An Alternative Future for the North East Mission Industrial Zone

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Mission Coalition for Economic Justice & Jobs (MCEJJ) Ideas and Vision for the NEMIZ The Goals/Comments of the group are as follows: Existing non-conforming uses should be zoned conforming uses. Live/work spaces should be woven into the fabric of the existing neighborhood with design improvements. More bike paths and lanes, wider sidewalks on some streets and reduction of sidewalks on others. Restrict industrial areas to where streets are wide enough to accommodate 40ft trucks Separate industrial uses from schools. Develop the “Mission Creek Bike Path” Support Mixed use Enhance artistic and cultural spaces Investigate the potential for the NEMIZ to be a Neighborhood Improvement District Support housing but balance with other uses Produce a short and long-range economic development plan for the NEMIZ. The NEMIZ should be a job generating area. Eliminate the PDR expression or expand its definition. Establish Zoning for NEMIZ The group strongly supported M-1 zoning to protect the diversity of uses in the neighborhood and some agreed that M-1 zoning creates flexibility that allows natural market forces to determine the future of the neighborhood. They objected to any zoning that would promote certain uses in specific areas because they value the mix of uses that exist block by block. Consensus was reached that the southern “tail” of the NEMIZ could be rezoned residential to fit into its surrounding neighborhood and that the northern area could be rezoned as IPZ, if necessary. Implementation Tools Zoning Eliminate idea of non-conforming uses Tax incentives for small and medium size businesses and artists and arts activities. Eliminate payroll tax. Capital improvements plan to implement transportation plan. Final Goals 1. NEMIZ should be job generating. 2. The NEMIZ should support mixed use including housing, arts and entertainment and industrial. 3. Eliminate the concept of “non-conforming” uses as long as they are not environmentally hazardous and eliminate the expression PDR or expend its definition. 4. Produce a short and long-range economic development plan including tax incentives. 5. Develop a Transportation Plan including the “Mission Creek Bike Path,” pedestrian access and streetscape improvements, 40ft truck access, bike lanes, etc. Appendix A.2
Summary: Group C Mission Coalition for Economic Justice & Jobs (MCEJJ) Group C was comprised of two residents, two property owners, and two individuals who lived and worked in the Box Factory. The primary point of consensus that came out of the group was an appreciation of the current mixed-use character of the NEMIZ, though all agreed that the existing zoning is too permissive to protect this character. Two extreme views were voiced early on. The first held that the City’s proposed zoning may somehow allow a loophole whereby non-profit housing developers could add housing to the area to the exclusion of market-rate developers. The constituent felt that this allowance in high-densities and would concentrate poor residents in the NEMIZ. From the other perspective, one individual felt that the NEMIZ had a responsibility to other neighborhoods, especially the Mission, to add affordable housing in the NEMIZ. All agreed that the NEMIZ should allow for some housing (some of which could be affordable) as well as a mix of uses, while preserving important industrial uses that would provide jobs for San Franciscans both inside and outside the NEMIZ. Two resident/workers from the Box Factory noted that they liked the idea of living and working in the NEMIZ. It was generally agreed that zoning alone would not be a sufficient tool to achieve the desired mix of development in the Mission. The group looked to discretionary review, guided by a set of land use and design guidelines as a solution to zoning for the type of mixed-use character they were after. (See “Establish Zoning for the NEMIZ,” below) Planning Goals Worksheet The Goals listed from previous planning efforts around the NEMIZ were a source of confusion for participants. In part participants were not clear about the history of these goals (i.e., they did not participate in the 1994 and 1999 planning process.) Also some items goals were unclear in their intent or phrasing. In order to limit unfocused discussion stemming from the goals analysis, and because we were running short on time, we proceeded through the goals taking votes for “disagree, agree, etc.” It immediately became apparent that, sometimes due to lack of clarity in the goal, or sometimes due to ambivalence, a third category noted as “Mixed” would have to be created as a response. The group generally voted together, with one individual generally presenting a dissenting opinion. In some cases further discussion brought this individual from a “disagree” opinion to “Mixed.” The following table summarizes the results of this portion of the small group process. The items hi-lighted in blue represent those for which there was most agreement. Appendix A.3
Page 1:
AN ALTERNATIVE FUTURE FOR THE Prepa
Page 5 and 6:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page 7 and 8:
The history of this neighborhood is
Page 9 and 10:
The City is addressing areas which
Page 11 and 12:
For non-Core PDR users, such as fur
Page 13 and 14:
Any IPZ Program Needs to Be Flexibl
Page 15:
EXISTING CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT This
Page 18 and 19: An Alternative Future for the NEMIZ
Page 53 and 54: PLANNING & POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS I
Page 55 and 56: C. Evaluate Each Industrial Neighbo
Page 57 and 58: NEMIZ Recommendations The following
Page 59 and 60: PDR Sub-Category Core PDR Medium PD
Page 61 and 62: D. Create a Small IPZ Focused on Ke
Page 63 and 64: Policy & Planning Recommendations
Page 65: APPENDIX
Page 70 and 71: Mission Coalition for Economic Just
Page 94: Mission Coalition for Economic Just
show all

An Alternative Future for the North East Mission Industrial Zone

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?