Download 01-04-07_Agenda_Item_1_-_Alternative_Allocation_Methods.pdf

Contents : A SSOCIATION OF B AY A REA G OVERNMENTS R epresenting City and County Governments of the San Francisco Bay Area MEMO To: From: Date: Subject: Housing Methodology Committee (HMC) ABAG Staff January 4 2007 Alternative RHNA Allocation Methodologies Background On November 16 2006 ABAG s Executive Board authorized the release of the Housing Methodology Committee s draft methodology for the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) for 2007-2014. The release of the methodology opened a 60-day public comment period. The comment period will close on January 18 2007. On that date staff will bring to the Executive Board recommendations for the final RHNA methodology. Thus far comments received on the draft RHNA method are predominately on the weighted factors component of the methodology. Local jurisdictions have expressed concern with the use of both existing and planned transit as factors in the methodology. Some believe that this factor unfairly burdens those jurisdictions with either existing or planned transit especially those cities with multiple transit stations. Staff has developed three alternative scenarios for the HMC and ABAG Executive Board s consideration on January 18th. The alternative scenarios include 1) a reduced transit factor 2) existing transit only and 3) no transit. This staff report describes these alternatives and the anticipated impact to local housing allocations. Alternative RHNA Scenarios The HMC identified three broad categories of factors to be considered for inclusion in the RHNA methodology including housing employment and access to public transit (existing and planned). Draft Recommendation The weighted factors in the draft allocation methodology as recommended by the HMC are: Household Growth 40 percent Employment Growth 20 percent Existing Employment 20 percent Household Growth near Transit 10 Percent Employment Growth near Transit 10 Percent As expressed in the public comments received thus far the transit component of this allocation scenario is a point of contention for many jurisdictions in the Bay Area. The HMC and ABAG staff agreed however that a factor that directs growth to areas with public transit could benefit the region. Growth near transit could improve regional and interregional commuting reduce vehicle miles traveled and therefore lower carbon emissions and greenhouse gases. Mailing Address: P.O. Box 2050 Oakland California 94604-2050 Joseph P. Bort MetroCenter 101 Eighth Street (510) 464-7900 Fax: (510) 464-7970 info@abag.ca.gov Oakland California 94607-4756 Alternative RHNA Allocation Methodologies 1/04/07 Page 2 In response to the concerns over the transit component of the allocation method staff has developed three alternative scenarios. The alternative allocation scenarios reduce the weight of the transit factor remove planned transit and remove transit altogether as a factor in the methodology. Alternative 1: Reduced Transit This scenario reduces the weight of the transit factor in the methodology. In addition planned transit is removed from consideration. Only existing transit stations fixed rail and ferry are included. As a result household growth existing jobs and employment growth receive a greater weight in the allocation formula. Under this scenario the weighted factors are: Household Growth 45 percent Employment Growth 22.5 percent Existing Employment 22.5 percent Household Growth near Transit 5 Percent Employment Growth near Transit 5 Percent The effect of reducing transit s weight in the allocation and removing planned transit is that many jurisdictions with transit including Oakland San Francisco Berkeley and similar cities would see their allocations reduced over the draft method numbers. Allocations would go up in cities with high levels of expected household growth and/or where there are no or few transit stations including Brentwood Antioch Oakley and the northern rural counties of Napa Solano and Sonoma. Because household growth is weighted more heavily in this scenario in many of the jurisdictions with planned transit anticipated increases in household growth would offset any reduction that removing the planned transit option would have had. Therefore most jurisdictions with planned transit would see their allocations go up over the draft allocation numbers. These jurisdictions include Brentwood Antioch Oakley and Santa Rosa. Alternative 2: Existing Transit Only This scenario keeps the same weights for each factor as the draft method however planned transit is removed from consideration - only existing transit is included. Under this scenario the weighted factors are: Household Growth 40 percent Employment Growth 20 percent Existing Employment 20 percent Household Growth near Existing Transit 10 Percent Employment Growth near Existing Transit 10 Percent The effect of removing planned transit and onl

INFO HASH : fd29a8aefc584faeb63c4132c555c0e7d93a4f66

Download now

File Size: 47.1 kb