Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Staff Report 3623
City of Palo Alto (ID # 3623) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Informational Report Meeting Date: 3/18/2013 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Downtown Development Cap RFP Info Report Title: Downtown Development Cap Study Scope of Work and Request for Proposal From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Recommendation This is an informational report and no Council action is required at this time. Staff is providing this update as an informational report as it reports on directives Council has already issued, and the phase 1 RFP is essentially a technical data collection effort. (Phase 2 will require subsequent direction from the Council). Executive Summary On November 5, 2012, Council considered several approaches to address downtown parking concerns, including an evaluation of the City’s Downtown Development Cap, as required by the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance. The legal requirement for this evaluation, which originated from a 1986 Downtown Study, was recently triggered by the submittal of several Downtown development applications. On January 9, 2013, the Planning and Transportation Commission reviewed and commented on the scope of work for that study. The Development Cap Study will evaluate the potential development and its impacts on downtown and nearby residential areas in two phases: a “data and impacts” phase (Phase 1) and a “policy” phase (Phase 2). The RFP described in this report focuses on the first phase. Phase 2 will be released at a subsequent date, following Council discussion and direction. This overall study process would include the appointment of a Downtown Stakeholder Task Force. It is expected that Phase 1 of the Downtown Development Cap study will be the focus of a series of public meetings over a 6-month period. This will include meetings with the Planning and Transportation Commission, City Council, a Downtown Stakeholder Taskforce and community wide meetings. City of Palo Alto Page 2 Background In 1986, the City of Palo Alto conducted a Downtown Study, which examined parking, traffic and land use conditions in the Downtown area. The primary area which this study focused on is depicted in Attachment B. The original study area included the surrounding residential neighborhoods in the “periphery study area.” As a result of the Study, the Downtown Area was rezoned to Commercial Downtown (CD). This rezoning created Floor Area Ratios (FARs) and other zoning regulations that were generally more restrictive than the previous zoning, especially as it related to commercial properties adjacent to residential neighborhoods. In addition to the new zoning regulations, a CD development cap policy (Downtown Development Cap) was adopted. This policy restricted future non-residential development to a total of 350,000 square feet beyond what was in existence or approved in the CD area as of May 1986 (Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 18.18.040 and Comprehensive Plan Program L-8). CD development regulations were to be re-evaluated when new development reached 235,000 square feet. Residential development was excluded from the development cap to encourage future residents to live in close proximity to jobs. There were a number of other specific policies related to growth in the CD area as well. A list of measures that resulted from the 1986 Downtown Study are attached to the Planning and Transportation Commission’s January 9, 2013 staff report (web link: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/32538). In addition, a “Twelve Point Public Parking Program” was adopted as part of the Plan (attached to the PTC report), outlining efforts to address parking issues associated with downtown. Many of the measures outlined in the program have been implemented since the 1986 study, while some have not. For example, point #4 states the City should “discourage parking specifically in surrounding residential neighborhoods.” Although new parking garages have increased Downtown parking supply since 1986, little has been done to limit business employees from parking in the surrounding neighborhoods. The 1986 Downtown Study requires that City Staff monitor and submit an annual report to the City Council regarding development activity, vacancy rates and commercial lease rates in order to evaluate the effectiveness of these regulations. The most recent City Council report (Attachment C), released on March 11, 2013, provided information related to the 2011-12 time period. This report showed that the downtown area had fully recovered from the recession and that only 11,790 square feet of new non-residential development remains available (as of the end of 2012) before the re-evaluation limit of 235,000 square feet would be reached. Some developments have been approved since that time, such that the evaluation milestone has now been reached. The City Council, on November 5, 2012, instructed staff to develop a scope of work for this evaluation and for the PTC to review and provide input on the scope of work prior to a Request for Proposals (RFP) being released. The Scope of Work was reviewed by the PTC on January 9, 2013, and was forwarded to the City Council with recommendations. Transportation, planning City of Palo Alto Page 3 and economic consultant services are required to complete this study in a timely manner, as the work effort is substantial and well beyond staff’s work program capabilities. The study should also benefit from a consultant team’s knowledge of similar studies, issues, and solutions in other communities. As noted above, this proposed study has been broken down into two phases, and the attached RFP focuses on the first phase. Further background on the 1986 study is available in the PTC’s January 9, 2013 staff report (web link: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/32538). Discussion The Scope of Work (Attachment A) states that the City of Palo Alto is requesting proposals from qualified and experienced transportation and planning consultant firms to evaluate existing and projected parking, traffic and land use conditions in the Downtown Palo Alto. The overall evaluation must also contain a sound economic analysis focused on growth demands related to various downtown land uses. The analysis should be done within the context of the existing development cap (Downtown Development Cap) in the Commercial Downtown (CD) area of Palo Alto, with a particular emphasis on growth in Downtown and associated impacts on parking and traffic. This RFP is for the first phase of a study that will contain two phases. An RFP for the “second phase” will be sent out at a future date. This “Phase 1” proposal should include the following components: Phase 1: Data Collection and Projections Analysis A. Review of Prior Downtown Study and Related Documents The selected consultant for the project will review the 1986 Downtown Study report and related materials, as well as subsequent monitoring reports, Comprehensive Plan policies, zoning regulations, and any other relevant documents. B. Existing Conditions Evaluation The selected consultant will be responsible for evaluating existing traffic and parking conditions in the Downtown and immediately surrounding areas. Existing level of service studies should be conducted for key intersections and roadway segments. In addition, the selected consultant should evaluate existing visitor (hourly) and permit parking conditions in the Downtown and surrounding areas. C. Projected Growth Impact Analysis City of Palo Alto Page 4 Using the existing conditions report and an economic growth demand analysis as the foundation, the selected consultant should evaluate scenarios for potential development, and future level of service (LOS) of key intersections and roadway segments based on projected growth. In addition, future commercial and nearby residential parking conditions should also be evaluated based on growth scenarios. The parking analysis should be completed for Downtown visitor and permit parking, as well as street parking and “intrusion” in the surrounding residential neighborhoods. The projected traffic and parking conditions should be based on the existing development cap policies and zoning code regulations. Public Input and Task Force Meetings In conjunction with staff, the selected consultant shall organize and lead meetings of the Downtown Stakeholders Task Force and community workshop meetings. It is expected that initial meetings will be focused on presentation of the existing conditions report and projected growth conditions analysis described above. The consultants would also be available for check- in meetings and hearings with the Planning and Transportation Commission City Council and community-wide meetings. Nearby Developments The data phase will incorporate an analysis of potential developments outside of the original study area. For example, when conducting the described traffic analysis the data phase will consider potential developments in the Arts and Innovation District (27 University), and nearby developments in Menlo Park. Staff will be also returning to Council with a study plan for the Arts and Innovation District (27 University Avenue) in April, and expects that effort will benefit from the data and impact analysis resulting from the Downtown Development Cap Study. Phase 2: Policy Analysis Although not the subject of this RFP, an RFP for a second phase of this study will be released subsequent to the completion of Phase 1. This scope of work for this second phase has not yet been completed, however it is expected that the effort will require a consultant team to make planning and transportation policy recommendations using the “Phase 1” findings, a more detailed economic analysis and community input. Therefore, consultants submitting proposals in response to the subject, Phase 1 RFP, must be qualified to submit a proposal for Phase 2 work in the future. The draft RFP scope of work (Attachment A) also notes the creation of a Downtown Stakeholder Task Force, which will be formed to help guide the study. Staff will return to the Council with a summary of the intent, process, timeline and makeup of such a task force. City of Palo Alto Page 5 Timeline Staff will immediately begin work to release the Downtown Development Cap Evaluation RFP. It will take approximately two months to get a consultant team on-board following the release of the RFP. Phase 1 of the Downtown Development Cap “Phase 1” Evaluation will take about 6 months to complete. Staff will return to the Council within 6 months to report on initial Phase 1 findings, and to get direction regarding Phase 2. An early scoping meeting with the Planning and Transportation Commission may be used to refine the desired public outreach approach. Resource Impact Although the precise amount of the Downtown Development Cap Study cannot be determined until the scope of work is finalized and proposals received, staff estimates the cost of the “Phase 1” Study will range from $75,000-125,000, not including environmental review for any subsequent “Phase 2” study. The study cost is proposed to be funded by the Neighborhood Parking Preservation Project funds submitted by the Lytton Gateway project for parking studies. Additional funding may be sought to replenish the Lytton Gateway funding as part of the FY2014 budget process, and/or with a development surcharge on downtown development. Policy Implications The requirement to conduct this evaluation is specified in the Comprehensive Plan as follows: Program L-8: Limit new non-residential development in the Downtown area to 350,000 square feet, or 10% above the amount of development existing or approved as of May 1986. Reevaluate this limit when non-residential development approvals reach 235,000 square feet of floor area. In addition, other policies could be impacted as a result of this evaluation. This includes policies related to parking, traffic and land use (zoning) in the Downtown area. The 1986 study impacted policies in the Comprehensive Plan and text within the zoning ordinance. It is expected that this evaluation could result in revisions to both documents as well. The 1986 Downtown Study included a 12-point Public Parking Program that is outlined in the Comprehensive Plan. Many of these measures have been implemented since the 1986 study, while some have not. For example, point #4 states the City should “discourage parking specifically in surrounding residential neighborhoods.” Although new parking garages have increased Downtown parking supply since 1986, little has been done to limit business employees from parking in the surrounding neighborhoods. City of Palo Alto Page 6 Environmental Review Environmental review is not required in order for the Council to review and provide input on the scope of work, nor does releasing a Request for Proposal. All proposed policy changes, however, will need to be fully reviewed per the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The exact type of review will not be determined until the policy changes are proposed and associated impacts are identified. Attachments: Attachment A: Downtown Development Cap Study Scope of Work (DOCX) Attachment B: Map of Study Area (PDF) Attachment C: Downtown Monitoring Report (PDF) Request for Proposals Downtown Development Cap Evaluation Purpose: The City of Palo Alto is requesting proposals from qualified and experienced transportation and planning consultant firms to evaluate existing and projected parking, traffic and land use conditions in the Downtown Palo Alto. The overall evaluation must also contain a sound economic analysis focused on growth demands related to various downtown land uses. The analysis should be done within the context of the existing development cap (Downtown Development Cap) in the Commercial Downtown (CD) area of Palo Alto, with a particular emphasis on growth in Downtown and associated impacts on parking and traffic. In 1986, the City adopted the Downtown Development Cap, primarily due to traffic and parking concerns, along with incentives for future development and redevelopment. These policies were applied to the CD area and restricted future non-residential development to a total of 350,000 square feet beyond what was in existence or approved in May 1986. Residential development was purposely excluded from the development to encourage people in order to encourage future residents to live in close proximity to jobs. CD development regulations were to be reevaluated when new, non-residential development reached 235,000 square feet. This evaluation milestone has recently been reached with the submittal of several development applications. A Parking Assessment District (PAD) was also established prior to the 1986 study and remains in effect today, though it has been expanded during the interim. This RFP is for first phase of the Downtown Development Cap evaluation, primarily focused on gathering data, and evaluating existing and projected conditions. In the future, an RFP for the “second phase” of this study will be released, to seek transportation and planning (Comprehensive Plan, Zoning, etc.) policy recommendations using the “Phase 1” findings as the foundation. Background: As the result of a 1986 Downtown Study, the Downtown Area was rezoned to Commercial Downtown (CD). This rezoning created Floor Area Ratios (FARs) and other zoning regulations that were generally more restrictive than the previous zoning, especially as it related to commercial properties adjacent to residential neighborhoods. In addition to the new zoning regulations, a CD development cap policy (Downtown Development Cap) was adopted. This policy restricted future non-residential development to a total of 350,000 square feet above what was in existence or approved in the CD area as of May 1986. CD development regulations were to be reevaluated when new development reached 235,000 square feet. Residential development was purposely excluded from the development to encourage people in order to encourage future residents to live in close proximity to jobs. There were a number of other specific policies related to growth in the CD area as well. The measures that resulted from the 1986 Downtown Study are attached to this RFP. Citywide growth limits, and growth limits in other districts were also established at that time. The 1986 Downtown Study required that City Staff monitor and submit an annual report to the City Council regarding development activity, vacancy rates and commercial lease rates in order to evaluate the effectiveness of these regulations. The most recent City Council report (Attachment 2), released on March 11, 2013, provided information related to the 2011-12 time period. This report showed that the downtown area had fully recovered from the recession and that only 11,790 square feet of new non- residential development remains available (as of the end of 2012) before the re-evaluation limit of 235,000 square feet would be reached. Some developments have been approved since that time, such that the evaluation milestone has now been reached. Attachment A Request for Proposals Downtown Development Cap Evaluation Parking Parking intrusion into adjacent residential neighborhoods and parking permit supply are both major concerns. These concerns are not new, but there has been an increasing amount of attention focused on parking impacts with the improving economy. Parking was a key focus of the 1986 study. For example, as a result of the study, a parking policy was adopted that specified that new development should not increase the parking deficit beyond the 1986 deficit. Since that time parking garages have been built which have reduced the deficit, though concerns remain. These impacts may be exacerbated by zoning code assumptions which may not be consistent with modern planning and transportation engineering practices, such as the number of employees assumed on a per square foot basis in tech companies, particularly “start-ups.” Staff has also recently initiated a study of potential parking garage feasibility on five sites in the downtown area, which should inform the Downtown Development Cap study as well. A Downtown Parking Assessment District was first formed in 1978, and has been subsequently restructured several times. The Downtown Parking Assessment District, which is financially supported by downtown property owners via bond financing, paid for the construction of several downtown garages. Maintenance and operation costs of garages are funded through permit fees. Bonds financing restrictions, however, limit the way in which these garages can be utilized. After the formation of assessment district and the preparation of the 1986 Downtown Study, the zoning code was amended to allow several “exemptions” to parking requirements, including a 1:1 FAR exemption, 200 square foot minor parking exemption and a “Transfer of Development Rights” program, which allows square footage bonuses and parking exemptions to be transferred to other properties in certain cases. Traffic Traffic is another concern. Several policies were adopted in the 1986 plan, and numerous transportation improvements have been implemented in the CD and surrounding areas since that time. Transportation improvements include enhancements to the automobile, bicycle and pedestrian networks. In addition, the City has required Transportation Demand Management policies for a few recent downtown developments and businesses. The proximity of Downtown and Stanford to the Palo Alto Downtown Caltrain station and other transit services, along with the transportation initiatives of several firms and Stanford have contributed to the Downtown Caltrain station having the highest ridership at any Caltrain station other than at the San Francisco terminus. In addition, the City of Palo Alto has a top-rated bicycle network, and continues to adopt policies and programs and to enhance facilities to improve this network. Nonetheless, traffic congestion remains a major concern in the area, and is one of the primary aspects of the Downtown Development Cap evaluation and subsequent recommendations. Planning and Zoning In addition to parking and traffic policies, there are several planning related policies that are tied to the Downtown Development Cap. For example, a Ground Floor Combining District was created within the CD area, which encourages pedestrian uses, and limits business to retail eating and drinking uses. Office uses, which can typically attract higher rents, are allowed on upper floors and at the perimeter of the CD area. CD zoning also encourages seismic and historic upgrades to buildings by allowing property owners who make these improvements to expand beyond normal FAR limitations and/or to add floor area without providing parking. The property owners may also transfer (sell) those development rights to another property in the CD area. Request for Proposals Downtown Development Cap Evaluation The City is in the process of updating its Comprehensive Plan, including the Transportation and Land Use elements. Currently the document refers to and bases several policies on the 1986 Downtown Study. In addition, there are several ongoing efforts related to parking management, including the parking garage study and consideration of several other parking programs such as attendant parking and residential permit parking, all of which will be under study simultaneous with the Downtown Cap study. Finally, some potential proposed developments would be located just outside the CD area (“Peripheral Impact Area” on the map). Although these developments are not directly related to the original Downtown Development Cap, traffic and parking related to these developments may impact the Downtown area and should be addressed or referenced as well. Scope of Work: The City of Palo Alto is requesting proposals from qualified and well-experienced transportation and planning firms to evaluate existing and projected parking, traffic and land use conditions in the Downtown Palo Alto. The selected consultant must work closely with the City’s planning, transportation and economic development staff during the process, and must make presentations to the Planning and Transportation Commission and City Council, as well as various community groups as needed. This RFP is for the first phase of a study that will contain two phases. An RFP for the “second phase” will be sent out at a future date. This “Phase 1” proposal should include the following components: 1. Review of Prior Downtown Study and Related Documents The selected consultant for the project will review the 1986 Downtown Study report and related materials, as well as subsequent monitoring reports, Comprehensive Plan policies, zoning regulations, and any other relevant documents Given the City is in the process of updating the Comprehensive Plan, particular importance should be paid to Comprehensive Plan policies, and recent Planning & Transportation Commission discussions on the various Plan elements. A thorough review of the 1986 Downtown Study and associated environmental documents is also critical, as it provides the context for many of the adopted Comp Plan policies. 2. Existing Conditions Evaluation The selected consultant will be responsible for evaluating existing traffic and parking conditions in the Downtown and immediately surrounding areas. Existing level of service studies should be conducted for key intersections and roadway segments. The selected consultant should work closely with the planning and transportation staff during the existing conditions process to ensure the correct intersections and roadway segments are be evaluated. In addition, the selected consultant should evaluate existing visitor (hourly) and permit parking conditions in the Downtown and surrounding areas. At a minimum, studies should include: Existing traffic counts and level of service for identified intersections. Existing on-street and off-street parking spaces, capacity and occupancy, based on staff’s continuing efforts and adjusted as needed to reflect the needs of the Downtown Development Cap Study. Identification of downtown development over the past 10 years and estimated impacts of that development and trends over that timeframe, including the application of parking exemptions for transfer of development rights and other code provisions. Identification of non-conforming buildings (from a use and/or parking standpoint) that have converted to higher intensity office uses over the past 5 years. Request for Proposals Downtown Development Cap Evaluation A definition of the parking “intrusion,” “saturation,” “deficit,” or other term and how that is best applied to the study area and surrounding neighborhoods. 3. Projected Growth Impact Analysis Using the existing conditions report as the foundation, the selected consultant should evaluate scenarios for potential development, and future level of service (LOS) of key intersections and roadway segments based on projected growth. In addition, future commercial and nearby residential parking conditions should also be evaluated based on growth scenarios. The parking analysis should be completed for the Downtown visitor and permit parking, as well as street parking in the surrounding residential neighborhoods. The projected traffic and parking conditions should be based on the existing development cap policies and zoning code regulations. At a minimum, studies should include: A five-year and ten-year scenario of potential ranges of development, assuming the continued use of transfer of development rights and other existing provisions. Estimated changes to levels of service at key intersections based on potential increased growth. Estimated parking demand required by increased growth under each scenario and the likely impact of the demand on available parking in residential neighborhoods. The likely impact of parking reductions based on the proximity of new development to Caltrain and other transit, bicycling and walking facilities, based on surveys of existing employee ridership for Downtown businesses and Stanford. Public Outreach and Participation It is expected that Phase 1 of the Downtown Development Cap study will be the focus of a series of public meetings over a 6-month period. It is also expected that the public participation process will be guided by the formation and periodic meeting of a Downtown Cap Stakeholders Task Force. Public outreach may include, at a minimum: Periodic meetings with the Downtown Cap Stakeholder Task Force. This group would be comprised of downtown neighborhood representatives, downtown property owners, downtown business owners, and other interested individuals or organizations. Others may be included as recommended by the City Council. It is expected that there would be 11-15 committee members and they would meet approximately 3 times during the first phase of this study. 1-2 Larger community meetings with the broad Downtown community, including businesses, residents, and others. Meetings or focus groups with specific interests, such as the Downtown North, University South, and Professorville neighborhoods, the Downtown Business Improvement District, and/or the Chamber of Commerce’s Downtown Parking Committee. At least 1-2 meetings with the Planning and Transportation Commission. At least 1-2 meetings with the City Council. The proposal should outline a suggested proposal for public involvement, including the Downtown Cap Stakeholder Task Force process, but staff expects that a minimum of three (3) Downtown Cap Stakeholder Committee meetings, and 1-2 Planning and Transportation Commission and/or Council meetings should be included, as well at least 1 general community meeting and early and regular consultation with the interest groups outlined above. An early scoping meeting with the Planning and Transportation Commission should be used to refine the desired public outreach approach. Request for Proposals Downtown Development Cap Evaluation Phase 2: Policy Analysis Although not the subject of this RFP, an RFP for a second phase of this study will be released subsequent to the completion of Phase 1. This scope of work for this second phase has not yet been completed, however it is expected that the effort will require a consultant team to make planning and transportation policy recommendations using the “Phase 1” findings, an economic analysis and community input. Therefore, consultants submitting proposals in response to the subject, Phase 1 RFP, must be qualified to submit a proposal for Phase 2 work in the future. Proposal Submittal Requirements: Interested consulting teams shall submit a program that includes the following elements, limited to a total of 12 pages per proposal: Statement of Qualifications: Provide a Statement of Qualifications that highlights the team’s experience in conduct of transportation (traffic) and parking analyses, planning analysis, and economic evaluations related to these issues. This experience should include completed work related to evaluating the impacts of existing and projected development conditions. Special attention should be given to the firm’s experience in balancing commercial district needs with quality of life issues in adjacent residential neighborhoods. In addition, the team’s experience related to zoning code review, and preparation or revisions to comprehensive plans, as well as its general planning experience should also be detailed. Finally, any experience in analyzing development thresholds should be included. Include recent project reference and project cost information. (3 Page Max) Team Organization Structure: Include a flow chart that highlights the internal team’s reporting structure and the relation of team members and subconsultants. Highlight the Project Manager’s experience and qualifications and Quality Assurance programs to be used as part of the project. (2 Page Max) Understanding of Work Scope: Detail the approach (task-by-task) and steps your team would take to complete the scope of work discussed within this request for proposals. Highlight successfully completed or active projects with similar work scopes and demonstrate your team’s understanding of the Palo Alto community and Downtown business operations. (5 Page Max) Resumes: Include the resumes of the Project Principal and Project Manager (2 Page Max) RFP and Project Schedule: RFP Release Date: Request for Proposals Downtown Development Cap Evaluation RFP Request for Information (RFI) Deadline: RFP City Response to RFI: Proposal Due Date: Team Interviews (If Needed): Pricing on Proposals should be honored for up to 4 months to allow the city an opportunity to complete the award of a consultant agreement through the City Council. In addition to the consultant team interviews as part of the proposal evaluation process, the recommended consultant team may also be asked to make a presentation on their team’s qualifications and project approach to a panel of staff, Palo Alto Planning and Transportation Commission and/or community representatives. Attachments: 1. Map of Downtown Commercial (CD) District and Peripheral Study Area 2. Downtown Monitoring Report for 2011-12 3. 1986 Downtown Study Results Summary 4. List of Approved Non-Residential Projects (1986-2012) text texttext Downtown ParkingAssessment District Professorville Historic District RamonaStreetHistoricDistrict PF PC-1992 OR CS CC R-2 R-2 R-2 R-2 R-2 R-2 RM -15 R-2 R-2 R-2 R-2 R-1(10000) R-1(10000)PF R-2 PC-2967PC-3266 PF PFPF RM-15 PF CN R-1 PC-3902 PC-3707 PC-4283 PF RT-35 PC-4389 CS CS PC-4465 CS CD-C(P) R-1(10000) RM-30 AMF(MUO) DHS R-2 CD-S(P)AMF PC-4612 R-1 PF CC PF 4426 CC RM-30 PF PF CD-N(1)(P) RM-30 PC-4063 PC-3872 PF PF PC-2130 PF CD-C (P) PC-4374 PF PF PF CD-C(P) CD-C(P) CD-N (P) PF PC-3111 PC-3007 PC-3974 PF PF PC-4262 PC-4243 PC-4238 PC-4195 RM-15 RMD(NP) RM-40 PC-3429 CD-N (P) CD-C(GF)(P) RM-40 CD-C (P) CD-C (P) PFAMF DHS DHS PF PC-4611 CC(L) PC-4053 RMD(NP) RMD(NP) RM-30 PF PC-2049 PC-3102 R-2 RM-15 R-1 RM-30 PC-4339 RM-30 RM-30 PF PC-4052PF PC- 2545 R-2 RM-40 PC-2145 RM-30 PC-2968 PC-3995 R-2 PF R-1 R-1 PC-3753 PC-4782 CS RT-50 CD-S(P) RT-50 RT-35 RT-35 R-2 RT-50 RT-50 PC-4779 RM-30 CD-C(P) PC-2649 PC-4296 RM-15 PC-4173 PC-4436 PC-3437 RM-15 RM-30PC-4048 PC- 2836 PC-2152 PF R-1 R-2 RM-15 RM-30 R-1(10000) PC-3571 PF R-2 RM-30 R-2 R-2 RM-15 R R-1 CommuniGarden Palo AltoMedicalFoundation CityHall DowntownLibrary SeniorCenter FireSta.No.1 AddisonElementarySchool Children'sLibrary Palo AltoHigh School MainLibrary CulturalCenter HooverHospital JuniorMuseumandZoo WalterHaysElementarySchool Fire StationNo. 3 Elizabeth GambleGarden Center Lucie SternCenter ElPaloAltoPark El CaminoPark LyttonPlaza Cogswell Plaza ScottPark KelloggPark RinconadaPark JohnsonPark HopkinsPark EleanorPardeePark BowlingGreen WilliamsPark Quarry Road Welch Road Arboretum Road Somerset Place Martin Avenue Tevis Place Kirby Place Center Drive Pitman Avenue Arcadia Place Pitman Avenue Kings Lane Lincoln Avenue Forest Avenue Dana Avenue nter Drive Un WestCrescentDrive Hamilton Avenue Ashby Drive Island D rive Dana Avenue ntDrive Southwood Drive EdgewoodDrive Newell Road Louisa Court De Soto Da Waverley StreetPoe Street Palo Alto Avenue Kipling Street Ruthven Avenue Hawthorne Avenue Lane 33 Cowper Street Tasso Street PaloAltoAvenue Everett Avenue Webster Street Hawthorne Avenue Lytton Avenue Everett Court Byron Street Middlefield Road Middlefield Road Fulton Street Seneca Street Fife Avenue Guinda Street Hamilton Avenue Forest Avenue Forest Avenue Fulton Street Palo Al to Avenue Lytton Avenue Pa lo Alto Avenue Seneca Street Hale Street Forest Court University Avenue Hamilton Court Hamilton Avenue Hale Street Chaucer Street PaloAltoA Street M Ma Palm S University Avenue Embarcadero Road Webster Street Kellogg Avenue Lincoln Avenue Melville Avenue Fulton Street Byron Street Middlefield Road Melville Avenue Cowper Street Webster Street Coleridge Avenue Greenwood Avenue Harker Avenue Parkinson Avenue Hopkins Avenue Harriet Street Harriet Street Community Lane Wilson Street Lincoln Avenue Regent Place Kent Place Lowell Avenue Middlefield Road Embarcadero Road Tennyson Avenue Byron Street Fulton Street Guinda Street Harker Avenue Cedar Street Hopkins Avenue Pine Street Newell Road Parkinson Avenue Seale Avenue Mark Twain StNewell Road No P Walter Hays Drive Walnut Drive Greenwood Avenue Hutchinson Avenue Channing Avenue Sharon Court Newell Road Erstwild Court Newell Place High StreetHomer Avenue Channing Avenue Alma Street Lane A West Lane 8 West Addison Avenue Emerson Street Ramona Street High StreetLane B West Emerson Street Lincoln Avenue Waverley Street Gilman Street Bryant Street Forest Avenue Downing Lane Homer Avenue Waverley Street Kingsley Avenue Lane B East Ramona Street Addison Avenue Lane D West Scott Street Bryant StreetLane D East Lincoln Avenue Kingsley Avenue Lane 59 East Addison Avenue Kipling Street Channing Avenue Cowper Street Hamilton Avenue Tasso Street University AvenueWebster Street Lane 39 Webster Street Lane 56 (Private) Byron Street Forest Avenue Whitman Court Lincoln Avenue Kellogg Avenue Melville Avenue Kingsley Avenue Waverley Street Bryant Street Cowper Street Middlefield Road Addison Avenue Lincoln Avenue Cowper Street Churchill Avenue Tasso Street Kingsley Avenue Byron Street Guinda Street Fulton Street Homer Avenue Guinda Street Boyce Avenue Addison Avenue Channing Avenue Coleridge Avenue Lowell Avenue Waverley Street Bry Waverley Street nue Cowper Street gton Avenue Seale Avenue Tasso Street Tennyson Avenue Cowper Street Santa Rita Avenue Webster StreetEmbarcadero Road Kellogg Avenue Melville Avenue Alma Street MariposaA Coleridge Avenue venue Churchill Avenue Emerson Street Quarry Road Mitchell Lane Palm Drive (Stanford) Alma StreetEl Camino Real Hawthorne Avenue High Street Everett Avenue Lytton Avenue High Street El Camino Real Alma Street Hamilton AvenueUniversity Avenue Wells Avenue Emerson Street Ramona Street Emerson Street PaloAltoAvenue Bryant Street Ramona Street Lane 15 East Bryant Court Forest Avenue Lane 5 East Urban Lane Bryant Street Paulsen Lane Lane 12 West Encina Avenue Lane 7 West Lane 7 East Lane 6 East Centennial Walk Lane 11 West Lane 21 Florence Street Lane 20 East Lane 20 West Kipling Street Lane 30 WOODLAND AVE CONCORDLEXINGTON T PL CLELAND CT WOODLAND CREEK DR DR CAMBRIDGE AVE HARVARD AVE LN ALMA ST CORNELL AVE ALTO LN AVE EL CAMINO REAL CREEK RD PARK SHERWOOD WAVERLEY ST BURGESS RD E. CLAREMONT CREEKPL EAST DR PL MANOR LINFIELD WILLOW WY WOOD SHER WAVERLEY PLCLAREMONT WY CREEK RD DR WY E. CREEK DR WAVERLEY DR ST PL WILLOW PARKING LAUREL ST WILLOW RDCT WAVERLEY KENT PL ST BAYWOOD LINFIELD DR HOMEWOOD PL RN AVE AVE CLOVER LN CO This map is a product of the City of Palo Alto GIS This document is a graphic representation only of best available sources. Legend Primary Study Area (CD Zones) City Jurisdictional Limits Parking Assessment Districts Zone Designation Boundaries abc Zone Designation Labels Peripheral Study Area 0'780' Pa l o A l t o D o w n t o w n and Su r r o u n d i n g N e i g h b o r h o o d s CITY OF PALO ALTOINCORPORATED CALI FORNIA P a l o A l t oT h e C i t y o f APRIL 1 6 1894 The City of Palo Alto assumes no responsibility for any errors. ©1989 to 2013 City of Palo Alto RRivera, 2013-03-11 17:32:47CD Peripheral Study Area--Aaron (\\cc-maps\gis$\gis\admin\Personal\RRivera.mdb) City of Palo Alto (ID # 3462) City Council Informational Report Report Type: Informational Report Meeting Date: 3/11/2013 March 11, 2013 Page 1 of 9 (ID # 3462) Title: Downtown Monitoring Report 2011-2012 Subject: Downtown Monitoring Report 2011-2012 From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Recommendation This is an informational report and no Council action is required. Executive Summary The annual Commercial Downtown (CD) Monitoring Report tracks total non-residential growth in the commercial downtown area (CD-C and CD-C(GF)(P)zones) and office and retail vacancy rates in CD-C and CD-C (GF)(P) zones. Through mid-December of 2012, there was a 2.8 percent vacancy rate within the Ground Floor Overlay District and a 1.6 percent overall vacancy rate in the Commercial Downtown (CD) zoning district. In this monitoring cycle, approximately 49,860 square feet of space was approved or added to the total downtown non-residential square footage. An additional 11,790 square feet of new non-residential development can be accommodated before the re-evaluation limit of 235,000 square feet growth limit is reached. Background Annual monitoring of available space in Commercial Downtown (CD) zoning area was established in 1998 by Comprehensive Plan Programs L-8 and L-9. These programs require reporting of non-residential development activity and trends within the CD zone district. Staff regularly has tracked vacancy rates, changes in floor area and parking in the CD district resulting from approved development to comply with the Comprehensive Plan programs and to determine the ground floor vacancy rate in the CD zone district. The zoning code included an exception process to allow office development on the first floor if the ground floor vacancy rate exceeds 5%. In 2009, the City Council adopted zoning ordinance amendments to enhance protection of retail uses in downtown commercial districts to ensure that retail uses are retained and viability enhanced during the economic downturn and beyond. The ordinance also eliminated an exception process triggered when the GF vacancy rate is found to be greater than 5% during the annual monitoring. A map of the districts subject to the amendments was included in the Council report (CMR 20:09), available on the City’s website. March 11, 2013 Page 2 of 9 (ID # 3462) Staff completed field visits for this 2011-2012 monitoring period in mid-December 2012. Telephone interviews and email exchanges with local real estate leasing agents were also compiled at the same time to determine current vacancy rates and prevailing rents. This report also includes cumulative data on developments in the Commercial Downtown (CD) zone from January 1987 through August 31, 2012 and has specific data on vacancy information and rental rates through December 2012. Discussion The economic conditions of the Palo Alto downtown area are continuing to improve since last year. Currently there is a 2.8 percent vacancy within the Ground Floor Overlay District and a 1.6 percent overall vacancy in the Commercial Downtown (CD) zoning district. This is a noticeable drop of 2 percent vacancy in the Ground Floor Overlay District from last year. This number is close to the 2006-2007 period vacancy rate, before the economic downturn. The retail rental rates ranged from $3.00 to $6.50 per square foot based on the location, and office rental rates ranged from $4.00 to $7.00 per square foot during this reporting period. Office rental rates have increased marginally from last year and retail rental rates have remained steady through the 2011-2012 monitoring period. The following table shows the approximate total vacant square foot and percentage of vacancy from 2006. TABLE 1: Total Vacancy in CD-C & CD-C (GF) (P) Zones in Downtown Palo Alto Year Total CD-C Vacant (SQFT) % of CD-C Vacancy Total CD-C (GF) (P) Vacant (SQFT) % of CD-C (GF) (P) Vacancy 2006-2007 88,368 2.63 18,330 2.94 2007-2008 120,004 3.60 26,294 4.21 2008-2009 212,189 6.39 56,109 8.99 2009-2010 85,271 2.56 37,888 6.91 2010-2011 66,226 2.0 26, 290 4.8 2011-2012 52,368 1.6 15,550 2.8 Source: City of Palo Alto’s Planning Department. Non-Residential Development Activity The 1986 Downtown Study (and Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance) incorporated a growth limit of 350,000 square feet of additional floor area above the total floor area existing in 1986, and provided for a re-evaluation of the CD regulations when net new development reaches 235,000 square feet. Since 1986, a total of 223,210 square feet of non-residential floor March 11, 2013 Page 3 of 9 (ID # 3462) area has been added in the Downtown CD-C zoned area. In the past two monitoring cycles from 2009-2011, approximately 34,650 square feet of net new commercial floor area was added with a few major contributing projects such as 524 Hamilton Avenue and 265 Lytton Avenue. In this current cycle, 2011-2012, approximately 49,860 square feet of net new commercial floor area has been added through one major project, 335-355 Alma Street. Based on this recent monitoring, an additional 11,790 square feet of new non-residential development remains for development before the re-evaluation limit of 235,000 square feet growth limit is reached. Staff notes that the 135 Hamilton Avenue project was recently approved (though parking issues haven’t been resolved), which would increase the total by approximately 20,000 square feet, to about 245,000 square feet, in excess of the re-evaluation threshold. Staff has developed a scope of work for the new Development Cap Study and will initiate work in the next couple of months. TABLE 2: Total Non-Residential SQFT Added in Downtown Palo Alto since 2006. Year Total Non-Residential SQFT Added in CD-C Total Non-Residential SQFT Left to Reach the Re-evaluation Limit* 2006-2007 195 129,055 2007-2008 7,480 121,575 2008-2009 25,280 96, 295 2009-2010 21,150 75, 145 2010-2011 13,500 61,645 2011-2012 49,860* 11,790 Source: City of Palo Alto’s Planning Department *Projects filed as of August 2012. Below is a list of significant projects in the downtown CD-C zone area that added more than 5,000 square feet since 2006. 325 Lytton Ave--17,515 square feet 310 University Ave--7,481 square feet 265 Lytton Ave—21,151 square feet 524 Hamilton Avenue—9,345 square feet 355 Alma Street—49,860 square feet Demonstrating Special Public Benefits The Downtown Study reserved 100,000 square feet of the 350,000 square foot growth limit to be used for projects demonstrating special public benefits. Since 1986, eleven projects in the March 11, 2013 Page 4 of 9 (ID # 3462) Downtown area have been developed under the Planned Community zoning that requires a finding of public benefit. Six of the projects exceeded the non-residential floor area that would otherwise be allowed under zoning by a total of 66,915 square feet. The total changes in square footage of these projects are shown in the fourth column of Attachment C. The remaining five projects were mixed-use projects that did not exceed allowable non-residential floor areas. All of the projects either provided parking or paid a fee in-lieu of providing parking. Only one project; 355 Alma Street, in this current cycle added square feet demonstrating public benefit and provided in-lieu fees for parking. Projects Qualifying for Seismic, Historic or Minor Expansion Exemptions The Downtown Study designated 75,000 square feet of the 350,000 square foot cap for projects that qualify for seismic, historic or minor expansion exemptions in order to encourage these upgrades. Since 1986, 93,931 square feet have been added in this category. Two projects, 524 Hamilton Avenue and 668 Ramona, used close to 5000 square feet of Transfer Development Rights (TDR) square footage. This year’s only approved project, 335-355 Alma Street, did not add any square feet in this category. These projects are shown in the fifth column of Attachment C. Parking Inventory The 1986 Downtown Study set performance measures that established that new commercial development in the Downtown should not increase the total parking deficit beyond that was existing or approved through May 1986, or 1,601 spaces. This base “deficit” number was determined by counting the number of commercially bound vehicles (employees, customers, etc.) parked in residential neighborhoods. Increases or reductions to the deficit are determined by comparing the total number of commercial parking spaces constructed in the downtown area with the amount of new commercial square footage constructed. In general, for every 250 square feet of commercial development, an additional parking space should be constructed. There are certain projects that qualify for exemptions to parking requirements, which add to the deficit. Conversely, parking improvements that are independent of development reduce the deficit. As noted above, certain projects are exempt from providing parking or a portion thereof, which increases the deficit. The City tracks these exemptions, and at the end of the 2003 monitoring period, the City determined a re-evaluation of the parking exemption regulations would be undertaken when the unmet parking demand resulting from exemptions reaches a cumulative 450 spaces. Currently, the unmet parking demand resulting from exemptions is 350 parking spaces. In 2003, the City opened two new parking structures located at 528 High Street and 445 Bryant Street. This added a total of 713 net new parking spaces. Other improvements that have occurred since 1986 include a 2-floor addition to the Cowper/Webster Garage and significant restriping of on-street parking spaces by the City’s Transportation Division. Per the methodology prescribed in the 1986 downtown study, the total cumulative parking deficit has been “reduced” from 1,601 in 1986 to 901 in 2012. Attachment D is a chart that details the CD March 11, 2013 Page 5 of 9 (ID # 3462) (Commercial Downtown) parking deficit. Although defined as a deficit reduction, there is a general understanding that commercial parking intrusion into residential neighborhoods has increased since that time. Staff believes that the parking intrusion is not accurately depicted in Attachment D, as it likely doesn’t include factors such as a) increased employee density downtown, b) conversions of existing retail or underused office space to more intensive office uses, c) conversions of prior residential hotel uses to true hotel uses, and d) parking in neighborhoods from areas other than the downtown business, such as for Caltrain commuters, Palo Alto Medical Foundation, and/or Stanford. A better estimate of parking intrusion will be developed as part of the Downtown Development Cap Study. Recently, staff has been directed by City Council to undertake a site and feasibility study to evaluate the possibility of construction of additional public parking structures in and around the Downtown area, and to consider expansion of existing parking capacity through the use of attendant parking at existing structures. In addition, City Council directed staff to conduct a re- evaluation of the 1986 Downtown Development Cap Study. This study examined parking, traffic and land use conditions of the Downtown area and restricting future non-residential development to a total of 350,000 square feet in the Downtown CD-C zone area. The proposed re-evaluation study will also include analysis of existing and projected traffic, parking capacity, and the impacts from application of parking exemptions under transfer of development rights and other code provisions. Vacancy Rate for Ground Floor (GF) Combining District The Ground Floor Combining District (GF) was created to encourage active pedestrian uses in the Downtown area such as retail, eating and drinking and personal services. There is approximately 548,675 square feet of total Ground Floor area in the CD-C (GF) (P) zoning district after the adoption of the amended ordinance in December 2009. Staff surveyed downtown CD-C (GF) (P) zoned areas to assess vacancy in the second week of December 2012. Staff also consulted local real-estate agents and other databases and compiled a list of only five properties in the CD-C (GF) (P) area, which met the requirements for vacancy. The total vacancy amounted to 15,550 square feet. TABLE 3: Vacant Property Listings for Only Ground Floor (GF) Spaces in CD-C (GF) (P) Combining District. (As of December 14, 2012) Address Vacant Square Feet 575 High 4,437 174 University 2,300 March 11, 2013 Page 6 of 9 (ID # 3462) 355 University 3,694 429-447 University 3,300 436-440 University 1,818 Source: City of Palo Alto’s Planning Department This results in a GF vacancy rate of approximately 2.8 percent this year; 2 percent less than previous year’s vacancy rate. FIGURE1. Vacancy Rates in CD-C and CD-C (GF)(P) Zones Since 2006 Source: City of Palo Alto’s Planning Department Vacancy Rate for Entire CD District The entire CD area contains approximately 3,850,000 gross square feet of floor area, including approximately 330,000 square feet within the SOFA CAP Phase 2 area. About 525,000 square March 11, 2013 Page 7 of 9 (ID # 3462) feet is used for religious or residential purposes or is vacant and not available for occupancy. Thus, the net square footage of available commercial space is approximately 3,325,000 square feet. Staff conducted a field survey in mid-December 2012 and communicated with local real estate agents during same time to assess overall vacancies in the downtown area. In this monitoring cycle there was a total vacancy of 52,368 square feet. This vacancy equals a rate of 1.6 percent compared to 2.0 percent in last year’s monitoring report. The overall CD-C vacancy rate has reduced considerably since the 2008-2009 period, close to a drop of 5 percent. Table 4 was compiled based on staff conducted fieldwork, researches of different real estate websites and responses received from local downtown real estate agents. TABLE 4: Vacant Property Listings for Rest of Commercial Downtown (CD). (As of December 14, 2012)) Includes Upper Floor Office Space in CD-C (GF) (P) Combining District and all floors of CD-C (P) District Address Zoning District Vacant Square Feet 526 Bryant CD-C (GF)(P) 5,753 542 Emerson CD-C(GF) (P) 1,850 385 Forest CD-C (GF)(P) 2,038 201-225 Hamilton CD-C (GF)(P) 8,660 205 Hamilton CD-C (GF)(P) 9,857 437 Lytton CD-C (P) 1,204 550 Lytton CD-C (P) 2,662 355 University CD-C (GF)(P) 4,795 CD – Commercial Downtown, (C) – Commercial, GF – Ground Floor Combining District, P - Pedestrian Overlay March 11, 2013 Page 8 of 9 (ID # 3462) Trends in Use Composition The primary observation of change in the use composition of Downtown was, in this cycle about 48,360 square feet of new non-residential use was added through the 355 Alma Street project. Since the enactment of new CD zoning regulations in 1986, the total floor area devoted to higher-intensity commercial uses such as office, retail, eating/ drinking and housing has increased, while the total floor area in lower-intensity commercial uses like manufacturing, warehousing and business services has decreased (see Attachment E). Retail Rents Retail rental rates have marginally increased since last year’s monitoring report. According to the data gathered during December 2012 staff survey of commercial real estate agents offering properties for lease in Downtown, rents for retail space are generally ranging from $3.00 to $6.00 per square foot triple net (i.e. rent plus tenant assumption of insurance, janitorial services and taxes). The lower end of this range is generally for spaces in older buildings and away from University Avenue. Retail rental rates on core downtown University Avenue goes up to $5.00 to $6.50. For some vacant properties outside the downtown core, rental rates are lower and listed as negotiable. Office Rents Based on the information gathered from commercial real estate agents listing properties for lease in Downtown, rents for Class A Downtown office space (i.e. newer and/or larger buildings on University Avenue and Lytton Avenues) and Class B office space (i.e. older and/or smaller buildings further from University Avenue) are ranging from $3.75 to $7.00 per square foot triple net, more or less similar to last year’s monitoring cycle. Timeline This is an annual report. Resource Impact This report has no impact on resources, though the implications of reduced vacancy rates have positive impacts on the City’s property and sales tax receipts. Policy Implications This report on the Commercial Downtown (CD) zoning area is mandated by Comprehensive Plan Programs L-8 and L-9 and by the Downtown Study approved by the City Council on July 14, 1986. Environmental Review This is an informational report only and is exempted from CEQA review. March 11, 2013 Page 9 of 9 (ID # 3462) Courtesy Copies: Planning and Transportation Commission Architectural Review Board Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce Palo Alto Board of Realtors Palo Alto Downtown Business & Professional Association Downtown North Neighborhood Association Professorville Neighborhood University Park Neighborhood Association Attachments: : Attachment A: Downtown Study Summary (PDF) : Attachment B: Map of Downtown CD(C) District (PDF) : Attachment C: Non-Residential Square Footage (PDF) : Attachment D: Parking Changes (PDF) : Attachment E: Changes by Land Use Category (PDF) ATTACHMENT A DOWNTOWN STUDY RESULTS SUMMARY (July 1986) The following are the primary measures adopted as a result of the study: 1. A new Commercial Downtown (CD) zoning district, including three sub districts (CD-C, CD-S and CD-N), was created and applied to most of the Downtown area previously zoned Community Commercial (CC) or Service Commercial (CS). The basic provisions of the CD district include floor area ratios (FARs) that are more restrictive than in the previous CC and CS zones, limits to project size and to the overall amount of future development, and special development regulations for sites adjacent to residential zones. 2. Growth limits were applied to the CD district restricting future development to a total of 350,000 square feet beyond what was existing or approved in May 1986 and providing for a re-evaluation of the CD regulations when new development reaches 235,000 square feet. In addition, 100,000 square feet of the total new floor area was reserved for projects demonstrating special public benefits and 75,000 square feet for projects which qualify for seismic, historic or minor expansion exemptions. 3. Exemptions to the floor area ratio restrictions of the CD zone were established for certain building expansions involving historic structures, seismic rehabilitation, provision of required handicapped access, or one-time additions of 200 square feet or less. 4. New parking regulations were established for the University Avenue Parking Assessment District that requires new non- residential development to provide parking at a rate of one space per 250 square feet of floor area. Exemptions to this requirement are provided for certain increases in floor area related to provision of handicapped access, seismic or historic rehabilitation, one-time minor additions (200 square feet or less) and development of vacant land previously assessed for parking. The regulations also permit, in certain instances, off-site parking and parking fees in lieu of on-site parking. 5. Performance measures were established that specify that new development in the Downtown should not increase the total parking deficit beyond that expected from development that was existing or approved through May, 1986 (1600 spaces) and that call for re-evaluation of the parking exemption regulations when the unmet parking demand, resulting from exemptions, reaches one half (225 parking spaces) of the minimum 450 parking spaces deemed necessary for construction of a new public parking structure. Staff was directed to monitor the parking deficit. 6. A new Ground Floor (GF) Combining District was created and applied to the area along University Avenue and portions of the major side streets between Lytton and Hamilton Avenues, in order to restrict the amount of ground floor area devoted to uses other than retail, eating and drinking or personal service. 7. Staff was directed to monitor the Downtown area in terms of development activity, vacancy rates, sales tax revenues, and commercial lease rates to facilitate evaluation of the effectiveness of the new regulations. 8. Staff was directed to undertake a site and feasibility study to evaluate an additional public parking structure elsewhere in the Downtown, to consider development of a parking facility on public lots S, L and F, and to explore the possibility of leasing or purchasing privately-owned vacant lots suitable as parking structure sites. 9. Policies and regulations were adopted which encourage Planned Community (PC) zoning for parking structures and limit underground parking to two levels below grade, unless there is proof that regular pumping of subsurface water will not be necessary. 10. A Twelve-Point Parking Program was adopted to increase the efficiency of existing parking. 11. Traffic policies were adopted which prohibit new traffic signals on portions of Alma Street and Middlefield Road, and prohibit a direct connection from Sand Hill Road to Palo Alto/Alma Street. In addition, new signs were approved directing through traffic off of University Avenue and onto Hamilton and Lytton Avenues. 12. Staff and the Architectural Review Board (ARB) were directed to consider the possibility of an Urban Design Plan for Downtown and to develop design guidelines for commercial structures in neighborhood transition areas and for driveways which cross pedestrian walkways. 13. A temporary Design and Amenities Committee was created and charged with developing an incentive program (including FAR increases of up to 1.5) to encourage private development to provide a variety of public amenities in the Downtown area. 14. Staff was directed to study possible restrictions on the splitting and merging of parcels as well as the establishment of minimum lot sizes in the new CD district. COMMERCIAL DOWNTOWN (CD) ZONE DISTRICT MAP ATTACHMENT B ~ ;;9 -, o • o • il ® i = !i 0, , ., : Page 1 ATTACHMENT C CD NON-RESIDENTIAL CHANGE IN SQUARE FOOTAGE 09/01/86 TO 08/31/12 Project Address Zoning Date Approved Public Benefit Bonus Non Residential Square Footage Seismic, Historic, or Minor Bonus Square Footage Net change in non-Residential Floor Area 520 Ramona Street A CDCGFP 11/20/84 - 400 +400 220 University Avenue CDCGFP 2/5/87 - 65 +65 151 Homer Avenue CDSP 3/17/88 - - -9,750 314 Lytton Avenue CDCP 5/5/88 - - -713 247-275 Alma Street CDNP 8/4/88 - - +1,150 700 Emerson Street CDSP 9/15/88 - - +4,000 431 Florence Street CDCP 9/15/88 - 2,500 +2,500 156 University Avenue CDCGFP 12/15/88 - 4,958 +4,958 401 Florence Street CDCP 3/2/89 - 2,407 +2,407 619 Cowper Street CDCP 5/6/89 - - +2,208 250 University Avenue PC-3872 5/15/89 11,000B 300 +20,300 550 University Avenue CDCP 6/1/89 - - -371 Page 2 Project Address Zoning Date Approved Public Benefit Bonus Non Residential Square Footage Seismic, Historic, or Minor Bonus Square Footage Net change in non-Residential Floor Area 529 Bryant Street PC-3974 5/3/90 2,491C 2,491 +2,491 305 Lytton Avenue CDCP 9/28/90 - 200 +200 550 Lytton AvenueDE CDCP 10/22/90 - - +4,845 531 Cowper Street PC-4052 5/21/91 9,000 475 +9,475 540 Bryant Street CDCGFP 3/24/92 - 404 +404 530/534 Bryant Street CDCGFP 4/15/93 - 432 +432 555 Waverley Street/425 Hamilton AvenueE CDCP 9/21/93 - - +2,064 201 University Avenue CDCGFP 11/18/93 - 2,450 +2,450 Page 3 Project Address Zoning Date Approved Public Benefit Bonus Non Residential Square Footage Seismic, Historic, or Minor Bonus Square Footage Net change in non/Residential Floor Area 518 Bryant Street CDCGFP 3/3/94 - 180 +180 245 Lytton Avenue CDCP 7/21/94 - - -21,320 400 Emerson StreetEF PC-4238 9/19/94 - 200 +4,715 443 Emerson Street CDCGFP 1/5/95 - 26 +26 420 Emerson Street CDCP 3/16/95 - 125 +125 340 University Avenue CDCGFP 4/6/95 - - -402 281 University Avenue CDCGFP 4/20/95 - - -2,500 456 University Avenue CDCGFP 5/18/95 - 7,486 +7,486 536 Ramona Street CDCGFP 7/11/95 - 134 +134 725/753 Alma Street PC-4283 7/17/95 - - -1,038 552 Emerson Street CDCGFP 7/18/95 - 177 +177 483 University Avenue G PC-4296 10/2/95 3,467C 2,789 +7,289 424 University Avenue CDCGFP 9/21/95 - 2,803 +2,803 Page 4 Project Address Zoning Date Approved Public Benefit Bonus Non Residential Square Footage Seismic, Historic, or Minor Bonus Square Footage Net change in non/Residential Floor Area 901/909 Alma Street E,F PC-4389 8/1/96 - - +4,425 171 University Avenue CD-C(GF)(P) 9/19/96 - 1,853 +1,853 401 High Street CD-C(P) 10/3/96 - 350 +350 430 Kipling Street D,H CD-C(P) 10/22/96 - 200 +1,412 460-476 University Avenue CD-C(GF)(P) 3/20/97 - 1,775 +1,775 400 Emerson Street D PC-4238 3/21/97 - - +2,227 275 Alma Street CD-N(P) 7/8/97 - 200 +3,207 390 Lytton Avenue PC-4436 7/14/97 8,420C 689 +17,815 411 High Street H CDCP 12/18/97 - 2,771 +2,771 530 Ramona CDCGFP 05/20/99 - 2852 +2852 705 Alma St CDSP 09/21/99 - 2814 +2814 200 Hamilton Ave CDCP 10/21/99 - 10913 +10913 550 Lytton Ave CDCP 08/11/00 - - +93 Page 5 Project Address Zoning Date Approved Public Benefit Bonus Non Residential Square Footage Seismic, Historic, or Minor Bonus Square Footage Net change in Non Residential Floor Area 437 Kipling St CDCGFP 02/01/01 - - +945 701 Emerson St CDSP 05/29/01 - - +434 723 Emerson St CDSP 05/29/01 - - +400 880 - 884 Emerson St CDSP 05/29/01 - - +312 539 Alma St CDCGFP 10/23/01 - 2,500 +2,500 270 University Ave CDCGFP 11/01/01 - 2,642 +2,642 901 High St. E, F CDSP 12/12/02 - - +12,063 800 High St. I PC-4779 02/03/03 - - -15,700 164 Hamilton Ave CDCP 01/13/05 - - -2,799 335 University Ave CDCGFP 08/10/05 - 4,500J +5,249 382 University Ave CDCGFP 07/27/06 - 194 +194 102 University Ave CDCGFP 10/10/2006 - - +8 325 Lytton Ave CDCP 5/2006 - - +17,515 Page 6 Project Address Zoning Date Approved Public Benefit Bonus Non Residential Square Footage Seismic, Historic, or Minor Bonus Square Footage Net change in Non Residential Floor Area 310 University Ave CDCGFP 07/31/2008 - 7,481 +7,481 317-323 University Ave CDCGFP 01/2008 - 2,500 +3,290 564 University Ave CDCP 7/2008 - 2,500 +4,475 278 University CDCGFP 11/2008 - - +137 265 Lytton CDCP 7/2010 - 3,712 +21,151 340 University CDCP 12/2010 - - -1,360 524 Hamilton CDCP 2/2011 - 5,200 +9,345 630 Ramona CDCP 6/2011 - 437 +437 668 Ramona CDCP 7/2011 - 4,940 +4,940 661 Bryant CDCP 2/2011 - 1,906 0 335-355 Alma CDCP 8/11 9,700 - 49,863 Totals 1986-2012 44,078 93,931 223,219 A: Project approved during the Downtown Moratorium (9/84 to 9/86), but was not included in the Downtown EIR’s “pipeline projects.” As a result, the project is counted among the CD District’s nonresidential development approvals since the enactment of the Downtown Study Policies in 1986 B: Through Assessment District project provided additional 64 public parking spaces as part of public benefit instead of required 44 private spaces C: Project exceeded square footage otherwise allowed by zoning Page 7 D: Project converted residential space to non-residential space. Net non-residential space counts toward the 350,000 square foot limit E: Project included covered parking that counts as floor area but not counted 350,000 square foot limit F: Project was approved pursuant to PAMC Sections 18.83.120 or 18.83.130 which allow for a reduction in the number required parking spaces for shared parking facilities, joint use parking facilities, or substitution of 8 bike parking spaces for one vehicle space. G. In addition, project paid in-lieu fee for loss of 2 on-site parking spaces H: In addition, projects paid in-lieu fee for loss of 4 on-site spaces I: Part of the SOFA 2 CAP J: Transfer of Development Right (TDR) agreement with 230 and 232 Homer Avenue. 5000 total sq ft of TDR but only 4,500 sq. ft used for Non Residential Floor Area. Page 8 Page 1 CD PARKING DEFICIT FROM 9/1/86 to 8/31/2012 ATTACHMENT D PROJECT ADDRESS ZONING NET CHANGE IN NON/ RESIDENTIAL FLOOR AREA ADDED PARKING REQUIRED NET ADDED PARKING SPACES PARKING EXEMPTIONS PER 18.52.060 OF PAMC NET DEFICIT CHANGE TOTAL CUMULATIVE DEFICIT 1986 deficit 1,601 520 Ramona StreetA CDCGFP +400 2 0 0 +2 1,603 220 University Avenue CDCGFP +65 0 0 0 0 1,603 151 Homer Avenue CDSP -9,750 0 11 0 -50 1,553 314 Lytton Avenue CDCP -713 0 0 0 -3 1,550 247-275 Alma Street CDNP +1,150 5 5 0 0 1,550 700 Emerson Street CDSP +4,000 16 16 0 0 1,550 431 Florence St CDCP +2,500 10 0 10 +10 1,560 Page 2 PROJECT ADDRESS ZONING NET CHANGE IN NON/ RESIDENTIAL FLOOR AREA ADDED PARKING REQUIRED NET ADDED PARKING SPACES PARKING EXEMPTIONS PER 18.52.060 OF PAMC NET DEFICIT CHANGE TOTAL CUMULATIVE DEFICIT 156 University Avenue CDCGFP +4,958 20 0 20 +20 1,580 401 Florence Street CDCP +2,407 10 0 10 +10 1,590 619 Cowper Street CDCP +2,208 9 9 0 0 1,590 250 University Avenue PC-3872 +20,300 103 131B 0 -28 1,562 550 University Avenue CDCP -371 0 0 0 -1 1,561 529 Bryant Street PC-3974 +2,491 10 0 10 +10 1,571 520 Webster StreetC PC-3499 0 0 163 0 -163 1,408 305 Lytton Ave CDCP +200 1 0 1 +1 1,409 550 Lytton Avenue CDCP +4,845 19 19 0 0 1,409 Downtown Extensive restriping by Transportation Division of on and off/street parking -96 1,313 Page 3 PROJECT ADDRESS ZONING NET CHANGE IN NON/ RESIDENTIAL FLOOR AREA ADDED PARKING REQUIRED NET ADDED PARKING SPACES PARKING EXEMPTIONS PER 18.52.060 OF PAMC NET DEFICIT CHANGE TOTAL CUMULATIVE DEFICIT 531 Cowper Street PC-4052 +9,475 38 0 2 +38 1,351 540 Bryant Street CDCGFP +404 2 0 2 +2 1,353 530/534 Bryant Street CDCGFP +432 2 0 2 +2 1,355 555 Waverley Street/425 Hamilton AvenueD CDCP +2,064 8 0 0 +8 1,363 201 University Avenue CDCGFP +2,450 10 0 10 +10 1,373 518 Bryant Street CDCGFP +180 1 0 1 +1 1,374 245 Lytton Ave CDCP -21,320 90 149 0 -59 1,315 400 Emerson Street PC-4238 +4,715 18 5 1 +14 1,329 443 Emerson Street CDCGFP +26 0 0 0 0 1,329 Page 4 PROJECT ADDRESS ZONING NET CHANGE IN NON/ RESIDENTIAL FLOOR AREA ADDED PARKING REQUIRED NET ADDED PARKING SPACES PARKING EXEMPTIONS PER 18.52.060 OF PAMC NET DEFICIT CHANGE TOTAL CUMULATIVE DEFICIT 420 Emerson Street CDCP +125 1 0 1 +1 1,336 340 University Avenue CDCGFP -402 0 0 0 -2 1,334 281 University Avenue CDCGFP -2,500 0 0 0 -10 1,324 456 University Avenue CDCGFP +7,486 30 0 30 +30 1,354 536 Ramona Street CDCGFP +134 1 0 1 +1 1,355 725-753 Alma Street PC-4283 -1,038 7 7 0 -11 1,344 552 Emerson Street CDCGFP +177 1 0 1 +1 1,345 483 University Avenue PC-4296 +7,289 29 -2E 11 +31 1,376 424 University Avenue CDCGFP +2,803 11 0 11 +11 1,387 901/909 Alma PC-4389 +4,425 18 18 0 0 1,387 Page 5 PROJECT ADDRESS ZONING NET CHANGE IN NON/ RESIDENTIAL FLOOR AREA ADDED PARKING REQUIRED NET ADDED PARKING SPACES PARKING EXEMPTIONS PER 18.52.060 OF PAMC NET DEFICIT CHANGE TOTAL CUMULATIVE DEFICIT StreetD 171 University Avenue CDCGFP +1,853 7 0 7 +7 1,394 401 High Street CDCP +350 1 0 1 +1 1,395 430 Kipling Street CDCP +1,412 5 -4E 1 +10 1,405 460/476 University Avenue CDCGFP +1,775 7 0 7 +7 1,412 400 Emerson Street PC-4238 +2,227 9 0 0 +9 1,421 275 Alma StreetF CDNP +3,207 0 0 1 +1 1,422 390 Lytton Avenue PC-4436 +17,815 74 50 3 +27 1,449 411 High Street CDCP +2,771 0 -4E 11 +15 1,464 530 Ramona CDCGFP 2852 11 0 11 +11 1475 Page 6 PROJECT ADDRESS ZONING NET CHANGE IN NON/ RESIDENTIAL FLOOR AREA ADDED PARKING REQUIRED NET ADDED PARKING SPACES PARKING EXEMPTIONS PER 18.52.060 OF PAMC NET DEFICIT CHANGE TOTAL CUMULATIVE DEFICIT 705 Alma St CDSP 2814 11 0 11 +11 1486 200 Hamilton Ave CDCP 10,913 44 3E 35 +41 1527 550 Lytton Ave CDCP 93 0 0 0 0 1527 528 High St PF 0 0 138 G 0 -138 1389 445 Bryant PF 0 0 575 G 0 -575 814 437 Kipling St CDCGFP 945 4 0E 2 +4 818 701 Emerson St CDSP 434 2 1 1 +1 819 723 Emerson St CDSP 400 2 2 0 0 819 880 / 884 Emerson St CDSP 312 2 5 0 -3 816 Page 7 PROJECT ADDRESS ZONING NET CHANGE IN NON/ RESIDENTIAL FLOOR AREA ADDED PARKING REQUIRED NET ADDED PARKING SPACES PARKING EXEMPTIONS PER 18.52.060 OF PAMC NET DEFICIT CHANGE TOTAL CUMULATIVE DEFICIT 539 Alma St CDCGFP 2,500 10 0 10 +10 826 270 University Ave CDCGFP 2,642 11 0E 11 +11 837 SUBTOTAL 86-02 106,930 672 1297 236 -764 837 901 High St. CDSP 12,063 59D 60 0 -1 836 800 High St. H PC-4779 -15,700 0 63 0 -63 773 164 Hamilton Ave CDCP -2499 0 0 0 0 773 335 University AveI CDCGFP 5,249 0 0 0 0 773 Page 8 PROJECT ADDRESS ZONING NET CHANGE IN NON/ RESIDENTIAL FLOOR AREA ADDED PARKING REQUIRED NET ADDED PARKING SPACES PARKING EXEMPTIONS PER 18.52.060 OF PAMC NET DEFICIT CHANGE TOTAL CUMULATIVE DEFICIT 382 University Ave CDCGFP 194 0 0 1 +1 774 102 University Ave CDCGFP 8 0 0 0 0 774 310 University Ave CDCGFP 7,481 30 0 30 +30 804 317-323 University Ave CDCGFP 3,290 0 0 0 0 804 564 University Ave CDCP 4,475 10 0 10 +10 814 325 Lytton Ave CDCP 17,515 110 6 0 -6 808 265 Lytton CDCP 21,151 106 52 0 +54 860 278 University CDCGFP +137 1 0 1 +1 861 340 University CDCP -1,360 861 524 Hamilton CDCP +9,345 31 8 23 +23 884 Page 9 PROJECT ADDRESS ZONING NET CHANGE IN NON/ RESIDENTIAL FLOOR AREA ADDED PARKING REQUIRED NET ADDED PARKING SPACES PARKING EXEMPTIONS PER 18.52.060 OF PAMC NET DEFICIT CHANGE TOTAL CUMULATIVE DEFICIT 630 Ramona CDCP +437 2 0 2 +2 886 668 Ramona CDCP +4,940 20 0 20 +20 906 661 Bryant CDCP 0 0 0 0 0 906 Downtown Extensive restriping by Transportation Division of on and off/street parking -32 874 180 Hamilton Avenue CDCP 0 0 0 5 +5 879 355 Alma Street CDCP +49,863 166 144 22 +22 901 TOTAL 223,219 1,077 1,816 350 676 901 A: Project approved during the Downtown Moratorium (9/84 to 9/86, but was not included in the Downtown EIR’s “pipeline projects.”) As a result, the project is counted among the CD District’s nonresidential development approvals since the enactment of the Downtown Study Policies in 1986 B: Through Assessment District project provided additional 64 public parking spaces as part of public benefit C: Addition of 2 levels of parking to Cowper/Webster garage D: Project was approved pursuant to PAMC Sections 18.83.120 or 18.83.130 which allow for a reduction in the number required parking spaces for shared parking facilities, joint use parking facilities, or substitution of 8 bike parking spaces for one vehicle space. Page 10 E. Project removed existing on-site spaces or met required parking by paying in-lieu fee F: Site had existing parking sufficient to allow expansion G: Construction of 2 city parking lots. 528 High completed on Aug. 2003 and 445 Bryant completed on Nov. 2003 H: Part of the SOFA 2 CAP I: As per PAMC 18.87.055, the TDR area transferred to the site does not increase the number of automobile parking spaces required for the additional floor area. Page 11 ATTACHMENT E Commercial Downtown (CD) and SOFA 2 CAP Floor Area by Use Category Use Category Area (October 1986) Area (October 2012) Area Change, percentage 1. Offices 1,100,000 1,400,000 27% % 2. Retail 500,000 625,000 25.00% 3. Eating & Drinking 150,000 275,000 83.33% 4. Financial Services 200,000 200,000 0.00% 5. Business Services 150,000 175,000 16.67% 6. Basement Storage 175,000 100,000 -42.86% 7. Hotels 100,000 150,000 50.00% 8. Personal Services 75,000 125,000 66.67% 9. Utility Facility 150,000 100,000 -33.33% 10. Public Facilities 50,000 75,000 50.00% 11. Automotive Services 150,000 50,000 -66.67% 12. Recreation/Private Club 25,000 50,000 100.00% 13. Theaters 50,000 25,000 -50.00% 14. Warehousing & Distribution 50,000 25,000 -50.00% 15. Manufacturing 50,000 0 -100.00% 16. Religious Institutions 50,000 25,000 -50.00% 17. Multi-Family Residential 250,000 400,000 50.00% 18. Single Family Residential 50,000 25,000 -50.00% 19. Vacant & Under Construction 150,000 50,000 -66.66% 20. Vacant & For Sale 0 0 21. Vacant & Available 150,000 100,000 -33.33% Total 3,625,000 3,875,000 5.52% ADJUSTED TOTAL: (Deduct residential uses, religious institutions, vacant & for sale and vacant & under construction.) 3,125,000 3,350,000 (Rounded to the nearest 25,000 square feet) * The above table is rounded to the nearest 25,000 square feet and was based on a table originally prepared in 1986. Over the years, because of the rounding to 25,000 square foot increments, the table has had a greater margin of error. Staff attempted to update the table from the beginning in 1998; therefore the numbers may not compare directly to tables prepared prior to the 1998 report.