Loading...
165 Sherry Drive TREE25-0063 10.31.2025 SC TREE REMOVAL PERMIT APPLICATION FOR INTERNAL OFFICE USE ONLY City of Atlantic Beach CLASSIFICATION Community Development Division 800 Seminole Road Atlantic Beach, FL 32233 PERMIT# tlar (P)904-247-5800 PERMIT FEES Single-/Two-Family Residential $125.00 PERMIT REQUIRED FOR REMOVAL ❑ Other $250.00 OF TREES 8 INCHES DIAMETER AT BREAST HEIGHT AND GREATER `",.�, **'Please submit form in person or to building-dept@coab.us SITE INFORMATION ADDRESS 165 Sherry Drive APPLICANT INFORMATION NAME Jim and Cynthia Reagan ® OWNER ❑ LEGAL AUTHORIZED AGENT ADDRESS 165 Sherry Drive CITY Atlantic Beach STATE FL ZIP CODE 32233 PHONE# (770)329-2118 EMAIL jamesereagan@gmail.com REASON FOR TREE REMOVAL X 2 Probable fattucve. ofrnr_diur" I."Pact tike-(�r wi+-h si9r�'cF�;c2ht- c o yNs e U e.nc_e s+-v C)W hey a Vi d n e i g h b v►^, c,(n se ra rox t rn i+re (of y -I-o h�` L► I rn- zct (►fcel w s I n W_'2 ncmhs e Ue TREE REMOVAL PERMIT"A PLICATION PACKAGE" CHtCKLIST PLEASE ATTACH THE FOLLOWING EXHIBITS: *Additional information may be required,depending upon circumstances unique to individual applications EXHIBIT A-TREE PERMITTING PROCESS ❑ EXHIBIT B(Option 1)-PROOF OF OWNERSHIP:Copy of Warranty Deed that verifies record of owner ❑ EXHIBIT B(Option 2)-LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION: Please complete if the applicant is not the owner ❑ EXHIBIT C-TREE INVENTORY and SITE PLAN ❑ EXHIBIT D-TREE WORKSHEET 1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT ALL INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THIS APPLICATION IS CORRECT. I AGREE TO COMPLY WITH ALL PROVIS S F CHAPTER 23(PROTECTION OFTREESAND NATURAL VEGETATION)AND ALL OTHER APPLICABLE CODES AND ORDI ANCES OF THE F ATLANTIC BEA SIGNAT E OF OWNER or AGENT PRINT OR TYPE NAME DATE Signed and sworn before me on this day of by State of TV County of z Identification verified: Uo,I" � Oath Sworn: Yes ❑ No Notary Signature Ol 0®U My Commission expires m _ TREE REMOVAL PERMITAPPLICATION 07.31.2025 .:�� EXHIBIT A: TREE PERMITTING PROCESS 3 =1 City of Atlantic Beach Community Development Division 800 Seminole Road Atlantic Beach,FL 32233 � s35a ' (P)904-247-5800 This document provides a general guide of the tree removal permitting process. For complete information on permitting procedures see Section 23-23. Please sign the bottom of this page to certify that you have read this document and understand the permitting process. BEFORE PERMIT ISSUANCE 1. Submit Completed Application • All trees on property must be labeled on Exhibits C and D. 2. Schedule Inspections • All trees to be removed must be labeled with red or orange tape or ribbon and numbered per Exhibit C. • if there is construction on property,a barricade inspection will also be done at this time. Call for more information at(904) 247-5822. 3. Mitigation Assessment • Mitigation shall be in the form of preservation or relocation of existing trees, replacement with new trees or payment into the tree fund. See Section 23-33 for more information. • Staff will review the trees proposed for removal and send the applicant a Tree Permit Calculations sheet which outlines mitigation that is owed. 4. Proposed Mitigation Replacement Plan • Submit a mitigation replacement plan within 30 days of receiving the mitigation calculations. • The proposed plan must include a site plan, proposed species,and size(s). Plans must account for all inches owed. • A MITIGATION PLAN MUST BE SUBMITTED AND APPROVED PRIOR TO REMOVAL OF IDENTIFIED TREES. AFTER PERMIT ISSUANCE 5. Permit Issuance • When the permit is approved,staff will place a sign in the yard and contact the applicant.This sign must remain until the permit is finaled. • If paying for mitigation, payment must be made within 7 days following the issuance of the permit. 6. Mitigation Replacement • Replacement trees must be planted within 30 days of permit issuance or prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or Certificate of Completion. 7. Final Inspection • After trees are planted and/or construction is complete,a final inspection must be scheduled. Trees planted, preserved and relocated must survive three (3)years following the date the permit is finaled. Ing R'a ars IC1 I(( 2-OZ5 GNATURE OF APPLICANT PRINT OR TYPE NAME O APPLICANT DATE TREE REMOVAL PERMITAPPLICATION-EXHIBIT A:Tree Permitting Process 07.31.2025 01'i 1.1 EXHIBIT C: TREE INVENTORY and SITE PLAN ON City of Atlantic Beach Community Development Division FOR INTERNAL OFFICE USE ONLY F 800 Seminole Road Atlantic Beach,FL 32233 CLASSIFICATION (P)904-247-5800 PERMIT# TREE INVENTORY-Please sketch an inventory in the area below or attach a site plan showing all existing trees on the property below that are 8"diameter at breast height(dbh)and greater.Please complete the following: • Show the location of all trees to be removed with an"X" • Show the location of all trees to be preserved with"[I" • Show the location of all trees to be relocated with an"0" • Show all existing and/or proposed buildings • Show property access during the project using arrows"—" • Number all trees and list on EXHIBIT D:Tree Worksheet (not required for new homes,vacant land or large projects) P. ' O> P p; S Ski (y o e) E. > L A N' A V r E X 1 6 ( G p cis VC Y 6 5 S H R R y D R t V s PREPARED BY: e-- SCALE:1 SQUARE= TREE REMOVAL PERMITAPPLICATION-EXHIBITC;Tree Inventory and Site Plan 07.31.2025 EXHIBIT D: TREE WORKSHEET , s r� City of Atlantic Beach Community Development Division `, 800 Seminole Road Atlantic Beach,FL 32233 'ru„aa%' (P) 904-247-5800 List the species and diameter at breast height(dbh)of all trees identified on EXHIBIT C(attach additional pages as needed). removing ID DBH SPECIES preserving relocating COMMENTS(for use by City Staff) 1 wtf Lr've 0 a.14, 0 2 2' to La-U-Ine-1, Q a,K_ 0 3 Z*" O V e O CL K, 4 1 1 " P a- VY► 5 I " P 11 ✓Yl i 6 Pat ►-Y1 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 TREE REMOVAL PERMITAPPLICATION-EXHIBIT D:Tree Worksheet 07.31.2025 RIA ) 4 Basic Tree Rise Assessment Form Client "tE F :; ,, i' Date t CF , t Time - 4 Address/Tree location Tree no. Sheet of Trees ecies dbh �::•, Height= Hei ..� � Crown spread dia. a �. r Assessors) Tools used irrae frarn a T e w Target Assessment ITargetzone Occupancy „ v rate ! ,-rare et description target protection m °_=' r- 0 a x 2-occasional v U I -o .q�-t y��p 4 3-frequent v 2 b•" *^"a' 4-x "}t•; ; l 'S""F f fN�J FBF I i Site Factors History of failures1,_� --- _ Topography Flat Slope❑ __ % Aspect Site changes None 0"Grade change ElSite clearing❑ Changed soil hydrology ElRoot cuts El Describe________ Soil conditions Limited volume❑ Saturated❑ Shallow❑ Compacted q,-Pavement over roots❑ % Desr_ribe_� t,j`. ,, r � Prevailing wind direction t' ,- Common weather Strong winds ffvlce❑ Snow❑ Heavy rain❑ Describe Tree Health and Species Profile _ %ligor Low❑ Normal' E High❑ Foliage None(seasonal)Ef None(dead)❑ Normal % Chlorotic % Necrotic Bests/Biotic Abiotic Species failure profile Branches El'Trunk❑ Roots❑ Describe - Load Factors vVind exposure Protected❑ Partial❑ 170❑ Wind funneling❑ _ Relative crown size Small❑ Medium❑ Large❑ Crowndensity Sparse❑ Normal[] Dense[] Interior branches Few❑ Normal❑ Dense❑ Vines/Mistletoe/Mass❑ Recent or expected change in load factors J Tree Defects and Conditions Affecting the Likelihood of Failure —Crown and Branches .� rUnbalanced crown❑ LCR % Cracks ❑ _ Lightning damage ❑ Dead twigs/branches❑ %overall Max.dia. Codominant❑ included bark❑ Broken/Hangers Number i Max.dia. Over-extended branches ❑ Weak attachments El _ _ Cavity/Nest hole%circ. Pruning history Previous branch failures❑ Similar branches present❑ Crown cleaned ❑ Thinned ❑ Raised ❑ Dead/Missing baric❑ Cankers/Galls/Burls❑ Sapwood damage/decay❑ Reduced ❑ Topped ❑ Lion-tailed ❑ Conks ❑ Heartwood decay ❑ f Flush cuts ❑ Other Response growth Condition(s)of concern Part Size Fall'Distance Part Size Fall Distance Load on defect N/A❑ Minor ❑ Moderate❑ Significant❑ Load on defect: N/A❑ Minor ❑ Moderate❑ Significant❑ Likelihood of failure Improbable C] Possible El Probable ❑ Imminent ❑ Likelihood of failure Improbable❑ Possible 11 Probable ❑ Imminent❑ f —Trunk � Roots arses Root Collar— ;( Dead/Missing bark ❑ Abnorrnal bark texture/color❑ Collar buried/Not visible F Depth Stem girdling❑ Codominant stems ❑ included bark❑ Cracks❑ { Dead ❑ Decay❑ Conks/Mushrooms❑ Sapwood damage/decay❑ Can ❑ Sap ooze ❑ Ooze ❑ Cavity❑ %circ. Lightning damage❑ Heal wood decay Conks/Mushrooms❑ Cracks❑ Cut/Damaged roots❑ Distance from trunk Cavity/Nest hole %circ. Depth Poor taper❑ l Root plate lifting❑ Lean___' Corrected? _ r p g Soil weakness❑ Response growth Response growth Condition(s)of concern Condition(s)of concern Part Size Fall Distance Part Size Fall Distance Load on defect N/A❑ Minor ❑ Moderate❑ Significant❑ Load on defect N/A❑ Minor ❑ Moderate❑ Significant❑ Likelihood of failure Improbable❑ Possible Probable ❑ Imminent❑ J Likelihood of failure Improbable❑ Possible❑ Probable ❑ Imminent❑ Pavr I of 2 Risk Categorization " Likelihood FailureUmpact Consequences Failure impact (from MaIrix 1) or descripiot�� of concern o 2 Risk Matrix/,Likelihood matrix. Likelihood Likelihood of Impact Failure Very Low-- Medium High ^ —11--Mil.t Unlikely Somewhat likely Likely Very likely Probable Unlikely Unlikely Somewhat likely Likely Possible Unjjj�g]V Unlikely Unlikely Sornewhat likely Unlikely Unlikely ' / - _ rmmx2.Rim razing mairix. Likelihood of Consequences of Failure 1g,IficarT Failure St Impact Negligible Minor evere Very likely j Low Moderate Hioh Extreme --Likely Low Moderate High High Sornewhat likely Low Low Moderate Moderate Nmtes,explanations descriptions NAitigation options ^ Residual risk ~ Residual risk � Residual risk * Residual risk � Overall tree risk rating LOW IT Moderate O H/:|`O Extreme Overall,esiduai,is|' mune El ° Low-11 Moderate O H/ox O Extreme Recommended'inspection interval Data Op/na/ 11 Preliminary Advanced assessment needed 0-"�oOres-Type/nea,on � mspeouon|irnitadon, Qmone OvisibUny OAccess Ovine, []Root collar buried Describe o./^u"'va,rct.,,`p",a.,ua/,yo,,�",",,^o.""lx,u,,*.,]A*^m",x.=nS.,`-2o/, Pap 2o/z 'J 73 ID ry, tA In qw kV bDD > J N V^ I� V l� C lh P $ Owl 2 H' 'MY V/ l; u Z 'n Kzj s at: N§ vF� ' c Sp e tt CID U CL ui V) 0v r. ' L It > 0 0 m z im .i� UJ Lu i[! T _ - LIa c: <L � fir° `c a; � k } Li v "in r_ u cl 4 WR r O Y _ V Vi ii! W i %' f tA LU , rk f� r� {r; ��r r r � F ry IN Ln cr ua by iD S �, tY N G T] O ,hQ �fiJ1 Basici Client, yy 'w " _Date_l Time Address/Tree location G < . Tree no. Sheet -3-1.or Tree species_� r €w °; dbh Height l: Crown spread dia. •- Assessor(s) w-a L.'°$ i Tools useds 1 cue { Time frame Target Assessment Target zone _ Occupancy • V : t N rate o O c Target description Target protection y '3= i-rare ° r n v x v Ln 2-occ asionali u V-gyp L 3-frequent u O y N rro 4-constant a E cu a Site Factors History of failures fes,'Topography Flat Slope❑_ % Aspect Site changes None 51", Grade change❑ Site clearing❑ Changed soil hydrology❑ Root cuts❑ Describe __ Soil conditions Limited volume❑ Saturated❑ Shallow❑ Compacted 0 Pavement over roots❑ _% Describe Prevailing wind direction Common weather Strong winds❑?Ice❑ Snow❑ Heavy rain❑ Describe Tree Health and Species Profile Vigor Low 2 Normal ❑ High❑ Foliage None(seasonal)❑ None(dead)❑ Normal % Chlorotic % Necrotic Pests/Bio is Abiotic _ Species failure profile Branches in Trunk❑ Roots❑ Describe ( ( { Load Factors trt'ind exposure Protected❑ Partial L"1 Full❑ Wind funneling❑ Relative crown size Small'( Medium❑ Large❑ Crown density Sparse 12 Normal❑ Dense El interior branches Few FJ Normal F-1 Dense[I Vines/Mistletoe/Moss❑ t e r... Recent or expected change in load factors Tree Defects and Conditions Affecting the likelihood of Failure Crown and BranchesUnbalanced crown❑ LCR % Cracks ❑ Lightning damage 2f Dead twigs/branches Z %overall Max.cia. Codominant❑ Included bark❑ I Broken/Hangers Number Max.dia. Weak attachments ❑ Cavity/Nest hole%circ. Over-ex-lended branches ❑ ", Previous branch failures 9 Similar branches resent❑ { Pruning history p ( Crown cleaned ❑ Thinned ❑ Raised ❑ Dead/Missing barl<❑ Cankers/Galls/Burls❑ Sapwood damage/decay `r"�. Reduced ❑ Topped ❑ Lion-tailed ❑ Conks ❑ Heartwood decay ❑ Flush cuts, ❑ Other Response growth f0 ndi oon(s)or concern 1 Part Size Fall Distance Part Size Fall Distance ` Load on defect N/A❑ Nlinor ❑ Moderate❑ Significant❑ Load on defect N/A❑ Minor 9l,Moderate 13 Significant❑ \ Likelihood offailure Improbable❑ Possible 17-1ProbableED Imminent ❑ Likelihood of failure Improbable[] Possible❑ Probable 0'Imminent❑ —Trunk— � Roots and Root Collar-- i Dead/Missing bark ❑ Abnormal barktexture/color❑ Collar buried/Not visible❑ Depth Stem girdling❑ Codominant stems ❑ Included bark❑ Cracks❑ i Dead ❑ Decay❑ Conks/Mushrooms❑ Sapwood damage/decay❑ Cankers/Galls/Burls❑ Sap ooze ❑ Ooze ❑ Cavity❑ %circ. Lightning damage❑ Heartwood decay❑ Conics/Mushrooms❑ Cracks❑ Cut/Damaged roots❑ Distance from trunk Cavity/Nest hole %circ. Depth Poor taper❑ Root plate lifting❑ Soil weakness❑ Lean Corrected? Response growth Response growth Condition(s)of concern Condition(s)of concern Part Size Fall Distance Part Size Fall Distance Load on defect N/A❑ Minor ❑ Moderate❑ Significant❑ Load on defect N/A❑ Minor ❑ Moderate❑ Significant❑ Likelihood of failure Improbable❑ Possible❑ Probable ❑ Imminent❑ Likelihood of failure Improbable❑ Possible❑ Probable ❑ Imminent❑ P'lop. I of 9 02 Risk Categorization f € Likelihood p Consequences Failure Impact f=ailure&Im act Target Condition{s) (from Mai rix 1) (Target number Tree part ordescrip cn) ( of concern v w w a Risi; o Z ° v > w m cc a rating E o o o a m � o Y 'Nm s d Jrom in (n Matrix 2) t,is l ? moi_ -< .�: t i -1 _ p?' e41 9 I tj C i ( t 7 1 I . I (i Ii 3i+loit'ix d.Likelihood matrix. Likelihood Likelihood of Impact of Failure very Iow Low Medium High { Imminent Unlikely Somewhat likely Ver like) v v v Probable Unlikely Unlikely fSomewhat likely Likely Possible I Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely Somewhat likely Improbable IUnlikely Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely Motrix 2,Risk rating matrix. Likelihood of Consequences of Failure Failure u impact negligible Minor s Significant Severe s Very likely Low l�Moderate High Extreme € Likely Low Moderate High High Somewhat likely Low Low `IVioderate- Moderate Horde unlikeit) 5 Low Lots trrvRr Low I r (Votes,explanations,descriptions lvlitig8tion Options Residual risk Residual risk Residual risk Residual risk Overall tree res:.racing Low D Moderate 0 Higher� Extreme M Overall residuai risk None© Low"I Moderate❑ High r,� Extreme❑ Recommended inspection interval -ata ©Final El Preliminary Advanced assessment needed 0No❑Yes-Type/Reason inspection limitations ❑None ❑Visibility DAccess ❑Vines ❑Root collar buried Describe -ibis�1s4a'a�tcc4;cats pro(luced 1z1-ilic loternatiora;Su[Idr u!drbarJc;ilmre(1SA)—20J7 Page 2 Of 2 rsv++ td Basis gee Risk Assessment Form _ Client _, 4 Date Time Address/Tree location Tree n0. W Sheet or Tree species dbh ° Height , Crown spread dia �M Assessor(s) Tools used Time frame Target Assessment c`v Target zone Occupancy y o f V e c rate Target description Target protection = 3 i '3 = a-rare i a x N 2-occasional 'uu `L ru 3--frequent�-n d £4 constant u > y u O.a ll ._ Site Factors History of failures t � r't� � Topography Flag Slope❑ % Aspect Site changes None Cdl"Grade change❑ Site clearing❑ Changed soil hydrology❑ Root cuts❑ Describe Soil conditiors Limited volume❑ Saturated❑ Shallow❑ Compacted❑ Pavement over roots _% Describe Prevailing wind direction Fµ Common weather Strong winds Er Ice❑ Snow❑ Heavy rain❑ Describe Free Health and Species profile Vigor Low❑ Normal OR High❑ Foliage None(seasonal) None(dead)❑ Normal� % Chlorotic % Necrotic % Pests/Biotic c =r Abiotic --- Species failure profile Branches❑ Trunkl2l"Roots❑ Describe Load Factors Windexposure Protected❑ Partialis Full❑ Windfunn ❑elingRelative crown size Small❑ Medium Large Cl Crown density Sparse❑ Normall3' Dense 1771 Interior branches Few❑ Norrnallf Dense❑ Vines/Mistletoe/Moss❑ 0Xr..- Recent or expected change in load factors Tree Defects and Conditions Affecting the Likelihood of Failure F^czmsat and Srrartches— Unbalanced crown❑ LCR % Cracks ❑ _ Lightning damage ❑ Dead twigs/branches❑ %overall Max.dia. Codominant❑ Included bark❑ Broken/Hangers Number Max.dia. Weak attachments C1Over-extendedbranches l — Cavity/Nest hole%circ. :pruning history Previous branch failures El Similar branches present❑ Crown cleaned ❑ Thinned ❑ Raised 11Dead/Missing bark❑ Cankers/Galls/Burls❑ Sapwood damage/decay❑ Reduced ❑ Topped ❑ Lion-tailed ❑ Conks ❑ Heartwood decay ❑ Flush cuts ❑ Other Response growth Condition(s)ofconcern _ Part Size Fall Distance Part Size Fall Distance Load on defect N/A❑ Minor ❑ Moderate❑ Significant❑ Load on defect N/A❑ Minor ❑ Moderate❑ Significant❑ Likelihood offailure Improbable❑ Possible Probable ❑ Imminent ❑ Likelihood of failure Improbable❑ Possible❑ Probable ❑ Imminent❑ Roots and Root Collar Dead/Missing bark 01Abnormal bark texture/color❑ Collar buried/Not visible❑ Depth Stem girdling❑ Codominant stems ❑ Included bark❑ Cracks❑ Dead ❑ Decay❑ Conks/Mushrooms❑ Sapwood damage/decay❑ Cankers/Galls/Burls❑ Sap ooze ❑ OOZe ❑ Cavity❑ %circ. Lightning damage❑ Heartwood decay❑ Conks/Mushrooms❑ Cracks❑ Cut/Damaged roots❑ Distance from trunk { Cavity/Nest hole %circ. Depth Poor taper❑ Root plate lifting❑ Soil weakness❑ Leanrte" Corrected? Response growth Response growth Condition(s)of concern Condition(s)of concern 4 il "t "„I',.. Part Size Fall Distance Part Size Fall Distance Load on defect N/A❑ Minor Ci Moderate❑ Significant'� ( Load on defect N/A❑ Minor• ❑ Moderate❑ Significant❑ Likelihood of failure improbable❑ Possible❑ Probable,�M"Imminent❑ Likelihood of failure Improbable❑ Possible❑ Probable ❑ Imminent❑ Pape i of 2 Risk Categorization I ! Likelihood i Failure Impact Failure&Impact Consequences target ifit (from Matrix l) 4 (;'arr�er number Tree pari Condition(s) i! ordescriptionJ of concern n ° m > vRisk ? v v T z v rating z a a` > W E s to °c c (from ° 2 rn _+ > Z in PAatrfx 2) L---------------- tatrix 1.Likelihood matrix. i Likelihood Likelihood of Impact of Failure Very low tow Medium High Imminent Unlikely Somewhat likely Likely Ver fil:ely - Probable Unlikely Unlikely Somewhat likely Likely`; Possible Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely Someivliat likely - Improbable Unlil(eIy Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely _ iViatrix 2.Risk rating matrix. Likelihood of i Consequences of Failure Failure&impact p � Negligible Minor Significant Severe Very likely I Low Moderate High Extreme - Likely Low Moderate High`• High }Somewhat likely Love Low Mod'er,C Moderate t _ � Pdorcn Unlikely � Low Lov,� I Low Low Notes,explanations,descriptions Mi-dgation options Residual risk �" a -- Residual risk Residual risk Residual risk Overall tree risk rating Low i-1 Moderate D' High D'':Extreme❑ Overall residual risk None❑ Low❑ Moderate❑ High �Extremie❑ Recommended inspection interval Data ❑Final ❑Preliminary Advanced assessment needed ©No CIYes-Type/Reason _ Inspection limitations (]None OVisibility ❑Access ❑Vines ❑Root collar buried Describe tri da:uchcct xas prode}ad Lr lire Lrtcrnetional So:iehuf Arboriculture{ISA)—2bl7 Page 2 of 2 Recorded 08/25/2025 08 : 55 AM, JODY PHILLIPS CLERK CIRCUIT COURT DWAL COUNTY RECORDING $18 . 50 DEED DOC ST $5320 . 00 Prepared by and return to: Maria Coutu Atlantic Coast Title&Escrow 1525-B The Greens Way,Suite 100 Jacksonville Beach,FL 32250 (904)372-4834 File Number:2025-23121 Will Call No.: [Space Above This Line For Recording Datal Warranty Deed This Warranty Deed made this 22nd day of August,2025 between Sapphire 1002 LLC, a Florida Limited Liability Company whose post office address is 153 Acres Rd, #201, Monroe, NY 10950, grantor, and James E. Reagan Jr. and Cynthia C. Reagan,Husband and Wife, as joint tenants with the right of survivorship, and not as tenants in common whose post office address is 1218 Bridgewater Lane,Chattanooga,TN 37405,grantee: (Whenever used herein the terns "grantor" and "grantee" include all the parties to this instrument and the heirs, legal representatives, and assigns of individuals,and the successors and assigns of corporations,trusts and trustees) Witnesseth, that said grantor, for and in consideration of the sum of TEN AND NO/100 DOLLARS ($10.00) and other good and valuable considerations to said grantor in hand paid by said grantee, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, has granted, bargained, and sold to the said grantee, and grantee's heirs and assigns forever, the following described land, situated,lying and being in Duval County,Florida to-wit: Lot 31, FLOYD AND CAMP'S REPLAT, according to plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 22, Page 80,Public Records of Duval County,Florida. Parcel Number: 1697970000 Together with all the tenements,hereditaments and appurtenances thereto belonging or in anywise appertaining. To Have and to Hold,the same in fee simple forever. And the grantor hereby covenants with said grantee that the grantor is lawfully seized of said land in fee simple; that the grantor has good right and lawful authority to sell and convey said land; that the grantor hereby fully warrants the title to said land and will defend the same against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever; and that said land is free of all encumbrances,except taxes accruing subsequent to 12/31/2024. In Witness Whereof,grantor has hereunto set grantor's hand and seal the day and year first above written. Signed,sealed and delivered in our presence: Sapphire 1002 LLC,a Florida Limited Liability Company CeA100-- By: Witness MARIA COUTU Jacob Guttman,Managing Member Printed Name: P.O.Address: 1525b The Greens Way Jacksonville Beach, FL 32250 Sapphire 1002 LLC,a Florida Limited Liability Company SolVAnnAh (-GA�UG �. 4s �y: /kmye-v- Witness Eluzer Mayer,Managing Member Printed Name: Savannah League P.O.Address: 1525b The Greens Way Jacksonville Beach,FL 32250 State of Florida County of Duval The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me by means of U physical presence or[4 online notarization,this 21 st day of August,2025 by Jacob Guttman,Managing Member and Eluzer Mayer,Managing Member of Sapphire 1002 LLC who[j are personally known or V have produced drivers'licenses�tiftc�n /". [Seal] a�4'a'Y`�+rlr4 �� MARIA COUTU Notary Public Notary Public-State of Florida Print Name:Maria DiMartino Coutu N oI Commission#HH 214138 My Commission Expires: 04/2912026 Jpuol'II�.���h Expires on Apn129.2o28 Notarized remotely online using communication technology via Proof.