Page One

The recent ‘quadplex’ proposal, scheduled for Berkeley City Council hearing March 25th, floated by Council members, Kesarwani D1, Taplin D-2, Robinson D-7, Droste D-8 and Mayor Arreguin, already in its fourth? iteration, landed on the people of Berkeley, backed by the pro-development organization California YIMBY, funded by technology and real estate interests. What the ‘quadplex’ proposal does not provide is affordable (low-cost) housing, which is the real housing need, not more market-rate housing, currently in over-supply.

The State Density Bonus provides affordable units, in exchange for a 50% bonus in unit count in addition to a number of waivers and concessions, including increased height and bulk and reduced setbacks, for 15%* extremely low-income units. A benefit of the State Density Bonus is that units must be located on site, unlike Berkeleys’ affordable housing requirement, which allows 100% in lieu fees to avoid providing required 20% affordable units in the project. *Because State Density Bonus affordable units are calculated on the base project, the percentage of low-cost units may net only about 7% of the total project.

What the ‘quadplex’ proposal does not admit is that, under State Bonus Density and ADU laws additional units are allowed: 4 unit base units + 2 Density Bonus units + 2 ADU/JADU units = 8 units. In return, 1 affordable unit is required, along with waivers and concessions for height and bulk. There is no limit on the number of bedrooms per unit, and 6 bedroom units, with minimal living space, are becoming common for market rate projects.This formula presents an attractive opportunity to for-profit developers, and for the neighborhood a project taller and bigger than allowable under current development standards, with the detrimental conflicts that out of scale projects bring. 

The ostensible goals of the ‘quadplex’ proposal would be met if R-1 zoning were changed to allow 2 units, though this lessens the attraction to for-profit developers. Existing large single-family houses could be duplexed, plus an ADU + a JADU for 4 units. The same would apply for additions or new construction. This is already the case in R-1A, R-2 and R-2A zones, though the lack of objective standards creates privacy & shading conflicts. 

Other cities have changed single-family zoning to allow more units and higher density. A comparable city, Cambridge MA, has done so with the implementation of form-based zoning, or objective standards, which requires consideration of scale & context to mitigate detriment. Like comparably sized Berkeley, Cambridge has a large university which heavily influences housing. The major difference with the proposed market-rate ‘quadplex’ up-zoning is that Cambridge adopted a 100% affordable housing policy. Cambridge also has specific design guidelines, including form-base objective standards, and requires project review, not ministerial approval. This is well thought out community based planning, with an impressive level of detail, that took 3 years to realize. 

Berkeley could draw on its’ history of cooperatives, and promulgate zoning revisions which incentivize 100% affordable (low-cost*) non-profit equity and non-equity co-ops, and taking profit out of the equation, lowering housing costs for renters and owners. The City could further encourage non-profit housing by allocating Housing Trust Funds, which could be used to leverage available State matching funds. *moderate income households @ 80-120% AMI are not where the greatest affordable housing need is. 

To mitigate the detriment of increased density Berkeley should adopt form based and objective standards and incentivize historic preservation, adaptive reuse and sustainable environmental strategies in design and construction. This need not be limited to R-1 and residential zones, as potential re-use housing could utilize existing office and commercial buildings rendered redundant due to shifting patterns of use, i.e. remote working and e-commerce. 

City Council should refer a ‘100% Affordable (low-cost) Housing Zoning Revision Project’ to the Planning Commission for consideration by ZORP, the Zoning Ordinance Revision Project authorized by Council, funded and currently in process, which includes a contract planner, City Planning and members of the Planning Commission and Zoning Adjustments Board. This public process is guided by professionals and should include all stakeholders as full participants to further the goal of providing affordable (low-cost) housing.