HomeMy WebLinkAbout8.3 Attch 6 Eco Impact Analysis 06-04-2013 MEMORANDUM
To: Marnie R. Delgado, Senior Planner, City of Dublin
From: Economic & Planning Systems, Inc., and Joe DeCredico
Studio
Subject: Economic Impacts of Proposed Parking Zoning Ordinance
Amendment, EPS #122118
Date: June 4, 2013
`17r� h;rirur�rnfrw �3Jfera<r( (:_.�
The City of Dublin (City) engaged Economic&Planning Systems, Inc.
(EPS) and Joe DeCredico Studio (JDeS) to provide assistance in
evaluating a proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment (ZOA) that would:
�
' 1. Eliminate tandem parking as a means of meeting parking
requirements in residential development projects.
2. Increase the guest parking requirement for condominium projects
from 1/2-space per unit to one space per unit.
3. Require a minimum of 200 cubic feet of accessory storage for
multifamily projects that have private, enclosed garages assigned to
individual units.
EPS understands that the City is concerned the tandem parking spaces
are being used as in-home storage areas rather than as parking for
automobiles. In addition, the City is concerned that tandem parking
spaces are inconvenient for residents and are, thus, not utilized. As a
result, City streets, as well as private streets and guest parking spaces,
are congested with parked cars in areas where tandem parking is
prevalent. The policy goal of the ZOA is to require parking in a format
that will be used by residents for their cars, thereby minimizing the
residential parking overflow to City streets.
To provide the City guidance concerning the proposed ZOA, EPS and
Economic&Planning Systems,Inc, JDeS (1) reviewed relevant policy literature and the parking ordinances
2295 Gateway Oaks Dive,Suite 2.50
of nearby municipalities, (2) conducted interviews with stakeholders and
Sacramento,CA 95833-4210
916649 8010 tel local real estate/planning experts, and (3) developed a simple test case
916 6492070 fax to analyze a typical real estate development project that might use
tandem parking or traditional side-by-side parking to satisfy the local
Berkeley parking standard.
Denvor
Lois Aog&"
i
sacramenro
I
www.epsys.com
I
Attachment 6
Economic Impacts of Proposed Parking Zoning Ordinance Amendment
Appendix June 4,2013
Summary of Findings
• The elimination of tandem parking is unlikely to create a significant financial
burden for residential project developers. Most developers will be able to reposition
projects to lower density (DU/Acre) larger units, maintaining or increasing total project
square footage. While product price per square foot is likely to fall with the increase in unit
size, EPS finds that developers in most cases will be able to maintain total project revenue
- potential. For projects that suffer from parcel constraints, particularly small sites, financial
impacts may occur because of the inability to reconfigure the site for the larger product.
• Increased guest parking requirements likely will be taken out of landscaping with
no financial impact on project developers. Most sites offer sufficient surplus land to
provide additional guest parking without a loss of density. However, surface parking for
guests will reduce open space and project common areas. Infill development and other
projects with limited site flexibility will suffer a greater burden associated with the increased
parking requirement, as these sites are less likely to accommodate additional surface parking
without an impact on density.
• The proposed storage requirement is not an issue. Developer interviews confirm that
the provision of some additional interior storage space will not create a financial burden for
residential projects. A modest amount of additional storage can be integrated into residential
products without a significant impact on product format.
• The primary benefit of tandem parking is planning and design flexibility that
improves site efficiency. Tandem parking provides a means by which developers are able
to meet suburban parking standards without using traditional wide, suburban-sized house
lots. In certain situations, the narrow-lot tandem-parked residential products can "fill out"a
site, where side-by-side parking formats will not fit. A parking policy that allows a fraction of
the units in a residential project to use tandem parking may be appropriate. Interviews and
analysis suggest that allowing up to 25 percent of units to be parked in tandem could retain
sufficient flexibility in site development.
Parking Policy Standards
A review of current literature concerning parking policy offers a broad range of recommendations
to jurisdictions. In general, current best practices for residential parking policy focus on
providing flexibility, managing demand, and connecting alternative modes of transportation,
while minimizing impacts on residents. However, these best practices are geared toward parking
in urban areas and transit-oriented zones. The ZOA proposed for the City addresses the concern
that new suburban residential projects in Dublin are providing impractical (and therefore
insufficient) parking. The ZOA would require that parking be developed in a traditional side-by-
side format. EPS did not identify literature that addresses this particular policy issue.
To evaluate the appropriateness of the ZOA in a regional context, EPS conducted research
regarding off-street residential parking policies in neighboring jurisdictions in the greater Tri-
Valley area. Specifically, EPS contacted the Cities of Livermore, Pleasanton, San Ramon, and
Walnut Creek to determine whether these cities allowed tandem parking in residential projects. k
EPS also identified off-street parking standards for prevalent residential land uses in each city. 6
I
Of the jurisdictions surveyed, the City of Pleasanton is the only jurisdiction whose municipal code
Economic&Planning Systems, Inc. A-2
I
I
M
Economic Impacts of Proposed Parking Zoning Ordinance Amendment
Appendix June 4, 2013
does not allow for tandem parking. The other jurisdictions surveyed—Livermore, San Ramon,
and Walnut Creek—have municipal codes that allow for tandem parking based on bedroom
counts.
Pleasanton
The City of Pleasanton does not explicitly allow tandem parking. However, two multifamily
Planned Unit Development (PUD) residential projects—one approved and one under review—
contain units with a tandem parking design. If the residential development is contained in a
PUD, the city will consider and potentially approve a tandem parking design if the project is in
alignment with the city's planning and policy objectives. Because there are a limited number of
residential projects in the city with tandem parking, city planning staff did not identify any issues
related to this type of parking design (e.g., constrained on-street parking because the garage is
not used to capacity).
Livermore
In the City of Livermore, tandem parking is permitted in all residential and mixed-use zones
when two parking spaces are required for a single residential unit. For secondary residential
units (i.e., in-law unit) with two or more bedrooms (which requires two parking spaces), the
required spaces may be in tandem with each other, but cannot be in tandem with the required
parking spaces required for the primary residential unit on the lot.'
San Ramon
In San Ramon, tandem parking is permitted through the issuance of a Minor Use Permit and
must be designed to meet minimum dimension and size standards.Z 3 With the exception of one
single-family residential project (approved and constructed when it was located in the
unincorporated county), tandem parking in single-family residential projects in San Ramon is not
permitted. Tandem parking is permitted for multifamily residential projects, although San
Ramon planning staff generally discourages tandem parking design in residential projects. While
staff acknowledged the shortcomings of tandem parking, they did not identify specific cases
where projects with tandem parking created issues for residents.
Walnut Creek
The City of Walnut Creek's municipal code allows for tandem parking for multifamily and single-
family residential projects in the case where housing units require two parking spaces.4 Tandem
parking configurations can be utilized but one stall is not counted towards meeting the parking
requirement, unless an exception is granted by the city's planning commission. Tandem parking
for Second Family Units is permitted if the maximum of two spaces are provided and the City
finds that the design and lot configuration precludes placement of the parking spaces elsewhere
on the property.
f
i
1 City of Livermore Development Code § 4.04.010.
z In San Ramon, tandem parking must be 10 feet wide by 40 feet deep (with a 9-foot door opening)
and have a minimum of 200 cubic feet of storage area in or adjacent to the garage. f
3 City of San Ramon Zoning Ordinance § D3-35 A.2.
4 City of Walnut Creek Planning and Zoning Municipal Code § 10-2,3.206 Table A.
Economic&Planning Systems, Inc. A-3
i
Economic Impacts of Proposed Parking Zoning Ordinance Amendment
Appendix June 4, 2013
Figure 1 Comparison of Multifamily Parking Standards
Multifamily Parking Standards _
City Source Type Spaces/Unit Tandem Parking
Livermore City of Livermore, Studio and One Bdrm 1 space+ NA
Development Code, 1 guest space/4 units
§4.04.010
Two or More Bdrms 2 spaces+ Permitted
1 guest space/4 units
Downtown[t] City of Livermore Studio 1 covered space+ NA
Downtown Specific (Includes apartments/flats/ 1(guest)/10 units[21
Plan lofts)
Chapter 8
One Bdrm 1.5 spaces(1 covered)+ Permitted if 2 spaces
(Includes apartments/flats/ 1 guest space 110 units[2][31 are dedicated to
lofts) a single unit
Two or More Bdrms 1.75 spaces(1 covered)+ Permitted if 2 spaces
(Includes apartments/flats/ 1 guest space/10 units 121[3] are dedicated to
lofts) a single unit
Pleasanton[4] City of Pleasanton, Two Bdrms or Less Minimum of 2 spaces for projects Not permitted[5]
Municipal Code, with four or fewer units plus
§18.88.030 1.5 spaces foreach add?unit
(at least 1 space must be covered)
1 guest space/7 units
(may be open or covered)
Three Bdrms or More Minimum of 2 spaces Not permitted[5]
(at least 1 space must be covered)
1 guest space/7 units
(may be open or covered)
San Ramon 161 City of San Ramon, Studios and One Bdrn 1 covered space+ NA
Zoning Ordtnance, 1 guest space 14 units ,
§D3-35 A.2
Tw-Three Bdrms 2 spaces Permitted(wl
(at least 1 space must be covered) Minor Use Permit)
1 guest space/4 units
Four Bdrms or More 3 spaces Permitted(w/
(at least 1 space must be covered) Minor Use Permit)
1 guest space/4 units
Walnut Creek[71 City of Walnut Creek, Studio 1.25 spaces Permited[91[101
Planning and Zoning (1 covered)[31[81
Municipal Code,
§10-2.3.206 Table A One Bonn 1.50 spaces Permited[91[10]
(1 covered)(31[81
Two Bdrms 2.00 spaces Permited[9]1101
(1 covered)(31[81
Three or More Bdrms 2.25 spaces Permited[9](101
(1 covered)[31[8]
'pkg_summary'
Source:Cities of Livermore,Pleasanton,San Ramon,and Walnut Creek municipal code,EPS. '
NOTE: This table is not intended to be an exhaustive listing of parking standards for all residential types identified in each city's municipal code,
only the most prevalent, Also,this table excludes additional standards such as size dimensions and special circumstances that alter the
standards shown here(e.g.,development within TOD). Please see each city's municipal code for additional details.
Economic&Planning Systems,Inc. A-4
Economic Impacts of Proposed Parking Zoning Ordinance Amendment
Appendix June 4,2013
Figure 1 Comparison of Multifamily Parking Standards (continued)
_ Multifamily Parking Standards
City Source Type Spaces/Unit Tandem Parking
(1] Within a specific geographic area,residential units above retail/commercial and live/work spaces shall provide required parking spaces on-site,
off-site through the payment of an in-lieu fee,or through construction of parking facilities in the speck geographic area.
(2] Guest parking is only required for projects containing ten or more dwelling units. Guest parking shall be provided on-site,off-site in a dedicated
parking lot in the Downtown Specific Plan area that is within 600 feet of the project,or through the payment of in-lieu fees if an identified public
parking structure in the Downtown Speck Plan area is located within 600 feet of the project site.
[3] A fraction greater than or equal to 0.50 shall be rounded up to the nearest whole number,no additional space shall be required for a fractional unit of
less than 0.50.
(4] This table does not include reduced parking standards associated with Association of Bay Area Governments(ABAG)Regional Housing Needs
Allocation(RHNA)sites.
[5] Tandem parking may be proposed for units within a Planned Unit Development(PUD)and would be subject to case-by-case review and approval.
(6] This table does not include reduced parking standards for mixed-use development in certain districts within the City of San Ramon.
(7] This table does not include parking standards for residential structures that qualify for a density bonus or for structures with five or more residential
units and either within 112 mile of BART or with lower income units.
(8] Guest parking Is included within the multifamily parking standards for the City of Walnut Creek.
(9] Tandem parking configurations are permitted but one stall Is not counted towards meeting the parking requirement,unless an exception is granted
by the City of Walnut Creek's planning commission.
(10] For projects that qualify for density bonuses,the City of Walnut Creek allows for reduced parking standards,and parking may be provided through
tandem parking,uncovered parking,or other parking solution with the exception of on-street parking.
E
P
Economic&Planning Systems, Inc. A-5 .a-e�y ==�yv-=«�� .=•��mu=,ea
i
Economic Impacts of Proposed Parking Zoning Ordinance Amendment
Appendix June 4, 2013
Tandem-Parked Projects in Dublin
The City of Dublin has identified a number of projects where the tandem parking format has
been used by developers. As shown in Figure 2, the use of tandem parking in these projects
ranges from 14 percent to 92 percent. However, only one project predominantly comprises
tandem-parked units. With the exception of this project (The Courtyards at Dublin Ranch
Villages), no project has more than 43 percent of units using the tandem format. The street
parking congestion that has been attributed to tandem-parked units is most prevalent in Dublin
Ranch Villages, where the greatest use of tandem parking (as a share of project units) is
observed.
Figure 2 Tandem-Parked Projects in Dublin
No.of
Units with Percent of Units Parking Guest
Project Units Requirement Tandem with Tandem Parking
Garages Parking Requirement
San Ramon Village
The Willows 56 units 8 units 14% 2/unit .5/unit
Tralee
Townhomes 103 units 18 units 17% 2/unit .5/unit
Dublin Ranch Villages
Cottages 200 units 85 units 43% 2/2+BR unit .5/unit
1/1BR unit
6
Courtyards 281 units 258 units 92% 2/2+BR unit .5/unit
1/1BR unit i
Terraces 626 units 137 units 22% 2/2+BR unit 5/unit
1/1BR unit
Jordan Ranch
t
Subareas 2 and 3 109 units 40 units 37% 2/unit .5/unit
Source:City of Dublin
f
f
Economic&Planning Systems,Inc. A-6
t
Economic Impacts of Proposed Parking Zoning Ordinance Amendment
Appendix June 4, 2013
Interview Findings
EPS and JDeS conducted interviews with stakeholders and local real estate/planning experts to
solicit input regarding the proposed ZOA.'
Stakeholders
The primary stakeholder group that would be affected by the ZOA is the real estate development
community. EPS spoke with two developers active in the Tri-Valley, as well as two planning
professionals active in designing residential products in the region. Overall, EPS finds that
developers rely on small-footprint tandem parking as a tool to increase dwelling units per acre,
particularly when site constraints (e.g., parcel size and configuration) do not allow for a
traditional side-by-side garage format. In some specific cases, primarily large projects with
planning and design flexibility, developers acknowledge the ZOA would have little to no impact
on project density. However, developers expressed concerns that small projects planned for
constrained sites could suffer density losses attributable to the proposed ZOA. Based on
interviews conducted, it seems unlikely that developers would substitute a significantly higher
density product(e.g., podium-parked multifamily residential) in cases where the ZOA introduces
a development constraint. There are a limited number of high-value sites where a podium
product is likely to be financially feasible (e.g., transit-oriented development areas), and these
sites are likely to be slated for this format from early-stage predevelopment work onward.
Conversations with a developer currently building a 3-story townhome project in Dublin, who is
converting previously approved single-car garages to 2-car, side-by-side garages, indicate there
is the opportunity to reconfigure projects and replace tandem garages with traditional ones.
However, the developer emphasized the importance of the site geometry in making this change,
particularly on constricted infill sites, and notes that it also requires redesign of the project.
Planning Professionals
Local planning professionals confirm that tandem parking is an important tool for efficient use of
land. Of note, planners contacted suggested that a reduction rather than elimination of tandem
parking would be desirable. Small-footprint tandem-parked units help to"fill out"a development
program. It was suggested that allowing 25 percent of units to use tandem parking would allow
developers to use this format sparingly, fitting it in as needed to take advantage of lots that
cannot accommodate the wider, more traditional garage formats.
Economic Implications
To illustrate the potential effect of the ZOA on a typical residential project in Dublin, EPS and
JDeS agreed on a case study that evaluates a generic townhome project on a rectangular
1.41-net-acre site. The case study includes illustrative planning graphics and a high-level
assessment of economic effects. Figure 3 and Figure 4 present the case-study planning
schemes.
s Personal communication with Kevin Fryer, Mission Valley Homes, 12/21/12; Patrick Castonzo, PCJ
Real Estate Advisors, 1/8/13; Don Ruthroff, The Dahlin Group, 1/8/13; Steve Otto, City of Pleasanton,
2/15/13; Lauren Barr, City of San Ramon, 2/15/13; and Carlson Yin Chan, Ronsdale Management LLC,
I
2/21/13,
Economic&Planning Systems,Inc. A-7 ==i earn wrvrn>,xus,ism, oec 3cn
i
Economic Impacts of Proposed Parking Zoning Ordinance Amendment
Appendix June 4, 2013
Figure 3 Townhome Product with Tandem Garages (Scenario 1)
w a
UNIT A-3 UNITS UNIT B-3 UNITS UNIT C-21 UNITS
MAX LIVING AREA 1,278.5 SF MAX LIVING AREA 2,254 SF MAX LIVING AREA 1,387.5 SF
Wrii A— UW p Nel W np Nee Gvg Aea G'A09 A-
FloorI U`m9 Aea l:Jnp Aea Floor I Flaorl fbr3 floor1 liwr,0 Aea Wra Aea
105x3' Rood Fbor3 33'.10' 73'x40' 13'x50' 105.3' Fborl Fbor3
596 IF 1526'x40' 1615'x50' 4141F 020 IF MSF 695 IF 16.6'x40 156x90
610 IF 6105E 600 IF 0600F
Gaspe Nea Grape
Floc I 1 Oaope lava Moor
15.85x90' ! l 166x90'
610-506 13''.x 12' 6601 505
-3513 SF 606 IF -601.6 IF
MAXIMUM TANDEM GARAGE TOWNHOMES W/10%ADA ACCESSIBLE UNITS
2 CAR GARAGE
UNIT TYPE A:15.251 X 40'UNIT FOOTPRINT W/TANDEM GARAGE
UNIT TYPE B:23'X 40'UNIT FOOTPRINT W/SIDE BY SIDE GARAGE
UNIT TYPE C:16'X 40'UNIT FOOTPRINT WITANDEM GARAGE
FRONT SETBACK:10'
SIDE SETBACK:5'
ALLEY WIDTH:32
YIELD: 27 UNITS OR 19.15 du/ACRE
Scenario 1: Tandem Parking
The townhome product that relies on tandem parking is a three-level unit with approximately
1,280 to 1,390 square feet of living space. The garage uses most of the ground-level space in
the unit, though there is sufficient space on the ground level for some storage. Living room,
dining room, kitchen, bathrooms, and bedrooms are on the 2"d and 3'6 floors. In this test, a
density of roughly 19 units per acre is achieved, for a total of 27 units on the 1.41-acre case-
study site, including three traditionally-parked units that satisfy the Americans with Disabilities
Act (ADA) target for ground-level living space. Based on the size and configuration of the
tandem-parked units, EPS assumes current market pricing of about $390,000 to $416,000 ($300
to $305 per square foot).
Economic&Planning Systems,Inc. A-8 ,z•,= »,--o1-1-0 wosG-
<>
I
®I
Economic Impacts of Proposed Parking Zoning Ordinance Amendment
Appendix June 4, 2013
Figure 4 Townhome Product with Traditional Garages (Scenario 2)
i
rl i
� V
k�
TRADITIONAL SIDE BY SIDE GARAGE TOWNHOMES UNIT B-20 UNITS
2 CAR GARAGE MAX LIVING AREA 2,254 SF
23'X 40'UNIT FOOTPRINT
FRONT SETBACK:I
SIDE SETBACK:5'
ALLEY WIDTH:32'
YIELD:20 UNITS OR1418 du/ACRE EE E
Wmgp4a UwQa IQ T
bu
Fborl F2 Fl."
23'119• n'.m' 23'1A9•
414 sF 929$F 929 SF
Gaspe pea
3'x2
2
6 12
990$F
Scenario 2: Traditional Parking
The townhome product with a traditional side-by-side garage includes about 2,250 square feet of
living space. In this configuration, there is sufficient living area on the ground level to
accommodate a bedroom and bathroom. Additional bathrooms and bedrooms, as well as the
living room, dining room, and kitchen, are upstairs. The product achieves a density of roughly
14 units per acre, for a total of 20 units on the 1.41-acre case-study site. Based on the size and
configuration of this unit, EPS assumes current market pricing of about $586,000 ($260 per
square foot).
Scenario Comparison Evaluation
Scenario 1 and Scenario 2 are illustrative of how a developer might plan a site for residential
development with tandem parking versus traditional parking (with the ZOA), respectively. As
demonstrated in the case study, a project composed of about 90-percent tandem-parked units
on a land-constrained site would likely lose units as a result of the ZOA. In this case, 7 units are
lost (26 percent) when the developer switches from tandem parking to traditional parking. 'I
However, with the wider traditional garage, the developer is likely to transition to larger units.
In this case study, a townhome with a traditional garage is 62 to 76 percent larger than a
townhome with a tandem garage. The traditional garage necessitates a wider unit footprint; the
Economic&Planning Systems, Inc. A-9 ��•.__, a 4,�,_,__„• =ec=�_
�i
a
Economic Impacts of Proposed Parking Zoning Ordinance Amendment
Appendix June 4, 20I3
building height remains unchanged. Overall, despite having fewer units, Scenario 2 includes
roughly 5,300 more square feet of living space.
Residential market data reveal that unit values increase with unit size at a decreasing rate.
While the smaller tandem-parked unit is likely to sell for less than the larger, traditionally parked
unit, the per-square-foot value of the smaller unit will be higher. EPS evaluated several
residential projects in Dublin to assess pricing for various unit sizes. Interestingly, current
residential real estate market values indicate that the total finished value of Scenarios 1 and 2
may not be very different. Figure 5 presents the economic assessment of Scenario 1 versus
Scenario 2.
Figure 5 Case Study Economic Assumptions
Unit Size Price Per
Units (Square Feet) Square Foot Unit Price
Scenario 1
Tandem Garage Townhome Product
Unit A 3 1,279 $305 $389,943
Unit B 3 2,254 $260 $586,040
Unit C 21 1,388 $300 $416,250
Project Square Feet 39,735
Project Revenue $11,669,198
Profit Margin 15%
Developer Profit $1,750,380
f
i
Scenario 2
Traditional Garage Townhome Product
Unit A 0 1,279 $305 $389,943
Unit B 20 2,254 $260 $586,040
Unit C 0 1,388 $300 $416,250
Project Square Feet 45,080
Project Revenue $11,720,800
Profit Margin 15%
Developer Profit $1,758,120
i
Economic&Planning Systems,Inc. _ A-10 >„��„�,� m �• a_a�,:a � ,z�
i
i
Economic Impacts of Proposed Parking Zoning Ordinance Amendment
Appendix June 4,2013
Assuming the rate of return (profit margin) for a developer is similar across the two product
types, this case-study example reveals that, in situations where parcel configuration and other
site constraints are not present, there may be little financial impact from the ZOA. However, it is
important to note the developer would be delivering a different product at a different price point,
and market absorption (i.e., quantity of demand for the larger residential product) may or may
not be the same. In addition, for projects that have planned on a tandem configuration, there
will be significant planning and design costs associated with reconfiguring the project.
Policy Recommendation
The primary benefit of tandem parking is planning and design flexibility that improves site
efficiency. Tandem parking provides a means by which developers are able to meet suburban
parking standards without using traditional wide, suburban-sized house lots. In certain
situations, the narrow-lot tandem-parked residential products can"fill out" a site, where side-by-
side parking formats will not fit. A parking policy that allows a fraction of the units in a
residential project to use tandem parking may be appropriate. Based on a recommendation
received during the research process, EPS suggests that allowing up to 25 percent of units to be
parked in tandem would allow significantly better efficiency in site development. Figure 6
illustrates the application of this policy recommendation (with the same site assumptions that
are used the case study analysis, above).
In addition to recommending that the ZOA allow a fraction of units to be tandem-parked, EPS
suggests that it may be appropriate to exempt from the ZOA portions of the City where high-
density development is most desired. While developers may opt for podium-parked projects in
certain "premium" locations (e.g., near BART or retail amenities) with sufficiently large sites,
narrow and other small or challenged infill sites will likely benefit from the tandem parking option
to achieve the desired densities. It is notable that the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan
encourages density and parking flexibility. To maximize the potential for development at higher
densities, the tandem parking format could be permitted there. Developers seeking to redevelop
smaller infill sites may benefit from the use of tandem parking. In addition, these developments
are most likely to suffer from the proposed guest parking requirement.
f
Economic&Planning Systems,Inc, A-11
Economic Impacts of Proposed Parking Zoning Ordinance Amendment
Appendix June 4,2013
Figure 6 Case Study of Policy Recommendation (25%Allowance)
�p C
y.
UNIT A-6 UNITS UNIT B-16 UNITS
MAX LIVING AREA 1,278.6 SF MAX LIVING AREA 2,254 SF
,I
I1Nn0 Ma Lipp A lidn0 LMng A- f
Fbor7 i"'nO Rea 0A'aa fbe 1 Fbor2 Fb o,3 f
109'x7 Ft-2 A-3 27x10' 77x40' 23'.67 It
SpS SF IB100 1�10S 4140F 0200F 0200F
BsFt Fna t
ISIS'x 40' Fbmrl
010.50.5 77'
•SS I.S SF SOB YF
C
25%TANDEM GARAGE/75%SIDE BY SIDE GARAGE TOWNHOMES
2 CAR GARAGE
UNIT TYPE A:15,25'X 40'UNIT FOOTPRINT W(TANDEM GARAGE 4
UNIT TYPE B:23'X 40'UNIT FOOTPRINT W/SIDE BY SIDE GARAGE
FRONT SETBACK:10'
SIDE SETBACK:5'
ALLEY WIDTH:32'
YIELD: 22 UNITS OR 15.60 du/ACRE
Given the relatively high value of land proximate to BART, some developers in the Downtown will
opt to develop structured parking, which likely moderates the potential negative effects from
allowing tandem-parked units. However, in general, increasing development densities
Downtown and other areas of Dublin inevitably will necessitate increased attention to parking
management policies within the City. If the City chooses to continue to allow tandem-parked
projects in strategic locations where density is desired, EPS recommends that the City consider
additional alternative parking policies, potentially including a parking in-lieu fee program, street
parking permitting, and flexible parking ratios.
Economic&Planning Systems, Inc. A-12
1