My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
12
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2011
>
021511
>
12
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/11/2011 4:54:04 PM
Creation date
2/10/2011 2:13:42 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
2/10/2011
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
12
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
192
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
PROGRAM APPROACH RECOMMENDATIONS <br /> The regional funding needs and the case study programs provide enough understanding <br /> to provide some recommendations about potential program approaches that would be <br /> appropriate for the Bay Area. The following are initial recommendations for the structure of <br /> a TOD Financing program. <br /> A. Funding structure <br /> There are benefits to both grant and loan structures for a TOD financing program. Grants are <br /> simpler and easier to administer, but require ongoing allocations of funding. A loan fund can <br /> be self- sustaining but requires more overhead for administration. Existing MPO programs <br /> are set up as both grants and loans. If Federal funds are used for the program, once funds <br /> are put out as loans, restrictions on usage are often removed when issued for a second time. <br /> Federal funding provides an important source of capital for the program —and is the source <br /> of the current TLC program —but also limits flexibility of funding <br /> Recommendations <br /> A.1) Create a hybrid program structure with grants and loans. Grant funds may be more <br /> appropriate for some fund uses, such as affordable housing, or major infrastructure <br /> upgrades. Loan funds may be more appropriate for other uses, including land <br /> acquisition and parking management strategies. <br /> A.2) Create flexibility in funding uses. Federal funds carry substantial restrictions that <br /> limit the potential program options outlined above. MTC should work with local <br /> jurisdictions to identify creative ways to "swap" local infrastructure and transportation <br /> funds, which are usually more flexible, for federal funds. In the long term, identifying <br /> regional funding sources, as has been done in the Twin Cities, can help reduce the <br /> need to use Federal funds at all. <br /> A.3) Loan funds should have clearly defined requirements. Funds used for parking <br /> management strategies should require pricing to be part of the menu of strategies. <br /> Funds for and acquisition should require repayment of principal and potentially some <br /> sharing of profit or use of profit for affordable housing or other goals. An important <br /> benefit of loan funds is the long -term financial self - sufficiency of the program. <br /> B. Metrics and Evaluation <br /> A regional TOD financing program will require clear evaluation metrics and a transparent <br /> funding allocation process. There are many potential evaluation metrics that can link potential <br /> projects to local and regional goals and measurable outcomes (an initial discussion of potential <br /> metrics is included as Appendix C). Other regions use a variety of approaches in evaluating <br /> potential projects. The Met Council LCDA uses an Advisory Committee composed of a broad <br /> range of stakeholders, including community members, local agency staff, architects and <br /> designers, and policymakers to evaluate projects and make recommendations for funding. <br /> This approach has helped build the credibility of the program. <br /> 26 FINANCING TRANSIT ORII.N rED DEYELCF9IENT 'N THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.