Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCT 00-02; CALAVERA HILLS II; APPRAISAL REPORT OF COLLEGE BLVD REACH C; 2001-07-03July 3 2001 File No 21182-4 I Mr. Don Mitchell Calavera Hills II, LLC 2727 Hoover Avenue : I National City California 91950 RE College Boulevard Reach C 1 Calavera Hills Il, LLC Parcel, Carlsbad, California Dear Mr. Mitchell / I At your request I have completed an appraisal setting forth the fair market value and total just compensation for the proposed partial acquisition of right-of-way from the referenced property. The I appraisal report has been prepared to comply with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) the Code of Ethics and Supplemental Standards of the Appraisal Institute This appraisal has been prepared as a complete analysis and is presented as a summary appraisal report prepared under Standards Rule 2-2(b) of USPAP By virtue of my experience and based upon my investigation it is my opinion that the total just compensation for the part to be acquired including severance damages and benefits if any as of March 20 2001 was I Total Just Compensation for College Boulevard Reach C Acquisition $518,500 Please refer to the Limiting Conditions section of this report for the specific assumptions made in this I analysis. The slope easements and temporary construction easements have not been valued at the specific request of my client They are included in this report for reference purposes only. Submitted herewith is my report containing the facts and reasoning upon which the above value is based It has been a pleasure to be of service to Calavera Hills II LLC and the City of Carlsbad in this assignment 1 Sincerely ~~7GeralReai Estate Appraiser S St iforni I OREA Appraiser i D No AG 002571 Expiration Date:, 2/4/2004 S I I Commercial Real Estate Appraisal and Consulting ITEM ' PAGE' NO. Letter of Transmittal . .............................................................................................................. Summary of Conclusions ............... . ......................................................................................... i INTRODUCTION Valuation Methodology and Order of Presentation ................................................................. 2 Purpose of the Appraisal ..........................................................................................................2 Scopeof the Appraisal ........................... ......................................... . ................... . ....... ............. 2 Definitionof Market Value ..................... ................................................................................. 3 Project Description ............................................................................................. . .................... 5 Larger Parcel ...................... .................................................................................... ..................... 7 SITE AND IMPROVEMENT DESCRIPTION GeneralLocation Map.............................................................................................................. Subject Plat Map ....................................................................................................................10 SiteDescription ......................................................................................................................13 Subject Photos .......... .................................................................... ................. ........................... 20 DEMOGRAPHICS AND MARKET ANALYSIS CommunityAnalysis................................................................................................................23 HIGHEST AND BEST USE ANALYSIS Highestand Best Use ...............................................................................................................24 VALUATION ANALYSIS Valuation of Larger Parcel ......................................................................................................25 Valuation of Part to be Acquired ...............................................................................................44 Valueof Remainder.. ..............................................................................................................47 Summaryof Total Compensation ............................................................................................48 Limiting Conditions and-'Major Assumptions ............................................................................. 49 Certification..............................................................................................................................50 ADDENDA Appraiser Qualifications .........................................................................................Addendum A Rasmuson Appraisal Services Page ii '. oummary OT LOflCIUSIOflS' Property :Calavera Hills II, LLC Parcel, Carlsbad, California 10 AAA IM 'I a. uw. I 'JUUJL, I 00U'* I I I, I UO-JV-1 Project' Description Proposed acquisition by the City of Carlsbad, of right-of 'way for the extension of College Boulevard Reach C through the subject parcel. Acquisition Summary: College Boulevard Rig ht-of-Way Reach C 8.05 acres Slope Easement (Not Valued) ' , 4.79 acres Temporary Construction Easement (Not Valued) ' 1.55 acres Borrow Site ' ' 32.17 acres Apparent Ownership Calavera Hills II, LLC Purpose To estimate the subject's fair market value and total just compensation for the part to be acquired. Estate Valued The fee simple interest, Zoning'' P-C; Planned Community Zone by the City of Carlsbad Larger Parcel Site Size 159.8 acres Date of Value March 20 2001 Indicated Values , Value of Larger Parcel - Before Condition: $25,568,000 Based on average value of $160,000 per acre Compensation Summary - College Boulevard Reach C: Part to be Acquired - R/W Easement $518,526 Slope Easements ' Not Valued Temporary Construction Easements Not Valued Borrow Site , ' ; $o ,Severance Damages ' None Benefits to the Remainder ' ' ,None Total Estimate 6f .Just Compensation (rounded) ' $518,500 Date of Report , July 3, 2001 Specific Assumptions , The slope easements and temporary construction easements have not been valued at the specific request of my client. They are included in this report for reference purposes only. Appraiser Gary L Rasmuson MAI I Rasmuson Appraisal Services Page 1 Si 55 5 I: Introduction I Valuation Methodology and Order of Presentation .1 The project creating the requirement for acquisition of real property rights from the subject property is the construction of the College Boulevard Reach C through the subject site. The road construction requires I acquisition of road right-of-way, adjacent slope easements, temporary construction easements and a temporary borrow site. The valuation of real estate typically requires an analysis of community demographics, economic I influences, market forces, the physical site and improvement characteristics. After identifying and analyzing the opportunities and constraints of the subject real estate, the valuation approaches are applied resulting in a final value estimate. The order of report presentation is as follows: I > Introduction and Definitions > Subject Site Description I > Area Description, Demographics and Market Analysis > Highest and Best Use Analysis > Valuation of Larger Parcel I > Valuation of Part Acquired, Severance Damages, Benefits > Conclusion of Total Just Compensation Purpose of the Appraisal I The purpose of the appraisal is to provide an opinion of the fair market value of the larger parcel and total just compensation for the part to be acquired from the subject property. I Intended Use of Appraisal The intended use of this appraisal is for acquisition negotiation purposes by my client. It was prepared for the exclusive use of Calavera Hills II, LLC and the City of Carlsbad and may not be used or relied upon I by any other party. Any party who uses or relies upon any information in this report, without the preparer's written consent, does so at his own risk. I Scope of the Appraisal This appraisal has been prepared as a complete appraisal and is presented in a summary appraisal I report format under Standards Rule 2-2(b) of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP). In preparing this appraisal, I personally inspected the subject property, the comparable market data and interviewed brokers and investors active in this market. The following summarizes the extent of analysis performed for this report: I > Property inspection by appraiser > Market data gathered using published sources including Comps.com, First American Real Estate I Data, TURI Commercial Services, Daily Transcript > Market data verified with buyer, seller or participating broker and visually inspected by appraiser > Report written based on a summary report format with a complete analysis 'I IRasmuson Appraisal Services S Page 2 I Date of Value March 20, 2001 - Date of Inspection 1 Marketing/Exposure Time . The estimated marketing and exposure period for this property is approximately six months to one year I according to my analysis of the market data upon which this valuation is based Definition of Fair Market Value :1 Fair market value is defined as the highest price on the date of valuation that would be agreed to by a seller, being willing to sell but under no particular or urgent necessity for so doing, nor obligated to sell, and a buyer, being ready, willing and able to buy but under no particular necessity for so doing, each I dealing with the other with full knowledge of all the uses and purposes for which the property is reasonably adaptable and available. I. The fair market value of property taken for which there is no relevant market is its value on the date of valuation as determined by any method of valuation that is just and equitable. Source: Section 1263.32 Code of Civil Procedure, State of California Severance Damage Definition I The damage if any, caused to the remainder by either or both of the following (a) The severance of the remainder from the part taken. (b) The construction and use of the project for which the property is taken in the manner proposed .I' by the plaintiff whether or not the damage is caused by a portion of the project located on the part taken Source Section 1263 420 of Code of Civil Procedure State of California Benefits to the Remainder Definition I. Benefits to the remainder are defined as that benefit caused by the construction and use of the project in the manner proposed, whether or, not it is generated from a portion of the project located on the land taken. . • Source: Section 1263.430 of Code of Civil Procedure, State of California • • I Rasmuson Appraisal Services Page 3 Proposed Project ' The subject project consists of the proposed extension of College Boulevard through the subject property. The extension of College Boulevard will be along the general location shown in the Carlsbad General Plan circulation element. The project is known as the City of Carlsbad Bridge and Thoroughfare District No. 4 and Detention Basins. The construction of these improvements is required as part of the' development of the Calavera Hills II master planned area. College Boulevard will be extended from its existing terminus in the Calavera Hills project southeast through the subject, temporarily terminating at the southeast corner of the Robertson Ranch property where it will intersect with Cannon Road. Cannon Road is to be extended from El Camino Real northeasterly along the Robertson Ranch southern property boundary and temporarily' terminating at the intersection with College Boulevard. The extension of College Boulevard through, the subject property is known as College Boulevard Reach C. Although the future plan according to the Carlsbad General Plan is to extend College Boulevard southeasterly to intersect with El Camino Real, only Reach B and C will be completed ,as part of this project. Likewise, Cannon Road is planned to be extended northeasterly into the City of Oceanside boundary, but will only be completed through Reach 3 as part of this project. The construction of detention basins by the City of Carlsbad are needed to control flooding impacts within the Calavera Creek and the Little Encinas Creek watersheds. Although the EIR for this project refers to two detention basins, only the "BJB" basin located at the northeast quadrant of Cannon Road and College Boulevard is part of this project. Both College Boulevard and Cannon Road are shown as Major Arterials in the Circulation Element. Buildout design standards for' major arterials include a 102-foot right-of-way with two 12-foot travel lanes in each direction with an 18-foot center median.'As a result of the proposed project, a total of 8.05 acres of right-of-way for College Boulevard is to be acquired. In addition, as a part of this project, acquisitions of right-of-way for slope easements and construction easements will be needed Construction of the road extensions will require grading and fill in certain areas along the project right-of-way. Fill will be required and the source of the fill is to be a borrow site located on the subjéct'property. The borrow site will cover an area of 32.17 acres A summary of the proposed easement areas for the subject project follows Acquisition Type Type Area Road Right-of-Way - College Boulevard Reach C , Easement ' 8.05 acres Slope Easements - College Boulevard Reach C Easement 4.79 acres Temporary Construction Easements - College Boulevard Temporary Easement 1.55 acres Borrow Site (temporary) Temporary 32.17 acres Rasmuson Appraisal Services , , ,, ' ' ' ' ' ' Page 5 'TI I I CALAVERA HILLS MASTER PLAN— BOUNDAR:*• [ijecT OF GN LKTC$A . S • DEVapPMENTINC. V VILLAGE C • , . . . . \ LLA E [ UP ON' VIU.ftGE B 51 Ef /VILLAGE4 CBAD SCHOOL ROBERTSON / ,•• :— // /7 / . ANCHO CRA OWNERS ASSOCIATION cHOLLY, SPRINGS; LIMITED.. "U. 4t CARLSBAOh PARTNERS CANTARINI S / KELLY RICHARD LUBL ER TT7 ROADWAY LINKS TO BE FUNDED BY B&TD #4 Figure 1 - City of Carlsbad Bridge and Thoroughfare District No. 4 Project Location Map II Rasmuson Appraisal Services Page 6 Subject Larger Parcel The larger parcel is undefined in the Eminent Domain Law. The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal published by the Appraisal Institute defines the larger parcel as follows. "In condemnation, the portion of a property that has unity of ownership, contiguity, and unity of use, the three conditions that establish the larger parcel for consideration of severance damages in most states." In general, this definition describes three tests used to evaluate and describe the larger parcel from which the part taken is acquired. Unity of use between part taken and the remaining land Unity of ownership of the part taken and the remaining land and Contiguity of the part taken to the remaining land The subject parcel within which the proposed acquisitions are taken from is known as Assessor Parcel No. 168-040-29 and 168-050-27 under the ownership of Calavera Hills II, LLC. Contiguous to that parcel under the same ownership and use is Assessor Parcel No. 168-041-1.1. These parcels comprise Villages U, W, X and Y of the Calavera Hills Master Plan Villages El and K are contiguous and across College Boulevard from these parcels, but are not included as part of the larger parcel. No other contiguous parcels under the same ownership and land use were identified by public records. Based on the three tests applied above, the subject larger parcel is identified as these three parcels made up of four villages. I Rasmuson Appraisal Services . S Page 7 Rasmuson Appraisal Services Page 8 I - Rasmuson Appraisal Services • . Page 9 U si 0100 COUNTY *ssrs up 1 168-04 01 SHT 2 OF 2 SHT 1 GOT CITY OcEANSIDE OCEANSWE I fr 1" = 400 A 7-6-2000 AW 8DY CITY OWF AD LS8AD OPEN SPACE I SHT 2 SHT 1 SHT 1 im co I HARWICH OR SHT 3 I WLLJI SHT COASTVIEW 1 PORJ CAY OR 0" 14.46 AC ' POR D Q' 14823 - RD 041 6.tYAC & (04 IAC IEDGEW VIAY 4' 6.PAC0 LOT J j06 167 i_C LA 12 1 10 09 eO4 9.34 AC SHT 1 '1. SHT 3 9 SHT 1 ,;7 05 .~ SHT 1 Page 11 I I Site Analysis Property Identification .: .. I The Calavera Hills Phase II Property located at College Boulevard and Carlsbad Village Drive in • Carlsbad, California. I Legal Description . . . 0• • The subject larger parcel is defined as a portion of Lot "D" and Lot "E" of Rancho Agua Hedionda, in the , . City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California. .A complete legal description for the subject I larger parcel was not available. I. Apparent Ownership . . . . . The current record ownership is Calavera Hills II, LLC, a California Limited Liability Company. Sales History . According to public records, the property has been under, the Calavera Hills II, LLC ownership since I .December 31, 1998 when title transferred from Cypress Valley 0 LLC by Grant Deed. I am not aware of any current offering or pending sale of this property. . 0 Assessor's Information: . 0 Assessor Parcel No. 168-040-29 •0 Assessed Value: I . Land . . $779,174 Improvements 0 Total . •• . $779,174 . . .Tax Rate Area: . 09-013 Tax Rate: 1.06707% Real Estate Taxes . $8,314.32 I .Special Assessments . . $17,373.96 Total Taxes and Assessments . • $25,688.28 Assessor Pardel No. 168-041711 ' , 0 •. • Assessed Value: Land' $98,695. . Improvements • r $0 Total : • $98,695 Tax Rate Area: 09-013 0 • Real Estate Taxes . . $1,053.14 Special Assessments . . $169.22 Total Taxes and Assessments • $1,222.36 1 0 1 •' . . . 0 I Rasmuson Appraisal Services ' . . 0 ' . 0 Page 13 Assessor Parcel No. 168-050-27 Assessed Value: . : Land $363,614 Improvements S $0 Total $363,61 Tax Rate Area: 09-013 Real Estate Taxes $3,880.00 Special Assessments $5,411.92 Total Taxes and Assessments $9,291.92 Combined AQ.øQmnf Assessed Value: Land $1,241,483 Improvements $0 Total $1,241,483 Total Real Estate Taxes $13,247.46 Total Special Assessments $22,955.10 Total Taxes and Assessments $36,202.56 Site Area The larger parcel contains a combined gross area. of 153.08 acres according to Assessor Records. The Calavera Hills II Master Plan indicates that the gross lot area for Villages U, W, X and Y total 159.8 acres. I have used the Master Plan area for purposes of valuation analysis in this report. The site area summary follows. Assessor Plat Map Area: Parcel 168-040-29. 100.56 acres ,Parcel 168-041-11 7.21 acres Parcel 168-050-27 45.31 acres . Total Site Area . 153.08 acres Master Plan Site Area: . ;. . Village U 61.8 acres Village W . . . 36.2 acres .. Village X 52.7 acres Village Y 9.1 acres H Total Site Area 159.8 acres S Topography The property has a varied terrain, but consists primarily of rolling hills with native vegetation. A topographic map follows this property description section. It appears that around 75 percent of the property not designated for open space has slopes less than 25 percent. The 71 acres designated for open space has varied terrain, but much of it is over 25 percent. The Project EIR indicates that there are 88.6 net developable acres or 55 percent of the total. . Elevations range from approximately 360 feet above mean sea level (MSL) at thecurrent terminus of Carlsbad Village Drive in Village U to approximately 150 feet above MSL at the southern end of Village W. The predominately east-facing slopes are covered with native vegetation in the north at Village U, which eventually transition to agricultural fields south of Villages W and X These villages are dissected by a number of minor drainages with moderate to steep slopes. • Access The property has access from frontage on College Boulevard along the northwest boundary. Carlsbad Village Drive intersects with College Boulevard near the northwest property boundary and gives east/west access to the western section of Calavera Hills and Carlsbad. There are no existing improved streets crossing through the property. College Boulevard Reach C will provide the primary access to Villages U, W, X and Y after construction: Zoning/Community Planning The subject is zoned P-C, a Planned Community Zone by the City of Carlsbad. The P-C zone is intended to provide a method for and to encourage the orderly implementation of the general plan and any applicable specific plans by the comprehensive planning and development of large tracts of land under unified ownership or developmental control so that the entire tract will be developed in accordance with an adopted Master Plan. The P-C zone provides a framework for the phased development of an approved Master Plan. - The Carlsbad Community Plan identifies the subject as RL, RLM and OS use. RL is a low-density residential use allowing 0 to 1.5 DU per acre. RLM is a low to medium density residential use with an allowed residential density up to four dwelling units per acre. OS is an open space land use designation. A copy of the Carlsbad General Plan Map showing the subject parcel follows. Os ,RLM plot*'ig ;r titRLM ::'.Olse - lot - Os \ 'OS * M S ..• RLM RMH RL 4 RLM I LM j Os - . .4 RLM U os /) RL RL OS OS RL RL' Subject RLM RLM Figure 2 - Carlsbad General Plan Land Use Section - - The subject property development will be regulated by the approved Calavera Hills Master Plan. The Master Plan was approved November 1, 1993 and is the site-specific planning document for the Calavera Hills area. The approved land use designations forthe Master Plan match those of the Carlsbad General Rasmuson Appraisal Services Page 15 III c I Plan shown above. McMillin Communities is in the process of amending the Master Plan to shift allowed densities between villages in Phase Il. The proposed density of the subject Villages of U,.W, X and Y would increase from an approved 212 total units to 557 units upon approval of the proposed amendment. The environmental impact report prepared for the proposed amendment has been prepared and is in review. The City Council is expected to vote on this project in the fall of 2001. The increase in units within the subject villages is a result of a decrease in allowed units within nearby villages not part of this. appraisal. A table showing the proposed redesignation of land use for the subject villages follows. 44i Village Gross Acres 'Existing GF Existing Unit Proposed GP Proposed Yi&d U 61.8 RLM ' 139 RMH :' 179 W . 36.2 , RL 32 RM ' 121 X , 52.7 RL, , 36 RM ' 117 :y 9.1 RL .: 5 ,. RM 140 Total, 159.8 H 212 . 557 . H The subject property is also within Zone 7 of the Local Facilities Management Plan. This plan is I of 25 facilities planning areas in the City of Carlsbad. The plan is part of Carlsbad's overall growth management program. The purpose of the plan is to analyze and project public facilities requirements before and I during development. Conformance to the plan is mandatory.' The open space standard for this zone is 15 percent of total land area, exclusive of non-developable land. .. . The total proposed open space for the subject villages is 71.2 acres or 45 percent of the total gross area. I .A map showing the proposed open space per the Master Plan follows Ii I I I I I , I I . ,..,. I Rasmuson Appraisal Services , Page 16 VILLAGE T % •,?SxI'%'x.. f%t%//I/I/I I I / / I I I ' ' ' sr.xxI .. S. S S S S. S. S. S.. S S S S S S 5. 5 5. S I S. S. E,bPt,.XXXXII Il/Ill/I I # I // I//I/Il / , S S S. S S S .5 IqV1 / I I I / II ' S S 5 5 5 5 / / I fl/It /1/1111II / St IXXX1SSSSSS.S.S.S.SSS5SS.S. 7 S%SS.S.SS.SS.SS.SS. V 55.55.555.5 / VILLAGE W 1 H VILLAGE J LLAGE G I I VILLAGE LAG Ll VILLAGE B 1VLAGE)VILLAGE Current Development Approval Status LEGEND PHASE I EXISTING OPEN PHASE II OPEN SPACE CALAVERA NATURE PRE OPEN SPACE (JOINT PHASE I & II) As of the date of value, the subject property has an approved Master Plan for development with a total of 212 dwelling units in four villages. The developer is proposing to amend the Master Plan and develop 557 units by shifting density from other villages. In order to develop the subject as proposed, the developer will need to complete the Master Plan and General Plan amendment process, process and obtain approvals for tentative subdivision maps for each neighborhood or village. The final EIR is expected to be submitted for final approval in July and action by City Council on the proposed amendments and changes is anticipated a couple months later. Master tentative maps for the villages are also to be processed at that time assuming approval of the density shift. It appears that approval is likely. Hazardous Materials An environmental assessment was not made available. For purposes of this report, the site is assumed free of hazardous wastes or soil contamination. Please refer to Limiting Condition and Assumption No. 3 in this report. Utilities Public utilities are generally available to the property boundary including public water, sewer, gas and electric service. Soils and Vegetation. A soils survey was not provided for this assignment. The majority of the property is in its native condition with brush and scrub cover and some trees. A map showing the various native vegetation for this site as published in the Project ElR follows. Rasmuson Appraisal Services . Page 17 OitgnslAJsescrLb N'uiye grav,Ind RparItit woodIaiit iiitrsh Ciin,ini alkali niarsh(.seasonaflT Non nauegrmslnnd Eualyptua woqdlwul I)iLirbcd JlDevelopèd Visibility This property has good visibility from frontage along College Bouleva-d. Easements/Encroachments/Restrictions I A preliminary title report prepared by First American Title Insurance Company dated June 14, 2000 was provided to me for review. This report covered the subject parcels and several adjacent ownerships of Calavera Hills II LLC. The report indicated 49 exceptions to the title. The major easement affecting the I subject property is an SDG&E 150-foot wide electrical utility easement crossing through the center of the parcel in a north/south direction. Adjacent to and on both sides of the 150-foot easement is a 20-foot wide tree trimming easement also to SDG&E. Flood Zone/Earthquake Hazard The subject property is not within a flood hazard zone. The property is not located within an identified Aiquist-Priolo Earthquake Special Studies Zone. Surrounding Land Uses West: Existing single-family residential land use North: Existing single-family residential land use I Rasmuson Appraisal Services Page 18 !IIIP1Ih I!7:: - ; _• ..__.._,r_p_ - -'- -:-, ) -,- -.---. 4•_•_• - -. - V. V.,-- - ' --- - - - -- - - •- r •- . -'' - - . - V. • - --Al-'. . .- j - ,'- ,.'4 • - t- •. •• , - -• - , 4i Y -- f - - - .i •--.l' - ¼ - -'. . - •&_- - a, - , - r--- •-'- - j -, I - ( ' c --•.:Ac•t. •• - •.. - • -j'- l;A y 1 ', - ---• - - • #-• • '. .- •• • -,--- - •• -•-• -. ' -: - •- _,''L • -_ •-•- •..•-- :: )J -. -.: • •• At I. • • • • • r • - _?--'_. i_.__J - - ,--••.- L ,. - 1. --- -A —: - - a •.- I- - - .1 - -' -r .- • • • • 'T••. •• -•-, '-• -'i - -- - • I •-. - • •-••-• .• I-. - •I•• ,,: '4.uI - - • :i • •: ----A--- r ' t•• •- •- - - •-• - - Subject Topographic Map / A;J Rasmuson Appraisal Services Page 22 I I Demographics and Market Analysis Community Description . I .The subject is located within the City of Carlsbad, California. The City of Carlsbad is situated on the Pacific Ocean approximately 30 miles north of downtown San Diego and 90 miles south Of Los Angeles. Surrounding communities include the cities of Oceanside to the north, Vista and San Marcos to the east, I .and the City of Encinitas to the south. The city contains about 39 square miles and is bounded by the Pacific Ocean on the west, Highway 78 to the north, Rancho Santa Fe and Melrose Drive to the east, and Woodley and Olivehain Roads to the south. Carlsbad was incorporated in 1952 and has grown into one of San Diego County's main commercial, industrial and residential communities with an estimated I population of about 82,020. . . The City can be accessed by both Interstate 5 and State Route 78. Interstate 5 provides north/south I access in the western portion of Carlsbad. Interstate 5 extends northerly from the U.S.A./Mexico border through San Diego County and into Orange and Los Angeles Counties. Interstate 5 is the primary freeway providing access to Orange and Los Angeles Counties and has an average daily traffic count of . . approximately 161,800 vehicles at the subject's location. State Route 78 provides east/west access in I . the northern portion of the City. Several arterials serve the east/west traffic with Palomar Airport Road being the primary arterial. El Camino Real is the primary arterial providing north/south access within Carlsbad. The average daily traffic count on El Camino Real between State Route 78 and La Costa I Avenue ranges from 19,100 to 44,900 vehicles. The economic base of Carlsbad is diverse and includes a wide range of retail, industrial, and service industries. Primary retail employment is provided by numerous shopping centers. Major service I employers include the La Costa Hotel and Spa, Plaza Camino Real Shopping Center and Nellcor Puritan Bennet Corporation. The economy has been boosted by the recent development of the Legoland theme park within the city. • • I As of 2000, there were approximately 33,680 total housing units with fifty-one percent comprised of single-family residences. The projected build-out of the city is estimated at around 55,000 housing units. The area around Palomar Airport in Carlsbad is zoned for industrial use and offices. Several golf equipment manufacturers have built facilities in this area and have become a dominant employer base. Neighborhood Description' The subject property is located in an area northeast of El Camino Real approximately midway between Highway 78 to the north and Palomar Airport Road to the south. The natural topography is hilly. The subject and adjacent parcels represent a large portion of the undeveloped land in this community. I Cypress Valley LLC has been developing the master planned Calavera Hills subdivision; with the most recent villages in Phase I located to the north and west of the subject. A large undeveloped parcel used for agriculture is located south of the subject. Overall, the immediate neighborhood is characterized as being developing residential in nature with interim uses of agriculture. I ,' ': . •. I Rasmuson Appraisal Services • , Page 23 1 Highest and Best Use Analysis I. Definition I Highest and best use is an estimate of that use which provides the highest net return to the land and fits within the legal and physical constraints of the property. AslfVacant . I The property contains a total of 159.8 acres and has an approved Master Plan for residential development. The approved Calavera Hills Master Plan arid underlying Community Plan designation is for 212 dwelling units on 88.6 developable acres, or an average alldwêd density of 2.39 units per acre. The developer is currently processing a Master Plan and Community Plan amendment to increase the I density on the subject property within Villages U, W, X and,Y to 557 units or an average density of 6.29 . units per acre. The increased density will be. accomplished by shifting the density from other nearby undeveloped villages within the Master Plan. • . . The site has varied terrain, with approximately 73 percent having a slope less than 25 percent. The Master Plan calls for open space area of 71.2 acres or 45 percent of the total gross area. Much of the property has coastal sage habitat. Access to the property is by College Avenue adjacent to the western I .property boundary of Village U. Public utility infrastructure is in the area and appears to have the ability to be extended to this property upon development. Development of the subject property will require extension of College Boulevard through1the property, as is currently planned and as per, the Circulation I .Element of the Commünity Plan. ., . . . . . . The most likely highest and best use for this property is residential subdivision development as is . • currently proposed, at the highest allowable density. It is not known whether the proposed density shift will be approved, however thedeveloper indicates that it is likely.. I I I I I I Rasmuson Appraisal Services • . . . . Page 24 Introduction The purpose of this appraisal is to estimate the total just compensation for the proposed right-of-way acquisition. The valuation of the larger parcel is therefore based on valuing the land at its highest and best use. The estimate of compensation for the proposed right-of-way acquisition will be based on the underlying land value. Potential damages to the property due to construction of the project and benefits to the remainder are considered and discussed later in this report. Three methods of estimating market value are typically considered when valuing real estate; the Cost Approach, Income Capitalization Approach, and the Sales Comparison Approach. The Cost Approach and the Income Approach are not considered applicable to the valuation of land only and are not used in this report. The Sales Comparison Approach reflects the fact that buyers and sellers consider sale prices for other similar parcels of land within a comparable market area. This is the valuation method used to value the subject's larger parcel. After the valuation of the subject's larger parcel land value, an analysis of the value of the part acquired, severance damages and benefits to the remainder are presented. This analysis follows. Land Value - Larger Parcel Introduction Two sets of valuation data are presented in this analysis. The first set (Sales 1-5) are sales with potential residential subdivision, similar to the concluded highest and best use of the subject property if available for development. The second set of data (Sales 6-12) represent land purchases for agricultural use or open space. This data is used to value the portion of right-of-way within the center 60-feet. The basis for this analysis is recent court rulings indicating that compensation for the portion of the right-of-way that would likely be required for dedication upon development of the property to its highest and best use is valued using comparable sale data that reflects a use that would not invoke a dedication requirement. An agricultural' use or use for mitigation land or open space would be a use that would not require a public dedication of the College Boulevard right-of-way. Therefore, the portion of the proposed right-of-way within the estimated initial 60-feet of right-of-way width is valued under an agricultural or habitat mitigation use value. The balance of. the right-of-way beyond 60-feet is valued based on the first set of comparable market data under the concluded highest and best use for future residential development. A summary of the comparable sale data and analysis for both sets of data follow Rasmuson Appraisal Services ', ' Page 25 No. Location/Address Date Price Size $/Acre Land (Acres) Planning 1 Scripps Poway 1/5/1999 $15,283,000 246.95 $61,887 No map Parkway San Diego, CA 2 Vandegrift Blvd 8/9/2000 $4,174,500 44.99 $92,787 TM for 104 Oceanside, CA DU s 3 East of Caminito 2/21/2001 $8,200,000 39.39 $208,175 TM in Mend iola process for San Diego, CA 200 SFR's 4 West of Sundance 1/15/2001 $20,636,000 97.80 $211,002 No map Torrey Highlands Buyer San Diego, CA planning 310 DU' 5 Rancho Santa Fe 11/6/2000 $30,000,000 100.21 $299,371 TM for 218 Road DU's Carlsbad, CA Table I - Comparable Land Sales with Development Potential No. Location/Address Date Price Size $/Acre Proposed (Acres) Use 6 520 Yucca Road 9/4/1998 $1,250,000 117.07 $10,677 Hold Fallbrook, CA 7 6100 N. River Road 1/27/1997 $1,400,000 126.29 $11,085 Agricultural Oceanside, CA S 8 Precious Hills Road, 1/25/1999 $455,000 28.95 $15,717 Agricultural Oceanside, CA 9 South San Diego Bay 3/30/1999 $20,500,000 1,448 $14,157 Salt Ponds San Diego, CA Preserve 10 Mast Boulevard 10/29/1999 $525,000 35 $15,000 Mitigation San Diego, CA Land 11 Artesia Road 3/8/2000 $1,976,000 95.43 $20,706 Mitigation SD County, CA Land 12 318S aturn Boulevard 1/27/2000 $3,050,000 120.58 $25,294 Park land San Diego, CA Open Space Table 2— Comparable Land Sales Used for Agricultural or Open Space Rasmuson Appraisal Services Page 26 1 Land Sale Location Map H 'I. I 1.• I' 11. I .1 Page 27 :1 I .1 1. I I I 'I 1 ri DEL MAR\ • • • LSale 10 I SAN GO 4' /? 4. '9 ¶j• .èi ii / 1 u., • _________________ 1 Rasmuson Appraisal Services Page 28 Land Sale I Location/Address: North and South side of Scripps Poway Parkway, San Diego, CA Assessor Parcel No.: 315-040-45, 46,47; 319-150-01, 15,16 Site Data: Land Area 246.95 acres Zoning A-I-b (to be rezoned) Site Condition Raw, undeveloped; large amount of grading needed to pad the site Topography Rolling to steeply sloping hillside Land Planning Unentitled at time of sale Sale Data: Sale Date January 5, 1999 Document No. 1999-004122 Buyer: Shea Homes LP Seller: Wuest Estate Company Sale Price: $15,283,000 Unit Price: $61,887 per acre Terms: All cash sale Loan Data: N/A Proposed Use: Buyer rezoned property and will develop with mixed use of commercial, retail, office on north side and single family (300 units) and multi-family (150 condos) on south side. Source: Comps.com; Ryan Green by Hendrickson Appraisal Rasmuson Appraisal Services Page 29 +. ,'-, 4 I Land Sale 3 Location/Address: East of Caminito Meridiola, North side of proposed Highway 56, San Diego, CA Assessor Parcel No.: 306-051-07 Site Data: Land Area 39.39 acres gross; approximately 25 acres net of future Hwy 56 Zoning A-1 -10; City of SD (to be rezoned to higher density) Site Condition Raw, undeveloped Topography Sloping hillside Land Planning Located in Torrey Highlands Community Plan Subarea IV. A phase shift was approved by City voters allowing development. TM in processing by buyer for approximately 200 SFR's (5.2 DU's per acre); in escrow over 1 year while processing development plans Sale Data: Sale Date February 21, 2001 Document No. 2001-097139 Buyer: DR Horton SD Holding Inc. Seller: West Heights Properties Inc. Sale Price: $8,200,000 Unit Price: $208,175 per acre Terms: All cash sale Loan Data: N/A Proposed Use: 200 SFR's; Estimated finishing costs at $100,000 per acre Source: Comps.com; Frank Anderson - selling broker @ Anderson Realty Rasmuson Appraisal Services Page 31 :4a I I Land Sale I.Location/Address: South San Diego Bay -Western Salt Lands Assessor Parcel No.: Numerous parcels I Site Data Land Area 1,448 acres; 836 acres of fee-owned land and 612 acres of leased land from . State of CA .I Zoning Ml, M2 and FW; City of San Diego I Site Condition Salt plant improvements formerly operated by Western Salt located in the ,Chula Vista area of the South Bay Topography Mostly riparian land and land inundated by the San Diego Bay tidelands Land Use, Salt ponds and undeveloped land formerly used by Western Salt Company 1 - • Sale Data: I. Sale Date . Buyer: March 30, 1999 Document No. N/A - via title settlement SD Uhified Port District . Seller: Western Salt Company Sale Price: $20,500,000 , Unit Price: $14,157 /Acre Total Area • ' V $24,521 /Acre Fee Land ' 1. Terms: All cash sale Loan Data: N/A V. 1 Proposed Use: . Title to 722 acres of salt ponds, levees and habitat lands transferred to the' State of California; title to 114 acres of land including salt plant and Pond 20. transferred to San Diego Port District; quitclaim of 612 acres in South Bay to - .State Lands Commission I. Source: Port of San Diego documents and sources' i . .4, dk wt 'VVV• -' V . ., \.,-, r.4, • • ' ' I3AVI , l[..4eVo 4 •744S . tV4 1 1' 4 'i 6I , "1 T, 4 1V . ; V ' I 4 I ...' - LV. VT 711 11 - 1 ' ' flADIO Vd l . V•V s... ,; ' . .. V V!V' ( ' IT I 4 V " L_ Printed fiom TOPO! ©I997 Wildflower Pmductions (v.topo.com) V V V ' Rasmuson Appraisal Services • V V V V Page 37 V V 'V 1. Land Sale lO. .. .• . Location/Address: North of Mast Boulevard, east of Sycamore Landfill in the East Elliott: community of the City of San Diego .. Assessor Parcel No.: 366-080-23 Site Data: I Land Area 35.00 acres Zoning . R-1-40; within MSCP.desig nation Site Condition Raw, undeveloped land 'I .Topography 'Steeply sloping hillside with native vegetation and rocks; possible coastal sage habitat; top of hill Land Planning None Sale Data! . . . •.. . . . . i . Sale Date Buyer: October 29, 1999 . Document No. .1999-725227 Poway Unified School Dist: Seller: Harry Warren Roy, et al Sale Price $525,000 Unit Price $15 000 per acre I Terms All cash sale Loan Data N/A Proposed Use Mitigation land for West Hills High School site negotiated purchase no threat of I eminent domain Source Comps corn Poway Unified School District representative SOT' :1 . ., . . .. . ... •.POR 9 - — . .. POR 9 P09 8 .. SHT2- __.... . .5 , ; -- 800 00. . 2800 AC. .. Sale I 8. . . I POR 4 . . . . - . . - - It I . . .. . . 2200 AC. 2800 40. .,4 2300 40. 5 - . . 3.40 10100 0 ? 382700 . S. I PT 0 moo 00040. I 2L004C. I Rasmuson Appraisal Services Page 38 1 Proposed Use: Purchased for conservation Source: Comps.com I:. I I U. I . I I Rasmiison Appraisal Services 1 Land Sale 11 Location/Address: South and west of Artesia Road, at Lusardi Creek in San Diego County Assessor Parcel, No.: 269-100-17; 267-142-25 Site Data: Land Area 95.43 acres ,I Zoning. S87 Site Condition Raw, undeveloped Topography Steep hillside and sloping into 100-year floodplain of Lusardi Creek I Land Planning None I Sale Data: Sale Date March 8, 2000 Document No. 2000-118263 : Buyer: The Nature Conservancy Seller: Santa Fe Views, Ltd. Price: I Sale $1,976,000 Unit Price: $20,706 per acre Terms All cash sale Loan Data: N/A Page 39 Land Sale 12 Location/Address: 318 Saturn Boulevard, San Diego Assessor Parcel No.: 621-030-17 to 20; 622-120-18; 622-151-04; 622-152-04; 622-161-02; 622-161-04 Site Data: Land Area 120.58 acres Zoning FW; City of San Diego; within Coastal Zone Site Condition Undeveloped land Topography Generally level site within floodway of Otay River that crosses through property Land Planning None Sale Data: Sale Date January 27, 2000 Document No. 2000-041206 Buyer: California Coastal Conserv. Seller: Egger & Ghio Co. Inc. Sale Price: $3,050,000 Unit Price: $25,294 per acre Terms: All cash sale Loan Data: N/A Proposed Use: Purchased for Lower Otay River Wetlands/Multiple Species Conservation Program Enhancement; Site has coastal wetlands and riparian habitat and is within the adopted Otay Valley Regional Park Plan and the MSCP Subarea Plan. Source: Comps.com; Coastal Conservancy Project Summary; US Fish and Wildlife .rw1wu111 Rasmuson Appraisal Services Page 40 .5 5 . .. I SALE COMPARABLE SUMMARY & COMPARISON ANALYSIS .5.-. -. - -. Scripps Poway Parkway Vandegrift Blvd. Caminito Mendiola rropenyiLocatuon "- • Community f San Diego Oceanside San Diego City f . Sale Date 1/5/99 - 8/9/00 2/21/01 Property Dscription . ;Gross Lend Area (Acres)., 246.95 44.99 . , 39.39 Zoning I Land Planning A-1-10 Unentitled RS TM approved A-1-10 TM in process Allowed Density . ;' Not Available 2.3/Acre 5.2/Acre Site Topography ' . - Mod to steep Rolling Rolling .5 4 ' Sales Price- .. $15283000 $4174500 $8200000 PérAcrê', . '' $61,887 . $92,787 $208,175 COMPARSONANALySISW±4 - Non-Physical Comparisons: 4Property Rights .'Similar Similar Similar Financing )i. Market Market Market Conditions of Sale , . Market Conditions . . Similar Inferior Similar ' Inferior Similar Similar Physical Comparisons:_,,',-,;`. . . Location Similar Inferior Similar Similar Supenor Superior Sizekt Available Infrastructure . Similar Similar Similar Topography ' Inferior Similar ' Similar Density/DevelopableArea 't - Similar Inferior Similar Land Planning , 4 Infenor Supenor Similar • ¶e!aII Net Conparison Siffiil of 4i Property/Location '- ' - Sundance Avenue Rancho Santa Fe Rd Community ,.- I- San Diego Carlsbad Sale Date 1/15/01 11/6/00 Property Description . .. Gross Land Area (Acres) .-97.80' 100.21 Zoning — A-1-10 R-1-10000 Land Planning. " Unentitled . Final Map approved Density. . 3.2/Acre 2.18/Acre I . Site Topogràhy• . . '., Level to sloping . Rolling , . 4 Sales Price ".-: $20,636,000 5. $30,000,000 Per Acre . - $211,002 . '. $299,371 , I Property Rights Similar Similar Financing L Market Market Conditions oi Sale Similar Similar Market P . . -Conditions . Similar Similar PhysicalComparisons: Location j .- Similar Similar I Non-Physical Comparisons: 5.... S Size > s... Similar • .' Similar • . Avilable infrastructure . . Similar Similar Topography' .. ' Superior Similar Density/DevelàpabléArea', - Similar Inferior ' 'Land Pleniing . j --• ' Similar -: . Superior .1 Overall Net Comparison - , 'I:', .5 • ., .•. u Rasmuson Appraisal Services - Page 41 SALE COMPARABLE SUMMARY Si COMPARISON ANALYSIS I.- Elemeñt of. Comparison : T7 .9. Property/Location Yucca Road N. River Road Precious Hills Rd So. San Diego Bay City - Falibrook Oceanside Oceanside San Diego Sale Date 9/4/98 1/27/97 1/25/99 3/30/99 Property Description Gross Land Area (Acres) 117.07 126.29 28.95 1,448.00 Zoning A-70 A A Ml, M2, FW Planned Use Hold for development Agricultural Agricultural Salt Ponds/Consery Site Topography Rolling Rolling to level Gently rolling Flat - riparian Sales Price $1,250,000 $1,400,000 $455,000 $20,500,000 Per Acre $10,677 $11,086 $15,717 $14,157 t: COMPARISON ANALYSIS Non-Physical Comparisons: Property Rights Similar Similar Similar Similar Financing Market Market Market Market Conditions of Sale Similar Similar Similar Similar Market Conditions Inferior Inferior Inferior Inferior Physical Comparisons: Location Similar Similar Similar Similar Size Similar Similar Superior Inferior Zoning/Land Use Similar Similar Similar Similar Topography Similar Similar Similar Similar Land Planning Similar Similar Similar Similar Overall Net Comparison f T!o ETiI Community Sale Date Property Description Gross Land Area (Acres) Zoning Planned Use Site Topography Sales Price Per Acre COMPARISON ANAL'i Non-Physical Comparisons: Property Rights Financing Conditions of Sale Market Conditions Physical Comparisons: Location Size Zoning/Land Use Topography Land Planning Overall Net Comparison San Diego SD County San Diego 10/29/99 3/8/00 1/27/00 35.00 95.43 120.58 R-1-40 S87 RN Mitigation land Mitigation land Park land Steep sloping Sloping/Flood plain Level - flood plain $525,000 $1,976,000 $3,050,000 — $15,000 $20,706 $25,294 Similar Similar Similar Market Market Market Similar Similar Similar Inferior Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar Superior Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar Inferior Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar RasmUson Appraisal Services Page 42 :.•:. . 4 I I I 1 Land VaIueConcius.on—Largerparceu1 I The land value conclusion is divided into two sections based on the different data sets and highest and I best use assumptions applied to the subject. As previo'usly noted, the first data set is based on . comparable land sales with land development potential, similar to the highest and best use of the subject. This data set has been compared to the subject property based on criteria that have potential for significant influences on the price paid for the sale data. Sale I at $61,887 per acre sets the lower end of - the value range as it is judged overall significantly inferior to the subject property after considering the relative impact of each comparison item. Sate 2 is generally similar and indicates a price of $92,787 per acre. Sale '3 is considered slightly su'perior to the subject and indicates $208,175 per gross acre. Sales 4 and 5 are overall superior to the subject, with an indicated value rangefrom $211,002 to'$299,371 per I acre In addition to this data, I have considered the recent offer to purchase and acceptance of the offer by I . McMillin Communities to the owners of the Robertson Ranch property south of the subject. The offer to purchase was for a total gross area of 185 acreê and an estimated net developable area of 80 acres. The offer basis was based on $250,000 per developable acre or a total purchase price of $20,000,000. This ..I purchase price equates to $108,108 per gross acre. The offer to purchase was based on the eastern half of the property, just south of the subject parcel. The net developable area is after deduction of the proposed College Boulevard and Cannon Road right-of-way and mitigatiàn parcel acquisition. The ratio of developable togross area is 43 percent. This ratio is inferior to the subject's ratio of 55 percent (gross I area less required open space). The Robertson parcel is inferior in land planning since there is no planning in place. The subject has an approved Master Plan and the allowed density is known (subject to the proposed amendments and density, shift). Overall, this offer should set the lower limit of value for the subject propert.. .1 •. . ,I ' The general indicated value range based on thi data is from $100,000 to $210,000 per acre with the sale considered most similar having a price near the tower end of this range. Based on the comparable sale I data analysis, I conclude at a fair market value for the subject property at $160,000 per gross acre. The second data set represents sales of land for agricultural •use or purchased for open space or mitigation. The sales indicate a range from $10,677 per acre up to $25,294 per acre. The subject property I. is currently undeveloped rolling terrain that is not generally suitable for agriculture use. Therefore, the' agricultural sale data is considered less comparable to the subject than the coastal sage mitigation land sale data. Sales 6 through 9 are considered slightly inferior to the subject due to older dates of sale.? :.I These sales set the lower end of the indicated ialue range from $10,677 to $14,157 per acre. Based on- the comparable sale data and analysis, I conclude at a fair market value for the subject property, if based. on an assumed highest and best use as mitigation land or open space, at $20,000 per acre. This value is used for the valuation of the core right-of-way area. I A summary of the indicated value for the larger parcel follow'. I . . I •i • .. I Larger Parcel Valuation Summary Gross Land Area (acres) Value Per Acre - = Value 159.80 .: x $160,000 $25,568,000 Indicated Value of Larger Parcel (Rounded) . $25.568.000 I I I - Rasmuson Appraisal Services .. - . - Page 43 - :1, ': ':'' •' . •. :' '• I Value of Part Acquired I ,The value of the part acquired is based on applying the unit values established in the,valuation of the larger parcel to the part acquired. A summary of the proposed acquisition follows. I Acquisition Type . . Area of Acquisition Road Right-of-Way 8.05 acre or 350,841 SF Slope Easements . 4.79 acre or 208,441 SF I Temporary Construction Easements . . 1.55 acre or 67,335 SF Borrow Site . . . 32.17 acres or 1,401,512 SF The proposed project involves several separate, but related partial acquisitions from the subject property. Right-of-way is being acquired for the extension of College Boulevard through the subject. Additional right-of-way to support the road construction is needed for slope easements adjacent to the right-of-way I .and temporary construction easements adjacent to the slope easements. Secondly, the project requires the use of a borrow site to remove soil for use in construction of the road project. Each of these categories of acquisition are addressed separately in the following section. I Road Right-of-Way The College Boulevard construction requires 102.feet of right-of-way acquisition with 54 feet to be paved I. . and the balance in shoulder and berm. The acquisition is assumed to be in easement form dedicating the. right-of-way for public street. Compensation for this acquisition is based on 100 percent of the underlying O fee rights to the right-of-way based on the assigned unit value of the land. Where the land has been previously encumbered by an existing easement, the rights acquired have been adjusted to reflect my I opinion of the remaining rights to the underlying fee ownership. There is one primary easement within the area to be acquired for the various proposed easements. This I is a 150-foot wide electric utility easement to SDG&E for an overhead high-power transmission line. The area of proposed easements within the existing utility easement have been valued at 20 percent of the , underlying fee value since the existing easement already encumbers approximately 80 percent of the fee rights. Although a tree-trimming easement is adjacent to the electrical easement, this is considered a • minor easement and no adjustment to the rights,acquired is necessary. . . The value for the road right-of-way has been divided into two sections. The first section values the center 60 feet of the proposed road I right-of-way using a land value estimate based on an assumed agricultural .or mitigation land use of the property. This valuation method reflects court decisions in eminent domain cases directing a land value basis for a right-of-way corridor for future streets described within the Circulation Element of the General Plan by the city. A 60-foot wide corridor is valued under the I. assumption that compensation is based on 'a land use that would not invoke a road dedication requirement. This land value is based on, $20,000 per acre (Core Value),. The balance of the right-of-way outside of the 60-foot center portion is valued based on the unit value of I the land under its highest and best use. In this case, the highest and best use is for future residential development as allowed under the Master Plan' land use designations. The unit value for the land under this highest and best use has been previously estimated at $160,000 per acre. The compensation for this I area is based on acquisition of most the underlying rights to the land. The unencumbered fee area outside of the core right-of-way area is valued at 100 percent of the fee value (Full Value). A right-of-way plat map and a summary of the road right-of-way valuation for this property follow. ' I I • •'' ' 0 ' Rasmuson Appraisal Services , 0 " Page 44 I / .1 I I I Right of Way: . I . Area (SF) % Fee Value/Acre ComDensation College Boulevard Reach C In SDG&E Easement © Full Value 6,884 20% 160,000 $5,057 I In SDG&E Easement © Core Value 9,900 20% 20,000 $909 Fee @Full Value . 111,757 100% 160,000 $410,494 Fee @ Core Value . 222,300 100% . 20,000 $102,066 I Total Compensation - Right-of-Way . 350,841 SF $518,526 I. Slope Easements Slope easements will be acquired for selected areas adjoining and adjacent to the proposed street right- of-way. The easements will vary in width along the right-of-way boundary, but usually are in the area of 20 feet to 40 feet wide. There are two slope easement parcels to be acquired, one on the west side of College Boulevard right-of-way and the second on the east side of the right-of-way. The following easement language has been provided to me for this easement: an EASEMENT FOR SLOPE AND CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES over, under, upon I and across the real property together with the right to construct, grade, remove and deposit soil and construction materials, conduct operations related to the construction of adjacent facilities and features, clear, landscape, inspect, and maintain within the bounds of said I , easement .. . ." • The slope easements will be permanent, but does not preclude the right of the property owner to change the grade or elevation within the easement along the road right-of-way at some time in the future. I I have been asked by my client not to estimate the just compensation due for the proposed slope easements. Therefore, no presentation of valuation for this acquisition item is included in this report. Temporary Construction Easements The project construction requires acquisition of temporary construction easement's located along the perimeter of the proposed road right-of-way, adjacent to slope easements. Again, at the request of my client, I have not prepared an estimate of compensation due for these easements. Borrow Site A borrow site will be created within the subject property during the construction of the Cannon Road and I College Boulevard extensions. This borrow site will provide fill for areas along the proposed road right-of- way. It is my understanding that the borrow site will create a rough graded, superpad condition after completion of the road project. This padded area will then be developable land for the subject and will not be subject to any easement or restriction. I The borrow site will be located south of the SDG&E easement and will be essentially in the area of the proposed single-family residential lots for Village W and X. Based on this information, no additional compensation is due for the use of the borrow site since it creates a benefit to the property owner Rasmuson Appraisal Services Page 46 I t I I Severance Damage Estimate Severance damagesare measured as the diminution in value to the remainder parcel after the taking and construction in the manner proposed. After construction, no adverse impact on the remainder parcel is anticipated. No severance damages are considered applicable for this property. Benefits to the Remainder Benefits to the remainder are measured as the increase in value to the remainder parcel in the after I : condition, due to the proposed project. Benefits can be used to offset severance damages found to impact the remainder parcel but cannot offset compensation for the part acquired. No benefits are applicable to this property due to the construction in the maner proposed. I Value of Remainder Parcel - After Condition Sinôe the property is not considered to suffer from severance damages'or benefits in the after ddndition, I the value for the subject property is considered the same as the before condition less'the estimated value- of the partaicquired. • • • • II I I I I I I I ,_. _' -- VdiUdLIUI1 oummary Value of Larger Parcel - Before Condition (Land Only) 15980 Acres @ $ 160 000 per acre = $25,566,000 I Value of Part Acquired College Boulevard Right-of-Way: 9,900 SF or 0.23 Acres @ $ 20,000 per acre@ 20% = $909 6,884 SF or 0.16 Acres @ $ 160,000 per acre @ 20% $5,057 I 222,300 SF or 5.10 Acres © $ 20,000 per acre @ 100% = $102,066 111,757 SF or 2.57 Acres @ $ 160,000 per acre @ 100% $410,494 I Subtotal Road Right-of-Way 350,841 SF $518,526 Slope Easements I Borrow 208,441 SF or 4.79 Acres Not Valued Site 1,401,512 SF or 32.17 Acres© $ 160,000 per acre@ 0% $0 Total Compensation for Part to be Acquired I Value of Remainder - Before Condition (rounded) $25,049,474 Value of Remainder - After Condition (rounded) - $25,049,474 I Severance Damages $0 Benefits to the Remainder $0 I Net Severance Damages (Severance - Benefits) Temporary Construction Easement I 67,335 SF or 1.55 Acres Total Just Compensation Roundedto ..... I I .1 I I. Rasmuson Appraisal Services $518,526 $0 Not Valued $518,526 $518,500 Page 48 I This appraisal is made expressly subject to the following conditions and stipulations: General Limiting Conditions and Assumptions:• I 1. No responsibility is assumed for matters which are legal in nature, nor is any opinion on the title rendered herewith. This appraisal assumes good title, responsible ownership and competent management. The property has been appraised as though free of indebtedness. U 2. The factual data utilized in this analysis has been obtained from sources deemed to be reliable; however, no responsibility is assumed for its accuracy. 3. Unless otherwise stated in this report, the existence of hazardous material, which may or may not be I present on the property, was not observed by the appraisers. The appraisers have no knowledge of the existence of such materials on or in the property. The appraisers, however, are not qualified to detect such substances. The presence of substances such as asbestos, urea-formaldehyde foam i insulation, or other potentially hazardous materials may affect the value of the property. The value estimate is predicated on the assumption that there is no such material on or in the property that would cause a loss in value. I 4. Except as noted, this appraisal assumes the land to be free of adverse soil conditions which would prohibit development of the property to its highest and best use. This appraisal is of surface rights only; and no analysis has been made of the value of subsurface. I rights, if any. Disclosure of the contents of this appraisal report is governed by the By-Laws and Regulations of the Appraisal Institute. I . 7. Neither all nor any part of the contents of this report (especially any conclusions as to value, the identity of the appraisers or this appraisal firm, or any reference to the Appraisal Institute or to its designations) shall be disseminated to the general public by the use of advertising media, public I relations media, news media, sales media or other media for public communications without the prior written consent of the signatory of this appraisal report. Possession of this report or a copy thereof, does not carry with it the right of publication. It may not be used for any purpose by any person other than the party to whom it is addressed without the written consent of the appraiser, and in any I event only with the proper written qualification and only in its entirety. 8. This appraisal has been prepared as a complete summary appraisal report prepared under Standards Rule 2-2(b) of USPAP. • Specific Limiting Conditions and Major Assumptions: This valuation is based on right-of-way drawings, plans and area calculations provided by my client I and O'Day Engineering. The slope easements and temporary construction easements have not been valued at the specific request of my client. They are included in this report for reference purposes only. I i • • •0 I •, • I Rasmuson Appraisal Services • . Page 49 1 I certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief the statements of fact contained in this report are true and correct. . the reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions are limited Ionly by the reported assumptions and limiting conditions, and are my personal, impartial, and unbiased professional analyses, opinions, and conclusions. : I have no present or prospective interest in the property that is the subject of this report, and no personal interest with respect to the parties involved. . I have no bias with respect to the property that is the subject of this report or to the parties involved with this assignment my engagement in this assignment was not contingent upon developing or reporting predetermined results. . my compensation for completing this assignment is not contingent upon the development or reporting of a predetermined value or direction in value that favors the cause of the client, the amount of the value opinion, the attainment of a stipulated result, or the occurrence of a subsequent event directly related to the intended use of this appraisal. my analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared, in conformity with the requirements of the Code of Professional Ethics and the Standards of Professional Practice of the Appraisal Institute and the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. the use of this report is subject to the requirements of the Appraisal Institute relating to review by its duly authorized representatives. as of the date of this report Gary L Rasmuson MAI has completed the requirements of the continuing education program of the Appraisal Institute. I have made a personal inspection of the property that is the subject of this report. no one provided significant, professional assistance to the person signing this report other than Wendy Rasmuson, a State Certified General Appraiser who assisted in the data verification and report writing aspects of this report. • • , . . ry L. uson, MAI . Date: July 3, 2001 Certifie eneral Real Estate Appraiser State of California , OREA Appraiser I.D. No. AG002571 ' • , • : Expiration Date: 214/2004 I Rasmuson Appraisal Services • • Page 50 I Qualifications of Gary L Rasmuson, MAI I Expertise I . 'Mr. Rasmuson has been actively appraising real estate since 1977 as an independent fee .. appraiser. Rasmuson Appraisal Consultants was established in 1984 and has valued over 1,000 properties to date. Specialties include the valuation for litigation purposes including easement and right-of-way appraisals, appraisal of motels/hotels, apartments, office buildings, industrial I properties and all types of vacant land. '. General 'appraisal experience, includes valuation of residential subdivisions, 'industrial I subdivisions, single-family residences, mobile home parks, estate valuations, partial interest' valuation and retail commercial properties. Appraisal assignments have been performed primarily in San Diego County but have included within communities in Southern California and Arizona 'I. Business: , •'. ' ' •: . . , .. President - Rasmuson Appraisal Consultants I i 14665 Yukon Street, San Diego CA 92129 ' Phone: (858) 672-1796 . Fax: (858) 672-3816 Email: gary@rasmusonappriasal.com I Selected List of Clients: Arco . Fidelity Federal Bank Bank of America ' ' , Great Western Bank California Bank and Trust : Grossmont Bank Caltrans , . , ' McMillañ Communities Centre City Development Corporation . , Imperial Bank City of Chula Vista " ' , , •, La Jolla Bank and Trust City of Poway ' . . ' . Midas Realty Corporation I City of San Diego Office of Thrift Supervision City of Oceanside , , . ' ' : 'Port of San Diego City of Vista . . . , Southern Pacific Bank County of San Diego , . .. ' San Diego City Schools I Comerica Bank , •. . ' ' San Diego Gas & Electric Company Daley & Heft , ' ' . '• , Union Bank of California Higgs, Fletcher & Mack . • U.S. Navy' I .John Burnham Company " ' 'Wells Fargo Bank Memberships: • •• . ' • '. .I> Appraisal Institute - MAI Designation (No. 6926); SRA Designation, Past National Director - 1994; San Diego Chapter President 1984 (SREA) Director - 1987-89; 1994-1997; Regional Representative - 1991-1997; Treasurer - 1990; I California Legislative Committee: 1992. .' • > State of California - California General Real Estate Appraiser • • License No. AG002571; Expires February 4, 2004 • I > International Right of Way Association'- Member I F F I Qualifications of Gary L Rasmuson, MAI F F Continued I Education I .Bachelor of Science, Busines Administrätión; Economics Major University of North Dakota - 1977 Successful completion of the following courses sponsored by Appraisal Institute: I . Basic Appraisal Principles (1-A) . . Business Valuation - SR A _ The Appraisal of Partial Acquisitions Standards of Professional Practice Capitalization Theory and Techniques (1-B) Case Studies in Real Estate Valuation I . Valuation Analysis and Report Writing Litigation Valuatidn . . Seminars (Partial List): . . Litigation* Seminar . Analysis of Problem Properties I : Apartment Seminar ... Capitalization Update Seminar Appraisal Regulation Seminar . Fair Housing Seminar Subdivision Analysis Seminar Hotel/Motel Valuation Seminar I Qualifications: .. H . . > Qualified Expert Witness, Federal Bankruptcy CoUrt F . - . . .. • F •. I > Qualified Expert Witness, California Superior Court Appointed Special Master to Superior Court •. . . . . . I > Course Instructor - Appraisal Institute Course Capitalization Theory & Techniques 310 and Capitalization Theory & Techniques 510 : • > Received Distinguished Service Award - 1991 San Diego Chapter of the Appraisal Institute I I I F I F i F I 1 . . .. • .. . .., H