The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About12-6845 MILLER, TURETSKY, RULE, & McLENNAN By: Keith B. McLennan, Esquire Atty. I.D. No. 43628 3770 Ridge Pike, Suite 200 Collegeville PA 19426 (610) 489-3300 Attorney for Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION -LAW VALENTI MID-ATLANTIC REALTY, LLC 3450 Buschwood Park Drive, Suite 195 Tampa, FL 33618 v. CUMBERLAND COUNTY BOARD OF ASSESSMENT APPEALS 1 Courthouse Square Carlisle, PA 17013 and EAST PENNSBORO TOWNSHIP 98 South Enola Drive Enola, PA 17025-2796 and ~ c ~ ~ ~~ ~ --~ ~~ z~ •c -vim gip' ~ c~vQ c-x --~° ~~ c~ 3 ~-- ~ ~ ~ cn ~ :.' EAST PENNSBORO TOWNSHIP AREA SCHOOL DISTRICT . 890 Valley Street . Enola, PA 17025 . PETITION FOR APPEAL Pursuant to 72 Pa.C.S.A. §5350, Appellant, Valenti Mid-Atlantic Realty, LLC, "Lessee", hereby appeals the decision of the Cumberland County Boazd of Assessment Appeals, dated October 12, 2012, regazding the assessment of the premises located at 601 N. Enola Road, Enola, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, pazcel identifier 09-13-1003-018. In support hereof. Appellant states as follows: ~ j D3.75 PQ A'1Ty ~#5Q97 ~'~asass ~ 1. Appellant, Valenti Mid-Atlantic Realty, LLC is the lessee of the premises located at 601 N. Enola Road, Enola, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, pazcel identifier 09-13-1003- 418 (hereinafter referred to as the "Property"). 2. Incident to an Addendum to Lease, Appellant was provided the right to appeal the tax assessment on the leased property. 3. On August 31, 2012, Appellant filed an appeal with the Cumberland County Boazd of Assessment Appeals from the assessment on the Property for the year 2013. 4. The Boazd of Assessment Appeals, after hearing, refused to reduce the assessment on the property from $595,000 to $500,000 for the 2013 tax year. A true and correct copy of the Boazd's Notice of Disposition is attached hereto as Exhibit "A". 5. As per the appraisal attached as Exhibit "B", the current assessment on the Property is improper and does not reflect $500,000, the true tax value of the Property. WHEREFORE, Appellant respectfully requests this Court to provide Appellant with a hearing de novo and grant it a reduction of its assessment from $595,000 to $500,000. MILLER, TURETSKY, RULE & McLENNAN Dated: ~ ~ / Z By: Kei B. McLennan EXHIBIT "A" Cumberland County Assessment Office One Courthouse Square Room 107 Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 240-6350 Hours: 8:OOam to 4:30pm Stephen D. Tiley, Assistant Solicitor Bonnie M. Mahoney, Chief Assessor BUCHER, CHRISTINE Parcel Identifier: C/O KEITH MCLENNAN 09-13-1003-018. SUITE2 3770 RIDGE PIKE MAILING DATE: OCTOBER 12, 2012 COLLEGEVILLE PA 19426 APPEAL DEADLINE: NOVEMBER 11, 2012 BOARD OF ASSESSMENT APPEALS DECISION NOTICE - THIS IS NOT A TAX BILL This is a notice of a change to the assessed valuation or status of this property. RBASON FOR CHANGE: 04 - APPEAI. BOARD DECISION (DENI&D - NO CHANGE) The Board of Assessment Appeals has issued this decision regarding your tax assessment appeal. You may appeal this decision to the Caurt of Common Pleas by filing the appropriate paperwork with the Prothonotary's office in accordance with local rules of court. FUTURE TAX BILLING BASIS OLD N~f ASSES$IS~1~TT ~ 595, 000 595, 000 ~.'AX, ST7~T.tT$ .... Taxable Taxable CiG STATES MARKET-BASED ASSl33Sl~NT OLD NEW Land 206,100 208,100 Improvements 386,900 386,900 TOTAL 595,000 895,000 100 of Market Value at 2010 Base Year Rates. CLBAN AND GREEN (CiG) ASSESSlt~NT OLD NEW Land N/A N/A Improvements N!A N/A TOTAL N/A N/A Land value based on rates provided by the State. CHANGE OF TAX BASIS - NET CHANGE COUNTY/MUNIC SCHOOL Land.. ....... 0 0 . Improvements 0 0 TOTAL. 0 0 Effects Future Billing Cycles Only cc: BUCHER, CHRISTINE Cumberland County Board of Assessment Appeals Gearge A. DeMartyn Kristin Lehman Lloyd W. Bucher EFFECTIVE: 01/01/2013 for County/tunic 07/01/2013 for School I PROPERTY DESCRIPTION I Munic.: 09 - EAST PENNSBORO TWP School: 5 - EAST PENNSBORO SD Control Number: 09001891 Property Location: 601 N ENOLA ROAD LOT 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Unit/Lot ID: L-0001 + Land Size: .83 acres Property Type: CR Commercial - Restaurant Cumberland County Commissioners Barbara Cross Jim Hertzler Gary Eichelberger Dennis Marion, Chief Clerk (notc-a11L J CC ; EXHIBIT "B" WILLIAM YETKE REAL ESTATE REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL 601 N. ENOLA ROAD EAST PENNSBORO TWP, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA 17025 CLIENT: VALENTI MANAGEMENT 3450 BUSCHWOOD PARK DRIVE, SUITE 195 TAMPA, FL 33618 1315 WALNUT STREET, SUITE 808 PHILADELPHIA, PA 19107 September 19, 2012 Valenti Management 3450 Buschwood Park Drive, Suite 195 Tampa, FL 33618 Attn: Sharon Ritch Re: 601 N Enola Rd, East Pennsboro Township, Cumberland County, PA Dear Ms. Ritch: As requested, I have inspected and appraised the above referenced property for the purpose of estimating its market value. The value estimate was made as of September 12, 2012, the date of inspection. The valuation analysis was completed using the Sales Comparison and Income Approaches to estimating value. The market value estimates are given on the Summary of Important Data & Conclusion that follows. The appraisal was made subject to the special, general and specific assumptions and limiting conditions, and certifications set forth in the following Summary report. The appraisal analysis and report were completed in accordance with the Scope of Work described in the report and in conformance with the requirements of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) of The Appraisal Foundation. Sincerely, ~+~~ ~ William S. Yetke MAI, SRA PA Certified General Real Estate Appraiser #GA-000161-L TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................3 Summary of Important Data &Conclusions ............................................................................... 4 Market Value Estimate .................................................................................................................... 5 ................................. Identification of Property Appraised ........................................................... Property Rights Appraised ............................................................................................................. 5 Special Assumptions & Limiting Conditions ............................................................................... 5 Assumptions & Limiting Conditions ............................................................................................ 6 Certification ...................................................................................................................................... 9 Purpose & Intended Use ................................................................................................................ 11 Definition of Market Value ............................................................................................................11 Effective Date of Appraisal & Date of Report ...........................................................................11 Scope of Work ................................................................................................................................. .12 Area And Neighborhood Description ......................................................................................... .12 Location Analysis ............................................................................................................................ .13 Physical Description ....................................................................................................................... .14 Environmental Conditions ............................................................................................................ .15 Zoning .............................................................................................................................................. .15 Taxes & Assessment Data ............................................................................................................. .15 Ownership, History, and Occupancy ........................................................................................... .15 Summary of Lease Terms .............................................................................................................. .16 Highest & Best Use ........................................................................................................................ .16 Valuation Analysis ........................................................................................................................... .17 VALUATION -Income Approach ............................................................................................. .17 VALUATION -Sales Comparison Approach ........................................................................... .20 Description of Comparison Analysis ........................................................................................... .21 Reconciliation & Final Value Estimate ........................................................................................ .26 Estimated Exposure Time ............................................................................................................. .26 Addenda ........................................................................................................................................... .27 Photographs of Appraised Property ........................................................................................................................... 27 Tax Map ........................................................................................................................................................................... 34 Location Map ..................................................................................................................................................................35 Map of Comparable Sales .............................................................................................................................................3G Zoning ............................................................................................................................................................................. 37 Zoning Map .................................................................................................................................................................... 40 FEMA Flood Map ......................................................................................................................................................... 41 Statement of Professional Qualifications &Experience ............................................................42 3 SUMMARY OF IMPORTANT DATA & CONCLUSIONS € ~ ~~ - d Sk -; ~s ~ ~ Address: 601 N. Enola Road, Enola, East Pennsboro Township, Cumberland County, PA 17025 Type of Property: Restaurant Type of Appraisal: Market value appraisal Total Building Area: 2,395 square feet Total Land Area: .87 acres (37,897 s.f.) Zoning: C-G; Commercial General Zoning District Present Use: Fast food restaurant Date of Valuation: September 12, 2012 Highest and Best Use: Fast Food Restaurant Income Approach valuation: $350,000 Sales Comparison Approach valuation: $500,000 Final Value Estimate: $500,000 4 APPRAISAL OF 601 N. ENOLA ROAD EAST PENNSBORO TOWMSNIP, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA MARKET VALUE ESTIMATE As of the date of valuation, September 12, 2012, the following market value estimate was made: Total market value: $500,000 IDENTIFICATION OF PROPERTY APPRAISED The property appraised is a 1-story commercial building at 601 N. Enola Road, Enola, East Pennsboro Township, Cumberland County, PA. The tax parcel number is 09-13-1003-018. PROPERTY RIGHTS APPRAISED Fee simple rights were appraised. SPECIAL ASSUMPTIONS & LIMITING CONDITIONS The appraised property is a Wendy's restaurant. For valuation purposes, all removable equipment and fixtures have been omitted from the analysis. Only fixed items that are built into the structure have been considered in the valuation analysis. The land area used in this appraisal is based on information from the Cumberland County Office of Property Assessment (public record). The building area is based on information provided by the owner. 5 ASSUMPTIONS & LIMITING CONDITIONS Where applicable, this appraisal report has been made subject to the following assumptions and limiting conditions: • No responsibility is assumed for the legal description or for matters including legal or title considerations. Title to the property is assumed to be good and marketable unless otherwise stated. • The property was appraised free and clear of any or all liens or encumbrances unless otherwise stated. • Responsible ownership and competent property management are assumed. • It is assumed that if the property were marketed, it would be done in a manner consistent with good quality marketing procedures including adequate time exposure and typical market terms. • The information furnished by others is believed to be reliable. However, no warranty is given for its accuracy. • All engineering is assumed to be correct. The plot plans and illustrative material in this report are included only to assist the reader in visualizing the property. • It is assumed that there are no hidden or unapparent conditions of the property, subsoil, or structures that render it more or less valuable. No responsibility is assumed for such conditions or for arranging for engineering studies that may be required to discover them. • It is assumed that all applicable zoning and use regulations and restrictions have been complied with, unless nonconformity has been stated, defined, and considered in the appraisal report. • It is assumed that all required licenses, certificates of occupancy, consents or other legislative or administrative authority from any local, state, or national government or private entity or organization have been or can be obtained or renewed for any use on which the value estimate contained in this report is based. • It is assumed that there is full compliance with all applicable federal, state and local environmental regulations and laws unless noncompliance is stated, defined, and considered in the appraisal report. • It is assumed that the utilization of the land and improvements is within the boundaries or property lines of the property described and that there is no encroachment or trespass unless noted in the report. 6 • The distribution, if any, of the total valuation in this report between land and improvements applies only under the stated program of utilization. The separate allocations for land and buildings must not be used in conjunction with any other appraisal and are invalid if so used. • Possession of this report, or a copy thereof, does not carry with it the right of publication. It may not be used for any purpose by any person other than the party to whom it is addressed without the written consent of the appraiser, and in any event only with proper written qualifications and only in its entirety. • The appraiser herein by reason of this appraisal is not required to give further consultation, testimony, or be in attendance in court with reference to the property in question unless arrangements have been previously made. • Neither all nor any part of the contents of this report (especially any conclusions as to value, the identity of the appraiser, or the firm with which the appraiser is connected) shall be disseminated to the public through advertising, public relations, news, sales or other media without the prior written consent and approval of the appraiser. • Any value estimate(s) provided in the report apply to the entire property, and any proration or division of the total into fractional interests will invalidate the value estimate, unless such proration or division of interests has been set forth in the report. • The property is assumed to be free of toxic wastes and/or hazardous and prohibited substances in any form, unless otherwise noted in this report. No investigation has been made by the appraiser as to the existence of these substances and no guarantee is implied as to their absence. The appraiser is not qualified to detect such substances and conditions. The value conclusions assume that the property is free and clear of any such adverse conditions unless specifically indicated in this report. 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 any question exists about toxic wastes or hazardous substances. • The property is assumed to be free of any lead based paint unless otherwise noted in this report. No investigation has been made by the appraiser as to the existence of lead based paint and no guarantee is implied as to its absence. The appraiser is not qualified to detect such substances and conditions. The value conclusion(s) in this report assume that the property is free and clear of any such adverse conditions unless specifically indicated. No responsibility is assumed for the presence of lead based paint or for any expertise or engineering knowledge required to discover it. The client is urged to retain an expert in this field if any question or concern exists about the occurrence of lead based paint. • The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) became effective January 26, 1992. I (we) have not made a specific compliance survey and analysis of this property to determine whether or not it is in conformity 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 7 the ADA could reveal that the property is not in compliance with one or more of the requirements of the act. If so, this fact could have a negative effect upon the value of the property. Since I (we) have no direct evidence relating to this issue, I (we) did not consider possible noncompliance with the requirements of ADA in estimating the value of the property. 8 CERTIFICATION I certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief: • The statements of fact contained in this report are true and correct. • The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions are limited only by the reported assumptions and limiting conditions and are my personal, impartial, and unbiased professional analyses, opinions, and conclusions. • I have no present or prospective interest in the property that is the subject of this report and no personal interest with respect to the parties involved. • I have no bias with respect to the property that is the subject or this report or to the parties involved with this assignment. • My engagement in this assignment was not contingent upon developing or reporting predetermined results. • My compensation for completing this assignment is not contingent upon the development or reporting of a predetermined value or direction in value that favors the cause of the client, the amount of the value opinion, the attainment of a stipulated result, or the occurrence of a subsequent event directly related to the intended use of this appraisal. • The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared, in conformity with the requirements of the Code of Professional Ethics & Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice of the Appraisal Institute, which include the Uniform Standards of PmfessionalAppraisal Practice. • The use of this report is subject to the requirements of the Appraisal Institute relating to review by its duly authorized representatives. • I have made a personal inspection of the property that is the subject of this report. • Jiaxi Chen provided professional assistance to the appraiser. • I have not performed a previous appraisal involving the subject property within three years prior to this assignment. • As of the date of this report, I have completed the requirements under the continuing education program of the Appraisal Institute. • I am currently certified by the Pennsylvania State Board of Certified Real Estate Appraisers as a General Appraiser. Expiration date is June 30, 2013 • As of the date of valuation, September 12, 2012, the following market value estimates were made: Total market value: $500,000 9 ,~.~y~- William S. Yetke MAI, SRA SCGREA #GA-000161-L PA Certified Commercial Real Estate Appraiser 9/19/2012 Date 10 PURPOSE & INTENDED USE The purpose of this appraisal is to estimate the market value as of the date of valuation. The client is the tenant, Valenti Management. The purpose of the appraisal is for the client's use in a real estate tax appeal. The use of this report is intended for the client only and its use by others, and for other purposes, is not intended. DEFINITION OF MARKET VALUE Market Value is defined as follows: Market value means the most probable price which a property should bring in a competitive and open market under all conditions requisite to a fair sale, the buyer and seller each acting prudently and knowledgeably, and assuming the price is not affected by undue stimulus. Implicit in this definition is the consummation of a sale as of a specified date and the passing of title from seller to buyer under conditions whereby: (1) Buyer and seller are typically motivated; (2) Both parties are well informed or well advised, and acting in what they consider their own best interests; (3) A reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open market; (4) Payment is made in terms of cash in U.S. dollars or in terms of financial arrangements comparable thereto; and (5) The price represents the normal consideration for the property sold unaffected by special or creative financing or sales concessions granted by anyone associated with the sale. Source: Code of Federal ~gulations (CFA) > Title 72 > Chapter I > Part 34 -Real estate lending and appraisals EFFECTIVE DATE OF APPRAISAL & DATE OF REPORT Date of Physical Inspection: Date of Valuation: Date of Appraisal Report: September 12, 2012 September 12, 2012 September 19, 2012 11 SCOPE OF WORK The purpose of the appraisal is to estimate the market value of the subject real estate. The appraisal is to be used by the client for real estate tax appeal purposes. The information and data used in this appraisal were researched and obtained by the appraiser. Independent analyses were made by the appraiser. Professional assistance was provided by Jiaxi Chen. Information, including market data and trends, was obtained specifically for this appraisal but updated information on file may also have been used. In describing and analyzing the neighborhood, the greater subject area and market trends, the appraiser has relied on his firsthand knowledge based on his appraisal business. Also, information was obtained from various sources including owners, buyers, sellers, real estate brokers, and publications including specific real estate publications, business periodicals and newspapers. Published studies relating to market trends and characteristics may have been considered as well. The property appraised was personally inspected by the appraiser. Photographs were taken of the property and the immediate environs. Available information including right of way plans, tax maps and other descriptive material was reviewed and used where appropriate. Market data, including but not limited to sales data, rental data, asking prices, and market trends were obtained from information on file and from real estate brokers, sellers, and buyers. Multiple listing services as well as other market data sources were referenced including the public records of Cumberland County. Upon consideration of the three approaches to estimating value, market value analyses were completed using the Sales Comparison Approach and the Income Approach. The Cost Approach was not used. The Sales Comparison Approach is typically based on an analysis in which recent sales of comparable or similar properties are compared to the property being appraised. The comparison analysis is used as a basis for estimating the market value. The Income Approach is commonly used to estimate the value of income producing real estate such as that being considered here. The value estimates by the two methods used were correlated and a final total market value was estimated. Upon completion of the valuation analysis, a narrative appraisal report was prepared in Summary format. AREA AND NEIGHBORHOOD DESCRIPTION The subject property is located on N. Enola Road ui East Pennsboro Township, Cumberland County, PA. Cumberland County is located in southeastern Pennsylvania, and is bordered by Dauphin County to the northeast, Perry County to the north, Franklin County to the west, Adams County to the south and York County to the southeast. The subject property is located in East Pennsboro Township, which is on the northeastern edge of Cumberland County. Within Cumberland County, East Pennsboro Township is bordered by Camp Hill and Wormleysburg to the south and Hampden Township to the west. 12 Cumberland County had a population of 232,483 as of a 2009 estimate and a total land area of 550 square miles, which equates to a population density of 423 persons per square mile. The median income in Cumberland County is $58,605 compared to $49,520 in Pennsylvania. The subject property is located on US Routes 11 and 15. US Routes 11 and 15 are important traffic routes through the immediate area and the region and state. US Route 11 goes southwesterly to Carlisle, Shippensburg and Chambersburg, PA and also to Hagerstown, Maryland. US Route 15 also travels southwesterly through the western portion of the Harrisburg metro area and then to Gettysburg and the Catoctin Mountains area of Maryland. In a generally northerly direction, US Routes 11 and 15 follow the Susquehanna River to the Sunbury area and then Route 11 heads northeasterly to the Wilkes-Barre/Scranton area, and Route 15 follows the West Branch of the Susquehanna River northwesterly to Williamsport and then travels northerly to New York State. The subject location is a short distance south of the interchange of US Routes 11 and 15 with Interstate Route 81, one of the principal traffic arteries and truck routes through eastern Pennsylvania.. Interstate Route 81 crosses the Susquehanna River north of the city of Harrisburg and travels northeasterly to the Wilkes-Barre/Scranton metropolitan area and then heads north to the city of Binghamton in New York State. In a southwesterly direction, Route 81 generally parallels the path of US Route 11 (described above) in travelling to Carlisle, Shippensburg and Chambersburg, PA and also to Hagerstown, Maryland. Half a mile south of the subject property is the Summerdale Shopping Plaza. The Plaza contains stores like K-Mart, Subway, Dunkin Donuts, McDonald's, Radio Shack, and Shurfine Market. Land uses along North Enola. Road are mainly commercial and industrial in this area although some residential properties remain with some having been converted to other uses. On the east side of Enola Road is the extensive Enola railroad yard owned and operated by Norfolk Southern Corp. The Enola rail yard extends along the westerly side of the Susquehanna River northerly to a point north of the Interstate Route 81 Bridge, and south several miles to the village of West Fairview. The subject location is part of the Harrisburg metropolitan area and the city of Harrisburg is across the Susquehanna River to the east. LOCATION ANALYSIS The subject is located on N. Enola Rd (also known as US Routes 11 & 15) less than a quarter a mile south of the I-81 interchange. It is part of the first concentration of commercial/retail land uses along Enola Road south of the Interstate Route 81 interchange. The density of commercial/retail development increases in a southerly direction along Enola, Road from the subject location. The appraised property is also located about a quarter of a mile east of the East Pennsboro Area High School. Central Penn College is a short distance west of the subject location between Valley Road and College Hill Road. Despite the subject's close proximity to I-81, North Enola Rd is a two lane road with one travel lane in each direction that makes access difficult at certain times of the day. The physical site itself is good for a fast food operation with frontage on three roads and ample parking. The density of commercial/retail development increases in a southerly direction along Enola Road from the subject location. A newly renovated McDonald's is located less than a quarter of a mile south of the subject site. 13 PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION The property appraised is a 1-story restaurant building at 601 N. Enola Road, East Pennsboro Township, Cumberland County, PA Tax parcel number: 09-13-1003-018 Land Description: Lot area: 0.87 acres, or 37,897 square feet Street frontage: Approximately 300 feet of frontage on N Enola Road; 300 feet of frontage on Radam Street; and 200 feet of frontage on 3`~ St Extension Type: Above grade, rectangular corner lot Topography: Sloping and level Utilities: All municipal utilities Parking: Ample asphalt paved parking on site Building Description: Building layout: The building consists of a dining area, kitchen area, sales counter area, and men's and women's restrooms. The dining room area is carpeted and has wood panels on the walls and an acoustical file ceiling with recessed fluorescent lights. The kitchen area has several sections and has file floors, washable panels on the walls and an acoustical file ceiling. There is a walk-in cooler, awalk-in freezer, a storage area, and a manager's office where the electrical equipment is located. A free standing storage unit that includes bun storage is on a concrete pad to the rear of the building. Building area: 2,395 square feet Construction: Brick, steel and wood frame construction Heating/AC: Hot air heat and central air conditioning by rooftop units Condition: Fair, the roof is approximately 15 years old and has occasional leaks. The building was built in the 1978. Although it is functional, it has experienced some external and physical deterioration. Function: The subject is currently used as fast food restaurant 14 ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS No adverse environmental conditions were observed in the subject property. No information was furnished the appraiser about the environmental status of the building. The appraiser is not qualified to do an environmental evaluation. For appraisal purposes, it is assumed that the property is free and clear of any significant adverse environmental conditions and contamination. Should there be a finding to the contrary, this appraisal would be subject to reconsideration and possible revision, including the final value estimate. Reference is made to the statements about environmental issues given in the Assumptions and Limiting Conditions section of the report. A full examination by an environmental expert is recommended for any interested party. ZONING C-G; Commercial General Zoning District TAXES & ASSESSMENT DATA The subject property is assessed as follows according to the Cumberland County Office of Property Assessment. 601 N. Enola Road: Land Assessment $ 208,100 Building Assessment $ 386 900 Total Assessment $ 595,000 OWNERSHIP, HISTORY, AND OCCUPANCY Present listed owner: Christine Bucher Last deed recording: 8/13/1997 Consideration: $1 Deed reference: Book 162, Page 882 Grantor: Christine Bucher Occupancy: Tenant occupied 15 SUMMARY OF LEASE TERMS Lessor: Christine Bucher Lessee: Valenti Mid-Atlantic Realty Term: Original Term: September 6, 2008 -September 5, 2018 First Renewal Term: 5 years Second Renewal Term: 5 years Rental Schedule Lease Years Rental 1-5 $45,000.00 6-10 $55,800.00 11-15 (15` renewal term) $61,800.00 16-20 (2°d renewal term) $67,800.00 Monthly Payment $3,750.00 $4,650.00 $5,150.00 $5,650.00 Taxes: Lessee shall pay for all real estate taxes against the real property during the term of this Lease Utilities: Lessee shall pay when due all charges made against the real property HIGHEST & BEST USE Highest and best use is the reasonably probable and legal use of vacant land or an improved property, which is physically possible, appropriately supported, financially feasible, and that results in the highest value. The highest and best use of the subject land as vacant is for retail development consistent with the parcel's current zoning, C-G; Commercial General, and with the present and anticipated land use patterns and trends. The highest and best use of the property as improved is for continued use as a fast food restaurant. 16 VALUATION ANALYSIS The Income, Sales Comparison and Cost Approaches to estimating value, the usual methods of estimating the market value of real estate, were considered in this appraisal. The Sales Comparison and Income Approaches were used in the valuation analysis. The Sales Comparison Approach is appropriate for this appraisal because it utilizes recent market transactions which are available. The Income Approach is appropriate because the subject property is an income generating property. The Cost Approach was not applicable and was not used. VALUATION -INCOME APPROACH The Income Approach was applied using yield capitalization. The technique employed is discounted cash flow. The basic steps of this technique are to estimate a holding period (also known as the projection period) for projecting future cash flows, and to estimate the gross income that the subject property is capable of generating, an allowance for vacancy and rent loss, annual operating expenses and the net annual income. The net income received each year (cash flow) is discounted to present value and summed. This amount is added to the present value of the reversion to get the total market value by this technique. The reversion value is the future value of the property estimated at the end of the projected holding period. In other words, it is the estimated value of the property when it reverts back to the owner at the end of the holding period. The discounted cash flow analysis was completed as follows. A holding period of six years was used based on the remaining time for the initial term of the current lease. The contract rents were used. A vacancy and rent loss factor was applied to the gross income estimate each year and the equivalent dollar amount was deducted from the gross income. The resulting amount was the effective gross income for each year of the holding period. Operating expenses were estimated next. Those expense items that are the responsibility of the landlord were identified and estimated in order to get the total annual expense estimate. The present lease for the subject property is a net lease. Accordingly, the owner is responsible for the insurance expense and a charge for management and leasing. All other operating expenses are the responsibility of the lessee including real estate taxes, all utilities, and maintenance and repair. The net operating income was calculated by subtracting the total operating expense estimate from the effective gross income for each year. The annual net income was discounted using present value factors based on the estimated discount rate used in this analysis. A discount rate of 10% was used based on an analysis of rate of return data reported by the Real Estate Research Corporation (BERG), and other sources of published rate of return data. The following data were reported by RERC. 17 Second-Tier Retail Investment Properties in the Neighborhood/Community category Pre-tax Yield (IRR) (%) Range Average Terminal Cap Rate (%) Range Average 8.8% - 14.0% 10.4% 7.8% - 12.0% 9.4% The discounted cash flows for the six year projection period were summed to get the total present value of the cash flow for the holding period. The next step was to estimate the reversion value, discount it to present value and add the discounted reversion value to the total discounted cash flow to get the total market value estimate by the Income Approach using the discounted cash flow technique. The net income estimate for year 7 was divided by the terminal capitalization rate to arrive at the estimated reversion value, also known as the terminal value or resale value. The income estimate for year 7 represents an increase in rent as set forth in the lease agreement for the first renewal term. The seventh year net income estimate was capitalized using a 9.0% terminal cap rate. The terminal cap rate was estimated based on available rate of return data. Sources included market derived rates, and published reports from by the RERC, Real Estate Research Corp. and Costar Group. From the capitalized amount representing the reversion value, an adjustment for selling costs was made at a rate of 6%. The dollar amount of the selling costs was deducted from the reversion value and the net amount was discounted to present value using the 6`'' year present value factor based on the discount rate used. The last step in the cash flow analysis was to add the present value of the reversion to the present value of the 6-year cash flow to arrive at the total estimated market value. The valuation analysis is summarized in the table that follows. The total market value of the subject property, as estimated by the Income Approach, is $527,067, rounded to $5(}0,000, or FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS 18 ~ ~ °o o° °~ °o °o ~ ~ o A O o ~ o ~ .n ~ O \ 00 00 00 N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N N O ~r'~ ~ rr y ~ '" §~ a x sus ~ .7 M ~ v ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O O 40~ O O ~ ~ ~ Q L." d' ~ M \ 00 00 00 U'f ~ at M c~ «i pp G1 ~ ~ ~ o o v ~ r.. 44 S 3 8ff ti4 M~k i O ~ ~ ~ ~ y ¢' ~ o °o °o s°~ °o °o ~ ~ .00d. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ " ~ ~ c0 00 GO N ~ ~ M ~, r pp G~ M i~ ~ ~ v M ~ ~ ~ ~ , r Q ~ fi H E"~ ~ ~"~ ~"~ 44 d ~ ~ sa . r 44 ECi EFS g~ ~ +' H y ~ ~ z ti O O ~ O O ~' L'. dam' r+ ~' ~ ~ \ 00 00 00 u7 ~ c~ M c~ c~ pp G1 M ~ ~ ~ ,n ~n ~n .n E ~, H ~ E'+ F-+ s4 rh cM '..~ bS tl~ 6 k 4~# S4 G1 M O O ~ O O ~ ~ ~ L". ~ ~ N ~ , ,,i \ 00 00 00 O ~ ~ M ~ ~ M ~ r..i ~ `n' ~ 'n ~ M ~' u f ~ t rf H H ~ H H 4~ ~ M .-+ ~ ~ ~ 5~ G~ .~i O O 4O^k O O ~ ~ ~ ~ C. ~ ~ ~V' \ 00 00 00 O ~ cc M t~ c~ M ~ 00 N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N v ~ e H ~"'~ H ~"~ ~ ~ ~ 84 8 s ~ ~ ~ \ G1 eM-+ 0 0 0 O ~" ~ O t+" ~ O O o ~ \ O O O O ~ ~ l~ ~ ~ l ~ M O ~ e-+ ~ ~ O r, ~ ~ u'i ~ M y y N y ~ ~ G~ O ,~ N a0 O O ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ F, F-~ v~ E"i E"'i t~ ~ r. O N ~ N N O ~ \ N M uy uy ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a o G7 ~ v ,.O v ~ v ~ ~ ~ O V t° ~ O UU ~ ~i ~ ~ ~ q v U Q V y ~ ~ ~ ' ~ + . a ~ id ~ IH , . vi ~ v m iC y ~ y a0i ~ v w ~ v ~ ~ ~ ~ Q O ~ .~.+ /'~ ~+.; ~ ~ v 0 \ A ~ A bA v W ~ ~ ~ v w O ~ .b a + . .. ~ ~ '~ ~ ~ Q p cv w A. v ~ ~ ~ a ?-j ~ O ~ m O ~~ Q1 .--I VALUATION -SALES COMPARISON APPROACH In using the Sales Comparison Approach, recent sales of comparable or similar properties were located, researched, and compared to the property being appraised. A comparison analysis was made in which the comparable sale properties were compared to the subject property and adjustments were made for significant differences between the sale properties and the appraised property. The adjustments made reflect the price differentials for significant differences between the comparable sales and the property being valued and were based on an analysis of market data and price trends. After making the necessary adjustments, the adjusted prices of the comparable sales were used as a basis for estimating the market value of the appraised property. Typically, the comparison analysis is made on a unit price basis that is common to the type of property being considered and also to the market and locality in which the sales and appraised property are located. In this analysis, the unit of comparison used was the price per square foot of building including land. After completing the comparison analysis, a unit value was estimated for the subject property and applied to the total building area in order to get the total market value estimate by this technique. 20 DESCRIPTION OF COMPARISON ANALYSIS SALE N0.1 Location: 325 N Enola Rd. Enola, East Pennsboro Township, Cumberland County, PA 17025 Date of Sale: 11 / 11 /2010 Consideration: $650,000 Building area: 5,500 square feet Unit Price: $118.18/ s.f. Grantor: Summerdale Realty LLC Grantee: ST Michael and Mary Inc. Deed Reference: 201033075 Lot description: Level and gently sloping interior lot Lot Area: 46,609 square feet Street Frontage: ~ 197 front feet on N Enola Road Utilities: All municipal utilities Zoning: C-G; Commercial General Zoning Type: 1-story retail restaurant building Comments: The building is currently vacant. It was renovated in 2007. It has asphalt paved parking for approximately 70 vehicles. 21 SALE N0.2 Location: 1900 N Cameron Street, City of Harrisburg, Dauphin County, PA 17103 Date of Sale: 3/28/2012 Consideration: $385,000 Building area: 2,499 square feet Unit Price: $154.06/ s.f. Grantor: Resort Foods of Harrisburg Inc. Grantee: APP Northeast Property LLC Deed Reference: 20120008566 Lot description: Level and sloping corner lot Lot Area: 31,363 square feet Street Frontage: 250 front feet on N Cameron Street; ~ 100 front feet on Julia. Street; 200 front feet on Muench Street Utilities: All municipal utilities Zoning: ~75 feet at the rear of the lot is zoned M-H; Heavy Industry -125 feet at the front of the lot is zoned L-H; Light Industry Type: 1-story retail restaurant building Comments: The building is currently in use as a Popeye's restaurant. Built 1980. 22 SALE N0.3 Location: Date of Sale: Consideration: Building area: Unit Price: Grantor: Grantee: Parcel ID: Lot description: Lot Area: Street Frontage: Utilities: Zoning: Type: Comments: 3761 Peters Mountain Road, Halifax Township, Dauphin County, PA 17032 3/9/2009 $330,000 3,321 square feet $99.37/ s.f. Halifax Plaza Associates LP McDonald's USA LLC 29-017-131-000-0000 Level pad site 29,055 square feet 200 front feet on Peters Mountain Road All municipal utilities Commercial One story restaurant The building was used as a restaurant. Built 1994. The valuation analysis is s~,mma-led on the Sales Grid that follows. 23 SALES GRID Sale No. Date of Sale Location Consideration Total Building Area (s.f.) Unadjusted Unit Price Adjustments: Property Rights Conveyed Adjusted Price Financing Terms Adjusted Price Conditions of Sale (Motivation) Adjusted Price Market Conditions (Time) Adjusted Price Other factors: Location & Corner Influence Size Phys. Char./ Condition Land to building ratio Net Adjustments Adjusted Unit Prices Estimated Unit Value Total Building Area (s.f.) Total Value Estimate Rounded to: 1 2 3 Nov-10 Mar-12 Max-09 325 N. Enola 1900 N. 3761 Peters Rd Cameron St. Mountain Rd Enola., PA Harrisburg, PA Halifax, PA $650,000 $385,000 $330,000 5,500 2,499 3,321 $118.18 $154.06 $99.37 0% 0% 0% $118.18 $154.06 $99.37 0% 0% 0% $118.18 $154.06 $99.37 0% 0% 0% $118.18 $154.06 $99.37 0% 0% 0% $118.18 $154.06 $99.37 0% 0% 15% 10% 0% 5% 0% 0% -5% 7% 3% 7% 17% $138.27 $145.00 2,395 $347,275 $350,000 3% 22% $158.68 $121.23 Initial adjustments were considered for property rights conveyed, financing terms, and conditions of sale but none needed to be made. Adjustments fox market conditions were considered but none were made. The sale locations were characterized by a period of price stability during the period between the sale dates and the date of valuation. Other factors that were considered in this analysis include: (i) location & corner influence; (ii) size; (iii) physical characteristics/condition; and (iv) land to building ratio. 24 No adjustments were made to Sales 1 and 2 for location. On balance, their locations were regarded as comparable to that of the appraised property. A plus adjustment was made to Sale 3 for its inferior location in a more rural, less built-up location. Plus adjustments were made to Sales 1 and 3 for their building size. Smaller properties generally sell at higher unit values compared to larger properties, other things being equal. Sales 1 and 3 are significantly larger than the subject building and upward adjustments were indicated. No adjustment was necessary for Sale 2; it was comparable in size. No adjustments were made to Sales 1 and 2 for physical characteristics and condition; they were comparable in this respect. A minus adjustment was made to Sale 3 for condition because it was recently renovated. Plus adjustments were made to all of the sales for their smaller land to building ratios. They were inferior to the subject. The unadjusted unit prices ranged from $99.37 to $154.06 per square foot of building including land. Net plus adjustments were made to the sales. The adjusted unit prices range from $121.23 to $158.69 per square foot, which is a narrower range compared to that of the unadjusted prices. Correlating the results of the comparison analysis with all other market data and trends considered in the valuation process, an estimated unit value of $145.00 per square foot was applied to the total area of the building to arrive at the total estimated market value by the Sales Comparison Approach of $347,275, rounded to $350,000, or THREE HUNDRED AND FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS. 25 RECONCILIATION & FINAL VALUE ESTIMATE The total market value of the appraised property in its entirety was estimated using both the Sales Comparison Approach and Income Approach. The Cost Approach was not applicable and was not used. The total value estimate by Sales Comparison Approach was $350,000 and the total value estimate by Income Approach was $500,000. The value estimate using the Income Approach was substantially higher than that by the Sales Comparison Approach due to the existence of a long term lease with a rental rate at the upper end of current market rents. Further, the lease rental rate reflects the strength of national brand fast food outlets while the sales market demonstrates the prevailing price levels for properties not sought out by top tier fast food chains or for lesser locations. Given the strength of the long-term lease for the appraised property, the valuation by the Income Approach was regarded as the better indicator of value for the subject property. As of the date of valuation, September 12, 2012, the total market value was estimated to be $500,000, or FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS. ESTIMATED EXPOSURE TIME One to two years 26 ADDENDA PHOTOGRAPHS OF APPRAISED PROPERTY 27 North side of the subject property 28 rarxuig area -looking northerly Dining area 29 View of the dining area Lacing service counter 30 View of the dining area facing one of the parking areas View of hallway leading to restrooms Kitchen area 31 Kitchen area Drive-Thru window 32 33 Street View -Looking north at Enola Rd TAX MAP 50 . 200 R 34 s ~~ ~, `'Y 35 LOCATION MAP MAP OF COMPARABLE SALES ~~~' ,,-~.~ ,,;, ~ 2 mi ~ kl ~ '~ ~-I '~ ,k ~aa 36 A =Subject Property B =Sale Comparable 1 C =Sale Comparable 2 D =Sale Comparable 3 ZONING C-G COMMERCIAL GENERAL DISTRICT Section 1601. PURPOSE. The purpose of the C-G Commercial General District is to provide reasonable standards for the development of commercial uses in areas where such uses akeady exist and where the development of commercial uses is feasible. These commercial uses would include shopping centers. The standards of this district ate designed to minimize traffic congestion on the streets, provide for the public convenience, and fulfill the other broad purposes of this ordinance. Section 1602. PERMITTED USES. A building maybe erected or used and a lot may be used or occupied for any of the following uses: A. Residential use. Dwellings other than multi-family, in existence at the time of the adoption of this Chapter, may be continued pursuant to the rule governing non-conforming uses. B. Multi-family dwelling. C. Conversion apartments. D. Hotels and motels. E. Boarding house *; Bed and breakfast F. Restaurants G. Restaurants, Carry-out, Drive-through, Take-out. H. Bars and Taverns I. Night clubs. J. Business, government or professional offices and office complexes. K. Offices for non-profit, social, fraternal, religious, political or civic organizations. L. Banks, credit unions, brokerages and other financial service offices. M. Health services, including medical and dental clinics and laboratories; offices of licensed practitioners of the healing arts. * N. Commercial health club. O. Studios for instruction in music, arts, science, radio, and television. P. Shopping center and shopping malls. Q. Retail establishments, including but not limited to, those selling pharmaceuticals, clothing, dry goods, furniture, groceries and baked goods provided that any goods made on the premises must be sold only on the premises. R. Personal services including, but not limited to, barber shops, beauty shops, tailor shops, dry cleaning and laundry establishments, car washes, minor equipment repair or service shops which are not primarily manufacturing in nature. S. Kennels and veterinary hospitals. T. Newspaper and job printing establishments. U. Public and private off-street parking lots and garages. V. Automobile service stations. W. Automobile repair garages. X. Self Service Storage Facilities. Y. Convenience stores. Z. Child day care center. AA. Group child day care home. BB. Schools, public and private; colleges and universities. 37 CC. Churches; places of worship. DD. Commercial recreation areas and facilities. EE. Theaters and assembly halls. FF. Libraries. GG. Municipal recreation areas and facilities. HH. Municipal buildings. II. No Impact, Home-based business. JJ. Public utility facilities. KK. Telecommunication antenna (under twenty (20) feet in height). LL. Funeral Home/Crematorium. MM. Timber harvesting. NN. Accessory use on the same lot with and customarily incidental to any of the above permitted uses. An * indicates that additional regulations found in Article 19 apply. Section 1603. CONDITIONAL USES. The following conditional uses and no others may be allowed by the Township Board of Commissioners, pursuant to the express standards and criteria. set forth in Article 23 and Article 24 of this Ordinance. A. Telecommunication Towers B. Telecommunication Antennas (greater than twenty (20) feet in height). Section 1604. BUILDING HEIGHT LIMIT. No building shall be erected to a height in excess of forty (40) feet; provided, however, that the height limit may be increased one (1) foot for each additional foot that each and every setback exceeds the minimum required. Section 1605. LOT AREA REQUIREMENTS. A. For permitted non-residential uses, the lot area shall be not less than ten thousand (10,000) square feet and lot width shall be not less than one hundred (100) feet measured at the minimum required building setback line. B. For permitted residential uses and conversion apartments, lot width shall not be less than eighty (80) feet measured at the required minimum building setback line. The lot area shall be not less than the following: Number of Dwelling Units Lot Area - (Square Feet) One (1) Dwelling Unit 4,000 Two (2) Dwelling Units 7,000 Three (3) Dwelling Units 9,000 Four (4) Dwelling Units 12,000 For each additional dwelling unit 1,000 Section 1606. LOT COVERAGE. No more than eighty (80) percent of the area of the lot shall be covered by buildings, structures and other impervious surfaces. 38 Section 1607. MINIMUM SETBACKS. A. Non-residential uses 1. Front -thirty (30) feet, or fifty (50) percent of the width of the right-of--way upon which the lot abuts, whichever is greater. 2. Side -ten (10) feet each. 3. Rear -thirty (30) feet. B. Residential uses 1. Front -twenty-five (25) feet 2. Side -ten (10) feet each 3. Rear -twenty-five (25) feet Section 1608. BUFFERS AND SCREENING. Buffer yards and screening shall be provided in accordance with the development standards outlined in Section 1901.B of this Ordinance. Section 1609. ADJOINING BUILDINGS. In the case of a series of adjoining buildings or structures abutting and paralleling a public right-of- way, an open and unobstructed stabilized passage of at least twenty (20) feet in width shall be provided at grade level at intervals of not more than four hundred (400) feet. Common walls shall not be permitted between properties of separate ownership. Section 1610. SIGNS. Signs shall conform to the requirements of Article 20 of this Ordinance. Section 1611.OFF-STREET PARKING. Off-street parking shall be provided in accordance with Article 21 of this Ordinance. 39 =~ 4p *Subject Property is not located in the 100 year floodplain 41 FEMA FLOOD MAP STATEMENT OF PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS & EXPERIENCE WILLIAM S. YETKE, MAI, SRA WILLIAM YETKE, REAL ESTATE 1315 Walnut Street -Suite 808 Philadelphia., PA 19107 Telephone: (215) 546-3241 FAX: (215) 546-3879 E-mail: wyetke ~ etkeap~raisals.com BUSINESS EXPERIENCE Have been an independent fee appraiser and consultant in real estate since 1969 in the Philadelphia metropolitan area. Principal practice has been in the Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Delaware area. Assignments have been completed nationwide. Services provided include: Appraisals made of market value, rental value, insurable value, going concern value, value in use, easements, partial interests, minerals and natural resources. Feasibility and Highest and Best Use studies. Investment Analysis. Expert testimony. Review appraisals. Appraisals made for: Acquisition and Disposition, Estate Purposes, Insurance Purposes, Financing, Bankruptcy Proceedings, Eminent Domain, Conversion/Rehabilitation, Assessment Appeals and Zoning Cases. Qualified and testified as an expert witness in court, before Boards of View and Masters, and at arbitration hearings. EMPLOYMENT HISTORY Self-employed from January 1982 to the present Bernard C. Meltzer & Associates, Inc. (1970-1982) Albert M. Greenfield & Co., Inc. (1969-1970) LICENSES State Certified General Appraiser -Pennsylvania State Certified General Appraiser -New Jersey State Certified General Appraiser- Delaware Real Estate Broker -Pennsylvania PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS Appraisal Institute -Member (MAI, SRA) Pennsylvania Association of Realtors 42 Philadelphia Board of Realtors EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND Bachelor of Business Administration (BBA), Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania Graduated Cum Laude Major -Economics and Finance Completed Real Estate Program Appraisal Institute (formerly American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers) Course 1A -Principles of Appraising Course 1B -Capitalization Course 2 -Valuation of Urban Properties Course 6 -Investment Analysis CONTINUING EDUCATION Have completed the requirements of the continuing education programs of the Appraisal Institute, Pennsylvania State Board of Certified Real Estate Appraisers, Pennsylvania. State Real Estate Commission, and New Jersey State Board of Certified Real Estate Appraisers. TEACHING ASSIGNMENTS Adjunct Lecturer, Department of Legal and Real Estate Studies, Temple University -Real Estate Valuation Course. Taught Real Estate Investment Seminar at Penn State University, Abington Campus. Guest lecturer on mineral valuation, Penn State University, Main Campus, State College, PA. Guest lecturer, Real Estate Appraisal: Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania. PUBLICATIONS Contributing author: Chapter 6, "Valuation of Real Estate." Robert D. Feder, Editor. Valuation Strategies in Divorce, Fourth Edition, 1997. Chapters 12, 13, 14 & 14A, "Introduction to Real Estate; High-Price Homes, Including Golf Course Communities; Vacant Land; and Shopping Centers" Robert D. Feder, Editor. Valuing Specific Assets In Divorce. 2000. TYPES OF REAL ESTATE APPRAISED Air Rights Mineral Resources Apartments Archeological Properties Automobile Showrooms & Garages Banks Natural Springs Nursing Homes Office Buildings Oil, Gas & Mineral Rights 43 Breweries Parking Garages Bus Terminals Piers Campgrounds Post Offices Cemeteries Professional Buildings Churches Public Housing Coast Guard Station Developments Commercial Buildings Quarries Community Centers Railroad Rights-of--Way Commuter Systems Railroad Systems Condominiums -Residential Ranches Condominiums -Offices Recreational Facilities Conservation Land/Easements Residential Sites Convenience Stores Residential Subdivisions Correctional Centers Restaurants Country Clubs Retail Stores Day Care Centers Riparian Rights Department Stores Rooming Houses Dinner Theaters Sanitary Land Fills Dwellings Single Family Residences Easements Service Stations Estates Shopping Centers/Malls Farms Special Purpose Fisheries Properties Flex Buildings Subsurface Rights Forests and Timber Resources Summer Camps Golf Courses Supermarkets Highway Rights-of--Way Synagogues Historical Properties Theaters Institutional Buildings Timberland Indian Reservations Transit Systems Industrial Buildings Treatment Centers Islands Truck Terminals Land Tunnel Easement Land Leases Union Halls Marinas Warehouses Manufacturing Facilities Water Rights Medical Office Buildings Wetlands PARTIAL LIST OF CLIENTS SERVED Amerada Hess Corporation American Law Institute American Philosophical Society Amtrak Berks County Conservancy Blank Rome, LLP Burlington County Bridge Commission Cadbury Schweppes Co. 44 Citizens Financial Group City National Bank Conservation Fund Consolidated Rail Corporation East Penn Railroad Eckert Seamans Cherin & Mellot, LLC Financial Research, Inc. First Cornerstone Bank First National Bank of Palmerton General Accident Insurance Company Henderson, Wetherill, O'Hey & Horsey Laborer's International Union, Local #332 Lundy Flitter Beldecos & Berger Marriott Corporation Mellon Bank Monsanto Company Mount Washington Summit Road Company Neptune Corporation Norfolk Southern Corporation PNC Bank Republic First Bank River Network Royal Bank America Schnader Harrison Segal & Lewis Seneca Resources Company Shell Oil Company Shooster Properties Southeastern Pennsylvania. Transportation Authority (SEPTA) Sprague & Sprague St. Edmonds Federal Savings bank Strauss and Associates/Planners Teamsters Local #115 Temple University The Nature Conservancy The Trust for Public Land Texaco Oil Company Wachovia Bank Western Pennsylvania Conservancy Westinghouse Electric Company White and Williams Zarwin Baum Devito Kaplan Schaer Toddy, PC Government Agencies/Authorities• Feder Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation General Services Administration Internal Revenue Service U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 45 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service U.S. Forest Service U.S. Justice Department U.S. Postal Service State: Commonwealth of Pennsylvania General Services Administration Pennsylvania. Department of Transportation Pennsylvania Housing Finance Agenry Local/Regional Municipalities/Authorities• Baltimore Mass Transit Authority Bensalem Township, Bucks County, PA Bucks County Housing Authority Burlington County Bridge Commission City of Philadelphia -Redevelopment Authority City of Philadelphia -Law Department Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia Eddystone Borough, Delaware County, PA Greater Berks Development Fund Lower Merion Township, Montgomery County, PA Montgomery County Planning Commission Philadelphia Gas Works Philadelphia Industrial Development Corporation Westtown Township, Chester County, PA 46 • Y VERIFICATION I, Steven M. Nesbitt, Chief Financial Officer of Valenti Mid-Atlantic Realty, LLC, hereby state that I am authorized to take this verification on its behalf and do hereby verify that the statements made in the foregoing pleading are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief and that these statements are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S.A. Section 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. VALENTI MID-ATLANTI REALTY, LLC Dated: !/ G /Z By: Steven M. Nesbitt .~... IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA ~,,,,J( • CIVIL ACTION -LAW VALENTI MID-ATLANTIC REALTY, LLC 3450 Buschwood Park Drive, Suite 195 Tampa, FL 33618 v. CUMBERLAND COUNTY BOARD OF ASSESSMENT APPEALS 1 Courthouse Square Carlisle, PA 17013 and EAST PENNSBORO TOWNSHIP 98 South Enola Drive Enola, PA 17025-2796 and EAST PENNSBORO TOWNSHIP AREA SCHOOL DISTRICT 890 Valley Street Enola, Pennsylvania 17025 No. loZ - ~OS ~s l.:i V i 1 ~'N'- REAL ESTATE ASSESSMENT APPEAL r-~ C7 c ~ `TE 3 N ,..., Z i y +C '"a f."+ .,.~'Z' .... C!'1 .Cf Q z C-' .. ~ - ; y z~ p _ r C .7 ~ ~ ~ ~:, ~~~ ~ ~ ~ PRELIMINARY DECREE AND NOW, this /`7~day of 201~t is hereby ORDERED and DECREED as follows: 1. The appeal to Court is permitted and said case is to proceed in conformity with the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure; 2. Within five (5) days from the date of the preliminary decree, the Appellant shall serve a copy of the petition and preliminary decree upon: a. The Cumberland County Board of Assessment Appeals; b. The Board of County Commissioners of Cumberland County; c. The governing body of the municipality in which the real estate is situate; d. The Board of School Directors of the school district in which the real estate is situate; e. The Solicitors for the above; f. The property owner, if the property owner is not the appellant. 3. The aforesaid taxing authorities and the property owner, if the property owner is not the appellant, are hereby entitled to intervene as parties appellee. BY C pc: Keith B. McLennan, Esquire / eO~p; CS Mla. try / r~QS~ ~CI}» 5 arc ~Twjo '~ ~C~k~~ -Srlco'rp~ , G ~ / !~+ .-/.S~ ~w ,r !'3" ~e t~+ Gr I I ~ is f ~ /TpsGp~ i4 . C~trc,~~U , ~~ / Cash per nS Sc~ec/ ,6.s~• ~ cTaci MM •! 13k~1,R~` ~~ / ~p~~~ ~ , T'~ty, L~ ~ L'afl ~~a.-~1, ~.sy. /~M6. ~ ,r,~. ~ ~4ss~ss~~~ IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA IN RE: VALENTI MID-ATLANTIC REALTY, LLC Petitioner vs. CUMBERLAND COUNTY BOARD OF ASSESSMENT APPEALS, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, EAST PENNSBORO TOWNSHIP, and EAST PENNSBORO AREA SCHOOL DISTRICT, Respondents. "; ~^~a ~~ _ ..:.~ 7 ~'' O _ _~ ' _ ~. .' (~~7 i CIVIL ACTION -LAW ~~`~ `1' ~-,,,,- -; Case No. 2012-6845 Civil ~ ~- ~? ~ -r.' ~_ _. TAX ASSESSMENT APPEAL TYPE OF DOCUMENT: Petition to Intervene and Notice of Appearance Counsel for: EAST PENNSBORO AREA SCHOOL DISTRICT Patrick J. Fanelli, Esquire Pa. I.D. No. 85640 ANDREWS & BEARD 3366 Lynnwood Drive P.O. Box 1311 Altoona, PA 16603-1311 (814) 940-8672 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA IN RE: VALENTI MID-ATLANTIC REALTY, LLC CIVIL ACTION -LAW Case No. 2012-6845 Civil Petitioner vs. CUMBERLAND COUNTY BOARD OF ASSESSMENT APPEALS, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, EAST PENNSBORO TOWNSHIP, and EAST PENNSBORO AREA SCHOOL DISTRICT, Respondents PETITION TO INTERVENE The East Pennsboro Area School District, Intervener by and through counsel, Patrick J. Fanelli, Esquire, and Andrews & Beard, hereby intervenes in the above- captioned matter, and wishes to give notice of their Entry of Appearance. Respectfully submitted: Pa ~ J. Fanelli, Esquire Pa. I.D. No. 85640 NDREWS & BEARD 3366 Lynnwood Drive P.O. Box 1311 Altoona, PA 16603-1311 (814) 940-8672 FAX - 814-943-3430 d IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA IN RE: VALENTI MID-ATLANTIC REALTY, LLC CIVIL ACTION -LAW Case No. 2012-6845 Civil Petitioner vs. CUMBERLAND COUNTY BOARD OF ASSESSMENT APPEALS, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, EAST PENNSBORO TOWNSHIP, and EAST PENNSBORO AREA SCHOOL DISTRICT, Respondents. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Patrick J. Fanelli, Esquire, 3366 Lynnwood Drive, P.O. Box 1311, Altoona, PA 16603-1311, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Petition to Intervene and Entry of Appearance has been served on the following parties of record by U.S. First Class Mail, postage pre-paid on this 27t" day of November, 2012: Stephen D. Tiley, Esquire Solicitor for Cumberland County 5 South Hanover Street Carlisle, PA 17013 Joseph A. Curcillo, III, Esquire Solicitor for East Pennsboro Township 3964 Lexington Street Harrisburg, PA 17109 Keith McLennan, Esquire Counsel for Petitioner 3770 Ridge Pike, Suite 2 Collegeville, PA 19426 A REWS & BEARD atrick J. Fanelli, Esquire Pa. I.D. No. 85640 P.O. Box 1311 Altoona, PA 16603-1,311 814-940-8672/ Fax: 814-943-3430 1 ' John G. French, Esquire Attorney for Cumberland County Board of Assessment Appeals 1 Courthouse Square, Room 107 Carlisle, PA 17013 Attorney I.D. No. 90788 Tel.: 717-759-5297 IN RE: VALENTI MID -ATLANTIC REALTY : IN THE COURT OF COMMON LLC : PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND : COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Petitioner vs. CUMBERLAND COUNTY BOARD OF ASSESSMENT APPEALS, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, EAST PENNSBORO TOWNSHIP, AND EAST PENNSBORO AREA SCHOOL DISTRICT Respondent • • • • NO. 12-6845 CIVIL TERM REAL ESTATE TAX MUNICIPALITY: ASSESSMENT APPEAL EAST PENNSBORO TOWNSHIP Parcel No. 09-19-1592-031 PRAECIPE FOR ENTRY OF APPEARANCE PURSUANT TO PA. RCIV.P.1012(b) Please enter my appearance on behalf of the Appellee Cumberland County Board of Assessment Appeals, in the above captioned matter. Dated: c //II/141 Respectfully submitted, By John. French, Esquire Soli itor for Cumberland County Board of Assessment Appeals 1 Courthouse Square, Room 107 Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 759-5297 Supreme Court I.D. # 90788 C t*.'? : ca) --i IN RE: VALENTI MID -ATLANTIC REALTY : IN THE COURT OF COMMON LLC : PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND : COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Petitioner vs. • • CUMBERLAND COUNTY BOARD OF • ASSESSMENT APPEALS, CUMBERLAND : COUNTY, EAST PENNSBORO TOWNSHIP, AND EAST PENNSBORO AREA SCHOOL DISTRICT Respondent MUNICIPALITY: EAST PENNSBORO TOWNSHIP Parcel No. 09-19-1592-031 NO. 12-6845 CIVIL TERM REAL ESTATE TAX ASSESSMENT APPEAL CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on May 14, 2014, a true and correct copy of the foregoing Praecipe for entry of Appearance, Pursuant to Pa. R.Civ.P. 1012(b) was served by means of United States mail, first class, postage prepaid, upon the following: Keith McLennan, Esquire Patrick J. Fanelli, Esquire MILLER TURETSKY RULE & MCLENNAN ANDREWS & BEARD Attorney for Petitioner 3770 Ridge Pike, Suite 2 Collegeville, PA 19426 Joseph A. Curcillo, III, Esquire CURCILLO LAW LLC Solicitor for East Pennsboro Township 3964 Lexington Street Harrisburg, PA 17109 Solicitor for East Pennsboro School District 3366 Lynwood Drive Altoona, PA 16603 Steven D. Tiley, Esquire FREY & TILEY 5 South Hanover Street Carlisle, PA 17013 G. French, Esquire IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA IN RE: VALENTI MID -ATLANTIC REALTY, LLC Petitioner vs. CUMBERLAND COUNTY BOARD OF : ASSESSMENT APPEALS, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, EAST PENNSBORO TOWNSHIP, and : EAST PENNSBORO AREA SCHOOL DISTRICT, Respondents. CIVIL ACTION — LAW Case No. 2012-6845 Civil TAX ASSESSMENT APPEAL TYPE OF DOCUMENT: Notice of Appearance Counsel for: EAST PENNSBORO AREA SCHOOL DISTRICT Carl P. Beard, Esquire Pa. Id. No. 33479 Ronald N. Repak, Esquire Pa. Id. No. 309138 ANDREWS & BEARD 3366 Lynnwood Drive P.O. Box 1311 Altoona, PA 16602 (814) 943-3304 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA IN RE: VALENTI MID -ATLANTIC CIVIL ACTION — LAW REALTY, LLC Case No. 2012-6845 Civil Petitioner vs. CUMBERLAND COUNTY BOARD OF : ASSESSMENT APPEALS, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, EAST PENNSBORO TOWNSHIP, and : EAST PENNSBORO AREA SCHOOL : DISTRICT, Respondents. ENTRY OF APPEARANCE Please withdraw the appearance of Patrick J. Fanelli, Esquire, and enter the appearance of Carl P. Beard, Esquire and Ronald N. Repak, Esquire of Andrews & Beard, on behalf of East Pennsboro Area School District. Respectfully submitted: Carl P. Beard, Esquire Pa. Id. No. 33479 Ronald N. Repak, Esquire Pa. Id. No. 309138 ANDREWS & BEARD 3366 Lynnwood Drive P.O. Box 1311 Altoona, PA 16602 (814) 943-3304 FAX (814)-943-3430 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA IN RE: VALENTI MID -ATLANTIC REALTY, LLC Petitioner vs. CUMBERLAND COUNTY BOARD OF : ASSESSMENT APPEALS, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, EAST PENNSBORO TOWNSHIP, and : EAST PENNSBORO AREA SCHOOL : DISTRICT, Respondents. CIVIL ACTION — LAW Case No. 2012-6845 Civil CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Carl P. Beard, Esquire, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Entry of Appearance has been served on the following parties of record by U.S. First Class Mail, postage pre -paid on this 28th day of May, 2014: John G. French, Esquire Solicitor for Cumberland County 1 Courthouse Square, Room 107 Carlisle, PA 17013 Joseph A. Curcillo, III, Esquire Solicitor for East Pennsboro Township 3964 Lexington Street Harrisburg, PA 17109 Keith McLennan, Esquire Miller Turetsky Rule & McLellan 3770 Ridge Pike, Suite 2 Collegeville, PA 19426 ANDREWS & BEARD Carl P. Beard, Esquire Pa. Id. No. 33479 Ronald N. Repak, Esquire Pa. Id. No. 309138 3366 Lynnwood Drive P.O. Box 1311 Altoona, PA 16602 (814) 943-3304