Measure X Could Price Out Marinship Makers

Today’s Marinship rules are designed to preserve a working waterfront:

• Maritime, industrial, and arts uses are given room to remain. The rules discourage commercial businesses that could displace them or generate disproportionate traffic.
• New commercial office use is tightly limited. Office and retail space generally must be accessory to, or accompanied by, noncommercial uses.
• Different kinds of artists are protected. Applied arts may occupy no more than half of a parcel’s arts space. At least an equal amount must remain available for fine, industrial, or marine arts.

Measure X repeals that framework in its entirety. It replaces tailored protections with broad new commercial permissions and far greater development capacity.

Even Measure X’s promised protection for the ICB Building and historic Arques Shipyard may not work. The measure neither defines nor maps the sites, and the City’s independent legal review called the language “vague and unenforceable.”

Measure X is promoted as allowing makers to sell their work for the first time. That is not true. Current rules already allow on-site accessory retail to occupy up to 15% of a maker’s space.

If makers need more retail space, the City Council can expand that allowance directly. Helping makers sell more does not require a 650% or 900% increase in development capacity—or the repeal of the rules that protect their workspace.

Measure X says it prohibits new “commercial office” buildings. But its own use table allows many office-type businesses—including financial services, business support, design, publishing, medical services, and research—to occupy 100% of a building.

It also opens Marinship properties to logistics and distribution, retail, restaurants, fitness, recreation, and other commercial uses while allowing dramatically more floor area.

The independent economic review warns that existing arts, maritime, and industrial businesses are more price-sensitive than some of these newly allowed tenants. More competition for the same properties could mean higher rents—and fewer makers.