HomeMy WebLinkAboutParker Land Appraisal -2000 10 16
-~-~
-~.- -'""!!'I'"',-.-.--r-
---(---:"'"l!""'~~-..,---,--
"'1._.,'.-""......,..-
. .~-<'.':'~:;
~..' \~._-_..'-.-'
, "
\ .-r; l"
" ",.,--",.,.._-
\
1,1
CRM NO: 00-275
CERTIFICATE OF VALUE
PARKER LAND FOR WINTER SPRINGS PARK EXPANSION
, .'~
I certify to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:
1. The statements of fact contained in this report are true and correct.
2. The reported analyses. opinions, and conclusion are limited only by the reported assumptions and limiting conditions and are my personal.
impartial, unbiased. professional analyses, opinions, and conclusions..
\
3, I 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.
4,. 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.
5. 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 directly related to the intended use of this
appraisal.
6. My analyses, opinions, or conclusions were developed and this report has been prepared in conformity with the Uniform Standards of Professional
Appraisal Practice, and the provisions of Chapter 475, Part II, Florida Statutes and the Uniform Appraisal Standards for Federal Land Acquisitions.
7. I have made a personal inspection of the property that is the subject of this report and I have afforded the property owner the opportunity to
accompany me at the time of the inspection. I have also made a personal field inspection of the comparable sales relied upon in making this
appraisal. The subject and the comparable sales relied upon in making this appraisal were as represented by the photographs contained in this
appraisal.
8. No persons other than those named herein provided significant professional assistance to the person signing this report.
9. I understand that the City of Winter Springs may use this appraisal in purchase negotiations with Arbor Lake Development Corporation.
10. This appraisal has been made in conformity with the appropriate State laws, regulations, policies, and procedures, and, to the best of my
knowledge, no portion of the property value e.ntered on this certificate consists of items which are noncompensable under the established law of the
State of Florida. .
11. I have not revealed the findings or results of this appraisal to anyone other than the proper officials of the City of Winter Springs or their
representatives, and I will not do so until so authorized by City officials, or until I am required by due process of law, or until I am released from this
obligation by having publicly testified as to such findings.
12. Regardless of any stated limiting condition or assumption, I acknowledge that this appraisal report and all maps, data, summaries, charts, and
other exhibits collected or prepared under this agreement shall become the property of the City of Winter Springs without restriction or limitation on
their use.
13. Statements supplemental to this certification, as required by membership or candidacy in a professional appraisal organization, are described on
an addendum to this certificate and, by reference, are made a part hereof.
Based upon my independent appraisal and the exercise of my professional judgment, my opinion of the market value for the appraised property as of
October 2, 2000, is: $3.300.000.
Market value should be allocated as follows:
LAND
IMPROVEMENTS
TOTAL
$3,300,000
o
$3,300,000
LAND AREA
PROPERTY TYPE
27.3 acres, more or less
CODE *(1234) UVSW
PROPERTY TYPE CODES:
1. R-Rural
U-Urban
2. I-Improved
V-Vacant
3. H-(Home) Residence
B-(Business) Commercial
F-(Factory) Industrial
A-Agricultural
S-Spec;al Purpose
4. W-Whole Acquisition
P-Partial Acquisition
DATE: October 16, 2000
&ER~
STATE-CERTIFIED GENERAL APPRAISER
LICENSE NUMBER: RZ 0000141
F~ f1 ,J1;'
\ '\ \ (L (v->v-> ~ r ;-1 It i..
_....~.
~~,'------
.' ,," ~4'''.
*'!'.Pi,.'
)::,,~'~:'"','-"~':.::';~~~PG~~F~;=;
. " ~ ......
~,.~~.:~,'.,...:!"'l"Il;:O-~, ....._~...,...
- -.,',"" , '," ~,~,"" "",'.-"'-"q;r"" """"~~""~" .~~. ,...". ,
\
111'
ADDENDUM TO CERTIFICATE OF VALUE
SUMMARY COMPLETE APPRAISAL
APPRAISER:
Paul M. Roper, MAl, SRA
State-Certified General Appraiser
License Number: RZ 0000141
COUNTY:
Seminole
PARCEL:
Parker Land
Mr. Don Watson, State-Certified General Appraiser, License Number RZ 0001976 provided
professional assistance in the functions of data research, analysis, report writing, preparation
of exhibits, special expertise and preparation of the Summary Complete Appraisal Report,
but the conclusions pertaining to the values reported herein are strictly my own.
The Appraisal Institute maintains a voluntary continuing education program for its members.
As of the date of this report, the undersigned MAl, SRA has completed the requirements of
the continuing education program of the Appraisal Institute. We do not authorize the out of
context quoting from or partial reprinting of this appraisal report. Further, neither all nor any
part of this appraisal shall be disseminated to the general public by the use of media for
public communication without the prior written consent of the appraisers signing this
appraisal report.
SIGNED: ~ - ~ P october 16. 2000
PAUL M. ROPER, MAl,
STATE-CERTIFIED GENERAL APPRAISER
LICENSE NUMBER: RZ 0000141
CLAYTON, ROPER lit MARSHALL
--:-:-:"-~~'-:-
.L'tt~" Nt,),;,~,>1l~r..
-'
r
'\1:
l'
t
~
\~~
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
CERTI FICA TE OF VALUE...................................................................................................................... i
ADDENDUM TO CERTIFICATE OF VALUE ...................... ........... ................ ..... .... ....... ............... ..... ..... ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS ...................... .... .............. ...... ......................... ....... ........ ......... .................. ....... Hi
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL................................................................................................................. iv
EXECUTIVE SUMMARy........................................................................................................................ 1
GENERAL ASSUMPTIONS................................................................................................................... 4
GENERAL L1MITI NG CONDITIONS....................................................................................................... 4
PURPOSE OF THE APPRAISAL ...... .... ................................ .................. .............. .......... .................. .....6
FUNCTION OF THE APPRAiSAL........ ................... ............................ ........ .......... ......... .................. ...... 6
SCOPE OF THE APPRAISAL................................................................................................................ 6
SUBJECT PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRIPTION ...................................... ......... ....... ........ ..... .......... ........ 6
AREA LOCATION MAP.................................. ........................................................................................ 8
NEIGHBORHOOD LOCATION MAP...................................................................................................... 9
AREA AND NEIGHBORHOOD DESCRIPTIONS .................... ................ ................ .......... ............ ....... 10
SUBJECT PROPERTY PHOTOGRAPHS............................................................................................ 14
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION ........................... ............ ....... .................................................................. 17
PROPERTY SKETCH...................... .................................................................................................... 20
HIGHEST AND BEST USE ................................................................................................................ 21
APPROACHES TO VALUE.................................................................................................................. 24
SALES COMPARISON APPROACH.......................... .......................................................................... 26
COMPARABLE LAND SALES LOCATION MAP ................................. ........... ...... ....... .................... 31
COMPARABLE LAND SALES ANALYSIS GRID ................................ ............ ............ ............ .........32
ADDENDUM ........................................................................................................................................ 33
DEFINITIONS
SEVERABLE APPURTENANCES (EASILY REMOVABLE REAL TV ITEMS)
TOWN CENTER ZONING DESCRIPTION
LAND SALE COMPARABLE DATA SHEETS
QUALIFICATIONS OF APPRAISERS
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION APPRAISAL CHECKLIST
CLAYTON, ROPER & MARSHALL
'S:'~_;,\'Lx~3"-:~'J:r~~---- ----:rc
''''<,':'m~~;,,~',,-'''
-- ..", ,:;~:~'~!!i't_.'.,:.~<'-{;
, , 't''';'': ,,-i.; ~;, "'~: c,:,;;,m.~-'-"'W,r-' i'i""i:!J~
- ~~,~~_._.~~c....,.,._.., T
'""'T"'" ~ ~ r~'" r."" .,.,......'!:~'\"..,.~~\'i'"".. ....,., (. ...........
f.-.r,.,. .~, ,::t""',. ...,'I';'f.,.:,".,'l..-"~.....,,...,._,....l"'ti:"'c~'""'"::'0',""",,"""" """:w-"l'l,--.;r-~~jI'<,,... ,,~~-_.., "'T , -
REAL ESTA"fE APPKlUSERS · CONSULTANi~
-,-1
fU)RIDA:
Clayton. Roper &. MarshalL Inc.
a Ftortda corporation
GEORGIA:
Clayton. Roper &. MarshalL LP..
a Georgia llmUed partnership
CRAIG H. CLAYTON. MAl
SfATE-CERTIFIED GENERAL APPRAISER ??oo 118
PHILIP E. PAULK. MAl. SRA
SfATE-CERTIFIED GENERALAPPRAlSER 001521
PAUL M. ROPER. MAl. SRA
SfATE-CERTIFIED GENERAL APPRAISER ??oo141
October 16, 2000
STEVEN L. MARSHALL. MAl. SRA
SfATE-CERTIFIEO GENERAL APPRAISER ??oo 155
Mr. Charles Carrington, AICP
Community Development Director
City of Winter Springs
1126 E. SR 434
Winter Springs, Florida 2708-2799
RE: 27.3-acre Parker Land located in Winter Springs, Seminole County, Florida
Dear Mr. Carrington:
As requested, we have cqnduotedthe necessary analyses and incidental inspections of the
above referenced property~The subject property is more specifically described within the text
of the accompanying appraisal report; The effective date of this appraisal is October 2, 2000.
The use of this report is subject to the requirements of the Appraisal Institute relating to review
by its duly authorized representatives and to the requirements of the State of Florida relating to
review by its Real Estate Appraisal Board. This is a certified appraisal as defined in the
provisions of Part II, Chapter 475.501, Florida Statutes. To the best of the appraiser's ability,
the analysis, opinions, and conclusions were developed and the report was prepared in
accordance with the standards and reporting requirements of the Department of
Environmental Protection.
PMR: DPW
00-275
aul M. Roper, MAl, S
St~te-Certified General Appraiser
License Number: RZ 0000141
III 246 NORIH WES1ldON1E DRIVE
ALTAMON1E SPRINGS. FLORIDA 32714
407/772-2200 FAX 407/772-1340
www.crm-orlando.com
01225 JOHNSON FERRY ROAD
BUIIDING 200. sum: 250
MARIETIA. GEORGIA 30068
770/579-1995 FAX 770/579-1977
pepaulkOcompuscrvc.com
,--::g;::m:1l.Iv.;;'if'~ - -" ':""-~''ir''7~~:''r-
'f:';'~~"'r-':',"':
'-~'\;;.~lli," i
'-ro';'1
n "_~,,," '~~:" . ""'......,.,..,... "'1_Vo""'<<",~-~"' _~I';;',,-;~~ ,,,.,.. ,...-
~ . ~ ~ ...,..........,..,.. ~
.......-,
--,--~=-"-'~"~~-'-
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
~_.. .~. -~--_.--_. -----,
PROJECT IDENTIFICATION
Winter Springs Town Center Recreational Park Land
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION
2030-26-5AR-ODOO-00 10
LOCATION
North of S.R. 434, 7/10th mile west of Tuskawilla Road.
Winter Springs, FL
APPRAISER
PROFESSIONAL ASSISTANCE
Paul M. Roper, MAl. SRA
Don Watson
State-Certified General Appraiser
License Number: RZ 0001976
DATES
Date of Value:
Date of Report:
October 2, 2000
October 16,2000
INTEREST APPRAISED
PARCEL SIZE/ACREAGE
PROPERTY OWNERS
NAMES & ADDRESSES
Fee Simple
27.3 acres. more or less
Edward H. and Sue S. Parker. co-trustees (2040 Springs
Landing. Longwood. FL 32779) and Richard H. Parker
(3798 Kinsley Place. Winter Park. FL 32792)
OWNERSHIP HISTORY
There have been no arms length transfers of this property
within the previous five years.
INSPECTION DATES
October 2, 2000
OWNER(S) PRESENT AT INSPECTION
AND EXTENT OF INSPECTION None. We walked over portions of the property.
EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE APPRAISAL October 2. 2000
PARCEL ACCESS
At the southeast corner via a 90'-long easement along the
City of Winter Springs ball field access road.
ZONING/LAND USE
Town Cent~r District, City of Winter Springs
FUTURE LAND USE
Multifamily Residential
ASSESSED VALUE:
$567.805 (land only, no improvements)
CLAYTON, ROPER &: MARSHALL
';"-'--.-.::..,.y"
.-.'i.~~o!tt:g:-'~~'''~r
,:,:.mlliill!'" "
UTILITIES:
Water:
Sewer:
City of Winter Springs
City of Winter Springs
(within 700' to the east)
Florida Power & Light Co.
Sprint
Florida Public Utilities
Time Warner
Communications
Electricity:
Telephone:
Gas
Cable
FLOOD ZONE INFORMATION:
According to the FEMA Map, Community Panel No.
12117C-0135-E, having an effective date of April 17 1995,
the appraised property is not in a flood hazard zone.
MINERAL RIGHTS:
Not Applicable
EASEMENTS:
No easements, encroachments, or restrictions that have
any negative effect on the market value of the subject
property are known to exist.
TYPE OF PROPERTY
Vacant land
HIGHEST AND BEST USE:
INTEREST APPRAISED
Multifamily residential development
Fee Simple
TYPE OF APPRAISAL
Summary Complete Appraisal Report
OPINION OF VALUE:
UNITS OF VALUE:
$3,300,000
$7,500 per unit based on a density of 16 dwelling units per
acre
2
CLAYTON, ROPER & MARSHALL
....
SALes OATA
OE SCM,PT1ON
LOCATION
!
I North side S.R.
i 434, 7/10 mi.
I west of
Tuskawilla Road,
i Winter Springs,
I Seminole County
Town Center
District- Winter
Sorinas
ZONING
FRONTAGE & ACCESS
Adequate
All (sewer 700'
~~1.
good
UTILITIES
TOPOGRAPHY
TOTAL ADJUSTMENTS
ADJUSTED UNIT PRICE/AC
ADJUSTED UNIT PRICE/APT.
0%
I
i
$110495 !
$6,814
$81,440
$7,475
I
INDICATION OF LAND VALUE
$7,500 /Unit x 437
$3,277,500
or, as rounded,
$3,300,000
I N. of Aloma
jAvenue, 1/4th
! mi. E. of
I Dean Rd.,
I Oviedo,
Seminole
I County
I PUD,
I Seminole
Countv
" 430' Aloma
Avenue
i available
---1._ offsite
I aood
0%1
! $81 190
! $6,264
Potential Units =
CLAYTON, ROPER & MARSHALL
J---'~--~~--77-,r":&T'-- -- r--_
S. side SR
434, 1/4 mi.
Wof
Vistawilla,
Winter
Springs,
Sem inole
County
PUD Winter
Springs
475' SR 434
available
offsite
lake
35%
35%
lNC) SAl,lS C~ARlSOH ANAl. va..
SUBJECT : l..-d SlIIa.l :AOJ ; L~ S~ nL~j~J~.1"3 ADJ. lAnd Sale IN ADJ.
, n.3684- I n-3616- n-3582-
SAl.E IDENTIFICATION. I 77.3731-1091 I 0082 I 1331 1447
AP~~TMENT ~ME-; --. -- .. - -l~~a~ -He~g-~;s;-----I s~:~ I Loma Vista ~~~:v
SALE'DATe-----------i---current----ai30tf999'nOO/; 7/8/1999 15%1 3124/1999 15% 1/28/1999 15%
SALE PRICE I NIA $2,230,000 i ! $1,820,000 $2,070,000 $1,690,000
.sTz-e'(AC_RE S) _m.__________.. .....-. 27. 30------ii:20--'l-'-r-'2S'-?O--- ----mm----'i9-:-32-- 23.86
# APARTMENTS 437 360 I 280 380 252
DENSITY OF DEVELOPMENT 16.2! 10.9 13.0 10.6
ADJUSTED DENSITY 16.2! 10.9 16.6 17.0
SALE-PRicEiAC--.-..-----..----- ---.--..--------.- -'-s-1oo;45o-T'-'-----$7o:aTj'--s70 600--' -.. - $70,830
SALE PRICE/APT. $6,194 I $6500 $5447 $6.706
f{~~-'~~5~~~~g~~~T:.-------+-mm..----------.---- '-'---~~~81:5--.1_L\~:1is()- ----.-- '-'~~,2:> - --. ~~~s:
OTHER ADJUSTMENTS
N. side Lake I NEQ Dodd
Mary Blvd., i Road and
1/3rd mi. w. ofl Redbug Lake
Greeneway, ,.. Road,
Sanford, Seminole
Seminole I
County
County !
RM-3, sanT S:~~~le I
! Coun
1,341' Logan I'
HeiQhts Drive 133' Redbug
available I available
offsite I offsite
!-- aood
0%
$109963
$7,712
3
.t~ ~./~';:
'(~:~:;':~:>.YQ:'.-' ,ff"'~!f:f'."':-',
GENERAL ASSUMPTIONS
1. The legal description used in this report(s) is assumed to be correct.
2. No survey of the property has been made by the appraiser and no responsibility is assumed in
connection with such matters. Any sketches in this report are included only to assist the reader in
visualizing the property.
3. No responsibility is assumed for matters of legal nature affecting title to the property/properties 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, the appraiser assumes no responsibility
for its accuracy.
5. All mortgages, liens, encumbrances, leases and servitudes have been disregarded unless so
specified within the report(s). 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/properties, subsoil or
structures that would render it more or less valuable. No responsibility is assumed for such
conditions or for engineering that may be required to discover them.
7. It is assumed that there is full compliance with all applicable federal, state and local environmental
regulations and laws unless noncompliance is stated, defined and considered in the appraisal
report(s).
8. It is assumed that all applicable zoning and use regulations and restrictions have been complied with,
unless nonconformity has been stated, defined and considered in the appraisal report(s).
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(s) is based.
1 a.lt is assumed that the utilization of the land and improvements is within the boundaries or property
lines of the property described and that there is no encroachment or trespass unless noted within the
report.
GENERAL LIMITING CONDITIONS
1. Possession of the report(s), 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 appraiser, and in any event only with proper written qualifications and only in its
entirety.
2. The distribution of the total valuation in this report(s) 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.
CRM 00-275
4
CLAYTON, ROPER &: MARSHALL
._~-~
-.--..---. -" -------~
.~ .=~. 'ii:Ii~"-' ~.-
--- -~----- - --~---
~
y - ""'f'(.- ~--
lTf:n-'
I!,.~,""~""A.-
3. No environmental impact studies were either requested or made in conjunction with this appraisal(s).
and the appraiser hereby reserves the right to alter, amend, revise, or rescind any of the value
opinions based upon any subsequent environmental impact studies, research or investigation.
4. 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 appraiser. Nor shall the appraiser. firm or professional organization of which the
appraiser is a member be identified without written consent of the appraiser.
5. Unless otherwise stated in this report, the existence of hazardous material. which mayor may not be
present on the property. was not observed by the appraiser. The appraiser has no knowledge of the
existence of such materials on or in the property. The appraiser. however. is not qualified to detect
such substances. The presence of substances such as asbestos. urea-formaldehyde foam
insulation. or other 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.
6. Acceptance of and/or use of this appraisal report constitutes acceptance of the foregoing General
Assumptions and General Limiting Conditions.
CRM 00-275
5
CLAYTON, ROPER & MARSHALL
1
,;~:m:T'1 ~ 7'['S ~=-------
"".'~''''~-?~''''"'''''''. '-".'~"""'-"'."-'
rl
"
.e.uBPOSE OF THE APPRAISAL
The purpose of this appraisal was to estimate the market value of the fee simple interest of the appraised
property. The estimate of market value is made under market conditions prevailing as of the valuation
date, October 2, 2000.
FUNCTION OF THE APPRAISAL
The function of this appraisal report is to assist the City of Winter Springs in its negotiations with Arbor
lakes Development Corporation for the Possible purchase of the appraised property. Arbor lakes
Development Corporation currentiy has a purchase agreement with the property owner. The City of
Winter Springs will use the land for expansion of the Central Winds Park complex.
SCOPE OF THE APPRAISAL
In preparing this report, the appraisers have searched the greater Orlando area, with particular emphasis
on the subject's neighborhood area, for sales of similar properties (and associated market information)
that, in the appraisers' opinion would be most indicative of the current market value of the subject
property. The Sales Comparison Approach was employed in our analysis of the subject property as it is
considered to be the applicable valuation method. The methodology and steps taken have been
discussed in more detail within the body of this appraisal report.
COMPETENCY OF APPRAISERS
The appraisers' specific qualifications are inclUded in the Addendum of this report. These qualifications
serve as evidence of their competence for the completion of this appraisal assignment in compliance with
the Competency Provision contained within the Unifonn Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice as
promulgated by the Appraisal Standards Board of the Appraisal Foundation. The appraisers' knowledge
and experience, combined with their professional qualifications, are commensurate with the complexity of
this assignment. The appraisers have previously provided consultation and value estimates for similar
properties throughout the State of Florida.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY
lots 1 and 2 of Block D, of D.R. Mitchell's Survey of the levy Grant on lake Jessup, as recorded in Plat
Book 1, page 5 of the public reCOrds of Seminole County, Florida. Furthennore, the property now
CRM 00-275
CLAYTON, ROPER & MARSHALL
6
.............
~"-""'~~'''-'~''''-''-''''''''.~__.,'''''-''''N':_.....,,~::::......,",.:":':f';'~"7"':~~:~":il-:'.~,'
"a ~ .~.............
..;.;i'- ".,"," .' ",- ~~.i"" " '~W~H~'::'". ;, ,}~;:'~:..,..:....~;~"j'~-~:_~.~~~~;~j
Includ.. the west H of vacated Clifton Avenue on the east side of the subject property as recorded in
Official Records Book #2290, Page #216.
FIVE-YEAR HISTORY OF TITLE
There have been no arms length transfers of this property within the previous five years. There was a
related party transfer in June 1996 for a nominal amount of $100 as recorded in Official Records Book
#3109, Page #1542. We understand that the property may be under contract at this time but only few
details were available for further analysis at this time. Please refer to the reconciliation of value section of
this report for what contract information we have available.
CRM 00-275
7
CLAYTON, ROPER & MARSHALL
""""~"Y',~;~''''<i'''",,,.,
'''~
~"'."'''.''f
Winter Springs is located roughly 13 miles to the northeast of Orlando on the southwest shore of Lake
J~SSLJp. Winter Springs (formerly known as North Orlando) has historically been a semi-rural
community with a significant agricultural influence. Residential development initially concentrated on
the western side adjacent to Casselberry with agricultural uses predominately further to the east. An
unincorporated area of Seminole County lays to the south and the City of Oviedo borders it on the
east. As the Orlando metropolitan area population increased, residential development in Winter
Springs began to concentrate further to the east and on the south side of the city. Transportation
linkages were the reason for this pattern of development and as the road infrastructure has changed
over time, so have development trends in the area. Development east of Orlando extended south and
north. The focus of development to the south is the Orlando International Airport. Development to the
north was a consequence of a high tech corridor centered around the University of Central Florida
and an adjacent research park with a multitude of nationally based technology companies. Winter
Springs has had no defined city center due to its. polarized development and the absence (until
recently) of an adequate road network connecting the residential areas to each other.
Transportation
The major highways defining Winter Springs form a grid structure around and through the corporation
limits. Up to the last decade, the road infrastructure within the Winter Springs area had been
secondary two lane highways ill suited for transporting large volumes of residential commuters to the
employment center of the Greater Orlando Metropolitan Area. Consequently, residential and
commercial development clustered around the existing traffic arteries. The original residential areas
in western Winter Springs had convenient access to north-south running U.S. Highway 17-92. Red
Bug Lake Road one mile south of Winter Springs affords convenient east and west commuter access
to the employment centers of the Greater Orlando Metropolitan Area. Consequently, residential and
commercial also began to cluster close to this newer urban arterial. The net result was a bifurcation of
Winter Springs with a distinct east and west districts. A brief description of the major roads follows.
S.R. 434 (also S.R. 419 through Winter Springs) is a 4-lane divided east to west highway in the
northern section of Winter Springs. Until the mid 1990's this road was a two-lane country road. It was
recently expanded to four lanes and several of its more severe curves have been modified. This road
is a becoming a major conduit for traffic through Winter Springs since it connects to 1-4 and U.S.
Highway 17-92 to the west and the Central Florida Greeneway to the east. Traffic counts have
increased on this road by more than 15% annually for the past three years (33,121 ADT for the
CRM 00-275 10
CLAYTON, ROPER & MARSHALL
......-,..,_.~-~------
. .' --_..~~...~.
Ui BY
_, -.,'T~'. , "._~~"--'-- ~..--.,~~"",::~~~:.,...::~~~.::-=-:_-
;;i;iJgI~~~~(.i~;;r;:;';4);;':'!'F;:":;;::<J[f7',-:7?;-::::~_~-~~-'''''-::-:~;;;:
--.s:~-F:> -,
~~~'
-----~ -....~-(~.., - .....,..
~~;;]!:'W~::~~~-"',,'
RfId Bug 181ce Road Is a major 4-lane. easl 10 wesl divided arterial one mi'e soulh of Winler Springs.
This highway is a focus of commercial development along most of its length and is the major east-to
west arterial for the southern Winter Springs and Oviedo residential and commercial areas. Traffic
counts have increased on this road by nearly 6% annually for the past three years (42,567 ADT for
tli ~..net 8.R. ~10 1n1999)
.>:~~....,<:
1999).
Tuskawilla Road is a two-lane north to south highway commencing at its intersection with S.R. 434
near the center of Winter Springs and continuing south to Red Bug Lake Road and then on to Aloma
Avenue further to the south. This road is used primarily as a residential thoroughfare connecting the
residential areas of the eastern part of Winter Springs to the employment and business districts to the
south. This road is currently being widened to four lanes. Traffic counts have increased on this road
by more than 10% annually for the past three years (13,822 ADT for 1999).
The Central Florida Greeneway (S.R. 417) has had a major impact on development in Winter Springs.
This four-lane, controlled access, divided toll highway provides a high speed, high volume connection
to the major employment centers of the Greater Orlando Metropolitan Area. Construction work
currently underway in Sanford will extend this highway all the way to 1-4 and will provide a convenient
easterly bypass around the traffic congestion associated with 1-4 between Sanford and Orlando.
Annual traffic volume on this highway increased 13% for the fiscal year ending June 1999.
Government
Winter Springs' municipal government is modeled on a traditional city government with a mayor, city
commissioners, planning and zoning board, and various other city departments. City operations are
funded from real estate taxes that in turn are administered by Seminole County. The City of Winter
Springs provides sewer and water services to most areas within its corporation boundaries.
The City takes an active role in development within the community by ensuring that the City's
comprehensive rand use plan is adhered to. One significant feature of the comprehensive plan is a
detailed plan for development of a city center. As addressed previously, Winter Springs differs from
most municipalities in that it has no defined city center. Its comprehensive land use plan addresses
this issue in great detail and presents a well-thought out development concept that will eventually
result in a defined city center near the intersection of S.R. 434 and Tuskawilla Road. A feature of this
development plan is a realignment of the Cross Seminole Trail within the vicinity of the proposed
Town Center. Significant development has already taken place in conformity with this city center
CRM 00-275
11
CLAYTON, ROPER & MARSHALL
'\,~').;.;/;:~~.;~'i~~~::,.:~.., '>.
-" . '~\\~~:;;77'Z:;I;'~~h;:\;:~~X'~~~~'~/f~" '-.' "'Y~$
f
concept. Winter Springs CIty Hall. the Winter Springs High School and the U.S. Post office have been
constructed within this area and the city has had no little influence on the proposed commercial
development on the property in the northwest corner of the intersection of S. R. 434 and Tuskawilla
Road.
Population
Winter Springs has grown in area by annexation over the years to the point where it is the largest
municipality in Seminole County. Largely due to Orlando's rapidly expanding economic base, Winter
Springs' 1970 population of 1,160 has increased 25-fold to an estimated 29,220 in 1999. Population
growth continues as illustrated by the following chart. These population increases are equivalent to an
annual growth rate of 3% over the past decade.
Winter Springs Population Growth 1990-1999
35.lXJO
1990
1991
1992
1993
11194
1995
1998
1997
1998
1998
3O.lXJO
25.lXJO
20, lXJO
15.lXJO
10.lXJO
5.lXJO
Population growth is mirrored by school enrollments. Elementary school enrollments in the Winter
Springs area of Seminole county have increased 21 % since 1995. Numerous new schools
(elementary, middle, high, both public and private) have either been constructed or are in various
stages of construction in this area. The following chart illustrating the trend in residential building
permits over the past few years in Winter Springs is further evidence of population growth in this area.
CRM 00-275
12
CLAYTON, ROPER & MARSHALL
-~...-~------:
j
Winter Springs Single-Family
Residential Building Permits
II)
~
E 400 -----------
:. 300
-
o 200
....
,g 1 00
E o.
:J
Z
R>'<> ~ R>CO R>O)
"Cl> "Cl> "Cl> "Cl>
Year
Surrounding Land Uses
The subject neighborhood is clearly an area in transition. Vacant and agricultural land uses are being
displaced by residential and commercial construction. Immediately east of the subject property is the
recently constructed Winter Springs High School with its elaborate sports complex. On the north side
of the subject property is the Central Winds Park. West of the subject property are several single-
family residence~ on large lots and beyond that is a large single-family residential development by
Centex. Vacant commercial land is on the south side of the subject property sandwiched between the
realigned S.R. 434 and the abandoned S.R. 434. The U.S. Post Office is located southeast of the
subject property on the south side of S.R. 434. Numerous residential (single and multi family) and
commercial developments are in various stages of completion along area highways as the available
vacant lands are steadily being absorbed. Most vacant land parcels have for sale signs posted.
Conclusion
The expanding Greater Orlando Metropolitan Area economy has been fuel for residential
development in Winter Springs. The recently upgraded road infrastructure in the Winter Springs area
is the key to tying this area to Orlando's employment centers and will greatly influence future
development patterns. S.R. 434 in particular will be the focus for commercial development and its
intersection with Tuskawilla Road will inevitably become the city's de facto business center as a
consequence of natural development pressures focused by the city's comprehensive land use plan.
CRM 00-275
13
CLAYTON, ROPER & MARSHALL
-------~~ ~~~:.~:~-:~---
....!'.~-""."'~---. -.--
-
r
()
~
~
o
~
.
~
o
~
~
pp
~
~
CRM 00-275
NEIGHBORHOOD AREA MAP
;j
9
AREA MAP
()
~
~
o
~
..
~
o
~
~
pP
;
~
'~
'\
\
\
Christmas )
CRM 00-275
"'" '
:1 ~
l
~
.~
~
1
'1
q
1
,-',,_JIi;;!..:',,~JJil:jItU.':.T"..
'7'~'''''''Il.?-r',"''fi1 1f1"''''1~''' ...
,
SUBJECT PROPERTY PHOTOGRAPHS
14
CRM 00-275
CLAYTON, ROPER &: MARSHALL
.~,
"',,:"
_1IIII.~rtj.--- ~ - =-
tb'
~~
~.........-.,..,.,..
-3;~'-~~ .
~;
(1) View to the northwest towards the southeast corner of the subject property. This is where
the City of Winter Springs has granted an access easement along 90' of the road
leading to the ballpark parking lot on the east side of the property.
(2) View east along abandoned S.R. 434 along south side of subject property.
Photos by Don Watson October 2000
CRM 00-275
CLAYTON, ROPER & MARSHALL
.~_.- -.....~~
15
b
(3) View to northeast towards southwest corner of the subject property from S.R. 434.
CRM 00-275
CLAYTON. ROPER & MARSHALL
. C~';-~=---=:.:..---::",:,~_~_:~~,,:_ ~.;.._ _~:""~""'-______.__ _.~... ___
'~'~
16
-0- -
DESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT PROPERTY
....,", -t<, <A,~'U.:~:-"~.r. ~~' ;~'; 7:i'" ",?" ";,~"",,..,..;;-,~~
~ " ....,.I."V <',~!;...-'.,w~,;.~,.:i$'. '"""
location
The subject property is located North of S.R. 434, 7I10~ mile west of Tuskawilla Road, Winter
Springs. This property borders the north side of the rtght of way of the abandoned portion of S.R. 434.
This section of S.R. 434 was abandoned when the road was realigned to the south in the mid 1990's.
Configuration and Size
The sUbject property is a nearly rectangular parcel of land encompassing 27.3 acres. more or less
based on a property survey given to us by the Dick Parker, This area includes the area of abandoned
Clifton Avenue on the east side of the property.
Topography and Soil
This property has a slight slope down to the west with higher ground on the east side. The eastern
third of the property drops in elevation by 12 feet and the remainder drops by roughly 8 feet for a total
elevation drop of approximately 20 feet equating to slightly less than a 2% slope on average.
In conjunction with the current purchase agreement on the property, Universal Environmental
Services of Orlando performed a soil survey. We examined that survey report and saw nothing to
indicate any soil development limitations. Surrounding land uses on (presumably) similar soil types
suggest few, if any, soils limitations to development of the uplands on either property.
Drainage
Due to topography. the site is less well drained on the west side than il is on the east side. The
property owner dug four east to west drainage ditches to that connect to another ditch on the west
side and leads toward Lake Jessup to the north.
Vegetation
The subject property is mostly covered with thick stands of pine trees that were planted to preserve
the land's agrtcultural exemption after a freeze destroyed the orange grove that had been on the
property.
Access and Visibility
This property has limited visibility from S.R. 434, as there is an intervening parcel of land between the
re-aligned S.R. 434 and the subject property. The property at one time had frontage along the
CRM 00-275
17
CLAYTON, ROPER & MARSHALL
-"'-,---,~-..lIt .~__._~_~
1!l1 I..l~
-
western side of Clifton Avenue. The City of Winter Springs Vacated COOon Avenue In 1993 and the
westem half of the street became part of the Sobject property. When the Subject property owner
realized that this street vacation would deprive him of access to the property, the Manager of the City
of Winter Springs wrote him a letter stating that access to the property woutd be granted via a gO' long
easement OVer the road leading to the City of Winter Springs' ball field parking area. No specific width
for this easement was stated in this letter. Our interpretation of the letter means that the entire width
of the road leading to the ball field parking area is available for access to the subject property. The
letter also stated that if altemate access to the property was later obtained west of this crossing, then
the City of Winter Springs would no longer be liable for providing access along the ball field parking
road. In response to a lawsuit filed by an adjacent property owner, access across the Rails to Trails
land was granted to the plaintiffs in the lawsuit. This included the owners of the appraised property.
According to an agreement signed by the owners of the appraised property in October of 1 998, two
access easements across the Rails To Trails land were granted to the appraised property at two
hundred feet from the east and west boundaries of the appraised property. These access easements
do not however constitute full access to the appraised property because they only lead from the
appraised property across the Rails To Trails land to the abandoned S.R. 434. The abandoned S.R.
434 Was deeded to the City of Winter Springs once S.R. 434 was realigned. So, although this section
of S.R. 434 is paved, it is not a public right of way and public Use of it as Such is by no means
assUred. We consider it a reasonable assumption that the City of Winter Springs would grant
negotiated access rights OVer Ihis property 10 the owners of the subject property because it is in the
City's best interest for this land to be put to its highest and best use. Furthermore, use of the old S.R.
434 right of way would minimize potentialtraflic congestion on the ball field access road. The need for
Such a negotiated access along the old S.R. 434 right of way has negligible negative impact on the
property's market value because the party to be negotialed with (Ihe City of Winter Springs) has
compelling reasons to grant Such access.
Easements, Encroachments, or Restrictions and Their Effect on Utilization
Other than the access easemenl previously referenced, no easements, encroachments, or restrictions
that have any negalive effecl on the market value of the subject property are known to exist.
Adjacent land Uses
The adjacent land Uses around the subject property are reflective of the transitional stage of Ihis area.
New commercial, residential and municipal developments exist alongside vacant, low-density
residential or agriculturatland uses Ihat characterized this area for much of its his lory. Most of these
vacant or agricultural parcels are listed for sale. A fanner railroad righl of way along the south border
CRM 00-275
CLAYTON. ROPER & MARSHALL
18
_. . .....-..____,..-;,-c,_...~._.~,_
-~=_..~~ -
." 'c.,.,,,,,;.,' ,,..~, ..,'c...;",.~..,;o''''''~;~'.A',.'", """"--".""''''N;''-''W~''-',,..w...=: ..i:;'.."'''_~''''c.,",,,,~,,<< """......... ..~ .~. '~.,.,'.:.o"". ...,-~
~~.. .....
. ..... ,~
T
of the property Is now part of the Ralls To Trails recreational park. This section of the trail will
eventually tie into the Cross Seminole Trail.
Zoning
The Town Center zoning designation permits a wide variety of commercial and multifamily residential
activities. This zoning code focuses on promoting development that will result in a variety of
commercial and high-density residential land uses that will replicate a traditional town center. To the
extent that infrastructure such as roads, parks, and utilities availability influences development, Winter
Springs intends to foster and encourage development in this area to create a viable town center.
Governmental land uses at the city, county and federal levels in the area have already established the
basis for such a town center. A wide variety of commercial and residential uses are permitted in this
district, paralleling what is commonly found in existing town centers elsewhere. This district permits
residential densities up to 36 dwelling units per acre. The reader is directed to the Addendum for the
complete zoning description of the Town Center District.
CRM 00-275
19
CLAYTON, ROPER & MARSHALL
-:-. ---~;';;r~~.~":..'_~' < __________~_ _ .,_
rill:
..," c{-,,-""" ,,"d";'; .c',,'.;!
CRM 00-275
."--~:;.~.:.;-----;-::-
PROPERTY SKETCH
.,.' .:
/
-:;;. . \. ~ . ,.--..---..... '" <:.
.~. ~i ( ./ ."-.. ',,----__
.'-- ,. '. IJ /0 ~
"',.- ~ " ./. .-' "'./ ,..,...---
r
...............
,.,t-
:z
&]
:..
:;:
,
'. '-
". Dfail:1age'ditch'es
.
~
N
I
i /' /./~,./
.. .' /' ,../
;...~ .... ,,/"
/IC" "
5'" .. ,
.........-..
2
~
"'
'.
.
\
\
\
\
"
--
...
/' .....
,
.~=- '" "
.. \\ ................
\ /
, I
,
;
Ii
/
/
I
i
I
,
I
--y
-...
20
CLAYTON, ROPER & MARSHALL
.u.__~-.:_
-',- -.--- -.-'--'- _.+--......~?"'~~.~~.::. -=-.
WL1 ;..1
;;ijk
-
..........,.
HIGHEST AND BEST USE
Highest and best use is that use that is physically possible, legally permissible, and in conformity with
existing land use patterns and change trends in an area. Highest and best use is that use
representing the greatest economic return to the land. The highest and best use of the subject
property would be for multifamily residential development at a development density in the range of 16
dwelling units per acre. The factors that were considered in arriving at this conclusion included:
Physically Possible
From a physical perspective, the subject site is considered suitable for most types of development
that could be constructed within its confines. The subject site is of adequate size (27.3 acres) for a
mixed-use development and its shape presents no significant obstacle to development. The site has
good access to the greater Seminole County area however it has no frontage on and has only limited
visibility from S.R. 434. These frontage and visibility issues militate against commercial use of the
property, however they have much less of a negative impact on multifamily residential use of the site.
All necessary public utilities and services are avai1able or in close proximity to the site. There are no
unusual fill requirements or other known unusual physical barriers to development.
Legally Permissible
The subject site is zoned Town Center District by the City of Winter Springs. This district permits a
variety of commercial uses and would allow effective utilization of the subject site. The future land use
designation of the site is consistent with the current zoning. Mixed-use commercial development is
clearly the focus of the current and future zoning in this area. The subject is located in an area the
where the City of Winter Springs intends to provide development approval for those developments
which fall within their Town Center concept. From a legal standpoint, development of the appraised
property with a high-density multifamily residential development at a density no greater than 36 units
per acre is permissible.
Financially Feasible
The subject site is located in the center east portion of Seminole County. As detailed in the Area
Description section of this report, this area has experienced rapid growth over the past five years.
Commercial and apartment rents, occupancy levels, and sales prices have been steadily increasing
over the past 3 to 4 years and are expected to continue to increase as population pressures push
development out from the Orlando metropolitan area. Parcels of land with similar locational
CRMO~275 21
CLAYTON, ROPER &: MARSHALL
~r _
- ..-...--._".....,,,...---~-~.-.-
t_ .
~-~...,......~~ .. -- -
~ "'""-'-';';:';~ct.;"'.tlca typIcally are developed with multifamily residential uses. Accordingly, a multifamily
.c . 'esldenllal development of this pmperty confo'ming to the City of Winte, Sp,;ngs's Town Cente,
concept is the most feasible use of the property.
Maximally Productive
This is a use that represents the greatest financial return on the land investment. Given the
constraints imposed by the other factors, the most productive use of the site as vacant would be for
multifamily residential development that fits within the City of Winter Springs's Town Center concept.
The development density most strongly supported by market evidence is in the range of 16 dwelling
units per acre. The basis for this conclusion is an analysis of the multifamily market in the subject
neighborhood, defined as Study Area C (Casselberry, Winter Springs, and Oviedo) in the Residential
Market Reports published by Charles Wayne Consulting, Inc. The 38 multifamily residential
developments within this study area were analyzed using two comparisons as detailed in the following
. paragraphs.
Density and Property Size in Acres: This comparison was performed to see if there is any correlation
between the area of a multifamily residential uses and its density of development. The following table
suggests a weak inverse correlation between Overall parcel size and density of development. In other
words, as parcel size increases, density of development as measured by dwelling units. per acre
decreases. The sketched in line is an approximation of this relationship.
Parcel Size: DUlAC
25.0
20.0,
15.0,
0
~
~
0
10.0
5.0 '
0.0
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Development Size in Acres
CRM 00-275
22
CLAYTON, ROPER & MARSHALL
_._--~"._--_._-----_.,._- -.- -----
~-~:._-:--:-_.::..-=--,.:::....._"._-
-----.---.--..---.--,.,-
~:::...-~_..,.:;:_~-="""-=---
~
'-"'<',;;;-f~Tl
"'''''>.''''f
Age 0' Development and Density or Development: This comparison was performed to see if there Is
any trend in multifamily residential density over time. The following chart suggests a weak trend
towards reduced density of development for multifamily residential projects over time. The sketched in
line illustrates an approximation of this trend line.
Age: DUlAC
25.0
u
~
5.0
10
15 20
Apartmont Project Age In Ve...
25
30
35
Summary: We also looked closely examined the land sales used in the sales comparison approach
of this report. Accounting for non-developable areas on these comparable sales, three of the four
com parables indicated densities in the 16 to 17 dwelling units per acre range. Based on the
indications from the two comparative techniques and the particular densities of the comparable sales,
it appears that the market would warrant a multifamily residential development density on the subject
property 27.3-acre site in the range of 16 dwelling units per acre.
Exposure Time
The value conclusion above has considered a typical exposure time of one to two years prior to the
effective date of valuation. This is based upon general knowledge gained through our sales
verification and interviews with market participants.
Exposure time is defined as the estimated length of time the property being appraised would have
been offered on the market, prior to the hypothetical consumption of a sale at market value on the
effective date of the appraisal; a retrospective estimate based upon an analysis of past events
assuming a competitive and open market. Exposure time is always presumed to occur prior to the
effective date of appraisal.
CRM 00-275
23
CLAYTON, ROPER &: MARSHALL
-- _'.-'_'~_'~,"~--. ''-.'~
_..._.____ ---____.0
~.--..:;:;,:...-~-~---::c~~-._-_=__.::::..:.::..__-:.::_:_:;_~':.7-::..':"=,'"--'--'~=
<-..;,:",-:,..,.~~
.k- ,
"""""" '" '" "~~
~. ..~w, ~
~.~ .........-,. ....-...
APPROACHES TO VALUE
Traditionally, there are three approaches utilized in the valuation of real property: the Cost Approach,
the 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 super adequacies, or any adverse external influences.
· The next step is to deduct the accrued depreciation from the 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 Sales ComDanson Approach is based on the "Principfe 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
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.
In the Income Approach, we are concerned with the present value of 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 Approach is generally the most indicative value
indication for properties, which are held for income production or investment type properties in
general.
After obtaining value estimates by the three approaches, the results are reconciled into a final value
conclusion. This reconciliation process is a weighing of the strengths and weaknesses of each
CRM 00-275
24
CLAYTON, ROPER & MARSHALL
._' ".c::~.
--
.-- --"cs-':F,,\~~;:l'.
- ~'r,::;r,::~,:;"c,;,,~,~-'!l;":?1;'S!!\~~7~~"l:?r~ff"t,;;-_:,~m;'t~--4tF'}R~_.~:M_
~'
i\', 1;,"4.'"
~'~";': , """" ,0;'
. .~pp"'ech In ome. to .econclle the th...... Independent valuation estimates .,_ a single, conii><elienslve
estimate of market value.
The final step in the appraisal process is the consideration of the indicated value resulting from each
of the approaches utilized. Consideration is given to the relative applicability of each of the
approaches utilized prior to concluding with the final value estimate.
Since the appraised property is vacant land without a specific development plan, the Income
Approach is not applicable. The Cost Approach is likewise not applicable for vacant land. So, only the
Sales Comparison Approach to value is used in this analysis.
CRM 00-275
25
CLAYTON, ROPER & MARSHALL
--.,,;.,......_...,;~~"'""!t--.........::&
'"
,
-"'~~
"'"......
.... .:....
_,~~"""-;r'_.':~~..<,.'._,1'"""'l':'__,.,' .,~""""",..~:ff'JI_!:".".,I1']'\?"-"":J>-"
."."';"'.......~-.....,.. .
~ALES COMPARISON APPROACH
'"
To value the subject land, we have used completed land sale transactions. These sales were
considered the best indicators of value for the subject. The similarities and dissimilarities between the
subject and the sales in such areas as market conditions, location or physical characteristics have
been analyzed and are further discussed in the comparison of the individual sales to the subject. In
the highest and best use section of this report, we have determined that the highest and best use of
the subject property is multifamily residential development. Therefore, in our land valuation, we have
compared the subject property to land sale com parables with a similar highest and best.
Units of Comparison: The unit of comparison in this analysis is price per dwelling unit derived by
dividing the sales prices of the comparable sales by the number of units constructed. An apartment
developer's land valuation calculus typically will be based on a backdoor approach starting with a
maximum cost per unit based on market factors relating to rent and profitability, then proceeds by
deducting all construction and infrastructure costs to arrive at a feasibility land value per unit.
Although such an approach may suggest that higher density development will result in a higher land
value, higher 'construction costs for higher density construction effectively constrain project density.
We will also analyze the com parables on a price per acre basis because sellers typically price their
properties (initially, at least) on this basis.
The comparable sales utilized in this analysis have been summarized in the following Land Sales
Comparison Analysis chart. Complete descriptions of comparable sales used in the valuation of this
parcel are contained within the Addendum of this report.
Adjustment for changed market conditions from the date of sale of the comparable sales is based on
an annual appreciation rate of 10%. An indicator of changed market values over the relevant time
period is provided by Comparable Sale # 2 (77-3684-0082). This property sold in July 1999 for a unit
price of $1.63/SF and had sold in June 1998 as recorded in Official Records Book #3455, Page
#1933 for a unit price of $1.33/ SF, indicating an annualized appreciation rate of 18.9%. Commercial
and industrial land values in adjacent areas of Orange and Seminole Counties indicate annual
appreciation rates in the 10% range over the past few years. Residential lot prices in this area have
likewise shown annual appreciation rates generally in the 5% to 15% range. Based on these
observations, adjustments for changed market conditions are made on a 10% annual appreciation
rate over the relevant time period. We have rounded the indicated appreciation adjustments to the
nearest 5%.
26
-
CRM 00-275
!
CLAYTON, ROPER &: MARSHALL
.
iiii
~
II'
--.
-,
__ _._,,_..""1....----......- "'...~ ~~~_....-
.-....::::-.-~~
,--,---,- ._--~.:;:;:::
--~~_.~~...l..
~"
""
"."",n
-
--
-
.....
i
=
-~-' .
',<;';''k,,;:t:''.,\"3!'--',
; .'f;J;:r~rfi:~;:,
~_.'".'''''-~'_.. . . ..~ ..-- ,..~
Q'n 1, L:..&....~~.",.'L.~ < '",.,..,,,,,,,,,,."_ ~~.. .~.._ '...
~ .
;".' ...' .. '. ""~," bre.._tes .... within 8 miles of the subject property and have location
....a = J 1" 12..:' AlA .01....,
characteristics similar enough to the subject property to not warrant any adjustment for this factor.
Size: The sizes of the comparable sales are similar enough that no adjustments were warranted for
this factor.
Zoning: The zoning of the comparable sales is similar enough that no adjustments were warranted for
this factor, Even though the subject property zoning density allows the highest density at 36 dwelling
units per acre, the market does not warrant such a density, so it provides no increment in value to the
property at this point in time.
Topography (wetland) adjustments are made on the basis that such areas provide some marginal
contributory value to the land parcels. Although no adjustment for this factor is warranted for the per-
dwelling unit comparison, an adjustment is made for the per acre comparison. Wetland areas and
ponds do provide some utility for an apartment site because they can provide a view amenity, a buffer
from adjacent properties, and can be used for water retention and for meeting open space
requirements. We have based our adjustments for wetlands and ponds on the basis that these areas
have a utility of 25% of the developable land area.
Frontage and Access: The comparable sales are similar enough to the subject property in these
characteristics that no adjustments were warranted.
Utilities Availability: All of the comparable sales had off site utilities available. Although the subject is
slightly inferior in this regard because the closest sewer connection is 700 feet east of the property,
the impact on overall property value is negligible.
A narrative description of each sale property follows:
Land Sale #1 (77-3731-1091) is located on the north side of Lake Mary Boulevard 1/3rd mile west of
its intersection with S.R. 417 (The Central Florida Greeneway) in Sanford, Seminole County, Florida.
Huntington Properties & Investments, Inc. and Osceola Investment Co., Inc. sold the property to
Vestcor Fund XI, Ltd. on August 30, 1999 for the sale price of $2,230,000 for the eventual
development of a 360-unit apartment complex.
The site is irregular in shape with 1,341 feet of frontage on Logan Heights Drive. The site contains a
CRM 00-275
27
CLAYTON, ROPER & MARSHALL
- _ IL~~:=_.
,,,,,,,'t,~."iH'V,'<~\",,""'1So';'\"
-C-~----=-:--~-'--'---""''''''''T'~;c, l''0i'>o,;:'!yFr'"-:c-::-
total of 22.2 acres. all of Which Is developable. All utilities were available to this property, but lines
had to be re-routed.
r
The sale was adjusted Upward by 10% to reflect improved marketing conditions since the date of sale.
After adjustments, this sale reflected an adjusted unit value for the subject site of $6,814 per dwelling
unit and $110,495 per acre.
Land Sale #2 (77-3684-0082) is located in the northeast quadrant of Dodd Road and Red Bug Lake
Road in Seminole County, Florida. lOM Development, Inc. sold the property to Shadow Creek
Apartments Associates, Ltd. on July 8, 1999 for the sale price of $1,820,000 for the eventual
development of a 280-unit apartment complex.
The site is irregular in shape with 828.37 feet of frontage on Dodd Road and 132.51 feet of frontage
on Red Bug Lake Road. The site contains a total of 25.7 acres, or 1,119,492 square feet. The entire
site is uplands. All utilities were available to this property.
The sale was adjusted upward by 15% to reflect improved marketing conditions since the date of sale.
After adjustments, this sale reflected an adjusted unit value for the subject site of $7,475 per dwelling
unit and $81,440 per acre.
Land Sale #3 (77-3616-1331) is located on the north side of AJoma Avenue 1/4~ mile east of its
intersection with Dean Road in Oviedo, Seminole County, Florida. Charles W. and W. Malcolm
Clayton sold the property to Seminole Co. Loma Vista Partners, ltd. on March 24, 1999 for the sale
price of $2,070,000 for the development of a 380-unit apartment complex.
The 29.32-acre site is irregular in shape with 430 feet of frontage on the north side of Aloma Avenue.
An 8.6-acre pond is located in the west central POrtion of the site. All utilities were available to the site
at the time of sale.
The sale was adjusted Upward by 15% to reflect improved marketing conditions since the date of sale,
After adjustments, this sale reflected an adjusted unit value for the subject site of $6,264 per dwelling
unil. This per dwelling unit price is not directly correlated with the per gross acre price because
approximately 8.6 acres of this property is in the pond on the west side of the property. Although non
developable, this pond does have Some utility as a view amenity, as a buffer from adjacent land uses,
for water retention, and for meeting open space requirements. In this case, we have estimated that
the utility (meaning value) of the pond area is 25% that of the developable land. Therefore, the
CRM 00-275 28
CLAYTON, ROPER & MARSHALL
-"~""'~=""--'"'''--''-_'_4.,_.,.,' _,~ _-,',' ,'~' ~'....~
--.---~--.-----~.._-------
""16-.';:..i<-.-,,,,__
- ~;;:-~ -:--~-~~~~ -~
; .';'_<J--U".;:;~~~>~<h:.,;-',
'; ~>::-_' f"~~_::'_~~"~;:;~~,ALA:\:;';;:i::,r.:~[;
~-:--~----------::-~,~-'--:~- ';"o'fi{f':',_,'_,. -;.' ,~,' _. ".' -;~';,-:1~~~---- ~~ :_-,-_:,:-"n,.,-
equivalent I.nd area of this property Is roughly 22.87 acres. Indicating a unit value of $104.000 per
acre as rounded.
7....'--~"---'--
Land Sale #4 (77-3582-1447) is located on the south side of State Road 434 approximately 2,000:t
feet west of Vistawilla Road in Seminole County, Florida. Robert A. Yeager sold the property to
Courtney Springs, Limited Partnership on January 28, 1999 for the sale price of $1,690,000 for the
development of a 252-unit apartment complex.
The site is irregular in shape and contains a total of 23.86:t acres, or 1,039,342:t square feet. The
site has two separate sections of frontage on the south side of State Road 434, and a DOT retention
pond separates the two sections. The easterly section is 719.97 feet and the westerly section is
475.37 feet. The westerly section of this frontage is unusable due to wetlands. The site contains
approximately 12 acres of wetlands. All utilities were available to the site at the time of sale.
The sale was adjusted upward by 15% to reflect improved marketing conditions since the date of sale.
After adjustments, this sale reflected an adjusted unit value for the subject site of $7,712 per dwelling
unit. This per dwelling unit price is not directly correlated with the per gross acre price because
approximately 12 acres of this property is non-developable wetland. Although non developable, the
wetland area does have some utility as a view amenity, as a buffer from adjacent land ul?es, for water
retention, and for meeting open space requirements. In this case, we have estimated that the utility
(meaning value) of the wetland area is 25% that of the developable land. Therefore, the equivalent
land area of this property is roughly 15 acres, indicating a unit value of $130,000 per acre as rounded.
Correlation of Comparable Land Sales
The sales provided an unadjusted price range of $5,447 to $6,706 per dwelling unit and from $70,817
to $100,450 per acre. After adjusting the comparables for various elements of comparison, we have
arrived at adjusted unit value indications of $6.814, $7,475, $6,264, and $7,712 per dwelling unit and
$110,495, $81,440, $104,000, and $130,000 per acre for Comparable Sale 1,2,3,and 4, respectively.
The adjusted per dwelling unit prices of Comparable Sales #2 and #4 warrant slightly more weight
than do the others. Comparable Sale #4 is located on S.R. 434 only 2 miles further east. Comparable
Sale # 2 is also close to the subject property, and like the subject, is slightly off a highly traveled
highway (Red Bug lake Road).
Another indicator of unit land values for the subject property is the current purchase contract based on
CRM 00-275 29
CLAYTON, ROPER & MARSHALL
--_._..~.. .-'.; -
--~~_.__._-
1,
~-::=-4
-~. --.-
. ",~",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,",,'.:~'?,i
...-liIIi..oou..-..t.......-w"...........L...... ,. ~'_'_- '.'-:' ""'-k"'''' .
....~-~"
~"~
.'unfi'P;ici;~....$7~c;;, per dwelling unit and a minimum density of 18 dwelling units per acre times the
gross acreage less any areas excluded from density allowance calculations. The equivalent per acre
price is $126,000. Since the City of Winter Springs considers the gross acreage as the basis for
density calculations, the indicated contract price is $3,439,800. Of course, this overall price is subject
to the two factors of density and net developable land area. We regard the probability of a density
increase as unlikely because of the density analysis presented in the highest and best use section.
Indeed, we have concluded a market-supported density of 16 dwelling units per acre for this property.
Therefore, the only other variable that can affect the overall contract price is the net developable land
area that the contract density of 18 dwelling units per acre will be multiplied by. The net developable
area will likely be less than the gross land area, so the ultimate extended contract price for this
property will likely be less than $3,439,800 presented earlier.
Two counter opposing factors affect the weight to be placed on this value indication. On the one
hand, this is a current contract on the appraised property, so by definition it is the best comparable.
On the other hand, it is a purchase contract subject to some uncertainty regarding net developable
land area as opposed to an actual closed sale, and accordingly, warrants less weighting. We regard
the latter factor as more significant than the former.
Based on the adjusted unit value indications of the comparable sales and as well as the current
contract on the subject property, we have estimated a unit value for the subject property $7,500 per
dwelling unit per acre. Based on a probable density of 16 dwelling units per acre as developed in the
highest and best use analysis section, the per acre value is $120,000, which is within the range of per
acre land values of the comparable sales.
The following table presents the calculation of the overall property value.
Land Value Per Dwelling Unit $ 7,500
X # DwellinQ Units Per Acre 16
X # of Acres 27.3
Total Value $ 3,276,000
or, as rounded $ 3,300,000
Since the sales comparison approach was the only approach used in the valuation of this property,
this value conclusion is the estimated value of the subject property.
CRM 00-275
30
CLAYTON, ROPER & MARSHALL
n
~
~
~
..
~
o
~
~
~
pP
~
~
CRM 00-275
LAND SALES LOCATION MAP
.lU.lrtPISlJt.
r
,
.j
/
~ <II
10 _"
.) .,.
G> SFB
....
.
....
---,
l
. /
"dt~~
, i
~
~Ropka
.Snow ~ .
. .l,." ..
,':.. t~"~
.: -Avv-...-.. r'~
'y-..----^~...
~
. ...
....Chuluota .
4\.......'. '\
~ .
..).;
1!
g
438
"
\.
-~y
i'l'
I
Ii
t
I
r
I f
31
LAND SALES COMPARISON ANALYSIS
:~:::~::~~~_}~~_~=~DJ~_~:!~[J~I::;~ AW.J~ AW.
SALE DATE -j-----current---- 8130/1999 h60/~--mJ199-9 I 15%13124/1999 15% 1/28/1999 15%
~~~~~~)__t=~~;0-~= __$2,;~~,goO : I $1':;.~goo "$2-:g;.~~O~___ $1 ;i.~OOO
..11 APARTMENTS I 437 I 360' 280380 ._____"~"?.~_"_
DENSi=rv""OFDEVELOPME"NT-r---"--"-----r-16T--f-------- -----1-6~9- --"- "13~O-"- __ _.10.6 --
ADJUSTED DENSITY TI 16.2 f 10.9 16.6 17.0
SALE PRICE/AC I I $100450 I $70817 I $70600 $70830
SALE PRICE/APT. i I $6,194 I S6500' $5,447 $6706
TIME ADJ. PRICE/AC I I $110,495 , $81,440 i $81190 $81454
TIME ADJ. PRICE/APT. I $6,814 $7,475 $6,264 $7,712
OTHER ADJUSTMENTS
North '~e SR~I ~:.~ I I NEQ Dodd I
434, 7/10 mi. 1/3 d' f' I Road and ,
r mi. w. 0; I
west of G ! Redbug Lake I
Tuskawilla Road, sreen,ewd1J:of'", Road, I
W. S' an,or , S . I
m~er pnngs, Seminole emmo e
Sem mole County C t County
oun y I
Town Center I PUD,
District- Winter RM-3, Sanford I' Seminole
Sorinas County I
Adequate ~~~~;sL6:~~ [ 1133' Redbug I
AII(sewer iW-a~afiabie!--1 available
awav) offsite I I offsite
aood i i aood
.----"--~-10,495 : 0%, $81440
$6,814 I $7,475
:!!'clio';"~'--~""_~~~~&~_:i:~
_!!1 '
~--."~-
LOCATION
ZONING
FRONTAGE & ACCESS
UTILITIES
TOPOGRAPHY
TOTAL ADJUSTMENTS
ADJUSTED UNIT PRICE/AC
ADJUSTED UNIT PRICE/APT.
INDICATION OF LAND VALUE
$7,500 /Unit x 437
$3,277,500
or, as rounded,
$3,300,000
CRM 00-275
....J
I N. of Aloma
IAvenue, 1/4th
I mi. E. of
I Dean Rd.,
Oviedo,
'I Seminole
County
'I PUD, I
Seminole
I County. Springs
l4~~~;_~l__ ~:~ 434
"' available j available
offsite I offsite
, aood I lake
0%t$81.190--~--.Q~ $109963
I $6,264 I $7,712
S. side SR
434, 1/4 mi.
Wof
Vistawilla,
Winter
Springs,
Seminole
County
PUD Winter
35%
35%
Potential Units =
32
CLAYTON, ROPER &: MARSHALL
c......~~"'.,"'~....."'.."'._~ ............;~
CRM 00-275
ADDENDUM
CLAYTON, ROPER & MARSHALL
-.- --~~----,,---'_.~~:" .,'." ----"'.-._-~.---_..._-
- .-"'-~ -~_~~.,-7t~-~.~~__.;--:-,--_-_.,._ -:-.~"""'__--o-;-c~.c=-____~__
33
DEFINITIONS
SEVERABLE APPURTENANCES (EASILY REMOVABLE REAL TV ITEMS)
FLORIDA CONCURRENCY LAW
TOWN CENTER ZONING DESCRIPTION
LAND SALE COMPARABLE DATA SHEETS
QUALIFICATIONS OF APPRAISERS
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION APPRAISAL CHECKLIST
CLAYTON, ROPER & MARSHALL
_....,."~._, ,n__ _____...... m ___..
-,........'__.,.. ~~--,.-'-c.="_=::.=~.;_:-'-'...;.
'-""" - --.,--::-:,~";'-:'~'~~~":_~"':':_-"'-~:~_:_'-"-'~""-"'~--"
~.~.
-,,"?,,~'7.tT:':~;1~
"""-~",,-
DEFINITIONS'
MARKET VALUE
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 passing of title from seller to buyer under conditions whereby:
.. Buyer and seller are typically motivated;
.. Both parties are well informed or well advised and each acting in what they consider their own
best interest;
.. A reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open market;
.. Payment is made in terms of cash in U.S. dollars or in terms of financial arrangements
comparable thereto; and
.. The price represents the normal consideration for the property sold unaffected by special or
creative financing or sales concessions granted by anyone associated with the sale.
FEE SIMPLE ESTATE
Absolute ownership unencumbered by any other interest or estate, subject only to the limitations imposed
by the governmental powers of taxation, eminent domain, police power, and escheat.
HIGHEST AND BEST USE
The reasonably probable and legal use of vacant land or an improved property, which is physically
possible, appropriately supported, financially feasible and that results in the highest value. The four
criteria the highest and best use must meet are legal permissibility, physical possibility, financial feasibility
and maximum probability.
The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 3rd Edition (Chicago: Appraisal Institute, 1993).
CLAYTON, ROPER & MARSHALL
- .. -'.--7",~':I';~l!i(f~",~;,c,,-~-"
- r-,_..,;;-rti~~ic;oT~':"'(.~:Dk.l'-:--'-
'--""-"'o:,~,,;,.""'_ ~ ~ _ ~.~
, .
"'-'~"'-"_,,,-,,.,.".,...,...,
......A!~lilllU'l:\l'
~.l,
; , ~...... :
~"""""--""'~,""",,,,,---.,,,,,,,,,,~
SEVERABLE APPURTENANCES
We are not experts in the valuation of such items. but it is our opinion that the salvage value of severable
appurtenances. if any. are offset by the cost of labor. materials. and equipment to remove such items
from the right-of-way; unless, otherwise noted.
CLAYTON, ROPER & MARSHALL
,--------::-~~~':7!7~::c:;::":"r:_
;'!'-F''IT~'7.:''''T';'':
,~<"'C\1i_'7~" 0,<
L
~~;.;;.^'.,
'1,1;,~~~~:O;;;:.~"";I''''_';'''':-,;,,;' , '_:.::,'!ij;;l:,"""",~;'
FLORIDA CONCURRENCY LAW
COUNTY AND MUNICIPAL PLANNING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATION ACT:
CHAPTER 163, FLORIDA STATUTES
The County and Municipal Planning and land Development Regulation Act, commonly referred to as the
"Growth Management Act", limits and controls Florida's future growth to levels acceptable to natural,
environmental, political, social, and human tolerances. Simply stated, no city or county may issue
building permits to developers or allow general real estate growth and development:
1) ahead of existing public infrastructure (i.e., transportation, streets, water supplies, sewage
treatment and disposal, schools, social services, health services, etc); or
2) in advance of approved planned and funding of such public facilities.
The statute requires all city and county comprehensive plans to provide "basic service levels" for the:
future land use;
traffic circulation, roads, and mass transportation, if applicable;
natural g~ound water recharge, potable water, drainage, sanitary sewer treatment, and solid
waste management and disposal;
conservation and natural environmental impact;
open spaces and recreation facilities;
housing
intergovernmental coordination; and
capital improvement
All cities and counties are required to submit updated comprehensive plans to the Department of
Community Affairs (DCA), the state agency responsible for the evaluation and approval of the revised
plans. The plans must provide for "concurrency rules" that growth, zoning, and building permits must be
kept in line with existing infrastructure facilities. existing and approved plans for future facilities, and
developer commitment or local budget existing for development of future facilities in compliance with
present and future "levels of service" and environmental tolerances.
Once a plan is reviewed and accepted by the state, local. g?vernments must adopt a land Development
Reoulation (lOR) to implement the plan. When the, LOR I~ In plac~, no development order or permit may
be issued by a local government unless the project IS consistent With the plan and the lOR.
Concurrency requires that within one year after a local plan i~ required to be submitted to DCA, public
facilities and services, meeting or exceeding the levels of service established in the capital improvement
element of the plan, must be available concurrent with the actual impact of any development.
Central Florida developable properties are presently in a transitional stage. A determination of which
properties enjoy "vested" development rights has not bee~ determined. It is likely that property
constructed prior to the date of adoption of the comprehensive plan and those with DRI are vested.
Other properties are not guaranteed. If adequate services and public facilities are available, then it is
likely a building permit is obtainable.
Our estimate of market value within this report is predicated upon the assumption that the subject
property is in conformance with concurrency 13\\~ thus enabling the subject property to be utilized to its
highest and best use.
CLAYTON, ROPER & MARSHALL
................"...~.M..
..~c___.:..'''''~..............._~. '._.~
~...,......_..-..."""~.;&.~_.:........"".....~..
= ~. ~~~~:: ~~
-~~ :.-"";:"" .-~
-"T'l-~~1_~~~:;n
11
TOWN CENTER DISTRICT CODE
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTENT
I. Intent ............................................................... p.l
II. Administration....................... .......................... p.2
A. Town Center District Boundary Map... p.2
B. Review Process .................................... p.2
C. Special Exceptions ............................... p.3
D. Site Development Agreement Option.. p.3
E. Comprehensive Plan Compliance
Required ................ .... .................... ....... p.3
III. Definitions ....... ................ ................. ..... .......... p.4
IV. Permitted Uses.................................................. p.5
V. General Provisions ............................................ p.7
A. Comer Radii & Clear Zones ................ p.7
. B. Alleys ................................................... p.7
C. Exceptions from Build-to-lines ............ p.7
D. Side and Rear Setbacks ........................ p.7
E. First Floor Height for Residential......... p.7
F. Diversity of Building Widths ................ p.7
G. Accessory Structures ............................ p.7
H. Drive-throughs ..................................... p.7
I. Civic Sites .............................................. p.7
1. Parking ................................................... p.8
K. Single vs. Double Loaded Roads ......... p.9
L. Large Footprint Buildings .................... p.9
M. Additional Prohibitions ....................... p.9
VI. Squares, Parks, and Street Types .................... p.IO
A. Hierarchy of Squares, Parks,
and Streets ........................................... p.IO
B. "In Our Generation" Drawing .............. p.IO
C. Squares, Parks, and Streets Map .......... p. I I
Squares and Parks ........................ p.12
Street Types .................................. p.18
VI r. Building Elements ....................................... p.26
VIII. Architectural Guidelines ............................. p.29
The City of Winter Springs seeks to create a town center based
upon traditional standards for city building. In February, 1998
the City of Winter Springs created a plan for the town center
through a design session involving the community and a team of
design professionals. This Code is based on that plan.
Traditional urban design conventions have been applied to
create a palIette of squares, parks, and street types that form the
framework for the town center. These conventions are derived
from a number of sources in planning literature. Where
approvals, interpretations and judgements are left to the
discretion of City officials, these officials shall use the following
texts for guidance as to best practices:
Civic Art, by Hegemann and Peets;
Great Streets, by AlIan B. Jacobs;
The New Urbanism: Toward an Architecture of Community, by
Peter Katz;
AlA Graphic Standards. 9th Edition:
The Lexicon of the New Urbanism. by Duany et ai, Congress for
the New Urbanism;
Shared Parking, by Barton-Aschman Associates, The Urban
Land Institute
This document repeals the Town Center Overlay Zoning District
Regulations of June 9, 1997 (Ordinance #661) and September 8,
1997 (Ordinance 11676). Should any conflict arise between the
provisions of this Code and other local land development
regulations for the City of Winter Springs, the provisions of this
Code shall apply. To the extent that this code is silent where
other codes govern, they shall apply.
A. HowTo Use This Code:
1. Determine whether your use is permitted in the Town
Center.
2. Review the General Provisions which apply throughout
the district.
3. Determine which Street Type your lot fronts. (If you
have a comer lot, you must determine the primary space or
street based on the hierarchy on page 10.)
4. Next, review section VI. for provisions about the Street
Type, Square, or Park that corresponds to the lot.
5. Finally, review the Building Elements and Architectural
Guidelines which contain specific rules for buildings.
Town Center District Code
1_12.11_0I
Page 1
':,,<J:~7t~j,~~il,";15~-?"~ ,',
-~jo;.;..
-..;""-(ii'"
.c .
> > >. >-
_-----.-...:H~;.
..:~--
(
T
;,1
(
Interpretation of the standards in this code shall be the
responsibility ofthe City's Development Review
Committee (DRC). The "In Our Generation" Illustrative
Buildout Drawing on p.l 0 in this Code and on p.6 in the
adopted masterplan shall serve as guidance to the
Development Review Committee with regard to the
City's intent for land development in the town center.
The images contained in this code are meant to
demonstrate the character intended for the Town Center,
but are for m~~tr!!tiY_~ purposes only. The accompanying
text and numbers are rules that govern permitted
development.
B. Review Process
r
Applications are subject to review by the Development
Review Committee. The Committee shall have authority
within reason for approving all aspects of site planning
and exterior architecture, including aesthetic
appropriateness, environmental implications, traffic
impacts, and any other site-specific matters not
delineated herein.
Optional Preliminary Review: Applicants may, at their
option, submit designs in schematic or sketch form to
the Development Review Committee for preliminary
approval, subject to further review.
"~'.~'.."~"f;;';\'fl~:;".,~f:~"'{ff1[:
>."",
A. Town Center District Boundary Map
_ District Boundary
_.... County Enclaves (not in city)
~Q
-fe
./
eJ'
Z/p
\
'---
"\
\.1-
\
Applicants shall submit the following items to the u
Development Division of the Department ofCommu
Development for review:
I. A current Site Survey, no more than I year old.
2. A current Tree Survey, no more than 1 year old.
3. A Site Plan, drawn to scale, which shall indicate:
a. Building locations and orientations, and
landscape areas;
b. Parking locations and number of spaces;
c. Paved surfaces, materials and location(s);
d. Site location diagram & legal description
e. Signage.
4. Building Elevations illustrating all sides of struc!
facing public streets or spaces.
5. A parking analysis justifying the proposed parkil
solution (such as Shared Parking, by Barton Aschm
Associates, The Urban Land Institute).
6. Other reasonable supporting documents to indic:
intentions and/or any other items reasonably require
the Development Review Committee. I_n.l
Town Center District Code Page
I
Proc,:edure for Special Exceptions:
I. Approval may be granted only after a minimum of
two discretionary reviews. The first review shall be
(.." before the Development Review Committee, at
which time the Development Review Committee
shall review the project and provide to the City
Commission an advisory recommendation regarding
approval, approval with conditions, or disapproval.
The second review shall be a public hearing held
before the City Commission and shall be held no
sooner than seven calendar days following the
Development Review Committee hearing.
2. Requests for special exceptions under this ordinance
shall include each exhibit required in the
Administration Review Process per section II, part
B of this code. In addition, the City Commission
may within reason require additional exhibits and
may defer approval of the special exception
application or schedule an additional public hearing
or hearings to review those exhibits.
3. Special exceptions shall not be unreasonably
withheld, but the City Commission shall have
authority to require that the applicant satisfy any
additional conditions it deems necessary to fulfill
goals of the master plan, including reasonable olTsite
improvements directly related and proportionate to
the specific impact of the request, or Illrther
review(s) and approval by the Development Review
Committee.
r- 4. The City Commission may grant the approval of an
, . application for special exceptions from the code in
whole or in pm1upon ;) majority vote of its members.
Town Center District Code
'~~"''''''~."",,'::ij~~__ ~~',. .' . <
~__.~_&_L"""",'" ""' '~..llil.-~__~''''',..A._
...,...... f''''''''"~''''''''''''''''-''-''''-P''-'''''-
The City Commission may by special exception waive
(' strict compliance with provisions of this code. In granting
a special exception, the City Commission must find by
substantial compctent evidence that:
I. The proposed development contributes to, promotes and
encourages the improvement of the Winter Springs
Town Center and catalyzes other development as
envisioned in the Winter Springs Town Center
regulations.
2. The proposed development will not have an unfavorable
effect on the economy of the Winter Springs Town
Center.
3. The proposed development abides by all rules in this
code other than those specially excepted. Special
limitations apply to Large Footprint Buildings
(greater than 20,000 square feet); see section V (L)
for these limitations (page 9).
4. The proposed development meets any reasonable
additional conditions, restrictions or limitations
deemed necessary by the City Commission in order
to preserve and promote the intent of the Winter
Springs Town Center Master Plan.
-. ~ -~. .:..."\
._----~~----_...._-- .
"."~'b' .,""."'~
... H....Ji..............._. Aaa ........_~__..~
'Ine City may enter into a Site Development Agreemel
with the lIser or developer of a property, relating to
development of a particular parcel or tract of land, and
such an agreement may address such issues as impact
credits; a specialized or negotiated concept of design c
site plan development authorized or sanctioned by this
ordinance; infrastructure service credits or public-priv:
participation in funding, design or construction; or oth-
incentives based upon strict compliance with
requirements of this ordinance. The Agreement will b
mutually acceptable to all parties. Considerations for t
City in deciding whether to participate in such an
agreement will include compliance with the objectives
and design criteria specified in this ordinance;
demonstration of a cost benefit to City and developer;
consideration of development amenities provided by H
developer. Such a Site Development Agreement shall
adopted and be in conformance with the requirements I
the Florida Municipal Home Rule Powers Act or
Sections 163.3220 through 163.4243, Florida Statutes,
to effect, duration, public hearing requirements and olt
issues.
E. Comprehensive Plan Compliance
Required:
All development of property subject to the Town Cent(
zoning designation and these regulations shall be subje
to the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Winter
Springs, Florida, and all approvals and land developm(
permits shall be in compliance with the Comprehensivl
Plan. An amendment to the comprehensive plan has
been proposed and is currently being processed by the
City. This amendment is proposed to increase densitie
for the area alfected by these Town Center regulations;
however, until this amendment to the comprehensive
plan is approved and adopted in accordance with state
law, the City cannot lawfully assure any owner or user
any affected property densities and land uses not
currently allowed or permitted by the City's
Comprehensive Plan.
J__12,llnl
Page 3
+_V:'--'-~:'$t~~!t4~Jf'-
..~~~+--
. " "....-
-m _ ~.,......-.-.-.~~
(
Accessory Stmcture: a building or structure
subordinate to the principal building and used for
purposes customarily incidental to the main or
principal building and located on the same lot or set
of attached lots therewith.
Alle~: a publicly or privately owned secondary way
which affords access to the side or rear of abutting
property.
Appurtenances: architectural features not used for
human occupancy consisting of: spires, belfries,
cupolas or dormers; silos; parapet walls, and
cornices without windows; chimneys, ventilators,
skylights, and antennas.
Awning: an architectural projection roofed with
flexible material supported entirely from the exterior
waIl of a building.
Balcony: a porch cOIUlected to a building on upper
stories supported by either a cantilever or brackets.
Block: an increment of land composed of an
aggregate of lots, tracts and alleys circumscribed by
thoroughfares.
r",
i
Build-To-Line: a line parallel to the property line,
along which a building shall be built. Exact location
of Build-To-Lines shaIl be established by the DRC
at the time of application.
Buildin~ Frontage: the vertical side of a building
which faces the primary space or street and is built
to the Build-To-Line.
Building Volume: the space displaced by the
exterior waIls and roof of a building; a product of
building width, depth, and height. It is the intent of
this Code to regulate building volume in order to
shape public spaces that are human-scaled, weIl-
ordered, and which maximize the shared real estate
amenity.
(~
Building Width: the distance from one side of a
building frontage to the other. In conditions where
buildings are attached, building width is the
distinction between buildings which shall be
expressed via a change in architectural expression,
such as a vertical clement nmning from ground to
roof, a change in fenestration or style, color or
texture, or a break in facade plane or roof line.
These changes may be subtle or significant, but it is
the intent to avoid homogenous blocks of
excessively long buildings.
,'t'lRlllJ,
'~-r'n.';~_~5iP~'
,-,w""
~..:f.'.':;#, ',_
III slandlud dcnomlk levelllllDOhGct 10 or .......
with the building frontage; structure overhead is
supported architecturnlly by columns or arches
along the sidewalk.
DweIlinl! Area: the total internal useable space on
all floors ofa stmcture, not including porches,
balconies, terraces, st()ops, patios, or garages.
Front Porch: a roofed area, attached at the ground
floor level or first floor level, and to the front of a
building, open except for railings, and support
columns.
Garden Wall: a freestanding wall along the property
line dividing private areas from streets, aIleys, and
or adjacent lots.
Heigh!: the vertical distance from the lowest point
on the tallest side of the structure to the top of the
parapet, cornice or eave.
Liner Building: a building built in front of a parking
garage, cinema, supermarket etc., to conceal large
expanses of blank wall area and to face the street
space with a facade that has c100rs and windows
opening onto the sidewalk (see diagrams pp.8 and
9). Parking garages and their Liners may be built at
different times.
Lot: a single building plot; the smallest legal
increment of land which may be bought and sold.
Lot Frontage: the property line adjacent to the
frontage street.
Marquee: a permanently roofed architectural
projection the sides of which are vertical and are
intended for the display of signs; which provides
protection against the weather for the pedestrian;
and which is supported entirely from an exterior
wall of a building. .
Primary Space or Street: the space or street that a
building fronts. At squares and street intersections
the space or street highest in the hierarchy is the
primary street.
Stoog: a small platfonn and / or entrance stairway at
a house door, commonly covered by a secondary
roof or awning.
Storefront: building frontage for the ground floor
usually associated with retail uses.
Stmctured Parking: layers of parking stacked
veJ1ically.
Town Center District Code
'....12,1_
P<lge4
._~""'-.~---'~"--
~~~,--~
./
Administrative public buildings
Adult congregate living facility
Advertising agencies
Alcoholic beverage sales (package)
Alcoholic beverage on-premesis consumption
Alterations and tailoring
Amusement enterprises, private commercial
Antique and gift shop
Appliances, sales and service
Artists' studios
Automotive accessories sales
Bakery, wholesale and retail
Bathroom accessories
Bed and breakfast inn
Bicycles, sales and service
Bookstores, stationery, newsstands
Bookkeepers
Butcher shop, retail only
Carpets, rugs and linoleum
Churches (with or without educational and
recreational buildings and facilities)
Cleaners
Coin dealers
Computers, hardware, and software sales and
service
Confectionery and ice cream stores
Convention center
Comer store or neighborhood convenience store
without gas pumps
Dance and music studios
Day nurseries, kindergartens and day care
Drug and sundry stores
Employment agencies
Financial institutions, banks, savings and loan
Florist and gift shops
Furniture, retail, new and used
Government service facilities
Grocers, retail and wholesale
Gun shop
Hardware stores
Health food
Hobby and craft shops
Home occupations
Hospitals and nursing homes
Hotel
Hypnotists
Inn
Insurance
Interior decorating and draperies
Jewelry stores
Libraries
(.
Locksmiths'.........".
Luggage shops .
Manufacturing and assembly'of scientific and
optical precision instmments
Markets and stores, small
(Not exceeding 20,000 square feet) .
Medical clinics and laboratories
Municipal Buildings
Nurseries, plants, trees, etc., Retail and
wholesale
Nursing Homes
Offices
Outdoor signs sales offices
Paint store
Parking garages
Parks and public recreation areas and f.1cilities
Pet shops and grooming
Photographic studios
Physical fitness and health clubs
Post otlice
Private clubs and lodges
Public restrooms
Public utilities and service structures
Quick printers
Radio and TV broadcasting studios, excluding
towers
Radio and TV sales and service
Rental stores
Retirement homes, including independent living
through assisted living
Residential, single fiunily (attached and
detached)
Residential, multifamily
Restaurants
Schools, service and vocational schools (such as
cosmetology, medical and dental assistant's
training)
Shoe repair shops
Sidewalk cafes
Snack shops
Sporting goods, retail
Tailoring shops
Taxidennists
Telephone business office and exchanges
Theaters, not drive-ins
Title companies
Tobacco shops
Town Center marketing and sales center
Toy stores
Trail heads
Travel agencies
Wearing apparel stores
Town Center District Code
...~--.._--_._-._.._-~---.,....,.......~:c:-~.~_.~_::!___"-=-~_______
. -- -- - -- ----- -----
JulW: 11, 1UUU
Page 5
.. ~~.==:.=.=.c.___-:__~~
~._~~
P":'-.i:~"\.';j~:~.f":-'
, - ,- - - -"_.,,.... .,..,'~.,____ "","",rJ, "".,' .", ,'" , PO' ,,'" '""' ,_' "l""'~~,_,,_ - ""~
Permitted Uses, Continued:
Any other similar retail store or business
enterprise not listed, that in the judgement of
the Development Review Committee is not
specifically limited to other zoning districts
within the City and is consistent with those
included above, and further, that will be in
hannony with the spirit of the Winter Springs
Town Center Master Plan.
Uses Permitted
by Special Exception Only
r
Automobile repair shops (routine service)
Bowling alleys
Bus tenninal
Car wash
Comer store or neighborhood convenience store
with gas pumps
Equestrian facilities
Gas stations
Launderettes and laundromats
Printers, commercial
Schools, private and parochial
Skating rinks
Stadiums and arenas
Swimming pools; sales service and supplies
Veterinary clinics (no overnight boarding)
(-
Town Center District Code
.." .......
l_utl'l2.1UtlQ
Page 6
J
-.--- ";''''.~'' ..~'.'i_,,''t,:.wr<l!;~}"C;7T -
"~-
--"'---"--""~~~~.1~-;-.._i:t'
.;i,,,:'~~;;k'~; ~....~ .
~".."",-,,",-
'V: General Provisions
~.,,,
(
The following general provisions apply to all
Street Types.
A. Corner Radii & Clear Zones:
Comer curb radii shall be between 9 feet and 15
feet Fairly tight turning radii shorten pedestrian
crossings and inhibit reckless drivers from turning
comers at high speeds. To allow for emergency
vehicles (e.g. fire trucks) to turn comers, a 25 foot
radius Clear Zone shall be established free of all
vertical obstructions including but not limited to
telephone poles, sign poles, fire hydrants,
electrical boxes, or newspaper boxes.
. ... _.. _.. - . I
~ I J(J9h.-of-W"Y LiM.
25' ~Iu. Our ZoNU... ~.J
-
Our ZoN
,~_.
--~ (9"15')
(
B. Alleys:
Alleys are required in the town center to minimize
curb cuts and to provide access to parking and
service areas behind buildings. Alley
requirements may be waived by the DRC for
access to detached single family residential lots
greater than 55' in width in situations in which
proper streetfront orientation, pedestrian
circulation, and parking can still be accomplished.
Alley locations and dimensions are not fixed but
shall be designed to accommodate the alley's
purpose. Additional curb cuts shall be added only
with the permission of the Development Review
Committee. Alleys may be incorporated into parking
lots as drive aisles and fire lanes.
C. Exceptions from Build-to Lines:
Exceptions from Build-to Lines may be granted
by the Development Review Committee for
avoiding trees with calipers greater than 8 inches.
On comer sites (within 50 feet of the comer) with
Build-to Lines set back from the property line,
building frontage may be positioned forward of
the Build-to Line up to the Property Line,
provided it does not encroach upon the Clear
Zone.
(-
D. Side and Rear Setbacks:
No side or rear setbacks are required in the town
center.
E. First Floor Height for Residential:
Residential uses on the first story shall have
finished floor height raised a minimum of 2 feet
above sidewalk grade.
F. Diversity of Building Widths:
No more than three residential buildings 20 feet or
less in width are permitted within any two
hundred feet offrontage.
G. Accessory Structures:
Accessory Structures are permitted and may
contain parking, accessory dwelling units, home
occupation uses, storage space, and trash
receptacles. Home occupation uses are restricted
to owner plus one employee, shall not include
noxious or disruptive functions, and may not
disrupt parking for neighboring residents.
Accessory structures shall not be greater than 625
square feet in footprint and shall not exceed 2
stories in height.
H. Drive-throughs:
Drive-through service windows are permitted in
the rear in mid-block and alley accessed
locations provided they do not substantially
disrupt pedestrian activity or surrounding uses.
Example
Orivc-through
6crvice area
I. Civic Sites:
Civic buildings contain uses of special public
importance. Civic buildings include, but are not
limited to, municipal buildings, churches,
libraries, schools, daycare centers, recreation
facilities, and places of assembly. Civic buildings
do not include retail buildings, residential
buildings, or privately owned office buildings. In
order to provide greater flexibility to create a
special architectural statement, civic buildings are
not subject to Build-to Line requirements or
Building Frontage requirements. The design of
civic buildings shall be subject to review and
approval by the Development Review
Committee.
Town Center District Code
1_11.>>"
Page 7
"'~f~,~ -'-C'"""~~,_:.: '_. .:::" ,;..'''~ ~_,~ '."_ . ..
-
~:"I~""..,_7...,~1!"''''
c;-..",;,:.ij.--.,.-:;r....:_,,7.
(
J. Parking:
1. Parking Requirements
The intent of these parking regulations is to
encourage a balance between compact pedestrian
oriented development and necessary car storage.
The goal is to construct neither more nor less
parking than is needed.
There shall be no minimum parking requirement
in the Town Center. The applicant shall provide a
parking analysis justifying the proposed parking
solution.
Minimum parking space dimensions for head-in
or diagonal parking shall be 9'xlS' with 11 foot
drive lanes (22' for 2 way traffic) and parallel
parking spaces shall be S'x20' minimum with 10
foot dri ve lanes (20' for 2 way traffic).
Parking shall be provided as necessary to meet the
requirements of the Americans with Disabilities
Act and Florida Accessibili ty Code.
2. Oil-Street Parkillg
The selection of diagonal or parallel parking
along any section of road shall be determined in
consultation with DRC. In the event that DRC
approves diagonal instead of parallel parking,
dimensions should be adjusted on pages. 12-24.
,1
..r
!
3. Off-Street Su rface Parking Lot Placement
Off-street surface parking lots shall be set back a
minimum of 50 feet from the property line along
the Main Street. DRC shall have discretion to
make this requirement applicable elsewhere on
prominent frontages, such as along key pedestrian
connections, within significant vistas and within
important public spaces. Outbuildings serving as
garages facing alleys shall be permitted within
this setback. Surface parking lots may be built up
to the property line on all other street frontages.
) ;:- .--A( ~~~~lX \.
. ~%~ \., '~.K "\
"\1t~ Parking Structure
.:ll~./ .ii~ /
~( l~~. '1~v.I~~~'~. ~/
\ ~[< :.:' . / 'Liner" Buildings
" . t~. f;~ /'
,'. ..: . . /
""J:~ ~.". /
'V . I ,/" p' F
,. / rnnmy rontage
(,,~
('
4. Structured Parking Lot Placemellt
Parking structures shall be set back a minimum of
50 feet from the property lines of all adjacent
-
...'~
streets to reserve room for Liner Buildings
between parking structures and the lot frontage.
The Liner Building shall be nO less than two
stories in height. Liner Buildings may be
detached from or attached to parking structures.
5. Access to Off-Street Parking
Alleys shall be the primary source of access to off-
street parking. Parking along alleys may be head-
in, diagonal or parallel.
Alleys may be incorporated into parking lots as
standard drive aisles. Access to all properties
adjacent to the alley shall be maintained. Access
between parking lots across property lines is also
encouraged.
~Alley -+
. rulillllWT . ---r--" -1'
lJTllllll1TlJ - "
- I ~
. . m
"
~
m
~
~
Frontage Strut
.
Comer lots that have both rear and side access
shall access parking through the rear (see diagram
below).
~ Alley -+
t
~
m
"
~
m
Comer ~
Building
Property-.7':' -.. - . . -. . - . : -..
Line Front Side of Building5
Curb ~
~
Frontage Street
.
Circular drives are prohibited except for civic
buildings.
Garage door(s) shall be positioned no closer to
streets, squares or parks than 20 feet behind the
principal plane of the building frontage. Garage
doors facing streets, squares or parks shall not
exceed 10 feet in width. Where space permits,
garage doors shall face the side or the rear, not the
front.
Town Center District Code
I....: . 2, lUlU:
Page 8
.~
,-
~;..~,;.,....,,-- - -..- -..-
4-~,,,,....1.~ ~:.....~...,..,.... "'~"..#''''#H'..'.~
Landscape strips of at leust six feet in width shall
be provided between parking isles of either head-
in or diagonal parking. Tree spacing in parking
lots shall be determined by the City Arborist
based upon tree species and location. The
objective is to create as continuous a shade
canopy as possible. A diversity of tree species
across the Town Center is encouraged. To
minimize water consumption, the use of low-
water vegetative ground cover other than turf is
encouraged.
~
6 ft. min.
T
(
In lieu of landscape strips, landscape islands can
be provided. No more than 6 consecutive parking
stalls are permitted without a landscape island of
at least 6 feet in width and extending the entire
length of the parking stall. A minimum of one tree
shall be planted in each landscape island.
r
I
\
K. Single vs. Double Loaded Roads:
Segments of single loaded Edge Drive are
designated for portions of the masterplan in order
to provide public access to significant natural
areas and to enhance these significant natural
areas by facing them with the fronts of buildings.
Single loaded Edge Drive may, by special
exception, be replaced with a double loaded
alternative. Double loaded roads may be
appropriate in locations such as: where there is no
significant natural view, in circumstances where
no significant negative visual impact will be
created by having the developed properties back
up to the natural area or park space, or in other
locations where it is deemed to be in the balanced
public- private interest to incorporate double
loaded roads for the economical use of the
property.
L. Large Footprint Buildings:
~
...,,,, ..,_._' - .-
~ .....'."'. '
a. Build;".. may be one 5'Ory ;n bci8~.oUnY . ........
frontage except Main Street and Market
Square, but shall be at least 24 feet in height.
This may be accomplished with Liner
Buildings or higher ceiling heights and/ or
parapets.
b. To encourage use by pedestrians and decrease
the need for solely auto-oriented patronage,
Large-Footprint Buildings must reinforce the
urban character of the Town Center and shall
therefore continue a connected system of
walkable street frontages.
c. Buildings are exempt from maximum lot size
restrictions, however building footprints may
not be larger than a single block.
d. Loading docks, service areas and trash
disposal facilities shall not face streets, parks,
squares or significant pedestrian spaces.
~~;"'" , ." ,:;~8)' :~}" ~'-'-'-~~:~~i ,,' . I
(,-,\.. ',' . ~~,. ,~ ' '\'(~:Ii: , "j
'~;i..l,.:; .......:~ ~'. . 'j
...... 'I. "~I ~, .".- 'P " .',
;:lItO " . ',- -. .' t t~ ,. t g.,.,
.. '. ~:4~
,II ,''';'
'II. ,'\~
..,' ., ',~J
.~-
," ~~ 'J
{ L'
Large Footprint Building has blank facades and
sits behind a field of parking.
M. Additional Prohibitions:
r
Buildings with a footprint greater than 20,000
square feet may be built within the Town Center
District by special exception only. Such buildings
must abide by all rules in this code with the
following special limitations:
The following are prohibited where visible from
parks, squares and primary streets:
* Coin operated newspaper vending boxes
* Utility boxes and machinery including but not
limited to: backtlow devices, electric meters
and air conditioning units.
Town Center District Code
1_12.2""11
Page 9
1
!
COMPARABLE LAND SALES
~~AVTON. ROPER & MARSHALL
-_.~--~.._..~..- "---'---'.---"-'-- -
TYPE OF PROPERTY
1. RECORDED
2. GRANTOR
3. GRANTEE
4. SALE DATE
5. INSPECTION DATE
6. SITE DESCRIPTION
7. SALE PRICE
8. UNIT PRICE
9. TYPE OF INSTRUMENT
10. LOCATION
11. ZONING
12. PRESENT USE
13. HIGHEST & BEST USE
14. CONDITIONS OF SALE
15. FINANCING
16. ENCUMBRANCES
17. IMPROVEMENT DESCRIPTION
18. UTILITIES
19. VERIFICATION
With/Relationship:
Telephone Number:
oz,""'r' ;0.. '0 . ....~,..,~.""'" . .... ~. ."-_.~ . '
LAND SALE 77-3731-1091
Vacant Multifamily Residential Land
O.R. Book 3731, Page 1091, Seminole County, Florida
Huntington Properties & Investments, Inc. and Osceola
Investment Co., Inc.
Vestcor Fund XI, Ltd.
8/30/99
October 5, 2000
The site is irregular in shape and contains 22.2:f: acres.
This parcel has 1,341 feet of frontage on the west side of
Logan Heights Drive. Offsite utilities were available to the
site, however they had to be re-routed.
$2,230,000
$100,450 per acre
$6,194 per proposed dwelling unit
Warranty Deed
This property is located on the north side of Lake Mary
Boulevard, 1/3rd mile west of the intersection with the
Greeneway in Sanford, Seminole County, Florida.
RM-3, Sanford
Vacant
Multifamily residential development
Arm's Length transaction
Tax exempt bond through Florida Housing Finance
Corporation (3731/1091) $14.8M construction loan.
None Noted
Vacant
All utilities available
Barney Veal, grantee
407-846-3767
CLAYTON, ROPER & MARSHALL
~~-"'~i.;...,
-.-..~<C"
~
.,...~
20.
21.
22.
j
:to';,.t''''1'.~:<<:"
Date:
Verified by:
'",,:'C"It
___~m 'V~'''.'i'''~ ,. .
Land Sale #1, continued, page 2
10/6/2000
Don Watson
Typical market motivations.
MOTIVATIONS OF PARTIES
Same as sale price.
CASH EQUIVALENCY
COMMENTS
23.
SALE HISTORY
24.
TAXID#
360 dwelling units are planned for this site, resulting in ,
density of 16.2 units per acre. Due to the particula
financing, this project will have income restrictions. Sewe
and water lines were available to the site, however the
had to be rerouted at the buyers expense. Additional 01
site costs included installation of a turn lane on Lake Mar
Boulevard and construction of a sewer lift station. Th
offsite improvements cost and additional $400,000.
This property was part of an assemblage of severe
adjacent parcels in early 1999.
12-20-30-300-012E-0000
25.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
. is
A pordOll of tile SAllFORD 0lA/l'l' AIlD PORT1011S or 00VEIUIIlEln' LOTS 1. 1 AND J. all In se~i04
12. t.....ldp 20 South, Range JO East, Sninol. Couzlty, nodda, belll\1 ...re parl:lcula y
described as followl: ;z ~
CoaellCilllJ at the IIOrtMlt corner of the SOUtll_t 1/4 of .ald Section 12, pl:OC.od IOU~
01'J6'04' lIe.t, along the .....tuly U... of lai4 Section 12, . 41sunce of 101.57 fHt to
the Point of k9iMilI9 of lubject pare.l, theace COllcimaiDg e1Cll1!J tile s&14 Weacedy Line
of Seet1Oll12 SOUth 01"3"04" lIelt, a 4iltuee of 11,'0 fHt, thaDc:8 Soutb U.l1'U" Cast,
4apartiOtJ .ai4 ....t.dy line of Settioa 12, a d1l_ of 101.15 fHt, tbene. y"rch
41'S4'JS' Ba.c, a dist&llC. of 57.62 f.et. tbuce IIorth ".4I'JI" _t, a 4Utance of
11'.'0 feec, cbencelloRb U'{O'S4" last, a diatuce of 75.11 feet, thence North 74'00'54"
Baat. a dbt&IICe of 114." foet' theDce IIorth 0"11'27" _t, a 41ataac. of st,74 het.
tbmce SOUth 75'51'"'' Cut, a din_ of st.74 feet' tbence IIorth ".15'10" Ea.t, a
dhtaac. of 55.31 fo.t, tllonce South ".16'SI' Baat, a diataac. of C4.44 fHt, thelle.
SOUth "'5['51' !ut, a dilt&llC& of n .51 feet, theace Soutb n.U'51" Ea.t, a di.tance of
7S.65 feet, tileD<< _tll 61'06']1' !ut, a diotaaa of 72." feee, tbance South 72'55'"''
Eaat, a diataaee of 4;.il feeC, tbe:lce soutla S,'U'U' lue, a discance of 41.10 feet:
thaoce IIorth "'U'40'Ba.t, a diat&llCe of 65.20 fMt, ebanca South JS'14'O" lalt, a
cUlt.....,e of ilJ.1J teot, tllonc. SOUth 16'JS' U' Eut, a diltanee of It,,, feee, thence
South U''''11' !ut, a diac&IIC. of lJ.SI feet, tIIelIce SOUtb U'U'U. IaSC, a diatanc. of
".17 feec: tbeKe SOUth U"JO'24" Ea.., a diat&ftCe of 107.15 feet, t.heDCI SOI&tb 01'21'41"
Welt, a diat&IICe of '.41 fHt, thencl North 57'41'15. IaSC, a 41ltanc. of 217.17 feet.
tbmc::e l1'om )2.11' .S. veac. a diacance of 110.00 feet to a po1ac: of aar:vacure of ... cu.eve
c"""a.. IIortbaue.rly ao4 hiving a radi... of 'n.51 feet, ebaac. a10Dg the are of 0..4
curv. &II are 1aDgtb of SU.II feet, H14 ore beilllJ aubtu4e4 by a cboal beariDlJ all4
disraae. of North 11'16'11" Weat, 671.51 feet. thlace Kortb 0'.45'2)" lue, a 4ilc.....,e of
417.52 h.t to a poillt of rurvat..n of a ...... COIIC&" lou_sc.dy and havi"!J a rOlli...
of SO .00 feet, theIu:e along the arc of aai4 curve &Q arc l_tb of ... U feee, aaid curve
being suhtended by a chord bearing oIl4 4bunce of IIorcb J7'OS'SI" Welt, 17.56 feet,
thence WOrth ')'5""1.. .,.ac. a di.tuce of 111.51 feac. to a potac ot curvature of C1tr~
COClCAve ....the&.t.rly ao4 havllll.l a radi,," of 265.12 f..t, theac:e a1cmg the are of aaul
cu<ve aa4 arc length of 2SJ. 22 fne, aai4 are bellllJ luhunded by a c:IIord bearing oIl4
diOC&IICI of SOUth "'16' U' llest 242 .10 feet to a point of reve... cuzyature of a curva,
COIlCa.. Jortbveacerly ao4 had,,!! a radi..a of JII.17 feet: tbance &1"", tbe are of ..id
curvw &II are 10ll\lth of 211.41 f..t, Hid .re, heilllJ lubcend.4 by & chord bearing aa4
dllt&llCl of SOUtll 51'50'51' W..t 271.55 fe.t, to a point of rev.... c:u:rvat..r. of a ""r"
bellllJ CODe... SOUtlleaatarly aa4 havll11J a rodi... of 410,71 feet, tllen.. a1"", the arc of
..i4 ""rve an are llngth of "1.52 f..., aai4 arc heilllJ luhtudod by a chord bearing oIl4
dht&IICe of SOUth 51'02'OS. W.at 411.54 fHt, thellCll Souch 21'12'25" Wlat, a 4iatance of
)51." feet to a point of curtIltllre of a "".... COIlC&ve 1l0rth...SC.rlr &Ad ha..!1I'J a radl"l
of !to.t! f.et. tIIonee alOOtJ tbe arC of alid curve oIl4 are 1ugtla of 214.60 f..t, ...d arc
being auht,D4ed by a eIIord bead", oIl4 distance of South SC'27'01" Weac, 220.J4 'teet, to
tile Point of laglMilll.l of Hid Parcel.
CLAYTON, ROPER & MARSHALL
"~.,.;',j,j.i,~;...:,
;""'P7""ll'I'rF.;~:,1~-'.ii-"
'''.~''''''''^.''''''<''-''-''''
Land Sale #1. continued, page 3
TiM:
Sc*: I ioch -116 rc:ct Fi": Wee INI'Y ......
"'-'I; 12.1OlI"-< ...S 1Iq"""'-': a.-." 110..1'''''...1 '-', .........IIlSn7l' .........J091'-'
001-.1.)104..1..9
Ulll.0d6.ln:a.lOl.1S
ooJ"Il41S4JSoIn.~
UlM~.""IIU.\I
1Il.lS...w.~7S.11
....14.OOf-W1I4.!14
w1-IIftJ.lll"-J<t,74
....15.514"'= ".14
"",,".%SJfillU~1
01....,.14.104.44
01 1..1t.S!SJc 'HI
OI~.49Sle76,M
OIl-'l6I.O&JIlIn..
OI....1U,.,....lt
ols-d'.JO)I. .,..1
UI.....JSOe.u
UI,..n.I..,.'UJ
UI...IUItUl,..1l9
ul_U.!lIl1le7U6
~1.'.nJk".I'
MI..I9.~101,15
OU..U94twfl.41
0Il-1lSHlISol!l1.17
Ol4-ll1l-!,,,s..ltiO
......-...--.
-,.......-.,.
.....U51,..,.51
~..::....~..
~.',I..UU,
ia~~~
g.:7.EY.i-
"'2-41.112,.)".510
=:'4.-;.::.~.....-:i:'':
CLAYTON, ROPER & MARSHALL
'i!:~>
:o.",~.~',oror,::",:-,.. .~,,>.,.; -c~."'".,~.""-~~'":"""~
TYPE OF PROPERTY
Vacant Multifamily Residential Land
GRANTOR
O.R. Book 3684, Page 0082, Seminole County, Florida
ZOM Development, Inc.
RECORDED
GRANTEE
SALE DATE
INSPECTION DATE
Shadow Creek Apartments Associates, Ltd.
July 8, 1999
April2,2000
SITE DESCRIPTION
The site is irregular in shape with 828.37 feet of frontage
on Dodd Road and 132.51 feet of frontage on Red Bug
Lake Road. The site contains a total of 25.7 acres, or
1,119,492 square feet. The entire site is uplands. All
utilities are available to the site.
SALE PRICE
$1,820,000
ANAL YSIS
$70,817 per acre
$1.63 per square foot
$6,500 per dwelling unit based on 280 dwelling units.
TYPE OF INSTRUMENT
LOCATION
Special Warranty Deed
The site is located at the northeast corner of Dodd Road
and Red Bug Lake Road in Seminole County, Florida.
ZONING
PRESENT USE
HIGHEST & BEST USE
PUD, Seminole County
Vacant at time of sale
Commercial development
CONDITIONS OF SALE
Arm's length transaction
FINANCING
Cash to Seller
ENCUMBRANCES
None noted
IMPROVEMENT DESCRIPTION
Vacant at time of sale
VERI FICA TION
With/Relationship:
Telephone Number:
Date:
Verified by:
John Mosler/Grantor
(407)644-6300
March 21,2000
Michael P. Jonas
MOTIVATIONS OF PARTIES
Typical of market
CLAYTON, ROPER &: MARSHALL
.:..~.:..,
~:;""iolli..~'.i.jdr...u- :lL:.:JI. l~"~~'.~".';;i,- ._
~..,..,..,__"'--'_' ~~:__._~,r,."I-__.'"_1""_'P~~.fOO"''''"''' ,-
---...~~
CASH EQUIVALENCY
COMMENTS
';
SALE HISTORY
TAX NO.:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
~.
Land Sale #2. continued
Page 2
N/A
This property is being developed with 280 apartment
units, equating to a density of slightly less than 11 units
per acre.
The property was sold on June 23, 1998 by Adventist
Health Systems/Sunbelt, Inc. to lOM Development, Inc.
for a sale price of $1,490,100 as recorded in O.R. Book
3455, Page 1933.
24-21-30-300-009B-0000
See following deed.
A traI:t of and being a portioa of !he NortIn\$ ~ of ScctIoo 24. TOWDSbip 21 South.
Range 30 East. Seminole COIIIll)". Florida. being mon: pardculady de,cribed as foU,",,'S:
ColJllllCl1CC at die Sootbwcst comer of the NortIN"CSI 'A of said Scdion 24; 1heooe North
S9"52'2cr East. along the Soulh IiDc of dI: NcmIn\'I:sl ~ of ScctioD 24 for 1111.22 feet;
thence North 00"1T43" East fOf 60.00 feet to dI: POINT OF BEGINNING: thmcc
South B9"S2'34~ West a10ag Ibc NoI1h ricbl-of-OA'aY of Rat 8u& LaIcc Road fer 131.61
feet: Ihmce NOIlh 00"00'00'" East 33.27 feet: tbeDco Nodb 90"00'00" East 16.30 ~
thcote NorIh 00"00'00" EUlIIO.SO feet dlCIlCC Nodh 9O'OO'ocr East 13.J2lCc1: tbeDce
North 00"00'00" East 154.41 fed: thence Norlb 82010'55" Wd. SloSS feel: tbcDce
Nottb 49"48'or Wd. 113.11 feel; thcDcc North 0s049'43'" Wd. 94.49 icet; thence
North S9"S9'SII" West. 206.00 feet thcDcc Soalh .w2)'12" WaI. 13l.S3 fed; thence
South 89"47'03" West. st.9t rcet to a polnl on a curve COIICll\'C Soulhedy haviag a
laIlgCIIt bearing of North 5S'02'46" West lIIICI a radius of 170.00 fcec: tbcDcc run
N~erl)' aIoog \he an: or said CUM dIrough a ecnIIII . ol3100'M1" for a
distanl:e of92.34 feet to a PoUt ofTanccacY. thcnec l'\Il\ Nonh 860I0'Or West. 103.71
f'eet: lhl:nce South 00"00'111" West. nOI feet to . poilIl an a cum: concave
Southeasterly ha\inQ a tansCllt bcariD8 ofNorlh 89"S9'SlI" West 8lId. radius 01110.51
~ thence run South\\~r1r aIooB the an: of said CUI\'C 1bIolI&b . c:couaI qIe of
S4041'20~ for a cIislance of 105.4& fccc: dlcnce clqwting said c:urve llIllI run nd'1II North
5404 r09- Well. 43.79 f.:et 10 a poinI oa a cun'e concaYC Soudlcdy ha\iDg · taIlgCl1t
bearing of North 79"29"23" WeIl;xul a nmus of 4S2. 99 fed: Ibcnce nIB Wcacrl)' along
the lItI: of SlIid QK\"C \hroui!h a o:Nlal anl:k of Ilo\3'OS" for .4isbnce or SUO feet to a
PuUu of lllllGCI1:)"1IIeocC lUft South 89"IT29~ Wtsl. 3S.n feet to a Point ofCarvaturc
uC a eIIr"~ ~"l: SouIbe:Istcrl)" and havina . l'lIlIius of 17.so fca: tbcDcc I1Ill
SoutI\'A-estafr along the lII'C of sm cun-e duoucb . ccnuaI . ol9O"OO'4ti for a
cIist:mce of 27.49 fed to the Poilll ol'TaJlFllCr, thence fWl SouIh We"IT East. 17.72
tCI:l to 11 point OIl the EasIerly rigbt-or-\\~ \ine of Dodd Road: 1bcncc tIID along said
F.asted)' rigbt-o~way liDe for Ibc IOIlowlag c:owscs: Soudl S9"16 '4)~ West. 43.00 feet;
thence NorIh 00(4)'IT Wcst_a line 25.00 feel Edof_parallel to lhc West IiDe
of the Northwcsl ~ of said ScclioIl 24 for a distul<< or 82U7 fCd; thcKc North
89"3 l' 12" East alOll8 tb: Nodh rlRC of !be Southwcsl \.lI of the Nonhwest \4 of said
Section 24 for a diS1allOC 01' 1342.9S f<<1: tb.:nce Soutb 010tT4l" East IIoag Ihe East
line or the Snut\l\\'esl \4 of lbe NOI1hwesl % of said smiotl24, for. distance of 652.00
(CC'I; d1encc run along lbc \Vdb:rl)';md Northerl)" boundaly orScmiDole COUllI)' pupcrt)'
IwoW1l as rU'C S1oIion No. 27 die follo\\ing (4) courses: South 89"52'29" West. 44.61
feet: South OOGIT43" W\':IL ~-lCl.79 r\~1. South SCl"sncr WCSl. 200.00 feet: South
00" 1 T.O- We~ 3S013 '-oct 10 die Pnint oflkgilllling.
CLAYTON, ROPER lit MARSHALL
.-.""....~.~.....L.&."- ;'..-, '"...:,;,'-.~~' La';',
......~~~~.,
"=,.,...~
Land Sale #2, continued
Page 3
--.,~.-=~'~~-""'-
U4.9j
N89"H'1
~ ~
o w
~~1
'8
o
>
8
~
~ .
~;\
~51'19"W
100.00
Red Bug Lake Rd.
CLAYTON, ROPER & MARSHALL
':'.'~~:::-"'~r;;iitf.-,--:?",~:--,,,,-,,~
-~-.~,,.-,.,,~",,~.- ,
--:'-"'~"'~~~';,""7-"':',-':-,:
LAND SALE #3 (77-3616-1331)
"""""......,
1.
RECORDED
Vacant Multifamily Residential
O.R. Book 3616, Page 1331, Seminole County, Florida
TYPE OF PROPERTY
2.
GRANTOR
Charles W. Clayton, individually and as trustee for the
Charles W. Clayton Revocable Trust and W. Malcolm
Clayton, individually and as trustee for the W. Malcolm
Clayton Revocable Trust
3.
GRANTEE
Seminole Co. Lorna Vista Partners, Ltd.
4.
SALE DATE
March 24, 1999
5.
I NSPECTION DATE
October 5,2000
6.
SITE DESCRIPTION
The site is irregular in shape and contains 29.32:t acres, of
which 8.6:t acres is in a pond in on the west side of the
site. This parcel has 430 feet of frontage on the north side
of Aloma Avenue.
7. SALE PRICE $2,070,000
8. UNIT PRICE $70,600 per gross acre or $5,447 per planned dwelling unit
9. TYP'E OF INSTRUMENT Warranty Deed
10. LOCATION This property is located on the north side of Aloma Avenue,
1/4 mile north of it intersection with Dean Road in Seminole
County, Florida.
11. ZONING RM-3, Seminole County
12. PRESENT USE Vacant
13. HIGHEST & BEST USE Multifamily residential development
14. CONDITIONS OF SALE Arm's Length transaction
15. FINANCING Cash to Seller
16. ENCUMBRANCES None Noted
17. IMPROVEMENT DESCRIPTION Vacant
18. UTILITIES Electric and telephone service is available to the site.
Sewer and water lines available offsite.
CLAYTON, ROPER & MARSHALL
A
7":'~--'--~- --~---'-~.~'7,'_--'
.!,,~~',,~.
-
Land Sale #3. continued. page 2
,-~
19. VERIFICATION
With/Relationship:
Telephone Number:
Date:
Verified by:
'''''1!lI''h''~','''Ir'''-: ---
Charles Clayton, grantee
401-644-6200
10/5/2000
Don Watson & Craig Clayton
20. MOTIVATIONS OF PARTIES
Typical market motivations.
21. CASH EQUIVALENCY
Same as sale price.
22. COMMENTS
In addition to the sales price, the grantee paid an additional
$213,118 into an escrow account to be used for
construction of Loma Vista Way, extension of offsite utilities
to the property, and for a traffic light at the intersection of
Loma Vista Way and Aloma Avenue. The total estimated
cost of these improvements was $426,236. The grantor
owns adjacent property and also contributed $213,118 into
the escrow account for these improvements. A total of 380
dwelling units are planned, indicating a density of 18.3
units per developable acre.
23. SALE HISTORY
There have been no arms length transfers of this property
within the three years prior to this sale.
24. TAXID#
31-21-31-300-001 D-OOOO
25. LEGAL DESCRIPTION
TIMID
A pcIlIM III........ 7/1d" NaIll flZlI......... W d Idall If. T....
21 ..... ..... a1 e.c. ~ WIll d.... .... GI... ..... d..........
~....... eo.nr.flIIId& .... _.......dIIdlIlI....
eo..- II.. .....111_11I..... n. T..... 21 .......... If _
.......... _4%'................... III................. d
aG.II..... ._...WIIl..III.. W_III...... tlZlII...........
WIII...lIIIlIlaft; ........._......... ....llII'WO"..........
... ~.... ......lIIl114J1.....paIIIl... ..........
....., III III CIX ..... .... ...... .... _ ... .. IUI ....
00'14''''' ....... ...... III 1U1...... POINT 011ElG1111NJ, ......
..... .. .. ....... ....... ~ 1M d...... CIX ItIIIIIIId: ....
..... .............,...... Nd 7rG'14"fIIIt............,~
.....clllllllwlllGUt .......................,~
.. ...... 1r4r..,. &II lIIr...... all...... Ml Nd Jll't2'lJ" W
....... d 111.17" __....... W47'G' W......... d72AII
........... III CIlIllIIIuIoI III. _ _..................... III
2M.IlD ..... .... Ml ........, .. _ _ ....... . ... .... d
I4"t2W' ..._......11I ,......... ................. Nt
..... 4r1....WIIl......... III 141.74..... _1auII..4I'I7"EaII'"
. ...... III llIUI ... . . ... ... ...... .. d .. NaIll fIZ III ..
........ W d........ Idall" ... ... ... wtnr WIll .... ...
......,............11I 1JM.11.......... ........~..III..
W 7.. III....... tIZ ".. ....... VI"........ at; ..............
......, .... _ ..... llII'lI4'G' WIll.... ... w..tr 1M ... . ...... d
................. POINT Of IIEGIIlN1
lRAC1' 8
A"'" III" &117..11I....... fIZ"......... Wd..... If. T....
21 ..... ..... at _ ~ WIll III'" RDad _... ..... III...........
.....,. ......CUIr. FIiIldL ...._.......dIIdlIlI....
c...a II.. .....111_.. ......". T..... 21 ..... .... at IIIIl;
........... .....4%'W...... NaIll.. d... .............. III
aG.II..... ....... WIll III.... W 1/1"" Nd tIZ III...........
11111I....... ..................1III1auII OlI'ItG'..........
"'~""'''''''III''''''.."-.,, ~.. III
....... ..... VI III .. ,..... 111 III ... .... .. ........ ...
WiIIIlI* .. .. .... wtnr ... ... ... ..... III ... . ...... III
tJM.........1OlIII' 01-.................~.....
................. .........11I.........,...",.." EaIlIlr.
..... fII,.,......... poIIl.. _....... _..........,...
......... 1112M.1lD.......... .......... III.......... e.c.
... "'Ill:..... _.............. III W4tt1" IIr _..
...... III ....... poIIlIII.....-r:.......... 71'.............
......11I ,......... . poIIlIII...... 11I.- _.. ......
..... .... fII ttUO .... ....... .........,...... _...... .
.... .... III ...,.. .. . _ ..... III t... ...... . paIIIl".....-,;
.... ....It"a'll"faII........III2t.....................
........., III fII .... .... .. ... .... .... 28"ZnlZ' WIlt.. ....
..........,..... .....11141U1...III. _................
.. III...... tIZ III" ....... 111 III...., .... at; .... Ml ....
wtnr WIlt .... ... ...... .. ... . ..... fII _14 fill .. .........
POINTt11_
CLAYTON, ROPER & MARSHALL
" :,\:"'::_''!Pl'!I\1lI\''''
I"~'~,-;--;:-ll,_r~~:!'i '~"?,:~~r.'
Land Sale #3, continued, page 3
;(~X
.. ,Jf'-'
/- - - -U - - ~/;j ------Ii
"'-{ /' /./ LOT~/ :
~~~~-tI~ /' TRACT F /~ 1.IOAo f /-
~~~~f)~' /' -== ~~ ,/ /
~",i\ ", ~ WCRf~.~":;;" f' /
", ", ....-- .-' --....--\ ~ l ~/ LOT I
,., ____ ....-...-,;..,,/1"" ~ F.D.O.T. :tf"..
,., ~.-::::::.-..-.... ~E.T E ~ ~~ Retention Pond fJl' :" ~
."", ..........__. ..nMlClNMMo\.'ft,f~'f' \ ~ /:',' S
....--... ~....-::' ","__. ~._" 7\ : '
C ~ ~ ,,~~ ~.\ : /
...- ""--pJJ\\..S ~~ '" \ /:' ,: ~~ r1 ~ /
:.-..-- ~\. " . 1/ /' ~l'Jl/~ /1
, " .
\ ..... '. //:' (J:-i .
: ~A'-'.. ~.I
I ;:"'l' ~ '.
~ ' 1/
/' Loma Vista . /
----
//- Apartments
.;
"'~----- 380 Units
(Under l
Construction) l
-----------------~
~
~
II
II
CLAYTON, ROPER & MARSHALL
. .,' " n.T'"':."~T',".'''~'''''''-'\''~':'''"-
",~':~.:;;~~.~~;.n :""_,!,-.',> -"'-7"-''';~,t''<!''r'(~;;:~'-'i'J''.rY'~.;.;.;;J'
LAND SALE # 4 (77-3582-1447)
'-'-.......----..
,.,...-....'"~l>'........--..,.,......",.....-.,~
TYPE OF PROPERTY
Vacant Multifamily Residential Land
RECORDED
O.R. Book 3582, Page 1447, Seminole County, Florida
GRANTOR
Robert A. Yeager
GRANTEE
Courtney Springs, Limited Partnership
SALE DATE
INSPECTION DATE
January 28, 1999
April 2, 2000
SITE DESCRIPTION
The site is irregular in shape and contains a total of
23.86:1: acres, or 1,039,342:1: square feet. The site has
two separate sections of frontage on the south side of
State Road 434, and a DOT pond separates the two
sections. The easterly section is 719.97 feet and the
westerly section is 475.37 feet. The westerly section of
frontage is unusable due to wetlands. The site contains
approximately 12 acres of wetlands. All utilities were
available to the site at the time of sale.
SALE PRICE
$1,690,000
ANAL YSIS
$70,830 per gross acre
$142,496 per net acre
$6,706 per planned dwelling unit
TYPE OF INSTRUMENT
Warranty Deed
LOCATION
The site is located on the south side of State Road 434
approximafery 2,000:1: feet east of Vistawilla Road in
Seminole County, Florida.
ZONING
PUD, Winter Springs.
PRESENT USE
Vacant at time of sale
HIGHEST & BEST USE
Multi-family residential development
CONDITIONS OF SALE
Arm's length transaction
FINANCING
Cash to Seller
ENCUMBRANCES
No part of the property may be utilized for the sale of
motor fuel for a term of twenty-five years from the date of
sale.
IMPROVEMENT DESCRIPTION
Vacant at time of sale.
CLAYTON, ROPER & MARSHALL
.I
,.~' ~., .. ':""!'-~.'
- ""--'-"'"lI"C""r,..'''''''' .~-~, -
VERI FICA TION
With/Relationship:
Telephone Number:
Date:
Verified by:
-~""."'s'-
ft.
...... ].~,""",'"
-"""""",.> ,...:'''~ ~.-._._'~.,j-.;..~ C'~" ~--...--1.'.:.tl'.iI.... ~._,,,...'''',.j...2iic'i'lili:~:::.,.~..'lk'
Land Sale #4, continued
Page 2
Sharon TwidwelllGrantee
(407)333-0066
March 20, 2000
Michael P. Jonas
MOTIVATIONS OF PARTIES
To construct a 252-unit apartment complex
CASH EQUIVALENCY
N/A
COMMENTS
SALE HISTORY
TAX 10 NO.:
None
No transactions in the past five years
31-20-31-5BB-0000-019A
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
See following deed.
- TbIt put",dIe NIp ", die ftIIlp .. v_. CnuIt, ....... II PIal Bollk I. Pqel35-3I. PIbIk 1lIaIrdJ", c.:
SMI.. CoutJ. Plod'" ~ ,1I1IaIIuI1 dacriW. ''''' u. CJ
""0:
c-.. die I'IartIIrM Cll'lll!l'ttI~.. TcIlnaWp I............ "lat...... Caat7.lIarfdif N
,lInce ... SuIdI 00 __ u ..... 55 -"!all....... Eat.. ttldIe NankuC QaI1a' rI aM
~.. ~ttl2lIU6'" ....NdIatJ ....."...,.. flId1e I.&e au. ......",dIe &eaIIaIfJ
o.t LIIe .......(l.CJ..) (I'" ~rI~....... ""54 ....--U ......".... W.1klM
ald Nllrtllcrb If'" uI'''aJ lit. dlllUU lII29.1.IfIcd.u ........ ClIm.__ ....11I.............. -
.aIIlI1IIllIIllettlU__..........O................fSf."'. CIIaICC ra HortInrafcdr ~ .z:-
'lae lII'C of uI.eww ad.... NordIeItJ rf&'t of".,.... iIIIIuce ul'145.IJ feet "die..... llta.-r. .z:-
CIaa:.. NIIIdI1t ...-,...... '4................"enJIatJ ....,.. ttI...,... dbIuce '" \D
QlI.2ltfeetfOlIle..... ttI ClImIIa'lIfII. am, _~,....... taInIaqleflllldep'CCI 46
......31-.11........", Z6IUt fCldl dlalcera ffIIfInNIfafJ........lII'C ".... __1IId
Nart/acrlJ"aId .,war.....'....... rl53UJleettDlIle ...........-,; .... ralClldlla dep'CCI!IS
....... -.II W......... uld lfonkrl7 rfllllt rI...,..... dIICuce fIIl,..1I feet.. tile WaterIr.....
fIIw., IllleGf\'lllawlll. arM; <<'- ra !fardI1' __21 ......,..... lat......... WaCetfy .
rf&fat "war u... II"'- 1I.6.2J feet........." CIftIIlInl'" cum. -~, mi...
ratrd -.Ie I'"~ ctev-III.....,........ .......ttl5flUJ8 fedr...... NorIIleaIUd, aIoq
die arc " .... _ ... .... Wafaf, rfjlI " "., 1M . *- ., -.u feet fa IIIe .... fII_
GIn'IIfIIR ",.anw.ClIlIm'C NmhatcItr..... ...........ttI.4 .....".....,. 2J -" lid .
ndIlIattlllo.aDIIICIl dImce... NardaIIatJ.....IIIe-....... - lid .... WeoIerfr "&fat ttI.., lae.
. tiltaCettl.llUJ,. ...............WaIaIJ...... NcmII"-" 2J ............ Waf
......_......... ...-ttl..... .....".....,.... 52..-...a 61 ......Wac.. dIIt.ucc
fllUoas fed lor. POmTor BWIJlINIIW; a.-___ NardI.,."... 52 .....ed' "'Wat..
diItaDce IllZ01US'. dIaa Nd 1II....f11........U.... Ella. iIIatuce ttllOUO,. dIaa
Nol1ll" tIcp:ca 52 ..,..." -.II Walt. ~~47S1 f.c ... die......... _fIICndca....
.. r-*d...... Beak ~,.. I........ J...... ....flI...... CoutJ. ftorfUa dIBce..dIe
1IIlIIriIa-...*-.... IkIalaV lit....... Cftcka.... dIcace Norft 00,,-07111autc1
1. .... EIIf. .lIIIaacefll tS.17 fed; IIIIla "....47-.._....... $9 -'- J:aIt, . cIIIIaaee", 66.14
fed; CIaa: NordI JO ~49 RIIaIra U.......... a...ce 11I"-" fClCl; dtcace NordI" dc&nct 31
......1. -.II Eat. .~ttlH.JIfed;.....ftIdI U...-.., _lara sa KClIlIdI Wat..1lIWR
'" 7.J..IJ feet fa tile NaIdaII__ ".... C....1lar. ..... ....rd.. MI, 1aIret11.... .. SaacIa 19
'epUl5Z .....>> -a Eut" dIIlIIce ttI'''11 r_tkIKe NartII2I.... 05..........
Wat. . dbtucc"UM fCld; *- NartII U __ Z6 ......." _d. Waf,. dbt_ "17:14 fed;
dIaIce NonIa II.... D.1auta If ... War..6taacc", 6I.5J feet.... po/IIt. ch ~ RIp.
of W.,. II depkIaI 0I111e RIJ:IaI fIIW., Ifap farSCllc.... H...u4. SeclIoa17tJ1O.2S11; tIIacc... ch
f~_""/Ilum .loIItald s.dIntJ IflIIIt aI.., Pac; CIIcacc SaIIlII., ~.9 IIInfco 01
~ a:ur........., 14U1 fed; *-s.dI.""'" 18 ..... 53.... Wat.. ~ 115.00
fecq dICIIce s.tII., __ 49 .....".17 _..Eat.. diItIIIClC" 2AlCI.0I ftee; IIaeecc NonIa III ~ '0
....5J__ r.r...a.-"'UOftd; .....s.dIl9...-4' .1..us01_.. Eat..~-
", 13110 feet; dIaKt s.dIlIlI ~ 10.....,. 51 ~Wat.. 6luccof1l9AO feet; ..... SaIIIlI19
.seu-..' ..talIfrt 01__ !III.. dIoIaKc",..... feelllllalce Nerda GO ~ 10....",.51_*
!ul. . .1Icuce al2H.1l1 fat; IIace SaIdI19 dc&nct 49 -.ca.7 _III Eut, . dIJraaw ", 71tA7 fret;
..tIICC SIIatIIlJO ."... 10 .llIlIfa " _.. Wat.. d~ ., 'D.79 fClCl; IIlaIcc 5DIIlIa 19 dc&nct 49
.......".01... ElIII..~",26..,rllf;*-....__IO mia_fa" __ Wac.. d10Wcc
lIUI2.U fed... die POINT OF BEGINNINC.
CLAYTON, ROPER & MARSHALL
, -
~
l..,w.......~""'- ~........."
-,.~.'..~....~. ,...--":"-,.....,'
"" ~ '~'l:','i""'i.,
';f.{<"~b:"'_ -:mitf:
'~;>'i';~t:'..;:-~'~"~,.:~";~-:';
,. ,~,~ "'.'
land Sale #4, continued
Page 3
S.R. 434
200.00
S89049'07"E
719.07
S89"49'07"E
~
:;:8
~~
~M
FDOT retention pond
l.tl
8~
.0
~..
MO
~
800.00
S89"49'07"E
~
~~
~~
8'"
..
N890S2'39"W
203S.8S
CLAYTON, ROPER lit MARSHALL
Lei, '
~"""~...rL..
jJ ~J._ .. ~~ .~~...>~~~
.......................~..........
~.'" ' . I.
'BOREAt::'-C)F";;:;;'~;SAL - APPRAISAL CHECKLIST, PART ONE
I''''~-'
GENERAL-VACANT LAND
1
Does the appraisal include a completed copy of
the Bureau of "Appraisal's Checklist?" [The
appraiser is required to indicate compliance with
specific requirements by noting which page
number(s) of the appraisal contain required
minimum information] [Bureau of Appraisal,
"Supplemental Appraisal Standards for Board of
Trustees land Acquisitions" Page 15]
Isa completed "Executive Summary" included for
each parcel and/or opinion of value?
Does the appraisal follow the recommended
general format for narrative appraisal reports?
(This format should be used by the fee appraiser
as a general guide.) [Bureau of Appraisal,
"Supplemental Appraisal Standards for Board of
Trustees land Acquisitions: Page 9]
2
3
PREMISES OF THE APPRAISAL
4
Is there a description of the extent of the process
(scope) of collecting, confirming and reporting
data?
Is the Bureau of Appraisal's definition of market
value or the current USPAP definition used?
[Bureau of Appraisal, "Supplemental Appraisal
Standards for Board of Trustees land
acquisitions," Page 2]
Is the intended use (function) of the appraisal
identified?
Are the, property interests (rights) appraised
identified?
5
6
7
8
Does the appraisal express the estate which
existed as of the date of appraisal?
Does the appraisal report consider whether a
fractional interest, physical segments or partial
holding contribute pro rata to the value of the
whole?
9
7.1.99
Yes
v'
v'
./
./
./
./
./
Page No.
attached
1
6
Addendum
p.1
6
6
CLAYTON, ROPER &: MARSHALL
No
N/A
x
x
page 1
-"::-'-:r~t~~:t"'
~.,........., .'
~_......".-....~-,~~,--
....'....._.._",<1...,... ".....~-" ",. -
-
__ ~ -1b~~~~'~AreU:;;";;ff~ctlve date of the appraisal and the ./
,~. date of the appraisal report stated?
Letter of
transmittal
PRESENTATION OF DATA
11
Is a legal description of the property appraised
included in the report? [Bureau of Appraisal, ../
"Supplemental Appraisal Standards for Board of
Trustees land Acquisitions," Pages 9 and 16}
Is a five-year subject sales history included?
[Bureau of Appraisal, "Supplemental Appraisal ../
Standards for Board of Trustees land
Acquisitions, II Page 3 }
Does the appraiser explain why the previous sale
of the subject was not used in the valuation of the
subject property?
x
6
12
7
13
14
Is any current agreement of sale, option or listing
of the property under appraisal analyzed? [Bureau ../
of Appraisal, "supplemental Appraisal Standards
for Board of Trustees land Acquisitions," Page 4}
Was a neighborhood analysis provided including
a discussion of market trends, either positive or
negative, which affect the subject property? ../
[Bureau of Appraisal, "Supplemental Standards
for Board of Trustees land Acquisitions," Pages 9
and 15}
10
7,29-30
15
16
Is a zoning analysis provided which discusses
existing zoning and land use designations,
impending use restrictions or other existing or ../
proposed concurrency or land use planning
restrictions?
19
17
Does the appraisal report provide the current
assessed value of the subject property? [Bureau ../
of Appraisal, "Supplemental Appraisal Standards
for Board of Trustees land Acquisitions," Page 4}
1
DESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT SITE/LAND
18
19
Is a site sketch included? ../
20
Does the appraisal report describe the size,
shape and other physical characteristics of the
sitelland? [Bureau of Appraisal, "Supplemental ../
Appraisal Standards for Board of Trustees land
Acquisitions, Page 4}
17
7.1.99
page 2
CLAYTON, ROPER & MARSHALL
--. """':"".:".
20
27
28
29
7.1.99
~";:".7:7'!r~,'
17-18
~ ',,:;~""II:JIi'. . l~' .ll.~~
21
Does the appraisal report describe the current ../
state of access to the property? [Bureau of
Appraisal, "Supplemental Appraisal Standards for
Board of Trustees land Acquisitions, Page 4J
If the access if poor, inadequate or substandard,
does the appraisal address its affect, with
supporting market evidence, on market value?
[Bureau of Appraisal, "Supplemental Appraisal
Standards for Board of Trustees land
Acquisitions, Page 4J
Does the appraisal describe the topography of the
property? [Bureau of Appraisal, "Supplemental ../
Appraisal Standards for Board of Trustees land
Acquisitions, Page 4J
Does the appraisal report describe the location of
the property? [Bureau of Appraisal, ./
"Supplemental Appraisal Standards for Board of
Trustees land Acquisitions, Page 4J
Does the appraisal report describe the property's
road frontage? [Bureau of Appraisal, ../
"Supplemental Appraisal Standards for Board of
Trustees land Acquisitions, Page 4J
Does the appraisal report describe the property's
water frontage? [Bureau of Appraisal,
"Supplemental Appraisal Standards for Board of
Trustees land Acquisitions, Page 4]
Does the appraisal report describe utilities
available and their proximity to the property?
[Bureau of Appraisal, "Supplemental Appraisal ./
Standards for Board of Trustees land
Acquisitions, Page 4]
Does the appraisal report describe nuisances and
hazards, if any, affecting the market value of the
property?
Does the appraisal report describe any existing
and/or potential environmental hazards affecting
the market value of the property?
Does the appraisal report describe the drainage
and the existence of flood plain conditions
affecting the market value of the property?
[Bureau of Appraisal, "Supplemental Appraisal
Standards for Board of Trustees land
Acquisitions, Page 4]
2, 17
22
17
23
17
24
17
25
26
2
../
CLAYTON, ROPER & MARSHALL
x
x
x
x
page 3
..' ............. ~ ~"">"~,.";'O"....~'~'~.,';Jt,~~~_"" .": ~
~'~.,.~". ,...--
35
36
37
38
7.1.99
.-..
30
Does the appraisal report discuss any easements,
encroachments and rights-of-way affecting the ./
market value of the property?
Does the appraisal report address their affect(s),
if any, on the market value of the subject ./
property?
Does the appraisal report discuss the affect on
the market value of the property as a result of
outstanding oil, gas and mineral interests?
[Bureau of Appraisal, "Supplemental Appraisal
Standards for Board of Trustees land
Acquisitions, Page 4]
31
32
ANALYSIS OF DATA AND CONCLUSIONS
Highest and Best Use
33
Is the highest and best of the property "as vacant"
and "as improved, if applicable, analyzed?
[Bureau of Appraisal, "Supplemental Appraisal ./
Standards for Board of Trustees land
Acquisitions, Page 4]
Is the highest and best use based on an
"economic use" of the property. [Bureau of ./
Appraisal, "Supplemental Appraisal Standards for
Board of Trustees land Acquisitions, Page 5]
34
Land Valuation
Are the comparable sales verified, documented
and presented? [Bureau of Appraisal,
"Supplemental Appraisal Standards for Board of
Trustees land Acquisitions, Page 5,6 and 14]
Are photographs of the comparables sales
included? [Bureau of Appraisal, "Supplemental
Appraisal Standards for Board of Trustees Land
Acquisitions, Page 6]
Does the appraisal report include sketches of the
comparable sales? [Bureau of Appraisal,
"Supplemental Appraisal Standards for Board of
Trustees land Acquisitions, Page 6]
Did the appraiser include a general sales location
map that also shows the subject's proximity?
./
./
./
./
~"""""_""'.k;"'.-u,:",:;,.,....""."".-.;4:;"f.;,<;
17, 18
18
x
21
21-23
addendum
addendum
addendum
31
CLAYTON, ROPER & MARSHALL
page 4
J
,:~,"",,,,,,,~~,,,,,,-,,,,,,~,-,,,,,,'~"-'~""'<'","
~,~;~~_'tli-""~~~~~"""'-';;';;~'..t; ....",";.>
39 Is the unit of comparison appropriate for the
subject's market?
40
41
42
43
44
45
II
Is the unit of comparison reliable for the subject's
market?
Is the unit of comparison valid for the subject's
market?
46
Are the comparable sales similar to the subject in
highest and best use?
If the comparable sales are not similar in highest
and best use, is an adequate discussion included
as to why the sales are used?
Are the comparable sales adjusted for cash
equivalency or otherwise clearly explained?
If you included comparable sales to governmental
units and/or non-profit groups, were they analyzed
separately with appropriate comments explaining
differences, if any, compared to private
transactions? [Bureau of Appraisal,
"Supplemental Appraisal Standards for Board of
Trustees Land Acquisitions, Page 6]
If the appraisal report includes extraordinary
assumptions, are their impacts on value
adequately supported and reported in the
reconciliation and final value estimate?
47
If you provide a discounted cash flow model in
valuing the subject property, did you also provide
a sales comparison, or other, approach to arrive
at the present value of the subject property?
[Bureau of Appraisal, "Supplemental Appraisal
Standards for Board of Trustees Land
Acquisitions, Page 7]
Are demolition costs, if any, considered
appropriately for the comparable sales and the
subject property?
Did you consider and reconcile the quality and
quantity of data available and analyzed within the
approaches used and the applicability or
suitability of the approaches used?
Is the final value estimate consistent with the data
and analyses presented in the report?
Does the appraisal report consider and analyze
the effect on value, if any, of the assemblage of
48
49
50
51
7.1.99
,/
,/
,/
,/
x
,/
x
x
x
x
,/
,/
,/
page 5
CLAYTON. ROPER & MARSHALL
52
",,~.__.,._.~\":;i{'.i{;'
~ .",
Is the highest and best use conclusion(s)
consistent with the value reported?
Miscellaneous
53
54
55
56
Does the report provide an estimate of the
property's anticipated marketing (exposure) time?
Does the report contain a clear and adequate
disclosure of all ordinary and extraordinary
assumptions (see question 45) or limiting
conditions that directly affect the appraisal?
Does the appraisal explain and support the
exclusion of any of the usual valuation
approaches?
7.1.99
./
./
23
./
4
./
24
CLAYTON, ROPER & MARSHALL
x
page 6
-
t~~;k'Jk~.i'i'''''''''':' .'. .,..
~.' ~~~"f,~_","""",''C'C'8';-'"''''
Page 7
111" F HIJ
11.]_ . ,r "_r
. .'<. .
.~"' .. '.
BUREAU OF APPRAISAL - APPRAISAL CHECKLIST, PART TWO
Cost Approach
57
58
59
60
61
62
Are there are least two photographs or color
copies of each major improvement? [Bureau of
Appraisal, "Supplemental Appraisal Standards for
Board of Trustees Land Acquisitions," Page 7]
Is a sketch of the building or a copy of the building
plans included? [Bureau of Appraisal,
"supplemental Appraisal Standards for Board of
Trustees Land Acquisitions," Page 6]
Does the appraisal report identify and describe
any potential environmental hazards (e.g.,
asbestos; see questions 27 and 28)?
Is the source of the reproduction or replacement
cost new of the improvements identified and
explained?
Was entrepreneurial profit, whether included or
excluded, identified and supported?
Is curable physical deterioration (deferred
maintenance) considered?
Is curable physical deterioration (deferred
maintenance) adequately supported?
Is incurable physical deterioration considered?
Is incurable physical deterioration supported?
Is functional obsolescence considered?
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
Is functional obsolescence supported?
Is~ external obsolescence considered?
Is external obsolescence supported?
Is the contributory value of the site improvements
7.1.99
Yes
Page No.
CLAYTON, ROPER & MARSHALL
No
N/A
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
page 7
~-,~-_.. .
:h..> .Jlli
J.. 'UL ........_>
- -'~'~-,~ .....".---,-.-
-_._....~ .">'''---'
Page 8
supported?
Income Approach
71
Are the comparable rentals adequately
documented?
x
Are the comparable rentals adequately
presented?
73 Did you include a general comparable rental
location map also showing the location of the
subject property?
72
x
x
74 Are adjustments to the comparable rentals
supported?
75 Is a current rent roll and recent income industry
for the property provided in the report or lack
thereof explained?
76 Were all existing leases reviewed?
77 Were all existing leases described?
78 Were all existing leases analyzed?
79 Does the report indicate whether the contract
rental income is at or near market rental rates?
x
x
x
X
X
X
80 Is the projected potential income adequately
supported
81 Is your estimate of vacancy and collection loss
adequately supported?
82 Is a recent expense history for the subject
property provided in the report?
83 Are the projected expenses explained and
supported?
84 Are differences between the projected expenses
and the property's historical expense trend
supported and described?
85 Is each component of the selected capitalization
X
X
X
X
X
X
7.1.99
page 8
CLAYTON, ROPER & MARSHALL
Page 9
89
90
91
-,,-~ -~~
86
method and technique supported by appropriate
market data?
Are the income and expense projections utilized
in the discounted cash flow analysis supported?
Are the project vacancy and collection loss
estimates and the projected absorption period, if
applicable, supported?
Are deductions for rent loss, leasing
commissions, tenant improvements, deferred
maintenance, etc., accounted for in the
discounted cash flow analysis?
Is the discount rate supported by appropriate
market data?
x
x
87
x
88
x
Is the terminal capitalization rate supported
considering the future risk and increased age of
the improvements?
Are reasonable sales costs deducted from the
estimated reversion to arrive at the net property
reversion?
x
x
Sales Comparison Approach
92 Is the unit of comparison appropriate for the ./
subject's market?
93 Is the unit of comparison reliable for the subject's ./
market?
94 Is the unit of comparison valid for the subject's ./
market?
95 Are the comparable sales adequately ./
documented and presented? [Bureau of
Appraisal, "Supplemental Appraisal Standards for
Board of Trustees Land Acquisitions, Page 5,6
and 14]
96 Are photographs of the comparable sales ./
included? [Bureau of Appraisal, "Supplemental
Appraisal Standards for Board of Trustees Land
7.1.99 page 9
CLAYTON, ROPER &: MARSHALL
';.""'<}t~
~~~d. ~__
Page 10
Acquisitions, Page 6]
97 Does the report include a general sales location ../
map showing the proximity to the subject
property/
98 Are the comparable sales similar to the subject in ../
highest and best use?
If the comparable sales are not similar in highest
and best use, is a discussion included as to why
the sales are used?
100 Are the comparable sales adjusted for cash ../
equivalency or otherwise clearly explained?
99
101 Are the adjustments that were applied to the ../
comparable sales adequately supported?
SIGNED:
iO../. (') /-7
U.~' ~ l/C~
7.1.99
DATE:
10/16/00
CLAYTON, ROPER &: MARSHALL
x
page 10
.;,..,.,.......------
QUALIFICATIONS OF PAUL M. ROPER
Business Address
Clayton, Roper & Marshall
246 North Westmonte Drive
Altamonte Springs, Florida 32714
Telephone: (407) 772-2200, Extension 316
Education
BSBA Degree (Finance), University of Central Florida, Orlando, Florida. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1979
AS Degree, Daytona Beach Community College, Daytona Beach, Florida. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1974
Successfully Completed Real Estate Appraisal Courses & Seminars Under the Direction of the Appraisal Institute:
Appraising from Blueprints .............................................................. 2000
Partial Interest Valuation ................................................................ 2000
USPAP/Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2000
Business Enterprise Valuation - Course No. 701 ............................................. 1999
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) - Course No. 706 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1999
Improving Your Business, Management and Bottom Line Profit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1999
Valuing Your Business . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1999
Appraisal Considerations for Rural Properties. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1998
USPAP - Part C .................................................................... 1997
Fannie Mae Guidelines Update ........................................................ 1996
USPAP (Update/Core Law) ........................................................... 1996
Agriculture and the Internet Computer Workshop . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1995
How to Appraise FHA-Insured Property . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1995
Appraisal Institute Faculty Workshop. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1995
Technology Video Conference. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1995
Understanding Limited Appraisals & Reporting Options - General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1994
Powerline Easements & Electro Magnetic Fields' Effect on People & Value ..................... 1994
USPAP Core Law for Appraisers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1994
Standards of Professional Practice, Parts A & B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1992
Interim Use Properties ............................................................... 1992
SREA 201 Instructor's Clinic .......................................................... 1988
Course IV - Condemnation Appraisal Practice ............................................ 1988
Uniform Residential Appraisal Report ................................................... 1987
Valuation and Evaluation of Proposed Projects. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1987
R-41 c Overview and Analysis ......................................................... 1987
R-41 b - Overview and Analysis ........................................................ 1986
Capitalization Theory and Techniques. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . " 1986
Federal Income Taxes Affecting Real Estate. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1985
R-41 b - Federal Home Loan Bank Board Regulations ...................................... 1985
Condemnation and the Appraiser ...................................................... 1984
Development of Business Centers and Office Showrooms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1984
Overview - Apartment Development Process ............................................. 1984
Adjusting for Financing Differences in Residential Properties. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1983
SREA 201 Instructor's Clinic .......................................................... 1982
Report Writing Seminar. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1981
Construction Facts/Inspections ........................................................ 1981
Course VII, Industrial Valuation ........................................................ 1981
Hotel/Motel Valuation and Analysis Seminar. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1981
Golf Course Valuation and Analysis Seminar. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1981
R-2 Single-Family Residential Examination. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1978
Course II, Urban Case Studies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1977
Narrative Report Writing Workshop . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1976
Course 201 - University of Central Florida. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1976
Applied Capitalization Techniques Workshop. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1975
Course 101 - Stetson University. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1975
CLAYTON, ROPER & MARSHALL
~-
(Cont'd.)
Inde endent Seminars Other Than A raisallnstitute:
SFWMD Current Appraisal Issues in Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2000
Less Than Fee Interest Workshop. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1999
Real Estate Continuing Ed Course. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ., 1998
The Internet and Appraising . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1997
Risk Reduction for Brokers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1996
Contracts, Collectibles, Crimes, Copy & More . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ., 1996
Agriculture and the Internet II Workshop . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1996
Marshall & Swift Square Foot Method Use & Application .................................... 1996
Real Estate Law Symposium ...................................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ., 1995
Concurrency Management Seminar - City of Orlando . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1992
Citrus Groves _ Evaluation and Analysis ................................................. 1991
Appraisal Review of Commercial Real Estate and Federal Home Loan Bank Board Memorandum R-41 d 986
The Appraisal Institute conducts a voluntary program of continuing education for its designated members. MAl's
who meet the minimum standards of this program are awarded periodic educational certification. Paul M. Roper
is currently certified under this program through December 31, 2001.
Mr. Roper has also attended various seminars under the direction of the Orlando Area Association of Realtors and
the American Society of Appraisers.
Professional Desianations:
MAl Designation - Appraisal Institute, Certificate #6442
SRPA and SRA Designations - Appraisal Institute
(Past President of Chapter No. 100; Past Education Committee Chairman)
Licensed Real Estate Broker, State of Florida
State-Certified General Appraiser, State of Florida, Expires November 30,2000, License Number RZ 0000141
FNMA Approved - #1108588
Experience:
Special Masterfor Exemption Hearings - Orange County, Florida. .., . ... .. . . . . .., ..... 1992,1991,1990
Instructor: Less Than Fee Interest Workshop for Northwest Florida Water Management District ..... 1999
Appraisal Institute (Appraising Interim Use Properties) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ., 1992,1991
Society of Real Estate Appraisers (SREA Course 201) ........................ 1991, 1985
Society of Real Estate Appraisers (Uniform Residential Appraisal Reports) ............. 1987
Valencia Community College, Orlando, Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ., 1984
American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers (AIREA Course 8-2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1984
Author: Coursework for Teaching "Less Than Fee Interest"
............... ....................
1999
Author: Coursework and Appraisal Articles for Teaching and Publication, such as:
"Appraising Interim Use Properties" .......................................... 1992, 1991
Property Appraisal Adjustment Board Member
for Orange County, Florida .......................... 1992,1991,1990,1989,1988,1987,1986,1984
.!!!::
CLAYTON. ROPER & MARSHALL
,,<!P
'T:T;F\:-'<"~!~'~'r:::~;~-'7'"~'?" ~ -...
(~Onrd.)
Property Appraisal Adjustment Board
(sole member) for Osceola County, Florida
1990, 1~89, 1988, 1987, 1986
Vice-President of Clayton, Roper & Marshall, Inc.
(formerly Clayton & Roper Appraisal Services) ........................................ Since 1982
Associate with Pardue, Heid, Church, Smith & Waller. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1975 to 1982
Associations:
Member:
The Appraisal Institute
Home Builders Association of Mid-Florida
Orlando Area Chamber of Commerce
Better Business Bureau
Downtown Development Board of Orlando
Mortgage Brokers Association of Mid-Florida
Orlando Economic Development Commission
International Right-of-Way Association
Paul M. Roper has completed appraisal reports and lease negotiations throughout the United States for individuals,
attorneys, mortgage brokers, mortgage bankers, credit unions, banks, savings and loan associations and various
Federal, State, and local governmental agencies for valuation, evaluation and analysis assignments that include:
Agricultural Properties, Including Citrus Groves
Appraisal Reviews
Business Valuations
Commercial Properties
Condemnation (Eminent Domain)
Hotel/Motel Valuation
Industrial Properties
Office Buildings
Litigation/Consultation Assignments
MarkeUFeasibility Studies
Mobile Home Sales and Rental Parks
Personal Property Appraisals
Roadside Advertising Signs
Single-Family and Multifamily Residential Properties
Special Purpose Properties such as Major Citrus Packing Plants and Restaurants, Among Others
Paul Roper presently manages and/or owns full and/or partial interest in office buildings, detached residential and condominium
housing, apartments, vacant land, and citrus groves. He has testified as an expert witness for various litigation involving real
estate in Federal courts and the Circuit Courts of Brevard, Escambia, Lake, Marion, Orange, Osceola, Polk, Seminole, and
Volusia Counties in the State of Florida.
Other:
Member:
U.S. Marine Corps. (Vietnam Veteran) Honorable Discharge - 1969-1972
Disabled American Veterans (DA V)
Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW)
American Legion
South Orlando Elks Lodge (BPOE)
Updated :September 21, 2000
CLAYTON, ROPER & MARSHALL
\:) I f\ I C. vc.r\.llrl\Jf"\ "v,...
. I
._..._._----------~~---_.--~_._------
fi,1 5359 719 ST~TE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT Of' BUSINESS ANO.PROfESSIONAL REGULATION
FLORIDA REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL DP
;.
---..-.....-..-........ ....-.,-".--........-...-------
110/08/1998198011442 RZ -0000141
1_------'-.- ...----..------.-..-- --...-------..--.. --.,,-..--,~-.---~_.....--.-..-.. ,.----,...,..--,
TM CERTIfIED GENERAL APPRAISER
Namedbeln IS CERTIFIED
IJIder tilt pmislolS .f Chapter 47 5 FS.
ErplrallOlld* NOV 30, 2000
ROPER, PAUL M
1023 RIOGECREST ROAD
ORLANDO FL 32806
LAWTON CHILES
GOVERNOR
DISPLAY AS REQUIRED BY LAW
RICHARD T. FARRELL
SECRETARY
'-->">".W...,-~.' 'M"^"" n'_" ._.......,.._....._ ._..y...._.......__..'~M .._N'-.-_."-",''1/I<
CLAYTON, ROPER & MARSHALL
~w
~;.
~,
r -- ! - ~
Business Aooress
Clayton, Roper & Marshall
246 North Westmonte Drive
Altamonte Springs, Florida 32714
Telephone: (407) 772-2200, Extension 325
General Education
University of Wisconsin-Madison, MS in Real Estate Appraisal and Investment Analysis
University of Maine-Orono, B.A. in Economics
- 1987
-1976
Professional Education
University of Wisconsin Courses:
Introductory Appraisal Theory
Real Estate Principles
Market Analysis
Feasibility Analysis
Advanced Appraisal, Theory
Governmental Regulation of Real Estate
Real Estate Finance
Appraisal Courses Sponsored by the Appraisal Institute
(formerlv the American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers):
Basic Valuation Principles
Data Confirmation Techniques
Case Studies
Standards of Professional Practice A & B
Capitalization Theory A & B
Valuation Analysis and Report Writing
Subdivision Analysis
Conominium Analysis
Rates Ratio and Reasonableness
Government Regulation
Appraising Troubled Properties
Appraisal of Conservation Easements
Complete Appraiser's Review
American Society of Appraisers
Litigation Support
CLAYTON, ROPER &: MARSHALL
.-- ''"~''-,
--~
,n
- - ~---'--~,~~~7;;::"!"--'-",":
'--~,,,,,",-"-"
UUALlrl\jA IIVI\!'=> Vi UUI\lf"\LU t"'. VVt-\. I 0VI'I
(Cont'd.)
Professional Desianation and Affiliations
State-Certified General Appraiser - State of Florida License No. RZ 0001976, Exp. November 30, 2000
Accredited Senior Appraiser (ASA) designation of the American Society of Appraisers.
Experience
Commercial Real Estate Appraiser for Clayton, Roper & Marshall; Inc.
Orlando, FL
8/98 to present
Commercial Real Estate Appraiser for Pardue, Heid, Church, Smith & Waller
Tampa, FL
2/98 - 7/98
Commercial Real Estate Appraiser, dlbla Commercial Appraisals
Naples, FL
8/94 - 1/98
Commercial Real Estate Appraiser, dlbla Maine Real Estate Research Co.
Scarborough Maine
12191 - 7194
Commercial Real Estate Appraiser, Appraisal Associates, Inc.
Portland, Maine
7/88 - 11/91
Real Estate Analyst, State Teachers Retirement System of Ohio
Columbus, Ohio
6187 - 6/88
CLAYTON, ROPER &: MARSHALL
~;'\~.;-",,';'.';~'
.:,,;_,...--------i
_n , .
/,~,..",..t0{.
,. '~~~7'ij'1}~,
- - --.,-,.-.-'-':c,,:":;{. ','J~';i~~r~::-" - -
-r
)t
STATE CERTIFICATION
,.'1
~~
~V'.:~:,:.,::-' ;':.-
~
,~~.:,-~;., ':.~:..
/~~~w~~'RQPER & MARSHALL
- ~"'-"J"i(~'*;ytft~_ _ . .
.~,.;: