City of Palo Alto

Report Type:

(ID # 3417) Planning & Transportation Commission Staff Report

Meeting Date: 1/9/2013

Summary Title: Downtown Development Cap RFP Review Title: Planning and Transportation Commission Review of Proposed Scope of Work for the Downtown Development Cap Study From: Aaron Aknin, Assistant Planning Director Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Planning and Transportation Commission provide input on the attached Proposed Scope of Work to be incorporated into the Downtown Development Cap Evaluation Request for Proposal.

Background
In 1986, the City of Palo Alto conducted a Downtown Study, which examined parking, traffic and land use conditions in the Downtown area. As the 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. CD development regulations were to be re-evaluated when new development reached 235,000 square feet. Residential development was purposely excluded from the development 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 area attached to this report (Attachment B). Citywide growth limits and growth limits in other districts were also established at that time or shortly thereafter. 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
City of Palo Alto Page 1

(Attachment D), submitted in March 2012, provided information related to the 2010-11 time period. This report showed that the downtown area was recovering well from the recession and approximately 61,650 square feet of new non-residential development remained available before the re-evaluation limit of 235,000 square feet would be reached. The economy has continued to improve and several developments have been approved since that time, such that the evaluation milestone has now been reached. The City Council, therefore, recently 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. Staff and the Council believe that transportation and planning consultant services are needed to complete this study in a timely manner, as the work effort is substantial and well beyond staffs work program capabilities. The study should also benefit from a consultants teams knowledge of similar studies, issues, and solutions in other communities. Parking Parking Intrusion into adjacent residential neighborhoods and parking permit supply are both major concerns of the Downtown Cap Study. 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 that have reduced the deficit, though concerns remain. These impacts may be exacerbated by zoning code assumptions that 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 to respond to changing downtown needs and financing options. The Downtown Parking Assessment District, which is financially supported by downtown property owners via bond financing assessment, paid for the construction of downtown garages. Maintenance and operation costs of garages are funded through permit fees. Bond financing restrictions, however, limit the way in which these garages can be utilized. After the formation of assessment district and 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 parking exemptions to be transferred to other properties in certain cases. Traffic Traffic is another concern. Several policies were adopted as a result of the 1986 Downtown
City of Palo Alto Page 2

Study, and numerous transportation improvements have been implemented in the CD and surrounding areas since that time. Transportation improvements have included 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 the attached draft scope of work for the Downtown Development Cap Study is written with that in mind. 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 (GF) Combining District was created within the CD area, which encourages pedestrian uses, and generally limits business to retail, eating and drinking, and personal service uses on the ground floor. Office uses, which can typically attract higher rents, are allowed on 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. All of these issues contribute to downtown development potential, parking demand and supply, and traffic, and will be reviewed as part of the proposed study. The City is also 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. The subject study would help inform the Comprehensive Plan update process, as well guide other planning efforts. In addition, there are several ongoing efforts related to parking management, including the Parking Garage analysis, and consideration of several other parking programs such as attendant parking and residential permit parking initiatives, 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 (i.e., 27 University). 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.

Discussion

City of Palo Alto

Page 3

The following section outlines the draft scope of work attached to this report (Attachment A). The Commission is encouraged to comment and provide input on all of the proposed measures. As currently drafted, the Scope of Work states that the City of Palo Alto is requesting proposals from qualified and well-experienced transportation and planning firms to assist the City in determining the appropriateness of existing Downtown Development Cap policies and related parking strategies and development and land-use regulations. The scope proposes that transportation consultants analyze existing and projected traffic and parking conditions, and coordinate with planning consultants to make planning policy recommendations (zoning code, parking strategies, etc.) based on these conditions. The selected consultant must work closely with the Citys 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. The following tasks are anticipated. 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. 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 staffs 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 under transfer of development rights and other code provisions. 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
City of Palo Alto Page 4

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 5-year scenario and a 10-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, as well as other relevant resources.

4. Recommended Planning Policies: Based on the existing conditions report and the projected growth analysis, the consultant should recommend changes to Downtown Development Cap related zoning and land use policies. The recommended changes would be implemented through the Citys Municipal (Zoning) Code and Comprehensive Plan. At a minimum, studies and recommendations should include the following tasks: Assist staff to prepare Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan amendments, including requirements for transportation demand management (TDM) measures outlined under parking strategies below, if warranted. Address the appropriateness of or revisions to existing parking regulations to reflect how office and other land uses have evolved, as well as updated parking demands for expected uses proximate to transit (particularly rail transit). Identify the benefits or adverse effects of ground floor retail requirements regarding parking needs and demands, and its need to support other development. Address appropriateness of incentives to development of residential uses or mixed-use residential projects in the Downtown Area. Evaluate the transfer of development rights (TDR) program as it affects the development cap and Downtown parking impacts, including whether to maintain, modify or eliminate the program. Other code exceptions (e.g., 1:1 FAR exemption, 200 square foot minor parking exemption, etc.) should also be considered and recommended for retention, modification or deletion.

City of Palo Alto

Page 5

Suggest other possible zoning or land use approaches for consideration, based on the consultants experience and survey of efforts in other cities. Summarize how these recommended changes would impact LOS for key intersections and roadway segments, as well as Downtown permit parking, visitor parking and street parking in nearby neighborhoods.

5. Recommended Parking Strategies: Based on the implications of the existing conditions report, projections of ranges of future growth, and land use and zoning adjustments outlined above, the consultant should work with City staff to recommend parking strategies for the City to address the issues affecting visitor, permit, or neighborhood parking issues. At a minimum, the study and recommendations should address the following tasks: Identify transportation demand management (TDM) measures that would be appropriate for a strong Downtown TDM program, including a leading implementation effort by City of Palo Alto staff at City Hall and other Downtown City facilities. Coordinate with staff to determine the benefits of potential new parking structure(s) Downtown, or other methods to expand supply in existing facilities, and define the extent to which each approach would alleviate current parking concerns. Define an acceptable maximum level of neighborhood intrusion or saturation that provides for residents to maintain some level of parking convenience while recognizing that the streets also provide some measure of parking capacity for business employees. Work with staff to Identify pricing options for consideration, including for Parking Assessment District parking, commercial on-street parking, and neighborhood permit parking.

6. Public Participation: It is expected that the Downtown Development Cap study will be the focus of a series of public meetings over a 12-month period, with a report out to the City Council after not more than 6 months (with prior input from the Planning and Transportation Commission). Public outreach may include, at a minimum: Meetings with the broad Downtown community, including business, neighbors, 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 Commerces Downtown Parking Committee. At least quarterly reports to the Planning and Transportation Commission. At least 2-4 meetings with the City Council.

The proposal should outline a suggested proposal for public involvement and outreach, but staff expects that a minimum of eight (8) Planning and Transportation Commission and/or
City of Palo Alto Page 6

Council meetings should be included, as well as two-four (2-4) general community meetings 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.

Timeline
After the PTC provides input to the RFP, staff will begin the process of finalizing the document and preparing it for distribution. It is expected it can be distributed to consultant firms within 4-6 weeks. Staff will allow approximately 6-8 weeks for response, review and selection of the consultant firm. The evaluation is expected to take 9-12 months. Therefore, the study should be completed in the mid-2014 timeframe. The RFP will, however, require a report out at 6 months to include initial recommendations to pursue, particularly related to parking exemptions and as a follow-up to the parking garage study. The PTC, the Council and neighborhood groups will be involved throughout the process.

Resource Impact
Although the exact amount of the study cannot be determined until the scope of work is finalized and proposals received, staff estimates the cost of the study will range from $100,00$150,000, not including environmental review. The consultant contract will need to be approved by the City Council prior to work commencing. The study cost is proposed to be funded by either a) funds submitted by the Lytton Gateway project for parking studies; or b) developer contributions from current projects seeking exception from the parking exemption moratorium.

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, numerous 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.

City of Palo Alto

Page 7

Environmental Review
Environmental review is not required in order for the PTC 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: Draft Downtown Development Cap RFP Attachment B: Downtown Study Results Summary (PDF) Attachment C: Downtown Report Summary (PDF) Attachment D: Downtown Monitoring Council Report (March 5 2012) (PDF) (PDF)

City of Palo Alto

Page 8

ATTACHMENT A

RequestforProposals

DowntownDevelopmentCapEvaluation

Purpose: TheCityofPaloAltoisrequestingproposalsfromqualifiedandexperiencedtransportationandplanning firmstoevaluatetheimplicationsoftheexistingdevelopmentcap(DowntownDevelopmentCap)inthe CommercialDowntown(CD)areaofPaloAlto,particularlywithrespecttothecapacityforgrowthin Downtownandassociatedimpactsonparkingandtraffic.In1986,theCityadoptedtheDowntown DevelopmentCap,primarilybecauseoftrafficandparkingconcerns,alongwithincentivesforfuture developmentandredevelopment.ThesepolicieswereappliedtotheCDarea,andrestrictedfuture nonresidentialdevelopmenttoatotalof350,000squarefeetbeyondwhatwasinexistenceor approvedinMay1986.Residentialdevelopmentwaspurposelyexcludedfromthedevelopmentto encouragepeopleinordertoencouragefutureresidentstoliveincloseproximitytojobs.CD developmentregulationsweretobereevaluatedwhennew,nonresidentialdevelopmentreached 235,000squarefeet.Thisevaluationmilestonehasrecentlybeenreachedwiththesubmittalofseveral developmentapplications.AParkingAssessmentDistrict(PAD)wasalsoestablishedpriortothe1986 studyandremainsineffecttoday,thoughithasbeenexpandedduringtheinterim.Thepurposeofthis studyistoevaluateexistingandprojectedconditions,andtomeasuretheimpactoftheseconditionson theCDdistrictandsurroundingareas,particularlyonparkingandtrafficinDowntownandnearby neighborhoods.Theselectedconsultantwillthenoffertransportationandplanning(Comprehensive Plan,Zoning,etc.)recommendationsbasedonthesefindings.Theresultsofthisstudyand recommendedimplementingactionswillbeusedbyCityStaff,thePlanningandTransportation CommissionandtheCityCounciltoguidedecisionmakingduringtheDowntownDevelopmentCap evaluationprocessandtoestablishparkingstrategiesandrevisedcriteriaandproceduresasnecessary toaddressfuturedevelopmentanditspotentialimpactsandbenefits. Background: Astheresultofa1986DowntownStudy,theDowntownAreawasrezonedtoCommercialDowntown (CD).ThisrezoningcreatedFloorAreaRatios(FARs)andotherzoningregulationsthatweregenerally morerestrictivethanthepreviouszoning,especiallyasitrelatedtocommercialpropertiesadjacentto residentialneighborhoods.Inadditiontothenewzoningregulations,aCDdevelopmentcappolicy (DowntownDevelopmentCap)wasadopted.Thispolicyrestrictedfuturenonresidentialdevelopment toatotalof350,000squarefeetbeyondwhatwasinexistenceorapprovedintheCDareaasofMay 1986.CDdevelopmentregulationsweretobereevaluatedwhennewdevelopmentreached235,000 squarefeet.Residentialdevelopmentwaspurposelyexcludedfromthedevelopmenttoencourage peopleinordertoencouragefutureresidentstoliveincloseproximitytojobs.Therewereanumberof otherspecificpoliciesrelatedtogrowthintheCDareaaswell.Themeasuresthatresultedfromthe 1986DowntownStudyareaattachedtothisRFP.Citywidegrowthlimits,andgrowthlimitsinother districtswerealsoestablishedatthattime. The1986DowntownStudyrequiresthatCityStaffmonitorandsubmitanannualreporttotheCity Councilregardingdevelopmentactivity,vacancyratesandcommercialleaseratesinordertoevaluate theeffectivenessoftheseregulations.ThemostrecentCityCouncilreport(attached),submittedin March2012,providedinformationrelatedtothe201011timeperiod.Thisreportshowedthatthe downtownareawasrecoveringfromtherecessionandapproximately61,650squarefeetofnewnon residentialdevelopmentremainedavailablebeforethereevaluationlimitof235,000squarefeetwas reached.Theeconomyhascontinuedtoimproveandseveraldevelopmentshavebeensubmittedsince thattime,suchthattheevaluationmilestonehasnowbeenreached.

RequestforProposals

DowntownDevelopmentCapEvaluation

ParkingIntrusionintoadjacentresidentialneighborhoodsandparkingpermitsupplyarebothmajor concerns.Theseconcernsarenotnew,buttherehasbeenanincreasingamountofattentionfocused onparkingimpactswiththeimprovingeconomy.Parkingwasakeyfocusofthe1986study.For example,asaresultofthestudy,aparkingpolicywasadoptedthatspecifiedthatnewdevelopment shouldnotincreasetheparkingdeficitbeyondthe1986deficit.Sincethattimeparkinggarageshave beenbuiltwhichhavereducedthedeficit,thoughconcernsremain.Theseimpactsmaybeexacerbated byzoningcodeassumptionswhichmaynotbeconsistentwithmodernplanningandtransportation engineeringpractices,suchasthenumberofemployeesassumedonapersquarefootbasisintech companies,particularlystartups.Staffhasalsorecentlyinitiatedastudyofpotentialparkinggarage feasibilityonfivesitesinthedowntownarea,whichshouldinformtheDowntownDevelopment Capstudyaswell. ADowntownParkingAssessmentDistrictwasfirstformedin1978,andhasbeensubsequently restructuredseveraltimes.TheDowntownParkingAssessmentDistrict,whichisfinanciallysupported bydowntownpropertyownersviabondfinancing,paidfortheconstructionofseveraldowntown garages.Maintenanceandoperationcostsofgaragesarefundedthroughpermitfees.Bondsfinancing restrictions,however,limitthewayinwhichthesegaragescanbeutilized.Aftertheformationof assessmentdistrict,and1986DowntownStudy,thezoningcodewasamendedtoallowseveral exemptionstoparkingrequirements,includinga1:1FARexemption,200squarefootminorparking exemptionandaTransferofDevelopmentRightsprogram,whichallowsparkingexemptionstobe transferredtootherpropertiesincertaincases. Trafficisanotherconcern.Severalpolicieswereadoptedinthe1986plan,andnumerous transportationimprovementshavebeenimplementedintheCDandsurroundingareassincethattime. Transportationimprovementshaveenhancementstotheautomobile,bicycleandpedestriannetworks. Inaddition,theCityhasrequiredTransportationDemandManagementpoliciesforafewrecent downtowndevelopmentsandbusinesses.TheproximityofDowntownandStanfordtothePaloAlto DowntownCaltrainstationandothertransitservices,alongwiththetransportationinitiativesofseveral firmsandStanfordhavecontributedtotheDowntownCaltrainstationhavingthehighestridershipat anyCaltrainstationotherthanattheSanFranciscoterminus.Inaddition,theCityofPaloAltohasatop ratedbicyclenetwork,andcontinuestoadoptpoliciesandprogramsandtoenhancefacilitiesto improvethisnetwork.Nonetheless,trafficcongestionremainsamajorconcerninthearea,andisone oftheprimaryaspectsoftheDowntownDevelopmentCapevaluationandsubsequent recommendations. Inadditiontoparkingandtrafficpolicies,thereareseveralplanningrelatedpoliciesthataretiedtothe DowntownDevelopmentCap.Forexample,aGroundFloorCombiningDistrictwascreatedwithinthe CDarea,whichencouragespedestrianuses,andlimitsbusinesstoretaileatinganddrinkinguses.Office uses,whichcantypicallyattracthigherrents,areallowedontheperimeterofCDarea.CDzoningalso encouragesseismicandhistoricupgradestobuildingsbyallowingpropertyownerswhomakethese improvementstoexpandbeyondnormalFARlimitationsand/ortoaddfloorareawithoutproviding parking.Thepropertyownersmayalsotransfer(sell)thosedevelopmentrightstoanotherpropertyin theCDarea. TheCityisintheprocessofupdatingitsComprehensivePlan,includingtheTransportationandLandUse elements.Currentlythedocumentreferstoandbasesseveralpoliciesonthe1986DowntownStudy. ThesubjectstudywouldhelpinformtheComprehensivePlanupdateprocess,aswellguideother

RequestforProposals

DowntownDevelopmentCapEvaluation

planningefforts.Inaddition,thereareseveralongoingeffortsrelatedtoparkingmanagement, includingMasterDowntownParkingPlanandconsiderationofseveralotherparkingprogramssuchas attendantparkingandresidentialpermitparking,allofwhichwillbeunderstudysimultaneouswiththe DowntownCapstudy.Finally,somepotentialproposeddevelopmentswouldbelocatedjustoutsidethe CDarea.AlthoughthesedevelopmentsarenotdirectlyrelatedtotheoriginalDowntownDevelopment Cap,trafficandparkingrelatedtothesedevelopmentsmayimpacttheDowntownareaandshouldbe addressedorreferencedaswell. ScopeofWork: TheCityofPaloAltoisrequestingproposalsfromqualifiedandwellexperiencedtransportationand planningfirmstoassisttheCityindeterminingtheappropriatenessofexistingDowntownDevelopment Cappoliciesandrelatedparkingstrategiesanddevelopmentandlanduseregulations.The transportationconsultantsshouldanalyzeexistingandprojectedtrafficandparkingconditions,and shouldcoordinatewithplanningconsultantstomakeplanningpolicyrecommendations(zoningcode, etc.)basedontheseconditions.TheselectedconsultantmustworkcloselywiththeCitysplanning, transportationandeconomicdevelopmentstaffduringtheprocess,andmustmakepresentationstothe PlanningandTransportationCommissionandCityCouncil,aswellasvariouscommunitygroupsas needed. ReviewofPriorDowntownStudyandRelatedDocuments Theselectedconsultantfortheprojectwillreviewthe1986DowntownStudyreportandrelated materials,aswellassubsequentmonitoringreports,ComprehensivePlanpolicies,zoningregulations, andanyotherrelevantdocuments. ExistingConditionsEvaluation: Theselectedconsultantwillberesponsibleforevaluatingexistingtraffic andparkingconditionsintheDowntownandimmediatelysurroundingareas.Existinglevelofservice studiesshouldbeconductedforkeyintersectionsandroadwaysegments.Theselectedconsultant shouldworkcloselywiththeplanningandtransportationstaffduringtheexistingconditionsprocessto ensurethecorrectintersectionsandroadwaysegmentsarebeevaluated.Inaddition,theselected consultantshouldevaluateexistingvisitor(hourly)andpermitparkingconditionsintheDowntownand surroundingareas.Ataminimum,studiesshouldinclude: Existingtrafficcountsandlevelofserviceforidentifiedintersections. Existingonstreetandoffstreetparkingspaces,capacityandoccupancy,basedonstaffscontinuing effortsandadjustedasneededtoreflecttheneedsoftheDowntownDevelopmentCapStudy. Identificationofdowntowndevelopmentoverthepast10yearsandestimatedimpactsofthat developmentandtrendsoverthattimeframe,includingtheapplicationofparkingexemptionsfor transferofdevelopmentrightsandothercodeprovisions. Adefinitionoftheparkingintrusion,saturation,deficit,orothertermandhowthatisbest appliedtothestudyareaandsurroundingneighborhoods. ProjectedGrowthImpactAnalysis:Usingtheexistingconditionsreportasthefoundation,theselected consultantshouldevaluatescenariosforpotentialdevelopment,andfuturelevelofservice(LOS)ofkey intersectionsandroadwaysegmentsbasedonprojectedgrowth.Inaddition,futurecommercialand nearbyresidentialparkingconditionsshouldalsobeevaluatedbasedongrowthscenarios.Theparking analysisshouldbecompletedfortheDowntownvisitorandpermitparking,aswellasstreetparkingin thesurroundingresidentialneighborhoods.Theprojectedtrafficandparkingconditionsshouldbe

RequestforProposals

DowntownDevelopmentCapEvaluation

basedontheexistingdevelopmentcappoliciesandzoningcoderegulations. Ataminimum,studies shouldinclude: Afiveyearandtenyearscenarioofpotentialrangesofdevelopment,assumingthecontinueduse oftransferofdevelopmentrightsandotherexistingprovisions. Estimatedchangestolevelsofserviceatkeyintersectionsbasedonpotentialincreasedgrowth. Estimatedparkingdemandrequiredbyincreasedgrowthundereachscenarioandthelikelyimpact ofthedemandonavailableparkinginresidentialneighborhoods. ThelikelyimpactofparkingreductionsbasedontheproximityofnewdevelopmenttoCaltrainand othertransit,bicyclingandwalkingfacilities,basedonsurveysofexistingemployeeridershipfor DowntownbusinessesandStanford. RecommendedPlanningPolicies:Basedonexistingconditionsreportandtheprojectedgrowthanalysis, theconsultantshouldrecommendchangestoDowntownDevelopmentCaprelatedzoningandlanduse policies.TherecommendedchangeswouldbeimplementedthroughtheCitysMunicipal(Zoning)Code andComprehensivePlan.Ataminimum,studiesandrecommendationsshouldincludethefollowing tasks: AssiststafftoprepareZoningCodeandComprehensivePlanamendments,includingrequirements fortransportationdemandmanagement(TDM)measuresoutlinedunderparkingstrategiesbelow, ifwarranted. Addresstheappropriatenessoforrevisionstoexistingparkingregulationstoreflecthowofficeand otherlanduseshaveevolvedandexpectedusesrelatedtoproximitytotransit, Identifythebenefitsoradverseeffectsofgroundfloorretailrequirementsregardingparkingneeds anddemands,anditsneedtosupportotherdevelopment. Addressappropriatenessofincentivestodevelopmentofresidentialusesormixeduseresidential projectsintheDowntownArea Evaluationofthetransferofdevelopmentrights(TDR)programasitaffectsthedevelopmentcap andDowntownparkingimpacts,includingwhethertomaintain,modifyoreliminatetheprogram. Othercodeexceptions(e.g.,1:1FARexemption,200sfminorparkingexemption,etc.)shouldalso beconsideredandrecommendedforretention,modificationordeletion. Suggestotherpossiblezoningorlanduseapproachesforconsideration,basedontheconsultants experienceandsurveyofeffortsinothercities. SummarizehowtheserecommendedchangeswouldimpactLOSforkeyintersectionsandroadway segments,aswellasDowntownpermitparking,visitorparkingandstreetparkinginnearby neighborhoods. RecommendedParkingStrategies:Basedontheimplicationsoftheexistingconditionsreport, projectionsofrangesoffuturegrowth,andlanduseandzoningadjustmentsoutlinedabove,the consultantshouldworkwithCitystafftorecommendparkingstrategiesfortheCitytoaddressthe issuesaffectingvisitor,permit,orneighborhoodparkingissues.Ataminimum,thestudyand recommendationsshouldaddressthefollowingtasks: Identifytransportationdemandmanagement(TDM)measuresthatwouldbeappropriatefora strongDowntownTDMprogram,includingaleadingimplementationeffortbyCityofPaloAltostaff atCityHallandotherDowntownCityfacilities.

RequestforProposals

DowntownDevelopmentCapEvaluation
Coordinatewithstafftodeterminethebenefitsofpotentialnewparkingstructure(s)Downtown,or othermethodstoexpandsupplyinexistingfacilities,anddefinetheextenttowhicheachapproach wouldalleviatecurrentparkingconcerns. Defineanacceptablemaximumlevelofneighborhoodintrusionorsaturationthatprovidesfor residentstomaintainsomelevelofparkingconveniencewhilerecognizingthatthestreetsalso providesomemeasureofparkingcapacityforbusinessemployees. WorkwithstafftoIdentifypricingoptionsforconsideration,includingforParkingAssessment Districtparking,commercialonstreetparking,andneighborhoodpermitparking.

PublicParticipation:ItisexpectedthattheDowntownDevelopmentCapstudywillbethefocusofa seriesofpublicmeetingsovera12monthperiod,withareportouttoCityCouncilafternotmorethan6 months.Publicoutreachmayinclude,ataminimum: MeetingswiththebroadDowntowncommunity,includingbusiness,neighbors,andothers. Meetingsorfocusgroupswithspecificinterests,suchastheDowntownNorth,UniversitySouth, andProfessorvilleneighborhoods,theDowntownBusinessImprovementDistrict,and/orthe ChamberofCommercesDowntownParkingCommittee. AtleastquarterlyreportstothePlanningandTransportationCommission. Atleast24meetingswiththeCityCouncil. Theproposalshouldoutlineasuggestedproposalforpublicinvolvementandoutreach,butstaffexpects thataminimumofeight(8)PlanningandTransportationCommissionand/orCouncilmeetingsshouldbe included,aswellastwofour(24)generalcommunitymeetingsandearlyandregularconsultationwith theinterestgroupsoutlinedabove.AnearlyscopingmeetingwiththePlanningandTransportation Commissionshouldbeusedtorefinethedesiredpublicoutreachapproach. ProposalSubmittalRequirements: Interestedconsultingteamsshallsubmitaprogramthatincludesthefollowingelements,limitedtoa totalof12pagesperproposal: StatementofQualifications: ProvideaStatementOfQualificationsthathighlightstheteams experienceinthetransportation(traffic)andparkinganalyses,andin planninganalysisrelatedtotheseissues.Thisexperienceshould includecompletedworkrelatedtoevaluatingtheimpactsofexisting andprojecteddevelopmentconditions.Specialattentionshouldbe giventothefirmsexperienceinbalancingcommercialdistrictneeds withqualityoflifeissuesinadjacentresidentialneighborhoods.In addition,theteamsexperiencerelatedtozoningcodereview,and preparationorrevisionstocomprehensiveplans,aswellasitsgeneral planningexperienceshouldalsobedetailed.Finally,anyexperiencein analyzingdevelopmentthresholdsshouldbeincluded.Includerecent projectreferenceandprojectcostinformation.(3PageMax) TeamOrganizationStructure: Includeaflowchartthathighlightstheinternalteamsreporting structureandtherelationofteammembersandsubconsultants. HighlighttheProjectManagersexperienceandqualificationsand

RequestforProposals

DowntownDevelopmentCapEvaluation
QualityAssuranceprogramstobeusedaspartoftheproject.(2Page Max)

UnderstandingofWorkScope: Detailtheapproach(taskbytask)andstepsyourteamwouldtaketo completethescopeofworkdiscussedwithinthisrequestforproposals. Highlightsuccessfullycompletedoractiveprojectswithsimilarwork scopesanddemonstrateyourteamsunderstandingofthePaloAlto communityandDowntownbusinessoperations.(5PageMax) Resumes: IncludetheresumesoftheProjectPrincipalandProjectManager(2 PageMax) RFPandProjectSchedule: RFPReleaseDate: RFPRequestforInformation(RFI)Deadline: RFPCityResponsetoRFI: ProposalDueDate: TeamInterviews(IfNeeded): PricingonProposalsshouldbehonoredforupto5monthstoallowthecityanopportunitytocomplete theawardofaconsultantagreementthroughtheCityCouncil.Inadditiontotheconsultantteam interviewsaspartoftheproposalevaluationprocess,therecommendedconsultantteammayalsobe askedtomakeapresentationontheirteamsqualificationsandprojectapproachtothePaloAlto PlanningandTransportationCommissionand/orcommunityrepresentatives. Attachments: 1. MapofDowntownCommercial(CD)DistrictandSurroundingArea 2. DowntownMonitoringReportfor201011 3. 1986DowntownStudyResultsSummary 4. ListofApprovedNonResidentialProjects(19862012) 5. DowntownMapwithParkingGarageLocations

ATTACHMENT B

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. 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. 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. New parking regulations were established for the University Avenue Parking Assessment District that requires new nonresidential 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. 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. A new Ground Floor (GF) Combining District was created and applied to the area along University Avenue and portions of the

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

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. 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. 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. A Twelve-Point Parking Program was adopted to increase the efficiency of existing parking. 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. 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. 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. 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.

8.

9.

10. 11.

12.

13.

14.

ATTACHMENT C

ATTACHMENT D

City of Palo Alto

Report Type: Informational Report

(ID # 2424)

City Council Informational Report

Meeting Date: 3/5/2012

Title: Downtown Monitoring Report 2010-2011 Subject: Commercial Downtown (CD) Monitoring Report for 2010-2011 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 zones) and office and retail vacancy rates in CD-C and CD-C (GF)(P) zones. Through mid-January of 2012, there was a 4.8 percent vacancy rate within the Ground Floor Overlay District and a 2.0 percent overall vacancy rate in the Commercial Downtown (CD) zoning district. In this monitoring cycle, approximately 13,500 square feet of space was approved or added to the total downtown non-residential square footage. An additional 61,650 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 tracks vacancy rates, changes in floor area and parking in the CD district resulting from approved development to comply with Comprehensive Plan programs and to determine the ground floor vacancy rate in the CD zone district. The zoning code, until 2009, 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. A map of the districts subject to the amendments was included in the 2009 City Council report (CMR 20:09), available on the Citys website. The ordinance amendment eliminated the provision for an exception process if the GF vacancy rate is found to be greater than 5% during the annual monitoring period.
March 05, 2012 (ID # 2424) Page 1 of 7

Staff completed field visits for this 2010/2011 monitoring period in early January 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, 2011 and specific data on vacancy information and rental rates through January 2012. Discussion Economic conditions in Palo Alto downtown area are improving gradually. There is currently a 4.8 percent vacancy rate within the Ground Floor Overlay District and a 2.0 percent overall vacancy rate in the Commercial Downtown (CD) zoning district. This is a noticeable drop of 2.1 percent vacancy in the Ground Floor Overlay District from last year. This number is close to the 2007-2008 period vacancy rate, just before the start of the economic downturn. In the 20102011 monitoring period, the rental rates for retail varied from $2.75 to $4.00 per square foot based on the location, and the average office rental rate was between $4.50 and $7.00 per square foot. Office rental rates have increased in the last year and a half and retail rental rates have remained steady throughout the 2010-2011 monitoring period. The following table shows the approximate total vacant area and percentage of vacancy, beginning in the 2006-2007 monitoring period. TABLE 1: Total Vacancy in CD-C & CD-C (GF) (P) Zones in Downtown Palo Alto Total CD-C Vacant (SQFT) 88,368 120,004 212,189 85,271 66,226 % of CD-C Vacancy 2.63 3.60 6.39 2.56 2.0 Total CD-C (GF) (P) Vacant (SQFT) 18,330 26,294 56,109 37,888 26, 290 % of CD-C (GF) (P) Vacancy 2.94 4.21 8.99 6.91 4.8

Year

2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011

Non-Residential Development Activity The Downtown Study, approved in 1986, 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 reevaluation of the CD regulations when net new development reaches 235,000 square feet. Since 1986, a total of 173,356 square feet of non-residential uses has been added (or approved) in the Downtown CD-C zoned area. In the past two monitoring cycles from 2008-2010,
March 05, 2012 (ID # 2424) Page 2 of 7

approximately 46,500 square feet of net new commercial floor area was added with a few major contributing projects such as: 317-323 University Avenue, 325 Lytton Avenue, 564 University Avenue, 310 University Avenue, 278 University Avenue, and 265 Lytton Avenue. In this current cycle (2010-2011) approximately 13,499 square feet of net new commercial floor area has been added. Though significant construction activities continue in the downtown CD-C zone area, most of the construction includes redevelopment of existing sites since the existing downtown is close to being built-out. In the current cycle there were approximately five sites that were redeveloped but only one project, at 524 Hamilton Avenue, added significant square footage. Based on this recent monitoring, an additional 61,650 square feet of new non-residential development remains available for development before the re-evaluation limit of 235,000 square feet growth limit is reached. 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, ten projects in the Downtown area have been developed under the Planned Community zoning that requires a finding of public benefit. Five of the projects exceeded the non-residential floor area that would otherwise be allowed under zoning by a total of 34,378 square feet. The total changes in square footage of these projects are shown in the fourth column of Attachment E. 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. 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 Street, have used close to 5,000 square feet of Transfer Development Rights (TDR) square footage in this evaluation period. These projects are shown in the fifth column of Attachment E. Parking Inventory At the time of the Downtown Study, 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, or 1,601 spaces. In 2003, the City opened two new parking structures: one located on 528 High Street and the other at 445 Bryant Street, adding a total of 899 parking spaces. These parking structure projects, in addition to other projects that provide a parking component, decreased the original 1986 deficit to approximately 628 spaces. At the end of the 2003 monitoring period, the City determined that a re-evaluation of the parking exemption regulations would be undertaken when the unmet parking demand resulting from exemptions (transfer of development rights and FAR bonuses) reaches a cumulative 450 spaces. Currently, the unmet parking demand resulting from exemptions is 323 parking spaces. Through various projects, the total cumulative parking deficit has been significantly reduced from 1,601 in 1986 to 722 in 2011. The main
March 05, 2012 (ID # 2424) Page 3 of 7

reasons for the reduction are: 1) the two-floor addition to the Cowper/Webster Garage; 2) significant restriping of on-street parking spaces by the Citys Transportation Division, resulting in 96 additional spaces; and 3) the construction of the two previously mentioned parking structures located on 528 High Street and 445 Bryant Street. Attachment F is a chart of the CD (Commercial Downtown) parking deficit. Staff notes, however, that the effects of the parking deficit, particularly on adjacent neighborhoods, appear to have been exacerbated by the increased employee density of office uses in the downtown. 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. In October 2011, there was approximately 548,675 square feet of total Ground Floor area in the CD-C(GF)(P) zoning district following the adoption of the amended ordinance in December 2009 to enhance protection of retail uses in the heart (University Avenue and side streets) of the downtown commercial district. Attachment C provides the list of parcels affected by adoption of the ordinance. A map showing the location of these parcels is provided as Attachment D. The result was an approximate net 75,660 square feet reduction in the total square footage of GF district. During the staff survey of Downtown vacancies in first week of January 2012, there were seven properties, totaling 26,290 square feet, which met the requirements for vacant and available ground floor area. TABLE 2: Vacant Property Listings for Only Ground Floor (GF) Spaces in CD-C (GF) (P) Combining District. (As of January 4, 2012) Address 541 248 174 180 435 429-447 522 Total (GF) Vacancy Bryant Hamilton University University University University Waverley Vacant Square Feet 2,556 3,000 2,300* 12,459 1,450 1,800 2,725 26,290

March 05, 2012 (ID # 2424)

Page 4 of 7

*Vacant since last year This results in a GF vacancy rate of approximately 4.8 percent, a reduction of 2.1 percent from the vacancy rate of last year. Vacancy Rate for Entire CD District The entire Downtown Commercial (CD) area includes 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 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 early January 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 66,226 square feet. This vacancy equals a rate of 2.0 percent, somewhat less than the 2.6 percent vacancy noted in last years monitoring report. The overall CD-C vacancy rate has reduced considerably since the 2008-2009 period, close to a drop of 4 percent. Table 3 was compiled based on staff conducted fieldwork, research of real estate websites and responses received from local downtown real estate agents. TABLE 3: Vacant Property Listings for Remainder of Commercial Downtown (CD) (As of January 4, 2012) Includes Upper Floor Office Space in CD-C (GF) (P) Combining District and all floors of CD-C (P) District Address 635 644 418 155 120-122 209 261 400 245 Bryant Emerson Florence Forest Hamilton Hamilton Hamilton Hamilton Lytton Zoning District CD-C (P) CD-C (P) CD-C (P) CD-S (P); CD-C (P) CD-C (P) CD-C (GF)(P) CD-C (GF)(P) CD-C (P) CD-C (P) Vacant Square Feet 545 2,238 2,515 550 2,260 9,000 783 3,320 13,433
Page 5 of 7

March 05, 2012 (ID # 2424)

550 552

Lytton Waverley

CD-C (P) CD-C (GF)(P)

2,892 2,400 39,936

Total Rest of CD Vacancy CD Commercial Downtown, (C) Commercial, (S) Service, GF Ground Floor Combining District, P - Pedestrian Overlay

Trends in Use Composition The primary observation of change in the use composition of Downtown was, in this cycle, a reduction of approximately 12,860 square feet of religious/institutional use that was converted to office use at the 661 Bryant 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 lowerintensity commercial uses like manufacturing and warehousing has decreased (see Attachment G). Retail Rents Retail rental rates have marginally increased since last years monitoring report. According to the data gathered from the January 2011 staff survey of commercial real estate agents offering properties for lease in Downtown, rents for retail space generally range from $2.75 to $4.00 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 in the core downtown University Avenue sometimes increase to highs of $5.00 to $6.00 per square foot. For some vacant properties outside the downtown core, rental rates have been listed as negotiable. Office Rents Based on the information gathered from the 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) range from $4.50 to $7.00 per square foot triple net, compared to $3.50 to $5.50 per square foot triple net in last years monitoring report. 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 Citys potential source of property and sales taxes. Policy Implications This report on the Commercial Downtown (CD) zoning area is mandated by Comprehensive
March 05, 2012 (ID # 2424) Page 6 of 7

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. Courtesy Copies Planning and Transportation Commission Architectural Review Board Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce Downtown Palo Alto Palo Alto Board of Realtors Downtown North Neighborhood Association Professorville Neighborhood University Park Neighborhood Association

Attachments: Attachment A: 1986 Downtown Study Results Summary

(PDF)

Attachment B: Commercial Downtown (CD) Zone District Map (PDF) Attachment C: List of Parcels Added and Removed From CD-C(GF) P District (PDF) Attachment D: Downtown Map Showing the Zone Changes Attachment F: CD Parking Deficit(PDF) Attachment G: CommercialDowntown (CD) and SOFA 2 CAP Floor Area by Use Category (PDF) (PDF) (PDF) Attachment E: CD Non-Residential Change in SQFT 09/01/86 to 08/31/11

Prepared By: Department Head: City Manager Approval:

Chitra Moitra, Planner Curtis Williams, Director James Keene, City Manager

March 05, 2012 (ID # 2424)

Page 7 of 7

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. 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. 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. New parking regulations were established for the University Avenue Parking Assessment District that requires new nonresidential 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. 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. A new Ground Floor (GF) Combining District was created and applied to the area along University Avenue and portions of the

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

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. 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. 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. A Twelve-Point Parking Program was adopted to increase the efficiency of existing parking. 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. 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. 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. 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.

8.

9.

10. 11.

12.

13.

14.

COMMERCIAL DOWNTOWN (CD) ZONE DISTRICT MAP

ATTACHMENT B

ATTACHMENT C

LIST OF PARCELS ADDED AND REMOVED FROM CD-C (GF) P DISTRICT

The following properties were added to the Ground Floor (GF) Combining District: 200-228 Hamilton Avenue---APN 120-27-008 230-238 Hamilton Avenue---APN 120-27-009 240-248 Hamilton Avenue---APN 120-27-010 412 Emerson Street---APN 120-26-106 420 Emerson Street---APN 120-26-025 430 Emerson Street---APN 120-26-026

The following properties were removed from the Ground Floor (GF) Combining District: 115-119 University Avenue---APN 120-26-108 102-116 University Avenue---APN 120-26-039 124 University Avenue---APN 120-26-043 125 University Avenue---APN 120-26-138 525 Alma Street---APN 120-26-093 529 Alma Street---APN 120-26-110 535-539 Alma Street, 115 Hamilton Avenue---APN 120-26-091 135 Hamilton Avenue---APN 120-26-111 440 Cowper Street---APN 120-15-014 437 Kipling Street---APN 120-15-020 443 Kipling Street---APN 120-15-019

DOWNTOWN MAP SHOWING THE ZONE CHANGES

ATTACHMENT D

ATTACHMENT E CD NON-RESIDENTIAL CHANGE IN SQUARE FOOTAGE 09/01/86 TO 08/31/11 Project Address Zoning Date Approved Public Benefit Seismic, Historic, or Net change in nonBonus Non Minor Bonus Residential Floor Residential Square Square Footage Area Footage 11,000B 400 65 2,500 4,958 2,407 300 +400 +65 -9,750 -713 +1,150 +4,000 +2,500 +4,958 +2,407 +2,208 +20,300

520 Ramona Street A 220 University Avenue 151 Homer Avenue 314 Lytton Avenue 247-275 Alma Street 700 Emerson Street 431 Florence Street 156 University Avenue 401 Florence Street 619 Cowper Street 250 University Avenue

CDCGFP CDCGFP CDSP CDCP CDNP CDSP CDCP CDCGFP CDCP CDCP PC-3872

11/20/84 2/5/87 3/17/88 5/5/88 8/4/88 9/15/88 9/15/88 12/15/88 3/2/89 5/6/89 5/15/89

Project Address

Zoning

Date Approved

Public Benefit Seismic, Historic, or Net change in nonBonus Non Minor Bonus Residential Floor Residential Square Square Footage Area Footage 2,491C 2,491 -371 +2,491

550 University Avenue 529 Bryant Street

CDCP PC-3974

6/1/89 5/3/90

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

Project Address

Zoning

Date Approved

Public Benefit Seismic, Historic, or Bonus Non Minor Bonus Residential Square Square Footage Footage 2,450

Net change in non/Residential Floor Area

201 University Avenue

CDCGFP

11/18/93

+2,450

518 Bryant Street 245 Lytton Avenue 400 Emerson StreetEF 443 Emerson Street 420 Emerson Street 340 University Avenue 281 University Avenue 456 University Avenue 536 Ramona Street 725/753 Alma Street

CDCGFP CDCP PC-4238 CDCGFP CDCP CDCGFP CDCGFP CDCGFP CDCGFP PC-4283

3/3/94 7/21/94 9/19/94 1/5/95 3/16/95 4/6/95 4/20/95 5/18/95 7/11/95 7/17/95

180 200 26 125 7,486 134 -

+180 -21,320 +4,715 +26 +125 -402 -2,500 +7,486 +134 -1,038

Project Address

Zoning

Date Approved

Public Benefit Seismic, Historic, or Bonus Non Minor Bonus Residential Square Square Footage Footage 3,467C 8,420C 177 2,789 2,803 1,853 350 200 1,775 200 689 2,771

Net change in non/Residential Floor Area +177 +7,289 +2,803 +4,425 +1,853 +350 +1,412 +1,775 +2,227 +3,207 +17,815 +2,771

552 Emerson Street 483 University Avenue G 424 University Avenue 901/909 Alma Street E,F 171 University Avenue 401 High Street 430 Kipling Street D,H 460-476 University Avenue 400 Emerson Street D 275 Alma Street 390 Lytton Avenue 411 High Street H

CDCGFP PC-4296 CDCGFP PC-4389 CD-C(GF)(P) CD-C(P) CD-C(P) CD-C(GF)(P) PC-4238 CD-N(P) PC-4436 CDCP

7/18/95 10/2/95 9/21/95 8/1/96 9/19/96 10/3/96 10/22/96 3/20/97 3/21/97 7/8/97 7/14/97 12/18/97

Project Address

Zoning

Date Approved

Public Benefit Seismic, Historic, or Net change in Non Bonus Non Minor Bonus Residential Floor Residential Square Square Footage Area Footage 2852 2814 10913 2,500 2,642 +2852 +2814 +10913 +93 +945 +434 +400 +312 +2,500 +2,642 +12,063 -15,700

530 Ramona 705 Alma St 200 Hamilton Ave 550 Lytton Ave 437 Kipling St 701 Emerson St 723 Emerson St 880 - 884 Emerson St 539 Alma St 270 University Ave 901 High St. E, F 800 High St. I

CDCGFP CDSP CDCP CDCP CDCGFP CDSP CDSP CDSP CDCGFP CDCGFP CDSP PC-4779

05/20/99 09/21/99 10/21/99 08/11/00 02/01/01 05/29/01 05/29/01 05/29/01 10/23/01 11/01/01 12/12/02 02/03/03

Project Address

Zoning

Date Approved

Public Benefit Seismic, Historic, or Net change in Non Bonus Non Minor Bonus Residential Floor Residential Square Square Footage Area Footage 4,500J 194 7,481 2,500 2,500 3,712 5,200 -2,799 +5,249 +194 +8 +17,515 +7,481 +3,290 +4,475 +137 +21,151 -1,360 +9,345

164 Hamilton Ave 335 University Ave 382 University Ave 102 University Ave 325 Lytton Ave 310 University Ave 317-323 University Ave 564 University Ave 278 University 265 Lytton 340 University 524 Hamilton

CDCP CDCGFP CDCGFP CDCGFP CDCP CDCGFP CDCGFP CDCP CDCGFP CDCP CDCP CDCP

01/13/05 08/10/05 07/27/06 10/10/2006 5/2006 07/31/2008 01/2008 7/2008 11/2008 7/2010 12/2010 2/2011

Project Address

Zoning

Date Approved

Public Benefit Seismic, Historic, or Net change in Non Bonus Non Minor Bonus Residential Floor Residential Square Square Footage Area Footage 34,378 437 4,940 1,906 93,931 +437 +4,940 0 173,356

630 Ramona 668 Ramona 661 Bryant Totals 1986-2011

CDCP CDCP CDCP

6/2011 7/2011 2/2011

A: Project approved during the Downtown Moratorium (9/84 to 9/86), but was not included in the Downtown EIRs pipeline projects. As a result, the project is counted among the CD Districts 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 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.

ATTACHMENT F CD PARKING DEFICIT

9/1/86 to 8/31/2011

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 1,601

1986 deficit 520 Ramona StreetA 220 University Avenue 151 Homer Avenue 314 Lytton Avenue 247-275 Alma Street 700 Emerson Street CDCGFP +400 2 0 0 +2

1,603

CDCGFP

+65

1,603

CDSP

-9,750

11

-50

1,553

CDCP

-713

-3

1,550

CDNP

+1,150

1,550

CDSP

+4,000

16

16

1,550

431 Florence St

CDCP

+2,500

10

10

+10

1,560

Page 1

PROJECT ADDRESS

ZONING

NET CHANGE IN NON/ RESIDENTIAL FLOOR AREA +4,958

ADDED PARKING REQUIRED

NET ADDED PARKING SPACES 0

PARKING EXEMPTIONS PER 18.52.060 OF PAMC 20

NET DEFICIT CHANGE

TOTAL CUMULATIVE DEFICIT

156 University Avenue 401 Florence Street 619 Cowper Street 250 University Avenue 550 University Avenue 529 Bryant Street 520 Webster StreetC 305 Lytton Ave 550 Lytton Avenue

CDCGFP

20

+20

1,580

CDCP

+2,407

10

10

+10

1,590

CDCP

+2,208

1,590

PC-3872

+20,300 -371

103

131B

-28

1,562

CDCP

-1

1,561

PC-3974

+2,491

10

10

+10

1,571

PC-3499 CDCP CDCP

0 +200 +4,845

0 1 19

163 0 19

0 1 0

-163 +1 0

1,408 1,409 1,409

Page 2

PROJECT ADDRESS Downtown 531 Cowper Street 540 Bryant Street 530/534 Bryant Street 555 Waverley Street/425 Hamilton AvenueD 201 University Avenue 518 Bryant Street 245 Lytton Ave 400 Emerson Street

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 -96 +38

TOTAL CUMULATIVE DEFICIT 1,313 1,351

Extensive restriping by Transportation Division of on and off/street parking PC-4052 +9,475 38 0 2

CDCGFP

+404

+2

1,353

CDCGFP

+432

+2

1,355

CDCP

+2,064

+8

1,363

CDCGFP

+2,450

10

10

+10

1,373

CDCGFP CDCP PC-4238

+180 -21,320 +4,715

1 90 18

0 149 5

1 0 1

+1 -59 +14

1,374 1,315 1,329

Page 3

PROJECT ADDRESS 443 Emerson Street 420 Emerson Street 340 University Avenue 281 University Avenue 456 University Avenue 536 Ramona Street 725-753 Alma Street 552 Emerson Street 483 University Avenue

ZONING CDCGFP

NET CHANGE IN NON/ RESIDENTIAL FLOOR AREA +26

ADDED PARKING REQUIRED 0

NET ADDED PARKING SPACES 0

PARKING EXEMPTIONS PER 18.52.060 OF PAMC 0

NET DEFICIT CHANGE 0

TOTAL CUMULATIVE DEFICIT 1,329

CDCP CDCGFP

+125

+1

1,336

-402

-2

1,334

CDCGFP

-2,500

-10

1,324

CDCGFP

+7,486

30

30

+30

1,354

CDCGFP

+134

+1

1,355

PC-4283

-1,038

-11

1,344

CDCGFP

+177

+1

1,345

PC-4296

+7,289

29

-2E

11

+31

1,376

Page 4

PROJECT ADDRESS 424 University Avenue 901/909 Alma StreetD 171 University Avenue 401 High Street 430 Kipling Street 460/476 University Avenue 400 Emerson Street 275 Alma StreetF 390 Lytton Avenue

ZONING CDCGFP

NET CHANGE IN NON/ RESIDENTIAL FLOOR AREA +2,803

ADDED PARKING REQUIRED 11

NET ADDED PARKING SPACES 0

PARKING EXEMPTIONS PER 18.52.060 OF PAMC 11

NET DEFICIT CHANGE +11

TOTAL CUMULATIVE DEFICIT 1,387

PC-4389

+4,425

18

18

1,387

CDCGFP CDCP CDCP

+1,853 +350 +1,412

7 1 5

0 0 -4E

7 1 1

+7 +1 +10

1,394 1,395 1,405

CDCGFP

+1,775

+7

1,412

PC-4238

+2,227

+9

1,421

CDNP

+3,207

+1

1,422

PC-4436

+17,815

74

50

+27

1,449

Page 5

PROJECT ADDRESS

ZONING

NET CHANGE IN NON/ RESIDENTIAL FLOOR AREA +2,771 2852 2814 10,913 93 0 0 945 434 400

ADDED PARKING REQUIRED

NET ADDED PARKING SPACES -4E 0 0 3E 0 211 G 688G 0E 1 2

PARKING EXEMPTIONS PER 18.52.060 OF PAMC 11 11 11 35 0 0 0 2 1 0

NET DEFICIT CHANGE

TOTAL CUMULATIVE DEFICIT

411 High Street 530 Ramona 705 Alma St 200 Hamilton Ave 550 Lytton Ave 528 High St 445 Bryant 437 Kipling St 701 Emerson St 723 Emerson St

CDCP CDCGFP CDSP CDCP CDCP PF PF CDCGFP CDSP CDSP

0 11 11 44 0 0 0 4 2 2

+15 +11 +11 +41 0 -211 -688 +4 +1 0

1,464 1475 1486 1527 1527 1316 628 632 633 633

Page 6

PROJECT ADDRESS 880 / 884 Emerson St 539 Alma St 270 University Ave SUBTOTAL 86-02 901 High St. 800 High St. H 164 Hamilton Ave 335 University AveI

ZONING

NET CHANGE IN NON/ RESIDENTIAL FLOOR AREA 312 2,500 2,642 106,930

ADDED PARKING REQUIRED 2 10 11 672 59D 0 0 0

NET ADDED PARKING SPACES 5 0 0E 1483 60 63 0 0

PARKING EXEMPTIONS PER 18.52.060 OF PAMC 0 10 11 236 0 0 0 0

NET DEFICIT CHANGE -3 +10 +11 -578 -1 -63 0 0

TOTAL CUMULATIVE DEFICIT 630 640 651 651 650 587 587 587

CDSP CDCGFP CDCGFP

CDSP PC-4779 CDCP CDCGFP

12,063 -15,700 -2499 5,249

Page 7

PROJECT ADDRESS 382 University Ave 102 University Ave 310 University Ave 317-323 University Ave 564 University Ave 325 Lytton Ave 265 Lytton 278 University 340 University 524 Hamilton

ZONING

NET CHANGE IN NON/ RESIDENTIAL FLOOR AREA 194 8 7,481 3,290 4,475 17,515 21,151 +137 -1,360 +9,345

ADDED PARKING REQUIRED 0 0 30 0 10 110 106 1 0 31

NET ADDED PARKING SPACES 0 0 0 0 0 6 52 0 0 8

PARKING EXEMPTIONS PER 18.52.060 OF PAMC 1 0 30 0 10 0 0 1 0 23

NET DEFICIT CHANGE +1 0 +30 0 +10 -6 +54 +1 0 +23

TOTAL CUMULATIVE DEFICIT 588 588 618 618 628 622 676 677 677 700

CDCGFP CDCGFP CDCGFP CDCGFP CDCP CDCP CDCP CDCGFP CDCP CDCP

Page 8

PROJECT ADDRESS

ZONING

NET CHANGE IN NON/ RESIDENTIAL FLOOR AREA +437 +4,940 0 173,356

ADDED PARKING REQUIRED 2 20 0 911

NET ADDED PARKING SPACES 0 0 0 1672

PARKING EXEMPTIONS PER 18.52.060 OF PAMC 2 20 0 323

NET DEFICIT CHANGE +2 +20 0 649

TOTAL CUMULATIVE DEFICIT 702 722 722 722

630 Ramona 668 Ramona 661 Bryant TOTAL

CDCP CDCP CDCP

A: Project approved during the Downtown Moratorium (9/84 to 9/86, but was not included in the Downtown EIRs pipeline projects.) As a result, the project is counted among the CD Districts 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. 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 9

Page 10

ATTACHMENT G Commercial Downtown (CD) and SOFA 2 CAP Floor Area by Use Category Use Category Area (October 1986) 1,100,000 500,000 150,000 200,000 150,000 175,000 100,000 75,000 150,000 50,000 150,000 25,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 250,000 50,000 150,000 0 150,000 3,625,000 3,125,000 Area (October 2011) 1,350,000 625,000 275,000 200,000 175,000 100,000 150,000 125,000 100,000 75,000 50,000 50,000 25,000 25,000 0 25,000 400,000 25,000 50,000 0 100,000 3,875,000 3,350,000 Area Change, percentage 23% 25.00% 83.33% 0.00% 16.67% -42.86% 50.00% 66.67% -33.33% 50.00% -66.67% 100.00% -50.00% -50.00% -100.00% -50.00% 50.00% -50.00% -66.66% -33.33% 5.52%

1. Offices 2. Retail 3. Eating & Drinking 4. Financial Services 5. Business Services 6. Basement Storage 7. Hotels 8. Personal Services 9. Utility Facility 10. Public Facilities 11. Automotive Services 12. Recreation/Private Club 13. Theaters 14. Warehousing & Distribution 15. Manufacturing 16. Religious Institutions 17. Multi-Family Residential 18. Single Family Residential 19. Vacant & Under Construction 20. Vacant & For Sale 21. Vacant & Available Total ADJUSTED TOTAL: (Deduct
residential uses, religious institutions, vacant & for sale and vacant & under construction.) (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.