Election Section

ZAB CAVES IN ON SEAGATE EIR 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

On Thursday, Sept. 9, I attended the Zoning Adjustment Board hearing about the Seagate project—nine-and-a-half stories and four lots wide on Center Street below Shattuck Avenue. The project would be the biggest building constructed in Berkeley in 30 years, with underground parking three stories deep. 

I knew from many maps that the north fork of Strawberry Creek was either under or adjacent to the proposed project in a very old brick culvert. As a contractor for over 20 years, I know that the weight of a huge building would impact underground soil laterally as well as under the building, and could destroy the culvert even if it is under an adjacent lot. This could happen during construction, or years later. 

This meeting was profoundly sobering. The Board initially denied the mitigated negative declaration (an end-run around the necessary environmental impact report). A city staff member then began to advise the board, behaving like a booster for the developer. She told them not to worry about architectural, traffic and density issues as they would be dealt with elsewhere. She told them not to worry about the creek or the culvert because if a creek was found, the developer would talk to the city and deal with it then. She urged ZAB not to vote for an environmental impact report! I thought the ZAB was meeting expressly to make sure CEQA laws were followed, and determine if environmental impacts might be caused by the project, thus triggering an EIR. An EIR would have neutral experts examine the salient issues and present their findings for public review. The public is supposed to have a say in the process. 

After the staffer spoke to the board, the board members, eager to follow her lead, changed their vote, allowing the project to go forward without an EIR. Buildings that are just one twenty-fifth the size in Berkeley have been required to draft an EIR. 

Then things started to become clear. Board member Allen stated that he was sure that any EIR here would offer nothing, but would cost the developer 30 percent more. Amazingly he knew that this massive project would have no environmental impact to access before the project would be approved. Another board member voted for no EIR because “Berkeley needs buildings.” They were not voting on the need for buildings. They were mandated to assess whether the project had a reasonable chance of having a substantial environmental impact. I witnessed the board abandoning their obligations. 

Meanwhile no one could tell the board exactly where the creek is even though they asked many times! 

In the New Berkeley there is clearly a pro-development culture from the mayor’s office down. The Landmarks Commission has been appointed with employees of developers. ZAB is staffed with people who claim to know worthless outcomes of studies that have not been performed. Public comment time is reduced and decisions are increasingly made by a city attorney, without public knowledge, review or comment. The attorney, behind closed doors, decided that a project in a five-story zone could have a bonus of 4.5 more stories. 

Staffers are hand picking certain rules to follow and ignoring others, such as CEQA, the Creek Ordinance, the Downtown Plan, etc. Monied players are given massive special favors by our planning department when the regular working people are simply required to obey the law. Berkeley was the home of free speech, environmental concern, and urban creek restorers. In the New Berkeley developers have taken over. Bad development planning is literally eating our land, creeks and culture alive. I urge people who care about our environment here in Berkeley to contact the mayor and the City Council. Ask why the Planning Department and ZAB have become bodies which advise developers on how to “score” rather than advocates for the greater good.  

i