Sa nta Cla ra T rust L a nds De ve lo pme nt Optio ns Oc to b e - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Sa nta Cla ra T rust L a nds De ve lo pme nt Optio ns Oc to b e r 11, 2016

Sta nda rdize d L a nd Surve y Syste m T he Ge ne ra l L a nd Ordina nc e o f 1785 6 mile s A “T o wnship” 6 mile s T 2N R2E  Re c ta ng ula r Surve y  T o wnship L ine s  No rth/ So uth  Ra ng e L ine s T 2S  E R3W a st/ We st

Co ng re ssio na l L a nd Gra nt I nte nt No rthwe st Ordina nc e o f 1787  Sc ho o l in E ve ry T o wnship  Se c tio n 16  Ohio (1803) – Minne so ta (1858)  T he Arid We st  Se c tio ns 16 a nd 36  Ore g o n (1859) – Wyo ming (1890)  T he ‘ Re a lly’ Arid We st  Se c tio ns 2, 16, 32 & 36  Uta h, Arizo na a nd Ne w Me xic o

Qua ntity Gra nts  Hig he r E d uc a tio n I nstitutio ns  Unive rsity o f Uta h (156,080 a c re s)  Sc ho o l o f Mine s (100,000 a c re s)  Mine rs Ho spita l (50,000 + 50,000 a c re s)  Ag ric ultura l Co lle g e [Uta h Sta te Unive rsity] (200,000 a c re s)  No rma l Sc ho o l [T e a c he rs’ Co lle g e ] (100,000 a c re s)  Spe c ia l E d uc a tio n I nstitutio ns  Sc ho o l fo r the Blind (100,000 a c re s)  Sc ho o l fo r the De a f a nd the Dumb (100,000 a c re s)  Pub lic I nstitutio ns  Pub lic Building s (100 se c tio ns)  Re fo rm Sc ho o l (100,000 a c re s)  I nsa ne Asylum (100,000 a c re s)  Re se rvo irs (500,000 a c re s)

Ob lig a tio ns o f T rust L a nd Ma na g e me nt Dire c tio n fro m Uta h Supre me Co urt  Sta nda rd trust princ iple s  F ina nc ia l suppo rt o f the b e ne fic ia rie s  Duty o f undivide d lo ya lty  “T he b e ne fic ia rie s do no t inc lude o the r g o ve rnme nta l institutio ns, the pub lic a t la rg e , o r the g e ne ra l we lfa re o f the sta te ”

Sub je c t Pro pe rty

Histo ry  T rust ha s g o ne thro ug h nume ro us b usine ss mo de ls in the pa st – le a se , purc ha se , ho ld e tc .  Co mme rc ia l Zo ning o n pro pe rty ha s ma de it diffic ult to b o th find use rs a nd re c e ive full ma rke t va lue fo r pro pe rty.  T ra ffic c o unts a re lo w fo r ma jo r re ta il  Visib ility a nd a c c e ss fo r so me pie c e s o f pro pe rty a re sub pa r  Site ha s so me g ra ding c o nstra ints.  Ha s b e e n ma rke te d b y the T rust to the c o mme rc ia l de ve lo pme nt c o mmunity he a vily sinc e 2007  T rust ha s unde rta ke n a pla nning pro c e ss to a sc e rta in wha t is the hig he st a nd b e st use o f the pro pe rty tha t b o th fits the T rust’ s e c o no mic ma nda te a nd he lps fulfill City g o a ls.

Pla nning Go a ls  Complete district node by connecting visually to adjacent properties through building, open space and landscape treatments and materials.  Design must be a good entry to the City  Connection to existing and future open space and trail systems.  Creation of a gateway at the border of Santa Clara City by leveraging Lava Flow and Sunset Boulevard intersection and the grade change/ intersection at the east end of the site .  Help to establish an identity for the City.  Promote development that blends into the existing fabric of the area and is sensitive to neighboring residential and commercial uses.  Not necessarily more of the same but uses that will enhance economic impact to the city (tax base creation vs tax base enhancement)  Attract and support the highest and best uses for the site to maximize SITLA and City of Santa Clara objectives.

De ve lopme nt Alte r native 1: Boutique Re tail, Ar t & Dining

De ve lo pme nt # 1 Co nstra ints  PROS  Cre a te s a se nse o f pla c e  Co uld g e ne ra te T ra ffic  CONS  Ve ry little ma rke t to e sta b lish this use  De pe nds he a vily o n e xisting tra ffic mo de l  Will dilute e xisting re ta il o ptio ns a lre a dy fo und in surro unding a re a a nd ha s the po te ntia l to kill b usine sse s a ro und it.

De ve lopme nt Alte r native 2: Ope n Spac e / Civic

De ve lo pme nt # 2 Co nstra ints  PROS  Attra c tive E ntry to the City  Co mmunity Ga the ring Spa c e  CONS  Who pa ys fo r this? E xpe nsive to City to b uild a nd ma inta in  Who pa ys the la nd c o st. Do wn zo ning to o pe n spa c e no t a n o ptio n fo r SI T L A

De ve lopme nt Alte r native 3: Re side ntial Base d

De ve lo pme nt # 3 Co nstra ints  PROS  Cre a te s po pula tio n ma ss to suppo rt e xisting b usine ss a nd histo ric d istric t  Cre a te s a sc e na rio fo r SI T L A to a c hie ve mo ne ta ry g o a ls.  CONS  Wo uld re q uire string e nt de sig n g uide line s

De ve lopme nt Alte r native 4: Cultur e Village - Re side ntial

De ve lo pme nt # 4 Co nstra ints  PROS  Cre a te s a fo c a l po int fo r the City E ntry  Give s the City so me id e ntity  Cre a te s a me c ha nism to inc re a se tra ffic to the a re a a nd he lp e xisting histo ric distric t b usine ss to survive  CONS  F inding a pe rma ne nt pe rfo rming a rts g ro up  Pro g ra mming  City pa rtic ipa tio n in so me fo rm. T a x inc re me nt + de nsity to pa y fo r la nd.

T rust Re c o mme nda tio ns  F ro m a stric t mo ne ta ry pe rspe c tive Optio n # 3 mo st a ttra c tive to the T rust  F ro m a c o o pe ra tive sta ndpo int o f he lping the City o f Sa nta Cla ra a nd pro viding a wa y fo r SI T L A to me e t o ur ma na g e me nt o b je c tive s # 4 is the pre fe rre d a lte rna tive .  SI T L A wo uld re q ue st to mo ve fo rwa rd with the City in pla nning fo r a lte rna tive # 4