HomeMy WebLinkAboutSummary Appraisal Report 6-1-13 ' SUMMARY
APiRAISAL REPORT
' OF THE
SEVEN-UNIT OFFI E CONDOMINIUM PROPERTY
' LOCATED AT
11 POLK AVENUE
WITHIN THE ITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL
BREVARD COUNTY,
FLORIDA
f
II
AS OF
JUNE 1, 2013
t
FOR
IM . TODD MORLEY
CITY O CAPE CANAVERAL
7510 NO TH ATLANTIC AVENUE
CAPE C NAVERAL, FLORIDA
32920
BY
' CLARK A MAXWELL, MAI, PRES.
MAXWELL APPR ISAL 8, CONSULTING GROUP
' 2525 AU ORA ROAD, SUITE 105
MEL OURNE, FLORIDA
' 32935
•
e1*
e` Maxwell Appraisal
`` & Consulting
us
Group 2525 Aurora Road, Suite 105 Melbourne,Florida 32935 Phone:321-253-0026
June 21, 2013
Mr.Todd Morley
City of Cape Canaveral
I7510 North Atlantic Avenue
Cape Canaveral, Florida 329
I Dear Mr. Morley,
Y
IIn accordance with your instru Lions, I have made a summary appraisal of the
seven-unit office condominiu property located at 110 Polk Avenue within the
ICity of Cape Canaveral, Brev rd County, Florida. The purpose of this appraisal
is to estimate the market valu of the unencumbered fee simple interest in the
Iproperty that is legally describ d in the attached report.
have inspected the property, the neighborhood and its environs and have
II
analyzed the market behavior and the factors present that influence real
property value. The market has also been examined for the highest and best
Iuse of the land.
I Valuation discussions and further descriptions are detailed in the
accompanying report, which as been made subject to the assumptions and
limiting conditions therein. articular attention should be given to the
IExtraordinary Assumptions a d Hypothetical Conditions stated within this
report. Market value, as used i this report, is defined in the body of the report.
IThis Summary Appraisal Report is intended to comply with the reporting
requirements set forth under Standards Rule 2-2(b) of the Uniform Standards of
I
Professional Appraisal Practic for a Summary Appraisal Report. As such, it
presents only summary discus ions of the data, reasoning, and analysis that
Iwere used in the appraisal process to develop the appraiser's opinion of value.
I
I
1
Mr. Todd Morley
' June 21, 2013
Page 2
' Supporting documentation c ncerning the data, reasoning, and analysis is
retained in the appraiser's file. The depth of discussion contained in this report
' is specific to the needs of the Iient and for the intended use stated below. The
appraiser is not responsible for unauthorized use of this report.
It is my opinion that the "as is" market value of the unencumbered fee simple
interest in the subject property, as of June 1, 2013, was:
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTY-FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS
' ($185,000)
' Sincerely,
etLA 442ev
Clark A. Maxwell, MAI
Cert Gen RZ920
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SUMMARY OF IMPORTANT DAT AND CONCLUSIONS 1
PURPOSE OF THE APPRAISAL 2
' INTENDED USE / INTENDED USER OF THE APPRAISAL 2
SCOPE OF THE APPRAISAL 2
' EXTRAORDINARY ASSUMPTION AND HYPOTHETICAL CONDITIONS 4
DEFINITION OF VALUE 5
PROPERTY RIGHTS APPRAISED 6
t IDENTIFICATION OF THE PROPS . 7
SUBJECT SALES HISTORY 8
' STATEMENT OF OWNERSHIP 8
ASSESSMENTS AND TAXES 8
CENSUS TRACT 9
' UTILITIES
. 9
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS/ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS . 10
FLOOD ZONE 10
' ZONING 12
PRESENT USE 13
' BREVARD COUNTY DATA 14
NEIGHBORHOOD DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS 26
SITE DESCRIPTION 30
DESCRIPTION OF THE IMPROVEMENTS 34
HIGHEST AND BEST USE . 41
EXPOSURE TIME/MARKETING TIME 44
i APPROACHES TO VALUE 45
SALES COMPARISON APPROACH . 46
' INCOME APPROACH 56
RECONCILIATION 68
CERTIFICATION 69
CERTIFICATIONS, GENERAL CONDITIONS, QUALIFICATIONS, ETC.
ADDENDA
ZONING
SUBJECT PHOTOGRAPHS
I
I
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
tHEADING: CONCLUSIONS:
IPurpose of the Appraisal -- Estimate Market Value
IProperty Rights Appraised -- Fee Simple Interest
ISize of Site -- 6,250 Square Feet / .14 Acres
IBuilding Size -- 3,204 Square Feet
Age of Improvements -- 47 Years
I
Effective Age of Improveme its -- 30 Years
IIRemaining Economic Life -- 20 Years
IAssessed Valuation -- $86,530 (Total)
ITaxes, City and County -- $2,000.05 (Total)
IZoning -- C-1 (City of Cape Canaveral)
IHighest and Best Use -- Continued Office Use
Estimates of Value
ISales Comparison Approach -- $190,000
Income Approach -- $180,000
ICost Approach -- Not Applicable
IFinal Estimate of Value -- $185,000
Date of Value Estimate -- June 1, 2013
I - 1 -
THE APPRAISAL REPORT
PURPOSE OF THE APPRAISAL
' The purpose of this appraisal is to estimate the "as is" market value of
the unencumbered fee simple interest in the property described
' herein, as of June 1, 2013.
INTENDED USE / INTENDED USER OF THE APPRAISAL
The intended use of the appraisal is to provide the client, Todd Morley
and the City of Cape Canaveral, with the market value estimate of
the subject property to assist in determining a fair acquisition price.
SCOPE OF THE APPRAISAL
The appraisal assignment involves valuing the two-story office
condominium property located at 110 Polk Avenue, Cape
Canaveral, Florida. The subject consists of seven individual office
condominium units that occ py a total of 3,204 square feet.
The structure is of masonry construction and is situated on a 6,250
' square foot (.14 acre) tract of land. The improvements were built in
1966 and on the date o inspection, were found to be in fair
condition.
' The property is located alo g the north right-of-way of Polk Avenue,
just east of Atlantic Avenu (Highway Al A). This location lies in the
City of Cape Canaveral, within the central beach portion of Brevard
' County.
- 2 -
The scope of appraisal encompasses the a raisal asses the research necessary to
p
P
prepare a report in accordance with the intended use, the
"Standards of Professional Practice of the Appraisal Institute" and the
"Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice" of the Appraisal
1 Foundation. In regard to the subject property this involves the
following steps:
1 . The property was last inspected on June 1, 2013. The
photographs were taken at that time by Clark A. Maxwell, MAI.
' 2. Regional and neighborhood data was based upon
information gathered by the appraiser from newspapers,
published reports, county and city statistics as well as various
periodicals.
I I 3. In estimating the highest and best use of the property, the
appraiser analyzed the data collected.
4. In developing the value estimate, the market data utilized was
' collected by the appraiser from public records, realtors,
appraisers and office files.
5. After assembling and analyzing the data defined in the scope
of the appraisal, a final estimate of market value was made.
The appraiser was instructed to estimate the "as is" market value of
ithe property under appraisal. The Sales Comparison and Income
Approaches to Value were utilized to arrive at the market value
estimate. These approaches'are believed to be sufficient to arrive at
a credible estimate of market value.
The Cost Approach was found to not be applicable due to the age
of the improvements and the subjectivity in estimating accrued
- 3 -
depreciation. At the request of the client, the appraisal is being
transmitted in a summary format.
EXTRAORDINARY ASSUMPTIONS AND HYPOTHETICAL CONDITIONS
In the analysis of real prop rty interests it is often necessary for the
appraiser to make certain ssumptions or qualify the analysis with
limiting conditions. The typical General Assumptions and General
Limiting Conditions which are a part of most appraisal reports cover
the standard items which apply to the analysis of most property
interests and can be found cat the end of this report.
' Extraordinary Assumptions •nd Hypothetical Conditions, however,
generally have direct a•plication to specific interests being
' appraised. It is most import•nt, therefore, that the appraisers list and
discuss any such special ass mptions or limiting conditions early in the
appraisal report in order to •ssist the reader in fully understanding the
valuation analysis. It is equ•IIy as important to inform the reader that
no special assumptions or Ii iting conditions are being considered if
such is the case.
EXTRAORDINARY ASSUMPTION: an assumption, directly related to a
specific assignment, as of th- effective date of the assignment results,
' which, if found to be false could alter the appraiser's opinions or
conclusions.
HYPOTHETICAL CONDITION: a condition, directly related to a specific
assignment, which is contrary to what is known by the appraiser to
' exist on the effective date o the assignment results, but is used for the
purpose of analysis.
The following assumptions and conditions were relied upon in this
1 appraisal:
1 - 4 -
I
1 . The appraiser was not provided with a soil survey of the subject
property. The soil, h wever, appears to be suitable as no
adverse influences wee noted.
2. The appraiser was not provided with any environmental studies
relating to the subject roperty. It is assumed that no hazardous
' materials or endange ed species are located on the subject
property.
3. The appraiser has relied upon information provided by City
' and County officials a well as public records and information
available from these unicipalities' websites and online data.
tThe appraiser has m de reasonable attempts to verify the
validity of the inform tion but must assume the information
obtained is accurate nd true.
' 4. The appraiser was no provided with a survey of the property
under appraisal. In vi w of this, it is necessary to assume that
the land size and dim nsions utilized in this report are accurate.
' The appraiser reserves the right to alter this report should a
survey become avails le.
No other extraordinary assu ptions or hypothetical conditions are
' being applied in the followin analysis. The use of these extraordinary
assumptions and hypotheti al conditions may have impacted the
results of this appraisal assign ent.
DEFINITION OF MARKET VALUE
' The most probable price which a property should bring in a
competitive and open mark t under all conditions requisite to a fair
sale, the buyer and seller, each acting prudently and
f - 5 -
p
1
knowledgeably, and assum ng the price is not affected by undue
stimulus.
' Implicit in this definition ar the consummation of a sale as of a
specified date and the pa sing of title from seller to buyer under
conditions whereby:
Buyer and seller are typically motivated;
I1 .
2. Both arties are well informed or well advised, and acting in
P 9
what they consider theIir own best interests;
3. A reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open market;
4. Payment is made in t rms of cash in U. S. dollars or in terms of
financial arrangement comparable thereto; and
5. The price represents t e normal consideration for the property
sold unaffected by pecial or creative financing or sales
concessions granted by anyone associated with the sale.
I
The above definition app ars in Chapter 12, Code of Federal
Regulation, Part 34.42(f).
PROPERTY RIGHTS APPRAISED
' The appraiser has valued the unencumbered fee simple interest in
the property under appraisal which is defined as follows:
Fee Simple Estate is the `Absolute ownership unencumbered by
' any other interest or state, subject only to the limitations
imposed by the governmental powers of taxation, eminent
domain, police power and escheat.
' - 6 -
This definition was obtained from The Dictionary of Real Estate
Appraisal, Fourth Edition (Chiago: Appraisal Institute, 2002) Pg. 113.
IDENTIFICATION OF THE PROPERTY
Address
110 Polk Avenue
Cape Canaveral, Florida 32"20
Parcel ID Number(s)
' 24-37-23-CG-00041 .0-0013.01
24-37-23-CG-00041 .0-0013.0
24-37-23-CG-00041 .0-0013.0
24-37-23-CG-00041 .0-0013.0
24-37-23-CG-00041 .0-0013.0:
' 24-37-23-CG-00041 .0-0013.0
24-37-23-CG-00041 .0-0013.0:
Location:
' The subject property is located along the north right-of-way of Polk
Avenue. This location lies just east of Atlantic Avenue (Highway Al A)
' within the City of Cape Canaveral.
' Legal Description:
The subject property may be legally described as follows;
' Office Units 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 d 7, Cape Canaveral Professional Building, a
Condominium as per the D laration of Condominium thereof, recorded in
' Official Record Book 2292, P e 2699, together with any amendments thereto,
of the Public Records of Breva#d County, Florida.
Whenever the term "subjec " or "subject property" is used within this
report, it applies specifically to the property under appraisal.
' - 7 -
II
SUBJECT SALES HISTORY
A search of the Brevard County Public Records revealed the
' following transactions hav.7. taken place concerning the subject
property in the last three yea s:
' Unit #5 was purchased by t e current owner, Deborah F. Dean from
Canaveral Counseling Ce ter, Inc. on December 19, 2012 for
$35,000. Reportedly, this tra saction was not exposed to the open
market prior to the sale.
The remaining six units within he subject building (Units 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 & 7)
' were sold to Deborah F. De•n from Nancy Patricia Harris on August 9,
2012 for $132,000.
The subject property is cu ently listed for sale through MLS for
$269,900. The appraiser is not aware of any pending contracts for sale
' involving the subject prope .
STATEMENT OF OWNERSHIP
The property ownership is listed in the 2012 Brevard County Tax Roll as
p p Y P Y
' follows:
' Deborah F. Dean
701 15TH Avenue, Apt.
East Moline, Illinois 612
' - 8 -
ASSESSMENT AND TAXES
Brevard County and the City of Cape Canaveral assess and tax the
Y Y P
' subject property. These jurisdictions assess real property at 100% of
'just" value. The assessed value and taxes for 2012 are tabulated as
' follows:
Unit Assessed Millage Ad Non Ad Total
' # Value Rate Valorem Valorem Taxes
1,2,3,4,5,7 $75,840 $1,399.68 $345.48 $1,745.16
' 6 $10,690 18.4556 $ 197.31 $ 57.58 $ 254.89
Total $86,530 $1,596.99 $403.06 $2,000.05
' The assessment was check d against comparable properties and
found to be fair and reaso able. The amount of taxes shown is the
gross amount due in Marc of the year following the assessment
year. A discount of 4% is o ered if taxes are paid when the total
' amount is due. No tax delinq encies were found to exist.
CENSUS TRACT
The subject property is sho n on the 2010 Census Tract Maps as
being located in Census Tract 685.02.
' UTILITIES
' As of the date of valuation, t e following utilities were available to the
subject property:
1
' - 9 -
UTILITY PROVIDER
' Telephone AT&T
Power Fla. Power & Light
Water City of Cocoa
Sewer City of Cape Canaveral
The utility services are adequate to support the existing improvements
and the current use.
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS/ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
The appraiser was not provi ed with an environmental assessment
of the property. An inspec on of the property did not reveal the
' obvious presence of hazar ous materials or endangered plant or
animal species. The appra ser is not an expert in these matters,
' however, and recommend that an environmental assessment be
prepared to verify that thes conditions do not exist.
FLOOD ZONE
The subject property appears to lie within HUD Flood Zone X, which
' encompasses lands lying outside of the 500-year flood plain. The
subject can be found on Community Panel 12009C0313 E, of the April
' 3, 1989 National Flood Rate Maps. The following page contains the
flood map showing the location of the subject property.
1
' - 10 -
I
I
I 4 4
i!t•
.. ric ■-. ,..- ''' :
■ ....; ..c r. .
2E .., 7. 02 - 'c't •-•
I -
f... I 7-
■ ■••••
I ''''
''.! 1.4t
I.... ,
QC '.- •••
fl• i :.r.. 7 'L r-7
ii-
x-
.-•:I
- I g `c•' " ••7'.
N ..._ . 'tt!
1 3c = ..--- ,••• _ . .., r 1..`.-
• 4,t E
' i• r-. cc . ---
_ .,-r =, - • is F.; : , .,.z
7 — °
z-..
-;•
cac g = 7 • 0 I 55 _
lil ilia' --
FrCi•, 4 ,-
-'-'----'-•-• ___ '!..•`.'-‘v..?- .. '?
. 2 1
{t,
I
1----- 1
I 1F1 I "•^14- ,
..1 I •
7 1
fi 11
■r ''''.L."•+.,::, .
I
131 tat
1 •
t,— -,
I I 1
u .-t
.-------4----___......
t LI 61 r i <
,
IL '14
• • • 1
• ie.
I 1
I '
1
II 1
I 1
' I I 1 1 l''i at
t -
, , L
I , 1 1
I .1 i
1
■ —
i 1 1 I I I 1
1 I 1
1 I __I I ___1
I 1 I i 1
i I
I , 1 1 il
■
i 1111
1 I
I i
_ -__ 1
I _J L._ 1 i 1_ 11 l i
_I i
I L_____{ L__ _
_,4111411V 1_,
— -
1 IF 1
I ..--- -
. i
4 x
tu
2 1
ILI'
x c
/ X
ILO
Z N
----
i r,----------__
7 ,
I X
a,
2
7, `..,7:,•„i,.., „.
_
., ___ .- - --
_
LL.
w
0
NJ
......"." t 'Cr
'2
I
FLOOD MAP
I
I
I - 1 1 -
I
I
I
ZONING
IThe subject property is zon d C-1 (low density commercial) by the
I City of Cape Canaveral. T e requirements for the C-1 district are
intended to apply to an ar a adjacent to major arterial streets and
convenient to major resident al areas.
The types of uses permitte are intended to serve the consumer
Ineeds of nearby residen ial neighborhoods, as well as the
commercial needs of the m torist. Lot sizes and other restrictions are
Iintended to reduce conflic with adjacent residential uses and to
minimize the interruption of tr ffic along thoroughfares.
IPermitted uses include retail stores, personal service establishments,
I professional and general offices, clinics, motels, financial institutions
and restaurants to name a few.
ILot requirements include a inimum area of 5,000 square feet, with a
minimum width of 50 feet 0 nd a minimum depth of 100 feet. The
Imaximum coverage is to be o more than 50%.
pBuildings shall have a maxi um height of 45 feet and a minimum
floor area of 300 square fee . Setback requirements include 25 feet
Ifrom the front, 10 feet from t e rear and 25 feet from the sides.
I The improvements to the su eject site appear to be in conformance
with the C-1 zoning regulations. A complete copy of this regulation
has been included within th z addenda.
I
I
I
I - 12 -
I
I
LAND USE PLAN/CONCURRENCY
IThe City of Cape Canaveral Future Land Use Plan indicates that the
I subject property lies within a ommercial district. This district allows for
a variety of retail, office nd service uses. The land use plan,
therefore, conforms to the c rrent zoning of the property.
Further discussions with th City of Cape Canaveral Planning
IDepartment revealed that the property does not appear to be
adversely affected by c ncurrency and growth management
Irestrictions. The property has sufficient availability of utilities, the traffic
volume along Polk Avenue i in concurrence, and the property does
Inot have any wetland considerations.
IRESTRICTIVE COVENANTS
IThe appraiser knows of no restrictive covenants or deed restrictions
that would affect the use of the property.
I
PRESENT USE
I
As of the date of valuation, the subject property was in use as a
Ivacant, seven-unit office condominium facility.
I
I
I
I
I - 13 -
1
1
BREVARD COUNTY DATA
The subject property is located in the City of Cape Canaveral within
the central beach portion of Brevard County.
Geography
' Brevard County is located a proximately midway along the eastern
coast of the Florida peninsu a. The county area measures 71 miles
' north to south, and averag s 18 miles east to west, incorporating a
total area of 838,400 acres.
The county is bordered on t e north by Volusia County, on the west
by Osceola, Orange and V lusia Counties, on the south by Indian
' River County and on the e st by the Atlantic Ocean. The county
seat, Titusville, is located 40 iles east of Orlando, 200 miles north of
Miami, and 135 miles south o Jacksonville.
Brevard County has three distinct economic areas as a result of its
geography and unusual len th, referred to as the North, Central, and
' South areas of Brevard Cou ty. The county is further divided by the
Indian River, or Intracoastal aterway, which separates the mainland
from the beachside commu ities.
The north county area con ists of the incorporated City of Titusville
' and surrounding unincorporated areas, including the communities of
Scottsmoor, Mims, and Port S . John. The beachside area of the North
' County contains the Kenne y Space Center, and Cape Canaveral
Air Force Station, and the C naveral National Seashore. These land
' uses result in no commer ial or residential development in the
beachside area of north Brevard County. The north region is
' considered to be the least d veloped, and slowest growing of areas
in the county.
' - 14 -
The central region consists of the Cities of Cocoa and Rockledge and
' the unincorporated Merritt Island area. Beachside cities include
Cape Canaveral and Cocos Beach. This beachside area is largely
' tourism-based, due to its Ioc•tion along the ocean, and its proximity
to Port Canaveral and Orlan•o's theme park area.
' The south region of the cou ty is the largest of the three areas, and
the fastest growing. The south region contains the Cites of
' Melbourne, West Melbou ne, Palm Bay, Malabar and the
unincorporated Suntree/Vie a area. The beachside contains the
' Town of Melbourne Beach, and the Cities of Indialantic, Satellite
Beach, and Indian Harbor B-ach.
' The beach portion of the south county has more land depth from
river to ocean than the cen al county beach. It differs in character
from the central beach are. as it has fewer multiple family buildings
and a greater number of single family properties.
ty Transportation
o n
C u p
' Ground transportation in t e area is facilitated by an adequate
road system. Major north-s•uth traffic arteries in Brevard County
include Interstate 95, U.S. Hig way No. 1, and State Highway Al A.
Interstate 95 provides rapid access through the western portions of
' the county, as it runs west of the mainland areas of Titusville, Cocoa,
Rockledge, Melbourne and 'alm Bay. There are 13 interchanges in
' the county from SR 46 at the orth end, to Malabar Road at the south
end. These traffic arteries epresent the county's major east-west
' traffic arteries.
U.S. Highway No. 1 general y runs west of and parallels the Indian
' River, and provides acces through the eastern portions of the
mainland areas of Titusvill Cocoa, Rockledge, Melbourne and
' Palm Bay.
' - 15 -
Highway AlA runs west o and generally parallels the Atlantic
' Ocean. This road provid s access through all the beachside
communities in south and ce tral Brevard.
There are six causeways that link the beachside communities with the
mainland. These include (from north to south) State Road 405 (Nasa
' Causeway) in the north area of the county, State Roads 528 (Bennett
Causeway) and 520 (Merritt sland Causeway) in the central portion,
and State Roads 404 (Pined• Causeway), 518 (Eau Gallie Causeway)
and U.S. Highway 192 (Melb•urne Causeway) in the south area.
Brevard County is served oy the Melbourne International Airport,
' which is located in the cen al portion of the City of Melbourne. The
airport provides commercial passenger and cargo service, as well as
' general aviation. The airport currently provides only limited service by
Delta Airlines. The limited se ice by major carriers is attributable to a
greater availability of flights •nd generally lower fares offered by the
' Orlando International Airport a one-hour drive from MIA.
' Public transportation includ-s bus transportation by Space Coast
Area Transit, and Greyhoun• Bus Lines, which has three terminals in
the county.
' Population and Economic Indicators
According to the U.S. Cens s, Brevard County had a population of
' 476,000+ in 2000, representin a growth of 19.4% from 1990, and 57%
from 1980. The most recent r port in 2010 estimates the population at
543,376, indicating an approximate 14% increase in residents over the
' past ten years.
' A majority of the population lives in the unincorporated areas of the
county, with the incorpora d Cities of Palm Bay and Melbourne
' containing the largest popul tions.
' - 16 -
Population growth is largely t e result of a continued influx of northern
' state residents, as well as relocates from the south Florida counties of
Palm Beach, Broward and Dade. The population growth has slowed
' over the three years, is expe■ ted to remain low, or perhaps drop with
the Space Shuttle program d awing to a close.
' The median age in 2009 as 44 for the county, which is a slight
increase over 2005, which .aw a median age of 43.1 . This was a
' drastic increase from the me•ian age during the 1990's of 36.1 years.
The most recent data disclosed that approximately 20% of Brevard
' County's population is over t e age of 65. This indicates an increasing
trend of an older populatio for the county. The median household
' income is reported to be $49,523, which is about $2,000 higher than
the state median figure.
Brevard County, Florida Total Population
' July 1, 2010 543,376
July 1, 2009 536,357
July 1, 2008 536,314
July 1, 2007 534,407
July 1, 2006 530,319
July 1, 2005 526,088
1 July 1, 2004 515,890
July 1, 2003 502,985
July 1, 2002 494,239
July 1, 2001 485,810
' July 1, 2000 477,735
'April 1, 2000 (Census 2000) 476,230
' - 17 -
I
I
Area Employment
IThe major industry within Brevard County is the aerospace industry,
which is located on north Merritt Island and in the north beach
I portion. This aerospace act vity consists primarily of ballistic missile
testing and launching at t e Cape Canaveral military complex,
I and the recently shuttered ►pace Shuttle program located at the
Kennedy Space Center.
IThe Shuttle program has be-n replaced by four private enterprises
funded by NASA, with th= most prominent being SpaceX. The
IFalcon rocket just complet-d a successful launch and rendezvous
with the International Spa, e Station. This mission resulted in a
Icontract to send addition•I missions to the space station. Many
NASA employees that were laid off have been rehired by private
Icontractors such as SpaceX.
While the space program has played a vital role in Brevard's
Ieconomy, the diversity of i s industrial base allows for economic
stability. The electronics and defense-related industries in south
IBrevard have formed a se and level of major employment. The
largest employer in this sect r is the Harris Corporation, which is an
Iinternational communicate ns equipment company based in
Melbourne and Palm Bay. H rris Corp., with 6,500± employees, is the
I largest private employer in B evard County. Health First also employs
over 6,000.
Another major employer is ort Canaveral, a shipping and cruise-
ship port. The Port's annual economic value added impact within
IBrevard County is estimated t over $1 billion. The port accounts for
more than 13,500 direct jo s in the County, with a total annual
Ipayroll of about $566 million Factoring in induced employment, the
job levels exceed 22,000 a d the payroll increases to over $900
Imillion.
I - 18 -
II
Other major employers include Patrick Air Force Base, Rockwell
Collins, Nokia, Northrup Grumman, Wuesthoff Health Systems, and
Dictaphone.
1
' Brevard County.Fl
1
1
2%
0990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 Oct
' 2012
1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012
Data from U S Bureau of Labor Statistics Last updated Dec 22.2012
Brevard County's unemplo ment rate in April of 2013 was 7.5%,
' which is considerably lower than the high of 12.5% in November of
2010. The rate peaked due o layoffs at the Space Center and due
Ito the national recession and housing crisis. The latter led to
considerable job losses in th construction industry.
Although in the past, local employment was largely connected to
the space program, the can ellation of shuttle flights after the loss of
' Columbia in 2003 did not res It in any significant impact on the local
job and housing markets. T is was largely due to the strength and
' diversity of the Brevard ounty market, which has reduced
dependence on the space program. This diversity again softened
the impact of the cancellati n of the shuttle program.
' - 19 -
I
I
The effects of the cancellati•n of the Shuttle on the Brevard County
economy have not been as damaging as expected. While a
significant amount of I•yoffs have resulted, the overall
Iunemployment rate has rec°ntly been decreasing.
I Private space companies have emerged as well as other
opportunities for affecte• workers. Bertram Yachts recently
relocated their corporate offices and manufacturing operation
Ifrom Miami to a vacated Se• Ray Boats facility on the Barge Canal.
Bertram plans to hire 221 e ployees and initially produce 15 to 25
vessels per year. The spin o businesses associated with this major
company will also result in e ployment needs.
Tourism
I The rapid growth of the cruise industry at Port Canaveral over the
past five years has contributed to stable tourism in Brevard County.
The rapid growth is largely due to the Port's central location and
Iproximity to the Orlando area of Central Florida. Port Canaveral
hosts calls by several cruise lines carrying 1 .5 million passengers in
2011 and 2012, placing it n the top three of the busiest cruise
terminals in Florida, along wi h Port of Miami and Port Everglades.
I
Area Housing Market
I Brevard County experienc d significant growth and a robust
economy through late 2006 hen the decline of the housing market
I began. The median resale rice for an existing home declined 32%
through 2008, and continue to decline through 2011 . The median
price dropped to levels not seen since 2002/2003.
I
The median price level for the first quarter of 2011 was $89,500, as
I compared to the national average of $157,933. The median price
has rebounded to $126,000 in April of 2013.
I
I - 20 -
II
The market has historically s en a downward influence on median
price levels through high le Is of housing inventory and short sales.
The following table; howev r, shows that the housing inventory has
' been trending downward si ce year end 2007, which was the peak
inventory at over two years.
' Current inventory for single f mily residential is now estimated to be
approximately four months, hich is below the balanced inventory
of seven months. The curre t inventory for condos is in the seven
month range.
' Months of Inventory, or absorption rate, shows how many months of sales it would take, at the
current rate,to deplete the inventory.This is the best indicator of where the future market is
headed. Demand has been so high that sales are impeded due to lack of inventory Buyers are
waiting to find what they like
1 Months of Brevard Housing Inventory
,8
' mos is balanced
28 =Condos
' t Single Fair
23 '�
18 ,.
13
R nMdvt
' The construction and housing industry was the driving force that
fueled the economy during the boom years driving unemployment
historic lows of 3.3%, considered full employment. The surplus in
Ito
housing inventory that resulted led to a corresponding decrease in
housing starts. This, of course, resulted in higher unemployment.
The following chart shows that single family housing starts peaked in
' 2004 at 6,508. Condominiu starts peaked at 2,435 in that year. The
starts for 2011 were 855 an 27, respectively. Year to date totals for
t2012 through July were 575 nd 3.
' - 21 -
I
I
I
While not good for the c nstruction industry, the lack of new
IIconstruction has resulted i the decrease in housing inventory
shown above. The decreas indicates that there is a need for new
Iconstruction of both single a d multiple family residential housing.
1 EAR Construction Permits mil
a Issflld Multi F.util) Fay
II
1979 Annual Construction Md 3150 3341
19x0 3150 3218
1431 2155 2970
,0000
1982 1629 1718
I 1983 :1010- 3954 3601
1Nri4 BWO� --�
5638 4246
1 9x5 Fen 5260 4444
1986
7000 — •Sing*Fen 3219 3741
1987 0000 1 1 • ------- 1x65 ;145
' 19x4 1447 4662
t.
INK4 � I I ( _ 678 4585
1990 4000 1 922 3831
1991 30Dp r • f j 404 2928
1992 i ! I 41 3549 2000,111111 ill Nib
227 3702
1 1941 ) 552 3559
1995
1 I I I I I !111 Or 248 2461
1 o
19% § 1 0- ! ,; g S y I S g i R_ i I £d 47 1' 1997
1994 164m4 2 3
498 3284
1999 425 3165
2001) Jan Feb Mar Apr 'Nay ,I km Jul \u) Srp (k) No∎ Dec 864 3422
U 2001 325 282 309 329 349 363 373 415 413 383 416 390 692 4319
2002 325 406 524 350 344 325 474 455 362 579 423 452 125 4934
2003 451 423 557 ; 11 535 486 532 5[12 504 544 435 537 562 5607
2004 469 435 547 482 539 588 522 597 ;05 50(1 474 359 2435 650!
2005 445 407 619 507 562 581 563 620 544 606 516 450 1466 6279
I 2006 461 458 459 439 396 340 382 236 304 237 303 2% 1077 4074
2007 2)15 162 173 171 178 258 157 2)4 1411 154 117 I()8 894 2032
2008 99 108 x; 130 I(t9 34 139 76 112 82 67 56 372 1227
2009 58 59 43 62 711 96 88 77 92 82 112 117 893
2010 97 117 131) 79 88 85 80 69 63 52 35 5; 218 926
U 2011 72 61 77 99 63 87 70 81 81 62 49 57 27 855
2012 60 65 82 74 103 99 119 3 575
I
I
I
I
I
I - 22 -
II
I
I
-110-2001 I
630 , { ....r —f 00
—22002
I --a—2004
-4Y5
530 —+— i i6
—a1-2007
3:r:
I 430 -- ,. -- 202011
*- 12
1 _ i
�� �`
230 4 " /
30-
W•11
n .._ - -
I
30 i
B
m ,F t a A 5, 7 43. Si Q o
I .mace U.S census Bureau ®2012 Richard Webb-4Brevard.cdm
The Brevard County area experienced market conditions similar to
I the region with an over-supply of residential building lots, and
declines in sales volume an median prices. Based on the exhibited
over supply and lack of d mand, it was not feasible to develop
Iadditional residential units n a speculative basis until the existing
oversupply is absorbed, and local economic conditions improved.
IWhile it is unlikely that large acts of acreage will be purchased and
I developed with speculative ousing during 2013, the improvement of
the market has increased d-mand for end user lot purchases. The
effects of the NASA layoffs were not as severe as expected and
Imarket activity has recently i creased.
I The slow-down in the local housing market mirrored national and
state trends. Market conditi•ns appear to be returning to normal
levels as the large excess in entory that existed has been absorbed
Iby a more typical "owner-•ccupied" buyer. The lack of new units
coming onto the market in t e past three years has been beneficial
Iin stabilizing the overall resid=ntial market.
I Commercial Market
Since the height of the real estate market in 2005, the commercial
market maintained a relati ely steady pace until the end of 2007.
1
I - 23 -
I
1
Following this, 2008 was a year of decline for the commercial
' market and the economy in general. This continued into 2012 as the
national economy experienced a slower than expected recovery
from the recession.
' As discussed above, there are signs that the single family residential
market has improved. Sale' volumes have increased and realtors
have witnessed multiple off:rs on some properties. The market had
' a large number of "short sal:-s", or those in which homes were being
offered for less than their ortgage balances. The absorption of
these and the lack of new construction have increased demand for
traditional inventory.
Summary
In summary, the Brevard County area enjoyed a strong economy
during the 2000 to 2005 tim period as the real estate market, the
growth of the cruise indust , and low unemployment had positive
taffects upon the local eco omy. This trend reversed itself in 2006
when the national recession and housing crisis began.
The real estate "meltdown" that occurred appears to have
' bottomed out and all sig s are pointing to recovery. A large
number of foreclosure and ' short sale" transactions have occurred,
' clearing up a large invento that grew out of the crisis.
At present, the unemploym-nt rate is showing a gradual decline, as
well as the existing housing inventory. The median home price in
Brevard County is now sho ing gradual increases each month. It
' appears that the real estat- market is recovering and that positive
signs are expected in the for-seeable future.
On the following page is a map of Brevard County, showing the
tlocation of the subject prop:rty.
' - 24 -
I
I
r5r...
II1 North Brevard I
a
2 The Great Outdoors q r
I3 Titusville -a 'mss
4 Port St John . 3
I 5Wes t Brevard 2; -,`
6 Sharpes; Canaveral Groves r 4
Iop 7 Cocoa it 6 a0
8 Rockledge ,I 77 a
I9 Vera t Suntree 8
op 10 Lake Washington ,
al
I11 Northeast Melbourne a 9
40 12 Melbourne ,.. r,
5 410 1 1
I imp 14 Palm Bay
15 Malabar ; Barefoot Bay !I —"` Fla
2.0
I4. 16 Merritt Island
- 17 Cape Canaveral Cocoa Beach a4
' 20 South Beaches r 15 tz I BREVARD COUNTY MAP - (SUBJECT IS IN AREA 17)
I
I
I
I
I — 25 —
NEIGHBORHOOD DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS
The t subject neighborhood can best be described as that
g 1 g
' area bounded on the south by State Road No. 520; on the north by
Port Canaveral and the Ken edy Space Center; on the east by the
Atlantic Ocean; and on the west by the Banana River. This general
' area is known as the North Cocoa Beach/Cape Canaveral
community.
The neighborhood's major roadways consist of State Road No. 528,
State Road No. 520 and North Atlantic Avenue (State Road Al A).
State Road No. 528, which i also known as the Bennett Causeway,
' links Port Canaveral and th- north portions of the central Brevard
beach area with Merritt Islam. and the mainland City of Cocoa.
State Road No. 520 links the central Cocoa Beach area with Merritt
Island, Cocoa and the cen ral Florida City of Orlando. State Road
No. Al A is the major north to south traffic artery within the central and
south Brevard beach areas. This road terminates at State Road No.
' 528 a short distance to the north.
The immediate neighborh od consists of four distinctly different
markets. These markets are the commercial and industrial related
areas located along the major roadways and within Port Canaveral,
the waterfront condominium projects, the single family residential
areas, and a large area of mixed single-family and multi-family uses.
Typically, the properties fronting directly along the ocean or the
Banana River are multi-floored condominium projects with an
occasional hotel/motel use. _ying a short distance to the north of the
' subject property are several large residential condominium projects;
the Colonial House, Puerto Del Rio Condominiums, Bayside
' Townhomes, the Plaza and the Treasure Island Club Condominiums.
- 26 -
I
I
I
The immediate subject area along Atlantic Avenue is developed
Iwith a variety of uses. The area around the subject includes uses such
as Cape Canaveral City Hall Complex, convenience stores with gas
pumps, professional offices, retail shops and restaurants.
I The area to the east of Atlantic Avenue consists of the Avon-by-the-
Sea Subdivision. This subdivision consists of a variety of uses including
single and multi-family residences, apartment complexes and
Icondominium projects. This area also contains city and county
owned properties such as the Brevard County Sheriff's Office, Cape
ICanaveral Library, a city park, the Veteran's Memorial Park and the
Nancy Hanson Recreation Complex.
I The major influence on the subject neighborhood is its' excellent
major 9
I access to the Banana River, Atlantic Ocean, Port Canaveral and the
transportation routes to other portions of the county and the state.
The Port encompasses 3,300 acres with approximately 800 of these in
Ithe port proper with the rest being acreage along the Canaveral
barge canal further west on Merritt Island.
I
The Cape Canaveral/Cocoa Beach area has several forces that
Iincrease the amount of tourists to the area. One of these is the
Kennedy Space Center, which is located to the north. Tourists from
I the central Florida theme parks also come to the area as Cocoa
Beach is the closest beach community to the Orlando area.
Another major draw to the area is the Ron-Jon Surf Shop in Cocoa
Beach. This property lies approximately one block to the south of
IState Road 520 along State Road Al A. The store encompasses 52,000
square feet of area and has an estimated annual customer count of
Iapproximately 1 .5 million.
I
I - 27 -
I
I
In addition, the cruise line industry at Port Canaveral has been
Iexpanding over the past few years. The growth of the cruise line
business has brought many additional tourists to the area. The
I addition of Walt Disney World Cruise Lines has brought national and
international attention to the general area.
IThere is currently a good mix of commercial uses within the
neighborhood. The general lack of availability of additional vacant
Iland tends to control any new growth in this area. The lack of usable
land within the neighborhood should cause a continued increase in
Iproperty values.
IThe retail and office uses located within the subject area have
reasonably strong occupancy rates even throughout the recent local
I and national economic slowdown. The subject area is currently
experiencing occupancy rates in the range of 85% to 90%.
IIn conclusion, the subject neighborhood is a mature mixed
commercial, multi-family and single family district that is in a stable
Iposition at this time. The subject area in enjoying strong occupancy
rates which is expected to continue into the foreseeable future.
II area map following page contains a gene ea ap that shows the a a
Ilocation of the subject property in relation to the surrounding area.
I
I
I
I
I - 28 -
I
I
Challenger Rd a Dr
Atlantis Rd v
MA Q' %Shorew or
Lrl
Seaport Blvd
' L e Beach Park Ln
ZHarbor Dr Coral Dr
�O� Oc 03(‘W°°ds BNd
Ce
I Central CO - ntel Blvd W 2 Central Blvd E
co Surf or
Z
d
I NQdQo�� Caere
Chard
St
,r
tWashington Ave 1
Adams Ave Q'
I Jefferson Ave c
Madison Ave ii
Mo e,e 6Ty
HffiTWjAve
Arno Ave Cape Tyler Ave
anaveral poW Ave
Taylor Ave
Fillmore Ave 1
I Am > e
Center St Q
C g'
O
I Hayes Ave Atlantic
Garfield Ave Ocean
Arthur Ave
c
Taft Ave
i'
I 0�,a 4
cock Dr > x
i
Kent Dr m 6
I c Z
m
01
Cocoa Beach
Qyghtwaters Dr
ILeon Ln E
IGENERAL AREA MAP
I
I
I - 29 -
I
I
SITE DESCRIPTION
ISize and Shape
The subject site consists of a rectangular-shaped tract of land having
Ian approximate area of 6,250 square feet, or .14 acres. The site fronts
approximately 50 feet along the north right-of-way of Polk Avenue
Iand has a depth of approximately 125 feet.
IThese measurements and size calculations were obtained from the
Brevard County Tax Roll and Plat Maps. The appraiser assumes that
Ithe measurements and size calculations are correct. As was noted,
the appraiser reserves the right to modify this report upon receipt of a
tcurrent survey.
Elevation and Drainage
IThe site is basically flat and level and is to grade with the surrounding
streets and adjacent lands. An inspection of the site did not disclose
Iany obvious drainage problems. As was discussed previously, the site
does not lie within a flood hazard area. The elevation and drainage,
Itherefore, are considered to be good.
I Soils
The appraiser was not provided with soil boring studies; however, the
soil appears to be of the light, sandy type which generally provides
Igood capacity for building improvements. An inspection of the
improvements did not disclose any unusual settling cracks.
I
Vegetation
IThe subject site is nearly 100% improved with structures, paving and
landscaping consisting of St. Augustine grasses, palm trees and
Iflowers.
I
I - 30 -
I
I
Access
IAccess to the site is available from its frontage along Polk Avenue.
This is a two-lane asphalt paved street improved with sidewalks, curbs
and streetlights.
Anticipated Public or Private Improvements
' The appraiser is not aware of any anticipated public or private
improvements planned on or off the site.
I
Easements and Encroachments
INo adverse easements or encroachments that would hinder the site
from being developed to its highest and best use were found. The
I appraiser reserves the right to modify this report should a survey be
provided that indicates otherwise.
ISummary
In summary, the subject site consists of a 6,250 square foot (.14 acre)
Itract of land located along the north right-of-way of Polk Avenue.
The site is rectangular in shape and has adequate frontage and
depth. The appraiser knows of no physical conditions present that
would adversely affect the development of the site to its highest and
Ibest use.
I The following pages contain a subject property map and an aerial
map showing the size and shape of the site under appraisal.
I
I
I
I
I - 31 -
II
I
I
3 4 5 ' 6 7 8 7 2 J 4
I 'n 1 ' m _
-I -i
I > 11 .0 12 13 14 1516 > 9 10 11
269 Z 1
�
I _ TILE '
13 � A >
I C 1 4 5 7 1.0�� ',�� :
z I
I 4
9 1 El 114 artira 9 10 11
I _ _1 l
POLK AV
I
1
I - - 6 1
1 9 12 13
TAIL'
ISUBJECT PROPERTY MAP
1
I
I
I
I - 32 -
1
I
i .' rtPASM1•�YG�w�-
TYLE�R.
mot' -0;-..
lit
pS,:. Z-
-1,11,11W.,..ji.- 2!*4 '1.1' t€ irto Iwo . ,.: , 4
440. ,
# �.,
I
c3 , Z 1' 1
L
X ms:µ ; `:+*' '.C.) nt'
Aillli
,. - 4 .
1 AERIAL MAP
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I - 33 —
1
I
I
DESCRIPTION OF THE IMPROVEMENTS
I The subject major maj improvement to the ect site consists of a two-story,
P 1
I office condominium building. The structure occupies a total of 3,204
square feet and contains seven office units. The building is of masonry
construction with a stucco finish and a flat roof.
The layout consists of four units on the second floor and three units on
Ithe ground floor. Units 1 and 2, as well as Units 6 and 7, contain
connecting doorways that allow mutual access. On the ground floor
Iis a entrance drive between Units 2 and 3 that allow vehicle access
to the rear parking lot. The second floor is accessed via an exterior
Istairway along the front.
I The building was constructed in 1966 and, therefore, has an actual
age of 47 years. The appraiser estimates the improvements to have
an effective age of 30 years, with a remaining economic life estimate
Iof 20 years. An inspection of the improvements revealed that they
are in fair condition with some maintenance and repairs needed
Iprior to occupancy. The majority of the units require new floor
coverings, paint, new restroom fixtures and general cleaning to
Icompete in the market for potential tenants/buyers.
I The construction components of the building improvements will now
be discussed. The description of the improvements is based upon a
I physical inspection of the building improvements, and is subject to
change should the original construction plans be made available.
IFoundation
The building is set to grade on a steel reinforced concrete perimeter
Ifooting system.
I
I - 3 4 -
Floor Structure/Covers
' The floor structure consists of a four-inch concrete slab poured over
a vapor barrier and wire mesh reinforcing. The second floor is also of
' concrete construction. Five of the units contain terrazzo or vinyl tile
floor coverings. The remaining two units contain concrete flooring
with no covering.
Interior Construction
Each unit contains painted masonry walls. The units also contain
minimal interior partitions which consist of wood paneling. The
' ceilings are of painted plaster. Units 1 and 2, as well as Units 6 and 7,
contain interior doorways which allows for the units to be utilized as
' one.
Heating and Cooling
' Each unit within the building is serviced by a central heating and
cooling system. The systems were reported to have no defects at
the time of inspection.
t Electrical and Lighting
The units are adequately lighted with strip fluorescent lighting
fixtures. Each unit contains a separate electrical meter. The
telectrical capacity of the building appears to be adequate for the
use.
Plumbing
' Each unit contains one restroom with a toilet and a sink. The
plumbing service was found to be adequate for the use.
' Exterior Walls
The exterior walls are of eight-inch concrete block construction. The
' front wall of the building has metal and glass storefront windows
and seven metal and glass doors. The rear wall has three doors
which provide access to Units 1, 2 and 3 along the ground floor.
' - 35 -
II
I
I
Roof Structure
IThe roof structure is comprised of bar joist construction that is
covered with a built-up composition surface. The owner stated that
Ithe roof was repaired recently and was in good condition.
Site Improvements
IThe subject contains asphalt paving that includes 4 striped parking
spaces in the front and 12 spaces in the rear. This parking capacity
Iis legally adequate, however; discussions with the owner and an on
site inspection, revealed that the parking capacity is limited and
Imay adversely affect some potential users. Other site improvements
include a covered concrete walkway across the front of the first
Iand second floors, landscaping and fencing.
I Functional Utility
The facility appears to be functional in design and layout for its use
as an office condominium property. The building improvements
occupy approximately 22% of the total site area, which is within the
normal range of 15% to 25%. This coverage provides sufficient areas
for parking and landscaping.
I Summary
In summary, the subject site is improved with a seven unit
condominium office building that occupies a total of 3,204 square
Ifeet. On the date of inspection, the improvements were found to be
in fair condition and in need of refurbishment. The improvements
Iappear to be functional in design and layout and appear to
maximally utilize the site.
IThe following pages contain sketches from the condominium
Idocuments showing the site plan and the building/unit layout.
I
I - 36 -
I
I
�. ..
I CAPE CANAVERAL PROFESSIONAL 'B'LDG4,;.•�
A CONDOMINIUM . •
I
a.
i
er, . .
I .
•
ti � 2 sly. C.8.5 I O
1 \ n OFF/CE BLDG. 4 ti •4
F.FC.CEO/ - //.G'
49.D5'
I = -a 1
LeArav'con, U \I -
-T�•- •.lap' —_
s.aafe�wdC �,7 --
I
z'cu^b/RS*,
J88'O lw 'o►'
IN rn . . GRAPHIC PLOT PLAN
SURVEYOR'S NOTES:
Ii. THE BUILDING SHOWN IS A 7 UNIT, TWO STORY C.B.S. OFFICE
BUILDING APPROXIMATELY 30 FEET IN HEIGHT.
2. ALL AREAS AND IMPROVEMENTS EXCLUSIVE OF THE UNITS ARE
COMMON ELEMENTS OF THE CONDOMINIUM.
N 3. THIS GRAPHIC PLOT PLAN WAS PREPARED FROM AS AS BUILT
I V -0 SURVEY, UNDER THE DIRECTION OF JOHN R. CAMPBELL, P.L.S.
_ a
cC")m rn
I
ALLEN ENGINEERING, INC.
COCOA BEACH, FLORIDA - •
I FEBRUARY 25. 1981) .EXHIBIT-A SHEET 3 - 1
'
Ill
•
1 SITE PLAN
I
I — 37 -
1
I
I
I , IIIIIMMIIIIIIIIIIIIIMIIINII
CAP.E CANAVERAL PROFESSIONAL BLDG.
I • A CONDOMINIUM r•
I ..
11 -,"*.. ........,..... ..- -4—,.. — -..... "'Ll
/2.,2' ,V.Ars.' /./. . .
I I
!..
_Ni N. . i.....
I - -1
1 2 open 3
/Z.. ' . .
/s.?.-..;' ./.e.b•
ME■11......1■•■■■•/ .1■••■•■••■••■■ •.eirMe■•••■
. .7. 7,. . . . . .
I ____ .•I 1 -.r— .
. .
o . .
I 1 FIRST FLOOR PLAN
Po "ri
iso in .
Fl .
SuRVEVOR'S NOTES: -
I
I. THE FIRST YLS014 PiNISPEC FLOOR ELEVAT1LIN :S 11.68 FEET.
2. TH:S U:RS'7 monix FINISHED CEILING ELEVATION IR !A.C5
..., PEET.
J. A'.1. ARr.AS AND IMPROVEMENTS EXCLUSIVE CF TEE UNITS
THINSELVEV Aue onmptoN ELEMENTS Cr THE CUrOOMINIM.
I NJ ,
4, 0 I:9:CATES-TVE :NIT NUM8C1 %ESIDNATION-
-- I.
ap. AI ;. ■■■■■INOICATES TM L:M!':1) OP THE UNIT.
5. TEE xmwArloNs SHOWN ARE BASED ON N.S.V.(ATJM OF I'i'.
I 7, FOR THE UNIT FLOOR ?LAN* GWJETNNINCI ,NITS
RECR TO SHEETS 6 - P :E. THIS EXHIBIT.
. -
111 ',..
ALLEN ENCINEERINC., 11W.
. COCOA REACH, FLORIDA • ...
?TUX:ARV 25, 1981 UMUFT "A" SHEET 4
# .
I i .
•
. --'
I
I
I
I
I
AL
CAPE CANAVERAL PROFESSIONAL BLDG.' -
' .A CONDOMINIUM
• 4
r+
I ,_____ _ _ A
/t a' /8•o ro 6 i%V.'
'
? is
I. 1� /` A T. F.
Is
A 4 Is
I 4 5 6 . 7
.5.• /5onq
1111 !
SECOND FLOOR PLAN
0
T
I V
O Al £L1 R'JF.YUR'S NOM;:
. Jr
1 1. 71E SCCONO ricoa r1NIS}fro FLUOR CLMA'1'/ON : 20.1E FEET.
` 2. Trc SLCGSD EI.C.OR CIETsB:U Cr:11.,1r ; s.t-VA'FION IS 211.111 FEET.
I J. ALL AREAS AND IMPR(7VE>IINT.I 1:IIC1.0 i1VP OC TAY, UNITS
THEMSELVES ARE COA L1N ELEMENTS OF TUC c-(NUOM.INIUM_
4. () INDICATES THE UNIT I<LMRER 7ES I(NATIoN,
S. INDICATES THE LIMITS or 711E ;NIT. •
N
I ~
v O I, '6- THE us:item:y1 RHOUN AI<C RASED ON N.C.V. DATUM OF 1:'29.
Cl
'' R
FO �:HE Ux IT ['Look ?CAN'S ETALTERNINi; UNITS
REF£A TO r11EBYS 1C-17 TN TIITS EXHIBIT. r
ALLEN ENGINI:rR1.MYi. INC.
I .COCOA BEACH, I LONTDA
FEBRUARY 25, 1411 ExHIRIT "4" SHEET t, `
t,
I 1
I
I — 39 -
i
I
I -
..- CAPE CANAVERAL PROFESSIONAL BLDG ----,
A CONDOMINIUM
II
.
.. . .
_I ;
4 • .
• It 4,6:114
I , -.... Otoex 0,4r i "my.04Ir .
.3 C..= =
4:4-0%r 1"•-dil: . . . ••.
= . .
I :'' .- • ..
, .
I Orrice
.1714e)r/Z=Pr"
\
•
• .
I
- • .
= : !.•
• .
I N. • .
..cocet otary .
"et o'x Alede.
/ CD
P4 -n
it 1— . N
CD 73
• \
IV M
I .1 c, mu 1
•
I 0.11 SURVEYOR'S NOTES:
I. •THE DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARF REPRESENTATIONAL AND .
AS SUCH MAY VARY SLIGHTLY.
01:1 V'
2. •••••■•INDICATES THE LIMITS OF THE UNIT.
--■■ '- rn
I ,
, \ .
c--- .
IALLEN ENGINEERING, INC. •
COCOA BEACH, FLORIDA
FEBRUARY 25, 1901 minx: 'A' SKEET 6
I ,e
ITYPICAL UNIT SKETCH
I
I
I
1
I
HIGHEST AND BEST USE
IThe 12th Edition of the Appraisal of Real Estate defines highest and
best use as follows:
I
"the reasonably probable and legal use of vacant land
Ior an improved property, which is physically possible,
appropriately supported, financially feasible, and that
results in the highest value."
In estimating highest and best use, there are essentially four stages of
Ianalysis:
I 1 . Legally permissible use (legal). What uses are permitted by
zoning and deed restrictions on the site in question?
I2. Physically possible use. What uses of the site in question are
physically possible?
I3. Financially feasible use. Which possible and permissible use will
Iproduce a net return?
4. Maximally productive use. Among the feasible use, which use
Iwill produce the highest return or the highest present worth?
I The highest and best use of the land (or site) if vacant and available
for use may be different from the highest and best use of the
improved property. This is true when the improvement is not an
Iappropriate use, but it makes a contribution to the total property
value in excess of the value of the site.
IThe following tests may be met in estimating the highest and best use:
The use must be legal. The use must be probable, not speculative or
1 conjectural. There must be a profitable demand for such use and it
must return to the land the highest net return for the longest period of
I time.
I - 41 -
II
HIGHEST AND BEST USE AS IF VACANT
Permissible Use
' The appraiser is not aware of any deed restrictions that would dictate
the use that could be constructed on the property. There are,
however, public restrictions that do affect the use. As was previously
discussed in the zoning section, the subject property is zoned for
commercial use by the City of Cape Canaveral.
This zoning classification allows for development of retail stores,
1 professional offices, banks, personal service facilities to name just a
few.
Possible Use
The first constraint imposed on the possible use of the property is
dictated by the physical aspects of the site itself. The size and
location within a given block are the most important determinants of
' value. In general, the larger the site, the greater its potential to
achieve economies of scale and flexibility in development.
The subject site consists of a .14 acre, or 6,250 square foot tract of
' land that is rectangular in shape. The size and shape is conducive for
development of many small scale uses.
The site benefits from all utility services as well as frontage and access
along Polk Avenue. The site is flat and level and has good drainage
characteristics. The soil conditions were found to be favorable for
development.
The subject site is well-suited for development with those legally
' permitted uses which can conform to the size and shape of the site.
The appraiser is not aware of any physical conditions that could
' adversely affect development of the site to its highest and best use.
' - 42 -
I
I
Feasible Use
IAs was discussed, the subject site is zoned for commercial uses. By
location, the site is feasible for development with a low intensity use
I such as a retail store or office facility that would not require exposure
to high traffic volume. These uses would conform to the
neighborhood as the area is developed with similar uses.
Conclusion
IAfter consideration, the appraiser has concluded that the highest
and best use of the subject site is for development with a low intensity
Iretail or office facility. These uses are legally permissible, physically
possible and are believed to provide the highest return to the land
Iamong all competing uses.
HIGHEST AND BEST USE AS IMPROVED
The subject site is developed with a seven-unit office facility. This use is
legally permissible, as it is allowable under the C-1 zoning regulation.
I
The subject building encompasses a footprint of approximately 22%
Iof the total site area, which falls within the typical range of 15% to 25%
for like properties.
The present use is legally permissible, physically possible, and is
believed to provide the highest return to the underlying land. The
Ipresent use is in conformance with the other uses in the
neighborhood, and is fully functional.
I
I
I - 43 -
I
I
EXPOSURE TIME
Exposure Time is defined as: The estimated length of time that the
p g
I 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.
The appraiser consulted several local real estate brokers and was
Iinformed that the value concluded herein could have been
achieved after an exposure period of nine to twelve months.
I
IMARKETING TIME
I Marketing time differs from exposure time as it estimates the time
required to sell the property from the date of valuation forward. If
market conditions prior to the date of valuation are expected to
Iremain unchanged after the date, then the two would be the same.
In this case, the appraiser estimates that the marketing time would
Ialso be in the nine to twelve month range.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I - 44 -
I
I
APPROACHES TO VALUE
1 The sales comparison and income approaches to value will be
I utilized in estimating the market value of the subject property in fee
simple. These approaches are believed to be sufficient to arrive at a
credible estimate of market value.
The sales comparison approach to value estimates the value of the
Iproperty based upon an analysis of comparable sales. The market
will be researched in order to find sales of properties similar to the
Isubject. The sales are directly compared to the property under
appraisal and adjusted for any differences. The resulting value
I conclusions developed from the sales are then correlated into a
single estimate of value for the property under appraisal.
IThe income approach, the market rent is estimated by analyzing
recent leases and current rental rates for competitive facilities in the
Iarea. After deducting a reasonable allowance for vacancy and
income loss, expenses and replacement reserves, the net operating
Iincome is capitalized into an indication of value for the subject using
an overall capitalization rate.
IThe cost approach was determined to not be credible in
I determining the market value due to the age of the improvements
and the subjectivity in estimating accrued depreciation.
IIn this appraisal, the value indications produced by the Sales
Comparison and Income Approaches will be reconciled into a final
Ivalue estimate.
I
I
I - 45 -
I
I
I
SALES COMPARISON APPROACH TO VALUE
I The sales comparison approach to value is a process of comparing
g
I sales of similar properties that have sold in the marketplace to the
property being appraised. The strength of the sales comparison
I approach is that the data used to compare with the subject property
are actual sales in the market. The approach applies the actions of
buyers and sellers to a subject property in order to estimate a value.
IThe principle of substitution implies that a prudent purchaser will not
pay more for a property than a comparable property would cost
t him.
IThe application of the sales comparison approach in a given
situation consists of comparing the property being appraised with
I other similar properties that have moved in the marketplace. When
sufficient sales of comparable properties are available for analysis,
the sales comparison approach is a most reliable guide to value.
Each comparable sale is compared to the subject property, with
Iappropriate adjustments, in order to provide a value indication to the
subject by the comparable sale. These separate value indications
Iare then correlated into the estimate of value by the sales
comparison approach.
IThe first step in this approach is to search the market for sales with
I similar uses. The investigation disclosed four sales of similar properties
that were selected for analysis and comparison to the subject.
IThe following pages contain a tabulation of the pertinent data
obtained from each sale, as well as a sales location map,
Iphotographs and detailed sale sheets describing each transaction.
I
I - 46 -
1
TABULATION OF IMPROVED SALES
' SALE DATE PRICE SQ.FT. S/SQ.FT. LOCATION
1 4/13 $100,000 949 $105.37 2955 Pineda Plaza Way
Melbourne
2 3/13 $119,000 1,092 $108.97 1680 Highway A l A
Satellite Bch.
3 3/13 $45,000 998 $45.09 120 Venetian Way
' Merritt Island
4 12/11 $26,000 470 $55.32 102 Columbia Dr.
Cape Canaveral
' 110 Polk Av.
Subject 6/13 --- 468*
Cape Canaveral
' * = Typical Unit Size
1
' - 47 -
t
I
I
od Allen HIS Ave
a T 5 fr0f Ln
p`
5 p E A
O And%O or
Z Jen Dr
I
of
d Ca a Dr
509 l n c a
O O
Z
f Arlington I -o
4 E
A
I tam
� SsLE Ml
Pineda Causeway
g'
o • 404 n
Windsor E��e9 Dr
I B t
S
3
a
pineda Causeway z
Lcgetr
Hoofprkrt Or
309
0' O S Madrid P m Shares
a
O Outlook Dr z
`
,E i
ar Cove Rd
Buakress Center Blvd
I
x
it
I N
9 Ocean Spray Ave z
Greenway Ave Skyline Bit" i c
Maple Dr Y
Coach Rd = T
Cherry Dr *
I Carriage Rd Dr 5 '
n
0 Winchester Rd Elm Ave
n U
n 'c v
E
c
I Sateillte Desoto Pkwy p ,
' Bueh
rvgg
m K j54LEN2 _
��O 0t
Lynn Ave n C
Trinidad0 u ggg
0
I S 13 a m m ne
Tomahawk Dr .�a'1 N A 3 AtA
° A Q
n & Q o m,
`Dr 3 >Palmetto Ave g
k 5
I Q Satetltle Ave ¢
Eau Gone Ave
013
Indian Harbour Mach
i z
3 NO
CP U Martesia Way
m
py
c. Q Park Dr
o
River Or Pinetree Of
I 9 0
COMPARABLE SALE MAPS
I
I - 48 -
I
I
5
' 4016100010"'
I
Marine Hecba Or Ada Ray or .. Sea Rey a
I ..as f 32D
Furman Rd
Oak Park Cede "i c»3 ralenndge Circle
63 0 Ave
1 O
' 2` Q V smitten Way •
•
;13- Via Mayotte o
2
�.
Crown to N n V oe
!as Palmas
-- Rani - --
I
,.SM �t Nigh Field Manor Dr `----,;)
7 i)
' Rantree Lake Circle Cam a,
Pioneer Rd
<' 25 'LLD
hennas
Tropical Trail N m —.
Butler Ave *°°.���.,°r ,
J Manah Ct
Skyline Blvd soeaiocd Bar
crni
HrMrr Stone Dr
Joe PI
2
` m Charter St
KYtgs Ln e-,, Chen Down Ln .
DI >
'C •om.Beech Gac Q
cof mr Com !It lM
I 8
Caroine St gg
Manatee Bay Dr
��V re
Z Washington Ave
U
Columbia Or • Church Ln 4-
Adams Ave Q
I Long Porn Rd > i
Jefferson Ave <
Madison Ave
MA IX
' o Monroe Ave
International Dr f <
Cana., o Jackson Ave
Jackson Ave
Gay Par, i
Majestic Bay Ave ¢ Hann Ave
I Carver St N N
Carver St S I�-F Ia@M1
Riverside Dr rs Ave
Amo Ave < a ya
Hitching Post Rd -�.efy Polk Ave 'Alf
Riche Ave Cape w�oc.
I a Resort
Z Taylor Ave
a'
Fillmore Ave
I
COMPARABLE SALE MAPS
I - 49 -
1
Y I.
4 ill
*
' COMPARABLE SALE NUMBER 1
ADDRESS: 2955 Pineda Plaza Way, Melbourne
' TAX I.D. NUMBER: 26-37-19-00-00510.W-0000.00
' O.R. BOOK/PAGE: 6861 / 2334
GRANTOR: Annapolis Melbourne Management Group, LLC
GRANTEE: TNK Management, LLC
' LAND SIZE: .1 Acres ZONING: Commercial
PRICE: $100,000 DATE OF SALE: April 2013
' UNIT PRICE: $105.37 per sq. ft. TERMS: Conventional
HIGHEST AND BEST USE: Continued Office Use
PROPERTY DATA: The comparable sale property is located at the corner of
' Pineda Plaza Way and Wickham Road in Melbourne. The sale unit (#210)
is in use as an office condominium containing a total of 949 square feet.
The improvements were built in 1986 of masonry construction and were
' considered to be in good condition at the time of the sale.
COMMENTS/ VERIFICATION: Verified to be arms length by the grantee.
' - 50 -
II
®12 1 13,
COMPARABLE SALE NUMBER 2
' ADDRESS: 1680 Highway AlA, Satellite Beach
TAX I.D. NUMBER: 27-37-01-50-00006.0-0007.05
' O.R. BOOK/PAGE: 6836 / 1316
' GRANTOR: John L. and Christy H. Bocinsky
GRANTEE: Business Advisors, LLC
' LAND SIZE: .1 1 Acres ZONING: Commercial
PRICE: $119,000 DATE OF SALE: March 2013
' UNIT PRICE: q
per 108.97 s . ft. TERMS: Conventional
$ P
HIGHEST AND BEST USE: Continued Office Use
' PROPERTY DATA: The comparable sale property is located along the west
right of way of Highway AlA in Satellite Beach. The sale unit (#E) is in use
as an office condominium containing a total of 1,092 square feet. The
improvements were built in 1984 of masonry construction and were
' considered to be in good condition at the time of the sale.
COMMENTS/ VERIFICATION: Verified to be arms length by the grantee.
' - 51 -
1
• FP" ftt
1
COMPARABLE SALE NUMBER 3
ADDRESS: 120 Venetian Way, Merritt Island
' TAX I.D. NUMBER: 24-36-14-00-00287.6-0000.00
' O.R. BOOK/PAGE: 6828 / 2842
GRANTOR: David M. and Barbara A. Strock
' GRANTEE: Patrick J. O'Rourke and Laurie A. Lashomb
' LAND SIZE: .09 Acres ZONING: Commercial
PRICE: $45,000 DATE OF SALE: March 2013
' UNIT PRICE: $45.09 per sq. ft. TERMS: Conventional
' HIGHEST AND BEST USE: Continued Office Use
PROPERTY DATA: The comparable sale property is located along Venetian
Way, just west of Courtenay Parkway in Merritt Island. The sale unit (#21) is
in use as an office condominium containing a total of 998 square feet.
The improvements were built in 1980 of masonry construction and were
' considered to be in average condition at the time of the sale.
COMMENTS/ VERIFICATION: Verified to be arms length by the grantee.
' - 52 -
II
I
I
if
I _ ___�,�
V; .
I
w
I
la
1
ICOMPARABLE SALE NUMBER 4
ADDRESS: 102 Columbia Drive, Cape Canaveral
ITAX I.D. NUMBER: 24-37-22-02-00000.0-0001.11
IO.R. BOOK/PAGE: 6513 / 2050
GRANTOR: Hope Management, LLC
IGRANTEE: Jeffery S. and Nicole T. Luethje
ILAND SIZE: .03 Acres ZONING: Commercial
PRICE: $26,000 DATE OF SALE: December 2011
IUNIT PRICE: $55.32 per sq. ft. TERMS: Conventional
IHIGHEST AND BEST USE: Continued Office Use
PROPERTY DATA: The comparable sale property is located at the
I northwest corner of Columbia Drive and Astronaut Boulevard in Cape
Canaveral. The sale unit (#201) is in use as an office condominium
containing a total of 470 square feet. The improvements were built in 1985
I of masonry construction and were considered to be in good condition at
the time of the sale.
ICOMMENTS/ VERIFICATION: Verified to be arms length by the grantee.
I - 53 -
I
I
The four sales developed indicated unit prices to the subject
Iproperty ranging from a low of $45.09 per square foot to a high of
$108.97 per square foot of building area. The following discussion
I compares the four sales with the subject to develop a unit value for
the subject property.
IThe four sales were confirmed to have been arms length transactions
and were cash to seller transactions that did not include favorable
Iseller held financing. Sale Nos. 1, 2 and 3, which took place in 2013,
reflect current market conditions and no adjustments for time were
I necessary. Sale No. 4 took place in December 2011 and warranted
an upward adjustment due to appreciable market conditions since
its sale date.
Sale No. 1 is a condominium unit within the Pineda Plaza complex
Ialong Pineda Plaza Way and Wickham Road in Melbourne. This sale
location is superior to the subject due to its higher traffic volume. The
Isale office unit is also superior in condition when compared to the
subject. All other factors were considered similar to the subject.
I Overall, Sale No. 1 is superior to the subject and provides a higher
indication of value to the subject.
ISale No. 2 is an office condominium located along Highway AlA in
Satellite Beach. This location is superior to the subject due to its higher
Itraffic volume and proximity to the Atlantic Ocean. Sale No. 2 was
also in superior condition on the date of sale. All other factors were
Iconsidered similar to the subject. Overall, Sale No. 2 is superior to the
subject and provides a higher indication of value.
Sale No. 3 is located along Venetian Way, just west of Courtenay
Parkway (State Road 3) in Merritt Island. This location is considered
Islightly inferior to the subject. All other factors were considered similar
to the subject. Sale No. 3 indicates a somewhat lower value to the
Isubject.
I - 54 -
I
I
Sale No. 4 is situated at the corner of Columbia Drive and Astronaut
IBoulevard (Highway Al A) in Cape Canaveral. This sale is superior in
terms of location when compared to the subject. After the offsetting
I adjustments for time and location, Sale No. 4 developed an
indication similar to the subject.
After careful consideration of the preceding discussion, the appraiser
has concluded that a unit value of $60.00 per square foot for the
Isubject property is reasonable and will be utilized in developing the
value estimate through the sales comparison approach.
I
Applying the value indication to the subject's building area develops
Ithe following indicated market value, as of June 1, 2013:
INDICATED PROPERTY VALUE
$60.00 per square foot x 3,204 square feet = $192,240
ISay = $190,000
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I - 55 -
I
I
I
INCOME APPROACH
I The income capitalization approach is a method of valuation b
P pP by
I establishing a relationship between the income that can be
generated from a property and the perceived value of a property by
investors based upon the income-generating capabilities. The
Iapproach involves estimating the property's probable market rent,
the expenses of ownership attributable to the property, and an
Iappropriate capitalization rate that will convert the property's net
operating income into value. The appraiser does this by researching
Iand analyzing:
I (1 ) the property's income and expense history,
(2) histories of competing properties,
I (3) existing and asking rents for the subject and competing
properties,
I
(4) estimating vacancy levels from the subject and similar
( ) g Y 1
Iproperties,
(5) analyzing and estimating management's expense budget
Iand
(6) projecting tax assessments and utility costs.
I
ICONTRACT RENT
The subject property is currently unoccupied and, therefore, not
Isubject to any leases. The economic rent level for the subject
property will now be estimated.
I
I
I - 56 -
I
I
ECONOMIC RENT ESTIMATE
IEconomic rent can be defined as the rental income that a property
I would most probably command in the open market. It is indicated
by the current rents paid and asked for comparable space as of the
date of the appraisal.
1
In order to arrive at an estimate of economic rent for the subject
Iproperty, an investigation was made throughout the subject area for
similar properties that are currently rented or offered for rent. The
Iappraiser contacted several brokers and property managers for
information on comparable properties. The properties surveyed were
I restricted to properties that are believed to be comparable to the
subject.
The search of the market disclosed four office comparables that
were selected for analysis and comparison to the subject. The
Ifollowing pages contain a tabulation of rental data obtained from
each of the properties, rent location maps, photographs and
Icomparative adjustments made to each property.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I - 57 -
1
TABULATION OF RENTAL DATA
' RENT RENT/
NO. SQ. FT. SQ TYPE LOCATION
' 1485 Atlantic Av.
1 820 $10.24 Gross
Cocoa Beach
2 589 $12.22 Gross 1980 Atlantic Av.
Cocoa Beach
•
3 3,200 $10.50 Gross 99 George J. King Blvd.
Cape Canaveral
4 600 $1 1.50 Gross* 7001 Atlantic Av.
' Cape Canaveral
* = Includes Electric
' - 58 -
II
I
I
John F Kennedy Space Center
I 401 Highway 401
4.
1 Cape Canaveral Air
Cargo Rd Force Station
Idolphin Rd
O° Freddie t T N3
I 528 Astronaut Patrick
Park �d
George. 0 or Jetty Maritgn"Park
Atlantis Rd
I Al Ao/
Beach Park Ln-_.
IT(
' o antra/ Blvd W Central Blvd E
G ��9 Chan her St
Blvd Gf
1
L
o Adams Ave
Mao SUBJECT PtiWWBtTY
Cape
anaveral
Taylor Ave A t l a n t i c
Pierce Ave O c e a n
I Lincoln Me
AlA
Arthur Ave
I I RENT M4
?
m
II
m
c
c P
ic
I ca
C7:
Cocoa Beach
I
1144 m
m
c
re
I 320 ;.
O
IRENT COMPARABLES MAP
I
I
I - 59 -
I
I
Carmine Or
I Barrel/0 Ln
Angelo Ln
a
Cocoa Beach Causeway W 520 Cocoa beach Giiiiseiiray k{d m
I 0
. N
St Lucie Ln O
I1ager Ln
co
I
I 0.GOY.Ave
R
POW i2 1
AMA
ID
e i A t l a n t i c
1 �4�r Rd Roben B Murkshe
04,_• Dr RINT in c e an
te
I larjua Dr` Lori
June Dt Q Wilson Park
U
yotiday Ln i
1 f
0a��Qo,
a Rd z
�a�rGand
Ra i,
ict-
a
I -oc to I
I
AtA'
4th St N —
1 IR Q �
d
Q' o
`� o a:_
ll
•
1st St N
Minutemen Causeway i 111111
1
IRENT COMPARABLES MAP
I
I
I - 60 -
I
I
I
RENT NO. 1
I ---�.,,.
ca.It OA
w....-I,
1
IRENT NO. 2
I
1
nh W,.
s
OM +tee
Si
UM an
,"10
yt
ouNIIIIIIIIIPM
�' h.. ' Ter- �. ..+,
I
I - 61 -
I
RENT NO. 3
I
1
p 0 i is
X
0 :t N f
A `T
l ."` �3 tiff ql
I
} f f �v41 A
.,.. ,
_.... . ,... .....,, ;,- t.
. , ,.. . ,4,,,..„
t,..,.....
...,
I
1
f
1
IRENT NO. 4
I
I I
1,�I 1 of * . "of# .
few
f
I
li
I
I — 62 -
I
I
The four rent comparables developed rental rates ranging from a low
Iof $10.24 per square foot per year to a high of $12.22 per square foot
per year on a gross expense lease basis. These rentals were directly
I compared to the subject and adjusted for location and
age/condition.
IAs was discussed, the subject office units are in need of some
maintenance and repairs prior to occupancy. Each of the four rent
Icomparables were adjusted downward for their superior condition.
The four comparables were also adjusted downward for location as
1 they are situated along more intensive traffic arteries when
compared to the subject. A slight downward adjustment was
1 applied to Rent No. 4 as its rental rate includes electric.
I After adjustments, the four comparables developed a rental rate
range from $7.68 per square foot per year to $8.05 per square foot
iper year.
After consideration, the appraiser has concluded a rental rate of
I $8.00 per square foot per year for the subject. Applying this rate to the
area of the building develops the following gross potential income
Iestimate:
ESTIMATED GROSS POTENTIAL INCOME
$8.00/square foot/year x 3,204 square feet = $25,635
The above rental rates are based on a gross lease arrangement in
Iwhich the owner is responsible for management fees, legal and
accounting fees, exterior maintenance, real estate taxes, reserves for
Ireplacement and insurance; and the tenants being responsible for
interior maintenance and all utilities.
I
I - 63 -
OPERATING EXPENSE ANALYSIS
In order to arrive at the indicated net operating income that the
P 9
' property is capable of producing, it is necessary to estimate the
expenses of ownership and operation of the property. The appraiser
has relied upon expense data obtained from other properties similar
to the subject. Following is a discussion of these expenses:
' Vacancy and Collection Losses
Vacancy and collection losses must also be considered. The subject
' neighborhood is experiencing occupancy rate of 85% to 90% for
properties similar to the subject. Due to the subject's location, design
' and size, the appraiser believes a stabilized occupancy rate of 85% is
appropriate.
Management Fees
The appraiser consulted with several property managers and was
informed that management fees typically range from a low of 3% for
a one or two tenant facility to a high of 10% for multi-tenant
properties with a high rate of turnover. The research indicated that a
5% fee for the subject property would be appropriate.
Legal and Accounting
The next expense item to be calculated is that of legal and
accounting fees. The legal fees would be the cost to have an
attorney draft or interpret a lease while the accounting fees would
consist of the annual cost required for an accountant to figure the
taxes attributable to the property. This expense was found in the
market to vary, however, an annual expense of $1 ,000 appears to be
reasonable.
' - 64 -
Real Estate Taxes
' Real estate taxes for the subject property were estimated previously
in this report to total approximately $1,920 per year. This amount
' includes the ad-valorem taxes, the services tax as well as a 4%
discount for timely payment.
Insurance
The insurance premium for the property covers the annual cost to
insure the improvements against fire or other disasters. An estimated
annual premium of $1,200 appears reasonable for the subject.
Repairs
and Maintenance
' This category covers the cost of maintaining the grounds and the
structural components of the building. The subject basically has very
little grounds maintenance as it is practically 100% improved with
building and paving. Maintenance of the building improvements is
estimated to cost $.20 per square foot per year, or $640.
Reserve for Replacement
' The next expense to be considered is that of a reserve for
replacement fund. This expense item would consist of a reserve fund
set up to cover the costs of replacing long-lived items. These would
include the roof cover, the HVAC compressor units and other items
that will wear out prior to the economic life of the building. These
costs are normally found to total $.15 per square foot of building
area, or $480 per year.
Following is a summary of the operating expense analysis and the
estimate of the net operating income that the property is capable of
producing.
' - 65 -
II
I
Gross Potential Income $25,635
ILess: 15% Vacancy and Collection Loss - $ 3,845
Effective Gross Income $21,790
I Less: Operating Expenses
Management (5%) $1,090
Legal/Accounting $1,000
ITaxes $1,920
Insurance $1,200
IRepairs & Maintenance $ 640
Reserves $ 480
ITotal Expenses $ 6,330
Net Operating Income $15,460
IThe operating expense ratio was approximately 29%, which appears
I to be typical for properties of the subject type on a gross expense
basis. The net operating income will now be capitalized into value.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I - 66 -
CAPITALIZATION OF NET INCOME
The next step in this method is the selection of an appropriate overall
p
' capitalization rate and converting the subject's net operating income
into an indication of value. Factors such as risk, time, interest on the
' capital investment and recapture of the depreciating asset are
considered in the rate.
' The appraiser can estimate an overall capitalization rate by any of
several widely accepted techniques. These techniques include:
1
(1) derivation from comparable sales,
' (2) derivation from effective gross income multipliers,
(3) band of investment-land and building components and
' (4) mortgage-equity technique
(5) the debt coverage ratio method.
' The appraiser utilized the debt coverage ratio method, the
mortgage-equity technique and market extraction technique to
' arrive at a reasonable capitalization rate for the subject property.
These methods yielded a reconciled capitalization rate of 8.5% for
' the subject property. Dividing the estimated net operating income of
$15,460 by this rate results in the following property value:
INDICATED PROPERTY VALUE
Net Operating Income $ 15,460
Divided by Capitalization Rate .085
' Indicated Value $181,882
Say $180,000
' - 67 -
I
I
FINAL RECONCILIATION
IThe two approaches to value developed the following indications of
Ivalue to the subject property:
Sales Comparison Approach $190,000
IIncome Approach $180,000
IThe sales comparison and income approaches developed similar
value conclusions as they fell within $10,000 of each other. Both
Iapproaches are believed to be reliable as they were developed with
current sales and income data from the local market.
IThe appraiser has placed equal weight upon the sales and income
Iapproaches in arriving at a final estimate of value.
After careful consideration and analysis, I have concluded that the
Isubject property had an "as is" market value, as of June 1, 2013, of:
IONE HUNDRED EIGHTY-FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS
($185,000)
I
I
I
I
I
I
I - 68 -
CERTIFICATION
I, the undersigned, do hereby certify that I have personally inspected the
property identified as:
'
110 Polk Avenue
Cape Canaveral, Brevard County, Florida
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 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 (USPAP), the regulating agencies governed under
' FIRREA, and the requirements of the Code of Professional Ethics and
Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice of the Appraisal Institute.
I
' - 69 -
II
The use of this report is subject to the requirements of the Appraisal
' Institute relating to review by its duly authorized representatives.
' As of the date of this report, I, Clark A. Maxwell, MAI, have completed the
continuing education program of the Appraisal Institute.
I have made a personal inspection of the property that is the subject of this
report.
' We have performed no services, as appraisers 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.
' No one provided significant real property appraisal assistance to the
person signing this certification.
After careful consideration and analysis, I have concluded that the "as is"
market value of the subject property, as of June 1, 2013, was:
' ONE HUNDRED EIGHTY-FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS
($185,000)
&LA /* --/e
' Clark A. Maxwell, MAI
Cert Gen RZ920
' - 70 -
L
GENERAL ASSUMPTIONS
1. The legal description used thi s report i s assu m ed to be co rr ec t.
2. No survey of the property has been made by the appraiser and no
responsibility is assumed in connection with such matters. Sketches in
this report are included only to assist the reader in visualizing the
property.
3. No responsibility is assumed for matters of a legal nature affecting title to
the property nor is an opinion of title rendered. The title is assumed to
be good and merchantable.
' 4. Information furnished by others is assumed to be true, correct and
reliable. A reasonable effort has been made to verify such information,
' however, no responsibility for its accuracy is assumed by the appraiser.
5. All mortgages, liens, encumbrances, leases, and servitudes have been
' disregarded unless so specified within the report. The property is
appraised as though under responsible ownership and competent
management.
' 6. It is assumed that there are no hidden or unapparent conditions of
property, subsoil or structures, which would render it more or less
' valuable. No responsibility is assumed for such conditions or for
engineering, which may be required to discover them.
7. It is assumed that there is full compliance with all applicable federal,
state and local environmental regulations and law unless non-
compliance is stated, defined and considered in the appraisal report.
' 8. It is assumed that all required licenses, consents or other legislative or
administrative authority from any local, state or national governmental
' or private entity or organization have been or can be obtained or
renewed for any use on which the value estimate contained in this
report is based.
' 9. It is assumed that all applicable zoning and use regulations and
restrictions have been complied with, unless a non-conformity gas been
stated, defined and considered in the appraisal report.
10. It is assumed that the utilization of the land and improvements is within
' the boundaries or property lines of the property described and that
there is no encroachment or trespass unless noted within the report.
- 71 -
I
GENERAL LIMITING CONDITIONS
1. The appraiser will not be required to give testimony or appear in court
because of having made this appraisal, with reference to the property in
question, unless arrangements have been previously made.
' 2. Possession of this report, or a copy thereof, does not carry with it the rights
of publication. It may not be used for any purpose by any person other
than the party to whom it is addressed without written consent of the
appraiser, and in any event, only with proper qualification and only in its
entirety.
3. The distribution of the total valuation in this report between land and
improvements applies only under the reported highest and best use of
the property. The allocations of value for land and improvements must
' not be used in conjunction with any other appraisal and are invalid if so
used.
' 4. No environmental impact studies were either requested or made in
conjunction with this appraisal, and the appraiser hereby reserves the
right to alter, amend, revise or rescind any of the value opinions based
' upon any subsequent environmental impact studies, research or
investigations.
' 5. Acceptance of and/or use of this appraisal report constitutes
acceptance of the foregoing general assumptions and general limiting
conditions.
RESTRICTIONS UPON DI SC L OSU RE AND US E
Disclosure of the contents of this appraisal report is governed by the By-Laws
' and Regulations of the Appraisal Institute.
Neither all nor part of the contents of this report (especially any conclusions
' as to value, the identity of the appraiser or the firm with which he is
connected, or any reference to the Appraisal Institute) shall be disseminated
to the public through advertising media, public relations media, news media,
' sales media or any other public means of communication without prior
written consent and approval of the undersigned.
diY 14,l--/P
Clark A. Maxwell, MAI
- 72 -
I
QUALIFICATIONS OF CLARK A. MAXWELL, MAI
IPresently, and since 1979, Clark A. Maxwell has been engaged in real estate
appraisal practice in Brevard County, Florida. He specializes in the appraisal of
Ia wide range of commercial properties including vacant lots and acreage,
office buildings, service stations, condominium and subdivision projects,
I warehouses, citrus groves and mobile home parks to name just a few. He has
also been actively engaged in appraisals for estate tax purposes and
condemnation proceedings.
IAPPRAISAL EMPLOYMENT
IApril 1996 to Present-President, Maxwell Appraisal & Consulting Group, Inc.
August 1980 to March 1996-Staff Appraiser for Robert W. Houha, MAI
June 1979 to August 1980-Appraisal Assistant to Robert W. Houha, MAI
EDUCATION
IFormal Education:
I University of Florida - Graduate, B.S.B.A. Degree, 1979
Major Field of Study: Real Estate
Minor Field of Study: Environmental Sciences
I Courses Completed:
Real Estate Law Urban Geography
Real Estate Finance Real Estate Analysis
Real Estate Investment Real Estate Appraisal
Urban Land Use Analysis
IAppraisal Education:
Recent courses and seminars through the Appraisal Institute:
ICore Law Update - 2012
G Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice - 2012
I Business Practices and Ethics - 2012
G Appraising Convenience Stores-2012
Apartment Appraisal, Concepts and Applications - 2012
Small Hotel/Motel Valuation - 2005
I = Course 700: The Appraiser as an Expert Witness -2005
Course 710: Condemnation Appraising: Basic Principles - 2005
I Appraising a Proposed Property - 2004
G Subdivision Analysis - 2003
G Internet Search Strategies for Appraisers- 2001
Partial Interest Valuation - Divided - 2000
I = Rates and Ratios Used In The Income Approach - 1998
Highest and Best Use Applications- 1998
I
- 73-
II
I
QUALIFICATIONS OF CLARK A. MAXWELL, MAI -Continued
IOther Related Courses/Seminars:
I = Performing Commercial Evaluations - 2012 Webinar
G Appraising and Analyzing Industrial and Flex Buildings - 2012
G Appraising and Analyzing Retail Shopping Centers -2012
I G How to Analyze and Value Income Properties - 2012
G Income Capitalization -2010
G Florida Supervisor/Trainee Roles & Relationships -2010
I G Ad Valorem Tax Consultation - 2010
G Expert Witness Testimony- 2010
Sales Comparison Approach - 2004
I
COURT EXPERIENCE
IQualified as an expert witness in the Eighteenth Judicial Circuit Court of the
State of Florida, the Bankruptcy Court of the Middle District of the State of
IFlorida, and the United States Tax Court.
IPROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS
I MAI-Member of the Appraisal Institute - No. 8609
State-Certified General Appraiser Florida License No. RZ920
IPARTIAL LIST OF CLIENTS
IFinancial Institutions:
Bank of America Coastal Bank
Regions Bank TD Bank
IBankFirst SunTrust Bank
Prime Bank PNC Bank
Paradise Bank Community Bank of the South
I
RBC Bank Wells Fargo Bank
CCU BB&T
Sunrise Bank Florida Community Bank
I
Others:
Brandon Properties Harry A. Jones, Atty.
IBrevard Community College Philip F. Nohrr, Atty.
Brevard County Public Works Fla. Dept. of Transportation
Brevard County EELS Program The Coy Clark Company
ICDMA, Incorporated Town of Indialantic
Fla. Dept. of Environmental Protection Canaveral Port Authority
I
- 74 -
I
__... m s DOCUMENT HAS A CQL,•,,,.,"; ,.' _c.:..;s _'I MARK--"PA .:,y.:
G ':6437694 STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION
' FLORIDA REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL BD SEQ#L12100303352
DATE BATCH NUMBER LICENSE NBR
10/03/2012 128112206 ;RZ920
The CERTIFIED GENERAL APPRAISER
' Named below IS CERTIFIED
Under the provisions of Chapter 475 FS.
Expiration date: NOV 30, 2014
' MAXWELL, CLARK A
2351 W EAU GALLIE BLVD STE 4
MELBOURNE FL 32935
' RICK SCOTT KEN LAWSON
GOVERNOR DISPLAY AS REQUIRED BY LAW SECRETARY
I!
1
1
- 75 -
1
1
1
1
1
1
1 ADDENDA
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
ZONING
DIVISION 5. C-1 LOW DENSITY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT*
Sec. 110-331. Intent.
' The requirements for the C-1 low density commercial district are intended to
apply to an area adjacent to major arterial streets and convenient to major
residential areas. The types of uses permitted are intended to serve the
consumer needs of nearby residential neighborhoods, as well as the
commercial needs of the motorist. Lot sizes and other restrictions are intended
to reduce conflict with adjacent residential uses and to minimize the
interruption of traffic along thoroughfares. All buildings in this district shall
be considered in the fire district, as per the definition in section 110-1, and
shall be built in conformance with the rules and regulations of fire districts.
'
(Code 1981, § 637.45)
Sec. 110-332. Principal uses and structures.
' In the C-1 low density commercial district, the following uses and structures
are permitted:
(1) Retail stores, sales and display rooms.
(2) Personal service establishments, such as beauty shops and
' barbershops, laundry and dry cleaning pickup stations, tailor shops and
similar uses.
t (3) Professional offices, studios, clinics, laboratories, general
offices, business schools and similar uses.
(4) Hotels, motels. In no case shall there be more than 30 rental
units per net acre nor shall a rental unit have a floor area less than 300
square feet. Hotel and motel units containing provisions for cooking or
light housekeeping shall have a minimum floor area not less than 400
square feet. Motels and hotels may not be converted to other types of
' dwellings at more than the density required in this chapter for such
dwellings.
' (5) Eating establishments.
(6) Public and semipublic parks, playgrounds, clubs and lodges,
cultural facilities, hospitals, clinics, mortuaries, funeral homes,
' government offices, schools, churches and similar uses.
(7) Banks and financial institutions.
' (8) Commercial recreation, such as driving ranges, bowling alleys
and similar uses.
' (9) Plant nurseries and greenhouses, provided that all outside display
merchandise shall be contained in the required setbacks.
(10) Repair service establishments, such as household appliances,
radio and TV and similar uses, but not including automobile repairs.
(11) Kindergartens and child care facilities.
(12) Shopping centers and malls.
(13) Retail sale of beer and wine for off-premises consumption.
'
(14) Public schools.
' (Code 1981, § 637.47; Ord. No. 17-96, § 3, 10-1-96)
Sec. 110-333. Accessory uses and structures.
In the C-1 low density commercial district, customary accessory uses of one or
' more of the principal uses clearly incidental and subordinate to the principal
use, in keeping with the low density commercial character of the district, are
permitted.
(Code 1981, § 637.49)
' Sec. 110-334. Special exceptions permissible by board of adjustment.
(a) In the C-1 low density commercial district, after public notice and
' hearing, the board of adjustment may permit special exceptions which are
compatible to permitted uses and which are able to meet the minimum
requirements and performance standards as set forth in this zoning district.
' (b) The board of adjustment may adjust setbacks and provisions noted in
article IX of this chapter as necessary and appropriate in granting special
iexceptions.
(c) Special exceptions may be permitted for the following:
' (1) Veterinary hospitals and clinics.
(2) Radio and television studios, broadcasting towers and antennas.
' (3) Automotive service stations, subject to the following:
' a. All setbacks shall be no less than 25 feet from any portion
of the building, including pump island.
t b. Underground storage is required for all receptacles for
combustible materials in excess of 55 gallons. Such storage
shall comply with all Environmental Protection Agency
' standards.
c. The accumulation and storage of waste petroleum
' products is forbidden, unless in compliance with
Environmental Protection Agency standards.
' d. Curb cuts shall be made in accordance with section 110-
493.
' e. No service stations shall be erected or located within 150
feet of the property line of any church, hospital, school or park.
f. A visual screen, meeting the specifications of section 110-
566, shall be provided along any property line abutting a
' residential district or residential use.
g. Services and sales permissible include only the following:
' 1. Spark plugs, batteries, distributor parts, ignition
system parts, vehicle wiring and the like.
1 2. Exhaust system components, engine cooling
components, automotive air conditioning system
' components, braking system components, vehicle
lighting system components, radios, steering assembly
parts, fuel system components and the like.
' 3. Tire servicing and repair, but not recapping.
' 4. Washing and polishing, including the sale of
related materials.
' 5. Greasing, oil changes and other lubrication.
6. Sale of cold drinks, package foods, tobacco and
' similar convenience goods for service station
customers.
' 7. Road maps, informational materials, restroom
facilities.
8. Truck and trailer rentals.
h. Vehicles shall not be parked outside the building for more
than four days, such four days to be considered as an
accumulated parking time, whether consecutive or
accumulated.
i. Uses permissible at a service station do not include body
work, straightening of body parts, painting, welding(other than
' minor repairs), storage of automobiles not in operating
condition or other work involving noise, glare, fumes, smoke
' or other characteristics to an extent greater than normally found
in service stations. A service station is not a body shop.
j. Automotive parts, new or used, shall not be stored outside.
k. Vehicles are not to be dismantled or scrapped for parts.
' 1. Engine and transmission overhaul may be performed only
inside the service bays.
m. A minimum of two enclosed service bays and a customer
waiting area must be provided if maintenance and repairs are a
' part of the business.
n. A minimum building size of 2,000 square feet shall be
' provided.
o. No plants (grass, weeds, etc.) shall be allowed to grow
' through cracks or joints in the pavement.
p. Landscaping shall conform to section 110-566.
q.
Service stations shall not be erected or located within
2,000 feet of the property line of another service station.
' (4) Places in which goods are produced and sold at retail upon the
premises.
' (5) Vocational and trade schools not involving operations of an
industrial nature.
' (6) Commercial establishments which sell, dispense, serve or store
alcoholic beverages or which permit the consumption of alcoholic
beverages on their premises. Also see section 110-332.
' (7) Dry cleaning establishments using noninflammable solvents and
cleaning fluids, as determined by the fire chief.
' (8) Retail stores using outside display areas, provided the following
are met:
' a. The area of outside display shall not exceed in size one-
third of the enclosed area of the principal structure.
' b. The outside display area shall be considered the same as
P Y
' the floor area for the purpose of calculating offstreet parking,
setbacks and lot coverage.
' (9) New and used automobiles, major recreational equipment and
mobile home sales or rentals with accessory services, subject to the
following:
' a. All outside areas where merchandise is displayed shall be
paved.
b. All ingress and egress points to abutting streets shall be
marked clearly and placed not closer than 150 feet apart on the
1 same street.
c. All servicing and repair activities, except gasoline pumps
' shall be located in an enclosed structure.
d. There shall be no storage of junked or wrecked
' automobiles, other than temporary storage not to exceed 30
days, and these vehicles shall be in an enclosed area and not be
visible from outside the property.
e. Ingress and egress points shall not be placed so as to
P�' �' P P
endanger pedestrian traffic.
' (10) Single-family dwellings, two-family dwellings, townhouses and
multiple-family dwellings; provided, however, there shall not be more
than 15 dwelling units per net residential acre. See requirements in the
' R-2 district in division 3 of this article. These requirements apply to
residential construction in the C-1 district.
' (11) Commercial establishments for the storage or parking of
recreational vehicles, trailers and trailerable items, provided it meets
the following, as a minimum:
a. Minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet.
b. Vehicle storage area must be obscured from view by either
walls, fences or hedges.
' c. Walls, fences and hedges must comply with all city rules
and regulations and must be kept in good condition so as to
ensure obstruction from view.
(12) Public utility hequipment; uses and rights-of-way essential to
' serve the neighborhood in which it is located.
(13) Theatres, drive-in theatres, photographic studios, bookstores
' and dance studios, unless such uses fall within the scope and
restrictions of section 10-86 et seq.
' (14) Carwashes, including polishing, and sale of related materials.
(Code 1981, § 637.51)
Sec. 110-335. Prohibited uses and structures.
' In the C-1 low density commercial district, the following uses and structures
are prohibited:
' (1) All uses not specifically or provisionally permitted in this
division.
(2) Any use which fails to meet performance standards
specifications as provided in section 110-466.
' (3) Bottle clubs.
(Code 1981, § 637.53)
1
Sec. 110-336. Area and dimensions.
In the C-1 low density commercial district,the following areas and
dimensions shall be required:
(1) Minimum lot area shall be as follows:
a. Service stations, hotels and motels, 12,000 square feet.
b. All other principal uses and structures, 5,000 square feet,
and, in addition,the ratio of gross floor area to lot area shall not
exceed 1.5:1.0.
' (2) Minimum lot width shall be as follows:
' a. Service stations,hotels and motels, 100 feet.
' b. All other principal uses and structures, 50 feet.
(3) Minimum lot depth shall be 100 feet.
' (4) Maximum lot coverage shall be 50 percent.
(5) Minimum living or floor area shall be as follows:
a. Hotels and motels, 300 square feet per rental unit.
' b. Hotel and motel units containing provisions for cooking or
light housekeeping, not less than 400 square feet.
c. All other principal uses and structures, 300 square feet.
' (6) The maximum height of all buildings constructed within the C-1
district shall be 45 feet.
(Code 1981, § 637.55; Ord.No. 18-96, § 1, 9-3-96)
Sec. 110-337. Minimum setbacks.
'
(a) In the C-1 low density commercial district,the minimum setbacks
( ) tY >y
required shall be as follows:
1) Front, 25 feet. (See subsection(b) of this section.)
(2) Side (interior lot line), zero feet; 25 feet when abutting a
residential district.
' (3) Side (corner lot line), 25 feet.
(4) Rear, 10 feet; 25 feet when abutting a residential district.
(5) Public or private street, 25 feet.
(b) See section 110-536 for special setbacks.
(Code 1981, § 637.55)
' Sec. 110-338. Landscaping, screening and parking.
' In the C-1 low density commercial district, landscaping, screening and parking
shall be provided pursuant to article IX of this chapter pertaining to
supplementary district regulations.
(Code 1981, § 637.57)
' Sec. 110-339. Offstreet parking and access.
' In the C-1 low density commercial district, offstreet parking and access
to a public or private street shall be provided in accordance with
section 110-466.
' (Code 1981, § 637.59)
Secs. 110-340--110-350. Reserved.
I
I
I
oik, . ....
•
,,, - ■4,e":',V - ,
fr ' i4i:,"'Ii. a ' ''' ' ' ' , ''' ';:*: '44
Z4i:4;
-,:;.:
_ ::•.:
... - .. - .
...--
t - ztzt 4 i 111 - "T.
,,..„ Ilit,,,
, ,.
.., :
. .. .
„ .
. .
:. ,.. : : ‘,.. ..11,...1 - ;:iicicriiii :: :..1? ) ::_i. ...- . , : ..
.,...„ .r , I
I ... • $ A.
,,
. , - A fAL 4,,
. I 1"
-. I I ,
311
.. ,. . 4.4..... I ...........- - '71--,
. .. _ ex...
t-t,sr-
* '
- -
I 1---
..- ,
I
. , .
. .
SUBJECT PROPERTY FRONT VIEW
I ..., -- T te •
..;...4i,r E...:40.. ..,:,i■
I
II•1.111
: 1 1
ii olio
INN
, .
....
. .
I ,
I r____
-4. .
-
- .
II
I
, a ,
• k —
_
I
,.
I Allimomdi.
SUBJECT PROPERTY REAR VIEW
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
IRO
I i
1
4. .1, tia
SUBJECT UNIT INTERIOR
V
rilii
n ..
i
y
I
I
ISUBJECT UNIT INTERIOR
I
1
1
i
f
1
1
SUBJECT UNIT INTERIOR
i
SUBJECT UNIT INTERIOR
I
I
1
1
, i 01
r o-,
I
ISUBJECT UNIT INTERIOR
Iav
...............„. --.,:,..v ' ' '' s'‘''''. ' ' ,.. ._,,T 17'
I
atm
I
i
I
IPOLK AVENUE LOOKING EAST
I
I
e :ys.c -'
ms
T.
:{ f a 7
:,10....,..%,$-
I , . ..,_ .,.... d D j ,yvs 0.,, ,.. .. . . . .....
µ' i 4 r t; (; 2 i
c
"4%• d
° t.r b �` i-ae
'Y( ..'1-* -1". ,p,Y,
•T ''' ilk• i f _1 Uri ii,11,717,_• '4k:. kr4.4. .
i . -
'4..iw w
Z'.l11Ir :.
•r
A.
I
t ..
IPOLK AVENUE LOOKING WEST
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I