B-5 Bakas RFP Acceptance

Loading ...
HCConserv...
Civic & Government
Agenda Item Cover Sheet 
Agenda Item No. B-5
Meeting Date 1/11/2018
 Consent Section
 Regular Section
 Public Hearing
Subject: Bakas Therapeutic Equestrian Center Request for Proposals
Department Name:
Procurement Services
Contact Person:
Scott P. Stromer
Contact Phone:
301-7095
Sign-Off Approvals:
Tom Fesler
1/4/2018
Scott Stromer
1/4/2018
Assistant County Administrator
Date
Department Director
Date
Tom Fesler
1/4/2018
Christine Beck
1/4/2018
Management and Budget – 
Approved as to Financial Impact Accuracy
Date
County Attorney – 
Approved as to Legal Sufficiency
Date
Staff's Recommended Board Motion:
(a) Accept the sole proposal received in response to RFP 16581 for construction of two new therapeutic 
equestrian centers in exchange for transferring ownership of the real property and facilities associated 
with the current Bakas Equestrian Center to the proposer, Thomas A. Pepin, as Trustee of the Tomas A. 
Pepin Revocable Trust.  (b) Direct staff to negotiate and prepare necessary documents for Board 
approval.  The proposer will be required to fully complete construction of two new equestrian centers 
and accompanying facilities as specified, at no cost to the County, prior to conveyance of the existing 
facility to the proposer.  No County funding is required at this time. (Please note, however, that 
operational funding for both facilities will be shown in future budget years.) 
Financial Impact Statement:
No County funding is required at this time. (Please note, however, that operational funding for both 
facilities will be shown in future budget years.)   
Background:
On September 7, 2017, the Board authorized staff to issue an RFP to solicit proposals for construction of 
two (2) new therapeutic equestrian facilities on County-owned land in exchange for the property and 
facilities that currently house the existing Bakas Equestrian Center.  The RFP specified that each new 
facility must meet or exceed the specifications of the existing single Bakas Equestrian Center in 
exchange for conveyance of the same real property and facilities.  Additionally, the RFP required that the 
two (2) new centers be constructed and made ready for operation at no cost to the County (beyond the 
conveyance of the subject real property and facilities).  The two (2) new equestrian centers are proposed 
to be located at the Northwest Equestrian Park on South Mobley Road (near the existing Bakas facility) 
and Sydney Dover Trails Park on State Road 60 (near Sydney Washer Road).  The County issued the 
subject RFP on October 17, 2017, and a pre-proposal conference was held on October 23, 2017.  
Proposals were due on November 17, 2017, and the sole proposal was properly submitted by Thomas A. 
Pepin, as Trustee of the Thomas A. Pepin Revocable Trust.  On November 28, 2017, a public meeting 
was organized by the Conservation & Environmental Lands Management Department to provide 
interested parties an overview of the sole proposal and to gather feedback. At this meeting, the proposer 
provided an overview of the proposal.  The meeting was videotaped and public comment was gathered 
using both video and comment cards.  On December 8, 2017, a Review Team comprised of County staff 
met to formally review the proposal to determine its acceptability based on the published criteria: 1) 
developer qualifications, approach and ability, 2) development proposal, and 3) financial value to County.
After careful review and consideration, the committee determined that the proposal satisfied the 
minimum requirements and, therefore, was deemed acceptable and recommended for further 
consideration and approval by the Board.  Because two project packages were offered by the proposer, 
staff will negotiate costs for both options and bring back a recommendation in early 2018 for Board 
consideration. The Base Project Package substantially conforms to the base requirements of the RFP, 
provides the specified 60 ft x 120 ft riding arenas at both new locations, and an operation endowment of 
$50,000 each year, for each location, for five years ($500,000.00).  The Optional Project Package 
substantially conforms to the base requirements of the RFP; however, it provides larger 100 ft x 200 ft 
riding arenas at both new locations, and but significantly reduces or eliminates the operation endowment 
due to the added cost of the larger arenas. The community using the current Bakas facility prefers the 
larger arena to enhance fundraising opportunities; staff will seek an acceptable outcome on this issue 
during negotiations and will present the final package for Board consideration and approval.
List Attachments:  Review Summary, Proposal, RFP Document  
 
 
HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY 
FLORIDA 
 
 
 
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS  
 
FOR 
 
DEVELOPMENT FOR 
BAKAS EQUESTRIAN FACILITY EXCHANGE & 
REPLACEMENTS  
 
 
 
 
 
 
RFP NO.: 16581 
 
 
CONTACT PERSON: 
 
Sybil Tucker, Chief Procurement Analyst 
Procurement Services Department 
P O Box 1110 (601 E. Kennedy Blvd., 25th Floor) 
Tampa, FL 33602 
Telephone: (813) 301-7085 
Fax: (813) 272-6290 
Email: tuckers@HCFLgov.net 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
IP-1 
 
INSTRUCTIONS TO PROPOSERS 
 
 
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP) NUMBER: RFP-16581 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
PROJECT TITLE: DEVELOPMENT FOR BAKAS EQUESTRIAN FACILITY EXCHANGE & REPLACEMENTS 
 
PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE: OCTOBER 23, 2017 AT 11:00 AM. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
LOCATION: 
COUNTY CENTER, 601 E. KENNEDY BLVD., 24th FLOOR, Room 2416W, TAMPA, FL 33602   
 
PROPOSAL SUBMISSION DATE/TIME:  NOVEMBER 17, 2017 AT 2:00 PM. 
 
 
              
 
PLACE OF PROPOSAL DELIVERY/OPENING: PROCUREMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT 
 
 
 
COUNTY CENTER, 601 E. KENNEDY BLVD; 25TH 
 
FLOOR, TAMPA, FL  33602 
 
 
 
 
 
1.0 
INTRODUCTION 
 
1.1 
HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY (“the County”) is issuing this Request for Proposal (RFP) to solicit 
proposals for the development of a Public Private Partnership from interested entities for the construction 
of two new therapeutic equestrian facilities on County land in exchange for the property and facilities 
associated with the existing Bakas Equestrian Center located at 11510 Whisper Lake Trail, Tampa Florida 
33626. Information regarding the existing Bakas property is shown in Attachment A.     
 
1.2 
The County has received an unsolicited proposal regarding this matter as outlined in the Background.  
 
1.3 
The County’s minimum requirements are summarized in Attachment B. The two proposed County-owned 
locations for the new facilities are as follows: 
 
 
1. 
Northwest Equestrian Park located on the North side of South Mobley Road, approximately 1 
mile east of Race Track Road; and 
 
2. 
Sydney Dover Trails Park located on the North side of Highway 60, on the west side of Sydney 
Washer Road 
 
 
The County will not consider any alternate locations for the new facilities. 
 
1.4 
Proposals will be reviewed for their overall benefit/value to the County, including qualifications of the 
proposer team, the proposer meeting the County’s minimum requirements and any proposed additional or 
superior improvements or other services/support that benefit the County and operation of the facilities.  
 
1.5 
Proposers will be required to present their proposals to interested citizens in a public meeting to be 
 
scheduled by the County.  
 
1.6 
After completion of the RFP Process, staff will present to the Board of County Commissioners the 
proposals that qualify for consideration in accordance with the RFP, for selection by the Board.  
 
1.7 
The County has not established funding or a budget for this Project. The intent of this RFP is to seek 
competitive proposals through this solicitation and to enter into an agreement whereby the County will 
exchange the existing Bakas property (together with existing improvements) for the two new turnkey facilities 
(including all site work and off-site improvements) to be funded and constructed by the successful Proposer.   
 
1.8 
There is no contract guaranteed as a result of being evaluated through this solicitation. All developments 
and agreements stemming from this solicitation must meet the relevant local, state and federal 
requirements. Proposals may need to be modified during negotiation to meet legal sufficiency.     
IP-2 
1.9 
In consideration of the County's agreement to consider its proposal, each Proposer must agree that its proposal 
shall be valid for a minimum period of ninety (90) calendar days after the Proposal Opening Date.  Thereafter, 
the proposal shall continue in full force and effect until thirty (30) days following the Proposer's written notice 
to the County of its intent to withdraw its proposal.  
 
2.0 
BACKGROUND 
 
2.1 
The County’s Bakas Equestrian Center (Bakas), located near Ed Radice Park in northwest Hillsborough 
County is managed by the Conservation and Environmental Lands Management Department. This facility 
provides equestrian therapy to special needs children from Hillsborough, Pinellas, Pasco, and Hernando 
Counties.  
 
2.2 
The County has received an unsolicited proposal to construct two therapeutic equestrian facilities on two 
separate County-owned properties and to provide an endowment fund for operational expenses in exchange 
for the County conveying the existing Bakas facility.  Since the County cannot convey property directly to 
a private party, the County is providing the opportunity through this RFP process so that any interested 
party may submit a proposal to construct the two turnkey therapeutic equestrian facilities that will meet or 
exceed the existing Bakas facility in exchange for the conveyance of the existing Bakas facility and 
property. The RFP will provide an opportunity for proposers to present additional or superior 
improvements, services, or support that would benefit the County and the operation of these facilities.   
 
2.3 
The successful Proposer is required to fund, design and construct the two turnkey therapeutic equestrian 
facilities, to include all site work and all off-site transportation improvements, at no cost to the County.  
 
2.4 
All Proposers are encouraged to visit the existing Bakas Equestrian Facility and the two properties 
proposed for the new construction.  Contact Procurement Services Department to schedule a site visit.  
 
3.0 
ATTACHMENTS/EXHIBITS:   
 
 
The following Attachments and Exhibits are included as a part of this RFP: 
 
 
ATTACHMENT A: 
Information on Existing Bakas Property 
 
ATTACHMENT B: 
Summary of County’s Minimum Requirements  
 
ATTACHMENT C: 
County’s Proposed Schedule 
 
EXHIBIT 1: 
 
Proposer Certification and Warranty 
 
4.0 
RFP PROCESS 
 
4.1 
The County will use a staff Review Team to review the proposals based on criteria described in this RFP.  
Review of the proposals shall be subject to public input. Proposers will be required to present their 
proposals to the public during a public meeting which will be scheduled by the County.  The Review 
Team shall review the proposals to determine if the Proposers meet the minimum qualifications and the 
County’s needs, considering the criteria included herein.  
 
4.2 
The Review Team’s review of the proposals shall be presented to the Board of County Commissioners for 
ranking of the proposals and selection of the proposal that best meets the County’s needs.       
 
4.3 
After the Board’s action, County staff will enter into negotiations with the selected proposer in good faith. 
The negotiated agreement shall be presented to the Board of County Commissioners for approval.  
 
4.4 
If negotiations with the selected Proposer are not successful, County staff may proceed to negotiate with next-
ranked Proposers in order of ranking.  The County reserves the right to negotiate any element of the proposal 
in the best interest of the County.  
 
5.0 
INSTRUCTIONS FOR SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS: 
 
5.1 
Proposers must submit their proposals at the place and time shown in this RFP. One executed original together 
with an electronic copy on disc or memory stick must be submitted.       
IP-3 
5.2 
The proposal submittal should follow the following format: 
 
a) 
Introduction Letter 
b) 
Addendum Acknowledgements  
c) 
Proposer Information Certification  (Exhibit 1) 
 
d) 
Responses to specifically address the three (3) criteria listed below in Section 6.0.  
 
6.0 
REVIEW CRITERIA FOR PROPOSALS:  The Review Team will review each proposal based on the 
criteria described below. At a minimum, each proposal must address the following criteria:    
 
1. 
Developer Qualifications, Approach and Ability              
 
2. 
Development Proposal  
 
 
 
 
 
 
               
 
3. 
Financial Value to County  
 
 
Each criterion is further described below. Proposers must provide responses and information sufficient for 
evaluation under the pertinent rating system described below.  The County reserves the right to request 
additional information from Proposers subsequent to the receipt of proposals. 
 
6.1 
PROPOSER QUALIFICATIONS, APPROACH AND ABILITY  
 
6.1.1 
Provide overview of Proposer Team, including qualifications of its intended team of architect, engineers and 
contractor. 
 
6.1.2 
Provide a copy of relevant professional licenses for architect and engineers.  
 
6.1.3 
Demonstrate the ability of the contractor to obtain performance and payment bonds for the full amount of the 
construction contract(s). Provide a copy of the contractor’s license. At a minimum, a Florida Licensed Building 
Contractor or General Contractor in good standing must be used for the construction work.     
 
6.1.4 
Provide a narrative demonstrating Proposer’s approach to project and its ability to furnish services. Explain the 
organization of the developer team/partners and specific responsibilities of team members and partners.  
 
6.1.5 
Provide specific information on a minimum of three (3) and a maximum of ten (10) recent, successful projects 
similar to the proposed Project. Identify members of the project team who have worked on these representative 
projects and their levels of responsibility.   
 
6.2 
DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL  
 
6.2.1 
Concept Plan and Specifications 
 
 
a. 
Concept Renderings: Provide a concept design of the two replacement facilities, including: 
 
 
- Site Plans, including off-site improvements 
 
 
- Floor Plans 
 
 
- Building Elevations 
 
 
- Outline Specifications demonstrating quality equal to or greater than the Bakas Facility. 
 
b. 
Proposed Schedule for Planning, Design, Permitting and Construction. 
 
c. 
Describe how the development proposal will meet the Proposer’s and the County’s objectives and 
 
expectations as indicated in Attachment B.   
 
6.2.2 
Describe the design, construction and completion guarantees and warranties for all work proposed to be 
completed on County-owned land.  
 
6.3 
FINANCIAL VALUE TO COUNTY   
 
 
6.3.1 
Provide a financial analysis of the development, including the value of improvements the County will receive in 
exchange for the existing Bakas Facility.  
 
6.3.2 
Describe the financial incentive or offer to County.   
IP-4 
 
7.0 
RISK:  
 
7.1 
Proposers responding to this Request for Proposals do so at their sole expense and risk.  Subsequent to the 
issuance of this Request for Proposals, the County reserves the right to: 
 
 Make changes to the RFP; 
 Cancel this RFP; 
 Request clarifications; 
 Waive any informality or irregularity; 
 Negotiate modifications to proposals;  
 Reject any and all proposals; and 
 Proceed with alternative project delivery methods if so desired by the County. 
 
7.2 
No Proposer is guaranteed the award of an Agreement or any work as a result of being selected or short-listed 
 
for this project. 
 
8.0 
CLARIFICATIONS AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION 
 
8.1  
The County reserves the right to request clarifications or additional information from any Proposer.  Specific 
questions may be addressed to each of the Proposers and the Review Team may consider any further 
elaboration by the Proposers of any information previously submitted.   
 
9.0 
PARTNERSHIPS/CORPORATIONS/AGENTS 
 
9.1 
When a Proposer is a partnership or joint venture, the proposal shall be signed in the name of the partnership or 
joint venture and by all persons or entities required to do so under the terms of their partnership or joint venture 
agreement.  Any existing written underlying partnership or joint venture agreements shall be included as part of 
the proposal. If a Proposer has not yet formed the partnership or joint venture, the proposal must be signed by 
each of the principals who will be a part of the partnership or joint venture.  
 
9.2 
When a corporation is a Proposer, the authorized corporate officer signing the proposal shall set out the 
corporate name in full beneath which said officer shall sign his/her name and give title of his/her office. The 
proposal shall also bear the seal of the corporation. 
 
9.3 
Anyone signing the proposal as officer or other agent must file with it legal evidence of the authority to do so. 
Proposers who are or include corporations or limited partnerships shall furnish a duly executed certificate of 
status from the Florida Department of State. 
 
9.4 
The person(s) signing each proposal shall certify under oath on the attached Certification form that the 
information contained in the proposal is true and accurate.  Each Proposer understands, by submitting a proposal 
that the County will rely in part on such certification in reviewing the firm’s qualifications. 
 
9.5 
Failure to submit the above documents with the proposal or within 24 hours of request made by the County may 
be the basis for rejection of the proposal.  Such documents must be effective as of the date of the proposal. 
 
10.0 
CONFLICT OF INTEREST 
 
10.1 
No firm shall be eligible for selection on any project and no work shall be assigned to a firm which conflicts 
with or is duplicative of any work by the firm or any affiliated business entity, including, but not limited to, 
partnerships, joint ventures, and subsidiaries of the same parent corporation or firm. 
 
11.0 
CHANGES IN PROPOSER ENTITY/TEAM: 
 
11.1 
The Proposer is responsible to promptly notify the County as to any change in the information in its submitted 
proposal.  Failure to inform the County within 24 hours of occurrence of a change may result in removal of the 
Proposer from consideration for the Project.   
 
11.2 
Any changes to a Proposer entity after it has submitted its proposal may result in removal of the Proposer from 
consideration for the Project. Any additions, deletions or substitutions in a Proposer’s team after it has 
IP-5 
submitted its proposal require a showing of good cause and must be clearly identified by the Proposer; and the 
reasons for the changes must be provided.  
  
11.3 
Decreases in scoring may result from the reconsideration of changes in the project team.  No increases in 
scoring will result from the reconsideration of changes in the project team. 
 
12.0 
ASSIGNMENT OR TRANSFER 
 
12.1 
The selected Proposer shall be prohibited from assigning, transferring, conveying, subletting or otherwise 
disposing of its responsibilities under the Agreement, or its rights, title or interest therein or its power to 
execute such Agreement to any person, company, corporation or partnership without prior written notice and 
consent and approval of Hillsborough County.  Hillsborough County has sole discretion whether or not to 
consent to any contemplated assignment.   
 
13.0 
LATE SUBMITTALS 
 
13.1 
It is the Proposer’s responsibility to ensure its proposal is received by the County on or before the time and date 
specified above.  Under no circumstances will proposals received after the delivery time specified be 
considered; they will be returned to the Proposer unopened. 
 
14.0 
PUBLIC RECORDS ACT 
 
14.1 
Pursuant to Florida Statutes, sealed responses to this RFP are exempt from the public inspection requirements of 
the Public Records Act until such time as the announcement of a decision based on the proposals or within 30 
days after proposal opening date, whichever is earlier.   
 
15.0 
NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETINGS 
 
15.1 
Notice of any public meetings pertaining to this solicitation shall be posted on the Official Notices bulletin 
board located in the lobby of the Procurement Services Department, 601 E. Kennedy Blvd., 25th Floor, Tampa, 
Florida. 
 
16.0  
PUBLIC ENTITY CRIMES STATEMENT 
 
16.1 
A person or affiliate who has been placed on the convicted vendor list following a conviction for a public 
entity crime may not submit a bid, offer, or proposal on a contract to provide any goods or services to a public 
entity for the construction or repair of a public building or public work, may not submit bids on leases of real 
property to a public entity, may not be awarded or perform work as a contractor, supplier, subcontractor, or 
consultant under a contract with any public entity in excess of the threshold amount provided in Section 
287.017, Florida Statutes, for CATEGORY TWO for a period of 36 months from the date of being placed on 
the convicted vendor list. 
 
16.2  
Additionally, pursuant to County policy, a conviction of a public entity crime may cause the rejection of a bid, 
offer, or proposal.  The County may make inquiries regarding alleged convictions of public entity crimes.  The 
unreasonable failure of a bidder, offer, or proposer to promptly supply information in connection with an 
inquiry may be grounds for rejection of a bid, offer, or proposal. 
 
17.0 
REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION/CLARIFICATION 
 
17.1 
Any firm requesting additional information and/or clarification relating to this project shall direct such requests 
to: 
Sybil Tucker, Chief Procurement Analyst 
Procurement Services Department 
P O Box 1110 (601 E. Kennedy Blvd., 25th Floor) 
Tampa, FL 33602 
Telephone: (813) 301- 7085 
Fax: (813) 272-6290 
Email: tuckers@HCFLgov.net 
IP-6 
 
17.2 
Requests should be made, in writing, at least five days prior to the submittal deadline.  Requests may be 
transmitted by facsimile machine (fax). 
 
18.0 
PROPOSERS’S COMPLIANCE WITH COUNTY’S PROCUREMENT POLICY AND 
PROCEDURES AND HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY ORDINANCE:   
 
18.1 
Proposer is advised that by submitting a proposal, Proposer hereby agrees to comply with the County’s 
Procurement Policy and Procedures, including, but not limited to, the County’s policy and procedures 
regarding Bid Protests and Hillsborough County Ordinance No. 13-24.  The County’s Procurement Policy 
and Procedures can be found on the County’s website at: 
http://www.hillsboroughcounty.org/procurementmanual 
18.2 
CONE OF SILENCE:  Pursuant to Hillsborough County Ordinance No. 13-24, there shall be a Cone of 
Silence for all procurement solicitations issued by the County in order to safeguard the integrity of the 
County’s procurement and protest process.  The Cone of Silence shall go into effect on the date a 
procurement solicitation is issued by the County and shall end on the date the contract is awarded by the 
County or the date the procurement solicitation is canceled by the County.  Unless otherwise provided for 
in Hillsborough County Ordinance No. 13-24, during the time period the Cone of Silence is in effect, no 
Proposer, interested party and/or their principals, officers, employees, attorneys or agents shall 
communicate with County employees, the Hearing Master assigned to hear the applicable protest appeal 
and/or members of the Board of County Commissioners, including their aides and employees regarding a 
procurement solicitation and/or its related protest.  The Cone of Silence does not prohibit an Proposer from 
communicating with the Director of the County Department issuing the procurement solicitation, County 
staff listed as contacts in the procurement solicitation, or the attorney in the County Attorney’s office that 
is directly responsible for the applicable procurement solicitation (this information can be obtained by 
contacting the County staff person listed as the contact in the applicable procurement solicitation).  A 
violation of the Cone of Silence will result in the disqualification of the Proposer from consideration in the 
award of the procurement solicitation unless it is determined that the violation is unintentional and/or not 
material. 
 
19.0 
ALL PROPOSALS ARE IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN 
 
19.1 
In accordance with Chapter 119, Florida Statutes, and, except as may be provided by other applicable State 
and Federal laws, all Proposers should be aware that this Request for Proposals and all proposals are in the 
public domain and are available for public inspection. Proposers are requested, however, to identify 
specifically any information contained in their proposals which they consider confidential and/or 
proprietary, inclusive of trade secrets as defined in s. 812.081, Florida Statutes, and which they believe to 
be exempt from disclosure, citing specifically the applicable exempting law and including narrative 
explaining the applicable legal exemption as it relates specifically to Proposer’s confidential and/or 
proprietary information.  
 
19.2 
All proposals received in response to this Request for Proposals will become the property of the County 
and will not be returned. In the event of an award, all documentation produced as part of the Contract will 
become the exclusive property of the County.  
 
19.3 
All materials that qualify for exemption from Chapter 119, Florida Statutes or other applicable law must be 
submitted in a separate envelope, clearly identified as "EXEMPT FROM PUBLIC DISCLOSURE" with 
Proposer’s name and the RFP Number marked on the outside.  
 
19.4 
The County will not accept proposals when the entire proposal is labeled as exempt from public disclosure. 
 
 
 
END OF INSTRUCTIONS TO PROPOSERS 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
APPRAISAL REPORT 
 
BAKAS Equestrian Center 
(Horses for the Handicapped) 
11510 Whisper Lake Trail 
Project 2017-067-P 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Prepared for  
Pat Fishback, MAI, SRA 
 
 
 
 
 
Senior Appraiser 
Real Estate and Facilities Services Dept.   
Hillsborough County   
PO Box 1110 
Tampa, FL  33601 
  
 
 
Prepared by  
Kent Evans, MAI, CCIM 
KENNETH C. EVANS, P.A. 
Post Office Box 395 
 
 
 
 
 
Tampa, FL 33601 
 
Kenneth C. Evans, P.A. 
Real Estate Appraisal and Consultation Services 
 
Kent Evans, MAI, CCIM 
Cert Gen RZ1596 
 
2907 Bay to Bay Blvd, Suite 215, Tampa, FL  33629 • Post Office Box 395, Tampa, FL  33601  
Email kent.evans@kcepa.net • Phone (813) 545-4581 
 
July 20, 2017 
 
Pat Fishback, MAI, SRA 
Senior Appraiser 
Real Estate and Facilities Services Dept.   
Hillsborough County   
PO Box 1110 
Tampa, FL  33601 
Ref:  BAKAS Equestrian Center 
 
 
Project #2017-067-P 
 
Dear Mr. Fishback:   
 
As requested, I have re-appraised the referenced property located on Whisper Lake Trail in 
unincorporated Hillsborough County, FL.  I have used the contractor’s cost estimate prepared by 
Richard Bliss, dated June 01, 2017.   
 
The purpose of this appraisal report is to estimate the value of the referenced property for 
purposes of possible sale by Hillsborough County.  The improvements have been valued 
according to their Value in Use, as an equestrian facility.  The land has been valued based on its 
highest and best use, as though vacant.   
 
The appraisal is presented as an Appraisal Report, with market analysis and value conclusions 
summarized herein.  Supporting documentation and additional data are contained in the addenda 
to this appraisal report and within the appraisal work-file, which has been incorporated herein by 
reference.   
 
Upon reviewing this appraisal report and the data/analysis contained herein, if you have any 
questions or require any additional information, please feel free to contact me.   
 
Sincerely,  
 
 
 
 
Kent Evans, MAI, CCIM 
Cert Gen RZ1596
 
 
 
 
CERTIFICATE OF VALUE 
 
I certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief: 
 
 The statements of fact contained in this report are true and correct. 
 
 The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions are limited only by the reported assumptions and limiting 
conditions, and are my personal, impartial, and unbiased professional analyses, opinions, and conclusions. 
 
 I have no present or prospective interest in the property that is the subject of this report, and no personal 
interest with respect to the parties involved. 
 
 I have performed no services, as an appraiser or in any other capacity, regarding the property that is the 
subject of this report within the three-year period immediately preceding acceptance of this assignment. 
 
 I have no bias with respect to the property that is the subject of this report or to the parties involved with 
this assignment. 
 
 My engagement in this assignment was not contingent upon developing or reporting predetermined results. 
 
 My compensation for completing this assignment is not contingent upon the development or reporting of a 
predetermined value or direction in value that favors the cause of the client, the amount of the value 
opinion, the attainment of a stipulated result, or the occurrence of a subsequent event directly related to the 
intended use of this appraisal. 
 
 My analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared in conformity 
with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice.   
 
 I have made an inspection of the property that is the subject of this report. 
 
 The undersigned has not received professional appraisal assistance in the preparation of this appraisal 
report.  
 
The estimated value of the fee simple interest in the subject property, as of May 5, 2017, is:   
 
ONE MILLION, FOUR HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS 
$1,400,000 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
July 21, 2017  
 
 
Kent Evans, MAI, CCIM  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Date 
 
Cert Gen RZ1596 
 
 
 
 
ADDENDUM TO CERTIFICATE OF VALUE 
 
I certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, the reported analyses, opinions and 
conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared, in conformity with the 
requirements of the Code of Professional Ethics and the Standards of Professional Appraisal 
Practice of the Appraisal Institute.   
 
I certify that the use of this report is subject to the requirements of the Appraisal Institute relating 
to review by its duly authorized representatives.   
 
I certify that I have the knowledge and/or experience to complete the assignment, as required 
under the Competency Provision of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice, as 
promulgated by the Appraisal Standards Board of The Appraisal Foundation.   
 
In accordance with USPAP Standard 2-2, the report is presented as an Appraisal Report.   
 
As of the date of this report, Kent Evans, MAI, CCIM, has completed the requirements of the 
continuing education program of the Appraisal Institute.  Mr. Evans is a State-certified General 
R.E. Appraiser, No. 0001596, expiration November 2018.   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
July 21, 2017  
 
Kent Evans, MAI, CCIM  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Date 
Cert Gen RZ1596 
 
 
 
 
 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 
 
COVER PAGE 
TRANSMITTAL LETTER 
ADDENDUM TO CERTIFICATE OF VALUE 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 
 
QUALIFYING AND LIMITING CONDITIONS .......................................................................... 7 
SUMMARY OF SALIENT FACTS ............................................................................................... 9 
TYPE OF APPRAISAL AND REPORTING FORMAT ............................................................. 10 
PURPOSE AND INTENDED USE OF THE APPRAISAL ........................................................ 10 
DEFINITION OF VALUE ........................................................................................................... 11 
PROPERTY RIGHTS APPRAISED ............................................................................................ 11 
SCOPE OF THE APPRAISAL .................................................................................................... 12 
APPRAISAL PROBLEM ............................................................................................................. 13 
IDENTIFICATION OF PROPERTY ........................................................................................... 14 
DESCRIPTION OF NEIGHBORHOOD ..................................................................................... 15 
DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY ................................................................................................. 16 
OVERHEAD VIEW OF SUBJECT PROPERTY ........................................................................ 21 
DEEDPLOT OF SUBJECT PROPERTY ..................................................................................... 22 
CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN ....................................................................................................... 23 
SURVEY ....................................................................................................................................... 24 
SUBJECT LOCATION MAP ....................................................................................................... 26 
PHOTOGRAPHS ......................................................................................................................... 27 
ZONING AND FUTURE LAND USE ........................................................................................ 43 
HISTORY OF THE PROPERTY ................................................................................................. 43 
EXPOSURE TIME ....................................................................................................................... 43 
ASSESSED VALUE AND TAXES ............................................................................................. 44 
PUBLIC AND PRIVATE RESTRICTIONS ................................................................................ 44 
HIGHEST AND BEST USE ANALYSIS .................................................................................... 45 
HIGHEST AND BEST USE CONCLUSION .............................................................................. 46 
LAND VALUE ............................................................................................................................. 47 
COST APPROACH ...................................................................................................................... 54 
COST APPROACH CALCULATIONS ...................................................................................... 57 
SALES COMPARISON APPROACH ......................................................................................... 58 
INCOME APPROACH ................................................................................................................ 58 
RECONCILIATION ..................................................................................................................... 59 
 
 
ADDENDA 
 
 
 
Deed of Record (Hillsborough Co. OR Book 11043, Page 0518)   
 
 
Replacement Cost New Estimate by Richard Bliss, Bliss Enterprises, Inc.   
 
 
Perpetual Access & Utility Easement (OR Book 11043, Page 0521) 
 
 
Perpetual Access & Utility Easement (OR Book 11043, Page 0524) 
 
 
Comparable Sales Data Sheets 
 Land Comp #1 – 11439 Trotting Down Dr 
 Land Comp #2 – 11450 Trotting Down Dr 
 Land Comp #3 – Trackside Dr 
 Land Comp #4 – Cain Road 
 Land Comp #5 – 12320 Memorial Hwy   
Hillsborough County – Area Profile 
Hillsborough Co. Property Appraiser – Property Record Card 
Hillsborough Co. Tax Collector – Tax Information 
Land Use Regulations (RES-4)   
Wetlands Map (National Wetlands Inventory)   
Flood Hazards Map 
Demographic Ring Study (1-3-5 mile radii) 
 
 
Qualifications of Appraiser 
Kent Evans, MAI, CCIM 
 
 
 
 
 
 
7
QUALIFYING AND LIMITING CONDITIONS 
 
General Assumptions   
 
1. The appraiser assumes no responsibility for matters of a legal nature affecting the 
property appraised or the title thereto, nor does the appraiser render any opinion as to the 
title, which is assumed to be good and marketable.  The property is appraised as though 
under responsible ownership.   
 
2. The property has been appraised as free and clear, unencumbered by mortgages, liens, 
delinquent taxes, assessments, special or unusual deed conditions or restrictions, but 
subject to zoning regulations.   
 
3. Any sketch in the report may show approximate dimensions and is included to assist the 
reader in visualizing the property.  The appraiser has made no survey of the property; 
however, has relied on the Public Records of Hillsborough County.   
 
4. Information, estimates, and opinions furnished to the appraiser, and contained in the 
report, were obtained from sources considered reliable and believed to be true and 
correct.  Every reasonable effort was made to independently confirm this information.  
However, no responsibility for accuracy of such items can be assumed by the reader.   
 
5. Disclosure of the contents of the appraisal report is governed by the by-laws and 
regulations of the professional appraisal organizations with which the appraiser is 
affiliated.   
 
6. It is assumed there are no hidden or unapparent conditions of the property, subsoil, or 
structures. The appraiser(s) assumes no liability for any hidden or unapparent conditions 
of the property.  No responsibility is assumed for such conditions, or for arranging for 
engineering studies that may be required to discover them.   
 
7. Possession of this report, or a copy thereof, does not carry with it the right of publication 
or distribution.   
 
8. This report is limited with regard to any additional facts and/or data, which may become 
available between the date of report and any subsequent date (including the date of any 
subsequent legal proceeding).  The appraiser reserves the right to make appropriate 
adjustments and to update the Value in Use estimate contained in this report, as 
applicable.   
 
 
8
Extraordinary Assumptions (defined) – “an assumption, directly related to a specific 
assignment, as of the effective date of the assignment results, which, if found to be false, could 
alter the appraiser’s opinions or conclusions” 1 
 
1. The replacement cost new (RCN) derived in this report is based upon cost estimates 
provided by Richard Bliss, Bliss Enterprises, Inc.  A copy of the RCN estimate is 
contained in the addenda.  In my opinion, the RCN estimate is significantly below market 
for this property type (an equestrian facility).   
 
The appraiser had no involvement with compiling the RCN estimate and expresses no 
opinion with regards to its accuracy or reasonableness.  For purposes of this “Value in 
Use” appraisal, the RCN estimate is assumed correct and within market parameters.  
However, the appraiser reserves the right to amend the appraisal upon receiving 
information that would indicate otherwise.   
 
2. The land size delineations between usable uplands, wetlands, submerged land, 
encumbered land, land along north side of lake, etc. are based on estimates compiled by 
the appraiser.  They are assumed reasonably correct.  Although the appraiser was 
provided a survey indicating total land area, an allocation between these usable and non-
usable areas was not provided.  The appraiser reserves the right to amend the appraisal 
upon receipt of more precise land survey data with a break-out of these respective areas.   
 
 
Hypothetical Conditions (defined) – “a condition, directly related to a specific assignment, 
which is contrary to what is known by the appraiser to exist on the effective date of the 
assignment results, but is used for the purpose of analysis” 2 
 
1. The Planned Development zoning plan for Highland Park designates the subject land 
(Tract 14) as “Park and Recreation”.  However, for reasonable analysis of the highest 
and best use of the land, as though vacant, consideration is given to surrounding land 
uses.  In this case, the subject land has been appraised to a highest and best use as a 
Residential Estate tract.  This is necessary for credible analysis of the underlying land 
value.  The use of the land for residential would require a minor modification to the 
Planned Development (PD) zoning, which has been confirmed with Hillsborough 
County zoning & land use officials as a reasonably probable outcome, if applied.  The 
client has been advised of this condition in advance and has indicated their concurrence. 
  
 
 
 
                                                 
1 USPAP, 2016-2017 Edition, The Appraisal Foundation, Page U-3 
2 USPAP, 2016-2017 Edition, The Appraisal Foundation, Page U-3 
 
 
 
 
9
SUMMARY OF SALIENT FACTS 
 
Property Location 
The subject property is located at 11510 Whisper Lake Trail in 
unincorporated Hillsborough County, FL.   
 
Owner of Record 
Hillsborough County, a political subdivision of the State of 
Florida.      
 
Folio No(s)  
003517.0151  
 
Date of Value 
May 5, 2017   
 
Property Inspection  
 
The subject property was inspected on Friday, May 5, 2017.  The 
inspection consisted of photographing the property, inspecting its 
physical aspects, and taking notes regarding any improvements.  
 
Value Appraised  
 
 
Value in Use (building & improvements).  The underlying land has 
been valued based on Market Value.   
 
Property Rights  
Appraised 
Fee Simple Estate   
 
Subject Property  
Land Size3 
The total property contains 21.859 acres (or 952,178 sf).  
However, a large amount of acreage is submerged land and 
wetlands conservation land.  The net usable (uplands) land area is 
9.259 acres.   
 
Improvements 
The property is currently improved with a special use equestrian 
facility built in 2001 in average overall condition.   
 
Zoning 
PD, Planned Development  
Future Land Use 
RES-4, Residential (additionally, a small 1,212 sf. area may be 
P/QP, Public/Quasi-Public)    
 
 
                                                 
3 Source: Survey conducted by Heidt & Associates 
 
 
 
 
10
TYPE OF APPRAISAL AND REPORTING FORMAT 
 
In accordance with Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) Standard 2-
2, the report is presented as an Appraisal Report.   
 
 
PURPOSE AND INTENDED USE OF THE APPRAISAL 
 
The purpose of the appraisal is to estimate the value of the fee simple rights of the property.   
 
Intended Use (defined):  “the use or uses of an appraiser’s reported appraisal or appraisal 
review assignment opinions and conclusions, as identified by the appraiser based on 
communication with the client at the time of the assignment.” 4 
 
The purpose of the appraisal is to develop and report an opinion of value.  The intended use of 
the appraisal is for establishing a reasonable Value in Use for the improvements and Market 
Value for the land, for possible sale purposes.   
 
Intended User (defined):  “the client and any other party as identified, by name or type, as 
users of the appraisal or appraisal review report by the appraiser on the basis of communication 
with the client at the time of assignment.” 5 
 
Client (defined): “the party or parties who engage, by employment or contract, an appraiser in a 
specific assignment.” 6 
 
The intended users of this report are the client and his/her representatives.  For this appraisal, the 
Hillsborough County Real Estate Department is the client.  The use of this report by third parties 
is not intended.   
 
 
                                                 
4 USPAP, 2016-2017 Edition, The Appraisal Foundation, page U-3.   
5 USPAP, 2016-2017 Edition, The Appraisal Foundation, page U-3.   
6 USPAP, 2016-2017 Edition, The Appraisal Foundation, page U-2.   
 
 
 
 
11
DEFINITION OF VALUE 
 
Value in Use (defined): The value of a property assuming a specific use, which may or may not 
be the property’s highest and best use on the effective date of the appraisal.  Value in use may or 
may not be equal to market value but is different conceptually.”7 
 
The improvements have been appraised based on their Value in Use, as an equestrian facility.   
 
Market Value (defined): “Market value means the most probable price which a property should 
bring in a competitive and open market under all conditions requisite to a fair sale, the buyer and 
seller each acting prudently and knowledgeably, and assuming the price is not affected by undue 
stimulus. Implicit in this definition are the consummation of a sale as of a specified date and the 
passing of title from seller to buyer under conditions whereby: 
 
1. Buyer and seller are typically motivated;  
2. Both parties are well informed or well advised and acting in what they consider their own 
best interests;  
3. A reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open market;  
4. Payment is made in terms of cash in U.S. dollars or in terms of financial arrangements 
comparable thereto; and  
5. The price represents the normal consideration for the property sold unaffected by special 
or creative financing or sales concessions granted by anyone associated with the sale” 8 
  
The land has been appraised according to its highest and best use.   
 
 
PROPERTY RIGHTS APPRAISED 
 
The property rights or interest to be appraised is the undivided fee simple interest as if free and 
clear of all liens, mortgages, encumbrances, and/or encroachments unless otherwise provided for 
herein.   
 
Fee Simple Estate (defined): “absolute ownership unencumbered by any other interest or 
estate, subject only to the limitations imposed by the governmental powers of taxation, eminent 
domain, police power, and escheat.” 9 
 
 
 
                                                 
7 The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, Appraisal Institute, 6th Edition, page 245 
8 USPAP, 2016-2017 Edition, The Appraisal Foundation, Page 150 
9 The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 6th Edition, Appraisal Institute, page 90. 
 
 
 
 
12
SCOPE OF THE APPRAISAL   
 
Scope of Work (defined) “the type and extent of research and analysis in an appraisal or 
appraisal review assignment.” 10 
 
The scope of work performed in completing this appraisal includes the following:   
 
 Inspection of the subject property and surrounding neighborhood.   
 
 Research and analysis of the northwest Hillsborough County area, including general and 
immediate neighborhoods, familiarization with physical and economic factors in the market 
area as related to value.  Background research of the subject property and interviews with 
local market participants (such as local realtors, brokers, investors, etc.).   
 
 Data research including identification of comparable properties in northwest Hillsborough 
County area that have recently sold (or are under a pending contract), independent research 
of comparable sales including verification of transaction data with persons knowledgeable of 
the details of each sale.    
 
 Analysis of the highest and best use of the property, considering the physical, legal, and 
economically feasible factors.  Estimating a maximally productive use for the subject 
property, as though vacant and as currently improved (as applicable).  Correlating northwest 
Hillsborough County market data research to the current use of the subject property as an 
equestrian facility.   
 
 Comparison of sales of comparable northwest Hillsborough County properties to the subject 
property, noting superior, similar, and inferior factors.  Reconciling northwest Hillsborough 
County market sales data to estimate a value for the subject land, as of the date of value, 
using the Sales Comparison Approach to value.   
 
 The appraisal will include an analysis and valuation of the subject property.  The Market 
Value of the land will be estimated by using the Sales Comparison Approach (of the property 
as though vacant).  The Cost Approach will be applied to derive the Value in Use of the 
equestrian facility.  The Sale Comparison Approach (of the equestrian facility) and Income 
Approach are not considered applicable and have not been applied.   
 
 The report has been prepared in compliance with the Uniform Standards of Professional 
Appraisal Practice (USPAP).   
 
 
 
                                                 
10 USPAP, 2016-2017 Edition, Appraisal Foundation, page U-4  
 
 
 
 
13
APPRAISAL PROBLEM 
 
The subject property was originally constructed in 2001 as an equestrian facility.  It operates as 
“BAKAS Equestrian Center, Horses for the Handicapped”.   The improvements have a special 
public purpose use as an equestrian facility intended for use by special needs members of the 
community.   
 
It’s my understanding that the reason the client has procured this appraisal is to determine a fair 
value of the property to the County.  The abutting property owner reportedly has an interest in 
acquiring the property.  As such, the client (Hillsborough County) is seeking the Value in Use of 
the improvements, which is consistent with their use of the property as a special-needs 
equestrian facility.  The land has been appraised based on the market value of its highest and best 
use, as though vacant.   
 
The subject property is located in a developing area of Hillsborough County, near the Westchase 
development.  It is not located along an arterial roadway, but within a platted residential 
subdivision known as Highland Park.  The location is considered most suitable to Estate 
Residential purposes.  In the opinion of the appraiser, the highest and best use of the property, as 
though vacant, is for Residential Estate use.  See Hypothetical Conditions.   
 
Consideration was given to all three (3) traditional valuation approaches: the Cost Approach, the 
Sales Comparison (aka. Market) Approach, and the Income Approach.  In this case, the 
assignment is to estimate the Value in Use of the subject property (a special public purpose 
equestrian facility) to the County.  As such, the Cost Approach is considered the most reliable 
value method.  The Sales Comparison (aka. Market) Approach is considered less reliable for 
estimating the Use Value for a special public purpose facility.  The Income Approach is not 
typically applicable to estimating Use Value for special use properties; thus, it was also not 
applied.   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
14
IDENTIFICATION OF PROPERTY  
 
 Street Address 11510 Whisper Lake Trail, Tampa, FL, 33626    
 
 Physical  
 Location 
The subject property is located at the west terminus of Whisper Lake Trail 
in the Highland Park subdivision of west Hillsborough County, FL.   
 
 Legal 
 Description 
 
A survey conducted by Heidt & Associates, Civil Engineers, contains the 
following legal description of the subject property:   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
15
DESCRIPTION OF NEIGHBORHOOD 
 
Neighborhood (defined) – “A group of complementary land uses; a congruous grouping of 
inhabitants, buildings, or business enterprises.” 11   
 
The subject property is located in unincorporated northwest Hillsborough County, Florida.  This 
is within the overall general area known as west central Florida.  Demographic and statistical 
data on Hillsborough County has been included in the addenda.    
 
The subject property is located at the west terminus of Whisper Lake Trail in the Highland Park 
mixed use subdivision.   
 
The neighborhood is considered within the Growth stage of its neighborhood life cycle.  The 
Growth stage represents a period “in which the neighborhood gains public favor and acceptance, 
and development takes place.”12  The subject is positioned between growth pressures from 
Pinellas County (to the west) and Tampa (to the east).   
 
The future outlook for the neighborhood appears strong with anticipated steady growth of 
residential demand tied to the overall demand for housing in the general Tampa region.  Based 
on the Zoning (PD) and Future Land Use Plan (RES-4), the character of the area will likely 
continue to be oriented toward middle to upper-middle income residential.   
 
 
                                                 
11 The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 6th Edition, Appraisal Institute, page 156 
12 The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 6th Edition, Appraisal Institute, page 106 
 
 
 
 
16
DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY  
 
This section of the appraisal report will provide a subject location map, subject photographs, and 
a general description of the property.   
 
 Property Type 
Equestrian Facility    
 
 Existing Use 
The subject property was originally developed in 2001 as an 
equestrian facility for special needs members of the community.  It has 
been used as an equestrian facility since 2001.   
 
 Location 
The subject property is located at the west terminus of Whisper Lake 
Trail in northwest Hillsborough County.  The surrounding community 
is known as Highland Park.  The physical address is: 11510 Whisper 
Lake Trail, Tampa, FL  33626.   
 
Area, Shape, 
 & Dimensions 
The subject property has an irregular shape.  According to a survey 
prepared by Heidt & Associates, Civil Engineers, the subject land 
contains a total 21.859 acres (or 214,751 square feet).  The 
approximate breakdown between upland areas and submerged land is 
as follows:   
 
Land Size
Uplands along NS of Lake
4.930
                    
acres
Uplands surrounding Lake
4.329
                    
acres
Total Developable
9.259
                    
acres
Submerged (Lake/Pond)
11.200
                  
acres
Wetlands Conservation
1.400
                    
acres
Total Non-Developable
12.600
                  
acres
Total Land Area
21.859
                  
acres
 
 
 
 
 
 
It should be noted that a significant portion of the developable uplands along 
the north side of the lake are encumbered by easement to Florida Power 
Corp. (now Duke Energy).  The amount of unencumbered uplands is 2.110 
acres; 2.820 acres of land encumbered by easement.   
 
Ingress/egress 
The property can be accessed directly from Whisper Lake Trail, an 
access road by easement.   
 
 
 
 
 
17
Topography 
 
A significant portion of the total land is submerged land (estimated as 
11.200 acres13).  Additionally, there is a ±1.4 acre wetland 
conservation area at the southeast corner of the property.  Total 
uplands are estimated as: 9.259 acres, of which ±4.930 acres lies north 
of the lake (improved with the equestrian facility) and the remaining 
4.329 acres of uplands surrounding the lake.  A copy of the National 
Wetlands Inventory map can be found in the addenda.   
 
Flood Plain 
 
The non-submerged uplands are located in Flood Zone X, and area 
determined to be outside the 0.2% annual chance flood plain.  The 
submerged land is in Zone V.  Flood Hazards Map No. 12057C-
0180H, effective date August 28, 2008.  A copy of the Flood Hazards 
Map is included in the addenda.   
   
Drainage 
 
Storm-water drainage for the subject property percolates on-site and 
flows into the Lake.   
 
Soils 
 
The subject soils are Myakka fine sand.     
 
Utilities 
 
Public water, electric, phone/cable and garbage services are available. 
The property uses a septic system for sewage; there are no public 
sewer lines to the property.   
 
Easements,  
Encroachments, 
 and Restrictions 
There were several easements encumbering the property, listed as 
follows:   
 
 A Perpetual Access and Utility Easement, recorded in 
Hillsborough County OR Book 11043, Page 0521 (a copy is in the 
addenda).   
 A Perpetual Access and Utility Easement, recorded in 
Hillsborough County OR Book 11043, Page 0524 (a copy is in the 
addenda).   
 Easement in favor of Florida Power Corporation as recorded in 
Deed Book 1627, Page 84, of the Public Records of Hillsborough 
County, Florida (referenced in Title Report dated 8/31/2001).   
 Easement as recorded in Official Records Book 5017, Page 1499, 
of the Public Records of Hillsborough County, Florida.  This is a 
100’ wide transmission line easement to Florida Power Corp. (now 
Duke Energy) recorded in December 1986.   
 Easement as recorded in Official Records Book 6115, Page 0213 
of the Public Records of Hillsborough County.  This is a 190’ wide 
transmission line easement to Florida Power Corp. (now Duke 
                                                 
13 Source: Heidt & Associates survey information 
 
 
 
 
18
Energy) that encompasses the previous 100’ easement and expands 
that easement by 90’, recorded in October 1990.   
Trade Fixtures, 
Fixtures,  
& Equipment  
There were no items of personal property observed on the property 
that would be considered part of the real estate.   
 
Equestrian Facility  
 
The subject property was originally developed in 2001.  There are four (4) main buildings that 
comprise the overall Equestrian Facility.  They are:    
1. The Barn/Stable building that includes: 
a. fifteen (15) horse stalls (measuring 12’ × 12’ each),  
b. a tack room,  
c. a feed storage room,  
d. a cart storage room (measuring 12’ × 24’), and  
e. a “barn office” (measuring 12’ × 12’) 
2. An attached Office/Conference building that includes: 
a. a reception area (12’ × 20’), 
b. a kitchen/break area (8’ × 22’), 
c. two (2) private offices (15’ × 24’),  
d. a conference room, and  
e. enclosed restrooms/shower facilities (handicap accessible).   
3. An attached Canopied Riding Arena (including a small canopied  grandstand for 
spectator viewing).  Clear center span of 60’ × 120’.  Handicap accessible.   
4. A detached Maintenance Building (located across the lake along the east property 
boundary).   
 
The respective building sizes14 are outlined, as follows:   
 
Equestrian Facility
Size
Year Built
Condition
Office/Conference
2,414
2001
Average
Barn/Stables
7,560
2001
Average
Sub-Total
9,974
Canopied (Arena)
12,352
2001
Average
Total
22,326
Maintenance
1,104
2001
Average
Mezzanine
144
2001
Average
Sub-Total
1,248
Canopy (Dry Storage)
1,950
2001
Average
Total
3,198
 
                                                 
14 Source: Hillsborough County Property Appraiser records 
 
 
 
 
19
Construction Quality 
and Condition 
 
 Equestrian Facility – The subject Equestrian Facility is wood 
frame.  The foundation is poured concrete slab.  The exterior walls 
are finished with pressure treated wood (tongue & groove).  The 
roof is pitched/gable with galvanized metal.    
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
The stables include 16’ wide center aisles paved with saw cut 
concrete.  The stall fronts include steel & wood sliding doors 
mounted on steel rollers.  Each stall has an automatic waterer and 
swing-out feeder.   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
The interior of the Office/Conference building includes vinyl 
flooring, built-in cabinetry, various appliances, painted drywall, 
wood trim, florescent lighting, central HVAC, and aluminum 
window frames.  Restroom facilities include sinks, flush toilets, 
urinals, and tiled shower stalls.  The facility is entirely handicap 
accessible.   
 
Physical Age, 
Effective Age, & 
Economic Life 
The equestrian facility was constructed in 2001 and appears in 
average overall condition for the age of the buildings (16 years).  In 
general, the property has been well maintained.   
 
 
 
 
Marshall Valuation Service (MVS) was used as a source for 
estimating the economic lives of these building types.  In summary, 
MVS indicates the subject equestrian facility has an economic life 
of ±30 years.  In my opinion, considering the current condition, I 
estimate the facility has a remaining economic life of 20 years.   
 
 
 
 
Based on MVS depreciation tables retained in the appraisal work-
file, the equestrian facility is depreciated 25% (10 year effective 
age, 30 economic life).  
 
 
 
 
20
AERIAL PHOTO OF SUBJECT PROPERTY 
 
 
Source: Hillsborough County Property Appraiser 
 
 
 
 
21
OVERHEAD VIEW OF SUBJECT PROPERTY 
 
 
Source: Bing Maps 
 
 
 
 
22
DEEDPLOT OF SUBJECT PROPERTY 
 
 
Source: Deed of Record 
 
 
 
 
23
CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN 
 
 
Source: Heidt & Associates 
 
 
 
 
24
SURVEY 
 
 
Source: Heidt & Associates 
 
 
 
 
25
SITE LAYOUT 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
26
SUBJECT LOCATION MAP 
 
 
 
 
27
PHOTOGRAPHS 
 
 
View of Approach to Subject Property 
 
 
 
View of Entry to Stable/Barn & Office/Conference Buildings 
 
 
 
 
 
28
 
 
 
View of Office/Conference Building (from Parking Area) 
 
 
 
View of Office/Conference Building (from Lakeside) 
 
 
 
 
 
29
 
 
 
 
 
View of Barn/Stables Building (from Parking Area) 
 
 
 
View Office/Conference and Barn/Stables Buildings (from Lakeside) 
 
 
 
30
 
 
 
 
Interior View of Barn/Stables Building 
 
 
 
Interior View of Barn/Stables Building 
 
 
31
 
 
 
 
View of Picnic Tables & Viewing Area 
 
 
 
Exterior View of Barn/Stables Building 
 
 
32
 
 
 
View of Covered Arena 
 
 
 
Interior View of Office/Conference Building – Entry Area 
 
 
33
 
 
 
Interior View of Office/Conference Building – Kitchen/Break Area 
 
 
 
Interior View of Office (Typical) 
 
 
34
 
 
 
Interior View of Conference Area 
 
 
 
Interior View of Bathroom Facilities (Typical) 
 
 
35
 
 
 
Exterior View of Maintenance Building 
 
 
 
Exterior View of Maintenance Building/Dry Storage Area 
 
 
36
 
 
 
View of Dry Storage Area (Maintenance Building) 
 
 
 
Interior View of Maintenance Building 
 
 
37
 
 
 
View of Paved Parking Area for Office/Conference, Barn/Stable, and Covered Arena 
 
 
 
View of Covered Dock/Fishing Pier 
 
 
38
 
 
 
View of Well/Well Housing & Water Tank Facility 
 
 
 
View of Horse Paddock Loafing Shed (west) 
 
 
39
 
 
 
View of Horse Paddock Loafing Shed (east) 
 
 
 
Southerly View overlooking Lake (from Office/Conference Building) 
 
 
40
 
 
 
Oak Tree Canopied Entry Drive 
 
 
 
View of Horse Paddock/Grazing Area along West Bank of Lake 
 
 
41
 
 
 
View of Horse Paddocks East of Barn/Stables Building 
 
 
 
View of Access to Horse Trails within Abutting East Land (owned by Hillsborough County) 
 
 
42
 
 
 
View of Access Road/Gate located at Southeast Corner of the Property 
 
 
 
Northwesterly View of Equestrian Facility from across Lake 
 
 
43
 
 
 
ZONING AND FUTURE LAND USE  
 
The subject property is located in an unincorporated area of Hillsborough County, west of the 
City of Tampa.  It is within the legal jurisdiction of Hillsborough County.  The land is zoned PD, 
Planned Development, Highland Park subdivision.  The original PD site plan and zoning 
conditions are lengthy and have been retained as part of the appraisal work-file.   
 
The Future Land Use is classified: RES-4, Residential.  A copy of the RES-4 land use regulation 
is contained in the addenda.   
 
Note: The Hillsborough County Planning Information Map App (PIMA) indicates a small 1,212 
sf. area is classified P-QP, Public/Quasi-Public.  However, this area does not show-up on any 
Future Land Use maps for the subject.  The exact location and impact of the P-QP area, if it 
exists, is unknown.   
 
 
HISTORY OF THE PROPERTY 
 
The property has not sold in the prior 5 years.  The most recent ownership transfer was in August 
2001.  The recorded sale price was $3,000,000.  Reportedly, this transaction involved an 
exchange of 112 acres (owned by the County) for the subject property (including an 
earlier/smaller version of the equestrian facility) owned by Leslie Land Co, plus an additional 
$1,412,500.  The deed of record for this sale is included in the addenda.   
 
The property is not actively being marketed for sale or for lease.   
 
 
EXPOSURE TIME 
 
(Defined) “estimated length of time that the property interest being appraised would have been 
offered on the market prior to the hypothetical consummation of a sale at market value on the 
effective date of the appraisal.”15   
 
In this case, the Market Value estimate (of the land only) presumes an exposure time of 3 to 9 
months prior to the effective date of appraisal.   
                                                 
15 USPAP, 2016-2017 Edition, The Appraisal Foundation, Page U-2 
 
 
44
ASSESSED VALUE AND TAXES  
 
The subject property assessment and taxes are outlined, as follows:   
 
 
County Assessment (2016)
Sec-Twn-Rng
05-28-17
Folio No.
3517.0151
Market (Just) Value
701,800
$             
SOH Cap
-
                        
Assessed Value
701,800
$             
- Exemptions
701,800
                
Taxable Value
-
$                      
Millage Rate
19.09290
Ad Valorem Taxes
-
$                      
plus: Non-Ad Valorem Taxes
Stormwater Management
-
                        
Other
-
                        
Taxes
-
$                      
 
 
 
Assuming the property was not exempt as a County-owned property, taxes would be ±$13,400.   
A copy of the subject property tax information downloaded from the Hillsborough County Tax 
Collector’s website is included in the addenda.   
 
 
PUBLIC AND PRIVATE RESTRICTIONS 
 
There were several easements encumbering the property, listed as follows:   
 
 A Perpetual Access and Utility Easement, recorded in Hillsborough County OR Book 
11043, Page 0521 (a copy is in the addenda).   
 A Perpetual Access and Utility Easement, recorded in Hillsborough County OR Book 
11043, Page 0524 (a copy is in the addenda).   
 Easement in favor of Florida Power Corporation as recorded in Deed Book 1627, 
Page 84, of the Public Records of Hillsborough County, Florida (referenced in Title 
Report dated 8/31/2001).   
 Easement as recorded in Official Records Book 5017, Page 1499, of the Public 
Records of Hillsborough County, Florida.  This is a 100’ wide transmission line 
easement to Florida Power Corp. (now Duke Energy) recorded in December 1986.  
 Easement as recorded in Official Records Book 6115, Page 0213 of the Public 
Records of Hillsborough County.  This is a 190’ wide transmission line easement to 
Florida Power Corp. (now Duke Energy) that encompasses the previous 100’ 
easement and expands that easement by 90’, recorded in October 1990.    
 
 
 
 
45
HIGHEST AND BEST USE ANALYSIS 
 
Highest and Best Use (defined) "The reasonably probable use of property that results in the 
highest value.  The four criteria that the highest and best use must meet are legal permissibility, 
physical possibility, financial feasibility, and maximum productivity." 16  
 
Land as Vacant 
 
Legally Permissible – The subject property is under the legal jurisdiction of Hillsborough 
County, FL.  The land is zoned PD (Planned Development) for Highland Park subdivision.  The 
Planned Development zoning plan for Highland Park designates the subject land (Tract 14) as 
“Park and Recreation”.  However, for reasonable analysis of the highest and best use of the land, 
as though vacant, consideration is given to surrounding land uses.  The Future Land Use is 
classified RES-4 (Residential).  From a legally permissible standpoint, the property is intended 
for residential uses (ref: Hypothetical Condition #1).   
 
Physically Possible – The subject property is located at the west terminus of Whisper Lake 
Trail in northwest Hillsborough County.  The surrounding community is known as Highland 
Park.  The physical address is: 11510 Whisper Lake Trail, Tampa, FL  33626.   
 
The subject property has an irregular shape.  According to a survey prepared by Heidt & 
Associates, Inc. (civil engineers), the subject land contains a total 21.859 acres (or 214,751 
square feet).  However, a significant portion of the total land is submerged land (estimated as 
11.200 acres17).  Additionally, there is a ±1.4 acre wetland conservation area at the southeast 
corner of the property.  Total uplands are estimated as: 9.259 acres, of which ±4.930 acres lies 
north of the lake (improved with the equestrian facility) and the remaining 4.329 acres of 
uplands surround the Lake.   
 
Access to the property is by an access easement.  The road easement restricts access and the 
number of homes that can be accessed by the easement.  A significant portion of the developable 
uplands north of the lake are encumbered by an easement to Florida Power Corp.  However, it 
appears there is suitable unencumbered land area between the lake and easement to construct two 
(2) or three (3) lake-front Estate Residential homes.   
 
Public water, electric, phone/cable and garbage services are available.  The property uses a septic 
system for sewage; there are no public sewer lines to the property.  Considering the preceding 
physical characteristics, development potential of the property is limited primarily by the overall 
land size, shape, and proximity to the lake.   
 
Financially Feasible - The location makes the subject land a suitable location for a residential 
use.  Consistent with the legally permissible analysis and physically possible uses outlined 
above, economically feasible uses include residential uses.   
 
Maximally Productive Use - Based on the above, the maximally productive use of the land 
would be for an Estate Residential use, consistent with the intent of the future land use plan 
                                                 
16 The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 6th Edition, Appraisal Institute, Page 109 
17 Source: Heidt & Associates, Inc. survey information 
 
 
46
(RES-4).  The land sales researched for this appraisal ranged between 2.690 and 4.220 net 
developable acres.   
 
In my opinion, considering the size of the subject uplands and the transmission line 
encumbrance, the subject appears suitable for two (2) or three (3) lake-front home sites.  The 
uplands surrounding the lake to the south, east, and west would likely be used for open space or 
accessory buildings.   
 
Property as Improved 
 
Legally Permissible – The subject property was originally constructed in 2001 as an 
equestrian facility.  It operates as “BAKAS Equestrian Center, Horses for the Handicapped”.   
The improvements have a special public purpose use as an equestrian facility intended for use by 
special needs members of the community.  The zoning (PD) and future land use (RES-4) allows 
continued use of the improvements for their intended public/semi-public use.   
 
Physically Possible – The subject equestrian facility is a special public purpose use of the 
property.  Although it can physically be used for a wide range of activities, due to the design of 
the building, uses other than the intended use is unlikely.   
 
Feasible Uses – Considering the special public purpose nature of the design & construction of 
the buildings (especially the barn, stables, arena) , equestrian facility, the most feasible use is for 
its continued use as an equestrian facility.   
 
Maximally Productive – Considering the preceding analysis, the maximally productive use of 
the improvements is for an Equestrian Facility.   
 
 
HIGHEST AND BEST USE CONCLUSION 
 
 As Vacant 
 Estate Residential  
 As Improved 
Continued use as an Equestrian Facility   
 
 
 
 
47
LAND VALUE 
 
The subject property is a 21.859 acre tract of Estate Residential land that includes submerged 
land and environmentally sensitive conservation wetlands.  The net developable (uplands) area is 
estimated as 9.259 acres.  It is estimated that the Highest and Best Use of the land, as vacant, 
would involve Estate Residential development.   
 
A significant portion of the developable uplands north of the lake are encumbered by an 
easement to Florida Power Corp.  However, it appears there is suitable unencumbered land area 
between the lake and easement to construct several lake-front homes.   
 
The sales data search focused on properties of similar utility.  The following land sales are 
considered to give a reasonable bracketing of the value of the subject property.   
 
Land Sales  
 
The sales data search concentrated on generally similar Estate Residential tracts of land that are 
considered comparable to the subject land.  The comparable sales selected range in size between 
5.000 and 11.260 acres, with net usable uplands ranging between 2.690 and 4.220 acres.  These 
land sales are considered comparable and representative of market value for Estate Residential 
land in the unincorporated northwest Hillsborough submarket.   
 
The unit of comparison most common for this type of land is the price/acre (usable land area).  
Consideration was also given to the elements of comparison, including property rights conveyed, 
financing, conditions of sale, expenditures made immediately after purchase, and changes in 
market conditions over time.   
 
Comparable Sale Bracketing – In my opinion, there is insufficient market data available to 
produce precise, market-extracted adjustments for all the various dissimilarities between the 
sales, mainly because of the scarcity of data available to support such adjustments.  However, in 
an effort to recognize superior and inferior influences inherent in the sales as compared to the 
subject land, I have identified superior, inferior and similar characteristics.   
 
Discussions of superior & inferior factors are outlined in the Discussion of Physical 
Characteristics section.  These are identified as location, water amenity, size of usable area, 
shape of usable area, zoning/land use, topography, and utilities availability.   
 
Property Rights Conveyed – This adjustment accounts for differences in the legal estates 
between the comparable land sale and the subject property.  Each of the following land sales 
involved the normal transfer of fee simple rights and was not encumbered with unusual 
restrictions.  Therefore, an adjustment was not necessary for this factor.   
 
Financing – The financing (or cash equivalency) adjustment converts the transaction price of 
the comparable sale into its cash equivalent price or modifies it to match the financing terms of 
the subject property.  In this case, the market value estimate presumes all cash to the seller in 
U.S. dollars (or equivalent).  Each of the following land sales involved cash to seller transactions 
or conventional financing.  Therefore, an adjustment was not necessary for atypical (favorable 
and/or unfavorable) financing.   
 
 
48
 
Conditions of Sale – This adjustment reflects the difference between the actual sale price of 
the comparable and its probable sale price if it were currently sold in an arm’s length transaction. 
Based on my verifications with the parties involved, each of the following land sales is 
considered a good arm’s length market sale.   
 
Expenditures made Immediately after Purchase – This adjustment applies to costs that 
will have to be paid upon purchase of a property because these costs affect the price the buyer 
agrees to pay. Such expenditures may include: costs-to-cure deferred maintenance, 
demolition/site clearing costs, costs to petition for a zoning change, and costs to remediate 
environmental contamination.  In this case, the sale verifications did not indicate the need to 
apply an adjustment for such an expenditure.   
 
Market Conditions (Time) – The next adjustment is for Market Conditions, which reflects 
any changes in market prices being paid in relation to changes in market conditions and the 
purchasing power of money over time.  This is also referred to as a time adjustment, since it 
relates to a specific time period for a market.   
 
The comparable land sales date back to May 2015 and are considered relatively current.  
However, land values have been notably appreciating in recent years.  Therefore, in order 
recognize this factor, I have applied an adjustment based on changes in the Case-Shiller Index 
produced by Standard & Poor’s.   
 
Case-Shiller Index - Case-Shiller Price Indices are repeat-sales house price indices for the 
United States.  There are multiple Case–Shiller home price indices.  In this case, I have relied 
upon the Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater metro market index.  The Case-Shiller Indices are 
calculated and kept monthly by Standard & Poor's; they can be accessed through their website by 
subscription.   
 
The adjustment is calculated as the percentage change from the respective day of sale until the 
most current data point (in this case, Feb-2017).  For example, Comp #5 sold in May 2015 and 
had Case-Shiller Index of 169.34 (see Sales Grid).  The most recent Case-Shiller Index is 190.2. 
The difference (20.86) represents a 12.3% upward adjustment.  The Comparable Sales have all 
been adjusted accordingly.   
 
 
 
49
LAND SALES LOCATION MAP 
  
 
 
LAND COMPARABLE SALES GRID 
SALE #
SUBJECT
Land Comp 1
Land Comp 2
Land Comp 3
Land Comp 4
Land Comp 5
County
Hillsborough
Hillsborough
Hillsborough
Hillsborough
Hillsborough
Hillsborough
O.R. Book
24857
24012
23984
23791
23297
Page
519
331
1861
581
1783
Grantee
Meir Zuchman
Scott Anderson
KD West Coast
Nationwide Data
Bayshore Devel &
Vicki Gura
Karen Anderson
Holdings, LLC
Systems, Inc
Investments, LLC
Date
May-17
Mar-17
Apr-16
Mar-16
Dec-15
May-15
Consideration
$340,000
$335,000
$180,000
$325,000
$275,000
Document
Warranty Deed
Gen Warr Deed
Gen Warr Deed
Gen Warr Deed
Spec Warr Deed
Sec-Twn-Rng
05-28-17
20-27-17
20-27-17
33-27-17
12-28-17
20-28-17
Folio #
3517.0151
1704.0180
1704.0116
2725.2614
3624.0200
4324.0000
Street
11510 Whisper
11439 Trotting
11450 Trotting
Trackside Dr
Cain Road
12320 Memorial
Address
Lake Trail
Down Drive
Down Drive
Highway
Location
West Hillsb
Odessa
Odessa
West Hillsb
West Hillsb
West Hillsb
Case-Shiller Index
190.2
190.2
180.86
179.49
176.41
169.34
Land Area
Uplands (ac)
9.259
4.220
4.030
2.690
3.630
3.590
Wetlands (ac)
12.600
0.780
7.230
2.940
2.750
4.200
Total Acreage
21.859
5.000
11.260
5.630
6.380
7.790
Zoning
PD
PD
PD
AS-0.4
ASC-1
PD
Future Land Use
RES-4
A/R
A/R
RES-1
RES-4
RES-4
Public Utilities
Water/Septic
Well/Septic
Well/Septic
Well/Septic
Water/Sewer
Water/Sewer
Unit Sale Price ($/upland acre)
$80,569
$83,127
$66,914
$89,532
$76,602
Sale Adjustments
Ppty Rts Conv
Fee Simple
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
Financing
Cash to Seller
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
Cond of Sale
Arm's Length
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
Expend. Made
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
Market Conditions (Time)
0.0%
5.2%
6.0%
7.8%
12.3%
0.0%
5.2%
6.0%
7.8%
12.3%
Physical Comparison
Location
Similar
Similar
Inferior
Inferior
Inferior
Water Amenity
Inferior
Inferior
Inferior
Inferior
Inferior
Size of Usable Area
Superior
Superior
Superior
Superior
Superior
Shape of Usable Area
Superior
Superior
Similar
Superior
Similar
Zoning/Land Use
Similar
Similar
Similar
Similar
Similar
Topography
Similar
Similar
Similar
Similar
Similar
Utilities Availability
Inferior
Inferior
Inferior
Superior
Superior
Unit Sale Price
Price/Acre (Uplands)
$80,569
$87,450
$70,929
$96,515
$86,024
Comparison
Lower Limit
Lower Limit
Absolute Lower Limit Good Indication
Good Indication
 
 
51
 
Discussion of Land Sales 
 
Land Comp 1 – This is the sale of a pie-shaped 5.000 acre tract located in the Citrus Green 
development in Odessa, FL.  Citrus Green is a desirable gated community of Residential Estate 
lots (all 5 acres or larger).  The subdivision has excellent infrastructure (streets, security, etc) and 
permits equestrian facilities.  It includes a platted horse trail easement.  The platted lot contains 
0.780 acres of non-developable land, yielding 4.220 usable upland acres.  The land is zoned PD 
(Planned Development) and lies within an A/R (Agricultural Rural) future land use district.  The 
property was originally listed for sale, asking $399,000.  The land sold in March 2017 for 
$340,000 (or $80,569/usable upland acre).   
 
The lack of water amenity (lake view) and lack of both water and sewer are inferior factors.  This 
is somewhat offset by the smaller land size (superior) and shape.  However, this sale is 
considered a slight lower limit of value for the subject land.   
 
Land Comp 2 – This is the sale of an irregular-shaped 11.260 acre tract located in the Citrus 
Green development in Odessa, FL.  Citrus Green is a desirable gated community of Residential 
Estate lots (all 5 acres or larger).  The subdivision has excellent infrastructure (streets, security, 
etc) and permits equestrian facilities.  It includes a platted horse trail easement.  The platted lot 
contains 7.230 acres of non-developable land, yielding 4.030 usable upland acres.  The land is 
zoned PD (Planned Development) and lies within an A/R (Agricultural Rural) future land use 
district.  The property was originally listed for sale, asking $499,000.  The land sold in April 
2016 for $335,000 (or $83,127/usable upland acre).   
 
The lack of water amenity (lake view) and lack of both water and sewer are inferior factors.  This 
is somewhat offset by the smaller land size (superior) and shape.  However, this sale is 
considered a slight lower limit of value for the subject land.   
 
Land Comp 3 – This is the sale of an irregular-shaped 5.630 acre tract located in the 
Horseshoe Estates development in west Hillsborough County.  Horseshoe Estates is a desirable 
Residential Estate subdivision that permits equestrian facilities.  The platted lot contains 2.940 
acres of non-developable conservation land, yielding 2.690 usable upland acres.  The land is 
zoned AS-0.4 (Agricultural Single Family Estate) and lies within a RES-1 (Residential) future 
land use district.  The property was originally listed for sale, asking $215,000.  The land sold in 
March 2016 after 254 days on the market for $180,000 (or $66,914/usable upland acre).  The 
buyer owns the abutting home to the south.  As of the date of inspection, the land has not yet 
been developed.   
 
This sale has several inferior factors: inferior location (less desirable surrounding homes), lack of 
water view amenity, and lack of both public water and sewer service.  Therefore, this sale is 
considered an absolute lower limit of value in comparison to the subject.   
 
Land Comp 4 – This is the sale of an “L” shaped 6.380 acre tract located along the east side of 
Cain Road, just north of Gunn Hwy. in northwest Hillsborough County.  The land is zoned ASC-
1 (Agricultural, Single Family Conventional) and lies within a RES-4 (Residential) future land 
 
 
52
use district.  The property was originally listed for sale, asking $450,000.  The land sold in 
December 2015 after 154 days on the market for $325,000 (or $89,532/usable upland acre).   
 
This sale is located in an area with significantly lower quality homes (inferior to the subject).  
This factor, combined with the smaller land area (superior), and availability of both public water 
& sewer, establishes this sale as a good indication of value in comparison to the subject land.    
 
Land Comp 5 – This is the sale of a 7.790 acre, triangular tract residential land located on 
Memorial Highway near the Westchase Development of western Hillsborough County.  The land 
contains 4.200 acres of non-developable wetlands, yielding 3.590 usable upland acres.  The land 
is zoned PD (Planned Development) and lies within an R-4 (Residential) future land use district. 
 The property was originally listed for sale, asking $275,000.  The land sold almost immediately 
in May 2015 for $275,000 or $76,602/usable upland acre.  The property remains undeveloped at 
the time of inspection.   
 
The location and lack of water amenity (lake view) are inferior factors, somewhat offset by the 
smaller size (superior), as compared to the subject land.  Also, this site has both water and sewer 
available, which is superior in comparison.  In the end, this sale is considered a good indication 
of value for the subject land.   
 
 
 
53
Land Value Conclusion  
 
After applying adjustments, the preceding land sales indicated an adjusted price range of 
$70,929 to $96,515/net usable acre, with an average unit sale price of ±$84,297/acre.  The 
subject land has strong appeal as an Estate Residential tract, especially considering its water 
amenity (lake view).  I was unable to find sufficient data of Estate Residential lots on man-made 
lakes/ponds (similar to the subject).   
 
In the final analysis, it is estimated that the subject 9.259 acres of usable uplands has a value 
toward the middle of the range, or $85,000/acre (net usable).  The excellent water amenity 
characteristics are considered offset by the proximity of the transmission line easements.   
 
Therefore, the total value of the property can be calculated, as follows:   
 
 
 
Land
Uplands
9.259 acres @
$85,000 /acre =
787,015
$     
Rounded to
800,000
$     
 
 
Test of Reasonableness – An alternative valuation method is to consider the value of the 
property on a price/home site basis.  As discussed previously, considering the size of the subject 
uplands and the transmission line encumbrance, the land along the north side of the lake appears 
suitable for possibly two (2) or three (3) home-sites.  In my opinion, there is suitable land area 
between the easement and the top of bank for home development.   
 
Dividing $800,000 by 2-3 home sites, each would have an average home site value ranging 
between ±$267,000 to $400,000.  This amount is directly in-line with the home site (whole) 
prices for the researched land sales. It should also be noted that the researched land sales were 
not lake-front.   
 
Considering that each home site would have lake-front views, with suitable unencumbered 
building footprints large enough for Estate Residential homes, and with a private access drive, 
the $800,000 total land value is deemed reasonable and market supported.   
 
 
Indicated Value  
Land Valuation 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
$800,000 
 
 
 
 
54
COST APPROACH 
 
The premise of this approach to value is the principal of substitution.  This principal states that a 
prudent, well-informed purchaser would not pay more for a property than the cost to reproduce 
or replace, assuming that reproduction or replacement can occur without costly delay.  The 
present value of the subject site is estimated as though vacant and available to be put to its 
highest and best use.   
 
Replacement Cost New (RCN)  
 
The replacement cost new (RCN) derived in this report is based upon cost estimates provided by 
Richard Bliss, Bliss Enterprises, Inc.  A copy of the RCN estimate is contained in the addenda.  
In my opinion, the RCN estimate is significantly below market for this property type (an 
equestrian facility).   
 
The appraiser had no involvement with compiling the RCN estimate and expresses no opinion 
with regards to its accuracy or reasonableness.  For purposes of this Value in Use appraisal, the 
RCN estimate is assumed correct and within market parameters.   
 
Bliss Enterprises reportedly specializes in constructing equestrian facilities.  According to Mr. 
Bliss, he is able to obtain building materials for 25% to 30% less than competitors (market).  
Additionally, he states that his company does not sub-out various sub-trades (electrical, 
plumbing, etc) and that all trades are in-house.   
 
It is also noted that the Bliss estimate also does not include building permit or impact fees.  
These costs are typically included in any market-based RCN estimate.  It is assumed the rational 
for excluding these normal costs is due to the current ownership (Hillsborough Co.), which is 
exempted from these typical costs.  This exclusion causes the Bliss RCN estimate to be 
significantly lower than “market”.   
 
Indirect (soft) costs (usually paid by developer) for items such as architectural fees, boundary 
and as-built surveys, impact fees, and financing costs have been added based on 15% of hard 
costs.   
 
 
 
55
Entrepreneurial Profit (defined) "A market-derived figure that represents the amount an entrepreneur 
receives for his or her contribution to a project and risk; the difference between the total cost of a 
property (cost of development) and its market value (property value after completion), which represents 
the entrepreneur’s compensation for the risk and expertise associated with development.” 18    
 
Generally, an entrepreneur will require an investment return in direct relation to the risk inherent 
in the specific development and the time involved before profit is collected.  It should be also 
understood by the reader that Entrepreneurial Profit is a case-by-case figure and is dependent on 
many different risk factors (such as the type of development, the location, timing of the 
development, cost of capital, etc.).  In projects in which the entrepreneur and the developer are 
one in the same, the entrepreneurial profit is equivalent to the total project profit.   
 
Typically, Entrepreneurial Profit is a risk judgment of the appraiser based on his/her view of the 
health of the overall market and other factors.  In this case, the Value in Use (as a special 
purpose, publicly-owned Equestrian Facility) would suggest very low entrepreneurial risk.  In 
my opinion, only a minor Entrepreneurial Profit is applicable.  Considering the Value in Use 
assignment, I have estimated only ±5% (suggesting very low risk).   
 
Accrued Depreciation  
 
All forms of accrued depreciation affecting the subject property were considered.  The four (4) 
types of depreciation which affect the subject property are:   
 
1) Curable Physical Deterioration - this refers to items of deferred maintenance and 
items needing repair as of the date of appraisal.  In this case, the subject facility appear in 
average overall condition and no significant items of deferred maintenance were 
observed.  The manager of the facility stated that there were no pending maintenance 
issues.  She indicated the County maintenance personnel were very prompt to correct any 
issues as they arose.   
 
2) Incurable Physical Deterioration (Short-lived Items) - these are items which 
cannot be practically or economically corrected as of the date of appraisal (this also refers 
to the daily wear-and-tear of short and long-lived components).  Long-lived items are 
improvement components that are expected to have a remaining economic life that is 
equal to the remaining economic life of the improvements.  Short-lived items have a 
remaining economic life that is shorter than the remaining economic life of the 
improvements.   
 
Incurable Physical Deterioration (Long-lived Items) – The equestrian facility was 
constructed in 2001 and appears in average overall condition for the age of the buildings 
(16 years).  In general, the property has been well maintained.   
 
Marshall Valuation Service (MVS) was used as a source for estimating the economic 
lives of these building types.  In summary, MVS indicates the subject equestrian facility 
                                                 
18 The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 6th Edition, Appraisal Institute, page 77 
 
 
56
has an economic life of ±30 years.  In my opinion, considering the current condition, I 
estimate the facility has a remaining economic life of 20 years.   
 
Based on MVS depreciation tables retained in the appraisal work-file, the equestrian 
facility is depreciated 25% (10 year effective age, 30 economic life).   
 
3) Functional Obsolescence (defined) "the impairment of functional capacity of 
improvements according to market tastes and standards"19  Functional obsolescence can 
be curable or incurable.  The test to determine if functional obsolescence is curable or not 
is based on whether the cost to replace or fix the outmoded/unacceptable aspect is less 
than the resulting increase in value to the property.   
 
Curable functional obsolescence is divided into: 1) a deficiency requiring an addition, 2) 
a deficiency requiring substitution or modernization, or 3) a Super-adequacy.   
 
In this case, the subject equestrian facility was designed and constructed as a special 
purpose public use facility to serve the special needs community.  The various buildings 
function exactly as they were intended.   
 
Incurable functional obsolescence may be caused by a deficiency or a super-adequacy.  
In this case, there were no items needing substitution or modernization.  Also, there were 
not any super-adequate items noted.   
 
3) External Obsolescence (defined) “a type of depreciation; a diminution in value 
caused by negative external influences and generally incurable on the part of the owner, 
landlord, or tenant.”20   
 
                                                 
19 The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 6th Edition, Appraisal Institute, page 97 
20 The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 6th Edition, Appraisal Institute, page 83 
 
 
57
COST APPROACH CALCULATIONS 
 
Cost Approach Summary & Conclusions
General Contractor Costs
665,472
$      
+ Developer (soft) Costs @
15%
99,821
           
Sub-total
765,293
$      
+ Entrepreneurial Profit @
5%
38,265
           
Replacement Cost New
803,558
$      
less: Accrued Depreciation
Physical Deterioration
Curable Physical (Deferred Maintenance)
-
$                    
Incurable Physical (MVS) @
25%
200,890
              
Functional Obsolescence
-
                       
External Obsolescence
-
                       
200,890
         
Depreciated Value of Improvements
602,668
$      
plus: Land Value
800,000
         
Total
1,402,668
$   
Indicated Value by the Cost Approach (rd)
1,400,000
$   
 
 
 
 
 
Indicated Value – Subject Property 
by the Cost Approach 
 
 
 
 
 
 
$1,400,000 
 
 
 
58
SALES COMPARISON APPROACH 
 
The Sales Comparison Approach (aka. The Market Approach) is an appraisal analysis that is 
based on the proposition that an informed purchaser would pay no more for a property than the 
cost of acquiring an existing property of the same utility.  The basic principle underlying the 
Sales Comparison Approach is the principle of substitution.  The Sales Comparison Approach is 
based upon an analysis of the market behavior of purchasers.  The standards for comparing sales 
of competing properties with the subject property are those of the market.  For the Sales 
Comparison Approach to be applied properly and effectively, it requires sufficient quantities of 
accurate, reliable and verifiable market data.   
 
As previously described, the subject property is improved with a special public purpose 
Equestrian Facility designed for the special needs (handicapped) community.  For this 
assignment, the Sales Comparison Approach method of valuation is not considered to be reliable 
and applicable for estimating the Value in Use of this property type.    
 
 
INCOME APPROACH 
 
The Income Approach essentially measures the present value of the future benefits of property 
ownership.  It is based on the premise that there is a direct relationship between a property's 
value and the income it generates.  A property's income streams and its resale value, or 
reversion, are capitalized into a present, lump-sum value.  Research and data analysis is 
conducted against a background of supply and demand relationships, which provide information 
on trends and market anticipation.   
 
As previously described, the subject property is improved with a public purpose Equestrian 
Facility designed for the special needs (handicapped) community.  For this assignment, the 
Income Approach method of valuation is not considered to be reliable and applicable for 
estimating the value of this property type.    
 
 
 
 
59
RECONCILIATION 
 
The indications of value for the subject property by the three approaches were as follows: 
 
Cost Approach to Value 
 
 
 
  
$1,400,000 
Sales Comparison Approach to Value       
    
  
N/A 
Income Approach to Value 
 
 
 
  
N/A 
 
The subject property is improved with a public purpose Equestrian Facility designed for the 
special needs (handicapped) community.  For this assignment, the Cost Approach method of 
valuation is considered the most reliable and applicable method for estimating the Value in Use 
of this property type.    
 
The Sales Comparison Approach (aka. Market Approach) and Income Approach were not 
considered applicable and have not been applied.    
 
Based on the preceding analysis, emphasis was given to the Cost Approach.  The final estimate 
of value for the subject property, as of May 5, 2017, was $1,400,000.  
 
The appraisal presumes an exposure time of 3 to 9 months prior to the effective date of appraisal. 
  
 
 
Final Conclusion of Value 
of the Subject Property  
 
 
 
 
$1,400,000 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ADDENDA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Overhead View – 11439 Trotting Down Drive, Odessa, FL 
 
Recorded 
 
 
Hillsborough County OR Book 24857, Page 0519 
 
Grantor 
 
 
Jeffrey Rosenberg and Dana Rosenberg   
 
Grantee 
 
 
Vicki Rabenou Gura and Meir Zuchman   
 
Date of Sale 
 
 
March 30, 2017  
Warranty Deed 
 
Sale Price 
 
 
$340,000 
 
$80,569/usable acre  
 
Folio No(s) 
 
 
001704.0180 
 
Land   
 
 
Size1 
 4.220  acres (usable) 
 
 
 
 
 
 0.780  acres (wetlands)  
 
  
 
 
 
5.000  acres (total) 
 
Zoning 
 
 
PD, Planned Development   
Future Land Use 
 
A/R, Agricultural Rural   
 
Public Utilities 
 
 
No public water or sewer service is available nearby.   
 
                                                 
1 Source: Hillsborough County Property Appraiser records 
 
 
 
 
Aerial Photo 
 
Remarks 
This is the sale of a pie-shaped 5.000 acre tract located in the Citrus Green 
development in Odessa, FL.  Citrus Green is a desirable gated community of 
Residential Estate lots (all 5 acres or larger).  The subdivision has excellent 
infrastructure (streets, security, etc) and permits equestrian facilities.  It 
includes a platted horse trail easement.  The platted lot contains 0.780 acres of 
non-developable land, yielding 4.220 usable upland acres.  The land is zoned 
PD (Planned Development) and lies within an A/R (Agricultural Rural) future 
land use district.  The property was originally listed for sale, asking $399,000.  
The land sold in March 2017 for $340,000 (or $80,569/usable upland acre).   
 
 
 
The transaction was verified as a good, arm’s length market sale by Cindy 
Bohms, the listing agent, on 5/8/2017.   
 
 
 
 
 
PLAT MAP 
 
 
 
 
LOCATION MAP 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Overhead View – 11450 Trotting Down Drive, Odessa, FL 
 
Recorded 
 
 
Hillsborough County OR Book 24012, Page 0331 
 
Grantor 
 
 
James Joseph Sullivan, Jr.   
 
Grantee 
 
 
Scott Robert Anderson and Karen Crane Anderson   
 
Date of Sale 
 
 
April 8, 2016 
 
General Warranty Deed 
 
Sale Price 
 
 
$335,000 
 
$83,127/usable acre  
 
Folio No(s) 
 
 
001704.0116 
 
Land   
 
 
Size1 
 4.030  acres (usable) 
 
 
 
 
 
 7.230  acres (wetlands)  
 
  
 
 
 
11.260  acres (total) 
 
Zoning 
 
 
PD, Planned Development   
Future Land Use 
 
A/R, Agricultural Rural   
 
Public Utilities 
 
 
No public water or sewer service is available nearby.   
 
                                                 
1 Source: Hillsborough County Property Appraiser records 
 
 
 
 
Aerial Photo 
 
Remarks 
This is the sale of an irregular-shaped 11.260 acre tract located in the Citrus 
Green development in Odessa, FL.  Citrus Green is a desirable gated 
community of Residential Estate lots (all 5 acres or larger).  The subdivision 
has excellent infrastructure (streets, security, etc) and permits equestrian 
facilities.  It includes a platted horse trail easement.  The platted lot contains 
7.230 acres of non-developable land, yielding 4.030 usable upland acres.  The 
land is zoned PD (Planned Development) and lies within an A/R (Agricultural 
Rural) future land use district.  The property was originally listed for sale, 
asking $499,000.  The land sold in April 2016 for $335,000 (or $83,127/usable 
upland acre).   
 
 
 
The transaction was verified as a good, arm’s length market sale by Jack 
Bentley, the listing agent, on 5/8/2017.   
 
 
 
 
 
PLAT MAP 
 
 
 
 
LOCATION MAP 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Front Photo – Trackside Drive, Tampa, FL 
 
Recorded 
 
 
Hillsborough County OR Book 23984, Page 1861 
 
Grantor 
 
 
Milton H. Haberman and Regina A. Haberman   
 
Grantee 
 
 
KD West Coast Holdings, LLC 
 
Date of Sale 
 
 
March 25, 2016  
General Warranty Deed 
 
Sale Price 
 
 
$180,000 
 
$66,914/usable acre  
 
Folio No(s) 
 
 
002725.2614 
 
Land   
 
 
Size1 
 2.690  acres (usable) 
 
 
 
 
 
 2.940  acres (wetlands)  
 
  
 
 
 
5.630  acres (total) 
 
Zoning 
 
 
AS-0.4, Agricultural Single Family Estate   
Future Land Use 
 
RES-1, Residential   
 
Public Utilities 
 
 
No public water or sewer service is available nearby.   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
1 Source: Hillsborough County Property Appraiser records 
 
 
 
 
Aerial Photo 
 
Remarks 
This is the sale of an irregular-shaped 5.630 acre tract located in the Horseshoe 
Estates development in west Hillsborough County.  Horseshoe Estates is a 
desirable Residential Estate subdivision that permits equestrian facilities.  The 
platted lot contains 2.940 acres of non-developable conservation land, yielding 
2.690 usable upland acres.  The land is zoned AS-0.4 (Agricultural Single 
Family Estate) and lies within a RES-1 (Residential) future land use district.  
The property was originally listed for sale, asking $215,000.  The land sold in 
March 2016 after 254 days on the market for $180,000 (or $66,914/usable 
upland acre).  The buyer owns the abutting home to the south.  As of the date 
of inspection, the land has not yet been developed.   
 
 
 
The transaction was verified as a good, arm’s length market sale by Brandon 
Rimes, the listing agent, on 5/8/2017.   
 
 
 
PLAT MAP 
 
 
 
LOCATION MAP 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Front Photo – Cain Road, NW Hillsborough County 
 
Recorded 
 
 
Hillsborough County OR Book 23791, Page 0581 
 
Grantor 
 
 
Hit 55 Properties, LLC   
 
Grantee 
 
 
Nationwide Data Systems, Inc.   
 
Date of Sale 
 
 
December 28, 2015 
General Warranty Deed 
 
Sale Price 
 
 
$325,000 
 
$89,532/usable acre  
 
Folio No(s) 
 
 
003624.0200 
 
Land   
 
 
Size1 
 3.630  acres (usable) 
 
 
 
 
 
 2.750  acres (wetlands)  
 
  
 
 
 
6.380  acres (total) 
 
Zoning 
 
 
ASC-1, Agricultural, Single Family Conventional   
Future Land Use 
 
RES-4, Residential   
 
Public Utilities 
 
 
All public utilities, including water and sewer service, are 
available nearby.   
 
                                                 
1 Source: Hillsborough County Property Appraiser records 
 
 
 
 
Aerial Photo 
 
Remarks 
This is the sale of an “L” shaped 6.380 acre tract located along the east side of 
Cain Road, just north of Gunn Hwy. in northwest Hillsborough County.  The 
land is zoned ASC-1 (Agricultural, Single Family Conventional) and lies 
within a RES-4 (Residential) future land use district.  The property was 
originally listed for sale, asking $450,000.  The land sold in December 2015 
after 154 days on the market for $325,000 (or $89,532/usable upland acre).   
 
 
 
The transaction was verified as a good, arm’s length market sale by Ross 
Suddath, the listing agent, on 5/8/2017.   
 
 
 
 
LOCATION MAP 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Overhead View – 12320 Memorial Hwy, Tampa, FL 
 
Recorded 
 
 
Hillsborough County OR Book 23297, Page 1783 
 
Grantor 
 
 
TSPFL Holding, LLC   
 
Grantee 
 
 
Bayshore Development and Investments, LLC    
 
 
 
 
Laali Ali 
 
Date of Sale 
 
 
May 02, 2016 
 
Special Warranty Deed 
 
Sale Price 
 
 
$275,000 
 
$76,602/usable acre  
 
Folio No(s) 
 
 
004324.0000 
 
Land   
 
 
Size1 
 3.590  acres (usable) 
 
 
 
 
 
 4.200  acres (wetlands)  
 
  
 
 
 
7.790  acres (total) 
 
Zoning 
 
 
PD, Planned Development   
Future Land Use 
 
R-4, Residential 
 
Public Utilities 
 
 
All public utilities, including water and sewer service, are 
available nearby.   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
1 Source: Hillsborough County Property Appraiser records 
 
 
 
Aerial Photo 
 
Remarks 
This is the sale of a 7.790 acre, triangular tract residential land located on 
Memorial Highway near the Westchase Development of western Hillsborough 
County.  The land contains 4.200 acres of non-developable wetlands, yielding 
3.590 usable upland acres.  The land is zoned PD (Planned Development) and 
lies within an R-4 (Residential) future land use district.  The property was 
originally listed for sale, asking $275,000.  The land sold almost immediately 
in May 2015 for $275,000 or $76,602/usable upland acre.  The property 
remains undeveloped at the time of inspection.   
 
 
 
The transaction was verified as a good, arm’s length market sale by Cindy 
Ryan, the listing agent, on 5/8/2017.   
 
 
 
PLAT MAP 
 
 
 
LOCATION MAP 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2016
NOTICE OF PROPOSED PROPERTY TAXES
HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY TAXING
AUTHORITIES 
 
DO NOT PAY
THIS IS NOT A BILL
 
Post Office Box 172146
Tampa, FL 33672-0146
The taxing authorities which levy property taxes against
your property will soon hold PUBLIC HEARINGS to
adopt budgets and tax rates for next year.
The purpose of these PUBLIC HEARINGS is to receive
opinions from the general public and to answer
questions on the proposed tax change and budget
PRIOR TO TAKING FINAL ACTION.
Each taxing authority may AMEND OR ALTER its
proposal at the hearing. 
Location: 
Legal Desc: 
11510 WHISPER LAKE TL
BEG AT SE COR OF SEC 5-28-17 THN N 89 DEG 
05 MIN 49 SEC W 945.26 FT THN N 23 DEG 28 MIN 
PIN:   U-05-28-17-ZZZ-000000-26860.1 
Folio Number: 0035170151   U   GO NX
 
HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY
REAL ESTATE DEPT 
PO BOX 1110
TAMPA FL 33601-1110 
 
TAXING AUTHORITY TAX INFORMATION 
  REAL ESTATE  
LAST YEAR's
TAXABLE VALUE
(2015) 
YOUR FINAL TAX RATE AND
TAXES LAST YEAR
(2015) 
CURRENT 
TAXABLE VALUE
( 2016)
YOUR TAX RATE AND TAXES THIS
YEAR IF NO BUDGET CHANGE IS
MADE ( 2016)
YOUR TAX RATE AND TAXES THIS
YEAR IF PROPOSED BUDGET
CHANGE IS MADE ( 2016)
Taxing Authority
COLUMN 1 
COLUMN 2 
COLUMN 3 
COLUMN 4 
COLUMN 5 
MILLAGE
RATE
  TAXES   
MILLAGE
RATE
  TAXES   
MILLAGE
RATE
  TAXES   
  COUNTY: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
    General Revenue 
 0
 5.73220
 0.00
 0
 5.44880
 0.00
 5.73220
 0.00
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  PUBLIC SCHOOLS: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
    School-State 
 0
 4.99900
 0.00
 0
 4.73890
 0.00
 4.65800
 0.00
    School-Local 
 0
 2.24800
 0.00
 0
 2.13100
 0.00
 2.24800
 0.00
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  MUNICIPAL: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
    MSTU 
 0
 4.37450
 0.00
 0
 4.16130
 0.00
 4.37450
 0.00
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  WATER MGMT DIST: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
    SWFWMD 
 0
 0.34880
 0.00
 $0
 0.33170
 0.00
 0.33170
 0.00
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  INDEPENDENT
  SPECIAL DISTRICTS: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
    Port Auth. 
 0
 0.15500
 0.00
 0
 0.14750
 0.00
 0.14500
 0.00
    Children's Bd 
 0
 0.45890
 0.00
 0
 0.43560
 0.00
 0.45890
 0.00
    Transit 
 0
 0.50000
 0.00
 0
 0.47460
 0.00
 0.50000
 0.00
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  VOTER APPROVED
  DEBT PAYMENTS: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
    Environmental 
 0
 0.06040
 0.00
 0
 0.06040
 0.00
 0.06040
 0.00
    Unincorp Parks 
 
 0.02590
 0.00
 
 0.02590
 0.00
 0.02590
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  OTHER: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
    Library 
 0
 0.55830
 0.00
 0
 0.52980
 0.00
 0.55830
 0.00
  TOTAL AD-VALOREM PROPERTY TAXES
0.00
 
 
0.00
 
0.00
 
PROPERTY APPRAISER VALUE INFORMATION 
 
COUNTY
PUBLIC
SCHOOLS
MUNICIPAL
OTHER
DISTRICTS
2015 
2016 
2015 
2016 
2015 
2016 
2015 
2016 
MARKET VALUE
$705,554 
$701,800 
$705,554 
$701,800 
$705,554 
$701,800 
$705,554 
$701,800 
LESS APPLIED ASSESSMENT REDUCTIONS
 
 
 
 
ASSESSED VALUE
$705,554 
$701,800 
$705,554 
$701,800 
$705,554 
$701,800 
$705,554 
$701,800 
LESS EXEMPTIONS
Misc. Exemptions
$705,554
$701,800
$705,554
$701,800
$705,554
$701,800
$705,554
$701,800
 
 
 
 
TAXABLE VALUE
$0 
$0 
$0 
$0 
$0 
$0 
$0 
$0 
If you feel that the market value of your property is inaccurate or does not reflect the fair market value on January 1,
2016, or if you are entitled to an exemption that is not reflected above, contact your County Appraiser at:
601 East Kennedy Blvd., 15th Floor County Center, Tampa, FL 33602
If the Property Appraiser's Office is unable to resolve the matter as to market value or an exemption, you may file a
petition for adjustment with the Value Adjustment Board. Petition forms are available online at 
http://www.hillsclerk.com/publicweb/Forms.aspx and must be filed ON OR BEFORE September 13, 2016.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Hillsborough County Notice of Proposed Property Taxes 
The Taxing Authorities which levy property taxes against your property will soon hold PUBLIC HEARINGS to adopt budgets and tax rates for the
next year. The purpose of the PUBLIC HEARINGS is to receive opinions from the general public and to answer questions on the proposed tax
change and budget PRIOR TO TAKING FINAL ACTION. Each taxing authority may AMEND OR ALTER its proposals at the hearing.
Taxing Authority Hearing Information
TAXING AUTHORITY
HEARING LOCATION
DATE
TIME
PHONE
NUMBER
 Hillsborough County
601 E Kennedy Blvd Tampa
September 8, 2016
6:00 PM
(813) 272-5750
 Environmental Lands
601 E Kennedy Blvd Tampa
September 8, 2016
6:00 PM
(813) 272-5750
  M S T U
601 E Kennedy Blvd Tampa
September 8, 2016
6:00 PM
(813) 272-5750
  Library Services
601 E Kennedy Blvd Tampa
September 8, 2016
6:00 PM
(813) 272-5750
 Unincorp Parks and Rec.
601 E Kennedy Blvd Tampa
September 8, 2016
6:00 PM
(813) 272-5750
 School Board
901 E Kennedy Blvd Tampa
September 6, 2016
5:01 PM
(813) 272-4064
 Tampa Port Authority
1101 Channelside Dr Tampa
September 7, 2016
5:01 PM
(813) 905-5132
 Hillsborough Transit Authority
601 E Kennedy Blvd Tampa
September 12, 2016
5:30 PM
(813) 623-5835
 Children's Board
1002 E Palm Ave Tampa
September 14, 2016
5:01 PM
(813) 229-2884
 Southwest Florida Water Management Dist.
7601 Highway 301 N Tampa
September 13, 2016
5:01 PM
(352) 796-7211
 City of Tampa
315 E Kennedy Blvd Tampa
September 7, 2016
5:01 PM
(813) 274-8111
 City of Temple Terrace
11250 N 56 St Temple Terrace
September 7, 2016
6:00 PM
(813) 398-9710
 City of Plant City
302 W Reynolds St Plant City
September 12, 2016
7:30 PM
(813) 659-4200
YOUR FINAL TAX BILL MAY CONTAIN NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENTS WHICH MAY NOT BE REFLECTED ON THIS NOTICE SUCH AS
ASSESSMENTS FOR ROADS, FIRE, GARBAGE, LIGHTING, DRAINAGE, WATER, SEWER OR OTHER GOVERNMENTAL SERVICES AND
FACILITIES WHICH MAY BE LEVIED BY YOUR LOCAL COUNTY, CITY OR ANY SPECIAL DISTRICT.
PER FLORIDA STATUTES 200.069(10)(A), NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENTS ARE NOT REQUIRED TO APPEAR ON THIS NOTICE. IF
APPLICABLE, LOCAL GOVERNING BOARDS WILL SEND YOU A SEPARATE NOTICE OF ANY NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENTS FOR
YOUR PROPERTY.
Explanation of 'TAXING AUTHORITY TAX INFORMATION' section
COLUMN 1 - "LAST YEAR'S TAXABLE VALUE"
This column shows the prior assessed value less all applicable exemptions used in the calculation of taxes for that specific
taxing authority.
COLUMN 2 - "YOUR FINAL TAX RATE AND TAXES LAST YEAR"
This shows the tax rate and taxes that applied last year to your property. These amounts were based on budgets adopted last
year and your property’s previous taxable value.
COLUMN 3 - "CURRENT TAXABLE VALUE" 
This column shows the current assessed value less all applicable exemptions used in the calculation of taxes for that specific
taxing authority. Various taxable values in this column may indicate the impact of Limited Income Senior or the Additional
Homestead exemption. Current taxable values are as of January 1, 2016.
COLUMN 4 - "YOUR TAX RATE AND TAXES THIS YEAR IF NO BUDGET CHANGE IS MADE" 
This shows what your tax rate and taxes will be IF EACH TAXING AUTHORITY DOES NOT CHANGE ITS PROPERTY TAX
LEVY. These amounts are based on last year’s budgets and your current assessment. 
COLUMN 5 - "YOUR TAX RATE AND TAXES THIS YEAR IF PROPOSED BUDGET CHANGE IS MADE" 
This shows what your tax rate and taxes will be this year under the BUDGET ACTUALLY PROPOSED by each taxing authority.
The proposal is not final, and may be amended at the public hearings shown at the top of this notice. The difference between
columns 4 and 5 is the tax change proposed by each local taxing authority and is NOT the result of higher assessments.
Explanation of 'PROPERTY APPRAISER VALUE INFORMATION' section
MARKET (JUST) VALUE
The most probable sale price for a property in a competitive, open market involving a willing buyer and a willing seller. 
APPLIED ASSESSMENT REDUCTION
Properties can receive an assessment reduction for a number of reasons including the Save Our Homes Benefit and the 10%
non-homestead property assessment limitation. Agricultural Classification is not an assessment reduction, it is an assessment
determined per Florida Statute 193.461.
ASSESSED VALUE 
The value of your property after any “assessment reductions” have been applied. This value may also reflect an agricultural
classification. If “assessment reductions” are applied or an agricultural classification is granted, the assessed value could be
different for School versus Non-School taxing authorities and for the purpose of calculating taxes. 
EXEMPTIONS
Any exemption that impacts your property is listed in this section along with its corresponding exemption value. Specific dollar or
percentage reductions in assessed value may be applicable to a property based upon certain qualifications of the property or
property owner. In some cases, an exemption’s value may vary depending on the taxing authority.
Taxable Value 
The current value to which millages are applied after applying applicable assessment reductions and deducting applicable
exemptions.
 
 
  
Hillsborough County Future Land Use 
 
 
 172 
 
 
FUTURE OF HILLSBOROUGH 
 SUBURBAN LAND USE CLASSIFICATION 
Residential-4 (RES-4)  
 
 
RESIDENTIAL GROSS DENSITY 
TYPICAL USES 
MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA RATIO OR SQUARE 
FEET 
SPECIFIC INTENT OF CATEGORY 
 
 
 
 
Up to a maximum of 4.0 dwelling units per 
gross 
acre. 
Alternative methods 
for 
calculating density of certain uses are 
specified in the land development regulations.  
Density bonuses and credits may be 
considered in this category and are described 
in the Plan.  This maximum residential 
density is provided only as a limit for 
application in situations which represent an 
ideal set of circumstances with regard to the 
compatibility of the proposed development 
with surrounding land uses, existing and/or 
approved, and with regard to the adequacy 
and availability of public facilities.   
 
No minimum lot size is required to support 
the concept of clustering and preservation of 
open spaces left in a natural states left in a 
natural state.  See related policies regarding 
clustering. 
Residential, suburban scale neighborhood 
commercial, office uses, and multi-
purpose projects.  Non-residential uses 
shall meet locational criteria for specific 
land use.  
 
Agricultural uses may be permitted 
pursuant to policies in the agricultural 
objective areas of the Future Land Use 
Element. 
suburban scale neighborhood commercial, 
office, multi-purpose or mixed use projects 
limited to 175,000 sq. ft. or .25 FAR, 
whichever is less intense.  Actual square 
footage limit is dependent on classification 
of roadway intersection where project is 
located. 
 
For properties that are located within 0.5 
mile of a fixed-guideway transit station 
(light rail, bus rapid transit, etc.), the 
allowable densities/intensities and range of 
uses may be subject 
to 
the Goals, 
Objectives, and Policies related to Fixed-
Guideway Transit (See Objectives 54-57 
and related policies). The location and type 
of fixed-guideway transit stations can be 
found 
on 
the MPO Long Range 
Transportation 
2035 Cost Affordable 
Transit System Map. The Future Transit 
Envelope can be found on the Future 
Transit Envelope Map that is adopted as 
part of the Future Land Use Map Series. 
 
To designate areas that are suitable for low 
density residential development. 
 
In 
addition, suburban scale neighborhood 
commercial, office, multi-purpose and 
mixed use projects serving the area may be 
permitted subject to the Goals, Objectives, 
and Policies of the Land Use Element and 
applicable development regulations and 
conforming 
to 
established 
locational 
criteria for specific land use.   
 
 
BAKAS Equestrian Ctr
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Standards and Support Team,
wetlands_team@fws.gov
Wetlands
Estuarine and Marine Deepwater
Estuarine and Marine Wetland
Freshwater Emergent Wetland
Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland
Freshwater Pond
Lake
Other
Riverine
May 10, 2017
0
0.1
0.2
0.05
mi
0
0.15
0.3
0.075
km
1:6,248
This page was produced by the NWI mapper
National Wetlands Inventory (NWI)
This map is for general reference only. The US Fish and Wildlife 
Service is not responsible for the accuracy or currentness of the 
base data shown on this map. All wetlands related data should 
be used in accordance with the layer metadata found on the 
Wetlands Mapper web site.
May 10, 2017
11510 Whisper Lake Trail, Tampa, FL, 33626
Lat 28.080548
Long -82.609506
MAP DATA
Panel Date August 28, 2008
FIPS Code
12057
Map Number
12057C0180H
Census Tract 0115.06
Geocoding Accuracy
S5 (Most Accurate) - single close match, point located at the street address
position
© 2015 - STDB. All rights reserved
This Report is for the sole benefit of the Customer that ordered and paid for the Report and is based on the property information provided by that Customer. That Customer's use of this Report is
subject to the terms agreed to by that Customer when accessing this product. No third party is authorized to use or rely on this Report for any purpose. THE SELLER OF THIS REPORT MAKES NO
REPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTIES TO ANY PARTY CONCERNING THE CONTENT, ACCURACY OR COMPLETENESS OF THIS REPORT, INCLUDING ANY WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR
FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. The seller of this Report shall not have any liability to any third party for any use or misuse of this Report.
Demographic and Income Comparison Profile
11001 Whisper Lake Trl, Tampa, Florida, 33626
Prepared by Esri
Rings: 1, 3, 5 mile radii
Latitude: 28.07305
Longitude: -82.61638
1 mile
3 miles
5 miles
Census 2010 Summary
Population
5,218
42,196
135,122
Households
1,828
15,819
51,770
Families
1,320
11,436
36,292
Average Household Size
2.85
2.66
2.60
Owner Occupied Housing Units
1,170
11,411
36,632
Renter Occupied Housing Units
658
4,408
15,138
Median Age
34.6
37.5
38.5
2016 Summary
Population
5,592
46,335
144,874
Households
1,937
17,094
54,726
Families
1,388
12,266
38,052
Average Household Size
2.89
2.71
2.64
Owner Occupied Housing Units
1,115
11,529
36,060
Renter Occupied Housing Units
822
5,565
18,666
Median Age
35.5
38.9
39.8
Median Household Income
$110,346
$89,881
$62,766
Average Household Income
$126,508
$113,032
$88,808
2021 Summary
Population
6,250
50,276
155,355
Households
2,159
18,426
58,306
Families
1,536
13,167
40,371
Average Household Size
2.89
2.73
2.66
Owner Occupied Housing Units
1,220
12,287
38,042
Renter Occupied Housing Units
940
6,139
20,264
Median Age
35.7
39.0
39.9
Median Household Income
$110,476
$96,951
$71,881
Average Household Income
$132,084
$120,511
$96,621
Trends: 2016-2021 Annual Rate
Population
2.25%
1.65%
1.41%
Households
2.19%
1.51%
1.28%
Families
2.05%
1.43%
1.19%
Owner Households
1.82%
1.28%
1.08%
Median Household Income
0.02%
1.53%
2.75%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1.  Esri forecasts for 2016 and 2021.
May 10, 2017
©2016 Esri
Page 1 of 7
Demographic and Income Comparison Profile
11001 Whisper Lake Trl, Tampa, Florida, 33626
Prepared by Esri
Rings: 1, 3, 5 mile radii
Latitude: 28.07305
Longitude: -82.61638
1 mile
3 miles
5 miles
2016 Households by Income
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
<$15,000
41
2.1%
860
5.0%
4,126
7.5%
$15,000 - $24,999
130
6.7%
1,079
6.3%
4,838
8.8%
$25,000 - $34,999
91
4.7%
1,030
6.0%
5,279
9.6%
$35,000 - $49,999
144
7.4%
1,384
8.1%
6,997
12.8%
$50,000 - $74,999
294
15.2%
2,570
15.0%
10,124
18.5%
$75,000 - $99,999
127
6.6%
2,457
14.4%
7,057
12.9%
$100,000 - $149,999
477
24.6%
3,813
22.3%
8,677
15.9%
$150,000 - $199,999
382
19.7%
1,943
11.4%
3,706
6.8%
$200,000+
251
13.0%
1,958
11.5%
3,920
7.2%
Median Household Income
$110,346
$89,881
$62,766
Average Household Income
$126,508
$113,032
$88,808
Per Capita Income
$45,675
$41,836
$33,601
2021 Households by Income
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
<$15,000
39
1.8%
841
4.6%
4,198
7.2%
$15,000 - $24,999
150
6.9%
1,228
6.7%
5,795
9.9%
$25,000 - $34,999
50
2.3%
659
3.6%
3,562
6.1%
$35,000 - $49,999
83
3.8%
903
4.9%
4,918
8.4%
$50,000 - $74,999
388
18.0%
2,912
15.8%
11,723
20.1%
$75,000 - $99,999
213
9.9%
2,948
16.0%
8,469
14.5%
$100,000 - $149,999
525
24.3%
4,498
24.4%
10,754
18.4%
$150,000 - $199,999
438
20.3%
2,330
12.6%
4,557
7.8%
$200,000+
274
12.7%
2,106
11.4%
4,325
7.4%
Median Household Income
$110,476
$96,951
$71,881
Average Household Income
$132,084
$120,511
$96,621
Per Capita Income
$47,472
$44,306
$36,304
Data Note: Income is expressed in current dollars.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1.  Esri forecasts for 2016 and 2021.
May 10, 2017
©2016 Esri
Page 2 of 7
Demographic and Income Comparison Profile
11001 Whisper Lake Trl, Tampa, Florida, 33626
Prepared by Esri
Rings: 1, 3, 5 mile radii
Latitude: 28.07305
Longitude: -82.61638
1 mile
3 miles
5 miles
2010 Population by Age
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Age 0 - 4
467
8.9%
2,895
6.9%
8,069
6.0%
Age 5 - 9
577
11.1%
3,649
8.6%
9,363
6.9%
Age 10 - 14
428
8.2%
3,389
8.0%
9,758
7.2%
Age 15 - 19
277
5.3%
2,539
6.0%
9,068
6.7%
Age 20 - 24
199
3.8%
1,600
3.8%
7,175
5.3%
Age 25 - 34
695
13.3%
5,013
11.9%
16,874
12.5%
Age 35 - 44
1,262
24.2%
8,360
19.8%
22,003
16.3%
Age 45 - 54
749
14.3%
6,868
16.3%
22,505
16.7%
Age 55 - 64
326
6.2%
4,102
9.7%
15,647
11.6%
Age 65 - 74
170
3.3%
2,165
5.1%
8,392
6.2%
Age 75 - 84
50
1.0%
1,120
2.7%
4,586
3.4%
Age 85+
17
0.3%
498
1.2%
1,682
1.2%
2016 Population by Age
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Age 0 - 4
463
8.3%
2,882
6.2%
8,029
5.5%
Age 5 - 9
558
10.0%
3,385
7.3%
8,884
6.1%
Age 10 - 14
535
9.6%
3,846
8.3%
9,960
6.9%
Age 15 - 19
330
5.9%
3,067
6.6%
9,110
6.3%
Age 20 - 24
186
3.3%
2,248
4.9%
8,582
5.9%
Age 25 - 34
665
11.9%
5,199
11.2%
18,936
13.1%
Age 35 - 44
1,202
21.5%
7,380
15.9%
20,055
13.8%
Age 45 - 54
918
16.4%
8,064
17.4%
23,141
16.0%
Age 55 - 64
426
7.6%
5,219
11.3%
19,000
13.1%
Age 65 - 74
228
4.1%
3,044
6.6%
11,697
8.1%
Age 75 - 84
61
1.1%
1,334
2.9%
5,328
3.7%
Age 85+
19
0.3%
665
1.4%
2,153
1.5%
2021 Population by Age
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Age 0 - 4
512
8.2%
3,071
6.1%
8,538
5.5%
Age 5 - 9
615
9.8%
3,503
7.0%
9,107
5.9%
Age 10 - 14
546
8.7%
3,854
7.7%
10,096
6.5%
Age 15 - 19
402
6.4%
3,366
6.7%
9,433
6.1%
Age 20 - 24
185
3.0%
2,230
4.4%
8,185
5.3%
Age 25 - 34
758
12.1%
6,009
12.0%
21,399
13.8%
Age 35 - 44
1,358
21.7%
7,859
15.6%
21,624
13.9%
Age 45 - 54
978
15.6%
7,967
15.8%
21,995
14.2%
Age 55 - 64
522
8.4%
6,044
12.0%
20,989
13.5%
Age 65 - 74
273
4.4%
3,805
7.6%
14,634
9.4%
Age 75 - 84
78
1.2%
1,776
3.5%
6,811
4.4%
Age 85+
23
0.4%
791
1.6%
2,543
1.6%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1.  Esri forecasts for 2016 and 2021.
May 10, 2017
©2016 Esri
Page 3 of 7
Demographic and Income Comparison Profile
11001 Whisper Lake Trl, Tampa, Florida, 33626
Prepared by Esri
Rings: 1, 3, 5 mile radii
Latitude: 28.07305
Longitude: -82.61638
1 mile
3 miles
5 miles
2010 Race and Ethnicity
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
White Alone
4,267
81.8%
34,626
82.1%
108,214
80.1%
Black Alone
242
4.6%
2,269
5.4%
9,620
7.1%
American Indian Alone
6
0.1%
89
0.2%
413
0.3%
Asian Alone
434
8.3%
2,929
6.9%
7,289
5.4%
Pacific Islander Alone
6
0.1%
25
0.1%
83
0.1%
Some Other Race Alone
107
2.1%
977
2.3%
5,074
3.8%
Two or More Races
156
3.0%
1,281
3.0%
4,429
3.3%
Hispanic Origin (Any Race)
689
13.2%
6,882
16.3%
36,565
27.1%
2016 Race and Ethnicity
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
White Alone
4,422
79.1%
36,868
79.6%
113,240
78.2%
Black Alone
275
4.9%
2,656
5.7%
10,639
7.3%
American Indian Alone
8
0.1%
110
0.2%
509
0.4%
Asian Alone
554
9.9%
3,817
8.2%
9,073
6.3%
Pacific Islander Alone
9
0.2%
38
0.1%
108
0.1%
Some Other Race Alone
128
2.3%
1,210
2.6%
5,928
4.1%
Two or More Races
196
3.5%
1,636
3.5%
5,377
3.7%
Hispanic Origin (Any Race)
871
15.6%
8,832
19.1%
43,955
30.3%
2021 Race and Ethnicity
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
White Alone
4,786
76.6%
38,871
77.3%
118,877
76.5%
Black Alone
325
5.2%
3,024
6.0%
11,713
7.5%
American Indian Alone
10
0.2%
137
0.3%
613
0.4%
Asian Alone
716
11.5%
4,800
9.5%
11,039
7.1%
Pacific Islander Alone
12
0.2%
46
0.1%
127
0.1%
Some Other Race Alone
157
2.5%
1,421
2.8%
6,700
4.3%
Two or More Races
245
3.9%
1,978
3.9%
6,286
4.0%
Hispanic Origin (Any Race)
1,124
18.0%
10,882
21.6%
51,765
33.3%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1.  Esri forecasts for 2016 and 2021.
May 10, 2017
©2016 Esri
Page 4 of 7
Demographic and Income Comparison Profile
11001 Whisper Lake Trl, Tampa, Florida, 33626
Prepared by Esri
Rings: 1, 3, 5 mile radii
Latitude: 28.07305
Longitude: -82.61638
1 mile
Area
State
USA
Trends 2016-2021
Annual Rate (in percent)2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
Population
Households
Families
Owner HHs
Median HH Income
2016
2021
Population by Age
Percent20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
0-4
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-34
35-44
45-54
55-64
65-74
75-84
85+
   2016 Household Income
 
< $15K
2.1%
$15K - $24K
6.7%
$25K - $34K
4.7%
$35K - $49K
7.4%
$50K - $74K
15.2%
$75K - $99K
6.6%
$100K - $149K
24.6%
$150K - $199K
19.7%
$200K+
13.0%
2016 Population by Race
Percent70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
White
Black Am.Ind. Asian
Pacific Other
Two+
Hisp
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1.  Esri forecasts for 2016 and 2021.
May 10, 2017
©2016 Esri
Page 5 of 7
Demographic and Income Comparison Profile
11001 Whisper Lake Trl, Tampa, Florida, 33626
Prepared by Esri
Rings: 1, 3, 5 mile radii
Latitude: 28.07305
Longitude: -82.61638
3 miles
Area
State
USA
Trends 2016-2021
Annual Rate (in percent)2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
Population
Households
Families
Owner HHs
Median HH Income
2016
2021
Population by Age
Percent16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
0-4
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-34
35-44
45-54
55-64
65-74
75-84
85+
   2016 Household Income
 
< $15K
5.0%
$15K - $24K
6.3%
$25K - $34K
6.0%
$35K - $49K
8.1%
$50K - $74K
15.0%
$75K - $99K
14.4%
$100K - $149K
22.3%
$150K - $199K
11.4%
$200K+
11.5%
2016 Population by Race
Percent70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
White
Black Am.Ind. Asian
Pacific Other
Two+
Hisp
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1.  Esri forecasts for 2016 and 2021.
May 10, 2017
©2016 Esri
Page 6 of 7
Demographic and Income Comparison Profile
11001 Whisper Lake Trl, Tampa, Florida, 33626
Prepared by Esri
Rings: 1, 3, 5 mile radii
Latitude: 28.07305
Longitude: -82.61638
5 miles
Area
State
USA
Trends 2016-2021
Annual Rate (in percent)2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
Population
Households
Families
Owner HHs
Median HH Income
2016
2021
Population by Age
Percent16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
0-4
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-34
35-44
45-54
55-64
65-74
75-84
85+
   2016 Household Income
 
< $15K
7.5%
$15K - $24K
8.8%
$25K - $34K
9.6%
$35K - $49K
12.8%
$50K - $74K
18.5%
$75K - $99K
12.9%
$100K - $149K
15.9%
$150K - $199K
6.8%
$200K+
7.2%
2016 Population by Race
Percent70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
White
Black Am.Ind. Asian
Pacific Other
Two+
Hisp
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1.  Esri forecasts for 2016 and 2021.
May 10, 2017
©2016 Esri
Page 7 of 7
 
Kent Evans, MAI, CCIM 
 
EXPERIENCE 
 
Kenneth C. Evans, P.A. – Tampa, Florida 
 
 
(2001 - Present) President - Real Estate Valuation & Consulting.   
 
 
Emphasis: Eminent Domain Valuation, Ad Valorem Valuation/Consultation.   
 
Omni Appraisal Group, P.A. – Tampa, Florida 
 
 
(1991 to 2001) Real Estate Appraiser – Eminent Domain Valuation   
 
DeLaVergne & Ellis, P.A. – Tampa, Florida   
 
  
(1988 to 1991) Real Estate Appraiser – General Commercial/Residential Valuation   
 
First Florida Bank, N.A. – Tampa, Florida   
 
 
(1985 to 1988) Officer, Properties Management Dept. – Branch Bank Expansion/Development.   
 
Practice emphasis: i) preparing appraisals for Eminent Domain purposes, ii) providing Special Magistrate 
services, iii) advising clients regarding their real estate tax assessments (Ad Valorem), iv) foreclosure & 
deficiency appraisal/expert witness testimony.   
 
Fourth-generation Floridian.  Geographical expertise is primarily the West Coast of Florida and Central 
Florida.   
 
Qualified and has testified as a Real Estate Expert Witness in Hillsborough, Pinellas, Pasco, Manatee, 
Sarasota, Polk, Orange, Lee, DeSoto, and Citrus Counties.   
 
Special Magistrate – Value Adjustment Board – Hillsborough County, 2002 - 2015; Pinellas County, 2003-
2005, 2013; Pasco County, 2010-2015.   
 
List of recent Eminent Domain Right-of-Way projects (last 5 years):   
 
 
Ridge Road, New Port Richey  
 
Pasco County 
 
 
2010-2011 
 
Perrine Ranch Road  
 
 
Pasco County 
 
 
2010 
 
22nd Street, Tampa 
 
 
 
City of Tampa  
 
2011 
 
Dr. MLK, Jr. Blvd. & Williams Rd. 
 
Hillsborough Co. 
 
2011 
 
Pine Island Road (SR 78) 
 
 
FDOT, District 1 
 
2011 
 
I-4/I-275 Interchange (SR 400) 
 
FDOT, District 7 
 
2011 
 
US Hwy 17, Arcadia  
 
 
FDOT, District 1 
 
2012-2013 
 
US Hwy 19, Homosassa 
 
 
FDOT, District 7 
 
2012-2013 
 
Dr. MLK, Jr. Blvd, Seffner 
 
 
FDOT, District 7 
 
2012-2014 
 
SR 686 (Roosevelt Blvd) 
 
 
FDOT District 7 
 
2012-2014 
 
SR 93 (I-75), Fee Review 
 
 
FDOT District 7 
 
2013 
 
Interlaken Rd, Odessa  
 
 
Pasco County 
 
 
2013-2014 
 
US Hwy 301 (SR 43), Parrish  
 
FDOT District 1 
 
2013-2014 
 
North Powerline Sewer FM 
 
 
Pasco County 
 
 
2014 
 
Clinton Avenue, Dade City 
 
 
Pasco County 
 
 
2014-2015 
 
Hicks Rd & Hudson Av, Hudson 
 
Pasco County 
 
 
2015 
 
US Hwy 41, Sarasota  
 
 
FDOT District 1 
 
2015 
 
Suncoast Parkway, Phase II 
 
 
FL Turnpike Enterprise  
2015  
 
 
 
Property Types appraised include: Single & Multi-family Residential, General Commercial, Professional 
and Medical Offices, Retail Shopping Centers, Light and Heavy Industrial/ Distribution, Restaurants, 
Residential Subdivisions, Mobile Home Parks, Gas Stations, ODA Billboard Signs, Convenience Stores, 
Institutional, Agricultural, Contaminated, and Environmentally Sensitive properties.   
 
EDUCATION 
 
Academic 
 
 
University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL 
 
 
 
College of Commerce & Business Administration 
 
 
 
B.S. Degree - Accounting Major (Grad. 1984) 
 
 
University of Tampa, Post-graduate MBA program 
 
 
 
College of Business Administration 
 
 
Jesuit High School, Tampa, Florida (Grad. 1978) 
 
 
Professional   
  
Appraisal Institute, Chicago, IL   
  
 
Course 110 - Appraisal Principles (1988)  
 
  
 
Course 120 - Appraisal Procedures (1989) 
  
 
Course 310 - Basic Income Capitalization (1990)  
  
 
Course 320 - General Applications (1996) 
  
 
Course 400 - National USPAP Update & Florida State Law Update (1992 – 2014) 
  
 
Course 410 - Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice, Parts A and B (1989 – 2014) 
  
 
Course 510 - Advanced Income Capitalization (1992)  
  
 
Course 540 - Report Writing and Valuation Analysis (1993)  
  
 
Course 550 - Advanced Applications (1998) 
  
 
Course 700 - The Appraiser as an Expert Witness: Preparation & Testimony (2002) 
  
 
Course 705 - Litigation Valuation  (2002) 
  
 
Course 720 - Advanced Condemnation Appraising (2000)  
  
 
Course - Business Practices & Ethics (2005)   
  
 
Seminar - Litigation Valuation  
 
 
  
 
Seminar - The Appraiser’s Legal Liabilities  
  
 
Seminar - The Comprehensive Appraisal Workshop 
 
  
 
Seminar - Appraisal Consulting 
  
 
Seminar - Mark-to-Market: Valuation for Financial Reporting (2003) 
  
 
Seminar - Inverse Condemnation (2006) 
  
 
Seminar - Uniform Appraisal Standards for Federal Land Acquisitions (2008) 
  
 
Seminar – Property Tax Assessments (2009) 
  
 
Webinar – Understanding Interagency Appraisal & Evaluation Guidelines (2011) 
  
 
Webinar – Excel as an Appraisal Professional (2013) 
  
 
Webinar – Property Taxation: Valuation and Consultation Services (2013) 
  
 
Webinar – USPAP 2014-15 and the New Reporting Options (2014) 
 
 
CCIM Institute, Chicago, IL   
 
 
 
Course 101 - Financial Analysis for Commercial Real Estate (2004) 
 
 
 
Course 102 - Market Analysis for Commercial Investment in Real Estate (2005) 
 
 
 
Course 103 - User Decision Analysis for Commercial Real Estate (2006) 
 
 
 
Course 104 - Investment Analysis for Commercial Investment Real Estate (2004) 
 
 
 
CCR - Core Concepts Review (2006)  
 
 
Florida Department of Transportation, Tallahassee, FL   
 
 
 
Course – Advanced Appraisal Review (2008, 2010) 
 
 
 
Course – USPAP & Florida Law Update (2008, 2010, 2012) 
 
 
 
Course – Supervisor & Trainee Appraiser (2008, 2010) 
 
 
 
Course – Common Error & Issues in Appraising (2012) 
 
 
 
Course – Appraisal Project Management (2012) 
 
 
PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS, LICENSES, & ORGANIZATIONS 
 
Appraisal Institute (MAI Designated - No. 11642, Oct-2000) 
 
CCIM Institute (CCIM Designated - No. 13211, Oct-2006)   
Florida State-certified General R.E. Appraiser, RZ-1596 
 
Member – National Association of Realtors 
 
Member – Association of Eminent Domain Professionals 
 
Member/Director – Economic Club of Tampa 
1 OF 5 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ATTACHMENT B 
 
 
DEVELOPMENT FOR BAKAS EQUESTRIAN FACILITY EXCHANGE AND 
REPLACEMENTS 
SUMMARY OF COUNTY’S MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS 
 
 
 
 
B1:  AERIAL OF PROPOSED NW EQUESTRIAN SITE   
 
 
B2:  AERIAL OF PROPOSED SYDNEY DOVER SITE  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2 OF 5 
October 13, 2017 
ATTACHMENT B 
DEVELOPMENT FOR BAKAS EQUESTRIAN FACILITY REPLACEMENTS 
SUMMARY OF COUNTY’S MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS 
 
The following is an initial listing of the minimum requirements and improvements at each designated location. This is not 
intended to be a detailed listing of all requirements, but to summarize the minimum required standards, improvements and 
contract terms. 
 
1.0 
SUMMARY OF REQUIREMENTS 
 
1.1 
Generally the Work will include two turnkey public use facilities (including all site work and off-site improvements) 
at two separate County-owned properties (Northwest Equestrian Park and Sydney Dover Trails Park). The properties 
are located within unincorporated Hillsborough County and are therefore subject to the County’s development 
regulations including zoning (See Attached Aerials).  The facilities will be used for Horses for the Handicapped 
Programs for the public operated by the Hillsborough County Conservation & Environmental Land Management 
Department (CELM).  
  
1.2 
The Proposer shall incur all costs and expenses for the design, permitting and construction of both equestrian 
facilities. Construction of the new facilities will be contracted for and supervised by the proposer. Any cost overruns 
will be paid for solely by the proposer. Receipts will be provided to the County as documentation for all project 
expenditures. The County shall not incur any expense or financial obligation. 
 
1.3 
The two new replacement facilities (collectively referred to as the “Project”) must be of high quality and low 
maintenance and must meet or exceed the improvements at the existing Bakas Equestrian Facility located at 11510 
Whisper Lake Trail, Tampa Florida 33626.  Additionally, the design and construction of the improvements for the 
two new facilities shall meet the requirements of all current governing local, state and federal regulations, codes and 
ordinances, including but not limited to the Hillsborough County Land Development Code, Florida Building Code, 
Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD) requirements, Florida Accessibility Code for Building 
Construction and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the requirements of Hillsborough County Public 
Works Department & Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). Design and construction of the Project shall 
be in conformance with the requirements of the County, in conformance with sound architectural and engineering 
practices and shall be in conformance with the applicable federal, state and local laws, regulations and building 
codes. 
 
1.4 
The Project shall be generally located in the area shown on the attached aerial maps.  The exact description of the 
Project property shall be mutually agreed upon by the parties during the design process. The property shall include 
sufficient usable upland acreage to accommodate the facility of size and design acceptable to the County.     
 
1.5 
The Work must include all design, engineering, permitting and construction of the improvements and shall be 
performed by qualified licensed professionals and contractors. 
 
1.6 
The Proposer shall retain qualified professional(s) to provide architectural and engineering services for the design, 
permitting and construction administration of the Project. Services shall include surveying, geotechnical, civil, 
landscaping, architectural, mechanical, electrical and plumbing services.  
 
1.7 
The Proposer shall retain a qualified licensed contractor to construct the Project in accordance with the final 
Construction Documents. 
 
1.8 
Design professionals and contractors must be properly insured to meet the requirements of Florida Statute as well 
as requirements of County’s Risk Management Section. Professionals must be covered by Professional Liability 
Insurance. The County shall be named as an additional insured on all liability policies.   
 
1.9 
The Project construction work will require Performance and Payment Bonds, pursuant to Florida Statute.   
 
1.10 
All design and construction work shall be subject to review, inspection and acceptance by the County. Input from 
citizens will be part of the design process.  
 
1.11 
Upon approval of the contract by the Board, the Proposer shall commence with design and engineering. Proposer 
shall provide progress design documents for review and acceptance by County and citizens. The final construction 
3 OF 5 
documents shall consist of all necessary drawings and specifications (Civil, Landscape, Irrigation, Structural, 
Architectural, Mechanical, Electrical and Plumbing).  Specifications shall incorporate general and special extended 
warranties and guarantees.  
 
1.13 
County shall issue Notice to Proceed with Construction after County receives, reviews and accepts the final 
construction documents.  Proposer shall commence with construction only after receiving Notice to Proceed with 
Construction.  
  
 
1.14 
Construction of the Project shall be in accordance with the final Construction Documents. The Project must be 
functionally sound, maintain its structural integrity, exhibit good architectural principles and be built in compliance 
with all applicable laws, regulations and building codes.  
 
1.15 
The County may inspect the construction work from time to time during construction to verify that the work is 
progressing in accordance with the final Construction Documents. The County shall provide written notice to the 
Proposer of any non-compliance and the Proposer shall cause the contractor to rectify any such non-compliance in 
accordance with good construction administration practices.  However, an inspection by the County shall not waive 
compliance with the permitted construction documents.   
 
1.16 
Proposer shall provide the County notice of inspection for Substantial Completion. The County shall participate in 
Substantial Completion inspection(s).  Substantial Completion shall be subject to acceptance by the County.  
1.17 
Proposer shall provide the County notice of inspection for Final Completion. The County shall participate in Final 
Completion inspection(s). Final Completion shall be subject to acceptance by the County.  Prior to Final Completion, 
the Proposer shall provide to the County the close-out documents such as warranties, guarantees, including extended 
warranties, certified as-built construction documents, approved shop drawings and list of subcontractors.  
1.18 
The Proposer shall require its contractor to warrant and guarantee for a period of one (1) year following final 
completion of the Project that all materials and equipment shall be new, and that all work will be of good quality, 
free from faults and defects and in accordance with the Final Construction Documents reviewed and accepted by the 
County. In addition, extended warranties shall be provided for certain systems and equipment as listed in the Final 
Construction Documents. The Proposer shall assign to the County all rights and remedies under the terms of its 
existing contracts for the Project to enforce all warranties and guarantees to the County. 
1.19 
The Proposer shall assign to the County all rights and remedies existent under the terms of its contracts for the 
Project for work that is deemed to be faulty, unsatisfactory or nonconforming to the requirements of the Final 
Construction documents.  
1.20 
The Proposer shall include the County as third party beneficiary in all contracts and warranties between the Proposer 
and any third party or parties relating to the Project.  The County may initiate claims under such contracts and 
warranties (including claims for latent defects) in its own name or in the name of the Proposer.  In connection 
therewith the Proposer shall reasonably cooperate, aid and assist the County in the prosecution of any such contract 
or warranty claim. 
1.21 
To the extent provided by law, the Proposer shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the County and its officers, 
agents and employees from any and all claims, losses, damages, charges or expenses arising out of any act, action, 
neglect or omission of the Proposer or any of its agents, consultants or contractors in the design and construction of 
the Project.  
1.22 
All documents, including but not limited to, design drawings, construction documents, permits, specifications, 
reports, technical data, inspection reports, tests, field books,  etc., obtained by the Proposer for the Project shall be 
provided to the County at the County’s request.  All design documents, including final Construction Documents 
shall become the property of the County.  In the event that the County makes use of said documents on a project or 
projects not covered under this Agreement, such shall be at the sole discretion, liability and risk of County.       
1.23 
Upon completion of construction of both equestrian facilities, the proposer will provide the County with a minimum 
endowment of $50,000 annually for the operation of each facility for the next five years, for a total of $500,000. The 
current operating expenses for the Bakas Equestrian Center is approximately $600,000 per year. 
 
 
4 OF 5 
1.24 
The existing Bakas Equestrian Center and land will be exchanged for the two new equestrian facilities and transfer 
of ownership will take place after both facilities are built, operational and accepted by the County. This property has 
an appraised value of $1,400,000. 
 
2.0 
IMPROVEMENTS 
 
In general, the improvements at each site shall include at a minimum:  
 
2.1. 
SITEWORK (Off-Site and On-Site): 
 
 
a) 
Roadway and traffic improvements, access driveways, intersection improvements and turn lanes, off site 
 
and on-site sidewalks.  
 
b) 
Concrete-paved entry road tied into a concrete-paved parking lot with at least 14 handicapped spaces 
 
including 7 for one-sided van entry and an additional 20 standard regular parking spaces.  
 
c) 
Storm water drainage system. 
 
d) 
All utilities (including connection charges) such as potable water, fire line, wastewater, electrical service 
 
and distribution. 
 
e) 
Code required landscaping and irrigation. 
 
f) 
Site lighting, including lighting of parking lot. 
 
2.2 
BUILDINGS/STRUCTURES/AMENITIES: 
 
1. 
Barn/Stable building that at a minimum contains 7,600 square feet and includes:  
 
a) 
Fifteen (15) horse stalls (measuring 12’ × 12’ each), with ceiling fans and outside windows with latching 
shutters. Water faucets between every other stall; traditional sliding latch handles on stall doors. 
 
b) 
One tack room. 
 
c) 
One insulated feed storage room. 
 
d) 
One cart storage room with clothes washer and dryer (250 square feet or greater). 
 
e) 
One “barn office” (150 square feet or greater). 
 
f) 
Enclosed attic space for storage with ceilings above items b, c, d, and e. 
 
g) 
Ceiling fans providing adequate coverage for all areas. 
 
h) 
Horse wash down station in barn with cross ties to 6’ x 6’ posts. 
 
2. 
An attached Office/Conference building that at a minimum contains 2,500 square feet of heated/air conditioned 
space that includes: 
 
a) 
One reception area (approximately 250 square feet or more). 
 
b)  
One kitchen/break area (approximately 160 square feet or more) with full-sized appliances. 
 
c) 
Two (2) private offices (approximately 250 square feet each or more). 
 
d)  
One conference room (approximately 600 square feet each or more). 
 
e)  
Code compliant enclosed restrooms/shower facilities (handicap accessible). 
 
3. 
Open-air covered picnic and viewing area of at least 900 square feet with accompanying ceiling fans. 
 
4. 
A lighted metal canopied Riding Arena with footing that at a minimum has: 
 
 
a) 
Clear center span of 60’ x 120’ or greater, center height of 26 feet or greater and eave height of 18 feet 
 
or greater. An attached handicap accessible canopied grandstand that seats at least eighty. 
 
 
*Note: 
 
1) the County desires the option for a larger sized canopied Riding Arena with a clear center span of 100’ x 
200’. Proposals for this option should include construction, design and materials for this larger canopied 
Riding Arena, for review by the County and presentation to the public. This larger sized Arena is envisioned 
as a permanent metal frame structure with weather-tight cover options including metal or fabric, meeting all 
necessary code requirements. Additionally, the proposal shall include the 20-year life-cycle costs of this design 
option.   
 
 
5 OF 5 
 
 
2) The base proposal must include the smaller (60’ X 120’) arena.  
a) 
Hydraulic lift capable of accommodating riders of all sizes. 
b) 
Public address system. 
c) 
Ceiling fans providing coverage for entire arena. 
 
5. 
Pest Control system around perimeter of #’s 1, 2, 3, and 4 above. 
 
6. 
Detached Maintenance Building with bathroom and 1,350 square feet or greater storage room with covered entry 
area and 2,000 square feet or greater of canopied dry storage area. Include 10’ x 30’ storage shed near maintenance 
building.  
 
7. 
Two Horse Paddocks with horse shelters of at least 1,000 square feet each with at least two acres of improved pasture 
each. Include electrified paddock fencing. Include 20’ x 20’ covered outdoor horse wash down station. 
 
8. 
All buildings to have Fire Sprinkler systems equal or greater than the existing Bakas Equestrian Facility.  
 
9. 
All buildings to have standing-seam metal roofs. 
 
10. 
Provide new equestrian facility signage on County properties near entry roads and facing adjacent off-site 
 
roadways with clear visibility. 
 
11. 
Where feasible, move existing Bakas facility statues, monuments, or other signage to the new equestrian 
 
facilities at the direction of the County. 
 
2.3 
EQUIPMENT: 
 
1. 
Provide all furniture, fixtures and equipment (FF&E) for both locations. Existing FF&E from the Bakas Center can 
be re-located to one of the centers, if salvageable. If not salvageable, provide new to match existing. 
 
2. 
Proposer will pay for all moving costs from current facility to the new facilities. 
 
 
END OF DOCUMENT 
PAGE 1 OF 1 
 
 
ATTACHMENT C 
 
DEVELOPMENT FOR BAKAS EQUESTRIAN FACILITY  
EXCHANGE AND REPLACEMENT(S)  
 
 
COUNTY’S PROPOSED SCHEDULE SUMMARY 
 
 
 
TASK  
ESTIMATED DATES 
 
 
Proposal Opening Date  ................................................................................................................................................. 11/17/17 
 
Public Meeting to Present Proposals (Tentative) .......................................................................................................... 11/28/17 
 
Review Team’s Review of Proposals  ........................................................................................................................... 12/08/17 
 
Proposer Selection by BOCC  ....................................................................................................................................... 01/04/18 
 
Contract Approval by BOCC ............................................................................................................................................... TBD 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
E 1-1 
 
EXHIBIT 1 
 
PROPOSER CERTIFICATION AND WARRANTY 
 
 
1. Legal Name of Proposer.  (Indicate if the Proposer is a Corporation, Joint Venture, Partnership, etc.)  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2. Name/title of contact person for the Proposer:  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
3. Local business and mailing address: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
4. Primary business and mailing address: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
5. Telephone number: (       )                          FAX:(  
) 
 
  
 
6. Federal Employer Identification Number (FEIN) :  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
7. The business has been in operation under its present name since:  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
The above-named Proposer does hereby warrant and certify under oath: 
 
A. 
That the Proposer understands all requirements of the RFP and states that as a serious Proposer it will comply 
with all the stipulations included in the RFP package. 
 
B. 
That the Proposer is of lawful age and that no other person, firm or corporation has any interest in this 
Proposal or in the contract proposed to be entered into except as expressly stated below:                                     
                                                                                                                                                                                     
C. 
That this proposal is made without any understanding, agreement, or connection with any other person, firm or 
corporation making a proposal for the same purpose, and is in all respects fair and without collusion or fraud 
except as expressly stated below:                                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                                                                     
D. 
That the Proposer is not in arrears to Hillsborough County upon debt or contract and is not a defaulter, as 
surety or otherwise, upon any obligation to Hillsborough County except as expressly stated below:                   
                                                      
E. 
That no officer or employee or person whose salary is payable in whole or in part from the County Treasury 
is, shall be or become interested, directly or indirectly, surety or otherwise in this Proposal; in the performance 
of this Contract; in the supplies, materials, equipment, and work or labor to which they relate; or in any 
portion of the profits thereof. 
 
F. 
That the Proposer acknowledges, understands and agrees that the RFP does not reflect all of the design, 
permitting, regulatory and construction requirements for the Project and that these documents are sufficient in 
all respects for purposes of the Proposer's preparation and submittal of its Proposal. 
 
G. 
That Proposer has no interest and shall acquire no interest, either direct or indirect, which would conflict in 
any manner with the performance of services to be required hereunder.  The Proposer further certifies and 
agrees that no person having any such interest shall be employed or engaged by the Proposer for said 
performance not has or will any member of the team, person or employee be involved, engaged or employed 
on a contingent fee basis.  
 
H. 
That the Proposer has received and carefully examined all Addenda issued prior to Opening. 
E 1-2 
 
I. 
That the Proposer is fully informed respecting the preparation and contents of the attached Proposal and of all 
pertinent circumstances respecting such Proposal. 
 
J. 
That neither the Proposer nor any of its officers, partners, owners, agents, representatives, employees or 
parties in interest, including this affiant, has in any way colluded, conspired, connived or agreed directly or 
indirectly with any other Proposer, firm or person to submit a collusive or sham Proposal in connection with 
this RFP for which the attached Proposal has been submitted or to refrain from proposing in connection with 
such RFP, or has in any manner, directly or indirectly, sought by agreement or collusion or communication or 
conference with any other Proposer, firm or person to fix the price or prices in the attached Proposal or of any 
other Proposer, or to fix any overhead, profit or cost element of the Proposal price or the Proposal price of any 
other Proposer, or to secure through any collusion, conspiracy, connivance or unlawful agreement any 
advantage against the Board of County Commissioners or any person interested in the RFP; and  
 
K. 
The price or prices provided in the attached Proposal are fair and proper and are not tainted by any collusion, 
conspiracy, connivance or unlawful agreement on the part of the Proposer or any of its agents, representatives, 
owners, employees or parties of interest, including affiant. 
 
L. 
All statements made by the Proposer in the proposal are true and accurate as of the Proposal submittal date. 
 
Proposer hereby acknowledges the above certifications and attests to the accuracy of affirmation and assertions 
contained therein. 
 
 
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Proposal is hereby signed and sealed as of the date indicated. 
 
 
ATTEST:                                                               PROPOSER: 
 
 
__________________________________         BY:________________________________    (SEAL) 
Witness                                                                                   (Authorized signature in ink) 
 
 
__________________________________                ________________________________ 
Witness                                                                                     (Printed name of signer) 
 
 
                                                                                            _________________________________ 
                                                                                                    (Printed Title of signer) 
 
 
     CORPORATE SEAL                                                     _______________________________ 
     (Where appropriate)                                                                     (Date signed) 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
E 1-3 
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF PROPOSER, IF A CORPORATION 
 
STATE OF  _____________________) 
                                
 
 
SS 
COUNTY OF _____________________) 
 
     The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ___________ day of___________, 2017 by 
___________________________________________, who is personally known to me or who has produced  
_________________________________ as identification and who did take an oath and who executed the foregoing 
instrument as ___________________________ of _______________________________________________, a 
______________ corporation, and who severally and duly acknowledged the execution of such instrument as such 
officer aforesaid, for and on behalf of and as the act and deed of said corporation, pursuant to the powers conferred 
upon said officer by the corporation's Board of Directors or other appropriate authority of said corporation, and 
who, having knowledge of the several matters stated in said foregoing instrument, certified the same to be true in all 
respects. 
 
He/She is personally known to me or has produced                                                              as identification. 
 
 
WITNESS my hand and official seal the date aforesaid. 
 
                                                                                          (Signature of the Person taking Acknowledgement) 
 
                                                                                          (Name of Acknowledger Typed, Printed or Stamped) 
 
                                                                                           (Title or Rank) 
 
                                                                                           (Serial Number, if any) 
 
============================================================================== 
 
 
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF PROPOSER, IF A PARTNERSHIP OR INDIVIDUAL 
 
STATE OF  _____________________) 
                               
 
 
  SS 
COUNTY OF _____________________) 
 
     The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ________day of ______________, 2017, by 
________________________________, who 
is 
personally 
known 
to me or who has 
produced 
_______________________________ as identification and who did take an oath and who executed the foregoing 
instrument as a member of the firm of _______________________________________________ (if applicable) and 
acknowledged the execution of same, for and on behalf of and as the act and deed of said firm, for the uses and 
purposes therein expressed. 
 
He/She is personally known to me or has produced                                                as identification. 
 
 
WITNESS my hand and official seal the date aforesaid. 
 
                                 (Signature of the Person taking Acknowledgement) 
 
                                 (Name of Acknowledger Typed, Printed or Stamped) 
 
                                  (Title or Rank) 
 
                                  (Serial Number, if any)