item 4.01 - february 16, 2010 study session - general plan land use options and draft goals

8/14/2019 Item 4.01 - February 16, 2010 Study Session - General Plan Land Use Options and Draft Goals

1/14

CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEWMEMORANDUM 4 1

DATE February II 2010TO City Counci lFROM Mart in Alkire Principal PlannerSUBJECT FEBRUARY 16 2010 STUDY SESSION GENERAL PLAN LAND USE

OPTIONS AND DRAFT GOALS

PURPOSE

The purpose of this Study Session is to continue the discussion from the joint CityCouncil and Environmental Planning Commission EPC meeting of February 2 2010regarding the General Plan land use options and draft goals Specifically the followingchange areas and topics remain to be discussed

East Whisman

Moffett Boulevard

General Plan Process and ScheduleAt the meeting staff will provide a brief recap of the discuss ions on the EI Camino RealSan Antonio and North Bayshore change areasAdditional Information

At the February 2 2010 meeting Council and the EPC made seve ra l requests fo radditional data and information Attachment 1 contains a lis t o f the request with staffresponses

NorthBayshoreBased on the discussions at the first meeting North Bayshore is an area that has thepotential fo r significant change The Council and the EPC expressed interest instudying an FAR of up to 10 along with addit ional retail and service uses along


2/14

City Counci lFebruary 11 2010Page 2

Shoreline Boulevard This area also requires more detailed study o f policies to addressissues such as the followingTransportation connections to the downtown transit centerTransportation demand management TDM strategies to reduce traffic impactsStrategies to address sustainability of the areaStrategies to address sea level rise

In addition Google In c has submitted a letter to Council regarding the future of theNor th Bayshore Area see Attachment 2 February 11 Google Letter Google wouldlike an opportunity to have an in depth discussion with Council about their vision ofcreating a sustainable community in Nor th Bayshore that would incorporate a range o fuses including residentialGiven the complexity of the aforementioned issues and Google s interest staff suggeststhat Council and or the EPC schedule a Study Session focused on North BayshoreThis will allow staff to provide additional information and possible strategies regardingtransportation TDM and sea level rise issues The Study Session would also allowGoogle t ime to present their ideas on Nor th Bayshore and future development of theirpropertiesGeneral Plan Schedule and ProcessThe Genera l Plan Update is entering a crit ical phase into which goals land use optionsand key policies will need to be endorsed ultimately by the Counci l After Counci lendorsement a more detailed envi ronmenta l analysis will begin through theenvi ronmenta l review process At the meeting staff will provide information onupcoming steps in the General Plan process and will seek direction on the desiredprocess level o f review and the roles of Counci l Project Advisory Committee which is


3/14

City Counci lFebruary 11 2010Page 3

the EPC plus the Council General Plan Subcommittee and the EPC at key steps in theupcoming project phases

Mart in AlkirePrincipal Planner

cia QNadine P Levin

AS CKevin C DugganCity Manager

MA 7 CAM891 02 16 lO M E

Attachments 12 Supplemental General Plan Land Use Option InformationFebruary 11 Letter f rom Google


4/14

Attachment 1

5 Provide additional water supply and energy dataThefollowing is additional water supply and use information Staffwill provide additionalenergy information atafuturemeeting

1992 GeneralAssessment Plan Land Use Land UseCriteria Description Bu ild Ou t Option A Option B

Water Supply Total contracted water supply 19 500 000 GPD Gallons Per DayAssurance assurance

Existing Use Total existing water use 12 600 000 Average GPDProjected Use Total projected water use 14 100 000 15 400 000 17400 000

Average Average AverageGPD GPD GPD

6 Provide a map of area s surrounding proposed change areas and their allowableheightsMaps ofchange areas and the allowed heights of surrounding areas are attached forreference

7 Provide additional information on the General Plan Land Use Options andpotential school impactsStaff has met with the Mountain View Whisman School District and the Mountain ViewLos Altos High School District to discuss the General Plan process Staff will also beholding afollow up meeting with the Los Altos School District Staff will continue toshare information with the school districts regarding the development of General Plan landuse options and policies and their implications to the school districts

MA 7 CDD891 02 16 10A E


5/14

Attachment 1

SUPPLEMENTAL GENERAL P LAN LAND USE OPT ION INFORMAT ION

The following is a l ist of add i tiona l data requests from the February 2 2010 jointmeeting with staff responses in italics1 Clarify the Fiscal Impact Analysis Study

Staff has attached an excerpt from Mundie and Associates Fiscal Impact Analysis Study toprovide some additional context and information see attached excerptAdditionally the City s Finance and Administrative Services Department has beenworking closely with Community Development Department staffand Mundie andAssociates regarding the approach and content of the Fiscal Impact Analysis Study Staffnotes that the Fiscal Impact Analysis approach is different than the City s own budgetforecasting approach This difference is explained in the attached excerpt

2 Provide additional information regarding sea level rise impactsStaff continues to gather information regarding the impacts of potential sea level r ise in theNorth Bayshore Area The Santa Clara Valley Water District has taken a leading role inhelping South Bay cities understand the implications ofsea level rise and will be providingadditional resources to cities in the coming monthsThe City s General Plan EIR and related General Plan policies will address se a level riseimpacts in greater detail once the Preferred Land Use Alternative is selected An exampleofa potential strategy would be to evaluate the existing North Bayshore leveeinfrastructure for potential improvements that could mitigate future sea level rise

3 Provide actual existing population and jobs dataIn 2009 the City had a population of 72 300 and a total of 52 000 jobs

4 Provide additional jobs housing informationThe City s 2009 jobs to housing ratio was calculated at 14 jobs per employed residentThe General Plan build ou t scenarios project the following jobs

to employed resident ratios1992 General

Assessment Plan Land Use Land UseCriteria Description Bu ild Ou t Option A Option B

Jobs Housing The ratio of jobs to 10 136 136Ratio employed residents


6/14

Mundie AssociatesFiscal Impact Study Excerpt DRAFT January 11 2010

Land Use and th e City s Fiscal Condit ionHow might changes in land use permitted by the General Plan affect Mountain View s operatingrevenues and costs

Of the most important revenue sources included in the fiscal analysis 4Property taxes increase when new development occurs The annual increases in propertytax revenue are limited however with certain exceptions increases in assessed value thevalue on which the tax is based are capped a t two percent per year unless the property issold at which time the assessed value is rese t a t the sale priceIn practice the regulation of property tax increases means that nonresidential developmentis likely to deliver a bigger increase in the property ta x base when it is new because mosttypes of nonresidential buildings are more expensive to construct and therefore carry ahigher assessed value than res identia l buildings Over time however residential propertiesare likely to be sold more frequently than nonresidential properties the property taxes theygenerate are more likely to keep pace with inflation over a multi year period than are thetaxes paid on nonresidential usesSales taxes may increase as a result of 1 population growth as more residents seek to buyretail goods in Mountain View at stores convenient to their homes 2 employment growthas more businesses and their employees make purchases at Mounta in View stores and 3retail development as more stores become available to capture the purchases made byresidents of and businesses in Mountain View and the neighboring communitiesFor sales tax increases to occur with any of these types of new development however several other condit ions must be present most importantly to avoid simply shifting existing taxable sales from one locat ion to another the new space must o ffe r goods that are not currently available in sufficient quantity within the cityTransient occupancy taxes increase when new visitor accommodations are built Again critica l conditions must be present the new ho te ls mote ls or other accommodations mustattract overnight visitors who are not currently staying in Moun ta in V iew e ithe r because thesupply of existing rooms is insufficient or the types of rooms available do not meet theirrequirements e g fo r quality location and or priceUtility user taxes increase with all types of new development that use electricity natural gasor telephone service

Changes in costs that result from land use changes are generally attributed to the population andemployment that occupies new space but some costs are also related to physical characteristicssuch as miles of streets or acres of parksSome costs are less sensitive than others to changes in land use For example the City currentlyoperates five f ire stat ions These stations are located in a pattern that is expected to be able toprovide effective service throughout the City with any amount of development that may occurwithin or adjacent to the existing city limits Therefore the cost of fire protection is expected torise with inflation but not in response to new development

4 The fiscal analysis excludes certain operating revenues specifically permit fees an d other onetime charges fo rservice that are set at a level that is intended to cover the costs of th e services provided In Mountain View mostdevelopment related fees are collected in a separate operating fund an d therefore are no t included in the revenuesshown in Table 1 This analysis also does no t include revenue from interest on invested reserves

5


7/14

DRAFT January 11 2010

The General Plan Fiscal ModelTo assess the impacts of new development on th e City s ability to provide services MundieAssociates constructed a spreadsheet based f iscal impact model to project future revenues andcosts as well as property tax incrementsThe f isca l mode l considers all of the revenues collected by and costs of service covered by theGeneral Operating Fund and the SRPC Fund Construction of the model began with a review ofthe budget to identify all of the sources of revenues and costs of service Then City staff wereinterviewed to ascertain how revenues and costs are likely to change as a result of new development

Based on the budget review and interviews M staff formulated equations that describe thedynamics of change in revenues and costs The equations were then applied to the developmentpermitted by the existing General Plan and plan options to provide projections of future revenuesand costs in the General Operating Fund the SRPC FundAll together the fiscal model is comprised of a se t of 16 spreadsheet files w ith a total of over 100individual worksheets Figure 1 illustrates the flow of information through the fiscal model

Figure 1Flow o f Information fo r the F isca l Model

1ParametersAssumptions 6Data InDuts Assessed

K XiSling r Value 7Land Use Revenues3 9New Development NetUnder Construction Fiscal BalanceApproved orProposed 8ICPiDelinel Costs

4Developmentto be Removedfo r New Uses

5Future DevelopmentPermitted byGeneral Plan

6


8/14


Caveats in Evaluating th e General Plan Fiscal Impact AnalysisFocus on th e Impacts of Land Use ChangeThe focus of this f iscal analysis is specifically on the impacts of land use changes on the City soperating revenues and operating costs For that reason it attempts to hold all other condit ionsconstant

The Current Conditions Report notes some of these conditions which could affect the City s futurefiscal condition but because the focus of this analysis is on the impacts of land use changesare not considered explicitly in this study Briefly summarized they are

Economic climate factors The analysis assumes that the recession will end and that economic factors such as housing prices fo r example will behave as they do in normal economic timesCharacteristics of businesses located in Mounta in View Although the City through its zoning and development controls can regulate the types of buildings that are developed it hasless control over the specific businesses that occupy those buildings In and of itself theGeneral Plan cannot inf luence whether fo r example manufacturing firms with loca l salesand leasing operations will remain in Mounta in View or will continue the exodus that hasoccurred over the past decadeRules governing ta xation Lim itations on property tax increases described above andrequirements that every tax increase be approved by a vote of the electorate l imit cities ability to raise revenues Especially in the wake of the current recession which may result in areduction in the property tax base that persists fo r many yea rs these rules may challengefiscal health 5State revenue take aways At present the State of California facing its own fiscal challenges is proposing once again to shift money from local governments to the state treasury This analysis does not consider such pOSSible shiftsContractual obligations As noted in the Current Conditions Report about 80 percent ofexpenditures in the City s General Operating Fund are fo r salaries and benefits and thesecosts are governed by union contractsInflation Increases in the prices of goods and services throughout the economy affect bothCity revenues and City costs

Reporting th e FiscalResul tsThis f iscal report presents separate revenue and c os t projections fo r the General Operating Fundand the SRPC Fund

Results are reported fo r three indicator years 2009 10 the first year of the model 2032 33 thehorizon year of the new General Plan and 2022 23 midway through the planning period Foreach of these indicator years the report presents estimates of the net fiscal balance fo r that yearand the cumulative net f iscal balance through and including that year5 Real declines in home values and the values of nonresidential properties have prompted owners to apply to theCounty Assessor for reductions Proposition 8 reduction in th eir assessed values AV If an AV reduction isapproved the County reviews the adjustment annually comparing the tax roll value to the market value an dincreasing it as appropriate until th e AV reaches its level prior to the pre Proposition 8 reduction

7


9/14


Differences Between th e Fiscal Analysis and the City s Financial ForecastEvery year staff of the Mounta in View Finance and Administrative Services Department prepare amulti year financial forecast This forecast is a valuable tool in identifying long term fiscal trendsand providing an early warning system for potential f iscal imbalances that may arise over timeThe financial forecast is different from this General Plan fiscal analysis

The two documents serve different purposes This report the General Plan fiscal analysisis intended to illuminate the potential differences in fiscal condition that would occurwith different amounts and types of new land development over the long term in this case 20

yearst provides a planning level projection of revenues and costs that is useful fo r comparing alternative land use packagesThe Finance and Administrative Services Departments financial forecast is intended to provide more detailed information about the City s expected fiscal condition in order to guide theCity Council in its budgeting decisions during the next 5 to 10 years Its projections are morefine tuned by specific assumptions about economic condit ions legislative influences andother factors that are likely to affect revenues and costs in the near termThe two documents are based on different methodologies This report begins with FiscalYear FY 2008 09 revenues and costs and projects changes based on changes in land usewith adjustments for inflation that result in changes in population employment miles ofstreets acres of parks and other specific development related characteristics of the cityThe Finance and Administrative Services Department s financial forecast is based on historica l t rend information and known current conditions and contractual obligations It reflects thestaffs best judgment about economic condit ions and other factors that will affect revenuesand costs It does not explicitly consider the amount type or timing of development thatmay occur in the futureThis Genera l Plan fiscal analysis omits some revenues and costs that are included in thefinancial forecast As noted elsewhere this study does not consider interest on reservessome revenues that are intended to offset costs and debt service and capital improvementscosts in the SRPC Fund

The primary purpose and best use of this f iscal analysis is in the comparisons of projected fiscalconditions with the existing General Plan and the plan options

Land Use in Mounta in V iewExisting DevelopmentInformation about existing land use in Mountain View was compiled by City staffFor the fiscal analysis it was necessary to know whe re the various land uses are locatedbecause location affects the distribution of ongoing property tax revenues among taxing entitiesIn Mountain View there are three areas that are distinguished from each other in their revenueand cost characteristics

8


10/14


11/14

p INI ll A11141 CtI

CIQdA v

0zo

0

O

Lo

LN0

LNT0

Z 011II

CID

If

JfI

I

fIf

yIC

OOi

tncaICIC ItCc 0EO

C Cc caI

o ICCoCtn

C

6 caEI tnJcI

oCs

Q

I

QOJC LC lf0 Q I0OJ N enQ L Qc c lf C0 0 0CD 0 enQ Q I 0Q en en I I I0 J J 0 l I0 0 en 0 QLt C C Q EIn Q Q en C en 0 j0 Qns 0 Q c 0 Cen enCD T J 32 en 0 c0N enC Qj J iiJ 0 0 OJ 0 I cc m 0 ICD f f 0 iiD 0 c 0U OJ 0 a I I Z J I Zf N I ND c IIII r IIIns I IJ ns I I0 IE I IL J


12/14

is iQ 4110Cr LV Or0 Q IIJ 0III N enL Qr r V C2 ro 0 0CI 0 00 enQ Q Q Q C 0 11CC en en en en Q C l i0 J J J J E 1 0 J OJf0 en 0 Q EU U U E Q rQ Q Q 0 en en 0 iC Q0 0 0 ten eu c S C E t 0t CI ro en 0 c S i0E c r N en Jji 0 0 0 0 2 C J 0 C c0 CO 0 ICI en en en en 0 jI I I Q CI 0 C 00 C L V C N 0 J z J N I Z0 rIIIII r IIIeu I Ir eu I I0 E I IL J

iri b

f t oN

If

At i b f JP1 N1p10S04

o

U

o

Lo

LNo

o

z

tnca1

1CscaJomOs ss 0o sc

s

JC1Jc1

o

tn1

s1cao1

D to 0s tnECca s0w


13/14

ti

I

1ELOofLJ

tncuCIc

Cl GC iis CIcus ccoC iiS c0o CIc

0tntns

C CUmCIJ scCI 0zo

LO

o

LONo

o

fVlZeto

rnO N aII

z

w

jw0

etf6f

o a 3NI13110HS N

Qs

QCs LOs vQ L0 0N en

Q LO Qv Cs 0 01 0 enL f 0 fL f0 L LQ0 en 0 Een Q en 0 i0 C Qc 0 C E0 ceng 0s N oo Qjf cC III 0 0 I0 c 0 Qj 0J z N I Z

r III Ieu I IE I IL Jtos0 E

Q Q Q 0C oo oo en 00 0 0it 0 0 0 QUJ Q Q Q 0eu 0 01 QL ID c0 0 0 coc1 ij Cf Cf Cf CI I IC 0 LO f N Ws IIIIIeus0


14/14

Attachment 2

IncAmphitheatre Parkway

View CA 94043 COlogIe Main 650 253 0000Fax 650 253 0001www google com21 10

Kevin Duggan City ManagerEnvironmental Planning CommissionMountain View City Council500 Castro S t P O Box 7540 MV 94039650 903 6301 kevin duggan@mountainview govDear Kevin

Weare writing you to express our preferences fo r the future o f Google s continued growth inthe City o fMountain View We would encourage you toprovide opportunities fo r the NorthBayshore area to continue to be the center o f sustainable development fo r Google s HQcampus

Our goals fo r Google s HQ are to provide a future redevelopment that is nurturing andregenerative to the environment provide a vibrant community and worklife balance fo r alland efficiently manage transportation and pedestrian access needs This must includemixed uses office re ta il and residential along with the kind of land use developmentdescribed in the Final Report by the Mountain View Environmental Sustainability Task ForceWe encourage you to be the model Silicon Valley community leading the way withvisionary development opportunities to create the most efficient sustainable and fiscallysupportive plan to the community ofMountain View and the North Bayshore areaWe look forward to having an in depth discussion with you and the appropriate members ofyour staff as soon as possiblePlease contact either myself George Salah or Dan Hoffman with any questionsBe Re

David RadcliffeVP Real Estate and Workplace ServicesGoogle Inccc Randy Tsuda Ellis BurnsDan Hoffman George Salah

item 4.01 - february 16, 2010 study session - general plan land use options and draft goals

Documents