HomeMy WebLinkAboutR34 EDAECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCY
OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
REQUEST FOR COMMISSION /COUNCIL ACTION
FROM: RONALD E. WINKLER SUBJECT: 40TH STREET REDEVELOPMENT
Director SURVEY AREA
ORIU
DATE: August 5, 1999 "INA L
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Synopsis of Previous Comm ission/Councit/Com mittee Action(s):
On 10/27/94, the Council authorized submission of a Section 108 Loan Application for 40`h Street Shopping Center
to the U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development.
On 1/27/97, the Council authorized execution of a purchase option agreement with Sophia Salpatas.
On 1/28/99, the RDA Committee continued an item to consider redevelopment plan adoption in the area around the
40`h Street Shopping Center.
Recommended Motion(s):
(Synopsis continued to next page...)
(Community Development Commission)
Motion A: That the Community Development Commission receive and file the Feasibility Study prepared by Rosenow
Spevacek Group, Inc. (RSG) for the proposed 40`h Street Redevelopment Project.
(Mayor and Common Council)
Motion B: RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
DESIGNATING A REDEVELOPMENT SURVEY AREA FOR PROJECT STUDY PURPOSES (40TH
STREET).
Contact Person(s): Gary Van Osdel /Ronald E. Winkler Phone: 5081
Project Area(s): N/A Ward(s): Four (4)
Supporting Data Attached: 10 Staff Report ❑x Resolution(s) ❑ Agreement(s) /Contract(s) ❑x Map(s) ❑x Report
FUNDING REQUIREMENT • -Amount: $ N/A Source: N/A
Bud et Authority: N/A
SIGNATURE:
Gary an Osdel, Executive irector onald E. inkler, Director
E omic Development gency Develop ent Department
Commission /Council Notes:
REW:SMM:public \development \susan \40th Street Survey Area COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA
MEETING DATE: 08/16/1999
Agenda Item Number:
Request for Commission /Council Action
40' Street
July 21, 1999
Page Number -2-
Synopsis of Previous Commission /Council/Committee Action(s):
On February 4, 1999, the Redevelopment Committee discussed redevelopment plan adoption and
forwarded a recommendation to proceed to the Commission.
On March 15, 1999, the Council conducted a public hearing and approved an amendment to the
City's 1998 -99 Annual Consolidated Action Plan reallocating $150,0000 to fund a redevelopment
feasibility analysis and related costs for the proposed 40th Street and Waterman Avenue
Redevelopment Project Area.
On March 15, 1999, the Commission adopted Resolution #1999 -8A approving the execution of a
professional services agreement with Rosenow, Spevacek Group, Inc. (RSG) for purposes of
carrying out the redevelopment feasibility analysis for the proposed 40th Street and Waterman
Avenue Redevelopment Study Area.
REW:SMM:public \development \susan \40th Street Survey Area COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA
MEETING DATE: 08/16/1999
Agenda Item Number:
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCY
STAFF REPORT
40th Street Redevelopment Survey Area
Background
Over the past few years, there have been several attempts by the City and Agency to revitalize the
40' Street area with little success. These efforts have included a commitment from HUD for a
$2.295 million Section 108 loan, together with a $344,000 Economic Development Incentive Grant
for the renovation of the 40" Street Shopping Center. In addition, the City has worked closely with
existing property owners on rehabilitation concepts and designs for new retail developments.
However, poor economic conditions in the area have discouraged existing owners to incur additional
debt for renovation costs. In 1997, the Agency acquired an option to purchase a parcel of property
owned by Sophia Salpatas. The option was allowed to expire due to the inability to assemble
sufficient land area for new development through voluntary acquisition. Continued physical and
economic decline in the area has made it apparent that revitalization may not be possible without
redevelopment powers. As a result, major property owners such as Forecast Properties have
encouraged the City to consider adoption of a redevelopment plan.
Consequently, in March 1999, the Council /Commission authorized the Agency to retain the
professional services of Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. (RSG) for the purpose of completing a
redevelopment feasibility analysis for the 40" Street and Waterman Avenue Redevelopment Study
Area.
Feasibility Analysis
RSG's preliminary findings of the physical and economic blighting conditions that exist within the
study area indicate that a large portion of the residential and commercial properties qualify for
inclusion in a potential redevelopment project. A parcel -by- parcel field survey conducted by RSG,
combined with information obtained from other sources indicate that 74% of all parcels within the
study area suffer from one or more physical blighting and/or economic blighting conditions, or both.
The study area is comprised of deteriorated and dilapidated structures, with areas that do not meet
current codes, have poor access and other design problems. The majority of the commercial
properties in the study area contain deteriorated and underutilized structures with inconsistent
architectural or design themes. Inadequate access and inadequate parking further exacerbate the poor
condition and appearances of these properties. Within the last 5 years, property values in the study
area have declined by over 9 %, compared to a 3% increase City -wide and a 4% increase County-
wide. Taxable retail sales in the City and County between 1993 and 1997 have increased by 9% and
26% respectively. However, the study area has suffered a significant decrease of 10% for the same
time period.
REW:SMM:public \development \susan \40th Street Survey Area COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA
MEETING DATE: 08/16/1999
Agenda Item Number:
Economic Development Agency Staff Report
40`h Street Shopping Center
July 21, 1999
Page Number -2-
The feasibility analysis details the physical and economic conditions of the commercial and
residential areas of the Study Area. It is concluded in the report that without governmental
assistance utilizing the tools of redevelopment, Study Area properties will continue to decline. The
powers of redevelopment are needed to assemble properties and provide financial assistance for
improvements.
Power of land assemblage is only one tool that may be used to benefit the area. Development will
still be dependent upon private financing as well as the city's ability to provide the Section 108 Loan
and the Economic Development Initiative Grant for the 40"' Street Shopping Center. In addition, the
City's annual CDBG, HOME and ESG funds can be used to assist with land acquisition, demolition,
infrastructure improvements, construction or rehabilitation projects. These funds, as well as 20%
housing set -aside and potential tax increment monies may also be used for correcting the residential
problems and promote development of senior housing in the area.
Project Area Committee (PAC)
It is recommended that a Project Area Committee (PAC) be formed due to the number of residential
units within the Study Area that are likely to be occupied by low and moderate income people. A
PAC is an elected body comprised of residential owner occupants, residential tenants, business
owners (including non - residential property owners) and existing community organizations within
a project area. In accordance with Redevelopment Law, each group must be adequately represented.
The PAC will review the proposed redevelopment plan and may choose to prepare a report and/or
recommendation about the redevelopment to the City Council. If a PAC opposes the adoption of
a redevelopment plan, the City Council must adopt the plan by a two - thirds vote rather than a simple
majority. In the event we move forward with the plan adoption, PAC procedures will be developed
and presented to the Mayor and Council.
Current Issues
The first step in the Redevelopment Plan adoption process pursuant to California Community
Redevelopment Law is the designation of a Survey Area for study purposes. From within the Survey
Area, the Community Development Commission, in cooperation with the Planning Commission,
will select the proposed boundaries of a project area that may be comprised of all or part of the
Survey Area. Particular care should be taken in establishing the Survey Area to ensure that all areas
that may benefit from a redevelopment program are included. Once the Survey Area is adopted, the
boundaries of the proposed project area must be contained within the Survey Area. If the Planning
Commission or Community Development Commission wishes to expand the proposed boundaries
REW:SMM:public \development \susan \40th Street Survey Area COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA
MEETING DATE: 08/16/1999
Agenda Item Number:
Economic Development Agency Staff Report
40" Street Shopping Center
July 21, 1999
Page Number -3-
when they consider selection of the proposed Project Area, they would be prevented from such an
expansion until the City Council expanded the Survey Area boundaries.
In the pursuit of redevelopment of the 40" Street Area, a redevelopment program must be financially
viable, the redevelopment project area must be predominately urbanized, and the project area must
exhibit conditions of physical and economic blight that the private sector, governmental action, or
both, cannot remedy. The next step in the adoption of a redevelopment plan is the adoption by the
Planning Commission of a Preliminary Plan that designates more specific Project Area boundaries.
The Preliminary Plan will then be brought before the Commission for approval.
Boundaries
The proposed Survey Area consists of 73.17 acres of commercial and residential uses in the
northeastern portion of the City. The area is made up of two (2) non - contiguous portions (See map
marked Exhibit A). The larger area is generally bounded by 44" Street to the north, Waterman
Avenue to the east, Ralston Avenue and Sonora Drive to the south, and Electric and Mt. View to the
west. The smaller portion is multi -unit residential, just to the east of Sierra Way on 49th Street.
Fiscal Impact
None
Recommendation
Staff recommends the Mayor and Common Council and the Community Development Commission
adopt the form motions which (1) receive and file the feasibility study prepared for the proposed 40"
Street Redevelopment project and (2) adopt the attached Resolution designating a Redevelopment
Survey Area for that area commonly referred to as the 401" Street Study Area
Ronald E. inkler, Director
Development Department
REW:SMM:public \development \susan \40th Street Survey Area COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA
MEETING DATE: 08/16/1999
Agenda Item Number:
COFT
RESOLUTION NO.
2 RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO DESIGNATING A REDEVELOPMENT
3 SURVEY AREA FOR PROJECT STUDY PURPOSES (40TH STREET)
4
5
6
7
THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
HEREBY FINDS, DETERMINES, RESOLVES, AND ORDERS AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The Mayor and Common Council hereby acknowledge receipt of a report
entitled "Feasibility Study Proposed 40`x' Street Redevelopment Project" dated July 1999. The
8
Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino desire to designate a certain area to
9
to
be studied as a redevelopment survey area (the "Survey Area ") and authorize the San Bernardino
Community Development Commission (the "Commission ") to proceed with further studies to
11
determine the feasibility of potential redevelopment activities within the Survey Area.
12
SECTION 2. The California Community Redevelopment Law ( "CRL ") provides that if
f j
directed by the Mayor and Common Council, the Planning Commission shall select a project
14
comprised of all or part of a redevelopment Survey Area. It is hereby determined that
15
consideration of a redevelopment project within said redevelopment Survey Area is in the best
16
interests of the City.
17
SECTION 3. The Mayor and Common Council hereby finds and determines that the
18
area requires study to investigate the feasibility of the formation of a redevelopment project to
19
abate and eliminate the condition of blight as described in the July, 1999 survey area study
20
report, and the Mayor and Common Council hereby designate the Survey Area (as depicted on
21
Exhibit "A ") as a redevelopment survey area within the meaning of Section 33310 of the CRL.
22
SECTION 4. The Mayor and Common Council hereby direct the Planning Commission
23
of the City of San Bernardino to select the boundaries for one or more redevelopment project
24
`5
areas within the Survey Area and to submit a preliminary plan for the redevelopment of such
proposed project areas, pursuant to CRL Sections 33322 and 33325.
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
3
14
15
16 1
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
?5
SECTION 5. The designation of any territory as part of a redevelopment survey area
accomplished by action of the Mayor and Common Council prior to approval of this Resolution
shall remain in full force and effect.
////
////
////
-2-
2
3
4
5
6
7
s
9
10
11
12
3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24 1
?5 1
RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO DESIGNATING A REDEVELOPMENT
SURVEY AREA FOR PROJECT STUDY PURPOSES (40TH STREET)
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Mayor and
Common Council of the City of San Bernardino at a meeting
thereof, held on the day of , 1999, by the following vote to wit:
Commission/Council Members: Ayes Nays Abstain p
ESTRADA
LIEN
MCGINNIS
SCHNETZ
VACANT
ANDERSON
MILLER
The foregoing resolution is hereby approved this
Approved as to form and Legal Content:
James F. Penman
City Attorney
By:
-3-
City Clerk
day of
Judith Valles, Mayor
City of San Bernardino
1999.
48th St
m
m
�
c
m m
d
c
>
m ;
U
Qm
>
X19
d
L
m 7
a o
i
I.-- Jn
i
�.� Ralstont- ■■�■•�Avenue�•■�■■
I m
7
39th St c
m
a
' o
d m
J
in a Ps
3
> t
C, yt8 \
40th Street
as
m
�i
4
c
m
it
i
City of San Bernardino
NORTH ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCY
Aalstor
i I
NOT TO SCALE Proposed 40th Street Redevelopment Area
38th St
FEASIBILITY STUDY
PROPOSED 40TH STREET
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Prepared For:
The Economic Development Agency and The City of San Bernardino
201 North E Street, Suite 301
San Bernardino, California 92401 -1507
Prepared By:
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc.
540 N. Golden Circle, Suite 305
Santa Ana, California 92705
Phone 714.541.4585
Fax 714.836.1748
E -Mail Address: RSGINCCA @aol.com
July, 1999
3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION
PAGE #
EXECUTIVESUMMARY ............................................................................... ..............................1
I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................... ..............................4
11. LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS ....................................................... ..............................6
III. DESCRIPTION OF PHYSICAL AND ECONOMIC CONDITIONS EXISTING
IN THE STUDY AREA .......................................................................... ..............................9
IV. PRELIMINARY FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS ................ .............................24
TABLES AND MAPS
TABLES
Table1 ............................................................................................................... ..............................9
Table2 .............................................................................................................. .............................19
Table3 .............................................................................................................. .............................20
Table4 .............................................................................................................. .............................21
Table5 .............................................................................................................. .............................22
Table6 .............................................................................................................. .............................28
Table7 .............................................................................................................. .............................29
Table8 .............................................................................................................. .............................30
Table9 .............................................................................................................. .............................31
MAPS
Map1 .................................................................................................. ..................FollowingPage 5
APPENDICES
Appendix 1 — Photographs of the Study Area
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. ( "RSG ") was retained by the Economic Development
Agency and the City Council of the City of San Bernardino to conduct a Feasibility Study to
determine whether conditions pursuant to the California Community Redevelopment Law are
substantial enough to proceed with the adoption of a redevelopment project area for the 40th
Street Study Area ( "Study Area "). The information and recommendations of this study are based
upon a parcel -by- parcel field study conducted by RSG, information gathered from secondary
data sources, and a review of historical documents.
The 40th Street Study Area consists of approximately 73.28 acres (excluding public rights of
way) of commercial and residential uses in the northeastern portion of the City of San
Bernardino. The area is made up of 2 non - contiguous portions. The larger area is generally
bordered by 44th Street to the north, Waterman Avenue to the east, Ralston Avenue and Sonora
Drive to the south, and Electric and Mountain View Avenues to the west. The other area is
multi -unit residential, just to the east of Sierra Way on 49th Street. The existing commercial
areas in the Study Area are located on 40th Street, as well as along certain portions of Sierra
Way. These uses consist of a mix of marginal retail and other commercial uses serving the local
neighborhood. The residential areas are primarily north of 40th Street, east of Sierra Way, and
south of 40th Street, west of Sierra Way.
The results of the field survey indicate that 74% of all parcels in the Study Area suffer
from one or more physical blighting conditions, one or more economic conditions, or both.
The Study Area is comprised of deteriorated and dilapidated structures, with areas that do not
meet current codes, have poor access and other design problems. The majority of the
commercial properties in the Study Area contain deteriorated and underutilized structures with
inconsistent architectural or design theme. Inadequate access and inadequate parking exacerbate
the poor condition and obsolete appearance of these properties, and have contributed to the lack
of business patronage and the overall decline in the economic viability of the commercial uses in
the Study Area. Economic conditions in the Study Area are also strained. Property values in the
Study Area have declined by over 9% over a five -year period, while values in both the City and
County have increased. Despite substantial population growth and increasing retail sales in the
City and County of San Bernardino, the Study Area has experienced a decline of 10.1% in its
taxable sales in the last 4 years. As the economic viability of the commercial areas in the Study
Area has diminished, necessary maintenance of buildings has been deferred. Property owners
with little or no cash flow appear unable to fund improvements due to the relatively prohibitive
cost of routine maintenance.
A central focus in the Study Area is the 40th Street Shopping Center ( "Shopping Center ") and its
environs. The physical and economic blighting conditions present in the Shopping Center
include deterioration and dilapidation, defective design, substandard design, and a vacancy rate
of nearly 40 %. The Shopping Center also suffers from varying grade levels, as the portion
directly adjacent to 40th Street is of a higher grade than the southerly portion of the Center. The
Shopping Center has suffered a loss of 2 anchor tenants in the last decade, which has made
[ leasing vacant space problematic. The substandard condition of the Center, as well as the
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Feasibility Study for the
July, 1999 1 City of San Bernardino
development of a larger, newer, and more attractive adjacent shopping center fronting Sierra
Way have further exacerbated this problem. The use of Waterman Avenue as the primary
thoroughfare to the mountain areas, rather than Sierra Way, has also diverted a significant
amount of traffic away from the commercial properties in the Study Area.
Residential properties with the highest incidence of physical and economic blighting conditions
in the Study Area are primarily located in the following areas: in the northern portion along 49th
Street, near the corner of 44th Street and Mountain View Avenue, the area bounded by Electric
Avenue, Mountain View Avenue and 49th Street, and adjacent to the 40th Street Shopping
Center along Sonora Avenue. The properties along 49th Street exhibit the most severe
conditions of deterioration and dilapidation in the Study Area. High proportions of residential
units are boarded up and appear abandoned. Two large apartment complexes located near 44th
Street and Mountain View Avenue are land - locked with inadequate access points, some of which
require traveling through narrow alleys. The complexes also have bars on windows and doors,
which indicates crime issues in the neighborhood. Additionally, these structures suffer from
deferred maintenance and lack adequate tenant and visitor parking. Conditions documented in
the southerly portion of the Study Area, along Mountain View and Electric Avenue include
deterioration and dilapidation, inadequate parking access, outdoor storage, and incompatible
uses. Finally, the residential area located to the south of the Shopping Center exhibited signs of
varying grade levels, deferred maintenance, incompatible uses, and graffiti. Further, there are a
number of multifamily properties that are vacant and/or have been taken back by HUD or the
mortgage lenders. The 1990 Census reports that over 46% of the housing units in the City were
constructed prior to 1960. The poor condition of the housing stock in portions of the Study Area
is reflective of the older age structures and the lack of routine maintenance.
The conditions noted above, and detailed in the following report, have resulted in the overall
physical and economic decline of the commercial and residential areas of the Study Area. It is
our opinion that without governmental assistance utilizing the tools of redevelopment, the Study
Area properties will continue to decline, increasing the existing physical burden on the
community and further diminishing the economic viability of the area. Multiple ownerships and
small commercial lot sizes have acted as an impediment to rehabilitation and development. The
powers of redevelopment are needed to assemble properties and provide financial assistance for
improvements. In residential areas, many of which have been negatively impacted by the poor
condition of the commercial properties, public intervention and assistance is needed for
rehabilitation, reuse of abandoned buildings, and improved access and parking.
The City of San Bernardino has a long history of initiating proposed projects to alleviate the
blighting conditions at the 40`h Street Shopping Center with little success, including, previous
attempts to include the area in a redevelopment project area. To provide necessary financial
tools to initiate projects in the area, the City has obtained an Economic Development Initiative
(EDI) grant in the amount of $344,000 and has qualified for a $2,295,000 Section 108 Loan from
HUD for the 40`h Street Shopping Center. In addition, the City annually receives Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding in the amount of $3,884,000, HOME funding in the
amount of $1,773,000, and ESG funding in the amount of $138,000. It is anticipated that these
funding sources can be used in combination with the financial tools available through
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Feasibility Study for the
July, 1999 2 City of San Bernardino
r
redevelopment to alleviate blighting conditions in the Study Area. The principal financing
mechanism of redevelopment is the tax increment financing. Preliminary projections indicated,
that over the proposed 45 -year period to collect tax increment allowed under Community
Redevelopment Law, the Study Area may generated approximately $50 million dollars of gross
revenue. Of this amount, $34.2 million dollars of net tax increment revenue (after mandatory
payments to the Area's taxing agencies) allocate to the Agency for redevelopment and housing
purposes. These funds in conjunction with the other funding sources described above will
provide the necessary dollars need to address and remedy the blighting conditions now prevalent
within the Study Area.
STUDY AREA BOUNDARIES
The Study Area is generally bounded by 44th Street to the north, Ralston Avenue, and Sonora
Drive to the south. Electric Avenue and Mountain View Avenue to the west, and Sepulveda
Avenue and Waterman Ax,enue to the east. In addition, a section of high- density apartments
north of this area is included in the Study Area. This additional section is generally bounded by
Waterman Avenue to the east. Sierra Way to the west and northwest and parcels fronting 49th
Street on the south. Major land uses in the Study Area consist of retail, commercial and
residential uses located directly adjacent to or near commercial and office properties. A map of
the Study Area is attached as Map 1 of this Study.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the conditions of physical and economic blight documented in this Study, it is RSG's
preliminary determination that there is sufficient evidence to move forward with the adoption of
a redevelopment project. Additionally, because of the number of residential units within the
Study Area, it is also recommended that a Project Area Committee be formed pursuant to
California Community Redevelopment Law.
Rosenow Spevaeek Group, Inc. Feasibility Study for the
July, 1999 3 City of San Bernardino
I. INTRODUCTION
The Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. ( "RSG ") has been retained by the Economic Development
Agency of the City of San Bernardino ( "Agency ") and the San Bernardino City Council
( "Council ") to analyze the feasibility of establishing a redevelopment project area. More
specifically, the City requested that RSG review previously prepared studies and materials to
assess historical trends in the Study Area and assist in preliminary analysis to identify
appropriate redevelopment project area boundaries. To this end, RSG has prepared a Feasibility
Study ( "Study ") to identify areas in the City which meet the requirements of a redevelopment
project area, as specified in the California Redevelopment Law, Health and Safety Code Section
33000, et. seq., ("CRL"). With the assistance of studies to provide historical perspective on
portions of the Study Area, and other data provided by the City and other sources, the analysis
presented in this report focuses primarily on those areas which have been identified by RSG for
inclusion in a potential redevelopment project area, as shown in on Map 1 ( "Study Area ").
RSG's preliminary findings of the physical and economic blighting conditions present within the
Study Area to date indicate that a large portion of the residential and commercial areas in the
Study Area qualify for inclusion in a potential redevelopment project. The properties contained
within the Study Area appear to exhibit conditions of physical and economic blight, which
cannot be alleviated by private enterprise and /or government action, without redevelopment.
However, certain issues such as some parcel level analyses, lease rates, building code violations,
and crime statistics require further review and analysis by RSG staff.
It is important to note that this Study is limited in nature and therefore in scope. For example,
this Study does not recommend a specific redevelopment program of activities, or examine the
potential costs associated with such a redevelopment program, and therefore does not make any
formal determination of the economic feasibility of redevelopment. Section 33352(e) of the CRL
requires that when a project is adopted, the Agency must provide a detailed explanation of the
proposed method of financing so that the City Council may make a finding, in the ordinance
adopting the redevelopment plan, that the plan is economically sound and feasible. While we are
confident that feasibility can be adequately demonstrated to fulfill the CRL requirements, sources
of revenues other than tax increment revenue will need to be identified and incorporated into a
full financial analysis if a redevelopment plan adoption is undertaken. The Agency is not bound
by the assumptions used to demonstrate financial feasibility during the adoption process, but will
be required to adopt an implementation plan, covering the first five years of redevelopment
activity, concurrent with the plan adoption.
In addition to the above limitation, this Study is limited in its assessment of blight. While blight
assessment performed for this Study was based primarily on a parcel -by- parcel survey, it
contains a review of secondary data sources and does not contain the full scope of the
comprehensive review and research of secondary data sources that would be required for an
actual redevelopment plan adoption.
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Feasibility Study for the
July, 1999 4 City of San Bernardino
r
re-7
Another factor to consider in connection with the use of redevelopment is the formation of a
Project Area Committee. Section 33385 of the California Community Redevelopment Law
requires that a Project Area Committee ( "PAC ") must be formed in either of the following
situations:
(1) A substantial number of low and/or moderate income people reside within a project area,
and the redevelopment plan contains the authority for the agency to acquire, by eminent
domain, property on which any persons reside; or
(2) The redevelopment plan contains one or more public projects that will displace a
substantial number of low and/or moderate income persons.
Based upon the number of residential units within the Study Area that are likely to be occupied
by low and /or moderate income people, RSG recommends that a PAC is formed. A PAC is an
elected body comprised of residential owner occupants, residential tenants, business owners
(including non - resident property owners), and existing community organization within a
redevelopment project area. Each group must be adequately represented. A PAC reviews the
proposed redevelopment plan and may choose to prepare a report and/or recommendation about
the redevelopment to the City Council. If a PAC opposes the adoption of a redevelopment plan,
the City Council must adopt the plan by a two - thirds vote, rather than a simple majority.
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Feasibility Study for the
July, 1999 5 City of San Bernardino
L---j u
49th Street
48th Street
47th Street
\ 46th Street
/) N
T
� o �
a
m J m
Q 45th Street
m e
m
Q. A
(n 3
■■�� ■ ■� ■ ■� 44th Street
I
-- 43rd Street
I42nd Street
■
IIII I I
41st Street
i
40th Street
armei to
7
c
m
>
3
6/ Glentair
c
` ■� Ralston �u�■■�Avenue■�■■�■y
— I
39th St
— a
— I o
rn
� J
N W ate
`I d e
>
a m
w us
NORTH
Sonora
IRalston
City of San Bernardino \/
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCY
NOT TO SCALE --, 38th St Proposed 40th Street Redevelopment Area
_
T
�
I
A
w
` ■� Ralston �u�■■�Avenue■�■■�■y
— I
39th St
— a
— I o
rn
� J
N W ate
`I d e
>
a m
w us
NORTH
Sonora
IRalston
City of San Bernardino \/
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCY
NOT TO SCALE --, 38th St Proposed 40th Street Redevelopment Area
II. LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS
Section 33030 of the CRL states that "there exists in many communities blighted areas which
constitute physical and economic liabilities, requiring redevelopment in the interest of the health,
safety, and general welfare of the people of these communities and of the state." This Report
describes the existing physical and economic conditions present within the Study Area that create
blight, the factors which cause a reduction of or a lack of proper utilization of the Study Area,
why these blighting conditions create a burden on the community, and why private enterprise
acting alone is unable to reverse or alleviate the blighting conditions found within the Study
Area.
Section 33030 of the CRL states a blighted area is one that contains both of the following:
1. "An area that is predominantly urbanized, as that term is defined in Section 33320.1, and
is an area in which the combination of conditions set forth in Section 33031 are so
prevalent and so substantial that it causes a reduction of, or lack of, proper utilization of
the area to such an extent that it constitutes a serious physical or economic burden on the
community which cannot reasonably be expected to be reversed or alleviated by private
enterprise or governmental action, or both, without redevelopment."
2. "An area that is characterized by either of the following:
a. One or more conditions set forth in any paragraph of subdivision (a) of Section
33031 and one or more conditions set forth in any paragraph of subdivision (b) of
Section 33031;
b. The condition described in paragraph (4) of subdivision (a) of Section 33031."
Section 33031 of the CRL describes both physical and economic conditions that cause blight.
The "physical" conditions that cause blight, as detailed in subdivision (a) of Section 33031, are
as follows:
1. "Buildings in which it is unsafe or unhealthy for persons to live or work. These
conditions can be caused by serious building code violations, dilapidation and
deterioration, defective design or physical construction, faulty or inadequate utilities, or
other similar factors.
2. Factors that prevent or substantially hinder the economically viable use or capacity of
buildings or lots. This condition can be caused by a substandard design, inadequate size
given present standards and market conditions, lack of parking, or other similar factors.
3. Adjacent or nearby uses that are incompatible with each other and which prevent the
economic development of those parcels or other portions of the area.
4. The existence of subdivided lots of irregular form and shape and inadequate size for
proper usefulness and development that are in multiple ownership."
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Feasibility Study for the
July, 1999 6 City of San Bernardino
The "economic" conditions that cause blight, as stated in subdivision (b) of Section 33031, are as
follows:
1. "Depreciated or stagnant property values or impaired investments, including, but not
necessarily limited to, those properties containing hazardous wastes that require the use
of an agency's authority as specified in Article 12.5 (commencing with Section 33459).
2. Abnormally high business vacancies, abnormally low lease rates, high turnover rates,
abandoned buildings, or excessive vacant lots within an area developed for urban use and
served by utilities.
3. A lack of necessary commercial facilities that are normally found in neighborhoods,
including grocery stores, drug stores, and banks and other lending institutions.
4. Residential overcrowding or an excess of bars, liquor stores, or other businesses that cater
exclusively to adults, that has led to problems of public safety and welfare.
5. A high crime rate that constitutes a serious threat to the public safety and welfare."
This analysis, and the assessment of the blighting conditions found within the Study Area, is
based upon the following:
1. A windshield survey of the properties within the Study Area conducted during May of
1999 by RSG, redevelopment consultants to the City.
2. Information and data contained in the report from National Decision Systems, a division
of the VNU Precision Marketing Group, Inc.
3. Information and data contained in the Inland Empire Consultants, Inc., land lease analysis
of a site in the 40th Street Shopping Center, December 1997.
4. Information contained in the 108 Loan Application to the U.S. Department of Housing
and Urban Development for the 40th Street Shopping Center in November, 1994.
5. Information contained in the appraisal report of a portion of the 40th Street Shopping
Center by Gottfried, Gamble & Associates, Inc., April 1996.
6. Retail sales data obtained from the State Board of Equalization, 1994 through 1997.
7. Retail sales data from MBIA MuniServices Company, 1993 through 1998.
8. Parcel ownership, sales, and secured assessed valuation data from MetroScan Information
Service, derived from the most recent assessment roll of the County of San Bernardino
Assessor's Office.
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Feasibility Study for the
July, 1999 7 City of San Bernardino
9. Crime statistics from State of California Department of Justice - Bureau of Criminal
Information and Analysis, Criminal Justice Statistics Center.
10. Information provided by the City of San Bernardino.
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Feasibility Study for the
July, 1999 8 City of San Bernardino
III. DESCRIPTION OF PHYSICAL AND
ECONOMIC CONDITIONS EXISTING IN
THE STUDY AREA
The following discussion presents a general analysis of physical and economic blighting
conditions within the Study Area. As mentioned in the Executive Summary, for the purposes of
the description of physical conditions presented in this analysis, the Study Area is the area shown
on Map 1. However, the analysis of the economic conditions presented may in some instances
(e.g., crime statistics) include additional areas beyond the Study Area because the City provided
data for a district that encompasses additional land. Table 1 presents blight findings pursuant to
the field study.
TABLE 1
Adoption of the 40th Street Redevelopment Project Area
Summary of Blighting Conditions
(1) Includes Outdoor Storage or Production.
(2) This number represents the number of parcels with at least one condition of physical or economic blight
(3) Totals include Parcels Designated for Use by Business Establishments with at least one vacant unit.
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Feasibility Study for the
July, 1999 9 City of San Bernardino
No. of
No. of
%of Parcels with
Physical Blighting
Parcels /Properties with
Parcels/Properties
Blighting Conditions
Conditions
Blighting Conditions
in Project Area
in Project Area
Buildings Unsafe /Unhealthy to Live or work
Serious Building Code Violations
18
234
7.69%
Dilapidation and Deterioration
Deferred Maintenance
109
234
46.58%
Moderate Rehabilitation
24
234
10.26%
Extensive Rehabilitation
11
234
4.70%
Subtotal
144
234
61.54%
Defective Design/Physical Construction
57
234
24.36%
Faulty or Inadequate Utilities
46
234
19.66%
Factors that Prevent or Hinder the Economically
Viable Use or Capacity of Bldgs. or Lots
Substandard Design (1)
75
234
32.05%
Lack of Parking
29
234
12.39%
Incompatible Adjacent Uses
10
234
4.27%
Lots of Irregular Shape and Inadequate Size
and Development in Multiple Ownership
25
234
10.68%
Total Physical Blighting Conditions (2)
171
234
73.08%
Economic Blighting Conditions
Declining Property Values /Impaired Investments
19
234
8.12%
Business Vacancies (3)
16
69
23.19%
Abandoned Buildings
9
234
3.85%
Total Economic Blighting Conditions (2)
39
234
16.67%
Nt� with one,or more Physicai Blighting Con�tliions � �� � � �
�'otai
Gonditaous,or both
� .�
=�` 174 :': 234
�
oiron+�.or tu►ore EeonomicBlhting
(1) Includes Outdoor Storage or Production.
(2) This number represents the number of parcels with at least one condition of physical or economic blight
(3) Totals include Parcels Designated for Use by Business Establishments with at least one vacant unit.
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Feasibility Study for the
July, 1999 9 City of San Bernardino
A. Physical Conditions That Cause Blight
The CRL describes physical conditions that cause blight in Section 33031(a), as
shown above. These physical conditions are assessed in terms of the health and safety of
persons and the economic viability and development of the area. Seventy-two percent of all
parcels within the Study Area suffer from one or more conditions of physical blight. The
physical blighting conditions found in the Study Area include deterioration and dilapidation of
all types of buildings, buildings defective in design, buildings which do not meet code
requirements, buildings with faulty or inadequate utilities, buildings of substandard design,
properties with parking and access problems, and parcels of irregular form and shape, and
inadequate size which are under multiple ownership. Conditions of deterioration and
dilapidation, inadequate parcel size and shape for development, as well as the conditions listed
above, discourage private sector investment and further contribute to the blighting conditions of
the Study Area.
The area analyzed primarily comprises the commercial centers along 40th Street
and Sierra Way, which are important resources for neighborhood serving commercial uses in the
Study Area, and the surrounding residential uses. Poor physical conditions place a burden on
the immediate community by causing a lack of necessary commercial uses needed or desired by
area residents. The poor physical and economic conditions of the commercial property also
impact surrounding neighborhoods, as residents have no incentives in some cases to upgrade
and/or maintain their properties. The magnitude of these building and site problems has
seriously impacted the ability of the City to remediate poor conditions and facilitate private
reinvestment in the area. In many cases, the high costs involved in upgrading and rehabilitating
existing structures and infrastructure have caused buildings to deteriorate to a state of disrepair
that causes health and safety issues for occupants, and have caused buildings to remain vacant
for two years or more. Removing blighting conditions will require a concerted effort by both
the community and the private sector. Neither entity acting alone possesses the ability or the
resources to remediate the deficiencies of the Study Area.
The following discussion provides a preliminary summary of physical blighting
conditions found to be pervasive within the Study Area. The photographs contained in Appendix
1 provide examples of conditions within the Study Area described below.
1. Buildings in which it is Unsafe or Unhealthy for Persons to Live or Work
(a) Deterioration and Dilapidation
Deterioration and dilapidation is one indicator of buildings which are unsafe or
unhealthy for persons to live or work in, as identified under Section 33031(a)(1) of the CRL.
Buildings, which are in poor or substandard condition, jeopardize the health and safety of the
occupants and the community as a whole. The presence and persistence of deteriorated and
dilapidated building conditions reflects a lack of investment necessary to assure the safety of
persons who live or work in the area.
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Feasibility Study for the
July, 1999 10 City of San Bernardino
In order to assess the level of building deterioration occurring in the Study Area, a
parcel -by- parcel survey of blighting conditions was conducted in part to assess the overall
conditions of buildings in the Study Area. Buildings in the Study Area were viewed and
generally categorized based on the condition of the structures in one of the following categories:
=> Sound: There are no noticeable deficiencies in the structural condition of the
roof, walls, or foundation. The structure appears to have adequate plumbing and
electrical service and is subject to a regular program of maintenance. The exterior
walls and other surfaces are well painted and clean, and the windows and doors
are intact.
=> Deferred Maintenance: The structure has been maintained adequately enough to
eliminate any major structural defects. The exterior of the building shows signs
of deferred maintenance such as peeling paint, dirty exterior walls and other
surfaces, weathered and worn wood facades, and /or cracked plaster or
foundations.
Moderate to Extensive Rehabilitation: There are obvious indications that proper
maintenance to the structure is very infrequent. The building shows signs of
structural deterioration, such as rotten or cracked building materials, a sagging
roof or walls, or a crumbling foundation. Patchwork repairs may be apparent, and
paint may be largely peeled or faded. The exterior walls and other surfaces are
very dirty and show signs of neglect.
=> Dilapidated: The building appears structurally unsound, and maintenance is
nonexistent. Its fitness for human habitation is highly questionable, and its state
of deterioration and neglect is such that it is a candidate for demolition.
Deteriorated and dilapidated structures were observed throughout the Study Area.
The windshield survey identified a total of 144 parcels (62% of properties surveyed) with signs
of deterioration or dilapidation. Approximately 109 parcels had one or more signs of deferred
maintenance, 24 parcels were in need of moderate rehabilitation, and 11 parcels require extensive
rehabilitation.
Building conditions observed during the field survey include broken windows,
boarded up abandoned buildings, rotting wood eaves or trim, sagging roofs, damaged and
deteriorated roofing material, damaged exterior building material, cracked or crumbling
foundations, and substandard exterior electrical wiring and plumbing. The deterioration in the
commercial area includes damaged exterior building and roofing materials, exposed wiring and
plumbing, peeling paint, occasional broken windows, and obsolete signage. These conditions are
most prevalent in what appears to be the older commercial area along the northern portion of
Sierra Way. Physical blighting conditions are also concentrated along the businesses west of
Sierra Way on the south side of 40th Street, with many of the buildings exhibiting conditions
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Feasibility Study for the
July, 1999 11 City of San Bernardino
similar to those cited above. One of the most dramatic examples of the deterioration conditions
in some commercial areas is the Shopping Center, where the western side is not in use and has
been partially covered with exposed building materials, or has boarded up windows. Further, the
rear of these buildings show exposed plumbing and electrical wiring, cracked foundations,
peeling paint, and deteriorated building materials.
The majority of all structures within the Study Area are residential. The overall
condition of the building stock in the Study Area is reflective of the older age of the housing.
Residential units in the area are generally bounded by 40th Street to the north, Electric Avenue to
the west, and Mountain View Avenue to the east, exhibit one of the highest incidences of
deterioration in the Study Area. These "bungalow" type houses are quite deteriorated, primarily
due to age and lack of maintenance. Further, these residential properties contain trash and other
debris accumulating around properties. In addition, the residential area along 49th Street
contains at least six abandoned; boarded up buildings, as well as a large number of units in need
of moderate to extensive rehabilitation. According to the 1990 Census, approximately 46% of
the total housing units in the City were constructed prior to 1960. Given the age of many of the
residential units, routine minor and major maintenance and repair are required to insure the
structural integrity and safety of residential buildings.
In the absence of such repair, deterioration and dilapidation like that observed in
the Study Area can have an injurious effect on the physical and economic viability of the specific
property, as well as the surrounding area.
(b) Code Violations
Violations of local or state building codes is a condition identified under Section
33031(a) of the CRL, which characterize buildings that are unsafe or unhealthy for persons to
live or work. Buildings and structures that do not meet current uniform building requirements, or
other local codes mandated to ensure human health and safety, pose a threat to the workers,
patrons, visitors, and residents of an area.
According to a City of San Bernardino Senior Code Compliance Officer familiar
with the Study Area, the most significant problem, although not the most prevalent, is illegal
construction. During the windshield survey, RSG also identified several instances where
additions appeared to be faulty or illegal. The most frequent complaint in the residential areas is
landscape maintenance. Another recent concern for the Code Compliance Division has been the
neglect, and eventual abandonment, of several of the apartment buildings on 49th Street, east of
Sierra Way. Also, large apartment complexes on both Ralston and Sepulveda Avenues have
been notified by code enforcement staff regarding serious code violations such as plumbing,
heating, and electrical deficiencies.
The City of San Bernardino covers 59.83 square miles and has a population of
185,000 (January 1999, State Department of Finance). Because of the size of the City, code
enforcement efforts are, for the most part, limited to complaint generated enforcement. The
majority of the complaints come from property owners or tenants who observe potential
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Feasibility Study for the
July, 1999 12 City of San Bernardino
violations in their neighborhoods. However, due to the fact that code violations are investigated
if a complaint is filed or as observed by staff, many properties go unnoticed and the true number
of total building and other code violations are likely to be much greater than those reported.
Code enforcement complaints are currently maintained in a computerized log, which provides
updated information on the monitoring of residential and other structures with code enforcement
problems. This information included years 1997, 1998 and the first six months of 1999. Code
enforcement log data for the Study Area indicates that code violations have increased by
8% between 1997 and 1998. A total of 32 properties (or 13.6% of all Study Area
properties) was cited with code violations in 1998. Serious Code Violations have also
increased by 8% between 1997 and 1998. A total of 18 properties (or 7.6% of all Study Area
properties) was cited with serious code violations in 1998. Serious code violations are
violations, which are potential threats to public safety such as illegal construction, outdoor
storage /trash & debris, illegal home occupancy, building maintenance violations, and violations,
which are health code violations and fire code violations.
Violations, which are referred to outside agencies such as health, air quality, and
fire code violations, require further research to accurately determine the full range of code
violations with the Study Area.
(c) Faulty or Inadequate Utilities
Faulty or inadequate utilities, is a condition identified under Section 33031(a)(1)
of the CRL, which characterizes buildings that are unsafe or unhealthy for persons to live or
work. Buildings served by electrical or other utilities that are old, constructed inadequately,
modified without proper permits, or otherwise substandard, are considered faulty or inadequate.
These conditions, which include exposed electrical wiring or excessive concentration of utilities,
were documented during the windshield survey of blighting conditions within the Study Area.
Faulty or inadequate utilities systems often serve as an indicator of health and safety issues
facing building occupants and the area in general.
The results of the windshield survey indicate that 46 properties, (20% of parcels in
the Study Area), or one out of every five properties, exhibit faulty or inadequate utilities, or have
current violations concerning utility systems. This condition was present on residential
properties located along Mountain View Avenue, south of 40th Street, and on some of the high -
density apartment buildings between 44th Street, Sepulveda Avenue, and 42nd Street. The
majority of the properties suffer from exposed or damaged wiring. Exposed wiring often occurs
when structures as originally designed did not provide adequate electrical capacity or outlets. In
an effort to upgrade these utility systems, electrical wiring and plumbing are sometimes strung
along the exterior of a building where they are subject to damage due to adverse weather
conditions, accidental dislocation, and vandalism. Exterior wiring is also a potential safety
hazard because of the age of the work, location, and possible lack of compliance with modern
code standards. Substandard wiring is also an indicator of obsolescence (i.e., that the building is
approaching the end of its useful economic life).
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Feasibility Study for the
July, 1999 13 City of San Bernardino
(d) Lots /Buildings Suffering from Defective Design or Defective Physical
Construction
Buildings, structures, or their additions that are constructed with materials that do
not meet current design or construction standards may be considered defective in design. Such
buildings can present safety hazards, be functionally inefficient, or facilitate their own
deterioration. Defects may exist from the moment a given building is completed; or, they may
evolve as uses within the building or within the surrounding buildings change over time.
Conditions of defective design or physical construction can be manifested in a number of ways.
One example is where existing conditions do not meet modern construction standards established
to ensure the health and safety of building occupants. Such defects may not technically be code
violations (although, most older buildings suffer from many of these too) but rather deficiencies
resulting from evolutionary improvements in building code standards that have occurred since
the building's construction.
The results of the windshield survey indicate that 24% of the parcels in the Study
Area were observed to have one or more conditions of defective design or defective physical
construction. These include inadequate vehicular access and loading areas, outdoor storage, and
substandard building materials.
Examples of defective design can be seen in some of the auto repair shops in the
Study Area. These businesses seem to have inadequate storage area for the number of vehicles
currently in the repair facility. In addition, it appears that parts, storage, and repair often take
place in the open parking areas. Thus, these businesses do not appear to have adequate building
or parking lot space for their current business volume. Inadequate loading capabilities plague
many of the commercial retail uses along 40th Street. This lack of or inadequate loading areas
results in trucks loading and unloading in parking lots, impeding access to businesses and
restricting traffic flow.
Towards the north end of the Study Area on the eastside of Sierra Way, there is a
group of businesses that can only be accessed by the alley east of the street. This provides very
poor access and visibility for these commercial properties. Furthermore. there are few designated
parking spaces for these establishments.
The high- density apartments located on Sonora Drive and Ralston Avenue, south
of 40th Street, suffer from excessive lot coverage, which has caused inadequate parking, poor
vehicle access to parking, and little or no open space. These conditions make these
developments less attractive to tenants and would appear to affect the rental income potential for
the units. The units on Ralston Avenue have parking access only from a rear alley that may
increase the potential for crime in the parking areas. These units, as well as other high density
developments, seem to have only one off - street parking space per unit, which may be inadequate
for most families and does not meet current City standards.
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. FeasibilityStudy for the
July, 1999 14 City of San Bernardino
2. Factors that Prevent or Substantially Hinder the Economically Viable
Use or Compatibility of Buildings or Lots
Buildings in the Study Area were noted as having physical factors inhibiting the
economic viability of properties. Indicators of this condition that were frequently noted are
substandard design, lack of parking, and lots and buildings of inadequate size. Seventy -five
(32.05 %) of the parcels surveyed had substandard design.
(a) Substandard Design
Substandard design is identified as a factor that prevents or substantially hinders
the economically viable use or capacity of buildings or lots under Section 33031(a)(2) of the
CRL. Substandard design includes architecture, site layout problems, and other deficiencies
involving the building or parcel that do not meet the contemporary requirements of users or
residents. The results of the field survey indicate that 32% (nearly one -third of all properties)
exhibit conditions of substandard design.
The most obvious characteristic of substandard design in commercial properties
within the Study Area is obsolescence. Although not technically defined as a blighting
characteristic, it is most often a result of a combination of factors, including the age of a
structure, lack of maintenance and lack of desirable amenities such as parking and tenant
improvements and occurs as contemporary market standards evolve over time. This condition
often occurs as competing newer, more efficiently designed buildings or developments emerge.
The appeal of obsolete buildings diminishes, as market conditions and consumer preferences
change, or as factors important to the function for which the buildings were designed change,
making the buildings no longer useful in terms of their original function or purpose.
As stated above, important factors in determining obsolescence are the size and
design of commercial properties. Along the north side of 40th Street, several small stand -alone
retail stores show signs of deferred maintenance to extensive rehabilitation. Current market
standards make these small stores less desirable. Further, many of the stores have block walls or
other barriers that inhibit customers from going from store to store without pulling out on 40th
Street to do so.
The 40th Street Shopping Center is one of the two major retail centers in the
Study Area. The Shopping Center, located on 40th Street between Waterman Avenue and Sierra
Way, is 14 acres in size, which comprises 19% of the Study Area. Construction began in 1959
and the Center was completed in 1969 with the addition of the Stater Bros. grocery store. The
original anchor grocery store was destroyed in a fire in the early 1990's. The building was
subsequently demolished and never replaced. Shortly thereafter, the Center's other anchor
tenant, Thrifty Drug, left the Center. Currently, the Center is 35% vacant. The occupied tenant
spaces house marginal, incidental, small tenants and a low -end discount store (i.e., Cheapo
Depot). Given its generally poor condition, the Center will likely continue to suffer from tenant
attrition. The lack of maintenance and investment in the Center, as well as other factors, have
caused its deterioration: poor access from 40th Street, lack of presence on Waterman, poor
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Feasibility Study for the
July, 1999 15 City of San Bernardino
internal traffic circulation, the presence of trash and other debris. In addition, the many differing
facades result in a lack of Center identification, and signage is poor. Multiple ownership of this
property (the Center is owned by eight different owners) has caused rehabilitation efforts to be
nearly impossible. A recently completed appraisal of one of the properties in the Center states
that the multiple ownership have prevented any one owner to obtain financing for rehabilitation.
Another indicator of obsolescence was the prevalence of outdoor storage, which
was noted on many commercial properties particularly along Sierra Avenue. The storage of
construction materials and equipment, or the presence of other debris around buildings, not only
poses health and safety hazards, but also has the effect of reducing the economic value of
properties and diminishing the potential for a favorable economic return on the properties. The
presence of outdoor storage is also an indicator that the existing building stock provides
inadequate building space for modern business activity. When outdoor storage areas are
unscreened, as in the Study Area. it contributes to the declining appearance of an area.
It appears that the economic value of commercial land in the general area
encompassing the Study Area has gradually declined over the years as the needs of modern
commercial users have intensified, thereby requiring larger lot sizes and diverse building
amenities. Many of the commercial properties on the west side of Sierra Way, north of 42nd
Street, and intermittent parcels on the north side of 40th Street, exhibit signs of obsolescence.
These properties lack suitable access and convenient parking. Many are constructed in a manner
that prevents adequate provision for truck delivery, storage, manufacturing, and production
space. As a consequence, this section within the Study Area has a high proportion of vacant
tenant spaces. Sixteen of the 69 commercial parcels, or 239,0, have at least one vacant unit.
(b) Lack of Parking
Other factors, similar to substandard design, can also provide or substantially
hinder the economic viability of uses or capacity of buildings or lots as identified in Section
3303l(a)(2) of the CRL. Another factor specific to the Study Area is inadequate parking, which
inhibits the economic viability of properties in the Study Area. Properties that do not have
adequate available parking for patrons, employees, or residents, and/or do not provide
satisfactory access for vehicles and pedestrians, experience diminishing economic value. The
field survey results indicate that 29 parcels, or 12% of the properties in the Study Area, do not
have the parking needed to effectively conduct business. It should be noted, however, that this
figure is based upon a field survey in which only gross deficiencies in parking, such as
inadequate on -site and off -site parking adjacent to a business, were identified. For example,
there are two developments along the western side of Sierra Way, south of 40th Street that do not
appear to have adequate parking. The lots are narrow and cover several businesses, providing
insufficient space for turning around should all of the spaces be full. Further, these
developments do not have alley access, so all loading must be done in the small parking lots.
Additionally, the strip commercial center to the north of this property provides no off - street
parking for patrons.
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Feasibility Study for the
July, 1999 16 City of San Bernardino
3. Incompatible Adjacent Uses
Section 33031(a)(3) of the CRL states that adjacent or nearby uses that are
incompatible with each other and which prevent the economic development of those parcels or
other portions of the project area are conditions of blight. These incompatible uses hinder the
economic development of the area by causing a reduction in the proper utilization of the parcel.
This condition was noted on ten of the properties, or four percent of parcels within the Study
Area, where residential properties are directly adjacent to commercial properties.
One example is the area south of 40th Street, between Sierra Way and Genevieve
Street. The alley stretching north and south is the only buffer between the commercial uses on
the east and the housing on the west. Residents are likely impacted by truck deliveries being
made through this alley. In addition, the residential neighborhood along Ralston Avenue and
Sonora Drive is directly adjacent to the 40th Street Shopping Center. Since the majority of the
loading for the Center occurs on these streets, the residents are impacted by noise and
congestion. Graffiti and loitering were also observed in this area during the field survey.
4. Subdivided Lots of Irregular Form and Shape and Inadequate Size for
Proper Usefulness and Development That Are In Multiple Ownership
Economic dislocation, deterioration, or disuse can result from the prevalence of
lots of irregular form or shape and of inadequate size for proper usefulness and development.
Parcels must be large enough to accommodate the primary structure, setback areas, and parking
and circulation space. Irregularly shaped parcels frequently occur as a result of a change in the
street system or subdivision pattern. As with the Study Area, such a change can be a result of the
construction of roads that cut across existing subdivisions, causing irregularly shaped remnant
parcels. This is what has occurred between Electric and Mountain View Avenues, south of 40th
Street. A number of residential properties are of inadequate size in this area. Of the 113
residential parcels in the Study Area 9 parcels (8 %) are inadequate in size and under multiple
ownership.
In order to determine appropriate minimum lot sizes for properties within the
Study Area, the adopted ordinance for commercially zoned properties was reviewed and
analyzed. The results of this review indicate that of approximately 69 commercial parcels in the
Study Area, 16 (23 %), or nearly one out of every 5 parcels, are inadequate in size and under
multiple ownership. These parcels are a barrier to development because they are frequently
difficult or impossible to use without combining with other parcels. Multiple ownership
exacerbates this problem by complicating land purchases and shared use agreements that would
make these parcels more useful. One of the most severe examples of multiple ownership is in the
40th Street Shopping Center, which has 8 different property owners. This has made upgrading
and rehabilitating the Shopping Center nearly impossible. It is extremely difficult to coordinate
between property owners to make necessary improvements to the Center such as improvements
to vehicle access and pedestrian access. In addition, it is impractical for a single individual
owner to finance such a project that would benefit all tenants in the Center.
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Feasibility Study for the
July, 1999 17 City of San Bernardino
Due to small lot sizes, coupled with the diversity of ownership, it is unlikely that
the reuse or private redevelopment of deteriorated and obsolete properties would ever be possible
without a land assembly effort. The prevalence of economic blighting conditions in the Study
Area further discourages any prospect of attracting private sector investment. Even in the
unlikely event that two or three parcels were owned by the same property owner and were
successfully assembled, these combined parcels would only result in a site of little more than one
acre. Such properties are a barrier to development because, as stated previously, they are
frequently difficult or impossible to use without combining with other parcels.
A major tool of redevelopment is the power to assemble properties and remedy
ownership problems. Properties can be assembled for recycling to newly developed properties.
Viable uses that need to expand can also be assisted with an agency's power of assembly.
B. Economic Conditions That Cause Blight
The CRL requires that for an area to qualify for inclusion in a redevelopment
project area it must not only exhibit conditions of physical blight, but also must contain and
suffer from economic blight.
To accurately represent existing economic conditions, the Study Area has been
analyzed and information and data have been gathered from City, County, and private sources to
document the deteriorating economic conditions of the Study Area. The following describes the
economic blighting conditions that are present and contribute to the lack of proper utilization of
the properties within the Study Area.
1. Depreciated or Stagnant Property Values or Impaired Investments
(a) Depreciated or Stagnant Property Values
When assessed values are increasing at a comparable rate to surrounding areas,
such as the City, it is often an indicator of a healthy local economy. Conversely, if assessed
values are declining, especially at a rate greater than the remainder of the City, or the City as
whole; the area's economy is likely to be in a state of decline.
In order to examine the health of the real estate market in the Study Area, trends
in secured assessed property values, which include land values and building improvements for
fiscal years 1993 -94 through 1998 -99, were analyzed for the Study Area and compared to those
for the City and the County as a whole.
Data obtained from the San Bernardino County Auditor - Controller's office
indicates that the total secured assessed valuation in the Study Area has declined by over 9%
over a five year period, from $41,118,009 in fiscal year 1993 -94 to $37,371,172 in 1998 -99,
compared to a 3% increase City -wide and a 4% increase County -wide over the same time period.
This significant decrease in assessed property values in the Study Area compared to the increases
in both the City and the County is an indicator that the area's economic condition is weak and
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Feasibility Study for the
July, 1999 18 City of San Bernardino
investment in the area is impaired. Table 2 below presents the secured valuation for the Study
Area, the City, and the County for fiscal years 1993 -94 through 1998 -99.
TABLE 2
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
Comparative Secured Assessed Values, 1993 -94 through 1998 -99
CHANGES IN ASSESSED VALUATION
Changefrom
1993-94 1994-95 9I 95-96 91 96-97 1997-99 1998-99 FY 1993-9
Proposed Project Area $41,118,009 $41.195.872 $37,560,746 $38,035.643
City of San Bernardino $3,382,524,711 $3,353,924,718 $3,374,643.679 $3,396,989.862
County of San Bernardin $53,270,888,724 $52,616,134,087 $52,964,717,925 $53,531,875,400
Source. TRW Redi -Data MetroScan, HdL Companies and San Bernardino County Auditor Controller's Office, 1999.
Note. TRW Redi -Data MetroScan data, not San Bernardino County Auditor Controller's Off-Ice data, was utilized in the analy!
Proposed Project Area secured assessed values.
$37,468,172 $37.371,781 - 9.1/9.
$3,424,621,285 S3,467,788,731 1.52%
$54.410,823,045 $55,263,360,728 3.74%
is of
The significant drop in property values in the Study Area between fiscal years
1993 -94 and 1998 -99, compared to increases in the City and County, indicates that property
values in the Study Area are weak. When property values decline or remain constant over an
extended period of time, such as during the period reported above, property owners have little
incentive to reinvest in their property due to an uncertain return on their investment. Over an
extended period of time, lack of investment, including maintenance, contributes to the decline of
an area and eventual revenue loss to the City, particularly in commercial areas.
(b) Impaired Investments
(i) Retail Sales Tax Revenues
Stagnation or decline in sales tax revenues is an important indicator of impaired
investments. The majority of the commercial businesses north of the 30 Freeway are located
within the boundaries of the Study Area. Although Waterman Avenue is used as the primary
thoroughfare to the mountain areas rather than Sierra Way, the primary commercial corridors of
the Study Area (Sierra Way and 40th Street) continue to sustain sufficient traffic levels, and
businesses along these corridors should be successful. Many of the businesses located on these
streets have been unsuccessful in capturing business from a constant traffic flow as evidenced by
the taxable retail sales information reported by the California State Board of Equalization and
data provided by MBIA MuniServices Company.
RSG compared the taxable retail sales information provided by MBIA for the
Study Area and the same information for the City and County of San Bernardino between 1993
and 1997. For this period, the taxable retail sales in the City and County increased by 9 and 26%
respectively. Other surrounding cities, including Rialto, Colton, and Redlands have experienced
increases up to 44 %. However, the Study Area has suffered a significant decrease of 10% for the
five -year period.
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Feasibility Study for the
July, 1999 19 City of San Bernardino
TABLE 3
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
Taxable Sales Trends, 1993 through 1997
Source: California State Board of Equalization and MBIA MuniServices Company
The results of the analysis of State Board of Equalization and MBIA data
presented above indicates that many of the existing retail businesses in the Study Area are
performing below standard with regard to sales. Additionally, the analysis indicates that
significant retail sales tax leakage is occurring as residents and other business patrons are
traveling outside of the Study Area to purchase goods and services.
2. Abnormally Low Lease Rates
Preliminary research of lease rates within the Study Area and the City suggests
that lease rates are substantially lower in the Study Area as compared to those in surrounding
cities. However, further research, including a survey of local real estate brokers and firms, will
be necessary to determine actual lease rates throughout the area and the Inland Empire.
3. High Business Vacancies
High vacancy rates or high turnover rates in businesses provide an indication of
the presence of economic blight. A vacancy survey was conducted in June 1999 as part of the
field survey to determine the vacant parcels, buildings, and tenant spaces within the Study Area.
In addition to identifying vacancies during the field survey, the names and phone numbers of real
estate brokers representing the vacant buildings and/or tenant spaces were noted. These brokers
were interviewed regarding the size of the vacant buildings or tenant spaces, as well as how long
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Feasibility Study for the
July, 1999 20 City of San Bernardino
1993
1994
1995
Taxable Sales
%change
Taxable Sales
%change
Taxable Sales
%change
Study Area
357,981
N/A
337,980
-5.59%
329,678
-2.46%
City of San Bernadino
1.677,978
N/A
1.727,800
2.97%
1,747.319
1.13%
County of San Bernadino
11,131,798
N/A
11.843.466
6.39%
12.482,309
5.39%
City of Colton
391,231
N/A
397,593
1.63%
415,493
4.50%
City of Redlands
434,990
N/A
452,449
4.01%
459.561
1.57%
City of Rialto
325.543
N/A
331.805
1.92%
351.715
6.00%
1993 -1997 CHANGE IN
1996
1997
TAXABLE SALES
Taxable Sales
%change
Taxable Sales
%change
Study Area
336,824
2.17%
321,685
4.49%
- 10.14%
City of San Bernadino
1,792.467
2.58%
1,827.233
1.94%
8.89%
County of San Bernadino
13,126,523
5.16%
14,005,016
6.69%
25.81%
City of Colton
410.918
-1.10%
394,069
-4.10%
0.73%
City of Redlands
477.436
3.89%
521,703
9.27%
19.93%
City of Rialto
391,953
11.44%
468,630
19.56%
43.95%
Source: California State Board of Equalization and MBIA MuniServices Company
The results of the analysis of State Board of Equalization and MBIA data
presented above indicates that many of the existing retail businesses in the Study Area are
performing below standard with regard to sales. Additionally, the analysis indicates that
significant retail sales tax leakage is occurring as residents and other business patrons are
traveling outside of the Study Area to purchase goods and services.
2. Abnormally Low Lease Rates
Preliminary research of lease rates within the Study Area and the City suggests
that lease rates are substantially lower in the Study Area as compared to those in surrounding
cities. However, further research, including a survey of local real estate brokers and firms, will
be necessary to determine actual lease rates throughout the area and the Inland Empire.
3. High Business Vacancies
High vacancy rates or high turnover rates in businesses provide an indication of
the presence of economic blight. A vacancy survey was conducted in June 1999 as part of the
field survey to determine the vacant parcels, buildings, and tenant spaces within the Study Area.
In addition to identifying vacancies during the field survey, the names and phone numbers of real
estate brokers representing the vacant buildings and/or tenant spaces were noted. These brokers
were interviewed regarding the size of the vacant buildings or tenant spaces, as well as how long
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Feasibility Study for the
July, 1999 20 City of San Bernardino
the property had been vacant. The results of the field survey, interviews with local real estate
agents, indicates that of the 69 commercial parcels in the Project Area, a total of 16 properties, or
23 %, are partially or completely vacant. Real estate brokers and recently completed appraisals of
commercial properties cited the poor condition of the structures, small tenant spaces, and the
perception of criminal activity as primary factors affecting vacancy in the Study Area.
In order to illustrate the magnitude of the commercial /retail vacancy problem, the
field survey data was aggregated to show the vacancy rate of each shopping center and strip mall
in the Study Area (Table 4). As shown in Table 4, all but one shopping center has vacancies. Of
this amount, the centers located at 4276 North Sierra Way and 4236 North Sierra Way have
critical vacancy rates of 89% and 40 %, respectively.
TABLE 4
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
Shopping Centers and Stip Malls in Survey Area
Shopping Center
Tenant
Spaces
Vacant Tenant
Spaces
%
Vacant
4276 N. Sierra - Commercial Strip
9
8
88.89%
4236 N. Sierra - Commercial Strip
5
2
40.00%
40th Street Shopping Center
65
23
35.38%
Lucky's Shopping Center
17
6
35.29%
171 W. 40th Street - Commercial Strip
8
2
25.00%
3990 N. Sierra - Commercial Strip
5
1
20.00%
3970 N. Sierra - Commercial Strip
4
0
0.00%
Due to the fact that there are a number of well developed retail centers within a
fifteen- minute drive of the area, the Study Area has encountered great difficulty in attracting
larger retail businesses. The composition and quality of the existing retail stock further
exacerbates this problem as very few of the retail centers in the Study Area contain large enough
structures to house a "large" retailer or a value oriented discount retailer. Because of this,
developments in other parts of the City not only draw residents out of the Study Area to purchase
goods and services, but also inhibit other national retailers from adding locations in the area.
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Feasibility Study for the
July, 1999 21 City of San Bernardino
4. A High Crime Rate That Constitutes A Serious Threat To The Public Safety
and Welfare
According to the Community Redevelopment Law, "a high crime rate that
constitutes a serious threat to the public safety and welfare" constitutes a condition of economic
blight. In order to assess the impact of crime within the Project Area, information regarding the
incidence of violent and other serious crime reported by the San Bernardino Police Department
for the Study Area was analyzed. As shown on Table 5, information obtained from the Police
Department indicates that the total number of the most serious reported crimes in the police
districts that encompass the Study Area have increased between 1996 and 1997. Complete data
for 1998 was not available.
TABLE 5
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
Crime Statistics for 40th Street Redevelopment Project Area
YEAR
MURDER
RAPE
ROBBERY
A. ASSAULT
BURGLARY
LARCENY
G.T.A
TOTAL
1996
0
4
45
43
143
220
93
548
1997
1
4
28
43
108
240
134
558
1998
0
1
13
22
53
102
48
239
* - Reporting Districts roughly encompass the following geographic boundaries:
North - 48th Street, South - Parkdale Street, East - Waterman Avenue, West - H Street
** - Crime Statistics by specific geographic regions for 1998 was only available for the time span of
January 1, 1998 to July 31, 1998 due to computer conversions for compliance with Year 2000 issues.
These types of crimes can be potential safety threats, negatively impacting
existing businesses in the Project Area, and may discourage business investment and patronage
in the area. This has been confirmed by information gathered from local real estate brokers.
Additionally, appraisals conducted for commercial properties in the area indicate that crime,
and /or the perception of criminal activity, has negatively impacted the Study Area. Crime
represents an additional cost in conducting businesses, as well as attracting new businesses to the
Study Area. Crimes such as rape, burglary, and assault not only affect business owners and
tenants, but also discourage patronage. Businesses located in areas perceived to have a crime
problem suffer from increased insurance and other costs as a result of stolen merchandise.
Increases in crime rates may also negatively influence property values in an area by diminishing
the area's desirability. Give the location options within the competitive market area and the
potential threat to personal safety and property, crime presents a threat to the economic viability
of the Study Area. Also detrimental to property values is the presence of graffiti. Graffiti affects
the condition of a property and adds an extra cost and concern to doing business in communities
where it is prevalent. Aside from the cost and effort of removal, graffiti can also be a detriment
to investment and reinvestment, since it is often a sign of gang activity — a hazard businesses and
residents avoid whenever possible.
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Feasibility Study for the
July, 1999 22 City of San Bernardino
Further analysis of crime in the Study Area will be presented in the documents
prepared during the redevelopment plan adoption process.
CONDITIONS THAT CAN BE ALLEVIATED BY REDEVELOPMENT
This Report provides a description of the physical and economic blighting conditions prevalent
within the Study Area. The combination of these conditions has caused a physical and financial
burden on the City which cannot reasonably be expected to be reversed or alleviated by private
enterprise, or governmental action, or both, without redevelopment. This is primarily due to the
lack of incentive for the private sector to invest in this area. Redevelopment offers planning and
financial tools to the City to remediate the negative conditions in the Study Area through
implemented projects and programs. For example, a commercial rehabilitation program would
be established to provide assistance. in the forms of low interest loans and grants, to businesses
in the Study Area to encourage and assist in restoring, modernizing, and improving commercial
structures. Property acquisition could be used in some cases of multiple ownership as a means
for restoring and /or recycling buildings suffering from a variety of physical and economic
blighting conditions. A program of this type could enhance the appearance, visibility and
economic viability of the existing shopping areas. More specifically, projects for first- generation
retail centers in the Study Area could include commercial rehabilitation, architectural fagade
enhancement and the acquisition and redevelopment of vacant properties and structures, parking
facilities, and street improvements. This type of program could substantially improve the
physical appearance, structural integrity and economic viability of buildings, which will have the
effect of alleviating or eliminating physical blighting conditions such as deterioration, code
violations, defective design and substandard design. In addition, the rehabilitation and
modernization of the building stock will also have the effect of reversing economic blighting
conditions including impaired investments, declining property values and business vacancies.
Overall, the primary focus of this program could be to transform the obsolete commercial
corridors into economically viable shopping districts.
With regard to the residential portions of the Study Area, redevelopment would provide financial
assistance through the requirement to set aside not less than 20% of the tax increment revenue
generated by a redevelopment project into a low and moderate income housing fund. These
funds would be used to increase, improve, and preserve the supply of low and moderate income
housing in the Study Area. Specifically, the Agency could implement one or more of the
following programs: 1) residential rehabilitation loan program; 2) residential rehabilitation grant
program; 3) residential acquisition and rehabilitation program; 4) property acquisition assistance
for qualified home buyers, such as a first -time home buyers program; 5) residential loan
assistance; and 6) assistance in the construction of new dwelling units. This program could assist
very low, low and moderate income persons to not only rehabilitate and maintain existing
properties in order to alleviate physical conditions such as deterioration and dilapidation, but
may also provide relocation assistance for residential properties in the Study Area affected by
incompatible uses.
Feasibility Study for the
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc.
23 City of San Bernardino
July, 1999
IV. PRELIMINARY FINANCIAL
FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
The successful implementation of a redevelopment program in the Study Area will require both
capital and the tools and powers available to the Agency with the adoption of a redevelopment
plan. Redevelopment is traditionally funded through tax increment financing and is often
supplemented with State and/or Federal funds. Redevelopment agencies do not have the
authority to raise taxes or impose new assessments. Instead, tax increment financing allows for a
redistribution of future property tax revenue to a redevelopment agency.
Tax increment revenue is property tax revenue generated by increases in assessed values over an
established base year value. When a redevelopment project area is established, the county
auditor - controller sums up the existing value of all properties within the project area; this value is
called the base year value. As subsequent year assessed values within the project area increase
due to the reassessments provided for by Proposition I) (property improvements and /or sales,
and an up to 2% inflation adjustment), the resulting property tax revenue generated from this
incremental increase in assessed value over the base year value is allocated to a redevelopment
agency to fund redevelopment activities. The chart below graphically depicts how tax increment
is generated.
The underlying philosophy of tax increment financing is that without redevelopment, property
tax revenues within a redevelopment project area would remain generally flat or even decline.
However, when redevelopment powers are utilized in a proactive mode, such actions should
result in an increase in property values.
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Feasibility Study for the
July, 1999 24 City of San Bernardino
TAX INCREMENT
Ak
FINANCING
W
Red evelopm ent
JRedevelopment
Project Period
Q
Project Area Created
Completed
>
Tax Base Value Set
O
■
Increase In Assessed
W
N
New Private
■
Valuation Accrues to
N
Investment
Other Agencies
w
t�
rn
Increase Assessed
'
'
Valuation for
Redevelopment
a
■
I I
Start Project 10
I _j I I
20 30 40
s0
YEARS
The underlying philosophy of tax increment financing is that without redevelopment, property
tax revenues within a redevelopment project area would remain generally flat or even decline.
However, when redevelopment powers are utilized in a proactive mode, such actions should
result in an increase in property values.
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Feasibility Study for the
July, 1999 24 City of San Bernardino
When a redevelopment program and project area are established, all of the property tax revenues
generated from any future increase in the assessed value of properties is allocated to the agency.
Upon receipt, an agency is statutorily required to: 1) deposit 20% of the tax increment revenue
into a low and moderate income housing fund in order to improve and expand the community's
supply of affordable housing, and 2) remit statutory payments to each of the taxing agencies who
collect property taxes from the project area. With respect to the latter, a legally prescribed
formula is established that calls for payments equal to 25% of the remaining 80% nonhousing tax
increment revenue during the first ten years of a redevelopment project. Beginning in the 11th
year and again in the 31st year of a redevelopment project, these amounts increase pursuant to a
statutory formula. In general, over the 45 -year time period that a redevelopment agency may
collect tax increment revenue, $0.31 of every $1.00 of tax increment revenue is allocated to the
area's taxing agencies; the redevelopment agency retains $0.20 for affordable housing programs
and $0.49 for nonhousing programs.
The chart below depicts the disposition of the three primary ways tax increment revenue is
distributed.
Disposition of Tax Increment Revenues
Statutory
Payments (to
Affected Taxing
Agency
Agencies)
Nonhousing
31 %
Fund Revenue
7Agency
Housing
Fund Revenue
20%
AB 1290, adopted in 1993, changed the CRL by imposing upon redevelopment project areas new
limits and financing provisions, as well as requiring mandatory pass throughs of tax increment to
affected taxing agencies. In general, these new provisions have had a somewhat negative impact
on the financial feasibility of new redevelopment project areas. Two provisions that have the
greatest financial impact on new project area formations are: (1) the 20 year time limit on
incurring (nonhousing fund) debt, and (2) the provision for mandatory tax increment pass
throughs. The mandatory pass through provision allocates approximately 31% of all tax
increment generated from a project area over the 45 -year term for collecting tax increment to its
taxing agencies. These funds are passed through to the affected taxing agencies (excluding the
City) on a formula basis specified in the CRL that increases the percentage allocated to the taxing
agencies over time. The second provision limiting the amount of time an agency has to incur
debt severely limits the dollars available to invest in the redevelopment of a project area,
particularly as it relates to bonding capacity. These limits can be extended through the
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Feasibility Study for the
July, 1999 25 City of San Bernardino
amendment of a redevelopment plan. However, an amendment of this type would require the
resubstantiation of blight.
POTENTIAL 40TH STREET PROJECT AREA TAX INCREMENT REVENUE
Tax increment revenue projections were constructed to examine the preliminary financial
feasibility of the Study Area. All projections assumed that the established base year would be
1999 -2000 (see Table 6). The estimated base year value utilized in the projections was obtained
by totaling the fiscal year 1998 -99 secured assessed valuation of all properties within the
complete Study Area, as shown on Map 1, and inflating this amount by 1.8 %.
The projections in Table 6 show the total estimated fiscal year 1999 -2000 base year value of
$47,485,520; $38,044,473 in secured value and $9,366,303 in unsecured and utility value. In
total, the redevelopment project may generate $34.2 million in net tax increment for both
housing and non - housing projects. Table 6 utilizes an annual growth rate for secured assessed
valuation of between 2% and 5 %. Unsecured assessed values were estimated to increase at a rate
of 0.25% annually over the term of the projections shown in Table 6.
For the purposes of reviewing the proposed project's financial potential a New Development
scenario has been created. Table 7 summarizes 7 separate new development projects that could
be developed. New development values are net of current assessed values for land and
improvements. While some of these potential projects could occur without redevelopment, the
majority of the 7 would require at least the Agency's power to assemble properties, if not some
financial support.
• Project I assume the expansion of the Lucky's located on Sierra Way. This project
would require the removal of a number of retail structures that front the center and the
acquisition and inclusion into the market of the two adjoining structures to the north
of the market.
• Project II envisions construction of a Big Box retail use on the 40th Street and Lugo
Avenue shopping center. This project of approximately 10 acres would require the
assembly of 11 parcels including the apartment properties located on the north side of
Sonora Drive.
• Project III assumes the rehabilitation of the Stater Brothers store located at 40th Street
and Waterman Avenue.
• Project IV envisions the development of 60 units of Senior Housing on vacant
residential property within the proposed Study Area.
• Project V assumes the rehabilitation of a number of the multifamily properties located
on 49th Street.
• Project VI assumes the development of 6 single - family houses on the vacant
properties on the north side of 49th Street.
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Feasibility Study for lire
July, 1999 26 City of San Bernardino
• Project VII envisions the development of a second Senior Housing project of 100
units within the vacant and underutilized residential area of the Study Area.
OTHER FUNDING SOURCES
Redevelopment will provide additional tools in assisting this declining area. The Study Area
already benefits from several other funding sources that would be available to assist
redevelopment efforts. The City has qualified for a $2,295,000 Section 108 Loan for the 40th
Street Shopping Center, as well as a $344,000 Economic Development Initiative Grant. The City
annually receives $3,884,000 from Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding,
$1,773,000 from HOME Funds, and $138,000 from ESG funding. These funds can be used for a
wide array of eligible activities including land acquisition, demolition, infrastructure
improvements, construction or rehabilitation, and related development costs within targeted acres
of the City. These funds, combined with tax increment revenues expected to be generated by one
proposed Project Area will significantly increase the financial feasibility of revitalizing the Study
Area.
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Feasibility Study for the
July, 1999 27 City of San Bernardino
C�
TABLE 6
sT11nY ARFA.HYFnTHFTICAL ESTIMATED TAX INCREMENT REVENUE
Notes. BY = Base Year
Growth Rates over 2% reflect the statutory 2% assessed value increase limit per Pmpos4lon 13, plus assessed valuation increases due to new wnstructan and reassessment from property sales.
Housing set aside per Section 33334.2, Community Redevelopment Law (Health 6 Safety Code)
Statutory payments per Section 33607.5 (b), (c), and (d), Community Redevelopment Law (Health 8 Safety Code)
Tax Increment not collected in Year 1 due to assumed adoption date after January 1, 1999
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Feasibility Study for the
July, 1999 28 City of San Bernardino
Assumed
Unsewmd
Increased
Gross
Housing
Gross
Total
Net
Cumulative
Total
P
I
Fiscal
Growth
Secured
&Utility
value
Incremental
Tax
Set
Nonhousing
Statutory
Nonhousing
Net
Housing
Years
Rate
Value
Value @.25 %inc.
from
Value
Increment
Aside
Revenue
Pass Thru
Revenue
Nonhousing
Nonhousing
n
(estimated @ 25% of
Payments
Revenue
sec)*
construction
1%
20%
Y
998 -99
1999.2000
1.8%
37,371,781
38,044,473
9,342,945
9,366,303
-
BY
2000 -01
2%
38.805.363
9.389,718
1,480.355
14,804
Agency will not receive tax increment until following
fiscal year
2
2002 -03
3%
39,969,523
9,413,193
7,788,232
10.456,222
104,562
20,912
83,650
20,912
62,737
62,737
83.650
3
2002 -03
3%
49,190,488
9,436.726
6,422,880
18,335,367
183,354
36,671
146.683
36,671
110,012
172,750
146.683
4
2003-04
3%
57,281,769
9,460,317
8.759,383
28,786,743
287,867
57,573
230,294
57,573
172,720
345.470
230.294
5
2004-05
4%
68,682,798
9,483,968
831,600
32,283,640
322,836
64,567
258.269
64,567
193,702
539,172
258,269
6
2005-06
4%
72,294,974
9,507,678
35,087,926
350,879
70,176
280,703
70,176
210,528
749.699
280,703
7
2006 -07
4%
75.186.773
9,531,447
38,003,494
380,035
76,007
304,028
76.007
228.021
977,720
304.028
e
2007 -08
4%
78,194,244
9,555,276
41.034,794
410,348
82,070
328,278
82,070
246,209
1,223,929
328,278
9
2008 -09
4%
81,322,014
9.579.164
44,186.452
441.865
88,373
353,492
88,373
265,119
1,489,048
353,492
10
2009 -10
5%
85,388.114
9,603.112
48.276,500
482,765
96,553
386,212
96.553
289,659
1,778,707
386.212
11
2010 -11
5%
89,657.520
9,627,120
52,569.914
525,699
105,140
420.559
112,353
308,207
2,086.913
413.346
12
2011 -12
5%
94,140,396
9,651,188
57,076,858
570.769
114,154
456.615
128,938
327,677
2.414,590
441,830
13
2012 -13
5%
98,847.416
9.675,316
61,808.005
618,080
123,616
494.464
146,349
348,115
2.762,705
471,731
14
2013 -14
4%
102,801.313
9,699,504
65,786.090
657,861
131,572
526,289
160,988
365,300
3,128,005
496.873
15
2014 -15
4%
106.913.365
9,723,753
69.922,392
699.224
139.845
559,379
176,210
383,169
3,511,175
523.014
16
2015 -16
4%
111,189,900
9,748.062
74,223,236
742,232
148,446
593,786
192,037
401,749
3.912,924
550.195
17
2016 -17
4%
115,637,496
9,772.432
78.695.202
786,952
157,390
629,562
208,494
421,068
4,333,991
578.458
to
2017 -18
4%
120,262.996
9,796.863
83.345.133
833,451
166,690
666,761
225,606
441,155
4,775,147
607,846
19
2018 -19
3.5%
124,472.200
9.821,355
87,578,830
875,788
175.158
700,631
241,186
459.445
5,234,592
634.603
20
2019 -20
3.5%
128,828,727
9,845,909
bond issue
91,959.910
919,599
183,920
735,679
257,308
478,371
5,712,963
662.291
21
2020 -21
3.5%
133,337.733
9.870.524
limit
96,493.530
964,935
192,987
771,948
273,992
497,957
6,210,920
690.944
22
2021 -22
3.5%
138.004.554
9.895,200
101,185,027
1.011,850
202.370
809.480
291,256
518,224
6,729,144
720.594
23
2022 -23
3.5%
142,834,713
9.919,938
106.039.925
1,060,399
212.080
848.319
309.122
539,197
7,268.341
751.277
24
2023 -24
3%
147,119.754
9.944,738
110.349,766
1,103,498
220.700
882.798
324,983
557,816
7,826,156
778,515
25
2024 -25
3%
151,533.347
9,969.600
114,788,220
1,147,882
229.576
918,306
341,316
576,990
8.403,146
806.566
26
2025 -26
3%
156,079,347
9,994,524
119.359,145
1,193,591
238,718
954.873
358,137
596,736
8.999.882
835,454
27
2026 -27
3%
160,761.728
10,019,510
124,066,511
1,240.665
248.133
992.532
375,460
617.072
9.616.954
865.205
28
2027 -28
3%
165,584,580
10,044.559
128.914,412
1,289,144
257.829
1.031.315
393.301
638,015
10.254,968
895,844
29
2028 -29
3%
170,552,117
10.069,670
133.907.061
1,339,071
267.814
1.071 256
411,673
659.583
10.914,552
927.397
30
2029 -30
3%
175,668,680
10.094.844
139.048,798
1,390.488
278.098
1112.390
430,595
681,795
11.596.347
959.893
31
2030 -31
3%
180,938,741
10,120,081
144,344,096
1.443.441
288.688
1 154 753
456,012
698,740
12.295.087
987.428
32
2031 -32
3%
186.366,903
10.145.382
149,797,558
1,497,976
299.595
1198.380
482,189
716,191
13,011,278
1,015.786
33
2032 -33
3%
191.957,910
10.170,745
155,413,929
1,554,139
310.828
1243311
509,148
734,164
13,745.442
1,044,992
34
2033 -34
3%
197,716.648
10,196,172
161,198.093
1,611.981
322.396
1 289 585
536,912
752,673
14,498,115
1,075,069
35
2034 -35
3%
203,648,147
10.221,662
167,155,083
1,671.551
334.310
1.337241
565,505
771,735
15.269,851
1,106.046
36
2035 -36
3%
209.757,591
10,247,216
173.290.082
1,732.901
346.580
1386321
594,953
791,367
16,061,218
1,137,948
37
3036 -37
3%
216,050.319
10,272,835
179,608.427
1,796084
359217
1 436 867
625,281
811,586
16,872.804
1,170.803
38
2037 -38
3%
222,531,829
10,298.517
186,115.619
1,861,156
372231
1488925
656,516
832,409
17,705.213
1,204.640
39
2038 -39
3%
229,207,784
10.324,263
192,817,320
1,928.173
385635
1542539
588.684
853,855
18,559.068
1,239,489
4o
2039 -40
3%
236,084,017
10,350,074
199,719,364
1,997,194
399439
1597155
721,814
875,941
19,435,009
1,275,380
41
2040 -41
3%
243,166.538
10,375.949
206,827,760
2.068.278
413656
1654622
755,934
898,688
20,333.697
1,312,344
42
2041 -42
3%
250.461,534
10,401,889
214,148.696
2.141487
428.297
1 713 190
791,075
922,115
21,255,812
1.350,412
43
2042 -43
3%
257,975,380
10,427,893
221,688.547
2.216 885
443 377
1 773 508
827,266
946,243
22.202.055
1,389,620
44
2043 -44
3%
265,714.641
10.453,963
229.453,878
2.294.539
458.908
1835631
864,539
971,092
23.173.146
1.429,999
45
1 2044 -45
3%
273.686.080
10.480.098
237,451,452
2,374.515
474,903
1899612
902,928
99,684
24,169,830
1,471,587
Totals
23.802.095
50,140,794
10,025.198
40.100.792
15,930,962
24,169,830
34,195.028
Net Present Value (based on a 6% return)
10.606.151
2.245.543
8.982,173
3,162,687
5,819,486
8,065.029
Notes. BY = Base Year
Growth Rates over 2% reflect the statutory 2% assessed value increase limit per Pmpos4lon 13, plus assessed valuation increases due to new wnstructan and reassessment from property sales.
Housing set aside per Section 33334.2, Community Redevelopment Law (Health 6 Safety Code)
Statutory payments per Section 33607.5 (b), (c), and (d), Community Redevelopment Law (Health 8 Safety Code)
Tax Increment not collected in Year 1 due to assumed adoption date after January 1, 1999
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Feasibility Study for the
July, 1999 28 City of San Bernardino
TABLE 7
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
PROPOSED PROJECT AREA
NEW DEVELOPMENT SCENARIO
Increased Assessed
Project Value Roll Year
I. Expansion of existing Grocery Store
$1,954,102
2000 -011roll2001 -02
II. Big box user 120K sq. ft.
$6,422,880
2001 -021roii 2002 -03
III. Rehab of existing retail
$1,034,130
2000 -01 /roll 2001 -02
IV. Senior Housing Project 60 units
$4,800,000
2000 -01 /roll 2001 -02
V. Rehab of triplexes
$759,383
2002-03/roll 2003-04
VI. Development of vacant land
$831,600
2003-04/roll 2004-05
VII Senior Housing Project 100 units
$8,000,000
2002-03/roll 2003-04
In an attempt to identify the funds available for redevelopment implementation purposes, Tables
8 and 9 identifies the maximum bonding capacity. Maximum potential bonding capacity is based
upon the net redevelopment funds available to the subject area in year 20, which is consistent
with the CRL's 20 -year limit to incur debt. The potential bonding capacity for the net
redevelopment and combined with Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund's ( "Housing
Fund ") has also been identified. The CRL allows an agency to incur debt beyond the 20 -year
time limit to meet housing obligations. As shown in Table 8, the estimated bonding capacity for
the Redevelopment Fund is projected at $6.0 million by fiscal year 2019 -20. The
Redevelopment Fund and the Housing Fund have a projected bonding capacity of $8.6 million
by fiscal year 2019 -20.
The 20 -year limit on incurring debt is critically important in determining the financial feasibility
of a potential project area. For a new project to generate sufficient revenue to address blight,
new development value must be added before the 20 -year deadline to enable an agency to
finance (bond) needed area improvement.
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Feasibility Study for the
July, 1999 29 City of San Bernardino
BONDING
OF -.
San Bernardino Economic
Development Agency
TABLES
40th Street
Study Area
Plan Fiscal
Net
Debt
Issuance Reserve Net
Bond
Total Bond Coverage
Interest
Surplus
Year Year
Tax
Issued
Costs Funds Proceeds
Debt Service
Debt
Ratio on
Reserves
Resources
Increment
Service
(net of housing)
6%
2% 10%
1.15
5%
BY
1999 -2000
1
2000 -01
-
0
0
62.737
2
2002 -03
62,737
0
110.012
3
2002 -03
110,012
0
-
172.720
4
2003 -04
172,720
-
0
-
193.702
5
2004 -05
193.702
- - -
0
210,528
6
2005 -06
2006
210.528
228,021
2,729,278
54,586 272,928 2,401,765
198,279
198,279
1.15
13.646
43.388
7
-07
198,279
1.24
13,646
61,576
e
2007 -08
246,209
198,279
1,34
13.646
80,486
9
2008 -09
265.119
198,279
146
13,646
105.026
10
2009 -10
289 659
198,279
1.55
13,646
123.574
11
2010 -11
308 207
- - -
198,279
1.65
13,646
143.044
12
2011 -12
327677
- - -
198.279
1.76
13,646
163.482
13
2012 -13
348115
198,279
1,84
13.646
180.668
14
2013 -14
365 30C
- - -
198.279
1.93
13.646
198.537
15
2014 -15
2015
383165
401 745
2079422
41.588 207,942 1.829,892
151.068
349,347
1.15
24,044
76,446
16
-16
349,347
1.21
24.044
95,764
17
2016 -17
421068
- - -
349.347
1.26
24.044
115.852
to
2017 -18
441155
-
349,347
1.32
24,044
134,142
19
2018 -19
459445
- - -
zsn
r-)20
2019 -20
476.371
1.250.000
25.000 125,000 1,100,000
97,783
447,130
1.07'.
30.294
61,535
21
2020 -21
497 957
- - -
447,130
1.11
30.294
81,120
447,130
116
30,294
101,387
n
2021 -22
518.224
447.130
1.21
30,294
122,360
23
2022 -23
539.197
- - -
447,130
1.25
30.294
140.979
24
2023 -24
557.816
- - -
447,130
1.29
30,294
160.153
25
2024 -25
576.990
- - -
447,130
1.33
30,294
179,899
26
2025 -26
596.736
- - -
447,130
1.38
30,294
200,235
27
2026 -27
617.072
- - -
447.130
1.43
30.294
221,178
2e
2027 -28
638.015
- - -
447,130
1.48
30,294
242.746
29
3o
2028 -29
2029 -30
659.583
681.795
- - -
447,130
1.52
30.294
264.959
447,130
1.56
30,294
281,904
31
2030 -31
698,740
447,130
1.60
30,294
299,355
32
2031 -32
716.191
447,130
1.64
30.294
317,327
33
2032 -33
734.164
447,130
1.68
30,294
335,836
34
2033 -34
752.673
447,130
1.73
30,294
354,899
35
2034 -35
771,735
TOTAL BONDING
447,130
1.77
30,294
374,531
36
2035 -36
791,367
CAPACITY
248,851
3.26
30,294
593,028
37
3036 -37
811,586
$6,058,701
248,851
3.35
30,294
613.851
36
2037 -38
832.409
FUNDS REMAINING
248,851
3.43
30,294
635,297
39
2038 -39
853.855
$13,160,301
248,851
3.52
30,294
657,383
46
2039 -40
875,941
(includesfundsavailableafterdebt
41
2040-41
898.688
service and interest on reserve
248.851
3.61
30,294
680.130
42
2041 -42
922.115
funds)
248.851
3.71
30.294
703,557
248,851
3.80
30.294
727.685
43
2042 -43
946.243
1 1
248,851
3.90
30,294
752.534
u
2043 -44
971.092
248,851
4 01
30,294
778.126
a5
2044 -45
996.684
Totals
24,169.830
6.058,701
121,174 605,870 5,331.657
447,130
13,022,774
1,006,623
12,153,678
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Feasibility Study for the
July, 1999 30 City of San Bernardino
k
TABLE 9
San Bernardino Economic
Development Agency
40th Street
Study Area
Fiscal
Net
Debt
Issuance Reserve
Net Bond
Total Bond Coverage
Interest
Surplus
Plan
Tax
Issued
Costs Funds
Proceeds Debt Service
Debt
Ratio on
Reserves
Resources
Year Year
Service
Increment
1.15
5%
6%
2% 10%
BY
1999 -2000
0
-
1
2000 -01
0
83,650
2
2002 -03
83,650
0
146.683
3
2002 -03
146,683
p
-
230,294
4
2003 -04
230,294
0
258,269
5
2004 -05
258.269
-
0
280.703
6
2005 -06
280,703
304,028
3,639,038
72,781 363,904
3,202.353 264.372
264,372
1.15
18,195
57.851
7
2006 -07
264.372
1.24
18,195
82,101
e
2007 -08
328.278
264,372
134
18,195
107,315
9
2006 -09
353,492
264,372
146
18.195
140,035
10
2009 -10
386.212
-
264.372
1.56
18,195
167,169
11
2010 -11
413,346
- -
-
264.372
1.67
18,195
195,653
12
2011 -12
441,830
- -
-
264,372
1.78
18,195
225,554
13
2012 -13
471,731
- -
-
264.372
1.88
18.195
250,696
14
2013 -14
496,873
- -
264.372
1.98
18,195
276,837
15
2014 -15
523.014
550.195
2,946,481
58.930 294,648
2,592,903 214.059
478.431
1.15
32.928
104.692
16
2015 -16
478,431
121
32,928
132,955
n
2016 -17
578.458
- -
-
478.431
127
32,928
162.343
1e
2017 -18
607,846
-
478.431
1.33
32,928
189.100
19
2018 -19
634.603
- -
-
Mi
T—m
2019 -20
662,291
2,000,000
40,000 200,000
1,760,000 145,298
623.729
1.06
42.928
42.928
81,490
110,143
21
2020 -21
690.944
- -
-
623,729
623.729
1.11
1.16
42,928
139,793
22
2021 -22
720,594
- -
-
-
623.729
1.20
42.928
170.476
n
2022 -23
751,277
- -
623.729
1.25
42.928
197.714
24
2023 -24
778.515
- -
-
623.729
1.29
42.928
225.765
f 25
2024 -25
806,566
623,729
134
42.928
254,653
26
2025 -26
835,454
623.729
1.39
42.928
284,404
27
2026 -27
865,205
- -
-
-
623 729
1 44
42.928
315,043
2e
2027 -28
895.844
- -
623.729
1.49
42,928
346,596
29
2028 -29
927,397
- -
-
623.729
154
42,928
379.092
3o
2029 -30
959,893
023 729
1.58
42,928
406.627
31
2030 -31
987.428
623 729
1 63
42.928
434,985
32
2031 -32
1,015,786
TOTAL BONDING
623 729
1 68
42,928
464,191
33
2032 -33
1,044.992
CAPACITY
623 729
1.72
42.928
494,268
34
2033 -34
1,075,069
$8,585,519
623729
177
42,928
525.245
35
2034 -35
1,106.046
FUNDS REMAINING
623729
182
42.928
557,147
36
2035 -36
1,137,948
$16,508,182
623729
1 88
42,928
590.002
37
3036 -37
1.170,803
(includesfunds available afterdebt
623 729
1 93
42,928
623.839
3e
2037 -38
1,204.640
service and interest on reserve
623 729
1 99
42.928
658,688
39
2038 -39
1,239.489
funds)
623 729
2 04
42.928
694,579
4o
2039 -40
1,275,380
623 729
2 10
42.928
731,543
41
2040 -41
1,312,344
623 729
2 17
42,928
769,611
42
2041 -42
1,350,412
623 729
223
42,928
808,819
43
2042 -43
1.389,620
623 729
229
42,928
849.198
44
45
2043 -44
2044 -05
1,429.999
1,471,587
623 729
2.36
42.928
690,786
858.552
7,555,256 623.729
20.510.015
1,411,584
15,096,597
Totals
34,195,028
8,585,519
171,710
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Feasibility Study for the
July, 1999 31 City of San Bernardino
APPENDIX I
Summary of Attached Photos
1,2 exposed wiring
3 deteriorated eaves and overhangs, dry rot
4 buckled foundation
5,6 chipped and peeling paint
7 deteriorated roofing materials
8 deteriorated exterior building materials
9 outdoor storage
10 vacant building
11 trash and debris
12 vacant building
13 exposed wiring /missing, deteriorated exterior building materials
14 broken window /vacant building
15 vacant building
16 inadequate drainage, vacant building
17 inadequate loading
18 deteriorated exterior building materials /substandard exterior plumbing
19 trash and debris
20 inadequate loading
21 substandard exterior plumbing
22 deteriorated exterior building materials
23 deteriorated foundation
24 exposed wiring
25 broken window, peeling paint, vacant
26 faulty addition
27 deteriorated exterior building materials
28 faulty electrical
29 faulty addition
30 broken and deteriorated roofing materials
31 vacant building
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Feasibility Study for the
July, 1999 32 City of San Bernardino
e
e
�ti E .se
Photograph 1: APN: 0154 - 222 -Ul
4253 North Sierra Way
Photograph 2: APN: 0154 - 222 -25
175 East 44th Street
Photograph 3: APN: 0154 - 222 -23
4202 Sepulveda Avenue
Photograph 4: APN: 0154 - 222 -23
4202 Sepulveda Avenue
OPP"
Ny
Photograph 5: APN: 0271 - 062 -12
3952 North Mountain View Avenue
74 4"
� --
Photograph 6: APN: 0271-062-16
3932 North Mountain View Avenue
T77
Photograph 7: APN: 0271-062-17
3924 North Mountain View Avenue
Photograph 8: AFN: uzii- udc -.L/
3924 North Mountain View Avenue
Photograph 9: APN: 0271- 062 -24
3894 North Mountain View Avenue
Photograph 10: APN: 0271 - 062 -id
3932 North Mountain View Avenue
Photograph 11: APN: 0271- o62 -VS
3934 North Mountain View Avenue
y
Photograph 10: APN: 0271 - 062 -id
3932 North Mountain View Avenue
Photograph 11: APN: 0271- o62 -VS
3934 North Mountain View Avenue
Photograph 12: APN: 0154- 4bL-UL
161 East 40th Street
Photograph 13: APN: 0154 - 462 -02Z
191 East 40th Street
Photograph 14: APN: 0154 - 462 -02
161 East 40th Street
m
Photograph 15: APN: 0154 - 462 -02Z
191 East 40th Street
Photograph 16: APN: 0154 - 462 -13
Commercial Retail Center at 201 East 40th Street
Photograph 17: APN: 0154 - 462 -13
Commercial Retail Center at 201 East 40th Street
Photograph 18: APN: 0154 - 462 -13
Commercial Center at 201 East 40th Street
Photograph 19: APN: 0154 - 452 -49
277 East 40th Street
Photograph 20: APN: 0154 - 452 -46
265 East 40th Street
Photograph 21: APN: 0154 - 452 -44
255 East 40th Street
ri
i
�4
4
r
-
+g�g[
Y
�
M Mn
Photograph 21: APN: 0154 - 452 -44
255 East 40th Street
ri
h
Photograph 22: APN: 0154 -452 -44
255 East 40th Street
IL
Photograph 23: APN: 0154 - 452 -43
233 East 40th Street
Photograph 24: APN: 0154 - 462 -13
201 East 40th Street
rl
A..i
0 WOO 74=
q �
3
q �
r
Photograph 26: APN: 0154 - 461 -08
133 East 40th Street
Photograph 27: APN: 0154 - 263 -12
3981 North Sierra Way
Photograph 28: APN: 0154 - 262 -20
3948 North Sierra Way
Photograph 29: APN: 0154 - 262 -03
3955 Genevieve
Photograph 30: APN: 0154 - 261 -2v
3951 North Mountain View Avenue
Photograph 31: APN: 0154 - 261 -20
3951 North Mountain View Avenue
0
J
Photograph 34: APN: 0154 - 221 -33
4352 North Sierra Way
Photograph 35: APN: 0154 - 221 -31
4276 North Sierra Way
Photograph 32: APN: 0154 - 242 -02
194 East 40th Street
Photograph 33: APN: 0154 - 242 -28
4151 North Sierra Way