New: A BERKELEY ACTIVIST'S DIARY:week ending April 23
Earth Day has come and gone. My inbox was filled with donation requests, double and triple matches and offers for t-shirts and gear to celebrate earth day. More gear is so contrary to earth day.
My favorite quote from Nomadland is Linda’s comment on Amazon, “people buying stuff they didn’t need to impress people they didn’t like.”
Earth Overshoot Day for 2023 is calculated as July 27, but if the world’s population lived like Americans then Earth Overshoot Day would be March 13. The U.S. is tied with Canada and the United Arab Emirates. There are two countries that surpass us in consumption with earlier overshoot days, Luxembourg with February 14 and Qatar February 10. https://www.overshootday.org/newsroom/country-overshoot-days/
I am old enough to remember when the little closets in older houses were large enough to hold what we needed for play, every day wear and dress up for special occasions. That was years away from when consumption turned into “retail therapy” that was supposed to bring happiness, and rooms became walk in closets, and all those closets needed bigger houses to hold it all.
We could think of the last project at the Design Review Committee (DRC) on Thursday evening as a way to end oniomania and over consumption. 2147 San Pablo was the second group living building approved for San Pablo Avenue. This one is a 6-story mixed-use building with 128 group living accommodation units (including 12 very low-income units and one manager 2 bedroom unit). The drawings of the units packed in a bed, a table desk with chair, a kitchenette, a private bathroom and a miniature closet into square footage hovering around 200 to 300 square feet with one 472 square foot unit on the 6th floor. That would make most of the units smaller than the walk in closets displayed in home design and renovation magazines. The 27 to 31 units per floor share two common rooms with full kitchens, eating and a lounging areas.
DRC Committee member Steve Finacom asked the presenter (architect - I did not catch his name) who was their target occupant. He answered with a straight face people working remotely. Finacom said he lived in a 200 square foot studio for two years and that was his limit. Finacom said he has kept up with everyone who has lived in that same unit in the years after he left and no one lasted over two years. Diana Pink asked where one would put their books.
Working remotely, one can live anywhere, depending on how often showing up in person is required. While San Francisco is now up to 29.4% office vacancy and losing residents, Sacramento suburbs gained population, but not in the downtown, which has an 11.8% office vacancy according to the featured opinion column in the SF Chronicle.
People are not choosing tiny cramped spaces when given the option of an occasional long commute and the rest of the days spread out comfortably at home. Not so many months ago I had lunch with a young couple, both of whom work remotely most days. They spoke about how they chose their new home with lots of space for separate offices and all the accoutrements found in a single family living like a yard and garage.
Suburban spread covering open land with housing is not environmentally sustainable. And solar farms aren’t good for fragile habitats either. We need to find ways to live more compactly together.
Finacom suggested some years ago that the DRC should explore how well the roof decks on previously approved buildings were working. Were the roof decks used, and what were the conditions, including the plantings? I would suggest that the DRC put on their agenda to establish subcommittees on these group living buildings and the buildings with the four- and five-bedroom units for follow-up on how well these designs actually work over time.
Think about your lifetime best and worst roommates. These designs with 27 to 31 people living in tiny units barely big enough for a bed sharing two common rooms with kitchen facilities could work well, or not. . .
The other two projects were state-density-bonus proposed under SB 330, which limits public hearings to five. The ten-story at 2920 Shattuck that will sit across Russell from the old Berkeley Bowl with 221 units, of which 22 are very low income, received such a negative reaction to the design at the March DRC meeting, that a request was made by Trachtenberg Architects to bring the project back with a new design. There was no change in the height or size, but it did look more residential and less like an office building or something that came out of East Germany. The DRC members commented that nearly every unit is a studio and the west facing units with lots of glass would likely be miserably hot in the afternoon sun.
This single ten-story tower will soon have company with more towers to line this narrow end of Shattuck. This is the section of Shattuck that makes such a tight squeeze for buses that one bus took the side mirror off my parked car several years ago.
The other project was eight stories at 1598 University and California, with 207 units, of which 21 are very low income. The neighbors have been organizing around this project and put a focus on California and University as a preferred intersection for pedestrians with the traffic light. This led to discussion and suggestions to pull the building back from California, to consider a more open plaza for that area and live-work units on California.
Every city in California has an assignment of how much housing to build by income category through the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). Berkeley’s assignment is 27% very low income, 2446 units; 16% low income, 1408 units, 16% moderate income; 1426 units and 41% market rate, 3664 units. Multi-unit projects being approved are almost exclusively 90% market rate and 10% very low income to qualify for the state density bonus. This is not the mix of housing that Berkeley needs to fulfil the assigned RHNA or to serve the community.
It is the density bonus, adding extra height and mass and overruling local planning, that is causing objection to projects state wide. Bills from State Senators Weiner and Skinner turned into state law are the basis for the movement Our Neighborhood Voices and a ballot initiative to end the state legislature from wiping out local control. https://ourneighborhoodvoices.com
The bird safe ordinance passed by the Planning Commission was added to the DRC agenda at the request of Planning Department staff. Justin Horner, Associate Planner, put his slide on the screen with his three questions (price and availability, potential negative impacts on design and the inclusion of residential structures), saying he was writing a report to accompany the ordinance that would be coming to City Council on June 6. Horner paused and the DRC Chair called for public comment.
Glenn Philips, Director of Golden Gate Audubon Society (GGS), spoke first and said the GGS was putting together a list of resources.
I said I was present at the Planning Commission when the vote was taken, and all the issues brought by Horner were addressed by the commission, and this felt like an end run around the Planning Commission determination. For background, the Planning Commission rejected in total the version of the bird safe ordinance presented by Horner. As for residences, small houses and replacement windows, bird safe glass is being phased in. In the meantime, and even into the future, permanent exterior screens make windows bird safe. Bird safe film can also be applied on the exterior side. That is what I am doing.
Sara Soto who contributes to the Nor Cal Birding Facebook Page , which has 35,434 members, came to the meeting just to support the bird safe ordinance.
Erin Diehm brought poster size pictures of birds from her 100% native plant yard and spoke about bird safe glass. She had two poster size pictures of dead birds from glass collisions.
There was a brief discussion by the DRC members. Charles Kahn thanked Erin and me for coming to every meeting for three years to speak on bird safety and stated his 100% support for the ordinance passed by the Planning Commission, and the DRC agreed in total. There were two asks from committee members: one was to add the resource website for birdsafe materials and one to add birdsafe treatment of historic buildings from Steve Finacom, who said there are 400 buildings in Berkeley with historic designation.
Exterior screens on historic buildings would not change the architecture, and a quick google search turned up this article reporting that window screens were invented in the early 19th century and considered a necessity by the time they were patented in 1868, ten years before Berkeley was incorporated. https://www.glessnerhouse.org/story-of-a-house/2016/8/28/a-brief-history-of-the-humble-window-screen
The Planning Commission met Wednesday for discussion on one subject, the Southside Zoning Modification Project with the goal of increasing housing in the southside for students. The suggested changes are best understood through the presentation which has charts, diagrams and photos of examples to make understanding the proposed changes easier. https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/legislative-body-meeting-attachments/2023-04-19_Item_11_Planning%20Commission_Presentation_final.pdf
The proposal is for significant increases in lot coverage, the size and density of multi-unit buildings and reductions in setbacks and separations between buildings.
Rebecca Mirvish, Membership Director for Telegraph for People, the UCB student organization for a car-free Telegraph Avenue, spoke in favor of upzoning the entire Southside area and questioned why R3 was retained anywhere. R3 currently limits building height to 3 stories and lot coverage to 50%. In the new proposal R3 height would go to 45 feet, lot coverage to 70% and setbacks would decrease to 4 feet. The person from East Bay YIMBY, whose name I did not catch, followed suit, adding there is a housing shortage.
Those in opposition spoke about the following: if the buildings are leased to UCB they become tax exempt. There should be community benefits like parks and open space from upzoning (the increased land value to allow for bigger buildings). The new density cuts through blocks: planning needs to provide for delivery services and ridesharing (Uber, Lyft) and coordinated with fire safety. UJpzoning spurs the loss of older multi-unit buildings, tiny bedrooms are not livable and a 30 foot depth for commercial space isn’t workable.
The commission response started with Commissioner Elisa Mikiten, who went through a long list that included: buildings need light and air, there should be a transition between buildings, towers were created to have open space and laundry rooms and storage closets are not open space, a density minimum isn’t needed and could be problematic on some sites with unintended consequences. She asked that further study be done on whether a 30 foot commercial space was workable and stated that forced housing production will not lower housing cost and affordability will be lost.
I had to leave and heard second hand that the pro-housing, build- it-tall, wall-to-wall group pointed to the apparent age (gray hair of attendees) of those in opposition.
Budget and Finance Committee only got into one agenda item, the shortfall of funding to finish the approved T1 projects. No decisions were made, though there was lots of discussion. Councilmember Kesarwani said she would not vote for any T1 changes that did not include the bathrooms at the Tom Bates Field and Cesar Chavez Park, and that parks to the east had bathrooms. Gordon Wozniak, representing the Parks, Recreation and Waterfront Commission, spoke about potential funding sources and not to which projects might be put on hold.
The high cost of installing public bathrooms where there are not currently facilities is the plumbing (running new sewer and water lines). Public Works Director Garland informed the committee that the sewer fund cannot be used for new sewer connections. Public comment closed the meeting with South Berkeley speaking up for the African American Holistic Center. All this will come back on May 4 for further discussion and action.
The Water Emergency Transportation Authority (WETA) had a special meeting on long range planning for expansion. It is always the same, with grand plans and not the money to do it. The expansion plan called Plan Bay Area Network, which would add Mission Bay, Berkeley, South San Francisco and Redwood City, would not make the impact on wetlands any worse, but would add emissions and dredging impacts, and the proposals with greater expansion came with substantial environmental constraints (impacts). Survey respondents cared most about convenience. https://weta.sanfranciscobayferry.com/sites/default/files/weta-public/currentmeeting/b041723aDECK.pdf
With meetings in-person only except for City Council, Council Committees it is really impossible to cover it all. The City Manager, City Clerk Office and City Council are finally starting to move on agreeing that the City should be offering commission meetings in the hybrid format, online and in-person.
I covered what I was able to attend. I missed the Homeless Services Panel of Experts, the Commission on Aging, the Board of Library Trustees (I rarely attended even under the best of conditions), the Human Welfare and Community Action Commission, the James Kenney Park Skate Spot, the Mental Health Commission, the Transportation and Infrastructure Commission, the Rent Board, the Open government Commission, the Ashby BART Station Planning meeting and the Electrification Fair (I have already removed all natural gas from my 1918 year old house and gone 100% electric). FITES (Facilities, Infrastructure, Transportation, Environment and Sustainability) was cancelled.
The plans for San Pablo Avenue bus lanes and safety improvements are up on the Alameda County Transportation Commission website. I missed that meeting too. The plan in Berkeley from Heinz north is for bike improvements on parallel streets not on San Pablo. You can check the plans at https://www.alamedactc.org/programs-projects/multimodal-arterial-roads/sanpabloave .
My Diaries have been too long of late to include my reading and I am behind with that too. As I was finishing up this Diary, the news banner rolled across my phone that Tucker Carlson was fired. When I read Adam Hochschild’s latest book American Midnight: The Great War, a Violent Peace and Democracy’s Forgotten Crisis, I wondered if the Dominion lawsuit would finally bring down FOX. I was hopeful and then disappointed that Dominion settled.
Ashby Village is sponsoring a Zoom Webinar with Hochschild on Sunday, April 30 at 2 pm. https://www.ashbyvillage.org/content.aspx?page_id=4002&club_id=748044&item_id=1926561
It comes with the luring title “The Trumpiest Time in American History Before Trump…” I started with the audiobook and after 20 minutes, sent it back to the library and signed up for the ebook. There was just too much packed into the book to work as an audiobook for me.