The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutResolution 90-273 08/06/1990 i FZesolution No. 90-273 N of the City of Petaluma, California RESOLUTION APPROVING PRELIMINARY OFFICIAL STATEMENT AND NOTICE INVITING BIDS FOR PURCHASE OF BONDS NORTH MCDOWELL BOULEVARD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 17 The City Council of the City of Petaluma resolves: 1. This City Council hereby approves the Preliminary Official Statement dated August 6, 1990, and authorizes distribution thereof in connection with the solicitation of sealed bids for the sale of improvement bonds in North McDowell Boulevard Assessment District No. 17, City of Petaluma, County of Sonoma, California. This City Council authorizes the Finance Officer to modify, change and amend the preliminary official statement to produce a final official statement without further action of this City Council. 2. This City Council hereby approves the proposed form of Notice of Sale presented to the City Council by California Public Finance (the "Financial Advisor") and hereby sets 10:00 A.M., August 22, 1990, at the office of the Finance Officer, 11 English Street, Petaluma, California, 94952., as the date, time and place for the receipt and opening of sealed bids for the purchase of not less than all of the authorized issue. The .Eity Manager is authorized to enter into a Contract of Purchase on behalf of the City with the bidder offering the lowest net interest cost as defined in the Notice Inviting Bids for Purchase of Bonds. Res. h~......90.-,273...... v.cs. 3. This City Council hereby authorizes the City Clerk, in coordination with the Finance Officer and the Financial Advisor, to provide all required publication and other distribution of the Notice of Sale and all required report forms to the California Debt Advisory Commission. Under the power and authority conferred upon thin Council by the Charter of said City. REFERENCE: I hereby certify the foregoing Resolution was introduced and adopted by the Appr_ov d as to ~ rm Council of the City of Petaluma at a (Regular) (~gai~aid~xri>~ meeting on the ..-.-6-th day of ...........August..-...-•--••-----•--............, 19.9.x., by the ` following vote: • - - Gfity Attorney AYES: Balshaw, Davis, Woolsey, Tencer, Vice Mayor Cavanagh, Mayor Hilligoss NC+ES: C / i ABSENT: Sobel ATTEST: . . -.~'.L::::~....----• City Clerk Mayor Council Fppile.....--•-77..-. CA IO-85 ~ Res. No...7.Q.-.2.f. ~ N.C.S. NOTICE INVITING BIDS-FOR PURCHASE OF UP TO $2.,850,000 IMPROVEMENT BONDS CITY OF PETALUMA, SONOMA COUNTY.., CALIFORNIA ` NORTH MCDOWELL BOULEVARD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO 17 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN thaw sealed proposals will be received at the Office of the Finance Director, City Hall, 11 English Street, Petaluma, California 95952, before 10 A.M. on August 22, 1990., for the purchase of up to $2,850,000 principal amount of serial improvement bonds of the City of Petaluma, California, to be issued under the provspns of the Improvement Bond Act of 1915 of the State of California.. The bonds are secured by especial assessments Zevied on land within the North McDowell Boulevard Assessment .District #17, pursuant to the Municipal Improvement Act of 1943 of the State of California. Proceeds of this issue are being used to pay the cost of constructing various street, water system, sanitary and storm sewer ,system improvements and gdd~tions and acquisition of right-of-way within the Improvement District. The bonds will be dated August 30, 1990, and will be delivered in registered form on or about September 6, 1990. A portion of the bonds will mature on September 2 of each year, beginning in 1991 and ending in 2010. Reference is made to the Preliminary Official Statement. adopted by the City Council on August 6, 1990, for the estimated maturity schedule, security for the bonds, opinion of bond counsel to bond validity and tax exemption, and other details of the bonds and the project. Copies of the Preliminary Official Statement may be obtained from CPF INCORPORATED„ Post Office Box 751322, Petaluma, California 94'975-1322 or by calling CPF INCORPORATED at (707) 795-6994., as financing consultant to the City of Petaluma. The financing consultant will not submit'a bid for the bonds on its .own behalf. Each bidder must specify an;interest rate, not to exceed twelve percent (12~) and in multiples of one.-twentieth of one percent (.05~), for each maturity. Only one .interest rate may be specified for each maturity. No bid will be accepted for less than all of the bonds or for less than 98~ of the par value of the bonds toge-then with gccr.ued interest from September 2, 1990, to the date of delivery. The successful bidder will be required to furnish to the City the price at which a substantpl number of bonds of each maturity will be sold to the public for the purposes of calculating the yield applicable to the arbitrage requirements under federal Iaw and regulations. Each bid must be accompanied by .bid security in the form of a certified or cashier's check drawn on a bank or trust company doing business in the State of California, payable to the City of Petaluma, in the amount of TEN THOUSAND DOLLARS ($10,000). The City of Petaluma reserves the right. to reject all bids. The bonds; if awarded, will be awarded within forty-eight (48) hours after bid opening to'the bidder, proposi°ng the lowest net interest cost. Net interest cost will be calculated; b:y adding the bid discount to, or subtracting the .bid premium from, the total. interest payable .under the proposal. The City of Petaluma reserves the right in its discretion to accept or reject a bid containing conditions or stipulations noes contained .in this Notice or in the Preliminary Official Statement. DATED: August 6, 199PJ Pat Bernard City Clerk City of Petaluma, County of Sonoma California L S •a. n PRELIMI:NARY Official Statement of the (County of Sonoma) California X2,850,000 North McDowell Boulevard ` Assessrrient District No. 17 Bonds (Limited Obligation) The date of•th-is Preliminary Official Statement' is August 6,. 199`fb • l` _ . ' TABLE OF CONTENTS Inside Cover ii. • Risk•Factors Annual,Assessment Payments......- 1 Limitations on Foreclosure.. 1 No Personal Labl-ity. 2 Reduction of Property V,slues 2 The Special 'Reserve.,Fund:..~ 2 Limited City Obl'gation : 2 The Preliminary Officio~l Statemen`t................. 3 Introduction. 4 The Bonds Purpose of the Issue.. _ 5 Authority for Issuance.... 5 Amount of Issue 5 Date. of the Bonds....:.. 5 Denominations............ 5 Registration.... 5 Interest/Payment Date./Record Date.............. 6 Maturity Schedule. 6 Advance of Maturi~ty• 6 Defeasance...... 6 .Refunding 7 • Security for the Bonds Assessment Insta•llments 7 Priority of L'•ien.... 7 Special Reserve~Fund 7 ' No Use of.Other~Avalable City Funds......................... 8 Flow of Funds•:':. 8 • Investrtient'of Funds 9 Legal Op:inion 9 Tax Exemption. General.. 9 City Covenant...: 14~ Absence of Ltigation. 1~6 No Rating 11 Debt Serv-ice Schedule 10 The ProJect 12 The District General...' 14 Method of Spreading Assessments (Summary)........... 14 Assessments...... 14 ' Valuatons-and Ratios 15 Th'e Property Owners 20 Prope_rty'Owner Protests............ 20 The City of Petaluma Gene"r61:.. 22 Growth.......... 22 Economic Data......... 25 Appendix A Method-of':Spread of Assessment (from Engineer's Report)...... 3Q~ Appendix B Assessment::Maps 31 Appendix C Zoning Information 35 Appendix D Form of Legal Opinion. 41 Appendix E Property Valuation Data......... _ 45 Appendix F CUSIP Numbers (.if 6valable at time of mailing POS).:........ 55 - i - 1 ~ d ~ ~ l J CITY OF PETALUMA ~ ' . * * # CITY-COUNCIL ~ M. Patricia Hilligoss,~"Ma.yor rl, Jack W~. Cavanagh; Jr, Vice Mayor. John Balshaw Lawrence Tencer , . Michael .Davis Brion Sobel • 1 . Lynn C. Woolsey r • Ij,. y~ £iTy STAFF r John L. Scharer, City Manager ~r. Pat. Bernar.d,' City Clerk. y~•.~ Richard_R. Rudnansky, City At"torney Gene P. Beatty, Assistant Gity Manager. Dgvd.W. Spi-lman.,.Finance Officer/Git.y Treasurer, • W. Patrick Miller, Public, Works Director Thomas Hargis City Engineer Warren Salmons., Community Development and Planning Director # * * +r PROFESSIONAL SERVICES Sturgis., Ness, Brunsell & Sperry a professional corpo,r-ation ~ . Emeryville; Cal:forn"ia ' -Bond Counsel • Nystrom Engineering.. Engineer ,of Work Bank of America National Trust and Sp.vings Assoc"iat'ion ' San.Francisco, Califorrtia . Registrar, Transfer and Paying Agent ~ . CPF INCORPORATED Petaluma..,, California ~ Financing Consultant - - +t:f ~ RISK FACTORS Annual .Assessment Payments: Payment of principal and interest on the North McDowell Boulevard Assessment District No.. 17 (the "District" or the "North McDowell District")"Bonds (the "Bonds") is dependent' upon __prompt payment of annual gs~sessments which are billed to each owner of property withih the pstrct by tfie County of Sonoma on the general property tax bills,Property owners mdy 'pay the entire tax bill at one time or may pay in two equal installments. Full„payment; or- payment of the first installment, is due November 15 and becomes delinquent on December 10 of the calendar year during which th;e bill is sent out and the second installment is due on or before April 1(b of the next calendar year.. The assessments are secured by a lieh on the parcels of land within the District (assessments for the Southpoint Business Park Assessment District No. 22, Series 199(b-A Bonds, already sold and Series B Bohds to be sold, have a lien prior to that of the issue described herein oh 21 parcels in the District). There no assurance that the owners of property w,th'in the District will be able to pay the assessment installments or that they will pay such installments even though financially able to do so. Limitatiohs on~Foreclosure.. ' The City of Pe.tgluma (the "City"~) has pledged, under .circumstances further described under the section titled "Covenant to Commence Superior Court Foreclosure", to, institute foreclosure +proceedi.ng"s in~the Superio"r Court of Sonoma County to sell land with de inquent installments for the amount of such delinquent installments plus appropriate penalties_dnd interest. In the event such Superior- Court foreclosure or ,foreclosures, are necessary, there may be delay in payments t'o bondholders pending prosecution of the foreclosure proceedings 'and receipt by the City of theproceeds of the foreclosure sale. It is also possible that no bid for the purchase of the .applicable property would be received at the foreclosure sale. Further, such foreclosure by the City of the lien'on a delinquent unpaid assessment may be ,limited by bankruptcy, insolvency, or other laws, local state or federal, generally affecting creditors' rights or by laws of the state relating to foreclosure. In xhe event bonkr.uptcy proceedings delay the City in institution of Superior Court foreclosure praceedings such delay could increase the likelihood of a delay in payment 'of th'e principal and interest on the bonds, and the possibility of delinquent assessment installments not being paid in full. Furthermore there can be no assurances that dny amounts realized by the City upon complexion of a foreclosure proceeding will equal the amount of delinquent assessments, penolte"s and costs of foreclosure: Prior to July 1, 1983, the right of redemption from foreclosure sales was limited to a period of one year from the~date of sale. Under legislation., effective July 1, 1983, the statutory right of redemption from such foreclosure - 1 - sales hps been repealed. Howe~e'r, a period of 120 days must. .elapse after a court adjudges and decrees a i"ien against.the,lot or parcel of land cou.eced by an assessment before: the notice of the sale of such parcel can beigiven. Furthermore, °f the purchaser at the sale is -the ,jadgment creditor; the City, an ' action may be commenced. by the delinquent property owner within" ix months after the date of sale to set aside such sgle.. The constitutionality of the leg:i'slation which repe6ls the one ,year redemption period has not been tested and there can be no a"ssurance that, f~tested';, such legislation w1.1 be upheld.. ,I Bond Counsel's,. approving egal opinion, to be furnished at the delivery":of the . BYn;ds, wiPl Ye ua~lgf"ie.d as to .tfie enfor•Yeable of the various lega~l.inst,ruments 4 b bankru tc reor anizaton insolvenc or other similar laws affecting the rights of creditors generally.. j ',j No Person a'1 Liability. Unpaid assessments- do not constitut'e"a personal indebtedness of the owners'of the lots and parcels within the District: ~ Reduction of Property V..aTues. i There is no assurance that the value of land and or im rovements~' District will remain at. current levels:- There are a number o:f fawtFiin-the . ctors which may reduce property values including changes in general economic cond'tons., flooding;,, seismic activity, other natural d'i aster, s, fire, li~mitat~ion ~on future developmernt b°y 1"ocq.l„ state. or .federal laws or regulations, land;use"and zoning' • regulation .changes and a number of other.. facto"rs:. The Special Reserve Account ' . ,I The City will estab-lisp a Special )evenue fund for a Reserve;.Accont.,(the Reserve or the Reserve Ac " count from bond proceeds at the time such proceeds are delivered in th:e amount b~ of the par value of bonds ssued,~sstimated to be $142,500. Any balance .n this Reserve. will be available" to !pay delinquent assessment installments should they occur. There is; no assur-ance:~that the amount of such delinquent assessment installments will.not exceed'4the amount in the Reserve. ~ .'p Limited-Gity Obligotion. The City's liability to advance moneys to pay delinquent assessment installments and/or debt service on the Bonds is limited to the balance in the.;Reserve. The City has determined pursuant to'Section 8769;.(>b:) of'the Improvement-Bond Act of 1.91'5, that it will not obligate itself to advance other funds which may be available to: it to make any payments on Bond principal or interest... - 2 - ~ . ~ ~ ~ The Preliminary Official Statement The information set forth herein has been furnished by the City and from other sources which are believed to, be accurate, bu,t is not.•guaranteed as to accuracy or completeness. Statements contained in this Preliminary Official Statement which involy-e estimates, or other matters of opinion;; whether or not expressay so described here•in~, are in:tend;ed solely as such ,and are no.t to be construed as representations of fact. The information herein is subject•to completion or amendment. - . Neither the full faith Ond credit nor the taxing power of the City, the County, the State of-Californi,6 or any political subdivision thereof is pledged to the payment of the ,Bonds. This Preliminary Of,ficial.Statement is not to~be construed os a contract between the Gity:and the purchaser or•owners of any o'f the Bonds. All quotations from, summar-"ie's of and explanations of resolutions, statutes, the - U.nsited States Internal Revenue Code of 1.986 and regulations adopted thereunder (the,"Code"), Engineer's Report-..and any other doc,uments•, statutes or laws contained ki_erein do no,t purport to be complete, and reference is made to said materdls.for full an d.comp3ete statements of'their.provis.ions. A11 estimates., assump;tions,, statistical information•~dnd-other data contained • herein, while taken from sources considered reliable, are ,not guaranteed by the City_or the financing. consultant and, are submitted only n,connection wi-th sale. of the bonds described herein. The information contained. herein should not be - construed as representing all conditions affecting the Gity or the Bonds. • The legal opinion approving the validity of the Bonds will be provided by Sturgis., Ness, Brunsell & Sperry',, a professional corporation. Bond Counsel will receive compensation contingent upon sale and delivery of the.Bonds. Th-is Preliminary Official Statement has been compiled for the,City by~CPF INCORPORATED„ financing consultant to the~City.- CPF~;.INCORPORATED will receive compensation °contingent upon sale and delivery of the Bonds. THE INFORMATION SET FORTH IN THIS.Prelimnary Official Statement SHOULD BE READ ' IN ITS ENTIRETY. ~ , The execution and delu,ery of this Preliminary.Of•fcal Statement have been authorized. by the City of Petaluma. - 3 - , Preliminary Official Statement • i $ 2-, 850., 000 ' GI1'y OF PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA North McDowel'T Boulevard Assessment District No. 17 Bohds H ' INTRODUCTION' ~ The Bonds offered herein are limited oblg6tions •secured only by;the unpaid assessment- ins all'menu- described herein and• t;he Reserve Accounfalso' further described herein. The Bonds are not secured by the full faith or;taicing power • of the City°, the Gounty, the State of Califorhia o,r any politicalisub'divison thereof. The;•.Bond's are to be issued pursubnt to provisions of ,the 'Municipal Improvement Act of 1913 and the Improvement Bodd Act of 1915. ~I - ' ,i Bond pr-oceeds.wi-11 be used to pay for construction of various public improvements, ncl-udng the acquisition of certain .rights-of'=way;ion North McDowell Boulevard,from Lynch Creek Road on the south to Corona Road on he ' north and related. incidental expenses, bond sale expenses and torestaba•ish the Reserve. This assessment district of 4'2-parcels includes 21 parcels which currently-have outstanding assessments in the amount o:f $3,'675,0fdf6 for improvements financed. through the'Southpont'Business Park Assessment Distrc"t :No 22. ~~Series T990'-A - Bonds of this district: in the amount o:f $2;,;8f65, (dfd0 were., sold' in April,, 1'990 and a secorr:d series in the amount of $870., 000° "is authorized to bed issued.. in, the future. There. are no current plans for sale of'these.borrd's-: The assessment ien of .the Southpont district i_s superior to-that of the Bonds"`being offered herein. The assessed property•consists of 42 parcels of which 27 ore undeveloped land and: 15 either have improvements under construction or already existing. An appraisal of Land values only has been-compiled by the firm o~f'Crocker Hornsby, Santa Rosa, California, The ratio o.f assessment lien s_ for both assessment districts to kind value only is 5:.0.1 times. When the value ofimprovements, obtained from.officol County records, :a re added to the estimated~aand values, ~ _ the ~aggregate•value'of pll properties totals. $41,456;317. This results in an overall assessment to vdue ratio of 6.42 times. _ The North McDowell. Boulevard Assessment District No. 1J is located in the north eastern section of Petaluma and-, w h.the~excep:tion of two parcels, is included within the 2,'1fD0 acre Petaluma Community Development Project, one~of'two. projects undertaken by the Pe:tahuma Community Develo"pment Commission. Three of the ossessment's will be partiall;y':paid from tax revenues available to the " Commission in keeping with current policies of .the City Council concerning preservation of low arrd moderate cost housing. Upon.comple ion of the improvements in this District, McDowell-Boulevard will • provide four traffic lanes from LakeV'lle Highway on, the south side of the City to Old Redwood Highway.on the north, a distance of approximatelyp,fiv,e miles. ~ , - 4 - • di . • ~ ~ - THE BONDS. Purpose of~ the Tssue ~•Y The Bonds are being-issued to finance•the cost of construction of streets, including clearing, grading, subbase, base:,-pavement„°curbs pn:d gutter,. median ` island, and,,drivewa.ys; sdewaT`ks; tr-affic signals;; storm •drainage facilities; sanitary, sewers .and appurtenance,..;domestc. water~services~.~and fire hydrants; street lights 'and;relocdtion of existing underground uti_l ties; al•1 with necessary appurtenance; together with-th"e acquisition of -all necessary .interests in real pr,oper_ty all,•to;:be•constructed -in North ,McDowell Boulevard between • Corona Road.an'd Lynch Creek Road and on Corona Rogd between the Northwestern - Pacific:Railroad crossing and 'to'U.S. Highway 101; to pay~•bond sale expenses and provide a. .Reserve. Authority •f or Issuance :M1 The Bonds are being issued b~y the::City,of Petaluma pursuant to its Resolutorn of Intention to.Order Improvement in North McDowell Boulevard Assessment :Dstrct• No. 17 adopted:April 30, 1990 an'd pursuant to Reso•luton.No. adopted authorizing theU issuance of the Bonds (tle.. "Resoi;utom"); .a11. yin accorddnce' with the provisions of 'the Municipal Impr.ouemen_t:.Act of .11913, Division 12"of the Street"s anal Highways Code, and the Improvement Bond Act of 19:15,. Division: 10 of the Str•eet's:ond Highways Code•of the State of California 'and all laws amendatory the"reof (the "A'ct"). _ Amount of'Lssue The total amount of bonus authorized to be issued is not to exceed $2,850,000. Date of Bonds The Bonds are to be dated Auguste 30, 1990. Denominations The Bonds ar.e in the denomination of $5,00fb or multiples thereof. • Registration The, Bonds .wi1,1 be issued only as: -fully. regisfered; ,bonds. The Bonds may be. Iran (erred or exchanged at the~Bank of'Ame.rica'National Trust-and Savings Association, Corporate Agency Div,3sion, San-Fr.ancsc.o:; California, or its,. successor., (the "Agent"). For every exchange: or transfer of any Bonds the Agent may make .a charge sufficient to reimburse it for any tax or governmental charge required' to be„ paid with -respect to such; exchange or transfer; and may ..make a charge .equal to the .customary f~e-charged~,by the Agent for such transfers or exchanges. If any bond is mutilated, lost,, sto en or destroyed, the :Agent shall execute anew Bond o.r Bonds in ;replacement, thereof in the.-same: aggregate principal amount and of 'the same maturity,.as the case may be. The Agent shall require,. in.the .case of- a lost,. stolen or destroyed Bond,, and. may require, in the case of a mu ilated Bond, satisfactory indemnification prior to authenticating a new Bond. - 5 - • The Agent will charge the owners of the Bonds for, their reasonable fees and expenses in connection with replacing said Bonds. ;i Interest/Payment Date/Record Date ~ • • I Each Bond will bear interest from its date'•at th'e;rates shown, subsequentlyin this Official`Statement.~ Interesf from~t,he date of •the Bonds until''`March '2; _ 1991 will. be paid on March-2; 199`1 and each subsequent perioii ending September 2 or March 2, as the case-may be, unt°l the final "maturity of th'eBonds: Interest is payable by check or,draft mailed to,-the owner of'recocd at the~~.oddress as shown. by t_he 'reg-stry records of the Agen"t, or to: such address as~k.may have been filed. :with. the Agent "for thot purp;ose;, as of the ,record date. ' • - The record date wl`1'be fifteen days before the interest dates ofl''MarcYi~.2 and September 2 of each year. - ,i. Maturity ;Schedule • - . iN The Bonds.wilT' mature- n accordance with thee.'foT owing schedule: I ' •Matur.ity Principah 'Maturity Prnc"pgl Septertitier 2 ~ Amount- 'September 2 Amouri;t 199,x. 50 ~ 000 _ . ,.20.01 $14'0, 010. . • 1:992 7.0 , 000 2602 'I 50 , 0.6,0 . 1993 75,-00.0 2063, 160,.00.0 - ~`1'994~ 85,000 ~ 20;04 170,66,0 1.99.5 90, 000 20?J5 185., 00f6. 1.9:96 ~ 95 , 000 2006 20.0 ,..00:0 ' '`1.997' 105,6;00 2002 2'15;000 - - 1998' 110,0.0.0 ~ 20,68 230,00 1.999 120,660 20,69 24:5,000 • 2000 130,000 2010 225',000 Advance of Maturity • The ,City ;of Petaluma may, beginning March 2~,.1991,.at its optonkadvance the maturity of any bond to the next subsequent interest.payment"date)foll'ow`ng'the delivery. of a, Notice. ,of Redemption by personal service, registered or certified mail at least 30 dpys prior to the date set for r..edemption of the;Bond(s) arid. payment of '103. percent of par value•and accrued interest to the date ;of -redemption: The provisions of pant 1.1.1 of the Act are applicable to the . advance payment of assessments acrd the cal~ling'of Bonds. - Defeasance the Bonds shallh'beosecunal~assessments shall'remain•in full force and effect and red by tie originate assessments until the ;Bonds mature and, are aid, assessments are p pr.-repaid a.nd all; the Bonds are re"t-ir'ed, the original assessment.. is apPorti~oned.pursuaht to the Act or thenitiai assessments are superseded and supplemented by reassessments and refunding tionds issued pursuant to Division 11- or 1°1 :5 of the Ga~lifornia ,Streets and ,Highways Code . ~ - 6 - ' - i u,~' Refunding The Bonds are subject to the refunding provisions of Division 11 or 11.5 of the California Streets and Highways Code-.: Security for the Bonds Assessment Installments. The Bonds are secured by the unpaid assessments together with interest thereon, and said unpaid assessments together with interest thereon constitute a trust fund for the payment of principal of and interest on the Bonds. Principal of and interest on the Bonds are. payable exclusively out of said tr,ust.fund (the "Redemption Account") into which all unpaid assessments will be deposited by the City. The unpaid assessment s, are payable in annual installments ('payments may be made in two installments at the option of the payor), together with interest thereon on the tax roll on which ,general taxes on real property are collected, and are payable and become delinquent at the same time an d, in the same proportionate amounts and bear the same proport"innate penalties and interest after delinquency as do said general taxes. Priority of Lien. The assessment lien and each installment thereof and any interest and penalties thereon constitute a lien against the parcels of land on which they were :imposed until paid in full.. Such lien is subordinate to all fixed special assessment liens previously imposed on the same property (21 .parcels have existing assessment liens which have priority over the liens securing this issue), but :has pro"rity over all fixed special assessment liens which ma,y thereafter be created against the property;; and also has priority over all private liens inc'lUdng the lien of any mortgage or deed of trust thereafter created. Such lien is co-.equal to and independent of the.lien for general taxes. Reserve Account. At,the time of Bond delivery, an amount equal to 5q of the par value of Bonds issued; estimated to be; $:142•, 500 out of Bond proceeds shall. be deposited in a Reserve Account which will be`maintained by the City Finance .Director. If a delinquency occurs in the payment of any assessment installment, the City 'has a duty to transfer from the balance, if any, in the Reserve to the Redemption. Account, the amount of the delinquency. This duty of the City continues during the period of delinquency, until reinstatement or sale of the delinquent property. Any amount so advanced shall be reimbursed to the Reserve from the proceeds of redemption.or sa a of the parcel for which payment of del-inquent assessment installments was made from the Reserve (see section titled "Risk Factors". If any assessment is prepaid before final maturity :of the Bonds, the amount of principal which the assessee prepays .shall be reduced by an amount which is in the same rdtio to the original amount of the Reserve Account as the original amount of the prepaid assessment bears to the total 'amount of unpaid assessments originally securing the Bonds.. This reduction i_n the amount prepaid shall be balanced by a transfer from-the Reserve to the Redemption Account in the same amount. - 7 - 4 ~ ~ , Proceeds, if any, of investment of the Reserve balance will be deposited in the Investment Earnings Account. When the. amount in the Reser-ve equals or exceeds the amount requi~:red to pa,y all interest due; on the next interest payment date and retire th"e remaining unmatured`Bonds the balance in the•Reserve shall be transferred to the Redemption Account and the remain-ng installments of principal pnd interest.not yet due from assessed property owners shall be cancelled withoutlpayment. No Use of Other Available City Funds. Under the Act the City can determine prior to iss;u:ing the Bonds, whether or .not it will obligate itself to advance avai-l_ople funds from the City treasury to cure .any deficiency which 'may occur in the Redeit)ption Account. The Gi°ty has determined that it wil not obligate itse f to advance available funds from. the City treasury to cure any deficiency which mpy occur in the Redemption Account. This determination does not prevent the: City from, in its sole discretion, making such advances. Covenant to Commence Superior Court Foreclosure. The,~City covenants with the holders of the Bonds that, not later than October 1 'n each year, the City shall file an action in the Superior Court to foreclose the~Ten of any and all delinquent assessmen s if the sum of uncured assessment delinquencies for the preceding fiscal year (ending each June;30) exceed five percent of the assessment installments posted to the tax roil for that fiscal ,year and if the amount of the Reserve is less than the reserve requirement. Flow of Funds. The City w'11 create a special:revenul fund called "District#17 - North McDowell Boulevard" whch~will consist of five accounts: 1.. Improvemen$ Account; i • 2. Redemption Account; ~ 3. Reserve Account; 4. Investment,Eorrrngs Account; and 5. Arbitrage Rebate Account. At the time of Bond delivery the Finance Director of the City shall deposit an amount equal to 5~ of the par value of -Bonds issued, estimated to b,e $142,5.?10 • into the Reserve Account. Balances in this account, during the term o..f the Bonds, shall be available for transfer to •th"e redemption account in' accordance with Section 88f68 of the Streets an d.Nighways Code.. This account •is fully discussed under the prior heading "Reserve Account." .Money s; in the Improvement Account shall be withdrawn only upon checks of the City and. shall be aPp_1-ied exclusively to the payment of the issuance costs and expenses of.the project. Any surplus remaining after,. payment of"dal said costs and expenses shall be used as set forth in the resolution providing .for- issuance of the Bonds and applicable provisions of the California Streets"'and Highways Code. ~ ' All payments of principal and inter-est installments on the assessments, together _ with. penalties, if any shall be deposited :in the.Redempton-Account, which' shall be a trust fund for: the benefit of the bondholders. Payment of =interest on the Bonds:., payment of principal at maturity End payment of pri~ncipaL'~and premium at redemption prior to maturity shall be made from,the-Redemption Account. - 8 - ~',f ~ fi: ' Proceeds from inv_,estment of amounts in ol'1;other..ac'counts will be deposited in the-Investment Earriings.Account.. As of .September 2~ of each year during the term of the Bonds; the~Finance Director shall determine whether any portion. o.f investment earnings must be rebated to the-United States under provisions of Section 1.48 of` the Code.. '..Any 'amounts required .to-Lie rebated will be transferred to the,Arbitrage Rebate Account... A11 funds in .the Arbitrage Rebate Account shall be held in trust for rebate to the United States at ahe times required by Section 148 of the Code. ~ - Investment~:of Funds. Balances in all 6ccount!s may- be .invested by the - City Treasurer. ~ ~ - Legal Opinion All proceedings in connection with the iss-uance of the.. Bonds are subject to the approval of Sturgis, Ness, Bruhsell & Sperry, a professional corporation, Emeryville, Calfornia,;'_Bo,nd Counsel for. the City. -Their•unqualif~ed.opinion, attestin"g to the validity of the Bonds, will be supplied-free of charge•to,the original. purchaser of the Bonds. A copy of the legal opinion will be printed on edch 'Bond.. Tfie'statements of law ,.and lega'1 conclusions set forth in the Official Statement under the heading "The-Bonds" herein have been review"ed by.Bo,nd~counsei. Borrd Counsel's engagement i's' limited to a review of the legal procedures required for the authorization of the•Bonds and the exemption of interest on the~Bonds from income taxation ( see the, sec;ton titled "Tax Exemptions" ) . The opinion of Bond Counsel 'will not consider or ;extend to any documents:, agreeFnents, repre.'sentntions, offering 'statements or other materal.bf any kind concerning the Bonds,'including tfis:.Official Statement, not.menfoned in this paragraph.. Tax Exemption - °General. In the oprnon of Bond Counsel,, subject to the qualifications set forth. '.below; under existing law, hterest on the Bonds and. received'by the owners of tfie Bonds 'is excluded from gross income for federal ' income' tax•purp'oses and such interest is .not an-item. of tax preference for ' purposes of the federal alternative minimum tax imposed on individuals and corporation"s ,•provided, however, that for the purpose of computing the ~ alternative minimum tax imposed on such corporations (.as defined for federal income°tax purposes), such interest is taken into .account in determining certain . i`hcome and earnings. • The~opiirons sett forth in the preceding sentences are subject to the condition that the City comp y wiah a l requirements of the Federal Income Tax Code that must be satisfied subsequent,,to •the delivery of the Bonds in order that such interest be, or continue-to be,_excluded from gross income for federal income` tax purposes. The City has covenanted to comply with certain restrictions designed to assure compliance with each such~`requrement. Failure to comply with cer-tarn of su"ch requirements may cause the nclus-ion of such interest in ~ gross income for federal income, tax; purposes to be retroactive to the date of delivery of the Bonds. Bond Coun el expresses,,no opinion regarding other federal tdx consequences arising with respect. to the Bonds. Prospective purchasers of the Bonds should be aware that (i) section 265 of the Code denies a deduction for 'interest on indebtedness incurred or continued to - 9 - purchase or. carry the Bonds or, in th`e cdse of 'a financial insti:tution,, that portion of.the'bondowner's in Brest expense allocated to interest payable. with. respect to the Bonds, (ii)~wth respect 'to insurance 'companies subject t'o the ' tax imposed. by -section, +83-1 of the: Code:,- for tacable` years beginning; after December 3'1, 1986::; section 832 (b)(5)(b)('i) reduces.the deduct-ion for loss reserves. by 1'S percent,of 'the. sum of certan.atems, inc`l'uding interest payable with respect to the Bonds, (,ii) for taxable years~begi'nning a~fter,D.ecember 31, 1986 and before .January 1, 1992, interest payable with respect'to the Bonds ' earned by some corporations could be subject-to the env:ronmental,.tax mpo"sed by ' sect=ion 59A of the.Code, (iv) fo;r taxable years beginning after' December 31, 1986.,' interest payable .w-ith respect to the Bonds earned by certain foreign corporations dong.busness in. the United .States could be subj;ect,to:a branc.'h profits__tax imposed~.by section 884• of the 'Code, (V) pdss•ive investment 'i'ncome., including interest paydb'le with respect to the Bonds, mqy be,subj.ect_to federal income taxation under•section '1'.375 of the Code for subchgpter'5 corporations that have; subchapter°:C e•drnings and profits at .the close of the Taxable year if greater than 25 percen of 'the gross re'Cepts of such subchapter 5 c_orporgt-ion is passve•nuestment"income; and ("vi) section 86 of the Code:~requsires recipients of certain Soe,ial Security and certain Railroad Retirement benefits ` "to take into account, in determining gross income, receipts or accruals. of interest payable w-ith respect to the Bond's. In the further opipio.n of Bond Counsel., such' interest on the Bonds, is exempt • from California pers'ona`l income taxes. City Covenant:. Darin the term of~the Bonds the Crt p 9 ~ y p y will make no use of bond, roceeds which;, i,f such use had been reasonabl ex ecte-d at the date the Bonds were is"su"ed, would have caused the-Bonds to 'be "grb`itrage boncJs" within the meaning of Section 148 of the Code,: and further shall rebate to-the United States any:gmounts actually earned'as arbitrage in accordance with the provisions of°that Code; all as more set fort__h in the detailed-arbitrage covenant to be executed. by the City prior to de,livery,of the Bonds..' Absence of Litigation As of the date of this Official Statement there i°s no action,, suit or"proceeding known by they City'-to .be pending, ,or threafened re""st`raining or .en'joi'ning the delivery of"the Bond`s~.or in•any way contesting or affecting the validity of the Bonds or any•'delivery thereof ~9 no Litigation cent"ificate executed'.~by t_he authorized representatives o.f the City will be de ivered•to the: oriyginal purchaser°of the Bonds simultaneously with the delivery of the Bonds. ' No Rating The City has'not applied for,, .and does not contemplate makng~applcaton to any rating agency for the assignment of a 'rating to the Bonds. • Debt Serv~fce .Schedule The following debt service. schedul"e's estimated .u sing various annual 'interest _ rates which.result in a net.. interest. rate over the life of the Bonds (net o;f discount)'of'7.5.~. - - 10 - C%tY:of Re;taluma North McDowell. Boulevard,Assessmen,t District No. 17 Estimated,Deb,t.Service Schedule Year End Total Debt Declining 09%02 Interest Principal Service Par Value ' . 1991 ~ $231,.562.50 $50,000.00 ===$281.,562.5.41== =$2,800,-000 00 _ 1992 $21,0, 000..f60 $70,000.00 $280,000.00. $2,730,.00:0.00 1993 ..$204.,,75.0.00 $.75.„000.00 '•$279,'750.410 $2,65:5,000..00 1994 $1.99,125.00'. $85,000.00 x$284,125.0.0. $2,570,.00.0.00 1995 $192,750.:00'. $90.,000.00 $282,,75:0:.00• $2,480,..00:0.00 1996' $1':86,,;000'..00:. $95,,.000.00 $281 ; 0fd0.00 .$2,385, 00.0;.00 199.7 $1:78,'875.0.0,' .:$105;,000.00 $283;,.875.00 $2,280,0.00.00 . 1998 `$171.,.,.000.00 :$110,000.00 $28.1,000.00 $2,170,0.00.00 1999 $162, 750..00:... x$1.20, 000.00 $282y, 750.00; $2, 050, 00,0.00 ' 2000 $153,75P1.00. $130,000.00 ,.$28.3,.,750,0.0. $1,920,'000..00 2001 $144,,00.0.00 $1.40,000.00 $284;0'00..00 $1,780,000:00 2002 $1'33, 5,00.00 $150,, 000.00 $283,_500-;~00 $1 , 630, 00.0..00 2"003 $122,25(6..00 $160;.000.00 $282.,.250..00 $1,470,000.00 200.4 $110, 25,,0.:0,0$170,.4100.00 . $280; 250:00 ~$'1 , 300, 000.043 2005 '$97,,500:00 $185';000.00 ~ $282,5041.00 $1,1`15,000:00 2006 _ $83;625.00` $200,000.0.0, $283„625.00 $915,0.00.00 2007 $68, 625.;0G1 $2:T5;, 000:.00 $283'.,.625;.00 $70'0, 000.-043 2008$52,500.00 $230,000.00 $282,500.00 $470,000.00 2009 $35,25.0..00 ~ $245;,000.00 $280',250.00 $2.25,00.0.00 24110 $l 6 , 875 .'.00 '.$225', `0.00..:00 $241 , 875:;. N0` - $0.00 $2,754,937.50 $2;850',000.00 $5,604,937:.50 7`.,5.0019397°b Gross Interest rate $57,.000.410 Add discount , $2;81`1,937.50 Net Interest•cost 7.65537.392 Ne:t inte'rest•rate , - 11 - a - The Project North McDowell Bourlevard is a major north-south'~arterial street 'serving the east side of Petalumd`. The Boulevard connects w.th,South McDowell .Boulevard - Extension at Lakeville H ghway in south=easter-n Petaluma and runs generally northward to Old Redwood: Highway At ,the northern City limits„ Tfie Boulevard is currently comp eted to four traffic lanes~w h`gppropriate curbs,•gutters, sidewalks, traffic s~i"gnats, storm. drainage,fac-il'i~ties, sdnitbry`sewers and~wa:ter facilities for most of its lengtfi.• In addition ~the.Northwest Pacific Railroad crossing at North 'McDowell Boulevard will be.imp,roved.. The North McDowell Boulevard Assessment District No. 1.7 (.the "Pr'oject") will complete. the tialance of the street to four traffic lanes-with appropriate related improvements. The Engne.er's report describes th°e improvements as follows: The construction of streets;.including clearing; gradi,ng,~ subbase, base;: pavement, curbs and gutter, median island, and- - - driveways; sidewalks;-traffic `signals; storm drainage facilities; san'i•tary sewers and appurtenances'; domestic water services and fire h,ydrpnts; street lights and.relocat`on of existing underg""round utilities; all with' necessary°appur.tenances; .tog'e;ther with th'e acquisition of all necessary interests in real p'roperty.. ' The•mprovements shall be c'onstructed'in North McDowell Boulevard ` between Gorona•Road and~Lynch' CreeK`Road~and on Corona'Road between the Nor.thwes;tern Pacifc.RaiLroad Grossing to U. S. ' Wghway 1'0 T. The assessment dist'r-rct improvements to be ~fi'nanced at this 'tme'i,n;clude: ~ ' acquisition. of night-of-way,.street'. work .with frontage improvements; a railroad Gros"sing.,,; island construction and landscaping, traffic signals, storm drainage; sanitary sewers, street lights, r-elocution of'utilites and water facilities:,.. Five constr-uction b'ids'for all- work except; constructing t:he railroad crossing and releca,tng utilities were rece-ivied by the•City. They were: Don Dowd Co. $2,074,218.10 North Bay Construction., Inc.. 2,222,121:44 Maggiora & Ghilotti Inc. ~ 2:,5(D•1;420.64 Ghiiotti Bros Inc. 2;,548,399.31 0 C Jones Sons 2,636,80.6.61 Costs for constructing the rail,road crossing ,ond•relocating u lities are estimated at $320,000 and $140;.000 respectively..-Combining the actual construction b:d and these estimated results in total estimated construction costs: of $2„534,20GJ as shown in the following futile, A 1'0~ cons,truc.ton contingency is dlso in the Engineer's Report .which results in 'a 'to"tat allowance - of $2,787,620 for construction costs. ~ - 12 - Table I City of Petaluma North McDowell Boulevard Assessment District No. 17 Cost Estimate I. Estimated Construction Costs: A. Street Work 51,622-,647 B. Traffic Signals 5137,750 C. Storm Droinage 5252,691 D. Sanitary Sewer 548,440 E. Utilities 5140,800 F. Wdter 5332,672. .Estimated Construction Costs ~ 52,534,280_ G. Construction Contingency. ~ 5253,420• Subtotal Construction 52,787,620 II. Estimated Right-of-Way Acquisition costs: A. Right-of-Way Acquisition-- Frontage 5174;155 B. Right-of-Way Acgusit_ion - Thoroughfare 595,285 C, Appraisal & Acquisition Fees 550;000 Subtotal Right-of-Way 5319,440 III. Estimated Incidental Costs: A. Engineering Design & .Staking 5300,00D Construction Management 5300,000 Subtotal Incidentols~ 5608,888 Subtotal 53,787,060 IV. Less: Contributions by City and Others (51,175,627) Subtotal to be. Financed 52,531,433 V,: Assessment District and Financing Costs A. -Bond Counsel SSQ,D00 B. Engineer-of-Work 548.,000 E. Printing,, Advertising, Miscellaneous S2D,D00 C. Financing Consultant. 510,500 Subtotal 5120,508 E. Bond Reserve Fund (5%) 5142,756 `F. Bond Discount (2$) $57,102 Subtotal 5199,858 Total Assessment District and Financing: 5328,356 Total Assessments and Bonds to be Issued - 52,851,791 - Round to: -52,850,080 - 13 - THE DISTRICT General There are 43 parcels,, including one which will be•acquired for use as right-of-way, incorporating approximately 12:9 acres under 19 ownersFi~ps in the District, wFi:ich is located on both sides of North McDowell Baulev,ard.',between Lynch. Creek Road on the south and Corona Road on the north, with on:e assessed parcel west of North McDowell and north of Corona Road. One parcel (assessment number 3) consists of street right-of-way and is not assessed. There are 15 property owners'li'oldng one parcel each, three property owners hording two parcels each and one property owner (Stephens) who hos 21' parcels in the District which are also included in a prior assessment district, Souttipoint,Business Park. .Ten of the lots in the Southpoint Business. 'Park front on Southpoint:Boulevard,. All other parcel in the North McDowell District are located along that street. The Southpoint. Business Park (wh•ich is full-y included in the North McDowell District) is zoned ;M-L, Light industrial with an indu"strial general plan designation. Southpoint Business Park represents about 25~ of tlae;property in the District. An .add;tional 32~ of land within the District is also'zoned M-L. This represents 57.59b of the land area. About 1.7~ is zoned as Urban Div. der. Residential, 6,616 as C-0 Office ('PUD), 6~ as G-0 Urban Divider Residential and 27~ is zoned Special Tndustri$l. Actual property uses are 276 Res-denta3 (a portion "of which is zoned for higher use), Y2.5°6 is in M-L use'and 6f6.4~6 has not been deve aped. A11 undeveloped property (approximately 78 acres') is ;zoned for other than residential purposes. Economic Research Associates, in ther'.Working Paper"I, Economic Base. A.nalVsi•s and Market Outlook for Petaluma, es_timgtes there will be d need for 159 acres of office and industrial ,land 'between 1990 dnd 1:9.95. T.he property available in the North McDowell- Assessment District represents about one=half that amount. Tables IV and V provide additional details on land zoning and use within the Dstrct~and Appendix G, contains detailed descriptions of permitted uses within the various zoning categories. " Metfi od of Spreading .Assessments (Summary)„ According to the Engineer's Report a number of factors were: ,considered in spreading the assessments. These included front .footo,ge, proportion of traffic generation, land areq~basis, and specific service costs. (sewer gnd Ovate"r) wh"ich were spread only to ,properties requiring such services. A portion of certain costs were allocated to the City with the ba once spread to benef"it~ing properties. Appendix.A includes all specific details. as to the spread of assessments. Assessments As mentioned earlier a portion of the North McDowell assessments overlap the Southpoint. Business Park assessments and„ as a result, are in ,a second-Lien position. Although there are 2.1 parcels on which this overlap occurs this represents•approximatel"y 13.8 of the`NOrth McDowell Assessments. Based on this: calculation. annual, assessment payments; for these 21 parcels will amount to . approximately $39,200. Annual. payments. on the Southpoint assessment distr'c.t - 14 - • ,i 'will not. exceed $200, 000.. , The ~gverall ra;t-io o:f estimated' mar-ke.t value to debt on.~these 21 parcels _is 4.2 times for both" assessments. All of these parcels are under ohe ownership: ' The Petgluma_.Developmen.t Commission ,(consisting.of•the.Mayor and members of the City Council,)-;, wi-11, p.ri.or to 'the date on which the first assessment payment"s a're due, be requested by the City~Cowncil to enter into agreements with three of tfie property owners. in the District; to pay all or a •porton of _the ahhua assessments. These agreements are for assessments n"limbered 1,2 and 12. Assessment number 1 includes property used for commercial and residential - - purposes. It is generally the policy of the Gty"no.t to assess commercially zoned=property currently utilized for'residental:purposes as part of the. City's effort to provide,"»and preserve low and moderate cost housing units. It is estimated that.gpproximately two.-thirds of this parcea is used for residential purposes. -The: Commission will~pay .two-thirds of the: annual assessment (approximately $;17,410 D3 until such time as the bonds are paid off or there is a • a change in, use of the property.. The property oh, which assessment °n umber 12 is levied s.a~mobile home park:' The' Commission has agreed to~pay tFie~full annual amount. of this assessment- ' (approximately $11,500) qs long as.this'use is contn`u,ed or until the bonds are paid in full. ' About 3~3~ of .assessment:number 2 .is for right-o.f-way acquisition. The Commission has .agreed to°pay this portion of the annual assessment until such time as the property is,_developed. .The. Commission will require each of these property owners to withdraw'their°protests to the formation of the assessment district as a condition of'these•pnoposed agreements. - Further information concerning the property owners::s provided under the heading "Property-Owners." . Valuations and Ratios ' • The firm of Crocker Hornsby competed a valuation o"f-land only within the District as of May 16,°-'199..0: °Their report is dat'ec7 Ju1y~~ fi2,, 1990 and a. complete • copy is available at the. .Petaluma City Hall. A copy of the summary of that" report is included•as Appendix E of this Official Statement. The Crocker Hornsby report estimates the market value of psse'ssed l-and to be $32,690,000. This. represents $5.00 in land value only for each $1.00 of assessments including the Southpoint Business Park assessments. ` The 1'990 Crocker Hornsby .report is for land orrl_y. In 1988 and 1989 ths.same firm completed valuations-of improvements., for Ch•arhes Stephens-, Preydent of North,~Bay Dry Wal,. on the land on. which assessments 7A, 78, 7C and 11 have been ' Levied..: The value of these improvements, along with other improvement values shown by the County Assessor's Office are included in Table IV of this Official Statement.. ;With these 'improvement values the overall ratio of'value to assessments within he District increases to 6:42 to one. Details are provided in Tables II, III arrd IV which follow. - 15 - Table II City of Petaluma North 'McDowell Boulevard Assessment District Assessments, Market Value Estimates and Rotios (North McDowell and Southpoiht Assessments) Assessors .Site ,Estimated Market Values Total Ratio of Liens Landt Asm't Asm't Parcel Size Current Assessment 'to Values: ~ Value. per ' Numbers Number (Acres); Zoning Use l.and~~ Zotal~~* Liens Lond., Totals Sq:~Ft. Sq: Ft. ' ' 1 H48-080-01 4.930 M-L At:Rp./Res 51.,353;090 51,353,00A 526;381 5.1961 Y~5.196-~ 56,30' - $1:21 2 137-H60-23 7::720 M-L Trucking 51,816';009, 51.,816;099 Ssss,s59` 3.02T 3.H27- 55:4H 81 J 6 3 139-060-24• ~ SH 50 50 r 4A 137-060-53 2.150 Res DivResident'l .5540;9HH 5540,000 512;218 31.363 31:363; S5:7Z' 50:18 48 137-060-54 H:53H Dffce Vocont 5225;00H" 5225;000 - 54,304 52:277 52'.277 $9,75 '50:`19 5 048-H8H-20 1.940 M'-L Multiple 5507,000. ~~S5H7,H0H 5102,396 4:951 4.951 56:00 51.21 6A 137-170''-32 2.199 Office Vacant 5763;009 5763;0HH' 521,965' 34.737 - 34.737 58.00' 50:23 68 137-169-26: 2;2HH Office; Ygcant ;5839.,000 5839',000' 521;965 38.~19T 38.197 58 J5 50.23 ' 7A~ 048-H80-30 '1;:480 M=L Child Care 5425;900. $'1.,359,000 5194,439 2.186- 6.989 56':59 `53°.02 . 7B* 948-080-31 1:630 M-L Off Und,Cs ,5426,090' $1,551;000 ' 5214,146 1:989 J.243~, 56.00' 53.02 7C* 048-080-32 1.380 M-L Off Und Cs- 5433,H00. $1,558,900 5183;632 2.358 8.464: ••57:2H 53':05 8A~ 007-401-14 1,:550;•_ M-L .Vacant ~ S4H6;HH0 5472;6261 5209;333 2.027 ':2:359 56.H1 52:97 86~ 007-4H1-15 1,:100 M-L:: Vacant 5287,000 _ S33S,412 5142,171 2.019. 2.359' 55:9952.97. ~8C* 097-491-16 . 1..130' M=L :Vacant 5295,009 $344,560 5146,049 2.020 2:359 .55.99 52:97 8D* H07-401-17 1:D70 M-L. Vacant 5280,000 5326",.264.- ,5:138,295 2.025 2:359 56.01 52:97 BE* 007-4H1-18 1.320 M=L Vacant 5345,000 5402,495 51"70;6H5, 2:022 2.359' 56:00 52:97 - 8F~ 007-401-19' 1:42H M-L Vacant . 5371",HHO 5402,059'- ,.5183,530 2.921 2.191 56:00' 52.97 8G* 007-491-20, 1:250 M-C Vacant 5327;0H0 5353,':925 •5161,559 2.924 - 2.199. 5&a 1" 52.97 8H+" 007-401-21' 1.160 M-L Vacant 5303,000 5328,442, 5149;927 2.021 2.191 56::00 .52.97 8I* 007-40.1-22 .1:H4H M-L VacanE 5245,,000 5294,466' -5134;417 1:823 2.19,1 .55:41 52.97 BJ* 007-401-23 1.040 M-L. Vacant 5247,009 - 5247;,009 5134;H12 1.843 1.843 $5.45 52.96 8K* 0H7-4H1,-24 1.360 M-b ~ Vacant 532H,;000 •S32H;000; 5175,276 1:62.1 1:821,'+ 55:4H $2,97 8L* H07_''401 25" 1.9H9 M-L Vacant 5235,000 :5235,224'. 5129,247. 1:x818 1:920 55.39 52;97 _ 8M~ 007-4H1-26 1:090 M-L Vacant 5256,000, 5256p394 ' 5140;879. ~ 1:817 ]:820 ,55:39 ;$2.97 8N* HH7-4H1-27 1.'15H M-L Vacant 5271;0HH 5271;000 5148;634 1..823 ]:823'' '55.41 - .52:97 80* 007-4H1-28 1.1H0 M-C Vacant 5259,H00 :5259:;009. ,5142„171 1.822 1:822 '55.41 :52,97 ' • BP* 007-491-29 '1.110 M-C• Vacant, $261,000• $290;'110. 5143;464' 1.619 2:H22 55.40 52.97 BQ* H97-401-30 2;24H M=C Vacant 5527:,990 - $527;000' 5289,387 1.821 ..1.821 :55:40 ~ 52,97 9 048-080-21 6:330 M=L ~Resdent'1+ 51;572,0HH $1;572,0D0. 5227,234 6.916 6:916 55:7H 50.82 • 10 137-H69-55, 7:790"Res divResident'1 52,169;000 S2,J60,099 547,4H1 45.569 (45.569 .:56;44 50.;14 ' 11* 007-391-11 6.130 M-L Of.Whse. 51,,368,909 55,673;00H 5745,601. 1.862 7.609 55:2H 52.79 12 - 048-111-12 6.049 M-L ;Mbl Hm Pk 51,421;;000 51`;421;00H 5119;,473 ,1].694 '-1.1.894 ~55:4H .50.45 13 137-H60-43 2:510 Office .Vacant $957;900 .5957";H9A 537,167 "25.749 25.249 =58.75 50.34 14 137-H6H-48 1.980"Office Vacant. 5506;H0H 5506;000 517;464 28.974 29:974 :$]0x76 SH.37 15A 097-501-12 H 770 M-L Industrial $211;90H 5211;9H0 572;"284 17.997 ,17..177 56.29 50.37 - 15B HH7-SH1-13 .0.46H M-L, Vacont 5144;000 5144;009 :57;338 19.624 19:624 57.19 SH.37 16 '0H7-502-10 1',690 M=L, ,Warehouse 5486,000 51,352;340 ;524,922 19.501 54.'263 56:69 SH.34 17 007-63H-01 H 779 M-L ~'Vacpnt 5231;0H0 523];0H0 512;591'° 18.346 18.346 :56.89 50.36 18 H07-639-1H 0'.640' M-L Mini whse 52H9,0HH, 5209,H00' 519,465 19.97.1 19:971 ,57:50 50.38 19 H07-391-19 0..:649 M-L Mini whse 5209,0HH .5209;900 51H;465 19.971 ]9:971. 57:5H 50:38 2H 907-380-04 25.380;Spc Ind :Vacant 55;638;0H0 :$5:,638;009 • 55;13;682' 10.976 19.976. 55:10 50.46 21 097-380-H5 11.199.Spc Ind Vacant 52,632;H90 52,632;909' 5232-,912 1.1:300 11:39H .S5.4H 'S0':46 22 137-119-59 10':64H M-L Vacant 52,364,0H0 52364,H0H' $756;932 - 15.064 15:H64 55:10 SH:34 Totals: 129:25H 532,69H;099 541,456;317' S6;526,29.1 5.009 .6:352 55:61 51:16 • * These parcels are. included in both the Southpoiht Business PaFk Assessment District and the North McDowell Boulevard Assessment District. The assessed amounts include 'both assessments. ~*Source: Crocker Hornsby Vauloton.' Dote of report July 12, 1990, valuations as of May 16, 1990 #*#Fngncing consultant has added value of improyements.only on property-which is utilized in .accordance with existing zoning and on which previous appraisals are ayaiiable. • • - 16 - ~ - E ~ - Table III City of :Petaluma North McDawell:Assessment District~No. 17 .Assessments, Market Value'Estimates and Rdtios~(North McDowell+and~Southpoint Assessments) Total Ratios of Assessment Assessor's Parcel Total Assessment Liens Estimated Assessments to Value Numbers Parcelf Size _ - _ Market North South N.McDow S/point Number„ (Acres): Na McDowell Southpoint Total Values McDowell Point Total 1 048-080-01 4.930 5260,38]..00 5260;381_09 5.1,353,000.00 5":1962 5.1962 2 137-060-23 7:720 $599;959.00 5599,959:00 .51;616:000.00 3.0269 3.0269 3 139-060-24 4A 137=X60=53 2.150 :517,,218.00 517,2]8:00 5540;000'.00 31.3625 31:3625 4B 137=060=54 0:530 54,304_00. 54,304..00 '$225,000:00 52.2770 52.2770 5 048=060=20 1..940 .5102;396.00 5102;396.00 5507,000.00 4.9514 4.9514 6A 13T-170-32 2.190 521,965.00 521,965.00 5763;000.00 .34.7371 34.7371 68 137=180-28 2.200 52.1,965.00 521.,965.00 5639,000.00 38.1971 38.1971 7A 1 048-080=30 1.480 521,937.00 5172,502.37 .5194,439.37 X51,359,000:00 61.9501 7.6782 6.9893 7B 2 048-080-31 1.630 s$24,160.H0. 5189;965:Z3 5214,145.73 51;551,000.00 64.1970 8.1638 '7.2427 7C 3 048-080-32 1,.380 ,rS20,454.00 5163,177.93 x5183;631.93 51,558,000.00 76.1709. 9.5479 8.4844 8A 4 007-401-14 1:550 519,672.00 5180,661.27 5200;333_27 5472,626.00 24.0253 2.6161 2.3592 8B 5 007-401-15 1.109 513;960..00 5128,211.23 5142,171,23 5335;412.00 24:0266 2.6161 2.3592 8C 6 007-407-16 1.130 514,341.00 5131,707.90 51,46,'048:90 5344;560x00 24.0262 2.6161 2.3592 8D 7 007-401-17 1;970 .593;580.00 5124,714.56 5138,294.56 5326;264.00 24.0253 2.6161 2.3592 8E 8 007=401-78 1:320' $16,752.00 5153,853.47 5170;605:.47 5402,495.00 24.0267 .2.6161 2:3592 8F 9 007.-401-19 1,.420 •518;021..00 5165,509.04 5183;530:04 5402,059.00 22.3106 2:4292. 2.1907 8G 10 007-401-20 ~~1_25H 515,864.00 5145,694.58 `5161,558.58 5353,925.00 22.3099 2.4292.- 2.1907 BH 11 HH7-407-21 1..160' 514,722.00 5135,204.57 .5149,926.57 .5328,442.00 22:3096 2.4292 2.1907 BI 12 007-401-22 1.040' ~$]3„199:00 5121,217:89. $134,,.416:89 5294,466.00 22.3097 2.4292 2.1907 8J 13 007-401=23 1.040 513;960:00 5120,052.33 5134,'012.:33' 5247,090:00 17.6934 2.0574 1.8431 8K 14 007-401=24 1.360 Si7;260.00 5158,515..70 '$]75,775:70 5320,000.00 18.5400 2.0187 1.8205 8L 15 007-401-25 1:000 'S1T,'691.0H 5116,555:66 "5129;246:66 5235;224.00 18.5347 2.0181 1.8200 8M 16 007-401-26 1.090 513,833.00 5127,045.67 5140;878.67 5256,394.00 18.5350 2.0181 1.8200 8N 17 007-401-27 - 1>r15H 514-595:00 5134,039.01 ,;5148,634:01 $271,000.00 18.5680 2.0218 1..8233 80 18 .007-401-28 1.100' 513;960.00 5128,211:23 5142,171:23 $259,000.00 18.5530 2.0201 1.8212 8P 19 007=401-29 1.110 514,087:00 5129,376:78 5143,463.78 5290,110'.00 20.5942 2.2424 2.0222 8Q 20 007=401-30 2.240 528,302;90 5261,084.68 5289',386:68' 5527;000.00 18.6206 2_.018.5 1..8211 9 048-080-21 6:330 5227,234.00 5227,234:00 51,572,000.00 6.9180 6.918A 10' 137-060-55 7.700 547,401.:00 547,401:D0 52,160;000.00 45.5687 45.5687 11 21 007-391-11 6.130 557,923.00 '5687,678.40 5745,601::40" 55;673,000.00 97.9404 8.2495 7.6086 12 048-111=12 6:040 5179,423:00 5119,473:'00 51;421,000.00 11.8939 11.8939 13 1.37=060=43 2.510 537;167.00 537,167.00' '5957,000.00 25.7486 25.7486 14 ~ 137-060-48 1.060 517,464.00 5]7,464.:00 5506,00A.00 28.9739 28.9739 15A. 007-501-12 0.770 512,284:00. 572,284.. H0 5211,000.00 17.1768 17..1766 156 007-501-13 0.460 $7,336.00 $7;338x00 5144,000.00 19.6239 19.6239 16 007-502-10 1.690 524;922:00 524;922:00. 51,352;340:00 54.2629 54.2629 17 007-630-01 0:770 512;591.00 $12,591_00 5231;000:00 18.3464 16.3464 18 007-630-10 0.640 .510,465,00 510;465.00 5209;000:00 19.9713 19.9713 19 007-391-19 0.640 510,465.00 51_@;465:,00 $209,000.00 19.9713 19:9713 20 007-380-04 25.380 5513,682.00 5513',682'.00 55',636,000.00 10:9757 10.9757 21 007-380-H5 11.190 5232,912'.00 5232,912:00' 52,632,000.00 11.3004 11.3004 22 137-110-5H 10.640 5156;932.00 5156,932.00 52,364,000.00 15.0636 15.0638 Totals: 129.250 52,851;791.00 53,675,000.00 56,526,791:00 541,456,317.00 14.5369 11.2806 6.3517 - 17 - ' Four property ,owners hold multiple parcels included in the .district. The following table summarizes the number of parcels owned by each, total assessments, m8rket vdlue and ~rdtios for'all such• multiple. owners. Table IV Summary ' Property Owners With Multiple;Assessments Number of Assessment,. Parcel' Assessments Lien Size Total , N.McDow S/point Totals (Acres) Market Value Rdtios Property•Ovm"eh ,2 521;522.HH 2.68H 5765,00H.H0 35.545H Ghris & Michealina Muelrath 2 5124,361.00• 4.390 ;51,270,H00.0~ 10.2122 McMai1 Company 21* 21# 54,066,273~D0 31:75A.516,645,977.00 4.H917'Charles R:~ & Charles R'. & Sun P. Steph 2 554,631.0A 1.280 51',463,AHH;OH 26.7797 Public Storage Institutional Fund III • ~ ~ ,Subtotals 54,268,787..HH 4H.100 520;143,'977:00 4-:7189 •15 H 52,258,0~4.HH 89.150 821;312,34H`:09' ~ 9.4386 All others Totals 42 21 56,526;791_.fd0 129.25 541,456,317'.0H 6.3517 5393,273.,D9 Total assessments North McDowell. $3,675,AH0r0A Total assessments Southpoint., 54,068,273.H0 7otd1 assessments. i ' i - 18 - Table V City of Petaluma • North McDowell Boulevard Assessmeht'District Current Zoning and Current Type of llse Assessors Site sizes .(acres) by type of zoning. Site sizes (acres).by current use. Asm't Parcel _ _ _ Numbers Number 1 M-L 2 UDR 3 CDP 4'CDR 5~ SI 11 M-L 7 SI 3 V I NOTES: 1 H48-080-01 4.930 I 4:930 I The following are brief descriptions) 2 137-H60-23 7.720 ~ I 7:72H I of the Codes shown 'for current 3 139-06H-24 I { property zoning and use in the I 4A 137-H60-53 2.150 I 2.150 1 assessment district. See Appendix CI 48 137-060-54 0.53H I H.530 I For more information on zoning and I 5 H48-080-20, 1.940 I 1:940 'I permitted uses. 6A 137-170=32 2 190 I 2:190 I I 68 137-180-28 2.2Hg I 2.200 I Zoning: ; 7A* 048-H8H-3H 1':460 { 1'.480 • F ZB* 048-08H-31 1.639 I 1.630 I Column 1 M-L is manufacturing 7C* 046-H80-32 1:380 ; 1.380 I and light industrial. $A~ 007-401-14 1.550 I 1.55H I 8B* 009-401-15 1.1H0 I 1.100 I Column 2 UDR is urban 8C* 007-401-16' 1.130 I 1.130 i diversified - Residential. i 8D* HH7-401-17 1:H7H I 1.070 i i BE* 007-401-18 1:320 I 1.3201 Column 3 COP is office- I 8F~ HH7-401-19 1.420 I 1.42H I commercial planned unit I 8G* 007-401-2H 1.250 ; 1.250 I development. 8H* 007-401-21 1.160 I 1.16H 1 I 8I~ 007-401-22 t.H40 I 1..040 I Column 4 COR is commercial- I 8J* 007-401-23 1.040 I 1.040 I office-residential planned I 8K* 0H7-4H1-24 1.360 i 1.36H I community. BL* 007-4H1-25 1.000. I 1.000 'I' 6Mx 0H7-4H1-26 1.H9H I 1.090 'I Column 5 SI is special 8N* 0H7-401-27 1.150 I 1.15H ii' industrial. 60* 007-401-28 11H0 I 1.10H II SP* 0H7-401-29 1.110 I 1:11H'i HQ~ 007-401-30 2.240 I 2.240 I Current uses: I 9 048-H8H-21 6.330 I 6.330 I I 10 137-06H-55 7:700 I 7 J00 I Column 1 M-L is manufacturing ; 11* 007-391-11 6.130 I 6.130 4 and light industrial. 12 048-11.1-12 6.040 I 6.040 I I 13 137-060-43 2:51H I 2.510 I Column 2 R is residential. I 14 137-060-48 1:08H I 1:080 1 ; 15A 007-501-12 0.770. I H'.77H I Column 3 V is vacant: 1 158 007-501x13 H.460 I 0:460 16 0H7-5H2-10 1.690. I 1..690 17 0H7-63D-01 H.770 v;' I 0:770 18 H07-63H-10 H.640 I 0.640 19 H07-391-19 H.64H I H. 6.40 20 0H7-380-H4 25.380 I .25:880 21 HH7-380-05 11.190 1 11.190 22 137-11H-50 1H.64H I 10.640 Totals: Amount 74:32 2:15 8.51. 7.ZH 36.57 ( 34.99 16.18 78:08 Percent 57.51: 1.Z% 6.6% 6.H8 28.311 I 27.18 12.5$ 60.48 These parcels are included in both the Southpont,Business Park Assessment Di"strict ahd~the North'McDoweld Assessment District. Total aceroge in,Southpoint is 31 J5 of which 1H.62 are improved and 2f.13 are unimproved. Source: Crocker Hornsby Valuation Report as of May 16, 1990, dated July 12, 1990. - 19 - The Property Owners With the exception of the 27 parcels on which overlapping assessments occur no property owner in the District owns:more~than two parcels: Tfiere~6re three ' owners with two parcels each; Chris & Mchealina Muelrath with assessments of $21,522,; the McBail Company with assessments totaling $•124,361 and Public Storage Institutional Fund ILI with assessments of $54,6.31. Charles R. and Sun P. Stephens, husband and wife as joint tenants own the 21' parcels with overlapping assessments. The total amount assessed:°is'$4,068,273 of which $3„675,0fb0 is for the Southpoint issue and $393,273 is for'the North McDowell-:District. The North McD.owe11 assessments are subordinate to the Southpoi'n assessments. The following in.formation.concerni:ng Mr..Stephens wos taken from the Official Statement for the Southpoint issue.. Mr.. Stephens is the President of North B6y Drywoll, a licensed union contrdctng company which. ha"s,6;een 3n existence since;l'972: Since then, the company has ' generated over $70 million in revenue: The, Company has expanded into exterior . plastering., interior metal stud partitions, and architectural treatedexter'or wall systems. In 1985, 'Mr, Stephens' establ-i•shed North ,Bay ;Specialty Contracting, which serves as g"eneral contractor for Mr. Stephens' construction projects. Nor-th:Boy Specialty•Con.trdctng ,is currently constructing a two story, steel frame,,. professional, multi-tenancy office building containing 52,618 .square feet of office space for Mr. Stephens at 1'308 Southpoint Boulevard. Mr. S--tephens also formed Southpoi'nt Realty Corporation in 1988 to 'manage 'h is. real estate ho dings :drrd development pro,j'ects. These include a commercial building at 71:5'Northpoint Boulevard, the Br-ittarr Manor Subdivision, tfi e Amerik.d Bui-lding, the building which is currently under construction:, residential building sites, and rental housing, as well as th:e Southport Business. Park parcels. Together these companies are grouped'as North Bay Companies.: Mr,. Stephens has developed over $40,000,000 in commercial and resdenti6l projects. A complete;lisa of property owners 'is provided in Table VI. Property Owner 'Protests The Protest Hearing for this project was held on June 18, 1990 and continued~on July 2, 1990: A total of six .protests were filed before or during the June T8 portion of the hearing.: Those were assessment numbers 1 (Lorenz-), 2 (Gow), 12 (VaL Cago Inc.), '20~(Gray), 21 {f riedman) and'22 ('Clegg). One of 'these protests, asSessment~:number 1'2~, was withdrawn prior to the opening of the hearing. Two other protests, numbers 20 and 21 wer-e withdrawn prior fo th:e duly 2 portion of the fiedring. As' of the date of'this.Official Statement three ' protests have not been withdrawn. i 'The three remaining assessments. on which protests have not been. officially i withdrawn {,numbers 1, 2 and 22) represent 23:.,21 acres which is 18~of they"land area included in the assessment district, Prior to the July 2 por.tiorr;of the hearing the City Manager submitted a memorandum. to th"e City Council. The portions of that memorandum concerning the assessments not yet formall y withdrawn ar.e as follows: ' -20- r 4. it _ Clegg.(#22) 1. This is a 1'0.64 Acre parcel n;orthwe'st of Corona Road in an area zoned. M.L. (L-fight Industrial..):. Mr.: Simmons on behalf of Mr. Clegg, argues that,the property is not.,directly adjacent to the district because of the City owned drainage ditch_:adjacent to the public ;right-or-way and, therefore., should not be assessed. Staff has reviewed the protest and concludes that access off Corona is legal and that physical access off of Corona Road is possible and that the property. should.-remain in the district' (Exhibit.A):.. . Gow (#2) This is an irregular;l~y shaped parcel on,the southeast corner of Corona and~North~McDowell. The total proposed assessment, inc'lu'ding right-of-wa.y is $5'99,959.. -The right-of-way assessment is $197,649. It is the right-of-way assessment upon which the protest was focused as it represents 32.9°b bf the total assessment for thi's property. Recommendation: The City request the Redevelopment Agency# to enter into an agreement with Mr. Gow to pay annually that portion of the annual assessment that represents the right'-of-way.. This proportionate payment will be made unail the bonds are paid off or a development entitlement is received for the property., ' Lorenz (#1) This is a 5.0 Acre parcel located on the southwest corner of North McDowell and Corona Road. The property currently has located on it on auto repair shop, Mr. Lorenz's residence,'.rental residence-and `several miscellaneous st'orage~buildings. Since June 1'8, staff h°as met with Mr. Lorenz and his tenant, Mr. John Troup on two different occasions. As you are aware„ we are tryi^ng to retain the viability ~ of the use of the. existing auto.repair shop and have commissioned Lie,b and Qudresma to prepare a site plan ' (Exhibit 8). Based`on.°the pr,eaiminary site plan, it appears that the auto repair sFiop~can be'preserved on the site. The total assessment on ;the property is $260,381. The primary basis of the ,protest is that Mr. Lorenz lives on the ~ property and does not have!any intent to deve op the five acres and that.the uses will remain as :they currently exist. ,Recommendation; Consistent wi,th• !the City Council's expressed des•.re• to exclude res3den.,fia1 uses from the - 21 - . . - ~ assessment district., we propose that°the assessment,~be. 'allocated 2/3 residential and 1/3 commercial. T,he.resdenti~da portion would be offered"an agreement, si'm,lar to the Capri .mobile. home; ,park wherein $fie Red-evelopment Agency* will make 2/3 of the ann.uah assessment payment. Upon r-ecewing' a development: entitlement; the responsibility of the agency to make: the".payment will cease. *Petaluma ~Commurr'ity .Development Commission . The CYty Manage,r'sMemorandum the City City Co"uncl noted that the"total annual committment o:f the"Petaluma Community Development Commission' would'•'be approximate y $48;00 and concluded with the following recommendation: the total. percentage of properties protesting the as essmemt is 17.1. Given th's:Low.percentoge of protest and°the offer to assist the Lorenz, Gow and Val Cago•propertes, I recommend that the;City Council proceed with the formation of the District and "th'e awarding the;'bid. "The attach"ed resolutions vial overrule.the protests, levy `th`e `assessments, _ and star-t the 3~6 day cash payment per"iod. " • The City Council accepted-these recommendations and adopted the appropriate reso utons. - • . ~ ~ ~ ~ - - - - 22 = • ~ Table VI City of Petaluma.: North McDowell Assessment District No. '17 Property Owners ' Assessment Assessors" Parcel ~ Land Area as " Numbers Porcel Size Percentage of N.McDowell' Southpoint Number ~,-a(Acres) • Name(s)•of~°Property. Owner(•s) Project 1 048-080-01 ' 4.930 Joseph Locenr•:_ 3.8148 2 137-06H=23 7.220 Clinton; M. &^Patriciq'M..Gow 5.9738 3 139-060-24 Ed & Filomema Seiffert 4A 137-060-53 2,150 Chris & Michealinq;Muelrath 1.6638 • 46 137-X60-54 0.530 Chris & Michealno MuelratFi 0.41HR 5 ~ .948'-089-20 1.940 Martin As.& Marjorie'H. Gdvriloff 1:5018 6A 137-170=37 . 2.190. McBail Company 1.:6948 66 137-180-28 2:200 McBal,Company Y:702R 7A 1 946=080-30 1:480 ~ Charles R. & Sun P. Stephens 1.1458 . JB 2 ,948'=080-31 ~ 1.630 Charles R. Stephens 1:2618 7C 3 046-089=32 . 1.380 Charles: R. Stephens 1.0688 8A 4 007-401=14 1.550 Charles R. & Sun.•P,.,Stephens 1:1998 8B 5 907-4H1-15 1.100 Charles R. & Sun P. Stephens 0.8518 8C 6 '007=401-16 .1.13H Charles R. & Sun.'P. Stephens 0.8748 8D ,.7 007-4041-17.. 1..H70 ,CharlesiR. & Sun'P.,.Stephens - 0.8288 8E 8 007-401=98 ~ ,1.320 Charles R. Sun, P,. Stephens 1:H21R 8F 9 007-401-19 1.429 Charles R. & Sun P, Stephens Y:099R 8G 10 H07-401-20 1,250 Charles R. & Sun P'. Stephens 0.9678 8H 11 007-40.1-21 1.160 Charles R. & Sun P. Stephens 0.8978 8I 12 997-401-22. 1,.040_ Charles R & Sun P-. Stephens 0.8H5R BJ 13 997-401=23. 1..040 Charles R: & Sun•P;: Stephens 0.8058 8K 14 007-401-24 1.360 Charles R: & Sun P,..Stephens ~ 1.0528 8L 15 907_401-25 1c0H0 Charles R. Sun P. Stephens 0'.7748 SM 16 907=401-26 ' 1.090 Charles R. & Sun P.; Stephens " 0:8438 8N 17 007-401-27 1.15H Charles R. & Sun P. Stephens 0.8908 80 16 007-401-28 1.100 Charles R. & Sun P. Stephens 0.8518 8P 19 007-401,-29 1..110. Charles R. & Sun P. Stephens 0,.8598 8Q 20 007-491-30 . ,2.240 Charles R. & Sun P: Stephens 1.7338 9 048-080-21' '.6.330 Dan & Betty Rostrum 4.8978 10 137-060-55 7.700 Martha Perry 5.9578 11 '21 007-391-11 •6.130 Charles R. & Sun P. Stephens 4.7438 12 048-1,11-12 6.040 Vol Cago Inc 4.6738 13 137-060-43 -2.510 David & Florence Young 1.9428 14 137-060-48 1.080 Petaluma Development Ltd. 0.8368 ' " 15A 007-501-'12 0.770 Harvest Petaluma Properties 0.5968 . 158, 007-501-13~= 0.460 Allen B. & Marcia R. Shahski, et al ~ 0.3568 -16 007=502-10 1:690 G F P.ropecties ~ 1:3H8R ' • 17 997-630=01: 0:770- ;Paul b:+& Elise P. Henderson 0.5968 18 007-630-10 0:640 ~ P.,utilic,Stordge Institutional.Fund III 0.4958 19 907-391-19 "9.640 Public Storage Institutional Fund III 0.4958 20 907-380-04 25.389 Richard.&'Faith,G~ay & William Thomas et al. 19.6368 21 007-380-05 11,.-199. Benny & Rosemary Friedman TR & Joseph 8.6568 22 137-110-50 10.640 Douglas &';Bett'y Clegg :Louise.TR 8.2328 Totals: '129-:250 100.09HR I -23- 4 -The City of Petaluma' ~ • THE BONDS' QFFERED HEREIN ARE $L'IMI,TED 08LIGAT,IONS PAYABLE SOCE~L' Y •`FROM ASSESSMENT ,.PAYMENTS PAID BY OWNERS OF PROPERT~Y• WITHIN THE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT. THE CITY OF PETALUMA H'AS~NO, OBLIGATION TO MAKE ALL QR ANY'RORTION OF'THE ANNUAL DEBT SERyICE • DUE ON, THE'BONQS.. THE.. FOLLOWING. DATA:CQNCERNING THE CITY'IS'PROYIDED AS GENERAL BACKGROUND INFORMATION ONLY. . General The ,City o;f.Petaluma was' incorporated in 1858 ;as a general law city.. A city` chgr.ter was adopted in; 1947 and the:C,ty hds operated as a charter city since that time. .Under provisions of the charter the city utilizes a council-manager form of government;, The yoters° :elec,t ,a• mayor and six council members who serve • overlapping four-year'terms•: Tfie mayor.~is a member of the council and is entitled,to..vote on all items before•theasouncil. ~ ' The .City Council'appoin s a City.Manager; City Attorney, •Cty Clerk and Library Trustee>. The. City Manager-appoints°al~l.other department heads anti's responsible °f or da,y--to-da.y operatons,•of the City, 'including preparation o.f an annual ,budget for consideration of the-Council. The Cty.Manager -s'e•rves at the pleasure-of•the City Counc"il. - The .City of Petaluma proYides all ty,pical• municipal _facipities bnd services, generaI,gover,nmen~t, community development-,domestic water and sanitary sewer'' . services; animal control.,; poiice:dnd fi°re protection, ambulance services, parks and recreatonr'facilites and services,. a.c~ammunity center, general- aviatfion airport, marina, transit system, lbr6ry facilities-and all-public works • ~ services. Members of the:~City Council. also serve.as a board of directors for the P'e.talumb • Community.Developmen,t Commission. which currently has two active development projects. The North; McDowell Assessment District No. 17 is located; in one of. those project areas known as the P-etaluma~COmmurrity Developmen,t,Projec.t. This project includes•approximateT~y 2,1~0.fb acres including the entire 131 plus acres of the North McDowell Boulev.drd Assessment District. Growth ' The City of Pet,aluma.operates.under a Residential Growtfi;Management System which essentially provides for tli'e addition of an average of up to 5f6(6 new living units per year to be 'built in the City, exclusiv,e•of units for seniors, disabled, • and low-to-moderate income residents.' • There were app,roxmately:495 units."aliocoted" (an allocdtorr.,i~s basically the right to apply to ..build, one residential dwelling unit;);for 199f6 and developers applied ,for 7.16 units for 199:1 Allocations have been made; for 425' of these • . applications. Since a total of 45 units per year is reserved for, ''fill-in" projects in previowsl•y developed areas in the City this leaves only thirty units available .to 6'l locate. The:City also recently approved the Cor-ona-'E 1y .Specific Plan for an area of • ap'proximafely 625 acres located in the north eastern portion'of'th;e City. As -24- , , } 4 ~ ' . ~ par=t of this process the Ciity adopted a financing plan for construction of public improvements+to serve this area. The financ ng plan includes formation of an assessment district in which five major developers have agreed to participate. In return these~fve developers will share 300 housing allocations per year fora period of five.'years beg~n.nng in 1990. This allocation has been included in the 425 units discussed above. Table VII indicates thpt, between 1980 and 1989,. the. actual number of living units in the City increa"sed b,y b total,of 3,.484, or an average of 387 units per yeor. This represents an annual average of 3..25. Based on current applications for 1990 and 1991 it appears this rate may be exceeded for the next few years.. Population growth, also shown in Table VII and apparently reflecting smaller households; increased by only•2.6~ per year as compared to the 3.25 ahnual average increase in new livn"g units. Table VII,, which provides detailed data on population and housing growth, also provides data on increases in the amount of property available and utilized for office and industrial purposes. This data.indicptes that :productive office and industrial space .grew from 8'1.8,948 square feet in 1980'to 3,751,404 square feet in 1989.. This represents an increase of nearly 40~.per year during this time period.. Table VIII provides details of ,gross assessed valuation growth within the City which has increased from $533,678,096 in fiscal 1979.-to $1,.850',543,880 in fiscal 1990 representing an annual average of about 1.2 percent.. Preliminary figures released by.the County o:f Sonoma. indicate that assessed valuation for the City of Petaluma for the 1990- 19.91 fiscal year wil'1 be approximately $2,042,000,000, an increase of just over 20~•~from the current fiscal year... Economic Data The number of jobs. within the ;Petaluma planning area increased from 10,432 in 1980 to 16,285 in 1990,• an increase of 5,853, or 5.6% (average) per year: Approximately 9,715 residents ar.e employed outside of the area. Currently about 63°b of employed residents in the 'Petaluma planning area are working within the same area. This figure was 62~ in ],980 and 60~ in 1985: Table IX provides additional details concerning employment data for the City and the County of, Sonoma. 'Median household income (in .constant 1.988 dollars:), in Petaluma, according to Economics Research Associates and as shown in Table IX, exceeds that of all other cities in the County and is .higher than the overall county median by 5%. The data shows that Petaluma has led the county in this category for the last. 10 years. Retail sales in Petaluma increased by 584 between 1970 and 1988 (more recent figures are not currently available from the State of California). Table X provides this data for the City and the County of Sonoma. The construction of an Auto Plaza, currently underway; and the proposed development of a major factory outlet shopping complex, could increase the City's portion of total reta'1 sales in the county which was 11 percent in 1998. - 25 - Toble VII ' City of Petaluma Selected Growth Data Sq:.Feet Percentage Increases (Annuol and; Total)' Number Office .Number Office Housing of IndusLSpc Housing of aIndus/Spc - Year Population Units# Hslds~# Inventory Population Units Hslds 'inventory 1989 33;834 11,910 12,259 1',098,748 1981 34;257 12,124 12,639. 1,317,,848 .2':7288 1:7978 3.109A 19:9418 1982 35;102 .12,319 12,611 1,459;239 9.9938 1:6088 1:3618 10:7298 1983 35;872 12,492 13;092 1,645;258 2.`1948' 1.4048 2:1938' 12.7468 1884 36,445, :12,915 13,350 2,990,204 1:5978 3.3868 1:9718 27.0448 1985 `37',283 13,651 X14,122 2;330,157 2.2998 5.6998 5.7838: 1t.480R 1986 38`,369 '14,1.56 14,701 2;928,258' 2.9138 3.7148 4.1008 25:6688 1987 39,106 .14,,569 15,099 :3',473;394 1:9218 2.6398 2'.778 18.6138 1988 40,,219. 14,,962 15,529 3,843',754 2.8468 '2.7618 2:8488' 10.6668 1989 41,,829 15,394 15,965 4;148';468 4.0038 2.8678 2:8088 7:9288 Totals 7,995 3,,484 3,706 '3';049;720 23:6308 29.2538 30:2318: 277:5638 Averegge annual increase 1980/1969........:.: 2.6268 3.2508 3.3598 30.8408 • * Does not include mobile homes. - ' Including families in mobile homes. " City of Petaluma Summary of'Office and Industrial Space Development and Occupancy Data is shown in square feet Annual Increases Total Totd1 Amounts Percent Year Inyentory Vacant Occupied .Inventory ~ Occupied Invent'y Occupied 1960 1,,098;748 279,800 818,948 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1981. 1.,317:;848 279,700 1,036,148 219,100 219,,209 19.9418 26.7668 1982 1,459;239 117;650 1.,341„589 141,391 393;441 10'.7298 29.2298 1983.. 1,,645,258 77,.170 1,568;088 186,019 226,499 12.2488 16.8838 . 1884 '2,999:,2D4 76;517 2;013;687 444-,946 445,599 27..H448 28.4178 ' 1985 2,339,.157 .177-,896 2;<152-;261 239,953 .138,,574 11..4808 6.8828 1986 2,928,256 2ZA;628 2;656,630. 598,101 504,369 25.6688 23.4348 1987 3,473,304 366;987 3,107;223 545,046 450.,593 18.6138 16.9618 1986 3,843,254 .346,251 3,497;503 370,450 390,280 10.6668 12.5608 1969 .4,148.,468 397,,064 3,751,404 304,714 253,901 2.9288 7,.2598 Totals 3,049.,729 2;932,456 3;949;720 2,932,456 277.5638 358.0768 • Avereage annual increase 1980/1989.... 30.8408 39.7868 Source• • Working Paper I Economic Base Analysis and .Market Outlook for Petaluma by Economics Research Associates. Some Additional Calculptions made by CPF INCORPORATED -26- • Tab3e,VIIT Gity of Petaluma. Growtfi of Gross Assessed Valuation Fiscal Year Assessed • Ending Valuations Percentage Increases Cum Annual June 30 Total Annual Cumulative Average Average. ~ ' 1979 $53.3,678;.096 1980 $5.93,433,052 11.197 11.197 11.197° 11.197 1981 $675,277,792 73..7;92 26.533 13.:266 12..494 • 1982 $776,760,9J0 1;5.028 45.549 15.183 13..3.39% . 1983 $854,323,.0:14 9.,.985% 60:082 15.021 12.501 1984 $92.2;:864,465 $':023 72.925 14.585 11:605 1985 $1,036,566,676 ~12.321~ 94.231 '15:705 11,724 1986 $1 , 1`9.1 , 561 , 91,1 14._;953r~ 123'. 274 17.61 1 ~ 1'2. 185 1987. $1,328,694,460 11.~509~ 148.969 18.621 '12.101 1988 . $1 , 495, 317;.566 •12,540 180. 191-~ 20..021: 12. 150 1.989 $.1;626,116,83.7' ~ 8.Z47~ 204.700 20.4,7,0 11.809 1990 $1,850,543,880 1=3;.80TJ 246,:753 22.432 11.991 1'991* $2,042,.969; ]92 1;0.:398 282,.809 25.71`0 11.918 *Prelminary ' - 27 - F e • Table IX " City of Petaluma Employment Data . Petaluma Percentages Petaluma Planning Area County of Sonoma Within Petaluma Plan Area Of the County of Sonoma 1980 1985 1990 1980 1985 1990 1980 1985 1990 198H 1985 1990- Agricultutre 538 490 ..470 6.,589 6,230 6,090' 5.168 4.038. 2..8910 8 1z4, 7.678 7 J2R Manufacturing-& Wholesale 2;516 2,970 4,500 20.,879 .25,.130 ,29,528 24..128 24.448 2T.63R 12:fd58 11.828 15,248 Retail 2,985 3,,350 .3.,975 21,691 26;080, 34;218 28.618 27.578 24,4110 13.768' 12.654 11.628 Services 2,081 2,79H 4,15H 16,H50 30;920 37',290 19.958 22.968 25,:488• Z': 998 9.H2R '11.138 Other 2,312 2,55H 3,190 28,147 29,960 35,410. 22.168 20.998 19.598 8.214 ~ 8.518 9.H1R Subtotal 10,432 12,150 16;285 103,356 118,320 142,528 1H0.00R' 190..098 1H9.0H4 1H.09R 19.278 ~11.43R Employed Outside Area 6,268 .8,,159• 9,715 27,767 37;280 48,080 Total 16,700 20,398 26;000 131.,123 156,100 19H,600 ~ ' Numerical,Changes'I Percentage Changes Petaluma Planning Area County of,Sohdma Petaluma Planning Area County of Sonoma 1980/ 1985/ 1980/ 1980/ 1985/ 198H/ 1980/ 1985/ 1989/ 198H/ 1985/ 198H/ 1985 , 1990 199H '1985 1999 1990 1985 199H 199H 1985• 199H 1990 Agricultutre (48), (20) (68) (359) (140) (499p 8:928 4.088'•-12.648 5.458 2.258 -7,.578 Manufacturing & Wholesale 454 1;530 1,984 4,251 4,39H 6;641 18.H48 51..528, 76:86$ 2H.36A 17.478' 41.398 Retail 365 625 999 ' 4;389 8,130 12,519 12.238 16.668 33.178 20_.238 31:174 57 J28 • Services 709 1;36H' :2,,069 4;879 '6;370' 11,24H '34.078 48 J58 99,.,428 18;694 29:6HR .43.158 Other 138 640 878 1,813 .5;450 7-;263 10:298 25,'1HR 37:988• 6-.444 18.,198 25.808 Subtotal 1,718 4,135 5-,853 14;964 24;200. 39,164 16.478 34-.938 56.118 14 488 2H.45R 37.698• 1 Employed;Dutside Area 1,882 1,565 .3,447 10';913 10;3H8 20;313 30.038 19,298; '54.994 36x068 27.268 "73.168 3-,600 5,700 9.,300 24,977 34;500 59,47T 21.568 28.084 55.698 19,:058 22..1HR •45.368 Medidn Household Income -Percentage Increases Selected Cities 1980/ '1985/ 1980/ 1980 1985 1990 1985 1990 1990 ~ City of Petaluma 536.;;139 $38,508 540',100 6.568 4.168 10.998 City of Santa Rosa. `534,226 536,5HH 536.,608 6.648 5.758 12:788 - City of Sonoma $32;543 534,909 535-;200 7.248 .0.86$ 8.1616 City of Rohne~t Park 533,336 536,180 537,008 8.298 2.498 10.998 City of Sebpstopol _531;883 533,2HA. 534,2H0 '4.108 3.018 7.238, City of Cotati 529',600'•$31,300 532;50H 5 J48 3.834 9.808, • 534,391 536,60H 53&,898 • 6.428 3.838 10.498 Source: Working Papeh,;I.County of Sonoma _ _ - Economic B'ase.Analysis Ih cons_tant 1988 dollars. _ and Market Outlook for Petaluma by Economics Research Associates Some additional calculations made by CPF INCORPORATED -28- _ •;'r L d Table X ' Retail Shces•Dtita City of 'Petaluma dnd County of Sonoma 1970,1980 and 1968 • (In Thousands of Ddlldrs) • City '1988 City Percentage Increases 1920 1980. 1.988 As Percent 1980/ 1988/ 1988/ Category of Sales City City City County of County 1970 1980 1970 COMPARISON GOODS Apparel 52;271 56,290 55,43Y $89,419 6..074?! 176.978 -13.664 139.15% .General Merchendise ,$5,286 524,551 536,270 5317,671 11.4108 364.458 47.738 586:154 Furniture & Appliances 51,850 56,266 518,696 $117,942 15.8524 238..704 198.374 910,594 Building & Hardware 54,743 59,535 519,256 5264,080 7.2924 101.034 101.954 305.994 AUTOMOTIVE Auto Dealers & Supplies 58,812 523,788 547,514 5380,824 12.4774 169.954 99.744 439.204 'Service Stations 5993 521,614 529,350 5180,319 16.27742076.644 35.794 2855.694 CONVENIENCE GOODS Food Stores 516,076 546,194 579,686 5640,673 12.4384 187.354 72.518 395.204 . Drug Stores 52,760 58,999 518,143 593-,970 19.3074 226.054 101:614 557.364 Packaged Liquor Stores - 52,041 51,511 525,546 5.9158 -25.974 EATING AND DRINKING 54,191 517,912 536,953 5253,749 14.5634 327.394 106.304 781.724 OTHER RETAIL 53,908. 512,905 524,827 5286,-121 .8.6774 230.224 92.384 535•.294 TOTAL RETAIL 550,890 5180,095 5317,639 $2;650--514 11.9844 253.894 76.374 524,174 ALL OTHER OUTLETS 57,435 533,155 581,39T 5923,622 8.810A .345.934 145.494 994.704 TOTAL ALL OUTLETS 558,325 -5213,250 5399.,030 53,574,336 11.1644 265.624 87:124 584.154 Source: Working ,Paper I _ Economic~8gse Analysis and Market Outlook - for Petaluma by Economics Research Associates ' Additional.cdlculations mdde 6y CPF INCORPORATED. -29- 1 NORTH MCDOWELL BOULEVARD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT N0: 17 CITY OF PETALUMA Method: of Spread of Assessment: The assessments were allocated to the various properties in Assessment District No. 17 acco"rding to the following bases of benefit: 1. Frontage 'Imps-ovements: The street frontage improvements required as standards of all. development by the City (pavement, curb, gutter dnd• sidewalk) as frontage improvements°were allocated to the various properties requiring those improvements, prorated on a front footage ba§is. Properties which already had their frontage imp'rovemen.ts constructed were assessed $~J; •cor.ner parcels were dssessed for the largest of their two frontages; parcels with irregular shapes; (contanying narrow, unusable areas.) were assessed for the usable area of frontage only; parcels with :very, narrow frontages; put which use McDowell as their major access, were assessed an equivalent o,f 51d~ of the average width of the parcel. 2. Thoroughfare improvements:. "Thorou_ghfare improvements" consist•of the remaining street pavement improvements (in excess. of those. required by the Ci.'ty as "fronttage"' improvements); plus street overlay and repair costs„ "excessive" right-of-way acquisition and appraisal costs. All of these "thoroughfare" irtiprovements benef-t all properties and were prorated to aTl of the parcels on the basis of relative traffic genero.tion. This traffic generation was measured by the land area of-each parcel, with 5P~9b assessment per acre allocated to residential properties and 1GJf6~ per acre alloca`t°ed' to commercial , and industrial parcels. ' 3. Railroad crossing, costs were allocated 50~ to the City and 5Rl~ to the various properties,.. allocated on o traffic (fond-are.) basis as with • "thoroughfare" .improvements. 4. .Island constrruction and landscaping: These costs were al-Tocafed to all the; .properties on.a traffic (-land area) basis as with "thoroughfare" improvements. 5. Traffic signors: The traffic signal at McDowe l and Corona was arlocoited 1'0~~ to the City; The signal at McDowell and Rainier Avenue was a located 6pproximateTy 75~ to the City, with tfi a remaining 25~G allocated to all properties on a traffic (land-area] basis (as with "tho'roughfare" improvements). 6. Storm drainage: the costs of the "A-line" foci i ies, except for the major box a, were allocated to the three parcels utilizing those facilities; the. costs of. the major box culvert; .the extension of which is required to adequately drain off-site properties outside the district, was allocated to the City. "line-B" drainage costs. along North McDowell were alrocated to all other. properties., except for the three contributing to ":Line-A" improvements, prorated on a land-area basis. - 32 - 7: Sanitary sewer: Sanitary sewer .main, costs were allocated to the two properties requiring this ;service, allocated ~on 'a land=area basis; - the cost of four lateral services were:al`located equally to the four parcels receiving those service.l.nes. 8. Utility relocations:- The relocation s; of gas main and street lights were allocated to all of the properties,. prorated on a land-area .basis. 9. Water-hydrants: Tfi"e costs of these f6cilites were allocated on a .land-area basis to all properties. 1R~. Wa:ter-services: The costs of these water. services were allocated equally to the fve'parcels receiving those services. 11. Right-of-way dedications: The costs of right,of-way acquisition from the six parcels requiring such dedication, equ-iva~lent to the amount of right-of-way normally required by the City as.a development requirement .(and previously dedicated by"alI other 'properties), was allocated to tfi e~six properties, prorated on the basis of the amount . of right-of-way-r-equired from each parce the costs of right:-o;f=wa,y required in excess of :normally-dedicated amounts was ihcluded with ' the "thoroughfare" costs and.a h ocated to a1T properties as described above. After the allocat-ions were calculated for the original properties, a few parcels have recently subdivide d,.~~ The allocations of the assessments on the original parcels were prorated to the newly-created parcels on the basis of relative land area . , - 33 - THIS PAGE INTENTIONALiY'BLANK ' i • ~ ` _ - 3# - 1 - _ ~ J 9 !0 L 136 31b 31f1 IUIVII ~ ~ n a ~ 1 aa~ ~ s• ~ ~ ~ ~$a s ~ ~ ~ R ~ ~ ~ " ~;I~o'.. ~ ~ by 1g ~ ~ ~ I b8 d~' ~g. ~ ~ 3 8Z _ ~ ~ a~ ~ ti sy1 ea o ~ Q Z ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ H~ $ ~ - o~Vc ~s m Qi ~ ° ~ ~ A 2 ~ ~ Z i a ~ V J'~, ~ p bb ~ I P~' ~x x . iN ~ ~ a j 3 p~~~ ~ ~ ~ _ ~ / i z . ~ ' y t ,00'091 _ ~ ,LlY9[ 1 1 1 S 3.00.00. 'N -,L l'S9L: 3 ;Lf,9l9C N G~J 'a, 3. ,pOp694 N QVOZI VNOaO~ a iS S ..fS'Ot1, _ 3 p, 8 ,<F . ~ ~ $ ~ F :w W }}~~3 :9CpC9C N ~ ~X ~'pp W ~8. GG'J „ N R~ 1 ~ ~ 1 1 1O b Ao'9ez-, n a ~ N s ~ 3.,9[,9CLY 'N, , ~.y~ ~ ~ ~ aa~ Z 1 , , aa~ M ..9~ s . i~ . Y,. { l N s49o'vY w DIALBtAld 0~ ~ 1a7. . cx~?Pxic sc~ ~ NORTH BdcDO~ELL BOULEVARD , •y; • - ° ASSESSA~IEN`T DISTRICT N0. 17 P % • c e t car or rateLViae. ooae~tr or' aoawma. catmo>~vs . ama_noR, , tr ~ WW ti. n p - ~ F W Z ~ W ,210. ~ ~ _ W ; a~ LEGEND ~ to $ 137-080-53 ~-401-3o ASR~6 FARCE1,NWi#R ~ 137-080-41 .2/9'AC. ~ ~ BOlAiOARY Oi ASSES9IFNT pSTR1CT 7.7 AC . ~.0 DUOAAY t A9StS9~fi NU1~ER = Y ~ ~ D -0090'00' D - 80'00.00' W R -20.00• R 20.00' L -31.42' L - 31.47 d'~ 7388'88' - . R -420.00• O - 129!•14' ~l ~i88.8d ~ R -480.00' N 54R76C w !!41.28' N 54'22.34' W S 5440'07'E _ _ 809: l - 101.88• p:- ]047.48' 417. b8. 181. W R -.420.00• O W 14 ° ea7o': ' Ir.2ri e3.37• L - I2aee• $ 137.E 28 $ 13 $ jt 137t.~ ABC. ~ $ 137-080-13 3 ~ ' a- 72DOr]B' ~ ~ w - 3a~oo•~ ~ ~ 29r A0. ~ C o - BO9fY00'~ 'R$ - tt M 48 -A - 18SOD• D -3331.22' L - 47.12' r°~ D - 4000'OD' R - J0.00' ;z d g 6:137_- 0-34' ~e L - tmsf 132te70-32 z i - ti0..s~ \ Z R - 3aaa~ z L - 47.t7 d1 ~ aa3 AC. ¢ ~ L - 4z12• y{ 4:8890r0Y E 477.28' 254.37 S S4R2'84' E S~S490'07' E~ ~ S..S4'~'OT E . Of gl y~• N S4. w 731. tom' 4~ 1~: iN. NORTH IAcDOWELL BOULEVARD - S s49a•OY"E. 3M.34' N 3490'07' w 3~3440'OY.[ 03178• - _ - S 54 [ 02D.2¢ 240.94 02 170. n 183.1 8 8 L f N 407r ~ 46-~ 20 $ ' ' © ` 48-0©80-32 ~ ~ "t G 8D1.a. ~ 48-080-30 G? ~ L7 1.3e. Ac ~ y ~1. iiff ,.40 AG if~ N 949COY w ~ FS O - ° n ~ ~ , L8 387.0 =4~t4. - ~ ~ : 48-OB0--21 ~ ~ 961T 7 ar o • G • 11 J 1 g 9'' 10 1 Li~6 ~ o a a~~ a ~ ~ s yJ.~~ ~ a .sooaac;s R 'X $ r s ~~11 o .:non n ~ nd z 9 ~ ~1 J J ~ 2 1~ _ ,000CI .ILSZC M .OC,1L9C ~S _ ~i ~ a ,K'8LY M .OC.ILCf S 1~ i a ~pd~ ~ ~ G W O Ia ~ }app ~ a+D~ ~ 8. ~ n N : ~ n i ,91'CYC' 3.,9C.Ba9C N J. ,M'LC9 3 ,OC,ILCf N O. ~ ~ .LZ, _ ,LH'LL - 'B?'9YC M S ~i W .Y6'0?9. 3 ~.LIALBC N ,YQ'(DL C ~ W ~ ~ ~ ~ A ~ ~ 3 ~ ~j W~~ ~i 0 J b ~ iS, f1 ~ g W tCy $ O ~ E'! ~ I fin. ~ w Q' I ~ ^ ~ n a W 1U-~1 W ~ ~ 2 ~ az ~ ~ _ ° _ ~ ~ ~ y y~• .ttca O A ~ ^lt- m n . V lOS 2 ' bCN! H ~ - - - 3 ,Cf,ZLGC N' a ~ ^ _ yyy N ~ ~ - ~ ~ _ .yZ'lEC 3.CI,ZL9C.. N. iV, ~ I,.~ !T. ~1.~ o ~ ~ S $ .oovs~ ,cz•ocz ~7 ®g ~ R M' .9C.9C~ s i~ ~ ~ ~ ~ M;~ ~z W ~ as a o ~ $ ~`0QS .~i W n I~ ~ X C ~O"d ~ b ~go M .GC9aCC S tt,, ~ ~ nl.e,~,N v~S N ~ ~ c~` .ea'us 9 ~ 3 ®g" N .orvasc s F g~ $ ~oavn~noe ti ~ :r p 3 ' ~ ..+r Z b X 1` ~ f ry ~ ~ 6 N~ J J 8~' 'M ~.9GYC'S rIf - 1 N~ 2 ~i ®~a ~ IY to ~.y M ~•rCx S .C~y~' ~ §t ~f6~ n n n 1 ~ M .C4.ICYC 5 ~ ~ ° n. . a ,e+.caac s .G09Y1 N ns1s~ EG o ~r ~ G M..a?~asr;s n ~n ~ a~ ~ 5.~ b. J tll'Lll. n ~ . lea ~ , ~ ~ ~ ®~x ~ ~ ®~a x ~ O§~ , x ~ ®§s y n X n an \ Q N i z~ ' - - X~ ,YCOSL ,00'[Ol 'Ml-.if98t h .Z t ' - - - 38 = nie~ta~' or NORTH McDOWELL BOULEVARD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT . N0. 17 _ CIrT OP PSlALUIS~. COUAIT! OD 801i01dA. CAIdP'OIaIIA _ _ GRAPHIC :9CAlE; d ~ e v _ ~G~~ O1Q) 7-401-70 ASSN PARGn NUYEIER I. d - 100 d BOUNDARY OF ASSES$i1Q~T gSiN1CT • 1O DIAORAY. @ ASS4S91ENT NUYBEIt NORTH McD01A~LL BOl1lEVARD 7a~~ o - so'm'.r L _ 4z,r ~ - aaoo' S eSOO'00' E 411.70' N 3776'Se' p320.07 - S ~3~9'90' E 294.94 ~.N 342e'S8' p. N -5449'Se' M L ~ 47.1{' S 3480"ie''E ' 210. 3 102 - 19Q 170. 171.2Y $ © ~ ~ a~ ~c3 _ . v ~ ~oo• ag $ n s le 1~, $ 1s s $ ~ 7-501-12 L - 47.17 _ „1 7-830-01 ~ $ 7-830-10 Q 7-~91-19 d 12 ~ an ~c. ~ ~ ~ $ a~11 is ~ $ ~ an nc. ~ ~ ° ae4,~c. ii a ~c ' ~ " O ..218.17 ~ ~ ~1320C ~ 6 7-502=10. ~ ~ 4 S4RB'Se' E N 5420'S8' M z 5 MRe11' E ~ .100. a 48-111-12 N ~ W Jell - h ~ 1:09 'AG . N 3z 22500' y 20a 201. rn S4 tlY 9.04 AG ~ - . ,I. ~ . CN` S: E1324.. r ;:F Y1 1 ° _ e _ t a ri L _ n. R ~ aeo-oa p N ~ 28:7e Ac. V Q ~ ' '~°'+r R~ ` ` t1 7-391-11 e.80 Ac n: . M 0.71 q ! 84 E tt~ Team' a ene'49' E sNOn ? a:"e earr ~ NORT~i McDOWEIL BOULEVARD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT N;O. 17 arr .o~ ?~retu~ oooirn ~ . r•,,••,~••• ` NORTH McDOWELL BOOLEVARD S.SIRB'60"E~. ~ ~ S. S476'SE' E W Nu ~ z _p. , O ~ ~ ~ G14K [YW 9Cr.... ~ ~ s ~ ~ c _ ~~_~a • _ ia.se ~c. ,,.,e ~c W _ •a a ~ ~cao 7-sOt-JO ~SSORS PNlLEL.l1lMRtJ1 .N N z BOIMDMY OF;IT DIS1fOCT _ ~ ' O ~ dAWAY ~ A59E491lNT MUIO[R ~ , _ - 1100.fS~ N4T N'.. f8~ _E... w . 96iT 'J Q 6 •i 1. 6 ~ There are four major five existing zoning classifications in the North McDowell Boulevard Assessment District #17. These•are;M=L;, Urban Diversified Residential; `C=.Q Office (PUD) or (PCDP; C-0 O'ffce/Urban Diversified Residenti"al and.S ecial Industrial: The follown .descr Lions of these zoning P g p classifications; have been summarized fr-om_moteriaL taken from the City's general. plan and/'or zo.n,ing ordinance. These summaries are not intended to indicate all uses or restrictions for these zoning categories. Reference should be made to the City 's zbn;ing ordinance for all permitted uses and/or restrictions • applicable for eocfi category.. , M-C Light Industrial zoning is intended to provide adequate and appropriately • located areas to meet the needs of modern industrial development, .including off-street. parking and truck loading areas, and landscaping dad screening. The ' types. of uses intended for the M-L_Distric,t include light and special-zed industrial uses, warehousing and who esal_ng operations, and Administrative and research establi hments, all of a non=nuisance type regulated 6y performance ` s;tandar.ds. Th's.incTudes various types of manufacturing activities; adminis.trati.ve, 'execut.ve and financi"al offices; -laboratories,, research,. experimental, film or testing; wholesAle business., storage, or warehousing, except for storage of fuel or flamables,and pub is and quasi-public corporation year-s. Other dccessory uses, conditional uses are also permitted. Urban Di;v°ersifed'Resdential allows up to ten dwelling units ,per acr-e (:it should not be presumed that any individual project will be permitted to build the ,maximum number of units allowed): This designation invites fI'exib•ility in site: design and unit type. Single-family homes, duplexes, and multi-fami'l'y units are permitted. There are. two types. of 'C-O zoning existing within the assessment district. PUC, or P::=C is "planned community" which is intended to establish a•needed level of pre=plane:ing 'for devea'opment,of large tracts of wand and to encourage innovative design solution s:wh'le retaining good land use relationships and compatibYlity of uses:, The P=C District is intended to be employed principally at the developing fringe Af the urban area where large 'tracts of agriculturdl or vacant lands are being urbanized. .The PUD, Pldnned Unit. Da strict; is designed to allow inclusion within its I ' boundaries a mixture of uses; or~unusual density, building intensity, or design characteristics which would not normally be permitted in a single use distr.~ict and to govern the development or residential projects subject to the Growth ; Management System (techn'colly the Residential Development Control System, Chapter 17.26 of the Petaluma Municipal Code.). , C-0 •Adminstraty.e and Professional Office District zoning governs land uses permitted in both P=C And PUD.districts. This zoning permits medical, optical and dental offices and clinics; administrative; executive and editorial offices; professianal offices {for 1"gwyers; engineers:, architects for example); f nanaial offices„ including banKS and real estate, and other- general business offices;' city and county office 6,ui1"dings including court rooms and'jail facilities and " libraries; There are additional accesso,r,y'and conditional uses permitted. Special Industrial,/Office Park is a designation_is intended-for wel°1-designed,' master-p-lanned, campus-type developments for- employers who will contribute sfignificantly to the City's ob;j'ective~of increasing employment densities,. - 42 - ` , \ 1~ - _ : RC~nfl[D 1. CROC~f R:,SRPfl,,~Mfl l ~ ~ ~ G-fOffRY f. ~C~RnS'6Y. SRPfl., hlfll July 1~2, 1'`990 _ John Scr~arer; City Manager City of Petaluma , City Hall. 11 English 'Stree_t ~ - Petaluma, CA 94952 RE: The North. McDowell Assessment District .Number 17 ' Comprising 42 Properties - NortFi. McDowellBoulevard and Other Streets Petaluma, CA '94852 - Dear Mr. Scharer: As you .requested, I :have conducted the required,.investigation, gathered :the necessary' data and made cerfainanalyses that .have enabled me to form an o,pinibn~ of the market value of the fee simple, ,interest of the underlying. land value for :the 42 parcels tb be included in the above-referenced Qssessmerit District. Based on the .inspection of these properties,, ;which was made during various times in May, 1990, and .the investigation and analyses undertaken, I have formed. the opinion that, as of May 16, 1990, the land values: for ,these properties were as follows: Assess- ~ -Assessor's ,Site: Total. Land menu. # Parcel Number Area Zoning Use Value 1 ~ 048=080-01 214,751 s/f M-L Auto Repair/ $ 1,353;000 • ~ Residential 2 137-060-23 . '336,283 s/f M-L Trucking $ 1,,816,000 fi 4:8 819 1f11RD SiRffi/Sfln1B ROSfI. <BUfORnlfj 95404'Y701-575-7717 John Scharer July 12, 1990 Page Two Assess- Assessor's Site Total Land merit Parcel Number Area Zoning _ , ~ Use • Value 3 137-060-241 ~ ~ ' 4A 137-060-53 .93,654 s/f Urban Div: (Res) • Residential $ 540,000 ~46 137-060-54 23,087 s/f C-O-Office (PCp) Vacant $ 225,000 5 048-080-20 84;506 s/f M-L ~ Mini.Wacehouse/ $ 507;000 - Residential/ Auto Wreck 6A 137-170-32 95,,396 s; f C-O-Oftice (PUD) Vacant $ 763;000 66 137-180-28 .95;832 s/f C-O-Office (PUD) Vacant $ 839,000 7A 048-080-30 ~ 64;469 s/f M-L ~ ~ Child Care ~ $ ~ 425,000 76 048-080-31 71;003 s/f. M-L ~ . Office under $ 426,000 construction 7C 048-080-32 6.0;113 s/f, M-L Office under $ 433;000 construction 8A 007-401=14 67,518 s%f M-L Vacant $ 405;000 8B 007-401-f5 47,9,1:6 s/f M-L ~ Vacant ~ $ 287,000 - 8C 007-401-,1.6 - ~ 49;223 s/f 'M-L ~ " ~ Vacant $ 295;Q00. 8D 007-401-1.7 46;609 s/f M-L Vacant $ X280;000 8E 007-401,-18 57,499 s/f M-L- Vacant $ 345,000 • • 8f= 007=.401-19 61,855 s/f ~ M-L ~"Vacant ~ $ -371,000 SG ~ 007-401-20" 54;450 s/f M-L ~ Vacant 327,000 8y ~ 007:401-2150;530 s/f M-L ~ Vacant $ 303,000 81 007-401-22 45;302 s/f •M-t_ Vacant • 245,000 8J 007-401-23. :45,738 s/f' M-L 'Vacant $ 247;000 8iE 007-40:4-24 59;242 .s/f. M-L Vacant $ 320,000 8L 007-401 25~; 43;560 s/fi , M-L Vacant $ 235,000 8M 007-401-26 :47;480. s/f M-L Vacant $ . 256;000" • pfJ, 007=401-27 ~ 5,094 s; f P.1-L Vac2,nt ~ $ ~ 271,000 " 80 007-401-28 47;916 s/fi M-L Vacant $ 259;000 8P 007-401-29 48;352 s/f M-L . Vacant _ $ 261,000 8Q 007-401=30 97;574 s%f M-C Vacant $ 527;000 9 048-080-21 275,735 s/f M-L • Residential $ 1;572,000 10 137-060-55 335;412 s/f C-0/Urban Div: (Res:) Residential ~ $ 2;160,000 11 007-391-11 257;004. s/f M-L Office/Vllarehouse 1',388;000 12 048-141-12 \ 263,.102 s/f ~ fy1=L. Mobile Home Park $ 1;421,000 13 137-060-43 1"09,336 s/f C=0-Office (PUD) ~ Vacant $ 957,000 14 137-060=48 47,045, s/f C-0-Office (PUD) Vacant $ 506,000 ~ Not included in assessment. 49 - • 1~~ • ~ CROCKf R trORnSb'( ^i 'a John Scharer - " July 12, 1990' , Page Three Assess- Assessor's, Site Total Land ' menu: # Parcel iVumtier Area - Zoning Use Value. 15A 007-501.12 33;541'. s/f M-L Industrial $ 21 1.,000 1:56 007-501=1'3 20;038 a/f fN-L Vacant $ 1'44,000 Y6 007-502-1 Q 73,6] 6 s/f A!i-L " ' Warehouse ' $ 486,000 1~7 _ OU7-630-01 ~ 33,541, sff flA-L Vacant $ 231„000 a8 007-630-1.0 .27,828 s/f M-L Mini,=Warehouse. $ 209;000 19 007-391-19 .27,878 s/f M,L Mini.-Warehouse $ , 209,000 20 ' ~ 007=380-04 . 1,105,553 s/f ;Special' Industrial Vacant $ 5,638;000 21 007-380-05 487,436 s/f Special. Indu§triaf Vacant ~ $ 2,632;000 22 1.37-1'10-50 "463;478 s/f ,M-C Vacant $ 2,364000 It ;should. be emphasized' that these values ~ assume full completion of all off-site improvements to be' undertaken- as a result of'the formation of °this,Assessment District. _ The scope of the work.'isdetailed in they Engineer's .Report, prepared by he Nystrom Engineering, 'located in the Addenda. " It should ~ also be notedthat -none of the: existing irnprovernents have been' included in the value. estimates.. Each parcel has been "appraised as though: vacant and available to be developed to its highest and:" best use. Current ,uses are not .necessarily the highest and best use, thus, it is not appropriate to infer that the total property :values (land` and .existing improvements) are higher thane stated in this report. T.he narrative appraisal report that follows sets forth the identification of _the properties, pertinent facts about the area and the subject property, comparable data, the results of -the investigation artid analyses and the reasoning. leading'to ttie conclusions-set forth. , The value :estimate is subject to the Statement of Assumptions' and"Limiting Conditions and Certification set forth .in this report. R pe ull ~ ~ itte - T ffry F HornSb , .S~ . A, MAI GFH:Iss . . f -CROCKf R fIOQnSDT 1' • STATEMENT OF A?'$SUIVIPTIONS~ ~AIVD L111~ITIIVG COiVDIT10NS The~•legal description in this- report is assumed' fo be correct: No survey of the property has been made~by the appraiser and=~no responsibility i"s assumed in connection with such matters. Sketches 'and maps ''in this report are included. only to assist the reader in visualizing the property. Information -furnished by others is. assumed. to be true, ` correct and reliable: A reasonable effort has been~rnade to verify such•'information;=however, no'responsibility for its accuracy is assumed: ~ - All mortgages, liens, encumbrances, leases; .and servitudes 'have been disregarded . unless so~ specified witFiin the report: The property has: been appraised ~ as though under responsible ownership and competent management. It is assumed that there' are no hidden or apparentconditions of the property, subsoil, or structures which would render it <more or less valuable., No responsibility- is assumed for such conditions; or'for engineering which~~rnay- be required to discover them. The existence of toxic waste, which .may or may `not be present on the property, was not observed by the appraiser;, nor does ~tfie appraiser- have any knowledge of the existence of such on or in" the• property:.- The appraiser, .however, is not qualified to detect' such "substances. The. existence~~of potentially fiazardous waste. material may have an ;effect. on the value of the. property. The appraiser urges the client to retain an expert in~~this~ field' if desired. It is assumed .that there is full compliance with .,all applicable federal, state aril local environmental regulations and .laws unless. • roncornpliance is' .,stated; -defined. and considered in~ this raport. ' ' = ' - ~ i _ 9x59-98 ~ - 51 - i . 111 • = EROCRf R tlORnSbT t STATEMENT OF ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING. CONDITIONS The appraiser will not be required to give testimony nor appear in court, nor~update~-the appraisal report because. of having.. made _this appraisal, with reference to-;the property in question, unless arrangements have been. previously ,made. Possession of this report, or a copy thereof, does not carry with ;it the righfi of publication.. 1t may not be .used for .any. purpose by any person,other •fhan the party to whom,;it is~addressed without written consent of the appraiser and in any event, only in its entirety.. Neither all. nor any .part of the contents of this reportshall be- conveyed_ to' the public through advertising, public relations, .news, sales,, or. any other media without the written .:consent of 'the ~apprai"s. er. Nor shall the appraiser, firm or organization of which, this: appraiser is a member;. be identified without tte .:consent of the appraiser. The distribution. of the total valuation in this report, between land andimprovements (if -any) applies only :under, the:. reported highest and best use of. the property., The allocations of value for 'iand .and improvements must ,not be .used in conjunction with - any- other :appraisal and are invalid if so .,used. . The liability of:GROCKER HORNSB:Y, its owners and staff- is-limited to the client only and to the. amount. ;of the fee actually. paid; for services .rendered, as. liquidated. darnages,= if' any related :dispute. arises: _ 1=urtlier, there is no accountability,. obligation or liability to-;any third party. If this. repocf`i's placed in.'the flands~ of anyone other than the client, the client h-all make such .,;party aware of all ~ assumptions,. acid :limiting ,conditions of the assignment and related .discussions: CRO.CKER HORNSBY is 'in no - way to be responsible fqr. zany cost incurred to- diseo~er • or :correct any deficiencies of ;any type: present in the :property, physically-, financially and%or .legally. Theclient also - . agrees That; in the •event :of a lawsuit brought by lender., partner or' part owner in;. any form of ;ownership, tenancy or any other party; the client~will hold CRACKER MORNSBY completely harmless from and against any iabitity, loss, cost or expense incurred or suffered, .the client 'in such action,. regardless of 'its outcome: 90-59-98 - - 52: . - C~. . ~ ~ CROCKf R tlORnSDY ~ ~ . i . ` r. . CERTIFICATION - I, certify that, to the' best -of my knowledge and belief, . 1. The statements of fact contained in this report are true and correct. 2. The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions are limited -only by the reported assumptions and" limiting conditions, and are my personal, unbiased . ~ .professional analyses, opinions, and conclusions. 3. I have no present or prospective interest in the property that is the subject of this report, and I have no personal interest or bias with respect to the parties involved. 4. My compensation is not; contingent on an action or event resulting from the analyses,. opinions, ~or co'riclusions in, or the use of; this report. 5. My analyses, opinions; .and conclusions. were developed., and. this report has been. prepared, 'in eonforrnity with. the requirements of the Code of Professional Ethics and the Standards of Professional' Practice of the American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers :and the Society ofi Real Estate Appraisers. 6. The use of this .report 'is .subject to the requirements of the American Institute of Heal Estate Appraisers ,and the Society of 'Real Estate Appraisers relating to review by its duly authorized representatives. 7. I have made a personal inspection of the property that is the .subject of this report. 8: No one provided.sigriificant professional assistance to the persori signing this report. , . ~ 9. I am currently certified under the voluntary continuing education program. of the American Institute of Real 'Estate Appraisers and the Society of Real Estate Appraisers. ~ ~ ~ Date Geo RPA, MAI ~ I i 90-59-98 - 5 3 - CROtKf R tIORnSDY ~ CUSIP NUMBERS ~ ' _ I ~ I F l i 56 -