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 E Infrastructure Capacity, Needs, and Financing 1 Existing infrastructure capacity 2 Is there an existing CIP funded or other infrastructure financing plan in place? 0.00 0.05 0.05 PDA is very urban and primarily built-out. City is not aware of major sewer/water issues, but transportation improvements would be required to accommodate substantial new growth. 2010 survey identified $430M in transportation-related costs, including Van Ness and Geary BRT, Embarcadero and Montgomery BART station improvements, etc. Marginal growth can certainly occur without these major improvements, but substantial additions would likely trigger need. City has transit impact development fee that it is updating in 2013 as Transit Sustainability Program (including traffic calming, bike/ped facilities). Other Citywide fees apply also, and Rincon Hill area has its own impact fee schedule as well. A-76 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 PDA financing capacity 0.00 0.00 0.00 Prices are high enough to support significant contributions to infrastructure financing. For example, $430M infrastructure cost represents
Figure 26 PDA Readiness Criteria Worksheet PDA name: San Francisco Downtown-Geary-Van Ness Version: Amended # Readiness Criteria Category # Sub-Criterion Name Present (2012) PDA Development Readiness Scoring 2020 2030 2040 Notes A PDA Housing Capacity Estimate 1 Estimate of current local land use policy new housing capacity 16,846 Figure based on 2012 soft site survey from City; identified 1,415 underutilized sites summing to 221 acres (average under 7K SF sites) achieving average density of 76 DUs/acre; 2010 survey showed 2035 buildout would be just 10,400 more than 2010 existing units; 2007 Housing Element showed room for 9,545 RHNA units (all incomes) in PDA 2 Plan Bay Area new housing allocation 3 Capacity surplus or (shortfall) (10,293) 27,139 The increment of new housing allocated to the PDA in Plan Bay Area Difference between estimated housing capacity (2012) and allocation A-77 4 Estimated increased capacity through likely changes to land use policy, including any initiative-based density restrictions (percentage change to existing capacity) 0% 25% 50% Plans for PDA include Downtown Plan (1980s), Van Ness Area Plan (1980s), Rincon Hill Plan (2005), Western SOMA (to be adopted 2013), Chinatown, Civic Center, Northeast Waterfront Plan, Central Corridors Plan (to be done in next couple years, with potential upzoning). City has shown history of successful upzoning around Downtown (e.g. Rincon Hill and TCDP). EPS assumes some current soft sites will be redeveloped prior to future upzoning, while other sites will become "soft" when allowable densities are increased. Amendment assumes more aggressive upzoning. 5 Estimated gross housing capacity at each period 16,846 21,058 25,269 6 Sum of Capacity Constraint Coefficients 0.45 0.20 0.15 Major growth requires redevelopment of existing uses on many very small lots. Near-term challenges include lack of environmental clearance for larger projects and social conditions in Tenderloin and Mid-Market areas. Longer-term challenge includes need for major circulation improvements to facilitate growth, though values can support substantial costs. 7 EPS estimate of housing production given constraints 9,265 16,846 21,479 Pace of development likely to slow over time as most sites are physically challenging and easiest sites will be developed first. 8 Percentage of PDA 2040 housing allocation accommodated 34.1% 62.1% 79.1% Market is very strong but physical capacity of sites individually and in aggregate represents a significant constraint on development. Amendment assumes more aggressive upzoning, regional funding for transportation and other infrastructure, and restoration of Redevelopment-type powers to assist with parcel assembly. Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 3/26/2013 Page 1 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:
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 123: 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 175 and 176:
Figure 43 PDA Readiness Criteria Wo
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

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?