.

Management Analyst Vies for Newark Planning Commission Seat

Sherry Nikzat is one of four people who applied for a position on Newark’s Planning Commission. Discover what she would prioritize if appointed to the job.

Sherry Nikzat applied for a seat on Newark's Planning Commission in January 2014.  Photo courtesy of Sherry Nikzat
Sherry Nikzat applied for a seat on Newark's Planning Commission in January 2014. Photo courtesy of Sherry Nikzat
Sherry Nikzat is a Newark resident who works as a Senior Management Analyst for the city of Palo Alto's Planning and Community Development Department.  She used to work in Newark as a Senior Administrative Analyst, but was let go during a round of layoffs.  While she was unemployed she earned a Masters Degree in Public Administration at Golden Gate University. 

We asked her a few questions to see what she prioritize if appointed to the Newark Planning Commission.  Here is an unedited transcript of the Q & A: 

Patch: What inspired you to apply to join the Planning Commission?

Nikzat: My family and I have lived in Newark and enjoyed this community for 14 years.  Now that my children are grown, I have more time to devote to interests beyond those which are family-oriented and one of those interests is this community we call home.  To my way of thinking, planning and development set the character for any community; creating an identity, making it welcoming, giving it a sense of place.  The General Plan Update describes a Newark filled with challenges and promise.  This is an exciting time to work toward the community’s vision of Newark and I’d like to be a part of that.


Have you read the new General Plan update? 

Yes.

 

What are the issues with the proposed residential development in the Dumbarton TOD area?

The Dumbarton Transit Oriented Development (TOD) is a project planned to eventually include housing, retail, and office space in close proximity to the proposed site for a Dumbarton Rail station.  Dumbarton Rail is a regional goal that would connect the East Bay to the Peninsula through passenger rail service across the bay; providing a new alternative for commuters and helping the region adhere to the greenhouse gas reduction targets of California’s Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act.  I’ve read the comments to the draft EIR and news reports of public comments at the Planning Commission meeting.  Basically, it seems the majority of concerns are about possibilities of flooding, potential risks to groundwater, possible impacts to sensitive habitats and species, the project’s density, whether it is a suitable location for housing or a transit station, lack of open space, increases to traffic, and traffic safety.  These concerns were raised and addressed.

It’s always challenging to weigh the environmental pros and cons of development, but I support this project because it can bring vitality to the area and is smart infill growth for Newark.  It will provide jobs and housing, encourage commuters to stay out of their cars, and is less harmful to the environment than sprawl. 

 

What's your take on Senator Corbett's "Clean Communities" bill?

It’s an interesting question.  On its face, Senator Corbett’s bill could be helpful in encouraging smart growth and residential infill, which in turn, should increase pedestrian access, lessen automobile trips and protect pristine undeveloped land from sprawl.  I agree that smart growth should be encouraged but I also am concerned about projects that could have a real impact on the environment.  What isn’t clear to me is if the exemption proposed in her bill would be subject to the same exceptions of CEQA’s categorical exemptions, including when reasonable possibility of a significant effect on the environment exists due to unusual circumstances.  If so, I would be more strongly supportive of her bill.

 

What are your thoughts on New Park Mall and the upcoming Master Plan?

I must admit to some skepticism.  I think most Newark residents are frustrated by the mall and disappointed by the lack of progress over the last seven or eight years.  Personally, I’d much rather go to a mall in my own community and get a significant amount of my shopping done in one location than shop at Pacific Commons where stores are separated by streets and the area is not pedestrian friendly.  Yet I shop there because it houses the stores I want with the merchandise I seek and offers a wide variety of dining choices.

The Master Plan for the mall is ambitious so I imagine it would be undertaken in phases.  The Plan includes residential and office buildings, as well as other amenities.  I like that the plan could provide Newark with a badly needed sense of place.  With the influx of people from new development, perhaps NewPark Mall will be reinvigorated and able to bring in the retailers and restaurants consumers would like to patronize.  Maybe this will provide the necessary boost to allow progress on future phases.

 

Talk to me about increasing Newark’s population.

Newark’s population is bound to increase as the economy in the region continues to recover. 

According to the General Plan, the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) projects the number of housing units to grow by 27 percent between 2010 and 2040.  An analysis prepared for the General Plan anticipates even more growth, projecting a 46 percent increase in housing units by 2035 and resulting in a citywide population of roughly 60,000 or about a 40% increase over today’s population.  The General Plan points out that employment is projected to increase at the same rate as housing but surrounding communities are also planning for large growth in employment. The City will need to plan carefully.   Such an influx over just 21 years could stress Newark’s infrastructure and roadways.  These increases would also have a significant impact on traffic and housing availability and affordability, as well as increase the need for schooling, public safety, health care, and transit. This will present a challenge for City leaders and City coffers.

 

Do you think Newark needs to be more bicyclist and pedestrian friendly?

Absolutely, and I think the General Plan recognizes and includes specific goals for promoting bicycling and walking.  Most of the city was built out at a time when the automobile was the preferred mode of transportation. Today, as a community concerned with public health, the health of our environment, and traffic congestion, increasing opportunities to travel by bicycle or by foot makes sense and is in keeping with quality of life and smart growth goals.  The City Council also recognizes this.  In March, 2013, the Council adopted a Complete Streets concept so that roads will be planned to accommodate multiple modes of travel, including pedestrians and bicyclists. 

 

What’s something that most people don’t know about you?

Like many other people, I put myself through college. At the time, I could not afford to continue to graduate school.  Once my children were in high school, I realized a lifelong dream by returning to school and earning my master’s degree.

 

Anything else you’d like to add?

I enjoy public services.  I worked for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for many years, initiating their Brownfields program in the San Francisco region.  I also worked for the City of Newark’s Recreation and Community Services Department from 2005 – 2010. I now work for the City of Palo Alto’s Planning and Community Environment Department.



Mayor Alan Nagy will make the final decision about who gets the open seat on the commission.

[ Related Articles: Former Educator Aims Sights on Urban Planning in Newark ]




Linda Ashley January 29, 2014 at 10:54 PM
Good luck Sherry. You'd be a wonderful Planning Commissioner!
Nadja Adolf January 30, 2014 at 01:25 AM
Given that Ms. Nitzkat, who seems like a nice enough person, has no idea that the Dumbarton Rail project is on indefinite hold, and that there is no plan for it to stop in Newark (recent indications are that if it is ever built that it would not stop before the train station in Fremont), I am a bit concerned about her support for the alleged TOD - a development that will not even receive bus service from AC Transit without a city subsidy (read the statements from AC Transit that have been submitted regarding the TOD.) My concern is that we will have yet another person in the bureaucracy who does not deal with the real issues and relies on an idealized vision that does not coincide with reality. Please note that AC Transit appears to be *reducing* service to Newark at this time; coupled with their expectation that any service to the proposed TOD will require city funding, I am not sure the city has the funds to provide transit. If there is no transit, traffic will be beyond horrendous. Even with transit, the projections for the TOD foresee gridlock as a result of the increased traffic.
lewis2 January 30, 2014 at 01:09 PM
Interesting responses. Her replies sound like the same old party line. She says she has read the new master plan. Did she read the 100’s and 100’s and 100’s of pages submitted by other involved agencies outlining all the flaws, problems and reasons why the master plan doesn’t meet the necessary requirements to be useful and workable? The City is overlooking the most obvious “Transit Orientated” area in the City. Down near the vicinity of the Post Office, where Sycamore meets Central Avenue, there are several developable vacant lots as well as several vacant business, ie., the old Trench Plate building and land is for sale and could be used for high density housing. The palate company takes up a large lot that could become a parking lot for a train station. Do a land switch for the pallet company, move them to Area 2. Build high density housing on the vacant parcels. Zone everything else residential so that as business leave, their land can be converted to more housing. Every passenger train that goes through Newark passes the Pallet Co. lot. A station there could give Newark access to the Capitals, Altamont Express and Coast Starlight. A station on Area 2 has zero chance of seeing any train for a long time and probably never. We don’t need a “business as usual” appointment by the Mayor. We need to get some people in this position that think for themselves, read ALL the reports and are willing to shoot down all these bad plans the City keeps putting forward. Current members of the Planning Commission just vote for what ever the Planning Department puts in front of them. Maybe we should elect the Planning Commission members. We might just get some new ideas and direction from those that don’t just play “follow the leader”. Dean Lewis
Jacob M. March 01, 2014 at 10:39 AM
All for naught...she didn't get the position.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something