Loading...
LTC 398-2018 Appraisal of 500, 600, 700 Alton Road Development PMIAMI BEACH City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www.m.iamibeachfl.gov Jimmy L. Morales, City Manager Te l: 305-673-7010 , Fax: 305-673-7782 NO. LTC # 398-2018 TO: Mayor Dan Gelber and Members FROM: Jimmy L. Morales, City Manag "l'-~---- DATE: July 18 , 2018 LETTER TO COMMISSION SUBJECT: APPRAISAL OF 500, 600, 700 A TON ROAD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT The purpose of this Letter to Commission is to provide information to the Mayor and City Commission of a recent appraisal conducted on 500, 600 and 700 Alton Road , as part of the evaluation of a proposed development project. In ongoing efforts to explore possible opportunities to improve the City of Miami Beach from an aesthetic, functional and quality of life perspective, the undeveloped parcels at the eastern end of the MacArthur Causeway were identified as a significant opportunity for improvement. During the past several months there has been much engagement with the Community and the Developer to see what would be the best use of the properties. In furtherance of those efforts , we are providing a copy of the appra isal of the properties for better understanding of the proposed development project and market value within the surrounding neighborhood . Should you have any questions, please contact myself or Eric Carpenter at 305-673-7080 . JLM/€l2/FS APPRAISAL REPORT OF SEVERAL REDEVELOPMENT SITES LOCATED AT THE 500 AND 600 BLOCKS OF ALTON ROAD AND 600 AND 700 BLOCKS OF WEST A VENUE MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA DATE OF VALUATION: JUNE 27, 2018 J. ALHALE APPRAISALS, INC. Real Estate Appraisers and Consultants --------------.. ------------- J. ALHALE APPRAISALS, INC. REAL ESTATE APPRAISERS AND CONSULTANTS 3475 SHERIDAN STREET, SUITE 313 HOLLYWOOD, FLORIDA 33021 JOZEF ALHALE, MAI STATE CERTIFIED GENERAL APPRAISER NO. RZ0001557 July 16 , 2018 Mr. Eric T. Carpenter, P.E. Assistant City Manager City of Miami Beach 1700 Convention Center Drive Miami Beach, Florida 33139 CELL: (305) 613-7477 E-MAIL: jbalhale@aol.com WWW.jalhaleappraisals.com Re: Site I ("500 Site") 500 Alton Road &1220 6'" Street, Miami Beach, Florida Site 2 ("600 Site"): 630-650 Alton Road & 601-651 West Av enue, Miami Beach, Florida Site 3 ("700 Site"): 659-737 West Avenue, Miami Beach, Florida Site 4 ("Retail Site"): 600-650 Alton Road, Miami Beach, Florida Site 5 "(Park Site"): 601-737 West Avenue, Miami Beach, Florida Dear Mr. Carpenter: Pursuant to your request for an appraisal of the above referenced properties, I submit the following appraisal report. Legal Description: Site One-Lots I through 8, and Lots 13 through 19 , less street for road, and alley lying between and adjacent thereof closed per Resolution 2005-25869, and Lots 9 and 10 , and the easterly Y, of the alley lying west and adjacent, closed as per Resolution 2013-28343 ; and Lots 11 and 12, and western Y, of the alley lying east and adjacent, closed as per Resolution 2013-28343 , Amended Aquarium Site, as recorded in Plat Book 21 , Page 83 of the Public Records of Miami-Dade County, Florida Site Two -Lots I through 4 , less street, and Lots 5 through 7, and Lots 23 through 32 , Block 2 , and property interest in and to common elements not dedicated to the public , Fleetwood Subdivision, as recorded in Plat Book 28 , Page 34 of the Public Records of Miami-Dade County, Florida Site Three -Lots 8 through 14 , less the western IO feet for right of way , Block 2 , and property interest in and to common elements not dedicated to the public, Fleetwood Subdiv ision, as recorded in Plat Book 28 , Page 34 of the Public Records of Miami-Dade County, Florida Note: Sites Four and Five are portion s of Site Two and Three, as legally described herein Mr. E ric T Carpenter, P.E. July 16 ,2018 Page Two I have made a physical inspection of the subject sites , and performed market research to provide estimates of the Highest and Best Use, Market Value of the Fee Simple Interest in Properties One, Two and Four in "as is " condition (land value , less estimated cost of demolition and carting), as of June 27 , 2018 Market Value of the Fee Simple Interest in Properties One through Five, as vacant (land value), as of June 27, 2018. It is my estimate that the Market Value of the Fee Simple Interest in Properties One, Two and Four in "as is " condition (land value, less estimated cost of demolition and carting), as of June 27, 2018 Market Value of the Fee Simple Interest in Properties One through Five, as vacant (land value), as of June 27 , 2018 , was: MARKET VALUE OF THE FEE SIMPLE INTEREST JN SITE I ("500 SITE"), "AS IF " VACANT FIFTY ONE MILLION TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($51 ,200 ,000) MARKET VALUE OF THE FEE SIMPLE INTEREST JN SITE 1 ("500 SITE") IN "AS IS " CONDITION (LAND VALUE, LESS DEMOLITION COST) FIFTY ONE MILLION ONE HUNDRED SEVENTY THOUSAND DOLLARS ($51 ,170 ,000) MARKET VALUE OF THE FEE SIMPL E INTEREST IN SITE 2 ("600 SITE"), "AS IF" VACANT SEVENTY NINE MILLION EIGHT HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($79 ,800 ,000) MARKET VALUE OF THE FEE SIMPLE INTEREST IN SITE 2 ("600 SITE") IN "AS IS" CONDITION (LAND VALUE, LESS DEMOLITION COST) SEVENTY NTNE MILLION FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($79,500 ,000) MARKET VALUE OF Tl-IE FEE SIMPLE INTEREST IN SITE 3 ("700 SITE" IN "AS IS " CONDITION (LAND VALUE) TWENTY FOUR MILLION FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($24,500 ,000) MARKET VALUE OF THE FEE SIMPLE INTEREST IN SlTE4 ("RETAIL SITE"), "AS IF " VACANT FIFTY MILLION THREE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($50 ,300 ,000) Mr. Eric T. Carpenter, P.E . July 16 , 2018 Page Three MARKET VALUE OF THEFEE SIMPLE INTEREST IN SJTE4 ("RETAIL SITE") IN "AS IS " CONDITION (LAND VALUE, LESS DEMOLITION COST) FIFTY MILLION DOLLARS ($50,000 ,000) MARKET VALUE OF THE FEE SIMPLE INTEREST Sincerel y, IN SITE 5 ("PARK SITE") IN "AS IS" CONDITION (LAND VALUE) FIFTY TWO MILLION FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($52 ,500 ,000) "'= ";:;/ Y-··---- Jozef Alhale, MAI State Certified General Appraiser License No. RZ 0001557 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE NO. SUMMARY OF SALIENT FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS .. PHOTOGRAPHS OF SITE ONE ("500 SITE") .... . PHOTOGRAPHS OF SITE TWO ("600 SITE") ... . PHOTOGRAPHS OF SITE THREE ("700 SITE") .. . PURPOSE/FUNCTION OF THE APPRAISAL. ....... . SCOPE OF THE APPRAISAL .. . . . . . . . . . . . ....................... . PROPERTY RIGHTS APPRAISED ............................. . DA TE OF VALUATION AND REPORT ..... . STATEMENT OF OWNERSHIP AND HISTORY ...... . ESTTMA TED MARKETING AND EXPOSURE PERIOD .. DEFINITTON OF MARKET VALUE ............ . NEIGHBORHOOD ANALYSIS ............ . ACCESS TO THE SITES .............. . DESCRIPTION OF THE SITES ..................................... . UTILITTES........... . .........................•..... FLOOD ZONE.. .. .. . . . . . . . . . .. . ........................... . ZONING............ . . . . . . . . . ....... . ASSESSMENT AND REAL ESTA TE TAXES ....................... . MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL MARKET OVERVIEW ............... . HIGHEST AND BEST USE DEFINITTON. HIGHEST AND BEST USE, AS VACANT ... . THE V ALVA TION PROCESS .................... . THE SALES COMPARISON APPROACH TO VALUE ..... RECONCILIATION AND FINAL VALUE ESTIMATE .. CONTINGENT AND LIMITING CONDITIONS .. . CERTLFICA TION ............................. . ADDENDA ......................................... . COMPARABLE/COMPETITIVE RETAIL RENTAL RATES ...... . COMPARABLE/COMPETITTVE RETAIL SALES ................. . COMPARABLE/COMPETITIVE CONDO RENTAL RATES ...... . COMPARABLE/COMPETITIVE CONDO LISTINGS AND SALES. PROPOSED CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT SCENARIO ........ . ESTIMATED CONDOMINIUM UNIT PRICING SCHEDULE ............ . GROSS SELL OUT OF CONDOMINIUMS WITH A SIMULTANEOUS RENTAL USE (OLD DEVELOPMENT SCENARIO) ................. . GROSS SELL OUT OF CONDOMINIUMS WITH A STMULT ANEOUS RENTAL USE (NEW POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SCENARIO). ESTIMATED PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT COST. ... . QUALIFICATIONS (Jozef Alhale, MAJ) ............... . J. ALHALE APPRAISALS, INC. Real Estate Appraisers and Consultants 1-7 8 9 10 II II 11 11 12 12 13 13-14 14 14-15 15 16 16 16 17-21 22 23-26 27 28-44 45-46 47-48 49-50 51 52-54 55 56 57-68 69 70 71 72 73 74 ARQU/TECTON/CA §1:£ I ;::'o':.":;:::::;oo ~ .. ---.. .... R,__, __ ,.,,,_ .......... ,_,,_~_,_,,,._..._,.,,-...,_, ...... .,_--......_ .. ..,,..,. .. , .... , ..... ...__.R, ....... , ..... .,,., .. ,,. ....... ""_,,, ... .,... .... _,, .. .,.""""'"""'""""'"'-·"'-'---'-<0-R• __ ,,....,..,,._. ___ .. R<-"U<_O, ..... --~ .. .,,_,., __ ,,-..., ...... ,..,._,, .. ,. .......... . ------------------------------~ 500-600-700 Al TON MIAMI BEACH. FL SITE LOCATION 06/15120 18 ( 11 I ARGUITECTONICA §'£::~"f I ;::;:,~:::,oo ~ .. -.-.. ..... , .... ..._, __ ,.,......,,,,_ ______ ,_,,, __ __,.,..,_, ..... ,--... .. .. __ ..... , ....... -..... -... ........ ,_,,, .. ___ ,,,._ .... _. .. ...._.,_.,_,.,_ ... __ __ "'_ .. ,.,,_,,.....,., .. ____ .................... --.. ,.,,_,,, ___ ,""'~'-""''"'-······ 500-600-700 Al TO N MIAMI BEACH, FL j $ GROUND FLOOR 06/15/2018 QC--J I I ~ Vd ;;;;;;;;:;;;;;;;:;:wn""'"" ;---------~],~ " .. __JO I Jil -Jt _j_Ji 8 I I • I ~ . ( 11 I ARQU/TECTON/CA ~;f§' I ;::;o:.~:;:,oo "''°'..__.,,., ..... ,._, __ ,..,_"'-..""_,_ .. _, __ , __ ,,,.....,..,_ __ ., __ , ..... , ..... ...__ .. , .. _ ......... ,_, ... .,,,. ..... ,,, .. ,_ .. ,._,,,.,,..__,., ............. .,, ....... __ .. ,_ ... _ .. , ... -............. ---· ..... -..-...... --.... -.•. ---·-···-.... --······ 500-600-700 Al TO N MIAMI BEACH. Fl ~ +-- $ LEVEL 02 • 04 (500 Al TON ONLY) 06J1512018 SUMMARY OF SALIENT FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS Location: Address: Site One ("500 Site") -85,348 SF site which is the city block bound by 5'h Street on the south, 6"' Street on the north, Alton Road on the east and West Avenue on the west, Miami Beach, Florida Site Two ("600 Site") -138,842 SF site which is located on th e north side of6"' Street, extending from Alton Road on the east to West Avenue on the west, Mi am i Beach, Florida Site Three ("700 Site") -49,000 SF si te which is located along the east side of West Avenue, approximately 360 feet north of the northeast comerof6'h Street and approximately 136.50 feet south of the southeast comer of8'" Street, Miami Beach, Florida Site Four ("Retail Site")-The 87,412 SF eastern portion of the 138,8 42 SF site ("600 Site") which is located at the northwest corner of 6" Street and Alton Road, Miami Beach, Florida Site Five ("Park Site")-The 100,430 SF site is comprised of the 49,000 SF "700 Site" and the 51,430 SF southwestern portion of the 138,842 SF site ("600 Site"), and is located at the northeast comer of 6" Street and Alton Road, Miami Beach, Florida Site l ("500 Site") 500 Alton Road & 1220 6" Street Mi ami Beach, Florida Site 2 ("600 Site") 630-650 Alton Road & 601-651 West Avenue Miami Beach, Florida Site 3 ("700 Site") 659-737 West Avenue Miami Beach, Florida Site 4 ("Retail Site") 600-650 Alton Road Miami Beach, Florida Site 5 "(Park Site") 601-737 West Avenue Miami Beach, Florida .J. ALHALE APPRAISALS, INC. Real Estate A1>prnisers and Consult ants -1- SUMMARY OF SALIENT FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS Census Tract/B lock: Folio No: Owner of Record: 44.060 I 1 Site One 02-4204-006-0010 an d 02-4204-006-0070 Site Two 02-4203-001 -0 I 00 and 02-4203-001 -0280 Si te Three 02-4203-001-01 61; 02-4203-001-0170; 02-4203 -001 -0180; 02-4203-001-0190; 02-4203-001-0200; 02-4203-001 -020 I ; 02-4203-001-0210; 02-4203-00 1-0220 Site Four Portion of 02-4203-001-0 I 00 and all of 02 -4203 -001 -0280 Site Five Portion of 02-4203-001-0100 and all of 02-4203-001-0161; 02-4203-00 1-0 170; 02-4203-00 1-0 180; 02-4203-001-0190; 02-4203-001-0200; 02-4203-00 1-020 I; 02-4203-001-02 1 O; 02-4203-001-0220 Si te One 500 Alton Road Ventures LLC and 1220 Sixth LLC 2200 Biscayne Boulevard Miami , Florida 33137 Site Two South Beach Heights I LLC 2200 Biscayne Boulevard Miami , Florida 33137 Site Three KGM Equities LLC 2200 Biscayne Boulevard Miami , Florida 33137 N ote: Sites Four and Fi ve are portions of Site Two and Three, as legall y described herein .I. ALHALE APPRAISALS, INC. Real Es lale Appraisers and Consultants -2 - SUMMARY OF SALIENT FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS Legal Description: Description: Site One -Lots I through 8, and Lots 13 through 19 , less street for road, and alley lying between and adjacent thereof closed per Resolution 2005-25869, and Lots 9 and I 0, and the easterly Y, of the alley lying west and adjacent, closed as per Resolution 2013- 28343; and Lots 11 and 12, and western Y, of the alley lying east and adjacent, closed as per Resolution 2013-28343, Amended Aquarium Site, as recorded in Plat Book 21, Page 83 of the Public Records of Miami-Dade County, Florida Site Two -Lots I through 4, less street, and Lots 5 through 7, and Lots 23 through 32, Block 2, and prope1ty interest in and to common elements not dedicated to the public, Fleetwood Subdivision, as recorded in Plat Book 28, Page 34 of the Public Records of Miami-Dade County, Florida Site Three -Lots 8 through 14, less the western I 0 feet for right of way, Block 2, and property interest in and to common elements not dedicated to the public, Fleetwood Subdivision, as recorded in Plat Book 28, Page 34 of the Public Records of Miami-Dade County, Florida Note: Sites Four and Five are portions of Site Two and Three, as legally described herein Site One is an 85,348 SF (as per site survey; or 87, 140 SF as per the public records) city-block which is bounded by 5'" Street (Mc Arthur Causeway) on the south, 6'h Street of the north , Alton Road on the east and West Avenue on the west. The site is level at street grade, and currently has a 5,723 SF improvement at the northwest comer, built in 1960. The vacant improvements have no contributory value, as they do not reflect the Highest and Best Use of the site, as improved or as if vacant. Site Two is a 138,842 SF (as per site survey; or 140,700 SF as per the public records) site which is bounded by 6'" Street on the south (320 feet of frontage), Alton Road on the east (approximately 510 feet of frontage) and West Avenue on the west (approximately 360 feet of frontage). The site is leve l at street grade, and currently has an approximately 60,000 SF 9- level "shell" of an older structure built in 1983. The improvements have no contributory value, as they do not reflect the Highest and Best Use of the site, as improved or as if vacant. J. At.HALE APPRAISALS, INC. Real Estate Appraisers and Consullants -3 - SUMMARY OF SALIENT FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS Description: Site Area: Flood Zone: Site Three is a 49,000 SF (as per site survey; and the public records) site which is located approximately 360 feet north of the northeast comer of 6'" Street and West Avenue, with approximately 350 feet frontage along the east side of West Avenue, and a depth of 140 feet. The site is level at street grade, and currently being partially used for surface parking. Site Four ("Retail Site") is the 87,412 SF eastern portion of the 138,842 SF site ("600 Site"), and is located at the northwest comer of 6'" Street and Alton Road, Miami Beach, Florida. This po11ion of the site would have 170 feet of frontage along the north side of 6'h Street and 510 feet of frontage along the west side of Alton Road. The site is level at street grade, and currently has an approximately 60,000 SF 9-level "shell" of an older structure built in 1983. The improvements have no contributory value, as they do not reflect the Highest and Best Use of the site, as improved or as if vacant. Site Five ("Park Site") is a 100 ,430 SF site which is comprised of the 49,000 SF "700 Site" and the 51,430 SF southwestern portion of the 138,842 SF "600 Site'', and is located at the northeast comer of 6'h Street and Alton Road , Miami Beach, Florida. The site has approximately 710 feet of frontage along the east side of West Avenue and approximately 150 feet of frontage along the north side of 6'h Street. The site is level at street grade, and currently being partially used for surface parking. Site I - Site 2 - Site 3 - Site 4- Site 5 - 85,348 SF 138,842 SF 49,000 SF 87,412 SF (Portion of Site 2) I 00 ,430 SF (Portion of Site 2, and all of Site 3) Flood Zone "AE" -An area inundated by !00-year flooding; National Flood Insurance Program, Community Panel Number 12065 I -I 2086C03 I 7L, as revised on September I I , 2009. J. At.HALE APPRAISALS, INC. Real Estate Appraisers and Consultants -4- SUMMARY OF SALIENT FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS Zoning : Highest and Best Use: Site 1 -CPS-2 General Mixed-Use Commercial Performance District Site 2 -CD -2 Medium-Intensity Commercial District Site 3-RM-2 Medium-Intensity Multi-Family Residential District Site 4 -CD -2 Medium-Intensity Commercial District Site 5 -CD-2 Medium-Intensity Commercial District(5 l ,430 SF) and RM-2 Medium-Intensity Multi-Family Residential District (49 ,000 SF) The Highest and Best Use of Site One is its development with a residential condominium apartment building, with an ancillary commercial component. This site already has approvals to be developed with a mixed-use residential/commercial building with 18 ,000 SF of retail and approximately 159 ,650 SF 163-unit residential component (170 ,696 SF allowed). Subject to satisfaction of certain property rights among Sites 1, 2 and 3 , this site is proposed to be developed with a high-rise residential apartment building which would be built to condominium quality standards, and possibly have an interim rental apartment use during the sell-out period. The Highest and Best Use of Site Two is its development with a mixed-use residential/commercial condominium building. This site already has approvals to be developed with a mixed-use residential/commercial building with 42,915 SF of retail and 253 ,840 SF 256-unit residential component, totaling 275 ,298 SF of buildable FAR area (277,684 SF allowed). Subject to satisfaction of certain property rights among Site 1, 2 and 3, the 87,412 SF southeastern section of this site (Site 4) is proposed to be developed with a one-story multi-tenant 35 ,960 SF retail strip. J. ALHALE APPRAISALS, INC. Real Estate Ap11raisers and Consultants -5 - SUMMARY OF SALIENT FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS Highest and Best Use: Property Rights Appraised: Date oflnspection and Valuation: Date of Appraisal Report: The Highest and Best Use of Site Three is its development with a residential condominium apartinent building. This site already has approvals to be developed with a mixed-use residential/ commercial building with 12,756 SF of retail and 83 ,349 SF 66- unit residential component, totaling 96 ,105 SF ofbuildable FAR area (98,000 SF allowed). Subject to satisfaction of certain prope1ty rights among Sites 1, 2 and 3, this site (in conjunction with the 51 ,430 SF southwestern portion of Site 2) is proposed to be dedicated to create a City-owned public park to serve the surrounding residential neighborhood. The Highest and Best Use of Site Four is its development with a mixed-use residential/commercial condominium building. Subject to satisfaction of certain property rights among Sites 1, 2 and 3, this site is proposed to be developed with a one-story multi-tenant 35,960 SF retail strip. The Highest and Best Use of Site Five is its development with a mixed-use residential/commercial condominium apartment building. Subject to satisfaction ofcertain property rights among Sites 1, 2 and 3, this site is proposed to be dedicated to create a City-owned public park to serve the surrounding residential neighborhood. Fee Simple Interest June 27, 2018 June 16 , 2018 .f. ALHALE APPRAISALS, INC. Real Estate Appraisers and Consultants -6- ---- SUMMARY OF SALIENT FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS MARKET VALUE ESTIMATES: Income Capitalization Approach to Value: Sales Comparison Approach to Value: Cost Approach to Value: Reconciled Final Value Estimates: Not Applicable $51,200,000 Site 1 As if Vacant $51, 170,000 Site I As Is $79,800,000 Site 2 As If Vacant $79,500,000 Site 2 As ls $24,500,000 Site 3 As ls (Vacant) $50,300,000 Site 4 As lfVacant $50,000,000 Site 4 As Is $52,500,000 Site 5 As Is (Vacant) Not Applicable $51,200,000 Site 1 As if Vacant $51,170,000 Site I As Is $79,800,000 Site 2 As H Vacant $79,500,000 Site 2 As Is $24,500,000 Site 3 As Is (Vacant) $50,300,000 Site 4 As H Vacant $50,000,000 Site 4 As Is $52,500,000 Site 5 As Is (Vacant) .J. ALJIALE APPRAISALS, INC. Real Estate Appraisers and Consultants -7 - PURPOSE/FUNCTION OF THE APPRAISAL The purpose of this appraisal report is to provide estimates of the Highest and Best Use, the Market Value of the Fee Simple Interest in Properties One, Two and Four in "as is" condition (land value, less estimated cost of demolition and carting), as ofJune 27, 2018 Market Value of the Fee Simple Interest in Properties One through Five, as vacant (land value), as of June 27,2018. The function of this appraisal report is to assist the client (The City of Miami Beach) in executive decision making and/or collateral/asset valuation relative to the allocation of the development rights among the three privately-owned sites, as well as the potential transfer of one or portion of the sites to the City of Miami Beach to create a public park for the use and benefit of the surrounding densely populated residential neighborhood, in the South Beach section of Miami Beach. The intended user of this appraisal report is the City of Miami Beach or any of its assigns. SCOPE OF THE APPRAISAL I have made a physical inspection of the subject sites, and perfonned market research to provide estimates of the Highest and Best Use, Market Value of the Fee Simple Interest in Properties One, Two and Four in "as is" condition (land value, less estimated cost of demolition and carting), as of June 27, 2018 Market Value of the Fee Simple Interest in Properties One through Five, as vacant (land value), as of June 27, 2018. The scope of the appraisal involves the research and analysis of factual data relative to the subject properties, as well as market data necessary for the development of the Sales Comparison Approach to Value (land valuation). The data and infonnation used in developing our findings, projections and valuation estimates have been derived from published infonnation, direct interviews, analysis of similar properties and other sources which were considered appropriate as of the valuation date. PROPERTY RIGHTS APPRAISED This appraisal report is made with the understanding that the present ownership of the properties includes all the rights that may be lawfully held under a fee simple estate. Fee Simple Interest is defined in The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 2010 Edition , which was sponsored by the Appraisal Institute as follows: Absolute ownership unencumbered by any other interest or estate; subject only to the limitations imposed by the governmental powers of eminent domain, escheat, police power and taxation. DATE OF VALUATION AND REPORT The date of valuation is June 27, 2018. The date oft he appraisal report is June I6, 2018. J. ALHALE APPRAISALS, INC. Real Estate Appraisers and Consultants -11- STATEMENT OF OWNERSHIP AND HISTORY The 73,890 SF portion of Site One is owned by 500 Alton Ventures LLC which purchased it for$5,000,000 from Africa Israel Vitri Developers, LLC on February 18, 20 I 0, as recorded in Book 27190, Page 447 of the Official Public Records of Miami-Dade County, Florida. The previous sale was from Pin-Pon Corporation to MacArthur Gateway LLC for $9,800,000 on July 20, 2004, as recorded in Book 22515, Page 2137 of the Official Public Records of Miami-Dade County, Florida. The 13,250 SF northwestern portion of Site One is owned by 1220 Sixth LLC which purchased it for $4,000 ,000 from Mau-Mau Corporation on December I , 2011, as recorded in Book 27915, Page 3693of the Official Public Records of Miami-Dade County, Florida. Site Two is owned by South Beach Heights I LLC which purchased it for $28,000,000 from Geriatrics Service Complex Foundation, Inc. and South Shore Hospital Foundation, Inc. on February 24, 2004, as recorded in Book 22085, Page 1733 of the Official Public Records of Miami-Dade County, Florida. Site Three is owned by KGM Equities LLC which purchased it for $8,000,000 from West Alton Corporation on December 31, 2012 , as recorded in Book 28428, Page 56 of the Official Public Records of Miami-Dade County, Florida. As per the Public Records of Miami-Dade County, Florida, there was no other ann's length transfer of ownership at the subject properties during the five year period prior to the valuation date. We have not been infonned of any other current listings, options and/or pending contracts in effect at the subject properties, as of the date of valuation. ESTIMATED MARKETING AND EXPOSURE PERIOD Based on my analysis of the market, recent listings which have been since closed , as well as discussions with owners and Realtors active in the subject area, it is the appraiser's opinion that if the individual subject sites were listed for sale with an experienced Realtor, the marketing and marketing and exposure period would be approximately six to twelve months. Accordingly, this marketing and exposure period is considered to currently represent the most probable amount of time necessary to expose and actively market the subject properties to achieve a sale consistent with the Market Value. J. ALHALE APPRAISALS, INC. Real Estate A111>raisers and Consultants -12 - DEFINITION OF MARKET VALUE Market Value is defined in The Interagency Appraisal and Evaluation Guidelines, dated December 2, 20 I 0 , as follows: The most probable price, which a property should bring in a competitive and open market under all conditions requisite to a fair sale, the buyer and seller acting prudently and knowledgeably, and assuming the price is not affected by undue stimulus. Implicit in this definition are the consummation ofa sale as ofa specified date and the passing of title from seller to buyer under conditions whereby: I. Buyer and seller are typically motivated; 2. Both parties are well infonned 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 tenns of cash in U.S. dollars or in tenns of financial arrangements comparable thereto; and 5. The price represents the nonnal consideration forthe property sold unaffected by special or creative financing or sales concessions granted by anyone associated with the sale. NEIGHBORHOOD ANALYSIS The subject sites are located on the north and south sides of6'" Street, between Alton Road and West Avenue, in the South Beach section of Miami Beach, Florida. The immediate area surrounding the subject sites is comprised of low-rise, mid-rise and high-rise rental and condominium apartment buildings along Bay Road and West Avenue, as well as mixed-use residential/retail buildings along West Avenue, and commercial buildings with retail, office and restaurant space; office buildings, and other retail/service uses along Alton Road. Miami Beach is an island located just offthe southeast coast ofMiami-Dade County, Florida. The island is approximately one mile wide, ten miles long and travels in a northerly/southerly direction parallel to mainland Miami-Dade County. The town of Surfside bord ers Miami Beach to the north starting at approximately 87th Street. The Atlantic Ocean acts as th e eastern and southeastern border, while Biscayne Bay/the lntracoastal Waterway lies to the west. Five causeways connect Miami Beach to the mainland; the MacArthur Causeway (Highway No. 41 ); the Venetian Causeway; the Julia Tuttle Causeway (Interstate 195); th e Broad Causeway (State Road No. 922) and the North Dade Causeway (State Road No. 934). .J. ALIM.LE APPRAISALS, INC. Real Estate Appraisers and Consultant's -13 - NEIGHBORHOOD ANALYSIS As the City's economy drastically improved in the last twenty-five years, Miami Beach has experienced an influx of younger and more affluent residents. Close proximity to Miami's downtown business district , the Art Deco entertainment district and access to the beach are all considered to be contributing factors to the area's discovery as a place to live and work. The continued faith in the City's economy is reflected by the consistent increase in building pennit activity over the last twenty years. Developers and real estate professionals in Miami Beach have been aggressively marketing their properties to local and out-of-town residents and families. In the last fifteen years, the development and redevelopment activity has well spread over the waterfront corridors of Ocean Drive, Collins Avenue and Ocean Drive, as well as the Art Deco district , the 5th Street corridor and the area south of 5th Street which is referred to as the overall South Pointe area. The subject sites are located just north of 5th Street (connecting to MacArthur Causeway) which is the gateway to the South Beach area of Miami Beach, connecting it with the Central Business District ofMiami. The subject prope1iies are located 2/3 mile southeast of Lincoln Road which is an upscale pedestrian corridor which is considered ground-zero for retail/restaurant space in South Beach , commanding the highest rental rates and sale prices. The subject sites are within walking distance of the service, entertairunent, retail corridors of Alton Road and Lincoln Road. The viability of the subject neighborhood is further enhanced by the ease of accessibility to/from downtown Miami and the Central Business District (CBD) and other major employment centers within Miami-Dade County. The area surrounding the subject sites has been developed with mostly residential facilities and therefore, no nuisances , hazards or other adverse influences were observed. No notable signs of external obsolescence were observed and the overall appeal of the improved properties is considered to be above average to good. ACCESS TO THE SITES 6" Street, West Avenue and Alton Road provides direct access to Sites One and Two. West Avenue provides direct access to Site Three. DESCRIPTION OF THE SITES Site One is an 85,348 SF (as per site survey; or 87, 140 SF as per the public records) city- block which is bounded by 5' Street (Mc Arthur Causeway) on the south, 6" Street of the north , Alton Road on the east and West Avenue on the west. The site is level at street grade, and currently has a 5,723 SF improvement at the northwest comer, built in 1960. The vacant improvements have no contributory value, as they do not reflect the Highest and Best Use of the site, as improved or as if vacant. Site Two is a 138,842 SF (as per site survey; or 140 ,700 SF as per the public records) site which is bounded by 6" Street on the south (320 feet of frontage), Alton Road on the east (approximately 510 feet of frontage) and West Avenue on the west (approximately 360 feet of frontage). The site is level at street grade, and currently has an approximately 60,000 SF 9-level "shell" of an older stmcture built in 1983. The improvements have no contributory value, as they do not reflect the Highest and Best Use of the site, as improved or as if vacant. J. ALHALE APPRAISALS, INC. Real Eslale Appraisers and Consultant's -14- DESCRIPTION OF THE SITES Site Three is a 49,000 SF (as per site survey; and the public records) site which is located ap proximately 360 feet north of the northeast comer of 6" Street and West Avenue, with approximately 350 feel frontage along the east side of West Avenue, and a depth of 140 feet. The site is level at street grade, and currently being partially used for surface parking. Site Four ("Retail Site") is the 87,412 SF eastern portion of th e 138,842 SF site ("600 Site"), and is located at the northwest comer of 6'' Street and Alton Road, Miami Beach, Florida. This portion of the site would have 170 feet of frontage along the north side of6" Street and 510 feet of frontage along the west side of Alton Road . The site is level at street grade, and currently has an approximately 60 ,000 SF 9-level "shell" of an older structure built in 1983. The improvements have no contributory value, as they do not reflect the Highest an d Best Use of the site, as improved or as if vacant. Site Five ("Park Site") is a I 00,430 SF site which is comprised of the 49,000 SF "700 Site" and the 51,430 SF southwestern portion of the 138,842 SF "600 Site'', and is located at the northeast comer of 6'' Street and Allon Road, Miami Beach, Florida. The site has approximately 710 feet of frontage along the east side of West Avenue and approximately 150 feel of frontage along the north side of 6" Street. The site is level at street grade, and currently being partially used for surface parking. The subject sites are level at street grade and do not have any apparent drainage or other problems which would restrict or limit the use of the sites. No soil boring tests or engineering reports were submitted to the appraiser; however, the sites are assumed to have stable subsoil conditions as do most properties in the immediate area. The appraiser has not been infonned of any adverse subsoil conditions revealed by an environmen tal assessment conducted by a finn with experience in identifying such substances, nor is he qualified to detect such substances that may exist. It is assumed that the subject sites would be typical for prope1ties located in the subject area with no apparent soil problems which would restrict or limit the usage of the sites. If any adverse subsoil conditions are identified and do exist, these conditions would be considered to have a material affect on the Market Value estimates. The valuation analysis assumes the sites to be free of any adverse subsoil conditions, and is subject to the satisfactory removal of any contaminating material s in accordance with tec hnical , environmental and governmental guidelines. UTILITIES Public utilities available to the subject sites include electricity, water, sewer, gas and telephone service. Electricity is provided by FPL. Police and fire protection, water and sewer services are provided by the City of Miami Beach. J. ALHALE APPRAISALS, INC. Real Estate AJ>praisers and Consultants -15 - FLOOD ZONE Flood Zone "AE" -An area inundated by 100-year flooding; National Flood lnsurance Program , Community Pan el Number 120651-12086C03 ! 7L, as revised on September 11 , 2009. ZONING Site One is zoned as CPS-2 General Mixed-Use Commercial Perfonnance District which is designed to accommodate a range of business, commercial, office and hotel uses, as well as medium to high density residential development pursuant to performance standards which control the pennissible type, density or intensity, and mix of development. The maximum pennitted Floor Area Ratio is 2.0, which would result in a buildable area of 170,696 SF. Site One is zoned as CD -2 Medium-Intensity Commercial District which provides for commercial activities, services, offices and related activities which serve the entire city. The maximum pennitted Floor Area Ratio is 1.5; however, when more than 25% of the total area of the building is used for residential or hotel units, the Floor Area Ratio range shall be set as 2.0, as in the RM-2 District, which would result in a buildable area of277,684 SF. Site Three is zoned as RM-2 Medium-Intensity Multi-Family Residential District which allows single-family detached dwellings, town homes, apartments apartment-hotels, hotels, hostels, and suite hotels. Th e maximum pennitted Floor Area Ratio is 2.0, which would result in a buildable area of98,000 SF. ASSESSMENT AND REAL ESTATE TAXES The subject sites are located within the CityofMiami Beach and are subject to both the City of Miami Beach and Miami-Dade County ad valorem taxes. The Florida Stan1tes provide for assessment and collection of yearly Ad Valorem Taxes on Real and Personal Property. The assessment for the property is established each yearas ofJanuary I st by the Miami-Dade County Property Appraiser's Office at 100% of "Just Value". The tax due is computed according to annual millage rates esta blished by Dade County. Millage rates are the amount paid to each taxing body for every $1,000 ofassessed value. Taxes are payable in November with a 4% discount and become delinquent on April!". Site One is assessed at$ l 8,302,400 or $214.44/SF for land, $26,094 for the improvements, or a total of $18,328,494, with real estate taxes of $261,257.71, prior to a 4% discount for prompt payment. Site Two is assessed at $29,547,000 or $212.81/SF for land , $308 for the improvements, or a total of $29,547,308, with real esta te taxes of $352 ,201.89, prior to a 4% discount for prompt payment. Site Three is assessed at $12,250,0000 or $250/SF for land, $0 for the improvements, or a total of$12,250,000, with real estate taxes of$193,430. 76, prior to a 4'Yo discount for prompt payment. J. ALHALE APPRAISALS, INC. Real Estate Appraisers and Consultants -16 - MUL Tl-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL MARKET OVERVIEW Rental Apartment Market According to the Housing Report prepared by Reinhold P. Wolff Economic Research, lnc., the vacancy rate in mature ( 18 months and older) rental apartment complexes in Miami-Dade County was 5.0% in May 2018, 4. 7% in February 2018, 4.5% in November 2017; 4.4% in August 2017; 3.6% in May2017, 3 .6% in February 2017; 3.9% in November 20 I 6; 3 .9% in November 20 I 6; 3.4% in August 2016; 2.9% in May2016; 3.4% in February2016; 2.9% in November 2015; 3.0% in August 2015; 3.3% in May 20 15; and 3.9% in February 20 15. The subject South Beach sub-market had a vacancy rate of 4.0% fo r 2,046 units in February 2012; 4. 7% for 2,046 units in May 20 I 2; 4.6%% for 2,046 units in August 2012; 4.3% for 2,046 units in November 2012; 8.1%for2,046 units in February 20 I 3; 2.5% for 2,046 units in May2013; 4.1 % for2,046 units in August 2013; I .4% for2,046 un its in November 20 I 3; 4.5% for 2,046 units in February 2014; 5.4% for 2,046 units in May 20 14; 5.2% in August 2014 for 1,617 units; 5.7% for 2,046 units in November 2014; 3.7% for 1,617 units in Februaty 20 I 5; 3.8% for 1,6 I 7 units in May 2015; and 4.4% for 1,872 units in Aub'1JSt 20 I 5; 6.3% for 1,617 units in November 2015; 5.7%, for 1,6 17 units in February 2016; 5.9% for 1,6 17 units in May 2016; 4.3% for 1,872 units in August 2016; 3.3% for 1,872 units in November 20 16; 4.4% for 1,872 units in Februaty 2017; 3. 7% for 1,872 units in May 2017; 7.7% for 1,872 units in August 2017; 7.4% for 1,872 units in November 2017; 5.8% for 1,872 units in February 2018; and 6.2% for I ,872 units in May 2018. The neighboring sub-market of Central/North Beach sub-market had a vacancy rate of2.8% for 1,28 I units in February 2012; 4.9% for 1,281 units in May 20 I 2; 4.4% for I ,6 I 7 units in August 2012; 3.4% for I ,6 17 units in November 20 I 2; 9.1 % for I ,6 17 units in February 2013; 6 .1 % for 1,6 I 7 units in May 20 I 3; .2% in August 20 I 3 for 1,61 7 units; 5.5'Vo for I ,617 units in November20 13 ; 4.3% for I ,617 units in February2014; I .9% for 1,6 I 7 units in May 20 I 4; 3.4% in August 2014 for 2,046 units; 1.9% for 1,6 I 7 units in November 2014; I. 7'X> for I ,617 units in February 2015; 2.4% for I ,617 units in May 20 I 5; 2.5% for I ,6 I 7 units in Augi.1st 20 15; 4.0% for 1,617 units in November 2015; 1.1 % for 1,617 units in February 2016; 1.5% for 1,6 17 units in May2016; 2.7% for 1,902 units in August 2016; 2.0% for 1,902 units in November 2016; 4.0% for 1,902 units in February 2017; 5.0% for 1,902 un its in May2017; 5.0% for 1,902 units in Augi.1st 2017; 5.2% for 1,902 units in November2017; 4.5% for 1,902 units in February 2018; and 4.5% for 1,902 units in May 2018. There were no new rental apartment units added to the inventory in South Beach, and there is 0 months of inventory. The overall average monthly rent for apartments in mature rental developments in Miami- Dade County increased by $39 to $1,869 from February20! 8 to May2018. The May 2018 overall average rent of $1,869 is 6.7% greater than th e $1,75 1 average rent found a year earlier. J. ALHALE APPRAISALS, INC. Re:1I Eslate Ap1>raisers and Consultants -17 - MUL Tl-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL MARKET OVERVIEW --Continued - Rental Apartment Market (Continued) The average rental rate for apartment units in South Beach were $2,627 or $$3.235/SF for 779 one-bedroom units; $3,563 or $2.9 12/SF for 587 two-bedroom un its; and $5,224 or $2 .767/SF for 45 three-bedroom units . The renta l rates in South Beach are among the highest in Miami-Dade County, du e to its speci fic location. The overall average monthly rent for apartments in mature rental developments in Miami- Dade County increased by $9 1 to $1,830 from November 201 7 to February 2018. The February 201 8 overall average rent of $1,830 is 4.9% greater than the $1,744 average rent found a year earlier. The overall average monthly rent for apartments in mature rental developments in Miami- Dade County increased by $2 to $1,739 from Augi.1st 201 7 to November 20 17 . The November 20 17 overall average rent of $1,739 is .8% greater than the $1,725 average rent found a year earlier. The overall average monthly rent for apattments in mature rental developments in Miami - Dade County declined by $14 to $1,737 from May2017 to August 2017. The Augi.1st 2017 overall average rent of $1 ,737 is 4.4% greater than the $1,664 average rent found a year earlier. The overall average monthly rent for apartments in mature rental developments in Miami- Dade County increased by $7 to $1,77 1 from February 2017 to May 2017. The May 2017 overall average rent of $1,751 is 3.2% greater than the $1,696 average rent found a year earlier. The overall average monthly rent for apartments in mature rental develo pments in Miami- Dade County increased by $19 to $1,744 from November 2016 to February 2017. The February 2017 overall average rent of$ I ,744 is 5.1 % greater than the $1,660 average rent found a year earlier. The overall average monthly rent for apartments in mature rental developments in Miami- Dade County increased by $6 1 to $1,725 from Augi.1st 2016 to November 20 16. The November 2016 overall average rent of$1,725 is 7.2% greater than the $1,609 average rent found a year earlier. The overall average monthly rent for apartments in mature rental developments in Miami- DadeCountydecreased by$32 to $1,664 from May20 16 to Augi.1st 20 I 6. The August 2016 overall average rent of$ I ,664 is 3% greater than the $1,6 15 average rent found a year earlier. .I. ALHALE APPRAISALS, INC . Real Eslate Ap1>raisers a nd Consultants -18 - MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL MARKET OVERVIEW --Continued - The overall average monthly rent for apartments in mature rental developments in Miami- Dade County increased by $36 to $1,696 from Febrnary 2016 to May 2016. The May 2016 overall average rent of $1,696 is 5.3% greater than the $1,6 11 average rent found a year earlier. The overall average monthly rent for apartments in mature rental developments in Miami- Dade County increased by $51 to $1,660 from November 2015 to February 2016. The Febrnary 2016 overall average rent of $1,660 is 5.8% greater than the $1,569 average rent found a year earlier. The overall average monthly rent for apartments in mature rental developments in Miami- DadeCountydeclined by$6 to $1,609 from August to November2015. The November2015 overall average rent of $1,609 is 5.0% greater than the $1,532 average rent found a year earlier. The overall average monthly rent for apartments in mature rental developments in Miami- DadeCountyincreased by$4 to $1,615 from May to August 2015. The August 2015 overall average rent of $1,615 is 8.5% greater than the $1,489 average rent found a year earlier. The overall average monthly rent for apartments in mature rental developments in Miami- Dade County increased by $42 to $1,61 l from Febrnary 2015 to May 2015. The May 2015 overall average rent of $1,61 1 is 8.1 % greater than the $1,490 average rent found a year earlier. The overall average monthly rent for apartments in mature rental developments in Miami- Dade County increased by $37 to $1,569 from November 2014 to Febrnary 2015. The Febrnary 2015 overall average rent of $1,569 is 8.7% greater than the $1,443 average rent found a year earlier. The overall average monthly rent for apartments in mature rental developments in Miami- Dade County increased by $43 to $1,532 from August 2014 to November 2014. The November 2014 overall average rent of$ I ,532 is 8.4% greater than the $1,413 average rent found a year earlier. Condominium Apartment Market As per the 2"' Quarter 2018 Dade County Housing Market Report prepared by Reinhold P. Wolff Economic Research, Inc., a total of 137 new condominium units were sold (deeded) in Dade County during the I" quarter of 2018. The I" quarter sales were 23.5'Y., less than the 179 units sold in the 4'h quarterof2017, and 24.7"/., less than the 182 units sold in the I " Quarter of2017. New condominium sales in 2017 , totaled 784 units, 23.7% less than the 1,027 units sold in 2016. 61.6%, 30.2% and 35.0% of the total new condominium sales in Miami-Dade County in the I" Quarter of2017, 4'" Quarter of2017 and 1" Quarter of 2018, respectively, were above the $900,000 price level , making up the largest segment. J. ALHALE APPRAISALS, INC. Real Estate Ap1>raisers and Consultants -19 - MUL Tl-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL MARKET OVERVIEW --Continued - Condominium Apartment Market -Continued There were 362, 340, 235 , 307, 361, 290, 293 and 269 u sed condominium units were sold in the South Beach sub -market between 2"' Quarter of 2016 and I" Quarter of 2018, respectively. As per the I" Quarter 2018 Dade County Housing Market Report prepared by Reinhold P. Wolff Economic Research, Inc., a total of 179 new condominium units were sold (deeded) in Dade County during the 4'" quarter of2017. The 4'h quarter sa les were 14.8% less than the 210 units sold in the 3'' quarter of20 17, and 40.7% less than the 302 units sold in the 4'" Quarter of2016. As per the 4'" Quarter 2017 Dade County Housing Market Report prepared by Reinhold P. Wolff Economic Research, Inc., a total of2 10 new condominium units were sold (deeded) in Dade County during the 3'' quarter of2017. The 3n1 quarter sales were 1.4% less than the 213 units sold in the 2"' quarter of 2017, and 20.7% more than the 174 units sold in the 3'' Quarter of 2016. New condominium sales through September 2017, totaled 605 units, 16.6% less than the 725 units sold in the same period in 2016. As per the 3'' Quarter 2017 Dade County Housing Market Report prepared by Reinhold P. Wolff Economic Research, In c., a total of2 I 3 new condominium units were sold (deeded) in Dade County during the 2"' quarter of 2017. The 2"' quarter sales were 17% more than the 182 units sold in the I " quarter of 2017 , and 13.3% more than the 188 units sold in the 2"' Quarter of2016. New condominium sales through June 2017, totaled 395 units, 28.3% less than the 551 units sold in the same period in 2016. As per the 2"' Quarter 2017 Dade County Housing Market Report prepared by Reinhold P. Wolff Economic Research , Inc., a total of 182 new condominium units were sold (deeded) in Dade County during the I" quarter of 2017. The I" quarter sales were 39.7% less than the 302 units sold in the 4'" quarter of 2016, and 49.9% less than the 363 units sold in the I " Quarter of2016. New condominium sales in 2016 totaled 1,027 units, 42.5% less than the 1,786 units sold in 2015. As per the I" Quarter 2017 Dade County Housing Market Report prepared by Reinhold P. Wolff Economic Research, Inc., a total of302 new condominium units were sold (deeded} in Dade County during the 4'" quarter of2016. The 4'" quarter sales were 73.6% more than the 174 units sold in the 3'' quarter of20 16, but 37.9% less than the 486 units sold in the 4'" Quarter of 2015. As per the 4'" Quarter 20 16 Dade County Housing Market Report prepared by Reinhold P. Wolff Economic Research, Inc., a total of 174 new condominium units were sold (deeded) in Dade County during the 3n1quarterof2016. The 3'' quarter sales were 7.4% less than the 188 units sold in the 2"' quarter of 2016, and 59.7% less than the 432 units sold in the 3'' Quarterof2015. New condominium sales through September2016 totaled 725 units, 44.2% less than the 1,300 units sold during the same period in 2015. J. ALHALE APPRAISALS, INC. Real Estate Appraisers and Consu llants -20 - MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL MARKET OVERVIEW --Continued - Condominium Apartment Market -Continued As per th e 3'd Quarter 2016 Dade County Housing Market Report prepared by Reinhold P. Wolff Economic Research, Inc., a total of 188 new condominium units were sold (deeded} in Dade County during the 2"d quarter of 2016. The 2"d quarter sales were 48.2'Y,, less than the 363 units sold in the I" quarter of2016 , and 57.4% less than the 441 units sold in the 2"d Quarterof201 S. New condominium sales through June 2016 totaled SS 1 units, 36.5% less than the 868 units sold during the same period in 201 S. As per the 2"d Quarter 2016 Dade County Housing Market Report prepared by Reinhold P. Wolff Economic Research, Inc., a total of363 new condominium units were sold (deeded) in Dade County during the l " quarter of 2016. The I" quarter sales were 25.3':-'o less than the 486 units sold in the 4'h quarter of20 LS , and 15.0% less than the 427 units sold in the 1" Quarterof201 S. New condominium sales in 201 S totaled 1,786 units, 2.2 times more than the 827 units sold in 2014. As per the I" Quarter 2016 Dade County Housing Market Report prepared by Reinhold P. Wolff Economic Research, Inc., a total of486 new condominium units were sold in Dade County during the 4'h quarter of201 S. The 4'" quarter sales were 12.5% greater than the 432 units sold in the 3'd quarter of201 S, and 7.8% more than the 4S I units sold in the 4'" Quarter of2014. As per the 4'" Quarter 201 S Dade County Housing Market Report prepared by Reinhold P. Wolff Economic Research, Inc., a total of 432 new condominium units were sold in Dade County during the 3'd quarter of 20 IS. The 3'd quarter sales were 2.0% less than the 441 units sold in the 2"d quarter of 20 LS, and 2.5 times more than the 176 units sold in the 3'd Quarter of2014. New condominium sales through September 201 S totaled 1,3 00 units, 3.5 times more than the 376 units sold during the same period in 2014. As per the 3'' Quarter 20 LS Dade County Housing Market Report prepared by Reinhold P. Wolff Economic Research, Inc., a total of 441 new condominium units were sold in Dade County during the 2"' quarter of201 S. The 2"d quarter sales were 3.3% more than the 427 units sold in the l" quarter of 201 S, and 3.1 times the 142 units sold in the 2"" Quarter of 2014. New condominium sales through June 201S totaled 868 units , 4.3 times more than the 200 units sold during the same period in 2014. .I. ALHALE APPRAISALS, INC. Real Estate Ap11raisers and Consultants -21 - HIGHEST AND BEST USE DEFINITION The Highest and Best Use is a market-driven concept. It may be briefly defined as representing the most profitable, competitive use to which a site can be put, or that use which may reasonably be expected to produce the greatest net return to the land over a given period of time. In addition, the concept may further be defined as the available use and program of foture utilization that produces the highest present land value. Highest and Best Use is forther defined in The Dictionary Real Estate Appraisal, 2010 Edition, which was sponsored by the Appraisal Institute as follows: That reasonably probable and legal use of vacant land or an improved property that is physically possible, approp1iately supported, financially feasible, and that results in the highest value. It is to be recognized that in cases where a site has existing improvements on it , the Highest and Best Use may very well bedetennined to be different from the existing use. The existing use will continue, however, unless and until land value in its Highest and Best Use exceeds the total value of the property in its existing use. The estimate of Highest and Best Use is based upon four stages of analysis: I. 2. 3. 4. The possible use or uses which are physically possible for the site under analysis. The pennissible use or uses which are pennitted relative to zoning, historic preservation regulations , environmental controls and/or deed restriction of the site under analysis. The feasible use oruses which are considered economically and financially feasible for the site in tenns of existing and projected market conditions. The Highest and Best Use in consideration of those legally pennissible, physically possible, financially feasible and maximally productive uses which will result in the highest net return or the highest present worth. J. ALHALE APPRAISALS, INC. Real Estate Appraisers and Consultants -22 - HIGHEST AND BEST USE, AS VACANT The estimate of the Highest and Best Use of the land, as if vacant, requires market analysis in tenns of market conditions of supply and demand. The value of land is based upon the level of utility that is in demand and that will produce amenities or net income to the user. Therefore, the use which creates the greatest land value and which is considered compatible in tenns of the restriction imposed by the physical, legal, financial and maximally productive factors is inherent in this analysis. The physically possible uses of the subject sites , as vacant , would include a variety of commercial and multi-family residential uses. This is based upon analysis of the size, frontage, exposure, access, location and buildable utility characteristics of the 85 ,348 SF, 138 ,842 SF and 49,000 SF subject comer sites. Analysis of the pennissible uses at the subject sites takes into account those uses which would be pennitted by existing zoning and/or deed restrictions, providing that no deed restrictions are in effect at the subject sites which would restrict certain uses of the sites. Site One is zoned as CPS-2 General Mixed-Use Commercial Perfonnance District which is designed to accommodate a range of business , commercial , office and hotel uses, as we ll as medium to high density residential development pursuant to perfomiance standards which control the permissible type, density or intensity, and mix of development. The maximum pennitted Floor Area Ratio is 2.0, which would result in a buildable area of 170 ,696 SF. Site One is zoned as CD -2 Medium-Intensity Commercial District which provides for commercial activities, services, oflices and related activities which serve the entire city. The maximum pennitted Floor Area Ratio is 1.5; however, when more than 25% of the total area of the building is used for residential or hotel units , the Floor Area Ratio range shall be set as 2.0, as in the RM-2 District, which would result in a buildable area of277 ,684 SF. Site Three is zoned as RM-2 Medium-Intensity Multi-Family Residential District which allows single-family detached dwellings, townhomes, apartments apartment-hotels, hotels, hostels, and suite hotels. The maximum pennitted Floor Area Ratio is 2.0, which would result in a buildable area of 98,000 SF. Atler analysis of the physically possible and legally pennissible uses to which the subject sites could conceivably be put, a study of those uses which would be maximally productive is required. Therefore, an alternative use analysis was perfonned relative to that use which would represent the Highest and Best Use of the subject sites, as if vacant. The subject sites are located on the north and south sides of 6" Street, between Alton Road and West Avenue, in the South Beach section of Miami Beach, Florida. The immediate area surrounding the subject sites is comprised of low-rise, mid-rise and high-rise rental and condominium apartment buildings along Bay Road and West Avenue, as well as mixed-use residential/retail buildings along West Avenue, and commercial buildings with retail, office and restaurant space; office buildings, and other retail/service uses along Alton Road. J. ALHALE APPRAISALS, INC. Real Estale Appraisers and Consullants -23 - HIGHEST AND BEST USE, AS VA CANT Miami Beach is an island located just off the southeast coast ofMiami-DadeCounty, Florida. The island is approximately one mile wide, ten miles long and travels in a northerly/southerly direction parallel to mainland Miami-Dade County. The town of Surfside borders Miami Beach to the north starting at approximately 87th Street. The Atlantic Ocean acts as the eastern and southeastern border, while Biscayne Bay/the Intracoastal Waterway lies to the west. Five causeways connect Miami Beach to the mainland; the MacArthur Causeway (Highway No. 41 ); the Venetian Causeway; the Julia Tuttle Causeway (Interstate I 95); the Broad Causeway (State Road No. 922) and the North Dade Causeway (State Road No. 934). As the City's economy drastically improved in the last twenty-five years, Miami Beach has experienced an influx of younger and more affluent residents. Close proximity to Miami's downtown business district, the Art Deco entertainment district and access to the beach are all considered to be contributing factors to the area's discovery as a place to live and work. The continued faith in the City's economy is reflected by the consistent increase in building pennit activity over the last twenty years. Developers and real estate professionals in Miami Beach have been aggressively marketing their properties to local and out-of-town residents and families. In the last fifteen years, the development and redevelopment activity has well spread over the waterfront corridors of Ocean Drive, Collins Avenue and Ocean Drive, as well as the Art Deco district, the 5th Street corridor and the area south of 5th Street which is referred to as the overall South Pointe area. The subject sites are located just north of 5th Street (connecting to MacArthur Causeway) which is the gateway to the South Beach area of Miami Beach, connecting it with the Central Business District ofMiami. The subject properties are located 2/3 mile southeast of Lincoln Road which is an upscale pedestrian corridor which is considered ground-zero for retail/restaurant space in South Beach, commanding the highest rental rates and sale prices. The subject sites are within walking distance of the service, entertainment, retail corridors of Alton Road and Lincoln Road. The viability of the subject neighborhood is further enhanced by the ease of accessibility to/from downtown Miami and the Central Business District (CBD) and other major employment centers within Miami-Dade County. The area surrounding the subject sites has been developed with mostly residential facilities and therefore, no nuisances, hazards or other adverse influences were observed. No notable signs of external obsolescence were observed and the overall appeal of the improved properties is considered to be above average to very good. There are 30,27I residents within a I-mile radius of the subject property, with a projected population growth rate of3.6%, average age of 43 years, 18, 180 households, with a growth rate of 3.0% and 1.6 people per household and $48,312 of median household income and median home value of $394 ,201. J. ALHALE APPRAISALS, INC. Real Estate Appraisers and Consultants -24- HIGHEST AND BEST USE, AS VACANT There were no new rental apartment units added to the inventory in South Beach, and there is 0 months of inventory. The average rental rate for apartment units in South Beach were $2,627 or$$3.235/SF for 779 one-bedroom units; $3,563 or $2 .912/SF for 587 two-bedroom units; and $5,224 or $2.767/SF for 45 three-bedroom units. The rental rates in South Beach are among the highest in Miami-Dade County, due to its specific location. There are 64,013 residents within a 3-mile radius of the subject property, with a projected population growth rate of 4.3%, average age of 42 years, 35,689 households, with a growth rate of3.6% and l.7 people per household and $60,065 of median household income and median home value of$486,248. There are 256 ,499 residents within a 5-mile radius of the subject property, with a projected population growth rate of 5.8%, average age of40 years, 119,6 l 0 households, with a growth rate of 5.3% and 2.0 people per household and $49, 109 of median household income and median home value of $428,816. As per the most recent Miami-Dade County Retail Market Survey prepared by CoStar, the Miami Beach retail sub-market had a net absorption of -41, l 00 SF in the last twelve months (lower than the historical average of 105 , 149 SF, and lower than the 609,814 SF peak in 3"' Quarter of2007), with a vacancy rate of 5.3% and average quoted rental rate of $81.06/SF ($131. 75/SF for malls, $71.1 O/SF for power centers,$ l 00.3 l/SF forneighborhood shopping centers, $71.34/SF for strip centers, and $67.98 for general retail), with a rental rate t,>rowth rate of 5.2% in the last twelve months, with 74,702 SF delivered in the last twelve months, 60 ,091 SF to be delivered in the next twelve months and 142,173 SF proposed in the next four quarters. The five comparable rental located south of 5'" Street reflected a rental rate range of $54/SF to $80/SF on a triple-net basis; four comparable rental properties located along West Avenue, Purdy Avenue and Bay Road reflected a rental rate range of$70/SF to $90/SF on a triple net basis and $82. l l/SF on a modified-gross basis; while four comparable rental properties located along Alton Road, Washington Avenue and Pennsylvania Avenue reflected a rental rate range of $50/SF to $90/SF on a triple net basis (refer to the Addenda). As per CoStar, the nineteen sales of commercial properties in Miami Beach has indicated an average capitalization rate of5.7% which indicates strong demand from investors, with an average sale price/SF of $1,052. Six comparable sales of retail properties in South Beach in the last three years reflected a sale price/SF range of $894/SF to $1 ,080/SF (refer to the Addenda). We have analyzed the condominium sale prices, floor/view premiums, rate of sales, rental rates, as well as average price/SF for one-bedroom, two-bedroom, three-bedroom and four- bedroom units within eleven condominium apartment buildings in South Beach which would be comparable/competitive to the proposed condominium tower for the 500-block of Alton Road ("Site One"). Refer to the Addenda. J. ALHALE APPRAISALS, INC. Real Estate A11praisers and Consultants -25 - HIGHEST ANJl BEST USE, AS VA CANT Based upon analysis of those uses which would be considered physically possible, legally permissible and economically feasible , it is the appraiser's estimate that the Highest and Best Use of the subject sites would be : the Highest and Best Use of Site One is its development with a residential condominium apartment building, with an ancillary commercial component. This site already has approvals to be developed with a mixed-use residential/commercial building with 18,000 SF of retail and approximately 159 ,650 SF 163-unit residential component (170,696 SF allowed). Subject to satisfaction of certain property rights among Sites I, 2 and 3, this site is proposed to be developed with a high-rise residential apartment building which would be built to condominium quality standards, and possibly have an interim rental apartment use during the sell-out period; the Highest and Best Use of Site Two is its development with a mixed-use residential/commercial condominium building. This site already has approvals to be developed with a mixed-use residential /commercial building with 42,915 SF of retail and 253,840 SF 256-unit residential component, totaling 275,298 SF of buildable FAR area (277,684 SF allowed). Subject to satisfaction of certain property rights among Site l, 2 and 3, the 87,412 SF southeastern section of this site (Site 4) is proposed to be developed with a one-story multi-tenant 35,960 SF retai l strip; the Highest and Best Use of Site Three is its development with a residential condominium apartment building. This site already has approvals to be developed with a mixed-use residential/commercial building with 12,756 SF of retail and 83,349 SF 66-unit residential component, totaling 96,105 SF ofbuildable FAR area (98,000 SF allowed). Subject to satisfaction of certain property rights among Sites 1, 2 and 3, this site (in conjunction with the 51 ,430 SF southwestern portion of Site 2) is proposed to be dedicated to create a City- owned public park to serve the surrounding residential neighborhood; the Highest and Best Use of Site Four is its development with a mixed-use residential/ commercial condominium building. Subject to satisfaction of certain property rights among Sites 1, 2 and 3, this site is proposed to be developed with a one-story multi-tenant 35,960 SF retail strip; the Highest and Best Use of Site Five is its development with a mixed-use residential/commercial condominium apartment building. Subject to satisfaction of certain property rights among Sites I , 2 and 3, this site is proposed to be dedicated to create a City- owned public park to serve the surrounding residential neighborhood. J. ALHALE APPRAISALS, !NC. Real Estate Appraisers and Consultants -26 - THE VALUATION PROCEDURE The valuation procedure is defined in the 20 I 0 Edition of the Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal which was sponsored by the Appraisal Institute as follows: The act, manner and technique of performing the steps of a valuation method. In order to provide estimates of the Market Value of the Fee Simple Interest in Properties One, Two and Four in "as is" condition (land value, less estimated cost of demolition and carting), as of June 27, 2018 Market Value of the Fee Simple Interest in Properties One through Five, as vacant (land value), as of June 27, 2018, we have utilized the Sales Comparison Approach to Value. The Sales Comparison Approach to Value is based upon a comparison between recently sold sites and the subject sites, utilizing the sale price per square foot ofbuildable area unit of comparison. . J. ALHALE APPRAISALS, INC. Real Estate Appraisers and Consullants -27 - THE SALES COMPARISON APPROACH (LAND VALUATION) In order to estimate the value of the subject sites, the land is analyzed as vacant and available to be put to its Highest and Best Use. There are several different techniques which can be utilized in the valuation of land. The technique selected must relate to the specific factors inherent in the appraisal problem at hand. The land valuation technique selected must reflect the prudent and rationale behavior of the most probable, typically infonned purchaser/investor. In addition, the availability of reliable and verified market data forther leads to the selection of the applicable land valuation technique. I .The Sales Comparison Approach analyzes the sales of similar vacant sites, with comparison and adjustment made from these sales to the subject sites. The Sales Comparison Approach to Value is based on the principle of substitution; that is, when a property is replaceable in the market, its value tends to be set at the cost of acquiring an equally desirable substitute property assuming no costly delay in making the substitution. The Sales Comparison Approach to Value is based on a comparison between recently sold sites in Miami Beach and the subject site, utilizing the sale price/SF of buildable area method of comparison. 2. The Abstraction Method analyzes the sales of improved properties with an allocation made between land and improvement value. The indicated allocation may establish a typical ratio of land value to total value or to derive from the portion of the sales price allocated to land an estimate of land value for use as a comparable land sale. 3.The Cost of Development Method provides an estimate of the value of undeveloped land based upon the creation of a platted subdivision, development and sale of said parcel. The method assumes that the most probable purchaser of the land would be a developer/investor who plans to dispose of the developed sites at a profit. The costs of development are subtracted from the estimated proceeds of sale resulting in a net income projection which is discounted over the market absorption period. 4.The Land Residual Method treats the net income available to support the investment in the site as a residual. The income required to cover the investment in new improvements that represent the Highest and Best Use of the site is deducted from the Net Operating Income resulting in an estimate of the net income to the land which is then capitalized to estimate the land value. J. ALHALE APPRAISALS, INC . Real Estate Appraisers and Consullants -28 - THE SALES COMPARISON APPROACH (LAND VALUATION) T he comparable land sales are considered reasonably similar to th e subject property in tenns of zoni ng, location , physical characteristics, topogra phy and buildable utility . The sa les represent bona-fide "ann's length" tran sactions which are representativ e of preva iling market va lu es. Our ana lysis has taken into account those differentials relative to financing , time of sa le, size, location , fronta ge/ex posure, zoning, developmental potentia l and tunctional utility of the comparable sales as they compare to the subject sites. J. ALHALE APPRAISALS, INC. Real Estate Appraisers and Cons ultants -29- ----~-~---- .., l;;w~..; ~ill ~qq ~ffi § 8 13 § ~ :z.i ]JI w~ ~· m ~~ ~ • ~ ~~ i i ~ 1 ~ § ~ • ~m1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~1 ~..;~i ~E ~~~ ::0 ... ~ ~~ : : .. u : .. ... ; : u ~ z ~. ~~ ~ ~ J ~ ~ N ~ . I ~· •. .• . . . ~· . § • § " • § ~ • § • i~ ] ~ ~ ~" ~ ~" ~ ~ • • ~ • ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g ~ § 1 ! ~ Ii ! ! ~ ~ ~ ~~ • ~ " :ii f ~o~~ g~ ~~ =" "' -2 ~ ~ ~~ ~ ; ~ ; .. ~ .. ; # S g "' ~ §~ w • I ~~~~ ~~ ;;;;;; " • " S" § gj § • • §. • • • • § I ~ ~ ] • • z '" I; ti ~ 8 b ~ • ~ ~ ~ ~ ffi • ~ ~ ~ • :i • g • ~ ~ • g. ~g • ~ ~ ~ "' ;~~~ i!';o 2~ :.'!0 "' -f:l' ~ 5 ~e: ~ .., v~ ~ a il .,; .. .. : : u ~ ~ i% ~~ ~ Rw "' ~ "' "' . ~ h h H -• ~" ~~~· ~· § g~ § • • § • • •• § § I ~ ~ ~ ! I ~ ~, § ~ ~ ~ ~ § • ~ ~ ~-~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ • ~ " ~ ~ ~ ~ ! g ~ ~ !i g ~ ~ ~. " ~ a a ~ ~i ~i ~~ =o ~ s ~~ ~Q~~ ~~ a u~ ~ ~ .. ~ .. ... .. L~. ~ffiffi ~~,m " • ~~:i g~HH~ ~rn: § g~ § § § ~ = ~i I ~~·~ ~ •• um ~: ~ ~ ~ ~ H~ ~;:~rn:~ "~· ~ ~~ ~ I ; g ~ i a ~mg i J ! ~ i..;~i ~i! ~~,,~ ~ ~ ~ ~gg i~~I~~-~~~~ ~ 0 ~ a • a ~ • d ~ ~ ~ sssss ~"'.~~~.~~ ~ • > O<<o i " ~-· ~ ~~ !~ -" "" ~ • g~ § -§ ;; § ~ ~ i ] ! I e ~ h ~ ~ ~ ~ ~;: ~ ~ • ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ 1 ~ ~ ! ~ g ~ ~ i g ~ ~ ~~ • ~ a a ~ ~~~i ~~ ~~ -~ ~~ g l 0 ~ l • l ~ z ~~ ~ ~ z~ ~ ~ offi N I zt;~~ <w :J " -t" -§ "o § • 0 § • O ·~ ~ • I ~: !~,. ~· I I• ' 8 I ~ ~· w i I .~ I i ~ g I i ~ g·,~~ • ~ ~ I ., :il~~i ;~ ~ .,,o U N ~ ~~ ~ ~ U~ ~ -~ 21 a . L·. ~ffi ~ " -~ < § I g~ I § 8 • ~I ~ ~ ~· 1 ~~h fl• • h " • ~ § P ~ • ~ 1• ~ ! ! ~ ~ 1 ! *~~ ~ ~ ~ e 3 ~~~~ 1~ ~ go u N ~ ;a ~ 5 ~ ~ 0 ~ ; ; .. ~ I ,._ ,.. ,. . !"''"'' " -. . .... 0 Zzm~ zC~ ee ~8 ~ 8 ~ ! ~~~~ ~=~ ~~ ~~ u N ! §a:i ;t~.., ~~ f - . i ! ! c ! •. ,. ~ ~ ~ -~ l ~.? ~1 ! 1 1 ~ ~i h •; ·-! • ~ • ~ H ~ ~ I . b i~ U 1 h l J ~ " • • , 1 , • ! ~ ~. •• •U• ! J! !~ -§ ~~ ~ ] ~ ! ! ~ ~ -! h h h !!ll ~ ~ • zz N • 0 0 0 u " • "" "" ,.... • I ~- THE SALES COMPARISON APPROACH (LAND VALUATION) --Continued -- ANALYSIS OF COMPARABLE SALES (SITE ONE/ "500 SITE") Financing The comparable sales were "ann's length" and "cash to the seller" transactions, with typical tenns of purchase and therefore, no adjustment for financing was required. Time of Sale The comparable land sales analyzed herei n have occurred between March 2015 and Aui,'Ust 2017, in addition to two current li stings. The comparable sales reflect crnTent market conditions in the subject area and therefore, no quantitative adjustment was applied to the comparable sales. Location The comparable sales are located between 3'' Street and 17'" Street, in the South Beach section of Miami Beach. However, Comparable Land Sale Numbers Four, Six and Seven required a negative locational adjustment due to their specific location on 6'" Street and Washington Avenue, 3'' Street and Washington Avenue; and 3'' Street and Ocean Drive. FrontageNisibilitv/Exposure Site One, with frontage on three streets and a highway ramp, is superior to Comparable Land Sale Numbers Three, Five and Eight; and inferior to Comparable Land Sale Numbers One and Two. Configuration Site One and the comparable sites are generally shaped rectangular, with adequate frontage and depth, thereby requiring no adjustment for configuration. Size/Scale Comparable Sale Numbers Two, Three, and Five through Eight required a negative size/scale adjustment as significantly smaller sites command a premium on a sale price per square foot basis. Physical Development Potenti a l and Functional Utility The comparable sales were inferior to Site One in tenns of physical development potential and functional utility due to their significantly smaller size, thereby requiring a positive adjus~nent. J. ALHALE APPRAISALS, INC. Real Eslale A1>praiscrs and Consultants -31 - THE SALES COMPARISON APPROACH {LAND VALUATION) --Continued -- ANALYSIS OF COMP ARABLE LAN D SALES (SITE ONE / "500 SITE)-Continued Topography Site One and the comparable land sales were generally level at street-grade. However, we have estimated the cost of demolition at the comparable sales and the subject site, ifthere were older improvements which would be razed for redevelopment. CORRELATION OF VALUE The comparable sales indicated unadjusted sale price/SF of site area of $640.00, $662. 78, $295.31, $489.80, $245.45, $634.62, $944.2 I (asking price) and $579.06 (asking price). The comparable sales indicated unadjusted sale price/SF of build able area of $284.44, $331.39, $236.25, $244.90 $196.36, $362.64, $539.56 (asking price) and $289.53 (asking price). After the analytical adjustments, the comparable sales indicated adjusted sale price/SF of site area of $673.23, $695.92, $339.61, $492. 77, $295.45, $634.62, $991.42 (asking price) and $669.40 (asking price). After the analytical adjustments, the comparable sales indicated adjusted sale price/SF of buildable area of $299.21, $347.96, $271.69, $246.39, $236.36, $362.64, $566.54 (asking price) and $334.70 (asking price). Based on the preceding analysis, $300/SF ofbuildable area reflect a reasonable estimate of Market Value of the Fee Simple Interest in Site One, as vacant. The estimated cost of demolition of the nearly6,000 SF building was deducted to arrive at th e "as is" value. T hen: 170,696 SF x $300/SF = Estimated Market Value of the Fee Simple Interest in Site One, "as if" Vacant (Rounded) Less: Estimated Cost of Demolition and Carting of Existing Vacant Improvements Estimated Market Value of the Fee Simple Interest in Site One in "as is" Condition (Rounded) $51,208,800 $51,200,000 $30,000 $51,170,000 J. ALHALE APPRAISALS, INC. Real Estate Appntisers and Consultants -32 - ~i I U . I ~ ~. ~ffi n !l ~~~g ~~ ~~ ~ ,,~~-·~ .. H ]j ~ :i g,., ~~ :c ~ i~~ ~ ~~~ ~ > ~ • < ?i ~ g~ . ~ !~ ~ ~ " H ~~ ;~ ~~ ~~ !j ~ :c ~ ~i~~ e !~~~ ~ ' :i ~ I ~ ~= !i !i ~i p ·• ~~~~ ~i ~~~t ~:: g~:li s~ :i:tu~~ t;;ll!"'ii! ll:oi~ • ~~~~ ~ti~ ~ > ~~~;! s-o"'ii! ;~1~ ~ ~ ~§ !~ ~~ ~ii! ii ~~ ~; ~i ~: ~i ! ~ i ~m •m ~fil g~ ~~ ~~ H ~!~ m i i s ~ i " ~ ! § ~ ~ ! i i ~~~~~ l ~~~ll~ ! l i " ;, d ""• ""• !~ j! I'll 1is ~.t l.t ~: ~: ~~~~t! ~~~~~ ~~~s~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ f u nu~ I § § q § § • i • a § § ' . • i! ; :s ~ i :s g a ~ i a ~ i ~ -~ if ~~ ~f ~ It ~ u ~ ~ ~ = a ' ~ j ! 'Ii 'Iii h Ii HU THE SALES COMPARISON A PPROAC H (LAND VALUATION) --Continued -- ANALYSIS OF COMPARABLE SALES (SITE T WO I "600 SITE") Financing The comparable sales were "ann's length" and "cash to the sell er" transacti ons, with typical tem1 s of purchase and therefore, no a djustment for financin g was requ ired. Time of Sale The comparable land sales a na lyzed herein have occurred between March 2015 and August 20 17, in addition to two c urrent listings. The compa rable sales reflect current market conditions in the subject area and therefore, no quantitative adjustment was applied to the comparable sales. Location The comparable sales are located between 3'' Street and 17'" Street, in the South Beach section of M iami Beach. However, Comparable Land Sale Numbers Four, Six and Seven required a negative locational adj ush11ent due to their speci fic location on 6'h Street and Washington Avenue, 3'' Street and Washington Avenue; and 3"' Street and Ocean D rive. FrontageNisibility/Exposure Site Two, with frontage on three streets, is superior to Comparable Land Sale Numbers Three, Five and Eight; and inferior to Comparable Land Sale Numbers One and T wo . Configuration Site T wo a nd the comparable sites are generally sha ped rectangu lar, wi th adequate fron tage and de pth, there by requiring no adj ustment for configuration . Size/Scale Comparable Sale Num bers Two, T hree, and Five through E ight required a negative size/scale adjustment as signi ficantly smaller sites command a premium on a sale price per square foot basis. Physical D evelopment Potenti a l and Functional Util ity T he comparable sales were inferior to Site Two in tenns of physical development potential and functional utility due to their sign ifi cantly smaller si ze, thereby requiring a positive adjushnent. J. ALHALE APPRAISA LS, INC. Real Estate A1>1>raiscr s a nd Consulta nts -34 - THE SALES COMPARISON APPROACH (LAND V ALVA TION) --Continued -- ANALYSIS OF COMPARABLE LAND SALES (SITE TWO I "600 SITE")-Continued Topography Site Two and the comparable land sales were generally level at street-t,'l"ade. However, we have estimated the cost of demolition at the comparable sales and the subject site, if there were older improvements which would be razed for redevelopment. CORRELATION OF VALUE Th e comparable sal es indicated unadjusted sale price/SF of site area of $640.00, $662. 78 , $295.31, $489.80, $245.45 , $634.62, $944.21 (asking price) and $579.06 (asking price). The comparable sales indicated unadjusted sale price/SF ofbuildable area of$284.44, $331.39, $236.25, $244.90 $196.36, $362.64, $539.56 (asking price) and $289.53 (asking price). After the analytical adjustments, the comparable sales indicated adjusted sale price/SF of site area of $673.23, $695 .92 , $339 .61 , $492. 77, $320.00, $634.62, $991.42 (asking price) and $669.40 (asking price). After the analytical adjustments, the comparable sales indicated adjusted sale price/SF ofbuildable area of$299.21, $347.96, $271.69, $246.39, $256.00, $362.64, $66.54 (asking price) and $334.70 (asking price). Based on the preceding analysis, $275/SF to $300/SF ofbuildable area reflect a reasonabl e range of Market Value of the Fee Simple Interest in Site Two, as vacant. The estimated cost of demolition of the nearly 60,000 SF building was deducted to anive at the "as is" value. Then: 277,684 SF x $275 /SF = 277,684 SF x $300/SF = Estimated Market Value of the Fee Simple Interest in Site Two, "as if' Vacant (Rounded) Less: Estimated Cost of Demolition and Carting of Existing Vacant Improvements Estimated Market Value of the Fee Simple Interest in Site Two in "as is" Condition (Rounded) $76,363, I 00 $83,305 ,200 $79,800,000 $300,000 $79,500,000 J. ALHALE APPRAISALS, INC. Real Estate Appraisers and Consullants -35 - Jj Jj Hl1 li -·!' i! 111! !j i 1~ ~~ I ~ ~.. 5 u . I ·i.~ ! u ~. !~!~ ~ ~~ '. Jj Jj Jj . ' ~ .. ~ 2 '" " '!' ll . ,, ii Ii 1i1 !! q II .. !~ H ~~ H l,1. j! i ~ i ! ~ i . ''Ii H 11 I i!p 11 Jj I! 111 i ·P 1 '•l· iii! ~: ~2 ~ ~ ~ s 23 ~' !o I! != 1~ e" !1l I~~ ! ~ 'i ~ l ~ ~ ,, ! l := .. - s ~ l n " "! !i i i ,. !I ii ~HE iB~ d !' "' d !• "! ii "! •l l' "' d !' "' d !' "' ' } j ' ~l ll ' "H' ~ ~ ~ ~~ :;: i i ~ !' ~; ' ;;.1H1l-H ~~P-1 ~ "' ~' ~~~!I i; a ::; ~ i: ""'ii f J j f ! .i !f • l if i I • • t ! l 11 ll u THE SALES COMPARISON APPROACH (LAND VALUATION) --Continued -- ANALYSIS OF COMPARABLE SALES (SITE THREE I "700 SITE") Financing The comparable sales were "ann's length" and "cash to the seller" transactions, with typical tenns of purchase and therefore, no adjustment for financing was required. Time of Sale The comparable land sales analyzed herein have occurred between March 2015 and August 2017, in addition to two current listings. The comparable sales reflect current market conditions in the subject area and therefore, no quantitative adjustment was applied to the comparable sales. Location The comparable sales are located between 3'' Street and 17•h Street , in the South Beach section of Miami Beach. However, Comparable Land Sale Numbers Four, Six and Seven required a negative locational adjustment due to their specific location on 6'h Street and Washington Avenue, 3'' Street and Washington Avenue; and 3'' Street and Ocean Dri ve. FrontageNisibility/Exposure Site Three, with frontage on West Avenue, is inferior to Comparable Land Sale Numbers One, Two, Four, Six and Seven. Configuration Site Three and the comparable sites are generally shaped rectangular, with adequate frontage and depth, th ere by requiring no adjustment for configuration. Size/Scale Comparable Sale Numbers Two, Three, and Five through Eight required a negative size/scale adjustment as significantly smaller sites typically command a premium on a sale price per square fool basis. Comparable Sale Number Four required a slight positive size/ scal e adjustment as larger sites typically refl ect a discount on a sale price per square foot basis. . I. ALHALE APPRAISALS, INC. Real Estate Ap1>raisers and Consultants -37 - THE SALES COMPARISON APPROACH (LAND VALUATION) --Continued - ANALYSIS OF COMPARABLE LAND SALES (S ITE THREE I "700 SITE")-Conti nued Physical Development Potential and Functional Utility Comparable Sale Numbers One through Three, and Five through Eight were inferior to Site Three in tenns of physical developm ent potential and functional util ity due to their significantly smaller size, thereby requiring a positive adjustment. Comparable Sale Number Four was superior to Site Three in tenns of physical development potenti al and ftmctional utility due to its larger size, thereby requiring a slight negative adju stment. Topography Site Three and the comparable land sales were generally level at street-grade. However, we have estimated the cost of demolition at the comparable sales, if there were older improvements which would be razed for redevelopment. CORRELA TTON OF VALUE The comparable sales indicated unadj usted sale price/SF of site area of$640.00, $662.78, $295.31, $489 .80, $245.45, $634.62 , $944.2 1 (asking price) and $579.06 (asking price). The comparable sales indicated unadjusted sale price/SF ofbuildable area of$284.44, $331.39, $236.25, $244.90 $196.36, $362.64, $539.56 {asking price) and $289.53 {asking price). Aller the analytical adj ustments, the comparable sales indicated adjusted sale price/SF o f site area of $609.23, $662.78, $310.08, $419.30, $270.91, $57 1.15 , $897.00 (asking) and $611.49 (asking price). After the analytical adjustments, the comparable sales indicated adjusted sale price/SF of buildable area of $270.77, $331.39, $248.07, $209.65, $216.73, $326.37, $512.58 {asking price) and $305.75 {asking price). Based on the preceding analysis, $250/SF ofbui ldable area reflect a reasonable esti mate of Market Value of the Fee Sim ple Interest in Site Three, as vacant. Then: 98,000 SF x $250/SF = Estimated Market Val ue of the Fee Simple Interest in Si te Three in "as is" Condition (Vacant land; Rounded) $24,500,000 $24,500,000 .J. ALHALE APPRAISALS, INC . Real Estate Ap1>rnisers and Consultants -38 - , __ •~ • 3 THE SALES COMPARISON APPROACH (LAND VALUATION) --Continued --• I ~~ ~ ~ ~~ "o H ~ffi § ~ § ~ 0 • § ~ 0 ... • § § I ~ ~ ~ !~ ~~ ~ g §il 2~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ! i:l ~ § ! 0 § § ~ oe.!~b g ~ l a~ ANALYSISOFCOMPARABLESALES(SITEFOUR /"RETAILSITE") " w w w Financing ~ z ~t; ~ij ~ • > • • 3 ' I g~~~ <w o• " ' • ~ ~ ~ § ~ § -• § -• § -• !: . . . !~ ~~"~ ~~ ~~ s~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g ~ § i I ~§. i a ~~~11~. g ~ ~-Thecompa rablesaleswere"ann'slength"and"c~sh_tothe_seller"transact1ons,w1thtyp1cal ~ ~" 8 ~ d -~ ~ • ~ ;; ~ ;; · ;; · :i I: :q tenns of purchase and therefore, no adjustment tor fmanc mg was requ1red . e , ~t; U u ~ Time of Sale r I ~~~~ e~ ~~ h ~ • ~ • i ~ -§ ~ § • • • § • • .... 0 ~ ~ ~ • ! ~ ~~ ~ ~i ~ ~ o• " -• ~ ii ~ ~ ~ 3 ~ i M 0 ~ l M ••• ~. • ~ i a The comparabl e land sales analyzed he_rem ha ve occurred between March 20 I 5 and August ii ' ~ •" • £ 20 I 7, m add1tmn to two current hstmgs. The comparable sales reflect current market conditions in the subject area and therefore, no quantitative adjustment was applied to the · 1 § h ~~ ~; _ • ~' ~ ~ ;!;! § gilj § § § comparable sales. ! 1 ~ ~ i ~ § ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ; ~ ~ i ; ~ m~ ~ ~ i ~ Lo . ::1"" r~ ~~ -~ ~ 1:1 ;;i tH: r;t v~ ti • ri .. .. :! U U Catton o oo The comparable sales are located between 3'' Street and I 7" Street, in th e South Beach • ~~~~ ~$$ u n " 0 • ~~ ~ H ~ ~ § gffi § § § • section of Miami Beach. _However, Comparable Land Sale Numbers.Four, Six and Seven !J I ~~~~ :;~~ H U ~· 8 8 '· ~ i~ i ~~ ; ; ~ ~~ ~ i ; ~ ~ § i ~~~~~ ~ i i 3 reqmred a negahve locational adjustment due to th eir specific locahon on 6'h Street and m·~< ~H ~~ ~~ •-" 0 ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ a 0 ~ ~ • ::i . . . ;: !: i'i . Washington Avenue, 3'' Street and Washington Avenue; and 3'' Street and Ocean Drive. . 3: 0 C>C> ~~ ~ 20 ~ FrontageNisibility/Exposure . ~w~" n ~~ -~ i;; ~ • § g~ § -• § -§ ~ : i . . . . . !JI ~h~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 3~ 1'. i ft ~ 1' i i ~~~~~ • ~ ~ ~ ~ S1teFour,w1thfrontageonAltonRoad_and6"Street,1s supenortoComparableLand Sale ~ ::1 S:~ ss -g "' l ,_,_ l l u. u :ii Numbers Three, Fi ve and Eight; and mf"enor to Comparable Land Sale Numbers One, Two , "' Four, Six and Seven. ~ ~ 0 • !i I ~i~~ ii i §-~ 8 § ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ § • ' • § • ~ ... ~ 0 I ~ ~ Configuration ••i~ i~ ~ .~ ~ " • ~ ~ ~ I ~ 3~ ~ i a • ~ i a ··~ ~ • • : a . . . . ' " Site Four and the comparable sites are generally shaped rectangular, wi th adequ ate rrontage z and depth, thereby requiring no adj ustment for configuration. .. ~~ iii ~~ i .. :: w ~ ~ § ~~ § § § .. . !! I ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ :i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i g ~~ ~ i i ~ ~ i i *~~ ~ ~ ~ ;,: Size/Scale ~~ .._ ~s ~ .., "' IS 5 r.! ~ u~ ~ ~ "' :; ! U • • ° Comparable Sale Numbers Two, Three, and Five through Eight required a negative size/scale . I .,, .. ~,., ~ .,,.,""""' ·~"· ·"~ wm<=d • '"m,.m ,. • ~,, '""""' ~ ... ,~, ~ -c ~8 ~i~ ~ basis. 1;, I • ~ ~ • ~ "i~. ~ "-:; • ~ ~~ ~~ 9 ~~ me~ R ~~ u N ~ . . . . . a " ~ ~ 'h ~ • -Physical Development Potential and Functional Utility The comparable sales were in ferior to Site Four in tenns of physical development potential ~ j and functional uti li ty due to their significantly smaller size, thereby requiring a positive : i .3 ! adjustment. " -~= ~~ ~ i i ~ ~i [ ii ~i t~ ! l ! ? ~~ I H ~ i . I ' ·1~ i ~ L 1 ! h i l •• . '-. " '" '" l I ~ u r j I > l ! ~ ~ ~Jt it f'l ~ ! !~ ! ~ i! ~ ! ! ~ a J ~ ~ j l H ~' Lid l 1 l• 1 .1.ALHALEArrRAISALS,INc. Real l!:state Appraisers and ConsuHants -40 - THE SALES COMPARISON APPROACH (LAND VALUATION) --Continued -- ANALYSIS OF COMPARABLE LAND SALES !1l I !! ! !l '' Vi ' Ii "rn i 1 I .l (SITE FOUR I "RETAIL SITE")-Continued lf an ~ ! l ! ; ! ~ '! ! I ' i ~ ~ i • ~ i; ~ ~" H l j ! I• ! I I ! !f ~ ~ ~ ; § '! Topography I' i! !i l l l ' I l !!W 'i i ~l Site Four and th e comparable land sales were generally level at street-grade. However, we Ji ,qi I !I ~ ~ ~ ~ : i i ii ! I ! ! i i ' ! i • i have estimated the cost of demolition at the comparable sales and the subject site, if th ere l ' I i i ~ a ~ I •f were older improvements which would be razed for redevelopment. CORRELATION OF VALUE h!111 !! Ii 1. 'i I Jj i l ~~S ;~~~ ' i ' ~ I i ~ ! '~! ~ ~ "i' i ~ ~ ~ ' !· ~ 2 5 ! ~ i The comparable sales indicated unadjusted sale price/SF of site area of $640.00, $662. 78, $295.3 1, $489.80, $245.45, $634.62, $944.2 1 (asking price) and $579.06 (asking price). The comparable sales indicated unadjusted sale price/SF of buildable area of $284.44, Jj 1,1 , 11 u ~; i ~ ~-i ii !iii u ! i ! ! i l ' ! I ! •n u ~ J ! " i ~ ~ :r~t ii ~ a $33 1.39, $236.25, $244.90 $196.36, $362.64, $539.56 (asking price) a nd $289.53 (asking price). ii11 111 Ii l! ~ 3 ~ 3 ! '' After the analytical adjustments, the comparable sales ind icated adjusted sale price/SF of site Jj i''!H!ii !j I I ~H~ti!(• i ' i • i qi~~ area of$64 1.23, $662.78, $339.6 1, $443.79, $795.45, $602.88, $944.21 (asking price) and '' u u a ~! : I ! ri"' ;H ~~ ~~ j i $669.40 (asking price). ~ After the analytical adjustments, the comparable sales indicated adj usted sale price/SF Jj l,jl !l jj !l j ; ! ! 11 l I ! i j l i i ' ; ' i n ~ ~~ s I ' • i of buildable area of $284.99, $331.39, $271.69, $221.90, $236.36, $344.5 1, $539.56 ~i i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ! I ! a ~ (asking price) and $334.70 (asking price). n : q i . Based on the preceding analysis, $275/SF to $300/SF ofbuildable area re fl ect a reasonable ' '! I l range of Market Value of the Fee Simple Interest in Site Four, as vacant. The estimated cost Jj !ii i i· !~ ~ ! ! I U i l I j ! ~ i i ' ! i . '~ ~ ;J ' = "i ' ' • of demolition of the nearly 60,000 SF building was deducted to arrive at the "as is" val ue. ! a ! = Then: '. '1 l !" ~ 174,824 SF x $275/SF = $48,076,600 Jj !1!1 L i ~ i ~ i i. • I f i • • ~: a ~ ~ ~ ! I i ~ ~ l ~ l I I i ~ f ~t: ; ~ ~ ~ p ' 174,824 SF x $300/SF = $52,447,200 Estimated Market Value of the Fee I I II I hh !! ih·mnm 1, Simple Interest in Site Four, "as if'' Vacant (Rounded) $50,300,000 '~ i i ~ I Less: Estimated Cost of Demolition and Carting of Existing Vacant Improvements $300,000 I ! "i Estimated Market Valu e of the Fee I ' ,j, i i . I .. .. i Simple Interest in Site Four in "as is" i ~1 t ; ; i ! i i . l 1 I 1 Condition (Rounded) $50,000,000 l H l l j l r i ! 1 l ! ~ --i ~ I l II H j f ll I l l i ! j J l l i iliHi i ! ! : ; i ! J. ALHALE APPRAISALS, INC. Real Es ta lc A11praisers and Consultants -4 1 - THE SALES COMPARISON APPROACH (LAND VALUATION) --Continued -- ANALYSIS OF COMPARABLE SALES (SITE FIVE I "PARK SITE") Financing The comparable sales were "ann's length" and "cash to the seller" transactions, with typical tenns of purchase and therefore, no adjustment for financing was required. Time of Sale The comparable land sales analyzed herein have occurred between March 2015 and August 2017, in addition to two current listings. The comparable sales reflect current market conditions in the subject area and therefore, no quantitative adjustment was applied to th e comparable sales. Location The comparable sales are located between 3'' Street and 17'" Street, in the South Beach section of Miami Beach. However, Comparable Land Sale Numbers Four, Six and Seven required a negative locational adjustment due to their specific location on 6'" Street and Washington Avenue, 3'' Street and Washington Avenue; and 3'' Street and Ocean Drive. FrontageNisibilitv/Exposure Site Five, with frontage on West Avenue and 6'" Street, is superior to Comparable Land Sale Numbers Three, Five and Eight; and inferior to Comparable Land Sale Numbers One, Two, Four, Six and Seven. Configuration Site Five and the comparable sites are generally shaped rectangular, with adequate frontage and depth, thereby requiring no adjustment for configuration. Size/Scale Comparable Sale Numbers Two, Three, and Five through Eight required a negative size/scale adjustment as significantly smaller sites command a premium on a sale price per square foot basis. Physical Development Potential and Functional Utility The comparable sa les were inferior to Site Five in tenns of physical development potential and functional utility due to their significantly smaller size, thereby requiring a positive adjusnnent. J. ALHALE APPRAISALS, INC. Real Estate Ap1>raisers and Cons ultants -43 - THE SALES COMPARISON APPROACH (LAND VALUATION) --Continued -- ANALYSIS OF COMPARABLE LAND SALES (SITE FIVE I "PARK SITE")-Continued Topography Site Five and the comparable land sales were generally level at street-grade. However, we have estimated the cost of demolition at the comparable sales, if there were older improvements which would be razed for redevelopment. CORRELATION OF VALUE The comparable sales indicated unadjusted sale price/SF of site area of$640.00, $662.78, $295.31, $489 .80, $245.45, $634.62, $944.2 1 (asking price) and $579.06 (asking price). The comparable sales indicated unadjusted sale price/SF ofbuildable area of$284.44, $331.39, $236.25, $244.90 $196.36, $362.64, $539.56 (asking price) and $289.53 (asking price). After the ana lyti cal adjustments, the comparable sales indicated adjusted sale price/SF of site area of$641.23, $662.78, $339.61, $443.79, $295.45, $571.15, $897.00 (asking price) and $669.40 (asking price). After the analytical adjustments, the comparable sales indicated adjusted sale price/SF or buildable area or $284.99, $331.39, $271.69, $221.90, $236.36, $326.37, $512.58 (asking price) and $334.70 (asking price). Based on the preceding analysis, $250/SF to $275/SF ofbuildable area reflect a reasonable range of Market Value of the Fee Simple Int erest in Site Five, as vacant. Then: 200,860 SF x $250/SF = 200,860 SF x $275/SF = Estimated Market Value of the Fee Simple Int erest in Site Five in "as is" Condition (Vacant land; Rounded) $50,215,000 $55,236,500 $52,500,000 J. ALHALE APPRAISALS, INC. Real Esta te Appraisers and Consultants -44 - RECONCILIATION AND FINAL VALUE ESTIMATE MARKET VALUE ESTTMA TES: Income Capitalization Approach to Value: Sales Comparison Approach to Value: Cost Approach to Value: Reconciled Final Value Estimates: Not Applicable $51,200 ,000 Site I As if Vacant $51 ,170,000 Site I As Is $79 ,800,000 Site 2 As If Vacant $79,500,000 Site 2 As ls $24,500 ,000 Site 3 As ls (Vacant) $50,300,000 Site 4 As If Vacant $50,000,000 Site 4 As ls $52 ,500,000 Site 5 As Is (Vacant) Not Applicable $51,200,000 Site 1 As ff Vacant $51,170,000 Site I As Is $79,800,000 Site 2 As If Vacant $79,500,000 Site 2 As Is $24,500,000 Site 3 As Is (Vacant) $50,300,000 Site 4 As If Vacant $50,000,000 Site 4 As Is $52,500,000 Site 5 As Is (Vacant) In order to provide estimates of the Market Value of the Fee Simple Interest in Properties One, Two and Four in "as is" condition (land val ue, less est imated cost of demolition and carting), as of June 27, 2018 Market Value of the Fee Simple Int erest in Properties One through Five, as vacant (land value), as of June 27, 2018, we have utilized the Sales Comparison Approach to Value. The Sales Comparison Approach to Value is based upon a comparison between recently sold sites and the subject sites, utilizing the sale price per sq uare foot ofbuildabl e area unit of comparison. J. ALHALE APPRAISALS, INC. Real Estate Appraisers and Consultants -45 - RECONCILIATION AND FINAL VALUE ESTIMATE It is my estimate that the Market Value of the Fee Simple Interest in Properties One, Two and Four in "as is" condition (land value, less estimated cost of demolition and carting), as of June 27, 2018 Market Value of the Fee Simple Interest in Properties One through Five, as vacant (land· value), as of June 27, 2018, was: MARKET VALUE OF THE FEE SIMPLE INTEREST IN SITE I ("500 SITE"), "AS IF" VACANT FIFTY ONE MILLION TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($51 ,200,000) MARKET VALUE OF THE FEE SIMPLE INTEREST IN SITE I ("500 SITE") IN "AS IS" CONDITION (LAND VALUE, LESS DEMOLITION COST) FIFTY ONE MILLION ONE HUNDRED SEVENTY THOUSAND DOLLARS ($51, 170,000) MARKET VALUE OF THE FEE SIMPLE INTEREST IN SITE 2 ("600 SITE"), "AS IF" VACANT SEVENTY NINE MILLION EIGHT HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($79,800,000) MARKET VALUE OF THE FEE SIMPLE INTEREST IN SITE 2 ("600 SITE") IN "AS JS" CONDITION (LAND VALUE, LESS DEMOLITION COST) SEVENTY NINE MILLION FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($79 ,500,000) MARKET VALUE OF THE FEE STMPLE INTEREST IN SITE 3 ("700 SITE" IN "AS IS" CONDITION (LAND VALUE) TWENTY FOUR MILLION FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($24,500,000) MARKET VALUE OF THE FEE SIMPLE INTEREST IN SITE 4 ("RETAIL SITE"), "AS IF" VACANT FIFTY MILLION THREE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($50,300 ,000) MARKET VALUE OF THE FEE SIMPLE INTEREST IN SITE 4 ("RETAIL SIT£'') IN "AS IS" CONDITION (LAND VALUE, LESS DEMOLITION COST) FIFTY MILLION DOLLARS ($50,000 ,000) MARKET VALUE OF THE FEE SIMPLE INTEREST IN SITE 5 ("PARK SITE") IN "AS IS" CONDITION (LAND VALUE) FIFTY TWO MILLION FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($52,500,000) J. ALHALE APPRAISALS, INC. Real Estate Appraisers and Consultants -46 - CONTINGENT AND LIMITING CONDITIONS We assume no responsibility formatters legal in nature, nor do we render any opinion as to the title, which is assumed to be marketable. The properties are appraised as though under responsible ownership and management. When applicable, the sketch in this report is included to assist the reader in visualizing the properties , and we assume no responsibility for its accuracy. We have made no survey of the properties. We are not required to give testimony or appear in court because of having made this appraisal, with reference to the properties in question, unless arrangements have been previously made thereof. Additional professional valuation services rendered would require further compensation under a separate contractual agreement. Where applicable, the distribution of the total valuation in this report between land and improvements applies only under the existing program of utilizations. The separate valuations for land and building must not be used in conjunction with any other appraisal and are invalid if so used. We assume that there are no hidden or unapparent conditions of the property, subsoil or structures which would render it more or less valuable. We assume no responsibility for such conditions or for engineering which might be required to discover such factors. Jnfonnation , estimates and opinions furnished to us and contained in this report were obtained from sources considered reliable and believed to be true and correct. However, no responsibility for accuracy can be assumed by us. No one other than the undersigned prepared the analyses, conclusions and estimates concerning the real estate set forth in this appraisal. Neither all nor any part of the contents of this report, or copy thereat; shall be used for any purpose by any but the client without the previous written consent of the appraiser, and/or the client; nor shall it be conveyed by any including the client to the public through advertising, publications , news, sales or other media, without the written consent and approval of the author, particularly the valuation conclusions, identity of the appraiser, orany reference to any professional society or institute or any initialed designation conferred upon the appraiser. This appraisal report has been made in confonnitywith and is subject to the requirements of the Code of Professional Ethics and Standards of Professional Practice of the Appraisal Institute, the Unifonn Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice adopted by the Appraisal Standards Board of the Appraisal Foundation and the requirements of the State ofFlorida for state certified real estate appraisers, as well as current Federal regulatory agency criteria. J. ALHALE APPRAISALS, INC. Real Estate Appraisers and Consultants -47 - CONTINGENT AND LIMITING CONDITIONS --Continued - The existence of hazardous materials , which may or may not be present on the properties, was not observed. We have no knowledge of the existence of such materials on or in the properties , nor are we qualified to detect such substances. The presence of potentially hazardous materials and/or substances may affect the value of the properties. The value estimate reflected in this appraisal report is predicated on the assumption that there is no such material on or in the properties that would cause a loss in value. No responsibility is assumed for any such conditions, or for any expertise or engineering knowledge required to discover them. The client is urged to retain an expert in this field , if desired. The Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA") became effective January26, 1992. We have not made a specific compliance survey and analysis of this property to detennine whetheror not it is in confonnity with the various detailed requirements of the "ADA". It is possible that a compliance survey of the property, together with a detailed analysis of the requirements of the "ADA" could reveal that the property is not in compliance with one or more of the requirements of the Act. Since we have no direct evidence relating to this issue, we did not consider possible non-compliance with the requirement of"ADA" in estimating the value of the property. The appraisal report can not be used in connection with a real estate syndicate(s) or securities related activity(ies) and is invalid if so used without the previous knowledge or written consent of the appraiser. Said activities include but would not be limited to activities which are required to be registered with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission or any state regulatory agency regulating investments made as a public offering, as well as activities involving Real Estate Investment Trusts, Limited Partnerships, Mortgage Backed Securities and any other transaction which is subject to the securities Exchange Act of 1933 , the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Trust Indenture Act of 1939, the Jnvesbnent Advisors Act of 1940 or State Blue Sky or securities laws or any amendments thereto. As part of the Highest and Best Use analysis and scope of the consulting assignment, we have provided additional illustrative analysis relative to the conceptual 42-story residential apartment building at Site One and the one-story retail strip at the eastern portion of Site Two. The plans for these potential proposed uses are preliminary in nature, and have not been finalized or have approvals to be built. Accordingly, our analysis is illustrative and is intended to provide a comparative analysis. Extraordinary assumption is defined as an assumption, directly related to a specific assignment , which, if found to be false, could alter the appraiser's opinions or conclusions. Extraordinary assumptions presume as fact otherwise uncertain infonnation about physical, legal, or economic characteristics of the subject properties; or about conditions external to the subject properties, such as market conditions or trends; or about the integrity of the data used in an analysis. The use of the extraordinary assumption, as described herein, might affect the conclusion(s) of the comparative analysis as it relates to the subject properties. The use of this appraisal is limited to the client, and it should be further noted that the rationale for how the appraiser arrived at the opinions and conclusions set forth in the report may not be understood properly without additional infomiation in the appraiser's workfile . . J. ALHALE APPRAISALS, INC. Real Estate Appraisers and Consultants -48 - CERTIFICATION The undersigned do hereby certify that, to the best of our knowledge and belief, except as otherwise noted in the appraisal report: The statements of fact contained in this report, upon which the analyses, opinions and conclusions expressed herein are based, are tn1e and correct. I have perfonned no services as an appraiser regarding the properties that are the subject of this appraisal assignment, within the three year period preceding the acceptance of this assignment. The reported analyses, opinions and conclusions are limited only by the reported assumptions and limiting conditions and are our personal, unbiased professional analyses, opinions and conclusions. We have no present or prospective interest in the properties that are the subject of this report and we have no personal interest or bias with respect to the parties involved. The amount of our compensation is not contingent upon the development or reporting of a predetennined value of 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. Our analyses, opinions and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared , in confonnity with the requirements of the Code of Professional Ethics and Standards of Professional Practice of the Appraisal Institute, the Unifonn Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice adopted by the Appraisal Standards Board of the Appraisal Foundation and the requirements of the State of Florida for state certified real estate appraisers, as well as current Federal regulatory agency criteria. My engagement in this assignment was not contingent upon developing or reporting predetermined values. The appraisal assignment has not been based on a required minimum valuation , a specific valuation , or the approval of a loan. The use of this report is subject to the requirements of the Appraisal Institute relating to review by its duly authorized representatives, as well as the Florida Real Estate Appraisal Board. As of the date of this report, Jozef Alhale has completed the requirements of the continuing education program of The Appraisal Institute. The appraiser has visually inspected the perimeters of the subject vacant sites which are described in this report. .I. ALHALE APPRAISALS, INC. Real Estate A11praisers and Consultant's -49 - CERTIFICATION No one other than the undersigned prepared the analyses, conclusions and opinions concerning real estate that are set forth in this appraisal report, nor provided significant professional assistance to the person signing this report. It is the opinion of the undersigned that the estimated the Market Value of the Fee Simple Interest in Properties One, Two and Four in "as is" condition (land value, less estimated cost of demolition and carting), as of June 27, 2018 Market Value of the Fee Simple Interest in Properties One through Five, as vacant (land value), as of June 27, 2018, was as described herein. =-=,.£~--- Jozef Alhale, MAI State Certified General Appraiser License No. RZ 0001557 .I. ALHALE APPRAISALS, INC . Real Estate A11 11raisers and Consullanls -50 - SUMMARY OF COMPARABLE COMMERCIAL ANO OFFICE SPACE RENTAL RATES FIFTH STREET ANO SOUTH Comparable Comparable Comparab le Comparable Comparable ~ B<nlllllYi2 lllilli!l.IhJll ll<n1'!l.f2l!r llonW..fuo Address I 40 S. Pointe 850 Commerce 500 s . Pointe 515-541 Jefferson 729-741 5th Drive Street Drive Avenue Street Mi ami Beach Miami Beach Miami Beach Miami Beach Miami Beach Florida Florida Florida Florida Florida Use 1st Floor Retail 1st Floor Retail 1st Floor Retail 1st Floor Retai1/0ffice 1st Floor Retail/Office Leased Space Size (SF) 1,129 9,000 1,068 to 2,402 400 733 to 950 Net Rentable Are a (SF) 7,619 24,887 30,016 3,200 14,267 Year Built 2010 1920 2001 1971 1930 Condition +Average +Average +Average +Average Average lo Good to Good to Good (Renovated) {Renovated) Lease Term I 3-5 Years 3-5 Years 3-5 Years 1 Year and Up 3-5 Years ADDENDA I I Space Available (S F) Occupancy Rate 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Rental Escalations CP I or CPI or CPI or CPI or CPI or Stepped-up Stepped-up Stepped-up Stepped-up Stepped-up Tenant Expenses Pro-Rated Share Pro-Rated Share Pro-Rated Share Pro-Rated Share Pro-Rated Share of Operating of Operating of Operating of Operating of Operating Expenses Expenses Expenses Expenses Expenses Landlord Expenses I All other All other All other All other All other variable expenses; variable expenses; variable expenses; variable expenses; variable expenses; and reserves for and reserves for and reserves for and reserves for and reserves for replacement replacement replacement replacement replacement Rental Rate/SF I $61 .65 $80.00 $60to $62 $73.50 $54 to $60 (Trlple-Net) (Triple-Net) (Triple-Net) (Tr iple-Net) (Triple-Net) J . A LHALE APP RAISALS , I NC . .J. ALHALE APPRAISALS, INC. Real Estate Appraisers and Consultants -5 1 - SUMMARY OF COMPARABLE COMMERCIAL AND OFFICE SPACE RENTAL RA TES SUMMARY OF COMPARABLE COMMERCIAL AND OFFICE SPACE RENTAL RATES WEST AVENUE, PURDY AVENUE AND BAY ROAD, NORTH OF 17 STREET Comparable Comparable Comparable Comparable WASHINGTON AVE, ALTON ROAD, PENNSYLVANIA AVE, NORTH OF STH STREET Rental Sjx Rental Seven Rental Eight Rental Nine Comparable Comparable Comparable Comparable Address 1784 West 1835-1885 Purdy 1935 West 1916 Bay ~ Rental Eleyen Rental Twe!ye Rental Thjrteen Avenue Avenue Avenue Road Address 801-817 Washington 901 Pennsylvania 1428-1440 Alton 1501-1539 Alton Miami Beach Miami Beach Miami Beach Miami Beach Avenue Avenue Road Road Florida Florida Florida Florida Miami Beach Miami Beach Miami Beach Miami Beach Florida Florida Florida Florida Use 1st Floor Retail 1st Floor Retail 1st Floor Retail 1st Floor Retail Use 1st Floor Retail 1st Floor Retail 1st Floor Retail 1st Floor Retail Le ased Space Size (SF) 1,000 1,020 950 2 ,7 10 Net Rentable Area (SF) 7,021 30,000 16,265 6,323 Leased Space Size (SF) 850 911 2,239 1,260 Year Built 2004 2012 1940 1962 Net Rentable Area (SF) 15,975 7,266 7,000 25,000 Year Built 1935 1948 1940 1991 Condition +Average Good Ave rage Average to Good Condition +Average +Average +Average +Average (Renovated) to Good Lease Term 3-5 Years 3-5 Years 3-5 Years 5 Years (Renovated) Space Ava ilable (SF) 0 0 2,180 0 Lease Term 5 Years 3 Years 3-5 Years 3-5 Years Occupancy Rate 100% 100% 87% 100% Space Available (SF) 0 0 0 0 Rental Escalations CPI or CP1 or CPI or CPI or Occupancy Rate 100% 100% 100% 100% Stepped-up Stepped-up Stepped-up Stepped-up Rental Escalations CPI or CPI or CPI or CPI or Tenant Expenses Pro-Rated Share Pro-Rated Share Utilities and Pro-Rated Share Stepped-up Stepped-up Stepped-up Stepped-up of Operating of Operating Pro-Rated Share of Operating Expenses Expenses of Increases Above Expenses Tenant Expenses Pro-Rated Share Pro-Rated Share Pro-Rated Share Pro-Rated Share Base-Year Operating of Operating of Operating of Operating of Operating Expenses Expenses Expenses Expenses Expenses Landlord Expenses Al l other AU other All other Base Year All other Landlord Expenses All other All other All other All other variable expenses; variable expenses: Alt other fixed and va riable expenses: variable expenses; variable expenses; variable expenses: variable expenses: and reserves for and reserves for variable expenses; and reserves for and reserves for and reserves for and reserves for and reserves for replacement replacement and reserves for replacement replacement replacement replacement replacement replacement Rental Rate /S F $50.00 $55.00 $90.00 $70.48 Rental Rate/SF $70.00 $90.00 $82.11 $70.00 (Triple-Net) (Triple-Net) (Triple-Net) (Triple-Net) (Triple-Net) (Triple-Net) (Modified Gross) (Triple-Net) J. ALHALE APPRAISALS, INC. J. ALHALE APPRAISALS , INC. Address I Propeny ID: I Typ• Building Area (S F) Year Built Condition Site Area (SF) Site Area (SF) Zoning Land-to-Building Ratio Buyer Seller I Deed Book& Page I Date of Sale Capitaization Rate Sale Price Terms Cash Equivalent Sale Price/SF Time Adjustment Time Adjusted Sale Price Time Adjustlld Sale Price/SF Un Adju sted Sale Price/SF ! ' ~ ii H " ~ ~ g ~ § § ~ m ''"'"'"" . HH! Ii m ;;i;s :::-. m ~ - i i mn H m ................. ii ~~~ rrrrr il"il"il"ifil" " urn ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .. .,,,,,,.,,.,, .,. ... .,, .... !".......... ~,,,.. !" ...... ~s~:d::!::: ;;:s;: t i:::: 9 ff;;;; 9f 'iif SUMMARY OF CO MM ERC IAL PRO PE RTY SA LES IN SO UTH BEACH Sa le Sa le Sale Sa le Sa le Sa le 1 ! ~ i 1550-1554Alton 1671-1673Alton 919 Collins 915-955 Washington 1609-1613Atton 749-755 Washington Road Road Road Avenue Road Avenue Miami Beach Miami Beach Miami Beach Miami Beach Miami Beach Miami Beach Florida Florida Florida Florida Florida Florida 02-3234-018-0500 02-3234-017-0130 02-3234--008--0090 02-3234--008-1410 02-3234-018-0320 02-4203-004-0690 02-3234--008-1420 02-3234--008-1400 1-Story Retail!Office 1-StoryRetail/Office 1-StoryRetail 1-Story Retail 2-Story Retail/Office 1-Story Retail 5,000 7,523 7,941 30,100 1938 1936 1924 1942, 1936, 1937 +Average +Average +Average Average 7,500 7.500 7,000 3g,ooo 0.17 0.17 0_16 0.90 C0-2 CD-2 MXE CD-2 1.50 1.00 0.88 1.30 Espartano LLC Alton Road Silver Hill W ash ington Avenue OwnerLLC OneLLC AssociatesLLC ARRP Miami II, LLC Alton Florida S&S ESTl's, LLC; Properties, Inc. Properties g55 Washington Ovmer,LLC; Grand Trine Limited Partnership 30669 /4193 30488/715 3039712780 3012714584 3012714589 3012714581 8125/2017 313112017 1'23/2017 6/22/2016 3.76% 5.50% 6.60°/o $5,400.000 $7,425,000 $7,100,000 $29,000,000 Cashio Cash to Cash to Cash to the Seller the Seller the Seller the Sellers $1,080.00 $986.97 $894.09 $963.46 0% 0% 0% 0% $5,400,000 $7,425,000 $7.100.000 $29.000,000 $1 ,080.00 $986.97 $894.09 $963.46 $1,080.0 0 $986.97 $894.09 $963.46 J. ALHALE APPRAISALS, INC. r ! !!!!!![ii[[[fJ[[[[[[!i!i ' ! Jlllll1I!1~1li~~~~~:jJjf ! , , ~ ~;;;;r~oo~oo~~o oo~oo~~~~ •§i~i§§i~i~§i~!~~; ~ii~i~§~iii•i~~ii~gEs'i~i~,!~~iig~~' llliiiiiliii Iii i ;;;;;;;~;);~ ;;; ; iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii .................................... '"'"'"'"'"'"'"'"'"'"'"'"'"'"'"'"'"'" rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr il"il"il"il"il"ifil"il"il"il"il"il"il"il"il"il"il"il" ~~§§§~~~~~~~~~§iii ~ ........ "' ......................... "' .. .. ~=~~~i:i=i~~~~~~:~i~ ;;;; ilf 90 i9S i 9!i iii liiiiiiiii&iiliiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii pooo::ooo~~i'"~~popoo~~p~~P!i-<>P~<>po~oop jjjjjjjj#j),~Jjjjjj;~j~jj~jj~jjj,jjj iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii il"il"il"il"il"il"il"il"il"il"il"il"il"il"il"il"il"il"il"il"il"il"il"il"il"il"il"il"ififil"il"il"il"il"il" ~~~~~~i~~~§§i~~~~~~i~E§§~~g~~~~~~~~~ ~-.,,~~,...,~.,,.,,.~.,.,.,.,~~-~·w•~~.,~~'"'"'"•'".,~w .. ~~1:a~;o:~~~8~~2~=;2~~~~~~g~t~~e~~~~~ !i.i!~fi.i.ii.~9f9i.B!f'1'1iii.fi.i.9i.'19f!9ii.f 8,700 17,500 1947 1965 +Average Good 7.500 1g,500 0.17 0.45 CD-2 CD-2 0.86 1.11 1609Alton Jamestown Premier 755 Owner LLC Washington Avenue, LLC L.O.D. 8th Street Enterprises, Inc Washington Holdings, Inc . 3001213612 2982212086 3123/2016 10120/2015 4.15°/o 4 .03-Jo $8,650,000 $18.550,000 Cash to Cash to the Seller the Seller $994 .25 $1 ,060.00 0% 0% $8,650,000 $18,550,000 $994.25 $1,060.00 $994.2 5 $1,060,00 iH m I ~~~i~ii~ §~~~E=Es~§~~~e~ 8 mm ii p 0 <>:::::"":::.;, jjj;;_;, Hmm rrrrrrrr il"il"il"il"il"il"ifif ~~j;;;;; ,.. ... -.. -w --~ e i !Sa::!:: i:: i: '1f9i.i'1if &iiiii&iiiiiiii G Siii~~~iiiiiiii I iiiiiiiiiiiiiii § iiiiijiiiiiiiii 6 !§~:e;ii:3i~i::~;§ ""'""'"'Na.ww•~-~~~~-~=~:~~ri~~~B~~~~ ilfli.9'1iiiilii.9 ~ I I THE WAVERLY AT SOUTH BEACH-1330 WEST AVENUE, MIAMI BEACH lll:iW! im= ~ = Wiil == l!IWilf ~ ~ AVERAGE SALE AND LISTING PRICES/SF OF COMPARABLE/COMPETITIVE RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM UNITS IN SOUTH BEACH 522 $ 327,500 0.0% lbeds lbaths 806 $406.33 No $ 60> 805 $ 339,000 -7.4% lbeds !baths 793 $427.49 No $ 600 Vear ~ 1512 $ 360,000 2.8% lbeds lbaths 806 $446.65 No $ 576 8>0 $ 365,000 -9.2% lbeds lbaths 793 $460.28 '" $ 630 2605 $ 425.000 -5.5% lbeds lbaths 793 $535.94 No $ 600 Wawer!yatSouthBeach ""' "' 1/1.5 2/2 2/2.5 2/2 2/2 3/2.5 ,,, 3/3.5 ,,, Average $455.15 ll30We•tAvenu.,,M,ami8each Closed s 536.46 $ 929.51 7H $ 499.900 O.O"A> 2beds 2baths 1084 $461.16 No $ 822 Listed 1511 $ 538,000 0.0% 2beds 2baths >084 $496.31 No $ 756 Pending 506 $ 543,000 0.0% 2beds 2baths 1127 $481.81 No $ 851 424 $ 550,000 0.0% 2beds 2baths 1262 $435.82 No $ '" Floridian in South Beach 1997 l/1.5 2/2 1/2.5 2/2 2/2 3/2.5 3/3 3/3.5 ,,, 2107 $ 589,000 0.0% 2beds 2baths 1269 $464.14 No $ 950 650WestAvenue,Miami8each 1714 $ 590,000 ·5.0% 2beds 2baths 1262 $467.51 No $ ,., Closed $ 608.SS $634.12 2204 $ 615,000 ·4.8% 2beds 2baths 1084 $567.34 No $ 783 Listed s 694.41 $633.33 '" $ 619,688 -3.2% 2beds 2baths 1262 $491.19 No $ 898 Pending 2213 $ 635,000 -2.3% 2beds 2baths 1262 $503.17 No $ 894 913 $ 655,000 0.0% 2beds 2baths 1262 $519.02 No $ 783 Bentleyllay{NorthandSouth) "'" "' 1/1.S 2/2 2/2.5 2/2 3/2 3/2.5 3/2 3/3.S I '" 1407 $ 689.000 0.0% 2beds 2baths 1350 $510.37 No $ 956 520 & 540 West Avenue, Miami Beach LPH04 $ 710,000 -7.5% 2beds 2baths 1084 $654.98 No $ 783 Closed s 757.86 s 685.06 s 995.29 s 748.46 $ 748 .37 2302 $ 749,000 ·16.1% 2beds 2baths 1262 $593.50 No $ 895 Listed s 804.30 s 825.00 s 949.27 s 901.56 2708 $ 770,000 -26.0% 2beds 2baths 1384 $556.36 '" $ 979 Pending 1508 $ 799,000 ·11.8% 2beds 2baths 1384 $577.ll "' $ 978 2208 $ 825,000 -24.0% 2beds 2baths 1384 $:096.10 No $ ,,, '" 1/1.5 2/2 2/2.5 2/2 2/2 3/2.5 ,,, 3/3.5 ,,, 4SOAltonRoad,Miaml8each s 79 5.14 s 781.26 $1,019.92 $1,686.71 s 813.16 s 968.43 $1,230.95 Sl.196.0l Sl.758.28 Pending s 746.18 3002 $ 94-0,000 0.0% 2beds 2baths 1262 $744.85 No $ 894 3101 $ 1,100,000 O.O"A> 2beds 2baths 1262 $871.63 No $ 894 808 $ 1,100,000 0.0% 2beds 2baths 2384 $794.80 '" $ '" A~erage $569.99 Murano Grande ""' '" l/1.5 2/2 2/2.5 2/3 3/2 3/2.5 ,,, 3/3.5 '" l!t!ll1! im= ~ = Wiil == l!IWilf ~~ ~ 400AltonRoad,Miami8each 844.23 s l,031.96 $ 1,307.34 $1,798.92 $1,062.79 763.80 s l,083.07 s 1.266.06 $1,956.69 $1.474.74 Pending $ 648.27 $1,457.65 3202 $ 930,000 ·9.2% 2beds 2baths 1262 $736.93 No $ 894 5/21/2018 2614 $ 625,000 0.0% 2beds 2baths 1262 $495.25 No $ 875 5/11/2018 902 $ 699,000 0.0".' 2beds 2baths 1262 $553.88 No $ '" 4/30/2018 1406 $ 549,000 0.C)"AI 2beds 2baths 1127 $487.13 No $ 8>0 4/16/2018 MuranoiltPortofino "'" "' 1/1.5 2/2 2/2.5 2/2 2/2 3/2.5 ,,, 3/3.5 ,,, Average $570.53 100Cl 5.PointeDrive,MiamiBeach Closed $ 818.56 s 709.93 $1,269.09 s 1,667.95 s 1,729.90 lll:iW! ~~ = Wiil == l!IWilf ~ ~ =il..llAll Listed $1.288.69 SU84.38 $1.778.54 $1.782.76 Pending s 658.66 910 $ 320,000 -54.6% lbeds !baths 793 $403.53 No $ 600 3/20/2018 >503 $ 315,000 0.C1'AI lbeds lbaths 806 $390.82 No $ 630 2/8/2018 Vach!ClubatPortofino "" '" 1/1.5 2/2 2/2.5 2/3 2/2 3/2.S ,,, 3/3.5 </3 '" $ 338,000 0.1)% lbeds lbaths 806 $419.35 No $ 603 2/1/2018 90AltonRoi1d,Miilmi8eath 2403 $ 360,000 -2.6% lbeds lbaths 806 $446.65 No $ 605 12/14/2017 Closed s 691.14 $ 747.55 1110 $ 310,000 -5.7% lbeds lbaths 793 $ 390.92 No $ 580 10/5/2017 Li•ted $ 717.83 s 758.27 $1,257.14 $1.805.56 703 $ 340,000 -9.0% lbeds lbaths 806 $421.84 No $ 600 7/31/2017 Pending $ 637.29 $ 807.34 35-03 $ 410,000 0.0% lbeds lbaths 806 $508.68 '" $ 600 6/12/2017 2210 $ 357,500 0.0% !beds lbaths 793 $450.82 No $ 605 2/24/2017 "' 1/1.5 2/2 2/2.5 2/3 2/2 3/2.5 '" 3/3.5 ,,, 2605 s 380,000 0.0% 1 beds lbaths 793 $479.19 No $ 600 1/16/2017 ICollin•Avenue,MiamiBeach 6'2 $ 305,000 -6.1% lbeds lbaths 806 $378.41 No $ 605 1/12/2017 $1,304.84 $1,318.64 $1.337.24 s l,600.73 Pending 2610 $ 355,000 0.0% lbeds lbaths 793 $447.67 No $ 580 1/10/2017 3003 $ 400,000 0.0% lbeds lbaths 806 $496.28 No $ 600 1/6/2017 >805 $ 362,500 0.0% lbeds lbaths 793 $457.12 "' $ 605 9/15/2016 Cap1iSouthBeach 2003 ,,, 1/1.S 2/2 2/2.5 2/2 2/2 3/2.5 '" 3/3.5 ,,, 1445&146016thStreet,Mrami8each $1,019.50 $1,042.21 s 969.98 $1,851.85 2103 $ 380,000 -3.7% lbeds lbaths 806 $471.46 No $ 894 7/22/2016 "'" $ 360,000 -2.6% lbeds lbaths 806 $446.65 No $ 605 7/15/2016 Average $440.64 $1,107.27 $1.()04.67 $1.146.43 $ 959.98 $1,46S.80 $1,0ll.47 Pending $916.2 9 1908 $ 725,000 -7.2% 2beds 2baths 1384 $523.&4 No $ 1,050 6/8/2018 2004 s 535,000 -9.4% 2beds 2baths '°" $493.54 No $ 778 5/22/2018 MareaMiaml Beach 2015 "' 1/1.5 2/2 2/2.5 2/3 2/2 3/2.5 2/3 3/3.5 </3 8015.Pointe Drive,MiamiBeach Closed $1,016.39 $1,186.62 $1.843.82 1701 $ 750,000 0.0% 2beds 2baths 1262 $594.29 No $ '" 5/15/2018 2811 $ 540.000 0.0% 2beds 2baths '°" $498.15 No $ 822 4/27/2018 2802 $ 860,000 O.O"AI 2beds 2baths 1262 $681.46 "' $ 894 3/12/2018 listed $ 889.97 $1,390.18 $1.957.85 2807 $ 619,000 O.O"A; 2beds 2baths 235-0 $458.52 No $ 980 2/1/2018 Pending 1204 $ 4<10.000 -15.0% 2beds 2baths 2084 $405.90 No $ 782 11/2/2017 407 $ 575,000 ·3.8% 2beds 2baths 1350 $425.93 No $ '" 11/2/2017 Cosmopolitan South Beach "'" "' 1/1.S 2/2 2/2.5 2/3 3/2 3/2.5 3/3 3/35 </3 300> $ 889,000 -4.7% 2beds 2baths 1262 $704.44 No $ 894 10/3/2017 llOWashmgtonAvenue,MiamiBeath >608 $ 725,000 O.O"A; 2beds 2baths 1384 $523.84 No $ 975 6/21/2017 Closed s 604.93 s 656.70 $ 646.00 s 617.48 $680.02 1814 $ 730,000 O.O"A. 2beds 2baths 1262 $578.45 No $ 875 5/22/2017 listed $ 608.11 $ 686.74 $ 740.18 s 643.56 2706 $ 560,000 -4.1% 2beds 2baths 1127 $496.89 No $ 8>0 4/24/2017 Pend;ng 1613 $ 570,000 -4.9% 2beds 2baths 1262 $451.6.6 No $ 898 4/13/2017 1709 $ 490,000 -14.0% 2beds 2baths 1127 $434.78 No $ 812 3/7/2017 2406 $ 515,484 0 .0% 2beds 2baths 1127 $457.39 No $ 806 12/15/2016 3202 $ 980,000 0.0% 2beds 2baths 1262 $776.5$ No $ 894 11/22/2016 2509 $ 490,000 -21.0% 2beds 2baths 1127 $434.78 No $ 810 11/2/2016 2911 $ 555.000 -8.3% 2beds 2baths 1084 $511.99 No $ 782 8/11/2016 2511 $ 555,000 0.0% 2beds 2baths 1084 $511.99 No $ 782 7/29/2016 1702 $ 895,000 0.0% 2beds 2baths 1262 $ 709.19 No $ 894 7/21/2016 A'llerage $536.46 PH3601 $ 2,400,000 -13.1% 3beds 3baths 2582 $929.Sl No $ 1,764 1/2/2018 THE FLORIDIAN CONDOMINIUMS IN SOUTH BEAC H -650 WEST AVENUE, MIAMI BEA CH !.!l:IW!~~Jl.w:i ~ ~ ~ ~ MAINTENANCf 704 1004 1110 702 2904 2610 1702 1001 711 2401 2611 2011 3001 3111 PH09 PHOl 1908 2008 2808 560,000 572,000 589,900 650,000 699,900 725,000 749,000 749,000 749,000 895,000 920,000 935,000 945,000 1,149,000 1,499,000 2,499,000 799,000 850,000 879,900 0.0% 2 beds 2 baths 0.0% 2 beds 2 baths -12.0% 2 beds 2 baths 0.0% 2 beds 2 baths 0.0% 2 beds 2 baths 0.0% 2 beds 2 baths -4. 7% 2 beds 2 baths -11.3% 2 beds 2 baths 0.0% 2 beds 2 baths -20.1% 2 beds 2 baths 0.0% 2 beds 2 baths 0.0% 2 beds 2 baths 0.0% 2 beds 2 baths -12.3% 2 beds 2 ba t hs 0.0% 2 beds 2 baths 0.0% 2 beds 2.5 baths 0.0% 3 beds 2 baths 0.0% 3 beds 2 baths 0.0% 3 beds 2 bat hs 1078 1225 1225 1147 1225 1078 1147 1147 1147 1258 1258 1147 1147 1258 1351 Average 1500 1324 1324 1345 519.48 466.94 481.55 566.70 571.35 672.54 653.01 653.01 653.01 711.45 731.32 815.17 823.89 913.35 1,109.55 694.41 1,666.00 603.47 641.99 654.20 Average S 633.33 No No Ye• No No No No No No No No Ye. No Ye• No No No Ye• No 1,217 1,012 1,012 1,040 1,012 1,018 1,024 1,040 1,040 1,024 1,040 1,040 1,049 1,040 1,300 1,314 1,140 1,140 1,094 !.!l!W!~~~ ~ ~ ~ fl!™1ill! MAINTENAN(E ~ 1801 1202 2411 2104 1112 1503 1510 2901 2910 2601 901 2304 605 1911 3011 1203 2412 1211 1703 2410 2502 2703 1604 803 3110 2812 1207 2807 1508 1507 740,000 635,000 800,000 575,000 585,000 715,000 599,900 850,000 640,000 830,000 735,000 599,900 740,000 900,000 750,000 820,000 760,000 705,000 675,000 645,000 800,000 770,000 550,000 655,000 750,000 680,000 830,000 915,000 700,000 900,000 0.0% -3.8% 0.0% -6.6% -13.3% -2.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 3.2% 0 .0% 0.0% 0.0% -8.9% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% -4.3% 0.0% -1.2% 0.0% -1.7% -12.0% 0.0% -3.4% 2 beds 2 beds 2 beds 2 beds 2 beds 2 beds 2 beds 2 bed s 2 bed s 2 beds 2 beds 2 beds 2 beds 2 beds 2 beds 2 beds 2 beds 2 beds 2 beds 2 beds 2 beds 2 beds 2 beds 2 bed s 2 beds 2 beds 2 baths 2 baths 2 baths 2 baths 2 baths 2 baths 2 b aths 2 baths 2 baths 2 baths 2 baths 2 baths 2 baths 2 bat hs 2 baths 2 baths 2 baths 2 baths 2 baths 2 baths 2 baths 2 baths 2 b aths 2 baths 2 baths 2 baths -8.1% 3 beds 2 baths 0.0% 3 beds 2 baths -12.5% 3 beds 2 bath s -14.1% 3 beds 2 baths 1147 1147 1258 1078 1147 1225 1225 1258 1225 1147 1147 1225 1088 1147 1258 1225 1258 1147 1078 1078 1147 1078 1225 1225 1078 1147 Average 1234 1324 1345 1372 645.16 553.62 635.93 533.40 510.03 583.67 489.71 675.68 522.45 723.63 640.80 489.71 680.15 784.66 596.18 669.39 604.13 6 14.65 626.16 598.33 697.47 714.29 448.98 534 .69 695.73 592.85 608.55 672.61 691.09 520.45 655.98 Average S 634.12 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ No ~ ~ ~ ~ No ~ No No No Ye• $ $ s s s $ $ s $ $ s $ s $ $ s $ $ $ $ $ s $ $ $ $ 1,040 1,040 1,040 1,012 1,040 998 998 1,026 998 1,049 1,049 998 1,018 1,100 1,025 1,018 1,046 1.100 1,018 1,018 l,100 992 1,018 1,018 1,182 1,046 1,118 1,140 1,100 1,100 5/23/2018 5/21/2018 5/17/2018 5/4/2018 4/4/2018 12/4/2017 9/19/2017 8/29/2017 8/15/2017 8/14/2017 8/1/2017 6/16/2017 5/24/2017 5/10/2017 5/1/2017 4/3/2017 3/14/2017 1/30/2017 12/29/2016 11/28/2016 11/21/2016 10/31/2016 10/29/2016 10/3/2016 8/29/2016 6/30/2016 8/8/2017 4/27/2017 2/1/2017 9/6/2016 l!/:lllJ! 501 612 512 1812 2112 1113 903 1813 1403 1904 1714 611 2211 1903 1911 1405 1602 1401 PH-A PH-B !.!J:!W! 1001 i.!l:!W! 4 13 311 2012 712 1512 22 12 1713 511 614 PH2503 1502 1802 601 901 BENTLEY BAY NORTH AND SOUTH -520 & 540 WEST AVENUE, MIAMI BEACH ~ ~ ™ ™ ~ ~ ~MAINTE NA N CE 590,000.00 625,000.00 629,000.00 639,000.00 649,000.00 649,000.00 659,000.00 660,000.00 695,000.00 899,900.00 950,000.00 980,000.00 999,000.00 1,050,000.00 1,150,000.00 1,150,000.00 1,350,000.00 1,795,000.00 7,990,000.00 11,990,000.00 0.0% 2.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% O.O"Ai -1.5% -0.6% -20.0% 0.0% 0.0% -9.5% -9.1% 0.0% 0.0% -5.4% 0.0% -44.0% 0.0% !.!llfJl1Qi ~ 1,890,000 0.0% ~ ~ 550,000 -2.7% 610,000 3.2% 615,800 -3.9% 590,000 -3.1% 550,013 -8.5% 620,000 -14.3% 590,000 -12.1% 800,000 -24.2% 782,500 -6.1% 1,900,000 -14.9% 1,300,000 0.0% 1,350,000 0.0% 1,730,000 -4.9% 1,490,000 -4.7% 1 beds 1 baths 1 beds 1 baths 1 beds 1 baths 1 beds 1 baths 1 beds 1 baths 1 beds 1 baths 1 beds 1 bath s 1 bed s 1 baths 1 beds 1 baths 2 beds 2 ba ths 2 beds 2 ba ths 2 beds 2 bat hs 2 beds 2 baths 2 beds 2 bat hs 2 beds 2 baths 2 beds 2 baths 2 beds 3 baths 3 beds 3.5 baths 4 beds 4.5 baths 5 beds 5.5 baths 983 779 779 779 779 777 776 777 776 Average 1210 1058 1252 1252 1175 1252 1210 1929 Average 1991 SOOD 6111 ™~~ 2 beds 2.5 baths 1991 Wl.:i ~~ 1 beds 1 baths 777 1 beds 1 baths 776 1 beds 1 baths 779 1 beds 1 ba ths 779 1 beds 1 baths 779 1 beds 1 b aths 777 1 beds 1 baths 777 Ave rage 2 beds 2 bath s 1252 2 beds 2 baths 1058 Ave rage 2 beds 2.5 baths 1909 3 beds 3 baths 1929 3 beds 3 baths 1929 3 beds 3 baths 1994 Average 3 bed s 3.5 baths 1991 600.20 802.31 807.45 820.28 833.12 835.26 849.23 849.42 895.62 804.30 743.72 897.92 782.75 797.92 893.62 9 18.53 950.41 699.84 825.00 901.56 1,598.00 1,962.04 Ye• No Ye• No No No No Ye. No Ye• No No No Ye• Ye• Ye• No No Ye• Ye• $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 1,020 800 840 911 970 749 877 749 877 1,415 1,237 1,415 1,415 1,350 1,415 1,415 2,200 2,250 5,172 6,875 ~ ~ MA!N JFNANCf 949.27 Ye• 2,170 ~ ~ MAINTENANCE 707.85 No $ 909 786.08 No $ 845 790.50 Yes S 100 757 .38 No $ 800 706.05 No $ 848 797 .94 No $ 800 759.33 No $ 793 757.86 638.98 No $ 1,363 739.60 No $ 1,152 685.06 995.29 No 673.92 No 699.84 No 867.60 No 748.46 748.37 No 2,079 2,180 2,180 2,035 2,168 PEND ING QATE 5/15/2018 ~ 5/22/2018 9/6/2017 7/20/2017 7/1/2017 3/15/2017 7/6/2016 6/23/2016 3/28/2017 1/13/2017 2/24/2017 10/23/2017 3/20/2017 3/2/2017 5/15/2017 ~ ~HH~~~~~H~ ! I ~~~~~~~~~~H H~H~H~H ocio"!o~ooo;:ido ; !!HHH~H! ;:!;~~$:;3;1i~:Q9:;~ ~~~~*~§~~~~ ....... -....... . ... "'"'"'"'"'"'"'"'"' ]]]]]]]]]] NNNNNNNNNN "'"' "'"'"'"'"'"'"'"' ]]]]]]]]]] NNNNNNNNNN ~ ~ ~ " I 5 i ~ ~ ~ § H~~H~H ! ~ ~ I ; i ~ I ~ !~!!~!~! I I 0 0 z z ~ i I ~ I I I ~;;;; ~ ;:!; ,,;....,: <ivi ~ ~ ~ ~ I H~ I n~- 000000 zzzzzz 8! ~ ~ :::i 3l::; ~ ~g~~~~~ "'"'"'"'"'"' ]]]]]] NNNNNN "'"'"'"'"'"' ]]]]]] ll'>Ulll'lll'>U'lll'> NNNNNN ... "'"'"'"'"' ]]]]]] N N N N N N <1'l M U RANO AT PORTOFINO -1000 S. POINTE DRIVE, MIAMI BEACH YACHT CLU B AT PORTOFIN O • 90 ALTON ROAD, M IAMI BEACH lltJJI!! l1ill.lllU ~ lllfil llifil ~ f!!!!:WE f..!J..B.t:fil!~ l/J:filll ~ ~ ~ ~ ~Q fQQI8~' ~ ~ M6 1~Uf:J6 f:J!;' 505 $ 440,000 ·3.4% l beds lbaths 740 $ 594.59 '" $ 640 PH06 $ 1,299,000 ·5.7% 1 be ds 1.5 baths 1008 $ 1,288.69 No $ 940 1907 $ 469,000 ·2.1% l beds lbaths 740 $ 633.78 No $ 714 907 $ 470.000 0.<)% I beds !baths 740 $ 635.14 No $ "' 2307 $ 499,000 -7.9% l be ds lbaths 740 $ 674.32 No $ 716 507 $ 1.695,000 ·2.9% 2 beds 2.5 baths 1390 $ 1,219.42 No $ 1,267 1707 $ 1,800,000 ·15.2% 2 beds 2.5 baths 1390 $ 1,294.96 Ye• $ 1,203 1107 $ 1,980,000 0 .0% 2 beds 2.5 baths 1390 $ 1,424.46 Ye• $ 1,210 1507 $ 2,050,000 0.0% 2 beds 2.5 baths 1390 $ 1,474.82 No $ 1.202 2805 s 535,000 0.11% }beds lbaths 740 $ 722.97 "' $ 715 1206 $ 555.000 0.0% l beds lbaths 740 $ 750.00 No $ 714 I'°' s 559.000 0.11% !beds lbalhs 780 $ 716.67 No s 64• Pt\3307 $ 569,000 ·3.5% lbeds !baths 7<0 $ 768.92 No $ 715 2208 $ 617.000 0.0% lbeds lbatlu 780 $ 7'H.03 No $ 750 2606 $ 619,000 O.<l% lbeds !baths 780 $ 793.59 No $ "' 1705 $ 2,120,000 ·2.8% 2 beds 2.5 baths 1407 $ 1,506.75 No $ 1,278 Average $ 1,384.38 2906 $ 626.000 0.8% lbeds !baths 780 $ 802.56 No $ m Average $ 717.83 703 $ 699,000 -6.9% 2beds 2baths 1080 $ 647.22 No $ 1,047 1104 $ 3,390,000 -2.9% 3 beds 3 baths 2190 $ 1,547.95 No $ 1,870 2104 $ 3,900,000 0.0% 3 beds 3 baths 2190 $ 1,780.82 No $ 1,450 903 s 725,000 0.0% 2beds 2baths 1130 s 641.59 No s 870 2609 s 735,000 -10.8% 2beds 2baths 1080 s 680.56 No s 1,046 1009 s 740,000 00% 2beds 2baths 1080 $ 685.19 No $ 1,046 2604 $ 4,395,000 -12.8% 3 beds 3 baths 2190 $ 2,006.85 Ye• $ 1,861 Average $ 1,778.54 1211 $ 779,000 -5.1% 2beds 2baths 1130 $ 689.3g No $ l ,092 702 s 799,000 00% 2bed> 2baths 1130 s 707.08 "' s 870 "" $ 799.000 -9.1% 2beds 2baths 1090 $ 733.03 No $ 1,025 2603 s 819,000 -7.8% 2beds 2baths 1080 s 758.l l No s "' 501 $ 5,999,000 -6.1% 3 beds 3.5 baths 3365 $ 1,782.76 Ye• $ 2,900 1501 $ 825,000 -10.8% 2beds 2baths 1130 $ 730.09 "' $ 870 1611 s 869,900 0.0% 2beds 2baths 1130 $ 769.82 "' $ 870 2"" $ 879.500 0.0% 2beds 2baths 1080 $ 814.35 No s l,047 !.!.t!W! ~ ~ ~ M!fil ~g EQQie~E ~ ~ MA l ~IE~e ~cE ~~~QI~~ Q8T~ 2209 $ 890,000 0.0% 2beds 2baths 1080 $ 824.07 '" $ l,046 6l2 $ 895,000 -0.6% 2beds 2b<1ths 1130 $ 792.04 No $ 903 TH·AlO $ 795,000 -3 .7% 1 beds 1.5 baths 1 207 $ 658.66 No $ 1,050 5/17/2018 1203 $ 910,000 0.0% 2 beds 2baths 1080 $ 842.S9 No $ 739 Avernse $ 7~.27 lll:IW! ~ ~ ~ ~ TH-12 ~Q fCCie~~ ~ ~ M~ttfI~r:.&:a~~i; ~ s 2,199,999 ·16.7% lbe ds 2.5baths 1750 $ J,257.14 No $ 1,800 Pt13408 S 3,575,000 0.11% l beds ]baths 1980 $ 1.805.56 No $ 1,926 TH-A3 $ 988,000 3.6% 1 be ds 1 baths 1 207 $ 818.56 No $ 1,050.00 6/23/2017 TH3/TH4 $ 18,000,000 0.<1% 7 beds 6ba!lu '700 $ 3,829.79 No $ 3.000 506 $ 685,000 -17.8% 1 beds 1.5 bat hs 1008 $ 679.56 Ye• $ 1,288.69 4/25/2018 !!till! l1ill.lllU ~ lllfil llifil ~ f!!!!:WE f!il!lfillilllMlll!lli&rill WilllliOJ2All TH-A7 s 887,500 0 .0% 1 beds 1.5 baths 1207 $ 735.29 No $ 1,050.00 4/16/2018 Average $ 709.93 1205 $ 499,000 0.(1% tbeds !baths "' $ 637.29 No $ 642 5/30/2018 1804 s 880,000 -12.7% 2 beds 2baths 1090 s 80 7.34 No s 1,047 5/24/2018 403 $ 2,450,000 0 .0% 2 beds 2.5 baths 2008 $ 1,220.12 Ye• $ 1,7 13.00 3/29/2018 1403 $ 2,600,000 -3.5% 2 beds 2.5 baths 2008 $ 1,294.82 No $ 1,623.00 6/16/2017 llllW! ~ ~ -Wiil ~ f!!!!:WE ~~ ~ 1503 $ 2,595,000 0.0% 2 beds 2.5 baths 2008 $ 1,292.33 Ye• $ 1,623.00 4/3/2017 Average $ 1,269.09 2206 s 565,000 ·3.3% !beds I baths 780 $ 724.36 No $ 717 5/ll/2018 2306 $ 605,000 0.0% l beds lbalhs 780 $ 775.64 No $ 7l7 4/30/2018 905 $ 420,000 ·2.4% !beds tbaths 740 $ 567.57 No $ 573 4/13/2018 1202 $ 4.000,000 -2.4% 3 beds 3 baths 2618 $ 1,527.88 No $ 2,200.00 12/20/2017 2707 $ SOS,000 -4.7% lbeds lbalhs 740 $ 682.43 No $ "' 3/2/2018 1207 $ 475.000 -7.8% !beds lba1hs ''° s 64 1.89 No s "' 2/28/2018 TH -Ml $ 5,800,000 0.0% 3 beds 3 baths 2986 $ 1,942.40 Ye• $ 2,172.00 5/3/2017 2604 $ 3,200,000 ·14.5% 3 beds 3 baths 2190 $ 1,461.19 No $ 1,550.00 7/8/2016 Average $ 1,667.95 PH3308 $ 619.000 0.0% lbeds l baths 760 $ 8 14.47 No $ 630 11/22/2017 2108 s 525,000 -7.5% I beds !baths 780 s 673.08 No s 714 7/12/20 17 250• $ 530,000 011% l beds !baths 740 $ 716.22 No $ '" 6/20/2017 1608 s 555,000 -13.5% l beds !baths 780 $ 711.54 No $ 78< 6/20/2017 2405 $ soo.ooo -2.6% l beds 1 baths 700 $ 675.68 '" $ 642 6/16/2017 2201 $ 6,000,000 0.0% 3 beds 3.5 baths 3 365 $ 1.783.06 No $ 2,835.00 10/27/2017 2<-08 $ 545,000 0 .0% !beds !baths 780 s 698.72 No $ 650 6/lS/2017 1105 $ 445.000 -12.2% !beds !baths 740 $ 601.lS No $ 641 5/18/2017 3602 $ 4.700,000 0.0% 3 beds 3.5 baths 2618 $ 1,795.26 No $ 2,203.00 6/30/2017 2601 $ 6,000,000 0.0% 3 beds 3.5 baths 3365 $ 1,783.06 No $ 2,827.00 3/8/2017 2202 $ 4,000,000 0.0% 3 beds 3.5 baths 2618 $ 1,527.88 No $ 2,203.00 6/16/2016 2308 s 523,476 -5.7% !beds l baths 780 $ 671.12 No $ 571 4/ll/2017 2807 $ 515,000 -5.5% l beds !baths 740 $ 695.95 No $ 64-0 4/7/2017 1806 $ 565,000 00% l beds lbaths 780 s 724.36 "' s 78< 3/31/2017 260• $ 512.000 0 .0% !beds lbaths 740 $ 691.89 No $ 573 1/26/2017 Average $ 1,729.90 1008 $ 525,000 0.0% !beds !baths 780 $ 673.08 No $ 739 12/22/2016 Ave1age $ 691.14 1401 $ 5,000,000 -6.9% 3 be ds 4.5 baths 3365 $ 1,485.88 No $ 2,835.00 2/6/2018 301J $ 850.000 0.C1'• 2 beds 2baths 1130 $ 752.21 No $ 1,092 6/1/2018 1901 $ 588,000 -17.1% 2beds 2baths 1130 s 520.lS No $ 671 S/24/2018 240 1 $ 720.000 0.0% 2 beds 2baths 1130 $ 637.17 No $ 978 3/21/2018 2611 $ 940,000 -5.4,., 2 beds 2ba1hs 1130 $ 831.86 No $ 978 2/20/2018 24 10 s 840,000 0 .0% 2 bem 2baths 1090 s 770.64 '"' $ 1.046 2/12/2018 2910 $ 842,500 -2.3% 2beds 2bilth• 1090 s 772.94 No s 1,047 2/5/2018 23 12 s 925,000 -1.8% 2beds 2baths 1130 $ 8 18.58 No $ 919 11/30/2017 1210 $ 700,000 0.0% 2beds 2baths 1130 $ 6 19.47 '"' $ 864 ll/8/2017 2210 $ 810,000 -25.8% 2 beds 2baths 1090 $ 743.12 No $ 865 10/5/2017 260< s 850,000 -12.8% 2 beds 2battis 1090 $ 779.82 No $ 1,143 7/6/2017 1010 s 759.000 -11.9% 2 beds 2baths 1090 $ 696.33 v .. $ "' 5/15/2017 1003 s 705.000 -7.8% 2 beds 2ba1hs 1080 $ 652.78 No s "' 4/28/2017 209 $ 512,500 ·8 ,7" 2 beds 2baths 1130 $ 453.54 No s 905 4/12/2017 2701 s 940,000 o.cw. 2 beds 2baths 1130 s 831.86 No $ 979 l /22/2017 1502 s 979,000 0.0% 2 beds 2baths 1130 s 866.37 '"' s 1,118 2/21/2017 2509 $ 950,000 00% 2 beds 2bath• 1080 s 879.63 No 5 865 l/1{2017 1012 5 1,050,000 -2.6% 2beds 2baths 1130 s 929.20 No $ Ml 8/26/2016 1812 s l.o20,000 -21.3% 2beds 2baths 1130 s 902.65 No $ 'KB 8/5/2016 Average $ 747.55 ONE OCEAN -1 COLLINS AVENUE, MIAMI BEACH llliWl 109 404 60S 203 304 604 704 707 306 307 207 l!WI.ll 108 sos 402 403 303 40S 701 301 ~~~ ~~ 2,395,000 3,490,000 3,S00,000 3,79S,OOO 4,300,000 4,49S,OOO S,100,000 7,900,000 4,999,000 5,945,000 $ lS,100,000 -15.6% 2 beds 2.5 baths -25.1% 3 beds 3.5 baths 0.0% 3 beds 3.5 baths -2.6% 3 beds 3.5 baths 0.0% 3 beds 3.5 baths -6.6% 3 beds 3.5 baths -16.1% 3 beds 3.5 baths 0.0% 4 beds 4.5 baths -8.6% 4 beds 5.5 baths 0.0% 4 beds 5.5 baths 0.0% 5 beds 5.5 baths 1791 2486 2183 27SO 2S70 2860 2569 Average 3110 3242 3041 Average 5586 ~~~ l!llll!.:i~ 1,160,000 3,100,000 2,97S,OOO 3,975,000 3,300,000 2,4SO,OOO 6,500,000 3,760,000 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% -22.5% -14.8% 8.3% -19.8% 1 beds 1 baths 3 beds 3 beds 3 beds 3 beds 3 beds 3.5 baths 3.5 baths 3.5 baths 3.5 baths 3.5 baths 4 beds 4.5 baths 4 beds 4.5 baths 889 2122 2190 2860 27SO 2060 Average 3420 3534 Average 407 $ 4,34S,OOO -3.9% 5 beds 5.5 baths 3133 ~ 1,337.24 1,403.86 1,603.30 1,380.00 1,673.15 l,S71.68 1,985.21 1,600.73 2,540.19 1,541.95 l,9S4.9S 1,741.84 2,703.19 ~ MAINTENANCE No No No No Yes No No No No Yes No 2,047 3,273 2,179 2,954 3,146 3,136 3,021 3,575 4,268 3,721 6,S69 ~ ~ MAINTENANCE ~ 1,304.84 1,460.89 1,358.45 1,389.86 1,200.00 1,189.32 1,318.64 1,900.58 1,063.95 1,475.41 1,386.85 No Yes No No No No No No No 1,001 2,200 2,503 3,2SS 2,9S4 2,200 3,933 3,945 3,515 1/12/2018 1/16/2018 6/20/2017 4/19/2017 3/31/2017 11/lS/2016 2/28/2018 10/10/2017 S/12/2017 CAPRI SOUTH BEACH -1445 & 1460 lGTH STREET, MIAMI BEACH ill:fil!! 401 505 80S UP-S 102 1103 SOl 702 403 604/605 l.l!jJl.ll ~~ 1,249,000 1,300,000 1,3SO,OOO 1,39S,OOO l,S49,000 2,200,000 1,89S,OOO 2,700,000 l,89S,OOO 2,250,000 -1.3% -10.9% 0.0% -13.4% -6.3% -6.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% ~~ 704/?0S $ 1,997,900 0.0% !.U:filf! ~ ~ 301 1,lS0,000 0.0% 803 2,000,000 -4.2% PH -4 2,100,000 -21.6% PH-1 S,S00,000 0.0% ~ ~ SO FOOTAGE ~ ~ MA!NTENANCf 2 beds 2 baths 2 beds 2.S baths 2 beds 2.5 baths 2 beds 2.5 bat hs 2 beds 2.5 baths 2 beds 3 baths 3 beds 2.5 baths 3 beds 3 baths 3 beds 3.5 baths 3 beds 3.5 baths 1128 1396 1396 1396 1380 Average 1919 1974 1842 1919 2179 Average $1,107.27 931.23 967.0S 999.28 $1,122.46 $1,004.67 $1,146.43 $ 9S9.98 $1,46S.80 $ 987.49 $1,032.58 $1,011.47 No No No No No No No Yes No No 1,100 1,550 1,S84 l,S84 l ,S66 2,137 2,057 2,104 2,137 2,449 ~ aAf..l::lS SO FOOTAGE ~ ~ MAINTE NANCf PENDING QATE 4 beds 3 baths 2179 $ 916.89 No 2,498 6/1/2018 ~ ~ SO FOOTAGE ~~ MA IN TENANCE (!OSER DATE 2 beds 2 baths 1128 $1,019.SO Yes 1,100 4/29/2017 2 beds 3 baths 1919 $1,042.21 No 2,090 10/14/2016 3 beds 3 baths 2165 $ 969.98 No 2,474 10/21/2016 3 beds 3.5 baths 2970 $1,8Sl.8S No 3,377 S/2S/2017 \WWI 305 303 301 401 501 PH·3 l!liW! 304 402 506 PH2 MAREA MIAMI BEACH -801 S . POINTE DRIVE, MIAMI BEACH ~~ 1,650,000 1,595,000 3,500,000 3,550,000 3,675,000 6,989,000 ~ 1,550,000 2,200,000 3,320,000 5,995,000 -16.7% ·9.3% 0.0% -18.9% -3.3% 0.0% ~ ·43.8% -24.1% -8.1% -7.5% filfil ~ 50 FOOTAGE ~ ~ MA INTENAN([ 2 beds 2.5 baths 3 beds 2.5 baths 3 beds 2.5 baths 3 beds 3.5 baths 3 beds 3.5 baths 3 beds 3.5 baths 1854 1525 2140 Average 2140 2332 2788 Ave rage filfil Mifil SO FOOTAGE 2 beds 2.5 baths 1525 3 beds 2.5 baths 3 beds 3 beds 3.5 baths 3.5 baths 1854 2154 2898 Average $ 889.97 $1,045.90 $1,635.51 $1,390.18 $1,658.88 $1,575.90 $2,506.81 $1,957.85 No Yes Yes Yes No No 3,313 2,647 3,522 3,803 250 4,900 ~ ~ MAINTENANCE $1,016.39 $1,186.62 $1,541.32 $2,068.67 $1,843.82 No No No Yes 2,351 2,900 4,129 5,325 (LOSEQ QATE 2/28/2017 3/1/2017 5/18/2018 5/10/2018 ll!fill! 1422 2311 1210 1503 2602 1307 1413 1505 1804 1605 2601 2516 1614 l1/illH 1512 ll!:!!dl! 1306 1312 2420 1806 2520 1411 2614 17 18 1512 1316 2502 1213 1619 1823 2322 2309 2318 2507 1805 1315 1305 1811 2521 1515 1414 1601 & 1603 THE COSMOPOLITAN SOUTH BEACH -110 WASHINGTON AVENUE, MIAMI BEACH ~~~ ~ .so.....£QQIAGf ~ ~MAINTENANCE 409,900 449,000 499,000 539,500 565,000 580,000 584,500 729,000 780,000 789,000 830,000 775,000 785,000 ~ 435,000 -9.1% 0.0% 0.0",{, -6.4% O.O"A. 0.0% -0.9% -8.5% 0.0% -1.3% 0.0% 0.0% O.OOA. ~ 0.0% 1 beds 1 baths 1 beds 1 baths 1 beds 1 bat hs 1 beds 1.5 baths 1 beds 1.5 baths 1 beds 1.5 baths 1 beds 1.5 baths 2 beds 2 beds 2 beds 2 beds 2 beds 2 beds fillli 2 baths 2 baths 2 baths 2 baths 2.5 baths 2.5 baths ~ 1 beds 1 baths 686 686 861 Average 826 826 826 826 Average 1010 1010 1010 1196 Average 1177 1247 Average $ 597.52 $ 654.52 $ 579.56 $ 608.11 S~3n s-m sm~ s=u $-N $721.78 S=H s=u $~H s~u s 658.45 $ 629.5 1 s 64 3.56 No Yes No No No No No No No No No No No 573 573 699 690 690 690 690 849 850 850 1,006 958 1,051 ~ ~ ~ MA INTE NANCE 686 $ 634.11 No 572 PENDING DAJE 4/26/2018 ~~fillli .B.AI1:1..S ~ ~ ~ MAINTFNANCE ~ 490,000 400,000 415,000 375,000 398,000 435,000 415,000 420,000 4 1 0,000 476,500 520,000 580,000 560,000 560,000 625,000 510,000 490,000 748,000 635,000 775,000 750,000 785,000 715,000 760,000 770,000 1,375,000 0.0% -10.1% -3.7% -2.5% -21.7% 0.0% -3.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% -1.7% 0.0% 0.0% -5.6% 0.0% -5.7% 0.0% 0.0",.6 0.0% -2.6% 0.0% 0.0% -28.6% 1 beds 1 baths 1 beds 1 baths 1 beds 1 baths 1 beds 1 baths 1 beds 1 baths 1 beds 1 baths 1 beds 1 baths 1 beds 1 bat hs 1 beds 1 baths 1 beds 1 baths 1 beds 1.5 ba t hs 1 beds 1.5 baths 1 beds 1.5 baths 1 beds 1.5 baths 1 beds 1.5 baths 1 beds 1.5 ba t hs 1 beds 1.5 bat hs 2 beds 2 baths 2 beds 2 baths 2 beds 2 baths 2 beds 2 baths 2 beds 2 baths 2 beds 2 baths 2 beds 2 bat hs 2 beds 2.5 baths 4 beds 3 baths 686 686 686 686 686 686 686 686 686 826 Average 826 899 826 826 826 826 826 Ave rage 1196 1010 1196 1010 1196 1196 1196 Ave rage 1247 2022 $ 714.29 s 583.09 s 604.96 $ 546.65 $ 580.17 s 634.11 $ 604.96 s 612.24 $ 597.67 $ 576.88 $ 604.93 $ 629.54 $ 645.16 $ 677.97 $ 677.97 $ 756.66 $ 617.43 $ 593.22 $ 656.70 $ 625 .42 $ 628.71 $ 647.99 $ 742.57 $ 656.35 $ 597.83 $ 635.45 $ 646.00 $ 617.48 $ 680.02 Yes No No No No No No No No No No No Yes No No No No No No No Yes No No Yes No No s $ $ $ $ s $ 572 571 571 573 571 573 551 573 573 690 690 742 690 690 691 665 690 1,007 850 1,006 843 999 1,005 1,005 1,04 1 1,512 2/14/2018 12/29/2017 10/20/2017 10/13/2017 6/19/2017 5/30/2017 4/5/2017 11/21/2016 11/15/2016 9/26/2016 6/11/2018 2/13/2018 11/15/2017 9/18/2017 1/27/2017 11/23/2016 10/17/2016 5/17/2018 4/27/2018 12/7/2017 10/30/2017 6/15/2017 5/31/2017 3/14/2017 7/28/2016 4/1/2017 Lew.:141 Level40 Level30 Level29 Level18 Lew.:1 17 Level l 2 Level ll Levels Lew.:17 l.zvel6 l.zw.:15 Lew.:12 Levell ·suran SUnih 5Utot1 Sllr.U 9llnot1 9U .. o sonu su .. 1, 90nlt' so .. u 9UMS 90nln 90nlts 9Unlt' 9Unit' 9Uni11 9llrits 9UroiU 9Uflih 90rtiU 90111t' 90riib 90noU 901111s 90tob 90n1U 90rll$ 901'oilt 90nil$ 90 .. t• 90rih 90rib 90fils '"""' 9Unlli 9Ur.lts OOnitt OUnits OUnib OVniU OVnlb o\ir.itl A'4.UnitSi1e Tot•I Pukin~ 11,12$$l' U,t25SF U,t2SU U,ll:!ISf ~1,t25'U U,USSf 11,12$$1' n,t25Sf U,125Sf 11,12SSf H,1'2SSf n,12sSF U,l25Sf U,125Sf H,t25Sf H,12SSf H,t2SSf H,l25SF U,t25Sf 11,t2SSf n,12sSf U,12S.Sf l1,t2SSF l.1,125-Sf 11,12551' ll,\25Sf H,l25Sf 11,t'lS&I' 11,l'lSSf l1,l25Sf 11,t25Sf 11,tlSSf ll,12SSf 1!,l25Sf H,l25Sf 11,12SSf 1l,125Sf .,, °" ... ... "' 411,625SF 411,62SSFI 1,299SF 55JSpaces S3S,646Sf IPHGSF U.7.Ul>.SF l),19lGSF U,7Utj,SF IUHGSF U,7HGSF )l,7UGSF U,79lGSF ll,783GSF ll,793GSF H,7UGSF U ,7!UGSf ll,793GSf. ll,7UGSF ll,79lGSF U,783GSF 13,.783GSF ll,183GSF H,793GSF ll,793GSF ll,793GSF 13,.783GSF U,783GSF U,793GSF U~783GSF U,793GSf U,7'3GSF ll,793GSf tl,793G$F ll,793GSf 1l,793G:.F 13,793GSF ll,7.HGSF- ll,7113GSF Floorpl~te t1,010Sii H,0705f 17,<i7QSF P,070SF 17.,070Sf 11,070Sf l7.070SF 17,0705.F 11,<i70SF 11,07051' 17,(1705.f l7,(f105F 17,070SF 17,070SF 17,070Sf l1,070SF t1,070Sf l7.070SF 11p70Sf t7,070SF t1,(170Sf t1,070SF 17,(17051' 17,(17051' t7,070SF 11,070SF 11,()70SF l1,()70SF 11,07051' t7,070 SF 11,070"5F 11,070SF l7,()705F t1,(J70SF ll,793GSf t7,(1705F 13,79.!IGSF 17,070SF ll,79.!IGSF 17/;flfJSF P~rl•m1 6,753GSF 11,07051' AM(NITI OGSF 35:,000SF M~t io,is2GSF 41A60SF 121$p•(H OG~F l,,OliOSF l21S1met 1,lOOGSF 47,400 Sf IM%>1m 0 ~$, U~Hf lAl! %>4«t 535,646GSF 8S7,6455f 553Sp•ce• Floorplate Pirkin1 p· H/A f'f H/A 32,6aOSF 35,9f>OGSF N/A '8' 9110n-Gr~eSj:i~ei OUl"llU 32,680SF 35,9&0GSF (50o-600AltonAs•umptions I l,77SSF 2,215SF l~;~:t~.F~~e per Tower Floor I l~:~:~ ~:I 500-600-700AltonTo(i,IFAR 571,606SF(170,696SF+400,910SF} 600-700AltonRet•ilfAR 35,9&05F Effk:iencv!NSF/FAR' 8',4SOGSF UlSfl~t~ 87,4SOSF 128,700SF 181,SOOSF 35,440SF 411,:HSSF 331Sp•cu FAR forR~•'I 511l,341SF 510,341SF (ReductionofDemityandlntem.ity f J A5 Approved PropoSed Differenc~ lnte,...;ty. Commeric•IFAR 70,~76SFj -:5·960SFI ~-~'.'_SF FAR/FL 13,793SF 11,341Sf !M ~ w w M 2M M ~ 3M CT u 4M M M H Total Level42 level41 Level40 Level 39 Level 38 Level37 Level 36 Level35 Level 34 Level 33 Level32 Level31 Level 30 Leve l 29 Level 28 Level27 Level 26 Level25 Level24 Level23 Level22 Level 21 Level 20 Level 19 Level 18 Level17 Level 16 Level15 Level 14 Level13 Level 12 Level 11 Level 10 Leve!9 Levels Level 7 Level 6 ~ 942SF 974SF lM OUnits OUnits OUnits OUnits 4Units 4Units 4Units 4Units 4Units 4Units 4Units 4 Units 4Units 4Units 4Units 4Units 4Units 4Units 4Units 4Units 4Units 4Units 4Units 4Units 4Units 4Units 4Units 4Units 4Units 4Units 4Units 4Units 4Units 4Units 4 Units 4 Units ~ OUnits OUnits OUnits OUnits 4 Units 4 Units 4 Units 4 Units 4 Units 4 Units 4 Units 4 Units 4 Units 4 Units 4 Units 4 Units 4 Units 4 Units 4 Units 4Units 4 Units 4 Units 4 Units 4 Units 4 Units 4 Units 4Units 4 Units 4 Unit s 4Units 4 Units 4 Units 4Units 4Units 4 Units 4 Units i.!.!!lili i.!.!!lili 132 Units 132 Units 41.64% 41.64% lllli1l l.Sl.liUf 132 Units 128,766 SF 33 Units 31,086SF 33 Units 32,142 SF 843 SF 33 Units 27,819 SF 1,143 SF 33 Units 37,719SF 132 Units 181,368 SF 1,278 SF 99 Units 126,522 SF 1,662 SF 33 Units 54,846 SF 37 Units 6$,440 SF 1,7 12SF 33Units 56,496SF 2,236 SF 4 Units 8,944 SF 16 Unit5 3S,348 SF 2,111 SF 8 Units 16,888 SF 2,390SF 2,22SSF 4Units 4 Units 9,560SF ~ 317 Units 410,922SF m 1Units 1 Units 1 Units 1 Units 1 Units 1 Units 1 Units 1 Units 1 Units 1 Units 1 Units 1 Units 1 Units 1 Units 1 Units 1 Units 1 Units 1 Units 1 Units 1 Units 1 Units 1 Units 1 Units 1 Units 1 Units 1 Units 1 Unit s 1 Units 1 Units 1 Units 1 Units 1 Units 1 Units 1 Units 1 Units 1 Units lJllliU 37 Units 11.67% ~ 976SF 1,374 SF 1,769SF- 2,209Sf ill: 4Units 4 Units 4Units 4Units OUnits OUnits OUnits OUnits OUnits OUnits OUnits OUnits OUnits OUnits OUnits OUnits OUnits OUnits OUnits OUnlts OUnits OUnits OUnits OUnits OUnits OUnits OUnits OUnits OUnits OUnits OUnits OUnits OUnits OUnits OUnits OUnits !U!oil> 16Units S.05% 317 Units l.Sl.liUE~~ 128,766 800 103,012,800 780,400 Average/Unit 181,368 $ 900 163,231,200 1,236,600 Average/Unit 65,440 1,000 65,440,000 1,768,649 Average/Unit 35,348 $ 1,000 35,348,000 2,209,250 Average/Unit 410,922 367 ,032,000 893.19 1,157,830 PotenhalGross lncome (Year 1): E1dmaled Monthly Ren1 Per Squart1 Fool· Eshma\t1d Av.,.,rllgll Monthly Rl!111/Unit ~ ~:: g:::::~:: ~n~~ (SF ) . AVflrage Unit Size (SF): E11;mal...:!GrossSt1ll-OutValue AverageSalePrictlA.lnlt Avef390'!Sale PriC<llSF Income & E..pense Escalation Rate: Condomin1um Appr&cia~onRate: $1,589.980 U.50 $3,278 454.280 '" 937 S227.140.000 $468.330 $500.00 3% 0% 500 & &00 M.TON Rew> ANO 5$9-737 WEST ,\VENUE. MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA DISCOUNTED CASH FlCJW AHAL YSIS IN A pQWNIW BENJA! .CQNIXMNIJM 8Fl I ~JllT8CENA8!0 !FQR 11 !..ISJRAll\(f puRpQ!!FS l I POTENTIAL GROSS RENTAL INCOME VacancyandCollect1on Lrn;s% (S<taEflective()ccupancyBtttow) Len: Va<:iincy andCollection Loss POTENTIAL GROSS RENTAL INCOME [ POTENTIAL EXPENSE PASS· THROUGH Vacancy1W1dColltiedonLOSi11% (See EtrectiveOccupancyBelow) less: Vacar>eyandCollection l oss POTENTIAL EXPENSE PASS· THROUGH ITOT AL POTENTW. GROSS RENTM. INCOME EFFECTIVE OCCUPANCY AATE FOR INCOME !AVEAAGE UNSOl.D RENTAL SPACE) ,LESS 10% (Sasedonthtamollrlt ofun$Ol(lrentalspact1atthelleginnif'll8ndendof eaehperiod) !TOTH.. EFFECTIVE GROSS RENTAL INCOME IPRO-AATED NET OPERA.TING INCOME FROM UNSOl.D SPACE ITolal Condommium Area Available For Sale (1 ) PiofecledAnnual AbsorptlonRata I CondominoumArealobeSold Condommium Unit• 10 be Sold RemainingCondomlniumAieatobeSold (2) IAveragti Amount ol Un50ld Spaet1 Genentlif'll Rent I (1 ) +-(2) ] I 2 Pere&nta1111olTolalSpace IProjer::tedSalePrlce/SFln"Asils"COl'ldltlon I PROJECTED CONDOMINIUM SA.LES REVENUE I~:::: ~o~::s~:,is'!::i~e and Cont1ngendH (3%) IPLUS; PRO-Roi.TED NET OPERA.TINO INCOME (Buedonper1odti.Qlnnlngandend~•P909 l <0% ITOT"1. CASH FlOW (RENTM. NOi, AND NET SALES REVENUE; RESIDENllAL COMPOENT) Nat PresentValuea1 NetPrner11Valuea\ N111Presen1Valueat J.B.B. 16'.4 15% , .. """1.fJ.ll{t $146,718,100 $149.636.100 $152,652,200 YEAR ""' $1,589,980 " "' $1.589,980 "' .. "' "' $1,589,980 I S1,226,0ii $490,435 $7315.853 454,280 117,062 117,082 "' 337,19ll 395.739 07.11% I $58.541.237 $3.512,470 .l.!.1"""2 $53,272,527 -I $'4.008.180 fill!Jllilfl1 $146.720,000 $149,635.000 $152.650.000 DISCOUNTED NET PRESENT VM.UE TO A SINGlE PURCH"6ER IN A CONDOMINIUM SELL-OIJT, WrTH IN'TERJM RENTAL USE (Rou~) ESTIMATED PROSPECTIVE MARKETV,\LIJE OF THE RETi\ll COMPONENT (13.871 SF CFRETAILATMULTIPLE8UJLDINGS,AT $900/SF) (Rou~) TOTM. ESTIMATE> PROSPECTIVE VALUE AT COMPLETION J . ALHALE APPRAISALS, INC. YEAR YEAR ""' IlillEf $1,637,680 $1,686.8 10 0% 0% "' "' $1.637.680 $1.686,810 so so 0% " "' "' so so $1,837,880 $1,888,810 25.IS'MI. iM0,788 id1,287 $)38,315 $172,507 $504473 $258780 337.198 220.1 15 117,0112 117.082 117,lla2 117.0ll2 "' "' 220,115 103,033 278,656 161,574 61.34% 35.57% SSOU.tkl SSUU.00 $58 541 237 $58 541237 $3.512,470 $3,512,470 .l.!.1"""2 1llal!ll 6071(1 $53,272,527 S53,2n,527 ~ ml.lli_ $53,777 ,000 $53,531,287 """"""' Y&.ll<llllilI $322.97 $302,515 S329.3!il S3otl.526 S336.03 $314,742 -- s1u,eoo.ooo $88,300,000 $215,DOO.OOO YEAR """' IllI&. $1.737,410 0% "' $1.737,410 $0 .. "' so $1,737,410 U•% $23,285 I $9,314 $13971 I $1,1512.857 103.033 103.033 103033 '" 0 51.516 11.34% SSOU.tkl $51518 289 $227.140.000 $3,090.9110 ~ "'" $20,442,800 $41,879,819 $208,07,400 1ll.fil $1.512,857 $48,893,790 I s2ou 10.257 PotentlalGro=is lncome (Year 1): Estima1ed Monthly Rent Per Square Foot E5tlma\e(I Aveera9e Monthfy RenUUn1t TolalCondomlnlumAtea (SF): TotalCondom1niumUnit5 Average Unit Size (SF ): EstlmatedGrossSell·OJtValue· Average Sale Price/Unit Average Sale Price/SF. Income & E~pense EscalaLion Rate: Condominium Appreda11on Rate: $1,540,958 S3.75 S4.861 410,922 3H 1.296 $367.032.000 $1 ,157.030 $893.19 "· 0% &00 ALTON Rew>, MIA.Ml 8 Ei\CH, FlORiOA DISCOUNTED Cl.SH FLON AHAL YStS IN A P0TENTW. B0fTAL.CONQOMINIUM SELL-O!JISCENAR!O !fQA 1 1 U8JlWNE f'UBp08f8 \ ! POTENTIAL GROSS RENTAL INCOME Vacancy and Collection Lrn;s % (See Eflective Occupancy Below ) Less: VacancyandColleclionLrn;, POTENTIAL GROSS RENTAL INCOME [ Vacancy and Collecuon Loss % (Sota Eftective Occupancy Below) Less. Vacancy and Collection Lon POTENTIAL EXPENSE PASS-THROUGH ITOTi\L POTENTW. GROSS RENTAL. INCOME IE::=1~~=,:..,o:i!'!ce~t~==~~~~/!i;:~~CE ) ,LESS 10'11. !TOTH.. EFFEC'TIVE GROSS RENTM. INCOME !TOTH.. FIXED ANO VARli\BLE OPERA.TING EXPENSES <0% PRQ.RATEO NET OPERATING INCOME FROM UNSOlD SPACE TotalCor.domir.iumAleaAvailableForSalt1 (1) ProjecledAnnualAbsorption Rate Con<:lom1rnumAlea\obeSold CondornlnlumUnitstobeSold RemainirigCond~r>iumAreatobeSold (2) Average Amount of Unsold SpiK:a GeneraUng Bent [ (1) + (2) ] I 2 PercentageofTolal Spoce Pmjecled Sale Price/SF in "As Is" Condition PROJECTED CONDOMINIUM S>J..ES REVENUE r~-~ "' Condominium Adrnlrols!r911Yt1 and Contingencies (3%) ONOOMINIUM SALES COST ET CONDOMINIUM SALES REVENUE PLUS; PRQ.RATED NET OPERA.TINO INCOME lBaMClonpetlodbtlglnnlngandenclUOIOkl•P909) OTM. CMH FLOW (REN'TM. NOi, N.:> NET SALES REVENUE; RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT) J.B.B. """1.Elllli NelPreseMValueal "' $23\,020,500 NlllPresell\Valueat '" $235,931.000 Ntl!PreHll\Valueat '" $241,014,600 YEAR """ $1,540,958 .. "' $1,540.958 "' 0% "' "' $1 ,540,958 7U6'11. I S1'218,'2'4 $488,890 I s130035 410.922 90,740 90.740 70 320.182 365.552 889'% I "'"' I $810'48 078 S4.862.8ll0 1Z.il.illJ! I sz * 329 $73,753,758 lli2.m. I $74.483.790 fill!Jllilfl1 $231.020,000 $235.930.000 $241.015.000 DISCOUNTED NET PRESENT VALUE TO A SINGLE PURCHASER IN A CONDOMINIUM SELL-OUT, WfT1i INTERIM RENTAL USE (Rounded ) PLUS: ESTIMATED PROSP£CTIVE MARKET VALUE OF THE RETAIL COMPONENT (32,fl80SF ATllOO Al..TONROAD,AT$900ISF) (Rounded ) TOTH.. ESTIMATED PROSPECTIVE VALUE AT COMPLETION J. AUW..E APPRAISALS, INC. YEAR ""' $1,587,190 .. "' 1 1.507.190 so " "' so $1,587,190 56.88'11. $902,748 $381 ,098 $5'418"'7 320.102 90.740 90.740 70 229,442 274,812 66.88% M J I§ !!1O.Q078 $4,862,880 '2.ill"'2 it 2ij 320 $73,753,758 ~ $74,295,403 """"""' $56220 $574.15 S586.52 YEAR YEAR '"""" """' IllI&. $1,634.8 10 $1.683.850 .. .. "' "' $1.634.810 $1.683.850 so "' " .. "' "' so "' $1,834,810 $1,683,850 31.64'11. '·"" i!17BO S82,68o I $20l,9G4 $25,072 $310 358 $37 808 $1,fl19,1Mfl 229.442 112.777 116,666 112,1n 116,666 112.1n 90 67 112.777 0 17 1,109 "·"' 4164% 1372% MJ.1§ i AYJ i § .......... ._ ....... ,,.. ...... ,..., I $361.032.ooo ..... ~.~ ... ~-···~ $6,252.200 1'..12'-"" 19378420 SM,828.2..49 ruua $95,138,605 ~ $728.770 $744.259 $760.300 $235,900,000 $211,400,000 $286,300,000 $6.043,870 Wll>IJ! 19065810 $33,032,170 191 ,885,370 $333,9",130 lli.al!l $1,1119,IMfl $i1,702,978 S33l5,s1e,ne PfVfl OpMENT COS! SUMMMY Of THE 1£SIQRY BESIQENDAJ. coMpONENT AT THE :SQQ $!TE" AddreH: !Gross Building Area {SF): i~:: :~::::~~ ~== ~~~: ~~ ::~~s Space: !Gross Building Area (SF) of Above-ground Parking Garage I Gron Building Area (SF l o.f Below-ground Parking Garag&: SileAlea {SF) Number of Floon ol Pedestal: Number of Floors ol Residential Tower: Construction Cost (High-rise Residential Building: Section 11, Page 15; Floors 6-8 ) Com;truction Cost (High·rise Residential Building; Section 11, Page 15; Floor& 9-38 ) Construction Cost (High-rise Residential Building; S&etion 11, Page 15; FICIOr$ 39-42 ) Construction Cost (AmenitiesJClubhoose Space: S&etion 11, Page 30) Conslruc:tion Cost (Above-ground Parking Garage; S&etion 14, Page 34) Construction Cost (Below-ground Parking Garage; S&etion 13, Page 26) ,construction Cost (Site Improvements; Laodscaping ) iA) Total Hard Con1trucllon C0tt Indirect Costs (Architoct, engineers, professional, supervision and legal foes) Real Estate Taxes (During Construction) B) Tot.I Indirect CO&t Financing Cost I Interest (at 5.5%, ootstanding for an average of 1.5 years) Financing C05t/ Points (1% of Loan) C) Total Financing Coet 0 ) Pro11t I OV.me.d ;REPLACEMEITT COST NEW OF IMPROVEMEITTS {Rounded) I INCURABLE PHYSICAL DEPRECIATION (New/propoMd comlructlon) FUNCTIONAL. OBSOLESCENCE CURABLE PHYSICAL DEPRECIATION (No defem!ld maintenance) TOTAL PHYS1CALOEPRECIATION ESTIMATED COST OF CONSTRUCTION {RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT) j (BaMd on prellmlnary con.tructlon detalll for a conceptual buMdlng which don not yet hav• mpprcNed plans) 500 AJlOfl Road Miami Beach, FLORIDA 535,646 510,341 6,753 165.040 43,945 85,348 5 37 SQUARE = 41 ,379 413,790 55,172 6,753 165,040 43,945 85,348 535,646 8% 535,646 535,646 535,646 10% !5",648 0% 0% 0% COST UH $249.87 $251.12 $252.12 $191 .61 $71.69 $59.82 $0.70 $268.79 $21.50 $0.10 $21.60 $26.86 $31 .73 $348.92 J. ALHAL.E APPRAJSALS, INC. = $10,339,321 $103.910.1n $13,910,109 $1 ,295,279 $11 ,831,388 $2,628,895 liQ.22!! $143,975,169 $143,975, 169 $11 ,518,000 ~ $11,572,400 $12,832,700 WWJlQ $14,388,200 $18,994,000 $186,900,000 $0 $0 IQ $0 $187,000,000 TOTAL = $143,975,169 $155,547,569 $169,935,769 $186,929,769 JOZEF ALHALE, MAI 3475 Sheridan Street, Suite 313 Hollywood, Florida 33021 (305) 613-7477 jbalhale@aol.com www.jalhaleappraisals.com Experience: Membership: Professional Experience: 1990 Education: Licensed: Assignments: QUALIFICATIONS Thirty years in the field of real estate appraisal, appraisal revi ew, consultation, expert wi tn ess, economic research and market anal ysis. Appraisal Institut e, MAI CCIM In stitute Miami Society of Comm ercial Realtors Miami Association of Realtors J. Alhale Appraisals, Inc., President, September 2009 to present J.B. Alhale & Associates, Inc., Presi dent, May 1994 to present Dixon and Friedman, In c., Senior Appraiser, Oct. 1991 -May 1994 R.G. Davis & Associates, Inc., Fee Appraiser, Jan. 1991 -Oct.1991 lzenberg Appraisal Assoc.,lnc., Sta ff Appraiser, July 1988 -Dec. Master of Science, Computer Science Rensselear Polytechnic Institute, Troy, New York Bachelor of Arts, Cum Laude, Computer Science New York University, New York, New York Associate Engineering Degree, Computer Science Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel State Certifi ed General Real Estate Appraiser -State of F lorida Real Estate Salesman -State of Florida Vacant land , industrial facilities, shopping centers, office buil dings, rental and condominium apartment buildings, hotel/motel faciliti es, other special-purpose properties, air rights, as well as valuation of Leased Fee and Leasehold Interests, undivided partial interests for financ ing, litigation , divorce, estate taxes, gill taxes, trnsts, etc. Econom ic research, expert wi tness, Highest and Best Use analysis, market analysis, feasibility analysis pertai ning to commercial, industrial, lodging, retail, office, mu lti-family residential and special- purpose properties. J. ALHALE APPRAISALS, INC. Real Estate Ap1>raisers and Consullanls -74 -