Palo Alto, CA MARCH 2019 SB-50 OVERVIEW
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Senate Bill 50 Impact Analysis Palo Alto, CA MARCH 2019 SB-50 OVERVIEW California Senate Bill 50 (SB-50) is designed to incentivize higher density housing development near major transit stops, major bus routes, and in “areas of high-opportunity close to jobs” throughout California. The Bill requires local governments to grant “equitable communities incentives” waiving certain local zoning rules for housing projects that include a minimum number of affordable units.1 It applies to all cities, including charter cities. If passed, SB-50 would allow townhouses and apartment buildings to be developed on prop- erties throughout Palo Alto, effectively elimi- nating R-1 single family zoning city-wide.2 It would also limit the City’s ability to set height, Rendering of possible development along Addison Avenue. This area is in a Transit-Rich area and would building density, parking and a variety of other qualify for maximum height, parking, and density bonuses. development standards. 75% of students test “at or above” state stan- “High Quality Bus Corridor”4 AREAS AFFECTED BY UPZONING dards.3 As such, SB-50 will likely impact all of There are also three primary transit routes The bill targets three critical zones (shown in Palo Alto including neighborhoods far from that qualify as High-Quality Bus Corridors. This the map on the next page) that will be subject transit such as Crescent Park, Duveneck, Mid- designation includes areas that are within 1/4 to varying degrees of upzoning – Jobs-Rich, town and Fairmeadow. mile of bus routes that have service intervals of Transit-Rich, and High Quality Bus Corridors. no more than 15 minutes during peak weekday The Jobs-Rich zone is defined by an area’s “Transit-Rich” hours. Bus routes that qualify as a High-Quality proximity to jobs, school quality and medi- The Bill affects all of Palo Alto, but has particu- Bus Corridor include: an income. The last two zones are defined by lar significance for parcels that fall within a 1⁄2 proximity to transit. mile radius of three Caltrain stops: • VTA Rte 22 & 522 – Evergreen Park, South- gate, College Terrace, Barron Park, Ventura “Jobs-Rich” • Palo Alto Station – parts of Downtown • SamTrans Route 281 (University Ave.) – The exact threshold for Jobs-Rich has yet to be North, University South, Professorville Downtown North defined in SB-50. However, Palo Alto, under any • California Ave. Station – parts of Old Palo scenario will likely reach that threshold. Few Alto, Midtown, Evergreen Park, Mayfield, cities boast a jobs to housing ratio of almost Ventura 3:1, an area median income almost twice the • San Antonio Station – parts of state median, and a school district where over Greenmeadow and Monroe Park 2 SB-50 ANALYSIS PALO ALTO – EMBARCADERO INSTITUTE SAN SB 50 IMPACTS OVERVIEW FRANCISCO CITY OF PALO ALTO EL CAMINO REALMENLO BAY PARK LEGEND City of Palo Alto Boundaries MIDDLEFIELD PALO ALTO AFFECTED AREAS UNIVERSITY Job Rich Area (All Zones) (0.5 Parking Minimum; No Density Controls) ALMA High Quality Transit Corridor 2 (0.5 Parking Minimum; No Density Controls) COWPER 1/2 Mile of Major Transit Stop ARBORETUM EMBARCADERO (45 Feet or 3 to 4 stories; 2.5 FAR; No Parking Mins) 4 1/4 Mile of Major Transit Stop SAND HILL (55 Feet or 4 to 5 stories; 3.25 FAR; 82 No Parking Mins) 1 OREGON ALMA MIDDLEFIELD HEIGHT DIFFERENCES COWPER STANFORD 55 FEET 45 FEET 20-FT HOME 5 EL CAMINO REAL CALIFORNIA PAGE MILL JUNIPERO SERRA RENDERING SITES ALMA CHARLESTON 1. First Baptist Church 2. 225 Addison Ave. 3 3. 4027 Scripps Ave. 4. 307 Lowell Ave. 5. 243 Margarita Ave. SAN ANTONIO MOUNTAIN VIEW CENTRAL Disclaimer: Data used tocreate this map is from FOOTHILL public sources and may not be entirely accurate or 82 the most recent dataset. Data sources include MTC’s Open Data Portal, the City of Palo Alto, and Santa Clara County. N 0 2.5 .5 1 1:28,000 MILES Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community EMBARCADERO INSTITUTE – SB-50 ANALYSIS PALO ALTO 3 DEVELOPER INCENTIVES Projects in either Jobs-Rich or High-Quality Bus Corridor areas must be granted the Base Incen- tives described below. Projects that are ALSO within a half mile radius of a major transit stop (i.e., train station), are entitled to the Base Incen- tives plus the Secondary Incentives described here. Base Incentives Because all of Palo Alto likely qualifies as Jobs- Rich under SB-50, residential projects through- out the City that include the minimum number of affordable units, would be: • Exempt from local density controls on hous- ing. • Eligible for reduced parking requirements. • Allowed up to three additional incentives/ concessions related to such things as height, floor area, setbacks or daylight plane re- quirements, to be chosen by the developer. In communities/cities that are not deemed Jobs- Rich, the base incentives apply only to proper- ties within a High-Quality Bus Corridor. Secondary Incentives In addition to the Base Incentives, projects that Before and after rendering of First Baptist Church property at 305 N California Ave showing how a high fall within a 1⁄2 mile of the Caltrain stations – density, 4-story apartment building could be developed on the site. Palo Alto, California Ave and San Antonio, would • Allowed to build floor area up to 2.5 times be: the size of the lot (Floor Area Ratio) within the 1⁄2 mile radius and 3.25 times the size of • Entitled to build to a height of at least 45 the lot within the 1⁄4 mile radius. feet if within a ½ mile radius of the station, • Exempt from any on-site parking require- and to a height of at least 55 feet if within a ments. ¼ mile radius. 4 SB-50 ANALYSIS PALO ALTO – EMBARCADERO INSTITUTE POSSIBLE IMPACTS Table 1: Summary of Proposed Zoning Changes Max Units No. of Zoning Height FAR Parking 1. Single-family neighborhoods: Existing per acre Parcels1 single-family neighborhoods could be sig- EXISTING ZONING CONDITIONS nificantly altered by SB-50’s development R-1 30ft 0.45 2/unit 1 ~15,000 incentives that relate to height, density, 1.25/studio; parking and setbacks. With reduced or no RM15 30ft 0.5 15 ~900 2/2 br parking requirements, the streets could fill 1.25/studio; up with more parked cars on both sides RM40 40ft 1.0 40 ~400 2/2 br leaving a narrow passage lane for cars, CONDITIONS UNDER SB 50 bikes and pedestrians. Overall, approx- imately 7,000 parcels in Palo Alto lie in 1/4 mile of Caltrain Stop 55ft 3.25 none no max ~1,050 either the Transit Rich or High-Quality Bus 1/4 to 1/2 mile of Caltrain Corridor. This represents about 40% of the Stop 45ft 2.50 none no max ~2,900 approximately 18,000 parcels in the city, High Quality Corridor 30ft 0.5/unit no max ~3,250 and does not even include those parcels All other “Job Rich” par- in Jobs-Rich areas. SB-50 could result in a cels 30ft 0.5/unit no max ~13,000 complete shift from today’s detached sin- Table Note: (1) Based on City of Palo Alto GIS parcel layer. gle-family housing development pattern to a townhouse and apartment development 3. Parking: Given the combination of more 5. Transit: It would be great if everyone who pattern. housing density with zero parking re- lived and worked close to transit used it. quirement for Transit-Rich developments However, a recent study out of UCLA’s 2. Schools: SB-50 has no school funding and reduced parking requirement for Institute of Transportation Studies found formula. The economics of basic aid school developments throughout the rest of the that the “defining attribute of regular transit districts like Palo Alto’s are directly impact- city, it is reasonable to assume the surfeit riders is their relative lack of private vehicle ed by new housing development. They are of additional cars will be parked on the access” not proximity to transit.6 Perhaps dependent on local property taxes as a streets. According to Hedges & Company, it is not surprising then that while the Bay major source of revenue. And while new de- car registrations per capita in Palo Alto has Area has experienced sustained growth in velopment brings in additional property tax, climbed 12 percent over the last five years. vehicle ownership, the Valley Transit Author- it generally brings in additional students. This reflects car ownership trends across the ity has reported a decline in bus ridership, The student generation rate for housing can Bay Area and in other parts of California.5,6 and Palo Alto’s share of Caltrain ridership greatly affect the break-even economics for has plateaued.5,8,9 schools in basic aid districts. To date, Palo 4. Road Safety: More curb-parked cars reduc- Alto has been fortunate to operate public es visibility, contributing to pedestrian, bicy- More importantly only a small percentage schools with higher-than-state-average cle and car collisions. In Santa Clara County, of commuters arrive and leave Palo Alto per-pupil expenditures, but depending on Palo Alto already has the dubious distinc- each day by train. During the weekday the type and number of housing units built, tion of the highest per capita vehicle-bicycle AM Peak approximately 5,300 of the city’s that per-pupil spending could fall. and vehicle-pedestrian collisions.7 100,000 strong workforce arrive on Caltrain EMBARCADERO INSTITUTE – SB-50 ANALYSIS PALO ALTO 5 THE NUMBERS The table on the following page shows the maximum number of units that could be the- oretically constructed in the Transit-Rich and High Quality Bus Corridor areas.