Laserfiche WebLink
8.A. - PagpR??X9f36andum <br />Financial Review of Proposed Sequoia Station Development <br />September 28, 2020 <br />Page 6 <br />development window, the project could become infeasible due to cost prohibitive lease buyout or <br />relocation costs, and/or the inability secure redevelopment rights from the tenants. <br />In addition to site acquisition, preparing the site for redevelopment will also require tenant <br />relocation, demolition, environmental site clean-up, culvert relocation, affordable housing land <br />dedication, and land carry (because development will occur over multiple years), among others. <br />It is also important to note after this process has occurred the developer / real estate investor <br />will end up with a usable site that is somewhat smaller than the existing 12 acres. Among other <br />things, the developers net usable area will be reduced to accommodate the following: <br />• Dedication to an Affordable Housing Developer: All of the alternatives assume a portion <br />of the site is dedicated to an affordable housing developer for construction of a 240 -unit, low <br />income project. Such a project is likely to require between 2 to 2.5 acres of land. <br />Caltrain Right of Way: Through its Business Plan, Caltrain identified Sequoia Station as the <br />location of a mid -Peninsula transit hub with an increased number of tracks, including train <br />passing lanes. To accommodate more tracks, additional land would be needed from the <br />Sequoia Station shopping center, greatly impacting the existing CVS and Safeway buildings. <br />An estimation of required land is shown in Figure 3 (about 1.1 acres). Caltrain and <br />SamTrans are conducting technical studies to determine the exact amount of land needed, <br />with expected completion in late 2020. <br />Figure 3: Estimated Land for Dedication in Future Rai/ Improvements <br />Residual Land Value and Development Feasibility <br />EPS developed a vertical development cash flow model to simulate the financial performance <br />associated with the five Sequoia Station redevelopment alternatives defined with input from City <br />staff. The Appendix summarizes the key components of this analysis and compares the residual <br />land value of each alternative with site acquisition and preparation costs described above. The <br />z:�sneree�P.o�«u�oakia�e�m.000:�zomsz_nea.00eanF�:wi seu�aa swno��sea�oia sea \oavv b1e\S­s<a memov-ze-zozo.m213 <br />