Agenda packet — Berkeley City Council, February 22, 2022 (part 2 of 3)

174
Adopt a Resolution in Support of the California State Legislature Introducing and Passing a California Resident-Designated Support Person Act

CONSENT CALENDAR
February 8, 2022
The Act is written to take effect immediately.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
Staff time will be necessary for the Clerk to send the letter to the specified elected officials.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
No discernable impact.

CONTACT PERSON
Vice Mayor Kate Harrison, (510) 981-7140

ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution

2. Letters

3. Draft Legislation

Page 3 of 10 ends

175
RESOLUTION NO. ##,###-N.S.

RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF THE CALIFORNIA STATE LEGISLATURE

INTRODUCING AND PASSING A CALIFORNIA RESIDENT-DESIGNATED SUPPORT

PERSON ACT
Whereas, the COVID-19 pandemic has had a devastating impact on residents of long- term care facilities; and
Whereas, in addition to sickness and death from COVID-19 infections, residents suffered incalculable mental and physical health losses due to draconian visitation restrictions that separated residents from their families, friends, and essential support persons, who often provide life-saving and other services to their loved ones; and Whereas, it is essential, at all times, for individuals residing in long-term care facilities to have access to family members and friends who provide critical supportive services which may include, but are not limited to, emotional, mental, medical, financial, social and physical support; and
Whereas, support persons with access to in-person contact bring residents, among other things, medical decision-making support, companionship, psycho-social support, cognitive stimulation, communication assistance, assistance with daily living tasks such as eating, dressing and hygiene support, meaningful connection, relational continuity, decision-making assistance, transportation, physical activities, and fulfill other personal needs for long term care facility residents; and
Whereas, the California for Nursing Home Reform advocacy organization has drafted the Resident-Designated Support Persons Act, which would allow long term care facility resident or resident representatives to designate up to two individuals to provide in- person, on-site, support for a resident during state and local public health emergencies; and
Whereas, it is in the public interest for the California Legislature to immediately introduce and pass legislation that allows residents to have immediate and unscheduled physical access to designated support persons without restriction on time, frequency, physical contact, or proximity during health emergencies such as the COVID-19 pandemic.

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of Berkeley expresses its support for the California Legislature immediately introducing and passing the Resident- Designated Support Persons Act.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that copies of this Resolution and letters will be sent to State Senator Skinner and Assemblymembers Wicks and Bonta.

Page 4 of 10 ends

176
The Honorable State Senator Nancy Skinner
Capitol Office, 1021 O Street, Suite 8630
Sacramento, CA 95814
Re: In Support of the California State Legislature Introducing and Passing a California Resident-Designated Support Person Act
Dear Senator Skinner:

The Berkeley City Council conveys its urgent support for the California State Legislature introducing and passing a California Resident-Designated Support Person Act.

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a devastating impact on residents of long-term care facilities. In addition to sickness and death from COVID-19 infections, residents suffered incalculable loss due to draconian visitation restrictions that separated residents from their families, friends, and essential support persons, who often provide life-saving and other services to their loved ones.

It is essential, at all times, for individuals residing in long-term care facilities to have access to family members and friends who provide critical supportive services which may include, but are not limited to, emotional, mental, social and physical support.

Support persons with access to in-person contact bring residents, among other things, companionship, psycho-social support, cognitive stimulation, communication assistance, assistance with daily living tasks such as eating, dressing and hygiene support, meaningful connection, relational continuity, decision-making assistance, transportation, physical activities, and fulfill other personal needs for long term care facility residents. Recognition of the support role played by designated friends and family should not be seen as a substitute for consistent, ongoing care from facility staff, but rather part of the broader web of wholistic care.

Therefore, it is in the public interest for the California Legislature to immediately introduce and pass legislation that allows residents to have immediate and unscheduled physical access to designated support persons without restriction on time, frequency, physical contact, or proximity during health emergencies such as the COVID-19 pandemic.

For these reasons, we urge your support such for such legislation this session.

Thank you for your leadership and consideration.

Sincerely,
The Berkeley City Council

Page 5 of 10 ends

177
The Honorable Assemblymember Buffy Wicks
Capitol Office, 1021 O Street, Suite 4240
P.O. Box 942849, Sacramento, CA 94249-0015
Re: In Support of the California State Legislature Introducing and Passing a California Resident-Designated Support Person Act
Dear Honorable Assemblymember Wicks:

The Berkeley City Council conveys its urgent support for the California State Legislature introducing and passing a California Resident-Designated Support Person Act.

For these reasons, we urge your support such for such legislation this session.

Thank you for your leadership and consideration.

Sincerely,
The Berkeley City Council

Page 6 of 10 ends

178
The Honorable Assemblymember Mia Bonta
Capitol Office, 1021 O Street, Suite 5620
P.O. Box 942849, Sacramento, CA 94249-0018
Re: In Support of the California State Legislature Introducing and Passing a California Resident-Designated Support Person Act
Dear Honorable Assemblymember Bonta:

The Berkeley City Council conveys its urgent support for the California State Legislature introducing and passing a California Resident-Designated Support Person Act.

For these reasons, we urge your support such for such legislation this session.

Thank you for your leadership and consideration.

Sincerely,
The Berkeley City Council

Page 7 of 10 ends

179
Resident-Designated Support Persons Act
SECTION 1. The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(a) The COVID-19 pandemic has had a devastating impact on residents of long term care facilities. In addition to sickness and death due to COVID-19 infections, residents suffered incalculable loss due to draconian visitation restrictions that separated residents from their families, friends, and essential support persons. (b) It is essential, at all times, for individuals residing in long-term care facilities to have access to family members and friends who provide critical supportive services which may include, but are not limited to, emotional, mental, social and physical support. The Legislature affirms that a resident having physical access to family members or friends who provide support is necessary to mitigating a decline in the resident’s physical, mental, and emotional wellbeing. Therefore, when a public health emergency precipitates government-ordered visitation restrictions, we deem it necessary to allow residents to have immediate and unscheduled physical access to designated support persons without restriction on time, frequency, physical contact, or proximity. (c) Support persons with access to in-person contact provide, among other things, companionship, psycho-social support, cognitive stimulation, communication assistance, assistance with daily living tasks such as eating, dressing and hygiene support, meaningful connection, relational continuity, decisionmaking assistance, transportation, physical activities, and fulfill other personal needs for long term care facility residents. (d) While designated support persons provide essential support to long term care residents, their access should not be seen as a substitute for consistent, ongoing care from facility staff.

SECTION 2. Chapter 2.47 (commencing with Section 1439.70) is added to Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code, to read:

CHAPTER 2.47. Resident-Designated Support Persons Act 1439.70. For the purposes of this chapter, the following definitions shall apply:
(a) “Designated Support Persons” are individuals designated by a resident or resident representative to provide in-person, on-site, support for a resident. (b) “Long-term care facility” or “facility” means facilities listed in Section 1418 of this code and subdivision (b) of Section 9701 of the Welfare and Institutions Code. (c) “Long-term care facility staff” or “facility staff” means all individuals employed by or contracted directly with the facility who provide care to residents. (d) “Public health emergency” - A public health emergency is a natural disaster, an outbreak of an infectious disease, bioterrorist attack, or other significant or catastrophic event that triggers a state or local government order to restrict residents’ visitation rights in a long-term care home.
(e) “Resident” means a resident or patient of a long-term care facility.

Page 8 of 10 ends

180
(f) “Resident representative” means an individual who has authority to act on behalf of the resident, including but not limited to, a conservator, guardian, person authorized as agent in the resident's advance health care directive, the resident's spouse, registered domestic partner, or family member, a person designated by the resident to act as a representative, or other surrogate decisionmaker designated consistent with statutory and case law. 1439.71.
(a) Each long-term care resident shall have the right to in-person, on-site access to a minimum of up to two (2) designated support persons during any public health emergency in which residents’ visitation rights are curtailed by a state or local order.

Subject only to denial by the resident or their representative, the designated support person shall have the right to enter the resident’s dwelling at any time and provide private support as needed in an unscheduled manner and without limits to the duration or frequency of their visits. Facilities shall allow individual residents to have at least one (1) of their designated support persons physically present at any time. (b) A resident’s right to visitation with designated support persons includes the right to leave the facility on outings, with or without accompaniment by the designated support persons, so long as reasonable infection control precautions are taken. Residents who exercise this right to outings may not be required to quarantine or isolate upon their return to the facility unless there is a known exposure to a contagious infection.

Residents returning from an outing may not be required to practice stricter infection control precautions than those required of staff when they enter the facility. (c) Residents or their representatives have the right to designate support persons immediately upon admission to a facility and anytime thereafter. Residents or their representatives shall have the right to modify their designations at any time. (d) Selecting or modifying designated support persons shall in no way limit a resident’s right to other types of visitation accommodations available during a public health emergency. This may include, but are not limited to, expansive end-of-life or compassionate care visits, socially-distanced visits, virtual visits, or telephonic visits. 1439.72.
(a) Facilities may require designated support persons to adhere to the same, but not greater, infection control protocols required of care staff during a public health emergency. Facilities are required to provide personal protective equipment and any other mandated resources such as infection testing and relevant infection control training to designated support persons at no cost to the resident or designated support person.
(b) Facilities must provide infection control protocols required of care staff, designated support persons, and other visitors to the residents, resident representatives, and their designated support persons in writing and in their primary language. (c) Any changes in infection control protocols shall be communicated, reasonably in advance, to the residents, resident representatives, and their designated support persons in writing and in their primary language.

Page 9 of 10 ends

181
(d) Facilities may not require designated support persons to adhere to infection control protocols that have not been communicated as set forth in sections (b) and (c). 1439.73. Any waiver of the rights specified in this Act shall be deemed contrary to public policy and shall be void and unenforceable.
1439.74. This Chapter may not be suspended, overridden, or modified by an Executive Order, Public Health Emergency, Department of Public Health order, county or city rules, or local public health order.
1439.75. A violation of this Chapter shall be treated as a violation under Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 1250), Chapter 2.4 (commencing with Section 1417), or Chapter 3.2 (commencing with Section 1569). A violation shall constitute a class B violation, as defined in subdivision (e) of Section 1424, for long-term care health facilities, or grounds for a civil penalty as defined in subdivision (a) of Section 1569.49, for residential care facilities for the elderly.

SECTION 3. Section 1569.318 is added to the Health and Safety Code, to read:
1569.319. Every residential care facility for the elderly shall abide by the provisions of the Resident-Designated Support Persons Act (Chapter 2.47 (commencing with Section 1439.70)).

SECTION 4. This act is an urgency statute necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or safety within the meaning of Article IV of the California Constitution and shall go into immediate effect. The facts constituting the necessity are:

To protect the visitation rights of residents of long term care facilities and their ability to receive essential support from designated support persons during the COVID-19 state of emergency, it is necessary for this act to take effect immediately.

Page 10 of 10 ends

182
Councilmember Terry Taplin
Councilmember Rashi Kesarwani
Councilmember Rigel Robinson
Mayor Jesse Arreguin

CONSENT CALENDAR
February 22, 2022
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Councilmembers Rigel Robinson (Author), Terry Taplin (Author), Rashi Kesarwani (Author), & Mayor Jesse Arreguin (Author)
Subject: Budget Referral: South Sailing Basin Dredging

RECOMMENDATION
Refer to the City Manager to dredge the Berkeley Marina’s South Sailing Basin (SSB), including 1) pursuing and proposing potential funding opportunities for both planning and implementation, and 2) performing the necessary bathymetric, hydrography, technical, permitting, and mitigation studies required to move forward as quickly as possible.

Furthermore, refer $350,000 to the June 2022 budget process for the purposes of South Sailing Basin Dredging planning & evaluation.

BACKGROUND
The Berkeley Marina is a treasured public open space, with over 100 acres of park space, seven miles of trails, 17-acres of off-leash dog area, educational programming at the Shorebird Nature Center, the nationally celebrated Adventure Playground, bird- watching, picnic areas, and panoramic views. It serves as a regional hub for boaters and watersports.

In many ways, the heart of the Berkeley Marina is the South Sailing Basin, where the Cal Sailing Club and Cal Adventures are located. The three docks of the South Sailing Basin make the water accessible to Berkeleyans of all backgrounds, and have a true regional draw. Bay Area residents from near and far come to the South Sailing Basin, where they can find three public docks, two sailboat hoists, a windsurfing rigging area with wash-down facilities, well-maintained public bathrooms, and a beach launch at nearby Shorebird Park. The Berkeley Marina itself creates a breakwater and wind shadow for the South Sailing Basin, resulting in an ideal environment for learning windsurfers, sailors, kayakers, and swimmers.

However, over the last several decades, silt and mud have accumulated in the South Sailing Basin, making it more and more challenging for the cove to be used. On low tide days, the City’s three public docks sit on the mud. More and more frequently, due to the severity of the silt accumulation, it is impossible to use the SSB altogether. As a result, Cal Sailing and Cal Adventures must close on those days.

Page 1 of 4 ends

183
Budget Referral: South Sailing Basin Dredging CONSENT CALENDAR February 22, 2022

Page 2 ends

This challenge has prompted recreational users in the South Sailing Basin to consider advocating for the relocation of the public docks to the Hs Lordships peninsula, where the water would be consistently deeper. A more practical near-term solution would be to dredge the South Sailing Basin. While the City should aspire to dredge as much of the basin as possible, the City should also consider dredging a channel for only the three docks if that is more feasible. The SSB has not been dredged since the 1970s, when it was done alongside the work that created the peninsula out to 199 Seawall Drive.

Even as accessibility to the bay by way of the South Sailing Basin decreases due to increased siltage, interest in recreational activities at the waterfront is only increasing.

Attendance at Odyssey Open Water Swimming’s weekly chaperoned swims has quadrupled since 2018.1 Despite the pandemic, Cal Sailing Club recruited more members in 2021 than in 2019, averaging upwards of a thousand new members every year.

The silting of the South Sailing Basin threatens the long-term viability of recreational uses at the Marina, and thus threatens the mission of the Berkeley Marina itself. It is imperative that waterfront recreation continues to have a future at the Berkeley Marina.

It is therefore imperative that the City address this concern in a timely manner.

Council recently voted to request state funding for a number of necessary improvements at the Berkeley Marina, including dredging the main channel for better boat access.2 While including a funding request for dredging the SSB was considered, there is significant study that needs to be performed before that project is ready to pursue outside funding for implementation.

Dredging the South Sailing Basin is not currently on staff’s work plan. However, the Berkeley Marina Area Specific Plan process does create an opportunity to rank priority for infrastructure upgrades. Dredging the South Sailing Basin will be considered through that process. This referral seeks to see SSB dredging integrated into staff’s work plan.

At present, the City has a consultant on board responsible for planning work related to dredging the Main Harbor channel at the Berkeley Marina. Staff should consider expanding the scope of that consultant contract to also determine how to approach dredging the South Sailing Basin. This planning and evaluation would be a necessary precursor to the dredging work itself.

As the BMASP and Pier/Ferry projects move forward and bring new energy and uses to the Marina, it is critical that the City act with the same level of urgency to maintain the recreational uses that make the Berkeley Marina so special today. 1 https://www.berkeleyside.org/2021/09/27/odyssey-open-water-swimming-san-francisco-bay 2 https://www.berkeleyside.org/2021/10/27/officials-seek-state-money-help-revive-berkeley-marina

Page 2 of 4 ends

184
Budget Referral: South Sailing Basin Dredging CONSENT CALENDAR February 22, 2022

Page 3 ends

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
City staff have held a placeholder of $5 million on our unfunded list of capital projects for dredging the South Sailing Basin. Total waterside infrastructure needs are estimated to range from $64.5 million to $108 million. Recent conversations suggest that the technical, permitting, and mitigation elements of dredging the SSB are more complex than initially understood and may require extensive study and significantly more funding than $5 million. Staff should propose funding opportunities that could support dredging the South Sailing Basin and present Council with more precise figures on complete estimated costs. This referral refers to the budget process the consideration of $350,000 for planning and evaluation work related to South Sailing Basin dredging.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY & CLIMATE IMPACTS
Staff should research and consider the environmental impacts of dredging the South Sailing Basin. Dredging is important to maintain the feasibility of recreational uses at the Marina. As silt issues worsen, the draw of the Marina as a natural resource and public park will be jeopardized, creating further challenges for the City to maintain and preserve this beautiful public space.

CONTACT PERSON
Councilmember Rigel Robinson, (510) 981-7170
Attachments:
1: Citizens for East Shore Parks Letter, dated January 3, 2022

Page 3 of 4 ends

185
Budget Referral: South Sailing Basin Dredging CONSENT CALENDAR February 22, 2022

Page 4 ends

Page 4 of 4 ends

186
2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7170 ● TDD: (510) 981-6903 ● E-Mail:

[email protected]

CONSENT CALENDAR
February 22, 2022
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Councilmember Rigel Robinson
Subject: Support for AB 1602: Student Housing Revolving Loan Fund Act

RECOMMENDATION
Send a letter to Assemblymember Kevin McCarty, Senator Nancy Skinner, and Assemblymember Buffy Wicks in support of AB 1602, the California Student Housing Revolving Loan Fund Act of 2022.

BACKGROUND
Assembly Bill 1602, introduced by Assemblymember Kevin McCarty, would establish a revolving loan fund offering $5 billion in zero-interest loans to facilitate the construction of affordable student, faculty, and staff housing for the University of California, the California State University, and the California Community Colleges. This funding would create approximately 25,000 beds of student housing at below market rents.

AB 1602 provides priority for campuses with a greater unmet demand for student housing, as well as projects with an accelerated construction timeline. The bill also includes requirements for the project to be within a five-mile radius of the campus and for at least 50% of student residents to meet the criteria for need-based financial assistance, with limited exceptions.

Nearly half of all students enrolled at the CSU and CCC, and 40% of students at the UC are low-income and struggle to afford the rising cost of attending college. College students throughout California face a drastic housing crisis — one that will continue to worsen if mandated enrollment growth is not coupled with an increase in student housing construction.

Despite UC Berkeley’s efforts in recent years to build more on-campus student housing, more support from the state is critical. UC Berkeley has the lowest percentage of beds for its student body of any campus in the UC system.1 This crisis affects not only students, but also long-term residents who face increased competition for housing, resulting in gentrification and displacement.
1 https://evcp.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/housing_master_plan_task_force_final_draft_january_2017.pd f

Page 1 of 3 ends

187
Support for AB 1602 CONSENT CALENDAR February 22, 2022

Page 2 ends

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
None.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
No impact.

CONTACT PERSON
Councilmember Rigel Robinson, (510) 981-7170
Angie Chen, Legislative Assistant
Attachments:
1: Letter of support
2: Bill text
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB1602

Page 2 of 3 ends

188
Support for AB 1602 CONSENT CALENDAR February 22, 2022

Page 3 ends

February 22, 2022
The Honorable Kevin McCarty
Assemblymember, 7th District
State Capitol, Room 2136
Sacramento, CA 95814
RE: City of Berkeley’s Support for Assembly Bill 1602 Dear Assemblymember Kevin McCarty,
The Berkeley City Council would like to convey our full support for Assembly Bill 1602, which would provide much-needed funding for efforts to alleviate California’s student housing crisis.

The City of Berkeley is home to UC Berkeley, which, like many other UC, CSU, and CCC campuses across California, suffers from a severe undersupply of student housing and struggles to guarantee on-campus housing for its undergraduate students. UC Berkeley students are also impacted by the regional Bay Area housing crisis, meaning that securing affordable off-campus housing is not much easier. This puts gentrification and displacement pressure on long-term residents.

Despite the campus administration’s efforts in recent years to build more student housing, more support from the state is critical. The $5 billion in zero-interest loans provided by AB 1602 represent a solution that matches the scale of the problem. The City particularly appreciates your commitment to ensuring that the housing built is below local market rental rates, and that campuses with a greater unmet demand for student housing may be prioritized.

The Berkeley City Council strongly supports AB 1602 and thanks you for being a champion on this important issue.

Sincerely,
The Berkeley City Council
CC: Senator Nancy Skinner
Assemblymember Buffy Wicks

Page 3 of 3 ends

189
190
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
February 22, 2022
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: ZAB Appeal: 1527 Sacramento Street, Administrative Use Permit #ZP2020-0034

RECOMMENDATION
Conduct a public hearing, and, upon conclusion, adopt a Resolution affirming the Zoning Adjustments Board (ZAB) decision to approve Administrative Use Permit #ZP2020-0034 to: 1) add a 520 square-foot two-story addition with an average height of 21 feet 9 inches at the rear of the existing building; 2) add a major residential addition of more than 15 percent of the lot area, including 44 square feet at the first floor; 3) legalize the enclosure of the front porch in the non-conforming front setback; and 4) add an unenclosed hot tub, on a 2,783 square-foot lot that contains a one-story 824-square- foot single-family dwelling, and dismiss the appeal.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
None.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
On April 28, 2020, Jason Kaldis (“Applicant”) submitted an application for an Administrative Use Permit (AUP) to remodel and expand a single-family home located at 1527 Sacramento Street.

The applicant shared the plans with the owners and occupants of five of the seven neighboring properties in-person in early March 2020. The applicant sent plans to the neighbors at 1529 and 1525 Sacramento Street via certified mail in early April 2020.

On May 13, 2020, staff received a letter from the owners of 1529 Sacramento Street stating concerns that are similar to their appeal points listed below. Staff met via videoconference with the owners of 1529 Sacramento Street and the daughter of the owner of 1525 Sacramento Street in June 2020 to discuss their concerns and the AUP process. Staff met with the owners of 1529 Sacramento Street and two of the family members of the owner of 1525 Sacramento Street for a site visit at their properties in August 2020, and the Land Use Planning Manager met with them in November 2020.

The owners of 1529 Sacramento Street and two of the family members of the owner of 1525 Sacramento Street also submitted written questions and concerns, to which staff provided responses.

Page 1 of 63 ends

191
ZAB Appeal: 1527 Sacramento Street PUBLIC HEARING
Administrative Use Permit #ZP2020-0034 February 22, 2022

Page 2 ends

On June 14, 2021, the Notice of Administrative Decision was issued by the Zoning Officer, initiating a 20-day appeal period. On July 2, 2021, Joyce Lewis filed an appeal of the Zoning Officer’s decision on behalf of Sterling Lewis of 1525 Sacramento Street and his family. On July 6, 2021, Micah and Michele Liedeker of 1529 Sacramento Street filed an appeal of the Zoning Officer’s decision.

On September 23, 2021, the Zoning Adjustments Board (ZAB) conducted a public hearing for the appeal of the Administrative Use Permit. After hearing public comments and holding discussion, and adding Condition #11 (construction schedule must be shared with the neighbors at 1525 and 1529 Sacramento Street), the ZAB approved the Administrative Use Permit and dismissed the appeal by a vote of 8-0-0-1 (Yes: Duffy, Kahn, Kim, Gaffney, Olson, Thagard, Thompson, Tregub; No: None; Abstain: None;

Absent: O’Keefe).

On September 30, 2021, staff issued the notice of the ZAB decision, and on October 13, 2021, an appeal of the ZAB decision was filed with the City Clerk by Joyce Lewis, daughter of Sterling Lewis, the owner of 1525 Sacramento Street. The Clerk set the matter for review by the Council on February 22, 2022.

On or before February 8, 2022, staff posted the public hearing notice at the site and two nearby locations, and mailed notices to property owners and occupants within 300 feet of the project site, and to all registered neighborhood groups that cover this area. The Council must conduct a public hearing to resolve the appeal.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The subject property is located on the east side of Sacramento Street, between Rose Street and Cedar Street; the rear of the lot faces Buena Avenue. The project site is rectangular, with a 25-foot wide lot line along Sacramento Street and 111-foot lot depth.

The parcel is currently developed with an 824 square-foot, one-story single-family dwelling with a covered porch at the front of the lot and an uncovered deck at the rear along the south side property line. The parcel is non-conforming to current zoning standards in terms of minimum lot size, lot coverage, and building setbacks from the front (west) and right (right) side property lines. There is a garage along the right rear (southeast) corner of the lot, which is accessed from Buena Avenue.

The proposed project is a 564 square-foot addition, consisting of a 520 square-foot second floor addition and a 44 square-foot first floor addition at the rear of the existing residence. The existing average building height is 12 feet 3 inches. With the addition, the new average height would be 21 feet 9 inches. The existing dwelling has two bedrooms and one bathroom; with the addition, two bedrooms and a bathroom would be provided on the second floor and a portion of the first floor would be converted to a family room.

A hot tub would be added to the rear yard, 1 foot 6 inches from the north (left) property line and 7 feet from the rear property line. The storage shed attached to the garage

Page 2 of 63 ends

192
ZAB Appeal: 1527 Sacramento Street PUBLIC HEARING
Administrative Use Permit #ZP2020-0034 February 22, 2022

Page 3 ends

would be removed to bring the total lot coverage into compliance with zoning standards (maximum 40 percent coverage allowed). The existing front porch was enclosed around 2015 and is located within the required 20-foot front yard. The enclosure would be legalized with this zoning permit and recognized with a subsequent building permit.

BACKGROUND
At the September 23, 2021 ZAB hearing, the ZAB added Condition of Approval #11:

11.Prior to project construction, the Project Liaison shall email the construction schedule to the neighbors at 1525 and 1529 Sacramento Street, and offer to meet with them to discuss the construction procedures and schedule. City Planning Staff shall be copied on the email.

The issues raised in the appellant’s letters and staff’s responses follow. For the sake of brevity, the appeal issues are not re-stated in their entirety. Please refer to the attached appeal letters (Attachment 2, parts 1 and 2) for the full text.

The letter and petition that accompanies the appeal letter was originally submitted to the City on August 18, 2020. The six appeal points listed below are from page 7 of the appeal letter. After submitting the appeal letter on October 13, 2021, the appellant sent an addendum to the appeal letter raising four points, and attaching the appeal letter submitted on July 6, 2021 by Micah and Michele Liedeker, and Joyce Lewis’ talking points for her presentation at the September 23, 2021 ZAB meeting.

Appeal Letter
Issue #1: No adjustments or suggestions were made by ZAB to protect the use, enjoyment, property rights, or adverse impact of the addition on the neighbors at 1525 and 1529 Sacramento Street.

Response: The project approved by ZAB conforms to the development standards of the R-1 district, including residential density, lot coverage, useable open space, and setbacks. New windows will be installed along all building elevations, but the new windows will be outside of required setbacks. Most of the new windows at the first floor will be located in the same general places as existing windows, with limited new impacts to the privacy of neighbors. The proportions, setbacks, and roof slopes of the addition maintain the character of the existing property and surrounding neighborhood. Further, the proposed addition will not create detrimental air, views, or light impacts (see Findings and Conditions, included as Exhibit A to the resolution). ZAB added a Condition of Approval to require the project liaison (often the owner, architect, or contractor) to email the construction schedule to the neighbors at 1525 and 1529 Sacramento Street, and to offer to meet with them to discuss the construction procedures and schedule, in order to mitigate their concerns about noise and dust. ZAB considered and discussed the evidence presented at the hearing, and acted within its

Page 3 of 63 ends

193
ZAB Appeal: 1527 Sacramento Street PUBLIC HEARING
Administrative Use Permit #ZP2020-0034 February 22, 2022

Page 4 ends

purview to approve the proposed project. Therefore, staff recommends Council dismiss this appeal point.

Issue #2: Applicant mistakenly stated that neighbors at 1525 and 1529 Sacramento Street were unwilling to compromise.

Response: The appellants contend that they are willing to compromise, but they have not indicated that they would support a modified second-story addition. The appellant has stated that the applicant should not add a second story, and should instead seek a variance to exceed the lot coverage in order to add a one-story addition.

Administrative Use Permits apply to the height of the addition, the size of the addition, alterations to the front porch in the non-conforming front setback, and the addition of a hot tub. The existing average building height is 12 feet 3 inches. With the addition, the new average height will be 21 feet 9 inches, less than the average height limit of 28 feet. The project is a major residential addition because more than 15 percent of the lot area will be added. The 564 square-foot addition consists of a 520 square-foot second floor addition setback approximately 35 feet from the front property line, and a 44 square-foot first floor addition at the rear of the existing residence. The existing front porch was enclosed around 2015 and is located within the required 20-foot front yard.

The enclosure would be legalized with an Administrative Use Permit and established with a subsequent building permit. The project approved by ZAB conforms to the development standards of the R-1 district, and meets the findings for non-detriment as described in the findings and conditions (Exhibit A). Staff recommends the Council dismiss this appeal point.

Issue #3: The shadow study submitted by the applicant is vague and ambiguous, and there are not explicit details on the extent of shading on each window.

Response: The shadow studies prepared by the applicant comply with the City’s instructions. The proposed project meets the development standards of the district and the shadows caused by the proposed addition are normal for an urbanized area.

Because the impacts would occur on limited areas and would only partially shade neighboring buildings for a limited time during the year, and only for a few hours of the day, the residential addition would not result in a significant loss of direct sunlight on abutting residences, and the shading impacts were not deemed detrimental. Staff recommends the Council dismiss this appeal point.

Issue #4: Staff did not provide an honest and thorough analysis of BMC Section

23.406.030.F (formerly Section 23B.28.0501).
1 The prior Zoning Ordinance was in effect at the time this application was deemed complete and was heard by ZAB.

The version of the BMC Title 23, Zoning Ordinance, that was in effect at the time this application was deemed complete is available online:

Page 4 of 63 ends

194
ZAB Appeal: 1527 Sacramento Street PUBLIC HEARING
Administrative Use Permit #ZP2020-0034 February 22, 2022

Page 5 ends

Response: The required findings under BMC Section 23.406.030.F.12 are based on the broad land use regulatory (“police”) powers of all cities and counties and those terms (health, safety, and welfare) are not defined in the BMC. The appellants draw a connection between the health, safety, and peace of the residents of 1525 Sacramento Street and 1529 Sacramento Street and negative aspects of construction, and the proposed addition. The City has interpreted health, safety and welfare to mean access to sunlight, air, and privacy, which are analyzed in the Findings and Conditions (Exhibit A). Construction impacts, such as noise and dust, are addressed in the City’s Standard Conditions of Approval. ZAB also added a condition of approval to assuage concerns about construction impacts. Staff believes that the Finding under BMC Section

23.406.030.F.1 can be made, and thus recommends the Council dismiss this appeal point.

Issue #5: The proposed addition will lead to adverse economic impacts for the resident of 1525 Sacramento Street, including higher energy bills due to increased shadows, more caregiving services to help the occupant in lower light conditions, the need to install skylights to provide more light, and solar cells to offset increased energy costs. These economic impacts will be an unconstitutional “taking.”
Response: The economic concerns listed in the appeal letter do not address the findings made by the ZAB regarding the proposed project. Takings jurisprudence arises from the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, and provides that no private property can be taken for public use without the payment of just compensation.

There are many different types of takings (physical invasions of property, regulatory takings that restrict the use of property, or land use exactions such as easements), none of which are applicable to the effect of this project upon neighboring parcels. The Zoning Officer, the ZAB, and City Council must base the decision to approve or deny a project on the required findings in the BMC. A project cannot be denied or approved based on speculation, unsubstantiated opinions, or the level of support or opposition of various parties regarding its potential economic impacts. Staff recommends the Council dismiss this appeal point.

Issue #6: The applicant has refused to modify the project to address increased shadows, and loss of heat and natural light for 1525 Sacramento Street. https://www.cityofberkeley.info/Planning_and_Development/Land_Use_Division/Zoning_Ordinance_Revision_Project _(ZORP).aspx
2 1. To approve an AUP, the Zoning Officer shall find that the proposed project or use:
(a) Will not be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or general welfare of persons residing or working in the area or neighborhood, of the proposed use; and (b) Will not be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements of the adjacent properties, the surrounding area or neighborhood or to the general welfare of the City.

Page 5 of 63 ends

195
ZAB Appeal: 1527 Sacramento Street PUBLIC HEARING
Administrative Use Permit #ZP2020-0034 February 22, 2022

Page 6 ends

Response: The existing average building height is 12 feet 3 inches. With the addition, the new average height will be 21 feet 9 inches, below the limit of 28 feet. When the project was first submitted in April 2020, the proposed maximum ridge height was 23 feet 4 ¾ inches; the project was revised and resubmitted in August 2020, with a maximum ridge height of 22 feet 9 inches, 7 ¾ inches lower than originally proposed.

Furthermore, when the project was originally submitted, the right (south) setback for the area of the addition was 2 feet 1 3/8 inch, the same as the existing house (which is allowed with an Administrative Use Permit to extend a non-conforming setback, per BMC Section 23.324.050(D)(2)). The proposal was revised in August 2020 to meet the 3-foot setback, which complies with the requirement in BMC Section 23.304.030(B).

The proposed project otherwise meets the development standards of the district, and the shadows caused by the proposed addition are normal for an urbanized area.

Addendum to the ZAB Appeal
Issue #1: The architect’s response to the July 6, 2021 appeal letter was received on September 13, 2021, only ten days before the ZAB meeting, and did not answer the appellants’ questions about shadows.

Response: The appellants (1525 and 1529 Sacramento Street) have shared several concerns related to the shadow studies prepared by the applicant throughout the application process, and staff and the applicant have responded to those concerns in emails, letters, the ZAB staff report, and this Council report. In the addendum to the appeal of the ZAB decision, the appellants state that they would like to know the percentage of light lost to specific windows, and the hours per day, and the days per year that the windows would be affected. The appellants state that they need this specific data so that they have more information on potential economic loss.

The shadow studies prepared by the applicant comply with the City’s instructions. The shadows caused by the proposed addition are normal for an urbanized area. 1525 Sacramento is adjacent to the north of 1527 Sacramento, and it is set back approximately 5 feet from the shared property line. The potential impacts are summarized as follows:
 Two hours after sunrise on the winter solstice (December 21), shadows on the south side of the dwelling at 1525 Sacramento Street will increase and cover a window in the living room, front bedroom, closet, bathroom window, and two bedrooms near the rear.

Page 6 of 63 ends

196
ZAB Appeal: 1527 Sacramento Street PUBLIC HEARING
Administrative Use Permit #ZP2020-0034 February 22, 2022

Page 7 ends

 At noon on the winter solstice, shadows on the south side of the dwelling at 1525 Sacramento Street will increase and cover windows in a closet, bathroom, and six bedroom windows near the rear.
 Two hours before sunset on the winter solstice, shadows on the south side of the dwelling at 1525 Sacramento Street will increase and cover two bedroom windows near the middle of the house, and cover one quarter of the last bedroom window at the rear of the dwelling.
 At noon on March 13 (representative of the application date), shadows on the south side of the dwelling at 1525 Sacramento Street will increase and cover half of a bedroom window at the front of the house, windows in a closet, bathroom, and two bedroom windows near the middle of the house.

The shading impacts were not deemed detrimental by the Zoning Officer or ZAB.

Therefore, staff recommends the Council dismiss this appeal point.

Issue #2: ZAB did not require mediation, and only asked the applicant, and not the appellants, whether mediation was pursued.

Response: Mediation is not required by Title 23 of the BMC when there is a conflict between parties.3 ZAB considered and discussed the evidence presented at the hearing, and acted within its purview to approve the proposed project. Staff recommends Council dismiss this appeal point.

Issue #3: Staff has stated in emails that they do not analyze BMC Section

23.406.030(F) (formerly Section 23B.28.050) regarding health, safety and welfare.

Response: In emails exchanged between staff and the appellants in July of 2020, staff explained that although the Finding under BMC Section 23.406.030(F) (see footnote 2 on page 4 of this report) contains the word “health,” “health” is not defined in the BMC.

Because the use is conforming, i.e., a residential addition in a residential district, it is considered innocuous in the larger scheme of land use planning (as opposed to introducing an industrial use in a residential district, for example). Staff believes that the Finding under BMC Section 23.406.030(F)(1) can be made, and thus recommends the Council dismiss this appeal point.
3 BMC Section 23.404.050(F)(1) After the close of public hearing, the review authority shall either approve, modify, or deny the application; continue the hearing to a future date; or refer the application to a mediation or conflict resolution service.

Page 7 of 63 ends

197
ZAB Appeal: 1527 Sacramento Street PUBLIC HEARING
Administrative Use Permit #ZP2020-0034 February 22, 2022

Page 8 ends

Issue #4: The addition will have economic impacts for neighbors, such as decreased property values.

Response: Analysis of the potential economic impact of a small residential project is not required by the BMC. A project cannot be denied or approved based on speculation, therefore staff recommends Council dismiss this appeal point.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
The project approved by the ZAB is in compliance with all applicable State and local environmental requirements, would be located in a transit-rich area, and would be built and operated according to current codes for energy conservation, waste reduction, low toxicity, and other factors.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
The ZAB considered all of the information received from staff, the applicant, the appellants, and the neighbors, and determined that the project is consistent with the zoning ordinance and applicable policies of the General Plan, and would not result in detrimental impacts to residents, adjacent properties, the surrounding area, or to the general welfare of the city.

Staff believes that the ZAB considered and discussed the evidence presented at the hearing, and acted within its purview to approve the proposed project. None of the issues raised on appeal are different from those raised at the ZAB hearing, and no new evidence or argument would dispute the reasoned findings of the ZAB. Therefore, staff recommends that the City Council uphold the ZAB decision to approve the second-story addition with an average height of 21 feet 9 inches, legalize the enclosure of the front porch in the non-conforming front setback, and add an unenclosed hot tub, with the ZAB-approved condition of approval related to notification of neighbors regarding the construction schedule.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
Pursuant to BMC Section 23.410.040(G), the Council may (1) continue the public hearing, (2) reverse, affirm, or modify the ZAB’s decision, or (3) remand the matter to the ZAB.

Action Deadline:

Pursuant to BMC Section 23.410.040(I), if the disposition of the appeal has not been determined within 30 days from the date the public hearing was closed by the Council (not including Council recess), then the decision of the Board shall be deemed affirmed and the appeal shall be deemed denied.

Page 8 of 63 ends

198
ZAB Appeal: 1527 Sacramento Street PUBLIC HEARING
Administrative Use Permit #ZP2020-0034 February 22, 2022

Page 9 ends

CONTACT PERSONS
Jordan Klein, Director, Planning & Development Department, (510) 981-7534 Steven Buckley, Land Use Planning Manager, (510) 981-7411 Allison Riemer, Project Planner, (510) 981-7433
Attachments:
1: Resolution
Exhibit A: Findings and Conditions
Exhibit B: Project Plans, dated April 27, 2021
2: Appeal Letters, received October 13, 2021
3: ZAB Staff Report, dated September 23, 2021
4: Index to Administrative Record
5: Administrative Record
6: Public Hearing Notice

Page 9 of 63 ends

199
RESOLUTION NO. ##,###-N.S.

UPHOLD THE ZONING ADJUSTMENTS BOARD (ZAB) DECISION TO APPROVE ADMINISTRATIVE USE PERMIT #ZP2020-0034 TO ADD 1) A 520 SQUARE FOOT SECOND-STORY ADDITION WITH AN AVERAGE HEIGHT OF 21 FEET 9 INCHES AT THE REAR; 2) A MAJOR RESIDENTIAL ADDITION OF MORE THAN 15 PERCENT OF THE LOT AREA, INCLUDING 44 SQUARE FEET AT THE FIRST FLOOR; 3) LEGALIZE THE ENCLOSURE OF THE FRONT PORCH IN THE NON- CONFORMING FRONT SETBACK; AND 4) ADD AN UNENCLOSED HOT TUB, ON A 2,783 SQUARE-FOOT LOT THAT CONTAINS A ONE-STORY 824-SQUARE-FOOT

SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING, AND DISMISS THE APPEAL
WHEREAS, on April 28, 2020, Jason Kaldis (“Applicant”) submitted an application for an Administrative Use Permit (AUP) to remodel and expand a single-family home located at 1527 Sacramento Street; and
WHEREAS, on June 14, 2021, staff deemed this application complete and determined that the project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) under Section 15301 (“Existing Facilities”) of the CEQA Guidelines; and WHEREAS, on June 14, 2021, the Notice of Administrative Decision was issued by the Zoning Officer, initiating a 20-day appeal period. On July 2, 2021, Joyce Lewis filed an appeal of the Zoning Officer’s decision on behalf of Sterling Lewis of 1525 Sacramento Street and his family. On July 6, 2021, Micah and Michele Liedeker of 1529 Sacramento Street filed an appeal of the Zoning Officer’s decision; and WHEREAS, on September 23, 2021, the Zoning Adjustments Board (ZAB) conducted a public hearing for the appeal of the Administrative Use Permit. After hearing public comments and holding discussion, and adding Condition #11 (construction schedule must be shared with the neighbors at 1525 and 1529 Sacramento Street), the ZAB approved the Administrative Use Permit and dismissed the appeal by a vote of 8-0-0-1 (Yes: Duffy, Kahn, Kim, Gaffney, Olson, Thagard, Thompson, Tregub; No: None; Abstain: None;

Absent: O’Keefe); and
WHEREAS, on September 30, 2021, staff issued the notice of the ZAB decision, and on October 13, 2021, an appeal of the ZAB decision was filed with the City Clerk by Joyce Lewis, daughter of Sterling Lewis, the owner of 1525 Sacramento Street. The Clerk set the matter for review by the Council on February 22, 2022; and WHEREAS, on or before February 8, 2022, staff posted the public hearing notice at the site and two nearby locations, and mailed notices to property owners and occupants within 300 feet of the project site, and to all registered neighborhood groups that cover this area; and

Page 10 of 63 ends

200
WHEREAS, on February 22, 2022, the Council held a public hearing to consider the ZAB’s decision, and, in the opinion of this Council, the facts stated in or ascertainable from the public record, including the staff report and comments made at the public hearing, warrant approving the project.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that the City Council hereby adopts the findings for approval made by the ZAB in Exhibit A, affirms the decision of the ZAB to approve Use Permit #ZP2020-0034, and dismisses the appeal.

Exhibits
A: Findings and Conditions
B: Project Plans, dated April 27, 2021

Page 11 of 63 ends

201
A t t a c h m e n t 1, Exhibit A
Findings an d Condition s
S EPTEMBER 23, 202 1
1947 Center St
reet, 2nd Floor, Berkeley, CA 94704 Tel: 510.981.7410 TDD: 510.981.7474 Fax: 510.981.7420 E-mail: [email protected]
1527 Sacramento Street
Admini
strative Use Permit #ZP2020-0034
On a 2,7
83 square foot lot that contains a one-story 824-square-foot single- family dwelling: 1) 520 square foot second-story addition with an average height of 21 feet 9 inches at the rear; 2) major residential addition of more than 15 percent of the lot area, including 44 square feet at the first floor; 3) legalize the enclosure of the front porch in the non-conforming front setback; and 4) add an unenclosed hot tub.

PERMITS REQUIRED
• Administrative Use Permit pursuant to Berkeley Municipal Code (BMC) Section 23D.16.030 to construct a major residential addition.
• Administrative Use Permit pursuant to BMC Section 23D.16.070.C to construct an addition above 14 ft. in average height.
• Administrative Use Permit pursuant to BMC Section 23C.04.070.B to make alterations in a non-conforming yard.
• Administrative Use Permit pursuant to BMC Section 23D.08.060.C to add an unenclosed hot tub.

CEQA FINDINGS

1. The project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, Public Resources Code §21000, et seq. and California Code of Regulations, §15000, et seq.) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 (“Existing Facilities”). Furthermore, none of the exceptions in CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 apply, as follows: (a) the site is not located in an environmentally sensitive area, (b) there are no cumulative impacts, (c) there are no significant effects, (d) the project is not located near a scenic highway, (e) the project site is not located on a hazardous waste site pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5, and (f) the project would not affect any historical resource.

FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL

2. As required by BMC Section 23B.28.050.A, the project , under the circumstances of this particular case existing at the time at which the application is granted, would not be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, and general welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed use or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements of the adjacent properties, the surrounding area or neighborhood, or to the general welfare of the City because:

A. The subject property complies with BMC Section 23D.16.070 (R-1 Single Family Residential District Development S tandards) for maximum residential density ( one dwelling unit on the lot where only one is allowed), maximum lot coverage (39.9 percent

Page 12 of 63 ends

202
1527 Sacramento Street NOTICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION - Findings and Conditions

Page 2 of 9 ends

G:\LANDUSE\Projects by Address\Sacramento\1527\ZP2020-0034\DOCUMENT FINALS\2021-09-23_FC_Modified by ZAB_1527 Sacramento.docx lot coverage where the maximum allowed is 40 percent), and usable open space (over 400 square feet where a minimum of 400 sq uare feet is required). The second-story addition is setback approximately 35 feet from the front lot line and approximately 44 feet from the rear lot line ( 20 is required for each). Because this lot is less than 40 feet in width, the minimum setback from the side lot lines is three feet per BMC Section 23D.16.070.D.2, and the second-story addition will be setback 4 feet 3 inches from the north side lot line, and 3 feet from the south lot line.

B. The site complies with BMC Section 23D.16.080 (Parking) by providing a required off - street parking s pace within the detached garage where one space (covered or uncovered) is required.

C. T he existing average building height is 12 f eet 3 inches. With the addition, the new average height will be 21 f eet 9 inches. When the project was first submitted in April 2020, the proposed maximum ridge height was 23 feet 4 ¾ inches; the project was revised and resubmitted in August 2020, with a maximum ridge height of 22 feet 9 inches, 7 ¾ inches lower than originally proposed. Furthermore, w hen the project was originally submitted, the right (south) setback for the area of the addition was 2 feet 1 3/8 inch, the same as the existing house (which is allowed with an Administrative Use Permit to extend a non- conforming setback, per BMC Section 23C.04.070.B). The proposal was revised in August 2020 to meet the 3-foot setback, which complies with the requirement in BMC Section 23D.16.070.D.2.

D. The existing front porch was enclosed around 2015 and is located within the required 20-foot front yard. The enclosure will be legalized with this Administrative Use Permit and established with a subsequent building permit.

E. N ew windows will be installed along all building elevations, and the new windows will be outside of required setbacks. Most of the new windows at the first floor will be located in generally the same place as existing windows. Therefore, there will be limited impacts to the privacy of neighbors.

F. The hot tub will be at the left rear corner of the lot. The unenclosed hot tub will not affect the neighbor’s privacy because it will be 14 f eet 9 inches from the closest neighbor at 1517 Buena Avenue . The mechanical equipment and pump for the hot tub will be enclosed under the tub. Operation is subject to Conditions of Approval #31 – 34 as well as the controls imposed under BMC Chapter 13.40 as it relates to maximum noise levels.

3. Pursuant to BMC Section 23D.16.090.B (Findings to Deny a Use Permit), the Zoning Officer finds that the residential addition would not unreasonably obstruct sunlight, air, or views for the following reasons:

A. Sunlight: Shadow studies submitted by the applicant document the addition’s projected shadow angles and lengths at three times throughout the day during the summer and winter solstice. The studies show that the addition will create an incremental increase in shadows on three neighboring dwellings at 1529 Sacramento Street, 1525 Sacramento Street, and 1517 Buena Avenue, as follows:
• Two hours before sunset on the summer solstice, shadows on the north side of the dwelling at 1529 Sacramento Street will increase slightly and reach half of the middle third of a rear bedroom window;
• Two hours after sunrise on the winter solstice, shadows on the south side of the dwelling at 1525 Sacramento Street will increase and cover a window in the living room, front bedroom, closet, bathroom window, and two bedrooms near the rear;

Page 13 of 63 ends

203
1527 Sacramento Street NOTICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION - Findings and Conditions

Page 3 of 9 ends

G:\LANDUSE\Projects by Address\Sacramento\1527\ZP2020-0034\DOCUMENT FINALS\2021-09-23_FC_Modified by ZAB_1527 Sacramento.docx • At noon on the winter solstice, shadows on the south side of the dwelling at 1525 Sacramento Street will increase and cover windows in a closet, bathroom, and six bedroom windows near the rear;
• Two hours bef ore sunset on the winter solstice, shadows on the west side of the dwelling at 1517 Buena Avenue will slightly increase, but no windows will be affected.

Because the impacts to neighboring properties will occur on limited areas and will only partially shade neighboring buildings for a limited time during the year, and only for a few hours of the day, the residential addition will not result in a significant loss of direct sunlight on abutting residences, and these shading impacts are not deemed detrimental.

B. Air: The addition is found to be consistent with the existing development and building - to-building separation pattern in this R -1 neighborhood because the addition will be outside of all required setbacks and will not exceed height or story limits. Therefore, there will be no impacts to air circulation.

C. Views: The addition would not result in obstruction of significant views in the neighborhood as defined in BMC Section 23F.04.010 (Definitions). The neighborhood is generally flat and developed with one- and two-story residences that filter or obscure most views that may be available of the Berkeley hills or the Golden Gate Bridge from off-site view angles, and the area includes mature vegetation which provides additional visual screening.

4. Pursuant to BMC Section 23C.04.070.B, the Zoning Officer finds that:

A. Although the project would make alterations to the existing covered porch within the non-conforming front yard, the alterations may be authorized because the existing use of the property is conforming (single-family dwelling in the R-1 Single Family Residential District).

B. The roof within the front setback will not exceed the existing average height limit.

C. The alterations of the building will not further reduce the existing non- conforming front yard.

Page 14 of 63 ends

204
1527 Sacramento Street NOTICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION - Findings and Conditions

Page 4 of 9 ends

G:\LANDUSE\Projects by Address\Sacramento\1527\ZP2020-0034\DOCUMENT FINALS\2021-09-23_FC_Modified by ZAB_1527 Sacramento.docx

STANDARD CONDITIONS

The following conditions, as well as all other applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, apply to this Permit:

1. Conditions Shall be Printed on Plans
The conditions of this Permit shall be printed on the second sheet of each plan set submitted for a building permit pursuant to this Use Permit, under the title ‘Use Permit Conditions’.

Additional sheets may also be used if the second sheet is not of sufficient size to list all of the conditions. The sheet(s) containing the conditions shall be of the same size as those sheets containing the construction drawings; 8-1/2” by 11” sheets are not acceptable.

2. Applicant Responsible for Compliance with Conditions The applicant shall ensure compliance with all of the following conditions, including submittal to the project planner of required approval signatures at the times specified.

Failure to comply with any condition may result in construction being stopped, issuance of a citation, and/or modification or revocation of the Use Permit.

3. Uses Approved Deemed to Exclude Other Uses (BMC Section 23B.56.010) A. This Permit authorizes only those uses and activities actually proposed in the application, and excludes other uses and activities.

B. Except as expressly specified herein, this Permit terminates all other uses at the location subject to it.

4. Modification of Permits (BMC Section 23B.56.020)
No change in the use or structure for which this Permit is issued is permitted unless the Permit is modified by the Zoning Officer.

5. Plans and Representations Become Conditions (BMC Section 23B.56.030) Except as specified herein, the site plan, floor plans, building elevations and/or any additional information or representations, whether oral or written, indicating the proposed structure or manner of operation submitted with an application or during the approval process are deemed conditions of approval.

6. Subject to All Applicable Laws and Regulations (BMC Section 23B.56.040) The approved use and/or construction is subject to, and shall comply with, all applicable City Ordinances and laws and regulations of other governmental agencies. Prior to construction, the applicant shall identify and secure all applicable permits from the Building and Safety Division, Public Works Department and other affected City divisions and departments.

7. Exercised Permit for Use Survives Vacancy of Property (BMC Section 23B.56.080) Once a Permit for a use is exercised and the use is established, that use is legally recognized, even if the property becomes vacant, except as set forth in Standard Condition #8, below.

Page 15 of 63 ends

205
1527 Sacramento Street NOTICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION - Findings and Conditions

Page 5 of 9 ends

G:\LANDUSE\Projects by Address\Sacramento\1527\ZP2020-0034\DOCUMENT FINALS\2021-09-23_FC_Modified by ZAB_1527 Sacramento.docx

8. Exercise and Lapse of Permits (BMC Section 23B.56.100) A. A permit for the use of a building or a property is exercised when, if required, a valid City business license has been issued, and the permitted use has commenced on the property.

B. A permit for the construction of a building or structure is deemed exercised when a valid City building permit, if required, is issued, and construction has lawfully commenced.

C. A permit may be declared lapsed and of no further force and effect if it is not exercised within one year of its issuance, except that permits for construction or alteration of structures or buildings may not be declared lapsed if the permittee has: (1) applied for a building permit; or, (2) made substantial good faith efforts to obtain a building permit and begin construction, even if a building permit has not been issued and/or construction has not begun.

9. Indemnification Agreement
The applicant shall hold harmless, defend, and indemnify the City of Berkeley and its officers, agents, and employees against any and all liability, damages, claims, demands, judgments or other losses (including without limitation, attorney’s fees, expert witness and consultant fees and other litigation expenses), referendum or initiative relating to, resulting from or caused by, or alleged to have resulted from, or caused by, any action or approval associated with the project. The indemnity includes without limitation, any legal or administrative challenge, referendum or initiative filed or prosecuted to overturn, set aside, stay or otherwise rescind any or all approvals granted in connection with the Project, any environmental determination made for the project and granting any permit issued in accordance with the project. This indemnity includes, without limitation, payment of all direct and indirect costs associated with any action specified herein. Direct and indirect costs shall include, without limitation, any attorney’s fees, expert witness and consultant fees, court costs, and other litigation fees. City shall have the right to select counsel to represent the City at Applicant’s expense in the defense of any action specified in this condition of approval. City shall take reasonable steps to promptly notify the Applicant of any claim, demand, or legal actions that may create a claim for indemnification under these conditions of approval.

ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS IMPOSED BY THE ZONING OFFICER
Pursuant to BMC Section 23B.28.050.D, the Zoning Officer attaches the following additional conditions to this Permit:

Prior to Submittal of Any Building Permit:

10. Project Liaison. The applicant shall include in all building permit plans and post onsite the name and telephone number of an individual empowered to manage construction-related complaints generated from the project. The individual’s name, telephone number, and responsibility for the project shall be posted at the project site for the duration of the project in a location easily visible to the public. The individual shall record all complaints received and actions taken in response, and submit written reports of such complaints and actions to the project planner on a weekly basis. Pl ease designate the name of this individual below:
□ Project Liaison
Name Phone #

Page 16 of 63 ends

206
1527 Sacramento Street NOTICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION - Findings and Conditions

Page 6 of 9 ends

G:\LANDUSE\Projects by Address\Sacramento\1527\ZP2020-0034\DOCUMENT FINALS\2021-09-23_FC_Modified by ZAB_1527 Sacramento.docx

11. Prior to project construction, the Project Liaison shall email the construction schedule to the neighbors at 1525 and 1529 Sacramento Street, and offer to meet with them to discuss the construction procedures and schedule. City Planning Staff shall be copied on the email.

Standard Construction-related Conditions Applicable to all Projects:

12. Transportation Construction Plan. The applicant and all persons associated with the project are hereby notified that a Transportation Construction Plan (TCP) may be required for all phases of construction, particularly for the following activities:
• Alterations, clo sures, or blockages to sidewalks, pedestrian paths or vehicle travel lanes (including bicycle lanes);
• Storage of building materials, dumpsters, debris anywhere in the public ROW; • Provision of exclusive contractor parking on-street; or • Significant truck activity.

The applicant shall secure the City Traffic Engineer’s approval of a TCP. Please contact the Office of Transportation at 510-9 81-7010, or 1947 Center Street , 4th floor, and ask to speak to a traffic engineer. In addition to other requirements of the Traffic Engineer, this plan shall include the locations of material and equipment storage, trailers, worker parking, a schedule of site operations that may block traffic, and provisions for traffic control. The TCP shall be consistent with any other requirements of the construction phase.

Contact the Permit Service Center (PSC) at 510-981-7500, or 1947 Center Street, 3rd floor, for details on obtaining Construction/No Parking Permits (and associated signs and accompanying dashboard permits). Please note that the Zoning Officer and/or Traffic Engineer may limit off-site parking of construction-related vehicles if necessary to protect the health, safety or convenience of the surrounding neighborhood. A current copy of this Plan shall be available at all times at the construction site for review by City Staff.

13. Construction activity shall be limited to between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Monday through Friday, and between 9:00 a.m. and noon on Saturday. No construction- related activity shall occur on Sunday or on any Federal Holiday.

14. If underground utilities leading to adjacent properties are uncovered and/or broken, the contractor involved shall immediately notify the Public Works Department and the Building & Safety Division, and carry out any necessary corrective action to their satisfaction.

15. Subject to approval of the Public Works Department, the applicant shall repair any damage to public streets and/or sidewalks by construction vehicles traveling to or from the project site.

16. All piles of debris, soil, sand, or other loose materials shall be covered at night and during rainy weather with plastic at least one- eighth millimeter in thickness and secured to the ground.

17. All active construction areas shall be watered at least twice daily, and all piles of debris, soil, sand or other loose materials shall be watered or covered.

18. Trucks hauling debris, soil, sand, or other loose materials shall be covered or required to maintain at least two feet of board.

Page 17 of 63 ends

207
1527 Sacramento Street NOTICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION - Findings and Conditions

Page 7 of 9 ends

G:\LANDUSE\Projects by Address\Sacramento\1527\ZP2020-0034\DOCUMENT FINALS\2021-09-23_FC_Modified by ZAB_1527 Sacramento.docx

19. Public streets shall be swept (preferably with water sweepers) of all visible soil material carried from the site.

20. The applicant shall establish and maintain drainage patterns that do not adversely affect adjacent properties and rights-of-way.

21. The applicant shall ensure that all excavation takes into account surface and subsurface waters and underground streams so as not to adversely affect adjacent properties and rights-of-way.

22. Any construction during the wet season shall require submittal of a soils report with appropriate measures to minimize erosion and landslides, and the developer shall be responsible for following these and any other measures required by the Building and Safety Division and the Public Works Department.

23. Halt Work/Unanticipated Discovery of Tribal Cultural Resources. In the event that cultural resources of Native American origin are identified during construction, all work within 50 feet of the discovery shall be redirected. The project applicant and project construction contractor shall notify the City Planning Department within 24 hours. The City will again contact any tribes who have requested consultation under AB 52, as well as contact a qualified archaeologist, to evaluate the resources and situation and provide recommendations. If it is determined that the resource is a tribal cultural resource and thus significant under CEQA, a mitigation plan shall be prepared and implemented in accordance with State guidelines and in consultation with Native American groups. If the resource cannot be avoided, additional measures to avoid or reduce impacts to the resource and to address tribal concerns may be required.

24. Archaeological Resources (Ongoing throughout demolition, grading, and/or construction).

Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines S ection 15064.5(f), “provisions for historical or unique archaeological resources accidentally discovered during construction” should be instituted.

Therefore:

A. In the event that any prehistoric or historic subsurface cultural resources are discovered during ground disturbing activities, all work within 50 feet of the resources shall be halted and the project applicant and/or lead agency shall consult with a qualified archaeologist, historian or paleontologist to assess the significance of the find.

B. If any find is determined to be significant, representatives of the project proponent and/or lead agency and the qualified professional would meet to determine the appropriate avoidance measures or other appropriate measure, with the ultimate determination to be made by the City of Berkeley. All significant cultural materials recovered shall be subject to scientific analysis, professional museum curation, and/or a report prepared by the qualified professional according to current professional standards.

C. In considering any suggested measure proposed by the qualified professional, the project applicant shall determine whether avoidance is necessary or feasible in light of factors such as the uniqueness of the find, project design, costs, and other considerations.

Page 18 of 63 ends

208
1527 Sacramento Street NOTICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION - Findings and Conditions

Page 8 of 9 ends

G:\LANDUSE\Projects by Address\Sacramento\1527\ZP2020-0034\DOCUMENT FINALS\2021-09-23_FC_Modified by ZAB_1527 Sacramento.docx D. If avoidance is unnecessary or infeasible, other appropriate measures (e.g., data recovery) shall be instituted. Work may proceed on other parts of the project site while mitigation measures for cultural resources is carried out.

E. If significant materials are recovered, the qualified professional shall prepare a report on the findings for submittal to the Northwest Information Center.

25. Human Remains ( Ongoing throughou t demolition, grading, and/or construction) .In the event that human skeletal remains are uncovered at the project site during ground- disturbing activities, all work shall immediately halt and the Alameda County Coroner shall be contacted to evaluate the remains, and following the procedures and protocols pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 (e)(1). If the County Coroner determines that the remains are Native American, the City shall contact the California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5(c), and all excavation and site preparation activities shall cease within a 50- foot radius of the find until appropriate arrangements are made. If the agencies determine that avoidance is not feasible, then an alternative plan shall be prepared with specific steps and timeframe required to resume construction activities. Monitoring, data recovery, determination of significance and avoidance measures (if applicable) shall be completed expeditiously.

26. Paleontological Resources (Ongoing throughout demolition, grading, and/or construction).

In the event of an unanticipated discovery of a paleontological resource during construction, excavations within 50 feet of the find shall be temporarily halted or diverted until the discovery is examined by a qualified paleontologist (per Society of Vertebrate Paleontology standards [SVP 1995,1996]). The qualified paleontologist shall document the discovery as needed, evaluate the potential resource, and assess the significance of the find. The paleontologist shall notify the appropriate agencies to determine procedures that would be followed before construction is allowed to resume at the location of the find. If the City determines that avoidance is not feasible, the paleontol ogist shall prepare an excavation plan for mitigating the effect of the project on the qualities that make the resource important, and such plan shall be implemented. The plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval.

Prior to Issuance of Occupancy Permit or Final Inspection:

27. All construction at the subject property shall substantially conform to the approved Use Permit drawings or to modifications approved by the Zoning Officer.

28. All landscape, site and architectural improvements shall be completed per the attache d approved drawings received March 24, 2021, and April 27, 2021.

At All Times (Operation):

29. All exterior lighting shall be energy efficient where feasible; and shielded and directed downward and away from property lines to prevent excessive glare beyond the subject property.

30. Drainage Patterns. The applicant shall establish and maintain drainage patterns tha t do not adversely affect adjacent properties and rights -of-way. Drainage plans shall be submitted for approval of the Building & Safety Division and Public Works Department, if required.

Page 19 of 63 ends

209
1527 Sacramento Street NOTICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION - Findings and Conditions

Page 9 of 9 ends

G:\LANDUSE\Projects by Address\Sacramento\1527\ZP2020-0034\DOCUMENT FINALS\2021-09-23_FC_Modified by ZAB_1527 Sacramento.docx

31. Electrical Meter. Only one electrical meter fixture may be installed per dwelling unit.

32. The hot tub pump shall be mounted, enclosed and maintained to prevent noise from disturbing the occupants of neighboring properties.

33. The hot tub shall be equipped with safety features in accordance with the California Building Code.

34. This permit shall be subject to review and modification as necessary to alleviate excessive noise or disturbance to the neighborhood.

35. Mechanical operation and use must adhere to the exterior noise standards of BMC Section

13.40.050.

_____________________________________
Prepared by: Allison Riemer
Reviewed by: Samantha Updegrave, Zoning Officer

Page 20 of 63 ends

210
GSPublisherVersion 0.0.100.100
JY

ADDITION & REMODEL FOR

ANNA TALAMO & JONATHAN

LIPSCHUTZ
1527 SACRAMENTO STREET
BERKELEY, CA 94702

02.26.20 18026
1 of
drawn by
datejob address
job number
drawing title sheet
1250 ADDISON STREET - STUDIO 210

JASON KALDIS
ARCHITECT, INC.

BERKELEY, CA 94702
PH (510) 549-3584 FX (510) 549-3574
[email protected]
AUP APPLICATION SET 02.26.20
AUP APPLICATION SET REV1 08.17.201

08.17.20 AUP APPLICATION SET REV2 02.09.212

02.09.21 AUP APPLICATION SET REV2.5 04.27.213 12'-53/8"
43'-111/8"
90'-03/8"
4'-47/8"
4'-101/2"
28'-13/4"
27'-81/4"34'-115/8"
7'-0"
3'-0"
5'-0"
(N) 6'-61/4"
CLR.
(N) 26'-91/8" CLR. (N) 10'-71/4"
CLR.
(N) 8'-21/4"
CLR. 14'-9
3/4"

PROPERTY LINE

PROPERTY
LINE

PROPERTY LINE
(N) 3'-0"

SIDE YARD
(SOUTH)

SETBACK
(E) 2'-13/8" SIDE

YARD (SOUTH)

SETBACK
(E) 4'-31/4" SIDE

YARD (NORTH)

SETBACK
(E) 91/8" SIDE

YARD (SOUTH)

SETBACK
(E) 3'-57/8" SIDE

YARD (NORTH)

SETBACK
(N) GABLE
END
(E) GABLE
END
(E) GABLE END
(E) 4'-31/4"
SIDE
YARD
(NORTH)

SETBACK
(E) D.S. (N)
D.S.
(E) TRANSITE FLUE
(TO BE REMOVED)
EXTEND
(E) D.S.
(E) D.S. (E) FLUE
(E) D.S.
(E) CURB
(E) CONC. & DIAMOND
PLATE
(E) S.D.I.
(E) GABLE END
(N) 44 SQ. FT. MAIN FLOOR
ADDITION & 520 SQ. FT.

UPPER FLOOR ADDITION
(AREA SHOWN HATCHED)
(N) OPEN WOOD DECK PER

AREA SHOWN SHADED
(N) RIDGE
(N) RIDGE
(N) RIDGE
(N) GABLE
END
(N)
D.S.
(N) D.S.
(N)
D.S.
(N) D.S.
(E) WATER
METER
(E) CITY
STREET
TREE
(E) FIRE

HYDRANT
(E)

DRIVEWAY

CURBCUT
(E) PLANTER
(E) CURB
(E) PLANTER
(E) PLANTER
(E) CURB
(E) CURB
(E) TREE -

HAMAMELIS

VIRGINIANA
(WITCH HAZEL)
(E) PLANTER
(E) GRAVENSTEIN

APPLE TREE (MALUS

DOMESTICA

GRAVENSTEIN)

TO REMAIN
(E) CITY STREET TREE
(E) PLANTER
(E) 6'-0"H. FENCE
(E) 6'-0" H.

FENCE
(E) 6'-0"H. FENCE/ GATE
(E) RIDGE
(N) SKYLT.
(N) SKYLT.
(E) CITRUS X

SINENSIS
(ORANGE SHRUB)

ORANGE TREE

TO REMAIN

PROVIDE
TREE

PROTECTION

PROVIDE TREEPROTECTION

3.38" : 12"
(N) ROOF
(N) 1'-6" SIDE

YARD (NORTH)

SETBACK TO

SPA TUB
(N) 7'-0" REAR YARD
(EAST) SETBACK TO

SPA TUB
(N) CONC.

BLK. WALL

PROVIDE TREE

PROTECTION
(E) PLUM TREE TO
REMAIN
(N) 3'-0"
SIDE
YARD
(SOUTH)

SETBACK
(E) CONC.

WALKWAY

TO REMAIN
1-HOUR FIRE WALL TO

PROTECT OPEN WOOD
DECK (< 30" H.) <5'-0", >3'-0"

FROM PROPERTY LINE
(E) CAMELLIA

JAPONICA TO
REMAIN
(N) SIDE YARD (NORTH)

SETBACK
(E) PITTOSPORUM

TREE TO REMAIN
EXTEND
(E) FENCE/
GATE
(>6'-0" H.)
(E) 2'-11/2"

SIDE YARD
(SOUTH)

SETBACK
(E) YUCCA TO
REMAIN
N 5° 32' 00" W 25.00'
N 84° 30' 00" E 111.33'
N 84° 30' 00" E 111.32'
N 5° 30' 00" W 25.00'
UP
(E) ROOF

3.38" : 12"
(N) REAR YARD (EAST) SETBACK
(E) ROOF

3.38" : 12"
(E) ROOF

3.38" : 12"
(E) HOUSE AT 1527

SACRAMENTO STREET

NOT FIRE SPRINKLER PROTECTED

SACRAMENTO STREET

BUENA AVENUE
(E) DETACHED
GARAGE AT 1527

SACRAMENTO STREET

NO WORK TO BE DONE
(E) SIDEWALK
(N) FRONT YARD (WEST) SETBACK TO DETACHED GARAGE
(N) ROOF

3.38" : 12"
(N) ROOF

3.38" : 12"(N) OPEN
WOOD
DECK
< 30" H.
(E)
ROOF
(E)
ROOF
UP 1
2 3
4 (E) SIDEWALK
(E) HOUSE AT 1529

SACRAMENTO STREET
(E) HOUSE AT 1525

SACRAMENTO STREET
8 19
17 18
(E) HOUSE AT 1517

BUENA AVE
(E) 111/4" REAR

YARD (EAST)

SETBACK
SPA
MOTOR

LOCATION
(INTEGRAL

TO SPA)
REMOVE (E) 49 SQ.

FT. STORAGE SHED
(N) SPA TUB W/

SAFETY COVER
MFR: NORDIC HOT TUBS
MODEL: CROWN XL
SIZE: 84" DIA. x 38.5" H.

CAPACITY: 300 GALLON
PUMP: 2 SPEED, 3 HP(R) WALKWAY
(SEE SHEET 2)
(E) WISTERIA

TO REMAIN
(E) CITRUS

LIMON TO

REMAIN(E) FRONT YARD (WEST)

SETBACK
1-HOUR RATED ASSEMBLY AT EXTERIOR WALL

ASSEMBLY AT AREA OF ADDITION AT WALLS
<5'-0" FROM PROPERTY LINE
1-HOUR RATED ASSEMBLY AT EXTERIOR WALL
ASSEMBLY AT AREA OF ADDITION AT WALLS <5'-0"

FROM PROPERTY LINE
(N) FRONT YARD (WEST) SETBACK TO (N) SECOND STORY ADDITION For Assessment Use Only

NON-HABITABLE & NON-CONDITIONED FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS

EXISTING PROPOSED TOTAL
COVERED FRONT ENTRY 53 SQ. FT. NO CHANGE 53 SQ. FT.
(ACC. STRUCTURE)
DETACHED GARAGE 240 SQ. FT. -49 SQ. FT. 191 SQ. FT.
& STORAGE

TOTAL NON
-HABITABLE & NON -CONDITIONED
FLOOR AREA 293 SQ. FT. - 49 SQ. FT. 244 SQ. FT.

LOT COVERAGE
(E) LOT COVERAGE (EXISTING BUILDING FOOTPRINT ÷ LOT AREA) 1117 SQ. FT. ÷ 2783 SQ. FT. = 40.14% (>
40% MAX.)
(N) LOT COVERAGE (NEW BUILDING FOOTPRINT ÷ LOT AREA)
1112 SQ. FT. ÷ 2783 SQ. FT. = 39.96% (< 40% MAX.)

USABLE OPEN SPACE

EXISTING PROPOSED TOTAL
FRONT YARD 0 SQ. FT. NO CHANGE 0 SQ. FT.

REAR YARD 564 SQ. FT. +207 SQ. FT. 771 SQ. FT.

TOTAL 564 SQ. FT. +2 07 SQ. FT. 771 SQ. FT.

Reminders:
•Download the city’s tabulation/submittal checklist and supplement with any categories not included above!
•In Berkeley, Fire Zones 2 & 3 fall under the Hillside Ordinance (Wildland-Urban Interface – WUI).

All exterior windows should be Temp. Gl. and specify Fire Rated construction assemblies at exterior modifications.
•In Berkeley, the 40’ sideyard setback reduction can use the average width of the front and rear widths if the lot tapers.
•In Berkeley, there are sideyard setback reductions for corner lots – see Project Data from H:\Dobrin Brown #14014.

PROJECT DATA

ADDITION AND REMODEL FOR

ANNA TALAMO & JONATHAN LIPSCHUTZ
1527 SACRAMENTO STREET
BERKELEY, CA 94702
APN: 59-2285-36 USE: R-3 AT HOUSE; (SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING)

U AT DETACHED GARAGE
LOT SIZE: 111.32’ x 25.00’ ZONE: R-1
LOT AREA: 2783 SQ. FT. FIRE ZONE: 1
HOUSE BUILT IN: 1919 SHZ: NONE
T24 CLIMATE ZONE: 3 FLOOD ZONE: NO
CREEK ON PARCEL: NONE
ENV.MGMT. AREA: NO
CONSTRUCTION TYPE: V-B (NOT FIRE SPRINKLER PROTECTED)
NO. OF STORIES: EXISTING (HOUSE) – 1; PROPOSED (HOUSE) - 2 EXISTING (DETACHED GARAGE) – 1
EXISTING PROPOSED REQUIREMENT**
MAX. RIDGE HEIGHT: (WEST)
13’-7 1/8” 22’-9” 35’-0” MAX.
(EAST) 13’-10 1/4” 23’-0"
MAX. AVG. HEIGHT: 12’-3" 21’-9" 28’-0” MAX.

MAX. EAVES HEIGHT: (WEST) 10’-11 3/4” 20’-3" N/A (EAST) 11’-2 3/4” 20’-6" N/A
FRONT SETBACK (WEST): 12’-5 3/8” NO CHANGE 20’-0” MIN.

SIDE SETBACK (NORTH): 4’-3 1/4" NO CHANGE 3’-0” MIN.*
(10% x 25-0” < 3’-0”)
SIDE SETBACK (SOUTH): 2’-1 3/8” 3’-0” (AT UPPER 3’-0” MIN.* STORY ADDITION (10% x 25-0” < 3’-0”)
& LOWER STORY

ALTERATION)
REAR SETBACK (EAST): 48’-8 5/8” 43’-11 1/8” 20’-0” MIN. ** OR AS ALLOWED BY AUP & ORDINANCE
* WHEN LOT IS LESS THAN 40’ WIDE, SETBACK REDUCED TO 10% OF LOT WIDTH, BUT NOT LESS THAN 3’ PER SECTION 23D.28.070.D.
(SIDE YARD SETBACK FOR 1527 SACRAMENTO: 10% x 25’-0” – 2’-6” < 3’-0”, THEREFORE SIDE YARD SETBACK MINIMUM IS 3’-0”)

HABITABLE & CONDITIONED FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS

EXISTING PROPOSED TOTAL
MAIN FLOOR 824 SQ. FT. +44 SQ. FT. 868 SQ. FT.

UPPER FLOOR 0 SQ. FT. +520 SQ. FT. 520 SQ. FT.

TOTAL HABITABLE & CONDITIONED
FLOOR AREA 824 SQ. FT. +56 4 SQ. FT. 138 8 SQ. FT.

PROJECT DATA

ADDITION AND REMODEL FOR

ANNA TALAMO & JONATHAN LIPSCHUTZ
1527 SACRAMENTO STREET
BERKELEY, CA 94702
APN: 59-2285-36 USE: R-3 AT HOUSE; (SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING)

MAX. EAVES HEIGHT: (WEST) 10’-11 3/4” 20’-3" N/A (EAST) 11’-2 3/4” 20’-6" N/A
FRONT SETBACK (WEST): 12’-5 3/8” NO CHANGE 20’-0” MIN.

HABITABLE & CONDITIONED FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS

EXISTING PROPOSED TOTAL
MAIN FLOOR 824 SQ. FT. +44 SQ. FT. 868 SQ. FT.

UPPER FLOOR 0 SQ. FT. +520 SQ. FT. 520 SQ. FT.

TOTAL HABITABLE & CONDITIONED
FLOOR AREA 824 SQ. FT. +56 4 SQ. FT. 138 8 SQ. FT.

NON-HABITABLE & NON-CONDITIONED FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS

EXISTING PROPOSED TOTAL
COVERED FRONT ENTRY 53 SQ. FT. NO CHANGE 53 SQ. FT.
(ACC. STRUCTURE)
DETACHED GARAGE 240 SQ. FT. -49 SQ. FT. 191 SQ. FT.
& STORAGE

TOTAL NON
-HABITABLE & NON -CONDITIONED
FLOOR AREA 293 SQ. FT. - 49 SQ. FT. 244 SQ. FT.

USABLE OPEN SPACE

EXISTING PROPOSED TOTAL
FRONT YARD 0 SQ. FT. NO CHANGE 0 SQ. FT.

REAR YARD 564 SQ. FT. +207 SQ. FT. 771 SQ. FT.

TOTAL 564 SQ. FT. +2 07 SQ. FT. 771 SQ. FT.

NON-HABITABLE & NON-CONDITIONED FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS

EXISTING PROPOSED TOTAL
COVERED FRONT ENTRY 53 SQ. FT. NO CHANGE 53 SQ. FT.
(ACC. STRUCTURE)
DETACHED GARAGE 240 SQ. FT. -49 SQ. FT. 191 SQ. FT.
& STORAGE

TOTAL NON
-HABITABLE & NON -CONDITIONED
FLOOR AREA 293 SQ. FT. - 49 SQ. FT. 244 SQ. FT.

USABLE OPEN SPACE

EXISTING PROPOSED TOTAL
FRONT YARD 0 SQ. FT. NO CHANGE 0 SQ. FT.

REAR YARD 564 SQ. FT. +207 SQ. FT. 771 SQ. FT.

TOTAL 564 SQ. FT. +2 07 SQ. FT. 771 SQ. FT.

GSPublisherVersion 0.0.100.100

PROJECT DATA

ADDITION AND REMODEL FOR

ANNA TALAMO & JONATHAN LIPSCHUTZ
1527 SACRAMENTO STREET
BERKELEY, CA 94702
APN: 59-2285-36 USE: R-3 AT HOUSE; (SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING)

MAX. EAVES HEIGHT: (WEST) 10’-11 3/4” 20’-3" N/A (EAST) 11’-2 3/4” 20’-6" N/A
FRONT SETBACK (WEST): 12’-5 3/8” NO CHANGE 20’-0” MIN.

HABITABLE & CONDITIONED FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS

EXISTING PROPOSED TOTAL
MAIN FLOOR 824 SQ. FT. +44 SQ. FT. 868 SQ. FT.

UPPER FLOOR 0 SQ. FT. +520 SQ. FT. 520 SQ. FT.

TOTAL HABITABLE & CONDITIONED
FLOOR AREA 824 SQ. FT. +56 4 SQ. FT. 138 8 SQ. FT.
0 1/2'' 1'' 2''
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"

SITE PLAN W/ ROOF PLAN

ASSESSOR'S PARCEL MAP
SCALE: 1' = 1'-0"

NEIGHBOR SIGNATURES
1527

SACRAMENTO
STREET

DRAWING INDEX
SHEET 1: SITE PLAN WITH ROOF PLAN @ 1/8” = 1’–0”

PARTIES INVOLVED

PROJECT DATA

SCOPE OF WORK

VICINITY MAP

NEIGHBOR SIGNATURE FORM
SHEET 1.1: SITE SURVEY (PBY ANDREAS DEAK)
(FOR REFERENCE)

FLOOR AREA DIAGRAMS

USABLE OPEN SPACE DIAGRA

LOT COVERAGE DIAGRAM
BUILDING SECTION LOOKING EAST @ 1/4" = 1'-0"

GENERAL NOTES
SHEET 2: PROPOSED MAIN FLOOR PLAN @ 1/4” = 1’-0”
PROPOSED UPPER FLOOR PLAN @ 1/4” = 1’-0”

ARCHITECTURAL LEGEND
SHEET 2.1: PR0POSED MAIN FLOOR ELECTRICAL &
LIGHTING PLAN @ 1/4" = 1'-0"
PR0POSED UPPER FLOOR ELECTRICAL &
LIGHTING PLAN @ 1/4" = 1'-0"

ARCHITECTURAL LEGEND
SHEET 2.2: REMOVED WINDOW & EXT. DOOR SCHEDULE

WINDOWS & DOORS SCHEDULE

FINISH & APPLIANCE SCHEDULE

PLUMBING SCHEDULE
SHEET 2A: EXISTING MAIN FLOOR PLAN @ 1/4” = 1’-0”

ARCHITECTURAL LEGEND
SHEET 3: PROPOSED EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS @ 1/4” = 1’-0”
TYPICAL NEW EXT. BUILDING MATERIALS
SHEET 3A: EXISTING EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS @ 1/4” = 1’-0”
TYPICAL EXISTING EXT. BUILDING MATERIALS

PARTIES INVOLVED
OWNER: ANNA TALAMO & JONATHAN LIPSCHUTZ
1527 SACRAMENTO STREET
BERKELEY, CA 94702
(510) 528-6856
[email protected]
[email protected]
ARCHITECT: JASON KALDIS ARCHITECTS, INC.
1250 ADDISON STREET, STUDIO 210
BERKELEY, CA 94702
(510) 549-3584
(510) 549-3574 FAX
CONTACT: JASON OR JENNY
[email protected]
[email protected]
LAND SURVEYOR: ANDREAS DEAK
2116 BUENA VISTA AVE
ALAMEDA, CA 94501
(510) 865-4289
CONTACT: ANDREAS
[email protected]
SCOPE OF WORK:

REQUEST FOR:
• 1. AN AUP FOR A MAIN FLOOR ADDITION AND A NEW

UPPER FLOOR SECOND STORY ADDITION RESULTING
IN AN AVERAGE HEIGHT GREATER THAN 14'-0" H. AS
ALLOWED PER SEC. 23D.16.070C
• 564 SQ. FT. TOTAL (44 SQ. MAIN FLOOR LEVEL
AND 520 SQ. FT. UPPER FLOOR LEVEL)

ADDITION TO THE REAR (EAST) AND SIDE
(NORTH) YARD OF THE EXISTING HOUSE
• 2. AN AUP TO ADD AN UNENCLOSED NEW SPA/HOT

TUB IN THE REAR YARD SETBACK AS ALLOWED PER
SEC. 23D.08.060C
• 3. TO ENCLOSE THE EXISTING FRONT PORCH

HORIZONTALLY EXTENDING THE LEGAL NON-

CONFORMING FRONT SETBACK OF THE PORCH

COLUMNS
NORTH
16'8'0' 4'
SITE PLAN WITH ROOF PLAN @ 1/8" = 1'-0",

PARTIES INVOLVED, PROJECT DATA,

SCOPE OF WORK, DRAWING INDEX,

ASSESSOR'S PARCEL MAP,

BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES,

NEIGHBOR SIGNATURE FORM
BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES:

7. CONTRACTOR SHALL TRAIN AND PROVIDE

INSTRUCTION TO ALL EMPLOYEES/

SUBCONTRACTORS
RE: CONSTRUCTION BMPS

6. PROTECT ALL STORM DRAIN INLETS IN VICINITY

OF SITE USING SEDIMENT CONTROLS SUCH AS
BERMS, FIBER ROLLS OR FILTERS.

5. ALL WASTES ARE TO BE DISPOSED OF
PROPERLY. MATERIALS THAT CANNOT BE REUSED

OR RECYCLED MUST BE TAKEN TO AN

APPROPRIATE LANDFILL OR DISPOSED OF AS
HAZARDOUS WASTE. DEBRIS IS NEVER TO BE

THROWN INTO CHANNELS, CREEKS, OR WETLAND
AREAS. DEBRIS IS NEVER TO BE STORED OR LEFT

IN THE STREET OR NEAR A CREEK WHERE IT MAY
CONTACT RUNOFF.

4. VEHICLES OR EQUIPMENT ARE TO BE WASHED
AT APPROPRIATE OFF-SITE LOCATIONS.

3. PAVEMENT OR SURFACES WHERE MATERIALS
HAVE SPILLED ARE NEVER TO BE WASHED DOWN.

USE DRY CLEANUP METHODS WHEN EVER
POSSIBLE. IF WATER MUST BE USED TO FLUSH

PAVEMENT, RUNOFF IS TO BE COLLECTED TO

SETTLE OUT SEDIMENTS AND PROTECT STORM
DRAIN INLETS.

2. ALL LEAKS, DRIPS, AND OTHER SPILLS ARE TO

BE CLEANED UP IMMEDIATELY SO AS NOT TO
CONTACT STORM WATER.

1. BEFORE IT RAINS, MATERIALS ARE TO BE SWEPT

AND REMOVED FROM SURFACES THAT DRAIN TO
STORM DRAINS, CREEKS OR CHANNELS. EXPOSED

PILES OF SOIL, CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS AND

WASTES ARE TO BE COVERED WITH PLASTIC

SHEATHING OR TEMPORARY ROOFS TO PREVENT
RUNOFF DURING PERIODS OF RAIN.

DUMPSTERS, IF USED, SHALL BE COVERED WITH A

TARP AT THE END OF EVERY DAY AND DURING
WET WEATHER.

NOT TO SCALE

08.17.20 1
1 08.17.20
1 08.17.20
1 08.17.20
1 08.17.20
1 08.17.20
1 08.17.20
1 08.17.20
1 08.17.20
1 08.17.20
1 08.17.20
1 08.17.20
1 08.17.20

02.09.21 2
3 04.27.21
EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 2020, THIS PROJECT IS TO COMPLY WITH THE 2019 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA BUILDING STANDARDS CODE LOCATED IN TITLE 24 OF THE CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS INCLUDING: 2019 CALIFORNIA ADMINISTRATIVE CODE, 2019 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE (CBC), 2019 CALIFORNIA RESIDENTIAL CODE (CRC), 2019 CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING CODE, 2019 CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE, 2019 CALIFORNIA REFERENCE CODE, 2019 CMC, 2019 CEC, 2019 CPC, CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE AS

AMENDED BY THE CITY OF BERKELEY AND THE CALIFORNIA BUILDING STANDARDS CODE BASED ON THE 2018 IBC, 2018 IRC, 2018 UMC, 2018 UPC, AND 2017 NEC, NFPA 70 Attachment 1, Exhibit B

Page 21 of 63 ends

211
GSPublisherVersion 0.0.100.100
JY

ADDITION & REMODEL FOR

ANNA TALAMO & JONATHAN

LIPSCHUTZ
1527 SACRAMENTO STREET
BERKELEY, CA 94702

02.26.20 18026

1.1 of
drawn by
datejob address
job number
drawing title sheet
1250 ADDISON STREET - STUDIO 210

JASON KALDIS
ARCHITECT, INC.

BERKELEY, CA 94702
PH (510) 549-3584 FX (510) 549-3574
[email protected]
AUP APPLICATION SET 02.26.20
AUP APPLICATION SET REV1 08.17.201

08.17.20 AUP APPLICATION SET REV2 02.09.212

02.09.21 (E) HOUSE
877 SQ. FT. (E) ACC. GARAGE
240 SQ. FT.
(R) HOUSE
921 SQ. FT.
(44 SQ. FT. ADDED

TO (E) HOUSE)
(N) ACC. GARAGE/

STORAGE
191 SQ. FT.
(45 SQ. FT. REMOVED

FROM (E) STORAGE/
ACC. GARAGE)
UP
(E) LOT COVERAGE(E) LOT COVERAGE:
877 SQ. FT. + 240 SQ. FT. = 1117 SQ. FT.
1117 SQ. FT. ÷ 2783 SQ. FT. = 40.14%(N) LOT COVERAGE
(N) LOT COVERAGE:
921 SQ. FT. + 191 SQ. FT. = 1113 SQ. FT.
1112 SQ. FT. ÷ 2783 SQ. FT. = 39.96%
(E) HOUSE
824 SQ. FT.

HABITABLE
(N) MAIN FLOOR
ADDITION @ HOUSE
56 SQ. FT.

HABITABLE
(E) COVERED

FRONT ENTRY
53 SQ. FT.

NOT HABITABLE
(E) ACC. GARAGE/

STORAGE
240 SQ. FT.

NOT HABITABLE
(N) UPPER FLOOR
ADDITION @ HOUSE
520 SQ. FT.

HABITABLE
(R) ACC. GARAGE
191 SQ. FT.

NOT HABITABLE
49 SQ. FT. REMOVED
(RESULTING IN 191 SQ. FT.

ACC. GARAGE)
(N) MAIN FLOOR
-12 SQ. FT.

UP
(E) FLOOR AREA
(N) FLOOR AREA
(NOTE: 12 SQ. FT. IS

REMOVED FROM

HOUSE, THEREFORE

OVERALL TOTAL

ADDITION TO THE

HOUSE ADDITION IS
44 SQ. FT.)
38'-93/4"
21'-35/8"
12'-7"
10'-2"
31'-105/8"
10'-0"
17'-0"
(E) REAR USEABLE OPEN
SPACE
564 SQ. FT.
(N) REAR USEABLE

OPEN SPACE
771 SQ. FT.

LANDSCAPED OPEN SPACE
(E) TREE & PLANTER
UP
(E) USEABLE OPEN SPACE(E) USEABLE OPEN SPACE:
0 SQ. FT. + 564 SQ. FT. = 564 SQ. FT.
(N) USEABLE OPEN SPACE
(N) USEABLE OPEN SPACE:
0 SQ. FT. + 771 SQ. FT. = 771 SQ. FT.
14'-10"
10'-0"
(N) 9'-71/2" CLG. HT.
(N) 8'-11/2" CLG. HT.(E) 8'-3" CLG. HT. (V.I.F.)
6'-8" MIN. CLR.
2'-11/2" 4'-31/4"
9'-13/4"
3'-0"

PROPERTY
LINE

PROPERTY
LINE
(E) SIDE
YARD
(NORTH)

SETBACK
(E) SIDE
YARD
(SOUTH)

SETBACK
(R) KITCHEN
BEYOND
(N) RIDGE
(N) SIDE
YARD
(SOUTH)

SETBACK

DISTANCE OF (E) RIDGE

TO (N) RIDGE
(N)
BDRM
#1
CLOS.
(N) BEDROOM #1
(N) FAMILY
ROOM
(N)
STAIR
(E) HOUSE AT 1525 SACRAMENTO STREET
(E) HOUSE AT 1529 SACRAMENTO STREET
(E) CRAWLSPACE
F E
19 17
18 4
10 SITE SURVEY (BY ANDREAS DEAK) - (FOR REFERENCE)
SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0"

LOT COVERAGE DIAGRAM
SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0"

FLOOR AREA DIAGRAM
SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0"

USEABLE OPEN SPACE DIAGRAM
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"A BUILDING SECTION LOOKING WEST SCALE: 1" = 8'-0"

SITE SURVEY (BY ANDREAS DEAK) (FOR

REFERENCE)

LOT COVERAGE & FLOOR AREA DIAGRAM

USEABLE OPEN SPACE DIAGRAM

BUILDING SECTION LOOKING EAST

GENERAL NOTES

1. SITE CONDITIONS: BIDDERS SHALL VISIT THE SITE AND

FAMILIARIZE THEMSELVES WITH ALL EXISTING
LIMITATIONS. ALL FEATURES OF CONSTRUCTION NOT

FULLY SHOWN SHALL BE OF THE SAME TYPE AND

CHARACTER AS THAT SHOWN FOR SIMILAR
CONDITIONS. FOR SPECIAL CONDITIONS OR

DISCREPANCIES, NOTIFY THE ARCHITECT BEFORE
BIDDING OR PROCEEDING WITH THE WORK.

2. PERMIT FEES AND INSURANCE:

THE CONTRACT SHALL

INCLUDE ALL PERMIT FEES UNLESS SPECIFICALLY
NOTED IN THE BID AND CONTRACT. THE CONTRACTOR

SHALL CARRY LIABILITY, PROPERTY DAMAGE, AND

WORKERS COMPENSATION INSURANCE, AND PROVIDE
OWNER CERTIFICATES FOR THESE POLICIES. THE
OWNER SHALL CARRY FIRE INSURANCE.

3. BUILDING CODES:

ALL WORK SHALL CONFORM TO ALL
APPLICABLE CURRENT CODES AND ORDINANCES. THE

CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE ARCHITECT OF ALL

MODIFICATIONS REQUESTED BY THE BUILDING

DEPARTMENT, THE OWNER, CONSULTANTS, AND
OTHER PARTIES.

4. TRADE STANDARDS:

WORK SHALL BE COMPLETED

SKILLFULLY AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH ACCEPTED
TRADE STANDARDS. STANDARDS FOR CARE AND

WORKMANSHIP SHALL BE AS DEFINED AND OUTLINED

BY THE NATIONAL TRADE BODY SUCH AS SMACNA,

TILE COUNCIL OF AMERICA, NWMA, NRCA, LATHING

AND PLASTER INSTITUTE OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA,
ETCETERA.

5. MANUFACTURERS’ INSTRUCTIONS:

FOLLOW THE
MANUFACTURERS’ INSTRUCTIONS CAREFULLY.

INSTRUCTIONS AND WARRANTIES SHALL BE GIVEN TO
THE OWNER UPON SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION.

6. SUBSTITUTIONS:

SUBSTITUTIONS WILL BE

CONSIDERED, BUT THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT

SUBSTITUTE EQUIPMENT, MATERIAL, OR METHODS
WITHOUT SPECIFIC APPROVAL BY THE ARCHITECT.

7. SCHEDULE:

THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INFORM THE

OWNER AND ARCHITECT OF THE CONSTRUCTION
SCHEDULE PRIOR TO STARTING WORK. THE

CONTRACTOR SHALL MAKE EVERY EFFORT TO

MINIMIZE DISRUPTION TO OCCUPANTS AND
NEIGHBORS DURING CONSTRUCTION.

8. COORDINATION OF WORK:

THE CONTRACTOR SHALL

COORDINATE WORK BETWEEN SUBCONTRACTORS,

TRADESPEOPLE, AND SUPPLIERS AS SHOWN IN THE
DRAWINGS, SPECIFICATIONS, AND CONTRACT.

9. CHANGE ORDERS:

ALL CHANGE ORDERS SHALL BE

AGREED TO AND IN WRITING PRIOR TO EXECUTION OF
WORK.

10. DIMENSIONS:

CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL
DIMENSIONS IN THE FIELD. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS
HAVE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS.

DIMENSIONS ARE TO THE ROUGH FRAME UNLESS
OTHERWISE NOTED. ANY DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN

THE DRAWINGS AND/OR SPECIFICATIONS MUST BE

BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT FOR
CLARIFICATION PRIOR TO PROCEEDING WITH WORK.

11. NOTCHES, BORES AND CUTS TO THE STRUCTURE:

NOT NOTCH, BORE OR CUT MEMBERS FOR PIPES,

DUCTS OR OTHER REASONS EXCEPT AS SHOWN ON

DRAWINGS WITHOUT THE SPECIFIC ADVANCE
APPROVAL OF THE ARCHITECT.

12. DEMOLITION:

THE CONTRACTOR SHALL EXECUTE

DEMOLITION WORK TO ENSURE THE SAFETY OF

PERSONS AND ADJACENT PROPERTY FROM DAMAGE

BY SETTLEMENT, FALLING DEBRIS, AND OTHER
CAUSES IN CONNECTION WITH THIS WORK. WHERE

EXISTING CONSTRUCTION IS CUT, DAMAGED, OR

REMODELED, PATCH OR REPLACE WITH MATERIALS

THAT MATCH THE KIND, QUALITY AND PERFORMANCE
OF ADJACENT SURFACES.

13. ASBESTOS:

IF THE CONTRACTOR ENCOUNTERS

ASBESTOS, HE OR SHE SHALL WARN ALL

EMPLOYEES, SUBCONTRACTORS, OWNER,

OCCUPANTS, AND ARCHITECT PRIOR TO DEMOLITION
AND CONSTRUCTION. ALSO, IF DURING DEMOLITION

OR CONSTRUCTION, MATERIALS CONTAINING

ASBESTOS BECOME DISTURBED OR AIRBORNE, THEY
MUST BE REMOVED. REMOVAL AND DISPOSAL MUST

CONFORM TO THE LATEST REQUIREMENTS OF THE

EPA, OSHA, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
SERVICE AND LOCAL AUTHORITIES. ASBESTOS

REMOVAL IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE GENERAL
CONTRACTOR.

14. CLEANUP:

THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE ALL

CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS AT THE END OF THE JOB AND
DISPOSE OF IT LEGALLY. CLEAN ALL NEW WINDOWS
AND LEAVE THE JOB BROOM CLEAN.

15. WARRANTY:

CONTRACTOR SHALL WARRANT ALL

WORKMANSHIP AND MATERIALS FOR A PERIOD OF

ONE YEAR FROM THE DATE OF SUBSTANTIAL

COMPLETION OR FROM THE COMMENCEMENT OF

SPECIFIC WARRANTIES, AND MAKE CORRECTIONS TO
THE WORK DURING THESE PERIODS.
1 08.17.20

08.17.20 1

02.09.21 2

Page 22 of 63 ends

212
GSPublisherVersion 0.0.100.100
JY

ADDITION & REMODEL FOR

ANNA TALAMO & JONATHAN

LIPSCHUTZ
1527 SACRAMENTO STREET
BERKELEY, CA 94702

02.26.20 18026
2 of
drawn by
datejob address
job number
drawing title sheet
1250 ADDISON STREET - STUDIO 210

JASON KALDIS
ARCHITECT, INC.

BERKELEY, CA 94702
PH (510) 549-3584 FX (510) 549-3574
[email protected]
AUP APPLICATION SET 02.26.20
AUP APPLICATION SET REV1 08.17.201

08.17.20 AUP APPLICATION SET REV2 02.09.212

02.09.21 3'-0"
2'-13/8"
12'-53/8"
4'-31/4"
(N) 11'-7" CLR.
5'-0"
(N) 9'-7" CLR.
4'-91/2" (N) 10'-0" D. WOOD DECK
(N) 17'-0" W. MAX. WOOD DECK
12"12"
43'-111/8"
(N) REAR YARD (EAST) SETBACK
50'-3"
(E) HOUSE - REMODEL AT KITCHEN, HALL, AND BATH #1
4'-31/4"
10'-0"10'-2"
REMOVE (E) HT. REG.

PROPERTY LINE

PROPERTY LINE
(N) SIDE
YARD
(SOUTH)

SETBACK
(E) SIDE
YARD
(SOUTH)

SETBACK
(E) H.B. &
WATER IN.
(E) GAS
METER
(E) D.S.
(E) C.O.
(E) ELEC.

METER
(E) CSAP (E) FLUE
REMOVE
(E) FLUE
(E) D.S.

REMOVE/

RELOCATE
(E) D.S.
(E) TRANSITE FLUE (TO BE

REMOVED)
(E) RELOCATED TWH
(E) PALOMA TWH
MODEL #: PTG-74XN-2
INPUT (MAX.): 199900 BTU/HR
INPUT (MIN.): 19000 BTU/HR
(N) D.S.
(E) D.S.
(E) CONC. STEP
(N) SKYLT.
(VELUX
VSS D26)
(E) TWH TO BE RELOCATED
(MOVED WESTERLY)

REMOVE (E) STAIR

AND LANDING
FILL AND PATCH HORIZ.

WOOD WAINSCOT & EXT.

STUCCO TO MATCH (E)
(N) HORIZ. WOOD

WAINSCOT TO

MATCH (E)
(N) GUARDRAIL
W/ 4x6 POSTS
(N) D.S.
(N) D.S.
(N) D.S.
(E) GRAVENSTEIN

APPLE TREE
(MALUS DOMESTICA

GRAVENSTEIN)

TO REMAIN
(E) TREE
(E) PLANTER
(E) O.H.
(E) O.H.
(E) O.H.
(N) H.B.
(E) 6'-0" H. FENCE
(E) 6'-0"
H. FENCE/
GATE

EXTEND (E)

FENCE/GATE
(>6'-0" H.)

REMOVE PART OF
(E) WALKWAY(N) WALKWAY

ALIGN (N) WALKWAY

W/ (E) WALKWAY
(N) CONC. WITH METAL

GUARDRAIL ABOVE
(N) 8" TH. CONC. (E) DWARF

ORANGE TREE

TO REMAIN

PROVIDE TREE

PROTECTION

PROVIDE TREE

PROTECTION

REMOVE (E)

STORAGE
(N) UNDER

COUNTER

SEATING
(E) WALKWAY
(N) 3'-0"

SIDE YARD
(SOUTH)

SETBACK
(E) PITTOSPORUM

TREE TO REMAIN
(E) 2'-11/2"

SIDE YARD
(SOUTH)

SETBACK
(N) 81/2" TH. HIGH

PERFORMANCE
EXT. WALL
(N) STAIR/SOFFIT ABOVE
(E) CAMELLIA

JAPONICA TO
REMAIN
(E) 2'-91/4" x 4'-43/4"

WD-DG DH
(E) 2'-91/4" x
4'-43/4"

WD-DG DH
(E) 2'-91/4" x 4'-43/4"

WD-DG DH
(E) 1'-31/4" x
2'-101/2"
WD-SG
FXD
(E) 1'-31/4" x
2'-101/2"
WD-SG
FXD
(E) 2'-91/4" x
2'-101/2"

WD-SG FXD
(E) 3'-0" x
6'-61/4"

DOOR(E)
31/2"
(E) 2'-91/4" x 4'-43/4"

WD-DG DH
(E)
(E)
(E) 3'-0" x
6'-8"
DOOR
(E) 3'-0" x 2'-0"

WD-DG FXD
(E)
UP 1
2 3
(E) 3'-0" x 2'-0"

WD-DG FXD
N 5° 32' 00" W 25.00'
N 84° 30' 00" E 111.33'
N 84° 30' 00" E 111.32'
(E) & (N) SIDE

YARD (NORTH)

SETBACK
(E) FRONT YARD (WEST)

SETBACK
(E) SIDE
YARD
(NORTH)

SETBACK
(E) 4'-4" x 6'-81/4"
DOOR
HD @ 7'-05/8"
(E)
*1 *2 *3 *5 *6
*8
*9
*10
*11
*12*13
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 1011
12 13
2 3
4 1
UP
UP
(N) SINK
CL
1 2 3 4
5 6
TEMP.

GL.

CL
CL
(E) TUB/
SHOWER
8 AB
C
(N)
PANTRY
(N)
PANTRY
*4 *7
EGRESS
(E) HOUSE AT 1529 SACRAMENTO STREET
(E) HOUSE AT 1525 SACRAMENTO STREET
(E) 2'-91/4" x 2'-101/2"

WD-SG DH
OBSC. GL.

TEMP. GL.
(N) DW
(E)
(E)
+
7 TEMP. GL.
(STUCCO FIN. TO STUCCO FIN.)
(R) KITCHEN
(E) CLG. HT. @ 8'-3"
(N) TILE FLOOR
(N) FAMILY ROOM
(N)/(E) CLG. HT. @ 8'-3"
(E) D.F. FLOOR
(R) MAIN

FLOOR HALL
(E) CLG. HT. TO REMAIN
(E) D.F. FLOOR
(E) LIVING ROOM
(E) CLG. HT. TO REMAIN
(E) HARDWOOD FLOOR
(E) DINING ROOM
(E) CLG. HT. TO REMAIN
(E) HARDWOOD FLOOR
(E) COVERED
ENTRY
(E) CLG. HT.

TO REMAIN
(E) BRICK FLOOR
(E) GARAGE
(E) CONC. SLAB

ON GRADE
(E) BATH #1
(E) CLG. HT. TO REMAIN
(E) TILE FLOOR
(N) 11'-8" ADDITION
(E) CSAP

DISPOSAL
(N) UNDERSTAIR

STORAGE
(N) CLG. HT. VARIES
@ 7'-0" + TO 2'-111/4" +
(N) HARDWOOD FLOOR
(N) D.S.

EXTENT OF (N) FLOOR ABOVE
(N) OPEN

WOOD DECK
< 30" H.
(N) SIDE YARD
(NORTH)

SETBACK
(N) ADDITION
REFR. W/
UPPER CAB.
(E) SINK
(N) STAIR
MIN. 6'-8" CLG.

CLR. HT.
(N) HARDWOOD
FLOOR19
(N)
SINK
(N) 3'-0"

SETBACK

TO FRONT
OF CONC.

FIRE WALL
@ DECK
(DECK
< 30" H.)
11'-8"
4'-4"
14'-91/8" CLR.
28'-13/4"
4'-91/2"
6'-1"
27'-81/4"
31'-53/4"
(N) UPPER FLOOR SECOND STORY ADDITION
2'-0"10'-57/8" CLR. 3'-0"
CLR.
10'-01/2" CLR.
11'-113/8" CLR.
11'-53/8"
10'-21/2" CLR.
6'-35/8"
10'-81/8" CLR.
17'-9"
(N) UPPER FLOOR SECOND STORY ADDITION
6'-0" CLR.
34'-115/8" 44'-111/8"
5'-41/2"
(N) SKYLT.
(VELUX
VSS D26) (N) SKYLT.
(VELUX
VSS C01)
(N) SKYLT.
(VELUX
VSS M04)
(N) 63/8" TH.

EXT. WALL

PROPERTY LINE

PROPERTY LINE
(N) VAULTED CLG.
(N) VAULTED CLG. (N) 2 SHELF, 2 POLE
(N) 81/2" TH. HIGH

PERFORMANCE
EXT. WALL
(N) 63/8" TH.

EXT. WALL
(N) 81/2" TH. HIGH

PERFORMANCE
EXT. WALL
(N) 61/2" TH.

INT. WALL
(N) BDRM #1 CLOSET
(N) CLG. HT. @ 9'-0"+
(N) HARDWOOD FLOOR
(N) BDRM #2 CLOSET
(N) CLG. HT. @ 9'-0"+
(N) HARDWOOD FLOOR
(N) 1 SHELF,
1 POLE
(N) D.S.
(N) D.S.
(N) D.S.
(N) D.S.
(N) D.S.
(N) D.S.
(N) 63/8" TH.

EXT. WALL
(N) 63/8" TH.

EXT. WALL
(E) RIDGE
(E) RIDGE
(N) O.H.
(N) O.H.
(N) O.H.
(N) O.H.
(N) O.H.
(N) 41/2" TH.

INT. WALL
(N) 51/2" TH.

EXTENDED
EXT. WALL
(N) 41/2" TH.

INT. WALL
(N) 41/2" TH.

INT. WALL
(N) 5" TH. INT. WALL
(N) 51/2" TH.

EXTENDED
EXT. WALL
(N) 63/8" TH.

EXT. WALL
(N) SKYLIGHT (VELUX VSS M02)
(E) ROOF TO REMAIN
(N) END OF

BEAM TO WALL
(THAT WILL

PROTRUDE

THROUGH ROOF)
DWN
CL8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
TEMP. GL.

OBSC. GL.

EGRESS
D
E
F
G
H
J
N 5° 32' 00" W 25.00'
N 84° 30' 00" E 111.33'
N 84° 30' 00" E 111.32'
TEMP. GL.

OBSC. GL.
16 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
1011
12 13
14 15
EGRESS
EGRESS
(E) ROOF

3.38" : 12"
(E) ROOF

3.38" : 12"
1-HOUR RATED ASSEMBLY AT EXTERIOR WALL ASSEMBLY AT AREA OF ADDITION AT WALLS <5'-0" FROM PROPERTY LINE
(N) FRONT YARD (WEST) SETBACK TO (N) SECOND STORY ADDITION (N) REAR YARD (EAST) SETBACK TO (N) SECOND STORY ADDITION TEMP.

GL.
(N)

STORAGE
(N) UPPER FL. HALL
(N) CLG. HT. @ 9'-0"+
(N) HARDWOOD FLOOR
(N) LINEN CLOSET
(N) CLG. HT. @ 9'-0"+
(N) HARDWOOD FLOOR
(N) 5 SH. 19
20 (N) BEDROOM #1
(N) CLG. HT. VARIES
@ 9'-0" TO 10'-6"
(N) HARDWOOD FLOOR
(N) BEDROOM #2
(N) CLG. HT. VARIES
@ 9'-0" TO 10'-71/8"
(N) BATH #2
(N) CLG. HT. @ 9'-0"+
(N) TILE FLOOR
(N) STAIR
MIN. 6'-8" CLG.

CLR. HT.
(N) HARDWOOD
FLOOR
(N) 5 SH.
0 1/2''1'' 2''
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"

PROPOSED MAIN FLOOR PLAN
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"

PROPOSED UPPER FLOOR PLAN
NORTH
8'0' 4'2'

PROPOSED MAIN FLOOR PLAN
@ 1/4" = 1'-0"

PROPOSED UPPER FLOOR PLAN
@ 1/4" = 1'-0"

ARCHITECTURAL LEGEND
HEAT REGISTER @ CEILING
HEAT REGISTER @ FLOOR
HEAT REGISTER @ WALL OR TOEKICK

SUPPLY LINE

KEY TO ABBREVIATIONS
AAP = ATTIC ACCESS PANEL
AP = ACCESS PANEL
CAR = COLD AIR RETURN
CAP = CRAWLSPACE ACCESS PANEL
D = DIMMER
DS = DOWN SPOUT
(E) = EXISTING
F = FLUORESCENT
FAU = FORCED AIR UNIT
FIN. = FINISH (DIMENSION OFF SURFACE)
FV = FOUNDATION VENT
GFI = GROUND FAULT CIRCUIT INTERRUPTER
HB = HOSE BIB
H20 = WATER SUPPLY
LED = T24 QUALIFYING LED
MS = MOTION SENSOR
(N) = NEW
OH = OVERHANG
OS = OCCUPANCY SENSOR
PC = PHOTOCELL
(R) = REMODEL EXISTING
RO. = ROUGH (DIMENSION OFF FRAMING)
SS = SANITARY SEWER
VS = VACANCY SENSOR
WH = WATER HEATER
WP = WATERPROOF/WEATHERPROOF
1S. 1P = 1 SHELF, 1 POLE
220V = 220 VOLT

NEW (N) WALL

EXISTING (E) WALL TO REMAIN

EXISTING (E) WALL TO BE REMOVED

LINE ABOVE

LINE BELOW OR BEYOND

PROPERTY LINE

SECTION

DETAIL NUMBER

SHEET NUMBER

WINDOW KEY

DOOR KEY

REVISION

CEILING MOUNTED LIGHT

WALL MOUNTED LIGHT

RECESSED LIGHT

RECESSED ADJUSTABLE LIGHT

CABLE/TRACK LIGHTING

UNDERCABINET LIGHT

JUNCTION BOX

CEILING FAN W/ LIGHT

CEILING FAN

LIGHT-EXHAUST FAN COMBO

EXHAUST FAN
SWITCH
3 WAY SWITCH

DUPLEX WALL OUTLET

QUAD WALL OUTLET

FLOOR OUTLET

TELEPHONE JACK
T.V./DATA CABLE JACK

SPEAKER
CHIMES

PUSH BUTTON

SMOKE ALARM

CARBON MONOXIDE ALARM

HEATE DETECTOR/ALARM

THERMOSTAT CONTROLS

ARCHITECTURAL LEGEND
NEW (N) 1-HR. RATED EXT. WALL
NEW (N) 1-HR. RATED INT. WALL
1 08.17.20
1 08.17.20
1 08.17.20
1 08.17.20
1 08.17.20
1 08.17.20

02.09.21 2
SD
PL
A
6 1
5 1
1 A
CO
HD
S

Page 23 of 63 ends

213
GSPublisherVersion 0.0.100.100
JY

ADDITION & REMODEL FOR

ANNA TALAMO & JONATHAN

LIPSCHUTZ
1527 SACRAMENTO STREET
BERKELEY, CA 94702

02.26.20 18026

2.1 of
drawn by
datejob address
job number
drawing title sheet
1250 ADDISON STREET - STUDIO 210

JASON KALDIS
ARCHITECT, INC.

BERKELEY, CA 94702
PH (510) 549-3584 FX (510) 549-3574
[email protected]
AUP APPLICATION SET 02.26.20
AUP APPLICATION SET REV1 08.17.201

08.17.20 AUP APPLICATION SET REV2 02.09.212

02.09.21 SD
SD
SD
SD
(E)
V.S.
(E)(E)
(E) (E)
(E)
(N) (N)
(N)
(N)
(N)
(N)
(N)
(N)
(N) H.B.
(N) UNDERSTAIR

STORAGE

NEW ELECTRICAL/

LIGHTING WORK

PER PLAN
(E) BATH #1
(E) TO REMAIN - NO

NEW ELECTRICAL/

LIGHTING WORK

EXCEPT AS NOTED
(E)
*1 *2 *3 *5 *6
*8
*9
*10
*11
*12*13
1 2 3 4
5 6
8 AB
C
*4 *7
(E)
UP
CO
(E)
(E)
7 (E) LIVING ROOM
(E) TO REMAIN - NO

NEW ELECTRICAL/

LIGHTING WORK

EXCEPT AS NOTED
(E) DINING
ROOM
(E) TO REMAIN -
NO NEW

ELECTRICAL/

LIGHTING WORK

EXCEPT AS NOTED
(R) KITCHEN

NEW ELECTRICAL/LIGHTING

WORK PER PLAN (N) FAMILY ROOM

NEW ELECTRICAL/LIGHTING

WORK PER PLAN
(E) COVERED
ENTRY
(E) TO REMAIN - NO

NEW ELECTRICAL/

LIGHTING WORK
SMOKE ALARM & CARBON MONOXIDE ALARM NOTE:

WHERE MORE THAN ONE SMOKE DETECTOR IS

REQUIRED, THEY ARE TO BE INTERCONNECTED SO THAT
ACTIVATION OF ONE WILL ACTIVATE THEM ALL.

SMOKE DETECTORS SHALL BE INSTALLED ON THE

CEILING OR WALL OUTSIDE OF AND IN THE VICINITY OF
EACH SEPARATE SLEEPING AREA.

SEE PLAN CHECK NOTE #__/#__ FOR SMOKE ALARM AND

CARBON MONOXIDE NOTES
(E)
FAN
(N)
LED
(E)
LED
(E)
+48"
(E)
(E)
(E)
LT.
(E) LT.

W/ FAN
(E)
LT.
(E)
LT.
(N)
LED
(N)
LED
(N)
LED
(N)
LED(N)
LED
(N)
LED
(N)
LED
(N)
LED
(N)
LED
(N)
LED
(N)
LED
(N)
LED
(N)
LED
LT.

FAN
(E)
LT.
(N)
LED(N)
LED
(N)
LED
19 (N)
+12"
(N)
+12"
(N)
+12"
(N)
+12"
(N)
+12"
(N)
+12"
(N)
+12"
(N)
+48"
(N)
+48"
(N) GFCI
+30"
GAS(N)
+48"
(N)
+48"
(N)
+16"
(N)
+12"
(N)
+12"
(N) GFCI W.P.

TEMP. GL.

OBSC. GL.

EGRESS
(N) GFCI
W.P.

PHOTOCELL
W.P. LED

PHOTOCELL
W.P. LED
(R) MAIN

FLOOR HALL
(E) TO REMAIN - NO NEW

ELECTRICAL/ LIGHTING

WORK EXCEPT AS NOTED
(N) LED
SD
SDSD
SD
(N)
(N)
V.S.
(N)
8 9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
D
E
F
G
H
J
CO
EGRESS
EGRESS
EGRESS
TEMP. GL.

OBSC. GL.

TEMP. GL.

OBSC. GL.
19 20
(N)
LED
(N)
LED
(N)
LED
(N)
LED
(N)
LED
(N)
FAN
(N)
LED
(N)
+48"
(N)
W.P.

LED
(N)
LED
(N)
LED
(N)
+48"
(N) LED
(N) LED
(N)
+12"
(N)
+12"
(N)
+12"
(N)
+12"
(N)
+12"
(N)
+12" (N)
+12"
(N)
+12"
(N)
+12"
(N)
+12"
(N)
+12"
(N)
+12"
(N)
LED
(N)
+48"
(N)
LED
0 1/2''1'' 2''
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"

PROPOSED MAIN FLOOR ELECTRICAL & LIGHTING PLAN
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"

PROPOSED UPPER FLOOR ELECTRICAL & LIGHTING PLAN
NORTH
8'0' 4'2'
HEAT REGISTER @ CEILING
HEAT REGISTER @ FLOOR
HEAT REGISTER @ WALL OR TOEKICK

SUPPLY LINE

NEW (N) WALL

EXISTING (E) WALL TO REMAIN

EXISTING (E) WALL TO BE REMOVED

LINE ABOVE

LINE BELOW OR BEYOND

PROPERTY LINE

SECTION

DETAIL NUMBER

SHEET NUMBER

WINDOW KEY

DOOR KEY

REVISION

CEILING MOUNTED LIGHT

WALL MOUNTED LIGHT

RECESSED LIGHT

RECESSED ADJUSTABLE LIGHT

CABLE/TRACK LIGHTING

UNDERCABINET LIGHT

JUNCTION BOX

CEILING FAN W/ LIGHT

CEILING FAN

LIGHT-EXHAUST FAN COMBO

EXHAUST FAN
SWITCH
3 WAY SWITCH

DUPLEX WALL OUTLET

QUAD WALL OUTLET

FLOOR OUTLET

TELEPHONE JACK
T.V./DATA CABLE JACK

SPEAKER
CHIMES

PUSH BUTTON

SMOKE ALARM

CARBON MONOXIDE ALARM

HEATE DETECTOR/ALARM

THERMOSTAT CONTROLS

ARCHITECTURAL LEGEND
NEW (N) 1-HR. RATED EXT. WALL
NEW (N) 1-HR. RATED INT. WALL

PROPOSED MAIN FLOOR ELECTRICAL
& LIGHTING PLAN @ 1/4" = 1'-0"

PROPOSED UPPER FLOOR

ELECTRICAL & LIGHTING PLAN
@ 1/4" = 1'-0"

ARCHITECTURAL LEGEND
1 08.17.20
1 08.17.20
1 08.17.20

02.09.21 2
SD
PL
A
6 1
5 1
1 A
CO
HD
S

Page 24 of 63 ends

214
GSPublisherVersion 0.0.100.100
JY

ADDITION & REMODEL FOR

ANNA TALAMO & JONATHAN

LIPSCHUTZ
1527 SACRAMENTO STREET
BERKELEY, CA 94702

02.26.20 18026

2.2 of
drawn by
datejob address
job number
drawing title sheet
1250 ADDISON STREET - STUDIO 210

JASON KALDIS
ARCHITECT, INC.

BERKELEY, CA 94702
PH (510) 549-3584 FX (510) 549-3574
[email protected]
AUP APPLICATION SET 02.26.20
AUP APPLICATION SET REV1 08.17.201

08.17.20 AUP APPLICATION SET REV2 02.09.212

02.09.21 TALAMO/LIPSCHUTZ RESIDENCE
1527 SACRAMENTO ST
BERKELEY, CA 94702
APPLIANCE TYPE MANUFACTURER MODEL NAME MODEL NO. COLOR/FINISH

MICROWAVE TO BE CONFIRMED WITH
OWNER

TO BE CONFIRMED WITH
OWNER

DISHWASHER TO BE CONFIRMED WITH
OWNER

TO BE CONFIRMED WITH
OWNER

REFRIGERATOR TO BE CONFIRMED WITH
OWNER

TO BE CONFIRMED WITH
OWNER

GAS RANGE TO BE CONFIRMED WITH
OWNER

TO BE CONFIRMED WITH
OWNER

EXHAUST HOOD TO BE CONFIRMED WITH
OWNER

TO BE CONFIRMED WITH
OWNER

GARBAGE DISPOSAL TO BE CONFIRMED WITH
OWNER

TO BE CONFIRMED WITH
OWNER

A P P L I A N C E S C H E D U L E
OWNER TO FURNISH AND CONTRACTOR TO UNLOAD & INSTALL ALL APPLIANCES.

D O O R S C H E D U L E

TALAMO/LIPSCHUTZ

RESIDENCE
1527 SACRAMENTO ST
BERKELEY, CA 94702
SIZE (W x H x TH.) STYLE MATERIAL FINISH HARDWARE REMARKS A 3'-0" x 6'-8" x 1 3/4" ISFD CW-DG
(CONFIRM)
PAINT EA.

FACE & ALL
EDGES

ENTRY LATCH
& DEADBOLT (N) FAMILY ROOM
B 2'-0" x 2'-6" (MIN.)
x 1 3/8"

CONFIRM WITH
OWNER

SOLID CORE
WOOD
PAINT EA.

FACE & ALL
EDGES
(N) FAMILY ROOM
C 2'-6" x 6'-8" x 1 3/8" SINGLE PANEL SOLID CORE
WOOD
PAINT EA.

FACE & ALL
EDGES
(N) UNDERSTAIR STORAGE
D 2'-4" x 6'-8" x 1 3/8" SINGLE PANEL SOLID CORE
WOOD
PAINT EA.

FACE & ALL
EDGES
PRIVACY (N) BATH #2
E 2'-6" x 6'-8" x 1 3/8" SINGLE PANEL SOLID CORE
WOOD
PAINT EA.

FACE & ALL
EDGES
PRIVACY (N) BEDROOM #1
F 8'-0" x 6'-8" x 1 3/8" SLIDER
(3 PANEL)

SOLID CORE
WOOD
PAINT EA.

FACE & ALL
EDGES

RECESSED
PULLS (N) BDRM #1 CLOSET/STORAGE
G 1'-6" x 6'-8" x 1 3/8" SINGLE PANEL SOLID CORE
WOOD
PAINT EA.

FACE & ALL
EDGES
(N) LINEN CLOSET
H 2'-6" x 6'-8" x 1 3/8" SINGLE PANEL SOLID CORE
WOOD
PAINT EA.

FACE & ALL
EDGES
PRIVACY (N) BEDROOM #2
J
3'-0" x 6'-8" x 1 3/8"
(PAIR OF 1'-6" WIDE
DOORS)

SINGLE PANEL SOLID CORE
WOOD
PAINT EA.

FACE & ALL
EDGES
(N) BDRM #2 CLOSET
The architect is not responsible for the ordering of doors. Contractor, owner, and door supplier are to verify all door rough openings and verify coordination between manufacturer's model number, door size, safety glazing, finishes and accessories.

TALAMO/LIPSCHUTZ

RESIDENCE
1527 SACRAMENTO ST
BERKELEY, CA 94702

ROOM FLOOR BASE WALLS CEILING TRIM REMARKS
(E) LIVING ROOM

PRESERVE (E)

HARDWOOD
FLOOR
PATCH/

REFINISH AS

NECESSARY

TO MATCH (E)

PATCH/ REFINISH

AS NECESSARY
TO MATCH (E); (N)
1/2" TH. GYP. BD.,

PAINTED (AT EAST
WALL)

PRESERVE (E)

CEILING
PATCH/

REFINISH AS

NECESSARY

TO MATCH (E)
TYP. GYP. BD. TEXTURE TO

MATCH (E) HOUSE CEILINGS
& WALLS
(E) DINING ROOM

PRESERVE (E)

HARDWOOD
FLOOR
PATCH/

REFINISH AS

NECESSARY

TO MATCH (E)
PATCH/

REFINISH AS

NECESSARY

TO MATCH (E)

PRESERVE (E)

CEILING
PATCH/

REFINISH AS

NECESSARY

TO MATCH (E)
TYP. GYP. BD. TEXTURE TO

MATCH (E) HOUSE CEILINGS
& WALLS
(R) KITCHEN (N) TILE FLOOR MATCH (E) AT
HOUSE
(N) 1/2" TH. GYP. BD.
(AT EAST, WEST, &

SOUTH WALL) &
5/8" TH. TYPE X
GYP. BD (AT

NORTH WALL),

PAINTED

PRESERVE (E)
CEILIN; PATCH/

REFINISH AS

NECESSARY

TO MATCH (E)
PATCH/

REFINISH AS

NECESSARY

TO MATCH (E)
TYP. GYP. BD. TEXTURE TO

MATCH (E) HOUSE CEILINGS
& WALLS
(R) MAIN FLOOR
HALL
PRESERVE (E) D.F.

FLOOR
PATCH/

REFINISH AS

NECESSARY

TO MATCH (E)
PATCH/

REFINISH AS

NECESSARY

TO MATCH (E)

PRESERVE (E)
CEILIN; PATCH/

REFINISH AS

NECESSARY

TO MATCH (E)
PATCH/

REFINISH AS

NECESSARY

TO MATCH (E)
TYP. GYP. BD. TEXTURE TO

MATCH (E) HOUSE CEILINGS
& WALLS
(R) BATH #1 (N) TILE FLOOR MATCH (E) AT
HOUSE
PATCH/

REFINISH AS

NECESSARY

TO MATCH (E)

PRESERVE (E)

CEILING
PATCH/

REFINISH AS

NECESSARY

TO MATCH (E)
TYP. GYP. BD. TEXTURE TO

MATCH (E) HOUSE CEILINGS
& WALLS
(N) FAMILY ROOM (N) HARDWOOD
FLOOR

MATCH (E) AT
HOUSE

PATCH/ REFINISH

AS NECESSARY
TO MATCH (E); (N)
1/2" TH. GYP. BD.,

PAINTED (AT EAST,

SOUTH, & WEST
WALL)

PATCH/ REFINISH

AS NECESSARY
TO MATCH (E); (N)
1/2" TH. GYP. BD.
(AT ADDITION),

PAINTED

MATCH (E) AT
HOUSE
TYP. GYP. BD. TEXTURE TO

MATCH (E) HOUSE CEILINGS
& WALLS
(N) UNDERSTAIR

STORAGE
(N) HARDWOOD
FLOOR

MATCH (E) AT
HOUSE
(N) 1/2" TH. GYP.

BD., PAINTED
(N) 1/2" TH.

GYP. BD.,

PAINTED

MATCH (E) AT
HOUSE
TYP. GYP. BD. TEXTURE TO

MATCH (E) HOUSE CEILINGS
& WALLS
(N) STAIR (N) HARDWOOD
FLOOR

MATCH (E) AT
HOUSE
(N) 1/2" TH. GYP. BD.
(AT EAST, WEST, &

NORTH WALL) &
5/8" TH. TYPE X
GYP. BD (AT

SOUTH WALL),

PAINTED
(N) 1/2" TH.

GYP. BD.,

PAINTED

MATCH (E) AT
HOUSE
TYP. GYP. BD. TEXTURE TO

MATCH (E) HOUSE CEILINGS
& WALLS
(N) UPPER FLOOR
HALL
(N) HARDWOOD
FLOOR

MATCH (E) AT
HOUSE
(N) 1/2" TH. GYP.

BD, PAINTED
(N) 1/2" TH.

GYP. BD,

PAINTED

MATCH (E) AT
HOUSE
TYP. GYP. BD. TEXTURE TO

MATCH (E) HOUSE CEILINGS
& WALLS
(N) BATH #2 (N) TILE FLOOR MATCH (E) AT
HOUSE
(N) 1/2" TH. GYP. BD.
(AT EAST, WEST, &

SOUTH WALL) &
5/8" TH. TYPE X
GYP. BD (AT

NORTH WALL),

PAINTED
(N) 1/2" TH.

GYP. BD,

PAINTED

MATCH (E) AT
HOUSE
TYP. GYP. BD. TEXTURE TO

MATCH (E) HOUSE CEILINGS
& WALLS
(N) BEDROOM #1 (N) HARDWOOD
FLOOR

MATCH (E) AT
HOUSE
(N) 1/2" TH. GYP. BD.
(AT EAST, WEST, &

SOUTH WALL) &
5/8" TH. TYPE X
GYP. BD (AT

NORTH WALL),

PAINTED
(N) 1/2" TH.

GYP. BD,

PAINTED

MATCH (E) AT
HOUSE
TYP. GYP. BD. TEXTURE TO

MATCH (E) HOUSE CEILINGS
& WALLS

F I N I S H S C H E D U L E
(N) BDRM #1

CLOSET/

STORAGE
(N) HARDWOOD
FLOOR

MATCH (E) AT
HOUSE
(N) 1/2" TH. GYP. BD.
(AT EAST, WEST, &

NORTH WALL) &
5/8" TH. TYPE X
GYP. BD (AT

SOUTH WALL),

PAINTED
(N) 1/2" TH.

GYP. BD,

PAINTED

MATCH (E) AT
HOUSE
TYP. GYP. BD. TEXTURE TO

MATCH (E) HOUSE CEILINGS
& WALLS
(N) BEDROOM #2 (N) HARDWOOD
FLOOR

MATCH (E) AT
HOUSE
(N) 1/2" TH. GYP. BD.
(AT EAST, WEST, &

NORTH WALL) &
5/8" TH. TYPE X
GYP. BD (AT

SOUTH WALL),

PAINTED
(N) 1/2" TH.

GYP. BD,

PAINTED

MATCH (E) AT
HOUSE
TYP. GYP. BD. TEXTURE TO

MATCH (E) HOUSE CEILINGS
& WALLS
(N) BDRM #2
CLOSET
(N) HARDWOOD
FLOOR

MATCH (E) AT
HOUSE
(N) 1/2" TH. GYP. BD.
(AT EAST, WEST, &

NORTH WALL) &
5/8" TH. TYPE X
GYP. BD (AT

SOUTH WALL),

PAINTED
(N) 1/2" TH.

GYP. BD,

PAINTED

MATCH (E) AT
HOUSE
TYP. GYP. BD. TEXTURE TO

MATCH (E) HOUSE CEILINGS
& WALLS

TALAMO/LIPSCHUTZ

RESIDENCE
1527 SACRAMENTO ST
BERKELEY, CA 94702
LOCATION FIXTURE MANUFACTURER PRODUCT NAME MODEL NO. FINISH - COLOR

TUB FILLER &

CONTROLS

CONFIRM W/
OWNER

CONFIRM W/

OWNER CONFIRM W/ OWNER

PEDESTAL SINK CONFIRM W/
OWNER

CONFIRM W/
OWNER

CONFIRM W/

OWNER CONFIRM W/ OWNER

FAUCETS CONFIRM W/
OWNER

CONFIRM W/
OWNER

CONFIRM W/

OWNER CONFIRM W/ OWNER

SHOWER HEAD &

CONTROLS

CONFIRM W/
OWNER

CONFIRM W/

OWNER CONFIRM W/ OWNER

TOILET CONFIRM W/
OWNER

CONFIRM W/
OWNER

CONFIRM W/

OWNER CONFIRM W/ OWNER

TOILET CONFIRM W/
OWNER

CONFIRM W/
OWNER

CONFIRM W/

OWNER CONFIRM W/ OWNER

UNDERMOUNT SINK CONFIRM W/
OWNER

CONFIRM W/
OWNER

CONFIRM W/

OWNER CONFIRM W/ OWNER

FAUCET CONFIRM W/
OWNER

CONFIRM W/
OWNER

CONFIRM W/

OWNER CONFIRM W/ OWNER

SHOWER HEAD &

CONTROLS

CONFIRM W/
OWNER

CONFIRM W/

OWNER CONFIRM W/ OWNER

UNDERMOUNT SINK CONFIRM W/
OWNER

CONFIRM W/
OWNER

CONFIRM W/

OWNER CONFIRM W/ OWNER

FAUCET CONFIRM W/
OWNER

CONFIRM W/
OWNER

CONFIRM W/

OWNER CONFIRM W/ OWNER
(R) KITCHEN

P L U M B I N G S C H E D U L E
(R) BATH #1
(N) BATH #2
*

NOMINAL FRAME
SIZE

OPERATON
TYPE
FRAME/

GLAZING
1 2'-9 1/4" x 2'-10 3/8" DH RETROFIT WD-DG
2 1'-4" x 4'-0 3/4" CALIFORNIA

COOLER WD
3 2'-5 3/4" x 6'-5 3/4" INSWING
1/2 LITE DOOR WOOD
4 1'-3 1/4" x 2'-10 1/2" CSMT WD-DG
5 1'-8 3/4" x 2'-9 3/4" CSMT WD-DG
6 1'-8 3/4" x 2'-9 3/4" CSMT WD-DG
7 1'-8 3/4" x 2'-9 3/4" CSMT WD-DG
8 2'-5" x 2'-9 3/4" CSMT WD-DG
9 2'-5" x 2'-9 3/4" CSMT WD-DG
10 3'-0" x 6'-7" ISFD
15 LITE WD-SG
11 2'-9 1/4" x 4'-4 3/4" DH WD-DG
12 2'-9 1/4" x 4'-4 3/4" DH WD-DG
13 1'-2 1/2" x 2'-10" FXD WD-DG

REMOVED WINDOWS &

EXTERIOR DOORS

TALAMO/LIPSCHUTZ

RESIDENCE
1527 SACRAMENTO ST
BERKELEY, CA 94702
ROUGH OPENING TYPE MFR. &
MODEL #
See Ext.

Elevs. for
Lites
(WxH)
FINISH
FIN. INT. HD. @ 6'-8", TYP.,

UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED,

REMARKS
1 (3) 1'-6" x 4'-0" CSMT

MARVIN ESSENTIAL
(INTEGRITY ALL-ULTREX

BY MARVIN)
(ESCA1640)
(R) KITCHEN;
HD @ 7'-0"
2 4'-0" x 2'-0" FXD/PICTURE

MARVIN ESSENTIAL
(INTEGRITY ALL-ULTREX

BY MARVIN)
(ESCAP4020)
(N) FAMILY ROOM;
HD @ 7'-0"
3 4'-0" x 2'-0" FXD/PICTURE

MARVIN ESSENTIAL
(INTEGRITY ALL-ULTREX

BY MARVIN)
(ESCAP4020)
(N) FAMILY ROOM;
HD @ 7'-0"
4 4'-0" x 2'-0" FXD/PICTURE

MARVIN ESSENTIAL
(INTEGRITY ALL-ULTREX

BY MARVIN)
(ESCAP4020)
(N) FAMILY ROOM;
HD @ 7'-0"
5 (2) 3'-0" x 5'-0" CSMT

MARVIN ESSENTIAL
(INTEGRITY ALL-ULTREX

BY MARVIN)
(ESCA3050 E)
(N) FAMILY ROOM;
HD @ 7'-0";

EGRESS QUALIFYING
6 3'-0" x 5'-0" CSMT

MARVIN ESSENTIAL
(INTEGRITY ALL-ULTREX

BY MARVIN)
(ESCA3050 E)
(N) FAMILY ROOM;
HD @ 7'-0";

EGRESS QUALIFYING
7 2'-6" x 4'-6" FXD/PICTURE

MARVIN ESSENTIAL
(INTEGRITY ALL-ULTREX

BY MARVIN)
(ESCAP2646)
(N) STAIR (AT LANDING);
HD @ 7'-0";
TEMP. GL
8 1'-10 1/2" x 1'-10 15/16"

SOLAR POWERED
"FRESH AIR" CURB

MOUNTED SKYLIGHT

VELUX SKYLIGHT
(VSS D26)
(R) KITCHEN;
TEMP. GL.;

EDL FLASHING KIT FOR

DECK MOUNTED SKYLIGHT
9 2'-0" x 4'-6" CSMT

MARVIN ESSENTIAL
(INTEGRITY ALL-ULTREX

BY MARVIN)
(ESCA2046)
(N) BATH #2; HD @ 7'-0";
TEMP. GL.; OBSC. GL.
10 4'-0" x 2'-0" AWNING

MARVIN ESSENTIAL
(INTEGRITY ALL-ULTREX

BY MARVIN)
(ESAWN4020)
(N) BEDROOM #1;
HD @ 7'-0"
11 (2) 3'-0" x 4'-6" CSMT

MARVIN ESSENTIAL
(INTEGRITY ALL-ULTREX

BY MARVIN)
(ESCA3046 E)
(N) BEDROOM #1;
HD @ 7'-0";

EGRESS QUALIFYING
12 3'-0" x 4'-6" CSMT

MARVIN ESSENTIAL
(INTEGRITY ALL-ULTREX

BY MARVIN)
(ESCA3046 E)
(N) BEDROOM #1;
HD @ 7'-0"";

EGRESS QUALIFYING

W I N D O W S C H E D U L E
13 2'-6" x 4'-6" CSMT

MARVIN ESSENTIAL
(INTEGRITY ALL-ULTREX

BY MARVIN)
(ESCA2646 E)
(N) BEDROOM #2;
HD @ 7'-0";

EGRESS QUALIFYING
14 2'-6" x 4'-6" CSMT

MARVIN ESSENTIAL
(INTEGRITY ALL-ULTREX

BY MARVIN)
(ESCA2646 E)
(N) BEDROOM #2;
HD @ 7'-0";

EGRESS QUALIFYING
15 3'-0" x 4'-6" CSMT

MARVIN ESSENTIAL
(INTEGRITY ALL-ULTREX

BY MARVIN)
(ESCA3046 E)
(N) BEDROOM #2;
HD @ 7'-0";

EGRESS QUALIFYING
16 4'-0" x 2'-0" AWNING

MARVIN ESSENTIAL
(INTEGRITY ALL-ULTREX

BY MARVIN)
(ESAWN4020)
(N) BATH #2; HD @ 7'-0";
TEMP. GL.; OBSC. GL.
17 2'-6 1/16" x 3'-1 7/8"

SOLAR POWERED
"FRESH AIR" CURB

MOUNTED SKYLIGHT

VELUX SKYLIGHT
(VSS M04)
(N) BATH #2; TEMP. GL.;

EDL FLASHING KIT FOR

DECK MOUNTED SKYLIGHT
18 1'-9" x 2'-2 7/8"

SOLAR POWERED
"FRESH AIR" CURB

MOUNTED SKYLIGHT

VELUX SKYLIGHT
(VSS C01)
(N) STAIR; TEMP. GL.;

EDL FLASHING KIT FOR

DECK MOUNTED SKYLIGHT
19 2'-6 1/16" x 2'-6"

SOLAR POWERED
"FRESH AIR" CURB

MOUNTED SKYLIGHT

VELUX SKYLIGHT
(VSS M02)
(N) STAIR; TEMP. GL.;

EDL FLASHING KIT FOR

DECK MOUNTED SKYLIGHT
20 4'-0" x 2'-0" FXD/PICTURE

MARVIN ESSENTIAL
(INTEGRITY ALL-ULTREX

BY MARVIN)
(ESCAP4020)
(N) STAIR; HD @ 7'-0" FROM
SECOND FLOOR LEVEL;
TEMP. GL.

The architect is not responsible for the ordering of windows and skylights. Contractor, owner, window supplier, and skylight supplier are to verify all window and skylight rough openings and verify coordination between manufacturer's model number, window and skylight size, safety glazing, finishes and accessories.

MARVIN ESSENTIAL INTEGRITY ALL ULTREX) WINDOW NOTES:

REFERENCE STANDARDS: AMERICAN ARCHITECTURAL MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION (AAMA); NATIONAL FENESTRATION RATING COUNCIL (NFRC); LATEST EDITIONS.

INSTALLATION: INSTALL PER MANUFACTURER’S INSTRUCTIONS. COORDINATE WINDOW AND SCREEN INSTALLATION WITH SECURITY INSTALLATION.

MATERIALS: FIBERGLASS WITH DUAL GLAZED WINDOWS
OPERATION TYPE: AWNING
GLAZING: STANDARD LOW-E2-272, ARGON INSULATING GLASS, TEMPERED PER CODE AT HAZARDOUS LOCATIONS.

MANUFACTURER: MARVIN ESSENTIAL (INTEGRITY ALL-ULTREX BY MARVIN)

1. EXTERIOR CASING: MATCH EXITSING

2. EXTERIOR FINISH : MATCH EXISTING

3. HEAD FLASHING: G.S.M. DRIP CAP FLASHING AT ALL WINDOW AND DOOR HEADS, SEE DETAILS.

4. PENETRATIONS: (IE., WINDOWS, DOORS, VENTS, TYP .) FLASHING RECOMMENDATIONS: 12" WIDE FORTIFIBER MOISTOP E-Z SEAL FLASHING OR 9" WIDE PROTECTO WRAP BT-25XL FLASHING INSTALLED PER MFR'S INSTRUCTIONS; TYPICALLY, INSTALL SILL FLASHINGS FIRST, JAMB FLASHINGS NEXT, THEN HEAD FLASHING, FOLLOWED BY SHINGLED BUILDING PAPER (INSTALLED FROM THE BOTTOM UP). BE SURE THAT BUILDING PAPER

TUCKS UNDER THE SILL STRIP FLASHING WITH THE NEXT COURSE OF BUILDING PAPER OVER THE JAMB STRIP FLASHINGS. ASSEMBLY SHALL INSURE THAT ALL EXTERIOR OPENINGS EXPOSED TO THE WEATHER SHALL BE FLASHED IN SUCH A MANNER AS TO MAKE THEM WATERPROOF (PER UBC). SEE ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS FOR MORE INFORMATION.

5. SEALANTS: USE ONLY PRODUCTS AS RECOMMENDED & MANUFACTURED BY FLASHING MEMBRANE MFR.

INSTALLATION INSTRUCTIONS.

VELUX CLAD WOOD SKYLIGHT NOTES:

REFERENCE STANDARDS: ANSI, ASTM AND VELUX ARCHITECTURAL SPECIFICATION SHEET.

INSTALLATION: INSTALL PER MANUFACTURER’S INSTRUCTIONS.

MATERIALS: WOOD FRAME ROOF WINDOW TO BE "VELUX VSS D26, VSS M02, VSS M04, & VSS C01" AS MANUFACTURED BY VELUX-AMERICA LLC.

OPERATION TYPE: VSS: SOLAR-POWERED "FRESH AIR" SKYLIGHTS GLAZING: DUAL PANE LAMINATE GLAZING (xx04), TEMPERED PER CODE AT HAZARDOUS LOCATIONS.

MANUFACTURER: VELUX-AMERICA LLC.

1. CURB KIT & FLASHING SYSTEM: TYPE EDL, WITH PREFABRICATED 22 GAUGE LACQUERED ALUMINUM, STEP FLASHING, CURB FLASHING.

2. ACCESSORIES: CONFIRM WITH OWNER REMOVED EXT. WINDOWS & DOORS

WINDOW/DOOR SCHEDULE

FINISH/PLUMBING SCHEDULE

APPLIANCE SCHEDULE
1 08.17.20
1 08.17.20
1 08.17.20

02.09.21 2

Page 25 of 63 ends

215
GSPublisherVersion 0.0.100.100
JY

ADDITION & REMODEL FOR

ANNA TALAMO & JONATHAN

LIPSCHUTZ
1527 SACRAMENTO STREET
BERKELEY, CA 94702

02.26.20 18026
2A
of
drawn by
datejob address
job number
drawing title sheet
1250 ADDISON STREET - STUDIO 210

JASON KALDIS
ARCHITECT, INC.

BERKELEY, CA 94702
PH (510) 549-3584 FX (510) 549-3574
[email protected]
AUP APPLICATION SET 02.26.20
AUP APPLICATION SET REV1 08.17.201

08.17.20 AUP APPLICATION SET REV2 02.09.212

02.09.21 GSPublisherVersion 0.0.100.100
JY

ADDITION & REMODEL FOR

ANNA TALAMO & JOHNATHAN

LIPSCHUTZ
1527 SACRAMENTO STREET
BERKELEY, CA 94702

01.06.20 18026
2A
of
drawn by
datejob address
job number
drawing title sheet
1250 ADDISON STREET - STUDIO 210

JASON KALDIS
ARCHITECT, INC.

BERKELEY, CA 94702
PH (510) 549-3584 FX (510) 549-3574
[email protected]
AS-BUILTS 01.06.20
4'-31/4"
2'-11/2"
2'-13/8"
12'-53/8"
4'-31/4"
(E) 6'-0" CLR.
(E) HT.

REG.

PROPERTY LINE

PROPERTY LINE
(E) SIDE
YARD
(SOUTH)

SETBACK
(E) SIDE
YARD
(SOUTH)

SETBACK
(E) H.B. &
WATER IN.
(E) GAS
METER
(E) D.S.
(E) C.O.
(E) ELEC.

METER
(E) CSAP (E) FLUE
(E) FLUE
(E) D.S.
(E) D.S.
(E) TRANSITE

FLUE (TO BE

REMOVED)
(E) PALOMA TWH
MODEL #: PTG-74XN-2
INPUT (MAX.): 199900 BTU/HR
INPUT (MIN.): 19000 BTU/HR
(E) D.S.
(E) D.S.
(E)
CONC.

STEP
(E) D.S.
(E) 61/8"
STEP
(E) 2'-91/4" x 4'-43/4"

WD-DG DH
(E) 2'-91/4" x 4'-43/4"

WD-DG DH
(E) 3'-0" x 6'-7"
DOOR
(15 LITE, ISFD,
WD-SG)
(E) 2'-31/4" x 6'-61/2"
DOOR
(E) 2'-5" x 2'-93/4"

WD-DG CSMT
(E) 1'-83/4"
x 2'-93/4"
WD-DG
CSMT
(E) 1'-83/4"
x 2'-93/4"
WD-DG
CSMT
(E) 1'-83/4"
x 2'-93/4"
WD-DG
CSMT
(E) 1'-21/2" x 2'-10"

WD-SG FXD
(E) 2'-91/4" x 2'-101/2"

WD-SG DH
OBSC. GL.

TEMP. GL.
(E) 2'-91/4" x 4'-43/4"

WD-DG DH
(E) 2'-91/4" x
4'-43/4"

WD-DG DH
(E) 2'-91/4" x 4'-43/4"

WD-DG DH
(E) 1'-31/4" x
2'-101/2"
WD-DG
CSMT
(E) 2'-53/4" x
6'-53/4"

DOOR (IS,
1/2 LITE)
(E) 2'-91/4" x 2'-103/8"

RETOFIT

WD-DG DH
(E) 11/2"
(E) 1/4"
CL
(E) 1'-2" x
4'-41/4"
HD @
8'-03/4"
(E) 1'-31/4" x
2'-101/2"
WD-SG
FXD
(E) 1'-31/4" x
2'-101/2"
WD-SG
FXD
(E) 2'-91/4" x
2'-101/2"

WD-SG FXD
(E) 3'-0" x
6'-61/4"

DOOR(E)
31/2"
(E) 2'-91/4" x 4'-43/4"

WD-DG DH
(E)
(E)
(E)
(E)
(E)
(E)
(E)
(E)
(E)
(E) 3'-0" x
6'-8"
DOOR
(E) 3'-0" x 2'-0"

WD-DG FXD
(E)
UP 1
2 3
(E) 3'-0" x 2'-0"

WD-DG FXD
N 5° 32' 00" W 25.00'
N 84° 30' 00" E 111.33'
N 84° 30' 00" E 111.32'
N 5° 30' 00" W 25.00'

S A C R A M E N T O S T R E E T
(E) SIDE YARD
(NORTH)

SETBACK
(E) FRONT YARD (WEST) SETBACK
(E) SIDE
YARD
(NORTH)

SETBACK
UP
UP
UP
(E)
71/4"
(E) 1'-4" x
4-03/4"
CALIF.

COOLER
(E) 7'-117/8" x 6'-91/2" DOOR
(E) 4'-4" x 6'-81/4"
DOOR
HD @ 7'-05/8"
(E) 2'-5
1/4"
x 6'-6"
DOOR
(E)
(E)
(E)
CL
CL
(E) TUB/
SHOWER
(E) KITCHEN
(E) CLG. HT. @ 8'-3"
(E) SHEET VINYL FLOOR
(E) BEDROOM #1
(E) CLG. HT. @ 7'-11"
(E) D.F. FLOOR
(E) BEDROOM #2
(E) CLG. HT. @ 8'-3"
(E) D.F. FLOOR
(E) BDRM #2 CLOSET
(E) CLG. HT. @ ___
(E) D.F. FLOOR
(E) HALL
(E) CLG. HT. @ ___
(E) D.F. FLOOR
(E) LIVING ROOM
(E) CLG. HT. @ ___
(E) HARDWOOD FLOOR
(E) DINING ROOM
(E) CLG. HT. @ ___
(E) HARDWOOD FLOOR
(E) COVERED
ENTRY
(E) CLG. HT. @ ___
(E) BRICK FLOOR
(E) GARAGE
(E) CONC. SLAB ON GRADE
(E) STORAGE
(E) HARDWOOD
FLOOR
(E) OPEN WOOD
DECK
(E) BATH #1
(E) CLG. HT. @ ___
(E) TILE FLOOR
(E) CSAP
(E) 2'-5" x 2'-93/4"

WD-DG CSMT
(E) SINK
(E) SINK
12'-53/8"
48'-85/8"

83'-93/8"
14'-10"

PROPERTY LINE

PROPERTY LINE
(E) 2'-11/2" SIDE

YARD (SOUTH)

SETBACK
(E) 2'-13/8" SIDE

YARD (SOUTH)

SETBACK
(E) 4'-31/4" SIDE

YARD (NORTH)

SETBACK
(E) 91/8" SIDE

YARD (SOUTH)

SETBACK
(E) 3'-57/8" SIDE

YARD (NORTH)

SETBACK
(E) GABLE
END
(E) GABLE
END
(E) GABLE END
(E) 111/4" REAR

YARD (EAST)

SETBACK
(E) 4'-31/4" SIDE

YARD (NORTH)

SETBACK
(E) SIDE YARD
CONC. & WOOD

STEPS& LANDING
(E) D.S. (E) D.S.(E) TRANSITE FLUE
(TO BE REMOVED)
(E) D.S.(E) D.S. (E) FLUE (E) FLUE
(E) D.S.
(E) CURB
(E) CONC. &

DIAMOND
PLATE
(E) S.D.I.
(E) GABLE
END
(E) GABLE
END
(E) ROOF(E) ROOF
N 5° 32' 00" W 25.00'
N 84° 30' 00" E 111.33'
N 84° 30' 00" E 111.32'
N 5° 30' 00" W 25.00'
UP
(E) ROOF

3.38" : 12"
(E) FRONT YARD (WEST)

SETBACK
(E) REAR YARD (EAST) SETBACK
(E) ROOF

3.38" : 12"
(E) ROOF

3.38" : 12"
EXISTING HOUSE AT 1527

SACRAMENTO STREET

S A C R A M E N T O S T R E E T

B U E N A A V E N U E

EXISTING DETACHED
GARAGE AT 1527

SACRAMENTO STREET
UP
UP
(E)
ROOF
(E)
ROOF
(E)
ROOF

2.44" : 12"2.44" : 12"
(E) SIDEWALK
UP
(E) OPEN

WOOD DECK
(E) FRONT YARD (WEST) SETBACK TO (E) DETACHED GARAGE
(E) SIDE YARD
(NORTH)

SETBACK
0 1/2''1'' 2''
0 1/2''1'' 2''
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"

EXISTING MAIN FLOOR PLAN
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"

SITE PLAN W/ ROOF PLAN

EXISTING MAIN FLOOR PLAN
@ 1/4” = 1’-0”
NORTH
8'0' 4'2'
HEAT REGISTER @ CEILING
HEAT REGISTER @ FLOOR
HEAT REGISTER @ WALL OR TOEKICK

SUPPLY LINE

NEW (N) WALL

EXISTING (E) WALL TO REMAIN

EXISTING (E) WALL TO BE REMOVED

LINE ABOVE

LINE BELOW OR BEYOND

PROPERTY LINE

SECTION

DETAIL NUMBER

SHEET NUMBER

WINDOW KEY

DOOR KEY

REVISION

CEILING MOUNTED LIGHT

WALL MOUNTED LIGHT

RECESSED LIGHT

RECESSED ADJUSTABLE LIGHT

CABLE/TRACK LIGHTING

UNDERCABINET LIGHT

JUNCTION BOX

CEILING FAN W/ LIGHT

CEILING FAN

LIGHT-EXHAUST FAN COMBO

EXHAUST FAN
SWITCH
3 WAY SWITCH

DUPLEX WALL OUTLET

QUAD WALL OUTLET

FLOOR OUTLET

TELEPHONE JACK
T.V./DATA CABLE JACK

SPEAKER
CHIMES

PUSH BUTTON

SMOKE ALARM

CARBON MONOXIDE ALARM

HEATE DETECTOR/ALARM

THERMOSTAT CONTROLS

ARCHITECTURAL LEGEND
NEW (N) 1-HR. RATED EXT. WALL
NEW (N) 1-HR. RATED INT. WALL
NORTH
16'8'0' 4'
SD
PL
A
6 1
5 1
1 A
CO
HD
S
0 1/2''1'' 2''
NORTH
8'0' 4'2'
HEAT REGISTER @ CEILING
HEAT REGISTER @ FLOOR
HEAT REGISTER @ WALL OR TOEKICK

SUPPLY LINE

NEW (N) WALL

EXISTING (E) WALL TO REMAIN

EXISTING (E) WALL TO BE REMOVED

LINE ABOVE

LINE BELOW OR BEYOND

PROPERTY LINE

SECTION

DETAIL NUMBER

SHEET NUMBER

WINDOW KEY

DOOR KEY

REVISION

CEILING MOUNTED LIGHT

WALL MOUNTED LIGHT

RECESSED LIGHT

RECESSED ADJUSTABLE LIGHT

CABLE/TRACK LIGHTING

UNDERCABINET LIGHT

JUNCTION BOX

CEILING FAN W/ LIGHT

CEILING FAN

LIGHT-EXHAUST FAN COMBO

EXHAUST FAN
SWITCH
3 WAY SWITCH

DUPLEX WALL OUTLET

QUAD WALL OUTLET

FLOOR OUTLET

TELEPHONE JACK
T.V./DATA CABLE JACK

SPEAKER
CHIMES

PUSH BUTTON

SMOKE ALARM

CARBON MONOXIDE ALARM

HEATE DETECTOR/ALARM

THERMOSTAT CONTROLS

ARCHITECTURAL LEGEND
NEW (N) 1-HR. RATED EXT. WALL
NEW (N) 1-HR. RATED INT. WALL

EXISTING MAIN FLOOR PLAN
@ 1/4" = 1'-0"

ARCHITECTURAL LEGEND
SD
PL
A
6 1
5 1
1 A
CO
HD
S

Page 26 of 63 ends

216
GSPublisherVersion 0.0.100.100
JY

ADDITION & REMODEL FOR

ANNA TALAMO & JONATHAN

LIPSCHUTZ
1527 SACRAMENTO STREET
BERKELEY, CA 94702

02.26.20 18026
3 of
drawn by
datejob address
job number
drawing title sheet
1250 ADDISON STREET - STUDIO 210

JASON KALDIS
ARCHITECT, INC.

BERKELEY, CA 94702
PH (510) 549-3584 FX (510) 549-3574
[email protected]
AUP APPLICATION SET 02.26.20
AUP APPLICATION SET REV1 08.17.201

08.17.20 AUP APPLICATION SET REV2 02.09.212

02.09.21 12'-53/8"
(N) 4'-91/2"

ADDITION
23'-0"
20'-6"
22'-65/8"
20'-05/8"
2'-53/4" H.
21'-9"

PROPERTY LINE
(E) MAIN FLOOR
LEVEL
(E) MAIN FLOOR
LEVEL
(E) CSAP

RELOCATED
(E) TWH
(E) ASPHALT COMP.

SHINGLE ROOF
(E) RIDGE

REMOVE (E) OPEN

WOOD DECK,

STEPS, & WOOD

GUARDRAIL
(N) HORIZ. WOOD SIDING

TO MATCH (E) HOUSE
(E) STUCCO EXT.
(E) STUCCO EXT. & COLUMN
(E) HORIZ. WOOD SIDING
REMOVE (E) D.S.
(E) FRONT ENTRY STEPS
(E) D.S.

REMOVE (E)

TRANSITE FLUE
(E) RIDGE
(E) GRADE
(E) GRADE
(N) STUCCO
EXT. TO MATCH
(E) HOUSE
(N) UPPER FLOOR
LEVEL
(N) OPEN WOOD DECK
W/ CONC. STEPS, METAL

GUARDRAIL/HANDRAIL
(1
1/2" SQ. POSTS & 1/2"

BALUSTERS)
(N) SKYLT.
(N) RIDGE
(N) STUCCO
EXT. TO MATCH
(E) HOUSE
(N) D.S.
(N) AVERAGE

GRADE AT

ADDITION
(E) FRONT YARD (WEST) SETBACK
(E) (E)
MAX. DECK
(< 30" H.)
(N) MAX. EAVES HEIGHT
(N) MAX. AVG. HEIGHT
(N) MAX. BUILDING HEIGHT
(N) MAX. BUILDING HEIGHT
(N) MAX. EAVES HEIGHT
REMOVE (E) CONC. STEP

REMOVE (E) WOOD STEPS

REMOVE (E) WOOD GUARDRAIL
(E) ASPHALT
COMP. SHINGLE
ROOF
(N) ASPHALT
COMP. SHINGLE
ROOF
1 234
9 10
15 8
17 18
*7 *5
*1
*2*3*4*6
13'-71/8"
22'-9"
20'-3"
10'-113/4"
3'-0"
21'-9"

PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE
(E) RIDGE
(E) D.S. (BEYOND)
(E) SIDE YARD
(NORTH) SETBACK
(E) STUCCO
COLUMN
(E) FRONT

ENTRY STEPS
(E) ASPHALT
COMP. SHINGLE
ROOF
(E) MAIN FLOOR
LEVEL
(E) STUCCO
EXT.
(E) D.S.
(E) GRADE
(E) GRADE
(N) SKYLT.
(N) SKYLT.
(N) STUCCO EXT.

TO MATCH (E)
HOUSE
(N) UPPER FLOOR
LEVEL
(N) SKYLT.
(N) D.S.
(N) D.S.
(N) AVERAGE GRADE AT ADDITION
(E)
(E) (E)(E)
33/8"12" 33/8"12"
33/8"12"
(E) MAX. BUILDING HEIGHT
(N) MAX. BUILDING HEIGHT
33/8"12"
33/8"12"
(N) MAX. EAVES HEIGHT
(E) MAX. EAVES HEIGHT
(N) MAX. AVG. HEIGHT
3'-57/8"
2'-13/8"
(E) HORIZ.

WOOD
SIDING
(E) SIDE
YARD
(SOUTH)

SETBACK
(N) RIDGE
(N) STUCCO EXT.

TO MATCH (E) HOUSE
(N) ASPHALT
COMP. SHINGLE
ROOF
(N) SIDE YARD
(SOUTH) SETBACK
14 13
EGRESS
16 TEMP. GL.

OBSC. GL.
8 17
18 19
EGRESS
12'-53/8"
22'-9"
20'-3"

PROPERTY LINE
(E) MAIN FLOOR LEVEL
(E) MAIN FLOOR LEVEL
(E) CSAP
(E) ASPHALT COMP.

SHINGLE ROOF
(E) RIDGE

REMOVE (E) WOOD

GUARDRAIL & OPEN

WOOD DECK
(E) STUCCO EXT. & COLUMN
(E) HORIZ. WOOD SIDING
(E) FRONT ENTRY STEPS
(N) RIDGE
(N) ASPHALT COMP.

SHINGLE ROOF
(N) D.S.
(E) FLUE REMOVE
(E) FLUE
(E) D.S.
(E)
ELEC.

METER
(E) GRADE
(N) SKYLT.
(N) SKYLT.

BEYOND
(N) RIDGE
(N) ASPHALT COMP.

SHINGLE ROOF
(N) UPPER FLOOR
LEVEL
(N) D.S.
(N) D.S.
(E) ROOF TO REMAIN
(N) STAIR LANDING
(N) STAIR BEYOND
(N) AVERAGE GRADE

AT ADDITION

EXISTING FRONT YARD (WEST) SETBACK
(E) (E) (E) (E) (E) (E)
(N) MAX. BUILDING HEIGHT
(N) MAX. EAVES HEIGHT
(N) MAX. EAVES HEIGHT
(N) MAX. BUILDING HEIGHT
(N) 4'-91/2"

ADDITION
2'-13/4" H.
22'-6"
21'-9"
(N) STUCCO EXT.

TO MATCH (E) HOUSE
(E) GRADE
(N) HORIZ. WOOD

SIDING BEYOND TO

MATCH (E) HOUSE
(N) OPEN WOOD
DECK W/ CONC.

STEPS, METAL

GUARDRAIL/
HANDRAIL (1
1/2" SQ.

POSTS & 1/2"

BALUSTERS)
(N) CONC. BLK.

WALL W/

STUCCO FINISH
(1-HOUR RATED)
6 TEMP.

GL.
12 19
18 *12*13
MAX.

DECK
(< 30" H.)
7 TEMP.

GL.
20 TEMP.

GL.
2'-11/2" 4'-31/4"
(N) 11'-8" ADDITION
(STUCCO FIN. TO STUCCO FIN.)
2'-13/4" H.

DECK
(<30" H.)
2'-53/4" H.

DECK
(<30" H.)
23'-0"
20'-6"
3'-0"
21'-9"

PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE
(E) SIDE
YARD
(NORTH)

SETBACK
(N) SIDE YARD
(NORTH)

SETBACK
(N) RIDGE
(E) GRADE
(E) GRADE
(E) D.S.

BEYOND
(E) ASPHALT
COMP. SHINGLE
ROOF
(N) SKYLT.
(N) SKYLT.
(N) STUCCO
EXT. TO MATCH
(E) HOUSE
(N) OPEN WOOD DECK W/
CONC. STEPS, METAL
GUARDRAIL/HANDRAIL (1
1/2"
SQ. POSTS & 1/2" BALUSTERS)
(N) CONC. BLK. WALL
(N) AVERAGE GRADE AT ADDITION
33/8"12"
33/8"12"
A
(E) HOUSE AT 1525 SACRAMENTO STREET
(E) HOUSE AT 1529 SACRAMENTO STREET
(N) MAX. BUILDING HEIGHT
(N) MAX. AVG. HEIGHT
(N) MAX. EAVES HEIGHT
(E) MAIN FLOOR
LEVEL
REMOVE
(E) OPEN
WOOD
DECK,
STEPS,
& WOOD

GUARDRAIL
(E) HORIZ.

WOOD
SIDING
(E) STUCCO
EXT. &
COLUMN
(E) D.S.

BEYOND
(E) STUCCO
EXT.
(N) RIDGE
(N) STUCCO
EXT. TO MATCH
(E) HOUSE
(N) UPPER FLOOR
LEVEL
(N) HORIZ. WOOD

SIDING TO MATCH
(E) HOUSE
(N) D.S.
(N) D.S.
(E) 6'-0" H.

FENCE
(E) 6'-0" H. FENCE
(N) STAIR

LANDING
(BEYOND)
5 11
19 17
18 EGRESS
EGRESS
0 1/2''1'' 2''
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"

PROPOSED NORTH EXTERIOR ELEVATION
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"

PROPOSED WEST EXTERIOR ELEVATION
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"

PROPOSED SOUTH EXTERIOR ELEVATION
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"

PROPOSED EAST EXTERIOR ELEVATION

PROPOSED EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
@ 1/4" = 1'-0"

TYPICAL (N) EXTERIOR BUILDING

MATERIALS

TYPICAL (N) EXTERIOR BUILDING MATERIALS
• (N) CLASS "A" COMPOSITION SHINGLE ROOF
• (N) STUCCO, PAINTED (MATCH (E), TYP.)
• (E) HORIZONTAL WOOD EXT. WAINSCOT, PAINTED (MATCH (E), TYP.) • (N) FIBERGLASS WINDOWS (AS MFRD. BY MARVIN ESSENTIALS (INTEGRITY ALL-ULTREX))
• SKYLIGHTS (AS MFRD. BY VELUX)
• (N) WOOD/CLAD WOOD DOORS
• (N) PAINTED EXTERIOR CASING (MATCH (E), TYP.)
• (N) G.S.M. FOUNDATION VENTS
• (N) CONCRETE LANDING & STAIRS
• (N) OPEN WOOD DECK, GUARDRAIL, BALUSTERS, & WOOD/CONC. STEPS • (N) GUTTERS, & DOWNSPOUTS
• (N) PAINTED/STAINED WOOD CORBELS/BRACKETS (MATCH (E), TYP.) • (N) WALL MTD. LIGHTING
8'0' 4'2'
1 08.17.20
1 08.17.20
1 08.17.20
1 08.17.20

02.09.21 2

Page 27 of 63 ends

217
GSPublisherVersion 0.0.100.100
JY

ADDITION & REMODEL FOR

ANNA TALAMO & JONATHAN

LIPSCHUTZ
1527 SACRAMENTO STREET
BERKELEY, CA 94702

02.26.20 18026
3A
of
drawn by
datejob address
job number
drawing title sheet
1250 ADDISON STREET - STUDIO 210

JASON KALDIS
ARCHITECT, INC.

BERKELEY, CA 94702
PH (510) 549-3584 FX (510) 549-3574
[email protected]
AUP APPLICATION SET 02.26.20
AUP APPLICATION SET REV1 08.17.201

08.17.20 AUP APPLICATION SET REV2 02.09.212

02.09.21 GSPublisherVersion 0.0.100.100
JY

ADDITION & REMODEL FOR

ANNA TALAMO & JOHNATHAN

LIPSCHUTZ
1527 SACRAMENTO STREET
BERKELEY, CA 94702

01.06.20 18026
3A
of
drawn by
datejob address
job number
drawing title sheet
1250 ADDISON STREET - STUDIO 210

JASON KALDIS
ARCHITECT, INC.

BERKELEY, CA 94702
PH (510) 549-3584 FX (510) 549-3574
[email protected]
AS-BUILTS 01.06.20
12'-53/8"
13'-43/4"
13'-101/4"
10'-93/8"
11'-23/4"
12'-3"

PROPERTY LINE
(E) MAIN FLOOR
LEVEL
(E) MAIN FLOOR
LEVEL
(E) CSAP
(E) TWH
(E) ASPHALT COMP.

SHINGLE ROOF
(E) RIDGE
(E) OPEN WOOD

DECK, STEPS, &

WOOD GUARDRAIL
< 30" H.
(E) HORIZ. WOOD
SIDING
(E) STUCCO EXT.
(E) STUCCO EXT. & COLUMN
(E) HORIZ. WOOD SIDING
(E) D.S.
(E) FRONT ENTRY STEPS
(E) D.S.
(E) TRANSITE FLUE
(TO BE REMOVED)
(E) ASPHALT COMP.

SHINGLE ROOF
(E) RIDGE
(E) GRADE
(E) GRADE
(E) AVERAGE GRADE
(E) FRONT YARD (WEST) SETBACK(E) (E) (E) (E) (E)
(E)
(E) (E)
(E) MAX. BUILDING HEIGHT
(E) MAX. BUILDING HEIGHT
(E) MAX. EAVES HEIGHT
(E) MAX. AVG. HEIGHT
(E) MAX. EAVES HEIGHT
(E) CONC. STEP
(E) WD. STEPS
(E) WOOD GUARDRAIL
13'-71/8"
10'-113/4"
12'-3"

PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE
(E) RIDGE
(E) D.S. (BEYOND)
(E) SIDE YARD
(NORTH) SETBACK
(E) STUCCO
COLUMN
(E) FRONT

ENTRY STEPS
(E) ASPHALT
COMP. SHINGLE
ROOF
(E) MAIN FLOOR
LEVEL
(E) STUCCO
EXT.
(E) D.S.
(E) GRADE
(E) GRADE (E) AVERAGE GRADE
(E)
(E) (E)(E)
33/8"12" 33/8"12"
33/8"12"
(E) MAX. BUILDING HEIGHT
(E) MAX. EAVES HEIGHT
(E) MAX. AVG. HEIGHT
3'-57/8"
2'-13/8"
(E) HORIZ.

WOOD
SIDING
(E) SIDE
YARD
(SOUTH)

SETBACK
12'-53/8"
13'-41/8"
10'-113/4"
10'-83/4"
13'-71/8"
12'-3"

PROPERTY LINE
(E) MAIN FLOOR
LEVEL
(E) MAIN FLOOR LEVEL
(E) CSAP
(E) ASPHALT COMP.

SHINGLE ROOF
(E) RIDGE
(E)WOOD

GUARDRAIL
& OPEN WOOD

DECK (BEYOND)
(< 30" H.)
(E) STUCCO EXT. & COLUMN
(E) HORIZ. WOOD SIDING
(E) FRONT ENTRY STEPS
(E) RIDGE
(E) ASPHALT COMP.

SHINGLE ROOF
(E) STUCCO EXT.
& COLUMN
(E) D.S.
(E) FLUE (E) FLUE(E) D.S.
(E)
ELEC.

METER
(E) GRADE
(E) GRADE
(E) AVERAGE GRADE

EXISTING FRONT YARD (WEST) SETBACK
(E) (E) (E) (E) (E) (E)
(E) (E)
(E) MAX. BUILDING HEIGHT
(E) MAX. BUILDING HEIGHT
(E) MAX. EAVES HEIGHT
(E) MAX. EAVES HEIGHT
(E) MAX. AVG. HEIGHT
2'-11/2" 4'-31/4"
13'-101/4"
11'-23/4"
12'-3"

PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE
(E) SIDE YARD
(NORTH) SETBACK
(E) SIDE YARD
(NORTH) SETBACK
(E) MAIN FLOOR
LEVEL
(E) OPEN WOOD

DECK, STEPS, &

WOOD GUARDRAIL
(E) RIDGE
(E) HORIZ. WOOD
SIDING
(E) D.S.
(E) GRADE (E) GRADE
(E) D.S.
(E) ASPHALT
COMP. SHINGLE
ROOF
(E) AVERAGE GRADE
(E)
(E)
(E) (E)
33/8"12" 33/8"12"
(E) MAX. BUILDING HEIGHT
(E) MAX. EAVES HEIGHT
(E) MAX. AVG. HEIGHT
(E) STUCCO EXT.
& COLUMN(E) STUCCO EXT.
0 1/2''1'' 2''
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"

EXISTING NORTH EXTERIOR ELEVATION
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"

EXISTING WEST EXTERIOR ELEVATION
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"

EXISTING SOUTH EXTERIOR ELEVATION
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"

EXISTING EAST EXTERIOR ELEVATION

EXISTING EXTERIOR
ELEVATIONS @ 1/4”=1’-0”
TYP. EXISTING EXT. BUILDING

MATERIALS
8'0' 4'2'
0 1/2''1'' 2''
8'0' 4'2'

TYPICAL (E) EXTERIOR BUILDING MATERIALS
• (E) CLASS "A" COMPOSITION SHINGLE ROOF
• (E) STUCCO, PAINTED
• (E) HORIZONTAL WOOD EXT. WAINSCOT, PAINTED
• (E) WOOD WINDOWS
• (E) WOOD DOORS
• (E) PAINTED EXTERIOR CASING
• (E) G.S.M. FOUNDATION VENTS & LOUVERED ATTIC VENT
• (E) BRICK LANDING & STEPS
• (E) OPEN WOOD DECK, GUARDRAIL, BALUSTERS & WOOD STEPS • (E) GUTTERS, & DOWNSPOUTS
• (E) PAINTED/STAINED WOOD CORBELS/BRACKETS
• (E) WALL MTD. LIGHTING AT (E) DECK

EXISTING EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
@ 1/4" = 1'-0"

TYPICAL (N) EXTERIOR BUILDING

MATERIALS
1 08.17.20

08.17.20 1

02.09.21 2

02.09.21 2 02.09.21
2 02.09.21
2 02.09.21
2 02.09.21
2 02.09.21
2 02.09.21
2 02.09.21
2

Page 28 of 63 ends

218
GSPublisherVersion 0.0.100.100
JY

ADDITION & REMODEL FOR

ANNA TALAMO & JONATHAN

LIPSCHUTZ
1527 SACRAMENTO STREET
BERKELEY, CA 94702

02.26.20 18026

0.1 of
drawn by
datejob address
job number
drawing title sheet
1250 ADDISON STREET - STUDIO 210

JASON KALDIS
ARCHITECT, INC.

BERKELEY, CA 94702
PH (510) 549-3584 FX (510) 549-3574
[email protected]
AUP APPLICATION SET 02.26.20
AUP APPLICATION SET REV1 08.17.201

08.17.20 AUP APPLICATION SET REV2 02.09.212

02.09.21 GARAGE @ 1525

SACRAMENTO ST

B U E N A

A V E N U E
(N) SHADOW
(N) ADDITION

S A C R A M E N T O S T R E E T
1527 SACRAMENTO ST
1525 SACRAMENTO ST
1521 SACRAMENTO ST
1531 SACRAMENTO ST
1517 BUENA
AVE
1518 BUENA
AVE
1521
BUENA
AVE
1522
BUENA
AVE

OUTLINES THE

EXTEND OF
(N) SHADOW

WITHOUT

MASS OF

NEIGHBORING

BUILDINGS
(E) SHADOW
(HOUSE ONLY)
1529

SACRAMENTO
ST
GARAGE @ 1525

SACRAMENTO ST

B U E N A

A V E N U E

S A C R A M E N T O S T R E E T
1527 SACRAMENTO ST
1525 SACRAMENTO ST
1529

SACRAMENTO
ST
1517 BUENA
AVE
1521 SACRAMENTO ST
1531 SACRAMENTO ST 1518 BUENA
AVE
1521
BUENA
AVE
1522
BUENA
AVE
(N) SHADOW
(N) ADDITION

OUTLINES THE

EXTEND OF
(N) SHADOW

WITHOUT

MASS OF

NEIGHBORING

BUILDINGS
(E) SHADOW
(HOUSE ONLY)
GARAGE @ 1525

SACRAMENTO ST

B U E N A

A V E N U E

S A C R A M E N T O S T R E E T
1527 SACRAMENTO ST
1525 SACRAMENTO ST
1529

SACRAMENTO
ST
1517 BUENA
AVE
1521 SACRAMENTO ST
1531 SACRAMENTO ST 1518 BUENA
AVE
1521
BUENA
AVE
1522
BUENA
AVE
(N) SHADOW
(N) ADDITION

OUTLINES THE

EXTEND OF
(N) SHADOW

WITHOUT

MASS OF

NEIGHBORING

BUILDINGS
(E) SHADOW
(HOUSE ONLY)
GARAGE @ 1525

SACRAMENTO ST
(E) SHADOW

B U E N A

A V E N U E

S A C R A M E N T O S T R E E T
1527 SACRAMENTO ST
1525 SACRAMENTO ST
1529

SACRAMENTO
ST
1517 BUENA
AVE
1521 SACRAMENTO ST
1531 SACRAMENTO ST 1518 BUENA
AVE
1521
BUENA
AVE
1522
BUENA

AVEOUTLINES THE

EXTEND OF (E)
SHADOW

WITHOUT

MASS OF

NEIGHBORING

BUILDINGS
GARAGE @ 1525

SACRAMENTO ST

B U E N A

A V E N U E

S A C R A M E N T O S T R E E T
1527 SACRAMENTO ST
1525 SACRAMENTO ST
1529

SACRAMENTO
ST
1517 BUENA
AVE
1521 SACRAMENTO ST
1531 SACRAMENTO ST 1518 BUENA
AVE
1521
BUENA
AVE
1522
BUENA
AVE
(E) SHADOW

OUTLINES THE

EXTEND OF (E)
SHADOW

WITHOUT

MASS OF

NEIGHBORING

BUILDINGS
GARAGE @ 1525

SACRAMENTO ST

B U E N A

A V E N U E

S A C R A M E N T O S T R E E T
1527 SACRAMENTO ST
1525 SACRAMENTO ST
1529

SACRAMENTO
ST
1517 BUENA
AVE
1521 SACRAMENTO ST
1531 SACRAMENTO ST 1518 BUENA
AVE
1521
BUENA
AVE
1522
BUENA
AVE
(E) SHADOW

OUTLINES THE

EXTEND OF (E)
SHADOW

WITHOUT

MASS OF

NEIGHBORING

BUILDINGS

LIVING ROOM BEDROOM CLOSETBATH BEDROOM BEDROOM
(N) SHADOW(E) SHADOW

SUN PORCHENTRYCLOSETBEDROOMBATH

CLOSETBEDROOMBEDROOM

STORAGE ROOM BEDROOM BATH
(E) 6'-0" H. FENCE
(FOREGROUND)
(E) 6'-0" H. FENCE
(FOREGROUND)
(E) 6'-0" H. FENCE
(FOREGROUND)
ACC. GARAGE @ 1525 SACRAMENTO (FOREGROUND)

SHADOW CAST FROM

PROPOSED ADDITION
AT 1527 SACRAMENTO
(N) SHADOW(E) SHADOW

SUN PORCHENTRYCLOSETBEDROOMBATH
CLOSETBEDROOMBEDROOMSTORAGE ROOM HOUSE AT 1517 BUENA VISTA (BEYOND) (E) 6'-0" H. FENCE (E) 6'-0" H. FENCE

SHADOW CAST FROM

PROPOSED ADDITION
AT 1527 SACRAMENTO

SHADOW CAST FROM
GARAGE @ 1525 SACRAMENTO
(N) SHADOW(E) SHADOW
SCALE: 1/32" = 1'-0" SCALE: 1/32" = 1'-0" SCALE: 1/32" = 1'-0" SCALE: 1/32" = 1'-0" SCALE: 1/32" = 1'-0" SCALE: 1/32" = 1'-0"

SHADOW STUDY DIAGRAMS
1A 1B 1CPROPOSED SHADOW STUDY PROPOSED SHADOW STUDY PROPOSED SHADOW STUDY 2B 2CEXISTING SHADOW STUDY EXISTING SHADOW STUDY2A EXISTING SHADOW STUDY DECEMBER 21 @ 9:21 AM
(2 HOURS AFTER SUNRISE)
DECEMBER 21 @ 12:00 PM
(NOON)
DECEMBER 21 @ 9:21 AM
(2 HOURS AFTER SUNRISE)
DECEMBER 21 @ 12:00 PM
(NOON)
DECEMBER 21 @ 2:54 PM
(2 HOURS BEFORE SUNSET)
3A 3B 3CDECEMBER 21 @ 9:21 AM
(2 HOURS AFTER SUNRISE)
EXISTING 1525 SACRAMENTO

SOUTH ELEVATION
DECEMBER 21 @ 12:00 PM (NOON)
EXISTING 1525 SACRAMENTO

SOUTH ELEVATION
DECEMBER 21 @ 2:54 PM
(2 HOURS BEFORE SUNSET)
EXISTING 1525 SACRAMENTO

SOUTH ELEVATION

NORTH NORTHNORTH

08.17.20 1
EXISTING ACCESSSORY GARAGE @ 1525 SACRAMENTO
WEST ELEVATION (1517 BUENA VISTA BEYOND)
DECEMBER 21 @ 2:54 PM (2 HOURS BEFORE SUNSET)
EXISTING 1517 BUENA VISTA - WEST ELEVATION
DECEMBER 21 @ 2:54 PM (2 HOURS BEFORE SUNSET)4C5C
NOTE: SHADOW STUDY SHOWS SHADOWS CAST BY PROPOSED ADDITION AT 1527 SACRAMENTO ONTO 1517 BUENA VISTA WITHOUT THE (E) WEST SIDE YARD FENCE AT 1517 BUENA VISTA AND (E) ACC. GARAGE AT 1525 SACRAMENTO. SEE SHOW STUDY DIAGRAM 4C/0.1 (DIAGRAM TO THE RIGHT) FOR RESULTING SHADOW CAST WITH FENCE AND ACC. GARAGE.

NOTE: SHADOW ON ELEVATION

SHADED ARE

NOT SHADOWS CAST BY
1527 SACRAMENTO BUT BY

THE NEIGHBOR'S OWN HOUSE

02.09.21 2
2 02.09.212

02.09.21 DECEMBER 21 @ 2:54 PM
(2 HOURS BEFORE SUNSET)

Page 29 of 63 ends

219
GSPublisherVersion 0.0.100.100
JY

ADDITION & REMODEL FOR

ANNA TALAMO & JONATHAN

LIPSCHUTZ
1527 SACRAMENTO STREET
BERKELEY, CA 94702

02.26.20 18026

0.2 of
drawn by
datejob address
job number
drawing title sheet
1250 ADDISON STREET - STUDIO 210

JASON KALDIS
ARCHITECT, INC.

BERKELEY, CA 94702
PH (510) 549-3584 FX (510) 549-3574
[email protected]
AUP APPLICATION SET 02.26.20
AUP APPLICATION SET REV1 08.17.201

08.17.20 AUP APPLICATION SET REV2 02.09.212

02.09.21 GARAGE @ 1525

SACRAMENTO ST

S A C R A M E N T O S T R E E T

B U E N A

A V E N U E
1527 SACRAMENTO ST
1525 SACRAMENTO ST
1529

SACRAMENTO
ST
1517 BUENA
AVE
1521 SACRAMENTO ST
1531 SACRAMENTO ST 1518 BUENA
AVE
1521
BUENA
AVE
1522
BUENA
AVE
(N) SHADOW
(N) ADDITION

OUTLINES THE

EXTEND OF
(N) SHADOW

WITHOUT

MASS OF

NEIGHBORING

BUILDINGS
(E) SHADOW
(HOUSE ONLY)
GARAGE @ 1525

SACRAMENTO ST

S A C R A M E N T O S T R E E T

B U E N A

A V E N U E
1527 SACRAMENTO ST
1525 SACRAMENTO ST
1529

SACRAMENTO
ST
1517 BUENA
AVE
1521 SACRAMENTO ST
1531 SACRAMENTO ST 1518 BUENA
AVE
1521
BUENA
AVE
1522
BUENA
AVE
(N) SHADOW
(N) ADDITION

OUTLINES THE

EXTEND OF
(N) SHADOW

WITHOUT

MASS OF

NEIGHBORING

BUILDINGS
(E) SHADOW
(HOUSE ONLY)
GARAGE @ 1525

SACRAMENTO ST

S A C R A M E N T O S T R E E T

B U E N A

A V E N U E
1527 SACRAMENTO ST
1525 SACRAMENTO ST
1529

SACRAMENTO
ST
1517 BUENA
AVE
1521 SACRAMENTO ST
1531 SACRAMENTO ST 1518 BUENA
AVE
1521
BUENA
AVE
1522
BUENA
AVE
(N) SHADOW
(N) ADDITION

OUTLINES THE

EXTEND OF
(N) SHADOW

WITHOUT

MASS OF

NEIGHBORING

BUILDINGS
(E) SHADOW
(HOUSE ONLY)
GARAGE @ 1525

SACRAMENTO ST

S A C R A M E N T O S T R E E T

B U E N A

A V E N U E
1527 SACRAMENTO ST
1525 SACRAMENTO ST
1529

SACRAMENTO
ST
1517 BUENA
AVE
1521 SACRAMENTO ST
1531 SACRAMENTO ST 1518 BUENA
AVE
1521
BUENA
AVE
1522
BUENA
AVE
(E) SHADOW

OUTLINES THE

EXTEND OF (E)
SHADOW

WITHOUT

MASS OF

NEIGHBORING

BUILDINGS
GARAGE @ 1525

SACRAMENTO ST

S A C R A M E N T O S T R E E T

B U E N A

A V E N U E
1527 SACRAMENTO ST
1525 SACRAMENTO ST
1529

SACRAMENTO
ST
1517 BUENA
AVE
1521 SACRAMENTO ST
1531 SACRAMENTO ST 1518 BUENA
AVE
1521
BUENA
AVE
1522
BUENA
AVE
(E) SHADOW

OUTLINES THE

EXTEND OF (E)
SHADOW

WITHOUT

MASS OF

NEIGHBORING

BUILDINGS
GARAGE @ 1525

SACRAMENTO ST

S A C R A M E N T O S T R E E T

B U E N A

A V E N U E
1527 SACRAMENTO ST
1525 SACRAMENTO ST
1529

SACRAMENTO
ST
1517 BUENA
AVE
1521 SACRAMENTO ST
1531 SACRAMENTO ST 1518 BUENA
AVE
1521
BUENA
AVE
1522
BUENA
AVE
(E) SHADOW

OUTLINES THE

EXTEND OF (E)
SHADOW

WITHOUT

MASS OF

NEIGHBORING

BUILDINGS

BEDROOM
UTIL. GARAGE
(N) SHADOW(E) SHADOW
GARAGE @ 1525

SACRAMENTO ST

S A C R A M E N T O S T R E E T

B U E N A

A V E N U E
1527 SACRAMENTO ST
1525 SACRAMENTO ST
1529

SACRAMENTO
ST
1517 BUENA
AVE
1521 SACRAMENTO ST
1531 SACRAMENTO ST 1518 BUENA
AVE
1521
BUENA
AVE
1522
BUENA
AVE
(N) SHADOW
(N) ADDITION

OUTLINES THE

EXTEND OF
(N) SHADOW

WITHOUT

MASS OF

NEIGHBORING

BUILDINGS
(E) SHADOW
(HOUSE ONLY)
GARAGE @ 1525

SACRAMENTO ST

S A C R A M E N T O S T R E E T

B U E N A

A V E N U E
1527 SACRAMENTO ST
1525 SACRAMENTO ST
1529

SACRAMENTO
ST
1517 BUENA
AVE
1521 SACRAMENTO ST
1518 BUENA
AVE
1521
BUENA
AVE
1522
BUENA
AVE
1531 SACRAMENTO ST
(E) SHADOW

OUTLINES THE

EXTEND OF (E)
SHADOW

WITHOUT

MASS OF

NEIGHBORING

BUILDINGS

LIVING ROOM BEDROOM CLOSETBATH BEDROOM BEDROOM
(N) SHADOW(E) SHADOW

BEDROOM CLOSETBATH BEDROOM BEDROOMLIVING ROOM
(N) SHADOW(E) SHADOW
SCALE: 1/32" = 1'-0"SCALE: 1/32" = 1'-0" SCALE: 1/32" = 1'-0" SCALE: 1/32" = 1'-0"SCALE: 1/32" = 1'-0" SCALE: 1/32" = 1'-0" SCALE: 1/32" = 1'-0"
SCALE: 1/32" = 1'-0"

PROPOSED SHADOW STUDY PROPOSED SHADOW STUDY PROPOSED SHADOW STUDY 2A 2B 2CEXISTING SHADOW STUDY EXISTING SHADOW STUDY EXISTING SHADOW STUDY 1A 1B 1C
JUNE 21 @ 7:47 AM
(2 HOURS AFTER SUNRISE) JUNE 21 @ 12:00 PM (NOON)
JUNE 21 @ 6:35 PM
(2 HOURS BEFORE SUNSET)
JUNE 21 @ 7:47 AM
(2 HOURS AFTER SUNRISE) JUNE 21 @ 12:00 PM (NOON)
JUNE 21 @ 6:35 PM
(2 HOURS BEFORE SUNSET)
3A 3B 3CJUNE 21 @ 7:47 AM
(2 HOURS AFTER SUNRISE)
EXISTING 1529 SACRAMENTO

NORTH ELEVATION
JUNE 21 @ 12:00 PM (NOON) JUNE 21 @ 6:35 PM
(2 HOURS BEFORE SUNSET)
EXISTING 1529 SACRAMENTO

NORTH ELEVATION
EXISTING 1529 SACRAMENTO

NORTH ELEVATION

SHADOW STUDY DIAGRAMS

NORTH NORTH NORTH

NORTHNORTHNORTH

PROPOSED SHADOW STUDY
MARCH 13 @ 12:00 PM (NOON)
NORTH
1D
MARCH 13 @ 12:00 PM (NOON)
NORTH
2D EXISTING SHADOW STUDY
3C MARCH 13 @ 12:00 PM (NOON)
EXISTING 1525 SACRAMENTO

SOUTH ELEVATION
NOTE:

NO NEW SHADOWS CAST TO 1529 SACRAMENTO
ON DECEMBER 21 AT ANY TIME

08.17.20 1
NOTE: SHADOW ON ELEVATION

SHADED ARE

NOT SHADOWS CAST BY
1527 SACRAMENTO BUT BY

THE NEIGHBOR'S OWN HOUSE
EXISTING 1525 SACRAMENTO

SOUTH ELEVATION
JUNE 21 @ 12:00 PM (NOON)4B 02.09.21
2 NOTE:

NO EXISTING AND PROPOSED

SHADOWS CAST ON
1525 SACRAMENTO FROM
1527 SACRAMENTO. ALL
SHADOWS CAST ON 1525 ARE

FROM ITS OWN WALLS/
EAVES.

SHADOW ON ELEVATION

SHADED ARE

NOT SHADOWS CAST BY
1527 SACRAMENTO BUT BY

THE NEIGHBOR'S OWN HOUSE

02.09.21 2

Page 30 of 63 ends

220
GSPublisherVersion 0.0.100.100
JY

ADDITION & REMODEL FOR

ANNA TALAMO & JONATHAN

LIPSCHUTZ
1527 SACRAMENTO STREET
BERKELEY, CA 94702

02.26.20 18026

0.3 of
drawn by
datejob address
job number
drawing title sheet
1250 ADDISON STREET - STUDIO 210

JASON KALDIS
ARCHITECT, INC.

BERKELEY, CA 94702
PH (510) 549-3584 FX (510) 549-3574
[email protected]
AUP APPLICATION SET 02.26.20
AUP APPLICATION SET REV1 08.17.201

08.17.20 AUP APPLICATION SET REV2 02.09.212

02.09.21 GARAGE @ 1525

SACRAMENTO ST

S A C R A M E N T O S T R E E T

B U E N A

A V E N U E
1527 SACRAMENTO ST
1525 SACRAMENTO ST
1529

SACRAMENTO
ST
1517 BUENA
AVE
1521 SACRAMENTO ST
1531 SACRAMENTO ST 1518 BUENA
AVE
1521
BUENA
AVE
1522
BUENA
AVE
(N) SHADOW
(N) ADDITION

OUTLINES THE

EXTEND OF
(N) SHADOW

WITHOUT

MASS OF

NEIGHBORING

BUILDINGS
(E) SHADOW
(HOUSE ONLY)
GARAGE @ 1525

SACRAMENTO ST

S A C R A M E N T O S T R E E T

B U E N A

A V E N U E
1527 SACRAMENTO ST
1525 SACRAMENTO ST
1529

SACRAMENTO
ST
1517 BUENA
AVE
1521 SACRAMENTO ST
1531 SACRAMENTO ST 1518 BUENA
AVE
1521
BUENA
AVE
1522
BUENA
AVE
(N) SHADOW
(N) ADDITION

OUTLINES THE

EXTEND OF
(N) SHADOW

WITHOUT

MASS OF

NEIGHBORING

BUILDINGS
(E) SHADOW
(HOUSE ONLY)
GARAGE @ 1525

SACRAMENTO ST

S A C R A M E N T O S T R E E T

B U E N A

A V E N U E
1527 SACRAMENTO ST
1525 SACRAMENTO ST
1529

SACRAMENTO
ST
1517 BUENA
AVE
1521 SACRAMENTO ST
1531 SACRAMENTO ST 1518 BUENA
AVE
1521
BUENA
AVE
1522
BUENA
AVE
(N) SHADOW
(N) ADDITION

OUTLINES THE

EXTEND OF
(N) SHADOW

WITHOUT

MASS OF

NEIGHBORING

BUILDINGS
(E) SHADOW
(HOUSE ONLY)
GARAGE @ 1525

SACRAMENTO ST

S A C R A M E N T O S T R E E T

B U E N A

A V E N U E
1527 SACRAMENTO ST
1525 SACRAMENTO ST
1529

SACRAMENTO
ST
1517 BUENA
AVE
1521 SACRAMENTO ST
1531 SACRAMENTO ST 1518 BUENA
AVE
1521
BUENA
AVE
1522
BUENA
AVE
(E) SHADOW

OUTLINES THE

EXTEND OF (E)
SHADOW

WITHOUT

MASS OF

NEIGHBORING

BUILDINGS
GARAGE @ 1525

SACRAMENTO ST

S A C R A M E N T O S T R E E T

B U E N A

A V E N U E
1527 SACRAMENTO ST
1525 SACRAMENTO ST
1529

SACRAMENTO
ST
1517 BUENA
AVE
1521 SACRAMENTO ST
1531 SACRAMENTO ST 1518 BUENA
AVE
1521
BUENA
AVE
1522
BUENA
AVE
(E) SHADOW

OUTLINES THE

EXTEND OF (E)
SHADOW

WITHOUT

MASS OF

NEIGHBORING

BUILDINGS
GARAGE @ 1525

SACRAMENTO ST

S A C R A M E N T O S T R E E T

B U E N A

A V E N U E
1527 SACRAMENTO ST
1525 SACRAMENTO ST
1529

SACRAMENTO
ST
1517 BUENA
AVE
1521 SACRAMENTO ST
1518 BUENA
AVE
1521
BUENA
AVE
1522
BUENA
AVE
1531 SACRAMENTO ST
(E) SHADOW

OUTLINES THE

EXTEND OF (E)
SHADOW

WITHOUT

MASS OF

NEIGHBORING

BUILDINGS

BEDROOM
UTIL. GARAGE
(N) SHADOW(E) SHADOW

BEDROOM CLOSETBATH BEDROOM BEDROOMLIVING ROOM
(N) SHADOW(E) SHADOW
SCALE: 1/32" = 1'-0"SCALE: 1/32" = 1'-0" SCALE: 1/32" = 1'-0" SCALE: 1/32" = 1'-0"SCALE: 1/32" = 1'-0" SCALE: 1/32" = 1'-0"

PROPOSED SHADOW STUDY PROPOSED SHADOW STUDY PROPOSED SHADOW STUDY 2A 2B 2CEXISTING SHADOW STUDY EXISTING SHADOW STUDY EXISTING SHADOW STUDY 1A 1B 1C
JULY 04 @ 7:47 AM
(2 HOURS AFTER SUNRISE) JULY 04 @ 12:00 PM (NOON)
JULY 04 @ 6:35 PM
(2 HOURS BEFORE SUNSET)
JULY 04 @ 7:47 AM
(2 HOURS AFTER SUNRISE) JULY 04 21 @ 12:00 PM (NOON)
JULY 04 @ 6:35 PM
(2 HOURS BEFORE SUNSET)
3A 3B 3CJULY 04 @ 7:47 AM
(2 HOURS AFTER SUNRISE)
EXISTING 1529 SACRAMENTO

NORTH ELEVATION
JULY 04 @ 12:00 PM (NOON) JULY 04 @ 6:35 PM
(2 HOURS BEFORE SUNSET)
EXISTING 1529 SACRAMENTO

NORTH ELEVATION
EXISTING 1529 SACRAMENTO

NORTH ELEVATION

NORTH NORTH NORTH

NORTHNORTHNORTH

SHADOW STUDY DIAGRAMS
NOTE: NO NEW SHADOW CAST TO 1529 SACRAMENTO

08.17.20 1
NOTE: SHADOW ON ELEVATION

SHADED ARE

NOT SHADOWS CAST BY
1527 SACRAMENTO BUT BY

THE NEIGHBOR'S OWN HOUSE

02.09.21 2
EXISTING 1525 SACRAMENTO

SOUTH ELEVATION
JULY 04 @ 12:00 PM (NOON)5B
NOTE:

NO EXISTING AND PROPOSED

SHADOWS CAST ON
1525 SACRAMENTO FROM
1527 SACRAMENTO. ALL
SHADOWS CAST ON 1525 ARE

FROM ITS OWN WALLS/
EAVES.

SHADOW ON ELEVATION

SHADED ARE

NOT SHADOWS CAST BY
1527 SACRAMENTO BUT BY

THE NEIGHBOR'S OWN HOUSE
2 02.09.21

Page 31 of 63 ends

221
Attachment 2, pt 1

Page 32 of 63 ends

222

Page 33 of 63 ends

223

Page 34 of 63 ends

224

Page 35 of 63 ends

225

Page 36 of 63 ends

226

Page 37 of 63 ends

227

Page 38 of 63 ends

228
2 From: joyce lewis <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2021 11:32 PM
To: City Clerk <[email protected]>
Cc: Michele Liedeker <[email protected]>; Micah Liedeker <[email protected]>; Reggie Lewis <[email protected]>; David Lewis <[email protected]>; lena williams <[email protected]>; [email protected]
Subject: AUP#ZP2020-0034 Appeal Addendum Filing
WARNING: This is not a City of Berkeley email. Do not click links or attachments unless you trust the sender and know the content is safe.

Dear City Clerk,
I am requesting that this addendum email and attached documents be filed together with the appeal filed earlier today in your office.

1. There were procedural problems with the COB. Architect's response received September 13, 2021 - without answering questions as to what % light lost on what specific windows, X hours per day, x days per year. This left us with only about 10 days before public hearing. Specifics are important because that forms the basis of economic loss. ZAB did not require shadow study specifics.

2. Mediation - ZAB dismissed mediation without obtaining any testimony from parties at 1525 or 1529, only giving weight to Appellant’s testimony.

3. COB Planning Email admission they do not apply the applicable BMC as referenced in the appeal filed earlier today.

4. Economic loss in property value.

On Wednesday, October 13, 2021, 12:05:14 PM PDT, joyce lewis <[email protected]> wrote:

To: C
ity Clerk
2180 Milvia St. Berkeley, CA
This letter is an appeal of the ZAB decision.

The basis of the appeal is:

1. No adjustments or suggestions were made by the ZAB to protect the use, enjoyment, property rights, or adverse impact of the tower project on adjacent neighbors, 1525 and 1529 Sacramento Street.

2. Misrepresentation by Appellant that adjacent neighbors were unwilling to compromise.

3. COB acceptance of vague and ambiguous shadow study that did not specify in its findings report explicit details about the extent of shadowing on each window.

4. COB refusal to provide an honest and thorough analysis of BMC 23B.28.050.

5. Illegal unconstitutional taking. There will be an adverse economic impact to of use, quiet enjoyment, of 1525 Sacramento. Erection of the tower will lead to higher PGE energy bills due to shading and shadowing and blockage of natural solar heat. 1525 will incur the cost of solar installation to avert loss of heat. Erection of the tower will diminish access to natural light leading to excess costs associated with caregiving. Independent living activities will become more difficult due to inability to see, and greater assistance will be needed for 1525 Sacramento St. Costs to install skylights for increased natural lighting.

6. 1527 has refused any design modifications to eliminate the loss of shadowing, heat, and natural light for 1525 Sacramento.

Joyce Lewis
[email protected]
Sent fr
om my iPhone
Attachment 2, pt 2

Page 39 of 63 ends

229
June 28, 2021
To:

Planning Department – City of Berkeley, CA
RE:

Appeal of Decision to grant Proposed Project at 1527 Sacramento Street AUP# ZP2020-0034
For t
he appeal fee payment: We can be reached in the daytime at the following numbers for credit card payment:
510-524-5949 (hom
e) or
cell phone (415-378-3704).

This a
ppeal is due by July 6, 2021. Thus, it is being timely filed.

All issues
raised in the prior filings with the City of Berkeley are hereby incorporated into this appeal. The points below are provided as a summary. We trust all Zoning Board members shall undertake to review the complete file on this matter.

We write
as owners of the property at 1529 Sacramento Street, a split-level dwelling that is merely 6’ away from the proposed construction. We appeal the decision of the City of Berkeley Planning Department for the captioned project at 1527 Sacramento Street.

1. City o
f Berkeley Planning Department did not respond to our material questions We sent questions to the City of Berkeley regarding revised plan as (Letter dated My 13, 2021). Key questions include how many shadow studies were done, the source of each of the shadow studies, and why only the final shadow study suddenly reaches a different conclusion – that the adjacent propert(ies) are causing shadows. We also requested full copies of the shadow studies. These were not provided.

The conc
lusion of the final shadow study is inconsistent with past shadow studies. Even if the original proposal was modified, the question remains why all of a sudden does it conclude that shadows present are caused by the existing structure of adjacent propert(ies). Why did the prior shadow studies not reach the same conclusion? Also, the shadow studies are supposed to demonstrate not what shadows are already there, but what shadows would the proposed construction create.

The City
of Berkeley never responded to the questions we posed about the shadow study that we did receive incomplete information information about. Given the lack of transparency and the sudden final conclusion that shadows were being caused by the adjacent propert(ies) and not the proposed structure, we requested time to do our own shadow study. We should have been given time to do so and to seek expert review of the studies that were requested but never received. Especially with the pandemic, extra time is needed to accomplish these tasks.

Page 40 of 63 ends

230

2. The City of Berkeley is not following its own ordinance. The proposed project cannot, by law, be approved because Berkeley Municipal Code Section 23B.28.050 compels the City of Berkeley NOT to approved a project that is detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morality, comfort, and general welfare of the adjacent properties and neighborhood AND is detrimental and injurious to adjacent properties.

An exte
nsive review of the applicability of that ordinance to the facts of this proposed site – wherein disabled persons are living on both sides of the proposed construction, within 6’ of 1527 Sacramento Street – was submitted June 21, 2021.

Documentation was provided to the City of Berkeley summarizing the disabilities of residents of the adjacent properties and the impact it would have on their health and safety.

The City
of Berkeley staff has indicated that they do not have staff in their office who have training or expertise with regard to the factors required to be considered by this ordinance. When asked how they would apply this code section to this proposed project, the response was they that would look at past precedents. When asked if there are any precedents about such a proposed project when disabled residents live within 6’ of the construction site, there was no response.

A petitio
n signed by 10 people living on the same east side of the street, between Cedar and Rose also was submitted to the City of Berkeley, addressing concerns about public safety, health of residents, impact on the life expectancy and fragile health of adjacent neighbors and negative impact on the character of the neighborhood, including the creation of socio-economic inequities and perpetuation of racial inequalities. This is in contrast to the signatories on the proposed construction – whose houses are not situated in a place that would be affected by the proposal and its execution.

3. Alterna
tive property development strategies have not been sincerely undertaken.

Our letter of May 13, 2021 details these objections. We note the architect indicates that it is an ‘insurmountable problem’ if the accessory structure would be removed as it is used for storage and laundry and for the complying parking space. The accessory structure in fact does not provide a parking space. The ‘problems’ are not insurmountable and adjacent neighbors both voiced to the City of Berkeley their willingness to sign onto a proposal that would forego a second story in favor of expanded living space for the residents/owners of 1527 Sacramento Street at the ground level, even if a variance would need to be requested for lot coverage.

Alternativ
e property development strategies were not discussed with adjacent neighbors in good faith. When we asked to engage in a conversation with all three families at 1527, 1525 and 1529 Sacramento Street so we could all discuss how the

Page 41 of 63 ends

231
plans affect both adjacent neighbors and what modifications would work for the enjoyment of everyone’s home – including light, privacy, character of neighborhood, concerns about health, safety welfare, etc – especially for the homebound and disabled residents, the response was as follows in an e-mail from the residentsa/owners of 1527 Sacramento Street to adjacent neighbors – the Lewis family and the Liedeker family on June 5, 2020:

“To be frank, it is both preposterous and presumptuous to think we should have consulted you in any way about OUR home renovation. Period.”

4. The approval of this project institutionally widens both socio-economic and racial inequities in Berkeley.

Approval basically means, if you have the money, you can do whatever you want without regard to the health and well-being of the adjacent neighbors and to the neighborhood.

The impact of this particular proposal is grave. This project could literally take away a life.

Black lives matter. Black property matters. African American men in the United States have a significantly lower life expectancy than white men. The neighbor most affected by this project should be treasured by this community, not trampled by unchecked growth and lack of civility and concern for others.

The ordinance that the City of Berkeley continues to ignore, compels us to consider our community development more wholistically. Approval of this project is not only illegal but immoral. The City of Berkeley could and should do better by its citizens – ALL its citizens.

A Berkeleyside opinon published June 13, 2017 exposed how Berkeley’s zoning laws wall off communities of color, seniors, low-income people and others. The opinion calls out Berkeley for zoning laws that have historically used to exclude African Americans from certain parts of the city. The African American population in Berkeley has steadily declined. The pressure on seniors and people with disabilities has mounted.

This proposed construction reeks of all that is wrong about neighbors building skyward to capture views while overshadowing neighbors – taking away their light, privacy and changing the character of the community – both visually and morally. When neighbors do not care about the proposed impact of their growth on their neighbors, the City of Berkeley must step in to support the peace, health, safety and well-being of those other community members.

Sincerely,

Micah and Michel Liedeker
1529 Sacrmento Street
Berkeley, CA

Page 42 of 63 ends

232
1 ZAB Public Hearing – 09/23/2021
Good e
vening,
Let’s be clear: This project is does not add housing in Berkeley. It expands living space for 3 residents. Not one resident who lives on this east side of the block approves of this project.

Not one. Signatures and statements gathered by the applicant are from people who shall not be directly affected. Their views should not hold weight.

We appreciate all of you participating in this process. We know it takes time and energy to review the documents in all these cases in Berkeley. We trust you have done so diligently in this unique situation – where adjacent neighbors include a homebound elder living just 8’ from the proposed construction site, whose fragile health and life expectancy is directly threatened by this project, and a disabled young adult, our daughter, living within 6’. Our daughter has a serious, chronic health condition – impacted by stress, loud noises, disruption and chaos. As noted in prior correspondence, other family members also have chronic health conditions. We should value the lives of the elderly and disabled in our community, not make them victims of unchecked growth. Think about your parents. What if this project were proposed next to an elder that is dear to you?
Applicants
were made aware of these unique health and safety concerns at very start of this process. Their response?
“To be
frank, it is both preposterous and presumptuous to think we should have consulted you in any way about OUR home renovation. Period.”
Contrary to the perspective of the applicants. Health, safety, well-being, peace, and comfort of the adjacent neighbors are required to be considered in our city. Indeed a review of morality is specifically required to be considered by the city’s municipal code 23B.28.050. The city already admitted in its e-mail to me on July 1, 2020 that, despite that ordinance, it does not take health into consideration when the use is conforming (e.g. residential use in a residential zone). There you have it -an admission by the city that it does not apply its own ordinances. An admission that sets the city up for a lawsuit.

Legally, all ordinances must be applied - not just those ordinances technical in nature. We live in neighborhoods, not technical drawings. That statue calls for equity. Not to apply it creates inequity by design. We appeal to your legal responsibilities. We also appeal to your sense of morality – as required by the ordinance. We appeal to human decency.

Page 43 of 63 ends

233
2 What should happen in this case:

1. ZAB should TABLE this matter until a thorough application of BMC 23B. 28.050 is properly made. We have a public health department. If the planning office has no expertise to apply the city’s ordinance, the city itself has that resource. There are a lot of studies about how light and heat affect people, including people with varied skin coloring profiles and health conditions. Certainly, this minimal effort should be made to apply an ordinance that is meant to ensure equity.

2. ZAB should TABLE this matter until we adjacent neighbors are provided with a clear narrative from the architect stating window X and window Y, etc. shall be shaded by what specific % , for what specific hours of the day, for how many days of the year, what days of the year. Vague admissions that adjacent neighbors shall lose light (and thus heat we need to remember) are insufficient.

3. Once that clear narrative is provided, adjacent neighbors should be allotted a sufficient amount of time to do their own shadow study by an objective source – separate from an architect who has an active interest in the matter.

4. On the basis of concrete findings, the applicants should compensate adjacent neighbors with means to recapture lost light and heat. For example, installation of a skylight or repositioning of windows or replacement of windows for better heat and noise insulation. This should be accomplished prior to inception of any approved construction.

5. The construction schedule should be scaled back in light of the unique health issues of the adjacent neighbors. Construction should not be allowed on the weekends and reduced hours should be applied during the week. The COB department of public health would be a good resource to turn to for consultation as to what would be an allowable amount of noise and disruption in the face of the relevant health concerns.

6. Given public health concerns during the pandemic: public health practices may vary over time. To avoid confusion and inform the neighborhood, current guidelines should be posted and a specific phone number should be made available for reporting of violations.

7. Given the unique safety concerns regarding the adjacent disabled neighbor with behavior issues -unable to control her impulse to pick up debris, a phone number should be made available to call for clean-up when the COB conditions attached to this project are not being met.

TIME!!!!!!

Page 44 of 63 ends

234
3 Additio
nal notes if time allows:

Why is this situation unique?
The three plots in question are unique on our block. On the eastern side of Sacramento Street, between Cedar and Rose, the other properties include driveways between the houses – creating more space for light and air. However, there are no driveways between adjacent neighbors and this proposed sight. I can literally stand between our house and the applicants and touch both houses.

Another
unique aspect: There are homebound and disabled residents on both sides. Mr. Lewis – an elder in our neighborhood, and in our city, is entitle to quality of life. Such a large project would greatly impact his peace, health, welfare, comfort and well-being – even threaten his life expectancy. How is this moral?
Mr. Lew
is’s health is a matter of interest to all of us and any impact on his health should be of concern to the City of Berkeley.

Think a
bout your parents. What if this project proposed next to an elder that is dear to you? Would you want all the noise, disturbance, dust and debris and a swarm of people around your parent?
The s
hadow studies show significant impact on his light and heat along the entire south side of Mr. Lewis’ property. Every single window is negatively impacted.

How c
an you impose this construction on a homebound elder? This is a time in his life when he should be enjoying the fruits of his labor and the joy of his close family.

On top of
the seizures, our daughter’s condition results in attendant severe behavior challenges. Construction of this proposed project creates grave safety concerns. She has extraordinary vision and her impulsivity causes her to aggressively go, without any thought of safety, to grab an item. Any slight object left unattended by construction crews next door creates a serious safety issue for our family. We have, on many occasions, had to follow our daughter when she elopes and runs into the street in her compulsion to pick up a small speck of paper or object.

With re
gard to our property, it appears that every single window on the north side of our house would lose light and heat. We live in a split-level house with two bedrooms and full bath on the

Page 45 of 63 ends

235
4 second story. Two out of the three windows on our second story would, as a direct result of the proposed project, face a wall.

The impact on our light and warmth has not been concretely defined. Which window for how many hours per day, how many days per week, how many days of the year. This question has not been answered.

I can tell you that the every single window on the other side of our house is on the first floor facing south, and is covered by glazed glass. Why? Because the adjacent neighbors there wanted to have a third child. We did not oppose the project because we understood their need for expansion when they wanted to expand their family. We acted in support of our neighbors, our neighborhood. However, this project before us is different. The project in this case expands living space for the 3 person family that already lives there.

If we are accused of being loud and insistent in our appeal of this project, then that is right and good. We have been working on managing and reducing our daughter’s seizures for 20 years.

She has been through unspeakable pain and anguish and challenges. If we did not stand up for her rights to good health and our rights to be healthy in order to care for her, then we would be negligent parents.

What else is unique about this project?

There have been many procedural missteps by the COB in this case.

For example: Our appeal, filed July 6, 2021 was not forwarded to the applicants until September 9, 2021, over three months late. A response from the architect was then received September 13, 2021 – leaving us less than ten days to review and understand the response to our questions. Where is the equity in that?

As a matter of fact, on specific technical question: after a year and half we adjacent neighbors still do not have a concrete answer to how each window shall lose what percentage of light for how many hours a day, what hours of the day, for how many days a year.

The applicants may accuse us of delaying their project. According to the city’s website, however, the city itself had a lot of technical questions. The final project application was not submitted until April 27, 2021. A decision issued on June 14, 2021.

Distinguished ZAB members, If this project goes forward, it signals that:

8. The COB is, by its own admission, not applying its own ordinance and the ZAB is complicit in that cherry-picking of ordinances to apply.

9. The COB supports growth for the few and resourced over human life, safety, health, well-being, and comfort.

10. The COB cares not about its elderly.

Page 46 of 63 ends

236
5 11. The COB cares not about its disabled citizens for whom construction and its consequences have particular and unique consequences.

12. Adjacent neighbors can take away the light and heat from the elderly and disabled without consequences.

We have
extended an invitation for the ZAB members to visit the site. None has done so.

A site visit is critical to understand the scale and impact in this unique situation. Perhaps every application imposes inconvenience on adjacent neighbors, but this case goes beyond that –to life itself for the elderly and disabled.

We have
asked ZAB members to disclose any relationship with the architect and applicants in the proposed project. This request for transparency has been ignored.

Page 47 of 63 ends

237

Z ONIN G

A DJUSTMENTS
B OARD
Staff Report
1947 Center Stre
et, Second Floor, Berkeley, CA 94704 Tel: 510.981.7410 TDD: 510.981.7474 Fax: 510.981.7420 E-mail: [email protected]

FOR BOARD ACTION
SEPTEMBER 23, 2021
1527 Sacramento Street
Appeal
of Zoning Officer’s Decision to approve Administrative Use Permit #ZP2020-0034 to add 1) a 520 square foot second -story addition with an average height of 21 feet 9 inches at the rear; 2) a major residential addition of more than 15 percent of the lot area, including 44 square feet at the first floor; 3) legalize the enclosure of the front porch in the non -conforming front setback; and 4) add an unenclosed hot tub, on a 2,783 square-foot lot that contains a one-story 824-square-foot single-family dwelling.

I. Background
A. Land Use Designat
ions:
• General Plan: LDR – Low Density Residential
• Zoning: R-1 – Single Family Residential District
B. Zoning Perm
its Required:
• Administrative Use Permit pursuant to Berkeley Municipal Code (BMC) Section 23D.16.030 to construct a major residential addition.
• Administrative Use Permit pursuant to BMC Section 23D.16.070.C to construct an addition above 14 ft. in average height.
• Administrative Use Permit pursuant to BMC Section 23C.04.070.B to make alterations in a non-conforming yard.
• Administrative Use Permit pursuant to BMC Section 23D.08.060.C to add an unenclosed hot tub.

C. CEQA Recom
mendation: It is staff’s recommendation that the project is categorically exempt pursuant to Section 15301 of the CEQA Guidelines (“Existing Facilities”). The determination is made by ZAB.

D. Parties I
nvolved:
• Applicant: Jason Kaldis, 1250 Addison Street #210, Berkeley • Owner: Anna Talamo and Jonathan Lipschutz, 1527 Sacramento Street, Berkeley ATTACHMENT 3

Page 48 of 63 ends

238
ZONING ADJUSTMENTS BOARD 1527 Sacramento Street
September 23, 2021 Page 2 of 13

File: G:\LANDUSE\Projects by Address\Sacramento\1527\PLN2021-0029\DOCUMENT FINALS\2021-09-23_ZAB_Staff Report_1527 Sacramento.docx
• Appellants: Sterling Lewis, Joyce Lewis , Reginald Lewis, Lena Williams, David Lewis, 1525 Sacramento Street, Berkeley (PLN2021-0028)
• Appellants: Micah and Michele Liedeker, 1529 Sacramento Street, Berkeley (PLN2021-0029)

Figure 1: Vicinity Map

Appellant 1, 1525
Sacramento

Project Site, 1527
Sacramento

North
Appellant 2, 1529
Sacramento

Page 49 of 63 ends

239
ZONING ADJUSTMENTS BOARD 1527 Sacramento Street
September 23, 2021 Page 3 of 13

File: G:\LANDUSE\Projects by Address\Sacramento\1527\PLN2021-0029\DOCUMENT FINALS\2021-09-23_ZAB_Staff Report_1527 Sacramento.docx
Figure 2: Site Plan

North

Page 50 of 63 ends

240
ZONING ADJUSTMENTS BOARD 1527 Sacramento Street
September 23, 2021 Page 4 of 13

File: G:\LANDUSE\Projects by Address\Sacramento\1527\PLN2021-0029\DOCUMENT FINALS\2021-09-23_ZAB_Staff Report_1527 Sacramento.docx
Figure 3: Floor Area Diagram

Table 1: Land Use Information
Location Existing Use Zoning District General Plan Designation Subject Property
Single-family dwelling R-1 LDR (Low Density Residential) Surrounding
Properties
North
South
East
West

North

Page 51 of 63 ends

241
ZONING ADJUSTMENTS BOARD 1527 Sacramento Street
September 23, 2021 Page 5 of 13

File: G:\LANDUSE\Projects by Address\Sacramento\1527\PLN2021-0029\DOCUMENT FINALS\2021-09-23_ZAB_Staff Report_1527 Sacramento.docx
Table 2: Special Characteristics
Characteristic Applies to
Project? Explanation
Housing Accountability Act
(Govt. Code 65589.5(j)) No
The project is not a “housing development project,” as
no additional units would be created. The project is to expand an existing unit on the site. Therefore, the HAA findings do not apply to this project.

Coast Live Oaks No There are no existing oak trees on the site.

Creeks
(Per BMC Section 17.08.045) No No creek or culvert, as defined by BMC Chapter 17.08, exists on or within 30’ of the site.

Historic Resources No
The project does not propose the demolition or
substantial alteration of a building over 40 years old.

Staff approved a waiver from the Historical Resource
Evaluation requirement and it was determined that the
building is not likely to be a resource.

Housing Accountability Act
(Govt. Code 65589.5(j)) No
The project is not a “housing development project,” as
no additional units would be created. The project is to expand an existing dwelling on the site. Therefore, the HAA findings do not apply to this project.

Rent Controlled Units
(Per BMC Chapter 13.76) No
The existing residential building is a single-family
dwelling, and thus not subject to the Rent Control
Ordinance.

Residential Preferred Parking
(RPP)
(Per BMC Chapter 14.72)
No The project site is not located in a zone of the
Residential Preferred Parking program.

Seismic Hazards Mapping Act
(Per State Hazards Mapping Act) No
The project site is not located in an area susceptible to liquefaction, fault rupture, or landslide, as defined by the State Seismic Hazards Mapping Act (SHMA). Thus,
the project is not subject to additional review to comply with the Act.

Soil/Groundwater
Contamination No
The project site is not located in the City’s Hazards
Management Area and the site is not on any list
maintained pursuant to the Cortese List.

Transit and Bicycle Access Yes
The project site is within 0.2 miles of AC transit routes 688, and 52 on Sacramento Street and Cedar Street.

The site is within 0.4 miles of the Ohlone Greenway.

Also, the project site is approximately 0.3 miles from
the North Berkeley BART station.

Table 3: Project Chronology
Date Action
April 28, 2020 Application submitted
May 28, 2020 Application deemed incomplete
August 19, 2020 Revised application materials submitted September 17, 2020 Application deemed incomplete
March 24, 2021 Revised application materials submitted
April 23, 2021 Application deemed incomplete
April 23, 2021 Revised application materials submitted
April 27, 2021 Revised application materials submitted
June 14, 2021 Notice of Administrative Decision issued

Page 52 of 63 ends

242
ZONING ADJUSTMENTS BOARD 1527 Sacramento Street
September 23, 2021 Page 6 of 13

File: G:\LANDUSE\Projects by Address\Sacramento\1527\PLN2021-0029\DOCUMENT FINALS\2021-09-23_ZAB_Staff Report_1527 Sacramento.docx
July 2, 2021 First appeal received
July 6, 2021 Second appeal received
September 9, 2021 Public hearing notices mailed/posted
September 23, 2021 ZAB hearing

Table 4: Development Standards
Standard
BMC Sections 23D.16.070-
080
Existing
Proposed/
Approved by
Zoning Officer
Permitted/
Required
Lot Area (sq. ft.) 2,783 No Change 5,000 min.

Gross Floor Area (sq. ft.) 824 1,388 N/A
Dwelling Units (Parcel) 1 1 1 max.

Bedrooms (Parcel) 2 2 4 max.
(without AUP or UPPH)
Building
Height
Average 20’-4” 21’-9”
AUP for residential
additions greater than
14’
(28’ max. average height
w/AUP)
Stories 1 2 3 max.

Building
Setbacks
Front 12’-5” No Change 20’ min.

Rear 48’-9” 43’-11” 20’ min.

Left (North) Side 4’-3” 4’-3” 3’ min.

Right (South)
Side 2’-1” 3’ 3’ min.

Lot Coverage (%) 40.1 40.0 40 max.

Usable Open Space (sq. ft.) 564 771 400 min.
(400 per unit)
Automobile Parking 1 1 1 min.

II. Project Setting

A. Neighborhood/Area Description: The subject site is located on the east side of Sacramento Street, between Rose Street and Cedar Street, in a residential neighborhood that consists of single-family dwellings that range from one to two stories in height. The rear of the lot faces Buena Avenue. See Figure 1: Vicinity Map.

B. Site Conditions: The project site is rectangular, with a 25- foot wide lot line along Sacramento Street and 111-foot depth. The parcel is currently developed with an 824 square-foot, one-story single-family dwelling with a covered porch at the front of the lot and an uncovered deck at the rear along the south side property line. There is a garage along the right rear (southeast) corner of the lot, which is accessed from Buena Avenue. There is an existing 6-foot tall wood fence along the perimeter of the property in the rear. There are seven existing trees on the site; however, there are no protected

Page 53 of 63 ends

243
ZONING ADJUSTMENTS BOARD 1527 Sacramento Street
September 23, 2021 Page 7 of 13

File: G:\LANDUSE\Projects by Address\Sacramento\1527\PLN2021-0029\DOCUMENT FINALS\2021-09-23_ZAB_Staff Report_1527 Sacramento.docx
Coast Live Oaks. The parcel is non- conforming to current zoning standards in terms of minimum lot size, lot coverage, and building setbacks from the front (west) and right (right) side property lines.

III. Project Description

The project approved by the Zoning Officer would construct a 564 square-foot addition, consisting of a 520 square-foot second floor addition setback approximately 35 feet from the front property line, and a 44 square-f oot first floor addition at the rear of the existing residence. The existing average building height is 12 feet 3 inches. With the addition, the new average height would be 2 1 feet 9 inches. The existing dwelling has two bedrooms and one bathroom; with the addition the two bedrooms would move to the second floor, along with a bathroom, and at the first floor there would be a new family room.

A hot tub would be added to the rear yard, 1 foot 6 inches from the north (left) property , and 7 feet from the rear property line. The storage shed attached to the garage would be removed to bring the lot coverage into compliance (40 percent). The existing front porch was enclosed around 2015 and is located within the required 20- foot front yard. The enclosure would be legalized with an Administrative Use Permit and established with a subsequent building permit.

In addition, a new deck would be added off of the rear of the main building, less than 30 inches above existing grade, and three feet from the right (south) setback (therefore not subject to discretionary review),

IV. Community Discussion

A. Neighbor/Community Concerns: Due to Shelter in Place , a pre- application poster was not erected by the applicant. The applicant shared the plans with the owners and occupants of five of the seven confronting and abutting properties in-person in early March 2020. The applicant sent plans to the neighbors at 1529 and 1525 Sacramento Street via certified mail in early April 2020. On May 13, 2020, staff received a letter from the owners of 1529 Sacramento Street stating concerns that are similar to their appeal points listed below. Staff virtually met with the appellants in June of 2020 to discuss their concerns and the AUP process. The Staff Project Manager met with the appellants for a site visit at their properties in August 2020, and the Land Use Planning Manager/Zoning Officer meet with them in November 2020. The appellants also emailed Staff with questions and concerns and staff provided responses. On June 14, 2021, Staff posted the Notice of Administrative Decision at the site and two nearby locations, and sent notices to abutting and confronting property owners and occupants and to interested neighborhood groups.

B. Zoning Officer’s Decision to Approve: The Zoning Officer determined that the proposed project w ould not be detrimental to those living and working in the neighborhood because it would meet the R -1 district standards for maximum residential density, height, lot coverage, and useable open space, and because the

Page 54 of 63 ends

244
ZONING ADJUSTMENTS BOARD 1527 Sacramento Street
September 23, 2021 Page 8 of 13

File: G:\LANDUSE\Projects by Address\Sacramento\1527\PLN2021-0029\DOCUMENT FINALS\2021-09-23_ZAB_Staff Report_1527 Sacramento.docx
project would not worsen the non- conforming setbacks. The proportions, setbacks, and roof slopes maintain the character of the existing property and surrounding neighborhood. Further, the proposed addition will not create detrimental air, views, light, or privacy impacts (see Attachment 1).

The first appeal of the administrative decision was filed on July 2, 2021 by the owner and family of the owner of 1525 Sacramento Street (six people). The second appeal was filed on July 6, 2021 by the owners of 1529 Sacramento Street (two people).

C. Public Notice: On August 25, 2021, Staff notified the applicant and appellant that the public hearing date had been tentatively scheduled for September 23, 202 1. On September 9, 2021, the City mailed public hearing notices to all adjacent property owners and occupants within 300 feet of the subject property, and to interested neighborhood organizations. Staff also posted the Notice of Public Hearing at two locations within the immediate vicinity of the subject site. A t the time of this writing, Staff has received fourteen letters of support regarding this project (Attachment 8).

V. Appeal Issues and Analysis

A. Appeal Issue 1 – Shadow Studies. The following comments were submitted in regards to the shadow studies:

1. The appellants at 1525 Sacramento state that the applicant sought different shadow studies until they concluded that 1525 Sacramento causes its own shadowing, rather than the proposed addition. The appellants state that the short overhang at “1525 is part of the bungalow design; it does not cause shadowing.” In addition, the appellants at 1529 Sacramento add that the conclusion of the final shadow study is inconsistent with past shadow studies (Attachment 6 , page 1, #1).

2. The appellants contend that staff failed to analyze how the proposed project will cause severe shading at 1525 Sacramento.

3. The appellants assert that a request for a copy of the shadow study was ignored.

4. T hey state that they were not granted additional time to obtain a separate shadow study and independent analysis (Attachment 5, page 2, #1).

Staff Analysis:

1. In May of 2021, both appellants raised concerns about changing shadow studies.

Staff responded to their concerns via email on May 25, 2021 (see Attachment 4).

In the May 25 response, staff explained that there are not different shadow studies, but revised versions of the same studies. The shadow studies were required to be revised to follow submittal requirements
1 and correct typos . It is common for
applications to be deemed incomplete, and often additional materials or revisions are required. Consistent with standard submittal requirements, the shadow studies show the existing shadows at three times of the year (summer solstice, winter

1 https://www.cityofberkeley.info/uploadedFiles/Planning_and_Development/Level_3_- _Land_Use_Division/Shadow%20Study%20Instructions.pdf

Page 55 of 63 ends

245
ZONING ADJUSTMENTS BOARD 1527 Sacramento Street
September 23, 2021 Page 9 of 13

File: G:\LANDUSE\Projects by Address\Sacramento\1527\PLN2021-0029\DOCUMENT FINALS\2021-09-23_ZAB_Staff Report_1527 Sacramento.docx
solstice, and near the time of the submittal), and three times of day (two hours after sunrise, noon, and two hours before sunset), and show the proposed shadows caused by the addition at the same three times of year and times of day.

Shadow studies are analyzed after complete and accurate information is provided.

While there are multiple days of analysis there is one conclusion: there is no detriment to neighboring properties. This conclusion is found in the Findings section of the Notice of Administrative Decision (Attachment 1).

Depending on the angle of the sun, it is possible for a home to shade itself. Per page one of the shadow study instructions, shadows two hours after sunrise, and two hours before sunset on the winter solstice, and at noon throughout the year would generally be pointed north, so a dwelling would cast shadows onto its south façade two hours after sunrise, and two hours before sunset on the winter solstice, and at noon throughout the year. The applicant submitted photos on May 24, 2021 which were taken on July 3, 2020 , which is within a few weeks of the summer solstice, and thus the shadows would be in nearly the same place as the June 21 shadow studies. The shadow studies submitted on August 19, 2020, and March 24, 2021 show that 1525 Sacramento casts shadows onto itself to varying extents two hours after sunrise, and two hours before sunset on the winter solstice, and at noon on the winter solstice, summer solstice, and March 13 (near the time of initial submittal when the application was prepared).

2. Analysis of the increased shadows from the proposed project was included in the Notice of Decision (Attachment 1) and is based on the shadow studies on s heets

0.1-0.3 at the end of Attachment 2. 1525 Sacramento is adjacent to the north of 1527 Sacramento, and it is setback approximately 5 feet from the shared property line. The potential impacts are summarized as follows:
• Two hours after sunrise on the winter solstice (December 21), shadows on the south side of the dwelling at 1525 Sacramento Street will increase and cover a window in the living room, front bedroom, closet, bathroom window, and two bedrooms near the rear.
• At noon on the winter solstice, shadows on the south side of the dwelling at 1525 Sacramento Street will increase and cover windows in a closet, bathroom, and six bedroom windows near the rear.
• Two hours before sunset on the winter solstice, shadows on the south side of the dwelling at 1525 Sacramento Street will increase and cover two bedroom windows near the middle of the house, and cover one quarter of the last bedroom window at the rear of the dwelling.
• At noon on March 13 (representative of the application date) , shadows on the south side of the dwelling at 1525 Sacramento Street will increase and cover half of a bedroom window at the front of the house, windows in a closet, bathroom, and two bedroom windows near the middle of the house.

The proposed project meets the development standards of the district and the shadows caused by the proposed addition are normal for an urbanized area.

Page 56 of 63 ends

246
ZONING ADJUSTMENTS BOARD 1527 Sacramento Street
September 23, 2021 Page 10 of 13

File: G:\LANDUSE\Projects by Address\Sacramento\1527\PLN2021-0029\DOCUMENT FINALS\2021-09-23_ZAB_Staff Report_1527 Sacramento.docx
Because the impacts would occur on limited areas and would only partially shade neighboring buildings for a limited time during the year, and only for a few hours of the day, the residential addition would not result in a significant loss of direct sunlight on abutting residences, and the shading impacts were not deemed detrimental.

3. Staff emailed the March 24, 2021 resubmittal packet to the appellants on March 25, 2021, and provided instructions on how the appellants could obtain printed copies from administrative staff in the May 25 response. Staff had initially sent the link to the website where plans could be viewed in June of 2020.

4. T he project was submitted in April 2020 and the appellants have had more than a year to prepare their own shadow study, or hire someone to prepare a shadow study. The shadow studies submitted by the applicant align with City guidelines and the placement of the sun at varying points throughout the year.

For the reasons enumerated above, staff recommends the ZAB dismiss this appeal point.

B. Appeal Issue 2 – Neighbors object to the proposed design: The appellant s contend that multiple neighbors object to the proposed design and change in character. Further, the appellant s contend that staff have not given weight to the petition the appellants prepared, and instead accepted a petition from unaffected neighbors (Attachment 5, page 2, #2; Attachment 6, page 2, #2, paragraph 4).

Staff Analysis: The Zoning Officer and other decision makers, such as the ZAB or City Council, must base the decision to approve or deny a project on the required findings in the Berkeley Municipal Code, in this instance BMC Section 23B.28.050.A, non- detriment. A project cannot be denied or approved based on the level of support or opposition of various parties. The project planner and Zoning Officer considered the applicant’s statement and the concerns expressed by the neighbors as they analyzed the project. At the insistence of staff, the applicant did lower the roof height in August of 2020, from a maximum ridge height of 23 feet 5 inches to 22 feet 9 inches, and did increase the proposed right (south) setback for the area of the addition from 2 feet 1 inch, to 3 feet.

The “petition” from unaffected neighbors the appellants reference is not a petition but an acknowledgement from the abutting and confronting neighbors that they have seen the plans. By signing within a table on the site plan, neighbors are only indicating that they have seen the plans, they are not necessarily saying that they approve of the project and the plans.
2 Therefore, staff recommends the ZAB dismiss this appeal point.

2 Community Outreach Instructions
https://www.cityofberkeley.info/uploadedFiles/Planning_and_Development/Level_3_- _Land_Use_Division/Instructions%20Regarding%20Community%20Outreach.pdf. During Shelter in Place staff modified these requirements to minimize in-person contact between neighbors.

Page 57 of 63 ends

247
ZONING ADJUSTMENTS BOARD 1527 Sacramento Street
September 23, 2021 Page 11 of 13

File: G:\LANDUSE\Projects by Address\Sacramento\1527\PLN2021-0029\DOCUMENT FINALS\2021-09-23_ZAB_Staff Report_1527 Sacramento.docx
The City of Berkeley does not have residential design standards or guidelines, and structures in residential districts are not subject to design review. The proposed project would add a second story, where up to three stories is allowed, outside of the required setbacks. The proposed project is consistent with the pattern of residential development in the area, including one- to two- story residences.

C. Appeal Issue 3 – Lack of negotiation towards a favorable design: The appellants contend that the applicant team will not negotiate in good faith for a reasonable design, and that staff support this unreasonableness (Attachment 5, page 2, #3). Appellants state that they wanted all three families to meet and discuss modifying the project, but their offer was rejected (Attachment 6, pages 2-3, #3).

Staff Analysis: The appellants have stated on several occasions that the applicant should not add a second story, and should instead seek a variance to exceed the lot coverage, in order to add a one- story addition. Applicants are required to notify neighbors of certain proposed projects, and applicants/owners are encouraged to discuss potential concerns and solutions throughout the process. However, owners are not required to modify their project. Staff have explained to the appellants that the City would not support a variance to avoid adding a second st ory as the required findings could not be made, and the project approved by the Zoning Officer conforms to the development standards of the R -1 district, and meets the findings for non- detriment as described in the findings and conditions (Attachment 1). T herefore, staff recommends the ZAB dismiss this appeal point.

D. Appeal Issue 4 – Non-detriment finding cannot be met: The appellants have stated on several occasions (emails, letters) that the required finding under BMC Section 23B.28.050.A cannot be met:

The Zoning Officer may issue an AUP, either as submitted or as modified, only upon finding that the establishment, maintenance or operation of the use, or the construction of a building, structure or addition thereto, under the circumstances of the particular case existing at the time at which the application is granted, will not be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort or general welfare of persons residing or working in the area or neighborhood of such proposed use or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements of the adjacent properties, the surrounding area or neighborhood or to the general welfare of the City. (Attachment 5, pages 2-3, #4; Attachment 6, page 2, #2).

Staff Analysis: The Findings under BMC Section 23B.28.050.A are based on the broad land use regulatory (“police”) powers of all cities and counties and those terms (health, safety, and welfare) are not defined in the BMC. The appellants draw a connection between the health, safety, and peace of the residents of 1525 Sacramento Street and 1529 Sacramento Street and negative aspects of construction, and the proposed addition. The City has interpreted health, safety and welfare to mean access to sunlight, air and privacy , which are analyzed in t he Findings of the Notice Administrative of Decision; construction impacts, such as noise and dust, are addressed in the City’s Standard Conditions of Approval (Attachment 1). Therefore,

Page 58 of 63 ends

248
ZONING ADJUSTMENTS BOARD 1527 Sacramento Street
September 23, 2021 Page 12 of 13

File: G:\LANDUSE\Projects by Address\Sacramento\1527\PLN2021-0029\DOCUMENT FINALS\2021-09-23_ZAB_Staff Report_1527 Sacramento.docx
staff believes that the Finding under BMC Section 23B.28.050.A can be made, and thus recommends the ZAB dismiss this appeal point.

E. Appeal 1 Issue 5 – Proposed project equates to an illegal taking of property: The appellants contend that the project will lead to an illegal taking of 1525 and 1529 Sacramento Street since the project will decrease values of adjacent properties without compensation, and deprive property owners of the quiet use and enjoyment of their properties (Attachment 5, page 3, #5).

Staff Analysis: Takings jurisprudence arises from the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, and provides that no private property can be taken for public use without the payment of just compensation. There are many different types of takings (physical invasions of property, regulatory takings that restrict the use of property, or land use exactions such as easements) , none of which have any applicability to the effect of this project upon neighboring parcels.

Project construction would be temporary in nature and would only be allowed during certain hours and on certain days (see Condition of Approval 12 in Attachment 1). The 520 square foot addition to accommodate more communal living area on the first floor, relocating the same number of bedrooms to the second floor, is unlikely to create more noise than already exists after construction is complete. In addition, community noise is regulated in BMC section Chapter 13.40. Therefore, staff recommends the ZAB dismiss this appeal point.

F. Appeal Issue 6 and 7– Proposed addition is inequitable: The appellants contend that this project results in discrimination, inequity, systematic racism and economic privilege. The project is alleged to exacerbate economic and racial divisions . Racial equity should apply to the project, meaning that the project should be denied to avoid impact to this Black family. The Black population in Berkeley continues to decline due to gentrification, lack of housing, systematic racism , and economic constraints. The appellants express concern for the lack of diversity of City of Berkeley staff and demand this application be handled by someone who is culturally and racially sensitive. (Attachment 5, page 3, #6, #7; Attachment 6, page 3, #4).

Staff Analysis : The BMC does not include different levels of discretion or different findings based on race, ethnicity, financial status, longevity in Berkeley, etcetera. The proposed project meets the R -1 development standards, subject to obtaining Administrative Use Permits, and the Zoning Officer concluded that the project would meet the necessary findings. Therefore, staff recommends ZAB dismiss this appeal point.

VII. Recommendation

Because of the project’s consistency with the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan, and minimal impact on surrounding properties, staff recommends that the Zoning Adjustments Board: APPROVE Administrative Use Permit #ZP20 20-0034 pursuant to Section

Page 59 of 63 ends

249
ZONING ADJUSTMENTS BOARD 1527 Sacramento Street
September 23, 2021 Page 13 of 13

File: G:\LANDUSE\Projects by Address\Sacramento\1527\PLN2021-0029\DOCUMENT FINALS\2021-09-23_ZAB_Staff Report_1527 Sacramento.docx
23B.28.060.C.1 and subject to the attached Findings and Conditions (see Attachment 1) and DISMISS the Appeal.

Attachments:

1. Findings and Conditions, #ZP2020-0034, June 14, 2021

2. Project Plans, received March 24, 2021 and April 27, 2021

3. Pre-application neighbor signatures, received April 28, 2020

4. Staff Response to concerns of 1529 and 1525 Sacramento, sent May 25, 2021

5. Letter of Appeal, received July 2, 2021

6. Letter of Appeal, received July 6, 2021

7. Notice of Public Hearing

8. Correspondence Received

Staff Planner: Allison Riemer, [email protected], (510) 981-7433

Page 60 of 63 ends

250

Administrative Record
ZAB Appeal:
1527 Sacramento Street

This attachment is on file and available for review
upon request from the City Clerk Department, or can
be accessed from the City Council Website.

City Clerk Department
2180 Milvia Street
Berkeley, CA 94704
(510) 981-6900

or from:

The City of Berkeley, City Council’s Web site
http://www.cityofberkeley.info/citycouncil/

Attachments 4 & 5
251
Internal
Attachment 6
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING – BERKELEY CITY COUNCIL

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION BY REMOTE VIDEO ONLY
ZAB APPEAL: 1527 SACRAMENTO STREET, USE PERMIT #ZP2020-0034 Notice is hereby given by the City Council of the City of Berkeley that on TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 22, 2022 at 6:00 P.M. a public hearing will be conducted to consider an appeal of the decision by the Zoning Adjustments Board to approve Zoning Permit #ZP2020-0034 to:
1) add a 520 square-foot two-story addition with an average height of 21 feet 9 inches at the rear of the existing building; 2) add a major residential addition of more than 15 percent of the lot area, including 44 square feet at the first floor; 3) legalize the enclosure of the front porch in the non-conforming front setback; and 4) add an unenclosed hot tub, on a 2,783 square- foot lot that contains a one-story 824-square-foot single-family dwelling.

A copy of the agenda material for this hearing will be available on the City’s website at www.CityofBerkeley.info as of FEBRUARY 10, 2022. Once posted, the agenda for this meeting will include a link for public participation using Zoom video technology.

For further information, please contact Allison Riemer, Project Planner, (510) 981-7433, or [email protected]. Written comments should be mailed to the City Clerk, 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 or emailed to [email protected] 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.
________________________________
Mark Numainville, City Clerk
Mailed: February 8, 2022
NOTICE CONCERNING YOUR LEGAL RIGHTS: If you object to a decision by the City Council to approve or deny (Code Civ. Proc. 1094.6(b)) or approve (Gov. Code 65009(c)(5) an appeal, the following requirements and restrictions apply: 1) Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6, no lawsuit challenging a City decision to deny or approve a Zoning Adjustments Board decision may be filed more than 90 days after the date the Notice of Decision of the action of the City Council is mailed.

Any lawsuit not filed within that 90-day period will be barred. 2) In any lawsuit that may be filed against a City Council decision to approve or deny a Zoning Adjustments Board decision, the issues and evidence will be limited to those raised by you or someone else, orally or in writing, at a public hearing or prior to the close of the last public hearing on the project.

Page 62 of 63 ends

252
Internal
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 by request from the City Clerk Department and posted on the City of Berkeley webpage at least 10 days prior to the public hearing.

Page 63 of 63 ends

253
254
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

ACTION CALENDAR
February 22, 2022
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Dee Williams-Ridley, City Manager
Submitted by: Liam Garland, Director, Department of Public Works Subject: Southside Complete Streets Project Conceptual Designs

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution approving the conceptual designs for the Southside Complete Streets Project on Dana Street from Dwight Way to Bancroft Way; Bancroft Way from Milvia Street to Piedmont Avenue; Fulton Street from Dwight Way to Bancroft Way; and Telegraph Avenue from Dwight Way to Bancroft Way, and directing the City Manager to direct staff to proceed with the detailed engineering design of the project.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
The recommendation has no fiscal impacts.

SUMMARY
The Southside Complete Streets Project is an $8.3M Federal Aid funded transportation improvement project in Berkeley’s Southside neighborhood on Telegraph Avenue, Bancroft Way, Dana Street, and Fulton Street. The project proposes to construct improvements for walking, biking, transit, and commercial and passenger loading zones, as well as “placemaking” improvements to the public realm. The project repaves Telegraph Avenue and Dana Street from Bancroft Way to Dwight Way and Bancroft Way from Piedmont Avenue to Dana Street and from Fulton Street to Milvia Street. With the support of an engineering and design consultant team and staff from partner government agencies, City staff have identified conceptual design options for each of the project corridors; sought public input on and analyzed those conceptual design options; and selected recommended conceptual designs for consideration by the Berkeley City Council. Approval of the conceptual designs will keep the project on schedule for detailed engineering design in 2022, allowing the City to meet a January 2023 funding obligation deadline and receive $7.3M in Federal Aid construction funds.

Staff anticipates advertising for construction bids in 2023, followed by construction of the project in 2023 and 2024.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
The Southside neighborhood has experienced continuing growth in both commercial activity and residential occupancy, with increased walking, biking, transit use, ride- hailing, and freight and small package delivery. The Berkeley Vision Zero Action Plan

Page 1 of 18 ends

255
Southside Complete Streets Project Conceptual Designs ACTION CALENDAR February 22, 2022

Page 2 ends

has documented severe and fatal crashes on project streets; Southside sidewalks carry some of the highest numbers of people walking in the East Bay; gaps in the low-stress protected bikeway network result in connectivity problems that discourage bicycling for transportation; AC Transit buses have on-time performance issues that discourage bus ridership in the project area; and competition for limited loading zones creates operational issues for neighborhood businesses and further delays traffic and transit operations. The City of Berkeley Five-Year Street Repair Plan identifies numerous street segments in the project area with low Pavement Condition Index in need of repaving.

The goals of the Southside Complete Streets project are:
 Ensure safety for all street users consistent with the City’s Vision Zero policy  Improve transit reliability consistent with the City’s Transit-First policy  Support the economic and cultural vitality of Berkeley’s Southside neighborhood consistent with the Economic Development goals of the City’s Southside Plan The project follows a community and data-driven approach to deliver on the City’s Vision Zero, Complete Streets, Transit-First, and Climate Action Plan policies, and builds upon the specific recommendations of numerous plans and studies, including the Southside Plan, the Berkeley Bicycle and Pedestrian Plans, the 5-Year Street Repair Plan, the AC Transit Major Corridors study, and the Telegraph Avenue Public Realm Plan, among others. The Southside Complete Streets Project is a City of Berkeley Strategic Plan priority project and supports the Plan’s goals of being a global leader in addressing climate change, advancing environmental justice, and protecting the environment and creating a resilient, safe, connected, and prepared City.

Stakeholder and Public Engagement
City staff initiated the project in 2020 by convening an Institutional Stakeholder Group (ISG) consisting of government agency staff from various City departments as well as University of California Berkeley (UC Berkeley), UC Berkeley Bear Transit, Lawrence Berkeley National Labs (LBNL) shuttle operators, and Alameda-Contra Costa Transit (AC Transit). The ISG met multiple times, first identifying and refining preliminary conceptual design options for each project corridor, and then providing input on the selection of the preferred conceptual designs. In 2020, City staff also conducted preliminary outreach with the Telegraph Business Improvement District (TBID) and engaged in a robust public process with AC Transit for the Dana Complete Street Pilot Project – see the Background section for more information on these and other pre- project activities.

Following the kickoff of the design consultant contract in August 2021, City staff and consultants deployed an extensive public engagement strategy consisting of two online public meetings engaging dozens of attendees; an online public survey with over 1,300

Page 2 of 18 ends

256
Southside Complete Streets Project Conceptual Designs ACTION CALENDAR February 22, 2022

Page 3 ends

individual respondents; six Commission meetings, including the Transportation, Public Works, and Disability Commissions; and multiple stakeholder group meetings with the Associated Students of the University of California Berkeley (ASUC), TBID, Walk Bike Berkeley, and East Bay Transit Rider’s Union. City staff and project consultants publicized the process by distributing and mailing thousands of postcards and flyers; installing temporary sidewalk decals on project streets, especially at or near AC Transit bus stops; and issuing press releases and conducting a social media campaign, all with the support of partner organizations like AC Transit, UC Berkeley, and TBID to help get the word out.

City staff presented the recommended conceptual design options for each project corridor to the Transportation Commission on January 20, 2022. The Transportation Commission passed a motion supporting the staff-recommended design options, as follows:

Item B2 - Southside Complete Streets
It was Moved/Seconded (Parolek/Ghosh) that the Transportation Commission:
support Bancroft Option #1, support prioritized transit lanes on Bancroft and Telegraph, and ask staff to consider a wider sidewalk on the south side to create a pedestrian corridor between downtown and Telegraph;
that the Transportation Commission support Fulton Option #1; and that the Transportation Commission support Telegraph Option #4. The Commission strongly recommends that staff demonstrate how Option #4 can be operationalized as a car-free street with a transit lane, and with 2-way bike and micromobility facilities.

Finally, the Transportation Commission is in favor of making the Dana project permanent.

Ayes: Bruzzone, Ghosh, Gosselin, Greene, Leung, Lutzker, Parolek, Walton Motion carried 8-0-0-0
In response to the Transportation Commission action, City staff has directed the project design consultants to consider potentially widening the sidewalk and adding street trees and green infrastructure along Bancroft Way to create a more appealing pedestrian corridor between Downtown Berkeley and Telegraph Avenue. Further, City staff has directed the project design consultants to prepare additional graphics for the second online public meeting and other upcoming public engagement activities to clearly demonstrate how the staff-recommended conceptual design option for Telegraph Avenue can be operationalized as a car-free street.

Page 3 of 18 ends

257
Southside Complete Streets Project Conceptual Designs ACTION CALENDAR February 22, 2022

Page 4 ends

As of this writing, City staff has yet to conclude public engagement activities for this phase of the project in January and February 2022, including additional meetings with institutional and public stakeholder groups and the second online public meeting.

Following anticipated approval of the conceptual designs, City staff will continue to work with the Berkeley community and institutional stakeholders to refine the designs through the detailed engineering process during the remainder of 2022. Staff will continue to seek input on technical and operational details of the project designs from TBID, AC Transit, Bear Transit, LBNL Shuttle operators, and others. Staff anticipates that the Southside Complete Streets Project will next return to the Berkeley City Council for the authorization of the construction contract in early 2023.

Conceptual Design Options Analysis
As depicted in Exhibit 1 to the Resolution and described in the following section, City staff and consultants considered multiple design options for Telegraph Avenue, Bancroft Way, and Fulton Street, as well as a permanent version of the temporary Dana Complete Street pilot project being constructed by AC Transit. City staff and consultants analyzed these designs using two filters: 1) public input (as described in the previous section) and 2) technical analysis. The technical analysis utilized qualitative and quantitative criteria to assess how well each design option performed in meeting the project’s primary goals of safety, transit efficiency, and supporting local businesses. The analysis also tested each option against “baseline operations” metrics in order to identify potential fatal flaws, including traffic operations, parking effects, accessibility and “Universal Design”, construction impacts and costs, fire marshal requirements, and streets maintenance. Table 1 provides a high-level summary of public and stakeholder preferences for each design option. Table 2 provides a summary of the results of the technical analysis expressed as overall “Good, Fair, Poor” rankings for each design option.

A comprehensive traffic study was performed using Syncho traffic modelling software.

Vehicle Level of Service (LOS) is a traffic metric for individual vehicle delay, which ranks delay with a grade of A, B, C, D, E, or F. The traffic model showed that for each of the options, vehicle LOS remains at or above LOS D, and as such meets the City’s goal for vehicle delay. The only exceptions are two intersections where existing conditions operate at E (Bancroft Way & Piedmont Avenue) or F (Fulton Street & Channing Way); both locations would maintain their existing LOS under all project options. Queue length is a traffic metric that is used to understand the length of queues of vehicles waiting for a green signal at signalized intersections in the “worst case scenario” (during the peak hour of the day, which is about 5% of the time that a traffic signal operates). Queue length is important because of the impact on traffic operations when queues extend into adjacent upstream intersections. The traffic model showed three locations where some of the design options produced queue lengths that exceed the length of the block between traffic signals: Options 1 and 2 on Bancroft Way between Dana Street and Telegraph Avenue; Options 1 and 2 on Shattuck Avenue between Kittredge Street and

Page 4 of 18 ends

258
Southside Complete Streets Project Conceptual Designs ACTION CALENDAR February 22, 2022

Page 5 ends

Durant Avenue; and Option 1 on Fulton Street between Channing Way and Haste Street. None of these locations represent a “fatal flaw” in the design, but rather are locations where the detailed engineering design process will focus on signal design and optimization to try to reduce and hopefully eliminate these peak-hour queuing impacts to traffic operations.

Table 1: Southside Complete Streets Design Options Public and Stakeholder Input Input Fulton St Bancroft Way Telegraph Ave Dana St
Online Public
Meeting #1 Options 1 & 3 Option 2 Option 4 Support
Online Survey Option 1 Option 2 Options 1 & 4 Support
Institutional
Stakeholder
Meetings
Option 2 Option 1 Options 1 & 4 Support
Table 2: Southside Complete Streets Design Options Technical Analysis Results Corridor Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 4
Bancroft Way Good Fair Poor N/A
Telegraph
Avenue Poor Poor Fair Good
Fulton Street Fair Fair Poor N/A
Dana Street N/A N/A N/A N/A
Recommended Conceptual Designs
The following summaries describe the conceptual design options, their impacts, and the recommended conceptual design option for each project corridor based on public and stakeholder input and the results of the technical analysis. For each design option, the intent is to utilize the most permanent, durable, low-maintenance materials possible (e.g., raised concrete bikeway buffers vs. temporary “paint and posts” bikeway buffers, etc.). Final materials choices will be made during the detailed engineering design process, based on a variety of factors such as cost, Fire Marshall access requirements, accessibility for people with disabilities, and other technical criteria. Please see Exhibit 1 to the Resolution for cross-section illustrations of each design option. Additional conceptual design graphics will be prepared for the final public engagement activities in January and February.

Bancroft Way:

Page 5 of 18 ends

259
Southside Complete Streets Project Conceptual Designs ACTION CALENDAR February 22, 2022

Page 6 ends

 Option 1: one westbound travel lane with a two-way parking-protected bike lane on the south side and a curbside bus-only lane on the north side  Option 2: one westbound travel lane with a parking lane on the south side and a two-way curbside separated bike lane on the north side, next to a bus-only lane o To construct a bus-only lane and two-way protected bikeway, Options 1 and 2 remove one of two existing westbound traffic lanes and remove parking/loading on one side of the street, leaving a single westbound traffic lane and parking/loading on only the south side of the street  Option 3: one travel lane in each direction with a two-way separated bike lane on the south side and a parking lane on the north side
o To construct an eastbound traffic lane and two-way protected bikeway, Option 3 removes one of two existing westbound traffic lanes and removes parking/loading on one side of the street, leaving a single westbound traffic lane and parking/loading on only the south side of the street
Recommended Bancroft Way Conceptual Design: Option 1.

Telegraph Avenue:
 Option 1: one northbound travel lane (shared with bikes) with a wider sidewalk and contraflow raised southbound bike lane on the west side and a bus-only lane on the east side, with alternating bulb-outs and parking/loading on the east side only
o To construct a bus-only lane, a wider sidewalk, and one-way southbound protected bikeway, Option 1 removes one of two existing northbound traffic lanes and removes parking/loading on the west side of the street, leaving a single northbound traffic lane and consolidating all existing parking/loading to the east side of the street
 Option 2: one travel lane in each direction (shared with bikes), wider sidewalks on both sides of the street, with alternating bulb-outs and parking/loading on the east side only
o To construct a southbound traffic lane and wider sidewalks on both sides of the street, Option 2 removes one of two existing northbound traffic lanes and removes parking/loading on the west side of the street, leaving a single northbound traffic lane and consolidating all existing parking/loading to the east side of the street
 Option 3: one northbound travel lane (shared with bikes) with a bus-only lane on the east side, wider sidewalks on both sides of the street, and alternating bulb- outs and parking on either side of the street resulting in a chicane o To construct a bus-only lane, wider sidewalks on both sides of the street, and a traffic-calmed “chicane” roadway, Option 3 removes one of two existing northbound traffic lanes and removes parking/loading alternately on the east or west side of the street, leaving a single northbound traffic lane and approximately half as much parking/loading

Page 6 of 18 ends

260
Southside Complete Streets Project Conceptual Designs ACTION CALENDAR February 22, 2022

Page 7 ends

 Option 4: a “curbless” northbound street at sidewalk level with one northbound travel lane (shared with bikes), a bus-only lane on the east side, wider sidewalks on both sides of the street with pedestrian-scale lighting, bollards, and other “placemaking” amenities, alternating bulb-outs and parking on either side of the street
o To construct a curbless street with a bus-only lane and wider sidewalks on both sides of the street, Option 4 removes one of two existing northbound traffic lanes, leaving a single northbound travel lane. o Of the four options proposed for Telegraph Avenue, Option 4 is among the most expensive. For this reason, as detailed cost estimates are developed during the engineering design process, Option 4 may be constructed on a limited number of blocks, with a curbed version of this option as a lower- cost fallback design option.
o During the public engagement process, a substantial number of comments were received in favor of a “car free” design option for Telegraph Avenue.

Limiting or eliminating access for private vehicles on Telegraph Avenue is beyond the scope of this project. However, of the options considered, Option 4 provides the most suitable and intuitive built environment for future consideration of changes to private vehicle access.

Recommended Telegraph Avenue Conceptual Design: Option 4 (curbless street), budget permitting, with a curbed version of Option 4 as a lower-cost fallback design option.

Fulton Street:
 Option 1: one southbound travel lane with a two-way separated bike lane on the east side and parking on the west side
 Option 2: one southbound travel lane with a two-way parking-protected bike lane on the west side
 Option 3: one southbound travel lane with a parking-protected southbound bike lane on the west side and a contraflow raised northbound bike lane on the east side
o To construct either a two-way protected bikeway or one-way protected bikeways on either side of the street, Options 1, 2, and 3 remove one of two existing southbound traffic lanes and remove parking on the east side of the street, leaving a single southbound traffic lane and parking on only the west side of the street
Recommended Fulton Street Conceptual Design: Option 1.

Dana Street:
 Upgrade AC Transit’s Dana Street pilot project, scheduled for installation in Spring 2022, from temporary paint and post separated bikeway buffers to permanent concrete-protected bikeway buffers. See Background section for more information about the AC Transit pilot project.

Page 7 of 18 ends

261
Southside Complete Streets Project Conceptual Designs ACTION CALENDAR February 22, 2022

Page 8 ends

Recommended Dana Street Conceptual Design: Dana Complete Street pilot conversion to permanent project.

BACKGROUND
The Berkeley City Council has taken action on several occasions in support of transportation improvements in the Southside neighborhood. The current project delivers on past Council direction and referrals, as described below.

In 2013, the Berkeley City Council directed staff to study conversion of Bancroft Way and Durant Street from one-way to two-way streets consistent with the Southside Area Plan recommendation to study this change. In 2015, staff delivered a traffic study and identified a cost estimate of $5M for the conversion project. Also in 2015, as a follow-up to the two-way streets study, Council Member Kriss Worthington brought forward a referral to make Dana Street two-way for bicycle travel. This project considered but ultimately rejected the options to convert one-way Southside streets to two-way vehicle traffic, due to cost considerations and the poor performance of these options in meeting project goals. The project does carry forward the referral to implement a two-way bikeway on Dana Street.

In 2016, in response to a near-fatal vehicle-bicycle crash, the Berkeley City Council authorized installation of a one-way southbound protected bikeway on Fulton Street between Bancroft Way and Channing Way. This project continues that bikeway two blocks to the south to connect at Dwight Way with the planned and funded Fulton Street Bicycle Boulevard, and makes the bikeway two-way for all four blocks.

In 2016, the Berkeley City Council approved the Southside Pilot Project (SPP), which included the Phase I: Bancroft Way West bus lane and bikeway pilot project between Dana Street and Fulton Street, as well as a future Dana Complete Street Pilot Project as part of the overall SPP vision. This project proposes to upgrade the Phase I: Bancroft Way West project using more permanent, low-maintenance materials, as well as constructing the remaining phases of Bancroft Way as described in the SPP Council report.

In 2017, the Berkeley City Council approved the Berkeley Bicycle Plan, which calls for evaluation of two-way cycle tracks on Bancroft Way, Dana Street, Fulton Street, and Telegraph Avenue. This project evaluated bikeways on all project corridors and prioritized Bancroft Way, Dana Street, and Fulton Street for implementation of protected bikeways. Telegraph Avenue was considered for a protected bikeway but due to the space needs for wider sidewalks, abundant loading zones, and a bus-only lane, a protected bikeway could not be included.

In 2019, Council Member Rigel Robinson brought forward a referral to develop a plan to implement the shared streets proposal outlined in the Telegraph Public Realm Plan.

Page 8 of 18 ends

262
Southside Complete Streets Project Conceptual Designs ACTION CALENDAR February 22, 2022

Page 9 ends

The recommended option for Telegraph Avenue – Option 4 – is based on the ultimate design envisioned by the Telegraph Public Realm Plan.

In 2021, the Berkeley City Council approved the AC Transit Dana Complete Street Pilot project, which is currently being developed and delivered through a partnership between AC Transit and the City of Berkeley. AC Transit’s Dana Complete Street Pilot Project complements the City’s Southside Complete Streets Project by piloting a two-way cycle track and bus boarding island on Dana Street. Construction of the Dana pilot project is expected to be complete in 2022, followed immediately by an evaluation of the pilot project’s performance. AC Transit’s evaluation consultant will recommend design modifications, if any are needed, for integration into the City’s Southside Complete Streets Project detailed engineering design process. At a minimum, the City’s Southside project would repave the entire street and would make temporary elements of the Dana pilot project permanent.

In 2021, the Berkeley City Council approved the most recent Five-Year Street Repair Plan. Consistent with this plan, the project repaves Telegraph Avenue and Dana Street from Bancroft Way to Dwight Way, and Bancroft Way from Piedmont Avenue to Dana Street and from Fulton Street to Milvia Street.

Project Funding
In 2018, the City of Berkeley received an $8,335,000 grant from Alameda CTC and Caltrans for transportation improvements in Berkeley’s Southside neighborhood.

Improvements may include physically protected bikeways (i.e. cycle tracks), signal modifications, transit efficiency and reliability improvements (transit signal priority, transit only lanes), more useful freight and passenger loading zones, pedestrian sidewalk and crosswalk safety upgrades, and street repaving. Of this grant, $1M is allocated for the current phase of the project, consisting of Preliminary Engineering (planning, conceptual design, and public engagement); California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) compliance; Plans, Specifications, and Estimates (detailed engineering design and preparation of construction plans); and construction bid and engineering support. This phase of the project is projected for completion by April 30, 2023. The remaining $7,335,000 of the grant is for construction of transportation improvements, and would be obligated by Caltrans upon successful completion of detailed engineering design in January 2023.

Southside Complete Streets Project Timeline
 Conceptual Design, Preliminary Engineering,
Public Outreach, and Environmental Review
August 2021 to February 2022
 Environmental Review and Detailed
Engineering Design
March 2022 to January 2023

Page 9 of 18 ends

263
Southside Complete Streets Project Conceptual Designs ACTION CALENDAR February 22, 2022

Page 10 ends

 Advertise project & award construction
contract
February 2023 to April 2023
 Construction May 2023 to May 2024

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
Installation of protected bikeways, widening sidewalks, and improving pedestrian crossings is anticipated to increase walking and biking, which is consistent with the 2009 Berkeley Climate Action Plan Policy that calls for expanding and improving Berkeley’s bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure. Installation of bus-only lanes is anticipated to improve bus reliability and decrease travel times, making on-street transit a more attractive mode of transportation. The 2009 Berkeley Climate Action Plan sets targets of reducing transportation emissions 33% below year 2000 levels by 2020, and 80% below year 2000 levels by 2050. The Plan further states that transportation modes such as public transit, walking, and bicycling must become the primary means of fulfilling the City’s mobility needs in order to meet these targets.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
Approval of the conceptual designs will keep the project on schedule for detailed engineering design in 2022, allowing the City to meet a January 2023 funding obligation deadline and receive $7.3M in Federal Aid construction funds. Staff anticipates advertising for construction bids in 2023, followed by construction of the project in 2023 and 2024.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
Council could opt not to approve the conceptual designs for the project at this time, and instead defer the item to a future Council agenda. This decision would delay the subsequent detailed engineering design and endanger $7.3M of Federal Aid construction funds. The City would then need to reapply for these highly competitive construction funds, alongside all other Bay Area local agencies.

CONTACT PERSON
Farid Javandel, Deputy Director of Public Works for Transportation (510) 981-7010 Beth Thomas, Principal Planner, Public Works (510) 981-7068 Eric Anderson, Senior Planner, Public Works (510) 981-7062 Attachments:
1: Resolution
Exhibit A: Southside Complete Streets Corridor Design Options

Page 10 of 18 ends

264
RESOLUTION NO. ##,###-N.S.

SOUTHSIDE COMPLETE STREETS PROJECT CONCEPTUAL DESIGNS
WHEREAS, the Project includes the following Southside neighborhood corridors: Dana Street from Dwight Way to Bancroft Way; Bancroft Way from Milvia Street to Piedmont Avenue; Fulton Street from Dwight Way to Bancroft Way; and Telegraph Avenue from Dwight Way to Bancroft Way; and
WHEREAS, the Berkeley Vision Zero Action Plan has documented severe and fatal crashes on Project streets; Southside sidewalks carry some of the highest numbers of people walking in the East Bay; gaps in the low-stress protected bikeway network on Project streets result in connectivity problems that discourage bicycling for transportation; the Five-year Street Repair Plan documents poor pavement quality on Project streets; AC Transit buses have on-time performance issues that discourage bus ridership in the Project area; and competition for limited loading zones creates operational issues for neighborhood businesses; and
WHEREAS, to address these needs, the project delivers on the City’s Vision Zero, Complete Streets, Transit-First, and Climate Action Plan policies, and builds upon the specific recommendations of numerous plans and studies, including the Southside Area Plan, the Berkeley Bicycle and Pedestrian Plans, the Five-year Street Repair Plan, the AC Transit Major Corridors study, and the Telegraph Avenue Public Realm Plan, among others; and
WHEREAS, with the support of an engineering and design consultant team and staff from partner government agencies, City staff have identified conceptual design options for each of the Project corridors; sought public input on and analyzed those conceptual design options; and have selected recommended conceptual designs for consideration by the Berkeley City Council; and
WHEREAS, the recommended design options are Bancroft Option 1; Telegraph Option 4, budget permitting, with a curbed version of Option 4 or Option 3 as fallback design options; Fulton Option 1; and Dana Complete Street Pilot to Permanent Project, as described in Exhibit A to this Resolution; and
WHEREAS, approval of the Southside Complete Streets Project recommended conceptual designs will keep the project on schedule for detailed engineering design in 2022 which is necessary to meet a January 2023 funding obligation deadline for $7.3M in Federal Aid construction funds;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that the City Manager is authorized to direct staff to proceed with the detailed engineering design of the Southside Complete Streets Project, based on the preliminary engineering

Page 11 of 18 ends

265
February 22, 2022
of the recommended conceptual design for each of the project corridors; Dana Street from Dwight Way to Bancroft Way; Bancroft Way from Milvia Street to Piedmont Avenue; Fulton Street from Dwight Way to Bancroft Way; and Telegraph Avenue from Dwight Way to Bancroft Way.

Attachment
Exhibit A

Page 12 of 18 ends

266
Berkeley Southside
Complete Streets Project
Conceptual Design Recommendations

Page 13 of 18 ends

267
1/21/2022 Berkeley Southside
Complete Streets
Project Location
Bancroft Way
From Piedmont Avenue to Milvia
Street
Fulton Street
From Bancroft Way to Dwight Way
Dana Street
From Bancroft Way to Dwight Way
Telegraph Avenue
From Bancroft Street to Dwight Way

Page 14 of 18 ends

268
Bancroft Way Recommended Conceptual Design: Option 1
1/21/2022 Berkeley Southside
Complete Streets
Option 1 Option 2 Option 3

Page 15 of 18 ends

269
Option 1
Option 2
Option 3 Option 4
Telegraph Avenue Recommended Conceptual Design: Option 4 (curbless street) with curbed street Option 4 as lower-cost fallback.

Page 16 of 18 ends

270
Fulton Street Recommended Conceptual Design: Option 1
1/21/2022 Berkeley Southside
Complete Streets
Option 1 Option 2 Option 3

Page 17 of 18 ends

271
Dana Street Recommended Pilot to
Permanent Conversion Project
1/21/2022 Berkeley Southside
Complete Streets
Proposed Project

Page 18 of 18 ends

272

269423.1

ACTION CALENDAR
February 22, 2022
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Dee Williams-Ridley, City Manager
Submitted by: Donald E. Ellison, Interim Director of Human Resources Subject: Resolution Adopting the Resolution of Intention of Amendment to the Miscellaneous CalPERS Contract Pursuant to California Government Code 20516

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolution of Intention in order to approve the amendment of the contract between the Board of Administration, California Public Employees’ Retirement System and the City Council for the City of Berkeley pursuant to California Government Code 20516 to effectuate changes to the cost sharing agreement between the City and PEPRA members of Service Employee International Union, Local 1021 Maintenance and Clerical (SEIU MC), Public Employees Union Local 1 (Local 1), Community Services & Part-Time Recreation Leaders Associations Local 1021 (SEIU CSU/PTRLA), and the Unrepresented Employees Group.

Council adopted Resolution #70,156 N.S. at its December 14, 2021 meeting authorizing an amendment to the City’s CalPERS Miscellaneous contract. Council must now pass a Resolution of Intention in order to approve the amendment to the contract between the City and the Board Administration of the Public Employees’ Retirement System.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
The terms of the new MOU PEPRA ramp down is as follows:

SEIU MC and the Unrepresented Employees Group:
• FY2021-22: 1% reduction of cost share for a total of 7%, (to be effective as soon as administratively possible following adoption of successor contract by the City Council) • FY2022-23: 1% reduction of cost share for a total of 6%, effective July 10, 2022 • FY2023-24: 1% reduction of cost share for a total of 5%, effective July 9, 2023 • FY2024-25: 2% reduction of cost share for a total of 3%, effective July 7, 2024 • FY2025-26: 2% reduction of cost share for a total of 1%, effective July 6, 2025 • FY2026-27: 1% reduction of cost share for a total of 0%, effective July 5, 2026 The total cost to approve the ramp down for the SEIU MC PEPRA members is approximately $980,000. There are approximately 204 PEPRA employees affected by this resolution.

The total cost to approve the ramp down for the Unrepresented PEPRA members is approximately $420,000. There are approximately 51 PEPRA employees affected by this resolution.

Page 1 of 13 ends

273

269423.1
Funding for the Ramp Down comes from the General Fund and other special revenue funds. This cost of will be included in the fiscal years 2022 through 2027 budgets.

SEIU CSU/PTRLA and Local 1:
• FY2021-22: 3% reduction of cost share for a total of 5%, (to be effective as soon as administratively possible following adoption of successor contract by the City Council) • FY2022-23: 4% reduction of cost share for a total of 1%, effective July 10, 2022 • FY2023-24: 1% reduction of cost share for a total of 0%, effective July 9, 2023 The total cost to approve the ramp down for the SEIU CSU/PTRLA PEPRA members is approximately $952,000. There are approximately 178 PEPRA employees affected by this resolution.

The total cost to approve the ramp down for the Local 1 PEPRA members is approximately $448,000. There are approximately 59 PEPRA employees affected by this resolution.

Funding for the Ramp Down comes from the General Fund and other special revenue funds. This cost of will be included in the fiscal years 2022 through 2024 budgets.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
Council adopted Resolution #70,156 N.S. at its December 14, 2021 meeting authorizing an amendment to the City’s CalPERS Miscellaneous contract. Council must now pass a Resolution of Intention in order to approve the amendment to the contract between the City and the Board Administration of the Public Employees’ Retirement System. (See Cal. Gov. Code § 20516.) The contract amendment process, includes the following steps:
 The City shall provide CalPERS with the Resolution and a cover letter indicating the exact percentage of change, total cost-share percentage and who it is applicable to;
 CalPERS will contact the City to establish the Anticipated Schedule of Agency Actions and send the required documents;
 Over a time period specified by CalPERS, the City will:
o Conduct an employee election whereby a simple majority of the affected PEPRA members in the Unrepresented Group must vote in favor of proposed cost-share terms;
o The City shall adopt a Resolution of Intention;
o The City shall approve the final reading of an ordinance or final resolution and complete certification forms.
 Once the documents are received and approved, the contract amendment becomes effective and is updated with the effective date in myCalPERS.  CalPERS sends a fully executed contract to the City.

Page 2 of 13 ends

274

269423.1

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACT
There are no identifiable environmental effects or opportunities associated with the subject of this report.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
Council adopted Resolution #70,156 N.S. at its December 14, 2021 meeting authorizing an amendment to the City’s CalPERS Miscellaneous contract. Council must now pass a Resolution of Intention in order to approve the amendment to the contract between the City and the Board Administration of the Public Employees’ Retirement System.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
None. The City is obligated under the existing labor agreements to complete the Ramp Downs in accordance with the MOUs.

CONTACT PERSON
Donald E. Ellison, Interim Director of Human Resources, 981-6807 Attachments:
1: Resolution: Resolution of Intention
Exhibit A: Amendment to Contract

Page 3 of 13 ends

275

RESOLUTION OF INTENTION

TO APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT

BETWEEN THE

BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION

CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM

AND THE

CITY COUNCIL

CITY OF BERKELEY

WHEREAS, the Public Emp loyees' Retirement Law permits the partic ipation of public agencies and their employees in the Public Employees' Retirement System by the execution of a contract, and sets forth the procedure by which said public agencies may elect to subject themselves an d their employees to amendments to said Law; and

WHEREAS, one of the steps in the procedures to amend this contract is the adoption by the governing body of the public agency of a resolution giving notice of its intention to approve an amendment to said c ontract, which resoluti on shall contain a summary of the change proposed in said contract; and

WHEREAS, the following is a statement of the proposed change:

To provide Section 20516 (Employees Sharing Additional Cost) for a reduction of 1% for ne w local miscellane ous members in the Unrepresented Employees group and the Service Employees International Union Local 1021 Maintenance and Clerical Chapters; and

for a reduction of 3% for new local miscellaneous members in the Public Employees Union Loca l 1 and the Commun ity Services & Part-Time Recreation Leaders Association Local 1021.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the governing body of the above agency d oes hereby give notice of inte ntion to approve an amendment to the contract between said public agency and the Board of Administration of the Pub lic Employees' Retirement System, a copy of said amendment being attached hereto, as an "Exhibit" and by this reference made a part hereof.

By:_________________________________
Presiding Officer

_________________________________
Title
________________________________
Date adopted and approved

(Amendment)
CON-302 (Rev. 3/9/2016 rc)

Page 4 of 13 ends

276
A
CalPERS

EXHIBIT
California
Public Employees' Retirement System
_......._. __ . ___ _

AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT
Between the
Board of Administration
California Public Employees' Retirement System
and the
City Council
City of Berkeley
----•----
The Board of Administration, California Public Employees' Retirement System, hereinafter referred to as Board, and the governing body of the above public agency, hereinafter referred to as Public Agency, having entered into a contract effective March 1, 1942, and witnessed January 30, 1942, and as amended effective September 1, 1947, April 1, 1949, January 1, 1952, May 1, 1954, March 1, 1956, August 1, 1959, November 1, 1961, June 29, 1962, December 1, 1962, April 1, 1963, August 1, 1963, October 1, 1964, October 16, 1965, November 16, 1968, March 1, 1973, December 16, 1973, December 1, 1974, July 22, 1976, May 25, 1978, July 9, 1978, January 2, 1983, October 28, 1983, July 18, 1986, June 26, 1988, June 30, 1992, November 28, 1996, October 15, 1998, November 6, 1998, April 9, 1999, April 14, 2000, July 14, 2000, December 22, 2000, July 7, 2002, January 5, 2003, June 13, 2003, December 28, 2012, July 3, 2016, November 6, 2016, January 1, 2017 and December 31, 2017 which provides for participation of Public Agency in said System, Board and Public Agency hereby agree as follows:

A. Paragraphs 1 through 20 are hereby stricken from said contract as executed effective December 31, 2017, and hereby replaced by the following paragraphs numbered 1 through 20 inclusive:

Page 5 of 13 ends

277

1. All words and terms used herein which are defined in the Public Employees' Retirement law shall have the meaning as defined therein unless otherwise specifically provided. "Normal retirement age" shall mean age 55 for classic local miscellaneous members, age 62 for new local miscellaneous members, age 50 for classic local fire members and for those classic local police members entering membership in the police classification on or prior to December 28, 2012, age 55 for classic local police members entering membership for the first time in the police classification after December 28, 2012 and age 57 for new local safety members.

2. Public Agency shall participate in the Public Employees' Retirement System from and after March 1, 1942 making its employees as hereinafter provided, members of said System subject to all provisions of the Public Employees• Retirement Law except such as apply only on election of a contracting agency and are not provided for herein and to all amendments to said Law hereafter enacted except those, which by express provisions thereof, apply only on the election of a contracting agency.

3. Public Agency agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the California Public Employees' Retirement System (CalPERS) and its trustees, agents and employees, the CalPERS Board of Administration, and the California Public Employees' Retirement
Fund from any claims, demands, actions,
losses, liabilities, damages, judgments, expenses and costs, including but not limited to interest, penalties and attorney fees that may arise as a result of any of the following:
(a) Public Agency's election to provide retirement benefits, provisions or formulas under this Contract that are different than the retirement benefits, provisions or formulas provided under the Public Agency's prior non-CalPERS retirement program.
(b) Any dispute, disagreement, claim,
or proceeding (including
without limitation arbitration, administrative hearing, or litigation) between Public Agency and its employees (or their
representatives) which relates to Public Agency's election to amend this Contract to provide retirement benefits, provisions or formulas that are different than such employees' existing retirement benefits, provisions or formulas.
(c) Public Agency's agreement with a third party other than CalPERS to provide retirement benefits, provisions, or formulas that are different than the retirement benefits, provisions or formulas provided under this Contract and provided for under the California Public Employees' Retirement Law.

Page 6 of 13 ends

278

4. Employees of Public Agency in the following classes shall become members of said Retirement System except such in each such class as are excluded by law or this agreement:
a. Local Fire Fighters (herein referred to as local safety members); b. Local Police Officers (herein referred to as local safety members); c. Employees other than local safety members (herein referred to as local miscellaneous members).

5. In addition to the classes of employees excluded from membership by said Retirement Law, the following classes of employees shall not become members of said Retirement System:
a. PERSONS EMPLOYED JUNE 1, 1962, OR THEREAFTER IN THE

FOLLOWING CLASSES IN THE FOLLOWING CLASSES IN THE

RECREATION AND PARKS LIBRARY, AND FINANCE
DEPARTMENTS:

ASSISTANT CAMP UTILITY MAN

CAMP CLERK

CAMP COUNSELOR

CAMP NURSE

CAMP SUPERVISOR

CAMP UTILITY MAN

CAMP RECREATION LEADER

COOK'S AIDE

CHIEF COOK

FIRST ASSISTANT COOK

KITCHEN HELPER

SECOND ASSISTANT COOK

DINING ROOM HELPER

DINING ROOM SUPERVISOR

FIELD APPRAISER

LIBRARY PAGE I

LIBRARY PAGE II

LIFEGUARD

ASSISTANT PLAYGROUND LEADER

PLAYGROUND LEADER

PLAYGROUND LEADER TRAINEE

SENIOR PLAYGROUND
LEADER
SPECIAL ACTIVITY LEADER;

Page 7 of 13 ends

279
b. PERSONS EMPLOYED APRIL 1, 1963, OR THEREAFTER AS
POLICE TRAINEES;
c. PHYSICIANS EMPLOYED AFTER AUGUST 1, 1963, CLASSIFIED AS "PHYSICIANS" IN THE CITY'S POSITION ORDINANCE AS
THAT ORDINANCE EXISTED ON AUGUST 1, 1963;
d. PERSONS COMPENSATED ON AN HOURLY BASIS WHO

ENTER EMPLOYMENT WITH PUBLIC AGENCY ON OCTOBER
16, 1965, OR THEREAFTER; AND
e. EMPLOYEES WHO FIRST ENTERED PUBLIC AGENCY SERVICE
PRIOR TO JANUARY 26, 1973, IN AN EMPLOYMENT IN WHICH

THEY WERE ELIGIBLE FOR MEMBERSHIP IN ANY ONE OF THE

PUBLIC AGENCY'S RETIREMENT SYSTEMS FOR SAFETY

MEMBERS, AND WHO HAVE NOT EXECUTED AND FILED WITH

THE PUBLIC AGENCY A WAIVER OF RIGHTS UNDER THE

LOCAL SYSTEM DURING THE PERIOD PRESCRIBED, SUCH

EXCLUSION SHALL APPLY WHETHER OR NOT THE

EMPLOYEE REENTERS SERVICE OF THE PUBLIC AGENCY
THEREAFTER.

6. Those
safety members in the local retirement system employed by Public Agency and who did not waive their rights under said local system were provided another opportunity to execute and file a waiver on or before October 28, 1983.

7. Assets heretofore accumulated with respect to members in the local retirement system have been transferred to the Public Employees' Retirement System and applied against the liability for prior service incurred thereunder. That portion of the assets so transferred which represent the accumulated contributions (plus interest thereof) required of the employees under said local
system has been credited to the individual membership
account of each such employee under the Public Employees' Retirement System.

8. Public Agency and the Berkeley Redevelopment Agency have agreed to a merger of their contracts, and this contract shall be a continuation of the benefits of the contract of the Berkeley Redevelopment Agency, pursuant to Section 20567.6 of the Government Code. Such merger is effective as of August 1, 1977. Public Agency, by this contract, assumes the assets and liabilities accumulated under the former contract of the Berkeley Redevelopment Agency. Legislation repealed said Section effective January 1, 1988.

Page 8 of 13 ends

Berkeley City CouncilFebruary 22, 2022

Berkeley City Council
February 22, 2022