Laserfiche WebLink
<br />San Francisco Bay ~\rea <br /> <br />Draft Regional Housing Needs i\llocation, 4th Revision <br /> <br />investments for public transportation. Inclusion of planned stations gives communities that <br />will have new transit stations an opportunity to ensure that they plan sufficient housing to <br />support the extension of transit services. In addition, given the long time-frame for <br />implementation of service extensions, it makes sense to begin the land use planning around <br />proposed stations before the transit stations are put in place. This is in support of both state <br />and regional policies to ensure efficient use of transportation infrastructure and to encourage <br />increased transit use. There is a multitude of data supporting the theory that higher population <br />densities have a net positive impact on transit ridership. <br /> <br />The HMC was divided in its support for including a transit, and particularly planned transit, <br />as part of the allocation methodology. Many of the committee members believed that the <br />regional growth policies embedded in Projections sufficiently addressed both state and <br />regional policies promoting transit use and efficient use of transportation infrastructure. It <br />was felt by some members that having transit as a direct factor would give too much weight <br />to transit and would also unfairly burden communities with both existing and planned transit. <br />Planned transit was also contentious because some of the planned transit stations included in <br />MTC's Regional Transportation Plan may not be built, including many of the e-BART <br />stations planned for eastern Contra Costa County. However, others on the HMC felt that if <br />housing is built at appropriate densities before transit is put in place, the transit investment <br />may become more financially feasible, for projected ridership would be higher. <br /> <br />D. The Allocation Formula <br /> <br />The household growth, employment and transit factors are weighted together to create an <br />allocation formula. Each factor describes a jurisdiction's "share" of a regional total. For <br />example, if the region expects to grow by ] 00 households, and one city in the region is to <br />grow by 10 households in the same period, then that city's "share" of the region's growth is 10 <br />percent. <br /> <br />A jurisdiction's share of the Regional Housing need is assigned according to its percentage <br />share of regional: <br /> <br />(Honsehold Growth x .40) + (Employment Growth x .20) + (Existing Employment x .20) <br />+ (Household Growth near Transit x .10) + (Employment Growth near Transit x .10) <br /> <br />Growth is during the RHNA planning period (2007 - 2014). The transit factors refer to <br />growth that occurs within Y, mile of planned or existing fixed transit stations in the <br />jurisdiction. Planned stations are those in the RTP 2005 - Track]. <br /> <br />2. Regional Allocations of Housing Units hased on Affordahility <br /> <br />There are two primary goals of the RHNA process: I) increase the supply of housing and <br />2) ensure that local governments consider the housing needs of persons at all income levels. <br /> <br />The HMC recommends that each local jurisdiction should plan for income-based housing in <br />the same ratio as the regional average income distribution (as described by the 2000 Census). <br />A methodology that allocates each jurisdiction's regional housing need based on the regional <br />average income distribution would be an "equal share" approach because it applies the same <br />income distribution to each jurisdiction. Although considered an equitable approach, it does <br />not consider existing concentrations of poverty. <br /> <br />November 2006, Page 11 <br />