In general if the return to LPs is in excess of 20% IRR it should probably be a strong indication that the sponsor lacks access to investors, is risky/inexperienced, or both.  

He was getting a bit irritated with my constant querying of the bank's stance so I walked after hearing that.

If he thinks so then he has been smoking some really toxic weed.

I had to 'check myself' when I was irritated at the 3% (In this case...I understand it would have been at least that if he brought me the buyer)...They all said it was excessive.  

It is just irritating living with dust, and debris, plus waking up with a contractor in your room.You may have to leave on a moments notice when you list.  

Why do you even care that she wants to change to a 1 year lease since you were fine with it a month ago, and how does it benefit you to irritate the tenant?

I ended up getting a reduction in price because of the copper plumbing and wiring theft, so I wasn't too upset, just irritated at the additional time it would take for repairs.Then, literally the day after my electrician finished repairing/replacing the damaged wiring, it got broken into again. 

There was an old toxic spill by Amoco in the 90's you can read about here: http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/HAC/pha/AmocoSugarCreek092404-HC/AmocoSugarCreek092404-HC.pdf but as long as you aren't right next to the spill (which is in the north part I believe) I think you should be OK. 

I'm in agreement with many investors that HOAs are very irritating to work with, especially when they can levy assessments on the whole complex YOU have to help pay for.

The CA has was 25% LTV, so not much leverage.I checked your number and this is where it gets really interesting, so basically a $2.5M house in 2010 era, but in 2023 is "only" $3.9-$4.9M :-)In dollar value it's incredible, but in term of gross IRR it is like only 7%-8% IRR.