M E M O R A N D U M

November 24, 1999

TO: Planning Commission

FROM: Planning Staff

SUBJECT: Worksession: Text Amendment Application TXT1999-00178 Fallsgrove Associates

This worksession is intended to begin the review of the proposed Text Amendment submitted by the applicants for the Fallsgrove development. This will hopefully allow the Commission to put forth a recommendation into the public record for the CPD application before the record closes on December 20. The applicant has submitted the text amendment in order to modify Sections 25-643 and 25-648 of the Zoning Ordinance relating to Comprehensive Planned Development (CPD). As requested by the Mayor and Council, the discussion will focus on each of the five components of the Text Amendment separately.

Reduction in Structured Parking Requirement

The applicant proposes to reduce, from 45 percent to 25 percent, the minimum amount of parking spaces required to serve office uses that must be provided in an underground or structured parking facility (Section 25-648(1)). The Ordinance currently requires that 45 percent of parking spaces serving office uses be provided in a structured facility or underground, unless the CPD is adjacent to or crossed by an existing or proposed transitway, when the amount may be reduced to 25 percent. The proposed amendment would allow a reduction to 25 percent for those CPDs that include low density office or research and development structures, community retail facilities, and other uses that normally rely on surface parking spaces.

Staff comment: Primary justification given by the applicant includes the economic factors involved in providing structured parking for low density office and research and development uses. Additional justification given is that the environmental protection goals that were addressed by this requirement in CPDs can now be achieved through adherence to the Citys Environmental Guidelines. There may be some rationale for a reduced amount of structured parking given the amount of research and development uses on the site, although staff notes that the 45 percent requirement is an aggregate requirement for all office uses within a CPD rather than site specific. Although it may be difficult to provide structured parking on small sites, the overall average percentage of structured parking may be achievable at a higher percentage than proposed, if not at the 45 percent requirement. Staff therefore will request additional justification during review of this amendment.

Shopping Center Parking Standard Reduction

Provide for a new parking standard, for shopping centers that have less than 150,000 square feet of gross leasable area within a CPD, of 4.3 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor area (new Section 25-648(10)). The parking requirement for retail centers within CPDs is currently based on the sum of the individual uses in the center, which typically include retail and restaurant uses. Retail uses require one space per 200 square feet of floor area, equivalent to 5.0 spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor area, while restaurant uses require one space per 50 square feet of patron area and one space per two employees. The applicant has proposed the use of either the existing requirement or the new standard to apply to shopping centers within CPDs. The option to pick the lesser of the two methods to calculate parking requirements is currently available to centers over 150,000 square feet.

Staff comment: The applicant has patterned this request after the Citys parking requirement for shopping centers with greater than 150,000 square feet of leasable area, which is one space per every 250 square feet, or 4.0 spaces per 1,000 square feet. This standard may apply if restaurant uses comprise less that 15 percent of the center and theaters include less than 750 seats. Large shopping centers in the City may choose this standard or the sum of the individual uses. The rationale for the existing standard for large shopping centers stems from the high probability of common patrons among stores in large shopping centers. The applicants justification relates to the fact that the proposed retail center in Fallsgrove will be a neighborhood serving center within easy pedestrian access from the majority of the projects dwelling units. Staff notes that the applicant does have the ability to use the non-overlapping peak parking demand credit schedule found in the current Ordinance that applies to multi-use structures and properties in CPDs.

Additional Retail Uses

Permit additional uses within CPDs (Section 25-642(1)). The applicant has proposed the addition of the following uses to the list of uses permitted in a CPD: retailing of sporting goods; household appliances; beer, wine, or other alcoholic beverages for consumption off-premises; and office furniture. Health and fitness establishments are also proposed as a permitted use in CPDs. Staff notes that this use is currently permitted in Tower Oaks and King Farm CPDs which are in the O-3 Zone, but not in the Fallsgrove CPD because it is in the R-S Zone.

Staff comment: The intent of retail centers within CPDs has traditionally been to serve the residents and employees within the CPD. The proposed retail uses and the health and fitness establishment often are large in floor area and serve a trade area beyond the immediate neighborhood. The applicant has proposed restrictions on the maximum floor area of these types of uses to 2,500 square feet of patron area and no more than 4,000 square feet per establishment. These restrictions would be appropriate to ensure that the uses primarily serve the neighborhood. Potential impact on other CPDs would need to be evaluated.

Increased Size of Certain Retail Uses

Permit an increase in floor area of certain retail uses, currently permitted in the C-1 Zone and in CPDs but limited to 2,500 square feet in area per establishment, to 2,500 square feet in patron area and 4,000 square feet in total floor area per establishment (Section 25-643(10)(a)). In the C-1 Zone, the uses currently limited by size are retailing of computers and accessories, including repair; shoes; variety and dry goods; wearing apparel; music; musical instruments and accessories and recordings; jewelry, including repair; photographic studio; optician; private postal service; interior decorator and photographic processing.

Staff comment: The applicants justification indicates that the size limitations imposed on these certain retail uses are not in line with retail trends. Although these limitations derive from the C-1 Zone requirements where they are entirely appropriate for small neighborhood centers, slightly larger prototype stores may be appropriate in a larger center located in a CPD.

Semi-detached One-family Dwelling Unit MPDUs

Permit semi-detached one-family dwelling units (duplexes) within CPDs if approved as part of a CPD concept plan application, and if necessary to accommodate the requirement to provide Moderately Priced Dwelling Units (MPDUs) (Section 25-643). The applicant has proposed to provide MPDUs dispersed throughout the project, including single family detached areas, and has represented that providing MPDUs as single family detached units is not economically feasible if the units are to be compatible with market rate units.

Staff comment: Staff finds the potential for providing MPDUs in single family areas to have merit, especially in terms of ensuring dispersion of MPDUs throughout a development. Compatibility of these units with single family areas would be necessary and evaluated during review of a Detailed Application. Recent examples of MPDU duplex units constructed by the applicant are more consistent with the size and character of the market rate houses in the subdivision than a single family detached MPDU could be. Staff notes that duplexes would only be permitted as MPDUs and only if approved in a Concept Plan application.

/rjw

Attachment

1. Proposed Text Amendment