|
<br />Hans Ottinot, City Attorney
<br />February 7, 2008
<br />Page 3
<br />
<br />between $8,000,000 and $12,000,000. Both parties have supported their valuation of Parcel 1
<br />through the use of a state certified real estate appraiser. While a number of other individuals have
<br />been listed by each side as potential witnesses in the instant jury trial, the key witness for each party
<br />is the respective appraisers, Barry Diskin for the Respondent and J. Mark Quinlivan, for the City.
<br />
<br />As for Parcell, Mr. Quinlivan originally appraised it in or around January, 2003 and opined that the
<br />fair market value of the Parcel was $1,570,000. Quinlivan later appraised the subject parcel in about
<br />February, 2004, and opined that its fair market value was $2,250,000: His most recent appraisal of
<br />the subject parcel establishes the fair market value at $3,750,000 for its fee simple interest. For our
<br />pmposes, the fee simple interest typically represents the value of the total bundle of property rights
<br />inherent in a property. It is important to note, however, that after filing its eminent domain Petition,
<br />but before the Court entered the Order of Taking, the City successfully negotiated the acquisition of
<br />Vanguud Car Rental's leasehold interest in Parcel 1 for the sum of $450,000. That settlement
<br />essentially left Respondent's leased fee interest, as the remaining valuation issue.
<br />
<br />Quinlivan was specifically tasked with providing a valuation opinion of Respondent's leased fee
<br />interest in Parcel 1. He is expected to testify, however, that the professional appraisal standards
<br />required him to appraise Parcel l's fee simple interest as a prerequisite for opining the value of the
<br />leased fee. As such, he will further testify that the fee simple value of the suiject properry as of April 1, 2005 is
<br />$377507000 and the leased fee value of the suiject Parcell, as of April 1, 2005, is $371007000. These are the
<br />amounts that will be presented to the JUry as the reasonable and fair compensation that is owed to the Respondent. To
<br />date, I have worked closely with Quinlivan to prepare for this case and remain confident that
<br />Quinlivan's substantial experience in performing as an expert appraisal witness, along with his legal
<br />training and personal demeanor will serve both he and the City well at trial.
<br />
<br />On the other hand, as indicated above, I expect that Respondents' appraiser - Barry Diskin - will
<br />proffer his professional opinion that the fee simple market value of Parcell is $12 million. The
<br />more striking aspect of his appraisal analysis and opinion is that it relies upon three (3) land sales
<br />comparables - all of which were used in Respondent's prior appraisal. Our pretrial work and legal
<br />strategy has all but eliminated any prospect that Respondents will attempt to proffer any value
<br />related testimony or documents associated with "Transferable Development Rights ("TDRs"). To
<br />that end, I fully expect to prevail in a pretrial Motion in Limine to exclude any testimony or
<br />documents by Diskin or any other witness (es) which -either relies upon or considers TDRs or a so
<br />called "alternative valuation methodology" using transferable development rights transactions as a
<br />basis for opining on the fair market valuation or full compensation due to Respondent.
<br />
<br />In order to support his opinion that the fair market value of Parcell is $12,000,000 the first of
<br />Diskin's land sales comparables is a purchase option contract transaction, dated November, 2005,
<br />and which actually did not close until January, 2007 for $12,000,000. The property that was the
<br />subject of the option contract is located at 17150 Collins Avenue, on the west side and directly abuts
<br />the lUscal Plaza Restaurant (17190 Collins Avenue). The seller of this slightly less than one acre
<br />parcel (hereinafter "the Rascal Plaza transaction") was Babsky and the purchaser was Isaac
<br />Starkman. The sworn testimony of Mr. Starkman confirms my earlier assessment that this
<br />transaction was, in fact, atypical and dominated by the investment considerations of Starkman ,in the
<br />
<br />I
<br />i
<br />
<br />I
<br />
<br />FTLDOCS 5289886 1
<br />
<br />SHUTIS & BOWEN LLP
<br />
<br />MIAMI' FORT LAUDERDALE
<br />
<br />WEST PALM BEACH
<br />
<br />ORLANDO TAMPA
<br />
<br />TALLAHASSEE
<br />
<br />AMSTERDAM
<br />
<br />LONDON
<br />
|