Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout62-85BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DANVILLE In the Matter of: An Ordinance Adding Chapter 42 (Transportation Improvement Program ) Fee) to Title 8 (Planning and Land ) Use) Imposing Transportation ) Improvement Program Fee For ) Circulation and Parking Improvements ) on Development in Danville ) ) ORDINANCE NO. 62-85 The City Council of the City of Danville does ordain as follows: SECTION 1. Chapter 42 is added to Title 8 (Planning and Land Use) of the Danville Municipal Code to read as follows: "CHAPTER 42 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FEE Section 8-4201 Section 8-4202 Section 8-4203 Section 8-4204 Section 8-4205 Section 8-4206 Section 8-4207 Intent and Purpose Definitions Fee Requirement Time of Payment Credit Exemptions Appeal Section 8-4201. Intent and Purpose. The City Council of the City of Danville declares that: (1) Improvements to the circulation system, especially in the downtown area, are needed to promote the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of Danville. (The need for improvements is documented in the "County Public Works' Department Road Deficiency Study, 1968", the "Transportation and Parking Analysis, October 1984" prepared 'by JHK and Associates, and ~he 'Danville .General Plan.) (2) New development within downtown Danville and within the entire City will create an additional burden on the existing circulation systems. -1- (3) The General Plan includes goals and objectives relating to minimizing congestion and maximizing safety in the circulation system. Modifications within the downtown area are needed to mitigate existing and potential future circulation impacts. (4) All development for the erection, construction or alteration of non-residential buildings within the City of Danville must be consistent with the General Plan. In addition, the approval of such development must assure that the General Plan and implementation of the goals and objectives relating to circulation and parking are, or will be, implemented. (5) In order to implement the General Plan, and promote the health, safety and general welfare it is necessary (among other implementation methods) that new development pay a fee in lieu of the installation of the improvements necessary for implementation of the Circulation Element of the General Paln, including new streets, traffic signals, traffic signal interconnects and parking facilities. (6) Fees collected will be used throughout the down- town area based upon a priority ranking determined by the City Council. The projects selected as priorities may not necessarily provide a direct benefit to a development making a contribution. (7) This ordinance is adopted under the police power of the City, Article XI, Section 7 of the California Constitution, and under the appropriate provisions of the Planning and Zoning Law of the State of California, Govern- ment Code ~65000 et seq. Section 8-4202. Definitions. A "downtown area" means the downtown Danville study area identified on the map in Figure 1 of the April, 1985, City of Danville, Development Services Department report entitled "A Proposal for a Transportation Improvement Program Fee" and attached as Exhibit "A" Section 8-4203. Fee Requirement. A person who applies for a permit for the erection, con- struction or alteration of a non-residential building shall pay to the City a transportation improvement program fee for circulation and parking improvements in an amount to be determined by resolution of the City Council. -2- Section 8-4204. Time of Payment. The transportation improvement program fee shall be paid to the City of Danville before issuance of a building permit. Section 8-4205. Credit. The City Council may approve full or partial credit against the transportation improvement program fee for a person: (1) who has made substantial off-site, traffic- or parking-related improvements in the downtown area in connection with a development project approved Within the three years before the effective date of this chapter; or (2) who dedicates land or makes substantial off- site, traffic- or parking-related improvements in the downtown area in connection with a current development project. To qualify for credit under this subsection, the dedication or improvement must exceed that required for similar development projects; (3) whose development project is located outside the downtown area and if the City Council finds that the proposed project will have little or no impact on traffic or parking within the downtown area. Section 8-4206. Exemptions. The City Council may grant an exemption to the transportation improvement program fee for a person doing interior or exterior remodelling, rehabilitation or renovations which do not create a change in use or building size. Section 8-4207. Appeal. A decision by the Director of Development Services regarding a t~ansportation improvement program fee imposed under this chapter may be appealed in accordance with the appeal provisions of Chapter 26-2 of the OrdinanCe Code of ~"!Contra Costa County, adopted by the City by reference." SECTION 2. Certain development projects in the City have previously been approved subject to a condition which provides substantially as follows: "Applicant and City shall enter into an Agreement under the terms of which applicant will -3- agree to pay the applicable improvements fee imposed by the City. It is understood that the City is presently studying the composition of a fee structure for the funding of Capital Improvements in the downtown area and will establish a fee before May 31, 1985 .... " By the adoption of this ordinance, the City Council establishes the fee referred to in that condition. SECTION 3. Effective Date. This ordinance becomes effective thirty (30) days after adoption. SECTION 4. Publication. The City Clerk shall either a) have this ordinance published once within 15 days after adoption in a newspaper of general circulation or b) have a summary of this ordinance published twice in a newspaper of general circulation, once five days before its adoption and again within 15 days after adoption. The foregoing ordinance was introduced at a meeting of the City Council of the City of Danville held on May 6 , 1985, and was adopted and ordered published at a meeting of the Council held on May 20 1985, by the following vote: AYES: Lane, May, McNeely, Schlendorf ABSENT: ABSTAIN: 0ffenhart z MAYOR ATTEST: '/// CITY CLERK -4- A PROPOSAL FOR A TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FEE Prepared by: Development Services Dept. City of Danville April, 1985 Table of Contents Ae Introduction and Summary Findings · Development Potential · Required Transportation Improvements . Financing 1 1 5 5 Establishing a Development Fee · What is an appropriate structure and amount? What Have Other Cities Done? What is Equitable? Will A Fee Have Economic Effects? · Row Much Revenue would a Fee Produce? . Should Credits and/or Exemptions Be Granted? · Row to Establish a TIP Fee 8 8 10 11 11 11 13 Appendix A - Development Potential Analysis Appendix B - Description of Public Improvement Projects Appendix C - Summary of Financing Sources 14 19 21 A. Introduction and Summary This report presents an analysis and proposal for requiring a Transportation Improvement Program Fee for commercial development in Danville. Danville will require several major improvements to its transportation system to accomodate both existing needs and future development in the downtown area. Current financing sources are not adequate to finance these improvements. This report addresses the need for a fee, the amount of revenue a fee would produce, and the procedures for establishing a fee. The report focuses primarily on (1) the improvements required, (2) existing conditions and a development potential analysis, (3) a survey of development fees implemented by other cities, and (3) an analysis of potential revenue for Danville.. B. Findings A study area consisting of land currently designated for commercial use (office and retail) in the downtown area was established for the purpose of this analysis (see Figure 1, page 2). Figure 1 is a map of the downtown Danville area, showing the Study Area boundary and the location of the historic area, Charlotte Wood School, and currently vacant land. The majority of the commercial property in Danville is concentrated in this downtown area. The findings of the study effort are presented in the following report section. Development Potential Downtown'Danville is a 170 acre area (including streets) which presently contains approximately 900,000 square feet of commercial floorspace. The area is largely builtout, containing only six acres of vacant land. In addition to development on this vacant land, other future development may occur upon currently built upon parcels that could be assembled and reused at a higher density. The total amount of net new construction that is permissable under the current General Plan and zoning regulations in the downtown area varies between 523,000 and 781,000 square feet, depending upon assumptions that are made regarding the reuse of existing commercial property. When combined with existing floorspace that would remain, the maximum commercial floorspace that could occur in the downtown "without revisions to the current General Plan or zoningw is estimated to be between 1.4 and 1.8 million square feet. SCIq~ FIGURE t DOWNTOWN DANVILLE , STUDY AREA Land Supply Items VACANT PARCELS ~ HISTORIC AREA ~ CHARLOTTE WOOD SCHOOL OTHER / ,/ Table 1, page 4 is a summary of the development potential of the downtown Danville area. Definitions and assumptions supporting Table 1 are included in Appendix A. Development potential has been analyzed under two scenarios. Scenario A is based on current trends of development in the downtown area. Recent projects and applications are used to demonstrate the current trends. Scenario B represents the maximum growth potential with the existing General Plan and Zoning. Scenario B is the highest level of potential commercial development. Development in the downtown area, or any area of Danville, cannot be precisely predicted using only the General Plan and zoning. A master plan for downtown Danville is currently prepared~ this plan, when accepted, will more precisely fix the downtown area~s long term development potential. However, a master plan cannot predict the erate of new developments any more precisley than a general plan. Other findings of the development potential analysis includez Achieving the maximum commercial floorspace (Scenario B) will require substantial lot assembly and reconstruction of existing commercial buildings that are outside the historic area. The market for commercial space will be a major determining factor, both of the total amount of commercial development and the rate at which it occurs. The San Ramon Valley area is experiencing major population and economic growth which can be expected to continue near current rates over the next 15to 20 years. This growth will support continuing demand for local serving and regional serving commercial space in the area. This consideration would affect Scenarios A & B in similar ways. Charlotte Wood is a significant part of future development projections under both scenarios. The projections for the site include private development only. Scenario A assumes current trends and the anticipated level of development required to pay the School Districtgs current asking price for the land. Scenario B assumes more intensive development which may be required to meet the School District~s asking price, and reserve some land for public use. A land use policy issue is the proposed General Plan (Master Plan) update for the downtown area. This update could result in lower (or higher) densities of development, depending upon the policies ultimately approved by the City Council. It is significant that applications for 15-20% (about 119,000 square feet) of the total projected growth potential for the downtown area have been received in the last year. This fact makes the growth projections all the more realistic given current policies and trends. See-Appendix A, page 14, for a summary of downtown development applications. City staff is aware of several other projects which they believe will be submitted within the next several months. These projects could represent as much as 100,000 square feet of new commercial floorspace. Re~. { tea Tran~port~t~ on T~provement. The recent (October 1984) Transportation and Parking Analysis, prepared for the City by JHK & Associates found that without any further development in the downtown some improvements to circulation and parking are needed. With the exception of these isolated problems, traffic access and capacity are adequate. However, the study concluded that current traffic facilities in the downtown area are inadequate to accomodate future traffic increases. Following review of the JHK study, City staff identified four projects need to meet transportation requirements. These projects and their estimated costs arez o Railroad Avenue Improvements $4,000,000 o Parking Garage, or Lots 2,000,000 o Traffic Signal - Front and Diablo 230,000 Traffic Signal Interconnect Total 100,000 $6,330,000 A description of these projects is included in Appendix B, beginning on page 19. Financing Financing these traffic improvements is not possible given current financial resources and fiscal policies, either from general revenues or special revenues (such as Highway Users Tax Subventions). Present financial reserves and future general fund revenues are required for operating expenses, or are otherwise cos~itted. Dedicated revenues, such as Highway Users Tax subventions or federal grants may be available, but also will not provide adequate funding. These findings lead to the conclusion that new, locally generated, funding sources must be developed, if these improvements are to occur. Table 2, page 6, presents a s~mmary of Danville*s financial resources and committments over the next five years. Table 2 shows that of total available funds ($13 million) for major capital projects over the next five years, only $3.8 million is currently unallocated to specific projects. It is estimated that $500,000 (gas tax revenue) of the unallocated $3.8 million could be spent on downtown traffic improvements. The balance should be allocated to general capital improvement needs throughout the community. Table 2 FIVE YEAR TOTAL RESERVES PROJECTION GENERAL FUND $750,000.excess revenue per year at close of fiscal 1990: GAS TAX $350,000 per year at close of fiscal 1990: PARK FUND at close of fiscal 1998: CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FUND CIVIC FACILITIES FUND cash available now: REVENUE SHARING FUND $ 3,750,000 1,750,000 335,000 3,000,000 3,850,000 340,000 TOTAL FUNDING AVAILABLE LESS KNOWN REQUIREMENTS GENERAL RESERVES (for unforeseen operating expenses, economy downturns, etc.) CIVIC FACILITIES PARKS STREET REPAIRS TOTAL UNCOMMITTED $13, 025,000 [ 4,000,000 ] [ 3,800,000 ] [ 335,000 ] [ 1,000,000 ] $ 3,890,000 A development fee is a logical choice for financing at least a portion of the required improvements. Development fees have been imposed by many other cities and have become an integral part of capital improvement financing in California. Development fees and programs are known by many names, including off-site street improvement program (OSlP), in-lieu fees, construction taxes, and (the nomenclature recommended for Danville) Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). Table 3, below, presents a financing plan for the traffic improvements required. A description of the individual financing sources is provided in Appendix C. Table 3 Financing for Transportation Improvement Program Unallocated Gas Tax Potential FAU Grant(s) Developer Dedications/Improvements Sub-total $500,000 $2,000,000 $500,000 $3,000,000 Estimated Transportation Improvement Program Cost <$6,330,000> Estimated Deficitz <$3,330,000> R.t~hli.h{ng m Trmn~portmtto- T~provement Progrmm Fee Establishment of a Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) fee requires a policy decision by the City Council to require new development to pay their fair share of new public improvement costs. This decision requires consideration of several issues includingz chosing an appropriate structure and rate for the fee, calculating the amount of revenue a fee would produce, and determining the procedures for establishing the fee. The following paragraphs address these issues. 7 What iv an -~.~ro~r~ate str~ct,,re ~n8 ~mo,,nt? Deciding on the appropriate structure and rate for a TIP fee depends upon the specific objectives and circumstances of the City. TIP fees can be levied on the basis of a variety of criteria including "square feet of new constuction", "trips generated", etc. The fee can also be levied city-wide or restricted to a limited area. The decision regarding the appropriate structure and amount can be helped by considering what other cities have done, the equity issue, and potential economic effects. What Have Other Cities Done? As a part of this analysis, a survey of other cities was conducted. The results of this survey are presented below: Walnut Creek o In downtown (Core Area) only. o Fees are based on growth which can be generated (which is more that the amount the existing General Plan would permit). o Fees may change after Core Area Plan is revised. o A policy exists to give fee credits for improvements financed by the developer which are in the capital improvement plan for the Core Area. o Fees set by resolution (recently raised). Office $3.00 per gross square foot Retail 1.30 per gross square foot Residential no development fee Concord O O Fees collected city-wide, but 80% of the funds are distributed to the district from which they were collected. Collected fees are accumulated to finance improvements needed to alleviate traffic impacts. A few exemptions are covered in the ordinance and the policy. Fee-is set by Council resolution Office Commercial Industrial Residential $1.66 per gross square foot 2.13 per gross square foot 1.40 per gross square foot $458 per single-family dwelling unit 390 per multi-family dwelling unit Fremont No specific fees established that are tied to building construction. All impacts and improvements are handled on a case by case basis. Traffic study is required (generally through EIR) to determine generating share of traffic impacts, and developer pays a pro rata share. o Large developments are required to pay for the entire amount of improvements. o Development on a corner generally pays one-fourth the cost of signalization. An informal district may be established with proportionate fees collected, based on the traffic generation for a specific project (used infrequently). San Jose Transportation Level of Service policy: traffic study is required to determine trip generation of a development. If development contributes to more than 1% of the traffic (at an intersection that becomes conjected), developer pays 100% of the improvement costs. Improvements may be signals, turn lanes, restriping, etc. Construction "tax" is collected for building permits. Fees are put into road fund of capital improvements program. Some areas of the city are exempt. Commercial/Industrial 1% of building value. Residential 1-1/2 % of building value Chula Vista (near San Diego) o Traffic Signal Fee (established by council resolution). o Each development pays a portion of signal cost based on the number of average daily trips. o Trips are determined from a trip generation table which is based on the building use and building size. o Collected fees go to a fund for a specific signal. All Uses $8.00 per average daily trip. These examples are intended to demonstrate the variety of fee structures that are used by other communities. Each city has chosen their fees based on what is appropriate for them. Some cities differentiate fees based on use (retail vs. office). Walnut Creek has a higher fee for office construction whereas Concord has a higher fee for retail construction. The Danville commercial area is relatively small, suggesting the methods of other cities may not be well suited to Danville. It is expected that in order to assure the viability of all existing commercial establishments, all new commercial development should share equally in helping providing the needed improvements. Despite their differences in traffic generation, office and retail uses in Danville will generate the need for the same improvements. Therefore, the proposed fee structure for Danville does not provide a differential rate based on the type Of use. The manner of assessing fees can be based on square footage, average trips for a particular use, or building value. All of these methods are related to the size of the project, with the larger projects paying higher fees. Because the variety of commercial uses permitted in Danville is relatively limited, the simplest"approach seems the best suited to Danville. Fees should be based on gross square footage of construction. Wh~t i~ Rq3, itab]e? Any financing plan for these types of improvements should be equitable. Equity means that the benefits and burdens (costs) of the improvements are fairly distributed - those that benefit the most should pay the most. Development (TIP) fees place the burden upon new development. This is appropriate when new development creates the need for new capital improvements. Future development in Danville is the key contributor to the need for the required capital improvements hence development fees are an appropriate source of financing. Eowever, TIP fees will not be the only source of financing for the required improvements. Even at relatively high rates, development fees will not produce revenues adequate to finance all the required improvements. Under the proposed plan the 10 existing commercial community will contribute through the allocation of ~xisting (not new) tax revenues. In addition, the proposed Transportation Improvement Program has been limited to only traffic circulation safety, and parking improvements. Other needed improvements, such as a beautification project for Bartz Avenue must be financed in ways, other than from the Transportation Fee. What will be the Rconomic Rffect? TIP fees contribute directly to the cost of constructing new commercial floorspace. In a strong real estate market development fees will be'passed along to those who purchase new property. In a weaker market, fees will result in lower existing land values, hence they are absorbed by the sellers of property. If the cost of development is higher in Danrills than in neighboring communities, it is conceiveable that the high costs would deter development, resulting in lower growth rates and or lower density development. The fact that other communities, such as Walnut Creek and Concord currently have development fees for capital improvements at a similiar level to those being proposed in Danrills, in addition to the overall high demand for commercial space in the San Ramon Valley, will tend to minimize any significant economic effect of the proposed development fee. Bow Much Revenue Wo.ld ~ Fee Proance? The amount of revenue that a TIP fee will produce depends upon the fee rate structure and the amount of development that occurs. The fact that revenue from a TIP fee is dependent upon development occuring demonstrates one of its key limitations as a financing.source - it is unpredictable from year-to-year. As an unpredictable source of revenue it cannot be used for debt service or other long term financing methods. Nonetheless, in an area with strong growth potential such as Danville, the fee can be expected to produce a continuing source of revenue. Table 4 provides a projection of development fees at a range of rates (dollars per square foot of new Construction) for both Scenarios A and B as shown on Table 1, page 4. .~ho,,ld Credit~ or F.x~n~tion~ Re Grintea? Developers are frequently required to provide off-site improvements as part of the standard approval process. This requirement occurs for both residential and commercial projects. The following guidelines are recommended when reviewing exemptions or credits. Off-site improvements that would normally be required with or without a TIP fee should not be granted a credit or exemption. Such standard requirements include, but are not limited to, landscaping, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streets, drainage and traffic safety items. 11 s: 0 0 I1 > el U 0 1 c_ L ). · rr ~1 · 0 .,, c' 0 r- 0 U U) 0 U ~ 0 h 0 LL 0 C~ > ~. n,, U.-'~ 0 ~ s:: C > $ 0 U ~- f,,, I1 h 0 GI · -4 C )rrs II ,...e C I.,rr n, 0 ~ C ), I 0 12 o o Off-site improvements, in addition to standard improvements, occa~sionally may be required. If these improvements are in addition to those outlined in the TIP and primarily benefit the project, then credits or exemptions should not be granted. There will be situations where projects are required to make specific improvements in advance of, or which offset, those outlined in the City's TIP. In those situations credits or exemptions should be considered on a case-by- case basis. Currently almost all commercial property in Danville is contiguous to the downtown commercial district. Projects in these areas will have an impact on the entire commercial district. In a few instances there may be properties which are not contiguous or not in the immediate area. In these situations, specific improvements related to the projects should be considered for an exemption or credit to the standard TIP fee, on a case-by-case basis. Interior or exterior remodelling or rehabilitation for which no change in use or size of building occurs should be granted an exemption. This exemption would not apply to construction of a new buidling that replaces a structure. How to Rstahlish a TIP Fee Any financing plan that the City adopts should reflect 'the policies for growth and development and the available resources for funding. The exisiting General Plan requires that traffic and circulation be safe, efficient and promote the general welfare of the community. The General Plan should also contain language that states specific goals for traffic and circulation and which discusses needed captial improvements, financing mechanisms and implementation measures. It is recommended that a General Plan amendment be initiated that will further strengthen the Transportation Improvement Program. Further, reference to the October 1984 traffic analysis (JHK & Associates) would appropriately be included in the General Plan should an amendment be intiated. Institution of a TIP fee can be accomplished through a special ordinance enabling their collection. The enabling ordinance should clearly state the purpose of the fee, the collection of the fee and the use for collected fees. A council resolution can be used to set the fees called for in the enabling legislation. 13 APPENDIX A Development Potential Analysis Appendix R Table 1 DRHUILLE LAND USE SUMMARY ITEM URLUE 1, Total Land Area (1) 2, Total Buildable Land Area (2) 3, Total Existing Connercial Oeuelopnent 4_ Ryerage Floor Area Ratio, 1985 5. Uacant Land 6, Land uith Inprouenent Potential 170 Acres 133 Acres 900,000 Sq.Ft. 0.15 6 Acres 30 Acres Notes= (1) <2> (4) (5) TotaI Land (acres) of Study Area, This is land zoned, designated (GP) or used for connercial or office uses in the downtoun area, Total Buildable Area is Total Land Area nlnus streets. To.tal Existing ConnerciaI Area is non-residential buildings including retail, office and religious buildings, Floor Area Ratio (FAR) is the total connercial building floor area divided by Total Buildable Land Area, Buildable area is first converted to square feet (5,793,480 sq,ft_) 900,000 sq,ft,/5,?93,480 sq,ft, = FAR = 0,15 Vacant Land includes all parcels which currently have no buildings on then_ It does not include land owned by the County Flood Control District, Land with inprovenent potential includes parcels with a FRR less than 2SX and for which the buildings are More than 5 years old, 14 Development Potential Analysis - Definitions and Assumptions The following definitions and assumptions apply to Table I in the body of the report and use of the terms within the report. Floor Area Ratioz Floor area ratio (FAR) is a measure of the intensity of development on a parcel. It is equal to the gross building area divided by the lot area. total building floor area total lot area FAR is used in this report as a method for comparing the intensity of development on different properties or categories of property. Danville~s zoning regulations do not have explicit FAR standards for any zoning district~ however, other zoning regulations (e.g. setbacks, side yards, height, parking, open space, etc.) result in an effective FAR of 0.25-0.33 for most parcels. Some parcels will have, and will continue to be developed at a higher FAR. Use of this unit of measure is not intended to recommend FAR standards for Danville. Vacant Landz Vacant lands are generally the first and the most likely properties to be developed. The density to which these parcels are built will depend on city policies and, to some extent, on market forces and land values. Charlotte Wood School Sitez The development of Charlotte Wood School is unquestionably dependent on policies established by the City for the reuse (or continuation of the exisiting use) of the property. The 11 acre site has potential for construction of a commercial complex or a combined public building/commercial complex. A commercial complex of a minimum size (275,000 square feet) will be needed to cover development costs given the land sales price the School Board is asking. This level of development would result in a FAR of about 0.50. Even though the average FAR for downtown Danville is currently 0.15, a more intensive use of this site is possible (and probable) due to the large lot size and the type of facility that is likely to be constructed. Historic Areaz The historic area is 20 acres in the core of the downtown (see Figure 1). The historic area was so designated in the mPreliminary Historic Downtown Danville Guidelines.m 15 The historic ~rea contains approximately seven acres that can be considered "under-utilized" and less than one acre of available vacant land. Due to the small parcels and the communityws interest in retaining the historic flavor of the area, development in the historic area is assumed to be minimal. The historic area is built to an FAR higher than the remainder of the downtown (0.28). This is due in part to the lack of permanently vacant land such as creekside property. It is also partly due to the RB zoning which permits more coverage of a lot than other downtown zones. Another important reason for the high FAR is that many parcels are 'fully-utilized' given the existing General Plan and zoning. The existence of small lots has been reinforced recently as the city has collected fees in-lieu of requiring construction of on- site parking. This practise is likely to increase in the Historic Area as lots are rebuilt. These in-lieu fees are separate and apart from the proposed TIP fees. The in-lieu parking fees are to accomodate required parking, whereas the TIP fees are for the provision of general public parking. Land with Improvement Potentialz This land is represented by parcels with generally smaller buildings on them and whichz 1) can accomodate building additions to existing structures in the same lots or 2) may be torn down and rebuilt with larger structures Land with improvement potential could be rebuilt when adjacent (individually under-utilized) parcels are consolidated. The consolidation of lots will usually allow the land to be developed at higher FAR~s. A lot has improvement potential in Danville 1) exisiting regulations will permit more intensive use of the property (higher density)~ and 2) market demand exists for the more intensive use of the land. Fully-utilized Landz Land is considered fully utilized if, with current General Plan and zoning designations and current market conditions, there is no demand to increase the building area on a parcel. Parcels with built to an FAR greater than 25% were considered to meet this criterea. If land use policies and/or land values change, these parcels could have floor space added with building additions or a reconstruction to increase their level of utilization. 16 Appendix A Table Current New Project Applications and Approvals Downtown Danville Traffic Improvement Financing Study P~oaect Name Land Area (acres) Estimated Floorspace (Square Feet Floor Area Ratio (FAR) Current Zoning Victorian Village 1.5 70,000 1.07 NB Woodhill Developers <Town and Country) 1.17 13,000 0.25 R-20 ChamOlin and Cotton Development 0.45 7,000 0.36 R-80 Rand/McLean (Diablo Oaks Center) 1.05 29,000 0.63 0-1 Totals 4.17 119,000 0.65 17 MONTAIR SCHOOl. FIGURE 1 DOWNTOWN DANVILLE STUDY AREA Land Supply Items VACANT PARCELS HISTORIC AREA CHARLOTTE WOOD SCHOOL OTHER // :]-8 APPENDIX B Description of Public Improvements Project Descriptions RAILROAD AVENUE Railroad Avenue is proposed to be widened to permit four lanes of travel. The road will also be extended to the north to connect with Danville Blvd. A precise alignment for the road extension has not been selected. Most of the current north/south traffic in Danville uses Hartz Avenue (63%). In order to more effeciently handle new traffic either Front Street or Railroad Avenue will require widening. Due to the physical constraints of the creek (among other reasons), Front Street is not a good candidate. Railroad Avenue is a better choice also due to its alignment and connection with San Ramon Valley Blvd. Widening of Railroad Avenue will allow a redistribution of the traffic so that approximatedly 36% of the future traffic will use Bartz and 41% will use Railroad (data extracted from JHK & Associates, Transportation and Parking Analysis, October 1984, Table 4-1). It should be noted that even though the percentage of downtown traffic will be much lower on Hartz, if Railroad is four lanes, the number of average daily trips will only be decreased by 15% (from 17,100 to 14,100). PARKING GARAGE A 250 space parking garage is proposed for the downtown. As yet, no location has been selected for the garage, nor has the garage been designed. A garage will beneeded to provide public parking. Because of the small size of the downtown it is difficult for public parking to be provided. Parking is needed to assure the viability of all of the businesses~ the garage will encourage more people to use and stay in the downtown commercial area. A garage of 250 spaces is only one-third to one-half of the spaces recommended in the October 1984 study. Other parking solutions eventually need to be investigated. TRAFFIC SIGNAL A traffic signal at the intersection of Front and Diablo is proposed to control the traffic flow on these two streets. Front street will take on more north/south traffic and Diablo will be used for additional traffic accessing the freeway (or going further east, and coming into the downtown area. 19 TRAFFIC SIGNAL INTERCONNECT The interconnect will 'connects the operation of existing and future traffic signals in the downtown area. The interconnect controls the timing of the traffic signal cycles and is related to the volume of traffic. It is used to assure a more efficient traffic flow by making it possible for through traffic to move from signal to signal without having to stop for each one. 20