Agenda Item Cover Sheet
Agenda Item No. B-5
Meeting Date 1/11/2018
Consent Section
Regular Section
Public Hearing
Subject: Bakas Therapeutic Equestrian Center Request for Proposals
Department Name:
Procurement Services
Contact Person:
Scott P. Stromer
Contact Phone:
301-7095
Sign-Off Approvals:
Tom Fesler
1/4/2018
Scott Stromer
1/4/2018
Assistant County Administrator
Date
Department Director
Date
Tom Fesler
1/4/2018
Christine Beck
1/4/2018
Management and Budget –
Approved as to Financial Impact Accuracy
Date
County Attorney –
Approved as to Legal Sufficiency
Date
Staff's Recommended Board Motion:
(a) Accept the sole proposal received in response to RFP 16581 for construction of two new therapeutic
equestrian centers in exchange for transferring ownership of the real property and facilities associated
with the current Bakas Equestrian Center to the proposer, Thomas A. Pepin, as Trustee of the Tomas A.
Pepin Revocable Trust. (b) Direct staff to negotiate and prepare necessary documents for Board
approval. The proposer will be required to fully complete construction of two new equestrian centers
and accompanying facilities as specified, at no cost to the County, prior to conveyance of the existing
facility to the proposer. No County funding is required at this time. (Please note, however, that
operational funding for both facilities will be shown in future budget years.)
Financial Impact Statement:
No County funding is required at this time. (Please note, however, that operational funding for both
facilities will be shown in future budget years.)
Background:
On September 7, 2017, the Board authorized staff to issue an RFP to solicit proposals for construction of
two (2) new therapeutic equestrian facilities on County-owned land in exchange for the property and
facilities that currently house the existing Bakas Equestrian Center. The RFP specified that each new
facility must meet or exceed the specifications of the existing single Bakas Equestrian Center in
exchange for conveyance of the same real property and facilities. Additionally, the RFP required that the
two (2) new centers be constructed and made ready for operation at no cost to the County (beyond the
conveyance of the subject real property and facilities). The two (2) new equestrian centers are proposed
to be located at the Northwest Equestrian Park on South Mobley Road (near the existing Bakas facility)
and Sydney Dover Trails Park on State Road 60 (near Sydney Washer Road). The County issued the
subject RFP on October 17, 2017, and a pre-proposal conference was held on October 23, 2017.
Proposals were due on November 17, 2017, and the sole proposal was properly submitted by Thomas A.
Pepin, as Trustee of the Thomas A. Pepin Revocable Trust. On November 28, 2017, a public meeting
was organized by the Conservation & Environmental Lands Management Department to provide
interested parties an overview of the sole proposal and to gather feedback. At this meeting, the proposer
provided an overview of the proposal. The meeting was videotaped and public comment was gathered
using both video and comment cards. On December 8, 2017, a Review Team comprised of County staff
met to formally review the proposal to determine its acceptability based on the published criteria: 1)
developer qualifications, approach and ability, 2) development proposal, and 3) financial value to County.
After careful review and consideration, the committee determined that the proposal satisfied the
minimum requirements and, therefore, was deemed acceptable and recommended for further
consideration and approval by the Board. Because two project packages were offered by the proposer,
staff will negotiate costs for both options and bring back a recommendation in early 2018 for Board
consideration. The Base Project Package substantially conforms to the base requirements of the RFP,
provides the specified 60 ft x 120 ft riding arenas at both new locations, and an operation endowment of
$50,000 each year, for each location, for five years ($500,000.00). The Optional Project Package
substantially conforms to the base requirements of the RFP; however, it provides larger 100 ft x 200 ft
riding arenas at both new locations, and but significantly reduces or eliminates the operation endowment
due to the added cost of the larger arenas. The community using the current Bakas facility prefers the
larger arena to enhance fundraising opportunities; staff will seek an acceptable outcome on this issue
during negotiations and will present the final package for Board consideration and approval.
List Attachments: Review Summary, Proposal, RFP Document


HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY
FLORIDA



REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

FOR

DEVELOPMENT FOR
BAKAS EQUESTRIAN FACILITY EXCHANGE &
REPLACEMENTS






RFP NO.: 16581


CONTACT PERSON:

Sybil Tucker, Chief Procurement Analyst
Procurement Services Department
P O Box 1110 (601 E. Kennedy Blvd., 25th Floor)
Tampa, FL 33602
Telephone: (813) 301-7085
Fax: (813) 272-6290
Email: tuckers@HCFLgov.net








IP-1

INSTRUCTIONS TO PROPOSERS


REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP) NUMBER: RFP-16581







PROJECT TITLE: DEVELOPMENT FOR BAKAS EQUESTRIAN FACILITY EXCHANGE & REPLACEMENTS

PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE: OCTOBER 23, 2017 AT 11:00 AM.






LOCATION:
COUNTY CENTER, 601 E. KENNEDY BLVD., 24th FLOOR, Room 2416W, TAMPA, FL 33602

PROPOSAL SUBMISSION DATE/TIME: NOVEMBER 17, 2017 AT 2:00 PM.




PLACE OF PROPOSAL DELIVERY/OPENING: PROCUREMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT



COUNTY CENTER, 601 E. KENNEDY BLVD; 25TH

FLOOR, TAMPA, FL 33602





1.0
INTRODUCTION

1.1
HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY (“the County”) is issuing this Request for Proposal (RFP) to solicit
proposals for the development of a Public Private Partnership from interested entities for the construction
of two new therapeutic equestrian facilities on County land in exchange for the property and facilities
associated with the existing Bakas Equestrian Center located at 11510 Whisper Lake Trail, Tampa Florida
33626. Information regarding the existing Bakas property is shown in Attachment A.

1.2
The County has received an unsolicited proposal regarding this matter as outlined in the Background.

1.3
The County’s minimum requirements are summarized in Attachment B. The two proposed County-owned
locations for the new facilities are as follows:


1.
Northwest Equestrian Park located on the North side of South Mobley Road, approximately 1
mile east of Race Track Road; and

2.
Sydney Dover Trails Park located on the North side of Highway 60, on the west side of Sydney
Washer Road


The County will not consider any alternate locations for the new facilities.

1.4
Proposals will be reviewed for their overall benefit/value to the County, including qualifications of the
proposer team, the proposer meeting the County’s minimum requirements and any proposed additional or
superior improvements or other services/support that benefit the County and operation of the facilities.

1.5
Proposers will be required to present their proposals to interested citizens in a public meeting to be

scheduled by the County.

1.6
After completion of the RFP Process, staff will present to the Board of County Commissioners the
proposals that qualify for consideration in accordance with the RFP, for selection by the Board.

1.7
The County has not established funding or a budget for this Project. The intent of this RFP is to seek
competitive proposals through this solicitation and to enter into an agreement whereby the County will
exchange the existing Bakas property (together with existing improvements) for the two new turnkey facilities
(including all site work and off-site improvements) to be funded and constructed by the successful Proposer.

1.8
There is no contract guaranteed as a result of being evaluated through this solicitation. All developments
and agreements stemming from this solicitation must meet the relevant local, state and federal
requirements. Proposals may need to be modified during negotiation to meet legal sufficiency.
IP-2
1.9
In consideration of the County's agreement to consider its proposal, each Proposer must agree that its proposal
shall be valid for a minimum period of ninety (90) calendar days after the Proposal Opening Date. Thereafter,
the proposal shall continue in full force and effect until thirty (30) days following the Proposer's written notice
to the County of its intent to withdraw its proposal.

2.0
BACKGROUND

2.1
The County’s Bakas Equestrian Center (Bakas), located near Ed Radice Park in northwest Hillsborough
County is managed by the Conservation and Environmental Lands Management Department. This facility
provides equestrian therapy to special needs children from Hillsborough, Pinellas, Pasco, and Hernando
Counties.

2.2
The County has received an unsolicited proposal to construct two therapeutic equestrian facilities on two
separate County-owned properties and to provide an endowment fund for operational expenses in exchange
for the County conveying the existing Bakas facility. Since the County cannot convey property directly to
a private party, the County is providing the opportunity through this RFP process so that any interested
party may submit a proposal to construct the two turnkey therapeutic equestrian facilities that will meet or
exceed the existing Bakas facility in exchange for the conveyance of the existing Bakas facility and
property. The RFP will provide an opportunity for proposers to present additional or superior
improvements, services, or support that would benefit the County and the operation of these facilities.

2.3
The successful Proposer is required to fund, design and construct the two turnkey therapeutic equestrian
facilities, to include all site work and all off-site transportation improvements, at no cost to the County.

2.4
All Proposers are encouraged to visit the existing Bakas Equestrian Facility and the two properties
proposed for the new construction. Contact Procurement Services Department to schedule a site visit.

3.0
ATTACHMENTS/EXHIBITS:


The following Attachments and Exhibits are included as a part of this RFP:


ATTACHMENT A:
Information on Existing Bakas Property

ATTACHMENT B:
Summary of County’s Minimum Requirements

ATTACHMENT C:
County’s Proposed Schedule

EXHIBIT 1:

Proposer Certification and Warranty

4.0
RFP PROCESS

4.1
The County will use a staff Review Team to review the proposals based on criteria described in this RFP.
Review of the proposals shall be subject to public input. Proposers will be required to present their
proposals to the public during a public meeting which will be scheduled by the County. The Review
Team shall review the proposals to determine if the Proposers meet the minimum qualifications and the
County’s needs, considering the criteria included herein.

4.2
The Review Team’s review of the proposals shall be presented to the Board of County Commissioners for
ranking of the proposals and selection of the proposal that best meets the County’s needs.

4.3
After the Board’s action, County staff will enter into negotiations with the selected proposer in good faith.
The negotiated agreement shall be presented to the Board of County Commissioners for approval.

4.4
If negotiations with the selected Proposer are not successful, County staff may proceed to negotiate with next-
ranked Proposers in order of ranking. The County reserves the right to negotiate any element of the proposal
in the best interest of the County.

5.0
INSTRUCTIONS FOR SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS:

5.1
Proposers must submit their proposals at the place and time shown in this RFP. One executed original together
with an electronic copy on disc or memory stick must be submitted.
IP-3
5.2
The proposal submittal should follow the following format:

a)
Introduction Letter
b)
Addendum Acknowledgements
c)
Proposer Information Certification (Exhibit 1)

d)
Responses to specifically address the three (3) criteria listed below in Section 6.0.

6.0
REVIEW CRITERIA FOR PROPOSALS: The Review Team will review each proposal based on the
criteria described below. At a minimum, each proposal must address the following criteria:

1.
Developer Qualifications, Approach and Ability

2.
Development Proposal








3.
Financial Value to County


Each criterion is further described below. Proposers must provide responses and information sufficient for
evaluation under the pertinent rating system described below. The County reserves the right to request
additional information from Proposers subsequent to the receipt of proposals.

6.1
PROPOSER QUALIFICATIONS, APPROACH AND ABILITY

6.1.1
Provide overview of Proposer Team, including qualifications of its intended team of architect, engineers and
contractor.

6.1.2
Provide a copy of relevant professional licenses for architect and engineers.

6.1.3
Demonstrate the ability of the contractor to obtain performance and payment bonds for the full amount of the
construction contract(s). Provide a copy of the contractor’s license. At a minimum, a Florida Licensed Building
Contractor or General Contractor in good standing must be used for the construction work.

6.1.4
Provide a narrative demonstrating Proposer’s approach to project and its ability to furnish services. Explain the
organization of the developer team/partners and specific responsibilities of team members and partners.

6.1.5
Provide specific information on a minimum of three (3) and a maximum of ten (10) recent, successful projects
similar to the proposed Project. Identify members of the project team who have worked on these representative
projects and their levels of responsibility.

6.2
DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL

6.2.1
Concept Plan and Specifications


a.
Concept Renderings: Provide a concept design of the two replacement facilities, including:


- Site Plans, including off-site improvements


- Floor Plans


- Building Elevations


- Outline Specifications demonstrating quality equal to or greater than the Bakas Facility.

b.
Proposed Schedule for Planning, Design, Permitting and Construction.

c.
Describe how the development proposal will meet the Proposer’s and the County’s objectives and

expectations as indicated in Attachment B.

6.2.2
Describe the design, construction and completion guarantees and warranties for all work proposed to be
completed on County-owned land.

6.3
FINANCIAL VALUE TO COUNTY


6.3.1
Provide a financial analysis of the development, including the value of improvements the County will receive in
exchange for the existing Bakas Facility.

6.3.2
Describe the financial incentive or offer to County.
IP-4

7.0
RISK:

7.1
Proposers responding to this Request for Proposals do so at their sole expense and risk. Subsequent to the
issuance of this Request for Proposals, the County reserves the right to:

 Make changes to the RFP;
 Cancel this RFP;
 Request clarifications;
 Waive any informality or irregularity;
 Negotiate modifications to proposals;
 Reject any and all proposals; and
 Proceed with alternative project delivery methods if so desired by the County.

7.2
No Proposer is guaranteed the award of an Agreement or any work as a result of being selected or short-listed

for this project.

8.0
CLARIFICATIONS AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

8.1
The County reserves the right to request clarifications or additional information from any Proposer. Specific
questions may be addressed to each of the Proposers and the Review Team may consider any further
elaboration by the Proposers of any information previously submitted.

9.0
PARTNERSHIPS/CORPORATIONS/AGENTS

9.1
When a Proposer is a partnership or joint venture, the proposal shall be signed in the name of the partnership or
joint venture and by all persons or entities required to do so under the terms of their partnership or joint venture
agreement. Any existing written underlying partnership or joint venture agreements shall be included as part of
the proposal. If a Proposer has not yet formed the partnership or joint venture, the proposal must be signed by
each of the principals who will be a part of the partnership or joint venture.

9.2
When a corporation is a Proposer, the authorized corporate officer signing the proposal shall set out the
corporate name in full beneath which said officer shall sign his/her name and give title of his/her office. The
proposal shall also bear the seal of the corporation.

9.3
Anyone signing the proposal as officer or other agent must file with it legal evidence of the authority to do so.
Proposers who are or include corporations or limited partnerships shall furnish a duly executed certificate of
status from the Florida Department of State.

9.4
The person(s) signing each proposal shall certify under oath on the attached Certification form that the
information contained in the proposal is true and accurate. Each Proposer understands, by submitting a proposal
that the County will rely in part on such certification in reviewing the firm’s qualifications.

9.5
Failure to submit the above documents with the proposal or within 24 hours of request made by the County may
be the basis for rejection of the proposal. Such documents must be effective as of the date of the proposal.

10.0
CONFLICT OF INTEREST

10.1
No firm shall be eligible for selection on any project and no work shall be assigned to a firm which conflicts
with or is duplicative of any work by the firm or any affiliated business entity, including, but not limited to,
partnerships, joint ventures, and subsidiaries of the same parent corporation or firm.

11.0
CHANGES IN PROPOSER ENTITY/TEAM:

11.1
The Proposer is responsible to promptly notify the County as to any change in the information in its submitted
proposal. Failure to inform the County within 24 hours of occurrence of a change may result in removal of the
Proposer from consideration for the Project.

11.2
Any changes to a Proposer entity after it has submitted its proposal may result in removal of the Proposer from
consideration for the Project. Any additions, deletions or substitutions in a Proposer’s team after it has
IP-5
submitted its proposal require a showing of good cause and must be clearly identified by the Proposer; and the
reasons for the changes must be provided.

11.3
Decreases in scoring may result from the reconsideration of changes in the project team. No increases in
scoring will result from the reconsideration of changes in the project team.

12.0
ASSIGNMENT OR TRANSFER

12.1
The selected Proposer shall be prohibited from assigning, transferring, conveying, subletting or otherwise
disposing of its responsibilities under the Agreement, or its rights, title or interest therein or its power to
execute such Agreement to any person, company, corporation or partnership without prior written notice and
consent and approval of Hillsborough County. Hillsborough County has sole discretion whether or not to
consent to any contemplated assignment.

13.0
LATE SUBMITTALS

13.1
It is the Proposer’s responsibility to ensure its proposal is received by the County on or before the time and date
specified above. Under no circumstances will proposals received after the delivery time specified be
considered; they will be returned to the Proposer unopened.

14.0
PUBLIC RECORDS ACT

14.1
Pursuant to Florida Statutes, sealed responses to this RFP are exempt from the public inspection requirements of
the Public Records Act until such time as the announcement of a decision based on the proposals or within 30
days after proposal opening date, whichever is earlier.

15.0
NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETINGS

15.1
Notice of any public meetings pertaining to this solicitation shall be posted on the Official Notices bulletin
board located in the lobby of the Procurement Services Department, 601 E. Kennedy Blvd., 25th Floor, Tampa,
Florida.

16.0
PUBLIC ENTITY CRIMES STATEMENT

16.1
A person or affiliate who has been placed on the convicted vendor list following a conviction for a public
entity crime may not submit a bid, offer, or proposal on a contract to provide any goods or services to a public
entity for the construction or repair of a public building or public work, may not submit bids on leases of real
property to a public entity, may not be awarded or perform work as a contractor, supplier, subcontractor, or
consultant under a contract with any public entity in excess of the threshold amount provided in Section
287.017, Florida Statutes, for CATEGORY TWO for a period of 36 months from the date of being placed on
the convicted vendor list.

16.2
Additionally, pursuant to County policy, a conviction of a public entity crime may cause the rejection of a bid,
offer, or proposal. The County may make inquiries regarding alleged convictions of public entity crimes. The
unreasonable failure of a bidder, offer, or proposer to promptly supply information in connection with an
inquiry may be grounds for rejection of a bid, offer, or proposal.

17.0
REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION/CLARIFICATION

17.1
Any firm requesting additional information and/or clarification relating to this project shall direct such requests
to:
Sybil Tucker, Chief Procurement Analyst
Procurement Services Department
P O Box 1110 (601 E. Kennedy Blvd., 25th Floor)
Tampa, FL 33602
Telephone: (813) 301- 7085
Fax: (813) 272-6290
Email: tuckers@HCFLgov.net
IP-6

17.2
Requests should be made, in writing, at least five days prior to the submittal deadline. Requests may be
transmitted by facsimile machine (fax).

18.0
PROPOSERS’S COMPLIANCE WITH COUNTY’S PROCUREMENT POLICY AND
PROCEDURES AND HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY ORDINANCE:

18.1
Proposer is advised that by submitting a proposal, Proposer hereby agrees to comply with the County’s
Procurement Policy and Procedures, including, but not limited to, the County’s policy and procedures
regarding Bid Protests and Hillsborough County Ordinance No. 13-24. The County’s Procurement Policy
and Procedures can be found on the County’s website at:
http://www.hillsboroughcounty.org/procurementmanual
18.2
CONE OF SILENCE: Pursuant to Hillsborough County Ordinance No. 13-24, there shall be a Cone of
Silence for all procurement solicitations issued by the County in order to safeguard the integrity of the
County’s procurement and protest process. The Cone of Silence shall go into effect on the date a
procurement solicitation is issued by the County and shall end on the date the contract is awarded by the
County or the date the procurement solicitation is canceled by the County. Unless otherwise provided for
in Hillsborough County Ordinance No. 13-24, during the time period the Cone of Silence is in effect, no
Proposer, interested party and/or their principals, officers, employees, attorneys or agents shall
communicate with County employees, the Hearing Master assigned to hear the applicable protest appeal
and/or members of the Board of County Commissioners, including their aides and employees regarding a
procurement solicitation and/or its related protest. The Cone of Silence does not prohibit an Proposer from
communicating with the Director of the County Department issuing the procurement solicitation, County
staff listed as contacts in the procurement solicitation, or the attorney in the County Attorney’s office that
is directly responsible for the applicable procurement solicitation (this information can be obtained by
contacting the County staff person listed as the contact in the applicable procurement solicitation). A
violation of the Cone of Silence will result in the disqualification of the Proposer from consideration in the
award of the procurement solicitation unless it is determined that the violation is unintentional and/or not
material.

19.0
ALL PROPOSALS ARE IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN

19.1
In accordance with Chapter 119, Florida Statutes, and, except as may be provided by other applicable State
and Federal laws, all Proposers should be aware that this Request for Proposals and all proposals are in the
public domain and are available for public inspection. Proposers are requested, however, to identify
specifically any information contained in their proposals which they consider confidential and/or
proprietary, inclusive of trade secrets as defined in s. 812.081, Florida Statutes, and which they believe to
be exempt from disclosure, citing specifically the applicable exempting law and including narrative
explaining the applicable legal exemption as it relates specifically to Proposer’s confidential and/or
proprietary information.

19.2
All proposals received in response to this Request for Proposals will become the property of the County
and will not be returned. In the event of an award, all documentation produced as part of the Contract will
become the exclusive property of the County.

19.3
All materials that qualify for exemption from Chapter 119, Florida Statutes or other applicable law must be
submitted in a separate envelope, clearly identified as "EXEMPT FROM PUBLIC DISCLOSURE" with
Proposer’s name and the RFP Number marked on the outside.

19.4
The County will not accept proposals when the entire proposal is labeled as exempt from public disclosure.



END OF INSTRUCTIONS TO PROPOSERS













APPRAISAL REPORT

BAKAS Equestrian Center
(Horses for the Handicapped)
11510 Whisper Lake Trail
Project 2017-067-P













Prepared for
Pat Fishback, MAI, SRA





Senior Appraiser
Real Estate and Facilities Services Dept.
Hillsborough County
PO Box 1110
Tampa, FL 33601



Prepared by
Kent Evans, MAI, CCIM
KENNETH C. EVANS, P.A.
Post Office Box 395





Tampa, FL 33601

Kenneth C. Evans, P.A.
Real Estate Appraisal and Consultation Services

Kent Evans, MAI, CCIM
Cert Gen RZ1596

2907 Bay to Bay Blvd, Suite 215, Tampa, FL 33629 • Post Office Box 395, Tampa, FL 33601
Email kent.evans@kcepa.net • Phone (813) 545-4581

July 20, 2017

Pat Fishback, MAI, SRA
Senior Appraiser
Real Estate and Facilities Services Dept.
Hillsborough County
PO Box 1110
Tampa, FL 33601
Ref: BAKAS Equestrian Center


Project #2017-067-P

Dear Mr. Fishback:

As requested, I have re-appraised the referenced property located on Whisper Lake Trail in
unincorporated Hillsborough County, FL. I have used the contractor’s cost estimate prepared by
Richard Bliss, dated June 01, 2017.

The purpose of this appraisal report is to estimate the value of the referenced property for
purposes of possible sale by Hillsborough County. The improvements have been valued
according to their Value in Use, as an equestrian facility. The land has been valued based on its
highest and best use, as though vacant.

The appraisal is presented as an Appraisal Report, with market analysis and value conclusions
summarized herein. Supporting documentation and additional data are contained in the addenda
to this appraisal report and within the appraisal work-file, which has been incorporated herein by
reference.

Upon reviewing this appraisal report and the data/analysis contained herein, if you have any
questions or require any additional information, please feel free to contact me.

Sincerely,




Kent Evans, MAI, CCIM
Cert Gen RZ1596




CERTIFICATE OF VALUE

I certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:

 The statements of fact contained in this report are true and correct.

 The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions are limited only by the reported assumptions and limiting
conditions, and are my personal, impartial, and unbiased professional analyses, opinions, and conclusions.

 I have no present or prospective interest in the property that is the subject of this report, and no personal
interest with respect to the parties involved.

 I have performed no services, as an appraiser or in any other capacity, regarding the property that is the
subject of this report within the three-year period immediately preceding acceptance of this assignment.

 I have no bias with respect to the property that is the subject of this report or to the parties involved with
this assignment.

 My engagement in this assignment was not contingent upon developing or reporting predetermined results.

 My compensation for completing this assignment is not contingent upon the development or reporting of a
predetermined value or direction in value that favors the cause of the client, the amount of the value
opinion, the attainment of a stipulated result, or the occurrence of a subsequent event directly related to the
intended use of this appraisal.

 My analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared in conformity
with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice.

 I have made an inspection of the property that is the subject of this report.

 The undersigned has not received professional appraisal assistance in the preparation of this appraisal
report.

The estimated value of the fee simple interest in the subject property, as of May 5, 2017, is:

ONE MILLION, FOUR HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS
$1,400,000
























July 21, 2017


Kent Evans, MAI, CCIM








Date

Cert Gen RZ1596




ADDENDUM TO CERTIFICATE OF VALUE

I certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, the reported analyses, opinions and
conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared, in conformity with the
requirements of the Code of Professional Ethics and the Standards of Professional Appraisal
Practice of the Appraisal Institute.

I certify that the use of this report is subject to the requirements of the Appraisal Institute relating
to review by its duly authorized representatives.

I certify that I have the knowledge and/or experience to complete the assignment, as required
under the Competency Provision of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice, as
promulgated by the Appraisal Standards Board of The Appraisal Foundation.

In accordance with USPAP Standard 2-2, the report is presented as an Appraisal Report.

As of the date of this report, Kent Evans, MAI, CCIM, has completed the requirements of the
continuing education program of the Appraisal Institute. Mr. Evans is a State-certified General
R.E. Appraiser, No. 0001596, expiration November 2018.
























July 21, 2017

Kent Evans, MAI, CCIM









Date
Cert Gen RZ1596






TABLE OF CONTENTS

COVER PAGE
TRANSMITTAL LETTER
ADDENDUM TO CERTIFICATE OF VALUE
TABLE OF CONTENTS

QUALIFYING AND LIMITING CONDITIONS .......................................................................... 7
SUMMARY OF SALIENT FACTS ............................................................................................... 9
TYPE OF APPRAISAL AND REPORTING FORMAT ............................................................. 10
PURPOSE AND INTENDED USE OF THE APPRAISAL ........................................................ 10
DEFINITION OF VALUE ........................................................................................................... 11
PROPERTY RIGHTS APPRAISED ............................................................................................ 11
SCOPE OF THE APPRAISAL .................................................................................................... 12
APPRAISAL PROBLEM ............................................................................................................. 13
IDENTIFICATION OF PROPERTY ........................................................................................... 14
DESCRIPTION OF NEIGHBORHOOD ..................................................................................... 15
DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY ................................................................................................. 16
OVERHEAD VIEW OF SUBJECT PROPERTY ........................................................................ 21
DEEDPLOT OF SUBJECT PROPERTY ..................................................................................... 22
CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN ....................................................................................................... 23
SURVEY ....................................................................................................................................... 24
SUBJECT LOCATION MAP ....................................................................................................... 26
PHOTOGRAPHS ......................................................................................................................... 27
ZONING AND FUTURE LAND USE ........................................................................................ 43
HISTORY OF THE PROPERTY ................................................................................................. 43
EXPOSURE TIME ....................................................................................................................... 43
ASSESSED VALUE AND TAXES ............................................................................................. 44
PUBLIC AND PRIVATE RESTRICTIONS ................................................................................ 44
HIGHEST AND BEST USE ANALYSIS .................................................................................... 45
HIGHEST AND BEST USE CONCLUSION .............................................................................. 46
LAND VALUE ............................................................................................................................. 47
COST APPROACH ...................................................................................................................... 54
COST APPROACH CALCULATIONS ...................................................................................... 57
SALES COMPARISON APPROACH ......................................................................................... 58
INCOME APPROACH ................................................................................................................ 58
RECONCILIATION ..................................................................................................................... 59


ADDENDA



Deed of Record (Hillsborough Co. OR Book 11043, Page 0518)


Replacement Cost New Estimate by Richard Bliss, Bliss Enterprises, Inc.


Perpetual Access & Utility Easement (OR Book 11043, Page 0521)


Perpetual Access & Utility Easement (OR Book 11043, Page 0524)


Comparable Sales Data Sheets
 Land Comp #1 – 11439 Trotting Down Dr
 Land Comp #2 – 11450 Trotting Down Dr
 Land Comp #3 – Trackside Dr
 Land Comp #4 – Cain Road
 Land Comp #5 – 12320 Memorial Hwy
Hillsborough County – Area Profile
Hillsborough Co. Property Appraiser – Property Record Card
Hillsborough Co. Tax Collector – Tax Information
Land Use Regulations (RES-4)
Wetlands Map (National Wetlands Inventory)
Flood Hazards Map
Demographic Ring Study (1-3-5 mile radii)


Qualifications of Appraiser
Kent Evans, MAI, CCIM






7
QUALIFYING AND LIMITING CONDITIONS

General Assumptions

1. The appraiser assumes no responsibility for matters of a legal nature affecting the
property appraised or the title thereto, nor does the appraiser render any opinion as to the
title, which is assumed to be good and marketable. The property is appraised as though
under responsible ownership.

2. The property has been appraised as free and clear, unencumbered by mortgages, liens,
delinquent taxes, assessments, special or unusual deed conditions or restrictions, but
subject to zoning regulations.

3. Any sketch in the report may show approximate dimensions and is included to assist the
reader in visualizing the property. The appraiser has made no survey of the property;
however, has relied on the Public Records of Hillsborough County.

4. Information, estimates, and opinions furnished to the appraiser, and contained in the
report, were obtained from sources considered reliable and believed to be true and
correct. Every reasonable effort was made to independently confirm this information.
However, no responsibility for accuracy of such items can be assumed by the reader.

5. Disclosure of the contents of the appraisal report is governed by the by-laws and
regulations of the professional appraisal organizations with which the appraiser is
affiliated.

6. It is assumed there are no hidden or unapparent conditions of the property, subsoil, or
structures. The appraiser(s) assumes no liability for any hidden or unapparent conditions
of the property. No responsibility is assumed for such conditions, or for arranging for
engineering studies that may be required to discover them.

7. Possession of this report, or a copy thereof, does not carry with it the right of publication
or distribution.

8. This report is limited with regard to any additional facts and/or data, which may become
available between the date of report and any subsequent date (including the date of any
subsequent legal proceeding). The appraiser reserves the right to make appropriate
adjustments and to update the Value in Use estimate contained in this report, as
applicable.


8
Extraordinary Assumptions (defined) – “an assumption, directly related to a specific
assignment, as of the effective date of the assignment results, which, if found to be false, could
alter the appraiser’s opinions or conclusions” 1

1. The replacement cost new (RCN) derived in this report is based upon cost estimates
provided by Richard Bliss, Bliss Enterprises, Inc. A copy of the RCN estimate is
contained in the addenda. In my opinion, the RCN estimate is significantly below market
for this property type (an equestrian facility).

The appraiser had no involvement with compiling the RCN estimate and expresses no
opinion with regards to its accuracy or reasonableness. For purposes of this “Value in
Use” appraisal, the RCN estimate is assumed correct and within market parameters.
However, the appraiser reserves the right to amend the appraisal upon receiving
information that would indicate otherwise.

2. The land size delineations between usable uplands, wetlands, submerged land,
encumbered land, land along north side of lake, etc. are based on estimates compiled by
the appraiser. They are assumed reasonably correct. Although the appraiser was
provided a survey indicating total land area, an allocation between these usable and non-
usable areas was not provided. The appraiser reserves the right to amend the appraisal
upon receipt of more precise land survey data with a break-out of these respective areas.


Hypothetical Conditions (defined) – “a condition, directly related to a specific assignment,
which is contrary to what is known by the appraiser to exist on the effective date of the
assignment results, but is used for the purpose of analysis” 2

1. The Planned Development zoning plan for Highland Park designates the subject land
(Tract 14) as “Park and Recreation”. However, for reasonable analysis of the highest
and best use of the land, as though vacant, consideration is given to surrounding land
uses. In this case, the subject land has been appraised to a highest and best use as a
Residential Estate tract. This is necessary for credible analysis of the underlying land
value. The use of the land for residential would require a minor modification to the
Planned Development (PD) zoning, which has been confirmed with Hillsborough
County zoning & land use officials as a reasonably probable outcome, if applied. The
client has been advised of this condition in advance and has indicated their concurrence.





1 USPAP, 2016-2017 Edition, The Appraisal Foundation, Page U-3
2 USPAP, 2016-2017 Edition, The Appraisal Foundation, Page U-3




9
SUMMARY OF SALIENT FACTS

Property Location
The subject property is located at 11510 Whisper Lake Trail in
unincorporated Hillsborough County, FL.

Owner of Record
Hillsborough County, a political subdivision of the State of
Florida.

Folio No(s)
003517.0151

Date of Value
May 5, 2017

Property Inspection

The subject property was inspected on Friday, May 5, 2017. The
inspection consisted of photographing the property, inspecting its
physical aspects, and taking notes regarding any improvements.

Value Appraised


Value in Use (building & improvements). The underlying land has
been valued based on Market Value.

Property Rights
Appraised
Fee Simple Estate

Subject Property
Land Size3
The total property contains 21.859 acres (or 952,178 sf).
However, a large amount of acreage is submerged land and
wetlands conservation land. The net usable (uplands) land area is
9.259 acres.

Improvements
The property is currently improved with a special use equestrian
facility built in 2001 in average overall condition.

Zoning
PD, Planned Development
Future Land Use
RES-4, Residential (additionally, a small 1,212 sf. area may be
P/QP, Public/Quasi-Public)



3 Source: Survey conducted by Heidt & Associates




10
TYPE OF APPRAISAL AND REPORTING FORMAT

In accordance with Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) Standard 2-
2, the report is presented as an Appraisal Report.


PURPOSE AND INTENDED USE OF THE APPRAISAL

The purpose of the appraisal is to estimate the value of the fee simple rights of the property.

Intended Use (defined): “the use or uses of an appraiser’s reported appraisal or appraisal
review assignment opinions and conclusions, as identified by the appraiser based on
communication with the client at the time of the assignment.” 4

The purpose of the appraisal is to develop and report an opinion of value. The intended use of
the appraisal is for establishing a reasonable Value in Use for the improvements and Market
Value for the land, for possible sale purposes.

Intended User (defined): “the client and any other party as identified, by name or type, as
users of the appraisal or appraisal review report by the appraiser on the basis of communication
with the client at the time of assignment.” 5

Client (defined): “the party or parties who engage, by employment or contract, an appraiser in a
specific assignment.” 6

The intended users of this report are the client and his/her representatives. For this appraisal, the
Hillsborough County Real Estate Department is the client. The use of this report by third parties
is not intended.



4 USPAP, 2016-2017 Edition, The Appraisal Foundation, page U-3.
5 USPAP, 2016-2017 Edition, The Appraisal Foundation, page U-3.
6 USPAP, 2016-2017 Edition, The Appraisal Foundation, page U-2.




11
DEFINITION OF VALUE

Value in Use (defined): The value of a property assuming a specific use, which may or may not
be the property’s highest and best use on the effective date of the appraisal. Value in use may or
may not be equal to market value but is different conceptually.”7

The improvements have been appraised based on their Value in Use, as an equestrian facility.

Market Value (defined): “Market value means the most probable price which a property should
bring in a competitive and open market under all conditions requisite to a fair sale, the buyer and
seller each acting prudently and knowledgeably, and assuming the price is not affected by undue
stimulus. Implicit in this definition are the consummation of a sale as of a specified date and the
passing of title from seller to buyer under conditions whereby:

1. Buyer and seller are typically motivated;
2. Both parties are well informed or well advised and acting in what they consider their own
best interests;
3. A reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open market;
4. Payment is made in terms of cash in U.S. dollars or in terms of financial arrangements
comparable thereto; and
5. The price represents the normal consideration for the property sold unaffected by special
or creative financing or sales concessions granted by anyone associated with the sale” 8

The land has been appraised according to its highest and best use.


PROPERTY RIGHTS APPRAISED

The property rights or interest to be appraised is the undivided fee simple interest as if free and
clear of all liens, mortgages, encumbrances, and/or encroachments unless otherwise provided for
herein.

Fee Simple Estate (defined): “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.” 9




7 The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, Appraisal Institute, 6th Edition, page 245
8 USPAP, 2016-2017 Edition, The Appraisal Foundation, Page 150
9 The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 6th Edition, Appraisal Institute, page 90.




12
SCOPE OF THE APPRAISAL

Scope of Work (defined) “the type and extent of research and analysis in an appraisal or
appraisal review assignment.” 10

The scope of work performed in completing this appraisal includes the following:

 Inspection of the subject property and surrounding neighborhood.

 Research and analysis of the northwest Hillsborough County area, including general and
immediate neighborhoods, familiarization with physical and economic factors in the market
area as related to value. Background research of the subject property and interviews with
local market participants (such as local realtors, brokers, investors, etc.).

 Data research including identification of comparable properties in northwest Hillsborough
County area that have recently sold (or are under a pending contract), independent research
of comparable sales including verification of transaction data with persons knowledgeable of
the details of each sale.

 Analysis of the highest and best use of the property, considering the physical, legal, and
economically feasible factors. Estimating a maximally productive use for the subject
property, as though vacant and as currently improved (as applicable). Correlating northwest
Hillsborough County market data research to the current use of the subject property as an
equestrian facility.

 Comparison of sales of comparable northwest Hillsborough County properties to the subject
property, noting superior, similar, and inferior factors. Reconciling northwest Hillsborough
County market sales data to estimate a value for the subject land, as of the date of value,
using the Sales Comparison Approach to value.

 The appraisal will include an analysis and valuation of the subject property. The Market
Value of the land will be estimated by using the Sales Comparison Approach (of the property
as though vacant). The Cost Approach will be applied to derive the Value in Use of the
equestrian facility. The Sale Comparison Approach (of the equestrian facility) and Income
Approach are not considered applicable and have not been applied.

 The report has been prepared in compliance with the Uniform Standards of Professional
Appraisal Practice (USPAP).




10 USPAP, 2016-2017 Edition, Appraisal Foundation, page U-4




13
APPRAISAL PROBLEM

The subject property was originally constructed in 2001 as an equestrian facility. It operates as
“BAKAS Equestrian Center, Horses for the Handicapped”. The improvements have a special
public purpose use as an equestrian facility intended for use by special needs members of the
community.

It’s my understanding that the reason the client has procured this appraisal is to determine a fair
value of the property to the County. The abutting property owner reportedly has an interest in
acquiring the property. As such, the client (Hillsborough County) is seeking the Value in Use of
the improvements, which is consistent with their use of the property as a special-needs
equestrian facility. The land has been appraised based on the market value of its highest and best
use, as though vacant.

The subject property is located in a developing area of Hillsborough County, near the Westchase
development. It is not located along an arterial roadway, but within a platted residential
subdivision known as Highland Park. The location is considered most suitable to Estate
Residential purposes. In the opinion of the appraiser, the highest and best use of the property, as
though vacant, is for Residential Estate use. See Hypothetical Conditions.

Consideration was given to all three (3) traditional valuation approaches: the Cost Approach, the
Sales Comparison (aka. Market) Approach, and the Income Approach. In this case, the
assignment is to estimate the Value in Use of the subject property (a special public purpose
equestrian facility) to the County. As such, the Cost Approach is considered the most reliable
value method. The Sales Comparison (aka. Market) Approach is considered less reliable for
estimating the Use Value for a special public purpose facility. The Income Approach is not
typically applicable to estimating Use Value for special use properties; thus, it was also not
applied.










14
IDENTIFICATION OF PROPERTY

Street Address 11510 Whisper Lake Trail, Tampa, FL, 33626

Physical
Location
The subject property is located at the west terminus of Whisper Lake Trail
in the Highland Park subdivision of west Hillsborough County, FL.

Legal
Description

A survey conducted by Heidt & Associates, Civil Engineers, contains the
following legal description of the subject property:







15
DESCRIPTION OF NEIGHBORHOOD

Neighborhood (defined) – “A group of complementary land uses; a congruous grouping of
inhabitants, buildings, or business enterprises.” 11

The subject property is located in unincorporated northwest Hillsborough County, Florida. This
is within the overall general area known as west central Florida. Demographic and statistical
data on Hillsborough County has been included in the addenda.

The subject property is located at the west terminus of Whisper Lake Trail in the Highland Park
mixed use subdivision.

The neighborhood is considered within the Growth stage of its neighborhood life cycle. The
Growth stage represents a period “in which the neighborhood gains public favor and acceptance,
and development takes place.”12 The subject is positioned between growth pressures from
Pinellas County (to the west) and Tampa (to the east).

The future outlook for the neighborhood appears strong with anticipated steady growth of
residential demand tied to the overall demand for housing in the general Tampa region. Based
on the Zoning (PD) and Future Land Use Plan (RES-4), the character of the area will likely
continue to be oriented toward middle to upper-middle income residential.



11 The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 6th Edition, Appraisal Institute, page 156
12 The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 6th Edition, Appraisal Institute, page 106




16
DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY

This section of the appraisal report will provide a subject location map, subject photographs, and
a general description of the property.

Property Type
Equestrian Facility

Existing Use
The subject property was originally developed in 2001 as an
equestrian facility for special needs members of the community. It has
been used as an equestrian facility since 2001.

Location
The subject property is located at the west terminus of Whisper Lake
Trail in northwest Hillsborough County. The surrounding community
is known as Highland Park. The physical address is: 11510 Whisper
Lake Trail, Tampa, FL 33626.

Area, Shape,
& Dimensions
The subject property has an irregular shape. According to a survey
prepared by Heidt & Associates, Civil Engineers, the subject land
contains a total 21.859 acres (or 214,751 square feet). The
approximate breakdown between upland areas and submerged land is
as follows:

Land Size
Uplands along NS of Lake
4.930

acres
Uplands surrounding Lake
4.329

acres
Total Developable
9.259

acres
Submerged (Lake/Pond)
11.200

acres
Wetlands Conservation
1.400

acres
Total Non-Developable
12.600

acres
Total Land Area
21.859

acres






It should be noted that a significant portion of the developable uplands along
the north side of the lake are encumbered by easement to Florida Power
Corp. (now Duke Energy). The amount of unencumbered uplands is 2.110
acres; 2.820 acres of land encumbered by easement.

Ingress/egress
The property can be accessed directly from Whisper Lake Trail, an
access road by easement.





17
Topography

A significant portion of the total land is submerged land (estimated as
11.200 acres13). Additionally, there is a ±1.4 acre wetland
conservation area at the southeast corner of the property. Total
uplands are estimated as: 9.259 acres, of which ±4.930 acres lies north
of the lake (improved with the equestrian facility) and the remaining
4.329 acres of uplands surrounding the lake. A copy of the National
Wetlands Inventory map can be found in the addenda.

Flood Plain

The non-submerged uplands are located in Flood Zone X, and area
determined to be outside the 0.2% annual chance flood plain. The
submerged land is in Zone V. Flood Hazards Map No. 12057C-
0180H, effective date August 28, 2008. A copy of the Flood Hazards
Map is included in the addenda.

Drainage

Storm-water drainage for the subject property percolates on-site and
flows into the Lake.

Soils

The subject soils are Myakka fine sand.

Utilities

Public water, electric, phone/cable and garbage services are available.
The property uses a septic system for sewage; there are no public
sewer lines to the property.

Easements,
Encroachments,
and Restrictions
There were several easements encumbering the property, listed as
follows:

 A Perpetual Access and Utility Easement, recorded in
Hillsborough County OR Book 11043, Page 0521 (a copy is in the
addenda).
 A Perpetual Access and Utility Easement, recorded in
Hillsborough County OR Book 11043, Page 0524 (a copy is in the
addenda).
 Easement in favor of Florida Power Corporation as recorded in
Deed Book 1627, Page 84, of the Public Records of Hillsborough
County, Florida (referenced in Title Report dated 8/31/2001).
 Easement as recorded in Official Records Book 5017, Page 1499,
of the Public Records of Hillsborough County, Florida. This is a
100’ wide transmission line easement to Florida Power Corp. (now
Duke Energy) recorded in December 1986.
 Easement as recorded in Official Records Book 6115, Page 0213
of the Public Records of Hillsborough County. This is a 190’ wide
transmission line easement to Florida Power Corp. (now Duke

13 Source: Heidt & Associates survey information




18
Energy) that encompasses the previous 100’ easement and expands
that easement by 90’, recorded in October 1990.
Trade Fixtures,
Fixtures,
& Equipment
There were no items of personal property observed on the property
that would be considered part of the real estate.

Equestrian Facility

The subject property was originally developed in 2001. There are four (4) main buildings that
comprise the overall Equestrian Facility. They are:
1. The Barn/Stable building that includes:
a. fifteen (15) horse stalls (measuring 12’ × 12’ each),
b. a tack room,
c. a feed storage room,
d. a cart storage room (measuring 12’ × 24’), and
e. a “barn office” (measuring 12’ × 12’)
2. An attached Office/Conference building that includes:
a. a reception area (12’ × 20’),
b. a kitchen/break area (8’ × 22’),
c. two (2) private offices (15’ × 24’),
d. a conference room, and
e. enclosed restrooms/shower facilities (handicap accessible).
3. An attached Canopied Riding Arena (including a small canopied grandstand for
spectator viewing). Clear center span of 60’ × 120’. Handicap accessible.
4. A detached Maintenance Building (located across the lake along the east property
boundary).

The respective building sizes14 are outlined, as follows:

Equestrian Facility
Size
Year Built
Condition
Office/Conference
2,414
2001
Average
Barn/Stables
7,560
2001
Average
Sub-Total
9,974
Canopied (Arena)
12,352
2001
Average
Total
22,326
Maintenance
1,104
2001
Average
Mezzanine
144
2001
Average
Sub-Total
1,248
Canopy (Dry Storage)
1,950
2001
Average
Total
3,198


14 Source: Hillsborough County Property Appraiser records




19
Construction Quality
and Condition

Equestrian Facility – The subject Equestrian Facility is wood
frame. The foundation is poured concrete slab. The exterior walls
are finished with pressure treated wood (tongue & groove). The
roof is pitched/gable with galvanized metal.








The stables include 16’ wide center aisles paved with saw cut
concrete. The stall fronts include steel & wood sliding doors
mounted on steel rollers. Each stall has an automatic waterer and
swing-out feeder.








The interior of the Office/Conference building includes vinyl
flooring, built-in cabinetry, various appliances, painted drywall,
wood trim, florescent lighting, central HVAC, and aluminum
window frames. Restroom facilities include sinks, flush toilets,
urinals, and tiled shower stalls. The facility is entirely handicap
accessible.

Physical Age,
Effective Age, &
Economic Life
The equestrian facility was constructed in 2001 and appears in
average overall condition for the age of the buildings (16 years). In
general, the property has been well maintained.




Marshall Valuation Service (MVS) was used as a source for
estimating the economic lives of these building types. In summary,
MVS indicates the subject equestrian facility has an economic life
of ±30 years. In my opinion, considering the current condition, I
estimate the facility has a remaining economic life of 20 years.




Based on MVS depreciation tables retained in the appraisal work-
file, the equestrian facility is depreciated 25% (10 year effective
age, 30 economic life).




20
AERIAL PHOTO OF SUBJECT PROPERTY


Source: Hillsborough County Property Appraiser




21
OVERHEAD VIEW OF SUBJECT PROPERTY


Source: Bing Maps




22
DEEDPLOT OF SUBJECT PROPERTY


Source: Deed of Record




23
CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN


Source: Heidt & Associates




24
SURVEY


Source: Heidt & Associates




25
SITE LAYOUT







26
SUBJECT LOCATION MAP




27
PHOTOGRAPHS


View of Approach to Subject Property



View of Entry to Stable/Barn & Office/Conference Buildings





28



View of Office/Conference Building (from Parking Area)



View of Office/Conference Building (from Lakeside)





29





View of Barn/Stables Building (from Parking Area)



View Office/Conference and Barn/Stables Buildings (from Lakeside)



30




Interior View of Barn/Stables Building



Interior View of Barn/Stables Building


31




View of Picnic Tables & Viewing Area



Exterior View of Barn/Stables Building


32



View of Covered Arena



Interior View of Office/Conference Building – Entry Area


33



Interior View of Office/Conference Building – Kitchen/Break Area



Interior View of Office (Typical)


34



Interior View of Conference Area



Interior View of Bathroom Facilities (Typical)


35



Exterior View of Maintenance Building



Exterior View of Maintenance Building/Dry Storage Area


36



View of Dry Storage Area (Maintenance Building)



Interior View of Maintenance Building


37



View of Paved Parking Area for Office/Conference, Barn/Stable, and Covered Arena



View of Covered Dock/Fishing Pier


38



View of Well/Well Housing & Water Tank Facility



View of Horse Paddock Loafing Shed (west)


39



View of Horse Paddock Loafing Shed (east)



Southerly View overlooking Lake (from Office/Conference Building)


40



Oak Tree Canopied Entry Drive



View of Horse Paddock/Grazing Area along West Bank of Lake


41



View of Horse Paddocks East of Barn/Stables Building



View of Access to Horse Trails within Abutting East Land (owned by Hillsborough County)


42



View of Access Road/Gate located at Southeast Corner of the Property



Northwesterly View of Equestrian Facility from across Lake


43



ZONING AND FUTURE LAND USE

The subject property is located in an unincorporated area of Hillsborough County, west of the
City of Tampa. It is within the legal jurisdiction of Hillsborough County. The land is zoned PD,
Planned Development, Highland Park subdivision. The original PD site plan and zoning
conditions are lengthy and have been retained as part of the appraisal work-file.

The Future Land Use is classified: RES-4, Residential. A copy of the RES-4 land use regulation
is contained in the addenda.

Note: The Hillsborough County Planning Information Map App (PIMA) indicates a small 1,212
sf. area is classified P-QP, Public/Quasi-Public. However, this area does not show-up on any
Future Land Use maps for the subject. The exact location and impact of the P-QP area, if it
exists, is unknown.


HISTORY OF THE PROPERTY

The property has not sold in the prior 5 years. The most recent ownership transfer was in August
2001. The recorded sale price was $3,000,000. Reportedly, this transaction involved an
exchange of 112 acres (owned by the County) for the subject property (including an
earlier/smaller version of the equestrian facility) owned by Leslie Land Co, plus an additional
$1,412,500. The deed of record for this sale is included in the addenda.

The property is not actively being marketed for sale or for lease.


EXPOSURE TIME

(Defined) “estimated length of time that the property interest being appraised would have been
offered on the market prior to the hypothetical consummation of a sale at market value on the
effective date of the appraisal.”15

In this case, the Market Value estimate (of the land only) presumes an exposure time of 3 to 9
months prior to the effective date of appraisal.

15 USPAP, 2016-2017 Edition, The Appraisal Foundation, Page U-2


44
ASSESSED VALUE AND TAXES

The subject property assessment and taxes are outlined, as follows:


County Assessment (2016)
Sec-Twn-Rng
05-28-17
Folio No.
3517.0151
Market (Just) Value
701,800
$
SOH Cap
-

Assessed Value
701,800
$
- Exemptions
701,800

Taxable Value
-
$
Millage Rate
19.09290
Ad Valorem Taxes
-
$
plus: Non-Ad Valorem Taxes
Stormwater Management
-

Other
-

Taxes
-
$



Assuming the property was not exempt as a County-owned property, taxes would be ±$13,400.
A copy of the subject property tax information downloaded from the Hillsborough County Tax
Collector’s website is included in the addenda.


PUBLIC AND PRIVATE RESTRICTIONS

There were several easements encumbering the property, listed as follows:

 A Perpetual Access and Utility Easement, recorded in Hillsborough County OR Book
11043, Page 0521 (a copy is in the addenda).
 A Perpetual Access and Utility Easement, recorded in Hillsborough County OR Book
11043, Page 0524 (a copy is in the addenda).
 Easement in favor of Florida Power Corporation as recorded in Deed Book 1627,
Page 84, of the Public Records of Hillsborough County, Florida (referenced in Title
Report dated 8/31/2001).
 Easement as recorded in Official Records Book 5017, Page 1499, of the Public
Records of Hillsborough County, Florida. This is a 100’ wide transmission line
easement to Florida Power Corp. (now Duke Energy) recorded in December 1986.
 Easement as recorded in Official Records Book 6115, Page 0213 of the Public
Records of Hillsborough County. This is a 190’ wide transmission line easement to
Florida Power Corp. (now Duke Energy) that encompasses the previous 100’
easement and expands that easement by 90’, recorded in October 1990.




45
HIGHEST AND BEST USE ANALYSIS

Highest and Best Use (defined) "The reasonably probable use of property that results in the
highest value. The four criteria that the highest and best use must meet are legal permissibility,
physical possibility, financial feasibility, and maximum productivity." 16

Land as Vacant

Legally Permissible – The subject property is under the legal jurisdiction of Hillsborough
County, FL. The land is zoned PD (Planned Development) for Highland Park subdivision. The
Planned Development zoning plan for Highland Park designates the subject land (Tract 14) as
“Park and Recreation”. However, for reasonable analysis of the highest and best use of the land,
as though vacant, consideration is given to surrounding land uses. The Future Land Use is
classified RES-4 (Residential). From a legally permissible standpoint, the property is intended
for residential uses (ref: Hypothetical Condition #1).

Physically Possible – The subject property is located at the west terminus of Whisper Lake
Trail in northwest Hillsborough County. The surrounding community is known as Highland
Park. The physical address is: 11510 Whisper Lake Trail, Tampa, FL 33626.

The subject property has an irregular shape. According to a survey prepared by Heidt &
Associates, Inc. (civil engineers), the subject land contains a total 21.859 acres (or 214,751
square feet). However, a significant portion of the total land is submerged land (estimated as
11.200 acres17). Additionally, there is a ±1.4 acre wetland conservation area at the southeast
corner of the property. Total uplands are estimated as: 9.259 acres, of which ±4.930 acres lies
north of the lake (improved with the equestrian facility) and the remaining 4.329 acres of
uplands surround the Lake.

Access to the property is by an access easement. The road easement restricts access and the
number of homes that can be accessed by the easement. A significant portion of the developable
uplands north of the lake are encumbered by an easement to Florida Power Corp. However, it
appears there is suitable unencumbered land area between the lake and easement to construct two
(2) or three (3) lake-front Estate Residential homes.

Public water, electric, phone/cable and garbage services are available. The property uses a septic
system for sewage; there are no public sewer lines to the property. Considering the preceding
physical characteristics, development potential of the property is limited primarily by the overall
land size, shape, and proximity to the lake.

Financially Feasible - The location makes the subject land a suitable location for a residential
use. Consistent with the legally permissible analysis and physically possible uses outlined
above, economically feasible uses include residential uses.

Maximally Productive Use - Based on the above, the maximally productive use of the land
would be for an Estate Residential use, consistent with the intent of the future land use plan

16 The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 6th Edition, Appraisal Institute, Page 109
17 Source: Heidt & Associates, Inc. survey information


46
(RES-4). The land sales researched for this appraisal ranged between 2.690 and 4.220 net
developable acres.

In my opinion, considering the size of the subject uplands and the transmission line
encumbrance, the subject appears suitable for two (2) or three (3) lake-front home sites. The
uplands surrounding the lake to the south, east, and west would likely be used for open space or
accessory buildings.

Property as Improved

Legally Permissible – The subject property was originally constructed in 2001 as an
equestrian facility. It operates as “BAKAS Equestrian Center, Horses for the Handicapped”.
The improvements have a special public purpose use as an equestrian facility intended for use by
special needs members of the community. The zoning (PD) and future land use (RES-4) allows
continued use of the improvements for their intended public/semi-public use.

Physically Possible – The subject equestrian facility is a special public purpose use of the
property. Although it can physically be used for a wide range of activities, due to the design of
the building, uses other than the intended use is unlikely.

Feasible Uses – Considering the special public purpose nature of the design & construction of
the buildings (especially the barn, stables, arena) , equestrian facility, the most feasible use is for
its continued use as an equestrian facility.

Maximally Productive – Considering the preceding analysis, the maximally productive use of
the improvements is for an Equestrian Facility.


HIGHEST AND BEST USE CONCLUSION

As Vacant
Estate Residential
As Improved
Continued use as an Equestrian Facility




47
LAND VALUE

The subject property is a 21.859 acre tract of Estate Residential land that includes submerged
land and environmentally sensitive conservation wetlands. The net developable (uplands) area is
estimated as 9.259 acres. It is estimated that the Highest and Best Use of the land, as vacant,
would involve Estate Residential development.

A significant portion of the developable uplands north of the lake are encumbered by an
easement to Florida Power Corp. However, it appears there is suitable unencumbered land area
between the lake and easement to construct several lake-front homes.

The sales data search focused on properties of similar utility. The following land sales are
considered to give a reasonable bracketing of the value of the subject property.

Land Sales

The sales data search concentrated on generally similar Estate Residential tracts of land that are
considered comparable to the subject land. The comparable sales selected range in size between
5.000 and 11.260 acres, with net usable uplands ranging between 2.690 and 4.220 acres. These
land sales are considered comparable and representative of market value for Estate Residential
land in the unincorporated northwest Hillsborough submarket.

The unit of comparison most common for this type of land is the price/acre (usable land area).
Consideration was also given to the elements of comparison, including property rights conveyed,
financing, conditions of sale, expenditures made immediately after purchase, and changes in
market conditions over time.

Comparable Sale Bracketing – In my opinion, there is insufficient market data available to
produce precise, market-extracted adjustments for all the various dissimilarities between the
sales, mainly because of the scarcity of data available to support such adjustments. However, in
an effort to recognize superior and inferior influences inherent in the sales as compared to the
subject land, I have identified superior, inferior and similar characteristics.

Discussions of superior & inferior factors are outlined in the Discussion of Physical
Characteristics section. These are identified as location, water amenity, size of usable area,
shape of usable area, zoning/land use, topography, and utilities availability.

Property Rights Conveyed – This adjustment accounts for differences in the legal estates
between the comparable land sale and the subject property. Each of the following land sales
involved the normal transfer of fee simple rights and was not encumbered with unusual
restrictions. Therefore, an adjustment was not necessary for this factor.

Financing – The financing (or cash equivalency) adjustment converts the transaction price of
the comparable sale into its cash equivalent price or modifies it to match the financing terms of
the subject property. In this case, the market value estimate presumes all cash to the seller in
U.S. dollars (or equivalent). Each of the following land sales involved cash to seller transactions
or conventional financing. Therefore, an adjustment was not necessary for atypical (favorable
and/or unfavorable) financing.


48

Conditions of Sale – This adjustment reflects the difference between the actual sale price of
the comparable and its probable sale price if it were currently sold in an arm’s length transaction.
Based on my verifications with the parties involved, each of the following land sales is
considered a good arm’s length market sale.

Expenditures made Immediately after Purchase – This adjustment applies to costs that
will have to be paid upon purchase of a property because these costs affect the price the buyer
agrees to pay. Such expenditures may include: costs-to-cure deferred maintenance,
demolition/site clearing costs, costs to petition for a zoning change, and costs to remediate
environmental contamination. In this case, the sale verifications did not indicate the need to
apply an adjustment for such an expenditure.

Market Conditions (Time) – The next adjustment is for Market Conditions, which reflects
any changes in market prices being paid in relation to changes in market conditions and the
purchasing power of money over time. This is also referred to as a time adjustment, since it
relates to a specific time period for a market.

The comparable land sales date back to May 2015 and are considered relatively current.
However, land values have been notably appreciating in recent years. Therefore, in order
recognize this factor, I have applied an adjustment based on changes in the Case-Shiller Index
produced by Standard & Poor’s.

Case-Shiller Index - Case-Shiller Price Indices are repeat-sales house price indices for the
United States. There are multiple Case–Shiller home price indices. In this case, I have relied
upon the Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater metro market index. The Case-Shiller Indices are
calculated and kept monthly by Standard & Poor's; they can be accessed through their website by
subscription.

The adjustment is calculated as the percentage change from the respective day of sale until the
most current data point (in this case, Feb-2017). For example, Comp #5 sold in May 2015 and
had Case-Shiller Index of 169.34 (see Sales Grid). The most recent Case-Shiller Index is 190.2.
The difference (20.86) represents a 12.3% upward adjustment. The Comparable Sales have all
been adjusted accordingly.



49
LAND SALES LOCATION MAP



LAND COMPARABLE SALES GRID
SALE #
SUBJECT
Land Comp 1
Land Comp 2
Land Comp 3
Land Comp 4
Land Comp 5
County
Hillsborough
Hillsborough
Hillsborough
Hillsborough
Hillsborough
Hillsborough
O.R. Book
24857
24012
23984
23791
23297
Page
519
331
1861
581
1783
Grantee
Meir Zuchman
Scott Anderson
KD West Coast
Nationwide Data
Bayshore Devel &
Vicki Gura
Karen Anderson
Holdings, LLC
Systems, Inc
Investments, LLC
Date
May-17
Mar-17
Apr-16
Mar-16
Dec-15
May-15
Consideration
$340,000
$335,000
$180,000
$325,000
$275,000
Document
Warranty Deed
Gen Warr Deed
Gen Warr Deed
Gen Warr Deed
Spec Warr Deed
Sec-Twn-Rng
05-28-17
20-27-17
20-27-17
33-27-17
12-28-17
20-28-17
Folio #
3517.0151
1704.0180
1704.0116
2725.2614
3624.0200
4324.0000
Street
11510 Whisper
11439 Trotting
11450 Trotting
Trackside Dr
Cain Road
12320 Memorial
Address
Lake Trail
Down Drive
Down Drive
Highway
Location
West Hillsb
Odessa
Odessa
West Hillsb
West Hillsb
West Hillsb
Case-Shiller Index
190.2
190.2
180.86
179.49
176.41
169.34
Land Area
Uplands (ac)
9.259
4.220
4.030
2.690
3.630
3.590
Wetlands (ac)
12.600
0.780
7.230
2.940
2.750
4.200
Total Acreage
21.859
5.000
11.260
5.630
6.380
7.790
Zoning
PD
PD
PD
AS-0.4
ASC-1
PD
Future Land Use
RES-4
A/R
A/R
RES-1
RES-4
RES-4
Public Utilities
Water/Septic
Well/Septic
Well/Septic
Well/Septic
Water/Sewer
Water/Sewer
Unit Sale Price ($/upland acre)
$80,569
$83,127
$66,914
$89,532
$76,602
Sale Adjustments
Ppty Rts Conv
Fee Simple
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
Financing
Cash to Seller
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
Cond of Sale
Arm's Length
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
Expend. Made
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
Market Conditions (Time)
0.0%
5.2%
6.0%
7.8%
12.3%
0.0%
5.2%
6.0%
7.8%
12.3%
Physical Comparison
Location
Similar
Similar
Inferior
Inferior
Inferior
Water Amenity
Inferior
Inferior
Inferior
Inferior
Inferior
Size of Usable Area
Superior
Superior
Superior
Superior
Superior
Shape of Usable Area
Superior
Superior
Similar
Superior
Similar
Zoning/Land Use
Similar
Similar
Similar
Similar
Similar
Topography
Similar
Similar
Similar
Similar
Similar
Utilities Availability
Inferior
Inferior
Inferior
Superior
Superior
Unit Sale Price
Price/Acre (Uplands)
$80,569
$87,450
$70,929
$96,515
$86,024
Comparison
Lower Limit
Lower Limit
Absolute Lower Limit Good Indication
Good Indication


51

Discussion of Land Sales

Land Comp 1 – This is the sale of a pie-shaped 5.000 acre tract located in the Citrus Green
development in Odessa, FL. Citrus Green is a desirable gated community of Residential Estate
lots (all 5 acres or larger). The subdivision has excellent infrastructure (streets, security, etc) and
permits equestrian facilities. It includes a platted horse trail easement. The platted lot contains
0.780 acres of non-developable land, yielding 4.220 usable upland acres. The land is zoned PD
(Planned Development) and lies within an A/R (Agricultural Rural) future land use district. The
property was originally listed for sale, asking $399,000. The land sold in March 2017 for
$340,000 (or $80,569/usable upland acre).

The lack of water amenity (lake view) and lack of both water and sewer are inferior factors. This
is somewhat offset by the smaller land size (superior) and shape. However, this sale is
considered a slight lower limit of value for the subject land.

Land Comp 2 – This is the sale of an irregular-shaped 11.260 acre tract located in the Citrus
Green development in Odessa, FL. Citrus Green is a desirable gated community of Residential
Estate lots (all 5 acres or larger). The subdivision has excellent infrastructure (streets, security,
etc) and permits equestrian facilities. It includes a platted horse trail easement. The platted lot
contains 7.230 acres of non-developable land, yielding 4.030 usable upland acres. The land is
zoned PD (Planned Development) and lies within an A/R (Agricultural Rural) future land use
district. The property was originally listed for sale, asking $499,000. The land sold in April
2016 for $335,000 (or $83,127/usable upland acre).

The lack of water amenity (lake view) and lack of both water and sewer are inferior factors. This
is somewhat offset by the smaller land size (superior) and shape. However, this sale is
considered a slight lower limit of value for the subject land.

Land Comp 3 – This is the sale of an irregular-shaped 5.630 acre tract located in the
Horseshoe Estates development in west Hillsborough County. Horseshoe Estates is a desirable
Residential Estate subdivision that permits equestrian facilities. The platted lot contains 2.940
acres of non-developable conservation land, yielding 2.690 usable upland acres. The land is
zoned AS-0.4 (Agricultural Single Family Estate) and lies within a RES-1 (Residential) future
land use district. The property was originally listed for sale, asking $215,000. The land sold in
March 2016 after 254 days on the market for $180,000 (or $66,914/usable upland acre). The
buyer owns the abutting home to the south. As of the date of inspection, the land has not yet
been developed.

This sale has several inferior factors: inferior location (less desirable surrounding homes), lack of
water view amenity, and lack of both public water and sewer service. Therefore, this sale is
considered an absolute lower limit of value in comparison to the subject.

Land Comp 4 – This is the sale of an “L” shaped 6.380 acre tract located along the east side of
Cain Road, just north of Gunn Hwy. in northwest Hillsborough County. The land is zoned ASC-
1 (Agricultural, Single Family Conventional) and lies within a RES-4 (Residential) future land


52
use district. The property was originally listed for sale, asking $450,000. The land sold in
December 2015 after 154 days on the market for $325,000 (or $89,532/usable upland acre).

This sale is located in an area with significantly lower quality homes (inferior to the subject).
This factor, combined with the smaller land area (superior), and availability of both public water
& sewer, establishes this sale as a good indication of value in comparison to the subject land.

Land Comp 5 – This is the sale of a 7.790 acre, triangular tract residential land located on
Memorial Highway near the Westchase Development of western Hillsborough County. The land
contains 4.200 acres of non-developable wetlands, yielding 3.590 usable upland acres. The land
is zoned PD (Planned Development) and lies within an R-4 (Residential) future land use district.
The property was originally listed for sale, asking $275,000. The land sold almost immediately
in May 2015 for $275,000 or $76,602/usable upland acre. The property remains undeveloped at
the time of inspection.

The location and lack of water amenity (lake view) are inferior factors, somewhat offset by the
smaller size (superior), as compared to the subject land. Also, this site has both water and sewer
available, which is superior in comparison. In the end, this sale is considered a good indication
of value for the subject land.



53
Land Value Conclusion

After applying adjustments, the preceding land sales indicated an adjusted price range of
$70,929 to $96,515/net usable acre, with an average unit sale price of ±$84,297/acre. The
subject land has strong appeal as an Estate Residential tract, especially considering its water
amenity (lake view). I was unable to find sufficient data of Estate Residential lots on man-made
lakes/ponds (similar to the subject).

In the final analysis, it is estimated that the subject 9.259 acres of usable uplands has a value
toward the middle of the range, or $85,000/acre (net usable). The excellent water amenity
characteristics are considered offset by the proximity of the transmission line easements.

Therefore, the total value of the property can be calculated, as follows:



Land
Uplands
9.259 acres @
$85,000 /acre =
787,015
$
Rounded to
800,000
$


Test of Reasonableness – An alternative valuation method is to consider the value of the
property on a price/home site basis. As discussed previously, considering the size of the subject
uplands and the transmission line encumbrance, the land along the north side of the lake appears
suitable for possibly two (2) or three (3) home-sites. In my opinion, there is suitable land area
between the easement and the top of bank for home development.

Dividing $800,000 by 2-3 home sites, each would have an average home site value ranging
between ±$267,000 to $400,000. This amount is directly in-line with the home site (whole)
prices for the researched land sales. It should also be noted that the researched land sales were
not lake-front.

Considering that each home site would have lake-front views, with suitable unencumbered
building footprints large enough for Estate Residential homes, and with a private access drive,
the $800,000 total land value is deemed reasonable and market supported.


Indicated Value
Land Valuation








$800,000




54
COST APPROACH

The premise of this approach to value is the principal of substitution. This principal states that a
prudent, well-informed purchaser would not pay more for a property than the cost to reproduce
or replace, assuming that reproduction or replacement can occur without costly delay. The
present value of the subject site is estimated as though vacant and available to be put to its
highest and best use.

Replacement Cost New (RCN)

The replacement cost new (RCN) derived in this report is based upon cost estimates provided by
Richard Bliss, Bliss Enterprises, Inc. A copy of the RCN estimate is contained in the addenda.
In my opinion, the RCN estimate is significantly below market for this property type (an
equestrian facility).

The appraiser had no involvement with compiling the RCN estimate and expresses no opinion
with regards to its accuracy or reasonableness. For purposes of this Value in Use appraisal, the
RCN estimate is assumed correct and within market parameters.

Bliss Enterprises reportedly specializes in constructing equestrian facilities. According to Mr.
Bliss, he is able to obtain building materials for 25% to 30% less than competitors (market).
Additionally, he states that his company does not sub-out various sub-trades (electrical,
plumbing, etc) and that all trades are in-house.

It is also noted that the Bliss estimate also does not include building permit or impact fees.
These costs are typically included in any market-based RCN estimate. It is assumed the rational
for excluding these normal costs is due to the current ownership (Hillsborough Co.), which is
exempted from these typical costs. This exclusion causes the Bliss RCN estimate to be
significantly lower than “market”.

Indirect (soft) costs (usually paid by developer) for items such as architectural fees, boundary
and as-built surveys, impact fees, and financing costs have been added based on 15% of hard
costs.



55
Entrepreneurial Profit (defined) "A market-derived figure that represents the amount an entrepreneur
receives for his or her contribution to a project and risk; the difference between the total cost of a
property (cost of development) and its market value (property value after completion), which represents
the entrepreneur’s compensation for the risk and expertise associated with development.” 18

Generally, an entrepreneur will require an investment return in direct relation to the risk inherent
in the specific development and the time involved before profit is collected. It should be also
understood by the reader that Entrepreneurial Profit is a case-by-case figure and is dependent on
many different risk factors (such as the type of development, the location, timing of the
development, cost of capital, etc.). In projects in which the entrepreneur and the developer are
one in the same, the entrepreneurial profit is equivalent to the total project profit.

Typically, Entrepreneurial Profit is a risk judgment of the appraiser based on his/her view of the
health of the overall market and other factors. In this case, the Value in Use (as a special
purpose, publicly-owned Equestrian Facility) would suggest very low entrepreneurial risk. In
my opinion, only a minor Entrepreneurial Profit is applicable. Considering the Value in Use
assignment, I have estimated only ±5% (suggesting very low risk).

Accrued Depreciation

All forms of accrued depreciation affecting the subject property were considered. The four (4)
types of depreciation which affect the subject property are:

1) Curable Physical Deterioration - this refers to items of deferred maintenance and
items needing repair as of the date of appraisal. In this case, the subject facility appear in
average overall condition and no significant items of deferred maintenance were
observed. The manager of the facility stated that there were no pending maintenance
issues. She indicated the County maintenance personnel were very prompt to correct any
issues as they arose.

2) Incurable Physical Deterioration (Short-lived Items) - these are items which
cannot be practically or economically corrected as of the date of appraisal (this also refers
to the daily wear-and-tear of short and long-lived components). Long-lived items are
improvement components that are expected to have a remaining economic life that is
equal to the remaining economic life of the improvements. Short-lived items have a
remaining economic life that is shorter than the remaining economic life of the
improvements.

Incurable Physical Deterioration (Long-lived Items) – The equestrian facility was
constructed in 2001 and appears in average overall condition for the age of the buildings
(16 years). In general, the property has been well maintained.

Marshall Valuation Service (MVS) was used as a source for estimating the economic
lives of these building types. In summary, MVS indicates the subject equestrian facility

18 The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 6th Edition, Appraisal Institute, page 77


56
has an economic life of ±30 years. In my opinion, considering the current condition, I
estimate the facility has a remaining economic life of 20 years.

Based on MVS depreciation tables retained in the appraisal work-file, the equestrian
facility is depreciated 25% (10 year effective age, 30 economic life).

3) Functional Obsolescence (defined) "the impairment of functional capacity of
improvements according to market tastes and standards"19 Functional obsolescence can
be curable or incurable. The test to determine if functional obsolescence is curable or not
is based on whether the cost to replace or fix the outmoded/unacceptable aspect is less
than the resulting increase in value to the property.

Curable functional obsolescence is divided into: 1) a deficiency requiring an addition, 2)
a deficiency requiring substitution or modernization, or 3) a Super-adequacy.

In this case, the subject equestrian facility was designed and constructed as a special
purpose public use facility to serve the special needs community. The various buildings
function exactly as they were intended.

Incurable functional obsolescence may be caused by a deficiency or a super-adequacy.
In this case, there were no items needing substitution or modernization. Also, there were
not any super-adequate items noted.

3) External Obsolescence (defined) “a type of depreciation; a diminution in value
caused by negative external influences and generally incurable on the part of the owner,
landlord, or tenant.”20


19 The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 6th Edition, Appraisal Institute, page 97
20 The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 6th Edition, Appraisal Institute, page 83


57
COST APPROACH CALCULATIONS

Cost Approach Summary & Conclusions
General Contractor Costs
665,472
$
+ Developer (soft) Costs @
15%
99,821

Sub-total
765,293
$
+ Entrepreneurial Profit @
5%
38,265

Replacement Cost New
803,558
$
less: Accrued Depreciation
Physical Deterioration
Curable Physical (Deferred Maintenance)
-
$
Incurable Physical (MVS) @
25%
200,890

Functional Obsolescence
-

External Obsolescence
-

200,890

Depreciated Value of Improvements
602,668
$
plus: Land Value
800,000

Total
1,402,668
$
Indicated Value by the Cost Approach (rd)
1,400,000
$





Indicated Value – Subject Property
by the Cost Approach






$1,400,000



58
SALES COMPARISON APPROACH

The Sales Comparison Approach (aka. The Market Approach) is an appraisal analysis that is
based on the proposition that an informed purchaser would pay no more for a property than the
cost of acquiring an existing property of the same utility. The basic principle underlying the
Sales Comparison Approach is the principle of substitution. The Sales Comparison Approach is
based upon an analysis of the market behavior of purchasers. The standards for comparing sales
of competing properties with the subject property are those of the market. For the Sales
Comparison Approach to be applied properly and effectively, it requires sufficient quantities of
accurate, reliable and verifiable market data.

As previously described, the subject property is improved with a special public purpose
Equestrian Facility designed for the special needs (handicapped) community. For this
assignment, the Sales Comparison Approach method of valuation is not considered to be reliable
and applicable for estimating the Value in Use of this property type.


INCOME APPROACH

The Income Approach essentially measures the present value of the future benefits of property
ownership. It is based on the premise that there is a direct relationship between a property's
value and the income it generates. A property's income streams and its resale value, or
reversion, are capitalized into a present, lump-sum value. Research and data analysis is
conducted against a background of supply and demand relationships, which provide information
on trends and market anticipation.

As previously described, the subject property is improved with a public purpose Equestrian
Facility designed for the special needs (handicapped) community. For this assignment, the
Income Approach method of valuation is not considered to be reliable and applicable for
estimating the value of this property type.




59
RECONCILIATION

The indications of value for the subject property by the three approaches were as follows:

Cost Approach to Value




$1,400,000
Sales Comparison Approach to Value


N/A
Income Approach to Value




N/A

The subject property is improved with a public purpose Equestrian Facility designed for the
special needs (handicapped) community. For this assignment, the Cost Approach method of
valuation is considered the most reliable and applicable method for estimating the Value in Use
of this property type.

The Sales Comparison Approach (aka. Market Approach) and Income Approach were not
considered applicable and have not been applied.

Based on the preceding analysis, emphasis was given to the Cost Approach. The final estimate
of value for the subject property, as of May 5, 2017, was $1,400,000.

The appraisal presumes an exposure time of 3 to 9 months prior to the effective date of appraisal.



Final Conclusion of Value
of the Subject Property




$1,400,000

























ADDENDA











Overhead View – 11439 Trotting Down Drive, Odessa, FL

Recorded


Hillsborough County OR Book 24857, Page 0519

Grantor


Jeffrey Rosenberg and Dana Rosenberg

Grantee


Vicki Rabenou Gura and Meir Zuchman

Date of Sale


March 30, 2017
Warranty Deed

Sale Price


$340,000

$80,569/usable acre

Folio No(s)


001704.0180

Land


Size1
4.220 acres (usable)





0.780 acres (wetlands)





5.000 acres (total)

Zoning


PD, Planned Development
Future Land Use

A/R, Agricultural Rural

Public Utilities


No public water or sewer service is available nearby.


1 Source: Hillsborough County Property Appraiser records




Aerial Photo

Remarks
This is the sale of a pie-shaped 5.000 acre tract located in the Citrus Green
development in Odessa, FL. Citrus Green is a desirable gated community of
Residential Estate lots (all 5 acres or larger). The subdivision has excellent
infrastructure (streets, security, etc) and permits equestrian facilities. It
includes a platted horse trail easement. The platted lot contains 0.780 acres of
non-developable land, yielding 4.220 usable upland acres. The land is zoned
PD (Planned Development) and lies within an A/R (Agricultural Rural) future
land use district. The property was originally listed for sale, asking $399,000.
The land sold in March 2017 for $340,000 (or $80,569/usable upland acre).



The transaction was verified as a good, arm’s length market sale by Cindy
Bohms, the listing agent, on 5/8/2017.





PLAT MAP




LOCATION MAP








Overhead View – 11450 Trotting Down Drive, Odessa, FL

Recorded


Hillsborough County OR Book 24012, Page 0331

Grantor


James Joseph Sullivan, Jr.

Grantee


Scott Robert Anderson and Karen Crane Anderson

Date of Sale


April 8, 2016

General Warranty Deed

Sale Price


$335,000

$83,127/usable acre

Folio No(s)


001704.0116

Land


Size1
4.030 acres (usable)





7.230 acres (wetlands)





11.260 acres (total)

Zoning


PD, Planned Development
Future Land Use

A/R, Agricultural Rural

Public Utilities


No public water or sewer service is available nearby.


1 Source: Hillsborough County Property Appraiser records




Aerial Photo

Remarks
This is the sale of an irregular-shaped 11.260 acre tract located in the Citrus
Green development in Odessa, FL. Citrus Green is a desirable gated
community of Residential Estate lots (all 5 acres or larger). The subdivision
has excellent infrastructure (streets, security, etc) and permits equestrian
facilities. It includes a platted horse trail easement. The platted lot contains
7.230 acres of non-developable land, yielding 4.030 usable upland acres. The
land is zoned PD (Planned Development) and lies within an A/R (Agricultural
Rural) future land use district. The property was originally listed for sale,
asking $499,000. The land sold in April 2016 for $335,000 (or $83,127/usable
upland acre).



The transaction was verified as a good, arm’s length market sale by Jack
Bentley, the listing agent, on 5/8/2017.





PLAT MAP




LOCATION MAP








Front Photo – Trackside Drive, Tampa, FL

Recorded


Hillsborough County OR Book 23984, Page 1861

Grantor


Milton H. Haberman and Regina A. Haberman

Grantee


KD West Coast Holdings, LLC

Date of Sale


March 25, 2016
General Warranty Deed

Sale Price


$180,000

$66,914/usable acre

Folio No(s)


002725.2614

Land


Size1
2.690 acres (usable)





2.940 acres (wetlands)





5.630 acres (total)

Zoning


AS-0.4, Agricultural Single Family Estate
Future Land Use

RES-1, Residential

Public Utilities


No public water or sewer service is available nearby.












1 Source: Hillsborough County Property Appraiser records




Aerial Photo

Remarks
This is the sale of an irregular-shaped 5.630 acre tract located in the Horseshoe
Estates development in west Hillsborough County. Horseshoe Estates is a
desirable Residential Estate subdivision that permits equestrian facilities. The
platted lot contains 2.940 acres of non-developable conservation land, yielding
2.690 usable upland acres. The land is zoned AS-0.4 (Agricultural Single
Family Estate) and lies within a RES-1 (Residential) future land use district.
The property was originally listed for sale, asking $215,000. The land sold in
March 2016 after 254 days on the market for $180,000 (or $66,914/usable
upland acre). The buyer owns the abutting home to the south. As of the date
of inspection, the land has not yet been developed.



The transaction was verified as a good, arm’s length market sale by Brandon
Rimes, the listing agent, on 5/8/2017.



PLAT MAP



LOCATION MAP








Front Photo – Cain Road, NW Hillsborough County

Recorded


Hillsborough County OR Book 23791, Page 0581

Grantor


Hit 55 Properties, LLC

Grantee


Nationwide Data Systems, Inc.

Date of Sale


December 28, 2015
General Warranty Deed

Sale Price


$325,000

$89,532/usable acre

Folio No(s)


003624.0200

Land


Size1
3.630 acres (usable)





2.750 acres (wetlands)





6.380 acres (total)

Zoning


ASC-1, Agricultural, Single Family Conventional
Future Land Use

RES-4, Residential

Public Utilities


All public utilities, including water and sewer service, are
available nearby.


1 Source: Hillsborough County Property Appraiser records




Aerial Photo

Remarks
This is the sale of an “L” shaped 6.380 acre tract located along the east side of
Cain Road, just north of Gunn Hwy. in northwest Hillsborough County. The
land is zoned ASC-1 (Agricultural, Single Family Conventional) and lies
within a RES-4 (Residential) future land use district. The property was
originally listed for sale, asking $450,000. The land sold in December 2015
after 154 days on the market for $325,000 (or $89,532/usable upland acre).



The transaction was verified as a good, arm’s length market sale by Ross
Suddath, the listing agent, on 5/8/2017.




LOCATION MAP








Overhead View – 12320 Memorial Hwy, Tampa, FL

Recorded


Hillsborough County OR Book 23297, Page 1783

Grantor


TSPFL Holding, LLC

Grantee


Bayshore Development and Investments, LLC




Laali Ali

Date of Sale


May 02, 2016

Special Warranty Deed

Sale Price


$275,000

$76,602/usable acre

Folio No(s)


004324.0000

Land


Size1
3.590 acres (usable)





4.200 acres (wetlands)





7.790 acres (total)

Zoning


PD, Planned Development
Future Land Use

R-4, Residential

Public Utilities


All public utilities, including water and sewer service, are
available nearby.












1 Source: Hillsborough County Property Appraiser records



Aerial Photo

Remarks
This is the sale of a 7.790 acre, triangular tract residential land located on
Memorial Highway near the Westchase Development of western Hillsborough
County. The land contains 4.200 acres of non-developable wetlands, yielding
3.590 usable upland acres. The land is zoned PD (Planned Development) and
lies within an R-4 (Residential) future land use district. The property was
originally listed for sale, asking $275,000. The land sold almost immediately
in May 2015 for $275,000 or $76,602/usable upland acre. The property
remains undeveloped at the time of inspection.



The transaction was verified as a good, arm’s length market sale by Cindy
Ryan, the listing agent, on 5/8/2017.



PLAT MAP



LOCATION MAP







2016
NOTICE OF PROPOSED PROPERTY TAXES
HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY TAXING
AUTHORITIES

DO NOT PAY
THIS IS NOT A BILL

Post Office Box 172146
Tampa, FL 33672-0146
The taxing authorities which levy property taxes against
your property will soon hold PUBLIC HEARINGS to
adopt budgets and tax rates for next year.
The purpose of these PUBLIC HEARINGS is to receive
opinions from the general public and to answer
questions on the proposed tax change and budget
PRIOR TO TAKING FINAL ACTION.
Each taxing authority may AMEND OR ALTER its
proposal at the hearing.
Location:
Legal Desc:
11510 WHISPER LAKE TL
BEG AT SE COR OF SEC 5-28-17 THN N 89 DEG
05 MIN 49 SEC W 945.26 FT THN N 23 DEG 28 MIN
PIN: U-05-28-17-ZZZ-000000-26860.1
Folio Number: 0035170151 U GO NX

HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY
REAL ESTATE DEPT
PO BOX 1110
TAMPA FL 33601-1110

TAXING AUTHORITY TAX INFORMATION
REAL ESTATE
LAST YEAR's
TAXABLE VALUE
(2015)
YOUR FINAL TAX RATE AND
TAXES LAST YEAR
(2015)
CURRENT
TAXABLE VALUE
( 2016)
YOUR TAX RATE AND TAXES THIS
YEAR IF NO BUDGET CHANGE IS
MADE ( 2016)
YOUR TAX RATE AND TAXES THIS
YEAR IF PROPOSED BUDGET
CHANGE IS MADE ( 2016)
Taxing Authority
COLUMN 1
COLUMN 2
COLUMN 3
COLUMN 4
COLUMN 5
MILLAGE
RATE
TAXES
MILLAGE
RATE
TAXES
MILLAGE
RATE
TAXES
COUNTY:








General Revenue
0
5.73220
0.00
0
5.44880
0.00
5.73220
0.00









PUBLIC SCHOOLS:








School-State
0
4.99900
0.00
0
4.73890
0.00
4.65800
0.00
School-Local
0
2.24800
0.00
0
2.13100
0.00
2.24800
0.00









MUNICIPAL:








MSTU
0
4.37450
0.00
0
4.16130
0.00
4.37450
0.00








WATER MGMT DIST:








SWFWMD
0
0.34880
0.00
$0
0.33170
0.00
0.33170
0.00








INDEPENDENT
SPECIAL DISTRICTS:








Port Auth.
0
0.15500
0.00
0
0.14750
0.00
0.14500
0.00
Children's Bd
0
0.45890
0.00
0
0.43560
0.00
0.45890
0.00
Transit
0
0.50000
0.00
0
0.47460
0.00
0.50000
0.00









VOTER APPROVED
DEBT PAYMENTS:








Environmental
0
0.06040
0.00
0
0.06040
0.00
0.06040
0.00
Unincorp Parks

0.02590
0.00

0.02590
0.00
0.02590










OTHER:








Library
0
0.55830
0.00
0
0.52980
0.00
0.55830
0.00
TOTAL AD-VALOREM PROPERTY TAXES
0.00


0.00

0.00

PROPERTY APPRAISER VALUE INFORMATION

COUNTY
PUBLIC
SCHOOLS
MUNICIPAL
OTHER
DISTRICTS
2015
2016
2015
2016
2015
2016
2015
2016
MARKET VALUE
$705,554
$701,800
$705,554
$701,800
$705,554
$701,800
$705,554
$701,800
LESS APPLIED ASSESSMENT REDUCTIONS




ASSESSED VALUE
$705,554
$701,800
$705,554
$701,800
$705,554
$701,800
$705,554
$701,800
LESS EXEMPTIONS
Misc. Exemptions
$705,554
$701,800
$705,554
$701,800
$705,554
$701,800
$705,554
$701,800




TAXABLE VALUE
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
If you feel that the market value of your property is inaccurate or does not reflect the fair market value on January 1,
2016, or if you are entitled to an exemption that is not reflected above, contact your County Appraiser at:
601 East Kennedy Blvd., 15th Floor County Center, Tampa, FL 33602
If the Property Appraiser's Office is unable to resolve the matter as to market value or an exemption, you may file a
petition for adjustment with the Value Adjustment Board. Petition forms are available online at
http://www.hillsclerk.com/publicweb/Forms.aspx and must be filed ON OR BEFORE September 13, 2016.














Hillsborough County Notice of Proposed Property Taxes
The Taxing Authorities which levy property taxes against your property will soon hold PUBLIC HEARINGS to adopt budgets and tax rates for the
next year. The purpose of the PUBLIC HEARINGS is to receive opinions from the general public and to answer questions on the proposed tax
change and budget PRIOR TO TAKING FINAL ACTION. Each taxing authority may AMEND OR ALTER its proposals at the hearing.
Taxing Authority Hearing Information
TAXING AUTHORITY
HEARING LOCATION
DATE
TIME
PHONE
NUMBER
Hillsborough County
601 E Kennedy Blvd Tampa
September 8, 2016
6:00 PM
(813) 272-5750
Environmental Lands
601 E Kennedy Blvd Tampa
September 8, 2016
6:00 PM
(813) 272-5750
M S T U
601 E Kennedy Blvd Tampa
September 8, 2016
6:00 PM
(813) 272-5750
Library Services
601 E Kennedy Blvd Tampa
September 8, 2016
6:00 PM
(813) 272-5750
Unincorp Parks and Rec.
601 E Kennedy Blvd Tampa
September 8, 2016
6:00 PM
(813) 272-5750
School Board
901 E Kennedy Blvd Tampa
September 6, 2016
5:01 PM
(813) 272-4064
Tampa Port Authority
1101 Channelside Dr Tampa
September 7, 2016
5:01 PM
(813) 905-5132
Hillsborough Transit Authority
601 E Kennedy Blvd Tampa
September 12, 2016
5:30 PM
(813) 623-5835
Children's Board
1002 E Palm Ave Tampa
September 14, 2016
5:01 PM
(813) 229-2884
Southwest Florida Water Management Dist.
7601 Highway 301 N Tampa
September 13, 2016
5:01 PM
(352) 796-7211
City of Tampa
315 E Kennedy Blvd Tampa
September 7, 2016
5:01 PM
(813) 274-8111
City of Temple Terrace
11250 N 56 St Temple Terrace
September 7, 2016
6:00 PM
(813) 398-9710
City of Plant City
302 W Reynolds St Plant City
September 12, 2016
7:30 PM
(813) 659-4200
YOUR FINAL TAX BILL MAY CONTAIN NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENTS WHICH MAY NOT BE REFLECTED ON THIS NOTICE SUCH AS
ASSESSMENTS FOR ROADS, FIRE, GARBAGE, LIGHTING, DRAINAGE, WATER, SEWER OR OTHER GOVERNMENTAL SERVICES AND
FACILITIES WHICH MAY BE LEVIED BY YOUR LOCAL COUNTY, CITY OR ANY SPECIAL DISTRICT.
PER FLORIDA STATUTES 200.069(10)(A), NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENTS ARE NOT REQUIRED TO APPEAR ON THIS NOTICE. IF
APPLICABLE, LOCAL GOVERNING BOARDS WILL SEND YOU A SEPARATE NOTICE OF ANY NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENTS FOR
YOUR PROPERTY.
Explanation of 'TAXING AUTHORITY TAX INFORMATION' section
COLUMN 1 - "LAST YEAR'S TAXABLE VALUE"
This column shows the prior assessed value less all applicable exemptions used in the calculation of taxes for that specific
taxing authority.
COLUMN 2 - "YOUR FINAL TAX RATE AND TAXES LAST YEAR"
This shows the tax rate and taxes that applied last year to your property. These amounts were based on budgets adopted last
year and your property’s previous taxable value.
COLUMN 3 - "CURRENT TAXABLE VALUE"
This column shows the current assessed value less all applicable exemptions used in the calculation of taxes for that specific
taxing authority. Various taxable values in this column may indicate the impact of Limited Income Senior or the Additional
Homestead exemption. Current taxable values are as of January 1, 2016.
COLUMN 4 - "YOUR TAX RATE AND TAXES THIS YEAR IF NO BUDGET CHANGE IS MADE"
This shows what your tax rate and taxes will be IF EACH TAXING AUTHORITY DOES NOT CHANGE ITS PROPERTY TAX
LEVY. These amounts are based on last year’s budgets and your current assessment.
COLUMN 5 - "YOUR TAX RATE AND TAXES THIS YEAR IF PROPOSED BUDGET CHANGE IS MADE"
This shows what your tax rate and taxes will be this year under the BUDGET ACTUALLY PROPOSED by each taxing authority.
The proposal is not final, and may be amended at the public hearings shown at the top of this notice. The difference between
columns 4 and 5 is the tax change proposed by each local taxing authority and is NOT the result of higher assessments.
Explanation of 'PROPERTY APPRAISER VALUE INFORMATION' section
MARKET (JUST) VALUE
The most probable sale price for a property in a competitive, open market involving a willing buyer and a willing seller.
APPLIED ASSESSMENT REDUCTION
Properties can receive an assessment reduction for a number of reasons including the Save Our Homes Benefit and the 10%
non-homestead property assessment limitation. Agricultural Classification is not an assessment reduction, it is an assessment
determined per Florida Statute 193.461.
ASSESSED VALUE
The value of your property after any “assessment reductions” have been applied. This value may also reflect an agricultural
classification. If “assessment reductions” are applied or an agricultural classification is granted, the assessed value could be
different for School versus Non-School taxing authorities and for the purpose of calculating taxes.
EXEMPTIONS
Any exemption that impacts your property is listed in this section along with its corresponding exemption value. Specific dollar or
percentage reductions in assessed value may be applicable to a property based upon certain qualifications of the property or
property owner. In some cases, an exemption’s value may vary depending on the taxing authority.
Taxable Value
The current value to which millages are applied after applying applicable assessment reductions and deducting applicable
exemptions.



Hillsborough County Future Land Use


172


FUTURE OF HILLSBOROUGH
SUBURBAN LAND USE CLASSIFICATION
Residential-4 (RES-4)


RESIDENTIAL GROSS DENSITY
TYPICAL USES
MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA RATIO OR SQUARE
FEET
SPECIFIC INTENT OF CATEGORY




Up to a maximum of 4.0 dwelling units per
gross
acre.
Alternative methods
for
calculating density of certain uses are
specified in the land development regulations.
Density bonuses and credits may be
considered in this category and are described
in the Plan. This maximum residential
density is provided only as a limit for
application in situations which represent an
ideal set of circumstances with regard to the
compatibility of the proposed development
with surrounding land uses, existing and/or
approved, and with regard to the adequacy
and availability of public facilities.

No minimum lot size is required to support
the concept of clustering and preservation of
open spaces left in a natural states left in a
natural state. See related policies regarding
clustering.
Residential, suburban scale neighborhood
commercial, office uses, and multi-
purpose projects. Non-residential uses
shall meet locational criteria for specific
land use.

Agricultural uses may be permitted
pursuant to policies in the agricultural
objective areas of the Future Land Use
Element.
suburban scale neighborhood commercial,
office, multi-purpose or mixed use projects
limited to 175,000 sq. ft. or .25 FAR,
whichever is less intense. Actual square
footage limit is dependent on classification
of roadway intersection where project is
located.

For properties that are located within 0.5
mile of a fixed-guideway transit station
(light rail, bus rapid transit, etc.), the
allowable densities/intensities and range of
uses may be subject
to
the Goals,
Objectives, and Policies related to Fixed-
Guideway Transit (See Objectives 54-57
and related policies). The location and type
of fixed-guideway transit stations can be
found
on
the MPO Long Range
Transportation
2035 Cost Affordable
Transit System Map. The Future Transit
Envelope can be found on the Future
Transit Envelope Map that is adopted as
part of the Future Land Use Map Series.

To designate areas that are suitable for low
density residential development.

In
addition, suburban scale neighborhood
commercial, office, multi-purpose and
mixed use projects serving the area may be
permitted subject to the Goals, Objectives,
and Policies of the Land Use Element and
applicable development regulations and
conforming
to
established
locational
criteria for specific land use.


BAKAS Equestrian Ctr
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Standards and Support Team,
wetlands_team@fws.gov
Wetlands
Estuarine and Marine Deepwater
Estuarine and Marine Wetland
Freshwater Emergent Wetland
Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland
Freshwater Pond
Lake
Other
Riverine
May 10, 2017
0
0.1
0.2
0.05
mi
0
0.15
0.3
0.075
km
1:6,248
This page was produced by the NWI mapper
National Wetlands Inventory (NWI)
This map is for general reference only. The US Fish and Wildlife
Service is not responsible for the accuracy or currentness of the
base data shown on this map. All wetlands related data should
be used in accordance with the layer metadata found on the
Wetlands Mapper web site.
May 10, 2017
11510 Whisper Lake Trail, Tampa, FL, 33626
Lat 28.080548
Long -82.609506
MAP DATA
Panel Date August 28, 2008
FIPS Code
12057
Map Number
12057C0180H
Census Tract 0115.06
Geocoding Accuracy
S5 (Most Accurate) - single close match, point located at the street address
position
© 2015 - STDB. All rights reserved
This Report is for the sole benefit of the Customer that ordered and paid for the Report and is based on the property information provided by that Customer. That Customer's use of this Report is
subject to the terms agreed to by that Customer when accessing this product. No third party is authorized to use or rely on this Report for any purpose. THE SELLER OF THIS REPORT MAKES NO
REPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTIES TO ANY PARTY CONCERNING THE CONTENT, ACCURACY OR COMPLETENESS OF THIS REPORT, INCLUDING ANY WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR
FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. The seller of this Report shall not have any liability to any third party for any use or misuse of this Report.
Demographic and Income Comparison Profile
11001 Whisper Lake Trl, Tampa, Florida, 33626
Prepared by Esri
Rings: 1, 3, 5 mile radii
Latitude: 28.07305
Longitude: -82.61638
1 mile
3 miles
5 miles
Census 2010 Summary
Population
5,218
42,196
135,122
Households
1,828
15,819
51,770
Families
1,320
11,436
36,292
Average Household Size
2.85
2.66
2.60
Owner Occupied Housing Units
1,170
11,411
36,632
Renter Occupied Housing Units
658
4,408
15,138
Median Age
34.6
37.5
38.5
2016 Summary
Population
5,592
46,335
144,874
Households
1,937
17,094
54,726
Families
1,388
12,266
38,052
Average Household Size
2.89
2.71
2.64
Owner Occupied Housing Units
1,115
11,529
36,060
Renter Occupied Housing Units
822
5,565
18,666
Median Age
35.5
38.9
39.8
Median Household Income
$110,346
$89,881
$62,766
Average Household Income
$126,508
$113,032
$88,808
2021 Summary
Population
6,250
50,276
155,355
Households
2,159
18,426
58,306
Families
1,536
13,167
40,371
Average Household Size
2.89
2.73
2.66
Owner Occupied Housing Units
1,220
12,287
38,042
Renter Occupied Housing Units
940
6,139
20,264
Median Age
35.7
39.0
39.9
Median Household Income
$110,476
$96,951
$71,881
Average Household Income
$132,084
$120,511
$96,621
Trends: 2016-2021 Annual Rate
Population
2.25%
1.65%
1.41%
Households
2.19%
1.51%
1.28%
Families
2.05%
1.43%
1.19%
Owner Households
1.82%
1.28%
1.08%
Median Household Income
0.02%
1.53%
2.75%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri forecasts for 2016 and 2021.
May 10, 2017
©2016 Esri
Page 1 of 7
Demographic and Income Comparison Profile
11001 Whisper Lake Trl, Tampa, Florida, 33626
Prepared by Esri
Rings: 1, 3, 5 mile radii
Latitude: 28.07305
Longitude: -82.61638
1 mile
3 miles
5 miles
2016 Households by Income
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
<$15,000
41
2.1%
860
5.0%
4,126
7.5%
$15,000 - $24,999
130
6.7%
1,079
6.3%
4,838
8.8%
$25,000 - $34,999
91
4.7%
1,030
6.0%
5,279
9.6%
$35,000 - $49,999
144
7.4%
1,384
8.1%
6,997
12.8%
$50,000 - $74,999
294
15.2%
2,570
15.0%
10,124
18.5%
$75,000 - $99,999
127
6.6%
2,457
14.4%
7,057
12.9%
$100,000 - $149,999
477
24.6%
3,813
22.3%
8,677
15.9%
$150,000 - $199,999
382
19.7%
1,943
11.4%
3,706
6.8%
$200,000+
251
13.0%
1,958
11.5%
3,920
7.2%
Median Household Income
$110,346
$89,881
$62,766
Average Household Income
$126,508
$113,032
$88,808
Per Capita Income
$45,675
$41,836
$33,601
2021 Households by Income
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
<$15,000
39
1.8%
841
4.6%
4,198
7.2%
$15,000 - $24,999
150
6.9%
1,228
6.7%
5,795
9.9%
$25,000 - $34,999
50
2.3%
659
3.6%
3,562
6.1%
$35,000 - $49,999
83
3.8%
903
4.9%
4,918
8.4%
$50,000 - $74,999
388
18.0%
2,912
15.8%
11,723
20.1%
$75,000 - $99,999
213
9.9%
2,948
16.0%
8,469
14.5%
$100,000 - $149,999
525
24.3%
4,498
24.4%
10,754
18.4%
$150,000 - $199,999
438
20.3%
2,330
12.6%
4,557
7.8%
$200,000+
274
12.7%
2,106
11.4%
4,325
7.4%
Median Household Income
$110,476
$96,951
$71,881
Average Household Income
$132,084
$120,511
$96,621
Per Capita Income
$47,472
$44,306
$36,304
Data Note: Income is expressed in current dollars.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri forecasts for 2016 and 2021.
May 10, 2017
©2016 Esri
Page 2 of 7
Demographic and Income Comparison Profile
11001 Whisper Lake Trl, Tampa, Florida, 33626
Prepared by Esri
Rings: 1, 3, 5 mile radii
Latitude: 28.07305
Longitude: -82.61638
1 mile
3 miles
5 miles
2010 Population by Age
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Age 0 - 4
467
8.9%
2,895
6.9%
8,069
6.0%
Age 5 - 9
577
11.1%
3,649
8.6%
9,363
6.9%
Age 10 - 14
428
8.2%
3,389
8.0%
9,758
7.2%
Age 15 - 19
277
5.3%
2,539
6.0%
9,068
6.7%
Age 20 - 24
199
3.8%
1,600
3.8%
7,175
5.3%
Age 25 - 34
695
13.3%
5,013
11.9%
16,874
12.5%
Age 35 - 44
1,262
24.2%
8,360
19.8%
22,003
16.3%
Age 45 - 54
749
14.3%
6,868
16.3%
22,505
16.7%
Age 55 - 64
326
6.2%
4,102
9.7%
15,647
11.6%
Age 65 - 74
170
3.3%
2,165
5.1%
8,392
6.2%
Age 75 - 84
50
1.0%
1,120
2.7%
4,586
3.4%
Age 85+
17
0.3%
498
1.2%
1,682
1.2%
2016 Population by Age
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Age 0 - 4
463
8.3%
2,882
6.2%
8,029
5.5%
Age 5 - 9
558
10.0%
3,385
7.3%
8,884
6.1%
Age 10 - 14
535
9.6%
3,846
8.3%
9,960
6.9%
Age 15 - 19
330
5.9%
3,067
6.6%
9,110
6.3%
Age 20 - 24
186
3.3%
2,248
4.9%
8,582
5.9%
Age 25 - 34
665
11.9%
5,199
11.2%
18,936
13.1%
Age 35 - 44
1,202
21.5%
7,380
15.9%
20,055
13.8%
Age 45 - 54
918
16.4%
8,064
17.4%
23,141
16.0%
Age 55 - 64
426
7.6%
5,219
11.3%
19,000
13.1%
Age 65 - 74
228
4.1%
3,044
6.6%
11,697
8.1%
Age 75 - 84
61
1.1%
1,334
2.9%
5,328
3.7%
Age 85+
19
0.3%
665
1.4%
2,153
1.5%
2021 Population by Age
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Age 0 - 4
512
8.2%
3,071
6.1%
8,538
5.5%
Age 5 - 9
615
9.8%
3,503
7.0%
9,107
5.9%
Age 10 - 14
546
8.7%
3,854
7.7%
10,096
6.5%
Age 15 - 19
402
6.4%
3,366
6.7%
9,433
6.1%
Age 20 - 24
185
3.0%
2,230
4.4%
8,185
5.3%
Age 25 - 34
758
12.1%
6,009
12.0%
21,399
13.8%
Age 35 - 44
1,358
21.7%
7,859
15.6%
21,624
13.9%
Age 45 - 54
978
15.6%
7,967
15.8%
21,995
14.2%
Age 55 - 64
522
8.4%
6,044
12.0%
20,989
13.5%
Age 65 - 74
273
4.4%
3,805
7.6%
14,634
9.4%
Age 75 - 84
78
1.2%
1,776
3.5%
6,811
4.4%
Age 85+
23
0.4%
791
1.6%
2,543
1.6%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri forecasts for 2016 and 2021.
May 10, 2017
©2016 Esri
Page 3 of 7
Demographic and Income Comparison Profile
11001 Whisper Lake Trl, Tampa, Florida, 33626
Prepared by Esri
Rings: 1, 3, 5 mile radii
Latitude: 28.07305
Longitude: -82.61638
1 mile
3 miles
5 miles
2010 Race and Ethnicity
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
White Alone
4,267
81.8%
34,626
82.1%
108,214
80.1%
Black Alone
242
4.6%
2,269
5.4%
9,620
7.1%
American Indian Alone
6
0.1%
89
0.2%
413
0.3%
Asian Alone
434
8.3%
2,929
6.9%
7,289
5.4%
Pacific Islander Alone
6
0.1%
25
0.1%
83
0.1%
Some Other Race Alone
107
2.1%
977
2.3%
5,074
3.8%
Two or More Races
156
3.0%
1,281
3.0%
4,429
3.3%
Hispanic Origin (Any Race)
689
13.2%
6,882
16.3%
36,565
27.1%
2016 Race and Ethnicity
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
White Alone
4,422
79.1%
36,868
79.6%
113,240
78.2%
Black Alone
275
4.9%
2,656
5.7%
10,639
7.3%
American Indian Alone
8
0.1%
110
0.2%
509
0.4%
Asian Alone
554
9.9%
3,817
8.2%
9,073
6.3%
Pacific Islander Alone
9
0.2%
38
0.1%
108
0.1%
Some Other Race Alone
128
2.3%
1,210
2.6%
5,928
4.1%
Two or More Races
196
3.5%
1,636
3.5%
5,377
3.7%
Hispanic Origin (Any Race)
871
15.6%
8,832
19.1%
43,955
30.3%
2021 Race and Ethnicity
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
White Alone
4,786
76.6%
38,871
77.3%
118,877
76.5%
Black Alone
325
5.2%
3,024
6.0%
11,713
7.5%
American Indian Alone
10
0.2%
137
0.3%
613
0.4%
Asian Alone
716
11.5%
4,800
9.5%
11,039
7.1%
Pacific Islander Alone
12
0.2%
46
0.1%
127
0.1%
Some Other Race Alone
157
2.5%
1,421
2.8%
6,700
4.3%
Two or More Races
245
3.9%
1,978
3.9%
6,286
4.0%
Hispanic Origin (Any Race)
1,124
18.0%
10,882
21.6%
51,765
33.3%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri forecasts for 2016 and 2021.
May 10, 2017
©2016 Esri
Page 4 of 7
Demographic and Income Comparison Profile
11001 Whisper Lake Trl, Tampa, Florida, 33626
Prepared by Esri
Rings: 1, 3, 5 mile radii
Latitude: 28.07305
Longitude: -82.61638
1 mile
Area
State
USA
Trends 2016-2021
Annual Rate (in percent)2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
Population
Households
Families
Owner HHs
Median HH Income
2016
2021
Population by Age
Percent20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
0-4
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-34
35-44
45-54
55-64
65-74
75-84
85+
2016 Household Income

< $15K
2.1%
$15K - $24K
6.7%
$25K - $34K
4.7%
$35K - $49K
7.4%
$50K - $74K
15.2%
$75K - $99K
6.6%
$100K - $149K
24.6%
$150K - $199K
19.7%
$200K+
13.0%
2016 Population by Race
Percent70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
White
Black Am.Ind. Asian
Pacific Other
Two+
Hisp
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri forecasts for 2016 and 2021.
May 10, 2017
©2016 Esri
Page 5 of 7
Demographic and Income Comparison Profile
11001 Whisper Lake Trl, Tampa, Florida, 33626
Prepared by Esri
Rings: 1, 3, 5 mile radii
Latitude: 28.07305
Longitude: -82.61638
3 miles
Area
State
USA
Trends 2016-2021
Annual Rate (in percent)2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
Population
Households
Families
Owner HHs
Median HH Income
2016
2021
Population by Age
Percent16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
0-4
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-34
35-44
45-54
55-64
65-74
75-84
85+
2016 Household Income

< $15K
5.0%
$15K - $24K
6.3%
$25K - $34K
6.0%
$35K - $49K
8.1%
$50K - $74K
15.0%
$75K - $99K
14.4%
$100K - $149K
22.3%
$150K - $199K
11.4%
$200K+
11.5%
2016 Population by Race
Percent70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
White
Black Am.Ind. Asian
Pacific Other
Two+
Hisp
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri forecasts for 2016 and 2021.
May 10, 2017
©2016 Esri
Page 6 of 7
Demographic and Income Comparison Profile
11001 Whisper Lake Trl, Tampa, Florida, 33626
Prepared by Esri
Rings: 1, 3, 5 mile radii
Latitude: 28.07305
Longitude: -82.61638
5 miles
Area
State
USA
Trends 2016-2021
Annual Rate (in percent)2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
Population
Households
Families
Owner HHs
Median HH Income
2016
2021
Population by Age
Percent16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
0-4
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-34
35-44
45-54
55-64
65-74
75-84
85+
2016 Household Income

< $15K
7.5%
$15K - $24K
8.8%
$25K - $34K
9.6%
$35K - $49K
12.8%
$50K - $74K
18.5%
$75K - $99K
12.9%
$100K - $149K
15.9%
$150K - $199K
6.8%
$200K+
7.2%
2016 Population by Race
Percent70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
White
Black Am.Ind. Asian
Pacific Other
Two+
Hisp
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri forecasts for 2016 and 2021.
May 10, 2017
©2016 Esri
Page 7 of 7

Kent Evans, MAI, CCIM

EXPERIENCE

Kenneth C. Evans, P.A. – Tampa, Florida


(2001 - Present) President - Real Estate Valuation & Consulting.


Emphasis: Eminent Domain Valuation, Ad Valorem Valuation/Consultation.

Omni Appraisal Group, P.A. – Tampa, Florida


(1991 to 2001) Real Estate Appraiser – Eminent Domain Valuation

DeLaVergne & Ellis, P.A. – Tampa, Florida


(1988 to 1991) Real Estate Appraiser – General Commercial/Residential Valuation

First Florida Bank, N.A. – Tampa, Florida


(1985 to 1988) Officer, Properties Management Dept. – Branch Bank Expansion/Development.

Practice emphasis: i) preparing appraisals for Eminent Domain purposes, ii) providing Special Magistrate
services, iii) advising clients regarding their real estate tax assessments (Ad Valorem), iv) foreclosure &
deficiency appraisal/expert witness testimony.

Fourth-generation Floridian. Geographical expertise is primarily the West Coast of Florida and Central
Florida.

Qualified and has testified as a Real Estate Expert Witness in Hillsborough, Pinellas, Pasco, Manatee,
Sarasota, Polk, Orange, Lee, DeSoto, and Citrus Counties.

Special Magistrate – Value Adjustment Board – Hillsborough County, 2002 - 2015; Pinellas County, 2003-
2005, 2013; Pasco County, 2010-2015.

List of recent Eminent Domain Right-of-Way projects (last 5 years):


Ridge Road, New Port Richey

Pasco County


2010-2011

Perrine Ranch Road


Pasco County


2010

22nd Street, Tampa



City of Tampa

2011

Dr. MLK, Jr. Blvd. & Williams Rd.

Hillsborough Co.

2011

Pine Island Road (SR 78)


FDOT, District 1

2011

I-4/I-275 Interchange (SR 400)

FDOT, District 7

2011

US Hwy 17, Arcadia


FDOT, District 1

2012-2013

US Hwy 19, Homosassa


FDOT, District 7

2012-2013

Dr. MLK, Jr. Blvd, Seffner


FDOT, District 7

2012-2014

SR 686 (Roosevelt Blvd)


FDOT District 7

2012-2014

SR 93 (I-75), Fee Review


FDOT District 7

2013

Interlaken Rd, Odessa


Pasco County


2013-2014

US Hwy 301 (SR 43), Parrish

FDOT District 1

2013-2014

North Powerline Sewer FM


Pasco County


2014

Clinton Avenue, Dade City


Pasco County


2014-2015

Hicks Rd & Hudson Av, Hudson

Pasco County


2015

US Hwy 41, Sarasota


FDOT District 1

2015

Suncoast Parkway, Phase II


FL Turnpike Enterprise
2015



Property Types appraised include: Single & Multi-family Residential, General Commercial, Professional
and Medical Offices, Retail Shopping Centers, Light and Heavy Industrial/ Distribution, Restaurants,
Residential Subdivisions, Mobile Home Parks, Gas Stations, ODA Billboard Signs, Convenience Stores,
Institutional, Agricultural, Contaminated, and Environmentally Sensitive properties.

EDUCATION

Academic


University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL



College of Commerce & Business Administration



B.S. Degree - Accounting Major (Grad. 1984)


University of Tampa, Post-graduate MBA program



College of Business Administration


Jesuit High School, Tampa, Florida (Grad. 1978)


Professional

Appraisal Institute, Chicago, IL


Course 110 - Appraisal Principles (1988)



Course 120 - Appraisal Procedures (1989)


Course 310 - Basic Income Capitalization (1990)


Course 320 - General Applications (1996)


Course 400 - National USPAP Update & Florida State Law Update (1992 – 2014)


Course 410 - Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice, Parts A and B (1989 – 2014)


Course 510 - Advanced Income Capitalization (1992)


Course 540 - Report Writing and Valuation Analysis (1993)


Course 550 - Advanced Applications (1998)


Course 700 - The Appraiser as an Expert Witness: Preparation & Testimony (2002)


Course 705 - Litigation Valuation (2002)


Course 720 - Advanced Condemnation Appraising (2000)


Course - Business Practices & Ethics (2005)


Seminar - Litigation Valuation




Seminar - The Appraiser’s Legal Liabilities


Seminar - The Comprehensive Appraisal Workshop



Seminar - Appraisal Consulting


Seminar - Mark-to-Market: Valuation for Financial Reporting (2003)


Seminar - Inverse Condemnation (2006)


Seminar - Uniform Appraisal Standards for Federal Land Acquisitions (2008)


Seminar – Property Tax Assessments (2009)


Webinar – Understanding Interagency Appraisal & Evaluation Guidelines (2011)


Webinar – Excel as an Appraisal Professional (2013)


Webinar – Property Taxation: Valuation and Consultation Services (2013)


Webinar – USPAP 2014-15 and the New Reporting Options (2014)


CCIM Institute, Chicago, IL



Course 101 - Financial Analysis for Commercial Real Estate (2004)



Course 102 - Market Analysis for Commercial Investment in Real Estate (2005)



Course 103 - User Decision Analysis for Commercial Real Estate (2006)



Course 104 - Investment Analysis for Commercial Investment Real Estate (2004)



CCR - Core Concepts Review (2006)


Florida Department of Transportation, Tallahassee, FL



Course – Advanced Appraisal Review (2008, 2010)



Course – USPAP & Florida Law Update (2008, 2010, 2012)



Course – Supervisor & Trainee Appraiser (2008, 2010)



Course – Common Error & Issues in Appraising (2012)



Course – Appraisal Project Management (2012)


PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS, LICENSES, & ORGANIZATIONS

Appraisal Institute (MAI Designated - No. 11642, Oct-2000)

CCIM Institute (CCIM Designated - No. 13211, Oct-2006)
Florida State-certified General R.E. Appraiser, RZ-1596

Member – National Association of Realtors

Member – Association of Eminent Domain Professionals

Member/Director – Economic Club of Tampa
1 OF 5 












ATTACHMENT B


DEVELOPMENT FOR BAKAS EQUESTRIAN FACILITY EXCHANGE AND
REPLACEMENTS
SUMMARY OF COUNTY’S MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS




B1: AERIAL OF PROPOSED NW EQUESTRIAN SITE


B2: AERIAL OF PROPOSED SYDNEY DOVER SITE


























2 OF 5 
October 13, 2017
ATTACHMENT B
DEVELOPMENT FOR BAKAS EQUESTRIAN FACILITY REPLACEMENTS
SUMMARY OF COUNTY’S MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS

The following is an initial listing of the minimum requirements and improvements at each designated location. This is not
intended to be a detailed listing of all requirements, but to summarize the minimum required standards, improvements and
contract terms.

1.0
SUMMARY OF REQUIREMENTS

1.1
Generally the Work will include two turnkey public use facilities (including all site work and off-site improvements)
at two separate County-owned properties (Northwest Equestrian Park and Sydney Dover Trails Park). The properties
are located within unincorporated Hillsborough County and are therefore subject to the County’s development
regulations including zoning (See Attached Aerials). The facilities will be used for Horses for the Handicapped
Programs for the public operated by the Hillsborough County Conservation & Environmental Land Management
Department (CELM).

1.2
The Proposer shall incur all costs and expenses for the design, permitting and construction of both equestrian
facilities. Construction of the new facilities will be contracted for and supervised by the proposer. Any cost overruns
will be paid for solely by the proposer. Receipts will be provided to the County as documentation for all project
expenditures. The County shall not incur any expense or financial obligation.

1.3
The two new replacement facilities (collectively referred to as the “Project”) must be of high quality and low
maintenance and must meet or exceed the improvements at the existing Bakas Equestrian Facility located at 11510
Whisper Lake Trail, Tampa Florida 33626. Additionally, the design and construction of the improvements for the
two new facilities shall meet the requirements of all current governing local, state and federal regulations, codes and
ordinances, including but not limited to the Hillsborough County Land Development Code, Florida Building Code,
Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD) requirements, Florida Accessibility Code for Building
Construction and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the requirements of Hillsborough County Public
Works Department & Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). Design and construction of the Project shall
be in conformance with the requirements of the County, in conformance with sound architectural and engineering
practices and shall be in conformance with the applicable federal, state and local laws, regulations and building
codes.

1.4
The Project shall be generally located in the area shown on the attached aerial maps. The exact description of the
Project property shall be mutually agreed upon by the parties during the design process. The property shall include
sufficient usable upland acreage to accommodate the facility of size and design acceptable to the County.

1.5
The Work must include all design, engineering, permitting and construction of the improvements and shall be
performed by qualified licensed professionals and contractors.

1.6
The Proposer shall retain qualified professional(s) to provide architectural and engineering services for the design,
permitting and construction administration of the Project. Services shall include surveying, geotechnical, civil,
landscaping, architectural, mechanical, electrical and plumbing services.

1.7
The Proposer shall retain a qualified licensed contractor to construct the Project in accordance with the final
Construction Documents.

1.8
Design professionals and contractors must be properly insured to meet the requirements of Florida Statute as well
as requirements of County’s Risk Management Section. Professionals must be covered by Professional Liability
Insurance. The County shall be named as an additional insured on all liability policies.

1.9
The Project construction work will require Performance and Payment Bonds, pursuant to Florida Statute.

1.10
All design and construction work shall be subject to review, inspection and acceptance by the County. Input from
citizens will be part of the design process.

1.11
Upon approval of the contract by the Board, the Proposer shall commence with design and engineering. Proposer
shall provide progress design documents for review and acceptance by County and citizens. The final construction
3 OF 5 
documents shall consist of all necessary drawings and specifications (Civil, Landscape, Irrigation, Structural,
Architectural, Mechanical, Electrical and Plumbing). Specifications shall incorporate general and special extended
warranties and guarantees.

1.13
County shall issue Notice to Proceed with Construction after County receives, reviews and accepts the final
construction documents. Proposer shall commence with construction only after receiving Notice to Proceed with
Construction.  
 

1.14
Construction of the Project shall be in accordance with the final Construction Documents. The Project must be
functionally sound, maintain its structural integrity, exhibit good architectural principles and be built in compliance
with all applicable laws, regulations and building codes.

1.15
The County may inspect the construction work from time to time during construction to verify that the work is
progressing in accordance with the final Construction Documents. The County shall provide written notice to the
Proposer of any non-compliance and the Proposer shall cause the contractor to rectify any such non-compliance in
accordance with good construction administration practices. However, an inspection by the County shall not waive
compliance with the permitted construction documents.

1.16
Proposer shall provide the County notice of inspection for Substantial Completion. The County shall participate in
Substantial Completion inspection(s). Substantial Completion shall be subject to acceptance by the County.
1.17
Proposer shall provide the County notice of inspection for Final Completion. The County shall participate in Final
Completion inspection(s). Final Completion shall be subject to acceptance by the County. Prior to Final Completion,
the Proposer shall provide to the County the close-out documents such as warranties, guarantees, including extended
warranties, certified as-built construction documents, approved shop drawings and list of subcontractors.
1.18
The Proposer shall require its contractor to warrant and guarantee for a period of one (1) year following final
completion of the Project that all materials and equipment shall be new, and that all work will be of good quality,
free from faults and defects and in accordance with the Final Construction Documents reviewed and accepted by the
County. In addition, extended warranties shall be provided for certain systems and equipment as listed in the Final
Construction Documents. The Proposer shall assign to the County all rights and remedies under the terms of its
existing contracts for the Project to enforce all warranties and guarantees to the County.
1.19
The Proposer shall assign to the County all rights and remedies existent under the terms of its contracts for the
Project for work that is deemed to be faulty, unsatisfactory or nonconforming to the requirements of the Final
Construction documents.
1.20
The Proposer shall include the County as third party beneficiary in all contracts and warranties between the Proposer
and any third party or parties relating to the Project. The County may initiate claims under such contracts and
warranties (including claims for latent defects) in its own name or in the name of the Proposer. In connection
therewith the Proposer shall reasonably cooperate, aid and assist the County in the prosecution of any such contract
or warranty claim.
1.21
To the extent provided by law, the Proposer shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the County and its officers,
agents and employees from any and all claims, losses, damages, charges or expenses arising out of any act, action,
neglect or omission of the Proposer or any of its agents, consultants or contractors in the design and construction of
the Project.
1.22
All documents, including but not limited to, design drawings, construction documents, permits, specifications,
reports, technical data, inspection reports, tests, field books, etc., obtained by the Proposer for the Project shall be
provided to the County at the County’s request. All design documents, including final Construction Documents
shall become the property of the County. In the event that the County makes use of said documents on a project or
projects not covered under this Agreement, such shall be at the sole discretion, liability and risk of County.
1.23
Upon completion of construction of both equestrian facilities, the proposer will provide the County with a minimum
endowment of $50,000 annually for the operation of each facility for the next five years, for a total of $500,000. The
current operating expenses for the Bakas Equestrian Center is approximately $600,000 per year.


4 OF 5 
1.24
The existing Bakas Equestrian Center and land will be exchanged for the two new equestrian facilities and transfer
of ownership will take place after both facilities are built, operational and accepted by the County. This property has
an appraised value of $1,400,000.

2.0
IMPROVEMENTS

In general, the improvements at each site shall include at a minimum:

2.1.
SITEWORK (Off-Site and On-Site):


a)
Roadway and traffic improvements, access driveways, intersection improvements and turn lanes, off site

and on-site sidewalks.

b)
Concrete-paved entry road tied into a concrete-paved parking lot with at least 14 handicapped spaces

including 7 for one-sided van entry and an additional 20 standard regular parking spaces.

c)
Storm water drainage system.

d)
All utilities (including connection charges) such as potable water, fire line, wastewater, electrical service

and distribution.

e)
Code required landscaping and irrigation.

f)
Site lighting, including lighting of parking lot.

2.2
BUILDINGS/STRUCTURES/AMENITIES:

1.
Barn/Stable building that at a minimum contains 7,600 square feet and includes:

a)
Fifteen (15) horse stalls (measuring 12’ × 12’ each), with ceiling fans and outside windows with latching
shutters. Water faucets between every other stall; traditional sliding latch handles on stall doors.

b)
One tack room.

c)
One insulated feed storage room.

d)
One cart storage room with clothes washer and dryer (250 square feet or greater).

e)
One “barn office” (150 square feet or greater).

f)
Enclosed attic space for storage with ceilings above items b, c, d, and e.

g)
Ceiling fans providing adequate coverage for all areas.

h)
Horse wash down station in barn with cross ties to 6’ x 6’ posts.

2.
An attached Office/Conference building that at a minimum contains 2,500 square feet of heated/air conditioned
space that includes:

a)
One reception area (approximately 250 square feet or more).

b)
One kitchen/break area (approximately 160 square feet or more) with full-sized appliances.

c)
Two (2) private offices (approximately 250 square feet each or more).

d)
One conference room (approximately 600 square feet each or more).

e)
Code compliant enclosed restrooms/shower facilities (handicap accessible).

3.
Open-air covered picnic and viewing area of at least 900 square feet with accompanying ceiling fans.

4.
A lighted metal canopied Riding Arena with footing that at a minimum has:


a)
Clear center span of 60’ x 120’ or greater, center height of 26 feet or greater and eave height of 18 feet

or greater. An attached handicap accessible canopied grandstand that seats at least eighty.


*Note:

1) the County desires the option for a larger sized canopied Riding Arena with a clear center span of 100’ x
200’. Proposals for this option should include construction, design and materials for this larger canopied
Riding Arena, for review by the County and presentation to the public. This larger sized Arena is envisioned
as a permanent metal frame structure with weather-tight cover options including metal or fabric, meeting all
necessary code requirements. Additionally, the proposal shall include the 20-year life-cycle costs of this design
option.


5 OF 5 


2) The base proposal must include the smaller (60’ X 120’) arena.
a)
Hydraulic lift capable of accommodating riders of all sizes.
b)
Public address system.
c)
Ceiling fans providing coverage for entire arena.

5.
Pest Control system around perimeter of #’s 1, 2, 3, and 4 above.

6.
Detached Maintenance Building with bathroom and 1,350 square feet or greater storage room with covered entry
area and 2,000 square feet or greater of canopied dry storage area. Include 10’ x 30’ storage shed near maintenance
building.

7.
Two Horse Paddocks with horse shelters of at least 1,000 square feet each with at least two acres of improved pasture
each. Include electrified paddock fencing. Include 20’ x 20’ covered outdoor horse wash down station.

8.
All buildings to have Fire Sprinkler systems equal or greater than the existing Bakas Equestrian Facility.

9.
All buildings to have standing-seam metal roofs.

10.
Provide new equestrian facility signage on County properties near entry roads and facing adjacent off-site

roadways with clear visibility.

11.
Where feasible, move existing Bakas facility statues, monuments, or other signage to the new equestrian

facilities at the direction of the County.

2.3
EQUIPMENT:

1.
Provide all furniture, fixtures and equipment (FF&E) for both locations. Existing FF&E from the Bakas Center can
be re-located to one of the centers, if salvageable. If not salvageable, provide new to match existing.

2.
Proposer will pay for all moving costs from current facility to the new facilities.


END OF DOCUMENT
PAGE 1 OF 1


ATTACHMENT C

DEVELOPMENT FOR BAKAS EQUESTRIAN FACILITY
EXCHANGE AND REPLACEMENT(S)


COUNTY’S PROPOSED SCHEDULE SUMMARY



TASK
ESTIMATED DATES


Proposal Opening Date ................................................................................................................................................. 11/17/17

Public Meeting to Present Proposals (Tentative) .......................................................................................................... 11/28/17

Review Team’s Review of Proposals ........................................................................................................................... 12/08/17

Proposer Selection by BOCC ....................................................................................................................................... 01/04/18

Contract Approval by BOCC ............................................................................................................................................... TBD












E 1-1

EXHIBIT 1

PROPOSER CERTIFICATION AND WARRANTY


1. Legal Name of Proposer. (Indicate if the Proposer is a Corporation, Joint Venture, Partnership, etc.)

















2. Name/title of contact person for the Proposer:









3. Local business and mailing address:

























4. Primary business and mailing address:

























5. Telephone number: ( ) FAX:(
)



6. Federal Employer Identification Number (FEIN) :








7. The business has been in operation under its present name since:







The above-named Proposer does hereby warrant and certify under oath:

A.
That the Proposer understands all requirements of the RFP and states that as a serious Proposer it will comply
with all the stipulations included in the RFP package.

B.
That the Proposer is of lawful age and that no other person, firm or corporation has any interest in this
Proposal or in the contract proposed to be entered into except as expressly stated below:

C.
That this proposal is made without any understanding, agreement, or connection with any other person, firm or
corporation making a proposal for the same purpose, and is in all respects fair and without collusion or fraud
except as expressly stated below:

D.
That the Proposer is not in arrears to Hillsborough County upon debt or contract and is not a defaulter, as
surety or otherwise, upon any obligation to Hillsborough County except as expressly stated below:

E.
That no officer or employee or person whose salary is payable in whole or in part from the County Treasury
is, shall be or become interested, directly or indirectly, surety or otherwise in this Proposal; in the performance
of this Contract; in the supplies, materials, equipment, and work or labor to which they relate; or in any
portion of the profits thereof.

F.
That the Proposer acknowledges, understands and agrees that the RFP does not reflect all of the design,
permitting, regulatory and construction requirements for the Project and that these documents are sufficient in
all respects for purposes of the Proposer's preparation and submittal of its Proposal.

G.
That Proposer has no interest and shall acquire no interest, either direct or indirect, which would conflict in
any manner with the performance of services to be required hereunder. The Proposer further certifies and
agrees that no person having any such interest shall be employed or engaged by the Proposer for said
performance not has or will any member of the team, person or employee be involved, engaged or employed
on a contingent fee basis.

H.
That the Proposer has received and carefully examined all Addenda issued prior to Opening.
E 1-2

I.
That the Proposer is fully informed respecting the preparation and contents of the attached Proposal and of all
pertinent circumstances respecting such Proposal.

J.
That neither the Proposer nor any of its officers, partners, owners, agents, representatives, employees or
parties in interest, including this affiant, has in any way colluded, conspired, connived or agreed directly or
indirectly with any other Proposer, firm or person to submit a collusive or sham Proposal in connection with
this RFP for which the attached Proposal has been submitted or to refrain from proposing in connection with
such RFP, or has in any manner, directly or indirectly, sought by agreement or collusion or communication or
conference with any other Proposer, firm or person to fix the price or prices in the attached Proposal or of any
other Proposer, or to fix any overhead, profit or cost element of the Proposal price or the Proposal price of any
other Proposer, or to secure through any collusion, conspiracy, connivance or unlawful agreement any
advantage against the Board of County Commissioners or any person interested in the RFP; and

K.
The price or prices provided in the attached Proposal are fair and proper and are not tainted by any collusion,
conspiracy, connivance or unlawful agreement on the part of the Proposer or any of its agents, representatives,
owners, employees or parties of interest, including affiant.

L.
All statements made by the Proposer in the proposal are true and accurate as of the Proposal submittal date.

Proposer hereby acknowledges the above certifications and attests to the accuracy of affirmation and assertions
contained therein.


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Proposal is hereby signed and sealed as of the date indicated.


ATTEST: PROPOSER:


__________________________________ BY:________________________________ (SEAL)
Witness (Authorized signature in ink)


__________________________________ ________________________________
Witness (Printed name of signer)


_________________________________
(Printed Title of signer)


CORPORATE SEAL _______________________________
(Where appropriate) (Date signed)











E 1-3
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF PROPOSER, IF A CORPORATION

STATE OF _____________________)



SS
COUNTY OF _____________________)

The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ___________ day of___________, 2017 by
___________________________________________, who is personally known to me or who has produced
_________________________________ as identification and who did take an oath and who executed the foregoing
instrument as ___________________________ of _______________________________________________, a
______________ corporation, and who severally and duly acknowledged the execution of such instrument as such
officer aforesaid, for and on behalf of and as the act and deed of said corporation, pursuant to the powers conferred
upon said officer by the corporation's Board of Directors or other appropriate authority of said corporation, and
who, having knowledge of the several matters stated in said foregoing instrument, certified the same to be true in all
respects.

He/She is personally known to me or has produced as identification.


WITNESS my hand and official seal the date aforesaid.

(Signature of the Person taking Acknowledgement)

(Name of Acknowledger Typed, Printed or Stamped)

(Title or Rank)

(Serial Number, if any)

==============================================================================


ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF PROPOSER, IF A PARTNERSHIP OR INDIVIDUAL

STATE OF _____________________)



SS
COUNTY OF _____________________)

The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ________day of ______________, 2017, by
________________________________, who
is
personally
known
to me or who has
produced
_______________________________ as identification and who did take an oath and who executed the foregoing
instrument as a member of the firm of _______________________________________________ (if applicable) and
acknowledged the execution of same, for and on behalf of and as the act and deed of said firm, for the uses and
purposes therein expressed.

He/She is personally known to me or has produced as identification.


WITNESS my hand and official seal the date aforesaid.

(Signature of the Person taking Acknowledgement)

(Name of Acknowledger Typed, Printed or Stamped)

(Title or Rank)

(Serial Number, if any)