#1 Lead-in [0:50]:
Currently, only 5% of the Central Business District is dedicated to housing. To meet the goals of our Master Plan and Housing Element mandate, we need to increase this to about 20%, or approximately 2,000 units in the downtown core.
The 2020 charrette provided strategic guidance on creating efficient housing projects surrounding the central corridor of State street. Although not based on the AUD program, the charrette led to a wave of efficient prototype projects driven by its strategies. Success was further bolstered by AUD amendments, targeted specifically at Downtown’s Central Business District. Clearly, the right incentives let us produce more highly efficient designs.
However, we anticipate diminishing returns if we continue with more targeted AUD amendments. While further amendments might help, the remaining developable projects, including many potential Adaptive Reuse sites, will be increasingly challenging. Incentives alone might not be enough to achieve our ultimate goal of 2,000 units.
Question 1.1:
Peter, let’s start with you. How do we get to 2000 units in the Central Business District? What additional strategies are needed, beyond AUD incentives, to take full advantage of Adaptive Reuse opportunities found on highly challenging sites? What barriers need to be removed? What types of housing will likely take shape?
Follow up Question 1.2:
What types of partnerships with either the city or neighboring property owners will be required to pave a successful path here? Should Adaptive Reuse Projects be considered a Community Benefit? Do we need an “Adaptive Reuse Committee” to coordinate and expedite these projects?
Follow up Question 1.3:
What does a healthy balance look like between Hotels and Housing in the Central Business District? What strategies will be needed to achieve this balance as we develop 5, 10, even 20 years into the future?
Follow up Question 1.4:
The State Street Master Plan identifies the 700 to 900 blocks as the "Civic Core" or "City Center" (also known as the De La Guerra District). This area requires significant revitalization due to its relatively low activity levels. Given the disproportional need for revitalization in the Civic Center District, should housing projects be prioritized within this 9 square block area? What capital implementations should the Master Plan propose to optimize for housing in this zone?
I’m wondering if we can hear Anthony’s thoughts on this to start
#2 Lead-in:
If we view Adaptive Reuse projects, particularly on "limited or constrained" opportunity sites, as a type of Community Benefit Project, then this approach would definitely require a comprehensive, collaborative strategy. The need for Public and Private partnerships is clear, especially in mitigating infrastructural support issues. Redevelopment Agencies used to channel local taxes into prioritized programs, but now we’re left with alternatives institutional levers, like the Community Benefit Improvements District and potentially even Enhanced Infrastructure Finance Districts (EIFDs).
Question 2.1:
Dennis, in order to take advantage of some of these Adaptive Reuse opportunities, which specific infrastructure challenges do we need to be prioritizing, and what types of partnerships will be necessary to accomplish this? What can an EIFD provide that can’t be accomplished through partnerships with other institutions, such as the Community Benefit Improvements District?
What will it take to implement a Stormwater infrastructure improvement project at the scale of an entire city block, or even multiple city blocks?
Follow up Question 2.2:
Let’s talk about the State Street Master Plan’s Implementation Program.
Of all the infrastructural challenges that should be prioritized, can the State Street Master Plan identify what problems can be solved through specific partnerships, such as the one that could exist through an Enhanced Infrastructure Finance District? Will the implementation program go into this level of detail? At what point will the SSAC consider its mission complete? Where does the handoff occur and what does it look like?
Follow up Question 2.3:
Paul, How is Friends of State Street set up to aid these types of implementation efforts? Will Friends of State Street attempt to get involved in infrastructure projects?
#3 Lead-in:
At the March 18th SSAC meeting, local architects proposed exciting changes to replace some mid-block surface parking areas with housing, new paseos, and interconnecting walkways. Paseos would serve as both infrastructure for direct access to residences and as pedestrian-only routes connecting neighboring spaces. Coupled with closing sections of State Street to vehicles and bikes, the State Street Advisory Committee plans to expand the paseo system to better engage with State Street by intersecting the Public Right of Way.
To add to this, the South Coast Chamber of Commerce unveiled their "Vision for a Revitalized State Street" this week, proposing to transform the 700 to 800 blocks into a "Grand Paseo," a pedestrian oasis free from automobiles and bikes. [IMAGE]
Question 3.1:
How significant is the improvement and expansion of the Paseo system to the revitalization of the downtown area, and should we prioritize improving or increasing the privately owned Paseos, or developing new aspects of the Paseo system in the public right of way?
Follow up Question 3.2:
Building off of our infrastructure discussion, and thinking about the private/public partnerships that will help implement capital projects at the municipal level, how do we incentivize private developments to contribute to the Paseo system? Beyond incentives like tax abatements, can we refer back on our infrastructure discussion for more effective multi-benefit options?
Follow up Question 3.3:
Yesterday’s SSAC meeting revealed their updated Design Framework and Mobility Concepts. What do we think about the proposed balance between pedestrian-only paseos with bike- and car-friendly sections of State Street? Should the number and distribution of future housing projects in the Central Business District, which will expand the Paseo system, influence the layout and circulation of bikes and cars in the public right of way? Wouldn’t we first want to map out all of the unique adaptive reuse housing opportunity sites, and allow this to inform our circulation plan?