HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 11 E. TUSTIN REPORT 5-21-90Lon
DATE:
MAY 21, 1990
TO: WILLIAM A. HUSTON, CITY MANAGER
FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
CONSENT CALENDAR NO. 11
5/21/90
Inter - Com
SUBJECT: EAST TUSTIN DEVELOPMENT MONITORING AND ANNUAL REVIEW
REPORT FOR 1988-1989 REVIEW PERIOD
RECOMMENDATION
Receive and file.
BACKGROUND
The East Tustin Development Agreement between the City of Tustin
and the Irvine Company was originally adopted on October 22, 1986
as a mechanism for implementing the East Tustin Specific Plan. The
Agreement identified phased public improvements and required
dedications to be accomplished by the Specific Plan, assured
adequate funding of certain improvements, clarified the respective
responsibilities of the City and the developer, and provided a
program for monitoring and controlling the impacts of the project
on the City' s f iscal resources so that the phased completion of the.
project would not result in a negative fiscal impact on the City.
Pursuant to Section 3.1 of the Development Agreement, the
developer's performance under the Agreement was to be reviewed at
least every 12 months. Evidence of the developer's good faith
compliance with the items of the agreement would be demonstrated
by evidence of the following:
1. Conformance with the requirements of the Specific Plan and
Development Agreement;
2. Conformance with the adopted phasing schedule; and
3. Conformance with the fiscal impact model which requires a
minimum one-to-one cost vs. revenue ratio.
All of the detailed findings and exhibits are compiled in the
attached East Tustin Development Monitoring and Annual Review
Report. Staff believes that the developer has acted in good faith
in compliance with the terms of the Development Agreement and no
cause for further action at this time is considered necessary. The
remainder of this report summarizes the staff findings presented
in the attached report.
e
City Council Report
East Tustin Development Monitoring and
Annual Review Report for 1988-89 Review Period
May 21, 1990
Page 2
ANALYSIS
As discussed in more detail in the attached report, the annual
review includes three major components. Each of these components
are briefly summarized below:
1. Compliance with Development Agreement and Specific Plan
This component involves a review of the Development Agreement
and Specific Plan. Staff has continued to work with the
Irvine Company and various other developers in processing
Subdivision Maps and Building Permits for specific
developments within the East Tustin area. All of these
projects are reviewed on a case-by-case basis and no known
violations of the Specific Plan have occurred. Any variations
from the requirements of the Specific Plan have been processed
through the appropriate mechanism, an administrative
adjustment or variance. Both of these procedures are
considered acceptable in the Plan and by State law.
2. Development Phasing Schedule
The overall fiscal impact of development of the East Tustin
area was of substantial concern to the City of Tustin in
negotiating proposed land uses in the East Tustin area. As
part of the planning process a fiscal impact analysis was
conducted for the purposes of evaluating the planned
development to determine if the project would result in any
substantial negative impact to the City during the project
phasing or at completion of the development. It was,
therefore, the intent of the established phasing schedule to
balance the development of uses so that revenues to the City
would exceed costs. With the current number of auto dealers
operating and the square footage of commercial development
open for business in East Tustin, the developer was authorized
at the conclusion of the last annual review period to build
and occupy up to 2,790 residential units. Only 1,688
residential units were released for occupancy as of November
1, 1989, therefore the developer is in compliance with the
phasing schedule.
Community Development Department
City Council Report
East Tustin Development
Annual Review Report fo
May 21, 1990
Page 3
3. Fiscal Impact
Monitoring and
r 1988-89 Review Period
While closely related to the phasing schedule, the remaining
component of the required annual review goes one step further
in analyzing the impact of the project on the City
financially. As part of the contract with Stanley Hoffman who
prepared the Fiscal Impact Report (FIR) for the East Tustin
Specific Plan, a computer generated model was provided to the
Community Development Department. This model runs on Lotus
1,2,3 software and has been used by staff to determine
compliance with this portion of the annual review. All
reports generated by the model are provided as exhibits in the
attached East Tustin Development Monitoring and Annual Review
Report.
After running all of the development related figures, staff
has found that the model has estimated a 1.26 cost -to -revenue
ratio for the official monitoring period:
For every value equal to or greater than one, the number
represents either a break even (1.0) or excess revenue (values
over 1.0). So far, the estimated costs of the development
have not exceeded the anticipated revenue; therefore, the
developer is in compliance witli the fiscal element of the
annual review.
It is important to note that the fiscal model is based upon
assumptions made in 1985 and do not necessarily reflect the
actual revenues and costs incurred by the developer and the
City. Additionally, the revenues generated from taxes such
as retail sales are not remitted to the City until the State
Franchise Tax Board has completed their accounting process and
remits the funds to the City. This usually occurs at least
two to three calendar quarters after the funds are reported.
Therefore, the numbers generated by the Fiscal Impact Model
do not show actual revenues received by the City, but serve
as a frame work for determining the project's overall fiscal
balance for each review period.
CONCLUSION
Based upon consideration of all three components
review, staff believes that the Irvine Company has
faith compliance with the East Tustin Development
of the annual
exercisedgood
Agreement. All
Community Development Department
• 'wChT'b4iLL;AS,.lid.ldi,.�iIO�MSs�a.7Y►a..yiF-�s :: -.•ur _ _ _-_ ..__._._.
City Council Report
East Tustin Development Monitoring and
Annual Review Report for 1988-89 Review Period
May 21, 1990
Page 4
components of staff review indicated that the developer has met or
exceeded the minimum requirements of the Agreement. Staff suggests
that the City .Council receive and file this report with the
expectation of receiving a follow-up report each year as the
Community Development Department updates the annual review pursuant
to the Agreement.
Daniel Fox Christine A. S ingle n
Senior Planner Director of Community Development
DF:CAS:kbc
Attachment: Annual Review Report
East Tustin
Development Monitoring
and Annual Review I Report
OFFICIAL REPORTING PERIOD:
November 1, 1988 - November 1, 1989
,,, r
Prepared by
City of Tustin
Community Development Department
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, California 92680
(714) 544-8890
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
I. Introduction 1
II. Conformance with Requirements of Specific Plan 1
III. Conformance with Phasing Schedule and Fiscal Impact Model 3
IV. Conformance with the Requirements of the Development Agreement 13
V. Conclusion 14
Appendix 1: Cost and Revenue Assumptions 15
Appendix II: City's One -Time Cost and Related Fees 17
Staffig Projections
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES
Figure 1.
East Tustin Fiscal Area
4
Figure 2.
Tustin Auto Center Map and Development Status
9
Table I.
East Tustin Phasing Schedule
3
Table II.
Actual Development Activites in East Tustin
5
Table III.
Comparison with Adopted Phasing Schedule
6
Table IV.
Status of East Tustin Residential Projects
7
Table V.
Summary of Recurring Revenues and Costs
10
Table VI.
Summary of Fiscal Impacts
11
Table VII.
Fiscal Model Input Categories
12
I. INTRODUCTION
In March of 1986, the Tustin City Council approved the East Tustin Specific Plan (Specific Plan) for the project area
known as the Tustin Ranch. The East Tustin Development Agreement between the. City of Tustin and the Irvine
Company was subsequently approved in November of 1986 as a mechanism for implementing the Specific Plan and
ensuring compliance with the requirements of the Environmental Impact Report and Fiscal Impact Report for the
project. The Agreement provides for (1) the implementation of phased public improvements; (2) requirements to
accomplish certain dedications; (3) adequate funding for certain improvements; (4) the identification of the
respective responsibilities of the City and developer; and (5) a program for monitoring and controlling the fiscal
impacts of the project.
Pursuant to Section 3.1 of the Agreement, the developer's performance under the Agreement is to be reviewed at least
every 12 months. Evidence of the developer's good faith compliance with the terms of the agreement would be
demonstrated by evidence of the following:
1. Conformance with the requirements of the Specific Plan;
2. Conformance with the approved phasing plan and fiscal impact analysis; and
3. Conformance with the provisions of the Development Agreement.
The purpose of this report is to provide the necessary information in order to assist the City Council in undertaking
this annual review. All figures used in the review are based upon the actual records on file with the Community
Development Department as of November 1, 1989. Utilizing computer generated estimates, staff has also provided
preliminary projections for anticipated development during the next review period (November, 1989 - November,
1990). These projections were based upon current project approvals and construction activities.
The remainder of this report will focus upon the individual components of the annual review and development
monitoring requirements of the Agreement as noted above.
II. CONFORMANCE WITH REQUIREMENTS OF SPECIFIC
PLAN
The Specific Plan establishes the policies, guidelines and regulations that govern development in the Tustin Ranch
area. Development proposals are submitted to the Community Development Department and reviewed by the City's
Design Review Committee to ensure compliance with the Specific Plan and Tustin City Code. The Design Review
Committee is comprised of representatives from the City's Community Development, Public Works, and Community
Services Departments and the Orange County Fire Department. Each project is then presented to the Planning
Commission, and in some cases the City Council, for final determination of conformance with the Specific Plan,
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Subdivision Map Act.
An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Specific Plan was prepared and certified in accordance with CEQA-
This EIR identified several mitigation measures to reduce potential environmental impacts associated with develop-
ment of the Specific Plan. Some of the common mitigation measures related to individual projects which were also
considered during project review include conformance with the Specific Plan monitoring and limiting of construction
hours, noise testing, provisions for pedestrian circulation and other modes of transportation, and development limits
under the Browning Corridor.
The Specific Plan also identifies provisions for public infrastructure such as roads, flood control devices, sewer and
water facilities, utilities, parks, schools, and other public facilities. Since the last reporting period, the developer and
the City have continued to provide many of the public facilities in the project area, some of which are listed below:
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 86-2
1. Tustin Ranch Road between Irvine Boulevard and Jamboree Road.
2. La Colina Drive between the city boundary and Tustin Ranch Road.
3. Portola Parkway between Tustin Ranch Road and Jamboree Road.
4. Widen to ultimate the north side of Irvine Boulevard from approximately 740 feet west of Tustin Ranch Road
to Jamboree Road.
5. Jamboree Road between Irvine Boulevard and Tustin Ranch Road.
6. Lower Peters Canyon retarding basin.
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 85-1
1. Tustin Ranch Road between Bryan Avenue and Irvine Boulevard.
2. Myford Road between El Camino Real and Irvine Boulevard.
3. South half of Irvine Boulevard from 800 feet easterly of Browning Avenue to Myford Road.
4. El Camino Real from easterly boundary of Auto Center Drive to Jamboree Road.
5. Bryan Avenue from Browning Avenue to Myford Road except south half between Browning Avenue and 300
feet easterly of Tustin Ranch Road.
6. East half of Browning Avenue from 300 feet north of Bryan Avenue to 1300 feet north of Bryan Avenue.
7. Construction of sidewalks on Tustin Ranch Road between Bryan Avenue between the Edison sub -station and
Jamboree Road.
8. Construction of sidewalks on Tustin Ranch Road between Bryan Avenue and Irvine Boulevard.
9. Construction of sidewalks on Myford Road between Bryan Avenue and Heritage Way.
10. Construction of sidewalks on the west side of Jamboree Road from Bryan Avenue to approximately 1000 feet
northerly of Bryan Avenue.
11. Construction of sidewalks on the south side of Irvine Boulevard from approximately 600 feet westerly of
Tustin Ranch Road to approximately 400 feet westerly of Myford Road and from Myford Road to
approximately 700 feet easterly of Myford Road.
12. Median landscaping on Bryan Avenue from Browning Avenue to Jamboree Road.
13. Median landscaping on Tustin Ranch Road from Bryan Avenue to Irvine Boulevard.
14. Median landscaping on Jamboree Road from Bryan Avenue to Irvine Boulevard.
The Irvine Company
1. Greenway Drive
2. La Colina east of Tustin Ranch Road
3. Gallery Way
4. Rawlings Way
5. Robinson Drive
6. Keller Drive
7. Parkcenter Lane north of Bryan Avenue
8. Heritage Way
9. Lagier Way
10. Perimeter landscaping on the north side of Bryan Avenue between the Edison sub -station and Jamboree
Road.
11. Perimeter landscaping on Tustin Ranch Road between Bryan Avenue and Irvine Boulevard.
12. Perimeter landscaping on the west side of Jamboree Road from Bryan Avenue to approximately 1000 feet
northerly of Bryan Avenue.
13. Perimeter landscaping on the south side of Irvine Boulevard from approximately 600 feet westerly of Tustin
Ranch Road to approximately 400 feet westerly of Myford Road and from Myford Road to approximately 700
feet easterly of Myford Road.
To date, staff has reviewed all plans and supervised construction activities for conformance with the Specific Plan. No
known violations of the Specific Plan, City Code, Subdivision Map Act or CEQA have occurred. The developer has
complied with all development standards, policies, programs, and guidelines called out in the Specific Plan.
2
III. CONFORMANCE WITH PHASING SCHEDULE AND FISCAL
IMPACT MODEL
Another key element of the annual review process required by the Development Agreement is a review of actual
development activities for comparison with the approved phasing schedule and fiscal impact model prepared by
Stanley Hoffman and Associates. The phasing schedule was developed for the purpose of ensuring that anticipated
revenue producing uses are encouraged to be provided (such as auto dealers, retail space and hotel rooms) at a rate
which ensures a fiscal balance between these uses and the cost generating uses such as residential units. For the
purposes of the phasing schedule and the fiscal impact model, a slightly different project area was developed in order
to include the Phase One Residential Area and Tustin Auto Center. This area is identified as the East Tustin Fiscal
Area and is shown in Figure 1 on page 4. Both the Phasing Schedule and fiscal impact model components of the annual
review are discussed separately below:
PHASING SCHEDULE
Using information maintained by the Community Development Department, actual development figures were
compared with the phasing schedule contained in the Development Agreement. Table I below is the approved phasing
schedule which is contained in the Development Agreement. Table II on page 5 shows actual development
performance including the year and number of completed residential units, commercial square footage and auto
dealers. Tables III on page 6 provides a comparison between the phasing schedule and actual development. Both
Tables II and III project figures for the next reporting period (November 1989 - November 1990) to anticipate
continued compliance.
TABLE I
EAST TUSTIN PHASING SCHEDULE
CUM. CUM. AUTO
DWELLING DWELLING SQ. FT. SQ. FT. CENTER HOTEL
UNITS UNITS RETAIL RETAIL DEALERS ROOMS
955
955
0
0
3
0
740
1,695
0
0
4
0
1,095
2,790
0
0
2
0
1,303
4,093
400,000
400,000
1
0
1,273
5,366
400,000
800,000
0
250
1,192
6,558
0
800,000
0
0
1,212
7,770
0
800,000
0
0
339
8,109
80,000
880,000
0
0
336
8,445
0
880,000
0
0
187
8,632
220,000
1,100, 000
0
0
188
8,820
0
1,100,000
0
0
180
9,000
0
1,100, 000
0
0
9,000 9,000 1,100, 000 10 250
source: East Tustin Development Agreement
3
Figure 1 - East Tustin Fiscal Area
WE'S
4
In all cases, the definitions stated in the Develop-
ment Agreement were applied in order to determine
the actual value credited to commercial uses. This
means that for auto dealers, one dealer is counted
per site. Additional credits may bd applied to one
site if more than one vehicle type is sold and if the
average per vehicle type income is more than
510,900,000 in 1985 dollars. If the sales are adequate
to justify additional dealer credit, one credit per
$10,900,000 (1985 dollars) would be applied. No
dealers have received more than one credit. The
residential units are counted as of the date of issu-
ance of a Certificate of Occupancy. Retail square
footage is counted for the total square footage listed
on the approved building permit as of the date the
retail tenant is issued a Certificate of Occupancy for
a non -speculative development (i.e., one that is pre-
leased or pre -sold) and 50 percent of square footage
for a speculative project (i.e., one that is not pre-
leased or pre -sold).
As evidenced by the information provided by this
review and identified in Table III on page 6, the
developer has the authorization to occupy to a
maximum of 2,790 residential units during the No-
vember 1988 - November 1989 review period. An-
ticipated 1989-1990 construction activities show that
additional commercial square footage and auto dealers
are scheduled to open in the near future. With the
addition of this anticipated square footage, an addi-
tional 3,678 residential units may be built or a total
residential development authorization of 5,366 units.
This would include all of the approved/proposed
units as of November 1, 1989 in Phases I, II, and III.
At the discretion of the Developer, retail square
footage, auto dealers, and hotel rooms of equal
revenue may be interchanged at any period accord-
ing to the following formula: 1,000 square feet of
retail = .976 hotel rooms or .0135 auto dealers or
1,034 square feet of retail; one auto dealer = 71.81
hotel rooms or 74,251 square feet of retail. However,
anyone specific revenue generating category (hotel,
retail or auto dealer) cannot be completely elimi-
nated through the application of this formula with-
out an amendment of the Specific Plan.
The phasing schedule and determination of the status
of the Phasing Schedule does not include any inter-
change of uses unless requested by the Developer.
To date, no such request has been made to the City of
Tustin.
Supplemental information has been provided in Table
IV on pages 7 and 8 which shows the more specific
status of residential projects in the four phases of the
East Tustin project as of November 1, 1989. The
TABLE II
ACTUAL DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES IN EAST TUSTIN
* Review period runs from November 1 to November 1.
** All figures for 1989-1990 are estimates based upon project approvals and current
construction activities.
source: Community Devlopment Department Records.
Table identifies the number of units which have been approved, under construction, completed or currently in the
Design Review process. Figure 2 on page 9 also indicates the location and development status of each of the auto
dealerships in the Tustin Auto Center as of November 1, 1989.
Based on staff review of this information, the total number of allowed units (2,790) and that constructed (1,688) for
the 1988/89 review period is consistent with the amount of retail space and auto dealers as provided by the phasing
schedule. Based upon projected activity for the 1989/90 review period, additional retail square footage and auto dealers
would authorize a cummulative total of 5,366 residential units with a cummulative total of approximately 2,014
residential units expected to be completed which is consistent with the adopted phasing schedule.
FISCAL IMPACT MODEL (FIR)
The FIR was based upon a computerized program which was part of the original consultant contract with Stanley
Hoffman and Associates. A copy of the model was made available to the Community Development Department for
use when conducting the annual review and operates on the Community Development Department's computer
equipment. Staff uses the model in order to determine whether there is a fiscal balance between the cost and revenue
generating factors associated with the development in the East Tustin Fiscal Area as shown in Figure 1 on page 5.
The model uses the actual number of residential dwelling units and commercial square footages which are occupied
in certain reporting years and then estimates the costs of providing City services to the East Tustin area. It also
estimates the revenues received by the sales tax and other fees associated with the commercial and residential
development. The cost and revenue assumptions required to be used in the annual review are the original assumptions
stated in the FIR. These assumptions are provided in Appendix I of this report.
r
CUM.
CUM.
CUM.
YEAR
DWELLING
DWELLING
SQ. FT.
SQ.FT
AUTO
AUTO
BUILT*
UNITS
UNITS
RETAIL
RETAIL
DEALERS
DEALERS
1985-1986
0
0
0
0
3
3
1986-1987
373
373
0
0
1
4
1987-1988
363
736
194,111
194,111
2
6
344,758
1989-1990**
326
21014
207,568
7469440
3
10
* Review period runs from November 1 to November 1.
** All figures for 1989-1990 are estimates based upon project approvals and current
construction activities.
source: Community Devlopment Department Records.
Table identifies the number of units which have been approved, under construction, completed or currently in the
Design Review process. Figure 2 on page 9 also indicates the location and development status of each of the auto
dealerships in the Tustin Auto Center as of November 1, 1989.
Based on staff review of this information, the total number of allowed units (2,790) and that constructed (1,688) for
the 1988/89 review period is consistent with the amount of retail space and auto dealers as provided by the phasing
schedule. Based upon projected activity for the 1989/90 review period, additional retail square footage and auto dealers
would authorize a cummulative total of 5,366 residential units with a cummulative total of approximately 2,014
residential units expected to be completed which is consistent with the adopted phasing schedule.
FISCAL IMPACT MODEL (FIR)
The FIR was based upon a computerized program which was part of the original consultant contract with Stanley
Hoffman and Associates. A copy of the model was made available to the Community Development Department for
use when conducting the annual review and operates on the Community Development Department's computer
equipment. Staff uses the model in order to determine whether there is a fiscal balance between the cost and revenue
generating factors associated with the development in the East Tustin Fiscal Area as shown in Figure 1 on page 5.
The model uses the actual number of residential dwelling units and commercial square footages which are occupied
in certain reporting years and then estimates the costs of providing City services to the East Tustin area. It also
estimates the revenues received by the sales tax and other fees associated with the commercial and residential
development. The cost and revenue assumptions required to be used in the annual review are the original assumptions
stated in the FIR. These assumptions are provided in Appendix I of this report.
r
Section 1.9 of the Development Agreement requires that the project maintain a fiscally balanced cost to revenue ratio
so that the City's financial resources are not drained by providing costly public improvements and services to the
residential and commercial properties in the project area.
In all years, the Tustin Ranch project shows a positive fiscal impact to the City. A positive impact is determined by the
value of the Recurring Revenue/Expenditure Ratio (last line of figures in Table V). A value of 1.0 is considered a one-
to-one cost to revenue balance, and values over 1.0 represent an excess of revenues over costs. The figures contained
in the last line of Table V indicates that a minimum of 1.0 cost to revenue ratio has been attained. The ratio for this
reporting period is 1.26. Since this ratio is above 1.0, substantial conformance with the fiscal impact component of the
Annual Review can be determined. Table VI includes a summary of the fiscal impacts for each reporting year. These
impacts are provided in percentages of each major cost and revenue source.
It is important to note that the figures in Tables V and VI are generated based upon assumptions made in 1985 and
do not necessarily reflect the actual revenues and costs incurred by the developer and the City of Tustin. Additionally,
the revenues generated from taxes such as retail sales are not remitted to the City until the State Franchise Tax Board
has completed their accounting process and remits the funds to the City. This usually occurs at least two to three
calendar quarters after the funds are reported. Therefore, the numbers generated by the Fiscal Impact Model do not
show the actual revenue received by the City, but serve as a framework for determining the projects overall fiscal
balance for each review period.
TABLE 111
COMPARISON WITH ADOPTED PHASING SCHEDULE
TOTAL TOTAL
YEAR TYPE OF WORK UNITS UNITS AVAILABLE
BUILT* COMPLETED ALLOWED BUILT UNITS
1985-1986 3 AUTO DEALERS 1,695 0 1,695
1986-1987 373 UNITS 1,695 373 1,322
1 AUTO DEALER
1987-1988 363 UNITS 1,695 736 959
2 AUTO DEALERS
.194,111 SQ. FT. RETAIL
1989-1990** 326 UNITS 5,366 2,014 3,352
3 AUTO DEALERS
207,568 SQ. FT. RETAIL
* Review period runs from November 1 to November 1.
** All figures for 1989-1990 are estimates based upon project approvals and current
construction activities.
source: Community Devlopment Department Records.
East Tustin Development Agreement
6
TABLE IV
STATUS OF EAST TUSTIN RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS
NOVEMBER 19 1989
7
NO. OF
822
NO. OF
758
PROJECT
UNITS
UNIT
UNITS
PROJECT
APPROVED
TYPE
COMPLETE
STATUS
SHADOWBROOK
218
Single
196
Under
(Tracts 12719, 12868, 13044)
(Tract 13038)
Family
Condo
Construction
SYCAMORE GLEN
248
Condo
218
Under
(Tract 12732)
Model
(Tract 13053)
Construction
RANCHO ALISOL
356
Apts/
344
12 units
(Tract 12759)
Single
Condo
Under
Remianing
7
PHASE 1 TOTALS:
822
758
RANCHO MADERAS 266 Apts/ 266
Complete
(Tract 13030)
Condo
RANCHO TIERRA
252
Apts/
252
Complete
(Tract 13038)
Condo
ALMERIA
118
Single
117
Model
(Tract 13053)
Family
Build Out
MARICOPA
100
Single
68
Under
(Tract 13080)
Family
Construction
MONTEREY
103
Single
102
Model
(Tract 13094)
Family
Build Out
ARCADA
237
Condo
0
Under
(Tract 13096)
Construction
SEVILLA
110
Single
4
Under
(Tract 13106)
Family
Construction
Attached
ESTANCIA
145
Condo
121
Under
(Tract 13161)
Construction
RANCHO MARIPOSA
238
Apts/
0
Plan Check
(Tract 13735)
Condo
PHASE II TOTALS:
1,569
930
7
TABLE IV - CONTINUED
STATUS OF EAST TUSTIN RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS
NOVEMBER 11 1989
NO. OF
NO. OF
PROJECT
UNITS
UNIT
UNITS
PROJECT
APPROVED
TYPE
COMPLETE
STATUS
TRACT 13701/13990
161
Single
0
Plan Check
(Akins)
Family
TRACT 13733
73
Single
0
Design
(Bren Co.)
Family
Review
TRACT 13734
118
Single
0
Design
(Bren Co.)
Family
Review
TRACT 13746
316
Apts/
0
Plan Check
(Akins)
Condo
TRACT 13786
306
Apts/
0
Design
(Akins)
Condo
Review
TRACT 13788
170
Apts/
0
Design
(Westem National)
Condo
Review
TRACT 13796
108
Condo
0
Under
(Bren Co.)
Construction
TRACT 13824
317
Apts/
0
Design
(Regis)
Condo
Review
TRACT 13835
282
Condo
0
Plan Check
(RGC)
TRACT 13902
115
Single
0
Plan Check
(Bren-Osgood)
Family
TRACT 13908
97
Single
0
Design
(Bramalea)
Family
Review
TRACT 14068
182
Condo
0
Design
(Lyon)
Review
TRACT 14110
129
Condo
0
Design
(LDK
Review
TRACT 14168
137
Single
0
Design
(Bren-Osgood)
Family
Review
TRACT 14188
57
Single
0
Design
(Standard Pacific)
Family
Review
PHASE III TOTALS:
2,568
0
CUMMULATNE TOTALS:
4,959
1,688
source: Community Development Department Records
With three reporting periods complete and the availability of costs and revenues in the earlier phases of development,
the actual costs and revenues could be used to reevaluate these assumptions. Updating the assumptions for the next
reporting period would assist the City Council, staff and the developer to more accurately anticipate and evaluate the
remaining stages of the Specific Plan implementation.
Staff have also projected the remaining units into later years for the term of the Development Agreement assuming
construction of all 9,000 units authorized by the Agreement. These figures were then applied to the computerized
model so that the overall project projections reflect the total number of residential units and commercial square
footages approved in the Specific Plan. Each year anticipates a positive revenue/expenditure ratio of greater than 1.0.
These projections allow staff to analyze the future development activities and determine potential problems with
conformance. with the phasing schedule and fiscal model. Additional reports are generated by the model which
estimate: (1) the City's one-time costs and related fees, and (2) estimated staffing projections. These additional
reports are contained in Appendix II of this report.
ONTIAL;
(1987)
a
t
PARKI G
LOT
+
i i
DATE
OPENED
U. C.
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
F --
O
SITE UCHI_-r-�' Z
C. 1989
U. •
TUSTIN
DODGE MAC 1 `.,•
.----� LEXXUS
DEALER .� (1986) S PHERSON
STORAGE SITE �` TOYOTA U. C. ;/�
INTERSTATE 5 NO SCALE
Figure 2 - Tustin Auto Center Map and Development Status
9
TABLE V
- SUMMARY
OF
RECURRING
REVENUES
N
AND COSTS.
%0 O
M %t
M1CO
M
.- M. P O
OnO A P.
M
PN
--t
co
co
N
IONsOOMs
r
.N
1A �
•O
P CO
w
10 M P
O
M
Co
M
S 11% 5 -Z
N N
�t
P
PO
N
1 N r i
w �
w
W
N 1
PP
11
ti_ N M O M O (per. P 't
M
*0
`O N 00 P te' s �
N O M N
M
N
-0
11
In O �t 'O %s P co M
�O
M
N
d
r
II
O N O O w �t CO CO 1�
•p
'O M O P
A
a
II
N CO P N N
N
,
CO NM
%0
aft
•" N
w
.p
K
r
w
w
ccl
II
..pp
00• �O � O O M O INA CO��
.p �
COCMO
•
�t CO CPQ O f� V1 �
O
•C
M
N
(�
�
11
IA M M %t NO -r-, 'O 'O
Mr-
d
.r-
11
. . . . . .
r
O
r*J_
� Nt M A N :
O
M
d
C
O CO a N
L
w
CO
� in N 1A P
O
CO
�
w
>
r
11
It
CO CO IA O M f` M CO
O O NO M
O
NO
CO N M O �tpp c�
P %0 N �t CO
°rte°
i M
N
N
um
N
O.
11
.Ot .Ot �! P M
It1 N 1� O N O M if CO
.
IA
. . . . . .
�t N �t N O
�0
P
L
11
N N N 11%IN1 P �O •
N
M N1 N 0 't ti
O
N
M
O
u
to
C
d
L
O
11
N O O N �t O O I
't
` P -- V%
�O
1 P
i
ti•t
PP
itf�
Ns
P P t
CO
:1z�
1n
M
a
ImI-
r- O P 1t
M
�O CO �t �! CO ti
P
�t
O
C
11
c0
N M S �t �t N IA w r
N N
NO
N N N CO 1A 00
1.0 CO N N
►P►
O
C
N
11
cL.
d
•�
a.+
w
N
�
L
O
FVC
N ,
�
►^
M
�
i
� w
w
w
P
11
NO c0 O ipopp IA O %0 N �
co ti O ti
O
tM�
COLr% IA N P IA N
p- O
M
� %0
•--
�O
P
O~co
11
M CO
f`
M �O
>•
d
Is
act W;r O N% N �0% in%
I^ M M P NO
O
N
%0 N N M
O M �O
O
O
co
Ir
eJ
W
11
M N . -
M
n
w I` N N
O
L
w
a..
d
CIC
a+
L a+
d
w
�
N
w
w
� w
04
a+
eo
ii
q t 0 Mz O• .Mt
I%1
q 0 :17
NTT
o
.T
cJ
P
11
M
P N O O
ti
CO
r
IIe--
• M it,
N
N
�p O N .T CO N
M
M
CO
>
W
11
P O. M
M
N M
W
w
L
L.
a
a /o
Ce to
c.
I.- m u.
V
Cc
t
c.)
w
O
O:)
a of
w
IL u
'
f�
II
N t 0 (D O -T
M
.- O• N CO Pp
MM .- V1 .
ti
CO
co
N
O
'
P
11
s O O M %O ti
O
ti h N CO CO
N
N
CO
N
11
_
M M CO M
�%
r- �! N P
M
s
CO
11
IA a-
1A
CO t~A
404
N
N
11
w .t
�
w
w
t
w
ME
10
S
NO
11t
M
M
N
w
%O
N
M
O
r- P O O IA .t O O 'O�n
PO O N A i
N
N
%0 O
M %t
M1CO
.-- P
N P
O
�!
N
f`
r
1A �
•O
P CO
w
� Nw
O
M
:
M
w
.-
w
N
N
d
x
07
u
ccl
•�
•�
d
d
C
L
w
W
r x
ca
d
w
�
w
>
C
u a+
t_
C
w
to
w
ue
L
L
u
to
C
d
L
7
u
•3
0G
w
0
In
41
ImI-
41
C
>�
u d
u
0
>
C
N
V
cL.
d
•�
a.+
w
O
L.
10
L
O
FVC
L.
�
Z
L
w
O
u
7
2L x
.r N
41 01
(�.
W
O
V-
d
>
L
O
O
>•
d
u
>.
O w
C w N
eJ
W
u
d
X
ai
r-
lm o
C i7
O
L
w
a..
d
CIC
a+
L a+
d
d w •�
•w
d
w
L
a+
u •'�
•�
d
p..
w
C C
`1
l-
*
#
W •w !D
>
W
L
i
— .0
co a+
L
L.
a
a /o
Ce to
c.
I.- m u.
V
Cc
t
c.)
w
O
O:)
a of
u
IL u
...
10
S
NO
11t
M
M
N
w
%O
N
M
O
I
TABLE VI -SUMMARY OF FISCAL IMPACTS
11
XXXXXXxxX
x
XXXXXX
X
�t
11
•CO �t M d CO O f� f� 00
r O
'O CO V1 '! M 't
r O
11N
r M V1 0 N� M M
00
N O: V1 r 0 0
r O
r
II
r r
M N r N
O
11
r
r
11
r
r
r
r
r
r
X X x ?: X XX X X
r
X
x x X X x x
r
at
M
11
119 O cp O N �O CO
r O
1t r
r O
11
it
N No. N O N� M fn
CD
n
N O V% r 0 0
. O
r
If
II
In
CD
r r
M M r N
O
11
r
r
11
r
r
r
r
.
r
r
r
N N v NO O r M rn
00
NQ V% r 0 O%
r O
r
11
11
r
r
1
.
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
11
O N CO !. 9 V► O
O
O 99 CO CO
r O
It
N V1 pn %O O r c%j M M
CoO
N r V1 N O CO
r O
r
11
r r
M M r r
O
11
r
r
I
r
r
r
r
r
r
.e x x .e X .c x X
r
X
.e ae �: X X .•
r
X
O
5�`
11
11
�f N r O M M N (� CO
• . . . .
r O
r
O 1t 1t O• O M
. .
r O
r
N
r O
O• CO M M N M
r Co
11
O -
r r
N M r' r
r O
r r
11
r
r
11
r
r
r
r
r
r
X X �! X X .! X X X
r
X
X X X X X X
.
X
Cao
Cook
II
N M 1� O M 't M O CO
r O
N O �t �O N
II
N f� O r r CO N N
r O
N O M d' N N
r O
�O
r O
N .t r r
r O
•-
11
r
r
11
r
r
r
r
r
X X X X X X X �t .t
r
K
X X X X X ?•!
r
X
11
N N �! O M M M fM1�
r O
CO O• V1 CO Cp N
r O
P
11
M M O• Cl
W 'O
O
11
10
r O
r r
N M r .-
r O
r r
1
r
.
11
r
r
r
r
r
r
O P X C� X X X X
r
X
X X X X X.!
r
.�
t`
co
II
11
M
• . . . . . . .
r .
11
O CO O
. . .
r O
r
O•
II
a N �O O O r �O r N
r O
O• O .t V% NO
•"
11
f�
r O
N N r r r
r O
#
11
r
r
#
11
r
r
#
#
r
r
r
r
H
.y
r
r
C7
d
�O
co
11
11
N r 0 �t r• 0 0 V1
. . . .
r O
r
O� �t O CO O O
. O
r
W
o'.
II
O O a' O O O O O r
00
CO W O N O• r
r O
v N
O
C
11
11
r r
r
C)
u
It
r
.
r
N
U
d
It
rA d
xw u
._.cc
.1 •1.1 •>
a
nyi
L O d d
#
40 x W H
N
>I
0 41
ID c r
a
c W oi
ni
O
0 'C
LL.
O
CK
/- 1D 0 L L
7
U
u C7
OI
O C O 7 N
d
O>
L O
Y
CIC
x a+ u u7
d
•L
H CJ d a+
O
a
L
eo L o L c
o
41 K
Ix
L
ac In > u
L o as
u
.. d .; >
041
_
O
u
A O /0 c N to d
C7
u
2 a-+ O v O
10
N
d
of
�+ L •.+ d N d N L
L d •. d t CJ
1..
O
4!
a
C�
CJ V •C a
O
#
#
Ow �+ O N C� > 10 L
#
= .0 ccl
L. v#
CL cc N I. - CO CY U O
a a U a U ►�
11
TABLE VII - Fi6CAL MODEL INPU'i CATEGORIES
12
11 0
O
M O O
N ti N 0 1
�pp1►►
11
O
O�
11
�
11
11
11
11 tf1 O O A
co O O
ipn.
If
O
.-
a-
It
11
co
11 N
ull
in
O
IOn
M14.
11
O
pNp..
O�
II
N
r- �
N
11
O
O
11 In N Co %O
LA
O� Co
r-
11 N -t M r- S
11
N
Ln
O
O�
II � •-
M
11
�
11
O O
O%
M
N co Co
II %O Nt N
11 W- V-
1!1
M Ln
O
pQ..
Co
r-
11
N
N
11
t #
11 O O Co 1^ 1�-
O co
N CO O
i #
It �O M c0
ti
a f` (D
O
s
i 49 #
t #
a
r-
It
11 .
M
1
M
t p #
Ii
t W #
11
t H #
t S i#t
t a#
It O c0 O- NO Cl
It P
O .t
N
M s O
O
49
11
O
P
iCA #
p.
II
P
t In it
r
11
c -
t < #
II
t m #
t #
II
11
t 1-- #
LLJ 49
t W#
II O O O OA Nt
O O
•-
M O O
t U.#
1 N M
M O
t W #
II
O
t Q #
co
1
i O #
t N #
II
II
t #
11
t O #
11
t Z #
<*
i
11 O O O O O
O O
M
O O O
t N it
11
O
11
11
t #co
O•
It
t Z #
11
c J #
II
t J #
t W #
c 3 #
t #
41
i m #
C
W
#
� z s
v
v
►-
# ►#- #
c O#
N
W
# W#
t #
O49
N N
Lli
N
c V#
7
Z
W•-•
CG
y#
d
Q
W Q
i
I-
H
W
=
OJ
p d' x
t O#
Vf W N W N
N
I~-
t d#
t 2 #
1.. I- I-- h- I.-
�+ 1; 1: •+
Q
Q
N
d
��
I.-
W
I-
W
9
Z
W
N Z GC
W0 <
t .-. #
c #
c W #
=—
Z Z Z Z
> > > >
tL
O
§
N..
Q
C7
J
L
N
L
I-
I-
LL
I-
W
p
In
W
Q
W
O
O
W
N
W
DC Z d
c N#
< m U O W
w
w
41
W
OF
N
O
W
ix
>
W
O
N
W
Z
Cc
/A
V
a. d d
J cc t-
J
z
W
m
U.
N
N
J
W<
Z Z z
O O O O O
m —
Z
1-
'o
W
z
rn
w
►+
s
0
0
0
t <#
2 0 t h 0 0
u s w
O
2
N
OC
OC
N
W
•-•
W
U
Z<—
t J#
#
W W W W W W=
p I-• 1- 1� 1- 1-
<<<<<
0 1--
N
w •-•
0
W
W
W
cX
W
s
I-
O
r J��
w
<
W p
C� OC
«• ¢
GC
O
►-�
s
O
•-•
I--
N<
D
w
W
w
w
N
u�
J
m
u u u
W W W
x x x
t # #
w I.7 u U u u
Z O
w
\L
O
Q
In
w
U. 0
w=
2
=
wLU
d
c #
cc
U
O
s
O
•-•
W
M
O
M
# # #
# # #
12
IV. CONFORMANCE WITH REQUIREMENTS OF THE
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
The East Tustin Development Agreement is a mechanism for implementing several portions of the Specific Plan. The
primary objectives of the Agreement are as follows:
1. To secure phased completion of the public improvements and accomplish all required dedications/
reservations of the Specific Plan;
2. To assure adequate funding and dedication/reservation for the public improvements required by the Specific
Plan;
3. To clarify the respective responsibilities of the City and the developer for implementation of those public
improvements and dedications; and
4. To provide a program for monitoring and controlling the impacts of the project on the City's fiscal resources,
so that the phased development of the property and the completion of the project will not result in a negative
fiscal impact to the City.
In addition to the fiscal and development monitoring discussed previously in this report, the annual review must
determine whether or not the developer and the City have acted in good faith compliance with the objectives of the
Agreement. Since the review of the phasing and fiscal issues have been discussed in preceding sections of this report,
the remainder of this discussion will focus upon the analysis of the Development Agreement.
Required public improvements, dedications and reservations are generally provided with the approval of each
individual sector subdivision map (Tracts 12345, 12763, 12780, and 13627) for Phases I, II, III and IV respectively.
Dedications and/or reservations for all of the major public streets and arterial highways, community facilities, parks
and schools have been provided by the developer with the exception of Tract 13627 (Phase IV) which was not recorded
by November 1, 1989. The phasing of these improvements will be tied to the approved phasing schedule as discussed
previously.
Funding for all public improvements within the East Tustin project area are provided through various sources. These
funding sources include Assessment Districts 85-1 and 86-2, developer fees as created by Resolution No. 88-12 and
other various permit and review fees collected by the City. Resolution No. 88-12 was approved by the City Council in
March of 1988 for: (1) the funding and construction of a fire protection facility and acquisition of new fire protection
equipment; (2) a proportionate share of the costs for the widening of Irvine Boulevard; and (3) the expansion of the
Civic Center. These fees are collected based on the size of each individual development project and are paid by the
individual developers at the time building permits are issued.
Finally, clarification of the role of the City and developer in their respective roles in implementing the public
improvements and dedications/reservations are clearly defined in the Agreement. The developer's responsibilities
include items such as: (1) circulation improvement phasing, dedication and reservation of the required public
improvements, parks, facilities and schools; (2) providing fiscal integrity to the Specific Plan by providing a balance
mix of residential and commercial development; (3) provision of a privately owned but publicly accessible 18 -hole golf
course; (4) to develop properties in the Hillside District (as defined in the East Tustin Specific Plan) in conformance
with the City's hillside grading standards; (5) providing funding for a fire protection facility and equipment, the Civic
Center expansion and the widening of Irvine Boulevard as discussed above; and (6) to provide low and moderate
income family housing as required by California Government Code Section 65915.
The City has, by approval of the Development Agreement, committed to providing the following to the developer: (1)
the developer has the ability to process and obtain building permits for those uses in conformance the Specific Plan
at the land use intensities specified; (2) no additional restrictions (other than increased fees) may be applied to the
project unless specified in the Development Agreement or modified in the State Uniform Codes (Building Codes); (3)
to cooperate with the developer for timely progress of development in the project area; (4) approval of the
Environmental Impact Report and its identified potential adverse impacts in relation to the land uses and development
proposed in the approved Specific Plan; and (5) to cooperate in the provision of funding such as the County's housing
bond programs, and the creation of special assessment districts (Assessment Districts 85-1 and 86-2) to provide
adequate means for the provision of all required public improvements and facilities.
13
While the Agreement provides a mechanism to implement change, changes can not be made to the Agreement without
the express consent and knowledge of the City and developer. Any changes to the Specific Plan and/or the Developer
Agreement require analysis under the California Environmental Quality Act and other related state laws and
regulations.
In June of 1989, the City Council approved General Plan Amendment 89-02(c), Zone Change 88-02 and East Tustin
Specific Plan Amendment 88-01 modifying entitlements in Sectors 7 and 11 of the Specific Plan in response to the
School Facilities Agreement between the Tustin Unified School District and the Irvine Company and a Letter of
Understanding between the City of Tustin and the Irvine Company. The Specific Plan Amendment provided the
following changes to the Specific Plan:
1. Changed the easterly 10 acre portion of the former High School site located at Irvine Boulevard and Myford
Road in Sector 11 from High School (HS) designation to a Medium High Density Residential (MH)
designation;
2. Changed the 16 acres Community Park (CP) designation in Sector 11 to a High School (HS) designation; and
3. Changed the designation of a former 20 acres site located adjacent to Jamboree Road north of Keller Drive
in Sector 7 from Medium High Density Residential (MH) designation to a Community Park (CP) designation.
V. CONCLUSION
The annual review conducted by the Community Development Department provides information to the Tustin City
Council for the purposes of determining good faith compliance of the City and the developer under the terms of the
Development Agreement for the East Tustin Specific Plan. Each of the annual review components has been completed
and analysis of the results have been provided in this report. Each of the requirements of the developer and the City
have been met and based on the information provided in the annual review. This Development Monitoring and Annual
Review Report establishes:
1. Conformance with the requirements of the Specific Plan;
2. Conformance with the phasing schedule and Fiscal Impact Model; and
3. Conformance with.the requirements of the Development Agreement.
Based upon review of the Community Development Department records as presented in this report, the City and the
Developer are in general compliance with the adopted Development Agreement for East Tustin. In conformance with
the requirements of the Agreement, the Community Development Department staff will initiate the annual review
process in November for each year of the Agreement term. The results of this review will subsequently be presented
to the City Council for determination of compliance with the terms of the Development Agreement.
14
APPENDIX
MARKET AS4_. SPT I ONS
FACTOR VALUE EXPLANATION
** RESIDENTIAL CATEGORY A **
ED 1.20 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE
EV $500,000 SECURED VALUATION PER UNIT
EP 4.2 POPULATION PER UNIT
** RESIDENTIAL CATEGORY B **
LD 3.37 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE
LV $250,000 SECURED VALUATION PER UNIT
LP 3.4 POPULATION PER UNIT
** RESIDENTIAL CATEGORY C **
MD 7.23 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE
MV $170,000 SECURED VALUATION PER UNIT
MP 2.8 POPULATION PER UNIT
** RESIDENTIAL CATEGORY D **
MHD 11.54 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE
MHV $130,000 SECURED VALUATION PER UNIT
MHP 2.8 POPULATION PER UNIT
** RESIDENTIAL CATEGORY E **
HD 17.31 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE
HV $90,000 SECURED VALUATION PER UNIT
HP 2.2 POPULATION PER UNIT
RLF 45% PCT. OF SECURED VAL FOR LAND (RES. LAND)
15
** NEIGHBORHOOD RETAIL **
NRF
0.25
FLOOR AREA RATIO
NRL
$0
LAND VALUE PER SITE SO FT
NRB
$50
BUILDING VALUATION PER BLDG SO FT
NRU
$15
UNSECURED VALUATION PER BLDG SO FT
NRS
$130
TAXABLE SALES PER SO FT
NRE
500
SO FT PER EMPLOYEE
** DISTRICT
RETAIL **
DRF
0.25
FLOOR AREA RATIO
DRL
$0
LAND VALUE PER SITE SO FT
DRB
$50
BUILDING VALUATION PER BLDG SO FT
DRU
$15
UNSECURED VALUATION PER BLDG SC FT
DRS
$150
TAXABLE SALES PER SG FT
DRE
500
SO FT PER EMPLOYEE
** REGIONAL
RETAIL **
RRF
0.2296
FLOOR AREA RATIO
RRL
$0
LAND VALUE PER SITE SC FT
RRB
$50
BUILDING VALUATION PER BLDG SO FT
RRU
$15
UNSECURED VALUATION PER BLDG SO FT
RRS
$200
TAXABLE SALES PER SO FT
RRE
500
SG FT PER EMPLOYEE
** FREESTANDING RETAIL **
ACF
0.25
FLOOR AREA RATIO
ACL
SO
LAND VALUE PER SITE SO FT
ACB
$40
BUILDING VALUATION PER BLDG SO FT
ACU
$10
UNSECURED VALUATION PER BLDG SQ FT
ACS
$100
TAXABLE SALES PER SO FT
ACE
500
SO FT PER EMPLOYEE
** OTHER RETAIL ** (auto center)
ORF
0.15
FLOOR AREA RATIO
ORL
$0
LAND VALUE PER SITE SO FT
ORB
$40
BUILDING VALUATION PER BLDG SO FT
ORU
$10
UNSECURED VALUATION PER BLDG SO FT
ORS
$10,900,000
TAXABLE SALES PER AUTO DEALERSHIP
ORE
1,000
SO FT PER EMPLOYEE
15
** HOTEL **
HRR S80 HOTEL ROOM RATE
HOCC 80% HOTEL OCCUPANCY RATE
HEMP 1.0 HOTEL EMPLOYEES PER ROOM
HSV $1001000 HOTEL SECURED VALUE PER ROOM (total)
HUV $10,500 HOTEL UNSECURED VALUE PER ROOM
HLF 7.50% PCT. OF SECURED VAL FOR LAND (HOTELS), assuming 50 % TIC ownership
HS 50% TAXABLE SALES AS PERCENT OF ROOM RECIEPTS - HOTEL
HRF 1,000 HOTEL SQUARE FEET PER ROOM
HF 1.00 FLOOR AREA RATIO
** GARDEN OFFICE **
GOF 0.35 FLOOR AREA RATIO
GOL SO LAND VALUE PER SITE SO FT
GOB $80 BUILDING VALUATION PER BLDG SO FT
GOU S15 UNSECURED VALUATION PER BLDG SO FT
GOE 310 SO FT PER EMPLOYEE
** MIDRISE OFFICE **
MOF 0.35 FLOOR AREA RATIO
MOL $0 LAND VALUE PER SITE SO FT
MOB $90 BUILDING VALUATION PER BLDG SO FT
MOU $15 UNSECURED VALUATION PER BLDG SQ FT
MOE 310 SO FT PER EMPLOYEE
** HIGH RISE OFFICE **
HROF 0.35 FLOOR AREA RATIO
HROL SO LAND VALUE PER SITE SO FT
HROB $100 BUILDING VALUATION PER BLDG SO FT
HROU $15 UNSECURED VALUATION PER BLDG SO FT
HROE 310 SG FT PER EMPLOYEE
** INDUSTRIAL **
IF 0.50 FLOOR AREA RATIO
IL $5 LAND VALUE PER SITE SO FT
IB S40 BUILDING VALUATION PER BLDG SO FT
IU S15 UNSECURED VALUATION PER BLDG SO FT
IS S14 TAXABLE SALES PER SO FT
IE 700 SO FT PER EMPLOYEE
** RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT **
RDF 0.40 FLOOR AREA RATIO
RDL $5 LAND VALUE PER SITE SO FT
RDB S40 BUILDING VALUATION PER BLDG SO FT
RDU $15 UNSECURED VALUATION PER BLDG SO FT
RDS $14 TAXABLE SALES PER SO FT
RDE 350 SO FT PER EMPLOYEE
** OTHER NON-RESIDENTIAL ** (golf course land only)
ONRF 0.00 FLOOR AREA RATIO
ONRL $0.34 LAND VALUE PER SITE SO FT
ONRB $40 BUILDING VALUATION PER BLDG SO FT
ONRU $15 UNSECURED VALUATION PER BLDG SO FT
ONRS $O TAXABLE SALES PER SO FT
ONRE 350 SO FT PER EMPLOYEE
16
APPENDIX 11
• .t
11 1- CO O I
111
O M V% V1 O
.
O N
N
O
O O .
O
Ln
111
• pQ.�
11 CO O• W •
%O
*,O O• .t — %O
M ti
O
O
O O .
O
N
�t P •
0.
1` 0. N CO .-
O.
N r-
.T
N
.- N
V1
�O
.7
M
11 N •
M
N
i
CO
.
�
1
t
II
M
O.
11 %0 •
11 M •
N
CO
M CO %0 V1 �
-t M M 9 V1
Lr%
i Li
N M
O•
O
O O i
99 1
O
O
O .
O
N
N
7
1 r
11 M �r A 1
N
N P N N
co
N r
M
N
.-- N
V1
%0 1
r-
co
11 N
M
N
CO
�
t
1
11
N
M CO 0% .! CO
00
M
O
O O
O
co
CO
N
8Qz�
11 O- N N 1
M
I� O� O P M
M
N
O
O O
O
M
O
co
1 P
11 . . . 1
11 O .! CO
.
M
. • . .
%0 N N NO --
1
Ln
r- r-
� .
M
N
1
�- M 0
.
NO
1
Vl
M
O
II N
M
�
1
11
N
C
11 O V1 CO
.t
N O% -O CO
CO
CO
O
O O
O
O
%O
P
a+ O•
11 N �t f` 1
�!
�t •
V1
O
O O
•N
11 N M No
N
O
r-• •-
N
N
.- M
�O
.t
N
O
11 .� 1
N
N
�
II
.
11
•
i
i O
11 O N %0 •
O•
•• •t M CO N
111
N 0,
•
O
O O
O
M .
N
N
1 O•
-11 O %O —
f�
W N 7 W *O
� %O
n M
� P
O
O O �
O
NO
P
Ln
11 00 — M
N
s N .- M O
• N
O O
O
N.-
M
%0
N .
.T
.t
11 •
�-
•
M
�
I
�
1
II
O•
11 N CO M •
M
.t (> CO M 0.
CO
O O i
O
P
V1
ti
CO
11 .t N L 1 •
N
M CO 0: M 111
•-
.t
O
O
N
.t
r-
.-
11 %0 r- N 1
co
.1 •- O M O
O O
. O
N
M 1
%0
N .
O
.t
1
II •
.-
� �
.
.
.
M
.-
�
II
.
1
11
t
M
V% N NO -O
um
N 1�
. O•
O
O O
O
O
c0
• CO
11 �! �O M
.t
P O• .t V1 M
N
N
M
O
N
N
P
M O •'- 1
V1
r- O O .- O
V1
O O
O
N .
.t
•--
•O
c0
�
1
1
11
1
f`
11%0 •- N .
A
%O CO %0
M N
V1
CO %O
.T
O
O O .
O
01
ti
V1
1 t0
P
11 O N v 1
11
-,O
N M O N
O
O O
O
O O 1
O
.7 1
M
V1
.-
11 0 0 1
O O O O O
r-
O O
. O
.-
N .
J
O .
ti
N
2
O
•
11
II
F-
1
N
•
O
•
a
•
•
11 N N in 1
O•
.1 O M P CO
M
O O
CO
O
O O
O
O
N
N
CL'
1
110% 11 7 O O 1
r
7 0 0 0 0
1 M
O O
1 O
O
O O .
O
CO
CO
d
1 •-
11 O O O 1
O
O O O O O
1 O
O O
1 O
•-
N
.t
O I
.t
•t
N
�
11 �
�
•
1
�
N
11
0
11
N
U
I. -
Z
0
Ol L C
11 0- 0% .t
CCpp N %0 O N
N N
CO
II CO �O
CO N M N O
�t CO
IT
SZ
�-•
_C �O
11 O P O
0000 O O (e
�O V-
CO
U.1
OC
Q
4j
CCI •+ •.-
11
•
11 •- CO -4
Cp N , N CO
M O•
P
CIC
LU
L 0 M
41 0
11 V1 .r 3
N M
V1 V1 .t 0�
N M 44 N N
M
M
J
fA
O=
W
CL
O
00. a0
11
11
H
CLQ
. L
O
ttt
Z_
1
#
CJ
1+-
CO
O
C
O
C
0%
ca
L
Z
O
a
N
W
0 0
c
u
c
d
y
t-
cc
/o L
a
c
°'
L
41
>
c
a
v
a
u>
Q
qui� to
i
v,
c c
c
u
-�
m
O
O N d
>
•- N_
>. C_
L C
Q
N
ZO
�+
z
3
•C
�C
u
)
�
O
1W-
N
d N N C u
t9
'c
a
W
_C
0 a
U .L C
u aL. -rL. 0
�+ 1t1 L LQ
c
L
-
C --•
- O
_
Q. H Q>
O Q
d
0. CCI
a+
to
NO
H
Q
0
C
W
CO
a
a
U
17
A 11 Cp O
p�!
O
r-
O• II 1� ti O �
LM
OPP 11 N f� 04
11 CO N O CO CO
11 cep N 1..
11 CO N f�
qj
CO
11 Z8 I O•�t 1�t� I
cjg0
MA
�
11 e- r r
;
N
11
f�
N
M
H
H
Q 11 0 0
A
M 11 N M ti O
O
t�TT It O .- .--
•- 11 .
N
�. M �t M
11 p. �.
e
. .
11 P N P i
.
r
�- . ?
II P CO O
11
r
M �
W1
N
H
�
H
'
O
O: 11 N:9 O A M
t r
It N O
M
11 O P. A O
11
M
II NO %O
�
r
`M M N
pOCOp
v9
�
H
'
�- 11 P [� A
11 I t� co �
In
coO
.- It A Nr1i M s!Lr% cO
IA
t1 �„�,
N
a 11 N P O CO M
11 M IAA %O
INA
0- 11
11 ti s
~
11 -O O v1
�
N
M eO
11 O. %O
M
�
N �
rq
� •-
� H
O 11 M A IA '
M
11 Op.
%0
Cl 0-
&
OII
.Lrl
11 .
P N O O u1
ti
11 Off. N coA�
�
r' 11 . • . .
11 CO N P O O
� p
11 W- r
In
11 In •t S IA M
W :
H
H
M
i H
A 11 N T- (11 NO
co 11 N
CPCpp
CO 11 M O M p .Mp
A
�t O
�O
P tl N 10 O to
O
CIO
%O
N
CO
11 M N M
O
II M %O �t an
11 .- .- .- .-
H
.-
H
.O
H
�
M
'
i
11 r- CO O i
Ln r -i
A40
~
II �O •- M -.t M
ti
A II N I
11 N f� M
II � IA �-
11 1� IA
�
O.
y
•
II Zp CO A N O
�p
11 N r N
H
NO
W
11 H.r-
0
H
�t
7
'
ti 11 M IA
co
.-
O
11 N N M N M
O
11 M In
r tl
O
c
A 11 CO CO co
O v0
M
11I1I1
.
Ln
ql
-
Ln
NMq
M
rAO �--
rMCO-
•j
IA 11
N
y
'
'LU
W
c 11 M •- M N
aA 11 v
d
N 11 co
M O O �
�
N s
•- 11 . .
r
u
0
A 11 O .- O �r NO
CO
.
N M
•
A
e- 11 . . • . .
11 M i H
-C
v
11 %r A O 00
11 2 1A
A
11
>
%r M e-
11 H
.p
I
�
W
�
N
N
O
�•
V
i
w• L �
god
u
N u r+
0
X
v v O
ccl
C C a+
to C
Cv-
•+ N O
aY L.
U
••• •.� W Y
C C
a+
N
u u *a
c c
u 0
W
u u a
C
u u
#
m a z
> >
m m a a >
18