the neighborhoods of tustin town center: a new

Transcription

THE NEIGHBORHOODS OF
TUSTIN TOWN CENTER:
A NEW BEGINNING
A
S T R A T E G I C
G U I D E
F O R
D E V E L O P M E N T
THE NEIGHBORHOODS OF
TUSTIN TOWN CENTER:
A NEW BEGINNING
A
S T R A T E G I C
G U I D E
F O R
D E V E L O P M E N T
PREPARED BY
FIELD PAOLI
W ITH KEYS ER MARS TON AS S OCIAT ES
AND AUS TIN-FOUS T AS S OCIAT ES
PREPARED F OR
THE CITY OF TUST I N
THE T US TIN COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGEN CY
300 CENTENNIAL WAY
TUSTIN, CA 92780
STRATEGIC GUIDE - SEPTEMBER 21, 2010
C re di t s an d Ackn owl ed g ements
TUSTIN CITY COUNCIL AND TUSTIN COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD MEMBERS
Honorable Mayor Jerry Amante
Honorable Mayor Pro Tem John Nielsen
Honorable Councilmember Doug Davert
Honorable Councilmember Jim Palmer
Honorable Councilmember Deborah Gavello
CONSULTANT TEAM
Field Paoli
Frank Fuller, FAIA, Principal
Heidi Sokolowsky
Jane Lin
TUSTIN COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
William A. Huston, City Manager
Christine Shingleton, Assistant City Manager
John Buchanan, RDA Program Manager
Jerry Craig, RDA Program Manager
Kimberly McAllen, RDA Project Manager
Matt West, RDA Project Manager
Sesar Morfin, Management Analyst
Keyser Marston
Gerald Trimble, Principal
Michael Wong
Reena Arvizu
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Elizabeth Binsack, Community Development Director
Dana Ogdon, Assistant Community Development Director
Justin Willkolm, Principal Planner
Scott Reekstin, Senior Planner
Austin Foust, Inc.
Terri Austin, Principal
Krys Saldivar
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Doug Stack, Public Works Director
Doug Anderson, Transportation and Development Services Manager
Benny Tenekan, Public Works Manager
POLICE DEPARTMENT
Scott Jordan, Chief of Police
Captain Charlie Celano
Captain Steve Lewis
Lieutenant Paul Garaven (South Area Commander)
Lieutenant John Strain (North Area Commander)
PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT
David Wilson, Parks and Recreation Director
STRATEGIC GUIDE 09.21.2010
THE NEIGHBORHOODS OF TUSTIN TOWN CENTER
A NEW BEGINNING
v
Ta b l e o f Con ten ts
1. I N T R O DUCTIO N
1.1
Executive Summary
1-1
1.2
Background
1-2
2. E X IST I NG C O NDITIO NS
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
Area Conditions
2.1.1
Physical Context
2.1.2
Area Market Conditions Summary
2-1
2-7
Center City Neighborhood
2.2.1
Existing Conditions
2.2.2
Summary of Market Demand Analysis
2.2.3
Constraints and Opportunities
2-13
2-16
2-17
Southern Gateway Neighborhood
2.3.1
Existing Conditions
2.3.2
2.3.3
2-18
2-22
2-23
West Village Neighborhood
2.4.1
Existing Conditions
2.4.2
2.4.3
2-25
2-28
2-28
3. C O M MUN ITY O UTR EACH P R OCES S
3.1
Summary of the Community Outreach Process
3-1
3.2
Workshop #1 Summary, Discussion and Feedback
3-1
3.3
Workshop #2 Summary, Discussion and Feedback
3-3
3.4
Planning Commission
3-5
3.5
City Council
3-5
A NEW BEGINNING
vii
4. N E I G H BO R HO O D CO NC E P T PLAN ALTERNATIVES AND
O P P O RTUN ITY SITE S
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
An Overview
4.1.1
Overall Goals and Strategies for all Neighborhoods
4.1.2
Overview of Opportunity Sites
4-1
4-2
4.2.1
Concept Plan Alternatives
4.2.2
Opportunity Sites
4-4
4-10
4.3.1
4.3.2
Opportunity Sites
4-15
4-21
4.4.1
4.4.2
Opportunity Sites
4-27
4-32
5. T E S T I N G O F A LTE R NATIV E S AND KEY OPPORTUNITY S ITES
5.1
General Development Assumptions
5-1
5.2
5.2.1
Traffic Testing of Concept Plan Alternatives
5.2.2
Key Opportunity Site 3
5.2.2a Site Specific Development Assumptions for Site 3
5.2.2b Alternative Feasibility Analysis for Site 3
5-3
5-4
5-6
5-7
5.3.1
5.3.2
5-9
5-11
5-13
5-14
5.4.1
5.4.2
5-16
5-17
5-18
5-21
5.3
5.4
viii
A NEW BEGINNING
6. P R E F E R R E D CO NC E P T P LA NS
6.1
Guidelines, Goals, and Strategies for All Neighborhoods
6.1.1
General Goals
6.1.2
General Site Design and Building Design Guidelines
6.1.3
Overlay Zoning Concept
6-1
6-2
6-10
6.2
Center City Preferred Concept Plan
6-11
6.3
Southern Gateway Preferred Concept Plan
6-14
6.4
West Village Preferred Concept Plan
6-17
7. I MP L E ME N TATIO N P L A N
7.1
Implementation Strategies and Tools
7.2
Potential Financing Mechanisms
7-1
7-14
A P P E N D IX
A.1
A.2
A.3
A.4
A.5
A.6
A.7
Glossary of Terms
Development Thresholds
Traffic and Circulation Testing
Financial Feasibility Analysis for Key Opportunity Sites
Implementation Strategies Exhibits
Public Workshops
A.6.1 Workshop #1 Materials
A 6.2 Workshop #1 Public Comments
A 6.3 Workshop #2 Materials
A 6.4 Workshop #2 Public Comments
Workshop Attendees
A-1
A-3
A-8
A-28
A-48
A-62
A-72
A-77
A-95
A-106
Additional resource documents associated with the Town Center New Beginnings Project, (including copies
of community workshop materials, presentations on alternative concept plans, and the Refined Market
Analysis) are available on-line at the City of Tustin web site (tustinca.org), under Redevelopment, What’s
New, and the Town Center New Beginnings project.
A NEW BEGINNING
ix
1 . I N T RO D U C T IO N
INTRODUCTION
1 . 1 E x ecu tive Su mma ry
“The Neighborhoods of Tustin Town Center: A New Beginning” is a “Strategic Guide for
Development” for three neighborhoods in the center of the City of Tustin, California: Center
City, Southern Gateway, and West Village. The primary objective of the Guide for Development
(Guide) is to provide a framework for implementation of strategic development actions for each
of the neighborhoods. Private investment and private development is fostered in collaboration
with actions by the City to improve the three neighborhoods over the next few decades. The
Guide was initiated by the Tustin City Council in response to an Advisory Services Panel Report
by the Urban Land Institute, entitled: “Tustin California, Infill Development Opportunities,” which
concentrated on an area encompassing the three neighborhoods.
The creation of this Guide was accomplished through a public process including community
workshops, collaboration with property owners, and coordination with other stakeholders
in each neighborhood. The first series of three public workshops concentrated upon the
existing economic and physical conditions along with the possibilities for development in each
neighborhood. The second series of three workshops proposed and discussed alternative concept
plans for each neighborhood and considered possible development of selected opportunity
sites. The information from the public process has been incorporated into the Guide and in its
recommended actions.
The timing and the rate of development in the neighborhoods will vary and the Guide allows
variation to occur. Since the outset of the process for “The Neighborhoods of Tustin Town
Center,” the local and national economy has changed substantially, and so have market
conditions for development along with the economy. The Guide recommends concepts for the
neighborhoods, plans for key sites, and tools for implementation. In addition, the Guide permits
the development process to proceed in concert with the marketplace and under the leadership
of the private development community.
The Strategic Guide for Development is structured to be comprehensive and easy to use. After
the introduction, existing conditions of the three neighborhoods are presented in Chapter 2,
including a summary of market demand, opportunities and constraints. The process of community
outreach follows in Chapter 3, and then alternatives are considered in Chapter 4, both for the
neighborhood concept plans and for the opportunity sites within each neighborhood. Each of
the alternative concept plans for each neighborhood were tested for traffic and economic viability
and the results are shown in Chapter 5. Next, the preferred concept plans and design guidelines
are presented in Chapter 6, and then Chapter 7 includes a plan for implementation. Appendices
at the end of the report include reference materials and complete technical memoranda that
contributed to each chapter.
FINAL DRAFT 07.28.2010
A NEW BEGINNING
1-1
INTRODUCTION
1 . 2 Backgrou n d
ULI ADVISORY SERVICES PANEL STUDY
In June 2006, the City of Tustin invited the Urban Land Institute (ULI) to conduct an evaluation
of development and improvement opportunities in an area located in the west and southwest
sections of the city utilizing ULI’s advisory services program. This program offers advice to cities
by providing a professional panel that intensely studies an area over the course of three to five
days and develops recommendations in the form of a report.
Three Tustin Town Center neighborhoods, Center City, Southern Gateway, and West Village
(Figures 1-1) were identified within a larger area and evaluated by the panel for infill development
opportunities including the expansion of residential housing and commercial revitalization. The
study area is generally characterized by single-family, fourplexes, older manufactured housing,
and rental properties, as well as low-density strip center type commercial development that
experienced a significant population growth in the last 15 years due to the influx of Latino
households and a concentration of workforce households (Figure 1-3). Overall, the population
in the City of Tustin has grown from 21,000 in the early 1970s to more than 70,000 in 2006. This
population growth, the concentration of low-income families, and the old housing stock in the
study area led to issues such as overcrowding, substandard building conditions, and shortage of
open space and services.
The City expected the panel to develop recommendations for redevelopment strategies
and conditions that would initiate market-driven solutions for the improvement of the three
neighborhoods. New thinking about mixed land uses, increased densities and a more streamlined
planning and development process were encouraged for consideration to make Tustin more
competitive in the marketplace.
FIGURE 1-1: CONTEXT MAP
Center City
West Village
Southern
Gateway
ULI Study
Area
1-2
A NEW BEGINNING
INTRODUCTION
After an intensive study of the three areas and meeting with community leaders and stakeholders,
the eight-person Advisory Services Panel, consisting of planning, development, academic
professionals, provided the following key recommendations to the City to guide redevelopment
efforts:
•
Develop neighborhood concept plans with citizen and developer input that will guide the
creation of entitlements through tools such as overlay zoning and high-density bonuses
•
Develop general design principles and design guidelines for maintaining and enhancing
the overall character of the study areas
•
Develop an overall vision for the mixed-use and commercial portions of the study area, and
strategies that help stabilize and revitalize the existing residential neighborhoods
•
Develop implementation strategies that include planning and financial tools
•
Streamline the entitlement process to increase predictability, transparency, objectivity,
reliability, and flexibility for developers
•
Create a non-profit Community Development Corporation (CDC) that is charged with the
responsibility to implement the city’s goals and policies for providing affordable housing
and neighborhood revitalization.
In addition to these general recommendations, the ULI Advisory Panel developed conceptional
design ideas for specific opportunity sites.
“THE NEIGHBORHOODS OF TUSTIN TOWN CENTER - A NEW BEGINNING”
The Council prioritized the recommendations by the ULI Advisory Services Panel and initiated
the subsequent “The Neighborhoods of Tustin Town Center - A New Beginning” Study. The
objectives for this study are based on the ULI Panel’s findings, which were to explore opportunities
and strategies for each neighborhood in more detail.
Objectives of the City Work Program
•
Refine Market Study
•
Develop Neighborhood Concept Plans
•
Develop Design Guidelines
•
Develop an Implementation Strategy
•
Develop Regulatory Documents
The “Town Center, a New Beginning” Study, started in October 2007, focused on these objectives
and included an extensive community outreach process with two public workshops for each
neighborhood.
This report presents the results of the study and offers guidance for future development in the
form of final concept plans for each neighborhood and accompanying design guidelines and
implementation strategies.
A NEW BEGINNING
1-3
2 . E XI S T IN G C O N DITIO N S
EXISTING CONDITIONS
2 . 1 Area C on dition s
2.1.1 PHYSICAL CONTEXT
The three neighborhoods, Center City, Southern Gateway, and West Village, are located in the
central and western portion of the City of Tustin (Figure 2-1). All three neighborhoods are in
close proximity to each other and border on major freeways, Interstate 5 (the “I-5” or “Santa
Ana Freeway”) and State Route 55 (SR-55). Figure 2-2 illustrates the three neighborhoods in
relation to the Town Center and South Central Redevelopment Project Areas. The topography
is generally flat and the street layout is based on a grid pattern that shifts direction at Newport
Avenue in both the Center City and Southern Gateway neighborhoods.
Most of the development in these areas was built during the 1960s and 1970s in response to
Tustin’s significant population growth that transformed the city from a pre-war farming community
to a post-war suburban community. The rapid suburbanization of Orange County was the driving
force behind this growth. The land uses that resulted were low-density, auto-oriented commercial
and office development along large arterials as well as apartment complexes with interspersed
single family homes. Many of the apartment complexes are now overpopulated and in varying
states of disrepair. Overpopulation also causes traffic and parking issues, particularly in the West
Village, while amenities such as grocery stores and open spaces are insufficient in relation to the
population in the neighborhoods.
The parcel-by-parcel approach to expansion led to the formation of superblocks that impede
connectivity to and within the neighborhoods (Figure 2-4). The neighborhoods are accessed from
the two freeways and the major arterials in the vicinity, Newport Avenue and Redhill Avenue, as
well as on other major streets, namely McFadden Avenue, Walnut Avenue, El Camino Real, Main
Street and Bryan Avenue (Figure 2-5). The neighborhoods are served by two bus lines, Line 66
and Line 71 (Figure 2-6). Line 66 runs along McFadden Avenue and Walnut Avenue or alternatively
along a portion of Newport Avenue, depending on the route. It connects the Southern Gateway
Neighborhood to Huntington Beach to the southwest and Irvine to the southeast. From Newport
Avenue the route alternates between service to Irvine and short turn service to Bryan Avenue in
the Center City Neighborhood. Line 71 runs along a portion of Newport Avenue and El Camino
Real and connects the Center City Neighborhood with Newport Beach to the southwest and
Yorba Linda to the north.
A NEW BEGINNING
2-1
EXISTING CONDITIONS
FIGURE 2-1: LOCATION OF NEIGHBORHOODS
County of
Orange
CENTER
CITY
WEST
VILLAGE
Ra
ilw
ay
SOUTHERN
GATEWAY
Santa Ana
I-5
Rt
e
55
Irvine
2-2
Tustin
Legacy
A NEW BEGINNING
EXISTING CONDITIONS
FIGURE 2-2: REDEVELOPMENT AREAS AND NEIGHBORHOODS
A NEW BEGINNING
2-3
EXISTING CONDITIONS
FIGURE 2-3 TUSTIN GENERAL PLAN LAND USE POLICY MAP
2-4
A NEW BEGINNING
EXISTING CONDITIONS
FIGURE 2-4: NEIGHBORHOOD BOUNDARIES AND EXISTING CONDITIONS (AERIAL)
Center
City
West
Village
INT
AV
E
RE
D
HI
LL
AV
E
NU
E
ROUTE 55
NE
W
McFADDEN AVENUE
TAT
E5
PO
RT
Southern
Gateway
NU
E
ERS
E. EDINGER AVENUE
A NEW BEGINNING
2-5
EXISTING CONDITIONS
RT
AV
E
FIGURE 2-5: AREA CIRCULATION
NE
W
PO
E. FIRST STREET
IR
VI
AV
EN
UE
NE
BO
UL
LL
E. MAIN STREET
EV
AR
RE
D
HI
D
BR
YA
N
AV
E
NU
R AN
CH
RD
E
SC
RR
A
R.
IN
O.
TU
S
TIN
McFADDEN AVENUE
TE
W
.
TA
TE
5
W
AL
NU
E5
5
E. EDINGER AVENUE
RS
UT
TA
VE
NU
RO
E
c Circulation
500
0
1000
VA
L
Freeway
Major Arterial
Southern California Regional Rail
Authority (SCRRA) R.O.W.
Primary Road
0
1000
500
2000
RT
71
66
McFADDEN AVENUE
SC
RR
463
A
PO
adius - 10 min. wa
lk
UL
EV
AR
D
BR
YA
N
s - 5 min. wa
lk
AV
E
NU
66 short
CH
RD
iu
rad
BO
167
E
TU
ST
IN
S. GRAND AVENUE
59
1/4
mi
le
1/2
er
m il
IR
VI
NE
R AN
MAIN ST
79
W
EL CAMINO
E. FIRST STREET
NE
64
AV
E
TUST
FIGURE 2-6: PUBLIC TRANSIT
Rte
55
R.
O.
I-5
W
71
.
D
CA
M
IN
O
W
AL
NU
TA
VE
NU
E
RE
AL
66
RE
70
HI
LL
AV
E
NU
E
E. EDINGER AVENUE
EL
472
2-6
Route 59
Route 70
Route 167
Route 66
Route 71
Route 463
Route 64
Route 79
Route 472
A NEW BEGINNING
Southern California Regional Rail
Authority (SCRRA) R.O.W
0
500
1000
2000
EXISTING CONDITIONS
2.1.2 AREA MARKET CONDITIONS SUMMARY
The Center City, Southern Gateway, and West Village Study Areas (Study Areas) located in the
City of Tustin enjoy a strategic location within central Orange County with access and visibility to
major freeways, employment centers, and event destinations.
The majority of the land area within the Study Areas is dedicated to multi-family residential,
convenience retail and office, and light industrial uses. These uses are generally housed in older
buildings, where the retail and office uses are located in one-story strip centers or small standalone buildings.
Attraction of new real estate development to the Study Areas must overcome a few constraints.
While these constraints were analyzed in detail by previous studies, key findings affecting the
potential for new development are summarized here:
•
Land within the Study Areas is predominantly built-out, with less than 2.5 acres of
vacant land available for new development. Assemblage of small parcels for large-scale
development may be difficult due to multiple property owners and high acquisition and
relocation costs.
•
The inner core of the 1-mile radius is characterized by a large rental and low income
population. Household income and spending potential for households within the 1-mile
radius are weak relative to the larger trade areas (3-mile and 5-mile trade rings; see Figure
2-7). According to Claritas, Inc., the median household income within the 1-mile trade ring
is $52,000. This income level is far below comparable trade areas including the 5-mile
trade ring, the City of Tustin (City), Orange County (County), and the State of California
(State).
Notwithstanding these challenges, economic consultant Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. (KMA)
believes that there is potential for introducing new development within the Study Areas. This
conclusion is supported by the following key factors:
•
Newport Avenue, a major north-south arterial, currently dead-ends at the southern terminus
in the Southern Gateway study area. However, Tustin’s Capital Improvement Plan currently
includes the extension of Newport Avenue south to Edinger Avenue within the next five
to seven years. Due to better traffic circulation, the extension of Newport Avenue would
promote a positive commercial business environment and act as a potential catalyst for
new development.
•
Tustin and Irvine are among areas within Orange County that will continue to experience the
largest share of new population growth. According to the Southern California Association
of Governments (SCAG), the number of Tustin residents is expected to grow to 88,788 by
2030. Projected increases will be largely due to new residential developments at Tustin
Legacy.
A NEW BEGINNING
2-7
EXISTING CONDITIONS
•
On a national and regional level, there is increasing interest in “in-fill” residential and
mixed-use developments as a desirable housing option. Although new in-fill and mixeduse developments have been stalled by the current downturn in the housing market, this
fundamental trend is expected to continue. Examples of infill intensification in the City
include Arbor Walk, Prospect Village, and The Cottages.
•
As the County builds out, the Study Areas’ location and access from the I-5 and SR-55
Freeways presents a high visibility benefit to many potential developers. Developers
throughout California are pursuing freeway visible sites to build new retail and mixed-use
developments.
FIGURE 2-7: 1-MILE, 3-MILES, 5-MILES RADII
Anaheim
Villa Park
57
5m
iles
55
County
of Orange
3 mi
les
22
Garden
Grove
1-mile
Center
City
West
Village
Santa Ana
Southern
Gateway
City of
Tustin
261
Fountain
Valley
Tustin
Legacy
55
133
Irvine
73
2-8
A NEW BEGINNING
EXISTING CONDITIONS
In addition to vacant areas, larger development sites may be planned and implemented by
the Redevelopment Agency through lot configuration and consolidation, adaptive re-use,
repositioning, and/or increased densification of sites throughout the Study Areas. Potential sites
may include Red Hill Plaza, El Camino Plaza, and areas along Newport Avenue.
KMA estimated the potential long-term demand for the major land uses through 2030. The
absorption estimates are described in the following sections and are summarized in Table 2-1
below.
TABLE 2-1: ABSORPTION ANALYSIS BY LAND USE, STUDY AREAS, 2008-2030
Low
I.
Annual Space Demand
A. Retail Space
900 sf
5.2%
2,200 sf
6.3%
B. Restaurant Space
300 sf
1.7%
800 sf
2.3%
Subtotal
II.
High
1,200 sf
7.0%
3,000 sf
8.6%
C. Office Space
16,000 sf
93.0%
32,000 sf
91.4%
Total Annual Space Demand
17,200 sf
100.0%
35,000 sf
100.0%
Total Space Demand
378,000 sf
770,000 sf
III. Total Housing Unit Demand
A. Multi-Family*
B. Single-Family*
Total Housing Unit Demand
761 units
100.0%
1,141 units
100.0%
0 units
0.0%
0 units
0.0%
761 units
100.0%
1,141 units
100.0%
* Housing Unit Definition:
Single-Family Unit: Detached housing, one dwelling unit per lot
Multi-Family Unit: Attached housing
A. Retail Potential
It is KMA’s conclusion that short term (within five years) demand for new retail/restaurant uses
within the Study Areas is weak. Mid- (five to 10 years) to long-term (10 to 20 years) demand is
deemed moderate. The primary sources of market support for retail space within the Study Areas
are community residents and the existing and future workforce.
A shopping center’s size and orientation are generally determined by the market characteristics
of the trade area served by the center. KMA’s retail market analysis indicates that the Study Areas
are able to support additional retail and restaurant development in the range of 26,000 to 65,000
SF through 2030. According to typical shopping center criteria (see Table 2-2), these estimates
may support the development of a neighborhood shopping center within the Study Areas.
A NEW BEGINNING
2-9
EXISTING CONDITIONS
TABLE 2-2: TYPICAL SHOPPING CENTER CRITERIA
Center
General Concept
Range of SF
Range of
Acreage
Primary Trade
Superregional
Similar to regional center, but
larger with more variety
800,000+
60 to 120
5 to 25 miles
Regional
General merchandise, typically
an enclosed mall
400,000 to
600,000
40 to 100
5 to 15 miles
Lifestyle
Upscale national chain specialty
stores, dining and entertainment
generally in an outdoor setting
250,000 to
600,000
10 to 40
6 to 12 miles
Community
General merchandise and
convenience
150,000 to
500,000
10 to 40
3 to 6 miles
Power
Dominant anchors with few small
tenants
80,000 to
250,000
25 to 80
5 to 10 miles
Neighborhood
Convenience
30,000 to
150,000
3 to 15
3 miles
Source: ICSC Shopping Center Definitions
Although the Study Areas contain approximately 280,500 SF of existing neighborhood retail
space, existing residents do not have a full-service grocery or drug store located within any of
these centers. Planning and implementation efforts by the Tustin Community Redevelopment
Agency could help to redevelop and reposition existing shopping centers to accommodate
more efficient layouts of retail space in shopping center and dining facilities.
Additional suggestions for possible categories of retail uses within the Study Areas include:
•
Ground floor retail/restaurant uses incorporated into new mixed-use developments.
The amount and types of uses that can be supported will depend on the amount of new
residential and office development undertaken in the Study Areas.
•
With strong taxable retail sales in the Specialty Stores category, this market niche may
have a strong potential for both short and long-term development within the Study Areas.
In addition, the West Village can build upon the existing The Jewelry Exchange store. The
current mix of retail lacks cohesive marketing, but presents an opportunity for branding the
center as a “jewelry row.”
B. Office Space Potential
KMA concludes that short-term demand for office space in the Study Areas is moderately weak,
with potential for development in the long-term. The fallout from the implosion of the subprime
mortgage industry, in addition to new office construction, has increased the County’s office
market’s vacancy rate.
Office employment in Orange County is highly concentrated in the Greater Airport Area (Costa
Mesa, Irvine, Newport Beach, and portions of Santa Ana). However, the Study Areas within the
City are not currently established as an office node. KMA finds, overall, that the Study Areas may
have difficulty attracting large-scale office users unless a site (or sites) are made available for
2-10
A NEW BEGINNING
EXISTING CONDITIONS
higher density development. Therefore, it is anticipated that the Study Areas will yield minimal
demand for office space at least in the short-term. Office space in the Study Areas is limited
to small local-serving professional and business services dispersed among neighborhood retail
strip centers and free-standing buildings.
Total demand for new office space within the 3-mile radius of the Study Areas is estimated to
be 7,125,000 SF through 2030. Given the Study Areas high visibility and access, KMA estimates
that the Study Areas can capture 5% to 10% of this demand through 2030, equivalent to 356,000
to 713,000 SF. Short-term demand for office space would most likely continue from small
professional and business services that are local-serving. New office uses in the Study Areas will
require supporting amenities such as retail and restaurant uses.
The Tustin Hospital and Medical Center anchors the Southern Gateway study area, which may
provide opportunities for new development and increased access to additional medical services.
However, based on KMA’s interviews with office leasing agents, the Medical Center has a high
vacancy rate (30%). The office leasing agents also note that medical office demand throughout
the Study Areas is weak causing high vacancy rates. These vacancy rates could be attributed to
many factors, including poor marketing and/or management of the buildings, the elimination of
medical services, and lack of amenities to serve potential users.
Center City may be a candidate for finance, insurance, and real estate (FIRE) type professional
businesses that utilize office space that are local serving and regional tenants.
C. Residential Potential
Housing units within the City are projected to increase by approximately 5,100 through 2030, to
a total of about 29,900 units. KMA estimates that the Study Areas have the possibility to capture
20% to 30% of these new units over the long-term, or approximately 760 to 1,140 units.
It is KMA’s conclusion that there is a strong potential for multi-family residential development in
the Study Areas in both the short- and long-terms, with weak demand for single-family units in
the short-term. For the low and high capture scenarios, KMA allocated 100% of the new units as
multi-family and assumed no new development of single-family through 2030. Since the Study
Areas are located in the City’s urban core, it seems appropriate that the residential make-up of
the Study Areas is predominately multi-family. Despite the lack of available land, additional multifamily housing units within the Study Areas may be possible through increased densification and
adaptive re-use and repositioning of sites and existing buildings.
With the limited availability of large developable sites, additional single-family homes generally
do not appear conducive within the Study Areas. Single-family residential may be viable in the
future with turnover of certain key sites in the West Village Study Area and where higher density
patio home (condo-like) single family products are explored.
The rental market should remain stable and occupancy levels high due to the impact of the rise in
home foreclosures and new credit restrictions in residential lending. Expanding homeownership
opportunities within the Study Areas may improve income levels, increase neighborhood stability,
and attract retailers.
A NEW BEGINNING
2-11
EXISTING CONDITIONS
TABLE 2-3: TUSTIN TOWN CENTER REFINED MARKET ANALYSIS
Study Area Overview - 2008 Estimate (Source: Claritas, Inc.)
POPULATION &
INCOME
CENTER CITY
SOUTHERN
GATEWAY
WEST VILLAGE
CITY OF TUSTIN
3,088
9,997
8,867
71,955
$50,000
$48,400
$43,300
$70,000
25%
21%
15%
46%
1,101
3,545
2,594
26,767
Multi-Family*
82%
91%
84%
65%
Single-Family*
17%
8%
2%
31%
Other (includes
Mobile Homes)
0.2%
0.4%
14%
4%
Owner
22%
13%
23%
47%
Renter
75%
67%
74%
46%
Population
Median Household
Income
Households over
$75,000
HOUSING UNITS1
Total Units
Type
Occupancy
1
Numbers for tenure do not add up to 100% due to vacant units.
TABLE 2-4: TOTAL PROJECTED DEVELOPMENT
Long Term Projection, 2008-2030
LAND USE
LOW
HIGH
25,800 sf
65,300 sf
356,000 sf
713,000 sf
760 Units
1,140 Units
Retail / Restaurant
Office
Residential
2-12
A NEW BEGINNING
EXISTING CONDITIONS
2 . 2 C e n ter C ity
2.2.1 CENTER CITY EXISTING CONDITIONS
The Center City Neighborhood is bounded by the I-5 Freeway to the south, 6th Street and a
portion of Main Street to the north, and San Juan Street and Red Hill Avenue to the east. Two
major arterials, Newport Avenue and Redhill Avenue, are the main spines of the neighborhood
and the focus of commercial activity.
The neighborhood is characterized by a range of uses and parcel sizes. Tustin High School
occupies a large area located between Red Hill Avenue and Orange Street. The west side of Red
Hill Avenue is lined with commercial uses and a smaller office use at the intersection with San Juan
Street. A strip-retail center occupies several parcels on the east side of Red Hill Avenue. Newport
Avenue is lined with office and commercial uses on its west side and with commercial uses on
its east side. The area to the east of the commercial uses up to Orange Street is characterized
by a mix of multi-family and single-family uses on smaller or combined parcels. The intersection
of Newport Avenue and El Camino Real serves as an vehicular entry to Old Town Tustin located
along the north-western portion of El Camino Real (Figure 2-8).
Traffic moves through the neighborhood primarily on Newport and Red Hill Avenue in northsouth direction, and on Bryan Avenue and El Camino Real in east-east direction. Both Newport
and Red Hill Avenue connect to the I-5 Freeway on the south side of the neighborhood (Figure
2-9).
Clockwise from top left:
1. El Camino Plaza in Old
Town
2. Red Hill Plaza on Red
Hill and El Camino Real
3. Industrial and
commercial uses along
6th Street
1
2
4
3
4. A vacant lot along El
Camino Real, just east of
the “Jack in the Box” on
Newport Avenue
A NEW BEGINNING
2-13
EXISTING CONDITIONS
FIGURE 2-8: EXISTING USES IN THE CENTER CITY NEIGHBORHOOD
Br
ya
nA
ve
n
ue
Sa
nJ
Ci
rc
Es
te
ro
An
dr
ew
sS
tre
et
le
Main Street
ua
nS
tre
et
tA
ve
ni
ta
St
re
e
t
El
Lambert School
St
re
et
St
re
et
Ne
wp
or
W
aln
ut
Or
an
ge
El Camino Real
Bo
El Camino Way
B Street
6th Street
Sa
nJ
Ca
m
ua
Tustin High School
in
nS
tre
et
oR
ea
l
Ca
m
Re
al
Re
d
Hi
ll
Av
en
ino
ue
EL
Center City Neighborhood Boundary
Commercial Office with Retail Use
Town Center Redevelopment Area
Other Commercial Use
South Central Redevelopment Area
Industrial Use
Multi-Family Residential Use
Public Use
Single Family Residential Use
Private Institutional Use
Class I Bikeway
Commercial Retail Use
Commercial Retail with Office Use
Commercial Office Use
2-14
A NEW BEGINNING
0
150
300
600
EXISTING CONDITIONS
FIGURE 2-9: CIRCULATION IN THE CENTER CITY NEIGHBORHOOD
Residential (Large Rental)
School
Residential (Rental 1 - 6 Units)
Church
Residential (Ownership)
Park
Mobile Homes
Vacant Land
Commercial
Primary Street
Industrial
Secondary Street
A NEW BEGINNING
2-15
EXISTING CONDITIONS
2.2.2 CENTER CITY MARKET CONDITIONS SUMMARY OF MARKET DEMAND ANALYSIS
Key demographic findings for Center City in 2008 are as follows:
TABLE 2-5: CENTER CITY DEMOGRAPHICS, 2008
Population
3,088
Housing Units
1,101
Multi-Family*
82.3%
Single-Family*
17.4%
Average Household Size
Median Household Income
2.79
$50,016
Housing Tenure
Owner-Occupied
22.0%
Renter-Occupied
75.2%
Source: Claritas, Inc.
Existing properties within Center City were generally built in the 1960s and 1970s and include
a mix of low-density, single-family homes, strip retail, local-serving office, and light industrial
uses. Center City is anchored by two shopping centers, Red Hill Plaza and El Camino Plaza,
both of which are located along major commercial streets of Red Hill Avenue and El Camino
Real. In addition, the study area is also served by two adjacent shopping centers, Tustin Plaza
and Larwin Square. Large institutional uses within Center City include Tustin High School and
Lambert Elementary School. New developments underway include Tustin Cottages, a residential
townhome development along El Camino Real next to Tustin High School, and an assisted
congregate care facility on Red Hill Avenue.
Center City contains two vacant sites. A 0.52-acre site is located at 13742 Red Hill Avenue,
adjacent to the Red Hill Plaza shopping center, with the other site located at 1062 El Camino
Real, adjacent to the I-5 Freeway.
2-16
A NEW BEGINNING
EXISTING CONDITIONS
2.2.3 CENTER CITY CONSTRAINTS AND OPPORTUNITIES
The location and context of the Center City Neighborhood present the following constraints and
opportunities (Figure 2-10):
Constraints
Opportunities
•
•
The adjacency of Old Town is an asset.
•
City Hall, the new library, schools,
and parks are in the immediate area
surrounding the neighborhood.
•
Good access to the I-5 Freeway with two
interchanges.
•
Potential gateway locations with high
visibility at the intersections of El Camino
Real with Newport and Red Hill Avenue.
•
•
Elevated I-5 Freeway forms a
continuous barrier to the south and
impacts the neighborhood with noise
and high retaining walls along El
Camino Real.
The configuration of the I-5 Freeway
and Newport Avenue interchange
limits access and capacity.
Large parcels, such as Tustin High
School, and south of 6th Street, impede
connectivity within the neighborhood.
FIGURE 2-10: CONSTRAINTS AND OPPORTUNITIES IN THE CENTER CITY NEIGHBORHOOD
A NEW BEGINNING
2-17
EXISTING CONDITIONS
2 . 3 Sou th ern Gateway
2.3.1 SOUTHERN GATEWAY EXISTING CONDITIONS
The Southern Gateway Neighborhood is bounded by the I-5 Freeway and McFadden Avenue to
the north, the SR-55 Freeway to the west, the Southern California Regional Rail Authority rightof-way (“rail right-of-way”) and Sycamore Avenue to the south, and various property lines to the
east.
Newport Avenue is the main north and south arterial which transects the Southern Gateway
neighborhood and connects to the I-5 Freeway and the Center City Neighborhood to the north.
In contrast to Center City, a variety of uses are located along Newport Avenue. Commercial
uses are predominant in the section between McFadden and Nisson Streets, while a mix of
commercial, office, medical and residential uses characterize the area between Walnut Avenue
and Sycamore Avenue. A commercial office building and residential uses are located along the
southern portion of Newport Avenue between Sycamore Avenue and the rail right-of-way. Newport
Avenue is connected to the SR-55 Freeway at Sycamore Avenue via both on and off-ramps, and
an I-5 Freeway off-ramp is located abutting the northerly boundary of the Neighborhood. The
conditions of the buildings along Newport Avenue vary from new to substandard, and some of
the commercial parcels in the center portion of the Neighborhood are currently underutilized.
1. Tustin Medical Center
on Newport Avenue
2. Arbor Walk residential
development on
Newport Avenue
3. Commercial uses along
Newport Avenue
2-18
1
2
4
3
A NEW BEGINNING
4. Four-plexes along
Myrtle Avenue
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The neighborhood is predominantly multi-family residential with strip-type commercial uses
concentrated along the northern portion of Newport Avenue between Walnut Avenue and Nisson
Road. The Tustin Medical Center is located near the intersection of Sycamore and Newport
Avenue. The intersection of Newport Avenue with another major street, McFadden Avenue,
forms a triangular-shaped block in the center of the neighborhood that is currently occupied by
low-intensity commercial uses. In addition to the Tustin Medical Center office building, there are
two more parcels with office uses located on the west side of Newport Avenue (Figure 2-11).
Newport Avenue serves as the major traffic spine in north-south direction and connects to the
I-5 Freeway on the north and SR-55 Freeway on the southwest border of the neighborhood
via Sycamore Avenue. The planned extension of Newport Avenue will provide a connection to
the south via a grade-separated crossing of the railroad, and make the neighborhood more
accessible from Edinger Avenue and from the SR-55 Freeway at Del Amo Avenue. Currently,
Newport Avenue dead-ends at the rail right-of-way. McFadden and Walnut Avenue are the two
major streets connecting the neighborhood to the east and west (Figure 2-12) .
Newport Avenue is currently a six-lane major arterial with on-street parking restrictions (recently
imposed). Sidewalks are narrow in the area and there are inconsistent streetscape improvements.
The future planned extension of Newport south of this Neighborhood’s southerly boundary
(across the Southern California Regional Rail Authority right-of-way and Orange County Flood
Control District channel), combined with the proposed future street widening of Newport Avenue
from the rail right-of-way north to Myrtle Avenue will significantly improve vehicular connectivity
to the south and also provide additional direct connections to the SR-55 Freeway.
A NEW BEGINNING
2-19
EXISTING CONDITIONS
FIGURE 2-11: EXISTING USES IN THE SOUTHERN GATEWAY NEIGHBORHOOD
Nis
son
Rd
n Rd
SC
St
re
et
Nisso
BS
tre
et
55
M
itc
he
ll A
ve
W
aln
ut
Av
e
De
lA
m
oA
ve
or
wp
Ne
Fe
Ch
an
nn
el
tA
ve
Altadena Dr
Bliss Ln
Sa
nt
aA
na
Sa
nt
a
Myrtle Ave
Pasadena Ave
Mc Fadden Avenue
Syc
am
ore
Sc
he
re
rP
l
Ave
xD
r
aD
or
eA
ve
Ch
ar
lo
m
m
Ca
r fa
Sy
ca
De
lA
m
oA
ve
r
Kenyo
nD
r
Southern Gateway
Neighborhood Boundary
Public Use
OCTA/ SCRRA Railway
0
2-20
A NEW BEGINNING
150
300
600
EXISTING CONDITIONS
FIGURE 2-12: CIRCULATION IN THE SOUTHERN GATEWAY NEIGHBORHOOD
INT
ER
STA
T
M
E. McFADDEN AVE.
RO
UT
M
ET
RO
L
IN
K/
R
Primary Street
Secondary Street
.
.
AV
E
AV
E
.
.
AV
E
OR
E
AL
NU
T
AV
E
HI
LL
E5
5
NE
W
EDINGER AVE.
SY
CA
M
IT
CH
EL
L
RE
D
PO
RT
AV
E
.
W
E5
AI
L
Planned Street
Mobile Homes
Commercial
Industrial
Institutional (Medical Center)
School
Church
Park
A NEW BEGINNING
2-21
EXISTING CONDITIONS
2.3.2 SOUTHERN GATEWAY MARKET CONDITIONS SUMMARY OF MARKET DEMAND ANALYSIS
At approximately 136 acres, Southern Gateway consists primarily of multi-family residential
housing units constructed in the 1960s and 1970s. The following presents key demographic
findings for the study area for 2008:
TABLE 2-6: SOUTHERN GATEWAY DEMOGRAPHICS, 2008
Population
9,997
Housing Units
3,545
Multi-Family**
91.2%
Single-Family**
8.4%
3.55
%48.445
Housing Tenure*
Owner-Occupied
12.5%
Renter-Occupied
66.8%
* the balance of the owner- and renter-occupied units are considered to
be vacant units
** Housing Unit Definition:
Retail space in Southern Gateway is located along the major commercial corridors of Newport
and Walnut Avenues. Southern Gateway contains one neighborhood retail center, the Tustin
Freeway Center, located on Newport Avenue and the I-5 Freeway. The center does not contain
any major anchor tenants and experiences high vacancy rates, despite having good freeway
visibility.
Large institutional uses within Southern Gateway include the Tustin Hospital and adjacent medical
offices.
The most recent development in Southern Gateway is Arbor Walk, a residential condominium
development developed by the Olson Company, located on Newport Avenue between Walnut
and Sycamore Avenues.
KMA conducted site visits and visual surveys of the study area and found that there are no vacant
or underutilized sites in Southern Gateway.
2-22
A NEW BEGINNING
EXISTING CONDITIONS
2.3.3 SOUTHERN GATEWAY CONSTRAINTS AND OPPORTUNITIES
The location and context of the Southern Gateway Neighborhood present the following
constraints and opportunities (Figure 2-13):
Constraints
•
The neighborhood is confined by major barriers on three sides: the I-5 Freeway to the
north, the SR-55 Freeway to the west, and the rail right-of-way to the south. These barriers
create an island effect that impacts the connectivity to adjacent areas as well as significant
noise issues.
•
The configuration of the I-5 Freeway and Newport Avenue interchange limits access and
capacity.
•
Large apartment complexes and cul-de-sacs within the neighborhood limit access and
connectivity.
•
There is a lack of open space.
Opportunities
•
Good access to the I-5 Freeway and the SR-55 Freeway.
•
Views from McFadden Avenue overpass.
•
Planned Newport Avenue extension to the south will improve access to the
neighborhood.
•
The Tustin Medical Center is centrally located on Newport Avenue and has high visibility.
•
Two schools and one park (Frontier Park) are located nearby.
•
The Family and Youth Center on Newport Avenue is a community asset.
•
Potential gateway location on the northern and southern end of Newport Avenue.
A NEW BEGINNING
2-23
EXISTING CONDITIONS
FIGURE 2-13: CONSTRAINTS AND OPPORTUNITIES IN THE SOUTHERN GATEWAY
NEIGHBORHOOD
2-24
A NEW BEGINNING
EXISTING CONDITIONS
2 . 4 Wes t V il l age
2.4.1 WEST VILLAGE EXISTING CONDITIONS
The West Village Neighborhood is bounded by the I-5 Freeway and Main Street to the north, the
SR-55 Freeway to the east, and McFadden Avenue to the south. The neighborhood is surrounded
on three sides by the City of Santa Ana. The only road running through the neighborhood in
north-south direction is Williams Street, which connects to Main Street and McFadden Avenue.
The neighborhood is predominantly multi-family residential with smaller scale commercial uses
located along McFadden Avenue and a small store located at the corner of Main Street and
Williams Street. The commercial center at the intersection of McFadden Avenue and Tustin
Village Way includes the regionally known The Jewelry Exchange store that occupies one large
building. The other buildings on the site are currently vacant. The two large parcels located south
of Main Street are occupied by two separate mobile home parks.
The Robert Heidemann School is located on the west side of Williams Street and provides the
only open space in the neighborhood with its play field (Figure 2-14). The open space is not easily
accessible or readily visible due to the site being closed to the public.
The circulation options in the neighborhood are limited to Williams Street, Tustin Village Way,
and Alliance Avenue. Williams Street is the only through-street. Tustin Village Way connects
to McFadden Avenue but dead-ends on its northern end. The limited supply of on-street
parking in the neighborhood is an issue, particularly on Alliance Street. Access to and within
the neighborhood is restricted by large blocks of self-contained apartment complexes and
privately-owned streets. Most traffic within the neighborhood is local and primarily enters at the
intersections of Williams Street and Tustin Village Way with McFadden Avenue (Figure 2-15).
1. Commercial center
with The Jewelry
Exchange store on
McFadden Avenue and
Tustin Village Way
2. Multi-family housing
along Alliance Avenue
1
2
3. Apartment complex on
Tustin Village Way
4. The entrance to the
mobile home park on
the west side of Williams
Street
4
3
A NEW BEGINNING
2-25
EXISTING CONDITIONS
S Elk Ln
FIGURE 2-14: EXISTING USES IN THE WEST VILLAGE NEIGHBORHOOD
Main Street
Robert
Heidemann
School
55
Williams Street
Alliance Street
Fe
Ch
an
nn
el
Southewest Tustin Channnel
Sa
nt
aA
na
Sa
nt
a
Tustin Village Way
Lorelei Ln
Mc Fadden Avenue
West Village Neighborhood Boundary
Public Use
Mobile Home Park Residential Use
Vacant Land
Caltrans
OCTA/ SCRRA Railway
0
2-26
150
300
600
A NEW BEGINNING
EXISTING CONDITIONS
FIGURE 2-15: CIRCULATION IN THE WEST VILLAGE NEIGHBORHOOD
Park
Vacant Land
Primary Street
Mobile Homes
Secondary Street
Commercial
Industrial
Institutional (Medical Center)
School
A NEW BEGINNING
2-27
EXISTING CONDITIONS
2.4.2
WEST VILLAGE MARKET CONDITIONS SUMMARY OF MARKET DEMAND ANALYSIS
Key demographic findings for the study area for 2008 include:
TABLE 2.7: WEST VILLAGE DEMOGRAPHICS (2008)
Population
8,867
Housing Units
2,594
Multi-Family*
83.7%
Single-Family*
2.2%
3.52
$43,306
Housing Tenure
Owner-Occupied
23.2%
Renter-Occupied
73.8%
Encompassing approximately 167 acres, West Village contains a mixture of large and small
scale multi-family residential housing units and two manufactured home communities. The main
commercial corridor is McFadden Avenue, with The Jewelry Exchange Center as the only major
retail center in the study area. However, The Jewelry Exchange site currently provides little in
terms of neighborhood retail, such as grocery, convenience retail, and services.
West Village currently has one vacant site: 16801 McFadden Avenue (0.44 acres). Development
of a new 15,000-SF commercial building at 15700 Tustin Village Way is under construction.
2.4.3 WEST VILLAGE CONSTRAINTS AND OPPORTUNITIES
The location and context of the West Village Neighborhood present the following constraints
and opportunities (Figure 2-16):
Constraints
2-28
•
The neighborhood is confined by major barriers on two sides: the I-5 Freeway to the north
and the SR-55 Freeway to the east. The rail right-of-way the southwest of the neighborhood
forms a third barrier although it is not located within the city limits but in proximity to the
neighborhood. These barriers create an island effect that restricts connectivity to adjacent
areas and causes significant noise impacts.
•
Large blocks and self-contained apartment complexes as well as mobile home parks limit
access to the neighborhood and impact connectivity.
•
There are only three access points to the neighborhood located to the north and south;
there are no access points from the east or west.
•
Alliance Street is the only east- west connection.
•
Tustin Village Way dead-ends at its northern end and potentially limits life-safety access.
A NEW BEGINNING
EXISTING CONDITIONS
•
There is a lack of public open space.
•
There is a lack of sufficient on-street parking.
•
Although the Santa Ana Zoo to the north of the neighborhood is an asset in the area,
access opportunities from the neighborhood are missing.
Opportunities
•
The Robert Heidemann School is a community asset.
•
Tustin Village Way and Williams Street are suited to become improved entries to the
neighborhood.
•
There are already established commercial uses located along McFadden Avenue.
•
There is good visibility from the McFadden Avenue overpass traveling from the east.
•
Accessible to SR-55 Freeway from the southern end of Tustin Village Way.
•
Large opportunity sites for future development include the former Caltrans ramp site, The
Jewelry Exchange and commercial center, as well as the two mobile home sites.
FIGURE 2-16: CONSTRAINTS AND OPPORTUNITIES IN THE WEST VILLAGE NEIGHBORHOOD
A NEW BEGINNING
2-29
3 . C O MM U N I T Y O UTR E ACH
P ROC E SS
COMMUNITY OUTREACH PROCESS
3 . 1 S u mmary of th e Community Outreach Process
Community Workshops were held in October 2008 and in September 2009. The consultant team
presented existing conditions and initial concept plans for feedback. An extensive community
dialogue was conducted to help frame the proposed Concept Plans for each neighborhood.
A summary and discussion of the feedback from each series of workshops follows in this
chapter.
The proposed draft Concept Plans were also reviewed by the Planning Commission and City
Council. A summary of any concerns or refinements requested by each of these bodies is also
discussed.
3 . 2 Wo rksh op # 1 Su m mary D iscussion &
Fe e d b a ck
On October 6, 2008, the City of Tustin hosted three one-hour Community Outreach Workshops
to seek public input on revitalization efforts of three neighborhoods in Tustin: the City Center,
Southern Gateway, and West Village Neighborhoods.
The feedback provided by the public was used by the city and the consultant team to develop
two concept plan alternatives for each neighborhood and to select and evaluate opportunity
sites. Results were presented in the subsequent Public Workshop # 2 in September 2009.
All three workshops started with a presentation by the consultant team followed by an open
discussion. Questions and comments were recorded during the meeting and the public was also
given the opportunity to provide comments on the City’s website after the workshops. Please
refer to Appendix A.6 for the workshop presentation materials and recorded comments. For each
neighborhood, the presentation included background information about the study area, existing
conditions, a summary of the refined market analysis, and the identification of constraints and
potential opportunity sites.
An important point described at the workshops, based on direction of the City Council, was to
reinforce that the intent of the study was to encourage development to be market driven by the
private sector without the use of eminent domain.
A brief summary of comments received at each workshop follows on the next page.
A NEW BEGINNING
3-1
Center City - Key Public Comments:
•
Create more linkages, particularly to existing assets such as Old Town and El Camino Plaza.
•
Improve the pedestrian environment.
•
Provide bike lanes.
•
Placemaking.
•
Provide more public transit.
•
Maintain existing affordable housing and build new affordable housing.
•
Use current vacant office space before developing new office space.
•
Timeline of Newport Avenue extension?
•
Red Hill Plaza is an opportunity site.
•
Use vacant land for residential parking.
Southern Gateway - Key Public Comments:
•
Future use of the Tustin Medical Center?
•
Retail and commercial uses should focus on the community.
•
More mix of uses; no more strip centers.
•
Need for open space, parks, and greenbelts.
•
Provide more bus connections.
•
Make the Newport Avenue extension a priority.
•
The commercial center at Walnut and Newport Avenue is an opportunity site.
West Village - Key Public Comments:
3-2
•
Lack of parking on Alliance Avenue; introduce diagonal parking.
•
Provide financial mechanisms for improvements.
•
Use the school as a neighborhood amenity.
•
Address traffic issues on Williams Street caused by through-traffic from Santa Ana.
•
Reduce traffic in residential areas.
•
Lack of retail/ grocery store in the neighborhood.
•
Extension of Tustin Village Way to Main Street.
•
Consider converting some private roads into public roads.
•
Better configuration of buildings could free up space for new development or open space.
A NEW BEGINNING
3 . 3 Worksh op # 2 Su m mary D iscussion & Feed b ack
In September 2009, a second set of public workshops were held
for each neighborhood. The three workshops were conducted on
three separate days starting on September 28th and ending on
September 30th.
Based on the input given at Workshop #1, the team developed
alternative concept plans, and identified potential opportunity
sites.
Goals of Workshop #2:
1.
To educate and involve the participants and the neighborhood
in general about development and redevelopment in Tustin.
2.
To inform participants about the economics, realities and
possibilities of change affecting the neighborhoods’ physical
environment.
3.
To illustrate and describe two alternative conceptual plans for
the future of the neighborhood, one that is not as ambitious
and can be implemented more easily than the other.
4.
To identify key opportunity sites for possible redevelopment
and to explain the potential for the sites to be catalysts for
further improvements in the neighborhood.
5.
To discuss the conceptual plans and key opportunity sites and
to explain next steps in the study and in the neighborhood.
The workshops began with a presentation about existing conditions.
Participants reviewed the two proposed alternative concept plans
and discussed key opportunity sites. Participants were encouraged
to provide comments in a general discussion and on notes that
could be posted on the plan displays in the meeting room. The
plan displays showed all concept plan alternatives and opportunity
sites presented at the beginning of the workshop. The workshop
ended with a question and answer session, and an explanation of
the next steps in the planning process.
Participants at Workshop 2 discussing
alternative concept plans.
Participants at Workshop 2 writing
comments on notes to post on plan
displays (seen in the background).
A brief summary of comments received at each workshop follows
on the next page.
A NEW BEGINNING
3-3
Center City - Key Public Comments:
•
Residential uses, particularly multi-family housing, is preferred over office use on the south
side of 6th Street; office is appropriate along the freeway.
•
Use higher buildings along the freeway to mitigate noise.
•
Provide access to new development south of 6th Street, in addition to 6th Street.
•
Extend El Camino Real to B Street.
•
Improve Red Hill Avenue with on-street parking and better traffic flow at intersection of Red
Hill Avenue and El Camino Real.
•
Preference for opportunity sites #1 and #2.
Southern Gateway - Key Public Comments:
•
Newport Avenue extension is a top priority.
•
Prioritize improvements in the preferred alternative.
•
Provide more open space and parks for residents; liked idea of combining open space with
new youth center location.
•
Traffic concern if connection of Pasadena Avenue to Sycamore Avenue is closed.
•
What is meant by upgrades and what financial resources are available?
•
Good location for proposed new youth center in Alternative B.
•
Like streetscape improvements such as street trees and bike lanes.
•
Lack of residential parking.
•
Provide low- and middle-income housing.
•
Preference for Alternative B.
•
Preference for opportunity site #8 between McFadden, Walnut, and Newport Avenue.
West Village - Key Public Comments:
3-4
•
Reduce traffic in the neighborhood; school traffic is an issue.
•
Proposed new street perceived as positive and negative.
•
Accommodate Better mix of residents.
•
Develop a long-term vision.
•
Provide more retail on McFadden Avenue.
•
Make the neighborhood a part of Tustin: Announce with signs, mark entrance, improve the
streetscape.
•
Need of open space; liked proposed parks in both alternatives.
•
Liked the idea of replacing mobile home parks with residential in the long-term. What are the
incentives for the mobile home park to move?
•
Alternative A displaces too many residents on Alliance Street.
•
More parking is needed.
•
Preference for Alternative B as a long-term plan because it provides more improvements to
the neighborhood.
•
Preference for opportunity site #12; liked the proposed park and gateway to the
neighborhood.
A NEW BEGINNING
3 . 4 P l a n n in g Commission
On August 24, 2010, the Planning Commission met for a workshop session to discuss the draft
strategic guide for the Neighborhood of Tustin Town Center.
Public Comments:
Sam Myrich, Saddleback Mobile Home Park
• Disposition and/or impact of study and future proposals on mobile home parks?
Jacob Zamora, resident West Village area
• Are there plans for increased parking in the area?
Donna McClelland, resident Tustin Village II
• Traffic circulation pattern at McFadden and Tustin Village Way. Are there any changes
planned to improve circulation or add new streets?
Discussion was held and all questions were responded to by staff.
Commission Comments:
•
Good recommendations.
•
Compliments staff on the good work.
•
Open space and park land wherever possible.
•
Jewelry Exchange area improvements in West Village should be a priority.
•
An opportunity to introduce design guidelines and also integrate traffic calming into
circulation in neighborhoods via medians in major corridors. The Red Hill corridor between
Walnut and the railroad tracks was cited as an example.
•
Develop a common palette and template for landscaping along corridors and medians, using
bricks, foliages and trees to eliminate grass and conserve water.
•
Gateway landscaping to be consistent and provide an identity linking north, south, east and
west of city.
•
Complete Newport Extension as soon as possible.
•
Stay on track with plans for incentives to homeowners and for open space.
•
Consider live work units like Prospect Village along major corridors and pedestrian friendly
areas.
3 . 5 C i ty Cou n cil
At the Tustin City Council meeting on September 21, 2010, Councilman Doug Davert moved and
Mayor Jerry Amante seconded that the City Council and Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency
formally endorse the Town Center New Beginning study as a strategic guide for development
and instructed staff to proceed with specific programming of priority action programs, as funding
is available and in conjunction with the City’s and Redevelopment Agency’s normal budget
process. The motion was unanimously approved by all members of the City Council.
A NEW BEGINNING
3-5
4 . NE I GH B O R H O O D CO NC E P T
P L AN A LT E R N ATIVE S A ND
OP P O RT U N I T Y S ITE S
NEIGHBORHOOD CONCEPT PLAN ALTERNATIVES AND OPPORTUNITY SITES
4 . 1 An Overview
In preparing alternative concept plans for each neighborhood, overriding goals for short- and
mid-term development were determined to be applicable to all neighborhoods. Two alternative
concept plans were developed for each neighborhood for the purposes of evaluating a range of
alternative development programs. Each alternative will be described against how it will meet
these overall strategies.
4.1.1
OVERALL GOALS AND STRATEGIES FOR ALL NEIGHBORHOODS
Overall Goals
•
Increase the supply of housing
•
Upgrade the appearance of street
corridors and community gateways
•
Enrich the livability of neighborhoods
•
Revitalize commercial uses on arterial
streets
•
Create employment opportunities for
residents
•
Strengthen arterial corridors
•
Improve connectivity
•
Provide new open spaces
It was also determined that the following key strategies to support the overall goals would apply
to all three neighborhoods:
Overall Strategies to Accomplish the Goals
•
Strengthen arterial corridors by
consolidating commercial uses into
well-defined neighborhood centers
and/or mixed-use developments, and
revitalize arterial retail uses.
•
Redirect future development to
underutilized and underperforming
sites.
•
Focus uses onto neighborhood-related
and pedestrian-oriented sites to form
synergistic benefits with residential
uses.
•
Encourage introduction of moderate- to
high-density residential development
along street corridors, compatible with
the adjacent neighborhood.
•
Maintain an adequate
affordable housing.
•
Reduce residential overcrowding.
•
Encourage construction of a greater
variety of residential product types to
accommodate a variety of family sizes.
•
Develop additional park and open
spaces, where possible, particularly
within the West Village and Southern
Gateway neighborhoods.
supply
of
•
Relocate industrial uses away from
residential and commercial centers.
•
Convert underperforming commercial
sites to other uses or mixed uses.
•
Upgrade and revitalize older residential
areas.
•
Expand streetscape improvements
along street corridors and emphasize
gateways.
•
Improve connectivity in and between
neighborhoods, including provision of
bike lane routes.
A NEW BEGINNING
4-1
4.1.2
OVERVIEW OF OPPORTUNITY SITES
Based on the evaluation of existing conditions and the potential for future development in the
three neighborhoods of Tustin Town Center, a total of seventeen (17) opportunity sites (Figure
4-1) were identified. The sites were selected based on the following criteria:
•
Underutilization of land, buildings, or both
•
Key location with high visibility
•
Underperforming use
•
Buildings in state of disrepair
•
Use incompatible with surrounding uses, i.e. industrial close to residential uses
•
Access or traffic issues
•
Feasibility of development in the short- or long-term
Of the seventeen opportunity sites identified in the three neighborhoods of Tustin Town Center,
three (3) sites, one in each of the three neighborhoods, were identified as prototypical and having
potential as catalyst sites warranting further exploration:
•
Site 3 in the Center City neighborhood;
•
Site 9 in the Southern Gateway neighborhood; and,
•
Site 12 in the West Village neighborhood.
All key opportunity sites have the potential to significantly improve the neighborhoods and
initialize development on other opportunity sites (Figure 4-1). For the prototypical site testing
of each key opportunity site, i.e. the testing of building placement and size as well as a feasible
site layout based on site-specific development assumptions, and its financial feasibility analysis,
refer to Chapter 5.
While the improvement and development of all opportunity sites will likely play together to
achieve the overall goals for each neighborhood over time, current and future market conditions
as well as fluctuations in population and the job market will dictate the pace and phasing of
development. The three identified key opportunity sites, however, present viable opportunities
for development in the short- or mid-term due to the following factors:
Site 3, Center City
The site is strategically located at the intersections of El Camino Real, Newport Avenue, and
the ramps connecting to the I-5 Freeway. Due to its accessibility from Newport Avenue and El
Camino Real, and the proximity to Old Town, the redevelopment of the site can contribute to
forming an attractive gateway to the neighborhood. A large portion of the site is currently vacant
while the owner of the existing fast-food restaurant expressed a desire to relocate the building
as part of a reconfiguration of the site.
4-2
A NEW BEGINNING
Site 9, Southern Gateway
The site is currently occupied by an underperforming retail center that is in need of renovation
or reconfiguration. Centrally located at the intersection of Walnut Avenue and Newport Avenue,
the two main traffic connectors in the neighborhood, an improved retail center or a new mixeduse can start to form a currently missing commercial focal point in the neighborhood. The size
and shape of the parcel is ideal for a variety of development solutions.
Site 12, West Village
Compared to other opportunity sites in the neighborhood, the consultant team feels that
development of this site would be most beneficial to the neighborhood as it can accommodate
uses that were identified as needed the most: retail in proximity to the residential areas, open
space, and a central meeting place. Due to its location at the intersection of McFadden Avenue
and Tustin Village Way, the site has high visibility and the offers the opportunity to announce an
entrance to the neighborhood. The site amounts to 5.9 acres including the Caltrans parcel, which
allows for a larger scale, phased development. The city has the option to purchase the Caltrans
parcel and convert it to a public use, which makes the site an ideal candidate to accommodate
much needed open space for the neighborhood. The existing The Jewelry Exchange store
already attracts customers on a regional level and can become an anchor for new retail or mixeduse development. All other buildings of the retail center are currently sitting vacant, indicating
market conditions which may not be supporting the type of tenant mix that the commercial
center was designed for. This is a situation which may facilitate a relook at the type of appropriate
uses on the site that would facilitate redevelopment. With the right type of development, the site
can provide a center for commercial and recreational activity to the neighborhood.
FIGURE 4-1: OVERVIEW PLAN OF OPPORTUNITY SITES AND KEY OPPORTUNITY SITES
2
2
9
0
KEY OPPORTUNITY SITE
A NEW BEGINNING
4-3
4 . 2 C e n ter C ity N eigh borhood
4.2.1
CENTER CITY CONCEPT PLAN ALTERNATIVES
For the Center City Concept Plan, two alternatives were studied, Alternative A (Figure 4-2) and
Alternative B (Figure 4-3). Both alternatives follow the general objectives described below and
suggest solutions common to both alternatives as well as ones specific to each alternative. A
discussion of each opportunity site follows the discussion of alternative concept plans for each
neighborhood.
A. STRENGTHEN ARTERIAL CORRIDORS, REVITALIZE ARTERIAL RETAIL USES, AND
CREATE EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES
Many commercial parcels and buildings along the Newport Avenue, Red Hill Avenue, and El
Camino Real corridors are underutilized, not well-maintained, and dominated by parking lots.
Important goals for the neighborhood include the improvement of the visual appearance of
both corridors, the revitalization of commercial and retail uses, and the creation of additional
employment opportunities. Recommended improvements under either of the two concept plan
alternatives would include upgrades to the buildings and parking layouts, lot consolidation,
change of uses on selected sites, and streetscape improvements, such as improved sidewalks,
bike lanes, and continuous street trees. The alternative concept plans for the Center City
Neighborhood identify streets for streetscape improvements in general terms, whereas specific
streetscape and hardscape improvements within the public right-of-way would require further
study.
Improvements common to both Alternatives
4-4
•
On Newport Avenue, the existing commercial parcels on the east side of Newport Avenue
between Bonita Street and Andrews Street are identified for upgrades.
•
On the El Camino Real corridor between Newport Avenue and 6th Street, upgrades are
proposed for a series of commercial parcels on the north side of El Camino and south of
6th Street close to Old Town.
•
The existing church site on the west side of Red Hill Avenue will be developed with an
approved 201-unit senior housing complex.
•
On the south side of El Camino Real at the intersection of El Camino Way and El Camino
Real, a new two-story office building with ground floor retail has been approved and will
replace the existing office building.
A NEW BEGINNING
FIGURE 4-2: ALTERNATIVE A
Upgrade/ Renovate
Existing
Commercial Uses
along Newport Ave
New Retail/ Residential
Mixed-Use with Retail
oriented to El Camino
Br
ya
ue
Cir
cle
An
dr
ew
sS
tre
et
Upgrade/ Renovate
Existing Residential
te
ro
Upgrade Existing
Commercial
Upgrade/ Intensify
nA
ve
n
Main Street
Es
New Residential with
Lower Buildings and
Setbacks along
6th Street
Upgrade Existing
Residential Triplexes
Approved New
Commercial Use
Sa
nJ
ua
nS
tre
et
tA
ve
El Camino Real
Lambert School
Intensify/ Consolidate
Identified Existing
Residential Uses
between Newport Ave
and Orange St
or
W
aln
Ne
wp
ut
St
re
e
t
ni
ta
St
St
re
et
Bo
El Camino Way
re
e
t
El
Or
an
ge
B Street
6th Street
Sa
nJ
Ca
m
Tustin High School
in
ua
nS
ea
Potential El Camino Way
Alternative Roadway
Access (Subject to Further
Study)
tre
et
oR
l
Ca
m
Re
al
Av
en
ino
Re
d
Hi
ll
New
Retail/ Office
Mixed-Use
Upgrade Existing
Commercial
ue
EL
Improve Existing
Retaining Wall with
Vegetation or
Public Art
Upgrade Existing
Commercial
Retail/ Residential Mixed-Use
Streetscape Improvements
(subject to further study)
Existing Class I Bikeway
Public Use
Planned Class I Bikeway
Private Institutional
Institutional Use
Use
Private
Planned Class II Bikeway
Potential Bikeway Route
Proposed Upgrades/
Improvements
Proposed Change of Use and/or Consolidation
Review Alternative Roadway Access
A NEW BEGINNING
4-5
Improvements specific to each Alternative
Alternative A (See Figure 4-2)
•
The parcels south of El Camino and east of Newport Avenue are suitable for commercial
upgrades and infill development on the vacant portion of the parcel.
•
Real, directly to the south of the new two-story retail/office building and also fronting
on both streets, new commercial retail and office uses are proposed to complement the
existing uses at the intersection of El Camino Real and Newport Avenue.
•
On Red Hill Avenue, upgrades are proposed for the existing commercial parcels north of
El Camino and west of Red Hill Avenue.
Alternative B (See Figure 4-3)
4-6
•
The parcels south of El Camino and east of Newport Avenue can be consolidated and
redeveloped with new commercial office use and retail fronting on Newport Avenue and
El Camino Real.
•
Real, directly to the south of the new two-story retail/office building and also fronting on
both streets, new mixed-use is proposed as a part of a larger mixed-use development site
between 6th Street, El Camino Real, El Camino Way, and B Street.
•
On Red Hill Avenue, upgrades and lot consolidation are proposed for the existing
commercial parcels north of El Camino and west of Red Hill Avenue.
•
The Red Hill Center site on the east side of Red Hill Avenue is converted into retail and
office mixed-use.
A NEW BEGINNING
FIGURE 4-3: ALTERNATIVE B
Approved New
Commercial Use
New Mixed-Use with
Retail oriented to
El Camino
Br
Upgrade Existing
ya
ue
Cir
cle
An
dr
ew
sS
tre
et
Upgrade/ Renovate
te
ro
Upgrade Existing
Commercial
Upgrade/ Intensify
nA
ve
n
Main Street
Es
New Low-Scale
Atrium Type Office
Buildings
Upgrade /
Renovate Existing
Commercial Uses
along Newport Ave
Sa
nJ
ua
nS
tre
et
Av
e
El Camino Real
Lambert School
Identified Existing
Residential Uses
between Newport Ave
and Orange St
po
rt
W
aln
Ne
w
ut
St
re
e
t
ni
ta
St
St
re
et
El Camino Way
Bo
re
e
t
El
Or
an
ge
B Street
6th Street
Sa
nJ
Ca
m
Tustin High School
in
ua
nS
tre
et
oR
ea
Alternative Roadway
Study)
l
Ca
m
Re
al
Re
d
Hi
ll
Av
en
ino
ue
EL
Study Design
Options to Form
Gateway to
Old Town
Improve Existing
Retaining Wall with
Vegetation or
Public Art
New
Retail/Office
Mixed-Use
New Commercial
Office with Retail Use
Upgrade and
Consolidate Existing
Commercial
Study Design
Options to Form
Gateway
Public Use
Institutional Use
Use
Private
Proposed Upgrades/
Improvements
A NEW BEGINNING
4-7
B. IMPROVE STREETSCAPES AND EMPHASIZE GATEWAYS
The Center City Neighborhood is located north of the I-5 Freeway. There are on- and off-ramps
to the Freeway at Newport Avenue and Red Hill Avenue, the two north and south major arterials
traversing the neighborhood. The I-5 Freeway ramps provide limited access from and to Newport
Avenue as the exit off-ramp on the south side of the I-5 Freeway at Newport Avenue is restricted
and not all southbound movements on the freeway permit exiting at Newport Avenue given
improvement design constraints on the I-5 Freeway. The on-ramp on the north side at Newport
is for northbound traffic only. Both Newport and Red Hill Avenue intersect with El Camino Real
near the freeway and the two locations serve as community entry gateways to the neighborhood
and the entire city. The intersection of Newport Avenue and El Camino is also the main gateway
to Old Town. To reinforce the importance of a community gateway situation both visually and
spatially, gateway streetscape improvements should be made at these locations. There are
several opportunity sites at both intersections that can help shape a future gateway.
In addition to the Newport Avenue and Red Hill Avenue corridors, several other streets in the area
are identified for streetscape improvements provide for an enhanced pedestrian environment and
visual appearance. Streetscape improvements may include but would not be limited to sidewalk
widening, consistent street trees, planting strips, medians, reconfiguration of travel lanes and
on-street parking, traffic calming measures, pedestrian crosswalks, traffic signals, new street
lighting, and furniture. All locations shown for proposed streetscape improvements depicted in
the neighborhood plans are conceptual in nature and are subject to further study.
•
Streetscape improvements such as medians, street trees, signage, and public art can
support the gateway appearance and will require detailed study.
•
Beautification of the freeway retaining wall is shown along El Camino Real with vegetation
or public art.
•
Site layout and building design at these locations require further study and design
guidelines need to be developed to reinforce the community gateways.
•
Streetscape enhancements are proposed along El Camino Real between Newport Avenue
and Red Hill Avenue.
•
4-8
Lot consolidation and change of use for the purpose of new development is proposed
at the intersection of Newport Avenue and El Camino Real, as well as at the northeast
intersection of Red Hill Avenue and El Camino Real.
A NEW BEGINNING
C. ENRICH THE LIVABILITY OF RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS, INCREASE SUPPLY OF
AFFORDABLE HOUSING, CREATE EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES FOR RESIDENTS, AND
IMPROVE CONNECTIVITY
The Center City Neighborhood is the only neighborhood that includes industrial uses; they are
located on the south side of 6th Street east of B Street. To improve the livability of the existing
residential uses on the north side of 6th Street and to create more employment opportunities, the
properties on the south side of 6th Street are proposed for a change of use to either residential or
office uses. Similarly, the area between B Street and El Camino is underutilized with underperforming
commercial uses with the opportunity for a higher density mix of uses more appropriate to the
location due its proximity to Old Town. New development in this area should reinforce the entry to
Old Town, and become an attractive destination and gateway to Old Town.
Some residential parcels in the area between Newport Avenue, Orange Street, San Juan Street,
and Bonita Street are underutilized and some existing buildings are in sub-standard condition.
These parcels, particularly given multi-family zoning and their proximity to Newport Avenue, are
suitable for intensification through lot consolidation and infill development.
•
New residential and retail mixed-use is proposed for the parcels between El Camino Real,
El Camino Way and B Street, with ground-floor retail oriented towards El Camino Real. Lot
consolidation and new access streets, including the potential reconfiguration of El Camino
Way, would be required to accommodate the mixed-use development.
•
The new residential or office development along the south of 6th Street should have an
adequate greenbelt-like setback.
•
To mitigate the visual impact of new development along the south side of 6th Street relative
to the existing single-family houses on the north side of 6th street, building heights should
not exceed two stories along 6th Street and should gradually step up towards the freeway
with as many as five stories along the freeway.
•
Intensification and upgrades of residential uses is shown on identified parcels located
between Newport Avenue, Orange Street, San Juan Street, and Bonita Street. Intensification
includes lot consolidation and conversion from single-family to multi-family residential
uses.
•
Improvements should be made to maintenance of residential and commercial properties
through aggressive code enforcement and rehabilitation programs that might be offered.
•
The existing industrial uses south of 6th Street and east of B Street are replaced with new
multi-family residential uses.
•
The existing industrial uses south of 6th Street and east of B Street are replaced with new
atrium-type office uses.
•
New residential and retail mixed-use is proposed for some parcels east of El Camino Way
and west of El Camino Real.
A NEW BEGINNING
4-9
4.2.2
CENTER CITY OPPORTUNITY SITES
The following diagrams provide background and descriptions of each of the opportunity sites
identified in the Center City neighborhood under each concept plan alternative.
CENTER CITY OPPORTUNITY SITES 1-3:
EXISTING CONDITIONS
1
2
Site 1: 6th Street and B
Street
Total Area: 8.4 acres
Site 2: El Camino and
6th Street
Industrial/ Retail/
Office Use
Site 3: Newport Ave
and El Camino
Retail Use
SITE FEATURES
SITE LIMITATIONS
•
•
SITE 1:
•
Proximity to existing single-family residential
land uses north of 6th Street requires sensitive
solution for future uses, massing, and building
heights
•
•
•
•
•
Close proximity to Downtown
Good connectivity to El Camino & the I-5
Freeway
Gateway location to Downtown
Good visibility from El Camino and from parts of
Newport Avenue
Well served by public streets
Existing retail, office and residential adjacent to
sites
Potential for parcel consolidation
OPPORTUNITIES
•
Potential parcel consolidation
•
Intensification along El Camino
4-10
3
Industrial Use
A NEW BEGINNING
SITE 2:
•
Depth of parcels require improved accessibility
SITE 3:
•
Triangular shape of parcel limits efficient site
layout on the east side
ALTERNATIVE A
1
2
Residential Use
(Ownership)
3
Mixed-Use:
Neighborhood
Retail &
Residential
(Ownership)
Mixed-Use:
Retail &
Office
Retail Use No Change
ALTERNATIVE A
SITE 1:
•
New residential (ownership) with lower buildings up to 2 stories and setbacks along 6th Street and up
to 5 stories along the freeway; the transition from 2 to 5 stories should occur gradually
SITE 2:
•
New mixed-use: neighborhood retail & residential (ownership) with retail fronting on El Camino Real
•
Potential El Camino Way alternative roadway access (to be studied)
•
New mixed-use: retail & office use on east side of El Camino Way
SITE 3:
•
Upgrade and consolidate existing commercial uses
A NEW BEGINNING
4-11
ALTERNATIVE B
1
2
3
Office Use
(2-5 stories)
Mixed-Use:
Neighborhood
Retail &
Residential
(Ownership)
Mixed-Use:
Office & Retail
ALTERNATIVE B
SITE 1:
•
New low-scale atrium type office buildings up to 2 stories and setbacks along 6th Street and higher
office buildings up to 5 stories along the freeway; the transition from 2 to 5 stories should occur
gradually
SITE 2:
•
New mixed-use: neighborhood retail & residential (ownership) use with retail fronting on El Camino
Real
•
Potential El Camino Way alternative roadway access (to be studied)
•
New mixed-use: neighborhood retail & residential (ownership) use between El Camino Way and El
Camino
SITE 3:
•
Study design options to form gateway to Old Town
•
New mixed-use: office & retail use
4-12
A NEW BEGINNING
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Site 4: Red Hill Avenue & El
Camino
Site 5: Red Hill Avenue & El
Camino
4
5
Retail/ Other
Commercial
Use
Retail Use
SITE FEATURES
•
•
•
•
•
•
Good connectivity to El Camino and the I-5
Freeway
Good visibility from El Camino and Newport
Avenue
Southern portion of the site is visible from
the I-5 Freeway
Existing residential, retail, and office
adjacent to sites
Gateway location
Potential for parcel consolidation
SITE LIMITATIONS
SITE 4:
Residential uses on east and north side require
•
sensitive site layout and transitions
SITE 5:
•
Depth of parcels requires creative solutions for
accessibility and visibility
South-eastern parcels are only visible from El
•
Camino
OPPORTUNITIES
•
•
Intensification along Red Hill Avenue
A NEW BEGINNING
4-13
CENTER CITY OPPORTUNITY SITES 4-5
ALTERNATIVE A
SITE 4:
•
Upgrade existing
commercial uses
SITE 5:
•
Renovate or upgrade
existing retail/commercial
center and motel
4
5
Retail/ Other
Commercial Use
- No Change/
Upgrade Only
Retail Use No Change/
Upgrade
Only
ALTERNATIVE B
SITE 4:
•
Upgrade existing
commercial uses or
consolidate parcels into
one large parcel for new
commercial development
•
Form new gateway in
combination with Site 5
4
5
Mixed-Use:
Neighborhood
Retail & Office
Upgrade Only
4-14
A NEW BEGINNING
SITE 5:
•
New mixed-use:
neighborhood retail &
office use on consolidated
site
•
Form a new gateway in
combination with Site 4
4 . 3 S o uth ern Gateway Neig hb orhood
4.3.1
SOUTHERN GATEWAY CONCEPT PLAN ALTERNATIVES
For the Southern Gateway Concept plan, two alternatives were studied, Alternative A (see Figure
4-4) and Alternative B (see Figure 4-5). Both alternatives follow the general objectives described
below and suggest solutions common to both alternatives as well as ones specific to each
alternative. A discussion of each opportunity site follows the discussion of alternative concept
plans for each neighborhood.
The concept plan alternatives for the Southern Gateway neighborhood propose several land use
changes and streetscape improvements to revitalize the neighborhood.
Improvements common to both Concept Plan Alternatives
•
Several commercial parcels on both sides of Newport Avenue between McFadden Avenue
and Nisson Avenue are identified for upgrades.
•
The parcel at Mitchell Avenue and Newport Avenue, as well as the triangular-shaped block
between McFadden Avenue, Newport Avenue and Walnut Avenue, are suitable for new
mixed-use development, if the existing lots are consolidated into a larger site.
•
The residential area between Sycamore Avenue and Myrtle Avenue with frontage along
Newport Avenue is part of a larger area identified for major residential redevelopment.
•
Streetscape improvements are proposed along the entire stretch of Newport Avenue within
the neighborhood in order to improve the pedestrian environment. Specific measures and
recommendations, based on available right-of-way might include improved sidewalks,
medians, bike lanes, and other streetscape improvements which will require a detailed
study.
•
The proposed extension of Newport Avenue to the south, including the Newport underpass,
will provide a new connection to the SR-55 Freeway.
•
Improvements should be made to maintenance of residential and commercial properties
through aggressive code enforcement and rehabilitation programs that might be offered.
•
The retail center located at Newport Avenue and the south side of Walnut Avenue is
identified for upgrades.
•
The commercial parcel north of the existing youth center, located at Newport Avenue and
Sycamore Avenue, provides the opportunity for a youth center expansion site for the Tustin
Family Youth Center.
•
Upgrades are proposed for the residential area south of Sycamore Avenue and both west
(properties along Kenyon Drive) and east of Newport Avenue.
A NEW BEGINNING
4-15
•
The retail center located at Newport Avenue and the south side of Walnut Avenue is suitable
for office and retail mixed-use development. This site and the triangular-shaped mixed-use
site bounded by McFadden Avenue, Newport Avenue and Walnut Avenue are ideal sites
to form a new neighborhood center, due to their central location and high visibility.
•
The Tustin Family Youth Center parcel at Sycamore Avenue and Newport Avenue could
be combined with the adjacent commercial parcel to the north and the parking lot to the
east to form a larger site for commercial use. The site could serve as an additional gateway
entry point to the corridor from the SR-55 Freeway from the Sycamore Avenue freeway
ramps. This would necessitate the relocation and additional land area needed for outdoor
activities for the Tustin Family and Youth Center which might be located north of Sycamore
to the west of Pasadena Avenue to provide a more centralized location and additional
relief for denser portions of the Neighborhood.
•
The office building belonging to the existing medical complex and fronting on Newport
Avenue can be reused for commercial office uses.
•
The residential area south of Sycamore Avenue and east of Newport Avenue is proposed
for lot consolidation and residential redevelopment.
•
Since the neighborhood lacks open space, new institutional and residential development
can include small open space amenities.
B. ENRICH THE LIVABILITY OF RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS, INCREASE SUPPLY AND
DIVERSITY OF HOUSING, REDUCE OVERCROWDING, IMPROVE CONNECTIVITY, AND
PROVIDE ADDITIONAL OPEN SPACE
Several older residential areas need improvements or are identified for redevelopment to
enhance the overall housing supply and quality of buildings in the neighborhood. Suggested
improvements are building upgrades, lot consolidation to create larger sites for new residential
development, and changes of use from underperforming commercial uses to residential uses. New
residential development can create better connectivity in the neighborhood through reconfiguration
of access streets and pedestrian pathways. The neighborhood currently lacks open spaces. New
institutional and residential development can include open space amenities for residents as well
as limited access to the public.
4-16
•
Combining the single-family residential area, located at Mitchell Avenue and B Street, with
the underperforming commercial site to the north could form a larger site for possible new
multifamily residential development. The new larger site would require new access from B
Street.
•
Renovation and upgrades are proposed for the area bounded by Del Amo Avenue, Carfax
Drive, and Scherer Place, which is currently developed with four-plex residential buildings
in conjunction with site development.
•
The proposed mixed-use project located at the southeast corner of Mitchell Avenue and
east of Newport Avenue includes multifamily-residential use.
•
Lot consolidation is proposed in the area south of Altadena Drive between Newport
Avenue, Sycamore Avenue, and Myrtle Avenue, in order to form a larger site for new
residential development. Closed street portions in this area can either become part of the
development land or the right-of-way can be maintained for emergency access (subject to
further study).
A NEW BEGINNING
•
New landscaping is proposed within the Caltrans right-of-way area at the SR-55 Freeway
ramp and the Sycamore Avenue freeway exit.
•
New residential development at B Street and Altadena Drive could include small, publicly
accessible open spaces that serve neighborhood residents in addition to the private open
space required by code.
•
The lot consolidation in the area south of Altadena Drive would include the vacation of
Bliss Lane and the western portion of Altadena Drive.
•
The residential area located south of Sycamore Avenue and west of Newport Avenue is
identified for renovation and upgrades.
•
A potential cul-de-sac or partial closure of a portion of Pasadena Avenue (subject to further
study) is identified.
•
A proposed potential expansion of the youth center at Sycamore Avenue should include
open spaces.
•
The lot consolidation in the area south of Altadena Drive would include the vacation of
Bliss Lane, Altadena Drive, and the southern end of Myrtle Avenue in conjunction with
site development. A new street is proposed along the north side of the new development
site that connects Pasadena Avenue with Newport Avenue in east-west direction. The
consolidation includes a potential street closure and vacation of Pasadena Avenue between
Altadena Drive and Sycamore Avenue.
•
The residential parcels along Kenyon Drive are combined into one large site for new
multifamily residential development or for consolidated ownership and upgrade
improvements including the ability to add additional parking. The proposed consolidation
includes the abandonment of Kenyon Drive.
•
New or upgraded residential development at Kenyon Drive can include small amenity
open spaces.
•
A potential relocation of the Family Youth Center at Pasadena Avenue (or any other location)
should include a publicly accessible open space for neighborhood residents.
A NEW BEGINNING
4-17
(- (,$!1)(,)&$;$,-$(" ,$ (-$&
$,
*"+ ;$,-$("
)'' +$&
,)(
0 ,$ (-$&
0
)'' +$& -$&
(
*"+ ;$,-$("
)'' +$&
-
+
-
$,,)
0 -$&!!$ $; ,
-
55
-+
;*(,$)()!
;$,-$("9).-#
(- +
$-
#
#
1
'
((
(
)+
&
-
/
)
/
'
&
*"+ ;$,-$("
)'' +$&
(-
)+
(
*"+ ;$,-$("
)'' +$&
/
&- (+
*"+ ;$,-$("
,$ (-$&
.-
0*
(-
&(
&$,,(
*"+ ;$,-$("
)'' +$&
1+-& /
08 " --$)(
&)("+ 01
'*
0
-$& ,$ (-$&
$; ,
&&
/
(/ (.
, (/
)- (-$&.& )+
+-$&&),.+ )!)+-$)(
)!, (/ 2.: -
-).+-# +-.13
#
/
+
+
&
;
!
+
+
*"+ ()/- ;$,-$(" ,$ (-$&
&(( 0*)+/ ;- (,$)(
&)
+
#
+)*), $ ($("
)! 0*)+-
/ (.
'
/
&
)+
'
'
1
0 ,$ (-$&)(
)(,)&$- $-
)
/
+
7 (1)
(
+
*"+ ;$,-$("
$&)'*& ;
-+ -,* '*+)/ ' (-,
)'*& - -+ -+ ,2,.: --)
!.+-# +,-.13
).-# +(6- 01
$"#)+#))
).(+1
).-# (-+& / &)*' (-+ &(( &,,
$% 01
.&$,
)- (-$&
$% 01).-
+$/- (,-$-.-$)(&,
+)*), *"+ ,
'*+)/ ' (-,
)'' +$& -$&,
+)*), #(" )!,
)'' +$& -$&0$-#!!$ ,
*-$)(&&),.+ )!, (/
)'' +$&!!$ ,
.&-$'$&1 ,$ (-$&,
)- (-$&-+ -8-$)(0$-#
)-)(,)&$-$)(
$("& '$&1 ,$ (-$&,
$&01
-$& ,$ (-$&$; ,
4-18
A NEW BEGINNING
0
150
300
600
(- (,$!1)(,)&$;$,-$(" ,$ (-$&
*"+ ;$,-$("
)'' +$&
0 ,$ (-$&
$,,)
(
*"+ ;$,-$("
)'' +$&
-
+
-
0
-$&!!$ $; ,
55
)- (-$& 0
9).-# (- +$-
,)(
-
0-+ 2.: --)
.+-# +-.13
-+
&),.+ (
)*-$)(&/-$)(
)!, (/
2.: --)
.+-# +-.13
$,
0
)'' +$& -$&
$-
#
0
-$& ,$ (-$&
$; ,
&&
/
(/ (.
*"+ )(,)&$- ;$,-$(")'' +$&
1+-& /
&(
.-
/
*"+ ;$,-$("
)'' +$&
(
#
1
'
((
(
)+
&
#
/
+
7 (1)
(
+
+
&
., ;$,-$("
.$&$("
)'' +$&!!$ ,
)(,)&$- (
*"+ ;$,-$("
,$ (-$&
).-# (-+& / &)*' (-+ ;
!
+
+
'
&)
+
*"+ ()/- ;$,-$(" ,$ (-$&
*"+ ;$,-$("
$&)'*& ;
&(( 0*)+/ ;- (,$)(
).-# +(6- 01
$"#)+#))
).(+1
/
#
+)*), $ ($("
)! 0*)+-
/ (.
&
)+
'
'
1
)
/
+
0 ,$ (-$&)(
)(,)&$- $-
0
-$&!!$ $; ,
&
(-
'
)
/
&$,,(
)+
(-
-
/
&- (+
0*
, (/
08 " --$)(
&)("+ 01
'*
0)(,)&$- )'' +$&$-
-+ -,* '*+)/ ' (-,
)'*& - -+ -+ ,2,.: --)
!.+-# +,-.13
&(( &,,
$% 01
.&$,
&(( &,,
$% 01
+$/- (,-$-.-$)(&,
)- (-$&
$% 01).)'' +$& -$&,
)'' +$& -$&0$-#!!$ ,
)'' +$&!!$ ,
.&-$'$&1 ,$ (-$&,
+)*), *"+ ,
'*+)/ ' (-,
+)*), #(" )!,
&),.+ )!, (/
$("& '$&1 ,$ (-$&,
)- (-$&-+ -8-$)(0$-#
)-)(,)&$-$)(
-$& ,$ (-$&$; ,
+)*), 0-+ $&01
0
150
300
600
A NEW BEGINNING
4-19
C. IMPROVE STREETSCAPES
In addition to Newport Avenue, several other streets in the area are identified for streetscape
improvements to provide for an enhanced pedestrian environment and visual appearance.
Streetscape improvements, where adequate right-of-way exists, can include sidewalk improvements,
consistent street trees, planting strips, medians, reconfiguration of travel lanes and on-street
parking, traffic calming measures, pedestrian crosswalks, traffic signals, new street lighting and
street furniture. All proposed streetscape improvements that are illustrated in the neighborhood
plans are conceptual in nature and are subject to further study.
•
Streetscape enhancements are proposed for the intersection of McFadden Avenue and
Newport Avenue.
•
4-20
Streetscape enhancements are proposed at McFadden Avenue and Walnut Avenue.
A NEW BEGINNING
4.3.2
SOUTHERN GATEWAY OPPORTUNITY SITES
The following provides background of opportunities of each of the opportunity sites identified in
the Southern Gateway neighborhood under each concept plan alternative.
SOUTHERN GATEWAY OPPORTUNITY SITES 6-7:
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Site 6: Newport Ave & Mitchell Ave
Current Use: Commercial Retail
and Residential
Retail Use/
Residential Use
Site 7: Newport Ave & Mitchell Ave
Current Use: Commercial Retail
6
Retail Use
7
SITE FEATURES
SITE LIMITATIONS
SITE 6:
•
Marks the northern end of the Southern
Gateway neighborhood
•
Connectivity to Newport Avenue and limited
access to the I-5 Freeway from Newport Avenue
•
Good visibility from the I-5 Freeway exit and
Newport Avenue
•
Existing commercial and residential uses
adjacent to site
SITE 7:
•
Retail location on west side difficult due to
depth of parcel
•
Northern parcels require improved access
for future use
OPPORTUNITIES
•
•
Intensification along Newport Avenue
SITE 7:
•
High visibility from Newport Avenue
•
Efficient parcel shape
•
Site is surrounded by residential uses
A NEW BEGINNING
4-21
ALTERNATIVE A & B
Residential Use
(Rental/ Ownership)
6
Mixed-Use:
Retail &
Residential
(Rental/
Ownership)
7
SITE 6:
Intensify existing residential uses (rental/ ownership)
Consolidate residential parcels and add new residential (rental/ ownership) on north side
replacing the existing retail center
SITE 7:
New mixed-use: retail & residential (rental/ ownership) use
4-22
A NEW BEGINNING
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Site 8: Newport Ave and
Walnut Ave
Current Use: Commercial
Retail with some Office
Retail/
Office Use
8
Site 9: Newport Ave and
Walnut Ave
Current Use: Commercial
Retail with some Office
Retail/
Office Use
9
SITE FEATURES
Central location along Newport Avenue
•
corridor
Good connectivity to and visibility from
•
Newport Avenue and McFadden Avenue
Existing commercial and residential uses
•
adjacent to site
Sites are served well by public streets
•
SITE 8:
•
High visibility and accessibility from McFadden,
Newport, and Walnut Avenue
SITE LIMITATIONS
SITE 8:
Triangular shape is more difficult to develop
•
OPPORTUNITIES
Potential parcel consolidation for new
•
development
•
Sites 8 and 9 can form a new center for the
neighborhood
SITE 9:
•
Efficient parcel shape accessible from Newport
and Walnut Avenue
A NEW BEGINNING
4-23
SOUTHERN GATEWAY OPPORTUNITY SITES 8-9
ALTERNATIVE A
SITE 8:
New mixed-use: retail
& office use
Mixed-Use:
Retail &
Office
8
9
SITE 9:
Upgrade existing
commercial use
Retail/
Office Use No Change/
Upgrade
Only
ALTERNATIVE B
ALTERNATIVE B
Mixed-Use:
Retail &
Office
8
SITE 8:
& office use
SITE 9:
& office use
Mixed-Use:
Retail &
Office
9
4-24
A NEW BEGINNING
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Site 10: Newport Ave
and Sycamore Ave
Total Area: 6.3 to 10.2
acres
Current Use: Residential
Residential Use
10b
Retail Use
10a
11a
Youth Center
and Medical
Center
Parking Lot
Site 11: Newport Ave
and Sycamore Ave
Total Area: 0.5 to 2.5
acres
Current Use: Youth
Center, Commercial
Retail, Parking
11b
SITE FEATURES
•
•
•
•
•
•
Gateway location
High visibility and accessibility from Newport Avenue and Sycamore Avenue
Good connectivity to Newport Avenue, Sycamore Avenue, and the SR-55 Freeway
Efficient parcel shapes
Residential and institutional uses adjacent to sites
OPPORTUNITIES
•
•
•
•
•
Potential parcel consolidation at both sites to form larger development site
Potential closure of Pasadena Avenue to reduce through traffic
Possible reconfiguration of access streets to use Site 10 more efficiently
Intensification along Newport Avenue
Newport Avenue extension will increase access to neighborhood
A NEW BEGINNING
4-25
ALTERNATIVE A
Residential Use
(Ownership)
Youth Center
Expansion
SITE 10 a:
•
Potential cul-de-sac or
partial closure of a portion
of Pasadena Avenue
•
Potential street vacation of
Bliss Lane and the western
portion of Altadena Drive
•
Lot consolidation east and
west of Pasadena Avenue to
redevelop as new residential
(ownership)
10a
11a
SITE 11a:
•
Expansion of Existing
Youth Center on existing
commercial site
ALTERNATIVE B
Residential Use
(Ownership)
New Youth Center
w/ Green Space
10
a+b
Retail Use
11
a+b
SITE 10 a+b:
Potential youth center site
•
on the east side of Pasadena
Avenue
Potential cul-de-sac or
•
partial closure of a portion
of Pasadena Avenue
Potential street vacation
•
of Bliss Lane, the western
portion of Altadena Drive,
and the southern portion of
Myrtle Avenue
Lot consolidation east and
•
west of Pasadena Avenue to
redevelop as new residential
(ownership) on the east side
and new youth center on the
west side
New east-west street
•
connecting Pasadena with
Newport Avenue
SITE 11 a+b:
New consolidated retail
•
site, adjacent to upgraded
existing medical complex
4-26
A NEW BEGINNING
4 . 4 We s t V il l age Neighb orhood
4.4.1
WEST VILLAGE CONCEPT PLAN ALTERNATIVES
For the West Village Concept plan, two alternatives were studied, Alternative A (Figure 4-6) and
Alternative B (Figure 4-7).
The West Village neighborhood is bounded by Main Street, the I-5 and SR-55 Freeways, McFadden
Avenue, and the city boundary to Santa Ana. McFadden is a major street that passes by the
neighborhood at its southern end. The existing commercial uses along McFadden Avenue are
underperforming or vacant. These parcels are opportunity sites for new commercial or mixed-use
development, particularly at the intersection of Tustin Village Way, which could serve as a new
neighborhood node and visual entry to the West Village. The two alternative concept plans for
the neighborhood show the following proposed improvements:
•
Upgrade and renovate the small existing commercial retail uses at the intersection of Main
Street and Williams Street.
•
Upgrade or replace existing commercial retail uses at the intersection of McFadden Avenue
and Williams Street.
•
Upgrade and renovate existing commercial retail uses at McFadden Avenue and the west
side of Tustin Village Way.
•
Develop vacant, underutilized and underperforming parcels at McFadden Avenue and the
west side of Tustin Village Way and develop with new commercial retail uses.
•
Upgrade and potentially consolidate the existing retail center at McFadden Avenue and
the east side of Tustin Village Way to provide improved access and visibility.
•
Replace existing commercial retail uses at the intersection of McFadden Avenue and
Williams Street with new infill residential use to concentrate commercial activity at the
intersection of McFadden Avenue and Tustin Village Way.
•
Consolidate the commercial parcels at McFadden Avenue and west of Tustin Village Way
to provide one large parcel for new commercial development.
•
Redevelop the existing retail center at McFadden Avenue and the east side of Tustin Village
Way with residential and retail mixed-use development that includes public open space.
•
Add new small commercial uses on the west side of Williams Street at Main Street in
connection with a proposed redevelopment of the mobile home park.
A NEW BEGINNING
4-27
&%(
*"+ ()/- ;$,-$(")'' +$&
$(-+ -
)+ & $(
0#))&
;*(,$)(
+)*), )$(-
+%$("!)+
$"#)+#))
(+%,
(-
.,-$(8$&&" 1
)- (-$& 0
$"#)+#))
+%$-
) + $ '((
#))&
(
55
&&$( -+ -
0.&$
* (*
(-
((
(
&
$&&$',-+ -
#
).-# 0 ,-.,-$(#((( &
*"+ )(,)&$;$,-$("
)'' +$&
-$& (- +
(/ (.
*"+ ()/- ;$,-$(")'' +$&
0
)'' +$&
-$&,
0
)'' +$&
-$&,
+)*), *"+ ,
'*+)/ ' (-,
,-8$&&" $")+#))
).(+1
.&$,
+)*), #(" )!,
)'' +$& -$&,
$&01
.&-$'$&1 ,$ (-$&,
-+ -,* '*+)/ ' (-,
2,.: --)!.+-# +,-.13
&(( &,,
$% 01
&(( &,,
$% 01
4-28
A NEW BEGINNING
0
150
300
600
*"+ ;$,-$("
)'' +$&,
&%(
0)'' +$&
-$&$-
0 ,$ (-$&,
0$-#(- "+- .&$* (*
$(-+ -
0 ,$ (-$&
, 0$-#(- "+- .&$* (*
0-+ -4;- (,$)(
)!.,-$(8$&&" 1
2.: --).+-# +
-.13
)+ & $(
+)*), )$(-+%$("
!)+#))&(
$"#)+#)),
.,-$(8$&&" 1
0#))&
;*(,$)(
) + $ '((
#))&
*"+ ;$,-$(")+
0 ,$ (-$&, 5
$(&. '&&+%
55
(-
(
&&$( -+ -
(-
#
(
).-# 0 ,-.,-$(#((( &
((
&
0 -$& ,$ (-$&
$; ,
$&&$',-+ -
(/ (.
0(!$&&
,$ (-$&
)(,)&$- $- 0)'' +$&
-$&,
,-8$&&" $")+#))
).(+1
+)*), *"+ ,
'*+)/ ' (-,
.&$,
+)*), #(" )!,
)'' +$& -$&,
+)*), 0-+ .&-$'$&1 ,$ (-$&,
$&01
-$& ,$ (-$&$; ,
-+ -,* '*+)/ ' (-,
2,.: --)!.+-# +,-.13
&(( &,,
$% 01
&(( &,,
$% 01
0
150
300
600
A NEW BEGINNING
4-29
B. ENRICH THE LIVABILITY OF RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS, INCREASE SUPPLY AND
DIVERSITY OF HOUSING, REDUCE OVERCROWDING, IMPROVE CONNECTIVITY, AND
PROVIDE ADDITIONAL OPEN SPACE.
The West Village is primarily characterized by self-contained residential areas and two large
mobile home parks located at the northern end of Williams Street. The neighborhood also
currently lacks much needed public open spaces. The Robert Heidemann School, located on the
west side of Williams Street, is a neighborhood asset whose playing fields are currently the only
open space in the neighborhood albeit not available for non-curriculum activities and not open
to the public. Williams Street is the only north-south street that provides a connection between
McFadden Avenue and Main Street, and Alliance Street is an internal street which connects
Williams to Tustin Village Way. Some residential buildings on the south side of Alliance Street are
not in good condition and selected parcels could serve as opportunity sites for redevelopment.
The redevelopment of the two large mobile home park sites into new residential uses could
help to improve connectivity and access to the neighborhood with new streets and open space
included as part of development.
The two alternative concept plans for the neighborhood show the following proposed
improvements:
•
Work with Tustin Unified School District to obtain additional public access to outdoor play
areas at the existing Heidemann School site.
•
Identify the small residential site located immediately southeast of the school site for a
future school expansion. The site location is ideal for integration in the school site due to
its proximity to the school and the frontage along Williams Street.
4-30
•
Propose new public open space on the south side of Alliance by converting several parcels
located at the south side of Alliance Street from residential use to public open space.
•
The five westernmost parcels at the intersection of Williams and Alliance Streets are
opportunity sites for additional joint parking for the small park and potential parking areas
for school uses during school hours.
•
Convert existing Caltrans parcel at the SR-55 Freeway into public open space.
A NEW BEGINNING
•
Upgrade existing or develop new residential uses on a portion of the south side of Alliance
Street.
•
Propose new public open space on the south side of Alliance Street. The five westernmost
parcels east of Williams on the south side of Alliance would be developed as a small open
space.
•
Use both mobile home park sites for potential new multi-family residential development
that includes new public open space. The development of the eastern site would provide
the opportunity to introduce a new east-west street that would extend from Tustin Village
Way west to Williams Street.
•
Add new small commercial uses on the west side of Williams Street at Main Street and
connect it with a proposed redevelopment of the mobile home park.
•
Replace the existing commercial use at McFadden Avenue and Williams Street with infill
residential uses.
•
Propose a possible new mixed-use development on Tustin Village Way at McFadden that
could include a new neighborhood plaza.
C. IMPROVE STREETSCAPES
Streetscape improvements are proposed on public streets in the neighborhood to enhance
connectivity and the pedestrian environment. Streetscape improvements, depending on available
right-of-way, might include sidewalk improvements, installation of consistent street trees or
planting strips, reconfiguration of travel lanes and on-street parking, traffic calming measures,
improvements to pedestrian crosswalks, traffic signals, new street lighting, and furniture. The
proposed streetscape improvements, which are shown on the neighborhood plans, are conceptual
in nature and are subject to further study.
Propose streetscape improvements along Williams Street, Alliance Street, and Tustin Village
Way. Improvements, depending on available right-of-way, might include the addition of street
trees and street furniture, new street lights, sidewalk and pedestrian crosswalk improvements,
bike lanes, reconfiguration of curb cuts, and improvements to street parking.
A new street connecting Tustin Village Way and Williams Street would occur if new development
of one of the mobile home parks occurs. Its design would be coordinated with the other proposed
street improvements.
A NEW BEGINNING
4-31
4.4.2 WEST VILLAGE OPPORTUNITY SITES
The following provides background opportunities for each of the opportunity sites
identified for the West Village neighborhood under each concept plan alternative.
WEST VILLAGE OPPORTUNITY SITES 12-13:
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Site 12: Tustin Village Way
and McFadden Ave
Current Use: Vacant /
Commercial Retail
Site 13: Tustin Village Way
and McFadden Ave
Current Use: Vacant /
Commercial Retail
Retail Use
Retail Use
Vacant
12
13b 13a
SITE FEATURES
•
•
•
•
•
SITE LIMITATIONS
Can benefit from traffic on McFadden and serve as
a gateway to the West Village
Surrounded by existing residential and commercial
uses
Good visibility from the SR-55 Freeway
High visibility from McFadden Ave and Tustin
Village Way
Efficient parcel shape and size
OPPORTUNITIES
•
•
•
•
4-32
SITE 12:
Limited visibility from McFadden traveling
•
east due to overpass ramp
•
Site requires improved access
configuration due to parcel depth
•
No direct access from freeway
SITE 13:
•
Residential use on west side requires
sensitive site layout and transitions
Potential parcel consolidation at both sites
Both sites can serve as a neighborhood center due
to gateway location
Intensification along McFadden Avenue and Tustin
Village Way
Joint use agreement with school district to make
the open space at Robert Heidemann School
available for neighborhood recreational use
A NEW BEGINNING
ALTERNATIVE A
Public Park
Upgrade Only
Retail Use
SITE 12:
•
New public open space on
Caltrans parcel
•
Upgrade or consolidate existing
retail center
SITE 13 a:
•
Upgrade or renovate existing
commercial use and add new
retail commercial use on vacant
site
Upgrade
Only
12
13a
ALTERNATIVE B
SITE 12:
•
New mixed-use: retail &
residential (ownership) use on
consolidated site
Mixed-Use:
Retail &
Residential
(Ownership)
SITE 13 a+b:
•
Consolidate parcels and
redevelop entire site with new
retail use
Retail Use
12
13
a+b
A NEW BEGINNING
4-33
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Site 14: Alliance Street
Site 13: Williams Street
Residential Use
15
Residential Use
14
SITE FEATURES
Central location in the West Village
•
Sites are adjacent to school and residential uses
•
Sites are fronting on public streets
•
OPPORTUNITIES
Future open space can provide much needed amenity
•
and improve Alliance Street
Ideal location for school expansion
•
Potential parcel consolidation for new development
•
Joint use agreement with school district to make the
•
open space at Robert Heidemann School available for
neighborhood recreational use
4-34
A NEW BEGINNING
ALTERNATIVE A
SITE 14:
•
Potential new park site
•
Proposed new parking for joint
neighborhood and park use
on the west side of parcel
Joint Parking
for Park and
Neighborhood
New
Neighborhood
Park
SITE 15:
•
New school expansion site
adjacent to existing school
15
School
Expansion Site
14
ALTERNATIVE B
Joint Parking
for School and
Neighborhood
Residential Use
(Ownership)
SITE 15:
•
New school expansion site
adjacent to existing school
15
School
Expansion Site
SITE 14:
Proposed new parking for joint
•
school and neighborhood
use, or alternatively, new
neighborhood park
Upgrade existing or new
•
residential use (ownership)
including a small park
14
A NEW BEGINNING
4-35
EXISTING CONDITIONS
16
17
Residential Use
Site 16: Williams (east)
Current Use: Mobile Home Park
Residential Use
Site 17: Williams (west)
Current Use: Mobile Home Park
Residential Use
SITE FEATURES
•
Site fronts on Main Street and
Williams Street
•
Large, mainly rectangular shaped
parcels
•
Site is surrounded by residential and
commercial uses
•
Proximity to existing school
Residential Use
SITE LIMITATIONS
SITE 16:
Depth of parcel requires additional access streets
•
Parcel can currently only be accessed from two public
•
streets, Main Street and Williams Street
SITE 17:
Depth of parcel requires additional access streets
•
Parcel can currently only be accessed from Williams
•
Street
The parcel is oddly shaped on the north side and
•
borders on the freeway retention wall
Noise from the freeway
•
OPPORTUNITIES
SITE 16:
High visibility from Main Street and Williams Street
•
Large size of parcel allow for various site layouts
•
Opportunity site for additional small neighborhood
•
retail use
SITE 17:
Adjacent to residential uses
•
Site has a protected setting due to east west
•
orientation and freeway along the northern boundary
4-36
A NEW BEGINNING
ALTERNATIVE A: SAME AS EXISTING CONDITIONS - NO PROPOSED CHANGE
ALTERNATIVE B
Retail Use
16
Residential Use
(Ownership)
17
Residential Use
(Ownership)
SITE 16:
New residential use (ownership) with integrated public
open space ( size and location to be determined in further
study)
New retail use at the corner of Main Street and Williams
Street
SITE 17:
New residential use (ownership) with integrated public
open space (size and location to be determined in further
study)
New street connecting Tustin Village Way with Williams
Street
A NEW BEGINNING
4-37
5 . TE S TIN G O F A LT ER NATIV E S
AN D K E Y O P P O RTUN ITY SITE S
TESTING OF ALTERNATIVES AND KEY OPPORTUNITY SITES
5 . 1 Ge neral Devel opment Assum p tions
Field Paoli formulated development assumptions for each of the three key opportunity sites
(refer to Chapter 4 for discussion of opportunity sites and key opportunity sites). In addition to
the development assumptions which were site specific, there were general assumptions which
were applicable to all three sites as listed below. In addition, the “Prototype Opportunity Sites
Testing” by Field Paoli for the three sites included illustrative drawings of one potential conceptual
development approach possible on each site; other approaches are possible for the sites.
The sites were considered for development in accordance with several criteria:
1.
Allowable uses and quantities in accordance with the City’s zoning code (“Chart of
Development Thresholds”),
2.
A “Refined Market Analysis” by Keyser Marston Associates (KMA),
3.
Physical arrangements of the uses as depicted in scaled conceptual designs for the sites
(“Prototype Opportunity Sites Testing”) by Field Paoli, and
4.
“Traffic Testing of Concept Alternatives” memorandum by Austin-Foust Associates (A-F).
For each of the three opportunity sites, two alternative development scenarios were formulated:
one that has a single use with less development intensity – “Alternative A”, and; one that has
multiple uses and has a higher intensity of development – “Alternative B” (refer to Chapter 4 for
Concept Plan Alternatives). A discussion of the development assumptions follows the “Chart of
Development Thresholds,” the traffic study, and concept plans guided the layout plans for each
key opportunity site. Please refer to the Appendix A.2 for the Development Thresholds Charts,
and Appendix A.3 for the detailed Traffic Testing Memorandum.
Subsequent to the formulation of development assumptions, Keyser Marston Associates (KMA)
used the development assumptions and the conceptual designs to perform economic feasibility
analyses for “Alternative B” for each of the three (3) sites. KMA’s memorandum also is included as
a separate document in Appendix A.4, entitled “Financial Feasibility Analysis for Key Opportunity
Sites”.
GENERAL DEVELOPMENT ASSUMPTIONS
General assumptions for development on the three opportunity sites were in keeping both with
KMA’s refined market analysis and with the alternative approaches for the opportunity sites that
Field Paoli presented publicly at the second community workshops. The 2008 Refined Market
Analysis specifically identifies competing developments and projects absorption for each land
use. For this analysis KMA undertook a cursory review of the existing retail, office, and rental
residential markets as compared to the findings of the 2008 Refined Market Analysis. KMA also
relied on the 2008 Refined Market Analysis for identification of competing developments and
projected absorption for each product and further relied on Agency staff for updated market
data.
A NEW BEGINNING
5-1
The general characteristics assumed in the analysis for office space classifications is based on the
Building Owners and Managers Association International (BOMA), as follows:
•
Class A: Most prestigious buildings competing for premier office users with rents above
average for the area. Buildings have high quality standard finishes, state of the art systems,
exceptional accessibility and a definite market presence.
•
Class B: Buildings competing for a wide range of users with rents in the average range for
the area. Building finishes are fair to good for the area and systems are adequate, but the
building does not compete with Class A at the same price.
•
Class C: Buildings competing for tenants requiring functional space at rents below the
average for the area.
The general assumptions were revised and clarified:
5-2
1.
Office uses will be Class B or special, boutique space in a height that is suitable for the
market and site limitations. The floor plates will be 17,000 square feet or larger per floor with
a central core and curtain wall on all sides. The office buildings will be highly amenitized
and in a commercial environment with support services.
2.
Retail uses follow principles of visibility, accessibility, and spatial preferences to maximize
retailing success. The assumption relates to all sites in the three neighborhoods in which
retail spaces are included.
3.
Pedestrian access and convenience will be given high priority along street frontages and at
gathering spaces. The assumption applies to all three of the opportunity sites.
4.
Buildings will be sited to recognize views, to serve as visual markers, and to define public
ways and spaces. This assumption is applied as much as possible to each site in the three
neighborhoods.
5.
Parking will be surface and unstructured for development, except for at least two spaces
per dwelling unit for residential parking, which will be covered or in a garage.
6.
Spatial provisions will be made as site configurations permit for possible structured parking
in future phases of development. Structured parking could be economically feasible at a
future date and site development today should not preclude possible future redevelopment
of the sites at a higher density.
A NEW BEGINNING
5 . 2 C i t y Cen ter Neigh b orhood
5.2.1
TRAFFIC TESTING OF CONCEPT PLAN ALTERNATIVES
For the Center City Neighborhood Area, a traffic evaluation was carried out for the two
Neighborhood Plans (Alternatives A and B, described in Chapter 4) on existing conditions
assuming the vacation of El Camino Way south of El Camino Real. The intensity of the land uses
proposed in Alternative A in Center City would result in an approximate 32% increase in the
AM peak hour and under Alternative B volumes would be slightly more than double in the AM
peak hour compared to existing conditions. The doubling of trips could likely trigger significant
impacts to the intersections analyzed in this area even though most are currently operating at a
Level-of-Service (LOS) “B”, which on a LOS scale from “A” to “F” means that the intersections
are well-perfoming and allow for reasonable free flow of motorized traffic . For definitions of
the different LOS classifications according to the American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials (AASHTO) please refer to the Glossary of Terms in Appendix A.1. Any
land use combination selected will likely cause adverse traffic operation hot spots in the area if
the trip generation is higher than land use Alternative A. In addition, there are operational issues
that would need to be addressed under either land use alternative.
The potential operations hot spots that will occur in either land use Alternative A or B are the I-5
Freeway interchange ramps and El Camino Real intersections along Newport Avenue and Red
Hill Avenue. With a high LOS “B” at the intersection El Camino Real and Newport Avenue there
are no capacity issues expected in the neighborhood assuming LOS “D” as being acceptable.
However, there are potential operational issues at intersections that could occur during the
peak hour. The movement that would likely be most affected by project traffic is the left-turn at
Newport Avenue and Red Hill Avenue going away from the I-5 Freeway at the intersection with
El Camino Real. Currently a challenge today due to the closely spaced intersections, the left-turn
lane on Newport Avenue to El Camino Real currently cannot accommodate the existing left-turn
volume of 247 vehicles in the PM peak hour with a pocket of approximately 125 feet. To properly
store the left-turning vehicles without impeding through traffic, a pocket length of 250 feet is
required to accommodate the volume which cannot be achieved because of the close proximity
to the I-5 Freeway northbound on-ramp. The same movement on Red Hill Avenue at El Camino
Real presents more of a challenge even with two left-turn lanes because of the signals at the I-5
Freeway northbound ramp intersection that are approximately 130 feet away. Although no data
is available to make a definite determination, the office uses proposed in Alternative B will likely
create a hot spot at El Camino Real/Sixth Street intersection with a potential need to improve/
provide northbound left on El Camino Real and eastbound right on Sixth Street.
A proposed vacation of El Camino Way is identified under Neighborhood Plan Alternatives A and
B. The vacation would not be an issue provided the current access is not completely eliminated
for internal properties needing access to El Camino Real utilizing such tools as easements, or
relocating the access and/or providing or modifying other access way driveways.
A NEW BEGINNING
5-3
5.2.2
CENTER CITY - KEY OPPORTUNITY SITE 3
Based on the evaluation of several opportunity sites in the neighborhood (refer to Chapter 4), the
site located on the south-eastern corner of El Camino Real and Newport Avenue was selected
for further testing.
The combined parcels comprise a total of 138,695 sf and form a triangular-shaped site. The site
borders on the I-5 Freeway on its south side, which is elevated with an approximately 20 feet
high concrete retaining wall. The current uses on the site are a fast-food restaurant and a vacant
restaurant building, both facing Newport Avenue, and a self-serve car-wash and animal hospital
on the west side of the site. Driveways to the restaurants are located on Newport Avenue and El
Camino Real. All buildings are modest, single story structures with surface parking. The center of
the site is vacant. The surrounding uses are single-story retail centers along Newport Avenue and
El Camino Real, as well as a two-story apartment building and single-story residential building
with a commercial use on the north side of El Camino Real.
Av
en
ue
The study includes two layout alternatives: one scheme testing a lower intensity, commercial use,
and the second one testing a combination of office and commercial retail use. Both alternatives
lie within the established development thresholds (refer to Appendix A.2) and assume parking
ratios set forth in City of Tustin City Code.
Ca
Ne
w
po
rt
El
m
in
o
Re
al
3
Inte
5-4
A NEW BEGINNING
rst
ate
5
SITE 3 - Center City
ALTERNATIVE A
El Camino Real
Site: 3.18 acres/ 138,695 SF
Newport Avenue
Bldg B
Retail
1
168 sp.
Bldg A
Retail
1
I-5
0
100
200
0
100
200
Uses:
Retail: 41,800 SF total
Freestanding Retail Bldg A: 29,500 SF - 1 story
Freestanding Retail Bldg B: 12,300 SF - 1 story
Parking:
Demand: 167 spaces at 4/1000 SF
Supply: 168 surface spaces
SITE 3 - Center City
ALTERNATIVE B
El Camino Real
Bldg A
3
Lobby
Newport Avenue
Site: 3.18 acres/ 138,695 SF
Retail/
Office
Bldg B
1
230 s
p.
I-5
Uses:
Retail:
20,000 SF total
Groundfloor Retail in Bldg A: 11,000 SF
Freestanding Retail Bldg B:
9,000 SF - 1 story
Office: 40,000 SF/ 20,000 per Floor - 3 stories (2 office over 1 retail)
Parking:
Total by Zoning: 230 spaces
Total Supply:
230 surface spaces
Retail Zoning:
Office Zoning:
80 spaces total at 4/1000 SF
150 spaces total at 4/1000 SF for first 25,000 SF and 3.33/1000 SF
above 25,000 SF
A NEW BEGINNING
5-5
The consultant team tested Opportunity Site #3 in the Center City to determine the feasibility
of a potential prototypical project. The site specific assumptions utilized and conclusions of this
analysis follows:
1.
Site 3 is comprised of three parcels: 2.42, .40 and .36 acres, which total 3.18 acres in area.
2.
For Alternative A, the following assumptions were identified: upgrade the existing
commercial retail use with as much as 41,800 square feet of retail use and accompanying
parking.
3.
For Alternative B, the following assumptions were identified: the site would be a new mixeduse development with retail and office uses with the following summary of development:
4.
5-6
•
Office: New 3-story office building with retail on the ground floor at Newport and
El Camino Real, approximately 20,000 square feet per floor on two office floors for
a total of 40,000 square feet of office;
•
Retail: New retail spaces of approximately 11,000 square feet as part of the new
office building, and a freestanding retail building or buildings of approximately
9,000 square feet; totaling about 20,000 square feet of retail space; and,
•
Parking: Not less than 230 surface parking spaces, provided at a minimum of 4
spaces per 1,000 square feet of retail use. For office use, parking is provided at a
minimum of 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet for the first 25,000 square feet and 1
space per 300 square feet above 25,000 square feet. Note: If any portion of Site 3
is intended to support restaurant uses, a higher parking standard for such use of 1
space per 100 gross square feet would be required.
•
The site layout study revealed that the building areas of office and retail uses,
provided with their accompanying surface parking in accordance with the zoning
ordinance, was somewhat less than the estimate for Alternative B in the Chart of
Development Thresholds. The Chart of Development Thresholds for Alternative B
showed an estimate of 25,000 square feet of commercial retail space plus 45,000
square feet of commercial office space for a total of 70,000 square feet of space.
Two vehicular entrances on El Camino Real, are shown. But, it might be possible under an
actual development scenario to combine driveways on El Camino. A right-in/right-out only
access onto Newport Avenue may also be allowed, if deemed necessary.
A NEW BEGINNING
The Center City site (Site 3) is comprised of three parcels totaling 3.18 acres. The development
scenario assumes construction of a three-story building at Newport and El Camino Real
containing 40,000 square feet (SF) of office and 11,000 SF of retail space occupying the ground
floor. For the office space, KMA is projecting this to be Class B type space.
The development scenario also includes a one story 9,000 SF freestanding retail building. Retail
and office parking is accommodated in a surface lot configuration with a total of at least 230
parking spaces.
Total Development Costs
KMA anticipates that this development scenario will be of Type V construction and have estimated
total development costs (excluding land) of $9.3 million or $156 per SF gross building area (GBA),
as follows:
•
Direct construction costs consist of such items as off- and on-site improvements, parking,
shell construction, tenant improvements, and contingency. For these analyses, KMA has
assumed no payment of prevailing wages. Total direct costs are estimated at $6.8 million,
or $113 per SF GBA.
•
Indirect costs consist of architecture, engineering, public permits and fees, legal and
accounting, taxes and insurance, developer fee, marketing/sales/lease-up, and contingency.
Total indirect costs are estimated at $1.9 million, or 28% of direct costs.
•
Financing costs consist of such items as loan fees, interest during construction and leasing.
Total financing costs are estimated at $677,000, or 10% of direct costs.
Net Operating Income
KMA has estimated that the proposed development scenario will generate net operating income
(NOI) totaling $946,000 annually. The following assumptions were used in determining this
figure:
•
Gross scheduled income (GSI) of $1.2 million, or an average lease rate of $1.79 per SF per
month.
•
Overall vacancy factor of 5%.
•
Unreimbursed retail operating expenses at 5% of retail GSI.
•
Office expenses of $4 per SF per year.
A NEW BEGINNING
5-7
Residual Land Value
After assuming the capitalized value of the NOI from the retail, and office space, this scenario
generates a total project value of $12.6 million. After deducting a cost of sale (3% of value),
developer profit (12% of value), and total development costs, KMA finds the proposed project
generates a residual land value of $1.4 million, or $10 per SF of site area.
It should be noted that while Site 3 generates a positive residual land value, this does not assume
the proposed project is feasible. The residual land value is generally the amount a developer
can feasibly afford to pay for a site after considering the project’s value against development
costs and developer profit. KMA’s analysis has not estimated costs associated with acquisition,
demolition of existing improvements, and/or relocation of existing occupants.
SUMMARY TABLE - FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY FOR SITE 3 CENTER CITY STUDY AREA
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Acres
3.18 Acres
Residential Units
0 Units
Retail Uses
Freestanding Retail
9,000 SF
Retail (in office/residential building)
Total Retail SF
11,000 SF
20,000 SF
Office Uses
Net Leasable
34,000 SF
Circulation / Common Area
Total Office SF
6,000 SF
40,000 SF
Parking Spaces
230 Spaces
Type of Parking
Surface
Parking Ratios
Residential
0.00 Spaces/Unit
Retail
4.00 Spaces/1,000 sf
Office (1)
II. RESIDUAL LAND VALUE (2)
Total Residual Land Value
Per SF Site Area
$1,378,000
$10/sf Site Area
(1) Zoning code requires 4 spaces per 1,000 sf for first 25,000 sf, and 1 space per 300 sf for area above 25,000 sf.
(2) Represents the value a developer can feasibly afford to pay for land. Land acquisition, demolition, and/or relocation
are not included.
5-8
A NEW BEGINNING
5 . 3 S o uth ern Gateway Neig hb orhood
5.3.1
The traffic testing study was conducted for the two Neighborhood Concept Plans (Alternatives
A and B, described in Chapter 4). In Southern Gateway, on an average daily trip basis, the
intensity of land uses over existing for land uses, proposed in Alternative B would be expected
to increase by as much as 29% and 20% for land uses proposed in Alternative A. Average Daily
Trips (ADTs) generated by land uses under Alternatives A and B, 28,464 and 30,786, respectively,
are not that different and would result in moderate increases in traffic. Therefore the focus of the
evaluation and testing has been on the circulation alternative (i.e., Alternative A or B). Any land
use combination selected will not likely cause adverse impacts provided the trip generation are
not higher than land uses under Alternative B.
With the absence of data, no definite determination can be made but it is likely that the change
of retail to residential (even if mixed-use) in the northernmost portion of Alternative A will impact
Newport Avenue at its intersection with Mitchell Avenue and Newport Avenue at the I-5 Freeway
southbound off-ramp intersection particularly during the PM peak hour which has a high rightturning volume from the freeway ramp. Additional trips from both Center City and Southern
Gateway also contribute traffic volumes to this ramp intersection.
Alternative A in the southernmost portion of Southern Gateway includes a proposal to either culde-sac or partially close the southern portion of Pasadena Avenue where it currently connects to
the Sycamore Avenue ramp to the SR-55 Freeway, and the potential vacation of Bliss Lane and
Altadena Drive west of Pasadena Avenue. The potential vacation of Bliss Lane and the western
portion of Altadena Drive in the event that lot consolidation is possible, will pose no significant
traffic impacts as these are local serving roadways. In addition, the effect of potentially severing
the connection of Pasadena Avenue to Sycamore Avenue would add additional traffic at the
intersections of Newport Avenue at Walnut Avenue and Walnut Avenue at McFadden Avenue
but no capacity issues are expected since the current LOS at these intersections is “A.” It is
likely that with Alternative A (an increase of around 20% daily trips due to the land use changes)
as well as closure of Pasadena Avenue to Sycamore Avenue, the intersection with the highest
existing LOS (LOS “C”), Pasadena Avenue at McFadden Avenue, may experience higher LOS
due to additional through traffic along McFadden Avenue. The addition of residential units and
increase in traffic along Newport Avenue due to increased land use intensity and the closure
of Pasadena Avenue may trigger the need for signals at the current Myrtle Avenue/Newport
Avenue intersection. However, Altadena Drive and Myrtle Drive within the Southern Gateway
are internal and narrow neighborhood streets that are expected to be slow speed and therefore
would not be conducive to through traffic.
Alternative B includes a proposal to potentially add a new east-west street between Pasadena
Avenue and Newport Avenue north of Altadena Drive and the potential vacation of Altadena
Drive, Bliss Lane, Pasadena Avenue south of Altadena Drive, and Myrtle Avenue south of the new
street if lot consolidations occur. There are currently no capacity issues with the highest level of
service of LOS “C” in the PM peak hour at Pasadena Avenue and McFadden Avenue intersection.
The same concerns/issues that were discussed in Alternative A apply for Alternative B. However,
instead of signals needed at Newport Avenue and Myrtle Avenue, which is vacated in Alternative
B, the signals could be warranted at the new potential east-west road at Newport Avenue. This
more-direct connection, like the one provided by the new east-west road from Pasadena Avenue
to Newport Avenue, could potentially attract through traffic in the neighborhood especially
A NEW BEGINNING
5-9
by vehicles that are travelling to and from the SR-55 Freeway northbound ramps at Sycamore
Avenue or southern parts of Tustin particularly if the southern portion of Pasadena Avenue was
potentially closed or vacated.
No significant traffic impacts are expected with the proposed location of the youth center in
both Alternatives A and B except for the possibility of a new signal which may be warranted at
the new intersection of Newport Avenue at Myrtle Avenue (Alternative A) or the new east-west
road (Alternative B). In addition, if under either alternative the proposed vacation of Pasadena
Avenue to Sycamore Avenue is pursued by the City, the City will need to work with Caltrans to
provide proper signage in order to inform drivers of the new route to and from the SR-55 Freeway
northbound ramps.
Neither Alternative A or B is expected to have any significant traffic impacts in the immediate
surrounding area provided the resulting trip generation are not higher than identified for each
Neighborhood (land use Alternative A in Center City, and land use Alternative B in Southern
Gateway and West Village). However, the following are potential hot spots mainly dealing with
operational issues at certain intersections that would need to be monitored and addressed (i.e.,
lane or signal operation improvements, if possible) as each neighborhood plan is developed:
•
•
•
•
Newport Avenue at Mitchell Avenue and I-5 Freeway Southbound Ramps – The change of
retail to residential (even if mixed-use) in the northernmost portion of Alternative A will add
traffic that has different a directionality in the peak hours. The I-5 Freeway southbound offramp in particular will be affected in the PM peak hour, with homebound residential trips
adding to an already high right-turning volume from the freeway ramp. Additional trips from
both Center City and Southern Gateway will be contributing to this ramp intersection.
McFadden Avenue at Pasadena Avenue, Myrtle Avenue, Newport Avenue – Additional traffic
that is rerouted due to closure/vacation of Pasadena Avenue at Sycamore Avenue in both
Alternatives could require lane or signal operation improvements or addition of signals in the
case of Myrtle Avenue and McFadden Avenue intersection.
Newport Avenue at Myrtle Avenue – This is likely to meet signal warrants due to closure
of Pasadena Avenue at Sycamore Avenue, additional land uses and lot consolidation in
Alternative A.
Newport Avenue at New East-West Road – This is likely to meet signal warrants due to the
closure of Pasadena Avenue at Sycamore Avenue, additional land uses and lot consolidation
in Alternative B.
Please refer to the Glossary of Terms in Appendix A.1 for definitions of the different LOS
classifications according to the American Association of State Highway and Transportation
Officials (AASHTO).
5-10
A NEW BEGINNING
5.3.2
SOUTHERN GATEWAY - KEY OPPORTUNITY SITE 9
Based on the evaluation of several opportunity sites in the neighborhood (refer to Chapter 4), the site
located on the northeastern corner of Walnut Avenue and Newport Avenue was selected for further
testing.
The combined parcels comprise a total of 170,319 sf and form a rectangular-shaped site. The site borders
primarily residential land uses. The current uses on the site are retail facing Walnut Avenue. Driveways
to the site are located on Newport Avenue and El Camino Real. All buildings are modest, single story
structures with surface parking adjacent to their primary entrances.
en
ue
The study includes two layout alternatives: one scheme testing a lower intensity, commercial use, and the
second one testing a combination of office and commercial retail uses. Both alternatives lie within the
established development thresholds (refer to Appendix A.2) and assume parking ratios set forth in City
of Tustin Parking Ordinance.
Ne
w
po
rt
Av
W
al
nu
tA
ve
nu
e
9
A NEW BEGINNING
5-11
SITE 9 - Southern Gateway
ALTERNATIVE A
Walnut Avenue
Site: 3.9 acres/ 170,319 SF
Newport Avenue
Bldg A
Retail
Bldg B
Retail
178 sp.
1
1
0
100
200
0
100
200
Uses:
Retail: 41,000 SF total
Parking:
Total by Zoning: 164 spaces at 4/1000 SF
Total Supply:
178 surface spaces
SITE 9 - Southern Gateway
ALTERNATIVE B
Walnut Avenue
Site: 3.9 acres/ 170,319 SF
Newport Avenue
Bldg A
Uses:
Retail:
Bldg B
Retail
Lobby
Office/1
Retail 3
272 sp.
1
34,000 SF total
Groundfloor Retail Bldg A: 12,000 SF
Office: 34,000 SF/ 17,000 per Floor - 3 stories (2 office over 1 retail)
Parking:
Total by Zoning: 266 spaces
Total Supply:
272 surface spaces
Retail Zoning:
Office Zoning:
5-12
136 spaces total at 4/1000 SF
130 spaces total at 4/1000 SF for first 25,000 SF and 3.33/1000 SF
above 25,000 SF
A NEW BEGINNING
1.
Site 9 is comprised of three parcels of 2.26, 1.23 and .41 acres, which total 3.90 acres in
area.
2.
For Alternative A the following assumptions were identified: upgrade the existing
parking.
3.
For Alternative B the following assumptions were identified: study new mixed-use
development with retail and office uses. The new mixed-use development would include
office and retail uses with the following summary of development:
•
Office: New 3-story office building with retail uses on the ground floor at Newport
Avenue and Walnut Avenue, approximately 17,000 square feet per floor on 2 office
floors for a total of 34,000 square feet of office;
•
Retail: New retail spaces of approximately 12,000 square feet as part of the new
office building, and a new large store, which could be a grocery store, or several
smaller shops at the eastern portion of site of approximately 22,000 square feet;
and,
•
Parking: Not less than 266 surface parking spaces, provided at a minimum of 4
spaces per 1,000 square feet of retail use. For office use, parking is provided at a
minimum of 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet for the first 25,000 square feet and 1
space per 300 square feet above 25,000 square feet. Note: if any portion of Site 9
is proposed for dental or medical uses or restaurant uses, parking requirements
would be greater per City zoning code requirements.
•
The site layout study revealed that the building area of the retail use, provided
with the office space and the accompanying surface parking in accordance with
the zoning ordinance, was somewhat less that the estimate of Alternative B in
the Chart of Development Thresholds. The Chart of Development Thresholds for
Alternative B showed an estimate of 34,300 square feet of commercial retail space
plus 34,300 square feet of commercial office space for a total of 68,600 square feet
of space.
4.
Two vehicular entrances on Walnut Avenue and one entrance on Newport Avenue; all
entrances would be sited away from the intersection of the two streets by at least 240
feet.
5.
A service drive approach and a loading dock are provided for the larger retail building from
Walnut Avenue.
A NEW BEGINNING
5-13
5.3.2b Alternative Feasibility Testing for Site 9
The Southern Gateway site (Site 9) is comprised of three parcels totaling 3.9 acres. The development
scenario assumes construction of a three-story office building at Newport and Walnut containing
34,000 SF of office and 12,000 SF of retail space on the ground floor. The scenario also includes a
one-story 22,000-SF freestanding retail building, which allows potential for a grocery story, drug
store, or medium-sized tenant. Retail and office parking is accommodated in a surface lot with a
total of at least 266 parking spaces.
KMA anticipates that this development scenario will be of Type V construction and has estimated
total development costs (excluding land) to be $10.6 million or $156 per SF GBA, as follows:
•
Total direct costs are estimated at $7.7 million, or $113 per SF GBA.
•
•
Total financing costs are estimated at $0.8 million, or 10% of direct costs.
Net Operating Income
KMA has estimated that the proposed development scenario will generate a NOI totaling $1.1
million annually. The following assumptions were used in determining this figure:
•
GSI of $1.3 million, or an average lease rate of $1.75 per SF.
•
•
•
Office expenses of $4 per SF per year.
Residual Land Value
After assuming the capitalized value of the NOI from the retail, and office space, this scenario
generates a total project value of $14.7 million. After deducting a cost of sale (3% of value),
developer profit (12% of value), and total development costs, KMA finds the project generates a
modest residual land value of $1.9 million, or $11 per SF of site area.
Similar to the Center City Site (Site 3), Site 9 also generates a positive residual land value and as
previously mentioned does not account for costs associated with acquisition, demolition, and/or
relocation.
5-14
A NEW BEGINNING
SUMMARY TABLE - FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY FOR SITE 9 SOUTHERN GATEWAY STUDY AREA
Acres
Residential Units
3.91 Acres
0 Units
Retail Uses
Freestanding Retail
Total Retail SF
22,000 SF
12,000 SF
34,000 SF
Office Uses
Net Leasable
Total Office SF
Parking Spaces
Type of Parking
28,900 SF
5,100 SF
34,000 SF
266 Spaces
Surface
Parking Ratios
Residential
0.00 Spaces/Unit
Retail
Office (1)
Per SF Site Area
$1,908,000
$11/sf Site Area
are not included.
A NEW BEGINNING
5-15
5 . 4 We s t V il l age Neighb orhood
5.4.1
A traffic evaluation was carried out for the two Alternatives A and B (refer to Chapter 4) against
existing conditions for West Village. Alternative A assumes the existing circulation system and
Alternative B includes a proposal to extend Tustin Village Way through a current private street
to a new east-west street between Williams Street and Tustin Village Way running parallel to
Alliance Avenue. Similar to the other neighborhoods, there are currently no capacity issues (i.e.,
intersections expected to be higher than the acceptable level of service of LOS “D”) with the
highest level of service of LOS “B” at Tustin Village Way and McFadden Avenue intersection. Also
,out of the three neighborhoods proposed for changes, West Village is the least intense land
use proposal with an increase in intensity of 15% in ADTs. This assumes a higher trip generating
land use intensity under Alternative B which propose slight increases of retail and residential
compared to the existing uses in the neighborhood. The increase in ADTs of 1,153 for Alternative
A and 3,312 for Alternative B would add a low amount of traffic in the neighborhood that could
likely be accommodated by the existing circulation or Alternative B circulation changes. Any land
use or circulation combinations of the alternatives not generating more trips than Alternative B
will likely have no adverse impacts.
No capacity issues are expected with either alternatives, especially with the addition of an eastwest road parallel to Alliance Avenue. A likely benefit for the area under Alternative B is less local
traffic using Williams Street due to the new east-west road that would provide a route to Tustin
Village Way that runs parallel to Williams Street. Nevertheless, a potential hot spot that may
need to be improved would likely be at the intersection of Tustin Village Way and McFadden
Avenue because of additional traffic that is expected from the proposed land uses of either
alternative as well as changes to the Southern Gateway neighborhood and the proximity to the
SR-55 Freeway McFadden Bridge.
Please refer to the Glossary of Terms in Appendix A.1 for definitions of the different LOS
classifications according to the American Association of State Highway and Transportation
Officials (AASHTO).
5-16
A NEW BEGINNING
5.4.2
WEST VILLAGE - KEY OPPORTUNITY SITE 12
Based on the evaluation of several opportunity sites in the neighborhood (refer to Chapter 4),
Site 12, located on the southwestern corner of Tustin Village Way and McFadden Avenue, was
selected for further testing.
The combined parcels comprise a total of 176,694 sf and form a irregularly-shaped site. The
site borders on Highway 55 on its east side. The current uses on the site are retail. Access via
driveways are located on Tustin Village Way. All buildings are modest, single story structures with
surface parking. The surrounding uses are commercial and residential.
Tu s ti n Vi ll ag e Way
The study includes two layout alternatives: one scheme testing a lower intensity, commercial
retail and community uses; the second scheme tests a combination of residential, community,
and commercial retail uses. Both alternatives lie within the established development thresholds
(refer to Appendix A.2) and assume parking ratios set forth in City of Tustin Parking Ordinance.
12
Mc Fadden Avenue
A NEW BEGINNING
5-17
5-18
1.
Site 12 is comprised of three parcels, of 3.28, .44 and .34 acres, which total 4.06 acres in
area. In addition, the contiguous CalTrans parcel to the north is 1.96 acres and if added to
the site, the total would be 6.02 acres.
2.
For Alternative A, the following assumptions were identified: upgrade the existing
parking. The commercial development analysis at this time does not include the CalTrans
parcel to the north of the site; the CalTrans parcel could be developed simultaneously or at
a different time and conveyance of the site to the City from CalTrans could result in either
a public park or possibly affordable housing integrated into a development (this would be
separate prototype that would be evaluated if events warrant it)
3.
For Alternative B, the following assumptions were identified: study new mixed-use
development with retail and residential uses with the following summary of development,
which is consistent with the Chart of Development Thresholds for alternative B showed an
estimate of as much as 50,000 square feet of commercial retail space plus as many as 210
dwelling units of residential use.
•
Retail: New building of approximately 22,000 square feet, configured for possible
grocery and pharmacy type uses; retail shops on the ground floor of residential
mixed-use buildings along Tustin Village Way with approximately 18,000 square
feet; total retail space of about 40,000 square feet;
•
Residential: New mixed-use buildings along Tustin Village Way with up to 40
residential dwelling units on the second and third floors;
•
Parking: A minimum of 254 spaces total with not less than 160 surface parking
spaces for retail use at 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet; plus a minimum of 90 covered
spaces for residential use at: two spaces per dwelling unit and an additional one
guest space per 4 dwelling units; and,
•
Park: On the CalTrans parcel, the 1.96 acres could be developed as a public park
with a community building on Tustin Village Way and surface parking provided
(which could be connected with the surface parking on Site 12).
•
The site layout study revealed that the building area of the retail use, provided
with the residential use and the accompanying covered and surface parking in
accordance with the zoning ordinance, was somewhat less than the estimate of
Alternative B.
4.
One main vehicular entrance and one possible additional entrance for residential parking
on Tustin Village Way, all entrances are away from the McFadden intersection by at least
240 feet. The CalTrans parcel would have one vehicular entrance on Tustin Village Way.
5.
A service drive and loading docks are provided for the larger retail building along the
sloped embankment for the bridge approach of McFadden Avenue over Highway 55.
A NEW BEGINNING
SITE 12 - West Village
ALTERNATIVE A
Site: 4.06 acres/ 176,694 SF
C
D
1
1
Tustin Village Way
B
Bldg A
Retail
1
Hwy 55
185 sp.
1
McFadden Avenue
0
Uses:
Retail:
100
200
42,900 SF total
Freestanding Retail Bldg C: 5,000 SF - 1 story
Freestanding Retail Bldg D: 5,000 SF - 1 story
Parking:
Total by Zoning: 172 spaces at 4/1000 SF
Total Supply:
185 surface spaces
A NEW BEGINNING
5-19
SITE 12 - West Village
ALTERNATIVE B
Tustin Village Way
Southern Parcels:
4.06 acres/ 176,694 SF
Caltrans Parcel:
1.96 acres/ 85,332 SF
CC
Park
Total Potential Site:
6.02 acres/ 262,026 SF
Bldg C
1
166 sp.
Hwy 55
3
Bldg A
Retail
Bldg B
3
1
McFadden Avenue
0
Uses:
Retail:
100
200
Southern Parcels:
40,000 SF total
Freestanding Retail Bldg A:
22,000 SF - 1 Story
Groundfloor Retail Bldg B + C: 18,000 SF
Residential:
40 Dwelling Units total - 3 stories (2 residential over 1 retail)
Building B: 18 Units/ 2 stories over retail
Building C: 22 Units/ 2 stories over retail (street frontage), over
tuck-under parking (rear wing)
Uses: Cal Trans Parcel:
Community Center: 5,000 SF - 1 story
Park:
1.1 acres/ 48,400 sf
Parking:
Total Retail:
166 surface spaces
Total Residential: 80 underground spaces +12 tuck-under spaces
Total Supply:
258 spaces
Retail Zoning:
Residential Zoning:
5-20
Total by Zoning:
160 spaces at 4/1000 SF
80 spaces at 2 spaces per unit plus
10 spaces at 1 guest parking space per 4 units
250 spaces
Community Center:
Separate surface lot (could be connected)
A NEW BEGINNING
The West Village site generates a negative residual land value. This is due primarily to the high
cost of structured parking and the inability for the residential units to achieve market rents
sufficient to cover the cost of the structured parking. While the proposed development does
incorporate affordable housing, the affordable housing does not create a significant burden on
the land value. KMA’s calculation of moderate income rents exceeds achievable market rents in
the West Village area, therefore, KMA has adjusted the moderate income rents downward to
the market rent level. A potential alternative for this site is to develop a lower density residential
development, i.e., eliminate need for structured parking and/or reduce parking requirements.
Site 12 is comprised of three parcels totaling 4.06 acres. It should be noted that the contiguous
CalTrans parcel to the north (1.96 acres), which could be used for a community center and
park, has been excluded from this analysis. The scenario assumes construction of a three-story
residential building along Tustin Village Way containing 40 rental apartment units with 18,000 SF
of retail space occupying the ground floor. This scenario assumes the inclusion of 15% very low
and moderate income housing units.
The scenario also includes a one story 22,000 SF freestanding retail building, which may also
potentially allow for a grocery story, drug store, or medium-sized tenant. Retail parking will be
accommodated in a mix of surface and at-grade encapsulated parking with a total of at least
160 parking spaces. Residents of the apartment complex will be parked within the at-grade
encapsulated structure as well as in the below-grade parking level. Parking for the residential
component totals 90 parking spaces with an overall parking ratio of 2.25 spaces per unit (including
guest parking).
KMA anticipates that this development scenario will be of Type V construction and have an
estimated total development cost of $16.9 million or $202 per SF GBA, as follows:
•
Total direct costs are estimated at $12.1 million, or $145 per SF GBA.
•
•
Total financing costs are estimated at $1.5 million, or 12% of direct costs.
Net Operating Income – Retail
KMA has estimated the retail components of the proposed development scenario to generate
NOI totaling $710,000 annually. The following assumptions were used in determining this
figure:
•
GSI of $786,000, or an average lease rate of $1.64 per SF.
•
•
A NEW BEGINNING
5-21
Net Operating Income – Residential
KMA has estimated the residential component of the proposed development scenario will
generate NOI totaling $460,000 annually. The following assumptions were used in determining
this figure:
•
Mixed-income scenario including 2 very low income units (50% AMI), 4 moderate income
units (110% AMI), and 34 market-rate units. The unit mix and income levels are in compliance
with standard California Redevelopment Law requirements.
•
GSI of $771,000, or an average lease rate of $1.74 per SF (market-rate and affordable).
Rents by bedroom type are as follows:
INCOME LEVEL BY BEDROOM TYPE
MONTHLY
RENT/SF
RENT
One-Bedroom
Very Low (50% AMI)
$823
$1.03
$1,480 (1)
$1.85
$1,480
$1.85
$922
$0.92
Moderate (110% AMI)
$1,750
$1.75
Market-Rate
$1,750
Moderate (110% AMI)
Market-Rate
Two-Bedroom
Very Low (50% AMI)
(1) Reflects downward adjustment to reflect achievable market rents.
•
Other income of $10 per unit per month.
•
•
Annual operating expenses of approximately $6,900 per unit.
Residual Land Value
After assuming the capitalized value of the NOI from the retail, and residential components,
this scenario generates a total project value of $17.1 million. After deducting a cost of sale (3%
of value), developer profit (12% of value), and total development costs, KMA finds the project
generates a negative residual land value of $2.3 million, or negative $13 per SF of site area.
It should be noted that the negative land value will further increase once additional costs for
acquisition, demolition, and/or relocation are factored in.
5-22
A NEW BEGINNING
SUMMARY TABLE - FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY FOR SITE 12 WEST VILLAGE STUDY AREA
Acres
Residential Units
4.06 Acres
40 Units
Retail Uses
Freestanding Retail
Total Retail SF
22,000 SF
18,000 SF
40,000 SF
Office Uses
Net Leasable
0 SF
0 SF
Total Office SF
Parking Spaces
Type of Parking
0 SF
250 Spaces
Surface/ at-grade encapsulated /
one level below-grade
Parking Ratios
Residential
2.25 Spaces/Unit
Retail
Office (1)
Per SF Site Area
($2,334,000)
($13)/sf Site Area
are not included.
A NEW BEGINNING
5-23
6. PRE F E R R E D C O NC E P T P LA NS
THE PREFERRED CONCEPT PLANS
6 . 1 Gu idel in es , Goal s, and S trateg ies for All
N e i g hborh oods
6.1.1
GENERAL GOALS
As identified in Section 4.1 of this report, there are goals for development and overall strategies
for development that are applicable to all three neighborhoods.
Overall Goals for the Three Town Center Neighborhoods
•
Increase the supply of housing
•
Enrich the livability of neighborhoods
•
Revitalize commercial uses on arterial streets
•
Upgrade the appearance of street corridors and community gateways
•
Create employment opportunities for residents
Overall Strategies to Accomplish the Goals
1.
Consolidate commercial uses along corridors into well-defined neighborhood centers
and/or mixed-use developments
2.
Redirect future development to key opportunity sites that will have the most positive
impact on the neighborhood
3.
Focus uses onto neighborhood-related and pedestrian-oriented sites to form synergistic
benefits with residential uses
4.
Relocate industrial uses away from residential and commercial centers
5.
Convert underperforming commercial sites to other uses or mixed uses
6.
Expand streetscape improvements along street corridors
7.
Encourage introduction of moderate- to high-density residential development along street
corridors, compatible with the adjacent neighborhood
8.
Maintain an adequate supply of affordable housing
9.
Encourage construction of a greater variety of residential product types to accommodate
a variety of family sizes and price points
10. Develop additional park and open spaces, where possible, particularly within the West
Village and Southern Gateway neighborhoods
11. Upgrade and revitalize older residential areas and reduce overcrowding
12. Improving connectivity in and between neighborhoods, including provision of bike lane
routes
A NEW BEGINNING
6-1
6.1.2
GENERAL SITE DESIGN AND BUILDING DESIGN GUIDELINES
General guidelines for site design and development within each neighborhood include access
and connectivity, circulation, infrastructure, building placement, setbacks, density, building
height, parking, open space, signage and lighting, and amenities. The guidelines also apply
to all the identified opportunity sites in the three neighborhoods and have been applied in the
conceptual testing of the three Key Opportunity Sites. The development uses and patterns for
the three sites, as well as the conceptual designs depicted for the three sites, are one illustration of
the application of the design guidelines for buildings within the neighborhoods.
Land Uses and Densities
The land uses that are considered in the three neighborhoods and which are addressed by the
design guidelines include: office, retail, residential, institutional, government, service, and mixes
of these uses. Open space is an included land use in the neighborhoods; design guidelines for
development within an open space is confined to buildings that are sited within it.
The development thresholds that have been established for opportunity sites in each of the
neighborhoods range from a density of total development from 0.2 FAR to 0.5 FAR (see section
6.2 Preferred Neighborhood Concept Plans and Appendix A-2 Development Thresholds).
The Preferred Concept Plans for the three neighborhoods explain the improvements,
developments, and densities that are possible within each neighborhood.
SITE DESIGN
Building Siting, Setbacks and Entrances
6-2
•
Building sites where mixed uses are permitted should have retail and personal services on
ground floors when fronting on a street and residences and/or offices (depending on what
is permitted by zoning) on any upper floors. This vertical mixing of uses creates variety and
vitality along street frontages.
•
Buildings should be used to define the street spaces and public open spaces along the
major street corridors and in the commercial centers of the neighborhood.
•
In commercial areas, buildings should be generally built to the front and side property
lines, without intervening parking and landscaping, to create continuity in the streetscape.
Drive-through configurations are discouraged.
•
Landmark or gateway buildings, including buildings which feature a tower or other
architectural element, should be constructed on corner sites. These buildings can then
function as gateways, introducing visitors to the heart of a neighborhood.
•
Buildings should be sited to recognize views, to serve as visual markers, and to define
public ways and spaces. This assumption about site planning should be applied as much
as possible to each site in the three neighborhoods.
•
Sites which form the end of view corridors or a change of direction in a street offer the
possibility of siting special buildings or other vertical elements, and should be assigned
A NEW BEGINNING
extra design value. Each of the neighborhoods contain such sites, which offer unique site
possibilities for landmarks and special identity for the neighborhood.
•
For sites which are underutilized and which have issues with access, circulation, and
configuration; consolidation of parcels and the introduction of easements should be
considered.
•
For all three neighborhoods the size of city blocks should be kept relatively small and
defined by public ways. Small blocks with short block frontages, and with pedestrian ways
along both sides of streets, allow for a multiplicity of pedestrian access possibilities and
provide many corner sites.
•
Crime opportunities should be reduced by incorporating elements into site design
which create an atmosphere that does not encourage or invite unlawful activity. Some
of the design strategies to accomplish this goal would include, but not be limited to:
clear visibility maintained from a store to the street, parking areas, walkways and passing
vehicles; entrances and exits under visual surveillance; landscaping, building, wall and
fence locations which do not create hiding places or hinder visibility; physical features
used to distinguish private areas from public areas; and well lighted outdoor areas for
pedestrians and vehicular parking.
Mixed- Use buildings should have ground floor retail and
no setbacks to define the street and encourage pedestrian
activity.
Landmark buildings should have a higher building
element such as a tower to increase visibility, provide
orientation, or form a gateway.
Building Scale, Mass, Form and Height
•
Buildings which occupy prominent sites along major streets or which are at the terminus
of significant view corridors should be the tallest buildings in the neighborhood. The
height allowances should be especially applicable for sites that are at or near freeway sites,
with the provision that necessary transitions in height would be required for any adjacent
residential neighborhoods.
•
The mass and scale of buildings should reflect the neighborhood or street character in
which the buildings are located. Transitions should be made to neighboring buildings with
the use of stepbacks and other architectural massing devices.
A NEW BEGINNING
6-3
Adjacency to Residential Uses
•
Developments which are not residential land uses and incompatible with residential uses,
and which are adjacent or abutting existing residential development, shall provide buffering
through setbacks with enhanced vegetation, berming, or other landscape features,
unless they are compatible with residential uses, for example office uses or assisted care
facilities.
•
Site development that is adjacent to single family residences needs to provide a transition
in scale to the adjacent houses and properties through the height, massing and materials
of the building, in addition to providing setbacks from the property lines of the adjacent
neighborhood.
•
Low-density residential buildings should incorporate setbacks for front, side and rear yards,
which are in the character of the area in which they are located; commercial and mixeduse buildings as well as high-density residential buildings should have minimal setbacks
from street frontages, should be built to define the street, and should provide ample
pedestrian ways, particularly in areas that should promote pedestrian activity and an urban
environment including the articulation of gateways.
Higher-density residential buildings should have minimal
setbacks to define the street edge. Small setbacks can
accommodate stairs, porches, and greenery.
Larger residential developments should provide ample
pedestrian ways to contribute to neighborhood walkability
and connectivity
Pedestrian Circulation and Open Space
6-4
•
Pedestrian circulation should be an integral part of the layout of all site plans. The siting
of buildings should be organized so that the buildings frame and reinforce pedestrian
circulation and usable open spaces.
•
The site plan of each development should provide a complete network of pedestrian
circulation, which interconnects building entrances, parking, sidewalks, adjacent properties
and other key destinations.
•
Whenever there is the possibility in a proposed development of a ground level open space
A NEW BEGINNING
for public gatherings, small or large, the open space should be encouraged and should
be designed so that it is well defined with buildings that have active uses on the ground
level.
•
Buildings with commercial uses should be located along the streets edges and at corners
allowing for ample and protected pedestrian ways along street edges.
•
The design of public ways and the siting of buildings should consider possible future
expansion of transit of various modes and the connections by foot and bicycle to the
transit.
•
To promote a higher level of pedestrian awareness, the use of alternative paving materials
to designate pedestrian traffic areas from vehicle areas and travel lanes is encouraged.
Provide small ground level public spaces and connections
as part of the development to encourage pedestrian
activity
Pedestrian paths along building edges should be
designed to reinforce pedestrian circulation through a
network of paths, open spaces, and attractive materials.
Parking, Access and Vehicle Circulation
•
Buildings that front onto streets and that have on-site parking lots should have the parking
located behind buildings to protect the visual quality of the buildings’ street frontage.
•
Parking areas should consist of separated parking fields located so that the parking areas
are not the dominant visual feature along any street or intersection.
•
When parcels are located on corners, vehicular access should be gained from side streets.
When access can only be gained from a primary street, consolidation of access points
should be encouraged whenever possible, even if consolidation may require agreement
among multiple owners.
•
Parking standards should be balanced for future changes in the built environment, so that
the minimums of today can be reassessed in future decades with such ideas as shared
parking, stacked and structured parking, parking districts, and parking maximums for
certain land uses.
•
Spatial provisions should be made as site configurations permit for possible structured
parking in future phases of development. Structured parking could be economically
feasible at a future date and site development today should not preclude possible future
redevelopment of the sites at a higher density.
A NEW BEGINNING
6-5
Amenities
•
Amenities for commercial and residential developments should be clearly demarcated for
public and private access and use.
•
Public exterior amenities for commercial or institutional buildings should be accessible,
well signed and lit, and well supervised.
Signage and Lighting
•
Lighting for streets, public ways and surface parking should allow for color balance, safety,
minimal glare for pedestrians, and minimal lighting of the night sky and adjacent residential
development.
•
Lighting and signage for commercial and institutional building uses should have maximums
for numbers, types and areas of signs, as well as brightness of signage lighting. Lighting
should be designed as an integral part of new development, both for the site and
buildings.
Outdoor Storage, Services and Service Areas
•
Outdoor storage areas and building service areas should be screened from public, ground
level vantage points with landscaped planting and enclosures.
•
Utilities and services for commercial and institutional building uses should be screened from
public viewpoints with landscaped planting or enclosures, including views for pedestrians
along public ways and views from nearby buildings. Elements to be considered include
such items as transformers, valves, meters, ducts, service areas, loading docks, antennas
and mechanical units.
BUILDING DESIGN
Building Design and Sustainability
6-6
•
Sustainability should be encouraged in both the design of neighborhood walkability and
connectivity, as well as in the design of building energy usage and operability.
•
Buildings should be designed with quality materials and sustainable energy practices,
and a method of measurement should be adopted for the durability and sustainability of
buildings.
•
Building typologies that are most likely to be built in the near term future for many of the
sites in the three neighborhoods will be single use or two uses, combined with surface
parking. The uses should be placed at ground level with active uses along streets as much
as possible, particularly in commercial centers. Buildings should avoid being built above
open or naturally ventilated parking areas, except for residential covered parking.
A NEW BEGINNING
Architectural Style
•
Architectural style of an individual building or of a group of buildings should relate to the
context of the surrounding area, to the uses of the building, and to the location that the
building occupies on a street and in the neighborhood.
Modulation, Articulation, and Detailing
•
Ground floor facades with commercial and personal services uses should have visually
permeable frontages with large windows and clear glazing.
•
Entrances into buildings should be easily identified through the use of building design and
detailing, in addition to well-designed signage and lighting.
Building Elements for Commercial Buildings
•
Ground floor retail facades should have visually permeable shop frontages with large
storefront windows and clear glazing.
•
The design of retail uses should follow principles of visibility, accessibility, facade continuity,
and spatial preferences to maximize retailing success.
•
Commercial and mixed-use buildings should have minimal setbacks from street frontages,
should be built to define the street, and should provide ample pedestrian ways.
•
Buildings with office uses should be have Class B space or better, or special boutique office
space. The height of buildings should be suitable for the market and site limitations. The
gross floor area per floor should be 17,000 square feet or larger with a central core and
curtain wall treatment where feasible. Office buildings should be highly amenitized and in
a commercial environment with support services provided.
Mixed-use buildings should front the street with large
storefront windows for ground floor retail uses
Buildings should be modulated with architectural
elements, recesses, overhangs, and special corner
treatments. Entrances should be easily identifiable.
Signage should be well-designed and integrated in the
facade.
A NEW BEGINNING
6-7
Signage and Lighting
•
Signage and lighting for commercial and institutional building uses should have maximums
for numbers, types and areas of signs, as well as the color and brightness of signage
lighting.
•
Building lighting should be designed as an integral part of new development, both for the
interior and exterior of buildings.
Materials and Finishes
•
Materials and finishes on new and rehabilitated buildings should be of the high quality and
should be compatible with the neighborhood or street character of the buildings nearby.
•
Buildings should be designed with quality materials and sustainable energy practices,
and a method of measurement should be adopted for the durability and sustainability of
buildings.
Colors and Textures
•
Colors should be compatible with the context of the location of the project. Buildings
located along street frontages in commercial areas allow a broader range of color selections
than buildings located within residential areas.
•
Textures of surfaces should be matte or satin and non-reflective, with the exception of
glazing, which can be polished and reflective.
•
Colors which are different from the contextual colors of a neighborhood or street can be
used for emphasis and accent.
Roof Design
•
Roofs of buildings should be designed so that equipment is enclosed or shielded from
public viewpoints, that is, from streets or from buildings that are in near proximity. Rooftop
components should be designed as an integral part of a building design and the roofscape
design should utilize painting, green roofs, and shading.
LANDSCAPING
General
6-8
•
Landscaping for the purposes of these guidelines includes irrigated planted areas with
trees and all manner of plant materials, as well as areas of various hardscape treatment. It
also includes lighting, seating, and street and plaza furniture and equipment.
•
The corners of intersections, particularly at gateway sites and neighborhood entries, should
be distinguished by special landscape and architectural treatments.
A NEW BEGINNING
•
Planting should use deciduous and evergreen trees for comfort of pedestrians and building
occupants, as well as the efficient usage of building energy.
•
Flowering trees, shrubs and plants should be provided with building projects, streets, open
spaces and surface parking areas for color and delight at different times of the year.
•
Pavement should have a combination of porous and non-porous materials in concert with
drainage and storm water strategies for the site and the neighborhood.
Surface Parking Areas
•
Parking areas should consist of separated parking fields that are aesthetically pleasing, and
landscaped to screen public views of the vehicles.
•
Trees for shade should be provided in clusters and linear arrangements, not as single
specimens in individual planters within a parking field.
•
Consider the use of permeable pavement materials to minimize water run-off and heat
island effects.
Landscape Setbacks
•
Residential buildings should incorporate setbacks for front, side and rear yards, which are
landscaped and in the character of the area in which they are located.
•
Commercial and mixed-use buildings should have minimal setbacks from street frontages,
should be built to define the street, and should provide street landscaping treatment with
ample pedestrian ways.
Parking lots should be screened with vegetation and
shaded with clusters of dense trees.
Consider permeable pavement in parking areas to
minimize water run-off and heat island effects.
A NEW BEGINNING
6-9
6.1.3
OVERLAY ZONING CONCEPT
The purpose of the Concept Plan is to establish a vision, framework and strategic guide for
development within each neighborhood. To promote the goals, overall strategies and design
guidelines for each neighborhood, it is recommended that the City consider as a next step
the preparation and adoption of zoning code revisions to include an overlay zone concept
that would permit the uses, including mixed uses and densities for new construction and site
development identified in each Concept Plan. While the recommendation is discussed in more
detail in the Implementation Section of this report (see Section 7), the intent would be for the
City to develop incentives in a new overlay zone to stimulate the private sector and significantly
encourage redevelopment and rehabilitation.
A property owner should be allowed to continue to develop to the standards under existing
zoning and General plan requirements or to develop under standards to be contained with
the ultimate overlay zone. The overlay zone would identify permitted development that would
implement each Concept Plan and under which circumstances development can occur under the
proposed overlay zone such as the type of permitted uses and minimum size of a development
site.
Development capacity and development thresholds granted under the overlay zone concept
for new development and significant rehabilitation projects would be permitted up to the total
increase in non-residential square footages and total additional net increases in dwelling units
identified in the development threshold tables for each neighborhood (see tables 6-1, 6-2, and
6-3, and Appendix A.2), provided that residential density on individual development sites would
be permitted up to a maximum development intensity of 45 dwelling units per acre depending
on specific site characteristics and demonstration by an applicant of compatibility with adjacent
development. The process of approving additional net increases under the overlay zone concept
versus development by an applicant under existing General Plan and zoning requirements, would
be on a first-come, first serve basis up to the maximum development thresholds for net increases
identified in tables 6-1, 6-2, and 6-3.
In order to ensure that the any new development does not exceed the capacity of the circulation
system and to manage the availability of additional development capacity in each neighborhood,
the overlay zone concept would also need to include a monitoring process which would tract
the actual additional net increases of dwelling units and/or non-residential square footage
entitlements granted in each neighborhood under the overlay concept.
6-10
A NEW BEGINNING
6 . 2 C e n ter C ity P referred Concep t Plan
The preferred concept plan for the Center City Neighborhood is primarily a refinement of
Alternative A and some components of Alternative B with the key opportunity site located at
the intersection of Newport Avenue and El Camino Real (Site 3). The preferred plan serves as a
guidance for long-term development up to thirty years. Development may occur in the short- or
mid-term in some areas, particularly on the opportunity sites, if market conditions stimulate such
development. The identified opportunity sites are discussed in detail Chapters 4 and 5.
The preferred plan and its components evolved after taking into account the following factors
and results:
•
Community input from Workshop #1 and #2
•
Traffic and infrastructure testing (refer to Appendix A.3)
•
Market Analysis (separate document available from the City of Tustin)
•
Prototypical site testing
•
Financial feasibility analysis for key opportunity sites (refer to Appendix A.4)
•
Established development thresholds (refer to Appendix A.2)
•
Input from city departments (Redevelopment, Community Development, Public Works,
Parks and Recreation, and Police Departments)
KEY COMPONENTS OF THE PREFERRED CONCEPT PLAN
The Center City Neighborhood is adjacent to the I-5 Freeway and to Tustin’s Old Town. It is
important to phase the new development to emphasize the City’s gateway sites and prominent
streetscapes. Private development should be encouraged on opportunity sites that have the
greatest gateway and commercial potential, including key opportunity site 3 (see Chapter 4,
section 4.1.2). Public development would include streetscape improvements to Newport and
Red Hill Avenues, and to El Camino Real. Key components of the preferred concept plan are:
•
Low-scale residential development on the south side of 6th Street and west of B Street
(Site 1). A mix of residential with office buildings placed along the freeway is also possible
as long as the overall development intensity stays within the established thresholds for
development and traffic impacts.
•
New Retail/Residential Mixed-Use west of El Camino and south of 6th Street (Site 2) with
retail oriented to El Camino Real.
•
Upgrade of commercial uses along Newport Avenue and Red Hill Avenue.
•
Intensification and consolidation of select residential parcels.
•
Streetscape improvements on Newport Avenue, Red Hill Avenue, and El Camino Real.
•
Site 3 has been identified as a key opportunity site for development for new commercial
(retail only or retail/ office mixed use; refer to Chapter 5, Section 5.2.2).
A NEW BEGINNING
6-11
FIGURE 6-1: CENTER CITY PREFERRED CONCEPT PLAN
Upgrade/ Renovate
Existing
Commercial Uses
along Newport Ave
An
dr
ew
sS
tre
et
Sa
nJ
ua
Av
e
in
3
Alternative Roadway
Study)
tre
et
tre
et
Lambert School
Identified Existing
Residential Uses
between Newport Ave
and Orange St
St
re
et
Sa
Tustin High School
oR
ea
nJ
ua
nS
tre
et
l
Ca
m
ino
Re
al
lA
ve
n
EL
Re
d
Hil
New
Retail/ Office
Mixed-Use
Key Opportunity
Site 3:
New Commercial
ue
Ca
m
aS
nS
St
re
et
wp
or
t
Ne
El
nit
Upgrade/ Renovate
Or
an
ge
El Camino Real
El Camino Way
B Street
6th Street
W
aln
ut
Upgrade/ Intensify
Cir
cle
Upgrade Existing
Commercial
Bo
Br
ya
nA
ve
nu
e
Main Street
te
ro
Mixed-Use with Retail
oriented to El Camino
Es
New Residential or
Office Use with
Lower Buildings and
Setbacks along
6th Street and
Higher Buildings
along the Freeway
Upgrade Existing
Approved New
Commercial Use
Improve Existing
Retaining Wall with
Vegetation or
Public Art
Upgrade Existing
Commercial
0
150
300
600
Public Use
Institutional Use
Use
Private
Proposed Upgrades/
Improvements
3
Key Opportunity Site
6-12
A NEW BEGINNING
TABLE 6-1: CENTER CITY NEW DEVELOPMENT THRESHOLDS (2030)
Use
Residential (DU)
Opportunity Sites
(Sites 1,2,3,4,5)
Changes over
Existing (+/-)
0
506
506
219,706
295,100
75,300
Commercial Office (SF)
16,587
83,600
67,000
Commercial Hotel (SF)
37,551
21,200
(16,300)
271,520
0
(271,500)
763
1,113
350
Commercial Retail (SF)
139,111
150,000
10,900
55,624
90,000
34,400
763
1,619
856
358,817
445,100
86,300
72,211
173,600
101,400
Commercial Hotel (SF)
37,551
21,200
(16,400)
Industrial (SF)
271,520
0
(271,500)
Commercial Total (SF)
740,099
639,900
(100,200)
Residential (DU)
Residential (DU)
TOTAL
Concept Plan
Industrial (SF)
Other locations in the
Neighborhood
Existing
Conditions
The development thresholds will be governed by an overlay zone that would permit the uses,
including mixed uses, and densities for new construction and site development identified in
the Concept Plan (refer to section. 6.1.3). The opportunity sites ( Sites 1 to 5) account for a
total increase 126,000 sf of commercial uses compared to the existing commercial uses and an
additional 506 residential units compared to the existing number of units. Other opportunities
for development exist on sites in the neighborhood that were not identified as key opportunity
sites. On these sites, an additional 45,300 sf of commercial uses and 350 additional residential
units can be developed.
The Center City Concept Plan allows for an additional 187,700 sf of commercial uses, replacing
the existing industrial use of 271,500 sf and 16,400 sf of hotel use, and 856 additional residential
units. Overall, the Center City Neighborhood will have a projected decrease of 100,200 sf of
commercial space due to the elimination of industrial uses.
For detailed tables, refer to Appendix A.2.
A NEW BEGINNING
6-13
6 . 3 Sou th ern Gateway Preferred Concep t Plan
The preferred concept plan for the Southern Gateway Neighborhood is primarily based on
Alternative B with the key opportunity site located at the intersection of Newport Avenue and
Walnut Avenue (Site 9). The preferred plan serves as a guidance for long-term development up to
thirty years. Development may occur in the short- or mid-term in some areas, particularly on the
opportunity sites, if market conditions stimulate such development. The identified opportunity
sites are discussed in detail Chapter 4 and 5.
and results:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Parks and Recreation, and the Police Department)
The Southern Gateway Neighborhood is adjacent to both the I-5 Freeway and to the SR-55
Freeway. It is important to phase the new development to emphasize the City’s gateway sites and
prominent streetscapes. Private development should be encouraged on opportunity sites that
have the greatest neighborhood impact, including opportunity sites 6, 9 and 11 (see Chapter 4,
section 4.1.2). Public development would include streetscape improvements to Newport Avenue
and to the SR-55 Freeway off-ramp at Sycamore. Key components of the preferred concept plan
include:
6-14
•
Higher concentration of new retail and office mixed-use on key opportunity site 9 located
on the south side of Walnut and east side of Newport Avenue.
•
Consolidation for new residential use with new east-west street and new Youth Center west
of Pasadena Avenue.
•
Potential closure of the southern portion of Pasadena Ave that connects to Sycamore
Avenue.
•
Traffic calming along Pasadena Avenue and new street to minimize through-traffic.
•
Studying the potential relocation of Youth Center to a larger site, which could be in the
vicinity of the north-western corner of Pasadena and Sycamore Avenue; reuse of current
Youth Center site for larger retail in combination with commercial site on the north side
and parking lot on the east side.
•
New retail/ office and retail/residential mixed-use on identified sites on Newport Avenue.
•
New residential development replacing the retail center on the west side of Newport
Avenue and north side of Mitchell Avenue.
•
Streetscape improvements on Newport Avenue, McFadden Avenue, and Walnut
Avenue.
A NEW BEGINNING
FIGURE 6-2: SOUTHERN GATEWAY PREFERRED CONCEPT PLAN
Upgrade Existing
Commercial
Nis
New
Commercial Retail
Traffic Calming on
Pasadena Ave and
New Street
son
New Residential
Rd
Nisso
Upgrade Existing
Commercial
SC
BS
tre
et
55
Closure of Pasadena
Ave with Cul-de-Sac
or Optional Vacation
(Subject to Further
Study)
n Rd
St
re
et
New
Retail/ Office
Mixed-Use
New Street
(Subject to
Further Study)
M
itc
he
ll A
ve
New
Retail/ Residential
Mixed-Use
Mc Fadden Avenue
Upgrade/ Consolidate
ExistingCommercial
New Vegetation
along Freeway
Ramp
W
aln
ut
9
Upgrade Existing
Commercial
Av
e
ore
or
Key Opportunity Site 9:
New Retail/ Office
Mixed-Use
wp
De
lA
m
oA
ve
Syc
am
Sc
he
re
rP
l
Ave
Kenyo
nD
r
Reuse Existing Building/
xD
fa
r
aD
or
eA
ve
ar
lo
m
m
Ca
r
Sy
ca
De
lA
m
oA
ve
r
New Residential on
Consolidated Site
Ne
Fe
Ch
an
nn
el
tA
ve
Altadena Dr
Bliss Ln
Sa
nt
aA
na
Sa
nt
a
Myrtle Ave
Pasadena Ave
Potential New
Youth Center Site
Ch
Upgrade/ Renovate
Consolidate and
Upgrade Existing
Residential
Upgrade Existing
Medical Complex
Planned Newport
Ave Extension
Southern Gateway
Neighborhood Boundary
New Consolidated
Commercial Site
Streetscape Improvements/
Complete Street Trees (subject to
further study)
0
150
300
600
Public Use
Proposed Upgrades/
Improvements
Proposed Change of Use
Closure of Pasadena Ave
Potential Street Vacation with
Lot Consolidation
Proposed New Street
Streetscape Improvements/
Complete Street Trees (subject to
further study)
OCTA/ SCRRA Railway
9
A NEW BEGINNING
6-15
TABLE 6-2: SOUTHERN GATEWAY NEW DEVELOPMENT THRESHOLDS (2030)
Use
Residential (DU)
Opportunity Sites
(Sites 6,7,8,9,10,11)
Neighborhood
Concept Plan
Changes over
Existing (+/-)
177
384
207
111,217
109,000
(2,100)
0
57,900
57,900
Public/Youth Center
6,008
12,000
6,000
Residential (DU)
1,854
2,209
355
106,194
130,000
23,800
75,000
215,000
140,000
2,031
2,593
562
217,411
239,000
21,600
75,000
272,900
197,900
Residential (DU)
TOTAL
Existing
Conditions
Public/Youth Center
6,008
12,000
6,000
298,411
511,900
219,500
including mixed uses, and densities for new construction and site development identified in the
Concept Plan (refer to section. 6.1.3). The opportunity sites ( Sites 6 to 11) account for a total
increase 55,700 sf of commercial uses compared to the existing commercial uses and an additional
207 residential units compared to the existing units. The planned expansion of the public/ youth
center adds 6,000 sf to the existing square footage. Other opportunities for development exist
on sites in the neighborhood that were not identified as key opportunity sites. An additional
163,600 sf of commercial uses are allowable by the established limits as well as 355 additional
residential units.
The Southern Gateway Concept Plan allows for an additional 219,500 sf of commercial uses and
606 additional residential units.
6-16
A NEW BEGINNING
6 . 4 Wes t V il l age P referred Concep t Plan
The preferred concept plan for the West Village Neighborhood is primarily based on Alternative
B with the key opportunity site located at the intersection of Tustin Village Way and McFadden
Avenue (Site 12). The preferred plan serves as a guidance for long-term development up to
thirty years. Development may occur in the short- or mid-term in some areas, particularly on the
opportunity sites, if market conditions stimulate such development. The identified opportunity
sites are discussed in detail Chapter 4 and 5.
and results:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Parks and Recreation, and the Police Department)
The West Village Neighborhood is west of SR-55 Freeway and south of the I-5 Freeway, and north
of McFadden Avenue. It is important to phase the new development to emphasize sites and
streetscapes with the greatest benefit to the neighborhood. Private and public development
should be encouraged on opportunity sites that have neighborhood commercial uses and
open space, including opportunity sites 12, 14 and 15 (see Chapter 4, section 4.1.2). Public
development would include streetscape improvements to Williams Street and Tustin Village Way.
Key components of the preferred concept plan include:
•
On the south side of Alliance Street, reuse some residential parcels for joint parking for
school and neighborhood with optional new residential development to replace existing
residential uses.
•
Combine both parcels on key opportunity site 12 and develop with new retail and
residential mixed-use; with a new park fronting on Tustin Village Way proposed on the
Caltrans parcel.
•
Develop both mobile home parks with new residential uses that include new public parks.
•
New east-west public street that connects Tustin Village Way with Williams Street.
•
Use residential parcel south of the school side for future school expansion.
•
New commercial uses on McFadden Avenue east of Tustin Village Way.
•
Streetscape improvements on McFadden Avenue, Tustin Village Way, Alliance Street, and
Williams Street.
A NEW BEGINNING
6-17
FIGURE 6-3: WEST VILLAGE PREFERRED CONCEPT PLAN
Upgrade Existing
Commercial Use
New Residential Use
with Integrated
Public Open Space
S Elk Ln
New Commercial
Retail Site
Main Street
New Residential
Use with Integrated
Public Open Space
New Public Street,
Extension of Tustin
Village Way (Subject to
Further Study)
Lorelei Ln
New School
Expansion
Robert
Heidemann
School
55
Alliance Street
Key Opportunity Site 12:
Mixed-Use
Williams Street
Fe
Ch
an
nn
el
Southewest Tustin Channnel
Sa
nt
aA
na
Sa
nt
a
Upgrade Existing or
New Residential Use;
include Small Park
Tustin Village Way
Proposed Joint Parking
for School and
Neighborhood Use
12
Mc Fadden Avenue
New Infill
Residential
Consolidate Site/
New Commercial
Retail Use
West Village Neigborhood Boundary
Proposed Change of Use
Public Use
Proposed New Street
OCTA/ SCRRA Railway
12
Proposed Upgrades/
Improvements
6-18
A NEW BEGINNING
0
150
300
600
TABLE 6-3: WEST VILLAGE NEW DEVELOPMENT THRESHOLDS (2030)
Use
Residential (DU)
Opportunity Sites
(Sites 12, 13,14,15,16,17) Commercial Retail (SF)
Neighborhood
Residential (DU)
Concept Plan
Changes over
Existing (+/-)
400
751
351
48,321
71,100
22,800
2,396
2,396
0
20,627
20,600
0
2,796
3,147
351
68,948
91,700
22,800
68,948
91,700
22,800
Residential (DU)
TOTAL
Existing
Conditions
including mixed uses, and densities for new construction and site development identified in the
Concept Plan (refer to section 6.1.3). The opportunity sites (Sites 12 to 17) account for a total
increase of 22,800 sf of commercial uses compared to the existing commercial uses, and an
additional 351 residential units compared to the existing units.
A NEW BEGINNING
6-19
7 . I MPL E ME N TAT I O N P L A N
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
7 . 1 I m pl emen tation S trateg ies and Tools
INTRODUCTION
In order to achieve the goals for development and improvement of the Center City, Southern
Gateway, and West Village Neighborhoods in Tustin Town Center, a strategy is necessary to
implement the desired development program presented in the Final Concept Plans for each
neighborhood. This chapter presents a series of steps as a Strategy for Implementation, which
are prioritized and can be achieved over time.
GENERAL STRATEGIES
The first steps in initiating a strategy for implementation have occurred:
1.
Goals and approaches have been formulated for the neighborhood.
2.
A market study has been performed for land uses in each area.
3.
Alternative Neighborhood concept plans have been proposed and opportunity sites
identified.
4.
Public workshops have occurred and the concept plans and opportunity sites have been
tested.
5.
Key opportunity sites which are prototypical and catalytic have been tested for site layout
and analyzed for financial feasibility.
6.
Traffic and circulation testing has been evaluated for each of the Neighborhoods.
7.
A Conceptual Plan for each neighborhood has been created.
A NEW BEGINNING
7-1
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
In addition, the strategies that grew out of the goals for each neighborhood in the Town Center
were identified in more specificity as part of this study. The stated overall strategies are:
1.
Consolidate commercial uses along corridors into well-defined neighborhood centers
and mixed-use developments.
2.
Redirect future development to underutilized and underperforming sites.
3.
Focus uses onto neighborhood-related and pedestrian-oriented sites to form synergistic
benefits with residential uses.
4.
Relocate industrial uses away from residential and commercial centers.
5.
Convert underperforming commercial sites to other uses or mixed uses.
6.
Expand streetscape improvements along street corridors.
7.
Encourage introduction of moderate- to high-density residential development along
street corridors, compatible with the adjacent neighborhood.
8.
Maintain an adequate supply of affordable housing.
9.
Encourage construction of a greater variety of residential product types to accommodate
a variety of family sizes.
10. Develop additional park and open spaces where possible.
11. Upgrade and revitalize older residential areas and reduce overcrowding.
12. Improve connectivity in and between neighborhoods, including the provision of bike
lane routes.
ACTION PROJECTS AND PROGRAMS
The next step is to ensure that the public framework of the City, which includes Tustin Community
Redevelopment Agency, and other public and quasi-public bodies, encourages private
development to act and that public improvements are forthcoming in concert with private
development. Development of projects should be encouraged to take place by the private
development community through public actions and in partnerships with the public sector.
It is important to note that the steps in a strategy change over time and must be reevaluated
every three to five years concerning prioritization and rate of implementation. A good method
for organizing the actions in a strategy is to schedule them in a time sequence as short-term,
medium-term, and long-term, which can be assigned any lengths of time. Short-term is generally
one to three years, medium-term is generally three to five years, and long-term is generally five
to ten years.
The following action projects and programs have been identified and are organized by the time
frame within which they should be implemented, lead responsible party, and potential partial list
of potential funding sources which may be expanded (additional funding sources and programs
are also discussed further in Section 7.2.
7-2
A NEW BEGINNING
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
IMMEDIATE
1. It is recommended that the City Council formally endorse the Town Center New Beginnings
Study as a Strategic Guide for Development and instruct staff to proceed with specific
programming of priority action programs, as funding is available and also as part of the normal
City Budget process.
Responsible Party/Department: City Council with support from RDA.
Funding Source: No direct fiscal impact at this time unless specific recommendations are brought
forward for budget approvals in the future.
2. Notify property owners within each Neighborhood and development interests of the
Concept Plans endorsed by the City Council, the next steps in the process (i.e. regulatory
changes, etc), the City’s desire for the continued involvement of property owners in the
process, and solicitation of any specific development interests that an individual property
owner may have consistent with the Concept Plans.
Responsible Party/Department: Redevelopment Agency (RDA) with support from Community
Development.
Funding Source: Redevelopment Project Area Funds, and City General Funds for any portion of
this effort that is outside a Redevelopment Project Area.
3. Until the short-term action for General Plan and Zoning Code amendments can be
completed, evaluate and consider interim measures that would permit development to occur
consistent with a specific Concept Plan subject to certain interim conditions or performance
standards.
Responsible Party/Department: Community Development with support from RDA.
A NEW BEGINNING
7-3
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SHORT TERM (1-3 YEARS)
1. Utilize the General Design Guidelines contained in this Report by adoption of an interim
Resolution as a general guide in review of new development within each Neighborhood until
more formalized design guidelines can be developed as part of future regulatory changes
necessary to implement the Neighborhood Concept Plans.
Responsible Party/Department: Lead from Community Development with support and from
RDA.
Funding Source: Redevelopment Project Area funds, and City General Funds for any portion of
2. Initiate any necessary General Plan amendments, Overlay District Zoning, and other zoning
modifications as may be necessary to implement the uses recommended and permitted
development thresholds contained in the Neighborhood Concept Plans, and which will also
implement other overall strategies for encouraging revitalization in each Neighborhood
including, but not limited to: (1) streamlining review and approval procedures to facilitate and
development permitting, to ensure the simplicity and clarity of development regulations, and
to provide zoning incentives in older neighborhood which will encourage new development;
(2) consolidating commercial uses along major corridors into well-define centers and increasing
connectivity between neighborhoods; (3) encouraging mixed uses and a variety of different
residential development products; (4) encouraging introduction of medium to high density
residential development along street corridors, compatible with adjacent residential areas;
(5) supporting a flexible and balanced parking policy employing shared parking concepts and
different standards for sites were priority development needs to be provided with incentives
to occur; (6) encouraging accommodation of pedestrian and small amenity open spaces in
conjunction with individual site development; (7) incorporating sustainability concepts in to
land use regulations; (8) rezoning sites with industrial uses incompatible with neighborhood
revitalization in the Center City Neighborhood; (9) refining design guidelines developed with
the Concept Plan preparation to provide more specific identify elements for each Neighborhood
and incorporate into revisions of the zoning code.
Responsible Party: Lead from Community Development with support from RDA.
3. In conjunction with regulatory changes identified in Action Program #2 above, complete
any necessary environmental documentation required for such discretionary actions.
Responsible Party: Lead from Community Development and support from RDA
Funding Source: Redevelopment Project Funds and City General Funds for any portion of this
effort that is outside a Redevelopment Project Area.
7-4
A NEW BEGINNING
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
4. Enforce zoning and building code to improve the appearance of each Neighborhood.
Responsible Party: Lead from Community Development with support from the City’s Neighborhood
Improvement Team of City Departments.
Funding Source: Community Development Block Grant Funds, City General Funds, and
Redevelopment Project Funds.
5. Expand funding and marketing for commercial rehabilitation and new development by
providing incentives in the way of loans and grants for façade and site improvements of
commercial uses along major commercial corridors within each Neighborhood and for new
development. Also, explore providing additional design support to property owners struggling
with the type of improvements which would most improve their businesses.
Responsible Party: Lead from RDA with support from the City’s Neighborhood Improvement
Team of City Departments.
Funding Source: Redevelopment Project Funds, Community Development Block Grant Funds
(within those areas outside of the redevelopment project areas), state/regional and federal
funding programs, private financing and non-profit approaches.
6. Expand funding and marketing for housing rehabilitation and upgrades to residential areas
in individual Neighborhoods.
Responsible Party: Lead from RDA with support from the City’s Neighborhood Improvement
Team of City Departments.
Funding Source: Redevelopment Project Funds, Community Block Grant Funds, state/regional
and federal funding programs, private financing and non-profit/housing approaches.
7. Initiate short range infrastructure improvement, access and other program studies within
in each Neighborhood with the goal of improving the aesthetic appearance of streetscapes
and pedestrian amenities, improving connectivity between neighborhoods and facilities such
as the Tustin Metro Link station, including the provision of bike lanes were needed.
Specifically evaluate the feasibility of improvements, necessary right-of-way if needed, and
the level and type of specific improvements appropriate to individual locations. Depending
on the outcomes of individual studies, prioritization and future final construction design and
programming of improvements would be identified based on available funding sources. The
priority for the studies in each Neighborhood in the Short Range would be in the order of their
listing as follows:
A NEW BEGINNING
7-5
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
All Neighborhoods
•
Complete an analysis of demand for shuttle services and transportation programs to
be provided in individual Neighborhoods, if determined needed, to facilitate access
to the Tustin Metro Link station.
•
Gateway improvements at El Camino Real and Red Hill Avenue and at Newport Avenue
and El Camino Real.
•
Streetscape and median improvements along Red Hill Avenue
•
Improvements to the existing Caltrans Retaining Wall, El Camino Real,
•
Potential bike lanes along El Camino Real and streetscape and median
improvements.
Southern Gateway
•
Gateway and landscaping improvements at the SR-55 Freeway ramp at McFadden
(Sycamore) within Caltrans right-of-way.
•
Streetscape and median improvements along Newport
including potential bike routes.
•
Potential closure of Pasadena Avenue or construction of a cul-de-sac.
•
Potential new street from Newport Avenue to Pasadena, with vacation of portions of
Myrtle and Bliss.
•
Streetscape and median improvements along Newport Avenue south of Myrtle in
conjunction with the Newport Extension project, including bike routes.
Avenue north of Myrtle,
West Village
• Streetscape improvements at McFadden including potential bike lanes.
•
Potential extension of Tustin Village Way and acquisition of a new east-west public
street between Tustin Village Way and Williams Street.
Responsible Party: Lead by Public Works with support from RDA and other City Departments.
Funding: Redevelopment Project Funds, Community Development Block Grant Funds, state/
regional and federal funding programs, and General Funds.
7-6
A NEW BEGINNING
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
8. Initiate studies within in each Neighborhood, as applicable to determine the feasibility of
additional open space. Community facilities or public parking.
Specifically evaluate the feasibility of improvements, necessary acquisition needs and costs and
on the outcomes of individual studies, prioritization and acquisition may be considered, and
further construction design and programming of improvements based on available funding
sources. The priority for the studies in each Neighborhood in the Short Range would be in the
order of their listing as follows:
Southern Gateway
• New Youth Center and open space in closer proximity to major populations served by
the Center in the proximity of Pasadena north of Sycamore.
West Village
• Parkland facilities on current Caltrans (former abandoned ramp location adjacent to
the SR-55 Freeway) consolidation with redevelopment of the adjacent parcel to the
south.
•
Parking facilities and other amenities at Alliance at Tustin Village Way as overflow for
the school and to accommodate residential parking overflow on Alliance when the
school is not in operation.
Responsibility Party: Parks would be support for Parks and Recreation working with RDA; Parking
facilities would be Public Works with support from RDA and TUSD.
Funding Sources: Redevelopment project funding, Community Development Block Grant Funds,
state/regional and federal funding programs, Quimby Park fees, private financing, City General
Funds.
A NEW BEGINNING
7-7
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
9. Solicit more formally property owner interest in development of opportunity sites, first
prioritizing key opportunity sites and then moving on to all other opportunity sites. Determine
the following information for each opportunity site in the Center City, Southern Gateway, and
West Village:
•
A current property owner’s intentions for development or disposition consistent
with a Concept Plan and any subsequent re-zoning..
•
The willingness of an owner to subordinate their property to a larger redevelopment
effort in the interest of securing greater future return.
Of particular note is that early development of a key opportunity site can be a catalyst for
other development in a Neighborhood. A strategy for implementation is to devote significant
resources to development of these key opportunity sites since assumptions for the development
of these sites have been already tested. Depending upon owner interest, solicit private sector
interest on sites where current property owners do not demonstrate a desire for development
by issuing a Request for Qualifications and/or Request for Proposals for public-private sector
partnering.
Responsible Party: Lead from RDA, with support from Community Development and , the City’s
Neighborhood Improvement Team of City Departments.
Funding Source: Redevelopment Project Funds (only within a redevelopment project area),
Community Development Block Grant Funds, other state/regional and federal funding programs,
City General Funds (for areas outside of redevelopment project areas).
10. In Redevelopment Project Areas, ensure the policy contained in the City’s Comprehensive
Affordability Plan to provide the required 15% affordable housing obligations on individual
development sites within the Project Area are met. Outside of Redevelopment Project Areas,
negotiate the provision of a diverse housing types to accommodate a variety of family sizes
including the accommodation of affordable housing when financially feasible.
Responsible Party: RDA with support from Community Development
Funding Source: Redevelopment project funds, state/regional and federal funds, Community
Development Block Grant funds, and private financing.
11. Utilize the City’s site plan and design review process, to determine when contributions
of Quimby Act parkland fees and land dedications would be required in conjunction with
development and assess and impose the requirement that will be the best approach to meeting
the open space objectives identified in an individual Neighborhood Concept Plan.
Responsible Party: Parks and Recreation with support from Community Development
Funding Source: No negative fiscal impact but will be a process that will generate funding
resources into the City’s Park Development Fund or provide valuable land resources that can be
used to develop open space and community facilities.
7-8
A NEW BEGINNING
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
12. Explore financing approaches and potential tax incentives that can be used to assist in
accomplishing and/or expediting development through public-private partnerships, including
work force housing, redevelopment assistance and other approaches.
Responsible Party: Lead from RDA.
Funding Sources: Redevelopment Project Funds (only within a redevelopment project area),
Community Development Block Grant Funds, other state/regional and federal funding programs.
City General Funds (for areas outside of redevelopment project areas).
13. Ensure that all City and RDA assistance contracts, development agreements and/or
disposition and development agreements, and/or owner participation agreements include
required occupancy standards when any assistance is for residential development or
rehabilitation to reduce overcrowding.
Responsible Party: Lead from RDA with support from Operating Department.
Funding Source: No direct negative fiscal impact at this time that necessitates identification of a
funding source.
14. Explore development of a joint use agreement with TUSD so that Heidemann School
open space (particularly fields) can be available for recreational use given limited open space
resources in the West Village.
Responsible Party: Lead from Parks and Recreation and City Manager’s Office.
Funding Source: Quimby Act fees, Community Development Block Grant Funding.
A NEW BEGINNING
7-9
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
MEDIUM-TERM (3 TO 5 YEARS) TO LONG TERM ( 5+ YEARS)
1. Where parcels are necessary for right-of-way and community facilities and/or other public
purposes in any Neighborhood, specifically identify and assemble such parcels using acquisition
procedures and available funding sources.
Responsible Party: Operating department responsible for development of said facilities, with
support from RDA.
Funding Sources: Redevelopment Project Funds (only within a redevelopment project area),
Community Development Block Grant Funds, other state/regional and federal funding programs,
private sector dedication where necessary in conjunction with development, City General
Funds.
2. Initiate Medium Term infrastructure improvements, access and other program studies within
in each Neighborhood with the goal of improving the aesthetic appearance of streetscapes
and pedestrian amenities.
Specifically evaluate the feasibility of improvements, necessary right-of-way if needed, and
on the outcomes of individual studies, prioritization and future final construction design and
programming of improvements would be identified based on available funding sources. The
priority for the studies in each Neighborhood in the Medium Term would be in the order of
their listing as follows:
Center City
•
Improvements and upgrade renovations along Newport north of the I-5 Freeway to
Main Street.
•
Potential bike route along 6th street.
•
Potential for El Camino Real Vacation subject to accommodation of potential alternative
access to existing property owners and tenants utilizing this roadway.
Southern Gateway
•
Streetscape improvements along McFadden Avenue including potential bike lanes
•
Streetscape improvements along Walnut Avenue including potential bike lanes
•
Streetscape improvements along Sycamore between Newport Avenue and Red Hill
Avenue including potential bike lanes.
West Village
7-10
•
Streetscape improvements along Alliance Street including potential bike lanes.
•
Streetscape improvements along Williams Street including potential bike lanes.
•
Streetscape improvements along Tustin Village Way including potential bike lanes.
A NEW BEGINNING
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
Responsible Party: Lead by Public Works with support from RDA and other City Departments.
Funding: Redevelopment Project Funds, Community Development Block Grant Funds, state/
regional and federal funding programs, and General Funds.
3. Identify a specific time frame for phasing and funding of specifically prioritized public
improvements, community facilities and open space identified in Short Term and Medium
Term Action programs and projects.
Responsible Party: Public Works in cooperation with operating department responsible for such
facilities in conjunction with development of the City’s annual Capital Improvement Program
Funding Sources: to be determined but would include the range of resources defined in the
Implementation Strategy
4. Formalize a mechanism for acquisition and assemblage of opportunity sites on a prioritized
basis (determining on which sites will be the best catalyst for other redevelopment), where
there are willing buyers and without the Agency’s exercise of eminent domain for new private
development with the City’s Neighborhood Concept Plans
Responsible Party:
departments.
Redevelopment Agency and City staff in cooperation with operating
Funding: Redevelopment Project Area funding, Community Development Block Grant Funds,
state/regional and federal funding programs, private developer financing.
STRATEGIC DEVELOPMENT TOOLS
Strategic tools that can support commercial, residential, and mixed-use development within
these neighborhoods can include the following funding mechanisms and tools:
City / Redevelopment Agency
1.
Redevelopment Tax Increment
2.
General Fund Revenue - The City can elect to dedicate general fund revenue to capital
improvements that the City determines that sufficient benefit exists for assistance
3.
State Density Bonus Law
4.
Reduction/Deferral of Permits/Fees
5.
Reduction in Development and Parking Standards
6.
Zoning incentives for lot consolidations, assemblages, and development consistent with
Concept Plans
A NEW BEGINNING
7-11
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
State / Federal
1.
CalHome
2.
Affordable Housing Program (AHP)
3.
Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) Program
4.
Community Development Block Grants (CDBG)
5.
New Markets Tax Credits
6.
Proposition 42 and 1A (refer to exhibits in section 7.2 for description)
7.
Proposition 1B (refer to exhibits in section 7.2 for description)
8.
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA)
9.
SAFETEA-LU
Developer / Property Owner / User
1.
Community Facilities District (CFD)
2.
Special Assessment District
3.
Landscaping / Parking District
4.
Business Improvement District (BID)
5.
Development Impact Fees
6.
Property Owner / Developer Exactions
7.
Developer Advances / Reimbursement Agreements
8.
Land or Financial Contribution from Large Employer
For further detailed information on Potential Financing Mechanisms, please refer to the
following exhibits in Section 7.2:
7-12
•
Exhibit 1 – City/Redevelopment Agency Potential Financing Mechanisms
•
Exhibit 2 – State/Federal Potential financing Mechanisms
•
Exhibit 3 – Developer/Property Owner/User Potential Financing Mechanisms
A NEW BEGINNING
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
And for public-private partnerships, strategic tools can include:
1.
Partnerships among public agencies and the use of Cooperation Agreements spelling
out each party’s responsibilities.
2.
Formation of inter-governmental or joint powers authorities (JPAs).
3.
Identification of joint private non-profit with private development entities.
4.
Issuance of RFQs and RFPs to private development entities and proceeding through an
open developer selection process.
5.
After selection of a qualified developer for a specific site, entering into an Exclusive
Negotiation Agreement (ENA), memorization of public-private business terms in a
memorandum of understanding (MOU) and then final documentation of the transaction
in a Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA).
The City of Tustin and its Redevelopment Agency have established policies for guiding requests for
financial assistance. Please refer to Appendix A.5 for further information on these guidelines:
•
Submittal Information Required for Review of Requests for Agency Financial Assistance
•
Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency Assistance Criteria
The projected estimate of potential tax revenues and redevelopment increment that could be
generated from development on certain key opportunity sites, as illustrated in the financial pro
formas provided in Appendix 4 for Site 3, Center City, Site 9, Southern Gateway and Site 12, West
Village is detailed on Exhibit 4, Estimate of Potential Tax Increment (see Section 7.2).
A NEW BEGINNING
7-13
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
7 .2 Poten tial F inancing Mechanisms
EXHIBIT 1 CITY / REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY POTENTIAL FINANCING MECHANISMS
A. FUNDING MECHANISM
B. DESCRIPTION
REDEVELOPMENT TAX
INCREMENT
•
•
C. ELIGIBLE USES
•
•
•
•
•
D. FUNDING PARAMETERS
7-14
•
A NEW BEGINNING
The housing set-aside
portion is designated for
development of affordable
housing
The non-housing portion
of tax increment revenues
generated in the Project
Area can be used to fund
infrastructure improvements
GENERAL FUND REVENUE
•
Fees collected in the City’s
General Fund, generated
by property taxes, sales
tax, transient occupancy
tax, motor vehicle license
fees, and other sources of
revenue
Public improvements such as •
infrastructure and parking
Land assembly and
disposition
•
Direct property acquisition
and land cost write-down
Payment of permits and fees
Affordable housing
City services such as police,
fire, life safety, libraries,
and parks and recreational
facilities
Capital improvements
Redevelopment agencies
can provide financial
assistance to developments
and/or provide assistance to
homebuyers
The City can elect to
dedicate portions of specific
revenues, e.g., TOT, sales
tax, etc. to targeted capital
improvements that the
County determines that
sufficient benefit exists for
the assistance
•
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
STATE DENSITY BONUS LAW
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
REDUCTION/DEFERRAL OF
PERMITS/FEES
A voluntary inclusionary
•
housing ordinance providing
incentives to developers
providing affordable housing
in their projects
State legislation requires
cities and counties to grant
both density bonuses and
concessions
Affordable housing projects
that include at least 5 units
or unimproved lots and
remain affordable for a
specified period of time
Senior housing
developments with at least
35 units (units do not need
to be affordable)
Contribution of land if the
parcel is large enough to
accommodate at least 10%
of the market-rate units at
densities suitable for very
low income housing
•
Density bonuses differ based •
on the type of development
and affordability levels but
generally range between
15% and 35%
Concessions and incentives
may include:
- Reduction in site
development standards
and modifications of
zoning and architectural
design requirements
- Waivers and modifications
of development standards
- Reduction in parking
standards
MODIFICATION IN DEVELOPMENT
AND PARKING STANDARDS
Reduction or deferral of
select permits and fees
that results in upfront
development cost
reductions
•
Reduction in site development
standards or modification of
zoning code requirements or
design requirements such as a
reduction in setback and square
footage requirements and in the
required parking ratio
Permit and fee charges
payable to city
•
•
Modifications to design
standards and/or parking
requirements
Modified comparability for
affordable units, i.e., reduced
unit size, interior features, and/or
parking ratio
•
Cost savings to developer
Varies by city; some
cities are deferring
fees until Certificate
of Occupancy due
to current economic
climate
A NEW BEGINNING
7-15
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
EXHIBIT 2: STATE / FEDERAL POTENTIAL FINANCING MECHANISMS
B. DESCRIPTION
CALHOME
•
•
C. ELIGIBLE USES
•
•
AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROGRAM
(AHP)
State program providing
grants to local public
agencies and non-profit
developers to assist
individual households
through deferred payment
loans
•
Predevelopment, site
development, and site
acquisition for development
projects
Rehabilitation, and
acquisition and
rehabilitation, of site-built
housing, and rehabilitation,
repair and replacement of
manufactured homes
Downpayment assistance,
mortgage financing, and
homebuyer counseling
•
•
•
•
•
•
Applicant must be public
agency or non-profit
corporation
•
•
7-16
A NEW BEGINNING
Creates and maintains
affordable rental
and homeownership
opportunities through
competitive grants and
subsidized loans
Housing must remain
affordable 15 years for rental
housing and 5 years for
owner-occupied units
Construction, purchase and/
or rehabilitation of owneroccupied housing for very
low-, low- and moderateincome households
Construction, purchase
and/or rehabilitation of
rental housing, at least
20% of the units of which
will be occupied by and
affordable for very lowincome households for the
remaining useful life of such
housing or the mortgage
term
Construction and permanent
financing
Mortgage assistance, i.e.,
principal reductions, and
interest rate buydowns
Maximum grant
of $1,000,000 (per
development)
Developer must have a
member of the Federal
Home Loan Bank (FHLB)
apply
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
LOW INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDIT (LIHTC)
PROGRAM
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Indirect Federal subsidy used to finance the
development of affordable rental housing for
low-income households
Residential rental property
Commit to one of two possible low-income
occupancy threshold requirements
Restrict rents, including utility charges, in lowincome units
Operate under the rent and income
restrictions for 30 years or longer, pursuant to
written agreements with the agency issuing
the tax credits
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANTS /
SECTION 108 LOANS
•
•
Annual grants for use towards economic
development, public facilities, and housing
rehabilitation
Section 108 loans provide front-end financing
for large-scale community and economic
development projects that cannot be financed
from annual grants
•
•
•
Acquisition and disposition of property
Clearance and demolition
Public facilities and site work
Varies, annual competitive application process •
Credit amounts are based on the costs of
development and the number of qualified low- •
income units, and cannot exceed the amount
needed to make the project feasible
Varies, funds are provided by HUD and
administered by cities
Funds must be targeted to specific areas
benefiting low- and moderate-income persons
or to eliminate blight
A NEW BEGINNING
7-17
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
EXHIBIT 2: STATE / FEDERAL POTENTIAL FINANCING MECHANISMS (CONTINUED)
B. DESCRIPTION
NEW MARKETS TAX CREDITS
•
•
•
C. ELIGIBLE USES
•
•
•
•
7-18
A NEW BEGINNING
PROPOSITIONS 42 AND 1A
Program permits taxpayers
•
to receive a credit against
Federal income taxes for
making qualified equity
investments in designated
Community Development
Entities (CDEs)
Provides investors with
credits against federal
income tax in return for new
investments made in eligible
businesses and commercial
projects in low-income areas
Proposition 42 required
a portion of sales tax on
gasoline be transferred
to the Transportation
Infrastructure Fund (TIF);
Amended by Proposition 1A
to limit the State’s ability to
suspend transfer of revenues
from the TIF during fiscal
difficulties
Organizations must be
certified as a CDE by the
Fund
Activities may include:
- loans to, or investments
in, qualifying businesses,
including real estate and
redevelopment projects
- purchase of certain loans
made by other CDEs
- counseling and related
services to businesses
•
•
•
•
Congestion relief
Safety enhancements
Local streets repair
Public transportation
Varies, annual competitive
application process
Proposed funding
availability of $5 billion in
2010 and 2011
Funds cannot be used in
projects that are already
subsidized by other federal
tax subsidies; in mixed use
developments, subsidization
may be split between uses,
allowing NMTC financing for
parts of the project
•
Funds provided directly for
local road improvements, as
well as for capital projects
(highway and transit)
selected by Caltrans in
the State Transportation
Improvement Program.
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
PROPOSITION 1B
•
•
•
•
•
Highway Safety, Traffic
Reduction, Air Quality, and
Port Security Bond Act of
2006
Approved in 2006, made
available $20 billion for
state and local improvement
projects
•
Congestion relief
Improve air quality
Enhance safety and security
of transportation systems
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
League of California Cities is
drafting legislation with the
California State Association
of Counties for allocation of
this revenue source.
•
•
•
•
SAFETEA-LU
AMERICAN RECOVERY AND
REINVESTMENT ACT (ARRA) OF 2009
The Recovery Act includes
provisions for mortgage
relief, health insurance,
unemployment benefits, and
other forms of assistance
for both individuals and
businesses
Signed into law in 2009, the
ARAA purpose is to create
jobs, save existing jobs, spur
economic activity, and invest
in long-term growth
•
Mortgage relief and tax
credits to existing and future
homeowners
Income tax incentives and
credits
Provide healthcare and
extend unemployment
benefits
Aide in disaster relief
Education-related tax benefits
and savings plans
Construction and repair of
transportation and other
•
•
•
Varies, based on the funding
program
Federal grants are awarded
by a Federal agency for a
public project or service
authorized by Federal law
and are awarded through
a competitive application
process
Federal loans are provided
to a recipient by a Federal
agency that will eventually be
repaid to the government by
the recipient
Currently, California currently
has $40 billion available for
distribution
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Safe, Accountable,
Flexible, Efficient,
Transportation Act: A
Legacy for Users was
signed into law in 2005 as a
reauthorization of TEA-21
SAFETEA-LU’s purpose
is to focus on addressing
the existing and future
challenges in the
transportation system
Improve safety
Reduce traffic congestion
Improve efficiency in
freight movement
Increase intermodal
connectivity
Protect the environment
Research and studies
Varies, based on the
funding program
Currently, funding of $4.6
billion in Federal subsidies
for Build America Bonds is
available (created by the
ARRA of 2009); bonds allow
states and municipalities
to finance infrastructure
projects with an interest
subsidy from the Federal
government
Proposed amount of
future funds is still under
consideration by Congress
A NEW BEGINNING
7-19
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
EXHIBIT 3: DEVELOPER / PROPERTY OWNER / USER POTENTIAL FINANCING MECHANISMS
B. DESCRIPTION
COMMUNITY FACILITIES
DISTRICTS (CFDS)
•
•
•
C. ELIGIBLE USES
•
•
•
•
7-20
A NEW BEGINNING
SPECIAL ASSESSMENT
DISTRICTS
A special tax placed against
property located within an
established district to fund
public facilities and services
Municipal bonds supported
by revenues from the special
tax are sold by the CFD to
provide upfront funding to
build improvements or fund
services.
•
Funding of capital facilities
including:
- parks
- schools
- fire stations
- water and sewer systems
- government facilities
Purchase, construction,
and improvement or
rehabilitation of real
property
•
•
•
Requires 2/3 vote of
•
qualified electors in district.
If fewer than 12 residents,
vote is conducted on current
landowners
•
Assessment based on
allocation formula, not
necessarily in proportion to
the benefit received.
Requires value-to-lien ratio
of 3:1
Similar to a CFD but shifts
the funding of infrastructure
from all taxpayers to
only those who benefit
specifically from the
improvements
Sets a fixed lien on every
parcel within the assessment
district
Municipal bonds supported
by special assessments
provide upfront funding
Construction of capital
facilities such as roads,
water, sewer, and flood
control
Typically property owners
petition a City to form a
district to finance large-scale
Assessments on property
owners are determined in
proportion to the benefit
received
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
LANDSCAPING DISTRICTS /
PARKING DISTRICTS
BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS
(BIDS)
•
Assessment on properties located
within a specific district that benefit
from landscaping and/or parking
•
Annual fees paid by business owners
and/or property owners to fund
activities and programs intended to
enhance the business environment in
a defined area
•
Landscaping districts allow for
the funding of lights, recreational
equipment, landscaping, and
irrigation
Parking districts allow for the
acquisition, improvement, and
operation of shared parking facilities
•
•
•
•
Marketing and promotion
Security
Streetscape improvements
Operating and maintenance of public
improvements
Special events
Funds are typically collected
concurrently with the annual business
license tax or property tax bill, with
varying formulas for retail vs. nonretail businesses, and residential vs.
non-residential property
•
•
•
•
•
Once established, annual BID fees
are mandatory for businesses/
properties located within the BID
boundary
Business-based BID fees are
collected with business license fees;
property-based BID assessments are
collected on property tax bills
A NEW BEGINNING
7-21
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
EXHIBIT 3: DEVELOPER / PROPERTY OWNER / USER POTENTIAL FINANCING MECHANISMS
(CONTINUED)
B. DESCRIPTION
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
•
Fees paid by developers
to pay all or a portion of
the costs of any public
facility that benefits their
development
PROPERTY OWNER /
DEVELOPER EXACTIONS
•
•
•
•
C. ELIGIBLE USES
7-22
•
A NEW BEGINNING
Capital facilities or ongoing
services, such as:
- school impact fee
- mitigation fee (police, fire,
park, etc.)
- water meter installation
- sanitation capacity charge
- water system facility/
backup facility charge
•
Fees are paid in the form
of a specified amount as a
condition to the issuance
of building permits, an
occupancy permit, or
subdivision map approval
•
•
•
•
Payments made by
developers or property
owners in addition to, or in
lieu of, development impact
fees
Funds contributed are used
to install selected public
improvements.
Alternatively, developers
are required to construct
and deliver specific
improvements
Dedication of right-of-way
utilities
Provision of open space
Parks or landscape
Schools and community
facilities
Typically paid or committed
as part of the development
approval process
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
DEVELOPER ADVANCES /
REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENTS
•
•
•
LAND OR FINANCIAL CONTRIBUTION
FROM LARGE EMPLOYER
Advance of funds from developers for •
use toward backbone infrastructure
Alternatively, developers construct
and deliver specific improvements
City and developer enter into
Reimbursement Agreement
Dedication of land or financial
contribution from large employer or
institution
•
Backbone infrastructure
•
•
•
•
Development site
Construction subsidies
Construction financing
Direct assistance to homebuyers
•
Typically repaid from redevelopment
tax increment, CFD bond proceeds,
and/or development impact fees
collected from future developers
•
Varies
A NEW BEGINNING
7-23
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
EXHIBIT 4: ESTIMATE OF POTENTIAL TAX INCREMENT
SITE 3
CENTER CITY
SITE 9
SOUTHERN
GATEWAY
SITE 12
WEST VILLAGE
I. ESTIMATE OF ASSESSED VALUE
Commercial - Value of NOI
$12,613,000
$14,733,000
$9,467,000
$0
$0
$7,667,000
$12,613,000
$14,733,000
$17,134,000
$126,000
$147,000
$171,000
Non-Housing Funds (Discretionary) 60%
of Property Tax
$76,000
$0
$0
Housing Set-Aside (20% of Property Tax)
$25,000
$0
$0
$101,000
$0
$0
Capitalized Value Agency Tax Increment
(Discretionary) 8%
$950,000
$0
$0
Capitalized Value Agency Housing SetAside 8%
$313,000
$0
$0
$1,263,000
$0
$0
Residential - Value of NOI
Total Estimated Assessed Value
II. ESTIMATE OF ANNUAL PROPERTY TAX
@ 1.0% TAX RATE
III. ESTIMATED ANNUAL TAX INCREMENT
Total Annual Agency Tax Increment
IV. CAPITALIZED VALUE OF NET TAX
INCREMENT
Total Capitalized Value of Net Tax
Increment
7-24
A NEW BEGINNING
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
EXHIBIT 5: ESTIMATE OF POTENTIAL FINANCING GAP
SITE 3
CENTER CITY
I. SITE AREA
138,695 SF
13,081 SF - Existing
Buildings
II. ESTIMATED
RESIDUAL LAND
VALUE
(Less) Acquisition
Costs (1)
$1,378,000 $10/SF Land
($2,943,000) ($255)/SF
Existing
Buildings
SITE 9
SOUTHERN GATEWAY
170,319
41,140
($9,257,000) ($255)/SF
Existing
Buildings
$0 $0 Per
Existing
Tenant
$0
(Less) Demolition
$0
$0
Add: Potential Tax
Increment
IV. ADJUSTED
FINANCING SURPLUS/
(DEFICIT)
($1,565,000) ($11)/SF Land
$1,263,000
($302,000) ($2)/SF Land
SF - Existing
Buildings
$1,908,000 $11/SF Land
(Less) Relocation
Costs
III. FINANCING
SURPLUS/(DEFICIT)
SF
$0 Per
Existing
Tenant
($7,349,000) ($43)/SF Land
$0
($7,349,000) ($43)/SF Land
SITE 12
WEST VILLAGE
176,694 SF
42,890 SF - Existing
Buildings
($2,334,000) ($13)/SF Land
($9,650,000) ($255)/SF
Existing
Buildings
$0
$0 Per
Existing
Tenant
$0
($11,984,000) ($68)/SF Land
$0
(2)
($11,984,000) ($68)/SF Land
(1) Based on the sales of improved commercial properties as shown in KMA’s Refined Market Analysis, dated April 2008. Actual cost of
acquisition will vary based on an appraisal of Fair Market Value and the timing of acquisition.
(2) The West Village Study Area is not located within a Redevelopment Project Area. Should a finding of benefit be made, tax
increment funds could potentially be used for affordable housing.
A NEW BEGINNING
7-25
This page intentionally left blank
150 CALIFORNIA 7TH FLOOR
SAN FRANCISCO CA 94111
T. 415 788 6606
F. 415 788 6650
WWW.FIELDPAOLI.COM

the neighborhoods of tustin town center: a new

Transcription

Similar documents

Retail Leasing Opportunity

Subway Directions to Medgar Evers College Mathematics Department

Iluminate Your Style

Current Conditions Report - Opa-Locka Community Development

Haddon Hall - Plymouth Housing Group

Seven for All Mankind

New Year, New Stores

view weekly specials at:realcanadianliquorstore.ca

Brewerytown Development Overview

2016 Called by Love Full Year Scedule