Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout; Transit Center Studies-Carlsbad, Oside, Escon; Transit Center Studies-Carlsbad, Oside, Escon; 2007-06-01• ti sk^i iCj SI REDEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE OCEANSIDE, CARLSBAD & ESCONDIDO TRANSIT CENTERS Prepared for: D Prepared: June 2007 Carlsbad • Village Station REDEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE OCEANSIDE, CARLSBAD & ESCONDIDO TRANSIT CENTERS The North County IVansit District (NTCTD) launched Station Develop- ment Studies to explore opportunities at three of its transit stations: Carlshad Village Station, Oceanside Transit Center and Escondido IVansit Center. These transit stations serve the JVCTD Coaster com- muter train, the Breeze hus network and (coming soon) the Sprinter commuter train as well as other hus and train services provided hy other operators. Development concepts considered as part of this study have heen for- mulated to achieve specilic ohjectives: • To improve the efficiency of transit operations; • To increase transit ridership; • To help accomplish local redevelopment and community goals; • To he economically viahle and in synch with market trends; and • To result in economic henefits for the community and for NCTD. DRAFT CONCEPTUAL REPORT The primary purpose of this submittal is to test the feasibility of a variety of potential land uses and site plans. Feasibility is determined by the ability of the site to provide for a reasonable level of surface and structured parking and a financial return on investment that is adequate to cover the costs of construction and development efforts. These concepts are not meant to supersede or bypass NCTD or city staff input on concepts for this plan. They have been prepared in or- der to set parameters on site development types and densities that may be needed to make the redevelopment of these sites feasible. None of the plans can be implemented without review, input, adjust- ments and negotiations with the local city or redevelopment staff. Carlsbad Village Station REDEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE OCEANSIDE, CARLSBAD & ESCONDIDO TRANSIT CENTERS CARLSBAD CONCEPT DESCRIPTION (see Figures 1-4) la) The bus platform area is relocated from the west side of the tracks to the east side. Thc relocation centralizes the facility and avoids the requirement of transit riders needing to cross the tracks to make connections. lb) A transit station office would bc located in the ground floor of the new parking structure. lc & d) A drop-off and taxi zone for passengers. 2) A new track would be added to the east side of the tracks. A portion of the existing platform would need to be removed. A min. of 15' has been kept between all new improvements and this new location of the track. 3) To accommodate the double tracking, a new platform would be added to the west side of the tracks. Amenities such as benches, shade & trash cans would be added. 4) The existing station building could be kept in place with the public restrooms and commercial transit retail. 5a and b) The current bus platform area could be con- verted to on-street parking spaces. These spaces would consist of diagonal parking (where the roadway is wide enough to accommodate) or parallel parking. 6) A 20,000 sf retail space with high ceilings could be added such as a specialty grocery store or gourmet / health foods store. Docks would be placed at thc west side of the facility, within a high-bay section of the parking garage. 7) Additional retail shops could be added at the ground floor within the parking structure. The architectural form would allow for individual storefront identity and scale, while still being mostly under the parking garage. 8 a & b) The 5 story parking structure would accom- modate most all transit users and retail customers. Late aftemoon and weekend parking use would shift to cus- tomers of the grocery store and potentially other retail / restaurant uses in the Village. A pedestrian bridge would take advantage of the parking structure elevators & provide an elevated crossing for thc community and transit users accessing southbound Coaster access. 9) A surface parking lot supports retail functions and pro- vides for separate building masses. 10) A second parking structure would be placed inside a residential building "wrap" to support thc residential uses & provide additional retail & Village parking. 11) The 4 story residential structure would wrap and hide the parking structure and connect to it with exterior hall- ways and "cat-walk" bridge connections. 12) A parcel is recommended for acquisition to increase the visibility of the retail & parking structure, to provide better bus circulation, parking and physical pedestrian connection that is consistent wilh the block length. 13) Various ground floor retail spaces would be added with second floor office space. 14) A new surface parking lot would be added on the west side of thc tracks, south of Grand. This would require the removal of the gazebo & a portion of Rotary Park. 15) The adjacent Academy recreational field could be reconfigured for underground parking and new fields devel- oped on the roof structure. Revised Draft Conceptual Study, june 2007 RELATIONSHIP TO PUBLIC INPUT CARLSBAD VILLAGE STATION WORKSHOP INPUT (Wednesday, September 13, 2006) • Suggestions included having street fairs, provide good restaurants and nighttime entertainment with music (street performers), art and theatre, and retail establish- ments, (see concept items 6, 7 8f 13 to the left). • Set up outdoor/sidewalk cafes, (see concept items 6, 7 & 13 to the left). • Provide signage and access to the beach, (can be included, but not currently idenrified at a concept plan level). • Supply more parking, (see concept 8, 9, 10. 14 and 15). • Restore the theater across the street and consider a shared parking structure with theater, (parking added in 8, 9, 10 . 14 and 15 could support this use). • Redevelop land west of State Street with residential, retail and office uses and encourage State Street to be pedestrian-friendly, (see concept 6, 7 11. 12 & 13). • Include civic uses, a museum, plaza, and fountains at the south end of the site, (this concept would be real- ized through the City owned parcel in the southeast corner). • Provide residential uses at mixed densities (sec 11). • Incorporate mixed use at the northwest corner of Grand and State Streets (this concept would be realized through the City owned parcel in the southeast corner and see 13). • Serve commuters and the adjacent residential uses with convenience uses such as restaurants, petcare, day- care, grocery store (i.e., TYader Joe's), dry cleaning or auto-detailing shops near the station, (see concept 6, 7 11, 12 & 13). • Consider including a hotel. (Not recommended). • Use the vacant portions of thc site for parking in the interim and develop residential uses In the long-term, (see concept 8.10, 11, 12 8f 14). • Keep and restore the historic depot, (plan allows reloca- tion). • Provide informational kiosks with maps and/or a visi- tor's bureau, (would be added but nol noted at this conceptual level). • Encourage use of bikes, motorcycles, and scooters by providing parking for them in the front, (would be added bul not noted at this conceptual level). Page 4 IMPORTANT DECISIONS FOR THE CARLSBAD PLAN A) Is the centralized location of the bus platform next lo the rail platform a benefit and is there enough circulation space to concentrate these uses in one area? B) Building heights optimize costs, but the four floor resi- dential units (approximately 50') and the five floor park- ing structure (approximately 55*) may not be acceptable to the City of Carlsbad since they exceed the proposed 45' limit. Lower heights will reduce parking capacity, spread development, or reduce feasibility. Should the height of these facilities be decreased? C) Would the "PUC approved" at-grade crossing for pe- destrians be kept or be replaced by the pedestrian bridge and Grand Avenue crossing? D) The old depot's rent or relocation to some other prop- erty provides space for transit parking or development. E) Should transit parking or development options on thc parcels south of Grand be explored at this time? F) Right-of-Way adjustments may bc needed at the cul- de-sac road end by the proposed residential units? G) Should a parcel of land between State Street and thc alley be acquired to improve visual, pedestrian and ve- hicular access to the site? The site is currently hidden by properties on State Street, and is impacted by detrimental back-of-house views and activities.. Benefits would also include easier bus maneuvering into the transit platform area, additional parking and configuring the urban form of the block to match the existing street grid system. Is this a potential redevelopment agency incentive to ac- quire and finance? H) Should NCTD use land to provide capacity of up to 225 additional parking spaces on-site, for the benefit of Carisbad Village commercial or residential district? What financial contributions for land, construction, and maintenance could come from adjacent development, the redevelopment agency or cily? I) Concurrence is needed on the amount of parking the proposed development will be credited for transit orienta- tion, mixed-use, and shared-use parking programs (com- pared to non-transit center parking rates)? Parking rates can effect development potential and transit orientation? I) Should the Academy's recreation field to thc west of the site be considered for joint-use parking? Should the sliver of NCTD land on the Academy's side be made available for a nursery growing grounds lease, for other commercial leases or should it be leased to the Army / Navy Acad- emy? K) What site plan or changes in lot layouts would be required to provide for better visibility and viability of the commercial and residential areas of the site and also address the site's back-of-the-house impacts from busi- nesses along State Streel? Revised Draft Conceptual Study, june 2007 Page 5 Carlsbad Preliminary Site Plans REDEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE OCEANSIDE, CARLSBAD & ESCONDIDO TRANSIT CENTERS 30. PARKING STRUCTURE ] 220" X 250' (•1-1/2 leveis .a 29,875 s.t.) n-l.-lB? total square teet 32-? St/car -US CARS RECREATIONAL f-ACILrriES 2 13,500 total s.r. 9. NEW SURFACE PARKING LOT C HoCARS; OLD DEPOT I To be f docateC or mcorporatcc into connefaal devetopntfit at narkel tale; :3b. RETAIL I SHOPS (level: 'a- 5,495 s.f.) OFRCE SPACE 2 (Ievels2&3!i': 0,990 s.i.; :5,-l85tola square reet :3a. RETAIL 3 - SHOPS level: >a> 6,300 s.i.; OFFICE SPACE : (levels 2 & 3 .a :2,600 i.f.; : 8,900 total square tt-et CARLSBAD Transit Center Development Scenario 5/25/07 i. S. CO LEGEND Bus Primary Circulation ^-^^ Vehicular Primary Circulation ^ Parking Structure Access • Pedestrian / Bilce Access Improved Crosswalks llllllllll Stairway / Escalator ^ Station bypass route for Coastal Rail Trail inmi Rail Line General location for Boarding Platforms Pedestrian Bridge \ CARLSBAD TRANSIT CENTER DEVELOPMENT SCENARIO Pedestrian & Traffic Circulation 5/25/07 LEGEND CARLSBAD TRANSIT CENTER DEVELOPMENT SCENARIO Setbacks 5/25/07 I CARLSBAD TRANSIT CENTER DEVELOPMENT SCENARIO Aerial Isometric 4/25/07 Transit & Development Parking Requirements for Carlsbad Village Station REDEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE OCEANSIDE, CARLSBAD & ESCONDIDO TRANSIT CENTERS TABLE 1 SUMMARY OF PARKING CODE REQUIREMENTS CITY OF CARLSBAD LANO USE SlZE|a] CURRENT ADOPTED PARKING RATIO [a] NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES -Re!a:l 23 206 ».f. 1 OC ssacepe' 200 s.f 116 2 Gxcery S:cre '9,200 ».f. I.OC space pe' 260 S.f. 77 3 "9 605 S.f. 2 Beo.'corr l2CDU[cl 2.0C soaces pe-UP!; w in Sivc 0' Tcre DCQ'CCTS 240 G-e$: 120 DU '.CC soaces ?e-4 jri K 31 C^ce 23 590 sf '.OC space pe' 300 s.f. 79 T-a'^si: Re:a i/Se'v ces siessf 1 OC space pe" 3C0 s.f [dl 17 Total Spaces Required 560 NIo'.es [a] Sod'oe;KTU*A [b] Sojrce: C :y o' Ca''sbaa Zciog Cooo [cj 1.000 s.f per 2 Ded'oc.x j"": AOS oss..fred [dl Vsi'.cs tc "."e vais: rota wore ass-rred '.o oe •.ra-'s ". users. T^JS. cn y oarK ng soaces 'or e-"0 oyccs wcc caicuiateo oosed cn ger-cai ofice" oa''< ng reqj reTent rate ,'o-nd ng ^acM' TABLE 2 SHARED PARKINQ DEMAND SUMMARY CARLSBAD VILLAGE TRANSIT CENTER P£AK MONTH: - PEAK PtRlOO; 2 PM. '/rtEKDAY Weekday Weekend Weekday iVockond Non-Non-Peak Mo Ettmotoc Peak Hr Peak Mo Esiimaica Pro]CCI 0..\.i BasR Mode Captve Pmject Banc Mode CapUve Project Adi Parking Adj AOJ Parking Qu«n'.l^/ Unk Rate Ad) R;.l .^ Rate Unit Rale ACH Ratio Rata Un; Oecambar Drm,-ir,l 7PM December Domanc ;ofrrri,n:;y SlCBpng (<*C0 ksfl 42,406^a'G-A J,94 •M i3i ..-.'Gjk 3.20 aeo 100 250 /ofGLA 'j>6 100 96 C>5 1,00 62 ETCcyco 0,70 oao 1.00 C56 ^ /xafGLA 3.80 oao 1,C0 OM /«»fGLA -co 1.00 24 O80 • CO 22 ^oBCJon-.a' Re-.ff, scared Scacoa 12C bVj CSC 1,00 1.00 CSC ' AM 1,00 dsd 'un*. 0,70 i,W 42 O07 - -co ' a Rsaomoa 1 asfuiit 1 1,00 1.00 1 IM 1 1.00 1,00 1 ,1.-' •. '.00 100 120 1.00 r 1.00 12C Ces; 12C 0 IflO 1.00 " hint _0 1 1.00 1,00 0 • i.": 0.20 1.00 ^ -CO ' 1,00 30 bfcc «25 ki' 23,580 0.30 -.00 0.27 .•jr 1 0,03 ax 1,00 oo:i '. -.00 100 • C CO 1" 1,00 0 ULI Soso dau novo DCCT mixWod from defaul vali m. Cua'xmer 110 Cja'£"ier 112 Errptoyeo 132 Erroloyee ao NfiUL Reae-vod 120 Ress'veo 120 |a] 23,205 »f of r»a.i jee p ua '9,200 s' c' Brocery slo-e T0!8! 3«2 Tc-.a 312 ' See thc a",acncd irema Shareo Par«i->8 Redustici 23% TABLE 3 TRANSIT RIDERSHIP FORECAST CARLSBAD VILLAGE TRANSIT CENTER 2020 2030 Breeze 258 168 523 Coaster am 366 389 Subtotal 521^ 523 912 BRT N/A 1847 1771 Total 6/8 2.370 2,683 CHART 1 RIDERSHIP FORECAST CARLSBAD VILLAGE TRANSIT CENTER Note: Ridership forecast ig oata is prov oefl oy NCTD anfl SANDAG (January 4 2007) Revised Draft Conceptual Study, june 2007 Page 12 TABLE 4 PARKINQ DEMAND BY TRANSIT RIDERSHIP CARLSBAD VILLAGE TRANSIT CENTER Daily Riders^ in 2020 [al Drop-olf Arrived by Bus, Shuttle. Walk. Bike. etc. [b] tncomins Vehicle Parked ft)] Average Vehicle Occupancy (AVO) [bl OEBly Parking Demand by Transit Uaerc <2020) Peak Hour Adjustment Factor [c] Peak Hour Parking Demand by Transit Users (2020) COASTCR 366 7% 19% 74% 1.2 225 0.8 180 BREEZE 158 10% 80% 10% 1.5 11 0.8 8 BRT 1.M7 50% 5% 45% 1.2 6S3 0.8 554 TotH SpKM Required by T>«ra)t U 743 Notes: [a] Transit boafding projeciton provkted by NCTD aod SANDAG (January 4.2007) lb] Modal Split and AVO were assufTied based on the empiricai data arrtpraviouB studies by Ka^^ rc] Peak Hoiir Adlustrr^ent Factor ibr the transit center »»8 applied based on prevkn-s studies done by Kaku Associates in order to convert daily parking demand to peak hour parking aemana. TABLES PARKING SUPPLY SUMMARY CARLSBAD VILLAGE TRANSIT CENTER |Sbwture1 Struchjre2 Surfece Lot Ground B8 80 149 Level 2 98 124 NA Levtf 3 98 203 NA Level 4 98 203 NA Level 5 49 203 NA Level 6 NA Subtotal 431 813 149 Adjustment Factof* 0.95 0.95 1.00 Grand Total 1 Total 409 772 149 1.330 It was assumed that 5% ofthe total strucbire spaces were spared TABLES PARKING SUMMARY CARLSBAD VILLAGE TRANSIT CENTER Year 2020 Demand Year 2020 Supply Surplus of Emptoyees Development 50 [a] 362 [b] 743 tcl Stnjctures Surface Lot 1,181 [d] 149 fdl Surplus of Total 1,155 Total 1.330 175 Notes: [a] Proieded parking demand generated by employees of NCTD at the station and tfte proposed Greyhound office. [b] See Table 2: 'Weekday Totar [c] See Table 4. [d] See Table 5. Table 7: DEVELOPMENT SCENARIO FOR CARLSBAD VILLAGE TRANSn* CENTER TimitPWbnm SfacwIPtKaa aOpMho JUn4wa|»d TwaitSaniOM AM MMMtyi R«iM VttiaSm CaoiMon SurtmPMirg Paridng Studua SM RaMadRMidMjil OMnadRMidMiil Ground Floor Second Floor ThM Floor Fourth Ftoor Fifth Floor Sixth Floor Total DevetopmMit(sl} % Footprint it or LM Size 25,000 10,000 15,000 5.165 25,000 19.500 55,875 Z3^; 19.200 24.160 0 77,770 11.795 25.460 0 87.995 11,796 25.460 0 87,995 2S.460 0 73.058 19.065 0 1 1 0 25,000 5.29% 10.000 2.12% 15,000 3.17% 5,165 1.09% 25,000 5.29% 10.500 4.13% 11.62% 451% 0.00% 5.11% 4.06% GRAND TOTAL DEVELOPMENT (sO TOTAL LOT SIZE (sf) TOTAL LOT SIZE (acres) FLOOR AREA RATIO w/o Parkmg Structures FLOOR AREA RATIO wtth Parkkig Stiuctures SITE COVERAGE OF BUILDINGS (%) BUILOING SETBACK (REAR) MINIMUM BUILDING SETBACK (TRACK EDGE) MAXIMUM BUILDING SETBACK (GRMOD) BUILDING SETBACK (ALLEY) 0.00% 190.76S 472.626 10.85 0.40 1.20 25.9% 10 10 15 10 Developnmrt Parking Requirements for the Carisbad Village Tranait Center AMunad RMilfQnniyabNt RaM(TMiaitOnli4 OSca HWadlliJdintiillpirlJOOgtoiiiir (tMMniil QuHl (p« 1 MUsnM H)* ToURiqurad SF Mpar 1.000 pKOiyd Anunad ReduOianlmii SvtHoMSpMK ShMvttPMIng RM snaoN Aaaunad Aaduaontain PvtoigDifliMd Pin RaducMMlmn CtMnngi IWKIMVI Tontii AdjuaMPntM RM|M>I.W) HMPMUng RWuM A4«M(>ming 23,205 S.U 116.03 ».00% 0.00% 25.00% 2iS 52.21 45.00% 19.200 4.00 76.80 25.00% 0.00% S.00% 2J0 53.76 70.00% 5.165 3.33 17.20 25.00% 25.00% mm 0.83 4.30 25X10% 23,590 3J3 78.55 0.00% 10.00% 25.00% 2.16 51.06 6100% 119.605 2.00 239.21 10.00% 5.00% S.00% 1.60 191J7 8om 119.B05 0.25 29.90 75.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.06 7.48 25110% 310,370 SSS 360 • MHaw* «i •<MM0i IiM at SXM tiN 1,1.000 li gm pM ml MMfe Carlsbad Villaae Transit Dally Ridership to Parking Requirement Conversions Rammng AMUiMdVMi WdHihip PKttiMtMr *mm4»M- uTiwiMlhim ANurwdVMf Arrtvtngt Aiaurad EIHMD^M, RkMnki R^TMar «•«SMIfaMI BIwtraniiMijn AaauiwdDno- PaitngtM Widi FMHtwr MMang OitatWmu PMwSCar CamMU TiMMRtOan 2020 MtWUWKh UM IMimtnilM olPHMngirt Wadt Occuanor fMM RMutton CCWSTER 300 365 10.00% 2.00% 100% 10.00% 273.75 120 182.50 50.00% SimUMButSanic* 250 158 30.00% 5.00% 47.00% 10.00% \ZJM IJO 0.80 6.74 4.27% BM fbpM TIMI*-9MI OiapD aMk| 8M Rtpid TiMMil. 9«t Diaso (lAfMk rnAM^rl TMRaquMd 0 1.477 10.00% 3.00% 10.00% 30.00% 694.19 120 0-BO 462.79 31.33% BM fbpM TIMI*-9MI OiapD aMk| 8M Rtpid TiMMil. 9«t Diaso (lAfMk rnAM^rl TMRaquMd 0 369 15.00% 3,00% 15.00% 30.00% 136.62 120 0.80 91.08 24.67% BM fbpM TIMI*-9MI OiapD aMk| 8M Rtpid TiMMil. 9«t Diaso (lAfMk rnAM^rl TMRaquMd 550 2,389 1.117 743 BM fbpM TIMI*-9MI OiapD aMk| 8M Rtpid TiMMil. 9«t Diaso (lAfMk rnAM^rl TMRaquMd TdUiOMMRidertrap 71 PotmUiPinonionSd 18 fbr OAc» J RMSI1 RMdmea 666 ParcwM o( PottnW PwKiW on S«a uting Tnfikt 10.55% Parking Supply Calculations SIruetursdPafUng 6aaiin( ShKlufMl Nrtlng KanSndMdPvHng GraaaSqvam Feci NaiPMtaAg 0 0 1 0 382.B93 324 \ 1.181 TMaiatracamdMingPrMMitf 1,181 CMpwipHiafttnMiiMdfwMne $20,000 Coit fpr HMrSlrueiimd Ming ^.622,994 Parking Summary -RMAoniM Rtdiand AmcuK pm«w3 mSutm Prtno AmotM PmMidin SIMMM SpMMPiDwdMin •Mdt) 360 46 507 192 743 104 674 35 1,103 149 1.181 227 T«ai MUng PrMhtodAMM T>iAilil DM 227 OreiiSqwi SurtMsPsrting FM SFMrSpKt EMngMMeNmng 137,000 insxi 365 OMWttoA d 9u>lM* Ptriiii (21 ipMM MM) •129.000 375.00 •344 MM Mfm U c *«t MdHonMrM pMoTM 11.900 400.00 29 NM tialM W h MKMi sn MM WWMcquind pinl 9.500 4Q0Xn 24 NaaruafHt ue ••• Wi ntw gpocMjr wn 18250 400.00 48 Mdv M(M Md: «Mi Ml-M* dOmd 11.200 375,00 30 Revised Draft Conceptual Study, pne 2007 TaMSHrfawPvUniPrMiM 149 TMilPHhkvPtMlM 1,330 Plage 14 Carlsbad Project Pro-formas REDEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE OCEANSIDE, CARLSBAD 8i ESCONDIDO TRANSIT CENTERS TABLE A-1 CARLSBAO UlANStT CENTER MIXEO-USe DEVELOPMENT PROTOTYPE - RENTAL NCTD LAND l»E AND TRANSPORTATKM STUDY KTU+A DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION ONLY Protect DescriDtion Land Area (Less) Railroad, Street ROW, etc. Total Net Land Area Notes 10.9 Gross Acres f4.13l Acres 6.72 Nat Acres 292,723 SF Gross Building Area (GBA) - Resklential 119,605 SF Gross Building Area (GBA) - Retail 23,205 SF Gross Building Area (GBA) - Tranait Retail 5,165 SF Groas BuHding Area (GBA) - LiveWork Lofts 0 SF Gross BuHdHig Area (GBA) - Grocery Store 19,200 SF Gross Building Area (GBA) - Offica 23.590 SF Total Gross Buikling Area 190.766 SF Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 0.35 Based on 10.9 Gross Acres Densiiy - Units/Net Acre 17 Units/Net Acre Nutnber of Storias 1 -5 Stories Estimated Number of Dwelling Units • Mutti-family 112 Dwelling Units Average Unit Size • Multi-family 900 SF Estimated Number ot Units - Live/Work 0 Dwelling Units Average Unit Size - Uve/Work 1.500 SF Constructton Type Type V Structured Spaces 674 Spaces Suriace Spaces 104 Spaces Total Transit 778 Spaces OawBtoonienf Structured Spaces 507 Spaces Suriace Spaces Spaces Totf^ Devetopment 553 Spaces Total Parktog Space 1.331 Spaces Devetooment Coata (21 rai Land $0 ISF $0 Off-Site Improvements $3 /SFLand $1,416,000 On-Site In^Hwements/Amenities $5 /SFLand $2.363.000 SubUtai Site knpnsvements $6 /SFUnd $3,781,000 Parking • Structured - Transit S60 Spaces € t $20,000 /Space $11,200,000 1 Parking - Surface • Transit 104 Spaces i£ ) $5,000 €pace $520,000 Parking • Structured • Devek^ment 394 Spaces <! i $20,000 /space $7,880,000 Parking - Surface - Devetopment Spaces <i t SS.OOO 8230.000 Subtotal Parking 1.104 Spaces IS i $14,899 /Space $19,830,000 Stiell Construdton - Resklential $130 ISF GBA $15,549,000 Shell Constructton - Commercial - Retail SlOO ISFQBA $2,321,000 ShaH Consmiciton - Commercial - Transit Retail $100 /SFG8A $517,000 ShaH Constructton - Commercial - Grocery Store $100 ISFQBA $1,920,000 SheU Cortstructton - Commercial - Uve/Woffc $0 ISF GBA $0 SheU Construction - Commercial - Offtoe $100 JSF GBA $2,358,000 Tenant Improvements / FFAE - Retail/TransH Ratail $35 ISF GBA $993,000 Tenant Improvements / FFAE - Grocery Store $30 ISF GBA $576,000 Tenant Improvements / FFftE - Offlce $30 /SF GBA $708,000 Subtotal. Direct Costs $2SS /SF GBA $48,554,000 Add: Indirects^inandng (4) 35% of Directs $16,994,000 Tolal Devetopment Costa $344 /SFGBA $65,548,000 Notea Excludes 114 spaces to be paid for by Agency Excludes 113 spaces to be paid for by Agency Based on KMA's experience with similar product (1) fmtrrm tn 85% aMMncy facMr {ndudMCucuWion, common WM*. •M.) (2) Ml rumbn twm bMn roundwj to tho nMTTCt tWMiMnd. t3) M AgurM in 2007 doHara. (4) lndudoswetMSCtmanglneenng.tneo,muranc«.(n^^ Revised Draft Conceptual Study, June 2007 TABLE A-2 CARLSBAO TRANSIT CENTER MIXEO-USE DEVELOPMENT PROTOTYPE - RENTAL NCTD LANO USE AND TRANSPORTATION STUDY KTU+A DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION ONLY Annual Nt OoeratlnQ Income ti i ta Rent Per Unit - Multi-Family Residential Rent Per Untt - Uve/Work Residential Add: Other Income Annual Gross Scheduled Income (GSI) - Resklential (Less) Vacancy • All Residential Annual Eftective Gross income (EGI) - Residentiai (Less) Operating Eiqsenses - All Restoential (3) /^nual Net (grating Irwome • Resklential Commardal Rent per SF - Retail Rent per SF - Transit Ret^l Rent per SF - Grocery Store Rent per SF - Offlce Annual Gross Scheduled Income (GSI) - Commercial (Less) Vacancy - Retail (Less) Vacancy - Transit Retail (Less) Vacancy - Grocery Store Annual Effective Gross Income (EGI) - CommerciiM (Less) Expenses - Retail (Less) Expenaea - Transit Retaii (Less) Expenses - Grocery Store (Leas) Unreimbursed Expenses - Office (S) Annual Net Operating Income Parking Effective Paridng Revenue - NCTD Parking Effective Parking Revenue - OfRce Total Parking Revenue Total Annual Nat Operating income Notea $1,850 /Unit/Month $0 /Unit/Month $30 /Unit/Month 5.0% of GSI $3,700 /Unitnrear $17,429 /UnitATear $2.75 /SF/Month NNN (4) $2,75 /SF/Month NNN (4) $2.00 /SF/Month NNN <4) $2.50 /SF/Monlh FSG (4) 5.0% of Retail GSI 5.0% of Retail GSI 0.0% of QroceiyGSi 5.0% of Retail EQI 5.0% of Retail EGi 5.0% of Grocery EGI $9.00 /SF Office $0 /Spaoe/Month $35 ^pace/Month (S) $35 ^pace/Month Based on 120 dwelling units Inciudes laundry, vending, etc. $2,486,000 $0 $40.000 $2,526,000 f$i89.(?W) $2,400,000 ($44S,0QQ) Based onl20 dwelling units $1,952,000 $766,000 $170,000 $461,000 gToaooQ $2,105,000 ($38,000) ($9,000) $2,058,000 ($36,000) ($8,000) ($23,000) $1,779,000 $0 $28,000 $1,807,000 Based on 23,205 SF of retail Based on 5,165 SF of transit retail Based on 19,200 SF grocery store Based on 23.590 SF ol office Based on 23.590 SF of offtoe Based on 23.590 SF @ 2.8 spaoes/1,000 SF Httttftitf Lmrt Vittw"™ Annual Net OperaUng Income - Restoential Target Retum on Investment (ROI) (7) WanwMed Investment • Residential Annual Net Operating Income - Commercial Target ftotum on Investment (RCX) (7) Warranted Invesmieni - Commercial Total Warranted Investment (Less) Devetopment Costs Residual Land Value Per SFLand $1,952,000 7.5% $26,027,000 $1,807,000 8.5% $21,259,000 $47,286,000 tt6S-54a.00Ql ($18,262,000) (»39) ResMial Land Value Before Tranait Raquired PvWng Par SFLand ($2,440,000) <8) ($S) (1} M numbon IMM boon roundod to tho rwarMiihMiHnd. (2) AH (<gum« in SDDTdatara. O) mdudM MXM, manae^r'M'il <••*. fowrvM. mainMnanco, otc. (4) TTtplo m (NNN): FuU Sarvioa QroM (FSQ) (5} ndudoo laxM. inMrwioo. maMananco. roaonos. marMOOmani faes. etc. (6) Baaad on KUA't oMportane* In auDulMn eSlOB. (7) Targatraiuma ara baaad on currant nwkai financial ramm roquiroiiwnu in aunviaptiUiaUan rale Una perbd and n not incHcam (5) Baaad <xi trariari p«idng coala (811 .TmxnO], plua indracU and financing COM Revised Draft Conceptual Study. June 2007 Page 17