City of Santa Clara
Joint Meeting Agenda of the
Council and Authorities Concurrent &
Santa Clara Stadium Authority
Hybrid Meeting
City Hall Council Chambers/Virtual
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
Tuesday, April 18, 2023 4:00 PM
• 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 14 Printed on 4/13/2023
Councilmember Chahal will be attending remotely from the following location:
627 Sector 11
Panchkula, HR 134109
India
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).
Joint Council and Authorities
Concurrent & Stadium Authority
Meeting Agenda April 18, 2023
Closed Session - 4:00 PM | Study Session - 6:00 PM | Regular Meeting - 7:00 PM 4:00 PM CLOSED SESSION
Call to Order in the Council Chambers
Roll Call
1.A Conference with Real Property Negotiators (CC)
Pursuant to Gov. Code § 54956.8
Property: 800 Mathew Street, Santa Clara, California 95050 (APN: 224-03-081)
City/Authority Negotiator: City Manager/Executive Director (or designee)
Negotiating Parties: Jitendra G. Patel and Sashi J. Patel Under Negotiation: Accord and Satisfaction (provisions, price and terms of payment)
23-528
1.B Conference with Legal Counsel-Existing Litigation (CC) Pursuant to Gov. Code § 54956.9(d)(1)
City of Santa Clara v. Jitendra G. Patel, et al, Santa Clara County Superior Court Case No. 21CV377579
23-531
1.C Conference with Legal Counsel-Existing Litigation (CC) Pursuant to Gov. Code § 54956.9(d)(1)
County Sanitation District 2-3, et al. v. City of Santa Clara, et al., Santa Clara County Superior Court Case No. 18CV325480
23-523
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)
6:00 PM STUDY SESSION
Call to Order in the Council Chambers
2. 23-1171 Cleanup Campaign Alternatives and Community Survey Results Recommendation: Note and file the Report.
7:00 PM JOINT COUNCIL/STADIUM AUTHORITY MEETING
*Open Session to begin at 7:00 PM or shortly thereafter.
City of Santa Clara Page 2 of 14 Printed on 4/13/2023
Joint Council and Authorities
Concurrent & Stadium Authority
Meeting Agenda April 18, 2023
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] (Deferred from April 4, 2023)
23-527
Alternative 1: Approve a Resolution Declaring
City-Owned Property Located at 2319 Gianera Street
Surplus.
Recommendation:
SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS
4.A 23-386 Proclaim April as National Autism Acceptance Month
4.B 23-462 Proclamation of April 23-29, 2023 as National Library Week
4.C Proclaim April 30 through May 6, 2023 as Municipal Clerks Week
23-551
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.]
5.A Action on the Minutes of March 7, 2023 Joint Council and Authorities Concurrent and Santa Clara Stadium Authority Meeting and the March 21, 2023 Joint Council and Authorities Concurrent and Santa Clara Stadium Authority Meeting
23-543
Approve the Meeting Minutes Action on the Minutes of
March 7, 2023 Joint Council and Authorities
Concurrent and Santa Clara Stadium Authority
Meeting and the March 21, 2023 Joint Council and
Authorities Concurrent and Santa Clara Stadium
Authority Meeting.
Recommendation:
City of Santa Clara Page 3 of 14 Printed on 4/13/2023
Joint Council and Authorities
Concurrent & Stadium Authority
Meeting Agenda April 18, 2023
5.B 23-11 Board, Commissions and Committee Minutes
Note and file the Minutes of:
Senior Advisory Commission - February 27, 2023
Cultural Commission - March 6, 2023
Audit Committee - November 30, 2022
Audit Committee - February 3, 2023
Board of Library Trustees Minutes - January 26, 2023
Board of Library Trustees Minutes - February 16,
2023
Board of Library Trustees Minutes - March 6, 2023
Downtown Community Task Force (DCTF) Minutes -
January 19, 2023
Downtown Community Task Force (DCTF) Minutes -
February 6, 2023
Downtown Community Task Force (DCTF) Minutes -
February 16, 2023
Downtown Community Task Force (DCTF) Minutes -
November 18, 2021
Recommendation:
5.C 23-159 Action on the Single Audit Report for Fiscal Year 2021-22 Note and file the City of Santa Clara Single Audit
Report for the year ended June 30, 2022, as
recommended by the Council Audit Committee.
Recommendation:
5.D Action on an Agreement with Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc for Services for the Traffic Signal Management Software Upgrade and Adaptive Signal System Project
23-1424
1. Authorize the City Manager or designee to execute
an agreement with Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
for the purchase of a Citywide Advanced Traffic
Management System and Adaptive Traffic Control
System, including all software, hardware, and
professional services for design, implementation,
configuration, support, and maintenance, for a term
starting on or around May 1, 2023 and ending on or
around April 30, 2033, with maximum compensation
amount not-to-exceed $2,194,258, subject to the
appropriation of funds.
2. Authorize the City Manager or designee to execute
amendments to the agreement with Kimley-Horn and
Associates, Inc. to implement any changes and
enhancements to the system that may be required.
Recommendation:
City of Santa Clara Page 4 of 14 Printed on 4/13/2023
Joint Council and Authorities
Concurrent & Stadium Authority
Meeting Agenda April 18, 2023
5.E Action on Agreement for Services with Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. for Preparation and Application of a
Transportation Demand Management Monitoring and
Administration Program for Development Projects
23-412
1. Approve and authorize the City Manager’s Office,
consistent with properly delegated authority or
existing policy, to execute an agreement with
Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. for
preparation and application of a Transportation
Demand Management (TDM) monitoring and
administration program for development projects
for a three year term starting on May 1, 2023 and
ending on April 30, 2026 for a total maximum
compensation amount not to exceed $200,000;
and
2. Approve and authorize the City Manager’s Office
to execute amendments to the agreement to
extend the term and increase compensation as
may be required to support the requirements of the
TDM monitoring and administration program,
subject to appropriation of funds.
Recommendation:
City of Santa Clara Page 5 of 14 Printed on 4/13/2023
Joint Council and Authorities
Concurrent & Stadium Authority
Meeting Agenda April 18, 2023
5.F Action on Agreement with Impec Group, Inc. for Janitorial Services Citywide
23-436
1. Authorize the City Manager to execute an
agreement with Impec Group, Inc. for janitorial
services citywide for an initial five-year term, with
maximum compensation not-to-exceed $7,830,683,
subject to the appropriation of funds;
2. Authorize the City Manager to amend the
agreement with Impec Group, Inc. to add new sites or
to revise pricing in the event a price adjustment is
approved, subject to the appropriation of funds;
3. Authorize the City Manager to execute additional
agreements with Impec Group, Inc. as required for
other City departments not-to-exceed $250,000 each,
such agreements shall contain the same terms and
conditions as the agreement with Impec Group, Inc. for
Department of Public Works and shall be subject to
appropriation of funds; and
4. Authorize the City Manager to exercise up to three
one-year options to extend the term of the
agreement(s) after the initial term, subject to the
appropriation of funds.
Recommendation:
5.G Authorize the City Manager to enter into an Agreement for Real Estate Services with CBRE Inc. for the Loyalton Property and Other City Properties and Enter into Listing Agreements for Individual Properties
23-550
1. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and
execute an Agreement for Real Estate
Services with CBRE Inc. for the Loyalton
Property and Other City Properties and Enter
into Listing Agreements for Individual
Properties;
2. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and
execute amendments to these agreements to
(a) add or delete services consistent with the
scope of services for the agreements (b) adjust
future rates subject to the appropriation of
funds; and
3. Authorize the City Manager to take any actions
as necessary to implement and administer the
agreement.
Recommendation:
City of Santa Clara Page 6 of 14 Printed on 4/13/2023
Joint Council and Authorities
Concurrent & Stadium Authority
Meeting Agenda April 18, 2023
5.H Action on Sixth Amendment to Agreement A4220S with the Santa Clara Valley Water District (Valley Water) and the City of Santa Clara for Cost-Sharing of the Landscape Rebate Program 23-365
Authorize the City Manager to execute the Sixth
Amendment to the Agreement with Santa Clara Valley
Water District (Valley Water) to increase the amount
of the agreement by $300,000 for a revised
not-to-exceed maximum of $550,000.
Recommendation:
City of Santa Clara Page 7 of 14 Printed on 4/13/2023
Joint Council and Authorities
Concurrent & Stadium Authority
Meeting Agenda April 18, 2023
5.I Actions on Award of Contract for the Sanitary Sewer Condition Assessment Repairs - Package 1 Project (CE 20-21-03) to JMB Construction, Inc.; Adopt a Resolution Adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration, for which an Initial Study was Prepared, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; Adopt a CEQA Statutory Exemption; Adopt a Class 1 CEQA Categorical Exemption; and Related Budget Amendment.
23-305
1. Adopt a resolution Adopting the Mitigated Negative
Declaration, for which an Initial Study was Prepared
and Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program or
the Sanitary Sewer Condition Assessment Repairs -
Package 1 Project for repair segments 100, 231, 232,
233, and 242;
2. Adopt a Statutory Exemption under CEQA
Guidelines Section 15282 for repair segments 228,
202, 136, 122, 115, 91, 86, 85, 80, 77, 130, 112, 109,
101, 96, 95, 45, and 31;
3. Adopt a Class 1 Categorical Exemption under
CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 for repair segments
120, 132, 134, 203, 204, 205, 208, 209, 210, 211,
223, 224, 225, 226, 234, 235, 240, and 241;
4. Authorize the Director of Public Works or designee,
to file a Notice of Determination and a Notice of
Exemption with the County Clerk-Recorder and the
State Clearinghouse;
5. Award the Public Works Contract for the Sanitary
Sewer Condition Assessment Repairs - Package 1
Project (CE 20-21-03) for the Base Bid, to the lowest
responsive and responsible bidder, JMB
Construction, Inc., in the amount of $5,178,003 and
authorize the City Manager to execute any and all
documents associated with, and necessary for the
award, completion, and acceptance of this Project on
forms approved by the City Attorney;
6. Authorize the City Manager to execute change
orders up to approximately 15 percent of the original
contract price, or $776,700, for a total project budget not to exceed amount of $5,954,703; and
7. Approve the following FY 2022/23 budget
amendments:
A. In the Sewer Utility Fund, increase the
transfer to the Sewer Utility Capital Fund by
$4,245,609 and reduce the unrestricted fund
balance by $4,245,609 (five affirmative
Recommendation:
City of Santa Clara Page 8 of 14 Printed on 4/13/2023
Joint Council and Authorities
Concurrent & Stadium Authority
Meeting Agenda April 18, 2023
Council votes required for the use of
unused balances); and
B. In the Sewer Utility Capital Fund, increase
the transfer from the Sewer Utility Fund by
$4,245,609 and increase the Sanitary
Sewer System Improvements project by
$4,245,609 (five affirmative Council
votes required to appropriate additional
revenue).
5.J Adoption of a Resolution of Intention for Parking Maintenance District No. 122 - Franklin Square
23-193
1. Adopt a Resolution of Intention to order that the
alternative method for the levy of benefit
assessment be made applicable to the City of
Santa Clara Parking Maintenance District No. 122;
2. Set a hearing date of June 6, 2023 to approve the
Director’s Report FY 2023/24; and
3. Authorize the publication, mailing, and posting of
the Notice of Public Hearing as stated in the
Resolution of Intention.
Recommendation:
5.K Adoption of a Resolution of Intention for Santa Clara Convention Center Complex - Maintenance District No. 183
23-196
1. Adopt a Resolution of Intention to order that the
alternative method for the levy of benefit
assessment be made applicable to the Santa Clara
Convention Center Complex Maintenance District
No. 183;
2. Set a hearing date of June 6, 2023 to approve the
Director’s Report FY 2023/24; and
3. Authorize the publication, mailing, and posting of
the Notice of Public Hearing as stated in the
Resolution of Intention.
Recommendation:
5.L Action on a Resolution to Oppose Initiative 21-0042A1, “The Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act”
23-444
Adopt a Resolution Opposing Initiative 21-0042A1
“The Taxpayer Protection and Government
Accountability Act”.
Recommendation:
City of Santa Clara Page 9 of 14 Printed on 4/13/2023
Joint Council and Authorities
Concurrent & Stadium Authority
Meeting Agenda April 18, 2023
5.M 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)
(Deferred from April 4, 2023)
23-522
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:
5.N 23-446 Informational Report on 2023 Q1 Legislative Updates Note and file the informational report on 2023 Q1
legislative updates.
Recommendation:
SANTA CLARA STADIUM AUTHORITY CONSENT CALENDAR
6.A Action on Stadium Authority Bills and Claims for the Month of February 2023
23-340
Approve the list of Stadium Authority Bills and Claims
for February 2023.
Recommendation:
6.B Informational Report on Stadium Authority Contracts for Fiscal Year 2022/23 As Required by Santa Clara City Code Chapter
17.30 (Stadium Authority Procurement Policy)
23-58
Note and file the informational report on Stadium
Authority contracts for FY 2022/23.
Recommendation:
6.C Informational Report on Stadium Authority and Stadium Manager Meetings and Corresponding Minutes for the Period of October 1 to December 31, 2022
23-130
Note and file the informational report on Stadium
Authority and Stadium Manager staff meetings and
corresponding minutes for the period of October 1 to
December 31, 2022.
Recommendation:
6.D Action on Request Submitted by the Stadium Manager to Execute Agreement with Gachina Landscape Management for Landscaping Services at Levi’s Stadium
City of Santa Clara Page 10 of 14 Printed on 4/13/2023
Joint Council and Authorities
Concurrent & Stadium Authority
Meeting Agenda April 18, 2023
6.D.1 Request from the Stadium Manager to Execute Agreement with Gachina Landscape Management for Landscaping Services at Levi’s Stadium
23-507
6.D.2 Report from Stadium Authority for Action Regarding Stadium Manager’s Request to Execute Agreement with Gachina
Landscape Management for Landscaping Services at Levi’s Stadium
23-508
1. Approve the Stadium Manager’s request to
execute an agreement with Gachina
Landscape Management to provide
landscaping maintenance services at Levi’s
Stadium for a three-year period beginning April
19, 2023 through March 31, 2026, in an
amount not exceed $68,000 for the first
contract year, $70,000 for the second contract
year, and $72,000 for the third contract year for
a total not to exceed amount of $210,000 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.E Action on Request Submitted by the Stadium Manager to Execute Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement with Integrated Communication Systems (ICS) for Fire Alarm Testing, Inspection, Maintenance, and Related Services at Levi’s Stadium
6.E.1 Request from Stadium Manager to Execute Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement with Integrated Communication Systems (ICS) for Fire Alarm Testing, Inspection, Maintenance, and Related Services at Levi’s Stadium
23-534
City of Santa Clara Page 11 of 14 Printed on 4/13/2023
Joint Council and Authorities
Concurrent & Stadium Authority
Meeting Agenda April 18, 2023
6.E.2 Report from the Stadium Authority for Action Regarding Stadium Manager’s Request to Execute Amendment No. 1 to the
Agreement with Integrated Communication Systems (ICS) for Fire Alarm Testing, Inspection, Maintenance, and Related Services at Levi’s Stadium
23-535
Approve the Stadium Manager’s request to execute
Amendment No. 1 to the agreement with Integrated
Communication Systems (ICS) to move the term date
from March 31, 2023 to May 31, 2023 and include a
total not to exceed compensation amount of $10,000
for the extended term only in order for ICS to complete the necessary repairs as part of the agreement for fire alarm testing, inspection, maintenance, and related
services at Levi’s Stadium.
Recommendation:
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
7. Action on a Resolution Establishing the Average Per-Acre Land Values and Park Development Costs to be Used in Setting the Parkland In-Lieu Fees for New Residential Development for FY 2023/24
23-275
Adopt a Resolution to set the Parkland In-Lieu Fee
Schedule For New Residential Development in
accordance with Title 17 (“Development”) Chapter 35
(“Park and Recreational Land”) of the City Code
establishing the average per acre land values as
contained in the Annual Land Valuation Appraisal
Report and the Park Development cost per capita
value as contained in the Parks & Recreation
Facilities Development Impact Fee Study (Nexus
Study Update) and adjusted by the Construction Cost
Index.
Recommendation:
City of Santa Clara Page 12 of 14 Printed on 4/13/2023
Joint Council and Authorities
Concurrent & Stadium Authority
Meeting Agenda April 18, 2023
8. Public Hearing: Action on the Adoption of the Proposed FY 2023/24 Municipal Fee Schedule
23-141
Alternative 1:
Adopt the “City of Santa Clara 2023/24 Municipal Fee
Schedule” which by resolution (1) sets new Fees; (2)
amends existing Fees; (3) retains unchanged Fees for
various City departments; (4) deletes certain fees with an effective date of July 1, 2023.
Recommendation:
9. Action on Policy Options to Amend Regulations Related to Street Vending Activities in the City of Santa Clara
23-211
Direct staff to proceed with Option #1 (pilot program
in the area of Levi’s Stadium from August 2023
through January 2024, with the Police Department
returning to City Council with recommendations for
implementation for the 2024 concert and NFL
seasons, as well as how the Ordinance may need to
be amended to apply in other areas of the City, such
as City parks).
Recommendation:
10. Discussion and Follow Up on a Written Petition (Council Policy 030) Submitted by Kirk Vartan Related to Permit Parking Zones 23-145
Recommendation: Note and file the staff report.
REPORTS OF MEMBERS AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES
CITY MANAGER/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT
23-390 Update on City Council and Stadium Authority Staff Referrals 23-542 Tentative Meeting Agenda Calendar (TMAC)
ADJOURNMENT
The next regular scheduled meeting is on Tuesday, May 9, 2023 in the City Hall Council Chambers.
City of Santa Clara Page 13 of 14 Printed on 4/13/2023
Joint Council and Authorities
Concurrent & Stadium Authority
Meeting Agenda April 18, 2023
City of Santa Clara Page 14 of 14 Printed on 4/13/2023
MEETING DISCLOSURES
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
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
23-528 Agenda Date: 4/18/2023
SUBJECT
Conference with Real Property Negotiators (CC)
Pursuant to Gov. Code § 54956.8
Property: 800 Mathew Street, Santa Clara, California 95050 (APN: 224-03-081) City/Authority Negotiator: City Manager/Executive Director (or designee) Negotiating Parties: Jitendra G. Patel and Sashi J. Patel Under Negotiation: Accord and Satisfaction (provisions, price and terms of payment) City of Santa Clara Page 1 of 1 Printed on 4/13/2023
powered by Legistar™
City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
23-531 Agenda Date: 4/18/2023
SUBJECT
Conference with Legal Counsel-Existing Litigation (CC)
Pursuant to Gov. Code § 54956.9(d)(1)
City of Santa Clara v. Jitendra G. Patel, et al, Santa Clara County Superior Court Case No. 21CV377579
City of Santa Clara Page 1 of 1 Printed on 4/13/2023
powered by Legistar™
City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
23-523 Agenda Date: 4/18/2023
SUBJECT
Conference with Legal Counsel-Existing Litigation (CC)
Pursuant to Gov. Code § 54956.9(d)(1)
County Sanitation District 2-3, et al. v. City of Santa Clara, et al., Santa Clara County Superior Court Case No. 18CV325480
City of Santa Clara Page 1 of 1 Printed on 4/13/2023
powered by Legistar™
City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
23-1171 Agenda Date: 4/18/2023
REPORT TO COUNCIL
SUBJECT
Cleanup Campaign Alternatives and Community Survey Results
COUNCIL PILLAR
Deliver and Enhance High Quality Efficient Services and Infrastructure; Promote Sustainability and Environmental Protection
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
R3 Consulting Group (R3) was hired to identify and analyze alternatives to the Cleanup Campaign (CUC) and gauge the community’s interest in the alternatives. On-call collection programs, drop-off programs, and debris box drop-off events were identified as alternatives for hard-to-dispose-of items like bulky waste. An analysis was conducted for each alternative program that considered bulky item program types used by other cities, costs, community access, outreach needs, and advantages and disadvantages of other program types.
Following three community meetings to discuss alternatives to the CUC, a survey was conducted to gauge public opinion on other program types as well as the current programs offered by the City (CUC, city-wide garage sales, household hazardous waste drop-off events). Feedback from the community meetings and 86 percent of survey responses supported the current CUC format. Based on that information, the majority of residents prefer a hybrid approach, similar to what is provided today. This approach offers both single-family and multi-family homes multiple programs with collection and drop-off opportunities.
BACKGROUND
The Cleanup Campaign (CUC) has been conducted since 1961 and helps residential households dispose of 5,000 - 6,000 tons of unwanted debris annually. The primary mission of the current program is to remove unwanted debris (set out by residents) from the street as safely and swiftly as possible.
The City provides solid waste services to approximately 23,561 residential customer accounts that are comprised of 47,000 households. Approximately 14,000 of those households are not included in the CUC because there is inadequate space for setting out material and/or collection activities, and therefore do not pay for the service. Residents that do not have access to the CUC program are still provided opportunities to dispose of many of these same items through other programs, including two disposal days (no extra cost) at the Mission Trail Transfer Station, the on-call collection program offered by Mission Trail Waste Systems, two citywide garage sales and two Environmental Days (no extra cost) at the Recology facility.
City of Santa Clara Page 1 of 9 Printed on 4/13/2023
powered by Legistar™
23-1171 Agenda Date: 4/18/2023
On May 25, 2021 the City Council directed staff to hire a consultant to identify potential alternatives to the current CUC format, conduct a survey of customers, and draft a final report. The City hired R3 Consulting Group (R3) to:
· analyze program types actively used by other cities
· estimate costs of each potential alternative
· identify the advantages/disadvantages of each alternative program · survey the community on preferences and needs to collect hard-to-dispose-of items
DISCUSSION
Current Cleanup Campaign
Under the current CUC format, the City is divided into four collection areas, each being serviced during a one-week period in May. Residents who are part of the program are able to place debris on the street for collection in accordance with the CUC guidelines. The size of setouts is unlimited, although $25 per cubic yard is charged for setouts of construction/demolition debris over one cubic yard. The City and its contractors remove the debris and sweep each street during its respective collection week. Over 90 percent of the material collected is transported to Newby Island Landfill for disposal.
The CUC does generate some material that is not set out in compliance with CUC guidelines, such as household hazardous waste (paint, oil, batteries, pesticides etc.), loose construction/demolition debris on the street (concrete, dirt, etc.) and lightweight trash. Due to concerns that these materials can potentially be conveyed into catch basin inlets via run-off or wind, the City has undertaken past efforts to help mitigate the concerns. These mitigation measures include operating the CUC during the dry season, involving the County to collect illegally set out HHW, and requiring construction/demolition debris to be placed in bulk bags.
The CUC program is very labor intensive. DPW is only able to perform very limited non-emergency street, storm drain, traffic striping, and grounds maintenance activities during the CUC because approximately 30 employees are needed to fill the daily CUC roster.
Other Communities Providing Similar Service to Santa Clara A small number of communities provide a similar annual cleanup program, but all are much smaller versions with setouts limited to certain sizes.
· City of Campbell has an annual program in which residents can set out a maximum of 70 pounds of material in 32-gallon bags or 8 cubic feet boxes. Loose items, construction/demolition debris, electronic waste, and large appliances are not accepted · Central Contra Costa Solid Waste Management Authority provides two community cleanups annually in which residents can dispose of up to fourteen 32-gallon garbage bags or equivalent in items with no single item weighing over 50 pounds or longer than 4 feet. · City of Citrus Heights coordinates three setout days per year and notifies residents via door hanger one week prior to each pick-up day. Residents may set out up to 10 cubic yards of material and construction/demolition debris is prohibited. · City of Inglewood has a program in which residents can set out up to 15 bags or 10 bundles of unwanted bulky items up to 60 pounds each, twice per year.
City of Santa Clara Page 2 of 9 Printed on 4/13/2023
powered by Legistar™
23-1171 Agenda Date: 4/18/2023
Cost Estimates
The current City of Santa Clara CUC program costs approximately $2.5 million per year and is funded by participant charges of $6.28 per household per month.
Advantages
· Access to transportation not necessary
· Low outreach effort required
· High program satisfaction rate
· Less illegal dumping
· Lower cost alternative
Disadvantages
· Others outside the City dumping
· Material in street
· DPW staff reprioritized for the month
· One event per year
Bulky Waste Collection Programs Used in Other Cities
Bulky waste collection programs used throughout the Bay Area and the State of California have been profiled as examples that could be considered in Santa Clara. Program types used by other municipalities can generally be broken down into on-call pickup programs where items are picked up in front of residents’ homes, and drop-off programs where residents bring items in for free disposal.
These collection programs are typically tailored to the specific needs of each community and primarily fall into three categories:
· On-call Collection Programs
· Drop-off Programs
· Debris Box Drop-off Events
While these program types all have the potential to improve aspects of the current CUC program, they also provide their own challenges, costs, and limitations.
On-call Collection Programs
On-call collection programs are one of the most popular models throughout California, as they are convenient for residents to use. Each single-family account typically has access to at least two scheduled pickups annually and in some cities, this can be as high as six annual pickups. Setouts are limited to certain sizes or number of items, unlike the current CUC format where setouts are unlimited.
Mission Trail Waste Systems (MTWS) offers a version of on-call collection to all residential customers at a rate of $148.51 per pick-up, which is paid by the customer. Upon request, MTWS will drop off two 2-cubic yard heavy-duty bags to customers and return with a flatbed truck and a crane to lift the filled bags and up to three loose bulky items onto the vehicle. Electronic waste or appliances are also accepted as part of the three bulky items. The heavy-duty bags allow residents to contain multiple items of various sizes for disposal and ensure they do not become litter or end up in the storm drain.
MTWS has provided bulky item collection services to 145 customers over the initial two years of the program.
City of Santa Clara Page 3 of 9 Printed on 4/13/2023
powered by Legistar™
23-1171 Agenda Date: 4/18/2023
An on-call collection program can be accessed year-round at the customer’s convenience as opposed to once a year as designated by the City. Participation can range anywhere from 30-80 percent of customers. On-call collection programs still present some implementation challenges.
First, residents still need adequate space to set out their items for collection by the hauler.
Additionally, such programs may not be feasible for implementation in areas that are not currently served by the CUC program; for example, in larger, denser homeowner associations (HOAs). HOAs and other high-density dwelling areas often have private streets that do not provide access for collection vehicles and may require the permission of the HOA to enter. HOAs may also have aesthetic concerns about decorative stone being damaged by collection trucks, have limited parking/common areas for material setouts, or concerns that the setout site will turn into a dumping ground for everyone. MTWS has proactively reached out to 106 HOAs, but only five have authorized onsite bulky item collection.
Other Communities Providing On-call Collection Service
Some other local communities that provide on-call collection services include: San Jose, Mountain View, Palo Alto, Sunnyvale, Milpitas, Los Altos, South Bayside Waste Management Agency, Central Contra Costa Solid Waste Management Authority, Oakland, San Francisco, Fairfield, Vallejo, and San Rafael.
Cost Estimates
It is estimated that if an on-call collection program was established in lieu of the current CUC, the collection costs would be approximately $148.51 per pickup. Participation levels have the largest impact on program costs. If the program were offered to the current 33,000 CUC customers whose participation rates are estimated between 80 - 90 percent, the monthly cost could range between $10.00 to $11.20 per month for each household. At a lower participation rate of 40 to 45 percent, it is estimated that the service could cost $5.00 to $5.60 per month. Staff would need to spend time working with MTWS to determine exact fees.
Advantages
· Access to transportation is not necessary
· Less illegal dumping
· Available all year
· Lower impact to DPW staffing
Disadvantages
· HOA permission needed
· Potential for higher costs
Drop-off Programs
Drop-off programs are a convenient local option where residents can drop off a set amount of material at a local waste facility at no cost. Residency is usually verified at the facility. An expansion of the City’s current drop-off program in Santa Clara would likely use the Mission Trails Transfer Station (MTTS), where the City of Santa Clara currently holds its Rubbish Disposal Days. The City currently offers two disposal days (no extra charge) at the MTTS each year through the agreement with MTWS. Appointments are required to attend a free disposal day. On average, 206 residents attend each free disposal day. The City would need to enter into a separate agreement with MTWS or amend the current exclusive franchise agreement with them to expand this service.
City of Santa Clara Page 4 of 9 Printed on 4/13/2023
powered by Legistar™
23-1171 Agenda Date: 4/18/2023
Other Communities Providing Drop-off Programs
Oakland, Fairfield, Vallejo
Cost Estimates
Drop-off programs are the cheapest alternative for bulky item disposal. Depending on participation, monthly costs could range from $1.50 with a 40 percent participation rate to $4.90 with a 90 percent participation rate per household account, with the ability to dispose up to seven cubic yards at a time.
These costs are estimates only, staff would need to negotiate this type of program with MTWS and amend the current contract.
Advantages
· Program is accessible to all residents, including higher density multi-family dwellings · Less illegal dumping
· Available throughout the year
· Lowest cost
· Low impact to DPW staffing because residents deliver materials themselves Disadvantages
· Residents need to transport their waste to the drop-off site themselves, which potentially limits their ability to dispose of larger items due to physical constraints or not having access to reliable transportation
· Additional effort to outreach customers to participate Debris Box Drop-off Events
Debris boxes can be strategically placed in neighborhoods or at a single designated location for a set amount of time. Debris box drop-off events require residents to load, transport, and unload bulky items. Residents would need transportation to access these events and would have to be physically capable to empty their own vehicles. It is often difficult to find adequate space to host these events in high-density areas, where a service like this could have the most value.
Other disadvantages to these events are that they are very time consuming to organize and often require more staff resources because each debris box is typically overseen by an employee. A substantial amount of public outreach is required in advance of each event. Debris box drop-off events are usually scheduled on a weekend to make them accessible to more residents which also increases labor costs.
It should be noted that the City of San Jose once had a robust neighborhood debris box program but is shifting to unlimited on-call scheduled junk pick-ups at individual residences, which are funded outside of their solid waste program. Additionally, most communities that provide debris box drop-off events also provide other options for bulky item disposal.
Other Communities Providing Debris Box Drop-off Events
Milpitas, San Jose, San Francisco, San Rafael, Berkeley Cost Estimates
Debris box drop-off events can be scaled based on frequency. If a neighborhood was provided an event once every five years, the average cost per month per household (at an 80 to 90 percent City of Santa Clara Page 5 of 9 Printed on 4/13/2023
powered by Legistar™
23-1171 Agenda Date: 4/18/2023
participation rate) would range from $3.50 - $3.90. If a neighborhood was provided an event annually (again at an 80 to 90 percent participation rate) the monthly cost per household would range from $17.30 - $19.50. These cost estimates include modest assumptions regarding DPW staff time which would be necessary to schedule and promote each event; however, actual costs may be higher due to overtime costs to help staff them. Debris box drop-off events were the most expensive bulky item disposal program option analyzed.
Advantages
· Program is accessible to all residents, including higher density multi-family dwellings · Less illegal dumping
Disadvantages
· Residents need to transport their waste to the drop-off site themselves, which potentially limits their ability to dispose of larger items due to physical constraints or not having access to reliable transportation
· Limited availability of events
· High impact to DPW staffing because staff will have to spend significant time scheduling, outreaching, and staffing each event
· Highest Cost
Benefits and Characteristics Comparison
The table below compares characteristics of each bulky item collection program discussed previously, including the current CUC.
Characteristics On-call
Collection
Program
Drop-off
Program
Debris Box
Event
Program
(offered
annually)
Cleanup
Campaign
(current)
Transportation limitations No Yes Yes No
Easily available to highdensity dwelling residentsNo Yes Yes No Minimizes illegal dumping
from non-residents
Yes Yes Yes No
Available year-round Yes Yes No No
Commonly used in other
jurisdictions
Yes Yes No No
Monthly Cost (at 80% to
90% participation)
$10.00 to
$11.20
$3.00 - $4.90 $17.30 -
$19.50
$6.28
Outreach needed to
maximize participation
Medium Low High Low
Impacts on current DPW
staffing*
Low Low High High
*DPW Staffing for these events is funded through the solid waste program so there is no cost to the general fund City of Santa Clara Page 6 of 9 Printed on 4/13/2023
powered by Legistar™
23-1171 Agenda Date: 4/18/2023
Community Engagement
Three Community Meetings were hosted on April 20, 2022 (at 3 p.m. and 6 p.m.) and April 25, 2022 (at 6 p.m.) to give presentations outlining the various bulky item collection program types described above. The meetings were promoted on social media and advertised on the City’s website.
Approximately 65 residents attended the three events. Residents were provided the opportunity to ask questions and provide feedback on the other bulky item collection program types. The majority of residents at each meeting were supportive of the current CUC format and voiced concerns about the City moving away from it.
The City did not receive any negative feedback on scavenging during the CUC in the form of participants scavenging useful items from neighbors’ piles and taking pride in setting out items that get scavenged. This was surprising to DPW staff because scavenging related issues are some of the most received complaints each year. Feedback from the community meetings was incorporated into a statistically valid survey that was developed and conducted by R3’s subconsultant, SCI Consulting Group (SCI). This included leading the development of questions to measure participants feelings about scavenging.
Survey
In September 2022, surveys were mailed to all 23,561 accounts, which encompassed all households in the City that either currently participate in the CUC or could potentially be eligible to participate in an alternative program. Survey participants had the option to submit the survey by mail or online. A total of 5,169 surveys were completed, representing a response rate of 21.9 percent. This was a good response rate and exceeded the consultant’s expectations of 10 percent. A full summary of the survey questions and responses is included in Attachment 1.
The survey questions measured residents’ familiarity with the CUC program and participation rates in the current CUC program, as well as participation in Citywide garage sales, Recology’s Environmental Days, and the Santa Clara County Household Hazardous Waste Program. The survey also queried the community about which of the four collection/disposal options they preferred. The final survey question measured the level of satisfaction with the current CUC program.
When asked whether the respondent was familiar with the CUC program, 94 percent indicated “yes.” Most respondents (87 percent) participate in the CUC Program annually. Approximately 9 percent participate less often, and approximately 4 percent have never participated. Respondents indicated they use the current CUC program to dispose of the following items:
· 90% - Small items
· 78% - Bulky Items
· 60% - Yard trimmings
· 34% - Construction and demolition waste
Additionally, the survey produced data on the usage of other opportunities provided by the City to dispose of waste. Participation rates were as follows:
· 12% - Twice-a-year City-wide Garage Sales
· 19% - Recology’s Environmental Days
· 60% - Santa Clara County Household Hazardous Waste Program City of Santa Clara Page 7 of 9 Printed on 4/13/2023
powered by Legistar™
23-1171 Agenda Date: 4/18/2023
Residents that currently participate in the CUC ranked the four collection program options for bulky items and yard trimmings as follows:
1. Participate in a City-organized pre-scheduled collection at my property (current CUC format)
2. Schedule an on-call collection at my property throughout the year when needed
3. Schedule an appointment for drop-off at City-designated location when needed
4. Participate in a pre-scheduled drop-off event at City-designated location Residents that don’t currently participate in the CUC ranked their preferences as follows:
1. Schedule an on-call collection at my property throughout the year when needed
2. Participate in a City organized pre-scheduled collection at my property (current CUC format)
3. Schedule an appointment for drop-off at City-designated location when needed
4. Participate in a pre-scheduled drop-off event at City-designated location The overall satisfaction rate for participants in the current CUC program was 86 percent. The survey also found that 29 percent of respondents’ salvage materials that are set out by other residents and 82 percent of respondents did not mind that scavenging occurred. The survey provided participants with an opportunity to submit additional comments as well. R3’s final report noted that a total of 1,905 comments were received which is much higher than normally seen on this type of survey. Positive comments outnumbered negative comments by a ratio of 3:1.
Conclusions
There is not a single bulky item collection program that can be provided which addresses all the preferences of the community. Based on feedback received, a hybrid approach that includes both pick-up and drop-off options would be the best approach to meet the resident’s needs. The City currently provides multiple pick-up and drop-off opportunities for residents to dispose of unwanted items, including the CUC.
The on-call bulky item collection program offered by MTWS is a good compliment to the CUC.
Residents can utilize this program year-round and it is accessible to community members that don’t have access to transportation to utilize drop-off events. Participation can be increased by working with MTWS to promote the program through outreach and marketing efforts. Additionally, MTWS and staff can actively engage with higher-density areas to enable bulky item collection on private property.
The City could also potentially add more free disposal days at the MTTS. This would require negotiating an amendment to the current franchise agreement and would add costs to implement, which could result in increased garbage rates. Increasing promotion of the additional free disposal days could expand community awareness of the new opportunities. Council would need to provide direction to Staff to enter into discussions with MTWS to add additional drop-off events.
The existing Environmental Day and Citywide Garage Sale events provide the community additional options to recycle or reuse unwanted items. DPW promotes the availability of these events though print, our website, and social media. DPW will look for opportunities to promote these programs at future City sponsored events to increase awareness.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The action being considered does not constitute a “project” within the meaning of California Environmental Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378(a) as it has not potential for resulting in either a direct change in the environment, or as a reasonably foreseeable indirect City of Santa Clara Page 8 of 9 Printed on 4/13/2023
powered by Legistar™
23-1171 Agenda Date: 4/18/2023
physical change in the environment.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this report.
COORDINATION
This report has been prepared by the Department of Public Works. Meetings were held with the public on April 20 and 25, 2022. Also, surveys were distributed to all residential solid waste account holders.
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
Note and file the Report.
Reviewed by: Craig Mobeck, Director of Public Works
Approved by: Office of the City Manager
ATTACHMENTS
1. Clean-Up Campaign Program Survey and Other Program Types Report City of Santa Clara Page 9 of 9 Printed on 4/13/2023
powered by Legistar™
FINAL REPORT
City of Santa Clara
Submitted electronically: January 18, 2023
Cleanup Campaign Program
Survey and Other Program Types
City of
Santa Clara
The Center of What's Possible
a) :::2-,. CONSULTING GROUP, INC.
l<--___..-1 RESOURCES· RESPECT· RESPONSIBILITY
405 14th Street, Suite 350, Oakland, CA 94612 | p 916.782.7821 | f 916.782.7824 | www.r3cgi.com January 18, 2023
Mr. Dave Staub, Deputy Director of Public Works
City of Santa Clara
1700 Walsh Ave, Santa Clara, CA, 95050
submitted via email: [email protected]
SUBJECT: Final Report – Cleanup Campaign Program Survey and Other Program Types Dear Mr. Staub,
R3 Consulting Group (R3) is pleased to submit this Final Report to the City of Santa Clara (City) detailing our statistically valid survey of residential opinion regarding the City’s Cleanup Campaign (CUC) program and a description of other similar program types.
The survey focused on single family, multi-family, and high-density dwelling units – including those not currently eligible for participation in the CUC program – and gauged public opinion on other program types. This report presents the results of community engagement and surveying and describes comparable program types used in other communities.
The objectives of the project were to:
Analyze other program types actively used by other cities.
Identify the advantages and disadvantages of those other program types.
Analyze the public educational needs, community access, costs, and waste diversion potential of other program types.
Survey the community on residential preferences and needs to collect hard-to-dispose-of items.
The types of programs used frequently in other communities include on-call collection of bulky items and waste and free drop-off of waste materials to the local transfer stations or at local community events. Survey results demonstrated great overall satisfaction, awareness of and participation in the CUC program. The survey provided valuable feedback on what program elements are desired by Santa Clara residents.
* * * * *
We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to the City of Santa Clara. Should you have any questions on our Final Report, please don’t hesitate to reach out directly.
Sincerely,
Alex Soulard | Sr. Consultant Garth Schultz | Principal R3 Consulting Group, Inc. R3 Consulting Group, Inc.
707.888.8693 | [email protected] 510.292.0853 | [email protected] n ~ CONSULTING GROUP, INC.
l<,____....I RESOURCES· RESPECT · RESPONSIBILITY
))
))
))
))
TABLE OF CONTENTS
City of Santa Clara | CUC Opinion and Alternatives Survey – Final Report TOC
1. Executive Summary
page 1
2. Background
page 2
3. Alternative Program Options
page 4
4. Comparative Program Analysis
page 11
5. Statistically Valid Survey
page 14
6. Conclusions
page 17
Attachments
1. Summary of Survey Results
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
City of Santa Clara | CUC Opinion and Alternatives Survey – Final Report 1 of 17 R3 was retained by the City to conduct community engagement and surveying regarding the Cleanup Campaign (CUC) program and to review other program types based on how other jurisdictions provide bulky item collection services to their residential customers. This report details how neighboring Bay Area municipal programs work, as well as examples from throughout California, and how those communities supplement each program to best serve their communities.
Other Program Types
Bulky waste collection programs used throughout the Bay Area and the State of California have been profiled as examples of program types that could be considered in the City of Santa Clara. Other types of programs that are used by other municipalities can generally be broken down into on-call pick-up programs where items are picked up in front of residents’ homes, and drop-off programs where residents bring items for free disposal.
Such collection programs are typically tailored to the specific needs of each community and primarily fall into three categories:
On-call Collection Programs
Drop-off Voucher Programs
Debris Box Drop-off Events
These different program types all have the potential to improve aspects of the CUC program, but also provide their own challenges, costs and limitations.
On-call Collection Programs are by far the most-used model throughout California, as they are convenient for residents to use if needed. However, with such programs, residents need adequate space to set out their items for collection by their hauler. Additionally, such programs may not be feasible for implementation in areas that are not currently served by the CUC program; for example, in larger, denser homeowner associations (HOA’s). HOA’s and other high-density dwelling areas often have private streets that are not adequate to provide access to large collection vehicles necessary for such programs and may require the permission of the HOA to enter. HOA’s also may have aesthetic concerns about potential damage to landscape or hardscape by large collection vehicles, have limited parking/common areas for material set out, and concern that one set out will turn into a dumping ground for everyone.
Drop-off Voucher Programs and Debris Box Drop-off Events require residents to transport and load and unload bulky items. Not all residents have transportation or the physical ability to participate in these types of programs. Drop-off Events are typically not available year-round and require transportation unless locations are very close to high density areas. Space to host events is often unavailable in highdensity areas, where a service like this could have the most value.
Community Engagement and Statistically Valid Survey
Presentations regarding other program types were offered at three community meeting hosted on April 20, 2022 (at 3 p.m. and 6 p.m.) and April 25, 2022 (at 6 p.m.). An average of 20-25 participants attended each meeting for a total attendance of approximately 65 residents. Feedback from the community meetings was incorporated into a statistically valid survey was conducted by SCI Consulting Group. 23,561 households were sent surveys with a response rate of 21.9% (5,169 completed surveys).
Responses indicated a very high level of participation and satisfaction with the CUC program.
Survey results indicated that 86% of respondents were satisfied with the CUC format. A similar majority of respondents (87%) participate in the CUC program annually. Survey results revealed an overwhelming community support for the CUC program. Changes to the program design were viewed as concerning to long-term residents who have come to expect the CUC every spring. The survey also indicated community concern that additional programs may take away funding or resources from the CUC format. ))
))
))
2. BACKGROUND
City of Santa Clara | CUC Opinion and Alternatives Survey – Final Report 2 of 17 Current CUC Format
The City of Santa Clara has held the CUC since 1961, assisting almost 33,000 households annually with disposal of unwanted materials. The City, in partnership with R3 and SCI, conducted a survey following the 2022 CUC to look at other program types that could improve accessibility, encourage diversion of reusable, recyclable and compostable items, discourage illegal dumping and promote the proper disposal of household hazardous wastes.
Under the CUC format, the City is divided into four collection areas, each being serviced during a oneweek period. Residents can place an unlimited amount of debris on the street in front of their home for collection. The City and its contractors remove the debris and sweep the street during the collection week. Over 90% of the material collected is transported to Newby Island Landfill for disposal. The total volume of material collected typically averages between 5,000 – 6,000 tons. The primary mission of the current program format is to remove debris from the street as safely and swiftly as possible and does not emphasize landfill diversion.
Week1 Week2 Week3 ■ ■
Questions?
Visit SantaClaraCA.goy/CleanUp
Call 408-615-3080
Week4
Ema ii Envlronment(alSantaClaraCA.gov
Week 1 - Set out materials no earlier
than Saturday, April 30 and no later
than 7 a.m., Monday, May 2.
Note: Includes both sides of Monroe.
Week 2 - Set out materials no
earlier than Saturday, May 7 and no
later than 7 a.m., Monday, May 9.
Note: Includes both sides of
Homestead between San Tomas and
Lawrence.
Week 3 - Set out materials no earlier
than Saturday, May 14 and no later
than 7 a.m., Monday, May 16.
Note: Includes both sides of Newhall
between Saratoga and Winchester,
both sides of Saratoga between
Scott and Pruneridge, and north side
of Pruneridge between Saratoga and
Lawrence.
Week 4 - Set out materials no
earlier than Saturday, May 21 and no
later than 7 a.m., Monday, May 23.
Note: Includes the south side of
Pruneridge between Saratoga
and Lawrence and both sides of
Pruneridge west of Lawrence and
east of Saratoga.
Background
City of Santa Clara | CUC Opinion and Alternatives Survey – Final Report 3 of 17 The CUC format generates significant amounts of illegally set out hazardous waste, loose construction and demolition debris on the street, and lightweight trash that unfortunately can be conveyed into catch basin inlets via run-off or wind. The City has undertaken many efforts to prevent contamination from entering the stormwater system. The CUC is now operated only during the dry season, construction and demolition debris is required to be placed in bulk bags, and streets are swept after the event to pick up as much waste as possible. Even with these countermeasures, improper setouts remain an area of concern for the City.
Not all households are eligible for this program due to insufficient frontage or narrow streets. Residents that do not have access to this program for these reasons, are not assessed the Cleanup Campaign charge on their monthly utility bill. However, these households still have materials to dispose of. This can lead to materials being placed out for collection illegally during the CUC. There is a need to offer bulky item collection service to customers that don’t have access to the CUC, especially when residents are moving in or out of those locations. In addition, non-residents take advantage of this program by illegally dumping materials throughout the City during the campaign.
Communities Providing Similar Service
City of Campbell
The City of Campbell hosts an Annual CleanUp Program. A maximum of 70 pounds of material is collected and may be placed out in either a 32-gallon bags or 8 cubic foot boxes. All tree trimmings must be bundled. No loose items, Construction and Demolition Materials, E-Waste, Universal or Hazardous Waste, or refrigerators are accepted.
Central Contra Costa Solid Waste Management Authority (RecycleSmart) Two community garbage clean-ups per year. Customers are notified two weeks prior to event. Cleanup days are preceded by reuse days where donatable items are picked up by the garbage hauler.
Residents can dispose of up to 14, 32-gallon bags or the equivalent in items, with no single item or bag weighing over 50 lbs. each, or longer than 4 feet. No hazardous materials, tires, large furniture, refrigerators, or yard waste will be accepted. These residents also have one On-call Collection Program per year.
City of Citrus Heights
The City’s hauler coordinates three set-out days per year and notifies residents with a door hanger one week prior to each pick-up day. Residents may place out up to 10 cubic yards of material per pick up.
No boat or automotive parts, construction and demolition materials, or hazardous wastes are accepted.
City of Inglewood
“Operation Clean Sweep” is a twice per year program, which allows single and multi-family residents to set out up to 15 bags or 10 bundles of unwanted bulky items including furniture appliances, bags of trash, or bundled yard waste (not exceeding 4ft in length). Bags and bundles should not exceed 60 lbs. This program is supplemented with On-call Collection Program.
3. ALTERNATIVE PROGRAM OPTIONS
City of Santa Clara | CUC Opinion and Alternatives Survey – Final Report 4 of 17 R3 has prepared a summary of other program types, including On-call Collection Programs, Drop-off Voucher Programs and Neighborhood Debris Box Drop-off Events. The analysis includes cost data, service level options in terms of frequency and what material types could be accepted. Each program’s potential advantages and disadvantages are stated along with public outreach needs.
Option 1: On-Call Collection Program
On-call pick-up programs are by far the most commonly available bulky item collection programs throughout California. Most on-call programs are available to single-family residential accounts that are subscribed to service. Additionally, high-density dwelling complexes may participate if they have adequate space to place items.
Each single-family account typically has access to at least two scheduled pick-ups annually and in some cities, this can be as high as six annual pick-ups. Mission Trail Waste Systems (MTWS) would be the provider of this service in Santa Clara, should the City choose to go this route. The City currently offers a version of this service through MTWS at a current rate of $148.51 per pick-up for all residences regardless of whether or not they participate in the CUC. Residents requesting this service are billed directly through MTWS. If this program were offered as a service to all residents and costs were incorporated into the garbage collection rate pricing would be lower than what is currently offered.
With this program MTWS would drop off two 2-cubic yard heavy-duty bags to customers, on request, and then return with a flatbed truck using a crane to lift those filled bags and up to 3 loose bulky items onto the vehicle. Those 3 bulky items can also be electronic waste or appliances. There is an additional charge if the appliance is a refrigerator or contains Freon.
The heavy-duty bags allow residents to throw out items of various sizes and have them contained so they do not end up in the storm drain. Participation in these programs can be anywhere from 30-80% of customers using this service annually. MTWS has provided bulky item collection services to 145 customers over the initial two years of the program.
Advantages and Disadvantages
Residents must be aware of on-call pick-up programs to use them, so the success of these programs is directly tied to how well they are promoted. The outreach should be developed in multiple languages and should be promoted several times per year. Unlike the CUC, which is visible in the community and its own advertisement, on-call programs are frequently underused by customers. Robust outreach can propel a program like this into a higher threshold of participation.
Alternative Program Options
City of Santa Clara | CUC Opinion and Alternatives Survey – Final Report 5 of 17 When the community is aware of these programs participation rates can exceed 75%. Residents need to make an appointment to use the service. It is important that the hauler has bandwidth to make these pick-ups at the next scheduled pick-up day or within a week of the request.
Residents may be less inclined to use this service if the scheduled pick-up date is too far in the future.
The popularity of these programs can be influenced by social media and its use has greatly increased participation in some areas. If the system is overloaded and residents must wait multiple weeks for a pick-up, it is good to have an alternative drop-off program that a resident can use immediately.
The ability of these programs, however, to serve high-density dwelling unit residences is limited. Highdensity dwelling areas that have HOA’s with private streets require the permission of the HOA to enter.
These HOA’s have narrow streets, may have concerns about potential damage to landscape or hardscape by large collection vehicles, limited parking/common areas for material set out, and fear that one set out will become a dumping ground for everyone. MTWS has proactively reached out to 106 HOA’s, but only 5 have authorized onsite bulky item collection.
Potential Opportunities
Most communities using an on-call pick-up program also use their outreach to direct residents to reuse and outside recycling opportunities that already exist in the community. Pointing those residents to a reuse opportunity can extend the useful life of collected items and is the highest and best use of the material. The City of Santa Clara already currently does this for its CUC outreach and should continue to promote reuse before any other bulky waste disposal program.
As described in the section above, MTWS currently offers an on-call bulky item collection program which could be promoted with additional educational materials so that residents are fully aware that this is an option to them.
Cost Estimates
MTWS currently offers on-call bulky item collection to residents at a fee of $148.51 per pick-up. If implemented to the whole CUC service area at a participation rate of 80% to 90% (consistent with current CUC participation rates) this service will cost from $10.00 to $11.20 per ratepayer per month. At a lower participation rate of 40% to 45%, the service would cost $5.00 to $5.60 per ratepayer month.
The estimated costs for providing this service only to the 14,000 residences not in the current CUC area are the same as shown above, yielding total estimated annual costs of $1.66 million to $1.87 million assuming 80% to 90% participation (consistent with CUC participation rates) and $830,000 to $935,000 assuming lower 40% to 45% participation.
Communities Providing On-Call Collection Programs
On-Call Collection Programs are the most common bulky item collection programs used by municipalities in the state and are considered a best practice in the industry. This list of local municipalities is only a small representation of the total number of jurisdictions that use On-Call Collection Programs.
Cities of Mountain View, Palo Alto and Sunnyvale
On-Call Bulky Waste Pick-Ups are currently available to these Cities’ residents twice annually. This is supplemented by extra dumping weekend events, held in both spring and fall at the local Recycling Center (SMaRT Station). The costs for these services are bundled into residents’ solid waste rates.
South Bayside Waste Management Agency
Residents have access to two On-call Bulky Item Pick-Ups per year. High-density dwelling unit residences must coordinate through their property manager to get access to this service. Additionally, SBWMA hosts local paper shredding and e-waste events throughout the year. The costs for these services are bundled into residents’ solid waste rates.
Alternative Program Options
City of Santa Clara | CUC Opinion and Alternatives Survey – Final Report 6 of 17 Central Contra Costa Solid Waste Management Authority (RecycleSmart) Residents have access to one On-call Scheduled Bulky Item Pick-Up. This is supplemented by two communitywide Garbage Clean-Up events per year. The costs for these services are bundled into residents’ solid waste rates.
City of Milpitas
Single family residents in the City of Milpitas have four annual no fee On-Call Bulky Item Pick-Ups (with the costs for these services being bundled into residents’ solid waste rates). High-density dwelling unit complexes can schedule a pick-up for a fee of $163.51, with additional fees for major appliances and bulky items. No single items above 75-pounds are accepted. These pick-ups are supplemented with neighborhood clean-up events.
City of San Jose
The City of San Jose has unlimited on-call junk pick-ups available to their residents funded by solid waste rates. This was a recent change in service away from San Jose’s prior Neighborhood Clean-up Events.
This program is provided by the City’s Environmental Services Department through Integrated Waste Management Residential Garbage Contracts with GreenTeam and California Waste Solutions.
Franchised haulers are paid per pickup of up to 3 large items from single and multifamily residents.
Compensation for these services is almost $10 million annually. The cost per pickup compensation is detailed in Franchise Agreements with the City’s haulers. For some parts of the City, there are supplementary services including loose yard trimmings pick-up funded through solid waste rates.
City of Los Altos
City of Los Altos residents have access to two annual On-Call Bulky Item Pick-Ups. The costs for these services are bundled into residents’ solid waste rates.
City of Oakland
Oakland residents have access to an On-Call Collection Program. This is supplemented by a no fee bulky waste drop-off at the Davis Street Resource Recovery Complex in San Leandro. The costs for these services are bundled into residents’ solid waste rates.
City of San Francisco
Tenants in five or less unit buildings are entitled to two annual, no fee pick-ups per year; tenants in highdensity dwelling unit (six units or more) are entitled to one, no fee pick-up per year; property managers/owners are entitled to one, no fee pick-up per year; and residential customers (buildings with five units or less) receive two curbside Bulky Item Recycling collections, per year, at no additional charge.
This is supplemented by their “Gigantic 3 Collection” events. The costs for these services are bundled into residents’ solid waste rates.
City of Fairfield
Fairfield residents have access to two On-Call Bulky Item Pick-ups annually. This is supplemented with a landfill voucher program for residents to drop off one load per year at the landfill. The costs for these services are bundled into residents’ solid waste rates.
City of Vallejo
Currently, the City of Vallejo has two on-call scheduled pick-ups for residents annually. They are also considering expanding this to four annual collections and supplementing this with a drop-off voucher for disposal at a local facility. The costs for these services are bundled into residents’ solid waste rates.
City of San Rafael
Single family residents in the City of San Rafael have two free annual On-Call Bulky Item Pick-Ups. A pilot program exploring free pickups at Multi-family dwellings (pre-scheduled pickup times) was also instituted in 2022. This is supplemented with a debris box drop-off event held monthly in the City. The costs for these services are bundled into residents’ solid waste rates.
Alternative Program Options
City of Santa Clara | CUC Opinion and Alternatives Survey – Final Report 7 of 17 Option 2: Drop-Off Voucher Program
On-call drop-off programs are a local and convenient option where a resident can take material to a local waste facility and drop off a set amount of material for no fee. Residency is usually verified at the facility, or the program can also be provided through a voucher system – which allows the resident verified access to a no fee drop-off. Some communities have an on-call pick-up service and will allow one of those on-call pick-ups to be swapped to a drop-off voucher. A voucher program for Santa Clara would use the conveniently located Mission Trails Transfer Station (MTTS), where the City of Santa Clara currently holds its Free Rubbish Disposal Days.
The City currently offers two (2) free disposal days at the MTTS each year through the agreement with MTWS. The MTTS is permitted to accept no more than 250 appointments per day so additional drop-off days usually need to be added to accommodate demand. On average, 206 residents attend each free disposal day.
Advantages and Disadvantages
On-call drop-off programs are available to residents when they have a need to get rid of bulky waste. This is also the only alternative assessed that will be available to all residents with space constraints or a lack of street frontage necessary for the current CUC.
Drop-off vouchers do not require any HOA common area or street frontage use and are a convenient solution for those who cannot have pick up service at their residence. A drop-off voucher can also be an alternative solution for a resident who cannot wait for a pick-up to be scheduled or an annual campaign to occur.
Residents need access to a vehicle to haul these wastes and access drop-off sites. Depending on how far the drop-off sites are from a resident may be discouraged participation. Drop-off programs typically have a 5-15% participation rate if properly promoted. A drop-off program could be used in combination with the current CUC setup or an on-call pick-up program. Drop-off should not be the only option provided, as it will exclude those with no means of transporting large/bulky items.
Potential Opportunities
On-call drop-off programs have the potential to enhance other special collection programs offered by the City and highlight regional waste diversion and disposal options being provided through outreach at the event. The City could expand on the current free drop off days and promotion of those events or could institute a voucher program that would provide more flexibility for residents to drop off the material during regular facility hours. The City could also consider allowing small businesses to use these services.
Cost Estimates
Implementation of a drop-off voucher is a reasonable alternative analyzed for bulky item disposal. At a participation rate of 80%, the cost is around $3.00 per PRQWK per ratepayer. That cost increases to Mission Trail
Transfer Station
1313 MEMOREX DR. OPEN TO THE PUBl C
Hours
6 OC A1,tT0' FM
MON THRU FRI 5:0C Ml TO• FtJ
SATURDAY : s·
suNDAY 721-5365
(408)
Alternative Program Options
City of Santa Clara | CUC Opinion and Alternatives Survey – Final Report 8 of 17
per PRQWK, if used at a 90% participation rate. These costs are proportional to the use of the program, so at an estimated participation of 40-45% the costs will range from $1.50-$2. PRQWKO\ The City could alternatively expand on free drop off days at the MTTS with even less additional cost to the ratepayers. Although this option was not negotiated with MTWS they previously provided an estimate of $45-$65 per load to provide this service.
In the current Agreement the City has up to 900 of these appointments included annually:
Two Sundays each calendar year, up to 225 appointments each, AND Up to 225 additional appointments scheduled after each event on successive Saturdays.
Altogether, this comes to 900 appointments included in the Agreement today.
An annual “price tag” on the allotment for this service, it would come to $58,500 per year.
Currently less than half of these are being used, at an average of 412 appointments per year. Enhanced outreach and public education to encourage more customers to schedule appointments for the existing free drop off days could lead to a doubling of the service provided to residents without a change in the service cost to the City.
Adding more Sunday events and serving an additional 225 residents per event, would result in an additional cost of approximately ~$15,000 per event. Dividing that cost over the total rate base of 47,000 residential units (CUC and non-CUC combined) is an additional monthly residential ratepayer cost of ~$0.03 (rounded up to nearest cent). If the roughly 2,000 businesses subscribed to bulk garbage service were included, the cost would be divided over 49,000 accounts, still yielding a rounded-up figure of $0.03 per month per ratepayer for each Sunday event that would be added.
If the City were to add 10 more events (making these events monthly instead of just 2x annually) the additional cost would be ~$150,000 per year, for a monthly ratepayer cost of about $0.27 per month (rounded up to nearest cent). If the City were to consider this option, it would need to explore MTWS’s actual ability to provide this service and discuss costing – figures included here are estimates only.
Communities Providing Drop-Off Voucher Programs
Cities of Mountain View, Palo Alto and Sunnyvale
Extra dumping weekend events are held in these cities, in both spring and fall, at the local Recycling Center (SMaRT Station®) to dispose of garbage, concrete, demolition materials, tires and other nonhazardous materials at no additional charge. This is supplemented by On-call Bulky Waste Pick-Ups available to residents twice per year.
City of Oakland
Residents of Oakland have a no fee bulky waste drop-off at the Davis Street Resource Recovery Complex in San Leandro. This is supplemented by an On-Call Bulky Item Pick-Up program.
City of Fairfield
The City of Fairfield provides a landfill voucher program for residents to drop off one load per year at the landfill. This is provided in combination with an On-Call Pick-Up program.
City of Vallejo
The City of Vallejo is examining instituting a landfill voucher program this year. The program will be supplemented by On-Call Bulky Item Pick-Ups.
))
))
))
))
Alternative Program Options
City of Santa Clara | CUC Opinion and Alternatives Survey – Final Report 9 of 17 Option 3: Neighborhood Debris Box Drop-Off Events
Neighborhood debris box drop-off programs were analyzed with a frequency of once per neighborhood every year, three years and five years. Neighborhood Debris Box Events have a high cost, a small geographic service area, and do not provide a regularly reoccurring solution for bulky item disposal unless funded at very high levels. Events need to be staffed to prevent illegal dumping and improper disposal. Each neighborhood would likely only receive an event every several years due to cost and planning efforts. Residents would likely need transportation to access these events and would have to empty their own vehicles. Space to host events is often unavailable in high-density areas, where a service like this could have the most value.
Santa Clara has limited space for these types of events in high-density areas where they would otherwise have the greatest impact to residents that do not have other bulky item disposal option. If not conveniently located, residents would require transportation to use these programs. These programs also have a high cost of implementation and rarely are available to the same residents on an annual basis.
Advantages and Disadvantages
Neighborhood debris box drop-off events need to be made available in proximity to high-density dwelling unit housing and other areas that have issues with illegal dumping. If implemented in multiple different areas throughout the City at various times of the year, these events can be accessible options for residents who live close to an event location. Otherwise, residents will need transportation to access these sites.
These programs require staff to be present to help residents unload their vehicles, and place items in debris boxes, and prevent any contamination from entering the debris boxes.
These programs can also be expanded to be visible, highly promoted events that can combine a selection of services and can promote the Cities other recycling, composting and disposal programs. Drop-off sites are only available in a neighborhood if there is an event hosted nearby that year. Due to the high-density and lack of space in some areas of the City, these sites may be hard to strategically locate for residents who need a local drop-off option. Additionally, if the debris box drop-off events do not rotate through neighborhoods that need them, residents may only have access to the service locally once every few years.
Potential Opportunities
Neighborhood debris box drop-off events can be used as events to promote multiple diversion, recycling, composting and Household Hazardous Waste programs. In many areas paper shredding, electronic wastes, or other Universal Wastes are accepted for drop-off at the same time. These events are valuable to residents Alternative Program Options
City of Santa Clara | CUC Opinion and Alternatives Survey – Final Report 10 of 17 disposing of various items from their home. Events in the spring can be promoted as spring cleaning events and the proximity to tax time makes recycling and shredding old financial documents very appealing to the community. This is like the City of Santa Clara’s Environmental Day provided by Recology, which could be combined or expanded to help address bulky waste issues as well but would require an amendment to the agreement with Recology.
Cost Estimates
Drop-off events are costly but can be scaled to help address the community need. Implementing a dropoff event program for bulky items could cost between $2. and $1 per ratepayer monthly. On the
lower end of the spectrum this program would host a neighborhood drop off event in every neighborhood once every 5 years and would cost $
,000 annually and if every neighborhood had an
event hosted annually the cost could be as high as be $ . These cost estimates are based on
actual costs of Milpitas’ neighborhood cleanup eventsDQGYDU\EDVHGRQSDUWLFLSDWLRQUDWHV Communities Providing Neighborhood Debris Box Drop-Off Programs City of Milpitas
Neighborhood Clean-Up events are starting this year and residents subscribe to an email list to see when they will be available.
City of San Jose
The City of San Jose has moved away from their Neighborhood Cleanup Program to Council District Beautification days. Each Council District receives an $18,000 annual beautification budget and can choose to allocate the funds for cleanup days, litter pick-ups, graffiti removal, public plantings, etc. This resulted in 73 events in FY 20/21. The City supplemented this service with unlimited scheduled Junk Pick-Ups at residences (referenced elsewhere in this Report) which are funded via solid waste rates.
City of San Francisco
“Gigantic 3 Clean-Up” events are hosted once monthly in different districts of the City of San Francisco.
They accept bulky items, yard trimmings, recyclables, electronics and universal wastes.
City of San Rafael
The City of San Rafael hosts Neighborhood Clean-Up events at various areas near sites where illegal dumping normally occurs. This service is only available to high-density dwelling unit customers. San Rafael has expanded this program to twelve events per year (consistent location and time) and is looking at ways to augment it to further reduce dumping.
City of Los Angeles
Five locations around the City of Los Angeles are used to host drop-off days 10 times per year for bulky items only. These events are held simultaneously at each of the five locations each occurrence.
City of Berkeley
Although currently on hold, the City of Berkeley has a community dumpster program in which a neighborhood can come together to request a bin for their local area.
City of San Diego
The Environmental Services Department hosts 50+ events per year by partnering with community groups resulting in 25 tons of disposal and 9 tons of recycling.
Event Frequency Low High
Every 5 Year Drop off Event $ 2. $
Tri-Annual NH Drop-off Event 4.10 $ $
Annual NH Drop-off Event 12.30 $ $
Monthly Per Ratepayer
4. COMPARATIVE PROGRAM ANALYSIS
City of Santa Clara | CUC Opinion and Alternatives Survey – Final Report 11 of 17 Alternative programs are presented side by side in this section of the report to demonstrate how other communities address bulky item collection and how those programs compare to one another.
Figure 1 summarizes the bulky item programs used by in other neighboring jurisdictions. Figure 2, on the following page, outlines the benefits and characteristics of each bulky item program, including the current CUC format. Figure 3, on page 13, demonstrates the characteristics of each alternative program.
Figure 1: Programs Used by Neighboring Jurisdictions
On-Call Collection Program
x Mountain View
x Palo Alto
x Sunnyvale
x Milpitas
x San Jose
x Los Altos
x Oakland
x San Francisco
x Fairfield
x Vallejo
x San Rafael (residential and pilot for multi-family)
x South Bayside Waste Management
Agency
x Central Contra Costa Solid Waste
Management Authority (RecycleSmart)
Drop-Off Voucher Program
x Mountain View
x Palo Alto
x Sunnyvale
x Oakland
x Fairfield
x Vallejo
Debris Box Drop-Off Events
x Milpitas
x San Jose
x San Francisco
x San Rafael
x Los Angeles
x Berkeley
x San Diego
Hybrid Program Design
x Sunnyvale
x Mountain View
x Palo Alto
x Milpitas
x San Jose
x San Rafael
x San Francisco
x Los Angeles
Comparative Program Analysis
City of Santa Clara | CUC Opinion and Alternatives Survey – Final Report 12 of 17 Figure 2: Matrix of Alternatives and CUC Characteristics Benefits/Characteristics
On-call
Collection
Program
Drop-off
Voucher
Debris Box
Event
Program
CUC
Program
Available Year Round XXX
Increases Recovery of
Materials X
Drop-Off / Pick-Up Service Pick-up Drop-off Drop-off Pick-up Available to CUC Customers X X X X
Available to High-density
Dwelling Residents XX
Discourages Illegal Dumping X X
Prevents Litter XXXX
Commonly Used by Other
Jurisdictions X X
Addresses Stormwater
Concerns XXXX
Collects Appliances X X X
Comparative Program Analysis
City of Santa Clara | CUC Opinion and Alternatives Survey – Final Report 13 of 17 Figure 3: Characteristics of Proposed Alternative Programs On-call Collection Program
Accessibility
Can be made available to most city residents.
Benefits
Collection happens throughout the year, regulating flow of material and increasing diversion potential.
Promotion
Requires education to foster participation.
Opportunities
Usually made available twice per year per household and could be increased depending on participation.
Limitations
Requires set out space for items.
High-density Dwelling Needs
High-density Dwelling Customers may participate but would need HOA and/or property manager approval and sufficient space for collection. This type of program is not feasible for most high-density dwelling properties.
Drop-off Voucher Program
Accessibility
Can be made at time convenient for residents.
Benefits
No coordination of collection needed Residents deliver materials themselves.
Promotion
Requires education to foster participation.
Opportunities
Outreach can be sent out to residents along with voucher to promote other City Programs.
Limitations
Requires transportation, loading and unloading of vehicles.
Lower participation rate than other programs.
High-density Dwelling Needs
High-density dwelling customers can participate.
Debris Box Drop-off Events
Accessibility
Hosting events throughout City allows localized access to events.
Benefits
Impacts of program are contained to drop-off sites.
Promotion
Requires considerable outreach for the events.
Opportunities
Outreach can be provided to promote other City Programs.
Limitations
Not available year-round, residents must unload vehicles.
High-Density Dwelling Needs
High-density dwelling customers can participate locally.
5. STATISTICALLY VALID SURVEY
City of Santa Clara | CUC Opinion and Alternatives Survey – Final Report 14 of 17 Community Engagement
Three Community Meetings were hosted on April 20, 2022 (at 3 p.m. and 6 p.m.) and April 25, 2022 (at 6 p.m.) to give presentations outlining the various bulky item collection program types described above.
Approximately 65 residents attended the three events. Residents were provided the opportunity to ask questions and provide feedback on the other bulky item collection program types. The majority of residents at each meeting were supportive of the current CUC format and voiced concerns about the City moving away from it.
Survey Design
R3’s subconsultant, SCI developed a statistically valid survey designed to gather information to help the City understand residential preferences and needs to collect hard-to-dispose-of items.
Survey Participation
With assistance from City staff, SCI designed and mailed surveys to households within the City of Santa Clara on September 9, 2022. The project initially planned to mail 13,000 surveys with an expectation of receiving approximately 1,500 completed surveys, which would provide a margin of error of 2.5%.
However, it was later decided to mail surveys to all 23,561 accounts which encompassed all households in the City that are either currently eligible for Program participation or could become eligible in the future. This was done to raise awareness of the CUC program and generate interest in possible Program improvements.
A total of 5,169 surveys were received from the property owners, representing a response rate of
21.9%. Approximately 25% of the surveys were completed online. The statistical margin of error for the results presented in this report is about 1.21%. This margin of error means that there is a 95% certainty that the actual levels of support are ± 1.21% from the results presented in this report.
Survey Structure and Content
The survey recipients received a two-page survey which included 16 questions, and a postage-paid return envelope. Survey recipients were also given the option to respond to the survey online.
Residents were given five weeks to respond to the survey.
The survey provided a general statement about the CUC program. The questions were based on the familiarity of the CUC Program, the usage of the Program, costs and impacts to rates, the amount of time participating in the Program, and the number of items set out for collection.
The survey also tested the community’s preference for four alternate scenarios for collection/disposal options, as well as questions regarding on-call pick up program options. Questions regarding yard trimmings, salvaged materials, recycled materials, Citywide Garage Sales, Recology’s Environmental Days, Santa Clara County Household Hazardous Waste Program and the level of satisfactions with the CUC Program were also included on the survey.
The survey also provided space for write-in comments and a total of 1,905 comments were received.
Survey Results Overview
The following is an overview of survey results. More detailed survey results can be viewed in Attachment 1 (CUC Program).
Statistically Valid Survey
City of Santa Clara | CUC Opinion and Alternatives Survey – Final Report 15 of 17 Familiarity
When asked whether the respondent was familiar with the CUC Program, 94% said “Yes.” This is not surprising since people unfamiliar with the Program would be less likely to participate in the survey.
However, this response helps define the universe of households to which the remaining results apply.
Utilization
The extent to which respondents use the program are as follows:
90% - Small items
78% - Bulky Items
60% - Yard trimmings
34% - Construction and demolition waste
Frequency
Most respondents (87%) participate in the CUC Program annually. Approximately 9% participate less often, and approximately 4% have never participated.
Other Regional Program Participation
Participation in related regional programs was also measured with the following results:
12% - Twice-a-year Citywide Garage Sales
19% - Recology’s Environmental Days
60% - Santa Clara County Household Hazardous Waste Program Overall Satisfaction
Overall satisfaction with the CUC Program was 86%.
Other Program Types
Respondents were asked to rank four other collection methods. For bulky, household and/or home improvement waste, the ranking was (from most to least desirable):
1. Participate in a City-organized pre-scheduled collection at my property
2. Schedule an on-call collection at my property throughout the year when needed
3. Schedule an appointment for drop-off at City-designated location when needed
4. Participate in a pre-scheduled drop-off event at City-designated location For extra yard trimmings, the ranking was the same as shown above.
Non-CUC Area Responses
The survey was also mailed to households that are not currently participating in the program that include higher density and multifamily housing areas of Santa Clara including a subset of the Rivermark1 neighborhood. Notable results from that subset of respondents include the following:
1 The Rivermark neighborhood is comprised of 1,099 households, of which 133 responded to the survey. This represents a 12% response rate, which is about half that of the rest of the survey. However, this is understandable since that neighborhood is not currently served by the Program. The margin of error for this subset is much higher at 8.0%.
))
))
))
))
))
))
))
Statistically Valid Survey
City of Santa Clara | CUC Opinion and Alternatives Survey – Final Report 16 of 17 CUC Program Familiarity
When asked whether the respondent was familiar with the Program, 58% said “Yes.” Although this is significantly lower than the rest of the respondents, it is somewhat higher than might be expected for a neighborhood that does not currently participate in the Program.
Desired Program Options
Respondents were asked to rank four other collection methods. The results differed from the main survey with the first two options reversed as shown below.
For bulky, household and/or home improvement waste, the ranking was (from most to least desirable):
1. Schedule an on-call collection at my property throughout the year when needed
2. Participate in a City-organized pre-scheduled collection at my property
3. Schedule an appointment for drop-off at City-designated location when needed
4. Participate in a pre-scheduled drop-off event at City-designated location For extra yard trimmings, the ranking was the same:
1. Schedule an on-call collection at my property throughout the year when needed
2. Participate in a City-organized pre-scheduled collection at my property
3. Schedule an appointment for drop-off at City-designated location when needed
4. Participate in a pre-scheduled drop-off event at City-designated location Other survey questions were not significant for households not currently served by the Program.
Write-In Comments
The option to write additional comments on the survey was popular. A total of 1,905 comments were received – much higher than normally seen on this type of survey. Of those, 1,592 were general comments on the overall survey (another 313 were targeted at specific questions). It is worth noting that these comments are purely anecdotal, and no numerical significance should be placed on the comments. However, a few common themes emerged and are noteworthy.
Of the 1,592 general comments:
The most common write-in comment expressed the desire to keep the program in place (33%).
Conversely, 1% recommended cancelling the Program.
The second and third most common write-in comments came under the recommendations category, a preference for on-call services (37%) and having the Program expanded to twice a year (19%).
Concerns about illegal dumping and scavenging made up 6% and 4%, respectively.
Scavenging was also mentioned another 37 times in reference to Question #11. Of those, only 7 were against scavenging.
Question #11 asked about scavenging, and 82% stated they did not mind that scavenging occurred.
Write-in comment notes: taking the time to write additional comments is typically motivated by negativity about the subject matter. In this case, general positive comments outnumbered the general negative comments by a ratio of three to one (6% to 2%).
))
))
))
))
))
))
6. CONCLUSIONS
City of Santa Clara | CUC Opinion and Alternatives Survey – Final Report 17 of 17 Strong Support for CUC
The majority of feedback was in support of the CUC program in its existing format. It would be very challenging to move away from the CUC format given its high participation rate and popularity with the community.
Viable Additional Services to Consider
Feedback on other program types demonstrated some support for augmenting current service for bulky item collection. Adding any additional collection methods would provide additional hybrid design elements that serve those that currently do not or are unable to participate in the CUC. This could include increased outreach or expansion of existing City programs or roll out of new services.
Enhanced Services and Promotion of Existing Programs
MTWS On-Call Collection (Pay to Use)
MTWS On-Call Collection existing Pay to Use Service currently is available to Santa Clara residents for a current cost of $148.51 per pickup. Enhancing promotion of this option may result in more residents using the service on their own without creating an alternate funding mechanism for additional services.
Additional MTTS Free Disposal Days
The City could also potentially add more free disposal days at the Mission Trails Transfer Station (MTTS). Enhanced promotion of the program, highlighting the additional opportunities could increase use of this program. This would require direction from the City Council and negotiation of an amendment to the current franchise agreement which would add some cost.
Environmental Day and Citywide Garage Sale
The existing Environmental Day and Citywide Garage Sale events provide the community additional options to recycle or reuse unwanted items. The Department of Public Works promotes the availability of these events though print, website and social media. DPW will look for opportunities to increase promotion of these events to increase awareness.
Potential New Services
Free On-Call Collection or Drop-Off Vouchers for either the non-CUC area or the entire residential service area are good on demand options that exist in many other communities and could provide augmented Bulky Item solutions for residents year-round. These options come with considerable cost increases that would need to be considered by the City Council.
City of Santa Clara
Special Collection Programs
Survey Results
PRESENTED BY SCI CONSULTING
GROUP
November 9, 2022
$77$&+0(17
Survey Objective
Conduct a statistically valid mailed survey to determine the following:
¾ Awareness of the CUC Program¾ The usage and number of items set out for collection for the CUC Program for bulky items, other smaller items, yard trimmings and construction/demolition waste ¾ Method of payment for the Program fee¾ Preference of four potential collection/disposal options for bulky, household and/or home improvement waste and extra yard trimmings
¾ On-call bulky item options¾ Yard trimmings collection¾ Determination of salvaged materials by residents and surrounding cities¾ Determination of materials for reuse, recycled or donated through other providers¾ Level of participation in Citywide garage sales, Recology’s Environmental Days and Santa Clara County Household Hazardous Waste Program
¾ Level of satisfaction of current format of the CUC Program $77$&+0(17
SCIConsultingGroup
Public Finance Consulting Services
Survey Methodology
¾ Mailed 23,561 surveys to households within the City of Santa Clara • Recipients received a two-page survey and a postage-paid return envelope• Option to complete the survey online• 16 questions – written format• 30 questions – online format ¾ Survey in the field for five weeks¾ 5,169 of surveys returned, 21.93% return rate • 3,873 of surveys completed in written format• 1,296 of surveys completed online• More than 2,000 comments $77$&+0(17
SCIConsultingGroup
Public Finance Consulting Services
Survey Instrument – Page 1
CITY OF SANTA CLARA $77$&+0(17
Official Survey Regarding
Special Collection Programs
This survey has been mailed to hruseholds within the City of Santa aara to gather information. The information will help the City understand residential preferences and needs to get rid of hard to dispose of items. Please complete arid return this survey as soon as possible. You may take the survey online or mail the completed survey in the postage pre--paid relum envelope. Please respond by Friday, October 7. 2022.
Survey Instructions:
1. Read each question listed below.
2. Please use a pen to completely fill in the circles with your responses.
3. Mai your survey back in the postage pre-paid return envelope provided.
H you prefer to complete this survey online:
Visit www.inputlocal.com, enter SU RVEY NA.ME ssCSC PS• and SURVEY CODE OR scan the OR CODE
with your smartphone and follow the instructions. D
Under the current Cleanup Campaign Program ("CUC Program"), the City is divided into four calection areas, each being serviced during a one--week period. Residents are able to place an unlim~ed amount of debris (appliances, carpels, fum~re, mattresses. etc.) on the street for collection. The City arid its contractors remove the debris at sorre point during the collection week.
For each of the statements below, please fill in the circle for your response. Yes No I don't know
1. Are you aware the City of Santa Clara has a CUC Program? .. 0 0 0 My community does not receive CUC services. 0 If your community does not receive CUC services, please skip to #6.
2. Does your household regularly use any of the following CUC Program categories? Bulky Items ... 0 0 0
Other Smaller Items 0 0 0
Yard Trimmings .. 0 0 0
Construction/Demolition Waste .. 0 0 0
3. Does your household pay the CUC Program monthly fee with your utility bill? ___ 0 0 0 4. How often does your household participate in the CUC Program? Annually 0 Less than every 3 years 0 Every 2 to 3 years O Have never participated 0 5. How many items does your household set out for collection for each of these CUC Program categories? Please fill in the appropriate circles as your response.
Type of Items None 1-2 5+
Bulky
SCIConsultingGroup
Pub l ic Fi n a n ce Co n sulting Se r v i ces
Survey Instrument – Page 2
$77$&+0(17
City of Santa Clara Official Survey Regarding
Special Collection Prog rams
6. Please rank your preference for the following four potential scenarios for collection/disposal options. i Indicate with 1, 2, 3, or 4. 1 = most desirable, 4 = least desirable. Please use 1-4 one time in each column. bulky, household extra yard Collection/Disposal Options and/or home improvement waste trimmings
Participate in a City organized pre-scheduled collection at my property Participate in a pre-scheduled drop-off event at City designated location Schedule an on-call collection at my property throughout the year when needed Schedule an appoinlment for drop-off at City designated location when needed
7. ff an on-<:all bulky item (couch, mattress, washing machine, etc.) pick up program was offered, how likely are you to schedule an appointment?
Likely Q Unlikely Q
8. ff an on-call bulky item pick up had an option to set out up to 2 cubic yards of smaller items in contractor provided bulk bags, how likely are you to use the service to dispose of smaller items? LikelyQ Unlikely Q
9. Does your household generate large quantities of yard trimmings that do not fit in your green cart? Yes, in the spring 0 Yes, in the fall 0 Yes, in both the spring and fall O No 0
10. During the CUC Program, do you salvage materials that have been set out by other residents to be reused in your home?
Yes Q No Q
11. If your household participates in the CUC Program, do you mind d others salvage items that have been set out for collection?
Yes 0 No Q N/A - my community does not receive CUC services 0
12. Do you recycle materials through any other reuse, recycle or donation services throughout the year? (for example:
Goodwill, Salvation Anmy, thrift store)
Yes 0 No 0 I don't have reusable items to donate 0
13. Has your household participated in one of the twice yearly Citywide Garage Sales? Yes Q No Q Not familiar with this program 0
14. Has your household participated in Recology's Environmental Days? Yes 0 NoQ Not familiar with this program 0
15. Has your household participated in the Santa Clara County Household Hazardous Waste Program to dispose of items such as batteries, cleaners, oil, paints, pesticides, etc.? Yes 0 No Q Not familiar with this program 0
16. What is your level of satisfaction with the current format of the CUC Program? Satisfied 0 Unsatisfied 0 N/A - my community does not receive CUC services 0 Please add anv additional comments on the Citv's current soecial collection nrnnrams or alternatives.
I I
I I I I
~.SUWf l:i0eitVa:in:tt.aedDf art~Oll!dpa.'f/OODe!liAY~r/ECly.Afntlffna""»:loosnedi1r'cupJll'ICSp,cc~dDf!sJlilP'Jlil'll?~O'ly'1~.tvm.
SCIConsultingGroup
Pub l ic Fi n a n ce Co n sulting Se r v i ces
Question #1
Are you aware the City of Santa Clara has a CUC Program?
YES NO I DON'T KNOW
Series1 94.08% 4.54% 1.38%
0.00%
20.00%40.00%60.00%80.00%
100.00%
Awareness of CUC Program
My community does not receive CUC services = 6.76%
$77$&+0(17
+
SCIConsultingGroup
Public Finance Consulting Services
Question #2 Part 1 of 2
Does your household regularly use any of the following CUC Program categories?
YES NO I DON'T KNOW
Series1 78.08% 20.56% 1.37%
0.00%
20.00%40.00%60.00%80.00%
100.00%
Bulky Items
YES NO I DON'T KNOW
Series1 89.60% 9.43% 0.97%
0.00%
20.00%40.00%60.00%80.00%
100.00%
Other Smaller Items
$77$&+0(17
SCIConsultingGroup
Public Finance Consulting Services
Question #2 Part 2 of 2
Does your household regularly use any of the following CUC Program categories?
YES NO I DON'T KNOW
Series1 60.06% 38.63% 1.31%
0.00%
20.00%40.00%60.00%80.00%
100.00%
Yard Trimmings
YES NO I DON'T KNOW
Series1 34.32% 62.46% 3.22%
0.00%
20.00%40.00%60.00%80.00%
100.00%
Construction/Demolition Waste
$77$&+0(17
SCIConsultingGroup
Public Finance Consulting Services
Question #3
Does your household pay the CUC Program monthly fee with your utility bill?
YES NO I DON'T KNOW
Series1 82.37% 1.84% 15.79%
0.00%
20.00%40.00%60.00%80.00%
100.00%
Monthly Fee with Utility Bill
$77$&+0(17
SCIConsultingGroup
Public Finance Consulting Services
Question #4
How often does your household participate in the CUC Program? A = Annually B = Less than every 3 years C = Every 2 to 3 years D = Have never participated ABCD
Series1 87.41% 3.00% 5.49% 4.10%
0.00%
20.00%40.00%60.00%80.00%
100.00%
Level of Participation
$77$&+0(17
SCIConsultingGroup
Public Finance Consulting Services
Question #5 Part 1 of 2
How many items does your household set out for collection for each of these CUC Program categories? A = None B = 1-2
C = 3-4 D = 5+
ABCD
Series1 15.35% 51.95% 21.22% 11.48%
0.00%
20.00%40.00%60.00%80.00%
100.00%
Bulky
ABCD
Series1 6.81% 16.21% 24.58% 52.40%
0.00%
20.00%40.00%60.00%80.00%
100.00%
Other Smaller Items
$77$&+0(17
SCIConsultingGroup
Public Finance Consulting Services
Question #5 Part 2 of 2
How many items does your household set out for collection for each of these CUC Program categories? A = None B = 1 cubic yd
C = 2 cubic yds
D = More than 2 cubic yds
ABCD
Series1 43.79% 32.39% 14.73% 9.09%
0.00%
20.00%40.00%60.00%80.00%
100.00%
Yard Trimmings
E FGH
Series1 68.97% 21.19% 6.12% 3.71%
0.00%
20.00%40.00%60.00%80.00%
100.00%
Construction and Demolition Waste
E = None F = 1 bulk bag
G = 2 bulk bags
H = More than 2 bulk bags
$77$&+0(17
SCIConsultingGroup
Public Finance Consulting Services
Question #6 – Bulky, Household and/or Home
Improvement Waste Page 1 of 2
Please rank your preference for the following four potential scenarios for collection / disposal options. Indicate with 1, 2, 3, or 4. 1 = most desirable, 4 = least desirable. 1 = Participate in a City organized pre-scheduled collection at my property 2 = Schedule on-call collection at my property throughout the year when needed 3 = Schedule an appointment for drop-off at City designated location when needed 4 = Participate in a pre-scheduled drop-off event at City designated location $77$&+0(17
SCIConsultingGroup
Public Finance Consulting Services
Question #6 – Extra Yard Trimmings Page 2 of 2
Please rank your preference for the following four potential scenarios for collection / disposal options. Indicate with 1, 2, 3, or 4. 1 = most desirable, 4 = least desirable. 1 = Participate in a City organized pre-scheduled collection at my property 2 = Schedule on-call collection at my property throughout the year when needed 3 = Schedule an appointment for drop-off at City designated location when needed 4 = Participate in a pre-scheduled drop-off event at City designated location $77$&+0(17
SCIConsultingGroup
Public Finance Consulting Services
Question #7
If an on-call bulky item (couch, mattress, washing machine, etc.) pick up program was offered, how likely are you to schedule an appointment? Likely Unlikely
Series1 83.35% 16.65%
0.00%
20.00%40.00%60.00%80.00%
100.00%
On-Call Bulky Item - Schedule
Appointment
$77$&+0(17
SCIConsultingGroup
Public Finance Consulting Services
Question #8
If an on-call bulky item pick up had an option to set out up to 2 cubic yards of smaller items in contractor provided bulk bags, how likely are you to use the service to dispose of smaller items? Likely Unlikely
Series1 68.09% 31.91%
0.00%
20.00%40.00%60.00%80.00%
100.00%
On-Call Bulky Item - Dispose of Smaller
Items
$77$&+0(17
SCIConsultingGroup
Public Finance Consulting Services
Question #9
Does your household generate large quantities of yard trimmings that do not fit in your green cart? ABCD
Series1 9.80% 10.14% 15.25% 64.81%
0.00%
20.00%40.00%60.00%80.00%
Yard Trimmings - Generate Large
Quantities
A = Yes, in the spring B = Yes, in the fall
C = Yes, in both the spring and fall D = No
$77$&+0(17
SCIConsultingGroup
Public Finance Consulting Services
Question #10
During the CUC Program, do you salvage materials that have been set out by other residents to be reused in your home? YES NO
Series1 29.48% 70.52%
0.00%
20.00%40.00%60.00%80.00%
100.00%
Salvaged Materials for Reuse
$77$&+0(17
SCIConsultingGroup
Public Finance Consulting Services
Question #11
If your household participates in the CUC Program, do you mind if others salvage items that have been set out for collection? YES NO N/A*
Series1 14.77% 82.07% 3.16%
0.00%
20.00%40.00%60.00%80.00%
100.00%
Salvaged Materials by Others
* N/A – my community does not receive CUC services
$77$&+0(17
SCIConsultingGroup
Public Finance Consulting Services
Question #12
Do you recycle materials through any other reuse, recycle or donation services throughout the year? (for example: Goodwill, Salvation Army, thrift store) YES NO
I DON'T HAVE
REUSABLE
ITEMS
Series1 89.57% 8.10% 2.33%
0.00%
20.00%40.00%60.00%80.00%
100.00%
Other Reuse, Recycle or Donation Services
$77$&+0(17
SCIConsultingGroup
Public Finance Consulting Services
Question #13
Has your household participated in one of the twice-yearly Citywide Garage Sales? YES NO
NOT
FAMILIAR
WITH THIS
PROGRAM
Series1 11.52% 69.53% 18.95%
0.00%
20.00%40.00%60.00%80.00%
100.00%
Citywide Garage Sales
$77$&+0(17
SCIConsultingGroup
Public Finance Consulting Services
Question #14
Has your household participated in Recology’s Environmental Days? YES NO
NOT
FAMILIAR
WITH THIS
PROGRAM
Series1 19.24% 31.47% 49.29%
0.00%
20.00%40.00%60.00%80.00%
100.00%
Recology's Environmental Days
$77$&+0(17
SCIConsultingGroup
Public Finance Consulting Services
Question #15
Has your household participated in the Santa Clara County Household Hazardous Waste Program to dispose of items such as batteries, cleaners, oil, paints, pesticides, etc.? YES NO
NOT
FAMILIAR
WITH THIS
PROGRAM
Series1 59.60% 19.51% 20.90%
0.00%
20.00%40.00%60.00%80.00%
100.00%
Household Hazardous Waste Program
$77$&+0(17
SCIConsultingGroup
Public Finance Consulting Services
Question #16
What is your level of satisfaction with the current format of the CUC Program? YES NO N/A*
Series1 86.16% 9.27% 4.57%
0.00%
20.00%40.00%60.00%80.00%
100.00%
Level of Satisfaction
$77$&+0(17
SCIConsultingGroup
Public Finance Consulting Services
Keep the Program
Recommendations & Requests
Illegal Dumping Need More Information Service Fees
Questions
Cancel the Program
General Subjects
Hazardous Waste Salvage - Scavenge
$77$&+0(17
Common Topics
Keep the Program Recommendations /Requests Illegal Dumping General (Positive) Service Fees Hazardous Waste Salvage - Scavenge General (Neutral) Series1 33% 20% 6% 6% 5% 5% 4% 4%
0%5%
10%15%20%25%30%35%
Common Topics
$77$&+0(17
SCIConsultingGroup
Public Finance Consulting Services
Common Topics
Unkept
Neighborhoods Damages General (Negative) Need More Information Questions Fines - Reporting Yard Trimmings Cancel the CUC Program Safety Concerns Series1 3% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 1% 1%
0%1%1%2%2%3%3%
Common Topics
$77$&+0(17
SCIConsultingGroup
Public Finance Consulting Services
Common Topics – Recommendations/Requests
Preference for
On-Call Services
More than one
time a year General Other items for disposal Particular time of year Adding neighborhood Free service Shredding Series1 37% 19% 14% 14% 8% 4% 2% 2%
0%5%
10%15%20%25%30%35%40%
Topics for Recommendations & Requests
$77$&+0(17
SCIConsultingGroup
Public Finance Consulting Services
City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
23-527 Agenda Date: 4/18/2023
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 4/13/2023
powered by Legistar™
23-527 Agenda Date: 4/18/2023
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 4/13/2023
powered by Legistar™
23-527 Agenda Date: 4/18/2023
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 4/13/2023
powered by Legistar™
23-527 Agenda Date: 4/18/2023
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 4/13/2023
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