HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 11482
City of Palo Alto (ID # 11482)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 8/3/2020
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: PBA 2050 / RHNA Update
Title: Update and Discussion on Plan Bay Area 2050 Draft Blueprint and the
Regional Housing Needs Allocation Process and Direction to Staff to Prepare
Comment Letters on These Regional Efforts
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Planning and Development Services
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council take the following actions:
1. Discuss and provide direction to staff as appropriate on two regional planning efforts,
which are Plan Bay Area 2050 and the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA)
process;
2. Authorize the Mayor to sign a letter reflecting City Council comments on the Plan Bay
Area 2050 Draft Blueprint; and,
3. Direct staff to submit a comment letter to ABAG/MTC’s Housing Methodology
Committee reflecting City Council initial comments regarding the Regional Housing
Needs Allocation (RHNA) methodology options that are under consideration.
Background / Discussion
The purpose of this report and agenda item is to update the community and Council on the two
subject regional planning initiatives and provide an opportunity for public comment. There was
insufficient capacity to schedule this discussion in advance of Council’s summer recess, so an
informational report1 was prepared for the June 22, 2020 meeting. The lack of a discussion on
this topic before the break raised concerns from some community and Council members
interested in advocating the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) appeal the Housing
and Community Development (HCD) department’s regional housing needs determination
(RHND); the deadline for ABAG to appeal was July 10, 2020.
Information on the regional housing needs determination is provided below as well as updates
on efforts to develop a methodology that would distribute housing throughout the region. This
1 June 22, 2020 Informational Report: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/77349
City of Palo Alto Page 2
report also includes an update on Plan Bay Area 2050, which has a recently released a draft
findings report and is seeking public comment on or before August 10, 2020.
Staff prepared a comment letter regarding the Plan Bay Area 2050 Draft Blueprint. A second
letter has been prepared to document the City’s initial comments on the RHNA methodology
options currently under consideration; this letter would be sent to the ABAG Housing
Methodology Committee in advance of their August 13, 2020 meeting. If significant changes are
required to either letter, staff recommends the Council authorize the Mayor sign a revised
letter consistent with the Council majority’s interests. Both draft letters are included with this
report as Attachments A and B respectively.
Regional Housing Needs Determination
The regional housing needs determination (RHND) represents the number of housing units that
must be planned for in a given region over a certain period of time. The state Housing and
Community Development (HCD) department makes this determination for all metropolitan
planning organizations in California. The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) serves
as our MPO and distributes this housing allocation across the nine counties and 101 cities and
towns in the Bay Area.
For the planning period from 2023 through 2030, the Bay Area was assigned 441,176 housing
units, which represents a 16% growth in housing units over the next eight years. These units are
distributed among four incomes levels as shown in Table 1 below. HCD develops its forecast
based on projected population growth which includes analyzing birth and death rates, and
migration. Data for this analysis is collected from the California Department of Finance (DOF).
In 2018 the state legislature required HCD to consider additional criteria to respond to the
state’s housing crisis and amplify existing policies to affirmatively further fair housing in
upcoming housing element cycles. Some of these criteria include adjustments for housing unit
replacements, accounting for overcrowding rates, housing cost burden, and target vacancy
City of Palo Alto Page 3
rates. These adjustments alone accounted for 217,626 new housing units, or approximately
49% of the RHND of the 441,176 new housing units that HCD sent to ABAG.
Future job growth is not an explicit data point factored into HCD’s RHND, however, to the
extent net migration reflects future job growth, it represents a relatively small percent of
overall population growth.
ABAG received the RHND from HCD on June 9, 2020. The ABAG Executive Board reviewed the
RHND on June 18, 2020. The ABAG Executive Board declined to appeal the RHND for the nine
county Bay Area.
Only ABAG has the authority to contest the RHND. The process to contest the RHND is set forth
in state law and the ability for ABAG to register an objection on the RHND is limited to two
criteria and in its objection, ABAG would have needed to submit a proposed alternative
determination of its regional housing need along with documentation substantiating its basis
for the alternative determination. Since Plan Bay Area 2050 is well underway and forecasts a
larger Bay Area population than projected by HCD, it is unlikely any objection would have
resulted in a lower regional housing determination. Furthermore, ABAG staff recommended
that the ABAG Executive Board accept the RHND.
The Governor and state legislature up to this point have not made any adjustments to the state
deadlines2 associated with the upcoming housing cycle and local response to the coronavirus
pandemic is not currently a qualifying reason for ABAG to object to or appeal the RHND.
Regional Housing Needs Allocation Methodology
The Housing Methodology Committee (HMC) is an advisory group consisting of local elected
officials, jurisdiction staff, regional stakeholders, and a state partner.3 The HMC is supported by
ABAG staff and is tasked with developing a methodology that will distribute the RHND across all
counties, cities, and towns within the Bay Area, subject to statutory requirements.4 This
2 The Cities Association of Santa Clara County recently sent a letter to the Governor and the Director of HCD
requesting the regional housing needs allocation schedule be modified to give regional jurisdictions and the state
adequate time to assess the impact of COVID-19 and ensure the RHNA process achieves HCD’s goals.
3 Housing Methodology Committee Roster: https://abag.ca.gov/sites/default/files/hmc_roster_06_16_2020_0.pdf
4 RHNA Methodology Summary Requirements:
• Increasing the housing supply and the mix of housing types, tenure, and affordability in all cities and
counties within the region in an equitable manner.
• Promoting infill development and socioeconomic equity, the protection of environmental and agricultural
resources, the encouragement of efficient development patterns, and the achievement of the region’s
greenhouse gas reductions targets.
• Promoting an improved intraregional relationship between jobs and housing, including an improved
balance between the number of low-wage jobs and the number of housing units affordable to low-wage
workers in each jurisdiction.
• Allocating a lower proportion of housing need to an income category when a jurisdiction already has a
disproportionately high share of households in that income category.
City of Palo Alto Page 4
recommendation is forwarded to the Regional Planning Committee, which in turn, will make a
recommendation to the ABAG Executive Board. The ABAG Executive Board will decide on its
preferred approach to distribute housing units, which must be approved by HCD. Once
accepted, an appeal period begins where any jurisdiction within the Bay Area can appeal their
own regional housing needs assessment (RHNA), or another jurisdiction’s RHNA allocation.
Once a methodology is established, a RHNA number is assigned to each jurisdiction in the
region. The RHNA number represents a housing production target at various household income
levels that municipalities must proactively plan to accommodate within their jurisdiction. A
community’s plan to support future housing growth is set forth in their Housing Element, which
is (typically) updated every eight years to coincide with the RHNA process.5
The next HMC meeting will occur on August 13, 2020. At this meeting, the Committee is
expected to decide on a baseline that will serve as a starting point for distributing the RHND
throughout the Bay Area. One approach being considered is to use 2019 household numbers
and increase that number by sixteen percent (16%) for each jurisdiction, which reflects the
regional increase generated by the RHND. A second approach being considered is to use the
Plan Bay Area 2050 Draft Blueprint as the baseline with its forecasted growth adjusted to
coincide with the RHNA cycle; this baseline is also influenced by planning assumptions about
where job growth and housing is projected to occur in the future. For Palo Alto, the baseline
methodology determination is significant.
RHNA Methodology Baseline Data Options6
2019 Household A 4,475 Housing Units
Plan Bay Area B 11,130 Housing Units
A Source: https://rhna-factors.mtcanalytics.org/option1.html
B Source: https://abag.ca.gov/meetings/housing-methodology-
committee-2020-jul-09
The baseline data alone, however, may not sufficiently address statutory requirements to
distribute housing units in a manner that promotes infill development and socioeconomic
equity, address housing fit, jobs/housing balance, or affirmatively further fair housing
requirements such as access to high resource and opportunity areas, among other factors.
Accordingly, as noted in the June 22, 2020 informational report, the HMC is considering ten
factors7 and exploring options to weight those factors in accordance with their mandated
objectives. This chart was previously provided and illustrates factor options HMC is evaluating
• Affirmatively furthering fair housing.
5 The Housing Element is one of seven mandated elements in a local government’s general or comprehensive plan.
6 Numbers used in this report to illustrate anticipated housing units allocations are approximate and may adjust
significantly based on any number of factors until a methodology is adopted.
7 Ten Factors Include: Access to High Opportunity Areas; Divergence Index; Job-Proximity – Auto; Job Proximity –
Transit; Vehicle Miles Traveled; Job-Housing Balance; Jobs-Housing Fit; Future Jobs; Transit Connectivity; Natural
Hazards. More description regarding these factors is available online: https://rhna-
factors.mtcanalytics.org/data/RHNA_tool_factors_overview.pdf
City of Palo Alto Page 5
and how they could be weighted (note: at a previous meeting, more Committee members
supported the Housing/Jobs Crescent approach, while ‘hazards’ as a factor in the RHNA
methodology lost support):
Depending on the factors and weights chosen, each jurisdiction’s RHNA number will fluctuate
above or below the baseline data set. Much of Palo Alto is identified as either transit rich or
high opportunity areas, and Palo Alto has a sizeable jobs/housing imbalance. These
characteristics tend to result in more housing units being allocated to Palo Alto. Some factors
also influence the percentage of units directed toward lower income units versus market rate
units.
Another metric the HMC is considering is an income shift multiplier, which is intended to move
a jurisdiction’s mix of housing within four income bands in a direction that better reflects the
mix of housing throughout the region. Depending on the income shift percentage chosen, a
City of Palo Alto Page 6
community with more high income housing units would likely see a greater share of its RHNA
allocated toward lower income units and vice versa. The income shift does not result in more
housing allocated toward a jurisdiction but reallocates the number of units assigned to each
income category.
The following chart illustrates this concept. An income shift multiplier of 100 percent results in
every jurisdiction’s RHNA mirroring the region’s existing income distribution. In theory, setting
the income shift multiplier above 100 percent could close the gap between a jurisdiction’s
income distribution and the region’s distribution in a shorter period of time. At their May
meeting, HMC members expressed the most support for an income shift multiplier between
100 percent and 150 percent.
In contrast to the income shift approach and the methodology options presented above, the
HMC is also considering an alternative, standalone methodology referred to as the Bottom-Up
concept. This approach uses factors to determine allocations for the four income categories,
and the sum of these income group allocations represents a jurisdiction’s total allocation. A
jurisdiction’s allocation within each income category is determined based on how the
jurisdiction scores relative to the rest of the region on the selected factors. This approach is
illustrated in the following diagram:
City of Palo Alto Page 7
The HMC considered a two factor approach as well where each factor is weighed at 50%.
Depending on the combination of baseline data and factors recommended by the HMC, Palo
Alto stands to have a significant increase in market rate and affordable housing units in the
upcoming cycle. The range of housing units allocated to Palo Alto is depicted in this chart
produced by ABAG staff for the July HMC public meeting:
While many in the region may support the higher housing unit targets depicted above, from a
staff perspective, the diagram reveals that a Plan Bay Area 2050 Blueprint baseline is not
realistic for Palo Alto. The expectation that Palo Alto would increase its housing supply by 55%
over the next eight years is clearly unattainable. Accordingly, staff’s draft comment letter to
HMC recommends in favor of using the 2019 Household baseline for a future RHNA
methodology.
The comment letter also highlights concerns staff has regarding unreasonably high housing
targets and the implications that may have on communities based on current state law,
specifically, SB35. Palo Alto has struggled to produce significant low income housing units, is
marginally meeting the market rate target for the current housing cycle, and is well short of the
Council’s expressed goal of producing 300+ units each year through 2030. Palo Alto’s access to
high paying jobs, excellent schools, proximity to fixed rail and transit, well-established
jobs/housing imbalance, disproportionate mix of higher income households and lack of
affordable housing for lower wage earners makes this community more susceptible to higher
RHNA numbers. Palo Alto will face some difficult choices ahead that will necessarily need to
consider community member’s interests regarding parking, floor area, density and height
regulations to spur market rate housing or risk losing significant local control over future
qualifying housing projects based on SB35.
City of Palo Alto Page 8
Senate Bill 35 approved by the state legislature and signed by the governor in 2017 sets forth
the requirements for a market rate housing project to qualify for streamlined review, including
requiring a certain percentage of on-site affordable units; having at least two-thirds of the floor
area dedicated to residential uses; and, workers are paid at a prevailing wage, among other
factors.
Palo Alto is currently subject to SB35’s streamlining provisions, but to qualify under this law,
fifty percent (50%) of the housing units must be deed restricted for low income housing.
If the City misses its market rate housing targets after four years in the new housing cycle (or
fails to meet it at the end of the current cycle), qualifying market rate housing projects would
be subject to a 90 day review period and must be administratively approved; the City could not
impose any conditions of approval or deny the project if it meets all objective standards.
Moreover, the on-site affordability requirement is reduced from 50% to the 10% (note: in
practice, applicants will be subject to the 15% inclusionary requirement in the City’s municipal
code).
Plan Bay Area 2050
Plan Bay Area 2050 is a 30 year long range planning document for the nine county Bay Area
region. This effort is being managed by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and
the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and builds on the Horizon Initiative,8 which
sought to explore what living in the Bay Area would be like in 2050 and explored challenges the
region it is likely to encounter in the future. Plan Bay Area 2050 will examine a possible future
for the Bay Area and is organized into four topic areas:
• Housing
• Transportation
• Economy
• Environment
The Plan will also need to meet statutory requirements to reduce greenhouse gas emissions as
determined by the California Air Resources Board (CARB); accommodate projected household
growth; and will ultimately serve as the region’s sustainable communities strategy and regional
transportation plan. Federal law further requires the plan be financially constrained and reflect
reasonably anticipated transportation revenues during the planning period.
Plan Bay Area 2050 sets forth a vision of the Bay Area that is resilient and equitable. The effort
is guided by principles supporting affordability, diversity, connectivity, community health and
vibrancy – and uses twenty-five (25) strategies organized into nine objectives to model a path
forward for the region.
8 More information on the Horizon Initiative is available online: https://mtc.ca.gov/our-work/plans-
projects/horizon
City of Palo Alto Page 9
These strategies are not binding and require a coordinated effort among local, regional, state
governments to achieve the goal. Funding mechanisms are key implementation components of
this framework requiring political and in some instances voter approval.
Importantly, Plan Bay Area 2050 does not require any changes to local policy documents,
comprehensive plans or zoning regulations. Some communities may find they will miss out on
future funding opportunities if their local programs are not aligned with the Plan and there is
some connection between Plan Bay Area 2050 and how housing units are distributed in the Bay
Area through the RHNA process.
Draft Blueprint
On July 6, 2020, MTC/ABAG released the Plan Bay Area 2050 Draft Blueprint.9 The public
comment period ends on August 10, 2020. Staff has reviewed this document and has prepared
a comment letter (Attachment B). The letter covers a range of topics, seeking clarification and
advocating for positions in the best interest of Palo Altans. For example, several points seek
assurance that the inputs to the Blueprint and the model used to create the Blueprint include
accurate information and assumptions.
The letter identifies and supports strategies that align with Palo Alto policies, such as protecting
high-value conservation lands, requiring that 10 to 20 percent of new housing be affordable,
and advancing low-cost transit projects. The letter also identifies additional strategies for
inclusion and consideration, such as locating jobs in housing-rich areas (such as Alameda
County).
A chief request, though, is that ABAG/MTC seek relief from the statutory timeline to provide
more time for this process. Advancing a long-range planning process at this time does not
afford the Bay Area the opportunity to incorporate changes from the COVID-19 pandemic and
recession into the long-range plan. For example, the letter suggests that growth in
telecommuting could be greater than predicted and may change the location of jobs, housing,
and the demand for office space. Furthermore, community members, elected officials, and
local staff throughout the Bay Area are consumed by responding to the ongoing crisis. Allowing
only 30 days for public process seems insufficient during these times. An extension of time is
sorely needed.
In addition to the letter, staff outline below upcoming opportunities for City Council members
and community members to participate in the Plan Bay Area 2050 process and feedback on the
draft Blueprint.
Planning and Transportation Commission Review
9 MTC/ABAG
City of Palo Alto Page 10
On July 8, 2020, the Palo Alto Planning and Transportation Commission held a study session
regarding these two regional planning initiatives.10 Approximately fifteen community members
provided public comments during the study session in addition to written comments provided
to the PTC as well as the City Council. Commissioners perspectives have been incorporated into
the draft letters. As noted above, Commissioners cautioned against the Bottom-Up approach to
allocating the RHND. Additional reflections from Commissioners include asking ABAG/MTC to
apply more scrutiny to the definition of transit rich, aligning Plan Bay Area 2050 closely with
Palo Alto’s goals of climate sustainability and affordable housing development, and addressing
the regional jobs-housing imbalance by encouraging greater job development in other parts of
the region.
Timeline / Public Engagement
The following table provides a list of key milestones for Plan Bay Area 2050, RHNA, and
forthcoming Housing Element update processes. The public is encouraged to participate in any
of the following public engagement opportunities.
ABAG 2023 RHNA and Plan Bay Area 2050 Key Milestones11
ABAG 2023 RHNA/Plan Bay Area 2050 Key Milestones Proposed Deadline
Plan Bay Area 2050 Draft Blueprint Public Comment
Period
July 7, 2020 through August 10, 2020
RHNA Housing Methodology Committee Public
Comment Period on RHNA Methodology Options
Next Meeting: August 13, 2020
Ongoing through Fall 2020
ABAG & Housing Methodology Committee Proposed
RHNA Methodology, Draft Subregion Shares
Fall 2020
Plan Bay Area 2050 Final Blueprint December 2020
Final Subregion Shares December 2020
Draft RHNA Methodology to HCD for Review Winter 2021
Final RHNA Methodology, Draft Allocation Spring 2021
RHNA Appeals Summer 2021
Final Plan Bay Area 2050 September 2021
Final RHNA Allocation Winter 2021
Housing Element Due Date January 2023
Dates are tentative and subject to change
Key Upcoming Meetings for Plan Bay Area 2050 Draft Blueprint:
10 Staff report for Planning and Transportation Commission July 8, 2020 Study Session:
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/77546
11 April 27, 2020 Revised RHNA Timeline: https://abag.ca.gov/sites/default/files/abag_rhna_timelineapril.pdf
City of Palo Alto Page 11
• July 30, 2020 (1:45PM-3:45PM)
Policy Advisory Council Equity & Access Subcommittee:
Registration link: https://www.eventbrite.com/e/plan-bay-area-2050-blueprint-workshop-
a-focus-on-equity-tickets-113656431446
• August 5, 2020 (11:30AM – 1:30PM)
Plan Bay Area 2050 Draft Blueprint Virtual Workshop: Santa Clara County:
Registration link: https://bayareametro.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_VOD7L-qhS-
yUVRfuLHrd0g
• September 2, 2020
ABAG Regional Planning Committee Meeting
Attendance Information: https://mtc.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx
• September 11, 2020
Joint MTC Planning Committee with the ABAG Administrative Committee Meeting
Attendance Information: https://mtc.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx
Key Upcoming Meetings for RHNA:
• August 13, 2020
ABAG Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) Housing Methodology Committee
Meeting
Attendance Information: https://mtc.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx; https://abag.ca.gov/our-
work/housing/rhna-regional-housing-needs-allocation/housing-methodology-committee
• September 18, 2020
ABAG Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) Housing Methodology Committee
Meeting
Attendance Information: https://mtc.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx; https://abag.ca.gov/our-
work/housing/rhna-regional-housing-needs-allocation/housing-methodology-committee
Next Steps
Following Council’s discussion, staff will finalize the two letters as directed and send them to
the appropriate individuals.
Staff will continue to attend Plan Bay Area 2050 and HMC meetings and will regularly report
back to Council.
Discussion items will be scheduled on the Council agenda when direction is needed, or as
otherwise directed by the City Council.
City of Palo Alto Page 12
Staff encourages interested community members to attend upcoming meetings listed in the
table above to share their voice on these topics.
Administratively, a recruitment is underway to hire a housing specialist for Palo Alto and a long-
range planning professional to support the City’s effort in these and other initiatives.
Attachments:
• Attachment A: Draft Comments on RHNA Methodology (August 2020)
• Attachment B: Draft Plan Bay Area 2050 Comment Letter
• Attachment C: Plan Bay Area 2050 Draft Blueprint Documents (July 2020)
Date: August 9, 2020
Housing Methodology Committee (HMC) Members, info@bayareametro.gov
ABAG Regional Housing Needs Allocation Staff, RHNA@bayareametro.gov
Re: City of Palo Alto Initial Comments on 6th Cycle RHNA Methodology Options
Thank you, Committee members, for your time, expertise and commitment to designing a methodology
that fairly distributes housing in our region.
The City of Palo Alto requests that the Housing Methodology Committee recommend use of the 2019
existing households as a baseline allocation for the RHNA methodology and continue its review of an
appropriate mix of weighted factors using up to a 150% Income Shift multiplier to distribute new housing
units across the region.
The alternative baseline approach being considered by the Committee is unattainable for some Bay Area
jurisdictions and the imposition of this standard ensures some communities will dramatically fail to meet
their housing obligation. While those communities will need to contend with that result, including
implications associated with SB35, the risk is also that the region as a whole will produce far less housing
than it otherwise could achieve.
Plan Bay Area 2050 is a long range plan that requires significant economic investment and an
extraordinary amount of regional policy collaboration to implement its vision. Building a methodology
today that is actionable over the next eight years and relies on an idealized model depicting a regional
housing distribution thirty years from now ignores the reality that the infrastructure, funding and local
regulatory framework is simply not yet present to achieve this goal.
Palo Alto supports the regional efforts of Plan Bay Area 2050 and commends agency leadership and staff
for their tireless work to create a framework for our future. Palo Alto is a partner in this endeavor and
recognizes its role to stimulate more housing – especially more equitable and inclusive housing for all. At
the same time, Palo Alto cannot reasonably be expected to increase its housing supply by more than 50%
over the next eight years, as would be required under some early modeling results that use the Draft
Blueprint as a baseline.
There will be three and a half regional housing need cycles before the region meets the horizon year of
Plan Bay Area 2050. It is imperative that the RHNA methodology be used to shift local policies toward a
more inclusive and better balanced future to achieve housing equity and environmental goals. This RHNA
methodology needs to bridge where we are today as a region with where we want to go tomorrow.
Using the 2019 existing households as a baseline reflects where we are today, shares the responsibility
for adding more housing units throughout the region and is consistent with, but not dependent upon Plan
Bay Area 2050. Moreover, weighted factors can be used that stretch communities toward our housing,
transportation and environmental goals.
Thank you for your consideration,
Ed Shikada, City Manager
[MONTH ##], 2020
RECIPIENT
ADDRESS
CITY, STATE ZIP
Via E-mail to: info@planbayarea.org
RE: Comments on Plan Bay Area 2050 Draft Blueprint
Dear Chair Arreguin,
The City of Palo Alto wants to express gratitude for the exceptional long-range planning work
that staff, under the leadership and direction of the Executive Committee, have performed to
develop Plan Bay Area 2050, the Draft Blueprint, and other associated reports and documents.
The effort aims to ensure that by the year 2050, that the Bay Area is affordable, connected,
diverse, healthy, and vibrant for all.
As partners in realizing this vision, please accept the following comments on the draft Plan Bay
Area 2050 Blueprint:
• Request a time extension from appropriate regulatory bodies and statues in order to
provide more time to complete Plan Bay Area 2050.
While the COVID-19 pandemic has not eliminated the housing crisis in the State or region,
the impacts of COVID-19 on population growth and job growth remain to be seen. While
working to address the housing crisis is absolutely necessary, conducting long-range
planning processes for a thirty-year cycle may be unwise given the unknown impact of
COVID-19 on critical variables. A temporary extension of the timeline may provide
sufficient time to gather data, for circumstances to change so that the Plan is more useful
to the region and to jurisdictions.
Furthermore, smaller cities like Palo Alto are reeling from the impacts of COVID-19,
which continue to unfold. Insisting the long range planning process unfold unabated is
out of sync with the demands the global pandemic has placed on residents, elected
leaders, and staff. In this context, 30 days to review and respond to Plan Bay Area 2050
is insufficient. The outreach efforts are extensive, but the time frame is insufficient.
• Revise the near term projections and long-term projections to accurately integrate the
impacts of COVID-19 into the long-range model.
The Horizon Initiative “stress tested” Plan Bay Area strategies against a wide range of
external forces and commend the foresight to conduct such a planning exercise, the
results of which have informed the Draft Blueprint. The Horizon Initiative, however, falls
far short of the type of long-range planning required for a regional response to the
pandemic. Failing to specifically integrate the ongoing crisis into the near-term of the
forecast is a disservice to the millions of households suffering due to the pandemic. The
impact of the current recessionary period will stretch into the next decade, as the
Blueprint rightly notes. It is unclear how ABAG/MTC staff draw the conclusion that the
effects of the pandemic essentially wear off by 2030 and the region returns to the
forecasted growth trend.
It is unclear what underlying assumptions lead to this conclusion and whether a
traditional recessionary analysis is preferable given we are currently experiencing large-
scale, and long-term telecommuting. It is not clear if the assumptions include a
foreclosure and/or eviction crisis coupled with massive unemployment and the closure of
thousands of small business and the associated elimination of both wealth and livelihoods
for many throughout the Bay Area. The interest of Palo Alto isn’t to foretell doom from
the pandemic, but rather encourage that long-range regional planning pause to more
thoughtfully and collaboratively consider the compound impacts of this crisis--which
really is the genesis of several crises. Many Bay Area families and communities may not
fully recover from these crises for decades to come.
• Update telecommuting projections.
Telecommuting may be a long-term impact of COVID-19. Many businesses and
institutions are, out of necessity, finding ways to shift operations to completely or mostly
remote operations. In particular, large employers have shifted to remote operations.
Once the pandemic subsides--which could be as long as two years from its inception—
many employers may continue a portion of their operations remotely. The potential is
very real that telecommuting could represent a large share of jobs, and thus a reduction
in the number of commuters and a shift in where jobs are located.
Palo Alto encourages ABAG and MTC to work with CARB to increase the level of
telecommuting above 14%. Palo Alto also requests that increased telecommuting be
used to forecast shifts in housing demand, decrease in office demand. This adjustment
in the model could occur even if 14% needs to be the CARB initiated limit for calculating
potential decreases in greenhouse gas emissions. We would like to know how close the
Shelter In Place telecommuting levels bring us to meeting the greenhouse gas emission
reductions and addressing the regional job/housing imbalance.
Further, Palo Alto suggests that increasing telecommuting become a key separate
strategy in the Blueprint; it is a strategy the Bay Area can pursue in order to meet our
climate action goals and decrease greenhouse gas emissions, which are not currently met
by the draft Blueprint.
• Revise the Growth Geographies to more accurately represent the accessibility and
proximity of transit to adjacent neighborhoods.
The Growth Geographies show a ½ mile radius around transit stations and bus stops.
While this is meant to indicate an ability to access transit expediently, the reality is that
this might not always be the case. These transit-oriented growth geographies may not
accurately represent the accessibility of transit in Palo Alto. In many locations, the
Caltrain tracks create a physical barrier meaning that a transit stop is not within a ½ mile
of a residence, office, or retail location. Furthermore, electrification of the Caltrain system
will increase the frequency of train service and diminish the ability of transit users to cross
the tracks and access the transit stops. The Growth Geographies must take a more
nuanced, user-centered approach to indicating what areas are truly proximate to
transit.
• Revise and refine the definition of transit rich areas and include a more user-centered
view of transit use.
The transit-rich growth geographies include proximity to some high-speed and high-
capacity transit, such as the Downtown Palo Alto and California Avenue Caltrain stations.
The remainder of the Palo Alto Growth Geographies rely on bus service provided by the
Valley Transportation Authority. While headways along some of these routes can be 15-
minutes or less during peak times, we challenge the inclusion of these bus routes in the
definition of transit rich areas.
First, the off-peak capacity of these lines do not provide sufficient service to potential
residents of housing units along these transit lines. In off-peak times, these residents may
still need and/or use vehicles, which will lead to greater greenhouse gas emissions and
traffic increases. Secondly, changes to the service may occur. Recently, despite local
objection, VTA changed and decreased service to Palo Alto highlighting a concern about
the reliability of such service its ability to meet the needs of future car-light residents.
• Confirm the accuracy of underlying data used to map Growth Geographies.
The City of Palo Alto seeks confirmation in writing that information provided to ABAG and
MTC staff has been received and incorporated into the model and mapping for Growth
Geographies. This information includes locations and dimensions of historic districts,
areas zoned for single-family homes, location of Priority Development Areas, transit
services, and other information. In addition, Palo Alto wants to ensure the Growth
Geographies in nearby unincorporated Santa Clara County are not part of Palo Alto’s
growth geographies.
In particular, Palo Alto wants to ensure that newly designated Priority Conservation
Areas are taken into account when creating Growth Geographies. A large portion of
Palo Alto’s acreage consists of protected open spaces; these areas cannot be envisioned
for housing and/or job growth.
• Model the office development cap instituted in Palo Alto. Job growth numbers should
consider the fact that Palo Alto has adopted restrictions on the annual amount of office
growth that can occur in Palo Alto. The purpose of this cap is to decrease the jobs/housing
imbalance locally. Communities like Palo Alto and San Francisco that proactively seek to
address their jobs/housing imbalance through local policies should not be subjected to
projected job growth that is out of synch with local policies.
• Explain the distinction and overlap between the methodologies used to create Plan Bay
Area 2050 versus the methodologies used by the Department of Finance and the
Housing and Community Development Department to generate the regional housing
need determination.
Department of Finance (DOF) and Housing and Community Development (HCD) prepared
projections for population growth and growth in households. Palo Alto staff understand
that MTC/ABAG staff also prepared industry/employment, population by age and ethnic
characteristics, and household/occupancy/income information for incorporation into the
growth forecast for the region and into small area analysis. The Plan Bay Area 2050
Regional Growth Forecast Methodology was presented to the ABAG Executive Board in
2019. At that time the staff memo indicated that further public input would be requested
during the 2020 outreach on the Draft Blueprint. However, the latest methodology
information was not included in detail at any of three public presentations during the
week of July 7, 2020. Toward providing helpful comments on the Draft Blueprint, City staff
would appreciate an overview of the aforementioned methodologies used by DOF/HCD
and by MTC/ABAG staff and to understand how they are similar or different in their inputs
and assumptions.
• Palo Alto requests more specific data regarding how ABAG/MTC determined the jobs
growth in the plan. With this information, Palo Alto and other jurisdictions can offer more
feedback regarding how the job growth projections may be refined.
• Explain if or how policies, such as SB 35 Streamlining, were factored into models and
methodologies. MTC/ABAG staff included streamlining of housing projects in draft
strategy for public consideration in 2019. City staff would like to know how SB35 status
or other streamlining was or was not included in methodology assumptions for local
jurisdictions.
Strategies & Objectives
• The City supports inclusion of strategies that move jobs toward housing rich areas. All
jurisdictions need to support Bay Area residents with employment diversity and options.
By distributing jobs across the Bay Area, the region can decrease commute times,
decrease greenhouse gas emissions, and increase the resiliency of jurisdictions. Such
distribution strategies could be achieved through office caps in jobs-rich areas, while
other jurisdictions might incentivize office and job center development.
• The City supports frontloading those strategies that best respond to COVID-19, including
those that advance safe bicycle and pedestrian facilities, advance renter protections,
advance strategies for childcare which in turn could help essential workers, and advance
protecting much-needed open space. The pandemic has made clear the need to address
these issues in the near term in order to support households and put the Bay Area back
on track for a growing and expanding economy.
Transportation
• The City of Palo Alto supports the following transportation strategies:
o Operate and Maintain the Existing System.
o Enable Seamless Mobility with Unified Trip Planning and Fare Payments.
o Reform Regional Transit Fare Policy.
o Build a Complete Streets Network.
o Advance Regional Vision Zero Policy through Street Design and Reduced Speeds.
o Advance Low-Cost Transit Projects.
Economic
• The City of Palo Alto supports the following economic strategies:
o Expand Childcare Support for Low-Income Families.
o Create Incubator Programs in Economically-Challenged Areas.
o Retain Key Industrial Lands through Establishment of Priority Production Areas.
Housing
• The City of Palo Alto supports the following housing strategies:
o Fund Affordable Housing Protection, Preservation, and Production.
o Require 10 to 20 Percent of New Housing to be Affordable.
Environmental
• The City of Palo Alto supports the following environmental strategies:
o Adapt to Sea Level Rise.
o Modernize Existing Buildings with Seismic, Wildfire, Drought, and Energy
Retrofits.
o Maintain Urban Growth Boundaries.
o Protect High-Value Conservation Lands.
o Expand the Climate Initiatives Program.
Thank you for your time and attention to these suggestions, comments, and requests for further
information. To follow up on and/or respond to the content of this correspondence, please reach
out to Jonathan Lait, Director of Planning and Development Services for the City of Palo Alto. You
can reach Mr. Lait at Jonathan.Lait@CityofPaloAlto.org or at (650) 329-2679.
Sincerely,
Adrian Fine
Mayor of Palo Alto
CC:
City Council members
Dave Vautin, Assistant Director, Major Plans, Bay Area Metro via DVautin@bayareametro.gov
Paul Fassinger, Regional Planning Program, Bay Area Metro, via pfassinger@bayareametro.gov
Metropolitan Transportation Commission and the Association of Bay Area Governments Regional Advisory Working Group
July 7, 2020 Agenda Item 2
Plan Bay Area 2050 Draft Blueprint: Key Findings
Subject: Presentation on the findings from the Draft Blueprint analysis, highlights
successes and shortcomings, in advance of stakeholder workshops later this month.
Background: Regional Advisory Working Group Agenda Item 2, Plan Bay Area 2050 Draft Blueprint: Key Findings, is attached. This report will be presented to the Joint
MTC Planning Committee with the ABAG Administrative Committee on July 10, 2020.
Staff will be at your July 7, 2020 meeting to discuss this report. The Working Group’s input is requested.
Attachments: Agenda Item 4a from the July 10, 2020 Joint MTC Planning Committee with the ABAG Administrative Committee meeting
Metropolitan Transportation Commission and the Association of Bay Area Governments Joint MTC Planning Committee with the ABAG Administrative Committee
July 10, 2020 Agenda Item 4a
Plan Bay Area 2050 Draft Blueprint: Key Findings
Subject: Presentation on the findings from the Draft Blueprint analysis, highlighting successes and shortcomings in advance of stakeholder workshops later this month.
Background: Approved for further analysis by MTC and ABAG in February 2020, the Draft Blueprint is the “first draft” of Plan Bay Area 2050, integrating 25 resilient and equitable strategies from the predecessor Horizon initiative. Horizon tested strategies against a wide range of external forces, exploring which policies and
investments were best prepared for an uncertain future – from rising telecommute
levels to economic boom & bust cycles to consumer preference shifts. The Plan Bay Area 2050 Draft Blueprint weaves together these transportation, housing, economic, and environmental strategies – as highlighted in Attachment
B – alongside an expanded set of growth geographies to advance critical climate
and equity goals. Designed to accommodate the 1.5 million new homes necessary to house future growth and address overcrowding, as well as 1.4 million new jobs, the Draft Blueprint integrates strategies to address our severe and longstanding housing crisis. With infrastructure investments in walking, biking, and public
transportation – as well as sea level protections designed to keep most Bay Area
communities from flooding through 2050 – the Draft Blueprint makes meaningful steps towards the adopted Plan Bay Area 2050 Vision. In line with the Plan Vision, this memorandum includes some key highlights as
well as key challenges, organized by the five Guiding Principles – to ensure a
more affordable, connected, diverse, healthy, and vibrant Bay Area for all. For additional detail on the specific metrics – forecasted outcomes for equity & performance – please refer to Attachment C. Highlights of
Draft Blueprint: The Plan Bay Area 2050 Draft Blueprint goes well beyond what was included in
the current long-range regional plan, Plan Bay Area 2040. Notable highlights from the analysis conducted over the past four months include:
• Improving Affordability for All: For a typical household, the cost burden for
housing and transportation as a share of income declines by 9 points between
2015 and 2050. Reductions are even greater for low-income households – a decline of 26 points – with means-based fares and tolls yielding further dividends in advancing equity goals.
• Expanding Housing Opportunities for Low-Income Residents. With
robust regional measures in play – as well as an expanded inclusionary zoning strategy – the Draft Blueprint includes funding capacity for the construction of over 400,000 permanently-affordable homes through 2050.
• Focusing Growth in Walkable, Transit-Rich Communities. The majority
of future housing and job growth is located in walkable communities with frequent transit; the Final Blueprint may make further performance gains via additional transit strategies under consideration for the Final Blueprint.
Joint MTC Planning Committee with the ABAG Administrative Committee Agenda Item 4a July 10, 2020 Page 2 of 3
• Saving Lives and Protecting Communities. Reduced speed limits and roadway redesigns help play a critical role in saving thousands of lives through 2050, even as more progress is needed to achieve Vision Zero goals. Investments in sea level rise infrastructure saves 98 percent of at-risk homes through 2050, and funding for seismic home retrofits protects 100 percent of
homes at high risk of damage.
• Positioning the Region for Robust Economic Growth. Despite over $200 billion in new taxes in the decades ahead to pay for the bold strategies approved in February 2020, Bay Area businesses are forecasted to rebound
robustly, with per-capita gross regional product soaring by 65% through 2050. Challenges for Final Blueprint: While the Draft Blueprint strategies make meaningful headway on some of the region’s most critical policy issues, five key challenges remain in advancing the bold vision of Plan Bay Area 2050. These challenges will be the focus of our
outreach and engagement this summer, as we consider how to make the Blueprint
even more resilient and equitable in preparation for an uncertain future:
• Challenge #1: Affordable Guiding Principle. While the Draft Blueprint funds a considerable amount of deed-restricted affordable housing, hundreds
of thousands of existing low-income residents would still lack a permanently
affordable place to live. What strategies could we modify or advance to further increase production of homes affordable to lower-income residents, most importantly in High-Resource Areas with well-resourced schools and convenient access to jobs?
• Challenge #2: Connected Guiding Principle. While the Draft Blueprint
makes significant headway in improving access for drivers and transit riders compared to existing trends, traffic congestion and transit overcrowding remain significant challenges across the region. How can new or expanded strategies better address these key transportation issues?
• Challenge #3: Diverse Guiding Principle. While the Draft Blueprint focuses a sizable share of affordable housing in historically-exclusionary places in the Bay Area, displacement risk continues to rise, especially in Communities of Concern. How can new or expanded strategies reduce this risk of
displacement so more residents can remain in place?
• Challenge #4: Healthy Guiding Principle. While the Draft Blueprint includes robust protections for agricultural lands and communities vulnerable to sea level rise, the biggest challenge remaining relates to mitigating
greenhouse gas emissions (GHG). Given the magnitude of the gap between
Draft Blueprint performance and the state-mandated target, what strategies could we modify or expand to close this GHG gap in an equitable and sustainable manner?
Joint MTC Planning Committee with the ABAG Administrative Committee Agenda Item 4a July 10, 2020 Page 3 of 3
•Challenge #5: Vibrant Guiding Principle. While Bay Area businesses thrivein the Draft Blueprint, job growth remains relatively concentrated intraditional job centers such as Silicon Valley. Potentially impactful strategiessuch as office development caps were not included in the Draft Blueprintfollowing discussion at the Commission/Board workshop in January, and
more modest strategies such as impact fees led to positive yet limited effectsin shifting jobs to housing-rich communities, such as parts of AlamedaCounty. What additional strategies could be considered to shift jobs closer tothe region’s existing workforce?
Next Steps: Staff will now seek further input from the public, key stakeholders, and local
jurisdiction staff as part of summer 2020 engagement activities. Following a combination of virtual public workshops, telephone town halls, office hours, and non-digital engagement approaches, staff will return to this committee in September with a summary of feedback on Draft Blueprint strategies and
outcomes. Staff will also develop potential revisions to the strategies for the Final
Blueprint, with anticipated action also slated for September 2020. Following modeling and analysis of the Final Blueprint strategies this fall, MTC and ABAG will select a Preferred Alternative for the Plan Bay Area 2050 EIR by the end of 2020.
Recommendation: Information
Attachments: Attachment A: Presentation Attachment B: Draft Blueprint – Summary of Strategies (February 2020)
Attachment C: Draft Blueprint – Summary of Equity & Performance Outcomes
(July 2020)
Therese W. McMillan
Draft Blueprint:
Key Findings
July 2020
MTC/ABAG Regional Planning Program
Draft Blueprint:
Major Milestone for Plan Bay Area 2050
2
2019 20 20
Horizon
Public
Engagement
Horizon Plan Bay Area 2050
Technical
Analyses
Project
Performance
JULY 2020
Plan Bay Area 2050
2021
Scenario
Planning Futures Final
Report
Draft
Plan Document
Policy &
Advocacy
Perspective
Papers
Implementation
Plan
Other
Draft
Blueprint
Final
Blueprint
Final
Plan Document
Draft
EIR
Final
EIR
Forecast, Needs,
Revenues Prep
RHNA
Proposed Methodology
RHNA
Draft & Final Methodology
RHNA
Appeals, etc.
= Major Policy Board Decisions
The Draft Blueprint is built upon Horizon, which
tested visionary strategies for an uncertain future.
Horizon explored dozens of
bold strategies for the region’s
future, “stress testing” them
against a broad range of
external forces.
These included megaregional
trends, technological shifts,
and natural disasters, among
others.
3
Equity
Resilience
Strategies
prioritized
based upon:
Ultimately, some of the external forces our region
may face in the decades ahead make it harder to
achieve the regional vision.
4
Cost to drive
one mile
Market share of
autonomous
vehicles
Share of work from
home on typical day
Anticipated sea
level rise
Range Explored in Horizon Futures vs. Plan Bay Area 2050 Draft Blueprint
$0.10 per mile $0.40 per mile$0.19
per mile*
10%95%30% share
6%30%14% share
(~30% of office workers)
Examples of
External Forces (2050)
1 foot 3 feet2 feet SLR
+ flooding
Note: MTC/ABAG does not have independent authority to set external force levels for Plan
Bay Area 2050. CARB regulates these assumptions in the manner prescribed by SB 375.
* MTC/ABAG is specifically seeking a slightly higher
auto operating cost from CARB in summer 2020.
The Draft Blueprint integrates strategies to
make progress towards the regional vision, despite
the headwinds from external forces.
5
Vision: Ensure by the year 2050 that the Bay Area is affordable,
connected, diverse, healthy and vibrant for all.
•Transportation Strategies
•Housing Geographies & Strategies
•Economic Geographies & Strategies
•Environmental Strategies
6
A strategy is either a public policy or set of
investments that can be implemented in the Bay
Area over the next 30 years; a strategy is not a
near-term action or legislative proposal.
What do we mean by
“strategy”?
How many strategies
can we include in the
Blueprint?
Plan Bay Area 2050 must be fiscally constrained,
meaning that not every strategy can be integrated
into the Plan given finite revenues available.
Strategies in Plan Bay Area 2050 can be
implemented at the local, regional, or state
levels. Specific implementation actions and the
role for MTC/ABAG will be identified through a
collaborative process for the Implementation Plan
later this year.
Who would implement
these strategies?
Refresher: What is a strategy in the
context of Plan Bay Area 2050?
Picture of Public Outreach
Requesting from Graphics
7
3,000
comments at fall 2019
“pop-up” workshops
9,900
comments from Mayor of
Bayville online tool
90%
of comments at fall 2019
“pop-up” workshops
supported the strategies
advanced into Plan Bay
Area 2050 Blueprint
Maintain and
Optimize Existing
Infrastructure
Enhance Regional
and Local Transit
Create Healthy
and Safe Streets
Protect, Preserve, and
Produce More
Affordable Housing
Spur Housing
Production and Create
Inclusive Communities
Improve Economic
Mobility
Shift the Location of
Jobs
Draft Blueprint: 9 Themes and 25 Bold Strategies
Reduce Risks
from Hazards
Reduce Our Impact
on the Environment
25 Strategies
(Draft Blueprint Inputs)
8
Refer to Attachment B for details on
all 25 strategies in the Draft Blueprint.
Draft Blueprint: Highlights in the COVID-19 Era
While Plan Bay Area 2050 is a 30-year vision for the Bay Area, many of the strategies approved for
analysis by the Commission and ABAG Board in February have only become more timely, including…
Advancing thousands
of miles of safe bicycle
& pedestrian facilities
Integrating protections from
sudden rent hikes that
accelerate displacement
Protecting much-needed
open space for the
enjoyment of all residents
Prioritizing strategies for
essential workers, such as
childcare subsidies
HRAs
TRAs
PDAs
PPAs
Protect
Areas outside
Urban Growth
Boundaries
(including PCAs)
Unmitigated High Hazard
Areas
Priority Development
Areas (PDAs)
Priority Production
Areas (PPAs)
Transit-Rich
Areas* (TRAs):
Frequent Regional Rail
High-Resource
Areas* (HRAs)
* Applies to all jurisdictions except those that have already
nominated more than 50% of PDA-eligible areas
Prioritize
TRAs*:
All Other
10Note: some High-Resource Areas are also Transit-Rich Areas
Draft Blueprint: Expanded Growth Geographies
San
Francisco
San
Jose
Santa
Rosa
Walnut
CreekOakland
Palo
Alto
Fairfield
Draft Blueprint:New Revenues Required
11
Existing Revenues New Revenues Existing Revenues New Revenues Existing Revenues New Revenues Existing Revenues New Revenues
Note: some Transportation Element monies
were reserved for Final Blueprint, so not all
funds were expended in Draft Blueprint.
Note: as no Needs & Revenue work was done for
Economy Element, we do not have a baseline accounting
of local revenues for economic development.
Remaining Needs:
$397 billion unfunded need
for affordable housing
$3 billion in existing funding
$50 billion in new revenues
N/A in existing funding
$33 billion in new revenues
$103 billion in existing funding
$68 billion in new revenues
$463 billion in existing funding
$63 billion in new revenues
Transportation Element Housing Element Economy Element Environment Element
Draft Blueprint: How Did We Analyze It?
12
Strategies &
Growth Geographies
(February 2020 Approval
for Analysis)
Economic, Land Use,
and Transportation
Analysis & Modeling
(Spring 2020)
Performance
Metrics and
Growth Pattern
(July 2020 Release)
Baseline Data
(Zoning, Pipeline,
Growth Boundaries,
etc.)
Inputs
Inputs
Outcomes
What are the Potential
Outcomes of the Draft
Blueprint?
(in an uncertain future…)
14
Improved Affordability
Housing and transportation costs are significantly
reduced, especially for low-income residents.
More Permanently-Affordable Homes
New revenues enable a significant uptick in
production of deed-restricted affordable homes.
More Growth Near Transit
Most new homes are focused in walkable
communities with frequent transit service.
Draft Blueprint Highlights (1 of 2)
57%48%
in 2015 in 2050
% of household
income spent
on housing +
transportation
% of all housing
within ½ mile of
high-frequency
transit
32%43%
in 2015 in 2050
number of new
permanently-
affordable
homes
400,000+
by 2050
15
Lives Saved and Injuries Averted
Strategies to reduce vehicle speeds and build
protected bike/ped infrastructure save lives.
Greater Resilience to Hazards
Seismic retrofits and sea level rise infrastructure
protect thousands of homes from damage.
Robust Economic Growth
Despite significant tax increases to pay for new
strategies, Bay Area businesses continue to thrive.
Draft Blueprint Highlights (2 of 2)
>1,500
through 2050
fatalities avoided due
to Draft Blueprint
strategies
% of homes at
risk protected
growth in gross
regional product per
capita (constant $)
+65%
by 2050
100%
from quake
98%
from SLR
The Draft Blueprint accommodates the needs of future
residents by addressing historical underproduction of housing.
7.7
4.0
2.7 2.7
10.3
5.4
4.0 4.3
Population Employment Households Housing Units
2015
2020
2025
2030
2035
2040
2045
2050
Year
16
in millions
+2.7 million
2015 to 2050
in millions
+1.4 million
2015 to 2050
in millions
+1.4 million
2015 to 2050
in millions
+1.5 million
2015 to 2050
Regional Growth Forecast: Bay Area Integrating COVID-19/Recession Impacts between 2020 and 2030
Figures may not appear to exactly sum due to rounding.
Draft Blueprint: Housing Growth Pattern
17
Plan Bay Area 2040: 2010 to 2040
+0.8 million new households
Draft Blueprint: 2015 to 2050
+1.3 million new households
31%
17%
7%
23%
12%
3%
4%
1%
1%
41%
10%
10%
19%
8%
3%
6%
2%
1%
KEY GROWTH STATISTICS
46% in Big 3 Cities
33% in Bayside Cities
21% in Inland/Coastal/Delta
77% in Priority Development Areas
61% in Transit-Rich Areas
22% in High-Resource Areas
For breakdowns on the subcounty level, please refer to Attachment C. Totals do not always sum to 100% due to rounding.
County’s share of regional
growth, sized based upon total
number of new households
MAP LEGEND
X%
KEY GROWTH STATISTICS
41% in Big 3 Cities
37% in Bayside Cities
22% in Inland/Coastal/Delta
70% in Priority Development Areas
70% in Transit-Rich Areas
29% in High-Resource Areas
County’s share of regional
growth, sized based upon total
number of new households
MAP LEGEND
X%
Draft Blueprint: Jobs Growth Pattern
Plan Bay Area 2040: 2010 to 2040
+1.3 million new jobs
Draft Blueprint: 2015 to 2050
+1.4 million new jobs
30%
23%
10%
19%
11%
1%
1%
44%
13%
19%
8%
2%
0%
18
2%
3%
3%
KEY GROWTH STATISTICS
44% in Big 3 Cities
40% in Bayside Cities
17% in Inland/Coastal/Delta
55% in Priority Development Areas
59% in Transit-Rich Areas
25% in High-Resource Areas
County’s share of regional
growth, sized based upon
total number of new jobs
MAP LEGEND
X%
KEY GROWTH STATISTICS
49% in Big 3 Cities
35% in Bayside Cities
16% in Inland/Coastal/Delta
42% in Priority Development Areas
50% in Transit-Rich Areas
19% in High-Resource Areas
County’s share of regional
growth, sized based upon
total number of new jobs
MAP LEGEND
X%
For breakdowns on the subcounty level, please refer to Attachment C. Totals do not always sum to 100% due to rounding.
10%
3%
Draft Blueprint: Commute Mode Choices
19
19
75%
Auto
14%
Transit
5%
Walk + Bike
6%
Work from Home
58%
Auto
20%
Transit
8%
Walk + Bike
14%
Work from Home
2015 2050 Blueprint
Draft Blueprint: Sea Level Rise Protections
20
Plan Bay Area 2050: 2015 to 2050
+89,000 housing units protected 89,000
units protected
98%
100%97%
91%
94%
100%
94%
Circles and percentages show where
housing units are protected by the sea
level rise strategy. Circle size represents
the number of units protected.
70%
100%
All major highway and
rail corridors protected
at 2 feet of sea level riseTransportation
Environment
Housing
100,000
acres of marsh adaptation projects
166,000
jobs protected
10,000
jobs still at risk
Jobs
2,000
units still at risk
-4%*
PBA40
21
-15%
Plan Bay Area 2040
-15% per-capita
Previous CARB Target
-19% per-cap.
New Target
Updated
Assumptions
-15%
Remaining Gap
Previous
Assumptions
Updated
Assumptions
Low cost to drive
Moderate cost to drive
-10%
Remaining Gap
-9%
Draft Blueprint
Updated
Assumptions
Low cost to drive
-7%
Remaining Gap
-12%*
Draft Blueprint
Updated
Assumptions
Moderate cost to drive
* = approximated effect of higher auto operating cost based upon past analyses
-18%
Remaining Gap
Draft Blueprint: GHG
-1%
PBA40
How Does the Draft
Blueprint Align with
Guiding Principles?
Overarching Finding:
The Draft Blueprint strategies
excel in ensuring future growth is
more equitable and resilient than
past generations. However,
righting the wrongs of the 20th
century would require even
bolder action.
Staff developed 10 evaluation questions -two for each
Guiding Principle -based upon feedback from
stakeholder workshops in fall 2019 and winter 2020.
Evaluating the Draft Blueprint
Refer to Attachment C for all the
metrics, including breakdowns by
income level.
•Will Bay Area residents spend less on housing and transportation?
•Will the Bay Area produce and preserve more affordable housing?
•Will Bay Area residents be able to access their destinations more easily?
•Will Bay Area residents have a transportation system they can rely on?
•Will Bay Area communities be more inclusive?
•Will Bay Area residents be able to stay in place?
•Will Bay Area residents be healthier and safer?
•Will the environment of the Bay Area be healthier and safer?
•Will jobs and housing in the Bay Area be more evenly distributed?
•Will Bay Area businesses thrive?
•Will Bay Area residents spend less on housing and transportation?
Yes, with greater reductions for lower-income households.
•This will be the first Plan Bay Area that actually reduces housing
cost burden, especially for lower-income households.
•Means-based tolls are effective in mitigating most equity impacts,
whereas means-based fares lead to cost burden reductions for low-
income transit riders.
•Will the Bay Area produce and preserve more affordable housing?
Yes, but it remains short of existing regional needs.
•The Draft Blueprint has sufficient funding to permanently protect
existing deed-restricted units and to produce approximately enough
new units for all low-income household growth through 2050.
25
Key Findings: A More Affordable Bay Area
Key Challenge for Final Blueprint: How do we further increase production of
homes affordable to lower-income residents, especially in High-Resource Areas?
•Will Bay Area residents be able to access their destinations more easily?
Yes for transit, no for auto.
•Access to jobs improves for public transit, particularly in Communities of
Concern, thanks to bus and BART investments in the Draft Blueprint.
•Rising traffic congestion, combined with reduced speed limits, play a role in
reducing automobile access to destinations.
•Will Bay Area residents have a transportation system they can rely on?
Depends on the highway corridor and transit operator.
•Means-based tolls help reduce congestion on key corridors, but toll rates are
insufficient to mitigate all impacts of a growing population.
•While the New Transbay Rail Crossing addresses Transbay capacity
constraints, transit crowding challenges continue to grow elsewhere,
especially on express buses and rail systems.
26
Key Findings: A More Connected Bay Area
Key Challenge for Final Blueprint: How can new or expanded strategies
better address traffic congestion and transit overcrowding?
•Will Bay Area communities be more inclusive?
Only High-Resource Areas become more inclusive.
•Reducing barriers to housing production in High-Resource Areas
allows for an increase in the amount of deed-restricted affordable
housing in historically-exclusive areas.
•However, many Transit-Rich Areas are at risk of gentrification, as the
Blueprint forecasts an increasingly wealthy demographic profile.
•Will Bay Area residents be able to stay in place?
Not over the long-term without further mitigations.
•Low-income residents continue to be at a high risk of displacement,
especially in Communities of Concern; robust renter protections do
not provide meaningful long-term relief.
27
Key Findings: A More Diverse Bay Area
Key Challenge for Final Blueprint: How can we reduce risk of displacement so
more residents can remain in place?
•Will Bay Area residents be healthier and safer? Yes, but more gains
are needed for road safety.
•Nearly all homes at risk of sea level rise are protected by Draft
Blueprint resilience investments.
•While reduced speed limits save more than 1,500 lives through 2050,
expanded strategies would be required to reach Vision Zero.
•Will the environment of the Bay Area be healthier and safer? Yes,
but more reductions are needed for greenhouse gas emissions (GHG).
•While the Draft Blueprint strategies make significant headway, a
concerted effort in the Final Blueprint will be necessary if the Bay
Area intends to close the sizeable remaining gap.
28
Key Findings: A Healthier Bay Area
Key Challenge for Final Blueprint: How do we close the greenhouse gas
emissions gap in a sustainable and equitable manner?
•Will jobs and housing be more balanced? It depends.
•Higher-income jobs continue to cluster in Silicon Valley, even as
workers may choose to work from home multiple days per week.
•While job centers like San Francisco and Silicon Valley become
more balanced, housing-rich communities in the East Bay and
North Bay see more limited job growth.
•Will Bay Area businesses thrive? Yes, select industries are
anticipated to see robust growth.
•The Bay Area economy is projected to rebound robustly in the
decades ahead; additional tax measures enable some of these
gains to more equitably shared by all Bay Area residents.
29
Key Findings: A More Vibrant Bay Area
Key Challenge for Final Blueprint: How could more ambitious strategies be
employed to shift jobs closer to the region’s workforce?
How do we further increase production of
homes affordable to lower-income residents,
especially in High-Resource Areas?
How can new or expanded strategies better
address traffic congestion and transit
overcrowding?
How can we reduce risk of displacement so
more residents can remain in place?
How do we close the greenhouse gas
emissions gap in a sustainable and equitable
manner?
How could more ambitious strategies be
employed to shift jobs closer to the region’s
workforce?
5 Key Challenges for Final Blueprint -Seeking Solutions!
A larger regional
measure for
affordable
housing?
More strategic
investment in
High-Resource
Areas?
New strategies
related to
regional rail &
express bus?
More funding for
bike &
pedestrian
infrastructure?
Redesign transit
system with key
timed transfers?
Supportive
services in
Communities of
Concern?
50%
telecommute
mandate for big
employers?
Exponentially
grow regional
subsidies for
EVs?
Require GHG
offsets for all
highway
projects?
Office
development
caps in West &
South Bay?
Expand jobs-
housing impact
fees?
Expanded
affordability
requirements in
new TODs?
More affordable
housing in
Transit-Rich
Areas?
Reform on-and
off-street
parking policies?
More corridors
with means-
based all-lane
tolling?
Workforce
training
programs?
Tax subsidies to
woo major
employers?
Support for
modular housing
and lower-cost
techniques?
Pilot universal
basic income?
30
31
Listening and Learning from CBO Focus Groups
Time transfers so they
actually work for
people, especially
those with disabilities!
There are barriers to
applying for housing,
such as having a
criminal record.
This is not just
about jobs but about
what kind of jobs.
Any greening of the
community will
cause gentrification
and displacement.
10 to 20 percent
affordable housing is
simply not
sufficient.
Highlighted Quotes
from Spring 2020
Listening Sessions
on Draft Blueprint
A more comprehensive
report on Public Engagement
activities is slated for
September 2020.
Transitioning to the Final
Blueprint Phase:
Seeking Input from the Bay Area!
33
9
county-specific
virtual public
workshops
5
telephone town
halls
Also:
•Office hours
•Flyers/surveys
•Listening line
•Official comment period
•Statistically-valid poll
3
virtual
stakeholder
workshops
7
focus groups in
community
organizations
Upcoming
Summer 2020
Blueprint
Engagement
Looking for Input:
How can we address these remaining challenges in the Final Blueprint?
34
Final Blueprint
Modify strategy
Add strategy
Remove strategy
•We look forward to getting input from elected
officials, the public, and stakeholder organizations
on equitable and resilient strategies to advance
the Plan Vision of an affordable, connected,
diverse, healthy, and vibrant Bay Area.
•We’ve already started this process with the
Transportation Element -projects with
performance challenges were identified early
and project sponsors have made commitments to
address many of them. Work on this strand
continues through September -but transportation
projects are just one small piece of the puzzle.
What’s Next?
•Release of Draft Blueprint
•Virtual Workshops & EngagementJuly
•Close of Blueprint Comment Period
•Strategy Refinements for Final BlueprintMid-August
•Report Out on Public & Stakeholder Engagement
•MTC/ABAG Action on Final Blueprint Strategies & GeographiesSeptember
•Release of Final Blueprint
•MTC/ABAG Action on Preferred Alternative for Plan Bay Area 2050 EIRDecember
35
Questions/Comments?
For more information: refer to
Attachments B and C in your packet or
go to planbayarea.org.
Contact info: Dave Vautin,
dvautin@bayareametro.gov
36
Bay Area Metro Center375 Beale SteetSanFrancisco, CA 94105
415.778.6700info@bayareametro.govabag.ca.gov | mtc.ca.gov
HELP US DRAFT THE BLUEPRINT.
WHAT IS THE PLAN?
Plan Bay Area 2050 is the long-range plan now being developed by the Metropolitan
Transportation Commission and the Association of Bay Area Governments to
guide the growth of our nine-county region for the next generation. Scheduled for
completion in 2021, the Plan will integrate strategies for transportation, housing,
the environment and the economy and lead the Bay Area toward a future that is
affordable, connected, diverse, healthy, and vibrant for all by 2050.
DRAFTING THE
BLUEPRINT
WHAT IS THE DRAFT BLUEPRINT? WHAT IS A “STRATEGY”?WHO IMPLEMENTS THESE STRATEGIES?
Creating the Blueprint is the first step
toward developing Plan Bay Area
2050. The Draft Blueprint integrates
25 equitable and resilient proposed
strategies from the Horizon initiative
and offers bold solutions to address
nine primary objectives across key
areas including: transportation, housing,
the environment and the economy.
A strategy is either a public policy
or set of investments that can be
implemented in the Bay Area over the
next 30 years. A strategy is not a near-
term action, a mandate for a jurisdiction
or agency, or a legislative proposal. In
addition, because Plan Bay Area 2050
must be fiscally constrained, not every
strategy can be integrated into the Plan
given finite available revenues.
Strategies in Plan Bay Area 2050 can
be implemented at the local, regional,
or state levels. Specific implementation
actions and the role for MTC/ABAG will
be identified through a collaborative
process for the Implementation Plan
in late 2020. See inside to learn more
about the Draft Blueprint’s objectives
and proposed strategies.
WHAT REQUIREMENTS MUST THE PLAN MEET?
Among many statutory requirements, the Plan must be fiscally constrained and rely on reasonably expected revenues;
it must meet or exceed a 19 percent per-capita GHG reduction target for light-duty vehicles by 2035; and it must plan
for sufficient housing at all income levels.
WHAT ABOUT PUBLIC INPUT? WHAT’S NEXT?
In addition to robust analysis conducted as part of the Horizon initiative and ongoing feedback from elected officials,
thousands of comments from Bay Area residents and stakeholders helped define and refine the 25 proposed Blueprint
strategies. Staff will now conduct a detailed analysis and report back on outcomes from the Draft Blueprint strategies
this spring. Planned public engagement will provide additional opportunities for strategies and projects to be revised and
integrated into the Final Blueprint, with the Final Blueprint scheduled for completion later in 2020.
Attachment B
Agenda Item 4a
Bay Area Metro Center375 Beale SteetSanFrancisco, CA 94105
415.778.6700info@bayareametro.govabag.ca.gov | mtc.ca.gov
DRAFT BLUEPRINT STRATEGIES
OBJECTIVES TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIES
2. Create Healthy
and Safe Streets Build a Complete Streets Network. Enhance streets to promote walking, biking, and other
micromobility through sidewalk improvements and 7,000 miles of bike lanes or multi-use paths.
Advance Regional Vision Zero Policy through Street Design and Reduced Speeds. Reduce
speed limits to 25 to 35 miles per hour on local streets and 55 miles per hour on freeways,
relying on design elements on local streets and automated speed enforcement on freeways.
1. Maintain and
Optimize Existing
Infrastructure
Operate and Maintain the Existing System. Commit to operate and maintain the Bay
Area’s roads and transit infrastructure, while ensuring that all Priority Development Areas
have sufficient transit service levels.
Enable Seamless Mobility with Unified Trip Planning and Fare Payments. Develop a unified
platform for trip planning and fare payment to enable more seamless journeys.
Reform Regional Transit Fare Policy. Streamline fare payment and replace existing operator-
specific discounted fare programs with an integrated fare structure across all transit operators.
Implement Per-Mile Tolling on Congested Freeways with Transit Alternatives. Apply a
per-mile charge on auto travel on select highly-congested freeway corridors where transit
alternatives exist, with discounts for carpoolers, low-income residents, and off-peak travel,
with excess revenues reinvested into transit alternatives in the corridor.
3. Enhance Regional
and Local Transit Advance Low-Cost Transit Projects. Complete a limited set of transit projects that performed
well in multiple futures and require limited regional dollars to reach fully-funded status.
Build a New Transbay Rail Crossing. Address overcrowded conditions during peak
commute periods and add system redundancy by adding a new Transbay rail crossing
connecting the East Bay and San Francisco.
5. Shift the Location
of Jobs Allow Greater Commercial Densities in Growth Geographies. Allow greater densities for new
commercial development in select Priority Development Areas and select Transit-Rich Areas
to encourage more jobs to locate near public transit.
Assess Transportation Impact Fees on New Office Developments. Apply expanded county-
specific fees on new office development that reflects associated transportation impacts.
Assess Jobs-Housing Imbalance Fees on New Office Developments. Apply a regional jobs-
housing linkage fee to generate funding for affordable housing when new office development
occurs in job-rich places, thereby incentivizing more jobs to locate in housing-rich places.
OBJECTIVES ECONOMIC STRATEGIES
4. Improve
Economic Mobility
Expand Childcare Support for Low-Income Families. Provide a 50 percent childcare
subsidy to low-income households with children under 5, enabling more parents with
young children to remain in (or to enter) the workforce.
Create Incubator Programs in Economically-Challenged Areas. Fund pre-incubation
services or technical assistance for establishing a new business, as well as access to
workspaces, and mentorship and financing in disadvantaged communities.
Retain Key Industrial Lands through Establishment of Priority Production Areas.
Implement local land use policies to protect key industrial lands identified as Priority
Production Areas, including preservation of industrial zoning.
Attachment B
Agenda Item 4a
Bay Area Metro Center375 Beale SteetSanFrancisco, CA 94105
415.778.6700info@bayareametro.govabag.ca.gov | mtc.ca.gov
DRAFTING THE
BLUEPRINT
OBJECTIVES HOUSING STRATEGIES
6. Spur HousingProduction andCreate InclusiveCommunities
Allow a Greater Mix of Housing Types and Densities in Growth Areas. Allow a variety
of housing types at a range of densities to be built in Priority Development Areas, select
Transit-Rich Areas, and select High-Resource Areas.
Reduce Barriers to Housing Near Transit and in Areas of High Opportunity. Reduce
parking requirements, project review times, and impact fees for new housing in Transit-
Rich and High-Resource Areas, while providing projects exceeding inclusionary zoning
minimums even greater benefits.
Transform Aging Malls and Office Parks into Neighborhoods. Transform aging malls
and office parks into mixed-income neighborhoods by permitting new land uses and
significantly reducing development costs for eligible projects.
7. Protect, Preserve,
and Produce More
Affordable Housing
Fund Affordable Housing Protection, Preservation and Production. Raise an
additional $1.5 billion in new annual revenues to leverage federal, state, and local
sources to protect, preserve and produce deed-restricted affordable housing.
Require 10 to 20 Percent of New Housing to be Affordable. Require at least 10
percent to 20 percent of new housing developments of 5 units or more to be
affordable to low-income households, with the threshold defined by market
feasibility as well as access to opportunity and public transit.
Further Strengthen Renter Protections Beyond State Legislation. Building upon
recent tenant protection laws, limit annual rent increases to the rate of inflation,
while exempting units less than 10 years old.
OBJECTIVES ENVIRONMENTAL STRATEGIES
8. Reduce Risks
from Hazards Adapt to Sea Level Rise. Protect shoreline communities affected by sea level rise,
prioritizing areas of low costs and high benefits and providing additional support to
vulnerable populations.
Modernize Existing Buildings with Seismic, Wildfire, Drought, and Energy Retrofits.
Adopt new building ordinances and incentivize retrofits to bring existing buildings up to
higher seismic, wildfire, water and energy standards, providing means-based subsidies
to offset impacts.
9. Reduce Our Impact
on the Environment Maintain Urban Growth Boundaries. Using urban growth boundaries and other existing
environmental protections, confine new development within areas of existing development
or areas otherwise suitable for growth, as established by local jurisdictions.
Protect High-Value Conservation Lands. Provide strategic matching funds to help
conserve high-priority natural and agricultural lands, including but not limited to
Priority Conservation Areas.
Expand the Climate Initiatives Program. Expand MTC’s Climate Initiatives Program, which
includes investments in transportation demand management and electrification incentive
programs, while simultaneously working with the Air District and the State to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions for other transportation sectors.
Attachment B
Agenda Item 4a
@MTCBATA MTCBATA
@mtcbata #BayArea2050
TELL US WHAT YOU THINK!
ADVANCING EQUITY WITH BOLD STRATEGIES
Consistent regional means-based
discounts for fares and tolls.
Service frequency increases in
both high-ridership corridors and
in currently-undeserved PDAs.
Emphasis on growth in High-
Resource Areas to address the
legacy of race-based exclusion.
Prioritization of retrofit assistance
and sea level rise infrastructure in
lower-income communities.
Incubator programs and childcare
support designed to enable greater
economic mobility.
WINTERFALLSUMMERSPRING
• Release Draft Blueprint
Outcomes and Growth Pattern
• Revise Strategies for
Final Blueprint
• Stakeholder and
Public Workshops
• Adopt Final Blueprint
• Advance to
Environmental
Impact Report (EIR)
• Environment Analysis
MTC and ABAG will hold public workshops all around the Bay Area later in 2020 and invite you
to help shape the Plan Bay Area 2050 Blueprint. We want to find out what you – and your family,
friends, and neighbors – have to say about the 25 proposed strategies and how these strategies
could influence the way we will live, work and travel in the Bay Area over the next generation.
MTC and the ABAG Executive Board are scheduled to adopt a Final Blueprint in fall 2020. We look
forward to hearing from you!
Visit planbayarea.org to learn more or to check the schedule of public workshops. You can also
follow MTC BATA on social media.
As a cross-cutting
issue of Plan Bay Area
2050, staff has worked to
weave equity into every
single strategy for
the Draft Blueprint.
Attachment B
Agenda Item 4a
Bay Area Metro Center375 Beale SteetSanFrancisco, CA 94105
415.778.6700info@bayareametro.govabag.ca.gov | mtc.ca.gov
Strategy Funding Share of Total Topic Area Investment
Expand Childcare Support $30
Create Job Incubator Programs $3 9%
91%
EC
O
N
O
M
Y
$33
B
Fund Af fordable Housing Production $166
Fund Af fordable Housing Preservation $2
Fund Af fordable Housing Protection $3
97%
1%
2%HO
U
S
I
N
G
$
17
1
B
Adapt to Sea Level Rise (SLR)$17
Retrofit Existing Buildings $20
Protect High-Value Conservation Lands $15
Expand Climate Initiatives Program $1
32%
38%
28%
2%EN
V
I
R
O
N
M
E
N
T
$53
B
Maintain Existing System $392
Optimize System: Transit Fare Policy Reform $10
Optimize System: Seamless Mobility $0.1
Optimize System: Freeway Tolling $1
Safe Streets: Complete Streets Network $7
Safe Streets: Regional Vision Zero Policy $1
Projects: Low-Cost High-Performing Transit $20
Projects: New Transbay Rail Crossing $29
(Not in Dra) Projects: Other Regional Priorities $22
75%
2%
.2%
.2%
1%
.2%
4%
6%
4%
TR
A
N
S
P
O
R
T
A
T
I
O
N
$52
6
B
(Not in Dra) Projects: County Priorities $44 8%
To
p
i
c
A
r
e
a
a
n
d
T
o
t
a
l
A
n
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
e
d
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
(
$
783B)
Funding Share of Total TopicArea InvestmentStrategy Key Metrics
Share of Housing
Production Funding,
by Area Type
High-Resource Areas 75%
Transit-Rich Areas 76%
Communities of Concern 26%
HELP US DRAFT THE BLUEPRINT.
The Plan Bay Area 2050 Draft Blueprint is a package of 25 transformational strategies that aim to make the Bay Area more affordable, connected, diverse, healthy and
vibrant for all. Strategies are either public policies or packages of investments that could be advanced on the local, regional or state levels. This document describes
the outcomes of the Draft Blueprint based upon the strategies approved by the MTC and ABAG Boards in February (refer to strategies document for more information).
EQUITY AND PERFORMANCE OUTCOMESDRAFTING THE
BLUEPRINT
What Does This Document Include?Key Definitions in Metrics
1 | How Does the Draft Blueprint Allocate
Anticipated Revenues Toward Strategies?
2 | How Does the Draft Blueprint Influence
the Regional Growth Pattern?
3 | What are the Key Equity and Performance
Outcomes of the Draft Blueprint?
4 | What are the Key Takeaways from
the Draft Blueprint?
5 | How Did We Analyze the Draft Blueprint?
6 | What's Next, COVID-19 Impacts on Final
Blueprint, and How You Can Get Involved
2015 Refers to modeled 2015 conditions, which were
calibrated to closely match on-the-ground conditions.
2050 Trend Reflects the 2050 outcomes if
population and job growth continue according to
the Plan Bay Area 2050 Growth Forecast and all
Draft Blueprint land use strategies are implemented,
without any changes to the transportation system
(only available for transportation metrics).
2050 Blueprint Reflects 2050 outcomes with all 25
Draft Blueprint strategies.
LIHH Low-Income Households with household
incomes less than $45,000 in today’s dollars; shown
where feasible to parse out equity impacts.
CoCs Communities of Concern; updated using
latest ACS data.
High-Resource Areas State-designated areas with
access to well-resourced schools, open space, jobs
and services.
Transit-Rich Areas Areas within 1/2 mile of a rail
station, ferry terminal or frequent bus stop (every
15 minutes or less) consistent with MTC/ABAG-
adopted criteria.
Priority Production Areas Industrial districts
that support industries that are critical to the
functioning of the Bay Area economy and are home
to “middle wage” jobs.
1 | How Does the Draft Blueprint Assign Anticipated Revenues Toward Strategies?
The Draft Blueprint anticipates total inflation-adjusted revenues of $783 billion across four topic areas of Transportation, Housing, Economy and
Environment during the Plan period from 2021 to 2050, integrating the impacts of the COVID-19 recession as well as future regional revenue measures.
The chart below highlights how these revenues are assigned among various strategies. Zero-cost strategies (e.g., increased development capacity for
housing) that do not require significant financial investment are not shown. On the right, key metrics help characterize the investments. NOTE: There
is a $66 billion reserve in the Transportation Element for Final Blueprint strategies not included in the Draft Blueprint; this reserve can help fund other
county and regional priorities like Express Lanes and commuter rail lines.
Annual Subsidy per Low-Income Households
Childcare Support $10K
Job Incubator Programs $1K
Funding by Mode: Maintain System
Transit 70%
Road/Bike/Ped 30%
Funding by Mode:
All Other Strategies
Transit 79%
Road 4%
Bike/Ped 17%
Benefits for
Low-Income
Households
Share of Population 24%
Share of Road Funding 27%
Share of Transit Funding 44%
Benefits for
Minorities
Share of Population 60%
Share of Road Funding 52%
Share of Transit Funding 63%
Share of Funding in Communities of Concern*
Adapt to Sea Level Rise 25%
Retrofit Existing Buildings 15%
* Environment investment in Communities of Concern is fully sufficient to meet identified needs.
Attachment C Agenda Item 4a
Bay Area Metro Center375 Beale SteetSanFrancisco, CA 94105
415.778.6700info@bayareametro.govabag.ca.gov | mtc.ca.gov
2 | How Does the Draft Blueprint Influence the Regional Growth Pattern?
The nine-county Bay
Area is divided into 34
subcounty areas, called
“superdistricts.”
Superdistricts are
combinations of
cities, towns and
unincorporated areas
that allow the public to
see the more localized
growth pattern in Plan
Bay Area 2050.
More information on
the superdistricts can
be found in the layer
documentation.
6.1 4.6
Jobs/Housing Ratio
6.1 4.6
Jobs/Housing Ratio
0.6
0.6
0.9
0.9
0.9 0.9
0.9
0.9
0.91.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.4
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5 1.4
1.21.2
1.4
1.6
0.70.8
3.0
0.7
0.7
1.2
1.14.60.8
2.10.6
0.6
1.0
0.7
1.2
1.0 0.9
1.1
1.1
0.81.1
0.8
1.2
1.4
1.2
1.3
1.3
1.9
1.2 1.7
1.62.2
1.3
1.7
0.71.1
3.5 3.03.5
1.3
0.9
1.2
1.56.10.8
2.50.6
4.60.8
2.10.6
6.10.8
2.50.6
0.0 70.0
Persons/Acre,urbanized area only
0.0 70.0
Persons/Acre,urbanized area only
2.2
13.0
0.2
2.3
1.0 0.7
3.5
1.5
2.42.2
3.2
3.5
0.3
0.1
1.4
3.3
4.8 1.1
25.75.9
6.6
1.7 7.76.6
10.7
0.6
2.4
13.0
17.367.831.0
38.424.7
67.831.0
38.424.7
19.729.4
27.1
16.0
22.9
1.9
7.8
0.1
1.5
0.9 0.6
2.9
1.4
2.31.7
2.7
3.0
0.2
0.1
1.3
3.1
4.5 0.8
14.24.0
4.9
1.4 6.24.3
5.6
0.5
2.3
8.4
11.949.329.4
27.122.9
49.3
5%
5%6%6%
7%
8%30%30%
2%
2%2%
2%
3%
3%3%
4%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
-1%
0%
0%
0%0%
0%
0%
Total Growth
2015 to 2050
+1.4m Jobs
Job Growth between 2015-2050
(as a Share of Region’s Growth)
Population Density 2050
(Region-Wide Average: 2.2)
Jobs/Housing Ratio 2050
(Region-Wide Average: 1.34)
7%
8%
9%9%
12%
3%
3%
4%
4%
4%
6%
6%
3%
5%
2%
2%
2%
2%
2%
2%
2%
2%
1%
1%
1%
0%
1%1%
1%1%1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
Total Growth
2015 to 2050
+1.3m Households
Housing Growth between 2015-2050
(as a Share of Region’s Growth)
Population Density 2015
(Region-Wide Average: 1.7)
Jobs/Housing Ratio 2015
(Region-Wide Average: 1.50)
Attachment C Agenda Item 4a
Bay Area Metro Center375 Beale SteetSanFrancisco, CA 94105
415.778.6700info@bayareametro.govabag.ca.gov | mtc.ca.gov
WILL BAY AREA RESIDENTS SPEND LESS ON HOUSING AND TRANSPORTATION?
In 2015, low-income households have an extreme housing
and transportation (H+T) cost burden, with costs exceeding
average incomes when accounting for circumstances such as
zero-income, financial assistance or unhoused status. With all
Draft Blueprint housing strategies in place in 2050 Trend, H+T
costs as a percentage of income decrease for all households.
The addition of Draft Blueprint transportation strategies,
including means-based tolls and fares, further reduces H+T
costs for low-income households, though their cost burden
remains deeply unaff ordable.
H+T COST AS A PERCENT OF INCOME 2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINT
Low-Income Households (LIHH)109%86%83%
All Households 57%48%48%
Average transit fares per trip, while up in 2050 Trend due to
recent fare increases since 2015, decrease in 2050 Blueprint with
fare reform policies. The decrease is substantial for low-income
households with means-based fares. Average tolls per auto
trip increase due to the freeway per-mile tolling strategy, with
reduced impact on low-income households due to means-based
toll discounts.
TRANSPORT EXPENSES PER TRIP 2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINT
Average Fareper Transit Trip
Low-Income Households $2.78 $3.13 $1.60
All Households $3.16 $3.41 $2.96
Average “Out-of-Pocket” Cost per Auto Trip
Low-Income Households $1.02 $1.10 $1.11
All Households $1.26 $1.45 $1.53
Average Tollper Auto Trip
Low-Income Households $0.05 $0.08 $0.10
All Households $0.08 $0.12 $0.21
WILL THE BAY AREA PRODUCE AND PRESERVE MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING?
28 percent of all new homes built between 2015 and 2050 are
permanently aff ordable (deed-restricted) for low-income
households, with an even greater share of these units in High-
Resource Areas due to strategic investments in these locations.
SHARE OF NEW HOUSING PRODUCTION (2015-50) THAT IS DEED-RESTRICTED AFFORDABLE
Region-Wide 28%
High-Resource Areas 37%
The Draft Blueprint’s affordable housing preservation strategy
ensures that all existing deed-restricted affordable units at risk
of conversion to market-rate units are converted to permanently
affordable (deed-restricted) homes.
SHARE OF AT-RISK AFFORDABLE HOUSING PRESERVED Region-Wide 100%
WILL BAY AREA RESIDENTS BE ABLE TO ACCESS THEIR DESTINATIONS MORE EASILY?
The number of jobs accessible within a 30-minute drive is
forecasted to decrease in 2050 Trend due to population growth and subsequent road congestion, but it increases marginally with
the Draft Blueprint. Meanwhile, the number of jobs accessible
within a 45-minute transit trip is significantly lower than auto
accessibility in 2015. Focused housing growth near transit routes
increases transit accessibility in 2050 Trend, and performance improves further with investments in transit service in the Draft
Blueprint. Biking and walking access to jobs also increases with
land use strategies in 2050 Trend.
(Metric under development for Final Blueprint: Accessibility to
Community Places)
PERCENT OF ALL BAY AREA JOBS THAT ARE ACCESSIBLE BY 2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINT
By Car within30 Minutes
CoC Residents 19.2%13.6%14.4%
All Residents 17.8%12.2%12.6%
By Transit within 45 Minutes
CoC Residents 5.2%6.6%7.2%
All Residents 3.4%4.3%4.7%
By Bike within20 Minutes
CoC Residents 2.9%3.5%3.5%
All Residents 2.3%2.8%2.8%
By Foot within20 Minutes
CoC Residents 0.3%0.4%0.4%
All Residents 0.2%0.2%0.2%
SHARE OF HOUSEHOLDS AND JOBS WITHIN 1/2 MILE OF FREQUENT TRANSIT 2015 2050 BLUEPRINT
More households will live close to high-frequency transit,
including rail, ferry and frequent bus stops, in 2050 under
the Draft Blueprint. Growth geographies focus more growth
in Transit-Rich Areas, supported by more transit service in
these communities. Due to the more dispersed nature of job
growth, the share of jobs near high-frequency transit remains
relatively constant.
Households Low-Income Households 40%46%
All Households 32%43%
Jobs Manufacturing/Warehouse/Utilities 45%43%
All Jobs 52%52%
WILL BAY AREA RESIDENTS HAVE A TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM THEY CAN RELY ON?
Travel times on freeways are forecasted to increase significantly
between 2015 and 2050 Trend, again due to a growing
population. Under 2050 Draft Blueprint conditions, per-mile
freeway tolling on key corridors helps to alleviate this eff ect, even
as speed limits reduce free-flow travel times.
PEAK-HOUR TRAVEL TIME (MINUTES)2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINT
Most of Route Features All-Lane Tolling (>75%)
Oakland-SF 30 53 41
Antioch-SF 75 118 96
Antioch-Oakland 47 67 57
SJ-SF 64 100 87
Oakland-SJ 56 77 66
Oakland-Palo Alto 54 67 61
Part of Route Features All-Lane Tolling (25-75%)
Livermore-SJ 48 75 74
Vallejo-SF 57 103 87
Limited or No Tolling on Route (<25%)
Fairfield-Dublin 48 62 65
Santa Rosa-SF 69 136 138
Overcrowding on transit vehicles, which risks denial of boarding,
is anticipated to rise significantly under 2050 Trend conditions.
Crowding decreases in the 2050 Draft Blueprint for agencies with
planned investments, such as Muni and AC Transit, as well as in
the transbay corridor thanks to the New Transbay Rail Crossing.
Agencies not listed are not forecasted to have overcrowding
challenges in 2050.
PERCENT OF PERSON HOURS IN TRANSIT SPENT IN CROWDED CONDITIONS 2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINT
SFMTA Bus 20%40%29%
AC Transit Local 0%22%20%
AC Transit Transbay 48%64%50%
GGT Express 30%87%85%
BART 19%62%44%
Caltrain 8%32%50%
WETA 23%59%43%
SFMTA LRT 32%37%25%
VTA LRT 0%82%83%
In 2015, 30 percent of all transit vehicles had exceeded their
federally recommended lifespans. As the Draft Blueprint
only includes enough maintenance funding to retain existing
conditions, this metric remains mostly unchanged through 2050.
SHARE OF TRANSIT REVENUE VEHICLE ASSETS PASTTHEIR USEFUL LIFE BENCHMARK
2015 2050 BLUEPRINT
30%30%
WILL BAY AREA COMMUNITIES BE MORE INCLUSIVE?
Focused production of deed-restricted aff ordable housing
in High-Resource Areas increases access to areas of highest
opportunity for low-income households, helping reverse
historically exclusionary policies in many of these communities.
In Transit-Rich Areas, the total number of low-income
households continues to rise, but the share declines over time.
This indicates that aff ordable housing growth may not be
keeping pace with overall development in Transit-Rich Areas.
SHARE OF HOUSEHOLDS THAT ARE LOW-INCOME 2015 2050 BLUEPRINT
High-Resource and Transit-Rich Areas 28%23%
High-Resource (only) Areas 18%22%
Transit-Rich (only) Areas 40%36%
WILL BAY AREA RESIDENTS BE ABLE TO STAY IN PLACE?
At the neighborhood level, the risk of displacement persists in
many low-income communities and communities of color. The
Urban Displacement Project has identified 850 census tracts
with ongoing or risk of displacement, gentrification or exclusion.
In the Blueprint, 31% of these tracts experience displacement
between 2015 and 2050 – defined here as a net loss in number of
Low-Income Households. Further, nearly half of them experience
gentrification – defined here as when the share of low-income
households in the neighborhood drops by over 10 percent
between 2015 and 2050. Even more significant impacts are
forecasted for Communities of Concern.
SHARE OF NEIGHBORHOODS THAT EXPERIENCE DISPLACEMENT AND GENTRIFICATION BETWEEN 2015 AND 2050 DISPLACEMENT GENTRIFICATION
High Displacement Risk Tracts
(total 850 neighborhoods)31%44%
Communities of Concern
(total 339 neighborhoods)42%56%
Transit-Rich Areas
(total 114 areas)13%46%
High-Resource Neighborhoods
(total 638 neighborhoods)18%26%
WILL BAY AREA RESIDENTS BE HEALTHIER AND SAFER?
With Draft Blueprint strategies, 98 percent of all Bay Area
households that would be aff ected by two feet of sea level
rise are protected. All common seismically deficient housing
types and homes built in high wildfire risk zones would be
retrofitted to reduce the likelihood of damage in future
earthquakes and wildfires.
PERCENT OF HOUSEHOLDS IN RISK-PRONE AREAS OR RISK-PRONE BUILDINGS, THAT ARE PROTECTED OR RETROFIT
Sea Level Rise(2ft)
Communities of Concern 100%
All Households 98%
Earthquake Communities of Concern 100%
All Households 100%
Wildfire High /Medium Risk
Communities of Concern 100%
All Households 100%
The rate of fatalities and injuries decreases in the Draft Blueprint
with reduced speed limits and enhanced street design under the
Vision Zero strategy, but remains far from zero incidents.
ANNUAL INCIDENTS,PER 100 MILLION VMT 2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINT
Fatalities 0.98 0.99 0.91
Injuries 4.23 4.35 4.20
Total fine particulate matter emissions (PM2.5) are forecasted to increase under 2050 Trend conditions as population and miles driven continue to rise. The Draft Blueprint strategies help bring this metric down below 2015 levels.
DAILY PM2.5 EMISSIONS (TONS)5.5 5.7 5.2
WILL THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BAY AREA BE HEALTHIER AND SAFER?
Draft Blueprint strategies result in a drop in CO2 emission levels
per capita in 2035 (9% below 2005 levels), but are insuff icient to
curb them to state-mandated levels (19% below 2005 levels).
Further, CO2 emission levels are forecasted to increase between
2035 and 2050 (in both Trend and Blueprint), primarily due to
assumed adoption of driverless vehicles that can potentially
generate “zero occupant” mileage.
CHANGE IN DAILY CO2 EMISSIONS PER CAPITA RELATIVE TO 2005 2015 2035TREND 2035BLUEPRINT 2050TREND 2050BLUEPRINT
Cars and Light-Duty Trucks (SB 375)0%8%-9%14%-3%
All Vehicles(Including Fuel Eff iciency Gains)-7%-36%-42%-38%-43%
With an assumed growth in telecommuting by 2050, the mode
share of single occupancy auto travel is forecasted to drop in
2050 Trend conditions. With the Draft Blueprint strategies in play,
this share drops slightly further, with increases in transit, walking
and bicycling mode shares.
COMMUTE MODE SHARE 2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINT
Auto: Single Occupancy 54%42%40%
Auto: Other 21%19%18%
Transit 14%19%20%
Active Modes (Bike/Walk)5%6%8%
Telecommute 6%14%14%
WILL JOBS AND HOUSING IN THE BAY AREA BE MORE EVENLY DISTRIBUTED?
County-level jobs-to-housing ratios decrease in most counties,
reflecting a higher ratio of housing to job production. Further, the ratios in Alameda, San Francisco and Santa Clara counties
approach the region-wide ratio in 2050, indicating an improved
jobs-housing balance. However, other counties trend further
away from the region-wide ratio. These trends indicate that
housing strategies in the Draft Blueprint may bring housing to job-rich areas such as Silicon Valley, but strategies to move jobs to
housing-rich areas are not suff icient. (Metric under development
for Final Blueprint: Jobs-Housing Fit for low-wage jobs)
JOBS-HOUSING RATIO 2015 2050 BLUEPRINT 2015 2050 BLUEPRINT
Region-Wide 1.50 1.34 San Francisco 2.55 2.21
Alameda 1.48 1.33 San Mateo 1.29 1.21
Contra Costa 0.98 0.98 Santa Clara 1.69 1.41
Marin 1.09 0.75 Solano 0.87 0.89
Napa 1.24 1.46 Sonoma 1.05 0.89
Mean commute distances rise from 2015 to 2050 Trend with
Draft Blueprint land use strategies, due to the clustering of
jobs in existing centers far from housing-rich communities. Transportation strategies on their own aff ect this metric only
marginally in 2050 Blueprint.
MEAN COMMUTE DISTANCE (MILES)
2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINT
Low-Income Workers 9.5 12.0 11.9
All Workers 12.0 13.1 12.9
WILL BAY AREA BUSINESSES THRIVE?
The region’s economic recovery is expected to be robust
through 2050, even when accounting for the inclusion of new
regional tax measures to fund transportation and aff ordable
housing, among other areas.
GROWTH IN PER CAPITA GROSS REGIONAL PRODUCT (FROM 2015 TO 2050)65%
A key pillar in the region’s middle-wage workforce,
manufacturing and warehouse jobs are anticipated to grow at
a higher rate than other industries, with some of that growth
occurring in newly-designated Priority Production Areas.
GROWTH IN NUMBER OF JOBS (FROM 2015 TO 2050)
Region-Wide All Jobs 35%
Manufacturing/Warehouse/Utilities Jobs 48%
Priority Production Areas All Jobs 42%
Manufacturing/Warehouse/Utilities Jobs 48%
3 | What are the Key Equity and Performance Outcomes of the Draft Blueprint?
How does the Draft Blueprint advance or impede achievement of the Plan Vision? This section is organized by the five Plan Bay Area 2050 Guiding Principles with two key
questions presented to frame the exploration. Each question is accompanied by one or more metrics, highlighting impacts on disadvantaged populations where feasible
and indicating whether the 2050 Blueprint outcomes are equitable and favorable. Explanatory text sheds light on how Draft Blueprint strategies and assumptions contribute
to performance outcomes. On the left, outcomes that move in the right direction are represented by upward arrows, while outcomes that move in the wrong direction or fail
to meet state-mandated targets are represented with downward arrows.
WILL BAY AREA RESIDENTS SPEND LESS ON HOUSING AND TRANSPORTATION?
In 2015, low-income households have an extreme housing
and transportation (H+T) cost burden, with costs exceeding
average incomes when accounting for circumstances such as
zero-income, financial assistance or unhoused status. With all
Draft Blueprint housing strategies in place in 2050 Trend, H+T
costs as a percentage of income decrease for all households.
The addition of Draft Blueprint transportation strategies,
including means-based tolls and fares, further reduces H+T
costs for low-income households, though their cost burden
remains deeply unaff ordable.
H+T COST AS A PERCENT OF INCOME 2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINT
Low-Income Households (LIHH)109%86%83%
All Households 57%48%48%
Average transit fares per trip, while up in 2050 Trend due to
recent fare increases since 2015, decrease in 2050 Blueprint with
fare reform policies. The decrease is substantial for low-income
households with means-based fares. Average tolls per auto
trip increase due to the freeway per-mile tolling strategy, with
reduced impact on low-income households due to means-based
toll discounts.
TRANSPORT EXPENSES PER TRIP 2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINT
Average Fareper Transit Trip
Low-Income Households $2.78 $3.13 $1.60
All Households $3.16 $3.41 $2.96
Average “Out-of-Pocket” Cost per Auto Trip
Low-Income Households $1.02 $1.10 $1.11
All Households $1.26 $1.45 $1.53
Average Tollper Auto Trip
Low-Income Households $0.05 $0.08 $0.10
All Households $0.08 $0.12 $0.21
WILL THE BAY AREA PRODUCE AND PRESERVE MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING?
28 percent of all new homes built between 2015 and 2050 are
permanently aff ordable (deed-restricted) for low-income
households, with an even greater share of these units in High-
Resource Areas due to strategic investments in these locations.
SHARE OF NEW HOUSING PRODUCTION (2015-50) THAT IS DEED-RESTRICTED AFFORDABLE
Region-Wide 28%
High-Resource Areas 37%
The Draft Blueprint’s affordable housing preservation strategy
ensures that all existing deed-restricted affordable units at risk
of conversion to market-rate units are converted to permanently
affordable (deed-restricted) homes.
SHARE OF AT-RISK AFFORDABLE HOUSING PRESERVED Region-Wide 100%
WILL BAY AREA RESIDENTS BE ABLE TO ACCESS THEIR DESTINATIONS MORE EASILY?
The number of jobs accessible within a 30-minute drive is
forecasted to decrease in 2050 Trend due to population growth
and subsequent road congestion, but it increases marginally with
the Draft Blueprint. Meanwhile, the number of jobs accessible
within a 45-minute transit trip is significantly lower than auto
accessibility in 2015. Focused housing growth near transit routes
increases transit accessibility in 2050 Trend, and performance
improves further with investments in transit service in the Draft
Blueprint. Biking and walking access to jobs also increases with
land use strategies in 2050 Trend.
(Metric under development for Final Blueprint: Accessibility to
Community Places)
PERCENT OF ALL BAY AREA JOBS THAT ARE ACCESSIBLE BY 2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINT
By Car within30 Minutes
CoC Residents 19.2%13.6%14.4%
All Residents 17.8%12.2%12.6%
By Transit within 45 Minutes
CoC Residents 5.2%6.6%7.2%
All Residents 3.4%4.3%4.7%
By Bike within20 Minutes
CoC Residents 2.9%3.5%3.5%
All Residents 2.3%2.8%2.8%
By Foot within20 Minutes
CoC Residents 0.3%0.4%0.4%
All Residents 0.2%0.2%0.2%
SHARE OF HOUSEHOLDS AND JOBS WITHIN 1/2 MILE OF FREQUENT TRANSIT 2015 2050 BLUEPRINT
More households will live close to high-frequency transit,
including rail, ferry and frequent bus stops, in 2050 under
the Draft Blueprint. Growth geographies focus more growth
in Transit-Rich Areas, supported by more transit service in
these communities. Due to the more dispersed nature of job
growth, the share of jobs near high-frequency transit remains
relatively constant.
Households Low-Income Households 40%46%
All Households 32%43%
Jobs Manufacturing/Warehouse/Utilities 45%43%
All Jobs 52%52%
WILL BAY AREA RESIDENTS HAVE A TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM THEY CAN RELY ON?
Travel times on freeways are forecasted to increase significantly
between 2015 and 2050 Trend, again due to a growing
population. Under 2050 Draft Blueprint conditions, per-mile
freeway tolling on key corridors helps to alleviate this eff ect, even
as speed limits reduce free-flow travel times.
PEAK-HOUR TRAVEL TIME (MINUTES)2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINT
Most of Route Features All-Lane Tolling (>75%)
Oakland-SF 30 53 41
Antioch-SF 75 118 96
Antioch-Oakland 47 67 57
SJ-SF 64 100 87
Oakland-SJ 56 77 66
Oakland-Palo Alto 54 67 61
Part of Route Features All-Lane Tolling (25-75%)
Livermore-SJ 48 75 74
Vallejo-SF 57 103 87
Limited or No Tolling on Route (<25%)
Fairfield-Dublin 48 62 65
Santa Rosa-SF 69 136 138
Overcrowding on transit vehicles, which risks denial of boarding,
is anticipated to rise significantly under 2050 Trend conditions.
Crowding decreases in the 2050 Draft Blueprint for agencies with
planned investments, such as Muni and AC Transit, as well as in
the transbay corridor thanks to the New Transbay Rail Crossing.
Agencies not listed are not forecasted to have overcrowding
challenges in 2050.
PERCENT OF PERSON HOURS IN TRANSIT SPENT IN CROWDED CONDITIONS 2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINT
SFMTA Bus 20%40%29%
AC Transit Local 0%22%20%
AC Transit Transbay 48%64%50%
GGT Express 30%87%85%
BART 19%62%44%
Caltrain 8%32%50%
WETA 23%59%43%
SFMTA LRT 32%37%25%
VTA LRT 0%82%83%
In 2015, 30 percent of all transit vehicles had exceeded their
federally recommended lifespans. As the Draft Blueprint
only includes enough maintenance funding to retain existing
conditions, this metric remains mostly unchanged through 2050.
SHARE OF TRANSIT REVENUE VEHICLE ASSETS PASTTHEIR USEFUL LIFE BENCHMARK
2015 2050 BLUEPRINT
30%30%
WILL BAY AREA COMMUNITIES BE MORE INCLUSIVE?
Focused production of deed-restricted aff ordable housing
in High-Resource Areas increases access to areas of highest
opportunity for low-income households, helping reverse
historically exclusionary policies in many of these communities.
In Transit-Rich Areas, the total number of low-income
households continues to rise, but the share declines over time.
This indicates that aff ordable housing growth may not be
keeping pace with overall development in Transit-Rich Areas.
SHARE OF HOUSEHOLDS THAT ARE LOW-INCOME 2015 2050 BLUEPRINT
High-Resource and Transit-Rich Areas 28%23%
High-Resource (only) Areas 18%22%
Transit-Rich (only) Areas 40%36%
WILL BAY AREA RESIDENTS BE ABLE TO STAY IN PLACE?
At the neighborhood level, the risk of displacement persists in
many low-income communities and communities of color. The
Urban Displacement Project has identified 850 census tracts
with ongoing or risk of displacement, gentrification or exclusion.
In the Blueprint, 31% of these tracts experience displacement
between 2015 and 2050 – defined here as a net loss in number of
Low-Income Households. Further, nearly half of them experience
gentrification – defined here as when the share of low-income
households in the neighborhood drops by over 10 percent
between 2015 and 2050. Even more significant impacts are
forecasted for Communities of Concern.
SHARE OF NEIGHBORHOODS THAT EXPERIENCE DISPLACEMENT AND GENTRIFICATION BETWEEN 2015 AND 2050 DISPLACEMENT GENTRIFICATION
High Displacement Risk Tracts
(total 850 neighborhoods)31%44%
Communities of Concern
(total 339 neighborhoods)42%56%
Transit-Rich Areas
(total 114 areas)13%46%
High-Resource Neighborhoods
(total 638 neighborhoods)18%26%
WILL BAY AREA RESIDENTS BE HEALTHIER AND SAFER?
With Draft Blueprint strategies, 98 percent of all Bay Area
households that would be aff ected by two feet of sea level
rise are protected. All common seismically deficient housing
types and homes built in high wildfire risk zones would be
retrofitted to reduce the likelihood of damage in future
earthquakes and wildfires.
PERCENT OF HOUSEHOLDS IN RISK-PRONE AREAS OR RISK-PRONE BUILDINGS, THAT ARE PROTECTED OR RETROFIT
Sea Level Rise(2ft)
Communities of Concern 100%
All Households 98%
Earthquake Communities of Concern 100%
All Households 100%
Wildfire High /Medium Risk
Communities of Concern 100%
All Households 100%
The rate of fatalities and injuries decreases in the Draft Blueprint
with reduced speed limits and enhanced street design under the
Vision Zero strategy, but remains far from zero incidents.
ANNUAL INCIDENTS,PER 100 MILLION VMT 2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINT
Fatalities 0.98 0.99 0.91
Injuries 4.23 4.35 4.20
Total fine particulate matter emissions (PM2.5) are forecasted to increase under 2050 Trend conditions as population and miles driven continue to rise. The Draft Blueprint strategies help bring this metric down below 2015 levels.
DAILY PM2.5 EMISSIONS (TONS)5.5 5.7 5.2
WILL THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BAY AREA BE HEALTHIER AND SAFER?
Draft Blueprint strategies result in a drop in CO2 emission levels
per capita in 2035 (9% below 2005 levels), but are insuff icient to
curb them to state-mandated levels (19% below 2005 levels).
Further, CO2 emission levels are forecasted to increase between
2035 and 2050 (in both Trend and Blueprint), primarily due to
assumed adoption of driverless vehicles that can potentially
generate “zero occupant” mileage.
CHANGE IN DAILY CO2 EMISSIONS PER CAPITA RELATIVE TO 2005 2015 2035TREND 2035BLUEPRINT 2050TREND 2050BLUEPRINT
Cars and Light-Duty Trucks (SB 375)0%8%-9%14%-3%
All Vehicles(Including Fuel Eff iciency Gains)-7%-36%-42%-38%-43%
With an assumed growth in telecommuting by 2050, the mode
share of single occupancy auto travel is forecasted to drop in
2050 Trend conditions. With the Draft Blueprint strategies in play,
this share drops slightly further, with increases in transit, walking
and bicycling mode shares.
COMMUTE MODE SHARE 2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINT
Auto: Single Occupancy 54%42%40%
Auto: Other 21%19%18%
Transit 14%19%20%
Active Modes (Bike/Walk)5%6%8%
Telecommute 6%14%14%
WILL JOBS AND HOUSING IN THE BAY AREA BE MORE EVENLY DISTRIBUTED?
County-level jobs-to-housing ratios decrease in most counties,
reflecting a higher ratio of housing to job production. Further,
the ratios in Alameda, San Francisco and Santa Clara counties
approach the region-wide ratio in 2050, indicating an improved
jobs-housing balance. However, other counties trend further
away from the region-wide ratio. These trends indicate that
housing strategies in the Draft Blueprint may bring housing to
job-rich areas such as Silicon Valley, but strategies to move jobs to
housing-rich areas are not suff icient. (Metric under development
for Final Blueprint: Jobs-Housing Fit for low-wage jobs)
JOBS-HOUSING RATIO 2015 2050 BLUEPRINT 2015 2050 BLUEPRINT
Region-Wide 1.50 1.34 San Francisco 2.55 2.21
Alameda 1.48 1.33 San Mateo 1.29 1.21
Contra Costa 0.98 0.98 Santa Clara 1.69 1.41
Marin 1.09 0.75 Solano 0.87 0.89
Napa 1.24 1.46 Sonoma 1.05 0.89
Mean commute distances rise from 2015 to 2050 Trend with
Draft Blueprint land use strategies, due to the clustering of
jobs in existing centers far from housing-rich communities.
Transportation strategies on their own aff ect this metric only
marginally in 2050 Blueprint.
MEAN COMMUTE DISTANCE (MILES)
2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINT
Low-Income Workers 9.5 12.0 11.9
All Workers 12.0 13.1 12.9
WILL BAY AREA BUSINESSES THRIVE?
The region’s economic recovery is expected to be robust
through 2050, even when accounting for the inclusion of new
regional tax measures to fund transportation and aff ordable
housing, among other areas.
GROWTH IN PER CAPITA GROSS REGIONAL PRODUCT (FROM 2015 TO 2050)65%
A key pillar in the region’s middle-wage workforce,
manufacturing and warehouse jobs are anticipated to grow at
a higher rate than other industries, with some of that growth
occurring in newly-designated Priority Production Areas.
GROWTH IN NUMBER OF JOBS (FROM 2015 TO 2050)
Region-Wide All Jobs 35%
Manufacturing/Warehouse/Utilities Jobs 48%
Priority Production Areas All Jobs 42%
Manufacturing/Warehouse/Utilities Jobs 48%
Attachment C Agenda Item 4a
Bay Area Metro Center375 Beale SteetSanFrancisco, CA 94105
415.778.6700info@bayareametro.govabag.ca.gov | mtc.ca.gov
WILL BAY AREA RESIDENTS SPEND LESS ON HOUSING AND TRANSPORTATION?In 2015, low-income households have an extreme housing and transportation (H+T) cost burden, with costs exceeding average incomes when accounting for circumstances such as zero-income, financial assistance or unhoused status. With all Draft Blueprint housing strategies in place in 2050 Trend, H+T costs as a percentage of income decrease for all households. The addition of Draft Blueprint transportation strategies, including means-based tolls and fares, further reduces H+T costs for low-income households, though their cost burden remains deeply unaff ordable.H+T COST AS A PERCENT OF INCOME 2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINTLow-Income Households (LIHH)109%86%83%All Households 57%48%48%Average transit fares per trip, while up in 2050 Trend due to recent fare increases since 2015, decrease in 2050 Blueprint with fare reform policies. The decrease is substantial for low-income households with means-based fares. Average tolls per auto trip increase due to the freeway per-mile tolling strategy, with reduced impact on low-income households due to means-based toll discounts. TRANSPORT EXPENSES PER TRIP 2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINTAverage Fareper Transit Trip Low-Income Households $2.78 $3.13 $1.60All Households $3.16 $3.41 $2.96Average “Out-of-Pocket” Cost per Auto Trip Low-Income Households $1.02 $1.10 $1.11All Households $1.26 $1.45 $1.53Average Tollper Auto Trip Low-Income Households $0.05 $0.08 $0.10All Households $0.08 $0.12 $0.21WILL THE BAY AREA PRODUCE AND PRESERVE MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING?28 percent of all new homes built between 2015 and 2050 are permanently aff ordable (deed-restricted) for low-income households, with an even greater share of these units in High-Resource Areas due to strategic investments in these locations.SHARE OF NEW HOUSING PRODUCTION (2015-50) THAT IS DEED-RESTRICTED AFFORDABLE Region-Wide 28%High-Resource Areas 37%The Draft Blueprint’s affordable housing preservation strategy ensures that all existing deed-restricted affordable units at risk of conversion to market-rate units are converted to permanently affordable (deed-restricted) homes.SHARE OF AT-RISK AFFORDABLE HOUSING PRESERVED Region-Wide 100%
WILL BAY AREA RESIDENTS BE ABLE TO ACCESS THEIR DESTINATIONS MORE EASILY?
The number of jobs accessible within a 30-minute drive is
forecasted to decrease in 2050 Trend due to population growth
and subsequent road congestion, but it increases marginally with
the Draft Blueprint. Meanwhile, the number of jobs accessible
within a 45-minute transit trip is significantly lower than auto
accessibility in 2015. Focused housing growth near transit routes
increases transit accessibility in 2050 Trend, and performance
improves further with investments in transit service in the Draft
Blueprint. Biking and walking access to jobs also increases with
land use strategies in 2050 Trend.
(Metric under development for Final Blueprint: Accessibility to
Community Places)
PERCENT OF ALL BAY AREA JOBS THAT ARE ACCESSIBLE BY 2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINT
By Car within30 Minutes
CoC Residents 19.2%13.6%14.4%
All Residents 17.8%12.2%12.6%
By Transit within 45 Minutes
CoC Residents 5.2%6.6%7.2%
All Residents 3.4%4.3%4.7%
By Bike within20 Minutes
CoC Residents 2.9%3.5%3.5%
All Residents 2.3%2.8%2.8%
By Foot within20 Minutes
CoC Residents 0.3%0.4%0.4%
All Residents 0.2%0.2%0.2%
SHARE OF HOUSEHOLDS AND JOBS WITHIN 1/2 MILE OF FREQUENT TRANSIT 2015 2050 BLUEPRINT
More households will live close to high-frequency transit, including rail, ferry and frequent bus stops, in 2050 under the Draft Blueprint. Growth geographies focus more growth in Transit-Rich Areas, supported by more transit service in these communities. Due to the more dispersed nature of job growth, the share of jobs near high-frequency transit remains relatively constant.
Households Low-Income Households 40%46%
All Households 32%43%
Jobs Manufacturing/Warehouse/Utilities 45%43%
All Jobs 52%52%
WILL BAY AREA RESIDENTS HAVE A TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM THEY CAN RELY ON?
Travel times on freeways are forecasted to increase significantly
between 2015 and 2050 Trend, again due to a growing
population. Under 2050 Draft Blueprint conditions, per-mile
freeway tolling on key corridors helps to alleviate this eff ect, even
as speed limits reduce free-flow travel times.
PEAK-HOUR TRAVEL TIME (MINUTES)2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINT
Most of Route Features All-Lane Tolling (>75%)
Oakland-SF 30 53 41
Antioch-SF 75 118 96
Antioch-Oakland 47 67 57
SJ-SF 64 100 87
Oakland-SJ 56 77 66
Oakland-Palo Alto 54 67 61
Part of Route Features All-Lane Tolling (25-75%)
Livermore-SJ 48 75 74
Vallejo-SF 57 103 87
Limited or No Tolling on Route (<25%)
Fairfield-Dublin 48 62 65
Santa Rosa-SF 69 136 138
Overcrowding on transit vehicles, which risks denial of boarding,
is anticipated to rise significantly under 2050 Trend conditions.
Crowding decreases in the 2050 Draft Blueprint for agencies with
planned investments, such as Muni and AC Transit, as well as in
the transbay corridor thanks to the New Transbay Rail Crossing.
Agencies not listed are not forecasted to have overcrowding
challenges in 2050.
PERCENT OF PERSON HOURS IN TRANSIT SPENT IN CROWDED CONDITIONS 2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINT
SFMTA Bus 20%40%29%
AC Transit Local 0%22%20%
AC Transit Transbay 48%64%50%
GGT Express 30%87%85%
BART 19%62%44%
Caltrain 8%32%50%
WETA 23%59%43%
SFMTA LRT 32%37%25%
VTA LRT 0%82%83%
In 2015, 30 percent of all transit vehicles had exceeded their
federally recommended lifespans. As the Draft Blueprint
only includes enough maintenance funding to retain existing
conditions, this metric remains mostly unchanged through 2050.
SHARE OF TRANSIT REVENUE VEHICLE ASSETS PASTTHEIR USEFUL LIFE BENCHMARK
2015 2050 BLUEPRINT
30%30%
WILL BAY AREA COMMUNITIES BE MORE INCLUSIVE?
Focused production of deed-restricted aff ordable housing
in High-Resource Areas increases access to areas of highest
opportunity for low-income households, helping reverse
historically exclusionary policies in many of these communities.
In Transit-Rich Areas, the total number of low-income
households continues to rise, but the share declines over time.
This indicates that aff ordable housing growth may not be
keeping pace with overall development in Transit-Rich Areas.
SHARE OF HOUSEHOLDS THAT ARE LOW-INCOME 2015 2050 BLUEPRINT
High-Resource and Transit-Rich Areas 28%23%
High-Resource (only) Areas 18%22%
Transit-Rich (only) Areas 40%36%
WILL BAY AREA RESIDENTS BE ABLE TO STAY IN PLACE?
At the neighborhood level, the risk of displacement persists in
many low-income communities and communities of color. The
Urban Displacement Project has identified 850 census tracts
with ongoing or risk of displacement, gentrification or exclusion.
In the Blueprint, 31% of these tracts experience displacement
between 2015 and 2050 – defined here as a net loss in number of
Low-Income Households. Further, nearly half of them experience
gentrification – defined here as when the share of low-income
households in the neighborhood drops by over 10 percent
between 2015 and 2050. Even more significant impacts are
forecasted for Communities of Concern.
SHARE OF NEIGHBORHOODS THAT EXPERIENCE DISPLACEMENT AND GENTRIFICATION BETWEEN 2015 AND 2050 DISPLACEMENT GENTRIFICATION
High Displacement Risk Tracts
(total 850 neighborhoods)31%44%
Communities of Concern (total 339 neighborhoods)42%56%
Transit-Rich Areas (total 114 areas)13%46%
High-Resource Neighborhoods (total 638 neighborhoods)18%26%
WILL BAY AREA RESIDENTS BE HEALTHIER AND SAFER?
With Draft Blueprint strategies, 98 percent of all Bay Area
households that would be aff ected by two feet of sea level
rise are protected. All common seismically deficient housing
types and homes built in high wildfire risk zones would be
retrofitted to reduce the likelihood of damage in future
earthquakes and wildfires.
PERCENT OF HOUSEHOLDS IN RISK-PRONE AREAS OR RISK-PRONE BUILDINGS, THAT ARE PROTECTED OR RETROFIT
Sea Level Rise(2ft)
Communities of Concern 100%
All Households 98%
Earthquake Communities of Concern 100%
All Households 100%
Wildfire High /Medium Risk
Communities of Concern 100%
All Households 100%
The rate of fatalities and injuries decreases in the Draft Blueprint
with reduced speed limits and enhanced street design under the
Vision Zero strategy, but remains far from zero incidents.
ANNUAL INCIDENTS,PER 100 MILLION VMT 2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINT
Fatalities 0.98 0.99 0.91
Injuries 4.23 4.35 4.20
Total fine particulate matter emissions (PM2.5) are forecasted to increase under 2050 Trend conditions as population and miles driven continue to rise. The Draft Blueprint strategies help bring this metric down below 2015 levels.
DAILY PM2.5 EMISSIONS (TONS)5.5 5.7 5.2
WILL THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BAY AREA BE HEALTHIER AND SAFER?
Draft Blueprint strategies result in a drop in CO2 emission levels
per capita in 2035 (9% below 2005 levels), but are insuff icient to
curb them to state-mandated levels (19% below 2005 levels).
Further, CO2 emission levels are forecasted to increase between
2035 and 2050 (in both Trend and Blueprint), primarily due to
assumed adoption of driverless vehicles that can potentially
generate “zero occupant” mileage.
CHANGE IN DAILY CO2 EMISSIONS PER CAPITA RELATIVE TO 2005 2015 2035TREND 2035BLUEPRINT 2050TREND 2050BLUEPRINT
Cars and Light-Duty Trucks (SB 375)0%8%-9%14%-3%
All Vehicles(Including Fuel Eff iciency Gains)-7%-36%-42%-38%-43%
With an assumed growth in telecommuting by 2050, the mode
share of single occupancy auto travel is forecasted to drop in
2050 Trend conditions. With the Draft Blueprint strategies in play,
this share drops slightly further, with increases in transit, walking
and bicycling mode shares.
COMMUTE MODE SHARE 2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINT
Auto: Single Occupancy 54%42%40%
Auto: Other 21%19%18%
Transit 14%19%20%
Active Modes (Bike/Walk)5%6%8%
Telecommute 6%14%14%
WILL JOBS AND HOUSING IN THE BAY AREA BE MORE EVENLY DISTRIBUTED?
County-level jobs-to-housing ratios decrease in most counties,
reflecting a higher ratio of housing to job production. Further,
the ratios in Alameda, San Francisco and Santa Clara counties
approach the region-wide ratio in 2050, indicating an improved
jobs-housing balance. However, other counties trend further
away from the region-wide ratio. These trends indicate that
housing strategies in the Draft Blueprint may bring housing to
job-rich areas such as Silicon Valley, but strategies to move jobs to
housing-rich areas are not suff icient. (Metric under development
for Final Blueprint: Jobs-Housing Fit for low-wage jobs)
JOBS-HOUSING RATIO 2015 2050 BLUEPRINT 2015 2050 BLUEPRINT
Region-Wide 1.50 1.34 San Francisco 2.55 2.21
Alameda 1.48 1.33 San Mateo 1.29 1.21
Contra Costa 0.98 0.98 Santa Clara 1.69 1.41
Marin 1.09 0.75 Solano 0.87 0.89
Napa 1.24 1.46 Sonoma 1.05 0.89
Mean commute distances rise from 2015 to 2050 Trend with
Draft Blueprint land use strategies, due to the clustering of
jobs in existing centers far from housing-rich communities.
Transportation strategies on their own aff ect this metric only
marginally in 2050 Blueprint.
MEAN COMMUTE DISTANCE (MILES)
2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINT
Low-Income Workers 9.5 12.0 11.9
All Workers 12.0 13.1 12.9
WILL BAY AREA BUSINESSES THRIVE?
The region’s economic recovery is expected to be robust
through 2050, even when accounting for the inclusion of new
regional tax measures to fund transportation and aff ordable
housing, among other areas.
GROWTH IN PER CAPITA GROSS REGIONAL PRODUCT (FROM 2015 TO 2050)65%
A key pillar in the region’s middle-wage workforce,
manufacturing and warehouse jobs are anticipated to grow at
a higher rate than other industries, with some of that growth
occurring in newly-designated Priority Production Areas.
GROWTH IN NUMBER OF JOBS (FROM 2015 TO 2050)
Region-Wide All Jobs 35%
Manufacturing/Warehouse/Utilities Jobs 48%
Priority Production Areas All Jobs 42%
Manufacturing/Warehouse/Utilities Jobs 48%
WILL BAY AREA RESIDENTS SPEND LESS ON HOUSING AND TRANSPORTATION?In 2015, low-income households have an extreme housing and transportation (H+T) cost burden, with costs exceeding average incomes when accounting for circumstances such as zero-income, financial assistance or unhoused status. With all Draft Blueprint housing strategies in place in 2050 Trend, H+T costs as a percentage of income decrease for all households. The addition of Draft Blueprint transportation strategies, including means-based tolls and fares, further reduces H+T costs for low-income households, though their cost burden remains deeply unaff ordable.H+T COST AS A PERCENT OF INCOME 2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINTLow-Income Households (LIHH)109%86%83%All Households 57%48%48%Average transit fares per trip, while up in 2050 Trend due to recent fare increases since 2015, decrease in 2050 Blueprint with fare reform policies. The decrease is substantial for low-income households with means-based fares. Average tolls per auto trip increase due to the freeway per-mile tolling strategy, with reduced impact on low-income households due to means-based toll discounts. TRANSPORT EXPENSES PER TRIP 2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINTAverage Fareper Transit Trip Low-Income Households $2.78 $3.13 $1.60All Households $3.16 $3.41 $2.96Average “Out-of-Pocket” Cost per Auto Trip Low-Income Households $1.02 $1.10 $1.11All Households $1.26 $1.45 $1.53Average Tollper Auto Trip Low-Income Households $0.05 $0.08 $0.10All Households $0.08 $0.12 $0.21WILL THE BAY AREA PRODUCE AND PRESERVE MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING?28 percent of all new homes built between 2015 and 2050 are permanently aff ordable (deed-restricted) for low-income households, with an even greater share of these units in High-Resource Areas due to strategic investments in these locations.SHARE OF NEW HOUSING PRODUCTION (2015-50) THAT IS DEED-RESTRICTED AFFORDABLE Region-Wide 28%High-Resource Areas 37%The Draft Blueprint’s affordable housing preservation strategy ensures that all existing deed-restricted affordable units at risk of conversion to market-rate units are converted to permanently affordable (deed-restricted) homes.SHARE OF AT-RISK AFFORDABLE HOUSING PRESERVED Region-Wide 100%WILL BAY AREA RESIDENTS BE ABLE TO ACCESS THEIR DESTINATIONS MORE EASILY?The number of jobs accessible within a 30-minute drive is forecasted to decrease in 2050 Trend due to population growth and subsequent road congestion, but it increases marginally with the Draft Blueprint. Meanwhile, the number of jobs accessible within a 45-minute transit trip is significantly lower than auto accessibility in 2015. Focused housing growth near transit routes increases transit accessibility in 2050 Trend, and performance improves further with investments in transit service in the Draft Blueprint. Biking and walking access to jobs also increases with land use strategies in 2050 Trend.(Metric under development for Final Blueprint: Accessibility to Community Places)PERCENT OF ALL BAY AREA JOBS THAT ARE ACCESSIBLE BY 2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINTBy Car within30 Minutes CoC Residents 19.2%13.6%14.4%All Residents 17.8%12.2%12.6%By Transit within 45 Minutes CoC Residents 5.2%6.6%7.2%All Residents 3.4%4.3%4.7%By Bike within20 Minutes CoC Residents 2.9%3.5%3.5%All Residents 2.3%2.8%2.8%By Foot within20 Minutes CoC Residents 0.3%0.4%0.4%All Residents 0.2%0.2%0.2%SHARE OF HOUSEHOLDS AND JOBS WITHIN 1/2 MILE OF FREQUENT TRANSIT 2015 2050 BLUEPRINTMore households will live close to high-frequency transit, including rail, ferry and frequent bus stops, in 2050 under
the Draft Blueprint. Growth geographies focus more growth
in Transit-Rich Areas, supported by more transit service in
these communities. Due to the more dispersed nature of job
growth, the share of jobs near high-frequency transit remains
relatively constant.
Households Low-Income Households 40%46%All Households 32%43%
Jobs Manufacturing/Warehouse/Utilities 45%43%
All Jobs 52%52%
WILL BAY AREA RESIDENTS HAVE A TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM THEY CAN RELY ON?
Travel times on freeways are forecasted to increase significantly
between 2015 and 2050 Trend, again due to a growing
population. Under 2050 Draft Blueprint conditions, per-mile
freeway tolling on key corridors helps to alleviate this eff ect, even
as speed limits reduce free-flow travel times.
PEAK-HOUR TRAVEL TIME (MINUTES)2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINT
Most of Route Features All-Lane Tolling (>75%)
Oakland-SF 30 53 41
Antioch-SF 75 118 96
Antioch-Oakland 47 67 57
SJ-SF 64 100 87
Oakland-SJ 56 77 66
Oakland-Palo Alto 54 67 61
Part of Route Features All-Lane Tolling (25-75%)
Livermore-SJ 48 75 74
Vallejo-SF 57 103 87
Limited or No Tolling on Route (<25%)
Fairfield-Dublin 48 62 65
Santa Rosa-SF 69 136 138
Overcrowding on transit vehicles, which risks denial of boarding,
is anticipated to rise significantly under 2050 Trend conditions.
Crowding decreases in the 2050 Draft Blueprint for agencies with
planned investments, such as Muni and AC Transit, as well as in
the transbay corridor thanks to the New Transbay Rail Crossing.
Agencies not listed are not forecasted to have overcrowding
challenges in 2050.
PERCENT OF PERSON HOURS IN TRANSIT SPENT IN CROWDED CONDITIONS 2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINT
SFMTA Bus 20%40%29%
AC Transit Local 0%22%20%
AC Transit Transbay 48%64%50%
GGT Express 30%87%85%
BART 19%62%44%
Caltrain 8%32%50%
WETA 23%59%43%
SFMTA LRT 32%37%25%
VTA LRT 0%82%83%
In 2015, 30 percent of all transit vehicles had exceeded their
federally recommended lifespans. As the Draft Blueprint
only includes enough maintenance funding to retain existing
conditions, this metric remains mostly unchanged through 2050.
SHARE OF TRANSIT REVENUE VEHICLE ASSETS PASTTHEIR USEFUL LIFE BENCHMARK
2015 2050 BLUEPRINT
30%30%
WILL BAY AREA COMMUNITIES BE MORE INCLUSIVE?
Focused production of deed-restricted aff ordable housing
in High-Resource Areas increases access to areas of highest
opportunity for low-income households, helping reverse
historically exclusionary policies in many of these communities.
In Transit-Rich Areas, the total number of low-income
households continues to rise, but the share declines over time.
This indicates that aff ordable housing growth may not be
keeping pace with overall development in Transit-Rich Areas.
SHARE OF HOUSEHOLDS THAT ARE LOW-INCOME 2015 2050 BLUEPRINT
High-Resource and Transit-Rich Areas 28%23%
High-Resource (only) Areas 18%22%
Transit-Rich (only) Areas 40%36%
WILL BAY AREA RESIDENTS BE ABLE TO STAY IN PLACE?
At the neighborhood level, the risk of displacement persists in
many low-income communities and communities of color. The
Urban Displacement Project has identified 850 census tracts
with ongoing or risk of displacement, gentrification or exclusion.
In the Blueprint, 31% of these tracts experience displacement
between 2015 and 2050 – defined here as a net loss in number of
Low-Income Households. Further, nearly half of them experience
gentrification – defined here as when the share of low-income
households in the neighborhood drops by over 10 percent
between 2015 and 2050. Even more significant impacts are
forecasted for Communities of Concern.
SHARE OF NEIGHBORHOODS THAT EXPERIENCE DISPLACEMENT AND GENTRIFICATION BETWEEN 2015 AND 2050 DISPLACEMENT GENTRIFICATION
High Displacement Risk Tracts
(total 850 neighborhoods)31%44%
Communities of Concern
(total 339 neighborhoods)42%56%
Transit-Rich Areas
(total 114 areas)13%46%
High-Resource Neighborhoods
(total 638 neighborhoods)18%26%
WILL BAY AREA RESIDENTS BE HEALTHIER AND SAFER?
With Draft Blueprint strategies, 98 percent of all Bay Area
households that would be aff ected by two feet of sea level
rise are protected. All common seismically deficient housing
types and homes built in high wildfire risk zones would be
retrofitted to reduce the likelihood of damage in future
earthquakes and wildfires.
PERCENT OF HOUSEHOLDS IN RISK-PRONE AREAS OR RISK-PRONE BUILDINGS, THAT ARE PROTECTED OR RETROFIT
Sea Level Rise(2ft)
Communities of Concern 100%
All Households 98%
Earthquake Communities of Concern 100%
All Households 100%
Wildfire High /Medium Risk
Communities of Concern 100%
All Households 100%
The rate of fatalities and injuries decreases in the Draft Blueprint
with reduced speed limits and enhanced street design under the
Vision Zero strategy, but remains far from zero incidents.
ANNUAL INCIDENTS,PER 100 MILLION VMT 2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINT
Fatalities 0.98 0.99 0.91
Injuries 4.23 4.35 4.20
Total fine particulate matter emissions (PM2.5) are forecasted to increase under 2050 Trend conditions as population and miles driven continue to rise. The Draft Blueprint strategies help bring this metric down below 2015 levels.
DAILY PM2.5 EMISSIONS (TONS)5.5 5.7 5.2
WILL THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BAY AREA BE HEALTHIER AND SAFER?
Draft Blueprint strategies result in a drop in CO2 emission levels
per capita in 2035 (9% below 2005 levels), but are insuff icient to
curb them to state-mandated levels (19% below 2005 levels).
Further, CO2 emission levels are forecasted to increase between
2035 and 2050 (in both Trend and Blueprint), primarily due to
assumed adoption of driverless vehicles that can potentially
generate “zero occupant” mileage.
CHANGE IN DAILY CO2 EMISSIONS PER CAPITA RELATIVE TO 2005 2015 2035TREND 2035BLUEPRINT 2050TREND 2050BLUEPRINT
Cars and Light-Duty Trucks (SB 375)0%8%-9%14%-3%
All Vehicles(Including Fuel Eff iciency Gains)-7%-36%-42%-38%-43%
With an assumed growth in telecommuting by 2050, the mode
share of single occupancy auto travel is forecasted to drop in
2050 Trend conditions. With the Draft Blueprint strategies in play,
this share drops slightly further, with increases in transit, walking
and bicycling mode shares.
COMMUTE MODE SHARE 2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINT
Auto: Single Occupancy 54%42%40%
Auto: Other 21%19%18%
Transit 14%19%20%
Active Modes (Bike/Walk)5%6%8%
Telecommute 6%14%14%
WILL JOBS AND HOUSING IN THE BAY AREA BE MORE EVENLY DISTRIBUTED?
County-level jobs-to-housing ratios decrease in most counties,
reflecting a higher ratio of housing to job production. Further,
the ratios in Alameda, San Francisco and Santa Clara counties
approach the region-wide ratio in 2050, indicating an improved
jobs-housing balance. However, other counties trend further
away from the region-wide ratio. These trends indicate that
housing strategies in the Draft Blueprint may bring housing to
job-rich areas such as Silicon Valley, but strategies to move jobs to
housing-rich areas are not suff icient. (Metric under development
for Final Blueprint: Jobs-Housing Fit for low-wage jobs)
JOBS-HOUSING RATIO 2015 2050 BLUEPRINT 2015 2050 BLUEPRINT
Region-Wide 1.50 1.34 San Francisco 2.55 2.21
Alameda 1.48 1.33 San Mateo 1.29 1.21
Contra Costa 0.98 0.98 Santa Clara 1.69 1.41
Marin 1.09 0.75 Solano 0.87 0.89
Napa 1.24 1.46 Sonoma 1.05 0.89
Mean commute distances rise from 2015 to 2050 Trend with
Draft Blueprint land use strategies, due to the clustering of
jobs in existing centers far from housing-rich communities.
Transportation strategies on their own aff ect this metric only
marginally in 2050 Blueprint.
MEAN COMMUTE DISTANCE (MILES)
2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINT
Low-Income Workers 9.5 12.0 11.9
All Workers 12.0 13.1 12.9
WILL BAY AREA BUSINESSES THRIVE?
The region’s economic recovery is expected to be robust
through 2050, even when accounting for the inclusion of new
regional tax measures to fund transportation and aff ordable
housing, among other areas.
GROWTH IN PER CAPITA GROSS REGIONAL PRODUCT (FROM 2015 TO 2050)65%
A key pillar in the region’s middle-wage workforce,
manufacturing and warehouse jobs are anticipated to grow at
a higher rate than other industries, with some of that growth
occurring in newly-designated Priority Production Areas.
GROWTH IN NUMBER OF JOBS (FROM 2015 TO 2050)
Region-Wide All Jobs 35%
Manufacturing/Warehouse/Utilities Jobs 48%
Priority Production Areas All Jobs 42%
Manufacturing/Warehouse/Utilities Jobs 48%
3 | What are the Key Equity and Performance Outcomes of the Draft Blueprint?WILL BAY AREA RESIDENTS SPEND LESS ON HOUSING AND TRANSPORTATION?In 2015, low-income households have an extreme housing and transportation (H+T) cost burden, with costs exceeding average incomes when accounting for circumstances such as zero-income, financial assistance or unhoused status. With all Draft Blueprint housing strategies in place in 2050 Trend, H+T costs as a percentage of income decrease for all households. The addition of Draft Blueprint transportation strategies, including means-based tolls and fares, further reduces H+T costs for low-income households, though their cost burden remains deeply unaff ordable.H+T COST AS A PERCENT OF INCOME 2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINTLow-Income Households (LIHH)109%86%83%All Households 57%48%48%Average transit fares per trip, while up in 2050 Trend due to recent fare increases since 2015, decrease in 2050 Blueprint with fare reform policies. The decrease is substantial for low-income households with means-based fares. Average tolls per auto trip increase due to the freeway per-mile tolling strategy, with reduced impact on low-income households due to means-based toll discounts. TRANSPORT EXPENSES PER TRIP 2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINTAverage Fareper Transit Trip Low-Income Households $2.78 $3.13 $1.60All Households $3.16 $3.41 $2.96Average “Out-of-Pocket” Cost per Auto Trip Low-Income Households $1.02 $1.10 $1.11All Households $1.26 $1.45 $1.53Average Tollper Auto Trip Low-Income Households $0.05 $0.08 $0.10All Households $0.08 $0.12 $0.21WILL THE BAY AREA PRODUCE AND PRESERVE MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING?28 percent of all new homes built between 2015 and 2050 are permanently aff ordable (deed-restricted) for low-income households, with an even greater share of these units in High-Resource Areas due to strategic investments in these locations.SHARE OF NEW HOUSING PRODUCTION (2015-50) THAT IS DEED-RESTRICTED AFFORDABLE Region-Wide 28%High-Resource Areas 37%The Draft Blueprint’s affordable housing preservation strategy ensures that all existing deed-restricted affordable units at risk of conversion to market-rate units are converted to permanently affordable (deed-restricted) homes.SHARE OF AT-RISK AFFORDABLE HOUSING PRESERVED Region-Wide 100%WILL BAY AREA RESIDENTS BE ABLE TO ACCESS THEIR DESTINATIONS MORE EASILY?The number of jobs accessible within a 30-minute drive is forecasted to decrease in 2050 Trend due to population growth and subsequent road congestion, but it increases marginally with the Draft Blueprint. Meanwhile, the number of jobs accessible within a 45-minute transit trip is significantly lower than auto accessibility in 2015. Focused housing growth near transit routes increases transit accessibility in 2050 Trend, and performance improves further with investments in transit service in the Draft Blueprint. Biking and walking access to jobs also increases with land use strategies in 2050 Trend.(Metric under development for Final Blueprint: Accessibility to Community Places)PERCENT OF ALL BAY AREA JOBS THAT ARE ACCESSIBLE BY 2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINTBy Car within30 Minutes CoC Residents 19.2%13.6%14.4%All Residents 17.8%12.2%12.6%By Transit within 45 Minutes CoC Residents 5.2%6.6%7.2%All Residents 3.4%4.3%4.7%By Bike within20 Minutes CoC Residents 2.9%3.5%3.5%All Residents 2.3%2.8%2.8%By Foot within20 Minutes CoC Residents 0.3%0.4%0.4%All Residents 0.2%0.2%0.2%SHARE OF HOUSEHOLDS AND JOBS WITHIN 1/2 MILE OF FREQUENT TRANSIT 2015 2050 BLUEPRINTMore households will live close to high-frequency transit, including rail, ferry and frequent bus stops, in 2050 under the Draft Blueprint. Growth geographies focus more growth in Transit-Rich Areas, supported by more transit service in these communities. Due to the more dispersed nature of job growth, the share of jobs near high-frequency transit remains relatively constant.
Households Low-Income Households 40%46%All Households 32%43%
Jobs Manufacturing/Warehouse/Utilities 45%43%
All Jobs 52%52%
WILL BAY AREA RESIDENTS HAVE A TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM THEY CAN RELY ON?
Travel times on freeways are forecasted to increase significantly
between 2015 and 2050 Trend, again due to a growing
population. Under 2050 Draft Blueprint conditions, per-mile
freeway tolling on key corridors helps to alleviate this eff ect, even
as speed limits reduce free-flow travel times.
PEAK-HOUR TRAVEL TIME (MINUTES)2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINT
Most of Route Features All-Lane Tolling (>75%)
Oakland-SF 30 53 41
Antioch-SF 75 118 96
Antioch-Oakland 47 67 57
SJ-SF 64 100 87
Oakland-SJ 56 77 66
Oakland-Palo Alto 54 67 61
Part of Route Features All-Lane Tolling (25-75%)
Livermore-SJ 48 75 74
Vallejo-SF 57 103 87
Limited or No Tolling on Route (<25%)
Fairfield-Dublin 48 62 65
Santa Rosa-SF 69 136 138
Overcrowding on transit vehicles, which risks denial of boarding,
is anticipated to rise significantly under 2050 Trend conditions.
Crowding decreases in the 2050 Draft Blueprint for agencies with
planned investments, such as Muni and AC Transit, as well as in
the transbay corridor thanks to the New Transbay Rail Crossing.
Agencies not listed are not forecasted to have overcrowding
challenges in 2050.
PERCENT OF PERSON HOURS IN TRANSIT SPENT IN CROWDED CONDITIONS 2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINT
SFMTA Bus 20%40%29%
AC Transit Local 0%22%20%
AC Transit Transbay 48%64%50%
GGT Express 30%87%85%
BART 19%62%44%
Caltrain 8%32%50%
WETA 23%59%43%
SFMTA LRT 32%37%25%
VTA LRT 0%82%83%
In 2015, 30 percent of all transit vehicles had exceeded their
federally recommended lifespans. As the Draft Blueprint
only includes enough maintenance funding to retain existing
conditions, this metric remains mostly unchanged through 2050.
SHARE OF TRANSIT REVENUE VEHICLE ASSETS PASTTHEIR USEFUL LIFE BENCHMARK
2015 2050 BLUEPRINT
30%30%
WILL BAY AREA COMMUNITIES BE MORE INCLUSIVE?
Focused production of deed-restricted aff ordable housing
in High-Resource Areas increases access to areas of highest
opportunity for low-income households, helping reverse
historically exclusionary policies in many of these communities.
In Transit-Rich Areas, the total number of low-income
households continues to rise, but the share declines over time.
This indicates that aff ordable housing growth may not be
keeping pace with overall development in Transit-Rich Areas.
SHARE OF HOUSEHOLDS THAT ARE LOW-INCOME 2015 2050 BLUEPRINT
High-Resource and Transit-Rich Areas 28%23%
High-Resource (only) Areas 18%22%
Transit-Rich (only) Areas 40%36%
WILL BAY AREA RESIDENTS BE ABLE TO STAY IN PLACE?
At the neighborhood level, the risk of displacement persists in
many low-income communities and communities of color. The
Urban Displacement Project has identified 850 census tracts
with ongoing or risk of displacement, gentrification or exclusion.
In the Blueprint, 31% of these tracts experience displacement
between 2015 and 2050 – defined here as a net loss in number of
Low-Income Households. Further, nearly half of them experience
gentrification – defined here as when the share of low-income
households in the neighborhood drops by over 10 percent
between 2015 and 2050. Even more significant impacts are
forecasted for Communities of Concern.
SHARE OF NEIGHBORHOODS THAT EXPERIENCE DISPLACEMENT AND GENTRIFICATION BETWEEN 2015 AND 2050 DISPLACEMENT GENTRIFICATION
High Displacement Risk Tracts (total 850 neighborhoods)31%44%
Communities of Concern (total 339 neighborhoods)42%56%
Transit-Rich Areas (total 114 areas)13%46%
High-Resource Neighborhoods (total 638 neighborhoods)18%26%
WILL BAY AREA RESIDENTS BE HEALTHIER AND SAFER?
With Draft Blueprint strategies, 98 percent of all Bay Area
households that would be aff ected by two feet of sea level
rise are protected. All common seismically deficient housing
types and homes built in high wildfire risk zones would be
retrofitted to reduce the likelihood of damage in future
earthquakes and wildfires.
PERCENT OF HOUSEHOLDS IN RISK-PRONE AREAS OR RISK-PRONE BUILDINGS, THAT ARE PROTECTED OR RETROFIT
Sea Level Rise(2ft)
Communities of Concern 100%
All Households 98%
Earthquake Communities of Concern 100%
All Households 100%
Wildfire High /Medium Risk
Communities of Concern 100%
All Households 100%
The rate of fatalities and injuries decreases in the Draft Blueprint
with reduced speed limits and enhanced street design under the
Vision Zero strategy, but remains far from zero incidents.
ANNUAL INCIDENTS,PER 100 MILLION VMT 2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINT
Fatalities 0.98 0.99 0.91
Injuries 4.23 4.35 4.20
Total fine particulate matter emissions (PM2.5) are forecasted to increase under 2050 Trend conditions as population and miles driven continue to rise. The Draft Blueprint strategies help bring this metric down below 2015 levels.
DAILY PM2.5 EMISSIONS (TONS)5.5 5.7 5.2
WILL THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BAY AREA BE HEALTHIER AND SAFER?
Draft Blueprint strategies result in a drop in CO2 emission levels
per capita in 2035 (9% below 2005 levels), but are insuff icient to
curb them to state-mandated levels (19% below 2005 levels).
Further, CO2 emission levels are forecasted to increase between
2035 and 2050 (in both Trend and Blueprint), primarily due to
assumed adoption of driverless vehicles that can potentially
generate “zero occupant” mileage.
CHANGE IN DAILY CO2 EMISSIONS PER CAPITA RELATIVE TO 2005 2015 2035TREND 2035BLUEPRINT 2050TREND 2050BLUEPRINT
Cars and Light-Duty Trucks (SB 375)0%8%-9%14%-3%
All Vehicles(Including Fuel Eff iciency Gains)-7%-36%-42%-38%-43%
With an assumed growth in telecommuting by 2050, the mode
share of single occupancy auto travel is forecasted to drop in
2050 Trend conditions. With the Draft Blueprint strategies in play,
this share drops slightly further, with increases in transit, walking
and bicycling mode shares.
COMMUTE MODE SHARE 2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINT
Auto: Single Occupancy 54%42%40%
Auto: Other 21%19%18%
Transit 14%19%20%
Active Modes (Bike/Walk)5%6%8%
Telecommute 6%14%14%
WILL JOBS AND HOUSING IN THE BAY AREA BE MORE EVENLY DISTRIBUTED?
County-level jobs-to-housing ratios decrease in most counties,
reflecting a higher ratio of housing to job production. Further,
the ratios in Alameda, San Francisco and Santa Clara counties
approach the region-wide ratio in 2050, indicating an improved
jobs-housing balance. However, other counties trend further
away from the region-wide ratio. These trends indicate that
housing strategies in the Draft Blueprint may bring housing to
job-rich areas such as Silicon Valley, but strategies to move jobs to
housing-rich areas are not suff icient. (Metric under development
for Final Blueprint: Jobs-Housing Fit for low-wage jobs)
JOBS-HOUSING RATIO 2015 2050 BLUEPRINT 2015 2050 BLUEPRINT
Region-Wide 1.50 1.34 San Francisco 2.55 2.21
Alameda 1.48 1.33 San Mateo 1.29 1.21
Contra Costa 0.98 0.98 Santa Clara 1.69 1.41
Marin 1.09 0.75 Solano 0.87 0.89
Napa 1.24 1.46 Sonoma 1.05 0.89
Mean commute distances rise from 2015 to 2050 Trend with
Draft Blueprint land use strategies, due to the clustering of
jobs in existing centers far from housing-rich communities.
Transportation strategies on their own aff ect this metric only
marginally in 2050 Blueprint.
MEAN COMMUTE DISTANCE (MILES)
2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINT
Low-Income Workers 9.5 12.0 11.9
All Workers 12.0 13.1 12.9
WILL BAY AREA BUSINESSES THRIVE?
The region’s economic recovery is expected to be robust
through 2050, even when accounting for the inclusion of new
regional tax measures to fund transportation and aff ordable
housing, among other areas.
GROWTH IN PER CAPITA GROSS REGIONAL PRODUCT (FROM 2015 TO 2050)65%
A key pillar in the region’s middle-wage workforce,
manufacturing and warehouse jobs are anticipated to grow at
a higher rate than other industries, with some of that growth
occurring in newly-designated Priority Production Areas.
GROWTH IN NUMBER OF JOBS (FROM 2015 TO 2050)
Region-Wide All Jobs 35%
Manufacturing/Warehouse/Utilities Jobs 48%
Priority Production Areas All Jobs 42%
Manufacturing/Warehouse/Utilities Jobs 48%
At the neighborhood level, the risk of displacement persists
in many low-income communities and communities of color.
The Urban Displacement Project has identified 850 census
tracts with ongoing or risk of displacement, gentrification or
exclusion. In the Blueprint, 31% of these tracts experience displacement between 2015 and 2050 – defined here as a net
loss in number of Low-Income Households. Further, nearly half
of them experience gentrification – defined here as when the
share of low-income households in the neighborhood drops by
over 10 percent between 2015 and 2050. Even more significant impacts are forecasted for Communities of Concern.
Attachment C Agenda Item 4a
Bay Area Metro Center375 Beale SteetSanFrancisco, CA 94105
415.778.6700info@bayareametro.govabag.ca.gov | mtc.ca.gov
WILL BAY AREA RESIDENTS SPEND LESS ON HOUSING AND TRANSPORTATION?In 2015, low-income households have an extreme housing and transportation (H+T) cost burden, with costs exceeding average incomes when accounting for circumstances such as zero-income, financial assistance or unhoused status. With all Draft Blueprint housing strategies in place in 2050 Trend, H+T costs as a percentage of income decrease for all households. The addition of Draft Blueprint transportation strategies, including means-based tolls and fares, further reduces H+T costs for low-income households, though their cost burden remains deeply unaff ordable.H+T COST AS A PERCENT OF INCOME 2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINTLow-Income Households (LIHH)109%86%83%All Households 57%48%48%Average transit fares per trip, while up in 2050 Trend due to recent fare increases since 2015, decrease in 2050 Blueprint with fare reform policies. The decrease is substantial for low-income households with means-based fares. Average tolls per auto trip increase due to the freeway per-mile tolling strategy, with reduced impact on low-income households due to means-based toll discounts. TRANSPORT EXPENSES PER TRIP 2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINTAverage Fareper Transit Trip Low-Income Households $2.78 $3.13 $1.60All Households $3.16 $3.41 $2.96Average “Out-of-Pocket” Cost per Auto Trip Low-Income Households $1.02 $1.10 $1.11All Households $1.26 $1.45 $1.53Average Tollper Auto Trip Low-Income Households $0.05 $0.08 $0.10All Households $0.08 $0.12 $0.21WILL THE BAY AREA PRODUCE AND PRESERVE MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING?28 percent of all new homes built between 2015 and 2050 are permanently aff ordable (deed-restricted) for low-income households, with an even greater share of these units in High-Resource Areas due to strategic investments in these locations.SHARE OF NEW HOUSING PRODUCTION (2015-50) THAT IS DEED-RESTRICTED AFFORDABLE Region-Wide 28%High-Resource Areas 37%The Draft Blueprint’s affordable housing preservation strategy ensures that all existing deed-restricted affordable units at risk of conversion to market-rate units are converted to permanently affordable (deed-restricted) homes.SHARE OF AT-RISK AFFORDABLE HOUSING PRESERVED Region-Wide 100%WILL BAY AREA RESIDENTS BE ABLE TO ACCESS THEIR DESTINATIONS MORE EASILY?The number of jobs accessible within a 30-minute drive is forecasted to decrease in 2050 Trend due to population growth and subsequent road congestion, but it increases marginally with the Draft Blueprint. Meanwhile, the number of jobs accessible within a 45-minute transit trip is significantly lower than auto accessibility in 2015. Focused housing growth near transit routes increases transit accessibility in 2050 Trend, and performance improves further with investments in transit service in the Draft Blueprint. Biking and walking access to jobs also increases with land use strategies in 2050 Trend.(Metric under development for Final Blueprint: Accessibility to Community Places)PERCENT OF ALL BAY AREA JOBS THAT ARE ACCESSIBLE BY 2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINTBy Car within30 Minutes CoC Residents 19.2%13.6%14.4%All Residents 17.8%12.2%12.6%By Transit within 45 Minutes CoC Residents 5.2%6.6%7.2%All Residents 3.4%4.3%4.7%By Bike within20 Minutes CoC Residents 2.9%3.5%3.5%All Residents 2.3%2.8%2.8%By Foot within20 Minutes CoC Residents 0.3%0.4%0.4%All Residents 0.2%0.2%0.2%SHARE OF HOUSEHOLDS AND JOBS WITHIN 1/2 MILE OF FREQUENT TRANSIT 2015 2050 BLUEPRINTMore households will live close to high-frequency transit, including rail, ferry and frequent bus stops, in 2050 under the Draft Blueprint. Growth geographies focus more growth in Transit-Rich Areas, supported by more transit service in these communities. Due to the more dispersed nature of job growth, the share of jobs near high-frequency transit remains relatively constant. Households Low-Income Households 40%46%All Households 32%43%Jobs Manufacturing/Warehouse/Utilities 45%43%All Jobs 52%52%WILL BAY AREA RESIDENTS HAVE A TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM THEY CAN RELY ON?Travel times on freeways are forecasted to increase significantly between 2015 and 2050 Trend, again due to a growing population. Under 2050 Draft Blueprint conditions, per-mile freeway tolling on key corridors helps to alleviate this eff ect, even as speed limits reduce free-flow travel times.PEAK-HOUR TRAVEL TIME (MINUTES)2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINTMost of Route Features All-Lane Tolling (>75%)Oakland-SF 30 53 41Antioch-SF 75 118 96Antioch-Oakland 47 67 57SJ-SF 64 100 87Oakland-SJ 56 77 66Oakland-Palo Alto 54 67 61Part of Route Features All-Lane Tolling (25-75%)Livermore-SJ 48 75 74Vallejo-SF 57 103 87Limited or No Tolling on Route (<25%)Fairfield-Dublin 48 62 65Santa Rosa-SF 69 136 138Overcrowding on transit vehicles, which risks denial of boarding, is anticipated to rise significantly under 2050 Trend conditions. Crowding decreases in the 2050 Draft Blueprint for agencies with planned investments, such as Muni and AC Transit, as well as in the transbay corridor thanks to the New Transbay Rail Crossing. Agencies not listed are not forecasted to have overcrowding challenges in 2050.PERCENT OF PERSON HOURS IN TRANSIT SPENT IN CROWDED CONDITIONS 2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINTSFMTA Bus 20%40%29%AC Transit Local 0%22%20%AC Transit Transbay 48%64%50%GGT Express 30%87%85%BART 19%62%44%Caltrain 8%32%50%WETA 23%59%43%SFMTA LRT 32%37%25%VTA LRT 0%82%83%In 2015, 30 percent of all transit vehicles had exceeded their federally recommended lifespans. As the Draft Blueprint only includes enough maintenance funding to retain existing conditions, this metric remains mostly unchanged through 2050.SHARE OF TRANSIT REVENUE VEHICLE ASSETS PASTTHEIR USEFUL LIFE BENCHMARK 2015 2050 BLUEPRINT30%30%WILL BAY AREA COMMUNITIES BE MORE INCLUSIVE?Focused production of deed-restricted aff ordable housing in High-Resource Areas increases access to areas of highest opportunity for low-income households, helping reverse historically exclusionary policies in many of these communities. In Transit-Rich Areas, the total number of low-income households continues to rise, but the share declines over time. This indicates that aff ordable housing growth may not be keeping pace with overall development in Transit-Rich Areas.SHARE OF HOUSEHOLDS THAT ARE LOW-INCOME 2015 2050 BLUEPRINTHigh-Resource and Transit-Rich Areas 28%23%High-Resource (only) Areas 18%22%Transit-Rich (only) Areas 40%36%WILL BAY AREA RESIDENTS BE ABLE TO STAY IN PLACE?At the neighborhood level, the risk of displacement persists in many low-income communities and communities of color. The Urban Displacement Project has identified 850 census tracts with ongoing or risk of displacement, gentrification or exclusion. In the Blueprint, 31% of these tracts experience displacement between 2015 and 2050 – defined here as a net loss in number of Low-Income Households. Further, nearly half of them experience gentrification – defined here as when the share of low-income households in the neighborhood drops by over 10 percent between 2015 and 2050. Even more significant impacts are forecasted for Communities of Concern.SHARE OF NEIGHBORHOODS THAT EXPERIENCE DISPLACEMENT AND GENTRIFICATION BETWEEN 2015 AND 2050 DISPLACEMENT GENTRIFICATIONHigh Displacement Risk Tracts (total 850 neighborhoods)31%44%Communities of Concern (total 339 neighborhoods)42%56%Transit-Rich Areas (total 114 areas)13%46%High-Resource Neighborhoods (total 638 neighborhoods)18%26%
WILL BAY AREA RESIDENTS BE HEALTHIER AND SAFER?
With Draft Blueprint strategies, 98 percent of all Bay Area
households that would be aff ected by two feet of sea level
rise are protected. All common seismically deficient housing
types and homes built in high wildfire risk zones would be retrofitted to reduce the likelihood of damage in future
earthquakes and wildfires.
PERCENT OF HOUSEHOLDS IN RISK-PRONE AREAS OR RISK-PRONE BUILDINGS, THAT ARE PROTECTED OR RETROFIT
Sea Level Rise(2ft)
Communities of Concern 100%
All Households 98%
Earthquake Communities of Concern 100%
All Households 100%
Wildfire High /Medium Risk
Communities of Concern 100%
All Households 100%
The rate of fatalities and injuries decreases in the Draft Blueprint
with reduced speed limits and enhanced street design under the
Vision Zero strategy, but remains far from zero incidents.
ANNUAL INCIDENTS,PER 100 MILLION VMT 2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINT
Fatalities 0.98 0.99 0.91
Injuries 4.23 4.35 4.20
Total fine particulate matter emissions (PM2.5) are forecasted to increase under 2050 Trend conditions as population and miles driven continue to rise. The Draft Blueprint strategies help bring this metric down below 2015 levels.
DAILY PM2.5 EMISSIONS (TONS)5.5 5.7 5.2
WILL THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BAY AREA BE HEALTHIER AND SAFER?
Draft Blueprint strategies result in a drop in CO2 emission levels
per capita in 2035 (9% below 2005 levels), but are insuff icient to
curb them to state-mandated levels (19% below 2005 levels).
Further, CO2 emission levels are forecasted to increase between 2035 and 2050 (in both Trend and Blueprint), primarily due to
assumed adoption of driverless vehicles that can potentially
generate “zero occupant” mileage.
CHANGE IN DAILY CO2 EMISSIONS PER CAPITA RELATIVE TO 2005 2015 2035TREND 2035BLUEPRINT 2050TREND 2050BLUEPRINT
Cars and Light-Duty Trucks (SB 375)0%8%-9%14%-3%
All Vehicles(Including Fuel Eff iciency Gains)-7%-36%-42%-38%-43%
With an assumed growth in telecommuting by 2050, the mode
share of single occupancy auto travel is forecasted to drop in
2050 Trend conditions. With the Draft Blueprint strategies in play,
this share drops slightly further, with increases in transit, walking
and bicycling mode shares.
COMMUTE MODE SHARE 2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINT
Auto: Single Occupancy 54%42%40%
Auto: Other 21%19%18%
Transit 14%19%20%
Active Modes (Bike/Walk)5%6%8%
Telecommute 6%14%14%
WILL JOBS AND HOUSING IN THE BAY AREA BE MORE EVENLY DISTRIBUTED?
County-level jobs-to-housing ratios decrease in most counties,
reflecting a higher ratio of housing to job production. Further,
the ratios in Alameda, San Francisco and Santa Clara counties
approach the region-wide ratio in 2050, indicating an improved
jobs-housing balance. However, other counties trend further
away from the region-wide ratio. These trends indicate that
housing strategies in the Draft Blueprint may bring housing to
job-rich areas such as Silicon Valley, but strategies to move jobs to
housing-rich areas are not suff icient. (Metric under development
for Final Blueprint: Jobs-Housing Fit for low-wage jobs)
JOBS-HOUSING RATIO 2015 2050 BLUEPRINT 2015 2050 BLUEPRINT
Region-Wide 1.50 1.34 San Francisco 2.55 2.21
Alameda 1.48 1.33 San Mateo 1.29 1.21
Contra Costa 0.98 0.98 Santa Clara 1.69 1.41
Marin 1.09 0.75 Solano 0.87 0.89
Napa 1.24 1.46 Sonoma 1.05 0.89
Mean commute distances rise from 2015 to 2050 Trend with
Draft Blueprint land use strategies, due to the clustering of
jobs in existing centers far from housing-rich communities.
Transportation strategies on their own aff ect this metric only
marginally in 2050 Blueprint.
MEAN COMMUTE DISTANCE (MILES)
2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINT
Low-Income Workers 9.5 12.0 11.9
All Workers 12.0 13.1 12.9
WILL BAY AREA BUSINESSES THRIVE?
The region’s economic recovery is expected to be robust
through 2050, even when accounting for the inclusion of new
regional tax measures to fund transportation and aff ordable
housing, among other areas.
GROWTH IN PER CAPITA GROSS REGIONAL PRODUCT (FROM 2015 TO 2050)65%
A key pillar in the region’s middle-wage workforce,
manufacturing and warehouse jobs are anticipated to grow at
a higher rate than other industries, with some of that growth
occurring in newly-designated Priority Production Areas.
GROWTH IN NUMBER OF JOBS (FROM 2015 TO 2050)
Region-Wide All Jobs 35%
Manufacturing/Warehouse/Utilities Jobs 48%
Priority Production Areas All Jobs 42%
Manufacturing/Warehouse/Utilities Jobs 48%
3 | What are the Key Equity and Performance Outcomes of the Draft Blueprint?WILL BAY AREA RESIDENTS SPEND LESS ON HOUSING AND TRANSPORTATION?In 2015, low-income households have an extreme housing and transportation (H+T) cost burden, with costs exceeding average incomes when accounting for circumstances such as zero-income, financial assistance or unhoused status. With all Draft Blueprint housing strategies in place in 2050 Trend, H+T costs as a percentage of income decrease for all households. The addition of Draft Blueprint transportation strategies, including means-based tolls and fares, further reduces H+T costs for low-income households, though their cost burden remains deeply unaff ordable.H+T COST AS A PERCENT OF INCOME 2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINTLow-Income Households (LIHH)109%86%83%All Households 57%48%48%Average transit fares per trip, while up in 2050 Trend due to recent fare increases since 2015, decrease in 2050 Blueprint with fare reform policies. The decrease is substantial for low-income households with means-based fares. Average tolls per auto trip increase due to the freeway per-mile tolling strategy, with reduced impact on low-income households due to means-based toll discounts. TRANSPORT EXPENSES PER TRIP 2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINTAverage Fareper Transit Trip Low-Income Households $2.78 $3.13 $1.60All Households $3.16 $3.41 $2.96Average “Out-of-Pocket” Cost per Auto Trip Low-Income Households $1.02 $1.10 $1.11All Households $1.26 $1.45 $1.53Average Tollper Auto Trip Low-Income Households $0.05 $0.08 $0.10All Households $0.08 $0.12 $0.21WILL THE BAY AREA PRODUCE AND PRESERVE MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING?28 percent of all new homes built between 2015 and 2050 are permanently aff ordable (deed-restricted) for low-income households, with an even greater share of these units in High-Resource Areas due to strategic investments in these locations.SHARE OF NEW HOUSING PRODUCTION (2015-50) THAT IS DEED-RESTRICTED AFFORDABLE Region-Wide 28%High-Resource Areas 37%The Draft Blueprint’s affordable housing preservation strategy ensures that all existing deed-restricted affordable units at risk of conversion to market-rate units are converted to permanently affordable (deed-restricted) homes.SHARE OF AT-RISK AFFORDABLE HOUSING PRESERVED Region-Wide 100%WILL BAY AREA RESIDENTS BE ABLE TO ACCESS THEIR DESTINATIONS MORE EASILY?The number of jobs accessible within a 30-minute drive is forecasted to decrease in 2050 Trend due to population growth and subsequent road congestion, but it increases marginally with the Draft Blueprint. Meanwhile, the number of jobs accessible within a 45-minute transit trip is significantly lower than auto accessibility in 2015. Focused housing growth near transit routes increases transit accessibility in 2050 Trend, and performance improves further with investments in transit service in the Draft Blueprint. Biking and walking access to jobs also increases with land use strategies in 2050 Trend.(Metric under development for Final Blueprint: Accessibility to Community Places)PERCENT OF ALL BAY AREA JOBS THAT ARE ACCESSIBLE BY 2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINTBy Car within30 Minutes CoC Residents 19.2%13.6%14.4%All Residents 17.8%12.2%12.6%By Transit within 45 Minutes CoC Residents 5.2%6.6%7.2%All Residents 3.4%4.3%4.7%By Bike within20 Minutes CoC Residents 2.9%3.5%3.5%All Residents 2.3%2.8%2.8%By Foot within20 Minutes CoC Residents 0.3%0.4%0.4%All Residents 0.2%0.2%0.2%SHARE OF HOUSEHOLDS AND JOBS WITHIN 1/2 MILE OF FREQUENT TRANSIT 2015 2050 BLUEPRINTMore households will live close to high-frequency transit, including rail, ferry and frequent bus stops, in 2050 under the Draft Blueprint. Growth geographies focus more growth in Transit-Rich Areas, supported by more transit service in these communities. Due to the more dispersed nature of job growth, the share of jobs near high-frequency transit remains relatively constant. Households Low-Income Households 40%46%All Households 32%43%Jobs Manufacturing/Warehouse/Utilities 45%43%All Jobs 52%52%WILL BAY AREA RESIDENTS HAVE A TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM THEY CAN RELY ON?Travel times on freeways are forecasted to increase significantly between 2015 and 2050 Trend, again due to a growing population. Under 2050 Draft Blueprint conditions, per-mile freeway tolling on key corridors helps to alleviate this eff ect, even as speed limits reduce free-flow travel times.PEAK-HOUR TRAVEL TIME (MINUTES)2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINTMost of Route Features All-Lane Tolling (>75%)Oakland-SF 30 53 41Antioch-SF 75 118 96Antioch-Oakland 47 67 57SJ-SF 64 100 87Oakland-SJ 56 77 66Oakland-Palo Alto 54 67 61Part of Route Features All-Lane Tolling (25-75%)Livermore-SJ 48 75 74Vallejo-SF 57 103 87Limited or No Tolling on Route (<25%)Fairfield-Dublin 48 62 65Santa Rosa-SF 69 136 138Overcrowding on transit vehicles, which risks denial of boarding, is anticipated to rise significantly under 2050 Trend conditions. Crowding decreases in the 2050 Draft Blueprint for agencies with planned investments, such as Muni and AC Transit, as well as in the transbay corridor thanks to the New Transbay Rail Crossing. Agencies not listed are not forecasted to have overcrowding challenges in 2050.PERCENT OF PERSON HOURS IN TRANSIT SPENT IN CROWDED CONDITIONS 2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINTSFMTA Bus 20%40%29%AC Transit Local 0%22%20%AC Transit Transbay 48%64%50%GGT Express 30%87%85%BART 19%62%44%Caltrain 8%32%50%WETA 23%59%43%SFMTA LRT 32%37%25%VTA LRT 0%82%83%In 2015, 30 percent of all transit vehicles had exceeded their federally recommended lifespans. As the Draft Blueprint only includes enough maintenance funding to retain existing conditions, this metric remains mostly unchanged through 2050.SHARE OF TRANSIT REVENUE VEHICLE ASSETS PASTTHEIR USEFUL LIFE BENCHMARK 2015 2050 BLUEPRINT30%30%WILL BAY AREA COMMUNITIES BE MORE INCLUSIVE?Focused production of deed-restricted aff ordable housing in High-Resource Areas increases access to areas of highest opportunity for low-income households, helping reverse historically exclusionary policies in many of these communities. In Transit-Rich Areas, the total number of low-income households continues to rise, but the share declines over time. This indicates that aff ordable housing growth may not be keeping pace with overall development in Transit-Rich Areas.SHARE OF HOUSEHOLDS THAT ARE LOW-INCOME 2015 2050 BLUEPRINTHigh-Resource and Transit-Rich Areas 28%23%High-Resource (only) Areas 18%22%Transit-Rich (only) Areas 40%36%WILL BAY AREA RESIDENTS BE ABLE TO STAY IN PLACE?At the neighborhood level, the risk of displacement persists in many low-income communities and communities of color. The Urban Displacement Project has identified 850 census tracts with ongoing or risk of displacement, gentrification or exclusion. In the Blueprint, 31% of these tracts experience displacement between 2015 and 2050 – defined here as a net loss in number of Low-Income Households. Further, nearly half of them experience gentrification – defined here as when the share of low-income households in the neighborhood drops by over 10 percent between 2015 and 2050. Even more significant impacts are forecasted for Communities of Concern.SHARE OF NEIGHBORHOODS THAT EXPERIENCE DISPLACEMENT AND GENTRIFICATION BETWEEN 2015 AND 2050 DISPLACEMENT GENTRIFICATIONHigh Displacement Risk Tracts (total 850 neighborhoods)31%44%Communities of Concern (total 339 neighborhoods)42%56%Transit-Rich Areas (total 114 areas)13%46%High-Resource Neighborhoods (total 638 neighborhoods)18%26%
WILL BAY AREA RESIDENTS BE HEALTHIER AND SAFER?
With Draft Blueprint strategies, 98 percent of all Bay Area
households that would be aff ected by two feet of sea level
rise are protected. All common seismically deficient housing
types and homes built in high wildfire risk zones would be
retrofitted to reduce the likelihood of damage in future
earthquakes and wildfires.
PERCENT OF HOUSEHOLDS IN RISK-PRONE AREAS OR RISK-PRONE BUILDINGS, THAT ARE PROTECTED OR RETROFIT
Sea Level Rise(2ft)
Communities of Concern 100%
All Households 98%
Earthquake Communities of Concern 100%
All Households 100%
Wildfire High /Medium Risk
Communities of Concern 100%
All Households 100%
The rate of fatalities and injuries decreases in the Draft Blueprint
with reduced speed limits and enhanced street design under the
Vision Zero strategy, but remains far from zero incidents.
ANNUAL INCIDENTS,PER 100 MILLION VMT 2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINT
Fatalities 0.98 0.99 0.91
Injuries 4.23 4.35 4.20
Total fine particulate matter emissions (PM2.5) are forecasted to increase under 2050 Trend conditions as population and miles driven continue to rise. The Draft Blueprint strategies help bring this metric down below 2015 levels.
DAILY PM2.5 EMISSIONS (TONS)5.5 5.7 5.2
WILL THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BAY AREA BE HEALTHIER AND SAFER?
Draft Blueprint strategies result in a drop in CO2 emission levels
per capita in 2035 (9% below 2005 levels), but are insuff icient to
curb them to state-mandated levels (19% below 2005 levels).
Further, CO2 emission levels are forecasted to increase between
2035 and 2050 (in both Trend and Blueprint), primarily due to
assumed adoption of driverless vehicles that can potentially
generate “zero occupant” mileage.
CHANGE IN DAILY CO2 EMISSIONS PER CAPITA RELATIVE TO 2005 2015 2035TREND 2035BLUEPRINT 2050TREND 2050BLUEPRINT
Cars and Light-Duty Trucks (SB 375)0%8%-9%14%-3%
All Vehicles(Including Fuel Eff iciency Gains)-7%-36%-42%-38%-43%
With an assumed growth in telecommuting by 2050, the mode
share of single occupancy auto travel is forecasted to drop in
2050 Trend conditions. With the Draft Blueprint strategies in play,
this share drops slightly further, with increases in transit, walking
and bicycling mode shares.
COMMUTE MODE SHARE 2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINT
Auto: Single Occupancy 54%42%40%
Auto: Other 21%19%18%
Transit 14%19%20%
Active Modes (Bike/Walk)5%6%8%
Telecommute 6%14%14%
WILL JOBS AND HOUSING IN THE BAY AREA BE MORE EVENLY DISTRIBUTED?
County-level jobs-to-housing ratios decrease in most counties,
reflecting a higher ratio of housing to job production. Further,
the ratios in Alameda, San Francisco and Santa Clara counties
approach the region-wide ratio in 2050, indicating an improved
jobs-housing balance. However, other counties trend further
away from the region-wide ratio. These trends indicate that
housing strategies in the Draft Blueprint may bring housing to
job-rich areas such as Silicon Valley, but strategies to move jobs to
housing-rich areas are not suff icient. (Metric under development
for Final Blueprint: Jobs-Housing Fit for low-wage jobs)
JOBS-HOUSING RATIO 2015 2050 BLUEPRINT 2015 2050 BLUEPRINT
Region-Wide 1.50 1.34 San Francisco 2.55 2.21
Alameda 1.48 1.33 San Mateo 1.29 1.21
Contra Costa 0.98 0.98 Santa Clara 1.69 1.41
Marin 1.09 0.75 Solano 0.87 0.89
Napa 1.24 1.46 Sonoma 1.05 0.89
Mean commute distances rise from 2015 to 2050 Trend with
Draft Blueprint land use strategies, due to the clustering of
jobs in existing centers far from housing-rich communities.
Transportation strategies on their own aff ect this metric only
marginally in 2050 Blueprint.
MEAN COMMUTE DISTANCE (MILES)
2015 2050 TREND 2050 BLUEPRINT
Low-Income Workers 9.5 12.0 11.9
All Workers 12.0 13.1 12.9
WILL BAY AREA BUSINESSES THRIVE?
The region’s economic recovery is expected to be robust
through 2050, even when accounting for the inclusion of new
regional tax measures to fund transportation and aff ordable housing, among other areas.
GROWTH IN PER CAPITA GROSS REGIONAL PRODUCT (FROM 2015 TO 2050)65%
A key pillar in the region’s middle-wage workforce,
manufacturing and warehouse jobs are anticipated to grow at
a higher rate than other industries, with some of that growth
occurring in newly-designated Priority Production Areas.
GROWTH IN NUMBER OF JOBS (FROM 2015 TO 2050)
Region-Wide All Jobs 35%
Manufacturing/Warehouse/Utilities Jobs 48%
Priority Production Areas All Jobs 42%
Manufacturing/Warehouse/Utilities Jobs 48%
Attachment C Agenda Item 4a
@MTCBATA MTCBATAplanbayarea.org
info@planbayarea.org @mtcbata #BayArea2050
How Will COVID-19 Affect the Final Blueprint?
COVID-19 has upended everyday life throughout the world and intensified existing challenges, and we all feel uncertain
about what the future holds. While Plan Bay Area 2050 is a 30-year vision for the Bay Area, many of the strategies approved
for analysis by the MTC Commission and ABAG Executive Board in February have only become more timely.
The Final Blueprint will continue to focus on strategies such as:
BUILD A COMPLETE STREETS NETWORK: Enhance streets to promote walking, biking, and other micromobility through
improvements to the pedestrian environment and thousands of miles of bike lanes or multi-use paths with investments
targeted in Communities of Concern and near transit.
STRENGTHEN RENTER PROTECTIONS BEYOND STATE LEGISLATION: Building upon recent tenant protection laws,
limit annual rent increases to the rate of inflation, while exempting units less than 10 years old.
EXPAND CHILDCARE SUPPORT FOR LOW-INCOME FAMILIES: Subsidize childcare for low-income households with
children under 5, enabling more parents with young children to remain in (or to enter) the workforce.
PROTECT HIGH-VALUE CONSERVATION LANDS: Provide strategic matching funds to help conserve high-priority natural
and agricultural lands, expand regional trails, and restore marshlands.
Challenges
• Affordable housing production is
insufficient to address the existing
need for affordable units in the
Bay Area.
• Traffic congestion and transit
crowding increase significantly
with population growth and will
not be sufficiently addressed with
existing strategies.
• Low-income residents continue
to face a high risk of displacement,
particularly in Communities
of Concern.
• Per capita greenhouse gas
emissions decline, but still fail
to meet state-mandated
reduction targets.
• More ambitious strategies are
needed to shift jobs closer to
the region’s workforce.
Highlights
• Housing and transportation costs
are significantly reduced, especially
for low-income residents.
• New revenues enable a significant
uptick in production of deed-
restricted affordable homes.
• Most new homes are focused
in walkable communities with
frequent transit service.
• Strategies to reduce vehicle speeds
and build protected bicycle/
pedestrian infrastructure help to
save lives.
• Seismic retrofits and sea level rise
infrastructure protect thousands of
homes from damage.
• Despite significant tax increases
to pay for new strategies, Bay Area
businesses continue to thrive.
4 | What are the Key Takeaways from the Draft Blueprint?
What’s Next for the Final Blueprint?
JULY/EARLY AUGUST 2020
• Public Engagement:
Online and Remote
Offline Opportunities
MID-AUGUST 2020
• Refine Strategies
• Close of Blueprint
Comment Period
SEPTEMBER 2020
• Seek Approval of Final
Blueprint for Analysis
DECEMBER 2020
• Release Final Blueprint
and Seek Action on
Preferred EIR Alternative
INPUTS
Baseline Data
(Zoning, Pipeline, Growth
Boundaries, etc.)
INPUTS
Strategies and
Growth Geographies
(February 2020 Approval for Analysis)
ANALYSIS & MODELING
Economic, Transportation and
Land Use Analysis and Modeling
(Spring 2020)
OUTCOMES
Performance Metrics
and Growth Pattern
(July 2020 Release)
How Can You Get Involved in July/Early August? (From Home!)
Virtual Public
Workshops
Online Survey and
Official Comment Period
(ends August 10)
Telephone
Townhalls
5 | How Did We Analyze the Draft Blueprint?
Attachment C Agenda Item 4a
Bay Area Metro Center375 Beale Steet San Francisco, CA 94105
415.778.6700info@bayareametro.govabag.ca.gov | mtc.ca.gov
This technical appendix summarizes the growth pattern of households and jobs at the county and sub-county levels in the
Plan Bay Area 2050 Draft Blueprint. For more information on outcomes of the Draft Blueprint, refer to the Outcomes PDF document.
PROJECTED HOUSEHOLD AND JOB GROWTH, BY COUNTY
HOUSEHOLDS JOBS
COUNTY 2015 2050 GROWTH PERCENT GROWTH
SHARE OF REGIONAL GROWTH 2015 2050 GROWTH PERCENT GROWTH
SHARE OF REGIONAL GROWTH
San Francisco 362,000 501,000 139,000 +38%10%925,000 1,107,000 182,000 +20%13%
San Mateo 267,000 404,000 137,000 +51%10%349,000 494,000 145,000 +41%10%
Santa Clara 618,000 1,177,000 559,000 +91%41%1,036,000 1,647,000 612,000 +59%44%
Alameda 553,000 809,000 256,000 +46%19%815,000 1,077,000 262,000 +32%19%
Contra Costa 383,000 490,000 108,000 +28%8%374,000 480,000 107,000 +29%8%
Solano 144,000 188,000 45,000 +31%3%124,000 168,000 43,000 +35%3%
Napa 51,000 60,000 9,000 +18%1%63,000 88,000 24,000 +38%2%
Sonoma 190,000 271,000 81,000 +42%6%199,000 240,000 41,000 +21%3%
Marin 109,000 142,000 33,000 +30%2%120,000 107,000 –13,000 –11%–1%
REGION 2,677,000 4,043,000 1,367,000 +51%100%4,005,000 5,408,000 1,403,000 +35%100%
HELP US DRAFT THE BLUEPRINT.TECHNICAL APPENDIX:
DRAFT BLUEPRINT GROWTH PATTERN
DRAFTING THE
BLUEPRINT
Numbers may not always sum to 100% due to rounding.
Bay Area Metro Center375 Beale Steet San Francisco, CA 94105
415.778.6700info@bayareametro.govabag.ca.gov | mtc.ca.gov
Bay Area Metro Center375 Beale Steet San Francisco, CA 94105
415.778.6700info@bayareametro.govabag.ca.gov | mtc.ca.gov
PROJECTED HOUSEHOLD AND JOB GROWTH, BY SUPERDISTRICT
HOUSEHOLDS JOBS
COUNTY SUPER-DISTRICT SUPERDISTRICT NAME 2015 2050 GROWTH PERCENT GROWTH SHARE OF REGIONAL GROWTH 2015 2050 GROWTH PERCENT GROWTH SHARE OF REGIONAL GROWTH
San Francisco
1 Northeast San Francisco County 83,000 126,000 43,000 +52%3%504,000 578,000 74,000 +15%5%
2 Northwest San Francisco County 108,000 125,000 17,000 +16%1%89,000 103,000 14,000 +15%1%
3 Southeast San Francisco County 120,000 189,000 69,000 +57%5%300,000 389,000 89,000 +30%6%
4 Southwest San Francisco County 51,000 62,000 10,000 +20%1%32,000 38,000 6,000 +18%0%
San Mateo
5 North San Mateo County 98,000 175,000 76,000 +78%6%119,000 206,000 88,000 +74%6%
6 Central San Mateo County 88,000 117,000 28,000 +32%2%95,000 108,000 13,000 +14%1%
7 South San Mateo County 80,000 113,000 32,000 +40%2%135,000 180,000 44,000 +32%3%
Santa Clara
8 Northwest Santa Clara County 74,000 135,000 61,000 +83%4%161,000 168,000 8,000 +5%1%
9 West Santa Clara County 104,000 263,000 159,000 +152%12%367,000 790,000 423,000 +115%30%
10 North Santa Clara County 121,000 202,000 81,000 +67%6%133,000 164,000 30,000 +23%2%
11 Central Santa Clara County 104,000 221,000 117,000 +113%9%166,000 271,000 106,000 +64%8%
12 East Santa Clara County 108,000 201,000 93,000 +87%7%109,000 125,000 16,000 +15%1%
13 Southwest Santa Clara County 73,000 101,000 28,000 +38%2%51,000 73,000 22,000 +42%2%
14 South Santa Clara County 34,000 54,000 20,000 +58%1%48,000 56,000 8,000 +17%1%
Alameda
15 East Alameda County 72,000 113,000 42,000 +58%3%124,000 154,000 31,000 +25%2%
16 South Alameda County 106,000 160,000 55,000 +52%4%138,000 229,000 91,000 +66%7%
17 Central Alameda County 122,000 144,000 22,000 +18%2%148,000 222,000 74,000 +50%5%
18 North Alameda County 180,000 290,000 110,000 +61%8%264,000 316,000 52,000 +20%4%
19 Northwest Alameda County 74,000 101,000 28,000 +37%2%142,000 156,000 14,000 +10%1%
Contra Costa
20 West Contra Costa County 90,000 120,000 31,000 +34%2%76,000 118,000 43,000 +56%3%
21 North Contra Costa County 86,000 102,000 16,000 +19%1%110,000 151,000 40,000 +37%3%
22 Central Contra Costa County 60,000 81,000 21,000 +35%2%74,000 78,000 3,000 +5%0%
23 South Contra Costa County 54,000 66,000 12,000 +22%1%61,000 62,000 1,000 +2%0%
24 East Contra Costa County 93,000 121,000 28,000 +30%2%53,000 72,000 19,000 +37%1%
Solano 25 North Solano County 53,000 61,000 8,000 +15%1%42,000 54,000 12,000 +29%1%
26 South Solano County 91,000 128,000 37,000 +41%3%82,000 114,000 31,000 +38%2%
Napa 27 South Napa County 35,000 42,000 7,000 +21%1%44,000 63,000 19,000 +43%1%
28 North Napa County 16,000 18,000 2,000 +12%0%19,000 25,000 5,000 +28%0%
Sonoma
29 South Sonoma County 65,000 85,000 20,000 +31%1%65,000 79,000 13,000 +20%1%
30 Central Sonoma County 89,000 142,000 53,000 +59%4%107,000 122,000 15,000 +14%1%
31 North Sonoma County 36,000 44,000 8,000 +22%1%27,000 40,000 13,000 +48%1%
Marin
32 North Marin County 23,000 32,000 9,000 +38%1%26,000 31,000 5,000 +19%0%
33 Central Marin County 44,000 61,000 16,000 +37%1%56,000 41,000 –15,000 –26%–1%
34 South Marin County 41,000 49,000 7,000 +18%1%38,000 35,000 –3,000 –8%–0%
REGION 2,677,000 4,043,000 1,367,000 +51%100%4,005,000 5,408,000 1,403,000 +35%100%
HELP US DRAFT THE BLUEPRINT.TECHNICAL APPENDIX: DRAFT BLUEPRINT GROWTH PATTERNDRAFTING THE
BLUEPRINT
Numbers may not always sum to 100% due to rounding.
Bay Area Metro Center375 Beale Steet San Francisco, CA 94105
415.778.6700info@bayareametro.govabag.ca.gov | mtc.ca.gov
Bay Area Metro Center375 Beale Steet San Francisco, CA 94105
415.778.6700info@bayareametro.govabag.ca.gov | mtc.ca.gov
HELP US DRAFT THE BLUEPRINT.TECHNICAL APPENDIX: DRAFT BLUEPRINT GROWTH PATTERNDRAFTING THE
BLUEPRINT
SUPER- DISTRICT COUNTY SUPERDISTRICT NAME PRIMARY JURISDICTIONS INCLUDED IN SUPERDISTRICT
1 San Francisco Northeast San Francisco County San Francisco (partial)
2 San Francisco Northwest San Francisco County San Francisco (partial)
3 San Francisco Southeast San Francisco County San Francisco (partial)
4 San Francisco Southwest San Francisco County San Francisco (partial)
5 San Mateo North San Mateo County Brisbane, Colma, Daly City, Pacific, South San Francisco,
Millbrae, San Bruno, Burlingame (partial)
6 San Mateo Central San Mateo County Half Moon Bay, Hillsborough, San Mateo, Foster City, Belmont, Burlingame (partial)
7 San Mateo South San Mateo County Atherton, Menlo Park, Redwood City, Woodside, East Palo Alto, Portola Valley, San Carlos
8 Santa Clara Northwest Santa Clara County Los Altos Hills, Los Altos, Palo Alto (partial), Mountain View (partial)
9 Santa Clara West Santa Clara County Sunnyvale, Santa Clara (partial), Mountain View (partial),
Milpitas (partial), San Jose (partial), Palo Alto (partial)
10 Santa Clara North Santa Clara County Los Gatos, Monte Sereno, Saratoga, Cupertino, Campbell (partial), Santa Clara (partial)
11 Santa Clara Central Santa Clara County Campbell (partial), San Jose (partial)
12 Santa Clara East Santa Clara County Milpitas (partial), San Jose (partial)
13 Santa Clara Southwest Santa Clara County San Jose (partial)
14 Santa Clara South Santa Clara County Gilroy, Morgan Hill, San Jose (partial)
15 Alameda East Alameda County Dublin, Livermore, Pleasanton
16 Alameda South Alameda County Newark, Fremont, Union City
17 Alameda Central Alameda County San Leandro, Hayward
18 Alameda North Alameda County Alameda, Piedmont, Oakland
19 Alameda Northwest Alameda County Albany, Berkeley, Emeryville
20 Contra Costa West Contra Costa County El Cerrito, Hercules, Pinole, Richmond, San Pablo
21 Contra Costa North Contra Costa County Clayton, Pleasant Hill, Concord, Martinez, Lafayette (partial), Pittsburg (partial)
22 Contra Costa Central Contra Costa County Moraga, Orinda, Walnut Creek, Lafayette (partial)
23 Contra Costa South Contra Costa County Danville, San Ramon, Walnut Creek
24 Contra Costa East Contra Costa County Antioch, Brentwood, Oakley, Pittsburg (partial)
25 Solano North Solano County Benicia, Vallejo
26 Solano South Solano County Dixon, Fairfield, Rio Vista, Suisun City, Vacaville
27 Napa South Napa County American Canyon, Napa
28 Napa North Napa County Calistoga, St. Helena, Yountville
29 Sonoma South Sonoma County Cotati, Petaluma, Sonoma, Rohnert Park
30 Sonoma Central Sonoma County Santa Rosa, Sebastopol
31 Sonoma North Sonoma County Cloverdale, Healdsburg, Windsor
32 Marin North Marin County Novato
33 Marin Central Marin County Fairfax, San Anselmo, San Rafael, Ross
34 Marin South Marin County Belvedere, Corte Madera, Mill Valley, Sausalito, Tiburon, Larkspur
REGIONAL MAP – SUPERDISTRICTS