Page One

ZAB studied Beth El project and gave approval 

Editor: 

A recent letter to the Daily Planet asked a number of questions about Congregation Beth El’s planned new synagogue on Oxford Street. All of those questions were answered at Zoning Adjustments Board (ZAB) meetings during the months of hearings that led to the ZAB’s approval of the project.  

Since not everyone interested in the new building attended those meetings, here is the information requested by the letter writer:  

• Runoff: Runoff from the project’s driveway will be appropriately filtered before it reaches Codornices Creek, unlike street runoff that flows directly into the creek.  

• Creek: Beth El’s development will improve the open section of the creek, which has been seriously neglected for years. The underground part of the creek is 27 feet deep, and, even if it were daylighted, would not be visible to the public.  

• Parking: On-site parking at the project will be a model for Berkeley, much better than parking provided by Berkeley schools, senior centers and other comparable institutions.  

• Sound: Plantings around the lot and the thoughtful building design focus sound toward the center of the property and away from adjoining neighbors. Beth El’s permit also limits hours of use.  

The bottom line is that Zoning Adjustments Board members spent countless hours carefully studying these issues and many others. They examined every detail of the huge Environmental Impact Report, questioned experts, listened to citizens’ testimony, and visited the site repeatedly.  

Then, based on the facts, they approved the project. 

Debbie Leon 

Orinda 

BART should have planned better 

Editor: 

BART should have set up a uniform procedure to be followed for all extensions, to cover the circumstances, costs, etc. to be used in each instance. 

Fundamentally many things are wrong with BART and need correcting sooner rather than later: width of rails, earthquake safety, flood gate in SF, distances between water outlets in tunnels, reliability of station equipment, etc. 

BART should have used the taxing system when the 1016 Twin Peaks tunnels in SF were built with a tax on the owners of property near the stations, the principal beneficiaries of rail systems. The increased value of their property from the public investment is known was as “unearned increment” by Adam Smith, J.S. Mills, Jefferson, Paine, and rediscovered by Henry George in his 1879 book Progress and Poverty. 

BART should have been built after well-functioning bus system was in place with BART built on the most heavily used bus routes. Taxing owners who do not get good service from BART is bad public policy. 

See the book “Great Planning Disasters” by Peter Hall, U C Press with a chapter on BART.  

Charles L. Smith 

Berkeley