City of Santa Clara
Agenda
Council and Authorities Concurrent Meeting
Call and Notice of Special Meeting
Santa Clara Stadium Authority
Hybrid Meeting
City Hall Council Chambers/Virtual
1500 Warburton Avenue Santa
Clara, CA 95050
Tuesday, April 4, 2023 4:30 PM
The City of Santa Clara is conducting City Council meetings in a hybrid manner (in-person and continues to have methods for the public to participate remotely).
• Via Zoom:
o https://santaclaraca.zoom.us/j/99706759306
Meeting ID: 997-0675-9306
o Phone 1(669) 900-6833
How to Submit Written Public Comment Before City Council Meeting:
1. Use the eComment tab located on the City Council Agenda page https://santaclara.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx. eComments are directly sent to the iLegislate application used by City Council and staff, and become part of the public record. eComment closes 15 minutes before the start of a meeting.
2. By email to [email protected] by 12 p.m. the day of the meeting. Those emails will be forwarded to the Council and will be uploaded to the City Council Agenda as supplemental meeting material. Emails received after the 12 p.m. cutoff time up through the end of the meeting will form part of the meeting record. Please identify the Agenda Item Number in the subject line of your email.
NOTE: Please note eComments and Emails received as public comment will not be read aloud during the meeting.
Agendas, Staff Reports and some associated documents for City Council items may be viewed on the Internet at https://santaclara.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx All public records relating to an open session item on this agenda, which are not exempt from disclosure pursuant to the California Public Records Act, that are distributed to a majority of the legislative body will be available for public inspection at the Office of the City Clerk at Sana Clara City Hall, 1500 Warburton Avenue, Santa Clara, CA 95050 at the same time that the public records are distributed or made available to the legislative body. Any draft contracts, ordinances and resolutions posted on the Internet site or distributed in advance of the Council meeting may not be the final documents approved by the City Council. For the final document, you many contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 615-2220 or [email protected].
City of Santa Clara Page 1 of 11 Printed on 3/30/2023
Councilmember Chahal will be attending remotely from the following location:
627 Sector 11
Panchkula, HR 134109
India
Council and Authorities Concurrent
Call and Notice of Special Meeting
Stadium Authority
Meeting Agenda April 4, 2023
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that, pursuant to the provisions of California Government Code §54956 (“The Brown Act”) and Section 708 of the Santa Clara City Charter, the Chair calls for a Special Meeting of the Governing Board of the Stadium Authority, to commence and convene on April 4, 2023 for a Special Meeting to be held virtually and in the City Hall Council Chambers located in the East Wing of City Hall at 1500 Warburton Avenue, Santa Clara, California, to consider the following matter(s) and to potentially take action with respect to them.
Closed Session - 4:30 PM | Study Session - 5:00 PM | Regular Meeting - 7:00 PM 4:30 PM CLOSED SESSION
Call to Order in the Council Chambers
Roll Call
1. Conference with Real Property Negotiators (CC)
Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.8
Property: 2435 Lafayette Street, Santa Clara, California 95050 (APN: 224-35-020)
City Negotiator: City Manager (or designee)
Negotiating Counterparties: Wesco Properties, Inc., Home Depot
Under Negotiation: Purchase/Sale/Exchange/Lease of Real Property (terms and conditions, including, price and terms of payment)
23-438
Public Comment
The public may provide comments regarding the Closed Session item(s) just prior to the Council beginning the Closed Session. Closed Sessions are not open to the public.
Convene to Closed Session (Council Conference Room)
5:00 PM STUDY SESSION
Call to Order in the Council Chambers
2.A Project Update and Action on a Resolution Adopting the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority's Central Bikeway Feasibility Study
23-146
Adopt a resolution adopting the Central Bikeway
Study Feasibility Final Report.
Recommendation:
City of Santa Clara Page 2 of 11 Printed on 3/30/2023
Council and Authorities Concurrent
Call and Notice of Special Meeting
Stadium Authority
Meeting Agenda April 4, 2023
2.B Mission City Memorial Park (Cemetery) Operations - Study Session
23-1633
Recommendation: Review the staff presentation and provide input. 7:00 PM COUNCIL/SPECIAL STADIUM AUTHORITY MEETING
*Open Session to begin at 7:00 PM or shortly thereafter.
Call to Order
Call to Order in the Council Chambers (Open to the Public) Pledge of Allegiance and Statement of Values
REPORTS OF ACTION TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION MATTERS
CONTINUANCES/EXCEPTIONS/RECONSIDERATIONS
3. Per City Council Policy 042: Reconsideration of Council Action-Reconsideration of Council action taken March 7, 2023 regarding a Resolution Declaring City-Owned Property Located at 2319 Gianera Street as Surplus Land as Required by State Law [APNs: 104-05-052]
23-484
Alternative 1: Approve a Resolution Declaring
City-Owned Property Located at 2319 Gianera Street
Surplus.
Recommendation:
SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS
4.A 23-41 Proclamation of Earth Day/Arbor Day for April 27, 2023
4.B Presentation for 2023 Santa Clara Relay for Life by American Cancer Society
23-375
CONSENT CALENDAR
[Items listed on the CONSENT CALENDAR are considered routine and will be adopted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of the items on the CONSENT CALENDAR unless discussion is requested by a member of the Council, staff, or public. If so requested, that item will be removed from the CONSENT CALENDAR and considered under CONSENT ITEMS PULLED FOR DISCUSSION.]
City of Santa Clara Page 3 of 11 Printed on 3/30/2023
Council and Authorities Concurrent
Call and Notice of Special Meeting
Stadium Authority
Meeting Agenda April 4, 2023
5.A Action on the Minutes of January 10, 2023 Council and Authorities Concurrent and Special Santa Clara Stadium
Authority Meeting; January 31, 2023 Council and Authorities Concurrent and Santa Clara Stadium Authority Meeting;
February 7, 2023 Council and Authorities Concurrent and Special Santa Clara Stadium Authority Meeting; and the
February 21, 2023 Council and Authorities Concurrent and Santa Clara Stadium Authority Meeting
23-471
Approve the Meeting Minutes of January 10, 2023
Council and Authorities Concurrent and Special Santa
Clara Stadium Authority Meeting, January 31, 2023
Council and Authorities Concurrent and Santa Clara
Stadium Authority Meeting, February 7, 2023 Council
and Authorities Concurrent and Special Santa Clara
Stadium Authority Meeting and the February 21, 2023
Council and Authorities Concurrent and Santa Clara
Stadium Authority.
Recommendation:
5.B 23-10 Board, Commissions and Committee Minutes
Note and file the Minutes of:
Parks & Recreation Commission - February 21, 2023
Recommendation:
5.C Action on Bills and Claims Report (CC, SCSA, HA) for the period February 4, 2023 - March 3, 2023
23-397
Approve the list of Bills and Claims for February 4,
2023 - March 3, 2023.
Recommendation:
City of Santa Clara Page 4 of 11 Printed on 3/30/2023
Council and Authorities Concurrent
Call and Notice of Special Meeting
Stadium Authority
Meeting Agenda April 4, 2023
5.D Action on an Agreement with Ray Klein Inc., dba Professional Credit to Provide Collection Services to the City for Bad Debt and Delinquent Accounts
23-399
1. Approve and authorize the City Manager to
execute an agreement (Agreement), in
substantially the form attached hereto, with Ray
Klein, Inc., dba Professional Credit to provide
full-service collection services for unpaid and
delinquent accounts receivable and utility accounts
referred by the City starting on or about May 1,
2023 and ending on April 30, 2028; and
2. Authorize the City Manager to execute up to two
two-year options to extend the Agreement after the
initial five-year term (with the final term ending on
April 30, 2032, if all options are exercised) and
authorize the City Manager to take any and all
actions as are necessary or advisable to
implement and administer the Agreement.
Recommendation:
5.E Action on a Resolution Authorizing the Use of City Electric Forces at Various Locations; Determine the Proposed Actions are Exempt from CEQA Pursuant to Sections 15302(c) and
15303 (d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations 23-124
Determine the proposed actions are exempt from
CEQA pursuant to sections 15302(c) and 15303(d) of
Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations and
adopt a Resolution authorizing the use of City Electric Forces for work detailed in this report located at 1876 Cabrillo Avenue, 1205 Coleman Avenue, and 2920
Scott Boulevard.
Recommendation:
5.F Action on a Request for a Two-Year Special Permit to Use the Santa Clara Marriott Hotel Parking Lot as an Event Site at 2700 Mission College Boulevard (CEQA: Exempt 15304(e) Class 4 - Minor Alterations to Land)
23-231
Approve the Use of a Categorical Exemption per
CEQA 15304(e) Class 4 - Minor Alterations to Land
and Approve the Request for a Two-Year Special
Permit to use the Santa Clara Marriott Hotel Parking
Lot as an Event Site at 2700 Mission College
Boulevard, subject to conditions.
Recommendation:
City of Santa Clara Page 5 of 11 Printed on 3/30/2023
Council and Authorities Concurrent
Call and Notice of Special Meeting
Stadium Authority
Meeting Agenda April 4, 2023
5.G Action on Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Agreements and Other Necessary Documents for Participation in the National Prescription Opiate Litigation Settlement; Action to Authorize the City Manager to Negotiate and Execute Future Agreement(s) with the State or County for Use of Settlement Proceeds Without Further Council Action.
23-410
1. Adopt a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager
to Execute Agreements and Other Necessary
Documents for Participation in the National
Prescription Opiate Litigation Settlement
Agreements; and
2. Authorize the City Manager to Negotiate and
Execute Future Agreement(s) with the State or
County for Use of Settlement Proceeds Without
Further Council Action.
Recommendation:
5.H Action to Adopt a Resolution Approving the Water Supply Assessment for Mission Point - 3005 Democracy Way
23-254
Adopt a Resolution approving the Water Supply
Assessment for Mission Point - 3005 Democracy
Way.
Recommendation:
5.I Action on a Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map for 15 Condominium Units at 3575 De La Cruz Boulevard (CEQA: Use of the 2010-2035 General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR) per Public Resources Code Section 21094.5 and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.3, Streamlining for Infill Projects)
23-422
1. Adopt a resolution to find that the proposed
subdivision is within the scope of the 2010-
2035 General Plan Environmental Impact
Report (EIR) per Public Resources Code
Section 21094.5 and State CEQA Guidelines
Section 15183.3, Streamlining for Infill Projects
as detailed in an Appendix N checklist; and
approve the Vesting Tentative Subdivision
Map to develop the parcel (101-15-049) with
15 condominiums at the property located at
3575 De La Cruz Boulevard.
Recommendation:
City of Santa Clara Page 6 of 11 Printed on 3/30/2023
Council and Authorities Concurrent
Call and Notice of Special Meeting
Stadium Authority
Meeting Agenda April 4, 2023
5.J 23-474 Action on the Updated Outside Agencies Committee List Approve the updated Outside Agencies Committee
List
Recommendation:
SANTA CLARA STADIUM AUTHORITY CONSENT CALENDAR
6.A Action on a Resolution of the Santa Clara Stadium Authority Authorizing the Deposit of Stadium Authority Funds Into the State's Local Agency Investment Fund and Authorizing Staff to Deposit and Withdraw These Funds
23-414
Adopt a Resolution Authorizing the Deposit of
Stadium Authority Funds into the State's Local Agency
Investment Fund and Authorizing Staff to Deposit and
Withdraw These Funds
Recommendation:
6.B Action on a Resolution to Delegate Authority to the Executive Director and the Stadium Authority Counsel to Negotiate and Execute Documents Necessary to Implement Selection of US Bank as the Depositary Bank Under the Deposit and
Disbursement Agreement
23-338
Adopt a Resolution to Delegate Authority to the
Executive Director and the Stadium Authority Counsel
to Negotiate and Execute Documents Necessary to
Implement Selection of US Bank as the Depositary
Bank Under the Deposit and Disbursement
Agreement.
Recommendation:
6.C Action on Request Submitted by the Stadium Manager to Execute Agreement with West Coast Turf to Supply and Deliver Sod and Related Installation Services at Levi’s Stadium
6.C.1 Request from the Stadium Manager to Execute Agreement with West Coast Turf to Supply and Deliver Sod and Related
Installation Services at Levi’s Stadium
23-314
City of Santa Clara Page 7 of 11 Printed on 3/30/2023
Council and Authorities Concurrent
Call and Notice of Special Meeting
Stadium Authority
Meeting Agenda April 4, 2023
6.C.2 Report from the Stadium Authority for Action Regarding Stadium Manager’s Request to Execute Agreement with West Coast Turf to Supply and Deliver Sod and Related Installation Services at Levi’s Stadium
23-315
1. Approve the Stadium Manager’s request to
execute an agreement with West Coast Turf to
supply and deliver sod and related installation
services at Levi’s Stadium for a three-year
period beginning April 1, 2023 through March
31, 2026, in an amount not exceed $1,600,000
per contract year for a total not to exceed
amount of $4,800,000 over the three-year
period, subject to budget appropriations; and
2. Authorize the Executive Director to approve the
Stadium Manager’s exercise of the option to
extend the agreement with the same basic
terms and conditions for two additional
one-year periods, subject to budget
appropriations.
Recommendation:
6.D Action on Request Submitted by the Stadium Manager for Retroactive Approval of Incurred Expenses for Non-NFL Events Related to Marketing, Networking, and Travel and Entertainment Activities
6.D.1 Request from the Stadium Manager for Retroactive Approval of Incurred Expenses for Non-NFL Events-Related Marketing, Networking, and Travel and Entertainment Activities
23-370
6.D.2 Report from the Stadium Authority for Action on Stadium Manager’s Request for Retroactive Approval of Incurred
Expenses for Non-NFL Events-Related Marketing, Networking, and Travel and Entertainment Activities
23-371
1. Approve the Stadium Manager’s request for
retroactive approval of expenses incurred by the
Stadium Manager on behalf of the Stadium
Authority in an amount up to $44,162 for the FY
2022/23 Non-NFL Events-related marketing,
networking, and travel and entertainment activities,
including client entertainment with alcohol,
described in this report.
Recommendation:
City of Santa Clara Page 8 of 11 Printed on 3/30/2023
Council and Authorities Concurrent
Call and Notice of Special Meeting
Stadium Authority
Meeting Agenda April 4, 2023
PUBLIC PRESENTATIONS
[This item is reserved for persons to address the Council or authorities on any matter not on the agenda that is within the subject matter jurisdiction of the City or Authorities. The law does not permit action on, or extended discussion of, any item not on the agenda except under special circumstances. The governing body, or staff, may briefly respond to statements made or questions posed, and appropriate body may request staff to report back at a subsequent meeting. Although not required, please submit to the City Clerk your name and subject matter on the speaker card available in the Council Chambers.]
CONSENT ITEMS PULLED FOR DISCUSSION
PUBLIC HEARING/GENERAL BUSINESS
Discussion and Potential Action on Request from the Office of Assemblymember Evan Low to Support ACA 5
7. 23-477
Recommendation: Staff makes no recommendation.
8. Public Hearing: FY23/24 DRAFT Annual Action Plan for the Use of Federal Housing and Urban Development Grant Funds
23-180
1. Approve the 2023-2024 DRAFT Annual Action
Plan, and direct staff to incorporate all public
comment into the final version to be presented to
council on May 9, 2023.
Recommendation:
9. 23-135 Receive Silicon Valley Power Quarterly Update Note and file the Silicon Valley Power Quarterly
Update.
Recommendation:
10. Action on Resolution for an Exception to the 180 Day Waiting Period to Appoint Retired Annuitant, Mark Giovannetti, A Retired Annuitant To Serve as Temporary Extra Help (Government
Code Sections 7522.56 and 21224) in the Finance Department to Perform Work as a Purchasing Division Manager
23-439
Alternative 1: Adopt the attached Resolution for an
Exception to the 180 Day Waiting Period To Appoint,
Mark Giovannetti, A Retired Annuitant To Serve as
Temporary Extra Help (Government Code Sections
7522.56 and 21224) in the Finance Department to
Perform Work as a Purchasing Division Manager
Recommendation:
WRITTEN PETITION (COUNCIL POLICY 030) SUBMITTED BY THE PUBLIC/COUNCIL City of Santa Clara Page 9 of 11 Printed on 3/30/2023
Council and Authorities Concurrent
Call and Notice of Special Meeting
Stadium Authority
Meeting Agenda April 4, 2023
11. Action on a Written Petition (Council Policy 030), Submitted by Mayor Gillmor Requesting to Place an Agenda Item on a Future Council Meeting for Council to Consider a Subpoena and
Compel Production of a Full and Complete Set of FIFA World Cup 2026 Levi Stadium, Santa Clara Documents from the San Francisco 49er Management Company, Bay Area Host
Committee or other 49er Entity as Appropriate
23-478
Recommendation: Staff makes no recommendation.
REPORTS OF MEMBERS AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES
CITY MANAGER/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT
23-497 Tentative Meeting Agenda Calendar (TMAC)
ADJOURNMENT
The next regular scheduled meeting is on Tuesday, April 18, 2022 in the City Hall Council Chambers.
City of Santa Clara Page 10 of 11 Printed on 3/30/2023
Council and Authorities Concurrent
Meeting
Meeting Agenda April 4, 2023
The time limit within which to commence any lawsuit or legal challenge to any quasi-adjudicative decision made by the City is governed by Section 1094.6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, unless a shorter limitation period is specified by any other provision. Under Section 1094.6, any lawsuit or legal challenge to any quasi-adjudicative decision made by the City must be filed no later than the 90th day following the date on which such decision becomes final. Any lawsuit or legal challenge, which is not filed within that 90-day period, will be barred. If a person wishes to challenge the nature of the above section in court, they may be limited to raising only those issues they or someone else raised at the meeting described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Santa Clara, at or prior to the meeting. In addition, judicial challenge may be limited or barred where the interested party has not sought and exhausted all available administrative remedies.
STREAMING SERVICES: As always, the public may view the meetings on SantaClaraCA.gov, Santa Clara City Television (Comcast cable channel 15 or AT&T U-verse channel 99), or the livestream on the City’s YouTube channel or Facebook page.
Note: The public cannot participate in the meeting through these livestreaming methods; livestreaming capabilities may be disrupted at times, viewers may always view and participate in meetings in-person and via Zoom as noted on the agenda.
AB23 ANNOUNCEMENT: Members of the Santa Clara Stadium Authority, Sports and Open Space Authority and Housing Authority are entitled to receive $30 for each attended meeting.
Note: The City Council and its associated Authorities meet as separate agencies but in a concurrent manner. Actions taken should be considered actions of only the identified policy body.
LEGEND: City Council (CC); Stadium Authority (SA); Sports and Open Space Authority (SOSA); Housing Authority (HA); Successor Agency to the City of Santa Clara Redevelopment Agency (SARDA); Bayshore North Project Enhancement Authority (BNPEA); Public Facilities Financing Corporation (PFFC) Public contact was made by posting the Council agenda on the City’s official-notice bulletin board outside City Hall Council Chambers. A complete agenda packet is available on the City’s website and in the City Clerk’s Office at least 72 hours prior to a Regular Meeting and 24 hours prior to a Special Meeting. A hard copy of any agenda report may be requested by contacting the City Clerk’s Office at (408) 615-2220, email [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> or at the public information desk at any City of Santa Clara public library.
If a member of the public submits a speaker card for any agenda items, their name will appear in the Minutes. If no speaker card is submitted, the Minutes will reflect "Public Speaker." In accordance with the requirements of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 ("ADA"), the City of Santa Clara will not discriminate against qualified individuals with disabilities on the basis of disability in its services, programs, or activities, and will ensure that all existing facilities will be made accessible to the maximum extent feasible. The City of Santa Clara will generally, upon request, provide appropriate aids and services leading to effective communication for qualified persons with disabilities including those with speech, hearing, or vision impairments so they can participate equally in the City’s programs, services, and activities. The City of Santa Clara will make all reasonable modifications to policies and programs to ensure that people with disabilities have an equal opportunity to enjoy all of its programs, services, and activities.
Agendas and other written materials distributed during a public meeting that are public record will be made available by the City in an appropriate alternative format. Contact the City Clerk’s Office at 1 408-615-2220 with your request for an alternative format copy of the agenda or other written materials.
Individuals who require an auxiliary aid or service for effective communication, or any other disability-related modification of policies or procedures, or other accommodation, in order to participate in a program, service, or activity of the City of Santa Clara, should contact the City’s ADA Coordinator at 408-615-3000 as soon as possible but no later than 48 hours before the scheduled event.
City of Santa Clara Page 11 of 11 Printed on 3/30/2023
MEETING DISCLOSURES
City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
23-438 Agenda Date: 4/4/2023
SUBJECT
Conference with Real Property Negotiators (CC)
Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.8
Property: 2435 Lafayette Street, Santa Clara, California 95050 (APN: 224-35-020) City Negotiator: City Manager (or designee)
Negotiating Counterparties: Wesco Properties, Inc., Home Depot Under Negotiation: Purchase/Sale/Exchange/Lease of Real Property (terms and conditions, including, price and terms of payment)
City of Santa Clara Page 1 of 1 Printed on 3/30/2023
powered by Legistar™
City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
23-146 Agenda Date: 4/4/2023
REPORT TO COUNCIL
SUBJECT
Project Update and Action on a Resolution Adopting the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority's Central Bikeway Feasibility Study
COUNCIL PILLAR
Deliver and Enhance High Quality Efficient Services and Infrastructure
BACKGROUND
In 2018, the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA), adopted the Santa Clara Countywide Bicycle Plan that includes “bicycle superhighways” which are high quality, uninterrupted bikeways separated from motor vehicles that travel long distances across the county. In practice, the bicycle superhighway network will consist of on-street bikeways and off-street trails that provide efficient options for traveling greater than four miles.
On June 4, 2020, with grant funding from the State of California, the VTA Board of Directors authorized the Central Bikeway Study to move forward and be one of the first bicycle superhighway projects in the County. This study seeks to provide an east-west route to travel long distances and provide improved access to disadvantaged communities and transit stops (i.e. BART, Caltrain and VTA bus routes) while connecting the Lawrence Caltrain Station (City of Santa Clara/City of Sunnyvale) to the Berryessa BART Station (City of San Jose). VTA established a project website for the Central Bikeway Study (<https://www.vta.org/projects/central-bikeway-study>) The purpose of the study is to identify a preferred alignment including:
· Four rounds of public engagement
· An alternative and feasibility analysis which will review several different alignments · Creation of a Final Feasibility Study Report and 10 percent Basis of Design Concept Plans
DISCUSSION
After two years of outreach, public engagement, interagency coordination, and alternatives analyses, the Central Bikeway Feasibility Study Final Report (Attachment 1) and concept design is complete.
Based on community feedback and the alternatives analysis, VTA and City staff are recommending that the Central Bikeway corridor be established along the El Camino Real (Santa Clara), The Alameda (Santa Clara and San Jose) Hedding Street (San Jose), Taylor Street (San Jose) and Mabury Road (San Jose) as shown on the Project Location Map (Attachment 2). This alignment is 10 miles long and is the best performing alternative based on the criteria established within the Central Bikeway Study: Equity, Project Compatibility, Community-Desired Project, Sustainability, Access, Joy, Safety and Feasibility.
Within Santa Clara, on the El Camino Real, the conceptual design includes a sidewalk level bikeway City of Santa Clara Page 1 of 3 Printed on 3/30/2023
powered by Legistar™
23-146 Agenda Date: 4/4/2023
which extends the sidewalk into the parking lane (Attachment 3) and several bicycle friendly Protected Intersections to separate bicyclists from vehicles. This design is consistent with the highquality, protected bikeway recommended in the City of Santa Clara Bicycle Plan. The VTA also recently submitted for a 2023 United States Department of Transportation Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability and Equity (RAISE) Grant for the Central Bikeway project. If received, this grant opportunity would provide funding for $25 million to support the design and environmental work necessary to advance the project. The City of Santa Clara also submitted a letter of support for the VTA’s grant application.
Staff will provide a presentation to the City Council with additional background and details of the Central Bikeway Feasibility Study and requests that the Council adopt a resolution (Attachment 4) in support of the findings of the Central Bikeway Feasibility Study.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The adoption of the Central Bikeway Study Feasibility Final Report is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review pursuant to Section 15262 of the California Public Resource Code. This is a planning and feasibility study only and future environmental action will be considered for the project.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no immediate fiscal impact resulting from adoption of the Central Bikeway Feasibility Study Final Report. However, there will be a future design, construction, and operations and maintenance costs associated with implementation of future phases of the study. Currently, there is no dedicated funding source to implement the study.
COORDINATION
This report has been coordinated with the City Attorney’s Office and the Valley Transportation Authority. On January 24, 2022, the City’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC) reviewed and supported the findings of the Central Bikeway Study.
PUBLIC CONTACT
Public contact was made by posting the Council agenda on the City’s official-notice bulletin board outside City Hall Council Chambers. A complete agenda packet is available on the City’s website and in the City Clerk’s Office at least 72 hours prior to a Regular Meeting and 24 hours prior to a Special Meeting. A hard copy of any agenda report may be requested by contacting the City Clerk’s Office at (408) 615-2220, email [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> or at the public information desk at any City of Santa Clara public library.
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution adopting the Central Bikeway Study Feasibility Final Report.
Reviewed by: Craig Mobeck, Director of Public Works
Approved by: Office of the City Manager
ATTACHMENTS
1. Central Bikeway Feasibility Study Final Report, February 2022
2. Project Location Map
3. El Camino Real Conceptual Rendering
City of Santa Clara Page 2 of 3 Printed on 3/30/2023
powered by Legistar™
23-146 Agenda Date: 4/4/2023
4. Resolution
City of Santa Clara Page 3 of 3 Printed on 3/30/2023
powered by Legistar™
Central Bikeway Feasibility Study
and Alternatives Analysis
FEBRUARY 2022
CENTRAL BIKEWAY .
01 The Vision 03
02 Santa Clara and San José Today 09
03A Community-Based Process 15
04Central Bikeway Alternatives 29
06AppendicesA. Basis of Design PlansB. Gaps, Barriers, and OpportunitiesC. Alternatives Analysis + EvaluationD. Implementation Strategy E. Community Engagement
a. CBO Selectionb. Outreach Strategyc. Engagement Principlesd. Round 01 Summarye. Round 02 Summaryf. Round 03 Summary 05Recommended Alternatives 43
SETTING A VISIONUNDERSTANDING SANTA CLARA AND SAN JOSÉDEVELOPING CENTRAL BIKEWAY PROJECT PARTNERSCentral Bikeway project partners include:
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSƗʎʡ͝ڂ̵̿́ʽɟɂͮڂǵ͝ڂˍɟɎڂȻΰڂͮʎɟڂƉǵ˱ͮǵڂHˍǵ̿ǵڂǃǵˍˍɟΰڂƗ̿ǵ˱̵́̿ͮ͝ǵͮʡ́˱ڂͽͮʎ́̿ʡͮΰڂԲǃƗԼڂʡͮʎڂɿͽ˱Ɏʡ˱ʄڂ͝ͽ̵̵́̿ͮڂfrom a Caltrans Sustainable Planning Grant.Project Development Team:Brent Pearse, VTAKaren Gauss, VTADeanna Bolio, VTALauren Ledbetter, VTACarol Shariat, City of Santa Clara Jonathan Yee, City of Santa ClaraJohn Brazil, City of San JoséNicky Danty, City of San JoséEllen Talbo, Santa Clara CountyBen Aghegnehu, Santa Clara CountyElliot Goodrich, CaltransGreg Curry, CaltransConsultant Team: Alta Planning + Design HMH EngineersHexagon Transportation ConsultantsBike-minded Design Consulting B.V.Community Based Organizations:Ɖʡˍʡɂ́˱ڂǃǵˍˍɟΰڂ@ʡɂΰɂˍɟڂH́ǵˍʡͮʡ́˱ڂԲƉǃ@HԼġͽʽɟ̿ɟ͝ڂ˪^̵̿ɟ͝ǵ̿ʡǵ͝ڂƗ́˪ǵ˱Ɏ́ڂɂɂʡ̇˱ڂԲġ^ƗԼͽǵɎǵˍͽ̵ɟڂżʡΞɟ̿ڂŴǵ̿˅ڂH́˱͝ɟ̿Ξǵ˱ɂΰڂԲżŴHԼ
TABLE OF CONTENTS
~
anta Cla ra Val~ey
Transportation
Authority
Solutions that move you
·li:tltrans·
City of
Santa Clara
The Center of What's Possible
CITYOF A
SANJOSE
CAPITAL OF SILICON VALLEY
I
THE VISION
A Vision for the RegionThis Plan builds upon the vision set forth in ǃƗ՟͝ڂH́ͽ˱ͮΰʡɎɟڂ@ʡɂΰɂˍɟڂŴˍǵ˱ڂԲԇԅԆԏԼڂǵ˱ɎڂBicycle Superhighway Implementation Plan ԻԇԅԇԆԼհڂʎʡɂʎڂɟ˱Ξʡ͝ʡ́˱͝ڂƉǵ˱ͮǵڂHˍǵ̿ǵڂH́ͽ˱ͮΰڂǵ͝ڂan area that is served by a countywide bicycle network that is safe, convenient, and connected, enabling people of all ages and abilities to bike to work, school, shopping, transit, and elsewhere. The Countywide Bicycle Plan identifies a network of approximately 950 miles of Cross County Bicycle Corridors (CCBCs), as well as seventeen corridors for potential bicycle superhighways -- CCBCs that provide lowfriction, long distance, unbroken bicycle travel, separated from motorists.The Central Bikeway is one of the first bicycle superhighway projects to move forward and work toward completing this monumental vision.
WHY CONNECT SANTA CLARA AND SAN JOSÉ? Santa Clara and San José include highly populated areas, employment centers, and key destinations, with plans for expansion through numerous planned development projects. The study area has several important transit stations and services including the recently opened Berryessa / North San José BART Station and Santa Clara Transit Station. As part of the Countywide Bicycle Plan process, community members repeatedly commented on the need for east-west, low-stress bikeways in the region. While there are several north-south regional trails that pass through the study area, there are few comfortable east-west bicycle routes that connect these two cities. The Central Bikeway will close this key gap in the regional bikeway network, providing opportunities and improved access to disadvantaged communities. Through its connections to key CCBCs and transit stops like BART and Caltrain, the Central Bikeway will provide a key regional connection to destinations in Santa Clara County and beyond. Eventually, the Central Bikeway is proposed to connect west through the City of Sunnyvale.
The Central Bikeway corridor and study area
ۋ Study Areaۋ Central Bikeway
ۋ Trail
01 THE VISION
THE VISION 3
THE VISION 5
Central Bikeway Vision and GoalsThe Central Bikeway project is driven by a project vision and seven project goals: Equity, Project Compatibility, Community-Desired Project, Sustainable Mobility, Access, Joy, and Safety. Developed in collaboration with project partners, community partners, and the public, the vision and goals were used to guide the development of project alternatives and identify one preferred Central Bikeway alignment.
CENTRAL BIKEWAY VISION To create a bicycle superhighway that will provide a joyful, continuous, connected, and comfortable bikeway between Santa Clara and North San JoséBike riders at Viva Calle San José AccessA bikeway that expands travel choices, increasing access from local neighborhoods to transit stations and major destinations. JoyA bikeway that provides a continuous route through engaging landscapes, expanding travel choices that increase access from local neighborhoods to natural areas, parks, and elevated viewsheds.SafetyA bikeway that will provide a safe route that is separated from vehicular traffic.
EquityA bikeway that improves access to opportunities for traditionally underserved communities, especially in low-income or communities of color.Project CompatibilityA bikeway that will be compatible with previous and existing planning efforts.Community-Desired ProjectA bikeway that connects to community-identified destinations and serves community-identified desires and needs.Sustainable Mobility A bikeway that provides an efficient and continuous route for people to bicycle in a low-stress environment, expanding connections to the existing and planned active transportation network. 4 CENTRAL BIKEWAY FEASIBILITY STUDY | FEBRUARY 2022
8 0
0 ----------------------------------G
0 Bicycle Superhighways
Around the WorldWhile bicycle superhighways are new for Santa Clara County, there are numerous examples of successful bicycle superhighway networks around the world that make bicycling a safe, convenient, and normal everyday commute option.
What is a Bicycle Superhighway?Bicycle superhighways are low-stress, accessible, direct, and continuous routes that provide an efficient option for long-distance bike travel. They connect major commercial and employment destinations to local neighborhoods, nearby cities, and regional and local bikeways to create a consistent and accessible network.A NEW MODEL FOR SANTA CLARA COUNTYThe Central Bikeway will take the bicycle superhighway model and adapt it to an urban context. Because the Central Bikeway will be built along the existing roadway network, it will require stops at intersections and will not be fully grade-separated or uninterrupted. However, the Central Bikeway will be designed to provide a comfortable and accessible experience for users of all ages and abilities. The Central Bikeway will include design features such as physical separation from vehicular and pedestrian traffic, protected intersections, and features to minimize delay for bicyclists.
KEY FEATURESBicycle superhighways are...ACCESSIBLEThey are the backbone of the regional bicycle network.DIRECTThey connect key destinations with few detours and stops.DEDICATEDThey are mostly separated from vehicular and pedestrian traffic.LOW EFFORTThey have limited interruptions and low grades.ATTRACTIVEThey provide a positive and safe user experience, and include high quality materials and amenities.
A route with few interruptions and high quality lighting A clear route that is separated from vehicular traffic Photo Credit: Jack
Thurston, Flickr
COPENHAGEN CYCLE SUPERHIGHWAY NETWORKCopenhagen has an inter-municipal cycle superhighway network of 466 miles spanning across 30 municipalities in the Greater Copenhagen region. Cycle superhighways prioritize commuters by connecting residential areas, employment centers, and schools with each other and with public transit.
If San José wants to take climate change seriously, we need to put effective non-car infrastructure first.COMMUNITY MEMBER “
LONDON CYCLEWAY NETWORKLondon has an extensive urban cycle superhighway network within the boundaries of Greater London. The cycle superhighway network consists of a network of protected bikeways, off-street bikeways, and bicycle boulevards connecting the center of the city to the suburbs. 6 CENTRAL BIKEWAY FEASIBILITY STUDY | FEBRUARY 2022 THE VISION 7 Photo Credit: Bike-minded
Design Consulting
' ' o-:-r,:.o ' ' :
'
---· I
I I I I I I I I I I I I
CONTEXT
Project AreaThe Central Bikeway study area covers nearly 14 square miles between Santa Clara and North San José (Figure 1Լձڂľ˱ɂɟڂɂ́˪̵ˍɟͮɟɎհڂthe Central Bikeway will connect the Santa Clara and College Park Caltrain stations, VTA light rail, and the Berryessa BART station, as well as several shared-use paths, including the Guadalupe River Trail, Upper Penitencia Trail, San Tomas Aquino Creek Trail, and the future Coyote Creek Trail extension.
In addition to existing transit stations and trails, there are also numerous schools, parks, employment centers, and commercial areas including the San José International Airport, Santa Clara University, and commercial destinations along El Camino Real.Just beyond the study area, Downtown San José serves as a key employment and commercial destination, with San José State University located a few bocks away. See ̵̵ɟ˱ɎʡΫڂ@յڂǵ̵͝հڂ@ǵ̿̿ʡɟ̿͝հڂǵ˱Ɏڂľ̵̵́̿ͮͽ˱ʡͮʡɟ͝ڂfor more information on existing conditions in the study area. ʡʄͽ̿ɟڂԆյ Central Bikeway Study Area
San Jose
International
Airport
Walsh Ave
Hedding St
Taylor St
Maburry Rd
White Rd
El Camino Real
Central Expressway
Guadalupe River Park
Guadalupe River Trail
C oyote Creek Trail
SANTACLARA
DOWNTOWN
SAN JOSE
SAN JOSE
SUNNYVALE
BerryessaNorth San JoseBART Station
LawrenceStation
Milpitas
BART Station
College
Park
Station
San Jose
Diridon Station
Santa ClaraStation
Santa Clara
University
Levi
Stadium
£101
¥680
¥280 £101
£101
¥680
¥880
¥880
Ã82
Ã87
San Tomas Aquino Creek Trail
ۋ Study Area
Existing Trails Proposed Trails
02 SANTA CLARA AND SAN JOSÉ TODAY
9 ~1
1.f- l
·· -o ~--.-.
--
I -
I
I"
7 ',,,
... ...... _,
I
I
I
I
I
I
' I
I
I
I
I
10 CENTRAL BIKEWAY FEASIBILITY STUDY | FEBRUARY 2022 SANTA CLARA AND SAN JOSÉ TODAY 11 Who Will Use the Central Bikeway?Approximately 208,000 people live in the area around the Central Bikeway, with an average population density of 8,967 people per square mile. By 2040, the population is expected to increase to 14,085 people per square mile.The area is diverse and the languages spoken most frequently are English, Spanish, Vietnamese, and Chinese.1Ԇڂ ԇԅԆԇՔԇԅԆԍ ˪ɟ̿ʡɂǵ˱ H́˪˪ͽ˱ʡͮΰ Ɖͽ̿Ξɟΰ ԋՈΰɟǵ̿^ͮ͝ʡ˪ǵͮɟ The languages spoken most frequently are
English, Spanish, Vietnamese, and Chinese.
I believe that biking and good public transport is one of the ways to equalize and improve life and health for people in general.COMMUNITY MEMBER “ What Will the Study Area Look Like in the Future?
The Central Bikeway study area is undergoing rapid land use and transit changes (Figure 2ԼձڂThere are a number of capital improvement transportation projects planned within or adjacent to the study area, including the planned U.S. 101 De La Cruz/Trimble Interchange Redesign, the future U.S. 101 Berryessa Interchange, and several bicycle and pedestrian crossing improvement projects. In addition, the City of Santa Clara is continuing to work on Specific Plan for El Camino Real and there are numerous pending development projects in the study area. A future BART station will be built adjacent to the existing Santa Clara Station. ʡʄͽ̿ɟڂԇյ Ŵˍǵ˱˱ɟɎ Ɨ̿ǵ˱͝ʡͮ ǵ˱Ɏ SɟΞɟˍ̵́˪ɟ˱ͮ Ŵ̿́ʽɟɂͮ͝
Levi
Stadium
San Jose
International
Airport
Santa Clara
University
San Tomas Aquino Creek Trail
Piedmont Rd
Lawrence Expy
Berryesa RdMabury Rd
Capitol Ave
Kifer Rd
Walsh Ave Airport Blvd
Coleman Ave
Hedding St Taylor St
El Camino Real
D
e La Cruz Blv
d
B
o
wers Ave
S
a
n
Tomas
Ex
p
y
Central Expressway
Guadalupe
River Park
G
u
a
dalupe River
Tra
i
l
C
oyo t e Creek Trail
SANTACLARA
DOWNTOWN
SAN JOSE
SAN JOSE
NNYVALE
Berryessa
North San Jose
BART Station
e
Milpitas
BART Station
College
Park
Station
San Jose
Santa Clara
Station
£01
¥680
£101
¥680
¥880
¥880
Ã87
Coyote Creek Extension and Creek Overcrossing
10th & 11th Complete Streets
6th & Taylor Intersection Redesign
Bridge Widening
Trimble Interchange
Market Park Redevelopment
Coleman Highline & Gateway Crossings
Terminal B Expansion
NVIDIA Campus
There are also numerous pending development projects, which together will provide:
10,255 357,000 FT2 8,500,000 FT2
Additional Housing
Units
More Retail
Space
More Commercial
Space
ۉ Transportation Projectsۉ Development Projectsۋ Future Development The study area is racially diverse
46%
36%
24%
5%
3%
12%
are Asian
are White/Caucasian
are other race
are Hispanic or Latino
aremulti-racial
are Black/African American
!gill
12 CENTRAL BIKEWAY FEASIBILITY STUDY | FEBRUARY 2022 SANTA CLARA AND SAN JOSÉ TODAY 13 How Do People Currently Get Around?
78 %
11 %
6 %
3 %
1.4 %
2012-2016 American Community Survey 5-year Estimate
EXISTING AND PROPOSED BICYCLE NETWORKFigure 3 illustrates existing and proposed bikeways within and adjacent to the study area, as identified in the City of San José Better Bike Plan and City of Santa Clara Bicycle Master Plan as well as the CCBCs identified in the Countywide Bicycle Plan. The Central Bikeway will build upon these planned facilities to close existing gaps within the ʡʄͽ̿ɟڂԉյ ^Ϋʡͮ͝ʡ˱ʄ ǵ˱Ɏ Ŵ̵̿́́͝ɟɎ @ʡɂΰɂˍɟ ĩɟͮ́̿˅
£101
¥680
¥280 £101
£101
¥680
¥880
¥880
Ã87
Levi
Stadium
San Jose
International
Airport
Santa Clara
University
San Tomas Aquino Creek Trail
Piedmont Rd
Lawrence Expy
Berryesa Rd
Mabury Rd
Capitol Ave
Kifer Rd
Walsh Ave
Airport Blvd
Coleman Ave
Hedding St
Taylor St El Camino Real
De La Cruz Blvd
Bowers Ave
San Tomas Expy
Central Expressway
Guadalupe
River Park
Guadalupe River Trail
Coyo t e Creek Trail
SANTACLARA
DOWNTOWN
SAN JOSE
SAN JOSE
SUNNYVALE
Berryessa
North San Jose
BART Station
Lawrence
Station
Milpitas
BART Station
College
Park
Station
San Jose
Diridon Station
Santa Clara
Station
greater bicycle network, especially along key routes without existing facilities that have been identified as priority CCBCs. Notable gaps in the existing bikeway network include connections around Berryessa BART station, the east side of San José airport, and eastwest corridors through Santa Clara.TRANSIT RIDERSHIPThe project study area contains a high number of local and regional transit services. Transit services in the area include VTA bus service (Rapid 500, Rapid 522, Frequent 22, Frequent 60, Frequent 61, Local 59, Local 53, Ė́ɂǵˍڂԇԆԼհڂǃƗڂˍʡʄʎͮڂ̿ǵʡˍڂԲ̿ɟɟ˱հڂˍ@ͽɟհڂǵ˱ɎڂOrange lines), Caltrain, and Bay Area Rapid Ɨ̿ǵ˱͝ʡͮڂԲ@żƗԼձڂƗʎɟ̿ɟڂǵ̿ɟڂǵˍ́͝ڂ͝ɟΞɟ̿ǵˍڂcorporate shuttles that serve residents of the study area. Figure 4 illustrates VTA light rail and bus ridership by stop.
Cycling needs to be an easy, fast, and most importantly, safe method for almost everyone to commute and shop.COMMUNITY MEMBER ʡʄͽ̿ɟڂԊյ @ͽ͝ ǵ˱Ɏ Ėʡʄʎͮ żǵʡˍ żʡɎɟ̿͝ʎʡ̵
Levi
Stadium
San Jose
International
Airport
Santa Clara
University
San Tomas Aquino Creek Trail
Piedmont Rd
Lawrence Expy
Berryesa Rd
Mabury Rd
Capitol Ave
Kifer Rd
Walsh Ave
Airport Blvd
Coleman Ave
Hedding St
Taylor St El Camino Real
De La Cruz Blvd
Bowers Ave
San Tomas Expy
Central Expressway
Guadalupe
River Park
Guadalupe River Trail
Coyo t e Creek Trail
MILPITAS
SANTACLARA
DOWNTOWN
SAN JOSE
SAN JOSE
SUNNYVALE
Berryessa
North San Jose
BART Station
Lawrence
Station
Milpitas
BART Station
College
Park
Station
San Jose
Diridon Station
Santa Clara
Station
£101
Ã237
¥680
¥280 £101
£101
¥680
¥880
¥880
Ã
Ã87
Transit hub connections really help the everyday riders like myself.COMMUNITY MEMBER Bus Ridership Weekday BoardingsԻɟȻ̿ͽǵ̿ΰڂԇԅԇԅԼLight Rail Train Ridership Weekday Boardings ԅՔԆԅڂżʡɎɟ̿͝ԆԆՔԋԅԋԆՔԆԅԅԆԅԆՔԇԅԋԅՔԆԅԅڂżʡɎɟ̿͝ԆԅԆՔԍԅԅԍԅԆՔԆհԊԅԅ “
“
Existing Bikeway
Class I Shared-Use Path Class II Bicycle Lane Class III Bicycle Route Class IIIB Bicycle Boulevard Class IV Separated Bikeway Proposed Bikeways
Class I Shared-Use Path
Class II Bicycle Lane Class III Bicycle Route Class IIIB Bicycle Boulevard Class IV Separated Bikeway Cross Country Bicycle Corridors
Corridor
.. --
I 21 I [.! '-------l7 :
'
0 O 0
•
• • •
• • •
ڂHľġġƣĩÄƗǓՔ@Ɖ^SڂŴżľH^ƉƉڂ 15
OVERVIEW
Who Did We Partner With?VTA partnered with three community-based organizations (CBOs) to help lead meaningful outreach and engagement with local communities with a focus on reaching traditionally underrepresented community members. The CBOs served as the project’s anchor institutions in a paid role to help lead local outreach and engagement. ġ^ƗڂԻġƣć^ż^Ɖڂ^ġŴż^ƉżÄƉڂƗľġĩSľڂHHÄńĩԼMETA is a vibrant team of well trained, highly skilled peer educators and community workers that serve as a bridge between institutions and residents. META works with and represents low-income people and immigrants across the City of San José in English and Spanish using social meda, phone calls, messaging, pop-ups, and events. Meet the CBO PartnersWhat has been your role within the Central Bikeway and what do you consider the most important outcome of your involvement?Our role within the Central Bikeway Project was to conduct outreach to our hardest to reach community. We made sure to inform them, to listen to their feedback, and to encourage them to participate in helping pick out and design the bike route that would best fit their needs.
What is a message you would like to share about what the Central Bikeway could bring to the community?A route that is safe, secure and enjoyable. Most importantly it will be a route that was chosen and designed by the community for their families and children to enjoy. 03 ڂHľġġƣĩÄƗǓՔBASED PROCESS
16 CENTRAL BIKEWAY FEASIBILITY STUDY | FEBRUARY 2022 ڂHľġġƣĩÄƗǓՔ@Ɖ^SڂŴżľH^ƉƉ 17 ƣSĖƣŴ^ڂżÄǃ^żڂŴżČڂHľĩƉ^żǃĩHǓڂԻżŴHԼGRPC is a nonprofit that advocates for green communities with a primary focus on the Guadalupe River Park Trail and Gardens in San José and operates through social media, volunteers, and events.
ƉÄĖÄHľĩڂǃĖĖ^Ǔڂ@ÄHǓHĖ^ڂHľĖÄƗÄľĩڂԻƉǃ@HԼThe purpose of the SVBC is to create a healthy community, environment, and economy through bicycling for people who live, work, or play in San Mateo and Santa Clara Counties. Their mission states “We envision a community that values, includes, and encourages bicycling for all purposes for all people. Our mission and vision cannot be achieved without making our cultural humility and social justice central to our work.” What has been your role within the Central Bikeway and what do you consider the most important outcome of your involvement?The GRPC has served as a nexus between the community and the Central Bikeway project, as we have worked to disseminate information regarding project meetings, project status, and Central Bikeway updates to residents of Santa Clara County. Our extensive social media and park advertisement efforts have informed thousands of residents about this incredible Active Transportation Project. The most important component of the Conservancy’s involvement was ensuring that the community’s preferences were heard and subsequently considered in the Bikeway Design Process.
What has been your role within the Central Bikeway and what do you consider the most important outcome of your involvement?SVBC’s role has been to help ensure that diverse voices are included in the development of the project. That role stems from one of the most important outcomes of the project: That a project is delivered best when the concerns and needs of communities it is present in is well represented. SVBC is glad to have been able to do outreach and involve community groups and members as a part of the entire process, in particular its partnership with CBOs - GRPC and META LLC.
What is a message you would like to share about what the Central Bikeway could bring to the community?The Central Bikeway presents an exciting opportunity to increase bike ridership and transportation connectivity in Santa Clara County. This project gives residents multimodal transportation options, encouraging individuals to select an environmentally considerate, healthy, and joyful alternative to car commuting. With hundreds of thousands of bike rides along the Guadalupe River Trail annually, we see the Central Bikeway project as a way to encourage more park users to connect with nature and each other. The community will greatly benefit from having new bike infrastructure that will make riding pleasant, well-connected, and safe.
What is a message you would like to share about what the Central Bikeway could bring to the community?The Central Bikeway will provide a safe and high-quality transportation option for commuters, people who want to run errands by bike, and recreational or weekend bicycle riders. And, importantly, it will be the first bicycle superhighway, setting the stage for many more to come. This high-quality facility will ensure that biking is made more joyful and inviting for anyone to ride more and more often! 18 CENTRAL BIKEWAY FEASIBILITY STUDY | FEBRUARY 2022
Engagement PrinciplesThe project team created a set of five engagement principles to guide all engagement efforts for the project. The principles were co-created with the CBO partners.
ACTIVELY REACH UNDERREPRESENTED COMMUNITIESInclude all communities in the outreach process, with a particular focus on groups that have been excluded, underserved, or underrepresented in the planning processBUILD TRUST AND RESPECT WITH THE COMMUNITYHonor the community’s expertise, time, energy, and needs and create an open and honest dialogue between all community membersMAKE IT RELEVANTConnect the project to the community’s current and long-term needsYOU SPEAK, WE LISTENCommit to actively listening to community members’ needs, create a culture of participation and openness, and engage in shared decisionmaking to ensure all voices are considered and heardDON’T LOSE SIGHT OF JOYThe community engagement process must be fun and joyful for all who participate Community members stop by to learn about the Central
Bikeway during a pop up event.
Help out communities and people that have been ignored.COMMUNITY MEMBER “
ڂHľġġƣĩÄƗǓՔ@Ɖ^SڂŴżľH^ƉƉڂ 19
I
I 0 I I I 0
I I
:; :;
20 CENTRAL BIKEWAY FEASIBILITY STUDY | FEBRUARY 2022
Engagement Summary by RoundThe Central Bikeway engagement process was divided into four rounds between fall 2020 and ʡ˱ͮɟ̿ڂԇԅԇԆՔԇԅԇԇձڂƉɟɟڂ̵̵ɟ˱ɎʡΫڂ^յڂH́˪˪ͽ˱ʡͮΰڂ˱^ʄǵʄɟ˪ɟ˱ͮڂɿ́̿ڂ˪́̿ɟڂʡ˱ɿ́̿˪ǵͮʡ́˱ڂ́˱ڂͮʎɟڂͮʎ̿ɟɟڂrounds of outreach. ż́ͽ˱ɎڂԆյڂĖʡͮ͝ɟ˱ڂՄڂ̿ǵ˪ɟFALL 2020 The first round of engagement sought to listen to the community’s vision and needs for the Central Bikeway and refine project goals to guide the project.ż́ͽ˱ɎڂԇյڂH́ˍˍǵȻ́̿ǵͮɟڂՄڂ^ΞǵˍͽǵͮɟEARLY 2021The second round of engagement shared three potential alternatives for the Central Bikeway and sought feedback on the community’s preferences and priorities between the three alternatives and bikeway types.ż́ͽ˱Ɏڂԉյڂżɟɿʡ˱ɟڂՄڂSɟ͝ʡʄ˱SUMMER 2021The third round of engagement shared the top ranked alternative from the evaluation process and sought feedback on potential design features and amenities. ż́ͽ˱ɎڂԊյڂʡ˱ǵˍʡφɟWINTER 2021The fourth round of engagement sought feedback from community members on the Draft Plan before finalizing the document.
How Did We Engage the Community?Ä˱ڂƉ̵̿ʡ˱ʄڂ́ɿڂԇԅԇԅհڂͮʎɟڂHľǃÄSՔԆԐڂ̵ǵ˱Ɏɟ˪ʡɂڂ̿ɟ͝ͽˍͮɟɎڂʡ˱ڂͮʎɟڂɎɟɂˍǵ̿ǵͮʡ́˱ڂ́ɿڂǵڂͮ͝ǵͮɟڂ́ɿڂɟ˪ɟ̿ʄɟ˱ɂΰձڂWith this, the State of California and many local jurisdictions implemented executive orders per Center for Disease Control guidelines to limit gatherings, practice social distancing, and even ʡ͝͝ͽɟɎڂǵڂͮ͝ǵΰڂǵͮڂʎ́˪ɟڂ˪ǵ˱ɎǵͮɟڂɎͽ̿ʡ˱ʄڂͮʎʡ͝ڂ̵̿́ʽɟɂͮ՟͝ڂ́ͽͮ̿ɟǵɂʎڂ͝ɂʎɟɎͽˍɟձڂˍͮʎ́ͽʄʎڂͮʎɟڂHľǃÄSՔԆԐڂpandemic presented challenges, innovative responses were utilized to uphold a robust public engagement process through a variety of virtual and socially distant in-person events described on the next page.
How Did We Raise Awareness About the Project?• Direct mailers • Social media posts
• Online noticing & e-newsletters
• E-mail list serves
• Ä˱Ո̵ɟ̿́͝˱ڂɟΞɟ˱ͮ͝ڂǵͮڂHľǃÄSՔԆԐڂͮɟͮ͝ʡ˱ʄڂǵ˱Ɏڂ
vaccination clinics and food banks
• Flyers in public areas and along the
preferred route in Round 3
• Posters on A-frames
• Local news stories
• Briefings and committee presentations
• All materials presented in four languages:
English, Spanish, Chinese, and Vietnamese
ڂHľġġƣĩÄƗǓՔ@Ɖ^SڂŴżľH^ƉƉڂ 21
r1
I I I I I I I I I I ~. I I I I I I I I I I I ~.
-
..
I I I I I I I I I I I I
•·
ڂHľġġƣĩÄƗǓՔ@Ɖ^SڂŴżľH^ƉƉڂ 23
By the Numbers
14 ̵̵́Ոͽ̵ڂɟΞɟ˱ͮ͝
6 ɂ́˪˪ͽ˱ʡͮΰڂ˪ɟɟͮʡ˱ʄ͝
131
ɂ́˪˪ͽ˱ʡͮΰڂ˪ɟɟͮʡ˱ʄڂ
attendees
1,711
ʡ˱Ո̵ɟ̿́͝˱ڂͮ́ͽɂʎڂ̵́ʡ˱ͮ͝
2,550
ɂ́˪̵ˍɟͮɟɎڂ͝ͽ̿Ξɟΰ͝
44,000+
́͝ɂʡǵˍڂ˪ɟɎʡǵڂͮ́ͽɂʎڂ
̵́ʡ˱ͮ͝
4 languages
ÄĩڂŴ^żƉľĩڂľƣƗż^H ڂ֕ڂENGAGEMENTDuring the first two rounds of engagement, META was out in the community providing critical support services during the pandemic. META distributed flyers at food and diaper distribution centers and while doing door-todoor vaccine outreach. In addition to distributing flyers, META spoke one-on-one with community members to guide people through the online survey and assist with completion. During the third round, the project team conducted in-person engagement at the City of San José’s Viva Calle event. ǃÄżƗƣĖڂŴľŴՔƣŴڂġ^^ƗÄĩƉSVBC and META attended multiple local community group virtual meetings to present about the project and invite attendees to take the online survey and spread the word. Neighborhood group meetings included Vecino Actovos, EMPUJE, Jovenes, ǃʡɟͮ˱ǵ˪ɟ͝ɟڂǃ́ˍͽ˱ͮǵ̿ΰڂ́ͽ˱Ɏǵͮʡ́˱ڂԲǃÄǃľԼհڂProject Access, Northside, and Kings Crossing neighborhood meetings. Additionally, SVBC led an outreach training for both GRPC and META constituents to inform participants about the Central Bikeway project and get them more involved in overall bicycle advocacy efforts.
WHO DID WE HEAR FROM?The study area is diverse and the Central Bikeway is trying to meet the needs of people who are not currently biking for their everyday travel needs, which historically has been women, non-binary, and people of color. Following each round of outreach, the project team compared demographic information of people who completed the online surveys with census data in the study area to adjust outreach efforts to better represent the people who live there. The Central Bikeway team saw an increase in the percentage of new bike riders or commuters during the second round of engagement, which can be attributed to the CBO partners helping with outreach and engagement efforts in the community.The charts to the right provide an overall summary of who we heard from during all three rounds of engagement, out of a total of 2,550 completed online surveys. 55% of survey respondents were white, which is an overrepresentation compared to 36% of the population who is white in the study area. There was an underrepresentation from Asian and Hispanic populations with only 21% and 11% compared to 46% and 24% of the population reported in the census. 55%White
21%Asian or Asian American10%Prefer not to say
1%American Indian or Alaska Native1%Black or African American 11%Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish Origin
1%
Native Hawaiian or
Pacific Islander
WHICH RACIAL
GROUP DO YOU
IDENTIFY
65%Man
29%Woman
3%Prefer not to say2%I Self identify as...1%
WHAT Non-binary
IS YOUR
GENDER?
ONLINE ENGAGEMENT
A series of online surveys accompanied each round of community meetings. The online surveys were live for about 30 days during each round of engagement as an effective way to reach community members during the pandemic. The first round also provided an interactive mapping tool which collected community preferences for destinations to reach by bike and desired routes for the Central Bikeway. The surveys were available in four languages: English, Spanish, Vietnamese, and Chinese.
VIRTUAL COMMUNITY MEETINGSVirtual Community Meetings were hosted on Zoom to present a summary and status of the project, solicit preferences through interactive polling activities, and offer opportunities for questions, feedback, and comments. All of the virtual community meetings were streamed simultaneously on YouTube and interpreted in Spanish and Vietnamese. Chinese was available upon request. 22 CENTRAL BIKEWAY FEASIBILITY STUDY | FEBRUARY 2022
24 CENTRAL BIKEWAY FEASIBILITY STUDY | FEBRUARY 2022 ڂHľġġƣĩÄƗǓՔ@Ɖ^SڂŴżľH^ƉƉڂ 25 ACCESS TO DESTINATIONS IS IMPORTANTWhen asked why community members would use the Central Bikeway, half of respondents said they would use the Central Bikeway to get to work, school, or another destination, indicating the potential for the bikeway to serve as a critical transportation route, in addition to health, exercise, and fun! What would help you choose riding your bike? Over 60% of respondents said they would prefer a route that connects to more destinations over a route with a short travel time.
Reason Why People Would Use the Central Bikeway
29% 27% 24% 20%
For health or exerciseFor funTo commute to work or schoolTo get to another destination ۋۋۋۋ
Type of Route That Would Help People Choose to Ride a Bike 63% 37%
A route that connects to more destinationsA route with a short travel time ۋۋ
SAFETY IS KEYSafety was routinely identified as a top priority goal for the Central Bikeway. As shown in the graph the right, when asked about barriers to cycling, 74% of the responses involved safety from vehicle traffic and a lack of comfort on roadways. People were also concerned about personal safety related to crime and cycling in the dark and isolated locations. The remaining 26% of responses were not related to safety and are not included in the graph.Percent of Survey Respondents who Identified a Safety Issue as a Barrier to Bicycling PEOPLE LIKE TRAILSWhen selecting a preferred alternative, more people choose the alternative with the highest percentage of trails. People said that they feel safer on trails, prefer to be away from cars and traffic, and expressed concerns at conflict points when riding on streets such as at cross streets and driveways. Forty-eight percent of respondents said an off-street trail would most encourage them to ride on the Central Bikeway instead of driving or carpooling.
Type of Bikeway that Would Most Encourage People to Ride the Central Bikeway 48%
25%
27%
An off-street trailA two-way on-street protected bikewayA one-way on-street protected bikeway ۋۋۋ
Key ThemesThrough the three rounds of outreach, four key themes emerged from the community.
IMPLEMENTATION TIMELINERespondents were split on implementation. 53% of people wanted to see a bikeway that can be built more quickly on the street network versus new trail corridors that would take more time to build.
Type of Bikeway People Would Prefer
53% 47%
A bikeway that can be built more quickly, but uses the street networkA bikeway that may take more time to build, but uses trails not near cars ۋۋ
I'm concerned about personal safety from
traffic
There aren't comfortable bikeways or
roads that connect to where I want/need
togo
There isn't secure bike parking at my
destinations
Roads or bikeways are not pleasant or
comfortable
I'm concerned about personal safety from
other sources
26 CENTRAL BIKEWAY FEASIBILITY STUDY | FEBRUARY 2022
Demonstration EventAn in-person demonstration was showcased on September 19, 2021 during the City of San José’s Viva Calle event. The demonstration featured a seven foot wide bikeway separated from traffic by a physical buffer and trees and landscaping donated by Our City Forest. The bikeway passed along the back side of a simulated bus island to demonstrate how the bikeway would interact with bus stops and transit riders. It helped demonstrate to community members what it would feel like to ride the Central Bikeway. A photo booth allowed community members to picture themselves on the future Central Bikeway.Project staff asked participants to comment on proposed design treatments, and how comfortable the treatments would make them feel along three corridors proposed for the Central Bikeway (El Camino Real, Hedding Street, and Taylor Street).Of the 121 completed surveys completed during the demonstration event, being separated from traffic was voted as the design feature that would improve people’s comfort bicycling the most. Community members also prefer wide bikeways with shade trees and landscaping. 98%of people surveyed at the demonstration event say the proposed design features would improve their comfort riding along the Central Bikeway “I don’t ride on El Camino but I would with this bike lane”DEMONSTRATION EVENT PARTICIPANT“ Photos to right from the demonstration
event at Viva Calle ڂHľġġƣĩÄƗǓՔ@Ɖ^SڂŴżľH^ƉƉڂ 27
HERE'S WHAT PEOPLE HAD TO SAY ABOUT THE DAY:
"It makes me sad
it doesn't already
exist!!!"
''The barrier makes
you feel safer"
"I like this wide bike
lane, other ones are
too narrow."
"I like the shade"
"Me gusta el nuevo
ordenamiento
porque da
seguridad al peat6n.
iFelicitaciones!"
(I like the new
arrangement
because it makes
it safer for people
walking. Congrats!)"
CENTRAL BIKEWAY ALTERNATIVES 29
OVERVIEW
How Did We Develop Alternatives?The project team identified key east-west and north-south corridors in the study area to develop a network of potential corridor opportunities. These corridors were reviewed for feasibility, with non-feasible corridors removed; roadway and trail segments were then added between corridors to create ten potential alignments that would connect the western and eastern termini of the study area. All alignments met the key features for a bicycle superhighway described in Chapter 1.These ten alignments were screened against initial criteria to identify three alternatives, from which one would be selected as the preferred alternative for the Central Bikeway. Initial criteria were coded by project goal and included categories such as whether the route was identified in previous planning efforts, connected to communities of concern, and connected to major destinations. Initial criteria were scored on a qualitative basis. I think this is important and should be moved closer to the beginning of this section. The three alternatives selected best responded to the project goals, stakeholder input, and public feedback during the initial screening process. The three alternatives selected to be evaluated were the Walsh Wizard, the Trail Trackway, and the Shortliner, which are described in detail in the following pages.Ɖɟɟڂ̵̵ɟ˱ɎʡΫڂHյڂˍͮɟ̿˱ǵͮʡΞɟ͝ڂ˱ǵˍΰ͝ʡ͝ڂֈڂEvaluation for more information on the development and screening of the alignments and alternatives.
CORRIDORS
A BUNCH OF SEGMENTS
ALIGNMENTS
COHESIVE AND CONTINUOUS 8-MILE
BIKE SUPERHIGHWAY ROUTES
ALTERNATIVES
THREE ALIGNMENTS THAT RESPOND TO
THE PROJECT GOALS, STAKEHOLDER
INPUT, AND PUBLIC FEEDBACK
04 CENTRAL BIKEWAY ALTERNATIVES
30 CENTRAL BIKEWAY FEASIBILITY STUDY | FEBRUARY 2022 CENTRAL BIKEWAY ALTERNATIVES 31
KIFER RD
WALSH AVE
LAFAYETTE ST
£101
Ã237
Ã82
SANTA
CLARA
SUNNYVALE
Lawrence
Station
TRIMBLE RD
DE LACRUZBLVD
MARTIN AVE
BERRYESSA RD
GUADALUPE RIVER TRAIL
HEDDING ST
San Jose
International
Airport
¥680
¥280 £101
¥680
¥880
¥880
Ã87
MILPITAS
DOWNTOWN
SAN JOSE
SAN JOSE
Santa Clara
Station
Diridon
Station
Berryessa
BART Station
ˍͮɟ̿˱ǵͮʡΞɟڂՂԆյڂThe Walsh WizardThe Walsh Wizard represents the north-ofairport alternative option for the Central Bikeway (Figure 5ԼձڂƗʎɟڂ˪ǵʽ́̿ʡͮΰڂ́ɿڂͮʎɟڂalignment utilizes on-street one-way or two-way protected bikeways, except for the off-street trail portion along Guadalupe River Trail. The alignment follows Kifer Road and Walsh Avenue through Santa Clara as an alternate option to Central Expressway, and connects to planned improvements along Trimble Road. This alternative is the most readily implementable and lowest cost of the three, with extended portions along corridors with existing trails or bikeways. However it has the longest travel time for bicyclists. ʡʄͽ̿ɟڂԋյ The Walsh Wizard
TradeoffsHow does The Walsh Wizard compare to the other two alternatives?
BIKE SUPERHIGHWAY CRITERIATRAVEL TIMEQUANTITY OF ACCESS POINTSROADWAY IMPACTSCOST COMPARISON
LOWER PERFORMING
HIGHER PERFORMING
Connects with existing trails, may be implemented more quickly
PROTECTED BIKEWAYTRAIL
CROSSING IN PLANNING/DESIGN BY ANOTHER PROJECT
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONMINOR INTERSECTION
L
I
I
r'
-
..r.~===
y
\
\
\,
-
\
32 CENTRAL BIKEWAY FEASIBILITY STUDY | FEBRUARY 2022 CENTRAL BIKEWAY ALTERNATIVES 33
CALTRANS CORRIDOR COYOTE CREEK TRAIL
PENITENCIACREEK TRAIL
San Jose
International
Airport
¥680
¥280 £101
¥680
¥880
¥880
Ã87
MILPITAS
DOWNTOWN
SAN JOSE
SAN JOSE
Santa Clara
Station
Diridon
Station
Berryessa
BART Station
ˍͮɟ̿˱ǵͮʡΞɟڂՂԇյڂThe Trail TrackwayThe Trail Trackway provides a primarily off-street trail option for the Central Bikeway (Figure 6ԼձڂƗʎɟڂǵˍͮɟ̿˱ǵͮʡΞɟڂconnects the center roadway median along Central Expressway with San Tomas Aquino Creek Trail and the Railroad/Caltrain Corridor. It then connects the Santa Clara Station underpass to the Freeway Corridor along Coleman Avenue around the south side of the airport and continues north ǵˍ́˱ʄڂÄՔԏԏԅڂǵ˱ɎڂƣƉՔԆԅԆհڂȻɟɿ́̿ɟڂͽˍͮʡ˪ǵͮɟˍΰڂconnecting to the Penitencia Creek Trail. Use of the Santa Clara Station underpass will require further study. This alternative uniquely features extended segments of grade separated trail along Central Expressway and the Caltrans corridor to bypass major intersections and freeway on-ramps. This alternative features the greatest separation from vehicles. ʡʄͽ̿ɟڂԍյ Ɨʎɟ Ɨ̿ǵʡˍ Ɨ̿ǵɂ˅ǵΰ
CALTRAIN CORRIDOR
SAN TOMASAQUINO CREEKTRAIL
CENTRAL EXPRESSWAY
£101
Ã237
Ã82
SANTA
CLARA
SUNNYVALE
Lawrence
Station
TradeoffsHow does The Trail Trackway compare to the other two alternatives? Off-street trails along Caltrans corridor Off-street trails along Caltrain corridor are currently not allowed by policy in certain locations BIKE SUPERHIGHWAY CRITERIA
TRAVEL TIMEQUANTITY OF ACCESS POINTSROADWAY IMPACTSCOST COMPARISON
LOWER PERFORMING
HIGHER PERFORMING
żS^ՔƉ^ŴżƗ^SڂƗżÄĖPROTECTED BIKEWAYTRAILCROSSING IN PLANNING/DESIGN BY ANOTHER PROJECTżS^ՔƉ^ŴżƗ^SڂHżľƉƉÄĩSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION r'
!
I
I
r l
r I______!_! _
/
\
\
\,
34 CENTRAL BIKEWAY FEASIBILITY STUDY | FEBRUARY 2022 CENTRAL BIKEWAY ALTERNATIVES 35
HEDDING ST
THE ALAMEDA
TAYLOR ST
10TH ST /11TH ST
MABURY RD
San Jose
International
Airport
¥680
¥280 £101
¥680
¥880
¥880
Ã87
MILPITAS
DOWNTOWN
SAN JOSE
SAN JOSE
Santa Clara
Station
Diridon
Station
Berryessa
BART Station
ˍͮɟ̿˱ǵͮʡΞɟڂՂԉյڂThe ShortlinerThe Shortliner provides an entirely onstreet connection along the southern end of the study area (Figure 7Լձڂ@ɟʄʡ˱˱ʡ˱ʄڂalong El Camino Real and The Alameda, the alternative provides direct access to community-identified destinations, local bus stops, Santa Clara University, and the Santa Clara Caltrain Station. East of the airport, the alternative connects to Hedding Street and ultimately to Mabury Road, and features intelligent signal coordination to provide an efficient route for bicyclists from the Guadalupe River Trail to the Berryessa BART Station. This alternative provides the greatest level of access for local communities and the fastest travel time for bicyclists across the entire study area. ʡʄͽ̿ɟڂԎյ Ɨʎɟ Ɖʎ́̿ͮˍʡ˱ɟ̿
EL CAMINO REAL
£101
Ã237
Ã82
SANTA
CLARA
SUNNYVALE
Lawrence
Station
TradeoffsHow does The Shortliner compare to the other two alternatives?
BIKE SUPERHIGHWAY CRITERIATRAVEL TIMEQUANTITY OF ACCESS POINTSROADWAY IMPACTSCOST COMPARISON
LOWER PERFORMING
HIGHER PERFORMING
Connects to transit along El Camino Real
Connects to community identified destinations south of airport
PROTECTED BIKEWAYSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONMINOR INTERSECTION --~"' ==--'
r·
I
I
(
if I
\
'
\
I
- /
I
I
I I
,j, '
\
\
\
\1
}) \
'
\
\
\
..
'
J , l_J
I • ' l
, '
•
0 / '
\
------,--------1
36 CENTRAL BIKEWAY FEASIBILITY STUDY | FEBRUARY 2022 CENTRAL BIKEWAY ALTERNATIVES 37 Goal-Based Evaluation CriteriaA goal-based evaluation of the three alternatives was conducted, which involved four key steps. 01Develop CriteriaOn their own, there is no singular way to measure the project goals - they are inherently complex goals. Instead, each goal was broken down into two to five measurable criteria.02Identify SegmentsThe study area was divided into three segments (Figure 8Լձڂ@ΰڂɟΞǵˍͽǵͮʡ˱ʄڂǵɂ̿́͝͝ڂthree areas, it provided a more detailed comparison and enabled the preferred alternative to be the best possible mixand-match combination of the three alternatives. ʡʄͽ̿ɟڂԏյ Ɖɟʄ˪ɟ˱ͮ͝
SANTACLARA
DOWNTOWN
SAN JOSE
SAN JOSE
SUNNYVALE
Lawrence
Station
Santa Clara
Station
Diridon
Station
Berryessa
BART Station
03Measure CriteriaThe criteria were analyzed and measured for each alternative by segment to provide a standard basis for comparison. 04Compare Alternatives by GoalOnce measured, the criteria were consildated into their respective goals. This allowed for a direct comparison to identify where alternatives met or exceeded each goal.
SANTA CLARA AROUND
THE AIRPORT
SAN JOSÉ
ƗǵȻˍɟڂԆյ Ɖͽ˪˪ǵ̿ΰ ́ɿ ^Ξǵˍͽǵͮʡ́˱ H̿ʡͮɟ̿ʡǵ
GOAL TIER 2 CRITERIA
INFORMED BY
EngagementData
Equity
New UsersWomen/Non-Binary & People of ColorEquity Analysis Project Compatibility
Available ROWTraffic ImpactsParking AnalysisTransit ImpactsAligns with Planning Efforts Community-Desired Project
Community-Identified DestinationsCommunity-Identified Segments Sustainable Mobility
Time/LengthModal FrictionUser DemandPotential VMT Reduction Access
Transit AccessĖɟΞɟˍڂ́ɿڂƗ̿ǵɿɿʡɂڂƉͮ̿ɟ͝͝ڂԲĖƗƉԼڂ˱ǵˍΰ͝ʡ͝Access to Employment Joy
Access to Open SpacePromotes Passive AttentionExpands ChoiceLevel of Effort Safety
Separation from TrafficIntersections & Exposure to VehiclesTraffic SpeedPerceived Safety 111
• 111 111 ' ' ' ' '
111 ' ' ' ' ' 111 ' ' ' ' ' 111 ' ' ' ' ' 111 ' ' ' ' ' 0 ' ' ' ' ' '
111 111 111 • 111 111 111 111
\
0 111 111 0 111 111 111 111
(
111
n
0 111
j
lj
I
1 --r!
38 CENTRAL BIKEWAY FEASIBILITY STUDY | FEBRUARY 2022 CENTRAL BIKEWAY ALTERNATIVES 39 EQUITY Two of the equity criteria directly analyzed the responses of underrepresented groups in bikeway planning and design from the second round of outreach. The first criterion extracted the preferred alternatives selected by women/˱́˱ՈȻʡ˱ǵ̿ΰڂǵ˱Ɏڂ̵ɟ̵́ˍɟڂ́ɿڂɂ́ˍ́̿ڂԲŴľHԼձڂWomen/non-binary and POC made up 45% of respondents (Figure 11Լձ The second criteria extracted the preferred alternatives of potential new users—people who are interested in cycling but due to a variety of reasons do not currently bike. New users made up 29% of respondents, which is considerably high for this type of feasibility study. ʡʄͽ̿ɟڂԆԆյڂ džʎ́ڂ̵ǵ̿ͮʡɂʡ̵ǵͮɟɎڂʡ˱ڂͮʎɟڂ͝ɟɂ́˱Ɏڂ̿́ͽ˱Ɏڂ́ɿڂ́ͽͮ̿ɟǵɂʎԬ NEW
USERS OR
COMMUTERS
WOMEN/
ĩľĩՔ@ÄĩżǓ
AND POC
10%
45% 71% 45%
29% Prefer Not to Say
Women/Non- White MenBinary and People of Color
Existing Commuters
New Users or Commuters
ʡʄͽ̿ɟڂԆԇյڂ džʎǵͮڂǵ͝ڂͮʎɟڂ̵̿ɟɿɟ̿̿ɟɎڂǵˍͮɟ̿˱ǵͮʡΞɟڂʡ˱ڂɟǵɂʎڂ͝ɟʄ˪ɟ˱ͮԬ ۋ Trail Trackway ۋ Shortliner ۋ Walsh Wizard ۋ No Preference SANTA CLARA THE AIRPORT SAN JOSÉ
Community Input Guided the Development and Evaluation of AlignmentsCommunity input was used throughout the project to guide the development and evaluation of alternatives. In particular, community input directly informed the evaluation for two of the project goals: Equity and Community-Desired Project.HľġġƣĩÄƗǓՔS^ƉÄż^SڂŴżľć^HƗBoth criteria for the community-desired project goal were directly informed by community input. During the first round of outreach, the community was asked to identify destinations across the study area that they would like to access (Figure 9Լձڂ^ǵɂʎڂalternative was analyzed for the extent to which it provided access to these “Community-Identified Destinations” both along the route and accessible from ɂ́˱˱ɟɂͮʡ˱ʄڂˍ́Ոͮ̿͝ɟ͝͝ڂȻʡ˅ɟǵΰ͝ڂԲʡʄͽ̿ɟڂԆԅԼձ ʡʄͽ̿ɟڂԐյڂ džʎǵͮڂɎɟͮ͝ʡ˱ǵͮʡ́˱͝ڂɎ́ڂ̵ɟ̵́ˍɟڂ
Ԭɟ˅Ȼʡڂ̿ʎɟʡͮڂ˱́ڂͮ́ڂ́ʄڂͮ́ڂͮ˱ǵ
42% Grocery/Shopping/Restaurant/Other22% Recreation/Exercise15% Work or School12% Other5% Transit4% Friends or Family ۋۋۋۋۋۋ
ʡʄͽ̿ɟڂԆԅյڂ H́˪˪ͽ˱ʡͮΰՈʡɎɟ˱ͮʡɿʡɟɎڂɎɟͮ͝ʡ˱ǵͮʡ́˱͝
The results show significant latent demand for accessing destinations such as stores and restaurants.During the second round of outreach, the community was asked to select their preferred alternative in each of the three segments - Ɖǵ˱ͮǵڂHˍǵ̿ǵհڂʡ̵̿́̿ͮհڂƉǵ˱ڂć́͝ɣڂԲʡʄͽ̿ɟڂԆԇԼձڂThese preference percentages were directly used in the evaluation model. -
40 CENTRAL BIKEWAY FEASIBILITY STUDY | FEBRUARY 2022 CENTRAL BIKEWAY ALTERNATIVES 41
DOWNTOWN
SAN JOSE
SAN JOSE
ara
n
Berryessa
BART Station
SANTACLARA
Lawrence
Station
Santa Cla
Station
Summary of ResultsAlthough only the Equity and CommunityDesired Project goals were directly informed by outreach, all criteria were aimed at identifying an alternative that would best meet community needs. For example, community members noted the importance of making connections to open space, which was a criterion under the Joy goal. Figure 13 illustrates evaluation results by goal as well as provides as an overall roll up score within each of the project areas. In Santa Clara, the Shortliner performed the best with the project goals, and performed best for feasibility as well along with the Walsh Wizard.Around the Airport, the Shortliner overwhelmingly performed the best for both the project goals and feasibility. The Walsh Wizard and Trail Trackway were a distant second and third, respectively.In San José, the Shortliner performed the best with the project goals and feasibility, with the Walsh Wizard slightly behind. The Trail Trackway was a distant third.Although the Trail Trackway was the preferred alternative based on community input during Round 2 of outreach, the Shortliner was a close second. Because it provides more access to community-identified destinations, the Shortliner scored highest overall for the Community-Desired Project goal. ʡʄͽ̿ɟڂԆԉյ Ɖͽ˪˪ǵ̿ΰ ́ɿ żɟ͝ͽˍͮ͝
SANTA CLARA AIRPORT SAN JOSÉ
WizardTrackway
Shortliner
WIZARD TRACKWAY SHORTLINER WIZARD TRACKWAY SHORTLINER
EquityProject CompatibilityCommunity Desired ProjectSustainable MobilityAccessJoySafetyOverallFeasibility/Implementation Lowerperforming
Higher
performing
WIZARD TRACKWAY SHORTLINER
I
I \
\
\
\
,,
\
\
\
\
\
I /
V
\
\
\
\
' \
RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE 43
THE SHORTLINER ALTERNATIVE BECOMES THE CENTRAL BIKEWAYThe Shortliner alternative was the best performing alternative overall in Santa Clara, around the airport and in San José (Figure 14ԼձڂThe alternative connects from west to east along El Camino Real, The Alameda, Hedding Street, 10th/11th Street, Taylor Street, and Mabury Road. The Shortliner alternative scored highest for the goals of Community-Desired Project, Sustainable Mobility, Access, and Joy. It also scored highly for feasibility and implementation due to its relatively low cost and maintenance needs and high opportunities for funding. Because of its overall high scores, the Shortliner alternative was chosen as the preferred alternative for the Central Bikeway. It is referred to simply as the “Central Bikeway” in the following pages.ʡʄͽ̿ɟڂԆԊյڂ ƗʎɟڂƉʎ́̿ͮˍʡ˱ɟ̿ڂˍͮɟ̿˱ǵͮʡΞɟ 05 RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE
AT A GLANCE10 MILES LONGKEY DESTINATIONSBerryessa BART Station, Santa Clara Station, Santa Clara University, Japantown, Guadalupe River Trail, Coyote Creek TrailKEY CORRIDORSEl Camino Real, The Alameda, Hedding St, Taylor St, Mabury RdԐԐِڂľĩՔƉƗż^^ƗڂŴżľƗ^HƗ^SڂBIKEWAY 44 CENTRAL BIKEWAY FEASIBILITY STUDY | FEBRUARY 2022 RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE 45 Connects to Community DestinationsThe Central Bikeway connects to the greatest number of community-identified destinations.Access to Jobs & TransitThe Central Bikeway provides convenient access to jobs in downtown San José, the El Camino Real corridor, and Santa Clara University. It provides direct access to Santa Clara Caltrain station, two VTA light rail stops, Berryessa BART, and major bus lines along El Camino Real.Efficient and Quick RouteThe Central Bikeway is the shortest alternative both in terms of distance and travel time.WHAT DOES THE CENTRAL BIKEWAY DO WELL ALREADY? Santa Clara University
SAP Arena
Japantown
Berryessa
Flea Market
San Jose State University
Earthquakes
Stadium
Coyote Creek Trail
San Jose
Intl. Airport
¥680
¥280
£101
¥880
¥680
¥880
£
Guadalupe
River Park
& Trail
Penitencia
Creek Park
DOWNTOWN
SAN JOSE
NORTH
SAN JOSE
MILPITAS
Santa Clara Station
Diridon Station
Berryessa Station
Orange Line
Green & Blue Lines
Figure 15 shows how the Central Bikeway makes critical connections to transit and cross county bike corridors (CCBCs) in Santa Clara and San José. Through these connections, the Central Bikeway will connect users to a number of key commercial and employment destinations, including Santa Clara University, San José State University, and Berryessa Flea Market. In addition, the route will allow for connections to key recreational areas and sports arenas, including Guadalupe River Park, the Bay Trail and Baylands Park, and the Earthquakes and Levi Stadiums. ʡʄͽ̿ɟڂԆԋյڂ Hɟ˱ͮ̿ǵˍڂ@ʡ˅ɟǵΰڂH́˱˱ɟɂͮʡ́˱͝
NVIDIA
San Tomas Aquino Creek Trail
Levi’s Stadium
Santa Clara Town Center
Moonlite Center
£101
SANTA CLARA
SUNNYVALE
BAY TRAIL &
BAYLANDS PARK
CAMPBELL
Lawrence Station
S
LEGEND
Central BikewayConnecting trailBikeway connectorsTransit connectionDestination Q
o' I
6 Q
I
I
6 Q
'o
···········O ··································
-
111()11
.. o ..
•
RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE 47
Trail-Like ExperienceWe heard repeatedly from the community that trails are desirable and preferred. The Trail Trackway ranked highest by the community because it was the alternative with the most trails. However, it is not feasible at this time due to Caltrain policy along their ROW. When all criteria are taken into account the Central Bikeway alternative ranked highest overall, including for the Community-Desired Project goal due to its connections to community-identified destinations.Although the Shortliner runs along the road network, the design will incorporate design features that promote a feeling of openness, safety, flow, and physical comfort—making it feel more like a trail experience.
WIDE BIKEWAYThe standard width for each direction of the bikeway is seven feet. Significantly wider than a traditional protected bikeway, this provides space for passing and riding side-by-side with a friend.
SEPARATED FROM TRAFFICThe bikeway will be consistently separated from traffic, with a standard buffer of four to five feet. The buffer will be curb-height to provide a physical barrier to vehicles.
SHADE TREES & LANDSCAPEThe Central Bikeway will feature shade trees as well as extensive landscape to provide habitat, cooling, and stormwater benefits.
WHAT DESIGN FEATURES WILL HELP THE CENTRAL BIKEWAY ADDRESS COMMUNITY PREFERENCES? RAISED CROSSINGSAt stop-controlled intersections, the bikeway and crosswalk will cross the roadway elevated at curb height to prioritize cyclists and pedestrians and make them more visible to vehicles.@ÄČ^ՔŴżÄľżÄƗǓڂƉÄĩĖڂƗÄġÄĩFrom Berryessa BART to the Guadalupe River Trail, the bikeway will feature bike-priority signal timing. This will provide longer green lights for cyclists, shorter reds, minimize stopping, and increase flow.PROTECTED INTERSECTIONSWhere the bikeway crosses roadways with other bike routes, a protected intersection will provide dedicated space for cyclists to merge, turn, and queue, all while separated from traffic. 46 CENTRAL BIKEWAY FEASIBILITY STUDY | FEBRUARY 2022
RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE 49
WHAT WILL BE THE EXPERIENCE ALONG THE CENTRAL BIKEWAY?El Camino RealThe Central Bikeway along El Camino Real will be an active mobility backbone through Santa Clara. Closely aligned with the Santa Clara Bicycle Master Plan Update,, the bikeway is part of a larger regional effort to make El Camino Real a more walkable and multi-modal corridor.The bikeway will be seven feet wide at sidewalk level on both sides of the street to provide an urban trail-like experience and will connect conveniently to expanded bus-island stops. Separated from traffic by a landscape and tree-lined buffer, it provides shade and nature to a previously exposed and concrete environment. At intersections and driveways, the bikeway will be raised to curb height to prioritize bicyclists and make them more visible to vehicles. Driveway consolidation along El Camino Real is a goal in both Santa Clara and San José.A bicycle facility along El Camino Real will provide direct access to jobs, grocery stores, restaurants, and retail. Residents, students, and employees alike will have a choice in how they want to move through the corridor, making for a more diverse and accessible El Camino Real.
Conceptual rending of the Central Bikeway along El Camino Real 48 CENTRAL BIKEWAY FEASIBILITY STUDY | FEBRUARY 2022
Hedding StreetHedding Street is the connective tissue that links Japantown, Downtown San José, and the Guadalupe River Trail. Characterized by numerous connections to local bikeways, the Central Bikeway along Hedding Street features bicycle-priority signal timing and frequent protected intersections to create a quick and connected corridor.The design builds upon the existing bikeways along Hedding Street, making the bikeway wider and fully buffered from traffic. It maintains a residential character with a tree-lined buffer, landscape at intersections, and pedestrian lighting.Conceptual rendering of the Central Bikeway along Hedding St.
Clear separation from the road is key. It must be more than paint on the street.COMMUNITY MEMBER “
Taylor Street
Taylor Street links central San José to Berryessa BART Station, and provides safe crossing over US 101. On Taylor Street, the Central Bikeway is proposed to be a bi-directional bikeway, with a wide six to 10-foot landscaped buffer to create a traillike experience through a residential area. It features dedicated bike signals and raised crossings at intersections for a safe, relaxing, and joyful cycling experience. Over US 101, the Central Bikeway features a dedicated bike and pedestrian space physically separated from cars to provide convenient and safe access into Berryessa BART Station and Coyote Creek Trail. “Plant trees along bike routes for shade for bikers.”COMMUNITY MEMBER Conceptual rendering of the Central Bikeway along Taylor Street 50 CENTRAL BIKEWAY FEASIBILITY STUDY | FEBRUARY 2022
“
RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE 51
RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE 53
Building the Central Bikeway is an ambitious process that will require fundraising, community engagement, detailed design and engineering, environmental study, and permits from state and local agencies. The vision set forth for the Central Bikeway will require about $200 million to design and construct. Because of the large scope and scale of this multi-jurisdictional project, full implementation may take years due to the number of steps required to get to construction. Figure 16 describes where to go from here. Ɖɟɟڂ̵̵ɟ˱ɎʡΫڂSյڂÄ˪̵ˍɟ˪ɟ˱ͮǵͮʡ́˱ڂƉͮ̿ǵͮɟʄΰڂfor more details on the implementation strategy and funding opportunities. ʡʄͽ̿ɟڂԆԍյڂ Hɟ˱ͮ̿ǵˍڂ@ʡ˅ɟǵΰڂÄ˪̵ˍɟ˪ɟ˱ͮǵͮʡ́˱ڂˍ́ڂHʎǵ̿ͮ
2020-22
THE CENTRAL BIKEWAY STUDY identified a community-preferred feasible alignment, and established a basis of design to enable VTA and project partners to secure funding for future development.
The full vision of the Central Bikeway may not be built at one time. Construction of the Central Bikeway may be accomplished through PHASED COMPLETION.
Additions and improvements to the corridor may be accomplished over time.
Finally, CONSTRUCTION can begin on the Central
Bikeway. A public bid will be released to hire a construction team, and a qualified contractor will conduct oversight to ensure the plans, environmental mitigation measures, and permit conditions are followed as approved.
FINISH!
The Central Bikeway is
complete! You and your
family, friends, and
community will enjoy
and maintain the
bikeway for years to
come.
WE ARE HERE
Opportunity for public input
VTA will begin to
SEEK FUNDS FOR DESIGN, ENGINEERING, AND CONSTRUCTION. Grant application writing and securing funds can take between two and five years.
With funding secured, detailed ENGINEERING AND
DESIGN can begin. This will
result in detailed plans including the exact design of the Central Bikeway.
At the same time, the Lead Agency will apply for permits and complete Environmental documentation.
Opportunity for public input
HOW DOES THE CENTRAL BIKEWAY GET BUILT?
52 CENTRAL BIKEWAY FEASIBILITY STUDY | FEBRUARY 2022
I
I I I I
•
I I I
I
I I I
I
•
0 ,---------------- ' I
I
I I I I
I I
I I
54 CENTRAL BIKEWAY FEASIBILITY STUDY | FEBRUARY 2022 RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE 55 Implementation Approach: Phased with Segmented ConstructionIt is recommended that VTA pursue environmental clearance for the entire Central Bikeway project and then segment the corridor for phased construction. The primary benefit to this approach is the flexibility and efficiency it would allow. Smaller segments of the project could move forward as funds became available, which would allow for portions of the bikeway to be built more quickly. This could allow segments with greater public support to be built sooner and not be held up by more challenging locations. This approach would also require lower up front construction costs, and could rely on a variety of smaller grant programs. Figure 17 identifies the two segments under ɂ́˱͝ʡɎɟ̿ǵͮʡ́˱նڂƉɟʄ˪ɟ˱ͮڂԆյڂSanta Clara Station to White Roadڂǵ˱ɎڂƉɟʄ˪ɟ˱ͮڂԇյڂˍ^ڂHǵ˪ʡ˱́ڂżɟǵˍڂwest of Santa Clara Station. Segment 1 includes three sub-segments for consideration.
Within these two segments, further segmentation could be made based on existing bikeway conditions, alignment with other local projects, right-of-way availability, and connecting logical destinations. Each segment represents a different opportunity to rethink Santa Clara County’s streets. Segment 1 prioritizes connections to transit, while Segment 2 focuses on creating new connections to commercial destinations along El Camino Real. ʡʄͽ̿ɟڂԆԎյ Ɖɟʄ˪ɟ˱ͮɟɎ H́˱ͮ̿͝ͽɂͮʡ́˱
£101
¥680
¥880
Ã87
SANTA
CLARA
DOWNTOWN
SAN JOSE
SAN JOSE
SUNNYVALE
San Jose
International
Airport
Diridon
Station
Berryessa
BART Station
HEDDING ST EL CAMINO REAL
THE ALAMEDA
TAYLOR ST
10TH ST /11TH ST
MABURY RD
Santa ClaraStation
LawrenceStation
College ParkStation
SEGMENT 2 SEGMENT 1
East-west protected route is needed. Now.COMMUNITY MEMBER “
* SMALLER SEGMENTS CAN BE PURSUED
SEGMENT 1. ƗżĩƉÄƗڂHľĩĩ^HƗÄǃÄƗǓյڂƉĩƗڂHĖżڂƉƗƗÄľĩڂƗľڂdž ÄƗ^ڂżľSCompleting a segment of the Central Bikeway that connects from the Santa Clara Transit station, through downtown San José to the Berryessa BART station and east to White Road would make for a competitive grant package and minimizes potential right-of-way impacts along El Camino Real. This section of the Central Bikeway passes through the most communities of concern and may be most competitive for the state’s Active Transportation Program. Implementation of this section should focus on the full design features of the Central Bikeway, including Class IV separated bikeway, protected intersections, bicycle signal priority, and landscape and amenities along the route.
SEGMENT 2. Hľġġ^żHÄĖڂHľĩĩ^HƗÄǃÄƗǓյڂ^ĖڂHġÄĩľڂż^ĖڂƗľڂƉĩƗڂHĖżڂTRANSIT CENTERThe vision for the Central Bikeway may take years to see the full build out. However, much of the vision can be accomplished by installing a sidewalk-level separated bikeway in the space currently used by on-street parking where feasible. Because El Camino Real is owned by Caltrans, the agency will need to approve all designs along this corridor.There are currently three block faces where the removal of on-street parking is not recommended by the City of Santa Clara until redevelopment occurs. These locations are along the eastern portions of El Camino Real on the south side between San Tomas Expressway and Las Padres Boulevard, the north side between Las Padres Boulevard and McCormick Drive, and a short block on the north side between Main and Washington Ɖͮ̿ɟɟͮ͝ڂԲ͝ɟɟڂ̵̵ɟ˱ɎʡΫڂյڂ@ǵ͝ʡ͝ڂ́ɿڂSɟ͝ʡʄ˱ڂŴˍǵ˱͝ڂƉʎɟɟͮ͝ڂƉÄՔԅԋհڂƉÄՔԅԍհڂǵ˱ɎڂƉÄՔԅԏԼձڂÄ˱ڂthese sections, standard bike lanes are proposed until a later period of time. In addition, to accommodate VTA’s standard 10 foot wide bus boarding islands, there are selected locations where the existing sidewalk would narrow. If the City of Santa Clara’s El Camino Real Specific Plan is adopted, certain parcels will be redeveloped. Sidewalks will be widened and there may be opportunities to consolidate driveways to make the route safer for bicyclists. The first phase of the Central Bikeway on El Camino Real should focus on implementing the core alignment and key safety features, including a sidewalk-level Class IV separated bikeway, protected intersections with existing bikeways, and intersection improvements, where parking and ROW impacts are minimized. Because El Camino Real has a high bicycle and pedestrian collision history, it may be particularly competitive for grant programs that address existing safety issues.
It’s all about safety and physical separation from cars.COMMUNITY MEMBER “
\ ,>--- I l /t l
Xo i f 0
, \
Project Costs
A rough order of magnitude cost estimate has been developed based on Basis of Design plans for the long-term vision for the Central Bikeway. Environmental clearance, engineering, and construction management costs are estimated as 40% of construction costs (2% planning feasibility, 4% environmental, 12% design, 6% VTA project oversight, 8% construction management, and 8% inspections). Construction costs include material and labor costs for items to build the linear bikeway, intersection, landscape, and amenity improvements as well as construction soft ɂ́ͮ͝͝ڂɿ́̿ڂ˪́Ȼʡˍʡφǵͮʡ́˱ڂԲԆԅِԼڂǵ˱Ɏڂɂ́˱ͮʡ˱ʄɟ˱ɂΰڂԲԉԅِԼձڂƗǵȻˍɟڂԇڂ̵̿́ΞʡɎɟ͝ڂǵڂ͝ͽ˪˪ǵ̿ΰڂ́ɿڂͮʎɟڂɂ́ͮ͝͝ձƗǵȻˍɟڂԇյڂ ż́ͽʄʎڂ́̿Ɏɟ̿ڂ́ɿڂ˪ǵʄ˱ʡͮͽɎɟڂɂ́ͮ͝͝ Environmental Clearance and Design for Study CorridorŴ̿́ʽɟɂͮڂ̵̵̿́Ξǵˍڂԧڂ˱^Ξʡ̿́˱˪ɟ˱ͮǵˍڂŚɂͽ˪ɟ˱ͮڂԲŴՄ^SԼڂǵ˱ɎڂŴˍǵ˱͝հڂƉ̵ɟɂʡɿʡɂǵͮʡ́˱͝հڂǵ˱Ɏڂ^ͮ͝ʡ˪ǵͮɟ͝ڂԲŴƉԧ^ԼڂڂՔڂԆԏِ $27,000,000Construction Costs by AreaSanta Clara (3.5 miles) $57,000,000Airport (2.3 miles) $35,000,000San José (5.1 miles) $60,000,000Total Construction $152,000,000Oversight, Construction Management, and Inspections - 22% $34,000,000 Project Total $213,000,000
56 CENTRAL BIKEWAY FEASIBILITY STUDY | FEBRUARY 2022
Organizational StrategiesBecause the full vision of the Central Bikeway will take time to build, it is important to identify an organizational strategy that is conducive to this multi-jurisdictional corridor and will set the bikeway up for success. There are a number of criteria to consider when identifying an appropriate organizational strategy for a bicycle superhighway. These include:• Risk and Liability: The level of risk taken on by a single entity.
• Time Frame for Implementation: How
long the bikeway would take to implement given the strengths and weaknesses of the organizational structure. • Staff Expertise and Resources: The level
of staff expertise and capacity to implement and maintain the bikeway. • Design Consistency: The ability for
the bikeway to be consistently built and maintained. The bikeway should have uniform infrastructural standards across all municipal boundaries to ensure a standard level of service. • Funding Availability: The availability
of funding sources for planning, design, operations, and maintenance. • Maintenance Capabilities: The level of
resources available to maintain the bikeway.
Ɖɟɟڂ̵̵ɟ˱ɎʡΫڂSյڂÄ˪̵ˍɟ˪ɟ˱ͮǵͮʡ́˱ڂƉͮ̿ǵͮɟʄΰհڂɿ́̿ڂmore information on proposed organizational strategies for the Central Bikeway.
RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE 57
Potential Funding SourcesPotential funding sources for Section 1 include:• ɂͮʡΞɟڂƗ̿ǵ˱̵́̿ͮ͝ǵͮʡ́˱ڂŴ̿́ʄ̿ǵ˪ڂԲƗŴԼ • 2016 Measure B
• SB 1 Local Partnership Program
• Rebuilding American Infrastructure with
Ɖͽͮ͝ǵʡ˱ǵȻʡˍʡͮΰڂǵ˱Ɏڂ^̻ͽʡͮΰڂԲżÄƉ^Լ
• ľ˱ɟڂ@ǵΰڂ̿ɟǵڂ̿ǵ˱ͮڂԲľ@ԼڂŴ̿́ʄ̿ǵ˪
• Regional Measure 3 • Urban Greening Program
Potential funding sources for Section 2 include:• Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Ɖͽͮ͝ǵʡ˱ǵȻʡˍʡͮΰڂǵ˱Ɏڂ^̻ͽʡͮΰڂԲżÄƉ^Լ
• ľ˱ɟڂ@ǵΰڂ̿ɟǵڂ̿ǵ˱ͮڂԲľ@ԼڂŴ̿́ʄ̿ǵ˪
• Regional Measure 3 • Highway Safety Improvement Program Ի ƉÄŴԼڂ
A full list of potential funding sources is included in Appendix D. 58 CENTRAL BIKEWAY FEASIBILITY STUDY | FEBRUARY 2022
Operations + MaintenanceTo provide high-quality bicycling conditions, separated bikeways need consistent, dedicated maintenance, and sweeping. Bikeway users may not know what agency they should contact to report poor conditions so it is critical that a clear communication protocol is established for the Central Bikeway. Finally, the Central Bikeway will be designed to include potential amenities such as wayfinding, landscaping, seating, and public art. These amenities should be accounted for in any future maintenance plan.MAINTENANCE Required maintenance may be routine or remedial, and will vary depending on context, user demand, and the types of amenities present.• Routine. Routine maintenance refers to the day-to-day regimen of litter pick-up, trash and debris removal, weed and dust control, sweeping, vegetation trimming, and other regularly scheduled activities. Some routine maintenance may be conducted on a seasonal basis. • Remedial. Remedial maintenance refers
to repairing, replacing, or restoring major components that have been destroyed, damaged, or significantly deteriorated from normal usage and old age. Some items (“minor repairs”) may occur on a five to tenyear cycle, such as repainting or replacing signage. • Inspections. Inspections are important
for monitoring the maintenance needs of the bikeway and its associated amenities. Routine inspections such as monitoring surface conditions, signs, and lighting can be carried out by maintenance staff. A 311 System could serve as a way for the public to report necessary inspections and repairs.
Typical maintenance tasks along the Central Bikeway will include pavement sweeping, vegetation management, and landscape irrigation.
OPERATIONSOperation tasks along the Central Bikeway may include management and coordination, public safety, and emergency response services. It may be beneficial to designate one agency or staff person to oversee these tasks for all bicycle superhighways once the network is developed beyond the Central Bikeway.For more information on operations and maintenance, see Appendix SյڂÄ˪̵ˍɟ˪ɟ˱ͮǵͮʡ́˱ڂƉͮ̿ǵͮɟʄΰձ Keep the bike lane free of broken glass and debris.COMMUNITY MEMBER “
Project Partner Roles VTA is the preferred agency to lead implementation as a regional authority that can implement cross-county corridors. VTA would be responsible for securing funding, leading environmental clearance and design, ongoing community engagement and outreach, coordinating and tracking progress, and overseeing construction. Partner agencies will be responsible for allocating capital funds and staff time to implementation efforts, updating local plans for the Central Bikeway and bicycle superhighway design guidelines, developing policies and practices to reduce delay for bicyclists, and funding and prioritizing maintenance of bicycle superhighways. Regional ConnectivityThe Central Bikeway is the first of many bicycle superhighways to be implemented in Santa Clara County. Ultimately, the Central Bikeway is proposed to extend west through the City of Sunnyvale and connect to the Peninsula Bikeway. Any bicycle improvements within the City of Sunnyvale will be implemented in accordance with recommendations in the City’s Active Transportation Plan.
NEXT STEPS
Potential Future High Quality BikewaysThe Caltrain Corridor and Central Expressway are two corridors evaluated in this study that show potential for future high quality bikeways. The Caltrain corridor could provide an important spur connection between San Tomas Aquino Creek Trail and the Santa Clara BART station. A high quality bikeway along Central Expressway between Trimble and Palo Alto could serve as an efficient and continuous bicycle superhighway route through the South Bay.Although the Shortliner responded best to the Central Bikeway project goals and was chosen as the best alternative for the users in this project’s study area, this study does not preclude future high quality bicycle planning efforts along these two key regional corridors.
RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE 59
ATTACHMENT 2: PROJECT LOCATION MAP
ATTACHMENT 2: EL CAMINO REAL CONCEPTUAL RENDERING
Resolution adopting VTA Central Bikeway Study Final Report Page 1 of 2 Rev: 11/22/17
RESOLUTION NO. _____
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA
ADOPTING THE CENTRAL BIKEWAY FEASIBILITY STUDY
FINAL REPORT
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA AS FOLLOWS:
WHEREAS, the Valley Transportation Authority adopted the Santa Clara Countywide Bicycle Plan in 2018 to define a bicycle superhighway as a long-distance route intended to provide separation from automobiles;
WHEREAS, the Valley Transportation Authority created the Central Bikeway Study Feasibility Final Report to provide a strategy to develop the bicycle superhighway along El Camino Real in the City of Santa Clara to increase access to transit and other destinations; WHEREAS, the Central Bikeway Feasibility Study Final Report is a planning document designed to encourage bicycling as a safe and healthy alternative to the motor vehicle; WHEREAS, the Central Bikeway Feasibility Study Final Report development process has been a collaborative effort involving the Valley Transportation Authority, the City of Santa Clara, the City of San Jose, the County of Santa Clara, the State of California Department of Transportation, and the public;
WHEREAS, the Central Bikeway Feasibility Study Final Report is consistent with the goals and policies of the City of Santa Clara Bicycle Plan Update 2018; WHEREAS, the Santa Clara Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee supports the Central Bikeway Study Feasibility Final Report; and,
WHEREAS, the adoption of the Central Bikeway Study Feasibility Final Report is exempt from California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review pursuant to Section 15262 of the California Public Resources Code.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA AS FOLLOWS:
1. That the City Council hereby approves and adopts the Valley Transportation Authority Resolution adopting VTA Central Bikeway Study Final Report Page 2 of 2 Rev: 11/22/17
Central Bikeway Study Feasibility Final Report as attached and referenced herein.
2. Effective date. This resolution shall become effective immediately.
I HEREBY CERTIFY THE FOREGOING TO BE A TRUE COPY OF A RESOLUTION PASSED
AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA, AT A REGULAR MEETING THEREOF HELD ON THE ___ DAY OF _________, 2023, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: COUNCILORS:
NOES: COUNCILORS:
ABSENT: COUNCILORS:
ABSTAINED: COUNCILORS:
ATTEST: ______________________________
NORA PIMENTEL, MMC
ASSISTANT CITY CLERK
CITY OF SANTA CLARA
Attachments incorporated by reference:
1. VTA Central Bikeway Feasibility Study Final Report
S:\AttorneyRESOLUTIONS\Form Resolution-City.doc
City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
23-1633 Agenda Date: 4/4/2023
REPORT TO COUNCIL
SUBJECT
Mission City Memorial Park (Cemetery) Operations - Study Session
COUNCIL PILLAR
Deliver and Enhance High Quality Efficient Services and Infrastructure Manage Strategically Our Workforce Capacity and Resources Enhance Community Engagement and Transparency
BACKGROUND
The City of Santa Clara Cemetery Division operates and maintains two public cemeteries. The Agnews Historic Cemetery located at 1250 Hope Drive is a closed cemetery that operated from 1888 to 2009 for the workers and residents of Agnews Developmental Center (formerly the Agnews State Hospital). The Mission City Memorial Park (Cemetery) located at 420 N. Winchester Blvd. has been in continuous operation since 1850.The 25-acre Cemetery has more than 35,000 interments, including individuals and families that represent various aspects of the history of Santa Clara. The Cemetery is also home to over 500 trees and 70 species of birds. The Cemetery was first known as the Santa Clara Burial Ground, then Santa Clara Protestant Cemetery, then Santa Clara City Cemetery, and since 1972, Mission City Memorial Park. The Cemetery is operated and maintained by the Parks & Recreation Department.
DISCUSSION
The purpose of this City Council Study Session is to provide an update on the operations and challenges that affect the Cemetery and to seek Council input on a few policy considerations that will assist the Cemetery in remaining a viable City service in the future. The update is in the form of a presentation (Attachment 1) with opportunities for Council questions and input after review of relevant data that may affect policy direction. The sections below summarize the information developed for the presentation.
OPERATIONS
Cemetery Business Model
The Cemetery is owned, operated and maintained as a City facility under provisions of the City Code and adopted Rules & Regulations. Since Santa Clara is a charter city, it may set its own rules and regulations and does not fall under the jurisdiction of the State of California Department of Consumer Affairs Cemetery and Funeral Bureau, whereas private cemeteries do. As a public Cemetery, the City sets its own fees, determines its own level of service for operations and maintenance, adopts its own rules and regulations, establishes its own endowment/perpetual care investment policy, and can decide whether to subsidize fees and charges for operations, maintenance and perpetuity. Each of these areas is discussed in more detail below.
City of Santa Clara Page 1 of 10 Printed on 3/29/2023
powered by Legistar™
23-1633 Agenda Date: 4/4/2023
Facilities
The Cemetery features several types of facilities including above-ground interment sites (mausoleums, burial crypts, cremation niche banks), in-ground interment sites (single and double depth plots for caskets and urn placement cremains, historic family plots), an administration office, a chapel, a maintenance building and yard, as well as a variety of internal roadways and paths. The Cemetery is surrounded by a perimeter security fence and has a main entrance on Winchester Blvd. and a secondary entrance on Dolores Ave. The City develops new facilities based on market demand and available spaces as funds for capital improvements are made available. This is often done by repurposing internal roadways, cart paths for new in ground or above ground facilities for interments.
Services and Hours
The Cemetery provides a variety of interment options including full body and cremains burial in the above-ground mausoleum and niche bank space, in-ground spaces, and a communal cremains vault.
The grounds of the Cemetery are open for visiting hours Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., and Saturdays, 9:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m. The office hours for at-need and pre-need arrangements are Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. and 1:00 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. Cemetery services and hours are limited to the approved budget.
Personnel and Record Keeping
The Cemetery is currently staffed by three (3) Grounds Maintenance Workers, one (1) Office Specialist, and one (1) Cemetery Operations Manager supplemented with as-needed laborers, volunteers, and backup personnel accessed on occasion from the Parks Division. To address operational and maintenance issues as they come up, the City deploys staff from the Parks Division, or other divisions when necessary, to support administrative and/or grounds maintenance functions (sales, burials, maintenance); this causes an impact on the quality of the other services. The Cemetery currently uses an access database, Excel, and manual records (paper and books) for recording and management of documents, receipts and burials. There is software designed specifically for cemetery operations and services. Staff will be exploring the cost to acquire such software to improve efficiency, access and security of data.
Rules & Regulations
The general rules and regulations of the Cemetery are adopted by Council ordinance and found in City Code. Specific Cemetery operating rules and regulations are approved by Council resolution but have not been updated in over 15 years. The Cemetery rules and regulations guide both the process by which persons come to have interment rights and the City incurs responsibilities, as well as how the park visitors can interact with the facility as a City asset, park, and memorial grounds. For example, the City retains rights to the burial plot property while a person has rights to interment in the plot. The rules provide remedies for operating and maintenance issues so that staff can respond appropriately and in a timely manner to customer service issues. City retains the rights to make changes to cemetery property including but not limited to roadways, monuments, sections, and naming. An update of rules and regulations would improve customer understanding of Cemetery operations and provide greater transparency.
Components of Burial
There are six primary components for a burial to occur at the Cemetery; they are also drivers of revenue and expenses: a) interment rights; b) an outer burial container; c) opening and closing of the grave; d) the setting of a grave marker; e) the ongoing operation and maintenance of the Cemetery; f) the perpetual care of the Cemetery and its decedents.
City of Santa Clara Page 2 of 10 Printed on 3/29/2023
powered by Legistar™
23-1633 Agenda Date: 4/4/2023
· An “interment right” is the right to place a decedent at the Cemetery in a particular grave site.
The right may be purchased for immediate or for future need and may be for two persons in one grave or niche. The Cemetery has provided a 25% discount to residents and charges non-residents full cost.
· The outer burial container, or “burial vault” is for below-ground burials to protect the contents from the weight of earth or equipment moving over grave and in the case of above-ground placements, the outer burial container function is accommodated by the actual built mausoleum or niche bank. The cemetery charges a “pass-through” fee to cover the cost for the vault, but not the labor for pre-installation.
· The opening and closing services are the physical act of preparing a site for burial and occurs each time a site is accessed (i.e. second burial, disinterment). The City charges a fee that is paid for at the time of need based on the actual cost.
· A grave marker setting is optional for graves and required for a niche or crypt. The Cemetery has guidelines for the appropriate types & sizes for each section/area of the Cemetery. The markers are provided by others and set by Cemetery staff. The City charges a marker setting fee at actual cost of labor and materials.
· Cemetery administration and current year maintenance services support meeting with clients, managing services, completing general grounds tasks, etc. Most cemeteries have an administrative charge; the City currently does not charge for this activity and is therefore subsidized by the City.
· The final component of burial is the future grounds and building maintenance, particularly in perpetuity, when the Cemetery has no more space and/or closes permanently. It is commonly referred to as “Perpetual Endowment Care”. Currently, the City charges a onetime, per capita endowed care fee for future grounds & building maintenance. The City does not invest these funds long term, but at the same rate of return as the City cash pool.
OPERATIONS SUMMARY
The Cemetery workload measures are illustrated in the key categories of purchases and burials. The three-year averages indicate upward trends for burial rights, cremation plots/niches, and casket burials (Table 1). The Cemetery has a few above-ground casket spaces available; therefore, there is a relatively small quantity of purchases, and there is a wider market trend toward increased cremation burials.
.
Table 1 - Operations Summary of Purchases & Burials
City of Santa Clara Page 3 of 10 Printed on 3/29/2023
powered by Legistar™
23-1633 Agenda Date: 4/4/2023
Operating Budget
The Cemetery Division is currently accounted as an Enterprise Fund, distinct from the City’s General Fund. The Cemetery’s annual Operating Budget amounts to approximately $1.9 million (Table 2).
About 42% of revenues come from the components of burial mentioned above, such as fees for interment rights, labor charges, and interest on the Cemetery endowment fund principal. About 58% of revenues comes from a City General Fund subsidy, that has varied over time, and this year is in the amount of $870,000; it can change based upon actual revenues and expenditures. The FY 2022/23 expenditure budget includes $508,062 for salaries (33%), $312,127 for benefits (20%), $383,433 for materials/ services/ supplies (25%), and $342,322 for interfund charges (22%).
Table 2 - FY 2022/23 Cemetery Fund Budget
Beginning Fund Balance $398,384
Revenue - Other Fees for Services $600,000
Transfer From - General Fund $870,000
Transfer From - Endowment Care Fund $28,000
Transfer From - Perpetual Care Fund $500
Total Source of Funds: $1,896,884
Expenditures $1,545,944
Transfers To - General Government Capital Fund $822
Ending Fund Balance $350,118
Total Use of Funds: $1,896,884
The graph (Table 2) shows the ten-year revenue and expenditure trends. Revenues fluctuate within a range; expenditures are increasing over time.
Table 2 - Cemetery Revenues & Expenditures 10-year Trend City of Santa Clara Page 4 of 10 Printed on 3/29/2023
powered by Legistar™
-Cl)
Q)
Cl)
C1J
..c
~ ::::i
a..
C1J
·c
::::i
co
Category
Burial Right Recording Fees
Cremation Niche (AG)
Cremation Plot
CaskeUCrypt (AG)
CaskeUPlot
Cremation Burial
Casket Burial
Cremation Placement (AG)
Casket Placement (AG)
FY2019/20
12 9
13 2
19 29
59 16
0 FY2020/21 FY2021/22
20 25
30 32
24 29
1 0
22 33
35 46
57 70
28 27
1 1
Mfa•I
19 24
22 1
25 37
62 24
1 23-1633 Agenda Date: 4/4/2023
This results in an annual General Fund subsidy (Table 3), which in turn is increasing.
Table 3 - Cemetery General Fund Subsidy
CEMETERY CHALLENGES & POLICY OPTIONS
The Cemetery faces three fiscal challenges, namely the Operating Budget, Capital Budget, and the Endowment Fund. Policy direction and action in each of these areas can have a significant positive impact on Cemetery operations, maintenance, and long-term fiscal health. The current revenue constraints and less than full cost recovery negatively affect facilities and services in the form of reduced funding for services, staff, deferred maintenance, delayed development of new services, and future levels of perpetual care and subsidies.
Operating Budget Subsidized Services/Fees & Policy Options The current Cemetery Operating Budget fees for services constrain service and workload capacity as seen in limited office hours to serve customers pre-need and at-need, limited supervised cemetery visiting hours, funeral times, lower frequency of grounds maintenance tasks, reduced opportunities for staff training, and postponement of capital projects such as the development of new pre-burial City of Santa Clara Page 5 of 10 Printed on 3/29/2023
powered by Legistar™
$1,600,000
$1,400,000
$1,200,000
$1,000,000
$800,000
$600,000
$400,000
$200,000
$ -
$900,000
$800,000
$700,000
$600,000
$500,000
$400,000
$300,000
$200,000
$100,000
$ -
Revenue vs. Expenditures
- Sales/labor/ Materials - Expenditures
General Fund Subsidy
I I I I I I
23-1633 Agenda Date: 4/4/2023
areas
One operating budget policy option is to address the deficiencies by increasing existing fees to market rate (full cost recovery), eliminating the subsidized components of burial for residents, and implementing service changes such as reducing water use (lowers utility cost), introducing new fee producing services and facilities in keeping with market demand (cremation niche banks), and implementing new cemetery software to digitize historical paper records and increase efficiency, security, and access. Improved revenues may allow for increased staffing and cross training for continuity and depth of service.
Aged Infrastructure
A second major challenge encountered in the operation and maintenance of the Cemetery is its aged infrastructure. While there is only one Cemetery Capital Improvement project approved for the Sarah Fox Mausoleum roof repair, the Facility Condition Assessment conducted in 2017 indicated that over the past five years, the Cemetery grounds were in “poor” condition and requires over $1.17 million in lifecycle replacements and repair, while the Cemetery buildings were in “fair” condition and require over $772,000 in lifecycle replacements and repair. Given recent construction cost escalation/inflation and low project allocations, the costs are expected to be substantially higher. A dedicated and ongoing source of funding is needed to complete lifecycle replacement, major rehabilitation, and acquire and develop new cemetery space and facilities.
Endowment Fund
The Cemetery Endowment Care Fund (Fund) is the third major challenge. The purpose of a Perpetual Care or Endowment Care Fund is to protect and grow the principal in a way that generates added income to cover cemetery maintenance in perpetuity. The amount of funds earned should be sufficient to assure a long-term (100-year) funding source for maintenance, repair, and facility lifecycle renewals. A Perpetual Care Adequacy Study performed by an actuarial would provide models of what amount of funds are necessary to meet the Fund’s future financial obligations based on realistic scenarios of revenues and expenditures.
The Uniform Prudent Management of Institutional Funds Act (UPMIFA), a federal law enacted in 2006, provides guidance on investment decisions & endowment expenditures. It was adopted by California and the vast majority of US states. It recognizes that “Endowment funds” are a subset of “institutional funds” that are not wholly expendable by the institution on a current basis; they have spending rule requirements; and must follow UPMIFA guidelines regarding prudent management.
The City’s Fund principal balance amounts to approximately $2.1 million (Table 4). It is intended to support long-term maintenance of the property, particularly when the Cemetery is closed and has no new sales revenues. The City’s current investment policy, which adheres to California Government Code Sections 53601 and 53635, prioritizes safety and liquidity over yield. In the immediate previous decade, returns have been low due to the low interest rate environment. While the principal balance is growing, a recent conversation with a financial advisor that specializes in Cemetery Endowment Adequacy Studies throughout the United States, suggests that the City’s Endowment is significantly underfunded and the principal could be invested differently to focus on growth at a higher rate of return to provide enough revenue to support increasing costs of maintenance and subsidy.
Table 4 - Endowment Care Fund Balance
City of Santa Clara Page 6 of 10 Printed on 3/29/2023
powered by Legistar™
23-1633 Agenda Date: 4/4/2023
Comparable City Practice
One Endowment Fund policy option is to align the investment practice with the purpose of the funds similar to some other California cities with active cemeteries, that have segregated their funds from their city’s pool cash and placed them into separate legal trusts (fewer than ten cities in California own and operate a cemetery, and fewer still are active). The City of San Diego and the City of Santa Monica operate cemeteries larger than Mission City Memorial Park with more interments. Recent discussions with them provide comparable models of prudent management of funds for Perpetual Care. Both cities have funds held in trust managed and accounted for separately from other City funds; have developed an investment strategy (one by a Commission, one by City Council) that protect the principal and maximize rates of return; both have a Fiduciary to invest and manage funds.
While California requires endowment care trusts for private cemeteries, the City is exempt from this requirement as it does not apply to public cemeteries. That said, many states require the formation of a perpetual care or endowment care trust to guide investment of the funds for both private and public cemeteries. The formation of a trust and development of an investment strategy focused on the goals and timeline of funds needed, assures funds will not be comingled nor used for other purposes and that trustees are tasked/commissioned to develop an investment policy against which investments are evaluated.
In summary, formation of a trust, development of an investment policy, hiring of a fiduciary third party to caretake and invest funds according to the investment policy goals and principles, and to report periodically (quarterly) on investment and Fund performance, and ongoing prudent management of Funds is a workable policy option that may provide the City with significantly greater potential for increased Perpetual Care revenue and Fund growth over the current, short term investment in the City’s cash pool.
ALTERNATE POLICY DIRECTION
In addition to the above options that focus on current City operation and maintenance, the City could also consider studying the feasibility of other Operating Models such as formation of a cemetery special district, or private management agreement, or sale to take on future operations and maintenance of the city’s two cemeteries. While the effort is beyond the capability of current staff and scope of this update on current operations, Council could direct staff to explore such an option and return with an informational report, feasibility study of the advantages and disadvantages, requirements and public input at a future date.
City of Santa Clara Page 7 of 10 Printed on 3/29/2023
powered by Legistar™
Endowment
$2,500,000
$2,000,000
$1,500,000
$1,000,000
$500,000
s- FY FY FY FY FY FY FY FY
2014/1.5 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 23-1633 Agenda Date: 4/4/2023
Formation of a Cemetery Special District
There are approximately 250 cemetery special districts in California that own and operate cemeteries, such as Madronia Cemetery in Saratoga. Special districts are created by local petition or through popular election and are either Independent or Dependent. Independent special districts are separate, local agencies directly accountable to their constituents, and may be enterprise (fee-based revenue) or non-enterprise (tax-based revenue). Dependent special districts are administrative extensions of cities (or counties) and accountable to that unit of government. They are funded through property taxes which provide the means to publicly finance the improvement, expansion and operation of public cemeteries and the provision of interment services. Independent special districts have slower rates of spending growth, are independently audited, and subject to public scrutiny, reporting annually to the State Controller. Districts are governed by boards of directors, elected or appointed to terms, and accountable to the public. The Boards are subject to initiative, referendum, recall, the Brown Act and related public agency statues. The directors are members of the communities they serve and must reside or own property with their respective service areas. They often work and interact within the community in which they reside. The cemeteries may belong to the California Association of Public Cemeteries, and the California Special District Association.
Explore Private Management Agreement
Many cemeteries in California are owned and operated by a private secular corporation such as Service Corporation International (owns Oak Hill), Carriage Services (owns Los Gatos Memorial Park), or a religiously affiliated corporation (church) such as Santa Clara University (owns Santa Clara Mission Cemetery) and the Diocese of San Jose (owns Gates of Heaven). The private cemeteries fall under the jurisdiction of the State of California Department of Consumer Affairs Cemetery and Funeral Bureau. They can charge market rate for their facilities and services and are not restricted to legislated cost recovery limits. This alternative would need significant research and expert consultation services to more fully develop and understanding of this option and its feasibility.
Other
Cemeteries close operations due to a variety of factors including lack of new developable space, no operations/maintenance staff, fiscal constraints and other reasons. Agnews Historic Cemetery is an example of a closed cemetery that was transferred by the State to the City which now has responsibility for ongoing maintenance. Perpetual care for closed cemeteries is an ongoing concern throughout the state and whose funding is best addressed through careful planning in advance.
NEXT STEPS
Policy Considerations for Council Input/Feedback
Staff is seeking Council input on a few fundamental policy considerations. 1) Should the City of Santa Clara continue with the current operating model of a cityowned, operated and maintained cemetery facility? A) If yes, what actions should be taken to better position the Cemetery for future short and long-term viability and fiscal solvency?
B) If no, which alternative operating model would the Council like staff to explore further, an independent cemetery district, and/or private management, closure? City of Santa Clara Page 8 of 10 Printed on 3/29/2023
powered by Legistar™
23-1633 Agenda Date: 4/4/2023
2) In order to better position the Cemetery for future financial viability, which operating budget enhancements does Council support?
A) Adjust existing fees for all Components of Burial to 100% Cost Recovery (market rate) for residents and non-residents. This action eliminates resident subsidies. The resident interment rights fee would increase by 25%, resulting in an estimated $36,000, per year, of additional revenue. The endowment care fee for residents would increase by approximately 50% (depending on various factors) and result in an estimated $100,000 additional Endowment principal per year.
B) Add an Administrative Fee to cover current year operations and maintenance. Currently, no fee is charged and adds to the City’s level of subsidy. A proposed fee of $440 (based on the estimated cost of the service) would result in approximately $55,000 of new annual operating revenue to offset the expenses.
C) Formation of an Endowment Care Trust and related actions. This would direct staff to develop a Perpetual Care Investment Trust (Committee, Commission, or other body), development of draft Investment Policy, actuarial to conduct Perpetual Care Adequacy Study, and a fiduciary to invest funds according to Council established policy goals and principles, with quarterly reports to Council, and City Finance Dept. & Auditor oversight. This may result in investment interest on the Endowment Care Funds above cash pool rate of return.
D) Update to Mission City Memorial Park - Rules & Regulations. There is a need to update the current rules and regulations and City Code to clarify the day-to-day operations such as City’s rights & responsibilities to reuse abandoned plots, regrade the cemetery property, define components of burial, procedures for disinterment, flower placement rules, process for customer service issues/appeals. Staff will return at a future meeting with an ordinance to adopt recommended changes to City Code and to provide an update to the rules and regulations for the Cemetery Division. Should there be the Council direction for the formation of an appropriate Endowment Care Trust agency, this direction would implement current best practices and/or other actions as directed by Council.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The action being considered is a study session only and does not constitute a “project” within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378(a), as it has no potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment.
FISCAL IMPACT
This is a study session item only with no direct fiscal impact.
COORDINATION
This report has been coordinated with the City Attorney’s Office, Parks & Recreation Department, Finance Department, and the City Manager’s Office.
PUBLIC CONTACT
Public contact was made by posting the Council agenda on the City’s official-notice bulletin board outside City Hall Council Chambers. A complete agenda packet is available on the City’s website City of Santa Clara Page 9 of 10 Printed on 3/29/2023
powered by Legistar™
23-1633 Agenda Date: 4/4/2023
and in the City Clerk’s Office at least 72 hours prior to a Regular Meeting and 24 hours prior to a Special Meeting. A hard copy of any agenda report may be requested by contacting the City Clerk’s Office at (408) 615-2220, email [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>.
RECOMMENDATION
Review the staff presentation and provide input.
Reviewed by: James Teixeira, Director, Parks & Recreation Department Approved by: Office of the City Manager
ATTACHMENTS
1. Presentation
City of Santa Clara Page 10 of 10 Printed on 3/29/2023
powered by Legistar™
City Council
Study Session
Mission City Memorial Park
RTC#23-1633
April 4, 2023
• Background
• Operations Summary
• Challenges & Policy Options
• Alternate Policy Direction
• Council Input
• Next Steps
Agenda
2 3
Background
3 • Operating Model
• Video Tour
• Facilities
• Services & Hours
• Personnel & Record Keeping
• Rules & Regulations
• Components of Burial
Background
4 • Operating Model
• Video Tour -- Mission City Memorial Park
Fox
Mausoleum
Background
5 Mission City Memorial Park
• 420 N. Winchester Drive
• In operation since 1850
• Owned by City of Santa Clara
• Maintained by Parks & Recreation
• Over 35,000 interments
• Over 500 trees & 70 bird species
• Showcases history of Santa Clara
Ji Crestview Or.
Sunrise
Gardens
City of
ThoMo,o~ O ara .. • • , ..... ,~ -·- ·--
Notes:
• Garden Cou Inside the G n Niche Bank I arden Mausoleu North~
. ""''
6 MCMP – history
• 1850 Town purchased a two-acre plot
• Land added for stray animals & town dump
• September 13, 1864 – First documented
burial Walter S. McDonald
• 1864 plots ranged from $20 to $25;
Potter’s Field for indigents $2 to $5
• 1937 Federal Work Projects Administration
(WPA) employed 175 men which built the
Indoor Mausoleum for $100,000
Background
Current Operating Model:
• City owned, operated, maintained
– City sets Biennial Operating Budget, Capital Improvement Program, & Fees (Municipal Fee Schedule) to determine level of service, cost recovery/subsidy levels – City Code applies, adopts own Rules & Regulations
• Pros:
– Local control, On-site staff, one stop shop
– High touch/continuity of City service, lower resident fees – Other City divisions and General Fund support for grounds maintenance/admin functions • Cons:
– Fees and policies impact level of service, assets, maintenance, investment strategy Operations
7 - - ~ '
~ Cityof
~ ~~~~~ S~!~a
. ,. ,_ -
Background
8 Agnews Historic Cemetery & Museum
• 1250 Hope Drive, Santa Clara
• Closed to new burials – There are no 1906
earthquake burials
• Visitor Center – run by volunteer docents
• Grounds – Maintained by Cemetery staff &
volunteers
• Museum remembers workers and residents
of the Agnews State Hospital and the Agnews
Developmental Center from 1888 to 2009.
Facilities
9 Indoor Mausoleum Outdoor Garden Mausoleum
• Above ground interment sites – mausoleum burial crypts, niche banks, communal niche,
• Historic family plots, roadways, pathways
Sarah Fox Mausoleum
~ ~!1Xt~f Clara ... ,.,.o•~' The Center of What's Possible Facilities
10 Upright monument sections Flat marker sections
• In ground interment sites – single/double casket (body), urn (cremains) ffl Cityof ~ Santa Clara ..... ,.o•~' The Center of What's Possible Facilities
11 • Administration office
• Chapel
• Maintenance yard & building
• Office Hours
» Monday – Friday 8 a.m. -12 p.m.,1 – 5 p.m.
» Pre-need and at-need Consultation & Sales
» Cemetery administration & maintenance
• Visiting hours
» Monday – Friday 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
» Saturday 9:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
• Burials
» By appointment
Hours
12 Personnel
13 • Total staff: 6 FTE
– Cemetery Operations Manager (1 FT)
– Office Specialist II (1 FT)
– Grounds Maintenance Workers I, II, III (3 FT)
– Laborer 1000 hours (2 AN)
– Supplemented by volunteers
• Paper records, old software
– Need – efficiency, access, data security
• Code, Rules & Regulations
– Need – update
• Interment Right
• The right to place a loved one at MCMP
• For immediate or future need, for two persons in one grave or niche • Outer Burial Container (Burial Vault)
• For below ground burial
• Protects contents from weight of earth or equipment moving over grave • Opening & Closing Service
• Physical act of preparing the site for burial
• Occurs each time a site is accessed (second burial, disinterment) • Paid at time of Need
Components of Burial
14 - - ~ '
~ Cityof
~ ~~~~~ S~!~a
. ,. ,_ -
• Grave Marker Setting
• Optional for graves, required for niche or crypt
• Guidelines for type & size based on section; markers provided by others • Administration & Maintenance
• Free of charge (currently subsidized)
• Perpetual Endowment Care
• One-time, per capita charge, for future grounds & building maintenance • Funds placed in City cash pool (not invested long term) Components of Burial
15 - - ~ '
~ Cityof
~ ~~~~~ S~!~a
. ,. ,_ -
16 Operations Summary
16 • Budget
• Operations Summary
Operations Summary
17 Category FY2019/20 FY2020/21 FY2021/22 Avg
Purchases
Burial Right Recording Fees 12 20 25 19
Cremation Niche (AG) 9 30 32 24
Cremation Plot 13 24 29 22
Casket/Crypt (AG) 2 1 0 1
Casket/Plot 19 22 33 25
Burial
Cremation Burial 29 35 46 37
Casket Burial 59 57 70 62
Cremation Placement (AG) 16 28 27 24
Casket Placement (AG) 0 1 1 1
- - ~ '
~ Cityof
~ ~~~~~ S~!~a
. ,. ,_ -
18 Budget
Revenues
• Total: $1.9 M per year
• About half from fees, interment
rights, labor charges
• About half from General Fund
subsidy of $870k per year
Expenditures
• Total: $1.9 M per year
• Salaries $508,000
• Benefits $312,000
• Materials & Supplies $383,000
• Interfund charges $342,000
Cemetery Enterprise Fund
- - ~ '
~ Cityof
~ ~~~~~ S~!~a
. ,. ,_ -
Operating Budget
19 10 year trends
• Revenues not keeping up with expenses
• Annual General Fund subsidy
$1,600,000
$1,400,000
$1,200,000
$1,000,000
$800,000
$600,000
$400,000
$200,000
$-
Revenue vs. Expenditures
~ Sales/labor/Materials ~ Expenditures
~ ~!1Xt~f Clara ... ,.,.o• ~' The Center of What's Possible $1 ,000,000
$900,000
$800,000
$700,000
$600,000
$500,000
$400,000
$300,000
$200,000
$100,000
$-
General Fund Subsidy
20 Cemetery Challenges
• Subsidized Services & Fees
• Aged Infrastructure
• Capital Budget
• Endowment Fund
Policy Options
20 Operating Budget
21 • Subsidized Fees Constrain Budget Available for Services & Facilities – Office hours (pre-need & at-need appointments)
– Visiting hours & supervision of grounds/facilities
– Funeral times
– Maintenance frequency
– Staff Training, knowledge transfer
– Delays in Capital Project implementation
• Policy Options to Improve Service, Reduce Expense
– Increase existing fees to full cost recovery/market rate – Eliminate resident subsidies for components of burial – Introduce new fees, new services, reduce utility costs – Cemetery management software to improve efficiency, security, access - - ~ ' ~ Cityof
~ ~~~~~ S~!~a
. ,. ,_ -
• Aged Infrastructure
Facility Condition Assessment (Kitchell, 2017)
– Cemetery Grounds
» Needs = $1,173,683.
» Grade: 23 (Poor)
– Cemetery Buildings
» Needs = $772,945. not including cost escalation
» Grade: 9 (Fair)
• Construction Cost Escalation
• Limited Capital Funding
– No dedicated, ongoing source(s)
» Limits/delays lifecycle replacement, major rehabilitation » Limits acquisition and development/expansion of grounds and facilities 22 Capital Budget
- - ~ '
~ Cityof
~ ~~~~~ S~!~a
. ,. ,_ -
• Perpetual / Endowed Care
– Purpose: generate income to cover
cemetery maintenance in perpetuity
– Assures long term funding source for
maintenance, repair & facility renewal
– Currently placed in City cash pool
– Many states require a perpetual care or
endowment care trust
• Impacts – short & long term
– Current practice NOT providing enough
revenue to support future cost of
maintenance at current service levels
– Need to protect & grow principal
– Need to increase rate of return
Endowment Fund
23 Endowment
$2,500,000
$2,000,000
$1,500,000
$1,000,000
$500,000
$-
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 • Perpetual Care/Endowment Care Trust
– Assure long term source of funding for perpetual maintenance, repair and renewal – Insulate funds from current general operating revenues, changes in demographics, and cemetery market trends
– Establish a perpetual care endowment Trust, Commission, or Committee – Develop an Endowment Fund Trust & Investment Policy
– Have fiduciary invest funds according to policy goals and principles – Actuarial conducts Perpetual Care Adequacy Study to model 100-year income/expenses • Uniform Prudent Management of Institutional Funds Act (UPMIFA) – Law enacted 2006. Provides guidance on investment decisions & endowment expenditures – Adopted by California and the vast majority of US states – “Endowment funds” are a subset of “institutional funds” that are not wholly expendable by the institution on a current basis;
– Have spending rule requirements; must follow UPMIFA guidelines regarding prudent mgmt Perpetual Care
24 - - ~ '
~ Cityof
~ ~~~~~ S~!~a
. ,. ,_ -
• Established a “Funds Commission” responsible for managing all trust, perpetuity, and investment funds
• Established a Cemetery Perpetuity Fund (Fund) and placed in Funds Commission’s custody by Charter
• San Diego City Charter requires
– the Fund be invested in income-producing securities
– the principal of the Fund shall not be available for distribution – all income derived from the investment is to be expended for the cemetery care • Engaged a Fund Manager (fiduciary investment firm)
• Developed an Investment Policy Statement (IPS) for the Fund to guides investments • Fund Manager provides quarterly investment updates to the Funds Commission • Conducted an RFP for the Fund’s investment management and custody services Perpetual Care – City of San Diego
25 - - ~ '
~ Cityof
~ ~~~~~ S~!~a
. ,. ,_ -
• Established a Cemetery Perpetual Care Fund and a Mausoleum Perpetual Care Fund (Funds)
• Funds are managed and accounted separately per City of Santa Monica Municipal Code • Funds held in trust by the City on behalf of the owners of the plots, crypts, niches • The principal portion of the Funds can only be used for investment and reinvestment purposes • Income from Funds is used for perpetual care costs
• Investment guidelines for the Funds established by City Council – protecting the principal value
– maximize portfolio income
– comply with legal guidelines
• The nature and structure of the portfolio require the retention of an investment manager – 60% of Funds are invested in equities
– remainder invested in fixed income instruments
Perpetual Care – City of Santa Monica
26 - - ~ '
~ Cityof
~ ~~~~~ S~!~a
. ,. ,_ -
27 Mission City Memorial Park
• Policy Questions
• Operating Model
• Adjust Fees to Market Rate, Eliminate
subsidies
• Endowment Care Trust
• Update Rules & Regulations
• Council Feedback
• Next Steps
27 • Formation of a Cemetery Special District
– Over 250 in California
– Created by local petition or through popular election – Independent special districts are separate, local agencies directly accountable to constituents
» revenue may be enterprise (fee-based) or non-enterprise (tax-based); have slower rates of spending growth, are independently audited, and subject to public scrutiny, reporting annually to the State Controller
– Dependent special districts are administrative extensions of cities (or counties) and accountable to that unit of government
» funded through property taxes which provide the means to publicly finance the improvement, expansion and operation of public cemeteries and provision of interment services • Districts are governed by boards of directors, elected or appointed to terms, and accountable to the public
– Boards subject to initiative, referendum, recall, Brown Act & related public agency statutes Alternate Policy Direction
28 - - ~ '
~ Cityof
~ ~~~~~ S~!~a
. ,. ,_ -
29 Policy Direction
29 1. Should the City of Santa Clara continue with the current operating model of a city owned, operated and maintained cemetery facility? A) If yes, what actions should be taken to better position the Cemetery for future short and long-term viability and fiscal solvency? B) If no, which alternative operating model would the Council like staff to explore further, an independent cemetery district, and/or private management agreement, closure.
Council Input
30 - - ~ '
~ Cityof
~ ~~~~~ S~!~a
. ,. ,_ -
31 Operating Program
Enhancements
31 2. In order to better position the Cemetery for future financial viability, which operating budget enhancements does Council support:
A) Adjust existing fees for all Components of Burial to 100% Cost Recovery (market rate) for residents and non-residents. This action eliminates resident subsidies. The resident interment rights fee would increase by 25%, resulting in an estimated $36,000 per year additional revenue. the endowment care fee for residents would increase by approximately 50% (depending upon various factors) and result in an estimated $100,000 additional Endowment principal per year.
B) Add an Administrative Fee to cover current year operations and maintenance. Currently no fee is charged and adds to the City’s level of subsidy. A proposed fee of $440 (based on the estimated cost of the service) would result in approximately $55,000 of new operating revenue to offset the expenses.
C) Formation of an Endowment Care Trust and related actions. This would direct staff to develop a Perpetual Care Investment Trust (Committee, Commission, or other body), development of draft Investment Policy, actuarial to conduct Perpetual Care Adequacy Study, and a fiduciary to invest funds according to Council established policy goals and principles, quarterly reports to Council, City Finance Dept. & Auditor oversight. May result in investment interest on the Endowed Care Funds above cash pool rate of return.
Council Input
32 - - ~ '
~ Cityof
~ ~~~~~ S~!~a
. ,. ,_ -
33 Next Steps
33 Next Steps
• As appropriate, staff to return at future meeting with:
– Rules & Regulations update
– Additional Information/Clarifications Requested by Council – Actions to Adjust Fee Schedules
– Actions Related to Perpetual Care Trust
» Perpetual Care Adequacy Study
» Formation of a Council Committee, appointed Commission, Other (Council/Staff)
» Development of an Investment Policy
» Selection Process to Hire Fiduciary/Consultant for Investments 34 - - ~ '
~ Cityof
~ ~~~~~ S~!~a
. ,. ,_ -
City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
23-484 Agenda Date: 4/4/2023
REPORT TO COUNCIL
SUBJECT
Per City Council Policy 042: Reconsideration of Council Action-Reconsideration of Council action taken March 7, 2023 regarding a Resolution Declaring City-Owned Property Located at 2319 Gianera Street as Surplus Land as Required by State Law [APNs: 104-05-052]
COUNCIL PILLAR
Deliver and Enhance High Quality Efficient Services and Infrastructure
BACKGROUND
The City of Santa Clara owns a single-family home located at 2319 Gianera Street (Property). The City purchased the property on October 14, 1983 for $155,000 from the General Fund (Attachment 1). On the same Agenda, the Council also approved the authorization to prepare legal notices for the lease of the property at a minimum rate of $800 per month. It is assumed the property was likely leased between 1983 and 1998, however staff was not able to locate those records.
In 1998, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Santa Clara approved $25,000 in Affordable Housing Funds for the rehabilitation of the property. Later in 1998, a Master Lease Agreement (Attachment 2) was approved between the Redevelopment Agency and Project Match to be used as shared housing for low-income seniors. The property was last used as affordable housing around 2012-2014. It is staff’s understanding that Project Match cited difficulties in managing a single, and there were not enough economies of scale. The City did not have capacity to manage it as a rental unit, and it has been vacant since that time.
A description of the property is provided below:
· Single Family Home
· Gross Building Area - 1,140 SF
· Lot size - 12,478 SF
· Built in the 1960's
· Current Appraisal - $1.59 million
The appraisal (Attachment 3) provides pictures of the current condition of the property.
While there have not been day-to-day operational needs to maintain the property, it is maintained on an as needed basis. As an example, previously landscaping, weed management, tree trimming, and back fence replacement had to be completed and currently a fence replacement will be required and is being planned for both side and front fences. In addition, staff has requested assistance from the Police Department to enforce trespassing in the property as a homeless individual had previously City of Santa Clara Page 1 of 4 Printed on 3/30/2023
powered by Legistar™
23-484 Agenda Date: 4/4/2023
broken into the home.
DISCUSSION
Staff considered near-term and long term uses for the property and none were identified. When the City desires to dispose of land not necessary for agency use, it must first declare the land surplus at a regular public meeting and make written findings supporting the declaration that the land is “surplus land.”
The SLA and the Surplus Land Declaration
Effective January 1, 2020, Assembly Bill (AB) No. 1486 amended the SLA by prohibiting local agencies from commencing negotiations over the sale or lease of surplus property prior to sending notices about available, surplus local public land to designated entities (Eligible Entities), including:
· California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). · Any local public entity within the jurisdiction where the surplus local land is located. · Developers who have notified HCD of their interest in developing affordable housing on surplus local land.
Importantly, AB 1486 now requires a local agency to declare property as “surplus land” before taking any actions to dispose of such property. The declaration must be made by the legislative body of the local agency.
Following the declaration of surplus, the City must provide a NOA to the Eligible Entities for specified uses, including affordable housing, parks and recreation, and schools. An Eligible Entity desiring to purchase or lease the surplus land for any of the purposes described above must notify the City in writing of its intent to purchase or lease the land within 60 days after the receipt of the City’s notification of intent to dispose of the land.
If the City receives notice of interest from any Eligible Entities, the SLA mandates a 90-day negotiation period with any designated entities that submit timely offers. If no notice of interest is received or negotiations do not result in a disposition, the City may proceed with disposing of the land. The SLA does not require the City to dispose of surplus land at less than fair market value. (In fact, State Dissolution Laws require that the City dispose of the property at the highest value.) However, the SLA requires that, at a minimum, any subsequent development of 10 or more residential units on the site must designate at least 15 percent of units as affordable.
Generally, the Surplus Land Act (SLA) identifies three categories of land: (1) land necessary for “agency use,” (2) land no longer necessary for agency use but exempt from most of the SLA (“exempt surplus land”), and (3) land no longer necessary for agency use that is not exempt (“Surplus Land”). “Agency use” is defined as land that is being used or that has a planned use “pursuant to a written plan adopted by the local agency’s governing board.” Agency use does not include commercial or industrial uses, including retail, entertainment, office, or any property disposed of for the sole purpose of investment or revenue generation. (Gov. Code § 54221(c).) The proposed Resolution (Attachment 4) declares the Property as Surplus Land. Approval of the Resolution would provide that the Council finds that the City owns the Property in fee simple, the City does not currently use the Property, and the City has no written or adopted plan for future use of the City of Santa Clara Page 2 of 4 Printed on 3/30/2023
powered by Legistar™
23-484 Agenda Date: 4/4/2023
Property. Further findings include that the Property is no longer necessary for the City’s use or operations and thus should be declared surplus.
If Council adopts the proposed Resolution declaring the 2319 Gianera Street as surplus, staff will proceed with the disposition process by issuing a Notice of Availability (NOA) (Attachment 5) to certain parties as designated by HCD Guidelines. (Gov. Code §54222; HCD Guidelines, 201.) The anticipated process is outlined below.
The anticipated process is outlined below:
Notices of Availability and Noticing Period
Per the SLA, after City Council issues the surplus declaration, staff will issue NOAs to the Eligible Entities, beginning a minimum 60-day noticing period. Staff will release NOAs. During the 60-day noticing period, the SLA restricts City discretion in negotiating with potential buyers, prioritizing NOA responses, and limiting project design features. State law requires the City to first respond exclusively to Eligible Entities and to give priority to proposals that provide at least 25 percent of a project’s housing units affordable to lower-income households (at or below 80 percent of area median income). If multiple proposals provide at least 25 percent affordable units, State law requires prioritizing the project with the greater number of affordable units. If multiple proposals contain the same number of affordable units, staff are required to prioritize projects that provide the deepest average level of affordability for its affordable units. The City is also prevented from negotiating terms that would prevent residential use (even if not permitted by the existing zoning), reduce density below what is allowed by zoning, or impose design requirements that would have a substantial adverse effect on viability for affordable housing.
90-Day Negotiation with Eligible Entities
If staff receives a notice of interest from one or more Eligible Entity, staff will begin negotiations for a period of no less than 90 days.
Project Selection and Return to Council
If negotiations lead to development of a potential project, staff will return to Council to present the recommended project proposal for public comment and Council authorization for an Exclusive Negotiation Agreement (ENA). If no notices of interest are received or if negotiations conclude with no recommended project proposals, the City can proceed with its regular process for disposition of the city owned properties.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The declaration of the Property as surplus land and posting of the Notice of Availability is not a project within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) under CEQA Guidelines section 15206(b)(4), 15312 and 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the declaration and associated activities will have a significant effect on the environment because no development or construction is proposed.
FISCAL IMPACT
There are no additional costs anticipated at this time. If the property is sold, proceeds from the property sale, by City Council Policy, are recommended to be placed in the General Fund Land Sale Reserve.
City of Santa Clara Page 3 of 4 Printed on 3/30/2023
powered by Legistar™
23-484 Agenda Date: 4/4/2023
PUBLIC CONTACT
Public contact was made by posting the Council agenda on the City’s official-notice bulletin board outside City Hall Council Chambers. A complete agenda packet is available on the City’s website and in the City Clerk’s Office at least 72 hours prior to a Regular Meeting and 24 hours prior to a Special Meeting. A hard copy of any agenda report may be requested by contacting the City Clerk’s Office at (408) 615-2220, email [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> or at the public information desk at any City of Santa Clara public library.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Approve Resolution Declaring City-Owned Property Located at 2319 Gianera Street Surplus.
2. Do not approve Resolution Declaring 2319 Gianera Street Surplus.
3. Any other Council Direction.
RECOMMENDATION
Alternative 1: Approve a Resolution Declaring City-Owned Property Located at 2319 Gianera Street Surplus.
Reviewed by: Manuel Pineda, Assistant City Manager
Approved by: Office of the City Manager
ATTACHMENTS
1. 1983 Minutes
2. 1998 Lease
3. Property Appraisal Report
4. Resolution
5. Notice of Availability
6. Post Meeting Material - PowerPoint Presentation Given at March 7, 2023 Council Meeting
7. Resolution 23-9203
City of Santa Clara Page 4 of 4 Printed on 3/30/2023
powered by Legistar™
en
"J'-
C\l
(.)
co
<(
function known as "Flow Analysis" in lieu of the obligation for Mr.
Feldhaus to develop a new Sigma version. Motion was approved by the Council.
61 It was moved by Councilman Mahan, seconded by Councilman Tobkin, that the Council note and file the contents of Staff report (10/14/83) entitl ed "City/School Liaison Committee meeting Agenda - Meeting of October 25, 1983". Motion was approved by the Council.
Motion was made by Councilman Mahan, seconded by Councilman Tobkin, that, pursuant to Staff recommendations (10/6/83), Council approve a five percent salary adjustment for the Chief Electric and Water Systems Control Operator, effective the beginning of the next pay period.
Motion was approved by the Council.
Pursuant to Staff recommendations (10/13/8 3) , it was moved by Councilwoman Street, seconded by Councilman Tobkin, that the Council approve and authorize necessary signatures on behalf of the City on the following items: An Option to Lease Agreement; the Associated Lease; and the Option Payment in the amount of $45,000, with Southern Pacific Land Company, subject to final wording changes in the proposed documents to be approved by the City Attorney. Said proposed Agreement/Lease provides an option to lease for the development of several hydroelectric projects in the Trinity River Basin, including the East Fork Trinity No. 1 (approximately 3 .8 5 MW); East Fork Trinity No. 2 ( approximately 4.81 MW); Swift Creek ( approximately 4.6 MW); and for identified sites in the Upper East Fork Trinity Basin (total of approximately 15 MW). Motion was approved by the Council.
It was moved by Councilwoman Street , seconded by Councilman Tobkin, that pursuant to Staff recommendations (10/11/8 3 ), Council not authorize the execution of "Agreement for the Temporary Transfer of Project No. 2 Power" but direct the transmittai of a letter (10/11/8 3) to NCPA indicating Santa Clara's continued interest in the purchase of Northern California Power Agency (NCPA) Geothermal Project #2 when the City's concerns· have be.en adequately add·ressed. Motion was approved by the Council.
Motion was made by Councilman Tobkin, seconded by Councilman Ash, that, pursuant to Staff recommendations (10/14/83), the Council approve the purchase of certain property located at 2319 Gianera Street for the purchase price of $155,000; direct Staff to comp l ete the necessary transactions to effect above sal e ; and approve a Budget appropriation in the amount of $156,000 from General Contingency Reserve Budget Acconnt #063/0442 to Gianera Street Property Acquisition Budget Account #038/2105;{)020/000, to cover purchase price and incidental escrow fees for above property which will allow the relocation of Pacific Gas and Electric Comp any transmission power lines. Motion was approved by the following vote: Ayes : Councilmen Ash, Mahan, Souza, Street, Tobkin and Mayor Pro Tempore Martinez; Noes: None; Absent: Mayor Gissler.
It was moved by Councilman Tobkin, seconded by Councilman Mahan, that the Council note and file the contents of Staff report (10/ 14/83) regarding Assembly.Bill No. 1573 which concerns a possible change in the State Business and Professions Code, relating to Gaming Clubs.
Motion was approved by the Council.
Motion was made by Councilman Tobkin, seconded by Councilman Mahan, that Bills and Claims, as revised, in the amount of $815,439.25, submitted by the City Manager, be approved for payment. Also , that the fo llowing progress payments be approved: $295,076.32 to Moore Systems (SCADA - Electric Department); $233,018.28 to U.S.S. Fabrication (Northside Water Storage Tank #2); $205 ,000.00 to Ellerbe Associates, Inc. (Santa Clara Conference Center); $177,570.10 to Dickman Builders, Inc. (Communications/Emergency Operations Center - Partial Retention ); $53,249.70 to Duncan, Weinberg & Miller (Lega l Services - September 1983); $27,769.87 to Charles F. Gagliasso Trucking, Inc. (Contracts of Opporunity to Haul Dirt to Golf Course); $26,750.47 to Sverdrup & Parcel (Stony Gorge Hydroelectric Project Design); $7,936.32 to The Pied Piper Exterminators (On-Call Tree Trim); $4,857.00 to Bill Wilson Center (Per Agreement); $2,100.00 to Royston, Hanamoto, Alley & Abey (Central Park Play Area); $2,095.90 to Burns & McDonnell (Cal l s #4, 5 & 6 Professional Services - Electric Department); $1,826.00 to J .L. Drew Construction (Street Department Corporation Yard Locker Room ); $1,770.00 to Dawn Kettler (Per Agreement); $1 ,430. 52 to SAI Engineers, Inc . (Call #20 - Relay at Homestead Substation); $1,215.00 to John T. Jorgl (Architect - Rehabilitation Program); $1 ,1 23 . 30 to Spiegel & McDiarmid (Legal Services- m
"1"
(\j
0 m
107
It was moved by Councilmernber Street , seconded by Councilmember Mahan , that, pursuant to Staff recormnendations (12/15/83) , the Council approve and authorize the necessary signatures on beha1f of the C~ty_ on the Maintenance Con:-ract for Cogeneration Plant No . 1 , with :jf,3 Williams-& Lane, Inq. ,~ fo1: i:;he fixed sum of $98 , 407 per year for three years . .Motiori was approved by the Council . .
Pursuant to Staff recommendations ( 12/13/83), it was moved by Counci l member Street, seconded by Councilmember Mahan, that the Council approve the Plans and Specifications for the drilling of new Water We l l No . 13 - 02 ; authorize the execution of the application to the State of Ca.lifornia for Well Permit ; and authorize the use of City Forces to install certain piping and electrical appurtenances to the well. Motion was approved by the Council.
Motion was J:Ylade by CouncilJ:Ylember Street , seconded by Councilmember Mahan, that the Council approve and authorize necessary signatures on behalf of the City on certain Property Development Agreements and prepayment of development fees, per Staff report (12/15/83). Motion was approved by the Council .
Pursuant to Staff recommendations ( 12/15/83) , it was moved by Councilmember Street, seconded by Councilmember Mahan, that Council approve the Total Compensation Increases for Santa Clara Firefighters Association , Local 1171 , Unit #1-1984, providing for a total salary increase of 6.38%. Motion was approved by the Council .
It was moved by Councilmember Street, seconded by Councilmember Mahan, that, pursuant to Staff recommendations (12/15/83 ), the Council approve the authorization to prepare legal notices for the Lease of City-owned House - Gianera· Street , at a minimum rate of $800 per ITOnth.
Motion was approved by the Council .
Motion was made by Councilmember Street, seconded by Councilmember Mahan , that the Council note and file Application 83 - 13-03 filed by Pacific Gas & Electric Company to the State Public Utilities Commission requesting authorization td revise electric and gas tariffs under its Solar Financing Adjustment . Motion was approved by the Council .
It was moved by Councilmember Street , seconded by Councilmember Mahan , that , pursuant to Staff recommendations (12/15/83) , the Council approve Salary and Fringe Benefit Increases for Electrical Workers Bargai ning Unit #3-1984, providing for a salary increase of 7.23% .
Motion was approved by the Council.
Motion was made by Councilmember Street , seconded by Councilmember Mahan , that, pursuant to Staff recommendations (12/15/83) , the Council approve the Salary and Fringe Benefit Increases for Police Unclassified Bargaining Unit #9A-1984 , providing for a salary increase of
6.38% . Motion was approved by the Council.
Pursuant to Staff recommendations (12/15/83), it was m9ved by Councilmember Street , seconded by Councilmember Mahan, that the Council approve the Salary and Fringe Benefit Increases for Police Association · Bargaining Unit #2-1984;" providing for a salary increase of 6.32% . Motion was approved by the Council .
It was moved by Councilmember Street , seconded by Councilmember Mahan , that, pursuant to Staff recommendations (12/7/83), the Council approve the Addendum to Memorandum of Understanding for Fire Safety Unit #1 , modifying the method of medical insurance payments for retired personnel. Motion was approved by the Council.
Motion was made by Councilmember Lasher , seconded by Councilmember . Tobkin , that the Council accept the letter of resignation (12/5/ 83 ) submitted by Mr . John J . Kiely, and declare an opening on the Board of Library Trustees for term ending July 1986 . Also, that Councilset:
noon , January 13, 1984 as the deadline for the receipt of applications, with the Council to interview and consider filling said vacancy at the .January 17 , 1984 City Council meeting ; also, with an appropriate Certificate to be issued to above former Commission member for past services rendered to the City . Motion was approved by the Council .
Pursuant to the recommendations of the City Attorney (12/12/83) , 1t was moved by Councilmember Tobkin , seconded by Councilmember Lasher , I . , .. fh~ lYidd- 2311 #kW/'lVlft.,- 2fll..id ~ ,M,~ H,ua,/#Uj ·o ! , cl(}"V.r qlY/tcrtM. ~ -- 0 Meeting Date: 11/2,/11 - ' AGENDA REPOR{ Agendaitem# '18 Council [)J
Agency
SOSA
□ City of Santa Clara, California
□
DATE:
TO:
November 4, 1998
City Manager for Council Action
Executive Director for Agency Action
FROM: Redevelopment Agency Deputy Director
APPROVED BY COUNCIL
oa o: 4a~l tr
~~-/. /4. / .$1>..S
SUBJECT: Adoption of a City/ Agency Resolution Approving a Sublease Agreement between the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Santa Clara and Project Match, Inc. for the Sublease of Property Located at 2319 Gianera Street to Project Match to be Used to Provide Shared Housing for Very Low Income Seniors and Making Certain Findings with Respect to Such Sublease
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: On September 29, 1998, the Redevelopment Agency approved the use of $25,000 in Affordable Housing funds for the rehabilitation of a three bedroom home owned by the City and located at 2319 Gianera Street (Property). On October 20, 1998, the City and Agency approved a Master Lease Agreement between the City and the Agency for the property and scheduled a Joint Public Hearing for November 10, 1998 to consider the sublease of the property by the Agency to Project Match. The Master Lease provides for the Agency to lease the property at a market rate of $24,000 a year. The annual rent to be received by the Agency under the Sublease Agreement will be at a below market rate of approximately $6,000 a year in order to provide a subsidy for the very low income seniors who will be occupying the home.
The Sublease Agreement, drafted by Agency Special Counsel, Glenn Wasserman of Kane Ballmer and Berkman, has been reviewed and accepted by Project Match. The Agency and Project Match will execute the Sublease Agreement when the upgrades to the property have been completed and the property is ready for occupancy. Redevelopment law requires City approval before the Agency leases property acquired with tax increment funds and that the disposition of that property be considered at a Noticed Public Hearing. The Agency will be using tax increment set-asides to lease the property from the City and therefore the Public Hearing and City approval are required.
The proposed Sublease Agreement and the City/ Agency Resolution approving the Sublease have been placed in Council Office for review.
ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES: Approval of the Resolutions will further the City/ Agency goals of providing safe decent affordable housing in the City of Santa Clara.
Agenda Report- Sublease of Gianera Property
November 10, 1998
Page2
ECONOMIC/FISCAL IMPACT: The Sublease Agreement will provide the Agency with a minimum annual rent of $6,000 which will be deposited to the Agency's Affordable Housing Fund.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council/Agency approve the Resolutions approving the Sublease Agreement between the Agency and Project Match which provides for the sublease by the Agency to Project Match, property located at 2319 Gianera Street and making certain findings with respect to the Sublease of the property.
Kathleen
~~ Hickey
Deputy Director
APPROVED:
/~~~ ~YlJJ-CilL~
\.Ynnifer ~paracino
City Manager
Executive Director
CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA
RESOLUTION NO. 6505 ------
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA
APPROVING A SUBLEASE BETWEEN THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA AND PROJECT MATCH, INC. AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS WITH RESPECT TO SUCH SUBLEASE.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA, AS FOLLOWS:
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Santa Clara has heretofore adopted the Redevelopment Plan for the Bayshore North Redevelop~ent Project on December 28, 1973 by Ordinance No. 1283 (the "Redevelopment Plan"); and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 33334.2(a) and 33334.6(c) of the California Community Redevelopment Law (Cal. Health and Safety Code Section 33000 et seq.) not less than 20% of all taxes which are allocated to the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Santa Clara ("Agency") are set aside by the Agency in a Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund and used by the Agency for the purpose of increasing, improving and preserving the community's supply of low and moderate housing available at affordable housing costs to persons and families of low and moderate income, including very low income persons; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 33334.2(e) of the Community Redevelopment Law, the Agency may exercise any and all of its powers to carry out this purpose; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 33334. 6 (a) of the Community Redevelopment Law, the California State Legislature has found and declared that the provision of affordable housing outside of
redevelopment project areas can be of direct benefit to those projects in assisting the accomplishment of project objectives; and WHEREAS, in connection with the Rede-v:elopment Plan, the Agency has established a Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund in accordance with California Health and Safety Code Section 33334.2 et §.§.SL.. (the "Housing Funds"), to provide funding for housing within the City of Santa Clara that is affordable to persons and families of very low, low or moderate income; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 33334. 2 (g) of the Community Redevelopment Law, Agency may use the Housing Funds to assist in the provision of housing for low or moderate income households outside the Redevelopment Project Area upon resolution of the City Council and the Redevelopment Agency that such use will be of benefit to the Redevelopment Projects; and
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Clara (the 11 City11 ) owns a single family residence · in the City of Santa Clara outside of the Redevelopment Project area (the "Property") and the City and Agency have heretofore found that the use of Housing Funds to rehabilitate the Property and provide housing subsidies on behalf of persons of very low income is of benefit to the Redevelopment Project; and WHEREAS, City and Agency have heretofore entered into a Master Lease, pursuant to which Agency will master lease the Property from City and sublease it in order to provide for its use as affordable housing; and
WHEREAS, Project Match, Inc., a California nonprofit
corporation ("Project Match"), has offered to sublease the Property from Agency in order to provide for its use as affordable housing for very low income households; and
WHEREAS, Project Match has requested that Agency enter into a Sublease in the form presented to this City Council, pursuant to which the Agency will make certain improvements to the Property and sublease the Property to Project Match, for a rent and pursuant to the conditions and restrictions contained in the Sublease, and Project Match will sub-sublease the Property to very low income households, for an affordable rent; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Community Redevelopment Law (California Health and Safety Code, Sections 33000, et seq.) this City Council and the Agency held a joint public hearing on the proposed Sublease, having duly published notice of such public hearing and made copies of the proposed Sublease available for public inspection and comment; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has duly considered all terms and conditions of the proposed Sublease and believes that it is in the best interests of the City and the health, safety, morals and welfare of its residents, and in accord with the public purposes and provisions of applicable state and local law and requirements.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Santa Clara hereby finds and resolves as follows:
1. The City Council hereby finds that the foregoing recitals are true and correct.
2. The City Council recognizes that it has received and heard all oral and written objections to the proposed sublease of the Property pursuant to the Sublease and to other matters pertaining to this transaction, and that all such oral and written objections are hereby overruled.
)
3. The City Council . hereby finds and determines that the Sublease will provide affordable housing for very low income persons.
4. The Sublease is hereby approved.
5. This Resolution shall take effect upon adoption.
6. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution, shall enter the same in the Book of Resolutions of the City Council, and shall cause the action of the Mayor and.
City Council in adopting the same to be entered in the official minutes of the City Council.
* * * *
I HEREBY CERTIFY THE FOREGOING TO BE A TRUE COPY OF THE RESOLUTION
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA AT A REGULAR MEETING THEREOF HELD ON THE 10TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 1998, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTES:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAINED:
COUNCILMEMBERS: Di ridon, Gillmor, Mahan, Mclemore, Parle and Mayor Nadler
COQNCILMEMBERS: None
COUNCILMEMBERS: Arno
COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ATTEST: ----==--==--~ =--===:::-::'."'=-:='::':r=~""
lerk
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF
THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA
RESOLUTION NO. 98-13 (RA)
A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA APPROVING A SUBLEASE WITH PROJECT MATCH, INC. AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS WITH RESPECT TO SUCH SUBLEASE.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA, AS FOLLOWS:
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Santa Clara has heretofore adopted the Redevelopment Plan for the Bayshore North Redevelopment Project on December 28, 1973 by Ordinance No. 1283 (the "Redevelopment Plan 11 ); and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 33334.2(a) and 33334.6(c) of the California Community Redevelopment Law (Cal. Health and Safety Code Section 33000 et seq.) not less than 20% of all taxes which are allocated to the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Santa Clara ( 11 Agency 11 ) are set aside by the Agency in a Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund and used by the Agency for the purpose of increasing, improving and preserving the community's supply of low and moderate housing available at affordable housing costs to persons and families of low and moderate income, including very low income persons; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 33334. 2 (e) of the Community Redevelopment Law, the Agency may exercise any and all of its powers to carry out this purpose; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 33334.6(a) of the Community Redevelopment Law, the California State Legislature has found and declared that the provision of affordable housing outside of
redevelopment project areas can be of direct benefit. to those projects in assisting the accomplishment of project objectives; and WHEREAS, in connection with the Redevelopment Plan, the Agency has established a Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund in accordance with California Health and Safety Code Section 33334.2 et g_g__,_ (the "Housing Funds 11 ), to provide funding for housing within the City of Santa Clara that is affordable to persons and families of very low, low or moderate income; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Sect ion 3 3 3 3 4. 2 ( g) of the Community Redevelopment Law, Agency may use the Housing Funds to assist in the provision of housing for low or moderate income hou_seholds outside the Redevelopment Project Area upon resolution of the City Council and the Redevelopment Agency that such use- will be of benefit to .the Redevelopment Projects; and
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Clara (the "City") owns a single family residence in the City of Santa Clara outside of the Redevelopment Project area (the "Property") and the City and Agency have heretofore found that the use of Housing Funds to rehabilitate the Property and provide housing subsidies on behalf of persons of very low income is of benefit to the Redevelopment Project; and WHEREAS, City and Agency have heretofore entered into a Master Lease, pursuant to which Agency will master lease the Property from City and sublease it in order to provide for its use as affordable housing; and
WHEREAS, Project Match, Inc., a California nonprofit
corporation ("Project Match") , has offered to sublease the Property from Agency in order to provide for its use as affordable housing for very low income households; and
WHEREAS, Project Match has requested that Agency enter into a Sublease in the form presented to this Agency, pursuant to which the Agency will make certain improvements to the Property and sublease the Property to Project Match, for a rent and pursuant to the conditions and restrictions contained in the Sublease, and Project Match will sub-sublease the Property to very low income households, for an affordable rent; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Community Redevelopment Law (California Health and Safety Code, Sections 33000, et seq.) this Agency and the City Council held a joint public hearing on the proposed Sublease, having duly published notice of such public hearing and made copies of the proposed Sublease available for public inspection and comment; and
WHEREAS, the Agency has duly considered all terms and
conditions of the proposed Sublease and believes that it is in the best interests of the City and the health, safety, morals and welfare of its residents, and in accord with the public purposes and provisions of applicable state and local law and requirements.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Santa Clara hereby finds and resolves as follows:
1. The Agency hereby finds that the foregoing recitals are true and correct.
2. The Agency recognizes that it has received and heard all oral and written objections to the proposed sublease of the Property pursuant to the Sublease and to other matters pertaining to this transaction, and that all such oral and written objections are hereby overruled.
. Page 3 of s
3. The Agency hereby finds and determines that the Sublease will provide affordable housing for very low income persons.
4. The Sublease is hereby approved.
5. The Agency hereby authorizes the use of Housing Funds from the Redevelopment Project to improve the Property and/or to provide subsidies on behalf of very low income households.
6. The Executive Director of the Agency or her designee is hereby authorized to execute the Sublease on behalf of the Agency, provided that the City Council has first approved the Sublease.
7. The Executive Director of the Agency or her designee is hereby authorized, on behalf of the Agency, to sign all documents necessary and appropriate to carry out and implement the Sublease and to administer the Agency's obligations, responsibilities and duties to be performed thereunder.
8. This Resolution shall take effect upon adoption.
9. The Agency Secretary shall certify to the pas·sage and adoption of this Resolution, shall enter the same in the Book of Resolutions of said Agency, and shall cause the action of the Chairman and Governing Board in adopting the same to be entered in the official minutes of said Governing Board.
* * * *
I HEREBY CERTIFY THE FOREGOING TO BE A TRUE COPY OF THE RESOLUTION
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA AT A REGULAR MEETING THEREOF HELD ON THE 10TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 1998, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTES:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAINED:
AGENCY MEMBERS: Diridon, Gillmor, Mahan, Mclemore, Parle and Chairman Nadler
AGENCY MEMBERS: None
AGENCY MEMBERS: Arno
AGENCY MEMBERS: None
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF TF'- . )
1 CITY OF SANTA CLARA
ROUTING SHEET
Agency Meeting Date: November 10, 1998
between the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Santa Clara and Project Match, Inc. for the sublease of property located at 2319 Gianera Street to Project Match to be used as shared housing for very low income seniors.
CERTIFICATION
The proposed request to approve a Resolution of the Agency approving an agreement for the sublease of property located at 2319 Gianera Street by the Agency has been reviewed and is hereby certified.
1. As to Agency Functions,
2. As to Legality, by
3. As to Environmental
Impact Requirements, by
4. As to Substance, by
AGENCY AUTHORIZATION:
[I :\DATA\WP\CRIS\1995\l ROUTE . FRM]
byf~JL~ epartment ~ad
Director of Planning
& Inspection
---------------, 19
I •
) CITY OF SANTA CLARA
ROUTING SHEET
Council Date:November 10, 1998
SUBJECT : __ C=o=u=n=c'-'i=l=----=R=e=s-=o-=l=u=--'t=1=-· o==n'------'A=p-"'p=r'-'o"-v"--1=· =-=n=g..._-=t=h=e"'---=s'--'u=b=-l=e=a=s'""'e"'---=A=g""'r~e-=e=m~e=n=t= between the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Santa Clara and Project Match, Inc. for the sublease of property located at 2319 Gianera Street to Project Match to be used as shared housing for very low income seniors.
CERTIFICATION
The proposed request to approve a Resolution of the City Council approving an agreement for the sublease of property located at 2319 Gianera Street by the Agency to Project Match. Inc. has been reviewed and is hereby certified.
1. As to City Functions, by
2. As to Legality, by
3. As to Environmental
Impact Requirements, by
4. As to Substance, by
COUNCIL AUTHORIZATION:
[I :\DATA\WP\CRIS\1995\lROUTE.FRM)
Director of Planning
& Inspection
city Manager
_______________ ,19_
Appraisal Report
Residential Site
2319 Gianera Street
Santa Clara, Santa Clara County, California 95054
Report Date: January 9, 2023
FOR:
Mr. Joseph Bruzzone
Senior Electric Utility Engineer
City of Santa Clara | Silicon Valley Power
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, California 95050
Valbridge Property Advisors |
Northern California
1530 The Alameda, Suite 100
San Jose, CA 95126
408.279.1520 phone Valbridge File Number:
408.279.3428 fax CA02-22-0549-000
valbridge.com
© 2023 VALBRIDGE PROPERTY ADVISORS | NORTHERN CALIFORNIA 1530 The Alameda, Suite 100
San Jose, CA 95126
408.279.1520 phone
408.279.3428 fax
valbridge.com
January 9, 2023
Chrisoula Kantiotou, PhD
Norman C. Hulberg, MAI
408.279.1520, ext. 7141
[email protected]
Mr. Joseph Bruzzone
Senior Electric Utility Engineer
City of Santa Clara
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, California 95050
RE: Appraisal Report
Residential Site
2319 Gianera Street
Santa Clara, Santa Clara County, California 95054
Dear Mr. Bruzzone:
In accordance with your request, an appraisal of the above referenced property was performed. This appraisal report sets forth the pertinent data gathered, the techniques employed, and the reasoning leading to the value opinions. This letter of transmittal does not constitute an appraisal report and the rationale behind the value opinion(s) reported cannot be adequately understood without the accompanying appraisal report.
The property, as referenced above, is located at 2319 Gianera Street, Santa Clara, Santa Clara County, California 95054, and is further identified as Assessor Parcel Number (APN) 104-05-052. The site contains 12,478 square feet or 0.29 acres and is improved with a 1,140-square-foot single-family home.
The existing improvements do not contribute value to the site and the highest and best use is for redevelopment with up to 19 units per acre.
The analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report was prepared in conformity with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) of the Appraisal Foundation; the Code of Professional Ethics and Standards of Professional Practice of the Appraisal Institute; and the requirements of our client.
The City of Santa Clara/ Silicon Valley Power is our client in this assignment and is the sole intended user of the appraisal and the report and no others. The intended use is for due diligence on determining future actions regarding the property. The value opinions reported herein are subject to the definitions, assumptions, limiting conditions, and certifications contained in this report.
The findings and conclusions are further contingent upon the following extraordinary assumptions and/or hypothetical conditions, the use of which might have affected the assignment results:
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
Mr. Joseph Bruzzone
City of Santa Clara
© 2023 VALBRIDGE PROPERTY ADVISORS | NORTHERN CALIFORNIA Extraordinary Assumptions:
• None
Hypothetical Conditions:
• None
The value conclusions are based on the analysis in the following report and presented in the following table:
Respectfully submitted,
Valbridge Property Advisors | Northern California
Chrisoula Kantiotou, PhD
Senior Appraiser
California Certified License #AG027334
Norman C. Hulberg, MAI
Senior Managing Director
California Certified License #AG003542
Component As Is As Is
Value Type Fair Market Value Fair Market Rent
Property Rights Appraised Fee Simple
Effective Date of Value December 14, 2022 December 14, 2022 Value Conclusion $1,590,000 $2,600
$127 psf of Site Area $2.28 psf of NLA
Value Conclusion
Val bridge . .. PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
TABLE OF CONTENTS
© 2023 VALBRIDGE PROPERTY ADVISORS | NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PAGE 4 Table of Contents
Cover Page
Letter of Transmittal
Table of Contents......................................................................................................................................................................4 Summary of Salient Facts .......................................................................................................................................................6 Aerial and Front Views.............................................................................................................................................................8 Location Map..............................................................................................................................................................................9 Introduction.............................................................................................................................................................................. 10 Scope of Work......................................................................................................................................................................... 13 Regional and Market Area Analysis................................................................................................................................. 15 City and Neighborhood Analysis ..................................................................................................................................... 22 Site Description....................................................................................................................................................................... 27 Improvements Description ................................................................................................................................................. 34 Subject Photographs (Dated December 14, 2022).................................................................................................... 36 Assessment and Tax Data ................................................................................................................................................... 38 Market Analysis ....................................................................................................................................................................... 39 Highest and Best Use Analysis .......................................................................................................................................... 46 Appraisal Methodology ....................................................................................................................................................... 48 Sales Comparison Approach.............................................................................................................................................. 49 Estimate of Fair Market Rent.............................................................................................................................................. 64 Reconciliation........................................................................................................................................................................... 74 Exposure Time..................................................................................................................................................................... 74 National Quality Control................................................................................................................................................. 75 General Assumptions and Limiting Conditions .......................................................................................................... 76 Certification – Norman C. Hulberg, MAI........................................................................................................................ 80 Certification – Chrisoula Kantiotou, PhD....................................................................................................................... 81 Addenda .................................................................................................................................................................................... 82 Additional Subject Photographs (Dated December 14, 2022)......................................................................... 83 Sketch..................................................................................................................................................................................... 85 Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
TABLE OF CONTENTS
© 2023 VALBRIDGE PROPERTY ADVISORS | NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PAGE 5 .................................................................................................................................................................................................. 85 Glossary................................................................................................................................................................................. 86 Qualifications ...................................................................................................................................................................... 93 Valbridge Property Advisors Information / Office Locations ........................................................................... 97 Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
LO
CX)
N
0 0
N
40.0'
GBA 1 - First Floor
1140.2 sf
23.0'
40.0'
GAR- Garage
460.0 sf
23.0'
0 0
N
L()
CX)
N
Sketch by Apex Sketch
RESIDENTIAL SITE
SUMMARY OF SALIENT FACTS
© 2023 VALBRIDGE PROPERTY ADVISORS | NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PAGE 6 Summary of Salient Facts
Property Identification
Property Name Residential Site
Property Address 2319 Gianera Street
Santa Clara, Santa Clara County, California 95054
Latitude & Longitude 37.400159, -121.967374
Census Tract 5050.1
Tax Parcel Number 104-05-052
Property Owner City of Santa Clara
Site
Zoning Single Family Residential (R1-6L)
FEMA Flood Map No. 06085C0064H
Flood Zone X
Gross Land Area 12,478 square feet
Usable Land Area 12,478 square feet
Proposed Improvements
Property Use Single Family Home
Gross Building Area (GBA) 1,140 sf
Net Rentable Area (NRA) 1,140 sf
Number of Units 1
Number of Buildings 1
Number of Stories 1
Year Built 1960's
Condition Average
Construction Class D - Wood Frame
Construction Quality Average
Valuation Opinions
Highest & Best Use - As Vacant Redevelopment with up to 19 units per acre Highest & Best Use - As Improved Redevelopment with up to 19 units per acre Reasonable Exposure Time 6 to 9 months
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
SUMMARY OF SALIENT FACTS
© 2023 VALBRIDGE PROPERTY ADVISORS | NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PAGE 7 Approach to Value As Is
Cost Not Developed
Sales Comparison $1,590,000
Income Capitalization Not Developed
Component As Is As Is
Value Type Fair Market Value Fair Market Rent
Property Rights Appraised Fee Simple
Effective Date of Value December 14, 2022 December 14, 2022 Value Conclusion $1,590,000 $2,600
$127 psf of Site Area $2.28 psf of NLA
Value Indications
Value Conclusion
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
AERIAL AND FRONT VIEWS
© 2023 VALBRIDGE PROPERTY ADVISORS | NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PAGE 8 Aerial and Front Views
AERIAL VIEW
FRONT VIEW (DATED DECEMBER 14, 2022)
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
LOCATION MAP
© 2023 VALBRIDGE PROPERTY ADVISORS | NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PAGE 9 Location Map
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
Oakland
San Francisco Alameda
Tassajara
San Ramon
San Leandro
Dublin
Daly City
South San
Francisco
, San Bruno
Pacifica @
CD
9 san Mateo
@ Bair Island
El Granada V San Carlos
Redwood City
@
®
Half @)
Moon Bay
San Gregorio La Honda
Loma Mar
Pescadero
Big Basin
Redwoods
State Park
SWanton
Hayward Pleasanton
v @ Verona
Union City Sunol
Fremont
Don Edwards
San Francisco
'- Bay National
Wildlife ...
Palo Alto
Mountain @
View
Cupertino
Milpitas
@
San Jose
0 @ Campbell
Saratoga @
17 35
Redwood
Grove
Boulder Creek
Ben Lomond
Los Gatos
Sierra Azul
Open Space
Preserve
Scotts Valley
The Forest of
Davenport 0 Nisene Marks
State Park
Santa Cruz Capitola 0
Altamo
v
Ulmar
Livermore
Mende
Spri
Joseph
D. Grant
County Park
6§)
Coyote
Morgan
s
Freedom
Watsonville @
RESIDENTIAL SITE
INTRODUCTION
© 2023 VALBRIDGE PROPERTY ADVISORS | NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PAGE 10 Introduction
Client and Intended Users of the Appraisal
The City of Santa Clara/ Silicon Valley Power is our client in this assignment and is the sole intended user of the appraisal and the report. Under no circumstances shall any of the following parties be entitled to use or rely on the appraisal or this appraisal report:
i. The borrower(s) on any loans or financing relating to or secured by the property, ii. Any guarantor(s) of such loans or financing; or
iii. Principals, shareholders, investors, members or partners in such borrower(s) or guarantors.
Intended Use of the Appraisal
The intended use of this report is for due diligence on determining future actions regarding the property.
Real Estate Identification
The property is located at 2319 Gianera Street, Santa Clara, Santa Clara County, California 95054. The site is further identified by the Assessor Parcel Number (APN) 104-05-052.
Legal Description
We were not provided with a legal description of the subject. We assume the legal description corresponds to its address and Assessor Parcel Number (APN).
Use of Real Estate as of the Effective Date of Value
As of the effective date of value, the property was a single-family home.
Use of Real Estate as Reflected in this Appraisal
The opinion of value for the property as is reflects use as a residential site.
Ownership of the Property
According to public records, title to the subject is vested in the City of Santa Clara.
History of the Property
We are unaware of sales, listings or offers for any portion of the subject within three years of the valuation date. When appropriate, we consider and analyze the known history of the property in the development of our opinions and conclusions.
Type and Definition of Value
The appraisal problem is to develop opinions of the market value and market rent of the property.
The purpose of this appraisal is to develop an opinion of the market value of the subject property. “Market Value,” as used in this appraisal, is defined as “The most probable price, as of a specified date, in cash, or in terms equivalent to cash, or in other precisely revealed terms, for which the specified property rights should sell after reasonable exposure in a competitive market under all conditions Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
INTRODUCTION
© 2023 VALBRIDGE PROPERTY ADVISORS | NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PAGE 11 requisite to a fair sale, with the buyer and seller each acting prudently, knowledgeably, and for selfinterest, and assuming that neither is under undue duress.”1 Implicit in this definition is the
consummation of a sale as of a specified date and the passing of title from seller to buyer under conditions whereby:
• Buyer and seller are typically motivated.
• Both parties are well informed or well advised, each acting in what they consider their own best interests;
• A reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open market; • Payment is made in terms of cash in U.S. dollars or in terms of financial arrangements comparable thereto; and
• The price represents the normal consideration for the property sold unaffected by special or creative financing or sale concessions granted by anyone associated with the sale.” “Market rent,” as used in this appraisal, is defined as “the most probable rent that a property should bring in a competitive and open market reflecting all conditions and restrictions of the lease agreement, including permitted uses, use restrictions, expense obligations, term, concessions, renewal and purchase options, and tenant improvements (TIs).” (Source: The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, Fifth Edition, pp 121-122)
We have estimated the fair market value and fair market rent for the subject “as is,” under the market conditions as of the valuation date. Please refer to the Glossary in the Addenda section for additional definitions of terms used in this report.
Valuation Scenarios, Property Rights Appraised, and Effective Dates of Value Opinions of value for the subject were developed under the following valuation scenarios:
Date of Report
The date of this report is January 9, 2023.
List of Items Requested but Not Provided
• Preliminary Title Report
Assumptions and Conditions of the Appraisal
This appraisal assignment and the opinions reported herein are subject to the General Assumptions and Limiting Conditions contained in the report and the following extraordinary assumptions and/or hypothetical conditions, the use of which might have affected the assignment results. 1 THE DICTIONARY OF REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL, SEVENTH EDITION, (APPRAISAL INSTITUTE, 2022), 118 Valuation Scenario Effective Date of Value Fair Market Rent December 14, 2022
As Is Fair Market Value December 14, 2022
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
INTRODUCTION
© 2023 VALBRIDGE PROPERTY ADVISORS | NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PAGE 12 Extraordinary Assumptions
• None
Hypothetical Conditions
• None
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
SCOPE OF WORK
© 2023 VALBRIDGE PROPERTY ADVISORS | NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PAGE 13 Scope of Work
The elements addressed in the Scope of Work are (1) the extent to which the subject is identified, (2) the extent to which the property is inspected, (3) the type and extent of data researched, (4) the type and extent of analysis applied, (5) the type of appraisal report prepared, and (6) the inclusion or exclusion of items of non-realty in the development of the value opinion. These items are discussed as below.
Extent to Which the Property Was Identified
The three components of the property identification are summarized as follows:
• Legal Characteristics – The property was legally identified via the Assessor Parcel Number (APN), plat map, site visit, Google Earth, public records, and client-provided information. • Economic Characteristics - Economic characteristics of the property were identified via information provided by our client, market data, and discussion with active market participants, as well as a comparison to properties with similar locational and physical characteristics. • Physical Characteristics - The property was physically identified via an interior and exterior inspection by Yulia Ferguson.
Extent to Which the Property Was Inspected
We inspected the property on December 14, 2022. The improvements were measured during the course of the inspection.
Type and Extent of Data Researched
The following data was researched and analyzed: (1) market area data, (2) property-specific market data, (3) zoning and land-use data, and (4) current data on comparable listings and transactions.
Professionals familiar with the subject market/property type were also interviewed.
This report was prepared with the assistance of full-time trainee/assistant Yulia Ferguson, who performed and assisted in many tasks of the report under the full appraiser’s supervision, including research and data collection, assisted in writing regional and market analysis, city and neighborhood analysis, site and improvement description. In addition, Yulia searched and confirmed the comparable sales and rentals, completing the adjustment grid, determining the highest and best use, and reconciliation. The appraiser supervised and verified these steps.
Type and Extent of Analysis Applied (Valuation Methodology) Surrounding land use trends, the condition of any improvements, demand for the property, and relevant legal limitations were observed in the process of concluding a highest and best use for the property. The subject was then valued based on the highest and best use conclusion.
Appraisers develop an opinion of property value with specific appraisal procedures that reflect three distinct methods of data analysis: the cost approach, sales comparison approach, and income capitalization approach. One or more of these approaches are used in all estimations of value.
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
SCOPE OF WORK
© 2023 VALBRIDGE PROPERTY ADVISORS | NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PAGE 14 • Cost Approach - In the cost approach, the value indication reflects the sum of current depreciated replacement or reproduction cost, land value, and an appropriate entrepreneurial incentive or profit.
• Sales Comparison Approach - In the sales comparison approach, value is indicated by recent sales and/or listings of comparable properties in the market, with the appraiser analyzing the impact of material differences in both economic and physical elements between the subject and the comparables.
• Income Capitalization Approach - In the income capitalization approach, value is indicated by the capitalization of anticipated future income. There are two types of capitalization: direct capitalization and yield capitalization, more commonly known as discounted cash flow (DCF) analysis.
All these approaches to value were considered. The availability of data and applicability of each approach to value within the context of the characteristics of the property, along with the needs and requirements of the client, were assessed. Based on this assessment, we relied upon the Sales Comparison Approach. Due to the age of the improvements and difficulty in estimating depreciation, the cost approach is not considered to be applicable. The Income Capitalization Approach was not used because single family homes are not typically purchased by investors for their income and therefore, the Income Approach to Value is not considered to be applicable. Per our client’s request, the rent comparison approach is utilized to estimate the fair market rent for the home. Further discussion of the extent of our analysis and the methodology of each approach is provided later in the respective valuation sections.
Appraisal Conformity and Report Type
The analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report was prepared in conformity with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) of the Appraisal Foundation; the Code of Professional Ethics and Standards of Professional Practice of the Appraisal Institute; and the requirements of our client. This is an Appraisal Report as defined by the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice under Standards Rule 2-2a.
Personal Property/FF&E
All items of non-realty are excluded from this analysis. The opinion of market value developed herein is reflective of real estate only.
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
REGIONAL AND MARKET AREA ANALYSIS
© 2023 VALBRIDGE PROPERTY ADVISORS | NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PAGE 15 Regional and Market Area Analysis
REGIONAL MAP
Overview
The property is located in the San Francisco Bay Region, an area which is comprised of the nine counties bordering the San Francisco Bay. According to the State of California Department of Finance, the area had a combined population of approximately 7.61 million as of January 1, 2022. The Department of Finance characterizes the San Francisco Bay Area by a moderate climate, diversified economy and one of the highest standards of living in the United States.
Population
Santa Clara County is the most populous of the nine counties comprising the San Francisco Bay Region, with an estimated 1,894,783 residents as of January 1, 2022, according to the State of California Department of Finance. This was a decrease of 2.04% from the previous year. San Jose is the largest city in the county and the third largest in California, surpassing San Francisco.
According to the Site to Do Business projections, presented below, the county’s population is expected to decrease annually 0.3% between 2022 and 2027, while Santa Clara will increase approximately 0.1% annually over the same period.
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
Bair Island
Redwood City
Ecological
Reserve
..
Union City
Newark
Don Edwards
San Francisco
Bay National
Wildlife ...
@ Atherton East Palo Alto
Menlo Park
Palo Alto
Woodside stanford
Dresser Sunol
@)
Fremont
SUNOALE
EAST INDUSTRIAL
BAVLANDS
~ARM SPRI NCS
Milpitas ALVISO
Sunol
Regional
Wilderness
{§) California's Great America
•
V BERRYESSA
Portola Valley
La Honda
Creek Open
Space Preserve
La Honda
11vale
Los Trances
Woods
Russian Ridge
Open Space
Preserve
Los Altos Hills
Mountain
View
Rancho San
Antonio
County Park
& Open ...
Sunnyvale
@
...l...
'-Ill'
Cupertino
NORTH SAN JOSE
East Foothills
Alum Rock
@ Santa Clara @ V
ifw San Jose
~ EAST SAN JOSE
Fruitdale
Del Valle
Regional Park
Ohlone
Regional
Wilderness
Blue Oak
Ranch Reserve
Joseph
D. Grant
County Park
West Santa
Clara WEST s•N JOSE EVERGREEN
oma Mar
Butano
ate Park
Portola
Redwoods
State Park
Saratoga
© ® Castle Rock Sanborn State Park County Park
0 Campbell
@
Cambrian Park Robertsville
Alamitos
Los Gatos
EOENVAlE
@ (§3
SOUTH SAN JOSE
Mendenhall Springs
Mt Hamilton
RESIDENTIAL SITE
REGIONAL AND MARKET AREA ANALYSIS
© 2023 VALBRIDGE PROPERTY ADVISORS | NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PAGE 16 Transportation
Excellent transportation routes and linkages to all major cities within the region and throughout the state are primary reasons for the advancement of business activity in the Bay Area, including Santa Clara County.
Air service in the area is provided by Norman
Y. Mineta San Jose International Airport,
which accommodated more than 15 million
passengers from April 2019 to March 2020.
San Francisco and Oakland airports are also
within an hour’s drive from most portions of
the county. In 2010, San Jose International
Airport completed the first phase of a twophase expansion with the goal of increasing service to 17.3 million travelers a year, at a
cost of $1.3 billion. Planning for the second
phase, nine additional gates and a new
concourse extension at the south end of
Terminal B, began early in 2018.
The area has a well-developed freeway system although traffic congestion is unquestionably one of the negative aspects. The county’s transportation network also includes multiple expressways, which provide streamlined access to most interior locations. Lawrence Expressway, San Tomas Expressway and Foothill Expressway run north-south, while Central Expressway and Montague Expressway run roughly east-west.
Employment
High-technology employment and a skilled workforce translate into relatively high-income levels, and Santa Clara County is one of the most affluent metropolitan regions in the nation. Silicon Valley’s economy is stable, although its narrow range of driving industries has kept recent growth very slow.
Significant employment sectors within Santa Clara County include manufacturing; professional, scientific, and technical services; health care; retail; and educational services. Some of the largest employers are associated with the computer industry such as Adobe, Apple, AMD, and HewlettPackard; hospitals such as the VA Medical Center, Kaiser Permanente, and the San Jose Medical Center; space and aerotech including NASA and Lockheed Martin; and educational facilities such as San Jose State University and Stanford University School of Medicine. Population Estimated Annual ∆ Projected Annual ∆
Area 2010 2022 2010 - 22 2027 2022 - 27
United States 308,745,538 333,793,107 0.7% 333,934,112 0.0% California 37,253,956 39,770,476 0.5% 39,648,278 -0.1%
Santa Clara County 1,781,642 1,957,605 0.8% 1,925,788 -0.3% Santa Clara 116,610 130,983 1.0% 131,473 0.1%
Source: ESRI (ArcGIS)
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
,,-:".\ - ~ : P lo Alie__, .,_
@ Mountain @Milpitas
@ View
@ Los Altos ,,...Santa Clara E
le sAltos ~ @ vergreen
Hills Sunnyvale @North San Jose
upertino® 'I' @ San Jose West
Cernpbell@ @ San Jose
Saratoga @ @ . @Central San Jose
Monte ~no@ Cernbnan @ @Silver Creek
Los G OS @ @ Edenvale ®s ta T
0 Willow @ an , eresa
Los Gatos Glen Almaden
Mountain Vslley ,,.,
~ Morgan Hill
Santa Clara County
RESIDENTIAL SITE
REGIONAL AND MARKET AREA ANALYSIS
© 2023 VALBRIDGE PROPERTY ADVISORS | NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PAGE 17 Unemployment
The unemployment rate in Santa Clara County is currently less than the rates of the state and nation.
The County unemployment rate was 2.1% as of October 2022 (most recent available). The State of California was at 3.8% while the Nation was at 3.4% for the same time period.
National Economic Overview
The U.S. economy is in transition from a strong recovery following a brief COVID-related recession to a slowdown as persistently rising inflation and higher interest rates take their toll on consumers and businesses. In addition, China’s continued COVID lockdowns has placed supply-related constraints on the national (and global) economy. And the Russian invasion of Ukraine has increased energy prices worldwide.
Employment by Industry - San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA (MSA) 2022 Percent of
Industry Estimate Employment
Agriculture/Forestry/Fishing/Hunting 6,453 0.61%
Mining/Quarrying/Oil & Gas Extraction 308 0.03%
Construction 61,271 5.80%
Manufacturing 158,664 15.01%
Wholesale Trade 20,217 1.91%
Retail Trade 88,196 8.34%
Transportation/Warehousing 33,710 3.19%
Utilities 4,308 0.41%
Information 50,709 4.80%
Finance/Insurance 29,968 2.83%
Real Estate/Rental/Leasing 20,837 1.97%
Professional/Scientific/Tech Services 197,326 18.66%
Management of Companies/Enterprises 837 0.08%
Admin/Support/Waste Management Services 40,787 3.86%
Educational Services 81,755 7.73%
Health Care/Social Assistance 118,428 11.20%
Arts/entertainment/Recreation 15,993 1.51%
Accommodation/Food Services 57,512 5.44%
Other Services (excl Public Administration) 40,275 3.81% Public Administration 29,674 2.81%
Total 1,057,228 100.0%
Source: ESRI (ArcGIS)
Unemployment Rates
Area YE 2017 YE 2018 YE 2019 YE 2020 YE 2021 2022¹
United States 4.4% 3.9% 3.7% 8.1% 5.3% 3.4%
California 4.8% 4.3% 4.1% 10.2% 7.3% 3.8%
Santa Clara County 3.2% 2.7% 2.5% 7.2% 4.7% 2.1%
Santa Clara 3.1% 2.5% 2.3% 6.0% 4.0% 1.9%
Source: www.bls.gov data not seasonally adjusted; ¹October - most recent for US, others lag by 1-2 mos.) Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
REGIONAL AND MARKET AREA ANALYSIS
© 2023 VALBRIDGE PROPERTY ADVISORS | NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PAGE 18 Economic growth had surged through 2021, partially because of lower interest rates and about $6.4 trillion in government borrowing/spending, as well as from an increase in consumer spending. Since then, real gross domestic product (GDP) declined by 1.6% and 0.9% in the First and Second Quarters of 2022.
While two consecutive quarters of falling GDP are typically viewed as harbingers of an upcoming recession, it is counterbalanced by a strong, tight national job market. The national unemployment rate is low, at 3.5%, as of the end of September 2022 – a rate that is in line with the pre-COVID record high. As the national economy bounced back from an initial COVID shock, demand for employment (labor) has increased, and wages have been growing.
The Federal Reserve lowered its forecast for the U.S. economy to grow 0.2% by the end of 2022, and by 1.2% in 2023 – especially as interest rate increases begin to impact consumer demand and business investment. These rates are down from its previous 1.7% and 1.7% growth rate predictions for 2022 and 2023, respectively.
Inflation Rate
The rate of inflation accelerated during Fall 2021 and has been picking up speed throughout 2022.
Consumer demand surged following the “reopening of the economy” and from government stimulus payments.
According to the U.S. Labor Department, the Consumer Price Index (CPI) increased by 6.2% during Fall 2021 from the same one year ago. Price increases are observed in all areas – including gasoline, grocery, restaurant, and automobile prices. Businesses are also reporting higher labor costs, including vendor prices and costs for raw materials.
As of mid-year 2022, consumer spending increased by an adjusted annual rate of 1.1%. Consumer prices rose by 9.1%, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics, from the same time one year prior. Costs surged for gas, groceries, rent, and dental care.
In September 2022, the Labor Department reported that the rate of inflation was at 8.2%, largely due to a reduction in gasoline prices. The all-items index, minus the food and energy indices, was reported at 6.6% for the same period. By November 2022 (latest data available), the all-items index, minus the food and energy indices, was reported at 6.0%.
Federal Funds Rate
Inflation is currently at a level not seen since the early 1980’s. There are two means by which inflation can be decreased: fiscal policy or monetary policy. The former is controlled by Congress; the latter is controlled by the Federal Reserve (“Fed”). The Fed can raise the federal funds rate, which is the U.S. benchmark for interest rates, to combat inflation.
To maximize employment and stabilize inflation, the Federal Reserve Bank raised the federal funds rate nine times from 2015, when interest rates were almost zero, through 2018. Incremental rate decreases were made up to March 2020. In response to the pandemic, the Fed began to aggressively lower the federal funds rate, first by 50 basis points, and then again by 100 basis points.
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
REGIONAL AND MARKET AREA ANALYSIS
© 2023 VALBRIDGE PROPERTY ADVISORS | NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PAGE 19 In addition, the Fed began purchasing $120 billion
a month in U.S. Treasury bonds and mortgagebacked securities to hold long-term interest rates down and to stimulate the economy. By mid-year
2021, the rate was at near-zero.
Fast forward to Fall/Winter 2021-2022, at a time
when the inflation rate was rapidly climbing, the
Fed agreed to taper their government bond
purchases. Since then, government investment has
decreased and been phased out.
Beginning March 2022, the Fed began raising the
interest rate, for the first time in three years, to
temper the rapid inflation growth. Their initial rate
increase was 25 basis points. Further rate increases
followed: by 50 basis points in May 2022, by 75
basis points on each occasion, in June, July,
September and November 2022, and by 50 basis
points in December 2022. The benchmark interest
rate currently is at 4.25% to 4.50%.
Reference is made to the following graph. The current (as of October 2022) benchmark (Federal Funds) rate is lower than the prior peaks in 2000 and in 2007.
Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (US); fred.stlouisfed.org Supplemental Comments on Inflation and Interest Rates
The cause of inflation is attributed to a combination of factors. One of the most significant factors is the increase in money supply because of the fiscal stimulus (such as the Payroll Protection Program and other COVID-related relief payments) and monetary stimulus (such as decreasing the benchmark interest rate to near zero for two years and Federal balance sheet increases). Other factors exacerbating inflation include China’s COVID-Zero policy – resulting in numerous manufacturing shutdowns, and Russia’s halt on natural gas supply to Europe.
The Fed has pursued the action of raising the interest rate at the fastest pace in 40 years, with five rate increases throughout 2022, including three consecutive increases by 75 basis points on each occasion.
The underlying theory is that as interest rates increase, the cost of borrowing increases – which, in turn, Date Target Range (%) Basis Point
Change
Dec-18 2.25% - 2.50% +25
Aug-19 2.00% - 2.25% -25
Sep-19 1.75% - 2.00% -25
Oct-19 1.50% - 1.75% -25
Mar-20 1.00% - 1.25% -50
Mar-20 0.00% - 0.25% -100
Apr-20 0.00% - 0.25% 0
Mar-22 0.25% - 0.50% +25
May-22 0.75% - 1.00% +50
Jun-22 1.50% - 1.75% +75
Jul-22 2.25% - 2.50% +75
Sep-22 3.00% -3.25% +75
Nov-22 3.75% - 4.00% +75
Dec-22 4.25% - 4.50% +50
Federal Funds Rate
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
FRED oP - Federal Funds Effective Rate
2002 2004 2006 200B 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022
RESIDENTIAL SITE
REGIONAL AND MARKET AREA ANALYSIS
© 2023 VALBRIDGE PROPERTY ADVISORS | NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PAGE 20 diminishes the available credit to the market, causing downward pressure on asset prices, including real estate. Increasing rates, historically, have also placed upward pressure on capitalization rates, albeit not immediately.
As the cost of borrowing increases, the amount of money that real estate purchasers can finance decreases. Additionally, investors are looking for a return on investment, or yield. As the Federal Funds Rate increases, so do coupon rates of U.S. Government bonds, which has historically been perceived as being “risk free,” since it is assumed that the U.S. Government would not default on its debts. The result is a flight of capital to the perceived safety of bonds – and away from real estate investment.
The California Forecast
The state, previously on mandatory lockdown, officially “reopened” in June 2021 as a result of the mass vaccination efforts that were underway and, a then waning of the coronavirus pandemic. Other factors, such as higher energy costs, supply chain interruptions, and rising inflation and interest rates, are also influences contributing to a slower economic growth forecast for California.
The most recent UCLA Anderson forecast (September 2022) calls for employment gains over the next three years, primarily in the leisure and hospitality, health care, social services, technology, and construction sectors. Statewide unemployment rates forecast at the end(s) of 2022, 2023, and 2024 are expected to be at 4.5%, 4.1%, and 4.5%, respectively.
Concluding Remarks
As of year-end 2022, the Fed has raised the benchmark interest rates seven (7) times to combat inflation, with rate increases in March (+25 bps), May (+50 bps), June (+75 bps), July (+75 bps), September (+75 bps), November (+75 bps), and December (+50 bps).
In the near term, market participants will likely execute very few transactions into the early part of 2023.
Debt rates are increasing rapidly; we have observed pending sale transactions of commercial real estate that have fallen out of escrow while buyers were seeking financing. We expect to see more creative financing, such as seller-carried financing, loan assumptions, and wrap mortgages – as examples, when deals do close.
It is likely that only the best properties will trade at the early 2023. High-quality tenancies with longterm leases remain the most sought-after investments. Lower-quality properties that can be assembled into development sites as large as one-acre, or greater, will likely reflect land value for other commercial real estate sectors, such as life sciences, multi-family residential, or mixed uses.
Median Household Income
Total median household income for the region is presented in the following table. Overall, the subject’s MSA and county compare favorably to the state and the country.
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
REGIONAL AND MARKET AREA ANALYSIS
© 2023 VALBRIDGE PROPERTY ADVISORS | NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PAGE 21 Conclusions
Historically, the Santa Clara County region has been considered a desirable place to both live and work.
Physical features and a strong local economy attract both businesses and residents. It is a worldwide leader in technology and a regional employment center, with an increasingly diversified economy.
While traffic congestion will continue to be a problem, residents remain among the most affluent in the country.
The outlook is still somewhat clouded by the unknowns associated with the lingering effects of COVID19, inflation rates, and the other economic indicators discussed earlier in this section. Some people continue to curb their activity, and certain industries in particular have been severely affected.
California “re-opened for business” in June 2021, and the statewide mask mandate was lifted in February 2022.
Many market participants were becoming more optimistic, thanks in large part to the vaccination rollouts and the reopening of the state, however investors and consumers alike are proceeding with caution as we face headwinds. The timeline for a return to normalcy remains unknown, but the historic reasons for growth in the region remain the same, and thus the expectation is that normal growth will resume over time.
Median Household Income
Estimated Projected Annual ∆
Area 2022 2027 2022 - 27
United States $62,203 $67,325 1.6%
California $88,930 $106,150 3.6%
Santa Clara County $148,530 $170,727 2.8%
Santa Clara $146,845 $166,134 2.5%
Source: ESRI (ArcGIS)
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
CITY AND NEIGHBORHOOD ANALYSIS
© 2023 VALBRIDGE PROPERTY ADVISORS | NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PAGE 22 City and Neighborhood Analysis
NEIGHBORHOOD MAP
City Overview
The City of Santa Clara is located in the “heart” of Silicon Valley and is a progressive community, known for low crime rates and the quality of municipal services, as well as its proximity to a large number of high-technology employers. San Jose borders Santa Clara to the north, east, and south, while Sunnyvale borders it to the west.
Santa Clara is a progressive community which owns and operates its own electric, water and sewer utilities. The quality and reliability of utility services is excellent and service charges are the lowest in the entire Bay Area. Santa Clara has also been chosen by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) as the pilot city for implementation of an interactive regional on-line guide to government services.
Industrial development in Santa Clara is concentrated north of Central Expressway and most of the retail and residential development is located south of Highway 101. Because of the lack of available land for development, Santa Clara’s population growth is expected to remain relatively low.
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
he Golf Club&
Moffett Field Y
Meta Sunnyvale Campus
q
101
"' ,@j i @
R• !/!
..
!!
;;
I
"'
Washington
Park ~
q fl
A<
Twin Creeks
Sports Complex
Alviso Marina
County Park
Salt-Pond AS
Baylands Park
LAKEWOOD
@
Elko Dr Levi's Stadium
California's m Great America Y
AMC Mercado 20Q EOuaneAve
S1ewart0r ~
Whole Foods Market T
SAPS Shri Swaminaryan A
Mandir, San Jose T
Th 9 Milpitas High School The Dr
~,e,,o'l>\\6 Walmart Supercenterl.:.\ tot,~ y
Hidden
Lake Park
l q
z Safeway 9
'2
% Cardoza Park ~
ln-N-Out Burger
99 Ranch Market 9 9 New India Bazar
@ "'
Annapoorna Authentic 1 Indian Cuisine '
Cisco Systems ft Trader Joe's 9
Building 12 T
,:,'
~ \.·"" Target y
• 2B Indian Vegetarian
Milpitas Bart Station
1-c-, .... q,
~Intel Museum T Temporarily closed NORTH SAN JOSE
.. ,,,
BERRYESS
Q Costco Who I
\ "''1-
B san Jose Municip Y Golf Course
e Costco Wholesale I!\ Kite( Rd • &, .y ;: '¾,.,. fl
~
Movement Santa Clara
Walsh Ave q Norman
Y. Mineta
San Jose
Sunnyvale
I
l
W Fremont Ave
rr P rk
i @1 Reed Ave
PONOEROSA
PARK
Monroe St
~ I I ., ,8 ~
Triton Museum of Art f
!;: Santa Clara <@
' Santa Clara OMV ~ @ .• 0~,,~d's1- \
e g ~ <.
International. ..
n .... y '\.
"<>
fl .,, -,,.,.. i JAPANTOWN ~ 11,l S'
Regi
RESIDENTIAL SITE
CITY AND NEIGHBORHOOD ANALYSIS
© 2023 VALBRIDGE PROPERTY ADVISORS | NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PAGE 23 The city has good access to local and regional transportation. Highway 101 runs northwest/southeast through the center of Santa Clara providing excellent access to other “Silicon Valley” communities and the San Francisco Peninsula and San Francisco to the north. Interstate 280 also runs through Santa Clara providing an alternative route to San Francisco. Interstate 880 skirts Santa Clara to the east running in a north/south direction. This provides direct access to such East Bay cities as Fremont, Hayward and Oakland. Overall, the highway and local transportation systems in and around Santa Clara provides for excellent access to and from the city.
The major commercial thoroughfares include El Camino Real and Stevens Creek Boulevard, both running in an east/west direction and connecting Sunnyvale and San Jose. Major north/south thoroughfares include Lafayette Street, Scott Boulevard, San Tomas Expressway, Bowers Avenue and Lawrence Expressway.
The San Jose International Airport is minutes from anywhere in Santa Clara with service to most major U.S. cities.
Neighborhood Location and Boundaries
The subject neighborhood is located in the northern section of Santa Clara. The area is suburban in nature. The neighborhood is bounded by Highway 237 to the north, Zanker Road to the east, Highway 101 to the south, and Lawrence Expressway to the west.
Transportation Access
Within the immediate area, transportation access helps define the character of its development. Major travel and commuter routes within the immediate area include Tasman Drive and Lafayette Street.
Access to the area is considered average.
Demographics
The following table depicts the area demographics in Santa Clara within a one-, three-, and five-mile radius from the subject.
As shown in the table below, the total population and total households within a 1-mile radius are projected to increase at 0.6% between 2022 and 2027, while within 3- and 5-miles radius are projected to increase at 0.4% and 0.1%. Median household income is projected to increase at 2.4%, 2.1% and
2.6% within the 1-, 3-, and 5-mile radius from the property between 2022 and 2027. These demographics support a variety of single-family residential uses.
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
CITY AND NEIGHBORHOOD ANALYSIS
© 2023 VALBRIDGE PROPERTY ADVISORS | NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PAGE 24 Within a three-mile radius, the reported population is 122,811 with a projected growth rate of approximately 0.4% annually. There are 51,297 housing units within that three-mile radius. The growth rate is expected to be 1.0% annually. Most of the housing is tenant-occupied. Within a three-mile radius, the median household income is $155,454. Looking ahead, annual household income growth is projected at 2.1% per year. The average income figures suggest that the inhabitants are within the middle income brackets.
Immediate Area Uses
The property is located along the north side of Gianera Street in Santa Clara. The focal point of the neighborhood is the $1.2 billion Levi’s-49ers football stadium, which occupies a 17-acre site fronting the south line of Tasman Drive between the San Tomas Aquino Creek channel and Centennial Drive just north of the property. The stadium opened in July 2014 and has since hosted more than 100 events with an average of 20 events per year. In addition to 49er games, the stadium hosted the Super Bowl, Copa America Centenario in 2016. The below aerial photo exhibits the uses located in the immediate vicinity.
Neighborhood Demographics
Radius (Miles) 1 Mile 3 Mile 5 Mile
Population Summary
2010 Population 15,588 92,928 306,849
2022 Population Estimate 16,825 122,811 374,351
2027 Population Projection 17,319 125,427 376,657
Annual % Change (2022 - 2027) 0.6% 0.4% 0.1%
Housing Unit Summary
2010 Housing Units 6,093 36,122 117,789
% Owner Occupied 41.6% 44.6% 45.5%
% Renter Occupied 53.5% 50.8% 50.0%
2022 Housing Units 6,253 51,297 147,786
% Owner Occupied 34.7% 34.3% 39.7%
% Renter Occupied 62.4% 58.5% 53.7%
2027 Housing Units 6,607 53,799 153,091
% Owner Occupied 32.4% 33.0% 38.6%
% Renter Occupied 62.3% 58.3% 53.1%
Annual % Change (2022 - 2027) 1.1% 1.0% 0.7%
Income Summary
2022 Median Household Income Estimate $172,777 $155,454 $154,432 2027 Median Household Income Projection $194,573 $172,348 $175,460 Annual % Change 2.4% 2.1% 2.6%
2022 Per Capita Income Estimate $75,110 $74,636 $70,748 2027 Per Capita Income Projection $85,994 $87,014 $83,290 Annual % Change 2.7% 3.1% 3.3%
Source: ESRI (ArcGIS) (Lat: 37.400159, Lon: -121.967374) Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
CITY AND NEIGHBORHOOD ANALYSIS
© 2023 VALBRIDGE PROPERTY ADVISORS | NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PAGE 25
IMMEDIATE AREA USES
Source: Google Maps
The area is dominated by residential buildings to the east, south, and west. Directly to the north is a municipal service facility, known as Tasman Substation, including Northern Receiving Station and a parking lot.
Transportation to the area is good. Highway 101 runs northwest southeast through the center of Santa Clara providing excellent access to other "Silicon Valley" communities and the San Francisco Peninsula and San Francisco to the north.
The greater area, across San Tomas Aquino Creek Trail, is an area currently defined by exclusively commercial land uses. Great America Parkway is considered one of the more prestigious office corridors in Silicon Valley, and a number of high technology office and R&D users as well as luxury hotels are located along the thoroughfare.
Analysis and Conclusions
The property is located in the residential neighborhood in the City of Santa Clara, a progressive Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
CITY AND NEIGHBORHOOD ANALYSIS
© 2023 VALBRIDGE PROPERTY ADVISORS | NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PAGE 26 community known the quality of municipal services, as well as its large number of high-technology employers. The city owns and operates its own electric, water and sewer utilities, which are considered to be of excellent quality and reliability with the lowest service charges in the entire Bay Area.
Overall, the highway and local transportation systems in and around Santa Clara provide for excellent access to and from the city. The property is located in a highly desirable section of Santa Clara. Levi’s Stadium and California’s Great American are prime attractions that draw large crowds from all over the Bay. Overall, the property neighborhood is appealing to a variety of residential users.
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
SITE DESCRIPTION
© 2023 VALBRIDGE PROPERTY ADVISORS | NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PAGE 27 Site Description
The site is located 2319 Gianera Street, Santa Clara, Santa Clara County, California 95054. The characteristics of the site are summarized as follows:
Site Characteristics
Gross Land Area: 0.29 Acres or 12,478 SF
Usable Land Area: 0.29 Acres or 12,478 SF
Usable Land %: 100.0%
Shape: Rectangular
Average Depth: 143 feet
Topography: Level
Drainage: Assumed adequate
Grade: At street grade
Utilities: All public utilities are available to the site Off-Site Improvements: Gianera Street is a fully improved roadway with sidewalks, curbs, gutters, streetlights, and landscaping. This roadway carries one lane of traffic in each direction, east-west.
Interior or Corner: Interior
Signalized Intersection: No traffic signal at the site
Street Frontage / Access
Frontage Road Primary
Street Name: Gianera Street
Street Type: Local
Frontage (Linear Ft.): 85
Number of Curb Cuts: 1
Traffic Count (Cars/Day): Minimal
Flood Zone Data
Flood Map Panel/Number: 06085C0064H
Flood Map Date: 05-18-2009
Flood Zone: X
Flood Zone X includes areas of minimal flood hazard, which are outside a Special Flood Hazard Area and higher than the elevation of the 0.2%-annual-chance flood. No flood insurance is required.
Portion in Flood Hazard Area: 0.00%
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
SITE DESCRIPTION
© 2023 VALBRIDGE PROPERTY ADVISORS | NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PAGE 28 Other Site Conditions
Soil Type: We have not been provided a geotechnical report for the property.
Based on our physical inspection, soil conditions appear stable Environmental Issues: A Phase I Environmental Site Report was not provided for review.
We make no representations as to the presence of toxins and hazardous materials on the subject site. We are appraising the site as if clean. If this is of concern to any reader of this report, it is our recommendation that an environmental report is obtained from the appropriate professionals qualified to issue such opinions.
Easements/Encroachments: A Preliminary Title Report was not provided to the appraiser for review. We assume that there are no easements or encumbrances that would materially affect the value of the subject, either positively or negatively.
Earthquake Zone: The property is not located in an Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone for earthquake hazard. Earthquake hazard is typical for the overall area.
Proximity to Power Lines: The property is directly south from the Tasman Substation, a large, three bank distribution substation. Although electricity substations are an important part of power infrastructure, there are concerns about their safety as they emit electric and magnetic fields (EMFs).
There are rumors that EMFs cause cancer, miscarriages, birth defects and other health issues. However, that is no conclusive evidence to support these claims.
According to an OLD Research Report prepared in October 2004 by Kevin E. McCarthy, most of the research conducted on the potential health benefits of the EMFs has focused on transmission and distribution lines rather than substation. According to the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) most of the EMF that comes from a substation is produced by these lines, rather than the equipment at the substation itself. According to National Cancer Institute, although a study in 1979 pointed to a possible association between living near electric power lines and childhood leukemia, more recent studies have had mixed finding.
An article published in The Appraisal Journal in Summer 2016 by Ted Tatos, Mark Glick, PhD, JD and Troy A. Lunt, MAI finds some negative effects from transmission lines, sub transmission lines and substation on property values. The effects differ by type of transmission line and the effect diminish with distance. However, they also find evidence of modest positive effect associated with the proximity, which may be related to greenways constructed beneath power lines.
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
SITE DESCRIPTION
© 2023 VALBRIDGE PROPERTY ADVISORS | NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PAGE 29 These results are consistent with our own survey of active market participants, who report no impact due to the property’s proximity to the substation. We spoke with Mike Strouf, the broker representing the seller of 2303 Genera Street, Ramada Reddy, the broker representing the landlord of 2233 Calle De Primavera and Mei Ling, the broker representing the seller of 2215 Gianera Street among others. They all agreed that proximity to the substation was not an issue of concern among buyers and/or tenants and had no impact on the value or rental rate of the real estate.
Adjacent Land Uses
North: Municipal service facility
South: Residential, across Gianera Street
East: Residential
West: Residential
Site Ratings
Access: Average
Visibility: Average
Zoning Designation
Zoning Jurisdiction: City of Santa Clara
Zoning Classification: R1-6L, Single Family Residential General Plan Designation: Low Density Residential
Permitted Uses: A variety of single-family residential uses.
Zoning Comments: The property is under the jurisdiction of the City of Santa Clara and is zoned Single-Family (R1-6L). The General Plan land use designation is Low Density Residential. The zoning is in conformance with the General Plan.
According to the City of Santa Clara Municipal Code, the intent of Single-Family zoning district is to stabilize and protect the residential characteristics of the district and to promote and encourage a suitable single-family residential environment.
Permitted uses include single-family dwellings, private garages and accessory buildings, accessory unit, supportive and transitional housing.
Each lot shall contain a minimum area of 6,000 square feet. The minimum lot width shall not be less than 60 feet. The maximum permitted height shall be two stories but not exceeding 25 feet.
Each front yard setback shall not be less than 20 feet in depth. A Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
SITE DESCRIPTION
© 2023 VALBRIDGE PROPERTY ADVISORS | NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PAGE 30 minimum of thirty-five percent (35%) of the front yard shall be permanently maintained as landscaped area. Each side yard shall not be less than 5 feet; rear yard shall not be less than 20 feet in depth.
Each single-family dwelling shall have two garage or carport parking spaces; these parking spaces shall be prohibited in required front yards or corner lot side yards. A minimum driveway length of twenty (20) feet is required between said parking and any street right-of-way line. Additional parking shall be permitted in required front yards or corner lot side yards, with motor vehicles, trailers, and boats parked in an orderly manner, generally perpendicular to the street. Such parking shall be prohibited in the thirty-five percent (35%) minimum landscaped area. Motor vehicles that do not comply with restrictions imposed by other sections of this title are prohibited.
According to the City of Santa Clara General Plan, the Low-Density Residential land use designation is intended for residential densities of 8 to 19 units per gross acre. Building types may include detached or attached dwelling units. Low Density Residential development comes in the form of single-family dwelling units, townhomes, rowhouses and combinations of these development types.
Analysis/Comments on Site
The site consists of a single parcel located along the north side of Gianera Street in Santa Clara. The site has a rectangular shape and an interior lot configuration with approximately 85.00 feet of frontage along Gianera Street (with one curb cut). The site has average visibility and access.
The underlying site contains approximately 12,478 square feet or 0.29 acres. The property zoning is Single-Family, and the General Plan land use designation is Low Density Residential. Overall, the site conforms to the area and is well suited to a variety of residential uses.
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
SITE DESCRIPTION
© 2023 VALBRIDGE PROPERTY ADVISORS | NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PAGE 31 @)
TAX PLAT
OFFICE 0 F COUNT Y ASSESSOR SANTA CLAR A COUNTY , CAL I FORNIA © @ 0 [~JWI
OlY OF
SANTA Cl.ARA
-----,-33
:1~
~1 ._; ; (/)
I~ :
TRACT NO. 5966
390-M-20
---,
ST. [r. l FULLER 48/J4 487-f 46H f654 4!+4 f6J4 "R4
H .50 1 50 1 60 6D I f,O Ill) I IIU I 92.59 9'.f:41
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I •
M
~: : : il : !lZ Im : H : 112P : ~'j
,-.:
"' LAKESHORE - - - - - ---------------- , !)7~1 90,!)] I t .5f "·" . ~: : ... ,,
~: :
. ' , ::;,
:=t
' '
ll.1 - 1- w
!:;::I N
'
••I I I I I I I
-:- + - :- -+ t---+ +- --+ -
I I I I I I I I :
7 : 6 [ 5 • : 3 \ 2 : 1 '1 67 : 68~-
' I I I I I I I
117.85 I 60 I I 1 1 I 60 1 !»~59 J &7.41
- -- - ---...l.-----~0_;. ___ ..1. _____ i .... i ____ i "iii ___ J,._r···:............r. ... ~, 8 9 .
.... '-t!
ti- ;J: - ,,,. -ij- ·/, 1l1 -=< 'L u...2 - : ""' .U 7 7 : 66 4B ~: 56 ,,~> 1» ____ 5 : __ 1
S, ----- ' •
•
__ 1!'0____ 1-· 11 ' 65 UY g 1!'_0 ____ ,__ u li O t.1.1 58 ' - ,-=
"" ,i " IL< ' ! • • ------)_ '-<· " ,,.
,.,, : ---- : .. ,..
"
·-~~ /
--------,-- . : - -~----, ·, "
~ ·~ - -t ~O ___ _
~
,
~., 10 iil
\.to_,,"'~ 8
I "~
-0, l l)U11
-i..:-Zo - TJiOo
J 11 , 12 ' '
S : M !J§ ' ' - ---! • J ••~ !.!J> "· < ----- , 06 .:. --,~,-- °' . .,,: " L , • '3 W• , , = ,_ w . :, ,o "' ----·•· • ' °'
W " ,.,, ' • " -·-·•• BO
~- : " : ' > . -~----+----'----- u --- .:' - ,,
i u,, !i l!1 !i "' ' el ,;·- ",i " .., · I ~ I• " " "i----~--·; • . .,. ,, -----m -----,.• " "" : ' •• : ' •• " ,., • •: •• • ..
--~-- Z2 2a--~,,
.g ""' " .. -· ., .
00 • ~, '··
• " "' J: f L • GII.UIOR .,,, ,,., • -LI sr. "'"" • • "'· -•m _j , • __ .,., __ ~.[ • ---•~----; , :, .,. f!( ;'. 'S,-.. 6 l
-y - - ' ·- -~ ·- - - - ·- ·- ... , • ' ., • " ... ••
----~- • • ' • ' • ' • ' • ' • ' • ••• ·- 11 : ,. ~-- ••, • ·-. - ' / . "' : : : : : : : •'· . \ : •· ' ·., "'· §__ VII 62 • ., 0 .. 0 65 0 - 0 .. 0 •• 0 0 •• , , / 0 ,, •• ' ~- ., , - • - ' - ' - ' - ' ' - ,, ., ,, = .,. -, . ,,, ,, j £• .. ' - ' : : : : : : -, • = \ : -, ., ·-. / _•;._ .. i .. -.L~_ 1 __ ,_ . !..''. .L. '."..1 _ ." .1 _ !'.. L .i!,_ L . ... \,_:_.;• . _;;_ ...i_ ___ ,, " .. , d, !!Br J !l!Y...
~
,o 1·
~~., .. : !:! '1,'- I
Jt'leseo
·---- -- -- ---
«,..
-- " ,,, • ... ..,.,,___
________
_
__ ___ _ _
@
@)
@ . '
1"40CT.¥'l"9'
~NCE E. SlONI:: - J\SSES'
,drd m~ fw DS5!l:i!mll'lt p~rpcSill
,pi1d i.ndtr R. k T. Code, Set. 'Id!""" 20'l2-20ZJ
-0
,.., -C'"
-< -,
)> -· C.
~'° '1)
RESIDENTIAL SITE
SITE DESCRIPTION
© 2023 VALBRIDGE PROPERTY ADVISORS | NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PAGE 32
ZONING MAP
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
2:-
E
ltJ
u..
QJ
°M
C
V) ·
\D
.!.t ~
a::
2:-
E
ltJ
u..
QJ
°M
C
V)
I
-'
\D
RESIDENTIAL SITE
SITE DESCRIPTION
© 2023 VALBRIDGE PROPERTY ADVISORS | NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PAGE 33
GENERAL PLAN MAP
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
•
\
ro
:p
C:
dJ
"O
·;;;
dJ
Cl:
p
·;;;
C:
dJ
0 3:
0 -'
ro
.....
C:
dJ
"O
"' dJ
Cl:
>-
.....
·;;;
C:
dJ
0 ~ -'
RESIDENTIAL SITE
IMPROVEMENTS DESCRIPTION
© 2023 VALBRIDGE PROPERTY ADVISORS | NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PAGE 34 Improvements Description
The following description is based on property inspection, assessor records, and information provided by the client.
Improvement Characteristics
Property Type: Residential
Tenancy: Single Family Residence
Number of Buildings: 1
Number of Stories 1
Construction Class: D - Wood Frame per Marshall Valuation Service Construction Quality: Average
Gross Building Area (GBA): 1,140 SF (based on appraisal measurements and cross-checked with public records)
Ratios & Parking
Land-to-Building Ratio: 10.95 to 1 (Usable Land/GBA)
Floor Area Ratio (FAR): 0.09 (based on GBA)
Age / Life
Year Built: 1960’s
Condition: Below Average
Actual Age: 62 years
Effective Age: 50 years
Typical Building Life: 75 years
Remaining Economic Life: 25 years
Structural Characteristics
Foundation: Concrete slab
Building Frame: Wood frame
Exterior Walls: Painted stucco
Roof Type / Material: Composition shingle
Interior
Floors: Carpet and linoleum
Walls: Painted drywall
Ceilings: Painted drywall
Lighting: Standard
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
IMPROVEMENTS DESCRIPTION
© 2023 VALBRIDGE PROPERTY ADVISORS | NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PAGE 35 Site Improvements
Landscaping: Average
Legal, Conforming Status
Legally Permitted Use: Yes
Conformity Conclusion: The existing improvements appear to meet the zoning requirements.
Deferred Maintenance
Deferred maintenance was noted within the structure. It consists of ceiling cracks, worn out flooring, peeling paint, etc. The house is vacant for a long time and all utilities are shut off.
Analysis/Comments on Improvements
The property is improved with a single-family home. The improvements contain 1,140 square feet based on the appraisal measurements and cross-checked with public records. The building was constructed circa 1960s. The residence is secured with a wood fence.
The building has a wood frame construction. The roof has a composition shingle covering. The interior of the building has painted drywall walls and ceilings. The flooring consists of carpet and linoleum. The property has a total of five rooms, including three bedrooms, two full bathrooms, one family room, one living room, a kitchen, and a two-car garage. The kitchen has wood cabinets, laminate countertop, appliances, painted drywalls and linoleum flooring. Each bedroom has painted drywalls, carpet flooring and closet. Each bathroom has a shower fixture, single sink vanity, and linoleum flooring. Additional features include fireplace in the living room, built-in cabinets in the hallway, a patio, a porch, landscaping, and an attached, two-car garage.
The interior was minimally maintained over the years, and it is in below average condition. Overall, the improvements conform to the area and are well suited to various residential uses, including the existing single-family use. The functional utility of the property is below average based upon a comparison of similar properties in the market area.
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
SUBJECT PHOTOGRAPHS
© 2023 VALBRIDGE PROPERTY ADVISORS | NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PAGE 36 Subject Photographs (Dated December 14, 2022)
Typical exterior
Typical exterior
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
SUBJECT PHOTOGRAPHS
© 2023 VALBRIDGE PROPERTY ADVISORS | NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PAGE 37 Typical interior view of kitchen
Typical interior view of bedroom
Additional photos are included in the Addendum
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
ASSESSMENT AND TAX DATA
© 2023 VALBRIDGE PROPERTY ADVISORS | NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PAGE 38 Assessment and Tax Data
The State of California has provided for a unified system to assess real estate for property taxes.
Assessment Districts are established on a county basis to assess real estate within the county. The appraised property falls under the taxing jurisdiction of Santa Clara County and is subject to both general taxes and direct assessments. The property is City-owned, so exempt from tax. A buyer of the subject would need to consider the taxes that would be assessed at the current rate of 1.1753% plus all current special assessments.
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
MARKET ANALYSIS
© 2023 VALBRIDGE PROPERTY ADVISORS | NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PAGE 39 Market Analysis
COVID-19 Pandemic
Market activity in all property sectors in 2021 and 2022 has shown little, if any, impact from COVID-19.
Most markets have experienced growth, fueled by low lending rates and inflationary pressures.
Demand for investment properties continues to be high in all markets and is expected to increase in secondary and tertiary markets as investors look for higher yields. Investors and owners are also expected to continue to watch federal involvement in business loans, as the government may need to intervene if inflation continues to grow. This will influence the decision of business owners to choose between buying or leasing their commercial space. Continued supply chain issues have the potential to impact both inflation and the ability to satisfy space demand. A shortage of supplies as well as labor continues to cause delays in construction across the country.
Inflation
Inflation is perhaps the biggest 2022 concern for CRE markets and investors. High inflation rates are being driven by both demand (stimulus, more businesses opening, high savings rates) and supply factors (labor shortages and supply chain disruptions). While at the highest rate in 30 years, inflation will likely stay high for the next year. The following table presents historical inflations rates:
ANNUAL CPI RATE OF CHANGE
Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
The September 2022 CPI reading was an annual rate of 8.2%, down from the annual rate of 9.0% in June, which is a pace not seen since 1990. Because of the unique nature of the causes of this rate of inflation, the demand outlook does not point to accelerating inflation over the medium term, which is most important for the overall economic outlook and for decision makers at the Federal Reserve.
Market participants anticipate that the Fed will continue to hike interest rates in through 2022 to combat inflation. The biggest risk is that unexpected runaway inflation would be damaging to the economy and negatively affect commercial property markets. However, this is not the expected scenario and elevated inflation can have a net positive impact on commercial property values.
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
Pe rce nt
10.0 5.0
0.0 Sept
2006
Sept
2008
Sept
2010
Se pt
2012
Se,p
2014
Sept
2016
Sept
2018
Se pt
2020
Sept
2022
RESIDENTIAL SITE
MARKET ANALYSIS
© 2023 VALBRIDGE PROPERTY ADVISORS | NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PAGE 40 Interest Rates
To combat inflation, the Federal Reserve raised the federal funds rate by 25 basis points in March 2022, reflecting the first increase since 2018. However, this increase had little impact to no impact in year over year inflation and the Federal Reserve raised rates by an additional 50 basis points in May 2022.
Interest rate increases affect capital-intensive industries like real estate. As credit becomes more expensive, investor return requirements increase, which can lead to higher capitalization rates expectations. As inflation persists and the market anticipates additional rate hikes by the Fed, slower growth in CRE pricing and transactions should be expected.
In general, nominal (non-inflation adjusted) real estate returns perform well under a variety of rate environments, while inflation-adjusted real estate returns are strongest during periods of stability, according to research done by Trepp. In a March 2022 report on interest rates and commercial real estate, moderate declines or slight increases (0 to 50 basis points) create the strongest returns, with median annual growth at 3.1%. Trepp outlined the following possible impacts of higher interest rates on major CRE sectors:
Multifamily
Issuance in this sector has surged in the low-interest-rate environment of the last two years. Sharply higher interest rates could put a dent in issuance in the near term, as higher borrowing costs could reduce demand for debt financing. In the long-term, issuance could rebound. Despite the current trend of declining unemployment and rising income, wage inflation is outpacing price inflation as of now. If this inflation trend continues, consumer demand could be pushed further toward rental properties.
However, the market is currently experiencing a shift away from renting. According to data from the United States Census Bureau, the homeownership rate increased to 65.5% in Q4 2021, a decline from the Q2 2020 peak of 67.9% (a rate height that has yet to be surpassed by those seen post-2008 financial crisis). Additionally, those between the ages of 25 to 29 have increased their homeownership share to
35.4%, up from 34.8% a year earlier, possibly suggesting that younger families are moving away from renting.
Office
The office sector also benefited from the low-interest-rate environment. However, rising interest rates could lead to an overall drag on growth in 2022 which may result in some companies reducing their projections for future office space needs. With that in mind, landlords may be more willing to lock in tenants at their current rates rather than risk losing them. However, firms are already in the midst of the debate over hybrid, in-person, and fully remote expectations from employees, and some are choosing to offload their excess office spaces and either downsize or do away with their in-person spaces for good.
Additionally, Trepp estimates that the CMBS market can expect to see $10.3 billion in office loan maturities for 2022, rising rates could be problematic when it comes to refinancing. The office market is already in turmoil and rising interest rates will likely not serve to alleviate the uncertainty in the market.
Retail
With rising interest rates and a slowing economy, retailers may curtail plans for growth in response to an up-and-coming potential drop in disposable consumer income. This curtailment may make it more Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
MARKET ANALYSIS
© 2023 VALBRIDGE PROPERTY ADVISORS | NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PAGE 41 difficult to backfill vacant spaces and lead to consolidation by retailers. Investors could choose to approach 2022 with a more conservative view of retail occupancy going forward.
Lodging
The hotel industry faces challenges from both a supply and demand perspective. CMBS lenders abruptly stopped funding loans when the pandemic took effect in 2020, but, since then lodging loan issuance has picked up. While this seems like good news, the uptick in issuance could prove too fast and there is a potential for the supply to outpace demand. There may not be enough demand to absorb the new supply if consumers and businesses maintain and reduce their levels of spending.
Conclusions
Various market participants will feel the effects of rising interest rates. As highlighted above, each sector of the CRE space will react differently to these rising rates. Ultimately there may be some nearterm volatility in 2023 seen across all sectors of CRE, but higher rates should attract capital later in the year and beyond.
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
MARKET ANALYSIS
© 2023 VALBRIDGE PROPERTY ADVISORS | NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PAGE 42 Local Market Performance
MARKET MAP
The property is a Single-Family Residence and competes within the Santa Clara submarket of the Santa Clara County metro, as shown in the market area map above. As such, we provide overviews of the local single-family submarket followed by a brief discussion on the residential land market.
Santa Clara Single-Family Housing Submarket
To assess market trends in housing sales for the City of Santa Clara and Santa Clara County, we relied on data provided by Multiple Listing Service (MLS). The following table highlights median prices for singlefamily housing within Santa Clara County as reported by MLS.
YE 2019 YE 2020 YE 2021 2022 YTD
2019-2020
% Change
2020-2021
% Change
2021-2022
% Change
95054 $1,298,000 $1,375,000 $1,530,000 $1,565,000 5.9% 11.3% 2.3% City $1,353,500 $1,426,000 $1,638,000 $1,810,000 5.4% 14.9% 10.5% County $1,250,000 $1,370,000 $1,615,000 $1,766,500 9.6% 17.9% 9.4% Historical Median Single-Family Residence (SFR) Prices
in the City of Santa Clara and Santa Clara County SFR
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
ton Bridge ·-·
@)
Palo Alto
Don Edwards
San Francisco
Bay National
Wildlife ...
Costco Wholesale ' EAST INOUSTRIAL
BAYLANDS
WARM SPRI NGS
Mission Peak
Regional
Preserve
Wilderness
Bay/ands Nature Preserve
Byxbee Park
oAlto .f ;,
;f Shoreline Amphitheatre
cs Mitchell Park 4') GREEN n ~ T RI( y ~
b ~111..f'!
GREEN MEADOW Is;,.
MO NTA. LOMA
§]
Los Altos
Altos Hills
Mountain
View
q Cuesta Park
Loyola
Rancho San 'Aritonio
-, <;aunty-Park
& Open ...
Black
Mountain Permanente
West Santa ·c1ara Stevens Creek
Count Park
Alviso Marin·a
County'Park
f BAPS Shri Swaminaryan
Mandir, S~Jose Ed R. Levin
!!lll County Park
Q;W
99 Ranch Market f Milpitas ABC Bay Painti
,.,,
Baylands Park
ALVISO
@ (e) California's(,\\ y
@
~
Great America Y RIVERMARK ~~ i.......
""' '- Qlil
BERRYESSA
NORTH SAN JOSE
Norman §] f Apna Bazar Q costco Wholesale
Y. Mineta
San Jose
International...
Sunnyvale
PONDEROSA
PARK
Ortega Park @
q
Santa Clara
9 H Mart San Jose
Regional Medical Ctr~
JAPANTOWN
Sierra Vista Open Space
Preserve
Alum
Rock Park
East Foothills
Alum Rock
@
q I Rosicrucian Egyptian Museum Raging Waters San Jose
Cupertino
i
Winchester A
Mystery House T
WES T SAN JOSE
Qlil '
San Jose
Fruitdale
cw
Willow
Street Frank
Bramhall Park
q
SOFA
Happy Hollow
Park& Zoo
EAST SA N ' JOSE
Fow
Creek
RESIDENTIAL SITE
MARKET ANALYSIS
© 2023 VALBRIDGE PROPERTY ADVISORS | NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PAGE 43 The preceding table shows value depreciation over the past three years for single-family homes in Santa Clara County. In the three-year timeframe, the demand drove prices upward within the neighborhood, the city of Santa Clara submarket and Santa Clara County.
The following table and graph illustrate monthly market activity of detached single-family homes in Santa Clara from November 2021 to November 2022.
The table illustrates the following trends:
• Marketing periods changed widely, ranging from 2 to 23 days and averaging 10 days. From November 2021 to May 2022 marketing periods became shorter, demonstrating healthy demand. • Median sale prices wavered over the year. The larger increase is reported in March 2022 at 11.5% while the largest drop is recorded in November 2022 at 24.0% Overall median price decreased
0.6% since November 2021.
• The sale-to-list price ratio remained consistently robust throughout the year, ranging from 100.0% to 125.4%. Price ratios reached as high as 125.4% in January 2022.
Month Sale/List Median Price Change DOM
Nov-21 111.9% $1,621,750 9.4% 7
Dec-21 106.9% $1,475,000 -9.0% 6
Jan-22 125.4% $1,565,000 6.1% 7
Feb-22 113.9% $1,690,000 8.0% 8
Mar-22 118.1% $1,885,000 11.5% 7
Apr-22 115.3% $1,740,000 -7.7% 6
May-22 112.9% $1,550,000 -10.9% 7
Jun-22 103.9% $1,525,000 -1.6% 12
Jul-22 101.6% $1,400,000 -8.2% 11
Aug-22 102.0% $1,500,000 7.1% 22
Sep-22 101.8% $1,289,000 -14.1% 23
Oct-22 100.3% $1,390,000 7.8% 20
Nov-22 100.0% $1,056,000 -24.0% 2
Santa Clara - SFR Market
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
$2,000,000
$1,500,000
$1,000,000
$500,000
$0
Median Price
- -
- Median Price
RESIDENTIAL SITE
MARKET ANALYSIS
© 2023 VALBRIDGE PROPERTY ADVISORS | NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PAGE 44 Residential Land Submarket
Residential land values are directly tied to supply and demand of current housing product. Land values vary depending on location, size, permitted uses, and allowable density. However, with the prices of homes elevated, land prices have also experienced a notable upward trend over the past years. The Bay Area and Santa Clara County are both experiencing growth, in large part due to the various tech companies located in the area, and thus these areas command some of the highest home prices in the region.
Residential land is typically purchased contingent on project approval or with entitlements (tentative or final map) in place. When contingent upon approvals, the risk to a developer is significantly reduced, putting upward pressure on the price. Prices for land purchased without this contingency are typically lower than for land purchased on a contingency. The price differential is especially large as the risk increases. We note that citizen participation in planning activities is very high in certain municipalities; thus, the approval process for residential projects can become political, long and arduous. It is not uncommon for new projects to take three to four years for development approval.
The site’s R-1-6 zoning, and Low-Density Residential land use would permit low-density redevelopment.
Therefore, the property would be less attractive as an investment to residential developers seeking a higher density. However, the property offers desirable location withing a good school district and will be attractive to homebuyers.
Low-density residential land values in Santa Clara and surrounding cities are in the $60 to $140+ per square foot range depending on location and entitlements. Oftentimes, residential land is valued on the basis of price per unit as opposed to price per square foot of site area, utilized in valuing unentitled sites.
The following graph for the S&P/Case-Shiller San Francisco Home Price Index shows an increasing trend in housing prices. Demand for housing has increased through the recent economic recession stemming from the Covid-19 pandemic which has led to an increase in demand for residential development land. However, prices have been trending downward since June 2022 which corresponds with the federal funds rate increases as the Fed initiates quantitative tightening to curb inflation.
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
MARKET ANALYSIS
© 2023 VALBRIDGE PROPERTY ADVISORS | NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PAGE 45 Market Analysis Conclusions
As of the valuation date, the residential market was slowing down due to high interest rates. Investor and developer demand for residential land in the Bay Area was strong prior to the recent interest rate increases. Likely, we will continue to see a slowing trend for the Santa Clara County residential market in the near term.
Overall, the subject has a good general location in Santa Clara with good access to highway 101 and 237 and proximity to nearby amenities including Levi’s Stadium, California’s Great America, and VTA Light Rail. The improvements conform to the area, however, considering the large lot size, the property would also appeal to a local developer. The property would be well-received if placed on the market for sale.
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
FRED ~ - S&P/Case-Shlller CA-San Francisco Home Price Index 400
360
320 0
0 ,,
0 0 280 0
N
C:
" 24() x
'1J
"'Cl
.E
200
160
120
2016 2017 2018 2019
Shaded areas md1cace U.S. recessions. Source: S&P Dow Jones Indices LLC 2020 2021
fred.stlouisfed.org
2022
RESIDENTIAL SITE
HIGHEST AND BEST USE ANALYSIS
© 2023 VALBRIDGE PROPERTY ADVISORS | NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PAGE 46 Highest and Best Use Analysis
The Highest and Best Use of a property is the use that is legally permissible, physically possible, and financially feasible which results in the highest value. An opinion of the highest and best use results from consideration of the criteria noted above under the market conditions or likely conditions as of the effective date of value. Determination of highest and best use results from the judgment and analytical skills of the appraiser. It represents an opinion, not a fact. In appraisal practice, the concept of highest and best use represents the premise upon which value is based.
Highest and Best Use As Though Vacant
The primary determinants of the highest and best use as though vacant are (1) Legal permissibility, (2) Physical possibility, (3) Financial feasibility, and (4) Maximum productivity.
Legally Permissible
The property’s site is zoned R1-6L, Single Family Residential, which controls the general nature of permissible uses and is appropriate for the location and physical elements of the property. The General Plan land use designation of the site is Low Density Residential, which allows for redevelopment with up to 19 dwelling units per acre. The location of the property is appropriate for the uses allowed, as noted previously, and a change in zoning is unlikely. There are no known easements, encroachments, covenants or other use restrictions that would unduly limit or impede development.
Physically Possible
The physical attributes allow for a number of potential uses. Elements such as size, shape, availability of utilities, known hazards (flood, environmental, etc.), and other potential influences are described in the Site Description and have been considered. There are no items of a physical nature which would adversely impact development with the legal permitted uses. The most probable use of the site is for residential development at the highest allowed density, which conforms to the pattern of land use in the immediate area.
Financially Feasible
A review of sale prices, rental and occupancy rates suggests that there is an undersupply of residential properties and demand is sufficient to support construction costs and timely absorption of additional inventory in this market. Therefore, near-term speculative development of the site is financially feasible.
Maximally Productive
Among the financially feasible uses, the use that results in the highest value (the maximally productive use) is the highest and best use. Redevelopment of the site at the highest allowed density if the most productive use.
Highest and Best Use As Though Vacant Conclusion
The conclusion of the highest and best use as though vacant is for residential development with up to 19 dwelling units per acre.
Highest and Best Use As Improved
The determination of the highest and best use of the subject property as improved is focused on three possible conditions that may represent the maximally productive use of the property: (1) continuation Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
HIGHEST AND BEST USE ANALYSIS
© 2023 VALBRIDGE PROPERTY ADVISORS | NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PAGE 47 of the existing use, (2) modification of the existing use, or (3) demolition and redevelopment of the land. In addition, the presence of surplus or excess land is identified.
As noted, the property is improved with 1,140-square-foot home with three bedrooms and two bathrooms. Improvements were completed in 1960s and, as of the date of value, were in below average condition.
Retaining the improvements meet the test for legally permissible and physically possible. However, it is unlikely they are economically feasible. As shown below, the market value of the property, As Is, does not exceed the value of the site as vacant plus the cost of demolition.
To determine the value of the property, As Is, we have selected five comparables sales located in the Santa Clara and Campbell. We searched for smaller homes located on larger sites with similar redevelopment potential. The following table summarizes the sales utilized.
The high end of the range, Comparable Three is a recent sale of a larger three-bedroom home with one bathroom and similar in size lot. This comparable supports and indicator of $1,560,000. The low end of the range, Comparable Five is a pending sale of a property with superior location in Campbell.
This is a smaller home on a larger lot with superior quality of improvements. This comparable supports an indicator of $1,160,000. Three of the five comparables range between $1,424,000 and $1,457,000.
We estimate the market value of the property, As Is, at $1,430,000. The market value of the site as vacant redevelopment land is estimated at $1,620,000 as will be shown in the following section.
Therefore, demolition of the existing improvements and redevelopment of the site with up to 19 units per acre is the maximally productive use of the site, as improved.
Highest and Best Use As Improved Conclusion
The highest and best use of the property, as improved, is redevelopment with a residential complex, at the highest density allowed.
Most Probable Buyer
As of the date of value, the most probable buyer of the property is a local developer.
Improved Sales Summary
Comp. Year Lot Unadjusted
No. Date of Sale Location Built GBA Size Sale Price per Unit 1 April-22 2159 Avenida De Las Flores Santa Clara 1976 1,341 8,782 $1,550,000 $176.49 2 October-22 4472 Davis Street Santa Clara 1956 2,166 9,716 $1,390,000 $143.06 3 February-22 1742 Jackson Street Santa Clara 1900 1,432 12,066 $1,820,000 $150.84 4 July-21 93 Brookside Avenue Santa Clara 1940 1,839 13,690 $1,700,000 $124.18 5 Offer Pending 115 Memory Lane Campbell 1950 1,079 15,187 $1,698,000 $111.80 Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
APPRAISAL METHODOLOGY
© 2023 VALBRIDGE PROPERTY ADVISORS | NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PAGE 48 Appraisal Methodology
Three Approaches to Value
There are three traditional approaches typically available to develop indications of real property value:
the cost, sales comparison, and income capitalization approaches.
Cost Approach
The cost approach is based upon the principle that a prudent purchaser would pay no more for a property than the cost to purchase a similar site and construct similar improvements without undue delay, producing a property of equal desirability and utility. This approach is particularly applicable when the improvements being appraised are relatively new or proposed, or when the improvements are so specialized that there are too few comparable sales to develop a credible Sales Comparison Approach analysis.
Sales Comparison Approach
In the sales comparison approach, the appraiser analyzes sales and listings of similar properties, adjusting for differences between the property and the comparable properties. This method can be useful for valuing general purpose properties or vacant land. For improved properties, it is particularly applicable when there is an active sales market for the property type being appraised – either by owner-users or investors.
Income Capitalization Approach
The income capitalization approach is based on the principle that a prudent investor will pay no more for the property than he or she would for another investment of similar risk and cash flow characteristics. The income capitalization approach is widely used and relied upon in appraising income-producing properties, especially those for which there is an active investment sales market.
Subject Valuation
As stated within the Scope of Work, we have relied upon the Sales Comparison Approach. Income and Cost Approaches are not utilized. When valuing vacant land, the Cost and Income approach to value are not applicable.
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
SALES COMPARISON APPROACH
© 2023 VALBRIDGE PROPERTY ADVISORS | NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PAGE 49 Sales Comparison Approach
Methodology
This approach is based on the premise that a buyer would pay no more for a specific property than the cost of obtaining a property with the same quality, utility, and perceived benefits of ownership. It is based on the principles of supply and demand, balance, substitution and externalities. In the sales comparison approach, an indication of market value is developed by analyzing closed sales, listings, or pending sales of properties similar to the property, using the most relevant units of comparison.
The comparative analysis focuses on the difference between the comparable sales and the subject property using all appropriate elements of comparison.
Unit of Comparison
The unit of comparison selected depends on the appraisal problem and nature of the property and is intended to explain or mirror market behavior. The primary unit of comparison in the market for unentitled land is price per square foot of site area.
Elements of Comparison
Elements of comparison are the characteristics or attributes of properties and transactions that cause the prices of real estate to vary. The primary elements of comparison considered in sales comparison analysis are as follows: (1) real property rights conveyed, (2) financing terms, (3) conditions of sale, (4) expenditures made immediately after purchase, (5) market conditions, (6) location, (7) physical characteristics.
Comparable Sales Data
To obtain and verify comparable sales of vacant land properties, we conducted a search of public records, field surveys, interviews with knowledgeable real estate professionals in the area, and a review of our internal database. We include five sales in our analysis, as these sales were judged to be the most comparable to develop an indication of market value for the property.
The following is a table summarizing each sale comparable and a map illustrating the location of each in relation to the Gianera site. Details of each comparable follow the location map.
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
SALES COMPARISON APPROACH
© 2023 VALBRIDGE PROPERTY ADVISORS | NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PAGE 50
COMPARABLE SALES MAP
Land Sales Summary
Comp. Date Gross Gross General Sales Price Per
No. of Sale Acres Sq. Ft. Location Zoning Plan Actual Sq. Ft. 1 June-22 0.386 16,800 2303 Gianera St Santa Clara R1-6L Low Den. Resid. $2,443,000 $145.42 2 January-21 0.471 20,504 1991 Colony St Mountain View R-3-2 Med. Den. Resid $2,850,000 $139.00 3 March-19 0.201 8,775 3424 Cecil Av Santa Clara R1-6L Very Low Den. Res. $1,160,000 $132.19 4 February-22 0.312 13,605 272 Bonita Av San Jose R-1-8 Resid. Neighbor. $825,000 $60.64 Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
0 on
nlo Park
Palo Alto
Stanford
Los Altos Land Sale No. 2 £:
8! Subject P~ erty
® Santa Clara
Rancho San
Antoni;n-~--'---------,
CountyP·a....__ ~L~a~n~d~S~a~le~ N~o~-~3~ __,--... & 0 upertino pen ...
West Santa
Clara @ WEST SAN JOSE
Fruitdale
Campbell
Saratoga
Milpitas
BERRY ESSA
101
®
®
Robertsville
Cambrian Park
© 35
Castle Rock
State Park
Sanborn
County Park
Alamitos
0 Los Gatos
st Foothills
Alum Rock
ED NVAL
@)
Ra
EV ERG REE
RESIDENTIAL SITE
SALES COMPARISON APPROACH
LAND COMPARABLE 1
Property Identification
Property/Sale ID 11287845/1626752
Address 2303 Gianera Street
City, State Zip Santa Clara, California 95054
County Santa Clara
Latitude/Longitude 37.400934/-121.965485
Tax ID 104-06-037
Transaction Data
Sale Date June 17, 2022
Sale Status Recorded
Grantor Nuno & Jose Trinida
Grantee Gianeral St EST LLC
Property Rights Fee Simple
Recording Number 0025354706
Sale Price $2,443,000
Property Description
Gross Acres 0.39
Gross SF 16,800
Shape Rectangular
Topography Level
Utilities All public utilities are
available to the site
Flood Hazard Zone X
Earthquake Zone The property is not located
in an Alquist-Priolo Special
Studies Zone for
earthquake hazard.
Earthquake hazard is
typical for the overall area.
Use Designation Low Density Residential
Zoning Jurisdiction City of Santa Clara
Zoning Code R1-6L
Zoning Description Single Family Residential
Indicators
$/Gross Acre $6,334,431.00 $/Gross SF $145.42
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
,1~rn1
a'! ., 2
~
§
•. @ :~~ "' < ~i ., !
RESIDENTIAL SITE
SALES COMPARISON APPROACH
Remarks X
The property consists of a single parcel located along the north side of Gianera Street in Santa Clara. The site has a rectangular shape and an interior lot configuration with approximately 120.00 feet of frontage along Gianera Street (with one curb cut).
The underlying site contains approximately16,800 square feet or 0.39 acres and is improved with an 1,812- square-foot single-family residence. The property is zoned Single Family Residential (R1-6L) and the General Plan designation is Low-Density Residential. According to MLS the property was previously approved for redevelopment with six single-family homes and although approvals may have expired, they support the subdivision potential of the site.
Gianeral St EST LLC purchased this property from Nuno & Jose Trinida in August 2022. The property was listed in May 2022 for $1,999,999 and sold in 17 days for $2,443,000 or 1,348.23 per square foot. This is approximately 22.2% above asking. The buyer's broker reported the property was purchased as an investment, however, given to low coverage and the high sales price it appears that the price reflects its future redevelopment potential.
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
SALES COMPARISON APPROACH
LAND COMPARABLE 2
Property Identification
Property/Sale ID 11122215/1518918
Address 1991 Colony Street
City, State Zip Mountain View, California 94043
County Santa Clara
Latitude/Longitude 37.415685/-122.091049
Tax ID 153-04-014
Transaction Data
Sale Date January 15, 2021
Sale Status Recorded
Grantor Frank and Bruno Jr. Muzzi
Grantee Bei Jiang
Property Rights Fee Simple
Financing Cash
Conditions of Sale None
Recording Number 0024811488
Sale Price $2,850,000
Property Description
Gross Acres 0.47
Gross SF 20,504
Shape Rectangular
Topography Level
Utilities All are available to site
Flood Hazard Zone AO
Use Designation Medium-Density
Residential (13 to 25
DU/acres)
Zoning Jurisdiction City of Mountain View
Zoning Code R-3-2
Zoning Description Residential—MultipleFamily
Indicators
$/Gross Acre $6,054,683.00
$/Gross SF $139.00
$/Unit $950,000
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
SALES COMPARISON APPROACH
Remarks X
The property consists of one parcel of residential land located east of Rengstorff Avenue in Mountain View.
The site measures 20,504 square feet, or 0.47 acres, with 88 feet of frontage along Colony Street (one curb cut). The parcel has an interior configuration with a depth of 233.66 feet. The property is tucked in a quiet residential neighborhood yet within one mile of Highway 101, providing good regional access. The site also benefits from proximity to Old Middlefield Way, a commercial corridor, as well as shopping centers and prominent employers, including Google headquarters.
The site is zoned R3-2: Residential--Multiple-Family, and the General Plan designation is Medium-Density Residential. The R3-2 zoning permits the construction of a variety of residential uses, including apartments, condominiums, rowhouses, townhomes, and single-family homes. Of note, the entire site lies within Flood Zone AO, which requires flood insurance.
This property was listed on and off the market for a year and in that timeframe, it went into escrow four times. While the zoning would permit up to six units, the City would not approve row housing on the site because its width is less than 100 feet. Also, there is a BMR requirement, which made some of the buyers drop out. The property was priced for an as is sale, and the sellers did not want to hold the property for 12- 18 months until the buyer received approvals.
The buyer of the property is planning on subdividing into three lots with the intention of selling two of the lots and potentially keeping one. At the time of sale, the property was improved with a single-family home and other structures, but they were in fair condition and added no value to the property. The buyer purchased the property in an all-cash transaction with no contingencies. Close of escrow was very quick.
This is reflected in the sale price, which was 14% below the asking price.
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
SALES COMPARISON APPROACH
LAND COMPARABLE 3
Property Identification
Property/Sale ID 11024007/1472834
Address 3424 Cecil Avenue
City, State Zip Santa Clara, California 95050
County Santa Clara
Latitude/Longitude 37.324063/-121.958931
Tax ID 303-20-044
Transaction Data
Sale Date March 26, 2019
Sale Status Recorded
Grantor Dunn1 Family Trust
Grantee Kwong Cheng
Property Rights Fee Simple
Financing Cash
Conditions of Sale Typical
Recording Number 0024141709
Days on Market 7
Sale Price $1,160,000
Property Description
Gross Acres 0.20
Gross SF 8,775
Shape Rectangular
Topography Level
Utilities All utilities in place
Flood Hazard Zone D
Use Designation Very Low Density
Residential
Zoning Jurisdiction City of Santa Clara
Zoning Code R1-6L
Zoning Description Single Family Residential
Indicators
$/Gross Acre $5,758,253.00 $/Gross SF $132.19
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
COUNTY, CAL Ir O It NI A
RESIDENTIAL SITE
SALES COMPARISON APPROACH
Remarks X
The property consists of a single parcel located along the south side of Cecil Avenue in Santa Clara. The site has a rectangular shape and an interior lot configuration with approximately 65.00 feet of frontage along Cecil Avenue (with one curb cut).
The underlying site contains approximately 8,775 square feet or 0.20 acres and is improved with a 1,798- square-foot single-family residence completed in 1921 and updated in 1948. The property is zoned Single Family Residential (R1-6L) and the General Plan designation is Very Low-Density Residential.
Kwong Cheng purchased this property from Dunn1 Family Trust in March 2019. The property was listed on the market for seven days and sold above the asking price of $988,000. The sale price was $1,160,000. This is the sale of a home that was marketed as a "contractor's delight" with significant updating needed. There is also an un-permitted ADU. The property has the potential to be significantly updated and reconfigured or completely rebuilt with a larger home as well as an ADU.
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
SALES COMPARISON APPROACH
LAND COMPARABLE 4
Property Identification
Property/Sale ID 11255925/1604301
Address 272 Bonita Avenue
City, State Zip San Jose, California 95116
County Santa Clara
Latitude/Longitude 37.345414/-121.859191
Tax ID 472-06-008
Transaction Data
Sale Date February 7, 2022
Sale Status Recorded
Grantor Elena Vizcarra
Grantee Viam Bonita Partners LLC
Property Rights Fee Simple
Financing Cash
Conditions of Sale None
Recording Number 25265558
Sale Price $825,000
Property Description
Gross Acres 0.31
Gross SF 13,605
Shape Rectangular
Topography Level
Utilities Electricity available at the
street.
Flood Hazard Zone X (unshaded)
Use Designation Residential Neighborhood
Zoning Jurisdiction City of San Jose
Zoning Code R-1-8
Zoning Description Single Family Residential
Indicators
$/Gross Acre $2,641,437.00 $/Gross SF $60.64
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
~ I ., ..... , '."',. . '"".. - - '" M, ~
I --~- __:::::____-----1\- -
@ I .,--- '"""'' __ _j
CO UH Ty,
HIGHWAY
I
0 ~.,- U.Wl«ClC.STCl!E-"5Sl[SS01t __ ,.,....., ~ .... ll. l l.C....Sc."27
RESIDENTIAL SITE
SALES COMPARISON APPROACH
Remarks X
The site consists of a parcel of vacant, residential land, located one parcel east of Bonita Avenue in San Jose. The subject benefits from a central location within a 10-minute drive of Downtown San Jose and within one mile of Highway 101, near the interchange with Interstate 280. The neighborhood is mostly a lowdensity, residential community that includes some mobile home parks.
The property contains 13,605 square feet, or 0.31, acres, and is one of the larger lots in the immediate neighborhood. It was previously used for operation of a demolition business. The site lacks street frontage.
Instead, access to the property is provided via an adjacent parcel that fronts Kelly Court.
The property has zoning of R-1-8 zoning and a land use designation of Residential Neighborhood (RN) which permits up to eight dwelling units per acre. The site could therefore potentially be subdivided into two lots to accommodate two single-family homes.
The property was listed on the market for six months at an asking price of $995,000. It sold in February of 2021 for $825,000, approximately 17.1% below asking.
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
SALES COMPARISON APPROACH
Land Sales Comparison Analysis
The data utilized are the best available at the time of this report. We analyzed the sales and made adjustments for differences in the elements of comparison previously listed. The comparable sales are adjusted to the Gianera property: if the comparable sale was superior, we applied a negative adjustment to the comparable sale. A positive adjustment to the comparable property was applied if it was inferior to the site.
Transaction Adjustments
These items are applied prior to the application of property adjustments. Transaction adjustments include:
1. Real Property Rights Conveyed
2. Financing Terms
3. Conditions of Sale
4. Expenditures Made Immediately After Purchase
The adjustments are discussed as follows:
Real Property Rights Conveyed
The sale comparables all reflect the fee simple interest; thus, no adjustments for property rights are required.
Financing Terms
The transaction price of one property may differ from that of an identical property due to different financial arrangements. Sales involving financing terms that are not at or near market terms require adjustments for cash equivalency to reflect typical market terms. A cash equivalency procedure discounts the atypical mortgage terms to provide an indication of value at cash equivalent terms.
All comparable sales are financed at market, or they are all-cash sales. No adjustments are applied.
Conditions of Sale
When the conditions of sale are atypical, the result may be a price that is higher or lower than that of a normal transaction. Adjustments for conditions of sale usually reflect the motivations of either a buyer or a seller who is under duress to complete the transaction. No adjustments for condition of sale are required.
Expenditures Made Immediately After Purchase
A knowledgeable buyer considers expenditures that will have to be made upon purchase of a property because these costs affect the price the buyer agrees to pay. Such expenditures may include: (1) costs to demolish and remove any portion of the improvements, (2) costs to petition for a zoning change, and/or (3) costs to remediate environmental contamination.
The relevant figure is not the actual cost incurred, but the cost that was anticipated by both the buyer and seller. Unless the sales involved expenditures anticipated upon the purchase date, no adjustments to the comparable sales are required for this element of comparison. No adjustments are required in this category.
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
SALES COMPARISON APPROACH
Market Conditions Adjustment
Market conditions change over time as a result of inflation, deflation, fluctuations in supply and demand and other factors. Changing market conditions creates the need for adjustments to sale comparables that represent transactions during periods of dissimilar market conditions.
Discussions with market participants indicate the vacant land market was strong prior to interest rate increases. We applied a 5% upward adjustment until June 2022, based on MLS and our experience with similar properties.
Property Adjustments
Property adjustments are usually expressed quantitatively as percentages that reflect the increase or decrease in value attributable to the various characteristics of the property. In some instances, however, qualitative adjustments are used. These adjustments are based on locational and physical characteristics and are applied after the application of transaction and market conditions adjustments.
We have summarized adjustments to the sale comparables below and on the following page as delineated in the adjustment grid at the end of this section. These adjustments are based on our market research, best judgment, and experience in the appraisal of similar properties. The adjustments are discussed as follows:
Location
Location adjustments may be required when the locational characteristics of a comparable are different from those of the subject. These characteristics can include general neighborhood characteristics, freeway accessibility, street exposure, corner-versus-interior lot location, neighboring properties, view amenities and other factors.
The site is located along Gianera Street in Santa Clara. The location has average access and proximity to employment centers and it is located in an established residential neighborhood. Comparables Two and Three have superior locations within more desirable School Districts, and thus downward adjustments are applied. Comparable Four has an inferior location in East San Jose. An upward adjustment is justified. Comparable One is similar, thus no further adjustment is required.
Size
The size adjustment identifies variances in the physical size of the comparable sites. Typically, the larger a parcel, the higher the sale price per unit and the lower the price per square foot. In considering the size adjustment, both the physical size of the subject is considered, as well as the investment (price) size. Both these factors determine the buyer pool of a property.
Comparable Four with 13,605 square feet is similar to the subject’s 12,478 square feet. No adjustment is required. Comparables One and Two with more than 16,000 square feet are inferior. Upward adjustments are applied. Comparable Three with less than 10,000 square feet is superior. A downward adjustment is justified.
Shape/Corner Exposure
All comparables have similar shape that does not impose any constraints in the development potential.
They are all interior sites, similar to the Gianera property. No adjustments are required.
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
SALES COMPARISON APPROACH
Utilities
Comparable Four is adjusted upwards since only electricity is available on-site. All other comparables are similar. No further adjustments are required.
Zoning/General Plan/Density
The Gianera property has General Plan designation of Low Density Residential that allows redevelopment with up to 19 units per acre. Comparable One is similar, thus no adjustment is supported. Comparable Two has superior development potential and is adjusted downwards. All other comparables have inferior development potential thus upward adjustments are required.
Demolition Cost
Comparables One, Two, and Three are previously improved sites that require demolition, similar to the Gianera site. No adjustments are required. Comparable Four is a vacant site. A downward adjustment is supported.
Entitlements
The Gianera site is an unentitled residential site. Comparable One was previously approved for redevelopment with multiple residences and although approvals have likely expired, it supports a discount for the low risk associated with the redevelopment potential of the site. All other comparables are similar unentitled sites. No further adjustments are warranted.
Proximity to Power lines
Comparable One is similar, located on Gianera Street with proximity to the power station and power lines. No adjustment is required. All other comparables are not located in proximity to a substation.
However, based on our research and survey of active market participants, proximity to the power station has no impact on the value of the property. Therefore, no adjustments are justified.
Summary of Adjustments
Presented on the following page is a summary of the adjustments made to the sale comparables. As noted earlier, these quantitative adjustments were based on our market research, best judgment, and experience in the appraisal of similar properties.
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
SALES COMPARISON APPROACH
COMPARABLE SALES ADJUSTMENT GRID
Subject Sale # 1 Sale # 2 Sale # 3 Sale # 4
Sale ID 1626752 1518918 1472834 1604301
Date of Value & Sale December-22 June-22 January-21 March-19 February-22 Unadjusted Sales Price $2,443,000 $2,850,000 $1,160,000 $825,000 Gross Square Feet 12,478 16,800 20,504 8,775 13,605
Unadjusted Sales Price per Gross Sq. Ft. $145.42 $139.00 $132.19 $60.64 Transactional Adjustments
Property Rights Conveyed Fee Simple Fee Simple Fee Simple Fee Simple Fee Simple Adjusted Sales Price $145.42 $139.00 $132.19 $60.64
Financing Terms None Cash Cash Cash Cash
Adjusted Sales Price $145.42 $139.00 $132.19 $60.64
Conditions of Sale None None None None None
Adjusted Sales Price $145.42 $139.00 $132.19 $60.64
Expenditures after Sale None
Adjusted Sales Price $145.42 $139.00 $132.19 $60.64
Market Conditions Adjustments
Elapsed Time from Date of Value 0.49 years 1.91 years 3.72 years 0.85 years Market Trend Through June-22 -0.2% 6.9% 15.9% 1.6%
Analyzed Sales Price $145.10 $148.56 $153.25 $61.59 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Physical Adjustments
Location 2319 Gianera 2303 Gianera St 1991 Colony St 3424 Cecil Ave 272 Bonita Santa Clara Santa Clara Mountain View Santa Clara San Jose Adjustment - -20.0% -10.0% 25.0%
0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Size 12,478 sf 16,800 sf 20,504 sf 8,775 sf 13,605 sf
Adjustment 10.00% 15.0% -10.0%
0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Shape Rectangular Rectangular Rectangular Rectangular Rectangular Adjustment - - - -
0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Corner Exposure/ Interior Interior Interior Interior Interior Adjustment - - - -
0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Utilities To the site Similar Similar Similar Electricity only Adjustment - - - 10.0%
0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Zoning R1-6L R1-6L R-3-2 R1-6L R-1-8
General Plan Low-Dens. Res. Low-Dens. Res. Med.-Dens. Res Very Low-Dens.
Res.
Resid. Neighbor.
Density 8-19 DU/A 8-19 DU/A 13-25 DU/A Up to 10 DU/A Up to 8 DU/A Adjustment - -5.0% 5.0% 10.0%
0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Demolition Cost House/Garage House House House Vacant
Adjustment - - - -1.0%
0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Entitlements None Previously Approved None None None
Adjustment -25.0%
Proximity to Power Lines Yes Similar No No No
Adjustment
Net Physical Adjustment -15.0% -10.0% -15.0% 44.0%
Adjusted Sales Price per Gross Square Foot $123.33 $133.70 $130.27 $88.68 Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
SALES COMPARISON APPROACH
Sales Comparison Approach Value Indication
From the market data available, sales in competitive market areas were selected as most comparable to the property. We have adjusted the comparable sales based on pertinent elements of comparison as discussed earlier. The following table summarizes the unadjusted and adjusted sale prices:
Before adjustments the comparables indicate a range between approximately $61 and $145 square foot. The adjusted sale prices reflected a range from approximately $89 to $134 per square foot with an average of $119 per square foot and median of approximately $127 per square foot.
In the final market value estimate, we place greater weight on Comparables One for its location on Gianera in the immediate neighborhood. This comparable supports an indicator or $123 per square foot. Three of the four comparables range between $123 and $134 per square foot. Based on our analysis, the market value of the property “As Is” is $1,590,000 as follows:
Land Sale Statistics
Metric Unadjusted Analyzed Adjusted
Min. Sales Price per Gross Square Foot $60.64 $61.59 $88.68 Max. Sales Price per Gross Square Foot $145.42 $153.25 $133.70 Median Sales Price per Gross Square Foot $135.60 $146.83 $126.80 Mean Sales Price per Gross Square Foot $119.31 $127.12 $119.00 Land Value Conclusion
Reasonable Adjusted Comparable Range
12,478 square feet x $125.00 psf = $1,559,750
12,478 square feet x $130.00 psf = $1,622,140
Fair Market Value Opinion (Rounded)
12,478 square feet x $127.50 psf = $1,590,000
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
ESTIMATE OF FAIR MARKET RENT
Estimate of Fair Market Rent
Per our client’s request we also develop an opinion of market rent for the existing single-family home.
We surveyed competitive properties in the local market area, focusing on single-family residences with similar locations, size and market appeal. As most single-family homes are purchased by owner/users we were unable to find many comparables located in the immediate neighborhood. Instead, we searched in a wider area and back in time. We looked for smaller properties located on larger sites, similar to the Gianera property.
We used five rental comparables in the City of Santa Clara to derive an appropriate market rent for the property. The comparables utilized are the best available at the time of this report. Following is a table summarizing each rent comparable and a map illustrating the location of each comparable in relation to the Gianera home.
Market Rent Analysis
The property is located in the city of Santa Clara submarket. Rental comparables within the subject submarket were obtained, which reflect the average asking rents and occupancy rates for the selected comparables.
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
ESTIMATE OF FAIR MARKET RENT
Rent Comparable Summary
Comp. Lease Year Lot Bed Rental Lease
No. Commences Location Built NLA Size Bath Rate Rent / SF Parking 1 April-22 230 Tyler Ave Santa Clara 1949 1,264 9,295 3/2 $3,550 $2.93 Open 2 February-20 1818 Clay Str Santa Clara 1946 1,915 9,113 3/2 $3,800 $1.98 2 Grg 3 August-19 22 Brookside Ave Santa Clara 1940 1,704 13,689 3/1.5 $3,995 $2.34 2 Grg 4 August-21 2222 Gianera Str Santa Clara 1998 1,667 1,979 3/2.5 $3,650 $2.24 2 Grg 5 November-22 2189 Bohannon Dr Santa Clara 1952 1,165 10,903 3/2 $4,250 $3.65 2 Grg Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
ALVISO
A..t
Baylands Park
Sunnyvale
@)
California's ~ 8
Great America Y
PONOEROSA
Lease No. 2
Ortega Park
9 Cupertino
WEST SAN JOSE
Han
99 Ranch Market'
@)
~
,----- --==-_c,~........,.....,..."holesale f
'i) H Mart San Jose Norman
Y. Mineta
San Jose
International. ..
'
Fruitdale
@
The Ho
Rag
~ Happy Hollow
Park & Zoo
□
Whole Foods Market ' wiLLow GLEN
RESIDENTIAL SITE
ESTIMATE OF FAIR MARKET RENT
RENT COMPARABLE 1
Property Identification
Property/Rent ID 11287836/639198
Property Type Single Family Residential
Address 230 Tyler Avenue
City, State Zip Santa Clara, California 95050
County Santa Clara
Latitude/Longitude 37.324674/-121.958398
Tax ID 303-20-015
Transaction Data
Commencement April 15, 2022
Xxx xxx
Rental Rates xxx
Initial Rent/SF $2.81
Property Description
Gross Building SF 1,264
Net Rentable SF 1,264
Year Built 1949
Building Condition Average
Gross Acres 0.21
Remarks X
The property consists of a single parcel located along the east side of Tyler Avenue in Santa Clara. The site has a rectangular shape and an interior lot configuration with approximately 65.09 feet of frontage along Tyler Avenue.
The underlying site contains approximately 9,295 square feet or 0.21 acres and is improved with a 1,264- square-foot single-family residence. The house has three bathrooms and two bathrooms and is in average condition. Parking available for two cars on driveway. The property is zoned Single Family Residential (R1- 6L), and the General Plan designation is Very Low-Density Residential.
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
ESTIMATE OF FAIR MARKET RENT
RENT COMPARABLE 2
Property Identification
Property/Rent ID 11287837/639196
Property Type Single Family Residential
Address 1818 Clay Street
City, State Zip Santa Clara, California 95050
County Santa Clara
Latitude/Longitude 37.351112/-121.956932
Tax ID 269-01-042
Transaction Data
Commencement February 5, 2020
Xxx xxx
Rental Rates xxx
Initial Rent/SF $1.98
Property Description
Gross Building SF 1,915
Net Rentable SF 1,915
Year Built 1946
Building Condition Average
Gross Acres 0.21
Remarks X
The property consists of a single parcel located along the south side of Clay Street in Santa Clara. The site has a generally triangular shape and a corner lot configuration.
The underlying site contains approximately 9,113 square feet or 0.21 acres and is improved with a 1,915- square-foot single-family residence. The house has three bathrooms, two bathrooms, a 2-car garage and is in below average condition. The property is zoned Single Family Residential (R1-6L), and the General Plan designation is Very Low-Density Residential.
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
ESTIMATE OF FAIR MARKET RENT
RENT COMPARABLE 3
Property Identification
Property/Rent ID 11287838/639197
Property Type Single Family Residential
Address 22 Brookside Avenue
City, State Zip Santa Clara, California 95050
County Santa Clara
Latitude/Longitude 37.323996/-121.963086
Tax ID 303-22-040
Transaction Data
Commencement August 23, 2019
Xxx xxx
Rental Rates xxx
Initial Rent/SF $2.34
Property Description
Gross Building SF 1,704
Net Rentable SF 1,704
Year Built 1940
Building Condition Average
Gross Acres 0.31
Remarks X
The property consists of a single parcel located along the east side of Brookside Avenue in Santa Clara.
The site has a rectangular shape and an interior lot configuration with approximately 100.00 feet of frontage along Brookside Avenue.
The underlying site contains approximately 13,689 square feet or 0.31 acres and is improved with a 1,704- square-foot single-family residence. The house has three bathrooms, one full and one half-bathrooms, a 4-car garage and is in average condition. The property is zoned Professional and Administrative Office (OA), and the General Plan designation is Very Low-Density Residential.
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
ESTIMATE OF FAIR MARKET RENT
RENT COMPARABLE 4
Property Identification
Property/Rent ID 11287839/639199
Property Type Single Family Residential
Address 2222 Gianera Street
City, State Zip Santa Clara, California 95054
County Santa Clara
Latitude/Longitude 37.401146/-121.964075
Tax ID 104-59-016
Transaction Data
Commencement August 13, 2021
xxx xxx
Rental Rates xxx
Initial Rent/SF $2.19
Property Description
Gross Building SF 1,667
Net Rentable SF 1,667
Year Built 1998
Building Condition Average
Gross Acres 0.05
Remarks X
The property consists of a single parcel located along the south side of Gianera Street in Santa Clara. The site has a rectangular shape and an interior lot configuration with approximately 54.50 feet of frontage along Gianera Street.
The underlying site contains approximately 1,979 square feet or 0.05 acres and is improved with a 1,667- square-foot single-family residence. The house has three bathrooms, two full and a half bathroom, a 2-car garage and is in average condition. $80 HOA include a community pool, hot tub, and clubhouse. The property is proximate to Highway 101, 237, and 880. The property is zoned Planned Development (PD), and the General Plan designation is Low-Density Residential.
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
ESTIMATE OF FAIR MARKET RENT
RENT COMPARABLE 5
Property Identification
Property/Rent ID 11287514/639018
Property Type Single Family Residential
Address 2189 Bohannon Drive
City, State Zip Santa Clara, California 95050
County Santa Clara
Latitude/Longitude 37.336024/-121.956265
Tax ID 303-08-014
Transaction Data
Commencement November 4, 2022
xxx xxx
Rental Rates xxx
Initial Rent/SF $3.65
Property Description
Gross Building SF 1,165
Net Rentable SF 1,165
Year Built 1952
Building Condition Average
Gross Acres 0.25
Remarks X
The property consists of a single parcel located along the north side of Bohannon Drive in Santa Clara.
The site has a generally rectangular shape and an interior lot configuration with approximately 57.14 feet of frontage along Bohannon Drive. The underlying site contains approximately 10,903 square feet or 0.25 acres and is improved with a 1,165-square-foot single-family residence. The house has three bedrooms, two bathrooms, a 2-car garage, swimming pool and is in good condition.
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
ESTIMATE OF FAIR MARKET RENT
Market Rent Analysis
When necessary, adjustments were made for differences in the various elements of comparison, including lease structure, market conditions, location, size and other relevant factors. If the element in comparison is considered superior to that of the subject, we applied a negative adjustment. Conversely, a positive adjustment is applied if inferior. A summary of the elements of comparison follows.
Property Adjustments
Property Adjustments are usually expressed quantitatively as percentages or dollar amounts that reflect differences in rental rates attributable to the various characteristics of the property. In some instances, however, qualitative adjustments are used. Property adjustments are based on locational and physical characteristics and are made after the application of transaction and market conditions adjustments.
Location
The subject is located along the north side of Gianera Street in Santa Clara. Comparables One and Two have superior locations and downward adjustments are applied. All other comparables have similar locations in Santa Clara. No further adjustments are warranted.
Net Living Area
The size adjustment addresses variance in the net rentable area of the comparables and that of the subject, as a larger building typically commands a lower sale price per unit than a smaller building.
This inverse relationship is due, in part, to the principle of “economies of scale.” The subject’s improvements contain 1,140 square feet. Comparables One and Five are similar. No adjustments are warranted for this element of comparison. Comparables Two, Three and Four are adjusted upwards for their larger living area.
Lot Size
Comparable Four with less than 2,000 square feet of site area is inferior. Upward adjustment is required.
All other comparables are similar. No adjustments are applied.
Age/Condition
All else being equal, older properties typically command a lower price per square foot than newer properties. However, although a property may be physically older than another property, the effective age may be similar to a newer property and no adjustment may be indicated. This may be due to the older property being well maintained or a recent renovation.
The Gianera home was completed in the 1960’s and is in need of renovation. Comparable Four was built in 1998 and is superior, thus a downward adjustment is applied. All other comparables are similar.
No other adjustments are made for this element of comparison.
Bedroom/Bathroom
The property consists of three bedroom and two bathrooms. Comparable Three is adjusted upwards for its inferior bathroom count. Comparable Four is adjusted downwards for its superior bathroom count. No other adjustments are warranted for this element of comparison.
Garage/Pool
Comparable One has driveway parking for two cars inferior to the two-car garage parking available for the Gianera home. An upward adjustment is applied. Comparables Four and Five have swimming pool Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
ESTIMATE OF FAIR MARKET RENT
and they are adjusted downwards for their superior amenities. All other comparables are similar. No other adjustments are required.
Proximity to Power Lines
As discussed earlier, and based on our discussion with market participants, there is no impact in the rental due to property’s location in proximity to the substation and power lines. No adjustments are required.
Presented on the following page is a summary of the adjustments made to the rent comparables. As noted earlier, these qualitative adjustments were based on our market research, best judgment, and experience in the appraisal of similar properties.
Rent Comparable Adjustment Grid
Rental # 1 Rental # 2 Rental # 3 Rental # 4 Rental # 5
Comparable ID 639198 639196 639197 639199 639018
December-22 April-22 February-20 August-19 July-21 November-22 Property Name SFR SFR SFR SFR SFR SFR
Net Rentable Area 1,140 sf 1,264 sf 1,915 sf 1,704 sf 1,667 sf 1,165 sf Land Area (acres) 0.286 0.21338 0.20921 0.31426 0.04543 0.2503 Annual Rental Rate $2.81 $1.98 $2.34 $2.19 $3.65
Transactional Adjustments
Expense Structure Gross Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar Effective Rental Rate $2.81 $1.98 $2.34 $2.19 $3.65
Conditions of Lease Executed Executed Executed Executed Executed Adjustment
Adjusted Rental Rate $2.81 $1.98 $2.34 $2.19 $3.65
Market Conditions Adjustments FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE Elapsed Time from Date of Value 0.67 years 2.86 years 3.31 years 1.39 years 0.11 years Market Trend Through June-22 0.7% 11.6% 13.9% 4.3%
Analyzed Rental Rate $2.83 $2.21 $2.66 $2.28 $3.65
0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Property Adjustments
Location 2319 Gianera
Street
230 Tyler Avenue 1818 Clay Street 22 Brookside Avenue 2222 Gianera Street
2189 Bohannon
Drive
Santa Clara Santa Clara Santa Clara Santa Clara Santa Clara Santa Clara Relative Comparison (-) (-)
0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
NLA 1,140 sf 1,264 sf 1,915 sf 1,704 sf 1,667 sf 1,165 sf Relative Comparison - (+) (+) (+) -
Lot size 0.286 0.21338 0.20921 0.31426 0.04543 0.2503
Relative Comparison (+)
0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Age/Condition Year Built 1960's 1949 1946 1940 1998 1952 Condition Below Average Superior Similar Superior Superior Superior Relative Comparison (-)
0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Bedrooms/Baths 3Bed/2Bath 3Bed/2Bath 3Bed/2Bath 3Bed/1.5Bath 3Bed/2.5Bath 3Bed/2Bath Relative Comparison (+) (-)
0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Garage/Pool 2-car garage Driveway 2-car grg 2-car garage 2-car grg, pool 2-car grg, pool Relative Comparison (+) (-) (-)
Proximity to Power Lines Yes No No No Yes No
Relative Comparison
Overall Net Relative Comparison Similar to $2.83 Similar to $2.21 More than $2.66 Less than $2.28 Less than $3.65 Date of Value & Survey/Lease
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
SALES COMPARISON APPROACH
Conclusions
We adjusted the rent comparables based on pertinent elements of comparison as discussed earlier and summarized them in the preceding adjustment grid. The final analyzed rental rate range from $2.21 to $3.65 per square foot of NLA with an average of $2.73 and a median of $2.66 as shown below:
Comparable Four is given most weight for its location in the immediate neighborhood. The property supports a rental rate less than $2.28 per square foot of living area. The high end of the range, comparable Fine is a smaller home on a similar lot but offers superior amenities on-site. The low end of the range, Comparable Two is a larger home on a similar lot with superior location in Santa Clara.
This comparable supports a rental rate of $2.21 per square foot of living area.
Based on our analysis, a rental rate of $2.25 per square foot of rentable are per month, gross, is supported for the Gianera home. The rental rate is based on a gross lease structure with the tenant being responsible for phone and electric while the landlord pays for most operating expenses including property taxes, insurance, water, trash, repairs and maintenance.
Rent Comparable Statistics
Metric Unadjusted Analyzed
Minimum Rental Rate $1.98 $2.21
Maximum Rental Rate $3.65 $3.65
Median Rental Rate $2.34 $2.66
Mean Rental Rate $2.59 $2.73
Fair Market Rent Conclusion
1,140 square feet $2.25 psf = $2,565
Rounded $2,600
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
RECONCILIATION
Reconciliation
Summary of Value Indications
The indicated values from the approaches used and our concluded market values for the subject are summarized in the following table.
To reach a final opinion of value, the reliability and relevance of each value indication was considered based upon the quality of the data and applicability of the assumptions underlying each approach.
Given the availability and reliability of data within the Sales comparison Approach, this approach was given primary weight in reconciling to the final value conclusion.
The findings and conclusions are further contingent upon the following extraordinary assumptions and/or hypothetical conditions, the use of which might have affected the assignment results:
Extraordinary Assumptions:
• None
Hypothetical Conditions:
• None
Exposure Time
Based on statistical information about days on market, escrow length, and marketing times gathered through national investor surveys, sales verification, and interviews of market participants, exposure time estimate of 6 to 9 months is considered reasonable and appropriate for the property.
Approach to Value As Is
Cost Not Developed
Sales Comparison $1,590,000
Income Capitalization Not Developed
Component As Is As Is
Value Type Fair Market Value Fair Market Rent
Property Rights Appraised Fee Simple
Effective Date of Value December 14, 2022 December 14, 2022 Value Conclusion $1,590,000 $2,600
$127 psf of Site Area $2.28 psf of NLA
Value Indications
Value Conclusion
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
RECONCILIATION
National Quality Control
Valbridge’s top priority is delivering a quality report. Valbridge requires all reports to be reviewed by an experienced director with the MAI designation. This quality control assessment consists of reading the report, checking calculations, and providing feedback on its quality and consistency prior to report delivery. All Valbridge reports are signed by an experienced appraiser with the MAI designation.
Valbridge values all clients’ opinions, and any/all feedback is critical to the ongoing efforts to improve client servicing. Please feel free to contact the National Quality Control Director below with any feedback, questions, or comments.
Tye Neilson, MAI, SRA, MRICS, Esq.
Senior Managing Director
832.916.4608
[email protected]
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
GENERAL ASSUMPTIONS & LIMITING CONDITIONS
General Assumptions and Limiting Conditions
This appraisal is subject to the following general assumptions and limiting conditions:
1. The legal description – if furnished to us – is assumed to be correct.
2. No responsibility is assumed for legal matters, questions of survey or title, soil or subsoil conditions, engineering, availability or capacity of utilities, or other similar technical matters. The appraisal does not constitute a survey of the property appraised. All existing liens and encumbrances have been disregarded and the property is appraised as though free and clear, under responsible ownership and competent management unless otherwise noted.
3. Unless otherwise noted, the appraisal will value the property as though free of contamination.
Valbridge Property Advisors | Northern California will conduct no hazardous materials or contamination inspection of any kind. It is recommended that the client hire an expert if the presence of hazardous materials or contamination poses any concern.
4. Unless otherwise noted, it is assumed there are no encroachments, zoning violations or restrictions existing in the subject property.
5. The appraiser is not required to give testimony or attendance in court by reason of this appraisal, unless previous arrangements have been made.
6. Unless expressly specified in the engagement letter, the fee for this appraisal does not include the attendance or giving of testimony by Appraiser at any court, regulatory or other proceedings, or any conferences or other work in preparation for such proceeding. If any partner or employee of Valbridge Property Advisors | Northern California is asked or required to appear and/or testify at any deposition, trial, or other proceeding about the preparation, conclusions or any other aspect of this assignment, client shall compensate Appraiser for the time spent by the partner or employee in appearing and/or testifying and in preparing to testify according to the Appraiser’s then current hourly rate plus reimbursement of expenses.
7. The dates of value to which the opinions expressed in this report apply are set forth in this report.
We assume no responsibility for economic or physical factors occurring at some point at a later date, which may affect the opinions stated herein. The forecasts, projections, or operating estimates contained herein are based on current market conditions and anticipated short-term supply and demand factors and are subject to change with future conditions. Appraiser is not responsible for determining whether the date of value requested by Client is appropriate for Client’s intended use.
8. The sketches, maps, plats and exhibits in this report are included to assist the reader in visualizing the property. The appraiser has made no survey of the property and assumed no responsibility in connection with such matters.
9. The information, estimates and opinions, which were obtained from sources outside of this office, are considered reliable. However, no liability for them can be assumed by the appraiser.
10. Possession of this report, or a copy thereof, does not carry with it the right of publication. Neither all, nor any part of the content of the report, or copy thereof (including conclusions as to property value, the identity of the appraisers, professional designations, reference to any professional appraisal organization or the firm with which the appraisers are connected), shall be disseminated to the public through advertising, public relations, news, sales, or other media without prior written consent and approval.
11. No claim is intended to be expressed for matters of expertise that would require specialized investigation or knowledge beyond that ordinarily employed by real estate appraisers. We claim no expertise in areas such as, but not limited to, legal, survey, structural, environmental, pest control, mechanical, etc.
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
GENERAL ASSUMPTIONS & LIMITING CONDITIONS
12. This appraisal was prepared for the sole and exclusive use of the client for the function outlined herein. Any party who is not the client or intended user identified in the appraisal or engagement letter is not entitled to rely upon the contents of the appraisal without express written consent of Valbridge Property Advisors | Northern California and Client. The Client shall not include partners, affiliates, or relatives of the party addressed herein. The appraiser assumes no obligation, liability or accountability to any third party.
13. Distribution of this report is at the sole discretion of the client, but third-parties not listed as an intended user on the face of the appraisal or the engagement letter may not rely upon the contents of the appraisal. In no event shall client give a third-party a partial copy of the appraisal report. We will make no distribution of the report without the specific direction of the client.
14. This appraisal shall be used only for the function outlined herein, unless expressly authorized by Valbridge Property Advisors | Northern California.
15. This appraisal shall be considered in its entirety. No part thereof shall be used separately or out of context.
16. Unless otherwise noted in the body of this report, this appraisal assumes that the subject property does not fall within the areas where mandatory flood insurance is effective. Unless otherwise noted, we have not completed nor have we contracted to have completed an investigation to identify and/or quantify the presence of non-tidal wetland conditions on the subject property. Because the appraiser is not a surveyor, he or she makes no guarantees, express or implied, regarding this determination.
17. The flood maps are not site specific. We are not qualified to confirm the location of the subject property in relation to flood hazard areas based on the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps or other surveying techniques. It is recommended that the client obtain a confirmation of the subject property’s flood zone classification from a licensed surveyor.
18. It is assumed that there are no hidden or unapparent conditions of the property, subsoil, or structures which would render it more or less valuable. No responsibility is assumed for such conditions or for engineering which may be required to discover them.
19. We have attempted to reconcile sources of data discovered or provided during the appraisal process, including assessment department data. Ultimately, the measurements that are deemed by us to be the most accurate and/or reliable are used within this report. While the measurements and any accompanying sketches are considered to be reasonably accurate and reliable, we cannot guarantee their accuracy. Should the client desire more precise measurement, they are urged to retain the measurement services of a qualified professional (space planner, architect or building engineer) as an alternative source. If this alternative measurement source reflects or reveals substantial differences with the measurements used within the report, upon request of the client, the appraiser will submit a revised report for an additional fee.
20. In the absence of being provided with a detailed land survey, we have used assessment department data to ascertain the physical dimensions and acreage of the property. Should a survey prove this information to be inaccurate, upon request of the client, the appraiser will submit a revised report for an additional fee.
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
GENERAL ASSUMPTIONS & LIMITING CONDITIONS
21. Unless otherwise stated in this report, the value conclusion is predicated on the assumption that the property is free of contamination, environmental impairment or hazardous materials. Unless otherwise stated, the existence of hazardous material was not observed by the appraiser and the appraiser has no knowledge of the existence of such materials on or in the property. The appraiser, however, is not qualified to detect such substances. The presence of substances such as asbestos, urea-formaldehyde foam insulation or other potentially hazardous materials may affect the value of the property. No responsibility is assumed for any such conditions, or for any expertise or engineering knowledge required for discovery. The client is urged to retain an expert in this field, if desired.
22. No changes in any federal, state or local laws, regulations or codes (including, without limitation, the Internal Revenue Code) are anticipated, unless specifically stated to the contrary.
23. The data gathered in the course of this assignment (except data furnished by the Client) shall remain the property of the Appraiser. The appraiser will not violate the confidential nature of the appraiserclient relationship by improperly disclosing any confidential information furnished to the appraiser.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Appraiser is authorized by the client to disclose all or any portion of the appraisal and related appraisal data to appropriate representatives of the Appraisal Institute if such disclosure is required to enable the appraiser to comply with the Bylaws and Regulations of such Institute now or hereafter in effect.
24. You and Valbridge Property Advisors | Northern California both agree that any dispute over matters in excess of $5,000 will be submitted for resolution by arbitration. This includes fee disputes and any claim of malpractice. The arbitrator shall be mutually selected. If Valbridge Property Advisors | Northern California and the client cannot agree on the arbitrator, the presiding head of the Local County Mediation & Arbitration panel shall select the arbitrator. Such arbitration shall be binding and final. In agreeing to arbitration, we both acknowledge that, by agreeing to binding arbitration, each of us is giving up the right to have the dispute decided in a court of law before a judge or jury.
In the event that the client, or any other party, makes a claim against Valbridge Property Advisors | Northern California or any of its employees in connections with or in any way relating to this assignment, the maximum damages recoverable by such claimant shall be the amount actually received by Valbridge Property Advisors | Northern California for this assignment, and under no circumstances shall any claim for consequential damages be made.
25. Valbridge Property Advisors | Northern California shall have no obligation, liability, or accountability to any third party. Any party who is not the “client” or intended user identified on the face of the appraisal or in the engagement letter is not entitled to rely upon the contents of the appraisal without the express written consent of Valbridge Property Advisors | Northern California. “Client” shall not include partners, affiliates, or relatives of the party named in the engagement letter. Client shall hold Valbridge Property Advisors | Northern California and its employees harmless in the event of any lawsuit brought by any third party, lender, partner, or part-owner in any form of ownership or any other party as a result of this assignment. The client also agrees that in case of lawsuit arising from or in any way involving these appraisal services, client will hold Valbridge Property Advisors | Northern California harmless from and against any liability, loss, cost, or expense incurred or suffered by Valbridge Property Advisors | Northern California in such action, regardless of its outcome.
26. The Valbridge Property Advisors office responsible for the preparation of this report is independently owned and operated by San Francisco Bay Area | Silicon Valley | San Jose. Neither Valbridge Property Advisors, Inc., nor any of its affiliates has been engaged to provide this report.
Valbridge Property Advisors, Inc. does not provide valuation services, and has taken no part in the preparation of this report.
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
GENERAL ASSUMPTIONS & LIMITING CONDITIONS
27. If any claim is filed against any of Valbridge Property Advisors, Inc., a Florida Corporation, its affiliates, officers or employees, or the firm providing this report, in connection with, or in any way arising out of, or relating to, this report, or the engagement of the firm providing this report, then (1) under no circumstances shall such claimant be entitled to consequential, special or other damages, except only for direct compensatory damages, and (2) the maximum amount of such compensatory damages recoverable by such claimant shall be the amount actually received by the firm engaged to provide this report.
28. This report and any associated work files may be subject to evaluation by Valbridge Property Advisors, Inc., or its affiliates, for quality control purposes.
29. Acceptance and/or use of this appraisal report constitutes acceptance of the foregoing general assumptions and limiting conditions.
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
CERTIFICATION
Certification – Norman C. Hulberg, MAI
I certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:
1. The statements of fact contained in this report are true and correct.
2. The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions are limited only by the reported assumptions and limiting conditions and are my personal, impartial, and unbiased professional analyses, opinions, and conclusions.
3. I have no present or prospective interest in the properties that are the subject of this report and no personal interest with respect to the parties involved.
4. The undersigned has not performed services regarding the properties that are the subject of this report within the three-year period immediately preceding acceptance of this assignment.
5. I have no bias with respect to the properties that are the subject of this report or to the parties involved with this assignment.
6. My engagement in this assignment was not contingent upon developing or reporting predetermined results.
7. My compensation for completing this assignment is not contingent upon the development or reporting of a predetermined value or direction in value that favors the cause of the client, the amount of value opinion, the attainment of a stipulated result, or the occurrence of a subsequent event directly related to the intended use of this appraisal.
8. My analyses, opinions and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared, in conformity with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice.
9. Norman C. Hulberg, MAI has not personally inspected the subject property.
10. No one provided significant real property appraisal assistance to the person signing this certification, unless otherwise noted.
11. The reported analyses, opinions and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared, in conformity with the requirements of the Code of Professional Ethics and Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice of the Appraisal Institute.
12. The use of this report is subject to the requirements of the Appraisal Institute relating to review by its duly authorized representatives.
13. As of the date of this report, the undersigned has completed the continuing education program for Designated Members of the Appraisal Institute.
Norman C. Hulberg, MAI
Senior Managing Director
California Certified License #AG003542
Val bridge .. ,.,., PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
CERTIFICATION
Certification – Chrisoula Kantiotou, PhD
I certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:
1. The statements of fact contained in this report are true and correct.
2. The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions are limited only by the reported assumptions and limiting conditions and are my personal, impartial, and unbiased professional analyses, opinions, and conclusions.
3. I have no present or prospective interest in the property that is the subject of this report and no personal interest with respect to the parties involved.
4. The undersigned has not performed services, as an appraiser or in any other capacity, regarding the property that is the subject of this report within the three-year period immediately preceding acceptance of this assignment.
5. I have no bias with respect to the property that is the subject of this report or to the parties involved with this assignment.
6. My engagement in this assignment was not contingent upon developing or reporting predetermined results.
7. My compensation for completing this assignment is not contingent upon the development or reporting of a predetermined value or direction in value that favors the cause of the client, the amount of value opinion, the attainment of a stipulated result, or the occurrence of a subsequent event directly related to the intended use of this appraisal.
8. My analyses, opinions and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared, in conformity with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice.
9. Chrisoula Kantiotou did not personally inspect the subject property.
10. Yulia Ferguson provided significant real property appraisal assistance to the person signing this certification. Specific details as to the assistance provided is included in the Scope of Work section of this report.
11. The reported analyses, opinions and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared, in conformity with the requirements of the Code of Professional Ethics and Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice of the Appraisal Institute.
12. The use of this report is subject to the requirements of the Appraisal Institute relating to review by its duly authorized representatives.
13. As of the date of this report, the undersigned has completed the Standards and Ethics Education Requirement for Candidates/Practicing Affiliates of the Appraisal Institute.
Chrisoula Kantiotou, PhD
Senior Appraiser
California Certified License #AG027334
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
ADDENDA
Addenda
Additional Subject Photographs
Sketch
Glossary
Qualifications
• Norman C. Hulberg, MAI
• Chrisoula Kantiotou, Senior Appraiser
• Yulia Ferguson, Appraisal Analyst
Information on Valbridge Property Advisors
Office Locations
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
ADDENDA
Additional Subject Photographs (Dated December 14, 2022) Interior of residential structure -living room Interior of residential structure - bedroom View of the property restroom View of the property restroom View of the kitchen Typical interior of the garage
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
ADDENDA
View of the back yard looking north View of back yard looking south View of the front yard area Rear of residential structure Street scene looking west on Gianera Street,
subject to the right
Street scene looking east on Gianera Street,
subject to the left
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
ADDENDA
Sketch
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
lJ")
co
N
0 0
N
40.0'
GBA 1 - First Floor
1140.2 sf
23.0'
40.0'
GAR- Garage
460.0 sf
23.0'
0 0
N
ii)
co
N
Sketch by Apex Sketch
RESIDENTIAL SITE
ADDENDA
Glossary
Definitions are taken from The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 7th Edition (Dictionary), the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) and Building Owners and Managers Association International (BOMA).
Absolute Net Lease
A lease in which the tenant pays all expenses including structural maintenance, building reserves, and
management; often a long-term lease to a credit tenant. (Dictionary)
Amortization
The process of retiring a debt or recovering a capital
investment, typically through scheduled, systematic
repayment of the principal; a program of periodic
contributions to a sinking fund or debt retirement fund. (Dictionary)
As Is Market Value
The estimate of the market value of real property in its current physical condition, use, and zoning as of the
appraisal date. (Interagency Appraisal and Evaluation
Guidelines) Note that the use of the “as is” phrase is
specific to appraisal regulations pursuant to FIRREA
applying to appraisals prepared for regulated lenders in the United States. The concept of an “as is” value is not included in the Standards of Valuation Practice of the
Appraisal Institute, Uniform Standards of Professional
Appraisal Practice, or International Valuation Standards. (Dictionary)
Base Rent
The minimum rent stipulated in a lease. (Dictionary)
Base Year
The year on which escalation clauses in a lease are based. (Dictionary)
Building Common Area
In office buildings, the areas of the building that provide services to building tenants but that are not included in the office area or store area of any specific tenant. These areas may include, but shall not be limited to, main and auxiliary lobbies, atrium spaces at the level of the finished floor, concierge areas or security desks, conference
rooms, lounges or vending areas, food service facilities, health or fitness centers, daycare facilities, locker or shower facilities, mail rooms, fire control rooms, fully enclosed courtyards outside the exterior walls, and
building core and service areas such as fully enclosed
mechanical or equipment rooms. Specifically excluded
from building common area are floor common areas,
parking space, portions of loading docks outside the
building line, and major vertical penetrations. (BOMA)
Building Rentable Area
The sum of all floor rentable areas. Floor rentable area is the result of subtracting from the gross measured area of a floor the major vertical penetrations on that same floor.
It is generally fixed for the life of the building and is rarely affected by changes in corridor size or configuration.
(BOMA)
Bulk Value
The value of multiple units, subdivided plots, or
properties in a portfolio as though sold together in a
single transaction. (Dictionary)
Certificate of Occupancy (COO)
A formal written acknowledgment by an appropriate unit
of local government that a new construction or
renovation project is at the stage where it meets
applicable health and safety codes and is ready for
commercial or residential occupancy. (Dictionary)
Common Area Maintenance (CAM)
The expense of operating and maintaining common
areas; may or may not include management charges and
usually does not include capital expenditures on tenant improvements or other improvements to the property.
(Dictionary)
The amount of money charged to tenants for their shares of maintaining a [shopping] center’s common area. The
charge that a tenant pays for shared services and facilities such as electricity, security, and maintenance of parking lots. Items charged to common area maintenance may
include cleaning services, parking lot sweeping and
maintenance, snow removal, security, [amenities,] and
upkeep. (ICSC – International Council of Shopping
Centers, 4th Ed.)
Condominium
An attached, detached, or stacked unit within or attached to a structure with common areas that are held as tenants in common (an undivided interest) with other owners in
the project. The units can be residential, commercial,
industrial, or parking spaces or boat docks. These units are commonly defined by state laws in their locations.
Because units can be stacked on top of other units, these units can be defined both vertically and horizontally.
(Dictionary)
Conservation Easement
An interest in real estate restricting future land use to preservation, conservation, wildlife habitat, or some
combination of those uses. A conservation easement may
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
ADDENDA
permit farming, timber harvesting, or other uses of a rural nature as well as some types of conservation-oriented
development to continue, subject to the easement.
(Dictionary)
Contributory Value
A type of value that reflects the amount a property or
component of a property contributes to the value of
another asset or to the property as a whole.
The change in the value of a property as a whole, whether positive or negative, resulting from the addition or
deletion of a property component. Also called deprival
value in some countries. (Dictionary)
Debt Coverage Ratio (DCR)
The ratio of net operating income to annual debt service (DCR = NOI÷Im), which measures the relative ability of a property to meet its debt service out of net operating
income; also called debt service coverage ratio (DSCR). A larger DCR typically indicates a greater ability for a
property to withstand a reduction of income, providing
an improved safety margin for a lender. (Dictionary)
Deed Restriction
A provision written into a deed that limits the use of land.
Deed restrictions usually remain in effect when title
passes to subsequent owners. (Dictionary)
Depreciation
In appraisal, a loss in property value from any cause; the difference between the cost of an improvement on the
effective date of the appraisal and the value of the
improvement on the same date.
In accounting, an allocation of the original cost of an asset, amortizing the cost over the asset’s life; calculated using a variety of standard techniques. (Dictionary)
Disposition Value
The most probable price that a specified interest in
property should bring under the following conditions:
1. Consummation of a sale within a specified time,
which is shorter than the typical exposure time for
such a property in that market.
2. The property is subjected to market conditions
prevailing as of the date of valuation;
3. Both the buyer and seller are acting prudently and
knowledgeably;
4. The seller is under compulsion to sell;
5. The buyer is typically motivated;
6. Both parties are acting in what they consider to be
their best interests;
7. An adequate marketing effort will be made during
the exposure time;
8. Payment will be made in cash in U.S. dollars (or the local currency) or in terms of financial arrangements
comparable thereto; and
9. The price represents the normal consideration for
the property sold, unaffected by special or creative
financing or sales concessions granted by anyone
associated with the sale.
This definition can also be modified to provide for
valuation with specified financing terms. (Dictionary)
Double Net (Net Net) Lease
An alternative term for a type of net lease. In some
markets, a net net lease is defined as a lease in which the tenant is responsible to pay both property taxes and
premiums for insuring the building(s). (Valbridge)
(The market definition of a double net lease varies
depending on the market)
Easement
The right to use another’s land for a stated purpose.
(Dictionary)
EIFS
Exterior Insulation Finishing System. This is a type of exterior wall cladding system. Sometimes referred to as dry-vit.
Effective Date
1. The date on which the appraisal opinion applies.
(SVP)
2. The date to which an appraiser’s analyses, opinions, and conclusions apply; also referred to as date of
value. (USPAP, 2020-2021 ed.)
3. The date that a lease goes into effect. (Dictionary) Effective Gross Income (EGI)
The anticipated income from all operations of the real
estate after an allowance is made for vacancy and
collection losses and an addition is made for any other income. (Dictionary)
Effective Rent
Total base rent, or minimum rent stipulated in a lease, over the specified lease term minus rent concessions; the rent that is effectively paid by a tenant net of financial concessions provided by a landlord. (TIs). (Dictionary) EPDM
Ethylene Propylene Diene Monomer Rubber. A type of
synthetic rubber typically used for roof coverings.
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
ADDENDA
Escalation Clause
A clause in an agreement that provides for the
adjustment of a price or rent based on some event or
index. e.g., a provision to increase rent if operating
expenses increase; also called escalator clause, expense recovery clause or stop clause. (Dictionary)
Estoppel Certificate
A signed statement by a party (such as a tenant or a
mortgagee) certifying, for another’s benefit, that certain facts are correct, such as that a lease exists, that there are no defaults, and that rent is paid to a certain date.
(Black’s) In real estate, a buyer of rental property typically requests estoppel certificates from existing tenants.
Sometimes referred to as an estoppel letter. (Dictionary) Excess Land
Land that is not needed to serve or support the existing use. The highest and best use of the excess land may or may not be the same as the highest and best use of the
improved parcel. Excess land has the potential to be sold separately and is valued separately. (Dictionary)
Excess Rent
The amount by which contract rent exceeds market rent
at the time of the appraisal; created by a lease favorable to the landlord (lessor) and may reflect unusual
management, unknowledgeable or unusually motivated
parties, a lease execution in an earlier, stronger rental market, or an agreement of the parties. (Dictionary)
Expense Stop
A clause in a lease that limits the landlord’s expense
obligation, which results in the lessee paying operating expenses above a stated level or amount. (Dictionary)
Exposure Time
1. The time a property remains on the market.
2. An opinion, based on supporting market data, of the
length of time that the property interest being
appraised would have been offered on the market
prior to the hypothetical consummation of a sale at
market value on the effective date of the appraisal.
(USPAP, 2020-2021 ed.)
Extraordinary Assumption
An assignment-specific assumption as of the effective
date regarding uncertain information used in an analysis which, if found to be false, could alter the appraiser’s opinions or conclusions.
Comment: Uncertain information might include physical,
legal, or economic characteristics of the subject property; or conditions external to the property, such as market
conditions or trends; or the integrity of data used in an analysis. (USPAP)
Fee Simple Estate
Absolute ownership unencumbered by any other interest
or estate, subject only to the limitations imposed by the governmental powers of taxation, eminent domain,
police power, and escheat. (Dictionary)
Floor Common Area
In an office building, the areas on a floor such as
washrooms, janitorial closets, electrical rooms, telephone rooms, mechanical rooms, elevator lobbies, and public
corridors which are available primarily for the use of
tenants on that floor. In essence, floor common area
represents all of the area on the floor that is common to that respective floor with the exception of those areas that penetrate through the floor, such as the elevator
shaft and stairwell. The significant point to be made is that floor common area is not part of the tenant’s usable area. (BOMA)
Full Service (Gross) Lease
A lease in which the landlord receives stipulated rent and is obligated to pay all of the property’s operating and fixed expenses; also called a full service lease. (Dictionary) Furniture, Fixtures, and Equipment (FF&E)
Business trade fixtures and personal property, exclusive of inventory. (Dictionary)
Going-Concern Value
An outdated label for the market value of all the tangible and intangible assets of an established and operating
business with an indefinite life, as if sold in aggregate; more accurately termed the market value of the going
concern or market value of the total assets of the business. (Dictionary)
Gross Building Area (GBA)
1. Total floor area of a building, excluding unenclosed areas, measured from the exterior of the walls of the
above-grade area. This includes mezzanines and
basements if and when typically included in the
market area of the type of property involved.
2. Gross leasable area plus all common areas.
3. For residential space, the total area of all floor levels measured from the exterior of the walls and
including the superstructure and substructure
basement; typically does not include garage space.
(Dictionary)
Gross Measured Area
The total area of a building enclosed by the dominant
portion (the portion of the inside finished surface of the permanent outer building wall which is 50 percent or
more of the vertical floor-to-ceiling dimension, at the given point being measured as one moves horizontally
along the wall), excluding parking areas and loading
docks (or portions of same) outside the building line. It is Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
ADDENDA
generally not used for leasing purposes and is calculated on a floor by floor basis. (BOMA)
Gross Up Method
A method of calculating variable operating expenses in
income-producing properties when less than 100%
occupancy is assumed. Expenses reimbursed based on
the amount of occupied space, rather than on the total
building area, are described as “grossed up.” (Dictionary) Gross Sellout Value (Sum of the Retail Values)
The sum of the separate and distinct market value
opinions for each of the units in a condominium,
subdivision development, or portfolio of properties, as of the date of valuation. The aggregate of retail values does not represent the value of all the units as though sold together in a single transaction; it is simply the total of the individual market value conclusions. An appraisal has an effective date, but summing the sale prices of multiple units over an extended period of time will not be the
value on that one day unless the prices are discounted to make the value equivalent to what another developer or
investor would pay for the bulk purchase of the units. Also called the aggregate of the retail values, aggregate retail selling price or sum of the retail values. (Dictionary) Ground Lease
A lease that grants the right to use and occupy land.
Improvements made by the ground lessee typically revert to the ground lessor at the end of the lease term.
(Dictionary)
Ground Rent
The rent paid for the right to use and occupy land
according to the terms of a ground lease; the portion of the total rent allocated to the underlying land.
(Dictionary)
HVAC
Heating, ventilation, air conditioning (HVAC) system. A unit that regulates the temperature and distribution of heat and fresh air throughout a building. (Dictionary)
Highest and Best Use
1. The reasonably probable use of property that results in the highest value. The four criteria that the highest and best use must meet are legal permissibility,
physical possibility, financial feasibility, and
maximum productivity.
2. The use of an asset that maximizes its potential and that is possible, legally permissible, and financially
feasible. The highest and best use may be for
continuation of an asset’s existing use of for some
alternative use. This is determined by the use that a
market participant would have in mind for the asset
when formulating the price that it would be willing
to bid. (IVS)
3. [The] highest and most profitable use for which the
property is adaptable and needed or likely to be
needed in the reasonably near future. (Uniform
Appraisal Standards for Federal Land Acquisitions)
(Dictionary)
Hypothetical Condition
1. A condition that is presumed to be true when it is
known to be false. (SVP)
2. A condition, directly related to a specific assignment, which is contrary to what is known by the appraiser
to exist on the effective date of the assignment
results, but is used for the purpose of analysis.
Comment: Hypothetical conditions are contrary to
known facts about physical, legal, or economic
characteristics of the subject property; or about
conditions external to the property, such as market
conditions or trends; or about the integrity of data used in an analysis. (USPAP)
Insurable Value (Replacement Cost for Insurance
Purposes)
The estimated cost, at current prices as of the effective date of valuation, of a substitute for the building being valued, using modern materials and current standards,
design, and layout for insurance coverage purposes
guaranteeing that damaged property is replaced with
new property (i.e., depreciation is not deducted).
(Dictionary)
Investment Value
1. The value of a property to a particular investor or
class of investors based on the investor’s specific
requirements. Investment value may be different
from market value because it depends on a set of
investment criteria that are not necessarily typical of the market. (Dictionary)
2. The value of an asset to the owner or a prospective
owner given individual investment or operational
objectives (may also be known as worth). (IVS)
Just Compensation
In condemnation, the amount of loss for which a property owner is compensated when his or her property is taken.
Just compensation should put the owner in as good a
position pecuniarily as he or she would have been if the property had not been taken. (Dictionary)
Leased Fee Interest
The ownership interest held by the lessor, which includes the right to receive the contract rent specified in the lease plus the reversionary right when the lease expires.
(Dictionary)
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
ADDENDA
Leasehold Interest (Leasehold Estate)
The right held by the lessee to use and occupy real estate for a stated term and under the conditions specified in the lease. (Dictionary)
See also Positive Leasehold and Negative Leasehold.
Lessee (Tenant)
One who has the right to occupancy and use of the
property of another for a period of time according to a lease agreement. (Dictionary)
Lessor (Landlord)
One who conveys the rights of occupancy and use to
others under a lease agreement. (Dictionary)
Liquidation Value
The most probable price that a specified interest in
property should bring under the following conditions:
1. Consummation of a sale within a short time period.
2. The property is subjected to market conditions
prevailing as of the date of valuation.
3. Both the buyer and seller are acting prudently and
knowledgeably.
4. The seller is under extreme compulsion to sell.
5. The buyer is typically motivated.
6. Both parties are acting in what they consider to be
their best interests.
7. A normal marketing effort is not possible due to the brief exposure time.
8. Payment will be made in cash in U.S. dollars (or the local currency) or in terms of financial arrangements
comparable thereto.
9. The price represents the normal consideration for
the property sold, unaffected by special or creative
financing or sales concessions granted by anyone
associated with the sale. (Dictionary)
Loan to Value Ratio (LTV)
The ratio between a mortgage loan and the value of the
property pledged as security, usually expressed as a
percentage. (Dictionary)
Major Vertical Penetrations
Stairs, elevator shafts, flues, pipe shafts, vertical ducts, and the like, and their enclosing walls. Atria, lightwells and similar penetrations above the finished floor are included in this definition. Not included, however, are vertical penetrations built for the private use of a tenant
occupying office areas on more than one floor. Structural columns, openings for vertical electric cable or telephone distribution, and openings for plumbing lines are not
considered to be major vertical penetrations. (BOMA)
Market Rent
The most probable rent that a property should bring in a competitive and open market under all the conditions
requisite to a fair lease transaction, the lessee and the lessor each acting prudently and knowledgeably, and
assuming the rent is not affected by undue stimulus.
Implicit in this definition is the execution of a lease as of a specified date under conditions whereby:
1. Lessee and lessor are typically motivated;
2. Both parties are well informed or well advised, and
acting in what they consider their best interests;
3. Payment is made in terms of cash or in terms of
financial arrangements comparable thereto; and
4. The rent reflects specified terms and conditions, such as permitted uses, use restrictions, expense
obligations, duration, concessions, rental
adjustments and revaluations, renewal and purchase
options, and tenant improvements (TIs). (Appraisal
Institute)
Market Value
The following definition of market value is used by
agencies that regulate federally insured financial
institutions in the United States: The most probable price that a property should bring in a competitive and open
market under all conditions requisite to a fair sale, the buyer and seller each acting prudently and
knowledgeably, and assuming the price is not affected by undue stimulus. Implicit in this definition is the
consummation of a sale as of a specified date and the
passing of title from seller to buyer under conditions
whereby:
1. Buyer and seller are typically motivated;
2. Both parties are well informed or well advised, and
acting in what they consider their own best interests;
3. A reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the
open market;
4. Payment is made in terms of cash in United States
dollars or in terms of financial arrangements
comparable thereto; and
5. The price represents the normal consideration for
the property sold unaffected by special or creative
financing or sales concessions granted by anyone
associated with the sale. (Dictionary; 12 C.F.R. Part
34.42(g); 55 Federal Register 34696, August 24, 1990,
as amended at 57 Federal Register 12202, April 9,
1992; 59 Federal Register 29499, June 7, 1994)
Marketing Time
An opinion of the amount of time it might take to sell a real or personal property interest at the concluded
market value level during the period immediately after
the effective date of an appraisal. Marketing time differs from exposure time, which is always presumed to precede Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
ADDENDA
the effective date of an appraisal. (Advisory Opinion 7 of the Appraisal Standards Board of the Appraisal
Foundation)
Master Lease
1. A lease in which a part or the entire property is leased to a single entity (the master lessee) in return for a
stipulated rent. The master lessee then subleases the
property to multiple tenants.
2. The first lease in a sandwich lease. (Dictionary)
Modified Gross Lease
A lease in which the landlord receives stipulated rent and is obligated to pay some, but not all, of the property’s operating and fixed expenses. Since assignment of
expenses varies among modified gross leases, expense
responsibility must always be specified. In some markets, a modified gross lease may be called a double net lease, net net lease, partial net lease, or semi-gross lease.
(Dictionary)
Negative Leasehold
A lease situation in which the market rent is less than the contract rent. (Dictionary)
Operating Expense Ratio
The ratio of total operating expenses to effective gross income (TOE/EGI); the complement of the net income
ratio, i.e., OER = 1 – NIR (Dictionary)
Option
A legal contract, typically purchased for a stated
consideration, that permits but does not require the
holder of the option (known as the optionee) to buy, sell, or lease real estate for a stipulated period of time in accordance with specified terms; a unilateral right to
exercise a privilege. (Dictionary)
Partial Interest
Divided or undivided rights in real estate that represent less than the whole, i.e., a fractional interest such as a tenancy in common or easement. (Dictionary)
Pass Through
A tenant’s portion of operating expenses that may be
composed of common area maintenance (CAM), real
property taxes, property insurance, and any other
expenses determined in the lease agreement to be paid
by the tenant. (Dictionary)
Percentage Lease
A lease in which the rent or some portion of the rent
represents a specified percentage of the volume of
business, productivity, or use achieved by the tenant.
(Dictionary)
Positive Leasehold
A lease situation in which the market rent is greater than the contract rent. (Dictionary)
Potential Gross Income (PGI)
The total income attributable to property at full
occupancy before vacancy and operating expenses are
deducted. (Dictionary)
Prospective Opinion of Value
A value opinion effective as of a specified future date. The term does not define a type of value. Instead, it identifies a value opinion as being effective at some specific future date. An opinion of value as of a prospective date is
frequently sought in connection with projects that are
proposed, under construction, or under conversion to a
new use, or those that have not yet achieved sellout or a stabilized level of long-term occupancy. (Dictionary)
Replacement Cost
The estimated cost to construct, at current prices as of a specific date, a substitute for a building or other
improvements, using modern materials and current
standards, design, and layout. (Dictionary)
Reproduction Cost
The estimated cost to construct, at current prices as of the effective date of the appraisal, an exact duplicate or
replica of the building being appraised, using the same materials, construction standards, design, layout, and
quality of workmanship and embodying all of the
deficiencies, superadequacies, and obsolescence of the
subject building. (Dictionary)
Retrospective Value Opinion
A value opinion effective as of a specified historical date.
The term retrospective does not define a type of value.
Instead, it identifies a value opinion as being effective at some specific prior date. Value as of a historical date is frequently sought in connection with property tax
appeals, damage models, lease renegotiation, deficiency judgments, estate tax, and condemnation. Inclusion of
the type of value with this term is appropriate, e.g.,
“retrospective market value opinion.” (Dictionary)
Sandwich Leasehold Estate
The interest held by the sandwich leaseholder when the
property is subleased to another party; a type of
leasehold estate. (Dictionary)
Sublease
An agreement in which the lessee in a prior lease conveys the right of use and occupancy of a property to another, the sublessee, for a specific period of time, which may or may not be coterminous with the underlying lease term.
(Dictionary)
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
ADDENDA
Subordination
A contractual arrangement in which a party with a claim to certain assets agrees to make that claim junior, or
subordinate, to the claims of another party. (Dictionary) Surplus Land
Land that is not currently needed to support the existing use but cannot be separated from the property and sold
off for another use. Surplus land does not have an
independent highest and best use and may or may not
contribute value to the improved parcel. (Dictionary)
TPO
Thermoplastic polyolefin, a resilient synthetic roof
covering.
Triple Net (Net Net Net) Lease
An alternative term for a type of net lease. In some
markets, a net net net lease is defined as a lease in which the tenant assumes all expenses (fixed and variable) of operating a property except that the landlord is
responsible for structural maintenance, building reserves, and management; also called NNN lease, net net net
lease, or fully net lease. (Dictionary)
(The market definition of a triple net lease varies; in some cases tenants pay for items such as roof repairs, parking lot repairs, and other similar items.)
Usable Area
The measured area of an office area, store area, or
building common area on a floor. The total of all the
usable areas for a floor shall equal floor usable area of that same floor. (BOMA)
Value-in-Use
1. The amount determined by discounting the future
cash flows (including the ultimate proceeds of
disposal) expected to be derived from the use of an
asset at an appropriate rate that allows for the risk of the activities concerned. (FASB Accounting
Standards Codification, Master Glossary)
2. Formerly used in valuation practice as a synonym for contributory value or use value. (Dictionary)
VTAB (Value of the Total Assets of a Business)
The total amount that the real property, tangible personal property, and intangible property assets of a business
would sell for in an asset-based transaction. (Dictionary) Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE
ADDENDA
Qualifications
Val bridge
PROPERTY ADVISORS
RESIDENTIAL SITE Val bridge ADDENDA
PROPERTY ADVISORS
Chrisoula Kantiotou, PhD
Senior Appraiser
Valbridge Property Advisors I Northern California
MEMBERSHIPS & AFFILIATIONS
Appraisal Institute
Member
Candidate for MAI
Valbridge Women's Council
Member
APPRAISAL INSTITUTE & RELATED COURSES
Report Writing and Case Studies
USPAP
Capitalization Theory and Techniques
SPEAKING ENGAGEMENTS
Appraisal Institute 2022 Annual Spring Conference
Fractional Interest Valuation: Valuing a Piece of the Pie
EXPERIENCE
Valbridge Property Advisors I Northern California
Senior Appraiser, 2020-Present
Appraiser, 2015-2019
The Fillmore Group
Commercial Appraiser, 2003-2014
The Property Sciences Group, Inc.
Staff Appraiser, 1999-2002
Associate Appraiser, 1998-1999
With more than 20 years of experience, Ms. Kantiotou specializes in fractional interest valuations and complex appraisals, including estate portfolios. In her tenure at Valbridge Property Advisors, she has completed more than 280 fractional interest valuations.
Appraisal/valuation and consulting assignments include:
Commercial (office buildings, community and strip retail centers, medical buildings, childcare centers, preschools, and vacant land); Industrial (light industrial, research and development, warehouses, condominiums, and vacant land); and Residential (apartments, condominiums, subd ivisions, single-family dwellings, vacant land, mixed-use developments, and affordable housing).
RESIDENTIAL SITE Val bridge ADDENDA PROPERTY ADVISORS
Norman C. Hulberg, MAI
Senior Managing Director
Valbridge Property Advisors I Northern California
MEMBERSHIPS & AFFILIATIONS
Appraisal Institute, Member
MAI Designation, 1982
Santa Clara County Estate Planning Council
Director
Rotary Club of San Jose
Member
APPRAISAL INSTITUTE & RELATED COURSES
Continuing education courses taken through the Appraisal Institute and other real estate organizations.
EXPERIENCE
Valbridge Property Advisors I Northern California
Senior Managing Director, 2013-Present
Valbridge Property Advisors, Inc.
• National Director, 2013-Present
• Member, Board of Directors, 2013-Present
Hulberg & Associates, Inc.
• President, 1976-2013
Mr. Hulberg has provided valuation services in a wide variety of complex civil litigation including real estate, land use cases, condemnation , estate matters, property taxation, contract disputes, partnership and corporate disputes, environmental lawsuits, professional negligence cases, construction defect, and bankruptcy/creditors matters.
He is qualified as an expert witness in most counties in the San Francisco Bay Area, Monterey Bay, and Central Valley regions, as well as and in the U.S. Tax Court in the U.S. District Courts in San Jose, San Francisco, Oakland, and Las Vegas. Mr. Hulberg is a highly experienced forensic appraiser, having provided testimony on over 300 occasions. This includes over 100 jury trials in state and federal courts in addition to numerous court trials. He has also testified in major arbitrations and before state and federal courts, as well as private arbitrations.
Appraisal/valuation and consulting assignments include:
Residential (Single-family, condominium, apartments, land, mobile home parks), office buildings, hotels/motels, service stations, general retail, vacant land, industrial (plants, research and development, warehouses, data centers). Fractional interest valuations, contaminated properties, special purpose properties, feasibility studies, market studies, condemnation, construction defects, litigation supper~ mediations, arbitrations, and review appraisals.
RESIDENTIAL SITE Val bridge ADDENDA
PROPERTY ADVISORS
Yulia Ferguson
Appraisal Analyst
Valbridge Property Advisors I Northern California
MEMBERSHIPS & AFFILIATIONS
Appraisal Institute
Annually attend Fall and Spring conferences
APPRAISAL INSTITUTE & RELATED COURSES
Mbition
Basic Appraisal Principles
Basic Appraisal Procedures
Residential Market Analysis and Highest & Best Use
Residential Report Writing and Case Studies
Residential Appraiser Site Valuation and Cost Approach
Residential Sales Comparison and Income Approaches
McKissock Learning
15-Hour National USPAP Course
EXPERIENCE
Valbridge Property Advisors I Northern California
Appraisal Analyst, 2021-Present
Real Estate Appraisal Professionals
Real Estate Appraiser Trainee, 2020-2021
Ms. Ferguson has 1 O+ years of combined experience in real estate, business management, banking , accounting, and customer service. She also has extensive experience with researching, collecting , and analyzing financial data metrics.
Appraisal/valuation and consulting assignments include:
Retail (automotive service and repair facilities, freestanding buildings, and street retail); Office (low-rise buildings and business parks); Industrial (condominium units, freestanding buildings, and contractor's yards); Land (agricultural, multi-family development, commercial, industrial, remnants, and open spaces); and Easements (view, access, underground, temporary construction, and permanent right-of-way); as well as Shopping Centers and Mixed-Use properties.
RESIDENTIAL SITE
ADDENDA
Valbridge Property Advisors Information / Office Locations . v,ctone Se~nle
WASHINGTON
MONTANA
NORTH
DAKOTA NEW BJWNSWICK
Portland .
OREGON
SacrA
. nto
San Fr sco
NEVADA
IDAHO
WYOMING
.. , City
UTAH ""
COLORADO
SOUTH
DAKOTA
NEBRASKA
United States
MINNESOTA
Min
IOWA
WISCONSIN
ILLINOIS
St Is
MISSOURI
an Jose K(NTUC»(Y
CALIFORN14 la gas
Los ts
8AJA
CALIFORNIA
AAIZONt.
. Phoen
Albu que
HCW MUICO
. ChJdad Ju~rez
SONORA
CHIHUAHUA
OK OMA
TEXAS
0 n H4/t-on
SanAntonlo
OAHUILA
tlUIEVO l(OH
. Monteuev
ARKANSAS
Toron10
0 HCW YORK
IEHHSYLVANI
OHIO Philadelp 0
MA NO HJ
v1~i~J1A VI;, rr.gto~E
Jae vlllc
MAINE
VERMONT
• Valbridge is the largest independent commercial property valuation and advisory service firm in North America.
• Total number of MAI-designated appraisers (200+ on staff) • Total number of office locations (80+ across the U.S.) • Total number of staff (675+ strong)
• Valbridge covers the entire U.S. from coast to coast. • Valbridge specializes in appraising all types of real property. • Valbridge provides independent valuation services. We are NOT owned by a brokerage firm or investment company.
• Every Val bridge office is overseen by a senior managing director who holds the MAI designation of the Appraisal Institute.
• Valbridge is owned by local offices.
• Valbridge welcomes single-property assignments as well as portfolio, multi-market, and other bulk-property engagements.
PRINCE
EDWARD
ISLAND
NOVA SCOTIA
Bermuda
RESIDENTIAL SITE
ADDENDA
., S 101
Bl
]6106
on,AZ857t2
321-000
6611 587-10KI
1306
17822 St St . 211
T n,CA927BO
(71 I 49 0852
2 3
775 Sumi!> A .. S1 • 260
R tll , CA 95661
(9161 36 2509
, Sl • 100
6 SL • 101
~A/Ee S 7
Boul r, CO 80303
303) 867 1935
CORPORATE OFF1CE
1099 M In A\• ., Sl 311
Dur ttgo, CO 81301
970) 0-1016
73 Rugby
Otl ndo. Fl 3280
( 71 493-6426
2240Wf'I
646
208) 336 1097
. S1e. 5
B
. JOO
0 • S1 100
rk, KS 662KI
1 L. Sl~. 2
02) 585,3651
Wa!Shinoton Bl
26 3) 986 3313
Pr D
Ok r I 148864
517J 336-0001
valbr'dg .com
r, 32
RESIDENTIAL SITE
ADDENDA
g Bl S!e. Kl2A
55101
2 Ion Cir
Bl MS39047
C6 -0736
50 M
U I
on Ave., St . 208
M06
1323
01., St 100
89117
6490 S. C ·ran St.I Ste. 5
o NV89509
(775120 0
. Ste 202
E, St . 8
10 to
1655 rv M r St., S~ 130
Akron OH '14313
(1301899-9900
8291 B di ~Ave , S! B
Cine I OH 5255
f513) 785 0820
• Sle Kl
Pkwy .. S .150
150 S W Iner .• Ste. 440
or P1U!>!>la. PA 19 06
I St 545-1900
64 {843) 884·1266
9 S . 26
8 2990
843) 884-1266
Blvd Ste. 25
W y. Sr. . 300
81 ntwood. T 37027
(6151 369 670
Bl . SL .300
cenu Expy , Ste!. 115
Da 5231
121 16t1
Lubbock.. TX 79423
180617 1188
S . 1035
S&nA 78230
1210) 227-6229
. 2 0
20 NOf M in S
S Geo ge VT 84770
I 35) 773-6300
Coun
92-0000
VI
d., St . D
003
656 Ir d pet1denc~ Pkwy .. St . 220
Che,sa,;:,e&,U:!, VA 23320
1757) 10-1222
914 A hugh Ave., . 100
Ri ·r101 d, VA 23230
1757) 345-0010
er SL 2B
w 11 urg, VA 23\88
f757) 3 S-0010
N0t IA
K•n.1,11,-,, WI 53005
(26 1782·7990
Resolution/To Declare the 2319 Gianera Street Property as Surplus Land Rev: 11/22/17