Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAppeal Letter0 BERG®W RADELL FERNANDEZ & LARK -IN: ZONING, L.ANE:) USE ANS ENVIRONMENTAL LAW i ; `"5.�, qDirect:305-377-6235' .�: E -Mail: BFernRRZor]ingLawcom 3 , VIA HAND DELIVERY d, 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 BISCAYNE 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 BGRCOW RADELL FERNANDEZ & LARKIN ZONING, LANE> USB AN0 ENVIRONMENTAL 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 BCRCOW RADCLL FERNANDEZ & LARKIN ZONING, LANG USE ANO 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 -historic 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. LAND USE AN0 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. Sipe6re Ben Fernandez BF/bl Enclosures cc: Warren Adams Elisa Estrada BGRCOW RADELL FGRNAN DEZ & LARKIN ZONING, LANM USE ANM ENVIRONMENTAL LAW 1 *A11L 1M001' �'Oi1 City of Miami City Hall u u 3500 Pan American Drive U iz .: HEPB Resolution Miami, FL 33133 www.mlamlgov.com Enactment Number: HEPB-R-18-063 File Number: 4809 Final Action Dater 1/6/2018 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 6605 NORTH BAYSHORE DRIVE, MIAMI, FLORIDA, 33137, WITHIN THE MORNINGSIDE HISTORIC DISTRICT; FURTHER, INCORPORATING THE FINDINGS IN THE ANALYSIS ATTACHED HEREIN AS EXHIBIT CIA11. 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 (16) DAYS. HE 'tion'14,fficer Date STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF MIAMI -DALE Personally appeared before me, the undersigned authodly [m, Preservation Officer of the City of Miami, Florida, and acknowledges that s/he executed the foregoing Resolution. {� SWORN AND SUBSCRIBED BEFORE ME THIS � DAY OF S(W 201 P Personally know or Produced I.D. Type and number of I.D. produced C4m)nission#{3G i�g775 Atreshlovemhervn ono: City of Miami Page 1 oil Did take an oath or Did not take an oath City of Miami Page 2 of 2 File ID., 4809 (Revisfon.) Printed On: 11/15/2098 EXHIBIT A 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) STATUS: Contributing A. 9ENERAL INFORMA71ON: FILE ID: 4809 ZIP: 33137 HEARING DATE: 1012/2018 TDRs: No 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 "Scab -Urban Transect Zone", The subject property Is located within the Morningside Historic District, Bayshore Subdivision and the sipper Eastside Net Area. The site is approximately the second parcel located on the Northeast tercile of NE 56th 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 City of Miami Historic Preservation Office Jnr • r� It �..-;� 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) STATUS: Contributing A. 9ENERAL INFORMA71ON: FILE ID: 4809 ZIP: 33137 HEARING DATE: 1012/2018 TDRs: No 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 "Scab -Urban Transect Zone", The subject property Is located within the Morningside Historic District, Bayshore Subdivision and the sipper Eastside Net Area. The site is approximately the second parcel located on the Northeast tercile of NE 56th 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: Vold 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. COMPREHIENSIVEPLAN: The subject property is a contributing residential structure constructed In 1940 located within the Morningside Historic District, Pursuant to Coal 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 Applicants 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 Flan, Chapter 23 of the City of Miami Code of Ordinances, the Secretary of Interior Standards, and the Preservation Office Historic Design Guidelines. Amended 10/0312018 File No. 4807 Page 2 of 9 ` 17. . � a••:. 'wi. moi! �"C,� filE Q3hak - � . �. ,y+^�'i��p_ .•1 ,n FRUA F i- � � Y � �r •� � • � z #o to h� , T'• N R y*�• n '� � 1.�,�,lVp. t=m+ �' 3� ltsyz t ( = — :� �: � �• mss. / 5 E. NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS: ZONING Sub iectproperty T3 -R Sub -Urban Transect Zone Restricted (Morningside Historic District) §urrounding Properties NORTH,. T3.R; Single Family Transect Zone (Morningside Historic District) SOUTH: TM, Single Family Transact Zone (Morningslde Historic District) EAST: NIA WEST: T3 -R, Single Family Transact Zane (Morningside Historic District) F. ANA Yl YS ,; 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 Maximum of 9 D.U. per acre The following is a review of the request pursuant to 2342(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 taste 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 1010312098 File No. 4807 Page 6 of 9 60% threshold set by the Florida wilding 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. CE20170038141696 — 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. (i) Demolition by neglect of the City Code (Attachment "IT). 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 (i) 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. 2342, (i) (1) (a) - (h): (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 otherhorizontal 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. Amended 10/0812018 File 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 look 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 If 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 Morningside 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 Momingside 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 "(t) effect and accomplish the protection, enhancement, perpetuation, and use of historic structures... [and] ...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 6605 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 fagade 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 propertles 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 CCBOGO. 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 Y11. The Bast 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. Cue 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 Nigh 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 28' 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 COGOBGO decorative concrete lattice. The Environmental Resources Staff at the City of Miami has reviewed the plans and have provided comments (Attachment "C"). Amended 1010312098 File No. 4007 Page 8 of 9 Findings: In -Consistent G. NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES: Code Compliance Building NET Environmental Resources Art In Public Places Zoning H. CONCLUSION No Objection Required No Objection Approval with conditions pursuant to Attachment "C° No Objection No Objection 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 now construction does adversely affect the historic, architectural, or aesthetic character of the subject structure or the aesthetic interest or value of the historic district, 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 Cartificate of Appropriateness. lo�- , � k U Warren Adams Preservation Officer w. Goachowla 9/17/2018 Amended 1010312018 Filo No. 4807 Page 0 of 9 Attachment "A" Sczechowicz, Wend 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/a. Based on the percentages of deterioration and damages found, the recommendation on such structures by the Unsafe Structure Panel would be demolition. l will have Denise Matthews send you the case pictures. Thank you. Rene 1, Diaz, chief of Unsafe structures City of Miami Unsafe Section 444 SW 2111 Avenue 41h Floor Miami, Florida 33130 Telephone: 305.416-1107 Cell phone: 786.251.7181 rediaz@mlamim.com To learn more about our Unsafe Structures process just click 4h ere 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 this communication and any attachments. Please consider the environment before Printing this c -mail From: Sczechowicz, Wendy Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2018 2:36 PM To: Diaz, Rene <ReDiaz@miamigov.com> Subject: 5605 N Bayshore Dr 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, CX— ills'AP Wendy Sezechowlez Historic Presetvation Planner +oe,i$ $$„a Planning Department Preservation Office 4 -v t4 Visit us at Www,miamieov,com/plannu,g, 2 hment"B" Sec 23-6.2 (1) Demolition by neglect. (1) Demolition by neglect prohibited; affirmative maintenance required . The owner(s) 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 - - - ----deflned'YV-thls dha ter, 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 ether vertical structural supports. c. Members of callings, 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 of any portion of the Interior or exterior of the structure designated historic. Attachment "C" CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Wendy Sczechowicz DATE: 9114/18 FILE: 4809 Historic Preservation Planner FROM: Kyle Brudzinski SUBJECT: Demolition & New Construction Environmen I Resources Specialist REFERENCES: 5605 N Bayshore Dr ENCLOSURES: Environmental Resources has reviewed the proposed demolition and new construction at 6605 N Sayshore Drive. In response to this review, the following are Staffs recommendation(s) and/or 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 Certified Arborist, Property Search Application - Miami -Dade County 9", V] 2. 1 11 14, Page 1 of 1 Summary Report EXHIBIT B 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 I Baths I Half 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 Benefit Type 20181 20171 2016 Non -Homestead Assessment $1,093,123 Year 2018 2017 2016 Land Value $3,299,907 $3,299,907 $2,576,119 Building Value $360,507 $378,633 $328,930 XF Value $0 $0 $0 Market Value 1 $3,660,414E$32 78,740 $2,905,049 Assessed Value $2,567,29133,901 Taxable Value 1 $2,567,291 $2,333,901 $2,121,729 $2,121,729 Benefits Information Benefit Type 20181 20171 2016 Non -Homestead Assessment $1,093,123 $1,344,839 $783,320 Cap Reduction Exemption Value Note: Not all benefits are applicable to all Taxable Values (i.e. 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 Generated On: 1 112 9/201 8 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 $fl $0 $0 Taxable Value $3,660,414 $3,678,740 $2,905,049 City Exemption Value $fl $fl $0 Taxable Value $2,567,291 $2,333,901 $2,121,729 Regional Exemption Value $0 $0 $0 Taxable Value 1 $2,567,291 $2,333,901 $2,121,729 Sales Information Previous Sale Price OR Book -Page Qualification Description 1212812012 $2,250,000 28422-4458 Qua] by exam of deed 07/01/1988 $275,000 13779-2938 Sales which are qualified 06/0111985 $312,000 12560-1238 Sales which are qualified 0610111973 1 $100,000 00000-00000 1 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.govfiinfoldisclaimer.asp Version: httpsJ/www.iniamidade.gov/propertysearch/index.littnl 11/29/2018 EXHIBIT C 5605 NORTH BAYSHORE DRIVE ENGINEERING REPORT OF EXISTI�C�, � � � �i%,pITI NS a w a� STATE OF s� „ 0 �w �Ydeni 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 12124/12 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 of garage is 5.28' N.G.V.D.. Legal information on the property is available in the attached elevation certificate. Based on :Miami Bade 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 homes glazing system is unusable and must be completely replaced. The cost to. perform 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 Wishes, repairs of the pool, appliances, building decorative elements, landscaping, permit fees, design fees, etc. RIM E=41"R�• ri' R t t r � R ., . �. 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 cuiTent Building and Zoning Codes. Table of Content Page# Structural.................................. .. .. ..... .............1 Waterproofxzag and Building Envelope ............... ............... , ...........3 Electrical........................................................ . .......................4 Mechanical................................................................................ 5 Plumbing....................................................... . ..... . ....................6 CostSummary..,. . .......................................................................7 Photographs...............................................................................8 .elevation Certification..... . .......................................................... 38 Survey ..... .-..............................................................................41 OiloTi-4,e Test R ....+. / ATCServices.......................................................... . .................5+6 AppraisalReport ........................................................................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. Spalling and fractures occur throughout the structure of the residence. The supporUng 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 mid imsupportive 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 dining the entire life span of the structure, the chloride process of electrolysis occurs and the steel corrodes. With the corrosion of the steel, the rebar flake and, expands which causes the exterior cracks on the concrete walls. These cracks fin-ther allow for the intrusion of salt batten moistLwe 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 spalling 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 1 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 e=ent 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 out open to re -run conduits and to recruit an entirely new electrical system since the existing wiring is finbedded 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 far this removal and re- installation is $87,600.00. The cost for ceiling and wall removal and reinstallation us not included in this estimate. 5 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. 11 Cost Summary The cost summary for the restoration of this home leaving it at current flood elevation level is as follows: I. Structural: IL Waterproofing and Building Envelope: 111. Electrical: IV. Mechanical: V. Plumbing: $683,00 $ 0.00 392,000.00 $83,000,00 $87,600.00 $76,500,00 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. VA t - � f:. rt t- t "s"' �: i`a n . €;. �� c f 1' r _..A .� Y b � r� �I'Age llgjl�j .., ., '.: ( t `' k I k r FAQ` t `� �'� � `fie •� ? �' .-+�' _. _._ ,. .jy� �.r E'Y,V.2 'r'� � Y �- n 's r _r 11 q 1 f ,x 1 j f: � � �`" '✓ ` {�&',S� t � � `` isifd i15,aE 77 "-ft \«..}t<� � � ,�� %�\� �}\ 2Z� . : \ . � © <« � :< <.� z ` . ^� /�� � �� � �` . , - ««/» «� � ~ �����72: \ � � � � <. � \ � � � � � \\ � � � � / a .�� � � � � : w = ��� . / � � � . � � %�� �1 I m Elevation Certification 38 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY ELEVATION CERTIFICATE Federal Emergency Management Agency 'Natiohai=Flood Insurance Program Important: Read the Instri tions,on pages.i-8. SECTION A 4R6P•I;RTY INFORMATION A.I. Building Owner's Name SUPERNOVA BAYSHOIRE INVESTMENTS LLC C 1►2: Building Street Addressdinctuding Apt., Unit, Suite, and/or Bldg. No.) or P.Q. Route and Box No. 5608 N BAYSHORE OR .. city ZIP LOT Z BLOCK 20. SAY MORE UNIT NO 3, B0011 12; pG 50. MIAWME. �FL,.I:OL102 0132180370020 OMB No. 1660-Uoos Expires March 31, 201,2 A4. Building Use (e.g., Residential, Non -Residential, Addition, Accessory, etc.) RESIpENTIAL A'S. LailtudelLongltude: Lat. W-49'412WN Long. B_Q__1_t)'__48.4= Horizontal Datum: ❑ NAD 1927 ® NAD 1983 AB. Attach at least 2 photographs of the building if the Certificate is being used to obtain flood Insurance. A7. Building Diagram Number JA A13. For a building with a crawlspace or enclosure(s): A9. For a bulldino with an attached garage: a) Square footage of crawlspace orendosure(s) MA sq it a) Square footage of attached garage NIA sq ft b) No. of permanent flood openings in the crawlspace or b) No. of permanent flood openings In the attached garage enclosure(s) within 1.0 foot above adjacent grade tNIA, within 1.0 foot above odJaeent grade c) Total net area of flood openings In A8,b NIA sq in c) Total net area of flood openings In A9.b NIA aq in d) Engineered flood .openings? ❑ Yes ® No d) Engineered flood apanings? ❑ Yes 0 No SECT10N B - FLOODINSURANCE RATE MAP' FIRM), INFORMATION as �wu ,f'.IS7Yi71ri 120MC0308 L Date EflbdtlaLF.evlsed bate Zcane(s) a...,, Aor(aae. useibase flood 0911'112009 09111L2009 Ai; 9" 810. Indicate the source of the (lase f=lood Elevation (8FE) data or base flood depth enteied In Item 89. FIS Profile ® FIRM 0 Community Determined ❑tither (Describe) - 811. Indicate elevation datum used for SFE in ligm 89: 19 NGV01929 ❑ NAVO 1988 ❑ Other (Descifbe) 1312, is the building located In a Coastal Barrier Resources System (CBRS) area or Otherwise Protected Area (OPA)? ❑ Yes ® No : Designation Bate WA ❑ CaRS ❑ OPA _i SECTIO C - BUILDING ELlrWTION INFORMATION {SURVEY REPUIRE©) C1. Building elevations are based on: ❑ Construction Drawings" ❑ Building cinder Constructor` ®f=inished Construction 'A new Elevation 0e0cate will be required when constwotion of the building is complete. C2. Elevations -Zones A1 -A3% AF, Ali, A (with BFE), VE, WWI), V (with BFE), Aft, ARIA, ,ARIAS. APJA1-A30, APJAH, AR/A0. Complete Items 02.11-h below acc aiding to the building diagram specdlied In Item A7. Use the carne datum es the SPE. Benchmark Utilized Vertical DatumVj� D 19?9 Conversion/Comments WA a) Tap of bottom Roar(inaluding ttasement~ cmwispace, or+enclosure floor) 7,7;9 , b) Top of the next higher floor 7199 . c) Bottom of the lowest horizontal structural member (V Zones only) NLA , - d) Attached garage (top of stab) NIA e) Lowest elevation of machlnery or equipment servicing the bui'Iding 7.4.9 .= (Describa typo of equipmentand location In Comments) 1) Lowest odJacent (finished) graide next to building (LAG) •- 9) Highest adjacent (finished) grade next to building (HAG) h) Lowest adjacent grads at lowest elevation of deck or stairs, Including 4.93 . structural culipbri SECTION D - SURVEYOR, ENGINEER, OR ARCHIL Check the measurement used. tai feet ❑ meters (Puerto Rico only) ® feet ❑ meters (Puerto Ricooniy) 0 feet ❑ meters (Puerto Rico only) O feet Q meters (Puerto, Rico only) 0 feet ❑ meters (Puerto Rio only) 0 feet 0 meters (Puerto Rios only) 0 feet © meters (Puerto Rtco only) 0 feet ❑ meters (Puerto Rico only) i ills cwricarion is woe sirineo anrf swim by a Land survevor. eriotnAa -. or artNter.t anihnr;-,nt? by if, Mrarh;f.� IMPORTANT: In these spaceet, co '$ullding Sheat Address (including Apt., S.'B05-9BA1YSHORE DR City MIAMIState FL ZIP Code 33137 �l I0 the dormsponding lnfamation from ,Section A. Suits. andlor.Bidg. No.) or P.O. Rnuta an 60 N .� OR both sides of this Elevation Certificate for (1)" cpmmunity official. 121 insuranna anenVrmmr9nv mnA ra. h..uae.... Insurance SECTION E . ]BUILDING ELL';vAT1ON itriFt3R141A' ZONE AG AND ZOWIE A and and C. Feir,ttems i=1�E. es Ati and A (WilhoiJt B.FE}, �mplsktj items Et -1 5. !f the Cetllficate Is intended to suppbrt:a LOMA or Lt�itiAR--F request, complete sections A. 0' j C. use natural grpde, Ifavailable, Check the rri�asuramant used. in Puorto Rico only, entermeters. E1. Provide eliavaBnn Information for the talJcrwing and'check the-appr8prlate boxes to show whether the alevaNalr is abava or helowfhe highest adjacent. .grade (tagG)and the lowest adjacent,gradk(LAG). a) Top bf bollom floor Vricludin'g basement, c(awtspaca; or enclosure) is fleet p maters f 13 b} Top ofboltorrt 6rk- (including basement, cmwispao@,'crt padiosura} is above=lit [( below itis NA(3. Cl feat © meters 13 aboye or 0 betow'the,t AG. E2. F'or•Buitdln'g Ciq;jrams'tr$ with pemtarient flood openings provided in 8ec.ifon,A items 8 ah&o, r 9 (see p2' ' t3 �1 of inshuctions), tha ne�tthighe flobt (eiavati in ta2,b tri t}ie.dingrams) of iha,buitding is:..._ .._ 0 feet Ip mbi6fs flabove or [j below the HAG. E3. Attached garage {top of stall) Ij .-- 0 feet 0 rnetera' Q abOVe or 0 below the NAG. E4. Top•of plat bffn oimachinwy andior etiulpmient servicing i!* bultding is [3-leet Q'meters i] ahgve •cr J below lira NA , E-5. Zone AO only. it not'food'depth number Is avallabte. is the top of the bottom floor elevated In socordance with the cortrrnuh]W (oodpfain management ordinance? 0 Yes 0 No' 0 Unknown. Tho local oft lal trust certify this intbrrnation'in secilon G. SECTR3N F - PROPERTY The property owner or owners authorized represientative who completes Sections A, B, and E for Zane A or Zone Ata must sign here. The sfafamenfs In Secltons A, B, andt: ams con ecl to the best of mr+lrreowtst a FEMA issued or community Issued BFE) rropercy 0"ers ®r 0"Ges Authorized Representative's Name SUPERNOVA BAYSHORE INVESTMENTS LLC P -' ,qss 5505 N BAYSIgORE nR My MIAMI state FL ,ZIP Code 28137 _ _- Comments • COMMUNITY wi++au�e,.aa�vreu}crani..�a�attcn�llGi9iflrillnHnCwe'C8n r313,1,nplt8'$ti3Jn$,8�.or)ra rod G of this Elevatlbn Certificate. Gomplets the applicable itern(s) and sign below. Check Iia, measurement used In Iterrms GI3 and G9. i$. 0 Tire infonnatfon In Section C was taken from Wherdbcumentatton that has been signed and sealed by a licensed surveyor, enginesr or architect who is authorized by Iaw to certify elevation infolmatlon. (Indicale the MUM and date of the elavaWn data In the Comments area below.) Q. E3 A community official completed Section E for a building located In Zone A (without a FEMAIssuad or community -Issued BFq orzona Ata. )3. i3 The followring information (Ilents G4 -G9) Is pmAded for community floodplain rnanagementpurposes. Date Certificate r7. This permit has been Issued for. (3 New Construction 0 Substantial Improvement r8. Elevation of as -built lowest floor (Inclurding basement) of the bullding:_, j3 feet p meters (pR) Oatum a. BFE or (in Zona At)} depth of flooding at the building site. ❑ feet j3 meters (PR) Datum 10. Community's design hood elevation [] feat El meters (PR) Datum Local Official'SW as Title ^orrrmunity Name Telephone Signature Date �c ants — • • ,,. Check here if attachmenfs .MA Foal 8"1, Mer 09 Replaces all previous editions 0 41 ALTAIACSMLand Title ,Survey 0 Tyr D ,D 0 m— 1 1 9-15 LOCATION SKETCH N.T.S. WTD DDRVAW PMP -d SUPERNOVASAYZRE Wis =�— Pr*aAd*—: 660MRAYSHOREOR, m"I . FI. 33137 Job wum6a: 12-0001218-1 MORMON& LAND SURVEYOR A WPM Pwa Aw M.M GEORGE P.LSJOD. 2W WrATEOFFLORIDA) 0— Sr �AL 6mN^mmwvv. 2m Noun fpururgars LAND SURVEYORS wj= Ml:=, 6mN^mmwvv. 2m Noun fpururgars LAND SURVEYORS 0 0 Chloride Test Report 43 ■ R J 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 I 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% CLI-) by weight of concrete. The researched range of chloride content within reinforced concrete for the concrete to separate is between 0.0275% CLM to 0.03575% CL(-). 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. I 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 2017o. When the concrete falls, 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 RONFOCEMENT CORROSION Page 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 I" 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 foyer 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 pracficing 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 C 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 load 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 fcAc+fcAs Therefore, the ultimate load of a member is reached when the concrete crushes while the steel 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 lover tensile strength of concrete, means that the formation of oxide breams up concrete. it has been suggested that less than 100µm of steel section loss is needed to start cracking and spalling concrete. It is therefore to be understood that a chloride concentration causing corrasion 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 i of this report. As previously stated, less than t00µms i.e. 100 micrometers or 3.91 mils is required for concrete to separate due to expanded steel, this study indicates that a value of 1.1 to 1.3 of CLl 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 3 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 20.71 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 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 3.94/.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, macrocell 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 of time of ' design .and .construction. N Page 6 REFERENCES: 1) Ocean 3651 Existing Building Review - Ocean 3651 100 371h Street, Miami Beach, Florida. By Reymundo J. Miranda, P.E./President -UCl 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 U, (JI CORROSION RATE OF REINFORCING STEEL TABLE NO. 9 CL CORROSION RATE mils per year 0 0.08 0.0305 0.07 0.0485 0.06 0.0607 0.09 0.1214 0.52 0.3035 1.39 0.,607 5.66 0 EXTRAPOLATED SAMPLE CORROSION RATES TABLE NO.2 Sample No. Corrosion Rate (mils per Year) 1 0.06 2 0.x;6 3 3.19 4 0.06 5 0.06 6 0.06 7 0.06 S 0.06 9 0.06 10 0.06 11 0.06 12 0.06 Average 0.0708 EXTRAPOLATED SAMPLE LIFE EXPECTANCIES TABLE NO, 3 Sample No. Life Expectancies (Years) 1 65.67 2 65.67 3 2}.74 4 65.67 5 65.67 6 65.67 7 6.5.67 8 65.67 9 65.67 10 65.67 11 65.67 12 65.67 Average based 61.93 ayS life Average based avg CL (-) 55.+65 content 9955 NW 116'b Way Suite I Miami, Florida 33178 305.882.8200 --105.L82-1200 Date: September 22, 2016 Client: Elisa Estrada 5605 North Haysbore Drive Miami, FL 33155 Prolect; 5605 North Bayshore Drive Property Chloride Testing Cidoride Goamt of naftnd cona&k Rcr Method In accordance with your request and authorization, XFC Group Services LLC (ATC) performed the Chloride ,on Content Testing oil the sainples: that were extracted fiorn the property located at 5605 North Bayshore Olive Ori 9/812016- The tests were Performed in gametal accordance with the RCT Method, "Method for Determination of Chloride Ion Content in Harden*od Concretc." The results of the chloride testing along with the sample identification are listed in Table 1. Jbe chloride ion content listed is reported as 8 Percentage Ofthe total weight of concrete, (OACL9), See diagram for locations of each sample. Table 1. Results of Chloride Testing Sam le W Location O/OCLO 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 0'021J 12 See Diagram �O030 10 7 8 ATC appreciates the opportunity to be of service to you on this project Please feel ftec to contact us if you have any questions regarding this report Respectfully submitted, ATC Grouervices LC William I. M Project Manager Alwds Parxiagua, PR -%'� Florida Registration No. 6251 pa 0 ATC Services 56 August 4, 2016 Jacqueline Mustelier UCI Engineering 7428 S.W. 4811 Street Miami, Florida, 33155 305-661-0811 Subject: Proposal for Chloride ton Content Testing 5605 North Bayshore Drive, Miami, FL 33137 ATC Proposal No. 31.2016.0804.BM0I 9955 Northwest 1160, Way, Suite One Miami, Florida 33178 Phone 305.882.8200 Fax 305.8821200 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. ATCs local project manager W. 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 testned by our technician and transported back to our laboratory testing. Cardno ATC will Perform Chloride Ion Content Testing of Hardened Concrete by RCT Method. FRE SCHEDULE Based on our understanding of the project, we have established the following rates. Professional Services * Florida Registered Professional Engineer (Review, sign & sea] reports) $115.00/hour # Project Manager (inspect Samples, reporting & project management) $85.00/hour Laboratory Tenting Chloride Testing (each Sample) $ I 50,001test Fleld Services Field Technician (sample extraction) $55.00/hour 1!C! Engineering Laboratory Testing Services rt TC Proposal #31,2016.0804.6MU1 page, 2 - Nota: The sampling that is being performed is destructive and will leave holes in the concrete of each member that is sampled. ATG will not and can not be held liable for damage to the members that are sampled. Additionally, the client is responsible for hiring a contractor to patch back any holes left from the sampling process. ATC is not responsible for patching. PROJECT FEES We will perform the Scope of Services outlined above on an hourly fee & unit fee basis in accordance with the Fee Schedule above, The total cost of our services will be influenced by the number of samples to be extracted and tested, and the amount of time required for extraction of those samples. The locations to be sampled will be identified by the client. AUTHORIZATION To authorize ATC to proceed with the Proposed Scope of Services please complete the last page of the attached Client Service Agreement and return a copy to my attention. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. Should you have any questions regarding this information, please feel free to contact us at your earliest convenience. Sincerely, .ATI; Group Services LLC. William I Martin .Alexis Panlagua, P.H. Senior Ptgea Manager division Manager ■ J GROUP OrARtVICE$ INC. CLIENT SERVICES AGREEMENT This AGREEMENT is made this 4th day of august --... , 2016 , by and between uCi Engineering _ its employees, officers, directors, subsidiaries, and agents (Tient) at 7428 SW 48ih Street, Mtamt, FL eat 55 and ATG GROUP SERVICES INC., its employees, officers, directors, subsidiaries, and agents (ATC) at 9955 NWitem way, suite t. Miamr, FL 33178 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, artd to receive notices or other communications under this agreement at the following addresses: ATC:-wiliam Marlin CLIENT. UCI Engineering PROPOSAL NAMEMMDER. 31.2016.0804.SMUi SERVICE ORDERNUMIIER; 1. SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED ATC shall prepare a proposal and/or a service order for Client. 1he proposal and/or service order shall describe the work to be perforated (Services), the location (Site), fees and/or rates to be :charged, certain special conditions of performance including equipment, satnping protocols, and necessary reimbursable expenses. ATC will be authorized to proceed with tate Services (Service Order), when Client indicates its acceptance by sighting 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 differetnt Services are requited to complete an existing Service order, these additional Services shall be set forili in a new Service Order salisfying all applicable and appropriate requirements including, a separate schedule of fees and Services (Change Order). 3. COMPENSATION Client will pay ATC fbr Services and expeases in accordance with the Service +Order. ATG will submit periodic invoices to Client together with reasonable supporting documentation requested by Client and a final bill upon completion of its services. Unless otherwise agreed in writing, there shall be no retainage. Payment is due within thirty (30) days regardless of whether Client has been reimbursed by any tither party. ATC may suspend work, withhold reports and vacate the site without liability if payment is not received. Client will indemnify ATG for all claims concerning the suspension of work for nonpayment regardless ofwhetherthe claims are by the Client, someone claiming through the client, or by a third party. Client agTM to pay ATVs attorney'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. EI(PEN&F-8 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 aWases not outlined in Ute Service Order, for written authorization prior to billing. S. INSURANCE ATC agrees that it now carries, and will cominue to carry, diming the peribmumea 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) Employees Liability • Each accident $ 1,000,000 • Disease --Each Employee $1,000,000 ■ Disetase—Policy Limit $1,000,000 b. Commercial General Liability • Each Occurrence 3110001000 • personal and Advertising Injury $1,000,000 • General Aggregate $2,000,000 • Products and Completed Operations Aggregate $2,000,000 c. Commercial Automobile Liability • Combined Single Limit $1,000,000 d. Errors and Omissions I Professional Liability • Each Claim $1.0110.000 • Annual Aggregate $1,000,000 c. Contractor's Pollution Liability • Each Cid in S1,000,00D 4 Annual Aggregate 51.000,000 6, OBLIGATIONS OF CLIENT Client warrants that all information provided to ATC concerning the required Services is complete and accurate to the best of Client's knowledge. �1 ATC Client Services Agreement 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 or intbrmation supplied 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 am 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. T. 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 similar services under similar circumstances at the time the Services were provided, Client agrees to give ATC written notice within one (1) 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. S. 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 oft Service order as authorized by the Client The Client further acknowledges and agrees that reliability of tasting or remediation methods varies ecoording to the sampling frequency and other variables and that these factors, including cost, have been considered in the Chant's selection of Servlees. ATC's observations only represent conditions observed at the time of the Site v1st't ATC is not responsible for changes that may occur to the Site after ATC completes the Services. a. 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 moognixes 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. 911. THIRD PARTY INFORMATION ATC is dependent on information available from various governmental agonies and private database firms to aid in evaluating the history of the Site, ATC shall not be liable for any such agency's or database firot's failure to make relevant files or documents properly available to properly index files, or otherwise to fall to maintain or produce accurate or cornpleto 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 sinless otherwise specified in the Service Order, it represents that it has obtained the applicable permits and licenses for the proposed Suvices. if Client does not own the Site, 2095 Client represents that it has or will obtain prior to the commencement ofthe Services, the authority and permission ofthe. owner and/or the occupant of the Site. Client acknowledges that due to the nature oi'some Services unavoidable damage may occur. Client waives its right of recovery for such unavoidable damage, and XCiient is not the owner ofthe 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, andlor components not readily accessible to ATC during ATC's performance ofthe 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. Skil* CONTROL ATC's testing, observation, or inspection ofthe work ofotherpatties an aptoject shall] not relieve such parties of their responsibility to parl'orm their work in accordance with applicable plans, specifications and safety requirements. Continuous monitoring by ATC's empiayres 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 relkvo others of their responsibilities to perftnrn the work. 19. TEST" ANIS SAMPLING LOCATIONS Unless otherwise specified in the Service Onfer, the accuracy of test or sampling locations and elevations will be commensurate only with pacing and approximate measurements or estimates. Client should retain the services of a professional surveyor if greater aoouracy is required. Client will fhmish a diagram indicating the accurate location of the Site. Sample locations may also be indicated on the diagram. ATC raservcs the right to deviate a reasonable distance from the boring and sampling locations untess this right is specifically revoked 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 dile 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 properly 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 for proper disposal unless otherwise specified in the St rvice Order, 15. ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUC910N SERVICES lythe Stmees requested only require geotechnical engineering, subsurface exploration, construction materials testing, and or engineering, ATC assumes that there ars 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 ofspecifrc construction nativides as outlined in the Service Order. Page 2 of 4 1, ATC Client Services Agreement Unless otborwise specified in the Service Order, any consulting, testing or monitoring related to environmental conditions, including, but not limited to hazardous waste, sail or groundwater contamination, or air pollutants am not part of ATC's engineering and construction Services. If it becomes apparent during the Feld 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 far 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 sits. 1& UTILITIES Unless otherwise specified in the Service Order. it Is Client's responsibility to mark or famish 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 mark; protect or advise ATC of underground structures orudlities. 19. ROOF CUTS Unless otherwise specified in the Service Order, if roof cutclsamples are required by the Services, it is the responsibility of the Client to make appropriate repaim If 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. ATG personnel are not ctrtifted in roofing repair, therefore under nn circutnstanoes, shall ATC be responsible for any water damage to the roofing system, building, or its contents resulting from ATC's temporary repaus. 20. HAZARDOUS CONDITIONS OR SUBSTANCES Tbu Client ackriowledgos that ATC has neither created not 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 wash including used disposable protective gear and equipmank are the puuperiyofthe Client. Client agrees to indemnify and hold harmless ATC against all claims ibr Injury or toss 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 manifbsts, allegations that ATC is a handler, .generator, operator, treater or starer, 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 intmduced to the Site, before or atter the completion ofibe Services, 2015 V. RIGHT TO $TOP WORK If, 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 affects 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 hold harmless Client against claims, demands, and lawsuits, to the extent arising out of or caused by lire negligence or willful misconduct of ATC in connection with activities conducted in the performance of the Services. The Client shalt indemnify and hold luumless ATC from and against claims, demands, and lawsuits, to the extent arising out of or caused by Client's breach ofthis Agreement or the negligence or witIfol misconduct of the Client or other contractors retained by Client in connection with activities conducted in the performance of the Services. If a dispute arises between the patties 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 perlbrntance oftho Soivicrs. 23. LIMIT OF UABILITY 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 lirnits set forth in this Agreement. 24. CONSEQUENTiAL DAMAGES In no event shall either p;toy be liable to the other party for any consequential, incidental, punitive, liquidated or indirect damages, including but not limited to loss of income, loss ofprofits, loss or restriction ofuse of propertg, or arty other business losses, regardless if such damages are caused by breach ofcentract, negligent act or omission. other wrongful act, or whether ATC shall be advised, shall have other reason to know, orin factshall knowofthepossibilkyofsuch damages. 25. WARRANTY ATC is not a manufacturer. If any equipment is used or purchased by ATC for a Service Order the manufhcturer'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, conceming any of the goods or Services which may be f4miched 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 of -all such materials 27. RWANCE Documents and data produced by ATC arc not intended or represented by ATC to be suitable for use or reliance beyond the scope or purpose for which they were originally prepared, or for anyone except the Client, Any such unauthorized use will be at the Client's or third party's sole risk. Page 3 of 4 L.: ATC Client Services Agreement U. THIRD+PARTY D[..AW 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. SU19POEMAS lire 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 time 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 abject, 30. TE MINATION OF CONTRACT This Agreement may he 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 pant for Services peribmiod prior to the termination date plus reasonable termination and suspension expenses. 31. ASSIGNMENT Neither the Client nor ATC may assign, or trattsfbr its benefits, Tights, duties, or interest in this Agreement without the written consent of the other patty. Ws Agreement shall be binding on anti inure to the benefit of the successors and tassignsofthe panics. 32. FORCE MAJEURE Neither Client nor ATC shall hold the outer responsible: Ibr damages or delays in performance caused by uncontrollable events, which could not reasonably have been anticipated or prevented, including but not limited to, acts of Cad, the public enemy, acts ofthe Government ofthe United States or of the several states, or any foreign country, or any of diem. acting in tltcir sovereign capacity, materially different Site conditions, wars, riots, terrorisrn, rebellions, sabotage, fires, explosions, accidents, floods, strikes, or other conceded acts of workers, lookouts, or cbsnges in laws, regulations, or ordinances. 33. GENERAL PROVISIONS Tba captions and headings throughout this Agreement aro for convenience only and do not define, limit, modify, or add to the naming of any provislon of this Agreement. If any provision of this Agreement is in conflict with any provision ofthe Service Order, the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall prevail unless the conflict concerns the scope of Services to be providers, if any provision shall to any extent be deemed invalid, it shall be modified ifpasssible to full`til the intent of the parties as reflected in the original provision and the remainder of this Agreement shall not be affected. 11his Contract Document represents the entire 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 for the benefit of any persons not a party to this Agreement. No titins patty beneficiary rights are created. 2015 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 witbin the state and county ofthe Site. No waiver by either patty of any default by fire 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, and no parent, subsidiary or affiliated 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. lex. PRINTED NAME.Vllilliam J. Martin TITLE;. Sr. Project Manager DATE- 08/0/2016 CLIENT. (Person authorized to execute Contracts) 11Y. PRINTED NAME- TITLE* DATE: Page 4 of 4 , AAjy f*i A *W9,14,4 ow i4r, ol 3, whg-- A sk4v4--,�# 1q, (,f*,jmrO-k , m+jrIj pw *x W-4 A -If kr #,1 40" wl"Y Olil ciwl� Vim # 6#4 Pent mrAmroy W. *,-4 (kAO ONI 'Oe"tW410 . VbAM t I � vrovo, -t # tvil %-, �.,4fttl Ot i"k k#4 p7t*m 4 thlo, twl� or it bow up*$ �bc owokvrAm, fo ",:I er omc-~04 fg t �Mt1d t+4 AIC hjW OAPW 43 0 At Up" L "W OF =,PTP=f IW $low Jwr r4rtt ff SAY 4e4wl 6 okit VOW POT) 10 WR 31 M Mwt .Ivwvt*vc Cf pony "sof Oil* Arm""61" OW P, � l'i Lv 0 4-4 *my Nt�w *NVII. wbob*m.fit r AIC M*rmpm or 'htk of arras to rovic **%**1 00 0911*0, tt 40w&,rn, Awl K" **1 40 ATC COXv sk.WVKU M! TU C*W.0 D...W "k"w*o too logo1Ar ow"a NOWN44 w1ifto at 0161 446" whom" I VWPW& *4 to COMWW* I* �g 60 00 bM#A 0 A" OW 4 ""- 0- Ost Aff"Mot, *+ 0,W poly Nw*km" VIMS Wo vvwi Rtll Oscar M. lcabalceta Reid I slamr Appmiari a t na.nitune September 15th, 2016 Mr. Reymundo J. Miranda, P.E. Uciengineering 7428 SW48"' Street Miami, Florida 33155 Appraisal Report On: Market Value of Residential Building Structure at 5605 N. Bayshore Drive, Miami, Florida 33137-2329 Our Pile: RCN08163005 Dean' 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 strarcture, 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 lbarra, PLS No. 2534, elated 12-24-2012. The building has three bedrooms, four bath, foyer, living, dining;, :kitchen, family and terrace, The IYIDC 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 Y 1221599 Atitir�tisin,�tit Ica s t • 9010 SW 102 Court, Miami, FL. 33176 s Qfiiee (305) 8564492 s rax (305) 856-4493 Oscar M. Icabaiccta ReA I hov Appiako 0 ( w,uhonl Mr. Reymundo J. Miranda, P.E. Uciengmeenn 9 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 61", 2016, and with adequate exposure and marketing time is estimated at: TWO HUNDRED SEVENTY FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($275,000) Respectfully submitted :state certmea uenerai twat estate Appraiser, License # RZ 1599 State Certified General Real Estate Appraiser* Liceiise#RZ1599 * Appraisiridiolcaaagr2qnM 0 9010 SW 102 Coim, Miami, FL. 33176 9 Office (.305) 8564492 a Fax (305) 856-4493 TABLE OF CONTENTS Letter of Transmittal Single Family Residence at: 5605 N. Bayshore Drive, Miami, Florida 33137 SUMMARY OF SALIENT FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS ................................ ....................... 5 PURPOSEOF APPRAISAL.......................................................................................................9 EFFECTIVE DATE OF VALUATION..................................................................................9 PROPERTY RIGH'T'S APPRAISED ....................... ,.,.............. .......... ...,,,....................... ..9 SUBJECT PROPERTY HISTORY AND CONTRACT FOR SATs................................::........9 MARKET VALUE DEFINITION............................................................................................10 SUBJECT PROPERTY ESTIMATED MARKETING TIME .... ................... ............ ................ 10 SCOPEOF WORK OF APPRAISAL ....................................................................................... I I NEIGHBORHOOD DESCRIPTION.........................................................................................12 SITEDATA................................I...........,,,,».,,.......... .., .,...................,...... ................15 DESCRIPTION OF IMPROVEMENTS...................................................................................17 IMPROVEMENTPHOTOS...............................»,........,,..............,.......,.......,..............,...........18 ZONING.......... ...... . ..................,.........,..................................,.........>...........................,...24 ILEAL ESTATE TAXES AND ASSESSMENT DATA...........................»>...................,,,,...,,.25 HIGHEST AND BEST USE ANALYSIS ........................ ........................... ..................26 - M ---- M -W R R MARKET SALES LOCATOR MAP ................... r..................................... ........, .........,........47 ADJUSTED BUILDING SF UNIT VALUE x ............................................... ............................. 48 ESTIMATED MARKET VALUE BY DIRECT SALES COMPARISON APPROACH ........... 48 RECONCILIATION AND MARKET VALUE CONCLUSION.................................x.............49 CERTIFICATION OF VALUE.................................................................................................50 STATEMENT OF ASSUMPTIONS & LIMITING CONDITIONS....................x.....................51 x605 N. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 4of 54 SUMMARY OFSALIENT" FACT' S AND CONCLUSION'S APPRAISAL PROJECT: 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. PROPERTY ADDRESS: 5605 N. Bayshore Drive, Miami, Florida 33137 OWNER OF RECORDS: Supernova Bayshore Investments, LLC, Miami, Florida 33145 PROPERTY LOCATION: Subject property is located along the west side of N. Bayshore Drive, between NE 56'h and 57t" Streets, with an open water frontage view to Biscayne Bay, in City of Miami, Florida. LEGAL DESCRIPTION- As per Miami -Dade County public records and Boundary Survey by George Tbarra, PLS No. 2534, dated 12-24-2012: 4`h 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 ofMiami-Dade County, Florida, and including all Riparian Rights incident thereto. POLIO NUMBER: 01-3218-037-0020. SITE AREA: 30,000 SF (+/-I ftO' 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. SITE SHAPE: Rectangular/irregular, with +/-100.0 feet of water frontage with concrete seawall, with an east view to Biscayne Bay. TOPOGRAPHY: Slightly above street grade. FLOOD ZONE DATA: Review of FIRM flood zone rate maps indicates that the subject lies within a Flood Zone "AR", Flood Zone Map #120860 0308L, dated September 11, 2009. ZONING: R-1, Single Family Residential District, City of Miami, Florida. CENSUS TRACT: 21.00/3. 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page Sof 54 SUMMARY OF SALIENT FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS (continued SUBJECT PROPERTY: 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 Ibarra, PLS No. 2534, dated 12-24-2012. The building has three bedrooms, four bath, foyer, living, dining, kitchen, family and lei -race. The MDC tax roll 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 Sebeck. PROPOSED NEW DEVELOPMENT: The subject property site is proposed to have new improvements. YEAR BUILT: 1940, according to Miami -Dade County tax roll information, IMPROVEMENT AGE: 76 yews, according to tax roll. SITE IMPROVEMENTS: The site improvements include outdoors facilities, such as front open parking area, landscaping and walking areas, pool, concrete seawall and dock. ADJOINING LAND: Residential uses. ASSESSMENTITAX DATA (2016): The 2016 Assessments and R.E. Taxes for subject property, as per MDC figuiw, are: Description Assessment Buildin& $ 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 fbet). The building value reflects $94.81/SF for the total measured building area of 4,078 W 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 6of 54 SUMMARY OF SALIENT FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS (confinued 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 0, 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 RE -PORT: 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. 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 7of 54 Ift"N 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, UCIEngineeriDg, Miami, Florida (Mr. Reymundo J. Miranda, P.E.), for the proposed new residential development on,site. 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 DOIJ, ARS ($275,000) -06-2016 Page Sof 54 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09 PURPOSE OF APPRAISAL The purpose of this Appraisal Report is to estimate the market value of subject property residentia I building structure, in "as ie' 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. E FFECTIVE DATE OF VALUATION The effective date of market valuation is September 6'�, 2016. PROPE RTY RIGHTS APF'RAISED 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 pad; 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. Ile 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 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 Bayshore 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. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 9of 54 MARKET VALUE CVINITION 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 time 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 pmpe4ly 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 (IRS), 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 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 tealtor handles sales offer tinder a competent sales management contract. 5605 N. Bayshore Di, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 10of 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, UCIEngineering, Miami, Florida (Mr. Reymundo I 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 sal6s data were gathered and verified from sales of similar properties within the subject's immediate neighborhood -market area. All the sales data was verified with the registered Warranty Deed on Miami -Lade County tax roll information and county court information. As agreed with our client, UCIEngineering, 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. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page I lof 54 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 enterprises. 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 Baysliore Drive, between NE 56" and 57"' Streets, with an open water frontage view to Biscayne Bay, in City of Miami, with awater &ontage 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 1-195, to the south; Biscayne Bay, to the east and NE 135 Street, to the north. IT—A 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 inid-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 or canals located throughout the neighborhood. Some of these homes are custom built with amenities including tennis courts and boat docks, and swimming 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 ofwhich fronting Biscayne Bay. WIN 111111-1 IN 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-201.6 Page 12of 54 K NEIGHBORHOOD DESCRIPTION fconfirtutdj 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 property, There are employment centers, public parks, public beaches, shopping areas, places of worship and public transpoilation within the boundaries of the subject property neighborhood. Highway access to this neighborhood is good via the Julia Tuttle Causeway/1-195 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 S-] SUBJECT PROPERTY LOCATOR MAP 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 14of 54 SITE DATA APPRAISAL, PROJECT: 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. PROPERTY ADDRESS: 5605 N. Bayshore Drive, Miami, Florida 33137 OWNER OF RECORDS: Supernova Bayshore Investments, LLC, Miami, Florida 33145 PROPERTY LOCATION: Subject property is located along the west side of N. Bayshore Drive, between NE 50" and 57"' Streets, with an open water frontage view to Biscayne Bay, in City of Miami, Florida. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: 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 Miami -Dade County, Florida, and including A Riparian Rights incident thereto. SITE .AREA: 30,000 SF (+/-100.0' x 300.0'), with +/-100 feet of water frontage view, to Biscayne Bay, m per Boundary Survey by George Ibarra, PLS No. 2534, dated 12-24-2012. SITE SHAPE: Rectangular/irregular, with +/-100.0 feet of water frontage with concrete seawall, with an east view to Biscayne Bay. TOPOGRAPHY. Slightly above street grade, FLOOD ZONE DATA: Review of FIRM flood zone rate maps indicates that the subject lies within a Flood Zone "AE", Flood Zone Map #120860 0308L, dated September 11, 2009, ZONING: R-1, Single Family Residential District, City of Miami, Florida. CENSUS TRACT: 21.0013. 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page IS of 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, tetraces, landscaping and walking areas, pool, concrete seawall and dock-, ADJOINING LAND: Residential uses. TOXIC WASTE: Appraisers are not experts in determining the presence or absence of hazardous or toxic materials, 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, LOCATION ATTRIBUTES: Compatibility with surrounding uses is: Good Proximity to and access to regional expressways is: Good LAND USE RESTRICTIONS: 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. 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. Baysbore 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 lbarra, 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 store 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. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 17of 54 I MPROVEMENT PH OTO 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 18of 54 / \ { ` � |IMPROVE MENT PHOTOS \ / `_' -----__,--_'- Dr, Miami '-_----___ - -_-- ~ W, i wt, "? vo .;v,, _ r � � f e t i TOTAL Sketch software by a la made, inc, 1-800-212mode Fn F 1 Second Floor [956.24 Sq ft] 25,21' 5' galrony zo •tn M' b, �.. [105.66 Sq fu 5.4' ,.. ^.�,9.�1' .29.117° $5.61' a-• tiD Z Car Detached Fn ;d [641,52 Sq ft] N 41 20.41' 29.16' 2.5' First Fluor 6 12439.97 Sq ft] v, 2.5' BO 06 2.2' 4.8' .;r •-1 .i 2.2' n' N 6.25' cn 18.15' TOTAL Sk*h by to madq Inc. TOTAL Sketch software by a la made, inc, 1-800-212mode ...... Area wCuletions summary ffan frst Floor 2479.07 Sq ft I seoand Floor Taftil Living Area (Rounded):kok-.110n9 . A -Vi— p, ...... ..... .J. i Car P, Hitachi.( Balcony 956.24 Sq It 14 x 2.2 = 30.8 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 = 62o,98 1815 x 5.6 = i01.64 15.4 x 3.6 55.44 19.75 x 45.61 a 900.8 3436 Sq ft 641.52 SQ ft 22 x 29.115 641.52 105-65 sq it 5,5 x 19.21 -105.661 TOTAL Sketch software by a la mode, Inc. I-BUG-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, Bayshore 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 fora typical financing. Therefore, a property could be over assessed even if itsells 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 it 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 R.E. Taxes for subject property, as per MDC figures, are: Description Assessment Building $ 386,637 Land $3,299,907 XE 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 SR 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 SP. 11 Z 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 2W54 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 of aspecific 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. Therefore, 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, neat 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 proressional 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 of land 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 rectangularfirregular in shape and contains 30,000 SF as per tax roll and Boundary Survey by George lbarra, 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 not 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 (see 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 and 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 RCN08163005 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/m.arketable 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, modern 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 currently improved, the subject property residential improvement is above and beyond its economic life, as indicated by the market. The subject property is appraised accordingly. 5605 N. Bayshore 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. 1"heremaining 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 following. 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 thexelationship 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 comer 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. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 29 of 54 ANALYSIS OF COMPARABLE VACANT LAND SALES (cont! Sin-iflarly, 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 comparable 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 keel) 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 RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 30 of 54 VACANT LAND COMPARABLE SALE DESCRIPTION COMPARABLE LAND SALE No. I Property Location: 1133 Belle Meade Island Drive, Miami, Florida 33138 Legal Description, Lot 29, of BELLE MEADE ISLAND, PB. 40-89, Miarni-Dade County, Florida. Folio Number: 01-3207-037-0270. Parcel Location: At the northeast end curve of Belle Meade Island Drive, with an open and unobstructed water front view of Biscayne Bay. Lot Size/Shape: 13,172 SF, as per tax roll. Vacant land of irregular shape. Sale Price: $1,325,000, or $100.59 per SF, for the 13,172 SF. Property Zoning: R- 1, Single Family Residential District, City of Miami, Sale Date/ Recording: April 23d, 2014. Recorded at OR Book/Page: 29128-4470. Warranty Deed. Sale History: $630,100, in January 100, 2013, as per MDC public records, Buyer: 1133 Belle Meade, LLC.. Seller: SK FL 1133, LLC, Financing Terms: Cash to seller. No financing information available. Comments/ Analysis: Similar zoning; No adjustment warranted. Similar location as compared to subject property; No adjustment warranted. Smaller lot size (13,172 SP) 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. I. 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: 1125 Belle Meade Island Drive, Miami, Florida 33138 Legal Description: Lot 28, of BELLE MEADE ISLAND, PB. 40-89, Miami -Dade County, Florida. Folio Number: 01-3207-037-0260. Parcel Location- At the northeast end curve of Belle Meade Island Drive, with an open and unobstructed waterfront view of Biscayne Bay. Lot Size/Shape: 12,375 SF, as per tax roll. Vacant land of irregular -rectangular shape. Sale Price: $1,265,000, or $102.72 per SF, for the 12,375 SR Property Zoning, R-1, Single Family Residential District, City of Miami. Sale Date/ Recording: June 6"', 2014. Recorded at OR Book/Page: 29186-1225. Warranty Deed. Sale History. $200,000, in December 13', 1997, as per MDC public records. Buyer., 1125 Belle Meade, LLC. Seller: Joel & Magdalena Fabelo Financing Terms: Cash to seller. No financing information available. Comments/ Analysis: Similar zoning-, No adjustment warranted. Similar location as compared to subject property; No adjustment warranted. Smaller lot size (12,375 SP) 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. Bayshoi -e Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 33 of 54 VACANT LAND COMPARABLE SALE DESCRIPTION COMPARABLE LAND SALE No. 2. Aerial Photo. 5605 N. Baysbore 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- A portion of Lot 18, Block 3, of NEW BELLE Ml :ADE, PB. 40-45, Miami - Dade County, Florida; A portion of Lot 21, Block 2, of NEW BELLE MEADE, PB. 40-45, Miami -Dade County, Florida. Folio Number: 01-3207-031-0320 and 01-3207-031-0180 (2 folios sale). Parcel Location: At the northeast end curve of Belle Meade Boulevard, with an open and unobstructed water front view of Biscayne Bay. Lot Size/Shape-, 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. Sale Price: $2,350,000 (combined), or $84.69 per SF, for the 27,749 SF. PropertyZoning- R-1, Single Family Residential District, City of Miami. Sale Date/ Recording. November 7"', 2014. Recorded at OR Book/Page: 29400-1451 and 29386- 0591. Warranty Deed. Sale History: $1,608,800 (combined), in December 2006 and March 2012, respectively, as per MDC public records. Buyer: Huertas USA 111, Inc. Seller: Jonas Builders, Inc. and Solid Builders Group, LLC. Financing Terms: Cash to seller. No financing information available. IWITIM =-A Analysis: Similar zoning; No adjustment warranted. Similar location as compared to subject property; No adjustment warranted. Similar lot size (27,749 SP) 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. Baysbore 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 RCN08161005 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 cornparables sales presented. 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 S97.50/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 Di, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 37 of 54 I Apr -2014 $1,325,000 13,172 SF $100.59 $95.56 2 Jun -2014 $1,265,000 12,375 SF $101.72 $97.58 3 Nov -2014 $2,350,000 27,749 SF $84.69 $07.40 `E 7 nlb'ect ;. 30,000 Sly $9,71 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 S97.50/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 Di, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 37 of 54 LAND COMPARABLE LOCATOR MAP �.._�'ft'- r' E s - 1t/sl_ 91 r i i. 3 i +]jL (jj�`- I �� _ Illy 3 ..'^'_ y��� . al i i r_�a i- J. �- ? �---- � - ; �i � Mhz � ;; -j 1 �_ � _"�,► li;�- �► �� FEE -51 III. INC- �I�:! �1 i _Ja liif L{` itiNW:l�fillii"�iF }f l 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, RELATIONSI-111? 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 atterapts to consider all issues relevant to the valuation problem in a manner that is consistent and reflects local market conditions. APPLICABILITY AND LIMUATIONS. 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 fi-om public records or buyers and sellers. 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCN0816300S 09-06-2016 Page 39 of 54 MARKET SALES COMPARISON APPROACH continued 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 as 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. Depreciation is defined as the loss in value due to -qu" arab catase, It is the difference, between the market value of a structural impLoyemed 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 improvements, estimated at $97.501SC 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 Met 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 RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 40 of 54 IMPROVED COMPARABLE SALE DESCRIPTION IMPROVED COMPARABLE SALE No. 1 Propeily Location: 5625 N. Bayshore Drive, Miami, Florida 33137 Legal Description: Lot 1, and riparian rights, Block 20, BAYSHORE UNIT No. 3, PB. 12-50, Miami -Dade County, Florida. Folio Number.* 01-3218-037-0010. Property Location: Located at the SEC of the intersection of N. Bayshore Drive and NE 57"' Street, City of Miami, with water hunt to Biscayne Bay. Lot,Size/Shape: 31,800 SF, of rectangular shape (106' x 300'). Water frontage of 106.0 feet. Building Size: 4,316 SF, as per Public Records. Property Zoning: R-1, Single Family Residential District, City of Miami. Sale Date: November 6, 2013, Recorded at OR Book/Page., 28903-4943. Warranty Deed, Sale Price. $3,340,000, or $239,500 for improvements, or $55,491SP, 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). Buyer: aic A. Shelton Seller: Juan Chipoco & Luis Hoyos. Sale History: A prior sale on 02/0812013 for $2,375,000, as per MDC public records. M. Value/SF Of Improvement Not Including Land: S55A9/SF ($239,50014,316 SF) Financing Terms: 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, 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 41 of 54 IMPROVED COMPARABLE SALE DESCRIPTION IMPROVED COMPARABLE SALE No. 2 Property Location: 7405 Belle Meade Blvd, Miami, Florida 33138 Legal Description: Portion of Lots 8,9 and 10, Block 3, NEW BELLE MEADE-,,, PB. 40-45, Miami -Dade County, Florida. Folio Number. 01-3207-031-0242. Property Location: 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. Lot Size/Shape: 16,516 SF, of irregular shape. Water ftontage. Building Size: 4,321 SF, as per Public Records. Property Zoning: R-1, Single Family Residential District, City of Miami. Sale Date: February 10, 2015, Recorded at OR Book/Page: 29500-0909. Warranty Deed. Sale Price: $1,900,000, or $289,700 for improvements, or $67.04ISF, not including land as vacant and site improvements estimated value of $1,610,300 at $97.501SF of land ($1,900,000 - $1,610,300). Buyer: Mohamed Merabet & Yarnina Sabbah Seller: Luis A. Arias. Sale History: A prior sale on 01/05/2.012 for $840,000, as, per MDC public records. M. Value/SF of Improvement Not Including Land: $67.04/SF ($289,700 / 4,321 SF) Financing Terms: 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 tosu bject 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 RCN013163005 09-06-2016 Page 43 of 54 IMPROVED COMPARABLE SALE DESCRIPTION IMPROVED COMPARABLE SALE No. 3 Property Location: 928 Belle Meade Island Drive, Miami, Florida 33138 Legal Description: Portion ofLot 62, Block 3, NEW BELLE MEADE, PB. 40-45, Miami -Dade County, Florida, Polio Number,- 01-3207-037-0550, Property Location: At the northwest end curve of Belle Meade Island Drive (cast from NE stnAvenue), with a water front view on canal and with unobstructed exit to Biscayne Bay, in City of Miami. Lot Size/Shape: 14,850 SF, of rectangular shape (90' x 165'), Water frontage. Building Size: 4,427 SF, as per Public Records. Property Zoning: R-1, Single Family Residential District, City of Miami. Sale Date. October 20, 2014. Recorded at OR Book/Page: 29360-3556. Warranty Deed. Sale Price: $1,800,000, or $352,100 forimprovements, 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). Buyer: Daniel & Dawn Feinberg Seller. Renee Belle Meade 928, LLC. Sale History: A prior sale on 10/1°7/2013 for $1,350,000, as per MDC public records. M. Value/SF of Improvement Not Including Land- $79.53/SF ($352,100 / 4,427 SF) Financing Terms: 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 4.5 of 54 s � a � APP .L `} Nft £� 4 i,..: MARKET SALES LOCATOR MAP t � f i lz + i p RID it VII CA . - 16, ' `.ii� i1►�,��.. ��i�"��t �i.��r .,r, ; �. !'11.1 L I' $.Il ! 1^ 1,>7 ;E LI J , . ri 71i ; inli 1 P(�4{ iJ. R tP It fill T, IOU :I..lj' !) r � a icy+ i t ?i [ L j a�., ..J 11�. .(— _,aa4-._.l�t .❑l � `! � "I it = .w,. - r: a . t -r ,l :. ! t j + v'i,'� i � 'i'`+r C�• � 1 i a.:. {tom � I 1 'i U - + �yi ( I�. ! i�l i"li34�O-[:ri>�i 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCN00163005 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. �SalesPiricentaing d -6 M "en"4ttv" Just _S Sa�e�Da�es . wlrto. �A��:..,:. .SF , ,.. !F,�tcd3 � /SF y;g� ��,�tye�SFr, 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 -'a The unadjusted price per SP of comparable sales building area has a range from $55.49ISF to $79.53/SF. After adjustments, the price per SF of comparable sales has a range from $55-49ISF to $79.53/SF. The average figure is $67.35 and the median is $67.04 per SR Based on the indicated adjusted values per building SF, a value figure of $430.00/SF is considered a good nrarket value indication of subject property building of 4,237 SF, given similar emphasis to all comparable sales. ']Trus, the market value estimate, for the subject property building improvement of4,237 SF, in "as is or depreciated" condition, as of September Oh, 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 improvement, in "as is or depreciated" condition, is estimated at $67.20/SF, the market value of subject propexty 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 iMpr0VCMeDts, by the Direct Sales Comparison Approach, 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. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 48 of 54 RE' CONCILIATION 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 suUject'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 Ob, 2016, and with adequate exposure and marketing time, is estimated at: TWO HUNDRED SEVENTY FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS 000) 5605 N. Baysbore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 49 of S4 STATEMENT OF ASSUMPTIONS & LIMITING CONDITIONS The Appraisers assumes the following general assumptions: I.- 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 hell) 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 land 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. ilmom -101 —10011 -1 W11 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Mianal 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. 1.4. 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. Icabalceta 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 Stich 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 ofthe subject propet ty. 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 ofil 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. Icabalceta 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 EDF ASSUMPTIONS & LIMITING CONDITIONS Lconthmed) 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. Jos6 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 X Icabalceta, MBA 9010 SW 102 Count, Miami, FL 33176 (305) 856-4492 (305) 8564493 (Fax) MCK SCOTT 6' DVfRNOR KEN LAWSON, SECRETARY STATE Of FLORIDA DEPARTMENT Of BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION FLORIDA REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL 80 taxtaas The CLRIInED GENIEW APPRAISER Named below IS CERTIFIED -Tatler vie provisions of Chapter 415 FS Expiration date NOV X 2016 ICABALCETA, OSCAR M 2000 NW 96TH AVE SECOND FLOOR DORAL FL 33172 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Kai-ni RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 53 of 54 OSCAR M. JCABALCETA 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 Licensed Real Estate Broker -Sales. REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL EXPERIENCE: License 4 RZ 0001599. Expiration: 11-30-2016 License # BK 0419273. Expiration., 09-30-2017 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 econoinic-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 (Cotuse 1). Florida State Certified General Real Estate Appraiser (Course 11), Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal.Practice (USPAII), 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 Low Seminar. Discount Cash Flow (DCF) Software Comparison Analysis Serninar (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: 305.8564493. Ap-p-rd"'M&R, k4mmo–up-s-0—ni I 1 11 1 1 11 11 1 1 1 1 - 11 11 1,, 1 . go 5605 N. Bayshore Dr, Miami RCN08163005 09-06-2016 Page 54 of 54 EXHIBIT 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 darnages 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 i. Diaz, Chief of unsafe Structures 'i City of Miami Unsafe Section a;t 444 SW 214 Avenue 41h Floor e: Miami, Florida 33130 Telephone: 305-416-1107 Cell phone: 786-251-7181 redlaz0mlarn igov.com To learn more about our Unsafe Structures process just click 4 here To learn more about the 4q 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 this communication and any attachments. Please consider the environment before printing this ie -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, %i tti �tr C- ' • Wendy Sczechowica ti Historic Preservation Planner MIN G7 Planning Department f.; Preservation Office N N t. Visit us at www.mianigctv.pom/planning. 2 EXHIBIT E SUBMITTED INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD Fog I-rgm(s)q.-kj0N i! �[ Pfild is az, oriOa .33,137 .ctof pre j1:000 n 3600-patt; arybantz hVe wmew. ill -, ' '0' ' I di -Y. ir. . , , �, 0 --ort 45665,9. B D or D NK :'A qp pi AWA 9, 10 -4, 60 of nohome w Ivteaudtia Aid& opose'd oite, to, poift-lelf"Alic goo, . ). � ,coxa Val -sot e;-- -ba 0"o th ,u.A"-,r,yvjv time ani fa,. --o i bbig-14044dam BOMJ00m-Brody Udsio- ri 0 m z to (0 to <0 C? 00 co 0. w 0 E CD co v E ca Packet Pg: 734] i K I'Affil-gi8todo u4thVI 0 b icafloi a A Hy - Whi two Abors Aouih-lofUll ia.0-10,6-N wilyOo om- 1 655-4,,03' "BA -1 1. 4 bi 0, v 6N .. P, m t -Of -T,hukywyo :moo f-ov Oooirwid` - iii A, `jhiio,* i V # 0% PA Y ons. R Packet P77 1 387] NoVowbor)40 2018. VIA JANP-A-1101 DIVOT c Ity. aw"Im-.1-alooklo -PulAtood Mhtnm,Wo,-' 56.00 N. 5 e Oka A*- Q y 1,4004 fi 2". F� ut-'&6 Drive Dear , %V- - - i I M.C.M.-erM:,'i We QUi�iio at 5600N. 1"U":5 1 N Bay ore, ly ',Drive -i the. iba-"fu yau.for 4pproval aw-Mbla eorl't cote of ostruu i ox -:a: nqwhomo� t'e carate to VO"ib-ol.W NP, Q"AVfilar th f pMh ."M0.has W hire ani wo w, _01vome -upw, opypio h ©�lagratibA of ala 4ppl'dalids.� 9 *co M W Ka6 0, n MW 0 1 Packet Pg: 36 %Aw lojoy"IYER'r- 690 NE. 66. Street C- phtserv-44 ArlVe .3,500 M44rai, Florldi.-33 -/A p i obi �r A POO ",h; WO am h� it'699.N­F8.'66`-ftpt ;,w,�_.c cAq.. o i or, an, ed m-, ss tho.-,#ro.o fi, 11 Y.'s .9''o Ova -h0i Dn' Th" -a v 'Ot"a qu ox x i I 9 AAe W40 low to 6 fidA T% r Om .,gtd Am disrepair You eonstdoatim the,°applieaticix .. 4 Dian anA X-4hryn M, A Packet P e Nipple b, vise W&O'o. Mirk-11.1mok-bviv- ft. 690 XE Sb*.;f. VIAMAND D CIt of v.4dog A00a 41'034 44,140 D Dear wkio NE "il '57fil'SS g frp u. �N Th p AX -7 "Up. 0". W— -vm,"! 'W, o"Aw!"'Ow.-�Upport t6t,"her'-.4 and we'..'Awtom� tlie.pfopo A*i 0 0 Co :i Co 9 00 Ch CL uj 0 Q. Co E m V CD P Packet — 8 ] 11 r g. 3 7 bliaxell':azl 5.70 �':.:�:a�y care Din v City o£.,Mibtx�i: tiq z v a X. a ei^uat ar . ;o: . °� OO :Pati A�ri� Res 1%eimbeir. b -Q2 .01:8 A ei Item .<>A licaion'o�r ,LO P1?. gjr ►01,ateri e; o ,. L Ll:e�r'`Bdax�i:lU�l��s��.. • . p live: at 57Q1,N Baylix`TDe, virlil%'is<fwo �0br N:, 3a The other o60 Bshoe llrtve its}�edo..{y.,cii,tir :a�apx�oval 4 a'cate .d o t Eunice gay i pont. i t r =apP a%iaii din the: nc� t ci i; e_pro so ho ii : first It r be tj k a i a 1 t 8 -feet 016h t � watez�xont pint ty lie, an+ :th at: its sec i lc bx Gawk at,1 I1t +dz5;h �i3es dna t vsiti?t,pri line. Thak a • w 0 «o E . a Packet Pg. 39 SUBMITTED INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD FOO ITgm(s)gjojON ji �op I4E_ap d' AUG' 57 S r, t/ri�� - (C m J O /s j y Z Lo a Al, f9A Ij � M '. � V ' J p, 0 �6�Ns w w+ � � Q co +fir q�r��•iY�i��"1 Y4 105 . RLx o v -6-1 .LvLJ'- cl !� Olt Awl C N t V w w a Packet Pg'., 4U N 'A- Z Al 4w -IN -77-- �d La THE SECRETARY R I 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 \t att THE SECRETARY R I 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 RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Designing new construction on a historic site or in a historic Replicating the features of the historic building when designing a setting that it is compatible but differentiated from the historic new building, with the result that it may be confused as historic or building or buildings. 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- Adding new construction that results in the diminution or loss of ing and does not detract from its significance. 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 fagade 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 Note: Annual Registration Fee Effective Through 12/3112018 �� .Nfita'ihA tiF t For Office Check# % 7 r Use Only. C01 Receipt# u� CITY OF YHAMI LOBBYIST REGISTRATION FORM (1) Lobbyist Name: Fernandez, Ben (Last Name, First Name, Middle Initial) Business Phone: 305-374-5300 Business Address: 200 South Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 550, Miami, FL Zip 33131 Email Address: BFernandez@BRZoningLaw.com (2) Principal Represented: Supernova Bayshore Investments, LLC Business Address: 1826 Coral Way, Mail Stop 5983, Miami, FL Zip 33145 m (3) Specific issue lobbyist has beenretained to lobby (if representing a corporation, partnership or trust, give business address of chief officer, partner, or beneficiary of swine, 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 Mayer, 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. 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 asA lobbyist. I do soleirmly swear that all of the foregoing facts are true and coVect, andI ve read or, miliar with the provisions contained in Sections 2-551 through 2Z8 of the Miami City Code, as acne sled, f BEM LLEREM MYCOMMISSlON if 001 EXPIRES: Marcia 5, 2( Bonded'Thru Notaav Public Ung State of Florida, County oflWa—in—F-D-a-ire Sworn to and subscribed before me this day of June . 2018 Lobbyist �R Lary or Deputy Clerk Office of the City Clerk, 3500 Pan American Drive, Miami, FL 33133 / Phone: (305) 250-5351 / Email: clerks@miamigov.com Received from: Address: City of Miami OFFICIAL RECEIPT Tax $ Total $ No. 485469 Date: C J_L?_1 19 /100 Oollar5 Zee, For. Reference N This Receipt not VAUD unless dated. By: filled in and signed by authorized em- ployee of department or division des- Department: ignated hereon and Until the City has Collected the proceeds of any chocks Division, tendered as payment herein. LDistribution: White - Qjslorner: Canary - Finnnoe; Pink - Isquing Departmant 445 BERCOW RADELL FERNANDEZ & LARKIN OPERATING ACCOUNT OATS 90D SOUTJA BIWAYNE BOULEVARD, SUITE 850 MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 SUNTRUST ACHIRT061100a'16June 12,2018 63-215/631 AMOUNT end esnxrao� ***One Hundred Five 00/100 PAY TO THE GIRDER CITY OF MIAMI or: AIRICRIZED 616NATMIE 110000044soll, 1:0631021524LO00180097965112 BERCOW RADELL FERNANDEZ & LARKIN OPERATING ACCOUNT 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, SUITE 850 MIAMI, FLOAIDA 33131 DATE SugNUST ACH"'10610"O"Itine 12, 2018 63-215/631 jormw.g.g.4 AMOUNT ft4d. t. tffk— ***One Hundred Five ( PAY TO THE ORDE" CITY OF MIAMI OF: 0 __J 44 111000044S&II1 1:0G31021521:L000&800979[;SII4 ALYMOnIZED SIGNATURE Note: Annual Registrotlon Tee (fEffective Through 12/31/2018 Y F Cop, VO N CITY OF MUM For Office Check# Use Only: 4(ggSy6 q ReGoipt# 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 860, Miami, FL jqp 33131 Email Address: MAmster@BRZoningLaw.com (2) Principal Represented: Supernova Bayshore Investments, LLC Business Address: 1.825 Coral Way, Mail Stop 6983, Miami, FL Zip 33145^ (8) 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 (51%) 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 Chive, 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 Clork 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. 8k-iTYLLERENA — MY COMMISSION # GG 175999 EXPIRES: March 5, 2022 Lobbyist Signature State of Florida, County o1bTv Notary Pab1cUnderdteis m ! , � ded Sworn to and subscribed be ore me this day of June 2018 taffy or Deputy Clerk Office of the City Clerk, 3500 Pan American Drive, Miami, FL 33133 /Phone: (305) 250-5361 / Email: clerks@miamigov.com city of Miami OFFICIAL RECEIPT Total $ __._�. ')1 �._.__ No. 4.85469 Date:. .� ('_A_i C,� /100 Dollars For:_..J...'_!-.r X7'7 A,(� ci Reference N This receipt not VALID unless dated, By; filled in and signed by authorized eni- ployoe cal department or divlslon des- Department: __ _ ignated hereon and until the City hes t r C�(,C _ _.,;,. , ....�:._: � ..� . _ Lo hy.1st -R-eglstrntl0n•.�..........:. _ _:�-�_�_::..........__...---------------------....--- •� ,; .�..�. collected the proceeds of Any checks Division: tendered as payment herein. 0 — Sales Tax $ 1:0631021521.100018009496511■ Kr102 Rev. O3J03 Dislrlbution: Waite - Custamer: Canary - Finance; Pink - Issuing Department Received from: 1 Address: city of Miami OFFICIAL RECEIPT Total $ __._�. ')1 �._.__ No. 4.85469 Date:. .� ('_A_i C,� /100 Dollars i1 „ �� OPERATING ACCOUNT t DATE 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, SUITE 850 h �'��j�' GH RTas10Wi � MIAMI, FLORIDA 33132 63-215/631 0June 12 2018 AMOUNT ' $105.00 ***One Hundred Five *********x*******+**********+*******r** 00/100 PAY ' TO THE tty ORDER CITY O MIAMI OF: , A1J1i40FQf0ull3tViQUHE 1�obbyist.Rogtst��ttton..:._...__--.. 11100C}0411.1soil, 1.06a1021S21:100018009796Sit, _ .. _ ...__<.._... ;- .- t-.:<�:—.: ,n ,. .. .......m—e4i�.o?.'i?;%=�:fa"'sT:�i?��".'C�i�.aozTw. •—..rrc_;w.,-.r:._.�•':;r:' .•"-^`--s-.-�....__, __ _ 445 GERCOW RADELL FERNANDEZ & LARK#N�g „i1 OPERATING ACCOUNT DATE 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, SUITE B50 1�11uTizUSI' ��ctttiToctoc�oioJUne 12, 2018 MIAMI, FLORIDA. 33131 �' �763-215%691 �1nnart�a.rm AMOUNT :aacmHrru:x.,� *** One Hundred rive t PAY TO THE ORDER CITY01FMIAMI OR 'i' . For:_..J...'_!-.r X7'7 A,(� ci Reference N This receipt not VALID unless dated, By; filled in and signed by authorized eni- ployoe cal department or divlslon des- Department: __ _ ignated hereon and until the City hes t r C�(,C _ _.,;,. , ....�:._: � ..� . _ Lo hy.1st -R-eglstrntl0n•.�..........:. _ _:�-�_�_::..........__...---------------------....--- •� ,; .�..�. collected the proceeds of Any checks Division: tendered as payment herein. 11000014105111' 1:0631021521.100018009496511■ Kr102 Rev. O3J03 Dislrlbution: Waite - Custamer: Canary - Finance; Pink - Issuing Department ..__;..... ,�.:-' T-➢.Z`.a::w;''Gi.�'�•%''u�?:ra':S�w^'"..'t"7<�aaia:�'aTa��n.teu�.."$SSPd�ik`Y�'".....KFt'..�`,:!"P.:iS'f1',-:�-': cc:.. 5::.......:....T3F'.Y:..�-=.:�.;;"�.::.;_.:Src: �t�. ^•.�ta::a..::'r<l 445 BJCn# %^1N DA C1 FE0NA1kInE'7 P. I AMMIb/_o i1 „ �� OPERATING ACCOUNT t DATE 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, SUITE 850 h �'��j�' GH RTas10Wi � MIAMI, FLORIDA 33132 63-215/631 0June 12 2018 AMOUNT ' $105.00 ***One Hundred Five *********x*******+**********+*******r** 00/100 PAY ' TO THE tty ORDER CITY O MIAMI OF: , A1J1i40FQf0ull3tViQUHE 1�obbyist.Rogtst��ttton..:._...__--.. 11100C}0411.1soil, 1.06a1021S21:100018009796Sit, _ .. _ ...__<.._... ;- .- t-.:<�:—.: ,n ,. .. .......m—e4i�.o?.'i?;%=�:fa"'sT:�i?��".'C�i�.aozTw. •—..rrc_;w.,-.r:._.�•':;r:' .•"-^`--s-.-�....__, __ _ 445 GERCOW RADELL FERNANDEZ & LARK#N�g „i1 OPERATING ACCOUNT DATE 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, SUITE B50 1�11uTizUSI' ��ctttiToctoc�oioJUne 12, 2018 MIAMI, FLORIDA. 33131 �' �763-215%691 �1nnart�a.rm AMOUNT :aacmHrru:x.,� *** One Hundred rive t PAY TO THE ORDER CITY01FMIAMI OR 'i' . .. .. AUTfIORIM-11 aiamTun6 _ _.,;,. , ....�:._: � ..� . _ Lo hy.1st -R-eglstrntl0n•.�..........:. _ _:�-�_�_::..........__...---------------------....--- •� ,; .�..�. ___ -.�:. , .:....:.. � . _ .. _. _ .__... -- -�-- .- .. r . -_> 11000014105111' 1:0631021521.100018009496511■ Note: Annual Registration Fee Effective Through 1.2/31/2018 RECEIVED VD� ��G C4 � For Office Checkl#--� ~ . t Use Only: is r.st�t f (� 7010 JUL • 17 Ptd 2* 06 ^\ "R�i�oJJJJJ� . Receipts/ Of i Z`E OF THE CITY Cl~EM CITY OF MlAMl CITY OF MIAMI LOBBYIST REGISTRATION FORM (1) Lobbyist Name: Haro, Maritza (Last Name, First Name, Middle Initial) Business Phone: 305-371-5300 Business Address: 200 South Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 850, Miami, FL Zip 33131 Email Address: MHaro@BRZoningLaw.com (2) Principal Represented: Supernova Bayshore Investments, LLC Business Address: 1026 Coral Way, Mail Stop 5983, Miami, FL T –_—_ Zip 33145 (3) 'Specific issue lobbyist has been retained to lobby (if representing a corporation, partnership or trust, ,give business address of chief offioer, partner, or beneficiary of same, and the naives and addresses of all persons holding, directly or indirectly, at least five percent (51%) 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 lie or she lobbies, or intends to lobby. None. Lobbyists shall pay all regisVration 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 sloes 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 2-551 t h 2-658 of the Miami City Code, as amended; Lobbyist Signature '''�•.� State of Florida, County of Miam -lo'i► Sworn to and subscribed before met I 1day of.,WM " t ry ovObenutv Clerk Office of the City Clerk, 3500 Pan American Drive, Miami, FL 33133 / Phone, (305) 250-5361 / Email: oterks@iniainigov.com I '0 1 1 8 '20 S ojuly 17',�, -VARD, S bEZA,`�'- FERNAN ATING AC�09..O.T CAYNE BOULI; 'MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 63.215/631 AMOUNT $105.00 -f Z"lc i � 41' ales Tax $ Received from:, — 0 Total $ Addie ls, — For, u e, This Flerelpt not VALID ulless 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. By: __ Department: Division: — r C/; No. 485967 Date: /100 Dollars- 2�t�2 Rev, 133!133 Distribution: Mite - Customer; Conary - Finance; Pink - Issuing Department 4f VP1 * I.tlll Inti k C O H �V BUILDING DEPARTMENT Transaction Statement Financial Transaction ID: 561749 Transaction Date: Nov 29 2018 3:53PM Permit Number: FEE SUMMARY W Ben Fernandez, Es. obo Supernova Bayshore Invest, LLC (305)377-6235 Fee Category Fee Fee Description Quantity Unit Type Amount Code HEARING BOARDS - MS -239 APPEAL - HISTORIC 0.0000 N/A $525.00 APPLICATION/APPEAL DESIGNATION/CERTIFICATE OF APPROPIATENESS HEARING BOARDS - PUBLIC HEARING MS -226 PUBLIC HEARING - LU POLICY 33.0000 NGH X HRGS $148.50 1.5.4 HEARING BOARDS - PUBLIC HEARING MS -241 PUBLIC HEARING - MEETING 1,0000 HEARINGS $4.50 MAIL NOTICE - APPLICANT/APPEALLANT Total: $678.00 Rev. Jul/02/2012 Generated on Nov/29/2018 3:53 PM G�1Y pfid� * lean um k AT of Atial-ni BUILDING DEPARTMENT Transaction Statem( City of Miami Financial Transaction ID: 561749 F ...The city of Miami.. 3:Reference Number; 20185:30006-71 Permit Number: Transaction Date: Nov 29 2018 53PM Da�t�/Time; 11/20/2018 8;8;00 PM FEE SUMMARY Fee Category Fee Fee Description Code HEARING BOARDS - MS -239 APPEAL - HISTORIC APPLICATION/APPEAL DESIGNATION/CERTIFIC/ APPROPIATENESS HEARING BOARDS - PUBLIC HEARING MS -226 PUBLIC HEARING - LU K 1.5,4 HEARING BOARDS - PUBLIC HEARING MS -241 PUBLIC HEARING - MEE MAIL NOTICE - APPLICANT/APPEALLW LM Payments 201803006-71-1 Trans TD; 561740 Business Name; COM Fee Payment Pee Name; APPEAL - HISTORIC DESIGNATION/CE RTIhTCATE OF APPROPIATENESS Amount; Pee Payment X52 5.OQ Ree Name; PUBLIC HEARING - LU POLICY 1.5.4 Amount; Fee Payment $146,50 Fee Name; PUBLIC; HEARING - TICE - APPUCANT/APPEALLANCMEETING MAIL NO amount: $4.50 Total: $6"16,00 1 ,ITEM TOTAL; X678.00 TOTAL; � Visa $678.00 Credit Card Nbr.;;tear $678.00 Payment I` credit *.r=r a.***06401 Auth Code: Q6C30D ental Received; i"" 111111IIIIII3III�III�III0IIII0III6IIIIIII-IIIIX 6III' 6.00 coal Rev. Jul/02/2012 Generated on Nov/29/2018 3:53 PM