Agenda packet, special meeting — Glendale City Council, September 13, 2022 (part 1 of 2)

A G E N D A
SPECIAL MEETING: GLENDALE CITY COUNCIL

COUNCIL CHAMBERS
613 E. Broadway, 2nd Floor
Glendale, CA 91206
Meetings

are

broadcast

live

Glendale

TV,

viewable

Spectrum

Cable,

channel

and

AT&T

U-
verse,

channel

99. Meetings

are

also

streamed

live

high

definition

(HD)

the

city's

webpage,
glendaleca.gov/live
,

YouTube.com/myglendale
,

and

Apple

TV,

Roku,

and

Amazon

Fire
devices

using

free

app

called

Screenweave

and

choosing

“Glendale

TV”

from

the

menu.

Meetings
are

also

archived

the

City

Website

for

viewing

anytime

glendaleca.gov/agendas
.

Call

(818)
548-4013

for

program

schedules.

DVDs

the

proceedings

are

available

for

purchase

the

City
Clerk's

Office.

For

public

comments

and

questions

during

the

meeting,

call

(818)

937-8100.

Public
comments

specific

agenda

item

will

taken

when

that

agenda

item

discussed.

you

have
any

question

about

matters

the

agenda,

requests

for

assistance,

please

contact

the

City

Clerk
at (818) 548-2090 during regular business hours.

PLEASE TURN OFF CELLULAR PHONES WHILE INSIDE THE MEETING LOCATION In

compliance

with

the

Americans

with

Disabilities

Act

(ADA)

1990,

auxiliary

hearing

aids,

sign
language

translation,

and

Braille

transcripts

are

available

upon

request.

Assisted

listening

devices
are

available

same-day

upon

request.

least

48 hours

(or

two

business

days)

notice

required

for
requests

regarding

sign

language

translation

and

Braille

transcription

services.

All

documents
related

open

session

items

this

agenda

that

are

received

less

than

72 hours

prior

this
meeting,

and

are

public

records,

will

available

for

review

the

Office

the

City

Clerk,

613

Broadway, RM 110, Glendale, CA 91206.

Translation

services

are

provided

for

meetings

through

the

use

bilingual

staff

for

speakers

who
wish

utilize

the

service

available.

Speakers

should

state

their

request

contacting

the

City
Clerk’s

office

(818)

548-2090,

least

24 hours

prior

the

scheduled

meeting.

Please

specify
the

language

for

which

you

require

translation.

The

exclusive

use

City

provided

interpreters

not
required and persons are welcome to use their own interpreter or speak in their native language.

SEPTEMBER 13, 2022

ROLL CALL
-
1:00 PM
-
Report of the City Clerk of the City Council, re: Posting of Agenda. The Agenda for the Tuesday, September 13, 2022 Special Public Meeting of the City Council was posted on September 7, 2022 on the Bulletin Board Outside City Hall.

1 TYPED 9/8/2022 11:36:28 AM
09 13 22
SP CC

SPECIAL PUBLIC MEETING
of the City Council is hereby called to meet at

3:00
PM
on
Tuesday, September 13, 2022
, in the Council Chamber, 613 E. Broadway, 2nd Floor
,
Glendale, CA 91206 to consider the following item(s) of business, to wit;

1. Community Development, re: Update on the Tropico Transit Oriented District (TOD) and Presentation of the Draft Tropico Design and Development Standards

1. Motion to receive report and provide direction on the proposed zoning text and map amendments for the Tropico Transit Oriented District (TOD)

2. Community Development, re: Presentation of Results of Hotel Study Related to Hotel Moratorium and Direction on Code/DSP Amendments and/or Extension of Hotel Moratorium for an Additional One-Year Period

1. Motion to Note and File Report

2. Motion Providing Direction and Initiating Zoning Code and/or DSP Amendments Related to Hotel Uses in the DSP

3. Motion Directing Staff to Return with Ordinance for Introduction Extending Ordinance No. 5978 for an Additional One-Year Period

3. Management Services, re: Reach Code - Building Electrification

1. Motion providing direction on options to be included in a reach code for Building Electrification, Photovoltaic (PV) and Electric Vehicle (EV) Charging to amend Title 24 of the California Building Code or adopt an amendment to the Glendale Municipal Code

ADJOURNMENT

2 TYPED 9/8/2022 11:36:28 AM
09 13 22
SP CC

1 CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA ITEM
Report: Update on the Tropico Transit Oriented District (TOD) and Presentation of the Draft Tropico Design and Development Standards

1. Motion to receive report and provide direction on the proposed zoning text and map amendments for the Tropico Transit Oriented District (TOD)

COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Report Only
Approved for September 13, 2022 calendar

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Planning staff is providing an update on the Tropico Transit Oriented District (TOD) and presenting the draft Tropico design and development standards for the area surrounding the Glendale Transit Center for Council’s review. No changes are proposed to the current density limits, except for the Hospital TOD District, as previously directed by City Council.

The proposed zoning includes objective design standards and graphics in a similar format to the Downtown Specific Plan. Staff is also proposing to modify certain parking standards in the Glendale Municipal Code for the new TOD zoning. Based on Council’s comments, staff will proceed with finalizing the proposed zoning text and map amendments for the Tropico TOD Zoning Districts for future presentation to the Planning Commission and adoption by City Council.
3 of 199

21 3
5 0
3 COUNCIL PRIORITIES
Housing: The proposed Tropico TOD amendments and zoning standards are directly related to City Council’s Housing Priority #7 regarding the adoption of the South Glendale Community Plan and associated zoning (Tropico, multi-family development standards).

RECOMMENDATION
Direct staff to proceed with finalizing the proposed Tropico TOD map and text amendments, subject to any comments that City Council may have.

BACKGROUND
The following report summarizes the history of the planning efforts for the Tropico area, as well as the currently proposed set of development and objective design standards for Council’s review and comment.

Located in the southern most portion of the City and adjacent to Glendale Transit Center and the Los Angeles City / Atwater Village border, the Tropico area has always been defined by its proximity to high-quality transportation and a mix of industrial, commercial and a few residential uses. The area is bisected by San Fernando Road running north- west to south-east, and also by Central Avenue running north and south, and Los Feliz Avenue running east and west. Narrower side streets featuring smaller lots run perpendicular between San Fernando Road and Gardena Avenue, with West Cerritos Avenue terminating at the Glendale Transit Center.

Given the proximity to mass transit and unique mix of uses, the area has great potential for sustainable residential and commercial growth. Planning efforts for Tropico were spurred by a $225,000 competitive grant that was awarded in 2012 by the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) to better direct future development in the Tropico area. Work on the Tropico Center Plan (a neighborhood-level policy study) and the South Glendale Community Plan (SGCP) began in Fall of 2012 and spanned over five years of intensive research, preparation and public outreach. The Tropico Center Plan, prepared with contributions by Cityworks Design, Patricia Smith, AICP, ASLA, and Nelson/Nygaard Consulting, consisted of policies and recommendations to promote transit, and to support pedestrian-friendly and transit-oriented development, many of which were carried over into the SGCP. The policy-level Tropico Center Plan was adopted by City Council on July 18, 2018, as part of the South Glendale Community Plan hearing.

During that same hearing, Council also: certified the Final EIR for the SGCP and adopted a statement of overriding considerations; adopted a motion directing staff to modify the South Glendale Community Plan that included maintaining the current densities of the existing SFMU, IMU-R, IMU, C1, C2 and C3 zones; and adopted a motion to initiate preparation of the new TOD mixed-use zoning for the Tropico TOD Center.

Hyperlink to SCGP Council Report: City Council Staff Report for SGCP 06-31-2018 Following Council’s actions, a lawsuit was filed challenging the Final SGCP EIR; the trial court rejected the legal challenges and the Petitioner appealed. The Appellate Court hearing on the appeal is set for October 20, 2022 with a decision expected by no later 4 of 199

31 3
5 0
3 than January 20, 2023. Based on the City Council’s direction and grant requirements for the South Glendale Community Plan and Tropico TOD study area, Planning staff commenced work on the new Tropico TOD zoning. . In March 2020, Glendale was awarded a $625,000 grant through the SB 2 Planning Grants Program application from the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD); HCD’s intent for the grant money was to assist in accelerating or streamlining the production of affordable housing, consistent with the state’s planning priorities.

In April 2020, Council voted to accept and appropriate the SB2 Planning Grant and at the same time also authorized an amendment to the professional services agreement with Crandall Arambula to assist with the grant’s initiatives - updates to the multi-family and mixed-use standards, and also the completion of the design and development standards for the Tropico Center Plan. It was intended that the multi-family and mixed-use standards would follow the substantial completion of the Tropico zoning standards.

This sequencing of work is due in part to the Tropico zoning establishing a framework and informing the development and refinement of other zoning standards. As such, staff anticipates completing the updates to the multi-family and mixed-use zoning as soon as possible based on feedback from City Council on the Tropico TOD development standards.

Note: While the current SB 2 grant funding expenditure deadline is December 31, 2022, the State is considering extending that deadline to December 31, 2023.

ANALYSIS
The draft Tropico TOD zoning presented to City Council for review and comment has been designed to adhere to Council’s direction for the TOD zoning based on the July 2018 SGCP hearing, while fitting within the existing Zoning Code structure as a new mixed use chapter and also incorporating objective design standards, including figures and graphics, similar to the DSP. This is a different approach than the existing Residential, Commercial and Mixed Use chapters in the Zoning Code that are narrative and do not use visuals.

New Chapter: GMC 30.16 Transit Oriented Development Districts The new zoning standards will be added as a new chapter in the Zoning Code – Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Districts. The new TOD districts are based on existing development patterns and the current zoning for the area (see Exhibit 1 – Maps of current and proposed zoning), but will incorporate zoning modifications authorized by the Council as follows:

TOD I - This commercial and mixed-use TOD district is bounded by San Fernando Court to the north, San Fernando Road to the east, the parcels on the south side of South Brand Boulevard to the south, and the south-westerly border of the City to the west. The primary intent of the TOD-I district is to facilitate diverse employment options and a range of housing opportunities -- compatible in scale and form with a pedestrian oriented environment and accessible to 5 of 199

41 3
5 0
3 high quality public transportation (e.g., the Glendale Transportation Center).

The TOD-I district allows for densities up to 87 units per acre, which is consistent with the SGCP decision, but a downzone from the existing IMU-R and SFMU allowable densities for the TOD I district.

TOD II - This commercial and mixed use TOD district is divided into two areas, with the northernmost district area located to the northeast of the intersection of San Fernando Road and Los Feliz Road and the southernmost district area located to the southwest of the intersection of West Cerritos Avenue and San Fernando Road. The primary intent of the TOD-II district is to encourage a diverse mix of active retail and residential uses that complements well-established businesses and serves surrounding neighborhoods. Building design emphasizes walkable urban form to enhance the pedestrian experience within proximity to Tropico's public transportation network. The TOD-II district allows for densities up to 43 units per acre, which is consistent with Council’s SGCP decision to maintain the existing C3 allowable density (per the R-1250 zoning standards for residential development) for the district.

TOD III - This TOD district builds on the goals of TOD-I, and includes Glendale hospital uses and neighboring properties west of the Brand Boulevard of Cars. The primary intent of this zone is to allow for future hospital expansion that includes building heights up to 200 feet and encourages uses which support hospital uses, such as medical offices, treatment facilities, and special needs housing, as well as residential development at densities up to 100 units per acre. The height and density limits for this district were specifically agreed upon by City Council as part of the 2018 South Glendale Plan hearing.

Land Uses and Permit Requirements Table:

The new TOD chapter includes a use table based on the identical table format found in the Commercial, Industrial and Mixed Use chapters of the current Zoning Code. The permitted and conditionally permitted uses in each of the districts are essentially the same as corresponding C3, IMU-R and SFMU underlying zoning, except for TOD III, which focuses on medical and other uses that support the existing hospital uses.

General Development Table:

The TOD chapter also includes a General Development Standards Table using the same table format as found in the other zoning district chapters. Aside from the standard references, the table includes the following pertinent development standards:

Maximum Densities: The table specifies the maximum densities for the three new TOD districts, as previously identified by Council:

TOD I - Up to 100 dwelling units per acre (DU/AC) when not adjacent to multi-family zoning, otherwise – 87 DU/AC (as permitted in the existing SMFU and IMU-R zones);
TOD II - 43 DU/AC for lots greater than 90 feet in width, otherwise 35 DU/AC (as permitted in the existing C3 zones); and
6 of 199

51 3
5 0
3 TOD III - 100 DU/AC (as directed by Council).

These are consistent with the existing density standards for the area, except for TOD III – hospital district, which features an up-zone of up to a maximum of 100 DU/AC from the existing C3’s 43 DU/AC density limit given R-1250 zoning; this is consistent with City Council’s direction as part of the 2018 SGCP hearing and Tropico zoning initiation. Council approved no other density changes as part of the SGCP hearing.

Maximum Heights: The maximum height in the TOD I and II Districts is proposed at 60 feet, as discussed during the SGCP hearing, and in anticipation of the mixed-use and residential projects in Tropico exceeding this height standard, given the inclusionary housing requirement and density bonus provisions. The maximum height for the TOD III (hospital) district is 200 feet, as directed by Council in 2018.

TOD SECTIONS:

The new TOD chapter features four subsections with objective design standards that are similar to ones in the DSP: Site Planning; Massing & Scale; Architectural Elements; and Open Space, which includes landscaping standards.

Site Planning:

Public Realm:

Like the DSP standards for building setbacks regarding parkways, sidewalks and building adjacent zones (DSP 4.1.3), the new TOD chapter provide standards meant on focusing and creating a comfortable and inviting pedestrian experience.

Such a pedestrian environment is vital to promoting other means of transportation, such as walking, and in this area, walking to adjacent mass transit that connects residents and workers to other areas of the city and beyond. As such, the TOD zoning requires a minimum 15-foot “Public Realm Setback” consisting of a “Parkway Zone”, “Sidewalk Zone”, and “Building Adjacent Zone”.

Building Setbacks:

Street front setbacks in the TOD districts depend on the type of building proposed:
non-residential (which would include commercial and industrial) and residential.

No setback is required for non-residential buildings and mixed-use buildings with non-residential ground floor occupancies. For residential buildings and ground floor residential units, in order to achieve privacy and separation for the residential units from the public realm, a minimum five-foot average setback is required. No setback is required if the units are located between 30 and 48 inches above grade, such as with stoops adjacent to the public realm.

Publicly Accessible Open Space (PAOS):

Currently, no publicly accessible open space is required for projects in Tropico given the existing zoning in the area (C3, IMU-R, SFMU). The TOD zoning would require a minimum of 10 percent of the site to be devoted to PAOS. Many of the 7 of 199

61 3
5 0
3 same design standards for the PAOS provided in the DSP are included in the new TOD chapter. Such requirements for courtyards and paseos ensure the PAOS is meaningful, well-designed, and accessible to the public. The actual PAOS design standards are located in the Open Space and Landscaping section later in the TOD chapter.

Parking Design and Access Standards:

New objective design standards are proposed for the TOD district for at-grade parking. Currently, the Zoning Code requires that parking for residential uses be subterranean or semi-subterranean, which significantly adds to the cost of construction. Staff is proposing to amend the parking chapter to allow for at-grade residential parking in the TOD districts, provided the parking is appropriately screened from view with active ground floor uses or articulated building walls, as detailed in the new objective design standards. The standards also specify the location and orientation of parking garage entrances for all buildings, so as to ensure pedestrian safety and promote the active street frontages not focused on vehicular entrances.

Massing & Scale:

Step-backs:

A new objective design standard for the TOD districts to minimize blocky, massive building is the new step-back requirement. A step-back with a minimum average of six feet on street-facing elevations is required for all buildings greater than 50 feet in height; this step-back is a minimum average, allowing for flexibility for the architect, while ensuring relief at the top floor.

Façade Modulation
To further help break down the massing of larger new buildings and to provide visual interest along the elevations, the TOD chapter includes objective design standards similar to the ones found in the Urban Design chapter of the DSP, with a few new ones, and that are formatted into new groupings under “Façade Modulation”:

Vertical Modulation:

This subsection highlights standards for tripartite building layers – top, middle, base – to help break up the street-facing façade vertically for buildings four floors or greater. Differentiation of these layers through the use of architectural materials, textures and color are further detailed under architectural element section.

Horizontal Modulation:

This subsection provides objective design standards for articulation across a building façade that help to break up the massing horizontally. Street facing facades greater than 60 feet in length must have at least 30% of the elevation offset by a minimum of 24 inches, so as to provide undulation across a façade and not have solid, blank walls. Street facing façades 8 of 199

71 3
5 0
3 greater than 250 feet in length also must provide a building separation to cut down the longer massing of the structure. This building separation must have a minimum width and depth of 10% of the building length (example – 30-foot by 30-foot separation for a building that is 300 feet in length).

Interior Horizontal Façade Modulation:

Since often times the interior side elevations are visible from the surrounding properties and streets, objective design standards that require continuation of the façade treatment around the corner of the building and prohibit unbroken, solid wall planes greater than 30 feet in length are proposed for the interior elevations.

Corner Elements:

For buildings located at two street intersections, the building corner must be differentiated by height and design, so as to provide a focal point for the building at such visible locations.

Architectural Elements:

The TOD chapter features many of the same objective design standards set forth in the DSP Urban Design chapter under the same heading “Architectural Elements”, but with a few new ones that will be summarized below. The list of proposed Architectural Elements subsections includes the following:

Façade Materials and Colors
Storefront Transparency
Building Entries and Lobbies
Corners
Canopies and Awnings
Balconies
Fenestration
Freestanding Walls, Fences, and Gates
Trash Enclosures
Utilities
Outdoor Lighting
Rooftop Equipment
Solar Equipment
The two subsections that contain new objective design standards are Storefront Transparency and Building Entries and Lobbies. The Storefront Transparency subsection highlights standards that ensure non-residential buildings have activated street frontages with transparent windows into the commercial and industrial ground floor uses; greater window transparency is appropriately required along San Fernando Road, Central Avenue and Los Feliz Avenue than on the side streets. Meanwhile, the Building Entries and Lobbies subsection provides general standards, such as ADA accessibility, distinctive paving and entry design, and then has objective design and locational standards for non-residential versus residential ground floor building entries, such as when stoops for individual units are proposed.

9 of 199

81 3
5 0
3 Open Space and Landscaping
The proposed Open Space and Landscaping section features a combination of the current open space requirements for IMU-R and SFMU zoning for residential developments, while also incorporating the objective design standards found in the DSP Open Space chapter. The section is broken into two subsections:

Publicly Accessible Open Space Standards
Residential Open Space Standards
Publicly Accessible Open Space Standards
As previously noted in the report, one of the most notable changes in the TOD district zoning is the addition of a publicly accessible open space requirement for new projects on lots greater than 60 feet in width; none of the current zoning for the area has this requirement. Based on the DSP Section 5.4, objective design standards for PAOS courtyards and plazas are specified in this subsection regarding such items as minimum dimensions, accessibility, materials, landscaping to ensure the PAOS is meaningful and well-designed.

Residential Open Space Standards
The current requirement for residential projects in the IMU-R and SFMU zones is that a minimum of 140 SF of open space be provided per unit; this residential open space can be provided as extra PAOS, common (rooftop deck, etc), private (balconies), or combination. This subsection keeps the same requirement, while adding standards found in the DSP’s Section 5.5 Residential Development Open Space section to enhance the minimal requirements under current zoning.

PARKING AMENDMENTS
In order to incentivize development of transit-oriented projects adjacent to mass transit in the TOD districts, and reduce costly impediments towards such development, staff is also proposing several parking-related amendments in conjunction with the new TOD zoning.

These amendments include the following:
•Allow for at-grade parking for residential uses, in conjunction with the new parking screening requirements in the TOD chapter, when currently, the Zoning Code requires all residential parking to be semi- or subterranean; •Allow for tandem parking in certain situations, similar to those in the DSP; •Modify the residential per unit parking requirements to match those in the DSP; and
•Require larger projects to comply with the same trip reduction and travel demand measures as in the DSP.

Such parking incentives similar to the downtown parking incentives, in addition to the pedestrian-oriented public realm design requirements, would help to support transit, walkable streets, and transit-oriented streets in the Tropico area. 10 of 199

91 3
5 0
3 DENSITY CONSIDERATIONS FOR TOD DISTRICTS
As previously noted, in 2018, City Council voted to maintain the existing density limits for the existing zoning in the SGCP, aside from the TOD hospital zone. The proposed TOD zoning reflects these existing limits: Up to 43 DU/AC for C3-zoned sites greater than 90 feet in width, and up to 100 DU/AC for IMU-R and SFMU sites when not adjacent to multi- family zones.

However, based on the geographical proximity to the Glendale Transit Center and mass transit line along San Fernando Road, Central and Los Feliz Avenues, as well as comments from the development community regarding the 43 DU/AC density limit for certain prime sites in Tropico, there is an untapped transit-oriented residential development potential that may be considered at this time.

By increasing the density limit up to 100 DU/AC for all sites in TOD II, consistent with the TOD I density limit, the City could see more redevelopment of larger sites north of Los Feliz and north-easterly of San Fernando Road. For instance, the Von’s site on the north- west corner of Los Feliz and Central Avenues is a 2.79-acre site in a prime, transit- accessible location that developers have expressed interest in redeveloping with a mixed- use project that includes a new supermarket, but the low density of 43 DU/AC is a deterrence/non-starter.

Should Council wish to consider increasing the density in the TOD II to match TOD I, staff could bring back such a code update for Council’s consideration, especially given that the SGCP EIR had already analyzed such increased density.

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
Following Council’s direction, staff will initiate public outreach for the new standards prior to going to Planning Commission.

FISCAL IMPACT
No new costs associated with potential code revisions are expected at this time.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CEQA/NEPA)
This action is exempt from further environmental review under CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15262 because it involves only feasibility or planning studies for possible future actions which the City has not yet approved, adopted, or funded.

Environmental review will be completed prior to Planning Commission.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
This item is exempt from campaign disclosure requirements.

ALTERNATIVES

1. Direct staff to continue finalizing the draft TOD map and text amendments, including the amendments to the parking code, as submitted.

2. Provide comments and direct staff to proceed with revising the draft amendments, 11 of 199

101
3 5
0 3
based on Council’s comments.

3. City Council may consider any other alternative not provided by staff.

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Prepared by:

Vilia Zemaitaitis, Principal Planner
Ryan Banuelos, Planner
Approved by:

Roubik R. Golanian, P.E., City Manager

EXHIBITS/ATTACHMENTS

1. Tropico Area Maps – Existing and Proposed Zoning

2. Draft Tropico TOD Zoning Standards

3. Proposed Amendments to GMC Chapter 30.32 - Parking
12 of 199

MOTION
Moved by Council Member , seconded by Council Member , that the Council of the City of Glendale hereby receives a report about and provides direction on the proposed zoning text and map amendments for the Tropico Transit Oriented District (TOD) as outlined in the September 13, 2022 staff report from the Community Development Department, and as subject to City Council Comments thereon.

Vote as Follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
13 of 199

Citywide

W CHEVY CHASE DR E CHEVY CHASE DR

E PALMER AV

W PALMER AV E PALMER AV

MAGNOLIA AV

W CYPRESS ST E CYPRESS ST

W LOS FELIZ RD E LOS FELIZ RD

W LAUREL ST E LAUREL ST

E CERRITOS AV

W PALMER AV

W CERRITOS AV

FLORENCE PL

VIRGINIA PL

HAGUE CT

S ORANGE ST

S BRAND BLVD

S MARYLAND AV
Existing and Proposed Zoning for Tropico Area
TOD II
TOD II

TOD III
TOD II
TOD I
TOD I
TOD I
Central
Brand

MAGNOLIA AV

W EULALIA ST E EULALIA ST

CATHEDRAL DR
Atwater Village
Los Angeles
Tropico - Exhibit 1
14 of 199

Proposed Zoning For Tropico Area
TOD II

TOD III
TOD I
TOD II
TOD II
Glendale Transit
Center
Los Angeles
Brand Blvd.

Central Ave.

Tropico - Exhibit 1
15 of 199

TROPICO
Transit Oriented Development Standards
(Draft)

September 2022

16 of 199

GMC 30.16.010
DRAFT Tropico TOD Table of Contents | 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

30.16.010 TOD Purpose. ................................................................................................ 3

30.16.020 TOD District Land Uses and Permit Requirements. ....................................... 4

30.16.030 TOD District General Development Standards. .............................................. 9

30.16.040 TOD District Site Planning. ........................................................................... 10

30.16.050 TOD District Massing and Scale. .................................................................. 28

30.16.060 TOD District Architectural Elements. ............................................................ 33

30.16.070 TOD District Open Space and Landscaping. ................................................ 43

17 of 199

GMC 30.16.010
DRAFT Tropico TOD Purpose | 3

30.16.010 TOD Purpose.

A. TOD I (Transit Oriented Development I ) Zone. The commercial and mixed- use Transit Oriented Development ( TOD)-I district is generally located between San Fernando Road and the westerly border of the City within a five -minute walking distance of the Glendale Transportation Center . The primary intent of the TOD -I district is to facilitate diverse employment options and a r ange of housing opportunities – compatible in scale and form with a pedestrian oriented public realm – accessible to Tropico’s high quality public transportation offerings and walkable neighborhoods at densities up to 100 units per acre, consistent with the previous IMU- R and SFMU allowable densities.

B. TOD II (Transit Oriented Development I I) Zone. The commercial and mixed use TOD-II district is in close proximity to Tropico’s high quality public transportation and walkable neighborhoods. The primary intent of the TOD -II district is to encourage a diverse mix of active retail and residential uses that complement well -established businesses and serve surrounding neighborhoods. Building design emphasizes walkable urban form to priori tize the pedestrian experience within proximity to Tropico's public transportation network. The TOD-II district allows for densities up to 43 units per acre, consistent with the previous C3 allowable densities.

C. TOD III (Transit Oriented Development III) Zone. The TOD-III district builds on the goals of TOD -I, and includes hospital uses and neighboring properties west of the Brand Boulevard of Cars. The primary intent of this zone is to allow for future hospital expansion, that includes building heights up to 200 feet and encourages uses which support the hospital, such as medical offices, treatment facilities , and special needs housing, as well as residential development at densities up to 100 units per acre.

18 of 199

GMC 30.16.020
DRAFT Tropico TOD District Land Uses and Permit Requirements | 4

30.16.020 TOD District Land Uses and Permit Requirements.

A. Permitted Primary Uses and Structures. No building, structure or land shall be used and no building, structure or use in the Transit Oriented Development districts shall be erected, structurally altered, enlarged, or established except the following permitted uses, buildings and structures identified with a “P” in Table 30.16.020-A.

B. Conditional Uses and Structures. The following uses and structures identified with a “C” in Table 30.16 .020-A may be permitted in the Transit Oriented Development districts subject to approval of a conditional use permit (Chapter 30.42). The development standards of this zone shall apply except as otherwise provided herein.

C. Administrative Uses and Structures. The following uses and structures identified with an “A” in Table 30.16 .020-A may be permitted in the Transit Oriented Development districts subject to approval of an administrative use permit (Chapter

30.49). The development standards of this zone shall apply except as otherwise provided herein.

D. Temporary Uses. Temporary uses (identified with a “T” in Table 30.1 6.020-A), allowed subject to approval and compliance with all applicable provisions of this Zoning Code.

E. Permitted Accessory Uses and Structures. Accessory uses, buildings and structures shall be permitted in zones identified with a “P” in Table 30.16.020-A.

F. Wireless Telecommunications Facilities. Wireless telecommunications facilities, identified with a “W” in Table 30.16-A, may be permitted subject to the approval of a wireless telecommunications facility permit as set forth in Chapter 30.48 of this code.

G. Standards for Specific Uses. Where the last column in the following tables (“See Standards in Section or Chapter”) includes a section number, the regulations in the referenced section apply to the use; however, provisions in other sections of this Zoning Code may apply as well.

19 of 199

GMC 30.16.020
DRAFT Tropico TOD District Land Uses and Permit Requirements | 5 Table 30.16.020-A

TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS AND PERMIT REQUIREMENTS LAND USE (1)(2)

PERMIT REQUIREMENT BY
ZONE
See
Standards in
Section or
Chapter TOD I TOD II TOD III
Accessory Buildings, Structures and Uses
Accessory dwelling unit (ADU), and/or junior accessory
dwelling unit (JADU) on a lot developed with one
residential dwelling unit
P P P 30.34.080
Accessory dwelling unit (ADU), on a lot developed with
one residential dwelling unit P P P 30.34.080
Accessory uses P P P
Accessory buildings and structures P P P
Antennas (pole type) and flagpoles P P P
Carts (freestanding, non-motorized, portable type) P P P 30.34.040 Dish antennas P P P 30.34.050
Home occupation P P P 30.45
Home-sharing P P P 5.110
Reverse Vending Machines P P P 30.12.040
Signs P P P 30.33
Solar energy equipment P P P 30.30.050
Institutional Uses
Hospitals P
Places of worship C C
Schools, physical instruction P P C
Schools, private C C
Schools, private specialized education, and training P P C Recreation
Arcade establishment P P P
Billiard establishments P P
Community gardens P P 30.34.045
Gyms and health clubs C P
Indoor recreation center C P
Outdoor commercial recreation C C
Private clubs and lodges C C
Public dances P P
Taverns C C
Theaters P P P
Manufacturing and Processing
Backlots/outdoor facilities – production C C
Broadcasting studios and indoor support facilities –
production P P
Heavy manufacturing, if existing prior to (DATE TBD) P P P Laundries and dry cleaning plants, if existing prior to (DATE TBD) P P P
Light manufacturing P(3)(4)
Medical and dental laboratories P P P
Printing, publishing, and lithographic services P(3)(4) Research and development P(4) P(4)
Soundstages – production P P
Warehousing P
Wholesaling, including wholesaling of alcoholic
beverages P
20 of 199

GMC 30.16.020
DRAFT Tropico TOD District Land Uses and Permit Requirements | 6 Table 30.16.020-A

TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS AND PERMIT REQUIREMENTS LAND USE (1)(2)

PERMIT REQUIREMENT BY
ZONE
See
Standards in
Section or
Chapter TOD I TOD II TOD III
Residential Uses
Domestic violence shelters P P P
Conversion of a live/work unit to entirely residential or entirely business use C C
Emergency shelter C
Multiple residential dwelling units P(5) P(5) P(5)
Residential congregate living, Limited (subject to the
provisions of one residential dwelling per lot) P P P
Residential congregate living, Medical P P P
Residential congregate living, Non-medical P(5) P(5) P(5) One residential dwelling per lot subject to the provisions of the R-1250 zone P P
Senior housing P(5) P(5) P(5)
Mixed-Use Developments
Live/work units P(6) P(6) 30.34.090
Live/work units with conditionally permitted uses C C 30.34.090 Mixed-use development provided that all uses are
permitted in zone which the project is located P P P
Mixed-use development where at least one use is
conditionally permitted C C C
Retail Trade Uses
Alcoholic beverage sales A(8) A(8) A(8)
Automobile supply store P
Banquet halls C
Building materials, supplies, sales and service P
Christmas tree sales lots, when maintained between
November 1st and January 9th T T T 5.44
Jewelry stores P P
Liquor stores A A
Nurseries and garden supplies
Paint and wallpaper stores P
Pawnshops, if existing prior to (DATE TBD) P
Pharmacy P P P
Pumpkin sales lots, when maintained between October
15th and November 1st T T T 5.44
Restaurant, counter service with limited seating P P P
Restaurants, fast food P(7) P(7) P(7)
Restaurants, full service P P P
Retail stores, general merchandise P P P
Supermarkets P P P
Vehicle sales, leasing and rental agencies, including
new and used automobiles, motorcycles, light trucks,
recreational vehicles and boats, existing prior to (TBD) P 30.34.160
21 of 199

GMC 30.16.020
DRAFT Tropico TOD District Land Uses and Permit Requirements | 7 Table 30.16.020-A

TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS AND PERMIT REQUIREMENTS LAND USE (1)(2)

PERMIT REQUIREMENT BY
ZONE
See
Standards in
Section or
Chapter TOD I TOD II TOD III
Vehicle sales, leasing and rental agencies, including
new and used automobiles, motorcycles, light trucks,
recreational vehicles and boats existing prior to (TBD), including a one-time expansion on the same lot of up to 20 percent of floor area.

P 30.34.160
Expansion of vehicle sales, leasing and rental
agencies, including new and used automobiles,
motorcycles, light trucks, recreational vehicles and
boats existing prior to September 12, 2006, when
proposed expansion is on the same lot as the existing
facility and is greater than 20 percent of the floor area existing prior to September 12, 2006, or for any new
facilities on separate or non-contiguous lots.

C 30.34.160
Service Uses
Ambulance services
Banks and financial institutions P P
Body shops and painting booths 30.34.150
Business support services P P
Car washes, full or self service 30.34.030
Day care centers A A A
Equipment rental yards
Gas station P 30.34.020
Heating and air conditioning sales and service (HVAC),
if existing prior to (TBD) P P 30.34.070
Hotels and motels P P
Kennel, animal boarding and daycare P(9)
Massage establishment C C 5.64
Medical and dental laboratories P P P
Mortuaries and funeral homes A
Moving and storage services
Pawnshops See retail
sales
Personal Services P P P
Pet grooming P P
Repair and maintenance, consumer products P(4) P(4)
Tire stores 30.34.140
Towing services and impound yards
Vehicle repair garage, if existing prior to (TBD) P P 30.34.150 Office Uses
Contractors office and/or storage, temporary T T T
Medical and dental offices P P P
Office P P P
Office, consumer services C C
Veterinary offices, including hospitalization services P P Transportation and Communications Uses
Non-emergency heliports N C C
22 of 199

GMC 30.16.020
DRAFT Tropico TOD District Land Uses and Permit Requirements | 8 Table 30.16.020-A

TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS AND PERMIT REQUIREMENTS LAND USE (1)(2)

PERMIT REQUIREMENT BY
ZONE
See
Standards in
Section or
Chapter TOD I TOD II TOD III
Parking lot/structure facilities C P P 30.32,

30.51.020
Utility and transmission facilities C C C
Wireless telecommunications facilities W W W 30.48

Key to Permit Requirements Symbol See Chapter
Permitted use P
Administrative use—Administrative use permit
required A 30.49
Conditional use—Conditional use permit required C 30.42 Temporary use T
Wireless telecommunications facilities permit required W 30.48 Use not allowed
Notes:
(1) See Section 30.03.010 regarding uses not listed.
(2) See Chapter 30.70 for definitions of the land uses. (3) If gross floor area of the building is 10,000 sq. ft. or less and use is indoors; if greater than 10,000 sq. ft. and/or use is outdoors, a conditional use permit is required. (4) Requires a conditional use permit when combined in a mixed- use development which includes residential.
(5) When fronting San Fernando Road, Central Avenue, or Los Feliz Road, only allowed as mixed- use projects with commercial uses located along the street frontage as required in Section 30.34.100. (6) For lots having frontage along San Fernando Road, Central Avenue, or Los Feliz Road, manufacturing and processing uses shall not be on the ground floor fronting these streets. (7) No drive-thru facilities permitted.
(8) Supermarkets only require an AUP for on-site consumption of alcoholic beverages. CUP not required for wholesaling.
(9) Not to be located nearer than 200 feet to the R1, R1R, ROS, R -3050, R-2250, R16-50 and R -1250 zones if use includes outdoor facilities.

23 of 199

GMC 30.16.030
DRAFT Tropico TOD District General Development Standards | 9

30.16.030 TOD District General Development Standards.

Table 30.16-B

TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS GENERAL DEVELOPMENT

STANDARDS
Development Feature Requirement by Zoning District

TOD I TOD II TOD III
Minimum Lot Size Minimum lot area and width required for new parcels Area 10,000 square feet 10,000 square feet 10,000 square feet Width 100 feet
Maximum Residential
Density
87 dwelling units per
acre when abutting the
R-3050, R-2250, R-1650,
and R-1250 zones;

100 dwelling units per
acre when not abutting
the R-3050, R-2250,
R-1650, or R-1250 zone
43 dwelling units per
acre on lots having a
width of 90 feet or
greater;

34 dwelling units per
acre on lots having a
width less than 90 feet
100 dwelling units per
acre
Minimum Setbacks
Required (3) See Section 30.16.040(B)(1) for setback exceptions Street Front and Street
Side
Public realm minimum setback 15 feet, see Section 30.16.040 (TOD District Site Planning)
Interior None
Distance Between
Dwellings N/A
Maximum Height Limits
(1), (2), (3) Buildings
and Structures
60 feet 60 feet 200 feet
Landscaping
See Section 30.16.070(A) (Publicly Accessible Open Space Standards); Also see Sections 30.16.040 (TOD Site Planning) and 30.16.070(B) (Residential Open Space Standards)
Fences and Walls See Section 30.16.060 (TOD District Architectural Elements) Rooftop Equipment See Section 30.16.060 (TOD District Architectural Elements) Lighting See Section 30.16.060 (TOD District Architectural Elements) Trash Collection Areas See Section 30.16.060 (TOD District Architectural Elements) Parking and Loading As required by Chapter 30.32 (Parking and Loading); Also see Section 30.16.040 (TOD District Site Planning) Design Review As required by Chapter 30.47 (Design Review) Notes:
(1) Enclosed or screened rooftop equipment not exceeding 5 feet in height above the roof of a building shall not be computed as part of the height of the building. Elevator shafts and roof top stairwells not exceeding 15 feet in height above the roof of a building shall not be computed as part of the height of the building. See Chapter 30.70 (Definitions).
(2) For exceptions to height limits for wireless telecommunications facilities, see Chapter 30.48 (Wireless Telecommunications Facilities Permits).
(3) For setback and height requirements related to solar energy equipment, see Section 30.30.050 (Solar Energy Equipment).
24 of 199

GMC 30.16.040
DRAFT Tropico TOD District Site Planning | 10

30.16.040 TOD District Site Planning.

A. Site Planning: Public Realm Standards.

1. Public Realm Setback. The public realm consists generally of the publicly - owned street rights -of-way and other publicly accessible open spaces such as parks, squares, plazas, paseos, courtyards, and alleys. The public realm defines the visual character and function of an area through a framework of public street rights-of-way that provide circulation , access, and open space. All new development in the TOD district shall comply with a 15-foot minimum ground floor setback measured from the face-of-curb, excluding curb extensions, to the build-to-line on public streets. The build-to-line is defined as a line parallel to the street at which the vertical plane of the front building elevation may be located.

No building elevation shall be located closer than the build-to-line as specified in Figure 30.16.040-A.
a. A p ublic realm easement is required on pri vate property if the distance between the existing face- of-curb and the property line is less than 15 feet.

A public realm easement is not required if the distance between the existing face-of-curb and the property line is 15 feet or greater. b. Existing o r proposed curb extensions shall not be included in the measurement used to determine the required public realm setback. c. Building projections (balconies, etc.) shall not extend over the required public realm.

2. Public Realm Zones. The intent of the Tropico TOD public realm is to generate a pedestrian- oriented street network that supports and enhance s access to transit and consists of three distinct and contiguous sidewalk zones. a. Parkway Zone (PKZ) . There shall be a minimum five-foot parkway zone width measured from the face- of-curb to the sidewalk zone, as specified in Figures 30.16.040-A, 30.16.040-B and 30.16.040-C.
i. All parkway zones shall be landscaped a minimum of 20 percent. ii. Street furniture, landscaping, street trees, bike parking, light and utility poles, utility boxes, traffic control devices, benches, and trash cans are permitted in the parkway zone.
b. Sidewalk Zone (SWZ) . There shall be a minimum six -foot sidewalk zone width measured from the parkway zone to the building adjacent zone , as specified in Figures 30.16.040-A, 30.16.040-B and 30.16.040-C. i. Accessibility. The required public realm width shall remain clear of all obstructions to maintain universal access.
ii. Seating, poles, temporary or permanent signs, bike racks, bicycle sharing facilities, benches, permanent or temporary seating, temporary or permanent fences or enclosures, utility boxes, landscaping, planters, pots, or steps are prohibited in the sidewalk zone.
iii. Where the sidewalk width requirement exceeds the width of the public right-of-way the development must provide a setback to achieve the 25 of 199

GMC 30.16.040
DRAFT Tropico TOD District Site Planning | 11
required width. If additional area is required on private property to satisfy the minimum requirement, an easement shall be required. c. Building Adjacent Zone (BAZ). There shall be a minimum four-foot building adjacent zone width measured from the sidewalk zone to the building frontage. This area exists between the sidewalk and the building facade as specified in Figures 30.16.040-A, 30.160.40-B and 30.16.040-C. i. L andscaping, permanent or temporary seating, temporary enclosures or low fences (no greater than three feet in height), shall be permitted in the building adjacent zone.
ii. Walls or steps are prohibited.

FIGURE 30.16.040-A

PUBLIC REALM STANDARDS

26 of 199

GMC 30.16.040
DRAFT Tropico TOD District Site Planning | 12
FIGURE 30.16.040-B

PUBLIC REALM STANDARDS

27 of 199

GMC 30.16.040
DRAFT Tropico TOD District Site Planning | 13
FIGURE 30.16.040-C

PUBLIC REALM STANDARDS

3. Streetscape Standards. New construction and projects that involve major remodels of nonconforming buildings 10,000 square feet or more, per Section

30.60.040(B)(2), are required to install streetscape elements as follows:
a. Install sidewalk paving pattern and materials as specified by the City. b. Plant street trees and other landscaping specified by the City, spaced a maximum of 25 feet apart of as required by the City.
c. Install light poles and fixtures as specified by the City (see Section 30.16.060 (TOD District Architectural Elements) for additional requirements). d. Install pedestrian curb extensions on designated streets as required by the City.
28 of 199

GMC 30.16.040
DRAFT Tropico TOD District Site Planning | 14
e. Install sidewalk furniture (benches, trash receptacles, etc.) as required by the City.
f. Projects may install sidewalk elements, such as commemorative plaques or artwork, as approved by the City.
g. Improvements to the public realm adjacent to alleys as specified by the City for all new projects per Chapter 12.12 ( Street and Alley Improvements and Dedications).

B. Site Planning: Building Setbacks.

1. Street Front and Street Side Setback Exceptions. In any TOD District, no person shall construct, locate, or maintain within the space between the public realm setback and the build-to-line established by ordinance or by this Title, any building, wall, fence, other improvement , or stru cture with the following exceptions:
a. Driveways and walks, provided that a driveway shall be limited to that area reasonably necessary to provide safe and efficient ingress to and egress from off-street parking spaces located behind a setback area; b. An awning or canopy may project over a required building adjacent zone. But not over the sidewalk zone.
c. Flagpoles limited to one per site;
d. Footings and public utility vaults if fully subterranean; e. Landscape accent lighting not to exceed 18 inches in height; f. Necessary railings adjacent to stairways;
g. Retaining walls, planters or curbs which are not more than 36 inches in height above the ground surface existing at the time of construction; h. Subterranean parking garages may extend to the street property line including equipment, service, utility and storage areas provided such areas do not have any door, window or other opening to the outside along the street property line.

2. Ground Floor Non-Residential Street Setbacks. The following standards apply to all commercial and industrial building street frontages, and ground floor commercial portions of mixed use buildings, in all TOD districts , except for portions of a building fronting areas dedi cated as Public ly Accessible Open Space (PAOS) as specified in Figures 30.16-D and 30.16-E. a. The building shall comply with the Section 30.16. 040(A) (Site P lanning:

Public Realm Standards).
b. The setback is measured from the public realm build- to line to the ground floor face of the building wall.
c. There is no minimum setback required from the build- to-line. The maximum setback allowed is ten feet.
e. Parking, loading, or storage areas are prohibited in the setback. f. Setback areas shall be accessible to the public at all hours on all days. 29 of 199

GMC 30.16.040
DRAFT Tropico TOD District Site Planning | 15
g. Any setback area greater than two feet in width shall be composed of landscaping, planting beds, lawns, or paving, except for walkways, driveways and outdoor seating areas.
h. Permanent screening walls or fences greater than three feet in height are prohibited within the setback.
i. Private spaces within the ground floor setback are permitted. Patios shall be a minimum of four feet in depth and 40 square feet.

FIGURE 30.16.040-D

NON-RESIDENTIAL USE SETBACK

30 of 199

GMC 30.16.040
DRAFT Tropico TOD District Site Planning | 16
FIGURE 30.16.040-E

NON-RESIDENTIAL USE SETBACK

3. Above-Grade Non-Residential Street Setbacks. There is no additional setback requirement for above-grade non-residential floors facing streets.

4. Ground Floor Residential Street Setback Standards . These standards are applicable for all ground floor residential units adjacent to the public realm .

Setback requirements do not apply to façades that are directly adjacent to Publicly Accessible Open Space fronting the public realm. If a setback is required, the setback is measured from the public realm build -to line to the ground floor face of the building wall.
a. At-Grade Ground Floor Residential Uses.
i. A minimum five-foot average setback is required, excluding pilasters, columns, or other architectural articulation projections, not exceeding 12 inches from the adjacent building wall within the ground floor setback. The maximum setback allowed is 10 feet.
31 of 199

GMC 30.16.040
DRAFT Tropico TOD District Site Planning | 17
ii. All Building Adjacent Zone areas directly adjacent to at-grade residential units must be landscaped at-grade or include planters (less than two feet in height ) except for required walk ways and building entrances.
iii. Decorative paving or landscaping is permitted within the street setback. iv. Private residential open space is permitted within the street setback.

Private patios shall be a minimum of four feet in depth and 4 0 square feet.

FIGURE 30.16.040-F

AT-GRADE RESIDENTIAL USE SETBACK

32 of 199

GMC 30.16.040
DRAFT Tropico TOD District Site Planning | 18
FIGURE 30.16.040-G

AT-GRADE RESIDENTIAL USE SETBACK

b. Above-Grade Ground Floor Residential Uses . These standards are applicable where the finished ground floor elevation of fronting residential units is above the existing grade of the adjacent public realm. i. No setback is required. For above-grade residential units that do not have a setback, the finished ground floor shall be between a minimum of 30 inches to a maximum of 48 inches above grade.
ii. Steps, stoops, porches, terraces, balconies, or a combination of these elements are permitted within the above-grade ground floor residential use setback . For above-grade residential units that are setback for stairs, stoops, porches, terraces or balconies, the ground finished floor shall be a minimum 30 inches above the public realm.
33 of 199

GMC 30.16.040
DRAFT Tropico TOD District Site Planning | 19
iii. Private terrac es or balconies are permitted within the above- grade ground floor residential use setback and must be a minimum of four feet in depth and 40 square feet.
iv. The Building Adjacent Zone and any setback provided in front of steps, stoops, porches, terraces , or balconies for above- grade ground floor residential uses shall be landscaped at -grade or include planters (less than two feet in height) except for required walkways and building entrances.

FIGURE 30.16.040-H

ABOVE-GRADE RESIDENTIAL USE SETBACK

34 of 199

GMC 30.16.040
DRAFT Tropico TOD District Site Planning | 20
FIGURE 30.16.040-I

ABOVE-GRADE RESIDENTIAL USE SETBACK

5. Allowed Setback Projections for Residential or Mixed Use Buildings. a. Upper floors of residential buildings and residential portions of mixed- use buildings are permitted to project, cantilever, or extend within the setback up to 50 percent of the minimum five-foot average setback.

C. Site Planning: Publicly Accessible Open Space (PAOS). All new projects in any TOD Zoning Districts shall provide PAOS in compliance with the following standards:

1. Publicly accessible open space is not required f or development sites with frontage widths less than 60 feet.

2. Development sites with street frontage widths 60 feet or greater are required to provide a minimum of 10 percent PAOS of gross site area. a. Exceptions: For projects where a public easement is required in order to comply with the public realm setback standard, the area for the public easement may be excluded from the development site area to calculate the minimum required PAOS. For residential projects where a setback is 35 of 199

GMC 30.16.040
DRAFT Tropico TOD District Site Planning | 21
required, the area for the required setback may be excluded from the development site area to calculate the minimum required PAOS. See Table

30.16-B for calculations.

3. A minimum of 85 percent of the required PAOS must be in a contiguous space.

4. All publicly accessible open space shall comply with the standards in Section

30.16.070(A).

5. Exclusions. The following are excluded from any required publicly accessible open space calculation:
a. Required public realm areas.
b. Street setbacks.
c. Circulation areas (paths of travel, etc.) that exceed 10 percent of the total contiguous open space area.
d. Private outdoor dining areas.
e. Area occupied by subterranean garage ventilation or utilities (back flow preventers, electric meters, etc.).

D. Site Planning: Parking Design and Access Standards. This Section regulates the location, ingress and egress, screening , and the total lot area allowed for parking.

Parking, loading, and vehicular circulation should be located to minimize its visibility from the public realm. Parking required shall be provided in compliance with Chapter

30.32 (Parking and Loading). All off-street parking and loading areas located in the TOD zones shall be designed and developed consistent with the following standards contained in this Section.

1. At-grade Parking. The amount of at -grade parking permitted is determined by total street frontage length.
a. At-Grade Parking Area Calculation.
i. Less than 100 feet of street frontage. On development sites with less than 100 feet of street frontage, up to 80 percent of the development site area may be occupied by at- grade parking.
ii. More than 100 feet of street frontage. On development sites with more than 100 feet street frontage, up to 60 percent of the development site area may be occupied by at-grade parking.
b. Maximum permitted at-grade parking area shall include:
i. Stalls for vehicular parking and loading and circulation lanes. ii. Internal or covered parking access driveways.
iii. Parking related facilities such as those that provide ventilation for exhaust or mechanical equipment.
iv. Bike parking areas or rooms less than 100 square feet shall not be included in the maximum permitted parking area calculation. c. Required screening for at-grade parking: Refer to Section 30.16.040(3). 36 of 199

GMC 30.16.040
DRAFT Tropico TOD District Site Planning | 22

2. Driveway Locations. Driveways for vehicular ingress and egress shall comply with the standards in this Section. The number, width, and frequency of curb cuts and vehicular entries shall be limited to promote street wall continuity and reduce conflicts with pedestrians. Vehicular access should be designed such that it does not discourage or inhibit the pedestrian experience.
a. All Development Sites.
i. Parking and driveways shall be located toward the rear or side of buildings and away from the public right-of-way.
ii. Parking access shall be located as far from street intersections as possible to allow for adequate queuing and visibility.
iii Drive-thru elements shall be located away from intersections and shall not create a barrier between the sidewalk and building entrance(s). iv. Shared or combined v ehicular entries for parking and loading are permitted and shall not be more than necessary to allow access in and out of a development site or building . Loading activities may not encroach on or interfere with the use of sidewalks, drive aisles, queuing areas, or parking areas.
v. Separate, distinct, and dedicated vehicular and pedestrian circulation systems shall be provided where possible.
vi. All driveway entries shall comply with the screening requirements per Section 30.16.040(3) (At-Grade Parking Screening and Parking Garage Openings).
b. Parking Access from Alley. Vehicular access to a parking area shall be provided from an alley if the alley has an adequate width to provide such access in compliance with the Department of Public Works standards for alley width and capacity. For development sites without adequate alley access, see Section 30.16.040(2)(c) for parking access standards.

37 of 199

GMC 30.16.040
DRAFT Tropico TOD District Site Planning | 23
FIGURE 30.16.040-J

DEVELOPMENT SITE WITH ALLEY ACCESS

c. Parking Access from Street for Lots without Alley Access. The following standards are applicable to all development sites where no adjacent, adequate alley is present:
i. Vehicular access to parking areas along any street frontage is prohibited unless access to an alley does not exist or where the Department of Public Works has determined that an alley does not have 38 of 199

GMC 30.16.040
DRAFT Tropico TOD District Site Planning | 24
adequate width or capacity.
ii. On single frontage mid-block development sites without an alley and with only one street frontage, parking access shall be from the street. iii. On mid-block development sites without an alley and with two street frontages, parking access shall only be from one street frontage.

Iv. On corner development sites without an alley, and which have less than one acre in total gross lot area and less than 200 feet of street frontage, a single driveway is permitted on either side of the development site. v. On corner development sites without an alley, and which have a lot area greater than one acre and more than 200 feet of street frontage, two driveways are permitted. These driveways shall be located so that their inside edges are at least 120 feet apart.
vi. On corner development sites without an alley and more than two street frontages, parking access shall be limited to a single street frontage. A second driveway is permitted for properties with street frontages along San Fernando Road.
vii. On corner development sites without an alley , parking access should be located as far from the corner intersection as possible.

39 of 199

GMC 30.16.040
DRAFT Tropico TOD District Site Planning | 25
FIGURE 30.16.040-K

DEVELOPMENT SITE WITHOUT ALLEY ACCESS

3. At-Grade Parking Screening and Parking Garage Openings. a. Parking Screening . All at -grade parking and loading areas shall be fully integrated into the design and form of a project and shall be fully screened from public streets and publicly accessible open space in order to limit the visual and environmental impact of vehicular use areas on the public realm , to the extent appropriate. Except for the minimum ground- level frontage 40 of 199

GMC 30.16.040
DRAFT Tropico TOD District Site Planning | 26
required for access to parking and loading, no parking or loading areas shall be visible on the ground floor of any building façade that faces a street. At- grade parking screening is required along all interior lot lines , where an occupied ground floor use is not provided. The following screening standards are applicable to all development sites.
b. Active Ground Floor Use Screening for At-grade Parking. All street facing building elevations shall comply with the following standards. i. For street frontages with prohibited vehicular access, occupied ground floor uses are required.
ii. For street frontages where vehicular access is permitted, occupied ground floor uses are required except for driveway areas and screening walls in compliance with Section 30.16.040(c).
iii. For the occupied ground floor uses described above in i . and ii., the active ground floor uses shall have a minimum 20-foot depth, measured perpendicular from the face of the building into the structure , and shall be enclosed, conditioned rooms that are heated, cooled, and ventilated for habitation. Utility rooms, s tairs, elevators, storage, bike rooms, or service areas such as trash rooms, laundry, etc. shall not comprise more than 20 percent of the ground floor along the street frontage; the façade of these areas shall be integrated with the overall of the project. c. Building and Structure Parking Screening Walls. All at-grade and above- ground parking not screened by active ground floor uses shall be integrated into the design of the building façade so that it is not visible from any street, except for surface parking lots for non- residential uses located behind the building. All parking levels, except for surface parking lots for non-residential uses located behind a building, must be enclosed by a clad wall (“skinned”) or by other enhanced materials (“screened”) to minimize the appearance of the parking level. The following standards apply:
i. At-Grade Street Fronting Parking Screening Walls. Street fronting screening walls are allowed for parking located at -grade within a building on a street frontage where vehicular access is permitted. Street fronting screening walls shall not exceed 20 percent or 20 feet in cumulative length, whichever is less, along the street-facing lot frontage where parking vehicular access is permitted. The b uilding parking screening wall frontage shall include architectural form, massing, articulation, material, color, and other treatments such as a vertical living green wall that result in a unified façade composition with the building. The screening wall shall be no less than 75 percent opaque to allow for ventilation and reduce headlight glare.
ii. Parking Structure Screening Walls. Parking located inside of a structure or beneath an occupied space shall in integrate the architectural elements of the structure.
41 of 199

GMC 30.16.040
DRAFT Tropico TOD District Site Planning | 27
d. Parking Garage Openings. All entrances to parking garages shall comply with the following:
i. Garage doors shall be provided at all at -grade parking access driveways.
ii. Garage doors shall be set back a minimum of three feet from the face of a building.
iii. Garage doors shall be integrated into the architectural design of the building or wall to reduce the aesthetic impact on the pedestrian realm. iv. Garage doors shall be at least 50 percent opaque.
v. Garage doors shall be closed at all times when vehicles are not entering or exiting.
vi. The width of the garage opening shall be as narrow as possible to slow the movement of automobiles and reduce potential conflicts with other modes of transportation.
vii. Intercom systems shall be located adjacent to ingress and egress drive lanes and shall not obstruct the vehicular or pedestrian path of travel. viii. Parking garage entrances shall provide voice alert to warn pedestrians that a vehicle is exiting.
42 of 199

GMC 30.16.050
DRAFT Tropico TOD District Site Planning | 28

30.16.050 TOD District Massing and Scale.

A. Modulation of Height

1. Step-backs. Step-back requirements create an appropriate scale of buildings, reduce building massing, shape transitions between neighborhoods, and support high-quality architecture and urban design through modulation and variation in façade length.
a. Applicability. Buildings greater than 50 feet in height shall provide a street step-back at the upper floor on street-facing elevations. Upper floor step- backs are not required for buildings 50 feet or less in height and elevations directly adjacent to publicly accessible open space.
i. The required step-back shall have a minimum average of six feet (see Figure 30.16.050-A).
ii. The step-back shall be measured from the adjoining façade of a street- facing building wall below.

FIGURE 30.16.050-A

UPPER FLOOR STEP-BACKS

43 of 199

30.16.050
DRAFT Tropico TOD District Massing and Scale | 29
FIGURE 30.16.050-B
NO STEP-BACK FOR BUILIDNGS LESS THAN 50 FEET IN HEIGHT AND

BUILDINGS ADJACENT TO PUBLICY ACCESSIBLE OPEN SPACE (PAOS)

B. Façade Modulation.

1. Vertical Modulation. Building layers comprised of a base, middle and top help to break up the massing and clearly express building function and uses. The base is composed of the ground floor (the ground floor height of non-residential buildings shall have a minimum floor-to-floor height of 15 feet). The middle is the portion of the building between the second floor and the upper floor step -back.

Middle floors are permitted to step-back. The top is composed of the uppermost floor of a building. For buildings six floors or great er, the top two floors may constitute the top of the building.
a. Applicability. Each street-facing façade for buildings four floors or greater shall be composed of a clearly distinguishable base, middle, and top.

Buildings three floors or less do not have to provide a differentiated base, middle, and top.
b. Additional articulation of the base, middle, and top, shall be achieved by incorporating at least one of the following:
i. Changes in façade materials, textures, and color, as identified in Section 30.16.060 (Architectural Elements).
ii. Changes in type, size, number, and arrangement of façade doors and windows, permitting no more than two different types, sizes and arrangements of façade doors and windows for each base, middle, and top elements of a building.
iii. Use of functional and /or decorative horizontal façade projections or recesses at transition lines between the base, middle, and top. iv. Changes in floor-to-floor heights at the second floor or above.

44 of 199

GMC 30.16.050
DRAFT Tropico TOD District Site Planning | 30
FIGURE 30.16.050-C

TRIPARTITE VERTICAL MODULATION

2. Horizontal Modulation. Articulation across a building façade helps to break up the massing horizontally. The following standards relate to required horizontal modulation for both street-facing and interior elevations. a. Street-facing Horizontal Modulation.
i. Applicability. Each street facing or publicly accessible open space façade for building elevations greater than 60 feet in length shall comply with the horizontal modulation standards below. Horizontal modulation standards apply to all portions of street-facing facades except for upper floor step-backs. Horizontal modulation is not required for street-facing facades less than 60 feet in length.
ii. At least 30 percent of the area of a street-facing facade shall be divided into façade planes that are offset by at least a minimum average depth of 24 inches from the rest of the façade. Façade area used to meet this standard may be recessed behind, or project out from, the primary façade plane and may be in one continues section or a combination of sections across the façade.

FIGURE 30.16.050-D

STREET FACING HORIZONTAL MODULATION

45 of 199

30.16.050
DRAFT Tropico TOD District Massing and Scale | 31
iii. For street -facing facades with building elevations 250 feet or greater in length, a minimum of one building separation shall be provided, in addition to the horizontal modulation required above (ii). The separation shall be a minimum width and depth of 10 percent of the overall building length and shall extend the height of the building façade from the adjacent grade to the step -back floor, if required.

FIGURE 30.16.050-E

STREET FACING HORIZONTAL MODULATION

46 of 199

GMC 30.16.050
DRAFT Tropico TOD District Site Planning | 32
b. Interior Horizontal Facade Modulation.
i. Applicability. Interior building frontages greater than 60 feet in lengt h shall comply with the interior horizontal façade modulation standards below.
ii. Façade treatment and materials of street -facing elevations shall wrap around each interior building corner a minimum depth of 25 percent of the total interior façade length measured from the corner of the building. iii. The wrapped façade materials shall terminate at a corner junction to alleviate the appearance of a wallpaper application. Unbroken, solid wall planes greater than 30 feet in length along the remaining interi or façade elevation are prohibited.

FIGURE 30.16.050-F
INTERIOR HORIZONTAL FAÇADE MODULATION

c. Corner Elements.
i. Applicability. For buildings located at two street intersections a distinct corner element shall be required.
ii. The corner element shall be differentiated by height and design features from the primary massing of the building.
iii. For additional design standards see Section 30.16.060 (Architectural Elements).

47 of 199

30.16.060
DRAFT Tropico TOD District Architectural Elements | 33

30.16.060 TOD District Architectural Elements.

A. Architectural Elements: Façade Materials and Colors. Materials are a significant feature of design and are used to establish a unique aesthetic quality and character of a building. Materials are essential to diminish the massing and scale of a building and reinforce the base-middle-top principles of quality design. Materials at the ground floor, or base, should reinforce the pedestrian character of the public realm and employ materials that are of a human-scale. Human-scale shall be defined as a built environment designed and scaled for use by the average per son. As building height increases, larger scale materials may be appropriate. Except when directly abutting an existing building on- or off-site, all facades shall comply with the following materials and colors standards:

1. All building elevations, including public realm, publicly accessible open space, and alley fronting walls, shall be treated equally with high- quality and human- scaled materials to provide depth and contrast in color.

2. All exterior wall facades shall have a minimum of two cladding materials.

3. All projects shall avoid a monotone color palette.

4. Facades shall include colors or material changes that correlate with massing and scale, and façade modulation standards. Changes at building base, middle, or top divisions or with horizontally articulated façade recesses or projections shall be emphasized.

5. All building facades regardless of location, shall be constructed with durable materials, that can withstand significant deterioration, decay, or discoloring due to wear or weathering. Mat erials that are short ‐lived or insubstantial, such as unfinished wood for exterior use, shall not be permitted.

6. Non-durable synthetic stucco - Exterior Insulating Finishing Systems (EIFS) shall be prohibited at the ground floor level for all buildings.

7. Above the ground floor, no more than 60 percent of any building total façade area shall be clad with synthetic stucco-EIFS.

8. Street level materials shall be human- scaled such as brick, block, wood, stone, and others to provide a high-quality aesthetic and diversity in building design.

9. All vents, gutters, downspouts, flashing, electrical conduits, etc., shall be painted to match the color of the adjacent surface, unless being used expressly as a trim or accent element. All new buildings shall feature internal leaders and architecturally integrate vents on all street-facing elevations. Wherever possible, exterior vents shall be integrated into soffits or ceilings of balconies.

B. Architectural Elements: Storefront Transparency. All non -residential façades shall be designed to engage the s treet and generate activity and transparency between the pedestrian realm and businesses. This section does not apply to residential façades. All non- residential façades shall comply with the following transparency standards:

1. Façades that face the street or publicly accessible open space are required to provide a minimum of 75 percent transparency along Central Avenue, San Fernando Road, and Los Feliz Road, and a minimum of 60 percent transparency 48 of 199

GMC 30.16.060
DRAFT Tropico TOD District Architectural Elements | 34
on all other streets, comprised of glazed and transparent doors and window openings, as required below.

2. No dark-tinted or opaque glazing for any required wall opening (i.e., doors and windows) along street level facades is allowed, except that spandrel glass, façade mounted public art or living landscaped green walls, or combination thereof, may be used to count towards a maximum of 25 percent of the required 75 or 60 percent transparency standard, as applicable. Dark -tinted and opaque windows shall be defined as having less than a minimum visible transmittance of 70 percent, including any tint, treatment, or application on glazing in accordance with standards established by the National Fenestration Rating Council.

3. Where it is infeasible to provide glazing, such as a parking garage, trash room, mechanical room, or electrical room, landscaping with a minimum dimension of 18-inces in depth and a width equivalent to 75 percent of the wall, where door access is not required, shall be provided to soften the appearance of a blank wall on the ground floor. Lands caping shall be composed of tall shrubs with a minimum mature height of four feet or climbing vines to achieve a wall screening.

4. The following shall be used to determine the required façade transparency area:
a. The horizontal length of the frontage shall only include the HVAC-conditioned non-residential portions of the façade that are located on the ground floor and front a street or publicly accessible open space.
b. The horizontal length measurement excludes any ground floor residential use frontages, stairs and elevator shafts , loading, storage, parking access driveways, or garage doors.
c. The vertical height of the façade frontage used for calculating the transparency requirement shall be measured between the adjacent finished floor and the finished ceiling.
d. All window and door parts including the frame, jamb, head, sill, mullions, muntins, and glazing shall comprise an opening. Any decorative window or door trim around the window or door frame shall be not included as part of the opening calculation.

49 of 199

30.16.060
DRAFT Tropico TOD District Architectural Elements | 35
FIGURE 30.16.060-A

NON-RESIDENTIAL STOREFRONT TRANSPARENCY STANDARDS

C. Architectural Elements: Building Entries and Lobbies. Building entries and lobbies provide visual cues to building entrances and landmarks for pedestrians.

Entries and lobbies can be used to create visual interest and modulation in a building façade. Building entries and lobbies shall be designed to create landmark visual reference points and emphasize the importance of the building entrance by compliance with the following standards:

1. All Building Entries and Lobbies. The following standards apply to all ground floor elevations of a building.
a. Entries and lobbies shall incorporate at least one design feature such as a canopy, marquee, or other form of we ather protection that creates visual prominence.
50 of 199

GMC 30.16.060
DRAFT Tropico TOD District Architectural Elements | 36
b. At least one distinct paving materials shall be incorporated to differentiate the primary entrance path, distinct and unique from the adjacent paving materials.
c. Entries shall provide universal and American Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant access through a continuous and unobstructed way of ingress and egress from any primary entries to the public right -of-way or usable publicly accessible open space. Ramps or wheelchair lifts (elevator) shall be architecturally integrated into the design of the building.

2. Non-Residential Building Entries. The following standards apply to all ground floor, non- residential portions of a street - or publicly accessible open space- facing elevations of a building. For non-residential uses, the primary entrance of a building is defined as the door or doors which provide public access to a lobby or ground floor occupancy.
a. Primary entries shall be directly accessible from the public realm or publicly accessible open space. Primary entrance(s) that front publicly accessible open space shall have direct sightlines and a path of continuous and unobstructed pedestrian access to the public realm.
b. The primary non-residential use entrance(s) shall not be located adjacent to an alley, parking, or service driveway.
c. For lobbies, a recess or projection a minimum of four feet in depth is required to delineate the building lobby from the balance of the facade.

FIGURE 30.16.060-B

NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDING ENTRIES

51 of 199

30.16.060
DRAFT Tropico TOD District Architectural Elements | 37

3. Residential Building Entries. The following standards apply to the ground floor residential portions of street - or publicly accessible open space- facing facades of residential or mixed-use buildings. For residential uses, the primary entrance of a building is defined as a door or doors which provide primary access to a ground floor residential lobby. Individual entries are also permitted for private residential units.
a. Multi-family residential building lobbies shall be located at the ground floor and directly accessible from the public realm, publicly accessible open space, or residential setback. Primary entrance(s) that front publicly accessible open space shall have direct sightlines and a path of continuous and unobstructed pedestrian access to the public realm.
b. Primary entries are prohibited from alleys, driveways, at -grade parking lots, or parking structures.
c. Individual unit entries fronting the adjacent public realm shall be setback a minimum of five feet from the build-to line.
d. Individual residential entries are permitted to be accessed directly from the public realm and shall have a minimum walkway, ramp, and/or stairs width of four feet for single unit entries.
e. Entry porches, stoops, and terraces, not including stairs, shall be a minimum of 20 square feet.

52 of 199

GMC 30.16.060
DRAFT Tropico TOD District Architectural Elements | 38
FIGURE 30.16.060-C

RESIDENTIAL ENTRIES

D. Architectural Elements: Corners. Corner elements enhance the aesthetic quality of a building and can provide a visual terminus or prominence at a primary entrance. An enhanced corner creates variation in building massing and provides an opportunity 53 of 199

30.16.060
DRAFT Tropico TOD District Architectural Elements | 39
to establish a sense of place within the public realm through the incorporation of key design features. All corner elements shall comply with the following standards:

1. Corner elements shall be located at the intersection of two public rights -of-way, and not located near alleys, or mid-block.

2. Corner elements shall be off-set in height than the overall building mass in either direction.

3. At least one unique or distinct paving material shall be provided at a corner element to emphasize its prominence and importance within the public realm.

4. Enhanced canopies or marquees shall be provided to help create a sense of enclosure within the public realm.

5. Plazas may also be used to create a unique corner element and shall be developed per the standards outlined in Section 30.16.070 for publicly accessible open space.

E. Architectural Elements: Canopies and Awnings. Canopies and awnings function as an extension of the public sidewalk, providing shelter from inclement weather, shade, and a sense of enclosure to the public realm. Canopies and awnings also provide a visual reference to entrances or other important facade elements. All new canopy and awning installations shall comply with the following standards:

1. A minimum of 50 percent of the street elevations for ground floor non-residential uses shall include canopies or awnings, except when the non- residential uses are recessed from the floors above by an arcade a minimum of six feet.

2. Public realm fronting canopies or awnings shall be installed a minimum of nine feet above public realm grade and a maximum of 14 feet above the public realm grade, measured from the bottom of the canopy or awning to the adjacent grade.

3. Ground floor public realm fronting canopies or awnings are permitted to project a maximum of four feet beyond street front property lines. Any canopy supporting posts or columns are prohibited within the public realm.

4. Upper floor awnings or canopies are permitted over windows or balconies.

5. No more than two canopy or awning materials and or colors shall be utilized.

Materials and colors of all canopies or awnings shall be complimentary with the overall building massing and scale, and facade material and color palette.

6. Interior-illuminated vinyl awnings are prohibited. Any integrated light fixture within a canopy or awning shall direct light downward toward the sidewalk or facade.

F. Architectural Elements: Balconies. Balconies provide important outdoor private space for residential units. When designed well, they can provide visual interest to façade designs, in addition to depth and rhythm. Alternatively, balconies can also create a negative repetitive quality when they are designed identically or have the appearance of being “added-on” to a facade. All new balconies shall comply with the following standards:

1. All balconies shall be recessed into the adjacent building façade plane. The maximum projection shall be 50 percent of the balcony’s full depth or five feet, whichever is less.
54 of 199

GMC 30.16.060
DRAFT Tropico TOD District Architectural Elements | 40

2. No balconies shall project over the public right -of-way or sidewalk, as identified in Section 30.16.040 (Site Planning: Public Realm Standards) not including the portion of the building setback behind the property line.

3. All balconies shall include facias and soffits, and whenever possible, venting systems shall be built into the soffits.

G. Architectural Elements: Fenestration. Fenestration is the arrangement, proportioning, and design of windows and doors in a building. Well implemented fenestration patterns foster an identifiable building character and promote quality design. Window designs enhance façade modulation and emphasize changes in scale and materials. All fenestration patterns, including any glazed openings, window, and door frames shall correlate with massing and scale standards in Section

30.16.050 (TOD Massing and Scale). Window and door openings shall comply with the following standards:

1. Residential. For residential uses, a minimum of 50 percent of all window and door openings between the ground floor and 50 feet above grade shall be recessed a minimum of four inches. The recess shall be measured from the outer face of the window or door glazing to the outer edge of the primary façade cladding surface. Internal grid windows are prohibited.

2. Non-Residential.
a. Ground floor storefront or curtain wall windows and doors systems shall be limited to a maximum of 50 feet in length.
b. Storefront systems and curtain walls shall be recessed a minimum of six inches from the primary façade, columns, or pilasters of the building where buildings are constructed at the build-to line.

H. Architectural Elements: Freestanding Walls, Fences, and Gates. Freestanding walls, fences, and gates define and screen yards, walkways, and outdoors areas.

Design of all freestanding walls, fences, gates shall minimize the visual impact of parking facilities, provide privacy, and security. As such, the design of such barriers must be considered when addressing the streetscape experience. All walls, fences, and gates shall comply with Chapter 30.30.010 and the following standards:

1. The design of all freestanding fences, walls, gates, and garage doors shall match be integrated with the overall site design with high levels of transparency facing the public right of way, with the exception of alleys.

2. All freestanding exterior security gates or fences shall be located a minimum of two feet behind any build-to line or street-fronting building façade.

3. All freestanding at -grade parking lot screening walls and fences shall be a minimum of four feet and a maximum of eight feet in height. All driveway gates fronting the public realm shall be equipped with vehicle activated warning beacons, bells and light devices.

4. Chain link fences are prohibited.

5. No freestanding parking screening fences or walls shall front on any publicly accessible open space.
55 of 199

30.16.060
DRAFT Tropico TOD District Architectural Elements | 41
I. Architectural Elements: Trash Enclosures. Trash enclosures are necessary to ensure that trash areas are properly screened from public view. Trash enclosures shall comply with the Section 30.30.030 and the following standards:

1. Trash collection areas shall be designed, located, or screened so as not to be readily identifiable from adjacent streets.

2. Where possible, trash enclosure shall be enclosed within the building.

3. Trash enclosures are not permitted adjacent to any publicly accessible opens space area.

4. Sizes and dimensions of trash enclosures shall be regulated by the Building and Safety and Integrated Waste Divisions.

J. Architectural Elements: Utilities. Utilities are necessary to the function and operation of any building. They can also, when not properly integrated, detract from the aesthetic quality of an urban environment or pose hazards to pedestrians. All utility installations shall comply with the following standards:

1. All mechanical equipment, including electrical and gas meters, shall be architecturally screened from view.

2. All above-grade utility boxes shall be stainless steel or wrapped with an artistic application.

3. Gas, water, and electrical meter panels are prohibited to project into the public realm. Gas, water, and electrical utilities shall be integrated into the building facade and not freestanding.

4. Electrical transformers shall be either underground, enclosed within the building, or placed behind the building so as not to be visible from any public right-of-way.

Electrical transformers shall be located adjacent to alley wherever present.

5. If electrical transformers are located fronting the public realm, transformers shall be enclosed and incorporated as part of the building façade or screened by a combination of landscaping and walls or fencing to be approved by the City.

6. Electrical transformers, mechanical equipment, backflow prevention devices, and other utility equipment shall not be located within or directly adjacent to a designated publicly accessible open space.

K. Architectural Elements: Outdoor Lighting. Lighting can create a unique aesthetic, highlight the design of a building, provide Illumination for business operations, and enhance safety for pedestrians and other users. All new lighting shall comply with the following standards:

1. Outdoor lighting of buildings and landscaped and paved site areas shall be provided for aesthetic, utility, and security purposes.

2. The design of outdoor lighting shall minimize obtrusive impacts of light glare, pollution, and trespass.

3. Outdoor light fixtures shall be fully shielded from the top so that light is directed downward and confined to the development site. Outdoor light shall not spill over onto adjacent properties or the public realm.

4. All motion sensing light fixtures shall be fully shielded. 56 of 199

GMC 30.16.060
DRAFT Tropico TOD District Architectural Elements | 42

5. Outdoor flood lighting, search lights, and laser source high intensity lights shall be prohibited, except for emergency use by police, fire, or medical personnel.

6. Lighting shall not exceed the maximum permitted building height of the applicable TOD district. Lighting for uncovered parking areas, vehicle accessways and walkways shall not exceed a height of sixteen (16) feet. and the current Glendale Building & Safety Code.

L. Architectural Elements: Rooftop Equipment. All rooftop equipment shall comply with Section 30.30.020.B. (Rooftop equipment) that is not able to be concealed within the architecture of the building shall be located towards the center of the roof and screened from view behind a parapet wall or through the use of screens. Solar energy equipment, as defined in this title, shall not be considered rooftop equipment.

M. Solar energy equipment. All solar energy equipment must comply with Section

30.30.050 (Solar energy equipment).

57 of 199

30.16.070
DRAFT Tropico TOD District Open Space and Landscaping | 43

30.16.070 TOD District Open Space and Landscaping.

A. Publicly Accessible Open Space Standards. Well-designed open spaces are vital to an urban environment to provide relief and landscaping in contrast to the built forms and streets. The following standards have been identified to encourage the creation of publicly accessible open space, as well as outdoor activity areas in conjunction with private development.

1. Applicability. All new development on lots with a street frontage greater than 60 feet in width shall provide a minimum of 10 percent of gross site area as publicly accessible open space, per Section 30.16.040 (TOD District Site Planning).

2. General Standards.
a. The design of open space shall be integrated into the overall design concept of new development, surrounding buildings, and existing open space. b. All required publicly accessible open space shall be at the same elevation as the adjacent street level sidewalks and ADA/universal access compliant. c. A minimum of 85 percent of the required publicly accessible open space shall be in a contiguous space.
d. A minimum of 90 percent of all publicly accessible open space shall be open to the sky. No building projections may occupy or project into this space at any level of the building.
e. Paseos, provided as publicly accessible open space, a shall be open to t he sky a minimum of 75 percent.
f. A combination of paved and/or landscaped open space seating, gathering, or circulation areas are permitted in the PAOS except not greater than 10 percent of the contiguous open space shall be composed of circulation areas (paths of travel).
g PAOS shall be open and accessible to the public at a minimum from 7 AM to 10 PM. Signage shall identify the open space as a public amenity and the hours of accessibility.
h. Security fences, walls, and gates shall not obstruct access from the public realm.
i. Raised planters shall not be located along the perimeter of the required PAOS and used to privatize the open space.
j. Applicants will be required to enter into a stat utory development agreement or covenant with the City, specifying that that any required publicly accessible open space area shall comply with the intent and standards of the open space regulations.

2. Publicly Accessible Open Space Courtyards and Plazas. Publicly accessible open space courtyards and plazas are outdoor rooms designed for public use and are defined by surrounding buildings and/or streets. The p rimary functions of a courtyard or plaza is to provide an opportunity for people to engage in diverse social interactions and activities, establish public spaces for relief and relaxation, expand and reinforce the public realm, and contribute to the livability of the 58 of 199

30.16.070
DRAFT Tropico TOD District Open Space and Landscaping | 44 Tropico TOD Districts. During the overall project design process , the proposed use and design of courtyards and plazas should be explicitly defined and shall comply with the established design standards.
a. Dimensions. Publicly accessible open space courtyards and plazas s hall have a minimum area of 1,200 square feet and minimum dimensions of 30 feet by 40 feet, except if the required area is less per Section 30.16.040(C).

In such instances, the length of the courtyard or plaza shall be approximately the same as its width.
b. Accessibility.
i. Courtyards and plazas shall be adjacent and open to a public street and sidewalk of a primary building façade, on one or two- sides (courtyard or plaza) with an unobstructed opening dimension of 30 feet on any open side, unless as noted. An alley shall not be consider ed a public street.
c. Materials.
i. Courtyards and plazas shall be of high- quality materials. Careful detailing shall include consideration of materials, their durability and appearance. No more than 25 percent of the area may be paved in standard concrete.
ii. Street-level facade materials and colors standards (see Section

30.16.060) shall be applied to façades that front onto publicly accessible open space.
d. Landscaping.
i. At least 25 percent of the courtyard surface shall be landscaped with live vegetation. Shade trees and gardens are strongly encouraged. All landscaped areas shall contain a combination of low, medium, and tall plant materials as appropriate.
ii. A minimum of one 36- inch box shade tree shall be provided per 600 square feet of public open space in a planting area of at least six feet in length, six feet in width, and three feet deep. At the time of planting, trees shall be at least 12- feet tall with a two-inch caliper, six inches above the topmost root.
iii. A maximum of 25 percent of the required landscaping shall be in raised planters and not located on the streetside perimeter; the remaining planting areas shall be at the same elevation as the adjacent paving.

Planted areas may berm up within the perimeter at no more than a 3:1 slope. Minimum planting and soils area shall be 24- inch by 24-inch by 24-inch. Where a tree is planted the minimum area and depth shall be increased to 42-inch by 42-inch by 36-inch. Planters should have a 12- inch ledge for seating.
iv. The property owner or agent shall maintain open space and landscaping in an orderly and healthy c ondition within the publicly accessible open space. This shall include proper pruning, staking, 59 of 199

30.16.070
DRAFT Tropico TOD District Open Space and Landscaping | 45 sowing of lawns, weeding, removal of litter and debris , fertilizing, replacement of plants when necessary, and regular watering, where applicable.
e. Amenities.
i. Seating at the ratio of one seat per 200 square feet of courtyard or plaza area shall be provided, in addition to any permitted outdoor dining, in dispersed locations throughout the space. Seating shall be either movable chairs, or fixed seats or benc hes, where such seats shall be 18 lineal inches each. Movable seating is strongly encouraged. ii. Storefront and unit entries fronting on the open space shall be designed and lighted to address safety and avoid unsafe conditions such as limited visibility, poor illumination, or dark corners. iii. A majority of the open space should have access to sunlight for the duration of daylight hours. A mix of direct sunlight and shade is encouraged. Freestanding shading devices (single installation on the ground, such as trellis, patio covers, etc .) shall be permitted within the open space, provided no more than 50 percent of the open space is covered.
iv. Permanent building projections, including cantilevered overhangs or balconies, may not project over the open space.
v. Open space shall be inviting and well -illuminated at night with pedestrian-scaled lighting to address public safety. Fixtures may include low-level lights and overhead lights attached to building walls. vi. A special feature (public art, water feature, specimen tree, or other such focal point) shall be provided for each publicly accessible open space plaza or courtyard.
vii. Bike racks, scooter parking areas, waste receptacles, and other street furnishings shall be provided, if required.
viii. All publicly accessible open space shall follow the safety standards and considerations as defined by Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design.
ix. Lighting shall be pedestrian- scaled and may include low-level bollard lights or overhead wall-mounted fixture for a well illuminated area.

3. Publicly Accessible Open Space Paseos. Publicly accessible open space paseos are pedestrian passages that serve as a break in larger blocks, provide mid-block crossings , or access to interior courtyards. Paseos are ty pically separated from vehicular traffic thus enhancing the pedestrian experience regarding safety and reduced vehicular noise. When paseos are adjacent to large buildings or structures, the sense of enclosure and relative shade allows for paseos to be an attractive alternative to street retail. Paseos should comply with the following design standards:
60 of 199

30.16.070
DRAFT Tropico TOD District Open Space and Landscaping | 46 a. Dimensions. Paseos shall maintain a width of at least 20 feet but no greater than 30 feet. The directly adjacent building walls framing the paseo may not be greater than three times in elevation height than the width of the paseo.

The building above this height must be setback a minimum of 20 feet. b. Accessibility.
i. Paseos shall abut the public right -of-way, be physically and visually accessible from the public sidewalk, and shall connect a public street with a different public street or alley.
ii. Vehicular access, loading, and parking uses shall be prohibited within the paseo during hours of public accessibility.
c. Materials.
i. Paseos shall feature high quality and durable materials applied in a carefully detailed manner.
ii. Decorative paving compatible with the style of the adjacent structures shall be applied with no more than 25 percent of the paseo being paved in standard concrete.
iii. Street-level facade standards shall be applied to facades fronting onto the open space.
d. Landscaping.
i. A minimum of 10% of the paseo area shall be landscaped with live landscaping. All landscaped areas shall contain a combi nation of low, medium, and tall plant materials as appropriate.
ii. A minimum of one 24- inch box shade tree shall be installed per 750 square feet of paseo area.
iii. Planters shall have a minimum soils area of 24 inches by 24 inches by 24 inches, except where a tree is required, at which point the area and depth shall be increased to a minimum of 42 inches by 42 inches by 36 inches.
iv. The property owner or his/her agent shall maintain open space and landscaping within the publicly accessible open space.

B. Residential Open Space Standards. Additional open space is required for mixed- use and multi-family residential developments to ensure a quality of life standard, and access to light and air for building residents, occupants, and guests.

1. Applicability. New residential development shall meet the requirements of Section 30.16.070(A) (Publicly Accessible Open Space) and shall also provide additional outdoor space equal to a minimum of 140 square feet per residential and/or live work unit.

2. General Standards.
a. Required residential open space may be provided as: publicly accessible open space (above the minimum requirement), common open space (interior 61 of 199

30.16.070
DRAFT Tropico TOD District Open Space and Landscaping | 47 courtyards, paseos, and rooftop decks), private outdoor spac e (balconies, decks, and patios), or a combination thereof.
b. A minimum of 10 percent of the required open space for residential development shall be located at the ground floor.

3. Residential Common Open Space. Common open space provided in the form of interior courtyards and rooftop decks should be designed as one or two large, contiguous spaces and not many scattered, separate spaces and shall comply with the following:
a. Open space must be designed for a mix of active and pas sive uses and/or activities.
b. Building codes shall dictate the minimum sizes of these common open space areas.
c. Seating is to be provided through the use of portable or fixed site furniture or edges along planters and/or fountains.
d. Open space shall be inviting and well -illuminated at night with pedestrian- scaled lighting to address public safety. Fixtures may include low-level lights and overhead lights attached to building walls.

4. Residential Private Open Space. Private open space provided in the form of balconies, decks, terraces, and patios shall comply with the following:
a. Private open space shall have a minimum area of 40 square feet . Such private outdoor space shall be designed as a patio, deck or balcony and shall have a minimum length or width of four feet and shall be directly accessible and an integral part of the dwelling unit which it serves. b. Balconies must comply with the design standards of Chapter 30.16.060(F).

5. Residential Landscaping Standards.
a. A minimum of 20 percent of the total required open space for residential developments provided in the form of common open space must be landscaped with live plant material.
b. Permanent landscaping shall consist of landscaped areas at the ground level or in planters having a minimum length, width, diameter, and depth of 24 inches, except where a tree is required, at which point the area and dept h shall be increased to a minimum of 42 inches by 42 inches by 36 inches. c. All landscaped areas shall contain a combination of low, medium, and tall plant materials as appropriate.
d. Landscaping is required in the setback area for individual residential units on the ground floor, except for where a walkway, ramp, stoop, or stairs are directly adjacent to the public realm. Landscaping shall be of an appropriate height to screen the residential unit walls and stoops.

62 of 199

Proposed Amendments to the Parking Sections of the GMC Chapter 30.32 - Parking Section 30.32.040 General parking regulations.

These requirements are intended to ensure adequate parking for residents, and the employees and customers of all businesses.

A. Layout and Access Plan Required. All land use permit applications and any request for new or modified parking facilities shall include a parking layout and access plan, for approval of parking design and layout, access, signage, driveways, landscaping, and screening.

B. Location of Parking. Off-street parking shall be located as follows:

1. All required off-street parking and loading spaces shall be accessible, except for domestic violence shelters, and shall be located on the same lot as the use and/or development requiring such spaces, except as otherwise permitted herein.

For the purposes of this chapter, “accessible” shall mean capable of being reached for purposes of parking during hours of operation or occupation by means of the full and unobstructed minimum dimensions as specified herein.

Section 30.32.180 Chart VI shall be illustrative of the meaning of “accessible.” Required parking shall be located on the same site as the activities or uses served, unless a parking use permit is obtained in accordance with Chapter 30.51 and Section 30.32.120. In the DSP and TOD zones, off-street parking spaces that are not accessible, i.e., tandem or vertically stacked, shall be permitted as required off- street parking spaces, subject to the following standards:
a. For residential uses, a maximum of fifty (50) percent of the required off- street parking spaces may be tandem or vertically stacked, provided that each set of accessible and tandem or vertically stacked parking spaces shall be assigned to the same residential unit.
b. For nonresidential uses, a maximum of twenty-five (25) percent of the required off-street parking spaces may be tandem or vertically stacked. c. All parking spaces in tandem off-street parking space configurations shall comply with the dimensions in Section 30.32.180, Charts I, II, and III. d. The dimensions of vertically stacked off-street parking spaces shall be subject to the approval of the review authority or the director of community development where there is no other review authority.
e. The use of tandem or vertically stacked parking spaces for nonresidential uses shall require that the operator of the parking facility provide a valet or attendant at all times that the parking is accessible to users, except where the traffic and transportation administrator determines that the nature of the use and its operation will not require attended parking.
f. The assignment of tandem or vertically stacked parking spaces and the restrictions of their use shall be the responsibility of the owner of the premises Tropico - Exhibit 3
63 of 199

or the owner’s assigned representative, subject to the requirements of this chapter.

2. Off-street parking and loading spaces may not be located within any street setback area, except for domestic violence shelters.

3. Parking and loading spaces shall not preclude direct and free access to stairways, walkways, elevators, any pedestrian accessways or fire safety equipment. Such access shall be a clear minimum width of forty-four (44) inches, no part of which may be within a parking space.

4. When there is more than one (1) dwelling unit for each two thousand five hundred (2,500) square feet of lot area or when there are more than four (4) dwelling units in one (1) building on a lot, except in the TOD zone, all required off- street parking spaces for such dwelling units shall be provided in subterranean or semi-subterranean garages, except guest parking spaces which may be located above or below grade. Projects utilizing a garage design that is not subterranean or semi-subterranean shall provide private and direct access to the unit for which the garage is provided and ground level living space shall occupy not less than twenty- five (25) percent of the total unit area. Private and direct access shall mean access through a door directly into the floor area of a unit or access through a private outdoor area of the unit and then through a door into the unit and never through any common area of the project.

5. For additional regulations concerning the location of parking in the CPD zone, see Section 30.12.030.

Section 30.32.050 Minimum number of parking spaces required.

The minimum number of off-street parking spaces provided for any land use shall not be less than the following (see Sections 30.32.171 and 30.32.173 for bicycle parking requirements):

Table 30-32-A
A. Residential Uses.

Residential Uses Number of Required Parking Spaces
Dwelling units in all zones except
the ROS, R1R, R1, and DSP and
TOD zones where more than one
dwelling unit exists on a lot
Efficiencies of up to 1,500 square feet and 1
bedroom units - 2 spaces
2 bedroom units - 2 spaces
Efficiencies of 1,501 to 2,000 square feet and 3
bedroom units - 2.5 spaces
Efficiencies of more than 2,000 square feet and
any unit containing 4 or more bedrooms - 3
spaces
Tropico - Exhibit 3
64 of 199

Residential Uses Number of Required Parking Spaces
Dwelling units in all zones except
the ROS, R1R, R1, and DSP and
TOD zones where more than one
dwelling unit exists on a lot
Guest parking - 1/4 space per unit for residential
projects of 4 or more units; spaces must be
accessible, screened from view of the street, may
be unenclosed and must be clearly identified with
the words, “GUEST PARKING” painted in the
space with minimum eight-inch high letters; if the
guest spaces are located behind security gates a
communication system shall be provided and
maintained to allow guests to communicate with
residents to allow for guest vehicular access
through the gates
In the PRD zone, 1 uncovered guest space per
dwelling unit in addition to enclosed parking
spaces; the guest space shall be in close
proximity and bear direct relationship to the
dwelling unit for which it is intended; such guest
parking space may be located within the public
right-of-way
Guest parking spaces must comply with Building
Code requirements
Dwelling units in the DSP and
TOD zones
1 bedroom units - 1 space
Units of 2 bedrooms or more - 2 spaces, except
that only 1 parking space is required for each
senior residential unit
Guest parking - 1 space per 10 units for projects
of 10 or more units; spaces must be accessible,
screened from view of the street, may be
unenclosed and must be clearly identified with the
words, “GUEST PARKING” painted in the space
with minimum eight-inch high letters; if the guest
spaces are located behind security gates a
communication system shall be provided and
maintained to allow guests to communicate with
residents to allow for guest vehicular access
through the gates
Guest parking spaces must comply with Building
Code requirements
Tropico - Exhibit 3
65 of 199

Section 30.32.171 Additional trip reduction and travel demand measures in the DSP and TOD zones.

The provisions of this section shall apply in addition to the provisions of Section 30.32.170 in the DSP and TOD zones.

A. Definitions. For the purposes of this section, the following words and phrases shall have the meanings ascribed to them unless otherwise noted:
“AVR.” Average vehicle ridership.
“Carpool.” A vehicle carrying two (2) to five (5) persons to and from work on a regular schedule.
“Development.” The construction of new floor area.
“Preferential parking.” Parking spaces, designated or assigned through use of a sign or painted space markings for carpools or vanpools, that are provided in a location more convenient to the entrance for the place of employment than parking spaces provided for single-occupant vehicles.
“Transportation demand management (TDM).” The alteration of travel behavior through programs of incentives, services, and policies, including encouraging the use of alternatives to single-occupant vehicles such as public transit, cycling, walking, carpooling/ vanpooling and changes in work schedule that move trips out of the peak period or eliminate them altogether (as in the case in telecommuting or compressed work weeks).
“Trip reduction.” Reduction in the number of work-related trips made by single- occupant vehicles.
“Vanpool.” A vehicle carrying six (6) or more persons to and from work on a regular schedule, and on a prepaid basis.
“Vehicle.” Any motorized form of transportation, including, but not limited to, automobiles, vans, buses and motorcycles.

B. Applicability. The provisions of this section shall apply to the following developments referred to as Tier 1, Tier 2, and Tier 3, as defined below:

1. Tier 1.
a. All new nonresidential development twenty-five thousand (25,000) square feet or more of gross floor area.
b. Any nonresidential addition of twenty-five thousand (25,000) square feet or more of gross floor area.
c. All new residential development with one hundred (100) units or more, or mixed-use projects with fifty (50) residential units or more and twenty-five thousand (25,000) gross square feet or more of nonresidential floor area. d. Other projects to which the TDM requirements shall be applicable, based on a covenant, development agreement, or other such binding agreement with the city.

Tropico - Exhibit 3
66 of 199

2. Tier 2. Developments greater than fifty thousand (50,000) square feet in gross floor area or an expansion resulting in a development greater than fifty thousand (50,000) square feet.

3. Tier 3. Developments exceeding one hundred thousand (100,000) square feet, or an expansion resulting in a development greater than one hundred thousand (100,000) square feet.

C. Requirements. The requirements herein shall apply to Tier 1, Tier 2, and Tier 3 projects, as specified in this section, and to projects using the parking reduction measures of Section 30.32.070(C).

1. Transportation demand management (TDM) plan. For Tier 1, Tier 2, and Tier 3 projects, prior to the issuance of a building permit or approval of a development agreement, the project applicant shall develop a transportation demand management (TDM) plan, including a detailed list of facilities and programs that will be implemented, to meet the requirements listed below in this section. The TDM plan shall also include a schedule of implementation for TDM programs, and a budget for both programs and facilities. All programs shall be implemented within one (1) year of initial occupancy.

2. Transportation management association/organization (TMA/TMO). The property owners of Tier l, Tier 2 and Tier 3 projects, and property owners of projects using the parking reduction measures of Section 30.32.070(C), shall become dues-paying members of a designated transportation management association (TMA) or transportation management organization (TMO), and eligible for participation in the programs and activities of the TMA/TMO. Rates shall be set by the Board of the TMA/TMO and adopted by the city council, with the provision that they may be increased annually, based on changes to the consumer price index. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy or of a zoning use certificate for a project, annual dues for the first year of membership shall be paid to the city and then transferred to a designated TMA/TMO. The city shall define performance standards for the designated TMA/TMO to ensure effective administration of the TMA/TMO and communication with and between members of the TMA/TMO. The performance standards shall include the following standards:
a. Completion of an annual AVR survey for all member organizations, with a report provided to the city documenting the results of this survey. b. Assurance that all members of the board are decision makers or their designees, for the organizations they represent.
c. At least four (4) meetings of the board each year, with a quorum present at all meetings.

3. Facilities. The following facilities shall be implemented prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy:
a. Bicycle facilities.

Tropico - Exhibit 3
67 of 199

(1) Secure bicycle parking shall be provided for all development subject to the bicycle parking ordinance, at the following rates for various land uses:

Table 30.32—E
Long-term Short-term
Residential with private garage None None
Multifamily residential 1 space per 4 units 1 space per 20 units Retail and personal service uses 1 space per 12,000
square feet
1 space per 5,000
square feet
Supermarkets 1 space per 12,000
square feet
1 space per 2,000
square feet
Office, excluding medical, dental, and
consumer services
1 space per 10,000
square feet
1 space per 20,000
square feet

“Long-term bicycle facility” means a locker, individually locked enclosure or supervised area within a building providing protection for each bicycle therein from theft, vandalism and weather.
“Short-term bicycle facility” means a rack, stand or other device constructed so as to enable the user to secure by locking the frame and one wheel of each bicycle parked therein. Racks must be easily usable with both U-locks and cable locks, must support the bikes in a stable upright position so that a bike, if bumped, will not fall or roll down, and must be constructed in accordance with the provisions of Section 30.32.173(D).
(2) Additionally, Tier 2 developments shall provide a changing room and shower facilities.
b. Pedestrian facilities.
(1) Tier 1 and Tier 2 developments shall provide full pedestrian access to the public sidewalk as required by the zoning code and design guidelines as adopted by the city.
(2) Tier 3 developments shall provide sidewalks or other designated pathways following direct and safe routes from the external pedestrian circulation system to each building in the development. c. Transit facilities.
(1) For Tier 1, Tier 2, and Tier 3 developments, the design shall enable safe and convenient access to nearby transit stops and facilities. (2) For Tier 3 developments, a bus stop with shelter and other amenities shall be provided if required by the director of community development.

Tropico - Exhibit 3
68 of 199

d. Vehicle facilities.
(1) For Tier 1, Tier 2, and Tier 3 developments, preferential parking shall be provided for carpools and vanpools (most proximate to main entrances and/or at a reduced price).
(2) For Tier 3 developments, and for Tier 2 developments at the discretion of the director of community development, a convenient drop-off point for carpools and vanpools shall be provided on site.

4. Programs. The following programs shall be implemented within one (1) year of project completion, following the schedule included in the TDM Plan for the project.

All employers shall:
a. Designate an on-site transportation coordinator to be a point of contact with the city and the designated TMA/TMO regarding transportation demand management facilities and programs. For Tier 1 developments with multiple employers, the property manager shall designate an on-site transportation coordinator.
b. Provide an information board or kiosk in a prominent location for employees, residents, and/or visitors, with information about access to all modes of transportation, as well as the activities of the designated TMA/TMO. c. In Tier 2 and Tier 3 developments, either provide on-site transit pass sales or a pretax transit pass program.
d. Participate in the guaranteed ride home program of the designated TMA/TMO.
e. Demonstrate proof of compliance with the State of California’s parking cash out law.
f. Develop or participate in a ridesharing program to encourage carpooling and vanpooling.

D. Monitoring. For the purposes of determining whether applicable developments are complying with the provisions of this chapter, the city shall monitor compliance in a manner it deems appropriate and reasonable. Monitoring mechanisms include, but are not limited to, the following:

1. All projects shall submit an annual performance report to the city to validate continued compliance with the requirements of this section. A statistically valid survey shall be conducted of employees and/or residents of the project, to ascertain the level of success in achieving the goals of this section, including a determination of the AVR for that project. The AVR shall be determined according to the requirements of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD).

The costs to conduct the survey and produce the report shall be borne by the employer, property owner, or homeowners association, as appropriate.

2. City staff shall confirm to the city council on an annual basis that all projects subject to this section are in compliance with its requirements.

Tropico - Exhibit 3
69 of 199

3. City staff shall prepare a summary report evaluating the overall success of achieving the goals of the TDM provisions in this chapter. If the goals are not being met, staff shall propose alternate programs or strategies that could be pursued to achieve these goals. Costs for preparation of staff reports shall be borne by the city.

4. For Tier 2 and Tier 3 projects that fail to achieve an AVR of at least one and one-quarter (1.25), the city shall work with the designated TMA/TMO and the employer to modify their TDM plan to include programs and strategies that are expected to better support achievement of an AVR of at least one and one-quarter (1.25). The city may mandate the implementation of certain programs and strategies until this goal is reached. (Ord. 5732, § 7, 2011) Tropico - Exhibit 3
70 of 199

2 CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA ITEM
Report: Presentation of Results of Hotel Study Related to Hotel Moratorium and Direction on Code/DSP Amendments and/or Extension of Hotel Moratorium for an Additional One- Year Period

1. Motion to Note and File Report;

2. Motion Providing Direction and Initiating Zoning Code and/or DSP Amendments Related to Hotel Uses in the DSP;

3. Motion Directing Staff to Return with Ordinance for Introduction Extending Ordinance No. 5978 for an Additional One-Year Period.

COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Action Item
Approved for September 13, 2022 calendar

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report discusses alternatives to address the current hotel moratorium that is in place the Downtown Specific Plan (DSP). The moratorium was enacted, in part, to study and gain an understanding of the current market conditions and demands for hotels, while also considering land use and zoning requirements related to the approval of hotel entitlements. This report will recap the market study that was completed in the summer of 2022, while also outlining potential alternatives to modifying the land use code and approval process for hotels within the DSP. The hotel market study identified that Glendale is behind its peers with respect to hotel rooms, which also equates to missed opportunities for transient occupancy tax collection for the City. The report also identified niche markets that are missing within the City. Potential changes to the zoning code could include removal of the hotel use incentive, conditional use permit, prohibiting the use within the DSP, and making no changes to the zoning code and the allowed use of hotels. 71 of 199

22 3
5 8
7 COUNCIL PRIORITIES
Economic Vibrancy: The hotel study presentation and potential zoning code amendments or moratorium extension are consistent with the Council’s desire to ensure that the growth and economic vibrancy of downtown is befitting of the Council and community’s vision of a vibrant downtown, and to better understand the need and demand for new hotel rooms without encouraging over-development.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council receive this report regarding potential resolutions to the hotel moratorium within the DSP and provide direction upon review of the hotel market study and the zoning code alternatives. If City Council desires, it may direct staff to return to extend the moratorium for an additional year while staff further studies and finalizes zoning code amendments.

BACKGROUND
On October 19, 2021 City Council adopted Interim Ordinance No. 5977, temporarily prohibiting new hotel development projects within the DSP. City Council extended the moratorium for 10 months at 15 days at a duly noticed public hearing on November 30 2021. The moratorium exempted projects that had an approved development agreement prior to the effective date, as well as any hotel project that had received at least a Stage I Design Review Approval. This moratorium was based on the potential impacts of hotels on Downtown, including several recent proposals that had been approved, and to also conduct a market study to identify expected future demand of hotels within the City.

As directed by Council, Community Development commissioned a hotel study with PKF in July of 2022. This delay was to allow travel the opportunity for pre-pandemic levels, as well as to wait for a subsequent increase in Covid cases that could impede travel behavior to subside. The study sought to better understand Glendale’s current conditions, demand for hotel rooms, and gaps in the hotel marketplace to identify where the City may be oversaturating the market or could experience further economic growth.

PKF conducted a broad market study on hotel supply, demand, and current performance, as well as carefully consider residential, business, and entertainment/leisure growth patterns in Glendale and surrounding cities.

ANALYSIS
Market Study
The hotel market study found that Glendale’s hotel supply is slowly revitalizing with recent new hotel additions; however, the majority of the rooms in the market are classified as limited service and/or older, lower quality product.

Beginning May of 2021, hotel occupancy has climbed to approximately 65 percent since the Covid low periods, while the hotel average daily rates (ADR) have actually surpassed 2019 levels, similar to other markets around the country. Pre-pandemic, the Glendale/Burbank submarket occupancy ranged from 82 to 84 percent and even higher 72 of 199

32 3
5 8
7 in the 3 and 4-star hotel categories. ADR levels ranged between $156 and $158. As of the first quarter of 2022, the Glendale/Burbank submarket remains at a steady occupancy level of approximately 60 percent with and ADR of $164.

The Pasadena/Arcadia submarket had occupancy rates between 76 and 79 percent with ADR levels between $145 and $146, and upper tiered hotels higher in both ADR and occupancy. As of the first quarter of 2022, the occupancy levels were approximately 63 percent with an ADR of $135.

Glendale offers 13 hotels and lodging properties, rated between 2 and 4 stars. There are a total of 1,688 rooms in the city, with an additional 537 receiving some level of entitlement approval, but not built. In comparison, Burbank offers 29 hotels and lodging properties with 1,813 rooms and Pasadena offers 39 hotels with 2,329 room.

In 2019, Glendale generated $5,877,940 in transient occupancy tax (TOT) revenues, while the neighboring cities of Burbank and Pasadena generated $9,343,816 and $16,948,000 respectively. When compared to Burbank and Pasadena, Glendale currently has the lowest room count, resulting in lower TOT generation.

Glendale Burbank Pasadena
Number of Rooms 1,688 1,813 2,329
Number of
Properties
13 29 39
Transient
Occupancy Tax
(2019)
$5,877,940 $9,343,816 $16,948,000
Once geopolitical factors, including inflation and Covid are normalized, it is believed that Glendale’s market occupancy will approach 80 percent by 2024, indicating a capacity to absorb more hotel rooms.

The analysis performed by PKF concludes that the quality of the existing hotels in Glendale does not meet the needs of Glendale’s citywide offerings. The underlining reasons for this assumption are as follows:
•Approximately 65 percent of the city’s rooms are lower quality and/or limited- service hotels.
•Few properties offer meaningful event space with high-quality catering, and typically only providing simple gyms and outdoor pools. •No hotels offer spa amenities that would attract guests from a more regional expanse.

While the market study indicates that Glendale does not have a sufficient number of higher end hotels, and those that provide attractive amenities, the study also identified opportunities for boutique hotels. Given the current climate of inflation, as well as supply 73 of 199

42 3
5 8
7 constraints, PKF believes there is a market for conversion and rehabilitation work. It is recommended by PKF that incentives should be developed to promote the conversion of older, obsolete products into boutique offerings. PKF recommends that incentives should be developed for these kinds of properties, as well as amenity-rich, four star and higher properties. This include a modification of the existing incentive system that is part of the DSP, to be more focused on missing markets of hotels.

Zoning
In response to the market study, Council has several alternative to address the current moratorium that is in place. These alternatives are highlighted below.

Maintain Existing Zoning and Incentive System
Hotels can be developed by two different means. Currently, hotels are a permitted use in the Downtown. Provided that a proposed project meets the development standards of the project’s zoning (height, FAR, design, etc.), a project can be developed by-right.

Hotels are permitted in all zones of downtown. Like all downtown developments, the project must go through the Design Review process, including Stage I and II as well as review by the Design Review Board.

Hotel developments can also utilize the hotel use incentive. As part of Chapter 7 of the DSP, a hotel use is identified as a community benefit and is subject to increased density and building height. A hotel is defined as a community benefit based on its role as an important component of a thriving business district, and its ability to oftentimes provide amenities that are available for use by the general public. These amenities can include entertainment, restaurants, and meeting rooms. Hotels that participate in the community benefit program are required to provide ground floor designs that enhance the uses and activity of the pedestrian realm. This can be accomplished by including cafes, restaurants, or retail space at the ground level, as well as public art.

The use incentive was included in the original DSP, and maintained during the 2019 updates. The goal of the incentive has been to encourage the development of hotels, which had been identified as a needed use in the Downtown. This need has been based on what had been a deficiency of hotel rooms in Downtown Glendale, and the desire to create a more attractive destination for visitors within the region. In addition to creating vibrancy in the downtown, hotels generate revenue for the city by way of the transient occupancy tax (TOT). Encouraging hotels to be built could lead to increased revenue for the city as hotels begin to come online and open for business.

By meeting the objectives of the community benefit system, hotels may achieve the maximum allowable height and/or density within the proposed project’s district as illustrated in the table below. In exchange, they covenant (or agree) to maintain the use as a hotel, and community benefit, in perpetuity.
74 of 199

52 3
5 8
7 Council may elect to maintain this existing system which would continue to encourage hotel developments.

Modify Incentive System
The hotel market study identified gaps in the types of hotels provided in Glendale. These are mainly identified as higher end products and those that are amenity-rich. City Council may elect to maintain hotel uses as an allowable use, but to modify the hotel use incentive system. This could be accomplished by modifying the incentive so that additional density is only allowed for those projects that meet the amenity needs identified in the hotel market study. Those that do not meet the amenity criteria would still be allowed, per the Zoning Code, but would not receive any additional density.

Conditional Use Permit
A conditional use permit is often needed to ensure that a proposed use is compatible in design and operation with the surrounding neighborhood. Specific conditions can be applied to individual projects that address specific contextual challenges to ensure compatibility. Currently, all hotel projects in the DSP undergo Design Review which is reviewed by the City Council at both Stage I and Stage II, as well as an interview review by the Design Review Board. Each of these reviews present opportunities to provide feedback, guidance, and conditions to ensure that a project is contextually appropriate and responsive. Establishing a Conditional Use Permit, may prove to be redundant give the Design Review process. Council may elect to implement a Conditional Use Permit 75 of 199

62 3
5 8
7 process as well as provide direction regarding any modifications to the hotel use incentive. Staff would amend the Zoning Code and would include a public process with the Planning Commission and City Council
No Longer an Allowable Use in the DSP
Council may elect to no longer allow hotel uses in the DSP. This would apply to any future proposals that were not granted pipeline status at the time that the hotel moratorium was established. Staff would amend the Zoning Code to remove hotels as an allowed use, and would include a public process with the Planning Commission and City Council. It should be noted that no longer allowing hotel uses in the DSP would significantly impact any future Transient Occupancy Tax, which would have long-term consequences on the City’s General Fund.

Moratorium Extension
Under California Government Code section 65858, a city may adopt an interim ordinance to temporarily prohibit certain land uses that may be in conflict with a contemplated general plan, specific plan, or zoning proposal that the city council is considering or intends to study within a reasonable time. The purpose of such an interim ordinance is to give the City time to maintain the status quo and prohibit the issuance of entitlements or permits that would be in conflict with new contemplated standards. The rationale for an urgency ordinance that takes immediate effect is to prevent a “rush to the counter” of applications to establish new uses before standards can be put in place. The delay in permits allows the city to subject all new uses to the new standards.

Urgency interim ordinances under Government Code section 65858 require adoption by 4/5 vote of the Council and expire within 45 days, unless extended in the manner described below. An urgency ordinance may only be adopted if the Council finds that there is a current and immediate threat to the public health, safety and welfare, and that the approval of additional entitlements, permits and other approvals would result in a threat to that public health, safety or welfare. On October 19, 2021, the Council adopted Interim Urgency Ordinance No. 5977, with the required findings, that imposed a 45-day moratorium on new hotel development projects in the DSP.

The ordinance would have expired on December 3, 2021, but the City Council voted to extend the ordinance on November 30, 2021, for an additional 10 months and 15 days (Ordinance No. 5978). Ordinance No. 5978 expires on October 18, 2022, but may be extended again for a period not to exceed 12 months following a noticed public hearing.

If Council directs, staff will return prior to the October 18 expiration with an ordinance extending Interim Urgency Ordinance No. 5978 an additional 12 months.

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
N/A
76 of 199

72 3
5 8
7 FISCAL IMPACT
Noting and filing this report would have no fiscal impact. Initiation of zoning code or DSP amendments would not have an immediate fiscal impact outside of staff time needed to draft/prepare the amendments and return to City Council for consideration.

Depending on the amendments enacted, further fiscal impacts may occur, and those would be evaluated at that time. Any extension of the moratorium would continue to impact the City’s ability to increase the Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) revenue, therefore impacting the City’s General Fund. This would also include any associated permit fees with any new proposed hotel developments that are not provided pipeline status. A moratorium would avoid any potential costs associated with extra City services. Additional studies would also have a fiscal impact resulting from the cost of those studies.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CEQA/NEPA)
Community Development Department staff have evaluated the potential environmental effects of the Council’s actions of either providing direction regarding zoning code/DSP amendments, and/or direction regarding bringing back an ordinance extending for an additional 12 months Ordinance No. 5978 temporarily barring hotel development projects in the DSP, and/or undertaking additional studies, within the meaning of and pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), and have concluded that these actions are exempt from further environmental review under CEQA pursuant to Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations ("CEQA Guidelines") because these actions (providing direction on future actions that will be evaluated at the time they are prepared/presented for consideration) are not projects under CEQA Guidelines Section 15060 and 15378 because they will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. Furthermore, these actions are exempt from further environmental review under CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15262 because they involve only feasibility or planning studies for possible future actions which the City has not yet approved, adopted, or funded. Moreover, extension of the moratorium regarding hotel uses in the DSP is consistent with classes of projects that do not have a significant effect on the environment, and thereby qualify for a Categorical Exemption pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15061(b)(3), 15307, and 15308; that action is therefore exempt from further environmental review or the preparation of an environmental document.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
This item is exempt from campaign disclosure requirements.

ALTERNATIVES

1. Council may choose to note and file this report and not provide direction or initiate any zoning code amendments related to hotel uses within the Downtown Specific Plan or any moratorium extension.

2. Council may choose to provide direction and initiate zoning code amendments related to hotel uses within the Downtown Specific Plan, and/or to direct staff to return with an ordinance to extend the moratorium for an additional 12 months, and/or to direct staff to conduct any additional studies or analysis regarding hotels 77 of 199

82 3
5 8
7 as an allowed use within the Downtown Specific Plan.

3. Council may choose any other alternative not proposed by staff.

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Prepared by:

Bradley Calvert, Assistant Director of Community Development Approved by:

Roubik R. Golanian, P.E., City Manager

EXHIBITS/ATTACHMENTS
Exhibit 1: Hotel Market Study
78 of 199

MOTION
Moved by Council Member ____________________________, seconded by Council Member ____________________________, that the City Council hereby notes and files the staff report to the City Council by the Assistant Director of Community Development dated September 13, 2022, pertaining to the hotel study conducted by PKF.

Vote as Follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
79 of 199

MOTION
Moved by Council Member ____________________________, seconded by Council Member ____________________________, that the Council hereby initiates preparation of amendments to the Zoning Code and/or the Downtown Specific Plan (DSP) related to hotel uses in the DSP, as set forth in the September 13, 2022 staff report from the Director of Community Development, and per additional or further direction provided by Council at the meeting of the same date. Staff is further directed to submit the Ordinance to the Planning Commission for review and recommendation and then to the Council for its consideration. Council direction for the preparation of said code amendment/DSP amendment is as follows:
______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ _______.

Vote as Follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
80 of 199

MOTION
Moved by Council Member ____________________________, seconded by Council Member ____________________________, that the Council hereby directs staff to return with an ordinance for introduction extending the DSP hotel use moratorium, Ordinance No. 5978, for an additional one-year period.

Vote as Follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
81 of 199

draft
1 PKF hotelexperts

Market Study for
The City of Glendale
in Glendale, CA

City of Glendale
June 2022

PKF hotelexperts GmbH I Schubertring 3 l 1010 Vienna l Austria www.pkfhotels.com T: +43 (1) 5120707 E: [email protected]

managing directors Michael Widmann Christian Walter l commercial register FN 245617 b

PKF hotelexperts GmbH is a member firm of the PKF International Limited family of legally independ ent firms and does not accept any responsibility or liability for the actions or inactions of any individual member or correspondent firm or firms.

82 of 199

draft
2  executive summary

The City of Glendale, LA County’s 4 th largest city, continues a steady growth path. Since its population peak in 2018 with 200,000 residents, the city added 4,000 new residential units and is currently adding another 1,200 units (under construction or in entitlements).

This represents a 7% i ncrease over the current 74,000 household count. The city lost some business and residents when Nestle left in 2017 due to high state taxes, and it is emerging from the post-pandemic era along the lines of many other cities across the US:
office activity has declined as partial remote work has increased, travel has trended more towards leisure than business in the last two years, and a rise in construction costs, coupled with tight labor markets, has impacted development across all land uses.

Looking beyond the post-Covid recovery, Glendale is assessing the city’s hotel market with a specific view towards development incentives and regulations. The Downtown Specific Plan seeks to balance community needs and sustainable growth through the regulation of hotel and other land uses. An ordinance that placed a hold on new hotel permits was issued in March 2019, at the start of the Covid pandemic, and City Council is in the process of measuring the current status of the hotel market, as well as the impact of fu ture hotel development in Glendale.

The City has adopted a three -year economic development strategic plan that focuses on generating business and activity in the innovation, tech, and entertainment industries, while creating brand identity for the city. Often grouped into the tri-city region of Burbank, Glendale and Pasadena, Glendale can stand out further on its own for its walkable and culturally engaged downtown; its superior retail environment, anchored in the Americana at Brand entertainment center; its access to the Angeles National Forest and nearby trails; and its affordability relative to Pasadena and the major business centers in LA County.

The city has a notable base of business, which includes major insurance companies, a large Disney entity, and other regional headquarters ; and it has launched two new tech incubators to attract business and investment. The American Armenian Museum will open in 2024, creating an even more defined cultural hub for the city’s large Armenian population. And Blackstone recently announced a $7.6 Billion investment in Glendale - based PS Business Parks, which is growing its real estate portfolio throughout the region.

Tourism demand in Glendale has traditionally stemmed from local business travel to the city, w ith some business travelers choosing the quieter submarkets of Glendale and Pasadena for their Downtown LA and Hollywood business and convention needs. Leisure travel increases during major events at the nearby Rose Bowl, Occidental College, and Americana at Brand, among other tourism drivers. Since Covid, leisure travel has increased while business travel has decreased, and PKF believes the City of Glendale’s many cultural initiatives will work well with an overall improvement to the hotel product and amenities in consideration and under development.

Glendale’s hotel supply is slowly refreshing with recent new additions, yet the majority of rooms in the market are classified as limited service and/or older, lower quality product.

Today’s room count appears to service demand, particularly following the devastating impact of Covid on the hospitality industry. Beginning in May 2021, occupancy has climbed to approximately 65% since the Covid low periods. Hotel Average Daily Rates (ADR) have surpassed 2019 levels, as they have across most global markets – in some part due to inflation and in part due to pent-up demand following pandemic restrictions. 83 of 199

draft
3 Prior to Covid, occupancy ranged from 82-84% across the entire market, and even higher in the 3- and 4-star category, which reached 89% occupancy in some periods. Given that level of occupancy, developers added two new Marriott hotels, which opened in 2020 – the Tribute Autograph and the Residence Inn – increasing the upscale and above hotel supply by 50% (from 4 to 6 hotels) and increasing overall market roo m count by 6% to almost 4,000 total keys.

The greater LA market has experienced a faster recovery than the overall national averages.

According to Kalibri Lab’s data, 2021 saw a 34.5% increase in RevPAR (a measure of occupancy and ADR) above 2020 RevPAR, versus the nationwide increase of 23.2%. It is expected to regain 2019 RevPAR numbers by 2024. Notably, the upper -priced category of hotels is rebounding faster than all other categories, with a 51% RevPAR increase in 2022 YTD, versus only 11% increase in the same period for the economy category.

Once the impacts of Covid, the war in Ukraine, and current inflation growth normalize, PKF believes that Glendale’s market occupancy will approach or reach 80% again by 2024, indicating the capacity to abso rb more hotel rooms. This is being partially addressed by four new hotels that are approved and slated to open in 2022 and 2023, adding 465 new keys. Additionally, the Onni Group’s proposed 852 keys at the 134 freeway would bring the total supply to appr oximately 5,300 keys, a 32% increase over today’s room count.

It’s important to note that, while new supply has been added and relatively well absorbed, the number of Short Term Rental units (Airbnb and other) grew 45% during the last three years.

Based on market performance and the addition of the new approved keys, hotel supply will meet existing demand. The added Onni rooms would more comfortably meet existing demand. More broadly, however, PKF believes that the quality of the existing hotels does not meet the needs of Glendale’s city -wide offerings and strategic plans. Critical to the overall health of the city’s multiple land use ecosystem is a strong hotel industry. Given that approximately 65% of the city’s rooms are lower quality and/or limited-service hotels, demand will remain limited to largely local business and leisure needs. Few properties offer meaningful event space with high -quality catering, and while simple gyms and nice outdoor pools are available in the upper -priced properties, no hotels offer spa amenities that would attract guests from a more regional expanse. Based on PKF’s assessment of the market, we see a gap in the overall product offering in the following categories:

- Boutique hotel product – an interesting draw for younger travelers who are seeking a dynamic and affordable remote work/ vacation experience

- Meeting and Event Space hotel amenities – space that will service the local community for its weddings and other e vents, while also attracting business retreats and meetings to a comfortable, walkable, and green city center

- Extended stay product – additional supply that will allow the Hollywood production teams, the tech and other innovation entrepreneurs, and othe r remote workers to enjoy a longer stay in the area

- Overall 4-star supply – quality product in a full-service setting that places Glendale hotels in the ranks of its sister cities and attracts guests who would otherwise find an Airbnb in Silver Lake, a smaller boutique hotel room in DTLA or Hollywood, or studio-adjacent big box hotel

84 of 199

draft
4 Due to increased costs of construction, as well as constraints on the supply chain and within the labor markets, the easiest economic argument for hotel developers to m ake is limited service or conversion/ rehab work. PKF believes incentives should be in place to promote the conversion of older, tired product into more boutique offerings, as the Glendale Express Hotel has done. Additionally, 4 -star product and accompan ying amenities will better induce demand, create jobs, and service the local community than will new limited-service product, thus perhaps necessitating incentives for amenity-rich hotel product. As the economic and cultural/retail offerings continue to i mprove with private and public sector initiatives, Glendale’s capacity to induce regional demand, beyond the local area, is very feasible. Improved hotel supply will be an important component of that growth, and a critical part of Glendale’s strategic pla ns to increase the city’s brand recognition.

85 of 199

draft
5  table of contents
chapter heading page
1 Introduction 7

1.1 Assignment 7

1.2 Methodology 8
2 Location 11

2.1 Market Snapshot 11

2.2 Regional Context 12

2.3 Glendale 16

2.4 Hotel Corridors 20
3 Market 23

3.1 Overview 23

3.2 Short-term Rentals 23

3.3 Hotels 23

3.4 Relevant Market Segment 30
4 Gap Analysis 38
5 Incentives Analysis 41
86 of 199

draft
6  charts/illustrations
# title page
Chart 1 typical brands per segment 10
Chart 2 los angeles annual performance, historical and forecast 11 Chart 3 RevPAR annual change by hotel category 12
Chart 4 location of Burbank, Pasadena, and surrounding areas adjacent to Glendale 13 Chart 5 development of passengers and aircraft movements at Burbank Airport 15 Chart 6 development of passengers and aircraft movements at LAX 15 Chart 7 location of Glendale and proximity to surrounding areas 16 Chart 8 SWOT analysis macro site (Glendale) 19
Chart 9 hotel locations throughout Glendale 21
Chart 10 suitability of macro area for demand by different guest segments 21 Chart 11 short term rental supply in Glendale, Burbank, Pasadena (Airbnbs, VRBOs) 23 Chart 12 supply of hotels in key Los Angeles markets 24 Chart 13 hotel supply in Glendale 25
Chart 14 hotel supply in Burbank 25
Chart 15 hotel supply in Pasadena 25
Chart 16 high-end supply in Glendale, Burbank, Pasadena 26 Chart 17 hotel projects 26
Chart 18 hotel development compared to current relevant supply 27 Chart 19 hotel demand in key Los Angeles markets 28
Chart 20 hotel performance by submarket - Burbank/Glendale and Pasadena/Arcadia 29 Chart 21 hotel performance in Burbank/Glendale based on Upper-Mid-Lower-Priced 30 Chart 22 capacity of relevant hotels 31
Chart 23 overview of relevant hotels 32
Chart 24 overview of relevant hotels (continued) 33
Chart 25 overview of relevant hotels (continued) 34
Chart 26 seasonality based on years 2017-2019 36
Chart 27 historical occupancy, Glendale’s relevant market segment, 2014-2022 37 Chart 28 historical ADR, Glendale’s relevant market segment, 2014-2022 37 Chart 29 los angeles submarkets 40

87 of 199

draft
7 1 Introduction

1.1 Assignment
The City of Glendale , represented by Ms Tamar Sadd, awarded the contract to prepare a market study of the city’s hotel landscape in May 2022.

The study is intended to serve as a neutral basis for the client in terms of deciding whether to proceed with the development of the more hotels, the best positioning of any new hotels, and incentive programs that can be utilized by the City.

Subject matter of the assignment is the analysis of the following elements:
▪ Location overview
▪ market, supply & demand
▪ gap analysis
▪ incentives programs
PKF conducted the assignment from May to June 2022. The market research on site was conducted in May 2022 . The study is based on the site and market conditions at the time of the site and market research as well as the relevant supply and demand at that time.

The audit of the legal terms, in particular the ownership, building, corporate and fiscal terms, is not subject of this assignment. We have prepared the market study on the basis of the General Terms and Conditions of Doing Business (see Annex 3).

When preparing the study, we have acted in our position as an expert to the best of our knowledge. However, we cannot guar antee the actual oc currence of any forecasted results serving as the basis of future hotel market performance.

The study was exclusively prepared for the client’s use. If it is forwarded to any third party, the above -mentioned General Terms and Con ditions of Doing Busi ness shall also apply vis -à-vis this third party. The report (or parts of it) may only be published after the consultant’s prior written approval.

New York, 1 July 2022
PKF hotelexperts LLC

Channing Henry
Managing Director
88 of 199

draft
8 1.2 Methodology

1.2.1 General
The quality and significance of studies relies to a great extent on detailed re - search. In order to provide an insight into the applied methodology, we have listed selected aspects of our work:

The following people have worked on the assignment:
▪ project controller: Channing Henry (Managing Director) ▪ project manager: Kristopher Swanson (Junior Consultant) In case of questions regarding the content and structure of this market report, the project controller and the project manager are at your disposal. You can reach them under:

PKF hotelexperts LLC
245 Park Avenue
New York, NY
10167
telephone 917 270 3140
e-mail [email protected]
internet www.pkfhospitality.com
The individual steps of the assignment were done in the following order:
▪ date when assignment was given: May 2022
▪ collection/analysis of data and writing of the report: May to June 2022 ▪ delivery of draft report: 1 July 2022

1.2.2 Analyses
In the course of the collection of information, the project team interviewed – either personally or by telephone – several experts. A list of tho se people as well as of collected documents and other informatio n can be obtained from PKF hotelexperts.

The information was collected by using – amongst others – the following means:
▪ visit of the market in Glendale
▪ market research in Glendale, Pasadena, Burbank
▪ visit of selected relevant competitors
▪ personal interviews and interviews by telephone
89 of 199

draft
9 ▪ analyses of data and statistics provided by various statistical offices ▪ analysis of various publications
▪ internet research
▪ use of various databases (including databases by PKF hotelexperts) The collected information and data was analysed in the following way:
▪ analysis and evaluation of the collected market data and results of the interviews ▪ derivation and assessment of the development of the relevant hotel markets ▪ assessment of the hotel market for various guest segments based on the current and probable future market situation
▪ remarks on the optimal positioning of the hotels
▪ assessment of gaps in the market
▪ discussion of incentives programs

1.2.3 Ratios
The following ratios are used throughout the reports:
 occupancy
occupied rooms divided by the number of available rooms per period  multiple occupancy factor
number of guests divided by the number of occupied rooms per period  published room rate (= rack rate)
published room rate including VAT and – if applicable – breakfast  net room rate
rooms revenue (after deduction of breakfast, VAT and allowances/discounts) di - vided by the number of occupied rooms in each period
=x revenue per available room/revpar (= rooms yield) occupancy multiplied by the average net room rate respectively rooms revenue (excluding VAT, breakfast and allowances/discounts) divided by the number of available rooms per period

1.2.4 Classification
The classification of hotels in this study is based on the internal hotel classifica - tion of PKF hotelexperts, which is orientated towards the strict in ternational pa- rameters for the classification of hotels (maximum of five stars):
90 of 199

draft
10  outstanding standard; extraordinarily good service, extraordinarily large (mini- mum of 34 sq m) and lu xuriously equipped rooms; excellent food & beverage facilities; extensive and outstanding sports, leisure and spa facilities (for resort hotels) or high-quality fitness & spa facilities (for city hotels)  very high standard; very good service; large (minimum of 28 sq m) and very com- fortably equipped rooms; very good food & beverage facilities; sports, leisure and spa facilities, which are adequate to the type and the site of the hotel  high standard; good service; spacious (minimum of 22 sq m) and comfortably equipped rooms; good food & beverage facilities; sports, leisure and spa facili - ties, which are adequate to the type and the site of the hotel  simple standard; limited service; relatively small (minimum of 16 sq m) and basic rooms; no or only simple food & beverage facilities; no or only simple sports , leisure and spa facilities
 very simple standard; no or very limited service; very small and very simply equipped rooms; no food & beverage facilities; no sports, leisure and spa facilities Typical brands of the various market segments and their respective positioning as seen by PKF hotelexperts are illustrated in the following chart:

Chart 1 typical brands per segment
Days Inn aloft Radisson Blu
Ibis Budget Ibis Indigo Marriott
Holiday Inn Expr. Hilton Four Seasons
Sleep Inn Ramada Encore Sofitel
Super 8 Best Western Crowne Plaza Ritz-Carlton
Courtyard by M. Canopy by H. Park Hyatt
Easyhotel Hilton Garden Inn Wyndham
Première Classe Hampton by H. Novotel Grand Hyatt
Campanile Mercure InterContinental
Star Inn Holiday Inn Hyatt Regency
B&B Hyatt Place Hyatt
Park Inn by Radisson Sheraton
Motel One Andaz
Premier Inn Ramada Conrad
Moxy DoubleTree by H. Waldorf Astoria
Clarion Renaissance JW Marriott St. Regis
notes 1) stars according to classification by PKF ©PKF hotelexperts; status: 1 January 2017 2) per segment (dark grey:core positioning; light grey: range of existing properties) 3) size of standard room in sq m
  
- ++ -
34 42 50
+ -
32 - +

- +seg.2)
stars1)
size3) 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30


Please note that national or regional classification systems – as well as the hotel groups themselves – often are more generous in attributing stars to hotels.

91 of 199

draft
11 2 Location

2.1 Market Snapshot
The Los Angeles market was significantly impacted by the Covid -19 pandemic, with a 42% decrease in occupancy in 2020, following by a 35% recovery in 2021.

It is forecasted that 202 2 and 2023 will not recover to 2019 ’s occupancy level.

ADR is forecasted to recover and surpass 2019’s ADR in 2022 an d 2023 , accompanied by a recovery in RevPAR . This is reflective of the general travel trends throughout the Los Angeles submarkets, with heightened ADRs and recovering occupancies.

Chart 2 los angeles annual performance, historical and forecast

In the Los Angeles market, upper-priced hotels experienced the greatest RevPAR change in 2022, at 51%. This was followed by mid-priced at 23% and low-priced at 11%. The 2022 annual change highlights the consumer appetite for better quality hotel product for those with the spending power. It is important to note that with the evolving economic situation in the country, rising interest rates and inflation, personal spending power will decline, which may ultimately impact expenditure at the hotel level. Economists project that these factors will have less of an impact on the upper-priced segment, which tends to be less price-elastic.

Year Occ Occ Change ADR ADR Change RevPAR RevPAR Change 2017 79.80% -2.6% $175.71 2.3% $140.17 -0.4%
2018 79.90% 0.2% $178.89 1.8% $142.97 2.0%
2019 81.30% 1.7% $177.98 -0.5% $144.72 1.2%
2020 46.90% -42.3% $134.16 -24.6% $62.98 -56.5%
2021 63.50% 35.3% $155.24 15.7% $98.60 56.6%
2022F 71.60% 12.8% $185.11 19.2% $132.60 34.5%
2023F 75.70% 5.7% $190.93 3.1% $144.53 9.0%
92 of 199

draft
12 Chart 3 RevPAR annual change by hotel category

2.2 Regional Context

2.2.1 Location and geography
Glendale is part of the Tri-Cities area of Los Angeles County, along with Burbank and Pasadena. Regional context for the Tri-Cities area has been provided in the form of a more in -depth look at Pasadena and Burbank , to better understand Glendale’s positioning within the greater market.

Pasadena is a city 10 miles north of Downtown Los Angeles, to the immediate east of Glendale, measuring about 23 square miles. The city is home to about 145,000 residents with an average household income of $107,000, a labor force of about 81,000, a total of about 115,000 jobs within the city, and a population of which 70% has earned a college degree or higher.

Burbank is a city to the immediate west of Glendale, measuring about 17 square miles. The city has a population of about 105,000 residents with an average $125,000 household income, 75% of which have earned a college degree or higher, comprising of about 42,000 households, a nd a workforce population of about 132,000 people.
35%
51%
23%
11%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
All Hotels Upper-Priced Mid-Priced Low-Priced
2022 Annual Change in RevPAR
93 of 199

draft
13 Chart 4 location of Burbank, Pasadena, and surrounding areas adjacent to Glendale

2.2.2 Economy
Pasadena: The economy of Pasadena is comprised of numerous industries, the largest being finance, engineering, academics, and health care. Some of the largest employers include Bank of America, Caltech, East West Bank, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, and Wells Fargo. The city has 16.3 million square feet of office space with an 8.9% vacancy rate and a 3.5% retail vacancy rate.

Pasadena’s annual visitation is about 3.2 million people, benefitting from the business and entertainment landscape including the Rose Bowl, six academic institutions, nine co-working and business incubators, and 2,500 hotel rooms.

Burbank: The city’s economy is comprised of a range of different industries, the largest being entertainment, professional and scientific, administrative services, and education. The entertainment industry is by far the largest with about 36,000 jobs in the city across numerous companies including The Walt Disney Company, Warner Bros. Entertainment , Deluxe Entertainemnt Services Group, and TW Ventures. The professional and scientific industry includes companies such as Origin and Crane Aerospace and Electronics. Burbank has a 6.2% citywide office vacancy rate, a 5.9% retail vacancy rate, and a 3.1% industrial vacancy rate.

2.2.3 Culture and tourism
Pasadena: The city has a ra nge of cultural and historical institutions and attractions including The Huntington Library, Art Museum, and Botanical Burbank
Pasadena
Glendale
LAX
Downtown LA
Silver Lake
94 of 199

draft
14 Gardens; the Norton Simon Museum; the USC Pacific Asia Museum; the Pasadena Museum of History; the Gamble House; and the Tournament Hous e and Wrigley Gardens. Entertainment venues provide a platform for local artists and Hollywood stars to perform, some of the most prominent being A Noise Within Theatre, the Beckman and Ramo Auditoriums, the Boston Court Performing Arts Center, the California Philharmonic Orchestra, the Ice House Comedy Club, the Lineage Performing Arts Center, the Pasadena Civic Auditorium, and the Pasadena Playhouse. The city has three shopping districts : Old Pasadena with more than 200 retail stores, Pasadena Playhouse Village with eclectic art -focused shops, and South Lake Avenue with upscale designer outlets. Pasadena has numerous outdoor recreational activity areas in cluding Brookside Park, Hahamonga Watershed Park, and the Angeles National Forest.

Burbank: One of the differentiating cultural factors that sets Burbank apart from the surrounding cities is the significant presence and proximity to major film studios that have unique partnerships with Warner Bros. Studio and Universal Studios Hollywood, as well as access to TV show tapings, a strong tourism driver.

While not as saturated with museums and galleries compared to Pasadena, Burbank does have a f ew including th e Black Sheep Gallery and the Gordon R.

Howard Museum Complex. Well-known entertainment venues include the Colony Theatre, Flapper’s Comedy Club, Garry Marshall Theatre, The Nitecap LA, and the Starlight Bowl. The city has numerous shopping districts, the most prominent being the Burbank Town Center in downtown, Magnolia Park for retro boutiques, and the Airport District for tech-focused finds. Recreational activity opportunities can be found throughout the city at the many outdoor facilities and parks including Wildwood Canyon Park, Verdugo Park and Recreation Center, Stough Canyon Nature Center and Hiking Trails, the Los Angeles Equestrian Center, Brace Canyon Park, and the Debell and Lakeside Golf Clubs. Burbank is also home to LA’s second , and often preferred, airport, given its ease of access and manageable size.
95 of 199

draft
15 2.2.4 Accessibility
The following chart shows the development of passengers and aircraft movements at Burbank Airport between 2014 and 2021:

Chart 5 development of passengers and aircraft movements at Burbank Airport

In the years following 2014, the highest passenger count at Burbank Airport was about 6 million in 2019. Since then, with the decrease in travel from the pandemic, passenger count dropped to about 2 million in 2020 with a recovery uptick in 2021 with about 3.7 million passengers.

Chart 6 development of passengers and aircraft movements at LAX

Similar to the trends experienced at Burbank Airport, LAX witnessed a high in 2019 with about 88 million passengers, followed by a drop to about 29 million in 2020 and a recovery to about 48 million in 2021.

0 20
40 60
80 100
120
140
160
0 1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Thousands
Thousands
passenger movements aircraft movements
-
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
-
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
80,000
90,000
100,000
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Thousands
Thousands
passenger movements aircraft movements
96 of 199

draft
16 2.3 Glendale

2.3.1 Location and geography
Glendale, a city measuring about 31 square miles, has about 205,000 residents, comprising about 74,000 households. It is the fourth largest city in LA County with a fairly equal age composition – 23% Baby Boomer, 22% Gen X, Millennial 26%, and Gen Z 18%. 53% of the popu lation is foreign born, a significant proportion, including the largest Armenian diaspora. In 2021, annual household spending reached $1.4 billion, a reflection of an affluent population – 37% of households earned at least $100,000 in 2021. This is compare d to the median household income in Glendale in 2021 of $62,500. While the city has a good portion of affluent residents, the unemployment rate is on the higher end of the spectrum when compared to neighboring cities. The unemployment rate was

6.5% in 2021, with Pasadena at 4.2% and Burbank at 6.1%.

Glendale is situated among the Verdugo Hills, the southeastern end of the San Fernando Valley. The city has about 46 parks ranging from less than an acre neighborhood squares to 30+ acres of open land. In total, the city manages over 5,000 acres of open space, 30 miles of fire roads, and 7.5 miles of single -track trails, actively used by hikers and bikers. The most popular areas include Brand Park and Deukmejian Wilderness Park.

Chart 7 location of Glendale and proximity to surrounding areas

Glendale
Griffith Park
Rose Bowl
Stadium
Brand Park
Forest Lawn
Hollywood Hills
Deukmejian
Wilderness
Park
Dodger Stadium
97 of 199

draft
17 2.3.2 Economy
The city of Glendale is home to a range of different industries , commercial and business corridors, and large employers that drive the local economy.

Business: There are about 12,000 businesses in the city. Downtown Glendale is the heart of the city’s corporate and tech centers with companies such as CBRE, Dine Brands Global, and Cisco Systems. T o the northwest of Downtown in the northern portion of the city are the offices and studios of DreamWorks Animation and the Disney Company’s Grand Central Creative Campus.

Tech: The city has successfully increased its status as a tech hub with about 1,000 tech companies based in Glendale, totaling about 41,000 employees. Tech employees comprise about 42% of the Glendale workforce which totals 97,000 , 76% of which are white -collar employees. In addition to the corporate and tech centers, the city has a range of retail campuses and streets, food and beverage oulets, educational institutions, medical facilities, and entertainment venues.

Retail: The city estimates that an annual 30 m illion shoppers make their way to the area’s retail centers, including Americana at Brand and the Glendale Galleria.

The Brand Boulevard of Cars is another significant commercial and retail street , home to a total of 21 car dealerships.

Americana at Brand (case study): The Americana is the best performing asset within the Caruso portfolio, anchored by the arrival of new luxury tenants including Yves Saint Laurent, Chanel, and Gucci with a 6,000 square foot store.

The Americana brand at Glendale attracts an affluent customer base which has translated into strong performance. Louis Vuitton, with its three-month pop-up store, completed $3 milllion in monthly revenue . Amazon Style recently opened with a high -end shopping and technology forward experience with augmented reality dressing rooms and cashierless checkout. Glendale, as a safe and secure city to do business in, has acted as a safe harbor for luxury brands who want to provide a care-free shopping experience for their customers. This in contrast to the Beverly Hills area that has witnessed an increase in petty theft crime and violent acts. The Americana, in combination with Glendale’s inclusive community, hosts about 18 million guests annually and is the 12 th highest grossing retail center in North America.

2.3.3 Culture and tourism
Cultural: Glendale has a range of different cultural institutions and entertainment venues including the ongoing transformation of the Artaskh Avenue Paseo into an art and entertainment cente r and the construction of the Armenian American Museum. Museums include the Brand Library and Art Center and the Museum of Neon Art . Numerous theaters operate throug hout the city such as the Alex Theatre, the Glendale Centre Theatre, and the Antaeus Theatre. The City of Glendale is actively recruiting artists to the revamping Artaskh district with amenable lease terms, as part of a broader district-wide cultural reinvention.

Recreational: Recreational activities can be completed at the many parks and trailheads including Brand Park, Deukmejian Wilderness Park, Beaudry Loop, and Casa Adobe de San Rafael Park.
98 of 199

draft
18 In addition to the cultural and recreational tourism found within Glendale, the city’s prime location in the heart of LA County provides visitors with a wide variety of activities and sights within close driving distance.

2.3.4 Accessibility
a) airports
The nearest airport to Glendale is Burbank Airport, 10 miles to the northwest and about a 15-minute drive away. Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) is about a 23 mile and 45-minute drive away to the southwest. The Santa Monica Airport is about a 24 mile and 1-hour drive away.
b) road traffic
Glendale is framed by four major roadways. Interstate 210 runs from west to east along the northern edge of the city limits. California State Route 2 runs through the city and defines the border of eastern edge of downtown Glendale. Interstate 5 runs along the western edge of the city and Route 134 runs from west to east , separating downtown Glendale from northern Glendale.
c) public transportation
Glendale has a city bus service, the Beeline Bus, with twelve fixed routes operating throughout Glendale, La Canada Flintridge, and the unincorporated areas of La Crescenta and Montrose. The Beeline service is in addition to the city’s metro routes. The Metro (Regional Public Transit Bus Service) has numerous east-west and north-south routes throughout Glendale, along with routes that connect the city to other areas throughout Los Angeles County.

Metrolink offers a daily commuter service that connects Glendale to Union Station and East Ventur a through the Ventura County and Antelope Valley lines . The Glendale Transportation Center (GTC) services Metrolink in addition to Amtrak routes. The GTC services about 46,000 Amtrak train pa ssengers annually. The top origin and destination cities in terms of train ridership includes Santa Barbara, San Diego, San Diego Old town, Solana Beach, and Goleta.

Union Station services the Los Angeles area with its central location in downtown LA, a 20-minute drive south from Glendale. Union Station, in its capacity as an Amtrak terminal, had a total passenger count of about 1.4 million in 2019, including departures and arrivals. From Union Station, Amtrak operates five lines including the Pacific Surf liner with multiple daily trains, the Coast Starlight and the Southwest Chief with daily service, and the Sunset Limited and the Te xas Eagle with three trains/week. Union Station, alongside the train passengers, served an additional 206,000 passengers connecting through with bus service. 99 of 199

draft
19 2.3.5 Assessment
We have submitted the m acro site to a SWOT analysis. The results can be summarized as follows:

Chart 8 SWOT analysis macro site (Glendale)
▪ ▪
▪
▪ ▪
▪ ▪
▪
▪
▪ ▪
▪
▪
▪ ▪
▪
▪ ▪
▪
▪ ▪
▪
▪ ▪
▪ ▪ short-term rental growth
▪
© PKF hotelexperts
imbalance of hotel classes; more economy
hotels taking up market share
increased residential product creates more
demand for rooms and amenities
Strengths - Weaknesses - Opportunities - Threats
 –
 
city is separated by a major highway
good climate
neighboring city markets with increased
access to recreational activities
Americana at Brand is a regional destination historically a business market easy access to greater Los Angeles via two
airports and multiple highways
rising art scene
rising tech scene
charming smaller city feel relative to LA's
other submarkets
accessibity to natural resources and trails
walkable and clean downtown area
safe and quiet city
continued lack of refurbished and interesting
product creates opportunity in competitive
markets
offerings
no notable spa product in the market
not as culturally or economically known as
nearby Pasadena
historically a business market and now
increasingly a leisure market
limited four star supply for business or leisure,
and no five star product, creating a void in
public perception
chance to highlight the quieter community
from which to access greater LA
Americana at Brand corporate and cultural
partnership opportunities
current demand being absorbed by tired hotel
product
strong ability to service the Burbank studios
unique meeting and event spaces
continued supply chain restraints and
increased construction costs limits appetite
for full-service hotel development

100 of 199

draft
20 2.4 Hotel Corridors

2.4.1 Brand Blvd and Surrounding Areas
Out of the 31 hotel properties in Glendale, PKF has selected 10 that are distinguished by their better produc t and location, ranging from economy to upper upscale categories. The remaining 21 properties are characterized by outdated product, low room count, and indistinct branding, without the ability to drive the local hotel market.

Brand Boulevard, running from north to south from Verdugo Viejo, through downtown Glendale, and into the Boulevard of Cars section of the street , plays a central role as the city’s main artery with many of the prominent hotels situated on or around it.

N Brand Blvd : This portion of the boulevard spans Route 134 , connecting the commercial and business districts that lie on both sides of the freeway. The hotels in the N Brand Blvd area include The Glenmark (Tribute Portfolio Hotel), Hilton, Embassy Suites, and two blocks to the west of the boulevard, the renovated Glendale Express Hotel.

Retail District: Downtown Glendale’s retail district, most nota bly defined by the Galleria and Americana at Brand, is situated along Brand Blvd with a few hotels within the area including Hyatt Place, Residence Inn, and Hampton Inn.

Surrounding Areas: There are three outlier hotels located beyond the confines of Brand Blvd – Extended Stay America in the northeast quadrant of the city, Best Western Plus off of Route in Los Angeles (just outside the Glendale city limit), and the recently opened Holiday Inn Express on E Colorado Street (east of the Galleria).
101 of 199

draft
21 The following chart indicates the locations of the relevant Glendale hotels:

Chart 9 hotel locations throughout Glendale

2.4.2 Suitability for hotel
The following chart illustrates the suitability of the macro area for different guest segments:

Chart 10 suitability of macro area for demand by different guest segments limited extended boutique 4-star luxury
business glendale business travelers
conference/meeting attendees 1)
tech/innovation travelers2)
media production exec.
other LA business travel
leisure family/friend visits
LA/east side visitors
shoppers
rose bowl/event attendees
group local weddings
© PKF hotelexperts
suitability of hotel typeguest segment
for demand by particular guest segment
travel purpose category

Residence Inn
Extended Stay America
Embassy Suites
Hilton
The Glenmark
Glendale Express Hotel
Hyatt Place
Hampton Inn
Best Western Plus
N Brand Blvd
S Brand Blvd
Route 134
N Brand Blvd
Retail District
Surrounding Areas
102 of 199

draft
22 The guest segments with suitability for all hotel types include family and friend visits along with Rose Bowl and local event attendees. The other guest segments are more inclined to stay at specific hotel types such as conferenece and meeting attendees and media production executives. Boutique and 4-star are the two hotel types that are suitable for all guest segments based on the nature of their product offerings and applicability for many different travel purposes.

103 of 199

draft
23 3 Market

3.1 Overview
According to our assignment, we have analyzed supply and demand of the general accommodation market in Glendale, neighboring cities, and greater Los Angeles submarkets. Hotels from all classes and other types of accommodation facilities may stand in competition to one another and may have an impact on the general accommodation market.

3.2 Short-term Rentals
Alternative lodging facilities, in the form of Airbnb and other short-term rentals, have increased in Glendale from Q1 2019 to Q1 2022, while supply in Pasadena has decreased and supply in Burbank h as remained constant. The notable increased supply in Glendale , about 45% increase in three years, implies a demand for hotel rooms that are not being met by current hotel supply. Average daily rates in the Glendale market range from $210 in January 2022 t o $233 in April 2022. These rates are an average of studios to multi -bedroom homes with a range of amenities including A/C, kitchen, pool, washer and dryer, and parking.

Chart 11 short term rental supply in Glendale, Burbank, Pasadena (Airbnbs, VRBOs)

3.3 Hotels

3.3.1 Submarket Supply
Hotel supply in Glendale, c ompared to Burbank and Pasadena, is characterized by a disproportionately large amount of economy hotels. While the hotel count is high, 10 economy hotels, and the room count is comparatively low, 325 economy 0 100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
Q1 2019 Q1 2020 Q1 2021 Q1 2022
Glendale - Burbank - Pasadena Short Term Rental Supply
Glendale Burbank Pasadena
104 of 199

draft
24 rooms, the market appears to be saturated with small motel -type lodgings .

Glendale has three hotels respectively across each of the more relevant hotel classes, upscale and upper-upscale, with a combined 1,208 rooms. In a city such as Glendale, an economically and culturally significant market within the Tri-Cities region, there is an imbalance in the supply of hotels not found in neighboring Burbank.

The Burbank market has four economy hotels with 269 rooms, compared to the upscale and upper-upscale classes with a combined 10 hotels and 2,135 rooms.

The imbalance that exists in the Glendale market is not prevalent in the Burbank market.

Pasadena, while it does have a large amount of economy hotels and rooms, still has a comparatively significant supply of upscale and upper -upscale hotel product. The market has 11 economy hotels with 471 rooms. On the other hand, there are nine upscale and upper-upscale hotels with a combined 1,860 rooms.

This is in addition to one luxury hotel with 379 rooms.

Based on data provided by and limited to STR, as of June 2022, the total number of rooms in the Glendale market is 3,992 across all classes . Glendale has six hotels in the upscale and upper upscale category, contributing a large number of rooms to the market at approximately 1,200. It also has a very large number of economy and midscale hotels (16 total) that contribute only 500 rooms. This makes a negative physical impact on the larger community while creating fewer jobs across the real estate utilized.

According to information provided by CBRE, the total supply of hotel rooms in Burbank/Glendale, compared to other Los Angeles submarkets, in 2021:

Chart 12 supply of hotels in key Los Angeles markets

As can be seen in the chart above, the number of hotel rooms in Burbank/Glendale totals about 5,800, a slight increase over Pasadena/Arcadia’s 5,000 rooms. In stark comparison, the Hollywood/Beverly Hills submarket has about 13,300 rooms and East LA/Monterey has about 3,100 rooms. 0 2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
Burbank/Glendale Pasadena/Arcadia Hollywood/Beverly
Hills
East LA/Monterey
hotel rooms (2021)
105 of 199

draft
25 a) Glendale, Burbank, Pasadena hotel supply by class Chart 13 hotel supply in Glendale

Chart 14 hotel supply in Burbank

Chart 15 hotel supply in Pasadena

0 2
4 6
8 10
12 -
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
Economy Midscale Upper
Midscale
Upscale Upper
Upscale
Hotels
Rooms
Glendale Hotel Supply
Number of Rooms Number of Hotels
0 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 -
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
Economy Midscale Upper
Midscale
Upscale Upper
Upscale
Hotels
Rooms
Burbank Hotel Supply
Number of Rooms Number of Hotels
0 2
4 6
8 10
12 -
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
Economy Midscale Upper
Midscale
Upscale Upper
Upscale
Luxury
Hotels
Rooms
Pasadena Hotel Supply
Number of Rooms Number of Hotels
106 of 199

draft
26 b) Upscale and Upper Upscale Supply in Glendale, Burbank, Pasadena (short-term rentals included)
Chart 16 high-end supply in Glendale, Burbank, Pasadena

c) future development
According to information provided by STR, CBRE, and the City of Glendale, several new hotel projects are currently under construction and planned in Glendale.

Based on this information, about five hotels with a total of about 1,300 rooms are currently planned. Although not every pro ject will be implemented, a significant increase in the number of hotel rooms can be expected in the short to mid -term.

The additional supply will likely lead to increased price competition, in particular in the mid-market and upscale segments, since most of the projects being under construction or in planning are envisaged to be positioned in these segments.

The following chart gives an overview of selected hotel projects which are currently known to us:

Chart 17 hotel projects

The above chart may not be complete. Furthermore, not all projects are subject to public knowledge, and sometimes details (operator, financing, etc.) are un - clear. Not all planned hotels will be implemented, and delays in the development are common. To account for this fact the probability of an implementation for a certain project is 100%, a relatively certain 80%, a probable 60%, a project with limited probability 40%, and an uncertain project 20%.
0 200
400
600
800
1000
1200
Glendale Burbank Pasadena
Units
Glendale - Burbank - Pasadena High-end Supply
Upscale Upper Upscale Short Term Rental
project/location brand category rooms phase opening chance remarks name stars # name year %
Onni Group N/A N/A 852 planned N/A 40 Entitlement process Victory Hotel Independent N/A 64 planned 2023 80 Fully entitled AC Hotel AC Hotel 4 130 planned N/A 80 Replace existing Vagabond Hotel Holiday Inn Express Holiday Inn 3 134 constr 2022 100 Soon to open Hotel Indigo Hotel Indigo 4 137 constr 2023 80 Fully entitled total Σ x x 1,317 x x x
development pipeline
107 of 199

draft
27 Chart 18 hotel development compared to current relevant supply

Embassy Suites
Hilton
The Glenmark
Glendale Express Hotel
Extended Stay America
Hyatt Place
Residence Inn
Hampton Inn
Holiday Inn Express
Best Western Plus
N Brand Blvd
S Brand Blvd
Route 134
Hotel Indigo
AC Hotel
Victory Hotel
Onni Group
108 of 199

draft
28 3.3.2 Submarket Demand
d) development to-date
The following chart displays the demand for hotels in Burbank/Glendale compared to other Los Angeles markets, in 2021:

Chart 19 hotel demand in key Los Angeles markets

The above table shows that the Burbank/Glendale submarket achieved a greater amount of overnight demand compared to Pasadena/Arcadia. Hollywood/Beverly Hills stands as a reference to a more popular and trafficked submarket in LA.

Total room nights demanded of the combined submarkets Burbank/Glendale and Pasadena/Arcadia is equal to the total demand for shor t term rentals in Los Angeles. In 2022, about 2.7 million short term rental units were sold, compared to about 2.6 million hotel units sold between the Burbank/Glendale and Pasadena/Arcadia markets, highlighting the significance of short term rentals in the greater LA market.

3.3.3 Submarket Performance
e) Hotel performance in the Burbank/Glendale and Pasadena/Arcadia submarkets The Burbank/Glendale submarket outperforms the Pasadena/Arcadia submarket in terms of occupancy with 66% and 64% respectively, in 2021. In terms of ADR, Burbank/Glendale leads at $145 compared to Pasadena/Arcadia at $130 , in 2021. While Burbank/Glendale has a slight edge over Pasadena/Arcadia in ADR and occupancy performance, the two submarkets trend similarly in both metrics with relatively same performance results. That being said, the Glendale/Burbank market continues to support an imbalance in supply between low and high -end hotel product , while the neighboring markets perform similarly , yet support a greater amount of higher end product. The branding of Glendale will be important 0 500,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
2,000,000
2,500,000
3,000,000
Burbank/Glendale Pasadena/Arcadia Hollywood/Beverly
Hills
East LA/Monterey
overnights
109 of 199

draft
29 moving forward, to present the right image to a n increasingly discerning consumer base who are looking for the right market with the right product type.

Chart 20 hotel performance by submarket - Burbank/Glendale and Pasadena/Arcadia

f) Hotel performance in Burbank/Glendale based on price segments Occupancies across the three price segments in the Burbank/Glendale submarket are close to one another and trend similarly through the years, with the exception of 2020 and 2021 during the Covid -19 pandemic. The upper -priced segment consistently earned a higher occupancy than the other segments in 2017 to 2019.

The lower-priced segment in the years 2020 and 2021 outperformed the other two segments in occupancy, as leisure and business travel decreased , and consumers maintained a price-sensitive sensibility.

The ADR performance across the three segments trend similarly with dips in 2020 and a strong recovery in 2021 . In 2021, upper -priced reached an ADR of $172, mid-priced at $148, and lower -priced at $110. One thing to note is that the difference in ADR between the upper -priced and mid -priced segment is fairly 0 20
40 60
80 100
120
140
160
180
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
ADR $
Occupancy
Burbank/Glendale Occ. Pasadena/Arcadia Occ.

Burbank/Glendale ADR Pasadena/Arcadia ADR
110 of 199

draft
30 tight, indicating that the hotel product in the upper-priced segment is not able to achieve significantly higher rates over the rest of the market’s product.

Chart 21 hotel performance in Burbank/Glendale based on Upper-Mid-Lower-Priced hotels

3.4 Relevant Market Segment
A comprehensive analysis of the local hotel market with a focus on the relevant current and likely future hotels (existing capacities, hardware, quality of services offered, etc). Within the scope of our market analysis, we compiled a market sample whic h includes – to our judgement – the most relevant hotels in the Glendale market. In selecting the hotels, we focused on hotels in explanation of location criteria (e.g. throughout the city with a minimum of 49 guest rooms and a range of capacities, with a positioning in the three/four-star segment (according to national standards) with the exception of the Glendale Express Hotel and Extended Stay America . Particular attention was paid to the quality of the infrastructure and rooms, strong branding, and durability in the market. The Best 0 20
40 60
80 100
120
140
160
180
200
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
ADR $
Occupancy
Upper-Priced Occ. Mid-Priced Occ. Lower-Priced Occ.

Upper-Priced ADR Mid-Priced ADR Lower-Priced ADR
111 of 199

draft
31 Western Plus Glendale, while not within the Glendale city limits, is included based on its branding and positioning within the market.

3.4.1 Overview
The following table provides an overview of the room supply of the competitive set:

Chart 22 capacity of relevant hotels

The table above indicates that the Hilton is – with a total of 351 rooms – the largest hotel while the Best Western Plus is – with a total of 49 rooms – the smallest hotel within the competitive set. The average number of rooms per hotel amounts to about 159.

These nine hotels, while distinct from the other hotels in the market, do not have any remarkeable features or qualities that distinguishes one as far above the rest.

The Residence Inn and The Glenmark, two of the more recently opened hotels, are worth mentioning for their new product. The Glendale Express Hotel, a motel refurbished into a n upscale hotel, stands out for its more boutique product offering with trendy design. That being said, when looking at the current market landscape, the city lacks a design -forward and innovative hotel concept with a quality food and beverage outlet. The Glenmark does have a Mediterranean- inspired restaurant and rooftop deck, yet lacks the boutique and design-forward elements that would bring something innovative and fresh to the market.

In the following, the competitive set hotels are described in more detail:
hotel brand category rooms f&b event spaces
name name type # outlets sq. ft.

Residence Inn Marriott Upscale 145 0 360
Embassy Suites Hilton Upper Upscale 272 1 6,636
Hampton Inn Hilton Upper Midscale 94 0 0
Hyatt Place Hyatt Upscale 179 1 1,860
Glendale Express Hotel Express Upscale 172 0 2,800
The Glenmark Marriott Upper Upscale 85 1 3,259
Hilton Hilton Upper Upscale 351 1 15,236
Extended Stay America Extended Stay Economy 87 0 0
Best Western Plus Best Western Upper Midscale 49 0 0
Total x x 1434 4 30,151
Average x x 159 x 3,350
112 of 199

draft
32 Chart 23 overview of relevant hotels
source: Residence Inn sources: Hilton
▪ Upscale; 145 rooms ▪ Upper-Upscale; 272 rooms
▪ Facilities and Amenities ▪ Facilities and Amenities
✓ Outdoor Pool ✓ Outdoor Pool
✓ Fitness Center ✓ Fitness Center
✓ Convenience Store ✓ Business Center
✓ Laundry Service ✓ On-Site Restaurant
✓ Complimentary Breakfast ✓ Complimentary Breakfast
✓ Kitchens, Coffee/Tea ✓ Complimentary Evening Reception ✓ Meeting Space: 360 sq. ft., 30 max capacity ✓ Meeting Space: 6,636 sq. ft., 6 spaces source: Hilton sources: Hyatt
▪ Upper-Midscale; 94 rooms ▪ Upscale; 179 rooms
▪ Facilities and Amenities ▪ Facilities and Amenities
✓ Outdoor Pool ✓ Outdoor Pool
✓ Fitness Center ✓ Fitness Center
✓ Complimentary Breakfast ✓ Business Center
✓ Business Center ✓ Onsite Restaurant
✓ Complimentary Breakfast
✓ Meeting Space: 1,860 sq. ft.

Hampton by Hilton Inn & Suites Hyatt Place
picture picture
buildingcomments
comments
picture picture
Residence Inn Embassy Suites by Hilton
buildingcomments
buildingcomments
building

113 of 199

draft
33 Chart 24 overview of relevant hotels (continued)
source: Express Hotels sources: Marriott
▪ Upscale; 172 rooms ▪ Upper-Upscale; 85 rooms
▪ Facilities and Amenities ▪ Facilities and Amenities
✓ Outdoor Pool ✓ Concierge
✓ Room Service ✓ Fitness Center
✓ In-Room Coffee and Tea ✓ Turndown Service
✓ Pet Friendly ✓ On-Site Restaurant
✓ Meeting Space: 2,800 sq. ft., 5 spaces ✓ Meeting Space: 3,259 sq. ft., 3 spaces source: Hilton sources: Extended Stay
▪ Upper-Upscale; 351 rooms ▪ Economy; 87 rooms
▪ Facilities and Amenities ▪ Facilities and Amenities
✓ Outdoor Pool ✓ Complimentary Grab-and-Go Breakfast
✓ Concierge ✓ Kitchens with microwaves and stovetops
✓ Digital Keys ✓ Laundry Service
✓ On-Site Restaurant ✓ One Meeting Room
✓ Meeting Space: 15,236 sq. ft., 9 spaces
buildingcomments
buildingcomments
buildingcomments
picture picture
Glendale Express Hotel The Glenmark, a Tribue Portfolio Hotel Hilton Los Angeles North/Glendale Extended Stay America picture picture
buildingcomments

114 of 199

draft
34 Chart 25 overview of relevant hotels (continued)
source: Best Western
▪ Upper-Midscale; 49 rooms
▪ Facilities and Amenities
✓ Outdoor Pool
✓ Business Center
✓ In-Room Coffee and Tea
✓ Complimentary Breakfast
✓ Free Parking
note 1) sources: hotel website; PKF hotelexperts
buildingcomments
picture
Best Western Plus Glendale

115 of 199

draft
35 g) Notable properties in Burbank
Hotel Parent Company Class Room Count
Hotel Burbank OSO Upper Upscale 484
Marriott Marriott Upper Upscale 488
Hotel Amarano Independent Upper Upscale 132
Hilton Garden Inn Hilton Upscale 209
AC Hotel Marriott Upscale 196
Residence Inn Marriott Upscale 166
SpringHill Suites Marriott Upscale 170
Courtyard Marriott Upscale 190
Best Western Plus Best Western Upper Midscale 68
Hampton Inn Hilton Upper Midscale 105
Ramada Wyndham Midscale 142
Extended Stay America Extended Stay Economy 140
Total X X 2,490

h) Notable properties in Pasadena
Hotel Parent Company Class Room Count
Langham Huntington Langham Luxury 379
Hilton Pasadena Hilton Upper Upscale 296
Sheraton Hotel Marriott Upper Upscale 311
Westin Pasadena Marriott Upper Upscale 350
Hotel Pasadena Independent Upper Upscale 161
Residence Inn Old Town Marriott Upscale 144
Hyatt Place Pasadena Hyatt Upscale 189
Courtyard Old Town Marriott Upscale 314
Holiday Inn Pasadena IHG Upper Midscale 93
Best Western Royale Best Western Midscale 63
Ramada Pasadena Wyndham Midscale 75
Hyland Inn Pasadena Independent Midscale 54
Total X X 2,429

The notable properties mentioned in the charts above for Burbank and Pasadena have been chosen based on the same criteria as the relevant market segment hotels for Glendale. These hotels have distinguished branding , quality infrastructure and rooms, and durability in the market.

3.4.2 Demand
Similar to Glendale’s overall hotel market, the analyzed properties also register a high demand period during the summer season, from June to August. The guest mix of the selected hotels have a range of different clientele, from 50-80% leisure and 20-50% business, and predominantly transient with 10-15% group. This is in contrast to pre -Covid guest mixes – one hotel respondent recorded 60% transient, 25% group, and 15% airline crew. For the newer and better -quality product, including the Residence Inn and The Glenmark, the clientele leans more 116 of 199

draft
36 heavily towards millennial travelers and families, who have greater spending power and desire for such hotel product. Moving beyond the newer product in the market, the clientele becomes more mixed with a greater generational scope.

Pre-Covid, the Glendale ma rket experienced greater demand Tuesday through Thursday. With the shift to heightened leisure demand, the weekends have become increasingly more popular than weekdays. The length of stay varies between 1.8 days for the traditional hotel room product and 1+ week for the longer-term apartment style hotel product.

Demand generators for the analyzed properties include nearby tourist attractions for leisure guests, local industry for business travel, and event and group business from the residential community. Universal Studios Hollywood, nearby movie studio tours, The Americana at Brand, and the Rose Bowl are specific attractions and events that drive leisure travel to Glendale and the surrounding markets.

Business travel is dr iven by production /entertainment and local government, in addition to business travelers choosing to stay in Glendale instead of Downtown LA. Local residents drive event and group business in the form of room blocks for weddings and celebrations and rooms for visiting family members. The American- Armenian community is one specific resident group driving demand, enhanced by the attraction that will soon be the Armenian American Museum and Cultural Center.

Glendale is continually evolving , particularly eviden t in the demand drivers that are pushing the city forward in new directions . The Americana at Brand is one such demand driver, representative of a changing demographic and local and regional consumer base. With data from 78 different feeder zip codes, The Americana has a consumer base that is affluent and mobile. 41% of the consumer base has an average annual income of $125,000. The residents at The Americana have an average annual income of $400,000 , including numerous Los Angeles Dodgers players and coaching staff, commuters to downtown offices, and second resident buyers.

Chart 26 seasonality based on years 2017-2019

140
145
150
155
160
165
170
175
180
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100
Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May Jun. Jul. Aug. Sept. Oct Nov. Dec ADR $
Occupancy
ADR 2017 ADR 2018 ADR 2019
Occ. 2017 Occ. 2018 Occ. 2019
117 of 199

draft
37 3.4.3 Occupancy
According to information provided to us, the average room occupancy of the analyzed hotels in 20 19 was between approximately 70% and 92%, while the weighted average room occupancy was at approximately 83%. Compared to 2018, this reflects an increase by approximately 1 percentage points. In 2020, occupancy decreased to approximately 44%, which recovered to approximately 63% in 2021. Occupancy in the months January to May 2022 are below 2019 levels for those same months.

While occupancy used to be greater during the weekdays in the years prior to 2020, with the onset of the pandemic and the change in travellers, Glendale experiences greater occupancy during the weekend nights, with Friday and Saturday at 77% and 83% respectively, compared to Sunday through Thursday which ranges from 58% to 66%.

Chart 27 historical occupancy, Glendale’s relevant market segment, 2014-2022

3.4.4 ADR
The ADR of the competitive set hotels are in the range between $153 (November) and $173 (July) in 2019, with an annual ADR of $162. There was a $1 dollar unit decrease between 2018 and 2019 annual ADR for the competitive set. In 2020, annual ADR decreased about 21% to $128, which recovered to $150 in 2021.

ADR performance during the months January to May 2022 have surpassed 2019 levels for those same months. May 2022 had an ADR of $183, a 15% increase from May 2019.

Chart 28 historical ADR, Glendale’s relevant market segment, 2014-2022

Occupancy (%)
January February March April May June July August September October November December Total Year 2014 72.0 78.1 83.3 83.5 80.1 88.1 88.1 89.3 78.9 82.9 74.3 71.4 80.8 2015 72.6 82.7 85.2 85.0 84.3 89.1 90.0 92.4 83.5 86.6 78.0 79.3 84.1 2016 84.9 93.2 92.2 92.2 83.3 87.9 91.3 89.2 79.5 79.2 75.3 69.8 84.5 2017 76.6 83.3 93.2 91.4 88.5 92.5 91.6 89.1 85.0 86.4 78.2 75.4 85.9 2018 76.7 82.8 91.0 88.0 86.5 93.3 91.5 76.7 76.0 82.0 75.3 70.4 82.0 2019 69.5 82.1 85.7 87.2 84.9 90.7 91.9 88.9 74.3 84.6 82.2 78.8 83.4 2020 77.9 82.9 40.4 17.7 26.1 29.2 35.5 43.4 45.1 42.4 40.9 38.7 43.5 2021 42.9 49.0 57.4 62.6 64.8 67.5 74.1 69.1 62.0 69.4 66.0 65.9 62.7 2022 47.2 64.6 70.4 73.9 69.1
Avg 66.8 75.8 75.7 74.9 73.5 78.0 79.8 77.9 71.5 74.8 69.8 67.3 74.3 ADR ($)
January February March April May June July August September October November December Total Year 2014 152.52 142.75 139.85 141.10 138.71 149.53 149.48 150.39 146.56 150.14 146.17 146.01 146.15 2015 151.65 145.77 147.47 147.13 147.78 156.01 163.99 159.82 150.71 153.68 143.47 144.47 151.31 2016 161.31 180.09 176.10 177.04 172.06 171.08 168.68 168.75 158.35 164.32 164.91 151.60 168.07 2017 162.89 157.22 158.46 158.83 160.35 169.48 171.91 172.67 162.33 171.03 160.58 161.95 164.15 2018 161.14 161.75 158.89 160.14 160.50 170.44 173.88 167.31 156.85 168.59 155.34 160.93 163.15 2019 158.20 158.26 162.31 158.06 159.68 168.09 173.39 170.57 157.63 165.69 153.49 155.01 162.07 2020 150.89 153.26 148.36 103.59 100.59 109.08 112.00 110.46 119.49 120.92 121.17 116.77 127.95 2021 118.44 121.38 126.11 127.57 134.79 148.19 164.26 162.91 162.37 168.57 162.78 173.57 150.10 2022 169.84 178.51 171.58 179.64 183.72
Avg 154.80 156.77 155.66 155.85 155.78 159.29 163.36 160.56 153.42 159.98 152.55 153.59 155.64 118 of 199

draft
38 4 Gap Analysis
In order to better meet today’s demand, as well as induce new demand from a broader region, the City of Glendale should encourage the development of some new hospitality product type. The impact of diverse and well -positioned product can be measured directly in property performance as well as a less directly, in the halo effect on a community. Glendale is poised for more recognition as a destination city among travelers. The city is attracting more affluence in recent years and the residential base is growing. A long -time trend for business and leisure travelers to opt f or the quieter cities of Glendale and Pasadena is increasing with Covid, as remote work trends that result in longer and more flexible hotel stays drive people away from the more bustling city centers.

The Americana at Brand offers an optimistic viewpoi nt on what the City of Glendale has already attracted , as well as what lies ahead. The six new luxury brands that are entering the retail center, cite the success of the property’s retail sales as well as a safer and more relaxing environment than Beverly Hills, where some have flagship stores. Since Covid, the Americana at Brand is Caruso Holdings’ most successful retail center, placing it 12th in the nation in retail sales psf. While retail does not drive hotel stays, the larger entertainment concept that helps the Americana drive a 3x length of stay of shopper above national averages can translate into a deeper community involvement in the nearby Downtown and surroundings.

Among all of our interviews, PKF notes that the largest gaps within the hotel sector are the following:

- General 4-star Product
The increasing affluence of the market, as well as the connectivity with dynamic submarkets surrounding Glendale, would indicate that compelling 4 -star product and services be more available than are currently on offer. The Hilton, Tribute, and Residence Inn hotels are among the best quality, and each lacks something in either quality, F&B, event space, and spa amenities. The ADR that the existing upper -priced hotels is achieving is only slightly higher than the middle-priced hotels in the Glendale market, while both far surpass the lower - priced category. This shows us that the upper-priced hotels are leaving revenue on the table. They are not capturing all the business that can be captured from the existing guest base or the higher-end guest base that can be attracted.

o Good event space for private parties, smaller business meetings, and receptions is missing in the market and should be encouraged in new product. Numerous interviews indicated that the existing meeting space is too corporate for the request profiles that come in. o Spa Offerings. None of the hotels in Glendale offer a spa of any note, and the local operations are not high end. These tend to be breakeven operations, yet they elevate the guest experience. Outdoor pools are well-used at the properties that offer them.

- Suites and Extended Stay
The notable increase in short-term rental supply in Glendale in the last three years is an indication that guests are traveling in larger groups and/or looking 119 of 199

draft
39 for kitchen amenities and additional spa ce beyond the traditional hotel room.

The capacity to offer longer-stay, comfortable spaces for leisure travel groups, Hollywood and tech/innovation production and business development needs, and an increasing remote work base, is strong in the Glendale m arket. TOT dollars should be captured from this visitor base where possible, instead of going to the Airbnb market. The Residence Inn in Downtown has performed well, despite Covid constraints, and charts an average Length of Stay of longer than a week.

- Boutique
Well-designed product that attracts a broader LA market is missing from Glendale. The Glendale Express is a good example of a renovation of an old Days Inn motel, which appears to be doing well, despite its 2 -star categorization and lack of am enities beyond the pool. Whether new build, or a conversion of older existing economy product, the City’s capacity to boost boutique offerings will help bring Glendale to the “destination” level of so many other submarkets surrounding it. Not only does the city need more interesting product – still at an affordable price point – but it would benefit from encouraging the removal of outdated economy hotels that visually impact the city.

When PKF analyzed the composition of hotel supply across LA submark ets, looking at the number of rooms and hotels in the economy, midscale, upscale, upper upscale, and luxury categories, we noted that the Glendale/Burbank submarket mirrors that of Los Angeles North submarket, a sparsely populated and very large area that includes Palmdale and Lancaster. Of 15 submarkets in LA County, only these two had a composition of rooms that constitutes a majority of mid-priced rooms, and far more lower-priced rooms than upper-priced rooms.

In 2021, Los Angeles North achieved at Rev PAR of $97.23, compared to Burbank/Glendale’s RevPAR of $96.

As Glendale embarks on its strategic plan, and a rebranding of the city as a destination, this composition should be adjusted towards a greater number of upper-priced rooms and a conversion of the lower -priced rooms towards something more dynamic and in line with the City’s goals.

120 of 199

draft
40 Chart 29 los angeles submarkets

121 of 199

draft
41 5 Incentives Analysis
When considering the use of incentives at the city level, numerous questions must be addressed, including the ty pes of hotels to be incentivized and the impact of those developments. The impact being the consequences on the local economy and the city’s general fund, including direct and indirect revenue , supply and demand environment, and the support of a healthy labor market. Glendale must aim to minimize the risk to the general fund while maximizing returns to the city.

This can only be realized if it has been determined that a gap exists in the market and that by filling that gap, there is no cannibalization of existing TOT.

The applications of TOT include:
- Rebate a portion or the entirety of the TOT for new development Case Study: The JW Marriott in Downtown Los Angeles was developed with help from the city with a rebate structure based on a 100 % return of the TOT for 25 years or until a present value of 65 million was reached, taking into consideration a TOT rate o f 10%. It was determined, despite pushback from the surrounding hotels, that construction of the JW Marriott would induce demand in Downtown Los Angeles in support of greater convention business and improve the lack of supply of hotel rooms in the area. - Rebate a portion or the entirety of the TOT for refurbishment Case Study: The City of Palm Springs established the Hotel Incentive Program – Phase II Renovation Project, effective February 2019 to December 2023.

Existing hotels with a minimum of six rooms, once a renovation has taken place, will receive an annual share of the TOT by investing at minimum $ 5,000 per room. This share is 50 % of the TOT increment for a ten year period or until the hotel has recouped their renovation investment. If the hotel is a Class I Historic Hotel, the share is at a 75 % rate for a ten year period or until the investment has been recouped.

Additional incentive programs, at no cost to the city in an effort to minimize risk include:
- Land contribution or low market land use (long term lease with ramp up lease terms or reduced lease terms)
- Expedited permits
- Reduced permit fees
- Parking abatements
- Provision of off-site improvements
PKF recommends, in support of the previously mentioned statement, that any incentive programs put in place by Glendale should aim to reduce risk while maximing returns to the city . A TOT rebate program would enable the city to 122 of 199

draft
42 target the development of specific types of hotels while maintaining and improving the quality of the hotels that currently exist. - A f ull-service hotel to appropriately meet the mixed leisure and business demand in Glendale, while providing community amenities such as adequate event and meeting space, and food and beverage outlets. - A boutique hotel , sub -100 keys, to induce demand with a n innovative and exciting hotel product that is met by a multi-generational appetite for design- forward lifestyle driven experiences.
- Refurbishment of the tired motel product in the city, to reinvigorate what currently stands with fresh perspective and future outlook on demand driven by trending noteworthy spaces.

123 of 199

3 CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA ITEM
Report: Reach Code - Building Electrification

1.Motion providing direction on options to be included in a reach code for Building Electrification, Photovoltaic (PV) and Electric Vehicle (EV) Charging to amend Title 24 of the California Building Code or adopt an amendment to the Glendale Municipal Code.

COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Action Item
Approved for September 13, 2022 calendar

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City of Glendale hired Rincon Consultants, Inc. (Rincon) to assist in the preparation of a Building Electrification, Photovoltaic (PV) and electric vehicle (EV) charging Reach Code Ordinance. On June 22, 2022, Rincon delivered a memorandum outlining current best practices for reach code development and adoption in California. Based on an analysis of several criteria, including effectiveness in reducing greenhouse gases (GHGs), the feasibility of implementation, and cost- effectiveness, the following proposed ordinance modifications have been identified as best practices for the City of Glendale to consider in the effort to mitigate GHG and work towards achieving the State of California’s carbon neutrality target of 2045.

Building Electrification: Require all new construction (including standalone additional dwelling units, [ADU]) to be all-electric with no exemptions except as permitted by an infeasibility waiver.
▪This approach advances the most substantial climate benefit by requiring developers to prove the infeasibility of building electrification instead of categorizing entire building types as electrification exempt. ▪This structure maximizes long-term cost savings by keeping new gas infrastructure from being deployed, as most, if not all, new buildings in the City will be electrified (Gridworks 2020).
124 of 199

23 3
5 1
5 PV Infrastructure: Require non-residential and multifamily PV systems to be installed on all new buildings to at a minimum, offset 50 percent of projected electricity use or cover at least 50 percent of rooftop space. Include an infeasibility waiver for projects unable to meet the requirement due to shading or other constraints.
▪This approach allows for PV installation sizes that produce a more ambitious GHG reduction for lower density buildings while allowing flexible implementation in Glendale’s urban environment, where buildings with a large energy footprint may have a small available amount of rooftop space.
▪The suggested percentages in this ordinance can be further adjusted. ▪Current percentages based on existing example ordinances EV Charging Infrastructure: Glendale may consider adopting the CALGreen Tier 2 requirements for EV charging, which will expand EV charging infrastructure in all new residential and commercial locations, including multifamily buildings. Where:
➢One or Two-Family homes/ Low-rise Multifamily:
oOne Level 2 (40- to 100-amp breaker on a 208- or 240-volt alternating current (AC Circuit)) EV-Ready space per unit and Level 1 Circuitry (‘slow charging’).
➢Multifamily, Hotels & Motels:
o<20 Spaces: 40% of parking spaces must be EV Ready
o>20 Spaces: 15% of total parking spaces to have Level 2 EVSE (Electric vehicle supply equipment)
➢Other non-residential:
oAdopt an additional 10% Level 2 EV Charging requirement and 15% Level 2 capable spaces requirement for new non-residential buildings with 10 > spaces
Existing Building Requirements: In addition to the new construction ordinances suggested above for all electric buildings, additional solar PV, and EV charging, the City also has the option to expand some or all of these requirements to substantial remodels (remodels over a designated size or dollar amount). 125 of 199

33 3
5 1
5 COUNCIL PRIORITIES
Environmental Stewardship: Implementation of building electrification, PV and EV charging are currently cornerstones of modern climate action planning and can lay the foundation for significant GHG reduction across the building and transportation sectors.

Infrastructure: Electrifying our homes has major health benefits. Burning gas releases nitrogen oxides and particulates, which can have serious health consequences.

RECOMMENDATION
City Council provide direction on options to be included in a reach code for Building Electrification, Photovoltaic (PV) and Electric Vehicle (EV) Charging to amend Title 24 of the California Building Code or adopt an amendment to the Glendale Municipal Code.

BACKGROUND
The City of Glendale is considering three new reach codes which would be adopted through the 2023 California Building Code Title 24 code cycle. These codes are being proposed to help Glendale mitigate GHG emissions and health and safety concerns while taking advantage of cost savings and avoiding future retrofits. These reach codes would go beyond the State’s minimum requirements for buildings required by California Title 24 Building Code to emphasize even more significant energy savings and GHG reductions through the following new codes:
•Electrifying new construction,
•Expanding local solar generation and
•Increasing EV charging capacity
At the September 22, 2020 City Council meeting, staff presented a report asking for direction requiring commercial development in Glendale to provide rooftop solar photovoltaic systems. In the report, staff concluded in part; “Should City Council decide to pursue adoption of a Reach Code requirement for commercial photovoltaic, further study would need to be conducted toward that aim. In addition to a Glendale-specific cost-effectiveness study for commercial photovoltaics, City Council may desire to include other provisions within the Reach Code, which would require further study.” City Council directed staff to explore hiring a consultant team to determine the feasibility of adopting a commercial photovoltaic requirement. In addition, City Council also asked that any reach code study include information on building electrification, EV charging, battery storage and cool roof requirements.

Due to the complexity of this issue, at the March 22, 2022 City Council meeting staff 126 of 199

43 3
5 1
5 recommended that a consultant be hired to provide technical assistance and support to staff to assist in the development of a potential reach code and associated ordinances for the City of Glendale.

Based on direction form City Council, Rincon was hired to provide technical services and support to the City of Glendale for the development of building electrification, PV infrastructure, and EV charging ordinances.

As part of this work scope Rincon has been tasked to do the following:
•Draft a memorandum with ordinance options and best practices from other jurisdictions (attached to this Report as Exhibit 1);
•Develop draft ordinances for building electrification, photovoltaics, and EV infrastructure;
•Support the outreach and engagement process to refine the ordinances; and •Support City staff on the reach code development and adoption process This staff report outlines the recommendations from the Memorandum developed by Rincon (Exhibit 1).

ANALYSIS
The Rocky Mountain Institute (RMI), an independent, non-partisan, nonprofit organization, has identified building electrification as a critical strategy for combatting climate change and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. RMI outlines the benefits of building electrification including:

1. Building Electrification Creates Healthy Homes and Living Environments

2. Building All-Electric Homes Is Less Expensive Than Building Homes with Fossil Fuel Appliances

3. Building Electrification Can Be a Transformative, Positive Force for Low-Income Residents and Communities of Color

4. Gas Infrastructure Costs Are Soaring
All-electric construction is already the standard in many US states. Nearly 60 percent of new homes nationwide are built all-electric, and more new homes use heat pumps than any other technology.

Implementation of building electrification, PV, and EV charging is currently the cornerstone of modern climate action planning. It can lay the foundation for significant GHG reduction across the building and transportation sectors. According to the 127 of 199

53 3
5 1
5 California Energy Codes & Standards Cost-Effectiveness Study (2019), all-electric low- rise residential buildings are less expensive to build and operate than mixed-fuel buildings in most of Glendale (in Climate Zone 9). The results also show that including a PV system increases the cost-effectiveness of all electric buildings. While EV charging ordinances can provide for consistent design, reduce installation costs, mitigate GHG emissions that fuel climate change and, bring more equity to underserved communities.

How does Glendale benefit from All-Electric New Construction? •Natural gas use in buildings is a significant contributor to climate change. Nationwide, the majority of emissions from businesses and homes come from the combustion of fossil fuels (like natural gas) for heat. Reducing these emissions through electrification as the California grid goes carbon- neutral by 2045 will be a crucial strategy in City-level climate action planning. •Cleaner indoor air equals increased community health. All-electric induction stoves and appliances do not emit air pollutants in indoor spaces, providing healthier indoor air quality. Natural gas-powered appliances, especially gas stoves, can spike emissions of carbon monoxide and nitrogen dioxide emissions.
•All-electric homes and businesses can save consumers money. Natural gas prices are expected to increase over time, as infrastructure to transport natural gas stays the same, but the number of customers decreases as homes and businesses electrify. Electrifying new buildings now will save home and business owners future costs of retrofits and shield them from rising natural gas prices. Furthermore, with the new code, building all-electric saves money up front and, when paired with expanded solar, can also save residents money on their bills.

Local Solar:
•Solar + electrification = cost savings. California Energy Codes and Standards’ analysis shows cost savings for the community through improved grid reliability, decreased emissions, and on-bill savings.
•Local solar generation can increase grid resiliency. When paired with increased storage system updates, local power generation through solar can contribute to electrical grid demand reduction. This increases grid resiliency on days when there is high-electric demand (ex. a hot summer day when there is an increased use of air conditioning).
128 of 199

63 3
5 1
5 EV Charging:
•Decrease emissions from one of the biggest GHG emitting sources.

Transportation accounts for around 50% of California’s GHG emissions, most of which comes from gasoline combustion in passenger vehicles. As the California grid goes carbon-free by 2045, EVs will be key in reducing these sources of fossil fuel combustion emissions.
•Increase Glendale’s preparedness for future EV Demand. California State policy has aggressive targets for adopting zero-emissions vehicles and charging infrastructure, with a target of 100% in-state sales of passenger cars and light duty trucks by 2035 (Executive Order N-79-20).
•Increasing charging infrastructure for this uptick in electric vehicle usage will be critical to keeping up with statewide trends. Building in EV charging in the design phase will also save home and business owners future costs of installing EV chargers.

Reach Code Recommendations Summary
The Memorandum provided by Rincon (Exhibit 1) outlines current best practices for reach code development and adoption in California. Based on an analysis of several criteria, including effectiveness in reducing GHGs, the feasibility of implementation, and cost-effectiveness, the following ordinance modifications have been identified as best practices for the City of Glendale in the effort to mitigate GHG and work towards achieving the State of California’s carbon neutrality target of 2045.

Findings provided by Rincon in the Memorandum are outlined below. The Memorandum offers comprehensive justification for developing a reach code that may include the following aspects.

Ordinance Adoption Pathways
There are two primary pathways for ordinance adoption: a local building code amendment of Title 24 or a municipal zoning or health and safety amendment. Both pathways have been taken by other jurisdictions and are feasible for Glendale. A summary of the pros and cons of each approach are summarized immediately below, in Table 1.
129 of 199

73 3
5 1
5 Table 1
Policy Type Pros Cons Notes

1. Building Code- Local
Amendment to Title 24
(Reach Code)
▪Can be adopted as part
of building code update
already underway
▪Majority of cities have
taken this approach
▪May cover buildings
that are already
entitled (but have not
had building permits
issued)
▪Requires CEC approval
and cost-effectiveness
study (except for
electric vehicles)
▪Climate zone 16 could
be challenging to prove
cost-effectiveness
(pending 2022 cost-
effectiveness numbers)
Local amendments to Title 24
are common and encouraged by
the CEC and Local Codes and
Standards team. Cost-
effectiveness studies are readily
available.

2. Municipal Zoning or
Health and Safety Code
Amendment (Municipal
Ordinance)
▪Can proceed without
CEC approval or cost-
effectiveness study
▪Not required to renew
every code cycle
▪May not cover buildings
which have already
been entitled
▪Uncertainty on existing
or potential legal
challenges
▪Less common (although
several examples are
available)
Although less common, pursuing
a municipal zoning or health and
safety code ordinance provides
some benefits such as removing
the need for a CEC approval or
cost-effectiveness study. No
need to update every 3 years
which could be a pro or con
depending on perspective.

CEC = California Energy Commission
Staff recommends that the Building Code-Local Amendment to Title 24 (Reach Code) is the most appropriate approach for the City of Glendale. This would require Staff to review the California Building Code at the tri-annual update and to determine if any amendments of the Reach Code Ordinance would be necessary.

Procedure and Findings Required for Adopting Reach Codes California Energy Commission (CEC) approval would be required for the proposed reach codes affecting Title 24. The City would submit to the CEC the reach codes, supporting materials, and required findings to the CEC, along with relevant CEQA documents. The Reach Codes must be supported by an analysis and findings regarding the reach code’s energy savings and cost effectiveness and a statement or finding that the local energy standards will require buildings to be designed to consume no more energy than permitted by Part 6 of Title 24 of the Energy Code.

BSC Submittal & Review
Reach codes must also be submitted to the Building Standards Commission (BSC) for approval. BSC approval would be required for all three categories of the proposed reach code amendments – electrification of buildings, PV, and EV. The reach code must 130 of 199

83 3
5 1
5 be supported by findings that amendment is necessary because of local climatic, geological, or topographical conditions, along with the justification.

Building Electrification Infrastructure
Building electrification reach codes have taken several forms, including electrification of some but not all appliances, electric preferred, all-electric ready, and full natural gas bans. Exemptions for specific end uses (such as stoves) mean no decrease in natural gas infrastructure development. However, an infeasibility waiver process should be outlined in the ordinance to allow for specific process loads which cannot currently be all electric to have a path forward. An infeasibility waiver process places the burden on the project applicant or developer to prove that construction of the new building entirely without gas is not feasible, reducing the burden on City staff and removing the need to make whole categories of buildings exempt.

For these reasons, building electrification of all new buildings with no exemptions presents the strongest future climate and cost benefit to the City of Glendale. In this scenario, all new construction (including standalone additional dwelling units, [ADU]) must be all-electric with no exemptions, except for an infeasibility waiver. ➢This approach advances the strongest climate benefit by requiring developers to prove the infeasibility of building electrification, instead of categorizing entire building types as electrification exempt.
➢This structure maximizes long-term cost savings by keeping new gas infrastructure from being deployed, as most, if not all, new buildings in the City will be electrified (Gridworks 2020).

Building Electrification Summary:
➢What types of buildings will be included?
o All residential and non-residential buildings, as well as detached ADUs. ➢What does electrification cover?
oNew construction will require the installation of electric appliances like heat pumps and induction stovetops. Gas lines will not be installed in new buildings where feasible.
➢What is an infeasibility waiver, and when does it apply? oAn infeasibility waiver can be applied for by the building developer if the technology for an all-electric proposed building is impossible to acquire/use.
oInfeasibility waivers will only cover the specific end use that is not deemed feasible such as specific process loads.
131 of 199

93 3
5 1
5 How the proposed building electrification reach code exceeds Title 24 Title 24 Requirements (2022) Proposed New Building Electrification Reach Code
Residential: Electrification Ready + heat
pump water heating or space heating
standard. Gas installation still allowed.

Non-Residential: Heat pump for
HVAC/water depending on building type.

Gas installation still allowed.

All buildings:
•Full instead of partial
electrification, default is electric
building
•Fully electrified (all electric
appliances, not just heat
pumps/space heating)
•No gas installed without successful
infeasibility waiver application
Photovoltaic Infrastructure
Glendale’s existing building stock is urban and has a significant number of high-density buildings with limited roof space. This presents two challenges to installing PV infrastructure in Glendale. First, tall buildings may not be able to fit large arrays on their limited roof space. Second, large buildings with high-energy demand (ex. industrial buildings, refrigerated warehouses) may not be able to generate enough energy to offset a high percentage of their energy spend even if they used their entire roof space for PV.

Due to physical limitations associated with PV sizing on different building types, a variety of strategies have been developed that are intended to encourage the installation of PVs across a wide breadth of building types.

Table 2 summarizes the options for PV ordinances, as well as the pros and cons of each approach.

Table 2
Policy Type Pros Cons Rincon Recommendation
132 of 199

103
3 5
1 5

1. PV system that
establishes a minimum % of
rooftop space (50%) if an
array sized to offset 50% of
the building’s energy spend
is not feasible.
▪PV, particularly large
arrays, end up being long-
term cost effective
▪Greater savings when
combined with energy
efficiency
▪Can produce greater GHG
reduction over building
life
▪Can be a large
incremental cost
▪Variable investment
requirements distributed
across different project
types/developers
▪Physical constraints on
rooftop
Maximum Climate Benefit,
Adapted to Glendale’s urban
environment with
potentially variable rooftop
space. Note that this
recommendation blends
together two policy
approaches (% offset energy
spend and % rooftop
installation)

2. Small minimum PV size
requirement based off
building square footage
▪Greater savings when
combined with energy
efficiency
▪Small minimum system
size allows project sizing
flexibility
▪Cost-effective under most
major project scenarios
▪Requires external
documents and/or
calculations
▪If install minimum only,
offsets small percentage
of total usage
Medium Climate Benefit;
High Feasibility (largest # of
adopters) Cost-Effective

3. PV system requiring
some percentage of offset
projected annual electricity
usage
▪Greater savings when
combined with energy
efficiency
▪Cost effective under most
major project scenarios
▪Can produce more
ambitious GHG reduction
over the life of the
building
▪Can be a considerable
incremental cost
▪Variable investment
requirements
▪Physical constraints on
rooftop
▪Sizing may not be
feasible for different
project sizes
Not Recommended without
adaptation for urban rooftop
space (%) as does not
include considerations for
roof size, Less Feasible,
Climate-Ambitious
PV = photovoltaic
A recommendation is to require non-residential and multifamily PV systems to offset 50 percent of projected electricity use if roof space is sufficient, or cover at least 50 percent of rooftop space for buildings where a 50 percent offset of building electricity usage by a PV array is not possible. Exclude any specific exemptions.

Reasoning: This ordinance presents a hybrid-model between mandated percentages for roof size and energy spend, allowing for flexibility while maximizing GHG reduction and local renewable energy production.

Ordinance aspect: Physical infeasibility waiver (e.g., shading, vegetation, other structures). The burden falls on the project applicant to prove infeasibility.

Photovoltaic Summary
oWhat types of buildings will be included?
133 of 199

113
3 5
1 5
▪Non-residential & high rise multifamily. Single family and low-rise multifamily buildings are not included in the proposed reach code because they are already subject to PV requirements under the California Building Code.
▪
oWhat is an infeasibility waiver, and when does it apply? ▪An infeasibility waiver can be applied for by the building developer if the project is physically unable to meet the requirement due to shading or other constraints.

How the proposed PV reach code exceeds Title 24
Title 24 Requirements (2022) Proposed New PV Reach Code Residential (Single Family): Prescriptive
requirements for PV and battery.

Residential (Multifamily): Prescriptive
requirements for PV and battery.

Non-Residential: PV and battery storage
required for prescriptive approach.

All multifamily & commercial:
•Roof space or energy spend 50%
requirement is more ambitious
than system size equation under
Title 24 for many building types
which is based on floor size square
feet
Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure
New EV charging infrastructure will play an essential role in supporting the growing EV fleet in California, as installing charging infrastructure in new buildings is significantly less expensive than retrofitting existing buildings.

EV charging infrastructure requirements are subject to CALGreen regulatory standards set forth in Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations. The CALGreen standards include required standards for new developments and two sets of voluntary standards, Tier 1 and Tier 2, that are more ambitious.

Benefits of Adopting at Least CALGreen Code Tier 2 Voluntary Standards Avoid Retrofit Costs
According to the California Air Resources Board (CARB), installing EV charging infrastructure in a new building can save an estimated $7,000 to $8,000 per parking space compared with retrofitting it later (CARB 2019).
134 of 199

123
3 5
1 5
Increase Equity
Providing access to more Level 2 chargers in the workplace and public locations allows residents of multifamily households with ZEVs to charge more easily, especially if they do not have access to parking at home (BAAQMD 2022).

Maximize GHG-Emission Reductions
Adopting the suggested code changes for a 10 percent EV-Capable requirement for EV charging infrastructure would lead to an estimated total 690,000 to 820,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent reduction over a 4-year time frame (CARB 2019).

EV Charging Infrastructure Outline
To develop an ordinance that will best support EV adoption, minimize cost impacts, and avoid inequities, it is necessary to understand the different EV charging options. There are three standardized levels of EV charging facilities that provide charging at different rates. These include Level 1, Level 2, and Level 3 chargers, summarized in Table 3.

Table 3 EV Charging Levels
Type of Charger
Voltage Required
(Volts)
Charge per Hour
(Miles)
Estimated Time for
Full Charge (Hours) Typical Land Use Type
Level 1 120 3-6 8-12 Residential
Level 2 208-240 14-35 3-4 Residential,
Commercial
Level 3, DC Fast
Chargers
200-600 80-600 0.5-0.75 Commercial (e.g.,
offices)
Type of Charger
Voltage Required (Volts) Average Power (Kilowatts) –
Each EV Charger
Estimated Time for
Full Charge (Hours) Typical Land Use Type
Level 1 120 (source)
AC Circuit
2*
(2000 Watts)
14-16 Residential
Level 2 208-240 (source)
AC Circuit
6-8**/***
(6000-8000 Watts)
6-10***** Residential,
Commercial
Level 3, DC Fast
Chargers
480 (source)
200-600-800 V DC out
150, 250, 350, 500 & up****
(150,000 to 500,000 Watts)

0.33-0.5 Commercial (e.g.,
offices)
*Note 1: Level 1 uses just a normal 120 Volts AC (15 to 20 Amp) household outlet, above 20 Amps the circuit trips
**Note 2: Level 2 is at least 6000 Watts or 6 KW. Most households will opt to install two Level 2 chargers because they will have more than one EV (Car/Truck or SUV) ***Note 3: Also, regarding Level 2 EV chargers, 6 KW may not seem to be a lot, but in reality here is what happens
• In Glendale, Single Family Homes Typical Loads 6KW to 7 KW with HVAC system – Adding a 135 of 199

133
3 5
1 5
Level 2 Charger is like adding a single family home to the grid. • Hence, adding one to two Level 2 EV chargers (adds 12KW) will increase a Single Family Home loads by a factor of 2x or 3x
• In Glendale, Apartment Home’s typical Loads is about 2KW to 4KW • Therefore, adding one to two Level 2 EV chargers will increase an Apartment Home’s loads by a factor of 3x or 4x, since most apartments will have one or two parking spots ****Note 4: Original Level 3 chargers were 50KW … in an effort to charge electric vehicles from 20 % to 80% in 30 minutes or less.
• Today, Level 3 Chargers are 150KW+ (especially for buses or trucks or fleet/commercial) • Today, (8/2022) Tesla installs Level 3 Chargers (Super Chargers) that are rated 250KW each • To surpass Tesla, European Automakers and others are installing Level 3 Chargers at 350 KW to 500KW + each
*****Note 5: Charging times vary due to size of the Battery in the EV (Car/Truck/SUV) and State of Charge of the battery when plugged into the charger.
• Currently EVs (Car/Truck/SUV) have batteries rated at 60 KWH to 120+ KWH, Hybrid Plug-ins have batteries that range from single digit size to 20 KWH. • The level 2 chargers are assumed to be between 24 Amps and 32 Amps AC, at 240 volts which translates roughly into 6 – 8 kW of charging power. For an 80 kW battery going from 15% to 90% is 75% capacity or 60 kW; it will require 8-10 hours to accomplish.

All the above-mentioned chargers place an unprecedented strain on the Electric Power System and GWP’s opinion is that EV Charges will (2X) double the load of the Utility especially from 4 PM to 5 AM daily, as residents and fleets plug in EV vehicles for the night and PV Solar diminishes and disappears for the night. Most home energy storage “power walls” will help for 2 to 4 hours and then may also become a load to recharge to provide back-up power for the homes (they recharge later in the night or wait till morning). Adding a Level 2 Charger is equivalent to adding a single-family home to the grid. Level 3 (Fast DC chargers) will draw from GWP’s Grid from 150KW to 500KW each.

EV charging infrastructure requirements are generally described in three terms of completeness, as seen below in Table 4.

Table 4 EV Charging Infrastructure
Type of Space Infrastructure Included
Infrastructure
Not Included Unique Attributes
Typical Land
Use Type
EV-Capable Parking stall, underground
conduit
Charger hardware,
wiring, charging plug,
charging station
Can be easily
converted to charging
space, avoids costly
future retrofits
Residential
EV-Ready Parking stall, underground
conduit, wiring, wire outlet
Charging plug,
charging station
Baseline “Plug and
Play” charging station
Residential,
Commercial
EV-Installed5
(EVSE)
Parking stall, underground
conduit, wiring, wire outlet,
charging plug, charging
station
N/A Most advanced and
least prevalent space
available
Commercial, (e.g.,
offices and mixed-use
lots)
5 EV installed charging spaces also referred to as an Electric Vehicle Charging Station or Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment 136 of 199

143
3 5
1 5
The City should consider developing EV reach codes specific to varying land use types. ➢New One-and Two-Family Homes and Townhomes with Attached Private Garages
➢New Multifamily, Hotels, and Motels
➢New Non-Residential
It is well documented that limited access to EV charging infrastructure can limit EV adoption and slow progress on GHG reduction. While it may be tempting to require EV infrastructure in some form at every parking location, it is important to other impacts, such as grid capacity and future technology changes, to maximize efficiency while incentivizing EV adoption.

EV Charging: CALGreen Tier 2 Voluntary Standards
➢What types of buildings will be included?
oOne or Two-Family homes/ Low-rise Multifamily:
▪One Level 2 (40- to 100-amp breaker on a 208- or 240-volt alternating current (AC Circuit)) EV-Ready space per unit and Level 1 Circuitry (‘slow charging’).
oMultifamily, Hotels & Motels:
▪<20 Spaces: 40% of parking spaces must be EV Ready
▪>20 Spaces: 15% of total parking spaces to have Level 2 EVSE (Electric vehicle supply equipment)
oOther non-residential:
▪Adopt an additional 10% Level 2 EV Charging requirement and 15% Level 2 capable spaces requirement for new non-residential buildings with 10 > spaces
oCALGreen Tier 2 Voluntary Standards:
▪1-2 Family Homes + Low-Rise Multifamily: One Level 2 EV-Ready Space/ Unit + Level 1 Circuitry
▪Multifamily; Hotels & Motels: 40% of Parking spaces EV ready; >20 units; 15% of total spaces dedicated to EV
Definitions:

Electric Vehicle Capable Space – A vehicle space with electrical panel space and load capacity to support a branch circuit and necessary raceways, both underground and/or surface mounted, to support EVSE charging.
137 of 199

153
3 5
1 5
Electric Vehicle (EV) Ready Space – A vehicle space which is provided with a branch circuit, any necessary raceways, both underground and/or surface mounted, to accommodate EV charging, terminating in a receptacle or a charger.

Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE) – the 20 (low power) or 40 (high power) ampere branch circuit and the EV charging connectors, attachment plugs and all other fittings devices power outlets or apparatus installed specifically for the purpose of transferring energy between the premises wiring and the electric vehicle.

Note: An EVSE meets the requirement of an EV Ready space (but is more expensive).

Multifamily Base Code
Multifamily less than 20 dwelling units; Hotels and Motels less than 20 Rooms •10 Percent EV Capable
•25 Percent EV Ready
Multifamily MORE than 20 dwelling units; Hotels and Motels MORE than 20 Rooms •10 Percent EV Capable
•25 Percent EV Ready
•5 Percent Level 2 EVSE
Multifamily Tier 2
Multifamily LESS than 20 dwelling units; Hotels and Motels LESS than 20 Rooms •40 Percent EV Ready (low power)
Multifamily MORE than 20 dwelling units; Hotels and Motels MORE than 20 Rooms •40 Percent EV Ready (low power)
•15 Percent of those 40 must now be Level 2 EVSE (appears to be high or low power)
Non-Residential Base Code
Total number of parking
spaces
Number of required EV
capable spaces
Number of EVCS (EV
capable spaces provided
with EVSE)2
0-9 0 0
10-25 4 0
26-50 8 2
51-75 13 3
76-100 17 4
138 of 199

163
3 5
1 5
101-150 25 6
151-200 35 9
201 & more 20% of total1 25% of EV capable
spaces1
1 Calculation for spaces shall be rounded up to the nearest whole number 2 The number of required EVCS (EV capable spaces provided with EVSE) in column 3 count toward the total number of required EV capable spaces shown in column 2 Non Residential Tier 2
Total number of parking
spaces
Tier 2 number of
required EV capable
spaces
Tie 2 number of EVCS
(EV capable spaces
provided with EVSE)2
0-9 3 0
10-25 8 3
26-50 17 6
51-75 28 9
76-100 40 13
101-150 57 19
151-200 79 26
201 & more 45% of total parking
spaces1
33% of EV capable
spaces1
1 Calculation for spaces shall be rounded up to the nearest whole number 2 The number of required EVCS (EV capable spaces provided with EVSE) in column 3 count toward the total number of required EV capable spaces shown in column 2 Existing Building Requirements
Although staff recommends that reach codes for existing buildings be addressed in the City reach code at the next tri-annual California Green Building Code update in 2026, the benefits and drawbacks of including existing buildings in a reach code need consideration. While new construction represents the most straightforward and cost- effective way to ensure buildings electrify, the City of Glendale is mostly built out. A significant portion of emissions come from existing building stock. Therefore, extending PV, energy efficiency, EV, and electrification requirements to retrofits represents an opportunity for the City to further its climate goals. Furthermore, targeting existing buildings already undergoing significant renovations is the most cost-effective time for this work, allowing easy access to building systems and financing, which can significantly increase the project's cost-effectiveness.

The Rincon Memorandum summarizes the EV, PV, and electrification ordinances that have been adopted in California. Rincon has included an approach that utilizes a 139 of 199

173
3 5
1 5
scorecard that cities like Piedmont and Carlsbad have adopted to provide a performance-based approach for existing building retrofits.

Retrofit Thresholds
Many reach codes use the term “substantial” remodel or retrofit as a threshold for when a reach code would take effect. A substantial retrofit could be defined in several ways, including the percentage value of the work compared to the building market value or percent of floor area addressed. For example, “substantial” may be defined as a project affecting over 50% of floor area or using a dollar amount to target retrofits. Currently, no cities that specifically require electrification at the time of retrofit could be identified.

EVs
The City of Carlsbad adopted an EV charging requirement for major renovations (see definition above) that requires major renovations to comply with the new construction requirements of their EV ordinance for any new parking that is built as part of the project.

Solar PV
Several cities, including Carlsbad, Piedmont, and Santa Monica, require solar PV installation for major additions.

Existing Building Retrofit Performance Pathway
In addition to the prescriptive approaches for Building Electrification, EVs, and PV listed above, cities have begun adopting performance requirements for existing building retrofits. Due to the many variables associated with existing buildings, it can be challenging to identify specific actions that are cost effective and impactful in all scenarios. A performance pathway solves this issue by providing multiple options for each project to review and choose the best approaches that suit their project. The Local Energy Codes team has recently developed a tool for jurisdictions to create their own performance pathway which, establishes a target score and a menu of individual measures with points weighted by site energy savings.

Concerns
Rincon Consultants have engaged City staff representing Glendale Water and Power and Community Development Building & Safety Division throughout the reach code development process. These tier one stakeholders have provided extensive feedback to the consultants in three critical areas; Staffing and budgets, existing buildings, and the electrical infrastructure required to support the building electrification reach code. 140 of 199

183
3 5
1 5
Staff has observed an increase in PV and EV submittals before any reach codes adoption. The proposed building electrification reach code is focused on new construction and thus should not increase the number of new projects vis-à-vis non- adoption of a reach code. However, if staff do observe a further increase in submittals due to the adoption of reach codes, an analysis of additional full-time equivalents (FTE) for GWP and Community Development Building & Safety will be necessary to fulfill the needs of the reach code compliance implementation and administration.

For reference, in 2021-2022 new permits issued for new residential and commercial units were as follows:
➢Residential 12
➢ADUs 164
➢Multi-Family 6
➢Commercial 2
Rincon Consultants met with GWP to discuss the proposed reach codes and respond to any specific questions regarding the impact on the City’s electrical transmission and distribution infrastructure. As the momentum toward electrifying transportation and the built environment grows, the Electric Utilities will become the “Refineries, the Gas Stations, and the Gas Companies”. Although the proposed reach code is focused on new construction, GWP has to ensure the energy infrastructure is in place to support the electrification transition. It is anticipated that electrification will eventually double GWPs load in the next 10-20 years. And, compared to peers (utilities) GWP does not have internal generation resources to feed future loads.

Grid Considerations
As EVs and charging technologies advance, charging times are decreasing. Faster charging times mean more electricity is entering the car's battery in a shorter time, meaning more strain on the grid and potentially the need for new grid infrastructure when high levels of charging occur simultaneously. Furthermore, having more EVs and faster chargers means more vehicles can cycle through fewer charging stations and exhibit more strain on the electrical grid. New demands placed on existing electrical infrastructure should be carefully reviewed and incorporated into community planning efforts. In addition, as a result of these new demands placed on the grid, additional considerations should be made to increase electrical infrastructure in certain parts of the City, where applicable.

Other considerations for the proposed reach code to consider are:
141 of 199

193
3 5
1 5

1. Most California Cities that passed electrification codes are independent of the (IOU) Utilities, hence they are not affected by reach codes being associated with the Utility. Municipal Utilities will be associated with the reach codes and expectations for assistance/services. Customers may expect assistance such as subsidizing all or portions of the ordinance requirements.

2. The expectation that GWP/City Staff will assist the Public in all planning and permitting aspects of the electrification process.

3. As the momentum toward electrification of transportation and buildings gathers pace the utility infrastructure will require investment to meet this demand.

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
The Sustainability Office, in partnership with Rincon, has embarked on a stakeholder outreach program. This program has focused on internal stakeholders and external stakeholders as described below:

Internal stakeholders: An internal working group was established to provide feedback to Rincon Consultants, Inc. on the proposed Reach Code ordinance. The internal group consists of representatives from Glendale Water and Power, Community Development, and the Sustainability Office. The meeting consists of a bi-monthly check-in with Rincon. A special meeting with Rincon and GWP was held to discuss matters specific to GWP.

External Stakeholders: The Sustainability office has been holding bi-monthly meetings with the Glendale Building Electrification Working Group (GBWEG). The GBWEG is interested in advancing building electrification in local Communities.

On August 25, 2022, Rincon and the City of Glendale hosted an open webinar to review the City’s approach to the reach codes and to discuss potential concerns and issues.

The webinar was attended by 24 stakeholders including Glendale residents, building professionals and environmental organizations.

On September 1, 2022, staff met with the Sustainability Commission to receive feedback on the City’s proposed approach to the reach codes. The Sustainability Commission unanimously moved to recommend that the City Council direct staff to proceed with preparation of a reach code for Building Electrification, PV, and EV. The Sustainability Commission made the following specific recommendations regarding the reach code:
•Building Electrification: Require all new electric construction. Allow for applicants to apply for an infeasibility waiver, with infeasibility to be limited to situations where compliance is physically infeasible. Staff to report back to the Sustainability Commission within one year of implementation of the reach code 142 of 199

203
3 5
1 5
regarding the number and type of infeasibility waivers that have been sought or granted pertaining to the building electrification requirement. •PV: For non-residential and high-rise multi-family properties, require installation of PV to at a minimum offset 50% of projected electricity use or cover at least 50% of roof space. Allow applicants to apply for an infeasibility waiver, with infeasibility to be limited to situations where compliance is physically infeasible. •EV: Adopt CalGreen Tier 2 Standards for EV Charging, with the following additional requirements:
oFor new multi-family residential properties, 100% of parking spaces to be electric vehicle capable.
oFor non-residential properties, the EV-readiness standards shall be double those required by the CalGreen Tier 2 Standards.
oFor new multi-family residential and non-residential properties, at least 20% of each such property’s parking spaces must have Level 2 EVSE installed.
•Existing buildings: Remodels of existing buildings were not recommended to be included in this reach code. However, the Sustainability Commission recommended that the City Council direct staff to move expeditiously towards amending the reach code requirements for Building Electrification, PV, and EV to apply them to existing buildings undergoing a major remodel. The Sustainability Commission recommended that efforts to add existing buildings to the reach code requirements begin in 2023 and to be implemented as soon as possible, ideally in 2024 and before the next State Building Code update. Staff to research best practices and methods for defining what constitutes, and how to define, a major remodel triggering reach code requirements.

During the week of September 5-10 staff will host two Roundtables. One will be focused on building professionals, and one will be focused on community groups.

These roundtables will provide an opportunity to have a more in-depth discussion with interested parties.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this report. The fiscal impacts of the reach code itself, if adopted, including the cost of any additional staffing or necessary upgrades to GWP infrastructure, are not included in this report.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CEQA/NEPA)
This item is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as it is not a project approval.
143 of 199

213
3 5
1 5

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
This item is exempt from campaign disclosure requirements.

ALTERNATIVES
Alternative 1: Recommend that City Council provide directions on options to be included in a Reach Code for 1. Building Electrification – all electric new construction and infeasibility waiver, 2. Photovoltaic (PV) 50% energy offset OR roof area PV array and to amend Title 24 of the California Building Code or adopt an amendment to the Glendale Municipal Code and defer adopting the Electric Vehicle (EV) Reach Code.

Alternative 2: Recommend that City Council provide direction on options to be included in a Reach Code for 1. Building Electrification – all electric new construction and infeasibility waiver, 2. Photovoltaic (PV) 50% energy offset OR roof area PV array and

3. CalGreen Tier 2 Standards for Electric Vehicle (EV) Charging to amend Title 24 of the California Building Code or adopt an amendment to the Glendale Municipal Code.

Alternative 3: City Council not to adopt a reach code to amend title 24 of the California Building Code or adopt an amendment to the Glendale Municipal Code.

Alternative 3: The City Council may consider any other alternative not proposed by staff.

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Prepared by:

David Jones, Sustainability Officer
Approved by:

Roubik R. Golanian, P.E., City Manager

EXHIBITS/ATTACHMENTS

1.June 22, 2022 memorandum of Rincon Consultants, Inc. regarding Building Electrification, Photovoltaic Infrastructure, and Electric Vehicle Charger Building Code Information & Recommendations for the City of Glendale. 144 of 199

M O T I O N
Moved by Council Member ____________________________, seconded by Council Member ___________________________, that the City Council directs staff to prepare for the City Council’s consideration a proposed amendment to Title 24 of the California Building Code as it applies within the City of Glendale, or amendment to Glendale Municipal Code (“Reach Code”). The proposed Reach Code shall include the following elements: (1) for building electrification, a requirement that all new buildings, including standalone additional dwelling units (“ADU”), be all-electric, with an option for applicants to seek a waiver based upon infeasibility; (2) for photovoltaic (PV) installations, a requirement that all new non-residential and high-rise multi-family buildings have PV systems that offset fifty percent (50%) of energy use or cover at least 50% of rooftop space, with an option for applicants to seek a waiver based upon infeasibility; and (3) adoption of the CalGreen Tier 2 Standards for Electric Vehicle Charging.

Vote as follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain
145 of 199

Rincon Consultants, Inc.
1 8 0 N o r t h A s h w o o d A v e n u e
Ven tu ra , Ca lifo rnia 9 3003

805 6 4 4 4 4 5 5 O F F I C E A N D F A X

i n f o @ r i n c o n c o n s u l t a n t s . c o m
w w w . r i n c o n c o n s u l t a n t s . c o m
E n v i r o n m e n t a l S c i e n t i s t s P l a n n e r s E n g i n e e r s

M E M O R A N D U M
Date: June 22, 2022
To: David Jones
Sustainability Officer
City of Glendale
Via: [email protected]
From: Ryan Gardner Climate Action Program Manager
[email protected]
(510) 671-0177
Subject: Building Electrification, Photovoltaic Infrastructure, and Electric Vehicle Charger Building Codes Information & Recommendations for the City of Glendale Project Number: 21-11996
Attachment A: 2019 Building Reach Code Summary
Ordinance Recommendations Summary
Pursuant to the request of the City of Glendale, Rincon Consultants, Inc (Rincon) has developed this memorandum detailing the options for building electrification, photovoltaics (PV) and electric vehicle (EV) charging ordinances to help align city staff and the consultant team on the type or ordinances to be proposed to City Council. The memorandum includes analysis of ordinance type (i.e., performance, prescriptive, and hybrid reach codes or municipal ordinances), details best practices for ordinance development, and provides examples of existing ordinances for other cities in California.

Implementation of building electrification, PV and EV charging are currently cornerstones of modern climate action planning and can lay the foundation for significant greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction across the building and transportation sectors. According to the California Energy Codes & Standards Cost Effectiveness Study (2019), all-electric low-rise residential buildings are less expensive to build and operate than mixed-fuel buildings in a majority of Glendale (in Climate Zone 9). The results also show that the inclusion of a PV system increases the cost-effectiveness of all electric buildings. While EV charging ordinances can provide for consistent design, reduce installation costs, mitigate GHG emissions that fuel climate change and bring more equity to underserved communities.

Executive Summary
This section provides a high-level summary of the research conducted by Rincon on the current best practices for reach code development and adoption in California. Based on an analysis of several criteria, 146 of 199

City of Glendale
Building Codes Information & Recommendations

Page 2 ends

including effectiveness in reducing GHGs, feasibility of implementation, and cost-effectiveness, the following ordinance modifications have been identified as best practice for the City of Glendale in the effort to mitigate GHG and work towards achieving the State of California’s carbon neutrality target of 2045.

Building Electrification: Require all new construction (including standalone additional dwelling units, [ADU]) to be all-electric with no exemptions except for an infeasibility waiver. ▪ This approach advances the strongest climate benefit by requiring developers to prove infeasibility of building electrification, instead of categorizing entire building types as electrification exempt. ▪ This structure maximizes long-term cost savings by keeping new gas infrastructure from being deployed, as most, if not all, new buildings in the City will be electrified (Gridworks 2020).

PV Infrastructure: Require non-residential and multifamily PV systems be installed on all new buildings to at a minimum offset 50 percent of projected electricity use or cover at least 50 percent of rooftop space. Include an infeasibility waiver for projects unable to meet the requirement due to shading or other constraints.
▪ This approach allows for PV installation sizes that produce a more ambitious GHG reduction for lower density buildings, while allowing flexible implementation in Glendale’s urban environment where buildings with a large energy footprint may have a small available amount of rooftop space. ▪ The suggested percentages in this ordinance can be further adjusted. ▪ Current percentages based on existing example ordinances EV Charging Infrastructure: Require at least one Level 2 EV-Ready space per unit for one- and two- family homes/low-rise multifamily units with consideration for an additional Level 1 EV-Ready space per unit; at least 40-50 percent Level 2 EV-Capable spaces for larger high-rise multifamily complexes, hotels, and motels with consideration for between 15-33 percent of total spaces to be Level 2 EV-Installed spaces; and 40-75 percent EV-Capable for non-residential properties with 33-50 percent of these spaces requiring Level 2 EV-Installed spaces.
▪ High level of EV-Capable spaces allows for future electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) installations without high cost.
▪ EV-Capable ensures new technologies which require different wiring standards do not result in stranded assets associated with EV-Ready spaces.
▪ Some EVSE units encourage EV usage today.

Existing Building Requirements: In addition to the new construction ordinances suggested above for all- electric buildings, additional solar PV, and EV charging, the City also has the option to expand some or all of these requirements to substantial remodels (remodels over a designated size or dollar amount).

Ordinance Adoption Pathways
There are two primary pathways for ordinance adoption, a local building code amendment of Title 24, or a municipal zoning or health and safety amendment. Both pathways have been taken by other jurisdictions and are feasible for Glendale. A brief summary of pros and cons of each approach are summarized in Table 1.
147 of 199

City of Glendale
Building Codes Information & Recommendations

Page 3 ends

Table 1 Municipal Code Change Vs. Building Code Amendment Policy Type Pros Cons Notes

1. Building Code- Local
Amendment to Title 24
(Reach Code)
▪ Can be adopted as part
of building code update
already underway
▪ Majority of cities have
taken this approach
▪ May cover buildings
that are already
entitled (but have not
had building permits
issued)
▪ Requires CEC approval
and cost-effectiveness
study (except for
electric vehicles)
▪ Climate zone 16 could
be challenging to prove
cost-effectiveness
(pending 2022 cost-
effectiveness numbers)
Local amendments to Title 24
are common and encouraged by
the CEC and Local Codes and
Standards team. Cost-
effectiveness studies are readily
available.

2. Municipal Zoning or
Health and Safety Code
Amendment (Municipal
Ordinance)
▪ Can proceed without
CEC approval or cost-
effectiveness study
▪ Not required to renew
every code cycle
▪ May not cover buildings
which have already
been entitled
▪ Uncertainty on existing
or potential legal
challenges
▪ Less common (although
several examples are
available)
Although less common, pursuing
a municipal zoning or health and
safety code ordinance provides
some benefits such as removing
the need for a CEC approval or
cost-effectiveness study. No
need to update every 3 years
which could be a pro or con
depending on perspective.

CEC = California Energy Commission
Local amendments to the building code (reach codes) are similar to other local ordinances, but there are special requirements for reach codes, such as evidence of cost effectiveness and approval by the California Energy Commission (CEC). Because of these requirements, the City of Glendale may face hurdles in implementing a Title 24 amendment for electric buildings as the current 2019 California Energy Codes & Standards do not project cost savings for single-family home electrification in Climate Zone 16 (Glendale’s building stock falls both in Climate Zone 9 and Climate Zone 16). However, cost- effectiveness data for the updated Building Code cycle (2023-2025) is set to be released in July.

Preliminary results suggest that building electrification in Climate Zone 16 may now be cost-effective but cannot be confirmed until the data is released in July. If building electrification for all building types in Climate Zone 16 is found to be cost-effective, then the City would be able to develop an electrification ordinance via an amendment to the Building code (CEC 2022, California Energy Codes & Standards 2019).

Local Conditions and Policy Overview Summary
City of Glendale Building Stock Overview
California is divided into several climate zones. Climate zones are defined by an area’s weather, including annual maximum and minimum temperatures, precipitation, and other factors. Each climate zone has an assigned energy budget, which is determined using geographic area-based temperatures, including weather, temperature, and typical energy use. Climate zones are important for building ordinances (especially building electrification and PV) since they determine how much heating and cooling load and days of sun a building is likely to receive. The California Energy Codes & Standard’s Cost-Effectiveness Model includes projections on local building stock as a base for their forecasts on 148 of 199

City of Glendale
Building Codes Information & Recommendations

Page 4 ends

energy and cost savings, which are analyzed below (Local Energy Codes 2022). Both Climate Zone 9 and 16 are found in the City of Glendale, which means Glendale will need to show cost-effectiveness in both zones for any local amendment to the building code. The majority of Glendale’s commercial and residential building stock, as well as projected future growth, is located in Zone 9.

Policy Landscape Overview
2022 Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards
Title 24 of the Code of Regulations sets the building code standards for all jurisdictions in California. The 2022 Title 24 (Building Energy Efficiency Standards) was adopted by the CEC in August 2021, requiring buildings whose permit applications are applied for on or after January 1, 2023, to be in compliance with the 2022 Energy Code (CEC 2022).

Major updates found in the 2022 Title 24 Standards include:

Homes
▪ Establishes residential energy budgets based on efficient heat pumps for space or water heating. ▫ Incentivizes builders to install heat pumps instead of gas-fueled water heaters and heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) units.
▪ Requires new homes to have dedicated 240-volt electric circuits and space in addition to plumbing for water heaters (electric-ready homes). Electric-ready homes also includes requirements for cooktop and clothes-dryer-specific, 240-volt branch circuit wiring. ▫ Allows for easy and lower cost electric replacement of gas appliances and includes electrical circuits for space heating, battery storage, etc.
▪ Clarifies calculations needed to determine a building’s solar access in order to better calculate a minimum PV size, establishes battery storage standards for high-rise multifamily buildings and tenant space (Energy Ace Resources 2022).
▫ Increases on-site renewable energy generation, while allowing for size exceptions (e.g., smaller homes and vertical development where a large roof area is not available). ▪ Increases kitchen ventilation requirements, increasing airflow to capture efficiency of fans over cooktops.
▫ Improves indoor air quality, more effectively exhausting pollution from gas cooking.

Businesses
▪ Establishes combined solar PV and battery standards for certain businesses (hotel-motel, office, retail, grocery, restaurants, schools, civic).
▫ Maximizes PV sizing while allowing for lower electricity demand during times when the grid is pulling from fossil fueled energy sources instead of renewables. ▪ Improves efficiency standards for building envelope, internal systems, and grid integration equipment.
▫ Increases grid stability while increasing energy efficiency savings to businesses. ▪ Establishes an air-to-water, heat-pump standard for grocery, retail, libraries, schools, offices, and banks.
▫ Increases electric heat-pump adoption in the commercial sector. 149 of 199

City of Glendale
Building Codes Information & Recommendations

Page 5 ends

Local Amendments to Title 24 or Reach Codes
Jurisdictions are allowed to develop local ordinances that amend Title 24 to require local development to incorporate more stringent energy efficient design and technology. These more stringent codes are generally referred to as reach codes, energy code amendments, or building code amendments, and are generally established to increase both energy efficiency and cost-effectiveness, reduce GHGs, and help a local government meet their GHG-reduction goals. These amendments to Title 24 fall under Part 6 (energy conservation standards) and Part 11 (green building standards) of the 2022 Energy Code (CEC 2022). According to the California Energy Codes & Standards database, 27 California cities have adopted CEC-approved modifications to Title 24, Part 6, which requires some level of all-electric new construction projects. These reach code amendments to Part 6 require an application to the CEC which includes:
▪ A description of proposed energy standards,
▪ Local jurisdiction findings and analysis on energy savings and cost effectiveness, ▪ A statement of finding by the local jurisdiction that the new local energy standards will not require buildings to consume more energy than permitted by Part 6, and ▪ Any other findings, determinations, or reports, including an environmental impact report or negative declaration required pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

After the CEC confirms that the local analysis was accurate, the Title 24 amendment proposal will be brought before the Energy Commission for approval. After CEC approval, local governments can start to legally enforce local ordinances (California Building Standards Commission 2019).

In addition to the energy efficiency reach codes, a City can also adopt changes to other portions of a building not related directly to energy efficiency. These amendments to Title 24 fall under Part 11 (green building standards) of the 2022 Energy Code. These would include requirements that new developments be electric vehicle ready or include higher voltage electric panels or electric panel upgrades that could accommodate new, more efficient electric technologies. Recent reach codes addressed under Part 11 of the 2022 Energy Code include requiring electric vehicle charging stations (San Francisco) or EV charging readiness (Oakland). These codes generally do not require cost-effectiveness studies or approval by the CEC, although they will need to meet other requirements.

Municipal Codes
Another option for making changes to building requirements is through municipal codes, which are local requirements adopted through an ordinance that do not amend Title 24. Municipal codes modify either the zoning or health and safety codes of a city. A major benefit of municipal code adoption is that it does not require a cost-effectiveness study or CEC approval, though politically, understanding costs will be important. Municipal reach codes allow for a streamlined approval process, as the municipality does not have to go through the Title 24 amendment CEC approval. Though municipalities will have to get internal buy-in to pass the ordinance updates through City Council, the municipality will not be required to prove cost effectiveness through local analysis or go through CEC approval as they would if adopting the codes through a Title 24 amendment process. Municipal ordinances also do not need to be re- approved with each energy code update.

Municipal codes are less common for all three reach codes analyzed by this memo. However, examples of successful codes are available. 10 California cities have adopted all-electric new construction 150 of 199

City of Glendale
Building Codes Information & Recommendations

Page 6 ends

ordinances through the modification of municipal codes (including zoning, health, and safety). In addition, the City of Oceanside uses a municipal code for their PV and EV charging codes.

Timing for Reach Code Development
As the current building code cycle will sunset at the end of 2022, there is an option for the City to align with the 2022 cycle to adopt both the 2023 California Green Building Standards Code and the local amendments. This will allow the City to bring one suite of ordinances before the City Council. However, if needed, changes to municipal ordinance (e.g., through health and welfare, or zoning) will not sunset at the next building code cycle and will thus not be constrained by the Title 24 requirements, would outlast the building code cycle, and would not require cost-effectiveness studies or CEC approval (Engelman 2022).

Further analysis on each ordinance (building electrification, PV infrastructure, and EV infrastructure), including pros and cons of adopting the recommended ordinance modification(s), municipal case studies, and details on implementation are elaborated upon below.

Building Electrification
Building Electrification Overview
Building electrification is a critical tool to achieve climate action plan targets and protect residents and businesses from future increases in natural gas prices. Unlike some other climate solutions, this permanent reduction in GHGs from future buildings can be achieved through local policy and with today’s technologies.

In many climate action plans, electrifying ~25 percent of existing buildings is necessary to achieve the State’s 2030 climate targets (40 percent reduction in GHG emissions from 1990 levels). In order to achieve California’s ambitious climate goals on such a short timeframe, jurisdictions will not only need to electrify all future new building stock, but also start electrifying existing building stock. Electrifying existing buildings is also more expensive than electrifying new construction, which has been found to have upfront cost savings in both Climate Zone 9 and 16 (Cost Effectiveness Explorer 2019).1 Continuing to develop new gas infrastructure into the urban landscape will make achieving carbon neutrality by 2045 increasingly difficult, if not impossible. Meanwhile, under Senate Bill (SB) 100, all retail sales of electricity in California are required to be carbon-free by 2045, which will mean that electrified homes and businesses will become carbon-free on the same timeline (Cohen et al. 2021).

Going above and beyond state building requirements, which are updated every 3 years, provides an important opening for municipalities to achieve their climate goals by ensuring that building stocks can expand while keeping the City on track for achieving its climate goals.

Building electrification reach codes have taken several forms, including electrification of some but not all appliances, electric preferred2, all-electric ready, and full natural gas bans. While each of these code types progress electrification in some way, there are distinct risks associated with some approaches.

Exemptions for specific end uses (such as stoves) mean no decrease in the development of natural gas

1 It should be noted that based on 2019 cost effectiveness data, single-family homes are not cost-effective over time due to increased energy bills (mostly due to the need to demonstrate cost-effectiveness with non-heat pump technologies). 2 Electric preferred codes require mixed-fuel buildings (those with gas and electric) to meet higher energy efficiency standards, therefore increasing building costs and disincentivizing gas use. 151 of 199

City of Glendale
Building Codes Information & Recommendations

Page 7 ends

infrastructure. Exemptions like this saddle remaining natural gas users with increasing costs, as the costs of maintaining the natural gas infrastructure (e.g., transporting increasingly small volumes of natural gas through an established pipeline system) remain the same but are shifted onto an increasingly small number of consumers as building electrification expands. Building electrification is an important tool to protect residents and businesses from future increases in natural gas prices (Gridworks 2020). For this reason, tactics like electric-ready requirements that establish panel capacity and pre-wiring in new construction, but fall short of full-electrification, mean that developers have increased costs to build but none of the future cost-savings of an electric-only building if they still pursue a mixed-fuel building.

For these reasons, building electrification of all new buildings with no exemptions presents the strongest future climate and cost benefit to the City of Glendale.

Policy Pathways for Building Electrification
As described in the Ordinance Pathway Summary, the City can adopt a building electrification ordinance through two pathways: Pathway 1) modifies Title 24, Part 6, California’s Building Energy Efficiency Code, and Pathway 2) amends the City’s zoning health and safety or other municipal code.

The City could choose to use either ordinance type so long as the new 2022 cost-effectiveness studies show buildings in Climate Zone 16 to be cost effective. In the 2019 code cycle Climate Zone 16 was one of the few areas in California proven to not be cost-effective for single-family buildings (but was for all other types). However, due to expected changes in the 2022 code in the near future, all building types are anticipated to be cost-effective. The preliminary data has been released for single-family zones in Climate Zone 16 and show that single-family homes are cost-effective under the time-dependent valuation (TDV) metric. This TDV valuation is sufficient to adopt a local amendment to Title 24. When including heat pumps and solar PV single-family homes also become cost-effective based on on-bill savings.

Best Practice Ordinance Overview
Based on this analysis, starting with a reach code that requires 100 percent of new construction to be all-electric with no exemptions appears to be the best practice. However, an infeasibility waiver process should be outlined in the ordinance to allow for specific process loads which cannot currently be all- electric to have a path forward.

Ordinance aspect: 100 percent all-electric new construction ordinance with no exemptions and an infeasibility waiver process.

Reasoning: Allowing exemptions leads to a reduction in climate impact as new categories of buildings are added as exemptions to the municipal ordinance. For example, the City of Ojai’s amended 2019 building electrification municipal code includes nine separate exemptions to all-electric construction, from certain sections of affordable housing to swimming pool heaters (Local Energy Codes 2019).

Opening the door for exemptions during the ordinance update process will likely lead to a rapid expansion in stakeholders lobbying for exemptions, as well as potential equity implications if affordable housing is placed on the exemption list.

Ordinance aspect: Infeasibility waiver.
152 of 199

City of Glendale
Building Codes Information & Recommendations

Page 8 ends

Reasoning: An infeasibility waiver process places the burden on the project applicant or developer to prove that construction of the new building completely without gas is not feasible, reducing burden on City staff, and taking away the need to make whole categories of buildings exempt.

Cities that have recently chosen this implementation pathway (100 percent all-electric new construction + infeasibility waiver or very minimal exemptions) include Berkeley, Fairfax, Morgan Hill, Oakland, Petaluma, San Francisco, San José, Santa Cruz, Encinitas.

Case Study | 2021 City of Sacramento New Building
Electrification Ordinance
Pathway 1) Title 24 Part 6 modification
Of the 27 California cities that have implemented building electrification via updates to Title 24 Part 6, the City of Sacramento has one of the most climate-ambitious plans because of its lack of exemptions for entire building types and unique phased timetable for implementation. The Ordinance added to and amended provisions of Title 15 of the Sacramento City Code, in addition to adopting local amendments to Title 24.

Code Requirements
▪ Starting in 2023: all-electric requirement for buildings three stories or less; starting in 2026: all- electric requirement for buildings four stories or above. ▪ All building types included under all new construction.

Financing and Enforcement
▪ The ordinance includes provisions for an infeasibility waiver, as well as guidelines for an infeasibility waiver process where an all-electric project, or portion of a project is impossible. ▪ Adoption of local guidelines are timed in accordance with enforcement of the 2022 California Building Standards Code.
▪ Phased timeline for enforcement
Exemptions
▪ Limited exemptions for commercial food establishments (cooking equipment only); manufacturing process loads in a manufacturing or industrial facility, regulated affordable housing when virtual net energy metering is not available (water heating only) (Sacrament City Council 2019). 153 of 199

City of Glendale
Building Codes Information & Recommendations

Page 9 ends

Case Study | 2019 City of Berkeley Municipal Code
Prohibiting Natural Gas Infrastructure in New Buildings Pathway 2) Municipal Code Modification
Of the 10 California cities that have implemented building electrification ordinances through municipal code, the City of Berkeley is among the most climate-ambitious. The City of Berkley banned the construction of new natural gas infrastructure in buildings through municipal ordinance (Municipal Code Chapter 12.890), with no modification to Title 24, Part 6. Berkeley’s approach isn’t pinned to the 3-year building code update cycle, but rather, takes effect through the City’s Municipal Code for Health and Safety.

Code requirements
▪ Municipal Code Update: Title 12, Health and Safety, Chapter 12.80; Prohibition of Natural Gas Infrastructure in New Buildings; applies to Use Permit or Zoning Certificate applications submitted in Berkeley. All new construction must be all electric.
▪ Building types included under all new construction: single-family and low-rise multifamily, high-rise multifamily, and non-residential.

Financing and Enforcement
▪ Funded a 2-year position in the Building & Safety Division of the Department of Planning and Development to assist in implementation and enforcement.

Exemptions
▪ Berkeley’s ordinance does not allow electrification exemptions by building type. Natural gas infrastructure can only be permitted in new construction if the applicant proves physical infeasibility of construction. This means that if an all-electric system or design is available for a building type, it must be implemented.
▪ Berkeley also has a Public Interest Exemption which allows construction of natural gas infrastructure if it is determined to be in the public interest, post-City consideration of the availability of electric technologies/systems and any other impacts (City of Berkeley 2019).

Other Considerations:

The City of Berkley is currently facing litigation over its electrification ordinance by The California Restaurant Association. The California Restaurant Association argued that banning a building’s piping needed to supply natural gas is a functional ban on these appliances and is preempted by the federal Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA). The case was dismissed in July 2019 by the Northern District of California court, with Judge Gonzales Rogers citing the right of a city to exercise “its power to regulate building infrastructure to protect public health and safety” which was widely considered a win for local climate governance. However, the judge did not rule on if Berkeley’s natural gas ban is preempted by the California Energy Code, or California Building Standards Code, and sent the case to be further 154 of 199

City of Glendale
Building Codes Information & Recommendations

Page 10 ends

litigated in state court. The case is currently being argued in the Ninth Circuit and highlights a potential drawback to expansive electrification reach codes (Earls 2022, Teale 2021).

PV Infrastructure
PV Infrastructure Overview
Glendale’s existing building stock is urban and has a significant number of high-density buildings with limited roof space. This presents two challenges to installing PV infrastructure in Glendale. First, tall buildings may not be able to fit large arrays on their limited roof space. Second, large buildings with high-energy demand (ex. industrial buildings, refrigerated warehouses) may not be able to generate enough energy to offset a high percentage of their energy spend even if they used their entire roof space for PV.

Policy Pathways for PV Infrastructure
The City can adopt a PV ordinance through two pathways: Pathway 1) modifies Title 24, Part 6, California’s Building Energy Efficiency Code, and Pathway 2) amends the City’s zoning health and safety or other municipal code. The City could choose to use either ordinance type.

Due to physical limitations associated with PV sizing on different building types, there have been a variety of strategies developed that are intended to encourage installation of PVs across a wide breadth of building types. From our review, we have identified the three primary ways in which other California cities have drafted solar PV requirements:
▪ Requiring a small minimum solar PV size. Example: 3 kW if < 10,000 square feet (sf) and 5 kW if > 10,000 sf.
▪ Requiring some percentage of rooftop be solar. Example: 15 percent or 50 percent of rooftop area ▪ Requiring some percentage of projected annual electrical usage. Example: Supply 50 percent of estimated electricity demand with solar PV.

The majority of California cities (15) that have adopted PV ordinances or amendments to Title 24, Part 6 have required a small minimum system capacity (e.g., 3 kW if <10,000 sf, 5 kW if > 10,000 sf) on major high-rise multifamily or non-residential projects (Santa Monica, Brisbane, Burlingame, Encinitas, Menlo Park, Milpitas, Pacifica, Redwood City Richmond, San Carlos, San Luis Obispo, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Sunnyvale).

Thirteen California cities have adopted rooftop-percentage-based PV ordinances, with the majority adopting a >15 percent roof area requirement which fills out the existing PV-ready zone mandated by Section 110.10 of Title 24 (Mountainview, Alameda, Albany, Berkeley, Daly City, East Palo Alto, Emeryville, Half Moon Bay, Hayward, Millbrae, Palo Alto, Santa Clary County, Solana Beach).

Two California cities have adopted electricity-demand-percentage-based PV ordinances (Oceanside and Carlsbad), both of which incentivize larger PV arrays. Table 2 summarizes the options for PV ordinances, as well as the pros and cons of each approach.
155 of 199

City of Glendale
Building Codes Information & Recommendations

Page 11 ends

Glendale City CouncilSeptember 13, 2022

Glendale City Council
September 13, 2022