HomeMy WebLinkAboutPRESENTATION ITEM 17City Council Meeting
August 4, 2026
Downtown Commercial
Core & Red Hill Avenue
Specific Plans Analysis
2023
As directed by the City Council Economic Development Ad Hoc Committee and
entire Council body,an assessment was done on the Downtown Commercial
Core Specific Plan (DCCSP)and the Red Hill Avenue Specific Plan (RHASP).
▪Prepared by Economic &Planning Systems (EPS),Inc.
▪Identified potential specific plan revisions that could remove barriers and
encourage development
▪Intended to better align the specific plans with the real estate market.
Background
January 2024
The EPS report was finalized to include Council’s policy directions.
Specific Plans Analysis
This agenda item continues the analysis of the EPS 2024 study for the
RHASP and DCCSP, and implements the City’s Housing Element.
In November 2025 City staff pursued LEAP 2.0 grant funding through
OCCOG in order to implement mid-term items from the EPS study.
Staff is seeking City Council input to move the implementation
forward as part of LEAP 2.0 grant.
Staff will continue to do analysis and provide Council updates.
Four Areas for Modifications
A 2024 EPS assessment found barriers to investment in the DCCSP and RHASP
1
Density Bonus
& Workforce
Housing
Align TCC with
current State law;
make information on
workforce housing
and density bonus
easier to follow.
2
Standalone
Residential
Permit stand-alone
multifamily on small
infill parcels where
mixed-use is
impractical.
3
Building
Height
Add one story to
unlock development
capacity with
minimal visual
impact. (Additional
analysis needed in
DCCSP)
4
Mixed-Use
Parking
Standards
Allow shared
parking agreements
to capture a 20–40%
"captive market"
demand reduction.
10
What Is a Density Bonus? It’s State law.
Required to offer a package of incentives that make affordable housing financially feasible.
1
Density
Increase
More units than
the base zoning
or General Plan
allows.
2
Incentives &
Concessions
Reduced
development
standards (e.g.,
setbacks, height)
that cut project
costs.
3
Reduced
Parking
A cap on how
much parking the
City can require.
4
Waivers &
Reductions
Relief from any
standard that
would physically
block the
approved density.
2
Permitting Standalone Residential
Universal mixed-use mandates don't pencil on small, narrow, or irregular infill parcels.
The Problem
Standalone multifamily is currently
allowed only in small portion of DCCSP
—and not at all in the RHASP.
Forcing mixed-use onto sub-20,000 sq.
ft. parcels squeezes out parking,
amenities, and viable storefronts, and
complicates financing.
Below ~20,000 sq. ft., "support space"
(parking, aisles, utilities) overwhelms
revenue-generating space.
24
Eligible parcels identified
(21 in the DCCSP; 3 in the RHASP)
Recommendation
Amend the RHASP and DCCSP to allow
standalone multifamily residential on
eligible small parcels
12
Map of 21
DCCSP
Parcels For
Standalone
Multi-Family
Residential-
Only Uses
Downtown Commercial Core
Map of 3 RHASP
Parcels For
Standalone
Multi-Family
Residential-Only
Uses
Red Hill Avenue SP
Increasing Allowable Building Height
Massing studies show one additional story adds development capacity with minimal visual impact.
Why It Works
Research links height limits and floor-
area-ratio (FAR) caps directly to reduced
development capacity.
In land-constrained urban areas, growth
increasingly depends on building upward.
One more story adds little further “bulk”.
Specific plan design guidelines would
further soften visual impact.
Recommendation: +1 Story (12 ft)
Area Current Max Proposed Max
RHASP —Mixed-Use 4 stories / 50 ft 5 stories / 62 ft
DCCSP —DA-1 & DA-2 3 stories 4 stories
DCCSP —DA-4 3 stories 4 stories
DCCSP —DA-6A
(interior)4 stories 5 stories
DCCSP —DA-6A
(adj. freeway)5 stories 6 stories
Applies to mixed-use and multifamily
development areas
13
Recommendation: +1 Story (12 ft)
13
Modernizing Parking Standards
Shared parking captures the "captive market" effect of mixed-use districts
20% –40%
Reduction in total required
parking when residential
and commercial demand
peaks are blended instead
of calculated separately
Today
RHASP: Shared parking
allowed for mixed-use
(with a study), but not for
standalone residential.
DCCSP: Up to 20%
reduction for the
commercial portion of
mixed-use projects only —
residential parking can't be
reduced.
Peer cities (Irvine, Costa
Mesa, Santa Ana, Orange)
already permit
shared/pooled parking &
in-lieu fee districts.
Recommendation
Allow shared parking
agreements for mixed-use
projects in both the RHASP
and DCCSP.
Let standalone residential
projects secure long-term
recorded shared-parking
agreements with adjoining
commercial neighbors.
Support both with a
parking demand study
confirming residential and
commercial peaks don't
coincide.
14
Recommendations at a Glance
Update TCC to align local density bonus rules with current State law.
2 Provide feedback on:
a.Allowing standalone multi-family residential projects on eligible small infill
parcels (23 parcels identified).
b.Raising maximum building heights by one story (12 feet) across both specific
plans.
c.Allowing shared parking agreements for mixed-use and adjoining standalone
residential projects.
1
City Council Meeting
August 4, 2026
Thank you
Jay Eastman, AICP
Short-Term Implementation Items
Mid-Term Implementation Items
Long-Term Implementation Items
Recommendation: +1 Story (12 ft)
13
Next Steps
1 Provide to City Council to confirm direction & meet grant requirements
2 Continue document refinement & finalize analysis
3 Present code amendments and Specific Plan amendments to Planning
Commission
4 Return to City Council for approval