Downtown San Leandro Transit-Oriented Development Strategy Existing Conditions Report
Dowling
Euclid
Breed Park Dutton
Oakes
1 Begier
/ Lafayette 2 1
M / Woodland 2 i l e Haas M i R l 1 e a / 4 d 1 R i a M u / 4 d i s l i e M u i s R l e a
d R i a u d s i u
s
San Leandro
Davis
Callan Estudillo
Alvarado Estudillo Pacific
Orchard Washington Joaquin
Santa Rosa Martinez Juana Santa Maria
Bancroft
San Jose
Parrott 14th Dolores
Thornton
Maud Hays
Carpentier Clarke Williams
Elsie
Castro Legend Building Footprint Feet Legend BART Track/ Station BART Track/ Station 0 200 400 800 Residential- Single Family Pedestrian-Oriented Retail Parking Civic/ Institutional Feet Future BRT Stop Residential- Duplex Auto-Serving Retail Vacant Office Future BRT Stop 0 200 400 800 Residential- Multi Family Auto-Oriented Retail Open Space Light Manufacturing/ Flex Development Intensity Existing Land Use Plan
CITY OF SAN LEANDRO Community Development Department
M a r c h 2 0 0 6
Table of Contents
CHAPTERS FIGURES TABLES
1: Project Background ...... 2 1: Study Area—Regional Context ...... 7 1: Major Opportunity Sites ...... 26 2: Study Area ...... 6 2: Study Area—Overview ...... 9 2: TOD-Related Policies ...... 32 3: Urban Form ...... 12 3: Street Typologies ...... 13 3: Zoning Districts ...... 36 4: Land Use ...... 22 4: Development Pattern ...... 15 4: Intersection Levels of Service ...... 46 5: Land Use Plans and Policies ...... 30 5: Urban Form ...... 19 5: Average Daily Traffic Volumes ...... 47 6: Transportation Network ...... 42 6: Existing Land Uses ...... 23 6: AC Transit Routes ...... 50 7: Transportation Plans and Policies ...... 62 7: Major Opportunity Sites ...... 27 7: Parking Supply and Occupancy ...... 60 8: Market for Development ...... 66 8: Zoning Districts ...... 35 8: Pending Projects ...... 66 9: Community Services ...... 72 9: Roadway Network ...... 43 10: Historic Resources ...... 74 10: Transit Network ...... 49 11: Conclusion ...... 78 11: Transit Network with Bus Stops ...... 51 12: Acknowledgements ...... 80 12: Bicycle Routes ...... 53 13: Pedestrian Environment ...... 55 14: Truck Routes and Rail Lines ...... 57 15: Parking Supply ...... 59 16: Pending Projects ...... 67 17: Publicly Owned Land ...... 69 18: Historic Resources ...... 75
Existing Conditions Report for Downtown San Leandro TOD Strategy | 1 1 | Project Background
About this Report transportation network, public facilities, and pedestrian orientation. In doing so, the area, The City of San Leandro is formulating a infrastructure that could have an impact on, or and San Leandro as a whole, will acquire a transit-oriented development (TOD) strategy be impacted by, transit-oriented development. stronger, more positive sense of place, pride, for the downtown core and immediately Additionally, the report identifies key and civic identity. This can be accomplished surrounding areas, including the areas around development opportunity sites, summarizes AC through the sensitive integration of attractively AC Transit’s future “Rapid Bus” station and Transit’s plans for enhanced transit service designed, higher-density residential and proposed “Bus Rapid Transit” (BRT) station at through the downtown, and reviews the status commercial projects at key development East 14th and Davis streets and also around the of proposed or planned capital improvement opportunity sites and the creation of new public Downtown San Leandro BART station (see projects in the area. gathering places and focal points in the area. At sidebar on next page for more information on the same time, by focusing new development Rapid Bus and BRT). These areas are jointly on appropriate locations, the City can preserve referred to in this report as the study area or the area’s strengths, including the comfortable simply as the downtown; a more detailed development density of the downtown’s definition of the study area is provided in the shopping district and the integrity of next chapter. surrounding single-family residential neighborhoods. This existing conditions report is the culmination of the first task, or phase, of the larger TOD Strategy. The purpose of the report is to provide a foundation on which subsequent detailed analyses of the feasibility of transit- oriented development in downtown San East 14th Street at Juana looking north Leandro can be based. With that goal in mind, this report provides an assessment of institutional policies and physical factors that affect the feasibility of transit-oriented Project Description and Objectives development in the study area. There are two main objectives of the Downtown San Leandro TOD Strategy. The first is to recast Specifically, the report looks at aspects of the the downtown as a distinct and more vibrant downtown’s urban form, land use, destination by enhancing the area’s transit and
2 | C ITY OF S AN L EANDRO Project Background
study area—the intersection of East 14th and begin in 2009. The City of San Leandro has WHAT IS TOD? Davis streets. Meanwhile, AC Transit’s Rapid not come out in support of BRT service Bus service along East 14th, scheduled to begin through the downtown because of the lack According to the California Department of later this year—and proposed BRT service, of street right-of-way in the area for Transportation, or Caltrans, transit-oriented scheduled for completion in 2009—will offer dedicated bus lanes. development (TOD) is a moderate- to significantly enhanced transit service through
higher-density development located within the downtown with a station at the East
an easy walk of a major transit stop, 14th/Davis intersection. Both empirical and To achieve the project objectives, the TOD generally with a mix of residential, anecdotal evidence from other locations suggest Strategy will evaluate a wide range of relevant employment, and shopping opportunities that increasing the number of people who live, designed for pedestrians without excluding planning, development, and economic issues in work and shop near the BART and BRT the auto. TOD can be new development or the downtown. Specifically, the strategy will: stations—and improving access to them—will reconstruction of one or more buildings increase the number of transit riders. whose design and orientation facilitate • quantify the potential for residential,
transit use. commercial, and office development;
• formulate urban design goals and articulate Judgements vary on the minimum in more detail the General Plan’s land use RAPID BUS OR BUS RAPID TRANSIT? development intensity that is necessary to policies for the downtown; • support TODs. BART guidelines to promote “Rapid Bus” service incorporates a package develop land use development alternatives, TOD around its stations suggest at least 40 of rail-like features to provide faster, more with contrasting land use mixes and dwelling units per gross acre for individual convenient service than is usually offered by development intensities; residential projects and at least 20 residents conventional bus service. Such features • provide specific development guidance for and 10 jobs per gross acre for the overall include fixed schedules, frequent runs, key opportunity sites; station area. MTC recently adopted a policy widely spaced stops, upgraded shelters with • recommend TOD-supportive land use to encourage greater development intensity electronic bus arrival information and fare- policies, including amendments to the along corridors scheduled for transit vending machines, low-floor buses with General Plan and zoning code; extensions. The policy generally requires a multiple doors, and traffic-signal priority for • prioritize necessary transportation and minimum average of 3,850 existing and buses. AC Transit is planning to initiate streetscape improvements; planned housing units within a half-mile of Rapid Bus service along East 14th Street in • recommend financing options and each BART station along an extension the summer or fall of 2006. The City of San implementation strategies; and corridor, and 2,750 housing units for each Leandro supports Rapid Bus service through • analyze the potential environmental impacts “bus rapid transit” station. the city. of various development options.
“Bus Rapid Transit,” or BRT, service differs
from Rapid Bus service mainly in one Key Participants The second objective is to maximize the cost- important feature: it runs along a dedicated effectiveness of existing and proposed transit The TOD Strategy is being sponsored by the bus lane rather than along a mixed-travel improvements in the area by increasing the City’s Community Development Department, lane. AC Transit is proposing BRT service number of transit riders. The BART station is in partnership with AC Transit as the BRT through the East 14th corridor, schedued to just a few minutes’ walk from the center of the sponsor. The strategy is funded primarily
Existing Conditions Report for Downtown San Leandro TOD Strategy | 3 Project Background
through a grant from the Metropolitan adoption by the City Council, is expected to development intensity for the downtown. Transportation Commission—the Bay Area’s occur within 15-18 months, or by June 2007. Throughout the development of the strategy, transportation planning agency—as part of the Following completion of this report, the next City staff will distribute information to the agency’s program to assist cities in making tasks in the TOD Strategy will be: public and solicit public comments, at meetings transit-supportive land use changes around and via mailings and postings to the City’s transit stations. The Alameda Countywide • Task 2 consists of an analysis of the potential webpage dedicated to the project (www.ci.san- Transportation Improvement Authority has market demand for transit-oriented leandro.ca.us/slcommdevTODoview.html). also provided financial assistance with the development in the downtown. City’s required matching portion of the grant. • Task 3 entails the development of up to three land use alternatives for the study area. Preparation of the TOD Strategy will be closely • Task 4 includes feasibility analyses of the coordinated with other public agencies, land use alternatives and, subsequently, the particularly BART, Caltrans, the Association of selection of a single preferred alternative. Bay Area Governments, and the Alameda • Task 5 involves the preparation of a County Congestion Management Agency. To preliminary/internal draft TOD Strategy. provide community guidance in the • Task 6 consists of the preparation of a public preparation of the TOD Strategy, the San draft TOD Strategy, proposed amendments Leandro City Council has appointed 27 local to the General Plan and zoning code, and residents to a “citizen advisory committee” draft environmental review documents. (CAC) representing a broad cross-section of the • Task 7, the final task, involves presentation of city’s population. the documents produced as part of Task 6 for review, comment and, ultimately, adoption Lastly, the City has hired a multi-disciplinary by the City Council. team of consultants with experience in TOD, participatory community planning, urban The planning process will involve regular design, land use and transportation planning, meetings between City staff and the economic analysis, and environmental-impact consultants; approximately ten meetings of the review to assist in the completion of the CAC, which are open to the public; three strategy. The consultant team is headed by community-wide workshops; presentations to BMS Design Group, a San Francisco-based interested civic groups; and work sessions and urban planning and design firm. public hearings before the Planning Commission and the City Council. Under Process guidance of City staff and the CAC, the Preparation of the TOD Strategy began in consultant team will provide information to the January 2006, marked by the CAC’s first public about the possibilities offered by transit- meeting and the project kick-off meeting oriented development and enhanced transit between City staff and the consultant team. service in the downtown. Subsequently, they Completion of the strategy, including its will assist the community in reaching consensus on the urban form, land use mix, and optimum
4 | C ITY OF S AN L EANDRO
2 | Study Area
Definition of Study Area single-family residences (Figure 6, “Existing and newer, multi-story apartment and The City has defined the study area for the TOD Land Uses,” indicates areas of varying condominium complexes. The study area Strategy as a half-mile radius circle around the residential densities). encompasses a number of important civic intersection of East 14th and Davis streets in San resources, including: Leandro (see Figure 1 for the regional context and Figure 2 for an overview of the study area). Description • government buildings such as City Hall, the That particular intersection was chosen because The study area is located in the northern main library, the main police station, Fire it is the location of AC Transit’s future Rapid portion of the city. It encompasses the Station #9, Casa Peralta, and Washington Bus station and proposed BRT station. The downtown core, the downtown BART station Elementary School, and other community distance of one-half mile was chosen because it area, and the Creekside and Best Manor facilities such as Saint Leander’s Catholic is generally accepted by transit planners as the neighborhoods. The study area contains 4,474 Church; maximum distance that the average person is dwelling units and approximately 10,600 • more than 20 designated historic structures generally willing to walk to transit. (Because of residents; another 5,000-6,000 people work (see Chapter 10 for more information on the gridded street pattern used by pedestrians, there. historic resources); and a few locations will be farther away than one- • Thrasher, Memorial and Root parks, and half mile by foot; however, circles are a The area is crisscrossed by arterials such as additional open space in the form of San conventional “shortcut” used by planners for Davis Street/Callan Avenue, East 14th Street and Leandro Creek. the purpose of estimating walking distances.) San Leandro Boulevard, and by Union Pacific rail lines and BART’s elevated tracks. For the It should be mentioned that not all parts of the most part, the study area was developed prior study area will be considered for new to World War II. As such, it is generally laid development as part of the TOD Strategy. The out in a traditional grid pattern and contains half-mile-radius area provides the necessary many of San Leandro’s historical and older context for the strategy, since potential transit buildings. While the area contains a number of riders can be expected to come from throughout larger apartment and office buildings, it is the study area. However, in accordance with characterized by smaller-scale retail, office and the community’s desire to preserve established residential structures. The housing stock ranges residential neighborhoods, the focus of new from bungalows, cottages, and century-old development opportunities will generally Victorians—many with distinctive architectural exclude neighborhoods consisting primarily of features—to a few older apartment buildings
6 | C ITY OF S AN L EANDRO Study Area
Figure 1: Study Area—Regional Context
Sources: City of San Leandro, BMS Design Group
Existing Conditions Report for Downtown San Leandro TOD Strategy | 7 Study Area
Brief History after the county seat was moved to Oakland in opened in August 1957). At the same time, The study area was home to Native 1868 following an earthquake that destroyed growing automobile ownership, massive public Americans for more than 3,000 years before the the courthouse building. San Leandro investments in the roadway network (especially first European settlers arrived in the 18th incorporated as a city in 1872, and had grown to for interstate highways), and the dismantling of century. The official map of the early town of about 2,300 residents by 1900. the streetcar system in 1958 seriously San Leandro was recorded in 1856; it undermined the downtown’s transit established a grid of streets with sites set aside The city grew at a moderate pace during the orientation. for prominent buildings. The original town was first four decades of the 20th century. The Key bounded by San Leandro Creek to the north, System, an East Bay network of electric This decline continued through the 1960s and Washington Avenue to the east, Castro Street to streetcars that ran from Oakland to Hayward, 1970s as residents and investment shifted the south and Orchard Street to the west. The began serving San Leandro in 1928, running farther out still, to newly developed suburbs. th boundaries of the town site are no longer along East 14 and along Bancroft. Residents Contributing to this trend was the fact that the discernible, and all the buildings from the relied on rail service for access to San Francisco, city began to reach growth limits: steep hills on town’s early years—with the exception of the Oakland and other destinations beyond their the east, San Francisco Bay on the west, and Alta Mira Club—have been lost as a result of immediate neighborhoods. Much of the established communities to the north and south. fire, earthquake or demolition. development in the area reflects the streetcar Completion of the BART line in the early 1970s era: storefronts are pedestrian-oriented, for was a hopeful sign, as it re-established example, and stores provide little or no off- passenger train service to the rest of the East street parking. By 1940, San Leandro had Bay and to San Francisco. Development of the 14,000 residents; still, the city covered just a few Washington Plaza shopping center in 1983 was square miles and was surrounded by farms and well-intentioned but disrupted the historic orchards. street grid in the immediate area and introduced a land use primarily oriented to The 1940s and 50s were a time of significant motorists. changes for the city. San Leandro experienced its biggest growth spurt then, as the population Most recently, during the past decade and a more than quadrupled during those two half, several trends have coincided to increase decades to approximately 60,000 people. New interest in revitalizing the downtown, including residential neighborhoods and retail centers restoring its transit orientation. These trends San Leandro, 1899 (Source: USGS) sprouted throughout most of present-day San include the desire to strengthen San Leandro’s Leandro. The commercial strips along East 14th civic identity, growing pride and interest in the and other arterials, and early shopping centers city’s past, a craving for transportation Reflecting its early importance, the town was such as Pelton Center, date from this period. alternatives to the automobile, and an increased designated as the seat of Alameda County in need to optimize public investments in existing 1856. The first railroad arrived in the area in Downtown began to lose some of its vibrancy and proposed utilities systems and 1865, running from the north into San Leandro and significance as public and private transportation facilities. near Davis Street along present-day West investment shifted to other parts of the city and Estudillo and Washington. San Leandro as shoppers became attracted to new retail prospered as a small agricultural town even destinations such as Bayfair Mall (which
8 | C ITY OF S AN L EANDRO Study Area
Figure 2: Study Area—Overview
Sources: City of San Leandro, BMS Design Group
Existing Conditions Report for Downtown San Leandro TOD Strategy | 9 Study Area
Implications for Transit-Oriented Development While the downtown lost much of its transit orientation during the past several decades, it retains the necessary ingredients for transit- oriented development. Specifically, the area is:
• served by BART trains and AC Transit buses, with rail-like BRT service planned along East 14th; • compact, walkable, and largely laid out on a grid of short blocks; • more densely developed than surrounding areas yet contains a number of vacant and underutilized sites with significant development potential; and • already served by a combination of residential, commercial, and civic and public uses. (Public facilities provide particularly good opportunities to support transit- oriented development by promoting transit use among employees and visitors and also by organizing and hosting events and special activities that draw people to the downtown.)
The challenge, then, is not how to create a TOD district from scratch. Rather, it is how to reinforce the area’s patterns from the past to create a 21st-century TOD neighborhood that will strengthen the downtown’s—and the rest of the city’s—overall quality of life.
10 | C ITY OF S AN L EANDRO
3 | Urban Form
Overall Structure lines run through the area, west of the BART block sizes are more consistent and range from The study area encompasses San Leandro’s tracks and in a generally north-to-south 300 to 350 feet. Parcels tend to be small and downtown core, a larger downtown periphery, direction. The first line west of the BART tracks rectangular, though sizes and shapes vary, adjacent residential neighborhoods and the area is the “Oakland Subdivision,” which is rarely especially in the Creekside residential of the Downtown San Leandro BART station. used; the next westerly line is the “Niles neighborhood. Finally, in the BART station The area is bisected from east to west by Davis Subdivision,” which has high usage. area, the traditional grid is barely discernible Street/Callan Avenue and by San Leandro and the original blocks and parcels have been Creek. From north to south, it is bisected by consolidated into much larger ones. East 14th Street, which serves triple duty as State Street Grid and Street Character Highway 185, the city’s “Main Street,” and the The downtown’s urban form results from a Four types of streets have been identified in the proposed route for AC Transit’s BRT service combination of a traditional urban grid with an study area (see Figure 3): through San Leandro. Other main overlay of suburban-style redevelopment from • LARGE SCALE, DEFINED SPACE: Wide right-of- thoroughfares in the area include San Leandro the post-World War II era. With a history of way, usually with a taller "streetwall and a Boulevard and Estudillo Avenue. permanent settlement going back to at least the higher intensity of development. 1850s, three distinct grids come together in the • LARGE SCALE, UNDEFINED SPACE: Wide right-of- The downtown core is the city’s historic center downtown core, creating a rectilinear but way, indistinct street wall, irregular setbacks, and the civic heart of the community. It is irregular street pattern. The basic configuration mostly commercial development. bounded roughly by Davis/Callan, Santa Rosa, of these grids still exists; however, it has been • MIXED SCALE: Wide right-of-way, mixed scale Williams, and Hays streets. The downtown lost in places, most notably around the of development, mostly residential uses periphery extends to San Leandro Creek, Washington Plaza shopping center. along the street. Bancroft, Castro, and San Leandro Boulevard. • RESIDENTIAL SCALE: Narrower right-of-way, 1-2 The grids of the downtown core generally story buildings on either side, predominantly North of the creek, straddling East 14th, lie the extend into the periphery, though the creek’s but not necessarily entirely residential uses. attractive older residential neighborhoods of meandering path creates irregular blocks at the Best Manor and Creekside. Best Manor extends district’s northern edge. The residential west of East 14th while Creekside lies to the east neighborhoods north of the creek are marked of it. Finally, west of San Leandro Boulevard is by a modified grid pattern, with the occasional the area of the BART station. BART’s elevated curving street and cul-de-sac. Streets are tracks run generally parallel to, and west of, San relatively narrow and blocks are generally Leandro Boulevard. Two Union Pacific railroad small, though sizes vary. On East 14th Street,
12 | C ITY OF S AN L EANDRO Urban Form
Figure 3: Street Typologies
Sources: City of San Leandro, BMS Design Group
Existing Conditions Report for Downtown San Leandro TOD Strategy | 13 Urban Form
Development Pattern The newer redeveloped areas contain larger Figure 4 illustrates a figure/ground relationship surface parking lots and are set a considerable of buildings and open spaces in the study area. distance back from the street, reducing the The illustration shows the actual pattern of overall impression of intensity. Taller buildings buildings in the downtown with all non- are more common in the central area, with a building areas shown as voids or white. These variety of building heights ranging up to five may include roadways, vacant lots, parking, or stories. open space. As is the case with most downtown areas, the pattern and scale of Moving away from the center, to the north, east, development is most intense at the center, with and south, single family residential a noticeable reduction in intensity immediately neighborhoods predominate with a consequent outside of the central commercial area as the reduction in the pattern of building footprint study area transitions to a smaller scale in scale and development intensity. There is a residential areas. A higher level of scattering of multi-family buildings in the development intensity is also clearly seen along residential areas, particularly in the southeast the length of East 14th and Davis streets toward and southwest. The BART station area is home the BART station. to several large light-industrial facilities that in some cases stand in stark contrast to the more The scale of buildings in the downtown core is fine-grained residential neighborhoods that generally small; notable exceptions are they adjoin. Additionally there is significant Washington Plaza, the main library, and a vacant land closer to the BART station as well Joaquin Street number of multi-family residential and office as several facilities with large surface parking buildings. While not uniform, buildings tend to lots, , including the offices at Alvarado and have a “fine-grained texture” of architectural David streets, which contribute to a very elements (such as openings, ornamentation and different feeling from both the core downtown signage) that provide visual interest to people and the surrounding residential neighborhoods. passing by on foot. Significant redevelopment has led to parcel consolidation, in some cases across the street grid to create larger building sites. This is particularly obvious in the area surrounding the Washington Plaza shopping center, where larger building footprints are common. While large buildings are to be expected and are even desired in the downtown, the shopping center lacks the fine- grained texture that is of interest to pedestrians.
14 | C ITY OF S AN L EANDRO Urban Form
Figure 4: Development Pattern
Sources: City of San Leandro, BMS Design Group
Existing Conditions Report for Downtown San Leandro TOD Strategy | 15 Urban Form
Architectural Character distinctive than existing buildings from earlier The downtown encompasses an eclectic range eras. This has eroded the uniqueness of the of architectural styles from Victorian-era downtown. If allowed to continue, the result residences and commercial buildings through may be an area that lacks identity and character contemporary designs for downtown retail, and is indistinguishable from most other commercial, and financial institutions. commercial centers. Residential styles include California Craftsman, Italianate, Queen Anne, Mediterranean, and Prairie. In the downtown commercial area, there are a number of turn-of-the-century buildings that are of an Italianate/Victorian design and have significant scale and presence. These buildings contribute to a unique identity and image in the downtown that distinguishes it from the surrounding neighborhoods and much of the rest of the East Bay.
Senior housing, West Juana Street
Currently, downtown San Leandro lacks the sense of urban vitality that is the hallmark of a successful downtown. With a number of somewhat undistinguished recent buildings, inadequate lighting and street furniture, and an environment generally geared more towards automobiles than pedestrians, the downtown
has significant room for improvement in Small single-family dwelling complex, Cecilia Court realizing a vibrant, attractive, and flourishing experience for all users.
Overall, the downtown’s architectural identity lacks cohesiveness due in some part to the extensive redevelopment that has occurred in the area since the 1950s. Over the years, as buildings were replaced in the neighborhood, new buildings have been built that are less
16 | C ITY OF S AN L EANDRO Urban Form
Landscape Character creek, with its strong line of street trees; the Generally, landscape can be defined as natural mature canopy of trees in the Washington Plaza (native and made up of elements placed by parking area; and Estudillo Street, the new nature), naturalistic (created by humans with streetscape of which might constitute a model elements of nature and designed to present a for other pedestrian-oriented streets as it natural appearance), and urban (entirely includes pedestrian-scale lighting, bulb-outs, created by humans, which may be formal or street trees, decorative pavers that mark informal, depending on its design). pedestrian crossings, and a range of street furniture. All of these elements form a more pedestrian-friendly environment.
High-quality urban landscape at Huff and Callan Street trees on East 14th Street north of San Leandro Creek In the study area, there is one important natural landscape feature, San Leandro Creek. The creek appears to be the last remnant of a natural system of creeks, wetlands, and gently rolling uplands once present in the area. There are no naturalistic areas, with the exception of isolated private yards and gardens.
Most of the study area comprises an urban landscape, typically arranged formally in response to the street and block pattern, and including Memorial Park and Thrasher Park. Within the urban landscape, there are several other notable places: East 14th Street north of the
Existing Conditions Report for Downtown San Leandro TOD Strategy | 17 Urban Form
Other Determinants of Urban Form significant and well-defined as some of the STREET GRID AND STREET CHARACTER Figure 5 identifies various other determinants others, for example. • A clearer, better defined street grid would of urban form, including districts, activity improve visitors’ sense of orientation and centers, gateways, and barriers. Districts were The San Leandro General Plan also identifies access. One-way, non-gridded, and dead- defined based on changes in character, use, and gateways, although they tend to focus more on end streets can prove frustrating to people texture of the urban fabric. The downtown core the entry experience to the city as a whole from unfamiliar with the layout of an area. is identified as a distinct district as are the outside San Leandro. The plan does identify • Due to their existing character and use, predominantly single-family neighborhoods to two future gateways where Estudillo and Juana certain streets in the study area are better the southeast and northeast. Activity centers intersect with San Leandro Boulevard. suited for higher-intensity development. are government, commercial, and retail service- However, of these two locations only Estudillo Examples are the portions of San Leandro th oriented focal points. They include the civic currently provides a “gateway experience.” Boulevard, Davis and East 14 that are center, the downtown commercial core, the identified as “auto-dominated;” traffic BART station, and the neighborhood center at Barriers are spaces and elements that inhibit generated by intensification can usually be East 14th and Dutton. easy movement, particularly for pedestrians. accommodated more easily on such streets, These include the rail tracks, the creek, and though traffic studies will be required to streets with higher traffic levels such as Davis confirm this. and East 14th. Finally, long views from the • Certain developments are appropriate on the study area are not remarkable. As a result of streets identified as “mixed scale.” Large- the generally flat topography in the study area, scale development is possible but design views are limited to those to the hillsides. A sensitivity on a site-by-site basis is limited number of significant tree canopies particularly important in corridors with low- coupled with long, straight streets and low- scale adjacent uses. profile buildings, ensures that views into and • Bulky or large-scale interventions are not out of the downtown from the street level are appropriate on “residential scale” streets. maintained. Although the General Plan includes numerous significant views in the city as a whole, it does not include significant The BART gateway and Davis Street viewsheds originating or terminating in the study area.
Gateways include points where a definite sense of entry to the downtown core is experienced. Implications for Transit-Oriented Typically, gateways involve a change in scale, Development land use or texture. In some cases, a physical structure such as the overhead BART tracks at Below is a summary of the key implications for Davis or a natural feature such as the creek transit-oriented development derived from the provides a clear sense of transition. The relative study area’s urban form. strength of the downtown gateways varies; the gateway from the south on East 14th is not as
18 | C ITY OF S AN L EANDRO Urban Form
Figure 5: Urban Form
Sources: City of San Leandro, BMS Design Group
Existing Conditions Report for Downtown San Leandro TOD Strategy | 19 Urban Form
DEVELOPMENT PATTERN unique identity, not on “national branding” BART station and the downtown core, which • The downtown core could benefit from a or the latest architectural fashion. will also likely restrict access to the future more consistent development texture. BRT station. Measures to break down these • The study area lacks a sense of a strong, LANDSCAPE CHARACTER and other barriers could include traffic cohesive “center.” • The creek represents a great opportunity for calming in the core area along San Leandro • New development in the downtown should improvements that will enhance its utility for Boulevard, Davis and East 14th; elevated, consider how to address or mitigate any transit-oriented development by providing underground, or surface rail crossings; and, inappropriate scale conflicts that exist. an attractive pedestrian corridor as well as an possibly, bridges across the creek at locations • Washington Plaza is more reminiscent of an open space amenity for surrounding still to be determined. automobile-dominated suburban shopping development. • Views into the downtown and from the district and is not conducive to a pedestrian– • Creek enhancements must be balanced with primary transit destinations are important oriented place; efforts should be made to the potential to preserve and enhance the wayfinding devices and should be break down the scale of these blocks beyond creek as a natural system for habitat considered in future development plans. A what has already been accomplished with the conservation, natural drainage, and as sense of orientation for visitors arriving by West Estudillo pedestrian improvements. “breathing space” in the urban environment. transit can establish a level of comfort that • Smaller-scale infill opportunities exist in the Increased human intervention reduces the invites them to experience more of the downtown core and the east side of the study natural qualities of the creek, which downtown. Signage as well as clear visibility area. (Infill is the development of vacant or contribute to the downtown’s uniqueness. to key destinations should be encouraged in underutilized lots in areas that are already • Naturalistic design responses are probably the TOD Strategy. substantially built up.) not the most appropriate for the study area, • Large voids in the west side of the study area given the lack of existing examples. One contribute to an unfriendly pedestrian exception is in areas adjacent to the creek, environment and are prime opportunity where it might be appropriate to “expand” areas for new development. These sites are the creek’s presence through naturalistic also very close to the BART station and designs that could extend a considerable would, therefore, be well-served by transit. distance into adjacent urban areas. • The large existing flex office buildings southwest of the BART station could provide OTHER DETERMINANTS OF URBAN FORM a buffer between new larger-scale and • While the relative strength of the downtown higher-intensity development and the gateways varies, all could be reinforced and existing lower-density neighborhoods to the improved with the addition of streetscape west. features, pedestrian amenities, and architecturally memorable development. ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER • Since activity centers already possess a high • New development should respect the area’s degree of critical mass, they could be existing architectural character in order to appropriate locations for intensification as provide a cohesive and attractive part of a successful TOD Strategy. appearance. Design character should be • There are significant barriers to east/west based on elements that give San Leandro a movement that inhibit access between the
20 | C ITY OF S AN L EANDRO
4 | Land Use
Existing Uses Creekside neighborhood—north of the creek straddling the study area’s half-mile-radius th Figure 6 shows the study area’s existing land and to the west of East 14 —is primarily single- boundary. use pattern. The downtown core is, generally, a family residential of the same vintage as in Best compact mixture of retail along East 14th, offices Manor but includes a number of large to the east, and residences to the south and (to a apartment buildings immediately north of the th lesser extent) east. The downtown periphery creek. East 14 separates the two also is characterized by a mixture of uses. neighborhoods. The street features a mix of Single-family homes predominate, though there commercial and civic/public uses such as City are many apartment and office buildings Hall, the main police station, the only public scattered throughout. In particular, the area school in the study area (Washington between Callan and the creek is home to higher- Elementary) and Root Park. Public access to the density residential complexes and larger office creek from the north side is also severely buildings. The 2.7-acre Memorial Park is found limited except at Root Park. on the eastern edge of this sub-area. The creek constitutes an additional open-space resource, Finally, the western part of the study area though public access is severely limited except contains the BART station area and one of the for a new stretch of trail along the Creekside city’s two largest concentrations of office space. Plaza office project. It should be noted that the The station itself is immediately west of San existing land uses in the study area do not Leandro Boulevard (between Davis and always coincide with the underlying zoning of Parrott), with parking lots under the station and their parcels (see Chapter 5, “Land Use Plans tracks and across the boulevard. Two blocks and Policies,” for more information on zoning). north of the lot is the new Creekside Plaza office complex. There are a few large office and The Best Manor neighborhood—located to the light-industrial buildings west and north of the north of San Leandro Creek and to the west of station, a large car dealer north of Davis, a East 14th—is almost exclusively composed of mixed-use strip along San Leandro Boulevard older, small-scale, single-family residences. north of Davis, and several large vacant parcels Lots tend to be relatively modest-sized but north and immediately to the west of the generally meet the minimum lot size of 5,000 station. Thrasher Park occupies nearly five square feet called for by the City. The acres at the corner of Davis and Orchard,
22 | C ITY OF S AN L EANDRO Land Use
Figure 6: Existing Land Uses
Sources: City of San Leandro, County of Alameda, BMS Design Group
Existing Conditions Report for Downtown San Leandro TOD Strategy | 23 Land Use
Automobile-Related Uses Auto-serving uses have as their main or sole purpose to sell or service automobiles; such uses include body shops, parts stores, auto sales lots, gas stations, and vehicle-storage facilities. Auto-oriented uses are typically commercial uses that are designed primarily to serve automobile users; they include fast-food restaurants with drive-through windows, “quick stop” convenience stores, and offices and stores whose main entrances open onto a parking lot rather than onto the sidewalk.
East 14th Street and Callan
There is a large number of auto-oriented uses in the study area, particularly in the commercial core, including the Washington Plaza shopping center and the Long’s Drugs at the corner of East 14th and Callan. Automobile-related uses detract from the pedestrian environment. On the other hand, recent streetscape improvements on Estudillo to the west of the shopping center have improved the pedestrian environment and lessened the impact of Washington Center’s automobile orientation.
24 | C ITY OF S AN L EANDRO Land Use
Opportunity Sites new development, though, since some of the Approximately 67 acres of land in the study sites are occupied by uses or buildings that area have been identified as development might remain. Also, the acreage figure above opportunity areas. The major development- includes access and drop-off areas at the BART opportunity sites are summarized in Table 1 station, which are necessary for transit and shown in Figure 7. Also, a site visit was operations; these areas will need to be conducted to determine current uses. The sites considered before future development can were identified using the following criteria: occur.
• vacant land; • surface parking lots, including BART’s; • underutilized sites with buildings that are either vacant or might be reaching the end of their useful economic life; • publicly owned land with short leases; and • sites with auto-serving and auto-oriented uses (see Figure 6, “Existing Land Uses”).
BART parking at Juana and Carpentier
All opportunity sites except sites 18, 19, 20, 23, 25, 26 and a portion of 12 are within redevelopment areas, which provide another strong implementation tool for transit-oriented development. It is likely that not all of the acreage identified below will be available for
Existing Conditions Report for Downtown San Leandro TOD Strategy | 25 Land Use
Table 1: Major Opportunity Sites
SITE ACREAGE ZONING GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION CURRENT USE (BASED ON 2/06 SITE RECONNAISSANCE)
1 3.1 Industrial Park Office/High Density Residential, light manufacturing, vacant 2 1.9 Industrial Park Office/High Density Residential, light manufacturing, vacant, parking 3 6.3 Industrial Park General Commercial Vacant, retail 4 4.0 Industrial Park Office Parking 5 2.8 Industrial Limited Corridor Mixed Use Retail, residential, light manufacturing 6 0.8 Commercial Community Office Vacant Downtown Mixed Use/ 7 1.6 Commercial Downtown Parking, office, retail, open space Resource Conservation 8 1.5 Commercial Downtown Downtown Mixed Use Retail, parking 9 1.6 Commercial Downtown Downtown Mixed Use Retail, civic/institutional Commercial Downtown/ 10 1.2 Downtown Mixed Use Parking Residential Multi-Family-3000 11 0.9 Commercial Downtown Downtown Mixed Use Parking Commercial Downtown/ Downtown Mixed Use/ 12 1.6 Retail, parking, residential Residential Multi-Family-3000 Office 13 1.7 Commercial Downtown Downtown Mixed Use Open Space 14 7.1 Commercial Downtown Downtown Mixed Use Retail, parking 15 0.7 Commercial Downtown Downtown Mixed Use Parking 16 0.4 Residential Multi-Family-1800 Downtown Mixed Use Retail, residential 17 2.1 Public and Semipublic High Density Parking, residential 18 1.9 Residential Multi-Family-1800 Medium Density Civic/institutional 19 0.9 Commercial Community General Commercial Parking, retail, residential 20 0.6 Residential Multi-Family-1800 High Density Open space, residential 21 1.3 Industrial Park Light Industrial Open space, light manufacturing, parking 22 1.7 Industrial Park Light Industrial Parking, light manufacturing 23 1.6 Industrial Park Office Parking, retail Professional Office/ 24 9.7 Office Parking, open space Industrial Park 25 8.9 Public and Semipublic Public/Institutional Parking, civic/institutional 26 1.2 Public and Semipublic Public/Institutional Parking, civic/institutional Total 67.1
Sources: City of San Leandro, BMS Design Group
26 | C ITY OF S AN L EANDRO Land Use
Figure 7: Major Opportunity Sites
Sources: City of San Leandro, BMS Design Group
Existing Conditions Report for Downtown San Leandro TOD Strategy | 27 Land Use
Implications for Transit-Oriented AUTOMOBILE-RELATED USES development occurs on the opportunity sites. Development Auto-dominated land uses can create an This might require amendments to the General unfriendly environment for pedestrians and can Plan, Zoning Code and Redevelopment Plan for The analysis of land use in the study area has discourage transit users who might wish to the Plaza Redevelopment Project Area. If as numerous implications for transit-oriented access the downtown. Auto-serving and auto- much as two-thirds of the 67 acres of development. Following is a summary of the oriented uses often serve a clientele from development-opportunity land were developed initial observations and key considerations. significantly outside the immediate area and at 30 dwelling units per acre—still below
EXISTING USES may not require a downtown, transit-oriented BART’s goal of 40 units per acre for transit- location. Generally, these uses, especially larger oriented development—the TOD study area Generally, the mix of land uses could be surface parking lots that front streets with a would see an additional 1,340 units of housing. strengthened to provide the optimal high potential for pedestrian-orientation, combination of residential, commercial, civic, should be encouraged to relocate to other and office space to support transit, serve the locations in the city, freeing the sites to become immediate-area population, and attract visitors transit-supportive development opportunity from the rest of the city and the East Bay. Also, areas. the study area is deficient in usable open space.
Memorial and Thrasher parks are on the edges OPPORTUNITY SITES of the area, Root Park is a 0.8-acre “mini-park,” Most of the opportunity sites are within a and the banks of San Leandro Creek are mostly quarter-mile of the BART station or the future off-limits to the public. Specifically, the General BRT station. The larger opportunity sites on the Plan found that the southern part of the west side of the study area offer the greatest downtown did not meet the City’s standard potential for higher-density transit-supportive that there be a park within one-half mile of each uses due to their proximity to BART and the San Leandro resident. design flexibility that larger sites allow. (BART staff has authorization from the agency’s board to solicit for a developer for the station area but has postponed the process because the City has asked for an expanded redevelopment approach.) Also, larger-scale infill is possible on some parts of the west side as it would pose fewer land use-adjacency issues there. The railroad lines west of the BART tracks will make it difficult to develop the Westlake site, however. Smaller-scale infill is more appropriate in the east and center of the study area. Root Park The possibility of higher, TOD-supportive densities should be considered as new
28 | C ITY OF S AN L EANDRO
5 | Land Use Plans and Policies
This chapter summarizes a number of existing Leandro/BART Area Revitalization Strategy,” land use plans and regulatory policies that DOWNTOWN: For this area, the General Plan discussed later. According to the General Plan, provide direction for development in the study incorporates the recommendations of the the BART station area presents the most area. With one exception, these plans have “Downtown Plan and Urban Design substantial development opportunities in been adopted within the past five years. Also Guidelines,” which is discussed later in this central San Leandro, and offers the best of particular importance to the study area are chapter. The General Plan envisions the prospect in the city for both a regionally plans and policies related to transportation; downtown as a pedestrian-oriented district recognized office district and a vibrant new these, however, are discussed separately in the with a mix of commercial spaces, offices, civic mixed-use district. The plan believes that office ”Transportation Plans and Policies” chapter. uses, and upper-story residences; key to this space in this area would capitalize on the vision are the preservation of historic resources availability of public transit and proximity to and an attractive street environment— shopping and services in the downtown. San Leandro General Plan especially on East 14th and Washington—that The General Plan, the latest update of which would define downtown as “the” place in San was adopted in May 2002, is the City’s official Leandro for people to shop, eat, and relax. policy document regarding the general location of future housing, businesses, industry, Commerce-wise, the plan suggests that the transportation facilities, parks, and other land downtown needs to distinguish itself from uses throughout the city. This is arguably the regional malls, neighborhood shopping centers, most influential plan since all local government and regional big-box centers by emphasizing programs and decisions are required by higher-quality shops, restaurants, and California state law to be consistent with it. entertainment venues. The plan encourages small-scale residential and local-serving office The General Plan identifies ten “focus areas,” projects to the east of the downtown core. It where the most substantial land use changes in also calls for the character of residential East 14th Street the city are expected to occur over the next 20 neighborhoods on the perimeter to be retained, though compatible infill development is years and where public and private investment encouraged. should be actively encouraged. Below are EAST 14TH CORRIDOR: For this corridor, the summaries of the General Plan’s development General Plan incorporates the findings and DOWNTOWN BART STATION AREA: For this area, the guidance for the four focus areas that overlap recommendations of the “North Area Plan and General Plan incorporates the with the study area for the TOD Strategy. Revitalization Manual” and the “East 14th Street recommendations of the “Central San
30 | C ITY OF S AN L EANDRO Land Use Plans and Policies
South Area Development Strategy,” both of transition to office space, compatible residential new multi-family housing. The plan which are discussed later. The General Plan uses and commercial services to complement recommends that such development be believes that East 14th, as San Leandro’s “Main the Creekside Plaza office complex. The plan respectful of and sympathetic to the prevailing Street,” provides some of the best opportunities also calls for streetscape improvements to character of nearby residential areas. in the city for infill housing, small-scale office enhance this area as a gateway into the city, and space, and pedestrian-oriented retail. trails and public open space to be provided NORTH (includes the Best Manor neighborhood): along the creek. The General Plan’s key objective for this area is North of the downtown, this would mean the to maintain and enhance neighborhood reuse of older structures and transit-oriented Beyond these focus areas, the General Plan character. The plan calls for particular infill development, according to the plan; south includes discussions of the city’s main emphasis to be placed on revitalizing the of the downtown, it means reshaping the residential neighborhoods, including the major commercial areas located on the fringes of this existing land use pattern into distinct and planning issues affecting them. Below are area. A transition from light industrial to clearly defined neighborhood centers consisting summaries of the development guidance mixed-use development is envisioned along of attractive, mixed-use, transit-oriented included in the General Plan for the three San Leandro Boulevard, and pedestrian-scale development projects. The plan suggests residential neighborhoods that overlap with the mixed-use development is envisioned along improving the corridor’s image by providing study area. East 14th. attractive streetscape improvements, undergrounding utility lines, moving parking CENTRAL (covers the downtown core and The General Plan also contains a large number to the rear of properties, and eliminating periphery): According to the General Plan, of more specific goals, policies, and actions to nuisances to adjacent residential opportunities for new residential development guide the City’s land use-related decisions. neighborhoods. are concentrated around the BART station and Some of these have the potential to affect the along East 14th and Washington, some of which implementation of transit-oriented SAN LEANDRO BOULEVARD CORRIDOR: The area along may consist of mixed-use projects with ground- development. Table 2 lists the policies, actions, this street for one-half mile north and south of floor retail or office uses and upper-story and one goal from the General Plan that pertain the BART station represents one of the most housing. The plan recommends that infill in particular to the downtown; they are listed important development opportunities in San housing, streetscape enhancements and according to the General Plan chapter in which Leandro, according to the General Plan. The pedestrian amenities create an urban they appear. reasons are the area’s proximity to the BART environment while preserving the area’s older station and to the downtown and the large housing stock and historical ambiance. These policy statements have been summarized acreage in vacant and underutilized parcels. for the sake of brevity. Since they represent NORTHEAST (includes the Creekside official City policy, the General Plan should be The General Plan singles out the Alvarado neighborhood): The General Plan mentions that consulted for the complete text. In addition, Street frontage just south of San Leandro Creek there are few opportunities for infill there are many other pertinent policies and as the most immediate development development as the land use pattern in this area actions that apply to development citywide; opportunity. Low-rise offices are the plan’s is well established. The plan strongly they are found primarily in the land use and preferred use there, though high-density discourages the demolition of older homes. transportation chapters of the General Plan but housing or live-work units may also be Opportunities for new mixed-use development are too numerous to list here. considered. Along San Leandro Boulevard, the are seen along East 14th to provide General Plan encourages a longer-term neighborhood shopping and services as well as
Existing Conditions Report for Downtown San Leandro TOD Strategy | 31 Land Use Plans and Policies
Table 2: TOD-Related Policies from the San Leandro General Plan
CHAPTER 3, LAND USE Policy 6.10 Develop the BART station area as a mixed-use “transit village.” Policy 2.04 Preserve the character of single-family neighborhoods, Action 6.10-A Relocate the BART parking lot to a new parking garage concentrating new multi-family development near the west of the station, and redevelop the site with mixed BART stations and along major transit corridors. uses or high-density housing. Goal 6 Develop the downtown as the geographic and social heart Action 6.10-B Develop vacant sites west of the BART station with transit- of the city. friendly office uses. Policy 6.01 Ensure that new development in the downtown is Policy 7.12 Promote the transition of San Leandro Boulevard to attractive and conducive to economic revitalization. pedestrian-oriented mixed-use and light-industrial Action 6.01-A Implement the 2001 Downtown Plan, requiring that development. development proposals be consistent with its design Action 7.12-A Encourage office development and, possibly, high-density guidelines. residential uses along Alvarado south of San Leandro Action 6.01-B Update the zoning code to incorporate the Creek. recommendations of the Downtown Plan. Action 7.12-F Seek opportunities for new parks in the San Leandro Action 6.01-C Budget funds to restore downtown’s street grid, re- Boulevard corridor. establish the historic plaza, and create a pedestrian Action 8.01 Maintain community retail uses centered in the downtown. network throughout the downtown. Policy 8.04 In “Corridor Mixed Use” areas, emphasize pedestrian- and Policy 6.02 Improve the mix and quality of retail and service transit-oriented site design, mixed-use infill projects, businesses in the downtown. higher-value neighborhood-serving retail uses, and higher- Policy 6.03 Identify creative re-use options for vacant bank buildings density housing. in the downtown. Action 8.04-A Replace the NA-1 and NA-2 districts with “Corridor Mixed Policy 6.04 Strengthen pedestrian and transit links between the Use” zones emphasizing a mix of commercial uses, and downtown and the nearby BART station and upper-floor residential uses with ground-floor retail. neighborhoods. Policy 8.09 Transform East 14th into a series of distinct mixed-use Action 6.04-A Improve the streetscape in the BART station area, neighborhood centers. including on West Juana and West Estudillo. Action 8.09-A Implement the plan for the stretch of East 14th north of Action 6.04-B Redesign San Leandro Boulevard along the east side of the San Leandro Creek and cluster pedestrian-oriented retail BART station to add streetscape improvements. near Broadmoor and between Dutton and City Hall. Policy 6.05 Create a pedestrian-friendly environment in the Action 8.09-B Develop a series of activity centers or “districts” along downtown. East 14th south of the downtown. Policy 6.06 Promote high-quality architecture in the downtown. Action 8.09-C Revise the zoning code to provide incentives for mixed-use th Policy 6.07 Keep parking for downtown businesses convenient, but de- development on East 14 . emphasize surface parking lots. Action 8.09-D Prepare and implement an urban design and streetscape th Action 6.07-A Study the feasibility of developing an attractively designed plan for all of East 14 . downtown parking structure or expanding and redesigning the existing City-owned downtown parking garage.
32 | C ITY OF S AN L EANDRO Land Use Plans and Policies
CHAPTER 4, TRANSPORTATION CHAPTER 7, HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND COMMUNITY DESIGN
Policy 13.04 Develop properties adjacent to the two BART stations in Action 38.03-A Revitalize the historic downtown plaza. the city and along heavily used public-transit routes as Action 38.04-A Create an “Old San Leandro” historic district in the TODs. vicinity of the Casa Peralta and Daniel Best House. Action 13.04-A Implement the recommendations identified in the plans or Action 38.05-A Establish neighborhood conservation districts in areas studies prepared for both BART stations. characterized by pre-1940s-era housing stock. Action 13.04-B Adopt minimum density and intensity zoning provisions for th Action 38.06-B Add the Veterans Memorial Auditorium, Washington sites near the BART stations and along East 14 . Elementary School, and City Hall to the City’s registry of Policy 14.03 Use creeks and dormant rail lines as trail alignments. historic resources. Policy 14.05 Encourage walking and cycling to the BART stations and Action 44.05-D Make East 14th the City’s highest-priority area for the bus lines. undergrounding of utilities. Action 15.01-A Pursue shuttle service from the downtown to the BART stations. CHAPTER 9, HOUSING Action 15.01-B Pursue enhanced access to both BART stations and transit- th oriented development around them. Action 53.01-A Create a new “Mixed Use” zone on East 14 south of Thornton. Action 15.05-A Consider street-design changes to East 14th if light rail or advanced bus service is feasible. Action 53.02-B Promote mixed-use development opportunities around the BART stations and on East 14th among developers of Action 17.04-A Explore reducing the number of travel lanes and offering affordable housing. streetscape amenities on downtown streets. Action 53.03-B Require developers of residential projects within Action 19.01-D Provide streetscape improvements along East 14th to make redevelopment areas to provide affordable housing units it more transit- and pedestrian-friendly. (or, under Action 53.03-C, to pay in-lieu fees). Action 20.05-A Pursue the transfer of responsibility from Caltrans for East Action 53.05-C Rezone the site of the BART parking lot at San Leandro 14th and Davis east of Doolittle. Boulevard and West Juana to “High Density Residential” and the 13-acre multi-parcel site along Alvarado between CHAPTER 5, OPEN SPACE, PARKS AND CONSERVATION the World Savings and San Leandro Creek to “Mixed Use.” Action 57.08-C Amend the zoning code to conditionally allow group Policy 25.02 Require adequate setbacks and public-access easements residential uses on “Industrial-Light” parcels within one- for new developments next to San Leandro Creek. half mile of the BART stations. Action 25.05-A Develop a chain of parks and a continuous trail along the Action 58.01-B Revise the zoning code to facilitate multi-family uses in creek. the RM-1800 zone and additional single-family units in the RD and RM zones and to reduce the required setback requirements for small lots in the NA-2 zone. CHAPTER 6, ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS Action 58.01-C Reduce parking requirements for residential projects Action 36.01-A Pursue relief from train and bus noise (also covered under within one-quarter mile of the BART stations and along Action 36.05-A). East 14th. Action 58.03-B Consider reducing the undergrounding utility fee for th affordable housing projects on East 14 .
Existing Conditions Report for Downtown San Leandro TOD Strategy | 33 Land Use Plans and Policies
Zoning development on those sites. Amendments are Zoning designations establish the specific land also likely to be necessary to the land use map uses allowed for a given zoning “district” and in the General Plan—which forms the basis for the development standards, such as density and the more specific zoning map—and to height limit, that should be applied to that definitions of the various land use categories district. Table 3 summarizes the zoning that accompany the land use map. districts found in the study area, including the main locations where each zoning designation is found and some common permitted—and, occasionally, restricted—land uses for each. The list is not exhaustive of all permitted or restricted land uses; rather, it focuses mostly on those that have implications for transit-oriented development. Zoning designations (see Figure 8) are generally consistent with existing land use patterns in the study area:
• a mix of retail, office, and residential uses in the downtown core and mostly commercial uses along East 14th south of the creek; • offices to the east of the core and residential of various densities to the west, south, northeast, and southeast; • low-density residential north of the creek, except along East 14th, which has a mixture of civic and commercial uses; and • a combination of large-scale office, commercial, and light-industrial uses surrounding the BART station area.
Later phases of the TOD Strategy will examine zoning throughout the study area in greater detail, particularly for key development opportunity sites. The strategy will provide specific development guidance for those opportunity sites and will propose amendments to the City’s zoning ordinance that would be desirable in order to enable transit-oriented
34 | C ITY OF S AN L EANDRO Land Use Plans and Policies
Figure 8: Zoning Districts
Source: City of San Leandro
Existing Conditions Report for Downtown San Leandro TOD Strategy | 35 Land Use Plans and Policies
Table 3: Zoning Districts
PERMITTED USES CONDITIONAL USES DISTRICT PURPOSE MAIN AREAS RESIDENTIAL USES AUTO-ORIENTED USES (NON-RESIDENTIAL) (NON-RESIDENTIAL)
Commercial Wide variety of Along Washington Office, durable and Hotels/motels, bars, Two-family, multi- Permitted: attended Community (CC) commercial uses with south of Juana non-durable-goods entertainment, family and mixed-use auto-washing a citywide market area Northeast of Davis retail, restaurants department stores, (all conditionally Conditional: many and San Leandro hospitals, day care permitted) Parking lots with Boulevard admin review
Commercial Downtown Full range of Along East 14th south Professional and Bars, entertainment, Conditional: many (CD) commercial uses of San Leandro Creek, government office, public safety, day Parking lots with appropriate for the including Washington small and large retail, care, residential hotels admin. review downtown; upper-floor Plaza restaurants, residential permitted hotels/motels, artist studios
Commercial Businesses that serve Two small areas: east Office, retail, Cultural institutions, Conditional: service Neighborhood (CN) adjacent areas without of San Leandro Blvd restaurants, day care, government offices, Similar to above stations, adverse effects; north of creek, and neighborhood/ entertainment, bed supermarkets upper-floor residential northwest of Estudillo specialty food markets and breakfast inns, Parking lots with and offices permitted and Bancroft artist studios admin review
North Area 1 (NA-1) Small scale, Along East 14th north Entertainment, bars, Parking lots pedestrian-oriented of Oakes bed and breakfast inns (conditional) retail and services that serve adjacent neighborhoods
North Area 2 (NA-2) Multi-story mixed use East side of East 14th Permitted: Two- that is consistent with south of Oakes family Similar to above Similar to above Similar to above existing neighborhood Conditional: multi- quality family, mixed-use
Professional Office (P) Office uses Between East 14th Cultural institutions, Only as a conditional Conditional: encouraged, with and Bancroft south schools, public safety, use for group housing commercial parking retail discouraged of Callan hospitals, bed and facilities facilities Immediately east of breakfast Parking lots with Thrasher Park admin. review
Public and Semipublic Large public or semi- Surrounding the Minor utilities Cultural institutions, Only as a conditional, Not permitted (PS) public uses, with BART station schools, hospitals, secondary use flexibility for reuse of Civic Center government office, associated with a former public use Main library site religious assembly, hospital or site major utilities convalescent facility
36 | C ITY OF S AN L EANDRO Land Use Plans and Policies
PERMITTED USES CONDITIONAL USES DISTRICT PURPOSE MAIN AREAS RESIDENTIAL USES AUTO-ORIENTED USES (NON-RESIDENTIAL) (NON-RESIDENTIAL)
Industrial Limited (IL) Low- to moderate- North of Davis Warehousing, R&D, Public storage, retail Only if pre-existing Permitted: vehicle intensity industrial use between San Leandro office, business (incl. big box), food dealers that can be adequately Boulevard and the services, enclosed processing, Conditional: several buffered; commercial BART right-of-way building-supply retail, entertainment, Parking lots with and light artist studios, fitness restaurants, admin review manufacturing centers commercial recreation
Industrial Park (IP) High technology, R&D Immediately west of and associated uses in the BART station a landscaped setting North of Davis Street Similar to above Similar to above Similar to above Similar to above and west of the BART line
Residential Multi- Multiple residential RM-3000 (14.5 Day care, public park Schools, religious Permitted: Multi- Not permitted Family (RM) types, including units/acre): along and rec facilities, assembly, bed and family below 20 townhouses, condos, Haas, Karol minor utilities breakfast inns, swim units, single-family, apartments, duplexes RM-1800 (24 and tennis clubs, two-family and single-family units/acre): four major utilities Conditional: Large major clusters south multi-family of creek
Residential Duplex Duplexes and two- Northeast of East Congregate care (Two-Family; RD) family residences 14th and Oakes facilities, single- Southwest of family, two-family Washington and Parrott Similar to above Similar to above Same as above Residential Single- Single-family Best Manor Permitted: single- Family (RS) residences neighborhood family, pre-existing Most of Creekside two-family neighborhood Conditional: Southeast of East secondary dwellings 14th and Dolores
Source: City of San Leandro
Existing Conditions Report for Downtown San Leandro TOD Strategy | 37 Land Use Plans and Policies
Redevelopment The Redevelopment Agency has identified the whether transit-oriented or not. The goal of redevelopment is the elimination of following areas for improvement in the Plaza Redevelopment agency powers facilitate parcel blighted land uses in designated “project Project Area: consolidation, for example, while tax areas.” The City’s Redevelopment Agency increments—collected in the form of property- administers two project areas that fall within • assembling land for the mixed-use Town tax increases if assessed property values in the the study area of the TOD Strategy. The Plaza Hall Square project at Hays and Davis; redevelopment area rise—can be a source of Redevelopment Project Area covers much of the • implementing the “Central San funds for a variety of improvements. On the downtown core and several areas to the west. Leandro/BART Area Revitalization Strategy,” other hand, redevelopment areas are subject to Under the Redevelopment Plan governing it, which includes facilitating the development several state laws that might impose additional the Plaza Redevelopment Project Area has land of the Westlake property immediately west requirements on development. Examples use classifications that are more permissive of the BART station into an office/residential include requirements to replace destroyed low- than, and which override, zoning designations. project; and moderate-income housing units on a one- The various sub-areas of this redevelopment • retrofitting and expanding the Estudillo- to-one basis and to set aside a minimum area are due to expire between 2012 and 2029. Callan parking garage; percentage of new housing units in the area for • developing agency-owned infill properties low- and moderate-income households. on Davis into office or housing uses; and • assisting with the completion of the third and final building at Creekside Plaza (though the Downtown Plan and Urban Design Redevelopment Agency is not providing Guidelines funding at this point). The Downtown Plan, dated February 2001,
focuses on upgrading the appearance of the The second redevelopment area, the Joint City downtown, especially the retail environment, to of San Leandro/Alameda County Project Area, attract specialty shops; on coordinating special includes most of the East 14th corridor and areas events to increase economic activity; and on west of Park/San Leandro Boulevard north of providing for the area’s long-term maintenance. the creek. Unlike the Plaza Redevelopment The plan’s study area is a small parallelogram Project Area, this project area is governed by defined by East 14th, Davis, Hays, and Joaquin Street leading into Washington Plaza zoning regulations. This area is due to expire in Thornton. The plan promotes five key urban shopping center. the year 2034. For this area, the Redevelopment design concepts to improve the function and Agency plans to assist with implementation of appearance of buildings and spaces: the “East 14th Street South Area Development
Redevelopment in this area has resulted in the Strategy,” particularly enhancement of the East • restore the historic grid; creation of the Washington Plaza shopping 14th streetscape. This includes widening • reintroduce a “fine-grained” streetscape; center, the Creekside Plaza office complex and sidewalks, upgrading street lighting, and • give greater consideration to pedestrians; the Estudillo-Callan parking garage. installing crosswalks, landscaped medians, • emphasize architectural quality; and Additionally, redevelopment funds have street trees, and sidewalk amenities. • as the top priority, restore San Leandro’s recently been used for pedestrian and historic plaza. streetscape enhancements on West Estudillo Redevelopment areas, by their nature, provide th and for new streetlights on Davis and East 14 . valuable opportunities for development efforts,
38 | C ITY OF S AN L EANDRO Land Use Plans and Policies
The downtown plan is limited in scope. It • arched gateways spanning across Estudillo most controversial topic during the planning covers only a small area, roughly ten blocks, through the shopping center; process due to the potential parking impacts. and it is more of an urban design study than a • a series of commemorative markers and “specific plan.” Nonetheless, it has already exhibits forming a “history walk;” and The plan includes a set of design guidelines for yielded concrete results, including new • a water feature, decorative paving, new buildings, parking lots, and garages and an pedestrian-scale lighting fixtures throughout modifications to the Mission Bell monument, implementation strategy. The implementation the downtown core and streetscape a “history wall,” and a decorative bus shelter strategy recommends, among other actions, improvements for the four-block stretch of West at the Washington Plaza transit hub. changing the zoning designations of parts of the Estudillo from East 14th to San Leandro four sites mentioned above to allow transit- Boulevard through the Washington Plaza oriented development. While the plan is shopping center. The West Estudillo project Central San Leandro/BART Area visionary, the City has expressed its belief that seeks to improve the pedestrian connection Revitalization Strategy it presents several shortcomings with respect to between the BART station and the Washington transit-oriented development: it is conservative This 2001 plan presents a pedestrian-friendly, Plaza transit hub, which is the site of AC in its projection of development potential for TOD vision for the area west of the downtown. Transit’s proposed BRT station at East 14th and the area; it over-emphasizes office uses; and it The study area is roughly bounded by San Davis. Proposed improvements in the calls for compliance with citywide parking Leandro Creek, Hays/Washington, Williams, downtown plan include: requirements for new projects and with BART’s and the Union Pacific railroad line. The one-for-one replacement policy for displaced revitalization strategy recommends two kinds parking. of projects: capital improvements to enhance
the connection between the downtown and the
BART station and high-density developments East 14th Street South Area on four specific sites. Development Strategy The first kind of projects include pedestrian- This plan, adopted in April 2004, looks at the oriented streetscape improvements on West East 14th Street corridor between Maud and Estudillo, West Juana, and Alvarado; narrowing 150th Avenue. Its study area overlaps by only San Leandro Boulevard from six travel lanes to four city blocks, roughly, with that of this TOD four; renovation of the BART station; bike planning effort. Nonetheless, it deserves routes through the area; and a neighborhood mention because it shares many of the AC Transit’s Rapid Bus stop on East 14th Street park. The second kind include residential, objectives of the TOD Strategy currently office, and/or R&D uses for the following sites: underway. The development strategy is the BART parking lot on San Leandro primarily concerned with revitalizing the East • street-corner “bulb-outs” and decorative Boulevard; the Westlake property, immediately 14th corridor south of the downtown by creating crosswalk paving and curb ramps; west of the BART station; the west side of San an inviting physical environment that will • the undergrounding of utility lines; Leandro Boulevard north of Davis; and the area attract private-sector investment. It proposes to • street trees and sidewalk planters; surrounding the Alvarado/Antonio intersection. transform what is currently a long, unbroken • ornamental benches and trash receptacles Development of the BART parking lot was the automobile-oriented commercial strip into a • decorative pedestrian-scale streetlights;
Existing Conditions Report for Downtown San Leandro TOD Strategy | 39 Land Use Plans and Policies
series of distinct pedestrian-friendly, higher- Community Development Department. The density, mixed-use districts. determinations are based on factors such as market demand for housing, employment opportunities, and availability of suitable sites North Area Plan and Revitalization and public facilities. Manual San Leandro’s allocation for the period covered This 1991 document provides guidance for the by ABAG’s latest housing needs determination revitalization of the commercial districts along process—January 1, 1999 to June 30, 2006—is Bancroft, San Leandro Boulevard, MacArthur, 870 units. This number includes 195 very low- and East 14th north of the downtown, all in income units, 107 low-income units, 251 northeast San Leandro. The plan’s objective moderate-income units, and 317 above was to improve the visual quality of these moderate-income units. (Allocations for the corridors and, in so doing, highlight the next process are not known yet as the process adjacent residential areas. The plan contains a deadline has been extended by two years.) The set of design guidelines for sites, buildings, and City must identify in its Housing Element sites signs, adopting a distinct approach for each where the public, private, and non-profit corridor. The Dutton/East 14th intersection is sectors may develop these units and must identified as a “retail and service” cluster, with implement programs to facilitate their the suggestion that development of consistent construction. scale and quality be extended toward the City
Hall area. As a result of the plan, two zoning In response to ABAG’s housing needs districts, NA-1 and NA-2, were created along determination, the Housing Element of the East 14th. Both districts explicitly encourage General Plan identifies nearly 100 vacant and pedestrian-oriented projects combining underutilized sites throughout the city where residential and commercial uses. new housing could be built. The downtown
BART station area and the East 14th corridor,
ABAG’s Regional Housing Needs particularly south of the downtown, are identified as two of the primary housing Determination opportunity areas in the city. In addition, in California state law requires all jurisdictions to 2004 the City adopted an inclusionary zoning demonstrate that they can accommodate their ordinance requiring that 15 percent of units in “fair share” of their region’s anticipated all new housing developments and condo housing needs across a range of income levels. conversion projects be set aside for very low, The housing allocations for each city and low, and moderate-income households. county in the Bay Area are made by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), with the total number of units for the Bay Area established by the California Housing and
40 | C ITY OF S AN L EANDRO Land Use Plans and Policies
Implications for Transit-Oriented Strategy since no new residential uses are Development permitted there under current zoning.
The plans summarized above indicate a Changes to the zoning code resulting from the growing interest by the City, beginning at least TOD Strategy will focus on the aspects of as far back as 1991, to encourage mixed-use, zoning that determine the success of transit- pedestrian-oriented development patterns in oriented development projects: the range of the downtown. More recent plans show a land uses that are permitted and restricted and growing recognition of the benefits of transit- development standards dealing with such oriented development and increasing issues as density, building height and bulk, acceptance of attractively designed higher- pedestrian access, and parking requirements. density development in appropriate places.
Generally, the previous plans, taken together, REDEVELOPMENT strongly endorse the objectives of the current Regulations for the Joint Project Area generally TOD Strategy. The challenge then is to defer to the City’s and County’s general plans strengthen existing policies and implement and development codes. On the other hand, existing plans while formulating new some regulations for the Plaza Project Area supportive policies, regulations, and incentives. inhibit transit-oriented development and might
need to be amended. Among these are The policies under the General Plan, in regulations that: particular, are broadly supportive of transit- oriented development in the downtown. The • prohibit residential uses in the area of the TOD Strategy will articulate land use and Washington Plaza shopping center and transportation policies for the downtown in blocks immediately to the east; greater detail and propose any updates or • appear to be supportive of maximizing the amendments needed to make the General Plan amount of parking; fully supportive of transit-oriented • encourage pedestrian overcrossings; development. • and call for widening several streets (which
ZONING might not have happened yet) and rerouting planned bike routes out of the area. Zoning in the downtown core, the downtown periphery and areas north of the creek appears to be broadly permissive of transit-oriented development. That is not the case, however, in areas immediately to the north and west of the BART station, most of which are currently zoned for industrial uses. Those areas could be strong candidates for rezoning under the TOD
Existing Conditions Report for Downtown San Leandro TOD Strategy | 41 6 | Transportation Network
This chapter presents an overview of the 580, to the east of the study area, provides local destinations, and provide from two to transportation network in downtown San access to points north and also to points east six lanes of traffic. Arterials may offer Leandro and its vicinity and identifies key such as Pleasanton and Tracy; it also connects to direct, though controlled, access to implications toward meeting the objectives of other major freeways including I-5, Highway adjacent properties. Ideally, curb cuts for the TOD Strategy. Since transit-oriented 101, and I-680. I-238, which runs through the driveways are limited to essential points and development integrates land use with a well- southern tip of San Leandro, provides an east- curb parking may be restricted. Turning developed multi-modal transportation system, west connection between I-580 and I-880 (south bays may be provided, and major this chapter summarizes not only the of I-580, I-238 becomes a state route). intersections are signalized. automobile-transportation network but also Collectors carry moderate amounts of transit, pedestrian, and bicycle conditions as Caltrans is responsible for the design, traffic between arterials and local streets. well as other transportation issues such as operation, and maintenance of these interstate Residential collectors typically have two parking and freight movement. freeways. It is also responsible for state routes, lanes, with curb parking and traffic signals of which the following traverse San Leandro: at major intersections. Depending on State Route 185 (which is East 14th), State Route volume, intersections with other collectors Roadway Network 61 (on Doolittle north of Davis), and State Route may be controlled by four-way stops. 112 (on Davis from Doolittle to East 14th). Based on classifications in the city’s General
Plan, the roadway system in the vicinity of the Local streets are low-volume, low-speed study area is made up of freeways, arterials, roadways that link individual parcels to collectors, and local streets (see sidebar for collectors. Their primary function is to FUNCTIONAL STREET CLASSIFICATIONS definitions). These functional classifications are provide access to street-adjacent based on size, function within the network, properties. Local streets typically Freeways are limited-access, multi-lane capacity and area served. Figure 9 shows the accommodate one traffic lane and one roadways that accommodate regional and roadway network for the study area according parking lane in each direction. interregional trips. These roadways carry to functional classification. large volumes of traffic at high speeds. No Source: San Leandro General Plan direct access is provided to adjacent The freeways that run through San Leandro are properties. Interstate 880 (I-880), I-580, and I-238. I-880, located to the west of the study area, provides Arterials are the basic network for through access to Oakland and other points north of the traffic in and around the city. They provide city and to San Jose and other points south. I- connections between freeways and major
42 | C ITY OF S AN L EANDRO Transportation Network
Figure 9: Roadway Network
Sources: City of San Leandro General Plan (2002), Kimley-Horn & Associates
Existing Conditions Report for Downtown San Leandro TOD Strategy | 43 Transportation Network
Streets within and near the project area, with • Joaquin Avenue: two-lane local street with brief descriptions, include: on-street parking; one-way westbound west • Alvarado Street: two-lane arterial south of of East 14th. Marina and two-lane collector from Marina • Juana Avenue: two-lane collector with on- to Davis; on-street parking is provided street parking. intermittently. • MacArthur Boulevard (between Dowling and • Bancroft Avenue: two-lane arterial with on- Estudillo): three-lane arterial (two lanes street parking. southbound, one northbound) with on-street • Callan Avenue: two-lane arterial west of parking. Huff and two-lane collector east of it; on- • Marina Boulevard: four-lane arterial west of street parking is provided throughout. San Leandro Boulevard with no on-street • Castro Street: two-lane collector east of San parking, and two-lane collector east of it with Leandro Boulevard and two-lane local street on-street parking. west of it; on-street parking is provided • Parrott Street: two-lane local street with on- throughout. street parking. • Chumalia Street: two-lane local street with • San Leandro Boulevard: four lanes south of on-street parking. Thornton, six lanes from Thornton to Davis, • Davis Street (SR-112): four-lane arterial with and four lanes north of Davis; arterial street limited on-street parking. with on-street parking north of Davis. • Dolores Avenue: two-lane collector east of • Sybil Avenue: two-lane collector with on- East 14th and two-lane local street west of it; street parking. on-street parking is provided throughout. • Teagarden Street: two-lane arterial with on- • Dutton Avenue: two-lane collector with on- street parking. street parking. • Wayne Avenue: two-lane collector with on- • East 14th Street (SR-185): two lanes plus a street parking. center, two-way left-turn lane north of Davis, • Williams Street: two-lane collector with on- four lanes from Davis to Dolores, and three street parking. lanes south of Dolores (two lanes southbound, one northbound); arterial street Several streets in San Leandro have been with on-street parking. designated by the Alameda County Congestion • Estudillo Avenue; two-lane arterial east of Management Agency (ACCMA) as being key Huff, two-lane collector from Huff to East links in the regional circulation system and are, 14th and local street west of East 14th; on-street therefore, included in the agency’s Congestion parking is provided throughout. Management Program (CMP). All of East 14th • Grand Avenue: four lane collector with on- and Davis through the study area—as are all street parking. state highways—are part of the CMP network. • Hays Street: two-lane local street with on- street parking south of Davis.
44 | C ITY OF S AN L EANDRO Transportation Network
Traffic Conditions peak hour and at LOS F in the PM peak hour. “Level of service” (LOS) is a measure of the Table 5 shows the average daily traffic volume quality of the overall operating characteristics at these same intersections. of a street or highway. It is defined in terms of control delay, which is a measure of travel time, traffic conflicts and interruptions, freedom to maneuver, driving convenience and comfort, and operating costs. The measure ranges from LOS A (free-flow condition) to LOS F (highly congested condition). The City has established LOS D as the standard for signalized and unsignalized intersections, except at the intersection of Davis and San Leandro Boulevard, where LOS E has been deemed acceptable.
LOS D may only be exceeded when roadway improvements are not possible because of right- of-way constraints, economic infeasibility, or when a roadway is in a district where the priority is for pedestrian, bicycle and public- transit circulation over automobile circulation. Caltrans’ LOS goal is C/D; however, this goal is often unrealistic in urban areas. (Intersections on East 14th and Davis streets are under the jurisdiction of Caltrans; all other intersections are controlled by the City.)
Levels of service were evaluated under existing traffic conditions for 20 intersections in the vicinity of the study area for both the morning (AM) and afternoon/evening (PM) peak hours. Figure 9 shows the locations of these intersections while Table 4 summarizes their levels of service. All study intersections operate at levels of service of D or better in the AM and PM peak hours, with the exception of Hays/Davis, which operates at LOS E in the AM
Existing Conditions Report for Downtown San Leandro TOD Strategy | 45 Transportation Network
Table 4: Intersection Levels of Service
AM PEAK PM PEAK INTERSECTION DELAY DELAY LOS LOS (SECS.) (SECS.) 1. Alvarado St. / Davis St. 19.1 B 21.5 C 2. Bancroft Ave. / Dutton Ave. 26.0 C 28.4 C 3. Bancroft Ave. / Estudillo Ave. 53.0 D 49.0 D 4. Bancroft Ave. / Sybil Ave. 20.1 C 29.0 C 5. East 14th St. / Dutton Ave. 21.6 C 42.2 D 6. East 14th St. / Hays St. (Chumalia St.) 9.2 A 18.6 B 7. East 14th St. / Callan Ave. (Davis St.) 22.1 C 31.1 C 8. East 14th St. / Estudillo Ave. 14.3 B 25.4 C 9. East 14th St. / Joaquin Ave. 5.9 A 9.7 A 10. East 14th St. / Juana Ave. 14.7 B 15.4 B 11. East 14th St. / Dolores Ave. (Parrott St.) 12.1 B 17.5 B 12. East 14th St. / Sybil Ave. (Castro St.) 25.1 C 33.4 C 13. Hays St. / Davis St. 76.3 E 191.1 F 14. I-880 NB Ramp / Davis St. 18.2 B 23.6 C 15. I-880 SB Ramp / Davis St. 19.5 B 18.3 B 16. MacArthur Blvd. / Dutton Ave. 7.9 A 26.6 C 17. MacArthur Blvd. / Estudillo Ave. 50.3 D 28.8 C 18. San Leandro Blvd. / Davis St. 37.5 D 55.4 E 19. San Leandro Blvd. / Williams St. 40.7 D 31.9 C 20. Wayne Ave. (Teagarden St.) / Marina Blvd. 23.0 C 29.1 C
Source: Kimley-Horn & Associates (February 22, 2006); LOS based on the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual
46 | C ITY OF S AN L EANDRO Transportation Network
Table 5: Average Daily Traffic Volumes at Intersections (PM peak-hour volumes were assumed to be 10 percent of the daily volumes)
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC
INTERSECTION NORTH OF SOUTH OF EAST OF WEST OF INTERSECTION INTERSECTION INTERSECTION INTERSECTION 1. Alvarado St. / Davis St. 4,800 4,550 27,260 26,890 2. Bancroft Ave. / Dutton Ave. 11,150 11,570 7,180 6,980 3. Bancroft Ave. / Estudillo Ave. 11,240 8,860 10,060 7,280 4. Bancroft Ave. / Sybil Ave. 10,110 10,560 7,220 7,750 5. East 14th St. / Dutton Ave. 18,330 20,050 7,520 4,640 6. East 14th St. / Hays St. (Chumalia St.) 20,270 14,840 1,820 5,970 7. East 14th St. / Callan Ave. (Davis St.) 14,480 18,730 11,820 16,010 8. East 14th St. / Estudillo Ave. 18,780 16,190 9,810 6,460 9. East 14th St. / Joaquin Ave. 16,130 16,150 3,140 1,280 10. East 14th St. / Juana Ave. 15,690 14,430 5,460 6,400 11. East 14th St. / Dolores Ave. (Parrott St.) 14,780 13,890 4,120 5,930 12. East 14th St. / Sybil Ave. (Castro St.) 13,510 14,860 6,200 4,510 13. Hays St. / Davis St. 6,290 5,120 17,160 22,370 14. I-880 NB Ramp / Davis St. - 11,140 27,500 26,640 15. I-880 SB Ramp / Davis St. 12,720 - 34,320 27,740 16. MacArthur Blvd. / Dutton Ave. 10,830 9,710 4,930 10,270 17. MacArthur Blvd. / Estudillo Ave. 9,490 14,830 12,190 18,470 18. San Leandro Blvd. / Davis St. 20,580 18,980 22,650 29,530 19. San Leandro Blvd. / Williams St. 19,520 18,200 3,210 8,230 20. Wayne Ave. (Teagarden St.) / Marina Blvd. 4,280 9,540 15,990 22,410
Source: Kimley-Horn & Associates (March 16, 2006)
Existing Conditions Report for Downtown San Leandro TOD Strategy | 47 Transportation Network
Transit Service and Patronage businesses since January 2002. The shuttle San Leandro is served by BART passenger operates every 15 minutes during the morning trains and by AC Transit buses (see Figure 10). and afternoon commute hours. There are two BART stations in San Leandro: San Leandro, west of the downtown, and Bay Fair, at the southern end of the city. These stations provide direct service along the Richmond-Fremont, Dublin/Pleasanton- SFO/Millbrae, and Daly City-Fremont lines, each of which has an average service frequency of 15 minutes; connecting service is provided to the Daly City-Pittsburg/Bay Point line. Approximately 406 BART trains service the downtown San Leandro station daily and BART data indicates that in the October-December 2005 quarter there were 4,900 average weekday passengers exiting the station.
The AC Transit system consists of commuter- bus service to San Francisco and local buses that link San Leandro to destinations throughout the East Bay, including to some BART stations. Currently, seven AC Transit routes serve the study area and the San Leandro BART station (see Table 6 and Figure 11). The service areas of these routes include central San Leandro and the Davis, San Leandro Boulevard, and East 14th corridors. Currently, the only AC Transit line with high-frequency service is route #82, which has ten-minute headways. AC Transit’s rapid bus service will begin operation in the summer or fall of 2006.
In addition to the above services, the San Leandro Transportation Management Organization has been providing the free “Links” shuttle service between the San Leandro BART station and west San Leandro
48 | C ITY OF S AN L EANDRO Transportation Network
Figure 10: Transit Network
Sources: City of San Leandro, AC Transit
Existing Conditions Report for Downtown San Leandro TOD Strategy | 49 Transportation Network
Table 6: AC Transit Routes
HOURS OF AVG. FREQ. AVG. WEEKDAY LINE ROUTE OPERATION (MINUTES) BOARDINGS 55 – Mulford San Leandro BART to Bay Fair 6:15 am- 30 824 Gardens BART 6:45 pm San Leandro BART, Castro 7:15 am- 80 – B Street 30 721 Valley BART, Hayward BART 7:45 pm San Leandro BART to 6:20 am- 81 – Wicks 60 384 Hayward BART 7:30 pm 82 – International West Oakland, San Leandro 4:00 am- 10 9,614 Boulevard BART, Hayward BART 1:15 am 82L – International West Oakland to Bay Fair 4:00 am- 10 6,955 Boulevard Limited BART 7:00 pm 6:30 am- 84 – Somerset San Leandro to Castro Valley 30 2,245 8:00 pm San Leandro BART to 6:00 am- 85 - Washington 60 419 Hayward BART 7:15 pm
Source: AC Transit
50 | C ITY OF S AN L EANDRO Transportation Network
Figure 11: Transit Network with Bus Stops
Sources: City of San Leandro, AC Transit
Existing Conditions Report for Downtown San Leandro TOD Strategy | 51 Transportation Network
Bicycle Circulation Macarthur Boulevard, from Superior until San Leandro’s existing bicycle-route network Macarthur Boulevard and north until reaching consists of 7.4 miles of bike paths (Class I Durant and also on segments of Davis and facilities), 16.7 miles of bike lanes (Class II), and Alvarado, Dowling, Estudillo and Graff. A 1.4 miles of signed routes without lanes (Class proposed Class I facility in the western part of III). In the vicinity of the study area, there are the study area would run parallel to San no Class I facilities. There are Class II facilities Leandro Boulevard along Union Pacific’s on Bancroft and on portions of Alvarado, San “Oakland Subdivision” line, approximately Leandro Boulevard, Estudillo, Williams and from Williams to Peralta. Davis (see Figure 12). There are no existing Class III facilities within the project area.
Bike lane on Estudillo Avenue
The bikeway system within the project area is generally discontinuous, and only Bancroft provides a fully continuous route near the project area. However, the proposed Class I facility along San Leandro Boulevard would provide an additional continuous route. Class II proposed facilities would be located on segments of Merced, Westgate, San Leandro Boulevard and Dowling. Class III facilities are proposed along Peralta/Oaks from San Leandro Boulevard to Macarthur Boulevard, along Castro/Sybil to Grand and north along
52 | C ITY OF S AN L EANDRO Transportation Network
Figure 12: Bicycle Routes
Source: City of San Leandro Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
Existing Conditions Report for Downtown San Leandro TOD Strategy | 53 Transportation Network
Pedestrian Circulation TOD consultant team and may in some cases San Leandro’s pedestrian network consists of differ from a recent Caltrans study in which th sidewalks, trails, and crosswalks. All the streets much of East 14 Street is characterized as within the study area are constructed to City having a pedestrian environment of good and Caltrans standards and include sidewalks quality. on both sides of most streets, marked crosswalks at signalized intersections and at The City recently completed a pedestrian/ some unsignalized ones, and pedestrian streetscape-improvement project on West crossing signals. Most local streets and Estudillo between San Leandro Boulevard and collectors are relatively narrow, providing for Hays and is nearing completion of the segment th short crossings, and on-street parking on these of the project between Hays and East 14 . The streets provides a buffer from moving cars. On study area contains several key pedestrian arterials, pedestrians are directed to controlled locations identified in the city’s bike/pedestrian crossings. plan, including the San Leandro BART station, the main library, and several schools. The downtown’s street grid is made up of relatively short blocks of approximately 300 to 350 feet in length. Generally, sidewalks in the downtown core are narrower than desirable for an active mixed-use area, but since they incorporate a number of pedestrian amenities such as street trees, pedestrian-scaled lighting, and seating, they serve the downtown area successfully.
The pedestrian environment on streets in the study area was characterized as either “good,” “fair,” or “poor” (see Figure 13) based on a number of determinants: whether the building uses encourage pedestrian activity through attractive and interesting street-level activities, existence of a continuous “streetwall” of building fronts which provide visual interest for pedestrians, potential conflicts with automobile traffic, quality of sidewalks, and general streetscape quality (including landscaping, lighting, and pedestrian amenities). This analysis was conducted by the
54 | C ITY OF S AN L EANDRO Transportation Network
Figure 13: Quality of the Pedestrian Environment
Source: BMS Design Group
Existing Conditions Report for Downtown San Leandro TOD Strategy | 55 Transportation Network
Truck Routes daily. The lines cross streets, including arterials San Leandro has designated truck routes and collectors, at various locations throughout throughout the city to minimize neighborhood the city. Although warning bells and crossing impacts associated with truck traffic. Truck guards are used, providing for safe pedestrian routes in the vicinity of the project area include and vehicular crossing at these locations portions of Alvarado, Bancroft, Davis, Dutton, continues to be a challenge. East 14th, Hays, MacArthur, Marina, Merced, San Leandro, Washington, and Williams (see figure 14). The General Plan suggests a number of measures to improve goods movement such as upgrading intersections to accommodate the turning radius of large trucks, stepping up enforcement of truck prohibitions, marking the truck routes with signs (including weight-limit restrictions), and establishing parking regulations for trucks.
According to Caltrans, large trucks make up the following proportions of total traffic on several freeways in the vicinity of the study area: • I-880: approximately nine percent; • I-580: a negligible percentage, since large trucks are prohibited on this freeway; • STATE ROUTE 112 (which includes a portion of Davis): 3-5 percent; and • STATE ROUTE 185 (which includes East 14th): about two percent.
Freight-Rail Service Union Pacific owns and operates three main lines within San Leandro, including two in the study area (see Figure 14). These lines provide connections to the Port of Oakland as well as to the rest of California and the nation. Spurs from each line provide service to industrial areas of central and west San Leandro. Approximately 10-20 trains use these rail lines
56 | C ITY OF S AN L EANDRO Transportation Network
Figure 14: Truck Routes and Rail Lines
Source: City of San Leandro General Plan (2002)
Existing Conditions Report for Downtown San Leandro TOD Strategy | 57 Transportation Network
Parking Supply and Occupancy • MARTINEZ STREET, from Parrott to Estudillo: 102 unrestricted, but contains some areas with four- In November 2005, BART staff completed an spaces. hour restrictions from 9 am to 5 pm. In on-street parking survey and inventory of residential areas, there are no parking streets adjacent to the downtown station. The More recently, the transportation consultants restrictions. On-street parking in the residential survey found a peak parking occupancy rate of for the TOD strategy conducted a parking neighborhoods was approximately 60 percent 88 percent. Some streets near BART do not inventory and occupancy survey for the utilized during the noon-2 pm peak period; in have time limits on their parking spaces, so downtown on March 2, 2006. The inventory the study area overall, on-street parking was these spaces might be attractive to commuters. found 13 off-street public parking facilities approximately 35-45 percent utilized. within the study area, including two BART parking lots (see Figure 15), which are reserved for BART patrons.
As shown in Table 7 following the parking map, there are 2,548 off-street public parking spaces in the area. Of these, 1,258 are controlled by the City and 1,290 spaces are controlled by BART. BART spaces are free while many City spaces are metered and most are restricted to 1- 2 hours. Public parking in the downtown is well utilized. During the peak period— between noon and 2 pm—public parking lots BART parking lot at Juana were 65-100 percent occupied. BART’s parking facilities were 100 percent occupied. Reserved spaces—the upper level of the Estudillo Garage, The inventory found 374 spaces, distributed for example—were 27-69 percent occupied. (As among the following street segments: the garage is 20 percent oversubscribed, • PARROTT STREET, from San Leandro Boulevard however, it is expected to have 100 percent to Clarke: 45 spaces; occupancy once a building vacancy is filled.) • JOAQUIN AVENUE, from Carpentier to Clarke: 22 spaces; There are over 1,400 on-street public parking • JUANA AVENUE, from San Leandro Boulevard to spaces in the commercial areas of the Clarke: 44 spaces; downtown. The majority of on-street parking is • ESTUDILLO AVENUE, from San Leandro metered and restricted to two hours from 9 am Boulevard to Clarke: 35 spaces; to 5 pm, but there are one, 1.5, and four-hour • CLARKE STREET, from Estudillo to Parrott: 68 segments interspersed throughout the area. spaces; Many blocks, particularly west of Hays, have • CARPENTIER STREET, from Estudillo to Parrott: unrestricted parking. In transition areas 58 spaces; and between commercial areas and residential neighborhoods, on-street parking is mostly
58 | C ITY OF S AN L EANDRO Transportation Network
Figure 15: Parking Supply
Sources: Kimley-Horn & Associates, Downtown Parking Study (1996)
Existing Conditions Report for Downtown San Leandro TOD Strategy | 59 Transportation Network
Table 7: Parking Supply and Occupancy
PEAK PARKING SITE LOCATION RESTRICTIONS OCCUPANCY SPACES (NOON-2 PM) BART Parking (San Leandro 1 914 BART patrons only 100% between Davis and Parrott) BART Parking (San Leandro 2 376 BART patrons only 100% between Joaquin/Juana) Pelton Center (East 14th 3 76 2 Hr. Parking 9-6pm 100% between Juana and Parrot) Corner of Juana and 4 68 2 Hr. Parking 8-5pm 100% Washington Corner of Joaquin and 5 14 2 Hr. Parking 8-5pm 100% Washington East of E. 14th St between 6 58 1.5 Hr. Parking 8-6pm 90% Estudillo and Joaquin Public Library (on Callan 7 155 2 Hr. Parking 8-5pm 65% btwn Harrison/Santa Rosa) Estudillo Parking Garage 230 11 Wells Fargo (WF) reserved WF: 27% spots; 2nd level is restricted 8 Upper Level 113 69% by gate with separate Lower Level 117 entrance on Estudillo 42% East of E. 14th St. between 1 Hr. Parking 8-6. 39 Spaces 9 100 65% Callan and Estudillo are permit only from 8-5pm. West of E. 14th St. between 10 51 Permit parking only 9-5pm. 100% Toler and California West of E. 14th St. between For Police or Emergency 11 19 100% California and Loraine Vehicles only West of E. 14th St. between 12 92 No restrictions 100% Loraine and Peralta Washington Plaza (Safeway, 13 395 2 Hr. Parking 9-6pm 85% Pizza, Blockbuster, etc)
Total 2548
Source: Kimley-Horn & Associates (March 2, 2006)
60 | C ITY OF S AN L EANDRO Transportation Network
Parking Standards for affordable housing and senior-housing oriented development. At the same time, the Article 17 of the City’s Zoning Code specifies facilities, for mixed-use developments with area’s sound network of pre-WWII streets the required number of off-street parking shared parking, and for developments located provides the foundation for a pedestrian- spaces for new development under various within one-quarter mile of a bus stop or BART oriented district. With continued investment to land uses. Off-street parking requirements for station and that incorporate parking-demand improve existing pedestrian facilities and close some common land uses include: mitigation measures such as car sharing and gaps in the bike-route network, the downtown transit passes for tenants. Shared parking is could become entirely walkable and highly • SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (in most residential allowed if the applicant can show that it would bikeable. districts): 2.0 non-tandem covered spaces per adequately accommodate peak parking unit; demand for a complementary mix of uses. There are, however, several transportation- • MIXED-USE AND MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL: 1.5 related challenges to the successful th spaces (including one covered) for a studio or It is worth noting that the East 14 Street South implementation of TOD principles in the one-bedroom unit, 2.25 spaces (including two Area Development Strategy found that the downtown, including: covered) for a two-bedroom unit, and 2.5 existing residential parking requirements made • maximizing the traffic safety and spaces (including two covered) for a unit of multifamily residential development convenience of pedestrian links to the BART three bedrooms or more; 0.25 spaces per unit prohibitively expensive. For residential land station and the future BRT station; are required to be designated for on-site uses, the strategy recommended the following • the impact of traffic generated by new guest parking; parking standards per dwelling unit: development on the level of service at • STUDIO OR ONE-BEDROOM: • BARS, CAFES AND RESTAURANTS: one space per 100 one covered space intersections in the vicinity of the study area; square feet of gross floor area if the plus 0.5 guest spaces; • the potential to reduce parking requirements establishment is under 4,000 square feet; • TWO-BEDROOM: one covered space plus 0.75 in the Zoning Code for TODs while otherwise, 40 spaces plus one space for each guest spaces; providing sufficient parking to meet 50 square feet of seating area over 4,000 • THREE-BEDROOM OR LARGER: one covered space necessary demand; square feet; plus one guest spaces; • the potential to reduce parking at the BART • NEIGHBORHOOD/SPECIALTY FOOD MARKETS AND • LIVE-WORK: two spaces (including one station while meeting the needs of San SUPERMARKETS: one space per 200 square feet of covered) plus 0.75 spaces for guest/employee Leandro commuters; gross floor area; not residing in unit. • providing a continuous network of high- • OFFICES, BUSINESSES, AND PROFESSIONAL USES: one quality bike routes through the study area; space per 300 square feet of gross floor area; • accommodating truck-turning movements in and Implications for Transit-Oriented the study area while improving the • GENERAL RETAIL SALES: one space per 200 square Development pedestrian environment; and • overcoming the barriers created by freight feet of gross floor area for the first 5,000 Downtown San Leandro is positioned for rail lines both for development around the square feet, and one space per 250 square feet successful transit-oriented development by BART station and for pedestrian and over 5,000 square feet. nature of the existing transportation conditions vehicular access. in the area. The existence of a nearby BART Through a conditional use permit or planned station and a network of bus routes, and plans development approval, the zoning code permits for rapid bus in the near future and BRT in the exceptions to the above parking requirements longer term are a strong basis for transit-
Existing Conditions Report for Downtown San Leandro TOD Strategy | 61 7 | Transportation Plans and Policies
This chapter summarizes a number of key development of properties adjacent to BART various alternatives for improved transit transportation plans that affect development of stations and along heavily used public-transit service. In August 2001, AC Transit’s board of the transportation system in downtown San corridors to maximize transit use. directors adopted bus rapid transit (BRT) as the Leandro through the adoption of goals, policies, “locally preferred alternative,” with a potential and implementation strategies. Some of these The transportation element addresses the need long-term goal of implementing light-rail plans were developed and are administered by to work with BART and AC Transit (and, to a transit. To provide a rail-like experience, BRT the City while others were developed by lesser extent, Caltrans) to enhance transit service will be very frequent (headways of five transportation agencies such as BART and AC services for San Leandro residents. Policies and minutes or less) and stations would be spaced Transit. While land use and transportation are actions include improving AC Transit feeder- between 1/3 and 1/2-mile apart. inextricably linked (especially in the case of bus service to the two BART stations in the city, transit-oriented development), plans and using smaller buses to allow for broader service The proposed BRT service would run on an policies that deal primarily with land use are coverage, expanding shuttle service to the city’s exclusive transitway for most of its length in discussed separately, in Chapter 5, “Land Use employment districts and shopping areas, Berkeley, Oakland, and northern San Leandro. Plans and Policies.” coordinating AC Transit and BART schedules, In downtown San Leandro, the BRT route and developing a traffic-signal pre-empt would run on East 14th (see Figure 10) and is program for buses. Planned improvements proposed to use mixed-travel lanes, since there Transportation Element of the San related to traffic safety include lighted is insufficient right-of-way to dedicate lanes Leandro General Plan crosswalks, countdown signal heads at exclusively for buses. The transition from crossings, and longer crossing times for exclusive transitway to mixed-travel lanes is This chapter of the City’s General Plan pedestrians on wide streets. Neighborhood proposed on East 14th at some intersection addresses—either directly or by incorporating traffic-management policies promote traffic between Dutton and Davis. The southern other plans—the main transportation issues in calming through physical changes to streets to terminus of the BRT line would be the Bay Fair San Leandro: automobile traffic, public transit, slow down traffic or reduce traffic volumes. BART station. The City of San Leandro bicycles and pedestrians, rail, air and water currently is not in favor of dedicated bus lanes transportation, traffic safety, parking, and and believes that the transition to mixed-travel neighborhood traffic management. Generally, AC Transit’s Rapid Bus Service and lanes should be from International Boulevard in the transportation element is supportive of Oakland, immediately north of Durant Avenue transportation alternatives to the private Bus Rapid Transit at East 14th Street. automobile and of integrating transportation AC Transit conducted a two-year “major planning and land use development. More investment study” of the Berkeley/ Also under consideration is an alternative BRT specifically, the element promotes the Oakland/San Leandro corridor to explore route that would terminate at the downtown
62 | C ITY OF S AN L EANDRO Transportation Plans and Policies
San Leandro BART station; AC Transit’s bus- A parking inventory found that on-street strategy recommends pedestrian streetscape route #99 would be extended to connect the San parking was generally underutilized, at least improvements (including on West Estudillo Leandro and Bay Fair BART stations. AC outside of the downtown core; this was true Avenue, a project that is nearly complete), Transit expects to release draft environmental- even when nearby parking lots were nearly full. signalized intersections on San Leandro impact documents of the proposed BRT project The strategy addresses the placement and Boulevard, and bicycle routes. for public review in late spring 2006. design of parking so that it will not detract from Completion of the BRT project is scheduled for pedestrian- and transit-oriented development. Recommendations for the station emphasize 2009. It also expresses the concern that too much upgrading the level of amenities and the design parking will encourage automobile travel and of furnishings so that the station becomes an Commencing in mid-2006, and as a precursor to conflict with efforts to increase trips by attractive activity center. The existing station BRT, AC Transit will institute “rapid bus” walking, transit, and bicycle. does little to welcome arriving passengers to service along East 14th. This service will San Leandro and direct them to nearby incorporate operational changes and minor The strategy also addresses the need for destinations, and it does not provide safe and capital improvements, such as more frequent adequate sidewalk widths to ensure pedestrian convenient bicycle parking or a comfortable runs, a limited number of stops, low-floor, safety and comfort from speeding traffic as place for transferring to local buses. multiple door buses, and some traffic-signal development intensifies along East 14th. A final Additionally, the parking lot area is congested priority treatments, to provide a faster, more area of concern is the relatively poor pedestrian due to the lack of a drop-off area and the fact comfortable bus-riding experience. Capital- connectivity between neighborhoods on that taxi access is within the parking lot. The intensive elements, such as arterial opposite sides of the street. This is caused by renovated station would include a improvements, advanced traffic-management several factors: the many “T”-shaped pedestrianized drop-off/taxi-stand plaza, systems, and “station-like” bus shelters, would intersections in the area, the abundance of auto- complete with a coffee and newspaper stand, a be implemented later, as part of the full BRT oriented land uses, and the buildings with seating/waiting area and, possibly, valet project. street-front parking that are set back from the parking for bicycles. The strategy recommends property line. changing the station name to “Downtown San Leandro.” th East 14 Street South Area Development Strategy Central San Leandro/BART East 14th Street North Area Traffic According to this study, average daily traffic Revitalization Strategy volumes on East 14th in the year 2000 were The recommended capital improvement Study about 22,700 vehicles per day from Durant to projects in this strategy focus on improving This study, completed in November 2005, Davis, and about 18,750 vehicles per day from connections between the station and adjacent summarizes traffic volumes, vehicular turning Davis to San Leandro Boulevard. These are neighborhoods, and renovating the BART movements, collision history, level of service, typical volumes for four-lane arterials. On- station. The strategy recommends a number of and existing traffic conditions on East 14th street parking on East 14th, which is limited to streetscape improvements to integrate the area Street. According to the study, from 1994 to two hours, not only provides convenient with adjacent districts. These include reducing 2005 weekday traffic volumes on East 14th parking but also buffers pedestrians from fast- the number of lanes on San Leandro Boulevard increased by 14.9 percent while peak-hour moving traffic. from six to four and installing a median. The traffic volumes increased by 11.7 percent; both “pedestrian and bicycle linkages” section of the figures are approximately five percent higher
Existing Conditions Report for Downtown San Leandro TOD Strategy | 63 Transportation Plans and Policies
than the respective daily weekend and weekend and at wide, unsignalized intersections, replacement policy at stations where transit- peak-hour volumes. In addition, approximately uncontrolled crosswalks on arterials, trail oriented development is planned. BART 65 percent of the East 14th traffic is categorized crossings, and school pick-up/drop-off zones. currently uses a one-to-one parking-space as pass-through traffic. The master plan also provides maps of replacement practice but is considering a suggested safe walking routes to schools from performance-based approach instead. The The study also found that the majority of each neighborhood. report recommends a lower replacement ratio pedestrian-related collisions could have been based on such factors as ridership, density of mitigated by a combination of pedestrian the surrounding community, access mode split, crossing improvements and traffic-calming BART A-Line Study system capacity, supporting comprehensive measures. Four alternatives were considered This study, from September 2005, examines the station plans, and local and regional context. th for improvement of the East 14 Street corridor. trade-offs across the nine BART stations south The reduced replacement-parking approach is Engineering and Transportation staff will report of and including Lake Merritt between transit- to be tested on developments at the Concord, El to Council in late April 2006 and recommend oriented development and access strategies for Cerrito del Norte, MacArthur and downtown Alternative 2, 4-lane configuration or Modified optimizing ridership. The study evaluates land San Leandro stations. Alternative 4, Two Northbound Lanes and One use scenarios that maximize ridership, identifies Southbound Lane. opportunities for maximizing the utilization of The study also reviewed two San Leandro BART assets, and uses access mode-share development scenarios, including one that targets to help shape investment strategies. considers a 2.2-acre portion of BART’s land for Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan replacement parking. (BART’s parking areas at This plan identifies “pedestrian districts,” or The study found interest in residential the downtown station cover approximately nine improvement areas where walkability is a high development at the downtown San Leandro acres.) Both scenarios showed a negative priority. Designated pedestrian districts in San BART station, though this station was not ground-rent projection and ultimately Leandro encompass most of the study area, identified as a candidate for future TOD produced a net negative income for BART. The specifically the full length of the East 14th planning. The study recommended that the study, therefore, recommended that BART corridor through the area and an area around City pursue TOD aggressively within a half- pursue a larger, more comprehensive joint the downtown BART station bounded by Davis, mile of both of the city’s BART stations, and development scheme that involves other Marina, East 14th, and the Union Pacific railroad concluded that the downtown station might be property owners, as it would be more effective. line (with an extension covering the main a candidate for reduced replacement parking. library and Estudillo Avenue). A key issue related to the downtown that was identified in the study was the need to improve San Leandro BART Station Access The master plan identifies locations with high the connection between the BART station and Plan pedestrian volumes and special-use areas such AC Transit’s future BRT station. A key goal of this plan—prepared by BART and as schools, senior centers, and institutional uses. dated August 2002—is to ensure that access The plan does not list specific improvement planning for the BART station guides other projects for these areas, only types of BART Replacement Parking for capital investments for the station. Specific improvements that might be appropriate for Joint Development recommendations in the plan include: these areas. It provides prototypical treatments This BART report from October 2004 examines for mid-block crossings, crossings at signalized implementation of the agency’s parking-
64 | C ITY OF S AN L EANDRO Transportation Plans and Policies
• connecting the station to the downtown with friendly design, and other key features in a Implications for Transit-Oriented strategic streetscape improvements; transit-oriented development; and Development • redesigning the station's entry plazas, bus • corridor working groups that bring together The plans summarized above show support by transfer area and pick-up/drop-off areas; congestion management agencies, city and the City and other public agencies for • creating a new design for a commuter county planning staff, transit agencies, and encouraging transit use, walking, and bicycling. parking garage that frees the land for other key stakeholders to define expectations, Even more importantly, the plans also development, is safely located and integrated timelines, roles, and responsibilities for key recognize, to varying degrees, the importance of with transit-oriented development; stages of the transit project development integrating TOD-supportive land use decisions • enhancing bike routes within the station area process. in order to achieve desirable transportation and providing new bike-parking facilities at outcomes. Collectively, the plans describe an the station; attractive transportation vision in which • increasing transit feeder service to the Other Planned Changes to the alternatives to the automobile are as convenient station, especially in neighborhoods east of I- Network as driving, if not more so, and in which 580; and The City’s capital improvement program (CIP) transportation and land use decisions are made • strengthening the wayfinding network for outlines projects to improve the city’s with regard to each other. visitors to the station. infrastructure, extend the useful service life of
public facilities, and enhance the delivery of However, transportation plans are notoriously
City services. The CIP includes two projects difficult to implement because improvements MTC Resolution 3434 that are relevant to the study area: are expensive and often require rights-of-way This resolution, adopted by the Metropolitan reconstruction of the City parking lot adjacent that are not readily available. The Transportation Commission in July 2005, to 150 West Juana and street improvements to transportation plans that have been prepared establishes a TOD policy for nine transit- the Davis/East 14th intersection in the event that for the study area are no exception. TOD- extension projects, including AC Transit’s BRT the block of Hays north of Davis is closed for related recommendations from these plans that service through Berkeley, Oakland, and San development purposes. The project to reduce remain unimplemented include renovation of Leandro. The policy calls for three elements: the number of lanes and install medians on San the downtown BART station, a complete bike- Leandro Boulevard is identified as an unfunded route network, the reduction of parking near • thresholds for minimum levels of project. transit stations, and the provision of structured development around transit stations along parking. On the other hand, traffic–signal pre- the new transit corridors, including a MTC’s 2030 Regional Transportation Plan emption is being implemented in conjunction minimum average of 2,750 existing and identifies transportation investments and with AC Transit’s rapid bus service and the planned housing units within a half-mile of strategies throughout the region over the next City will complete the first project of its traffic- each BRT station (as indicated in Chapter 1, 25 years to maintain, manage, and improve calming program for residential streets later this the study area, which is within a half-mile of surface transportation. The plan includes the year. the proposed BRT station at East 14th and first phase of a transit village at the San Leandro Davis, contains 4,474 housing units); BART station, including parking, kiss-and-ride, • local station area plans that address future and bus-circulation improvements. land use changes, station access needs, circulation improvements, pedestrian-
Existing Conditions Report for Downtown San Leandro TOD Strategy | 65 8 | Market for Development
This chapter summarizes background for densities higher than the area’s prevailing information broadly related to market demand residential density. However, only one of the for development in the study area, as gathered projects meets or exceeds BART’s goal of 40 from documents provided by the City. During dwelling units per acre for transit-oriented the next phase of the TOD Strategy, a more development. This might be an indication that, detailed analysis of the potential market while there is fairly strong development interest demand for transit-oriented development in the in the study area, the market might not support downtown will be prepared. The analysis will such higher densities at these locations. cover demographic and employment projections for the area; detailed conditions in the local real-estate market; and, ultimately, an Table 8: Pending Projects estimate of the amount of various types of Gross Project Location Type Units/sf Density transit-oriented development that downtown Acreage San Leandro might be able to support. 1 1101 Davis 0.6 acres Residential 9 townhomes 15 du/acre
2 1040 Davis 0.5 acres Office 9,000 sf 0.4 FAR
1.4 – 2.9 3 San Leandro Blvd and Davis St 0.8 acres Office 50,000 – 100,000 sf Pending Projects FAR There are a number of known development 4 Chumalia and Hyde St. 0.5 acres Residential 11 condominiums 22 du/acre projects that have been proposed for the study 5 Park St and Cherrywood 0.5 acres Industrial NA area, some that have already been approved 6 1537 Hays St 0.3 acres Residential 6 single family 20 du/acre and some that are currently under construction. 60 units; 31,500 sf 7 Juana and E. 14th St 1.7 acres Residential 35 du/acre These projects are summarized in Table 8 and retail shown in Figure 16. During preparation of the Source: City of San Leandro detailed market analysis, the managers of all the developments will be contacted for additional data about their projects.
Most of the identified projects appear to be more transit-supportive than existing development in the sense that they are planned
66 | C ITY OF S AN L EANDRO Market for Development
Figure 16: Pending Projects
Source: City of San Leandro
Existing Conditions Report for Downtown San Leandro TOD Strategy | 67 Market for Development
Publicly Owned Land in the range of $0.60-$1.00 per square foot per relatively stagnant demand for office in San There are approximately 45 acres of publicly month “adjusted gross” (that is, reduced for Leandro. The study found a need in the area owned land, not including street rights-of-way, certain expenses paid by tenants). At the time, for more hotels, business services, restaurants, in the study area (see Figure 17). The main commercial capitalization rates were relatively and other amenities that attract office public landowners in the area are the City and high, at 11 percent, which indicates a weak employment. The study also found that retail BART, with Caltrans owning short stretches of commercial market. According to the report, sales were strong in the city at the time. The street frontage. Sites with functioning buildings prices for land zoned for multi-family and downtown was found to have the highest such as City Hall are not expected to be mixed-use development ranged between $25 taxable sales per acre among the sub-areas available for redevelopment anytime soon; and $35 per square foot. For the subject examined. However, much of the growth in nonetheless, it is worthwhile to note all public property, with development potential as an retail sales occurred outside of the downtown. lands because of the authority that public office project, the appraisal assumed a value of The study warned that the downtown faces agencies have to guide policy, including traffic- $25 per square foot. While at the bottom end of increased competition from big-box retailers, demand management, on their lands. the price range, that figure is higher than the threatening the long-term retail viability of the estimated price for similar land at 1103 Davis district. The study recommended increasing (see above), indicating that land prices rose the mix of uses in the downtown to generate Summary Appraisal Report for 1103 during the period between the two reports. more activity both during the day and at night. Davis Street
This report, dated February 2003, found that the City of San Leandro Economic and Per-Capita Retail Sales highest and best use for the subject property at Land Use Analysis Based on figures compiled by the State Board of the time was multi-family residential. The Equalization for 2004, San Leandro’s taxable appraisal stated that residential space remained For this study, dated January 2000, the retail sales are healthy, exceeding the average in strong demand but that demand for office consulting firm of Strategic Economics figure for California as a whole. In 2004, San and retail space had been relatively stagnant. identified five growing industry clusters in San Leandro saw approximately $16,500 in taxable The report estimated the price for land zoned Leandro: community services; construction and retail sales per resident compared to for multi-family residential to be $20 per square building services; food-related industries; light approximately $9,700 per resident for the state foot at the time. This and previous reports do manufacturing; and transportation, overall. Per-capita retail sales in San Leandro not necessarily reflect current or future market distribution, and storage. Of these sectors, only are considerably higher than in other East Bay values or opportunities; these will be addressed community services presents a potential market cities of similar size such as El Cerrito ($12,100) in the more detailed development-market for transit-oriented development, as it continues and Hayward ($10,400). Of the cities compared, analysis that will be prepared in the next step of to demand office space near public only Pleasanton ($19,500) had higher per-capita the TOD Strategy. transportation. The remaining four sectors are sales. This comparison suggests that San more automobile-dependent and present Leandro residents have a variety of retail limited demand for downtown commercial Appraisal Report for 1016, 1040, space. choices and that San Leandro is able to attract shoppers from other jurisdictions. 1048 and 1058 Davis Street Even though it was completed during the dot- This report, from August 2003, shows that rents com boom years, when office demand was in the area for “Class B” commercial space were skyrocketing in the Bay Area, the study found
68 | C ITY OF S AN L EANDRO Market for Development
Figure 17: Publicly Owned Land
Source: City of San Leandro
Existing Conditions Report for Downtown San Leandro TOD Strategy | 69 Market for Development
Implications for Transit-Oriented be managed to support transit or transit- Development oriented development through the implementation of shared parking strategies Good intentions alone on the part of the public and other parking-demand management tools. sector are not sufficient to generate transit- oriented development. While public investments can create the necessary supporting environment, successful TOD projects will happen in downtown San Leandro only if the right market conditions are present to attract private investment.
The detailed market analysis that will be prepared during the next task of this project is a critical element of the TOD Strategy. The analysis will be an objective, market-based look at the potential for transit-oriented development in the study area. It will help determine, for example, if tax or other government incentives might be required to stimulate transit-supportive development and the types of retail choices that are not well represented in the local area. While the number of projects that is underway and proposed for the downtown is certainly encouraging for the current TOD Strategy, the market analysis will provide the necessary quantitative tools to ensure that expectations surrounding the Strategy are realistic.
PUBLICLY OWNED LAND Publicly owned land provides unique opportunities both to support transit usage directly as well as to catalyze transit-oriented development. Strategically located excess public parcels should be considered first for redevelopment, through public/private partnerships, at TOD-supportive densities. At the same time, publicly owned parking lots can
70 | C ITY OF S AN L EANDRO
9 | Community Services
Public Utilities treatment capacity, in large part due to the impacts to the wastewater and drainage As a largely built-out area, downtown San infiltration of stormwater into sewage pipes. To systems and may require improvements or Leandro is criss-crossed by an extensive system remedy this situation, the City has undertaken a mitigation measures to prevent degradation of of pipes for water supply and wastewater and program to replace aging pipe segments. The the systems or of the environment. stormwater collection. Water service in the City is also in the process of replacing a number study area and elsewhere in San Leandro is of undersized sewage pipes. provided by the East Bay Municipal Utility Other Public Facilities and Social District (EBMUD), a publicly owned utility Lastly, there is a coordinated system for Services stormwater drainage owned and maintained by serving much of the East Bay. Water is The study area contains a number of important the City’s Department of Public Works and the provided for a wide range of needs including government buildings and other facilities. Alameda County Flood Control and Water domestic use, commercial and industrial Since they are mentioned elsewhere in this Conservation District (ACFCWCD). City processing, and fire suppression. The Existing report, they are only listed here briefly. They conduits feed into the ACFCWCD’s larger Conditions Report for the 2002 General Plan include City Hall, the main library, the main system of culverts, levees and pump stations stated that EBMUD reported no known water police station, a fire station, Washington which is designed to reduce the threat of creek supply deficiencies in the city. Elementary School, Casa Peralta (a meeting flooding. The Existing Conditions Report for space), Thrasher Park, Memorial Park (which the General Plan indicated that the drainage San Leandro is served by two wastewater/ includes Veterans Memorial Auditorium), and system functions adequately and that there are sanitary sewer systems. About two-thirds of Root Park. In addition, there are a number of no major problem areas; it does acknowledge, the city, including the study area, is served by a governmental and non-profit social services however, that ponding can occur in low-lying City-owned and operated system. Any new operating in the study area. These include: areas during periods of extreme rainfall but that development within the system’s service area is the duration of such incidents is usually brief. required to connect to the system. Wastewater • DCARA, the Deaf Counseling, Advocacy and City staff has indicated that such incidents have is treated at the City of San Leandro’s Water Referral Agency, on Parrott Street and San been observed in the study area. Pollution Control Plant, located at the end of Leandro Boulevard;
Davis Street. The treatment plant has been • Building Futures with Women and Children, While the General Plan indicates that there are upgraded substantially over the past two the administrative office of which is on no significant public utility constraints in the decades to meet more-stringent state and Joaquin below Bancroft; city, regular system maintenance and upgrades federal water-quality standards. During major • Social Security Administration building, on are necessary to ensure reliable water supply winter storms, sewer flows from throughout the Davis between East 14th and San Leandro and wastewater and stormwater collection. The service area sometimes exceed the plant’s Boulevard; City reviews major development proposals for
72 | C ITY OF S AN L EANDRO Community Services
• Two subsidized child care facilities operated Implications for Transit-Oriented by the Davis Street Family Resource Center: Development Davis Street Preschool (1190 Davis) and One of the major benefits of infill development Davis Street Infant/Toddler Center (580 over “greenfield” development is that it takes Joaquin Avenue); advantage of existing infrastructure, doing • CALICO Center (Child Abuse Listening, away with the need for entirely new systems. Interviewing & Coordination Center), at 524 As suggested above, much of the study area is Estudillo; and already served by extensive water supply, • Spectrum Home Health Care, at 341 Juana. wastewater, and stormwater systems and also
by a dense network of public facilities and As with utilities, the General Plan found that social services. For this reason, development in police, fire, library, recreation, and general the downtown is less likely to be constrained government and community services do not than development elsewhere in the city by the pose significant constraints to development in cost of extending utility lines and constructing the city. This is not the case, however, with new public facilities. school services. Most campuses of the San
Leandro Unified School District are at or above However, the increased population that would design capacity and overcrowding is a common result from new, higher-density development complaint. would contribute incrementally to the load on
local utility systems, such as the City’s School overcrowding is a result of the closure or wastewater treatment plant and pipes in the sale of several schools in the 1970s and early downtown, and also to the use of other 1980s, an upturn in enrollment since the mid- community services and facilities. As 1980s, and class size-reduction programs suggested earlier, this might present a approved by the State in 1997. In response, the particular challenge for public schools serving school district is undergoing a major facilities- the area. At the same time, drainage modernization and expansion program, deficiencies could impact pedestrian including the opening of a new wing at San accessibility and might necessitate Leandro High School in 2003. Nevertheless, the improvements to the drainage system, district estimates that $133 million is needed to especially if development results in increased meet all identified needs. The public schools impermeable surface. These and other that are most likely to serve children in the important issues regarding infrastructure study area include San Leandro High, Bancroft capacity will be examined as part of the Middle School and Washington, Roosevelt, and environmental review for the Downtown McKinley Elementary. Strategy.
Existing Conditions Report for Downtown San Leandro TOD Strategy | 73 10 | Historic Resources
Designated Historic Landmarks • Daniel Best Building; open-air shopping plaza built in the late 1940s Given the downtown’s role as the heart of • Little Brown Church, currently housing the that is a good example of the architectural modern-day San Leandro, it should not be San Leandro Historical Society; conventions in vogue at the time. These surprising that the area contains the largest • Holy Ghost Chapel/IDES Hall; structures were approved for landmark status concentration of historic resources in the city • Masonic Temple Building; and by the City Council in April 2004. (see Figure 18). Arguably, the most significant • garage at 1363 Hays, which was originally a of these are the city’s only two structures on the blacksmith shop. The area also contains a number of less-obvious National Register of Historic Places: Casa historic sites, where important structures once Peralta (1901; built in the Colonial Revival-style stood or important events once occurred. Most, but remodeled as a Moorish villa in 1926) and but not all, of these sites are marked by plaques the Alta Mira Clubhouse (1860), which is the or historical markers. They include the historic only standing structure in the city confirmed to sites of: pre-date the city’s incorporation in 1872. • DeAnza Expedition/Rancho San Antonio; Few structures built between 1870 and 1910 in • Jose Joaquin Estudillo home; the study area are still standing. Most were • San Leandro’s original town hall; torn down in the second half of the 20th century • early Alameda County courthouse; to make way for parking lots and modern • San Leandro Ball Park; structures. Most of the remaining structures • historic downtown plaza; from that period are small, wood-frame • original Methodist church; Daniel Best Building, at East 14th and Estudillo residences built in the architectural styles of • Best Tractor company; • Alameda County Gazette building; their day. The best-known residential example • San Leandro Reporter building; is the Daniel Best House. Other notable All the buildings mentioned above are locally • Thrasher Park; and residences include the Manual Garcia Home, registered historic landmarks and also • Portuguese Union of California. the Captain William Roberts Home, an designated California Points of Historical Italianate residence at 397 Maud, and a Interest. Some have been moved from their Victorian residence at 308 West Joaquin. Non- original locations but remain locally important residential examples worthy of note include the: cultural landmarks. More recent buildings now considered landmarks include Veterans Memorial Auditorium and Pelton Center, an
74 | C ITY OF S AN L EANDRO Historic Resources
Figure 18: Historic Resources
Source: City of San Leandro General Plan (2002)
Existing Conditions Report for Downtown San Leandro TOD Strategy | 75 Historic Resources
There are four designated California Historical Implications for Transit-Oriented Landmarks in San Leandro. Of these, three are Development in the study area. They are the site of the Downtown San Leandro’s historic resources are DeAnza Expedition/Rancho San Antonio, the a valuable complement to the area’s re- site of the Jose Joaquin Estudillo home, and the emerging transit orientation. Since most of San Alta Mira Clubhouse, mentioned earlier. Leandro’s historic structures were built in the
pre-automobile era, they tend to be designed
and oriented with the pedestrian and transit Non-Designated Landmarks user in mind. Pelton Center, for example, has a Far more numerous are structures built in the comfortable, pedestrian scale and its design period between the two world wars, which minimizes the impact of automobile through- could be considered historic but have no official traffic. historic-significance designation. In the study area, the entire neighborhoods of Best Manor and Creekside were developed during this period. These neighborhoods are characterized by early 20th-century cottages, bungalows and other small-scale houses. Specific buildings from the period worthy of mention are St. Leander’s Catholic Church and the First Presbyterian Church. Additionally, there are structures in the area built between 1945 and 1960 that are now approaching the point of possibly being recognized as having historic value. Pelton Center In recent years, San Leandro has seen increased interest in historic preservation, particularly in the downtown. Tangible examples of this Historic resources also contribute significantly interest are the streetlight banners on East 14th to several objectives of the TOD Strategy: celebrating the area’s history and the “history fostering the downtown’s sense of place, civic walk,” a series of sidewalk markers and pride and identity; enhancing the area’s exhibits—scheduled to be completed in mid- aesthetics; and providing landmarks, focal 2006—highlighting the history of important points, and public gathering places. historic buildings and sites in the area.
76 | C ITY OF S AN L EANDRO
11 | Conclusion
The City of San Leandro is formulating the plans that could have an impact on, or be reinforce the area’s historical patterns to create Downtown TOD Strategy with two key impacted by, transit-oriented development. a 21st-century TOD neighborhood that will objectives in mind: to revitalize the downtown strengthen the downtown’s and the rest of the as a vibrant, pedestrian-oriented destination The report finds that while downtown San city’s quality of life. and to maximize past and proposed transit Leandro lost much of its transit orientation investments in the area by BART and AC during the past several decades, it retains the A number of challenges remain, however, Transit. The City expects to accomplish this necessary ingredients for transit-oriented before the TOD vision for downtown can through the sensitive integration of well- development and, therefore, holds potential as become a reality. Some are relatively easy to designed, higher-density residential and a reinvented TOD district. The area is compact accomplish, namely amending select City commercial projects at key development and walkable, is already well served by transit, policies and regulations to fully enable transit- opportunity sites in the downtown. At the encompasses a wide range of commercial and oriented development. Some, however, will be same time, the City intends to preserve the residential uses, is home to many important much more challenging, for example securing comfortable scale of the downtown’s shopping civic resources, contains a number of vacant funds to implement needed land use and district and the integrity of surrounding single- and underutilized sites with development transportation improvements. Also, some are family residential neighborhoods by focusing potential, and is well served by utility systems outside the City’s control: for example, it new development on appropriate locations. and other public facilities. remains to be seen whether the market will support the desired critical mass of This report is the culmination of the first task in At the same time, land use plans for the area development in the downtown. the TOD Strategy. To serve as the foundation indicate support for mixed-use, pedestrian- for subsequent tasks, this report has provided oriented development patterns in the The TOD Strategy will provide information that an assessment of physical factors, plans, and downtown, a growing recognition of the will help the City resolve some of the challenges policies that affect the feasibility of transit- benefits of transit-oriented development, and and questions surrounding transit-oriented oriented development in the downtown. The increasing acceptance of attractively designed development in downtown San Leandro. report has looked at the area’s history, urban higher-density development in appropriate Following the City’s acceptance of this report, form, land use, transportation network, market locations. For their part, transportation plans the TOD Strategy will continue with Task 2, for development, community services, and support transit use, walking, and bicycling as which consists of an analysis of the potential historic resources and also at land use and alternatives to automobile travel and recognize market demand for transit-oriented transportation plans that have been prepared to the importance of integrating land use and development in the area. Subsequent tasks in guide development in the downtown. The transportation decisions. As mentioned at the the TOD Strategy are outlined near the end of report’s emphasis has been on conditions and end of Chapter 2, the challenge then is not how Chapter 1. to create a brand-new TOD district but how to
78 | C ITY OF S AN L EANDRO
12 | Acknowledgements
Consultant team: Special thanks to: ALAMEDA COUNTY CONGESTION MANAGEMENT AGENCY
Diane Stark, Senior Transportation Planner BMS DESIGN GROUP CITY OF SAN LEANDRO
CALTRANS Michael Smiley, Partner Hanson Hom, Community Development Barbara Maloney, Partner Director Beth Thomas, Chief, Community Planning Tim Hurley, Senior Designer Debbie Pollart, Planning Manager Branch Sharon Priest, Senior Planner Kathleen Livermore, Senior Planner Tetsuya Yaguchi, Designer Keith Cooke, Principal Engineer ASSOCIATION OF BAY AREA GOVERNMENTS Reh-Lin Chen, Senior Transportation Engineer EISEN|LETUNIC Luke Sims, Business Development Manager Christy Riviere, Regional Planner Gillian Adams, Regional Planner Victoria Eisen, Principal METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Niko Letunic, Principal Valerie Knepper, Transportation Planner BAY AREA ECONOMICS
AC TRANSIT Ron Golem, Vice-President Alexander Quinn, Senior Associate Jim Cunradi, Bus Rapid Transit Project Manager DESIGN, COMMUNITY & ENVIRONMENT Nathan Landau, Senior Transportation Planner
Steve Noack, Principal BART
KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES Val Joseph Menotti, Deputy Planning Manager—Stations Jim Daisa, P.E. Jeffrey P. Ordway, Manager of Property Leyla Hedayat, Senior Project Manager Development Report edited and designed by Niko Letunic, Diedre Heitman, Senior Planner SEIDEL/HOLZMAN Eisen|Letunic
Alexander Seidel, Partner
80 | C ITY OF S AN L EANDRO
CITY OF SAN LEANDRO Community Development Department
M a r c h 2 0 0 6