Project History Curtis Park Village
Project Entitlements and Site Remediation Now and the Future
• The site of Curtis Park Village was a dairy farm prior to 1909. • Site given to the City of Sacramento for the Western Pacific Railyard and Maintenance Facility. • Western Pacific bought by Union Pacific in 1983 and the facility shutdown in 1985.
Western Pacific Railyard, Sacramento circa 1929
• Declared as surplus property by Union Pacific in 1985 and the buildings on the site were demolished. • 1987: “Enforceable Agreement” between UP and the State of California DHS to remediate the toxics from the site. • 1995: Remedial Action Plan (RAP) approved by DTSC for the removal of 80,000 cubic yards of impacted soil by rail to Utah and to effectuate groundwater cleanup. • 1998: UP submits an Initial Study to the City of Sacramento for the Curtis Park West PUD. • Union Pacific abandons efforts to redevelop the property.
• May 2004: Petrovich Development Company (PDC) and Renova Partners purchase the property from UP. PDC subsequently buys out Renova. • As a condition of the land purchase PDC agrees to (1) complete site remediation and (2) develop a master plan to be approved by the City of Sacramento. All DTSC requirements of the site remediation RAP are transferred to PDC. • PDC begins working with the Sierra Curtis Neighborhood Association, stakeholders, and the City of Sacramento on the planning of the Curtis Park Village project.
Entitlements Process • The Curtis Park Village site was originally was zoned M-2 to accommodate the railyard use. • PDC started a project outreach in 2003 that eventually would include over 220 meetings on the project with neighbors, neighboring community associations, and other stakeholders. • The PDC team started with a blank slate and developed a land use bubble map for the site from the initial outreach effort.
• June 2008: A project plan was submitted to the City of Sacramento for project entitlements. Guiding principles of the plan from the community outreach effort included: A comprehensive cleanup program for the site Maintain, enhance, and model the project on the existing character of Curtis Park and surrounding neighborhoods Bring a mixture of land uses that are compatible and enhance the existing neighborhoods – new single-family homes adjacent to existing single-family homes in the Curtis Park neighborhood. Quality throughout the project Have an extensive community outreach throughout all phases of project development
Outreach • More than 220 stakeholder meetings (as of April 2014) • Outreach began in Spring 2003 • Meetings with groups including SCNA, HPNA, LPCA, WPANA, CPNA, Broadway Partnership, South of Sutterville Property Owners, SACOG, ECOS/AIA, Clean Air Partnership, Walk Sacramento, Sacramento Area Bicycle Advocates, and many other groups and individuals. • Two review and comment workshops before the City of Sacramento Planning Commission • Project website and newsletter
• The June 2008 project application submitted to the City of Sacramento included the following entitlements: General Plan Amendment from Industrial to Commercial and Residential Uses (this was subsequently incorporated into the City of Sacramento 2030 General Plan) Rezone of the site to the Curtis Park Village Planned Unit Development to include Commercial, Multi-Family Residential, Single-Family Residential, Park/Open Space, and Public Utility (Detention Basin) Uses Curtis Park Village PUD Schematic Plans and Design Guidelines Tentative Subdivision Map Project Environmental Impact Report
• September 2008: RAP work concluded at site. Confirmation sampling indicated that over 240,000 cubic yards of impacted soils required removal. Estimated Remediation cost went from $11.5 million to $40 million. • September 2008 to Spring 2010: New strategy developed to remediate the site that included removing and stockpiling impacted soils on site with eventual removal to landfills, mining and relocation of clean soils on site, and using roadways to storage of Class B soils as approved by DTSC and the City of Sacramento. Remediation cost for 240,000 cubic yards reduced from $40 million to approximately $30 million.
• September 2009: Submitted revised application to the City of Sacramento for: 259,000 sq. ft. of commercial/retail/office space 129 single family homes 45 brownstone residences 248 multi-family housing residences 90 senior multi-family housing affordable residence 6.8 acre neighborhood park
Over 30 items from the community outreach effort were incorporated into the final plan including: • Circulation plan designed to mitigate impacts to the surrounding neighborhood from the project. • Circulation plan designed to maximize connections to the surrounding neighborhoods. • “Village Center” in keeping with a traditional urban character. • Inclusion of single-family homes, “brownstone” homes, “cottage” homes, multi-family housing, and senior housing for a diversity of housing types. • Incorporation of City of Sacramento “Pedestrian Friendly Street Standards” to promote pedestrian and bicycle activity. • Commitment in the PUD to the remediation of the housing areas for all housing types to residential (unrestricted) standards.
Illustrative Plan • Commercial area in the south to mitigate traffic impacts to existing neighborhood. • Separated sidewalks with street trees and historic streetlights to enhance pedestrian and bicycle connectivity. • New SFH adjacent to existing SFH. • Connected street system to existing street grid wherever possible. • Accommodate new ped/bike bridge to SCC LRT Station. • Whenever possible garages accessed from alleys and always kept at the back of the house (PUD}.
• February 2010: Final Environmental Impact Report Released. • March 2010: EIR certified by the City of Sacramento • September 10, 2010: Project entitlements approved unanimously by the City Council. • February 2012: Site soil remediation completed, project hailed as a major success by the State of California DTSC.
Project Planning is not completed yet... • August 2012: Based upon issues developed during the storm system master plan and the ongoing remediation work a Post Subdivision Modification was submitted to the City of Sacramento. • The Post Subdivision Modification included the addition of a north detention basin, removal of a street on the west and south sides of the neighborhood park, definition of a pedestrian/bicycle connection at 22nd Street. • January 31, 2013: Post Subdivision Modification approved by the City Planning Commission.
2013 Post Subdivision Modification Tentative Map Current Tentative Map in effect
A Final Map to create 86 SFH lots on the east side of the project was processed starting in Fall 2013. The Final Map was approved in February 2014. First Phase of infrastructure completed and roads opened to the public on April 8, 2014
Economic Benefits What does Curtis Park Village economically to Sacramento?
• $31,500,000 of construction in public improvements • $250,000,000 in total construction on the site for buildings and improvements • $16,000,000 in fees paid to the City for improvement construction • 1,600 jobs during construction • 520 jobs at build-out • $2,527,000 generated in property taxes per year • $900,000 (estimated) generated in sales tax per year from the commercial development on the site.
April 2014: Application for the Curtis Park Village Neighborhood Commercial Shopping Center
Lessons of An Infill Development • It takes longer than you think – Curtis Park Village has been in planning and development for over 10 years and the first buildings will not be constructed until later this year! • It is more complicated than you think – each project is unique but site impacts, old infrastructure, remediation, and environmental issues on infill sites can be costly to both project budgets and schedules. • It requires patience and extensive outreach - infill development will bring impacts to surrounding areas and neighborhoods and required extensive outreach throughout the planning and entitlement process. • Change is constant – evolving market conditions and project requirements bring about project revisions including the need to work with the jurisdiction and revise entitlements to meet physical and market conditions.