Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSS3 - Banning RanchCITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Agenda Item No.SS 3 January 27, 2009 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:. City Manager's Office Sharon Wood, Assistant City Manager 949 -644 -3222, swood @city.newport- beach.ca.us SUBJECT: Appraisal Report for Banning Ranch RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Receive and file Consultive Pricing Study by Buss - Shelger Associates. 2. Provide direction to staff and consultants regarding additional actions. DISCUSSION: Background: The General Plan establishes open space as the primary use for Banning Ranch, and provides that if it is "...not acquired for open space within a time period and pursuant to terms agreed to by the City and the property owner, the site may be developed as a residential village.... with a majority of the property preserved as open space." The City Council set the following as a priority for 2008: "Conduct an appraisal of the Banning Ranch property and assess funding available for the purchase of the property for open space." In February 2008, the Council appointed the Banning Ranch Appraisal and Acquisition Ad Hoc Committee comprised of Mayor Selich and Council members Gardner and Rosansky. After research by staff on the qualifications and process for hiring an appraiser, the Committee directed staff to retain Dave Myerson of Resource Opportunity Group, LLC (ROG) as the City's open space acquisition consultant. Based on conversations with appraisers with experience on properties like Banning Ranch, Myerson recommended that the City not order a formal appraisal of the property at this time. State agencies won't work on funding an acquisition until there is an agreement with property owners, and the City needs an estimate of value to open discussions with the owners. In addition, the State is required to perform its own appraisal for acquisitions of more than Appraisal Report for Banning Ranch January 27, 2009 Page 2 $25 million. The Committee directed staff to request proposals from appraisers to conduct a pricing study to, establish a range of value for Banning Ranch. Four proposals were evaluated, and the Committee selected Buss - Shelger Associates. Appraisal Report: Buss - Shelger's Consultive Pricing Study is attached, and Ronald Buss will be at the City Council meeting to present his findings and respond to questions from Council members. His pricing recommendations are in the range of $184,000,000 to $211,000,000. With a 25% bulk price discount for acquiring all of the property at one time, the range would be reduced to $138,000,000 to $158,000,000. These pricing recommendations do not include the cost of clean -up and remediation from the oil operations on the property. Funding Availability: Dave Myerson is starting to make inquiries about the availability of State and other funds for acquisition of the property, and will provide the City Council with a brief oral report. He has advised staff that, in December, the State froze all disbursements from AB 55 loans and directed that all projects funded from this source be frozen. Following that direction, the Coastal Conservancy suspended all work under agreement with them that was funded with State bonds. Unfortunately, this is not a good time to be seeking funding for acquisition of open space, but Myerson will be exploring whether longer term prospects may be better. Public Notice: Staff provided notice of this study session to those who have subscribed to receive e- select alert messages on Newport Banning Ranch Updates, and to the list of interested parties and property neighbors maintained by the City. Submitted by A&J� _-)4�1 Sharon Wood Assistant City Manager Attachment: Consultive Pricing Study Pq CONSULTIVE PRICING STUDY POTENTIAL ACQUISITION PARCELS BANNING RANCH - 400t ACRES NEWPORT BEACH ANNEXATION THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY �r ry w rr �"_� �..�+• �� � � '�c. .�l�.�Cr"a'�e4`�x A .�yR y,Ka' t��is�re S °��`3' 'r ;T• :. ' �4► t y L 'd`+�; .i � t = � tY� atj"'Y r � j �� �s,�Y��[WJ�'Ar' .� / r , ♦ L. "�4"'��'�c ^�' Zxtb�,` �M -� ' H � yv,'t iw wwx'y` 4C 3`�{+ -' a .f #+�' 'i= ��" ,�'tr, � ��a yx'E magi -` +:• LL'Yir��x5y�� 4 � .. � r,,�,,wst ,y�+ .a..s� � r �,'�t'�a�f ��y� ,'aa` . ;;"'{ F _•sfi"ry° gtA",'.`t'° I 3e v ri4 �` wQ'y'�s '* 'ng � .fi 1.: YPYai �ri�+�s o �✓§�".�. .. Y"W`�P vic, �.� - µpti -'d- r ��'�+. -f �a.°'''3+.° r' =r^*'° y" t+_ay • � ' �� � �- * i...- . 1 V. t�.�a -n... ..ter .�sni vR'�..R'. „'�.. _..•_i.. w:R- <.:dr"�4 ti- .v^$•1 ,_ ",mss. _ '� I. - a.. t... '� .. .. ...rs�l BUSS- SHELGER ASSOCIATES Real Estate Consultants & Advisors December 23, 2008 City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92268 - 8915• Attn: Ms. Sharon Wood . Assistant City Manager Re: Consultive Pricing Analysis Potential Acquisition Components Banning Ranch, Newport Beach Our File No. 4262 -08 Ladies & Gentlemen: 865 S. Figueroa Street Suite 9900 Los Angeles, California 90017 Telephone: (213) SM7272 Fax: (213) 38&5276 &Mail: bumhelger®pacbea.net Resource Opportunity Group 811 6a' Street, Suite 301 Santa Monica, CA 90403 Mr. David Myerson Proprietor Buss - Shelger Associates has been requested to ascertain for the City the magnitude of capital funds from various sources that will be required to purchase all or portions of the Banning Ranch, depending on priorities. The current project proposes development on roughly one -half of the 402 - acre Ranch; entitlements are being sought for 1,375 dwelling units, 75 hotel rooms, 75,000 square feet of commercial space plus visitor oriented facilities. In order to assist the City in their deliberations, relevant market information has been assembled involving properties with features similar to the various Banning Ranch components. These price benchmarks have been applied to the subject components on both a conservative and optimistic basis. The market data program consists of the following broad categories. • Larger coastal degraded wetlands purchases • Sales of developable sites adjacent to wetlands • Transfers of developable marine terrace • Environmentally sensitive hillside acquisitions. Extensive back up details on each data item has been retained in our files, to be included in a final appraisal report if required. In the interest of providing concise results, the information will be shown in summary form in our ensuing presentation with an analysis and pricing recommendations. In the interest of efficiency, the conclusions may be found in the table on the following page. Additionally, we have provided our judgment as to the "bulk price" in the event the entire Banning Ranch is sought for acquisition rather than smaller increments. 7 THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY 0 n u r 1 ACOE RelkwgWn J it • I ,•� I \ Z �® i E nNGN AT ANEAS n) MRRQTEC}Etl ru.rwe.s ca.saca.�aw.+.wa.,.. i rarais sa. s:.�A WnG MN"RESnNWn ME rye _ KhNp�Yn cwra/smn Wl�swbn6un 1 V 11 Wefi A e PAC1F,, N Of EA.N ExhibR 3 -1 Habitat Protection and Restoration Plan f 4we�Ym�s-- :�b\:IaO:M+ewMAm \�eR•,wrge�e�n W Ps ID Parcel Proposed Land No. Price Recommendations Index Use Designation Acres Conservative Optimistic A Lowland Open Space 134.1 $ 8,000,000 $ 8,700,000 B -1 Oil Recovery Site 11.7 1,300,000 1,500,000 B -2 Oil Recovery Site 4.8 900,000 1,000,000 B -3 Benchland Open Space 43.5 6,500,000 7,600,000 C -1 Benchland Development 85.4 111,000,000 128,100,000 C -2 Benchland Development 29.7 52,000,000 59,400,000 D Hillside Open Space 93.1 4;200,000 4,700,000 TOTALS ......... ............................... 402.3 $184,000,000 $2.11,000,000 BULK PRICE (25% Discount) ... ............................... $138,000,000 $158,000,000 Set forth on the following pages may be found concise general land use comments, market information plus our recommendations pertaining to each land use category by parcel as shown above. Respectfully submitted, BUSS - SHELGER ASSOCIATES Ronald L. Buss ii THIS PACE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY 12-- lit ,l. t< A. ",A x i \I I, PARCEL A — LOWLAND OPEN SPACE (WETLANDS) Background This designation is fairly self - explanatory as it encompasses all the lower, flat land i areas that are heavily impaired with wells. The only exemptions are the two oil recovery sites (B -1 and B -2) located on the periphery of these degraded lands. Approximately 79 acres of the 134 acres in this category can be classified as wetlands, 42 acres are identified as wet meadows, the remaining 13 acres consist of trails, buffer zones and access corridors. It should be noted that all of the wetlands purchases (except Sale Nos. 4 and 5) involve degraded acreage impacted primarily with both defunct and currently active oil wells plus the support pipelines, water injection wells and storage tanks. The market information does not show a price differential between the more pristine sites and the impaired parcels. I 13 THIS PACE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY IH Mle. :m Wa1m Z^ �C\i �e INBM 1 LNnd E14 �'� PIWeeY N.u'+r G"Ie MR Anos r' � � / ENTURA 4 _ /'\•nix 4eke LOS PADRES }4T7ONAL ,Wd"r coUNTY rsn e ST _ -- •cR� — I� NMWfW SW�f ar sAxiivA NAIL �v� I lNrWtEI w jy,�, •ti:�i; .I FOREST fa; 1 ER ILcoUr r �._ue_ �Ef- Irt. vlc x. usE Um,Q 1 'rQ ACHY — n I_r N3 r LOSJ AN%ELESN OgBRI ANGELES �NTq /Ar5 Sen Ant eAM. I (Old Bally FOREST fa; _` ILcoUr r �._ue_ wFrSn�w / _ snMS •s OANS ` _.. 0 . AIUSA 23 POUT me i�uA,m A6RUAA s r xllu xourxN B LHAM AAMONIE rOYIxA pNE x° NI 101 O PL COVIN 6 5 "- °T° z_ SANTA MONIC� .3_ IZ IA PUExI[ 1 — _—� — __ � - WNILTIER1� �^M LOS ANGELES mr.1mnnn `�' HABRA - OOWNEY NORWA tOR BA L imHAIFANAEACM E� iEN, "I El(FLO P �. FULLERTON NFNBRSA WCN \ 6, 1 REBOX00 BEACN� FOR , �paAj 9 ',[ '^ Sid \9 TORRANCE uAE�BBB6 ANAHEIM O^ 3 RANBI * SANTA_> >drnx nrcxo 1 , L ELICf ao NA VERB _ PALOSES OST 2- 7 IHUNTI SUCH ESA IRVIN 1 GS L 2 I ��.y >71 �II c'Sa Sou4 f"{eb n n "aww •4WWm xv.t Erq 1 uhf( UAXA SaxtASA Ixfhn -Nx Pone II 1 ri "'= cum I'nlJlinn llarMir `, s TA WBilse ('noe � ��Q pn m' Gtr /Wesron Ptf 0TAIMM II / INrw /nn IfN�' \rswxo dLY4m x Selb Verde R.� � "to/, '. V S9�i i VnrUUre,r Ifurinn C ' Q SANCLFMENR Us IWpJSAWY ` N VAMON G' ,"No C� �r I� \'I.JnI.I amen Comparable Sales NAIL I�OR_E_N_O J "I I< —1. ,W% 1. FOREST 'WIMMU \ Ip PIO6EPH N. FB EOENIE PENDLETON I �- n ends OCEANSIDE r/�•�. mbmlmes.un:eu.• I \ae[\eue n.rz Ilan., /. LAIOIIA ICI PACIFIC BFAC I S 15 Buss-SHELGFR A&sku 1TFS Market Information A search was undertaken for larger acquisitions of degraded lands and environmental sensitive wet meadows to ascertain prevailing price levels. The data program encompasses a five- year period, transactions uncovered varied in location from Ormond Beach to the north, southerly to the Del Mar estuary in San Diego County. The sales are listed chronologically below to ascertain price trends over time, the general location of each item is indicated on the facing Sales Map. Due to the size of the subject, a minimum size criterion of roughly 30 acres was adopted; the purchases ranged up to 275± acres. Sale No. General Acre Date Location Area 1 Arnold Road @ Edison Drive 261.2 6/02 Ormond Beach, Oxnard 2 N/O PCH, W/O Brookhurst Ave. 4/03 Bolsa Chica, Huntington Beach 3 S/S Ballona Creek @ Culver Dr. 1/04 Playa Vista (Area B Wetlands) 4 W/S El Camino Real, S/O 6/04 de La Valle, Del Mar 5 W/O Edison Dr., S/O McWane 8/05 Ormond Beach, Oxnard 6 W/S Harbor Blvd., S/O 12/05 Gonzales, Oxnard 7 S/S 2nd St. @ Studebaker Rd. 6/06 Los Cerritos, Long Beach 8 N/S Batiquitos Lagoon 6/08 & Arenal Road, Carlsbad 9 E/S Long Beach Frwy., 8/08 N/O Imperial, South Gate 46.2 236.9 73.4 276.0 28.3 41.4 (1) 18.11 (2) 7.81 (3) Footnotes 1) Wetlands portion is $750,000 for 12.12 acres 2) Wetlands portion is $500,000 for 7.24 acres 3) Wetlands portion is $430,000 for 7.81 acres Buyer Purchase Price Site Condition Price /Acre Coastal Conservancy Degraded Wetlands H.B. Wetlands Com. Degraded Wetlands State Lands Com. Degraded Wetlands San Dieguito Auth. Mitigation Habitat Nature Conservancy Mitigation Habitat City of Oxnard Mitigation Habitat Los Cerritos Auth. Degraded Wetlands Batiquitos Lagoon Foundation/Wetlands Watershed Conserv. Auth. Reparian Welling $9,700,000 $37,136 $1,650,000 $36,537 $14,500,000 $61,207 $4,253,000: $57;934 $12,972,000 $47,101 $1,565,000 $55,398 $7,000,000 $61,882 $2,400,000 $67,567 $630,000 $55,058 2 1� Bus,S- SHELLER ASSOCIATES Price Trends An interesting price pattern emerges from the data assembled with the broad variance of $36,537 to $61,700 per acre attributable as much to location as the passage of time. Sale Nos. 1, 5 and 6 involve adjacent parcels at the more remote Ormond Beach, these items constitute the lower to mid -point of the price spectrum at $37,136, $47,101 and $55,398 per acre respectively. It is noted that Sale No. 1 is without direct access. Sale No. .2 ($36,537 /acre) does reflect a dated acquisition as it occurred in early 2003, it also lacked direct access to Pacific Coast Highway, the same as Sale No. 1. Conversely, Sale No. 5 fronted Harbor Boulevard and accounted for the higher end of the Ormond Beach transactions. Sale No. 9 is situated further inland, but was included as it involves wetland areas adjacent the Los Angeles River purchased for habitat preservation, the lack of direct access accounted for the somewhat lower price of $55,000± per acre. Sale Nos. 3, 4, 7 and 8 all involve parcels with access, the price variance is fairly narrow at $57,934 to $67,567 per acre. Clearly parcel size and date of purchase did not reveal any price discrimination as the sites ranged broadly from 18.1 to 236.9 acres over a four -year period. These latter indicators are very relevant to the Banning Ranch wetlands and wet meadows, the following prices have been adopted. It should be noted that in none of the degraded wetlands purchases was there an allowance for future remediation expenses. Conservative Price 134.1 acres @ $60,000 /acre ................ ............................... $8,600,000 Optimistic Price 134.1 acres @ $65,000 /acre ................ ............................... $8,700,000 3 �� �I til I_ It .I. It ANNA X I \ l-, PARCEL(S) B — OIL RECOVERY SITES /BENCHLAND OPEN SPACE Background There are several parcels currently in use adjacent to the degraded wetlands that effectively are tank farms and distribution points (B -1 and B -2). These involve buildable parcels, but of odd configuration and not well located from a development perspective. These attributes likewise apply to B -3, which includes the 3.7 acres proposed as a Vernal Pool Area. The upper mesa land areas that are designated for parks, interpretation center and staging area involve lower valued lands that have not been indicated as future residential parcels. The same type of market information applies to this land use classification as well. 4 - CAS[ACC a Inn a� N2 YAYn, IAR Rum �a_;e.� .n t°SRRgiiF aC.rsc AWS, : "'Y' •RM y `n�, NATL uueY nx.N.Mrrre M°'�"` _ xy PA' 0 I N "n"' N MORCO NNGTOM PBflOS u lim aANAR CREST_ RGFWItI � C`LnH�r f • B , jearkq uvnrt n "O `1A� r J "N'. fi. s`iMY t9 ♦ 4 ♦ nms APPLE VALLEY r:. F `.nnm u REDONDO BEACH - ` ToxaAxcE I B r�nli /` "� ICIOAYIILE t 41 _ _U�. F Wu A31AIC. _ Dk�• URUSCINYON Ae11N s1ABl1 I-C N4 1 aua \ d ' n'm z/ S Nfi M1NenXX n ua 1NE1M ESPEAIA LL IRK Yme COU iAY Cl L _� • N3 -'^ - - '� .`�r'g ♦ rrulr - YRFIICIA I LOS • o � m nY Y w; 1" m o me —iZ _,, -- rl \ 3w l m ♦....r } L nBN ANGELESN 13 7 GABRI' nnAe •�'`.'••l••'• SAN BERNARDINO to _ I Rr•.. tiY�1 ANGELES 9 MOUMT 'I� l AIt. •YN. I•v4.lb.•- Ilre Ria. Ifnl.lni ♦ a'"iwi 4l N5 Antanlo xl 'ai'••i'...I Lahr • -SAN FERNANDO aAfLSNn h..rl A (Old BaAdy M.) e.,m s ' 2 r IN t 13 iuPINAA N ZONAL FOREST IKA .�CgFSNME gA110M1„"0 mem RTN GNANARA a � L1 CANADA qwm An IAM INtgl°cE Mr. ieswn f ,SAN * AAr.,• I,y NATfONAL CA"I NILLSr, 'c IoM. URBAN —ALT EAI� � _,,,a�TX � BERNARDINOlt ANK RESEOA fi MOLL OOD PASADENA i^ L- ->T - t s -- Iius�o w ''"' "s s Ssn Go • oni ONROYU r. S X16XUX0 4N, funr N 101 ENtINO -. SNERMAN 5 e - 61EX00RA I s . . ARCA01 "' RIk'LTD� ' `•m r,cs °MN'' ppI 1 71 I 2 LWP .Soa RAILS GLE NAALE x°urwOaB a EL AZUSA _ z� r qqq N CUCAMON6 ONTAXA cbiiaN • REAUXBS - ,mekli,� GF FOREST MONTE .r cav XA_ >L ^ 15 ��6�' nP~f•n ei r LRAM RA 24 P YAmx 6 , lA YFNIONf RQq'O At Ifi ', 4r yAUgU O � , • POMONA ,mn �.,n n p� r• - 1 1 ONTERE AN .GOYIM ONTARI AIEM AVON— xlppAO 6RAMOIFRRACE IS 4;- � ggI YI B f' LINK 12 ' i-ii "' ••• ---. Aaees SANTA MOMICA .3 MORENO VALLE I N'RNIM S ANGELES NGLEWDDD l HABNA` AIR J -. PHU .5 - - UOWNEY NORWAI sit MORCO NNGTOM PBflOS u lim aANAR "WITHORX1 ( YORBA LINDA �...r. P• + +� XXR.� '4' r 1f'1' MANHATTAN BEACH '., 1°, BELLFLOWE 2? FULLERTRN o° \v YL "`" °" " N = " "�' ^inro qlw Nn Nnrhrrz. •. • \ i GDNBNA AWARE, XFRNOU•BFACX �' • . c. o 1 I'.nhr 1 N / Ix „r,....� u REDONDO BEACH - ` ToxaAxcE e 1.1NEWR00 / PARN 1 n 513 ORANGE r•d•�•.r•rr N;..., A, BAM IACINTOt Elcm n r.n gyyy ORYM. r••urn.rx s ANAHE .n...- ,rve:,:r IRA MESA ..ax rxE°.d_ CLEVELAND PINK. 14YBWN x'y"uu60°IA xEMET \ 3w 1 13 7 AN 2a 14 LA JOLLA • *_NITT B im nr” nn whSANTA NATLLANE ' RAxcxo LONG BEAC Y SPRIN g Z ELSMOq . FB 1oirr.r•,•a A• PALOSVEROES SAN PEURR j OSTNA �2 19 CNYON Lrrh: Li,r•�.•r. -_ n' .p,x •, LORAN IHUNTIN BEACH . MESA VIN is AARCHO • i si ;:p. i0 uu9NMw �- ppI 1 71 I 2 LWP .Soa -SANTA MARGANITA +xtwE n i:r / nYYYIw".R ! l- .; .tt;.;;• • SW 1 �. N�SnMi ��6�' nP~f•n ei . uGUN� C•()• /FORESTwno °Nlq R3 �E• /Y MNIRIfEA s ggI YI B f' LINK �Aw� ' i-ii "' ••• ---. Aaees S' 1 / Afi y a. .D 14 SAN LOAN CAm IAM� 'I:" "U MAKE" I / f� DANA POINt _ TEMECULA r .= WRM.IX°rtMX . ITAW vs _ ILP 1xYAmrsx ('urc l -- �CAMPICIBFBN H. -- iALUROOR (dBVELMYD- p .:3, • I,. N, AYYhpY SAN tIPM r NATL I walinrr lln, 01r SANTA Whir «('r.rr'Oe +- .e. usvxreer.rtw G N Vul S13 w�; FOREST Liuf.'Nrr. r.•,r li '� ^� ar4uwa °MYYexton R ' - 1- In So r,uyra+wr°ss S13 run �PYxnxr. n•16e 1- . NxEe� \. RR. rygruLrn /YnI ISLAND 1}1&ft Pg OS. M.O. HRAKI • 6F s SYIYAY ft. vxr� N`r GG Ixexlynt 513 nrRe SAN - OCEANSIDE VISTA - ice' t r AIR CARISBAO 4. tl- sit S:I ESCON0100 4 rr:we ' ♦wr.Me s'o cw MARCOS ~^ENCINITAS 20 •a. smI o gAIICx0 ` CAgtyIFiJV -tBE iO RAN r.s IFANAg00 , RANBMI• r• :"p�m'^s" RatlX� xrx. YA nw Am 55 24 SOLIx1 BEACH - 1 ORYM. r••urn.rx POYA Y •. .n...- ,rve:,:r IRA MESA ..ax rxE°.d_ AX.e IN. SAYRE 7 Z2 LA JOLLA PACIFIC BEACH' °' LA MESA* EL / 3 ACTION ., 4 Y SPRIN g Z VA 4NUl CITY SAN DIE NA TONAL CHULA VISTA o •. r.. Sales Map Buss-SHF,LGER ASSOCLATFS Market Information Our investigation and search for this type of market acquisitions produced limited results, which was not surprising as this is not a type of property actively sought and exchanged in the marketplace. Three transactions were uncovered, fortunately they are all fairly current. Similar to the previous section, the data is displayed chronologically in the ensuing table, the location of each sale is indicated on the facing map. Comments for subject Parcels B -1 thru B -3 to follow. Sale No. General Acre Buyer Purchase Price Date Location Area Site Condition Price /Acre 1 S/S Loynes Dr. & Palo 11.3 Bixby Long Beach, LLC $1,300,000 6/05 Verde Ave., Long Beach Level, Street Grade $115,386 2 S/S 2a" St. & Studebaker 41.4 Los Cerritos Authority $7,000,000' 6/06 Los Cerritos, Long Beach (1) Land, Adj. Wetlands $213,383 3 S/S Main St. & Nivera 12.5 R. Family Properties $2,500,000 11/07 Avenue, Chula Vista Level, Below Grade $200,000 4 N/S Batiquitos Lagoon, 18.1 Batiquitos Lagoon $2,400,000 8/08 W/O Arenal Road, Carlsbad (2) Former Nursery $174,793 Footnotes 1) Developable 29.29 acres purchased for $6,250,000 2) Developable 10.87 acres purchased for $1,900,000 Price Trends Parcel B -1 This oil recovery site is effective land - locked with access restricted to connecting gravel roads through the degraded wetlands and meadows. Effectively a tank farm and distribution point, this parcel is clearly at the lower end of the price potential scale, being most similar to Sale No. 1 which does have street access but is in a remote location and a poorly shaped triangular holding. We have adopted prices of $115,000 and $125,000 per acre for this holding. Conservative Price 11.7 acres @ $115,000 /acre :................. ............................... $1,300,000 Optimistic Price 11.7 acres @ $125,000 /acre ................ ............................... $1,500,000 5 � Parcel B -2 BCISS-SHEI ;ER ASSO(:IATFS Unlike parcel B -1, this smaller site fronts West Coast Highway and features favorable access and a fairly rectangular shape. Sale Nos. 2 and 3 are similar in terms of prominent street exposure and parcel configuration; their transfer prices are $197,130 and $200,000 per acre respectively. We have adopted prices of $190,000 and $2101000 per acre. Conservative Price 4.8 acres @ $190,000 /acre ................... ............................... $ 900,000 Optimistic Price 4.8 acres @ $210,000 /acre .................. ............................... $1,000,000 Parcel B -3 This broad category includes all the designated park areas, interpretive center, boarding area and vernal pool. All these uses involve lower valued land; a portion is adjacent the lowland, however the bulk is on the upper mesa. Individual parcel size and shape value widely, a somewhat middle of the road price is suggested at $150,000 to $175,000 per acre; the latter benchmark indicated by Sale No. 4, a former nursery on level to undulating terrain. Conservative Price 43.5 acres @ $150,000 /acre ................ ............................... $6,500,000 Optimistic Price 43.5 acres @ $175,000 /acre ................ ............................... $7,600,000 6 PARCEL(S) C — BENCHLAND DEVELOPMENT LANDS r. Background After all of Parcels A and B are caned out, as well as the hillside terrain (Parcel D) that is both too costly to develop and environmentally sensitive, the remaining residential development areas are effectively two upper mesa benchlands at the same general elevation relative to the nearby improved areas of Costa Mesa. Both Parcels C -i and C -2 have view features, particularly from the perimeter homesites. It is pointed out that Parcel C -2 involves a much smaller holding which encompasses a promenade and fairly broad ridge that has excellent vistas in a number of directions. Clearly this holding has a much higher value per acre due to both reduced size and superior view characteristics. 7 d ruE L !v lr _ T a•Xr. ta.a —I 1,,✓ GO ___ -r .7i "l Sb.,•� i .:.,. Mt. Nnos . N.tlNa xu TPRA Y\ rv: — `N.FPYM:.:r`• — I NCASTER Aumt PA. - IwN:n r 4.1m • MDDI m" A x I ANGELES ,s'MmmAE LANE AA ,Tr. OS PADRES NATIONAL \\ ° F"s`" D. nr.,• . O)ANL[lFS- 1 sran DEC. rwD tr,.,,.._,.r •.•; �•'• PALMBAIE Anrr NATL. ;;. , I AAFUxro r., > ORESrj 5 -rt.elm B 4 COL'�ITYr..,,,.� i �,. �- _LAB.: A 1a �„ „. -� � - '?:•_,.\M ear r•.,.. ' GASTRIC. a116U5 : -' - R "•`• '�ACiOXr - - 'N tln,u� I ..J , ES a.) •N El FOREST =Nm' — r;a• LMn - COU tar nJ. -�- DV r ... Pn r t • su • - — EIILwOR[ W I LOS :LA s rNA, s uuExciA N LL AM.FLE';' ". , Ru uABR Et ` r �- <am NTA PAULA1 F. Ed•e , 50X T MO NaaEURW m`^D r0 - YLMAV ANGELES 'YT J / ti 5 , Mt San MtBnio tins - w uvcD •R �. BDRPAAN VALMEY \\ tl 13 ° �.SA FERNANDO `. I (Old AaldyII ) CAfSNNf URA _ - NARIM NATTUNAL FOREST j &AAA (t siA A•) P 16 CHATSWORTH 6AANAOA ,e lost :.AN. IIVilsdn �NAwxA _ -- r 20° ” AAIAAILIO cDlO6E XILLSC(_�r u 10 URBAN - AmLTAp�ENA "�« LOUNTY `THOUSAND AESEU E _� t� cva A'xOKNARO NtFBUR, OAKS- PART G A XOLL 000 B PASAO NA ._ �� a '- CIFNDnRA PARN_ -rmm •. ]0 ENCIMO -. TNERMAM 5' . ARCADI .,F 6LENUALE EL AIUTA 2] ONTANA R, MUENEME rzranj / "WEE AWUIG OAKS s ¢ - MBNTE Y.'i'N COVINA RAN MaCU6Ar COLiOM HILLS NOLL,waD_ LNAM RA 2,r I Rrlsrnl 1 DNA ArNx IV / -" ~ NL M1lINB p SDI' O OHTER AR GDVI • BONTARI I6� AMA e,•N•rr.a is - 12 LA PUEMRss 1 '- I m aRUB1000K .ryvrAMe $ANT0. MONICA' .] {Q, - . v Point S '_RNGLEW000 LOS ANGELE DOWNEY NBRwAL X1BRA` _ U �. IWACQY' ALINBTON q roR uxOA �' _ r 2 �XAw NDRNL �p mm.Nx NA➢MOSA REACH is BELLELUWE fULLERTBN ` NERNOSA BUCN" r g"^,, r COAO A uroEa, 9 REDONOO BEACH u v LAKE 00 XUll ) TORRANCE 16 / PMK NAHEIIII ''B ORAPiGE tP 13 ' RANG CLEVELAND_ ro 4 GB SANTR Tgsnx NATLI e,ul RANCHO BEACH , A' NA g�gco AXi'siraR PAWSVEROES r, 3 �(N 1.�d CANYON r...r �r.r . CHO gI INUNTINGTON B" - IRVIN is - SAMYA yl IsAi BEACH ALAA6MnA nIRrE .y a r ZI Itl1 / r �.• CJ u6UNi. C•o. m FOREST �sr•• tI '� NIGUEL �I r .. mw, In•u y SM luAe cirlsmMO "L _ An. IL van w „rcnn I I. . � DAM IN ,.x PIMANBrAUtn � _I .J +,... .m r. ~r, CAASP IOSEPN X.” s.•.rM <ABaw•a •I - nwxd SAM ELENENIE )wMA- vfr••� •. - _ nsnpMr PLIYIrLETON .! Bm Wanm rt.. Sv.Wha d. �I lb., -. dAP V.i.M. r•lwvl �wMxx f•�•a WMr r, OCEANSIDE . CALLS CEHAyE . I StAND Sales Map a� Bu s- SHELLER ASSOCIATES Market Information Since the final quantity o£ dwelling units to be approved for these two areas is not known, they are effectively unentitled lands designated for.residential development. Accordingly, we have gathered larger land acquisitions involving parcels generally similar in condition to Parcel C. The purchases are summarized below. All have coastal orientation, ranging from Ventura on the north to Bolsa Chica on the south. Respective locations of each item may be found on the facing land Sales Map.. Sale No. General Date Location 1 W/S Lincoln Blvd., N/O Ballona 10/02 Creek, Playa Vista (Area A) 2 NWC Lincoln & Jefferson 10/02 Blvds., Playa Vista (Area B) 3 NEC PCH & Beach Blvd., 3/05 Huntington Beach 4 E/S Western Ave., S/O Palos 7/05 Verdes Drive, San Pedro 5 SE Warner & Los Palos Avenue 1/06 Bolsa Chica, Huntington Beach 6 N/S Ventura Freeway, W/O Escrow Sanjon Road, Ventura Price Trends Parcel C -1 Acre Seller Purchase Price Area Buyer Price /Acre 78.3 Playa Capital Co. $92;000,000 Wildlife Conservancy $1,174,818. 43.0 Playa Capital Co. $4700;000 Wildlife Conservancy $1,002,007 22.6 Mills Land & Water $38,000,000 JCC Homes $1,679,855 61.2 United States Navy $125,000,000 Bisno Development $2,042,484 15.0 Ocean View School $12,320,000 State of California $821,333 10/8 Lloyd Family $16,000,000 Confidential $1,477,378 The prices shown vary widely depending on timing and circumstance. As a point of reference, Sale No. 5 involves the purchase of 15 acres from the Ocean View School District for $821,333 per acre, however the parcel is land - locked. Obviously it is less meaningful to the subjecfs situation. Sale Nos. 1 and 2 were concurrent purchases at around the $1,100,000 per acre 8 a� BUSS-SHEwER ASSOCIATES mark, however the acquisition(s) must be considered in light of the older date of purchase and the ownership agreeing to a 10% price reduction in order to discourage legal interference on developing the balance of Playa Vista. Similarly, these benchmarks are considerably low. Sale No. 4 at slightly over $2,000,000 per acre is judged as comparatively high as the acquired land involved much more level terrain and is easier to improve. It should be noted that the financial partner has recently assumed control of the asset. The most relevant benchmarks as related to Parcel C-1 are Sale Nos. 3 and 6 at $1,679,855 and $1,477,578 per acre, respectively. Sale No. 6 is also easier to develop as it is level and at street grade, however, these factors are practically offset by its location in Ventura which is not Newport Beach. Nevertheless, we have applied price indexes of $1,300,000 to $1,500,000 per acre respectively to Parcel C -1, in -part recognizing the quantity of land involved, the magnitude of capital required and related infrastructure expense. Conservative Price 85.4 acres @ $1,300,000 /acre ......... ............................... $111,000,000 Optimistic Price 85.4 acres @ $1,500,000 /acre ......... ............................... $128,100,000 Parcel C -2 Clearly this is one of the finest, large parcels remaining on the South Coast with spectacular panoramic views. The area is proposed to be developed with both housing and a boutique hotel on a relatively small 29f acres, nevertheless infrastructure must be brought to the parcel. Sale No. 4 is the prime indicator, the price of $2,042,484 per acre does involve a parcel roughly twice the size of the subject, however all utilities were in -place and the site is level site and thus easier to improve. The buyer also assumed entitlements would be readily obtainable. We have adopted prices of $1,750,000 and $2,000,000 per acre for Parcel C -2. 9 as BUSS -SHEWER AW)C1ATES Conservative Price . 29.7 acres @ $1,750,000 /acre ........... ............................... $52,000,000 Optimistic Price 29.7 acres @ $2,000,000 /acre ........... ............................... $59,400,000 10 �1 b R 13t �ti ��ir.l <,t.it NY-A x a rl i , PARCEL D — HILLSIDE OPEN SPACE Background These hillside lands constitute about one - quarter of the entire Banning Ranch holding and effectively involve an elongated north -south parcel being the frontal downslope of the two developable benchland mesas with one major east -west canyon separating Parcels C -1 and C -2. A second canyon may be found on the north side of Parcel C -1. While portions of the surface topography has been disturbed due to the oil operations that have been ongoing for decades, there are sizeable areas in their natural state that exhibit environmentally sensitive habitat for a number of species. While lacking any realistic development prospects, this roughly 100 acres would not be Ia costly acquisition and would allow the City to create their own master trail system without requesting owner permission. insurance indemnification. etc. THiS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY W, THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY t THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY BUSS- SHEu3ER ASSYX:IA7'ES Development has occurred in the past on adjacent land with similarly challenging topography as evidenced by the housing trace abutting the northeast boundary of Banning Ranch. Currently the high cost of subdivision improvement makes this impractical at this juncture, disregarding any allowance for environmental concerns. Market Information Recognizing the size of this holding (93.1 acres), the market data program focused on coastal hillside purchases of roughly 40 acres or more, all with a similar environmental habitat overlay. The sales collected are also listed chronologically below, the price benchmarks are situated in either Los Angeles or Orange Counties as indicated on the facing map. A time frame covering the past three years was considered meaningful to current price levels. Sale No. Date General Location 1 N/O Palos Verdes Drive S., 12/05 W/O Narcissa, Rancho P.V. Acre Seller Purchase Price Area Buyer Price /Acre 462.9 P.V. Portuguese Bend $17,000,000 City, Rancho Palos Verdes $36,725 2 N/S Latigo Canyon Road @ 125.0 Paul Rubens, et. al. $6,250,000 11/06 Wilmot Way, Malibu Cyan Properties $50,000 3 E/S Laguna Canyon Rd., N/O 58.4 John Choa Trust $1,500,000 11/07 Castle Rock, Laguna Beach City Laguna Beach $25,685 4 N /S/ Tuna Canyon Road, S/O 38.1 Walter Van Buskirk $2,750,000 11/07 Saddle Peak, Malibu Justin Chancellor $72,210 5 N/S PCH, W/S Murphy 85.0 O'Haru Trust, LLC $2,675,000 1/08 Way, Malibu Malitos Partners $31,456 6 N/S Cinnamon Lane, 191.2 York Long Point Assoc. $8,360,000 Escrow Rancho Palos Verdes City Rancho Palos Verdes $43,724 7 N/S Palos Verdes Drive S., 94.0 York Long Point Assoc. $4,250,000 Escrow Rancho Palos Verdes York Point View Prop. $45,213 12 31 BCiss-SHEU;ER NW.-CIATFS Price Trends Fortunately there were sufficient quantity of coastal oriented hillside sale items which allowed the data program to focus on recent transactions. If the extremes are eliminated :(Sale Nos. 3 and 4), the price range narrows to roughly $32,000 to $50,000 per acre. Sale No. 3 is effectively . a secondary comparable as it is landlocked; Sale No. 4 is superior as it has spectacular views and was purchased for two homesites. Sale Nos. 2, 6 and 7 are considered the most meaningful as they involve similar size holdings and are current. The prices are $50,000, $43,724 and $45,213 per acre respectively. Related to the subject 93.1 acres, prices of $45,000 and $50,000 per acre have been utilized for the subject hillside lands. Conservative Price 93.1 acres @ $45;000 /acre .................. ............................... $4,200,000 Optimistic Price 93.1 acres @ $50,000 /acre .................. ............................... $4,700,000 13 2 `� Buss-SHH,(GER Aw, )c ATEs CORRELATION The aggregate of the individual parcels comprising the 400f -acre subject holding varies from $210 to $240 million; ,depending on market perspective. Clearly a discount for a bulk purchase is appropriate due in part to the odd mixture of property uses involved coupled with the total amount of capital required to purchase Banning Ranch in total. In the event the entirety is acquired, a discount on the magnitude of 201/o to 30% is representative, 25% being typical under normal circumstances. In light of the current poor condition of the capital/credit markets, 25% may be judged as "light'; however it is reminded however that residential land market is fickle with rapid changes occurring as demand rises. It is reminded that a major expense must be incurred to clear the terrain of contaminated soil, debris, defunct wells and pipelines, tanks, etc. The degraded wetlands price ($8.5t million if paid) reflects the unsightly .circumstances normally found with wetland acquisitions. The bigger issue is the cost of clean up for the balance of the Ranch which is a seller responsibility. A holdback of funds (escrow account) is recommended to ensure that this occurs. 14 33 PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS RONALD L. BUSS EXPERIENCE: Buss- Shelger Associates, Los Angeles, California (since 1984). President. Provides consulting, investment, valuation, advisory, brokerage and leasing services on all types of vacant and improved properties. Landauer Associates, Inc., Los Angeles, California (1975 - 1984). Senior Vice President. Real estate consulting services. Shattuck Company, Los Angeles, California (1971- 1975). Real Estate Counselor and Consulting Appraiser. State Board of Equalization, State of California (1963- 1970). PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES: Member: Urban Land Institute, 1998 - To date Member: Lambda Alpha International Director, 1998 - To date President - 2004 Member: Appraisal Institute, 1976 - To date Souther California Chapter President, 1987 Member: Counselors of Real Estate, 1983 - 2004 Southern California Chapter President, 1988 National Vice President, 1996 -1997 Member: Assessment Practices Advisory Council, Los Angeles County Assessor's Office, 1980 -1986 Member: Los Angeles Board of Realtors Member: California Real Estate Association Member: UCLA Center for Finance and Real Estate, 1993 - 1994 Member: National Association of Realtors Member: American Industrial Real Estate Association Advisor: Operating Engineers Pension Trust, 1983 -.To date Advisor: Electrical Workers Pension Trust, 1994 - To date Advisor: Independent Directors, Irvine Apartment Communities Investment United States Securities & Exchange Commission Advisor: Registered 2000 - 2004 CERTIFICATION: Currently certified under The Appraisal Institute voluntary program of continuing education for its designated members (MAls and RMs who meet the standards of this program, are awarded periodic certification). Certified as General Real Estate Appraiser in the State of California: OREA Appraiser Certification No. AGO09146 Licensed State of California Real Estate Broker EDUCATION: Bachelor of Science -Cali fornia Polytechnic College (1963) Certificate in Real Estate -University of California Extension l ZSS #�s e /'Y Vrt EC, H ,e Conference & Visitors Bureau City Council Study Session January 27, 2009 Newport Beach Tourism Economic Impact Total direct visitor spending of $1.04 billion (2007 Visitor Profile Study) -� $404.7 million or 39% spent by hotel guests -� $343.4 million or 33% spent by day visitors 4 $295.1 million or 28% spent by private residence guests ew ort E CHI Conference & Visitors Bureau National Industry Outlook PKF Revised Forecast to Reflect Acceleration of the Economic Downturn Forecast Change from 2008 to 2009 Measure Forecast Change Supply +3.0% Demand -1.5% Occupancy -4.4% ADR +0.1% RevPAR -4.3% Total Revenue -4.6% Net Operating Income -7.9% ew ort E CHI Conference & Visitors Bureau National Industry Outlook Cont. PKF is forecasting the U.S. hotels will average a 58.3% occupancy level in 2009, or 4.4% less than the 61% mark forecasted for year end 2008. The 58.3% occupancy rate being forecasted is the lowest level of occupancy in the past 20 years :D Forecasts for major cities: 4 New York -6.9% -+ Atlanta -3.6% Chicago -6.8% Dallas -5.5% Orlando -3.0% Washington DC -4.2% ort Seattle -2.7% VC E HI 4 San Francisco -3.2% Conference & C _, Visitors Bureau Newport Beach Hotel Business Overview VC ort E H A Conference d C Visitors Bureau — Current Conditions First Quarter of 2009 expected to be down 7 -10% Rate Wars have begun with a few exceptions i AIG Effect having some impact All large hotels have begun reducing staff (managerial and front line) The TOT effect of Pelican Hill still to be determined ew ort E CHI Conference d I Visitors Bureau NBCVB Organizational Overview :z Founded in 1989 501c6 Nonprofit Governed by seven person executive committee and 24 person board of directors 15 person staff with offices in Los Angeles and San. Francisco. Contract sales office in London. 4 ew ort E CHI Conference it i Visitors Bureau Budget :D Currently under a five year contract with the City of Newport Beach expires June 30, 2009 2008 -2009 Budget is $3.15 million (Projected $2.7 lad million from TOT). CVB receives 18% of the 10% Transient Occupancy Tax CVB is also a member based organization with approximately 300 dues paying members (partners) e�w ort E CHI Conference & Visitors Bureau — Mission Statement As the City of Newport Beach's official destination marketing organization, the mission of the Newport Beach CVB is to partner with the tourism and hospitality industry by protecting and nurturing the destination brand and to deliver additional spending by leisure and conference visitors leading to enhanced community economic vitality and quality of life. ew ort E CHI Conference & Visitors Bureau Newport Beach Brand Newport Beach is an opulent Orange County coastal fantasyland that represents a "taste of the perfect life," a place where visitors can experience a friendly sophisticated, aspirational lifestyle that permits them to , escape from daily reality. Comprised of a collection of unique islands and neighborhoods that form their own distinct character, the destination offers a combination of affluence, quaintness, casual glamour and attention o detail. Coupled with the manmade and natural beauty' I the destination, this is the place that allows the visitor o relax and recreate and dream of what can be. ew ort E CHI Conference er Visitors Bureau 2006 -2008 Achievement Highlights :z Became the first and only West Coast CVB to receive international accreditation. One of only 68 CVBs (out of 1400 nationally) in the world to receive this designation :z Reorganized organization and created the city's first ever Marketing Department Reorganized sales staff and increased personnel by two. Opened offices in San Francisco and Los Angeles :D Created a partnership approach to direct sales with hotels joining the CVB in sales missions Developed a first ever Newport Beach Tourism Strategic Plan ew ,port E CHI Conference er Visitors Bureau 2006 -2008 Achievement Highlights Developed strategic marketing partnerships with the Newport Beach Film Festival, Restaurant Assn., Toshiba Golf Classic, Chamber of Commerce, Irrelevant Week Opened new London marketing office �z Expanded destination PR efforts, including NYC :z Developed extensive online marketing program to increase web traffic ew ort E CH o 0. Conference e5- Visitors Bureau Functional Overview Three Departments -� Marketing: Research, Advertising, Media Relations, Publications, Electronic Marketing, International Marketing, Partnership Development, Brand Development -� Conference Sales: Direct Sales Solicitation to Meeting and Conference Planners Nationally Administration: Organizational Oversight, Community Relations, Industry Affairs, Financial Control and Planning VC ort 4 E H Conference d Visitors Bureau Conference Sales History Year Room Nights Percentage Change July 1, 2008 — January 22, 2009 69792 +56% Pace to last year July 1, 2007 —June 30, 2008 139808 +32.8% July 1, 2006 —June 30, 2007 109397 +7.4% July 1, 2005 —June 30, 2006 91681 +46.0% July 1, 2004 —June 30, 2005 61629 +12.8% [July 1, 2003 —June 30, 2004 5,873 —38.6% 4 ew ort E CHI Conference & Visitors Bureau rce Oate ( ear auGX" p <°�� 9 . d 222pp erg° �aruaey p0" 2pp "� aCy 31, 2 , pl,Jaru 1, 20 ao0o N�gr�'s 6192 4,36" P eGrarge NP 2009 Organization Initiatives Renewal of CVB Contract with the City of Newport Beach :) Creation of new Tourism Business Improvement District V ort E HI Conference d i Visitors Bureau CVB Contract Renewal of existing contract for 5 year period. No change in contract terms. :) Contract reviewed by city tourism consultant in August 2007 4 Reported that the CVB "has laid the foundation for an exceptional CVB model for the community, employing a number of industry best practices for destination ,W marketing that were previously lacking at the bureau" Endorsed the current contract format and five year term e�w ort E CHI Conference & Visitors Bureau Newport Beach TBID Tourism Business Improvement Districts currently in existence in San Diego, Palm Springs Valley, San Francisco, West Hollywood, Sacramento, Huntington Beach, Laguna Beach. Also planning underway for Anaheim /Garden Grove and Torrance areas. Preferred method of increasing tourism resources without demands on TOT Greater Industry Control and Participation ew ort E CHI Conference & Visitors Bureau Why A TBID? Increasingly competitive nature of Southern California tourism marketing A need to capitalize on the "new" Newport Beach hotel product with different and more affluent audiences r The Newport Beach hospitality community has asked for increased and more aggressive marketing during . the economic downturn TBID creates more TOT revenue without any additional negative financial impact on the city 6WHI not hurt city's competitiveness in terms e�w ort of total room taxes Etc x , Conference & 4 Visitors Bureau — 2009 Six Month Plan of Action Continue to emphasize direct sales and marketing in key regional markets :z Push online marketing initiatives in both leisure and group markets Emphasize public relations online and in select markets :z Continue to establish select long term marketing opportunities such as the UK market ew ort E CHI Conference d Visitors Bureau