The Southeast Framework seeks to ensure the new and growing neighborhoods in the southeast sector of San Francisco (SoMa to Candlestick Point) will have a quality of life and access to amenities and services equivalent to those available in neighborhoods throughout the City.
The southeast sector of San Francisco is rapidly changing. 75 percent of the City's predicted growth over the next 30 years is expected to take place there, with approximately 75,000 housing units and 150,000 jobs, effectively doubling the area's population. As the area becomes more dense and residential, it is critical to make strategic investments so that this primarily industrial land will support complete neighborhoods with shopping, services, open space, and a thriving public realm.
Given the expected growth, this is an opportunity to take a holistic look at the Southeast part of San Francisco to better understand community facility needs and develop recommendations for future facilities, services equivalent to those enjoyed by neighborhoods throughout the city, and examines seven community facility types that are generally built by the City; Police Stations, Fire Stations, Libraries, Recreation Centers, Public Health Clinics, Child Care Facilities, and Public Schools.
This framework includes a growth analysis for each facility type, existing standards, and opportunities and recommendations for how we think about community facilities in the southeast through 2040.
This process began with analysis of existing standards for each facility type and different scenarios for future growth. Based on the results, recommendations for new facilities were developed to ensure that all residents, existing and new, in the southeast part of the city have adequate access to community services. The research and analysis also included a conversation with City agencies on the likely impact of growth on their respective operations. Meetings took place in the spring and summer of 2017. Each agency was asked about physical parameters and plans to build new facilities.
Based on extensive research, analysis, and conversations with seven City agencies, the following key findings across all studied facility types have been identified:
- All types of new community facilities are needed.
- There are limited plans to provide new facilities across all facility types.
- The focus of many agencies is on the expansion and renovation of existing facilities.
- A standard for the number or distribution of facilities generally does not exist.
- Staffing is a barrier to expanding services at existing facilities.
- The price and availability of land are primary barriers to creating new facilities.
- There is an opportunity to better coordinate among city agencies in the planning for new facilities.
- Agencies plan in silos.
- New physical and programmatic models for community facilities are needed given the limited amount of available land and ongoing densification.
Based on the key findings, the following general recommendations about been developed:
- Allow and incentivize community uses at the ground floor;
- Include new community space in master developments taking into account long term Resiliency;
- Study co-location of community facilities;
- Maximize the use of existing City facilities;
- Increase budget for staffing, management, and maintenance costs;
- Ensure more robust data collection, data sharing and analytical capacity to better understand how facilities are used today and in the future;
- Study the creation of a public lands policy for community facilities; and
- Develop a citywide process to identify and prioritize new community facilities.
Recommendations Citywide for Community Facilities
Ensuring that the quality of life and access to amenities and services is equivalent to those enjoyed by all neighborhoods of San Francisco.See Recommendations
Adopted and Pending Area Plans and Development Agreements
Major land use plans, site-specific master plans, and development agreements have been adopted over the past decade and continue to be developed in this part of the city. Each plan and project has strived to be comprehensive in providing policies and supporting systems and infrastructure that support its own growth, that tie the neighborhood or site back to the rest of the city, and align with City policy objectives. However, the reality is that many of the supportive systems and overarching strategies can only be achieved with a comprehensive, holistic look at the southeast. Solutions may often (or necessarily) transcend the boundaries of development sites or plan areas, and can be best realized through bringing in resources that are pooled or external to these neighborhoods.