HomeMy WebLinkAbout8.3 Attch 1 CC Rpt 2.7.12~~ or o0~~i
~ ~ ~
iii
~`~~~~z
~ ~ ~
~'~L~FO~~•~
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL
CITY CLERK
File #570-20
February 7, 2012
Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
Joni Pattillo, City Manager ~ "~~ 7 ~~ ~'!~ ~ ~'~,
Area G Parking Report
Prepared by Mike Porto, Consulting Planner
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The City Council will receive information on the status of parking in Area G of Dublin Ranch.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
There is no financial impact for this review.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council receive the report and/or provide Staff with direction on
whether or not to research steps that could be taken to minimize parking challenges in Area G
and in future unentitled higher density residential neighborhoods.
~ "
_.
r~ ~ .~
Submitted By Reviewed By
Planning Manager Assistant City Manager
DESCRIPTION:
At the City Council meeting on October 18, 2011, Councilmember Biddle requested that an item
be placed on a future City Council Agenda to discuss the status of the parking in Area G of
Dublin Ranch (see Attachment 1). Area G, commonly referred to as "Dublin Ranch Villages," is
bounded by Central Parkway to the North, Dublin Boulevard to the South, Keegan Street to the
East and Brannigan Street to the West. The overall area is comprised of 1,396 approved and
constructed medium-high and high density for sale condominiums (the Villas, the Cottages, the
Courtyards and the Terraces), a 5 acre Neighborhood Park (Bray Commons), a 2 acre
Neighborhood Square (Devaney Square), and a 23 acre neighborhood retail commercial
property (commonly referred to as "The Promenade") bisects the area and is as yet
undeveloped. Three of the projects are constructed and completely occupied and the fourth
neighborhood (the Terraces) is still selling.
Page 1 of 8 ITEM NO. 7.'~
Attac ment 1
The four residential projects located within Area G comply and exceed the parking requirements
that are established in the City of Dublin Zoning Code (Section 8.76.080). The required parking
for condominiums is shown below.
Condominiums:
- 1 Bedroom Units: One (1) covered or garage space per dwelling plus 0.5 guest space per
unit
- 2+ Bedrooms: Two (2) covered or garage spaces per dwelling plus 0.5 guest space per
unit
The Cottages and The Villas
Two neighborhoods comprise the westerly half of Area G: "The Cottages" is designated as a
Medium-High Density development and is comprised of 200 side-by-side and stacked flat
condominium units. "The Villas" is designated as a High Density development and is comprised
of 289 stacked flat and side-by-side condominium units. The following table illustrates the
required and actual number of parking spaces for these two projects.
Page 2 of 8
Table 1: "The Cottages" and "The Villas"
The Cotta es (200 Units
Gara a Re uired Provided Excess Parkin
One bedroom units
23 units 1 s ace/unit
23
23
0
Two bedroom+ units
177 units 2 s aces/unit
354
354`
0
Guest Parkin
0.5 space/unit 100 108'~* +8
The Villas' 289 Units
Gara a Re uired Provided Excess Parkin
One bedroom units
112 units 1 s ace/unit
112
112
0
Two bedroom+ units
(177 units 2 s aces/unit)
354
354
0
Guest Parkin
0.5 s ace/unit 145 161 ** +16
'103 tandem garages = 206 parking spaces (described below)
`*There are an additional 22 on-street parking spaces along the Chancery and Finnian frontages
of Devaney Square.
"The Cottages" and "The Villas" comply with the City of Dublin Zoning Ordinance with respect to
parking and, due to restriping of Brannigan Street before occupancies, excess guest parking
was achieved adjacent to Devaney Square.
Tandem Parking: There are no tandem garage parking spaces in "The Villas." However, "The
Cottages" have 103 garages in a tandem configuration (total of 206 parking spaces allowing for
85 two bedroom units and 18 one bedroom units).
The Courtyards and The Terraces
Two neighborhoods comprise the easterly half of Area G: "The Courtyards" is designated as a
Medium-High Density development and is comprised of 281 side-by-side and stacked
townhome condominium units. "The Terraces" is designated as a High Density development
and is comprised of 626 stacked flat podium condominium units.
Table 2: "The Courtyards" and "The Terraces"
The Court aids (281 U nits
Gara a Re uired Provided Excess Parkin
One bedroom units 0 0 0
Two bedroom+ units
281 units 2 s aces/unit
562
562*
0
Guest Parkin
0.5 space/unit 141 146 +5
The Terraces 626 Uni ts
Gara a Re uired Provided Excess Parkin
Page 3 of 8
One bedroom units
92 units 1 space/unit
92
92
0
Two bedroom+ units
534 units 2 s aces/unit
1068
1068**
0
Guest Parkin
0.5 space/unit 313 330""'* +17
"The Couryards: 258 tandem garages = 516 parking spaces
'*The Terraces: 137 tandem parking spaces in parking structure
"'There are an additional 71 on-street parking spaces along the Maguire and Finnian frontages of
Bray Common.
There is an excess of 22 guest parking stalls for "The Courtyards" and "The Terraces"
The provision of guest parking on the east half of Area G did not take into account any parking
adjacent to the Neighborhood Park (Bray Commons). The frontage on Maguire, Finnian and
Keegan yields approximately 71 additional on-street parking stalls. Currently these uncounted
stalls are being utilized by residents for overnight and guest parking. It should be noted that
there would be a total of 93 additional parking spaces (71 on-street spaces, an additional 5
spaces on "the Courtyards, and 17 spaces on "The Terraces.") beyond those that are required
by the Ordinance for the east half of Area G.
Tandem Parking: "The Courtyards" have a total of 258 tandem garages accommodating 516
garage parking spaces. "The Terraces" has a total of 137 tandem parking spaces within the
parking garage.
The Homeowners Association, managed by Massingham Associates, continues to encourage
the residents to park both their cars in the designated garage and keep the garages free from
storage (see Attachment 2). The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC & R's) state "that
you must keep your garage clear enough to park the number of vehicles in it that it was
designed to hold."
Contributing Issues to Parking Concerns
While there is a myriad of factors that could contribute to the parking issues in Area G, Staff
feels that there are three primary contributing issues that appear to affect the parking conditions
in Area G.
Tandem Parking: The City of Dublin Parking Ordinance allows tandem parking in multi-family
projects. Additionally, the Planning Commission, in review of the projects acknowledged the
tandem parking design solutions in the graphics provided for review. In many instances the
residents of Area G are using their tandem garages to park two cars however, due to the
inconvenience of having to move one car to get to the other, some residents choose to find
parking on-street or within private parking courts. Over time, the unused second car space
becomes an area for storage.
Multiple Cars: Most residents have only one or two cars which can be adequately parked in their
garages; however, some residents have a third car, a business truck or recreational vehicle
which can displace parking. When this happens, guest parking is used to accommodate the
additional vehicles.
Page 4 of 8
One-Bedroom Units: In accordance with the City of Dublin Zoning Ordinance (Section 8.76.080)
Parking Requirements, one-bedroom condominium units (of which we have 227, including 23 in
the Cottages, and 112 in the Villas, and 92 in the Terraces) are only required to have one
parking stall and 0.5 guest stalls per unit. It is entirely possible that there are two people, with 2
cars living in these one bedroom units. The second car is then relegated to the guest parking
stalls located on the private streets, public streets or one of the guest stalls provided on site in
designated parking courts. By contrast, the Zoning Ordinance requirements for apartment
parking is one covered or garage stall for each unit regardless of bedroom count and one
unreserved guest parking stall for each unit resulting in more required spaces per one bedroom
unit and less required spaces per two bedroom unit than required for condominiums. It is
actually conceivable that an apartment project can provide more parking than a condominium
project.
Comparative Projects
California Highlands: For comparison, Staff reviewed California Highlands, a 246 unit
condominium project which was developed over 10 years ago and is located near the Dublin
Boulevard extension to Schaefer Ranch. The Planned Development Zoning requirement is to
provide 15% of the overall parking for guest parking, resulting in one guest parking stall for
approximately each 8 units. However, the guest parking was provided at a ratio of one guest
parking stall for each 3 condominium units, thus exceeding the minimum parking requirement as
noted in Table 3 below. No known guest parking issues have been raised at California
Highlands. As noted above, the ratio in Area G slightly exceeds 1 guest parking stall for every 2
condominium units.
Table 3: California Highlands
California Hi hlands 246 Units
Re uired Provided Excess Parkin
One and two bedroom units
246 units 2 s aces/unit
492
492
0
Guest Parkin
246 x 15% 37 84 +47
Sorrento West: Sorrento west is comprised of 5 neighborhoods. Neighborhood 1 is a
traditional single-family detached product with a standard 2 car garage. Guest parking is on
public and private streets and is provided at the required ratio of 1 guest space for each
residential unit. This product does not compare with a product in Area G. The following table
illustrates the required and actual number of parking spaces for the remaining 4 neighborhoods
in Sorrento West.
Table 4: Sorrento West
Trevi- 117 Units
Gara a Re uired Provided Excess Parkin
Two bedroom+ units
117 units 2 s aces/unit
234
234*
0
Guest Parkin
0.5 s ace/unit 59 79 +20
*18 tandem garages = 36 parking spaces
Firenze 66 Units
Page 5 of 8
Gara a Re uired Provided Excess Parkin
Two bedroom+ units
(66 units 2 spaces/unit)
132
165
+33*
Guest Parkin
0.5 space/unit 33 42 +9
'`An extra 3~' car tandem space provided on 33 units
Siena 64 Units
Gara a Re uired Provided Excess Parkin
Two bedroom+ units
64 units 2 spaces/unit
128
192
+64*
Guest Parkin
0.5 s ace/unit 32 79 +47
*An extra 2-car garage space (tandem 4-car) provided on 32 units
Amalfi 96 Units
Gara a Re uired Provided Excess Parkin
Two bedroom+ units
96 units 2 s aces/unit
192
192
0
Guest Parkin
0.5 space/unit 48 48 0
Excess guest parking in Sorrento West is 78 stalls; however, Sorrento West is developed at a
Medium Density land use where the neighborhoods in Area G were developed at a more urban
Medium-High and High Density Land use. Sorrento West requires a parking permit to parking in
the guest parking spaces overnight. Additionally the additional 3 and 4 car garage spaces in the
attached Firenze and Siena product provide uncounted excess resident parking which provides
additional parking for homeowners with extra personal vehicles.
Currently, the City has not received concerns regarding parking in Sorrento West. The Milano
and Amalfi projects are complete but not completely sold and the Firenze and Siena
neighborhoods are almost complete with unsold units. Trevi still has two buildings to construct.
The CC&R's for Sorrento West have identical language as Area G regarding parking the
number of vehicles in the garage and not allowing storage to obstruct vehicle parking.
Massingham Associates (the same property manager as Area G) has been issuing Community
Bulletins, in a similar manner to Area G, stating these requirements.
Potential Options for Area G:
The following is a discussion of potential options for the homeowner's association and/or the
City to pursue in order to address the parking concerns within Area G.
Potential Action by the Homeowner's Association
1. Increase the amount of guest parking. This option would require the HOA to identify
locations where it is practical to add additional on-site parking, prepare improvement
plans and process an amendment to the existing Site Development Review permit.
However, there are limited opportunities to create additional parking spaces because the
Page6of8
development is at a relatively high density and the improvements have already been
constructed.
2. Require a parking permit for all vehicles that are parked overnight in the on-site guest
parking spaces. This would force the residents to park their vehicles in their garages,
leaving the guest spaces open to visitors. This would require an amendment to the
CC&Rs by vote of the property owners. It would also require enforcement by the HOA,
which could include citation or towing of vehicles. However, this could result in additional
vehicles parked off-site on public streets.
3. Establish a protocol that residents cannot park company owned vehicles anywhere in
Area G. Many companies find it cheaper to have employees drive their company vehicle
to and from work rather than provide space to leave company vehicles. This would
require a vote of the owners to amend the CC&Rs.
The City is limited in its ability to require action by the property owners and their HOA.
However, Staff could work with the HOA to try and implement measures as directed by the City
Council.
Potential Action by the City
1. Enforce the rule prohibiting vehicles to be parked in the public right-of-way for more than
72 hours. This would force the residents to use their garage spaces for their vehicles. As
a result, this option would help make street parking available for guests and help to
ensure that street parking is not used for long vehicle storage. This would require
increased Staff time for the Police Department to patrol and enforce this requirement.
However, this option would effectively reduce the amount of parking available to the
residents and could increase the parking concerns for residents of Area G.
2. Prohibit overnight parking on surrounding streets. This would force the residents to use
their garage spaces for their vehicles. This would also help make street parking
unattractive to residents thus freeing up spaces for guest parking. This option would
require increased Staff time for the Police Department to patrol and enforce this
requirement. This would effectively reduce the amount of parking available to the
residents and could increase the parking concerns for residents of Area G.
3. Staff could meet with Massingham Associates, the management company for the various
homeowner's associations, to discuss the parking issue and methods to address the
concerns using existing rules.
Staff could evaluate the viability of enforcing these measures as directed by the City Council. In
which case, Staff would return to the City Council with a report on the potential effectiveness of
these measures and the fiscal impacts.
Potential Options for City-Wide consideration:
1. Establish consistency in the Zoning Ordinance parking requirements for condominiums
and apartments related to amount of parking provided for one bedroom units and
required guest parking.
2. Evaluate a requirement to provide a minimum square foot area for personal storage for
all attached products.
3. Evaluate the effectiveness of tandem parking stalls and consider policy alternatives to
restrict the amount of tandem parking to meet minimum parking requirements, or prohibit
the use of tandem parking for compliance with required garage parking (additional stalls
could be allowed as tandem as long as the required stalls are not).
Page 7 of 8
Staff could further evaluate these options as directed by the City Council. In which case, Staff
would return to the City Council with a report on the potential effectiveness of these measures
and the fiscal impacts.
Conclusions
Some of the residents of Area G have raised concerns regarding the perceived lack of guest
parking within their neighborhoods. The parking provided at the Villages (Area G) is consistent
with the City's Zoning Ordinance. Area G has more guest parking than a similar project, the
California Highlands. There may be reasons beyond the City's regulations for these problems,
such as the displacement of the automobile by storage, the inconvenience of tandem parking
and households with multiple cars which were detailed above. Without the ability to conduct
studies which include going on to private property, it would be difficult to ascertain these
reasons. However, the City Council could direct Staff to analyze alternatives to address these
issues with future development projects, as outlined in this Staff Report.
NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH:
This is a public meeting item. Although we are not required to notice public meetings, the City
Council has previously provided staff with direction to notify the affected neighbors on any
issues relative to Area G. In an attempt to implement the City Council's direction, Staff provided
a notice of this Public Meeting to Massingham and Associates who are the property managers
for all of the Homeowner's Associations in Area G and Sorrento West. Massingham Associates
posted the Public Meeting Notice at each of the mail kiosks in each of the projects they manage
the week of January 23, 2012, which is the legal posting place for messages in each of the
neighborhoods. Additionally the notice was placed in the Board Members' meeting packets and
announced at the Homeowner's meetings over the last three weeks. The notice was also
published on the HOA web site for each neighborhood.
Staff surveyed all of the posting locations on January 31, 2012 and the notices were all clearly
visible with the exception of The Terraces. The Notice had not been posted at The Terraces. As
a result, the HOA immediately posted the notice at The Terraces.
Additionally, a Public Notice was also published in the Valley Times and posted at several
locations throughout the City.
ATTACHMENTS: 1. Minutes from October 18, 2011 City Council meeting
2. Massingham notices distributed to the Cottage and Villas Residents
Page 8 of 8