Draft

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Figure 25 PDA Readiness Criteria Worksheet PDA name: San Francisco Downtown-Geary-Van Ness Version: Baseline # Readiness Criteria Category # Sub-Criterion Name Present (2012) PDA Development Readiness Scoring 2020 2030 2040 Notes B Planning and Entitlement Criteria 1 Displacement of existing stable residential neighborhoods 0.05 0.05 0.05 All of PDA is very urban, mixed-use, dynamic, and projected capacity reflects underutilized sites only, though some may be in residential use today. San Francisco has a history of requiring special assistance for displaced residents. 2 Time required and difficulty in obtaining entitlement: institutional capacity and jurisdictional track record 0.10 0.00 0.00 2010 survey said Specific Plan, programmatic EIR, zoning code, General Plan amendments, and urban design guideline are all in place, with no other major documents/processes required. 2010 survey said most vertical projects take 12-18 months to process if CEQA in place, but most major projects outside Western SOMA, Rincon Hill, and TCDP would require 24+ months. A-74 C Community Support 1 Elected official support for proposed PDA use types and densities during past 3 years 0.00 0.00 0.00 High-density TCDP was approved unanimously at the BOS, which is generally supportive of visions in the existing plans, but these don't add up to PDA projections. 2 History of neighborhood opposition 0.05 0.00 0.00 By San Francisco standards, Downtown PDA has had relatively little opposition to development. However, San Francisco is regarded as politically challenging by many developers. Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 3/26/2013 Page 2 of 4 P:\121000\121113MTC\Readiness_Assessment Process\PDA Readiness Assessment\DS_Readiness Assessment_032513
Figure 25 PDA Readiness Criteria Worksheet PDA name: San Francisco Downtown-Geary-Van Ness Version: Baseline # Readiness Criteria Category # Sub-Criterion Name Present (2012) PDA Development Readiness Scoring 2020 2030 2040 Notes D Market and Investment Attractiveness 1 History of real estate investment in PDA and surrounding city 0.00 0.00 0.00 2010 survey said 9,134 units built in PDA 2000-2010, and another 5,864 entitled. City and developers have been aggressive in adding housing on optimal sites. 2 Recent Local Development Activity 0.00 0.00 0.00 2010 survey indicated 10,391 units in the pipeline for this PDA. Substantial developer interest maintained virtually all the time due to high potential values. A-75 3 General Market Conditions 4 Financial Feasibility Constraint 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.05 0.00 Very high housing prices, proven market for multifamily and rental as well as for-sale units Greatest challenge is in displacement of existing uses, as virtually all development will occur on built sites. High achievable prices assist with this challenge, and eventually should overcome issues regarding existing building's values. 5 Parcel size and configuration 0.15 0.15 0.15 Tight urban environment has relatively small parcels, constraining development scale and making assembly challenging. Only 32 of 157 pipeline projects in 2010 had over 100 units, which is a typical target for large-scale housing builders. Some "large" sites include RDA sites, Rincon Hill sites, parking lots in Civic Center, AAA headquarters, etc., but most of these are actually under 1 acre in size. Average identified soft site is under 7K SF. 6 Existence of major investment disincentives Tenderloin and Mid-Market social issues represent a concern, but these have proven not to be a major deterrent to new development in the larger area. 0.05 0.00 0.00 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 3/26/2013 Page 3 of 4 P:\121000\121113MTC\Readiness_Assessment Process\PDA Readiness Assessment\DS_Readiness Assessment_032513
Page 1 and 2:
Draft March 2013 Strategy for a Sus
Page 3 and 4:
Final Report PDA Readiness Assessme
Page 5 and 6:
1. REPORT SUMMARY AND FINDINGS Plan
Page 7 and 8:
Table 1 Summary of PDA Readiness As
Page 9 and 10:
PDA Readiness Assessment Final Repo
Page 11 and 12:
2. STUDY BACKGROUND Over the past s
Page 13 and 14:
3. PDA DEVELOPMENT READINESS ASSESS
Page 15 and 16:
Table 2 Capacity Assessment for Sel
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Table 3 PDA Readiness Criteria Work
Page 21 and 22:
Table 3 PDA Readiness Criteria Work
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
5. POLICY ACTIONS TO IMPROVE DEVELO
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
A-1 Units 18,000 16,000 14,000 12,0
Page 51 and 52:
Figure 2 PDA Readiness Criteria Wor
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72: Figure 8 PDA Readiness Criteria Wor
Page 73 and 74: Figure 8 PDA Readiness Criteria Wor
Page 75 and 76: 7,000 6,000 5,000 Figure 9: Redwood
Page 77 and 78: Figure 10 PDA Readiness Criteria Wo
Page 93 and 94: 7,000 6,000 5,000 Figure 15: Santa
Page 111 and 112: 3,000 2,500 Figure 21: San Mateo El
Page 121: Figure 25 PDA Readiness Criteria Wo
Page 129 and 130: 140,000 120,000 100,000 Figure 27:
Page 147 and 148: 3,000 2,500 Figure 33: Antioch Hill
Page 165 and 166: 5,000 4,500 4,000 3,500 Figure 39:
Page 173 and 174:
Figure 41 PDA Readiness Criteria Wo
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
4,000 3,500 3,000 Figure 45: Pittsb
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
2,500 2,000 Figure 51: Morgan Hill
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
5,000 4,500 4,000 3,500 Figure 57:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
Page 227 and 228:
Page 229 and 230:
Metropolitan Transportation Commiss
show all

Draft

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?