Mark Luce Presentation from SFMS


Published on

Mark Luce Plan Bay Area Presentation for Marcus & Millichap Bay Area Multifamily Forum: San Francisco & Beyond

Published in: Business, Real Estate
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • As we begin to implement the SCS, the responsibility for coordinating transportation investment with land use development is expanding from the regional to the CMA level. For example, the CMAs must now create PDA Investment and Growth Strategies that state how they are using their funds to support PDA development. CMAs will engage jurisdictions in a Call for Projects in the fall to start the process. ABAG is hosting a series of SCS Leadership meetings in every county to help local jurisdictions prepare. ABAG will aid the CMAs, but we also want to support jurisdictions and encourage their participation in new processes. A third goal is to work to eliminate redundancies with Housing Elements as jurisdictions become accountable for their land use decisions to multiple agencies. Implementation areas: housing, complete communities, jobs, open space
  • Most hous./job+ projected in PBA - PDAs along 2 Inner Bay Area transit corridors
  • Detailed analysis corridor’s PDAs; - development potential - adopted local plans and - related CEQA documents
  • Analyzingunique character & needs of ea. PDA along both corridors to: - identifycommon obstacles to dev. - recomm. best practices & implementation actionsovercomeobstacles. Wheremajority of transit $ spent…employ. ctrs… lessons benefit all PDAs…We’d happy to respond to requests from any PDA for assistance
  • PDA Implementation
  • Next $8M: focus on current implement issues- best practices in planning for new growth; overcoming obstacles to infill dev.Details of program finalized in coming months.
  • Investigate unique role diff. types PDAs in regional econ.Strategies: - strengthening local bus. districts - create physical envirsto encourag &sup. investmentingrowing industries.
  • Rapid: Op-Eds: Top Down…End Local Control…One Size Fits All…Set In StoneWebsite: User friendly…easy nav…better resource: members/public…Compact Growth/PDA-Best PracConvene conv. EB/local del. re: challenges implementing PBA, role ABAG can play to help & how improve outreach process next PBAlearned a lot- (start earlier)
  • Mark Luce Presentation from SFMS

    1. 1. Developing a Sustainable Communities Strategy For the Bay Area Presented by Mark Luce, President, Association of Bay Area Governments Napa County Supervisor November 14, 2013
    2. 2. The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) Executive Board County Supervisors David Cortese John Gioia Mark Luce Eric Mar Karen Mitchoff Dave Pine David Rabbitt Katie Rice Jane Kim Linda Seifert Mike Wasserman Scott Haggerty Warren Slocum County of Santa Clara County of Contra Costa County of Napa County of San Francisco Count of Contra Costa County of San Mateo County of Sonoma County of Marin County of San Francisco County of Solano County of Santa Clara County of Alameda County of San Mateo Other Director Jason Elliott, Leg/Gov Affairs City of San Francisco Jeff Buckley, Office of the Mayor City of San Francisco Dep Dir Kelly Pretzer, Leg/Gov Affairs City of San Francisco Director William Kissinger RWQCB City Council members and Mayors Desley Brooks, City of Oakland Kansen Chu, City of San Jose Mayor Pat Eklund City of Novato Mayor Leon Garcia, City of American Canyon Mayor Pedro Gonzalez City of South San Francisco Mayor Bill Harrison City of Fremont Dave Hudson City of San Ramon Dan Kalb City of Oakland Wayne Lee City of Milbrae Sam Liccardo City of San Jose Jake Mackenzie City of Rohnert Park Mary Ann Nihart City of Pacifica Mayor Julie Pierce City of Clayton Mayor Harry Price City of Fairfield Mayor Jean Quan City of Oakland Libby Schaaf City of Oakland Mayor Greg Scharff City of Palo Alto Ash Kalra City of San Jose Joe Pirzynski Town of Los Gatos 2 11/21/2013
    3. 3. Basic Questions  Should government plan…?  Govern: Latin origin “to steer” as in guiding a ship.  Elected leaders are given the authority to lead.  We are expected to anticipate and avoid problems and to identify and create opportunities.  Governing is about delivering and that requires planning.  …and at what level?  At the most local level possible, that will encompass the breadth of a decision’s impact…where it is most accountable.
    4. 4. Plan Bay Area  Vision (understanding and moving toward the goal):  Strategic intent. Know what is important and adjust.  What is important: Improve our quality of life. • Accommodating growth, reducing greenhouse gasses, housing our population, and maintaining a vibrant economy, are strategic objectives. They are not an end to themselves. • We are diverse and “improved quality of life” takes on different meaning in each community. Plan Bay Area is respectful of local government plans and directions. Mandating sprawl where it is not wanted is counter productive and disrespectful. What is required: Comply with State law.  It is difficult to make predictions, particularly about the future.  – Yogi Berra  The best way to predict the future is to create it. – President Abraham Lincoln
    5. 5. Plan Bay Area  Reality: 2 million more Bay Area residents in the next 20 to 40 years, limited funds, aging infrastructure, diverse bay area values (urban/rural).  The Bay Area is not an island. We are a worldwide destination. Housing will always be expensive as long as we maintain our quality of life.  Beautiful and sensitive physical features (bay, river, wetlands, mountains, etc.) that contribute to planning complexity.  Healthy diverse economy.  Plan Bay Area does not prevent local governments from expanding their boundaries and zoning for more single family homes nor does it force them to do so.  Nothing gets approved unless local government supports it.  Nothing gets built unless private developers believe they can sell it. 
    6. 6. What it says and does not say.  Plan Bay Area EIR;  “The projected oversupply of single-family homes is expected to reduce demand for other housing types by almost 170,000 units as some households that would otherwise choose multifamily units instead opt for single family homes made more affordable due to excess supply.”  Randal O’Toole;  “Implementation of Plan Bay Area will require the demolition of more than 169,000 single-family detached homes, or one out of every nine such homes in the region, according to table 2.3-2 of the draft environmental impact report. Any earthquake or other natural event that resulted in this much destruction would be counted as the greatest natural catastrophe in American history.”
    7. 7. Plan Bay Area  Discipline   Accomplished through plans and programs that achieve our objectives consistent with our goal. Prioritize areas for higher density development near jobs and transit that LOCAL GOVERNMENTs have volunteered as welcomed and appropriate. Reward those plans with economic and policy support and eliminate obstacles. Courage  People coming together to move forward, refusing to compromise our future to the voices of fear and futility.
    8. 8. AB 32 Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 AB 32 establishes the first comprehensive program of regulatory and market mechanisms in the nation to achieve greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reductions AB 32 sets GHG emissions limit for 2020 at 1990 level   Acknowledges that 2020 is not the endpoint Points way towards 80% reduction by 2050 Air Resources Board (ARB) adopted a Scoping Plan to achieve AB 32’s GHG emissions reduction target
    9. 9. California’s Three Pronged Approach to Reducing Transportation Greenhouse Gases (with AB 32 Scoping Plan estimates for GHG reductions in 2020) Cleaner vehicles (Pavley, AB 32) - 38 tons Cleaner fuels (Low-Carbon Fuel Standard) - 15 tons More sustainable communities (SB 375) - 5 tons
    10. 10. SB 375 Basics  Directs ARB to develop passenger vehicle GHG reduction targets for CA’s 18 MPOs for 2020 and 2035  Adds Sustainable Communities Strategy as new element to RTPs  Provides CEQA streamlining incentives for projects consistent with SCS/APS  Requires separate Alternative Planning Strategy if GHG targets not met  Coordinates RHNA with the regional transportation planning process
    11. 11. ARB Adopted GHG Targets — September 2010 Percent Reduction in Per Capita Emissions from 2005 to Target Year 2020 2035 Bay Area 7% 15% Sacramento 7% 16% San Diego 7% 13% Los Angeles 8% 13% Central Valley 5% 10%
    12. 12. Location Matters Compared to sprawl, compact development results in a 20 to 40 percent reduction in VMT and hence in CO2
    13. 13. Strategy for Growth  What this means:  The growth we are planning for over the next several decades will be very different from the outward expansion over the last few decades.  With the demands for environmental resource conservation and infrastructure efficiency, infill development with streamlined permitting and financial support will be primary strategies.
    14. 14. Building on an Existing Framework  The region already has a local-regional partnership to support growth in sustainable Priority Development Areas and to protect important natural resources identified as Priority Conservation Areas.  SB 375 is structured as a voluntary, incentivebased program.
    15. 15. Priority Development Areas
    16. 16. Resources to Local Government Are Key  State and regional capital grants  New federal funding models (e.g. joint HUD/DOT/EPA programs)  Self-help tools (e.g. value-capture such as tax increment financing) PDA Capital Funding Shortfall Category $ billions Transportation Infrastructure 6.3 Affordable Housing 2.0 Parks 1.4 Utilities 0.9 Other Public Facilities 0.9 Pre-Development Activities 0.6 TOTAL 12.1
    17. 17. SCS Implementation: Regional, County, and Local Coordination Local Jurisdictions MTC Transportation CMAs ABAG Land Use Housing Jobs 17
    18. 18. Implementation Focus Areas PDA Implementation Economic Development Open Space and Farmland Housing Production and Affordability Research & Communications
    19. 19. PDA Implementation Transit Corridors Inner Bay Area Corridors and Regional Centers Regional Rail PDA (not exact size) Regional Center Corridor
    20. 20. Transit Corridors: Grand Boulevard Initiative Development coordination among 21 Jurisdictions • San Mateo and Santa Clara County •
    21. 21. Transit Corridors: San Pablo Ave and East Bay Corridor
    22. 22. Entitlement Efficiency • • • SB 375 and 226 SB 743 [Kings Arena] CEQA Streamlining
    23. 23. Entitlement Efficiency  IF projects are:  -Consistent with SCS  -Meet density/transit requirements  -Located in areas with already adopted programmatic EIRs
    24. 24. Entitlement Efficiency  THEN some projects in PDA’s:  -Won’t require add’l CEQA analysis,  or  -Have fewer issues to analyze in EIR
    25. 25. Entitlement Efficiency  ABAG/MTC to develop advisory guidelines to help determine if:  -Local programmatic EIRs meet SB 375 thresholds for these benefits, and if not  -What add’l CEQA analysis would be needed to meet thresholds?
    26. 26. Regional PDA Planning Grants  Previous Grants: • • Supported 52 plans Supported planning for 40,000 new housing units and 60,000 new jobs  New Grants: • $8 Million (2014-17)
    27. 27. State Housing Policy Coordination • • • Consult with local jurisdictions Identify state policies/regs that may impede PDA implementation Coordinate with state agencies re: potential policy adjustments
    28. 28. Place-Based Economic Development Strategies Downtown San Jose Downtown Sunnyvale Downtown Berkeley
    29. 29. • Data Analysis and Research • • • • Tracking development trends Refine land use model Consolidate PDA data on website Communication • • • Increase media response capacity Update ABAG website Conversations with delegates
    1. A particular slide catching your eye?

      Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.