1681 26th street (former papermate site development agreement

1681 26TH STREET

(FORMER PAPERMATE SITE)

DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Planning Commission

September 11, 2013

1681 26th St (former Papermate site) Development Agreement | Planning Commission | September 11, 2013

PROJECT LOCATION

2 310,504 sf (7.1 acre) site


PROJECT LOCATION

3

Subject Property Comparable to 3.5 Downtown Blocks

Future Bergamot

LRT Station


PROJECT SITE CONTEXT

4

Water Gardens

Red Bull Offices

Office Buildings

SMC Academy of Entertainment & Technology Penn Station


PROJECT DESCRIPTION

471 residential units (363,280 sf) and 27 artist work/live units

75 units of affordable and workforce housing

29,934 sf of neighborhood retail

375,000 sf of of creative office

1,936 parking spaces in 3-level subterranean garage

379 more spaces than required by draft Bergamot Area Plan at Plan adoption

2.47 FAR

Maximum actual height of 84’

5


FLOAT-UP PROJECT CONCEPT – USES + SITE PLAN

6

Use Square Feet

Creative Office 495,000

Retail 47,000

Residential 325 units

Creative Office

Residential/ Retail Creative Office/

Retail Creative Office/ Retail

Residen-tial


DESIGN BACKGROUND: FLOAT-UP DISCUSSIONS

Direction from City Council to deal move forward with additional design work necessary in following areas:

Mix of Uses

Pedestrian-oriented major open space

Building scale and block size

Building modulation

Mitigate campus feel of development by approximating massing and bulk character seen throughout the city in mixed-use, pedestrian-oriented areas

Skyline variation

Location of Western Road

Street and sidewalk width

Parking garage access

7


PROPOSED PROJECT CONCEPT – USES + SITE PLAN

8

Use Square Feet

Creative Office 374,423

Retail 29,391

Residential 471 units

Artist Work/Live 27 units

Creative Office/ Retail Creative

Office/ Retail

Residential Residen-tial

Residential

Building 4 switched to residential

Included pedestrian-oriented major open space

Location of Western Road

Street and sidewalk width

Parking garage access


PARKING

Required Parking Based on draft Bergamot Area Plan requirements at Plan adoption

748 parking spaces for Residential

807 parking spaces for Commercial

Minimum of 653 shared parking spaces

Proposed 1,936 parking spaces

9

Bicycle Parking provided in accordance with draft Bergamot Area Plan 928 long-term 122 short-term 20 showers 323 lockers


BERGAMOT AREA PLAN POLICY CONSISTENCY

Urban Form Complies with urban form

concept Further Consideration

Mass and scale of Building 5

Open Space Complies

Providing open space

Further Consideration Viability of trees on deck Sidewalk widths

Circulation and Mobility Further Consideration

Supporting no net new PM peak trips (parking cash-out issue)

Parking pricing structure

Land Use Complies with land use mix Further Consideration

Range of units

10


11

PROJECT EVALUATION: MANDATORY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS

Mandatory Standards

Building Height

FAR


MANDATORY STANDARDS: BUILDING HEIGHT AND FLOOR AREA

Intent to reduce mass of buildings at upper levels

Maximum FAR of 2.5 for Tier 3 project per draft BAP Already reduced from LUCE

maximum of 3.5 Building Modulation for top

two floors to be reduced by 90% and 50% of largest building floor plate

Conformance with design objectives to achieve same goal

Additional floor area reduction that corresponds to requested height over 75’ applies only to floor area between 75’ to 81’

12

79.5’

75’

90% of largest floor plate

50% of largest floorplate

18’

57’

70’

84’

18’

13’

13’

13’

13’

14’

Height above 13.5’ not counted (4.5’ height reduction)

Reduce floor area by % increase in height btw 75’ to 81’


13

PROJECT EVALUATION: FLEXIBLE STANDARDS

Building Modulation

Top Floor @ 50% of largest floor plate

Top Floor minus 1 @ 90% of largest floor plate

Maximum Floor Plate – 35,000 sf


FLEXIBLE STANDARDS FINDINGS

That meeting all development standards will prevent physical innovation in mixed-use development and/or building design

That the proposed design reinforces and enhances the establishment of a mixed-use pedestrian-oriented environment and sidewalk life in the Transit Village and Mixed-Use Creative Districts

That the proposed design supports local uses, including but not limited to the provision of housing, daily community needs and/or services, and/or public open space and green connections to adjoining neighborhoods

That the proposed design integrates features and amenities, including, but not limited to wider sidewalks, landscaping and trees and/or arts and cultural uses

That, where relevant, the proposed design maintains solar access for existing, adjacent or adjoining residential land uses

14


15

PROJECT EVALUATION: BAP DESIGN OBJECTIVES/GUIDELINES

Guidance for projects using flexible development standards

Encourage innovative ways to achieve design goals without prescriptive standards

Project does not conform with some design objectives

Objective 1: Open space

Objective 5: Building plane modulation

Objective 6: Height modulation

Objective 8: Integrate with and foster logical evolution of Bergamot’s industrial character

Objective 9: Innovative architecture


BUILDING 1

16

Co-planar north and south elevations

Articulation achieved through texture and balconies

270’ long elevations

Skyline variation only between each building

Proposed architectural projection

+70’

270’

+84’


BUILDING 2

17

Primarily rectangular building

Strategy appears to be vertical bays and horizontal articulation

Skyline variation

Does not conform with flexible standards

Proposed architectural projection +57’

+70’

+84’


BUILDING 3

18

Significant building offsets to create courtyards

60’ x 60’ courtyard dimensions – somewhat disproportionate to surrounding 80’ high building

+70’

+81’

+70’

+81’

+81’


BUILDING 4

19

Roughly 40’ wide building separation at upper levels

2-story volume beneath 5-story bridging element

Roughly 60’ wide separation at ground floor

Complies with draft BAP flexible standards on building modulation

+70’ +60’

+80’

+70’ +60’


BUILDING 5

20

Over 300’ long north elevation

Lack of natural light for ground floor units

Narrow area between buildings

Awkward transition between public and private space

+60’

+10’

300’+


OPEN SPACE

Distinction between design of public space and primarily site amenities

Major 31,000 sf open space on Site 1

Neighborhood park on Site 4

Plaza on Site 5

2 pedestrian pathways

21


WESTERN “A” STREET

22

Western “A” Street (Flexible)

Project Plan

Min Right-of-Way 68’ 60’

Min Ped Realm 13’10”-21’5”

13’

Min Through Zone 8’10”-13’5”

8’

Min Furnishing Zone 5-8’ 5’

Min/Max Lane Width 12’ 9’/11’

Min/Max Shared Travel Way -- --

Min/Max Parking Width 8’ 7’/8’

Min Ped/Vehicle Flex Space 8’ 12’

Parking Type Angled Parallel

BAP

Figure 7.10

(6)


EASTERN “B” STREET

23

Eastern “B” Street (Shared)

Project Plan

Min Right-of-Way 52’ 50’

Min Ped Realm 10-18’ 8’

Min Through Zone 5-10’ 5’

Min Furnishing Zone 5-8’ 5’/7’

Min/Max Lane Width -- --

Min/Max Shared Travel Way 24’ 16’/20’

Min/Max Parking Width 8’ 7’/8’

Min Ped/Vehicle Flex Space -- --

Parking Type Parallel Parallel

BAP

Figure 7.12

(0)


NEBRASKA AVE EXTENSION

Nebraska West (Complete)

Nebraska East (Shared)

Project Plan Project Plan

Min Right-of-Way 39’9” (half)

65’ 36’

(half) 65’

Min Ped Realm 16’8” 11’ 12’10” 8’

Min Through Zone 11’8” 5’ 7’10” 5’

Min Furnishing Zone 5’ 6’ 5’ 5’/7’

Min/Max Lane Width 11’ 10’ -- --

Min/Max Shared Travel Way -- -- 22’ 16’/20’

Min/Max Parking Width TBD 7’/8’ TBD 7’/8’

Min Ped/Vehicle Flex Space -- -- -- --

Parking Type TBD Parallel TBD Parallel

24

Complete Street Shared Street

BAP

Figure 7.02

(Page 209)


DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FRAMEWORK

Outside Building Permit Issuance Date Length of time for Developer to obtain building permit 10 years

Anticipates project being constructed in two phases and five buildings

Community benefits per Building On-site Publicly Accessible Open Space Early Childhood Initiative TMA and Bike Share Annual contribution Historic Preservation Annual contribution

Community Benefits per Phase Public transit stop enhancements Historic Preservation Initial Contribution

Joint obligations Streets Annual Monitoring Expo Buffer Park contribution Ongoing Landscaping Maintenance TDM Plan Local Hiring TMA and Bike Share Initial contribution

25


SIGNIFICANT PROJECT FEATURES

Affordable Housing 5% of units (25 units) @ Extremely Low Income

Utility Undergrounding Remove all overhead transmission, distribution, and electrical power

lines at project perimeter

Sustainability LEED Gold Certification 5% of parking spaces to be “EV Ready” Strive for net-zero water use in Creative Office Phase

Dual plumbing Non-potable water for toilet flushing and irrigation

Solar photovoltaic energy system that produces at least 5kw AC/1000 sf of building footprint area (alternative energy may be proposed to produce same amount of renewable energy)

Transportation Impact Fee Payment of up to approximately $5.1 fee

Arts Contribution $4/sf with first $500,000 set aside for Site 1 plaza programming Remainder for on-site public art

26


COMMUNITY BENEFITS

Surface easement for three new streets

$2M contribution for construction of Expo Buffer Park Payable 90 days after effective date of DA

On-site Public Accessible Open Space 31,000 sf Plaza + Eastern plaza: 8am – 11pm

14,000 sf Park + pathways & courtyards: 8am – 6pm

Up to $855,000 total contribution to TMA $30,000 initial contribution at first building permit

$3,000/building for life of project

Increases evenly to aggregate of $15,000 annually if at least 3 buildings constructed at Outside Permit Issuance Date

Up to $1,395,000 total contribution to Bikeshare $20,000 initial contribution at first building permit

$8,000/bldg in Creative Phase + $3,000/bldg in Residential Phase for life of project

27


COMMUNITY BENEFITS

Advance marketing preference to local workforce for housing units

27 artist work/live units including 1 unit at extremely low income Subject to initial and ongoing artist marketing plan Units required to comply with design guidelines

Up to $160,000 for transit improvements adjacent to project $80,000 payable with first building permit of each phase

Local hiring for construction and permanent jobs with commitment to interview qualified referrals

6 internships for Santa Monica High School and Santa Monica College students

Up to $200,000 annual contribution for Early Childhood Education Initiatives for life of project (up to $11M total) $0.2608/sf contribution per building for life of project

Up to $350,000 contribution for heritage preservation initiatives in underserved communities $25,000 initial contribution at each CofO for first 3 buildings $1,000/building for life of project

28


STREETS: PHASED APPROACH

29

Critical Temporary Improvements - network completion at 18 months from first CofO (if not already constructed with building) Nebraska Avenue Extension Western Street Olympic Sidewalk

Permanent Improvements With Site – Nebraska Avenue, Western Street, Olympic Sidewalk, Stewart Sidewalk, 26th

Sidewalk With first Building in Phase – Eastern Street; Stewart Street Crosswalk and Median At Outside Permit Issuance Date – All Streets and Sidewalks


TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT PLAN

3 principles

Establish compliance requirements

Create measures that would likely achieve targets

Monitoring and reporting with non-compliance penalties

Conventional Measures

Already required by TDM ordinance, set as expectations by LUCE and BAP, or development standards

Augmented

PM peak hour trip caps with penalties for non-compliance

50% transit pass subsidy offered to all residents

50% Vanpool program subsidies

30


OUTSTANDING ISSUES

Transportation Allowance/Parking Cashout

Parking Pricing

Mix and affordable level of additional affordable housing

Affordable housing obligation of commercial component

Striving for net zero water use in residential component

Amount of financial security to be posted for street improvements

31


OUTSTANDING ISSUE: TRANSPORTATION ALLOWANCE

Staff proposal

Parking cash-out of at least $160 for employees whose employer leases parking for their employees regardless of employer size

Transportation allowance of at least $140 for employees who employer does not lease parking for their employees

Applicant proposal

Implement existing parking cash-out law

Applies to employers in following circumstances:

1) Employ at least 50 persons

2) Worksites in air basin designated as nonattainment

3) Subsidize employee parking that they don’t own

4) Can calculate the out-of-pocket expense of the parking subsidy they provide

5) Can reduce the number of parking spaces without penalty 32

Based on

parking

subsidy

Based on

monthly

price of

transit


OUTSTANDING ISSUE: PARKING PRICING

Staff Proposal

Consistent with Bergamot Area Plan

Minimum $8/day

Preferred rate for employees who are also TMA members

Variable rate structure for non-TMA members and peak-period Park and Ride commuters

Developer Proposal

Does not agree with preferred rate for employees who are also TMA members

33


OUTSTANDING ISSUE: ADDITIONAL AFFORDABLE HOUSING

Agreement on additional 10% of units (50 units)

Staff Proposal

Range of unit types and different affordability levels

20% at 80% AMI

40% at 110% AMI

40% at up to 150% AMI

Developer Proposal

All at 180% AMI

34

Rent Limits in AHPP Rents Beyond AHPP


OUTSTANDING ISSUE: AFFORDABLE HOUSING OBLIGATION FOR CREATIVE OFFICE PHASE

Staff Proposal

Separate obligation of Creative Office Phase regardless of whether Residential Phase is constructed or not

Augmented fee based on commercial nexus study

Fee may be offset through demonstrated partnership with Residential Phase developers for construction of on-site units

Applicant Proposal

Fee only applicable if building permits not issued for all 3 Residential Phase buildings

Fee based on commercial nexus study

Fee reduced by number of affordable units constructed in Residential Phase

35


OUTSTANDING ISSUE: SUSTAINABILITY FEATURES

Residential Phase Water Use

Energy Use

Staff Proposal Aggressive but realistic performance standards for toilet flushing,

showers, and clothes washers

Non-potable water for toilet flushing

Striving for meeting as much on-site energy needs with on-site renewable energy as possible

Energy performance standard of 10kBTU/ft2/yr for parking garage

Applicant Proposal Performance standards for toilet flushing, showers, and clothes

washers based on Energy Star

Does not agree with use of non-potable water for toilet flushing

Would like to maintain flexibility in technology for non-renewable energy

Does not agree to energy performance standard for parking garage

36


OUTSTANDING ISSUE: FINANCIAL SECURITY FOR STREET IMPROVEMENTS

Staff Proposal

Financial security that covers temporary and permanent improvements

Possible event of Non-Monetary Default where City may choose to terminate the development agreement

Applicant Proposal

Financial security that covers only permanent improvements

37


SUMMARY OF ECONOMIC ANALYSES

Value Enhancement Analysis Identifies additional development value that the project would

create relative to hypothetical Tier 1 project: $25.7M

Feasibility Statement Residual Land Value used as expression of feasibility for project

alternatives Tier 1: 63% less than current assessed value of property; 47% less

than proposed project’s estimated residual land value Zoning Compliance: 40% less than current assessed value of

property 15% less than proposed project’s estimated residual land value

Fiscal Impact Analysis Project would result in estimated net annual impact of $420,000 to

City’s General Fund

Economic Impact Analysis During construction: estimated $322M of one-time economic

benefit; 1,781 direct jobs During project operations: estimated $282M of annual recurring

economic activity; 1,448 direct jobs 38


ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS

Original project studied in EIR consisted of more commercial use with less residential (541,822 sf of commercial and 325 residential units)

Draft EIR published January 12, 2012 for 45-day public comment period and extended for additional 14 days (total of 60 days)

341 comment letters received primarily focused on traffic, land use/planning, neighborhood effects, and alternatives

Applicant elected to pursue development of project substantially similar to Alternative 3 (Residential Alternative) after publication of Draft EIR

Final EIR published June 2013 includes all responses to comments

39



Unavoidable Significant Impacts

Aesthetics – removal of coral trees from Olympic Blvd scenic corridor

Air Quality – construction and project-related VOCs and NOx

Construction Effects – localized construction emissions

Traffic Impacts

20 Approval Year plus Project intersections

22 Future Year plus Project intersections

6 street segments

40



Alternatives Studied

No Project/Reasonably Foreseeable Alternative

Eliminates operational air quality impact

Reduces traffic impacts

Residential Alternative


Reduced Project Alternative Environmentally Superior Alt

19% less floor area than proposed project

Eliminates operational air quality impact


41


CONCLUSION

Outstanding Issues on Development Agreement Additional Affordable Housing unit mix and affordability level Affordable Housing Obligation of Creative Office Phase Parking Cashout/Transportation Allowance Parking Pricing Sustainability (Water Use for Residential Phase; Energy Use) Financial Security for Street Improvements

Outstanding Issues on Project Design Scale and length of Building 5 Skyline variation Building modulation Appropriateness of architectural projections Relationship between smaller open spaces and buildings on Sites 2 and 3 Resolving “campus feel” of project Lack of findings and conformance with design objectives and guidelines to

support deviation from flexible standards

42

Recommendation

Staff recommends Planning Commission review and provide comment on outstanding issues

Key Issues for Discussion

1681 26th street (former papermate site development agreement

Documents