Agenda packet — Berkeley City Council, January 18, 2022 (part 2 of 4)

159
4 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7110 ● Fax: (510) 981-7111 E-Mail: [email protected]
PBDs also require a community advisory board made up of local stakeholders. In the context of the Marina, that could be representatives from various constituencies, such as sailing and yacht clubs, the Doubletree Hotel, restaurants and other business owners, live-aboards, water sports enthusiasts, merchants and employees, and non-profits. Local stakeholders convene on a regular basis to make recommendations to the City Council for funding local improvements. This advisory structure is another way to help build support for a shift to metered parking as local stakeholders have direct input into the types of improvements to be adopted.

Establishing a PBD in the Marina is a long-term strategy that could at once help ease difficult parking situations while providing much needed resources to help fill funding gaps in the Marina Fund that would address ongoing infrastructure needs.11 While a PBD in Berkeley has yet to be established, funds have already been allocated to hire consultants to assist with this effort in both the Gilman and Lorin Commercial Districts. Once the ordinance language has been drafted and a PBD structure established and piloted in both these areas, extending this concept to the Marina would be within reach.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS
Staff time to investigate the creation of a Berkeley Marina Master Plan on Parking.

Depending on the findings and at a later point in time, a follow-up budget referral for pay-station installation and maintenance, parking enforcement staff, and potential consultant services may be necessary.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
Paid parking for use of our public right of ways at the Marina could incentivize some to use alternate transportation, such as public transit, biking or micro-mobility devices to gain access to that area, thereby decreasing greenhouse gas emissions from passenger vehicles–the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in the City, according to Berkeley’s December 6, 2018 Climate Action Plan update. Were a PBD to be established in the Marina, some of the revenues could help fund a bicycle infrastructure plan to further increase access for non-passenger vehicle transport.

This aligns with the City’s Climate Action Plan goals.

CONTACT PERSON
Councilmember Rashi Kesarwani, District 1 (510) 981-7110 Attachments:
11 See JDSupra January 2021 blog post: Can Parking Benefit Districts Step in as Revenue Sources Dry Up?

Page 4 of 26 ends

160
5 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7110 ● Fax: (510) 981-7111 E-Mail: [email protected]

1. Item #37, October 26, 2021 council agenda: Letter to Senate Budget Committee Chair Sen. Skinner Regarding Berkeley Pier, Supplemental 2 materials, Councilmember Taplin, author

2. Item #9, Establish a Parking Benefits District (PBD) in the Adeline Corridor and Fiscal Year 2022 Budget Referral, Supplemental Packet 1, March 23, 2021 City Council Agenda

Page 5 of 26 ends

161

Terry Taplin
Councilmember District 2

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 Tel: 510.981.XXXX TDD: 510.981.6903 Fax: 510.981.XXXX E-Mail: [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTAL

AGENDA MATERIAL
for Supplemental Packet 2

Meeting Date: October 26, 2021

Item Number: 37

Item Description: Letter to Senate Budget Committee Chair Sen. Skinner Regarding Berkeley Pier

Submitted by: Councilmember Taplin

● Letter has been updated with more detail on scope of fiscal needs at Pier. ● Assembly Budget Chair Ting added as addressee.

Page 6 of 26 ends

162

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981- ● TDD: (510) 981-6903 ● Fax: (510) 981- E-Mail:

CONSENT CALENDAR
Oct. 12, 2021
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Councilmember Taplin, Mayor Arreguín (co-sponsor), Councilmember Robinson (co-sponsor), Councilmember Kesarwani (co-sponsor) Subject: Letter to Senate Budget Committee Chair Sen. Skinner Regarding Berkeley Pier

RECOMMENDATION
Send a letter to Budget Chairs State Senator Nancy Skinner (D-Berkeley) and Assemblymember Phil Ting (D-San Francisco), Chair of the Senate Budget Committee, requesting state budget allocations for urgent infrastructure needs at the Berkeley Municipal Pier.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
None.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
The Marina Fund is projected to exhaust all reserves in FY2022, and its operating deficit will increase to an annual $800,000. The Berkeley Marina contains over $200 million in infrastructure assets, with an estimated $113 million needed in repairs, including a severely dilapidated pier. The Marina Fund has never had a permanent revenue source for capital improvements, and significant deficits have been documented as early as 1999.
1 Funding for infrastructure replacement has been provided in piecemeal fashion through an assortment of grants, loans, the Marina Fund when possible, and more recently, Measure T1 funds. The Berkeley Marina Area Specific Plan (BMASP) project is now underway to plan a revitalization of the area.

The City of Berkeley and Water Emergency Transportation Authority (WETA)’s Pier & Ferry Feasibility Study
2 estimates a $32-44 million replacement cost of the pier for a full 70-year lifespan. Currently, proposed concepts in the Berkeley Municipal Pier-Ferry Project include a replacement pier of only one-third to one-half of the full 3000 lineal foot length of the existing pier. The currently recommended $17.5 million covers the cost of 1,000 feet, but $35 million would cover the cost of the full 3000 lineal feet.

1 https://www.cityofberkeley.info/uploadedFiles/Clerk/Level_3_- _General/Marina%20Fund%20Update%20041218.pdf
2 https://www.cityofberkeley.info/uploadedFiles/Parks_Rec_Waterfront/Level_3__- General/Public%202021-08-010-Pier-Ferry_W2.pdf

Page 7 of 26 ends

163
Letter to Sen. Skinner Re: Marina Pier CONSENT CALENDAR Oct. 12, 2021

Page 2 ends

Source: Berkeley/WETA Pier & Ferry Feasibility Study – Community Workshop #2 slides

According to Parks and Waterfront Commission Chairperson Gordon Wozniak, there is a desperate need for $8 million to dredge the entrance to the main harbor, where boats often run aground at low tide; and the South Sailing Basin, which turns into a mud flat at low tide. With a total funding of $35 million, the City would have two options: (1) replace the entire 3,000 ft pier, or (2) replace 2,000 ft of the existing pier and dredge both the entrance to the main harbor and the South Sailing Basin.

Funding capital improvements at the Marina Pier is a Strategic Plan Priority Project, advancing our goal to provide state-of-the-art, well-maintained infrastructure, amenities, and facilities.

BACKGROUND
In May 2021, Governor Gavin Newsom announced a historic $76 billion state budget surplus, and paired it with federal aid in the SB 129 budget revision, dubbed the “California Comeback Plan.”
3 The budget bill, brought by Senate Budget Committee
Chair Sen. Nancy Skinner, received only one line-item veto.4 It contained major capital expenditures, such as $6 billion to expand hotel acquisition through Project Homekey.

California’s large budget surplus was the result of its progressive tax structure and strong economic conditions in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic. As vaccination increases and local businesses begin reopening, it is not unreasonable to presume that

3 https://www.gov.ca.gov/2021/07/12/california-roars-back-governor-newsom-signs-100-billion-california- comeback-plan-to-accelerate-states-recovery-and-tackle-persistent-challenges/ 4 https://www.gov.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/SB-129-Line-Item-Veto.pdf

Page 8 of 26 ends

164
Letter to Sen. Skinner Re: Marina Pier CONSENT CALENDAR Oct. 12, 2021

Page 3 ends

this pattern may repeat itself next year. Given the Berkeley Marina’s central location in the Bay Area metropolitan area, near-future plans for ferry service, and the City’s many critical infrastructure needs—including an estimated $1 billion in unfunded liabilities— the State of California must commit to allocating surplus revenues to meet one-time infrastructure replacement costs while the City develops long-term plans for operating revenues.

Replacing the full 3,000-foot pier will also ensure that the Marina can be a major source of revenue from recreational activities.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
None.

CONTACT PERSON
Councilmember Terry Taplin Council District 2 510-981-7120

Attachments:
1: Letter

Page 9 of 26 ends

165

October 26, 2021

The Honorable Nancy Skinner
Chair, Senate Budget Committee
California State Capitol, Room 5094
Sacramento, CA 95814

The Honorable Phil Ting
Chair, Assembly Budget Committee
California State Capitol, Room 6026
Sacramento, CA 95814

Re: 2022 Budget Request from the City of Berkeley Related to Infrastructure Improvements at the Berkeley Marina and Pier
Dear Senate Budget Chair Skinner and Assembly Budget Chair Ting:

On behalf of the City of Berkeley, we want to thank you both, as leaders of the Bay Area Caucus, for your long-standing support for open space and the environment throughout the region and for investing in our communities’ job base and capital improvement projects.

As you know, the Berkeley Marina is a beloved recreational area with more than 100 acres of open space and seven miles of trails that delight dog owners, birdwatchers, sailors, windsurfers, bicyclists, kite flyers, and anyone seeking to enjoy fresh air and expansive views of the bay. Nearly 100 years ago, the Berkeley Marina served as a municipal wharf and the pier offered auto ferry service to San Francisco. More recen tly, in 1991, a landfill was completely sealed and transformed into what is now known as Cesar Chavez Park.

The City of Berkeley now seeks to build on the historic role that the marina has played as both a beloved recreational area as well as a transportation hub by bringing a high- capacity commercial ferry to the Berkeley Marina. A high-capacity commercial ferry would offer our region an alternative form of transportation during peak commute times, but is also a matter of public safety in the event of a major earthquake that damages our roadways and/or Bay Area Rapid Transit tunnels and railways. Over the next decade, we plan to continue our ongoing partnership with the San Francisco Bay Area Water Emergency Transportation Authority to bring a ferry to the Berkeley Marina and restore our damaged pier to serve as a ferry terminal and a place for recreational fishing and taking in the bay view.

Page 10 of 26 ends

166
Letter to Sen. Skinner Re: Marina Pier CONSENT CALENDAR Oct. 12, 2021

Page 5 ends

replacing two full docks and a number of finger docks and pilings, making emergency electrical upgrades, and upgrading six restrooms, among other vital infrastructure improvements. We are also using a portion of these funds to plan for the future by investing in a Marina Area Specific Planning Study, a Pier -Ferry Feasibility Study, and a Marina Sea Level Rise Assessment Study.

Despite our significant investment, however, we still face more than $100 million in unfunded infrastructure needs at the Berkeley Marina and Pier. We are committed to serving as a responsible steward of the land granted to us in trust, and believe there is tremendous potential for the Berkeley Marina to become a regional recreation and transportation hub.

We therefore respectfully request the state’s support in the FY 2022 -23 state budget for the following highest -priority unfunded capital improvement projects that will help to ensure the vitality and longevity of the Berkeley Marina for years to come.

1. Dredging Main Channel - $6,000,000
Both the northern and southern entrances to the main Berkeley Marina need to be dredged. They were last partially dredged in 1989 by the Federal Emergency Management Agency after the Loma Prieta earthquake in order to allow for large ferry use. There are several spots where large boats cannot enter or exit during low tide.

2. Dock Piling Replacement - $1,300,000
The Berkeley Marina has approximately 500 pilings. Approximately 50 percent are the original wood pilings, many of which have failed or are near failure. The City has identified $1.2 million in City funding to replace the worst pilings, but is in need of additional funding to replace the remaining wood pilings.

3. Finger Dock Replacement - $850,000
Various small docks next to each slip that are adjacent to each boat need to be replaced in docks K, L, M, N and O. While the main docks are in decent shape, many of the finger docks are failing.

4. J Dock Replacement - $4,500,000
These docks are the oldest remaining unimproved docks since the initial construction in the 1960s. These docks will be converted from small boat slips to slips for medium and larger boats.

This parking lot is the busiest marina parking lot and serves multiple public uses in the Berkeley waterfront.

Page 11 of 26 ends

167
Letter to Sen. Skinner Re: Marina Pier CONSENT CALENDAR Oct. 12, 2021

Page 6 ends

6. Cesar Chavez Perimeter Path - $1,000,000
This failing one-mile pathway needs to be widened to meet Bay Trail standards and there are several locations that do not meet current ADA standards.

7. Marina Office Piling Replacement - $200,000
The twenty wood pilings which hold up the marina office/public restroom and related platform are near failure and need immediate replacement.

Thank you for your consideration and we look forward to working in partnership on these critical improvements.

The Honorable Nancy Skinner, Chair
Standing Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review
State Capitol, Room 5019
Sacramento, CA 95814

October 12, 2021

Dear Senator Skinner:

As you may know, the City of Berkeley’s Municipal Pier urgently needs replacement.

However, the City and the Water Emergency Transportation Authority (WETA) lack sufficient funds for a full replacement to accommodate all recreational activities as well as plans for a new ferry. Therefore, we humbly request that the California State Senate consider an appropriation of at least $17.5 million in the next budget to match the City’s recommendation and fund a full replacement of the Marina Pier.

The City of Berkeley and WETA’s Pier & Ferry Feasibility Study estimates a $32-44 million replacement cost of the pier for a full 70-year lifespan. Currently, proposed concepts in the Berkeley Municipal Pier-Ferry Project include a replacement pier of only one-third to one-half of the full 3000 lineal foot length of the existing pier. $17.5 million covers the cost of 1,000 feet, but $35 million would cover the cost of the full 3,000 lineal feet.

Additionally, there is a desperate need for $8 million to dredge the entrance to the main harbor, where boats often run aground at low tide, and the South Sailing Basin, which turns into a mud flat at low tide. Even a State contribution of $8 million would allow a 2,000 ft long replacement pier to be built, which would accommodate substantially more recreation and pedestrian usage. A longer pier that enables more recreational uses also increases potential revenue for the City.

In your capacity as Chair of the State Senate’s Standing Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review, we ask you to consider allocating state funds for infrastructure

Page 12 of 26 ends

168
Letter to Sen. Skinner Re: Marina Pier CONSENT CALENDAR Oct. 12, 2021

Page 7 ends

replacement at the Berkeley Pier. This would go a long way toward restoring a vital public resource in our community, while also guaranteeing future revenue potential and stability for the City’s Marina Fund. Thank you very much for your tireless service for the people of Senate District 9.

Respectfully yours,

City Council, City of Berkeley
2180 Milvia St
Berkeley, CA 94704

Page 13 of 26 ends

169

October 26, 2021

The Honorable Nancy Skinner
Chair, Senate Budget Committee
California State Capitol, Room 5094
Sacramento, CA 95814

The Honorable Phil Ting
Chair, Assembly Budget Committee
California State Capitol, Room 6026
Sacramento, CA 95814

Re: 2022 Budget Request from the City of Berkeley Related to Infrastructure Improvements at the Berkeley Marina and Pier
Dear Senate Budget Chair Skinner and Assembly Budget Chair Ting:

As you know, the Berkeley Marina is a beloved recreational area with more than 100 acres of open space and seven miles of trails that delight dog owners, birdwatchers, sailors, windsurfers, bicyclists, kite flyers, and anyone seeking to enjoy fresh air and expansive views of the bay. Nearly 100 years ago, the Berkeley Marina served as a municipal wharf and the pier offered auto ferry service to San Francisco. More recently, in 1991, a landfill was completely sealed and transformed into what is now known as Cesar Chavez Park.

The City of Berkeley now seeks to build on the historic role that the marina has played as both a beloved recreational area as well as a transportation hub by bringing a high-capacity commercial ferry to the Berkeley Marina. A high- capacity commercial ferry would offer our region an alternative form of transportation during peak commute times, but is also a matter of public safety in the event of a major earthquake that damages our roadways and/or Bay Area Rapid Transit tunnels and railways. Over the next decade, we plan to continue our ongoing partnership with the San Francisco Bay Area Water Emergency Transportation Authority to bring a ferry to the Berkeley Marina and restore our damaged pier to serve as a ferry terminal and a place for recreational fishing and taking in the bay view.

To realize our long-term vision for the Berkeley waterfront, we have invested over $26 million in local funds, grants, and a $5.5 million state loan in recent years. With these resources, we are making critical capital investments, including repaving of failing streets, replacing two full docks and a number of finger docks and pilings, making emergency electrical upgrades, and upgrading six restrooms, among other vital infrastructure improvements. We are also using a portion of these funds to plan for the future by investing in a Marina Area Specific Planning Study, a Pier -Ferry Feasibility Study, and a Marina Sea Level Rise Assessment Study.

Page 14 of 26 ends

170

We therefore respectfully request the state’s support in the FY 2022- 23 state budget for the following highest-priority unfunded capital improvement projects that will help to ensure the vitality and longevity of the Berkeley Marina for years to come.

1. Dredging Main Channel - $6,000,000
Both the northern and southern entrances to the main Berkeley Marina need to be dredged.

They were last partially dredged in 1989 by the Federal Emergency Management Agency after the Loma Prieta earthquake in order to allow for large ferry use. There are several spots where large boats cannot enter or exit during low tide.

5. J and K Parking Lot - $1,150,000
This parking lot is adjacent to the marina office, commercial fishing dock (K), a marina restaurant and the bait shop and has totally failed and needs complete replacement. T his parking lot is the busiest marina parking lot and serves multiple public uses in the Berkeley waterfront.

6. Cesar Chavez Perimeter Path - $1,000,000
This failing one-mile pathway needs to be widened to meet Bay Trail standards and the re are several locations that do not meet current ADA standards.

7. Marina Office Piling Replacement - $200,000
The twenty wood pilings which hold up the marina office/public restroom and related platform are near failure and need immediate replacement.

Thank you for your consideration and we look forward to working in partnership on these critical improvements.

Respectfully,
Berkeley City Council

Page 15 of 26 ends

171

Rashi Kesarwani
Councilmember District 1
2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 Tel: 510.981.XXXX TDD: 510.981.6903 Fax: 510.981.XXXX E-Mail: [email protected]

REVISED

AGENDA MATERIAL
for Supplemental Packet 1

Meeting Date: March 23, 2021

Item Number: 9

Item Description: Establish a Parking Benefits District (PBD) in the Adeline Corridor and Fiscal Year 2022 Budget Referral

Submitted by: Councilmember Rashi Kesarwani

The item has been amended to include the Gilman District and update the Fiscal Impact to reflect the cost of consulting services for two business districts. Additional edits are included to provide more detail about the concept of a Parking Benefit District, and Councilmember Rashi Kesarwani is added as a co-author.

Page 16 of 26 ends

172

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 1 CONSENT CALENDAR
March 23, 2021

To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council From: Councilmember Ben Bartlett (Author), Councilmember Rashi Kesarwani (Co-Author), & Mayor Jesse Arreguin and Councilmember Terry Taplin (co-sponsors)
Subject: Budget Referral: Establish a Parking Benefits Districts (PBD) in the Adeline Corridor and Gilman District and Refer Funding to the Fiscal Year 2022 Budget Referral Process

RECOMMENDATION
Refer to the City Manager to establish a Parking Benefits Districts (PBDs) in the (1) Adeline Corridor and (2) Gilman District in order to finance and support neighborhood improvements--such as landscaping;, enhanced lighting;, security ambassadors; enhanced street sweeping and sidewalk cleaning,; bike, pedestrian, micromobility, and public transit infrastructure,; marketing and promotion of the commercial areas, and other potential enhancements to be determined and more--in South and West Berkeley. and

Further, refer to the Fiscal Year 2022 budget process $50,000 $75,000 for city staff to hire and manage a seek consultanting services to assist in the formation and establishment of the PBDs.

CURRENT SITUATION
Outlined in the Lorin Business Association’s vision for South Berkeley and the Adeline Corridor draft plan is a business improvement district (BID). 1 A BID uses fees from
businesses and/or property owners to support physical improvements, special events, public safety, street cleanliness/maintenance, and programming. The Lorin Business Association has already spent five years advocating for a BID in South Berkeley but such a district has yet to be established in this community. Thus, the City can take a critical step in supporting innovative revitalization activities in South Berkeley by establishing a Parking Benefits District (PBD) to help the City improve the Adeline Corridor. In addition, the parking revenue generated within the PBD should fund designated neighborhood improvements.

The Gilman District has a similar need for a mechanism to fund necessary streetscape improvements. Establishing a PBD is a financing tool in which revenue is reinvested within the business district in order to fund necessary investments that encourage placemaking and a safe, clean, and pleasant experience for workers and visitors. The Gilman District is home to an eclectic mix of businesses and non-profits, such as art galleries, wineries, breweries, biotech, office space, and an educational farm and community center, among other varied enterprises.

1 https://www.cityofberkeley.info/council3/adeline/
Formatted: Indent: Left: 1"

Page 17 of 26 ends

173

Office of Councilmember Ben Bartlett
2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 2 BACKGROUND
The Covid-19 pandemic and resulting Shelter-In-Place orders have had a devastating impact on the vitality of our business districts. The development of a Parking Benefit District (PBD) within a business district is a long-term strategy for establishing a dedicated source of revenue to can enhance and reinvest in a commercial area as it seeks to recover from the economic recession resulting from the pandemic.

Parking benefits districts (PBDs) are defined geographic areas, typically along commercial corridors, in which revenue generated from on-street and off-street parking facilities within the district is returned to the district to finance neighborhood improvements. A PBD ties the economic benefits of parking directly to improving the quality of life in the immediate area.
2 PBDs specifically require local parking revenue to stay local, while financing neighborhood improvements. PBDs allow local merchants, organizations, property owners, residents and visitors to clearly see that the monies collected are being spent for the benefit of their district, on projects that they have chosen. In turn, they become willing to support, and often advocate on behalf of the needs of the residents and patrons who utilize the parking.

To improve our commercial districts and expand investments in our neighborhoods, the Council should adopt this item creating a South and West Berkeley PBD with the specific requirement that parking revenues generated in the district is be used for neighborhood improvements. Funds from a PBD could be used in critically important ways, such as hiring full-time staff to manage the following activities: landscaping and streetscape improvementsscreening, street cleaning, transit and pedestrian infrastructure, street furniture, marketing of local businesses, management activities, and visitor and security ambassadors.

Determination of how to allocate and use the funds could be managed by a Parking Advisory Committee, a group of representatives from the commercial district, that would make recommendations to City staff on how the revenues would best support the vibrancy of the business district.

In establishing the PBDs, the City should consider a separate permitting system for the benefit of employees of local businesses in order to enable access to parking within reasonable proximity to their place of employment at a fair price. In such a system, local businesses could purchase a certain number of annual permits for employees at a rate that is different from the rate charged to hourly visitors. Fee structures for employee permits versus hourly visitors could initially be determined with the help of the hired consultant.

The request for a PBD is an innovative approach to a real problem in South and West Berkeley. Constituents in both areas have faced many generations of neglect. in this

2 See Donald Shoup’s Fall 2016 Access Magazine’s article: Parking Benefit Districts:
https://www.accessmagazine.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/7/2016/11/access49-web-almanac.pdf Formatted: Font: Italic
Formatted: English (United States)

Page 18 of 26 ends

174

Office of Councilmember Ben Bartlett
2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 3 neighborhood. A PBD brings equity, a leg up for our commercial districts to develop in a cohesive, community- oriented way. It also gives our neighborhoods an opportunity to work together communally on issues of mutual interest to South Berkeley in each locale, while receiving the resources necessary to improve the quality of life of its for constituents. The establishment of these PBDs could potentially lead to the establishment of PBDs in other areas of the City, adding to the value of this effort.

A successful PBD in South Berkeley would also incorporate a number of other key elements that the City Manager Council should also consider:
• Creation of a governing and oversight body Parking Advisory Committee to recommend appropriate uses develop an approved program of revenue generated by the PBD. expenditures, subject to final approval by City Council.

This body could take one of several potential forms, such as: Aan appointed or volunteer advisory board, which could include residents, property owners, businesses owners and other community organizations operating within South and West Berkeley, residents and cCity staff;
• Implementation of parking meters and pricing structures that facilitate demand- based pricing, with employees of local businesses potentially receiving access to permits that are provided at a different rate from the parking rate charged to hourly visitors;
• Adoption of a defined list of PBD revenue expenditures; • Development of a coordinated public relations plan, which wcould use wayfinding, signage, and public outreach to explain the role of demand-based pricing and articulate how parking revenue is being utilized to benefit the two districts;
• signage, and public outreach to explain the role of demand-based pricing and articulate how parking revenue is being utilized to benefit South Berkeley; • Ongoing evaluation and management of PBD policies and expenditures; and • City reporting on the funds generated.

REVIEW OF EXISTING PLANS, PROGRAMS, POLICIES, AND LAWS
A PBD is a well established concept used in municipalities around the United States. In California, Pasadena3 and Newport Beach4 have used their PBDs to support revitalization needs. Parking management is an issue often overlooked in a neighborhood’s development plan. While it may seem like a secondary concern in the quest for economic development, parking management directly impacts accessibility to businesses, customer willingness to travel to certain areas, and the quality of life experienced by residents. Studies have shown that a smart, proactive parking policy can revitalize a neighborhood. South and West Berkeley is a are prime neighborhoods for this type of engagement.

3 See Donald Shoup’s Fall 2003 Access Magazine article focusing on Old Pasadena:
https://www.accessmagazine.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/7/2016/02/Access-23-02-Small-Change-into- Big-Change.pdf
4 See this promotional flyer from Newport Beach:
https://www.newportbeachca.gov/Home/ShowDocument?id=11814 Formatted: English (United States)
Formatted: English (United States)

Page 19 of 26 ends

175

Office of Councilmember Ben Bartlett
2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 4 CONSULTATION OVERVIEW
The District 3 Office consulted with leaders of the Lorin Business Association. Their advocacy has informed this recommendation. The District 1 office has conducted outreach to the Gilman District.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
The Council should promote equity by establishing a Parking Benefits Districts (PBDs) in the Adeline Corridor and Gilman District to finance and support neighborhood improvements in South and West Berkeley. In comparison to the ways the City has invested in other districts, South and West Berkeley has have often been neglected.

The Lorin Business Association has long advocated for the establishment of a traditional business improvement district, but such a district has yet to be established in this community. The Gilman District also is in need of additional investment. The Council now has the opportunity to support these South Berkeley commercial districts and improve the quality of life for its their constituents by establishing a PBD in each business district and dedicating parking revenue funding in the PBD to local neighborhood improvements, such as landscaping, lighting, cleaning, security ambassadors, publicity and promotion, pedestrian and transit infrastructure, and other things that City residents benefit from.

FISCAL IMPACTS
Rather than accruing to the City, if the PBD is established, all or a portion of revenue generated from on-street and off-parking facilities will be utilized to finance neighborhood improvements, thereby improving the quality of life in the business district and surrounding area. In order to form the PBDs, a one-time allocation of resources, estimated at approximately $50,000 $75,000 is required and being referred to the FY 2022 budget process for consulting services for the following activities:
• Working with key stakeholders to help define the general parameters of the PBDs;
• Developing each respective PBD’s boundaries, which revenues would be utilized, a draft budget for expenditures, a description of any new meters or other facilities that need be installed, and a timeline;
• Assigning of responsibilities to various organizations and creation of a new non- profit corporation, if needed;
• Development of a timeline with specific tasks and deadlines; and • Writing of an Ordinance for Council consideration and presentation to the City Council.

. Likely Aadditional costs to establish new meters or other facilities would be identified by the consultant and could potentially be covered by the resulting revenues from the PBD. fiscal impacts, if any, to the City will be analyzed in depth should City Council approve the referral along with the requested budget allocation when the FY 2022 budget is adopted.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
Formatted: List Paragraph, Bulleted + Level: 1 +
Aligned at: 0.25" + Indent at: 0.5"
Formatted: Font: 12 pt
Formatted: Underline

Page 20 of 26 ends

176

Office of Councilmember Ben Bartlett
2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 5 Providing parking for free or below the price that customers are willing to pay unnecessarily subsidizes a carbon-intensive mode of transportation. The City of Berkeley has declared a climate emergency, and it reflects the principles of environmental sustainability to impose a parking fee for the negative externality of greater greenhouse gas emissions emitted by non-electric cars compared to other modes of transportation, such as micromobility devices, public transit, biking or walking.

CONTACT PERSON
Councilmember Ben Bartlett: 510-981-7130 James Chang [email protected]

Councilmember Rashi Kesarwani 510-981-7111
Beth Gerstein [email protected]
Formatted: French (France)
Field Code Changed
Formatted: French (France)
Formatted: French (France)

Page 21 of 26 ends

177

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 1 CONSENT CALENDAR
March 23, 2021

To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council From: Councilmember Ben Bartlett (Author), Councilmember Rashi Kesarwani (Co-Author), Mayor Jesse Arreguin and Councilmember Terry Taplin (co-sponsors)
Subject: Budget Referral: Establish Parking Benefit Districts in the Adeline Corridor and Gilman District and Refer Funding to the Fiscal Year 2022 Budget Process

RECOMMENDATION
Refer to the City Manager to establish Parking Benefit Districts (PBDs) in the (1) Adeline Corridor and (2) Gilman District in order to finance and support neighborhood improvements--such as landscaping; enhanced lighting; security ambassadors; enhanced street sweeping and sidewalk cleaning; bike, pedestrian, micromobility, and public transit infrastructure; marketing and promotion of the commercial areas, and other potential enhancements to be determined -- in South and West Berkeley.

Further, refer to the Fiscal Year 2022 budget process $75,000 for city staff to seek consulting services to assist in the formation and establishment of the PBDs.

1 https://www.cityofberkeley.info/council3/adeline/

Page 22 of 26 ends

178

Office of Councilmember Ben Bartlett
2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 2 galleries, wineries, breweries, biotech, office space, and an educational farm and community center, among other varied enterprises.

BACKGROUND
The Covid-19 pandemic and resulting Shelter-In-Place orders have had a devastating impact on the vitality of our business districts. The development of a Parking Benefit District (PBD) within a business district is a long-term strategy for establishing a dedicated source of revenue to can enhance and reinvest in a commercial area as it seeks to recover from the economic recession resulting from the pandemic.

Parking benefit districts (PBDs) are defined geographic areas, typically along commercial corridors, in which revenue generated from on-street and off-street parking facilities within the district is returned to the district to finance neighborhood improvements. A PBD ties the economic benefits of parking directly to improving the quality of life in the immediate area.
2 PBDs specifically require local parking revenue to
stay local, while financing neighborhood improvements. PBDs allow local merchants, organizations, property owners, residents and visitors to clearly see that the monies collected are being spent for the benefit of their district, on projects that they have chosen. In turn, they become willing to support, and often advocate on behalf of the needs of the residents and patrons who utilize the parking.

To improve our commercial districts and expand investments in our neighborhoods, the Council should adopt this item creating a South and West Berkeley PBD with the specific requirement that parking revenues generated in the district be used for neighborhood improvements. Funds from a PBD could be used in critically important ways, such as hiring full-time staff to manage the following activities: landscaping and streetscape improvements, street cleaning, transit and pedestrian infrastructure, street furniture, marketing of local businesses, management activities, and visitor and security ambassadors.

2 See Donald Shoup’s Fall 2016 Access Magazine’s article: Parking Benefit Districts:
https://www.accessmagazine.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/7/2016/11/access49-web-almanac.pdf

Page 23 of 26 ends

179

Office of Councilmember Ben Bartlett
2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 3 The request for a PBD is an innovative approach to a real problem in South and West Berkeley. Constituents in both areas have faced many generations of neglect. A PBD brings equity, a leg up for commercial districts to develop in a cohesive, community- oriented way. It also gives neighborhoods an opportunity to work communally on issues of mutual interest in each locale, while receiving the resources necessary to improve the quality of life for constituents. The establishment of these PBDs could potentially lead to the establishment of PBDs in other areas of the City, adding to the value of this effort.

A successful PBD would also incorporate a number of other key elements that the City Manager should consider:
• Creation of a governing Parking Advisory Committee to recommend appropriate uses of revenue generated by the PBD. This body could take one of several potential forms, such as: an appointed or volunteer advisory board, which could include residents, property owners, business owners and other community organizations operating within South and West Berkeley, and City staff; • Implementation of parking meters and pricing structures that facilitate demand- based pricing, with employees of local businesses potentially receiving access to permits that are provided at a different rate from the parking rate charged to hourly visitors;
• Adoption of a defined list of PBD revenue expenditures; • Development of a coordinated public relations plan, which could use wayfinding, signage, and public outreach to explain the role of demand-based pricing and articulate how parking revenue is being utilized to benefit the two districts; • Ongoing evaluation and management of PBD policies and expenditures; and • City reporting on the funds generated.

REVIEW OF EXISTING PLANS, PROGRAMS, POLICIES, AND LAWS
A PBD is a well established concept used in municipalities around the United States. In California, Pasadena3 and Newport Beach4 have used their PBDs to support revitalization needs. Parking management is an issue often overlooked in a neighborhood’s development plan. While it may seem like a secondary concern in the quest for economic development, parking management directly impacts accessibility to businesses, customer willingness to travel to certain areas, and the quality of life experienced by residents. Studies have shown that a smart, proactive parking policy can revitalize a neighborhood. South and West Berkeley i are prime neighborhoods for this type of engagement.

3 See Donald Shoup’s Fall 2003 Access Magazine article focusing on Old Pasadena:
https://www.accessmagazine.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/7/2016/02/Access-23-02-Small-Change-into- Big-Change.pdf

4 See this promotional flyer from Newport Beach:
https://www.newportbeachca.gov/Home/ShowDocument?id=11814

Page 24 of 26 ends

180

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
The Council should promote equity by establishing Parking Benefit Districts (PBDs) in the Adeline Corridor and Gilman District to finance and support neighborhood improvements in South and West Berkeley. In comparison to the ways the City has invested in other districts, South and West Berkeley have often been neglected. The Lorin Business Association has long advocated for the establishment of a traditional business improvement district, but such a district has yet to be established in this community. The Gilman District also is in need of additional investment. The Council now has the opportunity to support these commercial districts and improve the quality of life for their constituents by establishing a PBD in each business district and dedicating parking revenue funding in the PBD to local neighborhood improvements, such as landscaping, lighting, cleaning, security ambassadors, publicity and promotion, pedestrian and transit infrastructure, and other things that City residents benefit from.

FISCAL IMPACTS
In order to form the PBDs, a one-time allocation of approximately $75,000 is referred to the FY 2022 budget process for consulting services for the following activities:
• Working with key stakeholders to help define the general parameters of the PBDs;
• Developing each respective PBD’s boundaries, which revenues would be utilized, a draft budget for expenditures, a description of any new meters or other facilities that need be installed, and a timeline;
• Assigning of responsibilities to various organizations and creation of a new non- profit corporation, if needed;
• Development of a timeline with specific tasks and deadlines; and • Writing of an Ordinance for Council consideration and presentation to the City Council.

Likely additional costs to establish new meters or other facilities would be identified by the consultant and could potentially be covered by the resulting revenues from the PBD.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
Providing parking for free or below the price that customers are willing to pay unnecessarily subsidizes a carbon-intensive mode of transportation. The City of Berkeley has declared a climate emergency, and it reflects the principles of environmental sustainability to impose a parking fee for the negative externality of

Page 25 of 26 ends

181

Office of Councilmember Ben Bartlett
2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 5 greater greenhouse gas emissions emitted by non-electric cars compared to other modes of transportation, such as micromobility devices, public transit, biking or walking.

CONTACT PERSON
Councilmember Ben Bartlett: 510-981-7130 James Chang [email protected]

Councilmember Rashi Kesarwani 510-981-7111
Beth Gerstein [email protected]

Page 26 of 26 ends

182
Rashi Kesarwani
Councilmember District 1

CONSENT CALENDAR
January 18, 2022
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Councilmember Rashi Kesarwani (Co-Author), Councilmember Ben Bartlett (Co-Author), Mayor Arreguin (Co-Sponsor), Councilmember Taplin (Co-Sponsor)
SUBJECT: Refer to the City Manager to Establish a Framework for Parking Benefits Districts in the Gilman and Lorin Commercial Districts

RECOMMENDATION
Refer to the City Manager to create a basic framework for establishing a Parking Benefits District (PBD) in the Gilman and Lorin Commercial Districts. This framework should include:
● A map establishing the boundaries of the Gilman District PBD. Suggested borders of the district should include: (1) on the west, the east side of Eastshore Highway from Page Street to the Albany border; (2) on the north, the Albany border from Eastshore Highway to the east side of San Pablo Avenue; (3) on the east, the east side of San Pablo Avenue from the Albany border to Gilman Street, both sides of Gilman Street from San Pablo Avenue to Kains, and the east side of San Pablo Avenue to the north side of Page Street; and (4) on the south, the west side of San Pablo Avenue from Page Street to Camelia Street, the north side of Camelia Street from San Pablo Avenue to Sixth Street; the west side of Sixth Street from Camelia to Page; the north side of Page Street from Sixth Street to Eastshore Highway. See map in Attachment 1.
● A map establishing the boundaries of the Lorin District PBD. Suggested borders of the district should include: (1) on the east, both sides of Shattuck Avenue from Carleton southward to Alcatraz Avenue; (2) on the south, the north side of Alcatraz Avenue from Shattuck Avenue to Martin Luther King Jr.

Way; Martin Luther King Jr. Way southward to 62nd Street; 62nd Street to King Street; (3) on the west, King street to Russell Street; (4) on the north, Russell Street to Grant Street; Grant Street north to Carleton Street; and Carleton Street to Shattuck Avenue. See map in Attachment 1.

Page 1 of 26 ends

183
2 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7110 ● Fax: (510) 981-7111 E-Mail: [email protected]
● Consideration of expanding the goBerkeley parking program 1 to include installation of paid parking within a subsection of the defined Gilman and Lorin Parking Benefit Districts only where warranted based on parking demand using a demand-based pricing model.
● Consideration of amending the goBerkeley program to allow net parking revenues to be reinvested within the Gilman and Lorin Parking Benefits Districts where the revenue is generated for the purpose of funding improvements, such as trash removal, sidewalk cleaning, enhanced lighting, signage, beautification like landscaping or other improvements based on input from an advisory board of stakeholders–in alignment with policy requirements of PBDs.
● Consideration of transportation-related amenities targeted to employees that may include: annual transportation passes to incentivize public transit use, annual memberships in shared electric micro-mobility programs, special employee parking permits, etc.
● A strategy for conducting outreach to Gilman and Lorin Commercial District stakeholders prior to implementation, including outreach to property and business owners and employees.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
The Gilman District is home to an eclectic range of businesses, services and amenities that attract visitors from across the Bay Area. The Gilman District, situated in the northwest section of Berkeley, is a dynamic mix of manufacturing, light industry, office and studio space, retail and food establishments, in addition to other services and amenities. It is home to recreational sports fields, for instance, and a flourishing urban farm, Urban Adamah, that hosts various family and community programs. Over the last couple of decades new and exciting businesses have settled into this district that are highly attractive to consumers throughout the Bay Area and have helped make this area a vibrant commercial district. These include food-related production and services such as Whole Foods, Philz Coffee, Fra’Mani handcrafted foods, Boichik Bagels (opening a warehouse in 2022); wineries such as Donkey and Goat and Broc Cellars as well as breweries such as Fieldwork and Gilman Brewing Company. The Tesla Service Center and other automotive services and industries are located in the same vicinity as community non-profit collaborative art spaces such as The Potters’ Studio.

Availability of parking is an issue in the Gilman District. Between the many employees and visitors, there is a large volume of stakeholders who frequent this area on a daily basis. Despite the popularity of this area, this district is hard to access via public transit. Currently only the 72 AC Transit lines (72, 72R, 72M) travel back 1 This program uses demand-based parking management practices in which staff periodically analyze parking activity to adjust meter pricing in order to improve parking availability and turnover.

Page 2 of 26 ends

184
3 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7110 ● Fax: (510) 981-7111 E-Mail: [email protected]
and forth along San Pablo Avenue and the closest bike share stop is eight blocks away, at Tenth and University Ave. The closest BART stations are close to a mile and a half away. Unless people access the Gilman District by foot, bike or micro- mobility device, they are likely driving into the area. The resulting high volume of single-occupancy vehicles impacts parking and exacerbates greenhouse gas emissions. The few metered blocks in the Gilman District are clustered around the large high-volume retail establishments REI and Whole Foods, leaving the vast majority of the district without an effective means to regulate parking and ensure adequate availability. Gilman District stakeholders can park their vehicles all day for free, and many of them do. Finding a place to park in the Gilman District can be challenging because the city does not currently have a mechanism to consider expansion of the goBerkeley parking program to this area.

The Lorin District is one of the most diverse, artistic and transit accessible commercial districts in the City of Berkeley. The Lorin District is home to the South Berkeley Farmers’ Market, boasts a thriving arts and antiques cluster, and is home to Shotgun Players and Berkeley Black Repertory Theater. It is also fast becoming an emerging food scene with an impressive assortment of new eating and drinking establishments. The Lorin is the southernmost gateway into the City. With direct access to Highway 24 from Adeline Street and Interstate 80 from Ashby Avenue, the district boasts an intermodal array of options for visitors including the Ashby BART and AC Transit bus lines, including Transbay bus stops with direct access to San Francisco. The Lorin Business Association includes businesses, nonprofits, artists, and property owners located along Adeline Street from Ashby Avenue to the Oakland border. The Association seeks to promote economic vitality by promotion of positive business and commercial activity, streetscape improvements and the arts. The consideration of additional paid parking in this area could encourage employees and customers to utilize alternative transportation options.

The Gilman & Lorin Business Districts have a significant number of unhoused individuals. In addition to parking challenges, both Districts struggle with a high number of unhoused individuals living on the sidewalk. Many of these encampments have also become sites of illegally dumped materials, and excessive trash and debris have attracted vermin. Hazardous materials such as human waste and used needles are frequently found at these sites. Unlike many other business districts in Berkeley, both Districts lack the structure and resources of a Business Improvement District (BID)—an entity that could provide services to benefit the commercial area and promote and maintain a cleaner environment. In short, these areas need additional resources to acquire street and landscape improvements, cleaning services, and amenities such as bike and pedestrian infrastructure to make the districts easy for everyone to access. These types of services are beyond what the City can currently provide.

Page 3 of 26 ends

185
4 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7110 ● Fax: (510) 981-7111 E-Mail: [email protected]
Parking Benefit Districts (PBDs) are a way to boost economic vitality while addressing parking challenges. Parking Benefit Districts2 spend meter revenue for public services in the metered areas. They are defined geographical areas typically located in commercial districts in which revenue generated from on-street and off- street parking facilities within the area is kept within the district to finance neighborhood improvements.3 A primary goal of PBDs is to effectively manage an area’s parking supply and demand, often using demand-based pricing, making parking convenient for drivers.4 Reinvesting the meter revenue back into the district helps build support among community members and businesses as the economic benefits of parking can fund local improvements within the area.

A PBD is led by a Community Advisory Board. PBDs also require a community advisory board made up of local merchants, employees, organizations, property owners and other stakeholders to convene on a regular basis to make recommendations to the City Council for funding improvements. This advisory structure is another way to help build support for a shift to metered parking as local stakeholders have direct input into the types of improvements to be adopted.

Establishing a PBD in the Gilman and Lorin Commercial Districts is a long-term strategy that could at once help ease the difficult parking situation district stakeholders experience daily while providing much needed resources to help fill in funding gaps that could address cleanliness, safety, and quality of life improvements, such as additional trash removal, sidewalk cleaning, enhanced lighting, beautification such as landscaping, or other improvements.5
Other cities have established PBDs with great success. A PBD is a well- established concept used in cities within California and throughout the United States.

Pasadena was an early adopter of a PBD in 1993.6 According to one legal publishing service, “In its first year, the PBD saw a 100 percent increase in sales tax revenue and in two decades, Old Pasadena became a popular shopping attraction, where just 21 square blocks raised $6.4 million for local investments in a five-year period.”7 San Diego was soon to follow in 1997 with now six distinct PBDs,8 and nearby Redwood City established one in 2017.9 All districts have successfully used revenues for street and sidewalk cleaning as well as improvements such as:
2 See Donald Shoup’s Fall 2016 Access Magazine article: Parking Benefit Districts 3 See Newport Beach’s Commercial Parking Benefit District flyer 4 Op cit. Newport Beach’s Commercial Parking Benefit District flyer 5 See JDSupra January 2021 blog post: Can Parking Benefit Districts Step in as Revenue Sources Dry Up?
6 See Douglas Kolozsvari and Donald Shoup’s Fall 2003 Access Magazine article: Turning Small Change into Big Changes
7 JDSupra January 2021 blog post, Op. Cit.
8 See Main Street America’s blog post: Parking Benefit Districts Case Study: San Diego California 9 See Redwood City’s webpage Community Benefit Improvement District

Page 4 of 26 ends

186
5 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7110 ● Fax: (510) 981-7111 E-Mail: [email protected]
● Infrastructure enhancements to its historic district, including vehicular and pedestrian wayfinding signs and neighborhood banners (San Diego)10 ● Sidewalk operations and beautification projects including murals, shadow art stencils, umbrellas and table and seating areas (Redwood City)11 ● Installation of historic light fixtures and street furniture, and tree planting (Old Pasadena)12
Other cities outside of California have successfully adopted PBDs as well. In Austin, Texas, for instance, a PBD was established in 2005 using Environmental Protection Agency funding that was so successful that it later established several more, raising $1.87 million for local improvement projects.13 Other geographically dispersed cities such as Houston, Texas14; Portland, Oregon15; and Washington, D.C.16 have similarly established PBDs as a way to revitalize a neighborhood, address parking management issues, and combat greenhouse gas emissions. It is a concept gaining traction throughout the country.

Examples of employee parking accommodations. Cities have used a variety of approaches to specifically address workers’ needs. Some cities, such as Boulder, Colorado have established PBDs that use some of the revenues to assist workers while disincentivizing single-occupancy vehicle transportation into the district.

Boulder’s Central Area General Improvement District (CAGID) dedicates funds for the Denver-Boulder transit agency Eco-Pass Program17 providing thousands of workers free unlimited-ride transit passes annually. Boulder additionally invested $50,000 in the BCycle Bikeshare program as another way to incentivize alternate methods of transportation for workers.18 In Houston, Texas, the Washington Avenue Parking Benefit District has created a permitting system allowing each commercial property to purchase an annual permit for parking in a designated area.19 The City of Berkeley, too, has a precedent of addressing merchant and employee parking needs as made evident in our Berkeley Municipal Code 14.72.100 - Local Business Parking Permits, which allows issuing a permit to business owners or lessees of commercial establishments located in designated commercial zoning districts within the City for use during the business activity of the establishment. Such a permitting program 10 See Main Street America’s blog post, op. cit.
11 See Redwood City’s Annual Report from the Redwood City Improvement Association, December 1, 2016 - November 30, 2017
12 Kolozsvari and Shoup, Op. Cit.
13 JDSupra blog post, Op. Cit.
14 See City of Houston Webpage: Park Houston
15 See City of Portland’s Meter District webpage
16 See Washington, D.C. press release regarding the Launch of New Parking Program Downtown 17 See RTD EcoPass
18 See SmartcitiesDIve blog post: Parking as an Economic Development Tool in Boulder 19 See the parking website Parkhouston for details on this PBD

Page 5 of 26 ends

187
6 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7110 ● Fax: (510) 981-7111 E-Mail: [email protected]
could easily be incorporated within the structure of a PBD, should the stakeholder advisory group opt to do so.

Existing meters in Gilman and Lorin Districts provide revenue to our Parking Meter Fund. Pre-pandemic, normal parking operations throughout the City yielded healthy revenues in excess of expenditures and contributed to the City’s Parking Enterprise Fund. These funds were intended to help cover the Center Street Garage bond debt service payment and for upgrades to the City’s parking meters.20 While the City paused fee collection at all meters and off-street parking facilities during the shelter-in-place order, revenue collection resumed later in 2020 and on and off-street parking revenues are again slowly beginning to climb. Currently, a limited number of blocks in the Gilman District have parking meters, with the Lorin District containing slightly more metered streets (see Attachment 1 maps). In both districts, meters are clustered around the high-volume retail and food establishments: REI and Whole Foods in the Gilman District and Berkeley Bowl in the Lorin District. Exhibit 1 shows the revenues for the meters in these two districts over the past few years.

Exhibit 1: Limited Number of Gilman and Lorin District Parking Meters Generated a Total of $162,323 in FY 2019-20
Total Revenue Hourly Rate
FY 2019-20 FY 2020-21
FY 2021-22
(Jul-Sept
2021)
FY 2019-20 FY 2020-21 FY 2021-22
Lorin $94,410 $23,025 $7,695 $86
($1.50/hr)
$17
($0.50/hr)
$24
($0.50/hr)
Gilman $67,913 $23,771 $10,689 $65
($1.50/hr)
$17
($0.50/hr)
$31
($0.50/hr)
Total $162,323 $46,796 $18,384
Source: Transportation Division, City of Berkeley
Note: During the period of March 20, 2020 through May 31, 2020 fees were not collected at any meters due to the shelter-in-place order.

The goBerkeley parking program uses demand-based management. In 2013, Berkeley began piloting the goBerkeley parking program in three commercial areas:

Downtown Berkeley, the Elmwood, and Southside/Telegraph, as a way to support their economic vitality and reduce congestion and emissions. In short, this program uses demand-based parking management practices in which staff periodically analyze parking activity to adjust meter pricing in order to improve parking availability and turnover. The program targets the availability of 1-2 open parking spaces (65-85 percent occupancy) on most block faces in a given area. If this target is reached, no adjustments are made. If blocks are too full, prices are increased; if they are too empty, prices are decreased accordingly. The meter time limits reinforce parking turnover in select areas or incentivize drivers to park in areas with longer time limits. 20 See Public Works Director Liam Garland’s report to the Budget and Finance Policy committee:

Parking Funds-Public Works Balancing Proposal

Page 6 of 26 ends

188
7 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7110 ● Fax: (510) 981-7111 E-Mail: [email protected]
This parking program strategy reduces vehicle emissions as the need to circle an area in pursuit of parking is reduced, and improves pedestrian and bicyclist safety by reducing driver distractedness while looking for parking. The January 14, 2020 program update to the Berkeley City Council (attached) noted the success of this program and the City’s intent to eventually transition all of our metered parking to this program, pursuant to robust community outreach and engagement with merchants and residents alike. This Council item recommends consideration of expanding this program to the Gilman and Lorin Districts once PBDs are established in order to help manage parking issues and fill in funding gaps for neighborhood improvements in these distinct areas.

BACKGROUND
Every year, funds from net parking revenues are set aside to fund meter replacement, help pay down the Center Street Garage general obligation bond and contribute to the General Fund for other ongoing City programs. Pre-pandemic, the Parking Meter Fund paid $1.9M annually towards the Center Street Garage bond obligation. Also pre-pandemic, the City’s FY 2019-20 projections for on-street parking fund revenues were roughly $9.3 million, with a monthly average of $779,285.21 When Covid hit, parking revenue was severely impacted. The Parking Meter Fund received a loan from the General Fund, but is still not solvent. Revenues from on- street parking are steadily climbing, although they have still not returned to their pre- pandemic level.22 Operational costs of parking meter maintenance, enforcement, and staffing are considerable, as shown in Exhibit 2, and it will take additional time before our Parking Fund is once again yielding revenues in excess of expenditures.

Exhibit 2: Parking Infrastructure Costs
Equipment One-Time Cost Ongoing Cost
Parking Pay Station (unit) $5,700 purchase, $300 install $660/year connectivity fee Single Space Meter (unit) $575 purchase $69/year connectivity Single Space Meter post (unit) $300; variable installation cost by Streets Division
N/A
Source: Transportation Division, City of Berkeley
Additional costs include maintenance and staffing.
● Staff time for collections and maintenance citywide is roughly $714,300 annually.
● Expansion to the Lorin and Gilman Districts would require 0.5 full-time equivalent (FTE) Meter Mechanic and 0.5 FTE Meter Collector.

During the March 23, 2021 City Council meeting, Councilmembers Bartlett and Kesarwani’s Item Number 9: Establish a Parking Benefits District (PBD) in the 21 See Director Garland’s November 12, 2020 report to the Budget and Finance committee, Op. Cit. 22 Communications with City of Berkeley Parking Services Manager, Danette Perry, Dec. 8, 2021.

Page 7 of 26 ends

189
8 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7110 ● Fax: (510) 981-7111 E-Mail: [email protected]
Adeline Corridor and Fiscal Year 2022 Budget Referral, Supplemental Packet 1 (see Attachment 3) was unanimously passed on consent as amended and later funded through the FY 2022 budget process. The requested funds were to support hiring a consultant to assist in the formation of a Parking Benefits District. In preparation for bringing a consultant on board, the City’s Office of Economic Development staff began working with a UC Berkeley graduate student intern studying City Planning at the College of Environmental Design to develop an existing conditions report for both districts, and to research and evaluate regional Parking Benefit District policies to recommend cities’ best practices that would be compatible with Berkeley’s local context. This council item is another step towards establishing PBDs in Berkeley as it provides additional direction to staff specifically for the Gilman and Lorin Districts pertaining to drawing defined district boundaries, expanding the City’s already established parking program, directing staff to determine the block faces for meter installation, seeking ways to minimize impacts on employees, and requesting outreach efforts with Gilman and Lorin District stakeholders. Once the PBDs’ structure has been established and a consultant hired to assist creating an ordinance and begin its formation, staff can work on calculations to determine the percentage of net revenue from these districts’ meters to be reinvested back into the district. One of the likely final steps in this process will be a budget referral for meter purchasing and installation and hiring additional parking enforcement staff.

FISCAL IMPACTS
Staff Time to determine block faces to be metered and recommend pricing levels specific to each district. Staff time will also be required to administratively address an expansion of the goBerkeley parking program. Lastly, staff time will be necessary to devise and conduct community stakeholder outreach within both the Gilman and Lorin Commercial Districts.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
According to Berkeley’s December 6, 2018 Climate Action Plan update, transportation is the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in the City, mostly generated from passenger vehicles. Installing meters and a demand pricing parking management system will reduce greenhouse gas emissions as it reduces the likelihood of drivers circling blocks in pursuit of parking and lessen traffic congestion.

Additionally, charging drivers for use of our public right of ways can be an effective way to disincentivize driving, providing another way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. This aligns with the City’s Climate Action Plan goals.

CONTACT PERSON
Councilmember Rashi Kesarwani, District 1 (510) 981-7110

Page 8 of 26 ends

190
9 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7110 ● Fax: (510) 981-7111 E-Mail: [email protected]
Attachments:

1. Proposed maps of Gilman and Lorin Parking Benefit Districts

2. goBerkeley Program Update - January 14, 2020 Council Worksession

3. Item #9: Establish a Parking Benefits District (PBD) in the Adeline Corridor and Fiscal Year 2022 Budget Referral, Supplemental Packet 1, March 23, 2021 City Council Agenda

Page 9 of 26 ends

191
Existing
metered
parking

Page 10 of 26 ends

192
Existing
metered
parking

Page 11 of 26 ends

193
Office of the City Manager
2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7000 ● TDD: (510) 981-6903 ● Fax: (510) 981-7099 E-Mail: [email protected] Website: http://www.CityofBerkeley.info/Manager

WORKSESSION
January 14, 2020
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Dee Williams-Ridley, City Manager
Submitted by: Phillip L. Harrington, Director, Public Works Subject: goBerkeley Program Update – January 2020

INTRODUCTION
goBerkeley is a baseline program comprising parking management strategies and projects that support economic vitality and reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the City of Berkeley. This report provides an update on current and future goBerkeley activities and initiatives, including the grant-funded Residential Shared Parking Pilot project.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
Operationally, goBerkeley’s primary tool is demand-responsive parking pricing. Staff periodically analyze parking activity to verify that there are at least 1-2 open spaces (or 65-85% occupied) on most block faces1 in an area. If this target is reached, then no price adjustments are needed. If blocks are too full, then prices need to be increased; if blocks are too empty, then prices need to be lowered. As a secondary tool, time limits are used to reinforce turnover in some areas or entice a shift of demand to areas with longer time limits.

As of January 2020, goBerkeley activities include initiating the grant-funded Residential Shared Parking Pilot project, expanding the existing demand-responsive parking program to other commercial districts, and evaluating evening and special event pricing to address high parking demand after 6 p.m.
goBerkeley Residential Shared Parking Pilot
The goBerkeley Residential Shared Parking Pilot (RSPP) is a grant-funded pilot project with goals of increasing parking availability, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and improving travel and mobility in the Elmwood and Southside/Telegraph neighborhoods.2 Inspired by feedback received during the initial goBerkeley pilot, the project is designed to support several groups of people currently sharing residential parking during the day, including residents, local employees, business owners, and visitors. While existing Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) restrictions may work well for residents, the two- 1 Block face - one side of one block, e.g., the north side of Center Street between Milvia Street and Shattuck Avenue.
2 February 23, 2016 Council Meeting: http://bit.ly/2me6EHN

Page 1 of 4 ends

194
goBerkeley Program Update – January 2020 WORKSESSION
January 14, 2020

Page 2 ends

hour time limits are challenging for people who need to stay longer, and some non- permitted users move their car every two hours to avoid a citation. This practice causes traffic congestion in neighborhoods, frustration and lost productivity for employees and their employers, and increased pollution from circling for parking, even in areas that have adequate parking availability.

The RSPP project is currently in its information gathering stage, with a consultant team supporting data collection, public outreach, and communication efforts.3 In fall 2019, staff held the first meeting of a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), which provides feedback on the operational feasibility of the project. The City has also created a brand identity for the project, goBerkeley SmartSpace, and a project website is now available at http://smartspace.goberkeley.info. In January 2020, staff will convene a Community Advisory Group (CAG), providing opportunities for local neighborhood groups and other representatives to help shape and evaluate the pilot project. Staff will also use a range of public outreach tools to ensure that all voices are heard so the pilot best responds to community needs.

Broader community outreach will occur this spring. With assistance from the CAG, staff will develop a set of pilot recommendations for Council approval this summer and implementation in fall 2020.

Managing goBerkeley in Existing Areas
goBerkeley currently manages public parking resources in the Downtown Berkeley, Southside/Telegraph, Northside (Euclid/Hearst), North Shattuck, and Elmwood commercial districts, including three City-owned parking garages and two off-street parking lots. The expansion to Northside in fall 2018 was the first since the pilot program was made permanent in 2015. On January 1, 2020, the North Shattuck parking meter district joined the goBerkeley program.

The next set of price and time limit adjustments, resulting from data collected in fall 2019, will go into effect February 1, 2020.4
Expanding Demand-Responsive Parking Management
Staff are currently working to expand demand-responsive pricing under the goBerkeley program to the Fourth Street and University/San Pablo commercial areas. Each expansion effort includes an analysis of parking occupancy rates to determine where price adjustments may be needed, coupled with in-depth outreach to the local business community to ensure that goBerkeley policies reflect the unique needs of each district.

Ultimately, staff are prepared to expand goBerkeley to all metered commercial districts in the City where merchants express interest in better parking demand management. 3 July 24, 2018 Council Meeting: http://bit.ly/2me7og3
October 2, 2018 Council Meeting: http://bit.ly/2lOz4bf
4 December 10, 2019 Council Meeting: http://bit.ly/37rnogQ

Page 2 of 4 ends

195
goBerkeley Program Update – January 2020 WORKSESSION
January 14, 2020

Page 3 ends

Evaluating Parking Management for Evenings and Special Events On-street parking meters in both goBerkeley and non-goBerkeley areas operate from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m., Monday through Saturday. Parking occupancy studies for recent goBerkeley program adjustments have consistently shown that demand in Downtown Berkeley, Southside/Telegraph, and Elmwood is very high after 6 p.m., particularly on Saturdays, as restaurants, event venues, and other attractions continue to generate demand well after meters are no longer enforced. With off-street parking facilities continuing to charge for parking until midnight or later, drivers are incentivized to circle to find free parking on-street. This is the opposite of the goBerkeley model, which strategically prices public parking garages and lots lower than on-street rates to reduce circling for a spot. Recognizing the need for parking management in the evening, other cities in the Bay Area charge for on-street parking after 6 p.m., including Santa Cruz, Santa Rosa, and Walnut Creek (until 8 p.m.); and certain areas of Sacramento and San Francisco (until 10 p.m.).

Likewise, during evening special events such as UC Berkeley concerts and sporting events, parking in localized areas near event venues becomes difficult to find and may also lead to circling for a spot, which increases greenhouse gas emissions. Several cities in the region have instituted special event pricing at on-street parking meters, including Sacramento, San Francisco, and San Jose.

In 2014, staff conducted a survey to better understand evening parking needs in goBerkeley areas, and concluded that in some cases, employees were parking in front of businesses after 6 p.m. This information was shared with merchants, which generated interest in an evening metering pilot in Downtown Berkeley and the Elmwood but a pilot was not pursued at that time. However, the demand for parking after 6 p.m. in certain areas remains. Staff will evaluate the need for and merchant interest in evening and special event pricing at on-street meters and expect to bring a proposal to Council in 2020.

Finally, expanding the goBerkeley Program is a Strategic Plan Priority Project, advancing our goals to:
 Provide state-of-the-art, well-maintained infrastructure, amenities, and facilities;  Foster a dynamic, sustainable, and locally-based economy;  Be a global leader in addressing climate change, advancing environmental justice, and protecting the environment; and
 Be a customer-focused organization that provides excellent, timely, easily- accessible service and information to the community.

BACKGROUND
In 2015, the City was awarded a $950,000 grant from the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) for the goBerkeley Residential Shared Parking Pilot (Resolution No. 67,382–N.S.). The pilot will test policies to increase parking availability for residents, employees, and visitors; reduce circling for parking; and expand access to non-

Page 3 of 4 ends

196
goBerkeley Program Update – January 2020 WORKSESSION
January 14, 2020

Page 4 ends

motorized means of transportation within Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) areas in the Southside and Elmwood neighborhoods.

The goBerkeley program comprises a suite of strategies and initiatives designed to improve economic vitality and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. goBerkeley features improved parking availability that in turn improves pedestrian and bicyclist safety by reducing the likelihood of incidents of distracted driving as drivers search for parking.

Clearer signage and longer on-street parking time limits also provide better customer service.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
According to the State of California Legislative Analyst’s Office, transportation was the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in California in 2016, with 69% of these emissions generated by passenger vehicles.5 Reducing greenhouse gas emissions produced by vehicular traffic is one of the City’s 2009 Climate Action Plan goals.

Parking management based on user demand should ultimately improve parking availability in commercial and residential areas, and lessen traffic congestion and vehicle emissions as drivers are anticipated to spend less time searching for available parking spaces.

POSSIBLE FUTURE ACTION
Staff will manage the goBerkeley Program, including the Residential Shared Parking Pilot project, as described above and will return to Council for input, updates, and/or approval of new programs and initiatives as needed.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF POSSIBLE FUTURE ACTION
Precise fiscal impacts depend on the nature and scope of future goBerkeley expansions and/or new programs. In most cases, these actions will require their own Council Reports to implement, and fiscal impacts will be presented to Council as part of these efforts. In general, however, fiscal impacts are difficult to forecast as demand- responsive parking pricing may result in increased or decreased parking rates in different areas, and parking behaviors resulting from these price adjustments may vary.

CONTACT PERSON
Farid Javandel, Transportation Manager, Public Works, 981-7061 Danette Perry, Parking Services Manager, Public Works, 981-7057 Gordon Hansen, Senior Planner, Public Works, 981-7064
5 Legislative Analyst’s Office Report, December 21, 2018 Assessing California’s Climate Policies— Transportation: http://bit.ly/2kKfcFN

Page 4 of 4 ends

197

Rashi Kesarwani
Councilmember District 1
2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 Tel: 510.981.XXXX TDD: 510.981.6903 Fax: 510.981.XXXX E-Mail: [email protected]

REVISED

AGENDA MATERIAL
for Supplemental Packet 1

Meeting Date: March 23, 2021

Item Number: 9

Item Description: Establish a Parking Benefits District (PBD) in the Adeline Corridor and Fiscal Year 2022 Budget Referral

Submitted by: Councilmember Rashi Kesarwani

Page 16 of 26 ends

198

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 1 CONSENT CALENDAR
March 23, 2021

Further, refer to the Fiscal Year 2022 budget process $50,000 $75,000 for city staff to hire and manage a seek consultanting services to assist in the formation and establishment of the PBDs.

1 https://www.cityofberkeley.info/council3/adeline/
Formatted: Indent: Left: 1"

Page 17 of 26 ends

199

The request for a PBD is an innovative approach to a real problem in South and West Berkeley. Constituents in both areas have faced many generations of neglect. in this

Page 18 of 26 ends

200

Page 19 of 26 ends

201

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
Formatted: List Paragraph, Bulleted + Level: 1 +
Aligned at: 0.25" + Indent at: 0.5"
Formatted: Font: 12 pt
Formatted: Underline

Page 20 of 26 ends

202

CONTACT PERSON
Councilmember Ben Bartlett: 510-981-7130 James Chang [email protected]

Councilmember Rashi Kesarwani 510-981-7111
Beth Gerstein [email protected]
Formatted: French (France)
Field Code Changed
Formatted: French (France)
Formatted: French (France)

Page 21 of 26 ends

203

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 1 CONSENT CALENDAR
March 23, 2021

Further, refer to the Fiscal Year 2022 budget process $75,000 for city staff to seek consulting services to assist in the formation and establishment of the PBDs.

1 https://www.cityofberkeley.info/council3/adeline/

Page 22 of 26 ends

204

To improve our commercial districts and expand investments in our neighborhoods, the Council should adopt this item creating a South and West Berkeley PBD with the specific requirement that parking revenues generated in the district be used for neighborhood improvements. Funds from a PBD could be used in critically important ways, such as hiring full-time staff to manage the following activities: landscaping and streetscape improvements, street cleaning, transit and pedestrian infrastructure, street furniture, marketing of local businesses, management activities, and visitor and security ambassadors.

2 See Donald Shoup’s Fall 2016 Access Magazine’s article: Parking Benefit Districts:
https://www.accessmagazine.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/7/2016/11/access49-web-almanac.pdf

Page 23 of 26 ends

205

REVIEW OF EXISTING PLANS, PROGRAMS, POLICIES, AND LAWS
A PBD is a well established concept used in municipalities around the United States. In California, Pasadena3 and Newport Beach4 have used their PBDs to support revitalization needs. Parking management is an issue often overlooked in a neighborhood’s development plan. While it may seem like a secondary concern in the quest for economic development, parking management directly impacts accessibility to businesses, customer willingness to travel to certain areas, and the quality of life experienced by residents. Studies have shown that a smart, proactive parking policy can revitalize a neighborhood. South and West Berkeley i are prime neighborhoods for this type of engagement.

3 See Donald Shoup’s Fall 2003 Access Magazine article focusing on Old Pasadena:
https://www.accessmagazine.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/7/2016/02/Access-23-02-Small-Change-into- Big-Change.pdf

4 See this promotional flyer from Newport Beach:
https://www.newportbeachca.gov/Home/ShowDocument?id=11814

Page 24 of 26 ends

206

Likely additional costs to establish new meters or other facilities would be identified by the consultant and could potentially be covered by the resulting revenues from the PBD.

Page 25 of 26 ends

207

CONTACT PERSON
Councilmember Ben Bartlett: 510-981-7130 James Chang [email protected]

Councilmember Rashi Kesarwani 510-981-7111
Beth Gerstein [email protected]

Page 26 of 26 ends

208
Kate Harrison
Councilmember District 4

CONSENT CALENDAR
January 18, 2022
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Councilmember Harrison (Author)
Subject: Budget Referral: Allocate Projected Revenues from Voter-approved Transportation Network Company User Tax to Support Priority Mobility Infrastructure, Including Tier 1 Protected Bicycle Lanes and Crossings, Pedestrian Street Crossings, and Quick-build Public Transit Projects

RECOMMENDATION

1. Refer to the June FY 23-24 budget process approximately $1.4 to $1.8 million in projected Transportation Network Company (TNC) User Tax General Fund revenue for FY 23 and FY 24, and the actual FY 2022 TNC Tax revenues (projected at $576,786), toward the construction and maintenance of:
i. Tier 1 protected bicycle lanes and crossings identified in the 2017 Bicycle Plan, including but not limited to quick-build projects; and ii. Priority pedestrian street crossings identified in the 2020 pedestrian plan, including but not limited to quick-build projects; and iii. Priority quick-build public transit projects under the Street Repair Program.

2. Refer to the Public Works and Transportation Commissions (or Successor Commission) in consultation with City staff to provide recommendations to the Facilities, Infrastructure, Transportation, Environment, and Sustainability and Budget and Finance Policy Committees by the end of March 2022 as to the specific allocation among the priorities in Recommendation 1 to equitably maximize transportation emissions reductions and to enhance mobility and public safety.

CURRENT SITUATION AND RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
A Metropolitan Transportation Commission report warns that Berkeley’s overall paving condition is “At Risk,” meaning on the cusp of falling into “Failing” category.1 The current five-year paving plan is the result of historic deferred maintenance and an underfunded, 1 “The Pothole Report: Bay Area Roads At Risk,” Bay Area Metropolitan Transportation Commission, September 2018,
https://mtc.ca.gov/sites/default/files/Pothole%20Report%20III_September%202018.pdf

Page 1 of 10 ends

209
Budget Referral: Allocate Projected Revenues from Voter-approved Transportation Network Company User Tax to Support Priority Mobility Infrastructure, Including Tier 1 Protected Bicycle Lanes and Crossings, Pedestrian Street Crossings, and Quick-build Public Transit Projects

CONSENT CALENDAR
January 18, 2022
2 imperfect and complex balance between arterial, collector and residential streets distributed across Council districts. Residential streets across the entire city are largely categorized as failing and bicycle, pedestrian, and Vision Zero projects are severely underfunded.

Meanwhile, neighboring cities in the Bay Area, such as Richmond, El Cerrito, San Francisco have “Excellent/Very Good” to “Fair/Good” street conditions.

To date, mobility infrastructure upgrades have generally competed for the same funding sources as automobiles. The Public Works Department has advised that ongoing funding under the rolling 5-Year Street Plan will not be enough to stabilize Berkeley’s streets let alone provide for the desperately needed bicycle, pedestrian and transit upgrades contemplated under the city’s various strategic plans. In fact, if street investment is not increased, Public Works warns that the City could face $1 billion in future repair costs as the cost of deferred paving maintenance increases exponentially each year.

Since January 2020, the Facilities, Infrastructure, Transportation, Environment, & Sustainability Committee has been working with the Public Works Department and Public Works Commission to explore funding opportunities to enhance the Paving Condition Index (PCI) of Berkeley’s streets. In addition, it has been reviewing the City’s Paving Policy, which was last updated in 2009, and which is expected to be updated with a more equitable framework in early 2022.

However, to stabilize and improve street conditions, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, enhance public safety, and improve mobility, the City will likely need to pursue a combination of investment strategies ranging from increasing General Fund allocations,

Page 2 of 10 ends

210
Budget Referral: Allocate Projected Revenues from Voter-approved Transportation Network Company User Tax to Support Priority Mobility Infrastructure, Including Tier 1 Protected Bicycle Lanes and Crossings, Pedestrian Street Crossings, and Quick-build Public Transit Projects

CONSENT CALENDAR
January 18, 2022
3 initiating transfers from waste and sewer accounts, and initiating fees in response to heavy vehicle use, and potentially issuing bonds. Before going to voters for new bonds, it is critical that the Council leverage the proceeds of existing tax revenues with a nexus to mobility such as the TNC Tax.

BACKGROUND
A recent University of Oxford study concluded that even partial substitution of vehicle travel with walking, cycling or e-biking are critical strategies for addressing climate change and lower mobility-related lifecycle CO2, and that cyclers have 84% lower CO2 emissions impact as compared to non-cyclers.2 According to the study, urban residents substituting one vehicle trip per day with cycling reduced their carbon footprint by 0.5 tons per year, and “[i]f just 10% of the population were to change travel behaviour, the emissions savings would be around 4% of lifecycle CO2 emissions from all car travel.” Berkeley voters overwhelmingly passed the TNC User Tax (Measure GG) in 2020 with a 50-cent fee per rideshare trip specifically in order to generate “at least $900,000 annually to support general municipal services like paving streets and improving pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure.”3 Before the global pandemic, City staff estimated the tax would bring in approximately $910,000 per year.4 2 “Study Shows Walking, Cycling, & e-Biking Make Significant Impact On Carbon Emissions,” CleanTechnica, February 3, 2021,
https://cleantechnica.com/2021/02/03/study-shows-walking-cycling-e-biking-make-significant-impact-on- carbon-emissions/.
3 “Argument in Favor of Measure GG,” Berkeley City Clerk, August 2020, https://www.cityofberkeley.info/uploadedFiles/Clerk/Elections/GG%20- %20Primary%20in%20Favor%20-%20FINAL.pdf
4 “Placing a Tax Measure on the November 3, 2020 Ballot to Adopt a Tax on Transportation Network Companies,” Berkeley City Clerk, July 21, 2020,
https://www.cityofberkeley.info/Clerk/City_Council/2020/07_Jul/Documents/2020-07- 21_(4pm)_Special_Item_04_Placing_a_Tax_Measure_on_the_November_pdf.aspx

Page 3 of 10 ends

211
Budget Referral: Allocate Projected Revenues from Voter-approved Transportation Network Company User Tax to Support Priority Mobility Infrastructure, Including Tier 1 Protected Bicycle Lanes and Crossings, Pedestrian Street Crossings, and Quick-build Public Transit Projects

CONSENT CALENDAR
January 18, 2022
4 This item proposes to allocate FY 2022 and FY 2023-2024 TNC tax revenues directly to projects aimed at building out mobility infrastructure that offsets vehicle miles travelled and paving impacts, enhances public safety, and lowers greenhouse gas emissions, to include the following priority projects:
 Tier 1 priority protected bicycle lanes and crossings, including but not limited to quick-build projects, which will enhance bicycle and micro mobility safety; and  Priority pedestrian street crossings identified in the 2020 pedestrian plan, including but not limited to quick-build projects; and
 Priority quick-build public transit projects under the Street Repair Program.

This item also proposes to refer to the Public Works and Transportation Commissions (or Successor Commission) in consultation with City staff to provide recommendations to the FITES and Budget and Finance Policy Committees by the end of March 2022 as to the specific allocation among the three priorities to equitably maximize transportation emissions reductions and to enhance mobility and public safety.

The TNC tax first went into effect during the second half of FY 2021 (January 1, 2021), during which the City received approximately $178,138. Unfortunately, Council did not specifically allocate these revenues for mobility purposes and they were folded into the General Fund.

Finance Department staff report that the City collected approximately $144,196.50 for the first quarter of FY 2022. Projected forward, the latest collection indicates growth as compared to FY 21—likely the result of the deployment of vaccines, relative economic recovery, and an easing in pandemic restrictions. If the TNC performs at the same rate for FY 2022 quarters 2-4, the City could see approximately $576,786 in total TNC Tax revenue for FY 2022. Therefore, the item refers the actual FY 2022 revenues to the FY 2022 May AAO #2 budget process to help fund the three priority projects.

In addition, this item assumes that TNC Tax revenues will continue to recover throughout FY 23 to 24, conservatively bringing revenues closer to City staff’s yearly revenue estimate provided before the pandemic (approximately $910,000 per year) and refers those amounts to the FY 23 and 24 biannual budget process.

Page 4 of 10 ends

212
Budget Referral: Allocate Projected Revenues from Voter-approved Transportation Network Company User Tax to Support Priority Mobility Infrastructure, Including Tier 1 Protected Bicycle Lanes and Crossings, Pedestrian Street Crossings, and Quick-build Public Transit Projects

CONSENT CALENDAR
January 18, 2022
5 Tier 1 Priority Projects Highlighted in Red
Surveys conducted as part of the 2017 Berkeley Bicycle Plan provided key data about the eagerness of Berkeley residents to bicycle or use other forms of mobility, assuming the City provides safe infrastructure and routes. An astonishing 70% of Berkeley residents expressed interest in bicycling but were concerned about safety. The 2017 Plan concluded: “90 percent of Berkeley residents already bicycle or would consider bicycling if the right bikeway facility or roadway conditions were available. That is a larger percentage than any other city that has conducted a similar study, including Portland, as shown at right.”5
5 “City of Berkeley Bicycle Plan,” May 2, 2017,
https://www.cityofberkeley.info/uploadedFiles/Public_Works/Level_3_-_Transportation/Berkeley- Bicycle-Plan-2017-Executive%20Summary.pdf

Page 5 of 10 ends

213
Budget Referral: Allocate Projected Revenues from Voter-approved Transportation Network Company User Tax to Support Priority Mobility Infrastructure, Including Tier 1 Protected Bicycle Lanes and Crossings, Pedestrian Street Crossings, and Quick-build Public Transit Projects

CONSENT CALENDAR
January 18, 2022
6 Berkeley has struggled to address its transportation GHG emissions, but the data suggest that biking and mobility options could dramatically offset vehicle miles travelled.

It is in the public interest to invest General Fund revenue, namely TNC Tax revenue, in street enhancements that can encourage mode shifts from vehicles to carbon-free transportation.

For example, if Council were to allocate the TNC Tax accordingly over next ten years, the period scientists consider critical to meet global emissions reductions targets, the City could fund 50% of the total “Class 4: Cycletrack” costs provided in the Bike Plan, and thus maximize the number of Berkeleyans who deem the streets safe enough to ride. Certainly, the expenditures proposed herein will not be enough to adequately fund Berkeley’s entire bike network, but they represent an important down payment.

Page 6 of 10 ends

214
Budget Referral: Allocate Projected Revenues from Voter-approved Transportation Network Company User Tax to Support Priority Mobility Infrastructure, Including Tier 1 Protected Bicycle Lanes and Crossings, Pedestrian Street Crossings, and Quick-build Public Transit Projects

CONSENT CALENDAR
January 18, 2022
7 In addition, expanding reliability and access to public transit is also key to lowering GHG emissions and improving quality of life. Revenue generated from the TNC user tax should benefit bus transit performance and the transit rider experience since transit has been particularly impacted by the influx in TNC volume and use. To demonstrate the immediate benefits of these funds to transit, projects should be implemented with AC Transit's Quick-build framework structure as pilot and demonstration projects that could be implemented in under 18 months.

The City, AC Transit and local Business Improvement Districts are developing a list of City infrastructure improvements to support transit use with a focus on prioritizing transit, including dedicated bus lanes, bulb outs and paving treatments, and improving transit rider access and experience. For example, the City could add transit shelter canopies at the stops near senior centers and enhancing benefits for nearby businesses through building parklets and other customer amenities that serve both business patrons and bus riders, with the goal of encouraging patrons to visit businesses via public transit. In addition, funding could be dedicated to a quick-build transit lane along Durant Street, as this project has been evaluated by AC Transit and City of Berkeley Transportation staff. Since preliminary coordination has been done, using these funds to augment this project would realize an immediate impact.

Any allocation will be overseen by a joint working group of AC Transit and City of Berkeley staff to quickly realize the benefits to transit. Out-years projects will be determined by the City of Berkeley Transportation Commission, or another process deemed appropriate by the City Council.

Page 7 of 10 ends

215
Budget Referral: Allocate Projected Revenues from Voter-approved Transportation Network Company User Tax to Support Priority Mobility Infrastructure, Including Tier 1 Protected Bicycle Lanes and Crossings, Pedestrian Street Crossings, and Quick-build Public Transit Projects

CONSENT CALENDAR
January 18, 2022
8 The item also includes consideration of priority pedestrian projects identified by the 2020 Pedestrian Plan consistent with Vision Zero, climate, and equity goals.6 6 2020 City of Berkeley Pedestrian Plan, Transportation Division, https://www.cityofberkeley.info/uploadedFiles/Public_Works/Level_3_- _Transportation/2020%20Pedestrian%20Plan%20FULL%20adopted.pdf

Page 8 of 10 ends

216
Budget Referral: Allocate Projected Revenues from Voter-approved Transportation Network Company User Tax to Support Priority Mobility Infrastructure, Including Tier 1 Protected Bicycle Lanes and Crossings, Pedestrian Street Crossings, and Quick-build Public Transit Projects

CONSENT CALENDAR
January 18, 2022
9 Prioritization criteria for the 2020 Plan included citywide “[project] improvements and countermeasures identified for the top ten high-injury street segments.” The prioritization also includes important equity criteria, including consideration of underserved neighborhoods and redlining maps. Most priority streets are located in West, South, and Central Berkeley, while simultaneously serving citywide purposes.

Given that voters in 2020 overwhelmingly supported the tax on the condition that it would improve mobility infrastructure in Berkeley and help offset externalities caused by TNC companies, it is in the public interest to allocate the TNC Tax revenues in FY22-24 for priority mobility projects. In addition, it is in the public interest to ask the City’s Public Works and Transportation Commission to consult the Council Committees as to the specific allocation among the priorities listed in Recommendation 1. a. in order to equitably maximize transportation emissions reductions and to enhance mobility and public safety.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
The item would have a net zero impact on the General Fund after considering the estimated $576,786 revenue credited from the TNC Tax in FY 2022 and $1.4 to 1.8 million in FY 23-24.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
Reducing carbon emissions at an emergency and equitable pace is a necessary step to meet the goals of the Climate Action Plan and Climate Emergency Declaration.

JUST TRANISITION
Substituting automobile vehicle miles travelled with low-carbon mobility can help reduce

Page 9 of 10 ends

217
Budget Referral: Allocate Projected Revenues from Voter-approved Transportation Network Company User Tax to Support Priority Mobility Infrastructure, Including Tier 1 Protected Bicycle Lanes and Crossings, Pedestrian Street Crossings, and Quick-build Public Transit Projects

CONSENT CALENDAR
January 18, 2022
10 greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution, which disproportionately impact frontline communities.

The item considers priority pedestrian projects identified by the 2020 Pedestrian plan using various equity criteria, including historically redlined, underserved and senior neighborhoods. The item also refers to the Public Works and Transportation Commissions (or Successor Commission) to equitably consider how to best allocate TNC revenues across each of the priority categories.

Consistent with City values and equity initiatives, project investments should benefit unionized and minority-owned contractors.

CONTACT PERSON
Councilmember Kate Harrison, Council District 4, 510-981-7140

Page 10 of 10 ends

218
Susan Wengraf
Councilmember District 6

CONSENT CALENDAR
January 18, 2022
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Councilmember Wengraf (Author), Councilmember Harrison (Co-Sponsor), and Councilmember Hahn (Co-Sponsor)
Subject: Resolution Reaffirming the City of Berkeley’s Commitment to Roe v. Wade

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution reaffirming the City of Berkeley’s commitment to Roe v. Wade, honoring the 49th anniversary of its passage and reiterating Berkeley's resolve to be a safe harbor for women asserting their constitutional right to access reproductive health and safe abortion services. It is essential that the City of Berkeley be a model for other cities and re-state their support for women to be able to exercise their constitutional rights and continue to have access to critical health care services, including abortion.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
None

BACKGROUND
Forty-nine years ago, on January 22, 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court announced its decision in Roe v. Wade, a challenge to a Texas statute that made it a crime to perform an abortion unless a woman’s life was at stake. The case had been filed by “Jane Roe,” an unmarried woman who wanted to safely and legally end her pregnancy. Siding with Roe, the court struck down the Texas law. In a ruling, the court recognized that the constitutional right to privacy “is broad enough to encompass a woman’s decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy” (Roe v. Wade, 1973).

Roe has come to be known as the case that legalized abortion nationwide. At the time the decision was handed down, nearly all states outlawed abortion. Roe rendered these laws unconstitutional, making abortion services safer and more accessible to all women throughout the country.

However, in recent years, reproductive health, including the right to choose, has been under relentless attack. The Trump administration shut down reproductive health services for women in every way possible — in presidential budgets, health care reform bills, tax reform legislation, and federal resolutions and regulations, as well as by nominating anti-abortion judges to the Supreme Court. Access to care at health centers, including many serving people who have nowhere else to go for basic health services, has been restricted.
2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7160 ● TDD: (510) 981-6903 ● Fax: (510) 981-7166
E-Mail: [email protected]

Page 1 of 3 ends

219
Resolution Reaffirming the City of Berkeley’s Commitment to Roe v. Wade CONSENT CALENDAR January 18, 2022

Page 2 ends

This year, the U.S. Supreme Court is reviewing a direct challenge to the long-standing legal protections of abortion services under Roe v. Wade. Should the Court overturn Roe or allow a pre-viability ban to remain in place, people in over half of the states in the country – over 36 million women and other people who may become pregnant - will lose access to abortion care. It is already happening. People in Texas have lost the protections under Roe when Senate Bill (S.B) 8 went into effect on September 1, 2021.

If Roe v. Wade is overturned or gutted, 26 states are likely to ban abortion, increasing the number of out-of-state patients who would find their nearest clinic in California from 46,000 to 1.4 million – a nearly 3,000 percent increase.

In 2019, Governor Newsom signed a Proclamation on Reproductive Freedom reaffirming California’s commitment to protecting women’s reproductive choices. The Governor has advanced investments to expand access to reproductive and sexual health care and signed multiple bills protecting reproductive freedom, including SB 374 earlier this year and SB 24 and AB 1264 in 2019.

January 22, 2022 will mark the 49th anniversary of the decision that effectively legalized abortion in the United States. The City of Berkeley has consistently passed resolutions in continued support of access to all reproductive healthcare services and all reproductive healthcare providers. The City also adopted a Resolution against proposed funding cuts to the Title X Family Planning program, the only federal program dedicated solely to providing low income women and men with comprehensive family planning and related preventive health services. On October 12, 2021, the Berkeley City Council adopted a Resolution "Denouncing Texas Anti-Abortion Law (SB8) and Re-affirming the City's Commitment to Reproductive Health."

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
N/A

CONTACT PERSON
Councilmember Susan Wengraf, Council District 6, 510-981-7160 Attachments:
1: Resolution

Page 2 of 3 ends

220
RESOLUTION NO. ##,###-N.S.

REAFFIRMING THE CITY OF BERKELEY’S COMMITMENT TO ROE V. WADE AND ACCESS to SAFE REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH SERVICES
WHEREAS, Prior to 1973, the year when Roe v. Wade was enacted, women faced significant obstacles to safe reproductive health services, resulting in widespread loss of life and serious illness; and
WHEREAS, The right to safe, legal and accessible abortion continues to be undermined by legal challenges, threatening the health and safety of women’s lives, including the most marginalized women: low-income women, women of color, refugee and immigrant women; and
WHEREAS, The City of Berkeley is in full support of the State of California's resolve to uphold women's equality and liberty by protecting their reproductive freedom, educating Californians about their rights to reproductive freedom, welcoming women to California to fully exercise their reproductive rights and acting as a model for other states that want to ensure full reproductive freedom for women.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF BERKELEY that we RECOGNIZE AND CELEBRATE THE 49 th ANNIVERSARY OF ROE V. WADE and praise the perilous and self-sacrificing work of the healthcare providers who face threats and violence for providing safe and legal health services to women throughout the Bay Area.

NOW FURTHER BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Berkeley re-affirms its commitment to the human rights afforded to all women under Roe v. Wade, regardless of socioeconomic, ethnic, racial, cultural or religious background, age or sexual orientation and to opposing any laws or regulations that pose a threat to abortion, reproductive rights, sexual freedom and/or self-determination.

Page 3 of 3 ends

221
222
Susan Wengraf
Councilmember District 6
2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7160 ● TDD: (510) 981-6903 ● Fax: (510) 981-7166 E-Mail: [email protected]

CONSENT CALENDAR
Jan 18, 2022
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Councilmember Wengraf (Author) and Councilmember Hahn (Co-Sponsor) Subject: OPPOSE Net Energy Metering 3.0 Proposed Decision of the CPUC and SUPPORT Net Energy Metering Policy that Continues the Growth of Local and Rooftop Solar

RECOMMENDATION
Send the attached Resolution in opposition to the Net Energy Metering 3.0 Proposed Decision of the CPUC and supporting a Net Energy Metering Policy that continues to support the growth of local and rooftop solar to: Governor Gavin Newsom, State Senator Nancy Skinner, Assemblymember Buffy Wicks, and members of the California Public Utilities Commission Board (CPUC). The Net Energy Metering (NEM) 3.0 decision issued by the CPUC on December 13, 2021 threatens access to net energy metering and rooftop-scale solar and storage by homeowners and tenants alike, interfering with Berkeley's and California’s climate action and equity goals.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Limited staff time associated with sending a letter to designated recipients.

BACKGROUND
Customers who install small solar, wind, biogas, and fuel cell generation facilities to serve all or a portion of onsite electricity needs are eligible for the state's Net Energy Metering (NEM) program. NEM allows customers who generate their own energy to receive a financial credit on their electric bills for any surplus energy fed back to their utility.

The current NEM program was adopted by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) in Decision (D.)16-01-044 on January 28, 2016. The program provides customer-generators rate credits for energy exported to the grid and requires them to pay charges that align NEM customer costs more closely with non-NEM customer costs. NEM is designed to support the installation of renewable energy generation.

In early 2021, the CPUC launched a formal proceeding to update the current NEM structure. The new rulemaking is referred to as NEM 3.0 because this is the third iteration of the NEM program. Over 17 proposals were submitted to the CPUC for consideration, including a joint proposal from the state’s big three investor-owned utilities (IOUs); Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E), Southern California Edison (SCE), and

Page 1 of 6 ends

223
Oppose Net Energy Metering 3.0 CONSENT CALENDAR
Jan 18, 2022

Page 2 ends

San Diego Gas & Electric (SDG&E). There is concern that the joint proposal will hinder the state’s highly successful rooftop solar market which is a key strategy in the state reaching its clean energy and environmental goals.

On December 13, 2021, the CPUC issued a Proposed Decision (PD) that is very similar to the "big three" proposal.1
Notable elements of it include the following:

Credit Value of Excess Energy Saved and Exported to the Grid is Slashed by Nearly 80%
- There is no transition glidepath, so the full reduction would take effect as soon as NEM 3.0 is implemented.
- The PD suggests values for each hour of the day rather than consistent values within time-of-use periods.
- The numbers vary for each of California’s 16 climate zones.

Inadequate Market Transition Credits are Proposed
- Under the PD, customers would be locked into a credit level from year of installation for ten years. This credit level would decline to zero over four years. - There would be no credit incentive for SDG&E customers. - There would be no incentive for commercial customers, including small businesses, schools, places of worship, and non-profits - There would be no incentive for new home construction, thus further exacerbating the unaffordability of the statewide real estate market and interfering with California’s Title 24 goals, particularly its solar mandate for residential customers.
- A new fund of $150 million per year would be created to fund solar for the lowest- income customers. The PD proposes no further specifics, with details promised to be worked out later.

Eligibility Term Reduced for Existing (NEM 1.0 and NEM 2.0) Solar Customers - The PD proposes that the current 20-year eligibility period for NEM 1.0 and NEM

2.0 would be reduced to 15 years for residential non-California Alternate Rates for Energy (CARE)2 customers.
1 https://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PublishedDocs/Efile/G000/M430/K903/430903088.PDF 2 https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/care/

Page 2 of 6 ends

224
Oppose Net Energy Metering 3.0 CONSENT CALENDAR
Jan 18, 2022

Page 3 ends

- The PD proposes to also slash the term to 15 years for all customers submitting applications under NEM 2.0 between the NEM 3.0 decision date and implementation of NEM-3. Under the PD the CPUC makes no exceptions for commercial and low-income customers.

Dramatic Increases in Payback Periods for Rooftop Solar Systems - Under the current NEM 2.0 rate design, the payback period for a typical residential rooftop solar system is estimated to range between 5 and 9 years. - Under the PD, the residential simple payback period for market-rate customers would increase to 16.0 years for PG&E customers, 18.6 years for SCE customers, and 9.3 years for SDG&E customers. The residential simple payback period for lower-income customers would increase to 11.6 years for PG&E customers, 11.2 years for SCE customers, and 12.2 years for SDG&E customers.

The PD violates the following key goals and themes that are consistent with what the City of Berkeley has supported in the past.

These include:
- Protecting and expanding rooftop solar via a strong succeeding NEM tariff and expanding clean energy access by making it easier, not harder, for people to adopt rooftop solar and energy storage in order to meet California's ambitious clean energy targets and deploy solar in all communities and households, particularly those struggling to pay for electricity; and - Expressing its support for the items as stated above, including urging the CPUC to:
(i) strengthen NEM to expand access to all households, particularly of low-and-moderate income customers;
(ii) expand access to other clean energy technologies that pair with solar, such as batteries;
(iii) ensure that the solar installations continue to grow in order to meet State and City climate goals; and
(iv) exclude provisions set forth in both the PD and the IOUs’ Proposal such as high monthly fixed fees and reducing or eliminating credits for sharing electricity with the power grid.

A consensus is emerging that a fair and effective rooftop solar policy must share its benefits with low-income and disadvantaged communities that have previously been left out. The PD further exacerbates these inequities.

Page 3 of 6 ends

225
Oppose Net Energy Metering 3.0 CONSENT CALENDAR
Jan 18, 2022

Page 4 ends

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
Passage of the IOUs’ proposal is likely to squelch the deployment of rooftop-scale solar and storage in the City of Berkeley, which would interfere with a key strategy in the realization of Berkeley’s Climate Action goals.

CONTACT PERSON
Councilmember Wengraf Council District 6 510-981-7160
Attachments:
1: Resolution

Page 4 of 6 ends

226
RESOLUTION NO. ##,###-N.S.

OPPOSITION TO NET ENERGY METERING 3.0 PROPOSED DECISION

SUPPORT NET ENERGY METERING POLICY THAT CONTINES THE GROWTH OF

LOCAL AND ROOFTOP SOLAR
WHEREAS, Net Energy Metering (NEM) is designed to support the installation of customer-sited renewable energy generation; and
WHEREAS, NEM allows customers to receive bill credits for power generated by their solar system and shared with the power grid and ultimately save money on their utility bills; and
WHEREAS, NEM is what has allowed solar to become increasingly accessible to low- and moderate-income households; and
WHEREAS, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) has launched a formal proceeding to update the current NEM structure to be introduced in 2022 as NEM 3.0 and a number of parties have submitted their proposal for what they believe NEM 3.0 should look like; and
WHEREAS, the California Investor Owned Utilities (IOUs), Pacific Gas and Electric, San Diego Gas & Electric and Southern California Edison, have submitted a joint proposal (the “IOU Proposal”) that calls for drastic changes to NEM that would make customer- sited renewable energy more expensive, increase the amount of time it takes for customers to pay off their systems, and ground to a halt the installation of distributed solar in California; and
WHEREAS, The IOU Proposal would make it impossible for customer-sited renewables to continue to grow sustainably as mandated by law as a result of high monthly fixed fees for all solar installations, and slashing credits customers receive for sharing their excess electricity with the power grid; and
WHEREAS, proposals submitted to CPUC by Protect Our Communities Foundation, California Solar & Storage Association, Vote Solar, GRID Alternatives, Solar Energy Industries Association, and others not only would encourage new solar adoption but also include additional subsidies for low income customers; and WHEREAS, California cannot meet its clean energy targets in time with utility scale solar alone and needs to triple the amount of rooftop solar, as reported by the California Energy Commission 2021 SB 100 Joint Agency Report Summary; and

Page 5 of 6 ends

227
WHEREAS, protecting rooftop solar and expanding access to rooftop solar in communities of concern will help California as well as our own city to move toward 100 percent clean energy, lessen the impacts of the climate crisis, and reduce climate injustices from dirty energy; and
WHEREAS, on December 13, 2021, the CPUC issued a Proposed Decision (PD) that is very similar to the IOUs’ proposal. Notable elements of it include the following:
- Credit Value of Excess Energy Saved and Exported to the Grid is Slashed by Nearly 80%
- Inadequate Market Transition Credits
- Eligibility Term Reduced for Existing (NEM 1.0 and NEM 2.0) Solar Customers - Dramatic Increases in Payback Periods for Rooftop Solar Systems; and WHEREAS, the climate crisis requires that the transition to clean energy be more accessible.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that it supports protecting and expanding rooftop solar via a strong NEM tariff and expanding clean energy access by making it easier, not harder, for people to adopt rooftop solar and energy storage in order to meet California's ambitious clean energy targets and deploy solar in all communities and households, particularly those struggling to pay for electricity.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council of the City of Berkeley urges the CPUC to reject the Net Energy Metering 3.0 Proposed Decision issued on December 13, 2021 and instead to:
(i) strengthen NEM to expand access to all households, particularly of low-and-moderate income;
(ii) expand access to other clean energy technologies that pair with solar, such as batteries;
(iii) ensure that the solar installations continue to grow in order to meet State and City climate goals; and
(iv) exclude provisions set forth in the IOU Proposal such has high monthly fixed fees, and reducing or eliminating credits for sharing electricity with the power grid.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that copies of this Resolution shall be sent to Governor Gavin Newsom, State Senator Skinner, Assemblymember Wicks and members of the California Public Utilities Commission Board.

Page 6 of 6 ends

228
Office of the City Manager
2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7000 ● TDD: (510) 981-6903 ● Fax: (510) 981-7099 E-Mail: [email protected] Website: http://www.CityofBerkeley.info/Manager

PUBLIC HEARING
January 18, 2022
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Dee Williams-Ridley, City Manager
Submitted by: Scott Ferris, Director, Parks, Recreation and Waterfront Subject: Selected Recreation and Camps Program Fee Increases

RECOMMENDATION
Conduct a public hearing and upon conclusion:

1. Adopt a resolution approving new fees and increasing current fees for select Recreation Division programs and rescinding Resolution No. 69,892-N.S. and all amendatory resolutions.

2. Adopt a resolution approving revised Policies and Procedures for Parks & Recreation Programs and Facilities, and rescinding Resolution No. 67,581-N.S. and all amendatory resolutions.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
The Camps Fund is a self-supporting fund, with revenues expected to cover expenditures. The proposed new fees and fee increases will provide additional revenue to cover the cost of delivering these programs.

New Tuolumne Camp fees would raise an estimated $1,446,900 in annual revenue for the Camps Fund, assuming 75% occupancy in summer 2022, with anticipated expenses of $1,419,000.

Increases to the non-resident fees at Echo Lake Camp are projected to generate an additional $18,750 in annual revenue for the Camps Fund. These fees help the City cover the costs to operate the camps and camp programs, (see Table 1).

Existing 100% scholarships are aligned with “extremely low income” HUD levels; and 50% scholarships are aligned with “very low income” HUD levels.

The proposed changes to the scholarship program are to expand eligibility for 100% scholarships from “extremely low income” to “very low income” HUD levels for Berkeley residents, adding between $19,150 and $36,150 in gross family income. Additionally, we are expanding the threshold for 50% scholarships from “very low income” to “very low income” plus the difference between the “very low income” and “extremely low income” thresholds, (see Table 2).

This recommendation would significantly increase scholarship program eligibility to Berkeley residents. The fiscal impact of this recommendation would be a decrease in General Fund and Camps Fund revenue.

Page 1 of 46 ends

229
Selected Recreation and Camps Program Fee Increases PUBLIC HEARING January 18, 2022
2 General Fund Scholarships
In 2021, the City provided $129,589 in scholarships for Recreation Division General Fund programs. City staff anticipate that this recommendation would result in an increase of 134 annual scholarships awarded to attend Recreation Division General Fund programs, resulting in a decrease in revenue of $38,877 to General Fund programs for a projected annual scholarship value of $168,466 for General Fund programs, (see Table 3).

Camps Fund Programs
This recommendation would make scholarships available for most Camps Fund programs, including new Tuolumne Camp programs. In 2021, the Camps Fund provided $52,870 in scholarships to Berkeley Residents for Echo Lake Camp and Berkeley Day Camp programs.

With the addition of new Tuolumne Family Camp scholarships this summer, this recommendation would result in an additional decrease in revenue of $97,400 to Camps Fund programs for a projected annual scholarship value of $247,130 for Camps Fund programs, (see Table 3).

Echo Lake and Tuolumne Camp traditionally offer several heavily subsidized or free programs (i.e. Teen and Pre-K Tots Weekends; and Echo Lake Youth Camp, Family Camp and CIT program scholarships) each season to historically underserved participants. This year, we are expanding these programs to include BUSD Bears and New Camper Weekends focused on historically underserved populations and we are adding 6 scholarships per week for Tuolumne Camp family camp programs.

The expense associated with offering these new programs in FY22-23 is projected at $85,360, and is included in the value of Camps Fund scholarships shown in Table 3. The $202,868 projected deficit in the Camps Fund is inclusive of $247,130 in 2022 planned scholarships. This deficit could be remedied by donations and a General Fund allocation in FY23.

Table 1 - Impact of New Fees and Program Changes on the Camps Fund Program Year 2022-23 Without new fees With new fees
Total Revenues* $791,717 $ 2,257,333
Total Expenditures* $955,842 $2,374,842
Costs for Expanded Subsidized
Programs ($85,360)
Net Revenue (Deficit)** ($164,125) ($202,868)
*Includes $97,400 in 6 new scholarships per Tuolumne Family Camp week. **Excludes Cazadero and Tuolumne Camp capital projects.

Page 2 of 46 ends

230
Selected Recreation and Camps Program Fee Increases PUBLIC HEARING January 18, 2022
3 Table 2. Proposed Scholarship Income Thresholds
Number of Household
members 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Qualifies
for 50%
New
calculated
figure 67,100 76,700 86,300 95,900 103,600 111,300 118,900 126,600 Qualifies
for100%
HUD Very
Low Income 47,950 54,800 61,650 68,500 74,000 79,500 84,950 90,450

HUD
Extremely
Low Income
28,800 32,900 37,000 41,100 44,400 47,700 51,000 54,300 Difference 19,150 21,900 24,650 27,400 29,600 31,800 33,950 36,150 *Income thresholds are updated annually based on HUD low-income guidelines. Thresholds above reflect HUD 2021 gross household income.

Table 3. Value of Recreation Division Scholarships 2019-2022 General Fund Programs Camps Fund Programs CombinedRecreation Division
Scholarships
# of
recipients Value # of
recipients Value # of
recipients Value
2019 241 $84,911 289 $81,345 530 $166,256
2020 122 $52,162 No Programs due to COVID-
19 122 $52,162
2021 445 $129,589 126 $52,870 571 $182,459
2022
(projected) 579 $168,466 325 $247,130 904 $415,596

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
On June 28, 2016, Berkeley City Council adopted the Policies and Procedures for Parks and Recreation Programs and Facilities (Resolution No. 67,581- N.S.). On May 25, 2021, Council adopted an updated Fee Schedule for the Recreation Division programs (Resolution No. 69,892-N.S.). The City periodically reviews all recreation fees in an effort to keep programs and facilities accessible to residents while accounting for increased costs to deliver those services.

The Parks Recreation & Waterfront Department is taking steps to improve accessibility to Recreation Division Programs for Berkeley Residents. This includes:
 Focusing on improving diverse and equitable access to programs  Offering priority registration to scholarship recipients  Increasing the number of scholarships
 Adding new camp programs for historically underserved participants  Increasing community outreach efforts.

In addition to these steps, we are recommending making changes to the Policies and Procedures for Parks and Recreation Programs and Facilities to increase Berkeley Resident scholarship program access and expand scholarship program offerings.

Page 3 of 46 ends

231
Selected Recreation and Camps Program Fee Increases PUBLIC HEARING January 18, 2022
4 Changes to Policy & Procedures
The Policies and Procedures for Parks & Recreation Programs and Facilities were last revised in 2016. This recommendation proposes changes to the Policies & Procedures to make Recreation Division programs more accessible and align the policies with new fees. The most significant proposed changes are:

Revision of the Scholarship Policy – This change is recommended to increase access to Recreation Division scholarships for Berkeley Residents, and to streamline the scholarship application process. The City awards scholarships to every applicant who meets the eligibility requirements, which include Berkeley residency. Income eligibility is based on the Federal Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Low-Income Guidelines. Qualifying recipients receive either a 50% fee reduction or a 100% fee waiver.

The Recreation Division recommends making changes to the scholarship application process to increase scholarship eligibility and reduce barriers to access. The proposed changes to the Recreation Policies include increasing the income threshold for scholarship eligibility to align with the HUD “very low-income” threshold instead of the “extremely low-income” threshold, (see Table 2).

Other Changes
In addition, City staff recommend making changes to align the Camps Program Policy with the introduction of new Tuolumne Camp Fees, and providing account credits when the Recreation Division cancels a program, reservation, or permit or when a customer requests an account credit.

Camps Fund Programs
The Camps Fund is comprised of four program areas:
 Berkeley Day Camp, a 9-week summer day camp program offered in City Parks;  Berkeley Cazadero Camp, operated by Cazadero Performing Arts Camp and offering music and performing arts programs, located in Sonoma County;  Berkeley Echo Lake Camp, offering Family Camp Youth Camp, adult, teen, tots, and other programs, located near South Lake Tahoe, CA; and
 Berkeley Tuolumne Camp. Berkeley Tuolumne Camp is scheduled to reopen this summer for the first time in nine years following the destruction of the facility by a wildfire in 2013. The City is preparing to welcome Campers back to this newly reconstructed facility.

The Camps Fund is a self-supporting fund, with revenues expected to cover expenditures. The total annual revenue for this fund is projected at $2,257,333 for the FY22-23 program year. The Recreation Division needs to establish new Tuolumne Camp program fees, and is recommending making minor changes to fees at Echo Lake Camp. The proposed fee increases and new fees will help to cover the costs of these programs and allow the City to continue to make these programs more accessible to Berkeley Residents.

Fee changes are proposed to go into effect January 19, 2022.

Fee increases and new fee schedules are proposed to the following programs. The proposed changes are detailed in Attachment 1, with fee comparisons in Attachment 2.

Page 4 of 46 ends

232
Selected Recreation and Camps Program Fee Increases PUBLIC HEARING January 18, 2022
5 Berkeley Echo Lake Camp
Non-Resident Fees – Current Echo Lake Camp non-resident fees are 10% higher than Berkeley Resident fees. All other Recreation Division non-resident fees are 20% higher than Berkeley Resident fees. This proposal would increase all Echo Lake Camp non-resident fees to 20% higher than Berkeley Resident fees.
50 & Better Camp – The current fee schedule includes a 4-day and weekend fee for 50 & Better Camp. This proposal would introduce a new 5-day session length and define 50 & Better Camp additional camper fees for each session length.

Family Camp Session Fees – Current Echo Lake Family Camp fees include only a 5-day and 7- day session length. This proposal includes single-day and 4-day session length fees.

Group Rental Fees
This proposal recommends an increase of approximately 12.5% to Echo Lake Camp Group Rental Fees. This increase is required to cover the direct program expenditures associated with offering Group Rentals.

New Camper Welcome Weekend Program
This discounted fee is proposed to offer inclusive and welcoming opportunities to new campers who are interested in attending Echo Lake & Tuolumne Camp programs but have not participated in the past.

School Outdoor Education
These fees are proposed to offer school outdoor education programs at Echo Lake Camp and Tuolumne Camp to Bay Area school districts, with a particular emphasis on Berkeley Schools.

Shoulder Season Rentals
This fee category has been developed to offer occasional rentals to small groups or individuals during non-programmed periods at the Camp. These rentals would offer limited accommodations and require minimal programming.

Surcharges – This proposal recommends adoption of a $500 Family Camp Program Deposit payment. This will allow Family Campers to make a deposit payment to hold their registration, and make final payment at a later date closer to their program.

Wedding Rental Fee
Echo Lake and Tuolumne Camp are beautiful outdoor locations, ideal for wedding venues. This fee is proposed to offer wedding parties the opportunity to get married at Camp as part of a day use agreement. Wedding parties that wish to extend their stay for an overnight experience would be required to complete a group rental permit.

Berkeley Tuolumne Camp
Berkeley Tuolumne Camp was destroyed by a wildfire in 2013. The City is nearing completion of reconstruction, and the facility is scheduled to reopen in Summer 2022. The proposed fees are recommended to allow the Recreation Division to begin accepting camper registrations for various programs.

Page 5 of 46 ends

233
Selected Recreation and Camps Program Fee Increases PUBLIC HEARING January 18, 2022
6 Most proposed fees are scheduled per tent, per group, per session. These proposed fees allow for more stable grouping during each session, allow for online registration, and reduce administrative management. See Attachment 2, Table 1 for fee comparisons. • Most proposed fees are per-tent and are all-inclusive for each session for 2 to 3 total guests and include meals, lodging, and all programs.
• Additional Campers (more than 2 guests for 50 & Better Camp, or more than 3 guests for Family Camp) may be added to Standard Occupancy Tent Cabin registrations for a per-person fee (Not applicable for infants under age 3). • A limited number of Low-Occupancy Tents will be available to groups comprised of one adult and two children under the age of 14 only. These tents are available on a first come first served basis. Guests with different group sizes or age ranges must register for one of our Standard Occupancy Tent Cabins.

The current fee schedule doesn’t have any fees for Tuolumne Camp programs, and this proposal would establish new fees for the following program areas:
 50 & Better Camp – This proposal recommends weekend, 4-day, and 5-day 50 & Better Camp fees, and defines 50 & Better Camp additional camper fees for each session length.
 Family Camp Session Fees – This proposal recommends single-day, 4-day, 5-day, and 7-day Family Camp session fees to accommodate a variety of programs planned for Tuolumne Camp in future seasons.
 Group Rental Fees - This proposal recommends adopting new group rental fees for Tuolumne
 New Camper Welcome Weekend Program - This fee is proposed to offer inclusive and welcoming opportunities to new campers who are interested in attending Echo Lake & Tuolumne Camp programs but have not participated in the past.  School Outdoor Education - These fees are proposed to offer school outdoor education programs at Echo Lake Camp and Tuolumne Camp to Bay Area school districts, with a particular emphasis on Berkeley Schools.
 Shoulder Season Rentals - This fee category has been developed to offer occasional rentals to small groups or individuals during non-programmed periods at the Camp.

These rentals would offer limited accommodations and require minimal programming.  Surcharges – This proposal recommends adopting similar surcharges to those already in use at Echo Lake Camp.
 Wedding Rental Fee - Echo Lake and Tuolumne Camp are beautiful outdoor locations, ideal for wedding venues. This fee is proposed to offer wedding parties the opportunity to get married at Camp as part of a day use agreement. Wedding parties that wish to extend their stay for an overnight experience would be required to complete a group rental permit.

Non-Resident Fees – These fees include fees for non-residents that are 20% higher than Berkeley resident fees.

BACKGROUND
All camp programs are run out of the Camps Fund which requires all expenditures be recovered by program revenue. New fees are required to run Berkeley Tuolumne Camp programs, and recommended fee increases are required to cover program expenditures.

Page 6 of 46 ends

234
Selected Recreation and Camps Program Fee Increases PUBLIC HEARING January 18, 2022
7 ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
The proposed fee increases will support sustainability in these camp programs which provide direct and indirect environmental benefits. Camp programs connect the community with the environment, emphasize the importance of environmental stewardship, and teach youth and community members about local environmental resources and how to preserve them.

CONTACT PERSON
Christina Erickson, Deputy Director, 510-981-6703
Denise Brown, Youth and Recreation Services Manager, 510-981-6707 Attachments:

1. Recreation Fees: Current vs. Proposed

2. Fee Comparisons

3. Resolution
Exhibit A: Recreation Fee Schedule
Exhibit B: Policies and Procedures for Parks and Recreation Programs and Facilities

4. Notice of Public Hearing

Page 7 of 46 ends

235
ATTACHMENT 1
1 Recreation Fee Schedule: Current vs. Proposed
Program Area Unit of
Measure

Resident

PROPOSED
Resident Non-
Resident

PROPOSED
Non-
Resident
I. DIRECTOR’S AUTHORITY TO

IMPLEMENT NEW FEES
The Director of Parks Recreation and
Waterfront, or his/her designee,
reserves the right to establish fees for
new Recreation programs based on
comparison with other municipalities.

Various Various Up to
$350 Up To
$420
II. FACILITY RENTAL CHARGES

1. Room Rentals - Regular Hours (1
hour minimum); Non-Regular Hours
(2 hour minimum)

James Kenney (JK) Live Oak (LO)
Frances Albrier (FA), Martin Luther
King (MLK)

A. Youth, Senior, Disabled
Regular Hours Hour $41.00 $49.00
Non-Regular Hours Hour $61.00 $73.00
B. All Other
Auditorium (FA) & Social Hall
(L0)
Regular Hours Hour $67.00 $80.00
Non-Regular Hours Hour $82.00 $98.00
Fireside Room (LO), Community
Room (JK)
Regular Hours Hour $52.00 $62.00
Non-Regular Hours Hour $67.00 $80.00
Game Room (FA, MLK) Arts &
Crafts Room (FA, JK, LO) Meeting
Room (JK, LO, MLK)

Regular Hours Hour $46.00 $55.00
Non-Regular Hours Hour $62.00 $74.00
C. Multi Room Discount
2nd room Rental 25%
discount 25%
discount
3rd room, each additional room Rental 50%
discount 50%
discount
D. Gym Rentals (JK, MLK)
Regular Hours Hour $64.00 $77.00
Non-Regular Hours $75.00 $90.00
E. Filming Fee

Page 8 of 46 ends

236
ATTACHMENT 1
2 Program Area Unit of
Measure

Resident

PROPOSED
Resident Non-
Resident

PROPOSED
Non-
Resident
Parks and Facilities ½ Day $400.00 $400.00
Full Day $800.00 $800.00
F. Surcharges
Table & Chair Set-Up Rental $63.00 $76.00
Kitchen Use Rental $86.00 $103.00
Small Storage Room Month $21.00 $25.00
Large Storage Room Month $31.00 $37.00
Stage Use w/Room Rental Hour $26.00 $31.00
P/A system & staff operation Hour $42.00 $50.00
Cleaning/Damage Deposit All Rentals
(Refundable) Rental $200.00 $200.00

2. City Athletic Fields
A. Cedar Rose, Codornices, Glendale-
LaLoma, Grove, James Kenney, Ohlone,
San Pablo, Willard, Rosa Parks,
Thousand Oaks

Youth non-profit leagues 2-Hours $36.00 $43.00
Adults, for-profits, private schools 2-Hours $72.00 $86.00 Maintenance Deposit 40% of
fee
B. Gabe's Fields at Harrison Park,
Natural Turf
Youth non-profit leagues 2-Hours $29.00 $35.00
Adults, for-profits, private schools 2-Hours $72.00 $86.00 C. Gilman Fields, Natural Turf
Youth non-profit leagues 2-Hours $29.00 $35.00
Adults, for-profits, private schools 2-Hours $72.00 $86.00 D. Gilman Fields, Synthetic Turf
Youth non-profit leagues 2-Hours $40.00 $48.00
Adults, for-profits, private schools 2-Hours $91.00 $109.00 E. Sports Field User Fines (Policy
Violations: Applicable to All Athletic
Fields)

Playing on Closed Grass Fields 1st Offense $250.00 $250.00 2nd Offense $500.00 $500.00
Running practices in main goal areas 1st Offense
within 12 mo $50.00 $50.00
2nd Offense
within 12 mo $100.00 $100.00
3rd Offense
within 12 mo $200.00 $200.00

Page 9 of 46 ends

237
ATTACHMENT 1
3 Program Area Unit of
Measure

Resident

PROPOSED
Resident Non-
Resident

PROPOSED
Non-
Resident
Dogs, Alcohol, Trash, Wheeled
vehicles Incident $100.00 $100.00
Field Monitor Hourly $25.00 $25.00
F. Additional Rules (Applicable to
all athletic fields)
Weekday slots used before 3:30pm throughout the
year are discounted 50%

Weekday slots 5:30pm-7:00pm are
charged as full two-hour slot
All other slots are pro-rated in 30
minute increments

3. Skate Park Rental (only available
AM hours)
A. Morning Hours (includes 2 staff
members) Hour $250.00 $300.00
B. Birthday Party (includes 2 staff
members & lesson) Hour $350.00 $420.00
Cleaning/Damage Deposit
(refundable) Rental $200.00 $200.00

4. Tennis Courts
A. Day Use (All Courts): Cedar
Rose, Grove, James Kenney, Live
Oak, Rose Garden, Roy Oakes, San
Pablo, Strawberry Creek, Willard

Adult Hour $7.00 $8.00
Youth, Senior, Disabled Hour $5.00 $6.00
B. Night Use/Lighted Courts: Cedar
Rose, Grove, James Kenney, Live
Oak, San Pablo, Strawberry Creek,
Willard

Adult Hour $10.00 $12.00
Youth, Senior, Disabled Hour $8.00 $10.00

5. Swim Centers (1-hour minimum)
King, West Campus
1-35 people Hour $100.00 $120.00
36-70 people Hour $145.00 $174.00
71-100 people Hour $177.00 $212.00
101-150 people Hour $217.00 $260.00
Cleaning/Damage Deposit
(refundable) Rental $200.00 $200.00

6. Picnic Areas (4-hour minimum)
A. Aquatic Park 4-hours $45.00 $54.00
B. Cedar Rose 4-hours $30.00 $36.00

Page 10 of 46 ends

238
ATTACHMENT 1
4 Program Area Unit of
Measure

Resident

PROPOSED
Resident Non-
Resident

PROPOSED
Non-
Resident
C. Codornices Park Area 1 4-hours $75.00 $90.00
D. Codornices Park Area 2 4-hours $60.00 $72.00
E. Cragmont 4-hours $45.00 $54.00
F. Grove 4-hours $30.00 $36.00
G. James Kenney 4-hours $45.00 $54.00
H. King School 4-hours $30.00 $36.00
I. Live Oak Park (Areas 1 & 2) 4-hours $60.00 $72.00
J. Ohlone Park @ McGee 4-hours $45.00 $54.00
K. San Pablo Park 4-hours $30.00 $36.00
L. Strawberry Creek 4-hours $30.00 $36.00
M. Shorebird Park: Areas 1, 2 4-hours $60.00 $60.00
N. Shorebird Park: Area 3 4-hours $45.00 $45.00
O. Cesar Chavez: Area 1 4-hours $45.00 $45.00
P. Cesar Chavez: Area 2 (large
picnic area) 4-hours $200.00 $200.00
Q. Bounce House Permit Per Use $20.00 $25.00

7. Parks & Open Space (not athletic
fields)
A. Special Events
1-99 Participants Day $180.00 $350.00
100-249 Participants Day $270.00 $500.00
250-499 Participants Day $350.00 $700.00
500+ Participants Day $550.00 $1,000.0
0 Cleaning/Damage Deposit
(refundable) Day $700.00 $700.00
Special Events – Additional Days
1-99 Participants Day $170.00 $340.00
100-249 Participants Day $230.00 $460.00
250-499 Participants Day $250.00 $600.00
500+ Participants Day $450.00 $900.00
B. John Hinkel Amphitheater Day $120.00 $144.00
Cleaning/Damage Deposit
(refundable) $350.00 $350.00
C. Camp Day Use Fee
1-50 Participants Day $50.00 $50.00
51-100 Participants Day $100.00 $100.00
101-150 Participants Day $150.00 $150.00
D. Small Turf Areas in Parks (Ages
8 yrs & under; Mon-Fri only; Max 3
days per week:

Page 11 of 46 ends

239
ATTACHMENT 1
5 Program Area Unit of
Measure

Resident

PROPOSED
Resident Non-
Resident

PROPOSED
Non-
Resident
Ohlone Park, Aquatic Park, James
Kenney Park, Live Oak Park
2-Hours $25.00 $30.00

8. Weddings (4-hour minimum)
A. Rose Garden 4-Hours $1,000.0
0 $1,200.0
0 Each Additional Hour (after 4 hours) Hour $170.00 $204.00 B. Cragmont, Live Oak Park, & John
Hinkel (outside areas) 4-Hours
$450.00 $540.00
Each Additional Hour (after 4 hours) Hour $75.00 $90.00 C. Spinnaker Way Vista 4-Hours $750.00 $750.00
Each Additional Hour (after 4 hours) Hour $170.00 $170.00 D. Yacht Club Point 4-Hours $750.00 $750.00
Each Additional Hour (after 4 hours) Hour $170.00 $170.00 Cleaning/Damage Deposit
(refundable) Rental $700.00 $700.00
III. SWIM CENTER FEES

1. Admissions (Public & Family
Swim, Laps)
Adult (Drop-in) Swim $6.00 $6.00
Adult (10-Swim Card) 10-Swims $51.00 $51.00
Adult (Monthly) Month $73.00 $73.00
Youth, Senior, Disabled (Drop-In) Swim $3.00 $3.00
Youth Senior Disabled (10-Swim
Card) 10-Swims $22.00 $22.00
Youth Senior Disabled (Monthly Card) Month $37.00 $37.00

2. Red Cross Swim Sessions
Adult Session $75.00 $90.00
Youth, Senior, Disabled Session $72.00 $84.00
Organized Youth Groups (Residents
only)
10-15 participants Session $65.00 -
16-21 participants Session $62.00 -
22-32 participants Session $54.00 -
33-43 participants Session $48.00 -
44-54 participants Session $39.00 -
55+ participants Session $37.00 -

3. Premium Classes
Continuous & Coached Workouts:
water aerobics, parent/tot, stroke
technique, Master Swim

Adult (Drop-in) Swim $7.00 $7.00

Page 12 of 46 ends

240
ATTACHMENT 1
6 Program Area Unit of
Measure

Resident

PROPOSED
Resident Non-
Resident

PROPOSED
Non-
Resident
Adult (10-Swim Card 10-Swims $66.00 $66.00
Adult (Monthly) Month $82.00 $82.00
Youth, Senior, Disabled (Drop-In) Swim $5.00 $5.00
Youth Senior Disabled (10-Swim
Card) 10-Swims $40.00 $40.00
Youth Senior Disabled (Monthly Card) Session $57.00 $57.00

4. Private Swim Lessons (1/2 hour
session)
Individual (One-on-One) Lesson $30.00 $36.00
Semi-Private Lesson (2 or more
Participants) Lesson $50.00 $60.00
IV. RECREATION PROGRAMS

1. Sports
A. Adult Softball League
4 Game Season Team $320.00 $384.00
8 Game Season Team $640.00 $715.00
10 Game Season Team $800.00 $875.00
B. Adult Basketball League
8 Game Season Team $560.00 $635.00
10 Game Season Team $700.00 $775.00
C. Adult Volleyball League
8 Game Season Team $320.00 $384.00
10 Game Season Team $400.00 $475.00
12 Game Season Team $480.00 $555.00
15 Game Season Team $600.00 $675.00
D. Open Gym Volleyball Drop-In $5.00 $5.00
E. Youth Baseball
Individual Session $51.00 $61.00
F. Youth Hoops League
Individual Session $30.00 $36.00
G. Youth Twilight Basketball
Individual Session $27.00 $32.00
H. Youth Flag Football League
Individual Session $30.00 $36.00
I. Tennis Lessons
Youth Session $73.00 $88.00
Adult Session $107.00 $128.00
J. Skate Park Lessons & Classes
Full Day Session $258.00 $310.00
1/2 Day Camp Session $195.00 $234.00
Park Introduction Session $11.00 $13.00

Page 13 of 46 ends

241
ATTACHMENT 1
7 Program Area Unit of
Measure

Resident

PROPOSED
Resident Non-
Resident

PROPOSED
Non-
Resident
Trick Clinic Session $11.00 $13.00
Private Lessons Hour $43.00 $52.00
Group Lessons Session $108.00 $130.00

2. Programs at Centers
A. After School Program
Registration Fee (Frances Albrier,
James Kenney)

Individual Week $25.00 $30.00
B. Community Center Camp
Programs (Winter, Spring, Summer)
Core 30 hours $101.00 $121.00
AM Extended Care 5 hours $10.00 $12.00
PM Extended Care 15 hours $30.00 $36.00

25% of
reservati
on not to
exceed
$150
B. Echo Lake Camp
50 & Better Camp
50 & Better Camp (per camper) 4-Day $290.00 Eliminated $320.00 Eliminated 50 & Better Camp (per camper) Weekend $230.00 Eliminated $254.00 Eliminated 50 & Better Camp Tent (up to 2
campers) 5-Day $730.00 $876.00
50 & Better Camp Tent (up to 2
campers) 4-Day $580.00 $696.00
50 & Better Camp Tent (up to 2
campers) Weekend $460.00 $552.00
50 & Better Camp Additional Camper 1-Day $40.00 $48.00 Counselor-In-Training
Counselor-In-Training 2-Week $400.00 $440.00 $480.00
Counselor-In-Training 1-Week $275.00 $300.00 $330.00 Family Camp
Full-Week Standard Tent (up to 3
campers) 7-Day $1,675.0
0 $1,842.5
0 $2,010.00

Page 14 of 46 ends

242
ATTACHMENT 1
8 Program Area Unit of
Measure

Resident

PROPOSED
Resident Non-
Resident

PROPOSED
Non-
Resident
Full-Week Low-Occupancy Tent 7-Day $1,450.0
0 $1,600.0
0 $1,740.00
5-Day Session - Standard Tent (up to
3 campers) 5-Day $1,100.0
0 $1,375.00 $1,100.0
0 $1,650.00
5-Day Session - Low Occupancy tent 5-Day $1,000.0
0 $1,206.25 $1,200.0
0 $1,447.50
Weekend Standard Tent (up to 3
campers) 4-Day $1,225.00 $1,470.00
Weekend Low-Occupancy Tent 4-Day $1,075.00 $1,290.00 Mid-Week Standard Tent (up to 3
campers) 4-Day $1,100.00 $1,320.00
Mid-Week Low-Occupancy Tent 4-Day $965.00 $0.00 $1,158.00 Additional Camper Fee 1-Day $65.00 $0.00 $78.00
Additional Camper Fee 5-Day
Session $250.00 Eliminated $275.00 Eliminated
Additional Camper Fee 7-Day
Session $375.00 Eliminated $415.00 Eliminated
Day Use Fees
Adult (15+) Day Use 1-Day $108.00 $120.00 $129.60
Youth (7-14) Day Use 1-Day $72.00 $80.00 $86.40
Child (3-6) Day Use 1-Day $54.00 $60.00 $64.80
Group Rental Rates
Adult (15+) 1-Day $76.00 $85.00 $84.00 $102.00
Youth (7-14) 1-Day $65.00 $71.50 $71.00 $85.80
Child (3-6) 1-Day $48.00 $52.80 $42.00 $63.36
Infant (0-3) 1-Day $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
New Camper Welcome Weekend Weekend $195.00 $234.00
School Outdoor Education
Teachers & Adult Chaperones 1-Day $60.00 $72.00
Youth Participants 1-Day $45.00 $54.00
Shoulder Season Rentals
Shoulder Season Tent Rental (no
meals, up to 3 campers) 1-Night $97.75 $117.30
Shoulder Season Tent Rental (with
meals, up to 3 campers) 1-Night $195.50 $234.60
Work Weekend Weekend $0.00 $0.00
Youth Camp
5-Day Program 5-Days $600.00 $660.00 $720.00
7-Day Program 7-Days $840.00 $924.00 $1,008.00
Per Day Fee 1-Day $120.00 $144.00
Wedding Rental
Wedding Rental 4-Hours $750.00 $900.00

Page 15 of 46 ends

243
ATTACHMENT 1
9 Program Area Unit of
Measure

Resident

PROPOSED
Resident Non-
Resident

PROPOSED
Non-
Resident
Wedding Rental - Each Additional
Hour (after 4 hours) Hour $125.00 $150.00
C. Tuolumne Camp
50 & Better Camp
50 & Better Camp Tent (up to 2
campers) 5-Day $900.00 $1,080.00
50 & Better Camp Tent (up to 2
campers) 4-Day $720.00 $864.00
50 & Better Camp Tent (up to 2
campers) Weekend $540.00 $648.00
50 & Better Camp Additional Camper
per day 1-Day $45.00 $54.00
Counselor-In-Training
Counselor-In-Training 2-Week $415.00 $498.00
Counselor-In-Training 1-Week $275.00 $330.00
Family Camp
Full-Week Standard Tent
(up to 3 campers) 1-Week $1,995.00 $2,394.00
Full-Week Low-Occupancy Tent 1-Week $1,715.00 $2,058.00 Weekend Standard Tent (up to 3
campers) 4-Day $1,460.00 $1,752.00
Weekend Low-Occupancy Tent 4-Day $1,280.00 $1,536.00 Mid-Week Standard Tent (up to 3
campers) 4-Day $1,300.00 $1,560.00
Mid-Week Low Occupancy Tent 4-Day $1,100.00 $1,320.00 Family Camp Day Use Fees
Adult (15+) Day Use 1-Day $135.00 $162.00
Youth (7-14) Day Use 1-Day $90.00 $108.00
Child (3-6) Day Use 1-Day $68.00 $81.60
Additional Camper Fee 1-Day $75.00 $90.00
Group Rental Rates
Adult (15+) 1-Day $110.00 $132.00
Youth (7-14) 1-Day $93.00 $111.60
Child (3-6) 1-Day $78.00 $93.60
Infant (0-3) 1-Day $0.00 $0.00
New Camper Welcome Weekend Weekend $195.00 $234.00
School Outdoor Education
Adult Chaperones 1-Day $75.00 $90.00
Youth Participants 1-Day $56.00 $67.20
Shoulder Season Rentals
Shoulder Season Tent Rental (no
meals) 1-Night $115.00 $138.00
Shoulder Season Tent Rental (with
meals) 1-Night $230.00 $276.00

Page 16 of 46 ends

244
ATTACHMENT 1
10 Program Area Unit of
Measure

Resident

PROPOSED
Resident Non-
Resident

PROPOSED
Non-
Resident
Work Weekend Weekend $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Youth Camp
5-Day Program 5-Days $750.00 $900.00
7-Day Program 7-Days $1,050.00 $1,260.00
Per Day Fee 1-Day $150.00 $180.00
Wedding Rental
Wedding Rental 4-Hours $1,000.00 $1,200.00
Wedding Rental - Each Additional
Hour (after 4 hours) Hour $150.00 $180.00
D. Resident Camp Surcharges
Family Camp Program Deposit
Payment $500 per
registration $500 per
registration
Late Fee
$75 if
balance is
not paid by
date
specified

Cleaning / Damage Deposit Rental $300.00 $300.00

Changes to Reservation resulting in
reduction in length of stay (30 days or
more before arrival)
Reservation $100.00 $100.00
Cancel Reservation (30 days or more
before arrival)
25% of
reservation
not to
exceed $150

Cancel Reservation (due to
emergency or illness, with Dr's excuse) Reservation No Charge No
Charge

4. Waterfront Programs
A. Adventure Playground
Individual Admission (anyone over 1
year old) Day $1.00 $1.00
Group size 5-10 2-hours $75.00 $75.00
Group size 11-20 2-hours $105.00 $105.00
Group size 21-30 2-hours $150.00 $150.00
Group size 31-40 2-hours $180.00 $180.00
B. Education Programs
Animal Session $200.00 $200.00
Low Tide Session $200.00 $200.00
Research Boat Trip Session $225.00 $225.00
Sail Boat Trip Session $255.00 $255.00
Docent Training Session $65.00 $65.00
Special Program Request Hour $65.00 $65.00

Page 17 of 46 ends

245
ATTACHMENT 1
11 Program Area Unit of
Measure

Resident

PROPOSED
Resident Non-
Resident

PROPOSED
Non-
Resident
Marine Biology 4-Days $75.00 $75.00
Marine Biology 8-Days $150.00 $150.00
Boating 4-Days $150.00 $150.00
Canoeing 3-Days $55.00 $55.00

Page 18 of 46 ends

246
ATTACHMENT 2
Table 1: Family Camp Program Fees – Per Session Fee Comparison Note: This analysis compares the total combined fee for a Family Camp stay during primary program periods for a 7-day stay for a family of four Berkeley Residents. Other Camp programs have fee models that differ from the City of Berkeley’s, which may include separate meal plans, capital improvement recovery surcharges, and fees for electricity or other special accommodations. This analysis assumes base program accommodations with meal plan for length of stay. Session fees are pro-rated or extended where applicable.

Agency Fee
City of Sacramento Family Camp $1,706
City of San Jose - Family Camp at Yosemite (2020 fees) $1,710 City of San Francisco - Camp Mather $1,723
Berkeley Echo Lake Family Camp (proposed) $2,065
Berkeley Tuolumne Camp (proposed) $2,445
UC Berkeley - Lair of the Bear $2,900
City of Concord - Camp Concord (30-person minimum group rate) $2,952 Table 2: Adult Camp Program (50 & Better) Fees – Per Session Fee Comparison Note: This analysis compares the per tent fee for a 4-day stay for two adult Residents at an adult (50+) Camp program. Other Camps have various fee models which may include separate meal plans, capital improvement recovery surcharges, and fees for electricity or other special accommodations. This analysis assumes base program accommodations with meal plan for length of stay.

Agency Fee
Berkeley Echo Lake Camp (proposed) $580
Camp Concord $582
Camp Sacramento (2020 fees) $700
Berkeley Tuolumne Camp (proposed) $720
Table 3: Group Rental Fees – Per Person Fee Comparison
Note: This analysis compares the per person fee for a 1-day stay for a private group rental program. Other Camps have various fee models which may include separate meal plans, capital improvement recovery surcharges, and fees for electricity or other special accommodations.

This analysis assumes base program accommodations with meal plan for length of stay.

Agency Adult (15+) Youth Child (6-8) Child (3-5) Infant (0-2) Berkeley Echo Lake
Camp (proposed) $85 $72 $53 $53 $0
Berkeley Tuolumne
Camp (Proposed) $110 $93 $78 $78 $0
Camp Sacramento
(2019 fees) $89 $69 $59 $49 $0
Camp Concord (2021
fees) $123 $123 $123 $123 $0
1

Page 19 of 46 ends

247
ATTACHMENT 2
Table 4: School Outdoor Education – Per Person Fee Comparison Note: This analysis compares the Resident per person fee for a 1-day stay for a School Outdoor Education Program. Other Camps have various fee models which may include separate program and meal plans, capital improvement recovery surcharges, and fees for electricity or other special accommodations. This analysis assumes base program accommodations with meal plan for length of stay.

Agency Teachers / Chaperones Youth Participants
Berkeley Echo Lake
Camp (proposed) $60 $45
Berkeley Tuolumne
Camp (Proposed) $75 $56
Nature Bridge Yosemite $105 $108
Walker Creek Ranch $76.40 $76.40
2

Page 20 of 46 ends

248
RESOLUTION NO. ##,###-N.S.

APPROVING NEW FEES AND INCREASING CURRENT FEES FOR SELECT RECREATION

DIVISION PROGRAMS
WHEREAS, on June 28, 2016, Berkeley City Council adopted the Policies and Procedures for Parks and Recreation Programs and Facilities (Resolution No. 67,581-N.S.); and WHEREAS, on May 25, 2021, Council adopted the new Fee Schedule for Recreation Division programs (Resolution No. 69,892-N.S.); and
WHEREAS, the Policies and Procedures for Parks and Recreation Programs and Facilities has been revised to change the Recreation Division Scholarship Application process and to align the Camps Program Policies with the introduction of new Tuolumne Camp Fees; and WHEREAS, the proposed Echo Lake and Tuolumne new fees and fee increases will provide additional revenue to the Camps Fund which will help cover the cost of delivering programs; and WHEREAS, the expansion of subsidized programs will improve access to camp and recreation programs for underserved participants; and
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that the rates and charges set forth in Exhibit A are hereby fixed and established for the parks and recreation programs and facilities and shall be effective January 19, 2022, unless otherwise noted in Exhibit A, and that the Policies and Procedures for Parks and Recreation Programs and Facilities are revised as set forth in Exhibit B and shall be effective January 19, 2022.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Resolution No. 69,892-N.S. and all amendatory resolutions are hereby rescinded.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Resolution No. 67,581-N.S. is hereby rescinded.

Exhibit A: Recreation Fee Schedule
Exhibit B: Policies and Procedures for Parks and Recreation Programs and Facilities

Page 21 of 46 ends

249
Resolution: Exhibit A
1 Recreation Fee Schedule
Effective January 19, 2022 (unless otherwise noted below) Program Area Unit of Measure Resident Non- Resident
I. DIRECTOR’S AUTHORITY TO IMPLEMENT

NEW FEES
The Director of Parks Recreation and Waterfront,
or his/her designee, reserves the right to establish
fees for new Recreation programs based on
comparison with other municipalities.

Various Various Up to $350 Up To $420
II. FACILITY RENTAL CHARGES

1. Room Rentals - Regular Hours (1 hour
minimum); Non-Regular Hours (2 hour
minimum)
James Kenney (JK) Live Oak (LO) Frances
Albrier (FA), Martin Luther King (MLK)
A. Youth, Senior, Disabled
Regular Hours Hour $41.00 $49.00
Non-Regular Hours Hour $61.00 $73.00
B. All Other
Auditorium (FA) & Social Hall (L0)
Regular Hours Hour $67.00 $80.00
Non-Regular Hours Hour $82.00 $98.00
Fireside Room (LO), Community Room (JK)
Regular Hours Hour $52.00 $62.00
Non-Regular Hours Hour $67.00 $80.00
Game Room (FA, MLK) Arts & Crafts Room
(FA, JK, LO) Meeting Room (JK, LO, MLK)
Regular Hours Hour $46.00 $55.00
Non-Regular Hours Hour $62.00 $74.00
C. Multi Room Discount
2nd room Rental 25% discount 25% discount
3rd room, each additional room Rental 50% discount 50% discount D. Gym Rentals (JK, MLK)
Program Area Unit of Measure Resident Non- Resident
Regular Hours Hour $64.00 $77.00
Non-Regular Hours $75.00 $90.00
E. Filming Fee
Parks and Facilities ½ Day $400.00 $400.00

Page 22 of 46 ends

250
Resolution: Exhibit A
2 Program Area Unit of Measure Resident Non- Resident
Full Day $800.00 $800.00
F. Surcharges
Table & Chair Set-Up Rental $63.00 $76.00
Kitchen Use Rental $86.00 $103.00
Small Storage Room Month $21.00 $25.00
Large Storage Room Month $31.00 $37.00
Stage Use w/Room Rental Hour $26.00 $31.00
P/A system & staff operation Hour $42.00 $50.00
Cleaning/Damage Deposit All Rentals
(Refundable) Rental $200.00 $200.00

2. City Athletic Fields
A. Cedar Rose, Codornices, Glendale-LaLoma,
Grove, James Kenney, Ohlone, San Pablo,
Willard, Rosa Parks, Thousand Oaks
Youth non-profit leagues 2-Hours $36.00 $43.00
Adults, for-profits, private schools 2-Hours $72.00 $86.00 Maintenance Deposit 40% of fee
B. Gabe's Fields at Harrison Park, Natural Turf
Youth non-profit leagues 2-Hours $29.00 $35.00
Adults, for-profits, private schools 2-Hours $72.00 $86.00 C. Gilman Fields, Natural Turf
Youth non-profit leagues 2-Hours $29.00 $35.00
Adults, for-profits, private schools 2-Hours $72.00 $86.00 D. Gilman Fields, Synthetic Turf
Youth non-profit leagues 2-Hours $40.00 $48.00
Adults, for-profits, private schools 2-Hours $91.00 $109.00 E. Sports Field User Fines (Policy Violations:

Applicable to All Athletic Fields)
Playing on Closed Grass Fields 1st Offense $250.00 $250.00 2nd Offense $500.00 $500.00
Running practices in main goal areas 1st Offense within 12 mo $50.00 $50.00
2nd Offense within
12 mo $100.00 $100.00
3rd Offense within
12 mo $200.00 $200.00
Dogs, Alcohol, Trash, Wheeled vehicles Incident $100.00 $100.00 Field Monitor Hourly $25.00 $25.00

Page 23 of 46 ends

251
Resolution: Exhibit A
3 Program Area Unit of Measure Resident Non- Resident
F. Additional Rules (Applicable to all athletic
fields)
Weekday slots used before 3:30pm throughout the
year are discounted 50%
Weekday slots 5:30pm-7:00pm are charged as full
two-hour slot
All other slots are pro-rated in 30 minute
increments

3. Skate Park Rental (only available AM hours)
A. Morning Hours (includes 2 staff members) Hour $250.00 $300.00 B. Birthday Party (includes 2 staff members &
lesson) Hour $350.00 $420.00
Cleaning/Damage Deposit (refundable) Rental $200.00 $200.00

4. Tennis Courts
A. Day Use (All Courts): Cedar Rose, Grove,
James Kenney, Live Oak, Rose Garden, Roy
Oakes, San Pablo, Strawberry Creek, Willard
Adult Hour $7.00 $8.00
Youth, Senior, Disabled Hour $5.00 $6.00
B. Night Use/Lighted Courts: Cedar Rose,
Grove, James Kenney, Live Oak, San Pablo,
Strawberry Creek, Willard
Adult Hour $10.00 $12.00
Youth, Senior, Disabled Hour $8.00 $10.00

5. Swim Centers (1-hour minimum) King, West
Campus
1-35 people Hour $100.00 $120.00
36-70 people Hour $145.00 $174.00
71-100 people Hour $177.00 $212.00
101-150 people Hour $217.00 $260.00
Cleaning/Damage Deposit (refundable) Rental $200.00 $200.00

6. Picnic Areas (4-hour minimum)
A. Aquatic Park 4-hours $45.00 $54.00
B. Cedar Rose 4-hours $30.00 $36.00
C. Codornices Park Area 1 4-hours $75.00 $90.00
D. Codornices Park Area 2 4-hours $60.00 $72.00
E. Cragmont 4-hours $45.00 $54.00
F. Grove 4-hours $30.00 $36.00
G. James Kenney 4-hours $45.00 $54.00

Page 24 of 46 ends

252
Resolution: Exhibit A
4 Program Area Unit of Measure Resident Non- Resident
H. King School 4-hours $30.00 $36.00
I. Live Oak Park (Areas 1 & 2) 4-hours $60.00 $72.00
J. Ohlone Park @ McGee 4-hours $45.00 $54.00
K. San Pablo Park 4-hours $30.00 $36.00
L. Strawberry Creek 4-hours $30.00 $36.00
M. Shorebird Park: Areas 1, 2 4-hours $60.00 $60.00
N. Shorebird Park: Area 3 4-hours $45.00 $45.00
O. Cesar Chavez: Area 1 4-hours $45.00 $45.00
P. Cesar Chavez: Area 2 (large picnic area) 4-hours $200.00 $200.00 Q. Bounce House Permit Per Use $20.00 $25.00

7. Parks & Open Space (not athletic fields)
A. Special Events
1-99 Participants Day $180.00 $350.00
100-249 Participants Day $270.00 $500.00
250-499 Participants Day $350.00 $700.00
500+ Participants Day $550.00 $1,000.00
Cleaning/Damage Deposit (refundable) Day $700.00 $700.00 Special Events – Additional Days
1-99 Participants Day $170.00 $340.00
100-249 Participants Day $230.00 $460.00
250-499 Participants Day $250.00 $600.00
500+ Participants Day $450.00 $900.00
B. John Hinkel Amphitheater Day $120.00 $144.00
Cleaning/Damage Deposit (refundable) $350.00 $350.00
C. Camp Day Use Fee
1-50 Participants Day $50.00 $50.00
51-100 Participants Day $100.00 $100.00
101-150 Participants Day $150.00 $150.00

D. Small Turf Areas in Parks (Ages 8 yrs &
under; Mon-Fri only; Max 3 days per week:

Ohlone Park, Aquatic Park, James Kenney Park,
Live Oak Park
2-Hours $25.00 $30.00

8. Weddings (4-hour minimum)
A. Rose Garden 4-Hours $1,000.00 $1,200.00
Each Additional Hour (after 4 hours) Hour $170.00 $204.00

Page 25 of 46 ends

253
Resolution: Exhibit A
5 Program Area Unit of Measure Resident Non- Resident
B. Cragmont, Live Oak Park, & John Hinkel
(outside areas) 4-Hours
$450.00 $540.00
Each Additional Hour (after 4 hours) Hour $75.00 $90.00 C. Spinnaker Way Vista 4-Hours $750.00 $750.00
Each Additional Hour (after 4 hours) Hour $170.00 $170.00 D. Yacht Club Point 4-Hours $750.00 $750.00
Each Additional Hour (after 4 hours) Hour $170.00 $170.00 Cleaning/Damage Deposit (refundable) Rental $700.00 $700.00 III. SWIM CENTER FEES

1. Admissions (Public & Family Swim, Laps)
Adult (Drop-in) Swim $6.00 $6.00
Adult (10-Swim Card) 10-Swims $51.00 $51.00
Adult (Monthly) Month $73.00 $73.00
Youth, Senior, Disabled (Drop-In) Swim $3.00 $3.00
Youth Senior Disabled (10-Swim Card) 10-Swims $22.00 $22.00 Youth Senior Disabled (Monthly Card) Month $37.00 $37.00

2. Red Cross Swim Sessions
Adult Session $75.00 $90.00
Youth, Senior, Disabled Session $72.00 $84.00
Organized Youth Groups (Residents only)
10-15 participants Session $65.00 -
16-21 participants Session $62.00 -
22-32 participants Session $54.00 -
33-43 participants Session $48.00 -
44-54 participants Session $39.00 -
55+ participants Session $37.00 -

3. Premium Classes
Continuous & Coached Workouts: water aerobics,
parent/tot, stroke technique, Master Swim
Adult (Drop-in) Swim $7.00 $7.00
Adult (10-Swim Card 10-Swims $66.00 $66.00
Adult (Monthly) Month $82.00 $82.00
Youth, Senior, Disabled (Drop-In) Swim $5.00 $5.00
Youth Senior Disabled (10-Swim Card) 10-Swims $40.00 $40.00 Youth Senior Disabled (Monthly Card) Session $57.00 $57.00

4. Private Swim Lessons (1/2 hour session)
Individual (One-on-One) Lesson $30.00 $36.00

Page 26 of 46 ends

254
Resolution: Exhibit A
6 Program Area Unit of Measure Resident Non- Resident
Semi-Private Lesson (2 or more Participants) Lesson $50.00 $60.00 IV. RECREATION PROGRAMS

2. Programs at Centers
A. After School Program Registration Fee
(Frances Albrier, James Kenney)
Individual Week $25.00 $30.00
B. Community Center Camp Programs (Winter,
Spring, Summer)

Page 27 of 46 ends

255
Resolution: Exhibit A
7 Program Area Unit of Measure Resident Non- Resident
Core 30 hours $101.00 $121.00
AM Extended Care 5 hours $10.00 $12.00
PM Extended Care 15 hours $30.00 $36.00

3. Camp Programs
A. Berkeley Day Camp
Youth Core Program 5-Days $240.00 $288.00
AM Extended Care 5-Days $51.00 $61.00
PM Extended Care 5-Days $79.00 $95.00
Counselor-In-Training 10-Days $194.00 $232.00
Surcharges
Changed reservation Per Change $0.00 $0.00
Cancelled Reservation
Session
25% of
reservation not
to exceed
$150
25% of
reservation not
to exceed
$150
B. Echo Lake Camp
50 & Better Camp
50 & Better Camp Tent (up to 2 campers) 5-Day $730.00 $876.00 50 & Better Camp Tent (up to 2 campers) 4-Day $580.00 $696.00 50 & Better Camp Tent (up to 2 campers) Weekend $460.00 $552.00 50 & Better Camp Additional Camper 1-Day $40.00 $48.00
Counselor-In-Training
Counselor-In-Training
2-Week $400.00 $480.00
Counselor-In-Training 1-Week $275.00 $330.00
Family Camp
Full-Week Standard Tent (up to 3 campers) 7-Day $1,675.00 $2,010.00 Full-Week Low-Occupancy Tent 7-Day $1,450.00 $1,740.00
5-Day Session - Standard Tent (up to 3 campers) 5-Day $1,375.00 $1,650.00 5-Day Session - Low Occupancy tent 5-Day $1,206.25 $1,447.50 Weekend Standard Tent (up to 3 campers) 4-Day $1,225.00 $1,470.00 Weekend Low-Occupancy Tent 4-Day $1,075.00 $1,290.00
Mid-Week Standard Tent (up to 3 campers) 4-Day $1,100.00 $1,320.00 Mid-Week Low-Occupancy Tent 4-Day $965.00 $1,158.00
Additional Camper Fee 1-Day $65.00 $78.00
Day Use Fees
Adult (15+) Day Use 1-Day $108.00 $129.60
Youth (7-14) Day Use 1-Day $72.00 $86.40
Child (3-6) Day Use 1-Day $54.00 $64.80
Group Rental Rates
Adult (15+) 1-Day $85.00 $102.00

Page 28 of 46 ends

256
Resolution: Exhibit A
8 Program Area Unit of Measure Resident Non- Resident
Youth (7-14) 1-Day $71.50 $85.80
Child (3-6) 1-Day $52.80 $63.36
Infant (0-3) 1-Day $0.00 $0.00
New Camper Welcome Weekend Weekend $195.00 $234.00
School Outdoor Education
Teachers & Adult Chaperones 1-Day $60.00 $72.00
Youth Participants 1-Day $45.00 $54.00
Shoulder Season Rentals
Shoulder Season Tent Rental (no meals, up to 3
campers) 1-Night $97.75 $117.30
Shoulder Season Tent Rental (with meals, up to 3
campers) 1-Night $195.50 $234.60
Work Weekend Weekend $0.00 $0.00
Youth Camp
5-Day Program 5-Days $600.00 $720.00
7-Day Program 7-Days $840.00 $1,008.00
Per Day Fee 1-Day $120.00 $144.00
Wedding Rental
Wedding Rental 4-Hours $750.00 $900.00
Wedding Rental - Each Additional Hour (after 4
hours) Hour $125.00 $150.00
C. Tuolumne Camp
50 & Better Camp
50 & Better Camp Tent (up to 2 campers) 5-Day $900.00 $1,080.00 50 & Better Camp Tent (up to 2 campers) 4-Day $720.00 $864.00 50 & Better Camp Tent (up to 2 campers) Weekend $540.00 $648.00 50 & Better Camp Additional Camper per day 1-Day $45.00 $54.00 Counselor-In-Training
Counselor-In-Training 2-Week $415.00 $498.00
Counselor-In-Training 1-Week $275.00 $330.00
Family Camp
Full-Week Standard Tent
(up to 3 campers) 1-Week $1,995.00 $2,394.00
Full-Week Low-Occupancy Tent 1-Week $1,715.00 $2,058.00 Weekend Standard Tent (up to 3 campers) 4-Day $1,460.00 $1,752.00 Weekend Low-Occupancy Tent 4-Day $1,280.00 $1,536.00
Mid-Week Standard Tent (up to 3 campers) 4-Day $1,300.00 $1,560.00 Mid-Week Low Occupancy Tent 4-Day $1,100.00 $1,320.00
Family Camp Day Use Fees
Adult (15+) Day Use 1-Day $135.00 $162.00
Youth (7-14) Day Use 1-Day $90.00 $108.00

Page 29 of 46 ends

257
Resolution: Exhibit A
9 Program Area Unit of Measure Resident Non- Resident
Child (3-6) Day Use 1-Day $68.00 $81.60
Additional Camper Fee 1-Day $75.00 $90.00
Group Rental Rates
Adult (15+) 1-Day $110.00 $132.00
Youth (7-14) 1-Day $93.00 $111.60
Child (3-6) 1-Day $78.00 $93.60
Infant (0-3) 1-Day $0.00 $0.00
New Camper Welcome Weekend Weekend $195.00 $234.00
School Outdoor Education
Adult Chaperones 1-Day $75.00 $90.00
Youth Participants 1-Day $56.00 $67.20
Shoulder Season Rentals
Shoulder Season Tent Rental (no meals) 1-Night $115.00 $138.00 Shoulder Season Tent Rental (with meals) 1-Night $230.00 $276.00 Work Weekend Weekend $0.00 $0.00
Youth Camp
5-Day Program 5-Days $750.00 $900.00
7-Day Program 7-Days $1,050.00 $1,260.00
Wedding Rental
Wedding Rental 4-Hours $1,000.00 $1,200.00
Wedding Rental - Each Additional Hour (after 4
hours) Hour $150.00 $180.00
D. Resident Camp Surcharges
Family Camp Program Deposit Payment $500 per
registration
$500 per
registration
Late Fee
$75 if balance is
not paid by date
specified

Cleaning / Damage Deposit Rental $300.00 $300.00
Changes to Reservation resulting in reduction in
length of stay (30 days or more before arrival) Reservation $100.00 $100.00 Cancel Reservation (30 days or more before
arrival)
25% of
reservation not to
exceed $150

Cancel Reservation (due to emergency or illness,
with Dr's excuse) Reservation No Charge No Charge

Page 30 of 46 ends

258
Resolution: Exhibit A
10 Program Area Unit of Measure Resident Non- Resident
B. Education Programs
Animal Session $200.00 $200.00
Low Tide Session $200.00 $200.00
Research Boat Trip Session $225.00 $225.00
Sail Boat Trip Session $255.00 $255.00
Docent Training Session $65.00 $65.00
Special Program Request Hour $65.00 $65.00
Marine Biology 4-Days $75.00 $75.00
Marine Biology 8-Days $150.00 $150.00
Boating 4-Days $150.00 $150.00
Canoeing 3-Days $55.00 $55.00

Page 31 of 46 ends

259
Resolution: Exhibit B
2 Policies and Procedures for Parks and Recreation Programs and Facilities I. CLASSIFICATION AND DEFINITION OF USER GROUPS
The following classifications and definitions are established for the purpose of determining recreation facility priority use and rental charges (exception: Athletic Fields).

User Groups may be required to provide insurance, (as a condition of facility use) as determined by the City of Berkeley Risk Manager.

1. City of Berkeley: Any department of the City of Berkeley using the facility for recreational or educational purposes.

2. Public Agencies: Agencies, such as Berkeley Unified School District, State of California, County, or University of California, providing a service to the City of Berkeley. (For example, the University providing tutoring to City recreation program participants.)

3. Resident Groups Serving Berkeley Residents With Disabilities: Per subtitle A of title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S. C. 12131), the term "disability" means, with respect to an individual:
a. A physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities of such individual;
b. A record of such impairment; or
c. Being regarded as having such impairment.

4. Resident Youth Groups: Any organized non-profit resident youth group that meets the following criteria:
a. A majority of the members are 17 years of age or under; b. There are adult leaders, advisors and/or chaperones that are present during events at COB facilities;
c. The group has documentation of non-profit status and adheres to all applicable rules and laws for non-profits including established meeting schedule, board of directors, and by-laws;
d. The group/non-profit organization does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, age, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, political affiliation, veterans' status, disabilities (physical and mental), and medical condition (including cancer and HIV status); e. The group's activities are recreational and/or educational in nature; f. At least 50% of the membership are residents of the City of Berkeley

5. Resident Senior Citizen Groups: Any organized adult group meeting the requirements listed under Resident Youth Groups in Section 4. above, except for numbers 4.a. and 4.b., and at least 75% of the membership is comprised of persons 65 years of age or older.

6. Residents: Persons who can prove Berkeley residency as noted below in Section II.1 and whose event/rental is not open to the public. (For example. Wedding receptions or parties.) Liability and/or other insurance may be required as determined by the City's Risk Manager. Resident must be at least 21 years old to rent facility.

7. Non-Resident: Persons residing outside of Berkeley. Non-resident must be at least 21 years old to rent a facility.

8. Non-resident Fees
a. Rental Fees for facilities, fields, and picnic areas are Resident Rate + 20% of Resident Rate

Page 32 of 46 ends

260
Resolution: Exhibit B
3 b. Program Fees for swim lessons, youth sports, tennis lessons, Skate Camp/Lessons, Recreation Center Afterschool Programs and Day Camp and Summer Fun Camps are Resident Rate + 20% of Resident Rate c. Adult Sports Team Fees are Resident Rate+ 20% of Resident Rate ($75 cap per team per season)
d. Berkeley Tuolumne Camp and Echo Lake Camp are Resident Rate + 20% of Resident Fees
II.

ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS

1. Residency: Proof of residency is required to receive the resident rate. A recent utility bill (within the past two months) is required for verification. Youth attending Berkeley Public Schools are eligible for the resident rate with current school photo identification card, and/or letter from school.

2. Age: New program participants may be required to provide proof of age at the time of registration to receive a youth discount. A copy of birth or baptismal certificate is acceptable proof.

III. BERKELEY TUOLUMNE CAMP AND ECHO LAKE CAMP
Fee Classifications
Fees for Echo Lake Camp and Tuolumne Camp Programs are scheduled in various ways depending on the program.

Family Camp:

Some programs utilize a per-tent, per-group fee for up to 3 campers. Group sizes larger than 3 may add campers for an additional fee per person, per night or session.

Some programs utilize a per-person, per-night fee. Per-person fees may vary depending on the age of participants, as shown below (note: ages at arrival to camp):
 Adult (ages 15+)
 Youth (Ages 7-14)
 Child (Ages 3-6)
 Infants (under 3) stay free of charge
Special Discounted Programs for Tuolumne and Echo Lake Camps The Department Director or designee may establish a discount during low attendance periods or during times when no formal camp is in session as a method to increase camp use. A discount of up to 40% may be given provided there is a clear benefit to the City of Berkeley and/or the City's Camp Fund.

Shoulder Season Use
Shoulder Season rates are applied when there is no program occurring at the Camp. (Shoulder-season individuals or groups may use the campgrounds, tents, cots with mattresses, and facilities, including food service, after payment of applicable fee.) Camp Reservations
 The City may cancel a reservation if the balance due is not paid by the payment deadline, or the following business day, should the deadline be a non-business day.

Page 33 of 46 ends

261
Resolution: Exhibit B
4  Any change that results in a reduction in a reservation must be requested at least 30 days or more prior to camp arrival date.
 A maximum of two cabins can be reserved under a single name.  An accommodation may be made for large group reservations.

Camps Service Charges
Changing Reservation: All changes must be made in writing at least 30 days prior to arrival date. No charges will be incurred for adding people, dates, or meals to an existing reservation. Changes resulting in a reduction of the reservation will result in a service charge according to the prevailing fee schedule. Additions may be made less than 30 days in advance as space allows.

Camp Closure Due to Emergency or Illness: In the event of an emergency or illness which leads to closure of camp, the Department Director, or designee may waive any unused portion of the reservation fee.

Cancel Reservation: A fee will be incurred for cancellations. Payments will be forfeited if cancelation is less than 30 days in advance of arrival date. See Refunds Policy. (Section VI)
Group Rentals – Camps

1. Exclusive use of Echo Lake Camp requires a minimum of 60 people. Exclusive use of Tuolumne Camp requires a minimum of 150 people.

2. Groups of less than the minimum may rent space at the camp, but use will not be permitted exclusive use.

3. Certificate of Insurance showing evidence of liability insurance in limits of not less than $1,000,000 and naming the City of Berkeley as an additional insured, is required for exclusive use group rentals only.

4. Groups Rentals are required to pay a 10% non-refundable deposit upon submission of the rental agreement to the City.

5. Group Rentals are required to pay an additional 20% non-refundable deposit at least 30 days prior to camp arrival date.

6. Group Rentals are required to pay the remaining balance due upon arrival at camp.

7. Group Rentals do not include access to the kitchen for meal preparation.

8. Groups must provide one dedicated medical staff at the user group's expense.

9. Groups must provide lifeguards, at the user group's expense. The number of lifeguards is based on the number of participants as determined by the Camp Manager.

10. A $300 cleaning deposit is required. Deposit will be returned if the camp has been left in the same condition as before the rental, as determined by the Camp Manager.

IV. LOW-INCOME FEE SUPPORT/ SCHOLARSHIPS
Low-income fee support/scholarships are available to Berkeley residents who meet Federal Low-income Guidelines. The City of Berkeley offers partial (50%) or full (100%) scholarships to Berkeley Residents for a wide variety of Recreation Division programs. Scholarship eligibility is based upon Housing and Urban Development (HUD) income thresholds, and applicants must submit documents to verify their proof of residency and gross household income or submit a low-income affidavit form to qualify.

Page 34 of 46 ends

262
Resolution: Exhibit B
5 Table 1. Scholarship Income Thresholds for Calendar Year 2021 Number of Household
members 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Qualifies
for 50%
New
calculated
figure 67,100 76,700 86,300 95,900 103,600 111,300 118,900 126,600 Qualifies
for100%
HUD Very
Low Income 47,950 54,800 61,650 68,500 74,000 79,500 84,950 90,450

HUD
Extremely
Low Income
28,800 32,900 37,000 41,100 44,400 47,700 51,000 54,300 Difference 19,150 21,900 24,650 27,400 29,600 31,800 33,950 36,150 *Updates annually based on HUD low-income guidelines.

Low-income fee support/scholarship availability in each program area may vary based on maximum capacities and enrollments. The Recreation Division reserves scholarship spaces in many program areas and provides priority registration opportunities to scholarship recipients.

Participants must re-apply for scholarships annually.

The Department Director, or his/her designee, can approve low-income fee support/scholarships for the program categories below. Low-income fee support/scholarships eligibility may vary for each of these categories.

CATEGORY A: General Fund Recreation Division Programs
General Fund programs have no limitations on the frequency of use, or the number of sessions attended by each scholarship recipient each calendar year. There are no scholarships for Drop- In programs. General Fund Programs include but are not limited to:

Afterschool Programs
Community Center Summer Fun Camps
Skate Park Camps
Special Events
Swim Lessons
CATEGORY B: Camps Fund - Resident & Day Camp Programs
Camp Fund programs have some limitations to the frequency of use, or the number of sessions attended by each scholarship recipient each calendar year. Scholarships are based on the operating fund’s ability to sustain them. The following Resident and Day Camp Programs operating out of the Camps Fund are eligible for scholarship use with some limitations:

Tuolumne Camp
Family Camp Programs
Youth Camp Programs
Counselor-In-Training Programs
Teen Leadership Programs
Echo Lake Camp
Family Camp Programs

Page 35 of 46 ends

263
Resolution: Exhibit B
6 Youth Camp Programs
Counselor-In-Training Programs
Teen Leadership Programs
Berkeley Day Camp
Core Program Enrollments
Counselor-In-Training Programs
In-Town Specialty Camp Programs
Echo Lake and Tuolumne Camp Year-Round Teen Leadership Programs 50 & Better Camp programs are not eligible for scholarships, as they are already offered at a discounted price.

Youth Camp and Counselor-In-Training (CIT) Programs:

Participants are allowed to apply their scholarship or hardship waiver to one (1) remote residential (sleepaway) Youth Camp or Counselor-In-Training session each calendar year, regardless of which Camp location is chosen (Echo or Tuolumne Camp). Camp sessions may vary in length and program offerings each season and at each Camp location. Due to capacity limitations, scholarship space may be limited for these programs.

Family Camp Programs:

Participants are allowed to apply their scholarship or hardship waiver to one (1) Family Camp session each calendar year, regardless of which Camp program is chosen (Echo or Tuolumne Camp). Family Camp sessions may vary in length and program offerings each season. Due to capacity limitations, scholarship space may be limited for these programs.

CATEGORY C: Self-supporting or Fee Based Recreation Programs These programs may vary annually. Limitations to the number of sessions, frequency of use, and scholarship amount awarded may apply. Scholarships are based on the operating fund’s ability to sustain them. There are no scholarships for Drop-In programs. Additional specialty programs may be eligible for scholarships at the discretion of the Parks Recreation Waterfront Director or their designee, and may include:

Third-party contractor offered specialty classes and sports programs Recreation Division specialty instructional programs and courses Other programs as determined annually and at the discretion of the PRW Director CATEGORY D: Marina Fund Program
Marina Programs do not require Berkeley residency, however, individuals or groups requesting low-income fee support for these programs are required to show proof that gross household income meets Federal Low-Income Guidelines:

Marine Biology and Boating Classes: A 50% discount from the standard/core fee. Eligible program participants will receive one discount per class per year.

Docent Training Programs: A 50% discount from the standard/core fee. Eligible program participants will receive one discount per class per year.

Classroom Field Trips to the Nature Center or Adventure Playground: A 50% discount from the standard/core fee will be allowed for qualifying classrooms. To qualify, teachers must first send a letter with proof that a minimum of 50% of the class (s) qualify for the school's free lunch program.

Page 36 of 46 ends

264
Resolution: Exhibit B
7 Letter must be directed to:

City of Berkeley Recreation Administration
c/o: Recreation & Youth Services Manager
1720 8th Street.

Berkeley, CA 94710
(510) 981-5150
[email protected]

ANNUAL RENEWAL PROCESS
Following initial approval for a scholarship, applicants must renew their scholarship eligibility annually by submitting current proof of Berkeley residency and income. City of Berkeley Recreation Administration staff will reach out to scholarship recipients annually to request renewal documentation.

SCHOLARSHIP DONATIONS
The City of Berkeley accepts donations from individuals who would like to contribute to offset the costs of operating the Recreation Division scholarship program. Direct questions about donating to support this program to the Recreation Administration office at (510) 981-5150 or e- mail: [email protected].

V. FEE WAIVERS
Hardship Waiver Eligibility
In a limited number of cases, fees may be waived altogether for participants who would otherwise not be able to participate in the program due to extreme financial, familial, or other hardship. The Director of Parks Recreation and Waterfront, or his/her designee will evaluate requests for waivers.

Applicant must submit a written request for a hardship waiver to the Parks Recreation Waterfront Director (or their designee) explaining the extreme financial, familial, or other hardship.

Recipients of waivers are required to demonstrate proof of Berkeley residency and legal guardianship. Proof of residency may include a letter of verification on a homeless services agency’s letterhead
Additional documentation may include a court order letter regarding Foster Care.

Camp Service Providers: Nurses and Independent Contractors are paid for their services and may receive a waiver of all camp fees while they are providing this service. One additional adult or two children under the age of fifteen, accompanying the camp service provider, may receive a waiver of all camp fees. Up to three additional family members, accompanying the camp service provider, may receive a waiver up to 80%, provided they use one tent cabin.

Artists-in-Residence: Artists-in-Residence are volunteers and are not paid for their services.

They may receive a waiver of all camp fees while they are providing this service. One additional adult or two children under the age of fifteen, accompanying the artist-in residence, may also receive a waiver. Up to three additional family members may receive a waiver up to 80%, provided they use one tent cabin.

Page 37 of 46 ends

265
Resolution: Exhibit B
8 Camp Volunteers: Volunteers may receive a fee waiver of all camp fees if all of the following applies: 1) must be a previous City of Berkeley or Tuolumne or Echo Lake Camp employee or have a skilled service that is deemed a necessity by the Parks Recreation & Waterfront Director; 2) must be over 18; and 3) no guests of volunteers are allowed during organized volunteer / work weekends.

VI. REFUNDS/ACCOUNT CREDITS
All requests for refunds or account credits must be directed to the Recreation & Youth Services Manager, Recreation Division, 1720 8th Street, Berkeley, CA 94710 or email [email protected]. The original receipt must be submitted with a written request for a refund or account credit. The request must state the reason for the refund or account credit, and the date, time and location of the program, and the amount requested.

The Recreation and Youth Services Manager will render a decision to either: 1) refund the fee; 2) issue an account credit; 3) pro-rate the fee; 4) apply the fees to another session or program (not applicable to sports field permits); or 5) deny the request.

Recreation and Marina Programs and Facility Rentals/Reservations: This policy includes but is not limited to Recreation Programs, Recreation Facilities, Picnic Site Reservations, Tennis/Pickleball Reservations, Camp Day Use Permits, Adventure Playground, and Marina Programs. No refunds or credit will be granted without 7-days-notice prior to date of reservation, except for rainouts or poor air quality. The City will deduct 25% of the amount paid from the refund or credit to cover administrative expenses or will deduct a minimum $10.00 service charge. The Administration Fee is not to exceed $150.00.

In the event of a rainout or poor air quality on the date of reservation, customer may request to change the reservation to a later date, subject to availability. If no other date is available or desirable, customer may request to apply the fees toward another Recreation program or request a refund or account credit. Rainout or poor air quality requests must be made in writing no later than 72 hours after the date of reservation. The Recreation and Youth Services Manager will render a decision to either: 1) refund the fee; 2) issue an account credit; 3) pro-rate the fee; 4) apply the fees to another program or reservation; or 5) deny the request.

Camp Programs (Tuolumne Camp and Echo Lake Camp): No refunds or credit will be provided if cancellation is made less than 30 days before camp arrival date. A refund or account credit will be provided if the entire reservation is cancelled not less than 30 calendar days prior to arrival date, less a 25% administration fee not to exceed $150.

Emergency, Illness and/or Bereavement Refund Request: The Department Director, or designee, may refund the reservation fee on a prorated basis in the event of an emergency, illness or bereavement of an immediate family member occurring after registering for a program. A written request must be submitted no later than 30 days after the date of the event and must include the reason a refund is being requested and a copy of a written doctor's verification for medical reasons, or a copy of the obituary or memorial service program for bereavement reasons.

Sports Field Permits: A refund may be requested for any time that a City field is not used due to circumstances beyond the control of the permit holder (e.g., weather). To request a refund, a letter must be sent to the City's Recreation Division Manager for approval at their

Page 38 of 46 ends

266
Resolution: Exhibit B
9 discretion. The letter must contain the following items: the dates and times and amounts requested, along with a copy of the permit and the City-issued payment receipt number.

Refunds for full season permits shall be issued for field closures that happen on the third or more closure that occurs in subsequent and separate weeks (e.g., the third Monday out of three rained out Mondays would be refunded) and are processed at the end of each season. Refunds for spot bookings are refunded in the full amount upon request and are processed throughout the season.

Account Credits: The Recreation Division of the Parks, Recreation and Waterfront Department (PRW) may issue Account Credits when the Recreation Division cancels a program, reservation, or permit. PRW may also issue a credit when a customer requests an Account Credit for a program that they have paid for but do not participate in, or for a reservation, or permit that they have paid for but do not use.

Definition: Account Credit – reversal of a customer payment, which is applied to their account for future use in the Recreation Division.

Account Credits must be cleared before the end of each fiscal year. Any customer that has an Account Credit of $10 or more will be automatically issued a refund check beginning May 1st of that current fiscal year. Refunds may take up to 10 – 12 weeks to process.

Per Department policy, checks will not be issued for refunds for less than $10.00. Account Credits under $10.00 will roll into the next fiscal year.

Special Requests: Customers may request a refund of their Account Credit in writing to the Recreation Customer Service Hub. The decision to issue a refund of an Account Credit will be determined by the Recreation and Youth Services Manager or their designee.

VII. SPECIAL USE RENTAL POLICY

1. Purpose
A primary goal of the City's Community Centers is to become a "hub" of resources and referrals for neighborhoods by establishing a relationship of mutual support and trust.

Through this trust, we promote safe neighborhoods and opportunities for families and youth to be engaged in activities that enhance the community and support the goals of the Parks Recreation and Waterfront Department. Each year the Parks Recreation and Waterfront Department receives numerous requests from community groups to meet at its Community Centers as well as the Berkeley Marina Conference Room for no fee. As a way to cultivate community relationships and respond to community requests for free meeting space, the City has created a policy whereby qualified local groups (e.g., neighborhood, Community Agency Contract, or non-profit groups that comply with this policy) are allowed to hold meetings, free of charge, at the City's Community Centers and the Berkeley Marina Conference Room during normal business hours.

2. Application Process
A completed application and attachments must be submitted before a reservation is confirmed. Groups applying for a Special Use Rental must support and benefit the goals of the City of Berkeley Parks Recreation and Waterfront Department ("PRW"). The department is committed to administering excellent recreation programs at our community centers, camps, marina and parks; developing new programs that improve access for

Page 39 of 46 ends

267
Resolution: Exhibit B
10 historically underserved participants; maintaining our trees and municipal urban forest, landscaping and infrastructure; and, developing Capital Projects with community input to improve and enhance residents' park and facility experience.

All interested groups must submit a completed Special Use Rental application on an annual basis, with all of the following attached:
 Proof that membership has approved meetings (either by providing a Board resolution, Agendas, or Minutes).
 A $200 Cleaning/Damage Deposit (Refundable).
 A written statement that the group/non-profit organization does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, age, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, political affiliation, veterans' status, disabilities (physical and mental), and medical condition (including cancer and HIV status).  A written statement describing the group's goals and how they support and benefit the goals of the City of Berkeley Parks Recreation and
Waterfront Department.

In addition to the above requirements that apply to all interested groups, Community Agency Contract and non-profit groups must also submit:
 List of membership roster with names, addresses, and phone numbers  Proof of non-profit status (required for non-profit groups)  At least 14 days before the date of the first meeting, qualified groups must provide a valid Certificate of Insurance (COI) containing the City's minimum liability requirements, and naming the city of Berkeley as additional insured on separate Endorsement. This COI must cover all of the group’s reserved dates for the year. If the COI is not provided at least 14 days prior to the first reserved date, the reservation will be cancelled.

PRW will not begin to review the application until the application is complete, including all required information and attachments. A reservation is not confirmed until the applicant receives written notice of approval from PRW.

Applications may be picked up at: 1) any Recreation Center; 2) Recreation Division Office, 1720 8th St., Berkeley, CA 94710; 3) Berkeley Marina Office; or 4) City of Berkeley website:
www.cityofberkeley.info/parks
Approval of applications is at the discretion of the Recreation and Youth Services Manager or designee; a decision denying the application is final and not subject to appeal. If PRW denies the fee waiver application, the interested group may apply to rent the room for the standard fee.

Qualified Groups: In order to qualify for this policy, groups must comply with all of the requirements set forth above in section I. In addition, groups must support and benefit the goals of the City of Berkeley Parks Recreation and Waterfront Department and groups must be one of the following:

Neighborhood Groups: Any group living in a specific area of Berkeley that comes together to either exchange ideas for neighborhood improvement and community building, or to help solve neighborhood problems or issues.

Non-profit Groups: Any organized non-profit group that meets at least quarterly.

Page 40 of 46 ends

268
Resolution: Exhibit B
11 Community Agency Contract Groups: Any City of Berkeley Community Agency Contract group that serves youth under 18 years of age.

There must be adult leaders, advisors and/or chaperones attending each meeting.

3. Limitations
 Qualified groups may hold a regular meeting of up to two hours at a specified meeting room in a Community Center or the Marina Conference Room for up to eight (8) times per year during regular operating hours.  Exception: The Community Room, Auditorium, or Social Hall at each Community Center may be used for one additional "larger scale" meeting, such as a banquet or social event, each year.
 Meetings must be open to the public.
 Regular Business Operating Hours are when the Community Center or Marina Office is open (Hours may vary for each facility based on its regular schedule of use).
 Qualified groups may not conduct the following activities: for-profit business or commercial activities; campaign activities; private instruction; or fundraising (unless fundraising proceeds are devoted solely to municipal recreation and park improvements, which must be demonstrated with a written request to the Recreation and Youth Services Manager/designee).
 A reservation for the qualified group may be scheduled a maximum of 180 days in advance and a minimum of 14 days in advance, and must not conflict with ongoing programs, paid rentals, or classes.
 A qualified group is required to do set-up, takedown and clean up.  Any additional fees other than the waived rental fee (e.g., kitchen use, stage, set- up/take down, etc.) shall apply and are the sole financial responsibility of the qualified group
 The City has the right to cancel a reservation at any time.  Groups cancelling a reservation must give at least 72-hours-notice. If proper notice of cancellation is not given, the City reserves the right to revoke the group's reservations for the entire year, or any part of the year. The City may revoke the group's reservations for the entire year, or any part of the year for any of the following reasons: if the group fails to abide by any of the information in its application; the group fails to comply with any of the Rules and Regulations of the City's Facility Rental Policy.

VIII. IMPLEMENTATION OF NEW FEES
The Director of Parks Recreation and Waterfront, or his/her designee, reserves the right to establish fees for new Recreation programs up to $350 for Berkeley residents and $420 for non-residents based on comparison with other municipalities.

Page 41 of 46 ends

269
ATTACHMENT 4
1 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING

BERKELEY CITY COUNCIL
Recreation Division Fee Increases
Notice is hereby given by the City Council of the City of Berkeley that a public hearing will be conducted by said city council of the City of Berkeley at which time and place all persons may attend and be heard upon the following:

The Department of Parks, Recreation & Waterfront is proposing to increase selected fees, as contained in the attached Recreation Fee Schedule and excerpted below:

Program Area Unit of
Measure

Resident
Resident
(proposed)
Non-
Resident
Non-Resident
(proposed)

3. Camp Programs
B. Echo Lake Camp
50 & Better Camp
50 & Better Camp (per
camper) 4-Day $290.00 Eliminated $320.00 Eliminated
50 & Better Camp (per
camper) Weekend $230.00 Eliminated $254.00 Eliminated
50 & Better Camp Tent
(up to 2 campers) 5-Day $730.00 $876.00
50 & Better Camp Tent
(up to 2 campers) 4-Day $580.00 $696.00
50 & Better Camp Tent
(up to 2 campers) Weekend $460.00 $552.00
50 & Better Camp
Additional Camper 1-Day $40.00 $48.00
Counselor-In-Training
Counselor-In-Training 2-Week $400.00 $440.00 $480.00
Counselor-In-Training 1-Week $275.00 $300.00 $330.00 Family Camp
Full-Week Standard
Tent 7-Day $1,675.00 $1,842.50 $2,010.00
Full-Week Low-
Occupancy Tent (up to
2 campers)
7-Day $1,450.00 $1,600.00 $1,740.00
5-Day Session -
Standard Tent (up to 3
campers)
5-Day $1,100.00 $1,375.00 $1,100.00 $1,650.00
5-Day Session - Low
Occupancy tent (up to 2
campers)
5-Day $1,000.00 $1,206.25 $1,200.00 $1,447.50

Page 42 of 46 ends

270
ATTACHMENT 4
2 Program Area Unit of
Measure

Resident
Resident
(proposed)
Non-
Resident
Non-Resident
(proposed)
Weekend Standard Tent
(up to 3 campers) 4-Day $1,225.00 $1,470.00
Weekend Low-
Occupancy Tent (up to
2 campers)
4-Day $1,075.00 $1,290.00
Mid-Week Standard
Tent (up to 3 campers) 4-Day $1,100.00 $1,320.00
Mid-Week Low-
Occupancy Tent (up to 2
campers)
4-Day $965.00 $0.00 $1,158.00
Additional Camper Fee 1-Day $65.00 $0.00 $78.00
Additional Camper Fee 5-Day
Session $250.00 Eliminated $275.00 Eliminated
Additional Camper Fee 7-Day
Session $375.00 Eliminated $415.00 Eliminated
Day Use Fees
Adult (15+) Day Use 1-Day $108.00 $120.00 $129.60
Youth (7-14) Day Use 1-Day $72.00 $80.00 $86.40
Child (3-6) Day Use 1-Day $54.00 $60.00 $64.80
Group Rental Rates
Adult (15+) 1-Day $76.00 $85.00 $84.00 $102.00
Youth (7-14) 1-Day $65.00 $71.50 $71.00 $85.80
Child (3-6) 1-Day $48.00 $52.80 $42.00 $63.36
Infant (0-3) 1-Day $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
New Camper Welcome
Weekend Weekend $195.00 $234.00
School Outdoor
Education
Teachers & Adult
Chaperones 1-Day $60.00 $72.00
Youth Participants 1-Day $45.00 $54.00
Shoulder Season
Rentals
Shoulder Season Tent
Rental (no meals, up to
3 campers)
1-Night $97.75 $117.30
Shoulder Season Tent
Rental (with meals, up to
3 campers)
1-Night $195.50 $234.60
Work Weekend Weekend $0.00 $0.00
Youth Camp
5-Day Program 5-Days $600.00 $660.00 $720.00
7-Day Program 7-Days $840.00 $924.00 $1,008.00
Per Day Fee 1-Day $120.00 $144.00

Page 43 of 46 ends

271
ATTACHMENT 4
3 Program Area Unit of
Measure

Resident
Resident
(proposed)
Non-
Resident
Non-Resident
(proposed)
Wedding Rental
Wedding Rental 4-Hours $750.00 $900.00
Wedding Rental - Each
Additional Hour (after 4
hours)
Hour $125.00 $150.00
C. Tuolumne Camp
50 & Better Camp
50 & Better Camp Tent
(up to 2 campers) 5-Day $900.00 $1,080.00
50 & Better Camp Tent
(up to 2 campers) 4-Day $720.00 $864.00
50 & Better Camp Tent
(up to 2 campers) Weekend $540.00 $648.00
50 & Better Camp
Additional Camper per
day
1-Day $45.00 $54.00
Counselor-In-Training
Counselor-In-Training 2-Week $415.00 $498.00
Counselor-In-Training 1-Week $275.00 $330.00
Family Camp
Full-Week Standard
Tent
(up to 3 campers)
1-Week $1,995.00 $2,394.00
Full-Week Low-
Occupancy Tent
(up to 2 campers)
1-Week $1,715.00 $2,058.00
Weekend Standard Tent
(up to 3 campers) 4-Day $1,460.00 $1,752.00
Weekend Low-
Occupancy Tent (up to 2
campers)
4-Day $1,280.00 $1,536.00
Mid-Week Standard
Tent (up to 3 campers) 4-Day $1,300.00 $1,560.00
Mid-Week Low
Occupancy Tent (up to 2
campers)
4-Day $1,100.00 $1,320.00
Family Camp Day Use
Fees
Adult (15+) Day Use 1-Day $135.00 $162.00
Youth (7-14) Day Use 1-Day $90.00 $108.00
Child (3-6) Day Use 1-Day $68.00 $81.60
Mid-Week Low-
Occupancy Tent 4-Day $1,140.00 $1,368.00
Additional Camper Fee 1-Day $75.00 $90.00

Page 44 of 46 ends

272
ATTACHMENT 4
4 Program Area Unit of
Measure

Resident
Resident
(proposed)
Non-
Resident
Non-Resident
(proposed)
Group Rental Rates
Adult (15+) 1-Day $110.00 $132.00
Youth (7-14) 1-Day $93.00 $111.60
Child (3-6) 1-Day $78.00 $93.60
Infant (0-3) 1-Day $0.00 $0.00
New Camper Welcome
Weekend Weekend $195.00 $234.00
School Outdoor
Education
Adult Chaperones 1-Day $75.00 $90.00
Youth Participants 1-Day $56.00 $67.20
Shoulder Season
Rentals
Shoulder Season Tent
Rental (no meals) 1-Night $115.00 $138.00
Shoulder Season Tent
Rental (with meals) 1-Night $230.00 $276.00
Work Weekend Weekend $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Youth Camp
5-Day Program 5-Days $750.00 $900.00
7-Day Program 7-Days $1,050.00 $1,260.00
Per Day Fee 1-Day $150.00 $180.00
Wedding Rental
Wedding Rental 4-Hours $1,000.00 $1,200.00
Wedding Rental - Each
Additional Hour (after 4
hours)
Hour $150.00 $180.00
D. Resident Camp
Surcharges
Family Camp Program
Deposit Payment $500 per
registration $500 per registration
Late Fee
$75 if balance
is not paid by
date specified

Cleaning / Damage
Deposit Rental $300.00 $300.00
Changes to Reservation
resulting in reduction in
length of stay (30 days
or more before arrival)
Reservation $100.00 $100.00
Cancel Reservation (30
days or more before
arrival)
25% of
reservation not
to exceed
$150

Page 45 of 46 ends

273
ATTACHMENT 4
5 Program Area Unit of
Measure

Resident
Resident
(proposed)
Non-
Resident
Non-Resident
(proposed)
Cancel Reservation
(due to emergency or
illness, with Dr's excuse)
Reservation No
Charge No
Charge
The hearing will be held on January 18, 2022, at 6:00 p.m. in the School District Board Room, 1231 Addison Street.

For further information, please contact Denise Brown at 510-981-6707.

A copy of the agenda material for this hearing will be available on the City’s website at www.CityofBerkeley.info as of January 18, 2022.

Written comments should be mailed or delivered directly to the City Clerk, 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704, in order to ensure delivery to all Councilmembers and inclusion in the agenda packet.

Communications to the Berkeley City Council are public record and will become part of the City’s electronic records, which are accessible through the City’s website. Please note: e-mail addresses, names, addresses, and other contact information are not required, but if included in any communication to the City Council, will become part of the public record.

If you do not want your e-mail address or any other contact information to be made public, you may deliver communications via U.S. Postal Service or in person to the City Clerk. If you do not want your contact information included in the public record, please do not include that information in your communication. Please contact the City Clerk at 981-6900 or [email protected] for further information.

If you challenge the above in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Berkeley at, or prior to, the public hearing.

Background information concerning this proposal will be available at the City Clerk Department and posted on the City of Berkeley webpage at least 12 days prior to the public hearing.

Published: January 10 and January 17, 2022 – The Berkeley Voice Published pursuant to Government Code 6062a
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I hereby certify that the Notice for this Public Hearing of the Berkeley City Council was posted at the display case located near the walkway in front of the Maudelle Shirek Building, 2134 Martin Luther King Jr. Way, as well as on the City’s website, on January XX, 2022.

Mark Numainville, City Clerk

Page 46 of 46 ends

274

Rashi Kesarwani
Councilmember District 1
2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 Tel: 510.981.XXXX TDD: 510.981.6903 Fax: 510.981.XXXX E-Mail: [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTAL

AGENDA MATERIAL
for Supplemental Packet 2

Meeting Date: December 14, 2021

Item Number: 46

Item Description: Response to City Council Action on October 26, 2021 regarding Short Term Referral for Amendments to Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Ordinance

Submitted by: Councilmember Rashi Kesarwani

The purpose of this supplemental report is to provide minor clarifying changes to the proposed ADU Ordinance in order to ensure its consistency with Council’s direction on October 26, 2021 and with state Government Code Section 65852.2 and 22.

Page 1 of 110 ends

275

Rashi Kesarwani
Councilmember District 1

CONSENT CALENDAR
December 13, 2021

TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council

FROM: Councilmember Rashi Kesarwani (Author)

SUBJECT: Response to City Council Action on October 26, 2021 regarding Short Term Referral for Amendments to Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Ordinance (Item #46)

1. Further restrict areas in multi-family buildings that may be converted to ADUs in order to protect non-habitable space that may be within a tenant’s dwelling unit. (23.102.020.B.3.b)
The proposed zoning ordinances states that “non-habitable” portions of multi-family buildings may be converted to ADUs. State law, however, applies a different standard—that the area must be outside a dwelling unit. “Non-habitable space” can occur both inside and outside of dwelling units. To protect the non-habitable space that may be within a tenant’s dwelling unit, it is proposed that Berkeley specify that these spaces be outside the walls of a dwelling unit to qualify for conversion.

Berkeley’s Baseline Zoning Ordinance states that storage areas are not habitable space.1 If it’s within a dwelling unit, it may not be converted to an ADU according to State law; if it’s outside of a dwelling unit, it may. State law allows conversion of areas “that are not used as livable space” but it does not define “livable space.” To resolve this problem, the state’s Housing and Community Development Department (HCD) has interpreted “livable space” in this case to mean “outside the walls of the living area.”2

1 See Berkeley Baseline Zoning Ordinance Section 23.502.020.H.1. Habitable Space. A space in a building which is used or designed to be used for living, sleeping, eating or cooking, but not including garages, bathrooms, utility, storage and laundry rooms, halls or closets . 2 HCD Official Correspondence 22: Livable space is the area within a building that is within the walls of an individual dwelling unit. Unused non-livable space may be converted to ADUs in multi-family buildings.

Note: "Habitable space," as defined in the Building Code, is not the appropriate term in this case because it excludes spaces such as baths, kitchens, hallways, etc. These excluded areas—called non-habitable

Page 2 of 110 ends

276
2 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7110 ● Fax: (510) 981-7111 E-Mail: [email protected]

2. Clarify rules that apply to Accessory Structures being converted into ADUs.

The footnotes in Table 23.306-1 ADU and JADU Development Standards explain how the development standards apply to accessory structures under different circumstances. The three minor proposed changes here seek simply to clarify when these standards apply.

• In Footnote #1, delete date “prior to December 1, 2021” so that all legally-established accessory structures are eligible to be converted into a full size ADU (850 or 1,000 square feet). Footnote #1 specifies that only accessory structures built before December 1, 2021 may be converted into full-sized ADUs (850 or 1,000 square feet). This arbitrary date would go against the spirit of Council’s direction on October 26, 2021 that all legally- established existing accessory structures should be able to be converted into ADUs.
• In Footnote #2, clarify that only accessory structures that exceed the development standards in the table are limited to a physical addition of no more than 150 square feet. Footnote #2 currently refers to “non- compliant” accessory structures, which is not as clear as specifying that the footnote is only applicable to accessory structures that “exceed” the development standards specified in the table.
• In Footnote #4, clarify that replacement parking for ADUs and JADUs is optional. Footnote #4 is not clear that replacement parking is not required. A sentence has been added to specify that replacement parking is not required.

3. Clarify owner occupancy requirement for JADUs
The language requiring owner-occupancy for properties with a JADU mentions that the owner may occupy either the JADU or the main dwelling. Since a single-family parcel may include an ADU and a JADU, it is recommended that the language clarify that they owner may also occupy an ADU on the same property. The modification applies to the language required for the Deed Restriction and the language in the definition of a JADU:
• 23.306.050 Deed Restrictions
• 23.502.020.J.1 Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit (JADU)

4. Modify noticing requirements for tenants and neighbors (23.306.060) The proposed noticing requirement applies to ADUs proposed for both single-family homes and multi-family properties. It requires noticing of both tenants and neighbors before the owner has submitted the ADU application. The purposes of these notices differ. For tenants, it is to ensure that they are aware of the changes proposed so any

space—may not be converted to an ADU if they are within an individual dwelling unit (Last Modified:
2021-08-27). State Government Code Section 65852.20(e)(1)(C)(i) reads, “Multiple accessory dwelling units within the portions of existing multifamily dwelling structures that are not used as livable space, including, but not limited to, storage rooms, boiler rooms, passageways, attics, basements, or garages, if each unit complies with state building standards for dwellings” (Last Modified: 2020-01-01).

Page 3 of 110 ends

277
3 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7110 ● Fax: (510) 981-7111 E-Mail: [email protected]

problems that tenants might encounter may be resolved early in the permit process.

For the neighbors, it is to provide a courtesy notice about pending construction, the rules that apply, and the name and phone number of someone to contact in case there are problems.

Given these differences, we propose two notices that differ in timing, content, and recipients.
• The notice to tenants should be given before the application is submitted and should be submitted to tenants of the subject property.
• The notice to neighbors should be given before construction begins and should be submitted to owners and occupants of both the subject and neighboring properties.

CONTACT PERSON
Councilmember Rashi Kesarwani, District 1 (510) 981-7110

Page 4 of 110 ends

278
4 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7110 ● Fax: (510) 981-7111 E-Mail: [email protected]

ORDINANCE NO. -N.S.

AMENDMENTS TO THE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT (ADU) ORDINANCE (BMC

23.306) AND DEFINED TERMS (BMC 23.502.020) RELATING TO ADUS

BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Berkeley as follows:

Section 1. That Berkeley Municipal Code 23.306 is amended to read as follows:

23.306 Accessory Dwelling Units

Sections:

Error! Reference source not found.Error! Reference source not found.

23.306.040– Development Standards

23.306.050– Deed Restrictions

23.306.060– Neighborhood Noticing

– Purposes
The purposes of this Chapter are to:

Implement California Government Code Section 65852.2 and 65852.22.

Increase overall supply and range of housing options in Berkeley.

Expedite small-scale infill development.

Support Housing Element goals of facilitating construction of accessory dwelling units and increasing the number of housing units that are more affordable to Berkeley residents.

Encourage development of accessory dwelling units in zoning districts with compatible land uses and infrastructure.

Reduce potential impacts of new development in high fire severity areas and the Hillside Overlay District due to unique conditions and hazards within these areas that require additional restrictions on ADUs and JADUs because of impacts of traffic flow and public safety, consistent with Government Code 65852.2, subdivision (a)(1)(A), which allows local agencies to regulate ADUs based on "adequacy of water and sewer service, and the impacts of traffic flow and public safety."

– Applicability

Page 5 of 110 ends

279
5 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7110 ● Fax: (510) 981-7111 E-Mail: [email protected]

A. The provisions of this chapter apply to zoning districts where residential uses are permitted, on lots that have at least one existing or proposed Dwelling Unit or Group Living Accommodation that is not a Fraternity House, Sorority House or Dormitory.

1. Exceptions. The provisions of this chapter that permit ADUs and JADUs do not apply to lots in the R-1H (Single-Family Residential—Hillside Overlay), R-2H (Restricted Two-Family Residential—Hillside Overlay), or R-2AH (Restricted Multiple-Family Residential—Hillside Overlay) Districts. In such districts, ADUs and JADUs shall only be permitted to the extent required by subdivision (e)(1) of Government Code Section 65852.2.

B. Number of ADUs and JADUs Permitted Per Lot.

1. Lot with one Single Family Dwelling: One ADU and/or one JADU.

2. Lot with more than one Single Family Dwelling: One ADU.

3. Lot with a Duplex or Multi-Family Dwelling, either:
a. Up to two detached ADUs; or
b. At least one ADU converted from non-habitable portions of the existing Main Building that are not within the living space of a dwelling unit (e.g. basement, attic, garages, storage room). The maximum number of ADUs converted from non-habitable portions of the existing Main Building that are not within the living space of a dwelling unit shall not exceed 25% of the total number of existing Dwelling Units on the lot.

4. Lot with a Group Living Accommodation that is not a Fraternity House, Sorority House or Dormitory: One ADU.
– Permit Procedures
A. Zoning Certificate. An application for an ADU or JADU shall be allowed with a Zoning Certificate. Review must be completed within 60 days of submission of a completed application. A completed application must include evidence of compliance with this Chapter, including Development Standards, Deed Restrictions, and Neighborhood Noticing.

1. If an application to create an ADU or JADU is submitted as part of a project that requires discretionary review, a Zoning Certificate for a Building Permit shall not be issued for the ADU or JADU until the discretionary approval(s) has/have been granted and any applicable appeal periods have expired.

2. Issuance of a Zoning Certificate shall not be denied for the construction or conversion of an ADU or JADU that complies with the requirements of Government Code Section 65852.2(e)(1).

Page 6 of 110 ends

280
6 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7110 ● Fax: (510) 981-7111 E-Mail: [email protected]

3. Issuance of a Zoning Certificate for the construction or conversion of an ADU or JADU shall not be denied based on the failure of an applicant to correct a nonconforming zoning condition.

23.306.040 Development Standards

A. Basic Standards. See Table 23.306-1: ADU and JADU Development Standards.

TABLE 23.306-1 ADU AND JADU DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
ADU1 JADU
Maximum Size2 500 sf
Studio or 1 bedroom 850 sf
N/A
2 + bedrooms 1000 sf
Maximum Height 20 ft.

Front Yard Setback Same as underlying district
Rear Setback 4 ft3
Side Setback 4 ft3
Required Off-Street Parking None4
[1] An ADU converted from an Accessory Building or Accessory Structure legally established prior to December 1, 2021 that does not comply with the Maximum Height, Size, and/or Rear and Side Setback requirements is allowed to maintain non-conformity to the same dimensions of the existing Accessory Building or Accessory Structure. Any physical additions to the existing Accessory Building or Accessory Structure shall comply with the development standards in this table.
[2] An ADU created entirely through conversion, with no modifications to the existing building envelope that exceedsis non-compliant with the development standards in this table is allowed a physical addition of no more than 150 square feet. The addition must that complyies with Maximum Height and Setback requirements in this table.
[3] If there is a lesser setback allowed for a comparable Accessory Building or Accessory Structure in the underlying zoning district, that setback shall apply. [4] Replacement parking is not required. Replacement of off-street parking for the Main Building is allowed and does not need to comply with Parking Maximums (BMC 23.322.070) nor Parking Layout and Design (BMC 23.322.080).

B. Projections. Architectural features (Chimneys, Water Heater Enclosures, Flues, Heating and Cooling Equipment, Eaves, Cornices, Canopies, Awnings) may project two feet into the required setbacks, so long as there remains at least a two-foot setback from property lines. Bay windows may not project into a setback.

23.306.050 - Deed Restrictions
A. The property owner shall file a deed restriction with the Alameda County Recorder which states:

1. The JADU shall not be sold separately from the Main Building;

Page 7 of 110 ends

281
7 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7110 ● Fax: (510) 981-7111 E-Mail: [email protected]

2. The ADU shall not be sold separately from the Main Building unless the conditions of BMC 23.306.050 B are met;

3. The ADU and/or JADU shall not be rented for a term that is shorter than 30 days; and

4. If the property includes a JADU, the JADU, or the Single Family Dwelling in which the JADU is located, or an ADU shall be owner-occupied.

B. ADUs Developed by a Qualified Nonprofit Developer. An ADU built or developed by a “qualified nonprofit corporation” may be sold or conveyed separately from the Main Building to a “qualified buyer,” as such terms are defined in subdivision (b) of Section 65852.26 of the California Government Code. The ADU must be held pursuant to a recorded tenancy in common agreement recorded on or after December 31, 2021 that includes the following elements:

1. Delineation of all areas of the property that are for the exclusive use of a cotenant;

2. Delineation of each cotenant’s responsibility for the costs of taxes, insurance, utilities, general maintenance and repair, and improvements associated with the property;

3. Procedures for dispute resolution among cotenants before resorting to legal action;

4. Allocates to each qualified buyer an undivided, unequal interest in the property based on the size of the dwelling each qualified buyer occupies;

5. A repurchase option that requires the qualified buyer to first offer the qualified nonprofit corporation to buy the ADU or primary dwelling if the buyer desires to sell or convey the property;

6. A requirement that the qualified buyer occupy the ADU or primary dwelling as the buyer’s principal residence; and

7. Affordability restrictions on the sale and conveyance of the ADU or primary dwelling that ensure the ADU and primary dwelling will be preserved for low - income housing for 45 years for owner-occupied housing units and will be sold or resold to a qualified buyer.

8. If requested by a utility providing service to the primary residence, the ADU shall have a separate water, sewer, or electrical connection to that utility.

23.306.060 – Neighbor Noticing

A. A. Tenant Notices

1. Scope and Timing of Notice. Notice of an ADU application on a multi-family parcel shall be mailed to owners and tenants of the subject, adjacent, confronting and abutting propertyies within ten working days of submission to the Planning Department.

2. B. Content of Notice. Notice shall provide the address of the project, allowable hours of construction, and a link to the City’s ADU webpage.

Page 8 of 110 ends

282
8 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7110 ● Fax: (510) 981-7111 E-Mail: [email protected]

B. Neighbor Notices

1. Scope and Timing of Notice. Notice of an ADU application shall be mailed to owners and tenants of the subject, adjacent, confronting and abutting properties when the Building Permit is issued.

2. Content of Notice. Notice shall provide the address of the project, allowable hours of construction, and a link to the City’s ADU webpage.

C. Mailing Fees. The applicant shall be responsible for the cost of materials, postage and staff time necessary to process and mail notices.

Section 2. That the definition of Accessory Dwelling Unit in Berkeley Municipal Code Chapter 23.502.020.A.4 is amended to read as follows:

23.502.020.A.4

Accessory Dwelling Unit. A secondary dwelling unit that is located on a lot in a zoning district where residential uses are permitted with a proposed or existing Single Family Dwelling, Duplex, Multi-Family Dwelling Use or Group Living Accommodation. An Accessory Dwelling Unit must comply with local building, housing, safety and other code requirements, except as expressly modified in Chapter 23.306, and provide the following features independent of the primary dwelling unit: 1) exterior or independent access to Accessory dwelling unit; 2) living and sleeping quarters; 3) a full kitchen; and 4) a full bathroom. An Accessory Dwelling Unit also includes the following:
a. An efficiency unit, as defined in Section 17958.1 of the Health and Safety Code. b. A manufactured home, as defined in Section 18007 of the Health and Safety Code.

Section 3. That the definition of Primary Dwelling Unit in Berkeley Municipal Code Chapter 23.502.020.P.16 is rescinded.

23.502.020.P.16

Primary Dwelling Unit: A legally established Single Family Dwelling that is on a lot with an Accessory Dwelling Unit.

Section 4. That the definition of Efficiency Kitchen is adopted in Berkeley Municipal Code Chapter 23.502.020.E.1 as follows:

23.502.020.E.1

Efficiency Kitchen: A kitchen that includes a sink, a cooking facility with appliances (e.g. microwave, toaster, oven, hot plate), and food preparation counter space and cabinets.

Page 9 of 110 ends

283
9 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7110 ● Fax: (510) 981-7111 E-Mail: [email protected]

Section 5. That the definition of Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit (JADU) is adopted in Berkeley Municipal Code Chapter 23.502.020.J.1 as follows:

23.502.020.J.1

1. Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit (JADU): A unit that is contained entirely within the walls of a Single Family Dwelling. A JADU must include a separate exterior entrance and an Efficiency Kitchen with a working refrigerator. A JADU may include separate sanitation facilities or may share sanitary facilities with a Single Family Dwelling. The property-owner must reside in either the Single Family Dwelling, or the JADU, or an ADU on the property.

Section 6. Copies of this Ordinance shall be posted for two days prior to adoption in the display case located near the walkway in front of the Maudelle Shirek Building, 2134 Martin Luther King Jr. Way. Within 15 days of adoption, copies of this Ordinance shall be filed at each branch of the Berkeley Public Library and the title shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation.

Page 10 of 110 ends

284
Office of the City Manager
2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7000 ● TDD: (510) 981-6903 ● Fax: (510) 981-7099 E-Mail: [email protected] Website: http://www.CityofBerkeley.info/Manager

PUBLIC HEARING
January 18, 2022
(Continued from December 14, 2021)
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Dee Williams-Ridley, City Manager
Submitted by: Jordan Klein, Director, Planning and Development Department Subject: Response to City Council Action on October 26, 2021 regarding Short Term Referral for Amendments to Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Ordinance

RECOMMENDATION
Conduct a public hearing and upon conclusion, adopt first reading of a local Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Ordinance [Berkeley Municipal Code (BMC) Chapter 23.306] and amendments to relevant Defined Terms [BMC Chapter 23.502.020] in the Zoning Ordinance.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
None

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
A local ADU Ordinance is a Strategic Plan Priority Project, advancing our goal to create affordable housing and housing support service for our most vulnerable community members. Over the past five years, Berkeley has adopted three comprehensive ADU Ordinance amendments in order to maintain compliance with changing State ADU law.

The most recent round of State regulations, which came into effect on January 1, 2020, replaced Berkeley’s ADU Ordinance and significantly reduced jurisdictions’ abilities to regulate ADU development.

Jurisdictions are authorized to adopt local ordinances that are more expansive than State law. Over the past year, Planning Commission and City Council have been discussing options for a local ADU Ordinance. On October 26, 2021, City Council considered Planning Commission’s recommendations (see Attachment 2: Staff Report from October 26, 2021 City Council Meeting) and requested modifications to the ADU Ordinance that allow greater flexibility across the city. At that same meeting, City Council directed the City Manager to develop a set of narrowly-focused public safety regulations that address public safety issues that arise from new development in fire- prone areas. Those regulations will be considered separate from the local ADU Ordinance presented in this report.

Page 11 of 110 ends

285
Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance PUBLIC HEARING
January 18, 2022

Page 2 ends

Below is a summary of the regulations found in the local ADU Ordinance. These regulations reflect City Council’s direction from the October 26th meeting (see Attachment 3: Annotated Agenda from October 26, 2021 City Council Meeting):

1. New BMC Style, Formatting, and Numbering
On December 1, 2021 the newly formatted BMC (resulting from the Zoning Ordinance Revision Project) will take effect. The writing style, formatting and numbering of the local ADU Ordinance is consistent with the new BMC.

2. Applicability
City Council will be considering a second ordinance that address public safety issues in fire-prone areas. In the interim, the local ADU Ordinance allows ADUs and JADUs in the R-1H (Single-Family Residential—Hillside Overlay), R-2H (Restricted Two-Family Residential—Hillside Overlay), and R-2AH (Restricted Multiple-Family Residential—Hillside Overlay) Districts that comply with subdivision(e)(1) of Government Code Section 65852.2. Outside of the aforementioned districts, the local ADU Ordinance applies to lots with at least one existing or proposed Dwelling Unit in zoning districts where residential uses are allowed. ADUs are not allowed on lots with Dormitories, Fraternities or Sororities.

3. Number of ADUs Allowed on a Lot
Berkeley’s local ADU Ordinance follows State law for the number of ADUs and JADUs allowed on a lot with one exception: lots with Group Living Accommodations (GLAs) are allowed one ADU. ADUs must be rented to a single household and may not be rented by the bed.

4. Maximum Size of ADUs
Berkeley’s local ADU Ordinance follows State guidance for maximum ADU size based on bedroom count (850 square feet for studio and one-bedroom ADUs and 1,000 square feet for ADUs with more than two bedrooms). Berkeley’s local ADU Ordinance is more expansive than State law, allowing ADUs created by conversions of legally non-conforming Accessory Buildings and Accessory Structures to expand to the maximum allowable size. Additions to existing building envelopes (i.e. walls and roof) must meet development standards of Chapter 23.306.

The maximum size of a JADU is 500 square feet.

5. Maximum Height
Berkeley’s local ADU Ordinance is more expansive that State ADU law, allowing ADUs a maximum height of 20 feet.

6. Rear and Side Setbacks

Page 12 of 110 ends

286
Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance PUBLIC HEARING
January 18, 2022

Page 3 ends

Berkeley’s local ADU Ordinance follows State law, requiring 4-foot rear and side setbacks, but also allows projects to use a lesser side and rear setback if established by the underlying district.

7. Front Yard Setbacks
Berkeley’s local ADU Ordinance utilizes the front yard setback of the underlying zoning district.

8. Off-street Parking
Off-street parking is not required for ADUs or JADUs. If off-street parking for the Main Building is removed due to ADU or JADU construction, flexible replacement off-street parking wil be accommodated.

9. Projections into Setbacks
Projections of up to two-feet are allowed in the rear and side setbacks for mechanical and other buildings features, such as heating or cooling equipment, eaves and awnings. Bay windows cannot project into setbacks.

10.Noticing of ADU Applications Submitted to Planning Department State Law does not allow for public input on by-right ADU applications; however, Berkeley’s local ADU Ordinance adds an administrative process for notifying neighbors when an ADU application is submitted. Noticing will go out to owners and tenants of subject, adjacent and abutting properties.

BACKGROUND
In the past six years, Berkeley’s ADU Ordinance has been modified multiple times to conform to State law and to facilitate the construction of ADUs. State law that came into effect on January 1, 2020 requires increased flexibility and streamlines the ADU permitting process significantly. The number of building permits issued for ADUs in Berkeley has increased steadily over the past five years, as illustrated in Table 1.

Table 1. City of Berkeley ADU Building Permits Issued, 2016-2020 Year 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
# 16 74 80 96 119
Local jurisdictions have the ability to adopt local regulations that go beyond State law to further facilitate ADU development. Planning Commission and City Council have been discussing a local ADU Ordinance since October 2020, when California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) released guidance on State ADU law.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
ADUs are generally low impact infill development that have the potential to decrease vehicles miles traveled and greenhouse gas emissions and increase availability of

Page 13 of 110 ends

287
Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance PUBLIC HEARING
January 18, 2022

Page 4 ends

housing near various community amenities, the university campus, transit services and employment opportunities.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
The local ADU Ordinance clarifies and expands on State ADU law to meet the needs of Berkeley residents.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
Council could take no action and continue to utilize State ADU regulations, with no local modifications.

CONTACT PERSON
Jordan Klein, Director, Planning and Development Department, (510) 981-7400 Steven Buckley, Land Use Planning Manager, Planning and Development Department, (510) 981-7411
Alene Pearson, Principal Planner, Planning and Development Department, (510) 981- 7489
Attachments:
1: Ordinance
2: Staff Report from October 26, 2021 City Council Meeting 3: Annotated Agenda from October 26, 2021 City Council Meeting 4: Public Hearing Notice

Page 14 of 110 ends

288
ORDINANCE NO. -N.S.

AMENDMENTS TO THE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT (ADU) ORDINANCE (BMC

23.306) AND DEFINED TERMS (BMC 23.502.020) RELATING TO ADUS BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Berkeley as follows:

Section 1. That Berkeley Municipal Code 23.306 is amended to read as follows:

23.306 Accessory Dwelling Units
Sections:

23.102.010– Purposes

23.102.020– Applicability

23.102.030– Permit Procedures

23.306.040– Development Standards

23.306.050– Deed Restrictions

23.306.060– Neighborhood Noticing

23.102.010 – Purposes
The purposes of this Chapter are to:

A. Implement California Government Code Section 65852.2 and 65852.22.

B. Increase overall supply and range of housing options in Berkeley.

C. Expedite small-scale infill development.

D. Support Housing Element goals of facilitating construction of accessory dwelling units and increasing the number of housing units that are more affordable to Berkeley residents.

E. Encourage development of accessory dwelling units in zoning districts with compatible land uses and infrastructure.

E.F. Reduce potential impacts of new development in high fire severity areas and the Hillside Overlay District due to unique conditions and hazards within these areas that require additional restrictions on ADUs and JADUs because of impacts of traffic flow and public safety, consistent with Government Code 65852.2, subdivision (a)(1)(A), which allows local agencies to regulate ADUs based on "adequacy of water and sewer service, and the impacts of traffic flow and public safety."

23.102.020 – Applicability

Page 15 of 110 ends

289

Page 2 ends

B. Number of ADUs and JADUs Permitted Per Lot.

1. Lot with one Single Family Dwelling: One ADU and/or one JADU.

2. Lot with more than one Single Family Dwelling: One ADU.

3. Lot with a Duplex or Multi-Family Dwelling, either:
a. Up to two detached ADUs; or
b. At least one ADU converted from non-habitable portions of the existing Main Building (e.g. basement, attic, storage room). The maximum number of ADUs converted from non-habitable portions of the existing Main Building shall not exceed 25% of the total number of existing Dwelling Units on the lot.

4. Lot with a Group Living Accommodation that is not a Fraternity House, Sorority House or Dormitory: One ADU.

23.102.030 – Permit Procedures
A. Zoning Certificate. An application for an ADU or JADU shall be allowed with a Zoning Certificate. Review must be completed within 60 days of submission of a completed application. A completed application must include evidence of compliance with this Chapter, including Development Standards, Deed Restrictions, and Neighborhood Noticing.

2. Issuance of a Zoning Certificate shall not be denied for the construction or conversion of an ADU or JADU that complies with the requirements of Government Code Section 65852.2(e)(1).

Page 16 of 110 ends

290

Page 3 ends

1.3. Issuance of a Zoning Certificate for the construction or conversion of an ADU or JADU shall not be denied based on the failure of an applicant to correct a nonconforming zoning condition.

23.306.040 Development Standards
A. Basic Standards. See Table 23.306-1: ADU and JADU Development Standards.

TABLE 23.306-1 ADU AND JADU DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
ADU1 JADU
Maximum Size2 500 sf
Studio or 1 bedroom 850 sf
2 + bedrooms 1000 sf
Maximum Height 20 ft.

Front Yard Setback Same as underlying district
Rear Setback 4 ft3
Side Setback 4 ft3
N/A
Required Off-Street Parking None4
[1] An ADU converted from an Accessory Building or Accessory Structure legally established prior to December 1, 2021 that does not comply with the Maximum Height, Size, and/or Rear and Side Setback requirements is allowed to maintain non-conformity to the same dimensions of the existing Accessory Building or Accessory Structure. Any physical additions to the existing Accessory Building or Accessory Structure shall comply with the development standards in this table.
[2] An ADU created entirely through conversion, with no modifications to the existing building envelope that is non-compliant with the development standards in this table is allowed a physical addition of no more than 150 square feet that complies with Maximum Height and Setback requirements in this table.
[3] If there is a lesser setback allowed for a comparable Accessory Building or Accessory Structure in the underlying zoning district, that setback shall apply. [4] Replacement of off-street parking for the Main Building is allowed and does not need to comply with Parking Maximums (BMC 23.322.070) nor Parking Layout and Design (BMC

23.322.080).

DB. Projections. Architectural features (Chimneys, Water Heater Enclosures, Flues, Heating and Cooling Equipment, Eaves, Cornices, Canopies, Awnings) may project two feet into the required setbacks, so long as there remains at least a two-foot setback from property lines. Bay windows may not project into a setback.

23.306.050 - Deed Restrictions

Page 17 of 110 ends

291

Page 4 ends

A. The property owner shall file a deed restriction with the Alameda County Recorder which states:

1. The JADU shall not be sold separately from the Main Building;

2. The ADU shall not be sold separately from the Main Building unless the conditions of BMC 23.306.050 B are met;

3. The ADU and/or JADU shall not be rented for a term that is shorter than 30 days; and

4. If the property includes a JADU, the JADU, or the Single Family Dwelling in which the JADU is located, shall be owner-occupied.

B. ADUs Developed by a Qualified Nonprofit Developer. An ADU built or developed by a “qualified nonprofit corporation” may be sold or conveyed separately from the Main Building .to a “qualified buyer,” as such terms are defined in subdivision (b) of Section 65852.26 of the California Government Code. The ADU must be held pursuant to a recorded tenancy in common agreement recorded on or after December 31, 2021 that includes the following elements:

1. Delineation of all areas of the property that are for the exclusive use of a cotenant;

2. Delineation of each cotenant’s responsibility for the costs of taxes, insurance, utilities, general maintenance and repair, and improvements associated with the property;

3. Procedures for dispute resolution among cotenants before resorting to legal action;

4. Allocates to each qualified buyer an undivided, unequal interest in the property based on the size of the dwelling each qualified buyer occupies;.

5. A repurchase option that requires the qualified buyer to first offer the qualified nonprofit corporation to buy the ADU or primary dwelling if the buyer desires to sell or convey the property;

6. A requirement that the qualified buyer occupy the ADU or primary dwelling as the buyer’s principal residence; and

7. Affordability restrictions on the sale and conveyance of the ADU or primary dwelling that ensure the ADU and primary dwelling will be preserved for low- income housing for 45 years for owner-occupied housing units and will be sold or resold to a qualified buyer.

8. If requested by a utility providing service to the primary residence, the ADU shall have a separate water, sewer, or electrical connection to that utility.

23.306.060 – Neighbor Noticing
A. Scope and Timing of Notice. Notice of an ADU application shall be mailed to owners and tenants of the subject, adjacent, confronting and abutting properties within ten working days of submission to the Planning Department.

Page 18 of 110 ends

292

Page 5 ends

B. Content of Notice. Notice shall provide the address of the project, allowable hours of construction, and a link to the City’s ADU webpage.

C. Mailing Fees. The applicant shall be responsible for the cost of materials, postage and staff time necessary to process and mail notices.

Section 2. That the definition of Accessory Dwelling Unit in Berkeley Municipal Code Chapter 23.502.020.A.4 is amended to read as follows:

23.502.020.A.4
Accessory Dwelling Unit. A secondary dwelling unit that is located on a lot in a zoning district where residential uses are permitted with a proposed or existing Single Family Dwelling, Duplex, Multi-Family Dwelling Use or Group Living Accommodation. which is occupied by one legally established single-family dwelling that conforms to the standards of Chapter 23.306. An Aaccessory Ddwelling Uunit must comply with local building, housing, safety and other code requirements, except as expressly modified in Chapter 23.306, and provide the following features independent of the single-familyprimary dwelling unit: 1) exterior or independent access to Aaccessory dwelling unit; 2) living and sleeping quarters; 3) a full kitchen; and 4) a full bathroom. An Aaccessory Ddwelling Unit also includes the following:
a. An efficiency unit, as defined in Section 17958.1 of the Health and Safety Code.
b. A manufactured home, as defined in Section 18007 of the Health and Safety Code.

Section 3. That the definition of Primary Dwelling Unit in Berkeley Municipal Code Chapter 23.502.020.P.16 is rescinded.

23.502.020.P.16
Primary Dwelling Unit: A legally established Single Family Dwelling that is on a lot with an Accessory Dwelling Unit.

Section 4. That the definition of Efficiency Kitchen is adopted in Berkeley Municipal Code Chapter 23.502.020.E.1 as follows:

23.502.020.E.1
Efficiency Kitchen: A kitchen that includes a sink, a cooking facility with appliances (e.g. microwave, toaster, oven, hot plate), and food preparation counter space and cabinets.

Section 5. That the definition of Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit (JADU) is adopted in Berkeley Municipal Code Chapter 23.502.020.J.1 as follows:

Page 19 of 110 ends

293

Page 6 ends

23.502.020.J.1

Page 20 of 110 ends

294
2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 Tel: 510.981.7140 TDD: 510.981.6903 Email: [email protected]
Kate Harrison
Councilmember
District 4
SUPPLEMENTAL 3 AGENDA MATERIAL
Meeting Date: October 12, 202 1
Item Number: 28
Item Description: Response to Short Term Referral for Amendments to Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Ordinance to Address Public Safety Concerns; Amending BMC Chapters 23C.24 and 23F.04 Submitted by: Harrison
“Good of the City” Analysis:

The analysis below must demonstrate how accepting this supplement/revision is for the “good of the City” and outweighs the lack of time for citizen review or evaluation by the Council.

This supplemental makes only one clarifying edit to Subsection A of 23C.24.040 (Development Standards) regarding applicable state law.

Consideration of supplemental or revised agenda material is subject to approval by a two-thirds vote of the City Council. (BMC 2.06.070)

Page 1 of 85 ends

ATTACHMENT 2Page 21 of 110
295
2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 Tel: 510.981.7140 TDD: 510.981.6903 Email: [email protected]
A minimum of 42 copies must be submitted to the City Clerk for distribution at the Council meeting. This completed cover page must accompany every copy.

Copies of the supplemental/revised agenda material may be delivered to the City Clerk Department by 12:00 p.m. the day of the meeting. Copies that are ready after 12:00 p.m. must be delivered directly to the City Clerk at Council Chambers prior to the start of the meeting.

Supplements or Revisions submitted pursuant to BMC § 2.06.070 may only be revisions of the original report included in the Agenda Packet.

Page 2 of 85 ends

296

ORDINANCE NO. -N.S.

ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT ORDINANCE
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Berkeley as follows:

Section 1. That Berkeley Municipal Code Chapter 23C.24 is amended to read as follows:

Chapter 23C.24
Accessory Dwelling Units

Sections:
23C.24.010 Applicability of Regulations

23C.24.020 Purposes
23C.24.030 Permit Procedures
23C.24.040 Development Standards
23C.24.050 Special Provisions

23C.24.010 Applicability of Regulations

A. The provisions of this Chapter apply to all lots that have at least one existing or proposed Dwelling Unit or Group Living Accommodation that is not a Fraternity House, Sorority House or Dormitory.

B. ADUs and JADUs are allowed on lots as follows:
a. One ADU and/or one JADU is allowed on a lot with one Single Family Dwelling.
b. One ADU is allowed on a lot with multiple Single Family Dwellings. c. For lots with a Duplex or Multiple Dwelling Uses, one of the following is allowed:
i. Up to two detached ADUs; or
ii. At least one ADU created from non-habitable portions of the existing dwelling structure (e.g. basement, attic, storage room). The maximum number of ADUs created from non-habitable portions of the existing dwelling structure shall not exceed 25% of the number of existing Dwelling Units on the lot.
d. One ADU is allowed on a lot with a Group Living Accommodation that is not a Fraternity House, Sorority House or Dormitory.

Page 3 of 85 ends

297

23C.24.020 Purposes

The purposes of this Chapter are to:

A. Implement California Government Code Section 65852.2 and 65852.22.

B. Increase overall supply and range of housing options in Berkeley.

C. Expedite small-scale infill development.

D. Support Housing Element goals of facilitating construction of Accessory Dwelling Units and increasing the number of housing units that are more affordable to Berkeley residents.

E. Encourage development of Accessory Dwelling Units in zoning districts with compatible land uses and infrastructure.

F. Reduce potential impacts of new development in high fire hazard severity areas.

23C.24.030 Permit Procedures

A. An application for an ADU or JADU is subject to ministerial review. Review must be completed within 60 days of submission of a complete application.

B. If an application to create an ADU or JADU is submitted as part of a project that requires discretionary review, a building permit shall not be issued for the ADU or JADU until the discretionary approval(s) has/have been granted and any applicable appeal periods have expired.

23C.24.040 Development Standards

A. Development Standards in Paragraphs B through G, below, apply as follows:

1. Nothing in this Chapter shall preclude the application of Objective Development Standards, once adopted, to ADU’s that do not fall under Gov.

Code § 65852.2(e).

2. Detached New Construction. A detached, new construction ADU is subject to Development Standards for ADUs. A detached, new construction ADU is defined as having a 3-foot separation from a Main Building per Section 23E.04.030.

3. Converted or Rebuilt Entirely from an Existing Building or Structure. An ADU converted or rebuilt entirely from an existing building or structure, in the same location with the same dimensions and roof height, is not subject to Development Standards for ADUs. These include:
a. An ADU created entirely within an existing Single Family Dwelling. b. An ADU created entirely within the existing non-habitable space of a Duplex or Multiple Dwelling Use.
c. An ADU created entirely within an existing detached Accessory Building or Accessory Structure.
d. An ADU created entirely within an existing Accessory Building or

Page 4 of 85 ends

298

Accessory Structure that is demolished and rebuilt.

4. Addition to an Existing or Rebuilt Building or Structure. An ADU, fully or partially created by an addition of square footage to or changes in roof height is subject to Development Standards for ADUs. Paragraph B applies to the ADU’s maximum size and Paragraphs C through G apply to the added square footage and roof design. These include:
a. An ADU created by an addition or roof change to an existing Single Family Dwelling.
b. An ADU created by an addition or roof change to an existing detached Accessory Building or Accessory Structure.
c. And ADU created by an addition or roof change to an existing Accessory Building or Accessory Structure that is demolished and rebuilt.

5. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Chapter, no ADU is permitted to be built in the Hillside Overlay or Environmental Safety Residential (ES-R) districts unless it complies with the requirements of Government Code section 65852.2(e)(1).

6. A JADU is subject to applicable Development Standards in Paragraphs B and G.

B. Maximum Size

1. A detached, new construction ADU or an ADU fully or partially created by addition to an existing or proposed Single Family Dwelling is subject to the following maximum size limits:
a. 850 square feet for a studio or one-bedroom ADU.
b. 1000 square feet for an ADU with two or more bedrooms.

2. An ADU created from an existing Accessory Building or Accessory Structure or a portion of the existing building that does not conform to the Development Standards in Paragraphs C and D may extend beyond the physical dimensions of the existing building or structure as long as the new construction is outside the four-foot setback and conforms to all other conditions herein. Additions shall conform with the Development Standards in this Chapter

3. An ADU created from an existing Accessory Building or Accessory Structure that conforms to the Development Standards in Paragraphs C and D must comply with one of the following:
a. May include an expansion of not more than 150 square feet beyond the same physical dimensions of the existing building or structure; or
b. 850 square feet for a studio or one-bedroom ADU; or. c. 1000 square feet for an ADU with two or more bedrooms.

4. The maximum size of a JADU is 500 square feet.

C. Maximum Height is applied to ADUs as follows. See Chapter 23F.04 for definition.

1. Maximum Height of a detached, new construction ADU is 18 feet.

2. Maximum Height of new square footage added to a Single Family Dwelling, Accessory Building or Accessory Structure to create an ADU is 18 feet.

D. Rear and Side Setbacks. The required rear and side setbacks for a detached, new construction ADU or addition to an existing building or structure are 4 feet, Deleted: include an expansion of not more than
150 square feet beyond the same physical
dimensions as the existing building or structure

Page 5 of 85 ends

299

unless a lesser setback is allowed for a comparable Accessory Building or Accessory Structure in the underlying zoning district.

E. Front Yard Setback. The required front yard setback is the same as is established in the underlying zoning district.

F. Parking

1. Off-street parking is not required.

2. Replacement parking is not required, but is allowed if in compliance with Chapter 23D.12 and/or Chapter 23E.28.

G. Nothing in this Chapter shall preclude the issuance of Zoning Certificate for the construction or conversion of an ADU or JADU that complies with the requirements of Government Code section 65852.2(e)(1). The City shall not apply the Development Standards in this Chapter to the extent they are inconsistent with the requirements of Government Code sections 65852.2 and 65852.22.

H. A Zoning Certificate for the construction of an ADU or JADU may not be denied based on the failure of the applicant to correct a nonconforming zoning condition.

23C.24.050 Special Provisions

A. A JADU must be owner-occupied. For purposes of this paragraph, “owner- occupied” means that a person with legal title to the property must reside in either the Single Family Dwelling or the JADU as their legal permanent residence.

B. The property owner shall file a deed restriction with the County Recorder providing that:

1. The ADU and/or JADU shall not be sold separately from the Dwelling Unit.

2. The ADU and/or JADU shall not be rented for a term that is shorter than 30 days.

Deleted: Projections. Architectural features
(Chimneys, Water Heater Enclosures, Flues, Heating
and Cooling Equipment, Eaves, Cornices, Canopies,
Awnings and Bay Window) may project two feet into
the required setbacks, so long as there remains at
least a two-foot setback from property lines.¶
Deleted: <#>A rooftop deck may be established
provided that the entire roof, deck and railing comply
with Development Standards for ADUs in Section
23C.24.040 Paragraphs C through G.¶

Page 6 of 85 ends

Berkeley City CouncilJanuary 18, 2022

Berkeley City Council
January 18, 2022