Loading...
There is hereby established a separate fund set aside for a special purpose entitled the Downtown Park Fund ("Fund"). All monies collected by DBI pursuant to this Section 412.1 et seq. shall be deposited in the Fund. All monies deposited in the Fund shall be used solely to acquire and develop public recreation and park facilities for use by the daytime population of the C-3 Use Districts, except that $100,000 of the monies from the fund shall be used to fund a nexus study, under the direction of the General Manager of the Recreation and Park Department, to examine whether the Downtown Park Fee should be imposed on uses other than office and on geographic areas of the City other than C-3 use districts. No Downtown Park Fee monies shall be expended on improvements for Ferry Park (generally Assessor's Block 202, Lots 6, 14 and 15, and Assessor's Block 203, Lot 14) until such time as this nexus study is completed unless use of such Downtown Park Fee monies is approved by a financial committee of the Board of Supervisors.
The Fund shall be administered jointly by the Recreation and Park Commission and the Planning Commission. The two Commissions shall conduct business related to their duties under this Section at joint public hearings, which hearings may be initiated by either the Recreation and Park Commission or the Planning Commission. A joint public hearing shall be held by the Commissions to elicit public comment on proposals for the acquisition of property using monies in the Fund. Notice of any joint public hearings shall be published in an official newspaper at least 20 days prior to the date of the hearing, which notice shall set forth the time, place, and purpose of the hearing. The hearing may be continued to a later date by a majority vote of the members of both Commissions present at the hearing. At a joint public hearing, a quorum of the membership of both Commissions may vote to allocate the monies in the Fund for acquisition of property for park use and/or for development of property for park use. The Recreation and Park Commission shall alone administer the development of the recreational and park facilities on any acquired property designated for park use by the Board of Supervisors, using such monies as have been allocated for that purpose at a joint hearing of both Commissions.
(Added by Ord. 108-10, File No. 091275, App. 5/25/2010)
The Downtown Park Fee shall be paid to DBI for deposit into the Downtown Park Fund at the time required by Section 402(d).
AMENDMENT HISTORY
[JOBS-HOUSING LINKAGE PROGRAM]
Sections 413.1 through 413.11, hereafter referred to as Section 413.1 et seq., set forth the requirements and procedures for the Jobs-Housing Linkage Program. The effective date of these requirements shall be either March 28, 1996, which is the date that the requirements originally became effective, or the date a subsequent modification, if any, became effective.
(Added by Ord. 108-10, File No. 091275, App. 5/25/2010)
The Board hereby finds and declares as follows:
(a) Large-scale entertainment, hotel, office, laboratory, and retail developments in the City have attracted and continue to attract additional employees to the City, and there is a causal connection between such developments and the need for additional housing in the City, particularly housing affordable to households of lower and moderate income. Such commercial uses in the City benefit from the availability of housing close by for their employees. However, the supply of housing units in the City has not kept pace with the demand for housing created by these new employees. Due to this shortage of housing, employers will have difficulty in securing a labor force, and employees, unable to find decent and affordable housing, will be forced to commute long distances, having a negative impact on quality of life, limited energy resources, air quality, social equity, and already overcrowded highways and public transport.
(b) There is a low vacancy rate for housing affordable to persons of lower and moderate income. This low vacancy rate is due in part to large-scale commercial developments, which have attracted and will continue to attract additional employees and residents to the City. Consequently, some of the employees attracted to these developments are competing with present residents for scarce, vacant affordable housing units in the City. Competition for housing generates the greatest pressure on the supply of housing affordable to households of lower and moderate income. In San Francisco, office or retail uses of land generally yield higher income to the owner than housing. Because of these market forces, the supply of these affordable housing units will not be expanded. Furthermore, Federal and State housing finance and subsidy programs are not sufficient by themselves to satisfy the lower and moderate income housing requirements of the City.
(c) The City has consistently set housing production goals to address the regional and citywide forecasts for population, households, and employment. Although San Francisco has seen increased housing production each successive decade since the 1970s, the City has not been able to close the gap between its housing production goals and actual production.
(d) There is a continuing shortage of low- and moderate-income housing in San Francisco. It is desirable to impose the cost of the increased burden of providing housing necessitated by large-scale commercial development projects directly upon the sponsors of the development projects by requiring that the project sponsors contribute land or pay a fee to the City to subsidize housing development as a condition of the privilege of development and to assist the community in solving those of its housing problems generated by the development.
(e) The Bay Area has seen dramatic increases in land acquisition costs for housing, the cost of new housing development and the affordability gap for low to moderate income workers seeking housing. Commute patterns for the region have also changed, with more workers who work outside of San Francisco seeking to live in the City, thus increasing demand for housing and decreasing housing availability.
(f) As the regional job center, San Francisco has historically had the highest ratio of jobs-to-housing units in the Bay Area.
(g) The required housing exaction shall be based upon formulas derived in a periodic jobs housing nexus analysis. Consistent with the requirements of the California Mitigation Fee Act, the jobs housing nexus analysis shall demonstrate the validity of the nexus between new, large scale entertainment, hotel, office, laboratory, and retail development and the increased demand for housing in the City, and the numerical relationship between such development projects and the formulas for the provision of housing set forth in Section 413.1 et seq.
(h) The Board of Supervisors has reviewed the Jobs Housing Nexus Analysis (“Jobs Housing Nexus Analysis”), which is on file with the Clerk of the Board in Board File No. 190548, and adopts the findings and conclusions of that study, and incorporates the findings by reference herein to support the imposition of the fees under Section 413.1 et seq.
AMENDMENT HISTORY
Former divisions A.–C. and K. amended and redesignated as divisions (a)-(c) and (e); former divisions D. and F. amended and combined as division (d); former divisions E., G.–J., L., and M. deleted; new divisions (f)-(h) added; Ord. 251-19, Eff. 12/16/2019. Division (h) amended; Ord. 193-23, Eff. 10/16/2023.
See Section 401 of this Article.
(Added by Ord. 108-10, File No. 091275, App. 5/25/2010)
Loading...