• Still feasible, returns compressed. The project continues to support the conclusions of the original feasibility study. Adjusted equity IRR of 19.8% remains above the sponsor's 15% hurdle, but ~370 bps of erosion since underwriting is driven by a 3.2% cost increase, an ~8-point lease-up lag, and 25 bps of exit-cap expansion.
• NOI is holding; the pressure is on value and timing. Stronger street rates (+4.3%) have offset a 12.2% jump in operating expense — led by property insurance — keeping stabilized NOI essentially flat. The valuation headwind is the cap-rate environment, not the asset.
• Three watch items. (1) Insurance cost inflation, (2) enclosed-bay lease-up pace, and (3) the open county conditional-use and stormwater approvals that gate Phase 2. Each is addressable; see Recommendations.
• Overall risk: 2.0 / 5 (Moderate), improved from Elevated in Q1 2026 as schedule float was partially recovered.

Stage read. The subject is in the construction / initial lease-up stage. Vertical construction of the pre-engineered metal buildings is approximately 68% complete, with substantial completion tracked for Q4 2026; site work, utilities and paving are finished, and FF&E, gate and access-control fit-out is sequenced to follow building close-in.^[3] Pre-leasing of the enclosed bays is active but running roughly 8 points behind plan, concentrated in the highest-margin enclosed product that does not open until completion. Because the asset is mid-construction, its current As-Is value (illustratively ~$21.5M) sits below total development cost ($25.6M) — the development premium is realized only as the project completes and leases up, which is the central message of the Equity-timing (XIRR / MIRR) section that follows.

Outlook. At this stage the project's risk is a completion-and-lease-up story rather than a viability one: the items that most often sink a development — entitlement, financing and market demand — are substantially de-risked, while the live exposures (finishing on schedule, leasing the enclosed bays, and the sector-wide insurance repricing) are timing and execution risks with active mitigations. Risk should continue to ease toward Low–Moderate as the buildings reach substantial completion in Q4 2026 and occupancy ramps through 2028; a stall in lease-up or a further leg up in the exit-cap environment is what would move it the other way. This rolls up to the overall 2.0 / 5 · Moderate rating detailed in the Risk assessment section above.^[4]

• [1]Construction schedule & progress. General-contractor baseline schedule, monthly pay applications and draw requests; architect's field reports and inspection sign-offs (representative — see Sources & bibliography).
• [2]Hold & exit assumptions. Sponsor pro forma and the 5-year hold carried through the Returns, cash-flow and Equity-timing sections of this report.
• [3]Stage assessment. Percent-complete and substantial-completion date per the contractor's schedule and the monitor's site observations for the period.
• [4]Risk roll-up. The nine-category 1–5 risk matrix in §2 (Risk assessment); methodology consistent with Wert-Berater's monitoring framework.

Net read. Forecast distributions to equity total $17.63M — a 2.42× multiple and 19.8% IRR — against the $19.43M pro forma (2.90× / 23.5%): $1.80M less cash returned and, after the larger equity outlay, $2.40M less net profit. The $1.80M distribution shortfall is overwhelmingly valuation-driven — $1.36M is the lower net sale reversion as the exit cap widened from 6.00% to 6.25%, and the remaining $0.44M is thinner operating distributions, chiefly a ~$0.30M Year-2 deferral from the slower lease-up with stabilized Yr 3–5 only ~$0.14M light. The step from that $1.80M distribution gap to the $2.40M net-profit gap is the extra $0.60M of equity drawn from contingency. The variance is therefore a valuation-and-timing story, not an operating-cash one.

The deal clears the 15% equity hurdle across all modelled scenarios down to a 6.50% exit cap at ≥2% rent growth. Below that — a 6.75% exit cap — returns fall through the hurdle, which is why we recommend underwriting the exit conservatively and protecting rate growth via the lease-up actions noted below.

XIRR — the annualized internal rate of return on dated, irregular cash flows (the Excel XIRR / Actual-365 convention).^[2]   MIRR — the modified IRR, which removes IRR's optimistic reinvestment assumption by financing outflows at a cost of capital (8.0%) and reinvesting inflows at a conservative rate (6.0%).^[3] Two horizons are shown: an interim mark at the current monitoring date (6/30/26), and the projected return to the modeled 2030 exit.

Net read. On a money-weighted basis the projected XIRR is 17.2% and MIRR 16.5% — both comfortably above the sponsor's 15% hurdle, and both modestly below the §4 time-weighted IRR of 19.8% because the equity is committed earlier (across 2025) than the single-outlay convention assumes, so capital is at risk longer. The interim mark is negative (XIRR −12.2%, 0.86×) purely because the project is mid-construction: $7.30M has been invested, no bay has opened, and the As-Is value sits below cost — the textbook bottom of the equity J-curve. The trajectory from −12.2% today to a projected +17.2% at exit is the value-creation path the monitoring program tracks each quarter. These figures are illustrative and conditional on the project completing and stabilizing as modeled.^[4]

• [1]Equity draw schedule. Sponsor capital-call notices and lender draw requests (representative — see Sources & bibliography). Draw amounts are illustrative.
• [2]XIRR. Annualized money-weighted IRR on dated cash flows (Actual/365; the Microsoft Excel XIRR convention).
• [3]MIRR. Modified IRR with a finance rate of 8.0% (assumed cost of capital) and a reinvestment rate of 6.0%; the Excel MIRR convention.
• [4]Interim NAV & projected cash. Interim equity NAV = illustrative As-Is value ($21.5M) less estimated debt drawn (~$15.2M); projected distributions ($17.63M) per the 5-year hold in §4.

Read. On a trailing basis the asset is roughly break-even (NOI ≈ $0.0M) because it is only 63% leased and still absorbing lease-up concessions and an insurance spike. Normalized to stabilized occupancy and a re-bid expense load, the same asset supports $2.08M of NOI on $3.18M of EGI — a 34.6% expense ratio — which is the NOI carried into the valuation and returns sections. The $2.09M bridge is roughly 95% a revenue (lease-up) story and 5% expense normalization.

Conclusion. In this illustration, an independent MAI appraisal would conclude a prospective As-Stabilized market value of $33.30M (effective June 30, 2026), $1.20M (−3.5%) below the $34.50M value projected in the original feasibility study. The entire variance is attributable to +25 bps of exit-cap expansion in the current rate environment; stabilized NOI is essentially unchanged. The variance does not impair the SBA 504 collateral position — the stabilized loan-to-value remains ~55% — and does not alter the feasibility conclusion. Such an As-Stabilized opinion would be developed under a hypothetical condition that the project is complete and at stabilized occupancy as of the effective date; see the USPAP compliance & disclosures section.

Net read. The macro environment is mildly favourable for demand but unfavourable for valuation: elevated long rates keep exit caps wide even as the local economy supports rents. This is the same tension reflected throughout the report — NOI is holding while value is pressured by the rate environment. A sustained move lower in the 10-year Treasury (e.g., the cuts priced for late 2026) would be the single biggest upside to the adjusted equity IRR.

Demand fundamentals remain favourable: vehicle registrations and household incomes are growing faster than their three-year averages, HOA and municipal restrictions on at-home boat/RV parking continue to push owners toward dedicated facilities, and the submarket has historically been under-supplied in enclosed product. The principal medium-term headwind is announced new supply (~700 spaces within ten miles by 2028), which we expect to temper rate growth from the high-single digits toward a 2–3% stabilized pace — the assumption used in the base-case returns above.

Net read. The subject’s pre-leasing reservation desk scores 90/100 — near the top of the comp set, a point behind only Northgate (91) and well clear of the rest (72–79) — so the ~8-point enclosed lease-up lag reads as a delivery-timing constraint (enclosed bays don’t open until Q4 2026), not a demand or sales-execution problem. Every competitor quoted at or above published rates, and the two strongest operators (Lakeside 94%, Northgate 96% occupancy) are now wait-listing enclosed product — direct field confirmation of the +4.3% street-rate growth and the enclosed-demand depth underwritten in the returns. The clearest opening to take share is follow-up discipline: Summit, the weakest shop (72), never returned the inquiry — exactly the execution gap the subject’s same-day reservation follow-up is built to win. Recommendation: sustain the founder’s-rate enclosed-bay reservation push (see Recommendations).

Demand tailwinds. On balance the surrounding pipeline is a net positive for demand. The Lakewood Ranch active-adult community (850 homes) and the Sarasota Bay marina expansion together enlarge the affluent, vehicle-owning household base that is the core renter for enclosed boat and RV storage, while the I-75 / Fruitville interchange upgrade shortens drive times from north Sarasota and Manatee County and widens the subject's effective catchment. These factors support — and modestly de-risk — the 2–3% stabilized rate-growth assumption used in the base-case returns.

Competitive headwinds & share. The same trade area will absorb roughly 700 announced competing spaces by 2028 (Gulf Coast Storage Partners and I-75 Logistics). At full delivery we estimate this dilutes the subject's share of net new demand by ~8–12% and is the principal reason rate growth is underwritten to decelerate from the current high-single digits. The subject's defenses are structural: the largest enclosed count and broadest product mix in the immediate trade area, a first-mover position ahead of both announced projects, and a mid-market rate that leaves room to compete without eroding the enclosed premium.

Net effect on value. Netting demand growth against new supply, we estimate the surrounding development pipeline is value-neutral to mildly accretive over the five-year hold — on the order of +1% to +3% of stabilized value relative to a no-growth catchment — and does not by itself alter the feasibility conclusion. The dominant value drivers remain the exit-cap environment and the insurance-led expense load addressed in the Threats and Recommendations sections. These estimates are re-tested each quarter as the residential and competing-supply projects reach delivery.

1. Re-bid the property & casualty insurance program.High
   OpEx is the single largest NOI drag; restoring ~$80–100k of premium recovers ~4–5% of stabilized NOI and ~$1.3–1.6M of value at the exit cap.
2. Accelerate marketing on enclosed bays.High
   Enclosed is the highest-margin product and the segment most behind plan (lease-up −8 pts). Closing the gap protects rate growth and trims the interest-reserve draw.
3. Hold the exit cap conservative (≥6.25%) in lender reporting.Medium
   Do not underwrite cap compression; the sensitivity table shows the deal clears the 15% hurdle down to a 6.50% exit at ≥2% rent growth.
4. Pursue conditional-use & stormwater approvals before Phase 2 mobilization.High
   Protects schedule float and avoids a standby-cost exposure on the third enclosed building.
5. Evaluate an interest-rate cap on the floating bank tranche.Medium
   Caps DSCR downside while approvals and lease-up complete; DSCR is currently 1.38× against a 1.20× covenant.
6. Maintain contingency ≥ $0.4M until substantial completion.Medium
   Preserves cushion against residual schedule and change-order risk through Q4 2026.

For the quarter ended June 30, 2026, the GKBH Boat & RV Storage facility continues to track the conclusions of the original feasibility study, and the project remains feasible as underwritten. Total development cost has risen 3.2% to $25.6M, funded from contingency without a new capital call. Stabilized NOI is essentially unchanged (+0.5%) as stronger enclosed-unit rents offset a 12.2% rise in insurance and security expense, and DSCR of 1.38× remains comfortably inside the 1.20× covenant. The principal effects this quarter are on timing and value, not viability: a slower lease-up and 25 bps of exit-cap expansion compress the adjusted equity IRR to 19.8% (from 23.5%) — still above the sponsor's 15% hurdle. Overall risk is assessed as Moderate, improved from Elevated last quarter. No amendment to the feasibility conclusions is recommended at this time; the action items above are management recommendations, not conditions of feasibility.

In an actual assignment, this Project Monitoring & Risk Report, and any independent MAI appraisal summarized within it, would be developed and reported in conformity with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) promulgated by The Appraisal Foundation, including the applicable provisions of STANDARDS 1 and 2 governing the development and communication of a real property appraisal. Because this example is hypothetical and no appraisal has been performed, the statements below are illustrative of that required form.

Intended use: to assist the named intended users in monitoring the construction progress, market position, financial performance, risk, and value of the subject asset during its construction and lease-up phase, and in administering the associated SBA 504 financing. The report is not intended for any other use.

Intended users: the client — the GKBH Boat & RV Storage sponsor / ownership group — and its identified SBA 504 lender group only. No other party is an intended user. This report is delivered solely through the secure Wert-Berater client portal and is restricted to authorized portal users acting for the named intended users; possession by, or distribution to, any other party confers no right of reliance, reproduction, or publication. Use of this report by anyone other than the intended users, or for any purpose other than the intended use, is unauthorized.

In an actual assignment, the scope of work would be determined to be sufficient to produce credible assignment results for the intended use. It would include identification of the problem and the relevant property characteristics; a personal inspection of the subject; research of sponsor pay applications, draw requests and the operating budget, the architect's field reports, a quarterly survey of the boat / RV-storage comparable set, lender draw and interest-reserve schedules, the SBA 504 loan documents, and public land, permit and tax records; and application of the income approach (multi-year discounted-cash-flow), supported by the sales-comparison approach and a cost reconciliation. No such work has been performed for this hypothetical sample; further detail on the methodology is provided in the Sources & methodologies appendix to the slide deck.

• That construction will be completed substantially in accordance with the approved plans, specifications, and development budget reviewed in this assignment.
• That the cost, draw, occupancy, and operating data furnished by the sponsor, general contractor, and lender are accurate and complete.

The use of these extraordinary assumptions might have affected the assignment results.

• The prospective As-Stabilized market value is developed under the hypothetical condition that, as of the effective date, the project is complete and has achieved stabilized occupancy — a condition contrary to the fact that the property remains in construction and lease-up.

The use of this hypothetical condition might have affected the assignment results.

Wert-Berater, Inc. prepared the original feasibility study for the subject and provides the ongoing quarterly monitoring of which this report is a part. This prior and continuing service is disclosed in accordance with the ETHICS RULE.

In a completed assignment, the state-certified appraiser of record would sign a certification in substantially the USPAP-required form below. Because this report is hypothetical and no appraisal has been performed, the certification is reproduced here for illustration only and is unsigned; the first-person statements show the form such a certification would take and are not assertions about a completed assignment. A signing appraiser would certify that, to the best of their 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 of this report or to the parties involved with this assignment.
• my engagement in this assignment was not contingent upon developing or reporting predetermined results.
• my compensation for completing this assignment is not contingent upon the development or reporting of a predetermined value or direction in value that favors the cause of the client, the amount of the value opinion, the attainment of a stipulated result, or the occurrence of a subsequent event directly related to the intended use of this appraisal.
• my analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared, in conformity with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice.
• I have made a personal inspection of the property that is the subject of this report.
• except as disclosed above (the firm's prior feasibility study and ongoing quarterly monitoring), I have provided no services, as an appraiser or in any other capacity, regarding the subject property within the three-year period immediately preceding acceptance of this assignment.
• Able Taye and Bohdan Syvka provided significant professional assistance to the person signing this certification; no others provided significant real property appraisal assistance.
• as of the date of this report, I have completed the continuing education program for Designated Members of the Appraisal Institute.

• Information furnished is reliable. Cost, draw-request, rent-roll, occupancy, operating, and lender data supplied by the sponsor, general contractor, and SBA 504 lender are assumed accurate and complete; they have been reviewed for reasonableness but not independently audited or verified.
• Title is marketable. Good and marketable title is assumed. No title search has been performed and no responsibility is assumed for matters legal in character, liens, or encumbrances; the property is analyzed as though free and clear unless otherwise noted.
• No survey or engineering opinion. Site dimensions, acreage, and improvement areas rely on plans and public records; no boundary survey or structural, geotechnical, or mechanical engineering study has been commissioned, and none is implied.
• Environmental condition. The property is assumed free of hazardous materials and adverse environmental conditions unless otherwise stated. No environmental assessment has been performed and the analysts are not qualified to detect such conditions; their presence could affect value.
• Hidden conditions. No responsibility is assumed for hidden or unapparent conditions of the soil, subsoil, or structures; latent defects could materially change the conclusions.
• Legal use and compliance. The property is assumed to comply, or to be capable of compliance, with applicable zoning, land-use, building, and life-safety codes, and to hold or be able to obtain the conditional-use, stormwater, and other approvals that gate Phase 2.
• Forecasts are projections, not guarantees. Absorption, rate-growth, expense, interest-reserve, and exit-cap inputs reflect current market evidence and management guidance as of the effective date; actual results will vary and the projections are not warranted.

• Effective-date market. Conclusions reflect market conditions as of the effective date of value; the analysts assume no obligation to revise the report for events or conditions arising after that date.
• Intended use and users only. The report is prepared solely for the intended use and intended users identified in the USPAP compliance & disclosures section and delivered only through the secure client portal; possession by any other party confers no right of reliance, reproduction, or publication.
• Whole-report reliance. The analysis must be considered in its entirety; extracting any figure, table, exhibit, or conclusion out of context may be misleading.
• Maps and exhibits are schematic. Location maps, radius rings, and the distribution-bridge and sensitivity exhibits are illustrative and not to scale or survey-grade; they support the narrative and are not independent determinations of distance, area, or boundary.
• Not an appraisal. This monitoring report is not, and does not substitute for, a USPAP appraisal. Any independent MAI appraisal would be a separate, signed work product whose full report and certification would govern.

• Sponsor monthly draw requests, pay applications, and development budget vs. actuals; general-contractor field reports and the updated construction schedule.
• Property operating statements, trailing rent roll, and the pre-leasing / reservation pipeline furnished by ownership.
• SBA 504 loan documents, lender draw and interest-reserve schedules, and the original Wert-Berater feasibility study for the subject.

• Proprietary self-storage market data and rate surveys (subscription market-data and broker market reports for the self-storage / boat & RV sector).
• Wert-Berater field inspection and the Q2 2026 anonymous shop of the subject's reservation desk and the four comparable facilities.
• Published street rates, availability, and occupancy for the comparable set within the ~10-mile trade area.

• U.S. Census Bureau (population, household formation, income) and U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (employment, wages) for the Sarasota–Manatee metro and Sarasota County.
• Florida Department of Highway Safety & Motor Vehicles boat and RV registration trends; Florida Department of Transportation interchange and roadway plans.
• Sarasota County Property Appraiser and Planning & Development Services records for land, permit, tax, and entitlement status; public filings and broker intelligence for announced competing supply.

• Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP), The Appraisal Foundation — current edition.
• The Appraisal of Real Estate, Appraisal Institute — income, sales-comparison, and cost approaches and discounted-cash-flow methodology.

• Money-weighted return (XIRR) computed on the dated monthly equity cash flows using the Actual/365 convention, equivalent to the Microsoft Excel XIRR function.
• Modified internal rate of return (MIRR) per the standard finance-rate / reinvest-rate construction (here an 8.0% finance rate and a 6.0% reinvestment rate), equivalent to the Microsoft Excel MIRR function.
• Time-weighted equity IRR, equity multiple, and discounted-cash-flow returns per The Appraisal of Real Estate (income approach / DCF) and standard real-estate private-equity practice; interim mark = illustrative net asset value (As-Is value less debt drawn).

• General-contractor baseline and updated construction schedule, monthly field / progress reports, and percent-complete certifications furnished by the sponsor and GC.
• Lender draw log and interest-reserve schedule, and the sponsor's pre-leasing / reservation pipeline, used to date the monthly equity contributions and assess lease-up versus plan.
• Construction-stage / phase definitions and the development-premium framing per The Appraisal of Real Estate (cost and income approaches) and the original Wert-Berater feasibility study for the subject.