MISSION STATEMENT

The purpose of the Japantown Planning, Preservation and Development Task Force (JPPDTF) is to organize and direct the preparation of a comprehensive community assessment and planning document on the future of San Francisco’s Japantown. The New Japantown Plan will serve as a blueprint to guide the implementation of recommendations to help preserve and enhance the community.

BACKGROUND

The JPPDTF grew out of community concerns over the future of San Francisco’s Japantown. Arising from a community assessment funding proposal in mid-1998, the momentum quickly picked up to incorporate a number of interested individuals and community organizations. This interest culminated with a community forum on October 31, 1998 to identify issues relating to the preservation of Japantown.

The JPPDTF was initiated by an ad-hoc committee, which shaped the make-up of the Task Force. With cooperation from the Mayor’s Office and the San Francisco Redevelopment Agency, the Task Force has become a truly all-inclusive body—receiving input from all sectors of the community. The JPPDTF is composed of close to 50 members involved in an array of Japanese and Japanese American community organizations, and includes merchants, residents, seniors, younger generations, Japanese American media, the arts community, and members of the Korean American and African American communities. An advisory committee has also been established to include further perspectives.

The JPPDTF has sought and is in the process of receiving consultation from two experienced Asian American consulting teams—Chinatown Community Development Center and Asian Neighborhood Design—who will assist the Task Force in the preparation of the New Japantown Plan. This is an 18-month process, and input from all members of the community is highly encouraged.

TASK FORCE COMPOSITION

Task Force members include leaders of local community organizations and businesses. The following are officers of the Task Force: chair, Sandy Mori; secretary, Geri Handa; and treasurer, Neal Taniguchi. The Executive Committte of the Task Force is composed of the chair, secretary, treasurer and chairs of the four standing committees.

COMMITTEES

The Task Force has the following four standing committees, which also hold regular meetings:

Communications & Marketing (chair: Chris Hirano; vice chair: Seiko Fujimoto). The scope of the Japantown, outreach to other Japanese American communities, tourism and linking the wider community to Japan.

Economic & Community Development (chair: Caryl Ito; vice chair: Min Paek). The scope of the Economic and Community Development Committee includes the development of business opportunities for families, small businesses and the encouragement of new businesses. Future business opportunities should reflect the existing character of the community.

Environment (chair: Sara Ishikawa; vice chair: Kaz Naganuma). The scope of the Environment Committee includes urban design, physical beauty, signage, safety and security in the area, crime, maintenance and lighting. Also of concern are open space issues such as the Buchanan Mall and the Peace Plaza.

Real Estate and Land Use (chair: Gary Kitahata; vice chair: Doug Dawkins). The scope of the Real Estate and Land Use Committee is the preservation of community, housing, affordable housing, and land transfers. Includes new and ongoing community projects.

I. INTRODUCTION

The Japantown Planning, Preservation, and Development Task Force ("Task Force") is pleased to submit this Status Report to update the San Francisco Redevelopment Agency (SFRA) and the SFRA Commission on the progress of our 18-month planning process to develop a New Japantown Community Plan. When completed, the Plan will serve as a blueprint to guide the implementation of recommendations to help preserve and enhance the Japantown community.

We are currently two-thirds near the end of our first six-month contract with the SFRA, in which SFRA has contributed $100,000 towards our planning efforts. We anticipate to continue our planning work through August 31, 2000, with an additional $200,000 from SFRA to effectively complete the planning process to develop the Plan.

Thus far, we have made an incredible amount of progress in these first 5 months, with the assistance of our Japantown Planning Consultant Team, consisting of two experienced local Asian American non-profit organizations — Chinatown Community Development Center (CCDC) and Asian Neighborhood Design (AND).

This Status Report has been prepared by our Planning Consultants. The Status Report documents the work that has been completed during the period from March 1, 1999 to July 23, 1999, in accordance with our first six-month contract’s scope of services, set forth in Table I-1 below. We will submit a final report to the SFRA at the end of our six-month contract in August 31, 1999. We appreciate the SFRA’s continual support in our efforts to develop concrete strategies to preserve and enhance the future of our community.

Table I-1. Scope of Services (March 1, 1999-August 31, 1999)

Scope of Services

 

Status as of July 23, 1999

1. Define Community

 

* Compile and review existing data, studies, plans, and demographics to summarize and present to Task Force.

Completed, see Attachment IV-1

* Define "community" expansively for the purposes of the planning process to include businesses and residents of Japantown and adjacent areas.

Completed, see III-C-1. Community Definition

* Analyze different physical boundaries of Japantown and present the impacts of each alternative on the planning process.

Completed, see III-C-2. Physical Boundary Maps III-1& III-2

* Start land use surveys and building analysis.

Completed, see IV-C. Japantown Property & Land Use Profile, with accompanying maps and graphics

* Develop an outreach strategy for participation of community members.

Completed, see VII-A. Outreach Strategy

* Identify potential interns and volunteers to help with research, outreach, surveys, building inventory, business analysis, etc.

Completed, see Attachment III-1. Planning Consultant Team and Interns & Volunteers

* All work reports in connection with this task are to be submitted to the Agency.

Completed, work reports have been submitted

2. Vision and Identity

 

* Prepare statement of vision and identity for community as developed in previous community meetings.

Completed, see III-C-3. Vision/Identity

* Analyze and present issues of potential conflict and solutions.

To be completed by end of August 1999

* Define goals and objectives for the planning process.

Completed, see III-B. Goals & Objectives of Planning Process

3. Stakeholder Interviews and Focus Groups

 

* Begin to conduct Focus Groups and interviews with stakeholders

Currently, we are conducting stakeholder interviews and focus groups. We have completed over 11 focus groups/presentations and many interviews. Through these efforts, we have outreached directly to over 150 non-Task Force members. We also have conducted over 200 surveys.

* Analyze Focus Group concerns and conduct additional research.

To be completed by end of August 1999

* Synthesize data collected for presentation to Sub-Committees.

To be completed by end of August 1999

* Work with the Task Force to prioritize stakeholders' concerns.

To be completed by end of August 1999

* Refine Community Vision and Identity.

Community Vision and Identity has been developed and will be refined, if necessary.

* Present preliminary list of both stakeholders and focus group concerns to appropriate groups and individuals and shall be an ongoing work-in-progress.

On-going work-in progress.

* Begin process to result in a long-range plan.

We are 5 months into the process.

* Begin to identify goals and objectives.

Completed, see VI. Draft Goals & Objectives of Plan

* Begin the dialogue with City Departments, such as Department of City Planning, Mayor’s Office of Community Development and Department of Public Works, to identify public resources for improvements to the community.

The Task Force is sending a letter to the Mayor to request City Departments heads or their representatives to work with us in this process

* All work reports in connection with this task are to be submitted to the Agency.

To be completed at the end of August 1999

4. The work products that will result from the studies, analysis and meetings will include:

 

* Time Schedule for deliverables to be provided within four weeks of signing this Agreement.

Completed, the time schedule and work process, dated March 31, 1999 was submitted to SFRA staff. Since then, we have submitted a revision of the work process/schedule to SFRA. See Attachment III-2. Planning Process & Time Schedule

* Monthly reports on progress commencing on April 15, 1999.

We are up to date with monthly reports. Thus far, we have submitted 4 monthly reports, dated April 15, 1999, May 15, 1999, June 15, 1999, and July 15, 1999.

* Work Reports specified in each of the preceding tasks.

We provide work reports within our monthly reports.

* Vision Statement.

Completed, see III-C-3. Vision/Identity

* Draft preliminary analysis of stakeholder interviews and Focus Groups and shall be an ongoing work-in-progress.

On-going work-in progress.

* A description of the process that will result in a Plan to address the community's mission, goals and objectives.

Completed, see III-A. Overview of Planning Process, with Figures II-1 and II-2. Attachment III-2. Planning Process & Time Schedule

* Work products associated with the Defining the Community, Vision and Identity, and Preliminary list of stakeholder and focus group to be submitted within 6 months after this Agreement is signed.

To be completed by the end of August 31, 1999

II. OVERVIEW OF THE JAPANTOWN PLANNING, PRESERVATION, AND DEVELOPMENT TASK FORCE

A. Background

The Japantown Planning, Preservation, and Development Task Force ("Task Force") grew out of community concerns over the future of San Francisco's Japantown, one of only three Japantowns remaining in the United States. Arising from a community assessment funding proposal in mid-1998, the momentum quickly picked up to incorporate a number of interested individuals and community organizations. This interest culminated with a community forum on October 31, 1998 to discuss issues relating to the preservation of Japantown.

In December 1998, the Japantown Planning, Preservation, and Development Task Force was organized to address the need for a long term plan to ensure the future of San Francisco's Japantown community. Initiated by an ad-hoc committee, the Task Force is now composed of close to 50 members, consisting of a broad cross section of the Japantown. There are representatives from small and large businesses, social service agencies, arts and cultural groups, religious organizations, community newspapers, residents, senior citizens, youth, the Japanese speaking community and from the Korean American community. In addition to the seated members of the Task Force, an Advisory Council has been established to provide additional guidance and support for the Task Force. Currently there are 15 members on the Task Force's Advisory Council. The Task Force continues to outreach to, inform, and obtain input from the community at large.

With support from the Mayor's Office and funding provided by the San Francisco Redevelopment Agency (SFRA), the Task Force is undergoing an 18-month planning process, begun in March 1999, to develop a New Japantown Community Plan to preserve and enhance the Japantown community.

B. Mission Statement

The Japantown Planning, Preservation and Development Task Force's mission is to organize and direct the preparation of a comprehensive community assessment and planning document on the future of San Francisco's Japantown. The New Japantown Plan will serve as a blueprint to guide the implementation of recommendations to help preserve and enhance the community.

C. Task Force Composition and Meetings

The Task Force members include leaders of local community organizations and businesses and interested community members.

The following are officers of the Task Force: Sandy Mori, Chair; Geri Handa, Secretary; and Neal Taniguchi, Treasurer,. The Executive Committee of the Task Force is composed of the chair, secretary, treasurer and the chairs of the four standing committees.

The Task Force has the following four standing committees, which also hold regular meetings:

     Communications & Marketing (Chris Hirano, Chair and Seiko Fujimoto, Vice Chair): The scope of the Communications & Marketing Committee includes the coordination of community organizations within Japantown, outreach to other Japanese American communities, tourism and linking the wider community to Japan.

    Economic & Community Development (Caryl Ito, Chair and Min Peak, Vice Chair): The scope of the Economic and Community Committee includes the development of business opportunities for families, small businesses and the encouragement of new businesses.

         Environment (Sara Ishikawa, Chair and Kaz Naganuma, Vice Chair): The scope of the Environment Committee includes urban design, physical beauty, signage, safety and security in the area, maintenance and lighting. Also of concern are open space issues such as the Buchanan Mall and the Peace Plaza.

     Real Estate & Land Use (Gary Kitahata, Chair and Doug Dawkins, Vice Chair): The scope of the Real Estate & Land Use Committee is the preservation of community, affordable housing, and land transfers, and includes new and ongoing community projects.

III. OVERVIEW OF JAPANTOWN COMMUNITY PLANNING PROCESS

A. Overview of Planning Process

The Japantown Community Planning Process, spearheaded by the Japantown Planning, Preservation and Development Task Force, is an 18-month process. The general planning process that the Task Force will undertake is outlined in Figure II-1.

The Task Force is currently working with a joint planning consultant team of two local Asian American non-profits with extensive experience in community planning: Chinatown Community Development Center and Asian Neighborhood Design.

The planning process during the first six months is shown in Figure II-2. The specific work plan and schedule is shown in Attachment III-2.

B. Goals and Objectives of the Planning Process

The Task Force's goals and objectives of the planning process are as follows:

1. Build Community.

Bring community together to plan for the future of Japantown.

Galvanize community-wide participation and interest in planning for the future of Japantown.

Increase interaction, communication and networking between and among different segments of the community to work together.

Build community support for advocating for benefits for the Japantown community.

2. Develop Knowledge Base of the Community.

Collect base data on the community.

Create forum for information sharing and discussion about the Japantown community.

Provide information to community regarding current activities and developments that might impact the Japantown community.

3. Develop a Community Plan for the Preservation, Planning, and Development of Japantown that will be implemented.

Solicit community-wide input on developing the community plan.

Build community-wide consensus and support for the implementation of the goals, objectives, and specific projects that come out of the Community Plan.

Identify public policies, strategies, and specific projects to be implemented for the benefit of the Japantown community.

Identify resources and strategies to bring about implementation of the Plan.

4. Support selected existing and on-going projects in their implementation in Japantown.

C. Defining Community

1. Community Definition:

For the purpose of this planning process, "Community" is defined as people of Japanese ancestry in America, and people who support and have a vested interest in the development and preservation of San Francisco's Japantown.

2. Physical Boundary:

Setting the physical boundaries of the Japantown community was difficult given that there are historical, cultural, and psychological spheres of influences which impact the identity and definition of the Japantown community and its boundaries. For example, How do we know we are in Japantown? What is the internal and external definition of what it is to be “Japanese” living in America? How is it defined by the larger community surrounding us and outside of this community?

As a starting point, the Planning Consultants began gathering existing land use data around the area bounded by Bush, Geary, Steiner and Gough. Based on input from the committees, the Consultants broaden their data collection to a larger area, extending to California, O'Farrell, Pierce, and Franklin, at the same time, including other properties that are significant to the Japanese and Japanese-American community that might lie outside this general boundary. This information was presented to the Task Force members at their general meeting on April 14, 1999.

During that meeting, Task Force members discussed extensively about what they considered to be the physical boundaries of Japantown. Historically, Japantown extended to over 30 square blocks, with a large Japanese-American residential population, which has diminished and dispersed from the area due to two major actions by the government: The first was the Japanese internment during World War II, the second, the redevelopment of Western Addition A-2 area.

Today, Japantown's commercial core is concentrated along Buchanan and Post, on seven square blocks, three of which are taken up by the Japan Trade Center (Kintetsu and Kinokuniya buildings) and the Miyako Hotel and Mall. According to the 1990 U.S. Census, the Japanese and Japanese-American residential population make up only ten percent of the greater Japantown area (as defined by three main census tracts 0152, 0155, and 0159.)1 However, Japantown has maintained a strong base of community organizations and religious institutions which have historically and continue to address Japanese and Japanese-American needs and interests as well as serve the greater population. At the same time, many community organizations and religious institutions, considered as assets to the community, have located outside the immediate Japantown area.

1 The three census tracts over an area much greater than the Japantown Planning Study.

In order to facilitate our initial study of Japantown, the Task Force endorsed the following physical boundaries as the Japantown Planning Study Area, to be revisited and discussed at a later point in time:

For now, the physical boundaries set for our initial study would include both sides of Fillmore, Pine, Octavia, and O'Farrell.

3. Vision/Identity:

On May 19th, the Task Force endorsed the following vision statement:

The Vision of this Community Plan is to provide ideas and strategies to preserve and develop Japantown as a viable neighborhood by revitalizing its commercial and cultural district into a local, statewide, national, and international resource. We envision strengthening the ethnic diversity of San Francisco by bringing together the culture and history of the Nikkei community into the Japantown center for all to share, and to create an atmosphere of safety, beauty, and prosperity for the residents, organizations, and businesses all residing in the neighborhood for now and in the future.

IV. COMMUNITY PROFILE

A. Community Historical Context

San Francisco's Japantown or "Nihonmachi" evolved from several earlier Japanese American communities during the early 1900's. Due to immigration, social, economic and racial forces impacting the Japanese community at the time, early settlements existed in the South Park and Chinatown districts of San Francisco. As with many ethnic communities, the formation of Japantown provided support for the first generation of Japanese immigrants, or Issei, by providing services, language and housing at a time when they were not welcome in other parts of the City. Located near the shipping docks where many first arrived to this country, this early community provided a central base to Japanese Americans throughout Northern California.

After the 1906 earthquake, a shift in the Japanese American community began towards the Western Addition area that provided greater residential opportunities. The disruption caused by the start of construction of the Bay Bridge completed the relocation of the community away from South Park. With the relocation of the community came more Japanese businesses, shops, churches, schools, restaurants, hotels, and other organizations, which grew in the Western Addition and further supported the growth of the community. This growth continued through the 1920's and 1930's.

The start of World War II brought an abrupt end to the flourishing community. Executive Order 9066, issued by President Roosevelt in 1942, brought the evacuation of all persons of Japanese ancestry. Western Addition Isseis and their children, the Second Generation or Niseis, along with other Japanese throughout the West Coast, were evacuated first to local "Assembly Centers," then onto "Relocation Camps" located in isolated areas throughout the West. The impact of World War II to the Western Addition was the removal of Japanese Americans and the influx of a new African-American community primarily from the South who were recruited for shipyard work for war construction.

At the end of the War, many Japanese families returned to the Western Addition. However, the scale and quality of the pre-war community was never re-established. Many families never returned to the area. The Japanese American community scattered throughout the country. Due to the changing economics of the City, the movement towards the suburbs and the aging residential building stock which dated from before the earthquake making upkeep difficult, the post-war Japantown area deteriorated.

During the 1960's and 1970's, the area was placed under the control of the San Francisco Redevelopment Agency. Identified as an area characterized by "blight," the Redevelopment Plan for the Western Addition Redevelopment Project Area A-2 was instituted with the intent to "remedy" these conditions.

Large portions of the neighborhood building stock were removed to make room for newer developments such as the Japantown Trade Center and Miyako Hotel. Community opposition such as CANE (Committee Against Nihonmachi Eviction) sought to stop further demolition and relocation of housing and building stock. The Third Generation, or Sansei, protested this demolition to the neighborhood because it was resulting in the further dissemination of the Japanese American community. Through the activism and efforts of the Nisei and Sansei, many new community-based organizations arose during this period to address the community needs for seniors, children, youth, and others.

Efforts were made to both protect the cultural existence of Nihonmachi and to expand the spirit of the community to Japanese and Japanese Americans throughout the area. Events such as the annual Cherry Blossom Festival celebrate Japanese culture and bring elements of the Japanese American community together with those from Japan. The community-based Nihonmachi Street Fair celebrates Japanese American and Asian American values and spirit.

Changes in the neighborhood are on going with the continuing shifts in the Japanese American and newcomer Japanese populations, an evolving local Korean American community and businesses, and changes along the commercial Fillmore Street District.

Today San Francisco Nihonmachi is one of only three remaining major Japanese American communities in the United States. The others are in San Jose and Los Angeles.

B. Demographics of the Japantown Community

Japantown has historically been a mixed use neighborhood with residential, commercial and cultural establishments, serving both the neighborhood area as well as the broader Japanese American community in the Bay Area. Recognizing this, in examining the demographics of the community, we will look at both the demographics of the neighborhood as well as the demographics of the Japanese and Japanese American community, or the Nikkei population, of the greater Bay Area.

Japantown, the Neighborhood
Population: Who lives in the neighborhood?
A Closer look at the San Francisco and Bay Area Nikkei Population

1. Japantown, the Neighborhood

The Task Force identified the Japantown neighborhood, for working purposes, as being bounded by both sides of Pine Street and O'Farrell Street from the north and south, and Octavia Street to Fillmore Street to the East and West. While not exact, the Census Tracts which largely cover this area are 0152, 0155 and 0159, hereby, defined as the “greater Japantown neighborhood”.

2. Population: Who lives in the Neighborhood?

Ethnicity: Based on 1990 U.S. Census data, the greater Japantown neighborhood had a population of 9,324 residents, among whom over half (or 53%) were White, a quarter (or 26%) were Asian American, 19% African American, and 2% Hispanic. (See Figure IV-1.)

Source: 1990 U.S. Census

Among the Asian population in the neighborhood, 37% were Japanese, 29% Chinese, 22% Korean, 6% Filipino and 6% other Asian2. (See Figure IV-2.) Therefore, about 10% of the greater Japantown neighborhood is made up of Japanese and Japanese Americans3. Given that the Japanese and Japanese-American population makes up less than 2% of the City's overall population, the Japantown area is still considered to have a high concentration of Japanese and Japanese Americans living there. The Nikkei population residing in the greater Japantown neighborhood makes up 7.3% of the City's Nikkei population. (See Table IV-1)

Source: 1990 U.S. Census

 

2 In comparison to the overall Citywide population in which Japanese accounted for 12.3% of all Asian Americans.

3 37% of the Asian population in the area is Japanese, and the Asian population makes up 26% of all the overall area's population.

 

Age: As shown in Table IV-1, the greater Japantown area has an older population, with an average age of 45, in comparison with that of the City's average (38.8). In 1990, seniors aged 65 and over comprised nearly a quarter of the greater Japantown neighborhood, with young adults, aged 25 to 34, also making up nearly a quarter of the area's population. Less than 10% were children under 15. About 10% were youth, ages 15 to 24. (See Figure IV-3.)

Source: 1990 U.S. Census

Top

Neighborhood Comparison to the City and Region: The population residing in the greater Japantown area is about 1.3% of that of the City. As discussed above, the Japantown population is older, and has a higher per capita income than the City as a whole. However, it has a lower median household income, about 83% of the City's median household income, and 67% of that of the Bay Area. It also has a smaller average household size than the City's and that of the Bay Area. Median rent in that area in 1990 was also slightly lower than the City's and Bay Area's average. (See Table VI-1 below.)

Table IV-1. Neighborhood Comparisons to the City and Region

 

Japantown

(CT: 0152, 0155, 0159)

San Francisco

Bay Area

(CMSA)

Area

.35 sq. miles

46.7 sq. miles

7,374 sq. miles

Population

9,324

723,959

6,253,311

Average Age

45.0

38.8

 

Per Capita Income*

$16,356

$13,923

$15,355

Median Household Income*

$27,805

$33,414

$41,459

Average Household Size

1.7

2.4

2.7

Median Rent

$574

$653

$690

Japanese Population

932

12,047

81,504

Japanese Speakers

807

6,061

 

Source: 1990 U.S. Census (*Income figures are for 1989)

Top

3. A Closer look at the San Francisco and Bay Area Nikkei Population

In 1990, 12,047 people of Japanese descent were reported through the census for the City and County of San Francisco. Two thirds of the San Francisco Nikkei Population were American born, and about 30% were born in Japan.4 Nearly half (or 46.5%) of the City's Nikkei population were Japanese speaking. (Between 1980 and 1990, the total number of Japanese speakers (i.e., immigrants) in the United States increased by 27%.5)

4 Kobashigawa, Ben "Demographic Analysis of the San Francisco Bay Area Nikkei Population"

5 www.asiacentral.com/pop/demo/demo9.htm

Within San Francisco, the main areas of concentration of the Nikkei and related population are in Japantown, the Richmond and Sunset districts.6

6 Kobashigawa, Ben "Demographic Analysis of the S.F. Bay Area Nikkei Populations" 5/28/99 pg. 7

Newcomer and Visitor Population: In looking at Japanese immigration to the Bay Area, immigration data indicates that there were 5,877 Japanese immigrants in San Francisco with a green card in 1997. In addition, 4,713 Japanese visitors with visas indicated a stay of three months or more in San Francisco. When this number of Japanese immigrants and visitors is added to the existing Japanese population not included in the 1990 U.S. Census, the Japanese speaking population in San Francisco would be increased by 39%. This would make the Japanese newcomer and extended visitor population 50% of the total Japanese population in San Francisco and therefore, an important group to attract to Japantown to help the revitalization of its commercial center.

In addition, of the Japanese surveyed in the 1990 census, 33% were identified as being "linguistically isolated"7 and would benefit from services that are linguistically and culturally appropriate to this population.

7 www.asiacentral.com/ademo/fig4.htm

Nikkei Population Distribution in the Bay Area: Table VI-2 below shows nearly as many Japanese immigrants go to the South Bay as to San Francisco.

Table IV-2: Japanese Immigration to the Bay Area

 

San Francisco

Silicon Valley

Totals

Stay more than 3 months

4713

4582

9295

With green card

5877

5690

11567

Totals

10590

10272

20862

Source: 1997 Immigration data

 

Within the 9 county Bay Area region, over a third (35.3%) of the Nikkei population resides in Santa Clara County. Alameda County has the second largest percentage of Bay Area's Nikkei population (17.8%), with San Francisco, as third with 14.6%. In terms of the Japanese speaking population, again, Santa Clara County has the greatest percentage at 31.4%, but San Francisco is second with 19%, and San Mateo is third with 15.7%. (See Tables IV-3 & IV-4 and Map IV-2.)

Table IV-3. Bay Area Japanese Population Distribution by County

County

Total County Population

Distribution of Pop. In Bay Area By County (%)

Total Japanese Population

Distribution of Japanese Pop. In Bay Area By County (%)

Japanese as % of Total County Pop.

Alameda

1,279,182

21.2%

14,077

17.8%

1.1%

Contra Costa

803,732

13.3%

8,264

10.4%

1.0%

Marin

230,096

3.8%

1,855

2.3%

0.8%

Napa

110,765

1.8%

644

0.8%

0.6%

San Francisco

723,959

12%

11,591

14.6%

1.6%

San Mateo

649,623

10.8%

10,250

12.9%

1.6%

Santa Clara

1,497,577

24.9%

27,967

35.3%

1.9%

Solano

340,421

5.7%

2,923

3.7%

0.9%

Sonoma

388,222

6.4%

1,606

2.0%

0.4%

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bay Area

6,023,577

 

79,177

 

1.3%

Source: Asian Pacific Islander Health Forum

 

Table IV-4. Bay Area Japanese Speakers Population Distribution by County

County

Total Japanese Speakers

Distribution of Japanese Speakers In Bay Area By County (%)

Japanese Speakers as % of Japanese Population

Alameda

5,122

14.8%

36%

Contra Costa

3,096

8.9%

37%

Marin

787

2.3%

42%

Napa

396

1.1%

61%

San Francisco

6,600

19.0%

57%

San Mateo

5,442

15.7%

53%

Santa Clara

10,905

31.4%

39%

Solano

1,704

4.9%

58%

Sonoma

635

1.8%

40%

 

 

 

 

Bay Area

34,687

 

44%

Source: Asian Pacific Islander Health Forum

Top

 

C. Japantown Existing Property and Land Use Profile

1. Project Area: The Project Area or Planning Study area is defined by the Japantown Planning, Preservation and Development Task Force as an area roughly bounded by both sides of Pine, Octavia, O'Farrell, and Fillmore (see Map IV-3). The Project Area analysis includes the following blocks: 0649-0654, 0659-0664; 0673-0678; 0683-0688; 0697-0702; and 0707-0712.8

8 (Please note that partial land use information, primarily for lots facing Geary and Pine, is included in the land use analysis for the following blocks: 0649-0654 and 0707-0712)

2. Existing Zoning and Existing Height Limits: Map IV-4 shows the existing zoning for the Project Area. See Attachment IV-2 for a summary of the definitions of the different zoning types. Map IV-5 shows the existing height limits. Most of the area fall within the 50-X (up to 50 feet by right) allowed and 40-X (up to 40 fit by right) height limit. See Attachment IV-3 for definition of the height and bulk limits.

3. General Land Use Pattern: Map IV-6 identifies the general land use pattern of the area, according to commercial, institution, mixed use, open space, parking, residential, vacant, and no data. The definitions of these use types are given below.

Definitions:

·         Commercial Use is defined here to include office, retail, banks, and hotels.

·         Residential Use is defined as land use for residential or housing purposes only.

·         Mixed-Use is defined as a mix of commercial and residential uses.

·         Institutional Use includes churches, religious institutions, schools, hospitals and public and community related uses, including non-profits.

·         Open Space is defined as an area of land occupied for the purpose of outdoor use (for passive or active recreation).

·         Parking is defined here to include only surface parking lots within the Project Area.

·         Vacant Land includes parcels currently empty and not in use.

·         No Data is defined for this map as parcels where either data is not available or are not within the definition of commercial, residential, mixed-use, institutional use, open space, parking or vacant properties.

Below are some key conclusions draw from the General Land Use map and the Detailed Residential Use map.

Key Conclusions:

·         The majority of land within the Project Area is residential use.

·         Commercial and institutional uses combined are the second largest land uses within the Project Area. Although the number of commercial use parcels exceed institutional use (59 to 32), the total areas of the two are similar (see Figures IV-4 and IV-5).

·         Commercial use is primarily concentrated on the southern and western ends of the Project Area, at Post, Buchanan and Fillmore Streets, areas that occupy less than one-third of the Project Area.

·         There is one clear distinction between the commercial use on Post and Buchanan and the Fillmore Street areas. The commercial use on Post and Buchanan is primarily limited to mainly commercial use while the businesses on Fillmore Street employ a "mixed-use" of land more where commercial use is found along side residential within individual parcels. (For specific types of commercial use, see discussion on Detailed Commercial Use below).

·         As stated above, thirty-two parcels are occupied by institutional use in the Project Area. Of the total, more than half are occupied by churches or for religious purposes. The rest are community or non-profit related uses (see discussion on Type of Property Ownership below).

·         Few open space is available to the large residential community present for outdoor and recreation activities; there are only 4 parcels that could be defined as open space within the entire Project Area. Closest sizable open space to the Project Area is outside of the area. It is the Hamilton Fields and Recreation Center, which is located near Geary and Steiner.

·         There are 10 vacant parcels within the Project Area and they are primarily owned by public entities (see discussion of Type of Property Ownership below). Development opportunities are small within these vacant parcels since many are already spoken for or are currently under development.

Top

4. Detailed Commercial Use: A detailed breakdown of commercial uses by bank, hotel, office, retail, retail/office/bank, and no data is shown in Map IV-7 and Figure IV-6. Some key conclusions are summarized below.

Definitions:

·         No Data is defined for this map as parcels where either data is not available or are not within the definition of bank, hotel, office, or retail properties.

Key Conclusions:

·         The majority of the commercial use in the Project Area is retail, i.e. shops, clothing boutiques, cafes and restaurants. Of the total retail, restaurant use is the primary commercial activity. Other retail in the Project Area includes grocery stores, hair salons, dry cleaners, cosmetic stores, photo shops, book stores, pottery, art galleries and jewelry shops (see Figure IV-7).

·         There is a significant number of professional offices, i.e. accounting, architectural, real estate, insurance and law offices, within the Project Area (see Figure IV-7).

·         The commercial use within the Project Area is concentrated along two corridors as discussed above, Post & Buchanan and Fillmore, respectively covering blocks 675-676, 685-686, and 700-701, and 653-654, 659-60, 677-78,683-84, 702, and 707-708.

·         The Fillmore commercial corridor is primarily outdoor, whereas the Post and Buchanan commercial core includes mostly indoor locations, the primary use being the Japan Center that includes the Miyako and the Kintetsu Malls (see Figures IV-8 and IV-9).

·         There are two banks in the Project Area: one within the Miyako Mall and on Post.

·         There are five hotels in the area; two major ones, the Miyako Inn and the Miyako (Radisson) Hotel, are located in the Post and Buchanan commercial core.

Top

5. Detailed Residential Use: Map IV-8 and Figures IV-10 and IV-11 show a breakdown of the residential uses by single family, flat, apartment, condominium, single room occupancy, and no data. The definitions and key conclusions are provided below.

Definitions:

·         Single Family unit is defined as a single unit dwelling for single family occupancy.

·         A Flat is a unit that allows for more than one family occupancy; it typically has 2 to 4 units.

·         Apartments are defined here under three categories: large, medium and small. Small apartments are defined to include 2 to 12 units, and are typically larger than a flat. Medium size apartments hold approximately 13 to 100 units, and large apartments have 101 units or greater.

·         Condos are defined as dwellings that have been legally defined as condominiums or apartments with separate ownerships within a single building. Condos in the Project Area vary from 12 to 150 units.

·         Single Room Occupancy units or SROs are dwelling units containing one room only.

·         No Data is defined for this map as parcels where either data is not available or are not within the definition of single family, flat, apartment, condo or SRO properties.

Key Conclusions:

·         The majority of the parcels (approximately 49% of the total residential units or 34% of the total parcels) of the identified residential area within the Project Area, are used for small to medium sized apartments or flats (see Figures IV-10 and IV-11). Many of these units are located along the northern half of the Project Area above Sutter Street.

·         Very few single family units (3% of the total residential units) exist within the Project Area (see Figure VI-11).

·         Many flats and single family units in the Project Area are victorians, often renovated and were built before 1960 (see discussion of Building Built Date below).

·         Large sized apartments, although small in number (1% of total parcels), make a significant presence in the Project Area, as they contain large number of dwelling units (28% of total units) (see Figures IV-10 and IV-11). The building heights of large sized apartments can go up to 240 feet in a mostly 40-50 feet tall neighborhood (