Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Appeal Letter
• BERCOW RADELL FERNANDEZ & LARKI N ZONING, LAND USE AND ENVIRONMENTAL LAW Direct: 305-377-6235 E-Mail: BFernandez(BRZoningLaw.com VIA HAND DELIVERY November 29, 2018 Ms. Olga Zamora Planning and Zoning Department Hearing Boards Section Miami Riverside Center (MRC) 444 SW 2nd Avenue, 3rd Floor Miami, Florida 33130 Re: Appeal of HEPB-R-18-063 concerning 5605 N. Bayshore Drive Dear Ms. Zamora: This firm represents Supernova Bayshore Invest LLC (the "Appellant") in relation to the referenced property (the "Property") located in the Morningside Historic District (the "District") identified by the Miami -Dade County property Appraiser's Office as Folio No. 01-3218-037-0020. This letter shall serve as the Appellant's appeal to the Miami City Commission of Resolution HEPB-R-18-063 concerning Agenda Item No. HEPB.2 (See Exhibit A, the "Decision") of the Historic Preservation Board (HEPB, the "Board") on November 6, 2018. This appeal is brought pursuant to Section 23-6.2(e) of the City of Miami Code to appeal the Resolution that arbitrarily, and without regard to the expert evidence presented by the Appellant denied the requested Certificate of Appropriateness ("COA") to allow the demolition of the dilapidated structure and the proposed new construction on the Property. Section 23-6.2 (e) provides that any aggrieved party may appeal to the City Commission a decision of the board on matters relating to Certificates of Appropriateness and by filing an appeal within fifteen (15) calendar days after the date of the decision. Accordingly, this appeal is timely and enclosed are three (3) SOUTHEAST FINANCIAL CENTER • 200 SOUTH BISCr4YNE BOULEVARD, SUITE 850 • MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 PHONE. 305.374.5300 • FAX. 305.377.6222 • WWW.BRZONINGLAW.COM Ms. Olga Zamora November 29, 2018 Page 2 copies of the appeal and the requisite appeal form. Also enclosed is a check in the amount of $525.00. Subparagraph (e) also provides that the appeal to the City Commission shall be de novo and that the City Commission may consider new evidence or materials. Accordingly, the Appellant hereby incorporates the letter of intent and exhibits submitted to the HEPB in support of the application and provides the following information in support of the appeal: Property. The Property is currently developed with a 78 year old dilapidated single family structure and detached garage approximately 3,811 square feet in size and built in 1940 (See Exhibit B). The Property is located within the Morningside Historic District (the "Historic District") abutting North Bayshore Drive to the west and Biscayne Bay to the east. The Appellant acquired the Property in 2012 in a deteriorated condition with the intent of redeveloping the Property. The Appellant's appeal should be approved as the denial by the HEPB failed to recognize several important facts in support of the COA. Most significantly, the HEPB failed to acknowledge the fact that the Engineering Report of Existing Conditions prepared by Reymundo I. Miranda, P.E. (the "Engineering Report"), included with the application materials, confirmed that the structures at the Property have outlived their intended lifespan and had major structural damage for well over 12 years. Substantial deterioration of the steel reinforced concrete has occurred over the many years due to exposure to the salt from the waters of Biscayne Bay. The lack of repair and replacement necessary years ago by prior owners has rendered the existing structures uninhabitable and the necessary repairs and renovations to keep them at the current elevation would require such intervention that the structures would end up being essentially demolished and replicated, not preserved (See Exhibit C, Engineer's Report, Page 2). Unsafe Structure. The City of Miami Chief of Unsafe Structures, Mr. Rene Diaz, agreed with the conclusion of the Engineering Report after having reviewed and having independently had his Department conduct an onsite inspection. In his email to the Preservation Office, the Chief of Unsafe Structures confirmed that after reviewing the Engineer's Report (Exhibit B), pictures, and Unsafe Structure Inspector's comment, the cost of repairs exceed the 50% threshold set by the Florida Building Code and the structural damages are also in excess of 30%. Based on the percentages of deterioration and damages found, the recommendation on BERCOW RADELL FERNANDEZ & LARKIN ZONING, LAND USE AND E NVIRON NI ENTAL LAW Ms. Olga Zamora November 29, 2018 Page 3 such structures by the Unsafe Structures Panel would be demolition (See Exhibit D). The HEPB also disregarded the evidence presented by the Appellant that the existing structures are at a substantial risk of flooding on a regular basis. An elevation certificate from 2012, included as part of the Engineering Report, shows the first floor elevation of the single family home is at 7.79' NGVD and the finish floor elevation of the garage structure is 5.28' NGVD. Today's Base Flood Elevation (BFE) for Property is considerably higher, with the west portion of the Property at 9' NGVD, which includes the garage, and the east portion of the Property at 10' NGVD, which includes the entire existing single family home. The current Florida Building Code requires homes to be at 1' above BFE, which is 10' NGVD for the west side and 11' for the east side. This means the existing home is currently more than 3' lower than required and the adjacent roadway is even lower at approximately 4.3' NGVD. The existing structures also do not comply with the current Building or Zoning Code and are not built to today's resiliency standards which make them even more susceptible to impacts from stormwater. The Engineering Report concludes that due to the significantly compromised structural conditions and original wood beam floor system, if the structures were to be raised to BFE + 1', an entire new structural system is needed - new slab, pile foundations, tie -beams, tie - columns and roofing system - and such invasive work would essentially require complete demolition of the structure to implement as hardly any portion of the existing structure would be able to be saved in order to effectively raise the structure (See Exhibit C, Engineering Report at Page 1). The costs associated with the aforementioned work is especially high when compared to the depreciated replacement value of the existing home. As stated in the Engineering Report, the estimated cost to reconstruction and essentially replicate the structure in place - notably 3' below required elevation for resilient homes - is over $1.5 million. At an estimated depreciated replacement value of $275,000, the costs represent 553% of the existing value. These amounts do not factor in significant additional costs to raise the existing home to BFE + 1' and the exterior yards, terraces, pool and pool deck to appropriate elevations for proper stormwater management and resiliency. Compatibility. The Appellant's proposed house is designed with materials found in the District, incorporates design elements from the existing home and is consistent with the massing and scale of the adjacent homes as well as other homes BERCOW RADELL FERNANDEZ & LARKIN ZONING, LAND USE ANC) ENVIRONMENTAL LAW Ms. Olga Zamora November 29, 2018 Page 4 on Bayshore Drive. In addition, the lots immediately abutting on both sides of the Property are developed with houses that are of a contemporary architectural design. Based on the' proposed home's compatibility with the surrounding properties, the owners of these homes have expressed their written support for the Appellant's requested COA to the HEPB and the City Commission (See Exhibit E, Support Letters). The approval of this Appeal is also supported by the fact that the design of the proposed home is consistent with the Secretary of the Interior Standards for Historic Preservation which state that new construction in historic districts be differentiated from the original historic fabric. New construction projects should not duplicate a style from the past, but should complement the district by using materials found in the district as well as architectural features that are common in the surroundings. In addition, the new construction should fit in with the sense of scale of the district and complement its surroundings by the use of appropriate massing and setbacks (See Exhibit F, Secretary of the Interior Standards for Historic Preservation, Page 162). Although the Property is classified as a "contributing resource" to the District, the classification appears to be solely based on the year of construction which fell into the years described in the Morningside Designation Report. The architecture is mostly non -distinct in character of its design. The house was built during the established years of significance described in the Designation Report, but the house is not characteristic of the styles of architecture described in the Designation Report. In fact, the home is more consistent with the most prevalent styles of architecture found in the non-histdric section of the Morningside Neighborhood. To date, the non -historic part of the Morningside Neighborhood remains excluded from the Morningside Historic District as the majority of the architectural styles of the homes in that area have not been found to be contributing to the Historic District. As the Staff Analysis for Special Certificate of Appropriateness provides, "when a building is important due to its architectural style it must retain most of the physical features that contribute to creating that style or character". In the present case, the structure is comprised of an amalgamation of influences, the sum of which does not contain the requisite architectural integrity to merit contributing status. Therefore, the structure does not contribute to the architectural significance and purpose of the Morningside Historic District. BCRCOW RADELL FERNANDEZ & LARKIN ZONING. LANE, USE ANC) ENVIRONMENTAL LAW Ms. Olga Zamora November 29, 2018 Page 5 The Appellant's request and the design of the proposed home and garage complies with Certificate of Appropriateness criteria outlined in Section 23- 6.2(h)(1) of the City of Miami Code. Specifically, the proposed demolition of the existing structures and the construction of the proposed single family residence and detached garage will not adversely affect the relationship and congruity with the neighboring structures and surroundings. The architectural design and form of the proposed single family residence with elements of the existing home ensures compatibility with neighboring properties and the Historic District. For all of the foregoing reasons we request that you grant this appeal. Si�,neere Ben Fernandez BF/b1 Enclosures cc: Warren Adams Elisa Estrada BERCOW RADELL FERNANDEZ & LARKIN ZONING, LANE, USE ANC> ENVIRONMENTAL LAW City of Miami HEPB Resolution Enactment Number: HEPB-R-18-063 EXHIBIT A City Hall 3500 Pan American Drive Miami, FL 33133 www.miamigov.com File Number: 4809 Final Action Dater 1/6/201l8 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI HISTORIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL PRESERVATION BOARD, PURSUANT TO SEC. 23-6.2(4) OF THE CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES, DENYING AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR THE DEMOLITION OF A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE AND THE NEW CONSTRUCTION OF A TWO-STORY SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE WITH SITE IMPROVEMENTS, LOCATED APPROXIMATELY AT 5605 NORTH BAYSHORE DRIVE, MIAMI, FLORIDA, 33137, WITHIN THE MORNINGSIDE HISTORIC DISTRICT; FURTHER, INCORPORATING THE FINDINGS IN THE ANALYSIS ATTACHED HEREIN AS EXHIBIT "A". The board considered the plans presented; heard and received City staff's report; and, heard competent substantial evidence from witnesses and as indicated in the record. The board based its decision to deny this Special Certificate of Appropriateness for this application on the Agenda Report from Staff which was placed in the record and was considered , the evidence and other matters of record, and being otherwise advised on the matter and in consideration of the foregoing and the applicable Guidelines for the demolition of a contributing structure, finding that the conditions have not been met on the Application presented to the Board on November 6, 2018. Further, the Board found the proposed new construction would adversely affect the historic, architectural, and esthetics of the surrounding Morningside Historic District. THIS DECISION IS FINAL UNLESS APPEALED IN THE HEARING BOARDS DIVISION WITHIN FIFTEEN (15) DAYS. Preservation cer of itpit Date STATE OF FLORIDA ) COUNTY OF MIAMI-DADE ) Personally appeared before me, the undersigned authority,( .)G1,VIiti- (',lu+ft), Preservation Officer of the City of Miami, Florida, and acknowledges that slhe executed the +foregoing Resolution. SWORN AND SUBSCRIBED BEFORE ME THIS t ( DAY OF \4 .) , 2017 Print Notary Name` Personally know or Produced I.D. Type and number of i.D. produced City of Mlami Page 1 of 2 AO viS44 BEA1RIIALVAREZ *•!; Commission#CGi53775 = a Expires Nova► er20, 202i 2018 Did take an oath or Did not take an oath City of Miami Page 2 of 2 File IA:.4809 (Revision:) Printed On: 11/15/2018 EXHIBIT A �,SU`:SA\qql i),N City if lemi • Planning ID pertment `,, Historic Preservation Office ANALYSIS FOR A SPECIAL CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS APPLICANT: Matthew Amster PROJECT ADDRESS: 5605 N Bayshore Dr NET OFFICE: Upper Eastside COMMISSION DISTRICT: District 2 (Ken Russell) FILE ID: 4809 ZIP: 33137 HARING DATE: 1012/2018 STATUS: Contributing TDRs: No A. GENERAL INFORMATION: REQUEST: Pursuant to Section 23-6.2(b)(4) of the City Code of Ordinances, as amended, the Applicant is requesting a Special Certificate of Appropriateness to allow for the demolition of an existing contributing structure and the new construction of single-family, residential structure located on a parcel zoned T3-R "Sub -Urban Transect Zone", The subject property is located within the Morningside Historic District, Bayshore Subdivision and the Upper Eastside Net Area The site is approximately the second parcel located on the Northeast tercile of NE 56rh Street and N Bayshore Drive. (Complete legal description is on file with Hearing Boards) Folio: 0132180370020 Lot Size: Approximately 30,000 sq. ft. B. BACKGROUND: On December 31,1924, the Clerk of the Circuit Court, filed the 3rd Addition to Bayshore Subdivision in Section 18, Township 53, Range 42 in the City of Miami establishing lot 2 of Block 20 also known as 5605 North Bayshore Drive. Code Violations: The subject residence has been issued multiple violations for failing to maintain the structure and property. Amended 1010312018 File No. 4807 Page 1 of 9 Issued Apr 17, 2013: 1, Failure to maintain lot in a safe, clean condition; not allowing accumulation of debris, trash or dense growth of grass. Closed; Apr 29, 2013 Status: Void Issued Oct 10, 2013: 1, Failure to maintain exterior of commercial or residential property 2. Failure to maintain lot In a safe, clean condition; not allowing accumulation of debris, trash or dense growth of grass 3, First year failure to register a Blighted, unsecured, or abandoned structure. Closed: Nov 14, 2013 Status: Complied issued: March 09, 2017: 1. Failure to register a vacant structure 2. Vacant, blighted, unsecured, and or abandoned structure 3. Failure to maintain exterior of commercial or residential property Closed: Jun 16, 2017 Status: Complied C. CQMPREHENSJVE PLAN: The subject property is a contributing residential structure constructed in 1940 located within the Momingside Historic District, Pursuant to Goal LU-2, 2.3 and 2,4 of the Miami Neighborhood Comprehensive Plan the City will preserve and protect the heritage of the City of Miami through the identification, evaluation rehabilitation, adaptive reuse, restoration and public awareness of Miami's historic and archeological resources. The Applicant's request for the approval for the demolition of a contributing structure and the new construction of a single-family structure on a residential parcel is not In accordance with the Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 23 of the City of Miami Code of Ordinances, the Secretary of Interior Standards, and the Preservation Office Historic Design Guidelines, Amended 10/03/2018 File No. 4807 Page 2 of 9 D. PHOTOGRAPHS: Historic Photo 1940 CURRENT CONDITION: Front facade 2018 Amended 10/0312018 File No, 4807 Page 3 of 9 Street Vlew 2018 PROPOSED PLAN: Proposed Vlew 2018 Amended 10103/2018 File No. 4807 Page 4 of 9 E. NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS: ZONING Subject Property T3-R Sub -Urban Transact Zone Restricted (Morningside Historic District) surrounding Properties NORTH: T3-R; Single Family Transect Zone (Morningside Historic District) SOUTH: T3-R; Single Family Transect Zone (Morningside Historic District) EAST: N/A WEST: T3-R; Single Family Transect Zone F. ANALYSIS: FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION Single Family Residential Maximum of 9 D.U. per acre Single Family Residential Maximum of 9 D.U, per acre Single Family Residential Maximum of 9 D.U. per acre N/A Single Family Residential (Morningside Historic District) Maximum of 9 D,U, per acre The following is a review of the request pursuant to 23-6.2(b)(4) of the City Code of Ordinances, the Preservation Office Historic Design Guidelines, and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards, Analysis: The existing structure is located at N Bayshore Drive in the Morningside Historic District, The applicant is requesting the demolition of a contributing ranch -style structure built In 1940, On the lot is a single-family residence, a detached garage, and a gazebo, Application for Demolition: The Applicant states that the building has significant structural damage, and that to repair the plumbing, electrical, and air conditioning would require the near demolition of the existing structure. Furthermore, the Applicant argues that the building is under the required Base Flood Elevation and that to raise the structure would also take the near demolition of the existing structure. Both would come at considerable loss, To this effect, the applicant has submitted an engineer's report, photos, comparable cost descriptions, and the costs to repair the structure. Preservation Staff presented these documents to the Chief of Unsafe Structures, Rene Diaz. Upon his review of the engineer's report, photographs, and unsafe structure inspector's comments on the structure he determined that the cost of the repairs would "...exceed the Amended 1010312018 File No. 4807 Page 6 of 9 50% threshold set by the Florida Building Code and the structural damages are also In excess of 30%," (Attachment "A"), He concluded that based on these findings the recommendation of the Unsafe Structure Panel would be demolition. The Applicant purchased the property in 2012 and has since received multiple violations for failing to maintain the property, In 2013, the applicant received a violation titled 'First year failure to register a Blighted, unsecured, or abandoned structure.' Chapter 23 of Miami's City Code defines Demolition by Neglect as, "The deliberate or Inadvertent failure to maintain minimum maintenance standards for those properties designated historic either individually or as a contributing property within a historic district by action of the Historic and Environmental preservation Board" At the time this staff report was drafted, records show that there have been six violations on the subject property dating back to 2013: CE2013019341 2171- Failure to maintain exterior of commercial or residential property, 2180 - Failure to maintain lot In a safe, clean condition; not allowing accumulation of debris, trash or dense growth of grass 1696 - First year failure to register a Blighted, unsecured, or abandoned structure, CE2017003814 1695 — Failure to register a vacant structure. 1697 — Vacant, blighted, unsecured and/or abandoned structure 217.1-- Failure to maintain exterior of commercial or residential property. To prepare this analysis, staff referred to Sec. 23-6.2. (1) Demolition by neglect of the City Code (Attachment "B"). Based on the property owner's complete lack of action towards the property over the last six years, Staff believes this is a clear case of Demolition by Neglect. The long list of violations above is proof that the property's condition was in violation of Sec. 23.6,2 (1) dating back to at least 2013, when the property owner was first cited for failure to register a "a Blighted, Unsecured or abandoned structure," Staff believes that the violations from 2013 and 2017 is sufficient evidence to prove that as of October 10, 2013, the property owner was in violation of the following section of the Code Sec. 23-6,2, (1) (1) (a) - (h): Amended 1010312018 (1) All such properties shall be preserved against such decay and deterioration and shall be free from structural defects through prompt corrections of any of the following defects: a. Facades which may fall or damage the subject property, adjoining property, or injure members of the public, b. Deteriorated or inadequate foundation, defective or deteriorated flooring or floor supports, deteriorated walls, or other vertical structural supports. c. Members of ceilings, roofs, or atherhorizontal members which sag, split, or buckle due to defective material or deterioration. d. Deteriorated or ineffective waterproofing of exterior walls, roofs, foundations, or floors, including broken or missing windows or doors. Ale No. 4807 Page 6 of 9 e. Any fault or defect in the property which renders it structurally unsafe, insufficiently protected from weathering, or not properly watertight. f Defective or insufficient weather protection which jeopardizes the integrity of exterior or interior walls, roofs, or foundation, including lack of paint or weathering due to lack of paint or protective covering. g. Any structure designated historic which is not properly secured under the Florida Building Code or other technical codes and is accessible to the general public; or, any fault or defect on the property designated historic that renders 11 structurally unsafe or not properly watertight. h. Spelling of the concrete of any portion of the interior or exterior of the structure designated historic. In assessing the demolition Preservation Staff assessed the architectural value, the benefits of a demolition to the neighborhood, and the condition of the property. 5605 N Bayshore Drive is a Contributing property within the Morningside Historic District due to its age and architectural style. When a building is Important because of its architectural style, It must retain most of the physical features that contribute to creating that style or character. In addition to the physical features, are whether a building retains the majority of the features that illustrate its style in terms of the massing, spatial relationships, proportion, pattern of windows and doors, texture of materials, and ornamentation. 5605 N Bayshore Dr still contributes to the district as it contains architectural value as a good example of a Ranch style residence. The structure remains largely un-altered from its historic photo; maintaining the linear layout, historic window configuration, decorative iron rails and balconies. Staff does not see a major benefit to the Momingside Historic District in a contributing structure being demolished, The subject property currently contributes to the architectural and cultural significance and the purpose of the Morningside Historic District. As stated, it is a good example of Ranch style architecture which adds to the character and historic narrative of the Morningside Historic District. Pursuant to Sec, 23-1(a) of the City Code of Ordinance, as amended, the purpose of Miami's Historic Districts is to "(1) effect and accomplish the protection, enhancement, perpetuation, and use of historic structures...(andj...neighborhoods which represent distinctive elements of the city's historic, cultural... and architectural heritage; and (2) To protect and enhance the aesthetic and environmental character, diversity, and interest of neighborhoods," Following conversations with the Morningside Civic Association, Staff has been made aware that the neighborhood is also of the opinion that the subject property is of value to the neighborhood and should not be demolished. The proposed demolition of the Contributing residence at 5605 N Bayshore Drive is in violation of the Purpose of Chapter 23 and Code Sec. 23-6.2(i)(1)(a) (h). Application for New Construction: Single -Family Residence: The applicant has submitted plans for a two-story single-family residence of modern/contemporary design and a detached garage. The residence will face the West with Amended 10103/2018 File No, 4807 Page 7 of 9 two stories of horizontal board formed architectural concrete walls with wooden grain exposed. One square window will be placed on the south side of the front facade of the second floor, A second window will be placed on the north side of the front facade of the first floor, The front door is camouflaged in to the front facade, Overhanging eaves project over the first floor to create a covered walk around the entire building, Above the eaves is a wooden deck with horizontal slatted wood panels, The setback from the front property line to the residential structure is 98' 31/". The application packet depicts the inspiration for the building as coming from nearby streamline modern style and international style properties within the Morningside neighborhood, Staff finds the current facade to not be complementary to the historic neighborhood with the noticeable lack of windows and door to the front facade. Additional, horizontal windows should be added to the design and the door be made apparent. The North and South elevations will have a covered walk way screened with decorative concrete lattice called COBOGO, The Inspiration for the design is taken from nearby properties, The side setback to the South Is 18' 8", To the north, the side setback Is 13' 7 %ll The East elevation depicts a glass rear facade along the first floor that opens on to the covered terrace. Steps lead down to a pool deck and swimming pool. The second story is covered in horizontal slatted light wood panels with a wood deck, The rear setback to the Eastern property line is 84' 9", Above the second floor Is the mechanical equipment, Due to Its visibility It is screened with the same slatted wood panels that run the length of the second•floor, There is a 10' foot high wood fence at the front property line screening the property from the street, The height of this fence would impede visibility to the property and adversely affect the aesthetic character and interest of the historic district, As such, the height of the fence In the front property should be reduced in height to no taller than 5'. The proposed masonry wall on the side property lines does not exceed 4' In height within the first 20' of the property, Continuing In In to the second and third layer the proposed wall will not exceed 8' in height, Garage: The applicant is requesting a detached parking garage in the front yard. The proposed garage, like the existing, is in the Northwest comer of the property. Mirroring the main structure, the proposed garage has a projecting roof that connects with a wall of C©C©BGO decorative concrete lattice. The Environmental Resources Staff at the City of Miami has reviewed the plans and have provided comments (Attachment "C„ ) Amended/0/0312018 File No. 4807 Page 8 of 9 Findings: In -Consistent G. NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES: Code Compliance No Objection Building Required NET No Objection Environmental Resources Approval with conditions pursuant to Attachment "C" Art In Public Places No Objection Zoning No Objection H. CONCLUSION: The application has not demonstrated compliance with Chapter 23 entitled "Historic Preservation" of the City of Miami Code of Ordinances and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards. Staff finds the request does not comply with all applicable criteria and finds that the request for a Special Certificate of Appropriateness for demolition and new construction does adversely affect the historic, architectural, or aesthetic character of the subject structure or the aesthetic interest or value of the historic district, RECOMMENDATION: Pursuant to Section 23-6.2(b)(4) of the City of Miami Code of Ordinances, as amended, and the Secretary of Interior Standards, the Preservation Office recommends denial of the Special Certificate of Appropriateness, Warren Adams Preservation Officer w. sczech©wwaz 9/17/2018 Amended 1010312018 File No. 4807 Page 9 of 9 Attachment "A' Sczechowicz, Wendy From: Diaz, Rene sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2018 5:03 PM To: Sczechowicz, Wendy Cc: Matthews, Denise Subject: RE; 5605 N Bayshore Dr Importance: High Good afternoon Wendy, After reviewing the engineers report, pictures and unsafe structure inspector's comment, the cost of repairs exceed the 50% threshold set by the Florida Building Code and the structural damages are also in excess of 30%. Based on the percentages of deterioration and damages found, the recommendation on such structures by the Unsafe Structure Panel would be demolition. I will have Denise Matthews send you the case pictures. Thank you. Rene 1. Diaz, Chief of Unsafe Structures City of Miami Unsafe Section 444 5W 2nd Avenue 41h Floor Miami, Florida 33130 Telephone; 305-426-2107 Cell phone: 786.251.7181 reds az@miemleov.corrt To learn more about our Unsafe Structures process just click - here To learn more about the 40-Year Recertification process, please click 4 here To reach the Building Department webpage, please click 4 here This communication, together with any attachments, may contain legally privileged and confidential information. It is intended only for the use of the above person or persons. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or duplication of this communication is strictly prohibited. if you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender Immediately by reply e-mail and immediately destroy all copies of thls communication and any attachments. Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail From: Sczechowicz, Wendy Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2018 2:36 PM To: Diaz, Rene <ReDlaz@miamigov.com> Subject: 5605 N Bayshore Dr Good afternoon, Rene Per our meeting today regarding the subject address, can you send me comments an your review of the applicant's report and the photos taken by Code Enforcement? Kind regards, t r Wendy Sezecliowicz Historic Preservation Planner Planning Department Preservation Office Visit us at www,miamigov,com/planning, 2 Attachment "B' Sec 23-6.2 (I) Demolition by neglect. (1) Demolition by neglect prohibited; affirmative maintenance required . The owners) of a property designated historic pursuant to this chapter, which Includes a property either individually designated, or designated as a contributing property within a historic district, as --defined by -this chapter, shall comply with all applicable codes, laws, and regulations governing the maintenance of the property. it is the intention of this section to preserve from deliberate negligence, or Inadvertent neglect the exterior features of property designated historic and the interior portions thereof when maintenance is necessary to prevent deterioration and decay of the property, All such properties shall be preserved against such decay and deterioration and shall be free from structural defects through prompt corrections of any of the following defects: a, Facades which may fall or damage the subject property, adjoining property, or Injure members of the public. b. Deteriorated or inadequate foundation, defective or deteriorated flooring or floor supports, deteriorated walls, or other vertical structural supports, c. Members of ceilings, roofs, or other horizontal members which sag, split, or buckle due to defective material or deterioration. d, Deteriorated or ineffective waterproofing of exterior walls, roofs, foundations, or floors, including broken or missing windows or doors. e. Any fault or defect in the property which renders it structurally unsafe, insufficiently protected from weathering, or not properly watertight. f. Defective or insufficient weather protection which jeopardizes the integrity of exterior or interior walls, roofs, or foundation, including lack of paint or weathering due to lack of paint or protective covering. g, Any structure designated historic which Is not properly secured under the Florida Building Code or other technical codes and is accessible to the general public; or, any fault or defect on the property designated historic that renders it structurally unsafe or not properly watertight. h. Spelling of the concrete deny portion of the Interior or exterior of the structure designated historic. Attachment "C' CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Wendy Sczechowicz Historic Preservation Planner FROM: Kyle Brudzinski Environmen I Resources Specialist DATE: 9/14118 FILE: 4809 SUBJECT: Demolition & New Construction REFERENCES: 5605 N Bayshore IDr ENCLOSURES: Environmental Resources has reviewed the proposed demolition and new construction at 5605 N Bayshore Drive. In response to this review, the following are Staffs recommendation(s) andlor comments: 1. Tree protection plan will be required for all trees to remain on -site during demolition and new construction phase. Protection plan will be according ANSI A300, any increase or decrease In tree protection will be specified by a Certified Arborist. 2. Relocation specifications required by a Codified Arborist, Property Search Application - Miami -Dade County Page 1 of 1 OFFICE OF THE ' ROPERTY APPRAISER Summary Report Property Information Folio: 01-3218-037-0020 Property Address: 5605 N BAYSHORE DR Miami, FL 33137-2329 Owner SUPERNOVA BAYSHORE INVEST LLC Mailing Address 1825 CORAL WAY MAIL STOP 5983 MIAMI, FL 33145 USA PA Primary Zone 0100 SINGLE FAMILY - GENERAL Primary Land Use 0101 RESIDENTIAL - SINGLE FAMILY: 1 UNIT Beds!BathslHalf 3/4/0 Floors 2 Living Units 1 Actual Area 4,176 Sq.Ft Living Area 3,118 Sq.Ft Adjusted Area 3,811 Sq.Ft Lot Size 30,000 Sq.Ft Year Built 1940 Assessment Information Year 2018 2017 2016 Land Value $3,299,907 $3,299,907 $2,576,119 Building Value $360,507 $378,833 $328,930 XF Value $0 $0 $0 Market Value $3,660,414 $3,678,740 $2,905,049 Assessed Value $2,567,291 $2,333,901 $2,121,729 Benefits Information Benefit Type 2018 2017 2016 Non -Homestead Cap Assessment Reduction $1093,123 $1,344,839 $783,320 Note: Not all benefits are applicable to all Taxable Values (Le. County, School Board, City, Regional). Short Legal Description BAYSHORE UNIT NO 3 PB 12-50 LOT 2 & RIP RTS BLK 20 LOT SIZE 100.000 X 300 OR 13779-2938 0788 1 EXHIBIT B Generated On : 11/29/2018 Taxable Value Information 2018 2017 2016 County Exemption Value $0 $0 $0 Taxable Value $2,567,291 $2,333,901 $2,121,729 School Board Exemption Value $0 $0 $0 Taxable Value $3,660,414 $3,678,740 $2,905,049 City Exemption Value $0 $0 $0 Taxable Value $2,567,291 $2,333,901 $2,121,729 Regional Exemption Value $0 $0 $0 Taxable Value $2,567,291 $2,333,901 $2,121,729 Sales Information Previous Sale Price OR Book -Page Qualification Description 12/28/2012 $2,250,000 28422-4458 Qual by exam of deed 07/01/1988 $275,000 13779-2938 Sales which are qualified 06/01/1985 $312,000 12560-1238 Sales which are qualified 06/01/1973 $100,000 00000-00000 Sales which are qualified The Office of the Property Appraiser is continually editing and updating the tax roll. This website may not reflect the most current information on record. The Property Appraiser and Miami -Dade County assumes no liability, see full disclaimer and User Agreement at http://www.miamidade.govlinfo/disclaimer.asp Version: httpsJ/www.miamidade.gov/propertysearchlindex.html 11/29/2018 EXHIBIT C E. lden# 5605 NORTH BAYSHORE DRIVE ENGINEERING REPORT OF EXISTIeNO ° � ipITIONS N©.35574 STATE OF \;\Pds1-4 May 15, 2018 (Revised) Summary The 5605 North Bayshore residence was built in 1940. The residence is two stories and has a separate garage and pool. The main residence has a ground floor living area of 2,480sq.ft. and a second floor living area of 956 sq.ft.. The total residence living area is 3,436 sq.ft.. The separate garage has a total area of 642 sq.ft.. Based on the elevation certificate dated 12/24/12 the first floor of the residence is at an elevation of 7.79' N.G.V.D.. The base flood elevation is at 9.00' N.G.V.D.. The finish floor elevation ofthe garage is 5.28' N.G.V.D.. Legal information on the property is available in the attached elevation certificate. Based on Miami Dade Property Appraiser information, the residence has an adjusted area of 3,811 sq.ft.. The overall condition of this residence is that it is uninhabitable. The required maintenance and necessary upgrades and repairs have been none existent. There is major structural damage to the home as well as the electrical system and air conditioning system. It is expected that the plumbing system is vintage to the home as well. The home's glazing system is unusable and must be completely replaced. The cost toperform the necessary system replacement, structural repairs, and re- roofing would greatly exceed the cost of replacement of the residence itself. The sum of the estimated costs of repairs for the building and its systems is $1,520,415.00. This cost does not include stabilizing the exterior ground floor in the back of the residence. The cost does not include any finishes, repairs of the pool, appliances, building decorative elements, landscaping, permit fees, design fees, etc. The cost to replicate this structure to today's code is approximately $400/sq.ft. and the depreciated replacement value in 2016 dollars is $72.16/sq.ft.. To this end, the owner would spend upwards of $1,5 million to at best replicate this home since it is structurally unfeasible to bring the existing home to compliance to current Building and Zoning Codes. There would be no historic structure remaining at this home site but simply a new structure designed to replicate the existing. Building and Zoning Codes. There would be no historic structure remaining at this home site but simply a new structure designed to replicate the existing. The depreciated replacement value of the home in 2016, as calculated by State Certified General Appraiser, Oscar M. Icabalaceta, MBA report attached, is $275,000. The cost to repair this structure and leave in place 3 feet below flood is 553% of its 2016 depreciated replacement value. Therefore, it is my Professional opinion that this residence be demolished and a new residence built above flood and to current Building and Zoning Codes. fi Table of Content Page# Structural .1 Waterproofing and Building Envelope .,3 Electrical 4 Mechanical .5 Plumbing .6 Cost Summary 7 Photographs ..8 Elevation Certification .38 Survey , , .41 Chloride Test Report ..43 ATC Services 56 .Appraisal Report ,,..,...64 Structural The home was built in 1940 and based on my inspection there have never been any concrete repairs performed. The residence has numerous structural cracks throughout the exterior structural supporting walls which in my professional opinion have existed for over 12 years. Spoiling and fractures occur throughout the structure of the residence. The supporting structure for the 2nd floor balcony of the main residence is nearly rusted through and concrete has fallen from the bottom of its supporting members. The bottom of the 2nd floor bay window is totally degraded and unsupportive of its glazing. What has been determined during numerous studies is that a steel reinforced concrete building near a coast line will possess a very limited life span if not protected from the chloride attack of the salt spray. Without adequate and consistent protection of the concrete structure from the elements during the entire life span of the structure, the chloride process of electrolysis occurs and the steel corrodes. With the corrosion of the steel, the mbar flake and expands which causes the exterior cracks on the concrete walls. These cracks further allow for the intrusion of salt latten moisture into the concrete which then further accelerates the steel corrosion process and further weakens the structure. This residence is 78 years old. The useful life of the concrete structure has been exceeded by at least 12 years. This means that for at least the last 12 years, the steel within the concrete structure throughout the building has lost enough strength that it no longer meets the strength values at the time of original construction. The concrete itself is also spoiling and chalking which means that the concrete is also no longer salvageable. The home's flooring structural system is wood beams creating a framing system for the wood floors above. Concrete grade beams support the elevated wood beam structural system. It is academic to consider raising the existing structure above flood since the shell of the home would not withstand any movement without needing its entire structure to be reconstructed. The structure and its foundation need to be demolished and the entire structural system rebuilt. Estimated cost for the demolition and reconstruction is $683,000.00 for the structure system only not including, roof, roofing finishes, electrical, air conditioning, plumbing and glazing. Additionally new glazing could not be installed without first rebuilding the structure to enable the new windows and doors to have attachment possibilities that would enable their required wind pressure designs to meet current ASCE 7-10 requirements. The same would be said if new shutters were installed. A roofing replacement currently could only been done onto a roof structural system that does not meet the wind pressures of ASCE 7-10 as well. The roof tie -downs and trust system do not meet current wind load requirements. In short, unless the entire building structure were to be rebuilt with new pile foundations, tie -beams and tie -columns, new exterior block walls, new windows and doors under the current required wind pressure ratings, the structural shell would remain unsafe. Unless the roof trusses, tie -downs and roofing system, for the home were to be replaced with current ASCE 7-10 compliant wind load design requirements the complete building envelope would remain none code compliant and most likely uninsurable and therefore uninhabitable. 2 Waterproofing and building Envelope The main reason for the structural degradation of this residence is the lack of the building's "waterproofing" systems. The windows are poorly sealed and are vintage to the home. Caulking and painting of the residence exterior has occurred very infrequently during the home's 78 years life span. Water and moisture is entering through the doors, windows, walls, and roof. The air conditioning system is none functional and therefore does not dehumidify. All the exterior doors, windows, fixed glass, and roofs need to be removed and replaced to provide for a water and moister tight envelope. The exiting roof trusses are not designed to carry the loads of a new code compliant roofing system nor it is designed to withstand the current required wind pressures. After the demolition and reconstruction of the residences' shell, new current code compliant roof trusses and roofing system to today's ASCE 7-10 code would have to be installed. The doors, windows and fixed glazing would have to be replaced with current wind pressure requirements for 175MPH wind speed. Estimated cost of roof structure, roofing, glazing, windows, and doors is $392,000,00. 3 Electrical The residence electrical system has cloth wiring with a mixture of unpermitted electrical modifications. There are numerous amounts of dangling wiring, rusted panels, and panels without covers. In order to correct the electrical deficiencies of this residence, the entire electrical system has to be completely redone. All existing wiring, devices, panels, conduits, lighting fixtures, etc. must be removed The walls, floors, and ceilings would have to be cut open to re -run conduits and to recruit an entirely new electrical system since the existing wiring is imbedded within the walls. Most every fixed in place lighting fixtures has no UL label. All these would need to be removed and replaced with UL certified figures. The estimate cost to remove and replace the entire electrical system is $83,000.00. This estimate is for the electrical devices, panels, wiring, conduits, etc. This cost does not include lighting fixtures and patching. The cost for patching walls and ceilings to reinstalled the new electrical system is part of the total cost stated in the structural portion of this report. 4 Mechanical The air conditioning system for the residence is in extremely poor condition. There is mildew throughout the residence. The extended poor condition of the air conditioning system has greatly added to the enormous deterioration of the residence and if reused would expose the resident to health issues due to mold and mildew growth within its ductwork and air handling units. To say the least, all ductwork, registers, air handling units, condensing units, refrigerant lines, and controls need to be replaced. All the ceilings of the residence would have to be removed to allow for the removal and reinstallation of the new air conditioning system. The total estimated cost for this removal and re- installation is $87,600.00. The cost for ceiling and wall removal and reinstallation us not included in this estimate. Plumbing The plumbing system is expected to be vintage to the building, 1940. The plumbing system for the past 78 years is not expected to have been so cared any differently than the visible aspects of the home. Cracked piping could create health hazards as the residences breath the air born pollutants caused by a poorly maintained drainage system. All the sanitary piping, plumbing fixtures, cold and hot water piping, storm piping, irrigation system and hot water heating systems must be replaced. Ceilings, walls and floors will have to be removed to allow for the removal and replacement of these system components. The estimated cost to remove and replace the entire plumbing system not including replacing walls, floors, ceilings, or rebuilding bathrooms is $76,500.00. 6 Cost Summary The cost summary for the restoration of this home leaving it at current flood elevation level is as follows: L Structural: II. Waterproofing and Building Envelope: III. Electrical: IV, Mechanical: V. Plumbing: $683,000.00 $392,000,00 $83,000,00 $87,600.00 $76,500,00 Subtotal: $1,322,100.00 Due to the property's location, it is expected that a 15% premium would be added to the cost of reconstruction of the home which brings the cost to replicate this residence to $1,520,415.00. With and adjusted living area of 3,811 sq.ft., the cost to replicate this residence to today's code would be $398.95/sq.ft.. This would be considered a reasonable amount since most higher -end homes built on the water can be expected to cost in today's market in South Florida near or above $500.00/sq.ft. The above estimated cost does not include finishes, repairs to the pool, appliances, building drywall, floor and tile finishes, decorative elements, landscaping, permit fees, design fees, etc. These additional cost could easily be expected to run upwards of $200/sq.ft. or a total of $762,200.00. Therefore, a total expected minimum cost would be $2,282,615.00 or $2.3 million. 7 PHOTOGRAPHS - ,-,.. , :• ,,,-., ,,,,,, ; . v. _ -,„_ :r.--rv..4-• ' r - - 3-",!,4,-. 0,- ' 4,4--Ar kr:4,10,14-N ,,--4:,,,,,,,- r lt; 3? - , .0.., % -..r,4,,,e.e.„41t, ;,...,,1,._, ,,,,,,,,•:,, r , ----- .... — ;•4*.'m"::,T47:7t, -,' ., i..i:;..7.-, - 4.A1V.71, ' -.401 44" r 4 I L 1 1 - .,t, rr'n • . • . . . - • - . Elevation Certification 38 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency 'NatloitarFlood Insurance Program ELEVATION CERTIFICATE Important: Read the Instructfons,on pages.1-a. . SECTION A —PROPERTY INFORMATION Al. Building Owner's Name SUPERNOVA BAYSHOIRE INVESTMENTS LW 42. Building Street Address(inctuding Apt., Unit, Suite, and/or Bldg. No.) or P.O. Route and Box No. 5605 N BAYSHORE DR .. , City MIAMI State FL ZIP Code 33137 OMB No. 1660-0008 Expires March 31, 2012 fox 1pi ralt*m etal' pow Noi 1i?ItkY... N • r A3. Property Oast Option (Lot and Block Numbers, Tax Parcel Number, Legal t7.ascriptian, etc.) LOT 2, BLOCK 20, BAY SHORE UNIT NO 3, BOOK12; PG50, MIAMI4bADE, FL, FOLIOS 0132180370020 A4. Building Use (e.g., Residential, Non-Restdenllel, Addition, Aocessory, etc.) RESIDENTIAL A5. Latitude/Longitude: Let, 2 ' 4_$' 4t 29"N Long. 80' 10' 48.43"ty Horizontal Datum: 0 NAD 1927 ® NAD 1983 A6. Attach at least 2 photographs of the building tithe Cerificate Is being used to obtain flood Insurance. A7. Building Diagram Number IA AB. For a building with a erawlspace or enciosure(s): e) Square footage of crawlspaoe orenclosure(s) 11/A sq ft b) No. of permanent flood openings in the crawtspace or enclosure(s) within 1,0 foot above adjacent grade ILIA, c) Totai net area of Hood openings in A8.b NM sq In d) Engineered flood ppentngs? ❑ Yea ® No A9. For a building with an attached garage; a) Square footage of attached garage sq ft b) No. of permanent flood openings in the attached garage within 1.0 foot above adjacent grade NA • c) Total net area of flood openings In A9.b NIA sq in d) Engineered flood openings? 0 Yes 114 No SECTION B - FLOOD1NSURANCE RATE'MAP'(FIRM),INF©RMATtoN Bi. NFIP'Cbnymullty Name 8 Coramunity Number 132. County. Name MIAMI-DADE 120550 iv/IAMI-DADE 84. Map/Penal Number 12086f 030e 85. Suffix L 1-:1.3, Slat FL Be. FIRM Index Date 09/11/2009 87. FIRM Panel Effective/Revised Date 09/11/2009 Be. Flood Zone(s) AE aa. Base Flood Elevadon(s) (Zone AO, use base flood depth) 9 FT 1310. Indicate the source of the Base Hood Elevation (BFE) data or base flood depth entered In Hernia. ❑ FIS Profile IR FIRM 0 Community Determined 0 Other (Describe) 811. indicate elevation datum used for EWE in Item 139: igi NOVO 1929 0 NAVD 1988 0 Other (Describe) B12, Is the building located In a Coastal Banger Resources System (CBRS) area or Otherwise Protected Area (OPA)? 0 Yes Designation Date atia 0 CBRS 0 OPA ® No SECTION C - BUILDING ELEVATION INFORMATION (SURVEY REQUIRED) C1. Building elevations ere based on: ❑ Constructton Drawings" ❑ Building Under Construction' :( Finished Construction 'A new Elevation Certificate will be required when construction of the building is complete. C2. Elevations —Zones At-A30. AE, Al -I, A (with BFE), VE, V1-V30, V (min BFE), AR, ARIA, AR/AE, ARiAi A30, AR/Ali, AR/AO. Complete Items G2,a-h below according to the building diagram spactlied in Item A7. Use the same datum as the BFE. Benchmark Utilized Vertical Datum NGVD 1029 Conversion/Comments ISA a) Top of bottom floor (including basement crawlspace, or enclosure floor) 7.79 . b) Top ofthe next higher lloor MI, c) Bottom of the Lowest horizontal structural member (V Zones only) NIA , d) Attached garage (top of slab) NIA e) Lowest elevation of machinery or equipment servicing the building 7.41 (Describe type of equipment and location In Comments) f) Lowest adjacent (finished) grade next to building (LAG) 4,93 . g) Highest adjacent (finished) grade next to building (HAG) 5.00 h) Lowest adjacent grade at lowest elevation of deck or stairs, including 4.9 _,. structural support Check the measurement used. feet feet feet I$! feet feat Et feet ® feet feat 0 meters (Puerto Rico only) ❑ meters (Puerto Rico only) ❑ meters (Puerto Rico only) 0 meters (Puerto Rico only) ❑ meters (Puerto Rico only) 0 meters (Puerto Rico only) © meters (Puerto Rico only) ❑ meters (Puerto Rico only) SECTION I} - SURVEYOR, ENGINEER, OR ARCHITECT CERTIFICATION This certification ation is to be signed and sealed by a land surveyor, erfgt eat; or architect aulhorized,by law to certify elevation information, 1 cerlilylirat the Information on this Certificate represents my best aliens to Interpret the data avaiiable_I understand that any false statement may be punishable by fine or imprisonment under 18 U.S. Code, Secffoe foot.0 Check here if comments are provided on back of form, Were latitude and longitude In Section A provided by a licensed land surveyor? ® Yes 0 No Cert1Ber's Name GEORGE (BARRA Ucense-Number 2534 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR Cempahy Name NOVA SURVEYORS, INC. dress 5582 . TFH STREEr,.SUITE 202 city MIAMI State FL Signature j. Date 12124/2012 Telephone (305) 264-2660 c FEW Form 81-31, Mar09 See reverse side for continuation_ Replaces all previous editions IMPORTANT: In these space*, copy the correaprntding Information from Section A. $iillding Slreet Address onckuding Apt., Un t,. suite, and{or Btdg. No.) or P.O. }mue and Box No. 0505-t't6AYSHORE DR City MIAMState FL ZIP Code 33137 For Insurance Company Lim J ? SECTION D -SURVEYOR, ENGINEER, OR ARCHITECT CERTIFICATION (CONTINUED) .y both sides of this Elevation Certificate for (1) community official, (2) insurance agenYcompany, and (s) building owner. Comments Section C 2(e) Lowest E(ev Machiretry' Is A/C pad. Lat.& tong. Provided.2y Googte Earth CROWN OF ROAD Ef.EV=4.21 FT Signs — — The property owner or owner's authorized representative who completes Sections A, B, and E for Zone A (without a FEMAdsseed or community -issued BFE) or Zone AO must sign here. The statements fir Sections A, B, andEare correct to The best of my know/edge. Property Ownei's cis Authorized Representative's Name SUPERNOVA BAYSHORE INVEST/ ENTS !LC 7-ss 5505 N BAYBHORE nR City MIAMI State FL ZIP Cade 33137 Date 12/24/2012 Check here. If ankh/rants SECTION E - BUILDING ELEVATION INFORMATION (SURVEY NOT REQUIRED) FOR ZONE AO AND ZONE A (WITHOUT BFE) For Zones AD and A (Without t3FE}, mpleke Items Et-1 5. If the Certificate Is intended to supp'brt:a 1.OMA or LOMR-I= request, complete Spend -us A, 6, and C, For !terns El -Si. use nature/ grade, tfavaflable. Check the Measurement used. In Puerto Rico only, enter meters. El. Provide elevat en Information for the renewing and'check the-apprrpriate Nixes to show whether the elevation -Is above or beidw the highest adjacent. grade (HAG) and the lowest adjacent•grade.(tAG), -- a) Top Of bottom floor (Including basement, clawtspaca; or enciosura) is EJ feet Limeters b} Top ofbottom boor (inskrding basement, rrawlspaCo or enclosure) Is0 above=or 0 below the !LAG. 0 feat 0ureters C7 atsova or [I below' the,t.,,4+G. E. For Blinding 0 a rams' S-g with permanent flood openings provided in Seotfon'A items 8 and/or 9 (see pas 8 9 of Instructions), the next higher1leor (elevation C2.b In tt'e.diagrams) of the, building ie: ) feet p mt:tete 0 above or [j below the HAG. E3, Attached garage (top of slab) t� .-- [j feet 0 meters' 0 abase or 0 below the NAG. E4. Top•af platform of machinery and/or defiiemient seri/Ictn$ tir'e bultdtng is _ Q-teet Cl'meters ❑ above •or [J belew.the HAG. E5. Zerie AO only. if nolfood'depfh number is available, is the top of the bottom floor elevated In accordance With the cern munNltyr's tlogdptaiin management Ordinance? Yes 0 No 0 tinkneWni The tonal ofitclel Must -Certify this infomiation'In.Sectlon G. SECTION F - PROPERTY OWNER (OR OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE) CERTIFICATION ature comments Date Telephone SECTION G - COMMUNITY INFORMATION (OPTIONAL) local official who's.aulhorized by lawar ordinance to adminlster the ccinrrnunity's fioodplain management ordinance son complete Sect'ons.A. BB C {or E), rod G of ibis Elevation Certificate. Complete the applicable items) and slgn below; Check the measurement used In Items G8 and G9. M. 0 The Information in Section C was taken from other documentation that has been signed and sealed by a licensed surveyor, engineer, or architect who is authorized by taw to certify elevation information. (Indicate the source and date of the elevation data in the Comments area below.) 32. 0 A community Metal completed Section E fora building located in Zone A (without a FEMA-issued or community -issued BFE) orZone AO. )3. 0 The following Information (Items G4..69) is provided for community Iloodptatn management purposes. Q ch t34. Permit Number t G5. Date Permit Issued Gs. Date Certificate Of Cor"npliance/Occupancy Issued r7. Tuts permit has been issued for. 0 New Construction © Substantial improvement rB. Elevation of as -built fewest floor (Including basement) of the building: 0 feet 0 meters (PR) Datum •9. BFE or (tn Zone AO) depth of flooding at the building site: 0 feet 0 meters (PR) Datum 10. Community's design Rood elevation ❑feet 0 meters (PR) Datum Local Offlciai's Name Title :ammunity Name Telephone 3'gnature _ Date .r sots 1l Check here if attachments .MA Farts 81-31, Met 09 Replaces all previous editions (D SURVEY 1.010.70. 1.2.23.9.99 9.00.911 GRAPHIC n'114, 6,11,11317 f 1.06LE, i.QT-f BLOCIG24 ..ummor7rioomporoir nuroommarraeorn--- r••••••:mtramerer- M.•00.1.010•1109 ram...14 `arzt.m.-.rhieay.6.0.7=1:47-"-- -.91001 146,461.301.33MACCOOVAllr 3165P3OF =WAY ISLOMIrt •11311911,21.0.013M6111.3.¢¢ OhODA00612060LOOSA2024.0016 016.1116-1,51041.61161113,061666.17066 mammon ANOIAIDAMa oknorosogiroce.30662=1361.44611.O.LOOPISii VoggfileargAIEO 711003VAIMFORnEIRA,130,01.6 6 r ALVSOnoircrogootnalgas,66671.0116,611014,,6313041163619,01.2 onAll0.1161.16,0rAIngoortno01...61,61.1.4.00.60grogo...60161 OgrfOROPF .66,636Men F07,3 WM:7f, 11,3316346,6333,13311.31,028 oa, 66.01ofr soOso NA IV, VerforgroOloolo soalfflag 16.• XIII „.090,.........rn".... . ......1 ='''''''"=............ 6164 AgoOI• nein Boom_ , _ Mr . masem13,314 ,66,1,6,0,19 PITON. ,Exggolomgr. ..,,,,f ,„..............' g . ..., .21, 1.0.6 0101311/Y1 /=.1=02/1. KIX 9.1911.9009. ANL 11. 6, Imams Oggnomo, XII: .. egO6Oloi. ',or', i " 'AgrIrgliffi'Mr"' C,3,, :MOWN II1PX MOMS, 7,91.01.0 MY OM 1,19E10. 1.1 19. 1/.1/.11• II9COMEM00R11#31191., 6, NOOlog. PM. MVO. 10911076 MERU RIM XT.. 0. MO le, MORO ,09„...., AA.: Moe SO A PAM a ....... MINN NM AM. .(96.0/EPILIVEKVERCP1910.9101 11it" ..... analla•H're' t.:=661.2 2,1474 XX, foal o 36,16. 6617,9 , go;=1161.4611 o vio 4E10 7 ' AlKeNZIE' L0CAT0N SKETCH N.T.S. 1.3334333cre-ore. tar2:443400X20.1rfa4ygiffIRMITMAIURTIRrt..,04011311107071.1EPIAT 11.FR4 01,3311=4,01531/111*PLATKOSIZPAPFLK3,11.1¢ MAIO =Mel 9,1r3Og 13013M,FLORP4,A30111C6uPrand433.r3I441111017111400Erli UW. 'goo' ausaa- C337363ATI0N3g. 0tP13010131BAY030RZ 11WATANTO, LIAO. PLCARAIAIMIDIJAINUTYCOMArtft 0t0RtflZM7t0MLTIT0IN50N4C PRIPMW ,1:17r7` of >111 AIM Of 1141136g corgral 9.9/ noomAIARM3.11110WW4 LAX1163 61.0.co, ovtool.=07,74."1? tgl=inglor4Y4 =4"4.7.r 9 • MI/ MI/ OM NAT 100 vorstrr or Mang 1111141=116,or igglorArrallig =g, 1=17F40.1176gOggr girs'os I.0/ 0111901 loSAWILJOIO falatoor Ogl. ilefliggROIOrt, roma rim,/ rop row MO, Armor POOORMAWA rommorr AMMO. was of Mien. 00 IOW. Og {freCr Ogg tAt MT 01 Mg Ottrillate00, 673 OrgarAMPOO foloste erArtna0 Iligr 1419 oagAot,flae Woo:ow f000r 36401. Aogg000617 OgtIEL 113 MOM 00 .0.91.121OISP ILMWAgrOP r96,6,,,1414 921,L1909 SA. NA MOW XIAMOgiolgro woe olooi AgSmogo60:1 KM fa MOM. MOM 01010.110 =AS MOO, glo POOYMOIral MO PROT 11.11011BREI, ICMCO moms Lam ocoom06.$ g A or.onAgc. MSC fam,goommrs„4: Ila„=6411,.24.1.47 of„a„lomo tow,&teriarigral„, „a, zemodgramingal„O=6,1•0 oloorst alrIao.gogno ingegongoi alloogarAgl. G&W NV flagrir NWT EE0 ger.vtd., M.10-4.00 1...1 Or Ma WA. . ..+WrIre.. ow.. .14111, 141.14.A 110119./...1 00 AD.,,,ZE„.790/121/71 I/1 At.0000ga mgr., ofom MOO Z61 *rico ITOolgoo, AMPXY.S RSV. 1.0.11. MO CAM 10 en novums arealalOrr. 01-Zoloog000to „ rA prig=or„ttgizsatzzovrioo.„ =1,1:432, ZOI„„=A manor Now P9 AMP MI SEES R.I. ME EC 01.170.1 afgety esoongo 8,4071117=ts O... 1...10 ,r111.1011.0 SO 'AM VP P.P. 0.141.1. TN TA 1211.0 009,19109, 1r 14.1.110. 01 106 SAL40, fOoloonr 1.1 SONE TO-11 1.111. .13M.11 AM AO A& COSY AMA OM. O Ala owl,. IS Of MAL Aalgra .119, .10 1.00=1 er/d 0/10.1, ACE2.11 TO PO MIIwkS&t 13. .g431=34 PAW 11.0341, 'ALACrerl ,'7.4"0"1=1."Tr irWrIret 7=r0r %CAM Alf AGSM= AA AWN 41Z OMR, lo nor Ovog000r 11/01,37191. COS 001 RPM ..1.11100 P.1.17 PER V.31. 01.1011.01 4.066 NAM grarrArso $010.1101.94 waren. ex AMMO • NAM 9. Ali 191E/1•11 MOMS 00 OM VOW Vag Oa Moor • of foOng. 6 MOO VAMP AA66 167 01 VA10041=0".11=4. 1/1497=00. .0 • 191121 .41, 31,31, • Oat new ce $14 RE/A11,1 01 TOW IMPS. A.M. I PI TOT. MO OR 1.1,1 KAM O. TOM 0011.019C1 moo. goonao Now Somosoo 1.01/11/301. CIF 01Mic.9 41.4/0Ela MOT MN.. OW. 0.11,P10.1 00111,0 Ka= MI, ta. MN AAA Oa =MA AWN Milo Ao0 0 PM= WAIrgtroos gotornt o ANON OP FR omrser 4,,,o,ruriziger WOW. 69 NOW imogg mon romorroure agleam mot II:ST Of 14, IMMO 4.331,...11,71.2 MA OK... ARO MOWN AO AMMO 10 MY 01. TM MOM IS. MOO NAM, MI SOTOr't000rgoorgorosoa nagio AVA PP 10 RV MOM NM. CR /MAW 65.1141940/ er 1.00 • 7. fr rws mono, Pr Moo o.o.6 our rifle 9.191,91910/7 30.11631 Mr MR AVM. ros conotroolor IAA DPP MC MOW OW CIEC ACC HON9 IMO NM NAM A&O PP 191/ 01 MCC 10119101M0. al-lootoIA0014, MOO NM. , fOlOt rano ow. Aga. 00019/. a9 MEW. Ire, go Fog 06 =99. ; "o ei for goo, NOW OF OggOOMOIRCIO, IVO, Mae pflooliOh .1,36Le. MAO Or WNW 0.000 1111.1. OM • MEMO. pqmoirn ccpcs 19.1.11. 19.4.0.• INEVENESPRE loolrolOgr. goon. paCP MOV. An: =r11/01/1901/. 00/.0 MOP SI/00. 1O.P(Ot OILOO6113, 011611/.01.1.. /9/10 OM= 01 ARA, 14966 MOW ORM, .1116,11411.6 197...• SEM/. 09919 Aglar. • IV MO PM A41. P MEV. CANIS LIM azioat. sogroar"OsireLgOi. 0 01.0910.111 ZI190 MAW 901.01 OWN MO Mr MI= PM roornworr IMMO Mos 101.19 MIZE P.P•Ad For. SUPERNOVA SAYSHORE INVESTMENT, LLC. Pro•MAddrims: NON. BAYSHORE OR. Pro•MlocalIcc: MIAMI • FL 33137 Job 12-0001218-1 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR A MAPPER GE RGE P.L.S. No. 2634 !STATE FLORIDA) 13r j0wo AL IIR0V4J0P: Fled Dew 1347-12 ..90111E Dam: Ralelon: 66112K.W.71P eTREEMITE202 MIA101,19.0RI0143310 TEV0400t06) 22631P1 F04(2031031•0722 Nova urtregaro irrtr. LAND SURVEYORS Chloride Test Report R .1 MIRANDA CONSULTANTS, INC. 8211 SW 111 TERRACE MIAMI, FLORIDA 33156 5605 NORTH BAYSHORE DRIVE MIAMI, FL 33137 REPORT WITH CHLORIDE TEST RESULTS SUMMARY: This report with the results of the reinforced concrete chloride test supports the conclusion that the structure as -is cannot be maintained. The range of life expectancies of the entire structure's reinforced concrete is between 20.74 and 65.67 years based on the individual test samples. The overall average life span is between 55.65 years to 65.67 years based on the average chloride content for this structure which this year is 76 years old. A limited number of photographs have been included within this report to remind the reader that the reinforced concrete structure is not the only framework showing exceeded life expectancies. The structural wood roof members, balcony support wood members, floor decking system, roofing system and glazing system has to be replaced and there are numerous floor cracks throughout the residence's rear porch. It is my professional opinion that the structure would have to be completely replicated if anything and not repaired if It is to become a safe structure for habitation. The useful life has been completely exceeded for the reinforced concrete structure of this home. Page 1 RESULTS OVERVIEW: This report provides the test results and (analysis for the home's concrete condition and expected useful life. The results of the chloride tests for 5605 North Bayshore Drive has yield that the samples taken are as high as 0.075% CLH by weight of concrete. The researched range of chloride content within reinforced concrete for the concrete to separate is between 0.0275% CLN to 0.03575% CU-I. Research has shown that 3.94 mils is required to separate concrete. Table No. 1 states the corrosion rates of reinforced steel versus % of chloride H contents by weight that has been published in previous research. The research results of Table No. 1 directly translates to expected sample corrosion rates of Table No. 2, for the tested concrete of this residence. Since 3.94 mils of expansion within concrete will create separation, the life expectancy of each sample taken can be extrapolated as shown in Table No. 3. The results yield that the life expectancies of the test samples have been from a low of 20.74 years to a high of 65.67 years. The average of the tests samples is between 55.65 years and 65.67 years. This year the original structure will be 76 years old. The point of separation of concrete is taken as its life span because the concrete carries typically about 80% of the structural load and the steel 20%. When the concrete fails, the relationship changes and an undersized steel member (typically rebar) has to make up the difference in load baring capacity. This is further explained in the following section "CHLORIDE TRANSPORT AND REINFOCEMENT CORROSION". Page 2 CHLORIDE TRANSPORT AND REINFORCEMENT CORROSION: There is an enormous amount of literature and research pertaining to this subject matter. What amount of chloride ion content in percent of concrete weight will induce corrosion in the reinforcing steel and how effective will concrete restoration be? A selected few research publications will be referenced in this report to assess the final determination of 5605 North Bayshore Drive along with the chloride test results obtained by "ATC" from the boring samples taken. It should be observed that the samples were taken from the face the building inward and that the range.is from a low of 0.016% to a high of 0.075% by weight of concrete. It is also to be noted that the depth of the samples were taken from 1" to 2" into the concrete sample area. Concrete coverage over steel reinforcing in slabs is nominally 3/4" for slabs and 1-1/2" for beams and girders if the concrete surface is to be exposed to the weather or in contact with the ground, a protective covering of at least 2" is required. The mechanism by which chlorides initiate corrosion is by locally breaking down the passive film which forms on steel in the highly alkaline concrete pore solution. However the breakdown of passivity requires a certain concentration of chlorides. In good quality Portland cement concrete, steel develops a protective passive layer because of the high alkalinity of the pore solution. In the passive state, the steel corrodes at an insignificantly slow rate, typically of the order of 0.1pm/year. However, chloride ions can break down this passivity and allow the steel to actively corrode at rate several orders of magnitude higher than the passive rate. The critical amount of chloride necessary for the breakdown of the passive film and the onset of active corrosion has been a subject of controversy for many years. Moreover, the amount of chloride which can be tolerated without risk of corrosion is of major interest to all practicing Engineers and most importantly, of the greatest interest in the survivability of 5605 North Bayshore Drive. There are many factors which ultimately contribute to the chloride levels within concrete, atmospheric conditions, water and sand add mixtures and excelerants for the rapid hardening of the concrete. For the purpose of this report, it will be irrelevant as to how the levels of chloride have been reached within the concrete of 5605 North Bayshore Drive. There are two important factors that need to be considered when determining how critical is the corrosion of the steel within concrete. First would be the Page 3 ultimate strength of a concentrically loaded reinforced..concrete column. Not having to consider a slenderness ratio issue, in the elastic range of low stresses, the steel carriers a relatively small portion of the total load of an axially compressed member. As the ultimate strength is approached, there occurs a redistribution of the relative shares of the Toad resisted, respectively, by concrete and steel, the latter taking an increase amount. The ultimate load at which the member is on the point of failure consists of the contribution of the steel when it is stressed to the yield point plus that of the concrete when its stress has attained the ultimate strength of 0.85fc as reflected in the equation below: Pn = 0.85 fc AG +fc A$ Therefore, the ultimate load of a member is reached when the concrete crushes while the steer yields. In most columns, a fair ratio of load sharing between concrete and steel would be 80% to 20% respectfully. The significance of this explanation is that normally the concrete carriers the vast majority of the load during normal conditions (Elastic Range) and approximately 80% at failure. The thermodynamics of corrosion, compiled with the low tensile strength of concrete, means that the formation of oxide breaks up concrete. it has been suggested that fess than 100µm of steel section loss is needed to start cracking and spoiling concrete. If is therefore to be understood that a chloride concentration causing corrosion in reinforced concrete will cause to greatly reduce the ultimate load capacity of a structural member. Structural failure will occur at a much lower load than would have been calculated in design. A report by Tonini/Gaidis "Corrosion of Reinforcing Steel in Concrete" has evaluated the corrosion rate of concrete embedded steel verse NACI % Table 1 of this report. As previously stated, less than 100µms i.e, 100 micrometers or 3.94 mils is required for concrete to separate due to expanded steel, this study indicates that a value of 1.1 to 1.3 of CL(-J ions as the critical concentration. This would be an equivalent % of chloride by weight of 0.0275 to 0.03575. The test results indicate that most of the samples meet or greatly exceed the critical concentration for corrosion furthermore; an extrapolated life span can be calculated based on Table 1 of the Tonini report. Concrete crack initiation would be expected as indicated in Table (3). It is to be noted that the longest life span of some elements is 65.67 years to the shortest of 20.74 years. This range of time for the fracture mechanics of the concrete in relationship to expanding steel due to the corrosion is very complex. The levels of chloride have increased Page 4 0- in time and therefore the rate of the reinforcing steel corrosion is also changing, increasing in time. It is unknown how long any of the structural elements have maintained their current levels of chloride. The actual rates for a building and not a lab experiment will differ in Its function. An actual case would most likely be repressed by an exponential or partial differential equation which is beyond the scope of this report. What is most important is that most of the test samples as calculated have exceeded the life span of the structure since the building is 76 years old this year. Others as calculated have exceeded its life span by more than 366%. The table also provides an interesting insight to steel reinforced concrete structures. The very lowest level of corrosion rate is 0.06 mils per year which indicates that regardless of the chloride content in the concrete, fractures are to be expected any time after 3.941/06 = 65.7 years. The ultimate load capacity after this much time will degrade. VIABILITY OF REPAIRS: It is always assumed that a concrete structure can simply be repaired by removing the damaged areas caused by corrosion. This is an enormous position of liability which requires careful consideration prior to determining to proceed with repairs as opposed to replacement as presented earlier. It is already understood that any remaining existing structure will have a reduced ultimate strength. It will always remain uncertain to what extent the ultimate strength is reduced to since it is impossible to evaluate the compressive strength of every segment of the structure. The design capacities would have to be selected as extremely conservative to offset any unknown conditions of insufficient testing. Research has been performed by Pal Skoglund in 2006 where he found "that reinforcement corrosion occurred in and near the transition zone in local active areas with passive areas between, rnacrocell corrosion, and that the chlorides are transported from the contaminated substrate concrete into the repair concrete". It is worth mentioning again that the chlorides are transported to the repaired concrete. This research paper also indicates that there is a risk for reinforcement corrosion in the vicinity of the transition zone between repair concrete and substrate concrete which must be considered in concrete repair work". The repair or attempt to repair structural reinforced concrete will yield a chloride attack of the new repairs and create a condition of corrosion in any new steel added to the repaired structural member. Degradation in the member's ultimate strength will therefore be certain. It is to be understood that any attempt to structurally repair 5605 North Bayshore Drive due to the concrete's chloride content will produce degradation in all Page 5 repaired member's Load capacity which will not be understood at time of design and .construction. Page 6 REFERENCES: 1) Ocean 3651 Existing Building Review - Ocean 3651 100 37th Street, Miami Beach, Florida. By Reymundo J. Miranda, P.E./President UCI Engineering, Inc., 2007 2) The Threshold Concentration of Chloride in Concrete for the Initiation of Reinforcement Corrosion. By: Carolyn M. Hansson and Virgil Sorensen, 1990 3) Corrosion of Steel in Concrete By JP Broomfield, 1997 4) Chloride Transport and Reinforcement Corrosion in the Vicinity of the Transition Zone between Substrate and Repair Concrete. By: Pal Skoglund, 2006 5) Corrosion of Reinforcing Steel in Concrete, ASTM S7P713 By: Tonini/Gaidis 6) Design.of Concrete Structures By: George Winter and Arthur H. Nilson CORROSION RATE OF REINFORCING STEEL TABLE NO. 1 J CL 0 0.0305 0.0485 0.0607 0.1214 0.3035 0.607 CORROSION RATE (mils per year) 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.09 0.52 1.39 5.66 EXTRAPOLATED SAMPLE CORROSION RATES TABLE NO. 2 Sample No. Corrosion Rate (mils per Year) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 0.06 0.06 0.19 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 Average 0.0708 EXTRAPOLATED SAMPLE LIFE EXPECTANCIES TABLE NO, 3 Sample No. Life Expectancies (Years) 1 65.67 2 65.67 3 20.74 4 65.67 5 65.67 6 65.67 7 65.67 8 65.67 9 65.67 10 65.67 11 65.67 12 65.67 Average based avg life 61.93 Average based avg CL (-) 55.65 ,content 9955 NW 116thWay Suite Miami, Florida 33178 www,tocg nservices.conl 305.882.8200 305.882-1200 Date: September 22, 2016 Client: Elise Estrada 5605 North Bayshore Drive Miami, FL 33155 Project: 5605 North Bayshore Drive Property Chloride Testing Chloride Content pfllaritkensd Concrete 4v RCT Method In accordance with your request and authorization, ATC Group Services LLC (ATC) performed the Chloride Ion Content l'esting on the samples that were extracted from the property located at 5605 North Bayshore Drive on 9/8/2016. The tests were perfonned in general accordance with the RCT Method, "Method for Determination of Chloride Ion Content in Hardened Concrete." Maws: The results of the chloride testing along with the sample identification are listed in Table 1, The chloride ion content listed is reported as a percentage of the total weight of concrete, (%C1,0). See diagram for locations of each sample. Table 1. Results of Chloride Testing Sample ID Locatien(-) 1 See Diagram 0.050 2 See Diagram 0.026 3 See Diagram 0.075 4 See Diagram 0.050 5 See Diagram 0.037 6 See Diagram 0.018 7 See Diagram 0.016 8 See Diagram 0.047 9 See Diagram 0.047 10 See Diagram 0.026 11 See Diagram 0.025 12 See Diagram 0.030 7 8 ATC appreciates the opportunity to be of service to you on this project Please feel free to contact us if you have any questions regarding this report. Respectfully submitted, ATC Grou ervices LC William L Project M „ollivo„ 15 E. %. EATEof • Alexis Paniagua, PE. Nk.„1,011At. tt,ito Florida Registration No. 62519'4.'4"u" ATC Services 9955 Northwest 116th Way, Suite One Miami, Florida 331713 Phone 305.882.8200 Fax 305.8821200 August 4, 2016 Jacqueline Mustelier UCI Engineering 7428 S.W. 48th Street Miami, Florida, 33155 305-661-0811 Subject: Proposal for Chloride Ion Content Testing 5605 North Bayshore Drive, Miami, FL 33137 ATC Proposal No. 31.2016.0804.BM01 Dear Jacqueline Mustelier: ATC is pleased to present this proposal for laboratory testing services for your project. The project will be managed and staffed by ATC's professional team in Miami. ATC's local project manager Mr. William Martin will act as your single point of contact to assist in providing the professional services outlined herein. Included in the proposal is a Proposed Scope of Services, and a Fee Schedule. This proposal was developed based on the information provided on your request for prOposal email dated August 3, 2016. SCOPE OF WORK The proposed project will consist of testing concrete samples for chloride ion content. The samples will be obtained by our technician and transported back to our laboratory for testing. Cardno ATC will Perform Chloride lon Content Testing of Hardened Concrete by RCT Method. FEE SCHEDULE Based on our understanding of the project, we have established the following rates. Professional Services • Florida Registered Professional Engineer (Review, sign & seal reports) $115.00/hour • Project Manager (inspect Samples, reporting & project management) $85.00/hour Laboratory Testing • Chloride Testing (each Sample) SI 50.00/test Field Services • Field Technician (sample extraction) $55.00/hour (id Engineering ATC Proposal #31,2016.0804.BM01 laboratory Testing Services page ^ 2 - Notes: The sampling that is being performed is destructive and will leave holes in the concrete of each member that is sampled. ATC will not and can not be held liable for damage to the members that are sampled. Additionally, the client is responsible for hiring a contractor to patch back any holes left from the sampling process. ATC is not responsible for patching. PROJECT FEES We will perform the Scope of Services outlined above on an hourly fee & unit fee basis in accordance with the Fee Schedule above. The total cost of our services will be influenced by the number of samples to be extracted and tested, and the amount of time required for extraction of those samples. The locations to be sampled will be identified by the client. AUTHORIZATION To authorize ATC to proceed with the Proposed Scope of Services please complete the last page of the attached Client Service Agreement and return a copy to my attention. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. Should you have any questions regarding this information, please feel free to contact us at your earliest convenience. Sincerely, ATC Group Services LLC. William J. Martin Senior Project Manager Alexis Paniagua, Division Manager GROUP SeRVICES INtr. CLIENT SERVICES AGREEMENT This AGREEMENT is made this dth day of August 2016 , by and between its employees, officers, directors, subsidiaries, and agents (Client) at and ATC GROUP SERVICES INC., its employees, officers, directors, subsidiaries, and agents (ATC) at 9955 NW 118th Way, Suite 1, Miami, FL 33178 UCI Engineering 7428 SW 4811h Street, Mlemt, FL 33155 The parties mutually agree as follows: DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVES Except as expressly specified otherwise in writing, the parties designate the following named individuals as their authorized representatives to provide approvals, directives, and permissions, including changes, and to receive notices or other communications under this agreement at the following addresses: ATC: •William Martin CLIENT: UCI Engineering PROPOSAL NAME/NUMBER: 31,2018.0804.8MU1 SERVICE ORDERNUMBER: f. SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED ATC shall prepare a proposal and/or a service order for Client. The proposal and/or service order shall describe the work to be pertbrmed (Services), the location (Site), fees and/or rates to be charged, certain special conditions of performance including equipment, satnpling protocols, and necessary reimbursable expenses. ATC will be authorized to proceed with the Services (Service Order), when Client indioatcs its acceptance by signing this Agreement. The proposal, Service Order, this Agreement and any attachments pertaining to thereto shall comprise the Contract Document. 2. ADDITIONAL SERVICES If any additional or ditl'erent Services are requited to complete an existing Service Order, these additional Services shall be set forth in a new Service Order satisfying all applicable and appropriate requirements including a separate schedule of fees and Services (Change Order), 3. COMPENSATION Client will pay ATC lbr Services and expenses in accordance with the Service Order. Alt will submit periodic invoices to Client together with reasonable supporting documentation requested by Client and n final bill upon completion of its services. Unless otherwise agreed in writing, there shall be no reteinage. Payment is due within thirty (30) days regardless of whether Client has been reimbursed by any other party. ATC may suspend work, withhold reports and vacate the site without liability if payment is not received. Client will indemnify ATC for all claims concerning the suspension of work for nonpayment regardless of whether the claims are by the Client, someone claiming through the client, or by a third party. Client agrees to pray ATC's attomey's fees, and all other costs incurred in collecting past due amounts. ATC may from time to time revise its fess and/or rates and advise client either by general notification, or by specific Service Order, 4. EKPENSES Unless otherwise stated in the Service Order, Client agrees to pay ATC for its reimbursable expenses, in addition to its fees. Reimbursable expenses are expenditures made by ATC in the interest of the contracted Services. Reimbursable expenses shall be billed, and paid, in accordance with the schedule included with the Service Order. ATC will submit a Change Order to Client detailing other reimbursable expenses not outlined in the Service Order, for written authorization prior to billing. 5. INSURANCE ATC agrees that it now carries, and will continue to Carry during the perfbnnancc of any Services under this Agreement, Workers' Compensation and Employer's Liability, Commercial General Liability (including Contractual Liability), Commercial Automobile Liability, Professional Liability and Contractor's Pollution Liability insurance coverage with limits at or above those described below. a, Workers' Compensation (statutory) Employer's Liability • Each accident • Disease -• Each Employee • Disease — Policy Limit b. Commercial General Liability ■ Each Occurrence • Personal and Advertising Injury • General Aggregate ■ Products and Completed Operations Aggregate c. Commercial Automobile Liability • Combined Single Limit d. Errors and Omissions / Professional Liability • Each Claim • Annual Aggregate e. Contractor's Pollution Liability • Each Claim • Annual Aggregate S 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 S2,000,000 $2,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 31,000,00D S1,000,000 S. OBLIGATIONS OP CLIENT Client warrants that all information provided to ATC concerning the required Services is complete and accurate to the best of Client's knowledge. ATC Client Services Agreement 2015 Client agrees to advise ATC prior to commencement of the Services, and during the work, of any hazardous conditions on or near the Site known to Client Client understands that ATC is relying upon the completeness and accuracy of information supplted to It by Client and ATC will not independently verify such information unless otherwise provided in the Service Order. Client shall be solely responsible for and shall indemnify and hold harmless ATC for any costs, expenses or damages incurred by ATC due to Client's failure to follow applicable reporting and governmental requirements. Client wilt not hold ATC liable if ATC's recommendations are not followed and expressly waives any claim against ATC, and agrees to defend, indemnify and hold ATC harmless from any claim or liability for injury or loss that results from failure to properly implement ATC's recommendations. 7. STANDARD OF CARE ATC's Services as defined by the Service Order shall be performed in accordance with generally accepted Industry principles and practices, consistent with a level of care and skill ordinarily practiced by the consulting profession currently providing sheik services under similar circumstances at the time the Services were provided. Client agrees to give ATC written notice within one (I) year of any breach or default under this section and to provide ATC a reasonable opportunity to cure such breach or default, without the payment of additional fees to ATC, as a condition precedent to any claim for damages. 8. LIMITATIONS OF METHOD RELIABILITY The Client recognizes and agrees that all testing and remediation methods have inherent reliability limitations; no method or number of sampling locations can guarantee that a condition will be discovered within the performance of a Service Order as authorized by the Client The Client further acknowledges and agrees that reliability of testing or remedialion methods vales according to the sampling frequency and other variables and that these lectors, including cost, have been considered in the Client's selection of Services. ATC's observations only represent conditions observed at the time of the Site visit. ATC is not responsible for changes that may occur to the Site after ATC completes the Services. 9. INTERPRETATION OF DATA ATC shall not he responsible for the interpretation of ATC data by third parties, or the information developed by third parties from such data. Client recognizes that subsurface conditions may vary from those encountered at the locations where the borings, surveys, or explorations are made by ATC and that the data interpretations and recommendations of ATC's personnel are based solely on the information available to them. 10. THIRD PARTY INFORMATION ATC is dependent on inlbrmation available from various governmental agencies and private database funs to aid in evaluating the history of the Site. ATC shall not be liable for any such agency's or database ferm's failure to make relevant files or documents properly available, to properly index files, or otherwise to fait to maintain or produce accurate or complete records. 11. SITE ACCESS Client grants or shall obtain for ATC a right of entry to all parts of the Site necessary to complete the requested Services and unless otherwise specified in the Service Order, it represents that it has obtained the applicable permits and licenses for the proposed Services. If Client does not own the Site. Client represents that it has or will obtain prior to the commencement of the Services, the authority and permission of the owner and/or the occupant of the Site. Client acknowledges that due to the nature of some Services unavoidable damage may occur. Client waives its right of recovery for such unavoidable damage, and if Client is not the owner afthe Site, Client agrees to indemnify and defend ATC against any claims by the owner and/or occupant for any such damage. Unless otherwise specified in the Service Order, .ATC is not liable for damages caused by exploratory demolition or investigation to identify, quantify, or evaluate building materials, systems, and/or oomponents not readily accessible to ATC during ATC's performance of the Services. ATC is not responsible for unforeseen conditions that exist on the Site within building systems that prohibit or deter ATC from gaining access to building materials, systems, and/or components. 12. SITE CONTROL ATC's testing, observation, or inspection ofthe work ofothcr parties on aproject shell not relieve such parties of their responsibility to perform their work in accordance with applicable plans, specifications and safety requirements. Continuous monitoring by ATC's employees does not mean that ATC is observing or verifying all Site work or placement of all materials. Client agrees that ATC will only make on -Site observations appropriate to the Services provided by ATC and will not relieve others of their responsibilities to perform the work 13. TEST AND SAMPLING LOCATIONS Unless otherwise specified in the Service Order, the accuracy of test or sampling locations and elevations will he commensurate only with pacing and approximate measurements or estimates. Client should retain the services of a professional surveyor if greater accuracy is required. Client will furnish a diagram indicating the accurate location of the Site. Sample locations may also be indicated on the diagram. ATC reserves the right to deviate a reasonable distance from the boring and sampling locations unless this right is specifically revolved by Client in writing at the time the diagram is supplied. 14. SAMPLES AND EQUIPMENT Unkss otherwise specified in the Service Order or required by law, ATC will not retain any samples obtained from the Site. At no time does ATC assume tide to the samples; all samples shall remain the property of the Client, ATC will, however, sign manifests as agent for Client. All laboratory and field equipment contaminated during ATC's Services that cannot readily and adequately cleansed of' its hazardous contaminants shall become the property and responsibility of Client. Client shall purchase all such equipment as an expense of the Services, and it shall be turned over to the Client far proper disposal unless otherwise specified in the Service Order. 15. ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION SERVICES If the Services requested only require geotechnical engineering, subsurface exploration, construction materials testing, and or engineering, Alt assumes that there are no hazardous substances or constituents in the soils or groundwater underlying the Site. ATC's duties and responsibilities are limited to performing tests and monitoring of specific construction netivities as outlined in the Service Order. Page 2 of 4 ATC Client Services Agreement 2015 Unless otherwise specified in the Service Order, any consulting, testing or monitoring related to environmental conditions, including, but not limited to hazardous waste, soil or groundwater contamination, or air pollutants are not part of ATC's engineering and construction Services. Hit becomes apparent during the field exploration that hazardous substances or constituents may be present, field operations will be terminated without liability. 16. OPINIONS OF COSTS ATC may provide estimates of costs for remediation or construction as appropriate based on available data, designs, or recommendations. However, these opinions are intended primarily to provide information on the range of costs and are not intended for use in firm budgeting or negotiation unless specifically agreed to in writing by ATC. 17. SAFETY ATC shall not, unless otherwise specified in the Service Order, be responsible for health and safety procedures construction means, methods, techniques, sequences, or procedures, nor be responsible for the acts or omissions of contractors or other parties on the Site. 13. UTJLITSES Unless otherwise specified in the Service Order, it Es Client's responsibility to mark or furnish the locations of all underground man-made obstructions at all Sites that the Client owns and/or operates. Client shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless ATC from and against any claims, losses or damages incurred or asserted against ATC related to Client's failure to markprotect or advise ATC of underground structures orutilities. I9. ROOF CUTS Unless otherwise specified in the Service Order, if roof cuts/samples are required by the Services, it is the responsibility of the Client to make appropriate repairs. Ifa roofing contractor or maintenance personnel selected by Client is not on the roof to make repairs at the time Samples are obtained„ ATC may make temporary repairs, which may result in additional charges. ATC personnel are not certified in roofing repair, therefore under no circumstances, shall ATC be responsible for any water damage to the roofing system, building, or its contents resulting from ATC's temporary repairs. 20. HAZARDOUS CONDITIONS OR SUBSTANCES The Client acknowledges that ATC has neither created nor contributed to the creation or existence of any hazardous, radioactive, toxic irritant, pollutant, substance or constituent at the Site. All Site generated hazardous and non -hazardous waste, including used disposable protective gear and equipment, are the property of the Client. Client agrees to indemnify and hold harmless ATC against all claims for injury or loss sustained by any party, including the United States, from exposure, release, or the presence of any such hazardous, radioactive, toxic, irritant, pollutant, substance or constituent at the Site. This indemnity includes but is not limited to. ATC acting as Client's agent to sign waste manifests, allegations that ATC is a handler, generator, operator, treater or store , transporter or disposer under any federal, state or local, law, regulation or ordinance, and Client's or third party's violation of federal, state or local, law, regulation or ordinance, related to the handling, storage, or disposal of hazardous substances or constituents at/or introduced to the Site, before or after the completion o£the Services. 21. RIGHT TO l(:TOP WORK lf, during the performance of a Service Order, any unforeseen hazardous substance, material, element, constituent, condition, or occurrence is encountered which, in ATC's reasonable judgment significantly atfects or may affect the Services provided, the risk involved in providing the Services, or the recommended scope of Services, ATC may immediately suspend work. 22. ATC AND CLIENT INDEMNIFICATION ATC shall indemnify and bold harmless Client against claims, demands, and lawsuits, to the extent arising out of or caused by the negligence or willful misconduct of ATC in connection with activities conducted in the performance of the Services. The Client shall indemnify and hold harmless ATC from and against claims, demands, and lawsuits, to the extent arising out of or caused by Client's breach of this Agreement or the negligence or willful misconduct of the Client or other contractors retained by Client in connection with activities conducted in the performance ofthc Services. If a dispute arises between the parties resulting in litigation, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover all .reasonable costs incurred. Client agrees that all indemnifications granted to ATC shall also be granted to those subcontractors retained by ATC for the perfbrmance of the Services. 23. LIMIT OF LIABILITY ATC's total liability for all claims or causes of action of any kind, including but not limited to negligence, bodily injury or property damage, breach of contract or warranty, shall not exceed the amounts recoverable from the insurance limits set forth in this Agreement. 24. CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES In no event shall either petty be liable to the other party for any consequential, incidental, punitive, liquidated or indirect damages, including but not limited to loss of income, loss of profits, loss or restriction of use of property, or any ether business losses, regardless if such damages are caused by breach other wrongful act, or whether ATC shell be advised, shall have ether reason to know, or in fact shall knowofthepossibilityofsuch damages. 25. WARRANTY ATC is not a manufacturer. if any equipment is used or purchased by ATC for a Service Order the menufhcturer's warranties if any on the equipment are solely those of the manufacturer. ATC makes no other representation, guarantee, or warranty, expressed or implied, in fact or by law, whether of merchantability, fitness for any particular purpose or otherwise, concerning any of the goods or Services which maybe Ihmished by ATC to Client. 26. DOCUMENTS Project -specific documents and data produced by ATC under this Agreement shall, upon completion of the Service Order become the property of Client upon payment of amounts owed ATC. ATC shall have the right, but not the obligation, to retain copies ofall such materials. 27. RELIANCE Documents and data produced by ATC are not intended or represented by ATC to be suitable for use or reliance beyond the scope or purpose fbr which they were originally prepared, or for anyone except the Client. Any sued' unauthorized use will be at the Client's or third party's sole risk. Page 3 of 4 r ATC Client Services Agreement 2015 2a. THIRD -PARTY CLAIMS Client agrees to pay ATC's costs (including reasonable attorney's fees) for defending ATC against any claims that a third party or a regulatory agency asserts against ATC related to the Services that were provided to Client. CIaims include legal actions by a third party or a regulatory agency that are based upon the discoveries; findings or conclusions disclosed in documents or reports supplied to Client by ATC. 29. SUBPOENAS The Client is responsible for payment of ATC's time and expenses resulting from ATC's response to subpoenas issued by any party, involving any legal or administrative proceeding in which ATC is not named as a party, in connection with any Services performed Under this Agreement. Charges are based on fee schedules in effect at the lime the subpoena is served. ATC shall not object on Client's behalf to any subpoena, but will make reasonable efforts to cooperate with Client if Client chooses to object. 30. TERMINATION OF CONTRACT This Agreement may be terminated by either party upon seven (7) days written notice provided that any incomplete or unfinished Service Order will remain in effect until completed, unless otherwise agreed to in writing. In the event of termination or suspension, by the Client, ATC shall be paid for Services performed prior to the termination date plus reasonable termination and suspension expenses. 31. ASSIGNMENT Neither the Client nor ATC may assign, or transfer its benefits, rights, duties, or interest in this Agreement without the written consent of the other party. This Agreement shall be binding on and inure to the benefit of the successors and assigns ofthe parties. 32. FORCE MAJEURE Neither Client nor ATC shall hold the outer responsible ibr damages or delays in performance caused by oneontrollable events, which could not reasonably have been anticipated or prevented, including but not limited to, acts of Gad, the public enemy, nets ofthe Government of the United States or of the several states, or any foreign country, or any of them acting in their sovereign capacity, materially different Site conditions, wars, riots, terroriser, rebellions, sabotage, fires, explosions, accidents, floods, strikes, or outer conceded acts of workers, lookouts, or changes in laws, regulations, or ordinances. 33. GENERAL PROVISIONS The captions and headings throughout this Agreement are for convenience only and do not define, limit, modify, or add to the meaning of any provision of this Agreement. If any provision of this Agreement is in conflict with any provision of the Service Order, the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall prevail unless the conflict concems the scope of Services to be provided. If any provision shall to any extent be deemed invalid, it shall be modified if possible to fulfill the intent of the parties as reflected in the original provision and the remainder of this Agreement shall not be affected. This Contract Document represents the entice understanding between the parties and supersedes any and all prior contracts whether written or oral. Nothing contained in this Contract Document shall be construed to be fir the benefit of any persons not a party to this Agreement. No third party beneficiary rights arc created. The validity, interpretation, and performance of this Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the state in which the Site is located. Any legal action arising out of this Agreement shall be venued in a court of competent jurisdiction within the state and county ofthe Site. No waiver by either patty of any default by the other party in the performance of any provision of this Agreement shall operate as or be construed as a waiver of any future default, whether like or different in character, ATC is solely responsible for the performance of this Agreement, end no parent, subsidiary or aftlliated company, or any of its directors, officers, employees, or agents shall have any legal responsibility whether in contract or tort, including negligence. ATC GROUP SERVICES INC. BY: PRINTED NAME: William J. Martin TITLE; Sr. Project Manager DATE: 08/04/2016 CLIENT: [Person authorised t© execute contracts) BY: PRINTED NAME: TITLE: DATE: Page 4 of 4 1;:Ofst .$00:!''tictk/ Ai(44.401*Fa ?bit, "TIORD-PATY LAJA41, Vorox Iterro pitl Al V4 va3,-% owvrok ofiron,n,k 44rt) t444 o4e4044# ttimnott fisfrid *1.0,4 poll of A #14A4Airtiypi*Web IVO* (4, to-1 tow, pprt *rid ,s1Ty rmvioer4 Vhoti .1(.1$0114 ttpli t.**-ryth th4iltartf9, t* A TYVAARY, *Mgt tail-44 WOO 144 014**-etrtiet, fetfoll et: ttevAttoets4 Criclom4 tl ir,,w,totf.41314 fvp4ett imit4 ek Mott If) Al( IS, $WINCNAS- Ike 134411 ti Prfippit44# pere4s4 vs' Ai rowtf *mow b 100041 OrAirli y ORI) Pit?, 0141,11,461 tof OwtomirOlfiNit r.ctoctft, tOtiolk MC k w 11WINI * PVT), toroottiwi wit tiolihOl4tos porlonvial modo Nputtaut tlutrp* Mt told to pc ottsettOts so 'OW 6ir bolo Air 14004 NIC 100',000;t:Tle Oli"" *NH " ott otiose* immt 441 104,010.1.1* Oki** ottipplOt Mit WOO doocii swot* 110011104.11014 CONtRACI , •.. Pa-410 41401 -104 Air **Wanaiti WIKfilite *wow Aire ft itaiiitaiNNT*0.(*.c1Wil **At lio Weift. - "i4IsalrZ 104- nis•a4 * (P*41 h *dr *ii***4000iit Aimiggept te:4 =1"4111" " 64 T� Cuomo OP9/11481 elere 000001104111$ WrOPPit Olt .41 %IWO" *my tott m riot (loom* see1101 Wiese et Nei tookog Iflh1 l Min rearba 1:10mtvolo *A he weaved is i� tho Mod. of sty mum, 60 • tor to Avetwaret t4, ephed pett7 begokawy tithis ire itosto‘t 1.1* nad4tfel OfrivrtOrr, viAt titt#e9'itiortet Ituri Atiel.464floo 041 rierret4 by 414*4 torPOrtottt rk.44141vott %via lobitit Pig 4, foilttdA.r iffol to, orlioty t 4 1ik4 AVIMIKWAS 4,,Mr k h Ckstil 07,1 pArttekt* te**Itti 1140 *14 ttiotx, No vt-rtt Ober oty **it OT. tho Otatt Nen Id ICI' ptikgroteut of ;my protoo4o Avcrimesi irrnocit ifict ktt tottowt4 AA et AorArmt *my M *YAWL tvettato i.-Lt tit ***Too) ;cm etat1Witt A1C VW) rOPOartie ko. POrkrOO°64 or lh° 41°4 00 SO 740004 $040eary alitud 401104019.. lor An Or Hs 4impurt, Orion. olOsigym, ar sow* OM tow MI 101,0 topsiktity **Off *NOW OF Itirt, ONAelko, NrC CROUP SERVIAMIei airatt (topiotiottliotottirago011110111geg nurmao mom /111.1b DAY& r O.. • •1,,,e. • TO.4441.11.1.10. r Appraisal Report APPRAISAL REPORT RCN08163005 Market Value of Improvement of Single Family Residence LOCATED AT 5605 North Bayshore Drive, City of Miami, FL 33137 FOR UCIEngineering / Reymundo J. Miranda, P.E. Miami, Florida 33155 As OF September 6th, 2016 Oscar M. Icabalceta, MBA State Certified General Appraiser #RZ1599 Miami, Florida 33176 Oscar M. lcabalccta It¢i I I sLa Appmie't a t ++n.n8pne September 15t1i, 2016 Mr. Reymundo J. Miranda, P.E. Uciengineering 7428 SW 48`11 Street Miami, Florida 33155 Appraisal Report On: Market Value of Residential Building Structure at 5605 N. Bayshore Drive, Miami, Florida 33137-2329 Our File: RCN08163005 Dear Mr. Miranda: Pursuant to your request, we have appraised the above captioned property in order to estimate the Market Value, in Fee Simple Estate, of subject property residential building structure, in "as is or depreciated" condition, not including subject's land and site improvements value. Only the Market Sales Comparison Approach is developed in this report. The subject building improvement consist a 2-story single family residence, built in 1940, with a building area of 3,436 SF (first floor of 2,480 SF and second floor of 956 SF), and a detached 2- car garage of 642 SF, for a total building area of 4,078 SF, as per appraiser's measurements and Boundary Survey by George Marra, PLS No. 2534, dated 12-24-2012. The building has three bedrooms, four bath, foyer, living, dining, kitchen, family and terrace, The IvIDC tax roll indicates a building adjusted area of 3,811 SF. The measured total building area of 4,078 SF is used in this report. See building Scheck. The legal subject property description is: Lot 2, in Block 20, of BAYSHORE UNIT NUMBER THREE, according to the Plat thereof, recorded in Plat Book 12, at Page 50, of the Public Records of Miami -Dade County, Florida, and including all Riparian Rights incident thereto. The MDC property folio number is: 01-3218-037-0020. The Market Value definition used in report, is from regulations published by federal regulatory agencies pursuant to Title XI of the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act (FIRREA) of 1989 between July 5, 1990, and August 24, 1990, by the Federal Reserve System (FRS), National Credit Union Administration (NCUA), Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), and the Office of Comptroller of the Currency (OCC). This definition is also referenced in regulations jointly published by the OCC, FRS, and FDIC on June 1994, and in the Interagency Appraisal and Evaluation Guidelines, as revised and updated December 2010. The Fee Simple Estate interest in real estate is defined as the absolute ownership unencumbered by any other interest or estate. It may also be defined as the largest possible estate in real property, the owner of which has absolute use of the right to dispose of it as he pleases. State Certified General Real Estate Appraiser • License I/ RZ1599 • Appraising- t leappt.naup.i mr • 9010 SW 102 Court, Miami, FL. 33176 • Office (305) 856-4492 • Fax (305) 856-4493 Oscar M. lcabalccta !mow Appiakel ( Mr. Reymundo J. Miranda, P.E. Uciengineerin September 15 , 2016 Page 2 This appraisal report has been prepared in accordance with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP), as promulgated by the Appraisal Foundation and Appraisal Standard Board. This letter is accompanied by an Appraisal Report in narrative format. Therefore, based upon our independent appraisal and the exercise of our professional judgment, the market value of subject property building structure, in Fee Simple Interest, not including underlying land value and/or site improvements, in "as is or depreciated" condition, as of September 6", 2016, and with adequate exposure and marketing time is estimated at: TWO HUNDRED SEVENTY FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($275,000) Respectfully submitted Oscar M. lcabalceta, MBA State Certified General Real Estate Appraiser, License # RZ 1599 State Certified General Real Estate Appraiser • License # RZ 1599 • Anpraising(ii)lcanogroup..corn • 9010 SW 102 Court. Miami, FL. 33176 • Office (305) 856-4492 • Fax (305) 856-4493 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Letter of Transmittal Single Family Residence at: 5605 N. Bayshore Drive, Miami, Florida 33137 Table of Contents SUMMARY OF SALIENT FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS ................5 PURPOSE OF APPRAISAL 9 EFFECTIVE DATE OF VALUATION 9 PROPERTY RIGHTS APPRAISED .9 SUBJECT PROPERTY HISTORY AND CONTRACT FOR SALE...................:.............::........9 MARKET VALUE DEFINITION ................ ..................... ..,.,..................... .... 10 SUBJECT PROPERTY ESTIMATED MARKETING TIME 10 SCOPE OF WORK OF APPRAISAL ................ 11. NEIGHBORHOOD DESCRIPTION-- ....... , ...... ......... ......... ..... .... ....... . 12 SITE DATA ..,.»....,,,.».,,.,,.,. 15 DESCRIPTION OF IMPROVEMENTS ..... ......... ..:... .............. ...17 IMPROVEMENTPHOTOS .............. ....... .............,........,........,.................. ,......,......... ,..... .... ...18 ZONING .24 REAL ESTATE TAXES AND ASSESSMENT DATA25 HIGHEST AND BEST USE ANALYSIS ........................ .. ............................ 26 ANALYSIS OF COMPARABLE VACANT LAND SALES .......................................... 29 VACANT LAND COMPARABLE SALE DESCRIPTION 31 VACANT LAND COMPARABLE SALES CHART............................................37 LANDCOMPARABI :E. LOCATOR MAP .:.:...:...................... .......... .......... ............ ............ .....38 MARKET SALES COMPARISON APPROACH 39 IMPROVED COMPARABLE SALE DESCRIPTION........ ....... ..... 41 MARKET SALES LOCATOR MAP , 47 ADJUSTED BUILDING SF UNIT VALUE 48 ESTIMATED MARKET VALUE BY DIRECT SALES COMPARISON APPROACH48 RECONCILIATION AND MARKET VALUE CONCLUSION 49 CERTIFICATION OF VALUE ......••50 STATEMENT OF ASSUMPTIONS & LIMITING CONDITIONS 51 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 4of 54 SUMMARY OF SALIENT FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS APPRAISAL PROJECT: PROPERTY ADDRESS: OWNER OF RECORDS: PROPERTY LOCATION: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: FOLIO NUMBER: SITE AREA: SITE SHAPE: TOPOGRAPHY: FLOOD ZONE DATA: ZONING: CENSUS TRACT: The estimation of the market value of subject property residential building structure, in "as is" or depreciated condition, not including land market value and/or site improvements. The subject property building improvement consist a 2-story single family residence, built in 1940, with a building area of 3,436 SF (first floor of 2,480 SF and second floor of 956 SF), as per appraiser's measurements and Boundary Survey by George Ibarra, PLS No. 2534, dated 12-24- 2012. 5605 N. Bayshore Drive, Miami, Florida 33137 Supernova BayshoreInvestments, LLC, Miami, Florida 33145 Subject property is located along the west side of N. Bayshore Drive, between NE 56'h and 57'1' Streets, with an open water frontage view to Biscayne Bay, in City of Miami, Florida. As per Miami -Dade County public records and Boundary Survey by George lbarra, PLS No. 2534, dated 12-24-2012: Lot 2, in Block 20, of BAYSHORE UNIT NUMBER THREE, according to the Plat thereof, recorded in Plat Book 12, at Page 50, of the Public Records of Miami -Dade County, Florida, and including all Riparian Rights incident thereto, 01-3218-037-0020. 30,000 SF (+/-100.0' x 300.01), with +/-100 feet of water frontage view, to Biscayne Bay, as per Boundary Survey by George Ibarra, PLS No. 2534, dated 12-24-2012. Rectangular/irregular, with +/-100.0 feet of water frontage with concrete seawall, with an east view to Biscayne Bay. Slightly above street grade. Review of FIRM flood zone rate maps indicates that the subject lies within a Flood Zone "AB.", Flood Zone Map #12086C 0308L, dated September 11, 2009. R-1, Single Family Residential District, City of Miami, Florida. 21.00 / 3. 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 5of 54 SUMMARY OF SALIENT FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS (continued) SUBJECT PROPERTY: PROPOSED NEW DEVFI ,OPMENT: YEAR BUILT: IMPROVEMENT AGE: SITE IMPROVEMENTS: ADJOINING LAND: ASSESSMENT/TAX DATA (2016): The subject building improvement consist a 2-story single family residence, built in 1940, with a building area of 3,436 SF (first floor of 2,480 SF and second floor of 956 SF), and a detached 2-car garage of 642 SF, for a total building area of 4,078 SF, as per appraiser's measurements and Boundary Survey by George lbarra, PLS No. 2534, dated 12-24-2012. The building has three bedrooms, four bath, foyer, living, dining, kitchen, family and terrace. The MDC tax roil indicates a building adjusted area of 3,811 SF. The total measured building area of 4,078 SF is used in this report. See building Scheck. The subject property site is proposed to have new bnprovements. 1940, according to Miami -Dade County tax roll information. 76 years, according to tax roll. The site improvements include outdoors facilities, such as front open parking area, landscaping and walking areas, pool, concrete seawall and dock, Residential uses. The 2016 Assessments and R.E, Taxes for subject property, as per MDC figures, are: Descrption Assessment Building $ 386,637 Land $3,299,907 XF Value 34,709 Market Value $3,721,253 Assessed Value $2,121,729 R,E. Taxes (2015) 56,586 The indicated 2016 building market value is $386,637 and the land market value is $3,299,907 or $110.00 per SF, for the land size of 30,000 SF. The indicated land value reflects $32,999 per water front lineal foot (100 feet). The building value reflects $94.81/SF for the total measured building area of 4,078 SF, rk 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 6of 54 SUMMARY OF SALIENT FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS (continued) UTILITIES: Water, sewer, electricity and telephone. HIGHEST AND BEST USE: The subject property site as vacant is to be improved with a new single family residential improvement. As currently improved, the subject property residential improvement is above and beyond its economic life, as indicated by the market. DATE OF VALUE: This report date is: September 6th, 2016. RELATIONSHIP TO NEIGHBORHOOD: Rated good, as subject is a residential property located in City of Miami, in close proximity to the cities of Surfside, Bal Harbour, Bay Harbor Island and City of Miami Beach. EXPOSURE TIME: Exposure time is the estimated length of time the property interest being appraised would have been offered on the market prior to the hypothetical consummation of a sale at market value on the effective date of the appraisal. The exposure time for subject property is estimated at 6 months. MARKETING TIME: Marketing time is the time it might take to sell the property interest at the appraised market value after the initial for sale date in the open market. The reasonable marketing time for subject property is estimated at 12 months, if properly marketed as per market conditions. PRIOR REPORT: I have not performed appraisal or other type of services, regarding the property that is the subject of this report, within the three-year period immediately preceding acceptance of this assignment. TYPE OF REPORT: This is an Appraisal Report, in narrative format. Only the Market Sales Comparison Approach is developed in this appraisal report and considered the most reliable value indicator for subject property improvements depreciated market value. The Market Sales Comparison Approach is based on the most recent water -front similar vacant lots and single-family property improved sales in subject's immediate market area, to arrive at the depreciated market value for subject property improvement. These market sales are for a number of similar properties in the last years, and reflect the actions of buyers/sellers in that particular market, in the current market conditions. masimmenk 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCNO8163005 09-06-2016 Page 7of 54 SUMMARY OF SALIENT FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS (continued) PURPOSE OF APPRAISAL: The purpose of this Appraisal Report is to estimate the market value of subject property residential building structure, in "as is" or depreciated condition, not including land market value and/or site improvements, to help our client, UCIEngineering, Miami, Florida (Mr. Reymundo J. Miranda, P.E.), for the proposed new residential development onsite. Therefore, the Market Value, in Fee Simple Interest, of subject property residential building structure, in "as is" or depreciated condition, not including underlying land value and site improvements, as of September 6, 2016, and with adequate exposure and marketing time, is estimated at: TWO HUNDRED SEVENTY FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($275,000) 5605 N. Baysh ore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page Bof 54 PURPOSE OF APPRAISAL The purpose of this Appraisal Report is to estimate the market value of subject property residential building structure, in "as is" or depreciated condition, not including land market value and/or site improvements, to help our customer, UCIEngineering, Miami, Florida (Mr. Reymundo J. Miranda, P.E.), for the proposed new residential development on site. EFFECTIVE DATE OF VALUATION The effective date of market valuation is September 6th, 2016. PROPERTY mins APPRAISED A right or interest in property is referred to as an estate. This estate may be a fee ownership interest or a lease interest for a period of years. An estate in land is the degree, nature or extent of interest, which a person has in it. An undivided ownership of a parcel of real estate embraces a great many rights such as the right to its occupancy and use; the right to sell in whole or in part; the right to bequeath it; and the right to transfer it by contract for specified periods of time. These rights of occupancy and use are called beneficial interests. An owner, who leases real estate to a tenant, transfers one of these rights in his bundle, namely the beneficial interest or the right to use or occupy to the tenant, in accordance with the provisions of the lease contract. He retains all the other interest in the bundle. In subject instance the interest appraised herein and the scope of the assignment is to estimate market value of the Fee Simple Estate. Fee Simple Estate interest in real estate is defined as absolute ownership unencumbered by any other interest or estate. It may also be defined as the largest possible estate in real property, the owner of which has absolute use of the right to dispose of it as he pleases. It is subject only to the limitations imposed by the governmental powers of taxation, eminent domain, police power and escheat. Ownership or a Fee Simple Estate can be retained, sold, bestowed or bequeathed. SUBJECT PROPERTY HISTORY AND CONTRACT FOR SALE Subject property is not in the market for sale, or under a sale -purchase contract -agreement, as per information provided to appraiser. No current MLS sale information was available in public records. Subject property was purchased by current owner, Supernova Bayshorc Investment, LLC, in December 28, 2012, for $2,250,000 (MDC Public Records, OR Book -Page: 28422-4458). Seller was: Richard Walsh and Vicki L. Mitchell, husband and wife. 5605 N. ayshore Dr, Miami RCNO8163005 09-06-2016 Page 9of 54 MARKET VALUE DEFINITION The Market Value, as defined in the Agencies' appraisal regulations, is: The most probable price which a property should bring in a competitive and open market under all conditions requisite to a fair sale, the buyer and seller each acting prudently and knowledgeably, and assuming the price is not affected by undue stimulus. Implicit in this definition are the consummation of a sale, as of a specified date and the passing of title from the seller to buyer under conditions whereby: Buyer and seller are typically motivated; Both parties are well informed or well advised, and acting in what they consider their best interest; A reasonable tine is allowed for exposure in the open market; Payment is made in terms of cash in U. S. dollars or in terms of financial arrangements comparable thereto; and The price represents normal consideration for the property sold unaffected by special or creative financing or sales concessions granted by anyone associated with the sale. This Market Value definition, is from regulations published by federal regulatory agencies pursuant to Title XI of the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act (FIRREA) of 1989 between July 5, 1990, and August 24, 1990, by the Federal Reserve System (FRS), National Credit Union Administration (NCUA), Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), and the Office of Comptroller of the Currency (OCC). This definition is also referenced in regulations jointly published by the OCC, FRS, and FDIC on June 1994, and in the Interagency Appraisal and Evaluation Guidelines, as revised and updated December 2010. SUBJECT PROPERTY ESTIMATED MARKETING TIME The subject property residential improvement consist a 2-story single family home, built in 1940, with a total building area of 4,078 SF, has an estimated marketing -closing time of approximately one year, providing the property is offered at a price according to subject market conditions and a recognized professional realtor handles sales offer under a cotnpetent sales management contract. • _ - 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page lOof 54 SCOPE OF WORK OF APPRAISAL The purpose of this Appraisal Report is to estimate the market value of subject property residential building structure, in "as is" or depreciated condition, not including land market value and/or site improvements, to help our customer, UClEngineering, Miami, Florida (Mr. Reymundo J. Miranda, P.E.), for a proposed new residential development on site. The appraisers prepared this appraisal report using appraisal techniques and methodology in conformity with the latest edition of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) rules and regulations. This appraisal report details the appraiser estimate of the Market Value, in Fee Simple Estate, of the subject property existing building structure, in "as is" or depreciated condition, not including the subject's land market value and site improvements The appraisers inspected the subject property and the neighborhood area and have gathered data and information from several sources. This appraisal report details our overview of the current sales of water front vacant single family residential land and the sales of similar improved single family residential properties situated in City of Miami, and immediately areas. Data herein is the result of original research for subject property single family residential property, as well as information supplied by Miami -Dade County officials and agencies, and officials of the cities of Miami, and neighboring areas. Property managers, contractors, and principals of different projects and developments in the same areas of Miami, and immediately areas. Primary sales data were gathered and verified from sales of similar propetties within the subject's immediate neighborhood -market area. All the sales data was verified with the registered Warranty Deed on Miami -Dade County tax roll information and county court information. As agreed with our client, UClEngineering, Miami, Florida (Mr. Reymundo J. Miranda, P.E,), the purpose of this appraisal report is to estimate the market value of subject property building structure, in "as is" or depreciated condition, as described in this report, not including land market value and site improvements. 5605 N. Baysh ore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 1 lof 54 NEIGHBORHOOD DESCRIPTION A neighborhood can be defined as: "A portion of a larger community, or an entire community in which there is a homogeneous grouping of inhabitants, buildings, or business enteiptises. Inhabitants of a neighborhood usually have a more than casual community interest and a similarity of economic level or cultural background. Neighborhood boundaries may consist of well-defined natural or man made barriers or they may be more or less well-defined by a distinct change in land use or in the character of the inhabitants." Neighborhoods may be devoted to such uses as residential, commercial, industrial, agricultural, cultural and civic activities, or a mixture of these. Analysis of the neighborhood in which a particular property is located, is important due to the fact that the various economic, social political, and physical forces which affect the neighborhood also directly influence the individual properties within it, An analysis of these various factors as they affect value of the subject property is presented in the following discussion. Subject property is located along the west side of North Bayshore Drive, between NE 56th and 57" Streets, with an open water frontage view to Biscayne Bay, in City of Miami, with a water frontage view to Biscayne Bay, within the area known as Morningside in close proximity to Morningside Park. The subject property neighborhood is defined as: Biscayne Blvd., to the west; Interstate I-195, to the south; Biscayne Bay, to the east and NE 135 Street, to the north. The Biscayne Boulevard is a four lanes road traveling north -south, with curb, gutters, and streetlights, and concrete sidewalks. Properties situated along this street primarily consists of low to mid -rise hotels and motels, high-rise multi -family rental apartment building and hotels, as well as mixed use properties, restaurants, service establishments and commercial retails which are geared to serve the neighborhood areas. The neighborhood general area is of various zones classifications, among them single and multi- family residential, hotels, motels, mixed use commercial type zoning. Most of the area is zoned single, multi -family residential and hotels/motels, and construction for these improvements ranges from the early 1920's to the present. Many of the older improvements have been updated and/or demolished to allow new construction or to be remodeled, particularly those on beach front residential sites in order to be improved with new residential developments. The residential use consists of one and two story, medium to large size single-family residences, some with waterfront lots fronting Biscayne Bay or other waterways orcanals located throughout the neighborhood. Some of these homes are custom built with amenities including tennis courts and boat docks, and swinuning pools, Property values have shown a steady upward trend in the last years and the residential properties within subject's immediate neighborhood have shown an strong upward The neighborhood is mainly of middle to upper income levels families and single family residences are predominantly owner occupied, however, there are some rental properties for single-family use. There are some high-rise apartment buildings and condominium projects in the area, some of which fronting Biscayne Bay. 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 12of 54 NEIGHBORHOOD DESCRIPTION (continued). The overall neighborhood area is considered to possess an increased appeal and resultant investment viability and given the overall public/private investment interest in the area, this is considered a positive influence on the subject properly. There are employment centers, public parks, public beaches, shopping areas, places of worship and public transportation within the boundaries of the subject property neighborhood. Highway access to this neighborhood is good via the Julia Tuttle Causewayfl-195 Hwy. and the Biscayne Boulevard. CONCLUSION. The subject property enjoys a good water front location in North Bayshore Drive, having a good street location whiting the neighborhood. 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 13of 54 SUBJECT PROPERTY LOCATOR MAP 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 14of 54 SITE DATA APPRAISAL PROJECT: PROPERTY ADDRESS: OWNER OF RECORDS: PROPERTY LOCATION: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: FOLIO NUMBER: SITE AREA: SITE SHAPE: TOPOGRAPHY: FLOOD ZONE DATA: ZONING: CENSUS TRACT: The estimation of the market value of subject property residential building structure, in "as is" or depreciated condition, not including land market value and/or site improvements. The subject building improvement consist a 2-story single family residence, built in 1940, with a building area of 3,436 SF (first floor of 2,480 SF and second floor of 956 SF), as per appraiser's measurements and Boundary Survey by George Ibarra, PLS No. 2534, dated 12-24-2012. 5605 N. Bayshore Drive, Miami, Florida 33137 Supernova Bayshore Investments, LLC, Miami, Florida 33145 Subject property is located along the west side of N. Bayshore Drive, between NE 56th and 57th Streets, with an open water frontage view to Biscayne Bay, in City of Miami, Florida. As per Miami -Dade County public records and Boundary Survey by George Ibarra, PLS No. 2534, dated 12-24-2012: Lot 2, in Block 20, of BAYSHORE UNIT NUMBER THREE, according to the Plat thereof, recorded in Plat Book 12, at Page 50, of the Public Records of Miarni-Dade County, Florida, and including all Riparian Rights incident thereto, 01-3218-037-0020, 30,000 SF (+/-100.0' x 300.0'), with +/-100 feet of water frontage view, to Biscayne Bay, as per Boundary Survey by George Ibarra, PLS No. 2534, dated 12-24-2012. Rectangular/irregular, with +1-100.0 feet of water frontage with concrete seawall, with an east view to Biscayne Bay. Slightly above street grade. Review of FIRM flood zone rate maps indicates that the subject lies within a Flood Zone "AE", Flood Zone Map #12086C 0308L, dated September I I, 2009. R-1, Single Family Residential District, City of Miami, Florida. 21.00 / 3. RCNO8163005 09-06-2016 Page 15of 54 SITE DATA (continued) SITE CONDITION: Visual inspection of site did not show any encroachment or easement other than typical utility easements. The immediate area of site appears to have no unusual soil or subsoil conditions. No soil reports were available to appraiser. The appraiser is not qualified to evaluate soils conditions other than visual observation to the site surface. SITE IMPROVEMENTS: The site improvements include outdoors facilities, such as front open parking area, terraces, landscaping and walking areas, pool, concrete seawall and dock. ADJOINING LAND: Residential uses, TOXIC WASTE: LOCATION ATTRIBUTES: LAND USE RESTRICTIONS: HIGHEST AND BEST USE: Appraisers are not experts in determining the presence or absence of hazardous or toxic ntaterials, wastes, pollutants or contaminants. The value estimate is based on the assumption that the subject property is not affected. The appraiser has not been informed of any specific nuisances or hazards affecting subject's site. Compatibility with surrounding uses is: Good Proximity to and access to regional expressways is: Good The Appraisers conducted no title search; however the Appraisers have no knowledge of any restriction, encumbrances, reservations, covenants, declarations, special assessments, ordinances or any other information that would affect the Market Value of the subject property. The subject property site as vacant is to be improved with a new single family residential improvement. As currently improved, the subject property residential improvement is above and beyond its economic life, as indicated by the market. 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 16of 54 DESCRIPTION OF IMPROVEMENTS APPRAISAL PROJECT: The estimation of the market value of subject property building structure, in "as is" or depreciated condition, not including land market value and/or site improvements. Description as per public records information and building exterior observation on site. SUBJECT PROPERTY. Subject property improvement consist a 2-story single family residence, built in 1940, with a building area of 3,436 SF (first floor of 2,480 SF and second floor of 956 SF), as per appraiser's measurements and Boundary Survey by George Ibarra, PLS No. 2534, dated 12- 24-2012. See building Scheck. FOUNDATION. Reinforced concrete slab on foundation piles. ROOF. Concrete flat tiles. INTERIOR. Painted drywalls EXTERIOR. Smooth stucco on CBS wall and aluminum -wood -glass windows and doors. STAIRS. There is one staircase. FIREPLACE. There is a fireplace in living room. FLOORS. Floors are of ceramic tiles. AIR CONDITIONED. Three A/C central units. YEAR BUILT. 1940. IMPROVEMENT AGE. 76 years, according to tax roll. REMAINING ECONOMIC LIFE. As currently improved, the subject property residential improvement is above and beyond its economic life, as indicated by the market. SITE IMPROVEMENTS: The site improvements include outdoors facilities, such as landscaping, concrete walking areas, front open parking, pool and stone tiles deck, concrete seawall and dock and CBS -Metal entrance -front fence and gate. HIGHEST AND BEST USE: The subject property site as vacant is to be improved with a new single family residential improvement. As currently improved, the subject property residential improvement is above and beyond its economic life, as indicated by the market. 5605 N. l3ayshore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 17of 54 1 MIPROVEMENT P11 OTOS 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, MiamMiami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 18of 54 IMPROVEMENT PHOTOS 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCNO8163005 09-06-2016 Page 19of 54 IMPROVEMENT PHOTOS 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 20of 54 IMPROVEMENT STREET PHOTOS 1 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 21of 54 29.16' 2 Car Detached [641,52 Sq ft] 2 TOTAL 514ch by 10 made, Inc. 16' co 45.61' Second Floor [956.24 Sq ft] 2521' F-i to v1 �, 11 Balcony •cn 15.4' - L. [1°5'66 59 T....NI 45.61' 19.21' TOTAL Sketch software by a Is made, me. 1-800-alamode 11)TAL Sketch by bi nitdt, Int, Area Calculations SuMmity !-D11.00 Atcal Cateulm Details First Floor 2479.07 Sq ft 14 x 2.2 3= 39.8' 6.1 x 2,5 = 15,25 19.75 x 20.41 = 403.1 25.2 x 23.35 = 588.42 29.2 x 24.65 = 719.78' 24.4 x 25,45 = 620,98 18.15 x 5.6 = 101.64 Second Floor 956.24 Sq It 15.4 x 3,6 55,44 19.75 x 45.61 = 900.8 Total Living Area (Rounded): tkik110.130..kvq 2 Car Petached Balcony 3436 Sq ft . .....-. 641,5254 It 22 x 29.16 641;52 105.65 Sq ft 5,5 x 19.21 = 105.66 TOTAL Sketch software by a la mode, Inc. 1-800-alamode ZONING Zoning regulates land uses and related matters. Zoning has a direct effect on the health, safety, comfort and convenience of all the people in the community, because it has a direct effect on traffic and parking, congestion, slum prevention, general community and neighborhood appearance, community revenues, expenditures and property values. The purpose of planning and zoning include the following: - To conserve the value of the land, buildings and resources. To protect the character and maintain the stability of residential, agricultural, business and industrial areas, and to promote the orderly development of such areas. - To guide and accomplish a coordinated, adjusted and harmonious development, which, in addition to the purposes set forth above, will contribute to the efficiency and economy in the process of development, - To prevent overcrowding of land and undue concentration of population. Zoning should group compatible uses, and separate incompatible uses. Planning and zoning should establish an orderly land use pattern related to transportation facilities, utilities, and other public facilities and services, and to the physical suitability of the land for the intended purposes. Zoning assures an appropriate balance between lands developed or intended for development for various purposes, and protects reserved land so that it may be used for the most logical purpose. Grouping activities having similar needs in such a manner so as to maximize efficiency and minimize friction protects land values and amenity and reduces costs for services. The zoning of subject property is: R-1, Single Family Residential District, City of Miami, Florida Code. The zoning allows for uses such as (but not limited to) the following: Single -Family Residential Buildings The current use of subject property conforms to zoning. 5605 N. J3ayshore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 24of 54 REAL ESTATE TAXES AND ASSESSMENT DATA It is mistakenly believed assessments are supposed to be at 100 % of Market Value. In actuality, assessments should reflect net proceeds of a sale to a seller subtracting selling expenses and allowances for a typical financing. Therefore, a property could be over assessed even if it sells for an amount greater than the assessment. Depending upon the specific property type, assessment to sale ratios should typically range from 80 % to 95%. However, terms of the sale, selling expenses, and financing involved could dictate a lower or even higher AIS ratio. Most properties are assessed via the Cost Approach with additional support from the Direct Sales Comparison and Income Approaches (if available). Sometimes, because of the process of Mass Appraisal, relevant approaches are not relied upon, primarily due to the absence of pertinent information such as income statement or recent physical inspection of the property. Consequently, the assessment value is generally not representative of true 100% Market Value of the subject property. ASSESSMENT/TAX DATA (2016): The 2016 Assessments and RE. Taxes for subject property, as per MDC figures, are: Description Assessment Building $ 386,637 Land $3,299,907 XF Value 34,709 Market Value $3,721,253 Assessed Value $2,121,729 R.E. Taxes (2015) $ 56,586 The indicated 2016 building market value is $386,637 and the land market value is $3,299,907 or $110,00 per SF, for the land size of 30,000 SF. The indicated land value reflects $32,999 per water front lineal foot (100 feet). The building value reflects $94.81/SF for the total measured building area of 4,078 SF. . - . 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 25of 54 HIGHEST AND BEST USE ANALYSIS An understanding of the market behavior is essential to the concept of the highest and best use. Analyzing the highest and best use of a property may require detailed study, In many appraisals, however, the nature of the assignment sets limits on the extent of the analysis to be undertaken, and the characteristics of the property restricts the number of alternative uses to be considered. Highest and best use may be defined as: "The reasonably probable and legal use of vacant land or an improved property, which is feasible, possible, appropriately supported, financially feasible and that results in the highest value." The highest and best use °fa specific parcel of land is not determined through subjective analysis by the property owner, the developer or the appraiser; rather, the competitive forces within the market where the property is located shape highest and best use. Thereibre, analysis and interpretations of highest and best use is an economic study of market forces focused on the subject property. Market forces also shape market value. The appraiser to formulate an opinion of the property's highest and best use as of the appraisal date also uses the general data that are collected and analyzed to estimate property value. In all valuation assignments, value estimates are based on use. The highest and best use of a property to be appraised provides the foundation for a thorough investigation of the competitive positions of market participants. Consequently, highest and best use can be described as the foundation on which market value rests. The following tests must be passed in determining highest and best use: 1, The use must be legal 2. The use must be probable, not speculative or conjectural. 3. There must be a demand for such use. 4, The use must be profitable. 5. The use must be such as to return to land the highest net return. 6. The use must be such as to deliver the return for the longest period of time. Essentially it is a valuation concept that can be applied to either the land or improvements. It normally is used to mean that use of a parcel of land (without regard to any improvements upon it) that will maximize the owner's wealth by being the most profitable use of the land. The concept of highest and best use can also be applied to a property, which has some improvements upon it that have a remaining economic life. Generally accepted professional appraisal practices dictates that in appraising improved property, the highest and best use be estimated under two different premises. First, the highest and best use of the site "as vacant and available" must be estimated. The second analysis estimates the highest and best use of the property "as presently improved". 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 26of 54 HIGHEST AND BEST USE ANALYSIS (continued) HIGHEST AND BEST USE OF THE SUBJECT SITE AS VACANT. The first part of the analysis assumes a parcel (gland that it can be made vacant through a demolition of any improvements. The four criteria are then applied to the subject site as though vacant. PHYSICALLY POSSIBLE. The first constraint imposed on the possible use of the property is that dictated by the physical aspects of the site itself. Size, shape and terrain of the parcel of land affect the uses to which it can be developed. The utility of the parcel may depend on its frontage and depth. Also considered is the capacity and availability of public utilities. When a site's topography or subsoil conditions make development restrictive or costly, its potential use is adversely affected. In general, the grater potential for achieving economies of scale or flexibility in development lies in the larger sites. The subject site is of rectangular/irregular in shape and contains 30,000 SF as per tax roll and Boundary Survey by George Marra, PLS No. 2534, dated 12-24-2012. The topography is generally above street grade of adjacent streets. The physical configuration of subject site is conductive to single family residential buildings. Access to site is good via Biscayne Boulevard. The site allows for the development of single family buildings. LEGALLY PERMISSIBLE, The land use must be legal. The use must be probable, not speculative or conjectural. There must be a profitable demand for such a use and it must return to the land the highest net return for the longest period of time. Legal restrictions, as they apply to the subject property, are of two types, i.e. private restrictions (deed restrictions, easements, etc.) and public restrictions (zoning, building codes, environmental regulations and historic controls, etc.). These latter restrictions must be investigated, to the best of our ability, because they may preclude much potential highest and best use. According to City of Miami Code zoning classification (sec Zoning discussion), the subject property can legally be developed with a single family type building development. The economic activity of that area of City of Miami indicates demand for single family properties. Several single family type buildings have been developed or remodeled within the subject property neighborhood. No restrictions were found that would preclude the subject's single family building development use being legally permissible. FINANCIALLY FEASIBLE. After determining which uses are physically possible arid legally permissible, we have eliminated many uses from consideration. Then, the uses that meet the first two criteria are analyzed further to determine which are likely to produce an income, or return, equal to or greater than the amount needed to satisfy operating expenses, financial obligations and capital amortization. All uses that are expected to produce a positive return are regarded as financially feasible. A feasible use indicated by the market is of a single family type building development. A demand for single family properties in the neighborhood was observed. The most feasible use indicated by the market is single family type building development on subject site. 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCNO8163005 09-06-2016 Page 27of 54 HIGHEST AND BEST USE ANALYSIS (continued), MAXIMALLY PRODUCTIVE. While in most valuation/analysis cases, the legality of use and physical adaptability of a site or improvement to a use is ready ascertainable, rarely is the most profitable/marketable use apparent. The potential highest and best uses of land are long-term uses that are expected to remain on the site for the normal economic, or commonly referred to, as the useful life of the improvements. Depending on the building type, quality of construction and other factors, modem buildings are expected to remain at least for 60-65 years. The income stream produced by the buildings reflects a carefully considered and specific land use program. The use that produces the highest net return consistent with the risk is the highest and best use of the land. According to City of Miami Code zoning classification (see zoning discussion), the subject property can legally be developed with a single family type building development. A single family residential type building developments appears to be the maximally productive for the subject property as vacant, HIGHEST AND BEST USE AS IMPROVED. The subject property site as vacant is to be improved with a new single family residential improvement. The subject site is utilized in conformity with the zoning regulations and the physical and economic characteristics of the neighborhood environment, as described in the neighborhood analysis. As cutTently improved, the subject property residential improvement is above and beyond its economic life, as indicated by the market. The subject pmperty is appraised accordingly. 5605 N. Bays o e Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 28 of 54 ANALYSIS OF COMPARABLE VACANT LAND SALES Although, a large amount of sales data was originally assembled, a further examination of these properties and the facts surrounding their sale, led to the elimination of many. The remaining sales of comparable properties, which have been used, have met the requirements of a market situation as it applies to an analysis of market data. Inspections have been made of these properties, and the basis of the approach the value has, in fact, been founded upon the conclusions drawn from further amplification and study of these particular sales. Appropriate adjustments are made to the vacant land sales price of comparable sales for differences with the a typical site similar to subject such as for time and conditions of sale, location, and physical characteristics such as, size, utility, use, water frontage, accessibility, etc. Some of these elements of comparison are described tullowing, Real Property Rights conveyed. In most instances appraisers are asked to appraise the fee simple interest of the subject. However, income properties that are encumbered by leases will require valuation of the lease fee interest and possibly of the leasehold interest, depending in the relationship between market and contract rent. Financing terms. Financing terms can influence the price paid for a property. When financing terms are determined not to be cash equivalent, and adjustment is required, but only when this adjustment is weighted against market evidence, Market conditions can be such that financing terms adjustment is not recognized by market participants in which case no adjustment is warranted. Conditions of sale. They reflect the motivation of the buyer and the seller in a real estate transaction. If either party is unduly influenced, the price can be affected. However, sales that involve unusual terms are inherently suspect and should be used with caution. Market conditions, time of sale. It is not uncommon for sales to occur under market conditions different than those existing at the time of valuation. If the appraiser can document and support and appreciation rate for comparable properties within a particular sub market, an upward adjustment for time of sale is warranted. Conversely, if the demand for a particular type of property declines over time, a downward adjustment is warranted. The passage of time in and of itself does not affect prices, but changes in market conditions over time do. Location. Is one of the most significant characteristics influencing property values. Properties within the same neighborhood area can have similar location characteristics, but still location adjustments may be warranted to account for differences relating to things like corner location, superior amenity frontage and accessibility, etc. A downward adjustment is made to the price indicated by the sale comparable is its location is considered superior to the subject, and upward adjustment is warranted is its location is considered inferior to the subject. Physical characteristics. Usually, the sales comparables available for analysis are not identical to the subject property and may differ in conditions, size, and utility, etc. A comparable that has different utility than the subject property warrants an upward adjustment or a downward adjustment if it had superior or inferior utility to the subject. 5605 N, Baysh ore Dr, Miami RCNO8163005 09-06-2016 Page 29 of 54 ANALYSIS OF COMPARABLE VACANT LAND SALES (continued) Similarly, the unit price indicated by a property that is larger than the subject is adjusted upward and downward is it is smaller than the subject. Historically, the unit price indicated by the sale of a large property is smaller than the indicated price by a smaller property. In summary, it can be concluded that upward adjustments to the cornparable sales indicated unit price are made, when they are inferior to the subject. If they are superior to the subject, then a downward adjustment is warranted. The reader is not to be confused when thinking about this adjustment process, and must keep in mind that all the adjustments are made to the indicated prices of the comparable sales for differences with the subject. The adjustments are made because the comparable sales are either inferior or superior to the subject, not because the subject is inferior or superior to the comparables. Although many sales were studied to help the appraiser reach a value conclusion for the subject property, only those considered most appropriate for valuation are presented here. All comparables used in this study were selected because they are considered to be best area value indicators and good representatives of the most recent actions of buyers and sellers in the subject property neighborhood area for a typical site fronting the water, not beach front, in Miami Beach. Review of comparable sales data indicates the following: 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Miami R008163005 09-06-2016 Page 30 of 54 VACANT LAND COMPARABLE SALE DESCRIPTION COMPARABLE LAND SALE No. 1 Property Location: Legal Description: Folio Number: Parcel Location: Lot Size/Shape: Sale Price: Property Zoning: Sale Date/ Recording: Sale History: Buyer: Financing Terms: Comments/ Analysis: 1133 Belle Meade Island Drive, Miami, Florida 33138 Lot 29, of BELLE MEADE ISLAND, PB. 40-89, Miami -Dade County, Florida. 01-3207-037-0270. At the noitheast end curve of Belle Meade Island Drive, with an open and unobstructed water front view of Biscayne Bay. 13,172 SF, as per tax roll. Vacant land of irregular shape. $1,325,000, or $100,59 per SF, for the 13,172 SF. R-1, Single Family Residential District, City of Miami. April 23'1, 2014. Recorded at OR Book/Page: 29128-4470. Warranty Deed. $630,100, in January 16th, 2013, as per MDC public records, 1133 Belle Meade, LLC. SK FL 1133, LLC, Cash to seller. No financing information available. Similar zoning; No adjustment warranted. Similar location as compared to subject property; No adjustment warranted. Smaller lot size (13,172 SF) as compared to subject property (30,000 SF); A negative adjustment is warranted. No adjustment is warranted for time of sale and market condition. A negative net adjustment is warranted. The subject property site should sale for LESS as the price indicated for this comparable sale. Say at: $95.56 per SF. 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 31 of 54 VACANT LAND COMPARABLE SALE DESCRIPTION COMPARABLE LAND SALE No. 1. Aerial Photo 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 32 of 54 VACANT LAND COMPARABLE SALE DESCRIPTION COMPARABLE LAND SALE No. 2 Property Location: Legal Description: Folio Number: Parcel Location: Lot Size/Shape: Sale Price: Property Zoning: Sale Date/ Recording: Sale History: Buyer: Seller: Financing Terms: Conunents/ Analysis: 1125 Belle Meade Island Drive, Miami, Florida 33138 Lot 28, of BELLE MEADE ISLAND, PB. 40-89, Miami -Dade County, Florida. 01-3207-037-0260. At the northeast end curve of Belle Meade Island Drive, with an open and unobstructed water front view of Biscayne Bay. 12,375 SF, as per tax roll. Vacant land of irregular -rectangular shape. $1,265,000, or $102.72 per SF, for the 12,375 SF. R-1, Single Family Residential District, City of Miami. June 6th, 2014. Recorded at OR Book/Page: 29186-1225. Warranty Deed. $200,000, in December 13`, 1997, as per MDC public records. 1125 Belle Meade, LLC. Joel & Magdalena Fabelo Cash to seller, No financing information available. Similar zoning; No adjustment warranted. Similar location as compared to subject property; No adjustment warranted. Smaller lot size (12,375 SF) as compared to subject property (30,000 SF); A negative adjustment is warranted. No adjustment is warranted for time of sale and market condition. A negative net adjustment is warranted. The subject property site should sale for LESS as the price indicated for this comparable sale. Say at $97.58 per SF. 5605 N. Baysh ore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-20 6 Page 33 of 54 VACANT LAND COMPARABLE SALE DESCRIPTION COMPARABLE LAND SALE No. 2. Aerial Photo. 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 34 of 54 VACANT LAND COMPARABLE SALE DESCRIPTION COMPARABLE LAND SALE No. 3 Property Location: 7235 Belle Meade Island Blvd, Miami, Florida 33138 Legal Description: Folio Number: Parcel Location: Lot Size/Shape: Sale Price: Property Zoning: Sale Date/ Recording: Sale History: Buyer: Seller: Financing Terms: Comments/ Analysis: A portion of Lot 18, Block 3, of NEW BELLE MEADE, PB. 40-45, Miami - Dade County, Florida; A portion of Lot 21, Block 2, of NEW BELLE MEADE, PD. 40-45, Miami -Dade County, Florida. 01-3207-031-0320 and 01-3207-031-0180 (2 folios sale). At the northeast end curve of Belle Meade Boulevard, with an open and unobstructed water front view of Biscayne Bay. 27,749 SF (combined or 23,598 SF + 4,151 SF), as per tax roll. Vacant land of irregular shape consisting of two adjacent vacant lots. $2,350,000 (combined), or $84.69 per SF, for the 27,749 SE R-1, Single Family Residential District, City of Miami. November 7th, 2014. Recorded at OR Book/Page: 29400-1451 and 29386- 0591. Warranty Deed. $1,608,800 (combined), in December 2006 and March 2012, respectively, as per MDC public records. Huertas USA III, Inc. Jonas Builders, Inc. and Solid Builders Group, LLC. Cash to seller. No financing information available. Similar zoning; No adjustment warranted. Similar location as compared to subject property; No adjustment warranted. Similar lot size (27,749 SF) as compared to subject property (30,000 SF), but irregular shape or inferior utility; A positive adjustment is warranted. No adjustment is warranted for time of sale and market condition. A positive net adjustment is warranted. The subject property site should sale for MORE as the price indicated for this comparable sale. Say at: $97.40 per SF. 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 35 of 54 VACANT LAND COMPARABLE SALE DESCRIPTION COMPARABLE LAND SALE No. 3. Aerial Photo. 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 36 of 54 VACANT LAND COMPARABLE SALES CHART The following chart indicates the Unit Price/SF of comparable land sales and subject property land as vacant, according to the land comparables sales presented. Sale :No Sale: Date Sales •Land Size C&SF ..„ . Adjusted VaIueISF 1 Apr-2014 $1,325,000 13,172 SF $100.59 $95.56 2 Jun-2014 $1,265,000 12,375 SF $102.72 $97.58 3 Nov-2014 $2,350,000 27,749 SF $84.69 $97.40 ,-- ------ ,,----,-:.,.,,._ gil 'keii,:- ., ' '''-- , ,30,000SP. „. $97.50.. Therefore, based on the indicated range of land comparable sales indicated in chart, the estimated market value per SF of subject property land, as vacant, as of September 6'h, 2016, is estimated at $97.50/SF, as per current market conditions, with emphasis in all sales in the final value conclusion. Therefore, the market value of the subject property site as vacant land is calculated as: 30,000 SF @ $97.50/SF. = $2,925,000 TWO MILLION NINE HUNDRED TWENTY FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($2,925,000) The subject property land market value ($97.50/SF) as vacant, including site improvements, is used in subject property improvements market value analysis, in the following pages. 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 37 of 54 LAND COMPARABLE LOCATOR MAP 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 38 of 54 MARKET SALES COMPARISON APPROACH The sales comparison approach is the process in which a market value estimate is derived by analyzing the market of similar properties and comparing these properties to the subject property. Estimates of market rent, cost, depreciation and other value parameters may be derived in the other approaches to value, using comparative techniques. Often these elements are also analyzed in the sales comparison approach to determine the adjustments to be made to the sale prices of comparable properties. The comparative techniques of analysis applied in the sales comparison approach are fundamental to the valuation process. In the market sales comparison approach, market value is estimated by comparing the subject property to similar properties that have recently sold, are listed for sale, or are under contract (i.e., recently drawn up purchase offers accompanied by cash or equivalent deposit). A major premise of the sales comparison approach is that the market value of a property is directly related to the prices of comparable and competitive properties. The comparative analysis performed in the approach focuses on similarities and differences among the properties and transactions that affect value. These may include differences in the property rights appraised, the motivations of buyers and sellers, financing terms, market conditions at the time of sale, size, location, physical features and, if the properties produce income economic characteristics. Elements of comparison are tested against market evidence to determine which elements are sensitive to change and how they affect value. RELATIONSHIP TO APPRAISAL PRINCIPLES, The concept of anticipation and change, together with the principles of supply and demand, substitutions, balance, and externalities, are basic to the sales comparison approach. Guided by these principles, an appraiser attempts to consider all issues relevant to the valuation problem in a manner that is consistent and reflects local market conditions. APPLICABILITY AND LIMITATIONS. The market sales comparison approach is applicable to all types of real estate property interest when there are sufficient, recent and reliable transactions to indicate value patterns or trends in the market. For property types that are bough and sold regularly, the sales comparison approach often provides a supportable indication of market value. When data are available, this is the most direct and systematic approach to value estimation. When the number of market transactions is insufficient, the applicability of the sales comparison approach may be limited. The sale comparison approach has broad applicability and is persuasive when sufficient data are available. Buyers of income -producing properties, usually concentrate a property's economic characteristics, most often focusing on the rate of return for an investment made in anticipation of future cash flows. Thoroughly analyzing comparable sales of large, complex, income -producing properties, is difficult because information on the economic factors influencing buyers' decisions is not readily available from public records or buyers and sellers. 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 39 of 54 MARKET SALES COMPARISON APPROACH fcontinued) To ensure the reliability of value conclusions derived by applying the approach, the appraiser must verify the market data obtained and fully understand the behavioral characteristics of the buyers and sellers involved in property transactions. Caution should be exercised when relying on sales data provided by someone other than a party to the transaction. Incorrect assumptions and conclusions may result if the appraiser relies on cold statistical data without regard for the motivation of the parties to the transactions. Similarly, errors can result if the characteristics of the databases, anticipated income and expense schedules, or potential changes in use are not considered. The sales comparison approach is a significant and essential part of the valuation process, even when its reliability is limited. In situations where the dissimilarities in factors affecting property value cannot be properly determinate or quantified the sales comparison approach may still provide a probable range of value that can support a primary value indication derived from the application of one of the other approaches. Furthermore, data needed to apply the other approaches (e.g., overall capitalization rates for the income approach or depreciation estimates for the cost approach) are often obtained in the comparative process. In order to estimate the Market Value of the subject property improvements via the Market Sales Comparison Approach, a search was conducted for comparable hotel building sales in subject's market area, The appraiser has gathered, verified and analyzed several ocean front hotel building sales within the subject property's market area. All comparable sales used have sold within the last year; tax roll, city officials and all available information with all pertinent data regarding of the sales is presented. All comparable sales used were selected because they are considered best value indicators and good representatives of the actions of buyers and sellers in this particular market. A brief description of pertinent benchmarks, including sale price per building -living square foot not including land were analyzed. The approach is based on the depreciated market value of similar improvements within the subject property market value. Inasmuch as a typical building has been utilized in the normal sense of business enterprise, it has incurred some loss from its value, new. This loss is referred to as depreciation. Deprecintionis defined as the loss in value due to any cause. It is the difference between the market value of a structural improvement and its replacement cost as of the date of valuation, In the analysis of similar or comparables sales, and after deducting the market value of the land as vacant, including site unprovements, estimated at $97.50/S1?, the remaining value of the sale is the market value of the property depreciated improvements. The Income and Cost Approaches are considered not reliable approaches for subject property building valuation. The Income Approach is not developed due to the fact that the subject property is not an income producing property and the Cost Approach due to the improvements depreciation estimation. 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Miami IICN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 40 of 54 IMPROVED COMPARABLE SALE DESCRIPTION IMPROVED COMPARABLE SALE No. I Property Location: Legal Description: Folio Number: Property Location: Lot Size/Shape: Building Size: Property Zoning: Sale Date: Sale Price: Buyer: Seller: Sale History: M. Value/SF of Improvement Not Including Land: Financing Terms: 5625 N. Bayshore Drive, Miami, Florida 33137 Lot 1, and riparian rights, Block 20, BAYSHORE UNIT No. 3, PB. 12-50, Miami -Dade County, Florida. 01-3218-037-0010. Located at the SEC of the intersection of N. Bayshore Drive and NE 571h Street, City of Miami, with water front to Biscayne Bay. 31,800 SF, of rectangular shape (106' x 300'), Water frontage of 106.0 feet. 4,316 SF, as per Public Records. R-1, Single Family Residential District, City of Miami. November 6, 2013. Recorded at OR Book/Page: 28903-4943. Warranty Deed. $3,340,000, or $239,500 for hnprovements, or $55.49/SF, not including land as vacant and site improvements estimated value of $3,100,500 at $97.50/SF of land ($3,340,000 - $3,100,500). Eric A. Shelton Juan Chipoco & Luis Hoyos. A prior sale on 02/08/2013 for $2,375,000, as per MDC public records. $55.49/SF ($239,500 / 4,316 SF) Cash to seller. No financing information available. Comments: This property has similar location as compared to subject; No adjustment is warranted. Similar condition as compared to subject (1951, as compared to subject property (1940); No adjustment is warranted. No net adjustment is warranted. Subject property improvements market value is similar at the value indicated by this comparable sale. Say at: $55.49/SF. lammosor 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Miarni RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 41 of 54 IMPROVED COMPARABLE SALE DESCRIPTION IMPROVED COMPARABLE SALE No. 1 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 42 of 54 IMPROVED COMPARABLE SALE DESCRIPTION IMPROVED COMPARABLE SALE No. 2 Property Location: Legal Description: Folio Number: Property Location: Lot Size/Shape: Building Size: Property Zoning: Sale Date: Sale Price: Buyer: Seller: Sale History: M. Value/SF of Improvement Not Including Land: Financing Terms: 7405 Belle Meade Blvd, Miami, Florida 33138 Portion of Lots 8, 9 and 10, Block 3, NEW BELLE MEADE, PB. 40-45, Miami -Dade County, Florida. 01-3207-03] -0242. At the northeast end curve of Belle Meade Boulevard, with a water front view on canal and with unobstructed exit to Biscayne Bay, in City of Miami. 16,516 SF, of irregular shape. Water frontage, 4,321 SF, as per Public Records. R-1, Single Family Residential District, City of Miami. February 10, 2015. Recorded at OR Book/Page: 29500-0909. Warranty Deed. $1,900,000, or $289,700 for improvements, or $67.04/SF, not including land as vacant and site improvements estimated value of $1,610,300 at $97.50/SF of land ($1,900,000 - $1,610,300). Mohamed Merabet & Yamina Sabbah Luis A. Arias. A prior sale on 01/05/2012 for $840,000, as per MDC public records. $67.04/SF ($289,700 / 4,321 SF) Cash to seller. Conventional financing of $1.33 Mill by Bofi Federal Bk. Comments: This property has similar water front location as compared to subject; No adjustment is warranted. Similar condition as compared to subject (1945, as compared to subject property (1940); No adjustment is warranted. No net adjustment is warranted. Subject property improvements market value is similar at the value indicated by this comparable sale. Say at: $67.04/SF. 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCNO8163005 09-06-2016 Page 43 of 54 IMPROVED COMPARABLE SALE DESCRIPTION IMPROVED COMPARABLE SALE No. 2 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 44 of 54 IMPROVED COMPARABLE SALE D SCRIPTION IMPROVED COMPARABLE SALE No. 3 Property Location: Legal Description: Folio Number; Property Location: Lot Size/Shape; Building Size: Property Zoning: Sale Date: Sale Price: Buyer: Seller; Sale History: M. Value/SF of Improvement Not Including Land: Financing Terms: 928 Belle Meade Island Drive, Miami, Florida 33138 Portion of Lot 62, Block 3, NEW BELLE MEADE, PB. 40-45, Miami -Dade County, Florida. 01-3207-037-0550. At the northwest end curve of Belle Meade Island Drive (east from NE 9th Avenue), with a water front view on canal and with unobstructed exit to Biscayne Bay, in City of Miami. 14,850 SF, of rectangular shape (90' x 165'). Water frontage. 4,427 SF, as per Public Records. R-1, Single Family Residential District, City of Miami. October 20, 2014. Recorded al OR Book/Page: 29360-3556. Warranty Deed. $1,800,000, or $352,100 for improvements, or $79.53/SF, not including land as vacant and site improvements estimated value of $1,447,900 at $97.50/SF of land ($1)800,000 - $1,447,900), Daniel & Dawn Feinberg Renee Belle Meade 928, LLC. A prior sale on 10/17/2013 for $1,350,000, as per MDC public records. $79.53/SF ($352,100 / 4,427 SF) Cash to seller. Conventional financing of $1.00 Mill by Bk of America. Comments: This property has similar water front location as compared to subject; No adjustment is warranted. Similar condition as compared to subject (1949, as compared to subject property (1940); No adjustment is warranted. No net adjustment is warranted. Subject property improvements market value is similar at the value indicated by this comparable sale. Say at: $79.53/SF. 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 45 of 54 IMPROVED COMPARABLE SALE. DESCRIPTION IMPROVED COMPARABLE SALE No. 3 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 46 of 54 MARKET SALES LOCATOR MAP 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Miami �ts 111[2.011,�tE ff i �1 I RCNO0163005 09-06-2016 Page 47 of 54 ADJUSTED BUILDING SF UNIT VALUE The following chart indicates the Unit Price/SF of building area, not including land and site improvements value, for each one of the improved comparables sales presented. 1 Nov-2013 $239,500 4,316 SF $55:49 $55.49 2 Feb-2015 $289,700 4,321 SF $67.04 $67.04 3 Oct-2014 $352,100 4,427 SF $79.53 $79.53 The unadjusted price per SF of comparable sales building area has a range from $55.49/SF to $79.53/SF. After adjustments, the price per SF of comparable sales has a range from $55.49/SF to $79.53/SF. The average figure is $67.35 and the median is $67.04 per SF. Based on the indicated adjusted values per building SF, a value figure of $430.00/SF is considered a good market value indication of subject property building of 4,237 SF, given similar emphasis to all comparable sales. Thus, the market value estimate for the subject property building improvement of 4,237 SF, in "as is or depreciated" condition, as of September 6th, 2016, is estimated at $67.20/SF. ESTIMATED MARKET VALUE BY DIRECT SALES COMPARISON APPROACH Since the market value per building SF for subject property irnpmvement, in "as is or depreciated" condition, is estimated at $67.20/SF, the market value of subject property building structure, not including the subject's land market value and site improvements, is calculated in the following manner: 4,078 SF X $67.20/SF = $274,042, rounded to $275,000. Thus, the indicated Market Value of the subject property building structure, in "as is or depreciated" condition, not including underlying land value and/or site improvements, by the Direct Sales Comparison Approach, as of September 6th, 2016, and with adequate exposure and marketing time, is estimated at: TWO HUNDRED SEVENTY FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($275,000) 5605 N. Bays lore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 48 of 54 RECONCILIATION AND MARKET VALUE CONCLUSION The Market Sales Comparison Approach is based on recent water front single family property sales in the subject's immediate market area, adjusted to arrive at a value for subject property building structure market value. These market sales are for a number of similar residential properties in the last years in subject's immediate market area and reflect the actions of buyers/sellers in the that particular market. Therefore, giving consideration to the merits of each approach, and to the forces that create and affect value, it is the appraiser's opinion that the Market Value, in Fee Simple Interest, of the market value of subject property existing residential building structure, not including underlying land value and site improvements, in "as is or depreciated" condition as of September 6th, 2016, and with adequate exposure and marketing time, is estimated at: TWO HUNDRED SEVENTY FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($275,000) 5605 N. I3ayshore Dr, Miami F&CNO 163005 09-06-2016 Page 49 af 54 STATEMENT OF ASSUMPTIONS & LIMITING CONDITIONS The Appraisers assumes the following general assumptions: 1.- No responsibility is assumed for the legal description provided or for matters pertaining to legal or title considerations. Title to the property is assumed to be good and marketable unless otherwise stated. 2.- The property is appraised free and clear of any or all liens and encumbrances unless otherwise stated. Any maps included in this Appraisal Report are to assist the reader. 3.- Responsible ownership and competent property management are assumed. 4.- The appraiser obtained the information, estimates and opinions that were expressed in the appraisal report, from sources that they considered to be reliable and believes them to be correct. The appraisers do not assume responsibility for the accuracy of such items that were furnished by other parties. 5.- All engineering studies are assumed to be correct. The plot plans and illustrative material in this report are included only to help the reader visualize the subject property. 6.- It is assumed that there are no hidden or un-apparent conditions of the property, subsoil or structures that render it more or less valuable. No responsibility is assumed for such conditions or for obtaining the engineering studies that may be required to discover them. 7.- It is assumed that the property is in full compliance with all applicable federal, state and local zoning, use and environmental regulations and laws unless the lack of compliance is stated, described and considered in this Appraisal Report. 8. It is assumed that all required licenses, certificate. of occupancy, consents, and other legislative or administrative authority from any local, state or national government or private entity or organization have been or can be obtained or renewed for any use on which the value estimate contained in this Appraisal report is based. 9. It is assumed that the use of the ]and and improvements is confined within the boundaries of property line of the subject property described and that there is no encroachment or trespass unless noted in this Appraisal Report. It is assumed that the property herein set forth is an allowable use under the zoning, and is further considered its highest and best use. 10. The fees received for preparation of this Appraisal Report were not contingent upon the final value estimate of the subject property. 11. The appraiser is not required to give testimony or attendance in court by reason of this Appraisal Report, with reference to the property in question, unless arrangements have been made previously thereto. 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 51 of 54 STATEMENT OF ASSUMPTIONS & LIMITING CONDITIONS (continued) 12. Possession of the report or copies thereof, does not carry with it the right to publication nor may they be used for any purpose by any but the applicant, without written consent of the appraiser and then only with the proper qualification. 13. The valuations may not be used in conjunction with any other appraisal. The conclusions are based upon the program of utilization described herein and may not be separated into parts. 14. Value is expressed herein is based upon real estate value only, unless specific characteristics or areas are additionally included and then they will be so stated and delineated. Income Tax considerations have not been included or valued unless so specified herein. The analyses make no representations as to the value attributed to such considerations. 15. Market Value, as expressed in the Appraisal Report, is the current purchasing power of the United States Dollar. 16. The contract for this appraisal assignment is fulfilled by Oscar M. lcabalceta and/or any other persons signing the report upon delivery of the appraisal report attached hereto. 17. Opinions of value contained herein are estimates. This is the definition of an appraisal. There is no guarantee, written or implied; the subject property will sell for such amounts. 18. The estimate of Market Value applies only to the date specified in the report. Market Value of Real Estate is affected by many related and unrelated economic conditions, local and national, which might necessarily affect the future market of the subject property. We., therefore, assume no liability for an unforeseen precipitous change in the economy, the project, region or property. 19. Our analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared, in conformity with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) guidelines. 20. Neither all nor any part of the contents of this Appraisal Report will be conveyed to the public through advertising, public relations, news, sales or other media, without the written consent and approval of the author, particularly as to the valuation conclusion, and the identity of the appraiser, 21. The presence of any toxic substances or contaminants in the soil is unknown and detection of it is beyond the scope of the appraisal assignment. The presence of potentially hazardous materials and/or substances may affect the value of the subject property. The market value estimate reflected in this appraisal report is predicated on the assumption that there is no such material on the property that would cause a loss in value. 22. This report remains the property of Oscar M. lcabalceta and contains proprietary information. The use of this Summary Appraisal Report is expressly prohibited, unless all contractual obligations for payment thereof have been completed. 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 52 of 54 STATEMENT OF ASSUMPTIONS & LIMITING CONDITIONS (continued) 23, Our analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared, in conformity with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) guidelines. USPAP is published by The Appraisal Standard Board and The Appraisal Foundation, which are authorized by the U.S. Congress as the Source of Appraisal Standards and Appraiser Qualifications, 24. As of the date of this report, Mr. Oscar M. Icabalceta, State Certified General Appraiser, License # RZ 1599 and Mr. Jog A. Ortega, State Certified General Appraiser, License # RZ 1247 have completed the license continuing education requirements of the State of Florida, according to The Appraiser Qualifications Board and The Appraisal Foundation. 25, The American with Disabilities Act (ADA), became effective January 26, 1992. We have not made a compliance survey to the subject property, to determine whether or not it is in conformity with the requirements of this Act. We did not consider possible non-compliance with this Act in estimating the market value of the subject property. The reader of the Appraisal Report is encouraged to verify the contents and status by direct contact with: Oscar M, lcabalceta, MBA 9010 SW 102 Court, Miami, FL 33176 (305) 856-4492 (305) 856-4493 (Fax) NICK SCOT r CiOVERNOR NEN LAWSON SECRETARY STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION FLORIDA REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL BD k WYE tiUMbt# n GENERAL APPRAISER w IS CERTIFIED visions of Chapter 05 FS ion dae NOV 30. 2016 ICABALCETA, OSCAR M 2000 NW 86TH AVE SECOND FLOOR DORAL FL 331T2 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCNO8163005 09-06-2016 Page 53 of 54 OSCAR M. ICABALCETA Commercial Real Estate Appraiser PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION: BS. Electro-Mechanical Engineering. Master in Business Administration (MBA). FLORIDA'S REAL ESTATE PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS: Licensed State Certified General Appraiser. License # RZ 0001599. Expiration: 11-30-2016 Licensed Real Estate Broker -Sales. License # BK 0419273. Expiration; 09-30-2017 REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL EXPERIENCE: Professional real estate appraiser with over twenty-three years experience in the industry. Associated, along the years, with reputable appraisal firms offering services to a broad range of lending institutions, private investors and government agencies (FDIC). Residential and commercial appraisal assignments in Miami - Dade, Broward, Monroe, Palm Beach, Martin, Lee, Hendry and Brevard counties in South Florida. International appraisal experience in important cities of Latin America, such as Mexico City. Our appraisal assignments have been as diverse as: single family homes, residential condos, warehouses, office buildings, hotels, motels, retirement/nursing home facilities, medical (office -clinical) facilities, commercial condos (warehouse and offices), gas stations, residential developments, shopping centers, apartment buildings, vacant land (commercial, residential, etc.), manufacturing plants and equipment valuation, power lines distribution systems valuation, special use facilities, churches, school buildings, public cold storage facilities, trucks terminals, commercial projects, real estate economic -feasibility studies, commercial -residential projects market studies, business valuations, etc. REAL ESTATE EDUCATION; (A partial description) Real Estate Principles and Practice for Real Estate Salesman and Broker Licenses. Florida State Certified Residential Appraiser (Cowse I). Florida State Certified General Real F.state Appraiser (Coutse II), Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP), of the Appraisal Standards Board, Courses A and B. Principles, Methods and Techniques of Real Estate Appraising. Introduction to Appraising Real Estate Property. Single Family Appraising. Apartment Building Appraising. Income Property Appraising, Narrative Appraisal Report Seminar. Business Valuation Seminar. Special Purpose Properties Valuation Seminar. USPAP Core Law Seminar. Discount Cash Flow (DCF) Software Comparison Analysis Seminar (Argus, Dynalease and Pro-Ject), Small Hotel/Motel Valuation Seminar, Eminent Domain and Condemnation Appraising Seminar. Factory -Built Housing, Regression Analysis in Appraisal Seminar, Automated Valuation Models, Separating Real Property From Intangible Business Assets Seminar, etc. REAL ESTATE AFFILIATIONS: (Past and present) National Association of Realtors. Miami Board of Realtors. Address: 9010 SW 102'd Court, Miami, FL 33176. Phone: 305.856.4492, Fax: 305.856.4493. tippraising@leappgroup.com 5605 N. IIayshore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 54 of 54 EXHIBIT D Sczechowicz, Wendy From: Diaz, Rene Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2018 5:03 PM To: Sczechowicz, Wendy Cc: Matthews, Denise Subject: RE: 5605 N Bayshore Dr Importance: High Good afternoon Wendy, After reviewing the engineers report, pictures and unsafe structure inspector's comment, the cost of repairs exceed the 50% threshold set by the Florida Building Code and the structural damages are also in excess of 30%. Based on the percentages of deterioration and damages found, the recommendation on such structures by the Unsafe Structure Panel would be demolition. I will have Denise Matthews send you the case pictures. Thank you. Rene 1. Dfaz, Chief of Unsafe Structures City of Miami Unsafe Section 444 SW 2"a Avenue 4th Floor Miami, Florida 33130 Telephone: 305-416-1107 Cell phone: 786-251-7181 rediaz@miamigov.corn To learn more about our Unsafe Structures process just click here To learn more about the 40-Year Recertification process, please dick 3 here To reach the building Department webpage, please click -> here This communication, together with any attachments, may contain legally privileged and confidential information. It is intended only for the use of the above person or persons. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or duplication of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and immediately destroy all copies of this communication and any attachments. Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail From: Sczechowicz, Wendy Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2018 2:36 PM To: Diaz, Rene <ReDiaz@miamigov.com> Subject: 5605 N Bayshore Dr 1 Good afternoon, Rene Per our meeting today regarding the subject address, can you send me comments on your review of the applicant's report and the photos taken by Code Enforcement? Kind regards, t .. r RIe I au • «a e��+rcy e Wendy Sczeclhowicz Historic Preservation Planner Planning Department Preservation Office Visit us at www.miainigov.com/planning. 2 J EXHIBIT E 9.2.f SUBMITTED INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD FOR ITEM(00 ON 11)01Z8 NoVethber' VIA MktslabELIVERY and .EnviroflmQfltfll.Pretetwooz Boo 3.500 Pan Anior.ican Drhze Florliii5043$ .$0vOliet 6,:211114A iOadaOm 2 tik. •Ccrtifiiate of Appropriateness at 1:)atabani-MOtat0)* $ *OA :1, nexi (100rt#100't :NO Ote;pkw qtx$6, for. appro.val Of a 400401:to,g07.01#100i00,:fi tmottols ofia new home. .6; tortftlStflJl oor be,set bootat 1eatt' g. :.'mpi,b,aelc at least 121 561 N.,.13ayahore Drip Miami, Florida 33137 lioatlOo tot Qr0OrlVe upplieati�n 00140,1011, tha 4 .• the waterfront.propeLy line, and OJfl thc wate.rirontproperty the, ThoktOVibr y time andloor etz*-1001:cipm e application. TrIfsteo the roposed ti 0§04d Attachment: 4809 - Submittal Letters of Support (HEPB-R-18-063 SCOA - 5605 N. Bayshore Dr.) Packet Pg. 34 9.2.f Neveniber, 1 ()•14 • 14,11003,D1uvBY City Of 'stot,le taxa Bilvirenmen _Proervatioa-Beatcl 3000'PMfterIeiiDr� 'Miand,Florida 3irj eigartitakitto 555 .5iN .BoAlioro:Drivo •.giat* Kotida L13t7 caft010 .itte QfApppatdness a 56$N.Ba)$horeiprivq Dear J3ord Members: My Jirnily owns the . X ,s Ore :7#1 I'he owner4 5605 N. Baysho: crtific.ate of ttIVV010101100:At the deinolitionaf Wine. 14; NOTY#10pr geAtites., I wrItete 00 y 'ssuppo q'ms fu4j florbe bac at least 84 feet b'b ct backat 1at, 21 feet ant1,9.5 iaobes tvvo :deers, tteath of 060 101-0401,:fop4ppt4x4p: 0-atid4tAig • bit 0f-4-goy. tope.oetl onl ptopei hne xi ,tats:,kOe yetif04 -:rtikke,aaffaorifilevettfto. eOpttliev,0114tiext, Slater ly,;, Attachment: 4809 - Submittal Letters of Support (HEPB-R-18-063 : SCOA - 5605 N. Bayshore Dr.) Packet Pg. 35 9 2 f . . VIA.Akivolmumnity ONOro.OttO 3:604)::Pan Mode* ps Manu,fitootoM. Noveniber 40 2018 tratritai Preservatnn *401' .2 Islayo*Deri*:-.. Ago#0.*Iij., itainiatet at 6U5NF4 *Pore Drive new1:40ar4:14,- pattand.K444y0Pas.elt 5000 N. Bivyjaho0 tity Iillami1totida.511#7: 41/0 at 560014: Bayhorc tkr:041%* $ 605 N Bayshore.Drive. The owner of 5605 N. Bayshore ,Drive11414plibit0ru e0r4clite of apptepliatent§s14 to demolition of the. xisting hoine and. coust new holm &•to *aloe 00r. §4:pet1:.aptill#40*- iljarcp and we woken* new development there,.Thnk you fb your 040.4i4Prollixi ofthei., P.110-446* otigtiht hbite has om and Katkyn Attachment: 4809 - Submittal Letters of Support (HEPB-R-18-063 : SCOA - 5605 N. Bayshore Packet Pg. 36 9.2,f 41' Dot tad Radityik 0011 09Q.13 66. Steed Nevenibot. 14;0413' VD& IIAND Darirm City oNtoMiligtotiez pAtoeti :Pieskvi0OollOatd: 3500P4o.Amei1etui:OtiVe Miami; notidal:14.0 . . . WI. PO*, .911P.00,0113.Ageittjai tionilOt tertifiegitOVAPPI*4004004t% 1474. :010444001$0.0, We own the Ilmoe at 690344.,66:S:tteot; wliich cattyeornet and across I.lie-Attoeffie' : pliote Dri.vc. Theowner of 505 N. Aorsisito Drive. has you approva sate of appropriateness for theqf the existing. hoie" bit of .41 119140, , We *AO to voice our support for the application... disrepair and we Welcome: new development there: Than consideration of the,Oplie*Wg.. xiatin8 fbr }. • Attachment: 4809 - Submittal Letters of Support (HEPB-R-18-063 : SCOA - 5605 N. Bayshore Dr.) Packet Pg. 37 9 2 f Novottibo 4, 20118 VXAMAND DRLIVALW City of. 114iEatii_014tot.iOg, amriponielitatiVoporvation Botta 340.9 Pfm Anrn Dt� ,Miii,.100144::: 413$. erO1Mgeutatem ki • Corgileataot.:4 **4.0atep:esa,4. btat. VOittbot,$.1z Nicole:Idolise MOD* MarkliiptbAth 606 n $1reet 1\0041,, Fiptidg 30141 ati0ia far *shore the g own the hor40-4:00', 1hSirf10,Yli "A.013,1q4 4 acros.•s llw eeLfro= 5605 N J3ayshore Drive ; 1114, owner. of`,5 :05° Ni‘: Bayshorel,Drive haapplied to you tioptov: (47-a Lcth&atc'of appropriateness forthg, oi*Qati. , 0-9is1ing horne and Con*ttpttha Of af new O, .. We write to e0f#0,t) ;' =. support for her applieatu.m. r1he'.0X ;CiAg 10.0:it •14.:.7 06iidifictl, and wO3nrcicomk ' go . i.,0t1 new h lin • Thank you for your tirne and. :Livorub1e conidratibh fof °WV MbATeq, • '11.:1711 Attachment: 4809 - Submittal Letters of Support (HEPB-R-18-063 : SCOA - 5605 N. Bayshore Dr Packet Pg. 38 9.2,f Lis4Arell ' :at of 5701 NI, 3ity 141404 Plori,4a.:33137 November City o£'Miimi do ` virovioo.a.... `�S O :Pail Arri oani Dri 144 Vlria Res: *On' e r f - 01:8 Agei I• tem r 'teriiess at;ehaiie;DeiV I write o. voice n y port. of tlr °app a an oxr the:. fi rst l oar b aetj i aei at 1 ti 8 feet f om the water nt plro tie;gOt- ck at le t I 1 t d .5: hcues Ana t% w t i ?t op; ,. orate Attachment: 4809 - Submittal Letters of Support (HEPB-R-18-063 : SCOA - 5605 N. Bayshore Dr. Packet Pg. 39 SUBMITTED INTO THE POOL IO RECORD FOR ITM(5)YlO7AN l PEON 9.2.g g60Ai657Sr, Mi»Mi ft '3.1/3 o to 0 O covim, oh ci a. 0 w J To co i CO i cp .i7 C N t v a a dit4 /U & 2D/ 1 -Live- A. 1-4 IWt> - C it( 1-1I +4 t. eitetli EVE. e vla.1 d =4. .— _a_.i—MiAAA Y 6- o vYvi % V��WLIru r ppi�_ o rivp ,dtarrw-er.s ____Car: ;1-6o.S— Al. eiy 4 ou ,'v6 DGM'S 1VI/Al/S / ��_� 567 r et av4» to . ► C � d' • ^A] , �+� Ay�A"?��j, 1 J r Packet Pg. 4U THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR'S STANDARDS FOR THE TREATMENT OF HISTORIC PROPERTIES WITH GUIDELINES FOR PRESERVING, REHABILITATING, RESTORING & RECONSTRUCTING HISTORIC BUILDINGS - U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Technical Preservation Services REHABILITATION NEW EXTERIOR ADDITIONS TO HISTORIC BUILDINGS AND RELATED NEW CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Designing new construction on a historic site or in a historic setting that it is compatible but differentiated from the historic building or buildings. Replicating the features of the historic building when designing a new building, with the result that it may be confused as historic or original to the site or setting. Considering the design for related new construction in terms of its relationship to the historic building as well as the historic district and setting. Ensuring that new construction is secondary to the historic build- ing and does not detract from its significance. Adding new construction that results in the diminution or loss of the historic character of the building, including its design, materi- als, location, or setting. Constructing a new building on a historic property or on an adjacent site that is much larger than the historic building. Designing new buildings or groups of buildings to meet a new use that are not compatible in scale or design with the character of the historic building and the site, such as apartments on a historic school property that are too residential in appearance. Using site features or land formations, such as trees or sloping terrain, to help minimize the new construction and its impact on the historic building and property. Designing an addition to a historic building in a densely -built location (such as a downtown commercial district) to appear as a separate building or infill, rather than as an addition. In such a setting, the addition or the infill structure must be compatible with the size and scale of the historic building and surrounding buildings —usually the front elevation of the new building should be in the same plane (i.e., not set back from the historic build- ing). This approach may also provide the opportunity for a larger addition or infill when the facade can be broken up into smaller elements that are consistent with the scale of the historic build- ing and surrounding buildings. 162 NEW EXTERIOR ADDITIONS TO HISTORIC BUILDINGS AND RELATED NEW CONSTRUCTION State of Florida, County "ham -Dade Sworn to and subscribed before me this day of June 2018 Note: Aunnal Registration Fee Effective Through 12/31/2018 ) ,00\1\l'\" ok,.'� CITY OFMrAMI LOBBYIST REGISTRATION FORM (1) Lobbyist Name: Fernandez, Ben Print Form For Office Check/ Use Only: Receipt# fyb Cfgs 6c( (Last Name, First Name, Middle Initial) Business Phone: 305-374-5300 Business Address: 200 South Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 850, Miami, FL Email Address: BFernandez@BRZoningLaw.com (2) Principal Represented: Supernova Bayshore Investments, LLC (3) Zip 33131 Business Address: 1825 Coral Way, Mail Stop 5983, Miami, FL Lip 33145 Specific issue lobbyist has been retained to lobby (if representing a corporation, partnership or trust, give business address of chief officer, partner, or beneficiary of same, and the names and addresses of all persons holding, directly or indirectly, at least five percent (5%) ownership interest in said corporation, partnership or trust). Miscellaneous land use, zoning, permitting, and historic preservation matters concerning the property located at 5605 North Bayshore Drive, Miami, Florida. (4) Lobbyists shall state the extent of any business association, partnership, or financial relationship with the Mayor, any member ofthe City Commission, any member of a City board, the City Manager or a member of the City staff before whom he or she lobbies, or intends to lobby. None. Lobbyists shall pay all registration fees ($525.00 annually, plus $105.00 for each principal represented and for each issue a lobbyist has been retained to lobby on behalf of any one principal), and specifically define the issue for which they are employed. The Clerk shall reject any statement which does not detail the issue for which the lobbyist has been employed. Each lobbyist shall, within sixty (60) days after registering as a lobbyist, submit to the City Clerk's Office a certificate of completion of an ethics course offered by the Miami -Dade County Commission on Ethics & Public Trust ("Ethics Commission"). Lobbyists who have completed the initial ethics course mandated by the preceding sentence and have continuously registered as a lobbyist thereafter shall be required to complete a refresher ethics course offered by the Ethics Commission every two (2) years. Each lobbyist who has completed a refresher ethics course shall submit a certificate of completion within sixty (60) days after registering as bbyist. I do solemnly swear that all of the foregoing facts are true and correct, and I ve read or... ' : miliar with the provisions contained in Sections 2-651 through 2-658 ofthe Miami City Code, as acne ded. Bki1YLLERSNA ;.k. MY COMMISSION # OG 175999-- EXPIRES: Marcia 5, 2022 R , ; ' Bonded Tin Noieay Public tlndoauyito Lobbyist S gna re tary or Deputy Clerk Office of the City Clerk, 3500 Pan American Drive, Miami, FL 33133 / Phone: (305) 250-5361 / Email: clerks@miamigov.com ey: Department: to-2 • City of Miami OFFICIAL RECEIPT No, 485469 Total $ _ - 1.° Date: C'112113' 0 j-- /100 Dollars Address. r1ret. „..la 418121 For c 1.___ML-VCr a ., i efinctibl..ee- Reference Iv) Liti:51 / This Receipt not VAUD unless dated. filled in and signed by authorized em- ployee of department or division des- ignated hereon and until the City has collected the proceeds of any checks tendered as payment herein. IC LENTIM 402 Rev, 03/03 I Distribution: White -Customer; Canary -FInnnce; Pink -Issuing Department Received from. • BERCOW RADELL FERNANDEZ & LARKIN OPERATING ACCOUNT 200 SOUTH -BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, SUITE 850 FLORIDA 33131 11"'•,,k",..T„to.) Division' T/ATE SUNTRUST ACHITroaioomolune 12, 2018 63-215/631 kl=1,11%71 '14+ One Hundred Five *********************************************** 00/100 PAY TO THE ORDER CITY OF MIAMI OF: PAY TO THE ORDER OF: AMOUNT $ $105,00 445 AIIIITORIZEOSIONATUITh 000001145011* 1:06310 215 21: L00018009 79651P' BERCOW RADELL FERNANDEZ & LARKIN OPERATING ACCOUNT 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, SUITE 850 FA/AM, FLORIDA 33131 *** One Hundred Five CITY OF MIA1v11 DATE _IN V' SuNTRusr AQH °61multine 12, 2018 63-215/631 autztr,tm,;„„,, 0000044 5 loll 1:0E, 3 10 2 5 21: 1.000 18009 79E] Sill AtrIOIJNT AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE 445 Note: Annual Registration Fee Effective Through 12/31/2018 CITY OF MIAMI Print Form For Office Check# Use Only: Recoipt# LOBBYIST REGISTRATION FORM (1) Lobbyist Name: Amster, Matthew (Last Name, First Name, Middle Initial) Business Phone: 305-374-5300 Business Address: 200 South Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 850, Miami, FL zip 33131 Email Address: MAmster@BRZonIngLaw.com (2) Principal Represented: Supernova Bayshore Investments, LLC (3) Business Address: 1825 Coral Way, Mail Stop 6983, Miami, FL zip 33145 Specific issue lobbyist has been retained to lobby (if representing a corporation, partnership or trust, give business address of chief officer, partner, or beneficiary of same, and the names and addresses of all persons holding, directly or indirectly, at least five percent (5%) ownership interest in said corporation, partnership or trust). Miscellaneous land use, zoning, permitting, and historic preservation matters concerning the property located at 6605 North Bayshore Drive, Miami, Florida. (4) Lobbyists shall state the extent of any business association, partnership, or financial relationship with the Mayor, any member ofthe City Commission, any member of a City board, the City Manager or a member of the City staff before whom he or she lobbies, or intends to lobby. None. Lobbyists shall pay all registration fees ($525,00 annually, plus $105.00 for each principal represented and for each issue a lobbyist has been retained to lobby on behalf of any one principal), and specifically define the issue for which they are employed. The Clerk shall reject any statement which does not detail the issue for which the lobbyist has been employed. Each lobbyist shall, within sixty (60) days after registering as a lobbyist, submit to the City Clerk's Office a certificate of completion of an ethics course offered by the Miami -Dade County Commission on Ethics & Public Trust ("Ethics Commission"). Lobbyists who have completed the initial ethics course mandated by the preceding sentence and have continuously registered as a lobbyist thereafter shall be required to complete a refresher ethics course offered by the Ethics Commission every two (2) years. Each lobbyist who has completed a refresher ethics course shall submit a certificate of completion within sixty (60) days after registering as a lobbyist. I do solemnly swear that all of the foregoing facts are true and correct, and I have read or am familiar with the provisions contained in Sections 2-651 through 2-658 of the Miami City Code, as Fended. BEM LLERENA MY COMMISSION # GG 175999 EXPIRES: March 5, 2022 State of Florida, County of Jf .`fil+ 'i+ Tin Notary MbUnderwriters Sworn to and subscribed be ore me this day of June , 2018 Lobbyist Signature taffy or Deputy Clerk Office of the City Clerk, 3500 Pan American Drive, Miami, FL 33133 / Phone: (305) 250-5361 / Email: clerlcs®miamigov.com $ ...__._-"_..'_ — Sales Tax $ 4- LL ' -G/ — "9 cc,/ l f rG I'. Received from: Address' For. Y71.t�t� t „grip' a ip')'e. r r j ( + LPL'} i iii7r'fs' This Receipt not VALID unless dated, filled in end signed by authorized em- ployee or department or division des- ignated hereon and until the City has collected the proceeds of any checks tendered as payment herein. C f FNrTM 402 Rev. 03/03-1 By: Department' City of Miami OFFICIAL RECEIPT Total $ __._�. t Reference Nn, 3S Division: Date: No. 485469. CI12I lg /100 Dollars LL/'j 5 f L 4/ co DIslributiom White - Customer, Canary - Finance; Pink - Issuing Department ,„9ai'•' u7fi,:ra':S w"".,Tr.�xa aar,x 'aTiinnag iMEM: .....KF!.. ..TX: BERCOW RADELL FERNANDEZ & LARKIN OPERATING ACCOUNT 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, SUITE 850 MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 ..-5 .... . ....: ....'rB:'-�'?-=:.:��;"F::.;; _.}Src: 4t�,-;a.�c..•.:a.w'r<l DATE SUNTRUST ACHRTne10001Qjune l2, 2018 63.2t5/631 Hems *** One Hundred Five **************+ ******************a************* 00/100 PAY TO THE ©HDI=R CITY OF 1v1IAMI OF: 445 AMOUNT $ $105.00 laubbytsl Red stre I n : _ � _ . Z__� ..: �.._,,. 0OOOOt1t,5OII 4063 L02 15 _: Lasa L$sa9796511I AUINURIZi'0 5IGNATUHE . p4.:W4 _.;-;3.'=^-,-_w.,:xi:Mr;:._,,,,;iaia+;:,cr;.:t=:q.� ...z ,L.. L...o.n':s...aa - - s t.'C�i".ioxT,, +"`L.efiilrt ... _._..---7",-r,;-,. �;;r:— BERCOW RADELL FERNANDEZ & LARKIN OPERATING ACCOUN 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, SUITE 1350 MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 SLJINTRUST Act•tLIT octocl0104tole 12, 2018 63-215/631 I�y, nnart�a.r�m ffi9f.�bHTrA:Xm, *** One Hundred Five**********'*'**e******************:*************** 00/100 PAY TO THE ORDER CITY OF MIAMI OF: 'P • El ..�-_ - -... .... -ii ti-lit;:.... ;a ,...,:u.: _----------- - .. AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE .-k 7._::�<._::..-�.<...�._Lobby.Ist�t�glstrntl0n:.....:,.:.._:_��;�-�-�.::..........._...- - ----------_�. .. _... _ .__ _.�:. , .:....:.. :._ .. _ I1N0aaato La 5 ilia 1:0E 3 1a 2 b 5 21:1aaa L8aa9 79E 5t» AMOUNT $105.00 DATE 445 Note: Annual Registration Fee Effective Through 12/31/2018 RECEIVED EIVED 20I0JUL17 PMM.2.06 0I a OF THE CITY CLERK CITY OF MIAMl CITY OF MIAMI • LOBBYIST REGISTRATION FORM (1) Lobbyist Name: Hero, Maritza Print Form For Office Use Only: Checkll 4641 Receipt# 7 (Last Name, First Name, Middle Initial) Business Phone: 305-374-5300 Business Address: 200 South Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 850, Miami, FL Email Address: MHaro@BRZoningLaw.com (2) Principal Represented: Supernova Bayshore Investments, LLC Zip 33131 Business Address: 1825 Coral Way, Mall Stop 5983, Miami, FL Zip 33145 (3) 'Specific issue lobbyist has been retained to lobby (if representing a corporation, partnership or trust, give business address of chief officer, partner, or beneficiary of same, and the names and addresses of all persons holding, directly or indirectly, at least five percent (5%) ownership interest in said corporation, partnership or trust). Miscellaneous land use, zoning, permitting, and historic preservation matters concerning the property located at 5605 North Bayshore Drive, Miami, Florida. (4) Lobbyists shall state the extent of any business association, partnership, or financial relationship with the Mayor, any member ofthe City Cornmission, any member of a City board, the City Manager or a member of the City staff before whom he or she lobbies, or intends to lobby. None. Lobbyists shall pay all registrration fees ($525.00 annually, plus $105.00 for each principal represented and for each issue a lobbyist has been retained to lobby on behalf of any one principal), and specifically define the issue for which they are employed. The Clerk shall reject any statement which does not detail the issue for which the lobbyist has been employed. Each lobbyist shall, within sixty (60) days after registering as a lobbyist, submit to the City Clerk's Office a certificate of completion of an ethics course offered by the Miami -Dade County Commission on Ethics & Public Trust ("Ethics Commission"). Lobbyists who have completed the initial ethics course mandated by the preceding sentence and have continuously registered as a lobbyist thereafter shall be required to complete a refresher ethics course offered by the Ethics Commission every two (2) years. Each lobbyist who has completed a refresher ethics course shall submit a certificate of completion within sixty (60) days after registering as a lobbyist. I do solemnly swear that all of the foregoing facts are true and correct, and I have read or am familiar with the provisions contained in Sections 2-651 t t K. ;h 2-658 of the Miami City Code, as amended. State of Florida, County of Miam Sworn to and subscribed before me tin 1(0 day of +lu (r 1 , 2018 Lobbyist Signature''"�•.,, eputy Clerk Office of the City Clerk, 3500 Pan American Drive, Miami, FL 33133 / Phone; (305) 250-5361 / Email: clerks@nia:nigov.com PAY TO THE ORDER OF; . , RADE. l'., _ . , • B Fid01111:1LIL, FERNA, NDEZ' 8i.; KIIJW i ,y,-:: 11//, ( .:. '.,,,,) 1 t•,,' WOWING AD000Nf V,:‘ ) ki „, 1 ‘( u \ • •:-- . '', , ,,,,. : t, icl4p1174:1101,SOAYNE BOULEVARD, sur(E,136'6 o' ' . SUIVNEgr 'A'' AcceiTroeiockilauly 17, 2.0t 8 - - - ' MAW FLoMDA 33131 63..215/631 crrY 01 MIAMI '44 MgatIgl soi4***************** 00/100 000004 SLI 111. 1:0 3 2 LS 2I: 1000 0009 ? 9 GI So AMOUNT $ $105.00 AUTHORIZED SIDHATURE 5 0 4 6) City of Miami OFFICIAL RECEIPT Total $ Received from: Addregs: For: 155ue: u ,r00 Veu This Receipt not VALID u less dated, filled in and signed by authorized em- ployee of department or division des- ignated hereon and until the City has collected the proceeds of any checks tendered as payment herein. TM 402 Rev, 03/03 By: Department' Division' Referencyo• No. 485967 Dote: MA / /100 Dollars Distribution: White - Customer; Canary - Finance; Pink- issuing Department (fit of ixxnn BUILDING DEPARTMENT Transaction Statement -/ Financial Transaction ID: 561749 Transaction Date: Nov 29 2018 3:53PM Permit Number: FEE SUMMARY Ben Fernandez, Es. obo Supernova Bayshore Invest, LLC (305)377-6235 Fee Category Fee Code Fee Description Quantity Unit Type Amount HEARING BOARDS - APPLICATION/APPEAL MS-239 APPEAL - HISTORIC DESIGNATION/CERTIFICATE OF APPROPIATENESS 0.0000 N/A $525.00 HEARING BOARDS - PUBLIC HEARING MS-226 PUBLIC HEARING - LU POLICY 1,5.4 33.0000 NGH X HRGS $148,50 HEARING BOARDS - PUBLIC HEARING MS-241 PUBLIC HEARING - MEETING MAIL NOTICE - APPLICANT/APPEALLANT 1,0000 HEARINGS $4,50 Total: $678.00 Rev. Jul/02/2012 Generated on Nov/29/2018 3:53 PM 0111JafAmni BUILDING DEPARTMENT Transaction StatemE Financial Transaction ID: 561749 Transaction Date: Nov 29 2018 3:53PM Permit Number: FEE SUMMARY Fee Category Fee Code Fee Description HEARING BOARDS - APPLICATION/APPEAL MS-239 APPEAL - HISTORIC DESIGNATION/CERTIFIC) APPROPIATENESS HEARING BOARDS - PUBLIC HEARING MS-226 PUBLIC HEARING - LU P( 1.5.4 HEARING BOARDS - PUBLIC HEARING MS-241 , PUBLIC HEARING - MEE1 MAIL NOTICE - APPLICANT/APPEALLAN' Rev. Jul/02/2012 City of Miami ...The City of Mfamf.„ I Reference Number: 2018333006-71 Date/Time: 11/29/2018 3:57:33 PM LM Payments 2018333006-71-1 Trans ID: 561749 Business Name: COM Fee Payment Fee Name: APPEAL - HISTORIC DESIGNATION/CE RTIFICATE OF APPROPIATENESS Amount: Fee Payment Fee Name: PUBLIC HEARING - MEETING MAIL NO TICEArnninif APPLICANT/APPEALLANT $525.00 Fee Payment Amount: Fee Name: PUBLIC HEARING - LU POLICY 1,5.4 $148,50 Total: 1 ITEM TOTAL; TOTAL: Visa Credit Card Nbr: ************0649 $678.00 Payment Type: credit Auth Code: 026390 Tntal Received: "I I 11111111111111111#31110111111111190 $678.00 $4.50 $678.00 $678.00 $678.00 • COM Generated on Nov/29/2018 3:53 PM