Loading ...
HCConserv...
Civic & Government
27
0
Try Now
Log In
Pricing
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)