Marina City Council
August 3, 2022

EXHIBIT D
98 Table 3
Project Demographics
Marina Station
Marina, Ca
Demographic Measure
2024-
2026
2027-
2029
2030-
2032
2033-
2036 Total
Residents
Villas (3,100 SF) 2.7 59 76 0 0 135
Large SF (2,700 SF) 2.7 200 203 38 0 441
Small SF (2,300 SF) 2.7 259 292 89 0 640
Cottages (1,800 SF) 2.7 259 292 143 0 694
Townhomes (1,450 2.6 192 195 81 0 468
Condominiums, Market (1,075 SF) 2.5 75 263 0 0 338
Condominiums, Mod. 2.6 78 169 0 0 247
Apartments, Market Rate 5% Vac. 2.375 71 71 14 0 156
Apartments, Low and VL 2.5 150 150 143 0 443
Total Residents 2.62 1343 1711 508 0 3562
Employees
Office 5% Vac. 2.375 0 103 103 137 342
Retail 10% Vac. 2.25 0 34 51 51 135
Industrial 5% Vac. 1.9 0 0 530 707 1237
Total Employees 0 137 684 895 1,714
Resident Equivalents 0.25 0 34 171 224 429
Total Day + Night Population 1,343 1,848 1,192 895 5,276 Total Resident Equivalents 1,343 1,745 679 224 3,991
Marina Station
Household size
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
\\SF-FS2\wp\15\15927\048\Marina Station Fiscal 06 21 22.xlsx; 3 proj demog; 6/21/2022

EXHIBIT D
99 Table 4
Estimated Assessed Value
Marina Station
Marina, Ca 6/15/22
Taxable Assessed Value ($1,000s)
2024-
2026
2027-
2029
2030-
2032
2033-
2036 Total
Price Per
SF
Value Per
DU/SF
Villas (3,100 SF) $387.00 $1,200,000 $26,400,000 $33,600,000 $0 $0 $60,000,000 Large SF (2,700 SF) $390.00 $1,053,000 $77,922,000 $78,975,000 $14,742,000 $0 $171,639,000 Small SF (2,300 SF) $406.00 $934,000 $89,664,000 $100,872,000 $30,822,000 $0 $221,358,000 Cottages (1,800 SF) $451.00 $812,000 $77,952,000 $87,696,000 $43,036,000 $0 $208,684,000 Townhomes (1,450 $465.00 $674,000 $49,876,000 $50,550,000 $20,894,000 $0 $121,320,000 Condominiums, Market (1,075 SF) $483.00 $519,000 $15,570,000 $54,495,000 $0 $0 $70,065,000 Condominiums, Mod. $297.67 $320,000 $9,600,000 $20,800,000 $0 $0 $30,400,000 Apartments, Market Rate $310,000 $9,300,000 $9,300,000 $1,860,000 $0 $20,460,000 Apartments, Low and VL 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Total Residential $356,284,000 $436,288,000 $111,354,000 $0 $903,926,000 Cumulative, Residential $356,284,000 $792,572,000 $903,926,000 $903,926,000 Office $355 $0 $15,336,000 $15,336,000 $20,448,000 $51,120,000 Retail $360 $0 $5,400,000 $8,100,000 $8,100,000 $21,600,000 Industrial $150 $0 $0 $41,850,000 $55,800,000 $97,650,000 Total Office, Retail and Industrial $0 $20,736,000 $65,286,000 $84,348,000 $170,370,000 Cumulative, non-residential $0 $20,736,000 $86,022,000 $170,370,000 Total Project AV $356,284,000 $457,024,000 $176,640,000 $84,348,000 $1,074,296,000 Cumulative Project AV $356,284,000 $813,308,000 $989,948,000 $1,074,296,000 Estimated Additional Project AV $356,284,000 $457,024,000 $176,640,000 $84,348,000 $1,074,296,000 Cumulative Additional Project AV $356,284,000 $813,308,000 $989,948,000 $1,074,296,000 $0 Existing AV $0 0 $0 $0 $0
Incremental AV $356,284,000 $457,024,000 $176,640,000 $84,348,000 $1,074,296,000 Cumulative $356,284,000 $813,308,000 $989,948,000 $1,074,296,000 Marina Station
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
\\SF-FS2\wp\15\15927\048\Marina Station Fiscal 06 21 22.xlsx; 4 AV; 6/21/2022

EXHIBIT D
100
Table 5
Existing City Demographic Data
Marina Station
Marina, Ca 6/15/22
Demographic Measure
City of
Marina Source
Population, 2019/20 22,406 City Adopted Budget FY 2019/20 Employment, 2019/20 5,768 ESRI
Resident Equivalents 0.25 per employee 23,848
Day + night 28,174
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
\\SF-FS2\wp\15\15927\048\Marina Station Fiscal 06 21 22.xlsx; 5 extg demog; 6/21/2022

EXHIBIT D
101
Table 6
Revenue Source Assumptions
Marina Station
Marina, Ca 6/15/22
Property Tax 1% property tax assessment

16.53% City share of property tax allocation post-ERAF
Property Tax In-Lieu of MVLF
$1.62 per $1,000 in AV growth
Property Transfer Tax $0.55/$1,000 AV City transfer tax rate

10.00% estimated market rate turnover
Sales Tax 2.50% of taxable sales
2024-26 $8,754
2027-29 $8,277
2030-32 $7,799
2033-36 $0
General Retail $338 total sales PSF
100% taxable sales
0% vacancy rate
$338 total taxable general retail sales PSF
Business License Tax 0.20% $1,440,000 citywide
Retail 338 gross receipts per sf
Other 82 gross receipts per sf
Franchise Fees $1,060,000 citywide revenues in FY 2019/20 23,848 resident equivalents
$44.45 per resident equivalent
Licenses, Permits, and Fees $273,500 citywide revenues in FY 2019/20 23,848 resident equivalents
$11.47 per resident equivalent
Fines / Forfeitures / Penalties $126,100 citywide revenues in FY 2019/20 23,848 resident equivalents 10
$5.29 per resident equivalent
Gas Tax + Meas. X $1,118,000 Annual Revenue
23,848 Resident equivalents
$46.88 per RE
Per hhld. Spending at off-site Marina stores
Per hhld. Spending at off-site Marina stores
Per hhld. Spending at off-site Marina stores
Per hhld. Spending at off-site Marina stores
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
\\SF-FS2\wp\15\15927\048\Marina Station Fiscal 06 21 22.xlsx; 6 rev assumptns; 6/21/2022

EXHIBIT D
102
Table 7
Estimated Annual Recurring General Fund Revenue, By Absoprtion Period Marina Station
Marina, Ca 6/15/22
Revenue Source
2024-
2026
2027-
2029
2030-
2032
2033-
2036 Total Project
Measure
Total Taxable Incremental Assessed Value $356,284,000 $457,024,000 $176,640,000 $84,348,000 $1,074,296,000 For-sale Residential Incremental Assessed Value $346,984,000 $426,988,000 $109,494,000 $0 $883,466,000 Off-site Residential Spending, per du $8,754 $8,277 $7,799 $0 $24,830 Residential Units 512 654 194 0 1,360
Employees 0 137 684 895 1,716
Residents 1,343 1,711 508 0 3,562
Office SF 0 43,200 43,200 57,600 144,000
Retail SF 0 15,000 22,500 22,500 60,000
Industrial SF 0 0 279,000 372,000 651,000
Resident Equivalents 1,343 1,745 679 224 3,991
Property Taxes 16.53% share of 1% tax $589,000 $756,000 $292,000 $139,000 $1,776,000 Property Tax In-Lieu of MVLF $1.62 /$1,000 AV $577,000 $740,000 $286,000 $137,000 $1,740,000 Recurring Transfer Tax
Resale of Homes $0.55 /$1,000 AV 10% per year $19,000 $23,000 $6,000 $0 $49,000 Sales Tax
Off-site Retail Sales 2.50% tax $112,000 $135,000 $38,000 $0 $285,000 Project Retail Sales $338 psf 2.50% tax $0 $127,000 $190,000 $190,000 $507,000 Subtotal Retail Sales $112,000 $262,000 $228,000 $190,000 $792,000 Business License Tax, Excluding from Sale of Homes
Gross Receipts Tax
Office $82 per sf 0.20% $0 $7,000 $7,000 $9,000 $24,000 Retail $338 per sf 0.20% $0 $10,000 $15,000 $15,000 $41,000 Industrial $82 per sf 0.20% $0 $0 $46,000 $61,000 $107,000 Subtotal Business License Tax $0 $17,000 $68,000 $85,000 $172,000 Franchise Fees $44.45 per res eq $60,000 $78,000 $30,000 $10,000 $178,000 Licenses, Permits, and Fees $11.47 per res eq $15,000 $20,000 $8,000 $3,000 $46,000 Fines / Forfeitures / Penalties $5.29 per res eq $7,000 $9,000 $4,000 $1,000 $21,000 Total General Fund Revenue $1,379,000 $1,905,000 $922,000 $565,000 $4,771,000 Gas Tax Fund and Meas. X $46.88 per res eq. $63,000 $82,000 $32,000 $10,000 $187,000 GF + Gas Tax and Meas. X $1,442,000 $1,987,000 $954,000 $575,000 $4,958,000 Cumulative $1,442,000 $3,429,000 $4,383,000 $4,958,000
Estimating Factor
Absorption Period
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
\\SF-FS2\wp\15\15927\048\Marina Station Fiscal 06 21 22.xlsx; 7 rev; 6/21/2022

EXHIBIT D
103
Table 8
General Fund Operating Expense Assumptions
Marina Station
Marina, Ca 6/15/22
General Government $3,407,470 net expenses in FY 2019/20 50% percent variable costs
23,848 resident equivalents
$71.44 average cost per resident equivalent
Non-Dept. +vehicles $2,872,900 net expenses in FY 2019/20 50% percent variable costs
23,848 resident equivalents
$60.23 average cost per resident equivalent
Economic Development $267,507 net expenses in FY 2019/20 50% percent variable costs
23,848 resident equivalents
$5.61 average cost per resident equivalent
Net Planning, Eng., Bldg. $1,102,530 net expenses in FY 2019/20 50% percent variable costs
23,848 resident equivalents
$23.12 average cost per resident equivalent
Fire Services $3,627,760 net expenses in FY 2019/20

75.00% % Variable
23,848 resident equivalents
$114.09
2008 study
Cost of new Fire Station $1,796,250
Marina Station's share $898,000
Resident Equivalent Trigger
for full share 2,800
Full share cost esclated by
CPI since 2008 $1,212,000
Police Services $7,342,180 net expenses in FY 2019/20

75.00% % Variable
23,848 resident equivalents
$230.91 average cost per resident equivalent
Recreation and Culture $909,543 net expenses in FY 2019/20 75% percent variable costs
22,406 residents
$30.45 avg. cost per resident
average cost per resident equivalent until Fire station triggered
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
\\SF-FS2\wp\15\15927\048\Marina Station Fiscal 06 21 22.xlsx; 8 exp assumptns; 6/21/2022

EXHIBIT D
104
Table 8
General Fund Operating Expense Assumptions
Marina Station
Marina, Ca 6/15/22
Public Works Additional Wear on Existing Infrastructure:
$2,090,250 net expenses in FY 2019/20
50% percent variable costs
23,848 resident equivalents
$43.82 average cost per resident equivalent
Gas Tax + Meas. X $996,550.00 Expenditures in FY2019/20 23,848 Resident Equivalents
$41.79 Per RE
Cost to Maintain New Infrastructure:
$0 All new infrastructure to be maintained through a CFD $0
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
\\SF-FS2\wp\15\15927\048\Marina Station Fiscal 06 21 22.xlsx; 8 exp assumptns; 6/21/2022

EXHIBIT D
105
Table 9
Estimated Annual General Fund Expenditures
Marina Station
Marina, Ca
Expenditure
2024-
2026
2027-
2029
2030-
2032
2033-
2036 Total
resident equivalents 1,343 1,745 679 224 3,991
1,343 1,711 508 0 3,562
% total project resident equivalents 33.7% 43.7% 17.0% 5.6% 100.0% General Government $71.44 per res eq $96,000 $125,000 $49,000 $16,000 $286,000 Non-Departmental $60.23 per res eq $81,000 $105,000 $41,000 $13,000 $240,000 Economic Development $5.61 per res eq $8,000 $10,000 $4,000 $1,000 $23,000 Planning, Engineering, Bldg. $23.12 per res eq $31,000 $40,000 $16,000 $5,000 $92,000 Fire - Until Trigger of 2800 Res Equiv. $114.09 per res eq $153,000 $153,000 Cost of New Fire Station $1,212,000 for project $1,059,000 $0 $0 $1,059,000 Police $230.91 per res eq $310,000 $403,000 $157,000 $52,000 $922,000 Recreation and Culture $30.45 per res. $41,000 $52,000 $15,000 $0 $108,000 Public Works - Add'l Wear and Tear $43.82 per res eq $59,000 $76,000 $30,000 $10,000 $175,000 Total General Fund Expenditures $779,000 $1,870,000 $312,000 $97,000 $3,058,000 Gas Tax + Meas. X $41.79 per res eq $56,000 $73,000 $28,000 $9,000 $167,000 Total GF + Gas + Meas. X $835,000 $1,943,000 $340,000 $106,000 $3,225,000 Cumulative $835,000 $2,778,000 $3,118,000 $3,224,000
estimating factor 2
Absorption Period
residents
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
\\SF-FS2\wp\15\15927\048\Marina Station Fiscal 06 21 22.xlsx; 9 exp; 6/21/2022

EXHIBIT D
106
Table 10
One-Time Public Facilities Impact Fees
Marina Station
Marina, Ca
2024-
2026
2027-
2029
2030-
2032
2033-
2036 Total
Fee per Unit,
per SF
Villas (3,100 SF) $24,223 $532,906 $678,244 $0 $0 $1,211,150 Large SF (2,700 SF) $24,223 $1,792,502 $1,816,725 $339,122 $0 $3,948,349 Small SF (2,300 SF) $24,223 $2,325,408 $2,616,084 $799,359 $0 $5,740,851 Cottages (1,800 SF) $24,223 $2,325,408 $2,616,084 $1,283,819 $0 $6,225,311 Townhomes (1,450 $24,223 $1,792,502 $1,816,725 $750,913 $0 $4,360,140 Condominiums, Market (1,075 SF) $20,174 $605,220 $2,118,270 $0 $0 $2,723,490 Condominiums, Mod. $20,174 $605,220 $1,311,310 $0 $0 $1,916,530 Apartments, Market Rate $20,174 $605,220 $605,220 $121,044 $0 $1,331,484 Apartments, Low and VL $20,174 $1,210,440 $1,210,440 $1,149,918 $0 $3,570,798 Total Residential $11,794,826 $14,789,102 $4,444,175 $0 $31,028,103 Cumulative, Residential $11,794,826 $26,583,928 $31,028,103 $31,028,103 Office $12.35 $0 $533,520 $533,520 $711,360 $1,778,400
Retail $19.82 $0 $297,360 $446,040 $446,040 $1,189,440
Industrial $7.43 $0 $0 $2,073,249 $2,764,332 $4,837,581 Total Office, Retail and Industrial $0 $830,880 $3,052,809 $3,921,732 $7,805,421 Cumulative, Non-Residential $0 $830,880 $3,883,689 $7,805,421 Total, Residential + Non Residential $11,794,826 $15,619,982 $7,496,984 $3,921,732 $38,833,524 Cumulative, Total $11,795,000 $27,415,000 $34,912,000 $38,834,000 Absorption Period
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
\\SF-FS2\wp\15\15927\048\Marina Station Fiscal 06 21 22.xlsx; 2 program; 6/21/2022

EXHIBIT D
107
Table 11
One-Time Transfer Tax Revenues on New Home Sales
Marina Station
Marina, Ca
2024-
2026
2027-
2029
2030-
2032
2033-
2036 Total
Transfer Tax, per $1,000 $0.55
Price
Villas (3,100 SF) $1,200,000 $14,520 $18,480 $0 $0 $33,000 Large SF (2,700 SF) $1,053,000 $42,857 $43,436 $8,108 $0 $94,401 Small SF (2,300 SF) $934,000 $49,315 $55,480 $16,952 $0 $121,747 Cottages (1,800 SF) $812,000 $42,874 $48,233 $23,670 $0 $114,776 Townhomes (1,450 $674,000 $27,432 $27,803 $11,492 $0 $66,726 Condominiums, Market (1,075 SF) $519,000 $8,564 $29,972 $0 $0 $38,536 Condominiums, Mod. $320,000 $5,280 $11,440 $0 $0 $16,720 Total $190,841 $234,843 $60,222 $0 $485,906
Cumulative $191,000 $426,000 $486,000 $486,000
Absorption Period
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
\\SF-FS2\wp\15\15927\048\Marina Station Fiscal 06 21 22.xlsx; 2 program; 6/21/2022

EXHIBIT D
108
Table 12
Average SFH and Condo Sale Prices, Marina and Seaside
Marina Station
Marina, Ca
Average Sale Price Avg. SF Avg. Price per SF
Marina
2 BD Condominium $513,412 1,063 $483 1075 condo $483
3 BD Condominium $614,800 1,416 $434 1450 TH $465
2 BD SFR $692,200 1,261 $549 1800 cottage $451
3 BD SFR $775,701 1,565 $496 2300 small $406
4 BD SFR $916,627 2,258 $406 2700 large $390
5+ BD SFR $1,087,500 2,911 $374 3100 villas $387
Above 3000 sf
2500 to 3000
2200 to 2500
1600 to 2200
1300 to 1600
1000 to 1300
Seaside
2 BD Condominium $552,400
3 BD Condominium $615,250
1 BD SFR $546,286
2 BD SFR $589,845
3 BD SFR $753,160
4 BD SFR $882,670
5+ BD SFR $1,049,556
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
\\SF-FS2\wp\15\15927\048\home sales 06 22.xls; 6/21/2022

EXHIBIT D
109

PROPERTY ADDRESS

PROPERTY UNIT
NUMBER

PROPERTY

CITY PROPERTY TYPE BEDROOMS BLDG/LIVING AREA

LAST MARKET

RECORDING DATE

LAST MARKET SALE

PRICE LOT AREA YEAR BUILT P/SF
3095 Marina Dr 35 35 Marina Condominium 2 971 04/06/2022 $500,000 1002 1981 $515 3162 Eucalyptus St 34 34 Marina Condominium 2 867 03/21/2022 $445,000 891 1981 $513 3137 Seacrest Ave 31 31 Marina Condominium 2 1004 05/25/2022 $580,000 942 1974 $578 124 Cypress Grove Ct Marina Condominium 2 1096 04/13/2021 $535,000 519 1981 $488 146 Cypress Grove Ct Marina Condominium 2 1199 02/11/2022 $640,000 437 1981 $534 3157 Lynscott Dr 10 10 Marina Condominium 2 948 08/03/2021 $450,000 619 1978 $475 3095 Marina Dr 39 39 Marina Condominium 2 963 04/22/2022 $499,000 1026 1981 $518 3095 Marina Dr 49 49 Marina Condominium 2 1120 08/10/2021 $470,000 1051 1981 $420 3160 Eucalyptus St 24 24 Marina Condominium 2 867 11/12/2021 $465,000 889 1981 $536 143 Cypress Grove Ct Marina Condominium 2 1248 05/07/2021 $575,000 1463 1981 $461 3160 Eucalyptus St 26 26 Marina Condominium 2 867 07/09/2021 $455,000 887 1981 $525 3095 Marina Dr 43 43 Marina Condominium 2 1020 10/07/2021 $545,000 1098 1981 $534 134 Cypress Grove Ct Marina Condominium 2 1199 09/29/2021 $570,000 855 1981 $475 189 San Pablo Ct 13 13 Marina Condominium 2 1498 11/12/2021 $474,000 1498 1982 $316 3095 Marina Dr 4 4 Marina Condominium 2 1120 06/02/2021 $450,000 1049 1982 $402 3095 Marina Dr 17 17 Marina Condominium 2 1120 04/19/2022 $560,000 998 1982 $500 3095 Marina Dr 30 30 Marina Condominium 2 971 04/21/2022 $515,000 1012 1981 $530 Average Marina 2 BD Condominium 1,063 $513,412 $483
17818 Banks St Marina Condominium 3 1847 06/18/2021 $680,000 1137 2018 $368 3137 Seacrest Ave 8 8 Marina Condominium 3 1264 06/02/2021 $549,000 1149 1974 $434 3080 Crumpton Ln 11 11 Marina Condominium 3 1302 04/30/2021 $580,000 2203 1980 $445 172 Linde Cir Marina Condominium 3 1404 06/03/2021 $740,000 4129 1983 $527 3137 Seacrest Ave 1 1 Marina Condominium 3 1264 11/08/2021 $525,000 1184 1974 $415 Average Marina 3 BD Condominium 1,416 $614,800 $434
13317 Warren Ave Marina Sfr 2 1575 09/23/2021 $725,000 3049 2015 $460 5005 Telegraph Blvd Marina Sfr 2 1532 07/08/2021 $740,000 2645 2015 $483 5005 3rd Ave Marina Sfr 2 1532 03/18/2021 $735,000 2629 2015 $480 217 Mortimer Ln S S Marina Sfr 2 846 12/23/2021 $541,000 6414 1947 $639 225 Mortimer Ln S S Marina Sfr 2 822 01/10/2022 $720,000 19981 1950 $876 Average Marina 2 BD SFR 1,261 $692,200 $549
3204 Vista Del Camino Marina Sfr 3 1689 11/19/2021 $700,000 8033 1959 $414 506 Telegraph Blvd Marina Sfr 3 2054 02/07/2022 $918,000 3375 2015 $447 3130 Lake Dr Marina Sfr 3 1800 07/29/2021 $790,000 4736 2005 $439 236 Mcculloch Cir Marina Sfr 3 1464 10/07/2021 $840,000 7246 1964 $574 2713 Bungalow Dr Marina Sfr 3 2075 07/30/2021 $920,000 3375 2016 $443 238 Michelle Ct Marina Sfr 3 1585 02/02/2021 $710,000 6061 1989 $448 2962 Garnet Way Marina Sfr 3 2067 06/30/2021 $1,050,000 6835 2018 $508 349 Everett Dr Marina Sfr 3 1306 08/05/2021 $780,000 7650 1964 $597 427 Diana Pl Marina Sfr 3 1032 04/15/2022 $630,000 7772 1962 $610 3077 Zanetta Dr Marina Sfr 3 1103 09/01/2021 $735,000 7404 1962 $666 3006 Bayer Dr Marina Sfr 3 1039 09/21/2021 $685,000 7390 1964 $659 353 Carmel Ave Marina Sfr 3 1082 01/11/2021 $470,000 8800 1952 $434 3178 Crescent Ave Marina Sfr 3 1710 01/20/2022 $831,000 8990 1964 $486 3247 De Forest Rd Marina Sfr 3 1403 04/18/2022 $750,000 7147 1966 $535 Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
\\SF-FS2\wp\15\15927\048\home sales 06 22.xls; 6/21/2022

EXHIBIT D
110

PROPERTY ADDRESS

PROPERTY UNIT
NUMBER

PROPERTY

CITY PROPERTY TYPE BEDROOMS BLDG/LIVING AREA

LAST MARKET

RECORDING DATE

LAST MARKET SALE

PRICE LOT AREA YEAR BUILT P/SF
3082 Zanetta Dr Marina Sfr 3 1542 01/22/2021 $705,000 8748 1962 $457 3208 Melanie Rd Marina Sfr 3 1260 05/05/2021 $750,000 7464 1959 $595 488 Alexis Ct Marina Sfr 3 1700 05/05/2022 $870,000 6431 1973 $512 479 Lewis Pl Marina Sfr 3 1722 03/25/2022 $853,500 6406 1971 $496 3092 Snell Pl Marina Sfr 3 1713 12/21/2021 $776,000 7585 1975 $453 3364 Greenbrook Pl Marina Sfr 3 1360 03/05/2021 $604,000 7300 1974 $444 3143 Rose Ln Marina Sfr 3 1356 02/17/2021 $589,000 8157 1952 $434 279 Hillcrest Ave Marina Sfr 3 1306 03/30/2022 $689,000 7183 1963 $528 472 Sunrise Pl Marina Sfr 3 1422 10/13/2021 $830,000 9714 1975 $584 3292 Steven Ct Marina Sfr 3 1627 02/03/2021 $685,000 6310 1971 $421 3194 White Cir Marina Sfr 3 1500 06/02/2021 $792,000 7244 1964 $528 3186 Tallmon St Marina Sfr 3 1530 11/29/2021 $764,000 8330 1966 $499 206 9th St Marina Sfr 3 1802 04/07/2021 $800,000 2369 2017 $444 294 Park Cir Marina Sfr 3 1294 06/11/2021 $650,000 7246 1963 $502 3123 Lynscott Dr Marina Sfr 3 1039 11/02/2021 $650,000 7676 1962 $626 502 Ridgeview Ave Marina Sfr 3 1292 10/25/2021 $775,000 8183 1964 $600 5019 Telegraph Blvd Marina Sfr 3 2280 04/25/2022 $1,130,000 4326 2018 $496 312 Carmel Ave Marina Sfr 3 1646 02/19/2021 $649,000 2601 2005 $394 3317 Abdy Way Marina Sfr 3 2375 12/13/2021 $820,000 8800 1989 $345 362 Everett Dr Marina Sfr 3 1711 08/12/2021 $745,000 7624 1961 $435 3215 Susan Ave Marina Sfr 3 1147 02/09/2021 $700,000 9173 1959 $610 296 Costa Del Mar Rd Marina Sfr 3 1647 02/12/2021 $776,000 6126 1990 $471 483 Larson Ct Marina Sfr 3 1574 06/08/2021 $815,000 7752 1967 $518 3067 Bayer Dr Marina Sfr 3 1699 10/22/2021 $796,000 6262 1993 $469 3151 Crescent Ave Marina Sfr 3 1556 05/11/2021 $615,000 7361 1963 $395 234 Mcculloch Cir Marina Sfr 3 1440 02/26/2021 $660,000 7200 1964 $458 3070 Vaughn Ave Marina Sfr 3 1103 01/11/2022 $765,000 7501 1961 $694 456 Reindollar Ave Marina Sfr 3 1120 08/16/2021 $755,000 7268 1963 $674 3008 Eddy St Marina Sfr 3 1073 09/22/2021 $240,000 7200 1965 $224 161 Dolphin Cir Marina Sfr 3 1174 01/14/2022 $720,000 5401 1987 $613 3 Carmel Cir Marina Sfr 3 1715 03/11/2022 $795,000 3346 2006 $464 3104 Bayer St Marina Sfr 3 1500 12/17/2021 $820,000 7321 1965 $547 364 Everett Dr Marina Sfr 3 1103 12/22/2021 $640,000 7700 1962 $580 496 Jean Cir Marina Sfr 3 1039 07/20/2021 $715,000 6460 1964 $688 470 Logan Way Marina Sfr 3 2757 05/19/2021 $1,265,000 6350 2018 $459 471 Albert Way Marina Sfr 3 1039 04/04/2022 $725,000 7507 1962 $698 3200 Vista Del Camino Marina Sfr 3 1265 04/21/2021 $615,000 7713 1957 $486 274 Hibbing Cir Marina Sfr 3 1306 01/19/2021 $607,000 7142 1963 $465 3020 Talcott Ave Marina Sfr 3 1039 03/16/2021 $320,000 7092 1962 $308 2607 Bluewater Ct Marina Sfr 3 2054 07/07/2021 $952,000 4107 2017 $463 3124 Lynscott Dr Marina Sfr 3 1032 08/26/2021 $680,000 7785 1962 $659 3102 Bayer St Marina Sfr 3 1580 09/23/2021 $742,500 7272 1965 $470 3060 Bostick Ave Marina Sfr 3 2204 02/11/2022 $930,000 8810 1994 $422 3187 Vista Del Camino Marina Sfr 3 1168 08/18/2021 $810,000 8321 1958 $693 3360 Drew St Marina Sfr 3 1275 04/23/2021 $985,000 43560 1925 $773 322 Hillcrest Ave Marina Sfr 3 1470 04/20/2021 $625,000 5853 1987 $425 142 Seal Ct Marina Sfr 3 1627 07/23/2021 $830,000 3710 1987 $510 Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
\\SF-FS2\wp\15\15927\048\home sales 06 22.xls; 6/21/2022

EXHIBIT D
111

PROPERTY ADDRESS

PROPERTY UNIT
NUMBER

PROPERTY

CITY PROPERTY TYPE BEDROOMS BLDG/LIVING AREA

LAST MARKET

RECORDING DATE

LAST MARKET SALE

PRICE LOT AREA YEAR BUILT P/SF
146 Dolphin Cir Marina Sfr 3 1627 02/16/2021 $757,000 3694 1987 $465 142 Peppertree Pl Marina Sfr 3 1253 03/02/2021 $691,500 8071 1972 $552 218 Cosky Dr Marina Sfr 3 1648 06/08/2021 $860,000 8975 1967 $522 3171 De Forest Rd Marina Sfr 3 1849 03/08/2022 $979,000 7169 1978 $529 3052 Fredrick Cir Marina Sfr 3 2042 04/09/2021 $615,000 13200 1967 $301 3224 Susan Ave Marina Sfr 3 1265 12/03/2021 $775,000 7745 1959 $613 3197 Tallmon St Marina Sfr 3 1900 07/09/2021 $769,000 7514 1964 $405 257 Cosky Dr Marina Sfr 3 1592 02/22/2021 $668,000 7827 1967 $420 3238 Vista Del Camino Cir Marina Sfr 3 1176 03/07/2022 $725,000 6359 1981 $616 3050 Eddy Cir Marina Sfr 3 1485 11/30/2021 $770,000 7477 1964 $519 489 Forest Cir Marina Sfr 3 1640 04/28/2021 $660,000 7971 1966 $402 2712 Sea Glass Ave Marina Sfr 3 2126 06/14/2021 $1,025,000 4653 2017 $482 2966 Bluffs Dr Marina Sfr 3 1857 10/08/2021 $999,000 5379 2018 $538 2725 Sea Glass Ave Marina Sfr 3 2280 01/14/2022 $1,005,000 3600 2017 $441 231 Cosky Dr Marina Sfr 3 1712 09/24/2021 $729,000 7896 1967 $426 3024 Bayer Dr Marina Sfr 3 1304 02/16/2021 $685,000 7200 1964 $525 3194 Crescent Ave Marina Sfr 3 1500 04/28/2021 $720,000 7832 1964 $480 3198 Vista Del Camino Marina Sfr 3 1106 07/28/2021 $800,000 8000 1959 $723 335 Quebrada Del Mar Rd Marina Sfr 3 1799 04/29/2021 $828,000 7384 1989 $460 271 Hillcrest Ave Marina Sfr 3 1306 04/04/2022 $820,000 7124 1963 $628 2721 Sea Glass Ave Marina Sfr 3 2118 01/14/2022 $1,075,000 3600 2017 $508 249 Hillcrest Ave Marina Sfr 3 1306 04/22/2022 $750,000 7260 1963 $574 2992 Abrams Dr Marina Sfr 3 2356 10/05/2021 $1,310,000 5963 2018 $556 236 Michelle Ct Marina Sfr 3 1369 08/26/2021 $805,000 6094 1989 $588 3005 Canvas Way Marina Sfr 3 1988 01/07/2022 $990,000 3719 2015 $498 324 Quebrada Del Mar Rd Marina Sfr 3 1668 06/16/2021 $740,000 7554 1990 $444 610 Bluffs Dr Marina Sfr 3 2757 03/10/2021 $1,041,500 6175 0 $378 259 9th St Marina Sfr 3 1802 10/06/2021 $828,000 2442 2016 $459 143 Silverwood Pl Marina Sfr 3 1448 03/22/2021 $760,000 7747 1973 $525 2715 Bungalow Dr Marina Sfr 3 2003 02/26/2021 $875,000 3375 2016 $437 3000 Bayer Dr Marina Sfr 3 1445 04/28/2022 $927,000 6732 1988 $642 216 Cosky Dr Marina Sfr 3 1520 01/12/2022 $545,500 7764 1967 $359 2001 Boardwalk Ave Marina Sfr 3 1802 07/02/2021 $861,000 2431 2015 $478 3009 Vera Ln Marina Sfr 3 1658 04/02/2021 $599,000 7828 1978 $361 1 Elizabeth Ln Marina Sfr 3 1621 07/07/2021 $780,500 2643 2007 $481 3010 Bayer Dr Marina Sfr 3 1120 10/15/2021 $770,000 7200 1964 $688 248 Bennett Ct Marina Sfr 3 1306 02/25/2022 $481,500 7837 1963 $369 2968 Garnet Way Marina Sfr 3 2067 09/13/2021 $1,170,000 5467 2017 $566 3005 Bayer Dr Marina Sfr 3 1471 01/27/2021 $655,000 7305 1964 $445 3074 Vaughn Ave Marina Sfr 3 1103 08/05/2021 $580,000 7248 1962 $526 2751 Moonshell Ln Marina Sfr 3 2280 05/03/2021 $995,000 3996 2018 $436 490 Forest Cir Marina Sfr 3 1640 02/28/2022 $875,000 8202 1966 $534 3086 Redwood Dr Marina Sfr 3 1500 03/18/2021 $675,000 6142 1972 $450 3059 Mildred Ct Marina Sfr 3 1536 08/31/2021 $865,000 7704 1967 $563 3015 Liberty Ct Marina Sfr 3 1051 03/22/2021 $665,000 7489 1966 $633 324 Parson Cir Marina Sfr 3 1367 03/05/2021 $740,000 11832 1970 $541 3239 Crescent Ave Marina Sfr 3 2129 02/24/2022 $940,000 6855 1990 $442 Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
\\SF-FS2\wp\15\15927\048\home sales 06 22.xls; 6/21/2022

EXHIBIT D
112

PROPERTY ADDRESS

PROPERTY UNIT
NUMBER

PROPERTY

CITY PROPERTY TYPE BEDROOMS BLDG/LIVING AREA

LAST MARKET

RECORDING DATE

LAST MARKET SALE

PRICE LOT AREA YEAR BUILT P/SF
163 Ora Ct Marina Sfr 3 1552 01/22/2021 $650,000 6321 1972 $419 297 Whitney Pl Marina Sfr 3 1500 11/16/2021 $675,000 5000 1964 $450 3196 Martin Cir Marina Sfr 3 1175 02/16/2021 $690,000 8150 1962 $587 3192 Tallmon St Marina Sfr 3 1546 12/01/2021 $850,000 7099 1964 $550 Average Marina 3 BD SFR 1,565 $775,701 $496
2965 Garnet Way Marina Sfr 4 3374 06/24/2021 $2,272,000 12485 0 $673 481 Lewis Pl Marina Sfr 4 2061 08/27/2021 $845,000 6888 1971 $410 3003 Vera Ln Marina Sfr 4 1802 03/28/2022 $800,000 8138 1978 $444 3126 Ocean Ter Marina Sfr 4 2360 02/24/2021 $810,000 5812 2003 $343 412 Tamara Ct Marina Sfr 4 1887 03/30/2021 $695,000 5901 1973 $368 475 Carmel Ave Marina Sfr 4 1759 04/28/2022 $869,000 7657 1962 $494 478 Palisade Dr Marina Sfr 4 1948 06/01/2021 $935,000 3286 2017 $480 18106 Porter St Marina Sfr 4 3142 04/18/2022 $1,200,000 4792 2017 $382 3029 Max Cir Marina Sfr 4 1868 06/16/2021 $600,000 7510 1966 $321 3202 Crescent Ave Marina Sfr 4 1546 04/02/2021 $639,000 7291 1971 $413 160 Hilo Ave Marina Sfr 4 1966 05/06/2022 $870,000 8589 1972 $443 176 Paddon Pl Marina Sfr 4 2358 05/20/2021 $850,000 6070 2002 $360 479 Logan Way Marina Sfr 4 2726 09/15/2021 $1,200,000 6082 2017 $440 3049 Sunrise Cir Marina Sfr 4 1667 05/06/2022 $845,000 7813 1965 $507 3173 Shuler Cir Marina Sfr 4 1667 03/29/2022 $899,000 7475 1963 $539 610 Braden Way Marina Sfr 4 3074 05/25/2022 $1,595,000 6175 2019 $519 3350 Abdy Way Marina Sfr 4 1790 07/02/2021 $280,000 6332 1995 $156 3135 Messinger Dr Marina Sfr 4 1922 11/10/2021 $776,000 6400 1975 $404 3350 Cardoza Ave Marina Sfr 4 1974 12/17/2021 $950,000 7382 1994 $481 607 Bluffs Dr Marina Sfr 4 2973 03/17/2021 $1,043,000 6175 0 $351 3146 Lake Dr Marina Sfr 4 1911 03/12/2021 $799,000 7000 2001 $418 157 Aaron Way Marina Sfr 4 1974 06/08/2021 $902,000 6632 1995 $457 3028 Max Cir Marina Sfr 4 1620 07/13/2021 $685,000 7061 1966 $423 3025 Eddy St Marina Sfr 4 1429 01/31/2022 $799,000 7144 1965 $559 141 Peppertree Pl Marina Sfr 4 1487 03/25/2022 $860,000 8079 1972 $578 3106 Bradley Cir Marina Sfr 4 2006 09/01/2021 $845,000 7808 1969 $421 3114 Bradley Cir Marina Sfr 4 2653 06/02/2021 $449,500 7975 1969 $169 15169 Breckinridge Ave Marina Sfr 4 1866 03/04/2021 $736,000 2880 2016 $394 193 Paddon Pl Marina Sfr 4 1843 01/24/2022 $875,000 3516 2007 $475 425 Windsor Ct Marina Sfr 4 2016 07/13/2021 $826,000 5846 1973 $410 315 Quebrada Del Mar Rd Marina Sfr 4 2095 05/26/2021 $860,000 8296 1989 $411 491 Palisade Dr Marina Sfr 4 6148 06/10/2021 $1,325,000 7303 2017 $216 2969 Rainer Way Marina Sfr 4 3266 05/27/2021 $1,119,000 11301 0 $343 604 Bluffs Dr Marina Sfr 4 2973 03/03/2021 $1,036,500 6175 0 $349 330 Morse Ct Marina Sfr 4 1724 12/10/2021 $900,000 5672 1990 $522 2966 Hayden Way Marina Sfr 4 2973 05/28/2021 $1,053,500 6019 0 $354 2970 Hayden Way Marina Sfr 4 2973 05/28/2021 $1,065,500 6019 0 $358 3269 Marina Dr Marina Sfr 4 2915 05/28/2021 $945,000 6185 1997 $324 151 Lakewood Dr Marina Sfr 4 1699 03/18/2021 $755,000 10608 1976 $444 3204 De Forest Rd Marina Sfr 4 1666 12/03/2021 $845,000 4356 1967 $507 476 Hood Way Marina Sfr 4 2726 09/03/2021 $1,300,000 5016 0 $477 Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
\\SF-FS2\wp\15\15927\048\home sales 06 22.xls; 6/21/2022

EXHIBIT D
113

PROPERTY ADDRESS

PROPERTY UNIT
NUMBER

PROPERTY

CITY PROPERTY TYPE BEDROOMS BLDG/LIVING AREA

LAST MARKET

RECORDING DATE

LAST MARKET SALE

PRICE LOT AREA YEAR BUILT P/SF
2999 Abrams Dr Marina Sfr 4 1902 06/10/2021 $900,000 3145 2018 $473 488 Ferris Ave Marina Sfr 4 3055 12/10/2021 $988,000 7705 1964 $323 248 Boardwalk Ave Marina Sfr 4 1895 04/28/2021 $805,000 3726 2016 $425 2972 Garnet Way Marina Sfr 4 2726 06/25/2021 $1,240,000 5778 2017 $455 249 Bennett Ct Marina Sfr 4 1340 05/14/2021 $730,000 9915 1963 $545 328 Lievry Way Marina Sfr 4 1458 01/28/2022 $849,000 7886 1970 $582 3260 Marina Dr Marina Sfr 4 2915 01/12/2022 $950,000 7569 1997 $326 13434 Warren Ave Marina Sfr 4 2429 03/04/2021 $860,000 3920 2014 $354 3022 Independence Ave Marina Sfr 4 1976 07/09/2021 $712,000 7958 1966 $360 3197 White Cir Marina Sfr 4 1636 08/18/2021 $760,000 7209 1965 $465 Average Marina 4 BD SFR 2,258 $916,627 $406
2705 3rd Ave Marina Sfr 5 4442 03/16/2021 $1,250,000 5555 0 $281 589 Rosa Monte Way Marina Sfr 5 1902 08/20/2021 $935,000 2653 2018 $492 401 Reindollar Ave Marina Sfr 5 1696 02/28/2022 $865,000 7200 1967 $510 596 Braden Way Marina Sfr 7 3603 05/14/2021 $1,300,000 6370 2018 $361 Average Marina 5+ BD SFR 2,911 $1,087,500 $374
2975 Garnet Way Marina Sfr 05/21/2021 $1,807,500 15532
2999 Bluffs Dr Marina Sfr 10/07/2021 $1,784,000 14182
3009 Bluffs Dr Marina Sfr 11/22/2021 $1,566,500 12189
3003 Bluffs Dr Marina Sfr 03/23/2022 $1,522,500 11331
2981 Garnet Way Marina Sfr 07/30/2021 $1,902,000 15083
3007 Bluffs Dr Marina Sfr 11/23/2021 $1,814,500 11592
3005 Bluffs Dr Marina Sfr 12/17/2021 $1,545,000 11477
967 Hilby Ave D D Seaside Condominium 2 1035 02/17/2021 $475,000 6304 1975 $459 984 Sonoma Ave Seaside Condominium 2 1212 06/04/2021 $570,000 589 1981 $470 1023 Highlander Dr Seaside Condominium 2 980 07/08/2021 $605,000 2191 1988 $617 973 Hilby Ave B B Seaside Condominium 2 1035 07/16/2021 $502,000 1040 1975 $485 1087 Highlander Dr Seaside Condominium 2 980 10/15/2021 $610,000 2229 1987 $622 Average Seaside 2 BD Condominium 1,048 $552,400 $527
1020 Highlander Dr Seaside Condominium 3 1312 01/19/2022 $754,000 1696 1988 $575 1088 Highlander Dr Seaside Condominium 3 1382 05/26/2021 $605,000 1641 1987 $438 1081 Highlander Dr Seaside Condominium 3 1312 12/15/2021 $680,000 1646 1987 $518 1010 Olympic Ln Seaside Condominium 3 1462 03/15/2022 $750,000 2240 1987 $513 1217 Wanda Ave 20 20 Seaside Condominium 3 1300 07/09/2021 $575,000 968 1976 $442 1194 Trinity Ave Seaside Condominium 3 1200 10/27/2021 $499,500 874 1975 $416 1198 Trinity Ave Seaside Condominium 3 1200 04/16/2021 $535,000 644 1975 $446 1196 Trinity Ave 5 5 Seaside Condominium 3 1200 12/30/2021 $545,000 998 1975 $454 1222 Trinity Ave 13 13 Seaside Condominium 3 1200 03/04/2022 $560,000 1032 1976 $467 1091 Highlander Dr Seaside Condominium 3 1312 03/09/2021 $649,000 1772 1987 $495 Average Seaside 3 BD Condominium 1,288 $615,250 $478
1702 Goodwin St Seaside Sfr 1 705 01/08/2021 $485,000 1875 1979 $688 1275 Vallejo St Seaside Sfr 1 917 02/18/2022 $790,000 3650 1953 $862 Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
\\SF-FS2\wp\15\15927\048\home sales 06 22.xls; 6/21/2022

EXHIBIT D
114

PROPERTY ADDRESS

PROPERTY UNIT
NUMBER

PROPERTY

CITY PROPERTY TYPE BEDROOMS BLDG/LIVING AREA

LAST MARKET

RECORDING DATE

LAST MARKET SALE

PRICE LOT AREA YEAR BUILT P/SF
1727 Lowell St Seaside Sfr 1 440 05/14/2021 $465,000 3485 1950 $1,057 625 Harcourt Ave Seaside Sfr 1 760 04/06/2022 $760,000 2614 1949 $1,000 1436 Luxton St Seaside Sfr 1 403 01/10/2022 $489,000 1875 1943 $1,213 1268 Prospect St Seaside Sfr 1 1080 10/28/2021 $325,000 2325 1942 $301 1697 San Lucas St Seaside Sfr 1 432 04/15/2022 $510,000 1500 1940 $1,181 Average Seaside 1 BD SFR 677 $546,286 $807
610 Francis Ave Seaside Sfr 2 960 11/08/2021 $630,000 3920 1936 $656 649 Lopez Ave Seaside Sfr 2 780 02/26/2021 $603,000 4356 1950 $773 1564 Judson St Seaside Sfr 2 695 05/02/2022 $550,000 3485 1941 $791 1524 Soto St Seaside Sfr 2 768 05/11/2022 $665,000 3750 1956 $866 1257 Judson St Seaside Sfr 2 896 02/03/2022 $725,000 5227 1954 $809 1715 Flores St Seaside Sfr 2 840 12/29/2021 $655,000 3750 1956 $780 1817 Luzern St Seaside Sfr 2 897 05/20/2022 $642,000 3700 1971 $716 1741 Soto St Seaside Sfr 2 1001 12/14/2021 $718,000 3485 1972 $717 780 Sonoma Ave Seaside Sfr 2 660 09/10/2021 $575,500 3920 1935 $872 1265 Flores St Seaside Sfr 2 818 10/26/2021 $610,000 3000 1956 $746 1512 Wanda Ave Seaside Sfr 2 761 12/06/2021 $725,000 3485 1954 $953 1546 Military Ave Seaside Sfr 2 813 02/26/2021 $542,000 8712 1950 $667 1280 Canyon Del Rey Blvd Seaside Sfr 2 797 05/18/2022 $295,000 4792 1954 $370 616 Lopez Ave Seaside Sfr 2 793 01/21/2021 $350,000 4356 1951 $441 1889 Luzern St Seaside Sfr 2 872 10/26/2021 $580,000 3650 1952 $665 1832 Baker St Seaside Sfr 2 674 12/10/2021 $575,000 4792 1952 $853 1209 Darwin St Seaside Sfr 2 1098 11/18/2021 $699,000 3650 1958 $637 1028 Trinity Ave Seaside Sfr 2 780 03/11/2022 $649,000 6600 1943 $832 1269 Harding St Seaside Sfr 2 768 10/25/2021 $670,000 5227 1948 $872 1251 Olympia Ave Seaside Sfr 2 990 03/30/2022 $505,000 3800 1946 $510 1466 Darwin St Seaside Sfr 2 784 11/15/2021 $635,000 3485 1957 $810 1193 Phoenix Ave Seaside Sfr 2 672 01/15/2021 $535,000 6226 1948 $796 1730 Soto St Seaside Sfr 2 1099 04/11/2022 $760,000 3700 1957 $692 617 Lopez Ave Seaside Sfr 2 780 12/23/2021 $643,000 4356 1948 $824 1576 Kenneth St Seaside Sfr 2 605 12/15/2021 $365,000 3800 1941 $603 1500 San Pablo Ave Seaside Sfr 2 867 09/14/2021 $585,000 2737 1953 $675 1293 Olympia Ave Seaside Sfr 2 857 04/08/2022 $656,000 3750 1947 $765 1421 Hilby Ave Seaside Sfr 2 818 01/22/2021 $585,000 3920 1940 $715 1405 Military Ave Seaside Sfr 2 712 04/12/2021 $500,000 6970 1948 $702 1048 Elm Ave Seaside Sfr 2 915 06/22/2021 $525,000 5800 1949 $574 1604 Waring St Seaside Sfr 2 980 10/27/2021 $652,000 3485 1973 $665 395 Sonoma Ave Seaside Sfr 2 920 03/18/2022 $510,000 4800 1946 $554 1513 Luxton St Seaside Sfr 2 624 11/18/2021 $600,000 2800 1952 $962 355 Amador Ave Seaside Sfr 2 926 05/05/2021 $600,000 4000 1950 $648 1524 Kenneth St Seaside Sfr 2 1108 08/06/2021 $650,000 1875 1992 $587 1165 Elm Ave Seaside Sfr 2 761 12/30/2021 $670,000 6250 1963 $880 1236 Judson St Seaside Sfr 2 676 10/13/2021 $605,000 3750 1948 $895 1867 Highland St Seaside Sfr 2 884 10/26/2021 $595,000 3750 1972 $673 1373 Elm Ave Seaside Sfr 2 678 04/20/2021 $550,000 2343 1952 $811 610 Hilby Ave Seaside Sfr 2 1262 10/14/2021 $550,000 3920 1950 $436 Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
\\SF-FS2\wp\15\15927\048\home sales 06 22.xls; 6/21/2022

EXHIBIT D
115

PROPERTY ADDRESS

PROPERTY UNIT
NUMBER

PROPERTY

CITY PROPERTY TYPE BEDROOMS BLDG/LIVING AREA

LAST MARKET

RECORDING DATE

LAST MARKET SALE

PRICE LOT AREA YEAR BUILT P/SF
1272 Prospect St Seaside Sfr 2 948 07/12/2021 $700,000 4383 1952 $738 1485 Mira Monte Ave Seaside Sfr 2 858 12/29/2021 $450,000 9148 1949 $524 1713 Laguna St Seaside Sfr 2 1065 08/17/2021 $600,000 3485 1948 $563 1260 Canyon Del Rey Blvd Seaside Sfr 2 797 09/24/2021 $550,000 4792 1954 $690 1411 Kimball Ave Seaside Sfr 2 986 10/25/2021 $735,000 174240 1955 $745 1319 Judson St Seaside Sfr 2 864 05/12/2021 $635,000 3485 1945 $735 1738 Goodwin St Seaside Sfr 2 1113 07/23/2021 $700,000 3750 1952 $629 1200 San Pablo Ave Seaside Sfr 2 829 05/10/2021 $625,000 14500 1948 $754 1460 Luxton St Seaside Sfr 2 871 09/17/2021 $575,000 3750 1944 $660 1675 Kenneth St Seaside Sfr 2 836 02/02/2021 $590,000 3700 1952 $706 1249 Elm Ave Seaside Sfr 2 616 03/11/2022 $350,000 4953 1943 $568 1357 Military Ave Seaside Sfr 2 682 12/22/2021 $207,500 6970 1948 $304 1391 Alhambra St Seaside Sfr 2 616 05/04/2021 $542,000 4600 1946 $880 1364 Metz Ave Seaside Sfr 2 917 02/01/2022 $662,000 6534 1950 $722 1766 Judson St Seaside Sfr 2 1060 10/22/2021 $615,000 3650 1991 $580 1516 Military Ave Seaside Sfr 2 829 05/03/2022 $725,000 8712 1950 $875 510 Francis Ave Seaside Sfr 2 867 07/15/2021 $615,000 3920 1952 $709 1447 San Pablo Ave Seaside Sfr 2 884 05/20/2022 $600,000 3800 1971 $679 Average Seaside 2 BD SFR 849 $589,845 $695
2040 Lassen St Seaside Sfr 3 1128 04/15/2021 $685,000 7405 1956 $607 2060 Rainier Ct Seaside Sfr 3 1472 08/18/2021 $910,000 12197 1956 $618 5035 Beach Wood Dr Seaside Sfr 3 2115 07/30/2021 $930,000 6534 2004 $440 1232 Noche Buena St Seaside Sfr 3 1607 03/23/2022 $825,000 2813 2007 $513 1791 Saint Helena St Seaside Sfr 3 1512 03/17/2021 $790,000 5500 1975 $522 1773 Lowell St Seaside Sfr 3 1090 04/08/2021 $651,000 5500 1960 $597 5090 Peninsula Point Dr Seaside Sfr 3 3205 01/21/2021 $929,000 6534 2003 $290 4652 Sea Breeze Ct Seaside Sfr 3 1720 12/21/2021 $1,150,000 6650 2004 $669 597 Lopez Ave Seaside Sfr 3 1692 08/20/2021 $885,000 4005 2004 $523 2030 Lassen St Seaside Sfr 3 1316 01/19/2022 $815,000 6970 1956 $619 5025 Beach Wood Dr Seaside Sfr 3 3205 02/16/2021 $1,058,000 6534 2004 $330 1265 Vallejo St Seaside Sfr 3 2124 08/30/2021 $893,500 4500 1965 $421 1791 Juarez St Seaside Sfr 3 1533 04/05/2021 $731,500 6970 1961 $477 1776 Havana St Seaside Sfr 3 945 05/11/2021 $705,000 5227 1968 $746 2060 Buchanan St Seaside Sfr 3 1022 05/23/2022 $805,500 5663 1955 $788 1631 Soto St Seaside Sfr 3 964 11/08/2021 $669,000 3485 1959 $694 1663 Mescal St Seaside Sfr 3 1985 02/03/2021 $758,000 8500 1972 $382 1889 Highland St Seaside Sfr 3 982 09/02/2021 $710,000 3750 1956 $723 1637 Mendocino St Seaside Sfr 3 1483 07/30/2021 $600,000 5800 1973 $405 535 Francis Ave Seaside Sfr 3 1612 02/24/2021 $795,000 4400 0 $493 515 Francis Ave Seaside Sfr 3 1798 08/06/2021 $875,000 8800 1941 $487 1829 Mendocino St Seaside Sfr 3 972 04/25/2022 $787,500 3650 1958 $810 1950 Lincoln St Seaside Sfr 3 1104 01/05/2022 $768,000 6970 1956 $696 1524 Harding St Seaside Sfr 3 1027 03/23/2022 $605,000 3485 1956 $589 1945 Mariposa St Seaside Sfr 3 1445 05/25/2022 $840,000 6970 1954 $581 1241 Harding St Seaside Sfr 3 1030 12/10/2021 $610,000 3485 1958 $592 1655 Kimball Ave Seaside Sfr 3 1673 05/24/2021 $775,500 6600 1974 $464 Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
\\SF-FS2\wp\15\15927\048\home sales 06 22.xls; 6/21/2022

EXHIBIT D
116

PROPERTY ADDRESS

PROPERTY UNIT
NUMBER

PROPERTY

CITY PROPERTY TYPE BEDROOMS BLDG/LIVING AREA

LAST MARKET

RECORDING DATE

LAST MARKET SALE

PRICE LOT AREA YEAR BUILT P/SF
1613 Marietta St Seaside Sfr 3 1916 03/12/2021 $835,000 7600 1972 $436 1881 Noche Buena St Seaside Sfr 3 1064 09/03/2021 $670,000 3920 1950 $630 1513 Flores St Seaside Sfr 3 1201 10/06/2021 $845,000 3485 1956 $704 1777 Luzern St Seaside Sfr 3 1020 05/25/2021 $600,000 3650 1958 $588 1860 Laguna St Seaside Sfr 3 980 02/15/2022 $670,000 3756 1958 $684 1767 Hilton St Seaside Sfr 3 1141 03/05/2021 $460,000 3800 1959 $403 1659 Luzern St Seaside Sfr 3 1040 04/19/2022 $655,000 3700 1960 $630 1137 Suzanne Ct Seaside Sfr 3 1214 10/15/2021 $725,000 6059 1958 $597 1642 Goodwin St Seaside Sfr 3 1930 12/09/2021 $744,500 3750 1953 $386 1148 Shafer St Seaside Sfr 3 1254 04/26/2022 $847,000 6970 1956 $675 1608 Luzern St Seaside Sfr 3 1170 02/01/2022 $625,000 5500 1971 $534 4526 Seascape Ct Seaside Sfr 3 1720 06/04/2021 $890,000 6435 2005 $517 1590 Broadway Ave Seaside Sfr 3 1422 11/24/2021 $785,000 6500 1966 $552 1623 Mescal St Seaside Sfr 3 1904 03/10/2022 $855,000 8100 1974 $449 1515 Ancon St Seaside Sfr 3 1373 04/29/2022 $951,000 6000 1972 $693 1892 Lincoln St Seaside Sfr 3 1030 04/12/2022 $715,000 4626 1958 $694 700 Amador Ave Seaside Sfr 3 1064 03/30/2021 $539,000 3920 1946 $507 1166 Rousch Ave Seaside Sfr 3 1161 12/14/2021 $817,000 6516 1958 $704 1291 Kimball Ave Seaside Sfr 3 1765 05/26/2021 $774,000 11170 1929 $439 1800 Luzern St Seaside Sfr 3 1040 10/05/2021 $655,000 3650 1960 $630 1669 Soto St Seaside Sfr 3 1020 11/09/2021 $625,000 3650 1958 $613 1835 Ord Grove Ave Seaside Sfr 3 1124 02/11/2021 $715,000 7405 1956 $636 505 Elm Ave Seaside Sfr 3 1155 03/28/2022 $730,000 3920 2010 $632 1945 Lincoln St Seaside Sfr 3 1162 08/04/2021 $760,000 6534 1956 $654 1349 Luzern St Seaside Sfr 3 972 03/09/2022 $601,000 3650 1958 $618 4480 Peninsula Point Dr Seaside Sfr 3 2465 02/26/2021 $940,000 5585 2005 $381 1860 Lowell St Seaside Sfr 3 1040 06/25/2021 $685,000 3700 1956 $659 1694 Kenneth St Seaside Sfr 3 1056 07/15/2021 $600,000 3700 1960 $568 1426 Kenneth St Seaside Sfr 3 1019 09/02/2021 $645,000 4700 1948 $633 1337 Soto St Seaside Sfr 3 985 05/20/2021 $665,000 3650 1958 $675 1672 Laguna St Seaside Sfr 3 1344 05/20/2022 $750,000 5625 1948 $558 1260 Waring St Seaside Sfr 3 1198 02/17/2021 $675,000 3650 1954 $563 4705 Peninsula Point Dr Seaside Sfr 3 2337 05/03/2021 $920,000 6122 2004 $394 1372 Vallejo St Seaside Sfr 3 1602 06/18/2021 $621,000 5227 1945 $388 4657 Sea Breeze Ct Seaside Sfr 3 2337 04/26/2022 $1,242,500 5330 2004 $532 1325 Soto St Seaside Sfr 3 1562 01/26/2022 $650,000 5227 1960 $416 1721 Lowell St Seaside Sfr 3 1716 07/21/2021 $563,500 4100 1954 $328 1660 Sierra Ave Seaside Sfr 3 2476 07/16/2021 $1,032,000 6698 1974 $417 3 Velerton Ct Seaside Sfr 3 1418 01/13/2022 $800,000 7000 1972 $564 1849 Luzern St Seaside Sfr 3 1452 03/22/2022 $750,000 3650 1953 $517 620 Harcourt Ave Seaside Sfr 3 1140 12/03/2021 $850,000 3920 1959 $746 1175 Santa Ana St Seaside Sfr 3 1161 02/01/2021 $735,000 6700 1958 $633 1761 Noche Buena St Seaside Sfr 3 1099 04/13/2021 $615,000 3485 1930 $560 1965 Lincoln St Seaside Sfr 3 1077 04/15/2022 $958,000 6534 1956 $890 1349 Vallejo St Seaside Sfr 3 1120 04/05/2022 $825,000 3485 1963 $737 1931 Yosemite St Seaside Sfr 3 1620 04/02/2021 $1,088,000 6970 1954 $672 1443 Luzern St Seaside Sfr 3 1115 01/26/2021 $619,000 3485 1958 $555 Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
\\SF-FS2\wp\15\15927\048\home sales 06 22.xls; 6/21/2022

EXHIBIT D
117

PROPERTY ADDRESS

PROPERTY UNIT
NUMBER

PROPERTY

CITY PROPERTY TYPE BEDROOMS BLDG/LIVING AREA

LAST MARKET

RECORDING DATE

LAST MARKET SALE

PRICE LOT AREA YEAR BUILT P/SF
28 Yerba Buena Ct Seaside Sfr 3 1878 05/23/2022 $1,000,000 6600 1972 $532 1588 Luzern St Seaside Sfr 3 1080 04/01/2022 $525,000 5227 1959 $486 1148 Isabelle Ct Seaside Sfr 3 1604 12/21/2021 $812,500 5815 1960 $507 1448 La Salle Ave Seaside Sfr 3 1092 01/03/2022 $645,500 5600 1955 $591 1535 Mescal St Seaside Sfr 3 1571 12/28/2021 $875,000 7800 1971 $557 1577 Harding St Seaside Sfr 3 1033 07/06/2021 $685,000 3650 1962 $663 1024 Highland St Seaside Sfr 3 1616 02/14/2022 $900,000 11911 1958 $557 1832 Luxton St Seaside Sfr 3 936 04/02/2021 $615,000 3650 1954 $657 1300 Luxton St Seaside Sfr 3 1008 02/09/2021 $499,000 3485 1930 $495 1460 Noche Buena St Seaside Sfr 3 1058 05/11/2022 $715,000 3750 1952 $676 2015 Paralta Ave Seaside Sfr 3 1147 10/29/2021 $819,000 5663 1960 $714 1231 Rousch Ave Seaside Sfr 3 1168 03/14/2022 $725,000 7224 1959 $621 1643 Sierra Ave Seaside Sfr 3 1623 06/18/2021 $826,000 6327 1975 $509 1877 Soto St Seaside Sfr 3 967 11/30/2021 $580,000 3700 1956 $600 1454 Plumas Ln Seaside Sfr 3 2312 05/23/2022 $1,040,000 21780 1941 $450 1594 Soto St Seaside Sfr 3 1387 03/09/2022 $745,000 6300 1967 $537 4647 Sea Breeze Ct Seaside Sfr 3 2465 04/06/2022 $1,352,000 5139 2004 $548 4520 Peninsula Point Dr Seaside Sfr 3 2465 06/24/2021 $950,000 4903 2004 $385 4620 Peninsula Point Dr Seaside Sfr 3 2337 03/18/2021 $864,000 6884 2004 $370 1844 Luxton St Seaside Sfr 3 988 08/24/2021 $603,000 3650 1957 $610 1648 Kimball Ave Seaside Sfr 3 1030 04/26/2022 $740,000 6108 1958 $718 1845 Highland St Seaside Sfr 3 1135 12/17/2021 $500,000 9300 1954 $441 18 Yerba Buena Ct Seaside Sfr 3 1954 08/11/2021 $810,000 7000 1969 $415 1740 Judson St Seaside Sfr 3 914 05/05/2022 $705,000 3700 1955 $771 1237 Flores St Seaside Sfr 3 900 08/20/2021 $686,500 7405 1947 $763 1051 Waring St Seaside Sfr 3 1053 11/19/2021 $905,000 6343 1956 $859 1121 Madera Ct Seaside Sfr 3 1524 12/02/2021 $550,000 7314 1971 $361 1124 Noche Buena St Seaside Sfr 3 1008 05/16/2022 $755,000 6900 1954 $749 1270 Military Ave Seaside Sfr 3 1826 03/29/2022 $820,000 6098 1950 $449 2045 Military Ave Seaside Sfr 3 1147 11/12/2021 $839,000 5663 1960 $731 1740 Napa St Seaside Sfr 3 1030 02/09/2022 $830,000 4356 1959 $806 1125 Trinity Ave Seaside Sfr 3 1092 03/25/2022 $750,000 5000 1950 $687 1155 Plumas Ave Seaside Sfr 3 1248 02/10/2022 $855,000 6000 1961 $685 1075 Tweed St Seaside Sfr 3 1200 01/31/2022 $880,000 6000 1959 $733 1765 Darwin St Seaside Sfr 3 1132 05/23/2022 $885,000 5227 1961 $782 1625 Waring St Seaside Sfr 3 1035 05/18/2021 $700,000 3700 1955 $676 1253 Soto St Seaside Sfr 3 880 02/09/2022 $835,000 3600 1957 $949 1425 Luxton St Seaside Sfr 3 1056 02/08/2022 $710,000 3485 1962 $672 928 Trinity Ave Seaside Sfr 3 1592 08/13/2021 $790,000 5000 2004 $496 1540 Mescal St Seaside Sfr 3 1642 04/09/2021 $670,000 8750 1973 $408 1623 Darwin St Seaside Sfr 3 1158 08/10/2021 $670,000 5300 1970 $579 1324 Waring St Seaside Sfr 3 1400 10/28/2021 $732,000 3485 1963 $523 1188 Hilby Ave Seaside Sfr 3 1606 03/08/2021 $546,500 28746 1960 $340 1717 Kenneth St Seaside Sfr 3 864 07/19/2021 $500,000 5484 1957 $579 1187 Barbara Ct Seaside Sfr 3 1383 05/16/2022 $805,000 6045 1975 $582 1771 Luzern St Seaside Sfr 3 1039 06/17/2021 $625,000 3650 1958 $602 1809 Laguna St Seaside Sfr 3 1322 12/17/2021 $565,000 3800 1948 $427 Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
\\SF-FS2\wp\15\15927\048\home sales 06 22.xls; 6/21/2022

EXHIBIT D
118

PROPERTY ADDRESS

PROPERTY UNIT
NUMBER

PROPERTY

CITY PROPERTY TYPE BEDROOMS BLDG/LIVING AREA

LAST MARKET

RECORDING DATE

LAST MARKET SALE

PRICE LOT AREA YEAR BUILT P/SF
1061 Wanda Ave Seaside Sfr 3 1256 09/07/2021 $670,000 8361 1951 $533 1359 Sonoma Ave Seaside Sfr 3 1045 09/01/2021 $645,000 3920 1963 $617 1795 Ord Grove Ave Seaside Sfr 3 2106 10/07/2021 $920,000 7405 1956 $437 4371 Shoreline Ct Seaside Sfr 3 1720 04/26/2022 $1,150,000 6987 2005 $669 4415 Peninsula Point Dr Seaside Sfr 3 2465 09/28/2021 $1,100,000 4850 2004 $446 1531 Darwin St Seaside Sfr 3 1027 04/12/2022 $625,000 3485 1956 $609 1688 Luzern St Seaside Sfr 3 1061 04/28/2022 $665,000 3700 1960 $627 1118 Carson St Seaside Sfr 3 1192 09/29/2021 $785,000 7841 1959 $659 1048 Hamilton Ave Seaside Sfr 3 1344 02/12/2021 $600,000 7000 1959 $446 1221 Noche Buena St Seaside Sfr 3 1137 12/10/2021 $675,000 3000 2011 $594 1189 Palm Ave Seaside Sfr 3 1018 07/28/2021 $700,000 5005 1960 $688 1192 Waring St Seaside Sfr 3 1220 09/07/2021 $772,000 7500 1950 $633 1451 Mingo Ave Seaside Sfr 3 988 04/22/2021 $700,000 4792 1957 $709 1836 Harding St Seaside Sfr 3 1040 07/21/2021 $590,000 17600 1959 $567 1297 Luxton St Seaside Sfr 3 1064 05/11/2021 $685,000 3750 1964 $644 1518 Broadway Ave Seaside Sfr 3 1592 05/28/2021 $620,000 5600 1964 $389 1354 Noche Buena St Seaside Sfr 3 1100 03/18/2021 $685,000 3485 1953 $623 1334 Vallejo St Seaside Sfr 3 864 06/30/2021 $650,000 3650 1958 $752 4840 Peninsula Point Dr Seaside Sfr 3 2465 02/23/2021 $750,000 4792 2003 $304 1752 Flores St Seaside Sfr 3 1040 06/25/2021 $520,000 5150 1960 $500 1166 Bella Vista Ct Seaside Sfr 3 1433 04/21/2021 $670,000 8186 1964 $468 1664 Hilton St Seaside Sfr 3 1481 10/26/2021 $755,000 5600 1958 $510 1398 Waring St Seaside Sfr 3 1014 04/28/2021 $660,000 3485 1963 $651 1462 Wanda Ave Seaside Sfr 3 1009 03/29/2022 $440,000 3800 1949 $436 1865 Andrew Ct Seaside Sfr 3 1091 07/13/2021 $725,000 6970 1957 $665 1880 Ord Grove Ave Seaside Sfr 3 1114 09/30/2021 $712,500 6534 1957 $640 1708 Soto St Seaside Sfr 3 1093 11/02/2021 $650,000 3650 1957 $595 1820 Luxton St Seaside Sfr 3 936 03/30/2021 $500,000 3650 1957 $534 1712 Goodwin St Seaside Sfr 3 912 06/10/2021 $620,000 3750 1965 $680 4370 Peninsula Point Dr Seaside Sfr 3 2337 04/21/2021 $909,000 5058 2004 $389 1135 Madera Ct Seaside Sfr 3 1387 03/10/2021 $700,000 6747 1954 $505 4355 Peninsula Point Dr Seaside Sfr 3 2465 09/23/2021 $1,155,000 6008 2004 $469 1617 Darwin St Seaside Sfr 3 1242 05/23/2022 $674,000 3700 1956 $543 1059 Sonoma Ave Seaside Sfr 3 1043 02/28/2022 $585,000 6500 1956 $561 1872 Nadina St Seaside Sfr 3 1020 07/07/2021 $730,000 3485 1961 $716 2 Lysette Ct Seaside Sfr 3 1247 06/18/2021 $795,000 6534 1967 $638 1385 Darwin St Seaside Sfr 3 1260 01/27/2022 $730,000 3485 1964 $579 1342 Kenneth St Seaside Sfr 3 1744 04/02/2021 $780,000 3485 1991 $447 1130 Kimberly Ct Seaside Sfr 3 1411 03/02/2022 $870,000 5276 1989 $617 13 Harrow Ct Seaside Sfr 3 1620 09/08/2021 $895,000 7500 1973 $552 1381 Metz Ave Seaside Sfr 3 1687 06/01/2021 $690,000 8994 1956 $409 1485 Santa Clara Ave Seaside Sfr 3 1170 04/29/2022 $875,000 10454 1951 $748 1485 Kenneth St Seaside Sfr 3 1393 09/24/2021 $608,000 5227 1973 $436 1367 Harding St Seaside Sfr 3 1114 08/27/2021 $740,000 3485 1963 $664 1407 Soto St Seaside Sfr 3 1796 01/26/2022 $905,000 4356 1963 $504 545 Harcourt Ave Seaside Sfr 3 1170 02/11/2022 $780,000 4792 1956 $667 1693 Mescal St Seaside Sfr 3 1498 03/18/2022 $830,000 6834 1970 $554 Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
\\SF-FS2\wp\15\15927\048\home sales 06 22.xls; 6/21/2022

EXHIBIT D
119

PROPERTY ADDRESS

PROPERTY UNIT
NUMBER

PROPERTY

CITY PROPERTY TYPE BEDROOMS BLDG/LIVING AREA

LAST MARKET

RECORDING DATE

LAST MARKET SALE

PRICE LOT AREA YEAR BUILT P/SF
1289 Darwin St Seaside Sfr 3 1033 12/06/2021 $726,500 3650 1962 $703 1737 Highland St Seaside Sfr 3 1030 06/21/2021 $777,000 5600 1958 $754 1852 Laguna St Seaside Sfr 3 980 12/14/2021 $610,500 3750 1957 $623 324 Roberts Ave Seaside Sfr 3 1784 09/22/2021 $630,000 3920 1941 $353 Average Seaside 3 BD SFR 1,379 $753,160 $546
1755 Military Ave Seaside Sfr 4 1780 04/07/2022 $1,050,000 8276 1956 $590 4500 Peninsula Point Dr Seaside Sfr 4 2593 05/02/2022 $1,300,000 6267 2004 $501 1770 Luxton St Seaside Sfr 4 1310 05/12/2021 $740,000 7300 1972 $565 4747 Sea Crest Dr Seaside Sfr 4 2465 01/26/2022 $1,188,000 4792 2004 $482 1040 Sonoma Ave Seaside Sfr 4 3295 05/06/2021 $535,000 8931 1950 $162 1700 Waring St Seaside Sfr 4 1451 03/14/2022 $815,000 5500 1972 $562 1274 Trinity Ave Seaside Sfr 4 1302 05/23/2022 $945,000 5499 1953 $726 1649 Vallejo St Seaside Sfr 4 1259 11/02/2021 $735,000 7300 1959 $584 1861 Saint Helena St Seaside Sfr 4 1321 10/12/2021 $800,000 6600 1971 $606 1104 Yolanda Ct Seaside Sfr 4 1823 07/22/2021 $788,000 6322 1962 $432 5015 Peninsula Point Dr Seaside Sfr 4 3303 08/17/2021 $1,125,000 10890 2003 $341 1812 Luzern St Seaside Sfr 4 1545 08/25/2021 $650,000 6400 1963 $421 1471 Plumas Ave Seaside Sfr 4 1246 11/24/2021 $821,000 5663 1959 $659 1780 Eucalyptus Ave Seaside Sfr 4 1623 08/17/2021 $800,000 7405 1956 $493 1653 Darwin St Seaside Sfr 4 1330 05/24/2021 $625,000 7300 1971 $470 1148 San Lucas St Seaside Sfr 4 1184 08/31/2021 $600,000 6500 1958 $507 5020 Pacific Crest Dr Seaside Sfr 4 3303 06/25/2021 $1,125,000 7101 2004 $341 4220 Peninsula Point Dr Seaside Sfr 4 3303 12/08/2021 $1,150,000 6507 2004 $348 5046 Sunset Vista Dr Seaside Sfr 4 3303 11/08/2021 $1,150,000 6098 2004 $348 1141 Hilby Ave Seaside Sfr 4 1752 03/05/2021 $650,000 5000 2003 $371 4760 Sea Crest Dr Seaside Sfr 4 2593 06/02/2021 $998,000 4792 2004 $385 1776 Mescal St Seaside Sfr 4 2141 07/20/2021 $885,000 6534 1973 $413 1700 Sonoma Ave Seaside Sfr 4 2318 11/10/2021 $795,000 8100 1974 $343 4340 Peninsula Point Dr Seaside Sfr 4 2593 02/04/2022 $1,300,000 5280 2004 $501 1920 Luxton St Seaside Sfr 4 2070 04/18/2022 $837,000 8000 1950 $404 457 Hamilton Ave Seaside Sfr 4 1340 02/03/2021 $475,000 3920 1956 $354 1759 Vallejo St Seaside Sfr 4 1337 05/10/2021 $710,000 5500 1957 $531 1637 Darwin Pl Seaside Sfr 4 1170 06/17/2021 $715,000 5300 1970 $611 1699 Military Ave Seaside Sfr 4 1947 08/04/2021 $892,000 6970 1955 $458 1683 Mescal St Seaside Sfr 4 1885 10/27/2021 $750,000 7100 1974 $398 1018 Waring St Seaside Sfr 4 1184 12/08/2021 $875,000 6300 1956 $739 4705 Sea Ridge Ct Seaside Sfr 4 1720 07/21/2021 $879,000 6233 2005 $511 1738 Granada St Seaside Sfr 4 1385 10/15/2021 $800,000 5227 1968 $578 1372 Soto St Seaside Sfr 4 2140 07/09/2021 $1,047,000 5600 1961 $489 1985 Luxton St Seaside Sfr 4 1703 05/12/2022 $1,050,000 6750 1952 $617 5050 Peninsula Point Dr Seaside Sfr 4 3303 04/08/2022 $1,460,000 6000 2003 $442 1624 Mescal St Seaside Sfr 4 1778 09/14/2021 $765,000 7500 1972 $430 5000 Beach Wood Dr Seaside Sfr 4 3689 04/06/2021 $1,025,000 7405 2004 $278 1777 Juarez St Seaside Sfr 4 1339 09/27/2021 $841,500 4356 1959 $628 1619 Waring St Seaside Sfr 4 1616 12/15/2021 $725,000 6970 1970 $449 1755 Noche Buena St Seaside Sfr 4 1348 03/03/2022 $805,000 9148 1972 $597 Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
\\SF-FS2\wp\15\15927\048\home sales 06 22.xls; 6/21/2022

EXHIBIT D
120

PROPERTY ADDRESS

PROPERTY UNIT
NUMBER

PROPERTY

CITY PROPERTY TYPE BEDROOMS BLDG/LIVING AREA

LAST MARKET

RECORDING DATE

LAST MARKET SALE

PRICE LOT AREA YEAR BUILT P/SF
1455 La Salle Ave Seaside Sfr 4 2466 03/01/2022 $1,197,000 16000 1980 $485 1783 Kenneth St Seaside Sfr 4 1436 07/29/2021 $720,000 5475 1973 $501 1722 Mescal St Seaside Sfr 4 1530 04/23/2021 $699,000 5663 1971 $457 Average Seaside 4 BD SFR 1,966 $882,670 $449
4438 Cypress Ridge Ct Seaside Sfr 5 2593 01/28/2021 $950,000 6198 2005 $366 4290 Peninsula Point Dr Seaside Sfr 5 3878 03/17/2021 $1,074,000 6022 2004 $277 1076 Hilby Ave Seaside Sfr 5 1107 12/14/2021 $905,000 5663 1958 $818 1635 Plumas Ave Seaside Sfr 5 3120 10/15/2021 $1,125,000 10204 1963 $361 1381 Military Ave Seaside Sfr 5 1746 08/02/2021 $690,000 7200 1946 $395 5024 Pacific Crest Dr Seaside Sfr 5 3878 08/03/2021 $1,407,000 7382 2004 $363 4460 Ocean Heights Ct Seaside Sfr 5 3878 08/12/2021 $1,450,000 6052 2005 $374 1381 Circle Ave Seaside Sfr 5 2238 09/03/2021 $795,000 6970 1949 $355 1570 Mescal St Seaside Sfr 6 3026 09/01/2021 $1,050,000 8750 1974 $347 Average Seaside 5+ BD SFR 2,829 $1,049,556 $371
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
\\SF-FS2\wp\15\15927\048\home sales 06 22.xls; 6/21/2022

EXHIBIT D
121
Table 13
Industrial Sales Past Year - Marina, Seaside, Monterey, Salinas, Gilroy Marina Station
Marina, Ca
Property Address Property City Sale Price Size Sale Date Price Per SF Building Park Age Land Area AC 7620 Eigleberry St Gilroy $1,375,000 5,742 4/28/2022 239.46 61 0.20 8190 Murray Ave Gilroy $19,157,000 102,466 3/28/2022 186.96 32 4.61 450 E 9th St Gilroy $4,500,000 12,424 2/18/2022 362.21 52 5.95 6920 Monterey Rd Gilroy $1,160,000 20,000 12/23/2021 290.00 76 1.03 8460 Church St Gilroy $1,650,000 5,948 11/24/2021 277.40 35 0.70 7200-7230 Alexander St Gilroy $3,150,000 20,000 10/4/2021 157.50 72 0.46 6380 Monterey Rd Gilroy $960,000 4,000 8/27/2021 240.00 74 0.80 675 Buena Vista Ave Gilroy $2,000,000 16,800 7/2/2021 119.05 57 4.39 12 Lower Ragsdale Dr Monterey $799,000 1,435 4/11/2022 556.79 5 5.00 2969 Salinas Hwy Monterey $930,000 1,372 4/7/2022 677.84 Monterey
Motorsport
Park 3 1.49
2969 Salinas Hwy Monterey $400,000 686 3/16/2022 583.09 Monterey
Motorsport
Park 2 1.49
2456 Del Monte Ave Monterey $3,444,000 19,680 12/30/2021 175.00 53 0.64 2969 Salinas Hwy (Part of Monterey 686 9/24/2021 510.20 Monterey
Motorsport
Park 3
1586 Moffett St Salinas $800,000 2,862 5/27/2022 279.52 Moffett Street
Commercial
Center 16 0.06
155 Griffin St Salinas $550,000 1,320 3/14/2022 416.67 75 0.33 138 E Lake St Salinas $875,000 4,000 3/3/2022 218.75 59 0.15 312 Abbott St Salinas $3,100,000 21,816 10/12/2021 142.10 40 1.05 12 Harris Pl Salinas $1,500,000 9,519 9/30/2021 157.58 23 2.00 20800 Spence Rd Salinas $11,900,000 40,203 7/2/2021 296.00 29 5.00 Average, all 309.80
Average, ex. Monterey 241.66
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
\\SF-FS2\wp\15\15927\048\0622_Costar- Industrial Sales in Past Year - Marina Seaside Monterey Gilroy Salinas.xlsx; 6/21/2022

EXHIBIT D
122
Table 14
Office Sales Past Year - Marina, Seaside, Monterey, Salinas, Gilroy Marina Station
Marina, Ca
Property Address Property City Sale Price Size Property Name Sale Date Price Per SF Secondary Type Age Land
Area AC Percent Leased
42-46 Martin St Gilroy $700,000 3,088 4/1/2022 226.68 102 0.09 100.00% 7527 Eigleberry St Gilroy $1,450,000 4,552 2/24/2022 318.54 Office/Residential 122 0.26 10.00% 190 1st St Gilroy $550,000 1,573 1/3/2022 349.65 92 0.17 100.00% 320 1st St Gilroy $807,000 2,129 12/14/2021 379.05 Office Building 69 0.16 100.00% 8000 Santa Teresa Blvd Gilroy $4,000,000 19,209 10/6/2021 208.24 28 2.15 100.00% 380 Tomkins Ct Gilroy $1,240,000 4,120 8/16/2021 300.97 Industrial Live/Work Unit 36 0.49 100.00% 7767 Monterey Hwy Gilroy $1,899,999 5,410 Piazza Frascati 351.20 Office/Residential 19 0.17 0.18% 235 Reindollar Ave Marina $1,325,000 6,265
Reindollar Corner
Professional Building 1/24/2022 211.49 Office/Residential 44 0.30 100.00% 3153 Ocean Ter Marina $695,000 1,832 1/21/2022 379.37 Office Live/Work Unit 0.06 100.00% 1010 Cass St Monterey $700,000 3,486 Bldg C 5/2/2022 200.80 Medical 0.02 100.00% 9600 Blue Larkspur Ln Monterey $620,000 2,402 Office Condo 3/23/2022 258.12 31 0.11 100.00% 900 Cass St Monterey $1,700,000 3,868 Office Condo 3/18/2022 439.50 Medical 0.37 100.00% 1035 Cass St Monterey $1,775,000 5,300 2/17/2022 334.91 Medical 22 0.24 0.00% 24551 Silver Cloud Ct Monterey $2,850,000 10,200 1/26/2022 279.41 Medical 17 2.25 100.00% 650 E Franklin St Monterey $1,200,000 1,125 12/29/2021 1,066.67 Office/Residential 79 0.33 100.00% 475 Washington St Monterey $1,300,000 3,954 12/28/2021 328.78 38 0.20 100.00% 24591 Silver Cloud Ct Monterey $6,762,000 18,036 12/20/2021 374.92 20 1.00 100.00% 20-22 Dormody Ct Monterey $712,000 1,780 12/10/2021 400.00 Medical 58 0.17 0.00% 100 Wilson Rd Monterey $5,406,000 18,022 Office Condo 9/10/2021 299.97 15 6.43 0.00% 601 Abrego St Monterey $1,250,000 3,323 9/3/2021 376.17 38 0.16 100.00% 404 W Franklin St Monterey $2,350,000 7,966 7/22/2021 295.00 Office Building 13 0.38 100.00% 551 Foam St Monterey $1,150,000 2,913 6/22/2021 394.78 Office/Residential 41 0.04 100.00% 480 Calle Principal Monterey $2,400,000 10,173 235.92 81 0.16 0.00% 490 Calle Principal Monterey $1,800,000 5,369 335.26 77 0.16 55.73% 780 E Romie Ln Salinas $892,000 2,279 Office Condo 5/16/2022 391.40 Medical 38 0.44 100.00% 1021-1023 S Main St Salinas $4,100,000 13,817 4/13/2022 296.74 65 0.32 100.00% 110 E Romie Ln Salinas $1,200,000 3,665 2/22/2022 327.42 Medical 96 0.32 100.00% 340 Church St Salinas $580,000 895 2/2/2022 648.04 Medical 0.13 100.00% 780 E Romie Ln Salinas $675,000 1,559 Office Condo 11/1/2021 432.97 Medical 38 0.44 100.00% 1020 Merrill St Salinas $3,850,000 18,778 205.03 Medical 44 0.81 64.88% Avg, all $355
Avg. Marina 295.43
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
\\SF-FS2\wp\15\15927\048\0622_Costar- Office Sales in Past Year - Marina Seaside Monterey Gilroy Salinas.xlsx; 6/21/2022

EXHIBIT D
123
Table 15
Retail Sales Past Year - Marina, Seaside, Salinas, Gilroy Marina Station
Marina, Ca
Property Address
Property
City Sale Price
Price
per sf Size
Property
Name Sale Date Secondary Type Age
Building
Class
Land
Area SF
Typical
Floor (SF)
Number
Of Floors
Percent
Leased
6765 Camino Arroyo Gilroy $57,000,000 $645 88,408 Kohl's 5/24/2022 Department Store 18 C 332,363 88,408 1 100.00% 7445 Monterey St Gilroy $1,299,000 $290 4,480 5/13/2022 Storefront Retail/Residential 110 C 3,899 2,240 2 0.00% 7243 Monterey St Gilroy $1,050,000 $197 5,340 5/13/2022 Storefront 90 C 12,632 5,340 1 100.00% 7541-7543 Monterey St Gilroy $2,900,000 $116 25,080 3/24/2022 Storefront Retail/Office 122 C 14,884 12,540 2 100.00% 10015 Monterey Rd Gilroy $1,575,000 $303 5,200 3/7/2022 Freestanding 50 C 261,360 5,200 1 0.00% 7041 Monterey St Gilroy $1,140,000 $427 2,670 2/1/2022 Storefront Retail/Residential 87 C 12,240 1,335 2 0.00% 6800 Chestnut St Gilroy $6,000,000 $257 23,355 12/15/2021 Auto Dealership 24 B 132,858 23,355 1 100.00% 6805 Camino Arroyo Gilroy $3,100,000 $453 6,842
Buffalo Wild
Wings 9/30/2021 Restaurant 5 B 45,302 6,752 1
770 1st St Gilroy $11,050,000 $763 14,489 Walgreens 9/23/2021 Drug Store 13 B 58,370 14,469 1 100.00% 7900 Arroyo Cir Gilroy $14,300,000 $114 125,597
See Grins RV
part of
Johnson RV 9/17/2021 Auto Dealership 29 B 596,772 125,597 1 0.00% 7747 Monterey St Gilroy $2,950,000 $164 18,000
The Old Ford
Garage
Auto Repair 92 C 27,966 18,000 1 100.00%
8800 San Ysidro Ave Gilroy $1,899,000 $366 5,194
8800 San
Ysidro Ave
Restaurant 19 B 28,314 3,883 2 0.00%
7554 Monterey St Gilroy $1,750,000 $168 10,431 Bowling Alley 64 C 11,326 10,431 1 100.00% 330 Reservation Rd Marina $2,477,000 $255 9,697
Marina Town
Plaza
12/20/2021 Freestanding 47 B 84,071 9,697 1
264 Carmel Ave Marina $630,000 $648 972 10/15/2021 Storefront Retail/Residential 66 C 11,012 545 1 0.00% 601-605 Lighthouse Ave Monterey $1,600,000 $145 11,000 4/18/2022 Storefront Retail/Office 56 C 5,663 5,500 2 0.00% 2311-2319 Fremont St Monterey $3,450,000 $457 7,550 4/5/2022 Freestanding C 22,560 7,550 1 100.00% 500-528 Foam St Monterey $2,750,000 $1,058 2,600 3/31/2022 Retail Building 61 C 16,374 2,600 1 500 Hartnell St Monterey $3,250,000 $441 7,368 Stokes Adobe 2/10/2022 Restaurant 189 C 23,522 3,684 2 100.00% 552 Fremont St Monterey $900,000 $260 3,461 2/9/2022 Storefront 57 C 6,077 3,461 1 100.00% 1201 10th St Monterey $800,000 $328 2,441 1/31/2022 Auto Repair 59 C 7,065 2,441 1 100.00% 495 Washington St Monterey $4,800,000 $490 9,800 1/13/2022 Bank 32 B 21,806 9,800 100.00% 1250 Del Monte Ave
(Part of Multi-Property
Sale) Monterey $1,941,032 $620 3,130
Multi-Property
Sale
12/28/2021 Storefront Retail/Residential 72 C 14,444 1,565 2 570 Lighthouse Ave Monterey $1,400,000 $191 7,321 12/10/2021 Restaurant 58 C 10,890 7,321 1 100.00% 423-425 Alvarado St
(Part of Multi-Property
Sale) Monterey $2,255,000 $223 10,100
Multi-Property
Sale
12/8/2021 Storefront 56 C 10,402 10,100 1 75.00%
422 Tyler St (Part of
Multi-Property Sale)
Monterey $0 1,275
Multi-Property
Sale
12/8/2021 Restaurant 56 14,301 1,275 1 100.00%
1299 Del Monte Ave Monterey $1,350,000 $313 4,308 11/24/2021 Auto Repair 61 C 19,149 4,308 1 100.00% 2066 Fremont St Monterey $5,500,000 $548 10,032 11/18/2021 74 C 42,231 10,032 1 100.00% Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
\\SF-FS2\wp\15\15927\048\0622_Costar- Retail Sales in Past Year - Marina Seaside Monterey Gilroy Salinas - Export.xlsx; 6/21/2022

EXHIBIT D
124
Property Address
Property
City Sale Price
Price
per sf Size
Property
Name Sale Date Secondary Type Age
Building
Class
Land
Area SF
Typical
Floor (SF)
Number
Of Floors
Percent
Leased
2066 Fremont St Monterey $4,042,000 $403 10,032 8/4/2021 74 C 42,231 10,032 1 100.00% 160-198 Webster St Monterey $5,088,000 $500 10,185 7/21/2021 Freestanding 56 C 26,550 5,093 2 100.00% 417 Alvarado St Monterey $4,500,000 $173 26,000
Golden State
Theatre 6/17/2021 Storefront Retail/Office 96 B 16,988 8,667 3 100.00% 638 Lighthouse Ave Monterey $825,000 $250 3,300 6/16/2021 Freestanding 62 C 5,663 3,300 1 100.00% 870 Abrego St Monterey $2,195,000 $301 7,286 Auto Repair 76 C 7,549 7,440 1 0.00% 828 Lighthouse Ave Monterey $1,375,000 $452 3,040 Storefront 58 B 4,792 3,040 1 0.00% 664 E Alisal St Salinas $1,150,000 $843 1,364 5/20/2022 Fast Food 56 C 17,398 1,364 1 100.00% 695 E Alisal St Salinas $300,000 $99 3,042 5/20/2022 Storefront 75 C 18,300 3,042 1 100.00% 7900 Messick Rd Salinas $950,000 $297 3,200 4/29/2022 Auto Repair 76 C 104,958 3,200 1 100.00% 11 Clark St Salinas $1,500,000 $784 1,914 3/21/2022 Service Station 50 B 16,988 2,100 1 100.00% 315 N Main St Salinas $900,000 $208 4,335 3/15/2022 Retail Building 30 C 9,148 4,335 1 100.00% 695 E Alisal St Salinas $300,000 $99 3,042 3/11/2022 Storefront 75 C 18,300 3,042 1 100.00% 109 Capitol St Salinas $650,000 $407 1,599 12/28/2021 Freestanding 92 C 6,534 1,599 1 100.00% 630 E Market St Salinas $700,000 $349 2,008 12/9/2021 Storefront Retail/Residential 84 B 8,255 2,008 1 33.00% 260-262 E Market St Salinas $1,200,000 $182 6,610 9/9/2021 Auto Dealership 54 C 23,762 6,610 1 100.00% 1075-1089 S Main St Salinas $2,420,000 $248 9,767 7/1/2021 Freestanding 40 C 24,394 9,767 1 100.00% 47 John St Salinas $635,000 $420 1,511 6/24/2021 Service Station 67 C 11,326 1,511 1 27 John St Salinas $510,000 $675 756 6/23/2021 Bank 51 B 16,570 756 1 606 E Alisal St Salinas $950,000 $337 2,816 6/16/2021 Convenience Store 48 B 7,841 2,816 1 100.00% 910 S Main St Salinas $1,799,888 $95 19,000 Storefront 72 C 9,148 6,333 3 0.00% 490 Broadway Ave Seaside $1,093,000 $710 1,539 3/9/2022 Auto Repair 58 C 20,247 1,539 1 0.00% 1711 Del Monte Blvd Seaside $6,290,000 $299 21,019 1/25/2022 Auto Dealership 33 C 59,677 21,019 1 100.00% 1020 Auto Center Pky Seaside $2,750,000 $188 14,614 10/26/2021 Auto Dealership 32 C 22,216 14,614 1 100.00% 1020 Ord Grove Ave Seaside $1,000,000 $234 4,272 8/25/2021 Auto Repair 72 C 9,688 4,272 1 100.00% 620-630 Broadway Ave Seaside $1,720,000 $264 6,506 7/30/2021 Storefront Retail/Residential 35 C 8,002 3,253 2 83.33% 2019 Del Monte Blvd Seaside $1,250,000 $251 4,975 7/30/2021 Auto Repair 63 C 10,254 4,975 1 0.00% 3 Geary Plz Seaside $12,400,000 $292 42,446
Seaside Auto
Mall 7/28/2021 Auto Dealership 57 C 203,861 42,446 1 100.00% 1390 Fremont Blvd Seaside $900,000 $783 1,150 7/27/2021 Fast Food 35 C 13,939 1,150 1 100.00% 1143 Echo Ave Seaside $1,500,000 $116 12,925 7/14/2021 Storefront Retail/Office 67 C 19,166 6,463 2 100.00% Average, Gilroy $328
Average, Salinas $360
Average, Monterey $377
Average, Seaside $349
Average, Marina $452
Average, All $360
Average, less than 20 yrs
old. $488
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
\\SF-FS2\wp\15\15927\048\0622_Costar- Retail Sales in Past Year - Marina Seaside Monterey Gilroy Salinas - Export.xlsx; 6/21/2022

EXHIBIT D
125
Table 16
Sales of Apartment buildings over past 5 years
Marina Station
Marina, Ca
Property Address
Property
City Sale Price
Number
Of Units Size Property Name
Sale
Status Sale Date Price Per Unit Secondary Type
Avg Unit
SF Age
Land
Area AC
price
per sf
3289-3295 Drew St Marina $2,499,000 10 7,954 Sold 12/30/2021 $249,900 Apartments 926 97 1.39 $314 299 Carmel Ave Marina $39,350,000 134 102,308
The Gates at Marina
Apartments Sold 2/25/2021 $293,657 Apartments 763 35 7.38 $385 3330 Dunes Rd Marina $28,500,000 96
Marina Dunes RV
Resort Sold 10/16/2020 $296,875
Manufactured
Housing/Mobile Home
Park 43 5.58
233-235 Carmel Ave Marina $3,550,000 20 11,440 Sold 7/7/2020 $177,500 Apartments 572 53 0.59 $310 3330 Dunes Rd Marina $18,000,000 65
Marina Dunes RV
Resort Sold 6/20/2018 $276,923
Manufactured Housing/
Mobile Home Park 43 5.58
470 Reservation Rd Marina $1,100,000 6 6,836 Sold 5/11/2018 $183,333 Apartments 52 0.33 $161 470 Reservation Rd Marina $800,100 6 6,836 Sold 5/3/2018 $133,350 Apartments 52 0.33 $117 176-182 Palm Ave Marina $5,000,000 20 13,696 Sold 4/12/2018 $250,000 Apartments 547 62 1.30 $365 394 Reservation Rd (Part oMarina $1,366,279 7 5,000 Multi-Property Sale Sold 11/1/2017 $195,183 Apartments 0.32 $273 396 Reservation Rd (Part oMarina $983,721 6 3,600 Multi-Property Sale Sold 11/1/2017 $163,954 Apartments 0.17 $273 176-182 Palm Ave Marina $3,100,000 20 13,696 Sold 9/22/2017 $155,000 Apartments 547 62 1.30 $226 191 Debbie Dr Marina $1,649,000 5 4,533 Sold 7/24/2017 $329,800 Apartments 73 0.91 $364 1081 Trinity Ave Seaside $1,750,000 6 5,006 Sold 11/19/2021 $291,667 Apartments 43 0.17 $350 1283-1287 Playa Blvd Seaside $3,100,000 15 7,212
Playa Vista
Apartments Sold 10/1/2021 $206,667 Apartments 53 0.34 $430 1082 Wanda Ave Seaside $1,100,000 5 2,406 Sold 5/7/2021 $220,000 Apartments 72 0.40 $457 1191 Noche Buena St Seaside $3,550,000 17 5,958 Sold 4/8/2021 $208,824 Apartments 57 0.40 $596 1203 Ord Grove Ave Seaside $2,280,000 12 7,840 Sold 2/24/2021 $190,000 Apartments 645 45 0.28 $291 1132-1136 Phoenix Ave Seaside $3,900,000 18 10,500 Sold 11/5/2020 $216,667 Apartments 525 61 0.47 $371 1180-1184 Sonoma Ave Seaside $1,625,000 8 12,000 Sold 4/2/2020 $203,125 Apartments 725 58 0.24 $135 1881 Baker St Seaside $25,250,000 121 98,105
Sea Breeze
Apartments Sold 3/27/2020 $208,678 Apartments 592 58 3.09 $257 1280 Hilby Ave Seaside $6,150,000 32 19,891 Sold 3/6/2019 $192,188 Apartments 47 0.85 $309 1773 Waring St Seaside $41,000,000 133 166,151
Seaview Village
Apartments Sold 2/28/2019 $308,271 Apartments 1249 51 2.16 $247 1255 Circle Ave Seaside $1,375,000 7 3,921 Sold 11/30/2018 $196,429 Apartments 560 60 0.19 $351 942 Harcourt Ave Seaside $1,235,000 6 6,682 Sold 6/26/2018 $205,833 Apartments 50 0.16 $185 1119-1129 Clementina Av Seaside $1,800,000 9 5,788 Sold 2/16/2018 $200,000 Apartments 61 0.09 $311 1132-1136 Phoenix Ave Seaside $3,600,000 18 10,500 Sold 10/25/2017 $200,000 Apartments 525 61 0.47 $343 Average, All 7,831,273 31 22,411 221,301 56 $309
Average, 2019 - current 233,144
20% Prem. $371.08
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
\\SF-FS2\wp\15\15927\048\0622_Costar- Apt Sales in Past Five Years - Marina Seaside.xlsx; 6/21/2022

EXHIBIT D
126

MEMORANDUM
DATE: July 26, 2022
TO: Layne Long, City Manager
FROM: Guido F. Persicone, Community Development Director PREPARED BY: Alyson Hunter, AICP, Sr. Planner
SUBJECT: Summary Response to City Council re: Marina Station DA Amendment and Extension Council Questions from the June 21, 2022, meeting with Staff answers following:

1. Does the project already have all the water it needs allocated to it? According to Section 4.14 Utilities and Service Systems of the certified EIR (DD&A, certified 2008), there is sufficient water to meet the demands of the project together with other existing and planned future uses within the water district.

2. Regarding the vernal ponds, will the City be allowed access for monitoring and testing? The proposed DA amendment includes a provision that allows City access as described:

If the Subsequent Owner provides such access to the Wetlands Area to any other person or entity, then the City shall be allowed such access, and the City's access shall be on the same terms as provided to such other person or entity. (Item 9.1 in the First Amendment document included in the Council’s 6-21-22 and 7-19-22 agenda packets)

3. How will the City be notified if others are allowed access to the vernal pond for testing and monitoring so that the City can also participate in these activities? A process for City notification has not been identified as of this writing.

4. Are the developers frozen in time to 2008 rules and regulations? They are frozen in terms of City regulations. The vesting of the project in 2008 does not exempt them from following current state and federal regulations, like Building Codes, that are in effect at the time of building permit review, for example. Similarly, grading plans and stormwater requirements would need to meet current State permit requirements. Current CA housing laws, like SB 9, SB 35, etc., will apply within the project regardless of the DA’s affordable housing stipulations which were enacted only based on the City’s affordable housing (inclusionary zoning, density bonus) regulations in place at the time of approval. There is an exception to this rule in recital #4 which

EXHIBIT E
127

states that City shall be entitled to apply the provisions related to trees and fencing in Marina Municipal Code Chapter 17.62 and Title 17.42 in effect at the time the Developer submits applications related to trees and fencing.

5. Will the new General Plan have authority over the adopted Marina Station Specific Plan?

No. All of the City’s adopted SPs are stand-alone documents and will remain “as-is” after the completion of the GP update.

6. Will a new traffic study be prepared by the developer?

No. A traffic study was prepared for the project as part of the certified EIR. It studied future impacts and the mitigation measures that were prepared are still in effect and the responsibility of the developer to build.

7. This land was not part of the former Ft. Ord and was never regulated under FORA. This was a standard private land exchange between private individuals/business entities.

8. Any affordable housing agreements that are in place under the current DA remain in place unless otherwise amended through this Council process. Changes in the City’s municipal code or General Plan that have occurred after 2008 are not in effect for the Marina Station project.

9. Relating to recital #11 on the proposed amendment, this denotes that no additional amendments, other than those identified in this document, will be authorized without going through this same amendment process.

10. Will the requested extension to 2036 be sufficient to buffer the project from the effects of the current and likely future recession(s)?

As stated in the staff report, the developer indicates that, although the full 10 years may not be needed, the additional time will cover any unforeseen events that may occur as development proceeds, including economic cycles.

11. The DA appears to be similar to the DAs for the Seahaven and Dunes projects. Can we anticipate similar outcomes?

Every project developer and contractor team is different in their management styles, expectations, and responsiveness. It is City Staff’s role to ensure activities are conducted in compliance with approvals. On very large projects like these, there will be times when issues arise, but Staff expects that we will be able to work professionally with the development team to quickly and fairly address issues through the proper regulatory channels.

EXHIBIT E
128

12. What is the acreage of open space for the whole project?

Open Space – 20.8 acres. This is defined as passive recreational areas Parks – 19.1 acres. These are improved, landscaped playing fields and other active areas Conservation Easement – 23.5 acres. This is a requirement of the Sierra Club settlement agreement. This is only on the west side of the project directly associated with the protection of the vernal ponds. The terms for allowed uses and public access will be identified as part of the easement. The easement is required to be held by a qualified agency or non-profit like the Big Sur Land Trust or other entity.

13. Will these areas be open to the public?

Yes, with the exception of the conservation easement.

14. Can the current DA amendment include a stipulation that the City receive any testing and/or monitoring reports prepared by others relating to the vernal ponds?

Yes, this is included in the proposed DA amendment agreement.

15. If the DA extension is not granted, does the project come to a halt?

No. The current DA expires in March 2026 plus a generally-accepted 3-year force majeure where the timeframe was “stayed” due to litigation. This brings the existing expiration to 2029. The developer has indicated that they will continue to move the project forward.

16. Does a tentative map have an expiration date?

Yes, unless it is a “Vesting” Tentative Map (VTM) which “vests” its approval for a longer period as specified. This project includes a Vesting TM which is incorporated into the DA by reference and is subject to the same expiration period as the DA.

17. If the proposed amendment is not approved, what would happen to the tent. map?

It would expire along with the DA.

18. How many map versions are there?

There is only one (1) adopted VTM which is broken into eight (8) phases.

19. Why is it called Marina Station?

EXHIBIT E
129

From the certified EIR: TAMC is exploring long term plans to reinstate the intra-regional passenger rail service to Monterey on the Union Pacific rail line that runs through the City of Marina, which is supported by the City of Marina. One of the proposed rail station locations is along Del Monte Boulevard, in the middle of the project site. This feature was acknowledged in the design of the project site and the provision for a future rail station has been included in the Specific Plan. Land uses that will encourage the use of transit have been incorporated into the project at the future rail station location. The train station is not proposed as part of this project, nor is it expected to be operational in the next 20 years; therefore, train station operations are not included in this EIR analysis. (DD&A, Sec. 14.13-20; 2007)

20. Where is the transit station to be located?

There is no longer a transit station proposed as the development of the rail by TAMC is no longer a viable project, as noted above and in the EIR.

21. Can the Council alter the layout of the zoning districts at this point?

The general layout is identified in the Marina Station Specific Plan. A comprehensive amendment to the adopted SP would be required to change the layout of the zoning districts and general plan designations or to amend the text to allow changes to definitions and allowed uses.

22. Are the plans before the Council as part of the proposed DA amendment/extension the same as what was originally approved?

Other than the layout on the west side, currently identified as Phase 8, which was required to be redesigned to comply with the Sierra Club settlement, the design and layout of the entire project is substantially the same as what was originally approved.

23. Please provide for the Council maps showing the park locations as originally approved and as modified in response to the settlement agreement.

Please see the exhibits to the staff report.

24. What is the mix of for-sale versus rental below-market rate (BMR)?

The existing Affordable Housing Agreement language in Sec. 2.17 of the current approved DA specifies the following breakdown of BMR units to be developed:

EXHIBIT E
130

The mix of rental and for sale affordable units will be part of the Affordable Housing Plan that will be approved by Council at a later date.

25. Has the Sierra Club settlement and its effects on the vernal ponds ever been explained to the Council and Planning Commission? Did the City participate in the discussion and development of the conditions of the settlement?

Please refer to Exhibit “G”. The current City Council and Planning Commission have not been briefed on the Sierra Club and Save Our Peninsula settlement agreements which were executed on April 8, 2008, and March 7, 2011, respectively. Yes, the City is a signatory on the Save Our Peninsula settlement agreement.

26. Do we know how the settlement(s) changed the project?

The change to the project pertains to Phase 8.

27. Can invasive weeds/grasses at the site be addressed?

Although the EIR does not address invasive species on the site, the Biological Resources Sec. 4.4 of the certified EIR (DD&A, 2007) does include a discussion of botanical species.

The requirement to prepare a Habitat Restoration and Management Plan (Plan) is included as a mitigation measure. This Plan requires that the developer restore impacted coastal dune scrub and native grassland communities at a 2:1 ratio.

28. How will residents of Marina Station access the beach at or near the sand mine property?

Assuming that Lapis Rd. and the road off of it that travels west to the sand mine are public roads, residents will be able to access public coastal properties using this road. There was no additional access in this area required in the EIR. This road is not within the City of

EXHIBIT E
131

Marina’s boundary. New access through Caltrans right-of-way and in the Coastal zone would require significant cost and permitting and is beyond the scope of this project. New access to the coast was not identified in the circulation section of the EIR for the project and there is no nexus to the impacts that this project creates.

29. Can rent control or rent stabilization apply to this project?

Rent stabilization language has been removed from the Development Agreement.

30. Is the wording in the last paragraph negotiable?

Staff is unsure of which “last paragraph” this question is referencing.

31. Is there a limit to how many meetings can take place between the Planning Commission’s recommendation and Council action?

Yes.

32. What is the rush to approve this amendment/extension now?

The new developer, Third Millennium Partners (3MP), needs to be formally identified as the developer and owner of record so they can move forward with this investment; i.e., preparing the final maps, grading and improvement plans, etc.

33. Is it possible to have the inclusionary [BMR] homes built first?

This will be discussed as part of the Affordable Housing Agreement that will be reviewed and approved by the Council at a later date.

Council Questions from the July 19, 2022, meeting with Staff answers following:

1. Status of the development of a new fire station and/or in-lieu fees to cover ongoing operations.

The updated Fiscal Impact Study (Study) (KMA, June 2022) The DA calls for 50% of the cost of operations and maintenance of a new fire station to be paid out of the Community Facility District that will be set up.

2. What are the impact fees that the City will collect?

The park in-lieu fees to be collected are approximately $6.3M. According to the Fiscal Impact Study (pg. 4, Exhibit “D”), it is estimated that the development of Marina Station

EXHIBIT E
132

will yield approximately $38.8 million of impact fee revenues. The use of these revenues is restricted to fund public facilities that are needed to serve the Project.

3. What is it that the developer is asking for?

A 10-yr extension so that the DA expires in 2036 instead of 2026 to allow the entire project to be built-out.

4. What is the cause of the delay to this point?

Since its approval in 2008, there were two (2) lawsuits, the original landowner’s desire to sell the property to a qualified buyer/developer, and a recession that slowed or stopped nearly all development.

5. Can the developer tell Council how much they’ve put into this?

Mr. Bogue did not have a monetary amount but noted that it is in the millions.

6. Is the developer responsible for improvements to Del Monte Blvd. all the way to Hwy 1?

Yes. These, and other required mitigation measures, are noted in Table 2-1 - Summary of Significant Environmental Impacts and Mitigation in the certified EIR.

7. Staff to provide summaries of the two (2) settlement agreements.

Please refer to Exhibit “G”. This exhibit also includes a summary prepared by the City Attorney.

8. Can we have beach access to sand mine property using Lapis Rd? Could we use park in-lieu fees from project to help develop?

Please see #28 above. Lapis Rd. is outside City jurisdiction and the sand mine property is not included in the City’s current park impact fee schedule.

9. What will happen with the land that was formerly planned for the railway station? Will it have public restrooms and parking spaces for visitors?

This property is owned by 3MP and is part of the project. The original approval called planned and zoned this area for mixed-use which is still the plan today. Final designs will be known when the phased final map is submitted for review. Public restrooms similar to a public park facility were not included in the originally approved vesting tent. map.

EXHIBIT E
133

10. What are the options for the mix of affordable housing?

Please see #24 above.

11. Please summarize the Rent stabilization (control) restrictions.

Please see #29 above.

12. What will happen with the “dunes”/embankments along both sides of Del Monte Blvd?

The west side of Del Monte is also developed with PG&E’s main gas line easement and the existing or near-existing depth is required for safety purposes. Grading on the west side will be nominal. The east side will be graded with the cut material being used throughout the site.

13. Invasive dune plant question – please see #27 above.

EXHIBIT E
134
r
to
UJ
X
CA '
VfiX
2 6
O
xx
2 O
O
a/
CQ
a/
O
LU
X
<
<
N
O CA X
<
u
AARON WY.

LAKE WOOD DR.

LEGEND

EXISTING DESCRIPTION

PROJECT BOUNDARY

LOT LINE

RIGHT-OF-WAY/PRIVATE STREET/

PRIVATE DRIVEWAY

SHEET INDEX

1. TITLE SHEET

2. EXISTING CONDITIONS
5-12. SITE PLAN

13. STREET SECTIONS
14-23. PRELIMINARY GRADING

24. PRELIMINARY GRADING SECTIONS

25. GRADING CROSS SECTIONS & DETAILS

26. CUT/FILL MAP

27. CONCEPTUAL STORM DRAIN SYSTEMS MAP

26. CONCEPTUAL SANITARY SEWER SYSTEMS MAP
r
/
/
/ \
2 1

PROPOSED
Michael dr.
beach rd.
-<
)
/ \ / \ /
y
i <
11 1— I
I 2
aj
o
en
UJ x
<o
47 Park 1
Park 2
Park
3 Park 4
Park 5
Park 6
Park 7
Park
8 Park 9
Park
10 TOTAL ACTIVE PARK AREA: 18.94 Acres

PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT

CITY OF MARINA
211 HILLCREST AVENUE
MARINA, CALIFORNIA 93933
PH: (831) 884­1212
FAX: (831) 384­0425
SCALE: NONE

CITY OF MARINA
Marina Station "Active Park" Exhibit
Original Tentative Map, 2007
EXHIBIT A1
7/25/22

EXHIBIT F
135

DEL MONTE BLVD

COSKY DR

SEAN CT

MICHELLE CT

HARBEN CIR

MCCULLOH CIR

MICHAEL DR

BEACH RD

DE FOREST RD

CRESCENT AVE

PAUL DAVIS DR

ABDY WAY

CARDOZA AVE

DREW ST
HWY 1

CRESCENT AVE

DE FOREST RD

SELLS CT

IONE OSLON

ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL

WINDYHILL
PARK

MCWD TANK
SITE

RESERVATION RD
HWY 1

STREET J

STREET F

STREET G

GOLF BLVD

STREET U

STREET Z

STREET AB

STREET AD

STREET AM

STREET AH

STREET AU

STREET AX

CRESCENT

STREET R

STREET M

STREET S

STREET QSTREET P

STREET T

DE FOREST RD

STREET W

STREET R

STREET M

STREET AD

STREET V

STREET AA

STREET X

STREET AZ

STREET AS STREET AT

STREET V

STREET AN

STREET S

STREET AO

STREET AQ

STREET AP

STREET AH

STREET K

STREET I
MARINA

STREET B

STREET X

GREENS DR
AVE

STREET E

STREET C

STREET O

STREET AV

STREET AW

STREET BB

STREET BC

STREET AI

STREET AK

STREET AL

STREET AJ

STREET BD

STREET BA
TAMC
* ******
** **
**** **
***
* ** ** ***** ********** ***
****
****
**** ****
** **
**
**
**
*
*
LEGEND

SUBDIVISION BOUNDARY
NOTES

1. HOA WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR FRONT YARD

MAINTENANCE ON ALL PRIVATE SINGLE FAMILY
LOTS
*
PARK 2
PARK 1
PARK 3
PARK 4
PARK 3
PARK 9
PARK
8 PARK
5 PARK 6
PARK 7

PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT

CITY OF MARINA
211 HILLCREST AVENUE
MARINA, CALIFORNIA 93933
PH: (831) 884­1212
FAX: (831) 384­0425
SCALE: NONE

CITY OF MARINA
Marina Station "City Park" Exhibit
Proposed Tentative Map, 2021
EXHIBIT A2
7/25/22
PARK 10
Total Active Park Area: 15.63 Acres
In
Lieu Park Improvement Acreage Calculation:
• Specific Plan, Appendix E: 18.94 Acres of Park Improvements • Developer Proposal: 15.63 acres (Parks 2 through 9 w/ amenities as shown on Specific Plan Appendix E next page)
o Exception: No baseball field on Park 2 (i.e. Parcel 3).

Deficiency (Acres) = 18.94 – 15.63 = 3.31 Acres

3.31 Acreage of Park Improvements Deficient
x
$ 550,000.00 Credit per Acre, Park Improvements
=
$ 1,820,500.00 in lieu fee, as of Jan. 2008
$ 2,616,434.30 In Lieu Park Improvement Fee (adjusted for Construction Cost Index) PARK 1

EXHIBIT F
136
r
to
UJ
X
CA '
VfiX
2 6
O
xx
2 O
O
a/
CQ
a/
O
LU
X
<
<
N
O CA X
<
u
AARON WY.

LAKE WOOD DR.

LEGEND

EXISTING DESCRIPTION

PROJECT BOUNDARY

LOT LINE

RIGHT-OF-WAY/PRIVATE STREET/

PRIVATE DRIVEWAY

SHEET INDEX

1. TITLE SHEET

2. EXISTING CONDITIONS
5-12. SITE PLAN

13. STREET SECTIONS
14-23. PRELIMINARY GRADING

24. PRELIMINARY GRADING SECTIONS

25. GRADING CROSS SECTIONS & DETAILS

26. CUT/FILL MAP

27. CONCEPTUAL STORM DRAIN SYSTEMS MAP

26. CONCEPTUAL SANITARY SEWER SYSTEMS MAP
r
/
/
/ \
2 1

PROPOSED
Michael dr.
beach rd.
>
-< <c
f\l o
o
QJ
<c
o
)
/ \ / \ /
y
i <
11 1— I
I 2
aj
o
en
UJ x
<o
47 TOTAL PASSIVE PARK AREA: 57 Acres

PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT

CITY OF MARINA
211 HILLCREST AVENUE
MARINA, CALIFORNIA 93933
PH: (831) 884­1212
FAX: (831) 384­0425
SCALE: NONE

CITY OF MARINA
Marina Station "Passive Park" Exhibit
Original Tentative Map, 2007
EXHIBIT B1
7/27/22

EXHIBIT F
137

DEL MONTE BLVD

COSKY DR

SEAN CT

MICHELLE CT

HARBEN CIR

MCCULLOH CIR

MICHAEL DR

BEACH RD

DE FOREST RD

CRESCENT AVE

PAUL DAVIS DR

ABDY WAY

CARDOZA AVE

DREW ST
HWY 1

CRESCENT AVE

DE FOREST RD

SELLS CT

IONE OSLON

ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL

WINDYHILL
PARK

MCWD TANK
SITE

RESERVATION RD
HWY 1

STREET J

STREET F

STREET G

GOLF BLVD

STREET U

STREET Z

STREET AB

STREET AD

STREET AM

STREET AH

STREET AU

STREET AX

CRESCENT

STREET R

STREET M

STREET S

STREET QSTREET P

STREET T

DE FOREST RD

STREET W

STREET R

STREET M

STREET AD

STREET V

STREET AA

STREET X

STREET AZ

STREET AS STREET AT

STREET V

STREET AN

STREET S

STREET AO

STREET AQ

STREET AP

STREET AH

STREET K

STREET I
MARINA

STREET B

STREET X

GREENS DR
AVE

STREET E

STREET C

STREET O

STREET AV

STREET AW

STREET BB

STREET BC

STREET AI

STREET AK

STREET AL

STREET AJ

STREET BD

STREET BA
TAMC
* ******
** **
**** **
***
* ** ** ***** ********** ***
****
****
**** ****
** **
**
**
**
*
*
LEGEND

SUBDIVISION BOUNDARY
NOTES

1. HOA WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR FRONT YARD

MAINTENANCE ON ALL PRIVATE SINGLE FAMILY
LOTS
*
TOTAL PASSIVE PARK AREA: 39.9 Acres

PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT

CITY OF MARINA
211 HILLCREST AVENUE
MARINA, CALIFORNIA 93933
PH: (831) 884­1212
FAX: (831) 384­0425
SCALE: NONE

CITY OF MARINA
Marina Station "Passive Park" Exhibit
Proposed Tentative Map, 2021
EXHIBIT B2
7/27/22

EXHIBIT F
138
661\07\3336564.1
7/26/2022
Summary of Marina Station Settlement Agreements:

1. Agr
eement, Mutual Release and Covenant not to Sue with Sierra Club, Ventana Chapter Or
iginal Parties: Creekbridge Homes, LLC and Sierra Club, Ventana Chapter (SCVC) Parties after 2nd Amendment; Armstrong Owners and SCVC Or
iginal Agreement Date: April 8, 2008
1st Amendment Date : October 2008
2nd Amendment Date: June 9, 2010
Pri
mary Terms:
• Creekbridge agreed to modify Phase 8 to enlarge the open space on the western portion of the project, relocate homes in Phase 8 to Phase 7 and relocate the playing fields from Parcel 3 to Parcel 1, allowing for preservation of two wet meadows. Result of those changes is approximately 25 acres of conservation easement area on western edge of project
• Agreement incorporates the habitat restoration mitigation measures from the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) adopted as part of the certification of the Final EIR, including requirements for the preparation of restoration plans for loss of Monterey spineflower, coastal dune scrub and native grasslands. MMRP requires that restoration plans will be completed and approved prior to issuance of any grading or building permits, but Settlement Agreement contemplates that Developer will file a request to amend the MMRP to allow for completion and approval of Restoration Plans after construction of Phases 1-7 but before any grading on Phase 8. Phase 8 Final Map and building permits cannot be issued until successful implementation of Restoration Plans. • Restoration areas are contemplated to be located on conservation easements on land adjacent to Phase 8 owned at the time of the Settlement by the Armstrong Family, but off-site restoration is allowed.
• Parties to endeavor to negotiate and obtain conservation easements on the Armstrong Ranch within two years of the date of the recordation of the first final map. If conservation easements cannot be obtained on Armstrong Ranch within 2 years of first map, then parties to pursue conservation easement off-site within 30 months of the recordation of the first map.
• 2nd Amendment – Armstrong Owners became party to Settlement as successor to Creekbridge
• Armstrong agreed to record a Permanent Conservation and Open Space Easement over 50 acres north of and contiguous to Phase 8 between Highway 1 and Lapis Road including two vernal ponds in the conservation easement area. Conservation easement area satisfies all mitigation obligations for the Monterey Spineflower and Coastal Dune Scrub provided the conservation easement area and the on-site restoration area in Phase 8 equal at least 66 acres.
• Armstrong's obligation to grant the 50 acre permanent conservation easement is conditioned on finalization of the entitlements for the Marina Station project

EXHIBIT G
139

661\07\3336564.1
7/26/2022
including the Affordable Housing Agreement, Improvement Plans, Restoration and Mitigation Plans and Tentative and Final Maps.

• SCVC will not contest offsite mitigation of 42 acres of native grassland.

2. Settlement Agreement – Save Our Peninsula Committee

Parties: Save Our Peninsula Committee, Armstrong Owners, City of Marina, City Council of the City of Marina

Date: March 7, 2011

• City to require the payment of the TAMC fees prior to the issuance of building permits
• City to update fiscal impact study prior to issuance of final map taking into account the dedication of the conversation easements for habitat restoration • City to make best efforts to complete GHG Emissions Inventory and approval Climate Action plan prior to January 1, 2013 (City has met this obligation) • Developer can develop up to 680 homes, 71,904 square feet of office, 30,000 square feet of commercial and 325,812 square feet of industrial use after:
o satisfaction of all conditions of approval
o update fiscal impact study
o requirement that no word burning stoves will be allowed in the project incorporated into project (SOP has agreed that this requirement can be covered in the homeowners association covenants, conditions and restrictions)
o requirement that all single family homes will be equipped with solar panels as long as subsidy and tax credits remain effective (SOP has agreed that this requirement can be covered in the homeowners association covenants, conditions and restrictions)
o submittal of ROG emission program as required by EIR Mitigation Measure (SOP and City have agreed that submittal will be required prior to approval of first final map)
o conveyance of 50 acres of open space and conservation easement consistent with Sierra Club Settlement
• Remainder of Project can be developed when following additional conditions met:

o Submittal by developer of report on effectiveness of emissions program and approval of the report by the City
o conveyance of 33 acres into open space and conservation easements on property within Armstrong Ranch in addition to the 50 acres. Location of 33 acres requires approval of SOP

EXHIBIT G
140

EXHIBIT G
141

EXHIBIT G
142

EXHIBIT G
143

EXHIBIT G
144

EXHIBIT G
145

EXHIBIT G
146

EXHIBIT G
147

EXHIBIT G
148

EXHIBIT G
149

EXHIBIT G
150

EXHIBIT G
151

EXHIBIT G
152

EXHIBIT G
153

EXHIBIT G
154

EXHIBIT G
155

EXHIBIT G
156
SECOND AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT, MUTUAL RELEASE AND COYENAN_!

NOTTOSUE

THIS SECOND AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT, MUTIJAL RELEASE AND COVENANT NOT TO SUE ("Second Amendment") is made and effective a~ of the 9th day of June, 2010, by and between ARMSTRONG OWNERS ("Armstrong"), and SIERRA CLUB, VENTANA CHAPTER ("SCVC"), collectively "the parties."
RECITALS:

A. In April 2008 Creelcbridge Homes, LLC ("Crcekbridge") and SCVC executed that certain Agreement, Mutual Release And Covenant Not to Sue ("Agreement") pertaining to a development known as Marina Station located on a portion of the Armstrong Ranch in the City of Marina, Monterey County, California. The Agreement is binding upon and for the benefit of the successors, representatives and assigns of the parties.

B. In October of 2008 Creekbridge and SCVC executed that certain First Amendment to Agreement, Mutual Release and Covenant Not to Sue ("First Amendment"), which clarified that the Armstrong Owners were not a party to the Agreement and that nothing in the Agreement imposed any obligation or benefit upon the Armstrong Owners.

C. Creekbridge has withdrawn from the Marina Station project.

D. The Armstrong Owners are the owners of the Armstrong Ranch, including the portions on which the Marina Station project is located, and are referred to collectively in this Second Amendment as "Armstrong." Notwithstanding the first Amendment. Armstrong is the ~ucce..<;sor in interest to Creekbridge, and has agreed to become a party to the Agreement, subject to all rights and obligations imposed thereunder.

E. Armstrong and SCVC desire to further amend the Agreement to provide additional details and expanded mitigation for implementation of the Agreement.

NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals and the mutual covenants and promises herein contained and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, Armstrong and SCVC hereby agree as follows:

EXHIBIT G
156-A
AGREEMENT.

1. Defined Terms. All capitalized te~ms used in this Amendment which arc not otherwise defined in this Amendment shall have the meanings given to such tem1s in. the Agreement.

2. Phase 8 Modifications. The parties acknowledge and agree that the Phase 8 Modifications described in Section 1.1 of the Agreement will involve displacing some of the planned dwellings and relocating others within Phases 7 & 8. With these modifications there will be total on-site mitigation of approximately 25 acres for both the coastal dune scrub and the Monterey spirieflower, including approx. 18 acres of contiguous mitigation in Phase 8.

3. Off-Site Mitigation. In connection with implementation of the Habitat Restoration Requirements contained in Section 1.2 ofthe Agreement, SCVC will not contest off­ site mitigation (i.e., outside of the Armstrong Ranch, in such areas as Garland Ranch, Tres Pinos, among others) for the balance of the 42 acre native grassland mitigation requirement that cannot be included within the on-site or conservation easement restoration site.

4. Restoration Plan. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 3 above, the Restoration Plan shall be prepared. in a manner consistent with Section 1.2 of t'he Agreement.

The Restoration Plan shall include a study of, and recommendations for, restoration and/or mitigation of breeding, foraging/hunting and migratory habitat for the following special status spc.-cies reported in the Marina Station ErR (certified March 4, 2008) as having been observed on the project site: burrowing owl; northeril harrier; California homed lark; .loggerhead sh1ike; California tiger salamander; black legless lizard; coast horn lizard; American badger. SCVC and the California Nativ~ Plant Society shall have the right (but not the obligation) to participate in the creation of the Restoration Plan, but not the legal right to approve or disapprove the Restoration Plan _ SCVC reserves the right to challenge the Rc.storation Plan approved by the City and US.FWS if it believes it to be inadequate.

5. Conservation and Open Space Easement. Subject to the satisfaction of all conditions precedent contained in this Second Amendment, Annstrong agrees to record a Penn anent Conservation and Open Space Easement on 50 acres of the Armstrong Ranch north of and contiguous to the proposed Phase 8 development between Hwy 1 and Lapis Road configured with extended frontage along Hwyl and to include the two (2) vernal ponds located within in this area (the "Easement Area"). Ibis easement, together with the 18 acres of contiguous on-site mitigation in Phase 8 shall represent full and complete satisfaction of all mitigation requirements of the Marina Station project for both Monterey Spineflower and Coastal Dune Scrub, provided that the Easement Area pJus the on:-site restoration area within Phase 8 is equal to or greater than sixty-six (66) contiguous acres. Armstrong shall reserve all rights to transfer or convey title to the Easement Area for fair and reasonable compensation (subject to the Permanent Conservation and Open Space Easement) and to use the Easement Area as a mitigation area.

6. SCVC Legal Costs. Armstrong agrees to pay SCVC's legal costs for negotiating and drafting this Second Amendment and the terms of the conservation easement. 2 EXHIBIT G
156-B

7. Conditions Precedent. Armstrong's obligations under this Second Amendment, including the obligation to convey the Conservation and Open Space Easement pursuant to Section 5 above, are expressly conditioned upon a) the settlement and successful resolution on terms acceptable to Armstrong of Monterey County Superior Court Case No. 90148, Save Our Peninsula Committee v. City of Marina eta/.; and b) finalization of all remaining entitlements for the Marina Station project including, but not limited to, approval of an Affordable Housing Agreement; Improvement Plans; Restoration and Mitigation Plans; Tentative and Final Maps.

8. Cooperation. The parties agree to pursue the implementation of the Agreement in a spirit of good faith understanding and a long term working arrangement between the parties to work cooperatively together over the years on potential subsequent modifications or revisions to the Marina Station site plan that may be required, provided however that such modifications or revisions do not materially intensify the overall level of development or expand the footprint of the proposed development beyond the scope provided for by the Agreement Such a good faith cooperative understanding is an essential provision of this Second Amendment, recognizing that a project of the size and scope ofMarina Station will take a number of years to fully develop and there could be changes in market conditions and/or product innovations that would necessitate some project modifications.

9. Substitution of Partv. Armstrong is hereby substituted in the place and stead of Creekbridge as a party to the Agreement, assumes all of the obligation of Creekbridge under the Agreement. and succeeds to all of the rights and benefits of Creekbridge under the Agreement. 1 0. Full Force and Effect. As amended by this Second Amendment, the Agreement is hereby ratified and affirmed and shall continue in full force and effect.

11. Governing Provision. In the event of a conflict between the provisions of this Second Amendment and the provisions of the Agreement and First Amendment, the provisions of this Second Amendment shall govern, control and prevail.

12. Countemarts. This Second Amendment may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, and a11 of which, when taken together shall constitute but a single instrument Signatures on executed counterparts sent by electronic transmissions shall have the same force and effect as original signatures.

13. Notice. The persons authorized to receive notice under section 1.14 of the Agreement are:

ToSCVC:

Steve Zmak
Executive Committee
Sierra Club, Ventana Chapter
(Monterey & Santa Cruz Counties}
3200 Crescent Ave.

Marina, CA 93933
Tel: 831-8834459
3 EXHIBIT G
156-C
with a copy to:

Mark Wolfe, Esq.

M.R. Wolfe & Associates
49 Geary Stree~ Suite 200
San Francisco, CA 94108
Tel: 415-369-9400
To Armstrong Owners:

I ack Armstrong
270 River Road
Salinas, CA 93908
Tel: 831-455-1907
with a copy to:

Brian Finegan, Esq.

P. 0. Box 2058
Salinas, CA 93902
Tel: 831-757-3641
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Second Amendment individually or by their duly authorized representatives.

SIERRA CLUB, VENTANA CHAPTER ARMSTRONG 0\VNERS
I I
! By fNrun __ e_:_S_te-\-~-Z-rn--ac_k __________ ____ __ I Title: Chapter Executive Committe e Member
By ______ ~------------------
Name: Rita Dalessio
Title: Chapter Executive Committee Chair
4 EXHIBIT G
156-D
wi.th a copy to:
.Mark Wolfe, Esq.

M.R.. Wolfe & Associates
49 Geary Stree t, Suite 200
San Francisco, CA 94108
Tel: 415-369-9400
To Armstrong Owners:

Jack Annstrong
2 70 River Road
Salinas. CA 93908
Tel: 83 t -455-1907
with a copy to:

Brian Finegan, Esq.

P. 0. Box 2058
Salinas , C A 93902
Tel: 83 t -757-3641
IN WfTNESS WJ-lEREOF, the parties hereto have execute.d this Second Amendment individually or by their duly authorized representatives.

SIERRA CLUB, VENT ANA CH.A.PTER
By ________ _ ______________ ____ __
Name: Steve Zmack
Title: Chapter Executive ConJJnittee ~·1embcr
4 AR..".1STRONG OWNERS
By __________ ________ ______ _
Name: James Irvine Annstron g,. Jr.

Title: Attorney-in-Fact
By ________ ____________ ____ _
Name.: John A. Armstrong
Title.: Attome.y-in-Fact

EXHIBIT G
156-E
with a copy to:

Mark Wolfe, Esq.

M.R. Wolfe & Associates
49 Geary Street, Suite 200
San Francisco, CA 941 08
Tel: 415-369-9400
To Armstrong Owners:

Jack Annstrong
270 River Road
Salinas, CA 93908
Tel: 831-455-1907
with a copy to:

Brian Finegan, Esq.

P. 0. Box 2058
Salinas, CA 93902
Tel: 831-757-3641
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Second Amendment individually or by their duly authorized representatives.

SIERRA CLUB, VENT ANA CHAPTER
By----==--&_'~--~-~ -
Name: Steve Zrnack
Title: Chapter Executive Committee Member
By ________ ________ __________ _
Name: Rita Dalessio
Title: Chapter Executive Committee Chair
4 ARMSTRONG OWNERS
By ________ ________________ __
Name: James Irvine Armstrong, Jr.

Title: Attorney-in-Fact
By __________________ ____ __ __
Name: John A. Armstrong
Title: Attorney-in-Fact

EXHIBIT G
156-F
This Settlement Agreement is made as of the 7th day of March,2011 ,by and
between SAVB OUR PENINSULA COMMITTEE, Petitioner;THE CITY OF MARINA, a municipal corporation in the State of California; THE CITY COUNCIL OF MARINA, legislative bodyfor the CITY OF MARINA, and ARMSTRONG OWNERS (ARMSTRONG)
A. The CITY OF MARINA approved the Marina Station project,certified the Environmental Impact Report for the Project and approved by resolution other legislative and land use approvals on March 4, 2008.

B. The total project consists of approximately 1,360 residences,60,000 square feet of commercial retail,143,808 square feet of office use and 651,624 square feet ofIndustrial uses. The project is located on a portion of the Armstrong Marina Ranch which is owned by the Armstrong family (Armstrong Owners) C. On April 3, 2008 SAVE OUR PENINSULA COMMITTEE filed a Writ of Mandate in the Monterey Superior Court, Case Number 90148 (the Action) challenging the adequacyof the Environmental Impact Report certified bythe CITY and the other land use and legislative approvals approved bythe CITY on March 4,2008 (collectively, the Entitlements).

D. On or about June 25,2010 J AND J ARMSTRONG LIMITED
PARTNERSHIP intervened into Case Number 90148. J AND J ARMSTRONG LIMITED PARTNERSHIP is one of the owners of the Armstrong Marina Ranch,and intervened on behalf of all of the Armstrong Owners.

E. The Transportation Agency for Monterey County(TAMC) prepared a nexus study (Kimley-Horn,March 26,2008) for a Regional Development Impact Fee (RDIF) based on the Association of Monterey BayArea Governments' Regional Travel Demand Model (the Nexus Study). The Nexus Study identified regional transportation projects necessaryto mitigate the impacts of new development in the region which impact the regional transportation network. Based on the Nexus Study,TAMC adopted the RDIF and prepared a Joint Powers Agreement for administration of the RDIF.The Cityof Marina has adopted the Joint Powers Agreement and the ordinance imposing the RDIF requiring all new development in the City of Marina,including the project,to pay the RDIF. The joint powers agreement and the RDIF became effective on August 27, 2008.

EXHIBIT G
157
F. The Marina General Plan EIR contains Mitigation Measure 8.1(B) (Marina Participation in Fair-Share Regional Financing Program), referred to herein as "MM

8. 1(B)," that reads as follows:
"Marina will participate in a regional transportation financing mechanism,ifand when adopted by TAMC, and will undertake the steps necessary tofund its"fair share" of regional roadway and transit capital improvements (through traffic impactfees exacted from developers inportions of Marina outside offormer Fort Ord) based on a nexus analysis of the updated regional transportation model.If such afinancing mechanism is not inplace at the time a Specific Plan application for Armstrong Ranch is submitted to the Cityfor consideration,the City's capital improvement program should be updated to include a nexus studyfor the affected section of Highway1 within the Marina Planning Areafor thepurpose of determining needed interchange improvements, the cost of such improvements, and thefair-share portion of such improvement costs which should be assumed by Armstrong Ranch development and other new development which would significantly impact those highway segments within theplanning area." G. The Marina General Plan EIRcontains Mitigation Measure 8.l(C) (Update of Regional Traffic Impact Analysis by Armstrong Ranch), referred to herein as"MM

8.1(C)," that reads as follows:
"Aspart of the environmental review undertaken for the required Armstrong Ranch Specific Plan, an update of the regional and cumulative traffic impact analysis contained in the Marina FORA Reuse Plan EIR shall be undertaken for thepurpose of identifying traffic-related impacts (and correspondingfair sharefunding of needed improvements) on the regional roadsystem related to build-out of the Armstrong Ranch as allowed under the Marina General Plan." H. It is now the desire and intent of the Parties hereto to finally and completely settle this litigation,the Action and all issues and claims related thereto, pursuant to the terms of this Agreement.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual agreements and covenants contained herein,and other valuable consideration,the receipt of which is acknowledged by the parties,the parties hereto agree as follows:

2. Except as otherwise stated herein, prior to the CITY OF MARINA issuing afinal map and/or permit for any grading on the subject property pursuant to the approvals that are the subject matter of the instant litigation the following shall be accomplished and/or acknowledged as having been accomplished:

EXHIBIT G
158
A. The
City of Marina represents that it determined that the TAMC nexus study dated March 26, 2008, which includes analysis of the section of Highway 1 within the Marina Planning Area and determines the fair-share obligation of new development for needed regional transportation improvements, and the adoption by the City of the Joint Powers Agreement and ordinance imposing the Regional Development Impact Fee (RDIF) fulfills the mandates of General Plan EIR Mitigation Measure 8.1 (B). Petitioner will not object to such a determination.

B. As part of the environmental review for the Marina Station Specific Plan and by subsequent actions Marina FORA Reuse Plan EIR (by TAMC in 1996) was updated bythe TAMC Nexus Study for the Regional Impact Fee (2004) and bythe Final Updated Regional Impact Fee Nexus Study (2008) and the enactment of the Regional DevelopmentImpact Fee (RDIF) in August 2008. The Cityrequires the Marina Station project to paythe RDIF as its fair share of the funding for the identified needed improvements to the regional road system..The City represents that it has determined that the foregoing actions adhere to and satisfy the policyrequirements of General Plan Mitigation Measure 8.1 (C). Petitioner will not object to such a determination.

C. The City will require an updated Fiscal Impact Report prior to the issuance of a final map and/or permit for any grading on the subject property. In updating the report and considering consistency with City's fiscal neutralitypolicy,the Cityshall take into consideration the economic,legal,social,technological and other benefits derived from the ARMSTRONG OWNERS dedication into conservation easements of 83 acres within the Armstrong Marina Ranch for habitat restoration as spelled out in this agreement and the agreement between the ARMSTRONG OWNERS and the Sierra Club.

1. The City shall make a reasonable effort,subject to scheduling and funding by AMBAG, to complete the Community-wide GHG Emissions Inventory and approve a GHG Climate Action Plan or its equivalent prior to January1,2013. If the Climate Action Plan is not completed by January 1,2013, but the Citythereupon makes a representation that it has made a reasonable effort to complete the Climate Action Plan, Petitionerwill not object to such representation.

2. The City shall give notice to the Armstrong Owners regarding the preparation of the GHG Climate Action Plan.

E.Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this agreement, the developer of the project shall be entitled to record final maps and obtain building permits and to develop up to 680 residences (but not Phase 8), 30,000 square feet of commercial retail uses,71,904 square feet of office uses,and 325,812 square feet of industrial uses ("Increment One") upon the occurrence of the following: i) the execution of this agreement by all parties;ii) the dismissal of the Action; iii) the satisfaction of all conditions of approval previouslyapplied bythe City (or modified by the City pursuant

EXHIBIT G
159
to the provisions of the Sierra Club agreement) to the Entitlements for the portions of the . project for which permits are obtained; iv) satisfaction of the requirements of sub- paragraphs 2(C), 2(F) and 2(G) of this agreement; v) submittal by the developer of an ROG emission program as required by Final EJR Mitigation Measure 4.3-5, including. criteria
for assessing effectiveness of the program; and vi) the conveyance of the 50 acres into open space and conservation easement as required by the agreement between the Armstrong Owners and the Sierra Club.The developer of the project shall not be entitled to file final maps and obtain building permits for the balance of the project ("Increment Two") until all of the following have occurred:i) the·satisfaction of all conditions of approval previously applied by the City (or modified by the City pursuant to the provisions of the Sierra Club agreement) to the Entitlements for the portions of the project for which permits are obtained; ii) satisfaction of the requirements of sub- paragraph 2(D) of this agreement; iii) Submittal by the developer of a report on the effectiveness of the ROG emission program and approval of said report by the City; and iv) conveyance of 33 acres into open space and conservation easement on property within the Armstrong Marina Ranch. The 33 acres will be in addition to the Armstrong Owners' agreement with the Sierra Club to convey 50 acres into open space and conservation easement on property located within the Armstrong Marina Ranch outside of the boundaries of the project.There would then be a total of 83 acres of property located within the Armstrong Marina Ranch that would be transferred into conservation easement by the Armstrong Owners. As to the 33 acres that is being added by this agreement, the Armstrongs shall determine the suitable site on the Armstrong Marina Ranch for habitat restoration for native grasslands. The location of the 33 acres shall require the approval of SOP. Said approval shall not be unreasonably withheld.

F. Add to Development Agreement and Specific Plan approvals that there shall be no wood burning stoves in any residence, commercial (other than barbeques and pizza ovens in restaurants) or industrial parcel and that a restrictive covenant shall be filed on each lot of record with the county recorder's office specifying that no wood burning stoves are permitted.

G. Add condition that i) all new detached single-family homes in the project shall be equipped with solar electric panels as long as the January 2006 subsidy and tax credit program remains in effect, and ii) if the solar subsidy/tax credit program is no longer in effect, the developer shall equip all new single-family homes in the project with infrastructure so that solar panels can be added
H. lfthe City fails or refuses to satisfy in a timely manner the tasks referred to in sub-paragraphs C or D of this Paragraph 2, the Armstrong Owners or the developer of the project, shall have the right, but not the obligation, to complete the task or cause it to be completed, and pay the project's fair share of the cost thereof. The City shall recover from developers of other projects within the City their fair share of the costs incurred by the Armstrong Owners or the developer in completing such task,or causing it to be completed, and from said funds shall reimburse the Armstrong Family or their developer,as the case may be, for the costs incurred by them over and above the project's fair share of such costs ..

EXHIBIT G
160

3. Abandonment of Claims and Challenges. Petitioner shall forthwith file a dismissal with prejudice of the Action and abandon the prosecution of any and all claims and causes of action arising from the Petition and the alleged lack of City' s
compliance with California Environmental Quality Act and the General Plan and Zoning Statutes heretofore sued upon in any court and including, without limitation,Case Number 90148 pending in the Superior Court of California, County of Monterey.Such abandonment shall be reflected in a dismissal with prejudice to be filed by Petitioner promptly upon execution of this Agreement.Petitioner shall support the City's approval of the Agreement between the ARMSTRONG OWNERS and the Sierra Club. Upon the filing of the dismissal, all of the Entitlements for the project, with the exception of the Development Agreement, shall be deemed in full force and effect, subject to the provisions of this agreement and the conditions previously applied by the City to the project, with all timelines for expiration of said entitlements to run from the date of the filing of the dismissal.

4. Fees and Costs. The Armstrong Owners agree to pay Richard H.

Rosenthal the sum of $187,500.00 for fees and costs incurred in this litigation. The Armstrong Owners shall deposit this sum with Brian Finegan, Attorney at Law, within five (5) days after the execution by all parties of this agreement.Said deposit shall be held by Brian Finegan in a separate account, in trust for the benefit of Richard H.

Rosenthal, and shall be delivered to Richard H. Rosenthal promptly upon filing of the dismissal with prejudice and presentation to Brian Finegan of a conformed copy of the filed dismissal with prejudice. .

5. Settlement Not Admission. The parties agree that this Agreement and the settlement reached herein does not and shall not constitute or be construed in this matter or any other matter as an admission or indication on the part of the CITY that the CITY'S approval of the Project or any process or procedure related thereto violates or violated any statute, ordinance, or other requirement of law in any manner or respect whatsoever, or that any document or resolution relied on or adopted was deficient in any respect, or that any of the allegations in the Petition providing any basis for the relief sought are true.

6. Release. Except for the retention of jurisdiction over the parties hereto to insure compliance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement provided in Paragraph 7 below, by execution of this Agreement, the parties hereto mutually release and fully discharge each other and any and all of their present and past officers, partners, agents, employees, elected officials, insurers, attorneys and representatives and any other person, firm, entity or corporation against which the parties should at any time in the future seek relief, from any and all claims, demands, or causes of action in any manner related to, or arising from any actions or inactions, any errors or omissions and any involvement in any transactions or occurrences related in any way, either directly or indirectly, to the allegations in the Petition. .

EXHIBIT G
161

7. Performance of Agreement and Dispute Resolution. The parties agree to do all things necessary to effectuate the terms of this Agreement and not to do or fail to do anything directly or indirectly, that will interfere with the implementation of the terms and conditions of this Agreement. If
a dispute arises concerning a Party's compliance
with this Agreement, the Party asserting breach shall provide written notice of that assertion to the allegedly breaching Party. Within 14 days of receipt of that notice, if the circumstances constituting the alleged breach have not been cured, the Parties shall meet and confer to attempt in good faith to resolve the dispute. The parties understand that CCP 664.6 allow trial courts to retain jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the Settlement Agreement to the extent the parties elect to submit disputes regarding compliance with the agreement to the court. With this understanding,the parties agree that the trial court shall retain jurisdiction to hear disputes regarding any actions taken by any party pursuant to this Settlement Agreement. Any such proceeding regarding any actions taken by the City shall be limited to and based upon the record of the City's proceedings on the contested matter.

8. Severability. Every provision of this Agreement is intended to be severable. In the event any term or provision hereof is declared to be illegal or invalid, for any reason, whatsoever, by a court of competent jurisdiction,such illegality or invalidity shall not affect the balance of the terms and provisions hereof, which terms and provisions shall remain binding and enforceable.

9. Voluntary Agreement. The parties hereto declare that they have read and understand this Agreement and warrant and represent that this Agreement is executed by them voluntarily without duress or undue influence on the part of or on behalf of any party hereto. The parties hereby acknowledge that they have been represented in negotiations and for the preparation of this Agreement by counsel of their own choice, that they have read this Agreement and have had it fully explained to them by said counsel, and that they are fully aware of the contents of this Agreement and of the legal effect of each and every provision hereof.

10. Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the sole and entire agreement and understanding between the parties,with respect to the entire subject matter hereof,and any and all prior discussions, negotiations, commitments, or understandings related hereto, if any, are hereby merged herein.No representations, oral or otherwise,expressed or implied,other than those contained herein have been made by any party hereto with respect to the matters contained herein.

11. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts,each of which shall be deemed an original agreement,but all of which together shall constitute one agreement.

12. Notice. Any notices required by this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have provided when delivered to the addresses for the other Parties at the addresses provided in this paragraph, or at such other address for a Party as shall have

EXHIBIT G
162
been specified by the Party in written noticed provided to other Parties. Notices hall be addressed and delivered as follows:

Anthony J. Altfeld
City Manager
City of Marina
211 Hillcrest Avenue
Marina,CA.
93933
with copyto:

John A. Armstrong
270 River Road
Salinas,CA 93908
Rob Wellington
City of Marina,City Attorney
Wellington Law Offices
857 Cass Street, Suite D
Monterey,CA. 93940
Brian Finegan
60 West Alisal Street, Suite 1
Salinas,CA. 93902
Save Our Peninsula Committee
In care of Richard H.Rosenthal
P.O.Box 1021
Carmel Valley,CA. 93924

13. Binding Effect. The terms, covenants and conditions contained in this agreement shall be binding and inure to the benefit of the individual members,successors and assigns of the parties,including without limitation the members of the Armstrong Owners and the members of the Save Our Peninsula Committee.

14. Memorandum Recorded. A memorandum of this Agreement may be recorded at Petitioner's option,and the Armstrong Family, at the request of Petitioner, shall deliverto Petitioner a signed and acknowledged memorandum including a legal description of the project site, suitable for recording.

15. Notices of Proceedings. The City shall provide notice to Petitioner of all actions or proceedings of the City relating to the further permitting of the project or the implementation of the tasks contained in this agreement.

16. Warranty of Authority .•Each of the signatories to this agreement, including those signing as an attorney-in-fact,represents and warrants that he or she has the legal right,power and authorityto enter into this agreement,to legally bind the persons or entities on behalf of whom this agreement is executed,and to consummate the transaction contemplated hereby, and the execution,deliveryand performance of this agreement has been duly authorized.

EXHIBIT G
163

17. Confidentialit
y. The terms and contents of this agreement are
confidential among the parties,and shallnot be disclosed to third parties except to the extent that they are disclosed in ajoint written statement signed by all parties,are part of court proceedings relating to the enforcement of this agreement, or as may be otherwise required bylaw or ordered bya court of competent jurisdiction..

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date first above written.

EXHIBIT G
164

J& J ARMSTRONG LIMITED
PA

RTNERSHIP
BY:~
I~Wv:

The Irvine Armstrong,Jr.,and Carol V.

Armstrong Revocable Trust under Trust
Agreement dated ember 12, 1995
The 2003 Susanne Armstrong Irrevocable
Trus ted November ,200;--

EXHIBIT G
165
The trust for the benefit of Mary Janet
Armstrong Weber, as
set forth in the Order
Settling Report of Trustees due to the death
of Lois Armstrong, etc.,in the Estate of By: 2000 Jay M. Armstrong Revocable Irvine Armstrong,also known as James Trust UID/T 4/24/00 Irvine Armstrong,deceased,recorded •.-rb~~ Its: BGyee~n.ra~~~, ,;f::.~:r- January4, 1988,in 12191 atPage6:~ ~~~,,:'J';""
: James Irvine Armstro, ~rmstr011i,TfUSt
Trustee
JAY M. ARMSTRONG FAMILY

LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
YDE W. JOHNSON, III and

LAURENA JOHNSON FAMILY
LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, a California
~~~~1r::r-
Its: p'k-a~at..i4Lk}~
Date:~q{ It201/, (

EXHIBIT G
166

17. Confidentiality.The terms and contents ofthis agreement are confidential among the parties, and shall not be disclosed to third parties except to the extent that they are disclosed in a joint written statement signed by all parties, are part of court proceedings relating to the enforcement of this agreement, or as may be otherwise required by law or ordered by a court of competent jurisdiction.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date first above written. . .

Date:(fflfl-f<e
tf :2D /1

EXHIBIT G
167

17. Confi
dentiality.The terms and contents of this agreement are confidential among the parties, and shall not be disclosed to third parties except to the. extent that theyare disclosed in a jointwritten statement signed by all parties,arepartof court proceedings relating to the enforcement of this agreement,or as may beotherwise· required bylawor ordered bya court of competent jurisdiction.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date first abovewritten.

Date:~ &~ "JocD~
By:~=to 'I ~\ IVVv.'" ()

EXHIBIT G
168
The trust for the benefit of Mary Janet
.Armstrong Weber, as set.
forth in the Order
Settling Report of Trustees due to the death
of Lois Armstrong, etc., in the Estate of
Irvine Armstrong, also known as James
Irvine Armstrong, deceased, recorded
January 4, 1988, in reel 2191 at page 643
JAY M. ARMSTRONG FAMILY

LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
By: 2000 Jay M. Armstrong Revocable
TrustD/D/T 4124/00
Its: General Partner
By: _
Jay M. Armstrong, TrusteeBy: James Irvine Armstrong, Jr., Co- Trustee
CLYDE W. JOHNSON,III and

LAURENA JOHNSON FAMILY
LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, a California
limited partnership
By:, _
Its:, _
~4i(~
By: .

EXHIBIT G
169

ATTORNEY OR
PARTY WITHOUT A TTORNEY (Name, Slate Bar number,and address):

RICHARD H. ROSENTHAL #62574 FOR COURT USE:ONL Y
LAW OFFICES OF RICHARD H. ROSENTHAL
287880 DORRIS DRIVE, SUTIE 110, CARMEL, CA. 93924
FILED
P.O. BOX 1021, CARMEL VALLEY, CA. 93924
TELEPHONE NO: 8316255193 FAX NO. (Optional):

E-MAIL ADDRESS (Optional):

ATTORNEY FOR (Name): SAVB OUR PENINSULA COMMITTEE MAR'18 2011

SUPERIORCOURTOF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF MONTEREY
CONNIE MAZZEISTREET ADDRESS: 1200 AGUAJITO ROAD
MAILING ADDRESS: 1200 AGUAJITO ROAD ClERK OFTHESUPERIOR COURT CITY AND ZIP CODE: MONTEREY, CA. 93940 DEPUlY
BRANCH NAME: J.CEDiLLO
PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER:SAVE OUR PENINSULA COMMITTEE
DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT:CITY OFMARINA, ET.AL.

REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL CASE NUMBER:
o Personal Injury, Property Damage, or Wrongful Death
M 90148o Motor Vehicle o Other
o FamilyLaw o Eminent Domain
m Other (specify) : PETITIONFORWRIT OF MANDATE
-A conformed copy will not be returned by the clerk unless a method of return isprovIded withthe document -

1. TO THE CLERK: Please dismiss this action as follows:
a. (1) [{] With prejudice (2) 0 Without prejudice
b.(1) 0 Complaint (2) 0 Petition
(3) 0 Cross-complaint filed by(name):
(4) 0 Cross-complaint filed by(name):
(5) [{] Entire action of all parties and all causes of action (6)0 Other(specify):*
on (date):
on (date):

2. (Complete in allcases except familylaw cases.)
o Court fees and costs were waived for a party in this case.(ThiS in;jatiOn may be obtained from the c Chec1d.the declaration on the back of this form must be completed). /) Date:MARCH' ,2011 i'
.~~c;:~~~..:.~9.~~~1.'l:I.f\~. ............ ... ~!
(TYPE OR PRINT NAME OF m ATTORNEY 0 PARTY WiTHOUT ATTORNEY) "If dismissal requested Is of specified parties only of specified causes of action only, or of specified cross-complaints only. so state and identify the parties, causes of action, or cross-complaints to be dismissed.
(SIGNATURE)
Attorney or party withoutattorney for:
o Plaintiff/Petitioner 0 Defendant/Respondent
o Cross-Complainant

3.T~.:HE~'jRK'Con,en''0'he abovedl,ml".1 I,herebygiVen.""? ~ ~,:
//#tz2j/5;20//Bz.'AzJhNGG.oN ~~~--~
(TYPE OR PRINT NAME OF W ATTORNEY 0 PARTY Yv1THOUT ATTORNEY) (SIGNATUR~ ••If a cross-complaint- or Response (Family Law) seeking affirmative Attorney or party without attorney for.I.AIfCI?I/E.F~I(7 relief- is on file.the attorney for cross-complainant (respondent) must D'" . 0 .~F- sign this consentifrequired by Code of Civil Procedure section 581 0) Plaintiff/Petitioner Defendant/Respondent or 0). 0 Cross-Complainant
(TO~mPleted by clerk) i.1 •

4. Dismissal entered asrequested on (date)MAR 1I.l2011
5 Dismissal entered on (date): as to only (name):

6. 0 Dismissalnot entered as requested for the following reasons (specify):

7. a.'tzjAttorney or party withoutattorney notified on(date): MAR 1U 2011 b.0 Attorney or party without attorney not notified.Filing party failed to provide o a copy to be conformed 0 means to return conformed copy Date: MAR1L 7n,'lCON!\HE MAZZEIClerk,by_. J_,_C_E_D_I_L_L_O__ ,~:~~~2 Form Adopted for Mandatory Use . REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL Code of CivilProcedure. §581 etseQ.;Judicial CouncHof Califomia • . Gov. Code. §68637(c):Cal.RuleSof Court. rule 3.1390 CIV.110 (Rev. July 1.2009) www.cour!infp.C8.gOV

EXHIBIT G
170
July 25, 2022 Item No. 11a

Honorable Mayor and Members City Council Meeting
of the Marina City Council August 3, 2022

CITY COUNCIL CONSIDER ADOPTING RESOLUTION NO. 2022 -,

AWARDING A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR THE CITY PARK

BARRACKS AND CYPRESS KNOLLS BUILD INGS BLIGHT REMOVAL
2022 PROJECT TO UNLIMITED ENVIRONMENTAL INC. FOR THE
BASE BID IN THE AMOUNT OF $4,245,000; ALLOCATING AND

APPROPRIATING ADDITIONAL BLIGHT REMOVAL FUNDING IN
THE AMOUNT OF $577,000; AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY

MANAGER TO EXECUTE CONTRACT D OCUMENTS SUBJECT TO
FINAL REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE CITY ATTORNEY ; AND

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER OR DESIGNEE TO EXPEND UP
TO AN ADDITIONAL 10% OF THE CONTRACT AMOUNT FOR

CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCIES AND TO EXECUTE ALL
CONSTRUCTION CHANGE ORDERS ON BEHALF OF THE CITY;

AND AUTHORIZING THE FINANCE DIRECTOR TO MAKE
NECESSARY ACCOUNTING AND BUGETARY ENTRIES.

REQUEST:

It is requested that the City Council consider approving and adopting Resolution 202 2- for the following actions:

1. Awarding a construction contract for the City Park Barracks and Cypress Knolls Buildings Blight Removal 2022 Project to Unlimited Environmental Inc. of Long Beach, CA for the base bid in the amount of $4,245,000; and

2. Allocating and appropriating additional blight removal funding in the amount of $415,440 to project HSF2101 and $161,560 to project HSF2103 for a total of $577,000; and

3. Authorizing the City Manager to execute contract documents , EXHIBIT A, subject to final review and approval by the City Attorney; and

4. Authorizing t he City Manager or designee to expend up to an additional 10% of the contract amount for potential construction contingencies and to execute all construction change orders on behalf of the City; and

5. Authorizing the Finance Director to make necessary accounting and budgetary entries.

BACKGROUND:

The closure of Fort Ord resulted in land being deeded to the City of Marina (“City”) in an “as- is” condition. The land contains numerous buildings that served the former Army base, which have deteriorated since 1994 and need to be removed as part of the land redevelopment.

Some of the buildings are on property that the City will retain and must be removed or renovated for adaptive reuse. These include 62 -65 barracks buildings and 260 duplex housing units on what was planned to be the Cypress Knolls development.

Although the Fort Ord Reuse Authority (FORA) sunsetted on June 30, 2020, FORA secured bond funding for blight removal prior to closure. Included in the bond funding are FORA bond trust funds allocated to the City amounting to $8,561,968 and escrow bonds that are projected to generate $6.5M in blight removal funding through 2025.
1 On September 15, 2020, October 27, 2020, and January 20, 2021, the Marina City Council adopted Resolution No s. 2020 -127, 2020-140 and 2021 -11, respectively, receiving staff presentations on blight removal and blight removal projects and provide d direction to staff on priorities for blight removal.

On May 4, 2021, the City Council passed Resolution No. 2021 -42 approving an amendment to the Program Management Services and Construction Management and Inspection between the City and Wallace Group, to add program management and construction management and inspection services for the execution of hazardous material abatement an d blighted building removal projects.

The Wallace Group prepared bidding documents (plans, specifications, and estimates) for the blight removal project. The goal for this project is for the abatement, proper removal, and disposal of forty-five barracks and miscellaneous debris, including debris from two burnt buildings at the proposed City Park at the Dunes located along Second Avenue and 8th Street (City Park) and thirty duplex buildings and miscellaneous debris including debris from one burnt building, at the Cypress Knoll area along Rendova Avenue and Third Avenue (Cypress Knoll) for future park and or residential development . Site plans are shown in EXHIBITS B and C.

On March 10, 2022, the City Planning Commission held a public hearing and adopted Resolution No. 2022-05b, approving the removal of thirty-four trees at the proposed City Park location and five trees at the Cypress Knolls location to remove the blighted buildings. All healthy trees to be removed are to be replaced at a 2:1 ratio.

On March 15, 2022, the City Council passed Resolution No. 202 2-43 approving advertising and calling for bids for the City Park Barracks and Cypress Knolls Buildings Blight Removal 2022 Project (“Project”).

The two parcels, 031 -201-005 (City Park) and 031 -221-008 (Cypress Knolls), included in this Project were part of the scope of the original Removal Action Work Plan (RAW; Northgate, 2006) for Soil Impacted by Lead -Based Paint at former Fort Ord . For these p arcels to be used for residential housing or for a non-restricted use, the City must follow the approved remedy in the RAW from 2006 with the updated lead cleanup goal of 80 mg/kg.

Staff in consultation with Department of Toxic Substance Control ( DTSC) determined that soil removal would be required at a greater depth to remediate lead in the soil adjacent to buildings to be removed. Due to additional depth of soil removal, additional tree removal was identified.

On June 9, 2022, the Planning Commission held apublic hearing and adopted Resolution No. 2022-09, approving the removal of additional three trees for a total of thirty -seven trees to be removed, and two potential additional trees for removal at the proposed City Park.

On July 6, 2022, City Council passed Resolution No. 202 2-91 authorizing the City Manager, or designee, to enter into a Standard Voluntary Agreement (SVA), with the DTSC and pay associated fees for the Project.

ANALYSIS:

On May 17, 2022, eight (8) sealed bids were received, opened, and were publicly read via live video feed for the Project.

2 Following is the tabulation of bids received:

Name of Company
and Address
Base Bid Additive Alternate
Bids 1 &2
Grand Total
Unlimited
Environmental Inc.
(UEI)
Long Beach, CA

$ 4,245,000.00

$ 82,000.00

$ 4,327,000.00

Resource
Environmental Inc.
(REI)
Cerritos, CA

$ 4,334,000.00

$ 166,000.00

$ 4,500,000.00

JDML Inc. dba
Standard Industries
Ventura, CA

$ 4,893,764.10

$ 202,500.00

$ 5,096,264.10

Clauss Construction
Lakeside, CA

$ 6,588,099.00

$ 335,043.00

$ 6,923,142.00

PARC
Environmental
Fresno, CA

$ 5,149,747.00
Non-Responsive

$ 204,593.00
Non-Responsive

$ 5,354,340.00
Non-Responsive

Bowen Engineering
and Environmental
Fresno, CA

$ 7,442,000.60
Non-Responsive

$ 500,000.00
Non-Responsive

$ 7,942,000.60
Non-Responsive

Restoration
Management Co.

Hayward, CA

$8,327,355.75
Non-Responsive

$ 437,027.00
Non-Responsive

$8,764,382.75
Non-Responsive
SVG Contractor’s
Inc. (SVG)
Morgan Hill, CA

$ 3,714,547.80
Non-Responsive

$ 275,883.00
Non-Responsive

$3,990,430.80
Non-Responsive

The Engineer’s Opinion of Probable Construction Cost for this Project includes a base bid of $5,014047.00 and additive alternate bids 1 and 2 of $160,000 for grand total of $ 5,174,047.00.

Staff received two bid protests; EXHIBIT D-1 is a letter from REI protesting the bids submitted by SVG and UEI and EXHIBIT D-2 is a letter form UEI protesting the bids submitted by SVG and REI. EXHIBIT E-1 is SVG’s response to the bid protest, EXHIBIT E-2 is UEI’s response to the bid protest and EXHIBIT E- 3 is REI’s response to the bid protest.

The firm of Fenton & Keller was hired by the City Attorney as their sub -consultant and legal counsel to evaluate the bidding documents, b ids and bid prot est. After thorough review and evaluation of bidding documents, bids and bid protest by staff, City Attorney and special counsel, bids received from SVG , Restoration Management Co., PARC Environmental and Bowen Engineering and Environmental were deemed non -responsive. EXHIBIT F is a memorandum from special counsel outlining its analysis of the the bid protests and their recommendation for the contract award.

3 The City Attorney and special c ounsel determined UEI’s base bid of $ 4,245,000 is the lowest responsible and responsive bid. The prime contractor, UEI has not previously worked with City, but has successfully complete d similar projects with neighboring public agencies with favorable reference reviews. UEI’s sub-contractors, Tope’s Tree Service, and Superior Hydroseeding , Inc. are local contractors who have successfully completed work with the City in the past.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Following is the estimated expenditure to execute the project to completion.

Estimated Expense Amount
Construction Contract (Base Bid) $4,245,000.00
Construction Contingency Allowance (10%) $ 424,500.00 Construction Management and Inspection Allowance $1,088,405.90 Project Management, Surveys and Engineering $ 519,053.13 Total Estimated Expenditure $ 6,276,959.03

Capital Improvement Project funding, HSF2101 for Barracks Blight Removal and HSF2103 and Cypress Knol ls Building Removal have funding amounts of $4,100,000 and $1,600,000, respectively. The total available funding for this Project is $5,700,000.

To award this construction contract, $577,000 is requested to be allocated and appropriated to the project a ccounts HSF2101 and HSF2103 . This fund allocation will come from undesignated blight removal bond funding.

CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA)
The City Planning Division determined that this action, awarding a construction contract and executing the Project to be Categorically Exempt under CEQA Guidelines per Article 19, Section 15304, Minor Alterations to Land.

CONCLUSION:

This request is submitted for City Council consideration and possible action.

Respectfully submitted,

Elvie Morla-Camacho, P.E., QSD/P
Project Management Services Wallace Group

REVIEWED/CONCUR:

Brian McMinn, P.E., P.L.S.

Public Works Director/City Engineer
City of Marina

Layne P. Long
City Manager
City of Marina
4 RESOLUTION NO. 2022-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MARINA AWARDING A

CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR THE CITY PARK BARRACKS AND CYPRESS KNOLLS BUILDINGS BLIGHT REMOVAL 2022 PROJECT TO UNLIMITED ENVIRONMENTAL INC. FO R THE BASE BID IN THE AMOUNT OF $4,245,000;

ALLOCATING AND APPROPRIATING ADDITIONAL BLIGHT REMOVAL FUNDING IN THE AMOUNT OF $577,000; AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE

CONTRACT DOCUMENTS SUBJECT TO FINAL REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE CITY ATTORNEY; AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE TO EXPEND UP TO AN ADDITIONAL 10% OF THE CONTRACT AMOUNT FOR

CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCIES AND TO EXECUTE ALL CONSTRUCTION CHANGE ORDERS ON BEHALF OF THE CITY; AND AUTHORIZING THE FINANCE DIRECTOR TO MAKE NECESSARY ACCOUNTING AND BUDGETARY ENTRIES.

WHEREAS, the closure of Fort Ord resulted in land being deeded to the City of Marina in an “as-is” condition. The land contains numerous buildings that served the former Army base which have deteriorated since 1994 and need to be removed as part of the land redevelopment. Some of the buildings are on property that the City will retain and must be removed or renovated for adaptive reuse.

These include 62 -65 barracks buildings and 260 duplex housing units on what was p lanned to be the Cypress Knolls development; and

WHEREAS, the Fort Ord Reuse Authority (FORA) sunsetted on June 30, 2020, FORA secured bond funding for blight removal prior to closure. Included in the bond funding are FORA bond trust funds allocated to the City amounting to $8,561,968 and escrow bonds that are projected to generate $6.5M in blight removal funding through 2025; and

WHEREAS, on September 15, 2020, October 27, 2020, and January 20, 2021, the City Council of the City of Marina adopted Resolut ion Nos. 2020-127, 2020-140 and 2021-11, respectively, receiving staff presentations on blight removal and blight removal projects and provides direction to staff on priorities for blight removal; and

WHEREAS, on January 20, 2021, the City Council of the City of Marina adopted Resolution 2021 -11 and allocated $4,100,000 and $1,600,000, to Capital Improvement Projects Barracks Blight Removal (HSF2101) and Cypress Knolls Building Removal (HSF 2103), respectively; and

WHEREAS, On May 4, 2021, the City Counci l passed Resolution No. 2021 -42 approving an amendment to the Program Management Services and Construction Management and Inspection between the City of Marina and Wallace Group, to add program management and construction management and inspection services for the execution of hazardous material abatement and blighted building removal projects; and

WHEREAS, The Wallace Group prepared bidding documents (plans, specifications, and estimates) for the blight removal project. The goal for this project is for the abatement, proper removal, and disposal of forty-five barracks and miscellaneous debris, including debris from two burnt buildings at the proposed City Park located along Second Avenue and 8th Street and thirty duplex buildings and miscellaneous debris including debris from one burnt building, at the Cypress Knoll area along Rendova Avenue and Third Avenue for future park and or residential development. Site plans are shown in Exhibits B and C; and

WHEREAS, on March 10, 2022, the City of Marina Planning Commission held an open public hearing and adopted Resolution No. 2022 -05b, approving the removal of thirty-four trees at the proposed City Park at the Dunes location and five trees at the Cypress Knolls location to remove the blighted buildings.

All healthy trees are to be replaced at 2:1 ratio; and
5 Resolution No. 2022-
Page Two

WHEREAS, on March 15, 2022, the City Council passed Resolution No. 2022-43 approving advertising and call for bids for the City Park Barracks and Cypress Knolls Buildings Blight Removal 2022 Project; and

WHEREAS, the two parcels, 031 -201-005 (City Park) and 031 -221-008 (Cypress Knolls), included in this project were part of the scope of the original Removal Action Work Plan (RAW; Northgate, 2006) for Soil Impacted by Lead -Based Paint at former Fort Ord, Mari na, California. For these parcels to be used as residentials or for a non-restricted use, the City must follow the approved remedy in the RAW from 2006 with the updated lead cleanup goal of 80 mg/kg; and

WHEREAS, staff in consultation with DTSC determined that soil removal would be required at a greater depth to remediate lead in the soil adjacent to buildings to be removed. Due to additional depth of soil removal, additional tree removal was identified; and

WHEREAS, On June 9, 2022, the City of Marina Pl anning Commission had an open public hearing and adopted Resolution No. 2022 -09, approving the removal of additional three trees for a total of thirty - seven trees to be removed, and two potential additional trees for removal at the proposed City Park at the Dunes; and

WHEREAS, on July 6, 2022, the City Council passed Resolution No. 2022 -91 authorizing the City Manager, or his designee, to enter into a Standard Voluntary Agreement (SVA), with the California Department of Toxic Substance Control (DTSC) and p ay associated fees of $39,936 for the City Park Barracks and Cypress Knolls Buildings Blight Removal 2022 Project; and

WHEREAS, on May 17, 2022, eight (8) sealed bids were received, opened, and were publicly read via live video feed for the City Park Barr acks and Cypress Knolls Buildings Blight Removal 2022 Project ; and

WHEREAS, Staff received two bid protests; Exhibit D -1 is a letter from REI protesting the bids submitted by SVG and UEI and Exhibit D-2 is a letter form UEI protesting the bids submitted by SVG and REI. Exhibit E-1 is SVG’s response to the bid protest, Exhibit E-2 is UEI’s response to the bid protest and Exhibit E- 3 is REI’s response to the bid protest; and

WHEREAS, the firm of Fenton & Keller was hired by the City Attorney as their sub -consultant and Legal Counsel to help in the evaluation of bidding documents, bids and bid protest. After thorough review and evaluation of bidding documents, bids and bid protest by staff, City Attorney and Legal Counsel, bids received from SVG Contractor’ s Inc., Restoration Management Co., PARC Environmental and Bowen Engineering and Environmental were deemed non -responsive. Exhibit F is a memorandum from the Legal Counsel outlining the bid protests evaluation and basis of their recommendation for contract award; and

WHEREAS, City Attorney and Legal Counsel determined that United Environmental Inc. base bid of $4,245,000 is the lowest responsible and responsive bid. The prime contractor, United Environmental Inc. has not work with City but has successfully completed similar projects with neighboring Cities with favorable reference reviews. The sub -contractors, Tope’s Tree Service, and Superior Hydroseeding Inc.are local contractors who have successfully completed work with the City in the past; and

6 Resolution No. 2022-
Page Three

WHEREAS, the estimated total cost to complete the work is $ 6,276,595.03. This cost includes the construction cost for base bid of $ 4,245,000, ten percent construction contingency of $ 424,500; an allowance of $ 1,088,405.90 for construction management and inspectio n services, and $519,053.13 for program management, surveys, and engineering; and

WHEREAS, Capital Improvement Project funding, HSF2101 for Barracks Blight Removal and HSF2103 and Cypress Knolls Building Removal have funding amounts of $4,100,000 and $1,6 00,000, respectively. The total available funding for this project is $5,700,000; and

WHEREAS, to award this construction contract, a $577,000 is requested to be allocated and added to the project accounts. This fund allocation will come from undesignated blight removal bond funding; and

WHEREAS, the City of Marina Planning Division determined that this action, awarding a construction contract and executing the City Park Barracks and Cypress Knolls Buildings Blight Removal 2022 Categorically Exempt under CEQA Guidelines per Article 19, Section 15304, minor alteration to land; and

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Marina does hereby:

1. Award a construction contract for the City Park Barracks and Cypress Knolls Buildings Blight Removal 2022 Project to Unlimited Environmental Inc. of Long Beach, CA for the base bid in the amount of $4,245,000; and

2. Allocating and appropriating additional blight removal funding in the amount of $415,440 to project HSF2101 and $161,560 to project HSF2103 for a total of $577,000; and

3. Authorize the City Manager to execute contract documents, Exhibit A, subject to final review and approval by the City Attorney; and

4. Authorize the City Manager or designee to expend up to an additional 10% of the contract amount for potential construction contingencies and to execute construction change orders on behalf of the City; and

5. Authorize the Finance Director to make necessary accounting and budgetary entries.

PASSED AND ADOPTED, at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Marina, duly held on the 3rd day of August 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

Bruce C. Delgado, Mayor
ATTEST:

Anita Sharp, Deputy City Clerk
7 City Park Barracks and Cypress Knolls Buildings
Blight Removal 2022 Project
A9 Form of Contract
26 A9 FORM OF CONTRACT
FOR
City Park Barracks and Cypress Knolls Buildings
Blight Removal 2022 Project
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this __________day of _________ 2022, by and between The City of Marina, a municipal corporation of the State of California, hereinafter called "City of Marina” or “City” and Unlimited Environmental Inc. "hereinafter called Contractor," W I T N E S S E T H:

FIRST: Contractor hereby covenants and agrees to furnish and provide all labor, materials, tools, appliances, equipment, plant and transportation, and all other things required or necessary to be furnished, provided, or done, and build, erect, construct and complete the work at the time and in the manner provided, and in strict accordance with the plans and specifications therefore, for the City Park Barracks and Cypress Knolls Buildings Blight Removal 2022 Project adopted by the Council of the City of Marina on March 15, 2022.

SECOND: It is expressly understood and agreed that this contract consists of the following documents, all of which are incorporated into this agreement and made a part hereof as fully and completely as if set forth herein verbatim, to wit:
a. Signed and executed Bid and Proposal of Contractor, as accepted by City (A3); b. Proposal Guaranty Bond (A6);
c. Performance and Payment Bond(A10);
d. Plans, Specifications and Addendum if any for the project; e. Insurance;
f. California Building Code and associated codes, latest edition ad opted by the City; g. Standard Plans and Standard Specifications, Caltrans 2018 Edition; i. And this Agreement.

THIRD: That said Contractor agrees to receive and accept the following prices as full compensation for furnishing all materials and for doing all the work embraced and contemplated in this Agreement and as set forth in the Proposal adopted by the City of Marina, a true copy thereof hereto attached, also, for all loss or damage arising out of the nature of said work, or from the action of the elements or from any unforeseen difficulties or obstructions which may arise or be encountered in the prosecution of the work until the acceptance thereof by the City of Marina and for all risk connected with the work, and for well and faithfully completing the work, and the whole thereof, in the manner and according to the said Plans and Specifications and the provisions of this Agreement, and the requirements of the Engineer under them, to wit:

The prices as set forth in the Proposa l of said Contractor for the work to be constructed and completed under this Agreement, which prices shall be considered as though repeated herein.

Four Million Two Hundred Forty-Five thousand dollars (Base Bid Only) ________________________________________________________________________

EXHIBIT A
8 City Park Barracks and Cypress Knolls Buildings
Blight Removal 2022 Project
A9 Form of Contract
27 $_4,245,000.00

The undersigned Contractor further agrees to so plan the work and to prosecute it with such diligence that said work, and all of it, shall be completed on or before the expiration of the time specified in the Special Provisions after execution of the contract on behalf of the City of Marina and the receipt from the City of Marina of a notice to proceed with the work.

FOURTH:The City of Marina hereby promises and agrees with said Contractor to employ, and does hereby employ, said Contractor to provide the materials and to do the work according to the terms and conditions herein contained and referred to, for the price aforesaid, and hereby contracts to pay the same at the time, in the manner and upon the conditions set forth in the Specifications; and the said parties, for themselves, their heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns, do hereby agree to the full performance of the covenants herein contained.

FIFTH: No interest in this agreement shall be transferred by the Contractor to any other party, and any such transfer shall cause the annulment of this contract, so far as the City of Marina is concerned. All rights of action, however, for any breach of this contract are reserved to City.

SIXTH: Contractor shall keep harmless and indemnify the City of Marina, its officers and employees and agents, from all loss, damage, cost or expense that arises or is set up for infringement of patent rights of anyone for use by the City of Marina, its officers, employees or agents, of articles supplied by the Contractor under this contract, of which he is not entitled to use or sell. Contractor agrees to, at his own cost and expense, defend in court the City, its officers, agents and employees, in any action which may be commenced or maintained against them or any of them, on account of any claimed infringement of patent rights, arising out of this agreement.

SEVENTH: The Contractor agrees to immediately repair and replace all defective material and workmanship discovered within one year after acceptance of final payment by Contractor and to indemnify said City of Marina against all loss and damage occasioned by any such defect, discovered within said year, even though the damage or loss may not be ascertained until after the expiration thereof. Provided, however, that if such failure of the Contractor to perform should not, by reasonable diligence, be discoverable or discovered within said one year, then the obligation of the Contractor to repair and replace said defective material or workmanship shall continue until one year after the actual discovery thereof.

EIGHTH: The Contractor agrees at all times during the progress of the work to carry with insurance carriers approved by the City of Marina full coverage workmen's compensation and public liability insurance in the form and to the extent called for in Section 1.04 of Part C-Special Provisions.

Edition. Such insurance policy shall contain an endorsement that the same shall not be canceled nor the amount of coverage be reduced until at least 30 days after receipt by the City of Marina by certified or registered mail of a written notice of such cancellation or reduction in coverage.

NINTH: Contractor agrees to comply with all applicable federal, state and municipal laws and regulations, including but not limited to California Labor Code Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1.

TENTH: ATTORNEY’S FEES
In the event of any controversy, claim or dispute relating to this Agreement or the breach thereof, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover from the losing party reasonable expenses, attorney’s fees and costs.

9 City Park Barracks and Cypress Knolls Buildings
Blight Removal 2022 Project
A9 Form of Contract
28 ELEVENTH: COMPLIANCE WITH PROVISIONS OF LAW

a) The City is subject to laws relating to public agencies which are part of this contract as though fully set forth herein.

b) Contractor shall comply with City of Marina Municipal Code Chapter 13.02 Local Hiring for Public Works.

c) Contractor shall comply with laws relating to the work.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties to these presents have hereunto set their hands the year and date first above written.

CONTRACTOR CITY OF MARINA
By: ____________________________ By: Layne P. Long, City Manager Print Name: _____________________ Date: _______________________

Address: _______________________

_______________________
Date: __________________________
APPROVED AS TO FROM:

By: ____________________________
City Attorney
By: _________________________

Date: __________________________ Date: _______________________ ATTESTED:

By: ____________________________
Anita Shepherd-Sharp
Deputy City Clerk
Date: __________________________ Resolution No. 2022-_____

10 C I T Y O F M A R I N A

CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
612 CLARION COURT
T 805 544-4011 F 805 544-4294
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
www.wallacegroup.us

MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE

SURVEYING / GIS SOLUTIONS

WATER RESOURCES

PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION

PLANNING

CIVIL AND TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING
®
Elvira Nodora Morla-Camacho

C I V I L
No. 60577
AL
AT T
S
OFE C
A
O NRFI
I

REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER
May 5, 2022
REVISED DM-1 PER ADDENDUM No. 5
11 C I T Y O F M A R I N A

CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
612 CLARION COURT
T 805 544-4011 F 805 544-4294
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
www.wallacegroup.us

MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE

SURVEYING / GIS SOLUTIONS

WATER RESOURCES

PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION

PLANNING

CIVIL AND TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING
®
Elvira Nodora Morla-Camacho

C I V I L
No. 60577
AL
AT T
S
OFE C
A
O NRFI
I

REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER
May 5, 2022
REVISED DM-2 PER ADDENDUM No. 5

EXHIBIT C
12 Resource Environmental Inc.
13100 Alondra Blvd, Suite 108, Cerritos, CA 90703
Office: 562.468.7000 Fax: 562.468.0600
License #864417 / DIR #1000003121
May 20, 2022

Sent via Email (m [email protected])

Anita Shepherd-Sharp
Deputy City Clerk
City of Marina
211 Hillcrest Ave
Marina, CA 93933

RE: BID PROTEST – City Park Barracks and Cypress Knolls Buildings Blight Removal 2022 Project

Dear Ms. Shepherd-Sharp,

Resource Environmental, Inc. (‘Resource’) is hereby protesting the City Park Barracks and Cypress Knolls Buildings Blight Removal 2022 Project (‘Project’). Resource submits its protest on the grounds SVG Contractors, Inc. (‘SVG’) and Unlimited Environmental, Inc. (‘UEI’) are nonresponsive due to material deviations of the bidding requirements and violations of the State of California Public Contract Code (‘PCC’). In addition, Resource is challenging the responsibility of both SVG and UEI as patently unqualified to perform a project of this magnitude and character.

SUMMARY OF CALIFORNIA LAW

California law mandates that a public entity must competitively bid public works contracts and award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder that submits a responsive bid. MCM Construction, Inc. v.

City and County of San Francisco (1998) 66 Cal.App.4
th 359, 368. These requirements are strictly
enforced to protect taxpayers by inviting competition, which helps “guard against favoritism, improvidence, extravagance, fraud and corruption,” Domar Electric, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles (1994) 9 Cal. 4th 161, 173. These public interests are what is important. Ghilotti Construction Co. v. City of Richardson (1996) 45 Cal.App.4th 897, 908-909.

It is established under California law that bids which substantially conform to a public agency’s request but contain some error or irregularity may be accepted if the error does not affect the amount of the bid or gives the applicant an advantage that other bidders did not have. Bay Cities Paving & Grading, Inc. v.

City of San Leandro (2014) 223 Cal.App.4
th 1181, 1198-1199. Therefore, bids must be evaluated from a practical, rather than hypothetical standpoint, giving due consideration to the public interest being served. Ghilotti at 908-909; MCM at 370. These public interests are getting the best work and avoiding favoritism and corruption. Domar at 173.

To be responsive, a bid must conform to the material terms of the Instructions for Bidders. See Menefee v. County of Fresno (1985) 163 Cal.App.3d 1175. A bid that varies materially from the specifications must be rejected. Stimson v. Hanley (1907) 151 Cal. 379. The material terms of a bid are those that affect price, quantity, quality, or delivery and those terms that the bid package clearly identifies as mandatory. Id. A bid fails to comply materially with the bid package if it gives the bidder an advantage or benefit not enjoyed by other bidders. Menefee v. County of Fresno (1985) 163 Cal.App.3d 1175.

13 Resource Environmental Inc.
13100 Alondra Blvd, Suite 108, Cerritos, CA 90703
Office: 562.468.7000 Fax: 562.468.0600
License #864417 / DIR #1000003121
Mistakes that provide the bidder with an opportunity to withdraw its bid under Public Contract Code (‘PCC’) 5103 cannot be waived by the awarding body because the defective bid gives the bidder an unfair competitive advantage over other bidders. Ghilotti Construction Company v. City of Richmond (1996) 45 Cal.App.4th 897, 900; Konica Business Machines USA, Inc. v. Regents of the University of California (1988); Menefee v. County of Fresno (1985)

In MCM Construction, Inc. v. City & County of San Francisco (1998) 66. Cal.App.4 th 359, the court held
that the awarding body was without power to waive the bidder’s failure to state accurate dollar amounts of work to be performed by subcontractors because the nonresponsive bidder could seek withdrawal of its bid without forfeiting bid security, and thus obtained an unfair advantage not available to other bidders.

Licensing, Cert
ifications, Subcontracting, Balanced Pricing

As is standard practice, certain licensing and certifications are required of the contractor to bid and perform the work of the Project. If the prime contractor does not hold all necessary licenses and certifications, it must list subcontractors that do. Project Specifications, Notice to Bidders, lists general licensing requirements for bidders, but continues, “Review the project technical specifications for the proper contractor certifications necessary for this project.” A quick review of the technical specifications defines two unrelated but important certifications/licenses – the US Environmental Protection Agency Renovation, Repair and Painting (‘RRP’) certification and the Contractor State License Board (‘CSLB’) Tree Removal Contractor license.

Technical Specifications, Section 02080, Subsection 2.4(L), Licenses, declares, “The contractor shall have the EPA’s Renovation, Repair and Painting RRP certification.”

SVG and UEI do not currently hold, nor did they at the time of bid, valid US EPA RRP certifications. A previous company, or name, related to SVG appears to be certified, but the EPA strictly forbids a contractor from performing work unless the certificate is amended within 90 days of the change. If SVG is the same company as Silicon Valley Demolition, the 90-day window elapsed long ago. An initial search for UEI showed no certificate and subsequent communication with EPA revealed UEI’s certification has been expired for two years. Both SVG and UEI are unqualified, and unlicensed, to perform lead-related construction work – a key scope element.

City of Marina Municipal Code Section 17.62.030 requires tree removal permits and prohibits construction activities within the dripline of any tree, unless such activities are conducted in compliance with tree protection guidelines adopted by resolution of the planning commission. The commission relies on the recommendations of Denise Duffy & Associates, Inc., the Project arborist. Both arborist reports state, “Trimming must … be performed by a qualified tree removal contractor…” Technical Specifications, Section 108, Subsection 3, Tree Trimming, asserts, “Tree trimming shall be done by a licensed tree removal contractor…”

The CSLB requires a tree removal contractor to obtain a D-49, Tree Service Contractor, license. The CSLB defines the classification as, “A tree service contractor prunes trees, removes trees, limbs or stumps (including grinding) and engages in tree or limb guying.” While UEI did list a tree removal contractor for 14 Resource Environmental Inc.
13100 Alondra Blvd, Suite 108, Cerritos, CA 90703
Office: 562.468.7000 Fax: 562.468.0600
License #864417 / DIR #1000003121
tree trimming and removal - albeit for a paltry and unbalanced amount, SVG listed no subcontractors on its A5, Designation of Subcontractors.

PCC 4100, the Subletting and Subcontracting Fair Practices Act, contains a series of laws designed to promote fair, honest, and open bidding practices. Of significance here is PCC 4106, which states, “If a prime contractor fails to specify a subcontractor or if a prime contractor specifies more than one subcontractor for the same portion of work to be performed under the contract in excess of one-half of 1 percent of the prime contractor’s total bid, the prime contractor agrees that he or she is fully qualified to perform that portion himself or herself, and that the prime contractor shall perform that portion himself or herself.” The section continues, describing fines and penalties for both the contractor and owner if the Act is violated.

SVG is not a licensed tree removal contractor and cannot comply with the specifications, arborist report, and importantly, the City’s planning commission. The City of Marina is eco-friendly, and trees are of utmost importance. In fact, just last week the City Council held a special session to study the city’s process and regulations for tree removal and care – it is unlikely the public would entertain an exemption for a careless bidder. Additionally, SVG’s Bid Schedule, Line Item 3, Tree Removal and Trimming, lists the value at $75,260, which is almost 400% more than one half of one percent of its bid.

There is no subcontractor under capable of trimming 100 trees, at prevailing wage rates, for under $20,000. SVG is nonresponsive for failing to list a tree removal contractor, and as the work cannot be self-performed without the required license, is noncompliant with PCC.

PCC 4106 is also significant to the EPA RRP problem. Both SVG and UEI are out of compliance with the specifications and unqualified to perform lead-related construction work. As such, they needed to list a subcontractor holding a valid EPA RRP certification to perform any lead-related construction work. As previously explained, if a contractor does not list a subcontractor for a portion of the work, it agrees, or certifies, it is qualified and able to perform the work. Neither company listed a subcontractor for lead- related construction work, and both are in violation of the law. The City, or PCC, would never allow for a contractor to bid the Project without a valid General Engineering or General Building license at the time of bid to be awarded the project – even if they promised they would be certified in time for the licensing submittal. The same holds true for the required EPA RRP certification.

Yet another PCC violation is UEI’s listing of Superior Hydroseeding for “Hydroseeding AND Erosion Control.” The plans and specifications require, and Addendum 6 confirmed, all flat areas needed wood chips. Hydroseeding of the entire disturbed site was not acceptable – except for the alternate restoration. Superior Hydroseeding does NOT install wood chips (confirmation email attached) but is listed for erosion control – if Superior Hydroseeding does not install the wood chips, the City and UEI face fines and penalties for violations of PCC. If UEI were going to self-perform the wood chips, the subcontractor list must reflect that.

Compliance aside, it is possible, or even likely given the line item amounts, UEI disregarded the requirement to apply wood chips and planned to only hydroseed the areas in question. Or perhaps the bid is unbalanced, requiring a nonresponsive determination in and of itself. Standard Industries correctly listed Superior Hydroseeding as a hydroseeding subcontractor – without mentioning Erosion Control. A quick comparison of the line items indicates irregularities with UEI’s scope inclusions or item balancing. 15 Resource Environmental Inc.
13100 Alondra Blvd, Suite 108, Cerritos, CA 90703
Office: 562.468.7000 Fax: 562.468.0600
License #864417 / DIR #1000003121
The same issue is present with the trees – Standard Industries listed the tree removal and trimming at more than double UEI’s pricing, with the same subcontractor.

Perhaps the line items are unbalanced in a misguided effort to skirt PCC. In comparison to all bids, UEI line item for utility capping is exponentially lower than all other bidders. Since the specifications require compliance with MCWD standards, the contractor performing the utility capping and repairs must be CSLB Class A licensed contractors. UEI does not hold an A license but can now argue a subcontractor did not need to be listed because the amount was less than one half of one percent of its bid.

When comparing SVG and UEI’s line items for trees, restoration, and plumbing with all other bidders, its likely their lack of high-dollar public works prime contracting experience played a role in their decisions.

SVG’s list of projects, which violate the specification requirements of using only the forms provided, do not show any projects over $1,000,000 where it was the prime contractor. While some projects appear that way, it is false. The work was done for general contractors. UEI has one – a project for CSUMB from over 5 years ago. The City will be best supported by contractors with a track record of completing high- value projects as a prime contractor.

Finally, both SVG and UEI’s bid contained many irregularities and clerical errors, some of which were mandated by the specifications (i.e “All signatures MUST be notarized.”). SVG did not attest the bid bond or provide a notary acknowledgement, provided a notary acknowledgement instead of a jurat for the non-collusion affidavit, entered bid bond amounts too low for its bid, listed references as “Please see attached.”, and importantly, did not correctly extend its unit prices or add the amount sums. UEI’s bid bond contained an original seal and signature for only UEI and Ms. Dupleich – the Surety’s documents were scanned or a photocopy. UEI did not attest or provide an acknowledgement for its photocopied bid bond and provided a notary acknowledgement rather than a jurat for the non- collusion. Importantly, and glaringly, UEI did not extend its unit pricing correctly. Information for Bidders, 2.6, Bid Price, states the unit price prevails on all unit price items. As such, UEI’s price is exponentially higher than its listed total.

Ability to Withdraw Bid per Public Contract Code
5103

SVG and UEI’s clerical errors, especially in its bid schedules, are grounds for relief under Public Contract Code Section 5103. PCC Section 5103 allows a bidder to withdraw its bid, without forfeiting its bid security, if a mistake was made and the mistake made the bid different than intended. A bid with incorrect unit pricing is a common scenario for claiming relief under PCC 5103.

While isolated clerical or mathematical errors in a bid proposal are common, even a single error may warrant the rejection of a bid because the bidder gains an unfair advantage if a clerical mistake in its bid would give the bidder a right to withdraw its bid. MCM Construction, Inc. v. City & County of San Francisco (supra). In MCM Construction, the City was without power to waive the bidder’s failure to state accurate dollar amounts of work to be performed by subcontractors because the nonresponsive bidder could seek withdrawal of its bid without forfeiting its bid security and thus has an unfair advantage not available to responsive bidders.

These errors are not inconsequential, as the mistakes provide both SVG and UEI with competitive advantages and clear benefit over Resource. They had the opportunity to submit their bid, see the 16 Resource Environmental Inc.
13100 Alondra Blvd, Suite 108, Cerritos, CA 90703
Office: 562.468.7000 Fax: 562.468.0600
License #864417 / DIR #1000003121
spread, and decide whether they would proceed with award with no financial loss at stake. Resource was not afforded this luxury. This fact alone requires the City to reject the bid under the holding in MCM Construction.

SVG is nonresponsive for failing to hold a valid EPA RRP license or list a subcontractor for the work, failing to list a tree removal contractor, and unfair advantages. UEI is nonresponsive for failing to hold a valid EPA RRP license, unbalanced pricing, and unfair advantages. Both companies are not qualified to perform a project of this magnitude. The lowest responsive, responsible, qualified bidder is Resource.

Accordingly, Resource Environmental, Inc. requests the City of Marina deem the other bidders nonresponsive and award the contract to Resource Environmental, Inc.

Sincerely,

Chase Tinsley
Director, Bids and Project Administration
Resource Environmental, Inc.
[email protected]

cc: Elvie Camacho, Wallace Group, Construction Manager ( [email protected])
Brian McMinn, City of Marina, Dir. Of Public Works/City Engineer ([email protected]) 17 1
Chase Tinsley
From: Josh Freeman <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, May 13, 2022 8:28 AM
To: Chase Tinsley
Cc: Iridian Tello; Albert Sanchez Jr.

Subject: Re: City of Marina: City Park Barracks and Cypress Knolls Buildings Blight Removal Project-ADDENDUM 6
Hi Chase,

Thanks for the update on addenda #6. We actually don't do wood chips/mulch, but the hydroseeding option I'm sure would be less expensive. Do you have a quantity in mind as far as how much disturbed area you expect needing hydroseeded?

Thanks,

Josh Freeman
Lead Estimator | CPESC | QSD/QSP
Superior Hydroseeding, Inc.
250 W. Riverside Drive
Watsonville, CA 95076
Office: (831)763-1811

On Thursday, May 12, 2022, 04:53:49 PM PDT, Chase Tinsley <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi Josh-

See addendum 6 – can you please quote whichever way is cheapest – or give alts?

Thank you,

Chase Tinsley
Director, Bids and Project Administration

RESOURCE ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.

ENVIRONMENTAL REMEDIATION & DEMOLITION
13100 Alondra Blvd., Ste #108, Cerritos, CA 90703
Office (562) 468-7000 / Cell (530) 379-6687
18 2
Fax (562) 468-0600
www.resourceenvironmental.com
CSLB# 864417--A,B,C-21,C-22,C-61/D-63,ASB & HAZ

19 City Park Barracks and Cypress Knolls Buildings
Blight Removal 2022
A1 Notice to Bidders

1 PART A - LEGAL AND PROCEDURAL DOCUMENTS
A1 NOTICE TO BIDDERS

Notice is hereby given that sealed proposals will be received by the City Engineer of the City of Marina, located at 209 CYPRESS AVENUE, MARINA, CALIFORNIA, until 2:00 P.M. on Tuesday, April 26, 2022, for furnishing all labor, equipment, materials, and other items necessary to execute the
City Park Barracks and Cypress Knolls Buildings
Blight Removal 2022 Project

The goal for this project is for the abatement, proper removal, and disposal of 45 barracks buildings and miscellaneous debris at the proposed City Park located along Second and 8th Street and 30 buildings an
d miscellaneous debris at the Cypress Knolls area along Rendova and Third Avenue for future park and or residential development.

The work in general is not limited to; installation and maintenance of BMPs from Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan, tree protection and protective fencing. Tree removal and trimming as shown on the plans and further described on the Specifications and Tree Removal Permit and Arborist Report, Attachments 3. Abatement, and proper disposal of all hazardous materials on the sites described on the attached Pre demolition Hazardous Material Inspection Reports, Attachments 1 and 2 and removal of buildings on the two sites shown on the plans. Also included are utilities capping and repair and removal and disposal of roadways, walkways and retaining walls, rough grading, and site restoration.

The Contractor shall perform all work necessary to complete the City Park Barracks and Cypress Knolls Buildings Blight Removal project in their entirety in accordance with the Contract Documents.

Time for Completion - All work under this contract (Base Bid plus Additive Alternative) shall be completed before the expiration one hundred fifty (150) working days from the date specified in the Notice to Proceed.

1. One hundred twenty-five (125) working days for Base Bid

2. Twenty-five (25) working days for Additive Alternative Bids.

If Contractor shall be delayed in the work by the acts or neglect of Owner, or its employees or those under it by contract or otherwise, or by changes ordered in the work, or by strikes, lockouts by others, fire, unusual delay in transportation, unavoidable casualties or any causes beyond the Contractor's control, or by delay authorized by the Owner, or by any cause which the Owner shall decide to justify the delay, then the time of completion shall be extended for such reasonable time as the Owner may decide.

Liquidated damages amount per working day shall be as specified in the Special Provisions. All Federal holidays and City holidays observed during construction shall not be included on the construction timeline specified. Time extension for weather and City delays will be granted accordingly.

All contractors submitting bids must have a valid as of the date of bid opening a California Class “A” or “B” contractor’s license. Hazardous material abatement shall be completed by a licensed C-22 contractor or BCP Section 7058 asbestos certified and DOSH registered. Building demolition shall be completed by C21 licensed contractor as required on this contract.

Review the project technical specifications for the proper contractor certifications necessary for this project.
20 5/20/22, 4:55 PM Codes Display Text
Home

FORM ATIO
Bill Information California Law Publications Other Resources My Subscriptions My Favorites Code: !SelectCode V I Section: 1 or2or1001 I Search I (D Add To MY. Favorites

PUBLIC CONTRACT CODE - PCC
DIVISION 2. GENERAL PROVISIONS [1100 • 22355) ( Division 2 enacted by Stats. 1981, Ch. 306. ) PART 1. ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS [1100 • 9204) ( Heading of Parl 1 added by Stats. 1982, Ch. 1120, Sec. 2.) CHAPTER 4. Sublett ing and Subcontracting [4100-4114) ( Chapter 4 added by Stats . 1986, Ch. 195, Sec. 42.1.) 4100. This chapter may be cited as the "Subletting and Subcontracting Fair Practices Act ." (Added by Stats. 1986, Ch. 195, Sec. 42.1.)
4101. The Legislature finds that the practices of bid shopping and bid peddling in connect ion with the construction, alteration, and repair of public improvements often result in poor quality of material and workmanship to the detriment of the public, deprive the public of the full benefits of fair competition among prime contractors and subcontractors, and lead to insolvencies, loss of wages to employees, and other evils . (Added by Stats. 1986, Ch. 195, Sec. 42.1.)
4103. Nothing in this chapter limits or diminishes any rights or remedies, either legal or equitable, which :
(a) An original or substituted subcontractor may have against the prime contractor, his or her successors or assigns .
(b) The state or any county, city, body politic, or public agency may have against the prime contractor, his or her successors or assigns, including the right to take over and complete the contract . (Added by Stats. 1986, Ch. 195, Sec. 42.1.)
4104. Any officer, department, board, or commission tak ing bids for the construction of any public work or improvement shall provide in the specifications prepared for the work or improvement or in the general conditions under which bids will be received for the doing of the work incident to the public work or improvement that any person making a bid or offer to perform the work, shall, in his or her bid or offer, set forth :
(a) (1) The name, the location of the place of business, the Californ ia contractor license number, and pub lic works contractor registration number issued pursuant to Section 1725 .5 of the Labor Code of each subcontractor who will perform work or labor or render service to the prime contractor in or about the construction of the work or improvement, or a subcontractor licensed by the State of California who, under subcontract to the prime contractor, specially fabricates and installs a portion of the work or improvement according to detailed drawings contained in the plans and specifications, in an amount in excess of one-half of 1 percent of the prime contractor's total bid or, in the case of bids or offers for the construction of streets or highways, including bridges, in excess of one- half of 1 percent of the prime contractor's total bid or ten thousand dollars ($10,000), whichever is greater . (2) An inadvertent error in listing the California contractor license number or pub lic works contractor registration number provided pursuant to paragraph (1) shall not be grounds for filing a b id protest or grounds for considering the bid nonresponsive if the corrected contractor 's license number is submitted to the public entity by the prime contractor within 24 hours after the bid opening and prov ided the corrected contractor's license number corresponds to the submitted name and locat ion for that subcontractor . (3) (A) Subject to subparagraph (B), any information requested by the officer, department, board, or commission concerning any subcontractor who the prime contractor is required to list under this subdivision, other than the subcontractor's name, location of business, the California contractor license number, and the public works contractor registration number, may be submitted by the prime contractor up to 24 hours after the deadline established by the officer, department, board, or commission for receipt of bids by prime contractors . https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?division=2.&chapter=4.&part=1.&lawCode=PCC 1/5 21 5/20/22 , 4:55 PM Codes Display Text
(B) A state or local agency may implement subparagraph (A) at its option. (b) The portion of the work that will be done by each subcontractor under this act. The prime contractor shall list only one subcontractor for each portion as is defined by the prime contractor in his or her bid. (Amended by Stats. 2017, Ch. 28, Sec. 90. (SB 96) Effective June 27, 2017.) 4104 .5. (a) The officer, department, board, or commission taking bids for construction of any public work or improvement shall specify in the bid invitation and public notice the place the bids of the prime contractors are to be received and the time by which they shall be received . The date and time shall be extended by no less than 72 hours if the officer, department, board, or commission issues any material changes, additions, or deletions to the invitation later than 72 hours prior to the bid closing. Any bids received after the time specified in the notice or any extension due to material changes shall be returned unopened. (b) As used in this section, the term "material change" means a change with a substantial cost impact on the total bid as determined by the awarding agency .
(c) As used in this section, the term "bid invitation" shall include any documents issued to prime contractors that contain descript ions of the work to be bid or the content, form, or manner of submission of bids by bidders . (Amended by Stats. 2002, Ch. 204, Sec. 1. Effective January 1, 2003 .) ~ Circumvention by a general contractor who bids as a prime contractor of the requirement under Section 4104 for him or her to list his or her subcontractors, by the device of listing another contractor who will in turn sublet portions constituting the majority of the work covered by the prime contract, shall be considered a violation of this chapter and shall subject that prime contractor to the penalties set forth in Sections 4110 and 4111. (Added by Stats . 1986, Ch. 195, Sec. 42.1.)
4106. If a prime contractor fails to specify a subcontractor or if a prime contractor specifies more than one subcontractor for the same portion of work to be performed under the contract in excess of one-half of 1 percent of the prime contractor's total bid, the prime contractor agrees that he or she is fully qualified to perform that portion himself or herself, and that the prime contractor shall perform that portion himself or herself.

If after award of contract, the prime contractor subcontracts, except as provided for in Sections 4107 or 4109, any such portion of the work, the prime contractor shall be subject to the penalties named in Section 4111. (Added by Stats . 1986, Ch. 195, Sec. 42.1.)
4107 . A prime contractor whose bid is accepted may not :
(a) Substitute a person as subcontractor in place of the subcontractor listed in the original bid, except that the awarding authority, or its duly authorized officer, may, except as otherwise provided in Section 4107 .5, consent to the substitution of another person as a subcontractor in any of the following situations:
(1) When the subcontractor listed in the bid, after having had a reasonable opportunity to do so, fails or refuses to execute a written contract for the scope of work specified in the subcontractor's bid and at the price specified in the subcontractor's bid, when that written contract, based upon the general terms, conditions, plans, and specifications for the project involved or the terms of that subcontractor's written bid, is presented to the subcontractor by the prime contractor .
(2) When the listed subcontractor becomes insolvent or the subject of an order for relief in bankruptcy . (3) When the listed subcontractor fails or refuses to perform his or her subcontract. ( 4) When the listed subcontractor fails or refuses to meet the bond requirements of the prime contractor as set forth in Section 4108 .
(5) When the prime contractor demonstrates to the awarding authority, or its duly authorized officer, subject to the further provisions set forth in Section 4107.5, that the name of the subcontractor was listed as the result of an inadvertent clerical error.
(6) When the listed subcontractor is not licensed pursuant to the Contractors License Law. (7) When the awarding authority, or its duly authorized officer, determines that the work performed by the listed subcontractor is substantially unsatisfactory and not in substantial accordance with the plans and specifications, or that the subcontractor is substantially delaying or disrupting the progress of the work . (8) When the listed subcontractor is ineligible to work on a public works project pursuant to Section 1777 .1 or 1777 . 7 of the Labor Code.
https://leginfo.legislature .ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?division=2.&chapter=4 .&part=1.&lawCode=PCC 2/5 22 5/20/22 , 4:55 PM Codes Display Text
(9) When the awarding authority determines that a listed subcontractor is not a responsible contractor.

Prior to approval of the prime contractor's request for the substitution, the awarding authority, or its duly authorized officer, shall give notice in writing to the listed subcontractor of the prime contractor's request to substitute and of the reasons for the request. The notice shall be served by certified or registered mail to the last known address of the subcontractor. The listed subcontractor who has been so notified has five working days within which to submit written objections to the substitution to the awarding authority. Failure to file these written objections constitutes the listed subcontractor's consent to the substitution.

If written objections are filed, the awarding authority shall give notice in writing of at least five working days to the listed subcontractor of a hearing by the awarding authority on the prime contractor's request for substitution. (b) Permit a subcontract to be voluntarily assigned or transferred or allow it to be performed by anyone other than the original subcontractor listed in the original bid, without the consent of the awarding authority, or its duly authorized officer.
(c) Other than in the performance of "change orders" causing changes or deviations from the original contract, sublet or subcontract any portion of the work in excess of one-half of 1 percent of the prime contractor's total bid as to which his or her original bid did not designate a subcontractor. (Amended by Stats. 2009, Ch. 500, Sec. 58. (AB 1059) Effective January 1, 2010 .) 4107 .2. No subcontractor listed by a prime contractor under Section 4104 as furnishing and installing carpeting, shall voluntarily sublet his or her subcontract with respect to any portion of the labor to be performed unless he or she specified the subcontractor in his or her bid for that subcontract to the prime contractor. (Added by Stats. 1986, Ch. 195, Sec. 42.1.)
4107 .5. The prime contractor as a condition to assert a claim of inadvertent clerical error in the listing of a subcontractor shall within two working days after the time of the prime bid opening by the awarding authority give written notice to the awarding authority and copies of that notice to both the subcontractor he or she claims to have listed in error and the intended subcontractor who had bid to the prime contractor prior to bid opening.

Any listed subcontractor who has been notified by the prime contractor in accordance with this section as to an inadvertent clerical error shall be allowed six working days from the time of the prime bid opening within which to submit to the awarding authority and to the prime contractor written objection to the prime contractor's claim of inadvertent clerical error. Failure of the listed subcontractor to file the written notice within the six working days shall be primary evidence of his or her agreement that an inadvertent clerical error was made.

The awarding authority shall, after a public hearing as provided in Section 4107 and in the absence of compelling reasons to the contrary, consent to the substitution of the intended subcontractor :
(a) If (1) the prime contractor, (2) the subcontractor listed in error, and (3) the intended subcontractor each submit an affidavit to the awarding authority along with such additional evidence as the parties may wish to submit that an inadvertent clerical error was in fact made, provided that the affidavits from each of the three parties are filed within eight working days from the time of the prime bid opening, or (b) If the affidavits are filed by both the prime contractor and the intended subcontractor within the specified time but the subcontractor whom the prime contractor claims to have listed in error does not submit within six working days, to the awarding authority and to the prime contractor, written objection to the prime contractor's claim of inadvertent clerical error as provided in this section .

If the affidavits are filed by both the prime contractor and the intended subcontractor but the listed subcontractor has, within six working days from the time of the prime bid opening, submitted to the awarding authority and to the prime contractor written objection to the prime contractor's claim of inadvertent clerical error, the awarding authority shall investigate the claims of the parties and shall hold a public hearing as provided in Section 4107 to determine the validity of those claims . Any determination made shall be based on the facts contained in the declarations submitted under penalty of perjury by all three parties and supported by testimony under oath and subject to cross-examination. The awarding authority may, on its own motion or that of any other party, admit testimony of other contractors, any bid registries or depositories, or any other party in possession of facts which may have a bearing on the decision of the awarding authority . (Added by Stats . 1986, Ch. 195, Sec. 42.1.)
4107 .7. If a contractor who enters into a contract with a public entity for investigation, removal or remedial action, or disposal relative to the release or presence of a hazardous material or hazardous waste fails to pay a subcontractor registered as a hazardous waste hauler pursuant to Section 25163 of the Health and Safety Code https://leginfo.legislature .ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?division=2.&chapter=4 .&part=1.&lawCode=PCC 3/5 23 5/20/22 , 4:55 PM Codes Display Text
within 10 days after the investigation, removal or remedial action, or disposal is completed, the subcontractor may serve a stop notice upon the public entity in accordance with Chapter 4 ( commencing with Section 9350) of Title 3 of Part 6 of Division 4 of the Civil Code.
(Amended by Stats. 2010, Ch. 697, Sec. 43. (SB 189) Effective January 1, 2011. Operative July 1, 2012, by Sec. 105 of Ch. 697.)
4108. (a) It shall be the responsibility of each subcontractor submitting bids to a prime contractor to be prepared to submit a faithful performance and payment bond or bonds if so requested by the prime contractor. (b) In the event any subcontractor submitting a bid to a prime contractor does not, upon the request of the prime contracto r and at the expense of the prime contractor at the established charge or premium therefor, furnish to the prime contractor a bond or bonds issued by an admitted surety wherein the prime contractor shall be named the obligee, guaranteeing prompt and faithful performance of the subcontract and the payment of all claims for labor and materials furnished or used in and about the work to be done and performed under the subcontract, the prime contractor may reject the bid and make a substitution of another subcontractor subject to Section 4107 . (c) (1) The bond or bonds may be required under this section only if the prime contractor in his or her written or published request for subbids clearly specifies the amount and requirements of the bond or bonds. (2) If the expense of the bond or bonds required under this section is to be borne by the subcontractor, that requirement shall also be specified in the prime contractor's written or published request for subbids . (3) The prime contractor's failure to specify bond requirements, in accordance with this subdivision, in the written or published request for subbids shall preclude the prime contractor from imposing bond requirements under this section .
(Amended by Stats. 1991, Ch. 754, Sec. 1.)
4109. Subletting or subcontracting of any portion of the work in excess of one-half of 1 percent of the prime contractor's total bid as to which no subcontractor was designated in the original bid shall only be perm itted in cases of public emergency or necessity, and then only afte r a finding reduced to writing as a public record of the awarding authority setting forth the facts constituting the emergency or necessity . (Added by Stats. 1986, Ch. 195, Sec. 42.1.)
4110. A prime contracto r violating any of the provisions of this chapter violates his or her contract and the awarding authority may exercise the option, in its own discretion, of (1) canceling his or her contract or (2) assessing the prime contractor a penalty in an amount of not more than 10 percent of the amount of the subcontract involved, and this penalty shall be deposited in the fund out of which the prime contract is awarded . In any proceedings under this section the prime contractor shall be entitled to a public hearing and to five days' notice of the time and place the reof.
(Added by Stats . 1986, Ch. 195, Sec. 42.1.)
4111. Violation of this chapter by a licensee under Chapter 9 (commencing with Section 7000) of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code constitutes grounds for disciplinary action by the Contractors State License Board, in addition to the penalt ies prescr ibed in Section 4110 . (Added by Stats . 1986, Ch. 195, Sec. 42.1.)
4112. The failure on the part of a contractor to comply with any provision of this chapter does not constitute a defense to the contractor in any action brought against the contractor by a subcontractor . (Added by Stats . 1986, Ch. 195, Sec. 42.1.)
4113. As used in this chapter, the word "subcontractor " shall mean a contractor, within the meaning of the provisions of Chapter 9 (commencing with Section 7000) of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code, who contracts directly with the prime contractor .
"Prime contractor" shall mean the contractor who contracts directly with the awarding authority . (Added by Stats. 1986, Ch. 195, Sec. 42.1.)
4114. The county board of supervisors, when it is the awarding authority, may delegate its functions under Sections 4107 and 4110 to any officer designated by the board.
https://leginfo.legislature .ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?division=2.&chapter=4 .&part=1.&lawCode=PCC 4/5 24 5/20/22 , 4:55 PM Codes Display Text
The authorized officer shall make a written recommendation to the board of supervisors. The board of supervisors may adopt the recommendation without further notice or hearing, or may set the matter for a de novo hearing before the board.
(Amended by Stats. 1989, Ch. 43, Sec. 1.)
https://leginfo.legislature .ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?division=2.&chapter=4 .&part=1.&lawCode=PCC 5/5 25 Home CONTRACTORS STATE LICENSE BOARD
0Contractor's License Detail for License # 970115
DISCLAIMER: A license status check provides information taken from the CSLB license database. Before relying on this information, you should be aware of the following limitations. ► CSLB complaint disclosure is restricted by law (B&P 7124.6) If this entity is subject to public complaint disclosure click on link that will appear below for more information. Click here for a definition of disclosable actions. ► Only construction related civil judgments reported to CSLB are disclosed {B&P 7071.17). ► Arbitrations are not listed unless the contractor fails to comply with the terms. ► Due to workload, there may be relevant information that has not yet been entered into the board's license database.

This license is current and active.

All information below should be reviewed.
► C21- BUILDING MOVING, DEMOLITION
► A-GENERAL ENGINEERING
► B-GENERAL BUILDING
Data current as of 5/20/2022 4:29:54 PM
Business Information

SVG CONTRACTORS INC
155 E MAIN AVE #110
MORGAN HILL, CA 95037
Business Phone Number:(408) 218-0993
Entity Corporation
Issue Date 02/15/2012
Reissue Date 08/02/2016
Expire Date 08/31/2022
License Status
Classifications
► C22 -ASBESTOS ABATEMENT (Check DOSH Asbestos Registration ) Certifications
► HAZ - HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES REMOVAL
Bonding Information
26 Back to Top
Contractor's Bond
This license filed a Contractor's Bond with NATIONWIDE MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY.

Bond Number: 7900443972
Bond Amount: $15,000
Effective Date: 08/02/2016
Contractor's Bond History
Bond of Qualifying Individual
► The qualifying individual SCOTT JOSEPH HELF certified that he/she owns 10 percent or more of the voting stock/membership interest of this company; therefore, the Bond of Qualifying Individual is not required.

Effective Date: 04/12/2017
BQl's Bond History
► This license filed Bond of Qualifying Individual number 100357614 for SCOTT TYLER RIGHETTI in the amount of $12,500 with AMERICAN CONTRACTORS INDEMNITY COMPANY.

Effective Date: 07/27/2017
► The qualifying individual MARK DEWAYNE HUGHES no longer owns 10 percent or more of the voting stock/membership interest of this company; therefore, a Bond of Qualifying Individual is required.

Effective Date: 04/24/2018
Cancellation Date: 05/25/2022
Workers' Compensation
This license has workers compensation insurance with the STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND Policy Number:9152755
Effective Date: 02/13/2016
Expire Date: 02/13/2023
Workers' Compensation History
Miscellaneous Information
► 04/27/2018- DOSH REGISTRATION VERIFIED FOR C22
► 04/27/2018 - C22 NOT VALID 04/25/18 TO 04/26/18
Conditions of Use Privacy Policy Accessibility Accessibility Certification Copyright© 2022 State of California
27 Home CONTRACTORS STATE LICENSE BOARD
0Contractor's License Detail for License # 668511
DISCLAIMER: A license status check provides information taken from the CSLB license database. Before relying on this information, you should be aware of the following limitations. ► CSLB complaint disclosure is restricted by law (B&P 7124.6) If this entity is subject to public complaint disclosure click on link that will appear below for more information. Click here for a definition of disclosable actions. ► Only construction related civil judgments reported to CSLB are disclosed {B&P 7071.17). ► Arbitrations are not listed unless the contractor fails to comply with the terms. ► Due to workload, there may be relevant information that has not yet been entered into the board's license database.

This license is current and active.

All information below should be reviewed.
► B-GENERAL BUILDING
► C21- BUILDING MOVING, DEMOLITION
Data current as of 5/20/2022 4:33:46 PM
Business Information

UNLIMITED ENVIRONMENTAL INC
2300 E CURRY STREET BLG B
LONG BEACH, CA 90805
Business Phone Number:(562) 981-6600
Entity Corporation
Issue Date 04/02/1993
Reissue Date 03/12/2001
Expire Date 03/31/2023
License Status
Classifications
► C22 -ASBESTOS ABATEMENT (Check DOSH Asbestos Registration ) Certifications
► ASB - ASBESTOS (Check DOSH Asbestos Registration )
► HAZ- HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES REMOVAL
Bonding Information
Contractor's Bond
This license filed a Contractor's Bond with OHIO CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY (THE).

Bond Number: D10722C
Bond Amount: $15,000
Effective Date: 08/26/2019
Contractor's Bond History
Bond of Qualifying Individual
The qualifying individual WILLIAM SCOTT LANGE certified that he/she owns 10 percent or more of the voting stock/membership interest of this company; therefore, the Bond of Qualifying Individual is not required.

Effective Date: 07/13/2015
BQl's Bond History
Workers' Compensation
This license has workers compensation insurance with the GREAT DIVIDE INSURANCE COMPANY Policy Number:WCA2008227
Effective Date: 04/01/2021
Expire Date: 04/01/2023
Workers' Compensation History
28 Miscellaneous Information
► 03/12/2001- LICENSE REISSUED TO ANOTHER ENTITY
► 07/13/2015- DOSH REGISTRATION VERIFIED FOR C22
Other
► Personnel listed on this license (current or disassociated) are listed on other licenses.

Back to Top Conditions of Use Privacy Policy Accessibility Accessibility Certification Copyright© 2022 State of California
29 Home CONTRACTORS STATE LICENSE BOARD
0Contractor's License Detail for License # 864417
DISCLAIMER: A license status check provides information taken from the CSLB license database. Before relying on this information, you should be aware of the following limitations. ► CSLB complaint disclosure is restricted by law (B&P 7124.6) If this entity is subject to public complaint disclosure click on link that will appear below for more information. Click here for a definition of disclosable actions. ► Only construction related civil judgments reported to CSLB are disclosed {B&P 7071.17). ► Arbitrations are not listed unless the contractor fails to comply with the terms. ► Due to workload, there may be relevant information that has not yet been entered into the board's license database.

Business Information

RESOURCE ENVIRONMENTAL INC
13100 ALONDRA BLVD #108
CERRITOS, CA 90703
Data current as of 5/20/2022 5:00:07 PM
Business Phone Number:(562) 468-7000
This license is current and active.

All information below should be reviewed.
► C21- BUILDING MOVING, DEMOLITION
► B-GENERAL BUILDING
Entity Corporation
Issue Date 09/19/2005
Expire Date 09/30/2023
License Status
Classifications
► C22 -ASBESTOS ABATEMENT (Check DOSH Asbestos Registration ) ► C-61 / D63-CONSTRUCTION CLEAN-UP
► A-GENERAL ENGINEERING
Certifications
► ASB - ASBESTOS (Check DOSH Asbestos Registration )
► HAZ - HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES REMOVAL
Bonding Information
30 Back to Top
Contractor's Bond
This license filed a Contractor's Bond with AMERICAN CONTRACTORS INDEMNITY COMPANY.

Bond Number: 100249505
Bond Amount: $15,000
Effective Date: 01/01/2016
Contractor's Bond History
Bond of Qualifying Individual
► The qualifying individual JARED SLOAN COOPER certified that he/she owns 10 percent or more of the voting stock/membership interest of this company; therefore, the Bond of Qualifying Individual is not required.

Effective Date: 03/16/2018
BQl's Bond History
► The qualifying individual RICHARD BRADLEY MILLER certified that he/she owns 10 percent or more of the voting stock/membership interest of this company; therefore, the Bond of Qualifying Individual is not required.

Effective Date: 10/27/2021
BQl's Bond History
► This license filed Bond of Qualifying Individual number6131038077 for CYNTHIA MARIE SKIFF in the amount of $12,500 with UNITED STATES FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY.

Effective Date: 04/01/2022
NOTE: There are 4 qualifiers (with bonding Information) for this license. Up to 3 are displayed on this page.

Workers' Compensation
This license has workers compensation insurance with the GREAT DIVIDE INSURANCE COMPANY Policy Number:WCA2021740
Effective Date: 04/01/2019
Expire Date: 04/01/2023
Workers' Compensation History
Miscellaneous Information
► 08/07/2015- DOSH REGISTRATION VERIFIED FOR C22
► 08/30/2021 • DOSH REGISTRATION VERIFIED FOR C22
► 10/27/2021- DOSH REGISTRATION VERIFIED FOR C22
Other
► Personnel listed on this license (current or disassociated) are listed on other licenses.

Conditions of Use Privacy Policy Accessibility Accessibility Certification Copyright© 2022 State of California
31 Back to Top
Home CONTRACTORS STATE LICENSE BOARD
0Contractor's License Detail for License# 755357
DISCLAIMER: A license status check provides information taken from the CSLB license database. Before relying on this information, you should be aware of the following limitations. ► CSLB complaint disclosure is restricted by law (B&P 7124.6) If this entity is subject to public complaint disclosure click on link that will appear below for more information. Click here for a definition of disclosable actions. ► Only construction related civil judgments reported to CSLB are disclosed {B&P 7071.17). ► Arbitrations are not listed unless the contractor fails to comply with the terms. ► Due to workload, there may be relevant information that has not yet been entered into the board's license database.

This license is current and active.

All information below should be reviewed.

C-61 / D49 - TREE SERVICE
Data current as of 5/20/2022 4:46:37 PM
Business Information

LEWIS TREE SERVICE INC
1500 BROMMER ST
SANTA CRUZ, CA 95062
Business Phone Number:(831) 476-1200
Entity Corporation
Issue Date 10/16/1998
Expire Date 10/31/2022
License Status
Classifications
Bonding Information
Contractor's Bond
This license filed a Contractor's Bond with OHIO CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY (THE).

Bond Number: 243935C
Bond Amount: $15,000
Effective Date: 08/26/2019
Contractor's Bond History
Bond of Qualifying Individual
The qualifying individual NATHAN ALBERT LEWIS certified that he/she owns 10 percent or more of the voting stock/membership interest of this company; therefore, the Bond of Qualifying Individual is not required.

Effective Date: 10/16/1998
Workers' Compensation
This license has workers compensation insurance with the MANUFACTURERS ALLIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY Policy Number:2021011366889
Effective Date: 12/20/2021
Expire Date: 01/01/2023
Workers' Compensation History
Conditions of Use Privacy Policy Accessibility Accessibility Certification Copyright© 2022 State of California
32 Back to Top
Home CONTRACTORS STATE LICENSE BOARD
0Contractor's License Detail for License # 669057
DISCLAIMER: A license status check provides information taken from the CSLB license database. Before relying on this information, you should be aware of the following limitations. ► CSLB complaint disclosure is restricted by law (B&P 7124.6) If this entity is subject to public complaint disclosure click on link that will appear below for more information. Click here for a definition of disclosable actions. ► Only construction related civil judgments reported to CSLB are disclosed {B&P 7071.17). ► Arbitrations are not listed unless the contractor fails to comply with the terms. ► Due to workload, there may be relevant information that has not yet been entered into the board's license database.

This license is current and active.

All information below should be reviewed.

C-61 / D49 - TREE SERVICE
Data current as of 5/20/2022 4:46:15 PM
Business Information

TOPE'S TREE SERVICE INC
PO BOX51964
PACIFIC GROVE, CA 93950
Business Phone Number:(831) 373-7765
Entity Corporation
Issue Date 04/12/1993
Reissue Date 07/28/2011
Expire Date 07/31/2023
License Status
Classifications
Bonding Information
Contractor's Bond
This license filed a Contractor's Bond with AMERICAN CONTRACTORS INDEMNITY COMPANY.

Bond Number: 100164618
Bond Amount: $15,000
Effective Date: 01/01/2016
Contractor's Bond History
Bond of Qualifying Individual
The qualifying individual ANDREW GERARD TOPE certified that he/she owns 10 percent or more of the voting stock/membership interest of this company; therefore, the Bond of Qualifying Individual is not required.

Effective Date: 07/28/2011
Workers' Compensation
This license has workers compensation insurance with the STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND Policy Number:9287133
Effective Date: 11/01/2020
Expire Date: 11/01/2022
Workers' Compensation History
Miscellaneous Information
► 07 /28/2011- LICENSE REISSUED TO ANOTHER ENTITY
Conditions of Use Privacy Policy Accessibility Accessibility Certification Copyright© 2022 State of California
33 34
CSLB'S GET LICENSED TO BUILD WORKSHOP-will take place on Friday, June 3rd, starting at 10 a.m.

Register on Webex Watch Workshop on YouJube
,GO{ ~ f "JI @) in a eo ✓ License Check ,t. Subscribe About CSLB Public Meetings Contact Us Select LangJ.!l!ge I I
Back to Top
Translate this site:
..A.. ••• ~ ~
l:I~ coTNTRA.cTo'R's '•' Uil ~
ij~. STATE LICENSE BOARl:c:onsumers Licensees 8RP-licants j _
Online Services Media Resources
, a ·,i~ tree senilce
D-49 - Tree Service Contractor
California Code of Regulations
Title 16, Division 8, Article 3. Classifications
A tree service contractor prunes trees, removes trees, limbs or stumps (including grinding) and engages in tree or limb guying.

Conditions of Use Privacy Policy Accessibility Accessibility Certification Copyright© 2022 State of California
l:)Settings ~
X
1/1
35 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ABATEMENT SPECIFICATION

CITY OF MARINA
CITY PARK BARRACKS & CYPRESS KNOLLS BUILDINGS BLIGHT REMOVAL 2022 M3 PROJECT NO. 21341.0 TASK 2

Section 02080 – Asbestos & Lead Paint Abatement
Submittals and Substitutions 6 of 7

1. Name, address and telephone number of the Owner including the contact person.

2. Name, address, EPA numbers, license number and telephone number of the Abatement Contractor including the contact person.

3. Name, address and description of the building, including size, age, and prior use of building.

4. The type and quantity of friable asbestos material involved and the description of the work.

5. Scheduled starting and completion dates.

6. Procedures that shall be employed to comply with the regulations.

7. The name, address, EPA number and telephone number of the transporter.

8. The name and address of the hazardous waste disposal facility where the asbestos waste shall be deposited.

9. The name and address of the Contractor.

Copies of all government agency correspondence and proof of delivery shall be delivered to the observation service. No work shall commence until verification of required notifications is made by the observation service.

L. Licenses:

Asbestos
Provide proof of State of California Contractors State License Board license (Asbestos C - 22) and proof of Certificate of Registration for Asbestos -Related work with the Division of Occupational Safety and Health (DOSH) in accordance with Labor Code, Section 6501.8.

Lead
The contractor shall have the EPA’s Renovation, Repair and Painting RRP) certification.

The abatement supervisor shall be a California Department of Public Health (CDPH) certified lead related construction supervisor. All workers and supervisors performi ng deleading activities shall have successfully completed CDPH training. Copies of all notifications, permits, applications, licenses and like documents required by Federal, State, or local regulations

M. Certifications: Encapsulant manufacturer’s certification (when required) that the Abatement Contractor is an approved applicator of the encapsulants to be used on this project.

N. Scaffolding: Submit to the observation service prior to abatement work, certification from a licensed civil or structural engineer that the scaffolding design and installation is safe and adequate for the purpose for which it will be used. Submit a copy of the scaffolding permit when required by local regulatory agencies.

O. First-Aid Supplies: Provide a list in the form of a checklist, of the contents of the first-aid kit.

P. Fire Extinguishers: Provide product data, and submit a schedule indicating the locations of the extinguishers at the job site.

Q. Manometer: Shall have a built-in alarm and continuous hard copy readout. 36 5/20/22 , 4:40 PM Certified Renovation Firms I Lead I US EPA OEPA
\Qu a~e b.eret JtA Home » Lead F» Certified Renovation Firms Leruneo enovation irms
The following certified firm
matches the criteria that you
specified.

Renovation firms must apply for
recertification every 5 years. The expiration
of each firm's current certification is listed
• Certification Number: NAT- below. Go to EPA's lead-safe certification 23762-2 nrogram webpJ!,g~ for more information or to
• Discipline : Renovation apply online.
[ New Search ]
Show .... I _s __ v_ ..... l entries Filter results:

Firm Discipline Certification
Number
Resource Environmental, Inc.
13100 Alondra Blvd Lead Abatement, Renovation NAT-23762-3 Cerritos , California 90703 (562) 468-7000
Showing 1 to 1 of 1 entries First Previous Next Last
Disclaimer
For your convenience, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) publishes this list of certified renovation firms that meet EPA's standards to perform renovation activities involving lead-based paint. The list is an information resource only. EPA does not endorse any of the firms included on this list nor do we provide any warranty about their performance. Consumers are advised to request bids and conduct reference checks before engaging any finn/ contractor.

FEBRUARY 10, 2017
Expiratio
Date
04/23/2025
https://cfpub .epa.gov/flpp/pub/index .cfm?do=main . firmResults&Applicant_ Type=FI RM&static=true&doSearch=Yes&qlat=&qlong=&program Type=RRP.. . 1 /1 37 5/20/22 , 4:34 PM Certified Renovation Firms I Lead I US EPA &EPA
YQu a~e .b,ere.; It.A Home » Lead F» Certified Renovation Firms Lerunea enovation 1rms
There are no certified firms for below search.
• Firm Name: SVG Contractors
• Discipline: Renovation
[ New Search ]
FEBRUARY 10, 2017
https://cfpub .epa.gov/flpp/pub/index .cfm?do=main . firmResults&Applicant_ Type=FI RM&static=true&doSearch=Yes&qlat=&qlong=&program Type=RRP.. . 1 /1 38 5/20/22, 4:41 PM Certified Renovation Firms I Lead I US EPA OEPA
\Qu a~e b.eret JtA Home » Lead F» Certified Renovation Firms Leruneo enovation irms
The following certified firms
match the criteria that you
specified.

Renovation firms must apply for
recertification every 5 years. The expiration
of each firm's current certification is listed
• Firm Name: Silicon Valley below. Go to EPA's lead-safe certification • Discipline : Renovation nrogram webpJ!,g~ for more information or to apply online.
[ New Search ]
Show .... I _s __ v_ ..... l entries Filter results:

Firm Discipline Certification
Number
Rebuilding Togerther Silicon Valley
1701 S. 7th Street Renovation NAT-40169-3 San Jose , California 95112 408-5 78-9519
Silicon Valley Demolition Inc.
15 5 East Main Avenue Lead Abatement , Renovation NAT-F 158743-2 Morgan Hill, California 95037 408-218-0993
Silicon Valley Foundation
63 N 1st Street Renovation NAT-41529-3 Campbell , California 95008 408-879-0710
Showing 1 to 3 of 3 entries First Previous Next Last
Disclaimer
For your convenience, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) publishes this list of certified renovation firms that meet EPA's standards to perform renovation activities involving lead-based paint. The list is an information resource only. EPA does not endorse any of the firms included on this list nor do we provide any warranty about their performance. Consumers are advised to request bids and conduct reference checks before engaging any firm/ contractor.

FEBRUARY 10, 2017
Expiratio
Date
05/28/2025
11/17/2025
09/22/2026
https://cfpub.epa.gov/flpp/pub/index .cfm?do=main .firmResults&Applicant_Type=FIRM&static=true&doSearch=Yes&qlat=&qlong=&programType=RRP.. . 1/2 39 5/20/22, 4:41 PM Certified Renovation Firms I Lead I US EPA https:1/cfpub.epa.gov/flpp/pub/index.cfm?do=main.firmResults&Applicant_Type=FIRM&static=true&doSearch=Yes&qlat=&qlong=&programType=RRP... 2/2 40 5/17/22 , 8:01 PM Renovation , Repair and Painting Program : Firm Certification I US EPA If My Information Changes do I Have to Amend My
Application?
A firm must amend its certification within 90 days of a change to information included in its most recent application. Examples of amendments include a change in the firm's name without transfer of ownership, or a change of address or other contact information. If a firm fails to amend its certification within 90 days of the date the change occurs, then it will not be authorized to perform renovations until its certification has been amended.

Amending a certification will not affect the validity of the existing certification or extend the certification expiration date. EPA will issue the firm a new certificate if necessary to reflect information included in the amendment. Firm certifications are not transferable.

If the firm is sold, the new owner must submit a new initial application for certification . • Amend your application on line <https://epa.gov/lead/lead-renovationabatement-firm­ certification-application-or-update>
Fee Schedule
Fee Type Amount
Renovation Firm Certification/Recertification
$300 (this fee is $20
for a tribal firm)
Lead-based Paint Activities Certification/Recertification $550 (this fee is $20 (Abatement, Inspection, Risk Assessment) for a tribal firm) Combined Renovation and Lead-based Paint Activities $550 (this fee is $20 Firm Application for a tribal firm)
Replacement Certificate $15
Fee Refund Policy
https://www.epa.gov/lead/renovation-repair-and -painting-program -firm-certification 6/10 41 5/17/22 , 8:01 PM Renovation , Repair and Painting Program : Firm Certification I US EPA Firms having submitted an application and associated fees for certification or re­ certification who wish to withdraw their application prior to Agency approval will receive a fee refund based upon the schedule listed below. Firms who request a refund more than 10 days after the Agency receives the application will receive only a partial refund.

Number of Days Following Agency Percent Reimbursable (based upon Receipt of Application total fees submitted)
Up to 10 days 100%
11 to 60 days 75%
61 to 120 days 50%
121 or more days 25%
Note: Refunds will only be made after EPA verifies fee receipt and deposit by the U.S.

Treasury. Firms must notify the Agency in writing in order to qualify for a refund. The date of withdrawal is the date on which the Agency received the withdrawal notification. EPA will not refund fees after granting a firm certification or re-certification .

If your application is disapproved, then EPA will not refund fees. Refunds are not available for replacing a certificate. Refund and withdrawal requests must be sent to the following address:

U.S. EPA
P.O. Box 14417
Washington, DC 20044-4417
Have a Question?
• Search frequent questions about lead <https://epa.gov/faqs/search/topics/lead-315205> • View frequent questions about applying for firm certification <https://epa.gov /faqs/ sea rch/topics/lead-315205/top i cs/a pp lyi ng-ce rti fication-o r-accred itation-315223>. • Contact the Lead Hotline <https://epa.gov/lead/forms/lead-hotline-national-lead-information­ center>
https ://www .epa .gov/lead/renovation-repair-and -painting-program -firm-certification 7/10 42 5/20/22 , 4:35 PM Certified Renovation Firms I Lead I US EPA &EPA
YQu a~e .b,ere.; It.A Home » Lead F» Certified Renovation Firms Lerunea enovation 1rms
There are no certified firms for below search.
• Firm Name : Unlimited Environmental
• Discipline: Renovation
[ New Search ]
FEBRUARY 10, 2017
https://cfpub .epa.gov/flpp/pub/index .cfm?do=main . firmResults&Applicant_ Type=FI RM&static=true&doSearch=Yes&qlat=&qlong=&program Type=RRP.. . 1 /1 43 City Park Barracks and Cypress Knolls Buildings
Blight Removal 2022 Project
C2 Technical Specifications
92 shall be disposed properly.

A walk through with the City arborist and Contractor shall be done to properly mark trees to be removed before execution of work. Tree removal of trees not designated for removal shall be 3:1 replacement, of comparable size at maturity and native species. Fines and cost of replacements will be calculated and shall be borne by the Contractor and deducted from Contractor payment.

3 TREE TRIMMING

Trees designated for trimming/pruning shall be as shown on the plan and wrapped with ribbon.

Contractor may trim/prune additional trees to remain to execute their work and to protect remaining trees from damage due to Contractor’s operations, subject to the approval of the Engineer and the Arborist. Tree Trimming shall be done by a licensed tree removal contractor and shall not remove more than 30% of any one tree’s canopy. Trees shall be allowed to develop their natural forms and shall not be trimmed as topiaries or other unnatural forms.

The City arborist shall monitor all tree trimming and pruning. Broken limbs of trees to remain and not impacted by Contractor’s operations shall be cut, removed, and disposed.

END OF SECTION

44 City of Marina Blight Removal 2022 – Cypress Knolls 3 Arborist Report Denise Duffy & Associates, Inc. | 947 Cass Street, Suite 5 | Monterey, CA 93940 | (831) 373 – 4341 | www.ddaplanning.com − Good. Tree is healthy and vigorous, as indicated by foliage color and density, and has no apparent signs of insect, disease, structural defects, or mechanical injury. Tree has good form and structure.
− Fair. Tree is in average condition and vigor for the area, but may show minor insect, disease, or physiological problems. Trees in fair condition may be improved with correctional pruning.
− Poor. Tree is in a general state of decline. Tree may show severe structural or mechanical defects which may lead to failure, and may have insect or disease damage, but is not dead.

Tree health was evaluated by visually inspecting each tree from its root crown to its foliar canopy for signs of decay, disease, or insect infestations. In accordance with MMC’s definition of a “tree,” dead trees were not inventoried.

GPS data were collected using a Trimble® Geo 7 Series GPS and were then digitized using Trimble® GPS Pathfinder and ESRI® ArcGIS 10.4. GPS data were collected using geographic coordinate system Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) Zone 10 North and the World Geodetic System 1984 (WGS84) datum.

RESULTS
DD&A inventoried 96 trees in the vicinity of the buildings proposed for demolition, including 33 Monterey pines ( Pinus radiata ), 30 Eucalyptus ( Eucalyptus sp.), 23 Monterey cypresses ( Hesperocyparis macrocarpa), four (4) acacia (Acacia sp.), three (3) canyon live oaks (Quercus chrysolepis), one (1) coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia), one (1) Australian tea tree (Leptospermum laevigatum), and one (1) myrtle (Myrtus sp.) (Figure 1, Appendix A, and Appendix B). Most trees are in average vigor for the area but are showing signs of decay, disease, and insect infestations, including pitch canker (Fusarium circinatum), oak branch canker, foamy bark canker, oak ambrosia beetles, and Phytophthora root and crown rot . No symptoms of sudden oak death were observed.

DISCUSSION
Per conversations with Wallace Group, the City's engineering consultant for the project, demolition and excavation at Cypress Knolls would be limited to three (3) inches deep within the existing building footprints. Due to the shallow depth of excavation, demolition is not likely to significantly impact the dripline of any adjacent tree and tree removal is not required to successful implement the project. However, it is recommended that trees whose canopies overlap or abut buildings are trimmed prior to demolition. In accordance with the City’s Tree Protection Guidelines and with California Fish and Game Code, the following measures are recommended to avoid or minimize impacts potential adverse impacts resulting from tree trimming:

1. Trimming must conform to the guidelines and best management practices established in Appendix C, must be performed by a qualified tree removal contractor, and must not remove more than 30 percent of any one tree's canopy. Trees shall be allowed to de velop their natural forms and shall not be trimmed as topiaries or other unnatural forms.

45 City of Marina Blight Removal 2022 – City Park 5 Arborist Report Denise Duffy & Associates, Inc. | 947 Cass Street, Suite 5 | Monterey, CA 93940 | (831) 373 – 4341 | www.ddaplanning.com

DISCUSSION
Per conversations with Wallace Group, the City's engineering consultant for the project, excavation due to building demolition in the proposed City Park would be limited to three (3) inches deep within the footprints of all existing 47 buildings (to remove debris) and excavation due to soil remediation would extend to six (6) inches deep and six (6) feet out from five buildings (buildings T-2150, T-2170, T-2189, T-2191, and T- 2213).

Due to the shallow depth of excavation required for demolition, demolition is not likely to significantly impact the dripline of any adjacent tree and tree removal would not be required to successful implement this portion of project; however, it is recommended that trees whose canopies overlap or abut buildings are limbed or trimmed prior to demolition. In accordance with the City’s Tree Protection Guidelines and with California Fish and Game Code, the following measures are recommended to avoid or minimize impacts potential adverse impacts resulting from tree trimming:

1. Trimming must conform to the guidelines and best management practices established in Appendix C, must be performed by a qualified tree removal contractor, and must not remove more than 30 percent of any one tree's canopy. Trees shall be allowed to develop their natural forms and shall not be trimmed as topiaries or other unnatural forms.

2. Work should be timed to avoid the breeding and nesting season for raptors and other protected avian species. If work must occur during the avian breeding and nesting season (approximately February 1 through September 15), surveys for nesting birds shall be conducted no more than 15 days prior to project activities in all areas within 300 feet of the project footprint that may provide suitable nesting habitat. If nesting birds are identified during surveys, an appropriate buffer shall be imposed within which no work or disturbance will take place (generally 300 feet in all directions). A qualified biologist shall be on-site during work re-initiation in the vicinity of the nest offset to ensure that the buffer is adequate and that the nest is not stressed and/or abandoned. No work shall proceed in the vicinity of an active nest until such time as all young are fledged, or until after September 16, when young are assumed fledged.

Due to the level of excavation required for soil remediation, tree removal would be required around buildings T-2150, T-2170, T-2189, T-2191, and T-2213 and would include the following trees:

Tree 1278 (acacia in fair condition),
Tree 1279 (acacia in fair condition),
Tree 1281 (acacia in fair condition),
Tree 1282 (Australian cheesewood in fair condition), and Tree 1319 (Monterey pine in poor condition).

Per UVSP Tree Standards, mitigation (i.e., replacement) would not be required for removal of these trees, which are non-native species or native trees in poor condition. However, in accordance with City Code, a tree removal permit from the City would be required to remove all living trees, including trees in poor condition. Therefore, a completed tree removal permit application for Trees 1278, 1279, 1281, 1282, and 1319 is included in this report as Appendix D. Tree removal must conform to any requirements established •
•
•
•
•
46 17.62.030 Unlawful actions upon trees I Marina Municipal Code Page 1 of 1

17.62.030 Unlawful actions upon trees.

Unless otherwise exempted, it is unlawful for any person to:

A. Remove, damage or relocate or cause to be removed, damaged or relocated any tree within the city without first obtaining a tree removal permit following the provisions of Section 17.04.060, unless said removal, damage or relocation is exempted by Section 17.04.040 or 17.04.050; B. Conduct construction activities within the drip line of any tree unless these activities are conducted in compliance with tree protection guidelines adopted by resolution of the planning commission. (Ord. 2020-07 § 2, 2020; Ord. 2006-19 § 1, 2006)
The Marina Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 2022-01, passed March 1, 2022.

Disclaimer : The city clerk's office has the official version of the Marina Municipal Code. Users should contact the city clerk's office for ordinances passed subsequent to the ordinance cited above.

Note: This site does not support Internet Explorer . To view this site, Code Publishing Company recommends using one of the following browsers: Google Chrome , Firefox, or Safari.

City Website: cityofmarioa.org
Code Publishing Company
The Marina Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 2022-01, passed March 1, 2022. 47 17.62.060 Tree removal permit I Marina Municipal Code Page1 of3

17.62.060 Tree removal permit.

A. Application. A person who desires to remove or relocate any tree on any property unless exempted by Section

17.62.040 or 17.62.050 shall first secure a tree removal permit from the city. An application for such a permit shall be made on an application form provided by the city accompanied by fees established pursuant to action by the city council. The application shall contain the following:

1. The number, species, size, location of each tree proposed for removal and that may potentially be affected by the proposed development;

2. A statement on the reason for the requested action; and

3. Any other pertinent information determined necessary by the community development director or designee, such as an arborist report, prepared by a tree expert, that includes the following:
a. Physical identification of each tree on site that is addressed by the report, either by number or colored tag that is attached to each tree and keyed to the report, b. A site plan that identifies the location of each tree on site that is addressed by the report , its root zone and canopy in relation to proposed development,
c. Size, species, health, and impacts anticipated by the proposed development, and d. Whether the tree is proposed for preservation or removal;

4. That identifies all existing and proposed site improvements and the location, root zone drip line, and canopy of each tree in the arborist report.

B. Review Process. The community development director or designee, upon review and recommendation by the tree committee , may approve, deny or conditionally approve a request for removal. If the request is a part of a development proposal that requires review by the site and architectural design review board, the minor subdivision committee, and/or the planning commission , the community development director or designee shall refer the application together with a recommendation for action thereon to the appropriate reviewing body.

C. Required Findings for Approval of Tree Removal Permit. The following findings are required prior to approval or conditional approval of a tree removal permit:

1. The tree is in poor condition and is in danger of falling within proximity to existing structures , high pedestrian traffic areas such as parking lots, playgrounds and pedestrian walkways, or interference with utility services that cannot be controlled or remedied through reasonable preservation and/or preventive procedures and practices; or

2. The tree is host to a plant, or insect, or other parasitic organism which endangers other adjacent healthy trees; or
The Marina Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 2022-01, passed March 1, 2022. 48 17.62.060 Tree removal permit I Marina Municipal Code Page 2 of3

3. The location of more than three trees conflicts with the construction of street or sidewalk improvements, storm drain, traffic signals or signs; or

4. The number of trees on the site is in excess of the number of healthy trees the site is able to support , based on such considerations as tree species, growth characteristics, general health of the stand, tree age, solar orientation and soil condition; or

5. The applicant outlines other clearly documented and compelling reasons for the removal or relocation of a tree which do not include the elimination of falling leaves or shade, or improving a view; and

6. The tree does not serve as part of a windbreak system, or assist in drainage or in the avoidance of soil erosion, or serve as a component of a wildlife habitat, or otherwise play a prominent role in maintaining the existing urban forest; and

7. Due to the tree's contribution to the aesthetic beauty of the area, the removal would not have a substantial detrimental effect on neighboring property values; and

8. If the removal request is concurrent with development plans for the property and the development plans indicate that it is necessary to remove or relocate the tree to enable reasonable and conforming use of the property which is otherwise prevented by the location of the tree.

D. Conditions of Approval. If it is determined by the appropriate approval authority that adverse effects of tree removal can be mitigated , conditions shall be imposed on the removal including, but not limited to, one or more of the following :

1. Tree Removal and Protection Plan. Tree removal information shall be provided on the grading permit prior to issuance. All tree protection shall be installed and approved by the grading inspector prior to removal or retention of any trees. The tree removal and protection plan shall include:
a. Trees approved for removal;
b. Trees required to be preserved or relocated;
c. Tree protection guideline notes to include an objectively observable maintenance and care plan and program to be implemented to insure the continued health and care of other trees on the property during construction in accordance with tree protection guidelines adopted by resolution of the planning commission.

2. Compensation Plans. Requiring the replacement or placement of additional trees on the property and/or the payment to the city to fund the purchase, the planting and the maintenance of off-site replacement trees by the city pursuant to a city-adopted public tree planting plan. Such replacement trees and/or payment shall be based upon having the combined DBH of the replacement trees equal to the combined DBH of the healthy trees to be removed unless the compensation plan is appealed, in which case the city council may approve tree replacement at a lesser rate. However, until such time as said public tree planting plan is adopted, such replacement trees and/or payment shall be based upon the replacement of the healthy trees to be removed on a minimum two-for-one basis or multiplied by three for each tree removed in violation of this chapter, The Marina Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 2022-01, passed March 1, 2022. 49 17.62.060 Tree removal permit I Marina Municipal Code Page 3 of3 unless the compensation plan is appealed, in which case the city council may approve tree replacement at a lesser rate.

3. Site Restoration Plan. Requiring restoration of ground surface area in the vicinity of tree removals. Such restoration shall include but not be limited to the removal of tree stumps and the filling of any holes left by the tree removals.

E. Public Notice.

1. In the event that the tree removal request is associated with a development proposal, the public shall be informed of said request following the noticing procedures for said development proposals pursuant to Marina's subdivision and zoning ordinances .

2. In the event that the tree removal request is not associated with a development proposal and the city manager or designee grants a tree removal permit , a notice of such action shall be posted on the site together with information relative to appeal rights .

F. Display of Tree Removal Permit. Prior to and during the removal of any tree approved for removal, a copy of the tree removal permit shall be displayed on site. If no tree removal permit is displayed, the city will issue a stop work order and commence the city's administrative fine process. (Ord. 2020-07 § 2, 2020; Ord. 2006-19 § 1, 2006) The Marina Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 2022-01, passed March 1, 2022.

Disclaimer: The city clerk's office has the official version of the Marina Municipal Code. Users should contact the city clerk's office for ordinances passed subsequent to the ordinance cited above.

Note: This site does not support Internet Explorer. To view this site, Code Publishing Company recommends using one of the following browsers: Google Chrome, Firefox, or Safari.

City Website: cityofmarina.org
Code Publishing Company
The Marina Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 2022-01, passed March 1, 2022. 50 1
Chase Tinsley
From: Josh Freeman <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, May 13, 2022 8:28 AM
To: Chase Tinsley
Cc: Iridian Tello; Albert Sanchez Jr.

Subject: Re: City of Marina: City Park Barracks and Cypress Knolls Buildings Blight Removal Project-ADDENDUM 6
Hi Chase,

Thanks for the update on addenda #6. We actually don't do wood chips/mulch, but the hydroseeding option I'm sure would be less expensive. Do you have a quantity in mind as far as how much disturbed area you expect needing hydroseeded?

Thanks,

Josh Freeman
Lead Estimator | CPESC | QSD/QSP
Superior Hydroseeding, Inc.
250 W. Riverside Drive
Watsonville, CA 95076
Office: (831)763-1811

On Thursday, May 12, 2022, 04:53:49 PM PDT, Chase Tinsley <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi Josh-

See addendum 6 – can you please quote whichever way is cheapest – or give alts?

Thank you,

Chase Tinsley
Director, Bids and Project Administration

RESOURCE ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.

ENVIRONMENTAL REMEDIATION & DEMOLITION
13100 Alondra Blvd., Ste #108, Cerritos, CA 90703
Office (562) 468-7000 / Cell (530) 379-6687
51 2
Fax (562) 468-0600
www.resourceenvironmental.com
CSLB# 864417--A,B,C-21,C-22,C-61/D-63,ASB & HAZ

52 MARINA COAST WATER DISTRICT
standards, with regard to the construction of water facilities.

The "Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction," (Green Book), are incorporated herein by this reference. Copies may be purchased from Building News, Inc., 3055 Overland Avenue, Los Angeles, California 90034.
300.18 USE OF DISTRICT SEWERAGE FACILITIES
The District and the State of California have regulations on the types of wastes that are allowed to be discharged into its sewers in order to protect the facilities of the District and its operations to meet its discharge requirements. The section on the use of District sewerage facilities in the District's Code, including a separate supplement, sets forth these requirements. These provisions establish conditions under which certain users are required to obtain permits for use of District sewerage facilities. Applicants whose sewage discharges qualify them for a permit shall not be allowed to connect the building sewer to the District lateral sewer or sewer main until a written notification is provided by the District allowing the hookup. All users must comply with the discharge prohibitions established in the District's Code. 300.19 PROJECT CONSTRUCTION
300.19.1 Notification
Signed Utility Plans and notices shall be given to the District Engineer at least 48-hours before starting construction. Applicant shall also notify the city, and/or County inspector's prior to work within public right-of-way. For a complete review of the construction inspection requirements, please refer to the District's Construction Manual.
300.19.2 License Requirements

1. The applicant's contractor shall have a Class A or C-34 license.

2. The applicant's contractor shall have a business license to operate within the city having jurisdiction.
300.19.3 Preconstruction Meeting
A preconstruction conference is to be held no sooner that 24-hours before starting construction, at which will be present the applicant's contractor's working foremen and/or job superintendent, the applicant's engineer, the District inspector, and a representative from the District's O&M Department. The purpose of this meeting will be to answer any questions on District specification requirements, to obtain the contractor's construction schedule, and to discuss any known circumstances that might affect job installation.

Preconstruction Meeting Agenda: Without relieving the developer of responsibilities outlined elsewhere in the specifications; the District will present to the developer a list of requirements that may contain, but will not be limited to, the following items:

1. Order of work

2. Working hours

3. Site Accessibility

4. District facilities that will be taken off-line for construction

5. Startup operations of new facilities and other District facilities affected by the project December. 2014 300-1
53 2300 E Curry St Building B, Long Beach CA 90805 / 562-981-6600 / www.ueiteam.com

05/20/2022
City of Marina
Public Works Department
809 Cypress Ave
Marina, CA 93833

Attn: Elvie Camacho

Re: City of Marina City Park Barracks and Cypress Knolls Buildings Blight Removal 2022 Project Bid Submission Protest

Ms. Camacho,
Please allow this letter to serve as Unlimited Environmental’s (UEI)protest of bids submitted to the City of Marina for the City Parks Barracks and Cypress Knolls Building Blight Removal 2022 Project, specifically SVG Contracting (SVG), Inc and Resource Environmental, Inc (Resource).

After careful review of the bid specifications, addendum details and bids submitted by both SVG and Resources the following was found to be noncompliant with the bid specifications and addendums, which would cause the respective bid proposals to be non-responsive and should be rejected.

SVG failed to designate a Tree Trimming Subcontractor as required in the bid specifications outlined in A5 Designations of Subcontractors and the Technical Specifications Section 107-3, Tree Trimming… “Tree Trimming shall be done by a licensed tree removal contractor and shall not remove more than 30% of any one tree’s canopy.” Also as required by the CSLB, a D-49 Tree Service Contractor license is required to perform tree pruning services, SVG does not hold a D-49 license and therefore would require a subcontractor to preform said work. UEI received several bids from license D-49 contractors to perform the specified Tree Trimming scope of work, none of the bids received were less than the $25,000. As required in A5 Designation of Subcontractors, bidders were required to list all subcontractors whose portion of work would be more than one-half of one percent of the bidders’ total aggregate bid. A rough calculation of SVG’s bid would require SVG to list any subcontractor utilized on this project whose subcontract would exceed $19,952. I would respectfully ask SVG be required to provide proof of proposal from a D-49 licensed contractor with a specified scope of work as determined by the bid specifications, a total price less that the one half of one percent of their aggregate bid as required in the bid specifications and dated prior to the city’s bid opening. If they are unable to do so, the failure to list designated subcontractors would render SVG’s bid nonresponsive and therefore should be rejected.

Furthermore, in April of 2022 SVG made a change to the Qualifying Individual on their Contractors State License, specifically the C-22 Asbestos Abatement License. Mark Dwayne Hughes, is the individual who holds the C-22 license for SVG, changed from a RMO (Responsible Managing Officer) to a RME (Responsible Managing Employee). Although Mr. Hughes is still shown on SVG’s contractor’s license, an updated Bond of Qualifying Individual is not on file with the CSLB, and the current bond which secures the C-22 license is due to expire on May 25,2022 (see attached printout from the CLSB). Without a Bond 54 55
56 57
58 59
60 61
62 63
64 65
66 67
68 Unlimited Environmental Inc
has fulfilled the requirements of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) Section 402, and has received certification to conduct lead-based paint renovation, repair, and painting activities pursuant to 40 CFR Part 745.89
All EPA Administered States, Tribes, and Territories
This certification is valid from the date of issuance and expires June 22, 2027 Certification #
NAT-77916-3
Issued On
June 08, 2022
Michelle Price, Chief
Lead, Heavy Metals, and Inorganics Branch
69 70
71 From: Jill Dupleich <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2022 11:00 AM
To: Elvie Camacho
Cc: Nestor Reyes; Scott Lange;
[email protected]
Subject: Re: City Barracks and Cypress Knolls
Buildings Blight Removal 2022 Project -
Bid Protest RESPONSE
Attachments: EPA Lead Certificate exp. 06.22.27.pdf;
Nestor Reyes-RRP-cert.pdf; Jose Garcia
R
enovator Certification.pdf

G
ood Morning Elvie,
I wanted to reach out to see if there is an update on the protest and/or award for the City Barracks and Cypress Knolls project. Also, I wanted to make sure you have a copy of the attached RRP certification for UEI. I have included the corporate certifications for theRRP as well as the UEI supervisor and management which holds the certification, for Jose Garcia and Nestor Reyes, for your review and reference.

Any update you can provide would be greatly appreciated.

Best Regards,

Jill Dupleich
Executive Vice President
2300 E Curry St Building B | Long Beach, CA 90805
***PLEASE NOTE OUR NEW ADDRESS***
P. (562) 981-6600 | C. (562) 577-0861 | F. (562) 981-2218 | E. [email protected] www.UEIteam.com

On Tue, Jun 7, 2022 at 4:02 PM Elvie Camacho <[email protected]> wrote:

Jill,

In behalf of the City of Marina, this is to acknowledge receipt of your response to the bid protest.

Attached is your response letter with City stamp for your file.

72 Thank you,
Elvie

From: Jill Dupleich <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 7, 2022 1:21 PM
To: [email protected]; Elvie Camacho <[email protected]> Cc: Nestor Reyes <[email protected]>; Scott Lange <[email protected]> Subject: City Barracks and Cypress Knolls Buildings Blight Removal 2022 Project - Bid Protest RESPONSE

** WARNING: This email originated from outside of the organizat ion. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. **

Mr. McMinn,
Please find attached UEI's response letter to the bid protest submitted to the City of Marins for the above referenced bid package.

Confirmation of receipt of this email would be greatly appreciated.

Best Regards,

Jill Dupleich
Executive Vice President
2300 E Curry St Building B | Long Beach, CA 90805
***PLEASE NOTE OUR NEW ADDRESS***
P. (562) 981-6600 | C. (562) 577-0861 | F. (562) 981-2218 | E. [email protected] www.UEIteam.com
73 74
75 76
77 78
79 80
81 82
83 84
85 86
87 88
89 90
91 30919\000\1618943.3:72822

F E N T O N & K E L L E R

A P R O F E S S I O N A L C O R P O R A T I O N

MEMORANDUM
FILE NO.: 36607.36339
TO: Heidi A. Quinn, Interim City Attorney, City of Marina FROM: Alex J. Lorca, Special Counsel
DATE: July 27, 2022
RE: City Park Barracks & Cypress Knolls Building &
Blight Removal Project Bid Protests

INTRODUCTION
This memorandum summarizes the facts related to multiple bid protests received by the City of Marina (City) in response to the solicitation of bids for its City Park Barracks and Cypress Knolls Buildings Blight Removal 2022 Project (Project), provides a review of the law applicable to such bid protests, and provides a recommendation for awarding the Project contract (Contract).

I. BACKGROUND
Our opinion is based on the following background and facts.

The Project consists of the demolition of 45 barracks and 30 other buildings on land the City obtained following the closure of the Fort Ord Army Base. The Project also includes the removal of associated debris, tree trimming, and other work.1 Project bids were opened by the City o n May 17, 2022. The low bid was submitted by SVG Contractors, Inc. , of Morgan Hill (SVG) in the amount of $3,990,432. The second lowest bid was submitted by Unlimited Environmental, Inc. , of Long Beach ( UEI) in the amount of $4,327,000. T he third lowest bi d was submitted by Resource Environmental, Inc. (REI) of Cerritos in the amount of $4,500,000.

Following the bid opening the City received two bid protests – both dated May 20, 2022 – one from REI and one from UEI.2
On May 31, 2022, the City sent SVG, UEI, and REI each a letter offering them an opportunity to submit, by June 7, 2022, “legal authority together with supporting documents or materials” concerning the allegations in the bid protests. SVG, UEI, and REI all submitted letters on June 7, 2022 in response to the City’s May 31, 2022 letters. 1 See, generally, Specifications for City of Marina City Park Barracks and Cypress Knolls Buildings Blight Removal 2022 Project (Specifications).
2 A bid protest was not received from SVG, presumably because it was the low bidder. 92 Memo to Heidi A. Quinn
July 27, 2022

-2-
30919\000\1618943.3:72822
II. SUMMARY OF REI PROTESTS
A. Tree Removal and Trimming
In its May 20, 2022 letter, REI asserts SVG’s bid was nonresponsive because SVG was neither “a licensed tree removal contractor” as required by the Specifications, nor did SVG list a subcontractor with a tree removal and trimming license. REI reiterated this claim in its June 7, 2022 letter.

With respect to UEI, in its May 20, 2022 letter, REI admits UEI listed a subcontractor for tree trimming and removal, but stated it was “for a paltry and unbalanced amount.” In its June 7, 2022 letter, REI did not protest UEI’s bid with respect to tree trimming and removal.

B. Asbestos and Lead Licenses
In its May 20, 2022 letter, REI asserts SVG’s and UEI’s bids did not include evidence that either held a Renovation, Repair and Painting (RRP) certification from the United State s Environmental Protection Agency as required by the Specifications.3 REI reiterated this assertion in its June 7, 2022 letter.

C. Erosion Control
REI’s May 20, 2022 letter states that while the Specifications call for hydroseeding the Project’s slopes and installing woodchips on flat areas, UEI ’s bid only lists an estimate for hydroseeding and is therefore nonresponsive. REI repeats this assertion in its June 7, 2022 letter.

D. Other Objections
REI’s May 20, 2022 , and June 7, 2022 letters list a variety of other “irregularities and clerical errors” included in the bids provided by SVG and UEI.

With respect to SVG, REI alleges SVG “did not attest the bid bond or provide a notary acknowledgement, provided a notary acknowledgement instead of a jurat for the non -collusion affidavit, entered bid bond amounts too low for its bid” and that instea d of listing references in the space provided, SVG attached a list of references. REI also alleges SVG “ did not correctly extend its unit prices or add the amount sums. ” REI repeated these assertions in its June 7, 2022, letter.

With respect to UEI, REI asserts its surety’s documents were impermissibly provided in scanned or photocopied format, instead of the required original seal and signature format. REI also alleges UEI “did not attest or provide an acknowledgement for its pho tocopied bid bond and provided a notary acknowledgement rather than a jurat for the [N]on[ -]collusion [Affidavit].” Finally, REI alleges UEI did not properly break down unit pricing in its bid. 3 Specifications at Section 111 of C2 Technical Specifications. 93 Memo to Heidi A. Quinn
July 27, 2022

-3-

30919\000\1618943.3:72822
III. SUMMARY OF UEI PROTESTS
A. Tree Trimming
Like REI, UEI asserts SVG’s bid was nonresponsive because SVG does not have the proper tree removal and trimming license, and did not list a subcontractor holding one.

B. Asbestos and Lead Licenses
UEI asserts that SVG’s Bond of Qualifying Individual hasn’t been upd ated with the California Contractors State License Board (CSLB) to reflect the current holder of the C -22 Asbestos Abatement License.

C. Objection Regarding Bid Tally
UEI objects to REI’s failure to include an actual and accurate “Grand Total Bid” on the submitted bid schedule.

IV. LEGAL ANALYSIS
A. General Rules Regarding Public Contracting
“A basic rule of competitive bidding is that bids must conform to specifications, and that if a bid does not so conform, it may not be accepted. However, it is further well established that a bid which substantially conforms to a call for bids may, though it is not strictly responsive, be accepted if the variance cannot have affected the amount of the bid or given a bidder an advantage or benefit not allowed other bidders or, in other words, if the variance is inconsequential.” ( Ghilotti Construction Co. v. City of Richmond (1996) 45 Cal.App.4th 897, 904 (Ghilotti); internal citations and quotations omitted.) “To be considered inconsequential, a deviation must neither give the b idder an unfair competitive advantage nor otherwise defeat the goals of insuring [sic] economy and preventing corruption in the public contracting process.” (Ghilotti, supra, 45 Cal.App.4th at p. 900.) “These considerations must be evaluated from a practical rather than a hypothetical standpoint, with reference to the factual circumstances of the case. They must also be viewed in light of the public interest, rather than the private interest of a disappo inted bidder. It certainly would amount to a disservice to the public if a losing bidder were to be permitted to comb through the bid proposal or license application of the low bidder after the fact, and cancel the low bid on minor technicalities, with the hope of securing acceptance of his, a higher bid. Such construction would be adverse to the best interests of the public and contrary to public policy.” (Ghilotti, supra, 45 Cal.App.4th at pp. 908-909; internal citations and quotations omitted ; See also Bay Cities Paving & Grading, Inc. v. City of San Leandro (2014) 223 Cal.App.4th 1181.) 94 Memo to Heidi A. Quinn
July 27, 2022

-4-

30919\000\1618943.3:72822
B. SVG’s Bid is Nonresponsive.

1. The California State Licensing Law
The California State Licensing Law (CSLL) 4 is a comprehensive legislative scheme governing the construction business in California that is “designed to protect the public from incompetent or dishonest providers of building and construction services. ” (Pacific Caisson & Shoring, Inc. v. Bernards Bros. Inc. (2011) 198 Cal.App.4th 681, 687) (Pacific Caisson). “A class A or general engineering contractor is a contractor whose principal contracting business is in connection with fixed works requiring specialized engineering knowledge and skill, including t he following divisions or subjects: irrigation, drainage, water power, water supply, flood control, inland waterways, harbors, docks and wharves, shipyards and ports, dams and hydroelectric projects, levees, river control and reclamation works, railroads, highways, streets and roads, tunnels, airports and airways, sewers and sewage disposal plants and systems, waste reduction plants, bridges, overpasses, underpasses and other similar works, pipelines and other systems for the transmission of petroleum and o ther liquid or gaseous substances, parks, playgrounds and other recreational works, refineries, chemical plants and similar industrial plants requiring specialized engineering knowledge and skill, powerhouses, power plants and other utility plants and inst allations, mines and metallurgical plants, land leveling and earthmoving projects, excavating, grading, trenching, paving and surfacing work and cement and concrete works in connection with the above mentioned fixed works.” ( Pacific Caisson, supra, 198 Cal.App.4th at p. 687; internal citations and quotations omitted.) This list of fixed works is not exhaustive. (Ron Yates Construction Co. v. Superior Court (1986) 186 Cal.App.3d 337, 345– 347.)
In contrast to a general contractor, “[a] specialty contra ctor is a contractor whose operations involve the performance of construction work requiring special skill and whose principal contracting business involves the use of specialized building trades or crafts. ” (Business & Professions Code § 7058(a).) The Cal ifornia Code of Regulations and the CSLB subdivide specialty contracting work into subclassifications. One such specialty license is the D- 49 Tree Service Contractor license classification, which provides, “a tree service contractor prunes trees, removes t rees, limbs or stumps (including grinding) and engages in tree or limb guying.” 5,6
A bid by a contractor who is not properly licensed must be considered nonresponsive and be rejected by the public entity . An unlicensed contractor making such a bid is also subject to discipline by the state. (Business & Professions Code § 7028.15(a)). However, courts have found that where a bid package requires a specialty license, a general license will suffice if the work to be performed is encompassed by the general license.

4 Business & Professions Code § 7000 et seq.
5 See Title 16, Division 8, Article 3 of the California Code of Regulations. 6 While the Specifications do not specifically refer to a D -49 license, they do require a “ licensed tree removal contractor,” and the work listed to be performed by the winning bidder is substantially similar to that authorized by a D-49 license holder.
95 Memo to Heidi A. Quinn
July 27, 2022

-5-

30919\000\1618943.3:72822
A public agency has the discretion to determine which license s are required for its projects, and that determination will only be subject to reversal if it is arbitrary, capricious, entirely lacking in evidentiary support, contrary to established public policy, or is unlawful or procedurally unfair. (Business & Professions Code § 7059(b); M&B Construction v. Yuba County Water Agency (1999) 68 Cal.App.4th 1353, 1360-1361.)

2. SVG is not Properly Licensed to Perform Tree Trimming Work The City’s bid package states, “[t]rees designated for trimming/pruning shall be as shown on the plan and wrapped with ribbon. Contractor may trim/prune additional trees to remain to execute their work and t o protect remaining trees from damage due to Contractor’s operations, subject to the approval of the Engineer and the Arborist. Tree Trimming shall be done by a licensed tree removal contractor and shall not remove more than 30% of any one tree’s canopy.”7
REI and UEI argue that while SVG listed an amount for Tree Removal and Trimming as part of its bid ,8 SVG neither possessed a D-49 license nor listed a subcontractor possessing one, and therefore SVG’s bid must be deemed nonresponsive.

In its June 7, 2022 letter to the City, SVG, through its attorney M. Johnathan Robb Jr. , argues SVG did not need a D -49 license (or need to list a subcontractor with a D -49 license) because it possesses a Class A General Engineering Contractor License. Mr. Robb argues th at the D -49 license requirement is “superfluous as it is fully encompassed within the [C]lass A license requirements.”9
Specifically, Mr. Robb states that SVG’s Class A license allows it to “perform work at parks and playgrounds which frequently include t rees” and that it allows SVG to “level land and perform grading work, presumably including the removal of trees.” 10 As such, Mr. Robb concludes that “[b]y SVG’s specialized skill and knowledge, it is fit to perform tree trimming work.”11
As noted above, a Class A license holder may perform work related to parks, playgrounds, and other recreational works, as well as land leveling and grading. While it could perhaps be argued that the removal of trees is encompassed within the works allowed to be performed by a Class A license holder, su ch argument likely cannot be made regarding tree trimming.

The City’s bid package contains an exhaustive discussion of all trees that will be impacted by the Project. For both the City Park area and the Cypress Knoll s locations, the City’s

7 Specifications at “C2 Technical Specifications” Section 108 “ CLEARING AND GRUBBING AND TREE REMOVAL AND TRIMMING,” subsection 3 “Tree Trimming.” (Emphasis added.) 8 See Item 3 in SVG’s Bid Schedule.
9 June 7, 2022, letter from Mr. Robb of Sweeny Mason, LLP to City of Marina at page 3. 10 (Ibid.)
11 (Ibid.)
96 Memo to Heidi A. Quinn
July 27, 2022

-6-

30919\000\1618943.3:72822
contract planner provided : 1) a detailed Arborist Report prepared by ISA Certified Arborist Patric K rabacher; 2) a “Tree Table ” listing for each tree its species, size, health, and recommendation for either removal or retention ; 3) a photo log for many of the trees; 4) B est Management Practices (BMP) for handling the impacted trees ; and 5) a sample Tree Removal Application.

The BMPs for both areas stated, “[p]runing is to be minimal but performed only when necessary in accordan ce to American National Safety Institute ANSI A300 Pruning Standards.

Pruning may include the larger canopied trees that have deadwood or are exhibiting some minor structural defect or minor disease that must be compensated. Should the health and vigor of any tree decline it will be treated as appropriately recommended by a certified arborist or qualified forester.” The BMPs also provided direction with respect to pruning as it relates to a tree’s branch diameter, the direction and shape of branches, as wel l as direction with respect to a tree’s canopy. In all, the City devoted 51 pages to trees in its bid package.

Taken together, all of these facts provide substantial evidence of the importance to the City of the trees affected by the Project , and support the City’s determination that a specialized tree removal and trimming license is required.

In support of its argument that the required D -49 license is “fully encompassed” by its Class license, SVG cites Pacific Caisson, supra, 198 Cal.App.4th 681. However, Pacific Caisson is distinguishable.

In Pacific Caisson a subcontractor agreed to “excavate [a] site for footings, grade beams, plumbing and utility lines, and other requirements, backfill and grade, and provide temporary support…” and to “ prepare and submit calculations [of] subsurface conditions and geotechnical design parameters, factors of safety, assumptions, design criteria, overstress values and serviceability/deflection tolerances.” 12 The bid package required bidders to maintain a class C - 12 specialty “Earthwork and Paving Contractor” license. The winning bidder held a class A general engineering contractor ’s license and a class B general building contractor ’s license, but never held or obtained the class C-12 specialty license.

In holding that the class A general engineering contractor’s license was sufficient, the court noted much of the work allowed pursuant to a C -12 specialty license was also permitted by the class A general engineering contractor’s license. For example, the court noted both licenses allow a contractor to perform “earthmoving projects, excavating, grading, trenching, paving, and surfacing work and cement work and concrete works….”13
Because a public entity has the right to specify the type of license required, even when the work may be legally performed by contractors holding other classifications, the City has the right to insist on a license d tree removal and trimming contractor. 14 As SVG did not have the D-

12 Pacific Caisson, supra, 198 Cal.App.4th at pp. 685-686. 13 Ibid. at p. 691.
14 See M&B Constr. v Yuba County Water Agency (1999) 68 Cal.App.4th 1353. 97 Memo to Heidi A. Quinn
July 27, 2022

-7-

30919\000\1618943.3:72822
49 license itself and did not list a subcontractor who did, its bid is nonresponsive and should be rejected by the City.

C. The Bid Package did not Require an Asbestos and Lead License at the time Bids were Submitted.

The Technical Specifications for Hazardous Materials Abatement for the Project, at Part

2.4 “Submittals and Notifications” provides,
“[n]o work will be allowed to start until these documents have been submitted to reviewed [sic] and approved in writing by the Observation Service [¶] L. Licenses: Asbestos Provide proof of State of California Contractors State License Board license (Asbestos C -22) and proof of Certificate of Registration for Asbestos -Related work with the Division of Occupational Safety and Health (DOSH) in accordance with Labor Code, Section 6501.8. Lead The contractor shall have the EPA’s Renovation, Repair and Painting (RRP) certification. The abatement supervisor shall be a California Department of Public Health (CDPH) certified lead rela ted construction supervisor. All workers and supervisors performing deleading activities shall have successfully completed CDPH training. Copies of all notifications, permits, applications, licenses and like documents required by Federal, State, or local regulations…” (Emphasis added.) In its May 20, 2022 and June 7, 2022 letters , REI asserts UEI’s bid must be rejected as it does not hold RRP certification.15 However, as indicated above, the winning bidder was not required to possess the RRP certification at the time the bids were submitted. By the express language of the bid package, all that was required was that the winning bidder obtain ed the RRP certification before they start work on the Project. Such requirement did not give any “bidder an advantage or benefit not allowed other bidders…” ( Ghilotti Construction, supra, 45 Cal.App.4th at p. 904; internal citations and quotations omitted.)
D. Erosion Control
Section 110 , “Earthwork, Gradin g, and Hydroseeding” of the C2 Technical Specifications, as subsection 5 , “Hydroseeding,” requires the winning bidder to apply hydroseeding and erosion control to certain areas affected by the Project. Paragraph 11, “Site Restoration, Base Bid Areas” of th e Bid Item Descriptions in the bid package states, “ [t]he work shall include, but not be limited to, furnishing all labor, materials, tools, equipment, and incidentals necessary for rough grading areas where foundation and footings are taken out and capping the building footprint and surrounding soil disturbance with recycled wood chips on flat areas and hydroseeding on sloped areas.” (Emphasis added.)

15 Resource does not object to UEI’s status as a C-22 license holder, presumably because UEI’s bid states it holds this license.
98 Memo to Heidi A. Quinn
July 27, 2022

-8-

30919\000\1618943.3:72822
REI alleges UEI’s bid is nonresponsive because it listed Superior Hydroseeding, Inc. (Superior) as the subcontractor for the required site restoration work. Superior, REI asserts, “does NOT install wood chips” and therefore UEI’s bid was nonresponsive as it did not address the spreading of woodchips.

However, REI’s objection does not address the possibility that: 1) UEI may install wood chips on its own, under its class B General Contractor’s license ; 2) UEI’s Tree Trimming and Removal subcontractor, Tope’s Tree Service, would perform the work ; or 3) the amount quoted for spreading wood chips fell within the exception to listing subcontractors where the bid of the subcontractor does not exceed 0.5% of the total general contractor’s bid. (Public Contract Code § 4104(a).)
In response to REI’s protest regarding the spreading of woodchips, UEI asserts it has a subcontractor in place to spread the wood chips but that because the bid to do so was under 0.5% of the total bid, it was not required to list the subcontractor. This fact renders REI’s objection speculative and a complainant “cannot undermine a factual determination by relying solely on speculation.” (Bay Cities Paving & Grading, Inc. v. City of San Leandro (2014) 223 Cal.App.4th 1181, 1196.)
E. Other Objections
REI makes several other objections to UEI’s bid, namely: 1) UEI’s utility capping estimate is “exponentially lower than all other bidders;” 2) UEI’s Experience Statement lists only one “high value” project; 3) UEI’s bid was not properly notarized; 4) UEI impermissibly submitted photocopied versions of it surety documents; and 5) UEI made an error in listing unit prices for some items in its Bid Schedule.

As noted above, speculative comments by a complainant cannot undermine factual determinations made by a public agency. An d, inconsequential deviations may be waived by the public agency if the deviation neither gives the winning bidder an unfair competitive advantage nor otherwise defeats the goals of ensuring economy and preventing corruption in the public contracting process.

Here, REI does not provide any facts to demonstrate that UEI’s utility capping estimate or its Experience Statement is nonresponsive or otherwise flawed . With respect to the notarization and photocopying of documents, REI does not demonstrate how such minor deviations provided UEI an unfair advantage. Courts have upheld public agencies waiver of similar minor deviations.16
Finally, with respect to REI’s assertion that UEI listed its total price instead of unit price, such minor mistake does not rise t o an unfair advantage over other bidders. Moreover, i n

16 See, e.g., Bay Cities Paving & Grading, Inc. v. City of San Leandro (2014) 223 Cal.App.4th 1181; Menefee v.

County of Fresno (1985) 163 Cal.App.3d 1175; Ghilotti, supra, 45 Cal.App.4th 897. 99 Memo to Heidi A. Quinn
July 27, 2022

-9-
30919\000\1618943.3:72822
response to REI’s objection , UEI correctly notes that per Addendum 5’s revisions to the “ A3 Proposal Form,” the following language is included under the “BID CLARIFICATION” section:
“In case of discrep ancy between the unit price and the line -item cost set forth for a unit price item, the unit price shall prevail and, shall be utilized as the basis for determining the lowest responsive, responsible bidder. However, if the amount set forth as a unit price is ambiguous, unintelligible, or uncertain for any cause, or is omitted, or is the same amount as the entry in the “Item Cost” column, then the amount set forth in the “Item Cost” column for the item shall prevail and shall be divided by the estimated quantity for the item and the price thus obtained shall be the unit price. Discrepancies between the indicated sum of any column of figures and the correct sum thereof will be resolved in favor of the correct sum.” (Emphasis added.)
Therefore, by its terms, t he bid package provides for a resolution where a unit price is mistakenly stated as the total amount.

V. CONCLUSION
For the reasons set forth above, SVG’s bid is nonresponsive and as such should be rejected by the City. As the second low responsive bidder, UEI may be awarded the Contract.17 17 Because UEI may be awarded the contract, it is unnecessary to address UEI’s complaints regarding the Resource and SVG bids.
100
July 29, 2022 Item No. 11b

Honorable Mayor and Members City Council Meeting
of the Marina City Council of August 3, 2022

Chair and Board Members of Corporation Board Meeting
Abrams B Non-Profit Corporation of August 3, 2022

CITY COUNCIL AND ABRAMS B NON-PROFIT COR PORATION
BOARD CONSIDER ADOPTING R ESOLUTION NO. 2022-, AND 2022- (NPC), APPROVING ABRAMS B HOUSING A REA BUDGET FOR F Y
2022-22 AND AUTHORIZING FINANCE DIRECTOR TO MAKE

APPROPRIATE ACCOUNTING AND BUDGETARY ENTRIES

REQUEST:

It is requested that the City Council and Corporation Board consider:

1. Adopting Resolution No. 2022- and Resolution No. 2022- (NPC), approving the Abrams B Housing Area Budget for FY 2022-2023, and;

2. Authorizing Finance Director to make appropriate accounting and budgetary entries.

BACKGROUND:

The City of Marina is the owner of the 194-unit Abrams Park Housing Area. Alliance Residential Company has been retained to provide property management services.

City staff, Greystar staff , and Tenant’s Associati on representa tives have met to discuss the preparation of the Abrams B Housing Area Budget for FY 2022-23.

ANALYSIS:

The budget package provided for the City Council’s consideration includes:

• Alliance Residential Abrams Park FY 2022/2023 Proposed Budget Memo • Attachment A Abrams Park Income
• Attachment B Market Survey
• Attachment C BMR Rent Calculation Documentation
• Attachment D Abrams Park Expenses
• Attachment E Abrams Park Standard Budget
• Attachment F Abrams Park Capital Budget Projections 2022-2023

Information in each of the sections below is intended to highlight each of these pieces of the budget package. Please refer to the attachments themselves for greater details.

Alliance Residential Abrams Park FY 2022/2023 Proposed Budget Memo This document provides larger capital project accomp lishments for t he year, summary of revenue/rents, summary of expenses and capital budget spending.

Attachment A Abrams Park Income
Summarizes the performance of the current year revenues and projects revenu es for 2021/2022 budget year. Revenue for FY 2021-2022 is projected to end $3,200 under what was budgeted. The decrease in revenue is at tributed primarily to low turnover of units to market rate. Net revenue for FY 2021-2022 actual is estimated to close $93,945 more than budgeted due to operating expenses being lower tha n expected. FY 2022-2023 budget revenue totals $3,727,758. This is a $44,528 increase over FY 2021-2022 FY budget, primarily due to turnover of units to market rate. 1 In 2010, the City Council adopted a rent formula. In Place, market-rate residents (residents who are not on a Below Market Rate program), rent may increase by the lesser of CPI -U for SF/OAK/SJ for February over F ebruary annually or 3 % but no mo re than the a verage of the Monterey County Housing Authority Payment Standard a nd the HUD Fair Mark et Rent (FMR) doc umentation schedule, reduced by an average household amount for Water/Meter, Sewer and Garbage costs in the former Fort Ord commu nity as an equivalent re nt. If an individual’s current equivalent rent exceeds the averaged FMR, then no incr ease will be asse ssed. If an individual’s equivalent rent is less than the averaged FMR but exceeds it after the allowable increase is added, then the alternative increase will only be sufficient to meet the averaged FMR.

Attachment B Market Survey
Current market surv ey for 5 similar apartment communities in Marina, plus a “shadow market” or non-apartment complex compar able units. This sur vey is u sed to determine the ren ts for new market rate move-in tenants. The survey is update d throughout the year to reflect the most recent market rents of the comparable apartment homes in Marina.

Attachment C BMR Rent Calculation Documentation
Current year BMR rent calculations included in the proposed Alliance budget memo for the current 49-Very Low-Income qualifying units and 23-Low Income qualifying units.

Attachment D Abrams Park Expenses
Summary of all operating expenses. FY 2021-2022 is estimated to close with $117,385 in expenses under budget. This is primarily due to a decrease in ope rating expenses. Proposed FY 2022-2023 operating expenses tot al $1,461,787. This is a $95,147 increase over FY 20 21-2022 FY budget , primarily due to the addition of a nightly safety security patrol and an increase in capital expenses.

Attachment E Abrams Park Standard Budget
This do cument co ntains a summary sheet supported by the detailed budget line items . Th e summary sheet combines the Revenue and Operating Expenses described in the Attachments above and adds accounting for the City’s distribution of $1,532,220 and the Replacement Reserve (capital project set-aside) of $545,340. It should be noted that the Abrams B Housing Area debt payment of $735,000 is paid through the City’s distribution with the remainder of $420,000 being General Fund proceeds.

Attachment F Abrams Park Capital Budget Projections
A five -year projection of capital projects. This sheet also provides accounting fo r the Cap ital Reserve. The beginning balance of the Capital Reserve set aside funds is $1,027,051. The capital expenditures for FY 2022-2023 equal $653,408. Larger projects this year inc lude parking improvements, sidewalk repa irs, safety lighting addition s and increase in hea ter unit replacements.

Each y ear the re is a $ 545,340 set-aside contribution (Replacement R eserve) in the budget . The final Capital Reserve set aside funds for FY 2022-2023 will be $918,983.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Should the City Council and Corporation Board elect to approve this request for the FY 2022- 2023 Budget, the owner distribution as proposed will be $1,532,220. This owner distribution is used to pay the Abrams B Housing Area debt payment of $735,000 with the remainder of $420,000 being General Fund proceeds.

2 CONCLUSION:

This request is submitted for City Council and NPC Corporation Board consideration and possible action.

Respectfully submitted,

_________________________________
Matt Mogensen
Assistant City Manager
City of Marina

REVIEWED/CONCUR:

_________________________________
Layne P. Long
City Manager
City of Marina

3 RESOLUTION NO. 2022-
RESOLUTION NO. 2022- (NPC)

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MARINA AND

THE ABRAMS B NON-PROFIT CORPORATION APPROVING ABRAMS B
HOUSING AREA BUDGET FOR FY 2022-2023 AND AUTHORIZING

FINANCE DIRECTOR TO MAKE APPROPRIATE ACCOUNTING AND

BUDGETARY ENTRIES

WHEREAS, Alliance Residential Company (“Alliance”), now Greystar Real Estate Partners, as the management agent of Abrams B Housing Area , has submitted a draft FY 2022-2023 budget; and

WHEREAS, City staff, Greystar staff, and the Tenant’s Association representatives Paula Pelot and Denise Turley have met in preparation of this budget; and

WHEREAS, the staff of Greystar and the City of Marina have worked collectively on preparing a budget to be presented to the City Council and Board of Abrams B Non-Profit Corporation; and

WHEREAS, Alliance submitted a budget letter describing highlights of the proposed Abrams Park Housing Area FY 2022-2023 Budget and accompanied by updated proposed budgets; and

WHEREAS, the rental revenues are used to provide funds for debt service payments on the Abrams Park property purchase; and

WHEREAS, in 2010, the City Council adopted a rent formula. The Council Policy has been further clarified for In Place, market -rate residents as follows: In Place, market -rate residents (residents who are not on a Below Market Rate program), rent may increase by the lesser of CPI-U for SF/OAK/SJ for February over February annually or 3% but no more than the average of the Monterey County Housing Authority Payment Standard and th e HUD Fair Market Rent (FMR) documentation schedule, reduced by an average h ousehold amount for Water/Meter, Sewer and Garbage costs in the former Fort Ord community as an equivalent rent. If an individual’s current equivalent rent exceeds the averaged FM R, t hen no increase will be assessed. If an individual’s equivalent rent is less than the averaged FMR but exceeds it after the allowable increase is added, then the alternative increase will only be sufficient to meet the averaged FMR; and

WHEREAS, anticipated O wner revenues for Owner Distributions for FY 2022-2023 will be approximately $1,532,220. This owner distribution is used to pay the Abrams B Housing Area debt payment of $735,000 with the remainder of $420,000 being General Fund proceeds. This funding is available for city staff support for Abrams Park which includes assistance wi th the affordable housing program, developing a long -term capital improvement p rogram, and help with developing ideas for potential develo pment and expansion of the prop erty; and

WHEREAS, City staff has reviewed the budget package for FY 2022-2023; and

WHEREAS, the City Council of Marina and the Board of the Abrams B Non-Profit Corporation reviewed and considered the proposed budgets.

4 Resolution No. 2022-
Resolution No. 2022- (NPC)
Page Two

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Marina and the
Corporation Board of the Abrams B Non-Profit Corporation do hereby:

1. Approve the Abrams Park Housing Area Budget for FY 2022-2023, and;

2. Authorize the Finance Director to make appropriate accounting and budgetary entries.

PASSED AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Marina and the Corporation Board of the Abrams B Non-Profit Corporation at a regular meeting duly held on the 3rd day of August 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

Bruce C. Delgado, Mayor

ATTEST:

Anita Sharp, Deputy City Clerk

5 Preston/Abrams Park
682 Wahl Court
Marina, CA 93933
831-384-0119

July 28, 2022

Mr. Layne Long
City Manager
City of Marina
211 Hillcrest Avenue
Marina, California 93933

Re: Abrams Park FY 2022/2023 Proposed Budget

Dear Mr. Long:

It has been a pleasure to continue to work with residents and the City of Marina over the last year.

With the combination of wonderful residents and effective staff, a number of positive changes have been seen in Abrams Park:

1) Building Upgrades: Lighting improvements were completed throughout the property.

Mailboxes will be replaced throughout the property in July. 2) Landscaping/Asphalt Repairs: The annual tree trimming, fire clearance and common area clearance projects are currently underway and was completed in June. The asphalt was also repaired Ingman Court. Trip hazard mitigation will be completed in July. Irrigation repairs were made routinely throughout the property as well. Lastly, gopher abatement process is underway with a monthly service. Roof preventative maintenance will be completed in July.
3) Units of Long-Term Residents: In a typical year, several long-term residents go through the process to refresh their flooring, paint and appliances. These services are extended to long- term residents upon notification or inspection indicating replacement is necessary based on age or condition. These assessments were put on hold due to COVID-19 but resumed in April 2021 when Monterey County moved into the Orange Tier. 4) Green Initiatives: In addition to the Marina Coast Water District’s and other utility conservation programs, Greystar purchases and installs water or energy saving devices as replacement fixtures as needed. PG&E continues to work directly with income eligible residents to weatherize their homes at no cost to the resident or the community.

Greystar looks to continue to provide the residents at Abrams Park a comfortable and quality living experience. Continued capital improvements throughout the community will allow this property to remain a desirable neighborhood for renters, as well a source of hou sing that is essential to the general populace of Marina.

Revenue
6 The primary source of revenue is rents, Section 8 voucher payments from the Housing Authority of the County of Monterey, and associated charges to residents such as late fees.

The City C ouncil of the City of Marina and the Corporation Board of the Abrams B Non -Profit Corporation adopted rent formulas at a regular meeting held on the 2 nd of June 2010. The formula states that the annual increase in market rents for in-place residents shall be capped at the lesser of three percent (3%) or the Department of Labor’s Consumer Price Index for San Francisco -Oakland- San Jose, All Items, for All Urban Consumers (referred to as CPI -U) Average percentage for the previous year (February to February) to be applied to the next fiscal year, provided that the increased rent for in-place tenants does not exceed the market rent charged to move-in residents.

Proposed Budget – Targeted Rental In crease applies the allowable 3% Rental Increase to in -place residents who are currently under the Fair Market Rental Rate as computed by averaging rates from the Monterey County Housing Authority and the HUD Fair Market Rent schedule and is adjusted for a determined amount for the Water, Sewer and Garbage that residents pay directly to the provider for those services. A reduced Rental Increase amount proportionate to their current rent would be applied to households that may not qualify for the standard Rental Increase.

Current Market Rent Conditions
The market rent for new move-ins is calculated by comparable market rent levels in the competitive market throughout the year. As shown in Attachment A, the proposed Budget results in a 3% increase in Total Income ($32,203.80). Per the Marina City Council approved rent formula in 2010, the market rents for new move -ins are fluid throughout the year and change according to market conditions.

Currently, market rents for incoming residents are as follows:

Unit Size Current Rent Range for Incoming
Market Rate Residents
Two Bedroom $1,800 - $1,950
Remodeled – Two BR $2,350
Four Bedroom $2,570 - $2,700
Remodeled – Four BR $2,800 - $3,150

* Note: Four 2-Bedroom homes and eight 4-Bedroom homes have additional features that warrant higher than average rental rates.

The Averaged HUD Fair Market Rents (FMR) and the Monterey County Housing Authority Peninsula Payment Standard for December 2020 are as follows:

Unit Bedroom Size Fair Market
Rent
Utility
Allowance
Adjusted Rental
Amount
Two Bedroom $2,056.00 $157.02 $1,898.98
Four Bedroom $3,220.50 $157.02 $3,063.48

7 A number of in-place market renters in Abrams Park homes are leasing below the averaged Fair Market Rent. The Fair Market Rates above include allowance for some utilities, which are currently paid directly by Abrams Park residents in addition to their monthly rental amount. The two- bedroom average in-place market rent at Abrams Park is $1,564.00 (effectively $1,721), while the average four-bedroom units at Abrams Park rent at $2,206.00 (effectively $2,363).

Affordable Rents
Affordable rental rates are derived from median income schedules published by governmental agencies. Rental rates at Preston Park are based upon 50% and 60% and 80% of the median income for Monterey County. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development calculates the maximum household income by family size in Monterey County, generally once a year. As of the date of this memo , the rental rates are based upon families at 50% and 60% and 80% of the Monter ey County median income for 202 2. A rental increase is proposed per calculations using published information from the County of Monterey and Housing Authority.

Maximum Household Income Limits for 2022 as published in April 2022.

Income
Category
Two
Person
Three
Person
Four
Person
Five
Person
Six
Person
Seven
Person
Eight
Person
Nine
Person
50%Very Low $45,500 $51,200 $56,850 $61,400 $65,950 $70,500 $75,050 $79,590 60%
Low/Lower
$54,600 $61,440 $68,220 $73,680 $79,140 $90,060 $90,060 $95,512 80% Low $72,800 $81,900 $91,000 $98,300 $105,600 $112,850 $120,150 $127,400

Projected Revenue and Expenses in FY 21/22
FY 22/23 budget includes $3,727,758 in Total Revenue vs. FY 21/22 forecast of $3,680,031. Further, FY 22/23 budget includes $1,221,259 in Total Operating Expenses vs. FY 21/22 forecast of $1,140,345 resulting in a $80,914 unfavorable variance.

Expenses
Expenses as outlined in Attachment D include Operating Expense projections and r elevant changes from the FY 202 2/23 budget. Operating expenses typically include expenditures for routine maintenance of the property, redecorating expenses as they apply to unit turns, and expenditures relating to the daily operations of the Leasing Office. Overall, total operating expenses proposed for FY 2021/22 are 7.1% higher than the Estimated Actuals for FY 20 21/22. Greystar seeks to maximize cost savings, e.g., lower utilities expenses through installation of water/energy saving devices, while contending with cost increases.

Owner Distributions
The proposed budget repeats the previous years’ Owner Distributions $1,532,220.

8 Capital Expenses
Expenses categorized as Capital expenses directly impact the long-term value of the community, including roof replacements, exterior painting, large -scale landscaping improvements, and interior upgrades including appliances and carpeting/vinyl. Note that amounts labeled for interior upgrades in future budget years are placeh olders and are anticipated to change based on Annual Inspection findings.

Recommended capital projects include:

1) Asphalt repair, seal coat, Trip Hazards – $170,000
2) Parking Space Additions - $100,000
3) Gutter Cleaning - $10,000
4) Landscape Upgrades & Tree Trimming - $40,000
5) Lighting Additions - $78,000

Capital Reserve Fund
Adoption of the proposed budget will result in a contribution of $2,811 per unit during this fiscal year.

Please note the replacement reserve only conceptualizes typical replacements. It does not contemplate or allow for unknown expenses which are typical, particularly as a building continues to age.

In reviewing the physical needs of the property, and in conjunction with recommendations from the City of Marina Building Department, Greystar recommends the maximum reserve withholding per unit per year going forward. This withholding would ensure that the asset holds adequate reserves to perform necessary replacements and repairs to protect the useful life of the buildings (Attachment F).

We will continue to look for new ways to improve our services over the coming year and remain committed to meeting the objectives set by the City of Marina. Please feel free to contact me at (831) 384-0119 should you have additional questions or concerns.

Regards,
Victor Vo-Khuong
Community Manager
Cc: Sumer Perkins, Director of Real Estate Greystar

Attachments:
• A. FY 2022/23 Budget Revenue Summary
• C. BMR Rent Calculation Documentation
• D. FY 2021/22 Budget Highlights of Operating Expenses • F. Capital Improvement Plan/Reserve Withholding
9 Abrams Park Budget Memo Attachment A - Revenue Summary 2022/2023 Budget – Targeted Increase
GROSS MARKET POTENTIAL $3,767,298 $3,688,811 $3,769,114 D ($78,487) -2.1% Decrease in Estimated Actual versus Approved Budget due to
assuming increase in market rent
in January 2022 that did not occur.

I $80,303 2.2% Increase in Proposed Budget to
Estimated Actual due to proposed
budget assuming Market Rent
increase upon turnover and renwal
at 1-3%.

I $1,816 0.0%
TOTAL RENTAL INCOME (Gross
Potential Rent minus vacancy, non-
rev units, bad debt)
$3,658,850 $3,654,039 $3,704,163 D ($4,811) -0.1% Decrease in Estimated Actual versus Approved Budget due to
assuming increase in market rent
in January 2022 that did not occur ;
Offset by significant savings in
vacancy loss and non-revenue
units.

I $50,124 1.4% Increase in Proposed Budget to
Estimated Actual due to proposed
budget assuming above increase in
Market Rent offset by assumption
of 98% vacancy at higher market
rate versus forecast of 99% at
current market rates; assumes
increase in bad debt write-offs.

D $45,313 1.2%
MISCELLANEOUS INCOME $24,380 $25,991 $23,595 I $1,611 6.6% Decrease in Estimated Actual versus Approved Budget due to
increase in late fees after COVID.

D ($2,396) -9.2% Decrease in Proposed Budget
versus Estimated Actual due to
interest income and one-time
vendor rebate from 2021/2022.

D ($785) -3.2%
TOTAL INCOME $3,683,230 $3,680,031 $3,727,758 D ($3,200) -0.1% Decrease due to not achieving Market Rents increase
assumptions upon turnover.

I $47,728 1.3% Increase due to achieving Market
Rents upon turnover and
projected in place target rental
increases of 1-3%.

I $44,528 1.2%
NET INCOME $2,445,740 $2,539,685 $2,506,499 I $93,945 3.8% Increase due to Total Income detailed above as well as
Operating Expenses being 4.24%
less than anticipated in FY 21/22.

D ($33,186) -1.3% Increase due achieving Market
Rents upon turnover and
projected in place target rental
increases of 1-3%. Operating
expenses offset NOI with a 7.1%
increase in Operating Expenses
detailed on Attachment D.

I $60,759 2.5%

I -- DESIGNATES INCREASE

D -- DESIGNATES DECREASE
2021/2022 Proposed
Budget vs.
2021/2022
Approved Budget
%% Comments Variance of Proposed
Budget from FY
2021/2022 Estimated
Actuals
% CommentsRevenue Approved Budget
FY 2021/2022
Estimated Actuals FY
2021/2022
Proposed FY
2022/2023
Variance of
Approved Budget
From 2021/2022
Estimated Actuals
10 Shadow Market
Marina Square Apartments
Preston Park
Sunbay Suites
Marina Del Sol
Shoreline Apartments
7 8
9 10
Abrams Park
V2.2
Abrams Park
Market Survey
Presented to:

City Of Marina
Survey Date:
6/7/2022
Properties Included in Survey:

Greystar Proprietary and Confidential Information – Not for distribution or use without prior written authorization.

ATTACHMENT B
11 Property Name
Year
Built
# of
units
%
Occupied
Avg. Unit
Size (SF)
Avg. Mkt
Rent/Unit
Avg. Mkt
Rent $/SF
Avg. Eff
Rent/Unit
Avg. Eff
Rent $/SF
Subject Abrams Park 1978 194 9948% 1386 $2,227 $1.61 $2,227 $1.61 Comp 1 Shadow Market 1973 16 100% 457 $2,289 $5.01 $2,289 $5.01 Comp 2 Marina Square Apartments 1978 48 100% 1000 $2,550 $2.55 $2,550 $2.55 Comp 3 Preston Park 1987 354 99% 1393 $2,237 $1.61 $2,237 $1.61 Comp 4 Sunbay Suites 1989 266 90% 593 $2,215 $3.73 $2,215 $3.73 Comp 5 Marina Del Sol 1977 108 100% 677 $2,200 $3.25 $2,200 $3.25 Comp 6 Shoreline Apartments 1973 84 98% 742 $2,397 $3.23 $2,397 $3.23 Comp 7 7 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 8 8 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 9 9 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 10 10 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Total/Avg (Market) 1070 1505% 1038 $2,254 $2.52 $2,254 $2.52 Total/Avg. (Market less Subject) 876 98% 961 $2,260 $2.72 $2, 260 $2.72 lMarina 0
$1.61
$5.01
$2.55
$1.61
$3.73
$3.25 $3.23
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
$0
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
$3,000
$0.00
$1.00
$2.00
$3.00
$4.00
$5.00
$6.00
Subject Comp 1 Comp 2 Comp 3 Comp 4 Comp 5 Comp 6 Comp 7 Comp 8 Comp 9 Comp 10 Avg. Mkt Rent/Unit Avg. Eff Rent/Unit Avg. Eff Rent $/SF Map
Greystar Proprietary and Confidential Information – Not for distribution or use without prior written authorization. Competitive Analysis

ATTACHMENT B
12 Property Abrams Park Shadow Market
Marina Square
Apartments Preston Park Sunbay Suites Marina Del Sol
Shoreline
Apartments 7 8 9 10
Subject 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

PROPERTY INFORMATION
Owner City Of Marina Variable Greystar City of Marina Sunbay Resort Associates Pioneer Properties N/A
Management Company Greystar variable Greystar Greystar Sunbay Suites Pioneer Properties Greystar Total Number of Units 194 16 48 354 266 108 84
Location (City) Marina Marina Marina Marina Seaside Marina Marina Class 0 A A A A A A
Product Type Townhome Townhome Townhome Townhome Townhome Townhome Townhome Year Built 1978 1973 1978 1987 1989 1977 1973

DEPOSITS AND FEES
Application Fee $45 $0 $35 $45 $50 $35 $42 $0 $0 $0 $0
Deposit (Ref | Non-Ref) rent l 1.5 rent $0 l $0 $1 l $2400 $0 l $250 $250 l $250 $1000 l $0 $500 l $0 $0 l $0 $0 l $0 $0 l $0 $0 l $0 Admin or Redec Fee $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Pet Deposit | Pet Fee no pets l $0 $0 l $0 $0 l $0 $250 l $0 $0 l $0 $500 l $0 $350 l $0 $0 l $0 $0 l $0 $0 l $0 $0 l $0 Pet Rent no pets $0 $0 $25 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

UTILITIES
Electric Metered N/A Metered Metered Metered Metered Metered N/A N/A N/A N/A Gas Metered N/A Metered Metered Metered Metered Metered N/A N/A N/A N/A Water & Sewer Metered N/A Metered Metered Metered Metered Metered N/A N/A N/A N/A Trash | Valet Trash $0 l $0 $0 l $0 N/A l N/A N/A l N/A N/A l N/A N/A l N/A N/A l N/A $0 l $0 $0 l $0 $0 l $0 $0 l $0 Pest Control weekly N/A N/A Weekly weekly Not billed back N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Cable | Internet na l na $0 l $0 N/A l N/A N/A l N/A N/A l N/A N/A l N/A N/A l N/A $0 l $0 $0 l $0 $0 l $0 $0 l $0 PARKING AND STORAGE (# l $)
Covered Parking l $0 l $0 l $0 l $0 1 l $0 1 l $0 1 l $0 Garages (Attached) 1 l $0 l $0 l $0 1 l $0 l $0 l $0 l $0 Garages (Detached) l $0 l $0 1 l $0 l $0 l $0 l $0 l $0 Other Parking 1 l $0 l $0 l $0 l $0 1 l $0 1 l $0 1 l $0 Storage Rent l $0 l $0 1 l $0 l $0 1 l $0 1 l $0 1 l $0 Surface Parking l $0 l $0 l $0 l $0 l $0 l $0 l $0

COMMUNITY AMENITIES
Basketball Court
Billiards Room
Business Center
Car Wash
Coffee Bar/Internet Cafe
Conference Room
Dog Park
Exterior Breezeways
Fitness Center
Jacuzzi/Spa
Jogging/Walking Trails
Laundry
Media Room (Theatre)
On-Site Retail or Restaurants
Outdoor Fireplace
Outdoor Kitchen
Playground/Tot Lot
Pool(s)
Recycle Bins
Roof Deck
Tanning Bed
Tennis Courts
WiFi

CONVENIENCE
Concierge
Dry Cleaner Drop Off
Elevator(s)
Maid Service
Trash Chutes
Valet Parking

SECURITY
Access Gates
Audible/Monitored Alarms
Controlled Building Access
Guard House
Patrol Service
Security Cameras
Security Officer
Telegate

APARTMENT FEATURES
Accent Wall
Built-In Desk
Ceiling Fan(s)
Ceilings - 9' or Greater
Crown Molding
Fireplace
Flooring - Carpet
Flooring - Ceramic Tile
Flooring - Wood/Faux Wood
French Doors
Garden Tub(s)
Outside /Extra Storage
Private Patio/Balcony
Recessed Lighting
Separate Dining Room
Sunroom /Solarium
Utility Room
Walk-in Closet(s)
Washer Dryer Connection
Washer Dryer Included
Greystar Proprietary and Confidential Information – Not for distribution or use without prior written authorization. Amenities & Fees

ATTACHMENT B
13 Property Abrams Park Shadow Market
Marina Square
Apartments Preston Park Sunbay Suites Marina Del Sol
Shoreline
Apartments 7 8 9 10

KITCHEN
Appliances - Black
Appliances - Stainless/SS Look
Appliances - White
Countertops - Granite/Marble
Dishwasher
Disposal
Kitchen Island
Pantry
Greystar Proprietary and Confidential Information – Not for distribution or use without prior written authorization. Amenities & Fees

ATTACHMENT B
14 Property Name Year Built # of units
% of
Property
Avg. Unit
Size (SF)
Avg. Mkt
Rent/Unit
Avg. Mkt
Rent $/SF
Avg. Eff
Rent/Unit
Avg. Eff
Rent $/SF
Subject Abrams Park 1978 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 1 Shadow Market 1973 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 2 Marina Square Apartments 1978 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 Comp 3 Preston Park 1987 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 4 Sunbay Suites 1989 32 12% 345 $1,500 $4.35 $1,500 $4.35 Comp 5 Marina Del Sol 1977 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 6 Shoreline Apartments 1973 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 Comp 7 7 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 8 8 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 9 9 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 10 10 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Total/Avg (Market) 32 12% 345 $1,500 $4.35 $1,500 $4.35 Total/Avg. (Market less Subject) 32 12% 345 $1,500 $4.35 $1,500 $4.35 Property Name Year Built # of units
% of
Property
Avg. Unit
Size (SF)
Avg. Mkt
Rent/Unit
Avg. Mkt
Rent $/SF
Avg. Eff
Rent/Unit
Avg. Eff
Rent $/SF
Subject Abrams Park 1978 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 1 Shadow Market 1973 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 2 Marina Square Apartments 1978 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 Comp 3 Preston Park 1987 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 4 Sunbay Suites 1989 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 5 Marina Del Sol 1977 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 6 Shoreline Apartments 1973 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 Comp 7 7 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 8 8 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 9 9 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 10 10 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Total/Avg (Market) 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Total/Avg. (Market less Subject) 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 Standard Unit Types
Renovated Unit Types
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
$4.35
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
$0
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1,000
$1,200
$1,400
$1,600
$0.00
$0.50
$1.00
$1.50
$2.00
$2.50
$3.00
$3.50
$4.00
$4.50
$5.00
Subject Comp 1 Comp 2 Comp 3 Comp 4 Comp 5 Comp 6 Comp 7 Comp 8 Comp 9 Comp 10 Avg. Mkt Rent/Unit Avg. Eff Rent/Unit Avg. Eff Rent $/SF Studio Analysis l Standard
Greystar Proprietary and Confidential Information – Not for distribution or use without prior written authorization. Studio Analysis

ATTACHMENT B
15 Property Name Year Built # of units
% of
Property
Avg. Unit
Size (SF)
Avg. Mkt
Rent/Unit
Avg. Mkt
Rent $/SF
Avg. Eff
Rent/Unit
Avg. Eff
Rent $/SF
Subject Abrams Park 1978 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 1 Shadow Market 1973 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 2 Marina Square Apartments 1978 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 Comp 3 Preston Park 1987 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 4 Sunbay Suites 1989 64 24% 500 $1,950 $3.90 $1,950 $3.90 Comp 5 Marina Del Sol 1977 54 50% 618 $2,000 $3.24 $2,000 $3.24 Comp 6 Shoreline Apartments 1973 72 86% 720 $2,366 $3.29 $2,366 $3.29 Comp 7 7 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 8 8 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 9 9 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 10 10 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Total/Avg (Market) 190 53% 617 $2,122 $3.48 $2,122 $3.48 Total/Avg. (Market less Subject) 190 53% 617 $2,122 $3.48 $2,122 $3.48 Property Name Year Built # of units
% of
Property
Avg. Unit
Size (SF)
Avg. Mkt
Rent/Unit
Avg. Mkt
Rent $/SF
Avg. Eff
Rent/Unit
Avg. Eff
Rent $/SF
Subject Abrams Park 1978 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 1 Shadow Market 1973 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 2 Marina Square Apartments 1978 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 Comp 3 Preston Park 1987 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 4 Sunbay Suites 1989 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 5 Marina Del Sol 1977 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 6 Shoreline Apartments 1973 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 Comp 7 7 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 8 8 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 9 9 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 10 10 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Total/Avg (Market) 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Total/Avg. (Market less Subject) 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 Standard Unit Types
Renovated Unit Types
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
$3.90
$3.24 $3.29
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
$0
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
$0.00
$0.50
$1.00
$1.50
$2.00
$2.50
$3.00
$3.50
$4.00
$4.50
Subject Comp 1 Comp 2 Comp 3 Comp 4 Comp 5 Comp 6 Comp 7 Comp 8 Comp 9 Comp 10 Avg. Mkt Rent/Unit Avg. Eff Rent/Unit Avg. Eff Rent $/SF One Bedroom Analysis l Standard
Greystar Proprietary and Confidential Information – Not for distribution or use without prior written authorization. 1 Bed Analysis

ATTACHMENT B
16 Property Name Year Built # of units
% of
Property
Avg. Unit
Size (SF)
Avg. Mkt
Rent/Unit
Avg. Mkt
Rent $/SF
Avg. Eff
Rent/Unit
Avg. Eff
Rent $/SF
Subject Abrams Park 1978 4 2% 1000 $1,950 $1.95 $1,950 $1.95 Comp 1 Shadow Market 1973 9 56% 807 $1,737 $2.17 $1,737 $2.17 Comp 2 Marina Square Apartments 1978 48 100% 1000 $2,550 $2.55 $2,550 $2.55 Comp 3 Preston Park 1987 210 59% 1298 $2,046 $1.58 $2,046 $1.58 Comp 4 Sunbay Suites 1989 170 64% 675 $2,450 $3.63 $2,450 $3.63 Comp 5 Marina Del Sol 1977 54 50% 736 $2,400 $3.26 $2,400 $3.26 Comp 6 Shoreline Apartments 1973 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 Comp 7 7 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 8 8 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 9 9 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 10 10 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Total/Avg (Market) 495 55% 983 $2,266 $2.57 $2,266 $2.57 Total/Avg. (Market less Subject) 491 66% 983 $2,268 $2.58 $2,268 $2.58 Property Name Year Built # of units
% of
Property
Avg. Unit
Size (SF)
Avg. Mkt
Rent/Unit
Avg. Mkt
Rent $/SF
Avg. Eff
Rent/Unit
Avg. Eff
Rent $/SF
Subject Abrams Park 1978 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 1 Shadow Market 1973 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 2 Marina Square Apartments 1978 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 Comp 3 Preston Park 1987 19 5% 1261 $2,283 $1.81 $2,283 $1.81 Comp 4 Sunbay Suites 1989 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 5 Marina Del Sol 1977 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 6 Shoreline Apartments 1973 12 14% 875 $2,583 $2.95 $2,583 $2.95 Comp 7 7 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 8 8 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 9 9 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 10 10 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Total/Avg (Market) 31 10% 1111 $2,399 $2.25 $2,399 $2.25 Total/Avg. (Market less Subject) 31 10% 1111 $2,399 $2.25 $2,399 $2.25 Standard Unit Types
Renovated Unit Types
$1.95
$2.17
$2.55
$1.58
$3.63
$3.26
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
$0
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
$3,000
$0.00
$0.50
$1.00
$1.50
$2.00
$2.50
$3.00
$3.50
$4.00
Subject Comp 1 Comp 2 Comp 3 Comp 4 Comp 5 Comp 6 Comp 7 Comp 8 Comp 9 Comp 10 Avg. Mkt Rent/Unit Avg. Eff Rent/Unit Avg. Eff Rent $/SF Two Bedroom Analysis l Standard
Greystar Proprietary and Confidential Information – Not for distribution or use without prior written authorization. 2 Bed Analysis

ATTACHMENT B
17 Property Name Year Built # of units
% of
Property
Avg. Unit
Size (SF)
Avg. Mkt
Rent/Unit
Avg. Mkt
Rent $/SF
Avg. Eff
Rent/Unit
Avg. Eff
Rent $/SF
Subject Abrams Park 1978 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 1 Shadow Market 1973 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 2 Marina Square Apartments 1978 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 Comp 3 Preston Park 1987 120 34% 1572 $2,541 $1.62 $2,541 $1.62 Comp 4 Sunbay Suites 1989 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 5 Marina Del Sol 1977 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 6 Shoreline Apartments 1973 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 Comp 7 7 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 8 8 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 9 9 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 10 10 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Total/Avg (Market) 120 34% 1572 $2,541 $1.62 $2,541 $1.62 Total/Avg. (Market less Subject) 120 34% 1572 $2,541 $1.62 $2,541 $1.62 Property Name Year Built # of units
% of
Property
Avg. Unit
Size (SF)
Avg. Mkt
Rent/Unit
Avg. Mkt
Rent $/SF
Avg. Eff
Rent/Unit
Avg. Eff
Rent $/SF
Subject Abrams Park 1978 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 1 Shadow Market 1973 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 2 Marina Square Apartments 1978 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 Comp 3 Preston Park 1987 5 1% 1572 $2,836 $1.80 $2,836 $1.80 Comp 4 Sunbay Suites 1989 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 5 Marina Del Sol 1977 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 6 Shoreline Apartments 1973 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 Comp 7 7 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 8 8 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 9 9 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 10 10 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Total/Avg (Market) 5 1% 1572 $2,836 $1.80 $2,836 $1.80
Total/Avg. (Market less Subject) 5 1% 1572 $2,836 $1.80 $2,836 $1.80 Standard Unit Types
Renovated Unit Types
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00
$1.62
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
$0
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
$3,000
$0.00
$0.20
$0.40
$0.60
$0.80
$1.00
$1.20
$1.40
$1.60
$1.80
Subject Comp 1 Comp 2 Comp 3 Comp 4 Comp 5 Comp 6 Comp 7 Comp 8 Comp 9 Comp 10 Avg. Mkt Rent/Unit Avg. Eff Rent/Unit Avg. Eff Rent $/SF Three Bedroom Analysis l Standard
Greystar Proprietary and Confidential Information – Not for distribution or use without prior written authorization. 3 Bed Analysis

ATTACHMENT B
18 Property Name Year Built # of units
% of
Property
Avg. Unit
Size (SF)
Avg. Mkt
Rent/Unit
Avg. Mkt
Rent $/SF
Avg. Eff
Rent/Unit
Avg. Eff
Rent $/SF
Subject Abrams Park 1978 88 45% 1765 $2,639 $1.50 $2,639 $1.50 Comp 1 Shadow Market 1973 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 2 Marina Square Apartments 1978 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 Comp 3 Preston Park 1987 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 4 Sunbay Suites 1989 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 5 Marina Del Sol 1977 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 6 Shoreline Apartments 1973 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 Comp 7 7 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 8 8 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 9 9 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 10 10 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Total/Avg (Market) 88 45% 1765 $2,639 $1.50 $2,639 $1.50 Total/Avg. (Market less Subject) 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 Property Name Year Built # of units
% of
Property
Avg. Unit
Size (SF)
Avg. Mkt
Rent/Unit
Avg. Mkt
Rent $/SF
Avg. Eff
Rent/Unit
Avg. Eff
Rent $/SF
Subject Abrams Park 1978 10 5% 1760 $2,644 $1.50 $2,644 $1.50 Comp 1 Shadow Market 1973 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 2 Marina Square Apartments 1978 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 Comp 3 Preston Park 1987 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 4 Sunbay Suites 1989 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 5 Marina Del Sol 1977 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 6 Shoreline Apartments 1973 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 Comp 7 7 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 8 8 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 9 9 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 10 10 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Total/Avg (Market) 10 5% 1760 $2,644 $1.50 $2,644 $1.50 Total/Avg. (Market less Subject) 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 Standard Unit Types
Renovated Unit Types
$1.50
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
$3,000
$0.00
$0.20
$0.40
$0.60
$0.80
$1.00
$1.20
$1.40
$1.60
Subject Comp 1 Comp 2 Comp 3 Comp 4 Comp 5 Comp 6 Comp 7 Comp 8 Comp 9 Comp 10 Avg. Mkt Rent/Unit Avg. Eff Rent/Unit Avg. Eff Rent $/SF Four Bedroom Analysis l Standard
Greystar Proprietary and Confidential Information – Not for distribution or use without prior written authorization. 4 Bed Analysis

ATTACHMENT B
19 Used for
2BD
Used for 3
BD
Used for 4
BD
(A) MAXIMUM HOUSEHOLD INCOME LIMITS (ANNUAL)
(4.5
Persons)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9*
Very Low (50% AMI) $ 35,600 $ 40,700 $ 45,800 $ 50,850 $ 54,950 $ 59,000 $ 63,100 $ 67,150 71,190$ Low/Lower (60% AMI) $42,720 $48,840 $54,960 $61,020 $65,940 $70,800 $75,720 $80,580 $85,432 Low (80%) AMI $56,950 $65,100 $73,250 $81,350 $87,900 $94,400 $100,900 $107,400 $113,890 Source:HUD Median Income for Monterey County 2019 at https://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/il/il2021/2021summary.odn * 9-Person Income Limits are calculated as 140% of the 4 -person limits with rounding as per HUD Guidelines (B) MAXIMUM MONTHLY HOUSING COST (Rent + Utility Allowance) 2BD1 4BD2 3BD3
Very Low (50% AMI) 1,091$ 1,406$ $1,260
Low/Lower (60%) AMI 1,310$ 1,688$ $1,512
Low (80%) AMI 1,744$ 2,248$ $2,015
Notes:
1 Calculated as 2BD AMI @ 50%, 60% and 80% for 3 persons x 30% and then divided by 12 months 2 Calculated as 4BD AMI @ 50%, 60% and 80% for 6 persons x 30% and then divided by 12 months 3 Calculated as 3BD AMI @ 50%, 60% and 80% for 4.5 persons x 30% and then divided by 12 months (Preston Park Only) (C) AFFORDABLE UNITS RENT CALCULATION USING 50%/60%/80% BRACKET LESS HAMC (HCV Program) UTILITIES ALLOWANCE 5,6 21/22 20/21 21/22 20/21 21/22 20/21
Very Low (50% AMI) 1,091$ 1,091$ $1,260 1,260$ 1,406$ 1,406$ Less Utilities (202)$ (202)$ (264)$ (264)$ (328)$ (328)$ Monthly Rent Net of Utilities 889$ 889$ $996 996$ 1,078$ 1,078$ Low/Lower (60% AMI) 1,310$ 1,310$ $1,512 1,512$ 1,688$ 1,688$ Less Utilities (202)$ (202)$ (264)$ (264)$ (328)$ (328)$ Monthly Rent Net of Utilities 1,108$ 1,108$ $1,248 1,248$ 1,360$ 1,360$ Low/Lower (80% AMI) 1,744$ 1,744$ $2,015 2,015$ 2,248$ 2,248$ Less Utilities (202)$ (202)$ (264)$ (264)$ (328)$ (328)$ Monthly Rent Net of Utilities 1,542$ 1,542$ $1,751 1,751$ 1,920$ 1,920$ 5 Source for Utilities Deduction in the HAMC HVC Program Utilities Allowances for Apts & Townhouses 22-23 6 Utilities (UTA-Apts/Townhouses Allowances) used for calc are "HEATING (Natural Gas)", "COOKING (Natural Gas)", "OTHER ELECTRIC", WATER HEATING (Natural Gas), WATER , SEWER, and "TRASH COLLECTION" 2BD 4BD
Calculation of Affordable Units FY 22/3 Rent Levels
HUD Area Median Income
(AMI) Level
HUD AMI Level
Number of Bedrooms
Number of Persons
3BD (Preston Only)

ATTACHMENT C
20 Abrams Park Budget Memo Attachment D - Highlights of Operating Expenses PAYROLL $405,851 $382,587 $427,297 D $23,264 5.7% Decrease in Estimated Budget over Approved Budget due to open
positions during FY.

I ($44,711) -11.7% Increase in Proposed Budget over
Estimated Budget due to open
positions in 2021/2022 FY;
assumes annual merit increase of
3% and increase in tax and benefit
costs.

I ($21,446) -5.3%
CONTRACT SERVICES $61,626 $51,835 $79,526 D $9,791 15.9% Decrease in Estimated Budget over Approved Budget due to savings
in Landscape and General
Maintenance Contract.

I ($27,691) -53.4% Increase in Proposed Budget over
Estimated Budget due to addition
of nightly courtesy patrol in new
budget year, plus 10% increase in
Pest Control and Landscape
contracts.

I ($17,900) -29.0%
UTILITIES $154,404 $107,393 $118,944 D $47,011 30.4% Decrease based on actuals. I ($11,551) -10.8% 2022/2023 budget based upon 2021/2022 actuals with an a 10%
increase in rates.

D $35,460 23.0%
REDECORATING $90,513 $84,026 $81,720 D $6,487 7.2% Decrease in Estimated Budget over Approved Budget due to reduced
turnover.

D $2,306 2.7% Tracking YOY, budget assumes
slight increase in turnover YOY.

D $8,793 9.7%
MAINTENANCE $74,532 $81,726 $89,650 I ($7,194) -9.7% Increase in Estimated Budget over Approved Budget due to increased
in cleaning supplies, misc. repairs
and supplies budgeted in
Contracts under General
Maintenance.

I ($7,924) -9.7% Increase in Proposed Budget over
Estimated Budget due inflation.

I ($15,118) -20.3%
MARKETING $3,735 $4,191 $3,184 I ($456) -12.2% Tracking from Estimated Budget over Approved Budget
D $1,007 24.0% Tracking YOY with slight
decrease.

D $551 14.8%
ADMINISTRATIVE $79,040 $71,524 $69,852 D $7,516 9.5% Tracking from Estimated Budget over Approved Budget
D $1,672 2.3% Decrease in Proposed Budget over
Estimated Budget due to reducing
costs in multiple GL's.

D $9,188 11.6%
INSURANCE & TAXES $275,709 $260,311 $257,892 D $15,399 5.6% Reflects higher rates than anticipated.

D $2,419 0.9% Increase due to anticipated tax
increase and insurance premium.

D $17,817 0.0%
NON-ROUTINE MAINTENANCE $129,150 $108,909 $240,528 D $20,241 15.7% I ($131,619) -120.9% FY 22/23 budget includes trip hazard removal, gutter cleaning,
annual inspection supplies, a roof
preventive maintenance
inspection, tree trimming,
irrigation replacements and
unforeseen maintenance events.

I ($111,378) -86.2%
MANAGEMENT FEES $92,081 $96,754 $93,194 I ($4,674) -5.1% Increase from Estimated Budget over Approved Budget due to
increase in income.

D $3,560 3.7% Increase due to increase in Total
Income.

I ($1,113) -1.2%
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES $1,366,640 $1,249,255 $1,461,787 D $117,385 8.6% Decrease due to expense category increases detailed above.

I ($212,532) -17.0% Increase due to expense category
increases detailed above.

I ($95,147) -7.0%

I -- DESIGNATES INCREASE

D -- DESIGNATES DECREASE
Operating Expenses Proposed FY
2022/2023
Estimated Actuals FY
FY 2021/2022
Variance of Proposed
Budget from FY FY
2021/2022 Estimated
Actuals
%% Comments 2022/2023
Proposed Budget
vs. FY 2021/2022
Approved Budget
%Approved Budget
FY 2021/2022
Variance of
Approved Budget
From FY 2021/2022
Estimated Actuals
Comments

ATTACHMENT D
21 Entity: caabrpar (Abrams Park)
Annual Summary Report
Original
Budget Var $ Var %
Potential Rent 3,688,811 3,767,298 3,769,114 80,303 2.2% Net Potential Rent 3,688,426 3,767,298 3,769,114 80,689 2.2% Vacancy Loss (19,377) (66,372) (38,857) (19,480) (100.5)% Non Revenue Units (12,878) (35,826) (19,842) (6,964) (54.1)% Bad Debt (2,131) (6,250) (6,252) (4,121) (193.4)%
Total Rental Income-Residential 3,654,039 $ 3,658,850 $ 3,704,163 $ 50,124 $ 1.4% Other Income-Residential 25,991 24,380 23,595 (2,396) (9.2)% Total Income 3,680,031 $ 3,683,230 $ 3,727,758 $ 47,728 $ 1.3% Payroll & Benefits 382,587 405,851 427,297 (44,711) (11.7)% Repairs & Maintenance 81,726 74,532 89,650 (7,924) (9.7)% Make-Ready / Redecorating 84,026 90,513 81,720 2,306 2.7% Contract Services 51,835 61,626 79,526 (27,691) (53.4)% Advertising / Marketing / Promotions 4,191 3,735 3,184 1,007 24.0% Office Expenses 38,038 36,734 35,230 2,807 7.4%
Other General & Administrative 33,486 42,306 34,622 (1,136) (3.4)% Utilities 107,393 154,404 118,944 (11,551) (10.8)% Controllable Expenses 783,280 $ 869,700 $ 870,173 $ (86,893) $ (11.1)% Management Fees 96,754 92,081 93,194 3,560 3.7%
Taxes 50,927 56,592 50,928 (1) (0.0)%
Insurance 209,384 219,117 206,964 2,420 1.2% Non-Controllable Expenses 357,065 $ 367,790 $ 351,086 $ 5,979 $ 1.7% Total Operating Expenses 1,140,345 $ 1,237,490 $ 1,221,259 $ (80,914) $ (7.1)% Total Operating / Non Recoverable Expenses 1,140,345 $ 1,237,490 $ 1,221,259 $ (80,914) $ (7.1)% Net Operating Income 2,539,685 $ 2,445,740 $ 2,506,499 $ (33,186) $ (1.3)% Routine Replacement Expense 108,909 129,150 240,528 (131,619) (120.9)% Capital / Renovation Expense 243,047 - 431,680 (188,633) (77.6)% NOI After Replacements 2,187,729 $ 2,316,590 $ 1,834,291 $ (353,438) $ (16.2)% Partnership / Owner Expenses (737) - - (737) (100.0)%
Total Non-Operating Expense (737) $ 0 $ 0 $ (737) $ (100.0)% Net Income 2,188,467 $ 2,316,590 $ 1,834,291 $ (354,176) $ (16.2)% Budget Year

EXPENSES
Budget vs ReforecastReforecast
Reforecast Year Budget Year
Entity: caabrpar (Abrams Park)Annual Summary - Page 1 of 1 - Printed 7/29/2022 - 9:05 AM

ATTACHMENT E
22 Attachment F
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES - 2022/2023 Abrams Park Budget
ABRAMS - REVISED PHYSICAL NEEDS ASSESSMENT (5 Year Look Forward - Greystar Recommendation) Updated: 7/19/2022 Project Detail
Committed/
Completed
2021 - 2022 2022 - 2023 2023 - 2024 2024 - 2025 2025 - 2026 2026 - 2027 Projected Replacement Reserve Fund Balance $833,667 $1,027,051 $918,983 $296,511 $172,539 $376,867 Projected Replacement Reserve Fund Contribution $545,340 $545,340 $545,340 $545,340 $545,340 $545,340 Building & Structure Repairs 29,265$
Dry Rot Repairs Dry Rot on Windows, Eaves, Siding 50,000$ -$ Windows / Sliding Glass Doors *Replace Windows/Sliding Doors (estimated completion date in this FY 4/30/2021) Paving/Sidewalks Asphalt repair, seal coat, Trip Hazards 140,138$ 170,000$ Duct Cleaning -$ 95,000$
Toilet/showerhead/aerator retrofit
Parking Add parking spaces 1,100$ 100,000$ 425,000$ Lighting 78,000$
Landscape and irrigation 15,755$ 40,000$
Fence repairs / slat replacement
Roof Repairs/Replacement/Gutter Cleaning 13,183$ 10,000$ Exterior Paint Full Community Paint 400,000$ 400,000$ Playground Upgrades
Mailbox Replacenent Replacement 17,649$
Maintenance Vehicle Purchase New
Computers Purchase New 5,000$
Exterior Unit Doors Steel Front/Back Doors
Construction Management Fee 6% Fee on Construction Projects (see * for applicable items) 9,536$ 14,880$ 52,500$ 24,000$ 5,700$ -$ Dishwasher Replacement (assume 10 year life). Represents 12 units 5,919$ 4,200$ 4,200$ 4,200$ 4,200$ 4,200$ Refrigerators Replacement (assume 15 year life). Represents 24 units 9,510$ 15,600$ 15,600$ 15,600$ 15,600$ 15,600$ Stove/Rangehoods Replacement (assume 15 year life). Represents 15 units 21,753$ 8,400$ 8,400$ 8,400$ 8,400$ 8,400$ Garbage Disposal Replacement (assume 10 year life). Represents 12 units 1,553$ 1,200$ 1,200$ 1,200$ 1,200$ 1,200$ Hot Water Heaters Replacement (assume 15 year life). Represents 16 units 9,523$ 11,196$ 11,200$ 11,200$ 11,200$ 11,200$ Carpet Replacement (assume 10 year life). Represents 32 units 41,161$ 88,752$ 88,512$ 88,512$ 88,512$ 88,512$ Vinyl Replacement (assume 10 year life). Represents 32 units 29,930$ 51,180$ 51,200$ 51,200$ 51,200$ 51,200$ HVAC Furnace Replacement (assume 15 year life). Represents 8 units @ $7,400ea. 5,980$ 60,000$ 60,000$ 60,000$ 60,000$ 60,000$ Capital Expenses - uninflated (included as Capital Assets in the Standard Budget) (351,956)$ (653,408)$ (1,167,812)$ (669,312)$ (341,012)$ (240,312)$ Ending Replacement Reserve Fund Balance - uninflated $1,027,051 $918,983 $296,511 $172,539 $376,867 $681,895

ATTACHMENT F
23 July 29, 2022 Item No. 11c

Honorable Mayor and Members City Council Meeting
of the Marina City Council of August 3, 2022

Chair and Board Members of Corporation Board Meeting
Preston Park Sustainable Community Non-Profit Corporation of August 3, 2022

CITY COUNCIL AND PRESTON PAR K SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY

NON-PROFIT COR PORATION BOA RD CONSIDER ADOPTING
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-, AND 2022- (PPSC-NPC), APPROVING
PRESTON PARK HOUSING A REA BUDGET FOR F Y 2022-23 AND

AUTHORIZING FINANCE DIRECTOR TO MAKE A PPROPRIATE

ACCOUNTING AND BUDGETARY ENTRIES

REQUEST:

It is requested that the City Council and Corporation Board consider:

1. Adopting Resolution No. 2022- and Resolution No. 2022- (PPSC-NPC), approving the Preston Park Sustainable Community N on-Profit Corporation Preston Park Housing Area Budget for FY 2022-23, and;

2. Authorizing Finance Director to make appropriate accounting and budgetary entries.

BACKGROUND:

The City of Marina purchased the 354-apartment unit community of Preston Park in 2016. Greystar Residential has been retained to provide property management services.

City staff, Greystar staff, and Tenant’s Association representatives have met to review and discuss the preparation of the Preston Park Sustainable Community Non -Profit C orporation Preston Park Housing Area Budget for FY 2022-23.

ANALYSIS:

The budget package provided for the City Council’s consideration includes:

• Alliance Residential Preston Park FY 2022/2023 Proposed Budget Memo • Attachment A Preston Park Income
• Attachment B Market Survey
• Attachment C BMR Rent Calculation Documentation
• Attachment D Preston Park Expenses
• Attachment E Preston Park Standard Budget
• Attachment F Preston Park Capital Budget Projections 2022-2023 • Attachment G Preston Park Cash Allocations

Information in each of the sections below is intended to highlight each of these pieces of the budget package. Please refer to the attachments themselves for greater details.

Alliance Residential Preston Park FY 2022/2023 Proposed Budget Memo This document provides larger capital project accomp lishments for t he year , summary of revenue/rents, summary of expenses and capital budget spending.

1 Attachment A Preston Park Income
Summarizes the performance of the current year revenue s and projects revenu es for 2021/2022 budget year. Revenue for FY 2 021-2022 revenue is projecte d to end 48,581 over budget. The additional revenue is a result of an increase in damage recovery upon move outs, interest income and one -time reim bursement of overpayment for u tilities of utilities. Net revenu e for FY 2 021- 2022 actual is estimated to close $75,601 over budget . FY 2 022-2023 budget revenue totals $7,529,720. This is a $172,484 increase over FY 2021-2022 FY budget, primarily due to turnover of units to market rate.

In 2010, the City Council adopted a rent formula. In Place, market-rate residents (residents who are not on a Below Market Rate program), rent may increase by the lesser of CPI-U for SF/OAK/SJ for February over F ebruary annually or 3% but no mo re tha n th e average of the Monterey County Housing Authority Payment Standard and the HUD Fair Market Rent (FMR) documentation schedule, reduced by an avera ge household amount for Water/Meter, Sewer and Garbage costs in the former Fort Ord community as an equivalent rent. If an individual’s current equivalent rent exceeds the averaged FMR, then no increase will be assessed. If an individual’s equivalent rent is less than the averaged FMR but exceeds it after the allowable increase is added , then the alternative increase will only be sufficient to meet the averaged FMR.

Attachment B Market Survey
Current market surv ey for 5 similar apartment communities in Marina, plus a “shadow market” or non-apartment complex compar able units. This sur vey is used to determine the rents for new market rate move-in tenants. The survey is update d throughout th e year to reflect the most re cent market rents of the comparable apartment homes in Marina.

Attachment C BMR Rent Calculation Documentation
Current year BMR rent calculations included in the proposed Alliance budget memo for the current 19-Very Low-Income qualifying units and 31-Low Income qualifying units.

Attachment D Preston Park Expenses
Summary of all operating expenses. FY 2021-2022 is estimated to close with $33,909 in expenses less than budgeted. Proposed FY 2022-2023 operating expenses total $2,216,941. This is a $223,941 increase over FY 20 21-2022 FY budge t, primar ily d ue to the addition of a n evening security patrol, employee merit increase s, 10% increase in land scaping and pest control contracts and increased in capital projects and maintenance expenses including trip hazard removal, gutter cleaning, annu al inspection supplies, a roof preventive maintenance inspection, tree trimming, irrigation replacements and unforeseen maintenance events.

Attachment E Preston Park Standard Budget
This do cument contains a summary sheet s upported by the detailed budget l ine items . Th e summary sheet combines the Revenue and Operating Expenses described in the Attachments above, and adds accounting for the debt service of $1, 516,790, the City ’s distribution of $1,750,000 and the Replacement Reserve (capital project set-aside) of $890,664.

Attachment F Preston Park Capital Budget Projections
A five -year pro jection of capital proj ects. This sheet also provides accounting fo r the Cap ital Reserve. The beginning balance of the Capital Reserve set aside funds is $664,217. The capital expenditures for FY 2022-2023 equal $906,440 with the largest expend iture bei ng a parking expansion project. Also included this year are additional heating unit replacement additional safety lighting throughout the community. Each year the re is a $8 90,664 set -aside contribution (Replacement Reserve) in the budget. After the set-aside contribution and capital expenses the final 2 Capital Reserve set aside funds for FY 2022-2023 will equal $648,441.

Attachment G Preston Park Cash Allocations
This attachment is an accounting of all ca sh on hand and how it is allocated for the Pre ston Park bank accounts. Demonstrated are the actual bank balances for each of the three bank accounts that are mainta ined by Preston Park. The operatin g account is a check ing account and used to pay ongoing operati ng expenses. The Security Deposit account is a trust accoun t where s ecurity deposits are hel d. The final account is a s avings account for the property’s reserves. This account handles the reserves fo r capital ex penses and re serves to debt retirement. Excess cas h in the Operating account is annual sw ept into the debt retirement portion of the reserve ac count where they are dedicated towards buying down the debt . The reserve account is currently at $644,217 for capital expenses and $ 7,606,103 in debt retirement reserves. To fund the $1,383,440 in cap ital expenses this year, the
Capital Reserve receives an $890,644 contribution from the operating funds. This amount is based on a steady annual contribution that m eets the long-term capital replacement needs w ithin budgetary means. The ending balance for the capital reserves will be $171,441. The Loan Reserve is increasing to $7,606,103 which is well on target to reach $10 million by 2026 . The table below demonstrates the account balances.

Preston Park Cash Balances, 6/30/22
Accounts
Actual Bank
Balance
Proposed
Beginning
Budget
Allocations (after
Operating
Sweep)
Estimated Year
End Allocations
Estimated
Beginning
Allocation for
2023.24
Operating $454,067 $200,000 $1,011,904 $200,000
Security Deposit $568,686 $568,686 $568,686 $568,686
Bridgebank Reserve Total
Balance $8,016,253 $8,270,320 $8,270,320 $9,082,224

RESERVES ALLOCATIONS
Capital Reserve
Beginning Balance $664,217 $664,217 $171,441
Revenues $890,664 $890,664 $890,664
Expenditures $1,383,440 $1,383,440 $368,040
Ending Balance $171,441 $171,441 $694,065

Loan Reserves $7,606,103 $7,606,103 $8,910,783

Total All Accounts $9,039,006 $9,039,006 $9,850,910 $9,850,910

FISCAL IMPACT:

Should the City Council and Corporation Board elect to approve this request for the FY 2022- 2023 Budget, the owner distribution as proposed will be $1,750,000. This owner distribution is does not need to pay the Preston Park’s debt service as these expenses are paid form the property Budget.

3 CONCLUSION:

This request is submitted for City Council and PPSC-NPC Corporation Board consideration and possible action.

Respectfully submitted,

_________________________________
Matt Mogensen
Assistant City Manager
City of Marina

REVIEWED/CONCUR:

_________________________________
Layne P. Long
City Manager
City of Marina

4 RESOLUTION NO. 2022-
RESOLUTION NO. 2022- (PPSC-NPC)

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MARINA AND

THE PRESTON PARK SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY NON-PROFIT

CORPORATION APPROVING PRESTON PARK HOUSING AREA
BUDGET FOR FY 2022-2023 AND AUTHORIZING FINANCE DIRECTOR

TO MAKE APPROPRIATE ACCOUNTING AND BUDGETARY ENTRIES

WHEREAS, Alliance Residential Company (“Alliance”), now Greystar Real Estate Partners , as the management agent of Preston Park Sustain able Community Housing, has submitted a draft FY 2022-2023 budget; and

WHEREAS, City staff, Greystar staff, and the Tenant’s Association representatives Paula Pelot and Denise Turley have met in preparation of this budget; and

WHEREAS, the staff of Greystar and the City of Marina have worked collectively on preparing a budget to be presented to the City Council and Board of Preston Park Sustainable Community Non-Profit Corporation; and

WHEREAS, Alliance submitted a budget letter describing highlights of the proposed Preston Park Housing Area FY 2022-2023 Budget and accompanied by updated proposed budgets; and

WHEREAS, the rental revenues are used to provide funds for debt service payments on the 2016 Preston Park property purchase; and

WHEREAS, in 2010, the City Council adopted a rent formu la. The Council Policy has be en further clarified fo r In Place, market -rate residents as follows: In Place, market -rate residents (residents who are not on a Below Market Rate program), rent may increase by the lesser of CPI-U for SF/OAK/SJ for February over February annually or 3% but no more than the average of the Monterey County Housin g Authority Payment Standard and the HU D Fair Market Rent (FMR) documentation schedule, re duced by an average h ousehold amount for Water/Meter, Sewer and Garbage costs i n the former Fort Ord communit y as an equivalent rent . If an individual’s current equi valent rent exceeds the averaged FMR, t hen no increase will be assessed. If an individual’s equivalent rent is less than the averaged FMR but exceeds it after the allowable increase is added, then th e alternative increase will only be sufficient to meet th e averaged FMR; and

WHEREAS, anticipated O wner revenues for Owner Distributions for FY 2022-2023 will be approximately $1,750,000. This funding is available for city staff support for Preston Park which includes assist ance with the affordable housing p rogram, developing a long -term capital improvement p rogram, and help with developing ideas for potential develo pment and expansion of the property ; and

WHEREAS, City staff has reviewed the budget package for FY 2022-2023; and

WHEREAS, the City Council of Marina and the Board of the Preston Pa rk Sust ainable Community Non-Profit Corporation reviewed and considered the proposed budgets.

5 Resolution No. 2022-
Resolution No. 2022- (PPSC NPC)
Page Two

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Marina and the
Corporation Board of the Preston Park Sustainable Co mmunity Non-Profit Corporation do hereby:

1. Approve the Preston Park Housing Area Budget for FY 2022-2023, and;

2. Authorize the Finance Director to make appropriate accounting and budgetary entries.

PASSED AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Marina and the Corporation Board of the Preston Park Sustainable Community Non-Profit Corporation at a regular meeting duly held on the 3rd day of August 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

Bruce C. Delgado, Mayor

ATTEST:

Anita Sharp, Deputy City Clerk

6 Preston/Abrams Park
682 Wahl Court
Marina, CA 93933
831-384-0119
July 28, 2022

Mr. Layne Long
City Manager
City of Marina
211 Hillcrest Avenue
Marina, CA 93933

Re: Preston Park FY 2022/2023 Proposed Budget

Dear Mr. Long,

It has been a pleasure to continue to work with residents and the City of Marina over the last year. With the combination of wonderful residents and effective staff, a number of positive changes have been seen at Preston Park:

1) Building Maintenance: Full property exterior paint and sealing of all building envelopes were completed. The gutters were cleaned and inspected throughout the property. A total of ten (10) HVAC systems were evaluated for proper performance as well. A planned preventative maintenance inspection of the roofs will be completed in June. 2) Tree Trimming/Irrigation repairs: The annual tree trimming, fire clearance and common area clearance projects will be completed by the end of June. Irrigation repairs were made routinely throughout the property as well. In addition, new plants will be installed throughout the property in June. Lastly, gopher abatement process is underway with a monthly service.
3) Units of Long-Term Residents: In a typical year, several long-term residents go through the process to refresh their flooring, paint and appliances. These services are extended to long-term residents upon notification or inspection indicating replacement is necessary based on age or condition.
4) Green Initiatives: In addition to the Marina Coast Water District’s and other utility conservation programs, Greystar purchases and installs water or energy saving devices as replacement fixtures as needed. PG&E continues to work directly with income eligible residents to weatherize their homes at no cost to the resident or the community.

Greystar looks to continue to provide the residents at Preston Park a comfortable and quality living experience. Continued capital improvements throughout the community will allow this property to remain a desirable neighborhood for renters, as well as a continued source of affordable housing for the general populace of Marina.

7 Revenues
The primary source of revenue is rents, Section 8 voucher payments from the Housing Authority of the County of Monterey, and associated charges to residents such as late fees.

At a regular meeting on the 2 nd of June, 2010, the City Council of the City of Marina adopted a rent formula stating that the annual increase in market rents for in -place residents shall be capped at the lesser of three percent (3%) or the Department of Labor’s Consumer Price Index for San Francisco -Oakland-San Jose, All Items, for All Urban Consumers (referred to as CPI -U) Average percentage for the previous year (February to February) to be applied to the next fiscal year, provided that the increased rent for in -place tenants does not exceed the market rent charged to move-in residents.

Proposed Budget – Targeted Rental Increase applies the allowable 3% Rental Increase to in-place residents who are currently under the Fair Market Rental Rate as computed by averaging rates from the Monterey County Housing Authority and the HUD Fair Market Rent schedule and is adjusted for a determined amount for the Water, Sewer and Garbage that residents pay directly to the provider for those services. A reduced Rental Increase amount proportionate to their current rent would be applied to househol ds that may not quali fy for the standard Rental Increase.

Current Market Rent Conditions
The market rent for new move -ins is calculated by comparable market rent levels in the competitive market throughout the year. As shown in Attachment A , the proposed Budget results in an increase in Total Income of $152,892.36. Per the approved rent formula in 2010, the market rents for new move -ins are fluid throughout the year and change a ccording to market conditions. Currently, market rents for incoming residents are as follows:

Unit Size

Current Rent Range for Incoming Market
Rate Residents
Two Bedroom $1,957 - $2,086
Upgraded/Remodeled – Two BR $2,060 - $2,652*
Three Bedroom $2,541 - $2,568
Upgraded/Remodeled – Three BR $2,782 - $2,836*

* Note: Nineteen 2-Bedroom homes and five 3-Bedroom home have additional features that warrant higher than average rental rates.

The Averaged HUD Fair Market Rents (FMR) and the Monterey County Housing Authority Peninsula Payment Standard for January 1, 2021 are as follows:

Unit Bedroom
Size
Averaged HUD Fair
Market & HA
Peninsula Payment
Standard Rent

Utility
Allowance

Adjusted
Rental
Amount
Two Bedroom $2,056.00 $157.02 $1,898.98
Three Bedroom $2,920.50 $157.02 $2,763.48
8 A number of in-place market renters in Preston Park homes are leasing below the Averaged HUD FMR and the MCHA Peninsula Payment Standard . The Averaged HUD FMR and HA Peninsula Payment Standard above include allowance for Utilities, which are currently paid directly by Preston Park residents in addition to their monthly rental amount. The two-bedroom average in- place market rent at Preston Park i s $1 ,674 (effectively $1, 831), while the average three- bedroom units at Preston Park rent at $2,147 (effectively $2,304).

Affordable Rents
Affordable rental rates are derived from median income schedules published by governmental agencies. Rental rates at Preston Park are based upon 50% and 60% and 80% of the median income for Monterey County. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development calculates the maximum household income by family size in Monterey County, generally once a year. As of the date of this memo , the rental rates are based upon f amilies at 50% and 60% and 80% of the Monte rey County median income for 202 2. A rental increase is proposed per calculations using published information from the County of Monterey and Housing Authority.

Maximum Household Income Limits for 2022 as published in April 2022 in the State Income Limits for 2022 Memorandum.

Income
Category
Two
Person
Three
Person
Four
Person
Five
Person
Six
Person
Seven
Person
Eight
Person
Nine
Person
50%Very Low $45,500 $51,200 $56,850 $61,400 $65,950 $70,500 $75,050 $79,590 60%
Low/Lower
$54,600 $61,440 $68,220 $73,680 $79,140 $90,060 $90,060 $95,512 80% Low $72,800 $81,900 $91,000 $98,300 $105,600 $112,850 $120,150 $127,400

Income
FY 2 2/23 budget assumes $7,419,749 in Tota l Income vs. FY 21/22 forecast of $7, 291,083 resulting in a $128,666 positive variance.

Expenses
Expenses as outlined include Controllable Operating Expense projections and variances from the FY 22/23 budget. Operating expenses typically include expenditures for rou tine maintenance of the property, redecorating expenses as they apply to unit turns, and expenditures relating to the daily operations of the Leasing Office. Overall, total operating expense s proposed for FY 22/23 are 12.4% higher than the estimated actual expenses for FY 21/22 ($219,312). Greystar seeks to maximize cost savings, e.g. lower utilities expenses through installation of water/energy saving devices, while contending with cost increases.

Owner Distributions
The proposed budget reflects an Owner Distributions of $1,750,000.

9 Capital Expenses
Expenses categorized as Capital Expenses directly impact the long-term value of the community, including roof replacements, exterior painting, large -scale landscaping improvements, and interior upgrades including appliances and carpeting/v inyl. Note that amounts labeled for interior upgrades in future budget years are placeholders and are anticipated to change based on Annual Inspection findings.

Recommended capital projects include:

1) Parking Expansion/Additions to include design, cul-de-sac additions, parking area next to Community Center - $450,000
2) Lighting Additions $85,000

Capital Reserves Fund
Adoption of the proposed budget will result in a maximum contribution of $2,516 per unit during this fiscal year. Please note the replacement reserve only conceptualizes typical replacements. It does not contemplate or allow for unknown expenses which are typical, particularly as a building continues to age.

In reviewing the physical needs of the property, and in conjunction with recommendations from the City of Marina Building Department, Greystar recommends the maximum reserve withholding per unit per year going forward. This withholding would ensure that the asset holds adequate reserves to perform necessary replacements and repairs to protect the useful life of the buildings (Attachment F).

We will continue to look for new ways to improve our services over the coming year and remain committed to meeting the objectives set by the City of Marina.

Please feel free to contact me at (831) 384-0119 should you have additional questions or concerns.

Regards,

Victor Vo-Khuong
Community Manager

Cc: Sumer Perkins, Director of Real Estate

Attachments:
• A. FY 2022/23 Budget Revenue Summary
• C. BMR Rent Calculation Documentation
• D. FY 2021/22 Budget Highlights of Operating Expenses • F. Capital Improvement Plan/Reserve Withholding
10 Preston Park Budget Memo Attachment A - Revenue Summary 2022/2023 Budget
GROSS MARKET POTENTIAL $7,357,236 $7,324,727 $7,529,720 D ($32,509) -0.4% Decrease in Estimated Actual versus Approved Budget due to
assuming increase in market rent
in January 2022 that did not occur.

I $204,993 2.8% Increase in Proposed Budget to
Estimated Actual due to proposed
budget assuming Market Rent
increase upon turnover and renwal
at 1-3%.

I $172,484 2.3%
TOTAL RENTAL INCOME (Gross
Potential Rent minus vacancy, non-
rev units, bad debt)
$7,158,093 $7,188,881 $7,346,433 I $30,788 0.4% Increase in Estimated Actual to Approved Budget due to 99%
occupancy achieved versus budget
of 98%.

I $157,552 2.2% Increase in Proposed Budget to
Estimated Actual due to proposed
budget assuming above increase in
Market Rent offset by assumption
of 98% vacancy at higher market
rate versus forecast of 99% at
current market rates; assumes
increase in bad debt write-offs.

I $188,340 2.6%
TOTAL OTHER INCOME $53,620 $102,202 $73,316 I $48,581 90.6% Increase in Estimated Actual to Approved Budget due to increase
in damages recovery upon move-
out, late fees, interest income, and
one-time reimbursement for
overpayment of utility at $29k in
Jan 2022.

D ($28,886) -28.3% Decrease in Proposed Budget to
Estimated Actual due to prior year
one-time reimbursement for
overpayment of utility at $29k in
Jan 2022.

I $19,696 36.7%
TOTAL INCOME (Total Rental
Income plus Total Other Income.
$7,211,713 $7,291,083 $7,419,749 I $79,370 1.1% Increase in Estimated Actual to Approved Budget due to
achieving high occupany,
increase in Other Income.

I $128,666 1.8% Increase due to achieving Market
Rents upon turnover and
projected in place target rental
increases of 1-3%.

I $208,036 2.9%
NET OPERATING INCOME $5,461,193 $5,536,794 $5,446,148 I $75,601 1.4% Increase in Estimated Actual to Approved Budget due to Total
Income detailed above.2.

D ($90,646) -1.6% Decrease due to Operating
Expenses detailed on Attachment
D, offset by Market Rents upon
turnover and projected in place
target rental increases of 1-3%.

D ($15,045) -0.3%

I -- DESIGNATES INCREASE

D -- DESIGNATES DECREASE
2021/2022 Proposed
Budget vs.
2022/2023
Approved Budget
%% Comments Variance of Proposed
Budget from FY
2021/2022 Estimated
Actuals
% CommentsRevenue Approved Budget
FY 2021/2022
Estimated Actuals FY
2021/2022
Proposed FY
2022/2023
Variance of
Approved Budget
From 2021/2022
Estimated Actuals
11 Shadow Market
Marina Square Apartments
Abrams Park
Sunbay Suites
Marina Del Sol
Shoreline Apartments
7 8
9 10
Preston Park
V2.2
Preston Park
Market Survey
Presented to:

City Of Marina
Survey Date:
6/7/2022
Properties Included in Survey:

Greystar Proprietary and Confidential Information – Not for distribution or use without prior written authorization.

ATTACHMENT B
12 Property Name
Year
Built
# of
units
%
Occupied
Avg. Unit
Size (SF)
Avg. Mkt
Rent/Unit
Avg. Mkt
Rent $/SF
Avg. Eff
Rent/Unit
Avg. Eff
Rent $/SF
Subject Preston Park 1987 354 99% 1393 $2,237 $1.61 $2,237 $1.61 Comp 1 Shadow Market 1973 16 100% 457 $2,289 $5.01 $2,289 $5.01 Comp 2 Marina Square Apartments 1978 48 100% 1000 $2,550 $2.55 $2,550 $2.55 Comp 3 Abrams Park 1978 194 99% 1386 $2,227 $1.61 $2,227 $1.61 Comp 4 Sunbay Suites 1989 266 90% 593 $2,221 $3.74 $2,221 $3.74 Comp 5 Marina Del Sol 1977 108 100% 677 $2,200 $3.25 $2,200 $3.25 Comp 6 Shoreline Apartments 1973 84 98% 742 $2,397 $3.23 $2,397 $3.23 Comp 7 7 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 8 8 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 9 9 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 10 10 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Total/Avg (Market) 1070 98% 1038 $2,255 $2.52 $2,255 $2.52 Total/Avg. (Market less Subject) 716 98% 862 $2,264 $2.98 $2, 264 $2.98 lMarina 0
$1.61
$5.01
$2.55
$1.61
$3.74
$3.25 $3.23
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
$0
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
$3,000
$0.00
$1.00
$2.00
$3.00
$4.00
$5.00
$6.00
Subject Comp 1 Comp 2 Comp 3 Comp 4 Comp 5 Comp 6 Comp 7 Comp 8 Comp 9 Comp 10 Avg. Mkt Rent/Unit Avg. Eff Rent/Unit Avg. Eff Rent $/SF Map
Greystar Proprietary and Confidential Information – Not for distribution or use without prior written authorization. Competitive Analysis

ATTACHMENT B
13 Property Preston Park Shadow Market
Marina Square
Apartments Abrams Park Sunbay Suites Marina Del Sol
Shoreline
Apartments 7 8 9 10
Subject 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

PROPERTY INFORMATION
Owner City Of Marina Variable Greystar City of Marina Sunbay Resort Associates Pioneer Properties N/A
Management Company Greystar variable Greystar Greystar Sunbay Suites Pioneer Properties Greystar Total Number of Units 354 16 48 194 266 108 84
Location (City) Marina Marina Marina Marina Seaside Marina Marina Class 0 A A A A A A
Product Type Townhome Townhome Townhome Townhome Townhome Townhome Townhome Year Built 1987 1973 1978 1978 1989 1977 1973

DEPOSITS AND FEES
Application Fee $45 $0 $35 $45 $50 $35 $42 $0 $0 $0 $0
Deposit (Ref | Non-Ref) rent l 1.5 rent $0 l $0 $1 l $2400 $0 l $250 $250 l $250 $1000 l $0 $500 l $0 $0 l $0 $0 l $0 $0 l $0 $0 l $0 Admin or Redec Fee $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Pet Deposit | Pet Fee no pets l $0 $0 l $0 $0 l $0 $250 l $0 $0 l $0 $500 l $0 $350 l $0 $0 l $0 $0 l $0 $0 l $0 $0 l $0 Pet Rent no pets $0 $0 $25 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

UTILITIES
Electric Metered N/A Metered Metered Metered Metered Metered N/A N/A N/A N/A Gas Metered N/A Metered Metered Metered Metered Metered N/A N/A N/A N/A Water & Sewer Metered N/A Metered Metered Metered Metered Metered N/A N/A N/A N/A Trash | Valet Trash $0 l $0 $0 l $0 N/A l N/A N/A l N/A N/A l N/A N/A l N/A N/A l N/A $0 l $0 $0 l $0 $0 l $0 $0 l $0 Pest Control weekly N/A N/A Weekly weekly Not billed back N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Cable | Internet na l na $0 l $0 N/A l N/A N/A l N/A N/A l N/A N/A l N/A N/A l N/A $0 l $0 $0 l $0 $0 l $0 $0 l $0 PARKING AND STORAGE (# l $)
Covered Parking l $0 l $0 l $0 l $0 1 l $0 1 l $0 1 l $0 Garages (Attached) 1 l $0 l $0 l $0 1 l $0 l $0 l $0 l $0 Garages (Detached) l $0 l $0 1 l $0 l $0 l $0 l $0 l $0 Other Parking 1 l $0 l $0 l $0 l $0 1 l $0 1 l $0 1 l $0 Storage Rent l $0 l $0 1 l $0 l $0 1 l $0 1 l $0 1 l $0 Surface Parking l $0 l $0 l $0 l $0 l $0 l $0 l $0

COMMUNITY AMENITIES
Basketball Court
Billiards Room
Business Center
Car Wash
Coffee Bar/Internet Cafe
Conference Room
Dog Park
Exterior Breezeways
Fitness Center
Jacuzzi/Spa
Jogging/Walking Trails
Laundry
Media Room (Theatre)
On-Site Retail or Restaurants
Outdoor Fireplace
Outdoor Kitchen
Playground/Tot Lot
Pool(s)
Recycle Bins
Roof Deck
Tanning Bed
Tennis Courts
WiFi

CONVENIENCE
Concierge
Dry Cleaner Drop Off
Elevator(s)
Maid Service
Trash Chutes
Valet Parking

SECURITY
Access Gates
Audible/Monitored Alarms
Controlled Building Access
Guard House
Patrol Service
Security Cameras
Security Officer
Telegate

APARTMENT FEATURES
Accent Wall
Built-In Desk
Ceiling Fan(s)
Ceilings - 9' or Greater
Crown Molding
Fireplace
Flooring - Carpet
Flooring - Ceramic Tile
Flooring - Wood/Faux Wood
French Doors
Garden Tub(s)
Outside /Extra Storage
Private Patio/Balcony
Recessed Lighting
Separate Dining Room
Sunroom /Solarium
Utility Room
Walk-in Closet(s)
Washer Dryer Connection
Washer Dryer Included
Greystar Proprietary and Confidential Information – Not for distribution or use without prior written authorization. Amenities & Fees

ATTACHMENT B
14 Property Preston Park Shadow Market
Marina Square
Apartments Abrams Park Sunbay Suites Marina Del Sol
Shoreline
Apartments 7 8 9 10

KITCHEN
Appliances - Black
Appliances - Stainless/SS Look
Appliances - White
Countertops - Granite/Marble
Dishwasher
Disposal
Kitchen Island
Pantry
Greystar Proprietary and Confidential Information – Not for distribution or use without prior written authorization. Amenities & Fees

ATTACHMENT B
15 Property Name Year Built # of units
% of
Property
Avg. Unit
Size (SF)
Avg. Mkt
Rent/Unit
Avg. Mkt
Rent $/SF
Avg. Eff
Rent/Unit
Avg. Eff
Rent $/SF
Subject Preston Park 1987 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 1 Shadow Market 1973 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 2 Marina Square Apartments 1978 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 Comp 3 Abrams Park 1978 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 4 Sunbay Suites 1989 32 12% 345 $1,550 $4.49 $1,550 $4.49 Comp 5 Marina Del Sol 1977 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 6 Shoreline Apartments 1973 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 Comp 7 7 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 8 8 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 9 9 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 10 10 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Total/Avg (Market) 32 12% 345 $1,550 $4.49 $1,550 $4.49 Total/Avg. (Market less Subject) 32 12% 345 $1,550 $4.49 $1,550 $4.49 Property Name Year Built # of units
% of
Property
Avg. Unit
Size (SF)
Avg. Mkt
Rent/Unit
Avg. Mkt
Rent $/SF
Avg. Eff
Rent/Unit
Avg. Eff
Rent $/SF
Subject Preston Park 1987 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 1 Shadow Market 1973 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 2 Marina Square Apartments 1978 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 Comp 3 Abrams Park 1978 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 4 Sunbay Suites 1989 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 5 Marina Del Sol 1977 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 6 Shoreline Apartments 1973 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 Comp 7 7 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 8 8 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 9 9 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 10 10 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Total/Avg (Market) 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Total/Avg. (Market less Subject) 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 Standard Unit Types
Renovated Unit Types
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
$4.49
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
$0
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1,000
$1,200
$1,400
$1,600
$1,800
$0.00
$0.50
$1.00
$1.50
$2.00
$2.50
$3.00
$3.50
$4.00
$4.50
$5.00
Subject Comp 1 Comp 2 Comp 3 Comp 4 Comp 5 Comp 6 Comp 7 Comp 8 Comp 9 Comp 10 Avg. Mkt Rent/Unit Avg. Eff Rent/Unit Avg. Eff Rent $/SF Studio Analysis l Standard
Greystar Proprietary and Confidential Information – Not for distribution or use without prior written authorization. Studio Analysis

ATTACHMENT B
16 Property Name Year Built # of units
% of
Property
Avg. Unit
Size (SF)
Avg. Mkt
Rent/Unit
Avg. Mkt
Rent $/SF
Avg. Eff
Rent/Unit
Avg. Eff
Rent $/SF
Subject Preston Park 1987 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 1 Shadow Market 1973 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 2 Marina Square Apartments 1978 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 Comp 3 Abrams Park 1978 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 4 Sunbay Suites 1989 64 24% 500 $1,950 $3.90 $1,950 $3.90 Comp 5 Marina Del Sol 1977 54 50% 618 $2,000 $3.24 $2,000 $3.24 Comp 6 Shoreline Apartments 1973 72 86% 720 $2,366 $3.29 $2,366 $3.29 Comp 7 7 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 8 8 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 9 9 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 10 10 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Total/Avg (Market) 190 53% 617 $2,122 $3.48 $2,122 $3.48 Total/Avg. (Market less Subject) 190 53% 617 $2,122 $3.48 $2,122 $3.48 Property Name Year Built # of units
% of
Property
Avg. Unit
Size (SF)
Avg. Mkt
Rent/Unit
Avg. Mkt
Rent $/SF
Avg. Eff
Rent/Unit
Avg. Eff
Rent $/SF
Subject Preston Park 1987 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 1 Shadow Market 1973 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 2 Marina Square Apartments 1978 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 Comp 3 Abrams Park 1978 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 4 Sunbay Suites 1989 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 5 Marina Del Sol 1977 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 6 Shoreline Apartments 1973 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 Comp 7 7 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 8 8 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 9 9 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 10 10 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Total/Avg (Market) 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Total/Avg. (Market less Subject) 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 Standard Unit Types
Renovated Unit Types
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
$3.90
$3.24 $3.29
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
$0
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
$0.00
$0.50
$1.00
$1.50
$2.00
$2.50
$3.00
$3.50
$4.00
$4.50
Subject Comp 1 Comp 2 Comp 3 Comp 4 Comp 5 Comp 6 Comp 7 Comp 8 Comp 9 Comp 10 Avg. Mkt Rent/Unit Avg. Eff Rent/Unit Avg. Eff Rent $/SF One Bedroom Analysis l Standard
Greystar Proprietary and Confidential Information – Not for distribution or use without prior written authorization. 1 Bed Analysis

ATTACHMENT B
17 Property Name Year Built # of units
% of
Property
Avg. Unit
Size (SF)
Avg. Mkt
Rent/Unit
Avg. Mkt
Rent $/SF
Avg. Eff
Rent/Unit
Avg. Eff
Rent $/SF
Subject Preston Park 1987 122 34% 1317 $2,060 $1.56 $2,060 $1.56 Comp 1 Shadow Market 1973 9 56% 807 $1,737 $2.17 $1,737 $2.17 Comp 2 Marina Square Apartments 1978 48 100% 1000 $2,550 $2.55 $2,550 $2.55 Comp 3 Abrams Park 1978 92 47% 1000 $1,800 $1.80 $1,800 $1.80 Comp 4 Sunbay Suites 1989 170 64% 675 $2,450 $3.63 $2,450 $3.63 Comp 5 Marina Del Sol 1977 54 50% 736 $2,400 $3.26 $2,400 $3.26 Comp 6 Shoreline Apartments 1973 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 Comp 7 7 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 8 8 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 9 9 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 10 10 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Total/Avg (Market) 495 59% 934 $2,224 $2.61 $2,224 $2.61 Total/Avg. (Market less Subject) 373 64% 809 $2,278 $2.95 $2,278 $2.95 Property Name Year Built # of units
% of
Property
Avg. Unit
Size (SF)
Avg. Mkt
Rent/Unit
Avg. Mkt
Rent $/SF
Avg. Eff
Rent/Unit
Avg. Eff
Rent $/SF
Subject Preston Park 1987 15 4% 1290 $2,342 $1.82 $2,342 $1.82 Comp 1 Shadow Market 1973 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 2 Marina Square Apartments 1978 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 Comp 3 Abrams Park 1978 4 2% 1000 $1,950 $1.95 $1,950 $1.95 Comp 4 Sunbay Suites 1989 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 5 Marina Del Sol 1977 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 6 Shoreline Apartments 1973 12 14% 875 $2,583 $2.95 $2,583 $2.95 Comp 7 7 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 8 8 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 9 9 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 10 10 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Total/Avg (Market) 31 7% 1092 $2,385 $2.27 $2,385 $2.27 Total/Avg. (Market less Subject) 16 8% 906 $2,425 $2.70 $2,425 $2.70 Standard Unit Types
Renovated Unit Types
$1.56
$2.17
$2.55
$1.80
$3.63
$3.26
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
$0
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
$3,000
$0.00
$0.50
$1.00
$1.50
$2.00
$2.50
$3.00
$3.50
$4.00
Subject Comp 1 Comp 2 Comp 3 Comp 4 Comp 5 Comp 6 Comp 7 Comp 8 Comp 9 Comp 10 Avg. Mkt Rent/Unit Avg. Eff Rent/Unit Avg. Eff Rent $/SF Two Bedroom Analysis l Standard
Greystar Proprietary and Confidential Information – Not for distribution or use without prior written authorization. 2 Bed Analysis

ATTACHMENT B
18 Property Name Year Built # of units
% of
Property
Avg. Unit
Size (SF)
Avg. Mkt
Rent/Unit
Avg. Mkt
Rent $/SF
Avg. Eff
Rent/Unit
Avg. Eff
Rent $/SF
Subject Preston Park 1987 120 34% 1572 $2,541 $1.62 $2,541 $1.62 Comp 1 Shadow Market 1973 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 2 Marina Square Apartments 1978 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 Comp 3 Abrams Park 1978 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 4 Sunbay Suites 1989 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 5 Marina Del Sol 1977 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 6 Shoreline Apartments 1973 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 Comp 7 7 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 8 8 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 9 9 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 10 10 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Total/Avg (Market) 120 34% 1572 $2,541 $1.62 $2,541 $1.62 Total/Avg. (Market less Subject) 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 Property Name Year Built # of units
% of
Property
Avg. Unit
Size (SF)
Avg. Mkt
Rent/Unit
Avg. Mkt
Rent $/SF
Avg. Eff
Rent/Unit
Avg. Eff
Rent $/SF
Subject Preston Park 1987 5 1% 1572 $2,836 $1.80 $2,836 $1.80 Comp 1 Shadow Market 1973 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 2 Marina Square Apartments 1978 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 Comp 3 Abrams Park 1978 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 4 Sunbay Suites 1989 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 5 Marina Del Sol 1977 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 6 Shoreline Apartments 1973 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 Comp 7 7 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 8 8 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 9 9 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 10 10 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Total/Avg (Market) 5 1% 1572 $2,836 $1.80 $2,836 $1.80
Total/Avg. (Market less Subject) 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 Standard Unit Types
Renovated Unit Types
$1.62
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
$3,000
$0.00
$0.20
$0.40
$0.60
$0.80
$1.00
$1.20
$1.40
$1.60
$1.80
Subject Comp 1 Comp 2 Comp 3 Comp 4 Comp 5 Comp 6 Comp 7 Comp 8 Comp 9 Comp 10 Avg. Mkt Rent/Unit Avg. Eff Rent/Unit Avg. Eff Rent $/SF Three Bedroom Analysis l Standard
Greystar Proprietary and Confidential Information – Not for distribution or use without prior written authorization. 3 Bed Analysis

ATTACHMENT B
19 Property Name Year Built # of units
% of
Property
Avg. Unit
Size (SF)
Avg. Mkt
Rent/Unit
Avg. Mkt
Rent $/SF
Avg. Eff
Rent/Unit
Avg. Eff
Rent $/SF
Subject Preston Park 1987 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 1 Shadow Market 1973 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 2 Marina Square Apartments 1978 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 Comp 3 Abrams Park 1978 88 45% 1765 $2,639 $1.50 $2,639 $1.50 Comp 4 Sunbay Suites 1989 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 5 Marina Del Sol 1977 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 6 Shoreline Apartments 1973 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 Comp 7 7 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 8 8 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 9 9 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 10 10 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Total/Avg (Market) 88 45% 1765 $2,639 $1.50 $2,639 $1.50 Total/Avg. (Market less Subject) 88 45% 1765 $2,639 $1.50 $2,639 $1.50 Property Name Year Built # of units
% of
Property
Avg. Unit
Size (SF)
Avg. Mkt
Rent/Unit
Avg. Mkt
Rent $/SF
Avg. Eff
Rent/Unit
Avg. Eff
Rent $/SF
Subject Preston Park 1987 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 1 Shadow Market 1973 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 2 Marina Square Apartments 1978 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 Comp 3 Abrams Park 1978 10 5% 1760 $2,644 $1.50 $2,644 $1.50 Comp 4 Sunbay Suites 1989 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 5 Marina Del Sol 1977 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 6 Shoreline Apartments 1973 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 Comp 7 7 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 8 8 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 9 9 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Comp 10 10 0 0 0% 0 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Total/Avg (Market) 10 5% 1760 $2,644 $1.50 $2,644 $1.50 Total/Avg. (Market less Subject) 10 5% 1760 $2,644 $1.50 $2,644 $1.50 Standard Unit Types
Renovated Unit Types
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00
$1.50
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
$0
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
$3,000
$0.00
$0.20
$0.40
$0.60
$0.80
$1.00
$1.20
$1.40
$1.60
Subject Comp 1 Comp 2 Comp 3 Comp 4 Comp 5 Comp 6 Comp 7 Comp 8 Comp 9 Comp 10 Avg. Mkt Rent/Unit Avg. Eff Rent/Unit Avg. Eff Rent $/SF Four Bedroom Analysis l Standard
Greystar Proprietary and Confidential Information – Not for distribution or use without prior written authorization. 4 Bed Analysis

ATTACHMENT B
20 Used for
2BD
Used for 3
BD
Used for 4
BD
(A) MAXIMUM HOUSEHOLD INCOME LIMITS (ANNUAL)
(4.5
Persons)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9*
Very Low (50% AMI) $ 35,600 $ 40,700 $ 45,800 $ 50,850 $ 54,950 $ 59,000 $ 63,100 $ 67,150 71,190$ Low/Lower (60% AMI) $42,720 $48,840 $54,960 $61,020 $65,940 $70,800 $75,720 $80,580 $85,432 Low (80%) AMI $56,950 $65,100 $73,250 $81,350 $87,900 $94,400 $100,900 $107,400 $113,890 Source:HUD Median Income for Monterey County 2019 at https://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/il/il2021/2021summary.odn * 9-Person Income Limits are calculated as 140% of the 4 -person limits with rounding as per HUD Guidelines (B) MAXIMUM MONTHLY HOUSING COST (Rent + Utility Allowance) 2BD1 4BD2 3BD3
Very Low (50% AMI) 1,091$ 1,406$ $1,260
Low/Lower (60%) AMI 1,310$ 1,688$ $1,512
Low (80%) AMI 1,744$ 2,248$ $2,015
Notes:
1 Calculated as 2BD AMI @ 50%, 60% and 80% for 3 persons x 30% and then divided by 12 months 2 Calculated as 4BD AMI @ 50%, 60% and 80% for 6 persons x 30% and then divided by 12 months 3 Calculated as 3BD AMI @ 50%, 60% and 80% for 4.5 persons x 30% and then divided by 12 months (Preston Park Only) (C) AFFORDABLE UNITS RENT CALCULATION USING 50%/60%/80% BRACKET LESS HAMC (HCV Program) UTILITIES ALLOWANCE 5,6 21/22 20/21 21/22 20/21 21/22 20/21
Very Low (50% AMI) 1,091$ 1,091$ $1,260 1,260$ 1,406$ 1,406$ Less Utilities (202)$ (202)$ (264)$ (264)$ (328)$ (328)$ Monthly Rent Net of Utilities 889$ 889$ $996 996$ 1,078$ 1,078$ Low/Lower (60% AMI) 1,310$ 1,310$ $1,512 1,512$ 1,688$ 1,688$ Less Utilities (202)$ (202)$ (264)$ (264)$ (328)$ (328)$ Monthly Rent Net of Utilities 1,108$ 1,108$ $1,248 1,248$ 1,360$ 1,360$ Low/Lower (80% AMI) 1,744$ 1,744$ $2,015 2,015$ 2,248$ 2,248$ Less Utilities (202)$ (202)$ (264)$ (264)$ (328)$ (328)$ Monthly Rent Net of Utilities 1,542$ 1,542$ $1,751 1,751$ 1,920$ 1,920$ 5 Source for Utilities Deduction in the HAMC HVC Program Utilities Allowances for Apts & Townhouses 22-23 6 Utilities (UTA-Apts/Townhouses Allowances) used for calc are "HEATING (Natural Gas)", "COOKING (Natural Gas)", "OTHER ELECTRIC", WATER HEATING (Natural Gas), WATER , SEWER, and "TRASH COLLECTION" 2BD 4BD
Calculation of Affordable Units FY 22/23 Rent Levels
HUD Area Median Income
(AMI) Level
HUD AMI Level
Number of Bedrooms
Number of Persons
3BD (Preston Only)

ATTACHMENT C
21 Preston Park Budget Memo Attachment D - Highlights of Operating Expenses PAYROLL $618,841 $584,932 $640,610 D $33,909 5.5% Decrease in Estimated Budget over Approved Budget due to open
positons during FY.

I ($55,678) -9.5% Increase in Proposed Budget over
Estimated Budget due to open
positions in 2021/2022 FY;
assumes annual merit increase of
3% and increase in tax and benefit
costs.

I ($21,769) -3.5%
CONTRACT SERVICES $76,148 $82,100 $109,064 I ($5,951) -7.8% Increase in Estimated Budget over Approved Budget due to increase
in pest control, fire/life/safety
repairs/inspections, and COVID
janitorial cleaning.

I ($26,964) -32.8% Increase in Proposed Budget over
Estimated Budget due to addition
of nightly courtesy patrol in new
budget year, plus 10% increase in
Pest Control and Landscape
contracts.

I ($32,916) -43.2%
UTILITIES $128,427 $129,012 $141,636 I ($585) -0.5% Tracking from Estimated Budget over Approved Budget
I ($12,624) -9.8% 2022/2023 budget based upon
2021/2022 actuals with an a 10%
increase in rates.

I ($13,209) -10.3%
REDECORATING $195,500 $180,502 $179,400 D $14,998 7.7% Decrease in Estimated Budget over Approved Budget due to reduced
turnover.

D $1,102 0.6% Tracking YOY, budget assumes
slight increase in turnover YOY.

D $16,100 8.2%
MAINTENANCE $99,328 $110,931 $115,740 I ($11,603) -11.7% Increase in Estimated Budget over Approved Budget due to increased
in cleaning supplies, plumbing
and misc. repairs and supplies.

I ($4,809) -4.3% Increase in Proposed Budget over
Estimated Budget due inflation.

I ($16,412) -16.5%
MARKETING $4,784 $3,945 $2,738 D $839 17.5% Tracking from Estimated Budget over Approved Budget
D $1,207 30.6% Tracking YOY with slight
decrease.

D $2,046 42.8%
ADMINISTRATIVE $94,199 $98,527 $96,012 I ($4,328) -4.6% Increase in Estimated Budget over Approved Budget due to bank
fees, eviction fees, and
computer/software expense.

D $2,514 2.6% Decrease in Proposed Budget over
Estimated Budget due to reducing
costs in multiple GL's.

I ($1,813) -1.9%
INSURANCE & TAXES $353,001 $383,810 $502,908 I ($30,809) -8.7% Reflects higher rates than anticipated.

I ($119,098) -31.0% Increase due to anticipated tax
increase and insurance premium.

I ($149,907) -42.5%
NON-ROUTINE MAINTENANCE $242,480 $155,194 $243,340 D $87,286 36.0% D ($88,146) -56.8% FY 22/23 budget includes trip hazard removal, gutter cleaning,
annual inspection supplies, a roof
preventive maintenance
inspection, tree trimming,
irrigation replacements and
unforeseen maintenance events.

I ($860) -0.4%
MANAGEMENT FEES $180,293 $180,531 $185,494 I ($239) -0.1% Tracking from Estimated Budget over Approved Budget.

I ($4,962) -2.7% Increase due to increase in Total
Income.

I ($5,201) -2.9%
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES $1,993,000 $1,909,483 $2,216,941 D $83,518 4.2% Increase due to Capital savings. I ($307,459) -16.1% Increase due to expense category increases detailed above.

I ($223,941) -11.2%

I -- DESIGNATES INCREASE

D -- DESIGNATES DECREASE
2022/2023
Proposed Budget
vs. 2021/2022
Approved Budget
%Approved Budget
FY 2021/2022
Variance of
Approved Budget
From 2021/2022
Estimated Actuals
CommentsOperating Expenses Proposed FY
2022/2023
Estimated Actuals FY
2021/2022
Variance of Proposed
Budget from FY
2021/2022 Estimated
Actuals
%% Comments
22 Entity: caprepar (Preston Park)
Annual Summary Report
Original
Potential Rent 7,324,727 7,357,236 7,529,720 204,993 2.8% Net Potential Rent 7,324,727 7,357,236 7,529,720 204,993 2.8% Vacancy Loss (62,918) (127,124) (106,352) (43,434) (69.0)% Non Revenue Units (78,139) (65,069) (70,935) 7,204 9.2% Delinquent Rent 160 - - (160) (100.0)%
Bad Debt 4,800 (6,950) (6,000) (10,800) (225.0)% Other Misc Rental Income 252 - - (252) (100.0)%
Total Rental Income-Residential 7,188,881 $ 7,158,093 $ 7,346,433 $ 157,552 $ 2.2% Other Income-Residential 102,202 53,620 73,316 (28,886) (28.3)% Total Income 7,291,083 $ 7,211,713 $ 7,419,749 $ 128,666 $ 1.8% Payroll & Benefits 584,932 618,841 640,610 (55,678) (9.5)% Repairs & Maintenance 110,931 99,328 115,740 (4,809) (4.3)% Make-Ready / Redecorating 180,502 195,500 179,400 1,102 0.6% Contract Services 82,100 76,148 109,064 (26,964) (32.8)% Advertising / Marketing / Promotions 3,945 4,784 2,738 1,207 30.6% Office Expenses 37,942 47,968 46,357 (8,415) (22.2)% Other General & Administrative 60,584 46,231 49,655 10,930 18.0% Utilities 129,012 128,427 141,636 (12,624) (9.8)% Controllable Expenses 1,189,948 $ 1,217,227 $ 1,285,200 $ (95,252) $ (8.0)% Management Fees 180,531 180,293 185,494 (4,962) (2.7)% Taxes 148,734 146,572 223,020 (74,286) (49.9)% Insurance 235,076 206,429 279,888 (44,812) (19.1)% Non-Controllable Expenses 564,341 $ 533,294 $ 688,402 $ (124,060) $ (22.0)% Total Operating Expenses 1,754,289 $ 1,750,520 $ 1,973,601 $ (219,312) $ (12.5)% Total Operating / Non Recoverable Expenses 1,754,289 $ 1,750,520 $ 1,973,601 $ (219,312) $ (12.5)% Net Operating Income 5,536,794 $ 5,461,193 $ 5,446,148 $ (90,646) $ (1.6)% Routine Replacement Expense 155,194 156,890 243,340 (88,146) (56.8)% Capital / Renovation Expense 1,313,175 - 1,169,100 144,075 11.0% NOI After Replacements 4,068,425 $ 5,304,303 $ 4,033,708 $ (34,718) $ (0.9)% Debt Service 1,512,646 1,516,790 1,512,644 2 0.0% Total Non-Operating Expense 1,512,646 $ 1,516,790 $ 1,512,644 $ 2 $ 0.0% Net Income 2,555,780 $ 3,787,513 $ 2,521,064 $ (34,716) $ (1.4)% INCOME
Budget Year

EXPENSES
Budget vs ReforecastReforecast
Reforecast Year Budget Year
Entity: caprepar (Preston Park)Annual Summary - Page 1 of 1 - Printed 7/29/2022 - 8:58 AM

ATTACHMENT E
23 Attachment F
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES - 2022/2023 Preston Park Budget
PRESTON PARK - REVISED PHYSICAL NEEDS ASSESSMENT (5 Year Look Forward - Greystar Recommendation) Updated: 5/30/2022 Project Detail
Committed/Co
mpleted 2021-
2022 2022 - 2023 2023-2024 2024-2025 2025-2026 2026-2027 Projected Replacement Reserve Fund Balance 1,241,921$ 664,217$ 648,441$ 721,065$ 1,392,389$ 2,068,713$ Projected Replacement Reserve Fund Contribution 890,664$ 890,664$ 890,664$ 890,664$ 890,664$ 890,664$ Roof Repair/*Replacement 3,705$
Exterior Paint *Full Paint 1,183,683$
Exterior Unit Doors Replacement
Building Exterior Dry rot Repairs, Trip Hazards 89,492$ 50,000$ Lighting Replacement and Additions 85,000$
Resident Business Center FF&E
Landscape/ Irrigation *Replacement / Upgrades 21,470$ 40,000$ Parking Expansion Additional Parking Spaces 450,000$ 450,000$ Playgrounds Replacement/Upgrades
Duct Cleaning Cleaning/Repairing Heater vents 145,000$
Mailbox Replacement Replacement 5,400$
New Office Computers Replace existing old computers 5,000$ Maintenance Vehicles Needed for hauling etc…
Seal Coat Streets * Seal Coat Streets (estimated completion date in this FY: 5/15/2021) FF&E Resident Business Center Refresh 25,000$
Gutter Cleaning 7,100$ 10,000$
Tub Surrounds Replacement 2,500$ 2,500$ 2,500$ 2,500$ 2,500$ 2,500$ Applicable Construction Management Expenses Miscellaneous (see * items) 71,021$ 32,100$ 8,700$ Microwaves Replacement (assume 5 year life). Represents 4 units 853$ 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$ Dishwasher Replacement (assume 10 year life). Represents 24 units 9,650$ 8,400$ 8,400$ 8,400$ 8,400$ 8,400$ Refrigerators Replacement (assume 15 year life). Represents 24 units 10,155$ 15,600$ 15,600$ 15,600$ 15,600$ 15,600$ Stove/Range hood Replacement (assume 15 year life). Represents 24 units 14,181$ 13,440$ 13,440$ 13,440$ 13,440$ 13,440$ Garbage Disposal Replacement (assume 10 year life). Represents 12 units 1,586$ 1,200$ 1,200$ 1,200$ 1,200$ 1,200$ Hot Water Heaters Replacement (assume 15 year life). Represents 24 units 11,684$ 16,800$ 16,800$ 16,800$ 16,800$ 16,800$ Carpet Replacement (assume 10 year life). Represents 36 units. 17,102$ 80,400$ 80,400$ 80,400$ 80,400$ 80,400$ Vinyl Replacement (assume 10 year life). Represents 36 units. 12,402$ 45,000$ 45,000$ 45,000$ 45,000$ 45,000$ HVAC Furnace Replacement (assume 15 year life). Represents 4 units. 6,385$ 30,000$ 30,000$ 30,000$ 30,000$ 30,000$ Capital Expenses - uninflated (included as Capital Assets in the Standard Budget) (1,468,368)$ (906,440)$ (818,040)$ (219,340)$ (214,340)$ (214,340)$ Ending Replacement Reserve Fund Balance - uninflated 664,217$ 648,441$ 721,065$ 1,392,389$ 2,068,713$ 2,745,037$

ATTACHMENT F
24 Attachment G Preston Park Cash Allocations
Preston Park Cash Balances, 6/30/22
Accounts
Actual Bank
Balance
Proposed Beginning Budget
Allocations (after
Operating Sweep)
Estimated Year End
Allocations
Estimated Beginning
Allocation for 2023.24
Operating $454,067 $200,000 $1,011,904 $200,000
Security Deposit $568,686 $568,686 $568,686 $568,686
Bridgebank Reserve Total Balance $8,016,253 $8,270,320 $8,270,320 $9,082,224

RESERVES ALLOCATIONS
Capital Reserve
Beginning Balance $664,217 $664,217 $171,441
Revenues $890,664 $890,664 $890,664
Expenditures $906,440 $1,383,440 $368,040
Ending Balance $648,441 $171,441 $694,065
Loan Reserves $7,606,103 $7,606,103 $8,910,783
Total All Accounts $9,039,006 $9,039,006 $9,850,910 $9,850,910

ATTACHMENT G
25