Features

Council Considers Gaia, Harrison Project, Solar Panel Fees

By Judith Scherr
Tuesday October 24, 2006

Questions on whether a lecture on religion is a cultural use of the Gaia Building and whether Sunday church services are considered culture will be among the issues facing the City Council at tonight’s (Tuesday) meeting. 

The questions arose because builder Patrick Kennedy was allowed to build the mixed-use housing-cultural development at 2116 Allston Way two stories higher than the city would have otherwise permitted, in return for providing dedicated cultural uses in the first two stories of the building. 

Also on the council agenda are the proper housing of dogs left outside, the proposed housing-retail project at Harrison Street and San Pablo Avenue, waiving solar panel permit fees and considering building permits for a house on Miller Avenue. 

Anna de Leon, owner of Anna’s Jazz Island, located in the Gaia Building, said she doesn’t have a problem with religious forums. But she questions whether an Oct. 21 lecture on theology and Christ Church’s Sunday services should be deemed cultural uses of the building. 

The lecture addressed the issues, “Can science disprove the existence of God? Is there a conflict between mainstream science and Christianity?” 

Deputy Planning Director Wendy Cosin told the Daily Planet that lectures such as the Oct. 21 event are deemed cultural events, but, she said, “Sunday morning services are not cultural.”  

Similarly, in an Oct. 18 letter, de Leon wrote to the council: “Although the Christ Church of Berkeley continues to use the theater, this religious assembly use, clearly defined in our zoning ordinance, is not an approved [cultural] use.”  

In a phone message to the Planet, Kennedy argued, however: “I don’t think there is a bright line between something that is cultural and spiritual, nor would I think there’s a reason to make that distinction.” 

He further contended that the church services are a boon to the city, bringing 150 people downtown who would not otherwise be there.  

The issue has come to the City Council several times over the last few months and been delayed each time. At today’s meeting, staff will ask the council to approve a new proposal by Kennedy to make cultural use a priority, with most weekend dates reserved for cultural use and one-third of the days of the year scheduled for cultural use. 

 

Housing dogs 

Animal control officers often get calls from people concerned about conditions in which dogs are left outdoors. But since there are no clear standards for housing and feeding these pets, animal control can do little. So the Citizens Humane Commission is asking the City Council to approve an ordinance which states the kind of shelter a dog must have if kept outside, as well as the food and water that must be accessible to the animal.  

Housing people: Harrison and San Pablo project 

The proposed five-story, 27-unit project of housing above retail will be back on the table for discussion today. Last week the developer and the neighbors who had appealed the zoning board’s approval of the project, agreed, in concept, on a modified project. They will take next steps to formalize the agreement today. 

 

In other business, the council will consider: 

• Waiving permit fees on solar panels. This item, introduced by Councilmember Dona Spring, is intended to encourage use of solar electricity in Berkeley. Waiving the fees will cost the city about $20,000 annually, according to City Manager Phil Kamlarz. 

• Affirming or overturning the zoning board’s approval of a large dwelling at 1017 Miller Ave., in the North Berkeley hills. Sixteen neighbors have appealed the zoning board’s approval of the project, saying it obstructs their views, is not compatible with the neighborhood and does not protect trees. 

• Opposing new Homeland Security rules that would hold employers liable for violating immigration law if they continue employment of workers with letters from the Social Security Administration saying their Social Security numbers don’t match the names or numbers they have on file. Under current law, the employer simply provides the worker with the “no match” letter. 

“The new rule would create burdensome, inappropriate, and unclear new requirements for employers by forcing them to act as agents of the federal government to enforce immigration law,” says the council item authored by Mayor Tom Bates and Councilmember Kriss Worthington.