Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
105-Exhibit 4b.pdf
June 10, 2008 08-ASJ-082 SUMMARY APPRAISAL VALUATION STATEMENT Partial Acquisition Ingress/Egress Easement Rights Pacific Gas & Electric Company Property Saratoga de Anza Trail Site Between Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road & Saratoga Avenue APNs: 386-53-018 & 019 393-17-004 to 006 393-21-005 to 007 & 013 Saratoga, Santa Clara County, California 08-ASJ-082 Appraiser:Chris Carneghi, MAI Company:Carneghi-Blum & Partners, Inc. Address:1602 The Alameda, Suite 205, San Jose, California 95126 Phone:(408) 535-0900 Fax:(408) 535-0909 This summary of the basis of my appraisal is prepared for Mr. Andrew W. Schwartz with Shute, Mihaly & Weinberger, LLP, to comply with the California Government Code concerning condemnation and is intended to be a Summary Appraisal Report as defined in the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. If called, I will testify to the matters and opinions set forth herein. 1.Description of subject property taken:See Exhibit “A” 2.Conclusions: a.Fair Market Value of the subject property being taken:$190,000 See Exhibit “C” b.Amount of Severance Damages:None c.Amount of Benefits:None 1 of 44 Summary Appraisal Statement 08-ASJ-082, Saratoga de Anza Trail Acquisition Saratoga, Santa Clara County, California June 10, 2008 08-ASJ-082 d.Total Real Estate Compensation:$190,000 e.Amount of Other Compensation:None My conclusion is based, in part, on the opinion of:N.A. 3.Basic Data and Opinions: a.Estate or interest valued:Ingress/Egress Easement Rights b.Date of Valuation:May 22, 2008 c.Highest and Best Use of the Property: The larger subject property consists of a 75 foot wide strip of land which extends for approximately 1.6 miles in a generally northwest/southeast direction from Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road to Saratoga Avenue in the City of Saratoga. This represents a Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) right of way which (per the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared by LSA Associates in April 2007) is improved with a portion of the Metcalf-Monta Vista Transmission Corridor, extending from San Jose to Cupertino and containing four 230 kilovolt power lines supported on transmission poles that range in height from approximately 100 feet to approximately 135 feet. This corridor is also improved with a buried, 18 inch wrapped steel cement lined water pipe and a paved parking lot used by the City of Saratoga in conjunction with nearby Congress Springs Park. Physically Possible The subject site consists of a narrow elongated site. Due to this configuration, the subject property is considered to be physically restricted in terms of development potential. Also, there are overhead PG&E high voltage towers/wires and a buried water pipe that run the entire length of the property and essentially render the subject site undevelopable with any building improvements. For safety and access reasons, PG&E will not allow building construction under high voltage transmission lines. The presence of the buried water pipe would also restrict development potential. Consequently, the physical characteristics of the subject site tend to indicate that its highest and best use, as vacant, is for various types of uses which take into 2 of 44 Summary Appraisal Statement 08-ASJ-082, Saratoga de Anza Trail Acquisition Saratoga, Santa Clara County, California June 10, 2008 08-ASJ-082 consideration the limited development utility of the site due to the existing utility infrastructure. A physically possible use would be for use as a public park. Legally Possible The subject property has a General Plan designation of M-12.5 (Medium Density Residential) and a zoning designation of R-1-12,500. These designations are in conformance and are primarily intended for development of single family homes on lots of 12,500 square feet (maximum density of 3.48 dwelling units per acre). Other allowed uses under this zoning designation include agricultural and equestrian uses, community facilities, religious institutions, nursing/day care homes, and public utility installations. However, due to the restrictions imposed by the utility infrastructure on site, legally allowed uses would be limited to some type of park, open space, or agricultural use. The City of Saratoga General Plan Open Space Element states that “development of a comprehensive trail system has been a priority of the community for many years.” The Proposed Trails Map (Exhibit OSC-2) presented in the Saratoga General Plan identifies the subject location for a proposed trail. Based on the legal parameters, and considering the physically possible uses and surrounding neighborhood, the highest and best use of the subject site, as if vacant, appears to be for use as a public park. Economic Feasibility Physically and legally, the subject property appears to be best suited for park, open space, or agricultural use. Due to the restricted supply of suitable land available in the area, there is limited opportunity for governments to provide additional park spaces to residents. One opportunity for such a use is provided by sites which would otherwise be undevelopable. The subject is one such site. There are multiple locations in the Santa Clara County area where parks have been constructed on sites similarly encumbered by utility infrastructure. The existence of these parks supports the feasibility of a similar use on the subject site. 3 of 44 Summary Appraisal Statement 08-ASJ-082, Saratoga de Anza Trail Acquisition Saratoga, Santa Clara County, California June 10, 2008 08-ASJ-082 Conclusion The subject property has restricted development potential due to the presence of the existing high voltage wires/towers and underground water pipeline. The analysis in this appraisal addresses the value of the larger subject property as currently encumbered by the existing utility infrastructure. The resulting value conclusion will be based on a continued utility infrastructure use (i.e. the value conclusion will represent surface use rights only as the underground and aerial rights are retained by/for the existing utility infrastructure). While the existing use by PG&E for utility transmission lines is functional for PG&E, the additional use of the surface area for park, open space, or agricultural purposes would be considered more maximally productive as it would allow for a more functional use of the surface area. The highest and best use of the subject site is considered to be continued use of the existing utility infrastructure, with use of the surface area for park, open space, or agricultural purposes. d.Market Data:See Exhibit “B” e.Replacement cost less depreciation:N.A. f.Income Approach:N.A. g.Description and value of Entire Property: Description Gross Land Area:489,358 Sq.Ft. Existing Improvements:Utility Transmission Corridor Assessor’s Parcel Numbers:386-52-018 & 019 393-17-004 to 006 393-21-005 to 007 & 013 4 of 44 Summary Appraisal Statement 08-ASJ-082, Saratoga de Anza Trail Acquisition Saratoga, Santa Clara County, California June 10, 2008 08-ASJ-082 Fair Market Value of the Entire Property As Encumbered by the Existing PG&E High Voltage Transmission Lines and the Sub- Surface Water Pipeline: $734,000 4.We, the undersigned, hereby certify that, to the best of our knowledge and belief: the statements of fact contained in this report are true and correct; the reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions are limited only by the reported assumptions and limiting conditions, and are our personal, impartial, and unbiased professional analyses, opinions, and conclusions; we have no present or prospective interest in the property that is the subject of this report, and we have no personal interest with respect to the parties involved; we have no bias with respect to the property that is the subject of this report or to the parties involved with this assignment; our engagement in this assignment was not contingent upon developing or reporting predetermined results, our compensation for completing this assignment is not contingent upon the development or reporting of a predetermined value or direction in value that favors the cause of the client, the amount of the value opinion, the attainment of a stipulated result, or the occurrence of a subsequent event directly related to the intended use of this appraisal; the appraisal assignment was not based on a requested minimum valuation, a specific valuation, or the approval of a loan; our analyses, opinions and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared in conformity with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice, Code of Professional Ethics and the Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice of the Appraisal Institute, we have made a personal inspection of the property that is the subject of this report; Neil Johnson provided significant real property appraisal assistance to the persons signing this certification. The use of this report is subject to the requirements of the Appraisal Institute relating to review by its duly authorized representatives. As of the date of this report Chris Carneghi has completed the requirements under the continuing education program of the Appraisal Institute. In accordance with the Competency Provision in the USPAP, we certify that our education, experience and knowledge are sufficient to appraise the type of property being valued in this report. ________________________ Chris Carneghi, MAI 5 of 44 June 10, 2008 08-ASJ-082 EXHIBIT “A” DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY TAKEN (1)Subject Property Photos (2)Assessor Parcel Maps (3)Take Area Legal Descriptions & Maps 6 of 44 SUBJECT PROPERTY PHOTOS 7 of 44 SUBJECT PROPERTY PHOTOS 8 of 44 SUBJECT PROPERTY PHOTOS 9 of 44 SUBJECT PROPERTY PHOTOS 10 of 44 11 o f 4 4 12 o f 4 4 13 o f 4 4 14 o f 4 4 15 o f 4 4 16 o f 4 4 17 o f 4 4 18 o f 4 4 19 o f 4 4 20 o f 4 4 21 o f 4 4 22 o f 4 4 23 o f 4 4 24 o f 4 4 25 o f 4 4 26 o f 4 4 27 o f 4 4 28 o f 4 4 29 o f 4 4 30 o f 4 4 31 o f 4 4 June 10, 2008 08-ASJ-082 EXHIBIT “B” COMPARABLE SALES DATA 32 of 44 Ex h i b i t B Co m p a r a b l e L a n d S a l e s Ap p r a i s a l o f S a r a t o g a d e A n z a T r a i l Sa r a t o g a , C a l i f o r n i a CO E L a n d A r e a S a l e P r i c e / G r a n t o r / G r a n t e e C o m m e n t s No . L o c a t i o n D a t e ( A c r e s / S q . F t . ) P r i c e S q . F t . D o c u m e n t N u m b e r 1 8 1 S y l v a n W a y 5 / 0 8 0 . 4 8 $ 3 0 , 0 0 0 $1 . 4 3 Ro g e r R u f f o r d D e e d r e s t r i c t i o n s p r o h i b i t w e l l a n d La H o n d a 2 0 , 9 0 9 R o b e r t E . W o l f c o m m u n i t y w a t e r n o t a v a i l a b l e . AP N : 0 8 2 - 0 3 0 - 1 1 0 #0 8 - 0 5 6 3 6 5 M a r k e t e d f o r p i c n i c , s t o r a g e , R . V . u s e . 2 B e r l i n A v e n u e 1 2 / 0 7 0 . 0 5 $ 4 , 0 0 0 $1 . 8 4 Ma r y C . M a c D o n a l d T r u s t U n b u i l d a b l e d u e t o w a t e r a n d s e w e r Ha l f M o o n B a y 2 , 1 7 8 A l e x R a m s e y a v a il a b i l i t y i s s u e s . P u r c h a s e d f o r l o n g AP N : 0 4 8 - 1 7 6 - 0 9 0 #0 7 - 1 8 1 4 7 0 t e r m i n v e s t m e n t h o l d i n g . 3 U p p e r L o c k A v e n u e 1 0 / 0 7 0 . 4 1 $ 5 , 0 0 0 $0 . 2 8 Pa r n a z T r u s t S l o p i n g s i t e w i t h l a n d s l i d e i s s u e s . Be l m o n t 1 7 , 8 6 0 S c o t t R . P i a z z a R e q u i r e s u p g r a d i n g e x i s t i n g a c c e s s AP N : 0 4 3 - 1 2 2 - 4 1 0 #0 7 - 1 4 4 2 3 9 r o a d t o c i t y s t a n d a r d s . 4 H e l e n W a y 1 1 / 0 6 0 . 3 5 $ 2 2 , 0 0 0 $1 . 4 4 Da n H o U n b u i l d a b l e d u e t o s l o p e i s s u e s . Lo s G a t o s 1 5 , 2 4 6 J a m e s L . C e l c e r Ma r k e t e d f o r r e c r e a t i o n a l a n d AP N : 5 4 4 - 3 9 - 0 7 9 #1 9 1 7 8 8 6 4 c a m p i n g u s e s . Su b j e c t P r o p e r t y ( B e f o r e T a k e ) 1 1 . 2 4 48 9 , 3 5 8 So u r c e : C a r n e g h i - B l u m & P a r t n e r s , I n c . Ju n e 2 0 0 8 0 8 a s j 0 8 2 S a l e s 33 o f 4 4 Co p y r i g h t © 1 9 8 8 - 2 0 0 2 M i c r o s o f t C o r p . a n d / o r i t s s u p p l i e r s . A l l r i g h t s r e s e r v e d . h t t p : / / ww w . m i c r o s o f t . c o m / s t r e e t s © C o p yri ght 2 0 0 1 b y G e o gra p h i c D a t a T e c h n o l o gy , I n c . A l l r i ght s r e s e r v e d . © 2 0 0 1 N a v i gat i o n T e c h n o l o gie s . A l l r i ght s r e s e r v e d . T h i s d a t a i n c l u d e s i n f o r m a t i o n t a k e n w i t h p e r m i s s i o n f r o m C a n a d i a n a u t h o r i t i e s © H e r M a jesty the Queen in Right of Canada. Co m p a r a b l e L a n d S a l e s M a p 0 m i 5 101520 34 o f 4 4 June 10, 2008 08-ASJ-082 EXHIBIT “C” VALUATION NARRATIVE VALUATION TABLES 35 of 44 Summary Appraisal Statement 08-ASJ-082, Saratoga de Anza Trail Acquisition Saratoga, Santa Clara County, California June 10, 2008 08-ASJ-082 Valuation Narrative The following analysis involves the valuation of the larger subject property in the before condition, valuation of the proposed take area, and valuation of the larger remainder subject property in the after condition to determine severance damages. I.Value of the Larger Property in Before Take Condition Comparable Data and Analysis Table 1 in Exhibit B shows the comparable sales used by the appraisers in estimating market value for the subject property. The subject property has restricted development potential due to the presence of the high voltage wires/towers and underground water pipeline. This analysis is addressing the value of the larger subject property as currently encumbered by the existing utility infrastructure. The resulting value conclusion will be based on a continued utility infrastructure use (i.e. the value conclusion will represent surface use rights only as the underground and aerial rights are retained by/for the existing utility infrastructure). The selected comparable land sales are presented below and represent sites that likely cannot be developed due to various factors including topography, water/sewer availability, and legal issues. Comparable 1 is the May 2008 close of escrow on the property located at 81 Sylvan Way in the community of La Honda in San Mateo County. This is a 0.48 acre or 20,909 square foot site which has an irregular shape and sloping topography. However, the property has a deed restriction which prevents drilling a water well, and community water is not available to the property. According to the listing broker involved in this transaction, the deed restriction has been in place since the 1930s and it was the broker’s opinion that the chance that the deed restriction could be removed was “slim to none.” With the lack of water, the site is not developable. The site was marketed for picnic, storage, or recreational vehicle use. The buyer lives nearby and intends to use the property for storage purposes. The reported sale price of $30,000 is equivalent to $1.43 per square foot of land area. Comparable 2 is the December 2007 close of escrow on a 2,178 square foot site located on Berlin Avenue in Half Moon Bay. This is a level site which is currently unbuildable due to water and sewer access issues, as well as the lack of existing streets. The area in which this property is located previously had a PUD (Planned Unit Development) permit but this has expired and the issuance of a new PUD would require the cooperation of all property owners in the area. However, the broker involved in the transaction believed that it is highly unlikely that the City of Half Moon Bay will approve any development on this property 36 of 44 Summary Appraisal Statement 08-ASJ-082, Saratoga de Anza Trail Acquisition Saratoga, Santa Clara County, California June 10, 2008 08-ASJ-082 “in our lifetimes.” The buyer purchased the property for long term investment holding, believing that the property may be developable some day. The purchase price of $4,000 is equivalent to $1.84 per square foot of land area. Comparable 3 is the October 2007 close of escrow on a 17,860 square foot property located on Upper Lock Avenue in Belmont. This property has sloping topography and is in an area prone to landslides. Upper Lock Avenue is deemed by the City of Belmont to be an unimproved roadway as it does not meet City standards regarding street construction. Development on this comparable property would require the widening and upgrading of Upper Lock Avenue, which not only serves this property but other sites in the area. The broker involved in the transaction indicated that the property is currently unbuildable due to these issues, although the buyer believed that development may someday occur and purchased this property for speculative holding purposes. The purchase price of $5,000 is equivalent to $0.28 per square foot of land area. Comparable 4 is the November 2006 close of escrow on a property located on the south side of Helen Way in Los Gatos. This property is located in the Santa Cruz Mountains and contains a total of 0.35 acres or 15,246 square feet of land area. The intended use is residential, but the property is reportedly currently undevelopable due to slope/landslide issues. The reported sale price of $22,000 is equivalent to $1.44 per square foot of land area. The property was marketed as a camping and recreation use site, but the buyer’s intended use is not known. The comparable sales indicate an unadjusted price range of $0.28 to $1.84 per square foot of land area, although most fall in the upper portion of the range. All of the comparables represent sites which are not currently developable, and may never be developable, for a variety of reasons. While some of the comparables may have some future development potential, this was reported to be considered highly speculative on the part of the participants in these transactions. All of the comparables are located in residentially oriented areas in Santa Clara and San Mateo Counties. They are all relatively small sites in comparison with the subject, and a larger site will typically sell for less on a per square foot basis due to economies of scale. Value Conclusion Subsequent to consideration for the above factors, a value of $1.50 per square foot of land area is supported for the larger subject property in the before condition. This represents the value of the larger property as currently encumbered by the existing utility infrastructure improvements (i.e. the property rights required for the existing utility infrastructure and the 37 of 44 Summary Appraisal Statement 08-ASJ-082, Saratoga de Anza Trail Acquisition Saratoga, Santa Clara County, California June 10, 2008 08-ASJ-082 value of those rights have already been extracted). Application of this value conclusion to the larger property land area results in a value conclusion in the before condition of $734,037 (489,358 square feet x $1.50 per square foot). This is rounded to a value conclusion of $734,000. II.Value of Take as Part of the Whole As part of the Saratoga de Anza Trail Project, the City of Saratoga is acquiring an ingress/egress easement across the larger PG&E owned subject site. According to the legal descriptions provided for review, and reproduced in Exhibit A, the land area impacted by the partial acquisition amounts to 126,988 square feet. Starting at Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road, the easement will commence at approximately 63 feet wide to allow for a small parking area. The trail will subsequently narrow to approximately 15 feet wide for most of its length as it extends in a generally southeasterly direction, widening to 20 feet at some locations and widening further to extend around the existing high voltage towers. A gap occurs in the trail near Cox Avenue due to separate ownership (non-PG&E) of three intervening parcels. The trail will terminate at Saratoga Avenue. The portion of the proposed trail being addressed in this report terminates just short of Saratoga Avenue as the final segment of the trail will cross non-PG&E owned lands. The trail will be located along the northern property line and will be surfaced with decomposed granite. The project will include re-vegetation along the trail corridor and construction of two bridges to cross Rodeo Creek and Saratoga Creek. Minimal grading and excavation would occur with the right of way as part of the development of the trail, with ground disturbance generally extending to a maximum depth of nine inches (according to the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared by LSA Associates in April 2007). The proposed subject easement will not hinder the continued use of the property for utility transmission purposes, consisting of the overhead high voltage wires and underground water pipeline. The proposed easement will grant to the City of Saratoga ingress/egress rights for the construction of a pedestrian/biking trail across the larger subject property. Typically, the placing of an ingress/egress easement across a property would result in a division of the property rights and value between the parties involved. However, the concluded value for the larger subject property in the before condition is already reflective of the continued use of the property for the existing utility infrastructure improvements. That is, the property rights, and the value of those rights, to be retained for the utility infrastructure use have already been extracted in the concluded before condition value. The before take value conclusion essentially represents the residual surface use rights subsequent to the placement 38 of 44 Summary Appraisal Statement 08-ASJ-082, Saratoga de Anza Trail Acquisition Saratoga, Santa Clara County, California June 10, 2008 08-ASJ-082 of the utility infrastructure on site. The value of the proposed subject easement is concluded at 100 percent of the before take value. Application of the concluded fee simple value of $1.50 per square foot of land area as was indicated in the prior section, the value of the take area is calculated as follows: 126,988 sq. ft. x $1.50/sq. ft. x 100%=$190,482 Rounded=$190,000 The proposed surface easement area is currently unimproved, with the exception of improvements relating to the existing utility infrastructure. However, these improvements will remain in place and will continue to be accessible following enactment of the proposed surface easement. Therefore, no value is assigned to the improvements in the take area. III.Severance Damage The value, if any, of severance damages to a property is based on the value in before condition less the value of the property in after condition, with an additional deduction from the difference for the permanent take value already estimated. To estimate the value of the subject property in the after condition, the same comparable data will be considered. The same analysis as was previously discussed remains applicable for the subject property. The larger subject property in the after condition is essentially the same as in the before condition, with the exception of the new ingress/egress easement encumbrance. The value of the larger land areas not encumbered by the ingress/egress easement are concluded to be the same in the after condition as in the before condition ($1.50 per square foot). The value of the land area encumbered by the City of Saratoga ingress/egress easements is concluded to be zero percent of the previously concluded before condition value (since the take represents all of the remaining property rights after the property rights required for the existing utility infrastructure are extracted). Application of these estimates results in after take values for the remainder property as follows: Encumbered Land Area$1.50/sf x 126,988 sf x 0%=$ 0 Unencumbered Land Area $1.50/sf x 362,370 sfx 100%= $543,555 Total After Take Value= $543,555 Rounded= $544,000 39 of 44 Summary Appraisal Statement 08-ASJ-082, Saratoga de Anza Trail Acquisition Saratoga, Santa Clara County, California June 10, 2008 08-ASJ-082 Subtracting the above after-take value of the subject property from the before-take value of the entire property results in a difference as follows: Value in Before-Take Condition$734,000 Less Value of Take$190,000 Less Value in After-Take Condition$544,000 Difference$ 0 IV.Total Value of Permanent Take and Severance Damages The previously estimated values of the take and severance damages are added together in order to estimate the total compensation value for the subject property as follows: Permanent Take Value$190,000 Severance Damages$ 0 Total Value$190,000 40 of 44 Exhibit C Valuation Summary Appraisal of Saratoga de Anza Trail Saratoga, California LARGER PARCEL VALUATION Interest Value /Unit Units Valued Total Rounded Larger Property Value - Before Take$1.50/sq.ft.x489,358 sq.ft.x100%=$734,037= Note; the larger parcel value is for the surface rights only with the overhead and underground utilities remaining $734,000 TAKE PARCEL VALUATION Value of Take Area$1.50/sq.ft.x126,988 sq.ft.x100%=$190,482 =$190,000 DAMAGES/BENEFITS CALCULATIONS Benefits None Before Value of Subject Property$1.50/sq.ft.x489,358 sq.ft.x100%=$734,037$734,000 Take Value as Part of Whole$1.50/sq.ft.x126,988 sq.ft.x100%=$190,482($190,000) Difference $544,000 After Take Value Encumbered Land Area$1.50/sq.ft.x126,988/sq.ft.x0%=$0 Unencumbered Land Area$1.50/sq.ft.x362,370/sq.ft.x100%=$543,555 Total After Take Value (rounded)=$544,000 Damages Larger Parcel Before Value =$734,000 Less Value of Take =$190,000 Difference $544,000 Less After Take Value =$544,000 Damages =$0 Total Value of Proposed Acquisition - Take and Damages$190,000 Source: Carneghi-Blum & Partners, Inc. June 2008 08asj082 Valuation Summary 41 of 44 June 10, 2008 08-ASJ-082 EXHIBIT “D” SCOPE OF WORK GENERAL ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS DEFINITION OF FAIR MARKET VALUE 42 of 44 Summary Appraisal Statement 08-ASJ-082, Saratoga de Anza Trail Acquisition Saratoga, Santa Clara County, California June 10, 2008 08-ASJ-082 Scope of Work The scope of work for this appraisal is to use the appropriate approaches to value in accordance with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) to arrive at a market value conclusion. Specific steps include the inspection of the subject property and the research, analysis and verification of comparable data to arrive at a value indication as put forth in this report. The Direct Sales Comparison Approach is considered to be the best indicator for the subject property. The Cost and Income Approaches were not used, due to the fact that the market for this type of property does not rely on these approaches. General Assumptions and Limiting Conditions 1.It is the client’s responsibility to read this report and to inform the appraisers of any errors or omissions of which he/she is aware prior to utilizing this report or making it available to any third party. 2.No responsibility is assumed for legal matters. It is assumed that title of the property is marketable and it is free and clear of liens, encumbrances and special assessments other than as stated in this report. 3.Plot plans and maps are included to assist the reader in visualizing the property. Information, estimates, and opinions furnished to the appraiser, and contained in the report, were obtained from sources considered reliable and believed to be true and correct. However, no responsibility for accuracy of such items furnished the appraisers is assumed by the appraisers. 4.All information has been checked where possible and is believed to be correct, but is not guaranteed as such. 5.The appraisers assume that there are no hidden or unapparent conditions of the property, subsoil, or structures, which would render it more or less valuable. The appraisers assume no responsibility for such conditions, or for engineering which might be required to discover such factors. It is assumed that no soil contamination exists as a result of chemical drainage or leakage in connection with any production operations on or near the property. 6.In this assignment, the existence (if any) of potentially hazardous materials used in the construction or maintenance of the improvements or disposed of on the site has not been considered. These materials may include (but are not limited to) the existence of 43 of 44 Summary Appraisal Statement 08-ASJ-082, Saratoga de Anza Trail Acquisition Saratoga, Santa Clara County, California June 10, 2008 08-ASJ-082 formaldehyde foam insulation, asbestos insulation, or toxic wastes. The appraisers are not qualified to detect such substances; the client is advised to retain an expert in this field. 7.Neither all nor part of the contents of this report shall be conveyed to the public through advertising, public relations, new sales, or other media without the written consent and approval of the appraisers, particularly as to the valuation conclusions, the identity of the appraisers, or any reference to the Appraisal Institute or the MAI designation. Definition of Fair Market Value The measure of “just compensation” is “market value”. Section 1263.320 of the Code of Civil Procedure defines market value as: a)The fair-market value of the property taken is the highest price on the date of valuation that would be agreed to by a seller, being willing to sell but under no particular or urgent necessity for so doing, nor obliged to sell, and a buyer, being ready, willing and able to buy but under no particular necessity for so doing, each dealing with the other with full knowledge of all the uses and purposes for which the property is reasonably adaptable and available. b)The fair-market value of property taken for which there is no relevant comparable market is its value on the date of valuation as determined by any method of valuation that is just and equitable. 44 of 44