Laserfiche WebLink
9.C. - Page 16 <br /> Conclusion and Recommendations <br /> A number of best practices and recommendations for the City of Mountain View emerged in the <br /> process of research and analysis for this report. These are: <br /> 1. Adopt a public benefits bonus policy in conjunction with an upzoning process to <br /> capture market demand for increased development intensity and increase public <br /> participation. Tying these two processes together can make it easier for the City to gain <br /> input from residents about what benefits are most important for them,and provides a way <br /> to attain those benefits through the zoning code. In Oakland,residents were interested in <br /> pursuing public benefits density bonus program,but after the City had already dramatically <br /> increased FAR and height limits in the neighborhood. It is unlikely that there will be <br /> demand from developers to build beyond what is already allowed under the new zoning, <br /> undermining the City's ability to create a public benefits bonus program. Once a city has <br /> already increased development intensity in an area,it can become both politically and legally <br /> difficult to reduce zoning to establish a public benefits bonus program. <br /> 2. Work with residents ahead of time to determine their list of priorities for public <br /> benefits. To varying degrees, each of the case studies had some process to get community <br /> input into which public benefits were most important for residents. This step helps <br /> establish trust with residents that they will receive something important to them in <br /> exchange for the development incentives, and helps dispel concerns that the bonus is a <br /> "give-away" for developers. This critique is often heard in Palo Alto,which only allows <br /> residents give input on public benefits at a project-by-project level. <br /> 3. Commission an independent analysis of market conditions to determine the right <br /> balance of benefits to bonus. Nearly every case study reviewed for this report included a <br /> third party independent study. At a minimum,these studies should involve a feasibility <br /> analysis of likely projects under base zoning and bonus scenarios in order to determine <br /> whether or not the bonus will enhance development feasibility. In establishing what the <br /> right balance is,be aware that public benefits that are easier to obtain are more likely to be <br /> selected by the developers,if they have a choice. For example, building below market rate <br /> homes is going to be more complicated for a developer than simply purchasing additional <br /> FAR for a set price per square foot. The ratio for each benefit should be established with <br /> these considerations in mind. <br /> 4. Make the program simple to understand and easy to use. Because this is a voluntary <br /> program,developers are most likely to use it if they can understand it and easily see the <br /> benefit of opting to use it.Also,tight municipal budgets demand that the program be easy <br /> to administer in order to save on city costs. The City of Tampa is in the process of changing <br /> their bonus program from a quasi-judicial zoning amendment to a simple administrative act. <br /> This makes it easier for the developers to use,and less costly for the City to implement. <br /> However,with this change comes less oversight by the Planning Commission and City <br /> Council. The City of Palo Alto has kept their bonus program embedded in a zoning change <br /> in order to keep this level of oversight on individual projects. <br /> Page 11 of 15 <br />