Las Urbanistas

Key zoning report will outline impact on city’s eastern areas

Robert Selna, Chronicle Staff Writer; Monday, July 2, 2007

Scores of developers with residential projects pending on San Francisco’s east side will learn more this week about whether they will someday be allowed to build thousands of new apartments and condominiums.

More than a year after the Board of Supervisors and planning officials put an abrupt halt to the development plans, the city cleared for release on Saturday a draft report examining how zoning changes across 2,200 acres in four South of Market neighborhoods could affect the traffic, noise, pollution, jobs and housing supply in the area.

Together, the neighborhoods — the Mission, Showplace Square/Potrero Hill, East SoMa and Central Waterfront — represent much of the heart of San Francisco’s industrial past but also opportunities for new construction of market-rate and affordably priced condominiums and apartments.

And the 600-page draft Eastern Neighborhoods Environmental Impact Report — which developers, activists and politicians will start thumbing through this week — is expected to greatly influence the debate about how much land should be preserved for light industry and how much should be opened up for new housing development.

“Older cities like San Francisco have to decide how they will transform themselves, and this is a prime example of that,” said Supervisor Jake McGoldrick, a member of the board’s Land Use Committee. “There’s not much opportunity to build on the west side of town, and things have been changing on the east side for some time … but we have not had any comprehensive planning there.”

Neighborhood advocates, who blanched when live-work lofts replaced industrial land in the late 1990s, want zoning changes that will protect blue-collar jobs and increase the supply of affordable housing for working-class San Franciscans.

They want land dedicated exclusively for what the San Francisco Planning Department calls production, distribution and repair uses, and they argue that developers should pay more than the standard city fees for affordable housing, parks, libraries, transportation and other city services.

Developers see the neighborhoods’ potential for profitable residential construction that helps alleviate the city’s overall housing shortage. They are frustrated because they have paid taxes, mortgages and insurance on land with an uncertain economic future while waiting for proposed zoning changes from the city.

The builders expect that the draft report will tell them how the city believes their property should be zoned — whether it can be used to construct housing, or whether it must be preserved for industrial space, or a little of both.

In April 2006, when a Mission District condo development came before the board, the supervisors made a ruling that not only brought that particular project at 2660 Harrison St. to a standstill, but also put numerous other projects into bureaucratic limbo.

The supervisors called for an extensive evaluation of not only the project’s impact on traffic and the immediate physical environment, but also on blue-collar employment and affordable housing in the greater area.

City planners interpreted the order to apply to any development proposal for land in the eastern neighborhoods that might displace an existing or potential industrial use — there were about 53 projects in the pipeline at the time. Planners decided to initiate the broad environmental impact report introduced in draft form this weekend.

Builders say mounting costs associated with the delay, including the climbing price of materials and labor, mean that buyers and renters of the new housing will pay more, if the projects are ever built. Some developers said they decided to abandon projects because they became financially infeasible over time.

“All of us are dying to see this planning process complete — it’s an embarrassment and an outrage that it’s taken this long,” said Michael Yarne, development director at Martin Building Co. in San Francisco, which has seen two projects stalled by the city.

The city’s environmental report analyzes three zoning options, which vary by the amount of industrial-zoned land that could be converted for housing and mixed commercial uses.

In each option, the amount of land dedicated to light industry is expected to decrease. The middle of the three choices would see an increase of 7,385 residences and a decline of more than 2 million square feet zoned for production, distribution and repair.

However, unlike current rules, in which housing and commercial developers can obtain special permission to build on industrial land, the zoning would create areas where production, distribution and repair property would be protected and housing would be banned.

In addition to griping about the slow planning process, developers complain about additional fees that might be charged to pay for transportation, parks and other infrastructure needed to support the new development.

The Planning Department has proposed that developers pay $13 for each square foot of new residential development and $4 for each square foot of new commercial development or a conversion from industrial to commercial space. A separate departmental study, due out later this summer, will provide more detail about the fees.

In 2005, the Board of Supervisors imposed a $25 per-square-foot fee on developers of 2,200 new market-rate condominiums on Rincon Hill.

“All developers want is some certainty,” said Brett Gladstone, a lawyer who represents a developer with two projects pending in the eastern neighborhoods. “When the game changes midstream, they can lose their shirt.”

Neighborhood advocates who want to protect the land for blue-collar jobs — in industries such as auto and furniture repair, printing, storage, warehousing and shipping — say the city needs to proceed cautiously to avoid a mass socioeconomic shift in the area and maintain an important segment of the city’s economy.

They point to Planning Department estimates that 53,000 people work in production, distribution and repair facilities in San Francisco and that 70 percent of those workers live in the city.

The dot-com boom cost the neighborhoods a big chunk of industrial space, they note, with digital firms converting warehouses into office buildings and nearly 2000 live-work lofts taking over former industrial sites. Loft developers also escaped paying fees typically applied to new residential construction, because the city did not define the lofts as residential.

“We want to retain the character of those neighborhoods as mixed-use with a variety of work and activities and affordable housing for working-class people,” said community activist Calvin Welch. “When you talk about restricting production and distribution sites and expanding high-density condominiums, you’re talking about replacing one population with another.”

Welch said developers should expect to pay added fees because the cumulative impact of all the new housing will place a strain on infrastructure and police, fire and other city services.

City planners started paying attention to the eastern neighborhoods back in 2002, when it became clear that developers were gravitating to the area.

But it wasn’t until housing advocates challenged a Planning Commission decision on the 2660 Harrison St. project that the comprehensive zoning study got under way in earnest.

The supervisors voted 8-2 to require more study, and days later, the Planning Department announced the decision would be applied to all “similarly situated projects.”

Although completion of the draft report — officially released Saturday — has been much anticipated, a final draft will require public hearings and approval by both the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors.

City Planning Director Dean Macris said he hopes the report will be presented to the board by January, but others — developers in particular — believe it will take much longer.

E-mail Robert Selna at rselna@sfchronicle.com.

Metro’s new general manager wants to get rid of the carpet in trains, brighten the lighting in stations and increase advertising in stations, trains and buses.

In many places, such mundane changes would be met with a shrug.

But this is the Washington area Metro, which has long prided itself on a dignified ambiance that is supposed to make it better than the average commuter system.

The changes are intended to help make the nation’s second-busiest subway more modern and functional. As the system struggles to keep pace with growing demand, Metro’s new top executive, John B. Catoe Jr., wants to focus the agency’s limited resources toward moving people to and from work and away from some costly features that gave the subway a distinctive, first-class feel when it opened 31 years ago.

With ridership continuing to swell, the debate over those trade-offs is sharpening.

“We need to be open to change and willing to do some things differently while at the same time being mindful of the coherence that results from the original concept,” said Chris Zimmerman, a Metro vice chairman who has served on the board for nine years.

“When the system opened, the idea was, ‘How do we get people in suits and ties to get out of their nice cars and get on a train?’ ” he said. “Now we have 800,000 passengers showing up on a weekday.”

Record numbers are taking the train. Four of Metro’s all-time top 10 ridership days took place in June. On June 22, the night of a Washington Nationals baseball game, evening ridership between 7 p.m. and 3 a.m. was the largest in agency history.

Change, Catoe says, is inevitable, and he describes these as cosmetic. Dim stations need brighter, energy-efficient lighting. More advertising could generate much-needed revenue. Eliminating carpet would save money and allow mechanics to fix train wheels and brakes. High-quality art at station entrances and on walls would give passengers an experience beyond the ride itself. Dan Tangherlini, formerly Metro’s interim general manager, started the push for brighter lights and no carpet last year.

No one is planning to alter the most distinctive feature of the system: the vaulted arches in the underground stations.

“We won’t take away any of the majesty,” Catoe said in an interview, calling the design of the stations “timeless and brilliant.”

Still, change comes slowly to Metro, which several years ago hired a consultant and debated at length before deciding to alter the color scheme inside the rail cars.

“I’ll probably run into trouble with the ’stewards of the system,’ ” Catoe noted.

Such stewards worry that adjustments, however minor, have the potential to alter Metro’s identity. Unlike commercial transit systems that cashed in on every square foot of rentable space, or utilitarian ones that gave “passing notice to amenities,” the Washington Metro was built as something different, wrote Metro architect Harry Weese.

As part of that approach, “a certain dignity and even elegance is sought after” to raise the image of mass transit, he noted. “In Washington, since this is the system owned by all the people of the United States, it is particularly important that no stigma of cheapness or of the bargain basement be attached to it. With this in mind, the designers of the system are working to capitalize on the best practice and produce something that is the highest state of the art.”

Zachary M. Schrag, who wrote “The Great Society Subway: A History of the Washington Metro,” said those at Metro haven’t always been aware of its architectural significance. “It’s one of the three great works of public architecture in Washington since World War II,” he said, along with the National Gallery’s East Wing and Dulles International Airport.

Even changing the color of the blinking platform edge lights at Metro Center from white to red was a “massive departure from the landmark architectural design,” Schrag said. Metro is testing different-colored light-emitting diode bulbs that are more energy-efficient. Red means stop, and Metro wants to see whether that will keep riders from getting too close to the platform edge.

A few riders have noticed the change. “The red ones are ugly,” said Mary Burke, who rides the Green and Red lines. “They look like the gates of Hell.”

Many riders, while appreciative of Metro’s unique architecture, say their priority is reliability. “It’s a Cadillac system, and that’s part of the problem,” said Fred Marinucci, a Red Line commuter for 20 years. “It’s hard to maintain a Cadillac system.”

Still, the more time riders have spent on the New York subway, the more they appreciate everything that makes the Washington Metro different.

In New York, “it’s not a question of red lights or white lights at the platform,” Schrag said. “It’s a question of how much gum you’re standing in.”

In Washington, carpet was a luxurious touch designed to lure suburbanites out of their cars. Carpet was supposed to signal to people that better behavior was expected, that “this is a nice train and don’t mess it up,” Schrag said.

But over time, the carpet itself has gotten messed up. In the winter, people track in salt and mud; in the summer, the humidity breeds mold “and little things grow in there, and it doesn’t smell so good,” Catoe said.

Metro will be testing different kinds of nonskid flooring this summer. Switching from carpet saves money because vinyl, for example, is easier to clean and doesn’t need to be replaced as often. Carpet, on the other hand, is vacuumed once a week, shampooed every two months and replaced every five years; it costs Metro $5,200 to replace carpet in one car, officials have said. Two weeks ago, Catoe requested that carpet no longer be installed in older rail cars that are being overhauled. Riders will start seeing the transition in the fall, he said.

Down the road, Metro might switch from solid-colored train seats to a single multi-colored design to save money. Dave Kubicek, the new chief mechanical officer in charge of rail car engineering, design and maintenance, said it doesn’t make sense for Metro to stock more than 90 seat configurations in different colors. Newer cars have cushions in burgundy, blue and sand; the older cars have orange and brown.

Catoe’s effort to expand advertising, which the board approved Thursday, is even more controversial. He wants to see banners inside stations, graphics on the floors, and ads on blank platform pylons, rail car ceilings and Metro’s Web site.

How much advertising to allow has so divided the Riders’ Advisory Council that the group hasn’t been able to agree on a position, said Chairman Michael Snyder. “A lot of people think Metro is a shrine or monument that shouldn’t be plastered with advertisements,” he said. Others think that as long as advertising is controlled, they would rather see more advertising than higher fares.

The Metro board, said member Peter Benjamin, want to minimize intrusion into a system “of beautiful lines and beautiful style.” He was assured by Catoe at Thursday’s meeting that the advertising could be changed if board members did not like it.

Former Metro board member Cleatus Barnett, 81, who served for 32 years, fought hard to preserve Metro’s aesthetics. He was so loyal to the original color scheme of the rail cars — orange, gold and brown — that when Metro bought new cars with an updated interior of red, white and blue, one seat in the rear of each new car was upholstered in yellow in deference to Barnett.

In an interview from Pensacola, Fla, where he retired to several years ago, Barnett warned against too much advertising. Metro shouldn’t “look so gaudy you want to turn your head away,” he said.

In the past, Metro has found compromises that took note of design. During the late 1990s, the board, after a long debate, chose more expensive textured brick-red ceramic tile instead of yellow plastic bumpy strips to give warning underfoot to blind riders that they were near platform edges. The strips were rejected in part because some board members thought they would spoil the design. They would have been placed over Metro’s signature granite edge.

“I don’t think Metro should be frozen in time,” Schrag said. “I just think that in making these decisions, respect for the original design should be one of the factors.”