Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Transportation topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

City launches feasibility study of Fourth & King railyard and I‑280 boulevard alternatives

San Francisco Planning Commission · February 6, 2014
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Planning staff released an RFP and described a five-part feasibility study to evaluate boulevarding I‑280, rail-yard reconfiguration, DTX value engineering and related alternatives; staff estimates Phase 1 at about $350,000 and anticipates contract start in May–June 2014.

Planning Department staff told the Planning Commission on Feb. 6 they have issued an RFP for a feasibility study to examine alternatives for the Fourth & King railyard, boulevarding Interstate 280, the downtown rail-tunnel extension (DTX), a Transbay Transit Center loop track and placemaking and redevelopment opportunities on the railyard site.

"This technical study started and stopped a couple of times due to some flux with Caltrain and high speed rail, but we finally published a memo at the end of 2012 that put the development on the railyard site at a value of upwards of $200,000,000 conservatively," Planning staff Joshua Switzky said, summarizing earlier work and the rationale for a coordinated, citywide approach.

Project manager Susan Gigi described the study’s five components: boulevarding a 1.2‑mile stretch of I‑280, DTX value-engineering to assess alignment and construction methods, reevaluating a Transbay loop track, potential relocation or reconfiguration of parts of the Fourth & King railyard to free land for development, and a value-capture and placemaking analysis to estimate revenues and redevelopment scenarios. Gigi said the RFP went out Jan. 29 and staff expects to start a contract in May–June; Phase 1 (vision and conceptual development) is estimated at six to nine months, and Phase 2 (alternatives development) at 12–15 months, with study completion targeted between Dec. 2015 and June 2016.

Speakers from neighborhood groups urged that the study include explicit affordable-housing objectives. John Erbling of the Taco Group urged the commission to set a policy threshold so that "affordable housing has to be 30% of the future housing on this site." Commissioners and staff said housing mixes — including affordability targets — will be part of land‑use and financial scenario work in the study.

Next steps: staff will evaluate RFP responses and seek a contract in late spring; the study will include a technical advisory committee and focused public outreach, with periodic updates to commissions and community advisory panels.