Agenda packet — Escondido City Council, July 19, 2023 (part 5 of 5)

662
Item16.

ESCONDIDO EAST VALLEY SPECIFIC PLAN | CHAPTER 8.0 IMPLEMENTATION 80

8.1 Design Review & Permit Process
This section describes the procedures required for the timely implementation of development within the Plan Area. To ensure compliance with all applicable requirements of this Plan, all development projects (unless specifically exempt) shall be subject to design review by staff, Planning Commission, and/ or Zoning Administration process to potentially determine conformance with the design guidelines and policies provided in this document.

8.1.1 Design Review & Permit Process
The design review and permit process shall include the following steps:

A. Initial Meetings
Meet with City staff to discuss plans and any documentation that illustrates the proposed work. An initial meeting is required for all new development and significant redevelopment projects.

B. Application Submittal
Submit the plans to the Planning Division. Staff shall review the project for compliance with the EVSP, CEQA document, and CAP Checklist and to determine completeness.

C. Minor Projects - Design Review
Projects that include restoration, exterior changes to structures, exterior painting, minor demolitions, minor changes to the site (grading, paving, landscaping, etc.), or placement or removal of exterior objects, shall be reviewed by the Planning Division staff for compliance with this document.

Staff will issue a Certificate of Appropriateness, or letter of approval, or record of action, if the project complies with the guidelines.

D. Major Projects
Projects including all new construction (of a primary structure, an outbuilding, or an addition), demolition, relocation, significant changes to the site (grading, paving, landscaping, etc.); public right-of-way improvements, or any project requiring a Planned Development Permit or Plot Plan Approval, will be reviewed by staff, and the Planning Commission when applicable, based on the design guidelines outlined in this document and either:
» Issue a Recommendation of Approval or Conditional Approval; or » Disapprove the proposed work and provide the applicant with a written statement either giving the reasons for disapproval; or identifying recommended modifications.

E. Project Requiring Conditional Use Permit or Minor Conditional Use Permit
Projects that require a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) or Minor CUP, as indicated in Table 7-2, Permitted & Conditional Uses, will be reviewed by the Zoning Administrator who will review the project based on the design guidelines outlined in this document and either approve, disapprove, or condition the permit.

F. Project Requiring Building Permits
In addition to the requirements listed elsewhere in this section, building permits are required for all new construction, additions, exterior changes to a structure, demolition, relocation, or placement or removal of exterior objects, and as otherwise specified in the California Building Code.

The Building Division shall route the plans to the Engineering Division to determine necessary public improvements if the value of the work exceeds preset standards. The Building Division shall issue a Building Permit or return the plans to the applicant for necessary modifications.

G. Projects Requiring Grading Permits
Projects that require a Grading and/or an Encroachment Permit shall be submitted for review by the Engineering Division. An Encroachment Permit shall be required for any work within the public right-of-way, including work on driveways, curb cuts, sidewalks, curb and gutter, or street pavement.

Ordinance No. 2023-10
Exhibit "C"

Page 84 of 92 ends

663
Item16.

ESCONDIDO EAST VALLEY SPECIFIC PLAN | CHAPTER 8.0 IMPLEMENTATION 81 H. Project Completion
The Building Inspector shall check the work for compliance to the approved plans upon completion of the project.

8.1.2 Environmental Review Process
Projects adhering to the land use regulations and design standards of this Plan may not require an extensive California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") review process.

Projects that implement the applicable mitigation measures as conditions or project design features may be able to obtain streamlined, ministerial approvals. Projects that do not include the applicable mitigation measures as conditions or project design features may be required to prepare separate site specific analysis. Please refer to the mitigation measures included in the East Valley Specific Plan Programmatic Environmental Impact Report ("PEIR") for additional detail.

8.1.3 Transportation Fair Share Contribution Program
The Project has incorporated a Transportation Fair Share Contribution Program that the City has committed to in order to address the potential roadway deficiencies that may result from implementation of the East Valley Specific Plan. When specific developments are proposed in the EVSP Area, the average daily trips (ADT) would be determined and the development’s “fairshare” contribution to the overall improvements would be calculated. The Transportation Fair Share Contribution Program includes the transportation improvements such as signalizing intersections, dedicated turn-lanes, and signal timing modifications. Please refer to the Transportation Analysis (Appendix G) of the PEIR.

8.1.4 Public Hearing Process
Projects that require a Public Hearing, such as projects submitting a Planned Development application, shall be scheduled for Planning Commission consideration (and City Council, as appropriate). The Planning Commission (and City Council, as appropriate) shall:

A. Approve or Conditionally Approve the Project
If conditionally approved, the applicant shall be provided with a list of applicable conditions.

B. Deny the Project
The applicant shall be provided with a written statement providing the reasons for denial.

The Zoning Administrator is authorized to consider and approve, disapprove or modify application and/or issue use permits, for certain projects seeking a Conditional Use Permit, and all projects seeking a Minor Conditional Use Permit, variance, grading exemption, and other actions pursuant to Section 33-1319 of the Escondido Zoning Code. If the Zoning Administrator's decision is appealed, the project shall be scheduled for Planning Commission consideration.

Ordinance No. 2023-10
Exhibit "C"

Page 85 of 92 ends

664
Item16.

ESCONDIDO EAST VALLEY SPECIFIC PLAN | CHAPTER 8.0 IMPLEMENTATION 82

8.1.5 Minor Modifications
The following minor modifications to the EVSP do not require a Specific Plan Amendment and are subject to review and approval by the Director of Community Development. Although a formal amendment to the Specific Plan is not required in the following cases, any such minor modifications shall be identified as part of the required development application. » Consolidation of parcels provided that:
– Parcels are contiguous.
– Parcels have the same land use designation.
– If the total site after consolidation is greater than or equal to five (5) acres, the required supporting infrastructure and recreational amenities must be provided on-site.
» Development of park and open space in lieu of underlying EVSP land use designation.
» Density/intensity transfers provided that:
– The proposed number of dwelling units in the planning area receiving the density transfer does not exceed the maximum residential density specified by the planning area’s land use designation.
– Following the density transfer, the residential density within the planning area where units would be transferred from does not fall below the minimum density range as specified for that planning area’s land use designation.

8.1.6 Specific Plan Amendments
All substantive Plan modifications that do not meet the criteria of a Minor Modification as defined in Section 8.1.5 shall require a formal Specific Plan Amendment.

Projects that require a Specific Plan Amendment shall be scheduled for a City Council hearing for initiation prior to formal application submittal. The City Council shall consider whether the requested amendment satisfies the criteria identified in Section 2.2, Goals and Policies, as well as the Development Standards and Design Guidelines identified in Chapter 7.0. The City Council shall either:

A. Initiate the amendment
Staff shall receive the project for processing. Projects initiated for processing shall be evaluated by the Planning Commission prior to formal City Council consideration.

B. Deny the initiation request
Staff shall perform no additional processing of the application.

Ordinance No. 2023-10
Exhibit "C"

Page 86 of 92 ends

665
Item16.

ESCONDIDO EAST VALLEY SPECIFIC PLAN | CHAPTER 8.0 IMPLEMENTATION 83

8.2 Potential Funding Mechanisms
The EVSP implementation will take place over several years. Early actions are needed from the City to help remove constraints, establish the appropriate policy and regulatory framework, and make improvements that attract and encourage private investment. The implementation approach will rely on both public and private sector funding. Public investment is likely required in the initial phases of implementation to entice private investment. Implementation will rely on several public funding sources with the recognition that flexibility is needed as changes occur over time. State and Federal funding sources are likely to fluctuate making local market conditions and private investment more important for long term implementation.

This section identifies a series of funding mechanisms that can assist with the implementation of various components of the EVSP.

8.2.1 Financing Tools
» Business Improvement District (“BID”): A BID is a public/private partnership created to perform marketing, provide a variety of enhanced services, and complete minor capital improvements in order to improve commercial neighborhoods. The BID allows the governing body (City Council) to levy an additional tax on property owners or businesses within a designated area and to utilize the revenues for improvements and programs, subject to a majority vote of the property owners or business owners, within the proposed district. Establishing a BID is voluntary. A BID can perform a variety of activities including, but not limited to:
– Improvements, such as the acquisition, construction, installation, or maintenance of any tangible property with an estimated useful life of five years or more, including, but not limited to: parking facilities, benches, trash receptacles, street lighting, decorations, parks, and fountains.
– Activities, including, but not limited to, the following:
– Promotion of public events which benefit businesses in the area and which take place on or in public places within the area. – Activities which benefit businesses located and operating in the area.
» Community Facilities District (“CFD”), also known as Mello-Roos, is an ad hoc California tax district created to finance an infrastructure project.

A district may be created only with the approval of two-thirds of voters and permits a special tax to be assessed on its residents. The state law allowing such districts was implemented in 1982 as a way for local governments to bypass the state’s 1978 cap on property tax increases.

A CFD may be created by a city, county, or school district. A CFD allows a local county or city government or school district to sell bonds in order to finance a specific project or service. Projects permitted under California law range from infrastructure improvements to police and fire services, schools, parks, and childcare facilities.
» Landscape and Lighting District (“LLD”): LLDs may be used for installation, maintenance and servicing of landscaping and lighting, through annual assessments on benefiting properties. LLD’s also may provide for construction and maintenance of appurtenant features, including curbs, gutters, walls, sidewalks or paving, and irrigation or drainage facilities. They also may be used to fund and maintain parks above normal park standards as maintained through general fund revenues.

Ordinance No. 2023-10
Exhibit "C"

Page 87 of 92 ends

666
Item16.

ESCONDIDO EAST VALLEY SPECIFIC PLAN | CHAPTER 8.0 IMPLEMENTATION 84

8.2.2 Funding Sources

FEDERAL SOURCES
» Community Development Block Grants (“CDBGs”)
» U.S. Department of Transportation Pedestrian and Bicycle Funding Opportunities
– BUILD: Better Utilizing Investments to Leverage Development Transportation Discretionary Grants
– INFRA: Infrastructure for Rebuilding America Discretionary Grant Program
– TIFIA: Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (loans) – FTA: Federal Transit Administration Capital Funds
– ATI: Associated Transit Improvement (1% set-aside of FTA) – CMAQ: Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program – HSIP: Highway Safety Improvement Program
– NHPP: National Highway Performance Program
– STBG: Surface Transportation Block Grant Program
– Transportation Alternatives Set-Aside (formerly Transportation Alternatives Program)
– RTP: Recreational Trails Program
– SRTS: Safe Routes to School Program / Activities
– PLAN: Statewide Planning and Research (SPR) or Metropolitan Planning funds
– NHTSA 402: State and Community Highway Safety Grant Program – NHTSA 405: National Priority Safety Programs (Nonmotorized safety) – FLTTP: Federal Lands and Tribal Transportation Programs (Federal Lands Access Program, Federal Lands Transportation Program, Tribal Transportation Program, Nationally Significant Federal Lands and Tribal Projects)
– National Park Service: Tax Incentives for Preserving Historic Properties – Preservation Tax Incentives encourage private investment in rehabilitating historic properties to generate jobs and low- and moderate-income housing.
– Our Town: The National Endowment for the Arts’ creative placemaking grants program.

STATE SOURCES
» California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank (“IBANK”) » California Office of Traffic Safety
» Caltrans Transportation Planning Grant Program
» State Transportation Improvement Program
» Highway Safety Improvement Program (“HSIP”)
» Regional Surface Transportation Program
» Active Transportation Program
» Transformative Climate Communities
» Urban Greening Program
» Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities Program

LOCAL SOURCES
Escondido has adopted many citywide plans and programs that focus attention on various types of city programs, services, and facilities. These citywide plans and programs provide another implementation tool to ensure growth and changes occur in a consistent manner with the direction of the General Plan.
» City Council Action Plan
» Municipal Budget
» Capital Improvement Program
» Economic Development Plan
Ordinance No. 2023-10
Exhibit "C"

Page 88 of 92 ends

667
Item16.

ESCONDIDO EAST VALLEY SPECIFIC PLAN | CHAPTER 8.0 IMPLEMENTATION 85

8.3 Implementation Strategy
The list of actions identified in Table 8-1, Implementation Strategy help to ensure that the vision of the EVSP continually drives change and investment.

The Implementation Strategy summarizes each action by topic area and provides a priority timeframe, primary responsibilities and partners, approximate costs, and potential funding sources. Phasing and cost estimates may change over time based on development activity, funding availability, and staffing resources.

Ordinance No. 2023-10
Exhibit "C"

Page 89 of 92 ends

668
Item16.

ESCONDIDO EAST VALLEY SPECIFIC PLAN | CHAPTER 8.0 IMPLEMENTATION 86

POTENTIAL FUNDING

INFRASTRUCTURE FOR REBUILDING AMERICA DISCRETIONARY GRANT PROGRAMTIFIA LOANSSTIPRECREATIONAL TRAIL PROGRAMLOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUNDDEVELOPER CONTRIBUTIONS AND IMPACT FEESFUNDING FROM PRIVATE LAND OWNERHOA FEESLOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUNDCITY OF ESCONDIDOCOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANTS # ACTIONS TIMEFRAME RESPONSIBILITY COST
1 Four Lane Collector Streets Complete Streets Improvements (Various Segments). Include Complete Streets improvements that provide enhanced mobility for bicycles, transit, and pedestrians and support the continual improvement and potential redevelopment of surrounding land uses. Complete Streets address the safe accommodation of all users, including motorists, public transit users, bicyclists, and pedestrians of all ages and abilities. The sections and descriptions included in Chapter 5.0 Mobility outline the specific Complete Streets concepts for Four Lane Collector Streets. 5 – 30 Years Fronting Property
Owner
Greater than
$1 million

X X X X X
2 Improve drainage capacities and elevate properties above the floodplain in accordance with design standards.
0-30 Years Projects that trigger
LOS impacts
Greater than
$1 million
X
3 Implement Transportation Fair Share Contribution Program. 5 – 30 Years Projects that increase ADT
Varies X
4 Implement Level of Service Improvements consistent with the General Plan. 5 – 15 Years Developers; Private Landowners / HOAs
Varies X
5 Complete identified trail connections from local streets and neighborhoods to the Escondido Creek Trail.
5 – 15 Years Developers; HOAs;
Public Works
Department
$50,000 -
$250,000

X X X X
6 Prepare site-specific peak-hour traffic-management plans (as part of development review process).
1 – 5 Years Developers $50,000 -
$250,000
X
7 Promote ride-sharing and carpooling for residents and non-residents through preferential parking designations.
1 – 5 Years Public Works
Department
$250,000 -
$500,000
X
Table 8-1 Implementation Strategy
Ordinance No. 2023-10
Exhibit "C"

Page 90 of 92 ends

669
Item16.

ESCONDIDO EAST VALLEY SPECIFIC PLAN | CHAPTER 8.0 IMPLEMENTATION 87

POTENTIAL FUNDING

Provide businesses and business organizations, such as Chambers of Commerce, with information on iCommute.
1 – 5 Years Community
Development
Department
Less than
$50,000
X
9 Provide information on commuting resources. Install kiosks in East Valley with information on commute alternatives and provide information on websites and newsletters.
1 – 5 Years Community
Development
Department
$50,000 -
$250,000
X
10 Participate in and promote annual regional events and campaigns that encourage commute alternatives to driving alone such as Bike to Work Month, Dump the Pump, Rideshare Week, and Walk and Bike to School Day.
1 – 5 Years Community
Development
Department
Less than
$50,000
X
11 Develop marketing and promotional materials geared to attracting businesses to locate in the East Valley area.
1 – 5 Years Community
Development
Department
Less than
$50,000
X
12 Develop incentive programs, including density bonuses or expedited review for development proposals, to promote investment in the East Valley area. 1 – 5 Years Community
Development
Department
Less than
$50,000
X
13 Complete various park and open space improvements within Park Overlay Zones identified within the Plan Area.
5 – 15 Years Developers;
Recreation Division
Greater than
$1 Million
X X X
14 Complete an audit of existing city infrastructure in the East Valley area (including water, sewer, and dry utilities) to identify opportunities to install sustainable environmental technologies.
1 – 5 Years Public Works
Department
$50,000 -
$250,000
X
15 Install water management technologies in the existing water infrastructure in the East Valley area.
1 – 5 Years Community
Development
Department
$250,000 -
$500,000
X
Ordinance No. 2023-10
Exhibit "C"

Page 91 of 92 ends

670
Item16.

ESCONDIDO EAST VALLEY SPECIFIC PLAN | CHAPTER 5.0 MOBILITY 88 FIGURE 5-5 Local Collector with Two-Way Left Turn Lane
Escondido.org
Ordinance No. 2023-10
Exhibit "C"

Page 92 of 92 ends

671
Item16.

STAFF REPORT
DATE: June 13, 2023
PHG20-0028 - East Valley Specific Plan
PROJECT NUMBER/ NAME: PHG20-0028 / EAST VALLEY SPECIFIC PLAN REQUEST: A request to create a new Specific Plan that would provide a forward-looking vision for the future of the East Valley area in central Escondido ("Project"). The East Valley Specific Plan ("EVSP") is intended to provide guidance for private development and public investment in the EVSP Area, consistent with the adopted Escondido General Plan. The EVSP Area would be rezoned from existing commercial and office uses to mixed-use and high-density residential uses to encourage new housing opportunities, improve economic vibrancy, and allow for flexibility in use and implementation as the EVSP Area changes over time.

PROPERTY SIZE AND LOCATION: The East Valley Specific APPLICANT: City of Escondido Plan area is comprised of approximately 191 acres
generally bound by Escondido Creek to the north; Harding Street to the east, Grand Avenue and East 2nd Street to the south; and North Hickory, South Hickory, and North Fig Streets to the west
GENERAL PLAN / ZONING: General Commercial, Office / PRIMARY REPRESENTATIVE: Adam Finestone, AICP General Commercial, Commercial Professional, Hospital City Planner Professional
DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS REQUESTED: Specific Plan
PREVIOUS ACTIONS: In 2012, the City Council adopted the Escondido General Plan update which identified the East Valley Specific Plan area as a Target Area anticipated for mixed-use development.

CEQA RECOMMENDATION: Certify a Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report prepared for the Project.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Continuance to date-certain
REQUESTED ACTION: Provide input to staff; Continue Public Hearing to June 27, 2023.

CITY COUNCIL HEARING REQUIRED:

REPORT APPROVALS:
_lLYES _NO
Andrew Firestine, Director of Development Services
X Adam Finestone, City Planner
Attachment "1"
672
Item16.

CITY o[ ESCONDIDO

STAFF REPORT

BACKGROUND
A specific plan may be established through the authority granted to the City by California Government Code, Sections 65450 through 65457, as a means of systematically implementing the General Plan. A specific plan, through text and diagram(s), must identify the following:

1. The distribution, location, and extent of the uses of land, including open space, within the area covered by the plan.

2. The proposed distribution, location, and extent and intensity of major components of public and private transportation, sewage, water, drainage, solid waste disposal, energy, and other essential facilities proposed to be located within the area covered by the plan and needed to support the land uses described in the plan.

3. Standards and criteria by which development will proceed, and standards for the conservation, development, and utilization of natural resources, where applicable; and

4. A program of implementation measures including regulations, programs, public works projects, and financing measures necessary to carry out items 1 through 3 above.

In 2012, the Escondido City Council adopted a comprehensive General Plan update. The Land Use and Community Form chapter of that document called out the area along East Valley Parkway from downtown Escondido to just east of Midway Drive, as the East Valley Parkway Target Area ("Target Area") with the goal of revitalizing the area.

The EVSP area encompasses the western half of the Target Area. The current Land Use designations applied to the EVSP area are General Commercial and Office, with a Mixed-Use Overlay which designated the EVSP area for future mixed-use development via application of a Mixed-Use Overlay. The EVSP is intended to implement the Mixed-Use Overlay provided in the General Plan through the creation of a new Specific Plan.

In 2020, the City was awarded grant funding to conduct a Housing and Community Investment Study which included the recently-adopted 6
th cycle Housing Element, a sector feasibility study, and a proposed specific plan for the EVSP area. The Housing Element, among other programmatic goals, established an inventory of suitable sites ("Inventory") necessary for the City to achieve its share of the Regional Housing Needs Allocation ("RHNA"). A significant number of properties identified in the Inventory are within the portion of the Target Area that has a Mixed-Use Overlay designation. Without adoption the EVSP, the City would not be able to achieve its share of the RHNA. Thus, the EVSP serves as the rezoning effort necessary for the Housing Element to be in substantial compliance with housing element law.

SUMMARY OF REQUEST
The City of Escondido developed the draft EVSP in collaboration with residents, local businesses, and property owners, to provide a forward-looking vision for the future of the EVSP area. The EVSP presents goals, policies, design standards, and implementation strategies for categories such as land use, mobility, and parks and open spaces. The EVSP is intended to provide guidance for private development and public investment over the next 12+ years.

Further detail regarding the public outreach efforts taken in support of development of the EVSP can be found in the Public Input section later in this staff report.

The above stated collaborative efforts established the following vision ("Vision") for the EVSP area:

Attachment "1"
673
Item16.

CITY o[ ESCONDIDO

STAFF REPORT
The East Valley Specific Plan incorporates a dynamic mix of land uses, ensuring a variety of residential options, linked together through safe streets and a business corridor. The Plan creates an inviting atmosphere and quality of life with attractive public spaces and connected paths that leverage the Escondido Creek Trail and provide a unique and artistic identity that attracts local residents and North County Inland residents to live, shop, dine, and recreate.

The EVSP vision establishes an all-embracing mission for the Plan Area, while the following goals and policies act as tangible steps or actions towards achieving the vision. The goals are broken out into the different topics or lenses in which to carry out the vision. Each goal is supported by policies that give the City measurable, implementable actions intended to help accomplish that goal. Goals and policies are provided for the following topics: Land Use, Sustainable and Equitable Development, Site and Building Design, Mobility, Parks and Public Realm, Economic Development, Public Services and Infrastructure. Further discussion of the EVSP goals is provided below. A detailed list of policies intended to implement said goals can be found starting on page 7 of the draft EVSP which is included as Attachment 1 to this staff report.

East Valley Specific Plan Goals
Land Use - Policies related to the Land Use goals are intended to address the mix of land uses proposed for the EVSP area. They provide guidance that was utilized to establish the land use plan described later in this report.

1. A self-contained land use pattern that offers a mix of compatible land uses and community spaces.

2. A housing program focused on affordable housing opportunities.

Sustainable & Equitable Development- Policies that would implement the Sustainable and Equitable Development goal serve to create an environment where sustainability is essential to the vibrancy of the EVSP area, and where resources and desirable community amenities are distributed in fair and equitable manner.

1. Environmentally mindful and equitable development standards for the Plan Area choices.

Site & Building Design - Site and Building Design goals speak to the aesthetic quality of the built environment. The goals and their supporting policies address not only architectural design, but the appearance of streetscapes through right-of-way and landscape improvements.

1. Alluring building forms and streetscapes that enhance the physical character and pride of East Valley.

2. Development sites that seamlessly support all right-of-way users.

3. Quality landscaping and greenspace throughout the public realm.

Mobility- Mobility goals recognize the need to provide an array of transportation options for all EVSP area residents and visitors. Safety and efficiency are essential considerations when designing transportation improvements, and alternative modes of transportation should be given consideration in order to address concerns specific to all roadway users.

1. Public and private development that provides safe vehicular circulation while reducing overall vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and promoting alternative modes of transportation.

2. A safe and connective pedestrian and cyclist experience for residents and workers, through quality design, public amenities, and accessible facilities.

3. A transit-oriented community with safe, reliable and timely transit options.

4. More efficient parking strategies.

Attachment "1"
674
Item16.

CITY o[ ESCONDIDO

STAFF REPORT
Parks & Public Realm - Outdoor open space and recreational amenities improve the quality of life for residents and visitors alike. The Parks and Public Realm goal puts an emphasis on engaging with the community to assess their needs, and encourages flexibility in design of public and private open space, which will allow for alterations as needs change over time.

1. Accessible public gathering spaces with social and recreational amenities.

Economic Development - A strong economy can create vibrancy within the community. Policies established to implement the EVSP Economic Development Goal provide a framework by which to do so.

1. Robust economic activity within the Plan Area.

Public Services & Infrastructure - Quality public services and infrastructure are necessary to support growth and accommodate development and private investment. Efficient use and upgrades to existing systems can assist in achieving the Public Services and Infrastructure goal.

1. High-quality services and infrastructure that accommodate projected growth in the Plan Area.

Land Use
As noted earlier in this report, the Escondido General Plan provides a mixed-use overlay for the EVSP area, with a focus on residential growth. Historic development trends and existing land use allowances do not reflect this goal.

Current zoning for the EVSP area accommodates commercial development along the East Valley Parkway and lowerintensity commercial and office uses along East Pennsylvania, East Ohio, and East Grand avenues. Commercial uses continue to be a major focus along East Valley Parkway, however the demand for medical office uses is expected to wane as a result of the closure of Palomar Health's downtown hospital campus. Additionally, a significant amount of lower-density residential development occurred along East Pennsylvania, East Ohio, and East Grand avenues prior to establishment of the current Hospital Professional (H-P) zoning designation for the area, making those properties nonconforming with existing zoning.

A Land Use Plan ("LUP") has been established for the EVSP, which acts as the policy framework for the development and use of land in the EVSP area. The overall goal of the LUP is to encourage new housing opportunities, improve economic vibrancy, and allow for flexibility in the use and implementation as East Valley changes over time, while preserving strongly utilized uses that exist today. Land use designations proposed in the EVSP are intended to implement the mixed-use overlay identified in the General Plan, as highlighted in the Vision for the EVSP.

The LUP, found on page 17 of the EVSP (Attachment 1), envisions a compatible mix of land uses that support the overarching goals and vision for the area. The LUP focuses on maintaining many of the existing uses, while clustering them into different areas to create a more cohesive pattern and design. Additionally, the LUP would establish permitted land uses that would eliminate the nonconforming status for many of the residentially-developed properties noted above.

The LUP is comprised of three land use designations and one overlay zone, and sets forth a transition of intensities throughout the EVSP area. Consistent with the effort to encourage and accommodate residential growth, a vast majority of properties in the EVSP allow residential uses in some form. As shown on the LUP, the majority of properties along East Valley Parkway are designated as Mixed Use, allowing a variety of commercial uses along with residential development at up to 80 dwelling units per acre. The goal here is to create a more urban and vibrant 0 Attachment "1"
675
Item16.

CITY o[ ESCONDIDO

STAFF REPORT
character with an enhanced public realm through outdoor dining, public plazas, and other amenities, and provide transitions to larger commercial properties to the east and downtown to the west. Properties in the southern portion of the EVSP area (those generally along East Pennsylvania, East Ohio, and East Grand avenues), as well as those along Ash Street north of the flood control channel, are designated Urban IV /V, which allows multi-family residential development between 21 and 31 dwelling units per acre, consistent with the Urban IV and Urban V General Plan land use designations. The EVSP Urban IV /V designation differs from the Urban IV and Urban V designations in the General Plan, however, in that the EVSP designation also allows up to 15,000 square feet of retail and office uses per acre, enabling many of the properties to remain in conformance with land use designations. Additional discussion of certain unique provisions of the EVSP related to residential uses is provided later in this report.

A General Commercial land use designation is provided at the corner of East Valley Parkway and Ash Street, and on the southwest corner of East Valley Parkway and Harding Street. These properties would retain land use allowances highly similar to those allows in the General Commercial zone, and have been designated as such in order to encourage more compact commercial footprints and create an activity node proximate to shopping, transit, and residences.

A Park Overlay Zone is also identified on the LUP, with the goal of providing up to 25 acres of parkland in the EVSP area. In addition to linear parks envisioned for residential alleys, the Park Overlay Zone has been applied to three areas. Two of those areas were strategically selected because they would create the greatest expansion of land, both inside and outside the EVSP area, within ¼ mile of a park. The third was selected because it is a City-owned parcel (owned by the Utilities Department), though it does not significantly expand the amount of land within ¼ mile of a park. Additionally, while the Park Overlay Zone is only shown in the areas described here (totaling approximately 25 acres), it should be noted that parks are not precluded elsewhere in the EVSP area.

Residential Land Uses
As noted above, the EVSP includes some innovative provisions that would encourage higher-density development on Urban IV/V and Mixed-Use properties. The goal of these provisions is to ensure that housing can be developed at the densities and affordability levels provided for in the Housing Element.

Density Transfer Program - Similar to the Downtown Specific Plan, the EVSP contains a Density Transfer Program ("DTP") in order to maintain the full residential build-out potential of the EVSP area. The DTP would enable the City to transfer densities from undeveloped or underutilized properties (sending areas) within the EVSP area to other properties in the EVSP area (receiving areas) to enable a developing property to increase its density beyond what current zoning would permit. The transferred density will be held in a Density Credit Pool ("Pool") administered by the City.

As part of the development review process, and prior to issuance of any permits for a project, properties that are not being built to their full potential would be required, as a condition of project approval, to deposit the unused density (those units that could be built based on the underlying land use designation but are not) into the Pool. This would be accomplished through recordation of a restriction on the title of that property which would preclude further development without authorization of the City. Units deposited into the Pool would then be available for use by other developers in order to increase the density of their projects beyond what would otherwise be permitted on the subject property. The request for an increase in density would require City Council approval of a Planned Development Permit. Provided there is adequate density available in the Pool, there would be no ceiling Attachment "1"
676
Item16.

CITY o[ ESCONDIDO

STAFF REPORT
on the number of units that could be requested, and each development would be scrutinized through the entitlement and environmental review process. Properties that have deposited their excess density into the Pool would be eligible to claim that density back through the same process as any other development. (As a point of reference, at the time of this writing, the DTP Pool for the Downtown Specific Plan contains 922 units that could be allocated to developing properties.)
Target Production Point - The EVSP establishes a Target Production Point ("TPP") for each land use designation which permits residential development. The TPP is a density within the density range for each designation that provides realistic site development capacities that are likely to yield smaller housing units at a higher density that become more affordable by design. The Urban IV /V land use designation has a density allowance that ranges from 21- 30 dwelling units per acre. The TPP for the Urban IV/V designation is 25 dwelling units per acre. The Mixed Use land use designation has a density allowance that ranges from 30-80 dwelling units per acre. The TPP for the Mixed Use designation is 45 dwelling units per acre. For the purposes of RHNA, 25 and 45 dwelling units per acre are the densities utilized to allocate moderate income {120% of the county's area median income, adjusted for family size) and lower-income (80% of the county's area median income, adjusted for household size) units, respectively.

To ensure that the EVSP achieves a build-out that accommodates RHNA, especially for lower- and moderate- income households, residential development would not be permitted below the TPP unless a fee in lieu is received for onsite production. The TPP in-lieu fee would be paid into an applicable housing trust fund and used (along with other local funding sources) to finance affordable housing developed off-site. The per-unit fee shall be deemed a comparable affordable unit contribution towards lower or moderate income households. The TPP in-lieu fee is paid at the time of building permit issuance, or for conversion of existing apartments to condominiums prior to the recordation of a final map and/or issuance of a certificate of compliance, at a rate established by resolution of the City Council. The goal of the TPP is to encourage housing production by incentivizing construction at densities sufficient to achieve the City's RHNA. An in-lieu fee is not required for residential development built at or above the TPP.

Development Standards and Design Guidelines
The EVSP includes development standards and design guidelines intended to help achieve the vision for the EVSP by setting standards and guidelines for future development. The standards and guidelines are intended to complement other Citywide policy documents such as the Escondido Municipal Code, and provides regulations for a variety of design topics such as setbacks, landscaping, and parking. The EVSP provides development standards and guidelines that are intended to supplement the City's provisions with more specific guidance for how to achieve the unique vision for the Plan Area. The design guidelines and standards apply to future public improvements and private development in the Plan Area. They address the design of new buildings and renovations to existing structures. Where development standards are not provided, the most-relevant standards of the Escondido Zoning Code would be applicable.

Building conversion to new use - Any project looking to convert an existing building to a new use will be subject to design review to assess appropriateness of the proposed use and any proposed changes in relation to the area, the building, and the site. All conversions will also need to meet applicable provisions of the California Building Code.

Attachment "1"
677
Item16.

CITY o[ ESCONDIDO

STAFF REPORT
Open Space - Public (common) and private open space is required for each new development. These open spaces shall include elements such as shade, seating, water features, and public art. New development or redevelopment of residential dwelling units would be required to provide open space as follows:

1. 250 square feet per dwelling unit including:
a. Minimum of 150 square feet per unit as common open space b. At least 50% of units required to have 50 square feet of private open space (balconies/decks/patios/etc.)
c. Dedication of land for linear park(s) and areas along creek may be provided as part of common open space

2. Orientation toward streets/linear parks/creek

3. Benches and outdoor furniture
Landscaping - Landscaping is required in both on a project site and in the public right-of-way adjacent to it. New development or redevelopment of residential dwelling units would be required to provide landscaping as follows:

1. On-site - minimum requirement
a. Urban IV /V: 35% of site
b. Mixed Use: 20% of site
c. General Commercial: 30% of site

2. Right-of-Way
a. Street tree spacing: 20'
b. 15% - 25% canopy coverage at maturity
c. Stormwater basins prohibited ROW (must be on private property unless part of public works project)

3. Vertical L/S (vines/trellises/etc.) along blank walls Setbacks - Building setbacks vary by land use district. Special consideration is also given to setbacks from the creek.

The following table provides a summary of setback requirements as provided in the EVSP:

URBAN IV/V MIXED USE GENERAL COMMERCIAL
FRONT 10' 15' 15'
REAR 10' 10' 10'
ALLEY (SIDE OR REAR) 5' 5' N/A
SIDE (INTERNAL) 0' 0' 0'
SIDE (STREET) 10' 15' 15'
CREEK TRAIL 20' to building 20' to building N/A
10' to fence/wall 10' to fence/wall
Building Height- Similar to setbacks, maximum building height varies by land use district as well. In addition, height is also limited based on geographical location, such that taller structures are permitted along the creek trail and in the Mixed Use and General Commercial districts, with shorter structures permitted in the Urban IV /V district. The map on page 67 of the draft EVSP (Figure 7-2 Building Height) shows this geographical distribution. Regardless of location, the maximum height permitted in along the creek trail and in the Mixed Use and General Commercial districts is 75 feet. The maximum in the Urban IV /V district is 55 feet.

Attachment "1"
678
Item16.

CITY o[ ESCONDIDO

STAFF REPORT
Ground-Floor Residential Uses - The EVSP provides for flexibility in uses, such that all properties in the Urban IV /V and Mixed Use districts are permitted to have commercial uses on the ground floor. While ground-floor residential uses may make sense today, it is important to consider the long-range vision of the EVSP when considering building design. As such, the following requirements have been put in place for properties on along East Grand Avenue, East Valley Parkway, and North Ash Street ("Retail Corners & Frontages") shown on page 64 of the draft document):

1. Retail-ready ground floor
a. Minimum interior height of 16 feet
b. Minimum depth (street-facing unit) of 25 feet or 25% of the building depth (whichever is greater) c. Oversized storefront windows

2. Built to commercial building code standards
Parking - The EVSP includes a unique parking provision found nowhere else in Escondido. For residential development, the EVSP establishes parking maximums which limit the number of spaces permitted on-site. While it maintains a minimum of one covered parking space per unit, it limits parking to no more than 1.25 spaces per one-bedroom unit and 1.75 spaces per two-bedroom unit, plus 0.3 guest parking spaces per unit. Units with three or more bedrooms are allowed up to two parking spaces, with an additional 0.5 guest parking spaces per unit.

Parking for non-residential land uses is generally required to be consistent with the off-street parking provisions of the Escondido Zoning Code, with exceptions permitted in certain circumstances (TDM program, incentive for providing public open space, etc.).

Parking spaces for electric vehicles (EVs) are required at a rate greater than currently stipulated in the California Building Code. At least 10% of all parking spaces for new commercial development shall be designated for EV parking with Level 2 (or better) charging stations. Residential developments are required to provide EV space for every 10 units. (It should be noted, however, that it is likely that the California Building Code will increase EV parking requirements beyond what is currently required by the EVSP before the 2035 horizon date of the EVSP.) Provisions for loading spaces (delivery and ride-share pick-up/drop-off) and bicycle parking are also identified in the EVSP.

Parks and Public Realm
The vision for EVSP incorporates an active open space network, attractive public spaces, connected paths, parkland, and open space. This comprehensive and interconnected parkland network will provide a variety of active and passive recreational opportunities which will enhance the overall quality of life, community health, and wellness.

Park Overlay Zones - The EVSP establishes Park Overlay Zones intended to integrate public parkland and outdoor spaces within proximity to schools, transit, trails and activity nodes. The Park Overlay Zones span over multiple blocks in various areas throughout the Plan Area. The purpose of designating larger areas instead of individual parcels is to allow for flexibility in implementation of park facilities. The Park Overlay Zones act as recommended, or priority areas, for parks and public spaces within the Plan Area.

The placement of two of the Park Overlay Zones has been strategically identified in an effort to broaden the geographic area within 0.25-mile (or 5-minute walk) of a park, as shown on page 23 of the draft EVSP. (The third Park Overlay Zone is a parcel currently owned by the City of Escondido's Utilities Department.) Linear Parks in alleys in the Urban IV/V district are also identified as part of the Park Overlay Zone.

Attachment "1"
679
Item16.

CITY o[ ESCONDIDO

STAFF REPORT
The Park Overlay Zones do not establish what type of park or amenities shall occur within that zone. Rather, it specifies potential amenities appropriate for certain types of parks and public outdoor spaces. These spaces are identified as Pocket Parks, Neighborhood Parks, and Linear Parks. Additional areas described in the draft EVSP are public outdoor spaces and the public right-of-way. Amenities appropriate for each type of park and open space area are provided on pages 28 and 29 of the draft document.

Public Open Space Incentive Program - The EVSP identifies 25 acres of land within the Park Overlay Zone. It is acknowledged, however, that it is likely that only 10 acres of parkland would be developed. Because the City does not currently own enough land to develop this amount of parkland, an incentive program has been established to encourage dedication of property for public parks. This could include flexibility in development standards, fee reductions, use of units in the density credit pool, and other mechanisms, and would require approval of a Planned Development Permit by the City Council.

Mobility
The EVSP is designed for residents and visitors to move about the community safely and efficiently. The Plan Area is well connected to the surrounding destinations in Escondido; conveniently located east of Downtown Escondido, approximately one mile from the Escondido Transit Center, with the Escondido Creek Trail immediately accessible.

Although visitors and residents of the Plan Area primarily rely on private automobiles, public transit and nonmotorized transportation opportunities are available in the form of buses and a multi-use trail.

Bicycle Network - As part of the robust active transportation network envisioned in the EVSP, a significant bicycle network is identified, consistent with the City's 2012 Bicycle Master Plan. It is focused along the Escondido Creek Trail, which provides an east/west Class I bikeway through the City. While no other parts of the bicycle network currently exist, with the exception of a short portion of Class Ill bike route on East Washington Avenue, the network recommended by the EVSP includes Class II bike lanes on East Grand Avenue, East Valley Parkway, North Ash Street, and portions of North Date and North Fig streets. Class II bike lanes provide a minimum five-foot striped bike line, with a preference for six feet and an additional two-foot buffer where roadway width is available. The network also identifies Class Ill bike routes North Beech, North Cedar, and North Elm streets, and portions of North Date and North Fig streets. Class Ill bike routes are suggested bicycle routes marked by a series of signs and/or sharrows designating a preferred route between destinations such as schools, workplaces, and residential and shopping areas.

A safe and secure place to park and store a bicycle is also necessary in order to expand the use of this mode of active transportation, especially as a result of the ever-increasing costs of bikes brought on by the influx of e-bikes.

The EVSP makes provisions for both short-term and long-term bicycle parking facilities, differentiated by the location and duration of stay at the destination. Short-term parking typically consists of bike racks to which one wheel and the frame of a bicycle can be secured, and is appropriate for retail and personal service destinations.

Long-term bicycle parking consists of fully enclosed lockers or secure storage rooms within a garage or other portion of a building, and is appropriate for residential projects and offices where employees are anticipated to be on-site for more than a few hours at a time.

Pedestrian Network- Pedestrian facilities in the Plan Area include the aforementioned Escondido Creek Trail, and sidewalks along all public roadways. The General Plan envisions a pedestrian-friendly environment where public spaces, including sidewalks and off-street paths, offer a level of convenience, safety, and attractiveness to the pedestrian that will encourage and reward the choice to walk. To support this vision, the EVSP includes a network Attachment "1"
680
Item16.

CITY o[ ESCONDIDO

STAFF REPORT
of sidewalks, trails and linear parks organized around the grid network of public roadways. Policies intended to improve pedestrian comfort and mobility, such as mid-block pedestrian crossings and installation of sidewalk amenities, are also provided for in the EVSP.

Public Transportation - Public transit is an important component of the transportation network, both locally and regionally. The Escondido Transit Center is less than on mile west of the EVSP area, and numerous bus routes run either through or near the EVSP area. A shuttle system is also envisioned for the area, which would connect the EVSP area to the transit center. The EVSP includes policies that promote public transit ridership through a collaborative effort between the City and North County Transit District to increase frequency and efficiency of transit service.

Transportation Demand Management ("TDM")-A TOM program consists of a variety of measures that can be used to mitigate the transportation impacts associated with new development. By providing increased transportation choices, a TOM program is intended to reduce overall vehicle miles traveled ("VMT") through a combination of public and private measures. In addition, a TOM strategy typically increases the use of active modes of transportation, having the ancillary benefit of improving public health.

Some measures that can be implemented by public agencies as part of a TOM program include:

1. Develop and implement a Safe Routes to Transit Plan.

2. Participate in the City's commuter program that includes subsidized transit passes, preferred parking spots for carpool or vanpool, bike racks, showers on-site, teleworking, and flexible work schedules.

3. Encourage employers to offer programs, facilities, and incentives to their employees that would promote carpooling, transit use, and use of other alternative modes. Provide businesses and business organizations, such as Chambers of Commerce, with information on iCommute.

4. Provide information on commuting resources. Install a kiosk with information on commute alternatives and provide information on Web sites and newsletters

5. Participate in and promote annual regional events and campaigns that encourage commute alternatives to driving alone, such as Bike to Work Month, Dump the Pump, Rideshare Week, and Walk and Bike to School Day.

TOM measures can also be beneficial components of new private development projects. Residential projects can provide transit passes to tenants and high-speed internet to increase telecommuting, and can provide bicycle parking greater than that required by the EVSP. Non-residential projects can incentivize use of public transportation and/or carpooling, and promote telecommuting options as well. They can also ensure that there is sufficient bicycle parking, and can provide "end-of-trip" facilities such as showers, lockers, and changing rooms.

PROJECT ANALYSIS
General Plan Conformance
land Use and Community Form- The Land Use Element is one of eight elements required by state law to be included in California General Plans. The Element guides the desired pattern of growth, development and change in the community. The purpose of the Element is to ensure that a balance of residential, employment, commercial, recreational, civic/cultural and open space land uses are provided at appropriate intensities, locations and combinations to enhance Escondido's sustainability.

Attachment "1"
681
Item16.

CITY o[ ESCONDIDO

STAFF REPORT
In the Land Use Element, the EVSP area currently has land use designations of General Commercial ("GC") and Office ("O"). According to Figure 11-6 of the General Plan, the GC designation allows "a broad range of retail and service activities, including local-serving commercial, community shopping/office complexes, automobile sales and service, eating and drinking establishments, entertainment facilities." The O designation is intended for "administrative and professional offices; business support services; financial, insurance, and real estate services; supportive commercial uses such as restaurants" as well as "medical offices and health care services, short-term convalescent and longterm care facilities, research labs, medical supply, and similar uses." The EVSP area is also located in the East Valley Parkway Target Area, and has a mixed-use overlay on it. The language in the Target Area description directs the City to "establish a mixed use overlay between Palomar Hospital and Ash Street to focus residential growth ... " and the corresponding Figure 1/-27 has a cross-hatched overlay extending beyond Ash Street, to Harding Street. Since the text and the figure are inconsistent, the EVSP area was established using the larger of the two depictions in order to create a larger and more comprehensive specific plan, providing for increased development opportunities.

Adoption of the EVSP would also include an amendment to the General Plan. The amendment would address several related items:

1. Change the underlying land use designations from GC and 0, to Specific Plan Area ("SPA")

2. Revise the East Valley Parkway Target Area text to appropriately reference the newly adopted EVSP

3. Add a figure and text describing the location, size, current status, adopted plan details, and guiding principles for the SPA

4. Revise Figure 1/-8 to identify the EVSP area as "SPA 16"

5. Additional minor revisions for consistency (re-numbering of pages, figures, etc.) Proposition S - In 1998, voters of the City approved Proposition S, which established and affirmed various General Plan policies limiting the intensification of residential land uses. In addition, Proposition S specified that certain future amendments to the General Plan which affect the intent of the policies established and reaffirmed by Proposition S would require approval by vote of the public. In particular, Proposition S requires voter approval of any General Plan Amendment which would increase residential densities, change, alter or increase the General Plan Residential Land Use categories, or change any residential designation to a commercial or industrial designation on any property designated as Rural, Estate, Suburban, or Urban.

What Proposition S did not do, however, was limit the change of commercial (or industrial) land use designations to residential land use designations. This determination was affirmed by the City Council via Resolution No. 2021- 109 on July 14, 2021, which stated, in part, "(a) change in General Plan land use designation from a non-residential designation to a residential designation does not trigger Proposition S." The change proposed by the creation of the EVSP would change non-residential land use designations (CG and O) to a specific plan designation (SPA 16) in order to both maintain the existing commercial land-use ability and allow residential land uses. Thus, the adoption of the EVSP would not be a violation of Proposition S.

Housing Element - To ensure adequate housing can be developed in a jurisdiction, a Housing Element is required as part of the General Plan. The Housing Element has two main purposes: 1) to provide an assessment of both current and projected housing needs and constraints in meeting these needs; and 2) to state "goals, policies, quantified objectives, financial resources, and scheduled programs for the preservation, improvement, and development of housing." (Gov't Code § 65583.) Thus, a Housing Element has become the official "planning" Attachment "1"
682
Item16.

CITY o[ ESCONDIDO

STAFF REPORT
response to the need to provide housing and housing-related services for all economic segments of the community.

The City Council adopted the 6
th cycle Housing Element on March 22, 2023. In a letter dated May 24, 2023, the California Department of Housing and Community Development ("HCD") determined that the adopted element substantially meets statutory requirements and that it will comply with state housing element law when rezoning through the EVSP is completed, adopted, submitted, and approved by HCD.

East Valley Parkway Area Plan
The East Valley Parkway Area Plan ("EVPAP") serves as a zoning overlay district that covers properties along East Valley Parkway from Hickory Street on the west to Citrus Avenue on the east. The mission of the EVPAP is to develop and implement a comprehensive strategy for the revitalization of the physical character and economic health of East Valley Parkway businesses and community. A significant portion of the EVSP area lies within the boundaries of the EVPAP. The EVPAP is focused on commercial land uses and does not serve to implement the mixed-use overlay in the East Valley Parkway Target Area as provided in the General Plan. In order to remove any conflict between the EVPAP and the EVSP, the portion of the EVSP that is within the EVPAP would be removed from the EVPAP concurrent with the adoption of the EVSP.

FISCAL ANAL VSIS
The EVSP provides a framework to enable private development in the East Valley in areas currently characterized by lower-density and lower-intensity commercial and residential uses. As redevelopment occurs over time, development impact fees will be collected to pay for public improvements necessary to serve the area. In addition, impacts directly attributed to the construction of a specific project or projects will be required to construct those improvements (or pay their fair-share contribution toward the cost of construction). These requirements are typical of all development throughout the City, however it is important to note that impact fees collected from projects in the EVSP area will stay in the area.

Residential projects shall also fund the on-going operational cost of providing municipal services required for the project, through either an agreement to form or annex into a Community Facilities District or the establishment of another lawful funding mechanism reasonably accepted by the City.

ENVIRONMENTIAL ANALYSIS
A draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Report ("PEIR") was prepared for the EVSP and identified potential impacts to air quality, biological resources, cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources, and noise. The environmental analysis concluded that mitigation for impacts to air quality, biological resources, and cultural and tribal cultural resources would reduce them to a less than significant level, however impacts to noise would remain significant and unavoidable. The draft PEIR was made available for a 45-day public review period from March 30, 2023, through May 15, 2023, and two public comments were received. A final PEIR is being prepared which will include responses to the two comments received, findings of fact, a statement of overriding considerations, and a mitigation monitoring and reporting program. The final PEIR and will be presented to the Commission for consideration at along with the EVSP at the June 27, 2023, Planning Commission meeting.

Attachment "1"
683
Item16.

CITY o[ ESCONDIDO

STAFF REPORT

PUBLIC OUTREACH AND ENGAGEMENT
As noted earlier in this report, work on the East Valley Specific Plan began in 2020 as part of a larger Housing and Community Investment Study ("HCIS") which included a Sector Feasibility Study, the Housing Element update, and the East Valley Specific Plan. At that time, the City established a webpage for the program (https://www.escondido.org/hcis) to solicit input and provide updates on the status of all three HCIS documents.

Additional early outreach efforts included virtual meetings on July 23 and October 7, 2020. Mailers were sent to property owners, residents, and business owners, in English and Spanish, ahead of the meetings, and translation services were available at the meetings. Mailers were also sent out to business owners in August of 2020 (English and Spanish) specifically related to an online business survey.

The first draft of the EVSP was posted on the HCIS webpage in March 2021, and the document was discussed at Planning Commission meetings on the March 23, July 13, and October 21, of that year. At that time, focus on the HCIS work program turned toward the Housing Element which had been adopted by the City Council but failed to achieve certification from HCD. Because the EVSP is intended to serve as the rezoning program to achieve compliance with housing element law and enable HCD to certify the City's Housing Element, it was important that the EVSP be developed in conjunction with the Housing Element. The updated Housing Element was adopted by the City Council in March of this year, and, while there was some discussion of the EVSP during outreach efforts and public hearings ahead of that adoption, no outreach specific to the EVSP took place.

In March of this year, a revised draft of the EVSP was made available for public review concurrently with the draft PEIR described above. A public hearing notice was published ahead of this public hearing, and another notice will be published ahead of the June 27, 2023, public hearing. Notices will be mailed to property owners, residents, and business owners ahead of the June 27, 2023, public hearing, and publication and mailing will occur prior to the City Council's public hearing, tentatively scheduled for July 19, 2023.

CONCLUSION AND REQUESTED ACTION
Prior to bringing the EVSP forward for Planning Commission consideration and formal recommendation to the City Council, staff would like to obtain feedback from the Planning Commission on the EVSP. Staff has noted certain areas of the document that warrant minor revisions and will present those to the Commission at the meeting. Staff will also be asking the Commission for areas that they believe warrant revisions as well. It is unlikely that significant revisions can be made at this time, however input from the commission will be considered as the final draft is prepared. A summary of changes will be presented at the June 27th public hearing.

ATTACHMENTS

1. East Valley Specific Plan (Final Draft, March 30, 2023) Attachment "1"
684
Item16.

DATE: June 20, 2023
PHG20-0028 – East Valley Specific Plan
PROJECT NUMBER / NAME: PHG20-0028 / EAST VALLEY SPECIFIC PLAN REQUEST: A request to create a new Specific Plan that would provide a forward-looking vision for the future of the East Valley area in central Escondido (“Project”). The East Valley Specific Plan (“EVSP”) is intended to provide guidance for private development and public investment in the EVSP Area, consistent with the adopted Escondido General Plan. The EVSP Area would be rezoned from existing commercial and office uses to mixed-use and high-density residential uses to encourage new housing opportunities, improve economic vibrancy, and allow for flexibility in use and implementation as the EVSP Area changes over time.

PROPERTY SIZE AND LOCATION: The East Valley Specific
Plan area is comprised of approximately 191 acres
generally bound by Escondido Creek to the north; Harding Street to the east, Grand Avenue and East 2nd Street to the south; and North Hickory, South Hickory, and North Fig Streets to the west
APPLICANT: City of Escondido
GENERAL PLAN / ZONING: General Commercial, Office /
General Commercial, Commercial Professional, Hospital
Professional
PRIMARY REPRESENTATIVE: Adam Finestone, AICP
City Planner
DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS REQUESTED: Specific Plan
PREVIOUS ACTIONS: In 2012, the City Council adopted the Escondido General Plan update which identified the East Valley Specific Plan area as a Target Area anticipated for mixed-use development.

CEQA RECOMMENDATION: Certify a Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report prepared for the Project.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Continuance to date-certain
REQUESTED ACTION: Provide input to staff; Continue Public Hearing to June 27, 2023.

CITY COUNCIL HEARING REQUIRED: _X_YES ___NO
REPORT APPROVALS: Andrew Firestine, Director of Development Services X Adam Finestone, City Planner

STAFF REPORT
Attachment "2"
685
Item16.

SUMMARY OF REQUEST
At its June 13, 2023, meeting, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and received a presentation on the draft East Valley Specific Plan (“EVSP”). A copy of the staff report from that meeting is included as Attachment 1 to this staff report for reference. Input was provided by the commission on issues related to open space, landscaping, setbacks, parking, and requirements for ground-floor residential construction. The Commission wished to discuss additional aspects of the draft EVSP and continued the hearing on the item to a special meeting called for 6 p.m. on June 20, 2023.

CONCLUSION
Prior to bringing the EVSP forward for Planning Commission consideration and formal recommendation to the City Council, staff would like to obtain additional feedback from the Planning Commission on the EVSP. Staff will utilize the information provided by the Commission to make final edits to the EVSP. The revised document will be brought back to the Planning Commission on June 27, 2023, for formal recommendation to the City Council. The City Council is scheduled to consider the EVSP at its July 19, 2023, meeting.

ATTACHMENTS

1. June 13, 2023, Planning Commission staff report
Attachment "2"
686
Item16.

STAFF REPORT
DATE: June 27, 2023
PHG20-0028 – East Valley Specific Plan
PROJECT NUMBER / NAME: PHG20-0028 / EAST VALLEY SPECIFIC PLAN REQUEST: A request to create a new Specific Plan that would provide a forward-looking vision for the future of the East Valley area in central Escondido (“Project”). The East Valley Specific Plan (“EVSP”) is intended to provide guidance for private development and public investment in the EVSP Area, consistent with the adopted Escondido General Plan. The EVSP Area would be rezoned from existing commercial and office uses to mixed-use and high-density residential uses to encourage new housing opportunities, improve economic vibrancy, and allow for flexibility in use and implementation as the EVSP Area changes over time.

CEQA RECOMMENDATION: Certify a Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report prepared for the Project.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Continuance to date-certain
REQUESTED ACTION: Continue Public Hearing to July 6, 2023.

CITY COUNCIL HEARING REQUIRED: _X_YES ___NO
REPORT APPROVALS: Andrew Firestine, Director of Development Services X Adam Finestone, City Planner
Attachment "3"
687
Item16.

At the conclusion of the June 13, 2023, meeting, the Planning Commission called a special meeting for 6 p.m. on June 20, 2023, to discuss additional aspects of the draft EVSP. A copy of the staff report from the June 20, 2023, meeting, and a memorandum distributed at that meeting, are included as Attachments 2 and 3, respectively, to this report. Issues discussed at that meeting are identified in the memorandum (Attachment 3).

Staff is currently working with its consultants to make revisions to the EVSP to address the issues discussed at the June 13 and June 20, 2023 Planning Commission meeting. At the June 27, 2023, Planning Commission hearing, Planning Division staff will provide a summary of the EVSP, including a list of topics areas that are being revised. The final draft EVSP will be published online as soon as it is available.

PUBLIC INPUT
Staff mailed public hearing notices to all property owners, residents, and business owners within the EVSP area on June 12, 2023. As of the publication of this report, staff has received seven phone calls and four written comments in response to said notice. The written comments have been included as Attachment 4 to this report. Most of the phone calls were seeking general clarification on what is being proposed, with specific interest in changes to land use allowances. Five of the seven callers expressed support for the changes. The other two callers, as well as the three of the four written comments, expressed opposition to the changes. (Note that one of the callers is also the author of one of the three emails.) The final written comment came from a public agency and addresses coordination of efforts between the City and the agency.

Public outreach and engagement efforts during the preparation of the EVSP are discussed in the June 13, 2023, Planning Commission staff report (Attachment 1).

CONCLUSION AND REQUESTED ACTION
The June 27, 2023, Planning Commission public hearing provides an opportunity for the public to hear a presentation on the EVSP. It also gives staff the opportunity to provide an update on the status of changes being made to the EVSP in response to comments and input received from the Planning Commission over the last few weeks. At the conclusion of the public hearing, staff requests that the Planning Commission continue the item to a special Planning Commission meeting on July 6, 2023, at 7 p.m.

ATTACHMENTS

1. June 13, 2023, Planning Commission staff report

2. June 20, 2023, Planning Commission staff report

3. June 20, 2023, Planning Commission memorandum

4. Public Comments
Attachment "3"
688
Item16.

DATE: July 6, 2023
PHG20-0028 – East Valley Specific Plan
PROJECT NUMBER / NAME: PHG20-0028 / EAST VALLEY SPECIFIC PLAN REQUEST: A request to create a new Specific Plan that would provide a forward-looking vision for the future of the East Valley area in central Escondido (“Project”). The East Valley Specific Plan (“EVSP”) is intended to provide guidance for private development and public investment in the EVSP Area, consistent with the adopted Escondido General Plan. The EVSP Area would be rezoned from existing General Commercial (CG), Hospital Professional (HP), and Commercial Professional (CP) to Specific Plan (S-P), allowing mixed-use and high-density residential uses to encourage new housing opportunities, improve economic vibrancy, and allow for flexibility in use and implementation as the EVSP Area changes over time.

PROPERTY SIZE AND LOCATION: The East Valley Specific
Plan area is comprised of approximately 191 acres
generally bound by Escondido Creek to the north; Harding Street to the east, Grand Avenue and East 2nd Street to the south; and North Hickory, South Hickory, and North Fig Streets to the west
APPLICANT: City of Escondido
GENERAL PLAN / ZONING: General Commercial, Office /
General Commercial, Commercial Professional, Hospital
Professional
PRIMARY REPRESENTATIVE: Adam Finestone, AICP
City Planner
DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS REQUESTED: Specific Plan and Rezone PREVIOUS ACTIONS: In 2012, the City Council adopted the Escondido General Plan update which identified the East Valley Specific Plan area as a Target Area anticipated for mixed-use development.

CEQA RECOMMENDATION: Certify a Final Program Environmental Impact Report prepared for the Project.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Recommend City Council approval
REQUESTED ACTION: Adopt Resolution Nos. 2023-11 and 2023-12 CITY COUNCIL HEARING REQUIRED: _X_YES ___NO
REPORT APPROVALS: Andrew Firestine, Director of Development Services X Adam Finestone, City Planner

STAFF REPORT
Attachment "4"
689
Item16.

SUMMARY OF REQUEST
At its June 13, 2023, meeting, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and received a presentation on the draft East Valley Specific Plan (“EVSP”). The staff report from that meeting, included as Attachment 1 to this report, provides a thorough summary of the draft EVSP as it existed at that time. At that meeting, input was provided by the commission on issues related to open space, landscaping, setbacks, parking, and requirements for ground-floor residential construction. At the conclusion of the June 13, 2023, meeting, the Planning Commission called a special meeting for 6 p.m. on June 20, 2023, to discuss additional aspects of the draft EVSP. A copy of the staff report from the June 20, 2023, meeting, and a memorandum distributed at that meeting, are included as Attachments 2 and 3, respectively, to this report. Issues discussed at that meeting are identified in the memorandum (Attachment 3). On June 27, 2023, the Planning Commission held another public hearing and received another presentation on the status of the EVSP including additional details related to parking and open space. The staff report from that meeting is included as Attachment 4 to this report. At the conclusion of that meeting, the Planning Commission continued the hearing to a special meeting on July 6, 2023.

Staff has taken the input received from the Planning Commission into advisement and prepared revisions to the draft EVSP. The revised draft of the EVSP is provided as Exhibit B to Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-12, which itself is included as Attachment 7 to this report, Revisions to Draft East Valley Specific Plan
Revisions to the EVSP were both substantive and non-substantive. Non-substantive revisions addressed items such as punctuation, pagination, typographical errors, formatting, etc. Substantive revisions are described briefly in the table below, which includes references to where in the EVSP document that the revisions were made. As a result of the robust discussion on certain topics at Planning Commission meetings over the past several weeks, a detailed description of revisions that have been made in those topic areas follows the table.

PAGE # TOPIC REVISION(S)
5 Document approval Inserted City Council ordinance number to be used when EVSP is considered by City Council on July 19, 2023
12 Mobility Policies Revised Mobility Policy 2.2 to “encourage” rather than “require” internal pedestrian connections between properties
17 Map legend Removed “Preferred” prior to “Land Use Plan” 18 Density Transfer
Process
Revised language related to density allowance to reference “underlying land use designation” instead of “current zoning”
21 Document horizon Revised two locations to identify the accurate 12-plus year horizon date for EVSP projections
32 Roadway
classifications
Added language to specify that classifications described in the EVSP are based on the current General Plan designations and are subject to change 48-49 Parking
requirements
Removed maximum parking allowance and adjusted minimum requirements for residential uses; combined certain residential land use categories; clarified non-residential parking requirements to be maximum allowed; clarified references to Escondido Zoning Code; created allowance for modifications to requirements
50 Supplemental
parking standards
Provided additional language regarding reduction in vehicle emissions.

Simplified requirement for EV charging spaces by referencing California Building Code.

Attachment "4"
690
Item16.
51 Supplement parking
standards
Removed maximum bicycle and loading space columns; removed electric vehicle parking column; adjusted and provided limitations on minimum bicycle and loading space requirements; removed requirement for bicycle parking from units that have private garages
Removed Parking Exceptions Removed Parking Exceptions section 59 Precedence of
development
standards
Specified that development standards contained in the EVSP shall take precedence when conflicts exist between the EVSP and the municipal code 59 Open space
definitions
Provided definitions for “public open space,” “common open spaces,” and “private open spaces”
59-60 Open space
development
standards
Changed minimum open space requirement to 200 sf per unit; allowed reduction in to 125 sf of open space per unit for projects that meet TPP; clarified requirements for “public,” “common,” and “private” open spaces; 63 Development
standards table
Revised Table 7-1 to reduce certain setbacks and landscaping requirements; allow landscaping within setbacks to count toward the minimum landscape requirement; added information regarding locational dependence for building height in Urban IV/V district
65-69 Land use allowance Modifications to Table 7-2: referenced Escondido Zoning Code for ADU development standards; changed second hand stores and thrift shops to prohibited uses in all districts; allowed consignment stores as conditional use in CG district; changed for-fee EV charging stations to permitted use (as primary use); clarified allowances for animal care, daycare, and boarding; allowed duplicating services in MU district; clarified educational use allowances; included publicly accessible open space on private property as private parks; increased restrictions on automotive services; changed firearms dealers and sporting goods stores which sell ammunition and firearms to conditional uses in CG and MU districts;
70-71 Accessory use
allowance
Changed car or bike sharing services to permitted uses; restricted fleet vehicle storage; modified allowances for wireless facilities
80 Historic district Removed information regarding review of projects within the downtown historic district
80 Initial meetings Clarified that initial meetings are required prior to project submittal 80 Minor projects Specified that review required for minor projects is design review; removed staff referral to historic preservation commission and planning commission; 80 Major projects Clarified review process
80 Building permits Clarified process when building permits are required Removed Historic district Removed Figure 8-1 Historic District Map 81 Transportation fair
share contribution
program
Created separate section for Transportation Fair Share Contribution Program 81 Zoning Administrator Clarified Zoning Administrator’s role and authority Land Use Allowances – At the June 20, 2023, and June 27, 2023, Planning Commission meetings, commissioners and staff discussed land use allowances that would be appropriate within the EVSP. Table 7-2 of the EVSP identifies land uses as either permitted, conditionally permitted, or prohibited in each land use district. That table was derived from land use tables in Article 16 (Commercial Zones) of the Escondido Zoning Code, and the Downtown Specific Plan (“DSP”) and South Centre City Specific Plans(“SCCSP”). In reviewing the uses and allowances identified in Table 7-2 of the EVSP, the Planning Commission and staff identified several uses that warranted potential changes to their allowance, and noted others that required clarification or additional information.

Attachment "4"
691
Item16.

Revisions made to Table 7-2 would prohibit second hand and thrift stores in all districts, which is generally consistent with the other specific plans noted above aside from one district of the DSP and two districts in the SCCSP, which allow such establishments subject to specific provisions and require a conditional use permit. Changes would also allow consignment stores in the CG district, which is consistent with a majority of the districts in the DSP. (Consignment stores are grouped with second hand and thrift stores in the SCCSP.) For-fee EV charging stations have been changed to a permitted use in the CG and MU districts to comply with recent state law that mandates they be permitted in any parking facility. Animal-related uses have been modified so that animal care is classified as a permitted use in the CG district and a conditional use in the MU district; animal day-care and boarding is classified as a conditional use in the CG district; and animal shelters have been removed from the table.

Modifications have also been made to educational and childcare uses mainly to clarify what is included in each category. (In the Escondido Zoning Code, there is a separate subsection in the land use table which covers educational and child care uses, and when they were brought into the EVSP table, “Education and childcare” was included at the front of each use listed. No changes were made to the actual use allowances themselves.) Allowances for automotive services have been tightened to remove vehicle repair as a permitted or conditionally permitted use in the MU district and require a CUP for it in the CG district, and to require a CUP for boutique car sales in both the MU and CG districts. Other minor changes would add “publicly accessible open space on private property” in the same category as private or semi-private parks, which would be permitted in all districts; allow screen printing and duplicating services in the MU district; and provide a reference to the Escondido Zoning Code related to Accessory Dwelling Uses.

Subsequent to discussions regarding firearms stores at the past to Planning Commission meetings, staff explored the potential to allow for such stores further. Significant regulations related to gun sales exist in state and federal law, so the consideration of siting firearms stores in the EVSP would be based on site-specific issues and compatibility with nearby properties and uses. As such the chief of police recommended that any allowance for stores that sell firearms and/or ammunition require a conditional use permit so that his department can conduct a CPTED assessment and determine potential neighborhood impacts. Therefore, staff has provided an allowance for firearms stores through a CUP in the CG and MU districts. This requirement would also apply to sporting goods stores that sell firearms and ammunition.

Open Space – It is recognized that open space provides a myriad of benefits, including those related to recreational opportunities, shade, public health, and others. The challenge exists, however, in the fact that land that is used for open space purposes on a lot reduces the land that is available for residential development. In order to achieve the type of residential densities envisioned in the EVSP, an open space requirement of 250 square feet per unit, as had initially been proposed in the EVSP draft presented on June 13, 2023, would be challenging to achieve. High percentages of site landscaping and large setbacks further added to the density challenge.

With one of the overarching goals of the EVSP being to achieve a vibrant and active built environment through a significant increase in residential uses in the area, staff has proposed reducing open space requirements to 200 square feet per unit. Staff has also identified a further reduction to 125 square feet per unit for projects that achieve their Target Production Point as a way to incentivize development of dwelling units. To assist with the creation of more buildable area, front, rear, and street side setbacks have been reduced from 10 or 15 feet to eight feet in all districts, and the percentage of a site that is required to be landscaped has been decreased in the Urban IV/V district from 35% of the site to 25% of the site. (Note that landscaping in the setbacks counts toward the percent required, as does decorative hardscape.)
Attachment "4"
692
Item16.

Parking – Parking requirements contained in the initial draft EVSP were somewhat unclear. They identified maximum parking requirements for residential uses, but also allowed for reductions in the number of spaces required. Parking requirements for commercial uses were vague and incomplete as well. Through discussions at Planning Commission meetings over the past several weeks, staff has gained an understanding of the concerns raised related to parking and has identified a number of revisions. Specifically, staff has removed the maximum parking allowance for residential uses and applied a maximum allowance to commercial uses, with an ability to request an adjustment to that maximum. Additionally, parking requirements for some uses have been removed and instead reference the applicable provisions of the Zoning Code, and other requirements have been modified to be more appropriate to the use.

All of the above stated, the minimum parking requirement for residential uses remains unresolved. As currently drafted, the EVSP would require one space per unit, however concern has been expressed that one space per unit may not be the appropriate number, with arguments made for both higher and lower minimum requirements. At the July 6, 2023, Planning Commission meeting, staff will present a menu of options for residential parking requirements. As part of their action on the EVSP, the Planning Commission will be asked to select and incorporate one or a combination of the options presented for incorporation into the EVSP prior to it being forwarded to City Council for their consideration.

Environmental Determination
A draft Program Environmental Impact Report (“PEIR”) was prepared for the EVSP and identified potential impacts to air quality, biological resources, cultural and tribal cultural resources, and noise. The environmental analysis concluded that mitigation for impacts to air quality, biological resources, and cultural and tribal cultural resources would reduce them to a less than significant level, however impacts to noise would remain significant and unavoidable. The draft PEIR was made available for a 45-day public review period from March 30, 2023, through May 15, 2023, and two public comments were received.

A final PEIR has been prepared for the project and is included as Exhibit B to Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-11, which itself is included as Attachment 6 to this staff report. The final PEIR consists of a summary of corrections and revisions made to the draft PEIR, comments received on the draft PEIR and the City’s responses to those comments, a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and the revised draft PEIR showing revisions in strikeout/underline format. Pursuant to sections 15091 and 15093, respectively, of the State CEQA Guidelines, Findings of Fact (“Findings”) and a Statement of Overriding Considerations (“SOC”) have also been prepared, and are included as Exhibit C to Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-11. An SOC is required when a jurisdiction has determined that there are “specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations…[which] make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the EIR.” In this case, potential mitigation measures necessary to reduce noise impacts to a less-than-significant level would render the project infeasible, and any alternative analyzed in the EIR would eliminate the ability of the EVSP to meet the goals identified in the document.

Attachment "4"
693
Item16.

General Plan Conformance
A General Plan conformance analysis is included in the June 13, 2023 staff report (Attachment 1). That analysis identifies revisions which will need to be made to the General Plan for clarity as a result of approval of the EVSP.

Those revisions will be made via subsequent amendments that will be brought back before the Planning Commission for recommendation to City Council in the next few months. Note that adoption of the EVSP would not create inconsistencies with the General Plan, and that the future revisions to the General Plan are intended for clarity purposes.

PUBLIC INPUT
Staff mailed public hearing notices to all property owners, residents, and business owners within the EVSP area on June 12, 2023. Since that time, staff has received a combination of phone calls and emails from 15 individuals. The written comments have been included as Attachment 5 to this report. Additionally, two people spoke at the June 27, 2023, public hearing.

CONCLUSION AND REQUESTED ACTION
At the July 6, 2023, Planning Commission public hearing, City staff will be presenting a menu of options related to parking for residential developments. Staff requests that the Planning Commission select one option to be incorporated into the final version of the EVSP. Subsequent to that selection, staff requests that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the EVSP and certification of the associated final PEIR to the Planning Commission via adoption of Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 2023-12 and 2023-11, respectively.

ATTACHMENTS

1. June 13, 2023, Planning Commission staff report

2. June 20, 2023, Planning Commission staff report

3. June 20, 2023, Planning Commission memorandum

4. June 27, 2023, Planning Commission staff report

5. Public Comments

6. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-11 with Exhibits A through D

7. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-12 with Exhibits A through C Attachment "4"
694
Item16.

From: MunicodeEmails
To: Adam Finestone; Annie Ward; Dare DeLano; Andrew Firestine Subject: FW: [EXT] Form submission from: Public Comment Date: Thursday, June 22, 2023 3:53:55 PM
From: Escondido Meetings Portal via Municode Portal
Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2023 3:53:44 PM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) To: MunicodeEmails
Subject: [EXT] Form submission from: Public Comment
CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender email address AND know the content is safe.

Submitted on Thursday, June 22, 2023 - 3:53pm
Submitted by user: Visitor
Submitted values are:

Board or Commission for Public Comment Planning Commission Email [email protected]
Council Meeting Date July 27, 2023
Item # PHG20-0028
Subject EVSP does harm to single-family home owners
Position In Opposition
First and Last Name Jonathan Shradar
Are you an Escondido Resident? Yes
Comments
The EVSP does harm to existing single-family dwelling owners by changing zoning to Urban Housing IV/V. While the plan imagines zoning and improvements perhaps better suited for planned new communities, it does not honor or protect the residents of the city who have invested in this neighborhood. By attempting to increase availability of affordable housing this plan effectively eliminates the city's only affordable single-family homes. Height maximums should be lowered, and density reduced on streets with existing single-family dwellings to ensure responsible improvement to the city's core.

Attachment "5"
695
Item16.

June23, 2023
Mr. AdamFinestone
CityPlanner
CityofEscondido
201NorthBroadway
Escondido, CA92025
SentViaElectronicMail: [email protected]
Re: EastValleySpecificPlan (PHG20-0028)
DearMr. Finestone:

ThankyoufortheopportunitytoreviewthedetailsonthePHG20-0028: EastValleySpecific Plan, basedonthenoticeofthePlanningCommission meetingreceivedonJune12, 2023.

UponreviewofthenoticereceivedbytheNorthCountyTransitDistrict (NCTD), NCTDhas determinedthattherearemultipleBREEZERoutesandbusstopsthroughout thespecific planarea, includingBREEZERoutes351/352, 651/652, 355/357, 371, and388.

NCTDrecommends thecoordinationofimprovements anddevelopments withourService Planning, RealEstate, andBusOperationsDepartments. Formailednotices, pleasedirect themtoNCTDAdministrativeOffices, locatedat810MissionAve, Oceanside, CA92054.

Pleaserouteany planning noticesthatcouldimpactbusstopsorbusservicesto [email protected]. PleaserouteanynoticesthatmayimpactNCTDpropertyorrailRightof-WaytoRuthHinman, RealEstateAdministrator, [email protected] and [email protected].

Uponimplementation oftheplanandconstruction, NCTDrequeststhatyouoryour contractorprovideanotice, two (2)-weekspriortostartingwork, sothatwaywemaysend asupervisortomeetwithyourconstructioncrewtodeterminehowyourtrafficcontrol methodsaffectNCTD’sstops. [email protected].

Transit Oriented Development/Pedestrian:

NCTDhighlyrecommends thatthespecificplanarea of designallows forsufficient AmericanswithDisabilitiesAct pathsforconnectingpedestriansfromwithinyourfuture developmenttoaccessnearbybusstops, sidewalks, andcrosswalks. Tomakeyour developmentpedestrianandbike-friendly, NCTDhighlyencouragesyoutoprovideshading fromtreesorstructures, lighting, bikeracks, andseating. Potentialimprovements intransit accessatthissitewouldincludepedestrianegresstoaccesstheadjacentbusstopsand Attachment "5"
696
Item16.

Re: PHG20-0028: EastValleySpecific Plan
June23, 2023
Page2of2
betterpedestrian lighting alongcrosswalks atthetrafficsignalandthesidewalk. Thiswill support theconnectivity ofthepedestrian network tothetransit system.

Asdescribed inNCTD’sBusStopDevelopment Handbook (2018), newdevelopments shouldbedesigned toprovide clearanddirectaccess tobusstops (existing ornew), and shouldemphasize pedestrian access, activity, andsafety. Gated orwalleddevelopments should provide openings through wallstominimize thewalking distance andprovide amore directroutetobusstops. Developments withparking lotsshouldbedesigned withclear pedestrian walkways. Distinct walkway networks shouldbeprovided where busstops and/ortransit centers canbelinkedwithbuilding entrances. Entrances tobuildings should facethestreetwithpedestrian access locatedclosetothenearest busstop.

Belowisasample ofGuidelines fordesignsupported byNCTD, asfoundinourBusStop Development Handbook (2018).

Key Transit Supportive Design and Development Guidelines Supported byNCTD Orientdevelopments towards thestreet, withparking located totherearofbuildings ratherthanalongthestreetfrontage.

Building designandcirculation plansshould minimize theneedforparking andincrease theopportunity fortransitandactivetransportation.

Busstopandstationelements shouldbeincorporated intothedesign, inaddition to otherpublic spaces likewalkways, bicycle paths, andstreetfurniture.

Emphasize compatible andcompact landusesthatenable convenient accesstoand frombusroutes, andthataredesigned toprovide connections toavarietyofuses (i.e. residential, employment, educational, andcommercial).

Minimize walkdistances through developments tobusstops, especially thosewithwalls orgates, sothattransitisaccessible tomostpatrons orresidents.

Thank youagainforallowing NCTDtoreviewandcomment onthisspecific plan. Should youhaveanyquestions related tothisreview, feelfreetocontact meat (760) 966-6683or [email protected].

Sincerely,
KatiePersons
Director ofServicePlanning
cc: ChrisOrlando, ChiefPlanning andCommunications Officer, NCTD DerrickWojcik-Damers, Interim ChiefOperations Officer - Bus, NCTD RuthHinman, RealEstateAdministrator, NCTD
MaryBalderrama, TransitPlanner, NCTD
Attachment "5"
697
Item16.

From: MunicodeEmails
To: Adam Finestone; Annie Ward; Dare DeLano; Andrew Firestine Subject: FW: [EXT] Form submission from: Public Comment Date: Sunday, June 18, 2023 6:05:31 PM
From: Escondido Meetings Portal via Municode Portal
Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2023 6:05:20 PM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) To: MunicodeEmails
Subject: [EXT] Form submission from: Public Comment
CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender email address AND know the content is safe.

Submitted on Sunday, June 18, 2023 - 6:05pm
Submitted by user: Visitor
Submitted values are:

Board or Commission for Public Comment Planning Commission Email [email protected]
Council Meeting Date 6/27/23
Item # PHG20-0028
Subject East Valley Specific Plan
Position In Opposition
First and Last Name Ramon Balderas
Are you an Escondido Resident? Yes
Comments
Here is a list of some common downsides that can arise from housing and community investment in a city:

1. Gentrification: Housing and community investment can lead to gentrification, where wealthier residents move into a neighborhood, causing property values and rents to rise. This can displace lower-income residents and change the character of the community, leading to a loss of cultural diversity and community cohesion.

2. Displacement: As property values increase, some long-time residents may be forced to leave their homes due to rising rents or property taxes. Displacement can disrupt established social networks, strain community ties, and contribute to increased inequality.

3. Inequality: While housing and community investment can improve living conditions for some residents, they may exacerbate socioeconomic disparities. Affluent neighborhoods may receive more attention and funding, leading to a widening gap between wealthy and disadvantaged areas within a city.

4. Increased cost of living: As housing and community investments improve neighborhoods, the cost of living can rise. Higher property values, rents, and taxes can put financial strain on existing residents, especially those with fixed incomes or limited resources.

Attachment "5"
698
Item16.

5. Loss of affordable housing: Development and revitalization efforts may lead to a reduction in affordable housing stock. As properties are renovated or redeveloped, affordable units can be lost, making it harder for low-income individuals and families to find suitable housing options.

6. Traffic congestion: Housing and community investment can lead to increased population density, which can strain transportation infrastructure. The influx of new residents and businesses can contribute to traffic congestion, longer commute times, and a greater demand for public transportation.

7. Environmental impact: Urban development and increased population density can have negative environmental consequences. Construction activities, increased energy consumption, and additional waste generation can place a burden on local ecosystems and contribute to pollution.

8. Loss of green spaces: As cities grow and develop, green spaces such as parks and gardens may be diminished or replaced by buildings and infrastructure. This can reduce access to nature, limit recreational opportunities, and impact the overall quality of life for residents.

9. Social tensions: Changes in housing and community dynamics can sometimes lead to social tensions within a city. Conflicts may arise between new and long-time residents, resulting in divisions based on class, race, or cultural differences.

10. Lack of community input: In some cases, housing and community investment projects may be planned and implemented without sufficient community consultation or input. This can lead to a sense of disempowerment among residents and a perception that decisions are being made without considering their needs and preferences.

11. Crime: The addition of the requested 6,164 residential dwelling units will also indirectly lead to further cultivation of crime hot spots within Escondido. Many factors, such as social and economic conditions, systemic issues, and individual circumstances, contribute to crime rates in a city. Tens of thousands of additional variables would be flowing into Escondido and it would be reckless to cast them aside without assuming the possibility of some of those variables being a danger to the city council and to the community within proximity of the planned project.

Attachment "5"
699
Item16.

From: Joe Awad
To: Adam Finestone; Catherine A. Ferguson; Joe Awad
Subject: Comments to Planning Commission Plan for East Valley area Date: Thursday, June 22, 2023 12:43:31 PM
Hi Adam,
I would like to convey my concerns and comments re the planned rezoning of the East Valley area. I am concerned that i would not be able to rebuild and improve my property at 805 East Valley Parkway once this new zoning plans occurs. There should be some exceptions to allow this for existing properties. As you know I spent significant resources, time and money to improve my property (including extensive planning and building permitting processes).

I don't believe that car usage will go away for the foreseeable future and drive thru properties are as busy as ever.

I would ask that reasonable exceptions and accommodations be considered.

Thanks, Joe
Attachment "5"
700
Item16.
1 Adam Finestone
From: Mark Skovorodko <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 26, 2023 9:53 PM
To: Adam Finestone
Cc: Veronica Morones
Subject: EVSP Parking Reqs & Small Lot Development
Attachments: Parking Mandate Removals, 01-03-2023.pdf
Hi Adam,
I hope this email finds you well! Thank you for all the work you, Veronica, and the rest of our planning staff do for our city.

You and I haven't had a chance to meet yet, but my wife and I own a home off of 6th Ave in Old Escondido and are really passionate about seeing revitalization happen within our Downtown Specific Plan area and within the specific plan areas adjacent to downtown, including the areas encompassed by the East Valley and South Centre City Specific Plans.

We're very encouraged to see the work your team has done within the scope of the EVSP to address so many issues from housing affordability and built form, to mobility/transportation choice issues and under-utilized properties, especially following the move of Palomar Hospital and many of the medical providers occupying office space within the neighborhoods east of the old hospital site.

That said, I've been reading the draft plan over the course of the past two weeks and am disappointed by the off-street parking requirements in the plan. The requirements set out in Table 5-2 of the EVSP as well as Article 39 make it incredibly hard to make small lot infill development under 1/3 of an acre pencil financially for small-scale local developers.

As a specific example, requiring 2-3 parking spots per every artisan loft or live-work unit means that this typology will never be feasible for the small local developer hoping to build these types of units on the aforementioned small lots. My wife and I and a few local partners of ours would love to build this typology within the Downtown Specific Plan area, but the current requirements mean that each unit will carve out 500-750 sq ft of your parcel once you account for drive aisles/lanes. This is a consequential percentage (each unit carves out 7-10% of a 50x140 lot common to significant portions of the DSP and EVSP) when you multiply that across the number of units you need to build to reach the 6.5% yield-on-cost necessary to secure equity financing from sub-institutional investors. Effectively, this parking mandate requires either undergrounding your parking or doing podium-type construction with parking underneath, which kills project pro formas for the local small developer, and means the only way these lots will be redeveloped is through assemblage from large national developers like Integral who don't have the needs of the community at heart when they develop their projects.

In a time where cities across the US are removing their minimum parking mandates as a way to revitalize their communities and boost tax revenue (I've attached a list of these cities below, and a current map can be found here: https://parkingreform.org/resources/mandates-map/), and especially given our fiscal situation/structural debt here in Escondido, we can't afford to not reform our parking standards in our most urbanized specific plan areas in a way that leads to more productive land use and a more vibrant, walkable built environment.

I would ask our planning department to consider recommending to our council to remove parking mandates within the EVSP either entirely, or at the very least removing the parking requirements in the EVSP for any developments You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important Attachment "5"
701
Item16.
2 under half an acre in size. If there's any way this message can be passed along to the planning commission, that would be wonderful.

Parting thought: A framework that would be helpful for our staff to consider is evaluating our land use policy using the metric of tax revenue generated per acre – this framework puts concrete numbers to our varying land uses throughout the city and shows numerically how dense infill development drives tax revenue in a massive way compared to parking uses, single family neighborhoods, and low slung office uses common to the EVSP area. The consulting firm Urban3 used this approach in their work – here's an example from Rancho Cucamonga in the LA area: https://www.urbanthree.com/case-study/rancho-cucamonga/ Thank you again for all the work both of you do. If there's ever a chance to meet and discuss our urbanized specific plan areas in person, I'd love to continue the conversation about ways we can build a more vibrant, economically resilient city here in Escondido, and how small-scale, fine grained development can be part of the solution.

Warmly,
Mark
____________________________
To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.

Mark Skovorodko
Creative Director
www.westpine.co
(805) 453-6556
____________________________
Attachment "5"
702
Item16.

Parking Mandate Removals as of January 3, 2023
city state country report_summary report_status report_magnitude land_uses date_of_reform last_updated population 1 Calumet MI US There are no parking minimums and the Village has parking maximums. Implemented Citywide All Uses September 23, 2022 at 11:17:16 AM PDT
621
2 Bandera TX US Bandara adopted a place type zoning code which calls for market driven parking supply in residential zones and maximums in the downtown zone. There are no set parking ratios.

Implemented Citywide All Uses June 28, 2022 at
11:06:59 AM PDT
671
3 Stonington CT US The Downtown Pawcatuck Parking Overlay District eliminates the need for off-street parking for existing commercial buildings/uses. This enables change of use. There are also some parking maximums for certain uses townwide and bicycle parking required for certain uses. The Commission may allow shared / reduced parking when appropriate.

Implemented City Center/Business District Commercial May 24, 2022 at 3:03:38 PM PDT
884
4 Mancelona MI US There are no parking requirements in the Village of Mancelona. The Village also has parking maximums in place.

Implemented Citywide All Uses August 17, 2022 at
12:12:17 PM PDT
1708
5 Berrien Springs MI US Berrien Springs has no off street parking requirements in the central business district.

There are no set minimums along the M-139 Corridor for non-residential uses, but developers must demonstrate adequate parking supply.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses May 24, 2022 at 1:36:16 PM PDT
1727
6 Lunenburg NS CA In September, 2021, the Town of Lunenburg’s new Municipal Planning Strategy, Land Use Bylaw and Subdivision Bylaw went into effect. The new documents remove all minimum parking requirements.

Implemented Citywide All Uses Sep 22, 2021 June 27, 2022 at 1:35:16 PM PDT
2263
7 Bath Charter
Township
MI US The Planning Commission may reduce the amount of off-street parking as they deem necessary. They may also require bicycle parking.

Implemented Main Street/Special All Uses May 5, 2022 at 12:28:50 PM PDT
2319
8 Ketchum ID US In the community core and tourist zone, residential units under 750 square feet are exempt from providing any parking. Community housing, restaurants and food service, the first 5,500 sf of retail use, the first 5,500 square feet of assembly use (theaters, conference centers etc.), are exempt from providing any parking in the community core and tourist zone.

Implemented City Center/Business District Low Density (SF) Residential,
Commercial
June 28, 2022 at
11:23:46 AM PDT
2855
9 Provincetown MA US In the Town Center Commercial (TCC) non-residential uses are exempt from parking requirements.

Implemented City Center/Business District Commercial May 24, 2022 at 3:11:33 PM PDT
2994
10 Galena IL US There are no parking requirements in the Downtown Core zone. Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses August 17, 2022 at 12:12:26 PM PDT
3168
11 Flemington NJ US Parking minimums are eliminated in the Downtown Business (DB) zoning districts, primarily on Main Street and some adjacent side streets.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses September 23, 2022 at 12:43:34 PM PDT
4601
12 Colville WA US Colville, Washington is a small town of less than 5,000 people. Parking minimums are not required in the downtown area as street parking is provided via a fund developers pay into.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses May 17, 2022 at 12:28:24 PM PDT
4832
13 Travelers Rest SC US Parking maximums shall not exceed 125% of the minimum parking requirement stated in the zoning code for all land uses.

Implemented Citywide All Uses October 26, 2022 at
7:23:09 AM PDT
5346
14 Saranac Lake NY US There are no minimum parking requirements anywhere in the Village, including business districts. There are design standards for parking areas that are proposed for all new nonsingle family dwelling developments.

Implemented Citywide All Uses June 27, 2022 at
11:30:42 AM PDT
5700
15 Hudson NY US No required off-street parking spaces, voted on by City's Common Council in 2019. Implemented Citywide All Uses Feb 1, 2019 April 26, 2022 at 2:25:23 PM PDT
6072
16 Belfast ME US There are no off-street parking requirements for existing or proposed uses in the areas identified on the map entitled "Areas Exempt from On-site Parking".

Reductions are eligible if using on-street parking, public parking, or shared parking strategies.

Implemented Main Street/Special All Uses June 21, 2022 at 11:50:43 AM PDT
6679
17 Keyport NJ US There are no parking minimums for the general commercial (GC) district (Downtown Keyport). The GC district is approximately 76 acres and accounts for approximately 8% of the Borough.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses June 27, 2022 at 1:45:26 PM PDT
6977
18 Madras OR US Madras no longer has parking minimums in the Downtown Core Zoning District. They also have parking maximums of no more than 20% above minimum parking requirements.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses September 23, 2022 at 12:08:56 PM PDT
7051
19 River Rouge MI US River Rouge has no minimum parking requirements and has parking maximums in place. Implemented Citywide All Uses August 17, 2022 at 12:12:21 PM PDT
7465
20 Decorah IA US Off-street parking is not required in the C-3 Central Commercial Business District. Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses April 18, 2022 at 2:03:11 PM PDT
7576
1 Attachment "5"
703
Item16.
21 Brevard NC US Brevard's Downtown Mixed-Use zoning district and Neighborhood Mixed-Use in the Railroad Avenue/Lumberyard area are exempt from non-residential minimum parking requirements. Parking maximums apply to any parking that exceeds 10% of the minimum.

Implemented City Center/Business District Commercial,
Industrial
June 24, 2022 at
12:18:14 PM PDT
7824
22 Wickenburg AZ US The Town of Wickenburg eliminated parking requirements in the downtown zoning district and decreased all other commercial parking regulations by 25% in January 2021.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses April 26, 2022 at 1:06:11 PM PDT
8092
23 Vinton VA US No parking minimums in CBD except for hotels, motels, tourist homes, and bed and breakfast establishments.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses May 17, 2022 at 10:25:12 AM PDT
8104
24 Bath ME US There are no minimum parking requirements in the C1 Downtown District. Implemented City Center/Business District Commercial June 21, 2022 at 11:44:47 AM PDT
8338
25 Seabrook NH US Seabrook, NH has no minimum parking requirements and has parking maximums in commercial and industrial districts. Planning Board has have discretion of uses not specifically specified in the code.

Implemented Citywide All Uses May 11, 2022 at
2:51:49 PM PDT
8869
26 Sandpoint ID US Parking requirements are eliminated in the downtown core. Parking minimums are reduced by 20% for developments with affordable housing.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses May 17, 2022 at 12:15:22 PM PDT
8931
27 Penetanguishene ON CA In the Urban Core Zone, no parking is required for retail/office/or light manufacturing. Implemented City Center/Business District Commercial, Other, Industrial
May 17, 2022 at
11:06:27 AM PDT
8962
28 Medina OH US Uses within the Downtown Parking District Number 1 are exempt from minimum parking requirements.

Minimum off-street parking space requirement shall not be exceeded by more than twenty percent (20%) unless good cause can be shown by the applicant and approved by the Planning Commission. Single Family Dwellings and Two Family Dwellings are exempt from this provision.

Shared or joint use of up to fifty percent (50%) of required parking spaces may be permitted for two (2) or more uses if justified to the Planning Director Implemented City Center/Business District Commercial,
High Density
Residential
June 27, 2022 at
12:34:33 PM PDT
9002
29 Ridgefield WA US No off-street parking requirements in central mixed use district or the downtown transition area for non-residential establishments on lots less than 15,000 square feet.

Implemented City Center/Business District,
Main Street/Special
Commercial May 11, 2022 at
2:29:27 PM PDT
9153
30 Bastrop TX US Bastrop Building Block (B3) Code eliminated minimum parking requirements citywide. Implemented Citywide All Uses Nov 12, 2019 May 11, 2022 at 2:51:53 PM PDT
9242
31 Ecorse MI US Eliminated parking minimums and established maximums in November 2021. (Auto repair shops require two spaces per repair bay, which is also the maximum for this use).

Implemented Citywide All Uses Nov 4, 2021 June 27, 2022 at 1:43:24 PM PDT
9512
32 Howell MI US Howell has no required parking for uses in the Central Business District. New residential construction is exempt.

Implemented City Center/Business District Commercial August 17, 2022 at 12:12:14 PM PDT
9610
33 Canandaigua NY US There are no provisions that establish a minimum number of off-street parking spaces for development. However, certain development proposals are required to complete a parking demand analysis, which will assist in determining off-street parking spaces required.

Implemented Citywide All Uses Nov 16, 2020 April 18, 2022 at 2:08:13 PM PDT
10156
34 Fountain Inn SC US There are parking maximums for certain land uses (apartment, industrial manufacturing, medical/dental, retail/commercial/office, auditorium, automobile repair facility, automobile service station)
Implemented Citywide Residential,
Other, Industrial,
Medical,
Commercial,
Multi-Family
Residential
June 21, 2022 at
11:12:33 AM PDT
10441
35 Atchison KS US City allows for on-street spaces to count towards minimums in residential zones and allows for shared off-site parking reductions in other zones.

Implemented Main Street/Special Residential May 24, 2022 at 3:07:29 PM PDT
10476
36 Van Wert OH US The city of Van Wert has eliminated parking minimums for all uses in the downtown historic district, an approximately 20-block area.

Passed City Center/Business District All Uses June 27, 2022 at 12:24:02 PM PDT
11045
37 Branson MO US Branson parking minimums were flipped to parking maximums. Implemented Citywide All Uses Apr 10, 2018 June 24, 2022 at 12:30:46 PM PDT
11630
38 Healdsburg CA US Downtown Healdsburg has no parking requirements for non-residential uses for developments less than 15,000 square feet.

Implemented City Center/Business District Commercial May 17, 2022 at 11:03:06 AM PDT
11845
39 Emeryville CA US There are no minimum number of parking spaces required for any use, with the exception of accessible space provisions. The maximum number of parking spaces allowed shall be ten percent (10%) more than the estimated parking demand, specified in Table 9-4.404.

All off-street parking spaces shall be leased or sold separately from the rental or purchase fees giving potential renters or buyers the option of renting or buying a residential unit at a price lower than would be the case if there were a single price for both the residential unit and the parking space(s).

Implemented Citywide All Uses Jul 19, 2019 June 27, 2022 at 12:22:09 PM PDT
12000
2 Attachment "5"
704
Item16.
40 Brattleboro VT US Brattleboro has no off-street parking requirements in the city center district. Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses June 24, 2022 at 12:32:35 PM PDT
12184
41 Fernandina
Beach
FL US The Central Business District (C-3), lots containing industrial waterfront (I-W) or waterfront mixed use (W-1) are exempt from parking minimums.

Implemented City Center/Business District,
Main Street/Special
All Uses May 17, 2022 at
11:51:36 AM PDT
13169
42 Shorewood WI US Shorewood, WI reduced parking minimums on new construction to 1:1 - Smart Code standard.

Implemented Citywide All Uses June 24, 2022 at
12:37:40 PM PDT
13290
43 Brainerd MN US Brainerd has no off street parking requirements for the following zones: B-4 (General Business) District, B-5 (Commercial Amusement) District, B-6 (Washington Street Commercial) District, I-1 (Light Industry) District, I-2 (General Industry) District. Also, there are exemptions for further reduced parking 515-22-9: Parking Deferment.

Implemented City Center/Business District,
Main Street/Special
All Uses May 24, 2022 at
1:32:06 PM PDT
13434
44 Fruita CO US The city has taken steps to eliminate parking minimums for reconstruction of existing buildings and reduce requirements for new construction in the DMU zone (downtown mixed-use zone). ADUs in that zone require no parking. Elsewhere, parking requirements remain fairly high.

Implemented City Center/Business District Commercial,
Low Density (SF)
Residential
June 28, 2022 at
11:23:01 AM PDT
13478
45 High River AB CA There are no set parking minimums in High River, each development shall consider the appropriate number of stalls to support the use.

Implemented Citywide All Uses Jan 1, 2015 June 14, 2022 at 10:30:51 AM PDT
13584
46 Alexandria MN US Parking mandates may be waived for existing buildings in the Central Business District. Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses May 17, 2022 at 9:55:36 AM PDT
13822
47 North Mankato MN US Commercial properties having frontage on the 200 block of Belgrade Avenue are exempt from off-street parking and loading requirements.

Implemented Main Street/Special Commercial June 14, 2022 at 10:21:21 AM PDT
13948
48 Cayce SC US The Cayce Arts Design Overlay District has "No minimums; but Planning Director must approve parking plan to ensure it meets the demands of the proposed business" Implemented Main Street/Special Commercial,
Industrial
April 18, 2022 at
1:22:33 PM PDT
14009
49 Ferndale WA US The City of Ferndale has minimum parking requirements citywide, with the exception of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs). There are also maximum parking requirements for certain uses as stated in section 18.76.070.

Off-street parking credits are offered to reduce requirements by 25% for certain land uses with specific circumstances
Implemented Citywide Commercial,
Residential
June 28, 2022 at
11:17:17 AM PDT
14043
50 Metuchen NJ US In the Central Business District (B-1), Office Business District (B-3), and Downtown Development District (D-1) minimum parking requirements are reduced by 50% for all land uses.

Minimum parking requirements shall be considered maximum parking standards.

A payment in lieu of parking (PILOP) may be applied to applicant who have insufficient onsite parking.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses June 21, 2022 at 10:21:24 AM PDT
14543
51 Mountain Home ID US No off-street parking is required for any uses in the Downtown Overlay zone of Mountain Home, ID.

Implemented City Center/Business District Commercial May 5, 2022 at 12:43:23 PM PDT
14562
52 Graham NC US In downtown B-1 (CBD) zoned areas, there are no minimum parking requirements for all land uses. For nonresidential land uses, there are parking maximum requirements citywide.

Implemented City Center/Business District,
Citywide
Commercial June 14, 2022 at
11:16:32 AM PDT
15646
53 Traverse City MI US Traverse City does not require parking for residential uses citywide.

No car parking for any uses is required in the C-4 (Regional Center) District and the Grand Traverse Commons District. Properties located within 500 feet from the public transit center or parking decks have no parking minimums. This City also requires bicycle parking.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses May 5, 2022 at 12:42:28 PM PDT
15738
54 Uvalde TX US No parking requirements in the Central Business District. Parking reduction of 30% is possible for tree preservation.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses May 17, 2022 at 10:00:57 AM PDT
16001
55 Stuart FL US There are no parking requirements in the Old Downtown District.

Certain properties adjacent to the Old Downtown District are exempt from parking requirements if a specified number of spaces is maintained.

On-street parking may be used to offset the required number of parking spaces. Historic buildings may receive a 50% reduction to the minimum parking requirement.

There is a payment in lieu of parking options for up to three parking spaces required for any use in the Stuart Community Redevelopment Area.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses June 21, 2022 at 11:40:17 AM PDT
16160
56 Albemarle NC US Albemarle has no fixed parking ratios for nearly all uses other than: ADUs (one space required), selected home-based occupations (lawyers, physicians, dentists, and chiropractors), church tent uses, auction houses, and some light industrial uses.

Implemented Citywide All Uses April 26, 2022 at
1:48:06 PM PDT
16246
3 Attachment "5"
705
Item16.
57 Yorkton SK CA Yorkton exempts parking requirements for small developments in the city center. There is also an in-lieu option to further reduce requirements.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses May 24, 2022 at 2:39:31 PM PDT
16343
58 Phoenixville PA US Phoenixville PA had the zoning ordinance rewritten to remove parking requirements for specific blocks of the downtown, and all other parking is required to be based on a parking demand analysis, not specific standards.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses May 17, 2022 at 12:26:18 PM PDT
16968
59 Anacortes WA US Anacortes reduced parking minimums for most uses and implemented discretionary review for other uses. New projects in downtown have an additional reduction of 50% Implemented Citywide All Uses June 27, 2022 at
1:01:46 PM PDT
18089
60 Camrose AB CA In 2018, Camrose eliminated any minimum parking requirements on 3 blocks of Main Street (50th Street). Camrose reduced parking requirements for many uses in 2016 by up to 35%.

Implemented Main Street/Special All Uses May 11, 2022 at 3:13:51 PM PDT
18742
61 Mamaroneck NY US Unverified November 14, 2021 at
10:29:00 AM PST
19131
62 South Burlington VT US South Burlington has no minimum vehicle parking requirements city-wide, except in the case of requirements for multi-family residential use (0.75-1.5 spaces per dwelling unit depending on number of bedrooms).

Implemented Citywide Commercial,
Low Density (SF)
Residential
June 28, 2022 at
11:22:03 AM PDT
19509
63 Yellowknife NT CA Yellowknife, NT has eliminated parking minimums in the Downtown and Old Town areas.

Parking reductions have been made in other zones.

Implemented City Center/Business District Commercial,
Residential
June 30, 2022 at
11:57:53 AM PDT
19569
64 Norwood OH US There are no parking requirements, citywide for retail and office uses or single family homes. Parking requirements for other uses are relatively low.

Implemented Citywide Commercial,
Low Density (SF)
Residential
June 24, 2022 at
12:02:59 PM PDT
19883
65 South St. Paul MN US Permitted uses in all commercial and mixed-use zoning districts are exempt from minimum parking requirements if they are going into a new construction commercial space that is up to 7,500 in size or an existing commercial space that is up to 15,000 square feet in size.

For larger permitted uses, industrial uses, uses that require a conditional use permit, and institutional uses that are located in residential zoning districts, the property owner can submit a parking and circulation plan to the Planning Commission and City Council for review. The City Council can waive some or all of the use's "default" parking requirement if the property owner can demonstrate that they can partially or fully serve their building's transportation needs with nearby on-street parking, shared parking, bicycle parking, transit, pedestrian connectivity, etc.

Implemented Citywide Commercial June 27, 2022 at
1:23:02 PM PDT
20194
66 Punta Gorda FL US Within the City Center Zoning District, the city has established a Parking Exemption area.

In this area, buildings with a footprint below 10,000 square feet are not required to provide parking for uses on site.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses June 21, 2022 at 11:53:52 AM PDT
20369
67 West Saint Paul MN US Commercial mandates in the SMITH/DODD OVERLAY DISTRICT are waived. Implemented City Center/Business District Commercial Jan 13, 2020 October 28, 2022 at 11:47:58 AM PDT
20822
68 Milwaukie OR US There is a proposal to eliminate parking requirements for Middle Housing (i.e. duplexes, triplexes, quadplexes) and not require on-site parking for Accessory Dwelling Units citywide.

Proposed Citywide Residential,
Multi-Family
Residential
June 27, 2022 at
12:50:55 PM PDT
20990
69 Marquette MI US Parking space requirements for principal uses in the CBD apply only to residential uses, and all other principal uses in the CBD are exempt from parking space requirements.

Implemented City Center/Business District Commercial June 14, 2022 at 10:16:52 AM PDT
20995
70 Ashland OR US Ashland, Oregon does not require parking in the Commercial Downtown Zone. The North Mountain Plan District is also except, other than residential uses (1 spot minimum).

Implemented City Center/Business District Commercial May 4, 2022 at 5:56:02 PM PDT
21281
71 Klamath Falls OR US Developers are permitted to not provide parking for all land uses in the Downtown Business Zone if they pay into the parking district fund. The cost is $500 for each 1,000 square feet of gross floor area or $100 per space that would otherwise be required if expanding a use. The Downtown Business Zone is approximately 110 acres of land and are primarily commercial and public facilities.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses June 27, 2022 at 12:32:46 PM PDT
21335
72 Hamtramck MI US There are no parking requirements in the CBD for any use in Hamtramck, MI. Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses August 17, 2022 at 12:12:23 PM PDT
21704
73 Auburn ME US Parking requirements have been removed for all uses except for residential uses under Formed Based Code.

Passed Citywide Commercial June 14, 2022 at
11:09:34 AM PDT
23414
74 Watertown WI US The City of Watertown has no parking requirements for the Central Business (CB) Zoning District.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses May 24, 2022 at 1:50:52 PM PDT
23479
75 Freeport IL US The downtown district is exempt from parking requirements for all uses. Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses September 23, 2022 at 2:43:02 PM PDT
23930
76 Athens OH US There are no parking requirements for principal permitted business uses in the B-1 downtown business zone. This does not include residential uses.

Planned City Center/Business District Commercial June 21, 2022 at 11:44:11 AM PDT
24536
4 Attachment "5"
706
Item16.
77 Sandusky OH US There are no off-street parking requirements for all land uses in the Central Business District (CDB).

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses June 21, 2022 at 10:59:19 AM PDT
24564
78 Marysville OH US In the Historic Uptown Commercial core district, minimum parking requirements have been eliminated for nonresidential land uses.

Implemented City Center/Business District Commercial,
Other
May 11, 2022 at
3:02:05 PM PDT
24667
79 Zanesville OH US Zanesville eliminated parking requirements in the central business district. Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses May 11, 2022 at 2:13:04 PM PDT
25158
80 Decatur GA US No additional parking shall be required for a change in use, as allowed within the zoning district, for an existing building or the use of previously unused space within an existing building within the DDPD.

Unverified City Center/Business District All Uses October 30, 2021 at 12:28:37 PM PDT
25696
81 Stevens Point WI US No parking minimums in the Central Business District. Parking reductions based on transit availability, provision of structured parking, car-sharing, and tree preservation. Parking cannot exceed 150% of required parking (unless its on a pervious surface or underground).

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses May 17, 2022 at 9:58:27 AM PDT
25880
82 Mount Pleasant MI US As of 2018, there have been no minimum vehicle parking requirements citywide for all uses
Citywide January 17, 2022 at
5:56:17 AM PST
26000
83 Wooster OH US Properties in the C-4 District are exempt from off-street parking requirments. Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses September 23, 2022 at 12:45:18 PM PDT
26557
84 Winona MN US Parking minimums in Winona's Mixed Use-Downtown Core and Mixed Use-Downtown Fringe are 0 for commercial, retail, and office uses and residential developments up to six units. Bicycle parking may substitute for up to four automobile spaces for all residential uses.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses May 11, 2022 at 2:11:35 PM PDT
26594
85 Thomasville GA US Minimum parking requirements "shall not be exceeded" for specified TND conditional commercial land uses.
"If demonstrated to the satisfaction of the planning department" on-street parking within 600 ft of any building and shared spaces may be counted toward the minimum requirement.

Implemented City Center/Business District Commercial June 14, 2022 at 11:20:03 AM PDT
26649
86 Mason City IA US Retail and office developments have maximum parking entitlements and no minimum parking requirements.

Implemented Citywide Commercial May 17, 2022 at
10:50:17 AM PDT
26931
87 Frankfort KY US There are slight reductions available for parking requirements for bike parking and permeable surfaces.

Implemented Citywide All Uses May 24, 2022 at
2:42:05 PM PDT
27755
88 Yukon OK US Yukon implemented a form based code eliminating parking requirements in the Urban Gateway Overlay Supplemental District and then repealed it two years later.

Repealed Main Street/Special All Uses June 14, 2022 at
10:24:57 AM PDT
29000
89 Port Chester NY US There are no off-street parking requirements in the Central Business District (C2 Main Street Business District), with the exception of certain land uses (cabarets, catering/events, and theaters).

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses June 21, 2022 at 10:48:12 AM PDT
29163
90 Norwood MA US In the Central Business District parking mandates are 50% of elsewhere and if a project would require less than 20 parking spaces, the requirement is waived. In General Business, and Limited Business districts, projects which would require less than 5 spaces are considered waived. On street frontage counts toward requirements.

Implemented City Center/Business District Commercial May 24, 2022 at 2:54:01 PM PDT
29195
91 Fitchburg WI US Fitchburg has created a number of SmartCode districts in which there are no set parking mandates.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses June 30, 2022 at 12:07:59 PM PDT
30792
92 Ithaca NY US Ithaca New York does not require any parking for the Central Business District downtown, the West End, Cherry Street District, Newman District, Market District or Mixed Use Districts.

Implemented City Center/Business District,
Transit Oriented, Main Street/
Special
Commercial,
Residential
May 17, 2022 at
12:06:09 PM PDT
30837
93 Bowling Green OH US Bowling Green, Ohio does not require parking in the Central Business District. Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses May 4, 2022 at 5:43:46 PM PDT
31504
94 Dover NH US There are no statutory parking requirements in Dover, NH. There are parking maximums for all uses and required off-site parking is determined on a per-case basis as part of the application process.

Implemented Citywide All Uses May 17, 2022 at
10:49:24 AM PDT
32191
95 Lower Macungie
Township
PA US Unverified May 17, 2022 at
12:17:31 PM PDT
32626
96 Salisbury MD US Required off-street parking spaces were reduced and required bike parking were passed in 2018.

Implemented Citywide All Uses April 18, 2022 at
2:14:02 PM PDT
32935
97 Weatherford TX US Weatherford eliminated minimum parking requirements in the Central Business District in 2010. In 2020, Weatherford reduced minimum parking requirements for the majority of nonresidential uses and eliminated minimum parking requirements for non-residential uses in a new downtown-adjacent, mixed-use CN Central Neighborhood district.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses April 26, 2022 at 12:52:25 PM PDT
33547
5 Attachment "5"
707
Item16.
98 Penticton BC CA No minimum parking or loading is required in commercial zones C5 and C6. City wide parking minimums can be reduced by 1 space, per 5 bicycle parking, and 1 space for a fee of $13,000.

Implemented City Center/Business District Commercial May 11, 2022 at 3:19:06 PM PDT
33761
99 Leduc AB CA There are no parking requirements within the industrial land uses. The City of Leduc reduced minimum parking requirements for nonresidential uses in the downtown as part of the Land Use Bylaw. Two-thirds of the normal parking minimum is required. In two overlays of the downtown, parking minimums may be waived altogether for non-residential uses Implemented Main Street/Special Industrial September 15, 2022 at 2:44:26 PM PDT
34094
100 Panama City FL US Panama City removed all parking minimum requirements on lots less than 10,000 sq. ft., buildings built before 1945, and all new construction less than 5 stories.

Implemented City Center/Business District Commercial,
Other
May 17, 2022 at
11:10:48 AM PDT
34667
101 Natick MA US In the Downtown Mixed-Use District in Fall 2020, parking minimums were eliminated for ground floor commercial uses and allow for reduced residential parking subject to special permit approval. A partial fee-in-lieu option exists via special permit.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses April 18, 2022 at 2:09:49 PM PDT
36229
102 Norwich CT US Chelsea Central District does not have parking minimums and all retail/shopping centers have parking maximums.

Implemented City Center/Business District Commercial May 17, 2022 at 11:30:38 AM PDT
38768
103 Hot Springs AR US No minimum off street parking required in the business district/Downtown. Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses May 17, 2022 at 10:57:52 AM PDT
38797
104 Annapolis MD US There is a proposal from two city councilors to eliminate on-site parking requirements for all food establishments in all zones (restaurants, bars, deli's, clubs with food service, etc.) in the City of Annapolis. Annapolis previously reduced requirements for restaurants in West Annapolis.

Proposed Citywide Other May 24, 2022 at
3:12:50 PM PDT
39223
105 Culver City CA US Culver City officially adopted a zoning code amendment that abolishes all parking requirements city-wide, becoming the first in LA County to do so. Parking maximums are also being explored.

Passed Citywide All Uses Oct 24, 2022 October 28, 2022 at 10:56:38 AM PDT
39970
106 Danville VA US No minimum off-street parking requirements for developments in the C-E Casino Entertainment District.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses May 12, 2022 at 9:35:27 AM PDT
40668
107 Florence AL US No parking is required in the Central Business District or the East Florence Historic District. Implemented City Center/Business District, Main Street/Special
All Uses May 24, 2022 at
2:57:24 PM PDT
40797
108 Hickory NC US No minimum parking requirements in Central Business District zoning district. Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses May 11, 2022 at 2:14:48 PM PDT
41171
109 Woonsocket RI US Woonsocket, RI does not require parking for non-residential uses in the Urban Commercial and Mixed Use districts.

Implemented City Center/Business District Commercial May 17, 2022 at 11:59:53 AM PDT
41751
110 Burlington VT US Burlington Vermont has reduced parking minimums for all parts of the downtown district and shared used districts. Parking maximums can also not be over 125% of parking minimums in these districts.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses May 17, 2022 at 11:57:34 AM PDT
42819
111 Trelleborg Scan
ia
SE Trelleborg eliminated parking requirements fro new residential development in the city center.

Implemented City Center/Business District Residential June 30, 2022 at 11:58:29 AM PDT
43359
112 York PA US There are no parking requirements in the Central Business District. Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses June 24, 2022 at 12:39:33 PM PDT
43932
113 Winter Haven FL US In 2000, Winter Haven adopted a new Downtown Commercial zoning district that exempted all land uses within it from parking requirements.

Implemented City Center/Business District Commercial Jan 1, 2000 April 18, 2022 at 1:11:03 PM PDT
44955
114 Huntington WV US Off-street parking in the C-1 district has been reduced by 50% for nonresidential uses.

Nonresidential uses within 660ft. of a public parking lot will are exempt from off-street parking requirements.

Implemented City Center/Business District Commercial June 15, 2022 at 1:15:55 PM PDT
45110
115 Charlottesville VA US Charlottesville has eliminated parking minimums in the city center and a special university district. There is a zoning overlay that also eliminates mandates for smaller developments and reduces mandates for larger developments.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses June 24, 2022 at 12:41:00 PM PDT
47096
116 Roswell NM US There are no minimum parking requirements in Roswell's C-3 (downtown) district. Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses June 21, 2022 at 11:39:11 AM PDT
47551
117 Harrisburg PA US Off-street parking requirements do not apply to all land uses within the Downtown Center and Commercial Neighborhood Zoning Districts.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses June 21, 2022 at 11:00:19 AM PDT
49271
118 Dunwoody GA US Dunwoody has no minimum parking requirements. The city converted parking minimums into parking maximums in 2019.

Implemented Citywide All Uses Jan 1, 2019 June 24, 2022 at 12:13:46 PM PDT
49356
6 Attachment "5"
708
Item16.
119 Wilson NC US There are no minimum parking requirements for land uses in the R/A, OS, IMX and CCMX Districts.

There are no minimum parking requirements for industrial, religious institutions, and some commercial land uses ('amusements [indoor & outdoor]').

Parking maximums are set as twice the minimum requirement. Exemptions to parking maximums can be applied to single/two family dwellings and if the parking areas exceeding the maximum requirements are installed using Low Impact Development (LID) treatment OR the minimum number of trees is 1 tree per 10 spaces.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses June 14, 2022 at 11:27:03 AM PDT
49459
120 Bozeman MT US Bozeman eliminated minimum parking requirements in the Midtown Urban Renewal District.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses May 11, 2022 at 3:01:10 PM PDT
49831
121 Twin Falls ID US In the Downtown P1 District, no parking is mandated. In the P2 district, parking mandates are Reduced by 30% for non-residential uses.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses May 24, 2022 at 3:05:49 PM PDT
50197
122 Joplin MO US No minimum parking requirements in Central Business District. Proposed City Center/Business District All Uses May 24, 2022 at 2:55:55 PM PDT
50925
123 Grand Island NE US No car parking is required in the Downtown Business District and the Four Street Business District.

Implemented City Center/Business District Commercial June 28, 2022 at 11:23:22 AM PDT
51267
124 La Crosse WI US On March 10, 2022 LaCross eliminated parking mandates for non-residential uses in Local Business, Commercial, and Community Business zones. Previously LaCross had no parking requirements only in Industrial zones.

Implemented City Center/Business District Commercial,
Industrial
Mar 10, 2022 June 27, 2022 at
1:38:02 PM PDT
51666
125 Olympia WA US Olympia enacted specific zone district requirements, eliminating residential parking minimums as well as minimums for all existing commercial buildings, and new commercial construction or expansion totaling under 3,000 square feet within the Downtown Exempt Parking Area.

Implemented City Center/Business District Residential,
Commercial
May 11, 2022 at
2:54:31 PM PDT
52882
126 Mount Prospect IL US Mount Prospect lowered the parking requirement in the B-5 central commercial district and the B-5c central commercial core district.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses June 30, 2022 at 11:59:29 AM PDT
54165
127 Colton CA US Colton California has reduced parking minimums for commercial and residential in the downtown and mixed used neighborhoods but has not completely eliminated minimum parking in any area.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses May 24, 2022 at 1:24:13 PM PDT
54824
128 Manhattan KS US There are no minimum parking requirements in the Downtown District (C-4 District), limited requirements for business and apartment uses in the Aggieville District (C-3 District), and reduced parking requirements in the M-FRO District.

Implemented City Center/Business District,
Main Street/Special
All Uses April 26, 2022 at
2:11:23 PM PDT
55290
129 Tigard OR US No parking minimums in the Tigard Triangle, a 550-acre mixed-use zone slated for light rail service.

Reduced or eliminated parking minimums for residential uses in all but the highest-density zone through transit-proximate reductions and on-street parking credits.

No parking minimums in the Downtown Plan District Main Street Subarea.

No parking minimums for regulated affordable housing in the Downtown Plan District.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses May 5, 2022 at 2:08:16 PM PDT
55514
130 Pocatello ID US Parking requirements for all permitted uses are waived in the Central Commercial Zoning District and Warehouse Historic District.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses June 24, 2022 at 12:29:10 PM PDT
55525
131 Corvallis OR US The City of Corvallis, Oregon has recently adopted a Legislative Zone Change that, in combination with an earlier modification to the Land Development Code ("LDC"), eliminates off-street parking mandates throughout downtown and reduces mandates for most of the City's other commercial areas. The City has also eliminated off-street mandates for all mixed-use buildings meeting certain criteria, regardless of zone.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses October 28, 2022 at 11:35:46 AM PDT
58028
132 Des Plaines IL US Residential uses within 2,500 ft of an operational or proposed passenger rial station, or an operational bus rapid transit station in the C-3 Mixed-Use PUD zone may reduce parking requirements
Implemented City Center/Business District,
Transit Oriented
Residential June 30, 2022 at
11:59:49 AM PDT
58316
133 Lancaster PA US Lancaster PA has no minimum requirements for parking in the Central Business District and the surrounding Central Business 1 District, about a 0.25 square miles (~6%) of the historic 4 square miles of the city.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses May 17, 2022 at 12:20:46 PM PDT
59265
134 West Allis WI US West Allis, WI has no minimum requirements and citywide parking maximums. Implemented Citywide All Uses June 30, 2022 at 2:05:17 PM PDT
59861
135 Petaluma CA US Buildings in a municipal parking assessment district are exempt from parking requirements. City also has SmartCode which recommends elimination of requirements on a case by case basis if the developer waives the right to protest the formation of a parking district.

Implemented Main Street/Special All Uses May 24, 2022 at 2:46:10 PM PDT
60520
7 Attachment "5"
709
Item16.
136 Council Bluffs IA US No off-street parking is required for any use in the city's C-4 commercial district, except for residential portions of a mixed commercial-residential structure. The C-4 district covers the northern part of the city's central business district/downtown and the One Hundred Block of West Broadway historic district, as well as a small area near the Missouri River.

Implemented City Center/Business District Commercial June 27, 2022 at 1:29:19 PM PDT
62265
137 Chapel Hill NC US Chapel Hill has no parking mandates in the Town Center if the developer pays into the parking fund and/or presents an approved TDM Plan.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses June 14, 2022 at 11:07:45 AM PDT
64051
138 Cheyenne WY US Cheyenne implemented the UDC in 2012 which eliminated parking minimums for all uses in the CBD zone district (downtown).

Cheyenne established the Urban Use Overlay (UU) as an overlay zone district which eliminated parking minimums for all uses in that zone district in March 2022. This set up a rezoning action where an entire district was rezoned from mostly LI (Light Industrial) to MUB (Mixed-use Business Emphasis) with UU overlay. The zone change was implemented in June 2022.

The area covered is roughly 250 Acres.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses Jan 1, 2012 October 28, 2022 at 11:21:59 AM PDT
65051
139 Schenectady NY US Schenectady's zoning code does not have a minimum parking requirement for commercial properties in the downtown area. Parking maximums in this area should not exceed 110%-120% of the minimum requirements outside the downtown area. Shared parking is accepted if an applicant demonstrates that adjacent land uses have different hours of operation.

Implemented City Center/Business District Commercial June 27, 2022 at 12:29:51 PM PDT
65334
140 West Des Moines IA US Valley Junction Historic Business District (VJHB) is exempted from providing off street parking. All uses are exempt from providing off street parking.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses June 27, 2022 at 1:00:47 PM PDT
65606
141 Conway AR US There are no parking mandates in the Central Business District. The City has simplified its parking requirements and has maximums in place for all land uses.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses May 17, 2022 at 10:56:25 AM PDT
66127
142 Gaithersburg MD US Gaithersburg has a moratorium on parking mandates in the Olde Towne District (downtown) until 2025. The moratorium applies to redevelopment of existing buildings or changes in land use.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses June 24, 2022 at 12:28:06 PM PDT
67742
143 Jackson TN US In October 2021 Jackson eliminated all set parking mandates in the city, projects propose on-site parking individually as part of the application process.

Implemented Citywide All Uses Oct 1, 2021 June 24, 2022 at 12:14:30 PM PDT
68205
144 Portland ME US Portland, Maine allows up to 3 homes without parking in low-density residential zones. The city also exempts projects within 1/4 mile of fixed route transit from parking mandates.

ADUs are allowed without parking.

Implemented Transit Oriented All Uses, Low
Density (SF)
Residential
June 14, 2022 at
11:00:28 AM PDT
68408
145 Greenville SC US There are no set requirements in the downtown area, but developers must justify less parking, and historic structures are exempt from parking requirements.

Implemented Main Street/Special All Uses May 24, 2022 at 2:44:40 PM PDT
70635
146 Walnut Creek CA US Walnut Creek has reduced minimum parking requirements in two special downtown districts.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses June 27, 2022 at 12:59:04 PM PDT
70812
147 Kissimmee FL US Kissimmee, FL has made the Downtown district exempt from off-street parking requirements.

Implemented City Center/Business District Commercial,
Residential
June 30, 2022 at
11:57:41 AM PDT
72410
148 Bismarck ND US Off-street parking is not required for properties within the Downtown Parking District in Bismark.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses May 24, 2022 at 1:25:48 PM PDT
73529
149 Evanston IL US New buildings located in D1, D2, D3, and D4 districts can reduce parking requirements by 20% for non-residential uses.

Implemented City Center/Business District Commercial,
Other
June 30, 2022 at
11:59:53 AM PDT
73979
150 Framingham MA US Parking requirements in Framingham were reduced in the Central Business District and ground floor commercial uses in the district are exempt from parking requirements.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses May 24, 2022 at 1:45:12 PM PDT
74416
151 Missoula MT US No off-street is required in the CBD zoning district. Additionally, there is no off-street parking required for retail uses in the B1 Zoning District, Pedestrian-Oriented Overlay District, And Landmarks and Historic Districts. Off-street parking can be reduced by 25% of the maximum for every 8 long-term bicycle parking spaces.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses September 23, 2022 at 12:33:17 PM PDT
74994
152 Pasco WA US The City of Pasco does not require off-street parking in the Central Business District. Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses April 26, 2022 at 12:04:14 PM PDT
75432
153 Scranton PA US The C-D District (Downtown) of Scranton, PA is exempt from off-street parking requirements.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses June 30, 2022 at 11:59:25 AM PDT
76997
154 Alameda CA US Effective 12/16/2021, Alameda has repealed parking requirements for all uses, citywide, and implemented maximums.

Implemented Citywide All Uses Dec 16, 2021 June 24, 2022 at 12:04:07 PM PDT
78280
155 Lynchburg VA US No minimum parking requirements in the B-4 District which includes the entire Central Business District, the historic 5th Street Corridor and select high density nodes Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses June 28, 2022 at 11:16:35 AM PDT
80569
8 Attachment "5"
710
Item16.
156 Somerville MA US There are no minimum requirements for residential uses within 0.5 miles of an MBTA T station. Every commercial use within 0.25 miles of an MBTA T station has a parking maximum. The radius and parking maximum ratios change based on the location/land use.

Implemented Transit Oriented Residential,
Commercial
June 27, 2022 at
12:49:57 PM PDT
80906
157 Mountain View CA US The North Bayshore Precise Plan has eliminated minimum parking requirements for an office park district where Google, LinkedIn, and Intuit have their headquarters. A parking maximum of 2.7 spaces per 1,000 square feet of office/R&D was established. All new development must meet at 45% drive-alone rate cap, and there is an overall trip cap for the entire plan area.

Implemented Main Street/Special All Uses May 17, 2022 at 11:22:22 AM PDT
82739
158 Fayetteville AR US Fayetteville, Arkansas has no minimum requirements for commercial uses. There are residential minimum reductions available if certain criteria are met. They also have several reductions for residential uses as well as parking maximums.

Implemented Citywide Commercial May 17, 2022 at
11:28:42 AM PDT
87590
159 Champaign IL US Champaign eliminated parking requirements for all multi-family dwellings in the "University District". No off-street parking is required for any use within the MFUniv, CB1, CB2, and CB3 Districts. Elderly housing is subject to reduced parking requirements in all zones.

Implemented Main Street/Special, City
Center/Business District
All Uses May 24, 2022 at
2:33:24 PM PDT
88909
160 Santa Barbara CA US Parking reductions provided for affordable/senior housing and mixed-use development, the CBD, carsharing and bicycle parking. Small Residential Unit Reduction (July 2013):
only 1 space is required per unit 600 sq. feet or less, with no required guest parking. https://www.santabarbaraca.gov/services/planning/mpe/aud_program/default.asp.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses May 11, 2022 at 3:13:58 PM PDT
91364
161 Redding CA US There are no minimum parking requirements in the Downtown Core District, but if parking is provided it must be provided in accordance with the requirements of Redding Zoning Code. There are also minimum parking reductions in the Mixed Use District, and opportunities to apply for reductions citywide if shared parking is pursued, if the property is in proximity to transit, or if bicycle parking is present.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses June 27, 2022 at 12:43:56 PM PDT
91580
162 Bellingham WA US There are no minimum parking requirements for specific land tracts in the downtown area, with the exception of hotels/motels.

The planning director may reduce minimum parking required if the development includes programs to reduce single occupancy vehicle trips through senior and affordable housing, implementation of a shared car service (i.e., Zipcar™), enhanced bike storage facilities, purchase of WTA transit passes, installation of covered transit shelters, off-site pedestrian infrastructure improvements, or other similar strategies.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses June 21, 2022 at 11:22:14 AM PDT
92314
163 Asheville NC US There is no parking required for any uses in Asheville's Central Business District, except for hotels.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses April 26, 2022 at 1:37:35 PM PDT
92870
164 Yakima WA US Yakima Washington has no parking minimums for all uses in the Downtown Business District.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses May 17, 2022 at 12:28:55 PM PDT
93637
165 Dearborn MI US Dearborn eliminated parking requirements for all uses in the Public Parking Sector of the West Downtown District.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses September 23, 2022 at 12:36:52 PM PDT
94328
166 Chico CA US In downtown Chico, parking is no longer required for non-residential uses.

Specifically, there are no minimum parking requirements for non-residential uses within the Downtown In-Lieu Parking Benefit Area, an area that covers the entire downtown.

Implemented City Center/Business District Commercial,
Industrial
Jun 4, 2013 June 27, 2022 at
1:40:31 PM PDT
94529
167 Flint MI US Parking cannot exceed 20% of the required amount. New parking is not required in the downtown core. For more dense areas of the city, the "Parking Multiplier" can reduce required parking by 50%.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses September 23, 2022 at 11:13:58 AM PDT
95999
168 Longmont CO US Commercial land uses have no minimum parking requirements, with a set of maximum requirements.

Residential land uses have maintained minimum parking requirements and do not have maximum requirements.

Proposed Citywide Commercial June 21, 2022 at
11:42:29 AM PDT
97261
169 Roanoke VA US There are no minimum parking requirements for the Downtown District (D), the Commercial-Neighborhood District (CN), or the Urban Flex District (UF). There are no parking minimums for single family residential, and there are reductions based on scale, proximity to transit, sharing. There are also parking maximums.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses May 11, 2022 at 2:22:37 PM PDT
99143
170 Bend OR US Parking minimums were eliminated for the middle housing types (duplex, triplex, cottage housing) that replaced single-family housing in Bend's implementation of Oregon HB 2001, which banned single-family zoning. All zones that were previously under single-family zoning are now at least duplex and do not have any parking requirements. Other zones retain their parking requirements.

Implemented Citywide Residential,
Multi-Family
Residential
June 28, 2022 at
11:21:54 AM PDT
100421
171 San Angelo TX US Parking minimums eliminated for Central Business District. Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses May 11, 2022 at 2:31:13 PM PDT
101004
9 Attachment "5"
711
Item16.
172 South Bend IN US There are no off-street parking spaces mandated for any uses in South Bend, IN. Implemented Citywide All Uses Jan 13, 2021 September 23, 2022 at 2:57:36 PM PDT
102026
173 Davenport IA US Minimum parking requirements are exempt in the C-T Commercial Transitional District, C-1 Neighborhood Commercial District, C-D Downtown District, and C-V Village of East Davenport District.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses June 30, 2022 at 12:00:22 PM PDT
102169
174 Las Cruces NM US Adjacent on-street parking can be used for up to 25% of the minimum parking requirement.

Two trees planted may replace one parking stall for up to a 10% reduction of the minimum parking requirements.

Four bicycle spaces may replace one parking stall for up to a 10% reduction of the minimum parking requirements.

A ten percent reduction of the minimum parking requirements is granted if in a parking structure that is two stories or more.

Implemented Citywide All Uses June 21, 2022 at
10:29:43 AM PDT
103432
175 Green Bay WI US Parking is not required for non-residential uses in the downtown zoning district of Green Bay, WI.

Implemented City Center/Business District Commercial,
Medical, Other,
Industrial
April 26, 2022 at
1:37:32 PM PDT
104578
176 Billings MT US There are no minimum parking requirements in the Central Business District or the East Billings Parking Overlay.

Implemented City Center/Business District,
Main Street/Special
All Uses May 24, 2022 at
1:28:48 PM PDT
109577
177 Peoria IL US The city removed parking minimum requirements for commercial developments in 2015.

Zoning lots less than 12,000 square feet in land area in the Warehouse District and 7,500 square feet in the other Form Districts have no minimum parking requirements.

Implemented Citywide Commercial May 17, 2022 at
10:36:54 AM PDT
110417
178 West Palm
Beach
FL US Reduced Parking minimums with Parking Maximums in CBD and special districts. No parking minimums in Okeechobee Business district with soft and hard parking maximums, if the developer wants to exceed the soft max they have to pay into the transit operations budget. No parking minimum for microunits in CBD.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses May 24, 2022 at 1:53:05 PM PDT
111955
179 Manchester NH US Off-street parking is not required within the AMX, B-1 and CDBG Districts. However, a parking plan is required to be developed for each property and shall be submitted to the Planning Board.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses June 21, 2022 at 11:45:35 AM PDT
112673
180 Temecula CA US Office uses in the Old Town Specific Plan Area are exempt from parking, so long as the building is less than 4 stories. Additionally, adaptive re-use of historic structure do not require parking.

Implemented City Center/Business District Commercial May 24, 2022 at 2:49:42 PM PDT
114761
181 Provo UT US The City provides parking reductions for providing transit passes, robust bike parking, shuttles, shared cars, building near fixed transit stop, and other support for transportation alternatives.

Implemented Citywide All Uses May 11, 2022 at
2:23:40 PM PDT
116618
182 Clearwater FL US Clearwater eliminated parking minimums for the vast majority of its non-residential uses.

Residential requirements were reduced for attached dwellings.

Implemented City Center/Business District Commercial,
Industrial,
Medical, Other
May 17, 2022 at
10:22:30 AM PDT
116946
183 Cambridge MA US Cambridge City Council voted 8-1 in favor of eliminating all minimum parking requirements for residential and commercial developments citywide. It is the first city in MA to do so.

The Policy Order does require developers of buildings with 4+ housing units and buildings requiring special permits to submit a written rationale to the City explaining why they chose to include a certain number of parking spaces.

It also requires the Community Development Department submit a report by 2025 detailing how many housing units and parking spaces have been added since this policy's passage, and any impacts on street parking availability.

Implemented Citywide All Uses Oct 24, 2022 October 28, 2022 at 10:55:22 AM PDT
117090
184 Lansing MI US The City of Lansing has a new zoning code passed and implemented that removes parking minimums from the downtown core and reduces the minimums in the downtown edge and commercial/transit corridors. There is also a city-wide provision that can be envoked to reduce the minimum of any development by up to 20%. The parking reductions follow the zoning districts rather than the land use.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses June 27, 2022 at 1:19:44 PM PDT
117159
185 College Station TX US In August 2017 the city authorized the creation of "Alternative Parking Plans" but they are all by discretion of the city planner.

Unverified Citywide All Uses May 17, 2022 at
12:27:42 PM PDT
117911
186 Ann Arbor MI US Ann Arbor has no car parking mandates for any land uses citywide. Implemented Citywide All Uses Aug 15, 2022 August 17, 2022 at 12:11:29 PM PDT
120735
187 Berkeley CA US Berkeley has no parking requirements for new residential developments of any size, except for new developments on certain narrow streets in the hills. The city has parking maximums for new residential uses.

Implemented Citywide Residential May 24, 2022 at
1:39:29 PM PDT
121363
10 Attachment "5"
712
Item16.
188 Hartford CT US New form based zoning code with parking maximums city wide. Implemented Citywide All Uses Dec 1, 2017 May 24, 2022 at 3:01:45 PM PDT
122105
189 Norman OK US In early November 2021, Norman replaced "Spaces Required" with "Spaces Recommended" in zoning code for all land uses except for single family homes, duplexes, fraternity houses, and mobile home parks.

Implemented Citywide Commercial,
Residential,
Other
June 24, 2022 at
12:30:08 PM PDT
122837
190 Wilmington NC US Wilmington, North Carolina eliminated parking requirements for central business districts and historic districts.

Implemented City Center/Business District,
Main Street/Special
All Uses May 17, 2022 at
11:45:20 AM PDT
123744
191 Fargo ND US Fargo eliminated parking minimums in their DMU (downtown district) for all residential and nonresidential land uses.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses June 14, 2022 at 11:29:53 AM PDT
124662
192 New Haven CT US New Haven Parking Authority has signed on to support DesegregateCT's platform, which includes eliminating parking requirements.

Proposed Citywide All Uses May 17, 2022 at
11:50:50 AM PDT
130250
193 Cedar Rapids IA US Cedar Rapids has no parking required in the downtown district. There are many reductions available for parking requirements elsewhere.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses May 24, 2022 at 2:32:06 PM PDT
133562
194 Kingston ON CA Citywide removal of minimums for all non-residential uses, citywide removal of minimums for affordable residential units, citywide removal of minimums for designated heritage properties. Citywide reduction in minimums for residential, with cash-in-lieu option to bring down to zero (funds used to support car-share). Citywide maximums for multi-unit residential. The status is passed (as of April 26th) but not yet into effect due to appeal period.

Passed Citywide Commercial,
Other,
Residential
Apr 7, 2022 June 27, 2022 at
1:44:28 PM PDT
136685
195 St. Catharines ON CA The Downtown Parking Exemption (2013) exempts downtown developments from car parking mandates.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses June 14, 2022 at 10:51:00 AM PDT
140370
196 Dayton OH US There are no minimum parking requirements for non-residential uses located in the central business (CBD) and urban business (UBD) zoning districts. Commercial land uses in certain districts (MGC, MNC, EGC, ENC, SGC, SNC, MX, and T) must meet minimum and maximum requirements.

Implemented City Center/Business District Commercial June 21, 2022 at 10:56:15 AM PDT
140407
197 Rockford IL US No parking is required in the C-4, Urban Mixed-Use District except for Sexually-Oriented Businesses.

Implemented City Center/Business District Commercial,
Residential
August 17, 2022 at
12:12:08 PM PDT
147441
198 Bridgeport CT US Bridgeport has no established car parking mandates except for when accessible parking is required by state law. There are maximums for retail and office uses. These reforms were adopted November 29, 2021 as part of a comprehensive zoning reform.

Implemented Citywide All Uses Nov 29, 2021 June 27, 2022 at 12:55:02 PM PDT
148654
199 Pomona CA US The Downtown Pomona Specific Plan, adopted August 5, 2019, removes minimum parking requirements for most existing buildings and many new ones.

Specifically, the code states that "Parking requirements do not apply to the first two floors of any proposed development within the MU-CBD or MU-I districts. Moreover, the first two floors of any existing development within said boundaries are also not subject to parking requirements."
Since most of downtown Pomona's existing buildings are only one or two stories high, this provision removes minimum parking requirements for them. New one and two-story buildings are also exempt from parking minimums. Taller new buildings still have minimum parking requirements applied to the upper floors.

The plan also establishes maximum parking requirements, although this limit does not apply to parking spaces that are provided in parking structures.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses June 27, 2022 at 1:30:21 PM PDT
151691
200 Alexandria VA US Alexandria has established maximum parking requirements In some commercial land uses and reduced minimum requirements in 'enhanced transit areas'.

Additional reductions may be applied to multi-family/affordable housing land uses if in proximity to transit.

Implemented Transit Oriented, Citywide Commercial June 21, 2022 at 11:33:37 AM PDT
159428
201 Hayward CA US The Mission Boulevard Form-based Code, adopted in 2020, removes all minimum parking requirements within the code area. The code applies to approximately 480 acres along Mission Boulevard, a major commercial corridor that traverses the length of the city. The code also establishes maximum parking requirements for residential land uses, but not non-residential uses.

Implemented Transit Oriented All Uses June 27, 2022 at
1:02:57 PM PDT
162954
202 Oshawa ON CA Oshawa exempts non-residential uses from parking mandates in the city center. Also in this district, residential developments with fewer than 10 homes have no parking requirements.

Implemented City Center/Business District Commercial June 27, 2022 at 12:58:31 PM PDT
166000
203 Eugene OR US Eugene has eliminated parking minimums in the downtown and university districts. Parking requirements are reduced in various overlay districts.The maximum number of parking spaces for non-residential uses may not exceed 125 percent of the minimum spaces.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses May 17, 2022 at 12:16:37 PM PDT
172622
11 Attachment "5"
713
Item16.
204 Salem OR US January 2022: City of Salem officially passed its updated parking mandates as part of its Unified Development Code update. It waives parking mandates for all traditional missing middle housing types - duplexes, triplexes, quads, cottage clusters, and townhomes, as well as capping multifamily parking mandates at 1 per unit and reducing parking for shelters.

This builds on waiving mandates downtown and within 1/4 mile of the core transit network Implemented Transit Oriented, City Center/
Business District
Residential,
Multi-Family
Residential
Jan 21, 2022 June 21, 2022 at
11:36:41 AM PDT
174365
205 Santa Rosa CA US In Fall 2020, the Santa Rosa City Council adopted a new Downtown Station Area Specific Plan that revised Downtown parking policy to eliminate minimum parking requirements within the Downtown Station Area boundary. This policy was codified and went into effect on January 1, 2021.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses May 24, 2022 at 3:01:00 PM PDT
176753
206 Providence RI US There are no minimum parking requirements for the D-1 District land use and the “neighborhood commercial establishment” use.

TOD overlay districts have no minimum parking requirements, with maximums for residential land uses. For non-residential land uses, the first 5,000 GFA is exempt from minimum parking requirements, with maximums.

Commercial and office projects exceeding 20,000 GFA must comply with a parking maximum (may not exceed 135% of the minimum parking requirements).

Parking requirements may be reduced by 50% in the M-MU-90 Sub-District.

Non-residential land uses that provide cyclists shower and locker facilities may reduce parking by four spaces. Non-residential use provides 120% or more additional bicycle parking spaces may reduce parking by up to 10%. When 10 or more bicycles are provided for a bike-share facility, there may be a 5% reduction of required parking spaces.

Implemented City Center/Business District,
Transit Oriented
Commercial,
Residential
June 21, 2022 at
11:10:43 AM PDT
179883
207 Fort Lauderdale FL US There are no parking minimums for the City Center and Arts and Sciences Districts. Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses May 17, 2022 at 10:47:30 AM PDT
182437
208 Chattanooga TN US Chattanooga, TN has no parking requirements in the Downtown Core. Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses May 17, 2022 at 11:58:47 AM PDT
182799
209 Akron OH US Akron Ohio has no minimum requirements for parking for residential or commercial parking downtown. Maximum allowed is one space per residence.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses May 17, 2022 at 12:08:06 PM PDT
197597
210 Grand Rapids MI US Grand Rapids, MI eliminated minimum parking requirements in the TN-CC zoning district.

Citywide, reductions in minimum requirements are available subject to Planning Commission approval based on special requirements.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses May 4, 2022 at 5:38:54 PM PDT
201013
211 Rochester NY US There are no parking requirements in the Center City District (CCD). All applicants proposing to construct surface parking submit a parking demand analysis defining the number of spaces, why the off-street parking is required, and methods to accommodate potential deficiencies.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses June 21, 2022 at 10:50:25 AM PDT
205695
212 Birmingham AL US Off-street parking is not required in the B-4 Central Business District. Parking requirements were reduced in the B-3 Community Business District. Required spaces are reduced by 10% when within 1000 ft of transit
Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses September 23, 2022 at 11:03:40 AM PDT
210928
213 Oakville ON CA Oakville, Ontario has no minimum parkings in the downtown and reduced minimums in some reduction in parking in mixed-used zones.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses May 24, 2022 at 1:43:58 PM PDT
211382
214 San Bernardino CA US Parking minimum requirements were reduced for the Transit-Oriented Development Overlay District, and bicycle parking minimums were introduced. The development code noted that as the transit system matures, they are looking to reduce or eliminate parking minimums. A 2017 Accessory Dwelling Unit Ammendment reduced minimum parking requirements for ADUs, and prohibits minimums in certain qualified locations.

Implemented Transit Oriented Other, Low
Density (SF)
Residential,
Multi-Family
Residential
May 17, 2022 at
10:38:46 AM PDT
215784
215 Tacoma WA US The City of Tacoma has a "Reduced Parking area" that encompasses most of the downtown core area, and effectively requires zero parking. Also all of the mixed use centers (which makes up the majority of all the new development in town) has low/no required parking. There are still parking requirements, but they have been greatly reduced and there is support at the policy level to expand the reduced parking area.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses May 11, 2022 at 3:12:25 PM PDT
217827
12 Attachment "5"
714
Item16.
216 Richmond VA US In 2021, the City Council of Richmond, Virginia, voted 8-to-1 to eliminate minimum parking requirements. The resolution adopted by the Council declares that "the Council of the City of Richmond believes that the City’s zoning ordinance, codified as Chapter 30 of the Code of the City of Richmond (2020), as amended, should be amended by eliminating parking space minimums". It also initiates "an amendment to the City’s zoning ordinance to eliminate parking space minimums".

Currently, in CM, DCC, B-4, B-5, and TOD-1 zoning districts, off-street parking spaces shall not be required for uses other than dwelling uses, hotels and motels.

Proposed Citywide All Uses May 17, 2022 at
10:09:51 AM PDT
230436
217 Fremont CA US The Warm Springs/South Fremont Community Plan, adopted in July 2015, eliminates minimum parking requirements within the community plan area. The plan area is centered on the new Warm Springs/South Fremont BART Station.

Implemented Transit Oriented All Uses May 17, 2022 at
11:07:55 AM PDT
241110
218 Kitchener ON CA There are no mandates for most uses in the Urban Growth Center zones (large offices being one exemption).

Implemented City Center/Business District Residential,
Commercial
June 14, 2022 at
10:46:52 AM PDT
242368
219 Norfolk VA US Norfolk eliminated minimum off-street parking requirements for all non-residential uses and residential development of 24 multi-family dwelling units or less for properties within the Norfolk and Western Historic Overlay district.

Implemented Main Street/Special Commercial,
Residential
Apr 26, 2022 June 24, 2022 at
12:25:48 PM PDT
244601
220 Winston-Salem NC US In the Central Business district, Winston-Salem has no minimum parking requirements for high-density residential and office that is above first-floor retail. In all other areas, there are requirements.

In the MU-S District, an automotive thirty percent (30%) reduction of existing minimum parking requirements may be applied. There are no parking maximums for this land use.

Implemented City Center/Business District Commercial,
Multi-Family
Residential, High
Density
Residential
June 14, 2022 at
11:28:43 AM PDT
247945
221 Buffalo NY US There are no provisions that require a minimum number of off-street parking spaces for all land uses. A TDM plan is required for new construction (5,000 square feet or more) that determines the number of on-street, off-street, and shared vehicle parking spaces.

Implemented Citywide All Uses Jan 3, 2017 June 21, 2022 at 10:32:48 AM PDT
255284
222 Madison WI US There is no parking required in the Central District of Madison and in several other mixeduse districts. Some other districts waive parking requirements for new developments smaller than 10,000 square feet.

Implemented City Center/Business District,
Main Street/Special
Commercial,
Residential
May 24, 2022 at
1:42:22 PM PDT
259680
223 Jersey City NJ US Jersey City has about a dozen planning districts (known as Redevelopment Plans) with no parking minimums, largely concentrated near PATH rapid transit and HBLR light rail stations. In fact, several of these districts have parking maximums. Examples include the Journal Square 2060, Colgate, Harsimus Cove Station, Grand Jersey, and Newark Ave Downtown plans.

Implemented Transit Oriented, City Center/
Business District, Main
Street/Special
All Uses May 24, 2022 at
2:26:53 PM PDT
262075
224 Durham NC US Durham has a set of parking ratios, but certain districts are exempted or only must build a percentage of the ratio. There are maximums for all uses and in all districts based on a percentage of the ratio, as well.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses June 14, 2022 at 11:12:23 AM PDT
278993
225 Newark NJ US No parking is required for residential and non-residential land uses within a 1,200-foot radius of a light rail, PATH train or NJ Transit train station.

Implemented Transit Oriented All Uses June 21, 2022 at
10:24:18 AM PDT
282011
226 Anchorage AK US No parking is required in the Downtown Business Districts. Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses May 17, 2022 at 12:29:16 PM PDT
288000
227 Pittsburgh PA US In designated "Parking Exempt Areas", minimum parking requirements have been reduced by percentages ranging from 50% - 100% specified in the Pittsburgh zoning code.

Land uses within these boundaries may not exceed the minimum parking requirements otherwise stated in the zoning code.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses June 21, 2022 at 12:01:07 PM PDT
300286
228 Cincinnati OH US Cincinnati uses a tool known as an Urban Parking Overlay, which is a zoning overlay that removes parking minimums completely within its boundary. Cincinnati implemented and Urban Parking Overlay-- completely removing parking requirements-- in four neighborhoods: Central Business District, Over the Rhine, Pendleton (all of which are considered the "urban core") as well we parts of the Camp Washington neighborhood.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses June 21, 2022 at 10:52:13 AM PDT
303940
229 St. Paul MN US There are no requirements for a minimum number of parking spaces. Parking maximums apply to surface lots exceeding 15 spaces.

Facilities that exceed 15 spaces shall not be created unless a demonstration of need.

Projects exceeding 40,000 square feet are required to submit a TDM Plan (TDMP) for City Review.

There are minimum bike parking requirements for all land uses.

Implemented Citywide All Uses Aug 18, 2021 June 28, 2022 at 11:21:21 AM PDT
304547
13 Attachment "5"
715
Item16.
230 St. Louis MO US Implemented in Downtown District: No Minimum Parking Requirement in Downtown St.

Louis: In roughly 4 square miles in and around downtown St. Louis, St. Louis has never had a minimum parking requirement. This was most recently codified by the 1947 zoning code. The "I" Central Business District, "No parking regulations shall be required for this district". All land uses.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses June 27, 2022 at 1:16:53 PM PDT
308174
231 Lexington KY US On August 25th, 2022 The Planning Commission for Lexington-Fayette County (merged Urban-County Government unanimously approved 8-0 a Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment to eliminate minimum parking requirements, establish bicycle parking standards, mitigate environmental impacts of parking lots with an increase in required tree canopy, lighting restrictions, and increased buffering/screening meant to discourage the over provision of parking without instituting parking maximums.

Final action by the Urban-County Council was taken on October 27th, 2020. The regulations were adopted by a 14-0 vote.

Implemented Citywide All Uses Oct 27, 2022 October 28, 2022 at 11:08:36 AM PDT
341000
232 Honolulu HI US Honolulu County removed parking minimums for all uses in two of the most urbanized planning regions on Oahu, including Honolulu, and also removed parking minimums for all uses in TOD zones.

Implemented City Center/Business District,
Transit Oriented
Commercial May 30, 2022 at
12:36:08 PM PDT
345064
233 Cleveland OH US Off-street parking requirements are not required in the Central Business District for all land uses. A planned development group, or group of adjacent buildings may also propose to lower, share, or eliminate parking by presenting a detailed proposal to the City's Off Street Parking Committee.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses May 24, 2022 at 2:58:34 PM PDT
381009
234 Wichita KS US There are no parking minimums for the Central Business District (downtown and some nearby neighborhoods). This is implemented in the City Center, and applies to all land uses.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses June 24, 2022 at 12:36:57 PM PDT
389877
235 New Orleans LA US No parking minimum requirements in the Historic Core, part of the Historic Urban Neighborhood (HU-B1A) and Central Business District. Also exempt, in Historic Urban Neighborhood Districts: 1) all single-family and two-family dwellings on lots 30 feet or less. 2) a single-family or two-family dwelling on a blockface where 40% of those existing dwellings have no off-street parking. Also exempt: the first 3,000 square feet in gross floor area for commercial uses i the HMC-2 district, and the first 5,000 square feet in gross floor area for commercial uses in HU-B1, HU-MU and MU-1 Districts, except for shopping center configurations. Parking maximums are 150% of the minimums.

Implemented City Center/Business District,
Main Street/Special
All Uses May 24, 2022 at
2:52:32 PM PDT
390144
236 Tulsa OK US Tulsa Oklahoma has no parking minimums downtown for all uses. In the CH District and MX District and surrounding areas downtown, parking minimums are reduced 50% compared to other districts. Retail uses requiring more than two hundred twenty-five (225) parking spaces may not provide more than four (4) outdoor parking spaces per one thousand (1,000) square feet of floor area.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses May 17, 2022 at 12:18:51 PM PDT
401190
237 Minneapolis MN US Minneapolis has no minimum parking requirements. Implemented Citywide All Uses May 14, 2021 May 17, 2022 at 10:35:45 AM PDT
429606
238 Halifax NS CA Halifax removed all parking minimums in the Downtown Plan Area in 2009. Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses September 23, 2022 at 11:05:46 AM PDT
431479
239 Oakland CA US Oakland has no required parking in CBD, S-2, and D-LM zones. There are parking maximums in those zones.

Implemented City Center/Business District,
Transit Oriented
All Uses May 17, 2022 at
11:46:09 AM PDT
433031
240 Long Beach CA US Long Beach, California has reduced parking minimums for transit-oriented off street parking for residential and hospital use reducing parking from 25% to 50%.

Implemented Residential,
Medical
May 17, 2022 at
11:48:40 AM PDT
462628
241 Raleigh NC US On 3/15/2022 Raleigh City Council voted 7-1 to eliminate parking mandates citywide and impose parking maximums on many uses.

In June 2021, Raleigh City Council directed staff to develop an ordinance to eliminate parking mandates and implement parking maximums. On February 8th, 2022 the Planning Commission unanimously approved the zoning change and it will now go on to city Council.

Raleigh currently has no parking minimum requirements in the Downtown District and in the Transportation Overlay District.

Implemented Citywide All Uses Mar 15, 2022 June 27, 2022 at 12:54:20 PM PDT
467665
242 Miami FL US Miami repealed a significant portion of its parking reforms on April 28, 2022. Will take some time to determine the ongoing status.

Repealed City Center/Business District,
Transit Oriented
Commercial May 17, 2022 at
10:48:22 AM PDT
467963
14 Attachment "5"
716
Item16.
243 Omaha NE US Minimum parking requirements have been eliminated for all land uses in the central business district (CBD) and neighborhood business districts (NBD).

For TOD-1, there are no minimum parking requirements.

For TOD-2, TOD-3, TOD-4 the minimum number of required parking spaces is 50 percent of the specified minimum requirements.

Implemented City Center/Business District,
Transit Oriented
All Uses June 14, 2022 at
11:32:15 AM PDT
478192
244 Colorado Springs CO US There are two established parking exempt districts in which there is no additional off-street parking required; Downtown/Central business district and Old Colorado City. There is a provisional district with reduced parking requirements that partially connects these two districts.

Implemented City Center/Business District,
Main Street/Special
All Uses May 17, 2022 at
10:31:36 AM PDT
478221
245 Kansas City MO US There are no parking mandates in the downtown core and various levels of exemption for commercial and residential uses in several adjacent districts.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses June 14, 2022 at 11:09:59 AM PDT
495327
246 Atlanta GA US No parking is required within 1/2 mile of MARTA Stations and near more than a dozen activity centers (Special Public Interest Districts) for any uses except establishments that serve alcohol. No parking is required for any buildings built before 1965, citywide. Many districts exempt affordable housing from parking mandates.

Implemented Transit Oriented, City Center/
Business District
All Uses May 17, 2022 at
11:56:21 AM PDT
506811
247 Sacramento CA US The City has adopted Program H8. Revisions to Parking Requirements.

The City shall consider further eliminating City-mandated parking minimums and explore instituting parking maximums along established transit corridors. Analysis, community outreach, and coordination with the City’s Parking Services Division will be initiated in 2021.

Recommended revisions to the Planning and Development Code’s parking regulations to be presented to City Council for consideration in 2022.

There are currently no minimum parking requirements in the Central Business & Arts/ Entertainment District for all land uses. In this district, commercial land uses have parking maximums.

Implemented Transit Oriented All Uses August 17, 2022 at 12:41:23 PM PDT
513624
248 Fresno CA US Downtown Districts: No parking minimums for non-residential uses. Parking minimums reduced to .5 spaces per unit.

Mixed-Use District/Commercial Main Street: Require .75 spaces for every studio/onebedroom apartment, 1 space per two-bedroom, and 1.5 per three-bedroom, plus one per guest per four dwelling units. Commercial uses require one space per 600 square feet.

Implemented City Center/Business District Commercial,
Other
May 11, 2022 at
3:09:42 PM PDT
531576
249 Albuquerque NM US Albuquerque New Mexico has eliminated off street parking requirements in the downtown and SU-1 Transit Oriented Development. They have also reduced parking minimums in many other areas and had on street parking account for off street parking by different reduction rates in areas like transit oriented developments.

Implemented City Center/Business District,
Transit Oriented
All Uses June 28, 2022 at
11:22:35 AM PDT
560513
250 Surrey BC CA Parking Minimums were reduced by 20% for all land uses in the City Centre, other than office and multi-family residential with underground parking, which received their own rates. Offices were reduced by 44% of the city-wide standard. Multi-family residential with underground parking was reduced to by 38% of the city-wide standard. Former parking minimums are now parking maximums in the City Centre.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses June 28, 2022 at 11:15:37 AM PDT
568322
251 Milwaukee WI US There are no off-street parking requirements for uses located in downtown zoning districts (C9A) and uses located in a red redevelopment district. Land uses within 1,000 feet of a bus stop or within downtown boundaries are eligible for a 25% reduction in the number of parking spaces required. Required spaces may be satisfied by assets in a public lot or structure on a one-to-one basis, and must be located within 700 feet of the use.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses June 28, 2022 at 11:22:08 AM PDT
590157
252 Baltimore MD US Developments in the C-1, C-1-E, C-1-VC, and C-5 districts are exempt from parking mandates. Parking maximums are generally 2X the minimum, citywide.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses May 24, 2022 at 3:14:13 PM PDT
593490
253 Louisville KY US There are no minimum or maximum parking requirements for all uses in the Central Business District. There are maximum parking requirements for certain uses. There are opportunities to reduce the minimum parking required outside of the CBD if specific criteria are met.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses June 27, 2022 at 12:42:42 PM PDT
617790
254 Portland OR US Portland legalized up to six-units with no mandatory parking on most formerly single family lots citywide. There are no parking requirements in the central city for any use. Multi-family residential, citywide, is effectively exempt from parking mandates (if the project participates in a mandatory inclusionary affordable housing program or is 30 or fewer units near transit). All non-residential uses are exempt within 500 feet of frequent transit or 1000 1/4 mile of a transit station (this covers nearly all commercial zones in the city). Most uses have parking maximums and the maximums in the Downtown are fairly restrictive.

Implemented Citywide All Uses Aug 1, 2021 June 14, 2022 at 10:58:42 AM PDT
654741
255 Detroit MI US Uses in the B5 and PC Districts and in any other district in the Central Business District area shall be exempt from off-street parking requirements.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses June 14, 2022 at 10:19:13 AM PDT
670031
15 Attachment "5"
717
Item16.
256 Nashville TN US There are no parking requirements within Nashville's downtown area (DTC). There are also no parking requirements within the Urban Zoning Overlay, which are along multimodal corridors.

Implemented City Center/Business District,
Main Street/Special
All Uses July 11, 2022 at
12:42:10 PM PDT
692587
257 Boston MA US Boston City Council passed a resolution in October 2021 to eliminate parking mandates for developments with more than 60% affordable housing. Boston also has citywide parking maximums
Passed Citywide Residential June 24, 2022 at
12:02:21 PM PDT
692600
258 Washington DC DC US Parking requirements are eliminated in various zone overlays (D, SEFC, USN, CG, and MU-11 Zones). Washington, DC has reduced parking requirements near transit.

Implemented City Center/Business District,
Main Street/Special
All Uses June 28, 2022 at
11:22:27 AM PDT
705749
259 Winnipeg MB CA Since 2008, 20% reduction allowed (anywhere in city) if building is mixed-use and we allow developers to double it with infill reduction, totaling 40%. Parking is not required in the Downtown zoning district.

Implemented Citywide All Uses May 24, 2022 at
2:37:07 PM PDT
749534
260 Seattle WA US Parking is currently not required for any non-hospital uses in designated Urban Centers and Station Overlay Areas, plus any properties within 1/4 mile of a frequent transit stop that lie inside Urban Village boundaries.

For commercial and multifamily residential zones outside of Urban Villages, parking requirements are reduced by 50% within 1/4 mile of frequent transit stops.

Map: https://www.seattle.gov/Documents/Departments/OPCD/Vault/RegulatoryReform/ ParkingFlexibilityAreasMap.pdf. Dark and light grey areas have no parking requirements (except for hospitals), and yellow areas have 50% parking reductions.

Implemented City Center/Business District,
Transit Oriented, Main Street/
Special
High Density
Residential,
Commercial
June 27, 2022 at
12:36:04 PM PDT
753675
261 Indianapolis IN US No Off-Street Parking is required in the Mile Square Area or MU-4 District. Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses May 24, 2022 at 2:45:19 PM PDT
876384
262 San Francisco CA US There are no parking mandates in the city of San Francisco for any use except Mortuary (8 spaces mandated). There are parking maximums for most uses.

Implemented Citywide All Uses Dec 11, 2018 May 17, 2022 at 9:34:52 AM PDT
881549
263 Charlotte NC US No vehicle parking is required for any use in any TOD District, except for bars, restaurants, micro-breweries, microdistilleries, micro-wineries, and live performance venues within 200 feet of a single-family residential zoning district.

Implemented Transit Oriented All Uses May 17, 2022 at
10:15:59 AM PDT
885708
264 Columbus OH US Columbus has eliminated all parking minimums and requirements in the Downtown planning area. In much of the downtown new accessory surface lots are prohibited.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses May 17, 2022 at 12:10:07 PM PDT
898553
265 Fort Worth TX US For non-residential uses, there are no minimum parking requirements. Additionally, properties designated as historic and cultural landmarks are not subject to minimum offstreet requirements and there are no minimum off-street requirements in the Central Business District ("H").

The maximum number of parking spaces shall not exceed 125% of the minimum parking requirement for all uses listed.

Implemented City Center/Business District Commercial June 21, 2022 at 11:59:02 AM PDT
909585
266 Jacksonville FL US There are no parking minimums anywhere in the Downtown overlay district. Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses May 17, 2022 at 11:19:57 AM PDT
911507
267 Ottawa ON CA Ottawa has zero parking requirements in the city center and no residential parking requirements for buildings less than 4 stories. Remaining parking requirements are relatively low.

Implemented Citywide, City Center/
Business District
All Uses June 28, 2022 at
11:23:28 AM PDT
934243
268 Austin TX US In most parts of downtown Austin and West Campus (an area just north of downtown and west of the University of Texas), there are no minimum parking requirements except that buildings must provide the same number of ADA-accessible parking that they would be required to in other city districts. Essentially, the parking minimums have been split into ACCESSIBLE minimums and other minimums and only the ACCESSIBLE minimums were retained.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses June 24, 2022 at 12:11:47 PM PDT
978908
269 Edmonton AB CA Minimum on-site parking requirements have been removed from Edmonton’s Zoning Bylaw, allowing developers, homeowners and businesses to decide how much on-site parking to provide on their properties based on their particular operations, activities or lifestyle.

Implemented Citywide All Uses Jul 2, 2020 May 11, 2022 at 2:58:30 PM PDT
981280
270 San Jose CA US In July 2022 San Jose city council unanimously directed staff to bring an ordinance back to council, by the end of 2022, to eliminate minimum parking requirements citywide.

Proposed Citywide All Uses June 30, 2022 at
12:18:32 PM PDT
1021795
271 Montgomery
County
MD US Montgomery County has several parking districts in which parking mandates are waived if a tax to support district parking is paid. In recent years, the tax has been reduced to zero, thereby making parking minimums effectively zero in several downtown business districts in the county.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses June 24, 2022 at 12:41:53 PM PDT
1062061
272 Calgary AB CA The City of Calgary has removed minimum parking requirements for non-residential uses from the Land Use Bylaw.

Implemented Citywide Commercial,
Industrial
May 17, 2022 at
10:29:40 AM PDT
1335145
16 Attachment "5"
718
Item16.
273 Calgary AB CA Parking minimums are no longer required in the Downtown Core Zoning District. There is a parking maximum of no more than 20% of the minimum.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses October 1, 2022 at 6:54:18 PM PDT
1335145
274 Dallas TX US No parking requirements for areas outside single-family residential districts buffer area.

No parking requirements (regardless of area located) for 1) buildings built prior to March 17, 1965 and 2) the first 5,000 square feet of floor area of a use Proposed Main Street/Special All Uses June 24, 2022 at
11:59:08 AM PDT
1343573
275 San Diego CA US Residential developments within 1/2 mile of a current or planned major transit stop are exempt from minimum parking requirements. Any provided parking in market-rate developments with more than 4 units must be rented or leased separately (unbundled) from the dwelling unit. Commercial uses are exempt from requirements in transit priority areas and commercial neighborhoods citywide.

Implemented Transit Oriented All Uses May 24, 2022 at
1:55:48 PM PDT
1423851
276 San Antonio TX US The Downtown "D" District is exempt from minimum parking requirements. Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses May 17, 2022 at 10:03:08 AM PDT
1547253
277 Philadelphia PA US There are no minimum parking requirements for residential land uses in certain residential districts (RSA-4/5/6 and RM-1). There are no minimum parking requirements for residential, office, and retail land uses in certain commercial zoning districts (CMX-2/2.5, CMX-3, CMX-4/5).

Implemented City Center/Business District Commercial,
Residential
June 21, 2022 at
11:02:44 AM PDT
1584064
278 Phoenix AZ US No car parking is required for non-residential uses in the Downtown and Warehouse districts. Reductions for residential and commercial parking requirements are automatic near light rail stations. Parking maximums are in place for most uses, but there are ample opportunities to increase them.

Implemented City Center/Business District Commercial,
Residential
May 17, 2022 at
11:02:08 AM PDT
1680992
279 Alameda County CA US The Ashland and Cherryland Business District Specific Plan regulates a 246-acre area along two major streets in unincorporated Alameda County. Within the plan area, there are no minimum parking requirements for restaurants and small retail establishments. In most zones within the plan area, there are also no minimum requirements for offices, “general commercial”, gas stations, car washes, and automobile sales, rental, and repair establishments. For land uses where minimum parking requirements still apply, the requirements are generally lower than the County’s standard requirements. The plan sets maximum parking requirements for most land uses. At many residential developments, the plan also requires the unbundling of parking costs and the provision of designated spaces for carshare cars.

Implemented City Center/Business District Commercial June 27, 2022 at 1:15:52 PM PDT
1682353
280 Montreal QC CA Parking Minimums abolished in the borough of the Sud-Ouest for 99.9% of the territory (everywhere except in zone 415, in Griffintown, where citizens won a referendum to prevent minimums from being abolished on their block. Eliminations were also made in Ville-Marie borough and Plateau-Mont-Royal borough.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses September 23, 2022 at 11:07:48 AM PDT
1762949
281 Houston TX US There are no minimum parking requirements within the Central Business District (CBD); There are no parking requirements within primary Transit Oriented Development (TOD) streets and a 50% reduction along secondary TOD streets. In 2019, minimum parking requirements were also removed in parts of the Midtown and Downtown East neighborhoods.

Implemented City Center/Business District,
Transit Oriented
All Uses June 21, 2022 at
11:59:44 AM PDT
2320268
282 Chicago IL US There are no minimum parking requirements for certain nonresidential uses within the Downtown Zoning District, which are also subject to specific maximum requirements.

In certain districts (B,C, or D), the minimum parking requirement for residential uses may be reduced by 50% if the property is within 1,320 feet of a CTA rail station, a Metra rail station, OR along a high frequency bus line corridor, or 2,640 feet of other specified bus line corridors that is also along a designated 'pedestrian street or a 'pedestrian retail street'.

In other districts (B,C, D or M), the minimum parking requirement for non-residential uses may be reduced by 50% if the property is within 1,320 feet of a CTA rail station, a Metra rail station, OR along a high frequency bus line corridor, or 2,640 feet of other specified bus line corridors that is also along a designated 'pedestrian street or a 'pedestrian retail street'.

The parking may be reduced by 100% if it is approved as a special use.

Implemented Transit Oriented, City Center/
Business District
Commercial,
Residential
June 24, 2022 at
12:01:15 PM PDT
2693976
283 Toronto ON CA On December 15, 2021 Toronto repealed car parking mandates citywide for all uses. Implemented Citywide All Uses Dec 15, 2021 June 27, 2022 at 12:53:42 PM PDT
2731571
284 Connecticut CT US Connecticut adopted Public Act 21-29, a statewide zoning reform law that reduces minimum parking mandates, among numerous other reforms.

In May 2020, Governor Ned Lamont, as part of a pandemic response executive order, temporarily suspended statewide parking requirements for existing restaurants, allowing them to utilize their parking lots for outdoor dining.

Implemented Regional Residential June 27, 2022 at
1:33:32 PM PDT
3552821
17 Attachment "5"
719
Item16.
285 Los Angeles CA US The Cornfield Arroyo Specific Plan, passed in 2012, has no minimum parking requirements for projects in the area.

Implemented City Center/Business District All Uses May 17, 2022 at 11:29:55 AM PDT
3979576
286 Oregon OR US In July 2022, Oregon's Land Conservation and Development Committee adopted permanent rules which will require 61 cities in the state's 8 metro regions to eliminate parking mandates near high frequency transit service by 1/1/2023. Additional rules will require more comprehensive reforms in following years.

HB2001, passed in 2019, legalized “missing middle” housing types – such as duplexes, fourplexes, and townhomes – in medium and large cities statewide. The new rules implementing the law “hold mandatory parking ratios at or below one parking space per home.”
HB2001 rules apply to any city with a population greater than 10,000 people and to any city in a metro area with more than 1,000 people. Approximately 58 Oregon cities fall under this definition.

Medium cities had to comply by 6/30/2021 and Large cities must comply by 6/30/2022.

Additionally, ADUs are legal, statewide, and cities may not require parking for ADUs.

Passed Regional, Transit Oriented All Uses May 19, 2022 July 25, 2022 at 10:05:40 AM PDT
4028977
287 New Zealand NZ NZ The National Policy Statement - Urban Development (NPS UD) required councils to remove provisions for a minimum number of on-site car parks from district plans through a nonnotified process, to allow more intensive urban development with less space taken up by car parks, leading to better utilisation of urban land.

Implemented Regional All Uses Jul 23, 2020 June 27, 2022 at 1:34:08 PM PDT
5122600
288 New York CIty NY US NYC consists of 5 boroughs with over 8 million people. NYC has no parking minimums in most of Manhattan, and reduced requirements (with no requirement for certain types of housing) in several other dense neighborhoods around the city.

Implemented City Center/Business District,
Transit Oriented
All Uses May 24, 2022 at
2:40:41 PM PDT
8336817
289 Mexico City DF MX Mexico City eliminated parking minimums in July 2017. Previous minimum requirements became parking maximums. Developers must pay in-lieu fees for parking in excess of 50% of the parking maximums.

Implemented Citywide All Uses Jul 1, 2017 May 17, 2022 at 10:23:59 AM PDT
8918653
290 California CA US AB2097, signed into law in September 2022, prohibits cities and counties from enforcing parking mandates within 1/2 mile of high quality transit service. There are avenues for city's to enforce multi-family residential mandates on a case-by-case basis, but also a backup exemption for developments which include affordable housing.

Previous California laws limited local parking mandates.

Senate Bill 35, adopted in 2017, has streamlined the approval of thousands of affordable homes near transit. The law grants these projects relief from local parking mandates.

Senate Bill 9 signed into law in 2021, makes it legal statewide to build up to four homes on most lots that are currently zoned for single-family homes only. Cities cannot require more than one parking space per home for projects built under the law.

Implemented Regional, Transit Oriented All Uses September 23, 2022 at 12:19:47 PM PDT
39700000
18 Attachment "5"
720
Item16.
1 Adam Finestone
From: Don Zech <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 26, 2023 11:56 AM
To: Adam Finestone
Subject: RE: EVSP - former pill hill area
Adam,
I have submitted this to the EVSP comment page on the website but also thought I would submit directly to you. I try to keep my nose out of politics and government as much as possible but I really think this might be the only way to gain success on the old pill hill site (East of the old hospital between Grand and Valley) otherwise it will likely be another century of specific planning documentation and status quo (for the next generation of brokers and developers and planners!).

I have been a commercial real estate broker in Escondido for over 38 years. I have leased and sold and represent many many owners within the East Valley District. I appreciate the work that has been done on the EVSP and understand that it is necessary so as to meet the complex rules, regulations and bureaucracy that is government. However, the sector east of the old hospital and bordered by Valley and Grand on the North and south is a thorny urban planning issue. You have mixed use of old residential and old medical/professional that was supposed to overgrow the old residential 40 to 50 years ago. Now you have VERY old residential and obsolete office that has no hope for future growth because of the relocation of the Hospital and declining demand for offices in general. Small single-lot residences (including 1-4 multifamily) are at all-time highs in pricing, making their tear-down for redevelopment prohibitive. All of the above leads to a conundrum that is next to impossible to solve through planning documents and policy statements. I have given this a great deal of thought and looked outside of our marketplace for solutions and I think I have found one that works and I believe with some effort could be accomplished in Escondido. I leave the details to those with Urban planning backgrounds but the simplistic answer is that exponential density be granted for assemblage. For example, if a single lot allows for a single unit, two lots would allow for 4 units and 3 lots allow for 8 units etc.. Furthermore, you could designate a couple of streets for shopkeeper units and maybe some for row homes. The advantage of this plan is that it incentivizes a developer to overpay on small lots because they make up for it in density. The City controls the density and therefore in concert with developers can determine how much density has to be given to make it valuable enough for a developer to buy out everyone needed and sell the units for a profit. Something similar to this is being floated in San Marcos for their San Marcos Creek project, except in their case they are giving the density bonus to incentivize the developers to pay for the large amount of infrastructure improvements needed to create the Creekside project for the City.

Don Zech | Lic #00885909
CDC Commercial Inc. | Lic #01857155
11440 W Bernardo Ct. Suite 300
San Diego, Ca. 92127
858.486.9999
www.cdccommercial.com
NOTICE OF CONFIDENTIALITY & NON BINDING: This Electronic transmission contains CONFIDENTIAL AND PRIVILEGED INFORMATION from CDC Commercial. If you receive this message or any of its attachments in error, please return this transmission to the sender immediately and delete this message from your mailbox. Nothing in this email is intended to be contractual (unless a mutually executed document is attached), nor shall any party be bound by the terms and Attachment "5"
721
Item16.
2 conditions herein, unless and until a definitive Purchase Agreement or Lease Agreement and all other appropriate documentation has been mutually agreed upon, executed, and delivered to all parties.

Attachment "5"
722
Item16.

STAFF REPORT
July 19, 2023
File Number 0875-70

SUBJECT
CITY OF ESCONDIDO’S WRITTEN RESPONSE TO THE SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY REPORT TITLED “HOUSING IN SAN DIEGO COUNTY”

DEPARTMENT
City Attorney and Development Services

RECOMMENDATION
Request the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2023-78 approving the written response of the City of Escondido to the 2022/2023 San Diego County Grand Jury Report titled “Housing in San Diego County.” Staff Recommendation: Approval (City Attorney’s Office: Michael McGuinness, City Attorney; Development Services Department: Andrew Firestine, Director of Development Services) Presenters: Michael McGuinness, City Attorney

FISCAL ANALYSIS
There is no fiscal impact for the approval and submission of the City’s response to the Grand Jury Report.

However, the implementation of various recommendations may have cost and benefit implications which have not been estimated or calculated at this time.

PREVIOUS ACTION
On June 27, 2023, the City Council’s Housing Subcommittee reviewed and commented on a draft response. The comments from the subcommittee are included in the proposed City Response to the Grand Jury Report attached as Exhibit “A” to Resolution No. 2023-78.

BACKGROUND
Civil Grand Jury
In California, each county convenes a civil grand jury on an annual basis to carry out various functions.

Relevant to this matter, a grand jury has the authority to investigate and report on the operations of local government agencies, also known as the "watchdog" function. The Grand Jury serving in this role is an independent body and operationally separate from the entities and officials it investigates, including the 723
Item17.

County itself. The Grand Jury conducts its investigations under the auspices of the Superior Court and may summon for testimony public officials and employees as well as obtain records and information on the subject of the Grand Jury’s investigation.

The Grand Jury's investigations result in written reports which contain background on the purpose of the investigation, the facts and evidence discovered, and specific recommendations which, in the opinion of the Grand Jury, may result in opportunities to improve government operations.

The Grand Jury does not have the constitutional or statutory authority to compel compliance with its Report recommendations. However, the Reports issued by the Grand Juries are an opportunity for one entity to investigate a public agency and identify potential solutions to issues which may or may not have already been considered by the subject agencies to prompt consideration and possibly action.

Statutory Requirements for City Response
Under state law, the subject agency must respond to both Findings of Fact and Recommendations contained in the Grand Jury Report. As to Findings of Fact, the agency must either agree with the finding or disagree in whole or in part with the finding. If the agency disagrees with any part of the finding, it must explain the portion disputed. Penal Code § 933.05(a).

As to Report Recommendations, the subject agency has four alternative responses. The agency must indicate whether the agency: (1) has implemented the recommendation and a summary of such action; (2) has not yet been implemented the recommendation but will in the future, including an anticipated time frame; (3) the recommendation requires further analysis with an explanation of the scope and parameters of the analysis and a time frame for the matter to be prepared for consideration and discussion by the City Manager not to exceed six months from the date of publication of the Report; or (4) will not implement the recommendation because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. Penal Code § 933.05(b).

Grand Jury Report
On May 9, 2023, the Grand Jury filed its Report titled “Housing in San Diego County” (Report). The Report was sent to the city managers for every city in San Diego County and the Chief Administrative Officer of the County of San Diego. A copy of the Report is attached to this staff report as Attachment 1.

In general, the Report recounts the numerous challenges to the provision of adequate and affordable housing in the San Diego County region. The Report states, “[i]n recognition that San Diego County is failing to provide enough housing for its current and future citizens, the Grand Jury decided to look at the failure of the cities and County to meet their Regional Housing Needs Allocation [RHNA] goals and evaluate steps that could be taken to increase the regional housing stock.” Report, page 2. 724
Item17.

The Report provides a table identifying each public agency’s satisfaction of the allocation goals for the Fifth RHNA Cycle which spanned from January 1, 2013 to December 31, 2020 as to each income level goal.

According to the Report, this information was obtained from an undated SANDAG Fact Sheet. Report, page 2, footnote 4. The income level goals are “Very Low Income” (<50% of AMI), “Low Income” (<50- 80% of AMI), “Moderate Income” (80-120% of AMI), and “Above Moderate Income” (>120% of AMI).1 The Report notes that only the City of Lemon Grove satisfied each income level goal for this 5th Cycle, with all others failing to meet all four allocation goals and seven failing to meet any of the income goals.

Putting aside the issue of whether the City’s RHNA allocation goals were reasonable, fair and justified, as to the City, the Report indicates that it failed to meet the goals for all four income categories in the 5th Cycle. It should be noted that according to the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD)’s data portal, Escondido did meet its “Moderate Income” goal. The SANDAG Fact Sheet used by the Grand Jury as a reference for this portion of the Report is not readily available on its website to examine and it is possible that SANDAG used a different date range than HCD which is the state agency responsible for overseeing the annual progress of RHNA.

In addition to the RHNA goals, the Report discusses various planning tools and recent legislation to encourage housing production including accommodations for the construction of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU); using expedited ministerial approvals for certain housing developments; waiving certain development fees; using specific plans to streamline development and take advantage of existing mobility hubs; issuing bonds and implementing other revenue-raising activities to construct affordable housing; and increasing taxes and fees on businesses and developers to fund projects. Additionally, the Report cites to recent legislation enacted to encourage school and community college districts to utilize their properties to develop workforce housing for their educators and employees. The Report reviews the ongoing work being done by two transit agencies, North County Transit District (NCTD) and Metropolitan Transit System (MTS), to develop their properties for housing, including the Escondido Transit Center.

Finally, the Report outlines various current projects where religious institutions are using their land holdings for housing projects and identifies a pending piece of pending legislation, Senate Bill 4 (Weiner), which proposes to allow religious and non-profit organizations to develop their properties “by right” under certain circumstances.

City Response to the Report
As noted above, the City is required to respond to each of the Findings of Fact and Recommendations included in the Report by agreeing with or disputing the stated finding. The Housing Subcommittee considered the Report Findings and Recommendations and submits to the full City Council its

1 According to the Report, in 2022, the Average Median Income (AMI) in San Diego County was $106,900 for a family of four. Report, page 4.
725
Item17.
recommended language for the City Manager’s written response the draft of which is attached as Exhibit “A” to Resolution No. 2023-78.

A. Findings of Fact
At pages 11-13 of the Report, the Grand Jury includes six fact Findings accompanied by twenty-two facts.

The City does not dispute the Findings and facts as stated and the City’s response affirms those Report statements. See, Exhibit “A” to Resolution No. 2023-78 at pages 1 and 2.

B. Recommendations
At pages 14-15 of the Report, the Grand Jury makes a total of nine Recommendations to varying public agencies. (Recommendations 23-01 through 23-09). As to the City of Escondido, seven Recommendations are made which require a response. (Recommendations 23-01 through 23-06, and 23-08). The City Response to the seven Recommendations can best be broken down by grouping the responses by category of implementation.

1. Recommendations Already Implemented
The City has already implemented Recommendations 23-01, 23-04 and 23-08. Recommendation 23-01 involves consideration of the use of specific plans to help facilitate the development of housing. The City has already adopted two Specific Plans including the Downtown Specific Plan and the South Centre Specific Plan. The council will be considering a third with the proposed adoption of East Valley Specific Plan (EVSP) on July 19, 2023. Recommendation 23-08 asks the City to consider continuing to work with NCTD on potential development of its transit property in Escondido. The City is fully engaged with NCTD in both development of the transit property as well as with studying a potential land swap between NCTD and the City to include the City’s Public Works Yard and Quince and Spruce Street properties.

Recommendation 23-04 involves the consideration of drafting a local revenue-generating ordinance to fund affordable housing construction. The City’s proposed EVSP contains an affordable housing trust fund funded through an in-lieu fee operative when a development project fails to meet the target density provided for in the Plan.

2. Recommendations Requiring Further Analysis
The City response to Recommendations 23-02 and 23-03 is that they require further analysis.

Recommendation 23-02 includes consideration of working with schools and community college districts to identify developable land. Recommendation 23-03 suggests consideration of working with local religious institutions to identify developable land within the City’s jurisdiction. As the draft Response states, the City is not opposed to the Recommendations, and in the case of schools and religious institutions, already has cooperative relationships with these entities and looks forward to opportunities to review housing projects brought to staff. However, in order to respond that the City will implement the recommendation, by statute the City must identify the specific time frame for implementation. Penal 726
Item17.

Code § 933.05(b)(2). The City is best served with a response that provides that further analysis is warranted so the City Manager can receive City Council direction on the issue and manage staff workloads in undertaking any new program for a specific outreach program implementing the recommendations.

3. Recommendations Which Will Not Be Implemented
The City response to Recommendations 23-05 and 23-06 is that the recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted nor is it reasonable. (a) Recommendation 23-05 (Senate Bill 1105)
Recommendation 23-05 asks the City to consider providing support to re-introducing Senate Bill (SB) 1105 (Hueso) to create a San Diego regional agency to raise revenue for housing. SB 1105, also known as the San Diego Regional Equitable and Environmentally Friendly Affordable Housing Act, would establish the SD REEF Agency (Agency) to purportedly increase the supply of equitable and environmentally friendly housing in San Diego County. The text of this lengthy bill can be found at:

Bill Text - SB-1105 San Diego Regional Equitable and Environmentally Friendly Affordable Housing Agency. (ca.gov)
The bill’s author claimed it would provide enhanced funding and technical assistance acrossthe San Diego region for equitable and environmentally friendly housing projects and programs, equitable housing preservation, and rental protection programs. The law would establish a board composed of 6 voting members including: (1) one member appointed by the Mayor of the City of San Diego; (2) one member appointed by the San Diego County Board of Supervisors; and (3) four members representing the subregions of east, north coastal, north inland, and south counties.

SB 1105 would authorize the Agency to, among other things, incur and issue indebtedness, place various measures on the ballot in the County of San Diego and its incorporated cities, to raise and allocate funds, and to issue general obligation bonds secured by the levy of ad valorem property taxes, for purposes of producing and preserving “equitable and environmentally friendly” housing and supporting rental protection activities. Among the funding measures,the bill would authorize the Agency to impose a parcel tax, a gross receipts business license tax, a special business tax, specified special taxes on real property, and a commercial linkage fee.

Finally, the bill would require that projects funded by the Agency include in their construction contracts certain wage and labor standards, including a requirement that all construction workers be paid at least the general prevailing rate of wages.

The bill made it fairly far through the 2022 legislative session before it was finally held in the Assembly Appropriations Committee on the suspense file. The bill suffered from significant opposition from various apartment and housing associations, contractors, and even some affordable housing developers who 727
Item17.
were concerned about the labor standards contained in the bill. Neither the County of San Diego nor SANDAG took an official position on the bill.

The City’s response outlines several deficiencies and concerns regarding such a regional agency including that the law essentially creates a regional bureaucracy without adequate voter oversight, similar to SANDAG, which will not necessarily operate in the best interests of the City and its local residential needs.

Additionally, the City already has the ability to create a Joint Powers Authority with one or more local agencies to accomplish the same purpose but in that circumstance, the City would have control over revenue-generating and funding decisions which would not exist with the SB 1105 model. (b) Recommendation 23-06 (SB 4)
Recommendation 23-06 asks the City to consider providing legislative support to SB 4 (Weiner). SB 4, also known as the Affordable Housing on Faith and Higher Education Lands Act of 2023, would allow a housing development project to be a use by right on land owned by an independent institution of higher learning or religious institution. The bill is pending in the California legislature and as of the date of the drafting of this report is currently in the Assembly Committee on Natural Resources. The full text of the bill as of the date of this report can be found at:

Bill Text - SB-4 Planning and zoning: housing development: higher education institutions and religious institutions.

In summary, and according to the Legislative Counsel’s Digest, this bill would require that a housing development project be a use by right upon the request of an applicant who submits an application for streamlined approval, on any land owned by an independent institution of higher education or religious institution on or before January 1, 2024, if the development satisfies specified criteria. The bill would require that 100% of the units, exclusive of manager units, in a housing development project eligible for approval as a use by right be affordable to lower income households, with certain exceptions.

This bill would also provide that projects eligible for approval as a use by right are also eligible for certain density bonus, incentives, or concessions, or waivers or reductions of development and parking standards.

The bill would also prohibit a local government from imposing any parking requirement on a development subject to these provisions if the development is located within a certain geographic proximity to public transit areas or car share vehicles.

This bill would include additional requirements on local government including timeframes for application review, provision of documentation to developers identifying conflicts with objective planning standards, and allow for design review only if such review focuses on compliance with the requisite criteria of a streamlined, ministerial review process. Finally, the bill requires the payment of prevailing wages to all construction workers employed on all projects involving more than 10 units.

The City’s response outlines several deficiencies and concerns regarding a development-by-right bill including the further erosion of reasonable local control over projects without providing the City the ability to adopt reasonable conditions which protect surrounding properties; the payment of prevailing wages 728
Item17.
unnecessarily increasing the costs of construction; and, a general objection to Sacramento again using a complicated, ever-changing, one-size-fits-all methodology for housing production which fails to account for locale-specific issues.

RESOLUTIONS
a. Resolution No. 2023-78
b. Resolution No. 2023-78 Exhibit “A” – City of Escondido Response to San Diego County Grand Jury Report Title “Housing in San Diego County”

ATTACHMENTS
a. Attachment 1 - 2022/2023 San Diego County Grand Jury Report titled “Housing in San Diego County”
729
Item17.

RESOLUTION NO. 2023-78

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE WRITTEN

RESPONSE OF THE CITY OF ESCONDIDO TO THE
2022/2023 SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY REPORT
TITLED “HOUSING IN SAN DIEGO COUNTY”
WHEREAS, on May 9, 2023, the 2022/2023 San Diego County Grand Jury (“Grand Jury”) filed a Report, titled “Housing in San Diego County” (“Report”), with the Presiding Judge of the San Diego Superior Court in accordance with California Penal Code section 933; and WHEREAS, the Report explored the regional need for, and challenges related to, increasing housing stock and affordability and the role public agencies may play in resolving these issues; and WHEREAS, in total, the Report includes six findings and nine recommendations to the County of San Diego and various San Diego County municipalities, including seven recommendations directed at the City of Escondido (“City”), for comment; and
WHEREAS, the City is required to provide comments to the Presiding Judge of the San Diego Superior Court within ninety (90) days of the publication of the Report; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Penal Code section 933.05(a), in responding to each Grand Jury finding, the City is required to either (1) agree with the finding or (2) disagree wholly or partially with the finding; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Penal Code section 933.05(b), the City is required to indicate that a recommendation (1) has been implemented; (2) has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future; (3) requires further analysis; or (4) will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable and an explanation therefor; and
730
Item17.

WHEREAS, the City Manager’s Office, including the City’s Planning Department, in coordination with the City Attorney’s Office, reviewed and considered the Report’s Findings of Fact and Recommendations and have drafted a proposed Response attached hereto as Exhibit “A”; and WHEREAS, on June 27, 2023, the City’s Housing Subcommittee reviewed and considered a draft response to the Report and made recommendations thereto; and WHEREAS, the City’s Response attached hereto as Exhibit A provides accurate and complete responses to the Report Recommendations consistent with California law; and WHEREAS, the City Council is required to and desires to fully comply with state law in addressing the Report’s Recommendations and wishes to authorize the City Manager to execute the City’s Response attached as Exhibit “A” and timely file it with the Presiding Judge of the San Diego Superior Court.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Escondido, California as follows:

1. That the above recitations are true.

2. That the City Council approves and adopts, as its own, the Response to the San Diego Grand Jury Report titled “Housing in San Diego County” as set forth in Exhibit “A” (“Response”) attached hereto and made a part hereof.

3. That the City Manager is authorized and directed, on behalf of the City Council, to execute and deliver to the Presiding Judge of the San Diego Court the Response no later than August 9, 2023. 731
Item17.
1 City of Escondido
Response to San Diego County Grand Jury Report Titled
“Housing in San Diego County”
Pursuant to California Penal Code sections 933(c) and 933.05, the City Council of the City Escondido provides the following responses to the Findings and Recommendations of the 2022/2023 San Diego County Grand Jury Report title “Housing in San Diego County” (“Report”).

FINDINGS 01 THROUGH 06.

Finding 01: The City of Lemon Grove met its housing allocation for all the income categories identified by SANDAG in the Fifth RHNA Cycle.

City Response: The City agrees with the Finding.

Finding 02: The County of San Diego failed to meet their housing allocation for all income levels.

City Response: The City agrees with the Finding.

Finding 03: The following cities did not meet their housing allocations for all income categories: Carlsbad, Chula Vista, Coronado, Del Mar, El Cajon, Encinitas, Escondido, Imperial Beach, La Mesa, National City, Oceanside, Poway, San Diego, San Marcos, Santee, Solana Beach and Vista.

City Response: The City agrees with the Finding.

Finding 04: The San Diego region failed to meet its housing allocations for each of the income categories identified by SANDAG in the Fifth RHNA Cycle.

City Response: The City agrees with the Finding.

Finding 05: Specific plans are useful tools in spurring development, including housing development, and have been used by El Cajon and Chula Vista among others.

City Response: The City of Escondido agrees with the Finding and already has in place two Specific Plans, the Downtown Specific Plan and South Centre City Specific Plan.

Finding 06: Both transit agencies in San Diego County (NCTD and MTS) have made land available for development and are actively developing projects that include housing, among other uses.

Resolution No. 2023-78
Exhibit "A"

Page 1 of 5 ends

732
Item17.
2 City Response: The City of Escondido agrees with the Finding and is actively working with NCTD to develop a housing project in Escondido.

RECOMMENDATIONS 23-01 THROUGH 23-06, AND 23-08.

Recommendation 23-01: Consider, if they have not done so, using specific plans (as defined by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research) to facilitate the permitting and development of housing, particularly affordable housing, in their jurisdictions.

City Response: The recommendation has already been implemented. The City of Escondido continues to utilize specific plan to facilitate permitting and developing of housing, including affordable housing. The City’s Downtown Specific Plan (adopted), South Centre City Specific Plan (adopted), and forthcoming East Valley Specific Plan, create moderate to high density allowances and streamlined permitting processes to facilitate housing development. The East Valley Specific Plan includes a mechanism for affordable housing construction through an in-lieu fee process for any development proposing below a target production point density.

Recommendation 23-02: Consider working with school districts and community college districts within their jurisdictions to identify developable land for housing owned by districts within their boundaries.

City Response: The recommendation requires further analysis. The City does not currently work with school districts and community college districts within the City to identify developable land for housing. However, the City continues to maintain cooperative relationships with all school districts and is open to working and collaborating with the school districts to identify district-owned properties that are zoned and/or identified for housing. The anticipated time frame for City Manager review of any proposal to implement this recommendation will be dependent on available staff resources and will not exceed six months from the publication of the Report.

Recommendation 23-03: Consider working with local religious institutions within their jurisdictions to identify land developable for housing, particularly affordable housing.

City Response: The recommendation requires further analysis. The City’s adopted Sixth Cycle Housing Element’s Program 2.1 includes an action to allow for ADUs on places of worship and churches. As part of the Housing Element’s Program 3.4, City staff will contact all religious facilities annually to notify them of the forthcoming zoning ordinance modifications to allow for ADUs on religious institutions. The City supports further conversations with local religious institutions to aid in the identification of land developable for housing, including affordable housing. The anticipated time frame for City Manager review of any proposal to implement this recommendation will be dependent on available staff resources and will not exceed six months from the publication of the Report.

Resolution No. 2023-78
Exhibit "A"

Page 2 of 5 ends

733
Item17.
3 Recommendation 23-04: Consider drafting revenue-generating legislation at the jurisdiction level, if feasible and legal e.g., the Seattle Jumpstart Tax. Monies generated by such a tax to fund or assist in funding the construction of housing, particularly affordable housing.

City Response: The recommendation has already been implemented. The City’s forthcoming East Valley Specific Plan, which is a programmatic requirement of the City’s adopted Sixth Cycle Housing Element (Programs 1.1 and 1.3), contains an affordable housing trust fund that would be funded through an in-lieu fee derived from a target production point density threshold for development. Funds resulting from the in-lieu fee, which would result from development proposed below the target production point density, would then be used to facilitate affordable housing construction.

Recommendation 23-05: Consider providing legislative support to re-introducing in the State Legislature SB 1105, or similar legislation, to create a San Diego County agency that could raise revenue for housing.

City Response: The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted nor is it reasonable. The City of Escondido supports efforts to facilitate housing production for all income levels. However, this legislation suffers from several deficiencies including but not limited to:

1. It would create another expensive regional bureaucracy without adequate voter oversight, similar to SANDAG, which does not always make decisions in the best interest of all of its member agencies, including the City of Escondido;

2. The City would have fractional, and therefore diminished, voting power over the Agency’s revenue production and expenditure decisions given the composition of the voting board membership which is to the detriment of the City’s specific local interests;

3. The City’s residents and businesses will be subjected to various property and business taxes which may not have a direct or even proportional value to them in terms of local housing projects;

4. The specific projects described in the Act’s title as “equitable” and/or “environmentally friendly” are ill-defined;

5. The inclusion of more taxes on already over-taxed residents is regressive to the economy and impedes a local agency’s opportunity to initiate or raise a local revenue measure;

6. The proposed law creates both a board of directors comprised of six voting members and a large 12-member advisory committee (11 voting and 1 nonvoting members) who may have conflicting financial, policy, jurisdictional and political differences which can hinder the potential effectiveness of a regional effort;

7. The proposed law includes extraordinary detail as to the operations of the Agency such that it minimizes real-time, practical, flexible and local problemsolving;

8. Sacramento should allow local public agencies like the City of Escondido the flexibility to work within their individual jurisdictions with housing developers to Resolution No. 2023-78
Exhibit "A"

Page 3 of 5 ends

734
Item17.
4 pursue opportunities for the development of affordable housing suitable to this city and not impose a complicated, ever-changing “one-size-fits-all” law to cover a whole region which has different local needs and capabilities.

9. The City already has the ability to form a JPA with one or more local agencies to perform the same functions as the proposed law and with that power comes the ability to adopt standards and rules that take into account local needs and capacities.

10.It would require the payment of prevailing wage for all development projects funded by the Agency increasing the already high costs of construction.

Recommendation 23-06: Consider providing legislative support to SB4, which is currently before the legislature. The bill makes it easier to provide affordable housing on land owned by religious institutions.

City Response: The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted nor is it reasonable. The City of Escondido supports efforts to facilitate housing production for all income levels and desires to work with all property owners in the City on finding opportunities for housing projects. However, this legislation as currently written suffers from several deficiencies including but not limited to:

1. The requirement that Cities ignore local conditions and surrounding neighborhoods and allow “by right” a development project without any opportunity to adopt any reasonable conditions for the development fails to protect the legitimate interests of neighboring properties.

2. The requirement for the payment of prevailing wages on housing development projects unnecessarily increases the cost of construction.

3. Sacramento should allow local public agencies like the City of Escondido the flexibility to work within their individual jurisdictions with housing developers and religious institutions to pursue opportunities for the development of affordable housing suitable to this city and not impose a complicated, everchanging “one-size-fits-all” law to cover a whole region which has different local needs and capabilities.

Recommendation 23-08: Continue working with North County Transit to identify land suitable for development of housing, particularly affordable housing, at major transit stops including Coaster and Sprinter train and bus lines as appropriate.

City Response: The recommendation has been implemented. The City has two projects it is working on with NCTD at and around the NCTD Escondido Transit Center (Center). First, NCTD is working to redevelop the Center with a mixed-use development that will include housing, retail and other transit supportive uses. NCTD has received development proposals from prospective developers. The City’s Director of Development Services is participating in the selection committee this month to determine which proposal will be selected to move forward.

Resolution No. 2023-78
Exhibit "A"

Page 4 of 5 ends

735
Item17.
5 Second, the City and NCTD are partnering on a “land swap” study to evaluate the potential for creating additional transit supportive uses including housing on the land around the Center, including the City’s existing Public Works Yard and its property at Quince and Spruce Streets. A consultant has been selected and SANDAG is requesting authorization to expend grant funds. The study is partially funded with grant funds with contributions from both NCTD and the City. It is expected that grant authorization will be received in the next month and that the study will begin by Fall. The anticipated duration of the study is 6-9 months.

Resolution No. 2023-78
Exhibit "A"

Page 5 of 5 ends

736
Item17.

Attachment "1" 737
Item17.

Attachment "1" 738
Item17.

Attachment "1" 739
Item17.

Attachment "1" 740
Item17.

Attachment "1" 741
Item17.

Attachment "1" 742
Item17.

Attachment "1" 743
Item17.

Attachment "1" 744
Item17.

Attachment "1" 745
Item17.

Attachment "1" 746
Item17.

Attachment "1" 747
Item17.

Attachment "1" 748
Item17.

Attachment "1" 749
Item17.

Attachment "1" 750
Item17.

Attachment "1" 751
Item17.

Attachment "1" 752
Item17.

Attachment "1" 753
Item17.

Attachment "1" 754
Item17.

Attachment "1" 755
Item17.

Attachment "1" 756
Item17.

STAFF REPORT
July 19, 2023
File Number 0810-15

SUBJECT

COOL ZONE PRACTICES

DEPARTMENT
City Clerk’s Office

RECOMMENDATION
Request the City Council receive and file a presentation on Cool Zone Practices.

Staff Recommendation: Receive and File (City Clerk: Zack Beck) Presenter: Zack Beck, City Clerk

BACKGROUND
At the June 14, 2023 City Council Meeting, Councilmember Martinez requested that an item be placed on the Future Agenda to review Cool Zone Practices in Escondido. 757
Item18.

KEYCONSENT CALENDAR CURRENT BUSINESS

PUBLIC HEARING WORKSHOP
7/26/2023 - NO MEETING (SUMMER BREAK)
8/2/2023 - NO MEETING (SUMMER BREAK)

Page 1 ends

758
Item19.

Escondido City CouncilJuly 19, 2023

Escondido City Council
July 19, 2023