Loading...
03/02/2021 - Formal Meeting - City Council Comment File (2) Topic Name Comment District Construction Laura Howat Dear City Council:I live in the Wasatch Hollow neighborhood and am an avid bicyclist.As you are aware, 6 Google and their contractors have been cutting into SLC streets and laying their fiber.What has been left so far is a narrow groove right in the section of street a cyclist would ride.The groove is about a bicycle tire width and an extreme hazard to catch a tire and cause a crash.Even the grooves which have been paved are not much better and will likely degrade since it is just a thin coating across a gap.Since Google is one of the richest companies in the world,is there a plan to have them help SLC mitigate the damage they are causing and improve the already abysmal state of the local roads?Sincerely,Laura Howat Construction Carol Sweeney Re"Proposal to Require Notice for Permits to Work in the Public Way"Glad this is getting some attention.113 understand the city council did not have say over the 5G towers but a way for the community to have input is a good idea.The 5G towers are eyesores and the google fiber trenches can't have been good for our _streets. Construction John Gurr I like and agree that notice should be given.Living next to a major residential complex under construction,it n/a is most helpful to know what is going on and who to contact.My only suggestion would be expand the area of notification beyond adjacent to a small radius.Oftentimes the disruption may be across the street or just a few addresses away but still have a major impact on the property owner or tenant.Thank you.John Gurr, CCIM,SIOR Construction Melissa Regan Dear City Councilmembers-Please find the attached written submittal and supporting exhibit on behalf of n/a Verizon Wireless regarding the Ordinance Amendment to Require Notice for Permits to Work in the Public Way.This chart addresses the issues that will be discussed at tomorrow's Work Session.Verizon Wireless representatives will be in attendance at the City Council Work Session and available to answer any questions you may have.Thank you,Melissa*See Corresponding Attachment* Crime in Rose Park Margaret Holloway So tell me why it is acceptable for people to drive around our neighborhood shooting guns at homes and 1 people?All we keep getting told is its is just gangs..If this was on the east side,liberty park area,avenues. Heaven forbid.Sugarhouse.There would be cameras everywhere.But those people have the police cameras watching the homeless camping walking in the parks.Yes we know we dont have the big prominent people demanding something be done.So we are told its just gangs.Well now they have a neighbors guns added to their arsenal.And still we are told its just the gangs shooting.I see the police are having listening sessions but SO WHAT nothing changes Margaret Holloway Topic Name Comment District District Attorney's Office Albert Cramer I am CC other family members on this issue.Consider this a formal complaint against the Salt Lake n/a County Office of the District Attorney.In the media Sim Gill said the Conviction Integrity Unit would address issues of Prosecutorial Misconduct,Anna Rossie Anderson says they don't.Sim Gill told me on the phone Ben Haynes would connect me with Anna Rossi Anderson.That has not happened.I have submitted two GRAMA requests for a descriptions of the Cases sent to and addressed by the Conviction Integrity Unit but have not received such records.This reflects badly on all of Salt Lake County government.Who holds attorneys accountable when those attorneys violate the law and do not uphold the Constitutional rights of Citizens? Kindly tell me the answer to this question.It is not the State Bar,The DA,The AG,or the courts. What are you willing to do to address the issues of my Constitutional Rights being violated by Susan Hunt in my court proceedings and the other issues I have raised in the documents I filed with the Conviction Integrity Unit? Thank you for you time and service.My family and I look forward to your timely reply.*See Corresponding Attachments* Topic Name Comment District EV Ordinance Bill Kurek Good afternoon councilmembers,I signed up for a SLC Green Vehicle permit in 2020 after purchasing a new 1 hybrid vehicle and was extremely pleased upon discovering that the program existed--it has been a great way to incentivize my wife and Ito visit SLC's downtown core more often for little things like haircuts, brunch,and coffee.I recently discovered that this year's EPA Smartway Elite requirements imposed for the Green Vehicle Program dramatically phase out a huge segment of the hybrid vehicle category.Although I agree with taking tough action at every level of our Utah communities to combat air pollution and improve our transportation planning outlook,it feels a bit like this change has missed the spirit of the code in favor of it's letter.My vehicle for example,a 2019 Hyundai loniq,is one of the most efficient new hybrids on the market.We purchased it because it was affordable,but also because of the shift in the vehicle marketplace it represents.I can't help but consider that the language in ordinance 12.56.205--which includes the "Smartway Elite"criteria requirement might be amended to reflect the realities of the hybrid/EV marketplace.Frankly,the new requirements so heavily favor EVs over any viable hybrids that it feels almost like an issue of economic equity in that there are plenty of consumers who would love to own an EV,but are priced out by their extreme price tags.I bought a car in 2019,so obviously I am already in an economic category that many SLC residents can not claim.But the next cheapest EV to my vehicle,for example,had a sticker price of over$9000 more than our car--and we certainly did our research.As you are well aware, they only get much more expensive from there.Further,as a front line employee my household finally has COVID-19 vaccination dates within sight,and we are looking forward to getting back out and stimulating the local economy via patronizing restaurants,going to Jazz games,visiting the Broadway theater,and finally getting that much-delayed haircut.Though I'm sure we'll still end up downtown soon enough,the permit was honestly a huge incentive for those little errands--even if just for its perception of convenience. I would love to hear what the SLC Council is doing to address the changes to this year's program,if anything,and what future plans and goals the city is striving towards to address our community's urgent need to genuinely go green--even if it means that my participation in the Green Vehicle program was just a several-month romp through 2020.It was good while it lasted I Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely,Billy Kurek Rose Park Topic Name Comment District Homelessness Jennifer Murdock https://sltrib.com/news/2021/02/07/year-old-woman-dies-salt/I knew Brandy.Do something.In the next n/a week we will have snow,and temperatures dropping into the 20's.I found this out after my experience with Sean last night.For those who didnt get the email as the council for it.How many have to die?This is why I go out every night and pass out my warmers that are safe to burn in tents.People are cold.You had a missed opportunity with Camp Hope.You had an opportunity to come and meet the people who are attempting to fill in where you are failing.The city must open up 24 hour warming centers throughout the valley for the rest of the winter.Not another person should die a city that stigmatizes the homeless. (Looking at you DALE,who cares more about trash than their mental health)I should not have to drive around for hours with a cold scared unsheltered person trying to find a warm place to take them and not have any options. Topic Name Comment District Homelessness Jennifer Murdock On 2/6 I went out for my nightly rounds.I go out and refill the unsheltered sternos and also make n/a handmade warmers for persons who do not enter shelter.Since the sweep of Camp Hope I have been focusing my efforts on a community camp near my home.For 3 days I saw an individual there.This individual was 24 yrs old from what I find out over the course of the evening has been unsheltered since he was 18.He was dropped out at the Weigands center by his own father.He hasn't his mother and fathers since and claimed to be from Detroit.This person has a noticeable metal health issue.Has a history of suicide.He only remembers his fathers name is the same as his and not his mother though he continues to refer to her all evening.Clearly suffering from delusions he struggled to keep a conversation,and was constantly worried he had upset me or done something wrong.This man had the mannerism and behavior of a young teen or child.He had wandering around in the same spot all 3 days.He told me he didnt have a tent,the first day.The second day still no tent and the 3rd day still no tent.I offered him one of my warmers and showed him how to use it.While I was letting him get a scnack from my bag he was asking me if I thought it was safe for him to enter another tent in the area.I asked around and found that the tent he was referring to was taken.He continues to tell me that he doesnt feel safe because so many people in the area have a knife.He asked me if I would take him to the shelter to which I agreed,because I made him feel safe.I am very hesitant to ever take anyone in my vehicle and decided I ONLY take people in my car if they need to go to a safer place.It is my one exception.This appeared to fall into that instance.I took him to the The Road Home(Gail Miller)on Paramount-It was 6:30PM-There were NO Beds.I asked her about Valley Mental Health or Uni as he was visibly distraught,scared and experiencing delusions.They determined that he was not a threat to himself,but in a mental state of concern so would accept to take him into holding at Uni which is 24 hours.But they could not hold him against his will.This person was continually becoming very concerned any time it was suggested that we were going to be separated.This did slightly concern me for my safety but since the trained professionals from UHeath(Kim&Parker)are not allowed to transport they left it to me.1 of 2*Continued Below* Topic Name Comment District Homelessness Jennifer Murdock 2 of 2 Continued Above*I had somehow now become responsible for the wellbeing of this individual.I n/a spent hours up at UNI only to leave with Sean.The Social Worker(Mike)and staff up at UNI nor Gail Miller was unable to skillfully gain the trust of Sean for me to leave him in a safe location.I cannot take an in an unsheltered person experiencing delusions into my home with children.After driving him to both the other camps near the shelters and even attempting to see if Ty could help him with blankets or a tent.I did not receive any assistance and she wouldnt even come meet him.Last night I left Sean sad,and afraid with a blanket in front of the Gail Miller Resource Center which had no beds in a state of fear and delusion.This is your failure.I do not understand how an individual this age,who has received services at the VOA and has this severe mental illness has slipped through the cracks.The advice of the social worker was for him to take himself to the 4th street clinic.If you met this individual you would be able to see that without a caseworker to advocate for him and to help him with his appointments,medicine and continuum of care this person will stay unsheltered.I cried myself to sleep last night..This state must do better for our chronic unsheltered and I will not let up.This has only solidified my resolve.If anyone has any ideas for Sean please let me know because this person should not be on the street because his condition puts him in danger of being taken advantage of.III leave you with the words of Sean after I told him I hope he wasnt too upset that the evening did end with him with a bed and I hope he would consider me a friend.He said"because that's what the world needs more friends,right?"This is a picture of Sean,smiling while we waiting at Uni for the Social Workers,smiling while we played with instagram filters.Sean deserves better.He didn't deserve to be dropped off at a shelter by his own parents.He doesn't deserve to not get the care he needed after 5 years of being unsheltered.*See Corresponding Attachment* Topic Name Comment District Homelessness Chrystal Graham You know I just read this article about this man opening up a camp in his front yard makes me want to do n/a the same he should be considered a hero someone willing to take a chance no matter what pandemic or anything else is going on he's going to help someone something you failed to do your city has failed people you are failing people and now the residents of that city has to step up where the government has found you ask us to trust the government pay the taxes do what we need to do as a community well he is and you guys are trying to shut him down talking about it's only legal to camp in your yard for two days who are you to tell me what I can do on my property if I can hang out and camp in my yard with my kids or my family or anything else for that matter I pay my taxes it's my f******property the government is trying to overrun everything you guys might want to get yourself together cuz if he owns that property that's his to do with he pays his taxes how dare you if anything your city should be applauding him cuz now you don't have homeless people just walking around shooting up f drugs leaving dirty needles around no they're out there doing stuff for the community making it better if anything you need to be opening up a shelter to help him help the community shutting down everything oh it's a pandemic so let's make it worse by shutting down s***where people can't go and get a shower or wash their f******hands get it together as a community because our government f******sucks and I'm not just talking about in your city I don't even live in your God damn state but believe me there are a lot of homeless people in Ohio that I help and I wouldn't stop no matter what anybody tried to say or do and I hope that there's nothing you can say or do that will stop that man from being the perfect person he is by helping when people see that article of how the community is working together feeding these homeless people trying to help them get little jobs here in there to have money because God knows the government has made it to where we can't live without money the government wants our money oh you got to go to work you got to do this you got to do that you got to pay taxes you got to pay the f******senator to sit on his ass you f******people take money and go on God damn trips f***your vacation take that f******money and do something with the community that's why you're in politics remember because you care about people no it's not it's cuz you're a f******control freak 90%of the government are control freaks 1 of 2*Continued Below* Topic Name Comment District Homelessness Chrystal Graham 2 of 2*Continued Above*you realize this right go see a damn counselor and ask for yourself you know why n/a the government is so f******hated half the time and just so you know I don't hate all government I happen to love Mike dewine he is the most awesome governor in the entire United States of America because you're only in it for yourself yeah I probably shouldn't have cussed in this but you know what as a human I get upset too and I value human life more than most and so does that man how dare you how dare any of you how dare the residents that complain you know what their problem is they're f******Petty pieces of s***if anything when somebody calls on him for a complaint what you guys should be saying is is it dirty or are they being to loud or what's the problem there isn't a f******problem they're just assholes tell them to go f***off they got their own piece of property of these people ain't f******with their property or on them or they shouldn't be calling and they shouldn't even have the right to I know if my neighbor set up a f******camp for homeless people which I'm thinking of doing myself I'll be all in and I will try to make sure my entire neighborhood understood and felt the same way I hope he don't shut down and if you fine him I am pretty sure most of America will help him pay it and also help him to keep the camp going I'm actually going to start a GoFundMe page for him to help feed the homeless to help care for them hats gloves to help keep them warm to keep them productive people of the community something you f******government people don't know how to do it takes a great person to do these things with a lot of humanity and patience and love what you need to do is get your government together and learn the same damn thing School Closure Karren Hammer Please update community on measures you have taken to open the Salt Lake City Schools through the Salt n/a Lake City School Board and Superintendent.Why have Davis County and Granite District Schools been in session from the beginning of the school year yet the Salt Lake School District is just barely opening up?The School Districts next door to Salt Lake on the north and south are functioning normally,working around the pandemic,for the sake of their resident children.It seems so odd that Salt Lake Schools have not been able to open up.My grandchildren reside in those districts north and south of Salt Lake so I know that it's worked well in those districts.No major outbreaks of covid have happened and teachers are safe. Topic Name Comment District Utah Theater Casey McDonough Mayor and Council Members(RDA Executive Director and Board Members),Please see my public n/a comments regarding Agenda Item C.6."Informational:Update on Sales Pricing Terms of the Utah Theater and Adjacent Retail Property at 144-158 South Main Street-3:00 PM 30 min."as follows:We all know the criticisms made regarding this project,how it came about,and how it will seal the fate of the Utah (Pantages)Theater with its demolition.So here we are today,and I would be lying if I didn't admit that the proposed project looks like it could be a positive one for downtown.But I still strongly believe that the loss of the theater is too great a price to pay when every avenue to save theater hasn't been pursued.But here we are,and the project has advanced,and you are about to get an update on the sales pricing terms for this deal.Regarding the pricing terms and my public comments about them,I believe those terms are rife with problems.Firstly,the valuation of the property(see Integra appraisal dated May 31,2019)did not take into account the actual benefits to the developers and their existing property,in large part the parking benefits and related value the acquisition of the property will have for their existing property.This alone is enough to question the valuation of the property and therefore the entire agreement.Secondly,the valuation of the property was calculated for vacant land,but the developers aren't buying vacant land,they are buying the land and the building which of course have value.This may be the main answer to the question of how the RDA could have purchased the property years ago and as of 2019,the property is somehow worth less now.This means the RDA is giving some quantity of value away,a value that could be used by the RDA on other projects,to benefit more affordable housing,etc.Thirdly,wrapped into the lack of any value placed on the buildings is the added lack of any value for the historic artifacts in the buildings.Historic artifacts and antiques like the painted murals in the retail building,the crystal chandelier from the theater,other artifacts and antiquities,and most alarmingly the Tiffany skylight in the theater.The Tiffany skylight alone could have a value ranging from tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands,and possibly millions of dollars.1 of 3*Continued Below' Topic Name Comment District Utah Theater Casey McDonough 2 of 3*Continued Above*But none of these were appraised and their monetary value is left unaccounted n/a for in this deal.Lastly,the value of the property used in trade for the public benefits in this deal is confusing and seems very subjective making the entirety of this deal hard for a citizen to understand.Explanations about them to date have not resolved my suspicions that the deal was rushed so that it could be inked before the previous administration left office and ultimately gives a monetary value to the developers unaccounted for in trade for the public benefits.On top of that,a recent investigative article by Utah Stories(Broken Promises Historic Utah Theatre donated to a developer with an affordable housing promise.Impossible,now claims developer-Utah Stories)claims that the developer is now saying they can't meet the affordable housing commitment previously made as well.To date,these issues seem to have simply been shrugged off by the Mayor's office and the RDA with no real or substantive explanation to the public in response to them.These issues need to be fully addressed and accounted for so that everything about this deal and agreement is above board and in full view.When issues like these aren't addressed, specifically and formally,then a void is left that can easily fill with suspicion and mistrust between the public and their government,and that is unacceptable.In regards to the theater,talking with others who would also like the theater saved,a comment was made tome that we are looking at a 0 in 1,000 chance the theater could be saved at this point,but I hold out hope and have concluded that there is a 1 in 1,000 chance.But when I share that sentiment,I'm asked the question what would that 1 in 1,000 chance look like?I believe that chance is our city leaders including the Mayor and the City Council stopping and sitting down with the developers again to revisit all ways to meet everyone's goals and save the theater.But this time,the conversation wouldn't simply be a conversation about the theater property as it relates to the adjacent property owners,but a larger conversation about a master plan for the entire block and all the property owners on it.If there is a 1 in a 1,000 chance to save the theater,I believe it will require the City and the developers to take the lead.Together with input from all the other property owners on the block like the County,Zions Bank Corp.,2 of 3*Continued Below* Topic Name Comment District Utah Theater Casey McDonough 3 of 3*Continued Above*Rocky Mountain Power,and others,I believe there may be an avenue for not In/a only the theater to be saved,but for the developers to meet their development and parking goals,but possible also meet goals like connecting Main Street through the block to the Salt Palace Convention Center and their new hotel.Possibly meeting parking goals for property owners on the entire block in a more holistic way vs.just for the developers and their properties.I believe the previous administration,while with some well-meaning intentions,lacked not only a connection to what their constituency valued,but also the vision to see more than just dealing with the theater property.We still have an opportunity to see a greater vision,for the theater and the entire block,but it will take the wherewithal of the current administration and council to give that opportunity a real chance.The Utah(Pantages)Theater property was purchased by the RDA,on behalf of the residents of Salt Lake City.I believe it was purchased because we all recognized its value as an irreplaceable architectural and historic site in our City.A site as significant as The Capitol Theater,The Walker Center,the Hotel Utah,or the City&County Building.I also believe there was an implied promise made when we purchased the theater to do everything we could to save the theater,and I believe the current deal breaks that promise.I for one will continue to do what I can to give the theater all the chances it deserves to be saved,but I am just one guy without the financial means to do much more than say what I have to say.But I can only remain hopeful that there is a 1 in a 1,000 chance that the theater will be saved.It will take a vision beyond the current deal to save the theater,but I believe that vision for the theater,the entire block,and in turn the City will see greater returns than the current deal ever could.Thank you for your time and consideration,I appreciate it.Casey O'Brien McDonough*See Corresponding Attachment* Topic Name Comment District Wasatch BLVD Shoreline Trail Melissa Hardy Dear Honorable Erin Mendenhall&City Council Representatives,,Thank you for your attention to the 6 attached petition from concerned residents of District 6.As homeowners specifically living along the Wasatch Boulevard corridor between 1300 South and Crestview Drive,we(the eyewitnesses to the daily activity on the roadway)feel it our duty to bring the extreme dangers of this specific portion of roadway to the attention of city leaders.In addition to regular vehicular use,this portion of Wasatch Drive provides biking access to the Shoreline Trail,Emigration Canyon,Research Park,Hogle Zoo and the University of Utah.It is the only access point to city-owned Foothill Baseball diamonds and Liberty Hills Tennis facilities. On spring,summer and fall days,it also services hundreds of golf carts that compete with pedestrians for space along a short makeshift sidewalk.We understand this portion of Wasatch Drive plays an important role in our city's recreational landscape;however,we believe all who use it deserve infrastructure to support safety and order.Instead,the area lacks basics,such as curb,gutter,sidewalks,streetlights,park lights,park gates and bike lanes.While this petition includes a variety of recommendations,we hope it will, at a minimum,open the door for productive conversation,so that,together,we can work towards a safer Wasatch Drive,between 1300 South and Crestview Drive.As neighborhood liaisons,and chairs of this effort,we specifically request a meeting to discuss the issues and ideas outlined in the attached petition. We look forward to hearing back.Respectfully,Melissa Hardy&Tom Hagan`See Corresponding Attachment' Albert Cramer Anna Rossi Anderson 9 Dec. 2019 Assistant Division Administrator Conviction Integrity Unit Chief Salt Lake County District Attorney's Office 111 E. Broadway, Ste 400. Salt Lake City, Ut 84111 Dear Ms Anderson: I read, with dismay, your letter dated November 21, 2019. Enclosed you will find documents showing the State Bar does not generally address issues of prosecutorial misconduct and news articles where your panel was going to address such issues. I do expect you will keep the promises made in the news articles and, at minimum,petition the court to reduce the sentence from 5 to life, as intent was never proven by your attorney Susan Hunt, and inform the Utah Board of Pardons of that change. Note: under Utah Law a GRAMA request is to be responded to within 10 business days. I have yet you receive the records I requested.Nothing in the items below grant an attorney the authority to violate the Constitution or allow others to violate the Constitution or the law as I clearly spelled out in the packet I sent the Conviction Integrity Unit. Please keep the promises presented . Will you be available Friday Dec. 13, 2019 for me to call and discuss my concerns. If so,please email me what are possible times to call and what is the best phone #to use. If this date doesn't work what are the best days and times to reach you after 4 pm week days. Thank you for your service. It is clear that crimes were committed and Constitutional right were violated in this case. Attorney's Oath"! do solemnly swear that I will support, obey and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of Utah; that I will discharge the duties of attorney and counselor at law as an officer of the courts of this State with honesty and fidelity; and that I will strictly observe the Rules of Professional Conduct promulgated by the Supreme Court of the State of Utah." The Mission of the Salt Lake County District Attorney is: • To confront, challenge and aggressively pursue crime in our community. • To be firm and fair, swift and sure in holding offenders accountable for their criminal conduct. • To be respectful and responsive to the needs of the victims of crime. • To oppose crime,promote justice with integrity without fear of personal, professional or political consequence and without regard to race, religion, gender, political affiliation, sexual orientation, social or economic status. • To nurture and promote respect for the professionals who serve our community as public servants by establishing high standards of professionalism, fair compensation, a good work environment with adequate resources to provide the highest levels of professional service to our citizens. • To be fiscally efficient, socially responsive and personally accountable. • To demand the highest levels of professionalism, competence, honor,integrity and ethics in the execution of our responsibilities in the service of our citizens. • To daily earn the respect of our citizens and the trust of our communities with the integrity of our actions and the ethics of our convictions. • To maintain the public trust, honor, integrity and pride in our professional responsibilities and judgements. • To serve our citizens. Utah Code Chapter 18a Powers and Duties of County and District Attorney Part 1 General Provisions 17-18a-101 Title. This chapter is known as "Powers and Duties of County and District Attorney." Utah Rules of Professional Conduct https://www.utcourts.gov/resources/rules/ucja/#Chapter_13 PREAMBLE AND SCOPE PREAMBLE:A LAWYER'S RESPONSIBILITIES [1]A lawyer is a representative of clients, an officer of the legal system and a public citizen having special responsibility for the quality of justice. Every lawyer is responsible to observe the law and the Rules of Professional Conduct, shall take the Attorney's Oath upon admission to the practice of law, and shall be subject to the Rules of Lawyer Discipline and Disability. Rule 8.3. Reporting Professional Misconduct. (a)A lawyer who knows that another lawyer has committed a violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct that raises a substantial question as to that lawyer's honesty,trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects shall inform the appropriate professional authority. Rule 8.4. Misconduct. It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to: (a) violate or attempt to violate the Rules of Professional Conduct, knowingly assist or induce another to do so, or do so through the acts of another; (b) commit a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects; (c) engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation; (d) engage in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice; (e) state or imply an ability to influence improperly a government agency or official or to achieve results by means that violate the Rules of Professional Conduct or other law; or (f)knowingly assist a judge or judicial officer in conduct that is a violation of applicable rules of judicial conduct or other law. Rule 3.3. Candor Toward the Tribunal. (a)A lawyer shall not knowingly: (a)(1) make a false statement of fact or law to a tribunal or fail to correct a false statement of material fact or law previously made to the tribunal by the lawyer; (a)(2) fail to disclose to the tribunal legal authority in the controlling jurisdiction known to the lawyer to be directly adverse to the position of the client and not disclosed by opposing counsel; or (a)(3) offer evidence that the lawyer knows to be false. If a lawyer, the lawyer's client or a witness called by the lawyer has offered material evidence and the lawyer comes to know of its falsity,the lawyer shall take reasonable remedial measures, including, if necessary, disclosure to the tribunal.A lawyer may refuse to offer evidence, other than the testimony of a defendant in a criminal matter,that the lawyer reasonably believes is false. United States Constitution Amendment VI In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial,by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense. Note:Article I, section 2, of the Constitution was modified by section 2 of the 14th amendment. Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. Samples of URLs concerning Prosecutorial Misconduct in Utah. https://www.sltrib.com/opinion/commentary/2018/01/13/commentary-prosecutors-need-to-be-held- accountable-for-wrongdoing/ https://utahlawyerliability.com/category/prosecutorial-misconduct/ https://www.utcourts.gov/resources/rules/ucja/ch13/3 8.htm https://www.utahcriminallaw.net/what-happens-if-a-prosecutor-lies-or-withholds-evidence/ https://bloximages.chicago2.vip.townnews.com/heraldextra.com/content/tncros/assets/v3/editorial/c/17/ c 17e51 e2-c2b8-5e7e-a53d-084000abfe70/5a839991bce08.pdf.pdf https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/news/utah-supreme-court-grants-death-row-prisoner-hearing-on-damning- revelations-of-police-misconduct https://www.smartjusticeutah.org/prosecutorial-reform.html https://slco.org/district-attorney/Conviction-Integrity-Unit/ www.districtattorney.slco.org (this came up an error). An uestion, Comments or Concerns please email me (Albert Cramer) at Amended Aug 2020 In September of 1999 I was wrongfully convicted in Utah Third District Court before Judge Atherton Case 981907686 . I spent 15 years in prison for a crime I did not commit. My daughter and wife were sentenced to 15 years without a father in the home. Few people seem to be concerned about the impact of the Utah Criminal Justice System on families. I can provide documents to support the following. The following are some of the mistakes that were made during the court process: I was charged and convicted of a first degree felony but intent was never proven as required under Utah Law, thus placing me of the sex offender registry for life for something I did not do. • Most of my potential witnesses were NOT contacted by Kim Clark, my trial attorney from the Salt Lake Legal Defender Association, violating my Constitutional Rights. I was not allowed any witnesses (including myself)to testify on my behalf. • An interview with the alleged victim from August of 1997, where he said I did not commit the crime,was never in the discovery of the case, nor presented to the court, the jury or me. I received a printed copy years later. I have never seen the video. The 8 year old child was asked over 90 question. Over half where leading questions and the child denied any crime. Withholding evidence is a crime in Utah regardless of who does it, but I have not found anyone who holds Attorneys accountable for such criminal behavior. • A child witness, in this case, was emotionally abused during the court process by Sue Mineer, who was allowed to enter the witness room at will. I watched her enter the witness room after talking with Detective Huggard and Prosecutor Hunt. The court records from a later hearing show proof of this emotional abuse by Sue Mineer in and near the court room. My wife tells me Sue Mineer held the child up to the window to watch me removed, in shackles, from the court room. Why was a none family member allowed to even talk to the child. • My trial attorney, Kim Clark, has said she never intended to call any witnesses on my behalf • In 2002 an Administrative Law Judge for the Utah Department of Human Services ruled their was not any evidence to support a CPS finding of"Substantiated"in this case after giving the Utah Attorney Generals Office multiple opportunities to prove other wise. This hearing should have been held before trial CPS case 509425. • Four Utah Assistant Attorney Generals have claimed all my potential witness where contacted based solely on Kim Clarks false statement and in spite of evidence from the files of the Salt Lake Legal Defenders Association to the contrary, thus making false statements to a tribunal and violating my Constitutional Rights. • Erin Riley, from the office of the Attorney General, claimed I received records from that office in 2008 but I did not receive the records until 2014. As an inmate I would have had to sign for such mail. The A. G. s office cannot find any such receipt. • My warrant for arrest was not signed by a Judge. I have tried everything I know to overturn my conviction including but not limited to following: • Direct Appeal - I had two appointed attorneys Stephanie Aimes and Greg Skordas, appointed to do the original appeal but they did not address the issues of ineffective trial counsel. • Post Conviction Relief-I filed a Post Conviction petition and was appointed a law firm to take the case. In 2005 in an evidentiary hearing my trial attorney Kim Clark took the stand and, under oath, claimed she believed that all my potential witness were contacted (Perjury/Obstruction of Justice). • Numerous Assistant Utah Attorney General's claim time barred or procedurally barred. Relief from ones Constitutional Rights being violated should never be barred.All Utah Attorney's take an oath to uphold the Constitution. We, as Utah Citizens, should never have our tax dollars used to defend violations of Constitutional Rights. • Utah Executive Ethics Committee—from their own annually report rarely addressed complaints. This committee needs to be given the charge of addressing all serious complaints against the Executive Officers of Utah. Citizens need to know someone will investigate their honest complaints. The phone #on their Web site did not work. Filing a complaint with them was a waste of time and effort and tax payer dollars. • In 2017 I complained to Sean Reyes about the behavior of his Attorneys. He did not respond. The state records committee made me pay $100. for the time the AG's GRAMA specialist claimed he spent looking for records of how my concerns where addressed. Tyler Green, from the A Gs office said individual Utah Citizens are never the client of the office of the Utah Attorney General. My concerns were never seriously addressed. • Salt Lake District Attorney's Conviction Integrity Unit— Still waiting to have them take my concerns serious. How can we work together to do the following: • Create a clear and specific procedure of who investigates and prosecutes perjury/Obstruction of Justice (as noted above) in the Mathison Court house. • How do we, as citizens of the state of Utah, hold attorneys accountable to be honest in court documents and other court proceedings and when they learn what they have presented is not true? How do we hold them accountable to remedy the harm that has been done? We all should have the constitutional right to equal protection under the law. We currently do not. • How do we stop a child from being emotionally abused in or around the court room? How do we stop witness tampering like in this case? • Citizens are expected to follow laws and procedures that are hard to find and follow,but attorneys can violate the law and a citizen's Constitutional Rights (as noted above). How do we change this? I ask that Utah Law require all statements made before a Judge be under oath. • The office of the Utah Attorney General should uphold the Constitutional rights of ALL Utah citizens. I have learned they don't. I ask that the Utah Assistant Attorney Generals not fight against a petition when the petitioner's Constitutional Rights where clearly violated. This would save millions of tax payer dollars. • State Attorneys should be criminally charged when they violate the law. They should settle out of court when a Utah Citizen's Rights have been violated and never waste tax payer dollars allowing such violations to continue. • Insist that a person be allowed to be removed from the Sex Offender Registry when it can be shown that their Constitutional Rights where violated during the court process. It is time we demand Attorneys in the Mathison Court house take responsibility to uphold the Constitutional rights of ALL citizens and obey the laws and follow their own code of ethics. I may never be able to over turn my wrongful conviction,but I will speak out so others will not have to go through what my family and I have had to because of the illegal and unethical behavior of others. The impact of these unethical and unconstitutional behaviors will be felt by members of my family for generations to come. If you are reading this I ask what are you willing to do to prevent this from happening to others? This kind of behavior is not an isolated experience. Too many Utah Citizens have been the victims of similar abuse. This kind of be behavior has been tolerated for far too long. I (Albert Cramer) can be reached at email _ti rr = Toms., -pt�"1 • ..._._. ,... .. . , F.... r ... ,,b, w.. t ! , ..,g..,.. -,...• P 1---s r_ - •�-.... - --- • - i-__ _. - - r•-� w-fa rii - -_+ til t--_ -,- - ;0,11-7 I . .-- • ,--••••- 00111111-10ill.';•- _ Fi I 1 I III II II II 11 .�_T_ _ . _ �I 111 II 111 oposiori-rj 1 I 111 ii II II 1111 11 1111111:6-111: ' I _ 1 ll IN 111 I I 111 11 I1ili - - Iii pp II 11 II II 11 milwilimumiti... . , III II II II II II . lir- - . IiL _d. r .- Ill iM II 11 Ir 11 LI-= 1 t e - III IIIV i • rr ti n _ _ 1 : - - 1 , 9 I I -4, , 4 4 11 1 I _ ... , .40, .. i 1 I 1 ,1 ,r ,,,,, ,,. ., f__,... • ...:•• �, . ,� , .1 _. p i a s I i i i i :, ..,, ,,..f .. . :„. . _ . rik S' . . • -.t. . . . , , .dir 4 , • _. . • , ,.. 1 ... tom•Ire' ,•.. I Iiiikt .., , , - • j :i •,l • _ . ,,. -dio. i • •• . • . y M • • 114L ..1%.* '.,,, , ,I Al . s • _ . :: . . ...1 . . .. • , ak - . dol 111 .__ •��' r- -4 . C.E... •... _ , , .." • ' illi h il ,,,L,: I .....y r • ti I � Y. �• ~ �+Y. fit_ ' +. . i , 1 '1.--.411101-. C- • [ I Iiiik... ...,..... .4,...: s..1 1.1...,1 `'AIN .„ iok .11..,,-,_-,.4%"0; I • " ... ., i I i I I! ' 7 T .r• r( 1.,1 ! fl , 111 II 1 5 4 ' 4 �''•'1I• IIlllar r * w • . ' „ ',^:..* - pif r ill . i ,du o,or 1 I! 1 1 .,' 1 iii)1.110. J 3 ? •C t 4, I '1 . r I I .. . ) If , 1 I. t . ... I ••• .... IN . • 1 L \ 1 _ _ _ _ _ _ ....iibt01- r 1 Fp ............,.„....-.-- I , ..---- tl ! 11 i 1 riP ai mi i /1 I ---- II k-14111141 ill 0 I I 4 It AMP jj inumeig,.., 1 1 I , 11 11 m 1,1 r li, 1 W _,. t.i.:•, . ,......._ _ . • _ . . „.„,,,...... _.„,„„ „, .L. _., -0•*1 ligt, 37 Li -- I i„,.. ,, i „, ... 1 i I I,- ..„.., ....• _ • 4 III _ . I MI . II I I • . 4 i lag! F4 14 ii 7, „IA... .• , .0.1,7., 4 I. 44,.. . _ , ... .,.. , ---p- . . _ , k...; . i -...., _ , : - •-*. 1 , , .-, .4 ...,--., NOT Taros '1.*44117W' lie"'L:-trj-4.t - i 7.4 - :'4"..;r '. # !Jul! rotiVr.: 1011117 nun iclit r . ._ .9.? 4. I 1 , ... --.41 "alit alums- Jou- IfTV ... . • it —— — 4, iil Olga j 1 ] 1.......„ • • ..."- ,..1-tilin.S. IN P4 '• • ,.....- , I,. • r ) ..-Itif it . 1 l• ..,-..L.• Av't....4 t...! - .... . , :etc .... - ..., . - - IV' ."416 P ir . ' •rut 40 ' ai • ..t , v - . ' •.i, 4416 . ' . .. • .. ,,. 11: II 6.11 A ara ; \iiik ,, . i , ,1Ia \ . ,.\., „„,, ., 1 , . .,.2 , ,,,,, , ,,. ., ,.. f - ir . - .• . , \.\..k . .... -____ ,7---- , 4 wiffn I v„., OSYkINN \ NM ill ,,k4,-;11$: 4;) ' ,.`, '11. , 4 r•V ; -k*. \-\ .' . 4,* AO ., - . --:-- r ' —7-- 7t* \ . • li — ' ‘'\ , 1. v------v:-"::-* r) , A ,, 10 .,, 1 , .. ., . ,a • • 'Ill\„%,.,,., • Si rill , i V _.,_:-... --,111111:- ' 1. tt,N. irill %, . t • _ i 1 , .7.4::: ' Item: • , , it al • POF . i Ii111 � o. • .A.B NK 'lliiiiiilita -"„�f .�c 1 • •, 9-i . �✓. •AH La CIISP N Sot H r• M ZAP. 4'e i�1! P. _ j` - likif40.. k , 40 -r .. _•. :... , i,.. • _ ,. - 1. a.:. k 1 ‘ *. pe , a • km„.......... — tt ;.e \ \ \ \ \.,t ` _' l .,, '11 a� 11,, Integra Realty Resources Salt Lake City Appraisal of Real Property RDA Utah Theatre Property Vacant Land 144 & 156 South Main Street Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah 84101 Prepared For: Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City Effective Date of the Appraisal: Market Value As If Land Only: May 31, 2019 Market Value As If Land Only with Easement & Income Restrictions: May 31, 2019 Report Format: Appraisal Report—Standard Format hi",t IRR-Salt Lake City \, 4411:1444114INNI%%%Ilik'' File Number: 160-2019-0489JT • irr® 5 1 '1711\14S11114, _ '-rwiggiii eil .. . i . _.,o . , .. il A; --) . ___ . ' ,,c 11 i.-•-i • 14 \ s ..V'.. Y • II..,,r. 411air 1. . mo LI ? ...,,, ..., , ..r Li ,,.. ., , .iiit .. . , tiii..,. I --: ] I4.4 ale .. - :—'. x , a• - • wxos RDA Utah Theatre Property 144& 156 South Main Street Salt Lake City, Utah Integra Realty Resources 5107 South 900 East T 801.263.9700 Salt Lake City Suite 200 F 801.263.9709 Salt Lake City,UT 84117 saltlakecity@irr.com www.irr.com/saltlakecity ■ September 27, 2019 Mr.JP Goates Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City 451 South State Street, Room 418 P.O. Box 145518 Salt Lake City, UT 84114-5518 SUBJECT: Market Value Appraisal RDA Utah Theatre Property 144 & 156 South Main Street Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah 84101 IRR-Salt Lake City File No. 160-2019-0489JT Dear Mr. Goates: Integra Realty Resources—Salt Lake City is pleased to submit the accompanying appraisal of the referenced property.The purpose of the appraisal is to develop opinions of the market value as if land only of the fee simple interest in the property. As requested, we also develop and opinion of the market value as if land only with proposed easement and income restrictions. The client and intended user is Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City. The intended use is for internal decision-making purposes. To report the assignment results,we use the Appraisal Report option of Standards Rule 2- 2(a) of USPAP.As USPAP gives appraisers the flexibility to vary the level of information in an Appraisal Report depending on the intended use and intended users of the appraisal, we adhere to the Integra Realty Resources internal standards for an Appraisal Report— Standard Format. This format summarizes the information analyzed,the appraisal methods employed, and the reasoning that supports the analyses, opinions, and conclusions. The subject is a parcel of vacant land containing an area of 0.89 acres or 38,768 square feet. The property is zoned D-1 with Main Street Overlay, Central Business District, which permits a variety of commercial and residential uses. Based on the valuation analysis in the accompanying report, and subject to the definitions, assumptions, and limiting conditions expressed in the report, our opinions of value are as follows: Mr.JP Goates Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City September 27, 2019 Page 2 Value Conclusions Parcel Interest Appraised Date of Value Value Conclusion Market Value As If Land Only Fee Simple May 31,2019 $4,070,000 Market Value As If Land Only with Proposed Fee Simple May 31,2019 $2,910,000 Easement&Income Restrictions Extraordinary Assumptions and Hypothetical Conditions The value conclusions are subject to the following extraordinary assumptions that may affect the assignment results.An extraordinary assumption is uncertain information accepted as fact.if the assumption is found to be false as of the effective date of the appraisal,we reserve the right to modify our value conclusions. 1. The owner reports the existence of three easements affecting the subject property. The first is an access easement for vehicles stemming from 200 South Street and another access easement for pedestrians stemming from Main Street and connecting to another one running behind the Kearns Building. We have confirmed the existence of two of the three easements in the property survey provided. We have been unable to confirm the easment stemming from Main Street with public records. This report assumes all three of these easements exist. A title search is recommended to confirm the existence of these easements. The value conclusions are based on the following hypothetical conditions that may affect the assignment results. A hypothetical condition is a condition contrary to known fact on the effective date of the appraisal but is supposed for the purpose of analysis. 1. For this analysis,we hypothetically assume the improvements located on-site do not exist. This is contrary to fact as there are multiple buildings located on the site. 2. For the analysis involving the proposed easement and affordable housing restrictions,we hypothetically assume these restrictions exist. Although these restrictions are in the process of being implemented,they do not exist at the moment. irr Mr.JP Goates Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City September 27, 2019 Page 3 If you have any questions or comments, please contact the undersigned.Thank you for the opportunity to be of service. Respectfully submitted, Integra Realty Resources-Salt Lake City CFV�J �• Darrin W. Liddell, MAI, Al-GRS, FRICS, CCIM John T. Blanck, MAI, MRICS Certified General Real Estate Appraiser Certified General Real Estate Appraiser Utah Certificate#5450608-CGOO Utah Certificate#5506449-CGOO Telephone: Telephone c()';t44 Joel H.Thompson Certified General Real Estate Appraiser Utah Certificate#8822850-CG00 Telephone: irr Table of Contents Summary of Salient Facts and Conclusions 1 Adjustments Summary 73 General Information 2 Land Value Conclusion—As If Vacant with Identification of Subject 2 Easement& Income Restrictions 74 Sale History 2 Reconciliation and Conclusion of Value 75 Pending Transactions 2 Exposure Time 75 Purpose of the Appraisal 3 Marketing Period 75 Definition of Market Value 3 Certification 76 Definition of As Is Market Value 3 Assumptions and Limiting Conditions 78 Definition of Property Rights Appraised 3 Intended Use and User 4 Addenda Applicable Requirements 4 A. Appraiser Qualifications Report Format 4 B. Definitions Prior Services 4 C. Zoning Ordinance Scope of Work 4 D. Comparable Data E. Engagement Letter Economic Analysis 6 Salt Lake County Area Analysis 6 Surrounding Area Analysis 13 Office Market Overview 19 Multifamily Market Analysis 28 Class A Multifamily Market 30 Comparable Property Analysis 38 Property Analysis 42 Land Description and Analysis 42 Improvement Description and Analysis 55 Real Estate Tax Analysis 56 Highest and Best Use Analysis 57 Valuation 60 Valuation Methodology 60 Land Valuation—As If Vacant 61 Adjustment Factors 65 Analysis and Adjustment of Sales 65 Land Value Conclusion 68 Land Valuation — As If Vacant with Easement and Income Restrictions 69 Mid-block Walkway Pedestrian Easement 69 Affordable Housing 70 As If Vacant with Easement& Income Restrictions (0.89 Acres; 38,768 SF) 70 Analysis and Adjustment of Sales 71 irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Summary of Salient Facts and Conclusions 1 Summary of Salient Facts and Conclusions Property Name RDA Utah Theatre Property Address 144&156 South Main Street Salt Lake City,Salt Lake County,Utah 84101 Property Type Land Owner of Record Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City Tax ID 15-01-229-068 and 15-01-229-070 Land Area 0 89 acres;38,768 SF Zoning Designation D-1 with Main Street Overlay,Central Business District Highest and Best Use Office and multi-family uses Exposure Time;Marketing Period 12 months;12 months Date of the Report September 27,2019 Sales Comparison Approach Number of Sales 6 Range of Sale Dates Apr 17 to Apr 19 Range of Prices per SF(Unadjusted) $58.52-$123.22 Value Conclusions Parcel Interest Appraised Date of Value Value Conclusion Market Value As If Land Only Fee Simple May 31,2019 $4,070,000 Market Value As If Land Only with Proposed Fee Simple May 31,2019 $2,910,000 Easement&Income Restrictions Extraordinary Assumptions and Hypothetical Conditions The value conclusions are subject to the following extraordinary assumptions that may affect the assignment results.An extraordinary assumption is uncertain information accepted as fact. If the assumption is found to be false as of the effective date of the appraisal,we reserve the right to modify our value conclusions. 1. The owner reports the existence of three easements affecting the subject property. The first is an access easement for vehicles stemming from 200 South Street and another access easement for pedestrians stemming from Main Street and connecting to another one running behind the Kearns Building. We have confirmed the existence of two of the three easements in the property survey provided. We have been unable to confirm the easment stemming from Main Street with public records. This report assumes all three of these easements exist. A title search is recommended to confirm the existence of these easements. The value conclusions are based on the following hypothetical conditions that may affect the assignment results. A hypothetical condition is a condition contrary to known fact on the effective date of the appraisal but is supposed for the purpose of analysis. 1. For this analysis,we hypothetically assume the improvements located on-site do not exist. This is contrary to fact as there are multiple buildings located on the site. 2. For the analysis involving the proposed easement and affordable housing restrictions,we hypothetically assume these restrictions exist. Although these restrictions are in the process of being implemented,they do not exist at the moment. irr RDA Utah Theatre Property General Information 2 General Information Identification of Subject The subject is a parcel of vacant land containing an area of 0.89 acres or 38,768 square feet.The property is zoned D-1 with Main Street Overlay, Central Business District,which permits a variety of commercial and residential uses. Property identifying information is provided in the following table. Legal descriptions of the parcels provided by Salt Lake County are also provided below. Property Identification Property Name RDA Utah Theatre Property Address 144& 156 South Main Street Salt Lake City, Utah 84101 Tax ID 15-01-229-068 and 15-01-229-070 Owner of Record Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City Legal Description Parcel 15-01-229-068: Beginning South 17 feet from the Northeast Corner of Lot 8, Block 69, Plat A,Salt Lake City Survey; North 89°57'07"West 202.13 feet; North 0°05' East 7 feet; North 89°57'07"West 12.87 feet; North 0°05'20" East 10 feet; North 89°57'07"West 116.13 feet;South 0°08 24"West 108.833 feet;South 89°57'07" East 115.5 feet;South 0°05'20"West 0.354 feet;South 89°57'07" East 1.125 feet;South 0°05'20"West 7.479 feet;South 89°57'07" East 62.25 feet; North 1.32 feet; East 1.95 feet; North 0°03'50" East 21.58 feet; South 89°46'09" East 150.53 feet; North 77.246 feet to the beginning. Parcel 15-01-229-070: Beginning South 94.246 feet from the Northeast Corner of Lot 8, Block 69, Plat A,Salt Lake City survey;South 49 feet; North 89°43'59"West 165.743 feet; North 0°04' 16" East 15.45 feet; North 89°57'07"West 49.72 feet; North 0°05'20" East 10.50 feet;South 89°57'07" East 62.92 feet; North 1.32 feet; East 1.95 feet; North 0°03'50" East 21.58 feet;South 89°46'09" East 150.53 feet to Census Tract Number 1140 Sale History The current owner of record is Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City. This party has owned the property for a period of time in excess of three years. To the best of our knowledge, no sale or transfer of ownership has taken place within a three-year period prior to the effective appraisal date. Pending Transactions To the best of our knowledge, the property is not subject to an agreement of sale or an option to buy, nor is it listed for sale, as of the effective appraisal date. RDA Utah Theatre Property General Information 3 Purpose of the Appraisal The purpose of the appraisal is to develop an opinion of the market value as if land only of the fee simple interest in the property as of the effective date of the appraisal, May 31, 2019. As requested, we also develop and opinion of the market value as if land only with proposed easement and income restrictions as of the same effective date of the appraisal, May 31, 2019. The date of the report is September 27, 2019.The appraisal is valid only as of the stated effective date or dates. Definition of Market Value Market value is defined as: "The most probable price which a property should bring in a competitive and open market under all conditions requisite to a fair sale,the buyer and seller each acting prudently and knowledgeably, and assuming the price is not affected by undue stimulus. Implicit in this definition is the consummation of a sale as of a specified date and the passing of title from seller to buyer under conditions whereby: • Buyer and seller are typically motivated; • Both parties are well informed or well advised, and acting in what they consider their own best interests; • A reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open market; • Payment is made in terms of cash in U.S. dollars or in terms of financial arrangements comparable thereto; and • The price represents the normal consideration for the property sold unaffected by special or creative financing or sales concessions granted by anyone associated with the sale." (Source: Code of Federal Regulations, Title 12, Chapter I, Part 34.42g;also Interagency Appraisal and Evaluation Guidelines, Federal Register, 75 FR 77449, December 10, 2010, page 77472) Definition of As Is Market Value As is market value is defined as, "The estimate of the market value of real property in its current physical condition, use, and zoning as of the appraisal date." (Source:Appraisal Institute, The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 6th ed. (Chicago: Appraisal Institute, 2015);also Interagency Appraisal and Evaluation Guidelines, Federal Register, 75 FR 77449, December 10, 2010, page 77471) Definition of Property Rights Appraised Fee simple estate is defined as, "Absolute ownership unencumbered by any other interest or estate, subject only to the limitations imposed by the governmental powers of taxation, eminent domain, police power, and escheat." Source: Appraisal Institute, The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 6th ed. (Chicago: Appraisal Institute, 2015) irr RDA Utah Theatre Property General Information 4 Intended Use and User The intended use of the appraisal is for internal decision-making purposes.The client and intended user is Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City. The appraisal is not intended for any other use or user. No party or parties other than Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City may use or rely on the information, opinions, and conclusions contained in this report. Applicable Requirements This appraisal is intended to conform to the requirements of the following: • Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP); • Code of Professional Ethics and Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice of the Appraisal Institute. Report Format This report is prepared under the Appraisal Report option of Standards Rule 2-2(a) of USPAP. As USPAP gives appraisers the flexibility to vary the level of information in an Appraisal Report depending on the intended use and intended users of the appraisal, we adhere to the Integra Realty Resources internal standards for an Appraisal Report—Standard Format.This format summarizes the information analyzed,the appraisal methods employed, and the reasoning that supports the analyses, opinions, and conclusions. Prior Services USPAP requires appraisers to disclose to the client any other services they have provided in connection with the subject property in the prior three years, including valuation, consulting, property management, brokerage, or any other services. We have previously appraised the property that is the subject of this report for the current client within the three-year period immediately preceding acceptance of this assignment. We completed an assignment in August 2017. Scope of Work To determine the appropriate scope of work for the assignment,we considered the intended use of the appraisal,the needs of the user,the complexity of the property, and other pertinent factors. Our concluded scope of work is described below. Valuation Methodology Appraisers usually consider the use of three approaches to value when developing a market value opinion for real property.These are the cost approach, sales comparison approach, and income capitalization approach. Use of the approaches in this assignment is summarized as follows: irr RDA Utah Theatre Property General Information 5 Approaches to Value Approach Applicability to Subject Use in Assignment Cost Approach Not Applicable Not Utilized Sales Comparison Approach Applicable Utilized Income Capitalization Approach Not Applicable Not Utilized We use only the sales comparison approach in developing an opinion of value for the subject.This approach is applicable to the subject because there is an active market for similar properties, and sufficient sales data is available for analysis. The cost approach is not applicable because there are no improvements that contribute value to the property, and the income approach is not applicable because the subject is not likely to generate rental income in its current state. Research and Analysis The type and extent of our research and analysis is detailed in individual sections of the report.This includes the steps we took to verify comparable sales, which are disclosed in the comparable sale profile sheets in the addenda to the report. Although we make an effort to confirm the arms-length nature of each sale with a party to the transaction, it is sometimes necessary to rely on secondary verification from sources deemed reliable. Inspection Darrin W. Liddell,John T. Blanck and Joel H.Thompson conducted an on-site inspection of the property in conjunction with this assignment. Significant Appraisal Assistance No one provided significant appraisal assistance to the signer(s) of this report. irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Salt Lake County Area Analysis 6 Economic Analysis Salt Lake County Area Analysis An analysis of population, employment, and income trends for Salt Lake County,the State of Utah and the United States is performed by Integra Realty Resource's Area Data Analysis Module. This information is presented below. Population Salt Lake County has an estimated 2019 population of 1,157,455, which represents an average annual 1.3% increase over the 2010 census of 1,029,655. Salt Lake County added an average of 14,200 residents per year over the 2010-2019 period, but its annual growth rate lagged the State of Utah rate of 1.6%. Population Trends Population Compound Ann. %Chng 2010 Census 2019 Estimate 2024 Projection 2010-2019 2019-2024 Salt Lake County, UT 1,029,655 1,157,455 1,231,601 1.3% 1.2% Utah 2,763,885 3,179,999 3,406,410 1.6% 1.4% USA 308,745,538 329,236,175 340,950,101 0.7% 0.7% Source:Environics Analytics Looking forward, Salt Lake County's population is projected to increase at a 1.2%annual rate from 2019-2024, equivalent to the addition of an average of 14,829 residents per year. Salt Lake County's growth rate is expected to lag that of Utah, which is projected to be 1.4%. Employment Total employment in Salt Lake County is currently estimated at 706,920 jobs. Between year-end 2008 and the present, employment rose by 119,578 jobs, equivalent to a 20.4% increase over the entire period.There were gains in employment in nine out of the past ten years despite the national economic downturn and slow recovery. Although Salt Lake County's employment rose over the last decade, it underperformed Utah, which experienced an increase in employment of 23.2%or 281,352 jobs over this period. irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Salt Lake County Area Analysis 7 Employment Trends Total Employment(Year End) Unemployment Rate(Ann.Avg.) Salt Lake % % Salt Lake Year County Change Utah Change County Utah 2008 587,342 1,213,048 3.4% 3.6% 2009 561,590 -4.4% 1,157,064 -4.6% 7.0% 7.3% 2010 568,129 1.2% 1,170,113 1.1% 7.7% 7.8% 2011 581,762 2.4% 1,201,634 2.7% 6.6% 6.7% 2012 606,188 4.2% 1,246,051 3.7% 5.3% 5.4% 2013 625,879 3.2% 1,284,999 3.1% 4.4% 4.6% 2014 639,955 2.2% 1,324,820 3.1% 3.7% 3.8% 2015 663,566 3.7% 1,375,435 3.8% 3.4% 3.6% 2016 681,257 2.7% 1,414,274 2.8% 3.2% 3.5% 2017 701,190 2.9% 1,464,873 3.6% 3.1% 3.3% 2018* 706,920 0.8% 1,494,400 2.0% 3.0% 3.1% Overall Change 2008-2018 119,578 20.4% 281,352 23.2% Avg Unemp. Rate 2008-2018 4.6% 4.8% Unemployment Rate-December 2018 2.7% 2.9% *Total employment data is as of September 2018;unemployment rate data reflects the average of 12 months of 2018. Source:Bureau of Labor Statistics and Economy.com.Employment figures are from the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages(QCEW). Unemployment rates are from the Current Population Survey(CPS).The figures are not seasonally adjusted. A comparison of unemployment rates is another way of gauging an area's economic health. Over the past decade, the Salt Lake County unemployment rate has been consistently lower than that of Utah, with an average unemployment rate of 4.6% in comparison to a 4.8% rate for Utah. A lower unemployment rate is a positive indicator. Recent data shows that the Salt Lake County unemployment rate is 2.7% in comparison to a 2.9% rate for Utah, a positive sign for Salt Lake County economy but one that must be tempered by the fact that Salt Lake County has underperformed Utah in the rate of job growth over the past two years. Major employers in Salt Lake County are shown in the following table. irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Salt Lake County Area Analysis 8 Major Employers-Salt Lake County, UT Name Number of Employees 1 University of Utah Over 20,000 2 Intermountain Healthcare 15,000 to 19,999 3 State of Utah 10,000 to 14,9999 4 Granite School District 7,000 to 9,999 5 Jordan School District 5,000 to 6,999 6 Salt Lake County 5,000 to 6,999 7 Wal-Mart 5,000 to 6,999 8 Canyons School District 4,000 to 4,999 9 Smiths Food & Drug 4,000 to 4,999 10 Delta Airlines 4,000 to 4,999 Source:Utah Department of Workforce Services,updated September 2018 Gross Domestic Product Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is a measure of economic activity based on the total value of goods and services produced in a defined geographic area. Although GDP figures are not available at the county level, data reported for the Salt Lake City MSA is considered meaningful when compared to the nation overall, as Salt Lake County is part of the MSA and subject to its influence. Economic growth, as measured by annual changes in GDP, has been somewhat higher in the Salt Lake City MSA than the United States overall during the past eight years.The Salt Lake City MSA has grown at a 2.6%average annual rate while the United States has grown at a 2.1% rate.As the national economy improves,the Salt Lake City MSA continues to perform better than the United States. GDP for the Salt Lake City MSA rose by 2.5%in 2017 while the United States GDP rose by 2.2%. The Salt Lake City MSA has a per capita GDP of$61,809, which is 12%greater than the United States GDP of$55,418.This means that Salt Lake City MSA industries and employers are adding relatively more value to the economy than their counterparts in the United States overall. irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Salt Lake County Area Analysis 9 Gross Domestic Product ($ Mil) Salt Lake City ($ Mil) Year MSA %Change United States %Change 2010 62,047 15,598,753 2011 64,477 3.9% 15,840,664 1.6% 2012 65,892 2.2% 16,197,007 2.2% 2013 66,175 0.4% 16,495,369 1.8% 2014 67,969 2.7% 16,899,831 2.5% 2015 71,143 4.7% 17,386,700 2.9% 2016 72,554 2.0% 17,659,187 1.6% 2017 74,363 2.5% 18,050,693 2.2% Compound %Chg(2010-2017) 2.6% 2.1% GDP Per Capita 2017 $61,809 $55,418 Source:Bureau of Economic Analysis and Economy.com;data released September 2018.The release of state and local GDP data has a longer lag time than national data.The data represents inflation-adjusted"real"GDP stated in 2009 dollars. The figures in the table above represent inflation adjusted "real" GDP stated in 2005 dollars. Income, Education and Age Salt Lake County has a higher level of household income than Utah. Median household income for Salt Lake County is$75,190,which is 4.1%greater than the corresponding figure for Utah. Median Household Income-2019 Median Salt Lake County, UT $75,190 Utah $72,202 Comparison of Salt Lake County, UT to Utah +4.1% Source:Environics Analytics Residents of Salt Lake County have a slightly higher level of educational attainment than those of Utah. An estimated 33%of Salt Lake County residents are college graduates with four-year degrees,versus 32%of Utah residents. People in Salt Lake County are older than their Utah counterparts.The median age for Salt Lake County is 33 years, while the median age for Utah is 31 years. RDA Utah Theatre Property Salt Lake County Area Analysis 10 Education &Age - 2019 Percent College Graduate Median Age 80% 50 7- 70% 45 60% 40 33 31 35 50% 32% 30 _Z 40% 25 30% 20 20% 15 10% 10 Salt Lake County,UT Utah Salt Lake County, Utah UT Source:EnvironicsAnalytics Conclusion As the nation recovers from the 2008-2009 recession, economic conditions in Salt Lake County have improved as indicated by the growth in employment. The Salt Lake County economy will benefit from a growing population base and higher income and education levels. Salt Lake County experienced growth in the number of jobs and has maintained a consistently lower unemployment rate than Utah over the past decade. Moreover, Salt Lake County benefits from being part of the Salt Lake City MSA, which exhibits both a higher rate of GDP growth and a higher level of GDP per capita than the nation overall. We anticipate that the Salt Lake County economy will improve and employment will grow, strengthening the demand for real estate. irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Salt Lake County Area Analysis 11 Utah State Map CACHE RICH BOX EIDEN WIRER DANS SUMMIT �� 1�OOELE 101 WASATCH DUCHESNE UINTAH UTAH JUAB MON SANPETE MILLARD EMERY (gyp SEVIER BEAVER PIUTE WAYNE IRON GARFIOX • 1 _ SAN JUAN WASHINGTON KA NE RDA Utah Theatre Property Salt Lake County Area Analysis 12 Area Map i::. -- • Great. ? f- — i it 1 4 "'„..,. -... - , ..4, . i'.:.,..._ _ ' ., . ::: ...,.....,, _..... 111. ..„ " - ..... . . ._. �_ .._._ • N i f r,>, . .. - Magna West V , . -. _ •�z Tayl•ri. (.7.,. ....-..:..;_ ~ �1a. T West Jordan , T Sandy :'� �S+Z_ �-,. _'�f_ —'- 7ooele South Jordan• ' —f•• '^� •" me-` _ Riverton v Q[p: '.• y _ car„:. 69 ..�� ,.9' _i,.,��� .....04,17 :T5 _: *3038 L 0101114EltE irr. RDA Utah Theatre Property Surrounding Area Analysis 13 Surrounding Area Analysis Boundaries The subject is located in the Central Business District (CBD) area of Salt Lake City.This area generally is delineated as follows: North North Temple Street South 600 South Street East 200 East Street West 200 West Street A map identifying the location of the property follows this section. Jurisdiction and Proximity The subject is within the corporate jurisdiction of Salt Lake City in the heart of the CBD. The CBD is generally defined as an area from 250 West to 250 East and from 50 North to 550 South. The subject is located one block south of the City Creek Center, a mixed-use and regional mall project owned by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. City Creek Center contains approximately a two-block radius and makes up Salt Lake City's downtown retail core. The City Creek Center is the result of the renovation of two regional malls,The Gateway East Office Tower and virtually all properties within a two-block radius of the retail core. The City Creek Center includes significant retail and residential components as well as some limited office and institutional space. Two residential towers opened in late 2010. The major retail component, City Creek Center opened in Spring 2012 and is currently operating at stabilized levels. Also, approximately one mile east of the subject is The Gateway project, which is another mixed-use project at the west end of downtown Salt Lake City. The first phase came on line in late 2001 with the most recent office building being constructed in 2013. The office component of this project is generally operating at stabilized levels; however,the retail component has experienced significant operating difficulty since City Creek has opened. This subject site is within walking distance to the financial core of the city, shopping areas,Temple Square, the Energy Solutions Arena (formerly Delta Center), the Salt Palace Convention Center, hotels, restaurants and other office buildings. Salt Lake City offices are at 450 South State Street in the historic City and County Building.The Salt Lake International Airport is west approximately five miles with access from North Temple Street or Interstate 80. The University of Utah, the state's largest public university with nearly 30,000 students enrolled, is approximately three miles east. Access and Linkages Primary highway access to the area is via State Street, Main Street, 500 South and 600 South. The subject has good freeway access to Interstate 15, the primary north/south highway for the state. irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Surrounding Area Analysis 14 Access to Interstate 15 is available from 900 South at West Temple,400 South Street(northbound) and 500 South Street (southbound). Public transportation is provided by Utah Transit Authority("UTA") which has a light-rail transit system called TRAX that runs along Main Street and has a station stop near the subject block at 55 South Main Street. Overall,the primary mode of transportation in the area is the automobile, but coverage is very good via public transportation. Demand Generators Land use patterns within the CBD included institutional uses between North and South Temple and extending between State Street on the east and 200 West on the west. Major landmark properties in the core area include properties primarily related to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Such properties include the LDS Temple and Church Office Building and LDS Conference Center which was completed in 2000. The retail core is along Main Street between South Temple and 100 South which is the location of City Creek Center (regional open-air shopping mall). The south end of the CBD is anchored by the Matheson Courts Complex which is proximate to the Salt Lake City& County building and the Grand America Hotel. Land uses between the retail core on the north and the courts complex on the south are predominately mid-and high-rise office buildings, with some high-density residential development and retail uses at ground level. Major office towers are near the subject along Main Street and State Street. These include the 111 Tower which is a 24-story Class A office constructed in 2017. The marquee tenant in the building is Goldman Sachs who takes as many as 10 floors. The 111 Tower was constructed in conjunction with the Utah Performing Arts Center which is opened in 3Q 2016. The Utah Performing Arts Center is a $100+ million theatre located along Main Street. The theatre includes a 2,500-seat venue that accommodates Broadway-style shows, concerts and plays. Life Cycle Real estate is affected by cycles involving development trends within a market area as well as market and economic forces.Trends in demand for development in a particular market are described by the Market Area Life Cycle,while market and economic trends are described by the Real Estate Cycle. A Market Area Life Cycle typically evolves through four stages1: • Growth—a period during which the market area gains public favor and acceptance • Stability—a period of equilibrium without marked gains or losses • Decline—a period of diminishing demand • Revitalization—a period of renewal, redevelopment, modernization, and increasing demand 'Appraisal of Real Estate, 14th Edition. (2013). Appraisal Institute irr. RDA Utah Theatre Property Surrounding Area Analysis 15 The subject's market area is in the growth stage of the Market Area Life Cycle. The Real Estate Cycle also impacts a neighborhood.The stages of the Real Estate Cycle include: • Expansion-Sustained growth in demand, increasing construction • Decline-Positive but falling demand, increasing vacancy • Recession- Falling demand, decreasing vacancy • Recovery- Increasing demand, decreasing vacancy The subject is in the expansion state of the Real Estate Cycle. Demographic Factors A demographic profile of the surrounding area, including population, households, and income data, is presented in the following table. Surrounding Area Demographics Salt Lake County, 2019 Estimates 1-Mile Radius 3-Mile Radius 5-Mile Radius UT Utah Population 2010 19,275 128,674 215,606 1,029,655 2,763,885 Population 2019 24,691 141,312 234,706 1,157,455 3,179,999 Population 2024 26,796 149,554 248,173 1,231,601 3,406,410 Compound%Change 2010-2019 2.8% 1.0% 0.9% 1.3% 1.6% Compound%Change 2019-2024 1.6% 1.1% 1.1% 1.2% 1.4% Households 2010 10,827 53,366 84,587 342,622 877,692 Households 2019 14,294 60,489 94,472 387,750 1,016,121 Households 2024 15,695 64,630 100,688 413,931 1,091,744 Compound%Change 2010-2019 3.1% 1.4% 1.2% 1.4% 1.6% Compound%Change 2019-2024 1.9% 1.3% 1.3% 1.3% 1.4% Median Household Income 2019 $48,534 $53,866 $58,025 $75,190 $72,202 Average Household Size 1.6 2.3 2.4 3.0 3.1 College Graduate% 49% 41% 42% 33% 32% Median Age 38 35 34 33 31 Owner Occupied% 20% 42% 47% 67% 71% Renter Occupied% 80% 58% 53% 33% 29% Median Owner Occupied Housing Value $316,040 $279,291 $305,115 $310,161 $279,767 Median Year Structure Built 1978 1961 1963 1983 1990 Average Travel Time to Work in Minutes 21 22 22 25 24 Source:Environics Analytics As shown above,the current population within a 5-mile radius of the subject is 234,706, and the average household size is 2.4. Population in the area has grown since the 2010 census, and this trend is projected to continue over the next five years. Compared to Salt Lake County overall,the population within a 5-mile radius is projected to grow at a slower rate. irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Surrounding Area Analysis 16 Median household income is$58,025, which is lower than the household income for Salt Lake County. Residents within a 5-mile radius have a higher level of educational attainment than those of Salt Lake County,while median owner-occupied home values are lower. Land Use In the immediate vicinity of the subject, land uses include a mix of retail, office and residential. Other land use characteristics are summarized as follows: Surrounding Area Land Uses Character of Area Urban Predominant Age of Improvements New to 80+years Predominant Quality and Condition Average-to-Above Average Approximate Percent Developed ±95% Infrastructure/Planning Above Average Predominant Location of Undeveloped Land West and south Prevailing Direction of Growth West and south Subject's Immediate Surroundings North Kearns Mid-rise Office Building South Narrow Two-level retail/office building& 170 South Main High-rise Office Building with associated parking garage East 111 So. Main Office Building with Eccles Theater, Former Tribune Building and other Main Street retail West Capitol Theatre and other commercial properties Outlook and Conclusions The area is in the growth stage of its life cycle. Given the history of the area and the growth trends, it is anticipated that property values will increase in the near future. In comparison to other areas in the region,the area is rated as follows: irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Surrounding Area Analysis 17 Surrounding Area Attribute Ratings Highway Access Average Demand Generators Above Average Convenience to other supporting land uses Above Average Convenience to Public Transportation Above Average Employment Stability Above Average Police and Fire Protection Average Property Compatibility Average General Appearance of Properties Above Average Price/Value Trend Increasing irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Surrounding Area Analysis 18 Neighborhood Map viEms_ ---- - - Ave I IEe i NORTH TEMPLE , COMer.i ee: Z 1er: IJ 101 E 2nd Ave 2nd Are'- f:) 11 - - ,L—_,w North'Timpb- ,z , ENonh temple 3 I 1 Clfii ds t� PI , / w w.N 3 I I- t ike, "E$tAve II• I, C ,^� <_ ,- I�_e1 ,I P I ' � �t r--m—,�,---wsouthtapl�._�_�': `�I -_� _ ESadr7.npeSt �� IL ,,, E.Soueh'I,Mftpllsc' ;r r r- 1 —City Cr Center I Q. N'QQ I, P L .Ti Ni, 1 S t 3 r, F.1 - --At l 3 J f0ArenaOo ! J ' E100 S 'b�rMitlon WW - va r' mW Q ,. j 1. i -14 I _ t - — ,`=W_200 S -I�E-200 NI E 200 5 l- RIO GRANDE r 1 i I r - 3 a I J waoos *-1308s-_ E'ao dw.y ' -_ ems --CENTRAL,CITY N. h 3 1 I I .v, i �; ,;.a ►-w.wetn a in pOt V N At II=r. V M 3 M II M N NUeivetsity.'�','�' ' -W_,003-v I u nlgr.Mid_ E 4)0 S _eit 400 S University B! • Q ''— . r__ , _r`-rte_... '* - i,� r, -_...... I _Iniir,L-1 r✓ W ! I.? Washington g K vs I .- Square Park N Viiing Cesar E Chavez Blvd W 500 S _ __ _ f'f E 500 S E 500 S Le,....I.i..,...:atm i e 2015hI,crosaft Corporation 6 2018 HERE.,i irr. RDA Utah Theatre Property Office Market Overview 19 Office Market Overview Metro Area Overview The market has distinct classifications for building types which helps to determine competitors within the market. The market segments office space into predominately three areas which are economics, user and location. These are further discussed. Economic Segmentation The primary segments would be Class "A", "B" and Class "C" office space. These are defined as follows: Economic Office Market Segmentation Class "A" Class"B" Class"C" - Less than ten years old - More than ten years old More than ten years old - Primary location -Secondary location -Secondary location - High quality tenants/finish -Average quality finishes - Low quality tenants/finish -Generally, over 40,000 square -Generally smaller than -Generally smaller than 40,000 feet 40,000 square feet square feet - Highest lease rates - Lease rates 20%to 30% - Lease rates 30%to 40% lower lower than Class "A" than Class"A" A brief discussion of the primary research and the general use office sector is made below. User Segmentation The primary office users are broken down into categories below. Office Users User Type Characteristics Major institution/professional Occupied by banks, insurance companies, professionals, and corporate headquarters. General commercial Smaller buildings preferred; prestige of location is less important than accessibility to both workers and markets; parking is important: tenants are sales oriented and generally need convenient automobile access. Medical/dental Often located near hospitals Quasi-industrial Part of a manufacturing operation Government/education Uses and locations vary Location Segmentation The current market classifies office space into three primary areas which are CBD, the periphery and the suburbs. These are discussed in greater detail later in this section. irr. RDA Utah Theatre Property Office Market Overview 20 The subject is within the CBD market and would compete with other office product in the CBD. To better understand the office market, data relating to the Salt Lake City CBD as a whole is provided, as well as data relating specifically to the suburban and periphery markets. Demand There are two primary methods of estimating demand for office space. The first is an inferred method which relies on historic trends in absorption,vacancy/occupancy, and lease rates. The assumption of this method is that economic conditions are cyclical and that by studying historic trends in demand, future demand can be estimated. A shortcoming of this method is that data used are historic in perspective. The second method is a fundamental method that is based on projections of population/employment growth or decline,the primary determinate in demand for office space, as well as other more elemental economic criteria. The strength of this method is a more concerted effort to project changes in conditions into the future. The primary problem with this method is obtaining reliable projections from the different variables. Because of the scope of this assignment, only an inferred analysis is conducted. Inferred Analysis As noted above,the primary variables in this analysis include historic absorption,vacancy/occupancy, and lease rates.These factors are discussed individually below.To illustrate the current market for office properties,the year-end 2006 through year end 2016 market studies conducted by Commerce Real Estate Solutions (formerly Commerce CRG), and the year-end 2014 study conducted by CBRE were reviewed.The following data have been augmented by primary research conducted by the appraisers. Both county-wide data and information specific to the subject submarket are considered. The results of these studies are summarized as follows. The year 2001 represented a shift in the Salt Lake County office market.The previous decade had been one of growth with record levels of construction, absorption, and increasing lease rates.This positive market was in place as recently as 2000 when a record 1,496,357 square feet of office space was absorbed in Salt Lake County. In 2001 the slowing national economy finally caught up with the local office market. Vacancy rates increased, absorption was negative, and asking lease rates remained flat with increased leasing incentives continuing to lower effective rates. This trend continued through 2004. Between 2004 and 2008 the market strengthened again. Absorption in 2007 was at near record highs with increases in rental rates and decreases in vacancy over that same period. By 2008 the national economic troubles hit the office market. This is the period of the great recension. Conditions between 2008 and 2011 were sluggish at best. By year-end 2011, conditions were starting to improve; however,vacancy was at its highest point post-recession at year end 2012 at 14.86%. The market has significantly strengthened again since year end 2012. Vacancy has fallen each year since 2012 which is in line with the pre-recession low vacancy(similar to 2007). Over the same period rental rates have increases in all market sectors and across all quality classes. irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Office Market Overview 21 During 2016 and 2017,the office market posted strong absorption, but was outpaced by new construction. Through 2018, absorption reached 1,284,542 square feet for the year. Absorption Absorption figures from 1990 through year-end 2018 for Salt Lake County are presented in the chart below. Historic Absorption Year County-Wide Suburban CBD&Periphery Suburban Share of Total 1990 262,882 164,583 98,299 62.61% 1991 494,471 276,438 218,033 55.91% 1992 786,054 441,482 344,572 56.16% 1993 726,926 251,777 475,149 34.64% 1994 573,299 449,978 123,321 78.49% 1995 662,002 282,572 379,430 42.68% 1996 835,933 755,977 79,956 90.44% 1997 942,523 851,968 90,555 90.39% 1998 973,923 984,188 (10,265) 101.05% 1999 966,709 677,786 288,923 70.11% 2000 1,496,357 1,414,193 82,164 94.51% 2001 1,192,702 740,193 452,509 62.06% 2002 (230,822) 237,492 (468,314) -102.89% 2003 496,835 538,595 (41,760) 108.41% 2004 770,992 635,134 135,858 82.38% 2005 1,459,033 949,735 509,298 65.09% 2006 875,035 617,955 257,080 70.62% 2007 1,153,302 938,900 214,402 81.41% 2008 307,360 204,884 102,476 66.66% 2009 88,050 304,522 (216,472) 345.85% 2010 (105,218) (102,823) (2,395) 97.72% 2011 282,037 293,228 (11,191) 103.97% 2012 161,785 506,443 (344,658) 313.03% 2013 1,090,980 852,522 238,458 78.14% 2014 903,990 514,658 389,332 56.93% 2015 992,479 796,621 195,858 80.27% 2016 810,645 381,035 429,610 47.00% 2017 1,093,805 1,028,809 64,996 94.06% 2018 1,284,542 1,289,263 (4,721) 100.37% Source:Commerce Real Estate Solutions(formerly Commerce CRG) In 2005, absorption increased sharply by almost 90%over 2004 numbers. The 2007 year saw record absorption. A number of companies relocated to Utah in 2007. In addition, a number of companies expanded significantly in 2007 to provide additional demand for office space. A significant decrease in absorption occurred in 2008 with the downturn in the overall national economy. Despite the significant national downturn, Utah was relatively insulated from the more dire effects and had an unemployment rate half that of the nation as a whole. Relatively strong demand in the market allowed for positive, although significantly lower absorption in 2008.Absorption remained irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Office Market Overview 22 positive county-wide in 2009; however,the CBD and periphery each posted strong negative absorption numbers. Absorption remained anemic between 2009 and 2013; however, absorption has been strong since, including through 2018. New Construction From 2004 to 2009,there was a significant amount of new space brought on-line, with very little between 2010 and 2011. New construction was significant in 2012 and 2015. The year 2016 saw a record-breaking level of new office construction. The following table details new office construction as reported by Commerce for years between 2004 and 2018. New Office Construction Yea r New Constructi on (SF) Commerce Real Estate CBRE 2004 574,000 201,000 2005 400,000 484,809 2006 789,000 1,065,318 2007 1,530,567 1,108,896 2008 1,064,424 955,133 2009 768,000 559,771 2010 318,000 DNR 2011 157,000 DNR 2012 827,468 DNR 2013 388,815 310,825 2014 416,000 DNR 2015 830,813 DNR 2016 1,972,757 DNR 2017 1,400,000* DNR 2018 756,497 DNR Source:Commerce Real Estate Solutions(formerly Commerce CRG)and CBRE Mid-year and Year-end market overviews. *Expected completion 2017 In 2007, office space in the Salt Lake market totaled 29,300,388 square feet. Since then, office market has grown significantly. At 2018,total inventory is estimated at 37,679,091 square feet. In addition, proposed construction in Salt Lake and Northern Utah County is presented as follows. It should be noted that of the 25 projects mentioned, only the first three are in the downtown or periphery areas of Salt Lake City. Many of the other suburban office buildings do not directly compete with the subject. irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Office Market Overview 23 Projects Under Construction or Announced Completion Building Size Pre-leased or Leased Space Available Space(Rentable Project Name Date (Rentable Sq.Ft.) (Rentable Sq.Ft.) Sq.Ft.) Central Business District&Periphery 1 111 Tower 2017 400,000 350,000 50,000 111 South Main Street,Salt Lake City Tower 8 2 2023 450,000 0 450,000 95 So.State Street 3 Boyer State Street Tower 2022-Now planned as a 425,000 425,000 0 Approx.151 So.State Street residential tower Suburban-Salt Lake County 4 1-80 Business Park III TBA 80,000 0 80,000 200 East 2400 South,South SL 5 Creekside at Lake Park TBA 82,000 0 82,000 2980 West Parkway Blvd,West Valley 6 60 Park 2019 150,000 100,000 50,000 2290 South 1300 East,Salt Lake City 7 Cornerstone l&II at Cottonwood 2017 250,000 50,000 200,000 6200 South and Interstate 215 8 Towne Ridge Center l&II 2016-2019 250,000 225,000 25,000 10000 So.State Street 9 SoJo Station North&South 2017&2019 360,000 180,000 180,000 10600 South Jordan Gateway,So.Jordan 10 Lonepeak Corporate Center TBA 85,000 0 85,000 12100 South Lone Peak Blvd.,Draper 11 Boyer Vista Station(8 Buildings) 2015-2018 1,000,000 875,000 125,000 13000 So.Vista Station Blvd,Draper 12 136 Center-Buildings 1,2&3 14500 South Bangerter Highway 2017-2020 450,000 250,000 200,000 13 Fairbourne Station 2020 240,000 35,000 205,000 2700 West 3500 South,West Valley City 14 Barnger Crossing II 2020 60,000 0 60,000 100 East 13690 South,Draper 15 Minuteman Office V 2020 120,000 0 120,000 13800 So.Minuteman Dr.,Draper 16 The Point Buildings II-VII 2019&TBD 350,000 350,000 0 (aka Pluralsight Campus) 65 East Highland Drive,Draper 425,000 0 425,000 Suburban-Utah County 17 Innovation Pointe Corporate Center 2018-2021 280,000 150,000 130,000 1600 W.Innovation Pointe Way,Lehi 18 North Slopes at Traverse Ridge 2018&TBD 300,000 90,000 210,000 4100 N.Cabela's Boulevard,Lehi 19 Traverse Ridge III 2020 220,000 65,000 155,000 3300 No.Triumph Boulevard,Lehi 20 Young Living Global Headquarters 2019 250,000 250,000 0 1538 West Sandalwood Drive,Lehi 21 Lone Peak Tower 2019 125,000 60,000 65,000 3851 No.Thanksgiving Way,Lehi 22 Lehi Spectrum l&H 2018-2020 260,000 230,000 30,000 1550-1650 Digital Drive,Lehi 23 Thanksgiving Station I,IV,V,III and H 2015-2020 700,000 500,000 200,000 1-15 Highway 92(East of Freeway),Lehi 24 Grove Tower 2018 195,000 150,000 45,000 2100 Pleasant Grove Boulevard, 25 Mountain Tech Center II 2019 105,000 25,000 80,000 2570 West 600 North,Pleasant Grove TOTALS 7,987,000 4,735,000 3,252,000 ra RDA Utah Theatre Property Office Market Overview 24 Based on the foregoing data, there is approximately 7,987,000 square feet of office space which is already scheduled to come on line over the four-year period. Of that space, nearly 3,252,000 square feet still need to be leased. Of course, not all of the announced projects will happen. A few of the projects detailed above reported negotiated leases which are ready for signature or already have significant interest including having letters of intent. Also, many of the above projects will not be available to the market for a period of at least one year. By the time the projects come online existing vacancies in already available buildings may have had an opportunity to fill more. Vacancy The overall Salt Lake County market continued to see increases in vacancy between 2008 and 2010, including the CBD. This reversed itself in 2012. Vacancy experienced a downward trend between 2012 and 2015. Vacancies have increased slightly during 2017, but have dropped again in the 2018. Vacancy rates from 1998 to 2018 in the overall market and the CBD market as reported by Commerce Real Estate Solutions and CBRE are detailed in the chart below. Vacancy History Year Commerce Real Estate CBRE Overall Market CBD Market Overall Market CBD Market 1998 8.00% 8.60% 8.35% 8.97% 1999 8.42% 7.95% 11.77% 11.79% 2000 8.90% 8.66% 12.29% 10.60% 2001 12.09% 10.87% 17.62% 16.30% 2002 17.18% 16.21% 19.73% 17.17% 2003 16.69% 16.10% 21.16% 16.79% 2004 15.25% 15.53% 18.90% 19.52% 2005 11.24% 10.81% 15.50% 13.40% 2006 10.28% 10.54% N/A N/A 2007 10.76% 11.02% 12.00% 11.80% 2008 12.95% 10.30% N/A N/A 2009 13.61% 11.34% 17.18% N/A 2010 15.70% 14.53% 17.30% 12.60% 2011 13.83% 14.22% 15.30% 16.30% 2012 14.86% 21.10% 15.80% 19.80% 2013 11.80% 16.10% 11.7%to 20.6% 8.60%to 18.50%* 2014 10.80% 14.50% DNR DNR 2015 10.00% 13.40% DNR DNR 2016 12.20% 13.70% DNR DNR 2017 13.90% 14.10% 9.36% 11.90% 2018 12.40% 15.40% N/A N/A Source:Commerce Real Estate Solutions and CBRE Mid-year and Year-end market overviews Commerce states that, "sublease vacancy created by corporate restructuring, closures and other issues related to the national recession will rise through the remainder of this year." For more specific detail, unit vacancy for individual property types and locations is presented as follows: irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Office Market Overview 25 Vacancy Comparison CBD Periphery 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2012 _ 2013 2014 2015 2016 _ 2017 Class A 14.60% 11.70% 11.00% 8 80% 10.10% NR 3.20% 3 80% 3 20% 4.10% 8.50% NR Class B 24.60% 15.40% 16.20% 16.80% 7.80% NR 17 20% 15.30% 10.50% 14.00% 12 50% NR Class C 31 90% 31.40% 30.50% 20.90% 30.50% NR 18.70% 17.00% 16.10% 11.20% 6.30% NR Overall 20.70% 16.10% 14.50% 13.40% 13.70% 14.10% 12 90% 11.90% 9.10% 10.10% 9.90% 17.70% Source:Commerce Real Estate Solutions(formerly Commerce CRG) Rental Rates Rental rates reported by commercial brokerages are quoted on a full-service basis. Average lease rates for the Salt Lake County market from 2001 to 2018, as reported by Commerce Real Estate Solutions, are detailed in the following table. CBD Average Full Service Rental Rates 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Class A $21.96 $22.64 $25.02 $26.54 $26.71 $27.83 $28.69 $23.77 $28.86 $28.16 $30.77 $30.95 $31.93 $33.03 $32.60 Class B $17.01 $17.35 $18.71 $19.59 $19.83 $21.75 $20.49 $20.87 $21.59 $20.21 $21.57 $22.70 $23.71 NR NR Class C $14.31 $14.47 $15.81 $16.24 $15.77 $15.31 $15.52 $15.95 $15.73 $16.59 $16.09 $17.78 $17.71 NR NR Overall(Avg.) $17.76 $18.15 $19.85 $20.79 $20.77 $21.63 $21.57 $20.20 $22.06 $22.06 $25.32 $26.06 $27.22 $28.32 $28.76 Source:Commerce Real Estate Sol utionsyear-end Market Overviews(formerly Commerce CRG) Rents in the suburban office market have increased steadily since the end of 2003. Average rental rates for 2003 through 2018 for the Salt Lake County suburban office market are shown in the table below. Note,the 2017 and 2018 Commerce data does report the overall rental rate of the suburban area. CBD&Suburban Average Full Service Rental Rates 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Class A $19.06 $19.80 $2070 $21.60 $22.73 $23.11 $23.22 $2301 $22.53 $24.98 $25.14 $25.20 $26.36 $27.20 $28.71 $30.52 Class B $15.01 $17.05 $17.39 $18.24 $19.06 $19.32 $19.33 $18.95 $18.59 $18.92 $19.19 $19.90 $20.83 $21.10 $22.00 $24.30 Class C $13.57 $1370 $13.47 $14.24 $15.01 $1531 $1502 51476 $14.42 $1397 $14.58 514.77 $14.99 $15.20 NR $18.28 Overall(Avg.) $15.88 $16.85 $17.19 $1803 $18.93 519.25 $19.19 $1891 $18.51 $19.29 $19.13 $2047 $2146 $22.22 $2432 $30.52 Source'.Commerce Real Estate Solutions(formerly Commerce CRG) *yearend 2016 and 2017 represents countywide figures(CBD Is not excluded) Rates across all sectors fell in 2010 and again in 2011. Since then, rates have consistently trended upward. Submarket Information Commerce Real Estate Solutions breaks down Salt Lake County into office submarkets,which submarkets eight include: CBD, Periphery, Northeast, Northwest, Central East, Central, Southeast, and Southwest. irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Office Market Overview 26 -PUCIIW , , Sountikil _ - .-- .1:: it\ 89 Sale ' Plains �r'Labe Chi i I Emigration Vi,"`.._17p'71* G_____5„--792631 ' MOW a IPA 1 i set TIVIII H___ �"City � p !ill. ., IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIAL AP !I Holladay OrtiA.----4 �IV t • 1 'ice ■■ � �, ■�1 I , 1 u■ - Cotmnwood YYkat ill Apra.Copperton i,'''''. ' - 6 :II dp- ' , -',: ., .„ ---r - ...iiii ii......_ _ tth'-- ---� _ III I l� 11-..-Z. — - • '4� 1111 ut e: � _ illi rla..itt.at saRa.k IAN Alpine Hiv/,la•.• Office Sectors I* N& COMMERCE 0,1:,0WAKEFI WAKEFIELD - Salt Lake County, Utahi70South Mae Seim Sim 1600Sat Lie CcaLST M+poi)suaa P ..•1_ ow.p..w&CO-% $•.ri1 all t411n5 tam,.... Information from the year-end 2018 market study prepared by Cushman &Wakefield on the different submarkets is presented as follows. Note, submarket information from different sources varies significant due to the fact that that is several cases,there is no defined submarket area (meaning the different sources classify submarkets differently). Information is presented as follows. irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Office Market Overview 27 We believe the subject is part of the CBD submarket. This is defined as follows. Submarket Data-Year-End 2018(Cushman&Wakefield/Commerce) Average Asking Rental Submarket Inventory Overall Vaca ncy YTD Absorption Rate-AlI Classes(Full Service) CBD 8,384,515 15.40% -96,264 $28.76 Periphery 3,290,058 15 50% 91,543 $28.57 Northeast 3,180,772 4.60% 92,721 $21.94 Northwest 4,476,183 12.00% 124,464 $17.48 Central East 8,000,430 1490% 300,149 $24.30 Central West 1,549,213 820% (45,432) $18.09 Southeast 7,078,351 9.70% 765,497 $25.89 Southwest 1,719,569 10.10% 51,864 $24.21 Total Suburban 26,004,518 NR 1,289,263 NR Overal TOTAL 37,679,091 12.40% 1,284,542 $24.31 Source:Commerce Real Estate Solutions As indicated above, vacancy in the overall market is 12.40%. The CBD sector has an indicated vacancy at 15.40%. The average indicated per square foot rental rate is$28.76 per square foot in the CBD sector as compared to $24.31 per square foot for the overall market. Market Outlook and Conclusions Supply and demand factors in this area,for the short term, are expected to remain in balance. The office market in Salt Lake County continues to grow and is increasingly competitive. The area's population growth is projected to be above the national average. In comparison to the region overall,the Salt Lake County submarket is rated as follows: Submarket Attribute Ratings Market Size/Stature Average Market Demand/Rental Increases Average Vacancy Trends Average Barriers to Entry Above Average Threat of New Supply Minimal irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Multifamily Market Analysis 28 Multifamily Market Analysis Metro Area Overview The subject is located in the Salt Lake City metro area as defined by REIS. Supply and demand indicators, including inventory levels, absorption,vacancy, and rental rates for all classes of space are presented in the ensuing table. Salt Lake City Multifamily Market Trends and Forecasts Effective Effective Gross Inventory Occupied Vacancy Completions Absorption Rent Rental Rate Revenue Year (Units) (Units) (Units) Vacancy(%) (Units) (Units) ($/Unit) (%Change) ($/Unit) 2007 75,186 71,984 3,202 4.30% 308 1,298 $689 5.80% $693 2008 75,555 71,799 3,756 5.00% 369 -185 $707 2.70% $714 2009 77,465 71,930 5,535 7.10% 1,910 131 $697 -1.50% $696 2010 79,593 74,459 5,134 6.50% 2,128 2,529 $704 1.00% $699 2011 80,294 76,629 3,665 4.60% 701 2,170 $722 2.60% $731 2012 81,506 78,371 3,135 3.80% 1,212 1,742 $751 3.90% $759 2013 83,305 80,219 3,086 3.70% 1,799 1,848 $772 2.80% $781 2014 84,771 81,482 3,289 3.90% 1,466 1,263 $799 3.50% $804 2015 85,904 82,829 3,075 3.60% 1,133 1,347 $830 3.90% $839 2016 88,614 84,954 3,660 4.10% 2,710 2,125 $891 7.30% $889 2017 91,015 86,602 4,413 4.80% 2,401 1,648 $936 5.00% $932 Q3 2018 93,215 88,522 4,693 5.00% 760 774 $960 0.70% $963 2018 94,156 89,422 4,734 5.00% 3,141 2,820 $967 3.30% $971 2019 95,617 90,910 4,707 4.90% 1,461 1,488 $994 2.80% $1,005 2020 95,830 91,778 4,052 4.20% 213 868 $1,016 2.20% $1,037 2021 96,343 92,352 3,991 4.10% 513 574 $1,035 1.90% $1,060 2022 97,046 92,828 4,218 4.30% 703 476 $1,053 1.70% $1,078 2007-2017 Average 82,110 78,296 3,814 4.67% 1,467 1,447 $773 3.36% $776 Source:©Reis Services,LLC 2019.Reprinted with the permission of Reis Services,LLC.All rights reserved.Compiled by Integra Realty Resources,Inc. RDA Utah Theatre Property 13 Multifamily Market Analysis 29 Market Trends Key Takeaways Vacancy Rate vs. Effective Rental Rate $1,200 8.00% $1,000 7.00% 6.00% 11111 $800 5.00% $600 4.00% $400 3.00% 2.00% $200 II 1.00% $0 - 0.00% 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Effective Rent($/Unit) vacancy(%) Source:©Reis Services,LLC 2019.Reprinted with the permission of Reis Services,LLC.All rights reserved. • The current vacancy rate in the metro area is 5.0%; the vacancy rate has increased by 120 bps from 2012. • Four-year forecasts project a 4.3%vacancy rate in the metro area, representing a decrease of 70 bps by year end 2022. • Effective rent averages$960/Unit in the metro area; future rent values are expected to increase by 9.7%to $1,053/Unit by year end 2022. Supply and Demand Trends 3,500 8.00% 3,000 7.00% 2,500 6.00% 2,000 �. 5.00% 1,500 4.00% 1,000 Al - 3.00% 500 ' 2.00% - 0 1.00% • -500 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 0.00% Completions(Units) ME Absorption(Units) -Vacancy(%) Source:©Reis Services,LLC 2019.Reprinted with the permission of Reis Services,LLC.All rights reserved. irr. RDA Utah Theatre Property Multifamily Market Analysis 30 • Inventory in the metro area has increased by 14.4%from 2012, while the occupied stock has increased by 13.0%. • Between 2012 and 2017, completions have averaged 1,787 Units annually and reached a peak of 2,710 Units in 2016. • Between 2012 and 2017, absorption figures reached a peak of 2,125 Units in 2016 and a low of 1,263 Units in 2014. Class A Multifamily Market The subject is a Class A property as defined by REIS. Supply and demand indicators, including inventory levels, absorption,vacancy, and rental rates for all Class A space in the Salt Lake City metro area are presented in the following table. Salt Lake City Multifamily Class A Market Trends Asking Gross Inventory Occupied Vacancy Completion Absorption Asking Rent Rental Rate Revenue Year (Units) (Units) (Units) Vacancy(%) s(Units) (Units) ($/Unit) (%Change) ($/Unit) 2007 21,885 20,933 952 4.40% 248 550 $857 5.20% $820 2008 22,086 20,979 1,107 5.00% 201 46 $882 2.90% $838 2009 23,718 21,833 1,885 7.90% 1,632 854 $884 0.20% $814 2010 25,846 23,767 2,079 8.00% 2,128 1,934 $882 -0.20% $811 2011 26,547 25,143 1,404 5.30% 701 1,376 $907 2.80% $859 2012 27,759 26,490 1,269 4.60% 1,212 1,347 $938 3.40% $895 2013 29,558 28,330 1,228 4.20% 1,799 1,840 $966 3.00% $926 2014 31,024 29,437 1,587 5.10% 1,466 1,107 $991 2.60% $940 2015 32,157 30,569 1,588 4.90% 1,133 1,132 $1,031 4.00% $980 2016 34,823 32,655 2,168 6.20% 2,666 2,086 $1,082 4.90% $1,015 2017 37,080 34,517 2,563 6.90% 2,257 1,862 $1,146 5.90% $1,067 Q3 2018 39,107 36,244 2,863 7.30% 630 637 $1,182 0.90% $1,095 2007-2017 Average 28,408 26,787 1,621 5.68% 1,404 1,285 $961 3.15% $906 Source:©Reis Services,LLC 2019.Reprinted with the permission of Reis Services,LLC.All rights reserved.Compiled by Integra Realty Resources,Inc. irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Multifamily Market Analysis 31 Multifamily Class A Market Key Takeaways Vacancy Rate Vs Asking Rental Rate $1,400 9.00% $1,200 8.00% $1,000 7.00% 6.00% $800 5.00% $600 4.00% $400 3.00% 2.00% $200 1.00% $0 0.00% 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Asking Rent($/Unit) Vacancy(%) Source:®Reis Services,LLC 2019.Reprinted with the permission of Reis Services,LLC.All rights reserved. • The current vacancy rate for Class A properties in the metro area is 7.3%;the vacancy rate has increased by 270 bps from 2012. • Asking rent currently averages$1,182/Unit and has increased by 26.0%from 2012. Supply and Demand Trends 3,000 9.00% 8.00% 2,500 7.00% 2,000 6.00% 5.00% 1,500 4.00% 1,000 500 1.00% 0 J L 0.00% 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Completions(Units) Absorption(Units) Vacancy(%) Source:©Reis Services,LLC 2019.Reprinted with the permission of Reis Services,LLC.All rights reserved. • Class A metro area inventory has increased by 40.9%from 2012,while the occupied stock has increased by 36.8%. • Between 2012 and 2017, completions have averaged 1,756 Units annually and reached a peak of 2,666 Units in 2016. irr. RDA Utah Theatre Property Multifamily Market Analysis 32 • Between 2012 and 2017, absorption figures reached a peak of 2,086 Units in 2016 and a low of 1,107 Units in 2014. • Between 2012 and 2017, gross revenue for Class A properties in the metro area averaged $970/Unit and has increased by 18.3%. Submarket Overview The subject is located in the Central Salt Lake City submarket. In order to evaluate the market appeal of the subject's submarket in comparison to others in the Salt Lake City metro area, we compare key supply and demand indicators for all classes of space in the ensuing table. Salt Lake City Multifamily Submarket Comparison Inventory Inventory Asking Rent Free Rent Expenses Submarket (Buildings) (Units) ($/Unit) Vacancy(%) (mos) (%) Central Salt Lake 116 11,163 $1,209 8.30% 0.97 44.00% South Salt Lake 71 8,202 $883 4.00% 0.33 42.60% NW Salt Lake 27 4,930 $839 8.70% 0.99 42.30% Davis County 68 10,540 $997 3.10% 0.47 42.00% Murray 48 6,845 $1,020 2.90% 0.22 42.10% Weber County 61 6,305 $849 5.70% 0.60 42.40% Midvale/Sandy 74 15,918 $1,131 6.70% 1.00 40.90% West Jordan 60 11,461 $1,123 4.50% 0.44 41.10% SW Salt Lake 54 13,060 $884 2.50% 0.52 41.50% West Valley City 35 4,791 $918 4.50% 0.52 42.90% Market Averages/Totals 614 93,215 $985 5.03% 0.61 42.18% Source:©Reis Services,LLC 2019.Reprinted with the permission of Reis Services,LLC.All rights reserved. Central Salt Lake City Submarket Snapshot • The submarket contains 18.9%of the metro building inventory and 12.0%of the metro unit inventory. • The submarket's asking rent is $1,209/Unit which is greater than the metro average of $985/Unit. • The submarket's vacancy rate is 8.30%which is greater than the metro average of 5.03%. • Operating expenses, as a percent of potential rent revenue, average 44.0% in the submarket compared to 42.2%for the overall metro area. • Average free rent in the subject property's submarket is greater than the free rent for the metro area. In comparison to other submarkets in the region,the Central Salt Lake City submarket is rated as follows: El RDA Utah Theatre Property Multifamily Market Analysis 33 Submarket Attribute Ratings Market Size/Stature Above Average Market Demand Increasing Vacancy Trends Decreasing Threat of New Supply Above Average Rental Trends Increasing Submarket Analysis Supply and demand indicators for all classes of space in the Central Salt Lake City submarket are displayed in the following table. Central Salt Lake City Multifamily Submarket Trends and Forecasts Effective Effective Gross Inventory Occupied Vacancy Completion Absorption Rent Rental Rate Revenue Year (Units) (Units) (Units) Vacancy(%) s(Units) (Units) ($/Unit) (%Change) ($/Unit) 2007 7,474 7,197 277 3.70% 0 -104 $739 6.80% $740 2008 7,474 7,175 299 4.00% 0 -22 $773 4.60% $780 2009 7,678 7,233 445 5.80% 204 58 $741 -4.10% $741 2010 7,678 7,309 369 4.80% 0 76 $761 2.70% $761 2011 7,788 7,492 296 3.80% 110 183 $787 3.40% $792 2012 7,788 7,624 164 2.10% 0 132 $825 4.90% $839 2013 8,375 8,015 360 4.30% 587 391 $858 3.90% $856 2014 8,806 8,278 528 6.00% 431 263 $895 4.40% $875 2015 9,228 8,897 331 3.60% 422 619 $949 6.00% $954 2016 9,272 8,905 367 4.00% 44 8 $985 3.80% $985 2017 10,584 9,474 1,110 10.50% 1,312 569 $1,084 10.00% $1,044 Q3 2018 11,163 10,236 927 8.30% 182 183 $1,112 0.90% $1,109 2018 11,897 10,814 1,083 9.10% 1,313 1,340 $1,122 3.50% $1,107 2019 12,752 11,398 1,354 10.60% 855 584 $1,160 3.40% $1,133 2020 12,965 11,753 1,212 9.40% 213 355 $1,194 2.90% $1,185 2021 13,150 11,972 1,178 9.00% 185 219 $1,217 1.90% $1,219 2022 13,311 12,161 1,150 8.60% 161 189 $1,237 1.60% $1,251 2007-2017 Average 8,377 7,964 413 4.78% 283 198 $854 4.22% $852 Source:©Reis Services,LLC 2019.Reprinted with the permission of Reis Services,LLC.All rights reserved.Compiled by Integra Realty Resources,Inc. RDA Utah Theatre Property 13 Multifamily Market Analysis 34 Central Salt Lake City Submarket Multifamily Trends and Forecasts Key Takeaways Vacancy Rate Vs Effective Rental Rate $1,40o 12.00% $1,200 10.00% $1,000 8.00% $800 $600 6.00% 4.00% $400 $200 2.00% $0 0.00% 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Market Effective Rent($/Unit) Submarket Effective Rent($/Unit) Market Vacancy% —Submarket Vacancy% Source:CReis Services,LLC 2019.Reprinted with the permission of Reis Services,LLC.All rights reserved. • The current vacancy rate in the submarket is 8.3%;the vacancy rate has increased by 620 bps from 2012. • Four-year forecasts project a 8.60% vacancy rate in the submarket, representing an increase of 30 bps by year end 2022. • Effective rent averages$1,112/Unit in the submarket; future rent values are expected to increase by 11.2%to $1,237/Unit by year end 2022. Supply and Demand Trends 1,600 12.00% 1,400 10.00% 1,200 - 1,000 8.00% 800 ■ 600 6.00% 400 , 0 . 4.00% 200 Lam- '_1 . lii 2.00% — -200 2017 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 0.00% Completions(Units) Absorption(Units) —Vacancy(%) Source:©Reis Services,LLC 2019.Reprinted with the permission of Reis Services,LLC.All rights reserved. irr. RDA Utah Theatre Property Multifamily Market Analysis 35 • The current inventory level of 11,163 Units is expected to increase by 19.2%through year end 2022. • The inventory in the submarket has increased by 43.3%from 2012, while the occupied stock has increased by 34.3%. • Between 2012 and 2017, completions have averaged 466 Units annually and reached a peak of 1,312 Units in 2017. • Between 2012 and 2017, absorption figures reached a peak of 619 Units in 2015 and a low of 8 Units in 2016. Central Salt Lake City Submarket Class A Trends Supply and demand indicators, including inventory levels, absorption,vacancy, and rental rates for Class A space in the submarket are presented in the ensuing table. Central Salt Lake City Multifamily Class A Submarket Trends Asking Gross Inventory Occupied Vacancy Completions Absorption Asking Rent Rental Rate Revenue Year (Units) (Units) (Units) Vacancy)%) (Units) (Units) ($/Unit) (%Change) ($/Unit) 2007 1,736 1,694 42 2.40% 0 33 $1,039 6.00% $1,014 2008 1,736 1,695 41 2.40% 0 1 $1,062 2.20% $1,037 2009 1,736 1,653 83 4.80% 0 -42 $1,066 0.40% $1,015 2010 1,736 1,665 71 4.10% 0 12 $1,065 -0.10% $1,021 2011 1,846 1,734 112 6.10% 110 69 $1,102 3.50% $1,035 2012 1,846 1,772 74 4.00% 0 38 $1,190 8.00% $1,142 2013 2,433 2,270 163 6.70% 587 498 $1,193 0.30% $1,113 2014 2,864 2,632 232 8.10% 431 362 $1,232 3.30% $1,132 2015 3,286 3,132 154 4.70% 422 500 $1,289 4.60% $1,229 2016 3,286 3,099 187 5.70% 0 -33 $1,295 0.50% $1,221 2017 4,598 3,806 792 17.20% 1,312 707 $1,499 15.80% $1,241 Q3 2018 5,134 4,469 665 13.00% 182 174 $1,529 -0.50% $1,331 2007-2017 Average 2,464 2,287 177 6.02% 260 195 $1,185 4.05% $1,109 Source:©Reis Services,LLC 2019.Reprinted with the permission of Reis Services,LLC.All rights reserved.Compiled by Integra Realty Resources,Inc. irr. RDA Utah Theatre Property Multifamily Market Analysis 36 Central Salt Lake City Submarket Class A Trends Key Takeaways Vacancy Rate Vs Asking Rental Rate $1,600 20.00% $1,400 $1,200 15.00% $1,000 $800 10.00% $600 $400 Iii , 5.00% $200 Ilia g$0 - 0.00% 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Market Class Asking Rent($/Unit) Submarket Class Asking Rent($/Unit) Market Class Vacancy% -Submarket Class Vacancy% Source:©Reis Services,LLC 2019.Reprinted with the permission of Reis Services,LLC.All rights reserved. • The current vacancy rate for Class A properties in the submarket is 13.0%; the vacancy rate has increased by 900 bps from 2012. • Asking rent currently averages$1,529/Unit and has increased by 28.5%from 2012. Supply and Demand Trends 1,400 20.00% 1,200 18.00% 1,000 16.00% 14.00% 800 12.00% 600 10.00% 400 8.00% 6.00% 200 - 4.00% 0 2.00% -200 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 0.00% Completions(Units) Absorption(Units) -Vacancy(%) Source:®Reis Services,LLC 2019.Reprinted with the permission of Reis Services,LLC.All rights reserved. • Class A inventory in the submarket has increased by 178.1%from 2012,while the occupied stock has increased by 152.2%. irr. RDA Utah Theatre Property Multifamily Market Analysis 37 • Between 2012 and 2017, completions have averaged 459 Units annually and reached a peak of 1,312 Units in 2017. • Between 2012 and 2017, absorption figures reached a peak of 707 Units in 2017 and a low of- 33 Units in 2016. • Between 2012 and 2017, gross revenue for Class A properties in the submarket averaged $1,180/Unit and has increased by 19.6%. New and Proposed Construction The following table summarizes properties that are under construction, planned, and/or proposed in the subject's metro area. Salt Lake City Multifamily Construction by Phase and Subtype Multifamily Subproperty Under Construction Planned Construction Proposed Construction Type Properties Units Properties Units Properties Units Apartment 12 1,952 43 6,394 11 2,499 Condominiums 4 207 10 1,071 0 0 Subsidized/Low Income 5 819 12 1,062 5 312 Mixed Income 0 0 5 812 0 0 Townhomes 6 356 18 997 4 124 Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 N/A 0 0 2 426 1 200 Totals 27 3,334 90 10,762 21 3,135 Source:©Reis Services,LLC 2019.Reprinted with the permission of Reis Services,LLC.All rights reserved. Multifamily Market Construction Key Takeaways • There are 27 properties under construction, 90 properties in the planned construction phase, and 21 properties in the proposed construction phase in the metro area. • Apartment properties within the under construction phase have an average size of 163 units and range in size between 19 units and 352 units. • Apartment properties within the planned construction phase have an average size of 149 units and range in size between 12 units and 434 units. • Apartment properties within the proposed construction phase have an average size of 227 units and range in size between 58 units and 452 units. • Of the 3,334 units under construction, 58.5%are Apartment properties, 6.2%are Condominium properties, and 10.7%are Townhome properties. • Of the 10,762 units planned for construction, 59.4%are Apartment properties, 10.0%are Condominium properties, and 9.3%are Townhome properties. • Of the 3,135 units proposed for construction, 79.7%are Apartment properties, 0.0%are Condominium properties, and 4.0%are Townhome properties. irr. RDA Utah Theatre Property Multifamily Market Analysis 38 The following table summarizes properties that are under construction, planned, and/or proposed in the subject's submarket. Central Salt Lake City Submarket Construction by Phase and Subtype Multifamily Subproperty Under Construction Planned Construction Proposed Construction Type Properties Units Properties Units Properties Units Apartment 9 1,402 22 2,748 4 744 Condominiums 2 53 5 218 0 0 Subsidized/Low Income 2 372 6 440 3 201 Mixed Income 0 0 3 524 0 0 Townhomes 2 29 6 81 2 89 Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 N/A 0 0 2 426 1 200 Totals 15 1,856 44 4,437 10 1,234 Source:©Reis Services,LLC 2019.Reprinted with the permission of Reis Services,LLC.All rights reserved. Comparable Property Analysis Most relevant to the subject is the demand and supply of its comparable properties (as defined by REIS) as well as directly competing properties (i.e., peer group). A summary of the comparable and directly competing multifamily properties considered for the subject is shown in the ensuing tables. Average Submarket Lease Terms Submarket Free Rent Submarket Expense Ratio 0.97 44 Source:©Reis Services,LLC 2019.Reprinted with the permission of Reis Services,LLC.All rights reserved. Comparable Group Summary Stats* Low Mean Median High Current Asking Rent/Unit($) 741 1,525 1,422 2,410 Current Vacancy Rate(%) 0.0 12.6 4.1 89.8 Property Size(units) 42 161 124 484 Year Built 1927 2001 2003 2018 *Historical trends include only properties in the Comp Group that have at least five full years of history;aggregated data on rents and vacancies displayed in other tables may therefore not match precisely. Source:©Reis Services,LLC 2019.Reprinted with the permission of Reis Services,LLC.All rights reserved. irr. RDA Utah Theatre Property Multifamily Market Analysis 39 Comparable Group Summary Stats* Studio 1BR 2BR 3BR Current Asking Rent/Unit($) 1,173 1,355 1,709 2,117 Unit Size(SF) 523 733 1,097 1,318 Units 12 74 68 7 Current Asking Rent/SF 2.25 1.84 1.55 1.58 *Historical trends include only properties in the Comp Group that have at least five full years of history;aggregated data on rents and vacancies displayed in other tables may therefore not match precisely. Source:©Reis Services,LLC 2019.Reprinted with the permission of Reis Services,LLC.All rights reserved. Comparable Property Summary • Average lease terms for comparable properties in the metro area consists of free rent of 0.97 months/lease and an operating expense ratio of 44.0. • Vacancy rates range between 0.0%and 89.8%with an average vacancy rate of 12.6%across the comparable property set. • Asking rents range between $741/Unit and $2,410/Unit with an average asking rent of $1,525/Unit. • A studio, 1BR, 2BR, and 3BR command asking rents of$1,173/Unit, $1,355/Unit, $1,709/Unit, and $2,117/Unit respectively. • A studio, 1BR, 2BR, and 3BR are sized 523 SF, 733 SF, 1,097 SF, and 1,318 SF respectively. • The comparable properties in the metro area were built between 1927 and 2018. Multifamily Comparable Property Performance Summary Metro Performance* Submarket Performance* Comparable Properties Performance* Year Quarter Asking Rent/Unit($) Vacancy Rate(%)Asking Rent/Unit($) Vacancy Rate(%)Asking Rent/Unit($) Vacancy Rate(%) 2013 4 811 3.7 894 4.3 1106 5.0 2014 4 836 3.9 931 6.0 1119 4.0 2015 4 870 3.6 990 3.6 1181 2.5 2016 4 927 4.1 1026 4.0 1282 3.0 2017 4 979 4.8 1166 10.5 1349 4.3 2017 3 967 4.8 1156 9.0 1331 3.6 2017 4 979 4.8 1166 10.5 1349 4.3 2018 1 988 4.8 1176 8.2 1365 4.0 2018 2 1001 5.1 1198 8.5 1352 3.5 2018 3 1014 5.0 1209 8.3 1361 4.1 *Historical trends include only properties in the Comp Group that have at least five full years of history;aggregated data on rents and vacancies displayed in other tables may therefore not match precisely. Source:©Reis Services,LLC 2019.Reprinted with the permission of Reis Services,LLC.All rights reserved. irr. RDA Utah Theatre Property Multifamily Market Analysis 40 Multifamily Asking Rent (Current Quarter, Y-O-Y) $1,600 6.0% $1,400 5.0°k $1,200 ••�.•'=••.<- ,..+.••'••' d..$1,000g9:Il TUG.-6.......•*,.._•.!. $800 3.0°r6 $600 2.0% $400 - $200 1.0% $0 0.0% 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 si Metro Asking Rate($/Unit) iii Comparable Properties Asking Rate($/Unit) Metro Vacancy Rate(%) Source:©Reis Services,LLC 2019.Reprinted with the permission of Reis Services,LLC.All rights reserved. Multifamily Comparable Properties Size Current Vacancy Property Name County Submarket (units) Year built Class Asking Rent Rate(%) 200 West Apartments Salt Lake Central Salt Lake City 50 2018 A $1,557 2.00% 21 By Urbana Salt Lake Central Salt Lake City 126 2018 A $1,738 23.02% 4Th West Apartments Salt Lake Central Salt Lake City 484 2017 A $1,835 7.44% Alta Gateway Station Salt Lake Central Salt Lake City 275 2017 A $1,902 2.18% Altitude On Fifth Salt Lake Central Salt Lake City 163 2002 A $1,249 22.09% Block 44 Apartments Salt Lake Central Salt Lake City 214 2018 A $1,612 35.98% Braxton At Trolley Square Salt Lake Central Salt Lake City 88 1996 A $1,574 3.41% Bridges At Citifront Salt Lake Central Salt Lake City 294 2009 A $1,284 4.76% Brigadoon Salt Lake Central Salt Lake City 42 1969 BC $1,018 4.76% Brigham Apartments Salt Lake Central Salt Lake City 334 1998 A $1,724 2.10% C9 Flats Salt Lake Central Salt Lake City 97 2018 A $1,710 21.65% Cedar Cliff Salt Lake Central Salt Lake City 47 1975 BC $859 2.13% Citifront Apartments Salt Lake Central Salt Lake City 61 2003 A $1,154 13.11% City Creek Landing Apartments Salt Lake Central Salt Lake City 110 2011 A $1,781 4.55% Cityline Salt Lake Central Salt Lake City 57 1927 BC $923 8.77% Cityscape Apartments Salt Lake Central Salt Lake City 121 2013 A $1,599 3.31% Downtown 360 Apartments Salt Lake Central Salt Lake City 151 2017 A $1,412 10.60% Eagle Gate Apartments Salt Lake Central Salt Lake City 85 1988 A $1,825 0.00% Foothill Place Apartments Salt Lake Central Salt Lake City 449 1975 A $1,143 4.68% Foothill Terrace Salt Lake Central Salt Lake City 66 1974 BC $1,014 1.52% Garden Apartments Salt Lake Central Salt Lake City 196 1968 BC $741 0.00% Hardware District-Hardware West Salt Lake Central Salt Lake City 265 2018 A $2,410 89.81% Hightower Salt Lake Central Salt Lake City 112 1964 A $1,521 3.57% Irving Heights Salt Lake Central Salt Lake City 67 1963 BC $1,068 1.49% Irving Schoolhouse Salt Lake Central Salt Lake City 231 1997 A $1,416 5.19% Kensington Salt Lake Central Salt Lake City 64 1965 A $1,126 3.13% Lanai Apts Salt Lake Central Salt Lake City 44 1964 BC $962 2.27% Liberty Boulevard Apartments Salt Lake Central Salt Lake City 212 2018 A $1,428 25.00% Liberty Crest Salt Lake Central Salt Lake City 175 2017 A $1,939 1.71% Liberty Gateway Salt Lake Central Salt Lake City 159 2014 A $1,339 1.26% Source:®Reit Services,LLC 2019.Reprinted with the permrssion of Reis Services,LLC.All rights reserved.Compiled by Integra Realty Resources,Inc. irr. RDA Utah Theatre Property Multifamily Market Analysis 41 Multifamily Market Outlook and Conclusions Relevant vacancy rate indications are summarized as follows: Vacancy Rate Indications Market Segment Vacancy Rates Salt Lake City Metro Area 5.0% Salt Lake City Metro Area Class A 7.3% Central Salt Lake City Submarket Area 8.3% Central Salt Lake City Submarket Area Class A 13.0% Directly Comparable Properties 12.6% Based on the key metro and submarket area trends, construction outlook, and the performance of competing properties, IRR expects the mix of property fundamentals and economic conditions in the Salt Lake City metro area to have a positive impact on the subject property's performance in the near- term. irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Land Description and Analysis 42 Property Analysis Land Description and Analysis The following description is based on information obtained from Salt Lake City and Salt Lake County, our inspection of the property, discussions with ownership. For reference, an aerial photograph, plat map, zoning map, flood hazard map and liquefaction map are provided at the end of this section. Land Description Land Area 0.89 acres;38,768 SF Source of Land Area Public Records Primary Street Frontage Main Street- feet Shape Irregular Corner No Rail Access No Topography Generally level and at street grade Drainage No problems reported or observed Environmental Hazards None reported or observed Ground Stability No problems reported or observed Flood Area Panel Number 49035C0144H Date August 2,2012 Zone X Description Outside of 500-year floodplain Insurance Required? No Utilities Service Provider Water Salt Lake City Sewer Salt Lake City Electricity Rocky Mountain Power Natural Gas Dominion Energy Local Phone Multiple Providers irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Land Description and Analysis 43 Streets,Access and Frontage Street Main Street Frontage Feet Main Parcel 49 Excess Land 77 Paving Concrete Curbs Yes Sidewalks Yes Lanes 2 way, 1 lane each way Direction of Traffic North/South Condition Good Traffic Levels Moderate Signals/Traffic Control Traffic light Access/Curb Cuts None Visibility Good Environmental Hazards An environmental assessment report was not provided for review, and during our inspection, we did not observe any obvious signs of contamination on or near the subject. However, environmental issues are beyond our scope of expertise. It is assumed that the property is not adversely affected by environmental hazards. Zoning The subject is zoned D-1 with Main Street Overlay, Central Business District, by Salt Lake City.The purpose of the D-1 with Main Street Overlay zone is "to provide for commercial and economic development within Salt Lake City's most urban and intense areas." The following table summarizes our understanding and interpretation of the zoning requirements that affect the subject. irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Land Description and Analysis 44 Zoning Summary Zoning Jurisdiction Salt Lake City Zoning Designation D-1 with Main Street Overlay Description Central Business District Legally Conforming? Appears to be legally conforming Zoning Change Likely? No Permitted Uses Accessory use,adaptive reuse of a landmark site,alcohol outdoor/indoor uses(brewpub/dining club/social club,tavern),animal veterinary office, communication towner antenna,art gallery, bed and breakfast/inn/manor, bus line yard and repair facility,check cashing/payday loan business,clinic(medical/dental),community garden, crematorium, daycare center(adult/child), dwelling [artists' loft/studio,assisted living facility(large&small),group (small), multi- family],eleemosynary facility,financial institution,funeral home, hotel/motel, laboratory(medical, dental,optical), library, mixed-use development, mobile food business, mobile food court, museum,office, publishing company office,open space on lots less than 4 acres in size, park, off-site parking, performing arts production facility, place of worship, radio television station, railroad passenger station, reception center, recreation indoor, restaurant, retail goods&servoce establishments, sales and display(outdoor),schools(college/university, music conservatory, professional &vocational,seminary and religious institute),stores(deparment stores,fashion oriented department, mass merchandising, specialty), art studio, live performance theater, movie theater, utility buildings or structure, utility transmission wire/line/pipe/pole and vehicle automobile sales/rental and service Category Zoning Requirement Minimum Lot Area No minimum, but with a few exceptions Minimum Street Frontage(Feet) Not specified Minimum Lot Width (Feet) No minimum Minimum First Floor Glass 40%glass surface Minimum Setbacks(Feet) No requirements Maximum Building Height 375 Parking Setbacks No corner or surfacing parking. Surface parking within an interior side yard must have at leaset a 30-foot landscape setback from the property line or be located behind ap primary structure. Parking Requirement Not applicable Source:Salt Lake City Zoning Ordinance Central Business District Redevelopment Project Area. The subject lies within the Central Business District Project Area, which is a redevelopment area of the Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City. The purpose of the Project Areas is to utilize tax increment resources to strengthen the city's tax base through economic development and growth through the construction of new commercial and housing development, as well as the rehabilitation of existing buildings. The Project Area plan also irr. RDA Utah Theatre Property Land Description and Analysis 45 recommends the installation of public improvements, including parking and public rights-of-way enhancements. The Central Business District Project Area was created in 1982 and was set to expire in 2008. In 2008, the participating taxing entities extended the life of the project area to year 2040 to help fund improvements. Conclusion. Historically,the subject been utilized as a retail sites for buildings with frontage along Main Street and a theater property for the property towards the interior of the block. The property is legally conforming and is believed to meet the Salt Lake City zoning requirements. Easements, Encroachments and Restrictions We were not provided a current title report to review. We were made aware of a few easements impacting the subject. These are discussed as follows. 1. A vehicular easement connecting the subject to 200 South Street via a parking garage. This easement crosses parcel 15-01-229-060, where a multi-level parking garage is located.The easement crosses parcel 15-01-229-078. 2. Another pedestrian easement extends to the north of parcel 15-01-229-068 across parcel 15- 01-229-055 (the Kearns Building property) and then turns west along a driveway leading to West Temple Street. 3. A pedestrian easement that traverses the eastern portion of parcel 15-01-229-068, connecting the western portion of the same parcel to Main Street. We have been unable to verify the existence of the third easement stemming from Main Street. A title report is recommended to determine the existence and precise locations of the easements discussed. We are not aware of any other easements, encumbrances, or restrictions that would adversely affect value or use of the site. Our valuation assumes no adverse easements, encroachments or restrictions and that the subject has a clear and marketable title. A title search is recommended to determine whether any adverse conditions exist. Conclusion of Land Analysis The size of the Main Street Portion of land poses a development restriction for the site due mostly to the impacts such a size has on parking. Overall, the physical characteristics of the site and the availability of utilities result in functional utility suitable for a variety of uses including those permitted by zoning.There are no other particular restrictions on development noted in the analysis. irr. RDA Utah Theatre Property Land Description and Analysis 46 ,• ~ -1.. ° ••,- lama IA _ r- . _ i4 1 iii s•' 1'2 , - • .•',r 1 . Exterior view of the east elevation of the property's An aerial view of the property existing improvements ice_ r` ;j` aAiy 4 , i l , ilr. r -' 1r \ .. . `N. t s. . 0-4 itg,„ . , _ , ._ .., .. .. Exterior view of the south elevation of the property's Exterior view of the south elevation of the property's existing improvements looking northeast existing improvements looking northwest Y _ Ng - .. V tom' - - 11 iir / �' k , +� Ili' • :' . ., % I _—i -iT•' 411.i/er .• r Not.ir \ - filk Exterior view of the west elevation of the property's Interior view of what was the building's lobby area existing improvements irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Land Description and Analysis 47 ,14.Citireiat080111201. &I a 1. t .� % • It t ..y.... t"...i a,.i Interior view of what was the building's theater View looking north along 200 South Street ,. a ` Fix • ..•% . 1.1.1., Ail f _i I _ , Ilip – ...' ' . ..-. — . - —Air _.141‘11111. . Exterior view of the parking structure through which is an View looking west along the private driveway,which access easement connecting the property contains an access easement connecting to the property ......m t ,, . III4.4- v... lir ---a. kill IIIIIMPOIr.7---7- Oil -11 ! 100. -E!,...---1 View looking east along the private driveway,which Exterior view looking south of a portion of the property's contains an access easement connecting to the property north elevation from the neighboring property to the north irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Land Description and Analysis 48 Aerial Photo it!-iV--: l gi1 911 IB E '. . _ 'f• -. - ,' a.' e .�47• /4#1411, jts,w -R I ---1 n 1 4:1 1,1 ..-111 b .. 1 1 il.. 1 fl ttf-: AW- je 't>, . PEI Mil JI� IIII ¢, ,. fa.„ _ • , .. • _., , aiiiaL . • 4/ ' - ,:i - ' �I u _ i I III i ii, Irl .I• 1 -HI *1 ' _ ,� i lI '! , - . 47, ,,.... ,,, / _-;,.. • . .:7 -— i lit.. ..-40.. - ' "rf i[AIL .1.......y.;"....1.2, _ --- J :'1 .,� '�� k irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Land Description and Analysis 49 Property Plat tie" Ip,, zi , j 9.I 229008 21 229054 I m l— -- f'74; l''''11 � - cli al IW 2�lOq A� .w1 ,� 105 c 70 x '11 - '�i ur d w�ar� 4 — ° 88.26 ASI 67 ' `, F 164.90 , J'�1)' 229018 9 6 ; 229055 G Vhf � r d n. 5 1 115.91 116.13 , 201.71 220057 A 229018 / 1051 202.13 co 3 229019. . o 229068 1051 1 8 0 1051 75.34 ,. 103.28 .w 150.53 1051 1U1.9u y 115.5 T 1 81.25 729070 oi 229077 116 62 s 165.74 N P. 105( 166.4 75.34 13 ..Q 2290W rd o 1051 "li 145 6j 81 u. 0�L 29Q6 9 „ 1051 .4 (a r^sig-- n 0' W q N 2 N CD. 229060 0 i xw v 105( 2 0 ,�0 229078 R ,i 229051 1 �Q el " 153. G 61.6 Ws 1-- ar_ r___ I a 105( W 229062 a I" 229063 F I n 178 62 79.76 I,.,, I 78.5 I 150.78 153. Win irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Land Description and Analysis 50 Survey i(if7GJ] 6 . .„•0(OF PARCEL 2 i j 1a, a w • r / s MOM Y..LOT 4 ��% Q1,!0 B ..,' '44,-• iv// i %a:%'{ LOTT�7 I i / PARCEL 2+ r I`tan a .1i ;411.," Access i i 11'i'/ Easement c t i 1 / r-IcJI a►Ib / /,/di // .. gg�I / �anara..e '-` ee.amwaaocP+arwx:•/ 3; • • / .�=, .k1114110./Lf „I BEI.Yall 91R�daG�.SI TOWS OR'UICET .7/� (� I. • ..rs JJnel 'W 9AS I / • l' t\�v'1� -'� /.ti`-► • //� ') 'mac C 1• aes fSlI$ I /eftp/p�1 ! .. , / d.,►>F�—IC //////// , L !I li / i f .. / ., 1-.e.i i'1,- pr,--04...-/- Aar .; - . WI ///i21/ / / /eeC(I I ,A'. j,.Worts .z !i v a i / � / b/ir 4 PARCEL f• - ,. 495'' oat„`_`""P .-_ � AS. PSI. � � �� , / / 4' 1/' � / /� r.4.-- ,.,,.... .4.-- stn. ;R [ors "% PARCEL 5 %.0'.111/',.,',.77.,./ I4-f « LOT a k �` 5g; / // , N 7 i/ /�- 1✓./v 1 �'' I4 fr 1,...6„.,:,! / r Ci ;PII r> /r i�11er oI ger _, Iir� =VP'�%fiJry/P H g (� RLO 1M_ • IES g �Pt1ii 59n., i��r.� -�w SPIIt•".1-•r I f�// l;1%%y��I��-! 1 �UI� i C11 A. ! //,v,... 0.. •�e /.:A� �1 .1 `• j �/// i��!�% 11� � �5f 3a1 IC IOlo6 cox • maw I I i�!T�, T Y ,�� 4"I. z84 Y I•..��sums t „,, Ffi} ON7R moot toes 1 I� I , 7"r"2019M M ,,�:� l A .;� -:, _ It _ ;I � ,. . Qi r_ Q s#:� I 11'Is/1k 1C saw U[ dT OM 4 i S i cpr�! ..„,,.--,,,,t5.0$ "� Access CI,' poste ; H1 op 1 Easement P�'�4 91 �� p1114�� � "ff mi • I LOT2 ' I °P.I— .0 tOT SGLL:e.3O PARCVL 3 I w :_ Iomx 4M On 1 1 a 0 a rej : .i i- 4^ 60 A i.V IN WE.4 I filL, 0.11. 11 CORN CO 1p. V.SOU --�(-' ----- - - . . a„�. '� .1.c e.'`. — _r. _ -e—.__1,s �o....� • —ienfti.- Senn :! Ng nut pow.s erste a Sart s mer r vera••.. . =:' MS EasluM MI CR RDA Utah Theatre Property alil Land Description and Analysis 51 Zoning Map 1-4Z . 1 . - `,:t- • L r I f Ili I tl zoos zoos zoos 1111 D-1:Central Business 1 LL j District alil RDA Utah Theatre Property Land Description and Analysis 52 Easement Map .. .. . , 1 IY I\ _ I, A .LI 29.43/44k .. , ,1(•,,. oroff_11,-- 229-035 1 1 229-0011 . trill i a .ti... .4- ,,..n I - , 229039 'r'" r *Lk 229-01 10,.. • • , • • 11• .1 .1:11 • q _ ir,.- tr....1MM _ Pedestrian Access ,_..., f _ Easements t • ,, 4. i . L i • . , :•• .44 2230— ' 4—. • i. , _ , : ... , : 1 i • -, . , A I c • , . • I '. 4 . -a, .. - .r t 2. 1 . .. czo • 1 • • - ' -- .1.....22.9-0•-• -k** / - 1- 1:1- .r' . . , . di_tii _. , .. _ 077 . . . . , . , .t",- , : Tit- -- ' ,. 1 mar - ,. 4 113 _ - • , ' .Z 1 1jr-17a2:01_, - . • i•-:. __ CP ---,----- - ... tin I kJ Vehicular . 4- . 106 "----' 1 1, •' — •. 229 229-0 - 4.90 ... . 0 , .„. . - Access so ., . Easement -- le ,I 11 , Ili 220481 • 4#.‘ r -2-f[ ."--. akt ,. 1 N. . • • - - ,, A a ist‘ •• I. ' ; i 1 I ii.__,.1 -. 1 erfammaia_ ... . . • _•_ _ _ _ • ,4t , --s-A r..........,..= . • , .m....t El 17 PIC *Note,the presence of these easements is based on information provided from the client/owner. A title search is recommended to verify the location and type of the stated easements. irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Land Description and Analysis 53 Flood Zone Map National Flood Hazard Layer FIRMette FFM A Legend WS Mt _ _ ,.,� :y uva.rm.e.oaro ua:MM4/11Me MOO 9n..011RI il 9jr - ., ,i, 7 . w ^, SPECIAL FLOOD 1/44 BFEaD¢ry • e WARD AREAS A•p/atoryfaWteq 111 -- I 4 �r -_ r• -� 0 At Mnu40M.re Aced Ruud.Rws ^j Y. ,7♦y r I' d lx...,.a charm Id.abae,G. r "�--� _ s upIln6 WOO onnTOM a•tnaarete 'y1 . I• O 1 woos d los don as squaw mile �• �,•, Edda Gleam Lel Wool L� .•1 f ^ ' - �•• • — I �, ��1 melee FIOOI MaaM- Vilk + P d R.d.md Data Rid du<b rRr lz i ..... ,� I •\ A OTHER aAFAS6 I!N•.Ste nob.- .:, ' R PPP 0 a f i • ‘A• 7!a FLOJD HUMID. .:Ma as'Fad rtia a.aL..... '� N ' '' Mo woad hoe nil NeinulFbd lWe,d :: '• r�Edna.LOMB. • I IT- :.' 'el JImo ODER 4RFA5 hMO1LnklenniedFeed WS..,,- 4 GENERAL - •• Oun.N.cd►ert w SIm,.dean j l I r • 3.-- d SFRVCNRES 's ee.Dim a none.ed • - - w ate.se.tateeiaLxAnnual cl,mm .� t IS - F tAaar sve.»EJ..al;.n s:13( FelLT l..ll�'li(9biml FL. R 3? tbaOdkanaaq �• •. -yam�....-M�ya \ �>e Fad aa.m.t�,om ��`I7 • p Il -I•�LrLa.itd Stdy J -'.t. _ di mnutnne ttaseae ~_ .�.t 0011111 OTNFMR.RteBsdnv f„ FEALURB Foaw.. {- — e ,-112012 a,d w '- - - 1 ' t Betel Oda Amiable ' �.a • •�� �'J. - i i M~ b Dgld Data Mdea 1 �• — R — 1 _ I 1 NAP PANELS O,nypd • \, H'{, ,j r f S' 4 Pant rlho pin an dopamine.. od�neeFerm. IIIM aOw nd pi emsnot repromrt sal outeolitathe proper.Motion. t • 'I r+ II This reap complies reel, AW,ste drds Arae wed II• f • f +• IX 1. 0g1M1 rod rape/L b as ride.desubd OA.. Y as.napdie.n cavoGa atm FEMA'c Lawn op [ - , oar daMerds Lit_ - ' l r40' t f. Nye Road na,.,d.1101.11.0011 is dented.Ilntth vain a. •�. f d' �T'- eidnriaow RFtI nab mrvc:pLo^d'd by FFMA.The rap r . 1 is 11 2:13.. H1]iN and paw4 - _ �. .�'_ ;ryesnNnye ix anendnnts sLbspwM M this date and .I ' • Ione.The Nrl cod et...i I. .00.onto der4ea .i I .r_ • ''•' • tea �,`. , = Imam...pomaded h new dila ow done. 'el� t. 11i,,wrea,.i,van Raeosms.e da.t•Ra.w6 m� 1 ` Nsnte.p dd na apner.aha one fir ereo Rxd:Irk.,. - •. a , tl�- Atig „sL . Ile tawil!.2'79. ' leda,1,stale e,as�.coda..dou.ao.ninlea brarws, • Feet ' FIRM peel motet.aid FMM elan...dm.N.Images lar 1:6,000 rrr npodaMnnmM.ma.dam..ca.wtmmad F> 0 250 500 1.000 1.5011 2.000 , L1'eL•1 w'p°='. irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Land Description and Analysis 54 Seismic Liquefaction Map LIQUEFACTION-POTENTIAL iiAAP FOR A PART OF SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH UTAH GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Pubirc lniprmat�on Series 25 August 1994 UQUEFACTIUtt Fi;rE%'Ls! ■ HO . Moderate til" . Low . 1-1 Very Lao .•. / GREAT '•_ s i" r ( SALT t Salt Lake Cfto c'' I LAAE ,r •I1�111rpr• ,voi •V• Tailin , Pund 3903 S Cal y'C;1 SI00 S 1 ii= BIQ crtt II/JSIC 1! Westt Imo ' 1. �� �1 tele Cottonwood ta0 S`an� w II _i Riveii; grape( '' t1,._ .• GO SCALE I:31:04011 Utah'Geo lgalcS rvey. tateltalld bya Dv Janne L. e . 4 1'“. Automated Gros ripld6 Relereuce Carter I O G to 'i ICI.:91-Lf., Mil NIP Is N.0.11.11 Wows on►/ad was ImloMled Man Anderson, I R., Woo. &R.,Ses l.v, 11.and Alla A.C..1904,11;s:t ica pp1mdal map for Silt Lar Cody.Ut . Ulah Gnduyyc.I Sorrily GuN11 Repos 94a, 4 a.sat. I:4S, Copt.a et gds•sport arw asaRshh a1 9u Uh' 5nos�a' Smvey. irr. RDA Utah Theatre Property Improvement Description and Analysis 55 Improvement Description and Analysis Although we have been asked to conduction only a land valuation for this assignment, a brief description of the improvements on the site are provided below. The overall property has 1-2 level, historic Class "C" masonry office buildings along Main Street with retail uses on the main level. These buildings span the full length of the frontage of the property along Main Street. At the west side of the overall property is a multi-level, historic theater property constructed of Class "C" masonry materials. The theater building connects to the north office building via an enclosed hallway. irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Real Estate Tax Analysis 56 Real Estate Tax Analysis Real estate tax assessments are administered by Salt Lake County, and are estimated by jurisdiction on a case by case basis. Real estate taxes in this state and this jurisdiction represent ad valorem taxes, meaning a tax applied in proportion to value.Taxes in Utah are calculated by applying a tax rate to taxable value.Taxable value is a percentage of the assessor's estimate of market value.The tax rate varies depending on a given county's budget. Real estate taxes and assessments of the overall property for the 2018 tax year are shown in the following table. The overall subject property is owned by the Salt Lake City Redevelopment Agency making the properties tax exempt. Therefore,the property does not have any tax history to report. Taxes and Assessments-2018 Assessed Value Taxes and Assessments Ad Valorem Tax ID Land Improvements Total Tax Rate Taxes Total 15-01-229-068 $1,537,600 $1,887,400 $3,425,000 Tax Exempt 15-01-229-070 $497,000 $532,100 $1,029,100 Tax Exempt $2,034,600 $2,419,500 $4,454,100 Tax Exempt Historical real estate taxes for the last four years are presented below. Tax History Total Assessed Ad Valorem Direct Tax Year Value Tax Rate Taxes Assessments Total %Change 2015 $2,911,200 Tax Exempt Tax Exempt 2016 $3,135,300 Tax Exempt Tax Exempt 2017 $4,077,500 Tax Exempt Tax Exempt 2018 $4,454,100 Tax Exempt Tax Exempt Based on the concluded market value of the subject,the assessed value appears low. irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Highest and Best Use Analysis 57 Highest and Best Use Analysis Process Before a property can be valued, an opinion of highest and best use must be developed for the subject site, both as vacant, and as improved. By definition,the highest and best use must be: • Physically possible. • Legally permissible under the zoning regulations and other restrictions that apply to the site. • Financially feasible. • Maximally productive, i.e., capable of producing the highest value from among the permissible, possible, and financially feasible uses. Highest and Best Use As Vacant Physically Possible The subject tract is irregular in shape. Topography is generally level and at street grade. Overall,the physical characteristics of the site and the availability of utilities result in functional utility suitable for a variety of uses. The size of the overall property does appear to accommodate the parking demands necessary for future development of the site. Although there are access easements connecting the site, accessing the property via vehicle is constrained. Therefore, accessing the site does appear to impose restrictions on development. The subject is located along the light rail corridor with a stop located less than one block away.This is appealing. Legally Permissible The site is zoned D-1 with Main Street Overlay, Central Business District. This zoning classification allows for various types of commercial and multi-family residential development. To our knowledge, there are no legal restrictions such as easements or deed restrictions that would effectively limit the use of the property. From a neighborhood conformance perspective, for the most part, surrounding properties are generally mid/high-rise office in character with parking in the rear. A few multi-family residential uses have also been developed recently near the subject, including the redevelopment of the Salt Lake Tribune building across the street into multi-family apartment units. This effectively limits the use of the site to a mid/high-rise office use or multi-family residential use with parking in the rear. Financially Feasible Financial or economic feasibility relates to supply and demand factors for any given use. Brief consideration has been given regarding potential uses. In this case, a variety of commercial developments could be considered. The subject is located in the core of the Commercial Business District along the Main Street corridor. This corridor is dominated by office uses and office rents that are among the highest in the state. On the other hand, as presented earlier in the report in the multi- family residential market analysis, demand has been strong for multi-family residential development irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Highest and Best Use Analysis 58 across the Wasatch Front, in Salt Lake City and in the downtown area of Salt Lake City. When comparing the two uses, the rental rates per square foot for both office and multi-family residential along Main Street in the CBD are very similar, as presented in the following table. Rental Rates per Year:Office vs.Multi-family Office Multi-family Building Name: Wells Fargo Building City Creek Landing Address: 299 S.Main Street 15 W.South Temple Street Salt Lake City,UT 84101 Salt Lake City,UT 84101 Use: Office Multi-family Parking Requirement: 3 spaces/1,000 SF of 0.5 spaces per usable floor area for the dwelling unit main floor plus 1.25 for or 1 space per each additional level 2,000 SF Rent Analysis: Yearly Rental Rate Units Monthly Rental Average SF Average SF SF+Common Average Range Rate Area Factor Rental (15%) Rate/SF/Year $29 00-$34.00 Studio/1 Ba $1,442-$3,033 $2,237 50 668 668 768 $34.95 1 Bd/1 Ba $1,633-$4,797 $3,215 00 740-1,156 948 1,090 $35.39 2 Br/1 Ba $1,757-$3,804 $2,780 50 936 936 1,076 $31.00 2 Br/2 Ba $2,217-$4,615 $3,416 00 1281 1281 1,473 $27.83 Avg.Rental Rate(Full-Service): $31.50 Average $32.29 Lease-Terms Adjustment(Full- -$6.50 Lease Terms Adjusted(Modified Gross) -$5.00 Rental Rate per SF: $25.00 Rental Rate per $27.29 SF: Note,the multi-family rental rate is an estimate that converts the typical multi-family per unit rental rate to a square foot rental rate in order to compare with the square foot of office rental rate. As presented in the table,the parking requirement is slightly higher for office use than the multi- family use. In addition, capitalization rates for office use in the subject's market area is within the range of 6%-8%. Multi-family residential capitalization rates have a lower range of between 4%-6%. The area, as mentioned previously, is experiencing stable growth due to currently positive economic conditions. In this case, both multi-family and office uses is considered. Based on our analysis of the market, there is currently adequate demand for office and multi-family uses in the subject's area. It appears that a newly developed office and multi-family uses on the site would have a value commensurate with its cost.Therefore, office and multi-family uses is considered to be financially feasible. Maximally Productive There does not appear to be any reasonably probable use of the site that would generate a higher residual land value than office and multi-family uses. Accordingly, it is our opinion that office and multi-family uses, developed to the normal market density level permitted by zoning, is the maximally productive use of the property. irr. RDA Utah Theatre Property Highest and Best Use Analysis 59 Conclusion Development of the site for office and multi-family uses is the only use that meets the four tests of highest and best use.Therefore, it is concluded to be the highest and best use of the property as vacant. As Improved The subject site is improved with two, one-to-two level historic commercial buildings and a multi-level historic theater. This report treats the properties with a hypothetical condition that assumes no improvements exist on the site. Therefore, a highest and best use analysis as improved is not applicable. Most Probable Buyer Taking into account the functional utility of the site and area development trends, the probable buyer is a developer. irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Valuation Methodology 60 Valuation Valuation Methodology Appraisers usually consider three approaches to estimating the market value of real property.These are the cost approach, sales comparison approach and the income capitalization approach. The cost approach assumes that the informed purchaser would pay no more than the cost of producing a substitute property with the same utility.This approach is particularly applicable when the improvements being appraised are relatively new and represent the highest and best use of the land or when the property has unique or specialized improvements for which there is little or no sales data from comparable properties. The sales comparison approach assumes that an informed purchaser would pay no more for a property than the cost of acquiring another existing property with the same utility.This approach is especially appropriate when an active market provides sufficient reliable data.The sales comparison approach is less reliable in an inactive market or when estimating the value of properties for which no directly comparable sales data is available.The sales comparison approach is often relied upon for owner-user properties. The income capitalization approach reflects the market's perception of a relationship between a property's potential income and its market value.This approach converts the anticipated net income from ownership of a property into a value indication through capitalization.The primary methods are direct capitalization and discounted cash flow analysis,with one or both methods applied, as appropriate.This approach is widely used in appraising income-producing properties. Reconciliation of the various indications into a conclusion of value is based on an evaluation of the quantity and quality of available data in each approach and the applicability of each approach to the property type. The methodology employed in this assignment is summarized as follows: Approaches to Value Approach Applicability to Subject Use in Assignment Cost Approach Not Applicable Not Utilized Sales Comparison Approach Applicable Utilized Income Capitalization Approach Not Applicable Not Utilized irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Land Valuation—As If Vacant 61 Land Valuation —As If Vacant To develop an opinion of the subject's land value, as if vacant and available to be developed to its highest and best use, we utilize the sales comparison approach. This approach develops an indication of value by researching,verifying, and analyzing sales of similar properties. Our sales research focused on transactions within the following parameters: • Location: Salt Lake City, UT • Size: 0.25 acres to 4.00 acres • Use: Commercial and multi-family residential • Transaction Date: 2016 to 2019 For this analysis, we use price per square foot as the appropriate unit of comparison because market participants typically compare sale prices and property values on this basis.The most relevant sales are summarized in the following table. Detailed sales information is presented in the addenda. irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Land Valuation—As If Vacant 62 Summary of Comparable Land Sales-As If Vacant Sale SF; Date; Effective Sale Acres; $/SF No. Name/Address Status Price Corner Zoning Land 1 2nd&2nd Land Apr-19 $1,825,000 14,810 Central Business District $123.22 218 S.200 E. Recorded 0.34 Salt Lake City Yes Salt Lake County UT Comments:The broker,Peter Hanlon,reported that the sale price is very near the listing price of$1,825,000 or$123 per SF. The buyer intends on improving the site with either a mid-to-high rise multi family use or a hotel. 2 600 South-Land Parcel Dec-17 $8,738,000 149,324 Central Business District $58.52 154 W.600 5. Closed 3.43 Salt Lake City No Salt Lake County UT Comments:The property is situated South I-15 off ramp and has frontage on 600 South and 200 West.At the time of sale an operating motel exists on the property. This motel will probably remain in the short term,but over the long-term a new building(s)could be expected making this a long-term land sale.The buyers intend to construct a 272 unit low income housing project on the property.The improvements existing at the time of sale will be razed.Total demolition and asbestos abatement costs were estimated at approximately$900,000 by the buyers. 3 Salt Lake City Homeless Shelter Site Nov-17 $4,400,000 56,192 Downtown Support District $78.30 131 E.700 S. Closed 1.29 Salt Lake City No Salt Lake County UT Comments:The buyer intends to construct a homeless shelter on the site. 4 Confidential Oct-17 $1,525,000 17,860 Central Business District $85.39 Confidential Closed 0.41 Salt Lake County UT Comments:The buyer intends to tear down the current improvements on the site and build apartments on the site at approximately 160 units per acre. The building will have five levels of apartments over two levels of parking. Two tenants currently occupy the buildings with leases ending in Feb 2018&March 2018 respectively. We estimate that demolition costs associated with the two buildings will be off-set by the remaining rent income generated by the tenants. 5 Proposed 4Forty7 Apartments Sep-17 $1,500,000 19,166 Residential Mixed Use $78.26 447 E.100 S. Closed 0.44 Salt Lake City No Salt Lake County UT 6 The Void Corporate Center Land Apr-17 $6,500,000 60,113 Central Business District $108.13 370 S.West Temple Closed 1.38 Salt Lake City Yes Salt Lake County UT Comments:Fully entitled hotel/mixed-use site that is master-planned to accommodate a 20-story building. Subject 38,768 Central Business District RDA Utah Theatre Property 0.89 Salt Lake City,UT No RDA Utah Theatre Property Land Valuation—As If Vacant 63 Comparable Land Sales Map VMnt ; .__7 -71 7_ ._ 7. Satin i 1 'h'��N-b1 N. N IA i Mom. itUN II An..-1__ a.,.?dot. weans — ems- 1 nos W N = r x w W w ' M —W200S ._---7.—liar 0 not IN DI :, 1 1 u 1 i rimmil _ _ . vino s. _I w.aa.ewar� e�oes �lierwe..e - Icons ttNTRALCtri W # et W, Para /Pir.nret VI �1 N' i_emi -,__—____1::-.)_E — - E 490 S t 400 i Urbanity, • Q .-___ -IV — 111i11 it I P r ` I 1 , 0 wathmgtts, Q i Squaw Park » w N :lame 1I' Chaw(Ib'd w Sao S t _ 9E 5005- — 1500S=_ Grr_E.>rhrwr.Mrd t 'r: '� f I - , gime I I +ems. MOO( 1 .1 '� M.wawair.ar9*Aid.wlfos< itiO0 --• 1 taw a 600.5 Qes.a.iw. ►Fly I r N 17001 It' £705 bling: I i I s O2:1 3 ttcrocoh Comorxar G 'a++EAE irr. RDA Utah Theatre Property Land Valuation—As If Vacant 64 ..., ,*.,iemiis.....,....."4„*..-..-z.,_:,,,,..,..._- , , - I air, '.... ....•••.•0 I . MAW DratZir.-- -- _ , . ,. ' LAN lowep -_ .....- tri i i 0. i 4.. '' -' li , ii . 6101 k.,(' firt , . . 4 ; ill -? ita ...!...„1" ► 41 J Ii. f go .__.`sr Sale 1 Sale 2 2nd&2nd Land 600 South-Land Parcel •MC—1111ffir ._,_ .Y� t ' Confidential Photo 4'_T- 1‘..r -.- '`' NIP Sale 3 Sale 4 Salt Lake City Homeless Shelter Site Confidential '. ifs . _,1114 -,-__Air aii,:a-221 . • tfirill.-1T+._.' J . r a •pp < C:! I - `_-. ` , i __t 4 . , . Ate, 71 _ , , i - I ' VI L ti n'- ! t Ai* )fr • la...„...... irk - Sale 5 Sale 6 Proposed 4Forty7 Apartments The Void Corporate Center Land irr. RDA Utah Theatre Property Land Valuation—As If Vacant 65 Adjustment Factors The sales are compared to the subject and adjusted to account for material differences that affect value. Adjustments are considered for the following factors, in the sequence shown below. Adjustment Factors Effective Sale Price Accounts for atypical economics of a transaction, such as demolition cost, expenditures by the buyer at time of purchase, or other similar factors. Usually applied directly to sale price on a lump sum basis. Real Property Rights Fee simple, leased fee, leasehold, partial interest, etc. Financing Terms Seller financing, or assumption of existing financing, at non-market terms. Conditions of Sale Extraordinary motivation of buyer or seller, assemblage, forced sale, related parties transaction. Market Conditions Changes in the economic environment over time that affect the appreciation and depreciation of real estate. Location Market or submarket area influences on sale price; surrounding land use influences; convenience to transportation facilities. Street Orientation Ease of site access;visibility from main thoroughfares; traffic counts. Size Inverse relationship that often exists between parcel size and unit value. Shape and Topography Primary physical factors that affect the utility of a site for its highest and best use. Zoning Government regulations that affect the types and intensities of uses allowable on a site. Utilities Utilities readily available for development on or near the site. Entitlements The specific level of governmental approvals attained pertaining to development of a site. Analysis and Adjustment of Sales Adjustments are based on our rating of each comparable sale in relation to the subject. If the comparable is superior to the subject,the sale price is adjusted downward to reflect the subject's relative inferiority; if the comparable is inferior, its price is adjusted upward.The adjustable elements of comparison are: Real Property Rights Conveyed All of the sales are in the fee simple estate. No adjustments are necessary. irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Land Valuation—As If Vacant 66 Financing Terms For this analysis, no adjustments are necessary. Conditions of Sale For this analysis, no adjustments are necessary. Expenditures at Purchase For this analysis, no adjustments are necessary. Market Conditions When considering market conditions,we note that the sales took place from April 2017 to April 2019, and that market conditions generally have been strengthening over this period through the effective date of value.Accordingly,we apply upward adjustments of 3.0% per year to account for this trend. Location Location has a great impact on property values.This adjustment category considers general market area influences as well as a property's accessibility and visibility from a main thoroughfare. Appropriate adjustments are applied. The subject is located at the core office area of the Central Business District, which is along Main Street. This area houses some of the highest office rents in the market. Sales 1,4 and 5 are just outside of the core office area of the Central Business District. These areas are inferior to the subject. Upward adjustments are applied to Sales 1,4 and 5. Sale 6 has a similar location. No adjustment is necessary. Sales 2 and 3 are generally in the downtown area of Salt Lake City, but are even a greater distance away from the CBD that the previously mentioned sales. Upwards adjustments are applied to Sales 2 and 3. Physical Characteristics This adjustment category generally reflects differences such as site size, functional utility, zoning, street orientation, and availability of utilities. Appropriate adjustments are discussed. Street Orientation. With the exception of Sales 1 and 6, all of the sales are similar to the subject and require no adjustment. Sales 1 and 6 are corner parcels and are superior in terms of street orientation. Downward adjustments are necessary. Size. Sales3 and 6 are similar to the subject. No adjustments are applied. Sale 2 is larger than the subject, and an upward adjustment is necessary. All of the remaining sales are smaller than the subject, and downward adjustments are applied. Functional Utility. Properties with irregular shapes or other limiting factors are less functional and typically sell at a discount compared to fully functional parcels. As previously noted,the subject is an irregularly shaped parcel, but it does have a development limitation in the form of limited access and irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Land Valuation—As If Vacant 67 is encumbered with an access easement which requires special design considerations. Each of the comparables has a shape that is similar to the subject, but do not have any access issues similar to the subject. All of the comparables sales are superior. Downward adjustments are applied. Zoning. This adjustment category generally addresses any differences between the highest and best use of the subject and the comparables. No adjustments are necessary. Utilities. Parcels with utilities readily available for development typically command higher prices. This is due to the costs necessary to provide these services to the land. In this case, all of the sales are similar, and no adjustments are necessary. Adjustments Summary The sales are compared to the subject and adjusted to account for material differences that affect value.The following table summarizes the adjustments we make to each sale. irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Land Valuation-As If Vacant 68 Land Sales Adjustment Grid -As If Vacant Subject Comparable 1 Comparable 2 Comparable 3 Comparable 4 Comparable 5 Comparable 6 Name RDA Utah Theatre 2nd&2nd Land 600 South-Land Salt Lake City Confidential Proposed 4Forty7 The Void Property Parcel Homeless Shelter Apartments Corporate Center Site Land Address 144&156 South 218 S.200 E. 154 W.600 S. 131 E.700 S. Confidential 447 E.100 S. 370 S.West Main Street Temple City Salt Lake City Salt Lake City Salt Lake City Salt Lake City Confidential Salt Lake City Salt Lake City County Salt Lake Salt Lake Salt Lake Salt Lake Salt Lake Salt Lake Salt Lake State Utah UT UT UT UT UT UT Sale Date Apr-19 Dec-17 Nov-17 Oct-17 Sep-17 Apr-17 Sale Status Recorded Closed Closed Closed Closed Closed Sale Price $1,825,000 $7,838,000 $4,400,000 $1,525,000 $1,500,000 $6,500,000 Effective Sale Price $1,825,000 $8,738,000 $4,400,000 $1,525,000 $1,500,000 $6,500,000 Square Feet 38,768 14,810 149,324 56,192 17,860 19,166 60,113 Acres 0.89 0.34 3.43 1.29 0.41 0.44 1.38 Price per Square Foot $123.22 $58.52 $78.30 $85.39 $78.26 $108.13 Property Rights Fee Simple Fee Simple Fee Simple Fee Simple Fee Simple Fee Simple %Adjustment - - - - - - Financing Terms Cash to seller- Cash to seller Cash to seller Cash to seller Cash to seller Cash to seller %Adjustment - - - - - - Conditions of Sale %Adjustment - - - - - - Market Conditions 5/31/2019 Apr-19 Dec-17 Nov-17 Oct-17 Sep-17 Apr-17 Annual%Adjustment 3% - 4% 5% 5% 5% 6% Cumulative Adjusted Price $123.22 $60.86 $82.22 $89.66 $82.18 $114.62 Location 5% 10% 15% 5% 5% - Street Orientation -5% - - - - -5% Size -5% 10% - -5% -5% - Functional Utility -5% -5% -5% -5% -5% -5% Zoning - - - - - - Utilities - - - - -Net$Adjustment -$12.32 $9.13 $8 22 -$4.48 -$4.11 -$11.46 Net%Adjustment -10% 15% 10% -5% -5% -10% Final Adjusted Price $110.90 $69.99 $90.44 $85.17 $78.07 $103.16 Overall Adjustment -10% 20% 16% 0% 0% -5% Range of Adjusted Prices $69.99-$110.90 Average $89.62 Indicated Value $105.00 Land Value Conclusion Based on the preceding analysis and adjustments,the comparable land sales provide a range of value of$69.99-$110.90 per square foot. Typically,those sales considered most similar to the subject are given greatest emphasis. Sales 1 and 6 are considered most similar to the subject and are given the greatest weight. Sale 2 is at the extreme low end of the range and is not heavily weighted. A value towards the upper end of the range is appropriate. This is particularly reasonable considering the subject is located along the TRAX line and is near a TRAX stop. A value of$105.00 per square foot is concluded. The land value conclusion for the subject is presented as follows: Land Value Conclusion Indicated Value per Square Foot $105.00 Subject Square Feet 38,768 Indicated Value $4,070,640 Rounded $4,070,000 irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Land Valuation—As If Vacant with Easement and Income Restrictions 69 Land Valuation — As If Vacant with Easement and Income Restrictions In this scenario, we have been asked to value the subject property in a hypothetical condition that the subject has the following restrictions: (1) a mid-block walkway pedestrian easement across the property and (2) a requirement to include affordable housing within any proposed development. The following paragraphs discuss in more detail these two restrictions. Mid-block Walkway Pedestrian Easement The owner plans on recording a pedestrian easement across the property. This pedestrian easement would be 40 feet wide and 220 feet long running east and west. The pedestrian easement and future pedestrian walkway would provide pedestrians access to and from Main Street along the east-end of the northern perimeter of parcel 15-01-229-068 of the subject. This easement looks to partially be within the existing pedestrian easement in the same area. The walkway is projected to be constructed and maintained by the future developer/owner of the property The following images present the approximate location of the proposed mid-block pedestrian easement and a rendering of the proposed development on the site with the mid-block walkway. 0r--- �no��Q 1. ii10, se ,�:, 229-033I -I 1-,_ 1r ..!..$1.1+, .•YYee• .. - 229-034 ..x - I .I SI`- SVP^ I • 229-035 . '1 .. _ . 229.036 9 gill 4_l I . - ;' - 1- Existing Pedestrian �v: .� i ------,Il l - Access Easements :� -oss '- d._ iSI t "1 2z • 229.0 A 111 A___MA' Proposed Mid-Block w " t Pedestrian Easement i ..� " "'" _____ -077 , 1_ .� 219.070 4 0 iQ 131 - I , u9-oze ' Vehicular Access Al[ :,[:�`: i. . Easement i , I vIt �4 / .3:- I" ara;. ci 4-W 2. nn rr.r.m - W 200 s m' —s i irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Land Valuation—As If Vacant with Easement and Income Restrictions 70 r 111 0 I I ;1 001011011t- �li1�� Ml IIp �- R . I I l l 1 1 1 �� ���� __ � f I - [Eirr.:: ,;. ..,... _ ._ .,,,,,,,, ,..y,. pAt P T ..':-71''-'4":Z-: N 1 LJ G 7 ,-- ' 14_ Jai r „„ : ._ _ „, �' it4,t •iill MINI 1 !' i `� ', P4 y • r .1 t igf Affordable Housing The proposed development on the subject property will be a high-rise multi-family that will include approximately 298 units. The City will require the developer to designate 30 units as affordable housing units, which will be distributed across all of the unit types offered within the project. The proposed development's unit mix, along with its affordable housing component is outlined in the following table. Proposed Building's Unit Mix&Affordable Housing Component Total Affordable Affordable Housing Unit Type Total Units Units Rent per Month* Studio 50 5 $868 1 Bedroom 112 11 $930 2 Bedroom 136 14 $1,117 Total 298 30 *The affordable units will be restricted from high-end market rates to 60%of average monthly income(AMI). The following land valuation is the same as the previous land valuation, except that it takes into account the effects of the mid-block pedestrian easement and the income restrictions. As If Vacant with Easement & Income Restrictions (0.89 Acres; 38,768 SF) To apply the sales comparison approach to the As If Vacant with Easement& Income Restrictions, we utilize the same comparable land sales as used previously land valuation analysis. irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Land Valuation—As If Vacant with Easement and Income Restrictions 71 In addition, all of the same adjustments in the previous land valuation are used in this section, with the exception of the following adjustments: (1) real property rights conveyed and (2) functional utility. Only a discussion of these two differing adjustments are discussed below. Please refer to the earlier land valuation section for the full description of the similar adjustments For this analysis, we use price per square foot as the appropriate unit of comparison because market participants typically compare sale prices and property values on this basis. Detailed sales information is presented in the addenda. Analysis and Adjustment of Sales Adjustments are based on our rating of each comparable sale in relation to the subject. If the comparable is superior to the subject,the sale price is adjusted downward to reflect the subject's relative inferiority; if the comparable is inferior, its price is adjusted upward.The adjustable elements of comparison are: Real Property Rights Conveyed This adjustment is generally applied to reflect the transfer of property rights different from those being appraised, such as differences between properties owned in fee simple and in leased fee or other restrictions. All of the sales are in the fee simple estate; however, none of the sales have deed restrictions in place with economic restrictions for potential units. For this adjustment we deal with three of the four restrictions. Here we adjust for the permanent supportive housing, mixed-income housing and social enterprise space requirements. For market support we look potential income rates for the various types of units affected. Market rents for several comparable properties are presented as follows. irr. RDA Utah Theatre Property Land Valuation-As If Vacant with Easement and Income Restrictions 72 Comparable Rentals No. Facility Studio 1 Bedroom 2 Bedroom 1 Cityscape Apartments 528 SF 699-901 SF 951-1,067 SF 134 South 400 East $1,189-$1,289 $1,509-$1,809 $1,749-$1,979 Salt Lake City, Utah 2 Elevation on 5th 683-759 SF 985-1,004 SF 343 South 500 East $1,199-$1,500 $1,690-$2,035 Salt Lake City, Utah 3 Season on City Creek 437-540 SF 687-784 SF 1,015- 1,039 230 West North Temple $1,250 $1,215-$1,390 $1,415-$1,600 Salt Lake City, Utah 4 Liberty Gateway 457 SF 663-715 SF 964-1,091 SF 50 South 500 West $999 $1,149-$1,199 $1,399-$1,599 Salt Lake City, Utah 5 City Creek Landing 555-668 SF 686- 1,111 SF 1,023-1,347 SF 30 South Main Street $1,338-$1,442 $1,7451-$1,999 $1,874-$2,303 Salt Lake City, Utah 6 Brigham Apartments 637-694 SF 883- 1,319 SF 201 East South Temple $1,200-$1,497 $1,785-$2,500 Salt Lake City, Utah Based on the above market data, we assign potential market rates to individual unit types and compare the potential market rates to the maximum voucher income as indicated by the potential buyer. This helps suggest the magnitude of the income loss overall. This is presented in the following table. Economic Differences in Rate No.of Units Studo 1 bedroom 2 bedroom 298 5 11 14 Estimated Potential Market Rate $1,200 $1,500 $2,000 Unit Type Permanent Mixed Income Mixed Income Estimated Voucher Rent at 60%AMI $868 $930 $1,117 (as indicated by the RDA) Maximum Voucher Rent as a Percentage of Total Market Rent 72.33% 62.00% 55.85% Percentage Discount of Maximum Voucher Rent of Potential Market 27.67% 38.00% 44.15% Unit Type as a Total of all affected units 0.02 0.04 0.05 Weighted Average Percentage 0.5% 1.4% 2.1% Overall Percentage Discount 3.9% Based on this, it appears the potential income from the restricted units will represent an average discount off approximately 36.6%. Recall, it is planned that the overall restricted units will be approximately 10%of the overall unit total (30 restricted units/298 overall units). As a percentage,this suggests,the subject income may be affected by as much as 3.84%(on an unweighted basis). irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Land Valuation-As If Vacant with Easement and Income Restrictions 73 Overall,we believe the overall ratio should hold. Downward adjustments of 26%are applied to each of the comparable sales as none of the sales sold with economic restricted rental units. Functional Utility. The proposed pedestrian easement across the subject that will pave the way for the mid-block walkway will be 40 feet by 220 feet or 8,800 square feet. This 8,800 square-foot area constrains development as it requires special design considerations and reduces the effective site size. The easement represents 22%of the overall site. As a matter of practicality, not all functionality is lost with an easement. Also,the access easement described here appears to be partially within an already existing corridor. Downward adjustments are necessary to all of the comparables. Adjustments Summary The sales are compared to the subject and adjusted to account for material differences that affect value.The following table summarizes the adjustments we make to each sale. Land Sales Adjustment Grid -As If Vacant with Easement&Income Restrictions Subject Comparable 1 Comparable 2 Comparable 3 Comparable 4 Comparable 5 Comparable 6 Name RDA Utah Theatre 2nd&2nd Land 600 South-Land Salt Lake City Confidential Proposed 4Forty7 The Void Property Parcel Homeless Shelter Apartments Corporate Center Site Land Address 144&156 South 218 S.200 E. 154 W.600 S. 131 E.700 S. Confidential 447 E.100 5. 370 S.West Main Street Temple City Salt Lake City Salt Lake City Salt Lake City Salt Lake City Confidential Salt Lake City Salt Lake City County Salt Lake Salt Lake Salt Lake Salt Lake Salt Lake Salt Lake Salt Lake State Utah UT UT UT UT UT UT Sale Date Apr-19 Dec-17 Nov-17 Oct-17 Sep-17 Apr-17 Sale Status Recorded Closed Closed Closed Closed Closed Sale Price $1,825,000 $7,838,000 $4,400,000 $1,525,000 $1,500,000 $6,500,000 Effective Sale Price $1,825,000 $8,738,000 $4,400,000 $1,525,000 $1,500,000 $6,500,000 Square Feet 38,768 14,810 149,324 56,192 17,860 19,166 60,113 Acres 0.89 0.34 3.43 1.29 0.41 0.44 1.38 Price per Square Foot $123.22 $58.52 $78.30 $85.39 $78.26 $108.13 Property Rights Fee Simple Fee Simple Fee Simple Fee Simple Fee Simple Fee Simple %Adjustment -4% -4% -4% -4% -4% -4% Financing Terms Cash to seller Cash to seller Cash to seller Cash to seller Cash to seller Cash to seller %Adjustment - - - - - - Conditions of Sale %Adjustment - - - - - - Market Conditions 5/31/2019 Apr-19 Dec-17 Nov-17 Oct-17 Sep-17 Apr-17 Annual%Adjustment 3% - 4% 5% 5% 5% 6% Cumulative Adjusted Price $118.37 $58.46 $78.98 $86.12 $78.94 $110.10 Location 5% 10% 15% 5% 5% - Street Orientation -5% - - - - -5% Size -5% 10% - -5% -5% - Functional Utility -15% -15% -15% -15% -15% -15% Zoning - - - - - - Utilities - - - - - - Net$Adjustment -$23.67 $2.92 $0.00 -$12.92 -$11.84 -$22.02 Net%Adjustment -20% 5% 0% -15% -15% -20% Final Adjusted Price $94.69 $61.38 $78.98 $73.21 $67.10 $88.08 Overall Adjustment -23% 5% 1% -14% -14% -19% Range of Adjusted Prices $61.38-$94.69 Average $77.24 Indicated Value $75.00 irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Land Valuation—As If Vacant with Easement and Income Restrictions 74 Land Value Conclusion —As If Vacant with Easement & Income Restrictions Based on the preceding analysis and adjustments,the comparable land sales provide a range of value of$61.38-$94.69 per square foot. Typically,those sales considered most similar to the subject are given greatest emphasis. A value near the middle of the range is appropriate. While the subject has an above average location, the access easement will constrain development by requiring special design considerations. A value of $75.00 per square foot is concluded. The land value conclusion for the subject is presented as follows: Land Value Conclusion Indicated Value per Square Foot $75.00 Subject Square Feet 38,768 Indicated Value $2,907,600 Rounded $2,910,000 irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Reconciliation and Conclusion of Value 75 Reconciliation and Conclusion of Value As discussed previously, we use only the sales comparison approach in developing an opinion of value for the subject.The cost and income approaches are not applicable, and are not used. Based on the preceding valuation analysis, and subject to the definitions, assumptions, and limiting conditions expressed in the report, our opinions of value are as follows: Value Conclusions Parcel Interest Appraised Date of Value Value Conclusion Market Value As If Land Only Fee Simple May 31,2019 $4,070,000 Market Value As If Land Only with Proposed Fee Simple May 31,2019 $2,910,000 Easement&Income Restrictions Extraordinary Assumptions and Hypothetical Conditions The value conclusions are subject to the following extraordinary assumptions that may affect the assignment results.An extraordinary assumption is uncertain information accepted as fact. If the assumption is found to be false as of the effective date of the appraisal,we reserve the right to modify our value conclusions. 1. The owner reports the existence of three easements affecting the subject property. The first is an access easement for vehicles stemming from 200 South Street and another access easement for pedestrians stemming from Main Street and connecting to another one running behind the Kearns Building. We have confirmed the existence of two of the three easements in the property survey provided. We have been unable to confirm the easment stemming from Main Street with public records. This report assumes all three of these easements exist. A title search is recommended to confirm the existence of these easements. The value conclusions are based on the following hypothetical conditions that may affect the assignment results. A hypothetical condition is a condition contrary to known fact on the effective date of the appraisal but is supposed for the purpose of analysis. 1. For this analysis,we hypothetically assume the improvements located on-site do not exist. This is contrary to fact as there are multiple buildings located on the site. 2. For the analysis involving the proposed easement and affordable housing restrictions,we hypothetically assume these restrictions exist. Although these restrictions are in the process of being implemented,they do not exist at the moment. Exposure Time Exposure time is the length of time the subject property would have been exposed for sale in the market had it sold on the effective valuation date at the concluded market value. Based on the concluded market value stated previously, it is our opinion that the probable exposure time is 12 months. Marketing Period Marketing time is an estimate of the amount of time it might take to sell a property at the concluded market value immediately following the effective date of value. We estimate the subject's marketing period at 12 months. irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Certification 76 Certification We certify that,to the best of our knowledge and belief: 1. The statements of fact contained in this report are true and correct. 2. The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions are limited only by the reported assumptions and limiting conditions, and are our personal, impartial, and unbiased professional analyses, opinions, and conclusions. 3. We have no present or prospective interest in the property that is the subject of this report and no personal interest with respect to the parties involved. 4. We have previously appraised the property that is the subject of this report for the current client within the three-year period immediately preceding acceptance of this assignment. We completed an assignment in August 2017. 5. We have no bias with respect to the property that is the subject of this report or to the parties involved with this assignment. 6. Our engagement in this assignment was not contingent upon developing or reporting predetermined results. 7. Our compensation for completing this assignment is not contingent upon the development or reporting of a predetermined value or direction in value that favors the cause of the client, the amount of the value opinion,the attainment of a stipulated result, or the occurrence of a subsequent event directly related to the intended use of this appraisal. 8. Our analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared, in conformity with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice as well as applicable state appraisal regulations. 9. The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared, in conformity with the Code of Professional Ethics and Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice of the Appraisal Institute. 10. The use of this report is subject to the requirements of the Appraisal Institute relating to review by its duly authorized representatives. 11. Darrin W. Liddell,John T. Blanck and Joel H.Thompson made an on-site inspection of the property in conjunction with this assignment. 12. No one provided significant real property appraisal assistance to the person(s) signing this certification. 13. We have experience in appraising properties similar to the subject and are in compliance with the Competency Rule of USPAP. 14. As of the date of this report, Darrin W. Liddell, MAI, Al-GRS, FRICS, CCIM and John T. Blanck, MAI, MRICS have completed the continuing education program for Designated Members of the Appraisal Institute. irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Certification 77 15. As of the date of this report,Joel H. Thompson has completed the Standards and Ethics Education Requirements for Candidates of the Appraisal Institute. .> Darrin W. Liddell, MAI, Al-GRS, FRICS, CCIM John T. Blanck, MAI, MRICS Certified General Real Estate Appraiser Certified General Real Estate Appraiser Utah Certificate#5450608-CGOO Utah Certificate#5506449-CGOO 9/21'4 Joel H.Thompson Certified General Real Estate Appraiser Utah Certificate#8822850-CG00 El RDA Utah Theatre Property Assumptions and Limiting Conditions 78 Assumptions and Limiting Conditions This appraisal and any other work product related to this engagement are limited by the following standard assumptions, except as otherwise noted in the report: 1. The title is marketable and free and clear of all liens, encumbrances, encroachments, easements and restrictions.The property is under responsible ownership and competent management and is available for its highest and best use. 2. There are no existing judgments or pending or threatened litigation that could affect the value of the property. 3. There are no hidden or undisclosed conditions of the land or of the improvements that would render the property more or less valuable. Furthermore, there is no asbestos in the property. 4. The revenue stamps placed on any deed referenced herein to indicate the sale price are in correct relation to the actual dollar amount of the transaction. 5. The property is in compliance with all applicable building, environmental, zoning, and other federal, state and local laws, regulations and codes. 6. The information furnished by others is believed to be reliable, but no warranty is given for its accuracy. This appraisal and any other work product related to this engagement are subject to the following limiting conditions, except as otherwise noted in the report: 1. An appraisal is inherently subjective and represents our opinion as to the value of the property appraised. 2. The conclusions stated in our appraisal apply only as of the effective date of the appraisal, and no representation is made as to the effect of subsequent events. 3. No changes in any federal,state or local laws, regulations or codes (including, without limitation, the Internal Revenue Code) are anticipated. 4. No environmental impact studies were either requested or made in conjunction with this appraisal, and we reserve the right to revise or rescind any of the value opinions based upon any subsequent environmental impact studies. If any environmental impact statement is required by law,the appraisal assumes that such statement will be favorable and will be approved by the appropriate regulatory bodies. 5. Unless otherwise agreed to in writing,we are not required to give testimony, respond to any subpoena or attend any court, governmental or other hearing with reference to the property without compensation relative to such additional employment. 6. We have made no survey of the property and assume no responsibility in connection with such matters. Any sketch or survey of the property included in this report is for illustrative purposes only and should not be considered to be scaled accurately for size.The appraisal irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Assumptions and Limiting Conditions 79 covers the property as described in this report, and the areas and dimensions set forth are assumed to be correct. 7. No opinion is expressed as to the value of subsurface oil,gas or mineral rights, if any, and we have assumed that the property is not subject to surface entry for the exploration or removal of such materials, unless otherwise noted in our appraisal. 8. We accept no responsibility for considerations requiring expertise in other fields. Such considerations include, but are not limited to, legal descriptions and other legal matters such as legal title, geologic considerations such as soils and seismic stability; and civil, mechanical, electrical, structural and other engineering and environmental matters. Such considerations may also include determinations of compliance with zoning and other federal, state, and local laws, regulations and codes. 9. The distribution of the total valuation in the report between land and improvements applies only under the reported highest and best use of the property.The allocations of value for land and improvements must not be used in conjunction with any other appraisal and are invalid if so used.The appraisal report shall be considered only in its entirety. No part of the appraisal report shall be utilized separately or out of context. 10. Neither all nor any part of the contents of this report (especially any conclusions as to value, the identity of the appraisers, or any reference to the Appraisal Institute) shall be disseminated through advertising media, public relations media, news media or any other means of communication (including without limitation prospectuses, private offering memoranda and other offering material provided to prospective investors)without the prior written consent of the persons signing the report. 11. Information, estimates and opinions contained in the report and obtained from third-party sources are assumed to be reliable and have not been independently verified. 12. Any income and expense estimates contained in the appraisal report are used only for the purpose of estimating value and do not constitute predictions of future operating results. 13. If the property is subject to one or more leases, any estimate of residual value contained in the appraisal may be particularly affected by significant changes in the condition of the economy, of the real estate industry, or of the appraised property at the time these leases expire or otherwise terminate. 14. Unless otherwise stated in the report, no consideration has been given to personal property located on the premises or to the cost of moving or relocating such personal property; only the real property has been considered. 15. The current purchasing power of the dollar is the basis for the values stated in the appraisal; we have assumed that no extreme fluctuations in economic cycles will occur. 16. The values found herein are subject to these and to any other assumptions or conditions set forth in the body of this report but which may have been omitted from this list of Assumptions and Limiting Conditions. 17. The analyses contained in the report necessarily incorporate numerous estimates and assumptions regarding property performance,general and local business and economic irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Assumptions and Limiting Conditions 80 conditions,the absence of material changes in the competitive environment and other matters. Some estimates or assumptions, however, inevitably will not materialize, and unanticipated events and circumstances may occur;therefore, actual results achieved during the period covered by our analysis will vary from our estimates, and the variations may be material. 18. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) became effective January 26, 1992. We have not made a specific survey or analysis of the property to determine whether the physical aspects of the improvements meet the ADA accessibility guidelines. We claim no expertise in ADA issues, and render no opinion regarding compliance of the subject with ADA regulations. Inasmuch as compliance matches each owner's financial ability with the cost to cure the non- conforming physical characteristics of a property, a specific study of both the owner's financial ability and the cost to cure any deficiencies would be needed for the Department of Justice to determine compliance. 19. The appraisal report is prepared for the exclusive benefit of the Client, its subsidiaries and/or affiliates. It may not be used or relied upon by any other party.All parties who use or rely upon any information in the report without our written consent do so at their own risk. 20. No studies have been provided to us indicating the presence or absence of hazardous materials on the subject property or in the improvements, and our valuation is predicated upon the assumption that the subject property is free and clear of any environment hazards including, without limitation, hazardous wastes,toxic substances and mold. No representations or warranties are made regarding the environmental condition of the subject property. Integra Realty Resources—Salt Lake City, Integra Realty Resources, Inc., Integra Strategic Ventures, Inc. and/or any of their respective officers, owners, managers, directors, agents, subcontractors or employees (the "Integra Parties"), shall not be responsible for any such environmental conditions that do exist or for any engineering or testing that might be required to discover whether such conditions exist. Because we are not experts in the field of environmental conditions,the appraisal report cannot be considered as an environmental assessment of the subject property. 21. The persons signing the report may have reviewed available flood maps and may have noted in the appraisal report whether the subject property is located in an identified Special Flood Hazard Area. We are not qualified to detect such areas and therefore do not guarantee such determinations.The presence of flood plain areas and/or wetlands may affect the value of the property, and the value conclusion is predicated on the assumption that wetlands are non- existent or minimal. 22. Integra Realty Resources—Salt Lake City is not a building or environmental inspector. Integra Salt Lake City does not guarantee that the subject property is free of defects or environmental problems. Mold may be present in the subject property and a professional inspection is recommended. 23. The appraisal report and value conclusions for an appraisal assume the satisfactory completion of construction, repairs or alterations in a workmanlike manner. 24. It is expressly acknowledged that in any action which may be brought against any of the Integra Parties, arising out of, relating to, or in any way pertaining to this engagement,the irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Assumptions and Limiting Conditions 81 appraisal reports, and/or any other related work product, the Integra Parties shall not be responsible or liable for any incidental or consequential damages or losses, unless the appraisal was fraudulent or prepared with intentional misconduct. It is further acknowledged that the collective liability of the Integra Parties in any such action shall not exceed the fees paid for the preparation of the appraisal report unless the appraisal was fraudulent or prepared with intentional misconduct. Finally, it is acknowledged that the fees charged herein are in reliance upon the foregoing limitations of liability. 25. Integra Realty Resources—Salt Lake City, an independently owned and operated company, has prepared the appraisal for the specific intended use stated elsewhere in the report.The use of the appraisal report by anyone other than the Client is prohibited except as otherwise provided. Accordingly,the appraisal report is addressed to and shall be solely for the Client's use and benefit unless we provide our prior written consent. We expressly reserve the unrestricted right to withhold our consent to your disclosure of the appraisal report or any other work product related to the engagement (or any part thereof including, without limitation, conclusions of value and our identity),to any third parties. Stated again for clarification, unless our prior written consent is obtained, no third party may rely on the appraisal report (even if their reliance was foreseeable). 26. The conclusions of this report are estimates based on known current trends and reasonably foreseeable future occurrences. These estimates are based partly on property information, data obtained in public records, interviews, existing trends, buyer-seller decision criteria in the current market, and research conducted by third parties, and such data are not always completely reliable. The Integra Parties are not responsible for these and other future occurrences that could not have reasonably been foreseen on the effective date of this assignment. Furthermore, it is inevitable that some assumptions will not materialize and that unanticipated events may occur that will likely affect actual performance. While we are of the opinion that our findings are reasonable based on current market conditions, we do not represent that these estimates will actually be achieved, as they are subject to considerable risk and uncertainty. Moreover,we assume competent and effective management and marketing for the duration of the projected holding period of this property. 27. All prospective value opinions presented in this report are estimates and forecasts which are prospective in nature and are subject to considerable risk and uncertainty. In addition to the contingencies noted in the preceding paragraph, several events may occur that could substantially alter the outcome of our estimates such as, but not limited to changes in the economy, interest rates, and capitalization rates, behavior of consumers, investors and lenders,fire and other physical destruction, changes in title or conveyances of easements and deed restrictions, etc. It is assumed that conditions reasonably foreseeable at the present time are consistent or similar with the future. 28. The appraisal is also subject to the following: irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Assumptions and Limiting Conditions 82 Extraordinary Assumptions and Hypothetical Conditions The value conclusions are subject to the following extraordinary assumptions that may affect the assignment results.An extraordinary assumption is uncertain information accepted as fact. If the assumption is found to be false as of the effective date of the appraisal,we reserve the right to modify our value conclusions. 1. The owner reports the existence of three easements affecting the subject property. The first is an access easement for vehicles stemming from 200 South Street and another access easement for pedestrians stemming from Main Street and connecting to another one running behind the Kearns Building. We have confirmed the existence of two of the three easements in the property survey provided. We have been unable to confirm the easment stemming from Main Street with public records. This report assumes all three of these easements exist. A title search is recommended to confirm the existence of these easements. The value conclusions are based on the following hypothetical conditions that may affect the assignment results. A hypothetical condition is a condition contrary to known fact on the effective date of the appraisal but is supposed for the purpose of analysis. 1. For this analysis,we hypothetically assume the improvements located on-site do not exist. This is contrary to fact as there are multiple buildings located on the site. 2. For the analysis involving the proposed easement and affordable housing restrictions,we hypothetically assume these restrictions exist. Although these restrictions are in the process of being implemented,they do not exist at the moment. irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Addenda Addendum A Appraiser Qualifications IDRDA Utah Theatre Property Darrin W. Liddell, MAI AI-GRS FRICS CCIM Integra Realty Resources Salt Lake City Experience 5107 South 900 East Suite 200 Senior Managing Director and full time commercial real estate appraiser/consultant for Integra Salt Lake City,UT 84117 Realty Resources-Salt Lake City in Utah since November 2005. He has spent roughly 20 years assisting clients with commercial real estate valuation and consultation. He provides these T(801)263-9700 services to a variety of commercial, private and government organizations. F(801)263-9709 Darrin specializes in a wide range of property valuations and generates complex feasibility and cash flow analyses. He has experience with a wide variety of real estate types including but not irr.com limited to mixed-use, retail, multi-family,office,and industrial. He also specializes in automobile dealership valuation. By understanding the dynamics of a wide variety of real estate sectors, Darrin helps prepare clients to make complex real estate decisions. Darrin is a member of the Appraisal Institute(MAI)and is a Certified Commercial Investment Member(CCIM). He is also a fellow of the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors(FRICS). He has enjoyed teaching real estate principles, investment,and appraisal courses in the Masters of Business Administration(MBA), Masters of Real Estate Development(MRED),and undergraduate programs at the University of Utah David Eccles School of Business for nearly 25 years. Professional Activities & Affiliations Appraisal Institute,Member(MAI),January 1997 Certified Commercial Investment Member(CCIM),June 2002 Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors,Fellow(FRICS),December 2007 Instructor:Adjunct Assistant Professor of Finance;University of Utah,David Eccles School of Business, Department of Finance from 1994 to present. Course: Real Estate Principles(Finance 4740 and 6740). Course: Real Estate Appraisal and Investment(Finance 6780). Course: Real Estate Analysis(Finance 6770). Experience Review Committee:State of Utah,Department of Commerce Division of Real Estate from 1994 to present. Board of Director:Appraisal Institute-Utah Chapter from 2003 to 2009. President:Appraisal Institute-Utah Chapter in 2008. University of Utah Business Alumni Association,Board of Directors from 2003 to 2006. Board of Director:Integra Realty Resources,October 2016 Licenses Utah,Certified General Appraiser,5450608-CG00,Expires June 2021 Idaho,Certified General Appraiser,CGA-246,Expires March 2020 Wyoming,Certified General Appraiser, Permit#401,Expires December 2019 Montana,Certified General Appraiser,685,Expires March 2020 Arizona,Certified General Appraiser,31725, Expires June 2021 Colorado,Certified General Appraiser, 100003724,Expires December 2019 Utah,Sales Agent,5450608-SA00,Expires February 2020 Utah, Pre-Licensing Real Estate Instructor,5450608-PI00,Expires December 2019 Utah, Pre-Licensing Appraiser Instructor,5450608-PATO,Expires December 2019 irr dliddell@irr.com - (801)263-9700 x111 Darrin W. Liddell, MAI, AI-GRS FRICS CCIM Integra Realty Resources Salt Lake City Licenses (Cont'd) 5107 South 900 East Suite 200 Texas,Texas, 1380412, Expires February 2021 Salt Lake City,UT 84117 California,California,3002918, Expires February 2021 Florida,Certified General Appraiser,RZ3810,Expires November 2019 T(801)263-9700 Nevada,Certified General Appraiser,A.0207472-CG, Expires March 2021 F(801)263-9709 Education irr.com MBA,University of Utah,June 1993 Bachelor of Science, University of Utah,June 1991 Major: Finance;Minor:Sociology Qualified Before Courts & Administrative Bodies 2009:Wilburgene v. Kirk Blosch,et al. 2011: National Surety Company v.Questar Gas Company 2012:910 Cattle Company v.Stoel Rives,LLP,et al. 2012:Traverse Mountain Enterprises,LLC vs. Fox Ridge, LLC,et al 2013:910 Cattle Company v.Stoel Rivers LLP,et al 2014:SA Group Properties, Inc.v. Highland Marketplace, L.C. 2014: McGillis Investment Company,LLP v.Callister Nebeker&McCullough and W.Jeffery Fillmore iEJ dliddell@irr.com - (801)263-9700 x111 STATE OF UTAH DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE ACTIVE LICENSE DATE ISSUED:05191/2018 s.or Taft j' EXPIRATION DATE?06/3012021 • • o LICENSE NMI*. J t1 ,.< fY I UCEtSL 1 YPi: Certified General Appraiser 'r ,,:.1•A ISSUED Ire DARRIN WAYNE LIDDELL 1896 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84117 eorowasnnen erovFowr orool- o�w John T. Blanck, MAI MRICS Integra Realty Resources Salt Lake City Experience 5107 South 900 East Suite 200 John is a Director with Integra Realty Resources-Salt Lake City. He has been appraising full time Salt Lake City,UT 84117 since 2001,assisting lenders, private and government organizations with commercial appraisal and consulting services across a broad range of property types. T(801)263-9700 He specializes in the valuation of office properties where he has considerable experience with F(801)263-9709 historic,landmark and investment grade office buildings. John joined Integra Realty Resources- Salt Lake City in November 2005. Between 2001 and 2005 he worked with another Salt Lake based appraisal firm. irr.com Specialized Courses with Successful Examination Completion(last 10 years) Fundamentals of Separating Real, Personal Property,and Intangible Assets,2012 National Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice Update 2012 Litigation Appraising: Specialized Topics&Applications,2011 The Appraiser as an Expert Witness: Preparation&Testimony,2011 Business Practices and Ethics,2011 Condemnation Appraising: Principles&Applications, 2010 National Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice Update 2010 Litigation Appraising&Expert Witness Strategies,2009 Applied Market Analysis Workshop,2008 Successful Completion of General Comprehensive Examination of Appraisal Institute,2007 Uniform Appraisal Standards for Federal Land Acquisitions(Yellow Book),2007 Professional Activities & Affiliations Designated Member(MAI)-Appraisal Institute(#438674) Professional Member(MRICS)-Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors Member, NAIOP Commercial Real Estate Development Association Member,Salt Lake Board of Realtors Member,Wasatch Front Multiple Listing Service Member,Wyoming Multiple Listing Service Member,Teton County Multiple Listing Service 2010-2014 Trustee,Utah Association of Appraisers(elected as President in 2012 and Past President in 2013) 2009-2016 Director/Officer and Member of Board of Directors,Utah Chapter of the Appraisal Institute(served as Chapter President in 2015) 2008 Education Co-Chair,Utah Chapter of the Appraisal Institute 2005-2007 Salt Lake Branch Chair,Utah Chapter of the Appraisal Institute Licenses Idaho,Certified General Appraiser,CGA-3517,Expires July 2019 Utah,Certified General Appraiser,5506449-CG00,Expires October 2020 Utah,Sales Agent,5660584-SA00,Expires May 2020 Wyoming,Certified Real Estate Appraiser,Permit#865,Expires September 2020 Montana,Certified General Appraiser,6518, Expires March 2020 Education Master of Business Administration(MBA), University of Utah,2008 irr ra John T. Blanck, MAI, MRICS Salt tBakeCity/Resources Education (Cont'd) 5107 South 900 East Suite 200 Salt Lake City,UT 84117 Bachelor of Arts-Finance,University of Utah,2004 T(801)263-9700 Qualified Before Courts & Administrative Bodies F(801)263-9709 2006:Terry v.Kent,et al. 2016:Discover Card irr.com Oirr STATE OF UTAH DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE ACTIVE LICENSE DATE ISSUED:10/10/2018 'Jv ott rite 11 EXPIRATION DATE:10/31/2020 • . LKT SE NUMBER:Nimmisim o (t I c t r r TYPJ ♦Y LICENSE'MS:Certified General Appraiser yt_ ISSUED TO:JOHN T BLANCK 896 SALT LAKE CRY UT 84117 061W{0111OFMUN tarArz crrslcw 1L\.":a Integ Joel H. Thompson SaltL Lake City Salt Lake City Experience 5107 South 900 East Suite 200 Joel is an appraiser and consultant of commercial real estate for Integra Realty Resources-Salt Salt Lake City,UT 84117 Lake City. He joined IRR in June of 2013 and assists lenders, private and government organizations with commercial appraisal and consulting services across a broad range of T(801)263-9700 property types,including office properties,commercial and industrial properties,as well as raw F(801)263-9709 land. Prior to joining Integra Realty Resources—Salt Lake City,Joel worked as an analyst for the financial advisory firm Lewis Young Robertson and Burningham,where he performed various irr.com Professional Activities & Affiliations Appraisal Institute,Associate Member Licenses Utah,Certified General Appraiser,8822850-CG00,Expires September 2020 Education Specialized Courses with Successful Examination Completion: Basic Appraisal Principles,Appraisal Institute,June 2013 Basic Appraisal Procedures,Appraisal Institute,June 2013 Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice,October 2013 General Appraiser Sales Comparison Approach, May 2014 General Appraiser General Appraiser Site Valuation and Cost Approach,October,2014 General Appraiser Report Writing and Case Studies, November 2014 General Appraiser Market Analysis and Highest and Best Use, November 2014 General Appraiser Income Approach Part 1,April 2015 Master of Public Administration(MPA), Brigham Young University,2006 Graduate Certificate in Real Estate Development, Portland State University,2009 Bachelor of Arts,Literature,Pacific University,2003 irr STATE OF UTAH DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE ACTIVE LICENSE uo rp Mit ISSUED:09/19/2018 E7 ilt\FIOE 09/30/2020o Certified General Appraiser � ./.10 ISSUEDTO: JOEL HTHOMPSON 1896 ,. SALT LAKE CRY UT 84117 About IRR Integra Realty Resources, Inc. (IRR) provides world-class commercial real estate valuation, counseling, and advisory services. Routinely ranked among leading property valuation and consulting firms, we are now the largest independent firm in our industry in the United States, with local offices coast to coast and in the Caribbean. IRR offices are led by MAI-designated Senior Managing Directors, industry leaders who have over 25 years, on average, of commercial real estate experience in their local markets. This experience, coupled with our understanding of how national trends affect the local markets, empowers our clients with the unique knowledge, access, and historical perspective they need to make the most informed decisions. Many of the nation's top financial institutions, developers, corporations, law firms, and government agencies rely on our professional real estate opinions to best understand the value, use, and feasibility of real estate in their market. Local Expertise...Nationally! irr . com iEJ Addenda Addendum B Definitions lir:1 RDA Utah Theatre Property Addenda Definitions The source of the following definitions is the Appraisal Institute, The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 6th ed. (Chicago: Appraisal Institute, 2015), unless otherwise noted. As Is Market Value The estimate of the market value of real property in its current physical condition, use, and zoning as of the appraisal date. Disposition Value The most probable price that a specified interest in property should bring under the following conditions: 1. Consummation of a sale within a specified time, which is shorter than the typical exposure time for such a property in that market. 2. The property is subjected to market conditions prevailing as of the date of valuation. 3. Both the buyer and seller are acting prudently and knowledgeably. 4. The seller is under compulsion to sell. 5. The buyer is typically motivated. 6. Both parties are acting in what they consider to be their best interests. 7. An adequate marketing effort will be made during the exposure time. 8. Payment will be made in cash in U.S. dollars (or the local currency) or in terms of financial arrangements comparable thereto. 9. The price represents the normal consideration for the property sold, unaffected by special or creative financing or sales concessions granted by anyone associated with the sale. This definition can also be modified to provide for valuation with specified financing terms. Effective Date 1. The date on which the appraisal or review opinion applies. 2. In a lease document,the date upon which the lease goes into effect. Entitlement In the context of ownership, use, or development of real estate, governmental approval for annexation, zoning, utility extensions, number of lots,total floor area, construction permits, and occupancy or use permits. Entrepreneurial Profit 1. A market-derived figure that represents the amount an entrepreneur receives for his or her contribution to a project and risk; the difference between the total cost of a property(cost of irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Addenda development) and its market value (property value after completion), which represents the entrepreneur's compensation for the risk and expertise associated with development. An entrepreneur is motivated by the prospect of future value enhancement(i.e.,the entrepreneurial incentive).An entrepreneur who successfully creates value through new development, expansion, renovation, or an innovative change of use is rewarded by entrepreneurial profit. Entrepreneurs may also fail and suffer losses. 2. In economics,the actual return on successful management practices, often identified with coordination,the fourth factor of production following land, labor, and capital; also called entrepreneurial return or entrepreneurial reward. Exposure Time 1. The time a property remains on the market. 2. The estimated length of time that the property interest being appraised would have been offered on the market prior to the hypothetical consummation of a sale at market value on the effective date of the appraisal; a retrospective opinion based on an analysis of past events assuming a competitive and open market. Fee Simple Estate Absolute ownership unencumbered by any other interest or estate, subject only to the limitations imposed by the governmental powers of taxation, eminent domain, police power, and escheat. Floor Area Ratio(FAR) The relationship between the above-ground floor area of a building, as described by the zoning or building code, and the area of the plot on which it stands; in planning and zoning, often expressed as a decimal, e.g., a ratio of 2.0 indicates that the permissible floor area of a building is twice the total land area. Highest and Best Use 1. The reasonably probable use of property that results in the highest value.The four criteria that the highest and best use must meet are legal permissibility, physical possibility,financial feasibility, and maximum productivity. 2. The use of an asset that maximizes its potential and that is possible, legally permissible, and financially feasible.The highest and best use may be for continuation of an asset's existing use or for some alternative use. This is determined by the use that a market participant would have in mind for the asset when formulating the price that it would be willing to bid. (ISV) 3. [The] highest and most profitable use for which the property is adaptable and needed or likely to be needed in the reasonably near future. (Uniform Appraisal Standards for Federal Land Acquisitions) irr. RDA Utah Theatre Property Addenda Investment Value 1. The value of a property to a particular investor or class of investors based on the investor's specific requirements. Investment value may be different from market value because it depends on a set of investment criteria that are not necessarily typical of the market. 2. The value of an asset to the owner or a prospective owner for individual investment or operational objectives. Lease A contract in which rights to use and occupy land, space, or structures are transferred by the owner to another for a specified period of time in return for a specified rent. Leased Fee Interest The ownership interest held by the lessor,which includes the right to receive the contract rent specified in the lease plus the reversionary right when the lease expires. Leasehold Interest The right held by the lessee to use and occupy real estate for a stated term and under the conditions specified in the lease. Liquidation Value The most probable price that a specified interest in real property should bring under the following conditions: 1. Consummation of a sale within a short time period. 2. The property is subjected to market conditions prevailing as of the date of valuation. 3. Both the buyer and seller are acting prudently and knowledgeably. 4. The seller is under extreme compulsion to sell. 5. The buyer is typically motivated. 6. Both parties are acting in what they consider to be their best interests. 7. A normal marketing effort is not possible due to the brief exposure time. 8. Payment will be made in cash in U.S. dollars (or the local currency) or in terms of financial arrangements comparable thereto. 9. The price represents the normal consideration for the property sold, unaffected by special or creative financing or sales concessions granted by anyone associated with the sale. This definition can also be modified to provide for valuation with specified financing terms. Marketing Time An opinion of the amount of time it might take to sell a real or personal property interest at the concluded market value level during the period immediately after the effective date of an appraisal. irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Addenda Marketing time differs from exposure time,which is always presumed to precede the effective date of an appraisal. Market Value The most probable price which a property should bring in a competitive and open market under all conditions requisite to a fair sale,the buyer and seller each acting prudently and knowledgeably, and assuming the price is not affected by undue stimulus. Implicit in this definition is the consummation of a sale as of a specified date and the passing of title from seller to buyer under conditions whereby: • buyer and seller are typically motivated; • both parties are well informed or well advised, and acting in what they consider their own best interests; • a reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open market; • payment is made in terms of cash in U.S. dollars or in terms of financial arrangements comparable thereto; and • the price represents the normal consideration for the property sold unaffected by special or creative financing or sales concessions granted by anyone associated with the sale. (Source: Code of Federal Regulations, Title 12, Chapter 1, Part 34.42[g];also Interagency Appraisal and Evaluation Guidelines, Federal Register, 75 FR 77449, December 10, 2010, page 77472) Prospective Opinion of Value A value opinion effective as of a specified future date.The term does not define a type of value. Instead, it identifies a value opinion as being effective at some specific future date. An opinion of value as of a prospective date is frequently sought in connection with projects that are proposed, under construction, or under conversion to a new use, or those that have not yet achieved sellout or a stabilized level of long-term occupancy. irr RDA Utah Theatre Property Addenda Addendum C Zoning Ordinance IDRDA Utah Theatre Property 5/13/2019 Sterling Codifiers, Inc. 21A.30.010: GENERAL PROVISIONS: A. Statement Of Intent: The downtown districts are intended to provide use, bulk, urban design and other controls and regulations appropriate to the commercial core of the city and adjacent areas in order to enhance employment opportunities; to encourage the efficient use of land; to enhance property values; to improve the design quality of downtown areas; to create a unique downtown center which fosters the arts, entertainment, financial, office, retail and governmental activities; to provide safety and security; encourage permitted residential uses within the downtown area; and to help implement adopted plans. B. Site Plan Review; Design Review: In certain districts, permitted uses and conditional uses have the potential for adverse impacts if located and laid out on lots without careful planning. Such impacts may interfere with the use and enjoyment of adjacent property and uses. Site plan review is a process designed to address such adverse impacts and minimize them where possible. Design review is a process which addresses elements of urban design. Site plan review, pursuant to chapter 21A.58 of this title, for all of the downtown districts, D-1, D-2, D-3 and D-4 is required to protect the local economy, maintain safe traffic conditions, maintain the environment, and assure harmonious land-use relationships between commercial uses and more sensitive land uses in affected areas. Design review is necessary to implement the policies of the urban design plan as adopted by the city council. Design review shall apply only to conditional uses in the D-1 and D-4 districts. In the D-1 district, the conditional use process is used to evaluate and resolve urban design issues related to the downtown area. C. Development Review Steps In The Downtown Districts: The process for review of development proposals in the downtown districts is illustrated in the diagram set forth in section 21A.30.070 of this chapter. The specific procedures involving conditional use approval and site plan review are set forth in part V of this title. All proposed uses shall be subject to site plan review. For conditional uses in the D-1 district, the petition will be forwarded to the planning commission for approval. D. Impact Controls And General Restrictions In The Downtown Districts: 1. Refuse Control: Refuse containers must be covered and shall be stored within completely enclosed buildings or screened in conformance with the requirements of chapter 21A.48 of this title. For buildings existing as of April 12, 1995, this screening provision shall be required if the floor area or parking requirements are increased by twenty five percent (25%) or more by an expansion to the building or change in the type of land use. 2. Lighting: On site lighting, including parking lot lighting and illuminated signs, shall be located, directed or designed in such a manner so as not to create glare on adjacent properties. E. Outdoor Sales, Display And Storage: "Sales and display (outdoor)" and "storage and display (outdoor)", as defined in chapter 21A.62 of this title, are allowed where specifically authorized in section 21A.33.050, "Table Of Permitted And Conditional Uses For Downtown Districts", of this title. These uses shall conform to the following: https://sterlingcodifiers.com/codebook/index.php?book_id=672&chapter_id=49061 1/9 5/13/2019 Sterling Codifiers, Inc. 1. The outdoor sales or display of merchandise shall not encroach into areas of required parking; 2. The outdoor sales or display of merchandise shall not be located in any required yard area within the lot; 3. The outdoor sales or display of merchandise shall not include the use of banners, pennants or strings of pennants; 4. Outdoor storage shall be allowed only where specifically authorized in the applicable district regulation and shall be required to be fully screened with opaque fencing not to exceed eight feet (8') in height; and 5. Outdoor sales and display and outdoor storage shall also be permitted when part of an authorized temporary use as established in chapter 21A.42 of this title. F. Permitted Uses: The uses specified as permitted uses in section 21A.33.050, "Table Of Permitted And Conditional Uses For Downtown Districts", of this title are permitted; provided, that they comply with all requirements of this chapter, the general standards set forth in part IV of this title, and all other applicable requirements of this title. G. Conditional Uses: The uses specified as conditional uses in section 21A.33.050, "Table Of Permitted And Conditional Uses For Downtown Districts", of this title, shall be permitted in the downtown districts provided they are approved pursuant to the standards and procedures for conditional uses set forth in chapter 21A.54 of this title, and comply with all other applicable requirements of this title, including the design review process established in this chapter. H. Off Street Parking And Loading: All uses in the downtown districts shall comply with the provisions governing off street parking and loading in chapter 21A.44 of this title. I. Landscaping And Buffering: All uses in the downtown districts shall comply with the provisions governing landscaping and buffering in chapter 21A.48 of this title, including section 21A.48.100 of this title. J. Signs: Signs shall be allowed in the downtown districts in accordance with provisions of chapter 21A.46 of this title. K. Environmental Performance Standards: All uses in the downtown districts shall conform to the environmental performance standards in section 21A.36.180 of this title. (Ord. 66-13, 2013: Ord. 83-98 § 1, 1998: Ord. 26-95 § 2(15-0), 1995) This section has been affected by a recently passed ordinance, 14-2019 - CONDITIONAL BUILDING AND SITE DESIGN REVIEW. Go to new ordinance. 21A.30.020: 0-1 CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT: https://sterlingcodifiers.com/codebook/index.php?book_id=672&chapter_id=49061 2/9 5/13/2019 Sterling Codifiers, Inc. A. Purpose Statement: The purpose of the D-1 central business district is to provide for commercial and economic development within Salt Lake City's most urban and intense areas. A broad range of uses, including very high density housing, are intended to foster a twenty four (24) hour activity environment consistent with the area's function as the business, office, retail, entertainment, cultural and tourist center of the region. Development is intended to be very intense with high lot coverage and large buildings that are placed close together while being oriented toward the pedestrian with a strong emphasis on a safe and attractive streetscape and preserving the urban nature of the downtown area. This district is appropriate in areas where supported by applicable master plans. The standards are intended to achieve established objectives for urban design, pedestrian amenities and land use control. B. Uses: Uses in the D-1 central business district as specified in section 21A.33.050, "Table Of Permitted And Conditional Uses For Downtown Districts", of this title, are permitted subject to the general provisions set forth in section 21A.30.010 of this chapter. In addition, all conditional uses in the D-1 district shall be subject to design evaluation and approval by the planning commission. C. Organization Of District Regulations: In addition to regulations that apply to the D-1 central business district as a whole, three (3) sets of regulations are contained in this district that apply to specific geographical areas: 1. Special Controls Over Block Corners: These regulations apply only to properties within a specified distance from street intersections, as established in subsection E of this section. 2. Special Controls Over Mid Block Areas: These regulations apply only to the intervening property between block corner properties, as established in subsection F of this section. 3. Special Controls Over The Main Street Retail Core: These regulations apply only to the Main Street retail core area, as established in subsection G of this section. The regulations governing block corners and mid block areas also apply to the Main Street retail core. D. D-1 District General Regulations: The regulations established in this section apply to the D-1 district as a whole. 1. Minimum Lot Size: No minimum lot area or lot width is required, except in block corner areas as specified in subsection E5 of this section. 2. Yard Requirements: a. Front and corner side yards: No minimum yards are required, however, no yard shall exceed five feet (5') except as authorized through the conditional building and site design review process. Such conditional building and site design reviews shall be subject to the requirements of chapter 21A.59 of this title. Where an entire block frontage is under one ownership, the setback for that block frontage shall not exceed twenty five feet (25'). Exceptions to this requirement may be authorized through the conditional building and site design review process, subject to the requirements of chapter 21A.59 of this title. b. Interior side and rear yards: None required. 3. Restrictions On Parking Lots And Structures: An excessive influence of at or above ground parking lots and structures can negatively impact the urban design objectives of the D-1 district. To control such impacts, the following regulations shall apply to at or above ground parking facilities: https://sterlingcodifiers.com/codebook/index.php?book_id=672&chapter_id=49061 3/9 5/13/2019 Sterling Codifiers, Inc. a. Within block corner areas and on Main Street, parking lots and structures shall be located behind principal buildings. b. Within the mid block areas, parking lots and structures shall only be located behind principal buildings or be at least seventy five feet (75') from front and corner side lot lines or parking structures are allowed to be located adjacent to the front or corner side lot lines only if they provide adequately sized retail goods/service establishments, office and/or restaurant space on the ground floor adjacent to the public sidewalk to encourage pedestrian activity. The facades of the ground floor shall be designed to be compatible and consistent with the associated retail or office portion of the building and other retail uses in the area. Levels of parking above the first level facing the front or corner side lot line shall have floors/facades that are horizontal, not sloped. c. Accessory parking structures built prior to the principal use, and commercial parking structures, shall be permitted as conditional uses with the approval of the planning commission pursuant to the provisions of chapter 21A.54 of this title. d. No special restrictions shall apply to belowground parking facilities. e. Parking lots, proposed as a principal use to facilitate a building demolition, are prohibited in the D-1 district. 4. Interior Plazas, Atriums And Galleries: Interior plazas, atriums and galleries shall be permitted throughout the D-1 central business district. 5. Location Of Service Areas: All loading docks, refuse disposal areas and other service activities shall be located on block interiors away from view of any public street. Exceptions to this requirement may be approved through the site plan review process when a permit applicant demonstrates that it is not feasible to accommodate these activities on the block interior. If such activities are permitted adjacent to a public street, a visual screening design approved by the zoning administrator shall be required. 6. Landscape Requirements: All buildings constructed after April 12, 1995, shall conform to the special landscape requirements applicable to the D-1 central business district as contained in chapter 21A.48 of this title. 7. Mid Block Walkways: As part of the city's plan for the downtown area, it is intended that mid block walkways be provided to facilitate pedestrian movement within the area. To delineate the public need for such walkways, the city has formulated an official plan for their location and implementation, which is on file at the planning division office. All buildings constructed after the effective date hereof within the D-1 central business district shall conform to this officially adopted plan for mid block walkways. 8. Landscape Requirements For Demolition Sites: Vacant lots, resulting from demolition activities where no replacement use is proposed, shall conform to chapter 21A.48 of this title, special landscape requirements applicable to the D-1 central business district. E. Special Controls Over Block Corners: 1. Intent: Special controls shall apply to land at block corners to encourage greater commercial vitality in the downtown by focusing a higher level of development intensity at street intersections. Control over the intensity of development on blocks is needed due to the large size of blocks and streets and the resulting effects on pedestrian/vehicular circulation and business activity. https://sterlingcodifiers.com/codebook/index.php?book_id=672&chapter_id=49061 4/9 5/13/2019 Sterling Codifiers, Inc. 2. Block Corner: "Block corner" means the ninety degree (90°) intersection of private property adjacent to the intersection of two (2) public street rights of way both of which are at least one hundred thirty two feet (132') wide. 3. Corner Building: "Corner building" means a building, the structure of which rises above the ground within one hundred feet (100') of a block corner on the street face and one hundred feet (100') in depth. 4. Application: For corner buildings, the provisions of this subsection shall extend to one hundred sixty five feet (165') from the block corner on the street face and one hundred sixty five feet (165') in depth. 5. Lot Size And Shape: The size and shape of the lot shall conform to the following. Lots existing prior to April 12, 1995, which do not meet these requirements shall be exempt. a. Minimum lot area: Ten thousand (10,000) square feet. b. Minimum lot width: One hundred feet (100'). 6. Height Regulations: No corner building shall be less than one hundred feet (100') nor more than three hundred seventy five feet (375') in height. The minimum one hundred foot (100') high portion of the building shall be located not farther than five feet (5') from the lot line along front and corner lot lines. Buildings higher than three hundred seventy five feet (375') may be allowed in accordance with the provisions of subsections E6a and E6b of this section. a. Conditions For Taller Corner Buildings: Corner buildings may exceed the three hundred seventy five foot (375') height limit provided they conform to the following requirements: (1) To minimize excessive building mass at higher elevations and preserve scenic views, some or all of the building mass over the three hundred seventy five foot (375') height level shall be subject to additional setback, as determined appropriate through the conditional building and site design review process. (2) Not less than one percent (1%) of the building construction budget shall be used for enhanced amenities, including art visible to the public, enhanced design elements of the exterior of the building or exterior spaces available to the public for cultural or recreational activities. The property owner shall not be required to exceed one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000.00) in required amenities. (3) The operation of uses within the building, including accessory parking facilities, shall comply with the adopted traffic demand management guidelines administered by the city traffic engineer. b. Additional Standards For Certain Height Modifications: (1) The first one hundred feet (100') of height shall not be set back from the street front more than five feet (5') except that setbacks above the first fifty feet (50') may be approved through the conditional building and site design review process. (2) Modifying the height will achieve the preservation of a landmark site or contributing structure in an H historic preservation overlay district. (3) Modifying the height will allow interim service commercial uses to support the downtown community. https://sterlingcodifiers.com/codebook/index.php?book_id=672&chapter_id=49061 5/9 5/13/2019 Sterling Codifiers, Inc. c. Conditional Building And Site Design Approval: A modification to the height regulations in subsection E6a of this section may be granted through the conditional building and site design review process, subject to conformance with the standards and procedures of chapter 21A.59 of this title. F. Special Controls Over Mid Block Areas: 1 . Intent: Special controls shall apply to land located at the middle of blocks. Such controls are needed to establish coordinated levels of development intensity and to promote better pedestrian and vehicular circulation. 2. Area Of Applicability: The controls established under this subsection shall apply to: a. Buildings constructed after April 12, 1995; and b. All intervening land between block corner properties, as established in subsection E2 of this section. 3. Height Regulations: No building shall be more than one hundred feet (100') in height; provided, that taller buildings may be authorized through the conditional building and site design review process, subject to the requirements of chapter 21A.59 of this title. G. Special Controls Over The Main Street Retail Core: 1 . Intent: Special controls shall apply to land located within the Main Street retail core area to preserve and enhance the viability of retail uses within the downtown area. The regulations of this subsection shall be in addition to the requirements of subsections E and F of this section. 2. Area Of Applicability: The controls established in this subsection shall apply to property developed or redeveloped after April 12, 1995, when located along any block face on the following streets: a. Main Street between South Temple Street and 400 South Street; b. 100 South Street between West Temple Street and State Street; c. 200 South Street between West Temple Street and State Street; and d. 300 South Street between West Temple Street and State Street. 3. First Floor Retail Required: The first floor space of all buildings within this area shall be required to provide uses consisting of retail goods establishments, retail service establishments or restaurants, public service portions of businesses, department stores, art galleries, motion picture theaters or performing arts facilities. 4. Restrictions On Driveways: Driveways shall not be permitted along Main Street, but shall be permitted along other streets within the Main Street retail core area, provided they are located at least eighty feet (80') from the intersection of two (2) street right of way lines. (Ord. 12-17, 2017: Ord. 66-13, 2013: Ord. 62-13, 2013: Ord. 15-13, 2013) 21A.30.050: TABLE OF PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES FOR DOWNTOWN DISTRICTS : https://sterlingcodifiers.com/codebook/index.php?book_id=672&chapter_id=49061 6/9 5/13/2019 Sterling Codifiers, Inc. (Rep. by Ord. 66-13, 2013) 21A.30.060: SUMMARY TABLE OF YARD AND BULK REQUIREMENTS; DOWNTOWN DISTRICTS: (Rep. by Ord. 19-11, 2011) 21A.30.070: DOWNTOWN DISTRICTS DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL PROCESS: https://sterlingcodifiers.com/codebook/index.php?book_id=672&chapter_id=49061 7/9 5/13/2019 Sterling Codifiers, Inc. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW STEPS FOR DOWNTOWN DISTRICTS (DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION 3 ZONING ADMINISTRATOR D-2 !( TAKE] D- 1 D- ROUTING - PERMITTED DECISION PERMITTED USE USE CONDITIONAL Of DITIONAL USE SITE ll USE REVIEV1�Ll [DRQ DESIGN REVIEW HISTORIC; N T�]RIC PLANNING #O LANDMARK �I4NDh+1SPLAN N!!NO cr 1MI SIO J oMrv1IsiOIoN COMMISSION CCirolviiSSION FINAL ZONIN i •-- ADr'1FNITRATOR FINAL APPROVALrin , APPROVAL [ 01\11N CERTIFICATE T BLJILDIN'; OFFICIAL 3. stALIDING PERMIT CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY (Ord. 26-95 § 2(15-6), 1995) https://sterlingcodifiers.com/codebook/index.php?book_id=672&chapter_id=49061 8/9 Addenda Addendum D Comparable Data IDRDA Utah Theatre Property Land Sale Profile Sale No. 1 Location & Property Identification :.ate r� '� Property Name: 2nd&2nd Land -11 4 Sub-Property Type: Residential, Multifamily ,t IL 2, � Address: 218 S. 200 E. ?` _ : . � . • ' 1 City/State/Zip: Salt Lake City,UT 84111 1 i tea, _. . County: Salt Lake �D • 1. Submarket: Salt Lake City i'; , Ii Market Orientation: CBD �' ar. ar...utr-1�• —F'i Tom_ ei IRR Event ID: 1594230 ■ Sale Information Comments Sale Price: $1,825,000 The broker, Peter Hanlon, reported that the sale price is very Effective Sale Price: $1,825,000 near the listing price of$1,825,000 or$123 per SF. The buyer Sale Date: 04/19/2019 intends on improving the site with either a mid-to-high rise Sale Status: Recorded multi-family use or a hotel. $/Acre(Gross): $5,367,647 The property is currently a parking lot. $/Land SF(Gross): $123.22 Grantor/Seller: Guardian State Bank Grantee/Buyer: CW The Birdie, LLC Property Rights: Fee Simple Financing: Cash to seller-buyer obtained financing Verified By: Joel H.Thompson Verification Date: 05/20/2019 Confirmation Source: Peter Hanlon,Cushman& Wakefield, (801)322-2000 Verification Type: Confirmed-Seller Broker Improvement and Site Data Legal/Tax/Parcel ID: 16-06-176-026 Acres(Gross): 0.34 Land-SF(Gross): 14,810 Shape: Rectangular Corner Lot: Yes Zoning Code: D-1 Zoning Desc.: Central Business District Utilities Desc.: All utilities are available Source of Land Info.: Public Records 2nd & 2nd Land LIP Land Sale Profile Sale No. 2 Location & Property Identification -- = -= '.",',"" NN - d + - ++I`" - - Property Name: 600 South- Land Parcel ,��.�,i ; f ! � , Z,.4 Sub-Property Type: Commercial I 1 i ;ice- -� .: to , 4►,.... 7"'". J' j � .M r''4- Address: 154 W.600 S. - •, r �� ‘� E ' t ;,., t -r City/State/Zip: Salt Lake City,UT 84111 ; Land Sale Profile Sale No. 3 Location & Property Identification ``,' l _ ac+_. MEI Property Name: Salt Lake City Homeless Shelter Site 'i . . +} Sub-Property Type: Commercial p , . Address: 131 E. 700 S. --- s City/State/Zip: Salt Lake City,UT 84111 1 i$ . I County: Salt Lake . s R - =t Submarket: Salt Lake City !l_ �� l„• Market Orientation: Suburban Ij ���� .' r . . `..r - ,r ON MI IRR Event ID: 2195271 — - Zoning Desc.: Downtown Support District Sale Information Utilities Desc.: All utilities are available Sale Price: $4,400,000 Source of Land Info.: Public Records Effective Sale Price: $4,400,000 Sale Date: 11/28/2017 Comments Sale Status: Closed The buyer intends to construct a homeless shelter on the site. $/Acre(Gross): $3,410,853 $/Land SF(Gross): $78.30 This is the former site of the Deseret Industries store. Grantor/Seller: Corporation of the Presiding Bishop of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints Grantee/Buyer: Shelter the Homeless Committee, Inc. Property Rights: Fee Simple Financing: Cash to seller Verified By: Joel H.Thompson Verification Date: 01/30/2019 Verification Type: Secondary Verification Improvement and Site Data Legal/Tax/Parcel ID: 16-07-102-008 Acres(Gross): 1.29 Land-SF(Gross): 56,192 Shape: Irregular Topography: Level Corner Lot: No Zoning Code: D-2 Salt Lake City Homeless Shelter Site ID: Land Sale Profile Sale No. 4 Location & Property Identification Property Name: Confidential Sub-Property Type: Residential, Multifamily Address: Confidential State: UT Confidential Photo County: Salt Lake Submarket: Confidential Market Orientation: Suburban IRR Event ID: 1592697 site at approximately 160 units per acre. The building will Sale Information have five levels of apartments over two levels of parking. Two tenants currently occupy the buildings with leases ending in Sale Price: $1,525,000 Feb 2018&March 2018 respectively. We estimate that Effective Sale Price: $1,525,000 demolition costs associated with the two buildings will be Sale Date: 10/10/2017 off-set by the remaining rent income generated by the Sale Status: Closed tenants. $/Acre(Gross): $3,719,512 This property has two office buildings on the site. $/Land SF(Gross): $85.39 Grantor/Seller: Confidential Grantee/Buyer: Confidential Property Rights: Fee Simple Confirmation Source: REPC Verification Type: Confirmed-Buyer Improvement and Site Data Legal/Tax/Parcel ID: Confidential Acres(Gross): 0.41 Land-SF(Gross): 17,859 Shape: Rectangular Corner Lot: No Zoning Code: D-1 Zoning Desc.: Central Business District Utilities Desc.: All utilities are available Source of Land Info.: Public Records Comments The buyer intends to tear down the current improvements on the site and build apartments on the Confidential LIP Land Sale Profile Sale No. 5 Location & Property Identification 14 • -4 1"':. .. ...,:- , Property Name: Proposed 4Forty7 Apartments 1 �'� i�: � , L 0. 7-8-L.......12...- - - 11 Sub-Property Type: Residential, Multifamily itl'ill.t4. . A a iN t ' Address: 447 E. 100 S. r -41ii i - ▪ '•ti City/State/Zip: Salt Lake City,UT 84111 #pCounty: Salt Lake `; Land Sale Profile Sale No. 6 Location & Property Identification imin • Property Name: The Void Corporate Center r>sr LandI 1 U S• Sub-Property Type: Commercial . Address: 370 S.West Temple I, 4 iib• 1 City/State/Zip: Salt Lake City,UT 84101 •««•: County: Salt Lake • Submarket: Salt Lake City Market Orientation: CBD �p a IRR Event ID: 1397431 ow Sale Information Comments Sale Price: $6,500,000 Fully entitled hotel/mixed-use site that is master-planned to Effective Sale Price: $6,500,000 accommodate a 20-story building. Sale Date: 04/25/2017 Listing Price: $8,000,000 Sale Status: Closed $/Acre(Gross): $4,710,145 $/Land SF(Gross): $108.13 Grantor/Seller: Air Land, LLC Grantee/Buyer: 400 SW LLC(Held Properties) Property Rights: Fee Simple Verified By: Douglas W. Woodruff Verification Date: 05/05/2017 Verification Type: Secondary Verification Improvement and Site Data Legal/Tax/Parcel ID: 15-01-428-026 Acres(Gross): 1.38 Land-SF(Gross): 60,112 Shape: Rectangular Corner Lot: Yes Zoning Code: D-1 Zoning Desc.: Central Business District Utilities Desc.: All utilities are available in the street Source of Land Info.: Broker LIP The Void Corporate Center Land Addenda Addendum E Engagement Letter IDRDA Utah Theatre Property Integra Realty Resources 5107 South 900 East T 801.263.9700 Salt Lake City Suite 200 F 801.263.9709 Salt Lake City,UT 84117 dliddell@irr.com www.irr.com irro May 10, 2019 Mr.JP Goates Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City 451 South State Street, Room 418 PO Box 145518 Salt Lake City, UT 84114-5518 SUBJECT: Proposal/Authorization for Valuation and Consulting Services RDA Utah Theatre Property, 144& 156 South Main Street, Salt Lake City, Utah 84101 (the "Subject Property") Dear Client: Upon your acceptance of this letter agreement, Integra Realty Resources — Salt Lake City ("IRR— Salt Lake City"),will prepare an appraisal of the Subject Property. The purpose of the appraisal is to provide an opinion of the market value as if vacant of the fee simple interest in the Subject Property. The intended use of the appraisal is for internal decision- making purposes. The use of the appraisal by anyone other than you is prohibited. The client and intended user for this assignment is Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City. The appraisal will be prepared in conformance with and subject to, the Code of Professional Ethics and Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice of the Appraisal Institute and the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) developed by the Appraisal Standards Board of the Appraisal Foundation. The Ethics Rule of USPAP requires us to disclose to you any prior services we have performed regarding the Subject Property within a three year period immediately preceding the acceptance of this assignment, either as an appraiser or in any other capacity. We represent that we have performed any services that require disclosure under this rule.We completed an appraisal in August 2017. In accordance with our correspondence, the scope of this assignment will require IRR— Salt Lake City to consider all relevant and applicable approaches to value as determined during the course of our research, Subject Property analysis and preparation of the report. irr Mr.JP Goates Redevelopment Agency Department of Economic Development May 10, 2019 Page 2 Federal banking regulations require banks and other lending institutions to engage appraisers where FIRREA compliant appraisals must be used in connection with mortgage loans or other transactions involving federally regulated lending institutions. Given that requirement, this appraisal may not be accepted by a federally regulated financial institution. The appraisal will be communicated in an Appraisal Report-Standard Format. All work will be performed under the direct supervision of the undersigned, together with other staff members. The appraisal and this letter agreement will be subject to our standard assumptions and limiting conditions a copy of which is attached as Attachment I. IRR—Salt Lake City is an independently owned and operated company. The parties hereto agree that Integra Realty Resources, Inc. ("Integra") shall not be liable for any claim arising out of or relating to any appraisal report or any information or opinions contained therein as such appraisal report is the sole and exclusive responsibility of IRR — Salt Lake City. In addition, it is expressly agreed that in any action which may be brought against IRR — Salt Lake City and/or any of its officers,owners, managers,directors,agents,subcontractors or employees(the"Integra Parties"), arising out of, relating to,or in any way pertaining to this engagement letter,the appraisal reports or any related work product,the Integra Parties shall not be responsible or liable for any incidental or consequential damages or losses, unless the appraisal was fraudulent or prepared with intentional misconduct. It is further expressly agreed that the collective liability of the Integra Parties in any such action shall not exceed the fees paid for the preparation of the assignment (unless the appraisal was fraudulent or prepared with intentional misconduct). It is expressly agreed that the fees charged herein are in reliance upon the foregoing limitations of liability. The total fee for this assignment will be $3,100 [including expenses] and the delivery date will be 3 weeks from your acceptance of this letter agreement, but subject to extension based upon late delivery of the requested data and scheduled access for inspection. The fees will be due and payable within 30 days of the delivery of the reports. It is understood that simple interest of 15% per annum will accrue on any unpaid balance for compensation due,subject to reduction pursuant to any applicable usury law. We shall also be entitled to recover our costs (including attorneys' fees), associated with collecting any amounts owed or otherwise incurred in connection with this assignment. If the assignment is cancelled by either party prior to completion,you agree to pay us for all our expenses and our time to date based upon the percentage of work completed. Upon default, we shall be permitted to file a lien against the Subject Property for any amounts owed pursuant to this engagement. Two copies and a pdf copy of the appraisal report will be provided. The delivery date is contingent upon the absence of events outside our control, timely access for inspection of the Subject Property,as well as our receipt of all requested information necessary to complete the assignment. Please be advised that we are not experts in the areas of building inspection (including mold), environmental hazards, ADA compliance or wetlands. Therefore, unless we have been provided with appropriate third party expert reports, the appraisals will assume that there are no irr Mr.JP Goates Redevelopment Agency Department of Economic Development May 10, 2019 Page 3 environmental, wetlands, or ADA compliance problems. The agreed upon fees for our services assume the absence of such issues inasmuch as additional research and analysis may be required. If an expert is required,you are responsible for their selection, payment and actions. In the event that we receive a subpoena or are called to testify in any litigation, arbitration or administrative hearing of any nature whatsoever or as a result of this engagement or the related report, to which we are not a party, you agree to pay our then current hourly rates for such preparation and presentation of testimony. You agree that: (i) the data collected by us in this assignment will remain our property; and (ii)with respect to any data provided by you, IRR—Salt Lake City and its partner companies may utilize,sell and include such data (either in the aggregate or individually), in the Integra database and for use in derivative products. You agree that all data already in the public domain may be utilized on an unrestricted basis. Finally, you agree that we may use commercially available as well as proprietary software programs to perform your assignment(web based and others). If you are in agreement with the terms set forth in this letter and wish us to proceed with the engagement, please sign below and return one copy to us. Thank you for this opportunity to be of service and we look forward to working with you. Sincerely, INTEGRA REALTY RESOURCES-SALT LAKE CITY C112. John T. Blanck, MAI, MRICS Managing Director Attachments AGREED&ACCEPTED THIS (0 DAY OF /" 4aL/ ,2019. BY: THE CLAWSON GROUP / AUT 2R DSIGN• •E STP (/9qs NAME(PRINT) irr. Mr.JP Goates Redevelopment Agency Department of Economic Development May 10, 2019 Page 4 ATTACHMENT I STANDARD ASSUMPTIONS&LIMITING CONDITIONS The appraisal report and any work product related to the engagement will be limited by the following standard assumptions: 1. The title is marketable and free and clear of all liens, encumbrances, encroachments, easements and restrictions. The Subject Property is under responsible ownership and competent management and is available for its highest and best use. 2. There are no existing judgments or pending or threatened litigation that could affect the value of the Subject Property. 3. There are no hidden or undisclosed conditions of the land or of the improvements that would render the Subject Property more or less valuable. Furthermore, there is no asbestos in the Subject Property. 4. The revenue stamps placed on any deed referenced herein to indicate the sale price are in correct relation to the actual dollar amount of the transaction. 5. The Subject Property is in compliance with all applicable building, environmental, zoning, and other federal, state and local laws, regulations and codes. 6. The information furnished by others is believed to be reliable, but no warranty is given for its accuracy. The appraisal report and any work product related to the engagement will be subject to the following limiting conditions, except as otherwise noted in the report: 1. An appraisal is inherently subjective and represents our opinion as to the value of the Subject Property appraised. 2. The conclusions stated in our appraisal apply only as of the effective date of the appraisal, and no representation is made as to the effect of subsequent events. 3. No changes in any federal, state or local laws, regulations or codes (including, without limitation,the Internal Revenue Code) are anticipated. 4. No environmental impact studies were either requested or made in conjunction with this appraisal, and we reserve the right to revise or rescind any of the value opinions based upon any subsequent environmental impact studies. If any environmental impact statement is required by law, the appraisal assumes that such statement will be favorable and will be approved by the appropriate regulatory bodies. 5. Unless otherwise agreed to in writing, we are not required to give testimony, respond to any subpoena or attend any court, governmental or other hearing with reference to the Subject Property without compensation relative to such additional employment. 6. We have made no survey of the Subject Property and assume no responsibility in connection with such matters.Any sketch or survey of the Subject Property included in this report is for illustrative purposes only and should not be considered to be scaled accurately for size.The appraisal covers the Subject Property as described in this report,and the areas and dimensions set forth are assumed to be correct. irr Mr.JP Goates Redevelopment Agency Department of Economic Development May 10, 2019 Page 5 7. No opinion is expressed as to the value of subsurface oil, gas or mineral rights, if any, and we have assumed that the Subject Property is not subject to surface entry for the exploration or removal of such materials, unless otherwise noted in our appraisal. 8. We accept no responsibility for considerations requiring expertise in other fields. Such considerations include, but are not limited to, legal descriptions and other legal matters such as legal title, geologic considerations, such as soils and seismic stability, and civil, mechanical, electrical, structural and other engineering and environmental matters. Such considerations may also include determinations of compliance with zoning and other federal, state, and local laws, regulations and codes. 9. The distribution of the total valuation in the report between land and improvements applies only under the reported highest and best use of the Subject Property. The allocations of value for land and improvements must not be used in conjunction with any other appraisal and are invalid if so used. The appraisal report shall be considered only in its entirety. No part of the appraisal report shall be utilized separately or out of context. 10. Neither all nor any part of the contents of this report (especially any conclusions as to value, the identity of the appraisers, or any reference to the Appraisal Institute) shall be disseminated through advertising media, public relations media, news media or any other means of communication (including without limitation prospectuses, private offering memoranda and other offering material provided to prospective investors) without the prior written consent of the persons signing the report. 11. Information,estimates and opinions contained in the report and obtained from third-party sources are assumed to be reliable and have not been independently verified. 12. Any income and expense estimates contained in the appraisal report are used only for the purpose of estimating value and do not constitute predictions of future operating results. 13. If the Subject Property is subject to one or more leases, any estimate of residual value contained in the appraisal may be particularly affected by significant changes in the condition of the economy, of the real estate industry, or of the Subject Property at the time these leases expire or otherwise terminate. 14. Unless otherwise stated in the report, no consideration has been given to personal property located on the Subject Property or to the cost of moving or relocating such personal property; only the real property has been considered. 15. The current purchasing power of the dollar is the basis for the value stated in the appraisal; we have assumed that no extreme fluctuations in economic cycles will occur. 16. The values found herein are subject to these and to any other assumptions or conditions set forth in the body of this report but which may have been omitted from this list of Assumptions and Limiting Conditions. 17. The analyses contained in the report necessarily incorporate numerous estimates and assumptions regarding property performance, general and local business and economic conditions, the absence of material changes in the competitive environment and other matters. Some estimates or assumptions, however, inevitably will not materialize, and unanticipated events and circumstances may occur; therefore, actual results achieved during the period covered by our analysis will vary from our estimates, and the variations may be material. irr Mr.JP Goates Redevelopment Agency Department of Economic Development May 10, 2019 Page 6 18. The Americans with Disabilities Act(ADA) became effective January 26, 1992.We have not made a specific survey or analysis of the Subject Property to determine whether the physical aspects of the improvements meet the ADA accessibility guidelines. We claim no expertise in ADA issues, and render no opinion regarding compliance of the Subject Property with ADA regulations. Inasmuch as compliance matches each owner's financial ability with the cost to cure the non-conforming physical characteristics of a property, a specific study of both the owner's financial ability and the cost to cure any deficiencies would be needed for the Department of Justice to determine compliance. 19. The appraisal report is prepared for the exclusive benefit of you,your subsidiaries and/or affiliates. It may not be used or relied upon by any other party. All parties who use or rely upon any information in the report without our written consent do so at their own risk. 20. No studies have been provided to us indicating the presence or absence of hazardous materials on the Subject Property or in the improvements, and our valuation is predicated upon the assumption that the Subject Property is free and clear of any environment hazards including, without limitation, hazardous wastes, toxic substances and mold. No representations or warranties are made regarding the environmental condition of the Subject Property. IRR— Local City and/or any of its officers, owners, managers, directors, agents, subcontractors or employees (the "Integra Parties") shall not be responsible for any such environmental conditions that do exist or for any engineering or testing that might be required to discover whether such conditions exist. Because we are not experts in the field of environmental conditions, the appraisal report cannot be considered as an environmental assessment of the Subject Property. 21. The persons signing the report may have reviewed available flood maps and may have noted in the appraisal report whether the Subject Property is located in an identified Special Flood Hazard Area. However, we are not qualified to detect such areas and therefore do not guarantee such determinations.The presence of flood plain areas and/or wetlands may affect the value of the Subject Property, and the value conclusion is predicated on the assumption that wetlands are non-existent or minimal. 22. We are not a building or environmental inspector. The Integra Parties do not guarantee that the Subject Property is free of defects or environmental problems. Mold may be present in the Subject Property and a professional inspection is recommended. 23. The appraisal report and value conclusions for an appraisal assumes the satisfactory completion of construction, repairs or alterations in a workmanlike manner. 24. IRR—Salt Lake City is an independently owned and operated company. The parties hereto agree that Integra Realty Resources, Inc. ("Integra")shall not be liable for any claim arising out of or relating to any appraisal report or any information or opinions contained therein as such appraisal report is the sole and exclusive responsibility of IRR—Salt Lake City. In addition, it is expressly agreed that in any action which may be brought against the Integra Parties arising out of, relating to, or in any way pertaining to the engagement letter, the appraisal reports or any related work product, the Integra Parties shall not be responsible or liable for any incidental or consequential damages or losses, unless the appraisal was fraudulent or prepared with intentional misconduct. It is further expressly agreed that the collective liability of the Integra Parties in any such action shall not exceed the fees paid for the preparation of the assignment (unless the appraisal was fraudulent or prepared irr Mr.JP Goates Redevelopment Agency Department of Economic Development May 10, 2019 Page 7 with intentional misconduct). It is expressly agreed that the fees charged herein are in reliance upon the foregoing limitations of liability. 25. IRR—Salt Lake City is an independently owned and operated company,which has prepared the appraisal for the specific intended use stated elsewhere in the report. The use of the appraisal report by anyone other than the Client is prohibited except as otherwise provided. Accordingly, the appraisal report is addressed to and shall be solely for the Client's use and benefit unless we provide our prior written consent. We expressly reserve the unrestricted right to withhold our consent to your disclosure of the appraisal report or any other work product related to the engagement (or any part thereof including,without limitation, conclusions of value and our identity), to any third parties. Stated again for clarification, unless our prior written consent is obtained, no third party may rely on the appraisal report (even if their reliance was foreseeable). 26. The conclusions of this report are estimates based on known current trends and reasonably foreseeable future occurrences. These estimates are based partly on property information, data obtained in public records, interviews, existing trends, buyer-seller decision criteria in the current market, and research conducted by third parties, and such data are not always completely reliable. The Integra Parties are not responsible for these and other future occurrences that could not have reasonably been foreseen on the effective date of this assignment. Furthermore, it is inevitable that some assumptions will not materialize and that unanticipated events may occur that will likely affect actual performance. While we are of the opinion that our findings are reasonable based on current market conditions, we do not represent that these estimates will actually be achieved, as they are subject to considerable risk and uncertainty. Moreover, we assume competent and effective management and marketing for the duration of the projected holding period of the Subject Property. 27. All prospective value opinions presented in this report are estimates and forecasts which are prospective in nature and are subject to considerable risk and uncertainty. In addition to the contingencies noted in the preceding paragraph, several events may occur that could substantially alter the outcome of our estimates such as, but not limited to changes in the economy, interest rates, capitalization rates, behavior of consumers, investors and lenders,fire and other physical destruction, changes in title or conveyances of easements and deed restrictions, etc. It is assumed that conditions reasonably foreseeable at the present time are consistent or similar with the future. As will be determined during the course of the assignment, additional extraordinary or hypothetical conditions may be required in order to complete the assignment. The appraisal shall also be subject to those assumptions. irr 11 : 47 0 2 =:. .all I (0) 411F Ir 1gd ,1,4„ • ,4•• •o \ 4, 11101 lit , 0 Play video c<33 , m 1 I I • I I •11'I N 1.7.1! '1 0111'1 !I ! . 1 IN Ia — — — —— —— —— r,. ..�. ,�, Vii.,. ,:,WNC r-.rr _ T!I EEeasu NtD r NOM THE OUTsluE TO OffsluE OF Au OBJELTa AVAAIUETO7NFCiMAW PAIN'.UFItlU MOWN COIINTYPAR9Fl Y JAM•TW',Mr(WAS E1,N W0".NW^'R 1YraryrnlOc.ARc • nURILU11P1 LILROMILLY. 3'-d LLUVMA•L IRdu rRUN NIT sm.ALUIm II LY$ SUIIVEY08 AMIE REPORT Fu eEnHYEIAai/NOSiISEM43fORPd1En (PPES,MANHOLES,LITERALS,CLEN660S ETC). 3'-0'CLEARANCE REQUIRED FROM ]/ S u rW . rl ° .I.,I ° verizon� ANY WATER RELATED ITEMS(PIPES,VALVES,VAULT$,NETElNS,ETC). 3'-0'CLEARANCE ) _ LIES,FJGHT.ONWAYS,MING UTILME5.0R HEIGHTS MOM.THE 1 REVD FROM ANY STORY DRNN RELATED 11116(PIPES.UFA/OUTS,INLETS,ETC) CONTRACTOR SHOULD HAVEa mom UMCci48LUE TO TAKED ERpR TO (E)ONE FIBER HANUHOLE AND SOURCE STARTWG AH)Mum PROul6E 3'URC um U'.EARANCE TO ALLDTSInG 9656 SOUTH PROSPERITY ROAD 3'-0'CLEARANCE REVD FROM PRY COY OTMED FIBER(CABLES,CONDORS,HNDNOL6 OF FIBER FOR TIE VZW SMALL CELL POLE �l MUTES MR iHDR corou05 AND POSE FOUNDATION WEST JORDAN,UTAH 54085 OR PULIS). I (E)SEWER wNFroLE(TR)�( 1 s :�--�s..— liq • VERTICAL LOT,&ION 1B'OVER IND NN UNDER,CANALS REQUIRE A MINIMUM OF 5' 9,1sT BuUr INllm(LIARRr nln LRS OWNER PARR ID IR�TNL). (E)WATER MANHOLE(1YP) I. � "" . ' ;' •• r (E)STORM DRAIN INLET(TYP c• ,•(N)VZW PAIL BORE INA 4'FIRER CONDOR FROM 111E DIETING ONE „ gy FIBER HANCHOLE(NORTH SIDE CF 900 SOUTH STREET)TO THE VOA Technolo (fi Associates g SS�� LUAIL AND rI.QIEI.I TA.CURING LQOIHUCAUn,CON.,IAYMr R/WRAI 0 (Q LATE SCN, �l/ C m1113.74E FAP LMATON REAMDS �E�'€P 1.0‘...1.55 "aP^BE 5'-0'YNWIM $ •INSTALLED FIBER HANDFPLE NEAR THEIR SMALL CELL POLE(200') C,E,ED h.E 580W kJ_SEWER LATERALS. ' UTAH MARKET OFFICE 111 HIGHLAND SOUTH STREET aI 7896 500SFAAND DRNE SURE 200 COTTONWOOD HEIGHTS.UTAH 84121 PLL Kae u4. CORPORATE OFFICE /LGA 3129 ICER RUN COOK SUITE#206 'I (E)PEDESTRIAN CROSSING SIGN OARLSBAD,CALIFORNIA 92010 K N (E)DECORATE STREET LIGHT POLE $ P (Ej U.G.STORM DRAIN LINES(VP) m�sR •A fir' DRAM O9Y: JAY C f I (E)U.G.. WATER UIES MI •r-,__ Q >s c161®BY: PEE s (E)U.G.SEWER LINES(TW)—.... 1- .1I- T (E)STORM OR/JN INIEf(M) ; -1 ' (E)PARCEL LINES(TYP) i 1 1___T _ _ ___ • F .. , 1 I 7___1 T . r 4'WISE SH 014.5 MO 12'WIDE PARK STRIP 1 1 I I I I I I I I I w 1 I I I I I 1 12.15.2020 ADDED FDUC8 ROUTE _ I I 0 05.01.2020 CONSTRUCTION owes I rn RCC LV [ 13ESCTPRON ? (N)VZW SMALL CELL POLE LOCATICK CENTERED IN PARK STRIP 75 i I I I I I • 1 (0)WATER METER I I N4EIr,rr --- INNI P gTRUCTLR - I I I (� I I +_f___ 1 / 21Y-10a(nearest E tdny) I I I I ,���'. �( - OECORAITVE SlNktf LIGHT POLE N (< II I I I I I :W, ..� PARCEL INFO; PARCEL INFO; (N)RMP IN57AL SECONDARY BOX,VZW WILL BONE IN 2'POWER : Salt Lake City—Proposed Ordinance re Notice of Above-Ground Work in Public Way Chart of Key Issues Issue No. 1: Notice for Above-Ground and Below-Ground Work City's Proposed Ordinance Options Pros/Cons Other Jurisdictions Amendment The proposed amendment • Apply to only Above- • Above-ground work only currently is drafted to only Ground work. o Less property owners to apply to above-ground work in notify. the public way. • Apply to Above-Ground o Limited number of staff and Below-Ground work. required. o Above-ground work usually impacts property owners more than below-ground work. • Above-ground and below- ground work o Increase staff and costs for city to monitor and implement. o Below-ground work can nm several hundreds of yards or miles depending on project scope. Burdensome for applicants to notify every adjacent property owner. Active/52874388.1 o Need to revise definition of adjacent property owners for scope of below-ground work. Issue No. 2: Timing of Notice City's Proposed Ordinance Options Pros/Cons Other Jurisdictions Amendment The proposed amendment is in • Pre Application Notice— Pre Application Notice Phoenix: Section 5C-16 of the the section titled"Permit provide notice prior to • Provides more time to Phoenix AZ City Code Application Requirements." applicant submitting address potential problems. requires advanced Under the proposed application. • May lead to applications preconstruction notification no amendment,the applicant will being erroneously denied later than ten calendar days have to provide evidence that • Pre-Construction Notice— based upon negative prior to the start of "the applicant has provided provide notice feedback. construction. notice"to adjacent property approximately 48-72 hours • May erroneously lead owners before it submits the prior to when work is community/property Denver: SWF/Public ROW permit application. commenced in the public owners that community/ Requirements require property way property owners can decide owner(s)directly adjacent to on SWF location. proposed Small Cell infrastructure to be notified via Pre-Construction Notice certified mail once the City has • Timing of the notification assigned the application a aligns with the City's goal project. to provide notice to adjacent property owners that work will be performed that may directly impact those property owners. • It is not a logical step in the process to require an applicant to post a notice 2 Active/52874388.1 for construction work when the applicant does not yet have a permit. To do so may confuse the adjacent property owners as it may indicate the applicant has started the construction process when it has not yet started. • Allows the information to be retained and front of mind by for property owners/residents at time of construction. • More likely to provide notice to the correct resident/property owner as location will be confirmed and approved with permit. • Provides less time to address problems. • May be more difficult to provide evidence in timely manner that notice was provided prior to construction starting. 3 Active/52874388.1 Issue \o. 3: Touchpoint with City to Provide Evidence/Verification City's Proposed Ordinance Options I Options and Pros/Cons Other Jurisdictions Amendment City proposes applicants • Touchpoint at Application I Touchpoint at Application provide verification of notice Submittal: Applicants will Submittal at time application is provide verification of • Only requires one submitted. notice with application touchpoint with City at submittal so another time application is touchpoint is not required. submitted. • See issues above related to • Touchpoint Pre- notice pre-application. Construction: Applicants provide verification of Touchpoint Pre-Construction notice 48-72 hours prior to • Uploads to City's construction commencing electronic portal and email and verification be communications occur with uploaded through the City staff—should be City's electronic portal minimal to require system or emailed to additional touchpoint and assigned Planner/City staff City staff review. employee. • See above for benefits related to notice pre- construction. • Requires additional touchpoint and review with City staff. 4 Active/52874388.1 Issue No. 4: Evidence/Verification to Show Notice Was Provided City's Proposed Ordinance Options for Verification Pros/Cons Other Jurisdictions Amendment Such evidence shall be • Construction Drawing with Construction Drawing with satisfactory to the City Verification—See Exhibit Verification attached. • Construction drawing Engineer that all adjacent identifies specific property owners have received • Photos.Applicants take properties that require notice. photos of notice left at each notice. Evidence that the applicant has address. • Requires signature of provided required notice to individual who delivered adjacent property owners. • Certified Letters. notice to verify that notice Applicants will receive was provided. The proposed ordinance does receipts and notification • Construction drawings are not specify the type of that certified letters are already part of submittal to evidence/verification that the delivered and signed for by City.No additional applicant must provide to City property owners. documents are required to staff to demonstrate that the be created. applicant provided notice to • City staff can easily correct properties. identify if there are other properties that are required to receive notice based upon whether they are adjacent to public way. Photos • May require several photos depending on the number of properties adjacent to public way. • Issues with security and privacy concerns if 5 Active/52874388.1 applicant is taking pictures of private property. • May not be able to get notice in photo that confirms the address. • May have issues with data size to transmit to City via email or electronic portal. Receipts from Certified Letters • While a certified letter provides proof of receipt, property owners/residents may not pick up a certified letter. • Applicant may not receive delivery receipts in timely manner to submit to City prior to construction starting. • May impact shot clock if required before application is submitted. • Applicant will have to scan and upload delivery receipts to City staff. Any additional information or guidance the City provides on the type of evidence required should be provided in the design guidelines or regulations so that the City 6 Active/52874388.1 may easily amend them if required to do so. This avoids the City having to go through the process of an ordinance amendment. Issue No. 5: Notice Format City's Proposed Ordinance Options Pros/Cons Other Jurisdictions Amendment Proposed ordinance does not ' • Door hangers Door hangers: • Phoenix: Sec. 5C-16 of the I specify the format of the notice • More typical when notice Phoenix AZ City Code (e.g. letter, door hanger). • Certified Letters is given closer to requires notification by construction. mailing a letter or by • Better able to time placing a door hanger at notification with door the property owner's hanger within 48-72 hours address. of construction. • If a door hanger is used to • Denver:Notification provide notice, consider a construction drawings with statements must be on verification or photo if company letterhead and proof of notification is must follow the City required. provided template. • Not as burdensome on applicant. Certified Letters: • Letters are more common when notice is given at the time of permit application • If a letter notification is sent,it is often sent via certified mail 7 Active/52874388.1 • While a certified letter provides proof of receipt, property owners/residents may not pick up a certified letter • More difficult to ensure letter is provided close to when construction will occur so property owners are aware of specific timing. In-person Notice: Should not be considered/required in light of potential security and privacy concerns. Any additional information or guidance the City provides on the format of the notice or templates should be provided in the design guidelines or regulations so that the City may easily amend them if required to do so. This avoids the City having to go through the process of an ordinance amendment. 8 Active/52874388.1 Issue No. 6: Information included in Notice City's Proposed Ordinance I Options I Pros/Cons Other Jurisdictions Amendment The notice shall contain the • Information in Notice: I • Any additional information • Phoenix: Section 5C-16 of name of the permit holder,the Name, company or guidance the City the Phoenix AZ City Code purpose of the construction, identifying information, provides on information to requires the notification and a contact phone number description of the work and be included in the notice or language to be in a form and email for the permit where it will be performed, templates should be provided by the City to the holder. an email address, provided in the design provider and must include informational website, and guidelines or regulations so telephone and contact Proposed ordinance does not phone number. that the City may easily provide template with the amend them if required to information for the specific information the notice do so. This avoids the City provider. should include, in particular having to go through the • Denver:Notification what"purpose of construction" process of an ordinance statements must be on should include. amendment. company letterhead and must follow the City provided template, including the following at a minimum: o Company name, address,telephone number o Applicant contact name, email address, telephone number o Reason for the notification o Description of location and equipment installed 9 Active/52874388.1 o Link to Company's small cell information page, if available o Links to CCD Small Cell webpage, Small Cell Infrastructure Design Guidelines, and Small Cell online map o CCD assigned project number(e.g. 2019- ENCROACHMENT- 0001234) o Link to CCD E-Review webpage and instructions for submitting comments to CCD o Clarifying statement that the proposed location is not on private property and all work will be performed in public right of way o A link to the notification template is provided under `Additional Documents 10 Active/52874388.1 PETITION To: Honorable Mayor and the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah REGARDING WASATCH BOULEVARD BETWEEN 1300 SOUTH AND CRESTVIEW DRIVE AS A PORTION OF THE BONNEVILLE SHORELINE TRAIL (PROJECT AREA) TO IMPROVE THE PROJECT AREA NOW USED FOR BIKING, RUNNING, WALKING, TENNIS, BASEBALL, GOLF, ZOO AND USED BY APPROXIMATELY 30 RESIDENTS TO ACCESS THEIR HOMES OR CONDOMINIUMS---AND RESTRICT / PROHIBIT THRU VEHICULAR TRAFFIC AS DANGEROUS TO ALL RECREATIONAL USES. Whereas, in the 1980's the Wasatch Boulevard Shoreline Trail had been ignored for decades for its multiple-purpose uses; Whereas, there was no sidewalk, curb, gutter, bike lane, quality parking for little league baseball or the tennis center; And there were unmaintained berms to keep cars from driving on the golf course; people parked vehicles illegally for tennis and baseball, and bikers, walkers, parents with baby strollers had to endure gravel, bikes and speeding cars, which for at least on golfer lost his life when hit by a car going west down Wasatch Boulevard; Whereas, Karen Ann Fjeldsted Doctorman, of blessed memory, beginning in approximately 1993, while a young mother of two young children, living at 2439 Michigan, pleaded for many years with Salt Lake City to improve the Project Area to provide: a) a proper sidewalk to push a stroller and for walking/jogging, b) proper parking areas for little league baseball and tennis players and their families; c) bike lanes; d) street lights and eliminate late-night parking around baseball field; all to improve public safety; Whereas finally, in the late 1990s, the city installed an asphalt pathway for only a portion of the Project Area. The city did not install a sidewalk, curb, gutter, bike lanes, streetlights much less the other needed improvements for the multiple-purpose users of the Project Area;The Project Area still lacks these basic structural needs, and the exposure of pedestrians,bicycles and vehicles is still unsafe; As an example of poor planning, the asphalt pathway has golf carts competing with walkers and runners, causing yet another unsafe condition. Whereas, the city's response to Karen's plea was inadequate as decades later, nothing of substance has occurred to remedy safety for the multiple uses along the Project Area; Whereas, the Bonneville Shoreline Trail is dedicated for multi-purpose use and runs directly through the Project Area; Whereas, the city recently installed temporary signs to restrict thru traffic within the Project Area,but the signs failed to stop speeders or thru traffic, and the signs failed to demonstrate the City's desire to remedy its decades of neglect of the multiple purpose uses of the Project Area; Whereas, as neighbors, we have appointed Melissa Hardy and Tom Hagan to act as co-chairs to communicate the residents' comments to city in developing plans for the Project Area. We, the undersigned citizens and residents most affected daily by use of the Project Area,petition Mayor Erin Mendenhall and the City Council of Salt Lake City to please consider and have a public vote on a plan of action considering the following suggestions: PRIMARY IDEAS FROM THE RESIDENTS FOR CONSIDERATION As residents, we suggest multi-purpose recreation and vehicular access to the Project Area: 1. Be promptly studied and then improved to accommodate the multi-purpose uses the Project Area has served for decades; 2. That the city instructs all city departments that the Project Area has been ignored for decades and completion of improvements is a high priority for the Mayor, the city council and all city departments are instructed to promptly begin the process to study, plan and complete all improvements to the Project Area by September 1, 2022; As residents, our primary recommendations are: 1. The city install in the Project Area two cement sidewalks, curb, gutter, streetlights, two safe bike lanes, and golf cart paths all built to city code; 2. At both 1300 South and Crestview Drive that the city install cement installations that will separate bicycle and vehicular traffic and slow vehicular traffic with a one lane entrance/exit, to/from the Project Area. (See for example, 900 South and Parleys Way roundabouts that provide infrastructure to encourages separation of vehicles from bicycles.) (Of course, meeting the needs of emergency, fire and ambulance to access the Project Area and the residences and public buildings.) The purpose is to create safety for all users by separating vehicular/pedestrian/bicycle traffic and demonstrate this is a restricted area for multi-purpose use; 3. That prominent signs be installed at the single lane to enter/exit the Project Area prohibiting thru motor vehicles, but allowing motor vehicles for residents, employees of Hogle Zoo,participants and visitors to residents, the little league baseball diamond, and the tennis center; 4. That non-emergency motor vehicles using the roadway in the Project Area be limited to 15 or 20 miles per hour and that speeds be strictly and frequently enforced by the SLC Police Department; and 5. For security and public safety, that gates be installed to restrict access to the parking areas in the Project Area to times only when the park is open; 6. That there be no "on street"vehicle parking and illegal parking be strictly enforced; 7. The city shall treat the Project Area as a park and as part of the Shoreline Trail and prohibit parking after 10 pm and before 7 am(or times consistent with other city parks),just as the golf course, Zoo and other city parks; 8. The Bonneville Shoreline Trail Project Area have a recorded public easement restricting motor vehicular use to the uses described above. 2 As residents, we recommend a short timeframe to remedy the years of neglect and continual safety hazards with Labor Day 2022 scheduled as a public celebration, ribbon cutting and recreational events to inaugurate the completion of the project. WHILE SAFTEY IS THE NUMBER ONE PRIORITY, OTHER IDEAS FROM RESIDENTS FOR THE CITY TO CONSIDER INCLUDE: 1. The city declare the Bonneville Shoreline Trail Project Area as a Park and landscape with flowers and trees; 2. The city should promptly announce its own ideas for the Project Area and solicit ideas, contributions and name recognition; 3. The City should solicit public art and install public art in the Project Area; 4. To assist with the costs of the Project Area improvements, the city could seek financial donations: a) To prominently dedicate and memorialize Coach Mike,of blessed memory,near the tennis center; b) To prominently dedicate and memorialize the Hogle family and Hogle Zoo; c) To name and dedicate the little league baseball diamond; and d) To sell naming rights for the golf course snack shack on Wasatch Drive. The new snack shack should be open and staffed year-round but be closed after the park closes at night. It can be gently used by golfers, baseball, tennis, and other recreational uses. 5. That the Bonneville Shoreline Trail prominently acknowledge the life, efforts, and the memory of Karen Ann Fjeldsted Doctorman; a) Whereas, the undersigned appreciates Mayor Mendenhall and Council Member Rogers, Council Member Johnston, Council Member Wharton, Council Member Valdemoros, Council Member Mano, Council Member Dugan and Council Member Fowler, and that they also be recognized prominently and properly by dedicating the public art to the honorable elected officials of Salt Lake City, This petition for improvements to use Wasatch Boulevard as stated above is dated the 8th day of February 2021, from the following residents: 3 f/f Melissa4 ardy,Co-Chair a..,—C-)%, i'LL Tom Hagan, Co-Chair 4-I i/0�-�A Jo .hRi'' 4 • Mary Lou 'i 1 n_s I al : Phone: L/ / AtO7 Linda Wolcott .43 d11.6 f/i„ I.i z Jensen cA, pt10 � Paul Green, 5 /I Y I:al iJ i Olsen -\ I,-\ 14 VOL A- , coif- _o t arilyn Roberts /9,4•14Z4vvotogy Yin Lelmin Email: Phone: 6 Calli Short Rttfp<Sorbonne Oletir4tidk Jacki Welch 4000011111101111111° Asti' -tee's s •- 7 Mike Soulier James Neves • /1.0 l4 Claire Eva Doctorman R ohynne Neves 8 T G Doctorman t • t- i t ---- Sam DOCloiman, \ ' • /, .........................;.L.,y> Tro Hard 9 A`� i / l w. 1 imiirrs„, -- - n 1�,t-Ii,-rt C c rte 10