific buyer list from ownership, acquisition, financing, and portfolio signals.
We call the owners and investors most likely to act instead of relying on digital distribution alone.
Calls, tours, buyer feedback, and offer activity are organized into a clear weekly campaign update.
We are proactive marketers rather than reactive ones. The offering is built, priced and staged before it is released, the outreach runs on a schedule you can see, and you get a written report on what happened rather than a summary of what we hoped would happen.
| Address | City | Units | Asking Price | $/Unit | Cap | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 13724 Victory Blvd | Van Nuys | 68 | $22,900,000 | $336,765 | 5.50% | Available |
| 10455 Magnolia Blvd | North Hollywood | 26 | $9,200,000 | $353,846 | 5.03% | Available |
| 180 Holly Avenue | Carpinteria | 19 | $8,950,000 | $471,053 | 4.80% | Available |
| 2727 3rd Street | Santa Monica | 22 | $7,650,000 | $347,727 | 5.16% | Available |
| 31701 Ridge Route Rd | Castaic | 33 | $7,500,000 | $227,273 | 5.64% | Available |
| 3607 Pacific Ave | Marina del Rey | 6 | $5,395,000 | $899,167 | 4.75% | Available |
| 2001-2005 Grismer Avenue | Burbank | 14 | $5,350,000 | $382,143 | 4.56% | Available |
| 755 E Pine Street | Altadena | 19 | $5,195,000 | $273,421 | 6.68% | Available |
| 7018 Alabama Ave | Canoga Park | 9 | $5,100,000 | $566,667 | 5.27% | Available |
| 4603 La Mirada Avenue & 1255 Lyman Place | Los Angeles | 9 | $4,450,000 | $494,444 | 5.28% | Available |
| 24846 Walnut St | Santa Clarita | 16 | $4,200,000 | $262,500 | 5.13% | Available |
| 12314 & 12320 Washington Pl | Culver City | 8 | $3,096,000 | $387,000 | 5.00% | Available |
| 11025 Blix St | Toluca Lake | 4 | $2,700,000 | $675,000 | 5.27% | Available |
| 1303-1305 Laveta Terrace | Los Angeles | 10 | $2,590,000 | $259,000 | 4.24% | Available |
| 1807 Montana Street | Los Angeles | 4 | $2,395,000 | $598,750 | 5.84% | Available |
| 12231 Pacific Ave | Los Angeles | 7 | $1,900,000 | $271,429 | 5.02% | Available |
| 5614 W Adams Blvd | Los Angeles | 7 | $1,795,000 | $256,429 | 6.52% | Available |
| 24513-24519 Walnut St | Santa Clarita | 3 | $1,095,000 | $365,000 | 4.31% | Available |
| 20234 Roscoe Blvd | Winnetka | 25 | $4,750,000 | $190,000 | 5.51% | In Escrow |
| 3361 Hamilton Way | Los Angeles | 4 | $2,800,000 | $700,000 | 5.62% | In Escrow |
| 24802 & 24806 Walnut St | Santa Clarita | 7 | $1,725,000 | $246,429 | 5.31% | In Escrow |
| Total (21 listings) | 320 | $110,736,000 | $346,050 | 5.27% | ||
The LAAA Team is currently marketing 18 multifamily listings with 3 more in escrow, together representing 320 units and $110.7M of asking value. Every assignment runs on the same marketing platform proposed for 2500 N Naomi.
Listings and statuses as published at www.laaa.com/listings; pricing and status are subject to change. The summary row shows total units and total asking value, the blended price per unit across all listings, and the median published cap rate.
Burbank multifamily trades thinly and holds value. Four closed sales frame the subject, drawn from the Marcus & Millichap offering memorandum for 2001-2005 Grismer Avenue because they are the only Burbank sales available with verified income. They closed between August 2024 and February 2026 at cap rates of 3.87%, 4.40%, 4.73% and 5.00%, gross rent multipliers of 14.46 to 16.09, and $324.74 to $479.92 per SF.
Two of the Grismer comparables, 638 E Tujunga Avenue and 215 N Cordova Street, are eight-unit late-1980s buildings, the closest match in this entire analysis to the subject's unit count and vintage. Both closed in the first two months of 2026, at 5.00% and 4.73% caps and at $469.06 and $479.92 per SF. Their per-unit figures of $587,500 and $504,875 reflect average units of roughly 1,050 to 1,250 SF against the subject's 856 SF and do not transfer; the per-square-foot figures do. Two limitations stay on the record. The set is four sales, and their income is as published by the listing brokerage rather than independently audited. All four are also larger-unit buildings than the subject, so price per square foot carries the analysis and price per unit is context rather than an anchor.
The right buyer here is not the one paying the highest headline price. It is the one who can close without financing contingent on in-place income and can lease five units quickly, because that buyer is the one whose offer survives to closing. Positioning should qualify on capital and lease-up capability early rather than discover it in escrow.
A vacant-delivery building is unusually well suited to an exchange buyer, who needs to identify and close on a clock and cannot afford surprises in a rent roll. There is very little tenancy diligence here to slow a closing.
Burbank's small multifamily stock is held largely by long-term local owners, several of whom appear in this comparable set as recent buyers. This is a group that self-manages, knows the leasing market block by block and does not need a lease-up study to price the vacancy.
Buyers working in the City of Los Angeles face RSO buildings where a vacant unit is the only repricing event available and evictions are constrained. Burbank offers the same San Fernando Valley geography without a local rent stabilization ordinance, and this property offers five repricing events at once.
Most Los Angeles multifamily offerings ask a buyer to inherit somebody else's rent roll. This one does not. Five of eight units convey vacant, so 62.5% of the building resets at market on day one with no inherited rent basis and no tenancy history to underwrite around. That is the headline, and the campaign should say so in the first line rather than burying it in the rent roll.
The two closest comparables by unit count and vintage sold at $406,254 and $412,500 per unit, but both are materially larger buildings. Quoting those per-unit figures invites a buyer to discount for unit size. Leading with price per square foot, where the subject sits at $402 inside a $371 to $517 range, frames the same price as mid-market rather than aggressive.
Burbank has no local rent control, and buyers coming from the City of Los Angeles will assume otherwise. State the AB 1482 position and the Burbank Tenant Protection Ordinance directly in the offering rather than leaving a buyer to discover it, and note the pending soft cap proposal in the same breath. A buyer who learns the regulatory picture from us trusts the rest of the file.
2500 N Naomi Street is an eight-unit apartment building constructed in 1990 on a 6,892 SF lot in north Burbank, two stories of residential over gated at-grade parking. The unit mix is four one-bedroom, one-bath plans, three two-bedroom, two-bath plans and a single three-bedroom, two-bath plan across 6,844 gross SF. Every unit has at least two bathrooms except the one-bedrooms, a configuration that rents better and turns faster than the one-bath stock that dominates buildings of this size in the submarket.
What separates this offering from the rest of the Burbank market is the delivery. Units 101, 102, 104, 201 and 202 are vacant or contracted to be delivered vacant at close. Only three units convey occupied, at $1,738, $1,795 and $2,400 per month, each roughly 10% to 13% below the current asking rents in the immediate area. A buyer is therefore setting the rent basis on five of eight units rather than inheriting one, and holds near-term upside on the three that remain.
At the recommended $2.75M the property prices at $343,750 per unit and $402 per SF, producing a 5.35% return on current scheduled income and 5.66% at underwritten market rents. That per-unit figure sits below both late-1980s eight-unit comparables, which is appropriate given the subject's smaller average unit, while the per-square-foot figure sits in the middle of a range running from $371 to $517.
The right buyer here is not the one paying the highest headline price. It is the one who can close without financing contingent on in-place income and can lease five units quickly, because that buyer is the one whose offer survives to closing. Positioning should qualify on capital and lease-up capability early rather than discover it in escrow.
The property sits on N Naomi Street between Burton Avenue and San Fernando Boulevard, a residential pocket bordered on the west by Burbank's media and light-industrial corridor. Studio and production users occupy the blocks immediately west, and Hollywood Burbank Airport, the Downtown Burbank Metrolink station and the I-5 and SR-134 interchange are all within a short drive, which is what keeps this pocket leased.
Burbank's renter base is unusually well paid for the rent levels on offer. The 91504 zip code reports a median household income of $103,835 against a median gross rent of $2,169, and 48% of households rent. Vacancy across the zip code runs at 5.7%.
That combination, high household income against moderate rents in a city with no local rent control, is why Burbank turnover reprices quickly. A tenant leaving a Burbank one-bedroom is typically replaced within weeks at the prevailing asking rent rather than at a negotiated discount, which is the mechanism this offering is built to capture.
| Property & Location Details | |
|---|---|
| Address | 2500 N Naomi Street, Burbank, CA 91504 |
| City | Burbank, CA 91504 |
| APN | 2466-014-017 |
| Year Built | 1990 |
| Building SF | 6,844 |
| Lot Size | 6,892 SF (0.158 ac) |
| Units | 8 |
| Parking | Gated on-site parking at grade beneath the building; verify configuration and count during inspection |
| Property Overview | |
|---|---|
| Units | 8 |
| Year Built | 1990 |
| Building SF | 6,844 |
| Lot SF | 6,892 |
| APN | 2466-014-017 |
| Unit Mix | |
|---|---|
| 4x 1 Bed / 1 Bath | 675 (est.) SF |
| 3x 2 Bed / 2 Bath | 900 (est.) SF |
| 1x 3 Bed / 2 Bath | 1,200 (est.) SF |
The building is a two-story wood-frame structure of 6,844 gross SF built in 1990, sitting on a 50 by 135 foot lot of 6,892 SF zoned BUR4. The footprint runs the depth of the parcel with the narrow elevation addressing N Naomi Street, and residential floors sit above gated parking at grade. County records show the property in tax rate area 2-530 with no flood hazard exposure: FEMA Zone X, an area of minimal flood hazard.
Interior photography of the vacant units shows wood-look plank flooring throughout the living areas, recessed lighting, refreshed kitchens with full-height cabinetry and updated tub and shower surrounds in the baths. Unit sizes are approximate: roughly 675 SF for the one-bedroom plans, 900 SF for the two-bedroom plans and 1,200 SF for the three-bedroom. The county publishes gross building area only, so these are broker estimates and are labelled as approximate throughout. They total 6,600 SF rentable against 6,844 SF gross. Price per square foot on this analysis uses the 6,844 SF gross figure.
The condition of the vacant units is the reason the lease-up assumption in this analysis is a reasonable one rather than a hopeful one. These are units that can be shown and leased in their current state, not units that need a renovation budget before they produce income. A buyer should still verify condition, systems and any deferred maintenance through inspection.
Click any image to enlarge. Images depict the property and representative interiors. Source: listing media and site photography.
| Address | Unit Type | SF | Asking Rent | Distance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12253 N Niagara St #B, Burbank | 1 Bed / 1 Bath | 700 (est.) | $1,995 | 0.31 mi |
| 22324 N Catalina St #H, Burbank | 1 Bed / 1 Bath | 800 (est.) | $1,900 | 0.20 mi |
| 32420 N Buena Vista St #A, Burbank | 1 Bed / 1 Bath | 546 (est.) | $1,895 | 0.22 mi |
| 42321 N Niagara St #F, Burbank | 1 Bed / 1 Bath | - | $1,875 | 0.26 mi |
| 52421 N Brighton St, Burbank | 1 Bed / 1 Bath | - | $2,100 | 0.23 mi |
| 61721 Scott Rd, Burbank | 1 Bed / 1 Bath | 700 (est.) | $1,900 | 0.92 mi |
| Average (6 comps) | 686 (incl. est.) | $1,944 | 0.36 mi | |
| Address | Unit Type | SF | Asking Rent | Distance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7Castillian Apartments, 2021 Grismer Ave #26, Burbank | 2 Bed / 2 Bath | 922 (est.) | $2,695 | 0.76 mi |
| 82025 Peyton Ave #118, Burbank | 2 Bed / 2 Bath | 1,000 (est.) | $2,850 | 0.53 mi |
| 91731 Rogers Pl, Burbank | 2 Bed / 2 Bath | 950 (est.) | $2,775 | 0.81 mi |
| 101806 Grismer Ave, Burbank | 2 Bed / 2 Bath | 950 (est.) | $2,861 | 0.87 mi |
| 11333 Andover Dr, Burbank | 2 Bed / 2 Bath | 1,020 (est.) | $2,723 | 1.05 mi |
| 12476 E Cypress Ave, Burbank | 2 Bed / 2 Bath | 1,000 (est.) | $2,795 | 1.85 mi |
| Average (6 comps) | 974 (incl. est.) | $2,783 | 0.98 mi | |
| Address | Unit Type | SF | Asking Rent | Distance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 13509-519 E San Jose Ave, Burbank | 3 Bed / 2 Bath | - | $3,295 | 1.89 mi |
| 14360 N Hollywood Way, Burbank | 3 Bed / 2 Bath | - | $3,495 | 2.79 mi |
| 15301 E Verdugo Ave, Burbank | 3 Bed / 2 Bath | - | $3,550 | 2.35 mi |
| 16600 E Olive Ave, Burbank | 3 Bed / 2 Bath | - | $3,594 | 2.26 mi |
| Average (4 comps) | - | $3,484 | 2.32 mi | |
The comparables are grouped by plan so each underwritten rent answers to its own evidence. Six one-bedroom comparables run $1,875 to $2,100 and average $1,944; the closest match to the subject's plan, 2253 N Niagara Street in a 1988 building at approximately 700 SF, asks $1,995. The analysis underwrites $2,000, just above that average and inside the range. Six two-bedroom, two-bath comparables run $2,695 to $2,861 and average $2,783, four of them verified in the Marcus & Millichap offering memorandum for 2001-2005 Grismer Avenue, whose own market figure is $2,750. The analysis underwrites $2,700, below that average.
The three-bedroom is now comped directly rather than bracketed. Four three-bedroom apartment comparables in Burbank run $3,295 to $3,594 and average $3,484, the closest being a fourteen-unit 1963 building on E San Jose Avenue at $3,295 and a thirty-seven-unit 1990 building on N Hollywood Way, the same construction year as the subject, at $3,495. Two of the four advertise one month free, which on a twelve-month lease puts their net effective rents at roughly $3,204 and $3,254. The analysis underwrites $3,200 for unit 104, below every asking rent in the set and at the net effective level of the two carrying concessions.
| Address | Yr | Units | Bldg SF | Sale Price | $/Unit | $/SF | GRM | Cap | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1638 E Tujunga Ave, Burbank | 1989 | 8 | 10,020 | $4,700,000 | $587,500 | $469 | 14.46 | 5.00% | 2026-02-27 |
| 2215 N Cordova St, Burbank | 1988 | 8 | 8,416 | $4,039,000 | $504,875 | $480 | 14.91 | 4.73% | 2026-01-07 |
| 3536 E Cypress Ave, Burbank | 1986 | 13 | 15,012 | $4,875,000 | $375,000 | $325 | 16.09 | 4.40% | 2025-02-04 |
| 4420 W Elmwood Ave, Burbank | 1988 | 9 | 9,310 | $3,525,000 | $391,667 | $379 | 15.94 | 3.87% | 2024-08-01 |
| Median (4 comps) | 9,665 | $4,369,500 | $448,271 | $424 | 15.43 | 4.56% | - | ||
Burbank multifamily trades thinly and holds value. Four closed sales frame the subject, drawn from the Marcus & Millichap offering memorandum for 2001-2005 Grismer Avenue because they are the only Burbank sales available with verified income. They closed between August 2024 and February 2026 at cap rates of 3.87%, 4.40%, 4.73% and 5.00%, gross rent multipliers of 14.46 to 16.09, and $324.74 to $479.92 per SF.
Two of the Grismer comparables, 638 E Tujunga Avenue and 215 N Cordova Street, are eight-unit late-1980s buildings, the closest match in this entire analysis to the subject's unit count and vintage. Both closed in the first two months of 2026, at 5.00% and 4.73% caps and at $469.06 and $479.92 per SF. Their per-unit figures of $587,500 and $504,875 reflect average units of roughly 1,050 to 1,250 SF against the subject's 856 SF and do not transfer; the per-square-foot figures do. Two limitations stay on the record. The set is four sales, and their income is as published by the listing brokerage rather than independently audited. All four are also larger-unit buildings than the subject, so price per square foot carries the analysis and price per unit is context rather than an anchor.
1. 638 E Tujunga Ave, Burbank - The most recent closed eight-unit sale of the subject's construction era anywhere in Burbank, and the only comparable in the whole set that pairs the subject's unit count and vintage with a published cap rate. Eight units in 10,020 SF, so the average unit is roughly 1,253 SF against the subject's 856 SF. The per-unit figure reflects that size difference and does not transfer to the subject; the $469.06 per SF does. Closed at a 5.00% cap on $235,187 of net operating income, February 2026. 2.4 miles from the subject.
2. 215 N Cordova St, Burbank - Second eight-unit late-1980s Burbank sale with published income, closed five weeks before Tujunga and at a comparable price per square foot. Eight units in 8,416 SF, an average of 1,052 SF against the subject's 856 SF. Closed at a 4.73% cap on $189,702 of net operating income, January 2026.
3. 536 E Cypress Ave, Burbank - Larger 1986 building that sets the low end of the per-square-foot range and the low end of the cap range in the published-income set. Thirteen units in 15,012 SF, an average of 1,155 SF. Closed at a 4.40% cap on $214,569 of net operating income, February 2025.
4. 420 W Elmwood Ave, Burbank - Oldest trade in the published-income set and the sharpest cap in it; useful as the floor of the yield range rather than as a pricing anchor. Nine units in 9,310 SF, an average of 1,034 SF. Closed at a 3.87% cap on $136,513 of net operating income, August 2024.
| Basis | Price | $/Unit | $/SF | GRM Current | GRM Pro Forma | Cap Current | Cap Pro Forma |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Suggested list price | $2,750,000 | $343,750 | $401.81 | 12.37 | 11.87 | 5.35% | 5.66% |
| Range top | $2,975,000 | $371,875 | $434.69 | 13.38 | 12.85 | 4.85% | 5.14% |
| Midpoint | $2,862,500 | $357,812 | $418.25 | 12.87 | 12.36 | 5.09% | 5.39% |
| Range bottom | $2,750,000 | $343,750 | $401.81 | 12.37 | 11.87 | 5.35% | 5.66% |
Property taxes reassess at the sale price, so the net operating income and therefore the capitalization rate are recalculated at every rung above.
| 2500 N Naomi | 2001-2005 Grismer Ave, Burbank | Grismer at $4,500,000 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| List Price | $2,750,000 | $5,350,000 | $4,500,000 |
| Price per Unit | $343,750 | $382,143 | $321,429 |
| Price per SF | $401.81 | $472.03 | $397.04 |
| Cap Rate | 5.35% | 4.56% | 5.42% |
| GRM | 12.37 | 14.46 | 12.16 |
| Units | 8 | 14 | 14 |
| Year Built | 1990 | 1987 | 1987 |
| Building SF | 6,844 | 11,334 | 11,334 |
The third column restates 2001-2005 Grismer Avenue's own published income at an indicated market value of $4,500,000. Price per unit and price per square foot recompute from that listing's fourteen units and 11,334 SF; the cap rate and gross rent multiplier scale from its published 4.56% and 14.46 by the price ratio. The two cap rates are not measuring the same thing: Grismer's sits on in-place rent averaging $2,203 against the $2,750 its own offering memorandum carries as market, so a buyer there is acquiring roughly 25% of rent growth still to be captured. The subject's 5.35% sits on income already at market, because five of eight units convey vacant and reset on day one.
2001-2005 Grismer Ave, Burbank - The only directly comparable active listing in the submarket and the ceiling this offering prices against. Side by side: Grismer asks $382,143 per unit and $472.03 per SF at a 4.56% cap and a 14.46 gross rent multiplier, 100% occupied in a 1987 building. The subject is recommended at $343,750 per unit and $401.81 per SF at a 5.35% cap and a 12.37 gross rent multiplier, in a newer 1990 building delivering five of eight units vacant. The subject is 10.0% cheaper per unit and 14.9% cheaper per SF, on eight tenths of a point more going-in yield. Fourteen units in 11,334 SF on an 11,440 SF lot, built 1987, all two-bedroom two-bath. The subject is eight units in 6,844 SF on 6,892 SF, built 1990, with a mix of one, two and three-bedroom plans.
| Unit | Type | Approx SF | Status | Current Rent | Market Rent |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unit 101 | 2 Bed / 2 Bath | 900 (est.) | Vacant | $2,700 | $2,700 |
| Unit 102 | 1 Bed / 1 Bath | 675 (est.) | Vacant | $2,000 | $2,000 |
| Unit 103 | 1 Bed / 1 Bath | 675 (est.) | Occupied | $1,738 | $2,000 |
| Unit 104 | 3 Bed / 2 Bath | 1,200 (est.) | Delivered Vacant | $3,200 | $3,200 |
| Unit 201 | 2 Bed / 2 Bath | 900 (est.) | Delivered Vacant | $2,700 | $2,700 |
| Unit 202 | 1 Bed / 1 Bath | 675 (est.) | Delivered Vacant | $2,000 | $2,000 |
| Unit 203 | 1 Bed / 1 Bath | 675 (est.) | Occupied | $1,795 | $2,000 |
| Unit 204 | 2 Bed / 2 Bath | 900 (est.) | Occupied | $2,400 | $2,700 |
| Total Scheduled Rent | $18,533 | $19,300 | |||
| Additional Income[1] | $0 | $0 | |||
| Monthly Scheduled Gross Income | $18,533 | $19,300 | |||
5 of 8 units convey vacant and carry the asking rent in the Current Rent column; occupied units carry their in-place rent.
| Current | Market | |
|---|---|---|
| Scheduled Gross Income[2] | $222,396 | $231,600 |
| Vacancy Reserve at 3.0%[3] | ($6,672) | ($6,948) |
| Gross Operating Income | $215,724 | $224,652 |
| Operating Expenses | ($68,629) | ($68,986) |
| Net Operating Income | $147,095 | $155,666 |
| Current | Pro Forma | |
|---|---|---|
| Real Estate Taxes[4] | $32,541 | $32,541 |
| Insurance[5] | $8,444 | $8,444 |
| Utilities - Water, Power & Trash[6] | $7,592 | $7,592 |
| Utilities - Gas[7] | $2,441 | $2,441 |
| Repairs & Maintenance[8] | $6,080 | $6,080 |
| Landscaping[9] | $840 | $840 |
| Fire Department Inspection[10] | $62 | $62 |
| Replacement Reserves[11] | $2,000 | $2,000 |
| Management Fee (4.0% of EGI)[12] | $8,629 | $8,986 |
| Total Operating Expenses | $68,629 | $68,986 |
| Expense Ratio | 31.8% | 30.7% |
| Per Unit | $8,579 | $8,623 |
| Per Square Foot | $10.03 | $10.08 |
[1] Additional Income: None. Ownership reports no laundry, parking, storage or utility bill-back income.
[2] Scheduled Gross Income: Eight units at scheduled rent. The three occupied units carry their actual rents of $1,738, $1,795 and $2,400; the five units conveying vacant carry asking rents of $2,000, $2,700 and $3,200, which is standard Los Angeles practice for a property delivering vacant. The market column carries all eight units at underwritten market rents.
[3] Vacancy Reserve: 3.0% of scheduled gross rent. This is an ongoing stabilized reserve and does not model the lease-up period on the five units conveying vacant, which is a one-time cost a buyer should underwrite separately.
[4] Real Estate Taxes: Underwritten at reassessment on the recommended list price of $2,750,000 using the 1.1833% effective rate derived from the subject's own 2025 tax bill, $18,197 against $1,537,790 of assessed value, in tax rate area 2-530, or $32,541 per year. Ownership's current taxes reflect a 2004 purchase basis and will not survive a sale.
[5] Insurance: Carried at the LAAA underwriting allowance of eight units at $200 plus 6,844 gross SF at $1.00 per SF, or $8,444. Ownership's actual 2025 premium is $6,939. Obtain current quotes during diligence.
[6] Utilities - Water, Power & Trash: Ownership's expense schedule as reported, a single combined annual line. The building is master-metered for these services.
[7] Utilities - Gas: Ownership's expense schedule as reported, So Cal Gas annual total.
[8] Repairs & Maintenance: Ownership's reported spend: misc repairs $3,690, plumbing $1,150, materials $1,183 and window covering $57. This is a single year of reported cost, not a trailing twelve-month statement.
[9] Landscaping: Ownership's expense schedule as reported, gardener annual total.
[10] Fire Department Inspection: City of Burbank Fire Department annual inspection fee per ownership's expense schedule.
[11] Replacement Reserves: $250 per unit per year. Ownership's schedule carries no reserve line, so this is an addition to reported cost rather than a restatement of it.
[12] Management Fee (4.0% of EGI): Underwritten at 4.0% of effective gross income. Ownership's schedule carries no management line, so this is an addition to reported cost rather than a restatement of it.
Owner-reported figures are unaudited. A buyer should verify all income and expenses in due diligence.
| Operating Data | |
|---|---|
| Price | $2,750,000 |
| Number of Units | 8 |
| Price per Unit | $343,750 |
| Price per SF | $401.81 |
| Current GRM | 12.37 |
| Market GRM | 11.87 |
| Current Cap Rate (LAAA calculation: current NOI / recommended value) | 5.35% |
| Market Cap Rate (LAAA calculation: market NOI / recommended value) | 5.66% |
| Acquisition Structure | |
|---|---|
| Structure | All Cash |
| Equity Required | $2,750,000 |
Current scheduled gross rent of $222,396 carries the three occupied units at their actual rents and the five vacant units at asking, which is standard Los Angeles practice for a property conveying vacant. After a 3.0% vacancy reserve and $68,629 of operating expenses, current net operating income is $147,095, a 5.35% return on the recommended price and a 12.37 gross rent multiplier. Real estate taxes are reassessed at the $2,750,000 list price, which is what carries the expense line below the prior underwriting. At market rents across all eight units, scheduled gross rent rises to $231,600 and net operating income to $155,666, a 5.66% return.
Set against the only directly comparable active listing, the recommendation holds up on every metric a buyer will run. 2001-2005 Grismer Ave, a fourteen-unit 1987 building nine tenths of a mile away, asks $5,350,000: $382,143 per unit, $472.03 per SF, a 4.56% cap and a 14.46 gross rent multiplier, 100% occupied. The subject at $2,750,000 is $343,750 per unit and $401.81 per SF, a 5.35% cap and a 12.37 gross rent multiplier. That is 10.0% less per unit and 14.9% less per square foot, eight tenths of a point more going-in yield, a building three years newer, and five of eight units delivering vacant instead of none. The comparison carries a third column at an indicated market value of $4,500,000 for Grismer, where it prices at $321,429 per unit, $397.04 per SF, a 5.42% cap and a 12.16 multiplier. Those two cap rates are not measuring the same thing: Grismer's rests on in-place rent averaging $2,203 against the $2,750 its own offering memorandum carries as market, so a buyer there is still acquiring the rent growth. The subject's rests on income already at market. The four closed sales in the comparable set traded at 3.87% to 5.00% caps and 14.46 to 16.09 gross rent multipliers, and at $375,000 to $587,500 per unit. The subject at a 5.35% cap, a 12.37 multiplier and $343,750 per unit is priced at a wider yield, a lower multiplier and less per unit than any of them.
The recommended $2.75M enters at the floor of the supportable range of $2.75M to $2.98M. Below that floor the property is underpriced against every per-square-foot comparable in the set. The balance of the range is left to competition rather than asked for up front, because a higher entry would lean the stated return on leasing all five vacant units at the top of the asking range without a period of carrying cost.
Supported value range: $2,750,000 to $2,975,000
No trailing twelve-month operating statement exists for this property. Every expense line is either a single reported annual figure from ownership's schedule or an underwriting allowance, and the income statement is built from the rent roll rather than from collections.
Real estate taxes are reassessed at the recommended list price using the 1.1833% effective rate derived from the subject's own 2025 tax bill, $18,197 against $1,537,790 of assessed value, in tax rate area 2-530. Ownership's current taxes reflect a 2004 purchase basis and will not survive a sale.
Insurance is carried at the LAAA underwriting allowance of $8,444, calculated as eight units at $200 plus 6,844 gross SF at $1.00 per SF. Ownership's actual 2025 premium is $6,939. The allowance is used so a buyer is underwritten to a market replacement policy rather than to an incumbent's rate.
A management fee at 4.0% of effective gross income and replacement reserves at $250 per unit per year are added to ownership's reported costs. Ownership's expense schedule carries neither line, so together these represent $10,629 of annual cost a buyer will incur that the seller does not currently report.
Five units carry no rent on ownership's rent roll and enter scheduled income at asking rents of $2,000, $2,700 and $3,200. This accounts for $151,200 of the $222,396 current scheduled gross rent. Stated current cap rate and gross rent multiplier are calculated on that basis.
Per-unit square footage is approximate. The county publishes gross building area only, so the 675, 900 and 1,200 SF unit sizes shown are broker estimates and are labelled as approximations wherever they appear. They total 6,600 SF rentable against 6,844 SF gross. All building-level figures, including price per square foot, use the 6,844 SF gross area, which is why the building-level price per square foot differs from any unit-level calculation.
The City of Burbank has no rent stabilization ordinance. Rent increases are governed by AB 1482 at the lower of 5% plus CPI or 10% through January 1, 2030, and Burbank's Tenant Protection Ordinance, effective August 31, 2024 and amended March 11, 2025, applies just-cause, relocation and anti-harassment rules to covered units. On October 28, 2025 the City Council directed staff to draft a 4% soft cap on rent increases; that ordinance has not been adopted as of this date, and the drafted version would reach buildings with certificates of occupancy before February 2, 1995.
This is a broker's opinion of value prepared for the owner, not an appraisal. It relies on public records, ownership-provided documents and published asking rents, none of which have been independently audited. Comparable income for all four sales is as published by the 2001-2005 Grismer Avenue listing brokerage and has not been independently audited. Nine recorded-transfer-tax sales screened within 1.75 miles were excluded from this analysis as stale and income-free. A buyer should verify unit count, condition, systems, parking configuration, permits and all income and expense figures through inspection and diligence.