HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 2001 1017 CC REG ITEM 10EITEM /0- t '
CITV aDFF'1400RPARK, CALIFORNU
of 10-11- a OCR 1
AC x p:nWoL-Zr, I m" ReiauI
E Y,-,.Dew. d 1 ment- Ad liac.
BY: _
MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA REPORT
TO: Honorable City Council
FROM: Deborah S. Traffenstedt, ATOM /City Clerk `-:D,.5
DATE: October 10, 2001 (CC Meeting of 10/17/01)
SUBJECT: Consider Appointment of an Ad Hoc Committee for
Zelman Retail Partners Development Agreement and
Related Entitlements (Moorpark Marketplace Project
Proposed for New Los Angeles Avenue and Miller
Parkway Site)
BACKGROUND
At the City Council's meeting on August 1, 2001, the Council
considered a presentation regarding alternative architectural themes
for a proposed retail /commercial center including Target and Kohl
department stores at the southwest quadrant of New Los Angeles
Avenue and Highway 23. The developer for that project, Zelman Retail
Partners, has filed a Commercial Planned Development (CPD)
application for a commercial center totaling approximately 343,000
square feet. At this time, the developer has identified that the
Moorpark Marketplace could include Kohl's, Linens n' Things,
Michael's, Marshalls, and Target.
The applicant has requested financial assistance for the Moorpark
Marketplace, requiring a Development Agreement. Staff is requesting
that the City Council appoint two Councilmembers to an Ad Hoc
Committee for the Zelman Retail Partners Development Agreement and
related entitlements.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Appoint two Councilmembers to an Ad Hoc Committee.
L"0 G, 0 iS it
4' 4t, �
A � . . . . . . . . . .
00
.............
4L
AF�
.v OX
At�
•
qb
REQUEST FOR FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE
MOORPARK MARKETPLACE
TABLE OF CONTENTS
COVER LETTER
Section I Project Description
Section II Project Site Plans
• First Site Plan
• Revised Site Plan
Section III Conceptual Building Elevations
Section IV Summary of Benefits
Section V Critical Milestone Completion Dates
Section VI Economic Feasibility Analysis
• Assumptions & Limiting Conditions
• Projected Governmental & Utility Fees
• Development Proforma
• Conclusions
SECTION VII Requested Financial Assistance
• Necessary Assistance
• Financial Assistance Programs
SECTION Vlll APPENDIX - PROJECT BENEFITS
• Job Creation
• Additional Property Taxes
• Sales Tax Revenues
THE ZELMAN COMPANIES
October 5, 2001
Mr. Steve Kueny
City Manager
CITY OF MOORPARK
799 Moorpark Avenue
Moorpark, CA 93021
Re: Requested Financial Assistance
Moorpark Marketplace
SEC New Los Angeles Avenue & Miller Parkway
Moorpark, California
Dear Steve:
We understand the need to develop a shopping center at this gateway to the City
of Moorpark which is a credit to the City from a design standpoint, and features
proven, financially stable retailers and restaurants who are more likely to be part of
the community for many years.
As you know, we have been working closely with the City of Moorpark for several
months, in an effort to design Moorpark Marketplace in a manner which satisfies
the City's objectives, and is acceptable to the key retailers who are the driving
force and foundation of our tenant procurement program.
During this period of time, we're pleased to report that Kohl's, Michael's, and
Marshalls have conditionally approved the site (subject to their approval of the final
site plan, sign program, building elevations and materials, governmental and utility
fees, the City's conditions of approval, and a definite March 2003 opening date).
Target will present this opportunity to committee as soon as the same criteria can
be finalized and costed out. We expect Linens n' Things to obtain committee
approval this month.
Several sitdown restaurants and beverage and food establishments have
expressed interest in Moorpark Marketplace, including Olive Garden, Coco's,
IHOP, Soup Plantation, Jack in the Box, Applebees, Del Taco, Fresh Choice,
Coffee Bean & Tea, and Baja Fresh.
L ._ :�-�� r ... . O'P� �.� ,� ZLI w` -tip I^;. l%:,� 3i/�I_ r%,4r�1 :F.i -..� 'NC t.� � E "A;L
Steve Kueny
October 5, 2001
Page 2 of 2
In addition to the necessity to confirm our ability to open Moorpark Marketplace no
later than March 2003 in order to retain our major tenant commitments, the
threshold issue at this point is whether or not the project is economically feasible.
Our financing sources indicate that today's underwriting criteria require a return on
investment of 12% (Net Operating Income divided by Total Project Cost).
The enclosed Development Proforma reflects a return on investment of 10.86 %.
Since an increase in rents is highly unlikely, a cost reduction of $1,963,000 is
necessary in order to achieve a 12% return. Had we been able to avoid
elimination of the gas station /car wash (ground rent: $125,000 per year) in order
to revise the Site Plan, our return would be 11.41%, and a cost reduction of
$953,000 would be necessary to generate a 12% return.
With the foregoing in mind, we are submitting this Request for Financial
Assistance to the City of Moorpark, with the hope that a mutually acceptable
financial assistance program will facilitate the timely development of Moorpark
Marketplace.
After you have reviewed the enclosed materials, we would appreciate the
opportunity to discuss this matter with you in more detail.
Thank you for your consideration.
Very truly yours,
ZELMAN RETAIL PARTNERS, INC.
Ben Reiling
President
BR/rda/vc
cc: Robert D. Exel
Brett M. Foy
Paul T. Casey
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
MOORPARK MARKETPLACE
Moorpark Marketplace is a proposed first class, state -of -the -art community
shopping center anchored by financially stable, "best in category" national retailers,
complimented by other retailers providing quality goods and services, high quality
restaurants, and food and beverage establishments. In today's era of economic
uncertainty, it is more important than ever to select retailers with a strong national
presence, proven merchandising concepts and expertise, and substantial financial
strength.
The shopping center, which is located at the eastern gateway to the City, will be
designed with the importance of this location in mind. Design features will include
inviting and attractive public areas and amenities, safe and convenient ingress and
egress, generous amounts of landscaping, a well designed integrated sign
program, and convenient onsite parking exceeding that required by the City of
Moorpark.
Location: At the southeast corner of New Los Angeles Avenue and Miller
Parkway, in the City of Moorpark.
Land Area: Approximately 29 gross acres (27.3 net acres)
Building Area: Approximately 347,138 square feet of retail stores (including
Target garden center), restaurants, and food and beverage
establishments.
Anchor Retailers:
Target:
Kohl's:
Linens n' Things
Marshalls:
Michaels:
Page 1 of 2
135,800 sq. ft (incl. garden center)
86,584 sq. ft.
33,000 sq. ft.
30,000 sq. ft.
25,492 sq. ft.
Potential Co- Tenants:
Retailers:
Restaurants:
Staples
Petco
Famous Footwear
Dress Barn
Applebee's
Border Grill
Carrows
Chili's
Coco's
Cozymel's
Elephant Bar
Fresh Choice
Fuddruckers
IHOP
Landry's Seafood
Food & Beverages:
Lucille's Barbeque
Old Spagetti Factory
Olive Garden
On the Border
Red Lobster
Red Robin
Salt Creek Grill
Stuart Andersons
Soup Plantation
TGI Fridays
Baja Fresh
In & Out Burgers
Starbucks
Coffee Bean & Tea
La Salsa
Papa John's Pizza
Rubios
Jamba Juice
Great Steak & Potato
Panda Express
Del Taco
Jack in the Box
Page 2 of 2
PROJECT SITE PLANS
o FIRST SITE PLAN
• REVISED SITE PLAN
1
1
l
1'
11
t
f;
1
SUMMARY
NET LAND AREA
BUILDING AREA ' 1189,188 SF (APRO X 273
' 338,338
AC)
LAND /BUILDING SF•
PARKING ATIO .25/p
NG REQUIRED ( �85�)•
cm P
'' K�01EQUIREMENTS
PARKING PROVIDED X175 STALLS
PARKING RATIO 1490 STALLS
ReraL
STOCKROOM
OARDEN CENTER
_
•2e�W SF/30o SF. gaT STALLS
23.800 SF /Wo SF.
' NOT INCL 4.40/1°00•
INCL STOCK POOH CENTER OUTDOOR SEATING
RESTAURANT
P ARtCING
+a STALLS
4eoo SF /2000 SF. 6 STALLS
' 2t832 SFt= SF. 219 STALLS
OR P A710
REOUTAED
. ,176 STALLS
m p4 ff b0
c i 14 gpG INUM
LOS NCELES AVENUE �ruumra
------ _ � G
o
_ - -
°eR4A.06' t0'36
'
F.3t3500' ; i / 0.— SLOPE "W 1�PIT; r_ yam-- Boy 1Rf^A :+ i� i ANA
—' ` --- I '�'. _. •.; ` . - � 1�.w "e.�6�t -E _ � tt`' s,tYts•t7 _E1YT�GN
i ( '
c(�-. '�7�p, �� -i ' a "rig `_T-i 7'"A9 ;r=.i " (E � �'� EABEA�Nr /tit 0`°• 1zt!
i C —. C) N6t18 "as'E / 17
15 �a k� —' .. i ' I ' 1 ' L I���""'.f^tt -- C6ent info,
/ a° RES TAURANT 7 ` I I{ '� o R "'�c , IT I
+_ � _ � SF __ - f r rP � \
_ -= _ �, ' , �, , ; , , ,_ i Y g =}� 32 3b I i — _I '°, `; \ ZECMAN RETAIL
AR _ ': I �w --- 2 PARTNERS,
T E `� ! �; s� ,37 zs' ;,SiE. �m`� ' t _ _ ( , 1NC,
. a; -Jo.�. �' I I F I �� - � �
—� _3, F U'�ill!�ilj: RET;j, Los,,,`;,
z l AI
�36��'ta11 Fes= - ham. 33p p L I I !
S =� t s' f ,~ �`- .- •�,"',;E ,� r J j p SFI�` I
- — - _ � F���!�p7r 1 , , - _ � -��' • :mss: ���; - - -- - - _ 17: � If
AIEA
ULJ
+ _..
' � x�� �•:. is � N v
ADA PA)
' I - - _,,� , a� —' �I I 3115,319 SF I
I I I1r f Ix II„ E I m�ti y 4
1 I, GARDEN __ 8 i i 1 , I. �0�'{ • I I •'' aC
I'
8,800 SF:
2F- SQL -SP
00 SF
86584 SF Tg��ET (NCRJ LUDING hTOCKRpp M) J 3
`
v
J , * Q�
127000 SF RETAIL ,• ' +Iii I :, I f7'I 1i I i'i I 1 , �
1 I. "CL(OMG STOCKROOM, STOCKROOM 30000 SF $ ; : I I - I I I I j �'?'-�?� f 1 -
II, 16000 SF RETAIL { 'i�11' I
l L _ 00
J A
I
23,814 $F
c u :, 8 SF n*z
ow '
_ 2 54 s2 SF �r- ti l i: l l l`, f l - 1 �! l ✓ o .. r ac,
1a u• S I I I 1 1
A
p _ta ' STOCK I I @VISIOnS
* ~�_
aKiNAL - sa oti,p. }' ! "i°`4 7' _ - _ r0�^ "cap+' 5830 SF I T' S I +
\.OA PATH. *1 ` _ 07
Y a; wr .can +' 1 SHOPS
I I t D \� \ ,- l -1 -!_ '•-�-}'F• -i -r -_ ; i R +yt I 11 ij-" m;u'+tc ^tas>,.,, SF L_ ' I f �— LOIDI II
{•.. t_ �` �'-� -+cur ��s..r cowano. \ :1
�....• -Z `.` `80 NO g '.1 �'-�' + = �sa�+ii�_ J ": r I , "'"" 7p
LOT, I� Dra
b — M
+ b _ INDUSTRIAL =-- __- -_._ i win Info.
\ {'" -1• I ` `� '_ / AI I ' h" Dab I I I wSITE }� i ,' � � I � - I --•�I , � I 11 - I - � D�aa +gym
1w _`- - -- �=-•�, I I l ' I: , � L� ••I .a_..;. ;.I �--L -.
- - - --iI' ��,I ` , I'I� f �;- bran
PLAN sly, —wy T6,M, , "=
_ Fk Nov p�stT
SCALE: 1's; 5o' -0• I Job No.
98201 ?I
° So' 75.1°o• 150'
25 , SITE PLAN
-7�
REVISED SITE PLAN
MOORPARK MARKETPLACE
The enclosed Moorpark Marketplace Site Plan was created in response to specific
input and direction from the City of Moorpark, bearing in mind this high visibility
gateway location must provide visitors and residents with a positive introduction to
the City of Moorpark. Areas which were addressed and implemented provide a
much more people friendly, attractive, and interesting shopping and recreational
environment for the community to enjoy, while at the same time preserving the
"must have" functional qualities (i.e; safety, proper ingress and egress, sufficient
and convenient parking, store and sign visibility, efficient loading facilities, etc.) of a
well designed shopping center. Site Plan revisions include the following:
1. Elimination of the gas station /car wash, which was located at the main
entrance to Moorpark Marketplace on the first Site Plan.
2. Relocate the sit -down restaurant to a position adjacent to the main
entrance to Moorpark Marketplace.
3. Elimination of the long line of straight store fronts along the back property
line.
4. More opportunities exist for architectural relief in connection with building
store fronts, as a result of revised building placement.
5. Creation of a more interesting and inviting shopping environment, and a
place for people to congregate, through implementation of the following:
* Utilization of a "horseshoe" building configuration, rather than a
straight line configuration.
* Wider sidewalks, with certain areas designated for decorative
treatment and landscaping.
* Provide areas where amenities (i. e.; landscaping, hardscape,
fountains, attractive lighting, etc.) enhance gathering areas and
shopper transition areas.
6. Provide pedestrian access between Moorpark Marketplace and the
adjacent 33 acre Business Park proposed by Cypress Land Company.
1
r
I
SUMMARY
NET LAND AR=A
BUILDING AREA 1189,188 SF (APROX 27.3 AC)
LAND /BUILDING ' 333,792 28,
PARKING REQUIRED 10 125611, 1.160 S (28.S
PARKING PROVIDED • 1,160 STALLS
PARKING RATIO X522 STALLS
NOT IN„L ' 4a6 /1020•
INCL tTC)CXRO544. MER
/, ff
r,
.f
f
LL, \
y
NEW LDS NCELES AVENUE _
-�--- - -- -- -- ----- ----- ------------ - - - - ---------------------------------- - _____..- __�__.�'__.. .._ - - - - -J
i___________________ ____ _ _____ ___ _______ _ J ____ -____ l___.._.____ -_
-----------------
________ -- - _.______________e___________ _.____ -__ __.. -_i�� _ �__ _ ___ _ _ ___ __c- _----
----------------------------------- �1_�_ _
A�------------------- _---- •-------- _--- _- •_- __ - -__ __•- ______ - -__ _ t__..____"___-_____-___--_-_----•_--_-__-___ .- ___---- •_--- _______- ___ -____- __ --•_- ___ -,------
'•_2i �_ -____ �- Z "I I-___ - .____— __—____ --___ — IDENIMATOY
CITY PARKING REOUIgEMEr,TTS
RETAIL
STOCKROOM
GARDEN CENTERS
'29092 SF/300 SF. 897 STALLS
23M3 SF /500 SF. 48 STALLS
RESTAL%ANT
• "M SF /2000 SF. S STALLS
' n000 SF/100 SF. 110 STALLS
°RUNG REQUIRED
• 1160 STALLS
+,rne gr,rnrt
Al
1
H f1 1 1 2.
c
r I
I 1
1 710N
1 aRw i S-
t
I
i
� 1
f
1 t 1
r
' 6
f ,
I 1 JJ1
1
f
J
Isn
A
O TARGET
127,000 SF
°Naf+o omcn*ow
ms•
SrpN
6LOPE 7
fll.u• ` \` i (t (, ( � ew.s SANK ARFA
_ iw.wi.ti 1
T r(f
1�f
1 I
1
f r
1 I
�• ADA PATH, Tro
GARDEN
CENTER d {
8-8W SF - tu•
low B C
RETAIL ETAIL RET 30,000 SF � AIL
Z i 164W SF -1 23,680 SF
+ 678 SF mez
25358 SF
=1
'w
6
_,I
gf
n°
x�
an
ap
D
RETAIL
33,000 SF
S ORAiN�OiE
3
6XIM
SF
PLAZA
U'' E
RETAIL SHOPS
_17,850 SF
S
. 1
r
f.
C
.............
now /Yi ---_
SITE --Ilj
PLAN
DL WALL
A ,
mri
Im-
M
"a - -
li
KOHL'S
2F— SBL —SP
a��8r4 SF
ocoo,
1
^rinlrl<:S
2111 Fba'1 e'
1112t:
C"ww Oft
*h4G
lksymato
>G
It 'IT
SCAB : t. V.0• `--�•, ;::iI
252' c�
99201V
SITE PLAN
ZELMAN RETAIL
PARTNERS,
•,
Lu
I
CC
j�
/
ELCM
INC
l
Fit N"
SCAB : t. V.0• `--�•, ;::iI
252' c�
99201V
SITE PLAN
CONCEPTUAL BUILDING ELEVATIONS
1 -1 xl*w C//
~�
`-
.~-
/
/
�
/
'
/
/
�
/
'
/
'
/
�
�
/
/
/
�
m
^^�
-�
/
�
'
�
/
/
'
y i
SECTION IV
a
SUMMARY - PROJECT BENEFITS
SUMMARY OF PROJECT BENEFITS
MOORPARK MARKETPLACE
• Well Designed, State -Of -The -Art Shopping Center
• Attractive & Inviting People Friendly Environment
• High Quality Food & Beverage Establishments
• Proven, Financially Stable National Retailers
• Name Brand Merchandise Not Presently Available In Moorpark, At Competitive
Prices
• Projected Fees for Community Enhancement & Protection
- Police Facilities $134,000
Schools 109,000
- Park Improvement 82,000
- Fire Facilities 37,000
- Library Facilities 33,000
- Art in Public Places 33,000
- Trees & Landscaping 16,000
Total $444,000
• New Employment Estimate
• Reduction of Sales Tax Loss
• Projected Initial Taxable Sales
• Projected Property Tax Increase
(1) For detail, please refer to Appendix.
689 Jobs (1)
$61,810,000/yr (1)
$38,005,739 (1)
. fA
!11
O
Z
2
CRITICAL MILESTONE COMPLETION DATES
CRITICAL MILESTONE COMPLETION DATES
MOORPARK MARKETPLACE
Moorpark, California
MILESTONE
1. First Submittal of Commercial Planned
Development ( "CPD ") Application and
Tentative Parcel Map to City
2. City Response to First CPD & Tentative
Map Submittal
3. First Submittal to Cal Trans
a. Encroachment Permit
b. New Traffic Signal on New Los
Angeles Avenue
4. Cal Trans Response to First Submittal
5. Second Submittal to Cal Trans
6. Second Submittal to City
a. Financial Assistance Proposal
b. Revised CPD Application based on
revised Site Plan
c. Revised Tentative Map based on
revised Site Plan
7. Cal Trans Response to Second Submittal
8. City Response to Second Submittal
a. Financial Assistance
b. CPD Application
c. Tentative Map
9. City Delivers First Draft of Development
Agreement to Zelman
10. Third Submittal to Cal Trans
Page 1 of 4
COMPLETION DATE
05/30/01
06/29/01
07/12/01
08/31/01
09/27/01
10/05/01
10/05/01
10/12/01
10/12/01
10/24/01
10/26/01
10/26/01
10/26/01
10/31/01
11/08/01
MILESTONE
COMPLETION DATE
11. First Planning Commission Meeting
11/12/01
a. CPD Application
b. Tentative Map
12. First Citv Council Meeting
11/21/01
a. CPD Application
b. Tentative Map
13. Finalize Business Points of
11/28/01
- Development Agreement which includes:
a. City Financial Assistance
b. Developer & City Obligations
14. Cal Trans Response to Third Submittal
11/28/01
15. Second Moorpark City Council Meeting
12/05/01
a. CPD Application
b. Tentative Map
c. Business Points - Development Agreement
16. Second Planning Commission Meeting
12/10/01
a. Business Points - Development Agreement
17. Cal Trans Approval (includes building
12/14/01
permits)
a. Encroachment Permit
b. New Traffic Signal
18. Third Moorpark City Council Meeting -
12/19/01
FINAL APPROVAL
a. CPD Application
b. Tentative Map
c. Business Points - Development Agreement
19. Start Plans — Onsite Improvements
12/20/01
20. Start Plans — Zelman Buildings
12/20/01
(Marshalls, Michael's, Linens 'n
Things, Shops)
Page 2 of 4
MILESTONE COMPLETION DATE
21. Submit Onsite Improvement Plans
to City
22. Submit Zelman Building Plans
to City (Marshalls, Michael's, Linens `n
Things, Shops)
23. Receipt of Permits — Onsite
Improvements
24. Start Construction — On and Offsite
Improvements
25. Receipt of Permits — Zelman Buildings
26. Start Construction — Zelman Buildings
27. Deliver Completed Building Pad to
Target
28. Deliver Completed Building Pad to
Kohl's
29.Zelman Completion Offsite Improvements
a. New Traffic Signal
b. Restriping — New Los Angeles Avenue
c. Deceleration Lanes
d. Landscaping in Cal Trans ROW
30. Zelman Completion of Onsite
Improvements necessary to enable
Target and Kohl's to do the following:
a. Target activate & test building
systems
b. Target fixturize & stock
c. Kohl's activate & test building
Systems
d. Kohl's fixturize & stock
Page 3 of 4
01/31/02
02/28/02
04/8/02
04/15/02
05/09/02
05/16/02
06/1/02
07/01/02
09/16/02
11/30/02
12/17/02
12/02/02
12/17/02
MILESTONE
COMPLETION DATE
31. Target Completion - Target Building
12/17/02
32. Kohl's Completion — Kohl's Building
12/17/02
33. Zelman Completion - Zelman Buildings
01/15/03
_ 34. Retailer Fixturization & Stocking
Periods
a. Target
12/17/02 thru 03/03/03
b. Kohl's
12/17/02 thru 03/03/03
c. Zelman Buildings
01/18/03 thru 03/14/03
35. GRAND OPENING:
Week of 3/17/03
a. Target
b. Kohl's
c. Zelman Buildings
Page 4 of 4
to
m
n
..
O
z
b� k
ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
• ASSUMPTIONS & LIMITING CONDITIONS
• PROJECTED GOVERNMENTAL & UTILITY FEES
• DEVELOPMENT PROFORMA
• CONCLUSIONS
ASSUMPTIONS & LIMITING CONDITIONS
ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
MOORPARK MARKETPLACE
What follows is a summary of certain assumptions and limiting conditions which
were taken into account in the preparation of the enclosed Development Proforma.
A. Net Useable Land Area: 27.3 Acres
Land which is undevelopable as a result of street dedications, rights -of-
way, easements, or required infrastructure improvements such as
sizeable on -site storm water retention and treatment facilities will limit our
ability to design and construct buildings, associated parking, landscaping,
loading areas, and public areas.
Any reduction in the net useable land area will decrease building area,
lower rental income, and result in an adverse effect on the return on
investment required by our financing sources.
B. Total Building Area: 347,138 square feet
As mentioned above, any decrease in income producing buildings has an
adverse impact on the bottom line of the Development Proforma. It is
important to note that in order to enable us to respond to the City's
direction with respect to the Site Plan configuration, the gas
station /carwash had to be eliminated.
The resulting loss of annual ground rent was $125,000 which equates to
a loss in value of approximately $1,276,000 (assuming an investor would
capitalize the income at 9.5 %) and added $1,010,000 to the cost
reduction necessary to achieve our required return on investment (12%).
C. Net Land Cost:
1. The land purchase price of $7,244,000 ($6.09 per square foot)
appears fair and reasonable, in light of comparable values for freeway
oriented properties of similar size with a similar population base.
The Asking Price of the property was over $11.25 per square foot.
2. Target is purchasing approximately 10.4 acres from us on at no
markup, for $6.09 per square foot. This transaction is necessary and
justified, because Target is the anchor retailer which draws the other
retailers, restaurants, and food and beverage establishments to the
location. Without Target, other retailers and complimentary tenants
will not proceed.
Page 1 of 5
We pursued Target regarding Moorpark Marketplace for two years
before gaining their interest. Lowes and Home Depot have rejected
the location, and the only remaining large national retailer is Walmart,
who does not appear to be as well suited for the higher income
shopper as Target.
D. On & Offsite Improvements:
1. Offsite Improvements: $500,000
a) It is assumed that Zelman, Target, and Zelman's tenants have no
obligation to construct, contribute funds to, or reimburse others for
the cost of construction of any offsite improvements other than
those directly connected with our proposed Cal Trans
Encroachment Permit which will enable us to install a new traffic
signal on New Los Angeles Avenue.
As noted below, certain offsite improvements (including Miller
Parkway) constructed through a Community Facilities Assessment
District, have created an ongoing financial obligation for Moorpark
Marketplace tenants which increases their operating costs.
b) Estimated costs of our construction obligations associated with the
Cal Trans Encroachment Permit are as follows:
Signalization, Striping & Signing $250,000
Grading, Curbs, Gutters, $149,000
Sidewalks, Ramps,
& Traffic Control
Landscaping & Irrigation $81,000
Permit $20,000
Total $500,000
2. Onsite Improvements: $4,994,600
a) The projected cost of onsite improvements takes into account the
City's stated requirement for a generous amount of landscaping,
amenities including a foodcourt fountain, decorative treatment to
certain drivewalks, sidewalks, and public areas; drainage systems
and National Pollution Discharge Elimination Systems (NPDES),
and screening of backflow preventors, trash enclosures, fire
hydrants, transformer pads, and loading areas.
Page 2 of 5
b) As a result of the relocation of Kohl's and the projected Linens n'
Things building, additional costs are anticipated, as a result of the
construction of a retaining wall behind these buildings.
c) Although the Target transaction has not been finalized or approved
by Target, it is assumed Target will reimburse Zelman for its full
prorata share (38.10 %) of the total cost of on and offsite
improvements and associated design, plan check, and permitting
costs. Projected Target reimbursement for site improvement costs
paid by Zelman: $2,093,200.
d) The Kohl's transaction as approved by Kohl's provides that Kohl's
reimburses Zelman no more than $1,500.000 of the total cost of on
and offsite improvements and associated design, plan check, and
permitting costs. Projected Kohl's reimbursement for site
improvement costs paid by Zelman: $1,449,100.
e) It is anticipated that no other tenants will reimburse Zelman for any
portion of these costs.
E. Building Costs:
$6,920,300
1. Projected building costs are based on actual costs incurred in our
recently completed Burbank Empire Center, for the same or similar
tenants.
2. Funds over and above the cost of same or similar buildings in
Burbank have been budgeted in anticipation of the City of Moorpark's
design requirements.
F. Soft Costs:
$5,734,600
1. Architectural &Engineering: $962,200
Funds allocated for these consultants are expected to be
extraordinary for a number of reasons, including the design sensitive
nature of the project and the anticipated design review and approval
process required by the City and Cal Trans.
The fact that Moorpark Marketplace is, by necessity, a fast track
ro'ect will result in higher fees due to overtime hours expended by
our consultants in order to meet performance deadlines.
Page 3of5
2. Legal Fees: $341,100
Outside legal counsel will be utilized to assist in the negotiation and
preparation of all transactional documents related to Moorpark
Marketplace, including the following:
a) Land Purchase & Sale Agreement and associated documents.
b) Target Purchase & Sale Agreement and associated documents.
c) Approximately twenty one (21) leases.
d) Development Agreement and associated documents.
3. Governmental & Utility Fees: $3,105,400
a) Fees set forth in the enclosed Development Proforma are based
on the assumptions listed in the section entitled "Projected
Governmental & Utility Fees ".
b) Subject to our request for financial assistance which could include
the reduction or waiver of certain fees, it is assumed that Zelman,
Target, and Zelman's tenants will not be responsible for the
payment of any fees (including mitigation fees) other than those
contained in the enclosed summary of Projected Governmental &
Utility Fees.
c) It is assumed Target will reimburse Zelman for its full prorata share
(38.10 %) of certain fees paid by Zelman, although the Target
transaction is not finalized or approved. Projected reimbursement
amount: $890,000.
d) Due to Kohl's $1,500,000 reimbursement limit, Kohl's
reimbursement for certain fees paid by Zelman is projected to be
$51,000, since $1,449,000 will be reimbursed in connection with
site improvement costs.
e) It is anticipated that no other tenants will reimburse Zelman for
these costs.
G. Financing Costs:
$1,669,100
1. Assumes the construction loan will be replaced by a permanent loan
within twelve (12) months after initial funding of the construction loan.
Page 4of5
2. Assumes funds advanced by equity partner (s) will be paid off within
eighteen (18) months after initial funding of equity.
3. The first two assumptions may prove to be unrealistic in the aftermath
of the September 11th terrorist attacks, coupled with the instability of
financial markets, and the recessionary spiral of world economies.
The result: far more conservative lender underwriting criteria.
H. Rental Income:
Although the average household income in Moorpark is quite high, the
lack of population in the Moorpark trade area (3900 people within one
mile, 26,000 people within three miles, and 80,000 people within five
miles) has resulted in projected retail and restaurant sales by prospective
tenants which are not high enough to justify rents exceeding those shown
in the enclosed Development Proforma.
Moorpark Marketplace leasing agent Bill Bauman of Colliers Seeley (Bill
has been selected as the top retail broker in the Los AngelesNentura
county area each of the last three years) firmly believes we have pushed
our rents as high as possible.
L Expenses:
Each tenant will pay its prorata share of the existing Community Facilities
District Assessment ($277,115 per year for the entire shopping center),
which further limits their ability to pay more rent.
J. Return on Investment:
In order to finance the development of Moorpark Marketplace within the
limitations and constraints of today's loan underwriting criteria, the
completed, fully leased (other than 5% vacancy of small shops) shopping
center must generate an all cash return on investment of 12% (Net
Operating Income divided by Total Project Cost).
The fact that most of the midsize to large retailers have recently
shortened the initial term of their new leases from 15 to 10 years has also
had an adverse impact on financing and the market value of completed
shopping centers.
Page 5 of 5
PROJECTED GOVERNMENTAL & UTILITY FEES
MOORPARK MARKETPLACE
BASIS FOR PROJECTED FEES:
1. Development Fee:
2. Park Improvement Fee:
3. Area of Contribution Fee:
4. Art in Public Places:
5. Calleguas Water District:
6. Traffic Mitigation Fee:
7. Fire Facilities Fee:
8. Police Facilities Fee:
9. School Fee:
10. Flood Control District:
11. Ventura County Water District
No. 1
a) District Fee
b) Sewer Fee
c) Water Meters
12. Commercial Planned
Development Fee:
13. Initial Environmental Study
14. Tentative Map Filing Fee:
15. Condition Compliance Fee:
16. Sign Permits:
$7030 per gross acre
$0.25 / sf of building area
$19,892 per gross acre
$0.10 / sf of building area
$9677 per gross acre
$11,200 per gross acre
$0.11 / sf of building area
$0.41 / sf of building area
$0.33 / sf of building area
$2404 per gross acre
$2540 per gross acre
$2500 per building
$1200 per building
$11,000 plus $100.00 per 1000 sf
of building area.
Best estimate
$2728 plus $67.00 per lot
$11,000 plus $100.00 per 1000 sf
of building area.
Best estimate
Page 1 of 2
17. Air Quality (TSM) Fee:
18. Building Plan Check
& Inspection Fees:
19. Building Permits:
20. Sitework Plan Check
& Inspection Fees:
21. Perm its-S itework:
22. Library Facilities Fee:
23. Tree & Landscape Fee:
24. Cal Trans (Encroachment Permit):
25. Miscellaneous Fees:
$16,273 per gross acre
$1938 -first $500,000 valuation
$1570- second $500,000 valuation
$2.58 per $1000 of remaining valuation
$2981 -first $500,000 valuation
$2415- second $500,000 valuation
$3.97 per $1000 of remaining valuation
$26,150 plus 1% of cost over $1,000,000
$26,150 plus 1% of cost over $1,000,000
$0.10 / sf of building area
$0.05 / sf of building area
Estimate - $20,000
Best estimate
Page 2 of 2
PROJECTED GOVERNMENTAL AND UTILITY FEES
MOORPARK MARKETPLACE
Moorpark, California
October 5, 2001
ZELMAN (1)
TARGET (2)
KOHLS (3)
TOTAL
Development Fee (4)
$204,000
$204,000
Park Improvement Fee
28,000
32,000
22,000
82,000
Area of Contribution Fee (4)
577,000
577,00
Art in Public Places
11,000
13,000
9,000
33,000
Calleguas Water District (4)
281,000
281,000
Traffic Mitigation (4)
325,000
325,000
Fire Facility Fee
13,000
14,000
10,000
37,000
Police Facilities Fee
46,000
52,000
36,000
134,000
School Fee
37,000
43,000
29,000
109,000
Flood. Control District (4)
70,000
70,000
Ventura County Water District No. 1 (4)
74,000
74,000
Sewer Fee
10,000
2,500
2,500
15,000
Water Meters
5,000
1,200
1,200
7,400
Commercial Planned Development Fee (4)
46,000
46,000
Initial Environmental Study (4)
2,000
2,000
Tentative Map Filing Fee
4,000
4,000
Condition Compliance Fee (4)
46,000
46,000
Sign Permits (4)
2,000
500
500
3,000
Air Quality (TSM) Fee (4)
472,000
472,000
Bldg. Plan Check & Inspection Fees
19,000
18,000
12,000
49,000
Building Permits
29,000
27,000
18,000
74,000
Sitework, Plan Check & Inspec. Fees (4)
66,000
66,000
Perm its-S itework (4)
66,000
66,000
Library Facilities Fee
11,000
13,000
9,000
33,000
Tree & Landscape Fee
6,000
6,000
4,000
16,000
Cal Trans /Encroachment Permit (4)
20,000
20,000
Miscellaneous Fees (4)
175,000
50,000
35,000
260,000
TOTAL
$2,645,000-1
$272,2001
$188,200
$3,105,400
(1) Assumes Zelman builds 112,922 sq. ft. of stores. (cost: $6,920,300)
(2) Assumes Target's building size is 133,500 sq. ft. including 8800 sq. ft. garden center (cost: $6,518,000)
(3) Assumes Kohl's building size is 86,584 sq. ft. (cost: $4,156,000)
(4) Subject to partial reimbursement by Target & Kohl's.
ZELMAN RETAIL PARTNERS, INC.
PROJECT PRO FORMA MOORPK93Kohls GL
Location: MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA 10/08/01
03:54 PM
Developer
Co. Name: Zelman Retail Partners Project: Carlsberg Ranch Marketplace -Lot 1
Address: 707 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 3036 Type: Retail - Target /Kohl's Anchors
City, St. , Zip: Los Angeles, CA 90017 Prepared For: Reiling, Foy, Exel
PROJECT INFORMATION
Net Land Area 1,189,188 Square Feet
27.3 Acres
Gross Leasable Area: 347,138 Square Feet (including garden center)
Building Coverage: 29.19%
(1) Tenants:
Square Feet @
$0.42
PSF
1,189,188
Square Feet @
Transaction
Store Size
Target '
Sale
127,000
Square Feet
BTS
Plus Garden Ctr
Sale
8,800
Square Feet
G/L
Kohl's
G/L
86,584
Square Feet
Sale
Michaels
BTS
25,492
Square Feet
Total
Marshall's
BTS
30,000
Square Feet
Linens
BTS
33,000
Square Feet
Retail Shops - In Line
BTS
24,430
Square Feet
Pad 1 - Restaurant
G/L
7,000
Square Feet
Pad 2 - Fast Food
G/L
2,668
Square Feet
Pad 3 - Fast Food
G/L
2,164
Total:
347,138
Square Feet (including garden center)
A. NET LAND COST (Net Land Area):
Land Acquisition 1,189,188 Square Feet @ $6.09 PSF
Less Parcel Sale: Target (453,024) Square Feet @ $6.09 PSF
Net Land Cost 736,164 Square Feet @ $6.09 PSF
* $10,144,000 less estimated CFO Principal balance of $2,900,000
B. ON AND OFF SITE COSTS:
Offsite Improvements
Onsite Improvements
Subtotal:
(Less) Reimbursements: Target
(Less) Reimbursements: Kohl's
Net Site Improvements Costs:
1,189,188
Square Feet @
$0.42
PSF
1,189,188
Square Feet @
$4.20
PSF
$4.62
PSF
453,024
Square Feet @
$4 -62
PSF
313,632
Square Feet @
$4.62
PSF
112,922
Square Feet
98,416
Square Feet
135.800
Square Feet
347,138
Square Feet
7,244,000
(2,758,916)
4,485,084
500,000
4,994,600
5,494,600
($2,093,200)
($1,449,100)
1,952,300
This analysis a an estimate only and not a guarantee of actua! costs. expenses
Page I
ZELMAN RETAIL PARTNERS, INC. MOORPK93Kohls GL
PROJECT PRO FORMA 10/08/01
Location: MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA 03:54 PM
C. BUILDING COSTS:
Area S
Shell Cost /SF TI /SF
Weighted Cost
Total Cost
Target 127,000
Sale
Sale
0
plus Garden Ctr 8,800
Sale
Sale
0
Kohl's 86,584
G/L
0
Michaels 25,492
$54.00
$54.00
1,376,600
Marshall's 30,000
$51.00
$51.00
1,530,000
Linens 33,000
$36.00 $19.00
$55.00
1.815,000
Retail Shops - In Line 24,430
$70.00 $20.00(l)
$90.00
2,198,700
Pad 1 - Restaurant 7,000
G/L
0
Pad 2 • Fast Food 2.668
G/L
0
Pad 3- Fast Food 2,164
G/L
0
Total Building Costs: 347,138
6,920,300
(1) includes $10 for tenant improvements and $10 for TI Allowance
D. SOFT COSTS
Architectural and Engineering
7.75% of B +C (gross)
962,200
Legal
$1.00 PSF of GLA
347,100
Insurance & Bonds
1.25 %, of B +C (gross)
155,200
Property Taxes
1.00% of A (gross)
72,400
Gov't & Utility Fees:
See (1) below
2,644,000
Leasing Commissions
See (2) below
948,500
Closing Costs
0.33% of A (gross)
23,900
Construction Management
$0.75 PSF of BTS
84,692
Development Overhead
4.00% of B +C (gross)
496,G00
Subtotal Soft Costs:
5,734,600
Less: Target Reimbursement of Fees (See *)
(889,000)
Less: Kohl's Reimbursement of Fees (See *)
(51,000)
Total Soft Costs:
4,794,600
Total Pre - Financing Costs:
18,152,284
(1) Governmental & Utility Fees
Development Fee
204,000 *
Park Improvement Fee
28,000
Area of Contribution Fee
577,000
Art in Public Places
11,000
Calleguas Water District
281,000 *
Traffic Mitigation
325,000 *
Fire facility Fee
13,000
Police Facilities Fee
46,000
School Fee
37,000
Flood Control District
70,000 *
Ventura County Water District No. 1
74,000 *
Sewer Fee
10,000
Water Meters
5,000
Commercial Planned Development Fe
46,000 *
Initial Environmental Study
2,000 *
Tentative Map Filing Fee
4,000
Condition Compliance Fee
46,000 *
Sign Permits
2,000 *
Air Quality (TSM) Fee
472,000 *
Bldg Plan Check & inspection Fees
19,000
Building Permits
29.000
(continued on next page)
This analysis is an estimate oniy and not a guarantee of actual costs. expenses Page 2
ZELMAN RETAIL PARTNERS, INC. MOORPK93Kohls GL
PROJECT PRO FORMA 10/0801
Location: MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA 03:54 PM
(1) Governmental & Utility Fees Continued
Sitework, Plan Check & Inspec. Fees 66,000 *
Permits - Sitework 66,000 *
Library Facilities Fee 11,000
Tree & Landscape Fee 5,000
Cal Trans 20,000
Miscellaneous Fees 175 -000 * (50% reimbursed)
$2,644,000
*Amount subject to reimbursement by Target and Kohls: $2,337,000.
*Target reimbursement is 38.10% of $2,337,000 or $890,000.
*Kohl's reimbursement is calculated to be 26.37% of $2,337,000 or $616,000. Actual reimbursement:
$51,000 due to negotiated cap.
(2) Leasing Commissions
Target
plus Garden Ctr
Kohl's
Michaels
Marshall's
Linens
Retail Shops - In Li
Pad 1 Restaurant
Pad 2 - Fast Food
Pad 3 - Fast Food
E. FINANCING COSTS:
1. Construction Loan
Average Funds Out
Interest Rate
Construction Loan Period (Months)
Construction Loan Points
Construction Loan Interest
Miscellaneous Construction Loan Costs
2. Equity Partner
Average Funds Out
Interest Rate
Equity Investment Period (Months)
Interest Paid to Equity Partner
Total Financing Cost
F. CONTINGENCY:
TOTAL PROJECT COSTS:
Recap:
A. NET LAND COST
B. NET ON AND OFF SITE COSTS:
C. BUILDING COSTS:
D. SOFT COSTS
E. FINANCING COSTS:
F. CONTINGENCY:
TOTAL PROJECT COSTS:
Sq. Ft
127,000
8,800
86,584
25,492
30,000
33,000
24,430
7,000
2,668
2.164
347,138 Sq. ft.
50.00 %,
30.00% of Costs
Rate
5% of Sale Price
50 %, of a 1 yr. lease
$4.00 PSF
$4.00 PSF
$4 -00 PSF
$6.00 PSF
5017a of a 1 yr. lease
50% of a 1 yr. lease
50% of a 1 yr. lease
5 -0017o Of B +C +D +E
12,238,100
6,119,050
8.00%
12
1.00%
5,679,400
100.00%
11.00%
18
Amount
137,900
192,500
102,000
120,000
132,000
146,600
35,000
45,000
37.500
948,500
122,400
507,900
25.000
1,013,800
1,669,100
766,800
20,588,184
4,485.084
1,952,300
6.920.300
4.794, 600
1,669:100
766.800
20,588,184
This analysis is an estimate only and not a guarantee of actual cr sts, expenses Page 3
ZELMAN RETAIL PARTNERS, INC.
Community Facility Fees (1)
M00RPK93KohIs GL
PROJECT PRO FORMA
Tenant Payment - CFO Fees (1)
171,534
10 /08 /01
Location: MOORPAW CAUFORNIA
(70,500)
Vacancy
03:54 PM
(29,100)
Capital Replacement Reserves
$0.15 PSF of BTS
(16,900)
G. INCOME:
4.95 %, of Gross Income
(116,500)
Rate of
Annual
Tenant
Size
Rent P F
Return
Rent
Target
127,000
Sale
Sale
0
plus Garden Ctr
8,800
Kohl's
86,584
GAL
14.54%,
384,900
Michaels
25,492
$13.00
8.90%
331,400
Marshall's
30,000
$13.00
9.22%,
390,000
Linens
33,000
$13.00
8.79 %,
429,000
Retail Shops -In Line
24,430
$23.79
10.81%,
581,200
Pad 1 • Restaurant
7,000
G /L(1)
9.680/,
70,000
Pad 2 • Fast Food
2,668
G /L(1)
28.77%,
90,000
Pad 3 • Fast Food
2.164
G /L(1)
32.11 %,
75,000
347,138
Square Feet
Gross Income
2,351,500
(1) No reimbursement for site improvements or soft costs.
H. EXPENSES:
Community Facility Fees (1)
(171,534)
Tenant Payment - CFO Fees (1)
171,534
Management
3.00 %, of Gross Income
(70,500)
Vacancy
5.00%, of retail shops
(29,100)
Capital Replacement Reserves
$0.15 PSF of BTS
(16,900)
Total Expenses:
4.95 %, of Gross Income
(116,500)
Net Operating Income
2,235,000
(1) Annual Zelman Tenant Payment (excluding garden
center): 61.90 %, of $277,I15 = $171,5341year J 211,338 s.f. _ $0.84/s.f.
1. RETURN ON INVESTMENT:
10.867
Cost Reduction Required to achieve Return of:
12.00%
1,963,000
Project Cost necessary to achieve Return of:
12.00%
18,625 184
This analysis is an estimate only and not a guarantee of actual costs, expenses Page 4
CONCLUSIONS
ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
MOORPARK MARKETPLACE
1. Based on the numbers contained in the enclosed Development Proforma, the
development of Moorpark Marketplace is not financeable or economically
feasible.
2. The return on investment must be raised from 10.86 % to 12 %, in order to
procure debt and equity financing.
3. The return on investment can be increased by increasing income, or decreasing
costs.
4. Rent levels are maxed out, and cannot be significantly increased.
5. If income can't be increased, project costs need to be reduced by $1,963,000 in
order to generate a 12 % return.
6. The following project costs are not viable candidates for reduction:
a) Architectural & engineering fees associated with project design, plan
preparation, and construction, due to the critical importance of project
design and timing.
b) Leasing commissions as shown are necessary, in order to ensure timely
project leaseup to the best available tenants who meet our underwriting
criteria.
c) Financing costs as shown are not likely to be decreased. If the time
necessary to design, entitle, construct, and open for business is extended,
financing costs will increase.
d) Construction management costs are necessary, in order to ensure
compliance with conditions of approval, and proper construction of the
project in accordance with approved plans, "on time and on budget."
e) Development overhead offsets a portion of the actual cost of support
personnel and resources necessary to bring Moorpark Marketplace to
fruition.
f) The following fees appear to be possibilities for waiver or reduction, subject
to City approval:
i) Development Fee: $204,000
ii) Traffic Mitigation Fee: $325,000
iii) Air Quality (TSM) Fee: $472,000
Total $1,001,000
SECTION VII
44:'x.
REQUESTED FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE
• NECESSARY ASSISTANCE
• ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS
REQUESTED FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE
MOORPARK MARKETPLACE
In order to enable Moorpark Marketplace and its multiple benefits to the community
to materialize by March 2003, Zelman Retail Partners, Inc. respectfully requests
financial assistance from the City of Moorpark in such a manner which will reduce
project costs by approximately $1,963,000.
The City- approved Financial Assistance Program could include the following
elements:
1. Zelman's responsibility for the cost of design, permitting, and construction of
offsite improvements limited to those directly associated with Zelman's Cal
Trans Encroachment Permit (new traffic signal and related improvements on
New Los Angeles Avenue).
2. No financial contribution required by Zelman, it's tenants, or Target to any costs
or fees associated with Moorpark's citywide traffic control system, intersection
mitigation fund, or other infrastructure improvements.
We believe this request is justified in Tight of the existing Community Facilities
Assessment District which encumbers the property. Present balance:
Approximately $2,900,000. Annual assessment: $277,115 per year.
3. Support from the City of Moorpark in assuring that Zelman, it's tenants, and
Target are not responsible for any costs or fees associated with the County of
- Ventura's roadways, related facilities, or infrastructure improvements.
4. City confirmation that all Traffic Mitigation Measures set forth in Exhibit "A"
( "Mitigation Monitoring Program ") of the Carlsberg Specific Plan as amended on
September 7, 1994 have been fully satisfied.
If not satisfied, confirm that Zelman, it's tenants, and Target are not responsible
for the satisfaction of outstanding Traffic Mitigation Measures.
5. Waiver or reduction of certain City controlled fees (refer to enclosed letter dated
May 7, 2001 from Jerry Neuman).
6. City rebate of a portion of it's incremental increase of tax revenues generated by
Moorpark Marketplace for a specified period of time (refer to enclosed Neuman
letter).
7. Bond Financing Program (refer to enclosed Neuman letter).
Allen Matkins Leck Gamble & Mallory r.r.P
anamcp at lam
Al7 �� � r��y �� 516�South Figueroa 7th Floor Los Angeles California 9007133s8
1 if \r /if lie; telephone. 223 622 5555 facsimile. 213 620 8816 www alienmaddns.com
wriw. Jerry Nauman t-2=9555679
da aaasbe� 29369- t37/U.,a9445.4i e, jriarmen®e6��
May 7, 2001
VIA FACS AND FIRST CLASS MAIL
Mr. Steven Kueny
City Manager
City of Moorpark
799 Moorpark Avenue
Moorpark, CA 93021
Re: Zelman Retail Partners, Inc. ( "Zelman" or "Developer ") -
Moorpark Marketplace Development (the "Project ")
Dear Steve:
As we have discussed, this letter will set forth a number of options concerning the City of.
Moorpark's ( the "City') participation in assisting with the financing of the Project and ensuring
its ultimate development and success. As you are aware, a substantial economic gap exists in the
projected financial feasibility of the Project as currently contemplated. This is in part due to the
substantial fees which are assessed by the City and are noted on the attachment to this letter (the
"Fee Schedule ").
With this in mind, I would like to identify three potential programs whereby the City
could assist in reducing, the economic gap that exists. These programs are as follows:
1. Fee Earn -Back Proemm — Under this program, Zelman, together with the Project's
anchors, will pay 100% of the City's fees currently and will retain the right to earn
back a portion of the fees based upon the Project's performance over time. We
would propose that under this program a maximum of $500,000 of fee rebates
could be received each year during the first five years of the Project's operation.
The fee rebates would be based upon the project's performance, and the net
incremental tax revenues received by the City during that time period. To the
extent that the City's net incremental tax revenues in any given year did not equal
$500,000, the difference in the amount between the net incremental tax revenues
received by the City and 5500,000 would be carried forward to the next ye�..r, with
interest, and the rebate pro_pam would be extended beyond the five years until
such time as the Deve ?oper would receive a rebate of 52.5 million, plus interest.
Please note that Ln the ve-ars after year five in which the proa—ram continued, the
amount of rebate would be limited to 45 "0 of the City's nt.t incremental tax
revenue. As you .will note. tl s program maintains the least, risk to the City, but
accounts for the highest amount of public partic;Pation due to the nature of the
ti.-n-- involved and he additional burden of risk on the Pero cct;
�.cs =agc:el C-`c":V Cicy C:a n�zc c.._:cy San C;.ic,s $ar. Fcar.cscc
Allen Matkins Leck Gamble & Mallory LLP
a(fomeys et Idw
Mr. Steven Kueny
May 7, 2001
Page 2
2. Fee reduction Program — This program is the simplest in that, under this
progtam, Zelman, on behalf of itself and its major anchors, would request that the
City reduce its fees by approximately S 1.5 million in the categories identified by
asterisks on the attached Fee Schedule. Under this program., the City would
receive less fees at the inception of the Project, but the Developer would commit
to assist the City in identifying and obtaining alternative revenues, such as State
and federal grant programs, for either transportation or economic development; or
I Bond Financing Program — Under this program, the City would issue a bond or
note to the Developer on a tax- exempt basis in return for an agreed upon tax
exempt purpose. The bond would be in the face amount of $1.7 million, with a
nominal interest rate amortizing over a ten -year period. In the event the City has
not earned incremental tax revenues equal to the face amount of the bond during
the first seven years, the remainder of the payments under the bond or note would
be waived, subject to some adjustment for potential forgiveness of debt or tax
recapture issues. This program provides for the greatest equality in risk- sharing
between the City and the Developer and will ensure that the City receives 100%
of its fees while participating in only a moderate amount of assistance to the
Project.
I hope that the foregoing has been helpful to you in assessing the various options which
we believe are available to ensure that the Nect,moves forward.. If you have any questions
with regard to any ofthe information contained in this letter, please do not hesitate to contact me
at the above - referenced address and phone number.
On behalf ofmy client, I look forward to working with you towards the fulfillment of this
great opportunity for both my client and the City_
JBN:ar
Enclosure
cc: Nfr. Robert D. Exel
Brett M. Foy, Esq.
Mr. Ron Coleman
Mr. Paul J. Giuntini
Very truly yours,
Jerry Ne
SECTION Vill
APPENDIX
• JOB CREATION
• ADDITIONAL PROPERTY TAXES
• SALES TAX REVENUES
JOB CREATION
Retailer/ Tenant
Target
Kohl's
Marshalls
Michaels
Linens n' Things
Retail Stores / Food Court (24,430 so
Restaurant
Fast Food
Fast Food
TOTAL
Projected Employees
260
170
48
40
66
50
25
15
15
689 new jobs
PROJECTED FIRST FULL YEAR SALES VOLUMES
MOORPARK MARKETPLACE
TOTAL:
REVENUE TO CITY:
% Taxable Annual
Sales
Projected First
Retailer / Tenant
Year Sales
Target (135,800 so
$25,000,000
Kohl's (86,584 so
$18,000,000
Marshalls (30,000 so
$6,000,000
Michaels (25,492 so
$3,800,000
Linens n' Things (33,000 so
$6,600,000
Retail Stores D -1 (18,600 so
$2,325,000
Retail Stores D -2 (5,830 so
$730,000
Restaurant (7,000 so
$1,225,000
Fast Food (2,668 so
$350,000
Fast Food (2,164 so
$280,000
TOTAL:
REVENUE TO CITY:
% Taxable Annual
Sales
Taxable Sales
90%
$22,500,000
100%
$18,000,000
100%
$6,000,000
100%
$3,800,000
100%
$6,600,000
100%
$2,325,000
100%
$730,000
100%
$1,225,000
100%
$350,000
100 %
$280,000
$61,810,000
$618,100 per year
ADDED VALUE ANALYSIS - PROPERTY TAXES
MOORPARK MARKETPLACE
A. LAND VALUE:
27.3 acres
Sguare Feet
1,189,188 net
B. ONSITE IMPROVEMENTS:
27.3 net acres 1,189,188 net sf
Cost / SF Total
$6.09 $7,244,000
$4.20 $4,994,600
C. BUILDINGS AND FURNITURE FIXTURES
& EQUIPMENT:
Target
135,800 sf
$48.00
$6,518,000
Target FF & E
$1,300,000
Kohl's
86,584 sf
$48.00
$4,156,000
Kohl's FF & E
$1,000,000
Marshalls
30,000 sf
$51.00
$1,530,000
Marshalls FF & E
$480,000
Michaels
25,492 sf
$54.00
$1,377,000
Michaels FF & E
$385,000
Linens n' Things
33,000 sf
$55.00
$1,815,000
Linens n' Things FF &
E
$495,000
Retail Stores D -1
18,600 sf
$90.00
$1,674,000
Retail Stores FF & E
$280,000
Retail Stores D -2
5,830 sf
$90.00
$525,000
Retail Stores FF & E
$100,000
Page 1 of 2
ADDED VALUE ANALYSIS - PROPERTY TAXES
MOORPARK MARKETPLACE
Square Feet Cost / SF Total
Restaurant 7,000 sf $135.00 $945,000
(Includes FF & E)
Fast Food
(includes FF & E) 2,668 sf
Fast Food 2,164 sf
(includes FF & E)
Subtotal
D. ZELMAN SOFT COSTS:
TOTAL NEW VALUE:
Current Assessed Value
ADDED VALUE:
$120.00 $320,000
$120.00 $260,000
$23,160,000
$4,733,600 (1)
$40,132,200
$2,126,461
$38,005,739
Includes architectural, engineering, and legal fees, insurance and bonds during construction, governmental
and utility fees (less City waiver of Development Fee, Traffic Mitigation Fee, and Air Quality Fee; totaling
$1,001,000), and leasing commissions.
Page 2 of 2