08.08.2013 Views

An Alternative Future for the North East Mission Industrial Zone

An Alternative Future for the North East Mission Industrial Zone

An Alternative Future for the North East Mission Industrial Zone

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

<strong>Mission</strong> Coalition <strong>for</strong> Economic Justice & Jobs (MCEJJ)<br />

allowed live/work units to become largely high-end residential units. Af<strong>for</strong>dable housing did not come up as<br />

an issue and was often not in <strong>the</strong> radar.<br />

Planning Goals Worksheet<br />

Most of <strong>the</strong> participants were com<strong>for</strong>table giving <strong>the</strong>ir opinions on <strong>the</strong> goals from previous planning ef<strong>for</strong>ts.<br />

However, a couple of <strong>the</strong> participants were not com<strong>for</strong>table with <strong>the</strong> language and asked that we go through<br />

and explain each of <strong>the</strong> goals be<strong>for</strong>e <strong>the</strong>y cast a vote. This section took up much of our time and <strong>the</strong>re was<br />

difficulty in moving beyond <strong>the</strong> goals discussion, as many of <strong>the</strong> participants were more com<strong>for</strong>table with this<br />

more general approach at goals <strong>for</strong> <strong>the</strong> NEMIZ ra<strong>the</strong>r than talking about particular parcels or areas.<br />

As mentioned earlier, <strong>the</strong> participants were in general agreement as to whe<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong>y agreed or disagreed with<br />

past goals. Dissent was generally diffused as people discussed each issue and it was agreed upon that all were in<br />

agreement with some qualifiers. The dissenting opinions are given below:<br />

1994 NEMIZ Zoning Proposal Ef<strong>for</strong>t:<br />

“Knit <strong>the</strong> NEMIZ into <strong>the</strong> fabric of <strong>the</strong> <strong>Mission</strong> District and surrounding neighborhoods”<br />

There was general support <strong>for</strong> this goal, once we clarified what was meant by <strong>the</strong> term<br />

“knit.” However, <strong>the</strong>re was also some concern that <strong>the</strong> existing mixed-use character of <strong>the</strong><br />

NEMIZ should be protected; <strong>the</strong>y supported <strong>the</strong> idea that <strong>the</strong> NEMIZ should relate to <strong>the</strong><br />

surrounding areas, but <strong>the</strong>y didn’t want that to mean losing <strong>the</strong> existing character. \<br />

“Allowing existing non-con<strong>for</strong>ming uses to become con<strong>for</strong>ming uses”<br />

One participant felt that some current uses might not be desirable in <strong>the</strong> NEMIZ. This may<br />

include some of <strong>the</strong> larger PDR facilities such as PG&E. O<strong>the</strong>rs also felt that this would<br />

open <strong>the</strong> doors to o<strong>the</strong>r un<strong>for</strong>eseeable uses that might be detrimental to <strong>the</strong> existing<br />

character. There was some confusion in <strong>the</strong> group as to whe<strong>the</strong>r this statement was referring<br />

to <strong>the</strong> existing zoning or <strong>the</strong> new proposed zoning (<strong>Alternative</strong> B) Regardless, <strong>the</strong>re was a<br />

strong concern that most current uses – both business and residential – should not be<br />

considered non-con<strong>for</strong>ming.<br />

2001-2002 <strong>Mission</strong> Rezoning Planning Process:<br />

“Preserve existing af<strong>for</strong>dable housing and promote a range of new housing opportunities, in terms of size<br />

and af<strong>for</strong>dability”<br />

One participant did not want to see large-scale development of af<strong>for</strong>dable housing. This was<br />

in keeping with <strong>the</strong> idea of maintaining <strong>the</strong> varied, fine-grained character of <strong>the</strong> NEMIZ.<br />

“Discourage loft type residential developments”<br />

Participants were not sure if this meant live/work. The group was not against live/work per<br />

se, only against allowing live/work to be used exclusively as residential. The disagreement was<br />

largely due to not understanding <strong>the</strong> implications of “lofts”.<br />

“Create a balance between traditional PDR jobs and new businesses, but exclude ‘smokestack’ industries”<br />

The group supported this goal, but <strong>the</strong>y also assumed that no smokestack industries exist<br />

today<br />

Ideas and Vision <strong>for</strong> <strong>the</strong> NEMIZ<br />

Allow flexible zoning that incorporates market <strong>for</strong>ces and organic growth.<br />

Appendix A.18

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!