OA-P¢6 PL STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS & PROFESSIONAL REGULATION FLORIDA REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL BOARD j FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS & | PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, ; DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE, 4 4 Petitioner, { v. CASE NO. 9884273 i ‘ 9834288 ; ALBERT L. STRICKLEN AND © j THOMAS ALLAN RIDDLE, st : E) Respondents. o j Ea 4 ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT - S The Florida Department of Business & Professional Regulation, Division of Real Estate 4 4 ("Petitioner") files this Administrative Complaint against Albert L. Stricklen and Thomas Allan Riddle (“Respondents"), and alleges: F ESSENTIAL ALLEGATIONS OF MATERIAL FACT 1. Petitioner is a state government licensing and regulatory agency charged with the responsibility and duty to prosecute Administrative Complaints pursuant to the laws of the State of Florida, including Section 20.165 and Chapters 120, 455 and 475 of the Florida Statutes, and the rules promulgated thereunder. | 2. Respondent Albert L. Stricklen i is cu tly a Florida state-certified general eal estate appraiser having been issued license RZ0000315 i in accordance with fh Chapter 475 Part-II of the Florida Statutes. The last license the State is issued | 'o Respondent Was as a a state- certifi fied general real , estate appraiser at 13900 Yale Hammock Road, Umatilla, Florida 32784-8149. 4 FDBPR v. Albert L. Stricklen Case No. 9884273 Administrative Complaint hie 3. Respondent Thomas Allan Riddle is currently a Florida state-certified general real estate a Ses ee ee appraiser having been issued license RZ0001451 in accordance with Chapter 475 Part II of the Florida Statutes. The last license the State issued to Respondent was as a state-certified general real estate appraiser at 1371 Devon Road, Winter Park, Florida 32789. 4. On or about December 5, 1997, Respondents developed and communicated a narrative Use Value Appraisal report (Report) for the Lake County School Board for a vacant land site commonly known as a “thirty-acre site located on the West side of Round Lake Road, about 1290 Feet North of State Road 46, Lake County, Florida” (subject Property). A copy of the Use Report ll A a ei aA i ili lie. is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Administrative Complaint Exhibit 1. 5. Respondents estimated the use value of the subject property to be five hundred and forty thousand dollars as of December 5, 1997. 6. By letter dated December 11, 1997, the Lake County School Board (Client) requested that the Respondents prepare an appraisal report with certain specifications. A copy of the letter is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Administrative Complaint Exhibit 2. i i | 7. By letter dated March 2, 1998, Respondent Stricklen developed and communicated an Addenda to the Report, with an attached vacant land sales analysis chart, and estimated the market value of the subject property as $510 000. A copy of the Addenda is attached hereto and MAL, dba ba incorporated herein as Administrative Complaint Exhibit 3. 8. By letter dated November 10, 1998, Respondent Pro id -d P iti ner Wi response to the allegations of the complaint ¢ during the course of the official i investigation. A copy of the correspondence is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Administrative Complaint 2 Sebdih ab ee raced i i eA il ak a a li tak ts FDBPR v. Albert L. Stricklen Case No. 9884273 Administrative Complaint Exhibit 4. - 9. Petitioner obtained an expert review of the Report and Addenda. A copy of the review is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Administrative Complaint Exhibit 5. 10. In the transmittal letter dated December 9, 1997, as attached to the Report, the Respondents represented that the subject property was a limited market property. The letter included a definition of limited market property as “property that has relatively few potential buyers at a particular time.. have limited conversion potential and consequently are often called special-purpose or special-design properties.” it. The letter also stated that “if the property’s current use is so specialized that there is no demonstrable market for it, such as the case with the subject property, but use is viable and likely to continue, the appraiser may render an estimate of use value.” 12. The above-referenced statements are misleading as the subject property was vacant land, and did not represent a special use property. 13. The Report and Addenda failed to include the subject property’s real estate tax and assessment information, and indicated-that this data was not relevant. 14. The Report and Addenda failed to discuss the zoning and future land use, and indicated that this data was not relevant. 15. The Report and Addenda failed to discuss a large excavat t and landfill located on the North and West sides of the subject property, and any potential impact on the subject property’s value. 16. The Report and Addenda failed to discuss the four-year age of comparable sale number 3 Te RRA RR Ae ke A i kk ale eile cl i A li ls en wR ie a i ie a ib i A Hi ik ak FDBPR v. Albert L. Stricklen Case No. 9884273 Administrative Complaint one, and in light of its age, its appropriateness as a comparable sale to the subject property. 17. The Report and Addenda failed to discuss the substantial difference in unit prices of comparable sales numbered one and two. 18. The Report and Addenda provided a large adjustment for size without stating sufficient support for this analysis. 19. The Report and Addenda adjusted improperly the comparable sales for road frontage ‘without sufficient support. 20. The Report failed to address or discuss the pending contract price for the subject property of $500,000. 21. The Report failed to analyze or discuss the difference between the contract price and the Report and Addenda’s estimated market value for the subject property. . 22. The Respondents improperly developed a use appraisal for the subject property, rather than an estimate of market value for the property’s highest and best use. 23. At the least, once Respondent Stricklen developed the Addenda, changing the Report to one of an estimate of market value, it failed to state the subject property’s highest and best use. 24, The above-stated errors resulted in a misleading and unsupported Report and Addenda for the subject property. —~ COUNT I Based upon the foregoing, Respondent Albert L. Stricklen has violated a standard for the _ development or communication of a real estate appraisal or other provision of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (1997 and 1998) in violation of Section 475.624(14), Florida 4 ce a as ik a i ew i A ili iio ll ee Rl SB ae a lll i A i Re db FDBPR v. Albert L. Stricklen Case No. 9884273 Administrative Complaint Statutes (1997). _ COUNT I Based upon the foregoing, Respondent Albert L. Stricklen is guilty of having failed to exercise reasonable diligence in developing an appraisal report in violation of Section 475.624(15), Florida Statutes (1997). . COUNT HI Based upon the foregoing, Respondent Thomas Allan Riddle has violated a standard for the development or communication of a real estate appraisal or other provision of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (1997 and 1998) in violation of Section 475.624(14), Florida Statutes (1997). ~ COUNT IV Based upon the foregoing, Respondent Thomas Allan Riddle is guilty of having failed to exercise reasonable diligence in developing an appraisal report in violation of Section 475 .624(15), Florida Statutes (1997). WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully requests the Florida Real Estate Appraisal Board, or the Department of Business and Professional Regulation, as may be appropriate, to issue a Final Order as final agency action finding the Respondent(s) guilty as charged. The penalties which may be imposed for violation(s) of Chapter 475 of the Florida Statutes, depending upon t the severity of the offense(s), include: revocation of the license, registration, or certificate; suspension of the license, registration or certificate for a period not to exceed | ten (10) years; imposition. of an administrative fine of up to $5,000 for each count or offense; imposition of 1 investigative costs: 5 re elas kk it ili i ae ae i ak kk cae bales etal eee a ener ters onli i i ial bli il a FDBPR v. Albert L. Stricklen Case No. 9884273 Administrative Complaint issuance of a reprimand; imposition of probation subject to terms including, but not limited to, requiring the licensee, registrant, or certificate holder to complete and pass additional appraisal education courses; publication, or any combination of the foregoing which may apply. See Section 475.624, Florida Statutes and Rule 61J1-8.002, Florida Administrative Code. The penalties which may be imposed for violation(s) of Chapter 455 of the F lorida Statutes, depending upon the severity of the offense(s), include: revocation of the license, registration, or certificate; suspension of the license, registration, or certificate for a period not to exceed ten (10) years; imposition of an administrative fine of up to $5,000 for each count or offense; imposition of investigative costs; issuance of a reprimand; imposition of probation subject to terms including, but not limited to, requiring the licensee, registrant, or certificate holder to complete and pass additional appraisal education courses; publication; restriction of practice; injunctive or mandamus relief; imposition of a cease and desist order; or any combination of the foregoing which may apply. See § 455.227, Fla. Stat. (1999) and Fla. Admin. Code R. 61J1-8.002. SIGNED this, 4 dayof_ feb , 2002. Director, Division of Real Estate rey Sie nearer Ais i a i ee ie = bike 8 et i RM a A ei ite i a le, cis FDBPR v. Albert L. Stricklen Case No. 9884273 Administrative Complaint ATTORNEY FOR PETITIONER Sunia Y. Marsh , Fla. Bar No. 0068896 FDBPR-Division of Real Estate Legal Section 400 W. Robinson Street, N308A Orlando, Florida 32802-1772 (407) 481-5632 (407) 317-7260 - FAX PCP: LM/EC/CK 2/4/02 NOTICE TO RESPONDENTS . PLEASE BE ADVISED that mediation under Section 120.573 of the Florida Statutes, is not available for administrative disputes involving this type of agency action. PLEASE BE FURTHER ADVISED that pursuant to this Administrative Complaint you may request, within the time proscribed, a hearing to be conducted in this matter in accordance with Sections 120.569 and 120.57 of the Florida Statutes; that you have the right, at your option and expense, to be represented by counsel or other qualified representative in this matter; and that you have the right, at your option and expense, to take testimony, to call and cross-examine witnesses, and to have subpoena and subpoena duces tecum issued on your behalf if a formal hearing is requested. PLEASE BE FURTHER ADVISED that if you do not file an Election of Rights form or some other responsive pleading with the Petitioner within twenty-one (21) days of receipt of this Administrative Complaint, the Petitioner will file with the Florida Real Estate Appraisal Board a motion requesting an informal hearing and entry of an appropriate Final Order which may result in the suspension or revocation of your real estate license or registration. Please see the enclosed Explanation of Rights and Election of Rights form. A Use Value Appraisal of - 02 HAR -6 AM G:b2 A 30 Acre Potential Public School Site Located on the West Side of Round’ aN Lake Road, about 1290 Feet North of State Road 46, Lake County, Florida For Mr. Jerry Cox Assistant for Business and Support Lake County School Board 201 West Burleigh Boulevard Tavares, Florida 32778-2496 Date of Valuation: December 5, 1997 Prepared by: Albert L. Stricklen, MAI State-Certified General Real Estate ® Appraiser 0 00003 15 ‘Thomas A. A. é State- Certified General cent Real Estate Appraiser 0001431 sail. A te oils Ke einlania ae ok a. li I a NA i LC Pre ee ee arenes A a MN i TABLE OF CONTENTS TRANSMITTAL LETTER CERTIFICATION DEFINITIONS GENERAL ASSUMPTIONS GENERAL LIMITING CONDITIONS SUMMARY OF SALIENT FACTS _ PHOTOGRAPHS PURPOSE, FUNCTION AND SCOPE OF THE APPRAISAL IDENTIFICATION OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AREA MAP AND ANALYSIS NEIGHBORHOOD MAP NEIGHBORHOOD ANALYSIS SITE SKETCH DESCRIPTION OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY SPECIAL USE THE VALUATION PROCESS SALES COMPARISON APPROACH VACANT LAND SALES ANALYSIS CHART ee eee ns i i i i a i sa i ik i, Mek le i ik a a a ek le i ae esi a, AR Be LM ee i AMO ll MA i ek VACANT LAND SALES MAP RECONCILIATION AND FINAL VALUE ESTIMATE APPRAISER QUALIFICATIONS ADDENDA N vee sper Seen, ee ee ik, ls tk i ail ey oi ill al i j 4 i 4 4 i Stricklen Appraisal Services, P.A. 4 36 West Dicie Drive Telephone: (352) 589-512 589-9207 Eustis, FL 32726 ~ Fax: (352) 589. December 9, 1997 Mr. Jerry Cox7™” Assistant for Business and Support Lake County School Board 201 West Burleigh Boulevard Tavares, Florida 32778-2496 - Dear Mr. Cox: - As you requested, we have made the inspections, investigations. and analyses necessary to appraise the real property located on the west side of Round Lake Road, about 1,290 feet north of State Road 46, within unincorporated Lake County, Florida. The Subject property consists of about 30 acres of land which is being considered as a potential site for a public school. The subject is further described by both narrative and legal descriptions contained within the text of the following appraisal report. The purpose of this appraisal was to estimate the use value of the fee simple interest in the subject property. Use value is defined as the value a specific property has for a specific use. As stated in the Eleventh Edition of the Appraisal of Real Estate in the discussion of use value, the realities of current real estate practice require appraisers frequently to consider other types of value in addition to market value. One of these types. use value. is a concept based on the productivity of an economic good. When appraising a type of property that is not commonly exchanged, it may be difficult to determine whether an estimate of market value or use value is appropriate. Such limited market properties can cause special problems for appraisers. 1 limited market property is a propern: that has relatively few potential buyers at a particular time. These properties usually have limited conversion potential and consequently are often called.special-purpose or special-design ‘properties. Examples of such properties include houses of worship. museums. schools. public buildings and club houses, ee eT - Ifthe property's current use is so specialized that there is no demonstrable market for it. such as the case‘with the subject property: but the use is Viable and likely to continue. the appraiser may fender an estimate of use vaiue. riVE COMPLAINT i oO lll i ii lil ial lk Hi le i Sl kB oe SHULL ak lic lia i A ls i i in iil se i. i i ! ‘ In our opinion. the analysis of the subject property under the use value concept as a schcol site is appropriate for this report. The estimate of value is made under market conditions prevailing as of December 5. 1997. Use value. fee simple interest and other appraisal terms are defined within the text of the following appraisal report. Based upori our investigation into those matters which affect market value and by virme of our experience dfid training, we have estimated that the use value of the unencumbered fee simple interest in the subject property. effective December 3. 1997. to be: FIVE HUNDRED FORTY THOUSAND DOLLARS ($540,000). This letter of transmittal precedes and is hereby made a part of the complete summary appraisai report which follows, setting forth the most pertinent data and reasoning which was used in order to reach the final value estimate. This appraisal was developed as a complete appraisal and the following report is a summary appraisal report. The appraisal is subject to the "General Assumptions" and "General Limiting Conditions" which have been included within the text of this report. These assumptions and limiting conditions are considered usual for this type of assignment. The certifications included in this report are in accordance with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice Standard Rule 2-3, and with the Appraisal Institute Supplemental Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. effective January |. 1991. It is a certification under Florida Real Estate License Law Chapter 475. Albert L. Suricklen is a State-Certified General Real Estate” Appraiser. 0000315 and Thomas A. Riddle is a State- Certified General Real Estate Appraiser. 0001451 under this program. The use of this report is subject to the requirements of the State of Florida relating to review by the Real Estate Appraisal Board. Division of Real Estate. Department of Professional Regulation. As of the date of this report. Albert L. Stricklen and Thomas A. Riddle have completed the continuing education requirements for State-Certified General Real Estate Appraisers ;PLAINT i ll i i ie, lll i i 4 i ant We do not authorize the out of context quoting from or partial reprinting of this appraisal report. Further, neither ail nor any part of the appraisal shall be disseminated to the general public by the use of media for public communication without my prior written consent. The use of this report is subject to the requirements of the Appraisal Institute relating to review by its duly authorized representatives. N sees Respectfully submitted. Albert L. Stricklen, MAI State-Certified Genera] ‘Real Estate Appraiser 0000315 Thomas A. Riddle, MAI State-Certified General Real Estate Appraiser 0001451 efh/ALS/TAR 97-28 _ - i Ml OB = ith i i lies, iiliaadi iki tii, Me ct i i ia ii i i i a CERTIFICATION I certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief: ----the statements of fact contained in this report are true and correct. ~---the reported analyses. opinions. and conclusions are limited only by the repored assumptions and limiting conditions, and are my personal, unbiased professional analyses. opinions. and conclusioas. ----[ have no present or prospective interest in the property that is the subject of this report. and'I have no personal interest or bias with respect to the parties involved. ----my compensation is not contingent upon the reporting of a predetermined value or direction in value that favors the cause of the client, the amount of the vaiue estimate. the attainment of a stipulated result. or the occurrence of a subsequent event. ----my analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed. and this report has been prepared. in conformity with the Code of Professional Ethics of the Appraisal Institure. the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice, the Supplemental Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice, the Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice of the Appraisal Institute. ~--- have made a personal inspection of the property that is the subject of this report. ~---No one provided significant professional assistance to the person signing this report. ----as of the date of this report. | have completed the requirements of the continuing education program of the Appraisal Institute. ~---use of this report is subject to the requirements of the Appraisai Institute relating to review by its duly authorized representatives. Respectfully suomitted. ste fr : - Albert L. Siricklen. MAL State-Cenitied Generai Real Estate Appraiser 0000315 ok sh ibis ch il i cll lk ee hi tl i dk Ree sen a li peek ebi cilia A A a Sl sina io Ml CERTIFICATION I certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief: ----the statements of fact contained in this report are true and correct, ----the reported analyses. opinions, and conclusions are limited only by the reported assumptions and limiting conditions. and are my personal. unbiased professional analyses. opinions. and conclusions. ----[ have no present or prospective interest in the property that is the subject of this report. and I have no personal interest or bias with respect to the parties involved. ----my compensation is not contingent upon the reporting of a predetermined value or direction in value that favors the cause of the client. the amount of the value estimate. the attainment of a stipulated result. or the occurrence of a subsequent event. ----my analyses. opinions, and conclusions were developed. and this report has been prepared. in conformity with the Code of Professional Ethics of the Appraisal Institute, the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice, the Supplemental Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice, the Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice of the Appraisal Institute. ----I have made a personal inspection of the property that is the subject of this report. =o one provided significant professional assistance to the person si gning this report. ~---as of the date of this report. I have completed the requirements of the continuing education program of the Appraisal Institute. ----use of this report is subject to the reauirements of the Appraisai Institute relating to review ov its duly authorized representatives. Respectfully submitted. Thomas A. Riddle. MAL _ State-Certitied: Generai iva whee ek alte st Nile i Rh le ik lis i i i A HR le SR a. DEFINITION OF USE VALUE Use vaiue is defined as the vaiue a specific property has for a specific use. As stated in the Eleventh Edition of the Appraisal of Real Estate. in the discussion of use value. the realities of © current real estate practice require appraisers frequently to consider other types of value in addition to market value. One or these types, use value. is a concept based on the productivity of an economics good. When appraising a type of property that is not commonly exchanged, it ma be difficult to-determine whether an estimate of market value or use value is appropriate. Such. limited market properties can cause special problems for appraisers. 4 limited market property is @ property that has relatively few potential buyers at a particular time. These properties usuaily have limited conversion potential and consequently are often cailed special-purpose or special- design properties. Examples of such properties include houses of worship, museums, schools. public buildings and club houses. If the property’s current use is so specialized that there is no demonstrable market for it. such as the case with the subj ect property. but the use is viable and likely to continue. the appraiser may render an estimate of use value. In my opinion. the anaiysis of the subject property under the use value concept as a school site is appropriate for this report. DEFINITION OF FEE SIMPLE ESTATE Absolute ownership unencumbered by any other interest or estate: subject only to the limitations of eminent domain. escheat. police power. and taxation. SOURCE OF DEFINITIONS The Dictionary of Reai Estate Appraisal. Appraisal Institute. Third Edition. 1993. The Appraisal of Resi Zytate. \ppraisal Lystitute. £ Flew enth Edition, 196. COMPLAINT iil fi is hl ei i Ni ia ll i li i as a i A il i Ai at i i i gi il. otha, alte GENERAL ASSUMPTIONS I. The legal description used in this report is assumed to be correct. 2. No survey of the property has been made by the appraisers and no responsibility is assumed in connection with such matters. Sketches in this report are included only to assist the reader in visualizing the property. : 3. No responsibility is assumed for matters of a legal nature affecting title to the property nor is an opinion of title rendered. The title is assumed to be good and merchantable. 4. Information and data furnished by others is usually assumed to be true, correct and reliable. When such information and data appears to be dubious and when it is critical to the appraisal. a reasonable effort has been made to verify all such information: however. no responsibility for its accuracy is assumed by the appraisers. . 5. All mortgages. liens. encumbrances. leases and servitudes have been disregarded unless so specified within the report. The property is appraised as though under responsible ownership and competent management. , ; 6. It is assumed that there are no hidden or unapparent conditions of the property, subsoil or structures which would render it more or less valuable. No responsibility is assumed for such conditions or for engineering which may be required to discover them. 7. Tt is assumed that there is full compliance with all applicable federal. state and local environmental regulations and laws unless noncompliance is stated. defined and considered in the appraisal report. 8. Tt is assumed that all applicable zoning and use regulations and restrictions have been complied with. unless a nonconformity has been stated. defined and considered in the appraisai report. . 9. It is assumed that all required licenses. consents or other legislative or administrative authority: from any local, state or national governmental or private entity or organization have been or can be obtained or renewed for any use on which the value estimate contained in this report is based. ; - : ~ 10. It is assumed that the uulization of the land and improvements is within the boundaries or property lines of the property described and that there is no encroachment or trespass unless noted Within the report. i Sl BoB aed ki tbh td 2 ian ile i lie i a A ie, i ll ka i Nak a i kl i i i GENERAL LIMITING CONDITIONS |. The appraisers will not be required to give testimony or appear in court because of having made this appraisal. with reference to the property in question. unless arrangements have been previously made thereof. 2. Possession of the report, or copy thereof. does not Carry with it the right of publication. it may not be‘used for any purpose by any person other than the party to whom it is addressed without the ‘Written consent of the appraisers. and in any event only with proper written qualifications and only in its entirety. 3. The distribution of the total valuation in this report between land and improvements applies only under the reported highest and best use of the property. The allocations of value for land and improvements must not be used in conjunction with any other appraisal and are invalid if so used. - 4+. No environmental impact studies were either requested or made in conjunction with this appraisal. and the appraisers hereby reserves the right to alter. amend. revise. or rescind any of the value opinions based upon any subsequent environmental impact studies. research or investigation. 5. Neither all nor any part of the contents of this report, or copy thereof, shall be conveyed to the public through advertising, public relations. news. sales or any other media without written consent and approval of the appraisers. Nor shall the appraiser. firm or any professional organization of which the appraisers are members or candidates be identified without written consent of the appraisers. 6. The existence of hazardous material was not observed by the appraisers. The appraisers have no knowiedge of the existence of such materials on or in the property. The appraisers. however. are not qualified to detect such substances, The presence of potentially hazardous materials may affect the value of the property. The Value estimate is predicated on the assumption that there is no such material on or in the property that would cause a loss in value. No responsibility is assumed for any such conditions. or for any expertise or engineering knowledge required to discover'them. The client is urged to retain an expert in this field. if desired. 7, The Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA") became effective January 26. 1992. We have not made a specific compliance survey and analysis of this property to determine vehether or noi it is in conformity with the various detailed requirements of the ADA. It is possible that a compliance survey or the property, together with a detailed analysis of the requirements of the ADA, could reveal that the property is not in compliance with one or more or the requirements of the Act. If so. this fact could have 2 negative erfect upon the value of the property. Since we have no direct evidence relating to this issue. we did not consider possible noncompliance with the requirements of ADA‘in estimating the vaiue of the property. OLS Cay i i oi Hata sil, li A a, A al li aa. cae 1 Kes 8. Acceptance of and/or use of this appraisal report constitutes acceptance of the General A \ssumptions and General Limiting Conditions. COMPLAINT. foregoing lai li, a i ik ct A lin il i i ic a ai le | ibis ik Ma faery Grane warts Mieevdliaked MAR ianactinbond. SUMMARY OF SALIENT FACTS OWNER'S NAME PROPERTY LOCATION PROPERTY TYPE DATE OF VALUATION ZONING SPECIAL USE COST APPROACH TO VALUE SALES COMPARISON APPROACH TO VALUE INCOME APPROACH TO VALUE RECONCILIATED FINAL USE VALUE ESTIMATE David L. Brown West side of Round Lake Road. about 1.290 feet north of State Road 46. with Section 27, Township 19 South. Range 27 East. Lake County, Florida. About 30 acres of improved grove. December 5, 1997 A. Agriculture. Lake County Public school site The cost approach was not used in this: assignment. $540,000 The income approach to value was not used i in this assignment. $540.000 EXRe tie, aii. ia sia i a i, th A A i i ck Hl i A le alk Hl I. Street scene. North elevation view of Round Lake Road; Subject property on left. + tn cnn concen een ann UOMPLAINT. { MOREE ME ! 2. Street scene: South elevation view ¢ Subject propérty on Fi a g lla al Re a a ‘ BD UNIV]. Mt i i A Re ph il Ml I ' ; j ° S... Typical interior view of grove gn subject property, i ; ‘ ect property ‘ OU Sa ST RE TEE TRE | TY y. bject propert dary of su West elevation view of south bound 4 . ATIVE COMPLAINT ge SNR SRE coe rap nee eee ree ject property, D most boundary of su evation view of western DSR RRP onewee ET cere ge Ee Southwest elevation view of north boundary of subject property. 5 RATIVE COMPLAINT ct property. 2n subje ove on gr “pical interior vi Ts a ae bhbe al, i oe Roe kk il a A i A i i ik ka a a Aine ti ie eis, PURPOSE OF THE APPRAISAL The purpose of the appraisal was to estimate the use value of the fee simple interest in the sudject property as of the effective date of this appraisal. December 3, 1997. FUNCTION OF THE APPRAISAL The function-ef this appraisal is for use in site evaluation with regard to the sale and purchase of the subject property for use as a public school site. PROCESS OF COLLECTING, CONFIRMING AND REPORTING DATA For the purposes of this report. this process is defined as the extent of the process of collecting, confirming, and reporting data used in this report included research to find and verify vacant. arm's length sales which occurred over the previous four years and were located near the subject site. The sales used in this analysis were the most proximate to the subject and were indicative of current use value of the subject property. Sale prices, as well as the terms of sale were based on recorded documents and oral confirmation by the seller or buyer, or agent for the seller or buyer when possible. If, after reasonable efforts to contact a seller or buyer or agent for seller or buyer have failed and the sale appears to be a normal, market oriented transaction. the confirmation of the sale may be based on publicly recorded documents such as a warranty deed. As may be noted in the appropriate section of this report, sales data is reported separately in both a narrative and summary chart format. PMPLAINT IDENTIFICATION OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY Location The subject property is located on the west side of Round Lake Road. about 1,290 feet north of State Road 46, in Section 27, Township i9 South, Range 27 East, Lake County, Florida. see Hie, MRR ee ll ll Legal Description The subject property is legally described as: . North % of Northeast ‘4 of Northeast ' of Southeast '‘4 and Southeast % of Northeast “4 of Southeast 4 and Northwest 4 of Northeast % of Southeast % and South % of Northeast % of Northeast “4 of Southeast 4 in Section 27. Township 19 South. Range 27 East. Lake County, Florida. Flood Hazard Statement According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency Flood Insurance Rate Map, Community Panel No. 120421 0250 B, effective April 1, 1982 the subject property is located within Zone C. Zone C areas are outside the (500-year flood boundary and are areas of minimal flooding. a lille ice A i a ak: la 4 i Real Estate Tax Information 4 Under the special use valuation analysis where the site is to be purchased by the Lake County School Board, the subject property would be exempt from real estate taxes. Therefore. the real estate taxes have no relevance with regard to the estimation of the subject's use value. Zoning . os ARI A ee The subject property is zoned A, Agriculture. by Lake County is established as a transitional zoning district. In that the site is potentially being purchased by the Lake County Schooi Boara for use as a public school site. the present A. Agricultural District has no relevance’ on the site’s valuation as a special use site. RATIVE COMPLAINT ta os lie ei ei i ii fewer a ret ce Sane a ee eee | ; F i i i on Future Land Use The future land use designation is Suburban. As with the zoning designation. since the property is potentially being puchased by the Lake County School Board for a public school site use. the present Suburban land use designation has no relevance on the site’s valuation as a special use site. Brief History The subject property is currently under the ownership of David L. Brown. P.O. Box 256. Mount Dora, Florida. The subject is currently under contract for sale and purchase. The sale price is $16.667.67 per surveyed acre based on a size of about 30 acres or $500,000. The seller is David L. Brown and the buyer is the School Board of Lake County. The contract is contingent upon the subject land being approved for use as a public school facility. A copy of this contract has been included in the addendum of this report. on { . Area Map eed ao oo ia VCLUSIA COUNTY PL “TT SS vewusia COUNTY = ~ Li take coum Map of the zo fal > Mid-Florida Area inciuaing Orange, Osceola, Seminole, and Lake Counter > VE COMPLAINT reer 1 la dis ak ak ca alles iis i kk a ll eo ai i lle ti 5 cl ll aii i ait a se. ei A i ca a ani MN il al AREA ANALYSIS Environmental Forces Location The Orlando Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) is located in the geographical center of Florida and Gévers approximately 3.514 square miles in Orange, Seminole, Osceola and Lake Counties. Orlando, Winter Park. Kissimmee/St. Cloud and south Seminole County comprise the primary base which covers approximately 300 square miles and is the hub of activity in Central Florida. The Orlando Metropolitan Statistical Area is geographically located 148 miles southwest of Jacksonville, 57 miles west of Cape Kennedy, 220 miles north of Miami. and 87 miles east of Tampa, Florida. Historical Overview The Central Florida area was originally a citrus and agricultural center. Gradually, other industries such as electronics, manufacturing, distribution, and most importantly, tourism, began to thrive and the area's growth gained momentum. In 1956. the Glen L. Martin Company, a predecessor of the Martin Marietta Corporation, opened a defense plant in Orlando that brought 11,000 skilled employees to the Orlando area within a few years. In 1961. the space industry in Central Florida was launched. The first phase of Walt Disney World. which included the Magic Kingdom and resort hotels. opened publicly in October 1971. The opening of EPCOT (Experimental Prototype Community of Tomorrow) in October 1982 helped boost the total annual visitor count at Walt Disney World - to over 21,750,000 during 1985. Disney World no longer releases attendance figures. Other theme parks such as Universal Studios. Wet-N-Wild. Disney MGM Studios and Sea World have also made a major contribution ta the area economy. The Orlando area has become an international tourist destination and will continue to be the driving force behind Central Florida's economy. . As previously stated. the historical character of the area had been agricultural with the production and processing of'citrus being the predominant facet of the area agricultural industry. For many years. Lake County was the second largest citrus—producing county in the State of Florida a had approximately 125.000 acres in active citrus production. This agricultural orientation and character was dramaucally akered by a series of disastrous reezes which occurred trom December or 1981 ul hrough December of 1989. These treezes killed approximately 117.000 acres or the existing [75.900 acres of citrus. -\s a result of these freezes. the character of the area is in transition from agricultural to a character more closely related to tourism and residential retirement housing. « Thé inciusion ef Leake County in the Orlando ‘ ws MRE Rl ll le ci i ce i a a ili wi li a iia ik as UR BR metropolitan Statistical Area is likely to hasten this transition. Lake County is rapidly becoming a satellite community of the Orlando/Orange County area. Climate The mild climate in Central Florida is an ideal environment for work and play activity. The average temperature is about 72 degrees and the area has an average rainfall of about 30 inches per year. The terrain averages about 127 feet above Mean Sea Level (MSL). and the prevailing winds are sdtitherly at about nine miles per hour. The humidity averages about 55% and in general the area approaches being subtropical in nature. This climate character enables vear round activity which is not hampered by seasonal cold weather which would inhibit driving, transportation of goods or other outdoor activities. The only exception to this fairly mild climate has been the previously mentioned series of freezes which occurred from 1981 — 1989. The freezes, although disastrous to the citrus industry were of short duration and are not the normal climate pattern for the area. . In summary, the natural and manmade environmental forces present in the Orlando MSA are a positive influence on property values. The Orlando MSA's central location within the state of Florida as well as its extensive interstate and state road network provide locational characteristics which have a positive effect on property values. The historical growth patterns of the area indicate a continued positive influence on properties in the MSA. The climatic conditions, which approach being subtropical in nature, are such that year round outside activity is possible. Based on these factors, we have concluded that the environmental forces in the area have a positive effect on property values. Social Forces Popuiation There was an approximate’ 5.4% annuai average increase in population in the Oriando Metropolitan Statistical Area from 1970 to 1980. which ranked the Orlando MSA 14th among the nation's fastest growing metropolitan areas. The annual average growth rate from 1980 to 1990 was about 5.3%. The Orlando MSA population projections from 1990 to 2000 are shown on the following chart. & COMPLAINT [ coud AR be ae ee, i ls. ck is a tk ile. lh i li Hk lll i il i ei el a lia a i i F { i %Annual County Projected % Average Area 1995 199 2000 Increase Increase Increase Orange 767,000 777,556 846,700 79,700 10.4 2.1 Osceola 126,000 139,724 160,600 34,600 27.5 5.5 Seminole 347,300 329,031 360,900 13,600 3.9 0.8 Lake 179,000 182,309 201,200 22,200 12.4 2.5 MSA 1,420,000 1,428,620 1,569,400 149,400 10.5 2.1 The decrease in the growth rate projected through the year 2000 is partially a result of much of the MSA becoming more urbanized as a result of previous growth. As an area becomes more densely populated, the growth rate tends to slow. Additional slowing of the rate of growth is the result of government services and area roadways which are becoming inadequate to handle current and projected traffic amounts. Plans are currently underway to slow development expansion by utilization of concurrency laws which, in general, will prohibit new construction and development in areas where support services and roadways are inadequate to support the new development. Developers will be required to wholly or partially install support services and infrastructures prior to new development in any given area. The overall effect of these proposed regulations will be to slow development in the area. The average age of the population of the Orlando MSA is younger than the Florida population average, and there appears to be a steady trend toward an even younger population. The median age in the Orlando area was last reported at 33.3 years versus 37.6 years for the State of Florida. Current projections indicate the 25 to 44 year old age group is expected to increase at a greater rate than other age groups betweén the years 1990 and 2000. Lake County population projections tend to show that this 25-44 year age group has the lease projected rate of increase. This is primarily the result of Lake County becoming more of’a retirement area for Central Florida: 20 + Prete oe We See eee aii i i ik li tl ch i a ll a il alias i iil ii i li i lei SMBH i la li ies aaa, a A comparison of the projected increases of the Lake County population is as follows: - Annual % ' Average Age Group 1996 200 Increase Increase Increase 25-44 41,075 42,907 1,832 4.5 Ll * 45-64 41.934 49.438 7.504 17.9 4.5 65+ 52.744 59,154 6.410 12.2 3.1 Employment The Orlando MSA economic base is diversified. with tourism. defense. light manufacturing. and distribution facilities being the driving forces. Most economists consider Orlando to be Florida's strongest and most diversified economy. Per capita income figures are useful in showing trends over time but are not necessarily good indicators of the economic position of a typical household. Per capita income is based on total income which in tum is comprised of three components: earnings, transfer payments (money received by individuals from programs such as Social Security and AFDC); and dividends. interest, and rent. The per capita income for the Orlando MSA is as follows: Per Capita Income, 1990-1994 (Orlando MSA) Area 1990 1992 1994 Lake $16,278 $17,327 318.269 Orange - $17,734 $18.921 $20.469 ~ Osceola | . $14,408 $15.261 $16.256 Seminole $18.630 $19.696 $21.815 MSA $17.468 — $18.572 $20.119 Based on U.S. Deparment of Commerce’ data. per capita income for Lake Cougty residents in = 1990 was $16.275. By 1994. Lake County per capita income had increased to $18.269. This difference amounts to an annual average increase of 3.1%. ibis ae i ie ii Ml la ak lg a li il A il i be i thes ato ak li, Ferra Cte enn See Stee ee sem i ee A UR Tourism The most significant and widely known tourist attractions in the Orlando area are Walt Disney World and EPCOT Center. Several other major tourist attractions are within commuting distance from Orlando. Among these are Sea World. Disney/MGM Studios. Universal Studios Tour, Kennedy Space Center. Busch Gardens, and Cypress Gardens. There are also several smaller tourist attractions and recreational entertainment opportunities which benetit visitors by saving them potential time and travel costs. There are cost benefits from tourism that are taken for granted. For instance. hotels and motels. as well as other tourist-related facilities, pay property taxes. Rental car companies pay automobile registration fees. This activity stimulates trade and services. and helps the construction and real estate’sectors as well. . . The Orlando MSA ranks near first in the world in the number of hotel and mote! rooms available. From 6.300 hotel and motel rooms in 1971. the Orlando area room count has grown to about 85,000. The occupancy rates are near 80%. New hotel developments are being constructed and planned to accommodate increased tourism in the MSA. Office Development A significant increase in population has resulted in increased demand for office support services. Much of the recent office development has occurred in the Orlando central business district and in existing or developing office parks. During the last three to five years. there has been a significant rejuvenation of the downtown Orlando area with many renovation projects. as well as new construction. , A 1995 survey of office space in the Orlando MSA indicated over 21.645.000 square feet of office space with an occupancy percentage of approximately 90%. During i988. oltice space was absorbed at approximately 1.5 miilion square feet per vear. Substantial growth is anticipated for the Orlando office space market over the next five vears, with about 7.303.000 square feet being proposed for construction by 1999. Occupancy rates are expected to remain relatively stable or decrease slightly as the large office towers are completed. Industrial Development There are over 1.500 manuracturers in the Orlando \ISA providing more than 95.000 jobs. The Orlando area has over 30 industrial parks and free-standing areas. encompassing more than 20.000 acres and providing nearly 67.000.000 scuare feet of Warehouse and industrial space. Another 9.600.000 square feet is proposed for construction by 1999, sa There has been a significant amount of industrial perk development in the Orlando Metropolitan Area over the past 20 vears. Based on the current national and local economic situation. this development is expected to continue but at a somewhat slower rate than was evident over the past 20 vears. This slowing in Jadas@OhRKainpment. like the slowing in population growth fs ia a HA at cle hi ih a i, a AR il i i a Sei. ae RN BR at i tate tei - growth and the increasing inability of g due primarily to an overjoaded situation for government services and roadways. The proposed concurrency regulations will probably have a stabilizing effect on new industrial development over the next several years. In summary, the Orlando Metropolitan Area has experienced significant growth in population. employment, tourism and office development over the last 20 years. The industrial development in the area has matched the other types of development in order to support the additional population and tourist oriented growth. As a result of this development. the governmental services and Toad systems of the area are becoming overloaded. In order to slow the rate of development concurrency laws are being considered. These laws will generally require a developer to install infrastructure prior to completion and sale of any buildings within a given development. These concurrency laws are expected to have a stabilizing effect on real estate values. Based on the previous discussion, we have concluded that the social forces acting in the area will have a stabilizing effect on property values for the next five years. Governmental Forces Most cities in the Orlando Metropolitan Area operate under a mayor — council form of government. For example, the City of Orlando operates under a mayor — council form of government with the mayor and six commissioners elected to four year terms. The mayor. as chief administrator, appoints all department heads. subject to confirmation of the City Council. and is responsible for the enforcement of city ordinances. City commissioners are elected on a . nonpartisan basis. Most cities within the MSA follow this general form of government Most county governments in the MSA operate on a commissioner form of government. Orange County has five districts, each of which is represented by a commissioner who must reside in that district and is elected at large. The county commissioners are the chief administrators and fiscal officers of the county. They have no authority over other elected officiais such as the tax collector. tax assessor or sheriff. County commissioners are elected on a partisan basis. The Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners is nominated and elected by the members or the Board. Most other counties in the MSA follow this pattern of county government. Most governments in the Orlando Metropolitan Area have been pro development over the past 29 year. Zoning ordinances. developmental regulations and real estate tax criteria were all oriented toward enticing tourist oriented enterprises to the focal area. As previously discussed. the largest single impact on the area was when the Walt Disney Company moved to Central Florida. Disney's choice of location in Central Florida was partly based on the governmental-forces which were acting in the area at the time. As previously stated. the slow down in growth rate for the area is partly as a resuit of the prior Sernmental services to keep pace with the increasing population. In an attempt to slow the growth rate. concurrency laws are expected to further stabilize real estate values and prices in the area. Based on these actors. we have concluded that Mle ne alte i iiss ul AM A BR aR sabi oil soi Sina ih Ma ok eae the governmental forces. particularly the concurrency laws. are likely to have a stabilizing effect on property values for the next several years. Economic Forces The Orlando Metropolitan Area is subject to national economic forces as well as local economic forces. On a nationwide basis. real estate values are becoming somewhat stabilized and in some areas are decreasing. Although mortgage rates have decreased as compared to the 1980s levels. there has not been a corresponding increase in new mortgage lending. Various mortgage lenders as well as savings and loans and even some insurance companies are being forced out of business partly as a result of poor management and poor economic decisions concerning commercial real estate. The overall effect has been a dampening of real estate lending throughout the nation. These effects have been felt in the local real estate market. As a result of these economic forces. the previous rate of development in the area is expected to be more stabilized. Although continued growth of the area is probable. this growth rate is expected to be more moderate than it has been over the last ten years. Therefore. we have concluded that. due to the current economic forces, the area property values will remain stable or exhibit only a minor growth rate over the next five years. Summary and Conclusions The Orlando Metropolitan Area has experienced significant growth over the last 20 vears. This was primarily as a result of Walt Disney Company locating in this area. The area was converted from an agriculturally based community to: a tourist oriented community. Walt Disney drew ancillary tourist oriented business, support services, hotels. motels and numerous other facilities. Asa result. the economy. population and government grew at a tremendous rate. -\t this time the growth is beginning to overload the governmental services and roadways for the area. The governmental services and roadway construction have not been able to keep pace with the expanding population in the area. Although the local and county governments have been pro development in the past and will probabiy remain so on an overall basis. it now appears that the government will attempt to slow the rate of development by use of concurrency laws. The overall effect of the social. enyironmental. governmental and economic forces acting in the Orlando Metropolitan Area at this time would appear to tend to stabilize real estate values at least for the near future. Based on this analysis. it is our opinion-that the property values in the area will remain fairly stable for the next five vears. ive COMPLAINT ree a ae va He ei ial i i i li ek ak i il a i kis ak a oan”) ae sk a: liebe i aia i i i li Neighborhood } Map — Seneca —~“! Fa es ane Te aa lla i i a i lillie oii ii al a a BB lt A A A NEIGHBORHOOD ANALYSIS A neighborhood tends to be any separately identifiable cohesive area within a community with some community interest shared by its occupancy. Some neighborhoods may have recognizable natural or man made boundaries. While physical boundaries are used to describe and define a neighborhood. they are often less significant than other boundaries of influence. A neighborhood has been defined as a grouping of complimentaty land uses affected in a similar manner by the following forces - social, economic. governmental, and environmental - which affect all property values. In addition to physical boundaries, neighborhood boundaries can be further identified by perceptible changes in such characteristics as degree of similarity in land use. type of structure. architectural style and maintenance. Every neighborhood is influenced by its surrounding community or metropolitan area. For the purposes of this report the subject neighborhood has been defined as those properties being east of U.S. Highway 441. south of Wolf Branch Road. west of County Road 437 and north of the Lake County/Orange County line. The subject neighborhood is located adjacent and east of the city of Mount Dora in the central portion of Lake County. The neighborhood has an adequate road network which is comprised of several state highwavs and county roads. Examples of roadways which generally lie along the north/south axis include U.S. Highway 441 which forms the west boundary of the neighborhood, and State Road 437 which forms the east boundary of the neighborhood. U.S. Highway 441, is the primary roadway in the neighborhood. This is a four lane paved road which traverses the State of Florida. There are numerous other paved and unpaved neighborhood roadways in the neighborhood which lie along a north/south axis. Examples of roadways within the neighborhood which lie along an east/west axis include State Road 46 which traverses the center of the neighborhood and Wolf Branch Road which forms the north boundary of the subject neighborhood. In the neighborhood these two roads are paved two lane roadways. There are numerous other paved and unpaved neighborhood roadways which lie along an east/west axis. : The land uses in and around the neighborhood include inactive and active agricuitural uses. light industrial uses. commercial uses. and institutional uses. The residential uses include sinyie family residential homes in platted subdivisions. rural residential homes. and mobilg homes. The largest single family residential community in the neighborhood is the County Club of Mount Dora located on the east side of U.S. Highway 441 about 1.5 miles northwest of the subject property. This upscale residential “subdivision and golf community has homes which range in price trom the low $100’s to the upper $200°s. The topography: of the neighborhood ts rolling and varies in elevations from its highest point of about 165 feet above Mean Sea Level (MSL: to its lowest point which is about 65 feet above a cas t pa i ih ii ik a RH il lle ee eS A i a I lle I pe es a Mt lll: J: i RA 8 i A il ie i a am MSL. The highest point of the neighborhood is located near the Country Club of Mount Dora. The lowest properties are located around the neighborhood lakes such as Sand Lake and Lake Amos. . The majority of the subject neighborhood area does not have city water or sewer available. Typically, private water wells supply water and septic tanks are used to process effluent. Electrical service is provided by Florida Power and United Telephone provides telephone service. The neighborhood is in a growth phase with regard to land values. Over the past several years development within the subject neighborhood has been increasing. The most recent residential subdivision development is the Hills of Mount Dora located along the north side of Wolf Branch near Round Lake Road. Other recent development is north of the subject property along Wolf Branch Road and consists predominately of mural residential homes on | to 10 acre parcels of land. There are still many acres of land within the nefghborhood available to absorb future growth. In summary, the subject neighborhood is located east of the city of Mount Dora. There is good neighborhood access by the way of various paved roads in the area and over the next five years growth to the area is expected to increase. : Site Sketch i j 1,300” 660° 4 4 660? Round Lake i . 1320° Road ij 4 660’ i | . 640° 1,290° | ; State Road 46 : { i cost ll, ili eta i il i li A hai a El oR Ae aN a A A DESCRIPTION OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY Site Description ~ The subject property is located on the west side of Round Lake Road. about 1.290 feet north of State Road 46, within unincorporated Lake County, Florida. This property is located in Section 27, Township 19 South. Range 27 East. It has about 1.320 feet of frontage on the west side of Round Lake Road. Round Lake Road is a two lane. paved roadway, which generally runs along a north/south axis in the neighborhood. The subject contains about 30 acres of land area. The reader is directed to the sketch provided for a visual depiction of the sudject property. The subject property is gently sloping. The highest point is about 160 feet above Mean Sea Level (MSL). The lowest point is about 150 feet above MSL. The property is well drained land. The soil type of the subject is Astatula Sand. dark surface. U to 5 percent slopes. which is a neariy level to gently sloping. excessively drained soil. We have not been supplied with a report of the sub-soil conditions indicating the exact capacity of the sub-soil. Since we do not have the benefit of sub-soil test results on the property and detection of such possible defects would be beyond my realm of expertise. no responsibility is assumed for such conditions or for engineering which may be required to discover them. However, there appears to be no hidden or apparent conditions of the subject site or sub-soil structure that would render it more or less valuable. Electrical and telephone service are available at the subject property. Electrical service is provided by Florida Power and telephone service is provided by United Telephone. A weil would be necessary to supply potable water and a septic system would be necessary to process effluent at this location. The land is improved with a citrus grove. However. in this special use value analysis. the citrus trees have no contributory value overand above the use value of the land. The property north or the subject is vacant. The property east of the subject is improved with rural residential uses and vacant land. The property south of the subject is under contract and is seeking a conditional use permit for a church. et lt i i ie i le le ie i le ie sk A i oh i le se Bia He eit a 4 SPECIAL USE As briefly stated-n the letter of transmittal. the realities of current real estate practice require appraisers frequently to consider other ivpes of value in addition to market value. In this particular assignment. it was appropriate to consider the use value of the subject site as a location for a public school facility. Use vatue is the vaiue a specific property has for a specific use. As stated in the Eleventh Edition in the 4ppraisal of Real Estate. use value is often utilized when appraising a”property that is not commonly exchanged or rented. Such is the case with school sites or other special-purpose properties such as houses of worship, museums, public buildings and club houses. If a property's current use is so specialized that there is no demonstrable market for it, such as a public school site, but the use is viable and likely to continue it is appropriate for the appraiser to render an estimate of use value. Such an estimate should not be confused with the market value estimate. If no market can be demonstrated, such as is the case with the subject. when used as a public school site or if data are not available. the appraisers cannot estimate a market value. This is the case with the subject property in that there are relatively few buyers and no active market for school sites in Lake County. In this assignment. certain criteria were used to analyze the comparable sales as compared to the subject property. These criteria included. but were not limited to 1. Visible highway frontage from two separate access points to properly divide and maintain the traffic flow. iS) Adaptation of the site to school construction with a minimum of site work cost. Availability of utilities. police. fire and emergency services. us 4. Configuration of the site that can be adapted to the school pian 5. All of the site would be useable.~ These criteria were based on a generalized criteria letter from Herman Kicklighter. Director of the Facilities Maintenance. Warehouse and Grounds of the Lake County School Board. The complete and detailed criteria for selection of a potential school site is considerably more extensive than is presented in this report. however. sufficient information was provided with which to form an opinion pf the value of the subject property. .\ copy of the jgtter trom Mr. Kicklighter is included in the addenda of this rezort. , een RR MS a ln RR ak i i ll i Ms i ai ke inl oni BH a il THE VALUATION PROCESS Traditionally, there are three approaches utilized in the valuation of real property: the cost approach. the direet sales comparison approach. and the income capitalization approach. The cost approach is based on the “Principle of Substitution” which states that no rational person would pay more for a property than the amount for which he can obtain. by purchase of a site and construction of improvements, without undue delay, a property of equal desirability and utility. The basic steps of the cost approach are to estimate site value as if vacant. estimate the reproduction cost new of the basic improvements and minor structures (excluding any that were included as part of the land value) and then estimate. in dollar amounts. the accrued depreciation caused by the physical deterioration, functional deficiencies or superadequacies, or any adverse external influences. The next step is to deduct the accrued depreciation from the i improvement's estimated reproduction cost new to arrive at a present depreciated cost estimate. Then. by adding the site value estimate, the result is to arrive at an indicated value for the property by the cost approach. The cost approach is most reliable in proposed. new or nearly new properties which have little or no accrued depreciation. . The direct sales comparison approach is based on the “ Principle of Substitution” which indicates that an informed purchaser would pay no more for a property than the cost of acquiring an equally desirable substitute property with the same or similar utility. This approach is applicable when an active market provides sufficient quantities of reliable data which can be verified from authoritative sources. The direct sales comparison approach is reliable in an active market or if an estimate of value is related to properties for which there are comparable sales available. This approach to value is also pertinent when sales data can be verified with the principals to the transaction. Heavy emphasis is usually placed on this approach to value in an active market. This approach was also used to value the subject's vacant land under the special use value analysis in this report. In the income capitalization approach we are concerned with the present value or any future benefits of property ownership. Future benefits are generally indicated by the amount of net income the property will produce during its remaining useful life. After comparison of interest yields and characteristics of risk for investments of similar type and class of properties. this net income. is then capitalized into an estimate of value. The value indicated by the income capitalization approach is generally the most indicative value indication for properties which are held for income production or investment tvpe properties in general. After obtaining value estimates by the thre approaches. the resuits are reconciled into a Snal value conclusion. This reconciliation process is a Weighing of the strengths and weaknesses of each approach in order to reconcile the three independent valuation estimates into 2 single. comprehensive estimate of market value. Reconciliation is Roa matter of averaging the indications trom the three approaches. Yor example. greater weight would be placed on the cost approach indication i developmen mis or { ich were yet completed or hud little j . Pea & = COMPLAINT. ° ; oe AIR le do ie. ase lt Mi i, Bi er ae ae ai is A a i ose A i hs ei ARO RR a ll i depreciation. Conversely, litle weight would be placed on the cost approach indication in the appraisal of say, a 75 year old building which had not been renovated and was not being used at its highest and best use. Greater weight might also be given to the cost approach indication in special purpose préperties like churches. The direct sales comparison approach is generally given more weight in the appraisal of single family homes or other properties that are not held for income generating purposes. Vacant land is generally valued by using the sales comparison approach. The income capitalization approach is generally given the greatest w eight in appraisal of properties such as older office buildings, apartment complexes. hotels and other properties which are bought and sold based on their income characteristics. In this assignment. the direct sales comparison approach was considered to be the most appropriate for estimating the use value of the subject. The-cost and income approaches were not appropriate for use in this assignment. cathe Sa cf Mose ai i MM A a a a i Rl Ml i ait a i dll, a a fe AA A A SALES COMPARISON APPROACH cs previously stated, the estimate of site value is developed by utilization of the sales comparison approach. In properties such as the subject. comparison is generally made ona price per acre of land area. The analysis of value utilizing sales price per acre is conducted by comparing similarities and differences between the sale properties and the subject property. Adjustments are made to the sale indications for these differences. resulting in and indicated value for théappropriate unit of comparison for the subject property. This factor is then applied to the total subject property and the result is an indicated value for the entire subject property. We have conducted an extensive search to obtain comparable sales similar to the subject land. Our search revealed that the number of sales that were similar to the subject in most characteristics were limited, but were sufficient to provide an acceptable degree of reliability for estimating the subject's land value. . Of all sales information considered. the following comparable sales were the more reliable in developing an indication of use value for the subject. A brief narrative sales analysis. as well as an analysis in chart form and a location map showing the proximity of the sales to the subject. are included. The reader is referred to the sales write-ups which are included in the addenda of this report for specific information concerning grantor/grantee, legal description and other recorded information. The sales and contract used in this analysis were located in the subject s neighborhood area. All -sales prices were for cash to the seller or for terms that did not measurably affect the recorded sale price. Conditions of sale for all sales and the contract were normal and all sales were at arm's length. It is our opinion that no time adjustment was warranted to the sales indications utilized in this report. The sale price is divided by the size of the comparable sale and results in an indication per unit of comparison. These indications were then adjusted for physical differences as compared to the subject property. Sale I/SAS 728 occurred on January 27. 1994 for a sale price of $160.000. This sale was iocated on the south side of Wolf Branch Road about 1.500 feet east of Round Lake Road within Lake County, Florida. This sale had 507 feet of frontage along the south side of Wolf Branch Road and contained 10 acres of land area. The land was fairly level. at road grade and well drained Electric and telephone service were available to this sale. .\ private water well would ce necessary to supply potable water and a septic tank wouid be necessary to process.effluent at thi location. The sale price of $160.000 retlects a price per acre indication of $16.000. When compa red to the subject. all of the physical characteristics of this sale when considered 2s a poteniial schooi site were similar to the subject with dle exception of size and road front The sale size at 10 acres was smailer than what is iypicaily needed for an adequate school site area. -\dditionaily. stated in the letter contained in the addenda of this report. one of the criteria was that the site have visible highway frontage for {WO separate access points. upward adiustment 2s made to the sale to reflect‘; noun ot road frontage. TRATIVE COMPLAINT. aa ae lie ei el li il ai cil ils ie Hl li ei a A a 5, sbi le el an subject contained |.320 feet of road frontage compared to the sale which had 507 feet of road frontage. Therefore the size and road frontage characteristics of this sale warranted upward adjustments. After these adjustments were made. the indication of subject unit value developed by this sale was $20.000 per acre. Sale 2/SAS 735 occurred on April 19. 1996 for a total sale price of $168,800. This sale was located on the south side of Wolf Branch Road. about 2.000 feet east of Round Lake Road. Lake Country, Florida. This sale had 629 feet of frontage along the south side of Wolf Branch Road and contained 15 acres of land area. This land was sloping, below road grade and was moderately drained. Electric and telephone service were available to this sale. A private water well would be necessary to provide potable water and a septic tank would be necessary to process effluent at this location. The sale price of $168,800 reflects a price per acre indication of $11.273. When compared to the subject. all of the physical characteristics of this sale when considered as a potential school site. were similar to the subject with the exception of size. topography/site ‘work and road frontage. As was the case with Sale |. the sale site size at 15 acres is smaller than what is typically needed for an adequate school site area. Therefore. an upward adjustment was_ made to Sale 2 to reflect this inferior characteristic. As noted in the sale description. the topography of this sale was sloping. In that one of the criteria for selection of a school site is that the potential site be nearly level, the sale’s sloping characteristic would be inferior when | compared to the subject. This inferior characteristic would require a certain amount of land leveling and other site preparation cost. Based on our inspection of the properties. it is our opinion that a significant upward adjustment was appropriate to account for this inferior sale characteristic. In addition, this sale had inferior road frontage and an upward adjustment was made for this inferior characteristic. After these adjustments were made. the indication of subject unit value developed by this sale was $15.782 per acre. Sale 3/ SAS 727 is a current contract which is expected to close in January of 1998 for a sale price of $175.000. This contract is located on the west side of Round Lake Road about 630 feet north of State Road 46. Lake County. Florida. This contract had 660 feet of frontage along the west side of Round Lake Road and contained 10 acres of land area. This land was gently sloping, well drained and at road grade. Electric and telephone service are available to this property. < private water well would be necessary to supply potable water and a septic tank would be necessary to process effluent at this location. The.contract price of $175.000 reflects a price per acre indication of $17.500. When compared to the subject property. all of the physical characteristics of this property when considered as a potential school site. were similar to the subject with the exception of size and road frontage. As was the case with Sale i. these inferior characteristics warranted 2n upward wes adjustment. After these adjustments were made. tte indication of s by this sale was $21.875. Biect unit value developed Adjusted sale data indicated a unit value range for the subject properts S21.875 per acre. ter considering the diff ale nropertic the subiect . PLAINT i il i Aa 5 Ria 5. a iia ti i i ki property, it is our opinion that unit value indication would fall below mid range of the indications developed by the three sales. Given this consideration. it was our opinion that the subject unit value indication would be $18,000 per acre. Applying this $18,000 per acre indication to the subject’s 30 acres, the result is an estimate of market value for the subject of $540.000. a “TAIN PATI COMPLAINT. m. CLR ZF YSTH onndas “[paas ‘auoydayay ‘annals oc . Ayinog aye] ‘aunynoudy Sy proy aye"] punoy “G+ Jo apts isan uo 999 pouteip [19M Sapesd peor i ‘Furdoys Apap “0TH” ol Ayn) aY'] ‘Op US Jo {HOU ,O€9 ‘peoy aye] punoy Jo apis say OOS*LIS OOO'SLIS leqUOD WAND O00'SLIS jeuoN yseg O00'SLIS LTL SVS/€C HLS PRR OT ae EE ON0'OFSS = 949'V/000'81$ @ sasse OE -onesipuy ane, 1 MIV/NOO'RIS ONIIPUT aNEA WUE Ialqns CEL SIS *Ob+ andas “aan ‘auoydayay annaayy Awnog oyey Samynoudy ty PLOY YOURIET HOA, %S + © JO apts tpnas ay uol_ G79 : paurrap WSTH Mojaq APYTys ‘Furdos “ANI+ st Aung aye] ‘peoy oye] punoy jo 4Svd _QOOT ‘peoy yourag JIOM JO 9pPis anos CLT 008891 9661 ‘ot tady 008'891$ i JPUHON ysug 008'891$ TPV SEL SVS/Z ARS 000'07$ YST+ andas. “plas ‘auoydayay ‘9199474 Ayun09 aye] ‘aunynondy oy peoy yuesg Jom WS + JO apis yinos ap. wo _79¢ pouresp [jaar ‘aperd peos qe ‘Janay Ajuie.y 0TH Ol Ayunog aye’y ‘peoy aye] punoy jo isea OOS] ‘peoy yourg JIOM JO apis tinog 000°91$ 000'091$ P6GE ‘Lz Asenure 000091 JeluJON yseg 000'091$ TPV 87L SVS/T AIS nS VIN VIN. andas Paw ‘ouoydapay ‘onnaaysy uno - ayn yp Saanynaniay ty : proy oye] punoy * JO APIS AA UO OTE] pauresp qpaas ‘apess pros qe ‘Furdoys Apuasy O¢ “AMD ONLY, ‘OP US JO.YHOU 96Z1 ‘proy AYP] PUNOY JO apts isaAy V/N VIN “quan V/N (etutoN yses VIN palqus ARIVHO SISATYNY SA'TVS GNV'T LNVOVA EE ST ST EL LT Ea a TT son me ayoneoipuy paysnlpy syuainysnlpy yay sony dune aarp ” AA ang hyduatodo, VANS onto] OV Hones pay TILE ALS paysalpy aug, (sonipioe:y TypAr) ayy apes OLE AYES PRULION, AUS JO SHOUIPUO, > SULA NS dal uondiiasay PON a 2 ree REM EEE } ' Map Vacant Land Sales fd fae 3s, ‘hi 3a 28 = 3 oy oy MOLY) 3 i aye + wonnar aa f ay er. 7 eee Bap oy Tae w Say |= tO ai tt EJ) wamonvy ee N ° ec VWiSHYN ___l. Chai by a] IS vy 2 \ wOgHO IN rare) wua se LUOMCSEN] st acini) MARSELL & SUTMERLANO soonnal ZE Ona Fe, a y HE oe << KOWAL: ve fetaiely szivisa HONVYd FIOM nyon Atuvn (T) SUL IEE ~~ S pf spej eel Pale ai Q ey BO wy PANG) peer 8 ia EM RENN Gees : eehie JAN BE {aes YROTA, At , % oe Cffmagmrrefs S°8 | Sor cams nd Arr irr Doe spe ae SET TE SERRE EE ET SRE OR ER RT YT ERR RL ET PRET TREE MWS ETE EEE cae ne age wT T =KH:3i ~ sy Reconciliation and Final Value Estimate lect a es The subject property consists of a 30 acre parcel of land located on the west side of Round Lake Road about 1,290 feet north of State Road 46, within unincorporated Lake County, Florida. This site is improved with a citrus grove, however, the citrus trees have no contributory value over and above the special use value for the land as a school site. ; i F The purpose 0 of the appraisal was to estimate the use value of the fee simple interest in the subject : - as of the effective date of this appraisal. December 5, 1997. The direct sales comparison j approach was used in this analysis. The cost and income approaches were not applicable in this 4 appraisal assignment. i Based upon our investigation into those matters which affect market value and by virtue of our 4 experience and training, we have estimated that the use value of the unencumbered fee simple . interest in the subject property, effective December 5, 1997-was: 4 4 FIVE HUNDRED FORTY THOUSAND DOLLARS : ($540,000) 4 4 d i - : ; 4 - i i % 3 : 1 in N SV HVALT _ 2 i aha cede se PR Ct reer aee <3 SSS er ee ea aM kill i a il A Mi A sl abl i i ie i i i. ll a sch A M A k sd Education Successfully completed the following real estate appraisal courses and seminars under the direction of the American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers or the Appraisal Institute QUALIFICATIONS OF ALBERT L. STRICKLEN, MAI M Ag. Degree (Master of Agriculture), University of Florida -1970 Major Area of Study: Citrus Production Minor Areas of Study: Plant Pathology, Soil Science and Nematology B.S. Ag Degree (Agriculture), University of Florida -1968 A.A. Degree, University of Florida -1961 Umatilla High School, Umatilla, Florida -1959 Highest and Best Use and Marketability Analysis - -1997 Easement Valuation -1997 Eminent Domain -1996 Professional Standards USPAP Update Core Law for Appraisers -1995 Standards of Professional Practice, Part B -1995 Standards of Professional Practice, Part A -1995 Appraisal of Retail Properties -1995 Professional Standards USPAP Update Core Law for Appraisers ~1994 Discounted Cash Flow Analysis -1993 Appraising Troubled Properties : -1993 Market Extractions - Income Properties 1993 Appraisal Review -1993 Litigation Valuation -1989 Case Studies in Real Estate Valuation -1988 Standards of Professional Practice -1988 Easement Valuation . -1988 Accrued Depreciation Seminar -1987 Valuation Analysis and Report Writing : -1986 Financial Calculator Seminars (HP 12C) -1986 Capitalization Theory and Techniques, Part B -1986 Capitalization Theory and Techniques, Part A oO ; -1986 Basic Valuation / ; -1986 Real Estate Appraisal Principles . "21986 Have attended the following seminars, workshops and courses: ~ Real Estate Broker's Office Management Course -1993 Real Estate Broker's Investment Analysis Course -1993 The Comprehensive Appraisal Workshop -1992 Citrus, Farm and Land Institute sa ee i i aa co Ab AAA LA eR eal AA nln ili ik AR i i kt il ke Ri ai a i i Hla i i li Taxes, Farm and Land Institute -1984 Timberland Analysis, Farm and Land Institute -1983 Florida State Horticultural Society ; -annually Published Author The Citrus Industry, article: The Canopy Volume Method of Estimating Freeze Damage to Citrus Trees, March 1985, Vol. 66, No. 3. Reprinted February 1990, Vol. 71, No. 2. Licenses and Professional Affiliations Member Appraisal Institute, (MAI) Member No. 9615 State-Certified General Appraiser, State of Florida ‘License No. 0000315 - Master Residential Appraiser (MRA), National Association of Master Appraisers Member No. 8612 Real Estate Broker, State of Florida License No. 0335556 Member -- Association of Eminent Domain Professionals Experience Owner, Stricklen Appraisal Services, P.A. Currently Eustis, Florida Staff Appraiser, Clayton, Roper & Marshall, Inc. 1986-1990 Orlando, Florida : . Staff Appraiser, J. Fred Kurras, MAI 1985-1986 Mount Dora, Florida Agricultural Specialist, Keith Shamrock Realty 1980-1985 Eustis, Florida ° Citrus Production Manager or related positions (1970-1980 Expert Witness Testimony 18th Judicial Circuit Court, Seminole County, Florida Appraisal Types: Have completed the following types of appraisals: OO Oo | ee Agricultural, _ Commercial — HE (OE mene Citrus Groves (Market and Hotels/Motels Casualty Loss) Restaurants ibis i ili iil li lil a iil i wo dea eer eet Cea onan Muck Farms Ranches Timberland Greenhouse Operations Foliage Nurseries Industrial Light Manufacturing Facilities Warehouses Easements 200 KV Powerline Easements Conservation Easements Litigation Trespass cases involving the destruction of oak trees and other types of ornamental landscaping. Review Airport Runway Clear Zones Various Condemnation Appraisals Condemnation (Eminent Domain) Total Takes Partial Takes without Damages Partial Takes with Damages Easement Takings The condemnation appraisals were completed on almost all of the previously listed property types. U.S. Small Business Administration U.S. Farmer’s Home Administration Florida Department of Transportation St. Johns River Water Management District Various departments in the counties of: Citrus, Lake. Orange, Volusia Orange County Expressway Authority Florida Turnpike Authority Seminole County Expressway Authoriny, Bars/Lounges Laundromats Office Buildings ' Medical Office Buildings Other Have completed the following types of appraisals: (Cont'd) Residential Single-Family Multi-Family Proposed Subdivisions Bulk and Individual Lots Mobile Homes Mobile Home Parks Estates Agricultural and non-agricultural oriented Studies Highway Frontage Adjustment for Properties Located in the Central Florida Area Seminars (Instructor) Assessing Freeze Damage: The Canopy Volume Method Parks and Recreation Areas Conservation Areas Railroad Right of Ways Rails to Trails Projects Casualty Loss Appraisals Land Protection Agreements Commercial and Condemnation Appraisals have been completed for the following clients: Barnett Bank of Lake County Barnett Bank of Central Florida Barnett Bank of the St. Johns First National Bank of Mount Dora First Union National Bank’ of Eustis United Southern Bank ~ Peoples State Bank : The Enterprise National Bank of Sarasota c COMPLAINENtetprise National Bank, N.A. Ce ne ne on Hiab bod oe. ae ae, obits aii. lati laa a i ile ile Mi i i lili i Bi li ll. { 1 | 4 { i i a Fi 4 4 q a Various departments in the cities of: Green Swamp Land Authority Eustis, Leesburg, Mt. Dora, Tavares, Department of Environmental Umatilla Protection, State of Florida Lake County Board of County SunTrust, NA Commissioners Lake County Water Authority Lake Community Action Agency First Family Bank, FSB Litigation appraisals have been completed for the following firms: Brannen, Stillwell & Perrin, P.A., Inverness Warlick, Fassett, Divine & Anthony, P.A., Orlando. R. Patrick Phillips, Orlando Rumberger, Kirk, Caldwell, Cabaniss, Burke & Wechsler, P.A., Orlando Sparks, Cooper & Leklem, P.A., Orlando Miles and Cumbie, P.A., St. Cloud Aulls & Graves, P.A., Tavares Lennon E. Bowen, III, Eustis Bowen, Stone & Blanchard, P.A., Eustis Gordon H. Savage, Jr., P.A., Leesburg Maguire & Dvores, P.A. Orlando Cox & Lowry, P.A., Leesburg Sellar, Sewell, Russ & Saylor, P.A., Leesburg C.J. Smith, Attorney, Tavares Samuel Weiss, Attorney, Orlando . Fixel & Maguire, P.A., Orlando/Tallahassee + ae LANES te eH LAINT rated Lay lll dk te hh a van lads i i tl os we ULE aS all oe RR ka A NA Mil lil i ik i ake aa Ha on, QUALIFICATIONS OF THOMAS A. RIDDLE, MAI Education University of Central Florida - College of Business -1988 Bachelor of Science Degree in Finance . Successfullyéompleted the following real estate appraisal courses and seminars under the direction of the American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers or the Appraisal Institute: The Comprehensive Final Exam -1995 Standards of Professional Practice -1994 Appraisal Procedures -1994 Course 2-1 - Case Studies in Real Estate Valuation . -1992 Course 2-2 - Report Writing and Valuation Analysis -1992 Course 201 - Principles of Income Property Appraising -1991 Standards of Professional Practice -1990 Real Estate Appraisal Principles -1990 Have attended the following seminars, workshops and courses: The Comprehensive Appraisal Workshop -1994 Professional Standards USPAP Update Core Law for Appraisers -1994 ARGUS Training Seminar -1992 Principles of Appraising -1988 Real Estate Investment Analysis -1988 Licenses and Professional Affiliations Member Appraisal Institute, (MAI)- Member No. 11316 State Certified General Appraiser- 0001451- State of Florida Real Estate Salesperson - State of Florida , License No, 0494141 Experience Senior Staff Appraiser, Stricklen Appraisal Services, P.A. Currently Eustis, Florida . Associate Appraiser. Clayton, Roper & Marshall. Inc. 1988-1994 Orlando, Florida mere er ilk ii ak ol i A Ml i ill il iat, bl he Have completed the following types of appraisals: Agricultural - Commercial Citrus groves Hotels/motels Environmentally sensitive land Mini-warehouses Pasture Proposed and existing office buildings Native woodlands Shopping and retail centers tee Restaurants Industrial : Vacant land Industrial parks Light manufacturing facilities Residential Warehouses Single family Vacant land , Multi family : ; Proposed subdivisions Condemnation Bulk and individual lots Total takes Mobile home parks Partial takes without damages Vacant land Easement takings MT C8 ait 44 OSE ET mmp TM Te ~~ | b u = gf. 5 e ao, . =} : Om] wm t (o) oO a4 ud: . | = i 7 «f : ™ aoe x om | Hic vay ADDENDA SE ae eee grapes one ec oqeag ey one ae i ai se iii ere. Same Seater | | | Sale Number SAS Number - Recording data Grantor Lee Grantee Date of transaction Date inspected Dimensions and size Consideration Unit Price | Type of instrument Location Zoning Present use Highest and Best use at time of transaction Conditions of transaction Financing Encumbrances affecting price Type and description of improvements ‘ Utilities l 728 Official Record Book 1273, page 2393, Lake County, Florida Francie Wynalda and Mary Edmonds Peter and Doris Elicker January 27, 1994 December 5, 1997 Sale site size was 507’ x 795° + (avg); 10 acres. $160,000 $16,000/acre Warranty deed ” This sale is located on the south side of Wolf Branch Road about 1,500 feet east of Round Lake Road, Lake County, Florida. The address is 22330 Wolf Branch Road. A, Agriculture, Lake County Rural Residential Estate Rural Estate Arm’s Length Transaction Cash to seller None None at the time of sale. Electric, telephone. well, septic j Verification Public Records Motivation of parties Typical buyer/seller motivations ‘ Cash equivalency consideration $160,000 Analysis This sale had 507 feet of frontage on the south 1 ee side of Wolf Branch Road. The average depth { ! | i of this nearly rectangular land was about 795 feet. This site was fairly level, at road grade and well drained. Remarks ; Tax ID# 19-27-26-0002-000-019 co i IM A oc Y i \ jak, cet ee eee te ee Cee kak has kei Ki A A i Ai He ii ‘The Unstrvent Arepares by Sanford, Fl 22772-4848 26-19-27-0002-0000-1900 Oreamemtes SEH 19-30-1500 / 235-64-3697 ACE ABOVE THG UNE AOR PROCESENG OATA his Warrenty Beed, made the us n « FRASK C. WHIGHAM, ESQUIRE os, Ne oe abe EPs YRC LY recriven FoR : wr Santo YL 32772-0648 4 . se : Sanford, FL 32772- Boyar TE AR excise taxes { DOCLALD, “A AMES C. WATKINS FRANK C. WHIGHAM, ESQUIRE ‘ int_=<& cuRK LAKE £0 FL awnm > 0, Box 4848 94 5601 } a py oe. 806K 42°73 PACE 2393 ACT ABOVE THS UNE AOR RECORDING CATA 7 January 1996 aby Pereat Moatticason (Foe Memmertvi): (74 day of YFRANCLE WYNALDA, a single woman, and MARY EDMONDS, a single woman her¥inefier called the Grantor, to PETER ELICKER and DORIS ELICKER, his wife whose post office oddress is 124 Rue Acadian, Slidell, LA 70461 . hereinafter called the Grantee. (Aieremer ened hare the teres “Grier” nad “Cresme” inchate Af che partion ta th etree tad S00 heirs, ngts rapravannaten, td eoetg te of thts, wed Se Serrerwers mad Aen gNs of varpereons, wnerwrer te Comal O@ adenle OF repeares) Mihraeeth, That the Grantor, for and in consideration of the sum of $ 10.00 and other valuable considerations, receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, hereby gronts. bargains, sells, aliens, remises, releases, conveys and confirms unto the Grantee all thes certain land, situate in Lake County, State of Florida _ viz: See Exhibit "A", which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference; 2 en, reuasy ot om ‘Together, wish all the tenements, hereditaments and appurtenances thereto belonging or in anywise appertaintiég Wo Hake and to Hol, she same in fee simple forever. And the Grantor hereby covenants with said grantee that the grantor ts lawfully setzed of said land in fee simple: that the grantor has good right and lawful authority to sell and convey said land, ond hereby warrants the title to satd land and will defend the same against the lawful claims of all perzons whomsocver; and that said land ts free of all encumbrances, except taxes accruing subsequent to December 31, 1993. Gx Witress Wires, the said Grantor has signed and sealed these presents the day and year first above written. Signed, sealed and delivered in the presence of: _ he Lie Oth ‘Wrmaps Sicoglare (ne ve fret Cremar) near Sigmeere : i A {liam FRANCLE WYNALDA 610! Markham Road, Sanford, FL 32771 Pret Ochee Aadrees ‘Wika Sigua (os 00 Co-Oramen, 7) Come fi =r MARY EDMONDS Pied heme Preset Kaos : 6101 Markham Road, Sanford, FL 32771 Wines Sigactce (am ts Co-Cramton, tf aty) Par Offet AGdress - Fasonens . STATE OF FLORIDA ) { thereby Certify that on thie day, bufore me, as officer duly authorized COUNTY OF } lo admisisier oaths und take acknowledgments, personally appeared FRANCIW WYNALDA, a single woman, and MARY EDMONDS, a single woman kaowa ko re lo be the perton_6. described In aod who executed tha foregoing instrument, who acknowledged bafore me that 4 sxecuted the tame, and as oath wot WX (aken. (Chock one:) O Said person(s) ivers Personally knows to me. © Sald person(s) provided the following type of identificadon: ROTARY RUBBER TARO BEAL i | ‘Witoeas my band aod official seal in the County and Stale lect aforesaid this 12S sayoe__January a9 94 ———$_—__—__________ - J : nN OMPLAINT; ra { feeere' eres oe ilk i il A i i i ci i iii ck ai ak i a i ik il rere ers oN DESCRIPTION 300K 42°73 Net 2394 rom the Southwest corner of the Southwest k of Section 26, Township 19 South, Range 27 East, Lake County, Florida, cun North along the West line of said Southwest 4, 33.0 £t. to the Northerly right-of-way of Highway 46. Thence Easterly along said right-of-way of Highway 46 a diatance of 855.0 feet. Thenca North parrallel with the West line of the Southwest k, 1282.24 £t. Thence South 89° 26' 00° East, 1792.60 ft, more or less, to the Southeast corner of the Northeast of the Southwest k. Thence North 9° §s* 30” Faget along the East line of the said Northeast k of the Southwest k, and the West line of tha “Southwest & of the Northeast 4 a distance of 2588.21 ft. to the Northwest corner of the Southwest k of the Northeast 4. Thence North . 45° 55' 30" West a distance of 616,44 to the point of beginning. Thence continue N45° $5' 30*W a distance of 157.36 ft. Thence North 0°55'30* Bast parralel with the aforesaid West line of the Southwest & of the Northeast _ a distance of 738.99 ft. Thence North 88° 01’ 30” West a distance of 507.00 ft.. Thence sao $5' 24"E a distance of 851.55 fe. Thence S389 39' 59" E a distance of 618.10 to the point of beginning. Containing 10.002 acres more or less. ae ener | ee ok lb i. MC MRI AM A peer j 4 i 4 MERIT OO iii i ia, i it i i ik MN aR aa ce tlhe ie ia i cl ila A A A AME BAR inte Sale Number SASNumber - Recording data Grantor _ Grantee Date of transaction Date inspected Dimensions and size Consideration Unit Price Type of instrument Location Zoning Present use Highest and Best use at time of transaction Conditions of transaction Financing Encumbrances affecting price Type and description of improvements - Utilities Verification Cash to seller " None Official Record Book 1432, page 1340, Lake County, Florida Richard J. Green and Barbara S. Green Marcus O. Williams April 19, 1996 December 5, 1997 Sale site size was 629.25" x 772.03’ x 773.80" x 81.34’ x 1290.75’; 15 acres $168,800 $11,253 per acre Warranty deed South side of Wolf Branch Road, about 2,000 feet east of Round Lake Road, Lake County, Florida. A, Agriculture, Lake County Vacant Rural residential development Arm's Length Transaction None eS. SSPE COMPLAINT . / t ae Pen Electric, telephone. well, septic Public Records Me i ib ile coe a Baie bib sl. Motivation of parties Cash equivalency consideration Analysis Remarks a Typical buyer/seller motivations $168,800 This sale had 629 feet of frontage on the south side of Wolf Branch Road and contained 15 acres of land area. The sale was sloping and slightly below road grade. Tax ID# 19-27-26-0001-000-018 WE COMPLAINT oXuiary Pe FS | } | ee AR I HES Me a 36 26812 ree_S OP _ pecevtn FOR fr CO __ EXCKE TAES 4 THI INSTRUMENT PREPARED OY wont 008 G. EOWARO CLEMENT, Escure nero D0 POTTER, CLEMENT ANO LOWRY wr LE be 2 tat. ede o of. dom East Fenn Avenue fst 1432 ne 1340 DOMES ©. WATKINS, CLERK UKE CO. FL | Mount Dora, Fe 32757 . : | : sy__ Jah 0.c, This Warranty Deed Made and executed tne Chay of Aprit, 1996, 7 vy RICHARD J. GREEN and BARBARA S. GREEN, his wife, wnose access &: 1929 Emprass Court, Nagies, FL 32942 heremater cafod ihe grantor, a to MARCUS O. WILLIAMS,. 111 1301 Hickory Dr Longwood, FL 32779 whose accress ss: hereatier caled the grantee: te tip mateument ang ine [wneterm usee Revers tne terme Sgrantor” and *prantee”, melee an Ine pene, tegal capeecantatines and aenigns of mamduale, and the succeseare and other valuable considerations, receiot Witnesselni That tne grantor, for and in consideration of $ 10.00 and unto ihe wnoreot it hereby acknowlacgad, hereby grants, barcans, sels, slons, remmses, releases, conveys and contkms grantee, af that cortan land savate LAKE County, Florida, vie: the SW-1/4 of the NE-1/4, of Section in Lake County, Florida, for the point 85°30" West 773.80 feet, thence North e West line of the sald NE-1/4, a North fine of the NW-1/4 of sald East along the North line of sald Commencing at the Northwest corner of 26, Township 19 South, Range 27 East, of beginning; thence North 45 degrees 00 degrees 55°24" West, parallel with thi distance of 772.03 feet to a point on the Section 26, thence South 88 degrees 01°30" Section 26 a distance of 629.25 feet, thence South 00 degrees 55°24" East, parallel with the West tine of the sald NE-1/4, a distance of 1290.75 feet to a the North line of the said SW-1/4 of the NE-1/ thencesitorth. 83 point on degrees 31°59" West aiong sald North line 81.34 {eB fotn point mt beginning. = 7 = soz a ty am . = IO SUBJECT to easements restrictions and reservations of record, I any; however, operate to rampose Ihe seme, = 8 = = Parcel 1.0. No. 2619270001-000-01800 2 = = wo - a7 Together wan at ine tenements, herednamonts and appurtenances thereto Delongng or in anywse appectaning. To Hava-and to Hold, ine same in foe smpie forever. And tne grantor neredy covenants wah the sad grantee that Ihe grantor is lawtully seized of sad land fn fee simp; J right and lawful authorty 10 sel and convey said land: Inet the grantor Moraoy fury warrants ine that the grantor has 900: aX persons whomsoever; and inal said and ls ree 196 10 341d land and wit Gelend ine same aganst ine awtul clans of of af encumbrances, except taxes accrung subsequent to December 31, 1995, presents the Gay and year first above In Witness Whereol, tne sad grantor has signed and sealed tnese weaten. * Saqned, sous and delvered nm our presence: , Diane Whitacre ARBARA S. GREEN ngaives . STATE OF FLORIOA COUNTY OF COLLIER a | tne toregene astrument was acknowladgod betore me this LPB en at Luke 1996, by AICHARD J. GREEN and BARBARA S. GREEN, his wile, wno sidra personally own to me oF who has/nave produced 2 a, a8 identtcation. < “enc rege —muaneemmterrneyseeto POTTEH, CLEMENT & LOWRY DAE WATICRE mctary Public 308 East Filth Avenue is , SREROK |G re thy Commission Exores: in Domed Thane Sotary. uu -! wae mS ite Sacareeters : - Mount Dora, Florida 32757 tas nana Toe TE MEE LL LEE TT Te RE eT See RET” RARER ETE EE RAE ahaa, et ll a. Bl, bok bebe kd aeore sik a ei aie dessa ewer fe lei on i i a i 5 Ae i a i ik A A i Sale Number SAS Number - Recording data . Grantor... Grantee © Date of transaction Date inspected Dimensions and size Consideration Unit Price Type of instrument Location Zoning Present use Highest and Best use at time of transaction Conditions of transaction Financing Encumbrances affecting price Type and description of improvements Utiltties Verification Vacant land , PA 3 727 None; current contract expected to close January, 1998. . David L. Brown, et. al First Christian Church of Mount Dora Expected to close January, 1998 December 5, 1997 10 acres $175,000 $17,500/acre Warranty deed West side of Ranch road, north of State Road 46, Lake County, Florida A, Agriculture, Lake County Vacant Rural residential development Armn’s Length Transaction Cash to seller | | OOMPLAING we None SEE Se Electric. telephone. well, septic David L. Brown, Grantor. by Albert L. Stricklen. MAI on December 1. 1997 - onli Ro Serene as Hi AR kek coe Se i MB A, A i le, i i a HER Motivation of parties Cash equivalency_consideration Analysis Remarks Typical buyer/seller motivations $175,000 This contract has 660 feet of frontage on the west side of Round Lake Road. The site is gently sloping, well drained and at road grade. None oer i til bl kA a r) k,l, a i i dats at of pereby agree and wr he EAL Unsy at Brown {a si Highway 46, Mount Dora, The Schoo Tavares, i (Phone) a That Sailer shall se1 and Guyer snail buy Ihe follawng Gescnbed Neal Property and Personal Proverty (collectivery “Srorerhy) upon ihe following terms aed Conditions, winch al Estate Transactions (*Slardard(s)") on the reverse sida hareol of attached hereto and nders and addenda to this Contract ler Sate ana Purchase (“Contract nctude Siandarcs ‘or Ae DESCAIPTICN: ja) Legal descnotion of ne Alaal Property ‘ocated In NS_of NE 2 yet ae at = i > ; Cc Eg_of SEs, SEt of NEF of SEL Section 27 Township_19 15) Street aagiess. cilv. 7. of ha Proverty is; ROUNG Hwy Personal Property: oe . 1, “BURcuase price: .S.16,666.87..pex..surveyed.acre-approximately..30.aczes PAYMENT: (a) Ceposit held in ascew y RODer’ Vason Trust Account in the smouni of {2) Accitional escrow cecosit to be mada within days alter Elfective Date (as defined in Parageach itl] in the amount of. {e) Subject ta ANO assumotion of existing mortgage In good standing in favor af having an approximate present principal balance of (o) Purchase money mortgage and note 10 Sefler (see sccendum) in the amount of {a) Cines: s_. a . $490,000.00 (f) Balance to close by U.S. cash, LOCALLY ORAWN certified or cashier's check or third-party loan, sudject lo adjustments of prorations Mm, TIME FOR ACCEPTANCE OF OFFER: EFFECTIVE DATE; FACSIMILE: If mis offer Is not executed by and delivered to all parties OR FACT CF EXECUTION commurscated in writing: detween ino parties on of before October 10, 1997 ine aepostt(s) wil, al Buyer's option, be returned and this offer withdrawn. The data of Contract CEfechwe Date’) wel ba the date when the last one ol ihe Buyer and Soller has signed ims aller. A iacsina copy of this Contract and any signatures Inereon shall be considered tor aA purposes 3 ongmaln, Tat an Wwttal interest rate not 10 S “of principal amoumt, and for a term of years. 8 axe appicalion within days ater Stlective Dole and use rassonable diligence to obtain # loan Teheran, Inereatter, 10 sallsty terms and condiipseer he commitment and close the loan, Buyer shel pay af lozn expenses. I Buyer faits to cotain a comenitment of falls to waive Buyer's rig@ttrorcies his subp: phew ine time for oblaining & commitment or. after dRigent etiort, tats to ment Ihe leems and condillons of {he commitment, then aither party therastler, by written Noto ameertt may cancat this Contract and Buyer shal be refunded the deposit(s}; or {1 The orising morignge descrbod in Paragraph Ilfc), shove, fas (CHECS-ERCT ONE]: O a variabie WMrmalcatg: oF 2 a fixed interest rate of $3 per annum, AL Hime of Le STiSased, the rate sha not exceed * per Sonor aha _. days after Eftectve Date, ftinish To assume a morigage which requires. charga(s) nol to exces eee the lenps-orett Contract or morigagee makes @ charge in excess of Ihe stated amount, Seller or Buyer Vo TITLE EVIDENCE: At least 2.0 days belore closing date, but no eatlior than ___ days altar Sefer receives wniten natilication that Buyer has obizined the torn corenstrnnat oO has bean approved lor the loan assumption as provided i Paragraphs {V(al oF (b}, above. of, il applicable, watved the financing requremen's (CHECK ONLY ONE): WSater shat, at Softer's expense, celrver !o Suyer or Guyer's attorney; of ‘3 Buyer shail at Buyer's expense obtain (CHECK ONLY ONE): © abstract of Utle: or 4 IANCE COmmatment (wrth legke copses of nguuments tsted as exceptons allached thereto} and, altar closing, nn owner's policy olite msurance, -Ox befora Wa fh VL CLOSING CATE: This transaction shall be closed and ihe deed and oltier closing panats delivernd MANUATY 15,1998 uniess mocriied by other provisions of hes Contract Vi. RESTRICTIONS: EASEMENTS: LIMITATIONS: Buyer shail take lille subject to: comprehensive land use plans, zoning. resirictions, prohibitions and other requirements imposed Pry governmental auitority: restrictions afd matters appearing on tho plat or ollverwise common 10 the subdivision: public uility easements of record (exsemeis are 10 De Kocated Onnnuyers | Real Property lines and not more than 10 fect In width as to Ihe rear OF front tines and 7 1/2 feet in width as to te sxie lines, unless otherwise ataled herein): taxes for yenr of Gnsing Ane Subsequent years: assumed morigages and purchase money morigages. i any {il Adkilional items, see addendum): provided. thal there exrsis al closing no violation of the lnrracine and none prevent use of the Property for c Education Facility —_. ween, L__ pumposats} Vill, CCCUPANGY: Seller warrants that there aza no parties In occupancy other than Seller: bul il Proparty is Intended to be rented of occurred beyond closmg, Ihe LACT And terms theron and the lenant{(s) of occupants shal be disclosed pursuant to Standard F. Seller shalt daliver occmancy of Property to Buver at tinte of dosing tnless atherwrte stained Recem If norman is 10 De deiwered Sofore closing, Suyet assuines all risks ol loss to Property Irom date of occupancy. shat! be fesponsite and lable for maintenance rom that Cate, ANG shal be dremna ir have acenpind Property in its existing condilion as of lime of taking accunancy Uniess otherwise sinted herein, IX, TYPEWRITTEN Of HANOWRITTEN PROVISIONS: Typewatien of handwiillen promsions. nders and addenda shail control Ail orinled prenmicns A thes Contract m creitirt wathy mar X. RIDERS: (CHECK those riders which ato aonficable ANO are altactied fo this Contsact}: {3) U COASTAL CONSTRUCTION CONTROL LINE (0) ‘2 VAFHA {g) (4 HOMEOWNERS’ ASSOCIATION OISCLOSUNE 2d) UW CONDOMINIUM (e) UW INSULATION {h} D0 RESIDENTIAL LEAD-BASED HAZARN DISCLOSURE -) 11 FONEIGN INVESTMENT IN REAL PROPERTY TAX ACT () U°AS 1S oO XL ASSIGNABILITY: (CHECK ONLY ONE}: Buyer 12 may assign and thereby be released Irom any lurther ability under this Contra under this Contract: or Ymay not assign this Contract, x, - DISCLOSURES: fa) Radon 's a naturally occuring radioactive gas thal when accumulated in a building in sulficient quantities may present health risks to pArsoas whe Are meTersed to R owee heey Levels of radon tha! exceed lederal and sialo guidelines have been found in builcings in Florida. Additionat information regarding Radon or Ragen testing may be ontamed ~| your County Public Health unit, A (2) Buyer may have determined the enersy elficiency rating of the residential building, 1l any fs located on the Real Property. fe) I the Meat Property inctudan pre-1978 residential housing then Paragraph X (h} is mandatory. x asenmecnmerttin 8 may ASSIgN Fut AOL De telensed from tela —— - . mote ow ccitional terms are to De crowded, allach addendum and CHECK HERE X CLAUSES; ADDENDA: I THIS 1S INTENDED TO SE A LEGALLY BINDING CONTRACT. IF NOT FULLY UNDERSTOOD, SEEK THE AOVICE OF AN ATTORNEY PRICR TO SIGHMG THIS FORM HAS BEEN APPROVED Sif NIE FLOMICA ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS ANO THE FLOMINA BAN ! constitute an ceinion that any of the terms and cortnons in tus Contract should be accepted by the padies in a parhcular transaction Terns and comets stay ae bo negotiated based upcn the respecuve interests, Objectives and bargaining posiens of all interested persons ae QOPYRIGHT 1995 SY TIE =LORIGA BAR AND THE FLORIDA ASSOCIATION OF REALIONS i al a, g/aeler — oud 2. Brom role 7 7 Date) Setier) Tate) Social Secunty or Tax Date) (Sates) “Daten sunty or Tax 1.0.4 ee Socal Secunmy or Tar sD 8 diet Parageann tla) recened, IF OTHER THAN CASH THEN SUBJECT TO CLEARANCE BROKER'S FEE: The brskers named below, snchicting fisting and conperaing hinkers, ate tha only DIokE™S Auiied In Zompensation wn cennecnan wath thes Contract n Tyre, Tyre &@ Taylor Commercial Realtye.:- ii BCKTPricketty Prickett Proper tiessing grokers any = a. Gh ing Brokers. any rn ating Grover, J RICENS rAM an ca On pam tue pponins saanniuimy ae ngnrrenes an te cranny can vate nit Mihai Bs reerane Tae t Tee sili. iia cnt i ati i eC ol sii A shante ~ geguadbeiiug sor aah our eoulane ard emishes ats remh 2 De at accurate syeoeks ol he nstrumenss a crged in Me public “agcras’ ot Ne county wear nad commence win ine safest Quote recsres, of such ater 25:4 as Tay ary “Tse county. Udon clesing of Is Cox @ aDsirat snail Decame Ne zroparty of Buyer. adyect 12 "he AGNI of retention :Neredt vy Sst Fevgages unt fully sac Tt ig seucanee tommument issuad by 8 “onda Scensed msurer agreeing 20 sus Buyer, Leon recording of the 4 3-10 Buyer, an owner's doncy of “le nsurance A ine a a) ihe Gurcnase sfice, -esuning Buyer's ‘itle ‘9 che Real P-coerty, suciect only '0 Jens, sAcumorances, exceptions of S Mneations previged «n ths Coriract and “hese 10 Se discharged Sy Seller at of Tetore closing. Seller sna convey marketadte sitle subject amy 10 “ENS, encumorances, axceghons of ohneations oroviced :n ines Contract, Marcetagre tte snail De ceiermined according to acpicate Fille Stancarss acopted by auinonty st The Flora Sar sngin accordance with law. Suver nail have 20 cavs, f gosiract, oF 5 days. 1 te commitment, ‘ccm gate of fecenang avicence o} sla 10 examine +, {He 1s ‘ound celectia, Suver shai wilh 2 cavs Dentatler, souty Seller ‘a wing soecstying the delectis). it delect!s) render tile unmarcetacie. Seller wil nave 20 cays from recaiot of nonca to remove ine PROCEEDS OF SALE: CLOSING PROCEDURE: Tha ceed snail be recorded uoon clearance of tunds. if an abstract of tile nas Deen furnished, evidence of tide snail be continued Buver's Cxoense to shew tilla im Buyer. wiihoul any encumprances of change which would fencer Seller's ile unmarketadie Irom n9 Gate of he iasl evcence, Al closing proceeds sr3iit held 1 oserow by Seiter's atlorney oF other mutually acceptable escrow agent lot a Gertod of nol more than S cays after closing cate. Il Sellers wile 's rendered unmareetabie. Trough tautt of Buyer Guyer snail, wilin ihe S-day 2enad, nonly Setier in wating of the detect and Seller shail nave 30 days !rom date of recerol of sUCN nouticaton :0 cure Te dele. if Softer to nmely cure the Cetect, all deposii{s) anc closing lungs shail, von written demang dy Buyer end within § cays aRer comand, de returned 10 Buyer and. simultaneously win such reoavme’ Quiver snatt return ine Personal Properly, vacate Ihe Aeat Pecerty snc reconvey ine Proverty to Seiler Sy special warranty ceed and Dill of sate. if Suver fads to maxa tery Oemand | any intervening defect except as May De avalladle 10 Buyer oy wirive of warranues contained n Ihe Geed or D4 ancing oF fetinancing, tecuiremants of she tenaing ins:itutlon ag {0 28C8. Ime of Cay And procedures lor GoSIT revision in ints Contract. Sallar snail have ihe nght 10 recuire from we fencing ‘nsitubon a wimen comereynent tf 18 BSCrow ANd Closing Srocedure required Sy Imis Stancars snad és Jam to Sazesit :hem Sfomolly, Med same a escrow and, suteCt 6 Buyers pertormance. if 1M GOUDL as 10 Agent's Gunes OF sade Taage ane prowsians of iis Contract, Agent may, sl agents acuen, coeunue 19 Rela HSOUrSerMeNt OF UNIE a LOGE cha coun uf coroelent unsUichon shail Geletming Ing Fgn's of the Sarves, oF Agent may Geoosit same with tne Clerc of ine cucu Court Having unsaiction of ine cisoule. Upon nonyng cottes concerned of such act uatyuty an the part o" Agent srad ‘uly termmate. except 10 tne extent of accounting for ary tems previously elwered out of escrow I! a scenses f petal Sreser, Agant wil comply wh otovisions of Chapter 475, £S.. 28 amenced. Any suil between Buyar and Seller wherein Agents mace a party Decause of acung as Agent Nereune aay sut where Agent moroicags the subject matter ct ine esc:2m, Agen! sali recover reascnaDe attorney's fees and casts incuvved win these amounts ‘¢ De OaKd rom and 4} secrowed funds of equivalent and charged and awarce7 as court costs in favor of Ra Crevaning party. The Agent shalt nct De liable :0 any Darty OF person ‘ot misceinary to Save" ect to ine escrow, unless such msceivery ts due te ailiful Dreacn of the orowsiens of this Contract or gross negigenca of Agent A. ATTOANEY'S FEES; COSTS: fn any nigation, incluc:rg Dreacn. ertorcement of interpretation, ansing cut of ths Contrac. she prevailing party ‘9 such lingazon. which, lor Durpose” ig Slangard, suit include Seller, Buyer and any brokers acting “n agency of Achagency telanonsmzs auihortzec by Cnaptar 475, FS.. as smenced, shat be entitled to recover 1797 noa-atevailing Darly ‘eascnable allorney’s teas, costs and exoecses. S. FAILURE OF PERFGAMANCE: tl Buyer tails tc puter rms Co 3o oad, may de tecovered and retained by and fof tne account of Ze rs Paragrapn Vil hereof, sstle 10 rotund, Buyer snot rake fille as 9s, waning ail rights against Setter a: Wa portion of in2 ourchase orice #5 6 Se Cenved trem “sttunoral ard for Cebursement of morigage Drocoeds snail contror over eo 4 oni Rot enthhold cisdutsement of mortgage sroceecs as a casuit st atv itte elect artecutabie to Suyer-mertgagor 7! g27 7941. Sas amencea. *. 100 and agrees Dy acceptance ct Seuter of nems suo wiinin she ume specilied, ‘neucing payment ol all cenosits, the cepostils} Dad Dy Suver and deposn(s) agree 38 ag'2ed UDCN iquicaied damages, cons:ceration ‘or Me execution of Ts Contrac: and in tull setemect of cians: wnereveen, Buyer and Sellar smail ve rekeveo of 22 coigat crs onder this Contract: of Seties, at Seiier's option, may proceed in ecutty ‘0 enlorce Severs ngnis uncer ves Cont” Ir tor any reason sinar than tasture of Seiler to mane Severs tie naraoladie ster cuigant effort, Seer fais, nemects of tetuses 10 Sertorm tus Contac, Te Euver may sean Soe perlormance of elect 10 receive Ine Mturn 9 Buvers Cenesit5) wines! :RereDy warwng any action tor camages resulting "cm Souters breach. ° y CONTRACT NCT RECOROABLE: PERSCNS SOUND; NOTICE: ‘ines tis Contract Aer any netce of it shail be recorsed in any pudee fecores. This Contract snad bing and rr" she geneld of the a/nes and Ihe successOr5 in interest shane cantest Derm!s, singular snail inctude plusat and ona sender shail inciuce all Nonce gen Uy OF 10 Te ane ane party shat be as elective as tI aven Oy or to that catty UL CONVEYANCE: shal Convey nue to ine Beal Foner ang those o isles s, nerschal feorasentative’s or qusrdians deed, a3 anoroorate '9 re status of Galler st sonal Progerty $3 La rantieries by an gozorte Dll oF Suse ant 9" nequest of re Su beret _ surest one ma ‘Vy OOTHER AGREE 0 prior cf resent agren Soetract snat be «9.4 oF Binding voon the 3art Dee4 WARRANTY. warrants iat ae wract a “actcanon 10 er sracoe es HreSONIaHAAS $7.9" a Dining voOR Buyer or Setter 3 aes execute a haves imtenzag fo Se Couns Sv it wp ot the Progeny ween are rot eace casaqaue oy Bre oF at sagan ig bear mye cn ma) 2AOD ADDENDUM TO CONTRACT FOR SALE AND PURCHASE caer terre SELLER: David L, Brown, a single man BUYER: The Lake County Board of Public Instruction The following lerms and condilions shall be a part of the Contract for Sale and Purchase: 1. This is an “option contract” as defined In the Florida Statutes. Neither this Contract, nor any offer, counteroffer, appraisal or other document pertaining to this transaction, shall constitute a public record or be open for public inspection until this : Contract has been fully executed by both parties, or until 30 days before it is considered by j the Lake County Schoo! Board, if it is not then executed by both parties. This Contract shall : not be binding on the Buyer until it has been approved by the Lake County School Board by j affirmative vote of a majorily of the board members present at a public meeting where there 4 is a quorum and this Contract was duly placed on the agenda for consideration and action, and as to which there has been given not less than 30 days public notice as required by law. Once this Contract has been signed by both Seller and the Superintendent of Schools, it shall be placed on the agenda for consideration by the School Board at the next available regularly scheduled meeting, for which it is possible to meet the public notice requirements imposed by law. than 120 days from the Effective Date (which interval Is hereby referred to as the “Inspection Period”), Buyer shall conduct such investigations and Inspections as it deems necessary to salisfy the contingencies. If any contingency is not met to the satisfaction of Buyer, then | Buyer shall give written notice of that fact to Seller by not later than 5 days after the expiration 4 i 2. This Contract is subject lo the contingencies set forth below. Within not more i 4 of the Inspection Period. If such written notice ts given, this Contract shall be vold and Buyer shall receive a full refund of all deposits placed In escrow by It hereunder. If no such notice is given within the time permitted, Buyer shall be deemed to have waived all the contingencies listed herein. During lhe Inspection Period, Buyer shall have full access to the Property for itself and for Ils agents, servants, employees and Independent contractors retained by it, to conduct the inspections and investigations necessary to satisfy the : conlingencies, provided that following completion of the inspections and Investigations the : Property shall be retumed to substantially the condition it was in. before; and provided further that all costs and expenses related to the inspections and investigations shall be paid { promplly by Buyer and the Property shall be kept free and clear of liens for unpaid charges : related thereto. The contingencies referred to in this paragraph are as follows: 4 A. A Phase I environmental audit showing thé Property to be free and clear : of any and all evidence of contamination by toxic or hazardous wastes ; or substances, or other environmental contamination of any kind. ! B. An assessment of the Property showing it to be free df any endangered or threalened species of plants or animals, species of special concern, or other species of plants or animals, the presence of which would impede or prevent use of the Property or a substantial portion thereof, OMPLAINT INT, Page L.of 3 vanes iii: Mali i il a. se I. sk a ii ila ik ic ca ki ii le a ie ie. iii it li 3. or add substantially to the cost of Buyer's use of the Property for its intended purposes; and showing the Property to be free of sites or artifacts of historical or archaeological significance, the presence of which would impede cr prevent use of the Property or a substantial portion thereof, or add substantially to the cost of Buyer's use of the Property for its intended purposes. Soil testing and evaluation which demonstrates that the underground soil conditions at the Property will support the type of construction Buyer intends to place on it, without the demucking, substantial fill, or the use of any special construction or foundation techniques including but not limited to specially reinforced slabs, post tensioned slabs, or other methods which would add to the cost of construction due to soil conditions: Firm assurances by all agencies and governments having jurisdiction that the zoning of the Property, its designation on any future land use map or in any comprehensive land use plan, and all other laws, rules and regulations pertaining to land use, zoning and permitting, will allow the intended use of the Property as a public school campus, In substantially the manner intended by Buyer, without rezoning, conditional use permit or special exception use, comprehensive plan amendments, or other discretionary land use approvals; that the Property as it currently is configured, including road access and availabilily of utilities, can be used for Buyer's Intended purpose; OR In the alternative that before.closing, all necessary rezoning, discretlonary permits and approvals have been obtained at Buyer’s expense. Seller agrees to cooperate in this effort by executing any application forms or other documents needed to obtain any required land use approvals. Approval of the Property as the site for a public school by the Florida Department of Education. Assurance that all utililies required for Buyer’s Intended use, including but not limited to electricity, water, natural gas, telephone, cable television, garbage and trash disposal, and wastewater disposal and treatment, are either available at the Property from public providers or license private providers, or may be made available (such as by drilling a well or inslalting a package sewage treatment plant), at a cost and in a manner acceptable to Buyer. Verification that the road access to the Property is sufficient for Buyer's intended use or lhat it may be rendered sufficient at a cost and Ina manner acceptable to Buyer. Closing shall take place wilhin 30 days after thé expiration of the Inspection — Period unless Buyer has canceled this Contract as permitted by-Paragraph 2 above. RATIVE COMPLAINT. Page 2 of 3 64. OF 4, The Effective Date of this Contract shall be the date on which it receives final approval by the Lake County School Board, or the date on which all parties have affixed their signatures hereto, whichever is later. For the purpose of Paragraph Ill hereof, this Contract shall be deemed accepted for the purposes of that Paragraph by the signature of the Superintendent of Schools, although the Contract will not be binding on Buyer until It receives School Board Approval. 2k sl lk 5. W. Glenn Tyre, of Tyre & Taylor Commercial Realty, and Jack Prickett, of Prickett Properties, are the only real estate agents involved in this transaction and are acting as Transaction Brokers. At the closing, the real estate commission will be paid by the Seller in accordance with a separate agreement. ok i a a i il, 6. Buyer will have the Property surveyed within the Inspection Period and that survey shall be certified to Seller, Buyer, Buyer’s legal counsel, and the title insurance underwriter and agent issuing the evidence of title In accordance with Paragraph V of this Contract. ‘The survey shall state the number of acres in the Property and that acreage computation shall be utilized to determine the Purchase Price In accordance with Paragraph If of this Contract. pares_/0/3 142 urd ¥ Cron DAVID L. BROWN wee ble a, : "THE SCHOOL BOARD OF { LAKE COUNTY, FLORIDA BA pate: PLZ0/PD BY: Lia. Pst C . Superintendent 6f Schools BB a RB ' oe . . : an ate . : 2a Sun LAT T Page 3 of 3 ae COMMISSION AGREEMENT David L. Brown ; Ww. Glenn Tyre, Tyre & Taylor Commercial Realty Jack Prickett, Prickett Properties and South of Wolf Branch Road) Lake County, FL Maes sic ki lias a go . is) ie) o ‘dG Lal o ue} o tal 4 w le) + — ' > QO Lal oO oo Bul [e) S fe) fen P. oO v3) (o) ~ a. = eo} iO is) o Oo fon zZ oO S Oo al eu iam | & na BSy OV 4 i L Upon closing, Seller to pay each of the above Brokerage Firms 3% of selling price. 4 . Seller: — dal £Brr Date: _ “2 (alaz Broker: Yi Lh. Date: toLsloz W. Glenn e€ : . . o i Broker: Jack Prickett THAT OMacDi HVE COMPLAIN Ba See 2 aie MA i A il RR RI la i a A kl Lake County Schools Facilities Management Department (352) $43 - 1600 518 West Alfred Street 680-1280 SUNCOM Tavares, Florida $2778 (852) 843 - 1601 FAK 2 December 1}, 1997 Stricklen Appraisal Services 36 W. Dixic Strect Eustis, Florida 32726 -- RE: Sorrento Property 30 Acre Site for New Elementary School Dear Leon: The appraisal for the Sorrento Site Property should reflect the following: 1. Visible highway frontage for two separate access points to properly divide _ and maintain the traffic flow. 2. That it will adapt to school construction with a minimum of site cost. 3. That it is located where fire, police and emergency services are available. 4. That the configuration of the site will adapt te the schoo! pian. $. That all of said property is usable. If you need additional information, please contact me. A Facilities/Maimtenance/Warehouse & Grounds Uh STRATIVE COMPLAINT ce: Dr. R, Jerry Smith, Superintendent Jerry Cox, Assistant Superintendent 4 ; a ks La A RR kil ll i i iii i ae ll. ci i la, AMA AO A A A nn Stricklen Appraisal Services, P.A. 36 West Dicie Drive Telephone: (352) 589-5124 Eustis, FL 32726 ; Fax: (352) 589-9207 March 2, 1998 Mr. Jetry Cox Assistant for Business and Support Lake County School District 201 West Burleigh Boulevard Tavares, Florida 32778-2496 Dear Mr. Cox, As you have requested, I have prepared addenda to be presented in conjunction with the use value appraisal that I performed on the 30-acre potential public school site along the west side of Round Lake Road. The original report was identified as SAS Job Number 97-28. The effective date of that appraisal was December 5, 1997 and the use value was estimated to be $540,000 for the 30-acre parcel. That resulted in an indication of unit value of $18,000 per acre. This letter addenda is a brief analysis of my estimate of market value of the same 30-acre Property as was described in the original appraisal. That appraisal is hereby included, by reference, in its entirety in this addenda letter which estimates the market value of the subject property. This estimate of market value should only be utilized in conjunction with the original appraisal and is hereby is made part of the original appraisal. The definition of market value used in this addenda is as follows: ' 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 is the consummation of a sale as of a specified date and the passing of title from seller to buyer under conditions whereby: * q) Buyer and seller are typically motivated; (2) Both parties are well informed or well advised. and acting in what they consider their own best interests: ~ (3) A reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open market: (4) Payment is made in terms of cash in U.S. dollars or in terms of financial arrangements - comparable¢hereto; and, Pao) 7° 2° TIVE COMPLAINT nh ee La ROR RR RR ils. cles, it, ll, ls i i HR ll ll kk (5) The price represents the normal consideration for the property sold unaffected by special or creative financing or sales concessions granted by anyone associated with the sale. I have utilized the same sales for the market value analysis as were used in the original appraisal. A vacant land sales analysis chart with the appropriate adjustments is included in this letter, You may note that the only change in adjustments was that of the size characteristics. Given the specific size requirements for school sites, the sales used in the analysis of the use value had inferior size characteristics to that of. the subject. However, from a market standpoint smaller size, within limits generally warrants a higher unit price. With respect to size, it is a general market observation that bigger parcels tend to command lower unit prices when compared to smaller but otherwise similar parcels. There is generally a higher demand for smaller parcels because there are more potential purchasers who can afford to pay to total purchase price for smaller parcels as compared to bigger parcels. The effect of this supply/demand relationship is that the bigger parcels would typically command a lower unit value than the smaller parcels. However, this inverse price and size relationship ceases to exist at the lower end of the size spectrum. As parcels continue to diminish in size below the quantity perceived by the market to have economic utility, the price per unit diminishes. After appropriate adjustments from a market standpoint, Sale 1/SAS 728 required no net adjustment to the $16,000 per acre adjusted indication developed by this sale. Sale 2/SAS 735 had an overall upward adjustment to the $11,273 per acre indication of value developed by this sale. The adjusted indication for Sale 2 was $14,091 per acre. Sale 3 required no net adjustment to its $17,500 per acre indication. Adjusted market data ranged from $14,091 per acre to $17,500 per acre. Two of the three sales required no net adjustment and ranged from $16,000 to $17,500 per acre. Sale 3 which had the $17,500 per acre indication abuts the south side of the subject property, however, after considering all of the sales as compared to the subject, it was my opinion that the most probable subject unit value would be $17,000 per acre. When this factor is applied to the 30 acres of the subject property, the result is an estimate of market value as of the effective date of the original appraisal, December 5, 1997 of: ; FIVE HUNDRED AND TEN THOUSAND DOLLARS ($510,000). Respectfully submitted: ri kf , Wi fe oes iff Ve, A. Wei oft Albert L. Stricklen, MAT State-Certified General (eo COMPLAINT Real Estate Appraiser 0000315 i mn ¢ OOSLIS %0 andas ‘jaa ‘auoydayay ‘o1}99]3] { ‘ete Awinog aye] ‘aumynoudy Sy peoy aye] punoy %E 4. JO apts Isa UO _Y9g PauUlVp |[9M ‘opwad peor ie Sutdojs Apuay %S - Ol AunoD ayv"] ‘9p YS Jo You ,0¢9 ‘peoy aye] punoy Jo apis sayy, OOS LIS 000°SLI$ pwIIUOD WALLIN Oo0'sLi$ jeuon yseg OU0'SLIS DV LTL SVS/E AIRS PEE OR SEE MEET PTT 000°O1S$ = 249V/000'LI$ © sasoe O¢ :uoHeapuy ane, walqng MV/OOO'LIS vONnvoIpUy anfea wud yalqns 160r1S YST+ ondas ‘Hea ‘ouoydajay ‘on99]3 Ayunog aye’y ‘aunynoudy ‘y peoy yoursg JJOA, %S + JO apis nos ay uo _6zg ; pauieip Ajayesapow ‘apesd peor YOT+ Mojaq ANYays ‘FIurdoys %S - SI Ayunog oyu] ‘peoy aye] punoy jo 1s¥2_,QOOT ‘peoy yourrg 000°91$ %0 ondos “119as ‘auoydazay ‘o10914 Ayunog aye] aanynoudy ‘y peoy youeig J]oMy %S+ — JOapls yInos ay) uo ,L05 Pauresp pfaar ‘apesd peod ye ‘paaay Apaiey %S- : ol Ayunog ayy ‘peoy aye] punoy jo isea _.QOS‘| ‘peoy young VIN ondas “[}aa0 ‘auoydayay ‘onoayyy Ayuno aye] ‘oumnousy ‘y peoy oye] punoy JO apis isa uo QZe'] poutesp [jam ‘opwd peod ye ‘Buidojs Apuary 0€ “AyunoD 9yv7] “Ob US IS YOU ,O6ZI ‘pLroy . JIOM JO Epis ynog JIOA\ JO apis Ynog aNvT] punoy Jo apis say ELTHS 000'91¢ V/N 008°891¢ 000‘091$ VIN 9661 ‘61 Iudy P6G61 ‘LZ Aenuee wang 008'891$ 000‘09I$ V/N [PULON, [Buon _ RULON yseg yse9 ysug 008'891$ 000°091$ VIN TPV StLSVSiT AS = PY 87Z SVS/T eS Palqis JLUVHD SISNIVNY SH’1VS GNVT LNVOVA 7 ee i BRR Ri Mi Rl i ke ee ee ee = spuatuysnfp yay smut Buin07 aduyuory MAOAY aS /AYduss0do fF OVPUS uonLso'] OV/MoNvapuy dg VS paysnlpy oury (suonipuog IAD DUCE OPUS + DOL apUG FEULION a Jo suonipuos SWI] IRS MA AUS uondiasaqy ZXHiGIT. co oareere ie di Bs. tie A A NI A, 5 Mi ik a, ii i a li ak la a lia eb i 4 ‘ i i RECEIVED ga Stricklen Appraisal Services, P.A. Nov 161 REAL ESTATE 36 West Dicie Drive Telephone: (352) 589-5124 Eustis, Florida 32726 Fax: (352) 589-9207 November 10, 1998 Mr. Robert J. Baird Investigation Specialist IT Bureau of Enforcement Division of Real Estate Bureau of Investigative Services 400 West Robinson Street, N501 Orlando, Florida 32801 "RE: DBPR Case Number RZ98-84273 DBPR Case Number RZ 98-84288 Dear Mr. Baird, , This letter will serve as my initial response to the allegations made in the above referenced DBPR cases. First, ] would like to state that I deny all of the allegations made in the above cases. These allegations are groundless and are not based on fact. A cursory reading of the appraisal reports referenced in this instance would indicate that due diligence has been performed throughout the entire appraisal process and throughout the entire reporting process associated with these two appraisal assignments. The allegations were made on the basis of statements made by Mr. Gus Heim contained in his complaint to the Department of Business and Professional Regulations which was received by the Department on September 18, 1998. A comparison of Mr. Heim’s letter to my appraisal reports will show that Mr. Heim’s allegations are groundless. My reading of Mr. Heim’s letter reveals that the word “appraisal” is used six times within the letter. Basically, Mr. Heim comments that he is forwarding a copy of the appraisal which was ordered by Lake County to the DBPR and that the school system had specifically ordered a usé value appraisal. Additionally, Mr. Heim comments that I was requested to change the appraisal to a market value appraisal which I did by updating the original appraisal. Finally, Mr. Heim comments that if a use value appraisal was inappropriate or if something improper or incompetent was done, he will takéthe matter to a higher authority. The rest of the letter uppears to be a tirade against the Laké County School system. .. A comparison of statements made in Mr. Heim’s letter to the facts contained within my appraisal reports revealed that Mr. Heim’s letter is replete with errors, erroneous statements and other misleading information. A comparison of the letter and the facts contained within, my appraisal reports are presented in the following paragraphs. "2 CRATIVE COMPLAINT el i ld lk ie. wei, eB bie li ii 5 ill. li: ia le a a a MM a ll nl ARLE Complainant's Comments 1. It has no utilities on site other than a grove irrigation system. There are no industrial public utilities anywhere near this site. 2. The school system specifically ordered a use value appraisal. Aporaiser’s Response \. This is a correct statement, however, the Lake County School system often purchases land where there are no utilities or buildings on the site. In fact, almost ail sites purchased by the Lake County system are vacant land and have no utilities. In many cases the school system provides their own utilities. This fact-has no bearing on the appraisal with the exception that the reader may note that all of the comparables had the same utilities availability characteristic. 2. This is a correct statement in that the authorities for the school system had requested that | appraise the property for its value as a specific school site. School sites are not normally bought and sold as such and as a result there is not an active market or a great number of comparables which are school sites. Therefore, a use value appraisal is appropriate in this instance. Use value may vary widely from market value. Additionally, as noted in the letter of transmittal for my use value appraisal dated December 5, 1997 and identified as Job # 97-28, use value is defined as the value a specific property has for a specific use. Additionally, given that school sites per se are not normally bought and sold and that there is a limited market for these sites which have specific developmental criteria, I-classified the property, as a school site, to be a Simited market property. ‘Nowhere in the definition of use value or limited market properties is it stated that the property must be improved. As may be noted in the letter to me from Mr. Herman Kicklighter, Director of «Facilities and Maintenance for the Lake County School system contained in the addenda of the report, the school site had specific criteria for development as defined by the Lake County School system. Therefore. in my ek Keke ee A a ck ll lee, i in A el ek esos Abt, MI i | ‘ i 3. The property was never on the open market. 4. All the other properties on the market were ignored by the school system. 5. The comparables used in this appraisal merely are comparable in price to the asking price of the subject property. = COMPLAINT. opinion. a use value appraisal was appropriate on this property. 3. In my opinion. this is an incorrect Statement as the property abutting the subject property was purchased as a church site and the subject property could have been purchased as well. Furthermore, whether or not the property was on the open market has nothing to do with its selection as a school site by the Lake County School system or its subsequent appraisal as a school site. 4. This is an incorrect statement in that an extensive search was conducted in order to select the most appropriate school site in the area. Numerous properties were researched by a team of real estate brokers in Lake County. Their selections of parcels for use as school sites were presented to the authorities of the Lake County School system and those authorities chose the sites they felt. were most appropriate for development as school sites. ; 5. I am somewhat unclear as to what this sentence means. however, one may note in the vacant land sales analysis chart contained on page 36 of my report that all three comparables were similar to the subject property in terms of location, zoning and utilities availability. Additionally, it may be noted that only one of the comparables required an adjustment for topography or site work. All three comparables required a nominal adjustment for amount of frontage along tht highway and all three comparables required some adjustment for size. [It also may be noted that given the requirement that this specific school site be 30 acres, the,» three comparables which were smaller sized tracts were adjusted upward to reflect the difference in size. EXHISIT a as bibs andes Kala, ot llth wl i i ica oh AM A i i li fe a lili es, ile ld Ske MH Ul , 6. None of the comparable properties are big enough for a school site. None have the same future land use code as the subject. 7. The comparables are single-family. 8. One of the comparables is from 1994. 9. One is laketront. 6, This is an incorrect statement in that 10- acre school sites in other locations within the county have been purchased by the school svstem. The observation that this particular site was 30 acres has no bearing on anything. Additionally, if Mr. Heim had looked at the Future Land Use Map for Lake County, he would have noted that all of the comparables and the subject have the same Future Land Use Code of Suburban with a development potential of up to 3 dwelling units per acre. Additionaily, all of the comparables and subject have the same Agricultural zoning. Obviously, it was reasonably probable that the school system could obtain a land use code and zoning change if necessary to place a school at that site. 7. At the time of purchase. all comparables were vacant land. 8. The reader may note that the comparables ranged from sale dates of January 27, 1994 to a current contract which was expected, and did, close in January of 1998. In my opinion, no adjustment for improved market conditions was warranted and in this rural market. it is not uncommon to use a comparable sale which is several years old. Furthermore. Sale 3/SAS 727 abuts the subject property along its south border and the other two sales are within sight when one is standing on the subject property. Therefore, it is my opinion that the similarities in terms of location. topography and other physical criteria far outweighed the obserwation that one of the sales sold in 1994. ~ 9. Albeit, the vacant land sales map shows a small pond located alon& the northeast .-corner of Sale 2. in fact. this low area is not a lake and is not even a pond during dry — periods. [t is only a low area which ne Cane SET Aon a ine i revaey tia ike lil ore ARM a i i ea MR i ai li visi. ei 10. One of the comparables was not even a closed sale when this appraisal was performed and was sold by the same owner that had sold the subject to the school system. 11. No banks were involved with any of the comparable purchases. 12. In March, during the controversy, the school specifically requested the appraiser change the appraisal to a market value appraisal. ts intermittently has water in it during periods of heavy rainfall. 10. Given that conversations with the seller of Sale 3/SAS 727 indicated that the contract would close less than one month after this appraisal report, it was my opinion that this contract. was a valid indicator of the subject’s use value. In that this property abutted the south side of the subject property and was purchased as a special use site as a church, it was my opinion that it would have been inappropriate not to include this contract in my analysis. The observation that the same owner sold the comparable property to a different buyer is not relevant to this appraisal assignment. 11. Banks are not required to be involved with real property purchases, therefore. this statement is not relevant to this appraisal assignment. 12. This is an incorrect statement. As may be noted in the letter to Mr. Jerry Cox, Assistant for Business and Support. Lake County School District, dated March 2. 1998, I was requested to prepared an addenda to be presented in conjunction with the use value appraisal that I had performed on the 30-acre potential school site. As may be noted in the second paragraph of my letter to Mr. Cox. the . addenda was a brief analysis of my estimate of-market value as was described in the original appraisal. Furthermore, that appraisal was included by reference in its entirety in this addenda letter and the statement was made that the estimate of market value should only be utilized in conjunction with the original appraisal and was made part of the original appraisal. The original appraisal was not altered. changed or modified in any wav, shape or pee cet) Seve et iF kM ail a, Ni ci ck a i i i i a 13. This land purchase was totally surrounded by controversy. It was bought anyway. 14. It is my contention that the purchase price was at least double the fair market value of the 30-acre “L-shaped orange grove. ‘ 15. Ihave a map of the area. 16. I personally presented two pieces of property to the school system for $10,000 less per acre. 17. The appraiser's wife is a long time employee of the school system: form. The market value estimate was merely added to the original appraisal and it was clearlv stated that any reader should use the market value appraisal with the original appraisal. 13. The political controversies between the School Board and their opponents are not relevant to this appraisal assignment. 14. Mr. Heim's contention has no relevance with regard to my opinion of value or this appraisal assignment. 15. Sodol. 16. [ am not familiar with the properties presented to the school system by Mr. Heim, however. I am also not responsible if the school system did not chose to buy Mr. Heim’s property. On a professional level I fail to see what this statement has to do with the appraisal of the subject property, however, on a personal level, it. would appear to me that Mr. Heim may be suffering from a case of “sour grapes”. 17. The observation that my wife is a mental health counselor, licensed by the State of Florida, and has been employed by the Lake County School system for some 15 years has nothing to do with my appraisal of the subject property. Furthermore. Mr. Heim's apparent insinuation that I was awarded the appraisal assignment because of my _ wife's employment by the school system is not correct. My wife has no pars in the selection of school sites, determination of © price to be paid. to whom appraisal assignments will be awarded or any other matter with regard to the administration of the Lake County School system. 18. The location of the site and the road is not advantageous to bus tratfic and the neighbors fought the purchase. 19. None of this should have any bearing on the market value of a particular piece of real estate. I realize this! Or maybe not much bearing. 20. It is my belief that another inside deal was performed in Lake County and only the good old boys were involved. 21. If a use value appraisal was inappropriate or if something inappropriate or incompetent was done to justify a higher price, I will take this matter to higher authority. “22. Various comments about tax payers and the Lake County School system. ( 18. The Lake County School system chose the site to be appraised based on their own criteria and selection process. 19. This is a meaningless statement. 20. The Lake County Schoo! system administration follows a rotational format procedure in the selection of appraisers. The purpose for this rotational format procedure is to assure that there is no favoritism and that all qualified appraisers get a fair share of the work. At the time that I performed this appraisal or shortly thereafter. there were three other appraisals being performed on potential school site purchases in Lake County. It is my understanding that these appraisals were being performed by Kenneth Daw, MAI, from Clermont, J. Fred Kurras, MAI from Mount Dora and John Roberts, SRA from Eustis. Since the Lake County School system has a rotational policy for using appraisers, it is my opinion that the allegation that only good old boys were involved is absolutely groundless. 21. Nothing inappropriate. improper or incompetent was done in the performance of the appraisal assignment. 22. These-comments are meaningless. ~~ In summary, it is my opinion that Mr. Heim’s letter is more of a tirade against the school system for not purchasing the property that he supposedly offered to sell them than it is allegations against my appraisal. My personal opinion is that this is a classic case of “sour grapes” and that Mr. Heim’s allegations and statements are disjointed. meaningless and have no basis in fact. A a a a kf l,l i clk kk ll i i HR ea lili ek ke at According to the allegations filed by the Department of Business and Professional Regulations, I allegedly failed to exercise reasonable diligence in developing an appraisal report. Furthermore. I allegedly violated the Competency Provision of the USPAP’s as well as Standard Rule I-1 (a), (b), (c). Additionally, the Department has alleged that [ have violated Standard Rule 1-4 (b), (III). Finally, the Department alleges that I have violated Standard Rule 1-5 (b). (II). In my opinion, I did not fail to exercise reasonable diligence in developing the appraisal report. The appraisal report was developed in a competent and thorough professional manner. Furthermore, I did not violate the USPAP’s in any regard, especially with the Competency Provision or any of the Standard Rules stated in the complaint. I have performed various commercial real estate appraisal which involved numerous types of properties as well as condemnation appraisals for about 13 years. I have been an MAI for slightly over 6° years. I have performed special use appraisals which were submitted to the Internal Revenue Service of the United States as well as estate appraisals on agricultural properties which have amounted to millions of dollars. I have performed casualty loss appraisals on citrus groves, fee appraisals. conservation easement appraisals and many other types of appraisals. As a life-long resident of Lake County, I am thoroughly familiar with the Lake County market and its local nuances. I am currently involved in appraising 29 parcels of agricultural-type properties in Desoto County for the Florida Department of Transportation. Given my Masters of Agriculture from the University of Florida in addition to my MAI designation as well as a review of my qualifications contained in the addenda of the report I believe I am competent to perform a use value and a market value appraisal of a 30-acre parcel of vacant land in my home county. As for any supposed violations of Standard Rule 1-1, it is my opinion that I was aware of, understood and correctly employed all recognized methods and techniques that were _fecessary to perform a credible use value and market value appraisal of the subject property. Furthermore. [ did not commit any substantial error of omission or commission that significantly affected the appraisal. Finally, I did not render appraisal service in a careless or negligent manner. As to Standard Rule 1-4 (b) (IID) it is my opinion that a reading of the narrative description of the comparable sales located from pages 33-35 of the report as well as a study of the vacant land sales analysis chart on page 36 and the comparable sales map on page 37 and a reading of the detailed sales write-ups contained in the addenda of the repoit indicated that the comparable sales data was adequately identified and described in order to lead me to a use value and market value conclusion for the subject propesty. As to Standard Rule 1-5 (b), (IT) the reader may note that statemenis are made in the Brief History section of the report on page 16 of the appraisal report which clearly indicate that any prior s&les or in this ‘case contracts of the property being appraised were considered and analyzed. In conformance with Advisory Opinion AQ-1. 1 have included a clear’ statement as to the fact that the subject property was under contract for purchase by the Rial a Spee ears. carer ari tr ey ae thin ie i i a A RR RM la kk ll i i ll Kk ke laa ills de kite. ‘cc th tka aavt uc cee oa RR Lake County School system. There were no prior sales of the subject property within the previous three years and the contract is discussed on page 16 of the appraisal report. Additionally, a copy of the contract is included in the addenda of the report. With the exception of the statements regarding Mrs. Stricklen the responses presented in this letter are also the responses for Mr. Thomas A. Riddle, MAI. In summary, after an analysis and reading of Mr. Heim’s complaint as well as the allegations filed in this case, it is my opinion that Mr. Heim’s complaint and the allegations have no basis in fact and are groundless. I therefore request that these allegations be dismissed for lack of probable cause. , , Respectfully submitted, * Albert L. Stricklen, MAI State Certified General Real Estate Appraiser 0000315 Theruay lb beetle b. Thomas A. Riddle, MAI State Certified General Real Estate Appraiser 0001451 ceeded ls ci toes deine ie os 6 aks il i RN side of Round Lake Road approximately one quarter mile North of State Road: A A ak al i i ek MM i ll il a li i te ° Bledsoe & Ebaugh, Inc. Thomas W. Bledsoe, MAI Craig A. Ebaugh, MAI State-Certified General State-Certified General Appraiser RZ 0000901 Appraiser RZ 0000234 January 28, 2002 Ms. Sunia Y. Marsh, Senior Attorney Department of Business and Professional Regulations Division of Real Estate 400 West Robinson Street, Suite N 308 ’ Orlando, FL 32801-1772 Re: Expert Appraisal Review DBPR Case No. 98-84273; 98-84288 Dear Ms. Marsh: rer I have completed my review of the appraisal prepared by Albert L. Stricklen, MAI and Thomas A. Riddle, MAI of the vacant track of land located on the West 46 in East Lake County. i i A drive by inspection of the subject property, the surrounding neighborhood + a 3 and the comparable sales uged in the appraisal was done as part of the: ’. i. appraisal review process. The objective of the review was to assist the. ; Department of Business and Professional Regulation in identifying any possible . . violations of the USPAP provisions and to site any other concerns and ~ _ comments about the appraisal. The first item of review was the narrative appraisal report dated December 9, 1997. The appraisal was prepared for the Lake County School Board. : vent here Bu estat — The first item of concern is in regard to the letter of transmittal. ‘The third paragraph in the letter implies that the subject property is in someway a limited market property that has relatively few potential buyers at a particular time. The subject property is not a limited type property particularly when it is noted that there is an abundance of vacant land in immediate area. [ts current use and projected highest and best use is not specialized. The fact that the property is being purchased by the School Board does not, in itself, render the property to be limited in its marketability. Appraisers / Consultants / Real Estate Brokers Post Office Box 2641 * Winter Park, Florida 32790 « (407) 647-0876 * FAX: (407) 647-7564 « E-Mail: caebaugh@mpinet.net * DBPR Case No. 98-84273, 98-84288, page 2 The letter of transmittal goes on to say the current use is so specialized that there is no demonstratable market for it. In the opinion of Mr. Stricklen, this justifies an estimate of use value. It is my opinion that the subject property does not represent some type of special use property. I have done a number of appraisals of school sites in Orange and Seminole Counties and the basis for the appraisal has always been to reflect the market value of the property based on its highest and best use on the open market. In many Cases a prospective site for a school facility does not represent the highest and best use and there was never a request to estimate a use value. co kk ll A i i ls a elie I Kk a The Appraiser has included the definition of use value on page 6. The examples noted in the definition for special use properties include houses of worship, museums, schools, public buildings and clubhouses. This definition in no way relates or identifies the subject property as being specialized. The examples given all represent improved properties as well. It is my opinion that this reference to a use value could be construed as being misleading. 2 hse li ak. Reference is made to the real estate tax information on page 15 of the appraisal report. It is stated in the appraisal under the special use valuation analysis that the real estate taxes and assessment are not relevant. Assessment and taxes are always relevant and should have been given. It could be inferred that by not having the assessment and taxes that the exclusion of the information could be misleading. It is quite possible that the assessment of the property was reflective of an agricultural exemption since the property had been a producing citrus grove. If this was the case, it could be easily explained as to why the assessment was so low. i ME i i ii i Also on page 15 and 16 is reference to zoning and the future land use. In both cases the Appraiser is making a statement that the zoning and future land use . has no relevance on the site valuation. The Appraiser’s statement that the : zoning and future land use has no relevance is due primarily to his assumption i 4 that the appraisal has been based on a special use premise. I am not familiar 2! H : : A : . 75a with the Lake County zoning regulations, but in most counties a potential 2 fa} g edi, lie XN school site is either a permitted use under an agricultural or residential land), use or it would be reasonable to anticipate a change of zoning. ~@oning and = { future land use is always relevant and more discussion should have been given = { as to the permitted uses and what zoning would have been appropriate fora © = i { school site. The statement that the zoning and future land use is not relevant : is somewhat misleading. i On page 28 is a sketch of the property. The dimensions shown on the sketch indicate a land area of 29.3939 acres as compared to the 30 acres that was ‘ used in the valuation analysis. This is a minor item but the land area used in the valuation should correspond to dimensions given on a property sketch or an explanation should be given. , 4 i Bie a lhl i i i i 4 4 DBPR Case No. 98-84273, 98-84288, page 3 During my inspection of the subject property, it was noted that a large excavated clay pit and landfill is located on the North and West sides of the subject property. The land excavation has resulted in a substantial drop off in elevation along the West property line of the subject property. I did not read any reference to the clay pit and landfill in any part of the appraisal report. The presence of this landfill operation may not have any bearing on the property value but it should certainly have been disclosed. The only possible reference is on the bottom of page 29 with a statement indicating the property North of the subject is vacant. . 7 '’ On page 30 of the appraisal report there is discussion as to the special use Premise. It seems to be inappropriate to apply a special use value for vacant land of this type. School sites can use almost any type of property. If the primary use and best use is for a school site, then that is its primary use, nota special use. To compare a vacant tract of land to special use properties, such as houses of worship, museums, public buildings and clubhouses, is misleading. The statement the subject property’s current use is so specialized that there is no demonstratable market for it, does not apply to the subject property. A highest and best use analysis is not given. A highest and best use analysis should always be given and if there are specific reasons why a property does not fit the standard definition, reasons for any departure should be given. The valuation analysis starts on page 31. Comparable sale No. 1 is nearly four years old and there is no discussion as to the possible changes in market prices over that period of time. It could be that there have been no changes and no adjustment would be needed, but some discussion should have been given. ~ Also, if you were to compare sales 1 and 2 there is a substantial difference in the unit prices even though the sales are contiguous. There should be some discussion as to why this difference in value has occurred and it may be a basis for further adjustments. The large adjustment for size has no support other than indicating that a school site needs to be of a specific size and that all of these sales were smaller than. what is typically needed for an adequate school site. The Appraiser should provide some kind of support for this kind of reasoning. Typically a smaller site will sell for a higher unit value than a larger site. It is also noted that the Appraiser did not take into account that 10 of the 30 acres of the subject property represents back land. The adjustments for road frontage are not supported. Just because a property has more road frontage doesn’t necessarily mean it is superior, particularly sie ee ere Ss sede nll a i A Ri i i i ci i len A ak i i nn eh a 8 i ll i a LB DBPR Case No. 98-84273, 98-84288, page 4 when the tract of land is substantially larger. I did not understand the comment that the subject property has a higher visible frontage from two separate access points as a basis for an adjustment. It is generally not a good practice to have an adjusted value estimate that exceeds all of your comparable sales. It tends to give the impression that the . sales may not have been that comparable. The correlated value of $18,000.00 per acre would also be a possible indication the adjustments were not well supported when the adjusted range was from $15,782.00 to $21,875.00. Two of the three sales used reflected adjusted values 11 to 21% over the correlated value of $18,000.00. : The selection of sales used in the appraisal is very limited and does not offer a good indication as to the general market for acreage tracts of land in the Subject market area. It is also important to note that in the value conclusions, the Appraiser did not mention the contract price of $500,000.00 and why the appraisal was higher than the contract price by 8%. The next review was of the letter of transmittal dated March 2, 1998. This letter of transmittal is sited as being an addenda to the use value appraisal that was dated December 5, 1997. This new letter addenda is presented as being a brief analysis of the Appraisers estimate of market value of the same 30-acre property. This letter addenda was only signed by Albert L. Stricklen, MAI. This addenda letter basically discredits the original appraisal particularly if the value in use premise is found not to be appropriate. As noted in this addenda letter of transmittal the only change is in the adjustment of the size characteristics. The letter states that as a general rule larger parcels tend to sell for lower unit prices when compared to smaller parcels. It also lends support for the conclusion that the size adjustments used in the use value analysis have no support. If a site is superior because it has less cost for | development, then this should be a separate adjustment item. The mere facte that the property is being planned for use’ as a school site does not lend? 5 i i support for a higher size adjustment. aad COM 57 In conclusion, the appraisal could be considered to be somewhat misfeading ass well as the addenda letter particularly with the emphasis on the premise of a= use value. : The concern as to whether the appraisal has violated any USPAP standards has also been addressed. Standard Rule 1-1 {c} has possibly been violated. This standard states that an Appraiser must not render appraisal services in a careless or negligent manner, such as a series of errors that, considered i a a i, i 4 i 4 i A AMR i UN Kl a lll i i i i as a i i a i Ne At DBPR Case No. 98-84273, 98-84288, page 5 individually, may not significantly affect the result of an appraisal, but which, when considered in the aggregate, would be misleading. This would primarily apply to the value in use concept that was employed in the initial appraisal report. In my opinion, the subject property does not meet the requirements for a special use property and in turn the value conclusions may be misleading. The Appraiser did not demonstrate market support for the adjustments that were used under the value in use concept. Standard Rule 1-4 {b} fii} may not have been followed satisfactorily. This rule states the Appraiser. should collect, verify, analyze, and reconcile such comparable sales data, adequately identified and described, as are available to indicate a value conclusion. The 3 sales used by the Appraiser required fairly large adjustments in the value in use analysis and maybe a broader range of sales should have been analyzed to better document the value conclusions. It does appear as if there were some other sales based on the information sent in by Mr. Heim. The other Standard that may have been violated deals with Standard Rule 2-2 {a} {ix} and Standard Rule 2-2 {b} {ix}. These two references deal with highest and best use in a self contained appraisal report or a summary appraisal report. Mr. Striklen did not indicate whether the appraisal was a self contained or summary report. Under the self-contained appraisal report, the report must describe the Appraisers opinion of the highest and best use of the real estate when such an opinion is necessary and appropriate. This requirement calls for the Appraiser to describe the data considered and the procedures that were followed. Each item must be addressed in the depth and detail required by its significance tas the appraisal. The Appraiser must be certain that sufficient information iss provided so the Client and intended users of the report will understand it and3 will not be mislead or confused. The substantive content of the report, not its= size, determines its compliance. . ae The summary appraisal report must summarize the Appraisers option of th highest and best use of the real estate when such an opinion is nece8sary and*: appropriate. This requirement calls for a report to contain the Appraisers ~“ opinion as to the highest and best use of the real estate, unless an opinion as to the highest and best is unnecessary, that is insurance valuation or value in use appraisals. If an opinion as to highest and best use is required, the reasoning in support of the opinion must also be summarized in the depth and detail required by its significance to the appraisal. i Ha li i ll ea eek a i Rl Me AM le a a DBPR Case No. 98-84273, 98-84288, page 6 My concern is that Mr. Stricklen did not show adequate support for preparing a use value appraisal on a vacant tract of land. Thus, a discussion as to the property’s highest and best use should have been presented. The last part of the review deals with the complaint presented by Mr. Heim. Most all of the sales information provided by Mr. Heim was reviewed and I took the time to locate the sales on an ownership map. Most all of the sales that were listed represented sales that took place after the data of value of the appraisal report. Also most of the sales given by Mr. Heim were not very comparable and were located to the North and not on a primary road. ‘There were, however, a few sales that were discussed by Mr. Heim that may have been applicable in the appraisal and they were within the time frame of the date of value. Two such sales were located along SR 46 in proximity to Round Lake Road. Without further research into these particular sales, I am not able to express an opinion as to their comparability to the subject property. However, I do feel that they should have been researched and used in the appraisal report, which would have added further credibility to the overall appraisal. It was also noted that Mr. Heim did not specifically address the sales that were used in the appraisal or give any reasons why they were not relevant sales. This conchides my appraisal review and if any additional information is needed, please let me know. _ Respectfully Submitted, BLEDSOE & EBAUGH, INC. Mr. Craig A. Ebaugh, ) State Certified General Appraiser #0000234 =o i i Bt ni a a fa i is Hii eka A, RR I lk i an ae NID Case Nos. 98-84273,98-84288 — REVIEW _APPRAISORS CERTIFICATION I, the undersigned, do hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief: 1 the facts and data reported by the reviewer and used in the review process are true and correct. 2 the analyses, opinions and conclusions in this Teport are limited only by the assumptions and limiting conditions stated in this review report and are my personal, impartial, and unbiased professional analyses, opinions and conclusions. I have no present or prospective interest in the property that is the ko subject of this report and no personal interest with respect to the parties involved. I have no bias with respect to the property that is the subject of this report or to the parties involved with this assignment. my engagement in this assignment was not contingent upon developing or reporting predetermined results. my compensation is not contingent on an action or event resulting from the analyses, opinions or conclusions in this review or from its use. my analyses, opinions and conclusions were developed and this review report was prepared in conformity with my understanding of Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice and the State of Florida for State Certified Appraisers; also, that use of this report is subject to the requirements of the Appraisal Institute relating to review by its duly authorized representatives. : I did personally inspect the subject property of the work under review. no one provided significant real or personal property appraisal or “appraisal review assistance to the person signing this certification. 10 in accordance with competency provision in the Uniform Standards of ° Professional Appraisal Practice, the reviewer certifies that his education; Lp ln hO Io wViit Gs experience and knowledge is sufficient to review the type of appraisal 7. ~ \ being reviewed. il as of the date of this report, Craig A. Ebaugh, MAI, SRA, has completed the requirements of the continuing education program of the Appraisal Institute and the State of Florida Department of Professional Regulation. Signed: Ce Laue Craig A. E¥augh, MAI, SRA State Certified General Appraiser #0000234 Date: January 28, 2002 Feet) STATE OF FLORIDA ~ DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION March 6, 2002 VIA FACSIMILE and US Mail! Ms. Sharyn Smith, Director #8 Division of Administrative Hearings ; The DeSoto Building "Kim Biekey, 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1550 Division of Reat Estate 400 West Robinson Steet = RE: DBPR v. Albert Stricklen Suite NSOS DOAH Case No. Ortando, Fiostda DBPR Case No. 98-84273 32801-1772 . Dear Ms. Smith: sorusoms Attached please find Petitioner's Amended Motion for Clarification and Extension of Time to Respond to Respondent's Motion to Dismiss. The sole sonst, im purpose of the amended motion is to state in paragraph 7 that the attorneys a have attempted to confer, but were unable to do so by the deadline. EMAIL, - BREGdtprsniefve The undersigned is transmitting the aménded motion by facsimile and U. S. Intekner ” mail to ensure timely filing. Transmission of the exhibits is by U. $. mail only wewinytoréacom — because the exhibits are voluminous. These exhibits are the same exhibits i as those attached to Petitioner's Motion for Clarification and Extension of ; Time to Respond to Respondent's Motion to Dismiss. F j see : la N. Ropinson Pierce i Senior Attorney, Real Estate - F SNRP/ip { ec: = Jay W. Small, Esquire j _ Wilson, Garber & Small, P. A. 3 437 N. Magnolia Avenue Orlando, Florida 32801-1524 ‘ - Z0'd. LTE... 20.9.2 4 0972 LLE Ov wapues 9 F Wd €0:Z soul) ZO/O/E Tawi as diso. sowed :sebeq reyeq (pepessong yUeAg) JUsAZ paalsvoy

Docket for Case No: 02-000946PL

Issue Date	Proceedings
May 06, 2002	Subpoena Duces tecum, J. Prickett filed.
May 06, 2002	Subpoena Duces Tecum, J. Cox filed.
May 06, 2002	Subpoena Duces Tecum, A. Heim filed.
Apr. 16, 2002	Order Closing File issued. CASE CLOSED.
Apr. 15, 2002	Motion to Hold Case in Abeyance filed by Respondent.
Apr. 12, 2002	Notice of Taking Deposition Duces Tecum (4), D. Brown, J. Cox, J. Prickett, A. Heim filed.
Apr. 11, 2002	Order issued. (motion for modification/clarification is denied)
Apr. 11, 2002	Notice of Taking Deposition Duces Tecum, A. Stricklen filed.
Apr. 10, 2002	Petitioner`s Motion for Modification of Order (filed via facsimile).
Apr. 10, 2002	Response to Motion for Modification of Order filed by Respondent.
Mar. 27, 2002	Memorandum Concerning Jurisdiction filed by J. Small
Mar. 25, 2002	Order issued (On or before April 5, 2002, Petitioner shall amend Count I of Administrative Complaint to reflect specific reference number/provisions alleged to be violated. Otherwise, motion to dismiss is denied).
Mar. 22, 2002	Petitioner`s Notice of Filing Petitioner`s First Request for Production (filed via facsimile).
Mar. 22, 2002	Petitioner`s Notice of Filing Petitioner`s First Request for Admissions (filed via facsimile).
Mar. 22, 2002	Petitioner`s Notice of Filing Petitioner`s First Interrogatories to Respondent (filed via facsimile).
Mar. 22, 2002	Notice of Service of Interrogatories filed by Respondent.
Mar. 22, 2002	Request to Produce filed by Respondent.
Mar. 21, 2002	Petitioner`s Response to Respondent`s Motion to Dismiss (filed via facsimile).
Mar. 18, 2002	Order issued (the parties may file written argument concerning the jurisdiction, or lack of jurisdiction by March 27, 2002).
Mar. 18, 2002	Order of Pre-hearing Instructions issued.
Mar. 18, 2002	Notice of Hearing issued (hearing set for April 29 through May 1, 2002; 10:30 a.m.; Tavares, FL).
Mar. 13, 2002	Joint Response to Initial Order (filed via facsimile).
Mar. 06, 2002	Petitioner`s Motion for Clarification and Extension of Time to Respond to Respondent`s Motion to Dismiss filed.
Mar. 06, 2002	Petitioner`s Amended Motion for Clarification and Extension of Time to Respond to Respondent`s Motion to Dismiss (filed via facsimile).
Mar. 06, 2002	Administrative Complaint filed.
Mar. 06, 2002	Election of Rights filed.
Mar. 06, 2002	Agency referral filed.
Mar. 06, 2002	Initial Order issued.