825 NE Multnomah, Suite 2000 PACIFIC POWER Portland, Oregon 97232 A DIVISION OF PACIFICORP
August 17,2010
VIA ELECTRONIC FILING AND OVERNIGHT DELIVERY
Oregon Public Utility Commission 550 Capitol Street NE, Suite 215 Salem, OR 97301-2551
Attn: Filing Center
RE: UP _ - Application Requesting Approval of Sale of the Terminal-Camp Williams Property
Enclosed for filing by PacifiCorp dba, Pacific Power is an Application Requesting Approval ofthe Sale of the Terminal-Camp Williams Property. An original and one (1) copy will be provided via overnight delivery.
PacifiCorp respectfully requests that all data requests regarding this matter be addressed to:
By E-mail (preferred):
By regular mail: Data Request Response Center PacifiCorp 825 NE Multnomah, Suite 2000 Portland, OR 97232
Please direct informal questions with respect to this filing to J oelle Steward, Regulatory Manager, at (503) 813-5542.
Very truly yours,
~ - I 1 ~ ;\ f\ \jUffi l Andrea L. Kelly Vice President, Regulation
Enclosure BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION OF OREGON
UP
In the Matter of the Application of PACIFICORP Requesting Approval of the APPLICA nON OF P ACIFICORP AND Sale of the Terminal-Camp Williams WAIVER OF PAPER SERVICE Property
1 Pursuant to ORS 757.480(1)(a) and OAR 860-027-0025, PacifiCorp, d.b.a. Pacific
2 Power ("Company"), seeks approval from the Public Utility Commission of Oregon
3 ("Commission") for the sale of property located in Herriman, Utah, referred to by the
4 Company and in this Application as "Terminal-Camp Williams." Additionally, pursuant to
5 OAR 860-013-0070(4), the Company respectfully waives paper service in this docket. ORS
6 757.480(1) requires the Commission's prior approval for the sale of any property that is
7 necessary or useful in the performance of the Company's duties to the public.
8 I. Background
9 The Company owns and maintains certain property in Salt Lake County, Utah, for the
10 purpose of supporting the Terminal-Camp Williams transmission corridor. The Utah
11 Department of Transportation ("UDOT") is now in the process of constructing the Mountain
12 View Corridor, which is a project to develop a planned freeway, transit and trail system in
13 Salt Lake County and other western Utah counties. Portions of the Mountain View Corridor
14 will cross PacifiCorp property. UDOT owns property adjacent to the Terminal-Camp
15 Williams transmission corridor. To proceed with the Mountain View Corridor project,
16 UDOT desires to exchange "like-for-like" property with PacifiCorp so that UDOT may
17 proceed with the plans for the Mountain View Corridor. The value of the transaction is
18 $976,390.87. However, no funds will be exchanged. Because no funds will be exchanged,
Page 1- UP PacifiCorp Application Terminal-Camp Williams Exchange 1 there will be no gain or refund on this exchange. Therefore, there will be no entries to the
2 Oregon property sales balancing account.
3 PacifiCorp and UDOT are finalizing the terms and conditions, other than value and
4 amount of land to be exchanged, of the transaction. Included with this Application as
5 Attachment A is a copy of the standard Property Exchange Agreement. The Company does
6 not anticipate material changes to this agreement for this transaction.
7 II. Compliance with OAR 860-027-0025(1) Filing Requirements
8 A. Address
9 The Company's exact name and address of its principal business office are:
10 PacifiCorp 11 825 NE Multnomah Street 12 Portland, OR 97232
13 B. State in which incorporated; date of incorporation; other states in which 14 authorized to transact utility business
15 PacifiCorp is a corporation organized and existing under and by the laws of the State
16 of Oregon. PacifiCorp's date of incorporation is August 11, 1987. PacifiCorp is authorized
17 to provide retail electric service in Oregon, California, Washington, Idaho, Wyoming and
18 Utah.
19 c. Communications and notices
20 All notices and communications with respect to this Application should be addressed
21 to:
PacifiCorp Oregon Dockets Michelle Mishoe 825 NE Multnomah, Ste 2000 Legal Counsel Portland, OR 97232 PacifiCorp Email: ~~!lJd~~~@~1lli~~Qm 825 NE Multnomah, Ste 1800 Portland, OR 97232 Telephone: 503.813.5977 Facsimile: 503.813.7252 Email: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Page 2- UP PacifiCorp Application Terminal-Camp Williams Property Exchange 1 In addition, PacifiCorp respectfully requests that all data requests regarding this
2 matter be addressed to:
3 Bye-mail (preferred)
4 By regular mail Data Request Response Center 5 PacifiCorp 6 825 NE Multnomah, Suite 2000 7 Portland, OR 97232
8 Informal inquires may also be directed to Joelle Steward, Regulatory Manager at
9 (503) 813-5542.
10 D. Principal officers
Name Title
Gregory E. Abel Chairman of the Board of Directors & Chief Executive Officer
Micheal Dunn President, PacifiCorp Energy
A. Richard Wa~je President, Rocky Mountain Power R. Patrick Reiten President, Pacific Power
Douglas K. Stuver Senior Vice President & Chief Financial Officer
Mark C. Moench Senior Vice President & General Counsel Bruce N. Williams Vice President, Treasurer
Natalie L. Hocken Vice President & General Counsel, Pacific Power
11 E. Description of business; designation of territories served
12 The Company engages in the generation, purchase, transmission, distribution and sale
13 of electric energy in Benton, Clatsop, Coos, Crook, Deschutes, Douglas, Gilliam, Hood
14 River, Jackson, Jefferson, Josephine, Klamath, Lake, Lane, Lincoln, Linn, Marion, Morrow,
15 Multnomah, Polk, Sherman, Tillamook, Umatilla, Wallowa, and Wasco Counties in Oregon.
16 PacifiCorp also engages in the generation, purchase, transmission, distribution and sale of
17 electric energy in the states of Washington, California, Idaho, Wyoming and Utah. Page 3 UP __ PacifiCorp Application Terminal-Camp Williams Property Exchange 1 F. Statement showing for each class and series of capital stock: brief 2 description; amount authorized; amount outstanding; amount held as 3 required securities; amount pledged; amount owned by affiliated 4 interests; amount held in any fund
5 Not applicable. See request for waiver in Section IV below.
6 G. Statement showing for each class and series of long-term debt and notes: 7 brief description of amount authorized; amount outstanding; amount 8 held as required securities; amount pledged; amount held by affiliated 9 interests; amount in sinking and other funds
10 Not applicable. See request for waiver in Section IV below.
11 H. Purpose of application; description of consideration and method of 12 arriving at amount thereof
13 The Company seeks approval of the exchange of the Terminal-Camp Williams
14 Property, with a value of $976,390.87. To determine fair market value, the Company used a
15 formal third-party appraisal for UDOT's property to be given the Company, dated February
16 12, 2010. The appraisal values UDOT's property at $145,926 per acre, which, after the
17 Company's review and evaluation, was found to be a reasonable value. The Company also
18 determined the value to be reasonable for the Terminal-Camp Williams Property, as the two
19 properties are adjacent to each other and share similar characteristics. Included with this
20 Application as Attachment B is a copy of the Appraisal.
21 I. Statement of facilities to be disposed of; description of present use and 22 proposed use; inclusion of all operating facilities of parties to the 23 transaction
24 The Company uses the Terminal-Camp Williams Property to support its Terminal-
25 Camp Williams transmission corridor located in Salt Lake County, Utah. UDOT is in the
26 process of constructing its Mountain View Corridor, which is a project to develop a planned
27 freeway, transit and trail system in Salt Lake County and other western Utah counties. As
28 part of this process, UDOT is working with affected land owners to acquire necessary rights-
29 of-way either through easements or fee ownership. Certain Company property is located
Page 4 - UP __ PacifiCorp Application Terminal-Camp Williams Property Exchange 1 within the planned Mountain View Corridor route. UDOT desires the Terminal-Camp
2 Williams Property to complete its Mountain View Corridor construction. With this
3 transaction, UDOT and PacifiCorp will exchange adjacent parcels of property, each
4 consisting of 6.691 acres. The Company's transmission facilities located on the Terminal-
5 Camp Williams Property will be relocated at UDOT's expense.
6 J. Statement by primary account of cost of the facilities and applicable 7 depreciation reserve
8 PacifiCorp will transfer the original book value ($54,313) of the traded asset from
9 the original asset to a new asset. FERC account 101, Electric Plant in Service will not be
10 affected because the Company will simply move book value from one asset to another.
11 K. Required filings with other state or federal regulatory bodies
12 In addition to this Application, the Company also filed an advice letter with the
13 California Public Utilities Commission.
14 L. Facts relied upon by applicant to show transaction is within the public 15 interest
16 ORS 757.480 requires Commission approval for sales of property necessary and
17 useful in the performance of public service with a value in excess of $100,000. See ORS
18 757.480(1)(a). OAR 860-027-0025(1)(1) requires that the utility show that such a proposed
19 sale is "consistent with the public interest." The Commission has previously held that this
20 standard requires only a "no harm" showing. 1
1 See, e.g., In the Matter of a Legal Standard for Approval of Mergers, Docket UM 1011, Order No. 01-778 (Sept. 4, 2001) ("The remainder of the statutory scheme, those statutes governing transfer, sale, affiliated interest transactions, and contracts, either expresses no standard (for instance, ORS 757.480, .485) and has been read to require a no harm standard, or contains a 'not contrary to the public interest' standard (ORS 757.490, .495.)") (emphasis added); In the Matter ofthe Application ofPacijiCorp, Docket UP 168, Order No. 00-112, at 6 (Feb. 29, 2000) (regarding the sale of the Centralia generating plant); In the Matter of Portland General Electric, Docket UP 158, Order No. 00-111, at 2 (Feb. 29,2000) (regarding the sale of the Colstrip generating units); In the Matter of the Application of Portland General Electric, Docket UP 165iUP 170, Order No. 99- 730, at 7(Nov. 29, 1999) (regarding the sale ofthe Centralia generating plant). Page 5 - UP __ PacifiCorp Application Terminal-Camp Williams Property Exchange 1 The exchange of the Terminal-Camp Williams Property for an adjacent property of
2 the same size and value will not harm the public interest, or the Company's ability to provide
3 reliable electric service. This transaction will require that the Company's facilities on the
4 Terminal-Camp Williams Property be relocated. However, this will be conducted at UDOT's
5 expense and in such a manner to prevent service disruptions. Furthermore, UDOT has the
6 ability to condemn as the Terminal-Camp Williams as necessary for the Mountain View
7 Corridor. Negotiating this exchange is more administratively efficient than a condemnation
8 proceeding.
9 M. Reasons relied upon for entering into the proposed transaction; benefits 10 to customers
11 Please refer to sections I. and L. above.
12 N. Amount of stock, bonds, or other securities, now owned, held or 13 controlled by applicant, of the utility from which stock or bonds are 14 proposed to be acquired
15 Not applicable. See request for waiver in Section IV below.
16 O. Statement of franchises held; date of expiration; facilities of transferees
17 Not applicable. See request for waiver in Section IV below.
18 III. Compliance with OAR 860-027-0025(2) Filing Requirements
19 A. Exhibit A. Articles of Incorporation
20 Not applicable. See request for waiver in Section IV below.
21 B. Exhibit B. Bylaws
22 Not applicable. See request for waiver in Section IV below.
23 C. Exhibit C. Resolution of directors authorizing transaction
24 This transaction did not require approval from the Company's board of directors. See
25 request for waiver in Section IV below.
Page 6 - UP __ PacifiCorp Application Terminal-Camp Williams Property Exchange 1 D. Exhibit D. Mortgages, trust, deeds or indentures securing obligation of 2 each party
3 There are no such documents associated with these transactions. See request for
4 waiver in Section IV below.
5 E. Exhibit E. Balance sheet showing booked amounts, adjustments to record 6 the proposed transaction and pro forma, with supporting fIxed capital or 7 plant schedules in conformity with the forms in the annual report
8 This transaction will not materially affect the Company's balance sheet. See request
9 for waiver in Section IV below.
10 F. Exhibit F. Known contingent liabilities
11 There are no known contingent liabilities associated with this transaction. See
12 request for waiver in Section IV below.
13 G. Exhibit G. Comparative income statements showing recorded results of 14 operations, adjustments to record the proposed transaction and pro 15 forma, in conformity with the form in the annual report 16 17 The transaction will not materially affect the Company's income statement. See
18 request for waiver in Section IV below.
19 H. Exhibit H. Analysis of surplus for the period covered by income 20 statements referred to in G
21 The transaction will not materially affect the Company's income statement. See
22 request for waiver in Section IV below.
23 I. Exhibit I. Copy of contract for transaction and other written instruments
24 Included with this Application as Attachment A is a copy of the Property Exchange
25 Agreement.
Page 7 - UP __ PacifiCorp Application Terminal-Camp Williams Property Exchange 1 J. Exhibit J. Copy of each proposed journal entry to be used to record the 2 transaction
3 PacifiCorp will transfer the original book value ($54,313) of the traded asset from the
4 original asset to a new asset. FERC account 101, Electric Plant in Service will not be affected
5 because the Company will simply move book value from one asset to another.
6 K. Exhibit K. Copy of each supporting schedule showing the benefits, if any, 7 which each applicant relies upon to support the facts required by (1)(1) of 8 this rule and reasons as required by (1)(m)
9 This Application and attachments contain the necessary information to demonstrate
10 the benefits of this transaction and for the Commission to base its decision.
11 IV. Request for Waiver of certain filing requirements
12 Oregon Administrative Rules 860-027-0025(1) and (2) require certain information
13 and exhibits be provided when filing an application for authority to transfer utility property.
14 The Company either provides the required information as noted above, or seeks the
15 Commission's waiver of the requirements as follows:
16 (a) The information required in OAR 860-027-0025(1)(a)-(e), (h)-(m) is provided
17 in the Application above. Because this transaction does not involve the acquisition or sale of
18 financial instruments, the Company respectfully requests waiver of the requirements of OAR
19 860-027-0025(1)(f), (g), (n) and (0). A grant of this waiver will not impede the
20 Commission's analysis of this Application.
21 (b) OAR 860-027-0025 (2) (a) & (b) reqUIre submittal of a copy of the
22 Company's articles of incorporation and bylaws. The Company respectfully requests a
23 waiver of these filing requirements on the grounds that production of these documents would
24 be burdensome and would not advance the Commission's analysis of this application because
25 the subject transaction involves an encumbrance on utility property and does not affect the
26 Company's corporate structure or governance.
Page 8 - UP __ PacifiCorp Application Terminal-Camp Williams Property Exchange 1 (c) OAR 860-027-0025 (2)(c) reqUires submittal of a copy of the board of
2 director's resolution authorizing the transaction. The Company respectfully requests a waiver
3 of this requirement, as no board resolution was necessary for approval of the Terminal-Camp
4 Williams Property sale.
5 (d) OAR 860-027-0025 (2)(e) reqUires submittal of balance sheets showing
6 booked amounts, adjustments to record the proposed transaction and pro forma information.
7 The Company respectfully requests that the requirement to provide pro forma information be
8 waived because the Terminal-Camp Williams Property sale did not materially affect the
9 Company's financial statements.
10 (e) OAR 860-027-0025(2)(t) requires submittal of a statement of all known
11 contingent liabilities as of the date of the application. The Company respectfully requests a
12 waiver of this requirement as the Company is unaware of any contingent liabilities that
13 remain outstanding as of the date of this Application.
14 (t) OAR 860-027-0025 (2)(g) & (h) require submittal of comparative income
15 statements showing the results of operations as affected by the transaction and an analysis of
16 "surplus" for the period of the income statements, respectively. For the reasons set forth in
17 Section IV (e) above, the Company respectfully requests that this Commission waive these
18 requirements.
19 (g) OAR 860-027-0025(2)0) reqUires submittal of a copy of each proposed
20 journal entry to be used to record the transaction in PacifiCorp's books. The Company
21 respectfully requests a waiver of this requirement, as there will be no changes to FERC
22 account 101, Electric Plant in Service. The Company will simply move the book value for
23 the Terminal-Camp Williams Property from one asset to another.
Page 9 - UP __ PacifiCorp Application Terminal-Camp Williams Property Exchange 1 (h) OAR 860-027-0025 (2)(k) requires submittal of schedules upon which the
2 applicant relies for the contention that the transaction is in the public interest. The Company
3 relies upon the statements made in this application and respectfully requests a waiver of this
4 filing requirement.
5 V. Prayer for Relief
6 PacifiCorp respectfully requests a Commission order:
7 (a) finding that the exchange of the Terminal-Camp Williams Property will not
8 harm the Company's customers and is consistent with the public interest;
9 (b) granting other such relief as the Commission deems necessary and proper.
10 DATED this lih day of August, 2010.
Page 10 - UP __ PacifiCorp Application Terminal-Camp Williams Property Exchange ATTACHMENT A
PROPERTY EXCHANGE AGREEMENT DRAFT "Date" FOR NEGOTIATION DISCUSSION ONLY
PROPERTY EXCHANGE AGREEMENT
THIS PROPERTY EXCHANGE AGREEMENT is entered into as of the ___ day of ,2010, by and between PACIFICORP, an Oregon corporation d/b/a/ ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER ("RMP"), and UTAH DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, an agency of the State of Utah ("UDOT"), collectively referred to herein as the "Parties" or individually, a "Party".
1. RMP Property. RMP owns certain real property located at , County, State of Utah, (the "RMP Property"), the preliminary legal description of which is contained on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
2. UDOT Property. UDOT owns certain real property located _--:---=--=--______' County, State of Utah, (the "UDOT Property"), the preliminary legal description of which is contained on Exhibit "8" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
3. Exchange of Real Property and equalization funds:
(a) In consideration of the conveyance of the UDOT Property to RMP, RMP shall convey marketable fee title to the RMP Property to UDOT, by special warranty deed in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit "c" and shall in addition, pay to UDOT, in cash or certified funds at the time of closing, the sum of $372,000.
(b) In consideration of the conveyance of the RMP Property to UDOT and RMP's cash payment equalization funds to UDOT hereunder, UDOT shall convey marketable fee title to the UDOT Property to RMP, by special warranty deed in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit liD".
(c) The Parties agree that the exchange of the RMP Property, together with the payment of funds, in the sum of Three hundred seventy two thousand dollars and no cents ($372,000), will be an equal exchange for the UDOT Property provided for in this Agreement. Each of the transfers necessary to complete the exchange is part of an integrated, interdependent, mutual and reciprocal plan intended to effectuate a tax-deferred exchange of like-kind properties pursuant to and in accordance with the provisions of U.S. Internal Revenue Code Sections 1031 and 1033, and the Treasury Regulations promulgated thereunder, and similar state statutes. UDOT agrees to cooperate by accommodating such reasonable requests from RMP to facilitate a tax deferred exchange pursuant to the provisions of Sections 1031 and 1033.
(d) As additional consideration for the conveyance of the RMP Property and the cash payment hereunder, UDOT shall grant approach permits for two separate 25' wide approaches that will enable RMP to access the Property for the future substation from 11400 South Street, as shown on Exhibit liE". In addition, UDOT Page 1 of 10 shall provide a 20' curb cut with a drive return that will ensure RMP has continued and adequate access to the existing RMP Property until it is fully vacated and turned over to UDOT, as referenced in Section 10(a) and as shown in Exhibit "F".
(e) Additionally, in consideration for the fact that this property exchange shall require RMP to de-energize and remove its existing substation (the "Substation") from the RMP Property and replace it with a new substation on the UDOT Property prior to granting full access to UDOT, UDOT shall pay 100% of all costs required to construct the Functional Equivalent of the Substation on the UDOT property as well as 100% of all costs for temporary modifications to the Substation required to meet the occupancy dates outlined in paragraph 10. The full details of the Substation cost sharing shall be detailed in a supplemental agreement. RMP acknowledges that UDOT will not pay for upgrades beyond the Functional Equivalent. Functional Equivalent shall have the meaning set forth in 23 CFR 645.105.
4. Title and Permitted Exceptions:
(a) UDOT Property. By no later than 30 days following the date hereof, UDOT shall provide a preliminary title commitment to RMP concerning the UDOT Property. RMP shall have ten (10) days after the receipt of the preliminary title commitment to submit any written objections to any matter set forth on Schedule B to the commitment. Matters to which RMP does not object shall be deemed to be "Permitted Exceptions." If RMP objects to any matter set forth in Schedule B of the preliminary title commitment within the ten (10) days provided above, UDOT shall remove the exception. UDOT shall, at closing, convey the UDOT Property to RMP subject only to the Permitted Exceptions. Removal of all exceptions other than Permitted Exceptions is a condition to RMP's obligation to close this transaction.
(b) RMP Property. By no later than 30 days following the date hereof, RMP shall provide a preliminary title commitment to UDOT concerning the RMP Property. UDOT shall have ten (10) days after the receipt of the preliminary title commitment to provide any written objections to any matter set forth on Schedule B to the commitment. Matters to which UDOT does not object shall be deemed to be "Permitted Exceptions." If UDOT objects to any matter set forth in Schedule B of the preliminary title commitment within the ten (10) days provided above, RMP shall remove the exception. RMP shall, at closing, convey the RMP Property to UDOT subject only to the Permitted Exceptions. Removal of all exceptions other than Permitted Exceptions is a condition to UDOTs obligation to close this transaction.
(c) AS IS Purchase. UDOT and RMP acknowledge and agree that the properties are being acquired in "AS IS" condition, WITH ALL FAULTS, IF ANY, AND WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, and the Parties assume all liabilities related to the property that they are acquiring except as expressly provided in this Agreement. Neither of the Parties nor any of their agents, representatives, or employees have made any representations or warranties, direct or indirect, oral or written, express or implied, to the other Party or their agents with respect to the condition of the properties, its fitness for any particular purpose, or its compliance with any laws, and the Parties are not aware of and do not rely upon Page 2 of 10 any such representation of any other person. The Parties acknowledge that, prior to the closing date, (i) the Parties and their agents shall have had the right and opportunity to enter the properties and to conduct and carry out any and all inspections, tests and studies as they have deemed appropriate in connection with the acquisition of the properties, including, without limitation, the condition of soils and subsurfaces, and the status of all zoning, permitting and other entitlements relevant to the use and contemplated use of the properties, (ii) the Parties shall have had a full and complete opportunity to satisfy themselves with respect to, and they have approved, all matters relating to the properties; and (iii) the Parties shall have had the opportunity to review the respective Property Documents and ask questions and satisfy themselves with respect to any issues related to such documents.
5. Inspection and Environmental Review: Each Party shall have a thirty (30) day period beginning on the execution date of this Agreement (the "Due Diligence Period") to inspect and conduct environmental reviews of the property it will receive under this Agreement. Prior to the end of the Due Diligence Period, each Party shall have the right, in its sole discretion, to terminate this Agreement by giving written notice to the other Party that it is not satisfied with the condition of the property to be received. Each Party grants the other a license to enter upon the granting Party's Property to conduct surveys, environmental assessments, site analysis, soils tests, engineering studies and other investigations during the Due Diligence Period. Any party requesting access within the substation fence of the RMP Property must be accompanied by a qualified Rocky Mountain Power representative. Each Party agrees to repair any damage to the other Party's Property arising from the exercise of the rights conferred by this Section and to indemnify and hold the other Party free and harmless from any cost, expense, damage, liability or claim arising out of the negligence or other fault of the Party exercising the rights to inspect and review conferred by this Section.
6. RMP Covenants, Representations and Warranties: RMP does hereby covenant, represent, and warrant (which is deemed restated and remade as of closing) as follows:
(a) Title. RMP has good and marketable fee simple title to the RMP Property.
(b) Pending Assessments. RMP has no knowledge nor has received any notice of any pending proceeding for the imposition of any special assessment, or the formation of a special assessment district which would affect in any manner any portion of the RMP Property.
(c) No Litigation or Other Breach. No litigation, administrative or other proceeding, order or judgment is pending or outstanding, or to RMP's knowledge, threatened against or relating to any portion of the RMP Property.
(d) Land Use Restrictions. RMP has no knowledge nor has received any notice that any governmental or quasi-governmental agency, other than UDOT, is contemplating, has initiated, or has in place any land use regulation or other
Page 3 of 10 restriction which would detrimentally affect the development or operation of the RMP Property as contemplated in this Agreement.
(e) Compliance With Laws. RMP has no knowledge and has received no notice that the RMP Property, and every portion thereof, is not in full compliance with all building, environmental, land use, health, insurance and other applicable laws governing the use and operation thereof, nor does there exist any facts or circumstances which with notice or the passage of time would constitute such a violation.
(f) Authority. RMP has the right, power and authority to execute, deliver and perform this Agreement. The individuals executing this Agreement for RMP represent and warrant that they have the power and authority to do so, and to bind RMP to this Agreement.
7. UDOT Covenants, Representations and Warranties: UDOT does hereby covenant, represent, and warrant (which is deemed to be restated and remade as of closing) as follows:
(a) Title. UDOT has good and marketable fee simple title to the UDOT Property.
(b) Pending Assessments. UDOT has no knowledge nor has received any notice of any pending proceeding for the imposition of any special assessment, or the formation of a special assessment district which would affect in any manner any portion of the UDOT Property.
(c) No Litigation or Other Breach. No litigation, administrative or other proceeding, order or judgment is pending or outstanding, or to UDOT's knowledge, threatened against or relating to any portion of the UDOT Property.
(d) Land Use Restrictions. UDOT has no knowledge nor has received any notice that any governmental or quasi-governmental agency is contemplating, has initiated, or has in place any land use regulation or other restriction which would detrimentally affect the development or operation of the UDOT Property as contemplated in this Agreement.
(e) Compliance With Laws. UDOT has no knowledge nor has received any notice that the UDOT Property, and every portion thereof, is not in full compliance with all building, environmental, land use, health, insurance and other applicable laws governing the use and operation thereof, nor does there exist any facts or circumstances which with notice or the passage of time would constitute such a violation.
(f) Authority. UDOT has the right, power and authority to execute, deliver and perform this Agreement. The individuals executing this Agreement for UDOT represent and warrant that they have the power and authority to do so, and to bind UDOT to this Agreement. Page 4 of 10 8. Closing: Closing shall occur no later than 60 days following execution of this agreement, at the offices of Highland Title Company in Salt Lake City, Utah on a date and at a time mutually convenient to the Parties. Each party shall deposit with the closing office, on or before the time set for closing, all necessary funds and executed documents, and shall do all other acts necessary for the closing.
9. Title Insurance; Closing Costs: At closing; (a) UDOT shall pay for and deliver to RMP a standard ALTA policy of title insurance on the UDOT Property in the amount of its the fair market value, and (b) RMP shall pay for and deliver to UDOT a standard ALTA policy of title insurance on the RMP Property in the amount of its fair market value. UDOT and RMP shall each pay one-half of the fee charged by the closing office and one-half of all closing costs and fees associated with this transaction. Each Party shall pay the full amount of all real estate taxes and assessments, if any, due on the property to be conveyed by that party. Real estate taxes and assessments for the current year shall be prorated to the closing date, and each party shall pay its respective share for the property it owned prior to the exchange.
10. Possession and right to occupancy:
(a) On or after the effective date of this Agreement, UDOT shall have the right to require RMP to relocate the existing substation fence as shown on the attached drawing attached as Exhibit "G" hereto subject to the following restrictions. Prior to relocation of existing fence UDOT must provide a separate 20' entrance gate in the northeast corner of the existing substation to allow access to the SUbstation during UDOT construction. A minimum two week notice must be provided by UDOT to RMP prior to relocating the existing substation fence. Thereafter, UDOT may occupy said portion of the RMP Property outside of the relocated fence to do such work thereon as required for the reconstruction of SR 175 (11400 South Street). UDOT shall comply with the NATIONAL ELECTRIC SAFETY CODE (NESC) in performing all work at this location. RMP will cooperate with UDOT in facilitating said work including the de-energizing of conductors where reasonably convenient and necessary for the accomplishment of said work. UDOT's right to enter the RMP Property under this paragraph shall continue only so long as necessary to complete the work incidental to the installation of said improvements, including backfilling of the excavated area.
(b) UDOT shall be entitled to take full possession of the RMP Property as follows:
(i) UDOT shall be entitled to take full possession of the remainder of the RMP Property after the later of a) 90 days after the date RMP has permanently de-energized the Substation, or b) 30 days after UDOT has made full payment of UDOT's share of the costs of relocating the Substation. Both parties shall use commercially reasonable efforts to complete the final transfer by August 1, 2011.
Page 5 of 10 (ii) Until such time as UDOT is entitled to full possession, RMP may continue to occupy and use the RMP Property as a substation, without the payment of rent.
(c) As of the effective date of this Agreement, RMP shall be entitled to enter upon and occupy the UDOT Property without the payment of rent for the purpose of constructing a replacement substation thereon, including storage of materials and equipment related to the substation, transmission and distribution line construction.
(d) RMP shall be entitled to full possession of the UDOT Property immediately following the closing as provided herein.
11. Summary of contract deadlines. UDOT and RMP agree that the following deadlines shall apply to this agreement:
(a) Preliminary title commitments under Paragraph 4. must be exchanged no later than 30 days following execution of the Agreement;
(b) Notice of termination based on condition of property under Paragraph 5. must be given no later than 30 days following execution of this Agreement;
(c) Closing shall occur within 60 days following execution of this Agreement;
(d) UDOT shall be entitled to occupancy of the portion of the RMP Property outside relocated fence under Paragraph 10(a) no sooner than two weeks after the effective date of this Agreement as outlined under Paragraph 10.
(e) RMP shall be entitled to occupancy of the UDOT Property under paragraph 10(d) on the effective date of this Agreement;
(f) Upon closing, RMP shall have full possession of the UDOT Property.
(g) UDOT shall have full possession of the RMP Property on the later of 90 days after de-energization of the Substation or 30 days after payment of UDOT's share of substation relocation costs.
12. Commissions: Each Party represents and warrants that it has not entered into any contracts with any broker or finder, nor has it obligated itself to pay any real estate commissions or finder's fees on account of the execution of this Agreement or the close of the transaction contemplated hereby. Based on such representations and warranties, the Parties agree to pay any amounts owing by that party which arise on account of any claim that real estate commissions or finder's fees are payable as a result of the actions of that Party, and to hold the other harmless therefrom.
13. Notices: Notices made or given by the Parties must be in writing and may be served personally or by depositing the same in the United States mail, postage pre-paid, or by another commercially recognized means of delivery, addressed as follows:
Page 6 of 10 RMP: Rocky Mountain Power 1407 W. North Temple, Suite 110 Salt Lake City, Utah 84116 Attn: Buffi Morris
With a copy to: Rocky Mountain Power 201 S. Main, 23rd Floor Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Attn: Barbara Ishimatsu
UDOT: Lyle McMillan 4501 South 2700 West Box 148420 Salt Lake City, Utah 84114-8420
With copy to: James R. Soper 160 East 300 South P.O. Box 140857 Salt Lake City, Utah 84114-0857
Notices shall be deemed effective upon the receipt thereof.
14. Survival: All covenants, representations and warranties contained .in this Agreement shall survive any expiration or termination of this Agreement and shall not merge into any deed delivered and accepted upon the closing of the transaction herein contemplated.
15. Miscellaneous: The terms, covenants and conditions herein contained shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the heirs, successors, transferees and assigns of the Parties. No Party shall assign this Agreement or any rights hereunder to anyone except with the prior written consent of the other Parties, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. This Agreement constitutes the entire Agreement among the Parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and may only be modified by a subsequent writing duly executed by the Parties. Time is expressly made of the essence of each and every provision of this Agreement. This Agreement shall be interpreted and construed only the contents thereof, and there shall be no presumption or standard of construction in favor of or against any Party. This Agreement shall be construed and enforced in accordance with, and governed by, the laws of the state of Utah.
Page 70flO IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been executed as of the date first above written.
PacifiCorp, an Oregon corporation d/b/a ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER
By: ______
Title: ______Date:-----
UTAH DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
By: ______
Title: ______Date: _____
Page 8 of 10 EXHIBIT "A" (Description of RMP property)
Commencing at the center of Section 21, Township 3 South, Range 1 West, Salt Lake Meridian, and running thence West 183 feet; thence North 183 feet; thence East 183 feet; thence South 183 feet to the place of beginning
Page 9 of 10 EXHIBIT "B" (Description of UDOT property)
Page 10 of 10 SUMMARY APPRAISAL REPORT THE LAST HOLDOUT, LLC OWNERSHIP APPROXIMATELY 6001 WEST 10901 SOUTH SOUTH JORDAN, UTAH PARTIAL FEE AND TEMPORARY EASEMENT TAKINGS ASSOCIATED WITH THE MOUNTAIN VIEW CORRIDOR PROJECT
REPORT #202-10-L
DATE OF VALUATION
February 12, 2010
PREPARED FOR
Ms. Su J. Chon Attorney Office of the Property Rights Ombudsman State of Utah Department of Commerce 160 East 300 South Street, Box 146702 Salt Lake City, Utah 84114
PREPARED BY
Gary R Free, MAl, SRA Free and Associates Real Estate Appraisers and Consultants 1100 East 6600 South, Suite 201 Salt Lake City, Utah 84121 (801) 262-3388
313 South 740 East, Suite 1 20 North Main Street, Suite 304 American Fork, Utah 84003 SI. George, Utah 84770 (801) 492-0000 (435) 773-6300
FreeandAssociates, Inc. I "': " ' J~ree~nj.A.ssociates, Inc. REAL ESTATE APPRAISERS I CONSULTANTS
February 24,2010
Ms, Su J, Chon Attorney Office of the Property Rights Ombudsman State of Utah Department of Commerce 160 East 300 South Street, Box 146702 Salt Lake City, Utah 84114
RE Summary Appraisal Report The Last Holdout, LLC Ownership Project Parcels 136:A 136:2A, 136:3A, 136:4A, 136:5A, and 136:E Approximately 6001 West 10901 South, South Jordan, Utah
Partial fee and temporary easement taking of real property associated with the Mountain View Corridor project
Dear Ms, Chon:
Thank you for allowing our office to assist in the mediation of a dispute over valuation of the above referenced property between the property owner and the Utah Department of Transportation in connection with the Mountain View Corridor project
At your request, the attached summary appraisal report has been prepared, The purpose of the assignment was to investigate and analyze the regional and local environmental, social, economic, and governmental factors that influence value; to collect and interpret pertinent market information and sales data; and develop an opinion of market value forthe proposed takings, This was undertaken based on the "value of the taking plus damages rule" or "state rule"for eminent domain proceedings in Utah,
The intended users of the report are the State of Utah Department of Commerce - Office of the Property Rights Ombudsman, the Utah Department of Transportation, and the property owner, The Last Holdout, LLC, The intended use of the appraisal is to assist in the mediation of a dispute over valuation of the partial fee and temporary construction easement takings associated with the Mountain View Corridor project
Completion of the assignment and preparation of the attached summary appraisal report was undertaken and performed in a manner intended to comply with the applicable guidelines and specific requirements of the following:
1100 East 6600 South-Suite 201 Salt Lake City> Ut 84121 I p- (801) 262-3388 I F- (801) 262-7893 wwwfreeandassociates.C0111 Ms. Chon February 24, 2010 Page 2
• Code of Professional Ethics and Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice of the Appraisal Institute
• Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP), adopted by the Appraisal Standards Board of the Appraisal Foundation (2010 Edition)
My opinion of market value for the larger parcel, parts taken, and remainder portion is based on the "value of the taking plus damages rule" for eminent domain proceedings in Utah. After careful consideration of the information and analysis contained within this appraisal report, I conclude that the proposed partial fee taking of 705,261 square feet (16.191 acres) for the Mountain View Corridor and three-year temporary easement taking of 13,921 square feet (0.320 acres) for construction purposes have a market value effective February 12, 2010 based on fee simple estate property rights as follows:
"TWO MILLION THREE HUNDRED SEVENTY ONE THOUSAND DOLLARS" ($2,371,000)
Attention is directed to the attached summary appraisal report, which includes descriptive information regarding the subject property and its surrounding environs, pertinent market data, and other evidence relied upon, together with the reasoning, analyses, and justifications that support my conclusions. Special attention is directed to the Certification of the Appraiser, General Assumptions and Limiting Conditions, Special Limiting Conditions, and Extraordinary Assumptions and Hypothetical Conditions upon which my conclusions are based.
Please call if here are any questions.
Utah State Certified General Appraiser License #5450417 -CGOO (Expires 06-30-2011)
FreeandAssociatesJ' Inc. SUMMARY OF IMPORTANT FACTS
OWNERSHIP The Last Holdout, LLC
LOCATION Approximately 6001 West 10901 South South Jordan City, Salt Lake County, Utah
TAX PARCEL 10 26-14-300-004
LARGER PARCEL The property totals 142,078 acres (6,188,918 square feet) and comprises two rectangular shaped parcels that are connected by an easement across a bisecting ownership vested with Utah Power and Light Company, The easterly lands total approximately 40 acres, with the westerly tract approximating 100 acres, The terrain is generally level to slightly undulating and is currently used for the agricultural production of dry crops, There are no structural improvements,
ZONING I LAND USE A-1, South Jordan City jurisdiction
HIGHEST & BEST USE The larger parcel is concluded to have a highest and best use for future commercial and medium to high-density residential development in accordance with the land use plan adopted for the Daybreak masterplanned community,
PROPOSED TAKING Five partial fee takings totaling 16,191 acres (705,261 square feet), together with a th ree-year temporary construction easement of 0,320 acres (13,921 square feet),
DATE OF VALUE February 12, 2010
DATE OF APPRAISAL February 24,2010
PROPERTY RIGHTS Fee simple estate for the larger parcel and partial fee taking, together with a temporary easement for construction purposes,
CONCLUSION $2,371,000 (see following page for details)
FreearulAssociates-, Inc. ---,,------, SUMMARY OF APPRAISAL FINDINGS - CONCLUSION OF MARKET VALUE FOR THE TAKING
LARGER PARCEL VALUE - BEFORE THE TAKING
Allocated Contribution Propftt1V Bights Valued GmssSE Value /SE ~
Underlying Land Fee Simple Estate 6,188,918 $3.35 100°/,; $20,732,875
VALUE OF THE PART TAKEN - AS PART OF THE LARGER PARCEL BEFORE THE TAKING
EIJJ,~ct Eacc.e.llQ Et'J:JQfU1Y. B.lr;.b.rs llalfJJ1.ct GcossS£ It.a.lue LSE ~ 136:A Fee Simple Estate 415,513 $3.35 100% $1,391,969 136:2A Fee Simple Estate 27,855 $3.35 100% $93,314 136:3A Fee Simple Estate 1,521 $3.35 100% $5,095 136:4A Fee Simple Estate 21,106 $3.35 100% $70,705 136:5A Fee Simple Estate 239,266 $3.35 100% $801541 $2,362,624
REMAINDER VALUE - AS PART OF THE LARGER PARCEL BEFORE THE TAKING
LARGER PARCEL VALUE - BEFORE THE TAKING: $20,732,875 LESS PARTS TAKEN VALUE - AS PART OF THE LARGER PARCEL BEFORE THE TAKING: $2362624 $18,370,251
COMPENSABLE DAMAGES ATTRIBUTED TO THE TAKING .
REMAINDER VALUE - AS PART OF THE LARGER PARCEL BEFORE THE TAKING: $18,370,251 LESS REMAINDER VALUE - AFTER THE TAKING AND BEFORE CONSIDERING SPECIAL BENEFITS: $18370.251 $0
SPECIAL BENEFITS AS A RESULT OF THE TAKING
REMAINDER VALUE - AFTER THE TAKING AND BEFORE SPECIAL BENEFITS: $18,370,251 LESS REMAINDER VALUE - AFTER THE TAKING CONSIDERING SPECIAL BENEFITS: $18370251 $0
RECONCILIATION AND FINAL CONCLUSION OF MARKET VALUE FOR THE TAKING
MARKET VALUE OF THE PART TAKEN $2,362,624 COMPENSABLE DAMAGES ATTRIBUTED TO THE TAKING $0 LESS SPECIAL BENEFITS AS A RESULT OFTHE TAKING (IF ANY) $0 TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT (PROJECT PARCEL 218:CE) $8191 $2,370,815 ROUNDED TO $2,371,000
~A Inc. -----F reearu:i ssociates... Table of Contents
Introductory And General Information ...... 1 Larger Parcel Determination ...... 1 Purpose Of The Appraisal...... 2 Intended Users And Use OfThe Report ...... 3 Date Of Preparation And Effective Date Of Valuation ...... 3 Competency Of The Appraiser ...... 3 Appraisal Assignment Scope Of Work ...... 4 Definition Of Market Value ...... 7 Definition Of Just Compensation ...... 8 Statement Of Ownership And Ownership History ...... 9 Meeting With The Property Owner...... 9 Property Rights Appraised ...... 1 0 Area Analysis - Regional And County Data ...... 11 Neighborhood Data And Competitive Market Area ...... 24 Property Description - Larger Parcel Before Taking ...... 32 Zoning And Land Use Regulations ...... 42 Real Estate Taxes ...... 47 Highest And Best Use - Larger Parcel Before Taking ...... 48 Valuation Analysis - Larger Parcel Before The Taking ...... 52 Property Description - Proposed Takings ...... 66 Valuation Analysis - Proposed Takings ...... 69 Valuation Analysis - Remainder (Part Of Larger Parcel) ...... 71 Market Value Of The Larger Parcel - Before The Taking ...... 71 Property Description - Remainder After The Taking ...... 72 Valuation Analysis - Compensable Damages ...... 73 Valuation Analysis - Special Benefits ...... 75 Summary Of Appraisal Findings And Conclusions ...... 76 Certification Of The Appraiser ...... 78 General Assumptions ...... 79 General Limiting Conditions ...... 80 Special Limiting Conditions ...... 81 Extraordinary Assumptions & Hypothetical Conditions ...... 82
Freettf'W 'A SSOCla °t es ... I nco ---- INTRODUCTORY AND GENERAL INFORMATION
LARGER PARCEL DETERMINATION
Notwithstanding the differing constitutional provisions and statutory nuances offederal and state governments, which have given rise to a plentitude of conflicting case law and promulgation of numerous formulas and rules to compute just compensation, there is common agreement among the jurisdictions that appraisals prepared for the purpose of condemnation be based on the analytical premise of the "larger parcel." This concept is unique to the field of eminent domain valuation and asserts that the market value of the part taken is derived based on its value as part of the larger parcel "before the taking," with compensable damages or special benefits (if any) from the taking considered separately in the valuation of the remainder property "after the taking." The term "larger parcel" is defined as:
Larger Parcel " .. .in condemnation, the portion of a property that has unity of ownership, contiguity, and unity of use, the two conditions that establish the larger parcel for the consideration of severance damages in most states. In federal and some state cases, however, contiguity is sometimes subordinated to unitary use." 1
Appraisers are typically retained to provide a solution for valuation a problem; therefore, as a matter of standard business practice, the specific identity of the property to be appraised and its general attributes is known prior to the commencement of an assignment. This is not true in the case of condemnation assignments; in fact, it is just the opposite because in assignments of this type, the appraiser is responsible for determining and identifying the property boundaries associated with the taking as part of the appraisal process. The • importance of the larger parcel can be of critical in considering compensable damages and/or special benefits that may accrue to the remainder property after the taking. Proper
Appraisal Institute, Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 4th Edition, (Chicago: Appraisal Institute, 1993), 202
Free(uuIAssociates.. Inc. _lntr09uctoryand Generallnformati0rl- 2 identification of the larger parcel premise can also reduce the scope and complexity of an assignment. The determination is accomplished through the analysis of two criteria: unity of ownership, contiguity, and unity of use, each of which must be present for the determination to be valid.
The Last Holdout ownership totals approximately 142.078 acres and is identified by the Salt Lake County Assessor as Tax Parcel 26-14-300-004. The property comprises two separate parcels that are connected by an easement that crosses a bisecting 8.952-acre ownership vested with Utah Power and Light Company. This results in an approximate 40- acre easterly tract, and an approximate 100-acre westerly tract. For purposes of this appraisal, I conclude each of these portions represent the larger parcel.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE LARGER PARCEL
The following metes and bounds legal description was obtained from Salt Lake County public records:
South 80 rods of Section 14, Township 3 South, Range 2 West, Salt Lake Base and Meridian, less the tracts deeded to Utah Power & Light Company and Kennecott Land Residential Development Company.
PURPOSE OF THE APPRAISAL
The purpose of the assignment was to investigate and analyze the regional and local environmental, social, economic, and governmental factors that influence value; to collect and interpret pertinent market information and sales data; and conclude an opinion of market value for the proposed perpetual easement taking. This was based on the "value of the taking plus damage rule" or "state rule"for eminent domain proceedings
FreeatulAssociates~ Inc. ------INTENDED USERS AND USE OF THE REPORT
The intended users of the report are the State of Utah Department of Commerce - Office of the Property Rights Ombudsman, the Utah Department ofTransportation, and the property owner, The Last Holdout, LLC. The intended use of the appraisal is to assist in the mediation of a dispute over valuation of the partial fee and easement takings associated with the Mountain View Corridor project.
DATE OF PREPARATION AND EFFECTIVE DATE OF VALUATION
The appraisal assignment commenced on February 2, 2010 and the report was completed on February 24,2010. The effective date for my opinion of market value for the proposed takings is February 12, 2010, the date the property was most recently inspected.
COMPETENCY OF THE APPRAISER
Gary R. Free is an MAl and SRA member of the Appraisal Institute with nearly 30 years of full-time experience as a real estate appraiser. He is qualified and competent in the valuation of numerous types of realty within the immediate environs of South Jordan, including undeveloped land parcels such as the subject. This is attributed to his formal education, work experience, and adherence to the continuing education requirements of the Appraisal Institute and other jurisdiction bodies that regulate the licensing of real estate appraisers. Please refer to the statement of qualifications included in the Addendum for additional information.
FreecundAssociates.. Inc. APPRAISAL ASSIGNMENT SCOPE OF WORK
Standard 1 of USPAP pertains to the development of a real property appraisal, including the scope of work, research, and analysis necessary to produce credible opinions and conclusions. Standard 2 addresses the two available reporting options for communicating he results of an appraisal assignment (self-contained, summary, or restricted use) and the minimum level of content and information included in each.
This appraisal report has been prepared in a summary report format and defined as an independent appraisal service by the Utah State Real Estate Appraiser Registration and Certification Act. The report content and format are intended to comply with Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) Standard 2-2(b), which states the minimum requirements for a summary appraisal report. The appraisal assignment has been completed by the independent appraisal office of Free and Associates located in Salt Lake County, Utah. Gary R. Free is a licensed certified general real estate appraiser in the state of Utah.
It is intended that the appraisal service be performed in such a manner that the results of the analyses, opinions, and conclusions be those of a disinterested third party. All appropriate data deemed pertinent to the solution of the appraisal problem have been collected, confirmed, and reported in conformity with the 2008 Edition of USPAP and with the Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice and the Code of Professional Ethics of the Appraisal Institute. The amount of research and type of report is considered appropriate relative to the scope and significance of the appraisal problem. The following steps outline the appraisal or valuation process and the scope of work undertaken in the completion of the assignment:
• The property was inspected to identify its general attributes and characteristics in addition to the specific location of the proposed partial fee taking for the road widening, perpetual easement taking for utility right-of-way, and temporary two year construction easement taking.
FreeandAssociates.. Inc. ------~--~------='----~ ______intr0~uct~ry _al1~ <2~l1f:'!§! information- 5
• Investigations were made to identify the influence the four forces (environmental, social, governmental, and economic) exert on the regional, local, and immediate subject environs to ascertain boundaries of the competitive market area, physical conditions, supply-demand ratios, development trends, and other factors.
• Property specific information pertaining to the general plan, zoning and site development standards, required street dedications, and utility infrastructure capacities and availability was obtained from South Jordan City (planning and engineering departments) and various utility purveyors.
• Research was undertaken using public records and other industry sources to identify pertinent transactions of vacant or nominally improved acreage intended for future commercial and/or industrial development that share characteristics of location and physical attributes with subject larger parcel.
• Interviews were attempted with principals and/or brokers involved to verify the price and terms and to confirm property features and other relevant information. Since Utah is a "non-disclosure" state, data normally available through public records in states with "disclosure" practices was unavailable. For this reason, the reliability of the verification process is dependent on, and limited by, the truthfulness of the parties.
• Organization of the collected data, application of the valuation methodologies, and drafting of the summary appraisal report were the final steps.
To ensure compliance with the six-step Utah State rule, the descriptive information and valuation analyses follow a logical progression in the appraisal report, as follows:
a) Identify the larger parcel before acquisition.
b) Determine the highest and best use of the larger parcel before acquisition.
c) Estimate the market value before acquisition for the larger parcel.
d) Estimate the market value of the parts taken as part of the larger parcel.
e) Identify the remainder after the acquisition.
f) Determine the highest and best use for the remainder after acquisition.
g) Estimate compensable damages (if any) by deducting the market value of the remainder after the taking and before special benefits from the market value of the remainder as part of the larger parcel.
FreeandAssociates.. Inc. h) Estimate special benefits (if any) that can be used to offset compensable damages only by deducting the market value of the remainder after taking and considering special benefits from the market value of the remainder after the taking before special benefits. i) Estimate the market value of any temporary easements associated with the taking (including damages, if any). j) Conclude an opinion of market value for the takings in based on the "value of the taking plus damages rule" or "state rule" for eminent domain proceedings.
F reeal1a!A SSOCla. t es, Inc. ~~~-~~~-,. . DEFINITION OF MARKET VALUE
Both economic and legal definitions of market value have been developed and refined over the years by the Appraisal Institute, the federal government, the International Valuation Standards Committee, and others. Citable definitions of market value can be found in state and federal regulations, laws, or publications. The following definition is used by agencies that regulate federally insured financial institutions in the United States:
Market Value 2 "The most probable price which a property should bring in a competitive and open market under all conditions requisite to a fair sale, the buyer and seller each acting prudently and knowledgeably, and assuming the price is not affected by undue stimulus. Implicit in this definition is the consummation of a sale as of a specified date and the passing of title from seller to buyer under conditions whereby:
1. Buyer and seller are typically motivated;
2. Both parties are well informed or well advised, and eElch acting in what they consider their own best interests;
3. A reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open market;
4. Payment is made in terms of cash in U.S. dollars or in terms of financial arrangements comparable thereto; and
5. The price represents the normal consideration for the property sold unaffected by special or creative financing or sales concessions granted by anyone associated with the sale."
The term "As Is" when used in conjunction with "Market Value" means an estimate of market value of the property in the condition observed upon inspection and as it physically and legally exists without hypothetical conditions, assumptions, or qualifications, as of the date the appraisal is prepared.
2 Federal Register, Volume 55, Number 163, (August 22,1990),34228 and 34229; also quoted in the Definitions section of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice, 2008 Edition
Inc. ------Free(nulAssociates~ DEFINITION OF JUST COMPENSATION
Just compensation has been determined to mean compensation that is just not only to a person whose property is being taken or encumbered, but also to the condemner, who is in essence the general public or society as a whole, My function as an appraiser in connection with this appraisal assignment and proposed eminent domain proceedings is not to determine the "just compensation" to be awarded to the property owner, but rather, to estimate the market value of the acquisitions, plus related damages, upon which a trier of fact can objectively conclude an appropriate award for just compensation, The term, "just compensation" is defined as follows:
Just Compensation 3 "In condemnation, the amount of loss for which a property owner is compensated when his or her property is taken; should put the owner in as good a position pecuniarily as he or she would be if the property had not been taken; generally held to be market value, but courts have refused to rule that it is always equivalent to market value, "
3 Appraisal Institute, Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 4th Edition, (Chicago: Appraisal Institute, 1993), 194,
Freea dAssociates.. Inc. STATEMENT OF OWNERSHIP AND OWNERSHIP HISTORY
Title to the identified larger parcel is reported in public records to be vested in the name of The Last Holdout, LLC
On February 9, 2010, a purchase and sale agreement was negotiated between The Last Holdout LLC and Kennecott Land Residential Development Company. The transaction pertains to a small parcel of 4,786 square feet (0.1099 acres) or the larger parcel with a negotiated purchase price of $250,000 per acre, or $27,475.
Kennecott Land Residential Development Company has negotiated a first right of refusal for any transaction pertaining to The Last Holdout LLC ownership.
With the preceding exceptions, to the best of my knowledge, the larger parcel has not sold, been offered for sale, been placed under contract for sale, or received a purchase offer within the last three years.
MEETING WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER
A meeting with the property owner (Mr. David Bastian) and his attorney (Mr. Daniel Anderson) was held on February 12, 2010 at the property for the purpose of discussing the project and its potential impacts on the ownership. Gary Free and Doug Case of Free and Associates attended the meeting. Mr. Bastian appears knowledgeable with regard to the appraisal process and the procedures intrinsic to the estimate of compensation for eminent domain purposes. In discussing the project, his primary concern was the detrimental impact on value attributed to the severing of access between the east and west portions of his ownership attributed to the construction of the Mountain View Corridor project.
Inc. ----FreeaJ!ulAssociates, introductory and C;e~erallnformation- 10
PROPERTY RIGHTS APPRAISED
This appraisal is based on fee simple estate property rights for the larger parcel. The proposed takings involve a partial fee interest in five parcels totaling 16.191 acres and a three-year temporary easement totaling 0.320 acres for construction of the project. These terms are defined in the Appraisal of Real Estate, as follows:
Fee Simple Estate 4 "Absolute ownership unencumbered by any other interest or estate; subject only to the limitations imposed by the govemmental powers of taxation, eminent domain, police power, and escheat."
Easement 5 "An interest in real property that transfers use, but not ownership, of a portion of an owner's property. Access or right-of-way easements may be acquired by private parties or public utilities. Governments accept conservation, open space, and preservation easements on private property."
4 Appraisal Institute, Appraisal of Real Estate, 13th Edition (Chicago: Appraisal Institute, 2008), 114. 5 Ibid., 117.
Freec{ndAssociates, Inc. ------AREA ANALYSIS - REGIONAL AND COUNTY DATA
The subject is located in northern Utah within West Jordan City, approximately 15.5 miles southwest of Salt Lake City's central business district. Salt Lake City is the capital and seat of government for the state, and functions as a center of finance, health care, entertainment, and cultu ral arts for the Intermountain West. Positioned ±500 miles from Denver and Phoenix, and ±800 miles from the coastal cities and ports of Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Seattle, the location offers strategic transportation advantages that comprise an integral component of the regional economy.
Approximately 76 percent of the state population resides within an area of northern Utah known as the "Wasatch Front," an urbanized corridor that stretches for nearly 100 miles along the base of the Wasatch Mountains that spans four counties (Utah, Salt Lake, Davis, and Weber). It is bounded by the cities of Provo and Orem to the south and by Ogden on the north, with Salt Lake City equidistant in the middle.
The following is an overview of the four forces (environmental, social, governmental, and economic) that interact in the marketplace and exert influences on supply and demand that affects and assists in determining real property values in the subject market area.
Environmental Considerations These influences take into account the geographic setting, constraints imposed by natural terrain, fabricated barriers, climate, soil conditions, transportation linkages, and servicing ability of the regional infrastructure.
______---=F--=r=-e=-=-ea JntZAS sociates ~In_c_. Salt Lake County encompasses about 769 square files overlaying the Salt Lake Valley, bordered by the Wasatch Mountains to the east, the Oquirrh Mountains to the west, and the Great Salt Lake to the northwest. The elevation varies from 4,205 feet above sea level along the shore of the Great Salt Lake to the 11 ,051-foot peak of Sugarloaf Mountain at the Alta Ski Resort.
This setting is part of the Wasatch Front, an urbanized corridor that extends a distance of about 100 miles along the base of the Wasatch Mountains between the cities of Provo and Ogden, spanning four counties (Utah, Salt Lake, Davis, and Weber).
Interstate 15 (north/south) and Interstate 80 (east/west) intersect in Salt Lake City and are the primary corridors of transportation within the state. They are augmented by Interstate 84 (an east/west link between Interstate 80 at Echo Junction and Interstate 15 at Ogden) and Interstate 70 (extends east from Interstate 15 near Cedar City through the central portion of the state). Other components of the transportation infrastructure include an international airport, two major railroads, and numerous transport service companies.
The Utah Transit Authority (UTA) provides public transit throughout the metropolitan area of the Wasatch Front, with operations including a network of scheduled bus routes, light rail (TRAX) and commuter rail (FRONTRUNNER) service. TRAX operations commenced in late 1999 along a 15-mile route between downtown Salt Lake City and Sandy City. There are 16 interim stops, many with park and ride facilities. An easterly spur was subsequently completed along 400 South Street that provides east/west service between the main line and the University Medical Center. Construction is anticipated to commence shortly on a spur to the Salt Lake International Airport and on the Mid-Jordan spur line, which will extend west from Fashion Place Mall in Murray, through Midvale and West Jordan, to the Daybreak masterplanned community in South Jordan. Commuter rail service (FrontRunner) commenced operations in April 2008 along a initial 44-mile route between downtown Salt Lake City and Pleasant View (a suburb north of Ogden) with six interim passenger stations. Future phases of service are envisioned to extend north to Brigham City in Box Elder County and south to Payson in Utah County.
Free(!lrulAssociates~ Inc . . ~------Soil conditions are adequate to facilitate the majority of construction activities. The climate is conducive to substantial residential, commercial, industrial, and business activity, interrupted only occasional by inclement weather. The enforcement of zoning and general plan regulations has created conformity of land use that has had a positive influence on property values. Overall, the environmental considerations are favorable.
Economic Considerations Economic forces affect the relationships between the demand for and supply of goods and services, and the ability of the population to acquire what it needs or demands. Factors of influence include the composition of the work force, diversity of industry, competition, the supply and availability of real estate and other necessary or desired goods and services.
Utah's economic expansion Utah Nooagrlculwral Employmem: Anooal Percent Crnl"lJe has ended, prompted by a 10%r------, national credit crisis that manifested itself In the mortgage-lending industry, ,% T which has significantly slowed down Utah's home-building c', JLn Ilr U l market. The residential -2'10 construction boom has rapidly turned into a construction bust.
For most of 2008, employment loss was largely confined to the residential construction industry. While construction lost a substantial 15,450 jobs in 2008, most of Utah's other industrial sectors stayed vibrant, adding jobs and performing as if in a stable economic environment, including non-residential construction activity. Then came the late season national downturn of the stock and financial markets, and the stage is now set for a more comprehensive industrial downturn in Utah. This affects the 2009 employment outlook, which will likely be Utah's weakest economic year since 1954. Approximately 19,000 fewer jobs are expected for Utah in calendar year 2009 than 2008. This marks the second time
F ree(Uw~A SSOclates,. Inc. this decade that Utah will have P~rcert Chang~ In lJtah Employrmrt by Indu,tl)': 2!1D7·2DJ8e Amu,,1 Avmge fewer jobs in one year than in Total Q,l%
tbtur~1 ~SOllrll\!5 & Minil,o the previous, but only the C(lns!r~cllon fourth time such a ManuraC'luring Trwe, Tr~n5"Umi\ifS phenomenon will have InformlO-u.on Fin~MaI~1 Activity occurred in the past 60 years. PrQf. & E!
Given that economic Leisure & I-bspitaiity
OIher ServiC'.!s indicators at the end of 2008 Go~err,ment
~~-~-~-- portray a very volatile ·20% -15~\ -10'11 "" economic environment, with numerous national economic forecasts being revised downward shortly after released, downside risk significantly outweighs any upside risk in this forecast. The unemployment rate in Salt Lake County approximates 6.2 percent, which is favorable compared with the national average of 10.0 percent.
~hJre 2OC'6 :::'~]D7 2.m:H:·e ::;:'JO~
CIJ,II[,'31'! L:.3I:iOf Farce '1,2.15,9,'J75 '1~,311,ai'·.3 i, ~'72, 91:'0 '1,403,4'"14 ~, 44<5,'J50 E-~plo:f'OO P.ans.cm 1.2:14,150 1,27:2,.:m1 '~, 3:35.,9DO 'i, ~'57 ,21:,6 l.~,.s~J U'lErnp"J~ed Peffior,;; 53,925 ~~,:272 37,1CrO :52,14$ 79,.531] IJ.1F.rnpioyme,t Rat': 4.3 2. '3 ...."'~ 1 ·3.7 5.5 !J.El. P•. ate ·:1.1 ~.6 ~.6 ·5.3 .:1.:2
1'Jt31 NorTf';3m-. Jobs ':1, '~4,9,a~,7 1, :m·3,t02.9 t 2.51 ,21:2 ~l. 2..'53,':H}O :i,2:3tl,<9CG MUllr-g .9,472 1'J,'32' 11 ":J~4 12.41:'0 1.3.0][).J Otll161rJc11cn 81,'SfS 95, 'IE·::;: '~1J.-3,4E.o ;:;3.%0 7.3,~D·J r/i,3nut.:'~1u:1r.g ':117,242 '1123,051 ~2'7,>595 ";26,.5DO '~21.iJD(] Tr::3d~, "fr-ans., UmilE~:, 22.5,,97'4 :1.2~, '7ti3 2:4-.5,'57':,2 :2:49,'::ICO 245.9DO l'1!'Dm"lafr.k1n 3,2,"1[.;5 3,2,,5..:10 32,446 31 •• 9DO 3.2,,::mo FI'13.1Cla; ,t.,ct:",:y 67,.51:.2 7'1,470 7~,'f2>9 7,'3,·3DO 69,>5D'J P-n:~e.s~.or;3.':, ~ BUIS.''''E!E·!ii Der/cE--.s ''14'5,7136 ':15t,l, ..~:26 ~61 ,rJ2.2 '~6:3, ge'D '1&J,2D'J E·.jUC3tO!1 &. H:t.3::1h !J.:?:rrJc% '1l2~,<5C'.2 'l3.4,'::)D7 'i39,'~5'1 ri4S,2DO '~52.1 [;(,1 Let~:s:ure 8" Hrn:iplt3l'W 104.225 109,.::17"6 -112,,:i2:1 !1.5.oo0 ~ 1'5,,3DO (lthe:-IT' .Def'..ICE!5 33,2.:10 ~,.jE6 ~',5,,5.:12 :35,,9DO :n,:2ClJ GO'..emment :lO2,.]&\. 2J)t!l,4E4, 2D·5,8r..i:' :1:11,200 2:M,>:iDoJ
GOOdsc,OOO:U"lng 2iq,.3S,,~!I 229,2.:17 2:42, '179 226,91:-0 107,4DO :SENlce-prodL"!Cl~g 540J,.s2~:: 97'.5,-31:2 'I, C'03, 1 03 :1,1:'27,OC-o 1, D27,AD-) P,=roeni .G'.;C;.-pmch..lc.ng ,91.9% ,9'~.D%, ,SD_6~':' ,5i_~'% az,.2.%
Ll.D. Non"f.3rn Job· P,eml?"'lt Change 1.7 1.3 U "':1.2 -1.9
T"t~1 ~,l'),'1ag I"'I/age~ ,nlJllor::.) :;i:37,.a96 :::41,<551 :::4-5, '7D'3 Z"4'7, 'IDa :::47,'12.5 A1ieRige: A 1rU3i \"[.392 :;:·:3'2,·:.13:5 :534,aD:5 Z:3-5,5~-o SJ'7,-56~i £38,1e.4 A'~ra9E' M-on1hY l/oJ,3ge ~:2, 736 ~2,8E4 5·3,~J44 ~03, 1;:-0 ::;;,],11:0
!:::t:it ab"·s I',ments irir.s.i qu.:u1er) 77,42";3; 6.2)3T5 ::<3,.252 i55.'JT5 6-S.aCO
Freec:nuIAssociates.. Inc. ------The Gross Domestic Product (GOP) measures the value of goods and services produced by businesses and people in Utah. After more than a decade of posting strong increases in aggregate production, Utah's GOP slowed along with the nation in the early 2000's. GOP growth in Utah began to exceed the pace of growth experienced by the national as a whole in 2004. Utah's nominal GDP was estimated to be $105.7 billion in 2007, up from $98.0 billion in 2006. This represents a growth rate of 7.9 percent, the highest rate in the nation and above the national growth rate of 4.7 percent.
Percent of Utah Gro,s Ilomestic Product by Industry
tiA.JCS jndllSt" 1W8 1m 20[0 20Dj 20::Q 2003 2004 21:05 2005 2OJ7
11.21 Ag., Nat. Re:.OlIl"CeS, and Mining 2.2% 2. ~% 2.2%. 2.2;:'(" 1.9% 2.3% 2.g% 3.3% 3.5% 4.0% £.'3 O::ristructfoo K9 5.Q 5.7 5)5 5.4 .fiO 5.4 M 6.4 5.6 31·,33 Imn,"",ruring 13.0 ~2.2 12,5 ms 10,9 1i,0 i1.0 11..2 n.2 11.3 22,42-411 Tr<>:Ie. Tronsl»i;:Oim. Jl1d llilitios 1~,9 )9,7 IS,? 18.4 18,2 Is.o ~7.'Q 17.5 \7.2 17,:3 .Elt fnforrn~ion 2.6 4,3 4.2 4.0 3.8 2.7 3.B" 4,0 3,7 3,8 52,['3 Fir.anciaJ ActiLjt~E'S 1.5.4 ~8 ..s Ig.1 20.6 20.7 20,6 19,9 IQ,5 ~g.e 20,8 ,E4-EG Profussknal and BusinE'Ss Seruc~ 10,3 m,5 10,9 11.0 10.7 10.7 lO,9 11.1 11.2 10.7 61,62 Educ-atkn a-td tJ.e~Jth Seruce:s 5,9 5,8 6.0 6.2 M 5.. 7 6,7 {I.a 6.Q M 71,72 Leisure ;rid f-b::.,~ti31ity 3.3 3.. 6 3.3 3 ..E, 3,8 3,5 3.5 3.4 3.4 3,4 51 Ot:-.er Senk.es ·3.2 3,2 3.3 3.3 3,4 3,5 8.4 3.2 3.2 3,0 Q2 Go'lP-mment 14,2 ,4, , 14.2 14.4 14,8 15.0 14,7 14.2 13,5 13,1
Utah's estimated 2008 per U!~h Per C~pit~ Persomllncome ~s a PErcont ol!h~ UnKe<:l SlatQS capita income was 90'10,------, approximately $31,425, an increase of 4.4 percent from the 2007 estimate. Utah's per capita income measured 77.9
75% percent of the national per capita income in 2008, one of 70% JL\LJ,Ll,l.l,Ll,Ui-\L\LJ,LJ,l-\L1u,u\U!-J,LJ,l.J,!-\u,u\U!-J,Ll,l.l,Ll,L\LI,L\LJ,L\l.J,LJ!'-1 1975 1978 190'1 1984 ·1987 '1930 1993 19SG 19~9 20Q2 200S lOOSe the lowest shares of the past e· ""~n1"le GW(c~: u,s. Oep;lrt.~"nl oj Canlmer~~, 5ure ...... 01 E~al1OmlcAnol'4~: GOI'~mM$ Otfkle 1)/ p'Jnrlng o1d BUdget 15 years, Although Utahns have a very low per capita personal income, the median household income ranks relatively high, Using a two-year average' of median household income (2005 - 2007) shows Utah ranks 12th in the nation at $55,974, This is due to the fact the Utah has the largest
F reeana'I'A SSOclateS. .. Inc. ------household size of any state and the per capita figures are diluted by a large number of children.
During the past year, the value of permit-authorized construction has fallen 31.4 percent from $7.0 billion to $4.8 billion. This sharp decline in value is led by the severe contraction in residential construction, which has fallen from $4.0 billion in 2007 to $2.0 billion in 2008, a 50.0 percent decline. In terms of units, residential construction has dropped from 20,500 units in 2007, to 11,000 units in 2008, a decline of 46.4 percent. The single-family sector has absorbed the brunt of the residential decline as the number of detached homes receiving building permits has fallen from 13,500 in 2007 to only 6,000 in 2008, a 55.6 percent drop. The 6,000 units in 2008 is the lowest number of permits authorized for single-family units since 1989. The multi-family sector (townhomes, condominiums, and apartments) has not suffered like the single-family sector; nevertheless, permits for this sector are down 30 percent, from 6,300 units in 2007 to 4,400 units in 2008. In contrast, the non-residential sector has maintained a near record level of new construction activity. The value of non-residential construction was $2.0 billion in 2008, compared to the record high of $2.05 billion in 2007.
Valued Valueo! Valued Single- Multi- MolJile Residential Nrnresidential Add., Alt., Total Family Family Homes] Total Conslructirn Constructioo and R~airs VaJuatioo Year Units Units cabins Units (millions) (millions) (millions) (millions)
1995 13,9D4 6,425 1.,229 21.,558 1,854.6 832.7 400.0 3,096.3 1996 15,139 7,190 lAOS 23,737 2,104.5 951.8 3813.3 3,442.6 1997 14,079 5,265 j,343 20,687 1,943.5 1.,370.9 407.1 3,721.6 1998 14,476 5,762 ~,505 21.,743 2,188,1 1,148.4 461.3 3,798.4 1:999 14,561 4,443 1,346 20,350 2,238.0 j,195.0 537.0 3,971.0 2000 13,463 3,629 1,062 18,154 2,140.1 l,213.0 583.3 3,936.0 2001 13,851 5,089 735 19,675 2,352.7 970.0 562.8 3,885.4 2OG2 14,466 4,149 926 19,941 2,491.0 897.0 393.!l 3,782.0 2!lO3 16,515 5,555 766 22,836 3,046.4 1. ,an.4 497.!l 4,560.8 20M 17,724 5,853 716 24,293 3,552.6 t,089.9 4~6.D 5,118.5 2005 20,912 6,562 811 28,285 4,662.6 t,217.8 707.6 6,588.0 2000 19,888 5,658 776 26,322 4,955.5 j ,588.0 865.3 7,408.8 2007 13,510 6,290 739 20,539 3,963.2 2,051.0 979.7 6,9944 2000e 6,000 4,400 600 11,000 2,000.0 2,000.0 795.0 4,795.0
FreeandAssociates~ Inc. ------Since the early 1990's, Commerce CRG has published semi-annual data on the performance of the local real estate market. This data includes a breakdown by property type and geographic market area in addition to statistical summary with regard to total inventory, available inventory, and vacancy by improvement classification,
The table below provides an overview of this data for the industrial, office, and retail commercial realty components that comprise the Salt Lake County market area:
SALT LAKE COUNTY MARKET OVERVIEW
PROPERTY USE MARKET AVAILABLE YR END 2008 YR END 2007 YR END 2006 YR END 2005 YR END 2004 CLASSIFICATION INVENTORY INVENTORY VACANCY VACANCY VACANCY VACANCY VACANCY
INDUSTRIAL MARKET Under 5,000 SF 4,654,988 10,241 0.22% 0.12% 0.22% 0.30% 0,32% 5,0011020,000 SF 22,249,558 292,31 9 1,31% 0.81% 1.04% 1.52% 1.71% 20,001 10 50,000 SF 25,521,947 241,557 0,95% 0.86% 1.45% 1.78% 2.08% 50,001 SF or Larger 58002 610 2 485 303 4.28% :lJ!1% 4.69% 3.66% 4.38% '1'10,429, '103 3,029,420 6.77% 5.73% 7.40% 7.27% 8.49~/o
OFFICE MARKET Class A 12,085,913 1,139,754 9.43% 7.92% 5,95% 6,65% 11.74% Class B 11,690,919 1,626,696 13.68% 10.57% 9.61% 8.37% 13.26% Class C G 724 GOO 121Q.ill 18.00% 15.45% 17.03% 1954% 22.33% 30,70'1,432 3,976,927 '12,95% '[0.76% 10.28% '10.8'1% '15.25%
RETAIL MARKET Anchorless Strip Mall 4,395,555 673,320 '15,32% 12.19% 15.32% 13.18% 10.32% Neighborhood Center 7,508,007 575,275 7.66% 8,08% 9.97% 10.30% 7.85% Community Center 14.756~81 1,142,271 7.74% 5.81% 7.81% 7.59% 7.51% Regional Center 6,660,041 466,525 7.00% 4.64% 3.89% 2.00% 3.01% Regional Mall 3211724 180 000 5.60% 0.61% 1.07% 20.98% 12.30% 36,53'1,708 3,037,39'1 8,3'1% 6.39% 7.79% '[0.28% 7.97%
The strategic location within the Intermountain West, favorable growth policies, and a record-setting investment in the transportation infrastructure undertaken to facilitate the hosting of the 2000 Winter Olympics, are expected to have long-lasting beneficial influences that will likely be manifest by steady economic growth and continued real estate development activity in the residential, commercial, and industrial markets sectors, The fundamentals necessary to assure a strong performance in the future are favorable and include an educated and high-quality work force, attractive business climate, and diversified economic structure.
Governmental Considerations These factors take into account the direct and indirect influence of elected representatives, political action groups, and/or regulating agencies may have in the creation of policies, legislation, or enforcement of matters pertaining to the development process and maintenance of community support facilities (emergency services, libraries, schools, etc.). The Utah Association of Governments was empowered to assist the state's 29 counties and local governments with multi-county planning, program integration, and optimization of services. Salt Lake, together with Davis, Weber, Morgan, and Tooele counties are part of the Wasatch Front Regional Council.
In January 2007, "Governing" magazine graded Utah's state government an A-minus, the highest grade among all states in the nation. Grades were based on four areas of management: money, people, infrastructure, and information. On a local level, the governmental influences are generally favorable with good conformity of land use.
Utility costs are reasonable and the level of municipal services is adequate and capable of supporting growth in a controlled manner. Although some inefficiency exists in the coordination of services between the cities and unincorporated county areas, this has not caused a reduction or noticeable increases in the cost of services. Elected governmental officials are mindful of community needs, emphasizing education and family values.
Utah ranks fifth among states, with 91.2 percent of the residents graduating high school (versus 85.5 percent national average. Approximately 27.0 percent ofthe population aged 25+ years have a bachelors degree or better (28.0% percent nationally). The favorable education ran kings are likely partially attributed to the influence of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which encourages its members to seek higher education. The resulting local work force is generally better educated than the national average and this provides a positive benefit to local businesses. Numerous colleges and universities serve the Salt Lake area including University of Utah, Brigham Young University, Weber State
F reerntw'A SSOclateS . .. Inc. ------~------"'''-''','------University, Utah State University, Utah Valley State College, and Westminster College.
Although the local population is well educated and students generally perform consistent or better on A.C.T.'s compared to the national average, classroom over-crowding is a continuing problem caused by the fast growing population. This is especially true within emerging areas of development serviced by the Jordan and Granite school districts, which despite a non-stop mode of facility construction since the late 1990's, have resorted to a year-round scheduling in an effort to maintain manageable classroom size. According to the Utah Govemor's Office of Planning and Budget, the challenges are still ahead. Beginning in 2004 and continuing for at least a decade, the public school age population is expected to increase by over 50 percent, reflecting the state's high fertility rate and a pattern of births that peaked in the early 1980's, with this cohort of the population just beginning to move into the labor force and childbearing years.
Social Considerations Social influences are reflected in the demographic composition of the population base, community preferences, socio-economic issues, availability of cultural and recreation amenities, and the impacts of anticipated change.
According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the July 2008 population in Utah was estimated at 2,759,779, increasing by 58,225 people, or 2.2 percent over the prior year, ranking Utah first among states in population growth over a one-year period. Since the 2000 Decennial Census, the population expansion has averaged 2.61 percent annually, or a net gain of 453,001 persons. Statewide, near-term growth is forecasted to result in a 2010 population of about 2.93 million and 3.65 million persons by 2020. The tables that follow provide an overview of historical population expansion within Salt Lake County and its incorporated cities, together with long-term projections for state, its seven major statistical areas, and Salt Lake County.
lA . t es~ Inc . .. -.------Freeanc_ SSOCla . --_.- ---- ___ AI~a_A~Ellysi~: R.El£lJonal.an? COLinty D§l~a- 2Q
cenli~ % CI'lar!ge Ge &III Lat. COOlly 800.Jal' 91.,\1;6 92&,m'4 929,:1,53 1m,D54 '£63,717 .900,505 1,000,518 tim Alta to." ;mt 3m Jli8 00Ii ~ il&5 W5 37~ lA'll BIumn"e.llIty 4,IDJ 4,&"1; 4,913 5,551 5,gao 6,$9 7,145 1,697 7..7% ~ IO!IgtJI!>Clty X 35,2fj,7 35,1.23 '-l,S4~ 34,52. 35,052 35;~ 35,051 Ill% o 2000- County 2000 2010 2020 .2030 2D4D 2!lSD ;moo 2060 Salt Lake 902,m 1,079,679 1.,273,929 1,468,615 1,671,627 1,853,891 2,004,773 1.3% Mulli-CoWlty Disbicl Bear Ri>oer 136,712 169,946 211,143 255;156 310,516 380,910 462,666 2.1% Central 66,506 77,282 90,566 1M,D68 118,371 140,309 170,1113 1.6% Mountainland 417,375 627,761 825,637 J,039,155 1,261,701 1,479,640 1,717,239 2.4% Southea&t 54,075 55,761 63,642 66,705 70,911 75,452 81,645 0.7% Southwest 142,006 237,338 371,946 533,664 707,035 891 ,BOO 1,063,691 3.4% UinlBh Basin 40,627 49,707 59,156 63,326 66,328 72,382 80,319 1.1% WaSillch Front 1,389,252 1,709,828 2,030,257 2,323,757 2,636,529 2,948,506 3,243,614 1.4% Slate of Utah 12.246,553 2,927,643 3,.652,547 4,387,831 5,171,391 5,009,OB9 6,640,187 1.9% Utah has an unusual demographic profile compared to other states. Utahns, on average, are younger, live longer, have higher fertility rates, and have more persons per household. The following are illustrative traits disclosed by the 2000 Decennial Census: • Utah's residents have a median age of 27.9 years, which is the youngest of all the states and just over seven years below the national average (35.2 years). In addition, its average household size of 3.13 persons is also the highest in the nation (national average of 2.59 persons). Free(cndAssociatesy Inc, .__ ._------• Utah's school age children (5 to 17 years) accounted for 22.8% of the total population, also one of the highest shares in the nation. The Utah Economic and Business Review has forecast the statewide school enrollment to increase significantly through 2010, with Salt Lake and Utah counties projected to capture 60 percent of the growth. • Education is a priority in the state and Utah ranks fifth nationally in the educational attainment of its population over the age of 25, with 91.2 percent graduating high school and 27.0 percent conferred a bachelor's degree or better. • Family values and children are of great importance to Utahns. In terms of "child well-being, Utah ranked 9th based on percent low birth weight babies, infant mortality, child death rate, teen deaths (by accident, homicide, and/or suicide), and teen birth rate. • The state has the largest percentage of married couples (64.8% of households), the highest fertility rate, and lowest ranking of families headed by a single parent. • Another favorable social influence is the low percentage (9.6%) of the population living at or below the national poverty level. This reflects in part local outreach programs and unreported financial assistance the LDS church provides to the community and members in need. Residents of Utah enjoy an invigorating four-season climate, a moderate cost of living, high-quality education, excellent health care, and outstanding cultural and recreational opportunities. Outdoor activities abound, including downhill and cross-country skiing, snowmobiling, camping, hiking, hunting, fishing, boating, and golf. Its ski resorts are world renowned with eight (Deer Valley, Park City, The Canyons, Brighton, Snowbird, Alta, Solitude, and Snow Basin) located less than 45 minutes from the airport. According to the Utah Ski Association, skier visits have grown from 2.98 million in 2000 to 4.06 million in 2008, representing an average annual increase of nearly four percent. F reeanaI'A SSOCla . t es.. Inc. ------Conclusion The fundamentals necessary to assure a strong performance in the future include a well educated and high-quality work force, an attractive business climate, and a diversified economic structure. These strengths combined with a record-setting investment in transportation infrastructure improvements and continued construction activity should continue driving the economy over the next decade. The forecast is for continued steady growth in the residential, commercial, business, and industrial market sectors, with demand driven by a population expansion well above the national rate. In summary, the economic, social, and cultural advantages available to residents make Utah a very desirable place to live and conduct business. Free(;HuIAssociates-" Inc. ------REGIONAL LOCATION MAP : '. ,, / }, / , , '"L.., ,, ,.' , ., , " ,, ~ ;. , " , ,, ,, Vernon \ ,. i'i!rG Free ~,,1!" h. ,c, t,.i.~,}ASSOCl' ates ., I n c. NEIGHBORHOOD DATA AND COMPETITIVE MARKET AREA A neighborhood, according to the Appraisal of Real Estate, 13th edition, published by the Appraisal Institute, is defined as "".a group of complementary land uses." The traditional definition of a neighborhood is most appropriate when applied to residential realty, as prospective purchasers of these properties generally limit their consideration of available homes based on personal perceptions of desirability. This can include factors such as proximity and reputation of school facilities, commuting distance to employment centers, availability of household goods and business services, in addition to the benefits and opportunities offered by cultural or civic venues and recreation amenities. However, the geographic locale in which non-residential realty competes forthe attention of buyers and sellers oftentimes transcends the limits of a single homogeneous neighborhood or grouping of neighborhoods. Depending on the size, use, and economic characteristics of a property, the "competitive market area" (eMA) may extend to include several districts, encompass a metropolitan area, or span an entire geographic region. In the case of highly specialized properties, the CMA may even comprise a national or international market. Since the CMA oftentimes extends beyond the immediate environs of an appraised property, it is necessary to distinguish the influences of the four forces exerted on the immediate environs from those that affect the CMA. Separately identifying the CMA assists a reader or user of the appraisal report because it provides the context under which an opinion of value is developed. It also benefits the application of the valuation methodologies since it defines the margins from which competitive sales and other market evidence critical to the analyses is likely to be found. An analysis of the market area helps provide a context under which an opinion of value is developed. In addition, it assists in defining the limits within which market evidence critical to the application and expansion of the various valuation approaches is likely to be found. FreeC"ErUJ 'A SSOCla . t es, Inc . .. ------.~-~~~- Small-scale single-family residential, higher-density multi-family residential, commercial, and industrial development properties generally compete for the attention of prospective buyers and sellers within a relatively local geographic area. For this reason, I considered the competitive market area to include the communities of South Jordan, West Jordan, Riverton, and Herriman, which are situated within the Southwest area of Salt Lake County, The following boundaries comprise the immediate area of neighborhood influence affecting the subject: NOlth Boundary: Old Bingham Higlrway East BOlllldary: Bangelter Higlwiay South Boundary 11400 South VI/est Boundary: Mountain View Corridor Immediate Surrounding Environs Daybreak is a master-planned community over 4,126 acres in size being built by land development company Kennecott Land in South Jordan. Home construction began in 2004 and the community is expected to attain build-out by 2020, although development could continue until 2030. When completed, it will contain more than 20,000 residential homes and up to 13 million square feet of commercial space. The community has been designed to be walkable, and most of the homes have been constructed using some elements of traditional architecture. Construction began on the 67" acre Oquirrh Lake began in 2005 and it is expected to be in full operation by 201 0, offering motorized boating, fishing, and other recreational activities. Currently the community is divided into three villages: Founder's Village, Eastlake Village, and North Shore. On February 18, 2009, Kennecott Land announced plans for a fourth village called Garden Park, which will contain 500 homes restricted to residents 55 or older. On August 23,2009, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints dedicated the Oquirrh Mountain Utah Temple, which was built in a prominent location within the development. ---_.Free rulAssociates .. Inc. The Rio Tinto Regional Center, which is located just east of the South TRAX Station, is planned to include a concentration of office buildings, retail storefronts, and service businesses. The 68,000 square foot SoDa Row Village Center was recently completed, with tenants including Black Diamond Gymnastics and Sports Centers, San Gelato Cafe, Tio's Mexican Restaurant, Oopsie Daisy (children's boutique), Classic Cleaners, Guy's Barbershop, and Zion's Bank. Approximately 20,000 square feet remains available for lease Access and Transportation Links Interstate 15 Freeway is the primary north/south route for truck and passenger vehicle travel through the state. Controlled interchanges at 9000 South and 10600 South access surface arterials that serve South Jordan and the Daybreak masterplanned community. These are augmented by north/south arterial highways that include Redwood Road and Bangerter Highway in addition to collector roads such as 1300 West, 2700 West, 3200 West, and 4000 West Streets. The Mountain View Corridor, when constructed, will also provide access to Daybreak, The existing and proposed right-of-way links will adequately accommodate traffic circulation between the residential neighborhoods, shopping districts, and employment centers. Construction is in progress on the Mid-Jordan TRAX light rail line, an approximate 10.6-mile extension of service that is expected to reach the Daybreak Community from a new platform at the Fashion Place West station on the Sandy / Salt Lake City line. Nine stations are planned, including two within the Daybreak Community. Plats that provide an aerial overview of the TRAX right-of-way corridor can be found at the end of this section. Community Facilities and Residential Services General community facilities such as schools, parks, places of worship, and recreation centers are dispersed throughout the residential neighborhoods of Daybreak. Municipal services provided by the city of South Jordan include street maintenance, refuse collection, snow removal, and police/fire emergency services. Free(,~ dAssociates, Inc. -".------The Jordan Valley Hospital currently provides emergency medical services for the community, It was recently expanded with the construction of a Woman's Health Center, Within the Daybreak community, a multi-phase medical campus on up to 50 acres is planned for land next to the future Mountain View Corridor and south station depot of the Mid-Jordan TRAX line, Phase 1 construction will include a 150,000 square foot healthcare center facility that provides primary and specialty care, as well as radiology, pharmacy and vision care services, A full-service hospital, surgery and imaging center, and AI RMED base are planned for future phases, South Jordan includes numerous public parks, many with playground equipment and picnic shelters, some of which have facilities for more active recreational pursuits, such as ball diamonds, soccer fields, basketball courts, and tennis courts, Proximate public golf courses include Mountain View in West Jordan, Riverbend in Riverton, and Glenmoor in South Jordan, Most household goods and services desired by Daybreak residents can be found locally within a one to two mile radius at the numerous strip-mall developments and grocery anchored neighborhood centers, These are augmented by the greater diversity of offerings at regional centers such as The District at South Jordan (±1,2 million SF at Bangerter Highway /11200 South) and Jordan Landing (±1 ,3 million SF at Bangerter Highway / 7800 South), The Jordan School District provides public education (K through 12) for school aged children of the community, To date, two elementary schools (Daybreak and Eastlake) have been completed within the Daybreak Community, Population and Housing South Jordan city is still one of the fastest growing cities in the state, Since 1960, the population has grown from 1,345 to 54,551 (December 1,2009), The city had the second highest annual average growth rate in the state from 1990 to 1999 (9.4 percent), FreeandAssociates, Inc. Residential growth is projected to continue forthe next 20 to 25 years until the city reaches its ultimate population projection (85,000 - 90,000 persons). The growth is fueled by the availability of land, a community lifestyle based on open space, large lots, a rural atmosphere, and a general population increase in the Salt Lake Valley. Kennecott Residential Land Development commenced development of a new masterplanned community known as Daybreak in 2004. This project is located west of Bangerter Highway, between 10200 and 12600 South and encompasses over 4, 126 acres. Build-out is projected to continue through 2030, providing more than 20,000 residential housing units and over 13 million square feet of commercial! industrial space. Of the city's nearly 9,300 households, 8,770 are represented by single-family residences, and 560 are multi-family. The median home value is reported at $221 ,800 and the average household size approximates 3.9 persons. The following tables provide a historical summary of population growth and recent building permit issuances for new residential and commercial construction: SOUni JORDAN CITY POPULATION TREND 1'995 - December 1.2009 2000 ...... _-_ ...... --. 1995 1B9~5~-1997--1998-1-999--20-0D-20-D1-20-02-200-3 -""""::;--;;2Otl=5~20tl5 2007 2OOOD~2009 Inc. ------Freea,ndAssociates, YEARLY BUILDING PERMIT TOTALS (2005-2008 and YTD 2009) COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL YEAR # Issued . Valuation .#Issued . Valuation 2005 87 $ 92,398,315 994 $209,818,876 2006 166 $ 76,669,208 1,112 $226,157,991 2007 107 $140,988,080 808 $176,029,700 2008 105 $ 54,462,520 453 $118,207,000 2009 67 $250,803,575 448 $120,014,700 Resident Demographics The following table provides a statistical summary of South Jordan city and its residents: Acreage City Total 18,301 ; City Parks: 363 Median Age 27.5 Average Household Size 3.81 Household Income Average $93,351; Median $97,645 % High School Graduates (population 25 and older) 95.8% %College Degree Holders (population 25 and older) 30.9% Housing Units 13,396 Median Home Value $346,000 Median Home Sales Price $415,000 Mean Travel Time to Work (minutes) 26.1 min July Temperature (average maximum) 83.4'F; 28.6'C January Temperature (average minimum) 7.7'F; -13.5'C Annual Precipitation (inches) 14.96" Taxable Retail Sales 99-07 1999: $49,123,425; 2007: $515,354,600 Neighborhood Life Stage According to the Appraisal of Real Estate, neighborhoods evolve through four stages, described as follows: Growth A stage in a market area's life cycle in which the market area gains public favor and acceptance. Stability A stage in a market area's life cycle in which the market area FreeandAssociates.. Inc . .~----~~~~~-.~- _.. experiences equilibrium without marked gains or losses, Decline A stage of diminishing demand in a market area's life cycle, Revitalization A stage in a market area's life cycle characterized by renewal, redevelopment, modernization, and increasing demand. The immediate environs include undeveloped lands that are proposed for future phased development associated with the Daybreak masterplanned community, The neighborhood is considered to be in the growth stage of its lifecycle, Summary and Conclusions The neighborhood setting is proximate to major employment centers, shopping districts, and components of the transportation infrastructure, Resident serving retail shopping, service businesses and community support facilities are predominantly found along the major surface arterials and adequately provide the daily household goods and services desired by the local population, Overall, the four forces that create and maintain value are favorable for continued residential growth and commercial/industrial development within South Jordan City as a suburban bedroom community of the Salt Lake metropolitan region, FreearJIIAssociates.. Inc. ---""'" ~~~- NEIGHBORHOOD LOCATION MAP Freearnd "A SSOclateS . .. Inc. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION - LARGER PARCEL BEFORE TAKING Location and Accessibility The larger parcel is identified by the Salt Lake County Assessor to have an address of approximately 6001 West 10901 South. Access to the property is presently provided by two easements across lands owned by Kennecott Land Residential Development Company. The first extends east from State Route 111 and the second extends north from 11800 South. Each has a right-of-way width of approximately 100 feet. These accesses are adequate to accommodate the present agricultural use of the property. Future development within the Daybreak masterplanned community is anticipated to extend a road and utility infrastructure to the boundaries of both the east and west portions of the larger parcel. Land Area and Configuration The ownership is a rectangular shaped parcel that is bisected by an intervening property owned by Utah Power and Light Company, creating an east and west tract of land. The property comprises a gross land area of approximately 142.078 acres, or 6, 188,918 square feet. Please refer to the Assessor Plat Map that follows this section for additional details. Topography and Drainage The terrain is relatively level and at grade with surrounding streets. Drainage is by sheet flow runoff. Soil Conditions A reader is cautioned that no soil samples were made for purposes of this appraisal nor was a soil study provided for my review. According to mapping prepared by the National Resources Conservation Services, soils are shown to be associated with the Calcixerolls Calcic Argixerolls series. This occurs on the high lake terraces, deltas, and old alluvial fans along the west base of the Wasatch and Pavant Mountains from Millard County to Cache County at elevations ranging from about 4,300 to 5,300 feet above sea level. Slopes are FreearulAssociates... Inc . .. -.-.-~-~-.-- generally smooth with terrain nearly level to gently sloping. Soils in this associate are well, moderately well, and somewhat excessively drained. Permeability is rapid to moderately slow. Runoff is slow to rapid and sediment production is moderate to low. Flood Hazard Information This property is shown on the Flood Hazard Map that follows to lie within FEMA Community Panel #49035C 0420E (dated September 21, 2001), an area of minimal flood risk. Earthquake Hazard Information According to earthquake hazard mapping published by the Utah Geological Survey, the property is not located within a special geological study area and the risk of soil liquefaction is very low. This means that there is a less than 5 percent probability that the critical ground acceleration needed to induce liquefaction will be exceeded over a term of 100 years. A copy of the hazard mapping follows this section. Environmental Contamination This is defined to include any adverse environmental conditions resulting from the release of hazardous SUbstances into the air, surface water, groundwater, or soil. Generally, the concentrations of these substances would exceed regulatory limits established by the appropriate federal, state, and/or local agencies. The property has no known history of leakage or other potential problems and none were observed during the property inspection. However, the analysis of environmental contamination, toxic or hazardous material problems is beyond the scope of this appraisal. If desired, a qualified expert should be engaged to determine if there is a problem. My valuation is based on the assumption the property is clear of any such contamination or substances and available for development consistent with estimated highest and best use. Utilities No utility services have been extended to the property at present. The surrounding lands are part of the Daybreak masterplanned community. Future phased development of these lands is anticipated to result in the extension of services to the subject property. FreeafulAssociates~ Inc. ------,------Street Improvements The property is not presently abutted by any road improvements, with access provided by 100-foot wide easements that extend from State Route 111 and 11800 South. Future phased development of lands surrounding the property is anticipated to result in the extension of services to the subject. Easements and Encroachments A title report pertaining to the property was not available; therefore, easements and other items of record are unknown. No significant adverse easements, encroachments, or other conditions were visually identified at the time of my inspection. For purposes of this appraisal, it is assumed that no easements or other adverse conditions exist that could potentially preclude or significantly constrain development of the property in accordance with estimated highest and best use. FreeandAssociatesy Inc. ______JOropertLD(3scription - Before the Taking -35 1- SUBJECT PLAT MAP 1 / ~_/./// -~.,,-,-,j /./ 2&14-20()(JOS(4001 SQuth Jordan City 26-14-300.004 2.6-14-300-004 \ / / F reearUl'A SSOclates, . Inc. ~ropertyDescrip~on - ileforethe Taking -36 This association iE lot~ted lJ~inlv in ~hc north central pnrt of lltah. It bee-tirS In Ca~he, 8o~ EHor, Horg~~! r,:eb~tJ DaVis, Salt Luke, t:tRh, :u~b, and ~il. lard Counties on lake terra~e8 at (Jle'n!tions ranging (t~C about 4,3QO to 5,300 f~et, Slopes are oainly ~tooth n~arly level to ~cntly £lopil:g but ~o~c 6t~_e( t~rtare ~flCarpT:,Qnt~ nrc 1:\cllldi'.d, iJtiR a5soci~tlon c.QnB!.~ts of ab(lut I,D percent Calcic Ar~iY.Hol1s, 20 p~n.n: CaLcit H'lplor.HOll~, nile 15 ].'~l'I:~'lt CnL:ic Pul:h ,\r~ixurollv, Tbe {)th~t 25 pHcent h ::Iair.ly Typic Argh:erolls, Cu~.ulic Haplo xerolls, and (~lch:~rol1lc Xerochtepts. So!!.(> Typic Cald"quolh along the Jordan Rivu in S.l1t L~ke County 1m included, The ~alcic ,\rgb:~,~lls are dee~, Mutra! to moderately alkalin~ sails, TL~ ~urface lavets are dark graylsh-bro',ll lM~~ ~n(1 ,ilt lotl~g, ThG nub ~dls ~re I:rc~ll fill~-l~il:w nnd fin<,-dltv, Caltlu1E CnrbOllllte ld;.. crs oaur at'depth of bH~'~tn 211 Bnd 36 ir,elies, Reprn~~~tat1\'e Mil &eries ~re Parle)'; and Tir.'PJ:'I~~cs. The Calde, ~~oih ar,~ (Ieep or :r,od~r;llely ceep, neutral t~ stro:lgh alblin~ ~oils, Th\', $:.\r face layers ~re bro.'I1 and dark guyhh-brO',:n fir.1! s;;ndy In,1P.lS "11(1 gravell)' [lr,e snl1(ly loops, The sl:b soUr; arr. brOl-7i ~nd vcllc~,jsh-brQ'o'n r,oar~~-ioarr.Y I1nti lonu:y-skeletil1. The' suhstr~ta are gr8)'ish~bro'A;I, and light (.. ro~11:5h-gra)' coarse-leal: al\d loar,,' skelet~l. Ci\1ciuD cnrbOl1Jt6 l~ycrs occur nt clep~hs b~t'.'een 211 Bud 36 hcil("q, R('t)Tt!sentotil'c soil serIes ate flllPP, Kid[E~n, Lake~'i.n, nr.d ~liJdle, Ih~ Calcic ?nchk ~L1!.e.r.ol1s are deep, neucrai to MtlHatel}' all:.1lir,e sol Is, The sut[nre li1y~rg ~re dark~~ray .ad very dark-f.rn~' Sill hama ~nd silty clay lQa:r,s, The suhoils are clark-gra)', gpiyish hOlm, ilncl clark gra)'ish-hru.'n fine ~nd ilne-.qilt\', The AubAtratn ~rc ~'h!~~, lh~:l-grRy, M,d lIght b~01.1l' ish-gra}' I'be nr.d fi~c-~ilL;', CalciuQ car~r.nat~ laye.rs OCCJr at dCplh~ bet:~ .. ~en 2~ ar,d 36 inches, ~~pr~s~nt<.tive soil series are Avon ad )liHldot., Th~ s"::~ in tilts aSS(:dntiQn Bre ~'~ll B:1ti r.,(>d gr"t!!iy ,Iell drail\ed, P~rr,€al'111ty to slo'.' t~ rapid, Runofi is SlOl1 to rapid and sedb:~:tt production i:; rlouerate t~ lw. TIle hyd[o18~jc grDUpg are nlainly n al\~ C, 'f1:B ~dnci;lal nathe vege:atlon is big sage~ brush, ~·hJ:graoses. ar.d other ass()date~ gri\Ss€S, forbs, Mid sitn:)ls, Tn2s8 soils HrB us~J D2inh fer cullil'ated lnr.\! hoth irrigated m:d M:l!rdg~tecl· aad 'J:han de ... dop~~nt for ilm\es anc jr,dcotri~~, IrrigaLed crops illdud~ "Half;l, ~~nll ,1;rrlinH, C~l'il, ,'I~d ~tlf.nI' [11.'ecS, :1l:ul'C" air (h~ll\a):e l~ B.o<:>u,~pricC'~s, pcaelies, d\errl~!i, a?ple~, ~nci pears arr. aha gro'.TI, The nontrrigatt!G cropland La L"a;nl)' in ;:i~~er ""he'll. FreeandAssociates... Inc. LIQUEFACTION-POTENTIAL MAP FOR A PART OF SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH UTAH GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Public Information Series 25 August 1994 lIQU.FACTION POTENTIAL III HlI,h II Mod~'iltl) J <;)1,11 CN'r'OllaliC'1 tt~' J,ll1 N ~ j,U'lil • ..-~.)h (,M Dcc.]1 Sun't"/" f,l:-II~l1cd tl' '_. -' ;'1I!O)1'1,111:t.l GCl,I!.l'-l;Jtll(; Hel~1 eriC-{> ~:t. 11e-1 fNt. '<14(1 II '''' ""Jr~.L Itl FreeandAssociates-, Inc. ---- PROPERTY ADDRESS: lot%3A·40.553008%2C·Lon%M+·112.035534%OD%OA .....-_ .. " -_ ...... -' ~ North ~14 490107 LEGEND .t .!"' 'brL- .!f~,! il'! l'I".:'TrJ!1 .1 .... ,,1"0" 'f..I"; ,; ,r,j f" -'0","".' I :.1 r" " ; I ",- • , ,.' 1'.,. ;.. ~ '<1 J FLOODSCAPE .:<,' \,.",") ",,'I,,', 1",) F:~~ I r. ,_~,:'-'IP"J~; I \' ~jI,l .. I~.~"; ".1',_, l'~ '.J'N t~. ":~~"r: r.'I'J~~ .,1'0, ., Flood Hazards Map "',,,- , .... "",1,1 ",:'h'.j ,I" I)'. ;1" \'FF~~'J\'.' ,,,11..- ~IF'.~ ~'.'''I Map Nllmh-er {lj'C'C,,~, :--"( 'rCi :,-;'., ~ ",' tfJ ll' i l",,:I'I~" '~(.rnFI'I'1h '<""r;nr::ln,J11 400:35C0420E " •• ,~ ; I;, ~,',: ,Il: 1(1 11 INI I' 'lJ'I,It."f,:, ,)' ~::ldm(I')JI I'd ;,.l r Effectjve D.1te 23 (r ),1 'I,""''')'~' '"' ,j ,., "j,. 'Il'.' September 21, 2001 I , ~'~',hl"I' ." I .1, ,,' j- ,I I", h" I ,.",1,.1"", bJ\",~r ')" 1.,.11",.-...1.1 'J Flood Legend 1'\'1' I !'tl ~~ - 'lf'l <,<,\,,1 ::,!;~ ·I.I·~ I.h ~ 'I I"~ 1-'iF n 1).';'11 ,~I 1:1 I!,i}! rI High flood risk ::,\·:,:J~I" SJI 'I;:, ·f',C:i t;F.\~, ~",J j"(' 1111 .. ,."._, Co" ::.,... .I::~') g',.,":f o ModerJte ,lood ri-s~ 'f .' ~I' I ~·'If .~t?'~;"'? ;,1 \~ .. 'j, n «lI". ~~'I";II,,' ,,1 I,~'<. ',Jf·,', F:it D Low flood risk I"""!J 11".,(' "",'1',-" I," "'-,11 _I" 1'11'1.""'" Tn ~ repart.I1'~).e: n'J (,,·J<.I .. I tH:' ~ ,,',e'l' ." (I," I' ,'1. r~~nt.1llvm cr w~mmU~~ IKi/i ',,'~"', u' :. " I t;'A ,10.'" ,'!r., ,.,,' I:, II" db" .:1 .. , ';::~'" 'I I-I" c¢r,~~mM i:~ [O(1~n~ ~'"!.J(Y.y III:" III I"l' -'J,,:)j II !I.I-=I ~1o' :'Ii of~omp:ev.ne~", ZONE X Lt ..",,: :;M, ;!"Ijy,rr I~ '1'18 ;,,,n~",.n ,"_'J J 1.-.) LI~L'~ ",I ~1.l1~lIj"'.I~" STDBonline,e:om IUr)t:~d v,' ('I tll·'\' ,1'1;' ·,,,t,:;,~ 1111' 4Bfl.574.12::.4 i, FIR',,1 I ."-cw~re-:j b:t FIDDd:::-:'J.-t:~ .. n.n.R:OO:l ';,w".~o;.::daour.:~...:~11' .J Freetn'!dAssociatesJ Inc. SUBJECT1 ERIAL AP FreeandAssociates, Inc. ------"--"" ------PHOTOGRAPHS View looking west across the larger parcel from the TRAX line. The east portion in the foreground with the west portion located beyond the bisecting utility corridor seen in center frame. View southwest from the TRAX line showing a portion of the larger parcel. Inc. -----FreeclTxdAssociates.. PHOTOGRAPHS View southwest across the larger parcel, which extends beyond the bisecting utility corridor shown in center frame. View looking south along the TRAX light-rail line that closely abuts the larger parcel on the east FreeandAssociates... Inc. ZONING AND LAND USE REGULATIONS South Jordan City has jurisdiction with regard to implementation and enforcement of the zoning ordinance and all land use issues associated with the processing and approval of discretionary permits necessary to facilitate development. Referring to the zoning plat that follows this section, the larger parcel is currently zoned A- 1, This agricultural district requires a minimum lot area for development of one acre, The district was established to allow for the continuation of agriculture in an expanding urban community and to complement the existing rural residential environment in the city, The zoning regulations are intended to allow for the orderly expansion of residential and commercial developments into agricultural lands while encouraging compatibility of new growth with existing agricultural uses, The following is a recital of permitted and conditionally allowed land uses within the A-1 zoning district, together with a summary of site development standards, Please refer to the Addendum for zoning ordinance excerpts that provide additional detail. Permitted Uses • Agricultural and residential accessory uses and buildings • Agricultural buildings not exceeding five thousand (5,000) square feet • Crop production, horticulture • Farm animals as regulated by ordinance • Home occupations according to city ordinances • Household pets not exceeding two (2) per species over the age of four (4) months per dwelling • Produce stand, maximum two hundred (300) square feet, maximum one per parcel or lot for selling only produce grown on the premises • Residential facility for disabled persons as required by state law • Single-family dwelling, detached, maximum one per lot or parcel FreeandAssociates... Inc, Conditional Uses • Agricultural buildings exceeding five thousand (5,000) square feet in area • Animal husbandry, unique or exotic animal specialties or other animal uses not otherwise regulated by this chapter • Building other than single-family dwelling as a main building on the lot • Commercial or public corrals, arenas, stables, silos, barns, equestrian or rodeo facilities and other commercial agricultural related structures and uses • Cultural exhibits and activities • Educational activities • Golf courses and driving ranges • Group daycare facility on minimum one-acre lot • Household pets, maximum one additional per dwelling regardless of species • Nature or zoological exhibits • Parks and recreational activities • Public facilities • Religious activities • Residential facility for elderly persons as required by state law SUMMARY OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS - "A-1" DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT STANDARD· REGULATION Minimum Lot Area 1 Acres Maximum Lot Area No Requirement Minimum Lot Width 100 Feet Maximum Building Coverage 20 Percent Maximum Building Height No Requirement Front Yard Setback 30 Feet Side Yard Setback 10 Feet (30 Feet for Corner Lots) Rear Yard Setback 25 Feet (10 Feet for Corner Lots) Free(lru1Associates. Inc. [~§GEft~J .1 R-5 R-M I-F M-U R-4 C-N A-I C]M-U L___ I R-3 C-C A-5 p-C Inc. Free- ndAssociates- ... General Plan I Future Land Use Recommendation As shown on the preceding zoning plat, the subject is surrounded by lands that are designated by P-C zoning as part of the Daybreak masterplanned community. The P-C zone is designed to include neighborhoods, villages, towns, business and research parkways, and open space with convenient pedestrian access among residential, commercial, office, retail, and recreational areas. Individual structures within neighborhoods, villages, towns, and business and research parkways may contain mixed uses. The permitted densities and intensity of land use in villages and towns may be higher than that permitted within individual neighborhoods located outside of recognized masterplanned community developments. Allowed land uses include corporate, business, and professional offices, financial institutions, restaurants, and retail stores, in addition to a broad range of residential development densities. According to the 2009 draft Daybreak community masterplan (see plat on the following page), the subject larger parcel is envision for future development with commercial, commercial office, civic, and medium density residential development. F reeanalA SSOclateS . ... Inc. PROPOSED LAND USE PLAN - DAYBREAK MASTERPLAN COMMUNITY It:] CITY BOUNDARY SOUTH JORDAN PROPOSED LAND USE ~ MHD ~ MEDIUM HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL {UP TO 12 UNIl DAYBREAK LAND USE 1"--,.-/-'1 TC-MU ~ TOWN CENTER MIXED USE ~ HD ~ HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (UP TO 20 UNITS I ACRE) • CIVIC ~ COM - COMMERCIAL C3 VMR - VILLAGE MIXED RESIDENTIAL o VCOM - VILLAGE COMMERCIAL ~ NOS - NATURAL OPEN SPACE ~l 0 - OFFICE USE g as -OPEN SPACE COMMERCIAU OFFICE D VMU - VilLAGE MIXEO USE HI PUBLIC - PUBLIC USE 8TD DENSITY RESIDENTIAL 0 RURAL- RURAL RESIDENTIAL (UP TP 1.8 UNITS I ACRE) D TOD-MU MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL 0 LD - LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIALiUP TO 3 UNITS I ACRE) ~ INO • INDUSTRIAL PARKWAY ~ HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL D MD - MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (UP TO B UNITS I ACRE) ~ PARK! OPEN SPACE WJ WATER I Op,EN SPACE [tCi;",-,~ ROADWAY MEDIAN STORMWATER DETENTION DUTIUTY LANDFILL ______FreeatulAssociates~ Inc. Real Estate Taxes - 47 REAL ESTATE TAXES The subject property is identified by the Salt Lake County Assessor as Tax Parcel 26-14- 300-004. The following table provides a history of assessment and levy of real estate taxes: TAX PARCEL 26-14-300-004 TAX LAND IMPROVEMENT TOTAL ANNUAL YEAR ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT TAXES 2009 $ 8,931,100 $0 $ 8,931,100 $33.10 2008 $11,933,000 $0 $11,933,000 $36.36 2007 $ 8,609,900 $0 $ 8,609,900 $35.27 The Salt County Treasurer discloses there are no delinquencies for prior tax years. The minimal level of property taxes in comparison to the market value assessment results from the voluntary listing of the land by the ownership as "greenbelt" under the 1969 Farmland Assessment Act (FAA). This legislation provides the benefit of a nominal tax burden in exchange for the retention or use of the property for agriculture or greenbelt purposes. Most property owners elect to maintain the listing until development of the land is financially feasible. The listing can be cancelled at any time by the ownership; however, when a notice of cancellation is received, the Salt County Assessorwill retroactively levy a "rollback" tax assessment that reflects the uncollected difference between "market rate taxes," and "greenbelt taxes" for up to five years, or the duration the property has been listed as "greenbelt," whichever is less. Free(nu}Associates~ Inc . .~-- HIGHEST AND BEST USE - LARGER PARCEL BEFORE TAKING Real estate is typically valued in terms of its highest and best use. It acknowledges the relationship that exists between the interaction of market forces, market participants (buyers and sellers), and property value by assuming the price a buyer is willing to pay for a particular property reflects his or her perception as to the most profitable use of that property. Highest and best use is defined in the Appraisal of Real Estate as: "Highest and best use is the reasonably probable and legal use of vacant land or an improved property that is legally permissible, physically pOSSible, appropriately supported, financially feasible, and that results in the highest value." 6 The potential uses of a property can be limited by the presence of improvements, resulting in a highest and best use for the land "as if vacant" that is quite different from that of the property "as improved." For this reason, if building improvements exist, separate analyses of the land "as if vacant" and property "as improved" are required to ascertain whether the improvements should continue, undergo refurbishment / modification, or be demolished preparatory to redevelopment of the property with a more productive use. Highest and best use is an opinion, not a fact that can be proven; however, for the conclusion to be valid, it must pass the following four tests: 1. Legally permissible uses - Are there zoning or deed restrictions that would prohibit proposed uses? 2. Physically possible uses - From the permissible uses, which are physically possible when considering all aspects of the site size, shape, and topography or any other physical aspects? 3. Financially feasible uses - Which of the above legally permissible and possible uses will produce a net return to the owner of the site? 4. Maximally productive or highest and best use - After analyzing the above considerations, which of the proposed uses will produce or generate the highest rate of net return over a projected period of time? 6 Appraisal I nstitute, Appraisal of Real Estate, 13th Edition (Chicago: Appraisal Institute, 2008), 277. Freearu:lAssociates-, Inc. The analysis evaluates these criteria sequentially and cumulatively, paring potential uses until the use determined to be maximally productive is identified. Because this process is subjective, the determination and credibility of the conclusions are dependent on the analytical skills of the appraiser, relying on judgment refined and enhanced by experience and exposure to assignments involving a diversity of properties and land uses. Legally Permissible Zoning ordinances, general plan guidelines, building and safety codes, environmental regulations, deed restrictions or protective covenants, easements, and/or development moratoriums are each examples of a legal constraint that could potentially affect development. These limitations (among others) were first examined since they oftentimes prove most restrictive. Although the property is presently zoned A-1, the surrounding properties have P-C zoning as part of the Daybreak masterplanned community. The general plan for the subject anticipates development of the property with a range of land uses, including corporate, business, and professional offices, financial institutions, general retail, and higher density residential development in addition to attached and detached residential subdivisions. Physically Possible The physical characteristics of the property and its environs were next analyzed based on their suitability of supporting development consistent with the legally permissible uses. Factors considered included parcel size and shape, topography, soil conditions, adequacy and capacity of the utility infrastructure, suitability of access, and character of surrounding development. The larger property comprises a gross land area of 142.078 acres that is bisected by an intervening ownership vested with Utah Power and Light Company. This creates an easterly subject tract of approximately 40 acres and westerly lands of approximately 100 acres that are connected by a right-of-way easement 100-feet in width across the intervening ownership. The terrain is relatively level and at present, access is provided by Freecuw fA SSOCla . t es~ I nco ------Highest a~d BestUse - 50 easements that extend from State Route 111 and 11800 South. No utility services have been extended to the property. The surrounding lands are currently undeveloped; however, future phased construction of the Daybreak community is anticipated to extend an infrastructure of street and utility services to the property. Financially Feasible The preceding uses found to be both legally permissible and physically possible are next examined from the perspective of their financial feasibility. This analysis considers two factors. First is the cost of developing the proposed use, and of equal importance, the anticipated level of market demand for the proposed use. My experience has found that most uses are likely capable of producing a residual net value to the land, after deduction of their construction cost, and can generally be proven financially feasible. However, the level of market demand for the use must be sufficient to support a stabilized level of occupancy and operation in addition to providing a fair return "on" and "of" the capital invested. At present, the lands surrounding the subject properties are undeveloped. Subdivision and development of the Daybreak Community is in progress with build-out anticipated to occur sometime between 2020 and 2030. Development of the community's commercial core commenced about three years ago and to date, approximately one dozen retail and commercial office structures have been developed. Lands surrounding the commercial core include a mix of detached and attached residential developments, including a few higher density apartment projects. These developments have been extremely successful, despite the economic downturn that has affected Utah and the rest of the nation. In addition, three neighborhoods of single-family housing have been completed, with development of a fourth scheduled to commence shortly. Based on the success of these developments, the lands surrounding the TRAX right-of-way alignment are concluded to be financially feasible for development in accordance with the adopted future land use plan for the Daybreak Community. FreelH,',." :::h .r'ii "Irs ,f'i'A SSOclates, . Inc. Highest and Best Use Conclusion Based on the foregoing, I conclude the larger parcel has a highest and best use for future commercial and medium to high-density residential development in accordance with the adopted land use plan for the Daybreak masterplanned community. reeanaIA SSOclateS . .. Inc. ------F VALUATION ANALYSIS - LARGER PARCEL BEFORE THE TAKING The Sales Comparison Approach estimates market value by comparing the subject to similar properties that have sold, or that are currently listed for sale. The most accurate comparisons of properties are those that are similar in physical characteristics, location, financing terms, conditions of the sale, market conditions and income characteristics. Adjustments are made to account for the dissimilarities. The methodology is primarily based on the appraisal principle of substitution. Substitution is defined in the Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal as follows: "The appraisal principle that states when several similar or commensurate commodities, goods, or services are available, the one with the lowest price will attract the greatest demand and widest distribution." Other appraisal principles, which apply to this approach, include supply and demand, balance, and externalities. In applying this approach, the following steps were followed: Sales Comparison Approach Procedure 1. Research the market to obtain information on sales transactions, listing, and offers to purchase or sell properties that are similar to the subject property. 2. Verify the information by confirming the data obtained are factually accurate and the transactions reflect arm's length market considerations. 3. Select relevant units of comparison and develop a comparative analysis for each unit. 4. Compare comparable sale properties to the subject property using the elements of comparison and adjust the sale price of each comparable appropriately to the subject property or eliminate the sale property as a comparable. 5. Reconcile the various value indications produced from the analysis of comparables into a single value indication or a range of values." Freea.ndAssociatesy Inc. Competing Land Transactions An extensive search was made of the local market area and neighboring markets to identify recent sale comparables pertaining to vacant or nominally improved development sites that were arm's length transactions. The subject larger parcel includes an approximate 40-acre easterly tract and approximate 1 ~O-acre westerly tract. For this reason, the search for comparable properties focused on transactions with these size characteristics. It is also of importance that the sale properties have a highest and best use reasonably similar to that anticipated for the subject. A summary of the selected comparables is shown in the table that follows. The ensuing pages include a location map for the sales, together with detailed data sheets pertaining to the individual properties. SUMMARY OF COMPETITIVE LAND TRANSACTIONS - PROPERTY SALE LAND PRICE 10 SALE PRICE ZONING IDENTIFICATION DATE ACREAGE PERSF . . BJ 7200 to 7800 South 800 West 1 Dec-2007 $27,600,000 165.859 Bingham $3.82 Midvale, Utah Junction CR 4000 West 12600 South 2 Feb-20OS $5,722,262 20.210 Regional $6.50 Riverton City, Utah Commercial 7200 South 700 West MU 3 Mar-2006 $20,250,000 129.700 $3.58 Midvale City, Utah Mixed Use 7800 South Highway 111 A-2 4 May-2006 $17,312,500 138.000 $2.88 West Jordan City, Utah Agriculture 6420 South Highway 111 A-2 5 Aug-2006 $9,406,773 80.940 $2.67 West Valley City, Utah Agriculture R-C 12200 West 8800 North 6 Nov-2009 $4,143,810 28.578 Regional $3.33 Saratoga Springs, Utah Commercial FreeandAssociates, Inc. LOCATION MAP - COMPETITIVE LAND TRANSACTIONS Freeof'N,]AssOCl"ates,~ .. _ 11. d t.AL ., I nco Valuation Analysis --:.Lal"~~~ .I:'."fcel-= _5§ Comparable Land Sale #1 Property Identification Site Data 7200 to 7800 South 800 West Zoning: BJ (Bingham Junction) Midvale, Utah Parcel Size (Square Feet): 7,224,818 Salt Lake County Parcel Size (Acres): 165,859 Shape: Irregular Tax Parcel 10: Topography: Moslly level 21-26-200-015 and 21-26-401-003 Utilities: All available Streets: Frontage on asphalt paved streets Access: Adequate Value Indicators Sales Data Price Per Square Foot: $3,82 Sale Date: December 20,2007 Price Per Acre: $166,406 Sales Price: $27,600,000 Financing Terms: Cash Equivalent Cash Equivalent Price: $27,600,000 Grantor or Seller: Littleson, Inc, Grantee or Buyer: Gardner & Company Property Rights: Fee Simple Verification: Purchase Contract Robert Soehnlen (buyer's representative) Comments This sale had a deed restriction placed by the seller requiring the city and any future potential developers to maintain at least 20 percent open space I park area, This sale was not placed on the open market and was given to a small group of developers locally 10 bid, The winning bid was given to the "slrongest" buyer as opposed to the "highest paying" buyer. It is likely this sale could have sold for higher had it been placed on an open markel. This sale comprises the development large scale master plan of the north phase of Bingham Junction Boulevard, Free(JltulAssociates.. Inc. Comparable Land Sale #2 ~,jI;I" • - I I--~' r----- , (0- - ' ~.!. r::~ ~-:::;''< • 1":' - IiI.M,P' r-, "r>"- • " - ""';"" - = il,jl.. ... III .• .., - """.- ~ ,-;- , rvu I . :. I - ,... -"j,j. -~ ~ M - ...... ,.• ~. v,' . ;..... ~ ,. ~, ' , - t-r 111- - , "" Property ldentifica~on Site Data 40CXJ \/\lost 12600 Sruth Zoning: CR (Regiona ComrerciaJ) RiI.erton, utah Parcel Size (Square Feel): 880,348 Salt La 27-29-3OO-Cl Val ue Indicators Sales Data Price Per Square Foot: $6.50 Sale D3te: February 10, 2008 Price Per Acre: $283,140 Sales Price: $5,722,262 Finarcing Terrm: Cash Equil.alent Cash Equh.alent Price: $5,722,262 Grantor or Sellee StEMlart, Freermn, Lercaster Grantee or Bllfee Tenant Ser;ices International Prq::erty Rights: Fee Sirrple Verification: Bllfer and egent by Eric Leonhardt Comments Tha purDhase price was basee on $6.50 per square !cot according to tha buyer, ""th the repartee pUrDhase price representing a calculation using this square footege figure, Tha agent indicatee that tha bulk of the property (13A4 acres) was acquired from Cickson Freen-an for about $5.50 to $5.75 per square foot, ""th the balarce representing the assen-!>ege of smaller tracts. Tha higher price per square foot for the ernaler tracts was responsible for the higher asserrblee pLlrDhase price, Inc. ------Free nt/Associates, Comparable Land Sale #3 t~l .. -~.=---. ___ ~t:{1l1l==~l. =:11 ! I r 0~ ! ~-·-,·---·---tl + I I i I ~.,-+- Property Identification Site Data Approximately 7200 South 700 West Zoning: MU (Mixed Use) Midvale, Utah Parcel Size (Square Feet): 5,649,732 Salt Lake County Parcel Size (Acres): 129700 Shape: Irregular Tax Parcel ID: Topography: Level 21-23-476-003 Utilities: All available Streets: Frontage on asphalt paved street Access: Adequate Value Indicators Sales Data Price Per Square Foot: $2.29 Sale Date: March 10, 2006 Price Per Acre: $99,846 Sales Price: . $12,950,000 Financing Terms: Cash Equivalent Cash Equivalent Price: $20,250,000 (see comments) Grantor or Seller: Uttleson, Inc. Grantee or Buyer: Mercer Bingham Junction, LLC Property Rights: Fee Simple Verification: Jeff Bernson, agent with NAI Utah Commercial by Brent Clark, MAl Comments This is the sale of 12970 acres that are located in Midvale at 7200 South 700 West - north side of 7200 South. The site was reportedly purchased for $12,950,000 (+1- $2.29 I SF) and required an additional $7,300,000 for the clean-up of contaminated soil, new fill, as well as curing some other soil problems on the property. The indicated purchase price of $20,250,000 reflects these added expenditures. The zoning is Mixed Use for high-density residential on 11 acres, medium density residential on 37.3 acres and the balance for commercial, office and retail use, -, . PA . I""'reeana SSOclates-" Inc. Comparable Land Sale #4 Property Identification Site Data About 7800 South Highway 111 Zoning: A·2 (subsequently changed to R·1·8) West Jordan City, Utah Parcel Size (Square Feet): 6,011,280 Salt Lake County Parcel Size (Acres): 138.000 Shape: Irregular Tax Parcel 10: Topography: Lelel to gently rolling Portion of 20·27·100·002 Utilities: All available (sewer extension required) Streets: Frontage on asphalt paled street Access: Adequate Value Indicators Sales Data Price Per Square Foot: $1.88 Sale Date: May 18, 2006 Price Per Acre: $81,975 Sales Price: $11,312,500 Financing Terms: Cash Equivalent Cash Equivalent Price: $17,312,500 (see comments) Grantor or Seller: Oquirrh West, LLC Grantee or Buyer: G & N Wood Properties, Inc. Property Rights: Fee Simple Verification: Dustin Holt, partner with Oquirrh West Ryan Necham of Anderson Delelopment Comments The sale price reflects an $11,312,500 purchase option held by Oquirrh West with an additional $6,000,000 paid by the buyer for the option rights. This results in a total price of $17,000,000. At the time of sale the tract included a gralel pit that required remediation. In addition, some sewerage extensions were needed; howelver, this work was to be peliormed by the seller as part of the contract terms. The land is located jLlst west of the Jordan Hills masterplanned community. It was purchased for delelopment with medium·density housing. A portion of the property had "paper" entitlements for approximately 210 housing lots. Comparable Land Sale #5 Property Identification Site Data 6420 South Highway 111 Zoning: A-2 (subsequently changed to R-1-8) West Valley, Utah Parcel Size (Square Feet): 3,525,746 Salt Lake County Parcel Size (Acres): 80.940 Shape: Irregular Tax Parcel ID: Topography: Le,,"1 to gently sloping 20-21-276-0001 and 20-22-151-001 (portions) Utilities: All available (needs water/sewer extension) Streets: Frontage on asphalt pa\ed street Access: Adequate Value Indicators Sales Data Price Per Square Foot: $2.67 Sale Date: August 3, 2006 Price Per Acre: $116,219 Sales Price: $9,406,773 Financing Terms: Cash Equivalent Cash Equivalent Price: $9,406,773 Grantor or Seller: Dorothy R. and Harry V. Jones Family, LLC Grantee or Buyer: Arbor Gardner, LC Property Rights: Fee Simple Verification: Purchase Agreement Christian Gardner (buyer) Comments This transaction was originally negotiated as a three~phase takedown. The first increment (48.47 acres) closed on August 3, 2006 based on a price of$112,578 per acre and the second part (32.47 acres) closed on August 14,2007 at a price of $121,654 per acre. The third portion (35.06 acres) was scheduled for closing on or before July 31, 2008 al a price of $134,000; howe,,"r, this closing ne\er happened because of economic concerns regarding the residential market. The price pertained to unentitled land, with the buyer subsequently obtaining subdivision approvals. The project is known as Sunrise Hills PUD and to date includes 159 lots with an a\.erage lot size of8,410 square feeL De'vetopment required water and sewer main extensions that had a reported ofisHe cost of approximately $2,750,000, which equales to $33,976 per acre or about $0.78 per square foot. Free{lrrdAssociates~ Inc. ------Comparable Land Sale #6 Property Identification Site Data 12200 West 8800 North (see comments) Zoning: RC (Regional Commercial) Sara log a Springs Parcel Size (Square Feet): 1,244,858 Ulah County Parcel Size (Acres): 28.578 Shape: Trapezoid Tax Parcel 10: Topography: Level and gently rolling 58-033-0306 Utilities: Nearby from SR-73 and 11600 West Streets: Asphalt paved road Access: Adequate Value Indicators Sales Data Price Per Square Foot: $3.33 Sale Date: November 5, 2009 Price Per Acre: $145,000 Sales Price: $4,143,810 Financing Terms: Cash Equivalent Cash Equivalent Price: $4,143,810 Grantor or Seller: Collins Brothers Land Development Grantee or Buyer: Water Conservancy District Property Rights: Fee Simple Verification: Purchase Agreement Comments Address was provided by-the Utah County Recorder, This was a recent sale based on a highest and best use as speculative holding for future commercial development; however, the buyer is not a developer. This parcel is traversed by a canal that would require some fill or relocation prior to development. FreearuiAssociates~ Inc. Adjustment Methodology and Analysis Application of the adjustment process begins with the identification of those items of dissimilarity between the selected competitive property transactions and the subject considered to have a measurable impact on value. The sale price of a property can be influenced by a multitude of factors; however, the reason for the variances in prices paid for properties of the same type or classifications can generally be found to the following categories of transaction and property characteristics, which are common to all types of realty: • Property Rights Conveyed • Terms of Sale (financing considerations) • Conditions of Sale (special motivation and/or relationship parties) • Expenditures After Sale • Changing Market Conditions (value appreciation or depreciation) • Geographic or Market Location • Physical Characteristics (land and improvements) The identified items of disparity evident in the property transactions are analyzed on a "comparative unit basis." The most common comparative unit is the price paid per square foot, which is the accepted benchmark for many types of commercial, industrial, and office properties. Examples of other comparative units include price per acre, per front foot, per cubic foot, per room, per seat, per door, etc. Income multipliers and capitalization rates can also be used for this purpose; however, these types of comparative units are not adjusted, instead the transactions are discussed, analyzed, and concluded based on a weighting of the data to discern which of the indicated comparative units is most competitive and consistent with market actions. ------Ascertaining the correct comparative unit for the property under appraisal is vital for the valuation conclusion to be proper and credible. For purposes of this analysis, price per square foot is the appropriate comparative unit and used to expand the methodology. The potential adjustments for these categories must be considered and performed in a sequential manner, with the cumulative adjustment carried over to the next criteria considered. Properties identified to be pertinent are compared with the subject to identify dissimilar factors that may have a measurable impact on value. The adjustment for these differences is applied to the comparable property. Upward adjustments indicate the comparable is inferior to the subject, while downward adjustments denote superiority to the subject characteristics. After consideration and adjustment for identified variances, a range in value for the subject property is suggested. The final estimate of value by this approach emphasizes the indications from the most similar properties. The adjustment criteria are considered and discussed as follows: Property Rights Conveyed - All sales involved fee simple estate property rights. Financing and Terms of Sale - Referring to the introductory section of this report, the definition of "market value" requires cash or equivalent financing terms; therefore, adjustments must be considered for transaction pricing that includes "creative" terms or non-market concessions. The closed transactions were each negotiated with cash terms, or on equivalent terms. Conditions of Sale - An adjustment for conditions of sale may be applicable when a buyer or seller is uniquely motivated, or special circumstances influence the transaction; however, because they are likely "arms-length" representations of market actions, sales of this type should generally be avoided. None of sale comparables was influenced by special conditions of sale. Expenditures After Sale - None of the sale properties required adjustment for this category. SO y Inc. ------Free,],fulAs ciates Changing Market Conditions - Market conditions generally change over time, yet an appraisal is time specific (i.e. the effective date of value). For this reason, it is necessary to consider the direction of any change in value (if any) between the sale date and effective date of the appraisal. The most reliable means of supporting an adjustment for a change in market conditions is obtained from a comparison of sale/resale transactions pertaining to the same property over time; however, in practice, such data is oftentimes scarce, and when found, may not be pertinent to the time interval under analysis. None of the selected comparable properties involved a sale/resale transaction. Alternatively, adjustments for changing market conditions can be extracted from a general trending analysis of sale prices. Since 2006, property values escalated through mid-2008; however, have subsequently declined. Based on a trending of the sales data, my work experience, and economic studies of development activity, properties sold in 2006 (Data 2, 3,4 and 5) received an upward adjustment of 10 percent, with the 2007 sales (Data 1) adjusted upward 5 percent. Data 6 sold in November 2009 and required no adjustment for changing market conditions. Locational Influences - A location adjustment is generally required when the geographic or environmental setting of a comparable property differs from that of the subject. The location of Data 2 is significantly superior and requires a downward adjustment of 25 percent. Data 1 and 3 are slightly superior because of their closer proximity to Interstate 15 and received a downward 10 percent adjustment. Data 4 and 5 are concluded to have similar settings. Data 6 is considered inferior and received an upward 25 percent adjustment reflecting its setting within Saratoga Springs. Physical Property Characteristics - Adjustments were considered for dissimilar physical characteristics. This category included influences such as parcel size, shape, topography, street frontage and improvements, access, utility services, zoning and land use, and land use entitlements. The adjustment for differences was Freetnl'O 'A SSOclates-, . Inc. ---- applied based upon "paired" analysis of the transactions and experienced judgment gained from past valuation assignments involving similar properties. he following table summarizes the adjustment process and resulting indications of per square foot land value for the subject properties. LAND LAND LAND LAND LAND LAND SALE #1 SALE #2 SALE #3 SALE #4 SALE #5 SALE #6 SUMMARY OF ADJUSTMENTS FOR 7200 "7400 South 4000 West 7200 South 7800 South 6420 South COMPETITIVE LAND 12200 West 80D West 12600 South 700 West Highway 111 Highway 111 8800 North TRANSACTIONS Midvale Riverton Midvale West Jordan West Valley Saratoga Springs Sale Date Oec-2007 Feb-200e Mar-200S May-200B Aug-zOOs Nov-2009 Sale Price $27,600,000 $5,722,262 $20,250,000 $17,312,500 $9,406,773 $4,143,810 Land Area (Acres) 165.859 20.210 129.700 138,000 80.940 28,578 Sale Price Per Square Foot $3.82 $6.50 $3,58 $2.88 $2.67 $3.33 Expenditures After Sale None None None None None None Property Rights Fee Simple Fee Simple Fee Simple Fee Simple Fee Simple Fee Simple Terms of Sale (Financing) Cash Equivalent Cash Equivalent Cash Equivalent Cash Equivalent Cash Equivalent Cash Equivalent Conditions of Sale Arms-Length Arms-Length Arms-Length Arms-Length Arms-Length Arms-Length Subtotal $3.82 $6.50 $3.68 $2.88 $2.67 $3.33 Changing Markel Conditions 5% 10% 10% 10% 10% 0% Subtotal $4.01 $7.16 I· $3.94 $3.17 $2.93 $3.33 Neighborhood Location -10% -25% -10% 0% 0% 25% SUbtotal $3.61 $5.36 $3.55 $3.17 $2.93 $4.16 Physical Property Attributes · Parcel Size " -20% " " " -20% · Shape I Topography " " 5% 10% 25% " · Frontage I Access -10% -10% -10% -10% -10% " · Street Improvements " " " " " " · Utility Services " " " " " " · Zoning I Land Use " " " 5% 5% " · Land Use Entitlements " -10% " " " " Subtotal -10% -40% ·5% 5% 20% -20% Indicated Subject Value $3.25 $3.22 $3.37 $3.33 $3.52 $3.33 (Per Square Foot Basis) Average Per Squ.ae Foot Value $3.34 MedIan per Square Foot Value $3.33 Range' of Per Square Foot Value $3.22:> $3.52 FreetCuulAssociates. Inc. --~-.---~~- Larger Parcel Value Conclusion - Fee Simple Interest The comparables indicate an adjusted range of value for the subject properties from $3.22 to $3.52 per square foot. Statistically, they average $3.34 per square foot and have an adjusted median of $3.33 per square foot. Considering the close correlation of indicated values, I conclude the subject parcels have an underlying land value based on fee simple estate property rights approximating $3.35 per square foot, or approximately $145,926 per acre. Applying this to the larger parcel results in the following indication of value: 6,188,918 SF (142.078 AC) @ $3.35 Per SF:: $20,732,875 TWENTY MILLION SEVEN HUNDRED THIRTY TWO THOUSAND EIGHT HUNDRED SEVENTY FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($20,732,875) Additional support for this conclusion is shown in a pending transaction pertaining to a portion of the larger parcel. On February 9, 2010, a purchase and sale agreement was negotiated between The Last Holdout, LLC and Kennecott Land Residential Development Company. The transaction pertains to a small parcel of 4,786 square feet (0.1099 acres) with a negotiated purchase price of $250,000 per acre, or $27,475. Obviously, this transaction would require a downward adjustment by reason of its smaller size. Applying a 40 percent adjustment for this influence would result in a value of approximately $150,000 per acre, or $3.44 per square foot. This pending transaction provides strong supportive evidence because it represents a portion of the larger parcel. Free dAssociates~ Inc. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION· PROPOSED TAKINGS The Utah Department of Transportation is proposing to acquire a partial fee interest for road right-of-way associated with the Mountain View Corridor totaling 16.191 acres in addition to a temporary three-year easement for construction purposes. Copies of warranty and easement deeds pertaining to the takings are included in the Addendum. PARTIAL FEE TAKING FOR ROAD RIGHT·OF-WAY Referring to the unexecuted warranty deeds in the Addendum, the partial fee taking involves five parcels that total 16.191 acres or 705,261 square feet, as summarized in the following table: .. .. ··.·.PROJECT •.··.··· SQUARE . P~RCEL FOOTAGE ACREAGE 13G:A 415,513 9.539 136:2A 27,855 0.639 13G:3A 1.521 0.035 136:4A 21,106 0:485 13G:5A 239.266 5:493 Aggregate 705,261 16.191 TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT TAKING Referring to the temporary easement deed in the Addendum (Project Parcel 136:E), this parcel totals a gross area of 13,921 square feet, or 0.320 acres. It is described as a strip of land running parallel and west of Project Parcel 136:A that varies in width between approximately 10 and 11 feet. The purpose of this acquisition is to provide temporary right of-way for a three-year period to allow for the construction of the Mountain View Corridor project. Attention is directed to the following plat map and photographs pertaining to the proposed takings. ____.. ___Free(uulAssociates~ . • _____..c-. __Inc. w,~ iff <»:;< -.1/~ g fJi <'; ~£tj ~~ ""?>~ J,j ~ ~~ ~ '{:; c: AMENDED LOTS 82. T4, V4. V7 & -----:::------t-~~E ;;;; c KENNECOTT SUBDIVISION #1 WT C 2 ~ ~lSJ lIN ~DIiNER~_ ~ FOUND S~T~INr; 6. f,.H1"/\' """ 0 C;J~ BR~~3i~46 613.93 f/} -I 1'>7..t., ~2JH41&.ZS • =<: n , ""'0." ~;: "'C i'J~ r- :;:~ ~ 1 '11;11' :el",;!g:------;"'-kQT =",~. i '.'"" I!) ~~I 0 ." "'C ::0 0 "'C 0r.n m C r.n l-u c: ,0" to 1-0 ~ c.. (0 13.,'< 1111 m iO (0 gII C') i (]) ;:~ -I I~ I::!. ,-"'"'~ ",!3 -I '-0 n~ ~ "" CURVE DATA ~- -~ Igc Q.c.. J~·3S·ZB.56~ liT fi~ ~ ~"' \..V L JOM.9S' ;r.:; , A 5100.00' -~ - -U i T 1591.30' ~':! >: PI 1266+BJ.~9 f/l N J12~51.6"2 ~ Z la E 493131.26 f/l Cl 115 LOTS 82. 83, 052. T4. V4. V7 o KENNECOTT MASTER suBDIVISION n...... r.n I~ \lJ r. (0 1mI~ ..f/l I"" )-( ~ (l SOUTH JORDAN CITY { lNCOIIPOOTED] ~ LOT Tli o / ~ , AMENDED LOTS 82. 63. 052. T4. V4. V7 & WTC2 ":IS' END UA ~~ ~ ~:\ " 1251'+111.54 o~\ ;Ii KENNECOTT MASTER SUBG ISIaN #1 ~ 550.39' ~ 4''' c: 4'" / LOT T6 ::> ::> ~\ c ~\ LOT T5 i o / -i / "'C S o "TI "0 "o o"0 en m c : t/) 1-0 ::p LOT i/'iCZ ""'to c: :0,~ ~-r '" (t) ~~\ to 115 (D ~$ I' UDOT ::i,..., I' 1111 ....~ 1m ~ i; PROPERTY :l. - " I' (Jl -""..,! / -i <> ';.",..,& I~~'" / -I ~ " AUENDko LOTS 82. 83. -s i""'i·,d, 052, 4. V4. V7 .& WTC2 l> g I KENNECOTT MASTER SUB 0 I SiD N #1 ""--"" "'cz _ ;:J: ~ g ~ ~ ~ - !~ "f UIT n " 4\' ~n<" Z 1 LOT T3 0. '" :> n: 5: ri.. '"" 0 I~ / z .... ~ ~ Z tJ It. :'i; \II 1-00 rJ) <4 " The market value of the proposed taking is estimated based on its contributing value as part of the larger parcel "before the taking." Within the previous section, the underlying land within the larger parcel was concluded to have a market value based on fee simple estate property rights of $10,721 ,875, or approximately $3.35 per square foot. PARTIAL FEE TAKING FOR ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY My estimate of market value for the 705,261 square feet of land proposed for acquisition is based on the value contribution allocated to the underlying land of approximately $3.35 per square foot and is shown in the following table: 13G:A 415,513 $3.35 $1.391.969 1362A 27,855 $3.35 $93,314 136:3A 1,521 $3.35 $5.095 136:4A 21,106 $3.35 $70.705 136:5A 239.266 $3.35 .~801.541 Aggregate 705,261 $3.35 $2,362,624 TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT TAKING Since this easement involves a temporary use of land, it is logical to determine a current market rent or lease rate for the land area used. My review of information pertaining to recent land leases suggests lease rates predominantly range from 8 to 10 percent of land value annually. An annual rate of 1° percent is considered appropriate for a typical and exclusive lease. Based on the foregoing, a non-exclusive lease rate should be less than 10 percent; therefore, I have utilized a rate of6.0 percentfor purposes of the analysis. Using the previously concluded value per square foot for the land, the annual rent for the temporary easement is calculated as follows: 13,921 Square Feet @ $3.35 per Square Foot x 6.0 Percent = $2,798. The temporary easement will have a term of three years to provide for completion of the Mountain View Corridor project. Inc . ._----- Freea:ndAssociates, ______~ ______V~lu~~on_An Since compensation will be paid in advance, it is customary to apply discount the amount of the annual payments to represent the present value of a lump-sum payout. To insure that rent payments in future dollars are certain, the discount rate will be based on a safe investment with minimal risk. Recent interest rates are currently low, but are expected to return to average based on historical data. The current yield of a 3-year Treasury note is about 1.5 percent. Market expectations and historical rates suggest that the yield will increase over the next three years. A discount rate of 2.5 percent will be used for discounting the monthly lease payments to present value. The present value factor for a 2.5 percent discount rate over a period of three years is 2.9274 considering that rent payments are made at the beginning of the period. The present value of the rent payments is shown on the following table. Considering that the payments would be made at the beginning of each period, discounting would not begin until the second period. ,_·-··--~:~r1~~ta~;~j!~f~~~\!~f~i~~~~, 136:E $2,798 2.9274 $8,191 MARKET VALUE - PARTIAL FEE TAKING $2,362,624 MARKET VALUE - TEMPORARY EASEMENT TAKING $ 8,191 MARKET VALUE - AGGREGATE OF PROPOSED TAKINGS $2,370,815 Freei-::nuIAssociates~ Inc. Valuation Analysis - Remainder - 71 VALUATION ANALYSIS" REMAINDER (PART OF LARGER PARCEL) The remainder parcel is first valued based on its estimated pro-rata contribution as part of the larger parcel before the taking. This is accomplished mathematically simply by subtracting the previously concluded value for the partial fee and perpetual easement takings from the concluded market value of the larger parcel. This is shown as follows: Market Value of the Larger Parcel - Before The Taking $20,732,875 Less Value of Partial Fee Taking $ 2,362,624 $18,370,251 MARKET VALUE - REMAINDER AS PART OF LARGER PARCEL $18,370,251 FreeanclAssociates~ Inc. ______~r()pe_~L~e~c:;rijltion - Remainder After th~ Taking-_ll PROPERTY DESCRIPTION - REMAINDER AFTER THE TAKING Condemnation appraisal assignments involving a partial fee taking require a separate and independent analysis of highest and best use that is specific to the legally permissible, physically possible, financially feasible, and maximally productive uses of the remainder parcel. This is necessary because the potential exists for an entirely new real estate environment to be created by the taking and construction of the public improvement project. Oftentimes, and especially instances involving minor takings of right-of-way for roadway and utility infrastructure purposes, the changes to the legal and physical characteristics are nominal and the concluded highest and best use for the remainder parcel is unchanged from that of the larger parcel. Sometimes though, the analysis of the remainder parcel is exceedingly more difficult compared to that undertaken for the larger parcel in the before condition. This reflects the need for detailed studies and analyses that are necessary to properly evaluate and ascertain not only the physical and legal impacts associated with the taking, but those that may arise during the construction term, or potentially result following completion of the public improvement project. The proposed partial fee taking of 16,191 acres for roadway right-of-way associated with the Mountain View Corridor will reduce the size of the larger parcel by about 11.4 percent. The physical impact of the taking is minimal considering the land area of the larger parcel and the location of the taking does not further bisect the larger ownership. I- The terms "consequential damages" and "severance damage" has been avoided because of the confusion surrounding their precise definitions. In conjunction with the sovereign's right of eminent domain and the act of condemnation, the appraiser need only segregate damages into two categories, compensable damages and non-compensable damages. These are discussed as follows: Compensable Damages Compensable damages are measured as the difference in the market value of the remainder property, before and after the taking. The term is defined as "damages for which a condemnor is legally required to compensate the owner or tenant of the property that is being wholly or partially condemned." Compensable items generally include the following: • Damages resulting from the taking of property • Damages resulting during construction of the public improvement project • Damages resulting after construction of the public improvement project Non-Compensable Damages Some damages, as a matter of law in Utah, are not compensable and must be excluded from consideration, which include: • Down-zoning that leaves a reasonable remaining use • Changes in traffic patterns, circuitry of access, and temporary street blockages • Construction or project delays (unless unreasonable) • Loss of business • Tenant relocation and personal property moving expenses • Frustration of development plans and/or lost profits F.... reeatJ£lVA SSOclateS. ... Inc. Construction of the project is anticipated to occur over an approximate three-year term. During this interval, the ownership will likely suffer temporary periods of circuitous access between the west and east portions of the property. Although these impacts may be detrimental, under Utah State law, they are not compensable because their influence is temporary as opposed to permanent. No impacts were identified to occur during the construction of the project that could permanently affect the use and/or occupancy of the property in accordance with estimated highest and best use. Completion of the project will effectively sever the existing 1 ~O-foot right-of-way access between the east and west portions of the remainder parcel. Alternative access to the ownership will be provided by Kennecott Land Residential Development Company; however, the right-of-way for this alternative access will be GO-feet in width. This reduction in width will likely preclude access by some agricultural equipment. However, because the valuation of the larger parcel and the taking is based on a highest and best use for future commercial development, compensation for the restricted agricultural access would not be compensable based on the "consistent use" theory of valuation. In summary, I conclude the partial fee takings will not change the concluded highest and best forthe remainder parcel, which is defined as future commercial oriented development. As such, no damages are identified that will accrue to the remainder parcel after the taking MARKETVALUE-COMPENSABLEDAMAGES $0 FreearxdAssociatesy Inc. VALUATION ANALYSIS" SPECIAL BENEFITS Special benefits, like damages, can only occur in a partial acquisition. After the taking, a remainder property is said to have special benefits if it is advantageously influenced by factors that arise from a unique or singular relationship of the land to the public improvement project. Special benefits are distinguished from general benefits, which are not allowed to offset compensable damages. Special benefits add to the 1) convenience, 2) accessibility, and 3) use of the remaining property as distinguished from benefits arising incidentally out of the improvement project and enjoyed by the public in general. They are evidenced by a marked increase in the value of the remainder parcel after the taking, which exceeds any value increases experienced by other properties in the neighborhood of the taking. The increase must be a direct result of the public improvement project for it to be a special benefit. Under Utah law, special benefits can only be used to offset damages, never the award for the property taken. No special benefits have been identified to result from taking and/or construction of the public improvement project. MARKET VALUE - OFFSETTING SPECIAL BENEFITS $0 ·· 'A . reeCUUJ SSOclatesJ Inc . ._------_ .. _--- F ._. __ .____ .___ . ______.___ .____ .__ .____ S_ummarL0f.""ppraisal Findings=-_~_ SUMMARY OF APPRAISAL FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS After careful consideration of the information and analysis contained within this appraisal report, and in accordance with the "value of the taking plus damages rule" for eminent domain proceedings in Utah, I conclude that the proposed partial fee taking of 705,261 square feet (16,191 acres) for road right-of-way and temporary three-year easement of 13,921 square feet (0.320 acres) for construction of the widening project have a market value effective February 12, 2010, rounded as follows: "TWO MILLION THREE HUNDRED SEVENTY ONE THOUSAND DOLLARS" ($2,371,000) Attention is directed to the table on the following page for a table that details the valuation process and conclusions. ~reeana 'ASSOCla . t es~ I nco ------F SUMMARY OF APPRAISAL FINDINGS - CONCLUSION OF MARKET VALUE FOR THE TAKING . LARGER PARCEL VALUE ~BEFORE THE TAKING .. Allocated Contribution' pronertv RIghts Valued Gross SF Value/SF %ofFge Underlying Land Fee Simple Estate 6,188,918 $3.35 100% $20,732,875 VALUE OF THE PART TAKEN - AS PART OF THE LARGER PARCEL BEFORE THE TAKING ProJJJ.Gt Pa~ellQ PtlU2edv. B.igbJS lLall.l.fld GrossSE JLalUJi LSE %ofFee 136:A Fee Simple Estate 415,513 $3.35 100% $1,391,969 136:2A Fee Simple Estate 27,855 $3.35 100% $93,314 136:3A Fee Simple Estate 1,521 $335 100% $5,09" 136:4A Fee Simple Estate 21,101l $3.35 100% $70,705 136:5A Fee Simple Estate 239,266 $3.35 100% $801,541 $2,362,624 REMAINDER VALUE - AS PART OF THE LARGER PARCEL BEFORE THE TAKING LARGER PARCEL VALUE - BEFORE THE TAKING: $20,732,875 LESS PARTS TAKEN VALUE - AS PART OF THE LARGER PARCEL BEFORE THE TAKING: $2362,624 $1 B,370,251 COMPENSABLE DAMAGES ATTRIBUTED TO THE TAKING REMAINDER VALUE - AS PART OF THE LARGER PARCEL BEFORE THE TAKING: $18,370,251 LESS REMAINDER VALUE - AFTER THE TAKING AND BEFORE CONSIDERING SPECIAL BENEFITS: $18,370,251 $0 SPECIAL BENEFITS AS A RESULT OF THE TAKING· REMAINDER VALUE - AFTER THE TAKING AND BEFORE SPECIAL BENEFITS: $18,370,251 LESS REMAINDER VALUE - AFTER THE TAKING CONSIDERING SPECIAL BENEFITS: $18370251 $0 RECONCILIATION AND FINAL CONCLUSION OF MARKET VALUE FOR THE TAKING MARKET VALUE OFTHE PARTTAI VA . Freeana BSOclates~ Inc. -78 CERTIFICATION OF THE APPRAISER I, Gary R. Free, certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief: • The statements of fact contained in this report are true and correct. • The reported analysis, opinions, and conclusions are limited only by the reported assumptions and limiting conditions, and is my personal, unbiased professional analyses, opinions, and conclusions. • 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. • My compensation is not contingent on an action or event resulting from the analysis, opinions, or conclusions in, or the use of, this report. • The appraisal assignment was not based on a requested minimum valuation, a specific valuation, or the approval of the loan. • My analysis, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared, in conformity with the requirements of the Code of Professional Practice of the Appraisal Foundation and the Supplemental Standards of the Appraisal Institute. The use of this report is subject to the requirements of the Appraisal Institute relating to review by its duly authorized representatives. • I, Gary R. Free have made a personal inspection of the property that is the subject of this report. • The Appraisal Institute and other appraisal organizations, of which I am a member, conduct a voluntary program of continuing education. MAl's and SRA's who meet the minimum standards of this program are awarded periodic educational certification. As of the date of this report, Gary R. Free has completed the requirements of the continuing education program of the Appraisal Institute. • The undersigned hereby acknowledges that he has the appropriate education and experience to complete the assignment in a competent manner (see Statement of Qualifications included in the Addendum). Douglas W. Case provided Significant professional assistance to the person signing this report, including property inspections, ata collection, valuation analyses, and drafting of the appraisal report. 2 2-()/O Utah State Certified General Appraiser License #5450417 -CGOO (Expires 06-30-2011) Free(lrulAssociates~ Inc. - 79 GENERAL ASSUMPTIONS This appraisal report has been made with the following general assumptions: 1. The legal description used in this report is assumed correct. 2. No survey of the property has been made by the appraiser and no responsibility is assumed in connection with such matters. Sketches in this report are included only to assist the reader in visualizing the property. 3. No responsibility is assumed for matters of a legal nature affecting title to the property nor is an opinion of title rendered. The title is assumed good and marketable, unless otherwise stated. 4. Information furnished by others is assumed true, correct, and reliable. A reasonable effort has been made to verify such information; however, no responsibility for its accuracy is assumed by the appraiser. 5. All mortgages, liens, encumbrances, leases, and servitudes have been disregarded unless so specified within the report. The property is appraised as though under responsible ownership and competent management. 6. It is assumed that there are no hidden or unapparent conditions of the property, subsoil, or structures, which would render it more or less valuable. No responsibility is assumed for such conditions or for engineering that may be required to discover such factors. 7. Full compliance with all applicable federal, state, and local environmental regulations and laws is assumed unless noncompliance is stated, defined, and considered in the appraisal report. 8. It is assumed that all applicable zoning and use regulations and restrictions have been complied with, unless non-conformity has been stated,' defined, and considered in the appraisal report. 9. It is assumed that all required licenses, certificates of occupancy, contents, or other legislative or administrative authority from any local, state, or national government or private entity or organization have been or can be obtained or renewed for any use on which the value estimate contained in this report is based. 10. It is assumed that the utilization of the land and improvements is within the boundaries or property lines of the property described and that there is no encroachment or trespass unless noted in the report. Freetu.ldAssociates. Inc. ------~ - 80 GENERAL LIMITING CONDITIONS The appraisal report has been made with the following general limiting conditions: 1. The appraiser will not be required to give testimony or appear in court because of having made this appraisal, with reference to the property in question, unless arrangements have been previously made. 2. Possession of this report or a copy thereof does not carry with it the right of publication. It may not be used for any purpose by any person other than the party to whom 'It is addressed without the written consent of the appraiser, and in any event only the proper written qualification and only in its entirety. 3. The distribution of the total valuation in this report between land and improvements applies only under the reported highest and best use of the property. The allocations of value for land and improvements must not be used in conjunction with any other appraisal and are invalid if so used. 4. Disclosure of the contents of this appraisal report is governed by the By-Laws and Regulations of the Appraisal Institute. 5. Neither all nor any part of the contents of this report (especially any conclusions as to value), the identity of the appraiser, or any reference to the Appraisal Institute, or the MAl designaflon) shall be disseminated to the public through either advertising media, public relations media, sales media, or any other public relations media, sales media or any other public means of communication without the prior written consent and approval of the appraiser. 6. Acceptance of and/or use of this appraisal report constitutes acceptance of the stated general assumptions and limiting conditions. 7. Where the value of the various components of the property are shown separately, the value of each is segregated only as an aid to better estimating the value of the whole; the independent value of the various components may, or may not, be the market value of the component. FreearUA 7'A SSOclates~ . Inc. - 81 SPECIAL LIMITING CONDITIONS 1. The liability of Free and Associates is limited to the client only and to the fee actually received by appraiser. Further, there is no accountability, obligation, or liability to any third party. If this report is placed in the hands of anyone other than client, the client shall make such party aware of all limiting conditions and assumptions of the assignment and related discussions. The appraiser is in no way to be responsible for any costs incurred to discover or correct any deficiencies of any type present in the property, physically, financially, and/or legally. In the case of limited partnerships or syndication offerings or stock offerings in real estate, client agrees that in case of lawsuit (brought by lender, partner or part owner in any form of ownership, tenant, or any other party), any and all awards, settlements of any type in such suit, regardless of the outcome, client agrees and will hold appraiser completely harmless in any such action. 2. In this appraisal assignment, the existence of potentially hazardous material on or near the subject site and/or used in the construction or maintenance of any of the buildings, and/or the existence of toxic waste, which mayor may not be present on the property, was not observed by us, nor do I have any knowledge of the existence of such materials on or in the property. The appraiser, however, is not qualified to detect such sUbstances. The existence of urea-formaldehyde foam or asbestos insulation or other potentially hazardous waste material may have an effect on the value of the property. I urge the client to retain an expert in this field if desired. liA . FreearUI SSOclates, Inc. - 82 EXTRAORDINARY ASSUMPTIONS & HYPOTHETICAL CONDITIONS Sub-section 2-1(c) of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) requires ali categories of real property appraisal reports, oral or written, to "" ,clearly and accurately disclose all assumptions, extraordinary assumptions, hypothetical conditions, and limiting conditions used in the assignment." Sub-sections 1-1 (g) and 1-1 (h) pertain to the development of a real property appraisal and require an appraiser to "identify" those extraordinary assumptions and hypothetical conditions that are "necessary to the assignment." According to the explanatory comments to these standard rules, extraordinary assumptions and hypothetical conditions may only be used in an assignment if • The appraiser has a reasonable basis for their use; and • They are required for legal purposes, purposes of reasonable analysis, purposes of comparison, or to properly develop credible opinions and conclusions; and • Their use results in a credible analysis; and • The appraiser complies with all of the disclosure requirements set forth in USPAP, including the inclusion of a clearly conspicuous statement that their use might have affected the assignment results, Extraordinary assumptions presume as fact otherwise uncertain information about physical, legal, or economic characteristics of the subject property or about conditions extemal to the property, such as market conditions or trends, or the integrity of data used in an analysis, In a written appraisal report, such a disclosure is required in conjunction with statements of each opinion or conclusion that is affected, The term is defined in USPAP as "" ,an assumption, directly related to a specific assignment, which, iffound to be false, could alter the appraiser's opinions or conclusions, " Hypothetical conditions assume conditions contrary to known facts about physical, legal, or economic characteristics of the subject properties or about conditions external to the properties, such as market conditions or trends, or the integrity of data used in an analysis, The term is defined in USPAP as "", that which is contrary to fact, but is supposed for the purpose of analysis," This appraisal and its conclusions are not subject to any extraordinary assumptions or hypothetical conditions. Freea;rnlAssociates.. Inc. GARY R. FREE, MAl, SRA Free and Associates, Inc. INTRODUCTION Since 1976, Gary Free hils been the O\\'ner and manager of Free and Associates, hlC., a real estate appraising and consulting fll111. His experience encompasses all facets of commercial and residential real estate, with emphasis on retail, office, industrial, subdivision and multifamily developments. Mr. Free has served in elected offices and on boards of professional organizations such as the Appraisal Institute and the Society of Real Estate Appraisers. He is licensed in Utah, Wyoming, Idaho and Nevada, and has provided expert testimony in U. S. and District comt"l, DESIONA TIONS AND LICENSES MAl (Member Appraisal b1stiiute) Designation J]umber7272 SRP A (Society of Real Estate Appraiser) exchanged for SRA (nol1 M competing designation) as a result of merger SR.A. (Senior Residential Appraiser, Appraisal Institute) Certified General Appraiser, Utah License #CG00037508 Certified General Appraiser, \"/ilyoming Pe1111it #85 Certified General Appraiser, Idabo Number CGA-I25 Certified General Appraiser, Nevada License #1J 1002 PROFESSIO"lAL SERVICE President, Appraisal Instit11te~ lltah Chapter President, Society of Real Estate Appraisers, Salt La};:e 'City Chapter Regional Representative, Appraisal Institute Executive Board Member, Appraisal Lnstitute, Utah Chapter President, Utall Self-Storage Association Vice President and Director. Society of Reai Estate Appraisers, Salt Lake City Chapter Board Member, Society of Rea! Estate Appraisers, Salt Lake City Chapter Chairman, re-appraisal project for the Bureau of Economic Research, University of Utah Member, In1emationai Right-of-Way Association Member" Southwest Region Review and Counseling Committee, Appraisal Instihlte Member, Nonresidential Demonstration RepOlt Grading Pallei, Appraisal Institute 1100 EAST 6600 SOUTH. SUITE 201 SALT LAKE CITY, lTr 84121 (801) 262-3388 [email protected] Gary R. Free pg, 2 EXPERIENCE Founder, in 1976 of Free and Agsoc.iates, afnU-service real estate appraisal and consulting finn. President and manager of this finn until present. Qualified, through obtaining appropriate education and experi'~l1ce, to complete appraisals and provide consulting sen/jce on aU types of commercial and residential properti es, many of which ore included in the following pmtiallist. (I Retail: neighborhood centers to regional malls ~ Hotels and motels (t Restaurants II! Various cOlllmercial developments: self-storage facilities, convenience stores, fitness centers, auto dealerships, auto repair shops, car washes, historic buildings ~ Office buildings and complexes 6' Office/warehouse complexes, distribution and manufacturing centers e Eminent domain: road widelung, o11er property expansions (I Resort properties iii Residential properties: condominium and apartments complexes, single-family homes <:I Subdivisions o Ra\It' i f!.I Restrictive use easements 1976 - Present: President, Free and .Associates, Inc. 1978-1980: President, Capital Land Management, ILlc. 1974-1976: Commercial and residential appraiser, Commercial Security Bank COURSES COMPLETED SINCE 1990 Sponsored by the Appraisal Institute or Utah State Entities & TIle Appraiser as an Expe~t \/.,Titness o Revie\;ving Appraisals o Subdivision Analysis <'! Appraisal of Retail Properties " Geological COl1cems in Real Estate (t PropeIiy Title Concems ~ H.V.A.C. Systems in Commercial Buildings o Wasatch Front Real Estate Market o TIle Office Sub-market o Utah Department of Transportation Projects <:iI Non-Residential Demo Report \/ilriting (II Small Hotel/Motel Valuation 1100 EAST 6600 SOUTH, SUITE ,01 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 34121 (801) 262-3388 23nrf(a)freeandassocia\es.cOIll Gary R. Free pg.. 3 Courses - continued o .A•• natom)' of an Acquisition !II Appraisal and Real Estate Issues (I) Health Care Industry Trends & Real Estate (I Specialized Appraisal Issues ~ Special~:PulJ)ose Propeliies: TIle Challenge of Real Estate Appraisal in Limited Markets III Successful Real Estate Investing II> Eminent Domain: New Tools and Strategies for Public Projects in Utah (jI Business Practice & Ethics Q Eminent Domain Update '" Various seminars, symposiums and demonstration report writing cUnics " USP AP at regular intervals COURT TESTIMONY (P ARTIAL LIST) • Sandy City vs, Sneider Third District Court • FDIC vs. T & J Ranches TIllid District Court • A.rnericall Residential vs. Terry Diehl U.S. Bankruptcy Court • \l\ihitlock and Nelson vs. Provo City Fourih District COUIi • BullJey & Christensen vs. \¥ilson Fourth District Court • Hunter VS. Colorado Casualty 11J.ird Distdct COU11 • Provo City vs, Jol111son Fourth District OOUli • Amoco Pipeline Co. vs. Verl C. Thalman Trust Second District Court • Taft vs. Taft Third Distric! COlift • Town of Cedar Hills vs. Robelt Schow Fourth District Court • \Veber Basin \Vatef Conservancy vs, Second District Court 1110mley Investment (NPS) • Ivory vs, Ivory 111ird District Court (SulUmit County) • Red Hawk Ranch vs. Greyhawk Third District Court (Summit County) • Kem River Gas TransmissiO'll Co. vs. U. s. District Court .MS-Meadow, LLC, et.1. (Utah) • Denton Jo1mB vs. Washakie Ranches First District Court (Box Elder County) Brighton Corp. vs. Coats Third District Court • Bralite Holdings vs. Centennial Plaza Square Deposition • Salt Lake COlllJty vs, \'1./estem Dai.rymen Deposition • Salt Lake City vs. City of Norih Sa.lt Lake Deposition , Bank of America vs. Barton Deposition 1100 EAST 6600 SOUTH, SUITE 201 SALT LAKE CITY. UT 84121 (SOl) 262-3388 ga:yf@free~mdassociates,com ADDENDUM State of Utah Depaliment of Commerce GAR Y R. HERBER.T OFFICE OF THE PROPERTY RIGHTS OMBUDSMAN Govel'llor GRBG BELL Li~lIlenQnl Governor January 20, 2010 Gary R. Free, MAl, SRA Free & Associates, Inc. 1100 East 6600 South, Ste 201 SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84121 RE: APPRAISAL: THE LAST HOLDOUT, L,L,C. PROPERTY ADDRESS: APPROX 6001 WEST 10901 SOUTH, SOUTH JORDAN, VTAll Dear Mr. Free: This letter is to cQnfinn to you that as mediator in a dispute over valuation of the above property between the property owner and the Utah Department of Transportation, I have determined that an additional appraisal is reasonably necessary to resolve a dispute over the amOlll1t of just compensation. The property owner has recommended that your appraisal fum, Free & Associates, Inc., provide this appraisal, and on behalf of the Office of the Property Rights Ombudsman, I have agreed to engage your services to complete the appraisal in response to that recommendation. Based on our previous discussion, I understand that an estimated fee for a thorough evaluation of the property is $4,400.00. You also indicated that if appointed, your finn would be able to rerum the appraisal to us within three (3) weeks from the date of appointment. Please provide billing directly to Dian McGuire, Utah Depatiment of Transportation, Right of Way Division, 4501 South 2700 West, Salt Lake City, Utah, 84119. Please be sure to confirm that arrangements for payment have been made to your satisfaction, as I bave no independent authority to bind the Office of the Property Rights Ombudsman or the Utah State Depar1rnent of Commerce to pay for your services. Nevertheless, please keep in mind that this appraisal is commissioned by the Office of the Property Rights Ombudsman, and this Office is your client with respect to this appraisal. Please take great care to follow all appUcable appraisal laws and standards, and provide an unbiased appraisal af the property's fatr market value. Please do n,ot use any previous appraisals an the property to assist you in preparing your appraisal. Please appraise the property at its value as of date of inspection. The property 160 EElSl30D South. Box 146702, Sail Lake cay, UT 84114-6701' telephone (801) 530-6391 • fac~jmjle (801) 530-6338 • 11'ww,com/7lem,lllllh.gol' Gary R. Free JaJ1liary 20, 2010 Page 2 of2 owner is The Last Holdout, L.L.C. Please contact Mr. Daniel W. Anderson to arrange to inspect the propelty. He may be contacted at 801-451-4804. Ifyou need additional plan or site information from UDOT, please contact Wayne Larsen, at 801-907-5130. As with any appraisal for eminent domain, state law requires that the appraiser contact the property owner and offer the owner or a designated representative the opportunity to accompany the appraiser dming your inspection of the property. When the appraisals are done, you need not show them to me first. Please send a haJ'd copy of the appraisal to me at the address on ti1is letterhead, and another copy to the parties listed below: Dian McGuire Daniel W. Anderson Utah Department of Transportation Sundown Development, L.L.C. Right of Way Division 1466 North Highway 89, Suite 240 4501 South 2700 West Farmington, Utah 84025 Salt Lake City, Utah 84119 Please also send a copy of the appraisal to UDOT in PDF format. Yom work will include the production of a narrative report on the value of the property. I have attached a copy of the appraisal expectations as outlined for appraisers who help with valuation for our Office. We appreciate your help with this matter and look forward to receiving the infonnation you will provide. If you have other questions, please feel free to contact me, Sincerely, ey Office of ti1e Property Rights Ombudsman cc. The Last Holdout, L.L.C. Dian McGuire, UDOT (via Interoffice mail) -Encl: Second Appraisal Expectations Expectations - Second Appraisals for Property Owners: The following expectations apply to appraisals ordered by the Office of the Property Rights Ombudsman under Utah Code 78B-9-522. If the appraiser is not in agreement with these expectations, or they are unclear, he or she should contact the Office prior to proceeding with any services for which compensation is expected, The Office will finalize such questions with the appraiser and consult 'With the governrner:t entity involved if appropriate. 1. The appraiser should be a State Certified General Appraiser or State Certified Residential Appraiser, depending on what type of appraisal that needs to be done. [fthe property owner prefers having the appraisal completed by someone with a MAl designation, that preference is normally honored .. 2. The appraiser must estimate the fair market value of the subject property a~ of the date of the taldng of the property! or as of a current date if the taking has not yet occun·ed. 3. [f the subject is a partial taking of a larger tract: A. The appraiser will address the effect to the remaining tract 9fthe taking oftl1e subject property and oftlle construction of the project as proposed by tbe agency. B. If it is concluded that the taking and the construction of the project will have no effect the appraiser will state the reasons for the reaching that cone1u.sion. C. If the apprais,er concludes that the value of the remaining tract will be reduced as a result of the taking of the subject property and the construction of the project as proposed by the agency (severance or proximity damages) the appraiser will state the reasons for rus/her opinions. D. The appraiser must substantiate a before and after value of the subject property. 4, The appraiser must prepare a narrative report and justify his/her conclusiQns. 5. In preparing and completing the appraisa:, the appraiser shall adhere to thc standards and requirements of Utah Code Annotated 61~2b-27. If the appraisal is for property involved in a UDOT or federally funded project, modifications of those standards and requirements may be required to comply with 49 CFR 24. 103. 812009 WHEN RECORDED, MAIL TO: Utah Department ofTrnnsportation Right-of-Way, Fourth Floor Box 148420 Sl1lt LElke City, Utah 84114-8420 Warnmty Deed (Controlled Access) (Limited Liability Company) Salt Lake County Parcel No. 0182:136:A Project No. MP-0182(6) Affecting Tax ID. No. 26-14-300-004 The Last Holdout, L.L.C., a Limited Liability Company of the State of Utah, Grantor, hereby CONVEY AND WARRANT to the UTAH DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, at 4501 South 2700 West, Salt Lake City, Utah 84118, Grantee, for the sum of Dollars, and other good and valuable considerations, the following described parcel of land in Salt Lake County, State of Utah, to-wit: A parcel of land in fee for a highway known as Project No. MP-0182(6), being part of an entire tract. of property, situate in the SEY Beginning at a point in the southerly boundary line of said entire tract, which point is 1125.11 ft. N. 89'41 '41" W. along the section line from the Southeast corner of said Section 14, which point is 192.24 ft. radially distant northeasterly from the Mountain View Corridor Right of Way Control Line, of said project, opposite approximate Engineer Station 1257+62.12, which point is also the southwest corner of the tract of land deeded to Utah Power & Light Company (UP&L.I recorded as Entry No. 3625048 in Book 5315 at page 486 in the Salt Lake County Recorders Office, State of Utah; and running thence N. 89'4'1'41" W. 497.54 ft. alol1g said southerly boundary line to a point 246.00 ft, radially distant southwesterly from said control line opposite approximate Engineer Station 1259+96.70; and running thence Northwesterly 1,008.72 ft. along the arc of a Continued on Page 2 UMITED LIABILITY COMPANY RW-24LL (Modified 7-13-09) Modified with t~ew Access Conlrollanguage for a Frorllage Road Righi of Way System Page 2 of 3 Parcel No: 0182:136:A Project No: MP-0182(6) 5,346.00 ft. radius curve to the right, having a radius of (Note: Chord to said curve bears N. 21'15'37" W. for a distance of 1,007.22 ft.); thence N. 7'47'24" W. 352.94 ft.; thence N. 12'39'10" W. 30.40 ft. to a point 208.39 ft. radially distant southwesterly from said control line opposite approximate Engineer Station 1273+24.21, which point is also all the northerly boundary line of said entire tract; thence S. 89'31'55" E. 275.20 ft. along said northerly boundary line to the northwest corner said tract of land deeded to UP&L; thence along said westerly line the following two (2) courses 1) S. 0'17'19" W. 467.73 ft.; 2) thence S. 37'08'41" E. 1,067.23 ft. to the point of beginning as shown on the official rnap of said project on file in the office of the Utah Departrnent of Transportation. The above described percel of land contains 415,513 square feet in area or 9.539 acres, more or less. Continued on Page 3 LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANy RW-24LL (Modified 7-13-09) Modified with New Access Conlrollanguage for a Frontage Road Right of Way System Page 3 of 3 Parcel No: 0182:136:A Project No: MP-0182(6) To enable the Utah Department of Transportation to construct and maintain a public highway as a freeway, as contemplated by Title 72, Chapter 6, Section 117, Utah Code Annotated, as amended, the limited access highway facility that will comprise of frontage roads and adjacent lands between ·the frontage roads for a future limited access highway, the Owners of said entire tract of property hereby release and relinquish to the Utah Department of Transportation any and all rights of ingress and egress from Owner's remaining property adjacent to the land, which consists of the limited access highway facility, conveyed to the Utah Department of Transportation. (Note: Engineer Stations used in the above document are based on the Mountain View Corridor Right of Way Control line for highway Project No. MP-0182(6)) EXCEPTING and reserving to said Owners, their successors or assigns, the right of access for the purpose of a dedicated city street to said frontage roadway known as MP-0182 at a point directly opposite southwesterly from Engineer Station 1273+13; and PROVIDED however, that the access to and from the frontage roads shall only connect to the limited access highway at interchange points that the highway authority establishes. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said _---:--;--;--,;-___---;::_---:;--_-:-~ has caused this instrument to be executed by its proper officers thereunto duly authorized, this ___ day of ______, A.D. 20 _. STATE OF ) The Last Holdout, L. L. C. ) ss. COUNTY OF ) By ______~~ ___ Manager . On the date first above written personally appeared before me, -c------;-:=---;--.,--;-;-:-;---' who, being by me duly sworn, says that _he_ is the manager of Tile Last Holdout L.L.C., a limited Liability Company, and tllat the within and foregoing instrument was signed in behalf of said company by authority of its Article of Organization, and said acknowledged to me that said company executed the same. WITNESS my hand and official stamp the date in this certificate first above written: Notary Public Prepared by HDR, Inc. (PJW) LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY RW-24LL (Modified 7-13-09) REVISED 9/29109 Modmed with New Access Control language for a Frontage Road Right alWay System WHEN RECORDED, MAlL TO; Utah Department of Transportation Rignt-of-W~y, Fourth Floor Box 148420 Sal! Lake Cit)', Utab B4114-8420 Warranty Deed (Controlled Access) (Limited Liability Company) Salt Lake County Parcel No. 0182: 136:2A Project No. MP-0182(6) Affecting Tax 10. No. 26-14-300-004 The Last Holdout L.L.C., a Limited Liab;lity Company of the State of Utah, Grantor, hereby CONVEY AND WARRANT to the UTAH DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, at 4501 South 2700 West, Salt Lake City, Utah 84119, GrantA8, for the sum of Dollars, and other good and valuable considerations, the following described parcel of land in Salt Lake County, State of Utah, to-wit: A parcel of land in fee for a highway known as Project No. MP-0182(6), being part of an entire tract of property, situate in the SEYiSEYi of Section 14, T. 3 S., R. 2 W., S.L.B. & M. The boundaries of said parcel of land are described as follows: Beginning at a point 454.56 ft. radially distant northeasterly from the Mountain View Corridor Rigilt of Way Control Line, of said project, opposite approximate Engineer Station 1258+41.28, whicil point is 785.04 ft. N. 89'41'41" W. to the southeast corner of the tract of land deeded to Utah Power & Light Company (UP&L) recorded as Entry No. 1931034 in Book 2071 at page 357 in the Salt Lake County Recorders Office, State of Utah, and 242.34 ft. N. 37'04'40" W. along said tract of land, from the Southeast corner of said Section 14; and running thence N. 37'04'40" W. 151.59 ft. continuing along said Continued on Page 2 LIMITED LlABIUD COMPANY RW-24LL (Modified 7-13-09) lv10difred wllh New Access Control language for a Frontage Road Rigllt afWay System Page 2 of 3 Parcel No: 0182:136:2A Project No: MP-0182(6) tract of land to a point 429.32 ft. radially distant northeasterly from said control line opposite approximate Engineer Station 1260+04.94; thence N. 57"58'15" E. 185.56 ft.; thence S. 36"26'39" E. 151.04 ft.; thence S. 57"50'41" W. 183.85 ft. to the point of beginning as shown on the official map of said project on file in the office of the Utah Department of Transportation. The above described parcel of land contains 27,855 square feet in area or 0.639 acre l more or less. -_ ... _...... _- .-.._-_ .... _-_._._-- Continued on Page 3 LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY RW-24LL (Modified 7-13.0g) Modified with New Access Conlrollanguage for a Frontage Road Right of Way System Page 3 of 3 Parcel No: 0182:136:2A Project No: MP-0182(6) To enable the Utah Department of Transportation to construct and maintain a public highway as a freeway, as contemplated by Title 72, Chapter 6, Section 117, Utah Code Annotated, as amended, the limited access highway facility that will comprise of frontage roads and adjacent lands between the frontage roads for a future limited access highway, the Owners of said entire tract of property hereby release and relinquish to the Utah Department of Transportation any and all rights of ingress and egress from Owner's remaining property adjacent to the land, which consists of the limited access highway facility, conveyed to the Utah Department of Transportation. (Note: Engineer Stations used in the above document are based on the Mountain View Corridor Right of Way Control Line for highway Project No. MP-0182(6)) IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said ______has caused this instrument to be executed by its proper officers thereunto duly authorized, this ___ day of , A.D. 20 _. STATE OF The Last Holdout. L.L.C. ) ss. Limited Liability Company COUNTY OF By ______Manager On the date first above written personally appeared before me, ______, who, being by me duly sworn, says that _he_ is the of The Last Holdout. L.LC. , a corporation of the state of , and that the within and foregoing instrument was signed in behalf of said corporation by authority of , and said acknowledged to me that said corporation executed the same. WITNESS my hand and official stamp the date in this certificate first above written: Notary Public Prepared by HDR, Inc. (PJW) LIMITED L1ABILln' COIvIPAI>lY RW-24lL (Modified 7-13-09) REVISED 9/29/09 Modified with New Access Controllallguage for a FrontagE! Roed Righi of Way System WHEN RECORDED, MAIL TO: Utah Department ofTransportalion Right-of-Way, Fourth Floor Box 148420 Salt Lake City, Utah 84114-8420 WaJrnlllffity Deed (Controlled Access) (Limited Liability Company) Salt Lake County Parcel No. 0182:136:3A Project No. MPc0182(6) Affecting Tax 10. No. 26-14-300-004 The Last Holdout, L.L.C., a Limited Liability Company of the S.tate of Utah, Grantor, hereby CONVEY AND WARRANT to the UTAH DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, at 4501 South 2700 West, Salt Lake City, Utah 84119, Grantee, for the sum of Dollars, and other good and valuable considerations, the following described parcel of land in Salt Lake County, State of Utah, to-wit: A parcel of land in fee for a highway known as Projec! No. MP-0182(6), being part of an entire tract of property, situate in the SWXSEX of Section 14, T. 3 S., R. 2 W., S.L.B. & M. The boundaries of said parcel of land are described as follows: Beginning at a point 240.00 ft. radially distant northeasterly from the Mountain View Corridor Right of Way Control Line, of said project, opposite approximate Engineer Station 1267+70.19, which point is 785.04 ft. N. 89°41'41" W. along the southerly line of said Section 14, to the southeast corner of the tract of land deeded to Utah Power & Light Company (UP&L) recorded as Entry No. 1931034 in Book 2071 at page 357 in the Salt Lake County Recorders Office, State of Utah, and 1132.82 ft. N. 37'04'40" W. from the Southeast Corner of said Section 14; and running thence along said pal'cel the following two (2) courses 1) N. 37"04'40" W. 67.48 ft.; 2) thence N. 0°21'13" E. 76.29 ft. Continued on Page 2 LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY RW·24LL (Modined 7-13-09) Modified with New Access Control language (Dr a Frontage Road Right of Way System Page 2 of 3 Parcel No: 0182:136:3A Project No: MP-0182(6) to a point 240.00 ft. radially distant northeasterly from said control line opposite approximate Engineer Station 1269+13.12; thence Southeasterly 136.21 ft. along the arc of a 4,860.00 ft. radius curve to the left (Note: Chord to said curve bears S. 17".10'23" E. for a distance of 136.20 "t.) to the point of beginning as shown on the official map of said project on file in the office of the Utah Department of Transportation. The above described parcel of land contains 1,521 square feet in area or 0.035 acre, more or less. Continued on Page 3 LIMITED L1ABIUTY COMPANY RW-24LL (Modified 7-13-09) Modlnsd with New AC(;E1SS Conlrollangusge for a Frontage Road RighI of Way System Page 3 of 3 Parcel No: 0182: 136:3A Project No: MP-0182(6) To enable the Utah Department of Transportation to construct and maintain a public highway as a freeway, as contemplated by Title 72, Chapter 6, Section 117, Utah Code Annotated, as amended, the limited access highway facility that will comprise of frontage roads and adjacent lands between the frontage roads for a future limited access highway, the Owners of said entire tract of property hereby release and relinquish to the Utah Department of Transportation any and all rights of ingress and egress from Owner's remaining property adjacent to the land, which consists of the limited access highway facility, conveyed to the Utah Department of Transportation. (Note: Engineer Stations used in the above document are based on the Mountain View Corridor Right of Way Control Line for highway Project No. MP-0182(6)) IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said ______~ has caused this instrument to be executed by its proper officers thereunto duly authorized, this ___ day of ,A.D. 20 _. STATE OF The Last Holdout L.L.C. ) ss. Limited Liability Company COUNTY OF By ______Manager On the date first above written personally appeared before me, ------,--:-cc' who, baing by me duly sworn, says that _he_ is the of The Last Holdout L.L.C. , a corporation of the state of , and that the within and foregoing instrunent was signed in behalf of said corporation by authority of , and said acknowledged to me that said corporation executed the same. WITNESS my hand and offic'ial stamp the date in this certificate first above written: Notary Public Prepared by HDR, Inc. (PJW) LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY RW-24LL (Modified 7.13-09) REVIS ED 10101109 Modifled wilh New Access C(JntrollanguBge for a Frontage Road Right of Way System WHEN RECORDED, MAlL TO; Utah DepEJrtmen! of Trans po nation Right-of-Way, Fourth Floor Box 148420 Salt Lake City, Utnh 84114·8420 Warranty Deed (Controlled Access) (Limited Liability Company) Salt Lake County Parcel No, 0182:136:4A Project No, MP-0182(6) Affecting Tax 10, No, 26-14-300-004 The Last Holdout. L,L,C" a Limited Liability CDmpany Df the State of Utah, Grantor, hereby CONVEY AND WARRANT tD the UTAH DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, at 4501 South 2700 West, Salt Lake City, Utah 8411 g, Grantee, fDr the sum of Dollars, and other gODd and valuable considerations, the following described parcel of land in Salt Lake County, State of Utah, to-wit: A parcel of land in fee for utility relocation incident to the construction of a highway known as Project No, MP-0182(6), being part of an entire tract of property, situate in the SEY Beginning at a point 484,86 ft, radially distant northeasterly from the Mountain View Corridor Right of Way Control Line, of said prDject, Dpposite approximate Engineer StatiDn 1255+76.42, which point is also the sDutheast corner of the tract Df land deeded tD Utah PDwer & Ught Company (UP&L) recDrded as Entry No, 1931034 in Book 2071 at page 357 in the Salt Lake CDunty Recorder's Office, State of Utah, said point is also 785,04 ft, N, 89"41'41" W along the southerly line Df said Section 14, from the Southeast Corner of said Section 14; and running thence N, 37"04'40" W, 242,34 ft, along the easterly boundary line of said tract of land to a point 454,56 ft. radially distant northeasterly from said control line, Dpposite approximate Engineer Station 1258+41,28; thence N. 57"50'41" E, 109,59 ft.; thence S. 24'42'52" E. 277.41 ft. tD the southerly line of said Section 14; thence N, 89'41'41" W. 62,66 ft, along said southerly line to the point Continued on Page 2 LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY RW"24LL (Modified 7-13-09) Modified with New Access Control language for a Frontage Road Rigl1t of Way System Page 2 of 2 Parcel No: 0182:136:4A Project No: MP-0182(6) of beginning as shown on the official map of said project on file in the office of the Utah Department of Transportation. The above described parcel of land contains 21,106 square feet in area or 0.485 acre, more or less. To enable the Utah Department of Transportation to construct and maintain a public highway as a freeway, as contemplated by Title 72, Chapter 6, Section 117, Utah Code Annotated, as amended, the limited access highway facility that will comprise of frontage roads and adjacent lands between the frontage roads for a future limited access highway, the Owners of said entire tract of property hereby release and relinquish to the Utah Department of Transportation any and all rights of ingress and egress from Owner's remaining property adjacent to the land, which consists of the limited access highway facility, conveyed to the Utah Department of Transportation. (Note: Engineer Stations used in the above document are based on the Mountain View Corridor Right of Way Control Line for highway Project No. MP-0182(6)) IN WITN ESS WHEREOF, said ---c-----c--;--:c-----:;:---,-,------,---;-; has caused this instrument to be executed by its proper officers thereunto duly authorized, this ___ day of ______, A.D. 20 _. STATE OF ) The Last Holdout, L.L.C. ) ss. Limited Liability Company COUNTY OF ) By ______~--- Manager On the date first above written personally appeared before me, c------o-;;cc' who, being by me duly sworn, says that _he_ is the of The Last Holdout, L.L.C. , a corporation of the state of , and that the within and foregoing instrument was signed in behalf of said corporation by authority of , and said acknowledged to me that said corporation executed the sanie. WITNESS my hand and official stamp the date in this certificate first above written: Notary Public Prepared by HDR, Inc. (PJWI LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY RW-24LL (Modified 7"13.09) REVISED 9/29/09 Modified with New Access Control langLiage (or a FrontagB Road Righi of Way System "''HEN RECORDED, MAlL TO; Utah Department ofTransportntion Righi-or-Way, Fourth Floor Box 148420 Salt Lake City, Utah 84114-1\420 Warranty Deed (Controlled Access) (Limited liability Company) Salt Lake County Parcel No, 0182: 136:5A Project No. MP-0182(6) Affecting Tax ID, No, 26-14-300-004 The Last Holdout, L,L.C., a Limited Liability Company of the State of Utah, Grantor, hereby CONVEY AND WARRANT to the UTAH DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, at 4501 South 2700 West, Salt Lake City, Utah 84119, Grantee, for the sum of Dollars, and other good and valuable considerations, the following described parcel of land in Salt Lake County, State of Utah, to-wit: A parcel of land in fee for utility relocaton incident to tile construction of a highway known as Project No, MP-0182(6), being part of an entire tract of property, situate in the SEY-iSEY-i and the SWY-iSEY-i of Section 14, T. 3 S., R, 2 W., S,L,B, & M, The boundaries of said parcel of land are described as follows: Beginning at a point 429,32 ft. radially distant northeasterly from the Mountain View Corridor Right of Way Control Line, of said project, opposite approximate Engineer Station 1260+04,94, which point is 785.04 ft. N. 89°41 '41" W, to the southeast corner of the tract of land deeded to Utah Power & Light Company (UP&L) recorded as Entry No, 1931034 in Book 2071 at page 357 in the Salt Lake County Recorder's Office, State of Utah, and 393.93 ft. N, 3T04'40" W. along said tract of land, from the Southeast corner of said Section 14; and running thence N. 3T04'40" W, 738.89 ft, along said tract of Continued on Page 2 UMITED UABIUTY COMPANY RW-24LL (Modified 7-13-09) Modi~ed with New AGGess Conlrollanguage for a Frontage Rosd Right of Way System Page 2 of 3 Parcel No: 0182:136:5A Project No: MP-0182(6) land, to a point 240.00 ft. radially distant northeasterly from said control line opposite approximate Engineer Station 1267+70.19; thence Northwesterly 136.21 ft. along the arc of a 4,860.00 ft. radius curve to the right (Note: Chord to said curve bears N. 17'10'23" W. for a distance of 136.20ft.) to a point 240.00 ft. radially distant northeasterly from said control line' opposite approximate Engineer Station 1269+13.12, which point is also on said tract of land; thence N. 00'21'13" E. 284.26 ft. along said tract of land to the northerly boundary line of said entire tract; thence S. 89'31 '00" E. 232.80 ft. along said northerly boundary line; thence Southeasterly 1,006.26 ft along the arc of a 4,560.00 ft. radius curve to the left (Note: Chord to said' curve bears S. 20'07'07" E. for a distance of 1,004.22 ft.); thence S. 57'58'15" W. 111.20 ft. to the point of beginning as shown on the official map of said project on file in the office of the Utah Department of Transportation. The above described parcel of land contains 239,266 square feet in area or 5.493 acres, more or less. Continued on Page 3 LlIv\ITED LIABILITY COMPANY RW-24LL (Modified 7-13-09) Modified with New ACCBSS Conlrollenguage ror a Frontage Road Righi of Way System Page 3 of 3 Parcel No: 0182:136:5A Project I~o: MP-0182(6) To enable the Utah Department of Transportat'ion to construct and maintain a public highway as a freeway, as contemplated by Title 72, Chapter 6, Section 117, Utah Code Annotated, as amended, the limited access highway facility that will comprise of frontage roads and adjacent lands between the frontage roads for a future limited access highway, the Owners of said entire tract of property hereby release and relinquish to the Utah Department of Transportation any and all rights of ingress and egress from Owner's remaining property adjacent to the land, which consists of the limited access highway facility, conveyed to the Utah Department of Transportation. (Note: Engineer Stations used in the above document are based on the Mountain View Corridor Right of Way Control Line for highway Project No. MP-0182(6)) IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said ______has caused this instrument to be executed by its proper officers thereunto duly authorized, this ___ day of , A.D. 20 _. STATE OF The Last Holdout, L.L.C. ) ss. Limited Liability Company COUNTY OF 8y ______Manager On the date first above written personally appeared before me, ______" who, being by me duly sworn, says that _he_ is the of The Last Holdout, L.L.C. , a corporation of the state of , and that the within and foregoing instrument was signed in behalf of said corporation by authority of , and said acknowledged to me that said corporation executed the same. WITNESS my hand and official stamp the date in this certificate first above written: Notary Public Prepared by HDR, Inc, (PJW) LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY RW·24LL (Modified 7-13-09) REVISED 9129109 Modified with l>Jew Access Control language for a Frontage Road Right of Way System WHEN RECORDED, MAIL TO: Utah Depm1mcnl of Transportation Righl-of-Wny, Fourth Floor Box 148420 Salt Lake City, Utah 84114~8420 Easemellt (Limited Liability Company) Salt Lake County Parcel No. 0182:136:E Project No. MP-0182(6) Affecting Tax ID. No. 26-14-300-004 The Last Holdout. L.L.C., a Limited Liability Company of the State of Utah, Grantor, hereby GRANT AND CONVEY to the UTAH DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, at 4501 South 2700 West, Salt Lake City, Utah 84119, Grantee, for the sum of ______Dollars, a temporary easement, upon part of an entire tract of property, in the SW)l,iSE)I,i of Section 14, T. 3 S., R. 2 W., S.L.B. & M., in Salt Lake County, Utah, for the purpose of constructing thereon appurtenant parts incident to the construction of a highway known as Project No. MP-0182(6). This easement shall commence upon the beginning of actual construction on the property and shall continue only until project construction on the property is complete, or for three years, whichever first occurs. The easement shall be non-exclusive such that the Grantor may use the property at any time in a manner which does not interfere with constructicn activities. The boundaries of said parcel of land are described as follows: Beginning at a point 1025.20 ft. S. 89'41'41" E. along the section line from the South Quarter corner of said Section 14, said point is 246.00 ft. perpendicularly distant southwesterly from the Mountain View Corridor Right of Way Control Line opposite approximate Engineer Station 1259+96.70; and running thence N. 89°41'41" W. 11.22 ft. along said section line; thence Northwesterly 1,006.22 ft. along the arc of a 5,356.00 ft. Radius curve to the right (Note: Chord to said curve bears N. 21°13'45" W. for a distance of 1,004.74 ft.); thence N. 7°47'24"W. 353.22 It.; thence N. 12°39'10" W. 32.31 ft.; thence S. 89°31'55" E. 10.27 ft.; thence S.12°39'10" E. 30AOft.; thence Continued on Page 2 LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY RW·09LL (10-05-9~) Page 2 of 2 Parcel 1~0:0182:136:E Project No: MP-182(6) S. 7'47'24" E. 352.94 ft.; thence Southeasterly 1,008.72 ft. along the arc of a curve to the left, having a radius of 5,346.00 ft. (Note: Chord to said curve bears S. 21'15'37" E. for a distance of 1,007.22 ft.) to the point of beginning. The above described part of an entire tract contains 13,921 square feet in area or 0.320 acre, more or less. Note: Engineer Stations used in the above description are based on the Right of Way Control line for said Project. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said _~~~~_~~~~_~~~_ has caused this instrument to be executed by its proper officers thereunto duly authorized, this ___ day of , A.D. 20 ~. STATE OF The Last Holdout. L.L.C. ) ss. COUNTY OF ) By ______~ __ Manager On the date first above written personally appeared before me, ______, who, being by me duly sworn, says that _he_ is the manager of The Last Holdout, L.L.C., a Limited Liability Cornpany, and that the within and foregoing instrument was signed in behalf of said company by authority of its Article of Organization, and said ______acknowledged to me that said company executed the same. WITNESS my hand and official stamp the date in this certificate first above written: Notary Public Prepared by HDR, Inc. (PJW) LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY RW-09LL (10-05.94) REVISED 9/24/09