Extra

The June 2 special City Council meeting on the housing developments on the BART Station parking lots was the big event of the week. The North Berkeley Neighborhood Alliance let out a sigh of relief and celebration as the council voted unanimously after midnight in support of limiting the housing projects to a base of seven stories. 

The Berkeley Neighbors for Housing and Climate (BNCHA), who rejected the staff recommendation of a seven-story project and pushed the twelve-story base project approved by the Planning Commission in a 5 to 4 vote, also declared victory. Though they lost on their desired base height of 12 stories, they still won on the number of units with a minimum (not maximum) of 75 units per acre and the possibility of still getting to 12 stories using the state density bonus. 

The state density bonus (AB 2345) allows a developer/builder to exceed any zoning height limitation by reserving a percentage of units for low income households. There are a variety of combinations between the number of affordable units and the level of affordability outlined in AB 2345 which would allow a developer to exceed any zoning limits. The combination often used, and the one of concern here, is that by reserving 11% of the units for very low income households the developer receives a 50% award of extra units or height over any zoning restrictions. This could result in allowing an eleven-story building instead of the seven-story limit envisioned in the council vote. 

For those not immersed in the details of what really happened and what are the problems and potential outcomes, here are some perspectives and analysis. 

Mayor Arreguin defined the flow of the evening and the tasks at hand: the vote on the EIR (Environmental Impact Report) regarding the zoning decision, the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between BART and the City of Berkeley which definined the zoning and the joint vision and priorities. Arreguin reminded everyone that the first meeting on the BART housing projects was in March 2018. 

Arreguin abruptly cut off Councilmember Sophie Hahn a number of times in the evening. Hahn (trained as an attorney) submitted a supplemental document with recommended revisions to the Joint Vision and Priorities (JVP) statement. Hahn’s revisions provided stronger language with more detail regarding landscaping, with emphasis on tree canopy, wider sidewalks, children’s play area and a tighter breakdown of affordability by percentage of units. 

Arreguin submitted his own JVP supplemental based on both the staff’s document and Hahn’s document. Where Arreguin did not reject Hahn’s recommendations altogether, he usually watered them down by adding the words “feasible” or “consider”. 

In the first round of council comment prior to public comment, Councilmember Kate Harrison clearly stated her support of the seven-story limit as being the best alternative to protect the climate and the neighborhood, citing the increased GHG (greenhouse gas) emissions from high rise buildings. When Councilmember Rigel Robinson followed Harrison, he countered with support of the twelve stories as the base height, and argued that there should not be a height limit at all. He claimed that increased height and density was the best climate alternative. 

Public comment followed, lasting several hours with a heavy majority (both in person and on line) attempting to persuade council to approve the seven-story height limit. Many made the statement that they would not vote for anyone who voted for the twelve-story high-rise strategy. This was clearly directed to Councilmember Rashi Kesarwani who is up for re-election in November. 

Through the night, I was doing my imaginary vote counting, trying to guess where each councilmember would land. I was never sure the seven-story limit would win, even after Arreguin stated after the close of public comment that he was supporting the seven-story height limit. Arreguin spoke to respecting the public process and the years of work and engagement with the community. 

BART is a heavy-rail public transit system, which makes the parking lot on which the housing projects would be built public land. Even though BART is underground in Berkeley, the land for its three stations was taken from private owners by eminent domain. And that is the rub for many who spoke in favor of the seven-story limit with 100% affordable housing. They rightly insisted that public land needs to be used for affordable housing, for the public good, not for the profiteering of a for-profit developer/lessee. 

Non-profit affordable housing developers like to keep their projects in the sweet spot of four to six stories, where the number of affordable units is maximized and the added cost of high-rise construction and high-rise building maintenance is avoided. Construction changes as the building grows taller, usually breaking around eight stories when substantial bracing (steel) becomes needed to stabilize the taller structure. 

To be in compliance with AB 2923, whoever builds on the Ashby and North Berkeley BART Station sites will be required to build a minimum of seven stories and will be allowed to provide no more than half of one parking space for each residential unit. https://www.bart.gov/sites/default/files/docs/00_AB2923_TechGuide_Draft_2020Jun.pdf 

The problem for BART and how we conceive of transit oriented housing is that the pandemic changed how we live, work, attend meetings and even where we want to live. Working remotely is here to stay and so is attending meetings via Zoom. People who work remotely can live anywhere. In fact, the states of Maine, Vermont, and Alaska and the cities of Newton IA Tulsa OK, Chattanooga TN, Hamilton OH and Lincoln KN all pay remote workers to relocate into their states or cities. 

BART ridership has not recovered to pre-pandemic levels. In the most recent data available BART ridership is at 32% of 2019 levels. BART ridership for the month of May in 2019 was 413,525. In May 2022 it was 132,161. 

The ferry service provider Water Emergency Transportation Authority (WETA) was a little better off in April in recapturing ridership. It reached a new high of just over 60% of the pre-pandemic level, but that was only through cutting fare cost to compete with and undercut BART. The goal was to shift riders from BART to the ferry, with ferries to Chase Center and Oracle Park to take advantage of sports events. WETA is continuing to cut fares for another year, coasting on American Rescue Plan funding. WETA found through its own survey that when ferry ticket prices return to “normal” pre-pandemic levels the riders who shifted from BART to the ferry will return to BART. Those riders returning to BART still won’t be more than a drop in the bucket to compensate for the BART ridership decline. And WETA will be scrambling when the American Rescue Plan funds run out to cover operating costs. 

Pre-pandemic, the Berkeley Unified School District Board meeting room, where the Berkeley City Council now meets, would have been overflowing with people waiting in line outside for their turn to speak and BPD counting heads to keep the number inside the room within safety limit requirements. Instead , while the mayor said the attendee count of the hybrid meeting (in-person and remote) was over 300, the Board room wasn’t packed. Maybe 60 were present in the room, per a guess of someone who attended in person. The rest attended via videoconference or teleconference. 

The planning of transit oriented development (TOD) has not caught up with this new reality. Even discussions for restoration of the Civic Center buildings include some stuck in the past, conceiving of the need for a new large city council chamber. 

A number of speakers during the evening stated they were home putting children to bed during the meeting. My evening of attending on Zoom, aside from the usual taking notes and checking news and emails, included making and eating dinner and putting in an hour on my treadmill. 

All this is to frame what could happen with choosing the “master” developer for the BART housing projects. The housing projects at the BART Stations will consist of multiple buildings at each site and there could be a separate developer for each apartment building under the direction of the “master” developer. The selection of the “master” developer is the next big step. There will be input from the City of Berkeley and the agreements between BART and the City of Berkeley will define the qualifications.  

BART makes the final selection of the “master” developer. The worry from this corner is that low ridership, the changing post-pandemic landscape of working remotely will push the BART Board into seeking market-rate housing to bolster their lagging income, with the hope that residents living above BART will become heavy BART users. 

I have not gone deeply enough into past BART ridership records to see how housing at BART 

stations affects ridership and what happened station by station throughout the pandemic. The BART ridership reports are easily available going back to 2001. https://www.bart.gov/about/reports/ridership 

There was considerable council discussion around affordable units. Councilmember Harrison expressed wanting to ensure that if any developer chose to use in-lieu mitigation, the fee paid to escape including affordable housing in a project, then the in lieu-fee would go into on-site affordable housing. She noted further that there was no language in the agreements around in-lieu mitigation fees and asked the mayor when this would be addressed. Arreguin answered “good question.” 

Councilmember Wengraf said she heard that El Cerrito was getting 65% affordable housing without a city contribution and she wanted to know how, since Berkeley is contributing $53,000,000 to affordable housing. BART answered that it is 37% lower income and 12% middle income totaling 49% deed restricted, there are multiple factors and El Cerrito is using modular construction. 

The fatally flawed EIR (so-described by Thomas Lord, who is correct) was approved with a unanimous vote and used as justification for the council’s high-rise supporters as cover for their vote for the seven-story base, with the excuse that a twelve-story base would need a new EIR. This move in turn aided Kesarwani’s reelection bid. 

The mayor’s supplemental language was approved, rather than Hahn’s. Though I replayed the meeting end, the final version of the JVP seems a little squishy. 

As I’ve been reflecting on the organizing and perseverance of the North Berkeley Neighborhood Alliance,the work of both the group as a whole and the leaders keeping communication and organizing flowing are nothing less than amazing. They have a lot at stake. It is their neighborhood. This is not to diminish the hard work and engagement of the Friends of Adeline; they too organized and showed up. 

The fight isn’t over, but the understory of organizing carries lessons for all. Berkeley residents were up against the well-funded California YIMBYs, who have heavy real estate backing, paid staff and titles for front groups that avoid the word lobbyist. Real estate money funds election campaigns with political action committees (PACs aka dark money) and lobbyists. 

After Thursday night I’ve been thinking about close friends living in Southern California who listen to their political talk shows and have plenty of griping to do about what is happening in their city. To my knowledge they have never once attended a city meeting. To their credit they make an occasional phone call or send email on national issues, but when it comes to their own city they are disengaged except for complaining. 

Paying attention as I do to city action, there have been many times when community involvement and action ended in failure. The North Berkeley Neighborhood Alliance never quit. And they now have success under their belt to keep going. 

What a different country we would have if more of us followed the example of the North Berkeley Neighborhood Alliance and Friends of Adeline and engaged in our government instead of believing the nonsense on social media.  

There were other meetings this week, but they pale in the shadow of the special council meeting on the BART station housing projects. The Planning Commission did meet, but nothing was decided Wednesday evening. 

In other news: 

Don’t forget the state reading of ROE at the Brower Center next Sunday, June 12 at 5 pm and June 16th at the Marsh at 7 pm. I have already signed up for my free ticket. One little nicety is the tickets are through the Actors Ensemble of Berkeley and not evite. Seating is limited so don’t wait. All the details can be found at https://www.aeofberkeley.org/productions/upcoming-shows/378-roe-by-lisa-loomer 

As usual a close with my latest read. Through the 100 plus days of Russia’s war on Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelenskyy is often compared to Churchill, so when The Splendid and the Vile by Erik Larson published in 2020 on WWII and Churchill’s first year as Prime Minister appeared as available from the library as an audiobook I grabbed it. The description of the book really sums it up best, “The Splendid and the Vile takes readers out of today’s political dysfunction and back to a time of true leadership, when in the face of unrelenting horror, Churchill’s eloquence, courage, and perseverance, bound a country and a family, together.” Much of the same description of courage in unrelenting horror can be said of Zelenskyy.