Editorials

On Tuesday night the Berkeley City Council devoted more than two hours to listening to residents speculate on what "significant community benefits" must be provided by the lucky winners of the up-zoning variances which might be granted for a smallish number of extra-tall buildings downtown. This indecision left the Landmarks Preservation Commission in the dark about exactly what project at 2211 Harold Way they were supposed to be commenting on, so they chose to leave the question on the table for this month.

The distinction between mitigating detriments which such buildings create and providing new and better amenities for Berkeleyans as recompense for increased value was frequently blurred at the Council meeting. For example the very popular children's center Habitot, which would be demolished to make way for luxury apartments marketed as the “Residences at Berkeley Plaza" (RatBP), appealed for a $250,000 "benefit" as compensation for an expected $3,000,000 cost of replacement. Of the 87 people who spoke, perhaps 5 showed any real enthusiasm for the kind of projects under discussion. RatBP proponent (and ex-planner for the city of Berkeley) Mark Rhoades didn't say anything at the mike, but chatted with a couple of supporters in a back corner and at least one councilmember in the hall.

After the public comment period the councilmembers spent a half-hour discussing options. Councilmember Jesse Arreguin presented a full-blown roadmap for defining significant community benefits, complete with flow chart, which was praised by Councilmember Worthington as better than work the council usually gets from staff.

Worthington pointed out that the Council was not obligated to approve the first buildings which vied for the extra stories. He emphasized the need for accurate financial information from the would-be developer, verified by an independent consultant, since benefits by law must be proportional to the cost of the building. His own ballpark estimate was "tens of millions" to be spent for the public good, at least.

Max Anderson had stressed the same need at an earlier meeting. On Tuesday night he delivered one of his signature populist exhortations, highlighting his discomfort with the fact that men formerly employed by the city to make the zoning rules [Rhoades and Matt Taecker, who is promoting a hotel downtown and was present on Tuesday] were now trying to exploit those same rules on behalf of paying clients. He compared the situation to the often criticized "revolving door" in Washington, where retiring members of Congress and federal officials often re-emerge as corporate lobbyists. 

Councilmember Droste, responding to public comments from those who wanted to be sure that the Shattuck Cinemas would be rebuilt if destroyed on behalf of the RatBP, expressed apprehension that movie theaters might be on their way out. This elicited a skeptical grimace from Councilmember Wengraf, whose husband has won four Oscars for film sound work. 

An anonymous visitor snapped Wengraf chatting in the hall with Rhoades during the meeting, and also observed him going a couple of times into the councilmembers' back room through a (non-revolving) door clearly marked “authorized personnel only: members of the City Council and authorized employees only beyond this point”. 

Presumably this was just a flashback to his staffer past? 

This schedule for approval of the RatBP (2211 Harold Way) project has been provided to the Landmarks Preservation Commission, which must make recommendations regarding demolition of the historic buildings on the site: 

• May 7, 2015 - LPC Preliminary Design Recommendation
• May 14, 2015 - ZAB Final EIR certification - continued
• June 4, 2015 - LPC hearing on SAP
• June 11, 2015 - ZAB hearing on Use Permit

However with the Council still so far from being able to define what “significant community benefits” might mean, that schedule seems roughly impossible to carry out, since the Zoning Adjustment Board is required to decide that adequate benefits are being provided by the applicant before approving the variances for the project’s use permit. 

And even before that, the supplied Environmental Impact Report must be certified as providing enough information to guide a decision. Given the fact that construction impacts on Berkeley High, only 400 feet away, were essentially ignored in the EIR, that seems even more unlikely. Even if the ZAB were to approve the EIR, it could still be appealed to the Council. 

There will surely be more to come. 

Friday Update: Last night, following the example set by the Zoning Adjustment Board, the Landmarks Preservation Commission declined to follow the fast-tracking script urged on them by the Berkeley Planning Department staff. They unanimously refused to approve the preliminary design recommendations on the sensible grounds that the design for the RatBP kept shifting so that they couldn't yet be sure exactly what they were approving. They asked to see a number of additional items, including materials and floor plans, which are usually part of standard submissions for projects which require LPC approval. As has become standard, public commenters did a thorough job of pointing out deficiencies in the current proposal, including in this case inadequate evaluation of the effect on neighboring landmarks, including the abutting historic Shattuck Hotel.