An Alternative Future for the North East Mission Industrial Zone

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Mission Coalition for Economic Justice & Jobs (MCEJJ) Summary: Group J and K J and K had a predominance of business and property owners, several who live in the neighborhood, and consensus occurred between members on several issues. During the workshop discussions, members of the group expressed concern that the City of San Francisco used incorrect data to determine areas of industrial zoning. The group was also concerned about the high number of non-conforming uses under the City’s Alternative B. Another item of near universal agreement was maintaining the existing character of the NEMIZ, with its mix of industry, housing, commercial, and office. Several members of the group stated that while they could be in other areas of the city, they stay in the NEMIZ due to its character. They expressed concern about one use-type prevailing, but were wary of the city’s intervention, preferring a market-oriented approach. Another priority goal of the group was to protect existing industrial areas from being rezoned residential. A fear is that too much residential would change the character of the area and lead to other problems, such as parking shortages. There was concern that once industrial buildings are retrofitted for residential or office uses, it is unlikely they will be converted back for industrial uses. A dissenting voice in the group stated a desire for more affordable housing, and communityoriented uses, especially in the “tail” area of the Southern portion of the NEMIZ. In general, they felt that the city was pushing the rezone through too quickly, considering the data problems and non-conforming uses Alternative B would create in the NEMIZ. An enforcement issue mentioned is that Live/Work spaces should be used for work. Two members of the group own and work in a Live/Work unit. The group is not opposed to Live/Work units in general, only when they were used as high-end apartments or other non-intended uses. On new residential construction, the group was concerned about a large number of either high-end or affordable housing units in the neighborhood, as they feel too much of either would change the neighborhood’s character. They also expressed concern about the process for approvals of new housing construction, citing changes in the design of the apartments on the Penske lot at 19 th and Alabama Streets. The attitude of the group was suspicious and reserved. Several members of the group were reluctant to give personal input, and members expressed disappointment at not being invited to participate in the city’s process. Most group members also acknowledge that they are motivated by the desire for the neighborhood to stay exactly as it is. The group expressed cynicism that their input would be taken into account by the city. One member of the group repeatedly expressed the opinion that the city’s Alternative B is an attempt at a “land grab”. Other members were concerned that the great number of non-conforming uses under Alternative B would lead to the construction of predominantly affordable units, and lower property values. There is also concern about the effectiveness of using zoning to plan these areas, as current zoning allowed the construction of large numbers Live/Work lofts and Dot-Com offices in the area, many of which are empty today. They are also in favor of more neighborhood-serving retail, such as the 16 th and Bryant shopping center. The members approve of that center because it brings essential services to the neighborhood, as well as more foot traffic for safety. However, the group was not in favor of more “big-box” regional development, such as the Best Buy in the far North of the area, especially in the core NEMIZ. Planning Goals Worksheet The Goals listed from other NEMIZ plans were a source of confusion for the group. They felt that much of the language was difficult to understand, and most of the group didn’t feel comfortable giving an opinion before thorough discussion of each goal statement. After 45 minutes, we had gotten through the first 3 Goals before scrapping the effort and moving onto some of the group’s specific goals. Appendix A.22
Mission Coalition for Economic Justice & Jobs (MCEJJ) In general, the group voted together on the goals they discussed. Most of the group did not want the NEMIZ to be “knit into the surrounding neighborhoods” due to the fear that this would lead to an “avalanche” of new uses into the area. The point was also raised that the Mission is different from the NEMIZ, with “radical differences in lot sizes and current uses”. Most of the group wanted non-conforming uses to come into conformance, and most of the group was not in favor of new housing due to the lack of definition of housing types. Ideas and Vision for the NEMIZ NEMIZ should stay as is in use, despite large flaws in the system, such as parking requirements and how the uses of space are defined. Both of those issues need to be clarified. Feel that the diversity and coexistence of the neighborhood is key, and that the proposed zoning creates barriers instead of flexibility. Need to be thoughtful about industrial space. Very little left, so if it changes from industrial it really should be for the benefit of the people (working class) (This was the opinion of one group member). Industrial land is a scare resource. Maintain diversity of NEMIZ. Reconcile the findings of CD+A with the existing GIS Land Use data of the City of San Francisco. The use of improper data is unacceptable. Unique Character must be maintained. Totally opposed to creation of non-conforming uses. Need to clarify what is here and leave it as is. Non-conforming uses will create a slum. Residents and workers came to the NEMIZ for a reason, so leave it as is. Establish Zoning for NEMIZ The group pointed out several areas where contentious (mainly residential) projects had been constructed/approved, including the Penske Site, and a Live/Work Building on Harrison and Mariposa. Their main concern was for an accurate picture of current land uses to be established before establishing zoning and that new zoning should protect and promote the current mix of uses, and should not emphasize one land use type over another. A minority in the group designated the “tail” area south of 20 th street for affordable housing. In general, the participants were in favor of more business uses instead of new residential uses, if given a choice. Final Goals 1. San Francisco planning needs to reconcile new data findings with current data. 2. Identify Uses and maintain the diverse character of the NEMIZ. Appendix A.23
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 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39: 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 68 and 69: 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?