Berkeley City Council
October 11, 2022

Tuesday, October 11, 2022 AGENDA Page 1

AGENDA

BERKELEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Tuesday, October 11, 2022
6:00 PM

JESSE ARREGUIN, MAYOR
Councilmembers:

DISTRICT 1 – RASHI KESARWANI DISTRICT 5 – SOPHIE HAHN
DISTRICT 2 – TERRY TAPLIN DISTRICT 6 – SUSAN WENGRAF
DISTRICT 3 – BEN BARTLETT DISTRICT 7 – RIGEL ROBINSON
DISTRICT 4 – KATE HARRISON DISTRICT 8 – LORI DROSTE

PUBLIC ADVISORY: THIS MEETING WILL BE CONDUCTED EXCLUSIVELY THROUGH

VIDEOCONFERENCE AND TELECONFERENCE
Pursuant to Government Code Section 54953(e) and the state declared emergency, this meeting of the City Council will be conducted exclusively through teleconference and Zoom videoconference. The COVID -19 state of emergency continues to directly impact the ability of the members to meet safely in person and presents imminent risks to the health of attendees. Therefore, no physical meeting location will be available.

Live captioned broadcasts of Council Meetings are available on Cable B -TV (Channel 33) and via internet accessible video stream at
http://berkeley.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?publish_id=1244.

To access the meeting remotely: Join from a PC, Mac, iPad, iPhone, or Android device: Please use this UR L https://us02web.zoom.us/j/88115464108. If you do not wish for your name to appear on the screen, then use the drop down menu and click on "rename" to rename yourself to be anonymous. To request to speak, use the “raise hand” icon by rolling over the bottom of the screen.

To join by phone: D ial 1-669-900-9128 or 1-877-853-5257 (Toll Free) and enter Meeting ID: 881 1546 4108. If you wish to comment during the public comment portion of the agenda, Press *9 and wait to be recognized by the Chair.

Please be mindful that the teleconference will be recorded as any Council meeting is recorded, and all other rules of procedure and decorum will apply for Council meetings conducted by teleconference or videoconference.

To submit a written communication for the City Council’s consideration and inclusion in the public record, email [email protected].

This meeting will be conducted in accordance with the Brown Act, Government Code Section 54953. Any member of the public may attend this meeting. Questions regarding this matter may be addressed to Mark Numainville, City Clerk, (510) 981- 6900. The City Council may take action related to any subject listed on the Agenda. Meetings will adjourn at 11:00 p.m. - any items outstanding at that time will be carried over to a date/time to be specified.

Tuesday, October 11, 2022 AGENDA Page 2
Preliminary Matters
Roll Call:

Ceremonial Matters: In addition to those items listed on the agenda, the Mayor may add additional ceremonial matters.

City Manager Comments: The City Manager may make announcements or provide information to the City Council in the form of an oral report. The Council will not take action on such items but may request the City Manager place a report on a future agenda for discussion.

Public Comment on Non-Agenda Matters: Persons will be selected to address matters not on the Council agenda. If five or fewer persons wish to speak, each person selected will be allotted two minutes each. If more than five persons wish to speak, up to ten persons will be selected to address matters not on the Council agenda and each person selected will be allotted one minute each. The remainder of the speakers wishing to address the Council on non-agenda items will be heard at the end of the agenda.

Consent Calendar
The Council will first determine whether to move items on the agenda for “Action” or “Information” to the “Consent Calendar”, or move “Consent Calendar” items to “Action.” Three members of the City Council must agree to pull an item from the Consent Calendar for it to move to Action. Items that remain on the “Consent Calendar” are voted on in one motion as a group. “Information” items are not discussed or acted upon at the Council meeting unless they are moved to “Action” or “Consent”.

No additional items can be moved onto the Consent Calendar once public comment has commenced. At any time during, or immediately after, public comment on Information and Consent items, any Councilmember may move any Information or Consent item to “Action.” Following this, the Council will vote on the items remaining on the Consent Calendar in one motion.

For items moved to the Action Calendar from the Consent Calendar or Information Calendar, persons who spoke on the item during the Consent Calendar public comment period may speak again at the time the matter is taken up during the Action Calendar.

Public Comment on Consent Calendar and Information Items Only: The Council will take public comment on any items that are either on the amended Consent Calendar or the Information Calendar. Speakers will be entitled to two minutes each to speak in opposition to or support of Consent Calendar and Information Items. A speaker may only speak once during the period for public comment on Consent Calendar and Information items.

Additional information regarding public comment by City of Berkeley employees and interns: Employees and interns of the City of Berkeley, although not required, are encouraged to identify themselves as such, the department in which they work and state whether they are speaking as an individual or in their official capacity when addressing the Council in open session or workshops.

Consent Calendar
Tuesday, October 11, 2022 AGENDA Page 3

1. 2023 Tax Rate: Transportation Network Company User Tax From: City Manager
Recommendation: Adopt second reading of Ordinance No. 7,834-N.S. setting the 2023 tax rate (effective January 1, 2023) for the transportation network company at the following rates: 53.775 cents on the user for each prearranged trip that originates in the City that is not part of a pooled prearranged trip and 26.249 for each pooled prearranged trip on each user who arranges each prearranged trip that originates in the City and which comprises part of the pooled prearranged trip.

First Reading Vote: All Ayes.

Financial Implications: See report
Contact: Henry Oyekanmi, Finance, (510) 981-7300

2. Zoning Ordinance Amendments Making Technical Edits and Corrections to Berkeley Municipal Code (BMC) Title 23
From: City Manager
Recommendation: Adopt second reading of Ordinance No. 7,835-N.S. containing technical edits, corrections and other non-substantive amendments to the following sections of the Zoning Ordinance:
-BMC Section 23.204.050 (C-C Zoning District)
-BMC Section 23.204.080 (C-E Zoning District)
-BMC Section 23.204.090 (C-NS Zoning District)
-BMC Section 23.204.130 (C-DMU District)
-BMC Section 23.206.050 (Protected Uses)
-BMC Section 23.304.030 (Setbacks)
-BMC Section 23.304.090 (Usable Open Space)
-BMC Section 23.322.030 (Required Parking Spaces)
-BMC Section 23.406.070 (Design Review)
First Reading Vote: All Ayes.

Financial Implications: None
Contact: Jordan Klein, Planning and Development, (510) 981-7400

3. Resolution Making Required Findings Pursuant to the Government Code and Directing City Legislative Bodies to Continue to Meet Via Videoconference and Teleconference
From: City Manager
Recommendation: Adopt a Resolution making the required findings pursuant to Government Code Section 54953(e)(3) and determining that as a result of the continued threat to public health and safety posed by the spread of COVID-19, City legislative bodies shall continue to meet via videoconference and teleconference, initially ratified by the City Council on September 28, 2021, and subsequently reviewed and ratified on October 26, 2021, November 16, 2021, December 14, 2021, January 10, 2022, February 8, 2022, March 8, 2022, March 22, 2022, April 12, 2022, May 10, 2022, May 31, 2022, June 28, 2022, July 26, 2022, August 23, 2022, and September 20, 2022.

Financial Implications: To be determined
Contact: Farimah Brown, City Attorney, (510) 981-6950

Consent Calendar
Tuesday, October 11, 2022 AGENDA Page 4

4. Contract No. 117596-1 Amendment: Animal Fix Clinic (formerly Fix Our Ferals) for Spay and Neuter Services
From: City Manager
Recommendation: Adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to increase the total Spay Neuter Your Pet (SNYP) allocation from $23,812 to $35,000 and execute a contract and any necessary amendments with Animal Fix Clinic (formerly Fix Our Ferals) to provide no-cost spay and neuter surgeries to eligible pet owners for FY 2023, increasing the contract amount by $17,500 for a new total contract amount not to exceed $67,218 and extending the terms of the contract to September 14, 2023.

Financial Implications: General Fund - $17,500
Contact: Peter Radu, City Manager's Office, (510) 981-7000

5. Contract No. 108-410-1 Amendment: Paw Fund for Spay and Neuter Services From: City Manager
Recommendation: Adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to increase the total Spay Neuter Your Pet (SNYP) allocation from $23,812 to $35,000 and to execute a contract and amendments with Paw Fund to provide no-c ost spay and neuter surgeries to eligible pet owners for FY 2023, incr easing the contract amount by $17,500, for a new total contract amount not to exceed $134,466 and extending the terms of the contract to September 14, 2023.

Financial Implications: General Fund - $17,500
Contact: Peter Radu, City Manager's Office, (510) 981-7000

6. Formal Bid Solicitations and Request for Proposals Scheduled for Possible Issuance After Council Approval on October 11, 2022
From: City Manager
Recommendation: A
pprove the request for proposals or invitation for bids (attached to staff report) that will be, or are planned to be, issued upon final approval by the requesting department or division. All contracts over the City Manager’s threshold will be returned to Council for final approval. Total estimated cost of items included in this report is $2,968,600.

Financial Implications: Various Funds - $2,968,600
Contact: Henry Oyekanmi, Financ
e, (510) 981-7300

7. Contract No. 3220192 Amendment: Alameda County Network of Mental Health Clients
From: City Manager
Recommendation: Adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to amend Contract No. 3220192 with Alameda County Network of Mental Health Clients, Berkeley Drop-In Center (BDIC) Community Crisis Response Services to add $100,000 to hire one additional homeless outreac h staff member, increasing the not- to-exceed amount to $490,000, and extending the contract by one year to December 31, 2023.

Financial Implications: See report.

Contact: Lisa Warhuus, Health, Housing, and Community Services, (510) 981-5400

Consent Calendar
Tuesday, October 11, 2022 AGENDA Page 5

8. Revenue Grant Agreement: Funding Support from the State of California Women, Infant, Children Program
From: City Manager
Recommendation: Adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager or her designee to submit a grant agreement to the State of California, to accept the grants, and execute any resultant revenue agreements and amendments to conduct public health promotion, protection, and prevention services for the Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) program in the projected total amount of $1,810,197 for Federal Fiscal Years (FFY) 2023 through 2025.

Financial Implications: See report
Contact: Lisa Warhuus, Health, Housing, and Community Services, (510) 981-5400

9. Expand the Program Manager Series by Establishing the Principal Program Manager Classification and Salary Range
From: City Manager
Recommendation: Adopt a Resolution to expand the Program Manager Series by establishing the Principal Program Manager classification with a monthly stepped salary range of $12,651.60 to $15,309.90 effective October 7, 2022.

Financial Implications: See report
Contact: Donald E. Ellison, Human Resources, (510) 981-6800

10. Classification and Salary: Establishing the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Officer Classification and Salary Range
From: City Manager
Recommendation: Adopt a Resolution to expand the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Officer classification with a monthly stepped salary range of $11,497.20 - $15,107.73 effective October 7, 2022.

Financial Implications: See report
Contact: Donald E. Ellison, Human Resources, (510) 981-6800

11. Classification and Salary: Assistant to the City Attorney From: City Manager
Recommendation: Adopt a Resolution to establish the Assistant to the City Attorney classification with a monthly stepped salary range of $11,497.20- $15,107.73 effective October 11, 2022.

Financial Implications: See report
Contact: Donald E. Ellison, Human Resources, (510) 981-6800

Consent Calendar
Tuesday, October 11, 2022 AGENDA Page 6

12. Revision of the Tool Lending Specialist Classification to Reflect an Accurate Scope of Duties with a Four Percent (4%) Salary Increase From: City Manager
Recommendation: Adopt a Resolution amending Resolution No. 62,558-N.S. to approve the revision of the Tool Lending Specialist job specification to accurately reflect the scope of duties and to increase the current salary schedule by four percent (4%) effective March 16, 2021, or the employee’s start date, if more recent.

Financial Implications: See report
Contact: Tess Mayer, Library, (510) 981-6100

13. Contract: Abbe & Associates LLC for the development of the Integrated Zero Waste Management Strategic Plan
From: City Manager
Recommendation: Adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a contract and any amendments with Abbe & Associates LLC for the development of a draft and final Integrated Zero Waste Management Strategic Plan. Abbe & Associate LLC’s submittal was rated as the most comprehensive and responsive proposal to the RFP, Spec. No. 22-11477-C , released April 28, 2022. The contract’s total amount not to exceed is $500,000.

Financial Implications: See report
Contact: Liam Garland, Public Works, (510) 981-6300

Council Consent Items

14. Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) Program Expansion for West Berkeley Neighborhoods Within Two Blocks of Commercial Corridors From: Councilmember Kesarwani (Author), Councilmember Taplin (Co- Sponsor)
Recommendation: Referral to the City Manager to expand the scope of the Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) program as originally proposed by staff during the May 14, 2019 City Council Public Hearing as a way to allow more residents to opt-in to this program.

Financial Implications: See report
Contact: Rashi Kesarwani, Councilmember, District 1, (510) 981-7110

Council Consent Items
Tuesday, October 11, 2022 AGENDA Page 7

15. Regulation of Autonomous Vehicles (Reviewed by the Facilities, Infrastructure, Transportation, Environment & Sustainability Committee) From: Councilmember Taplin (Author), Councilmember Harrison (Co-Sponsor), Councilmember Robinson (Co-Sponsor)
Recommendation: Refer to the City Attorney the assessment of the legal abilities and opportunities for the City Council to regulate the operation, sale, and testing of autonomous vehicles (AVs) within the City of Berkeley and report to the Facilities, Infrastructure, Transportation, Environment and Sustainability Committee (FITES) on all findings.

Policy Committee Recommendation: To approve the item with a positive recommendation.

Financial Implications: Staff time
Contact: Terry Taplin, Councilmember, District 2, (510) 981-7120

16. Adopt an Ordinance Adding Chapter 13.09 to the Berkeley Municipal Code Prohibiting Discriminatory Reports to Law Enforcement (Reviewed by the Public Safety Committee)
From: Councilmember Harrison (Author), Councilmember Hahn (Co-Sponsor) Recommendation:

1. Adopt an Ordinance Amending Chapter 13.09 to the Berkeley Municipal Code Prohibiting Discriminatory Reports to Law Enforcement.

2. Refer to the City Manager to report to Council within twelve months with anonymized data and information regarding discriminatory reports to law enforcement.

Policy Committee Recommendation: Approve the item with a positive recommendation.

Financial Implications: Staff time
Contact: Kate Harrison, Councilmember, District 4, (510) 981-7140

17. Referral to the November 2022 AAO #1 Budget Process for $50,000 in Additional Traffic Calming at MLK and Addison
From: Councilmember Harrison (Author)
Recommendation: Referral to the November 2022 AAO1 Budget Process for $50,000 in additional traffic calming at MLK and Addison.

Financial Implications: $50,000
Contact: Kate Harrison, Councilmember, District 4, (510) 981-7140

Council Consent Items
Tuesday, October 11, 2022 AGENDA Page 8

18. Referral to the Transportation and Infrastructure Commission and City Manager to Consider and Make Recommendations Regarding the Policy of Deploying Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons and Other Treatments at Dangerous or High-Collision Pedestrian and Bicycle Intersections From: Councilmember Harrison (Author)
Recommendation: Referral to the Transportation and Infrastructure Commission and City Manager to consider and make recommendations regarding the policy of deploying Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) and other treatments at dangerous or high-collision pedestrian and bicycle intersections.

Financial Implications: See report
Contact: Kate Harrison, Councilmember, District 4, (510) 981-7140

19. Land Acknowledgement Recognizing Berkeley as the Ancestral, Unceded Home of the Ohlone people
From: Councilmember Hahn (Author), Mayor Arreguin (Co-Sponsor) Recommendation:

1. Adopt the Land Acknowledgement Statement Resolution recognizing that Berkeley is the ancestral, unceded home of the Ohlone people.

2. Display the Land Acknowledgement in writing at all in-person or online Regular meetings of the City Council and read the Acknowledgement at the first Regular meeting of each month in which Regular City Council meetings are held.

3. Recommend to all Berkeley Commissions, Committees, Boards, and other elected and appointed City entities to consider inclusion of the Land Acknowledgement in meeting practices and direct the City Manager to convey a copy of this Item and Resolution to all such entities for reference.

4. Direct the City Manager to post the Land Acknowledgement or a prominent link to the Acknowledgement on the home page of the City’s website and to create a webpage dedicated to Ohlone history and culture.

5. Now and in the future, consider additional more substantive reparative and restorative actions, including but not limited to those described under the heading “Actions/Alternatives Considered.”
Financial Implications: See report
Contact: Sophie Hahn, Councilmember, District 5, (510) 981-7150

Action Calendar
The public may comment on each item listed on the agenda for action as the item is taken up. For items moved to the Action Calendar from the Consent Calendar or Information Calendar, persons who spoke on the item during the Consent Calendar public comment period may speak again at the time the matter is taken up during the Action Calendar.

The Presiding Officer will request that persons wishing to speak use the "raise hand" function to determine the number of persons interested in speaking at that time. Up to ten (10) speakers may speak for two minutes. If there are more than ten persons interested in speaking, the Presiding Officer may limit the public comment for all speakers to one minute per speaker. Speakers are permitted to yield their time to one other speaker, however no one speaker shall have more than four minutes. The Presiding Officer may, with the consent of persons representing both sides of an issue, allocate a block of time to each side to present their issue.

Action items may be reordered at the discretion of the Chair with the consent of Council.

Action Calendar – Public Hearings
Tuesday, October 11, 2022 AGENDA Page 9
Staff shall introduce the public hearing item and present their comments. This is followed by five -minute presentations each by the appellant and applicant. The Presiding Officer will request that persons wishing to speak use the "raise hand" function to be recognized and to determine the number of persons interested in speaking at that time.

Up to ten (10) speakers may speak for two minutes. If there are more than ten persons inte rested in speaking, the Presiding Officer may limit the public comment for all speakers to one minute per speaker.

The Presiding Officer may with the consent of persons representing both sides of an issue allocate a block of time to each side to present their issue.

Each member of the City Council shall verbally disclose all ex parte contacts concerning the subject of the hearing. Councilmembers shall also submit a report of such contacts in writing prior to the commencement of the hearing. Written reports shall be available for public review in the office of the City Clerk.

20. Referral Response: Amendments to the Zoning Ordinance to clarify and streamline the permit process for Amusement Device Arcades From: City Manager
Recommendation: Conduct a public hearing and, upon conclusion, adopt the first reading of Zoning Ordinance amendments to provide consistency for the incidental use of Amusement Devices and regulate Amusement Device Arcades as Commercial Recreation Centers.

Financial Implications: See report.

Contact: Jordan Klein, Planning and Development, (510) 981-7400

21. ZAB Appeal: 2018 Blake Street, Use Permit #ZP2021-0095 From: City Manager
Recommendation: Conduct a public hearing and, upon conclusion, adopt a Resolution affirming the Zoning Adjustments Board (ZAB) decision to approve Use Permit #ZP2021-0095 to construct a six-story, multi-family residential building with 12 units (including two Low-Income units), and dismiss the appeal.

Financial Implications: None
Contact: Jordan Klein, Planning and Development, (510) 981-7400

Action Calendar

22a. Fair Workweek Ordinance; Adding Berkeley Municipal Code Chapter 13.110 (Reviewed by the Health, Life Enrichment, Equity & Community Committee) (Item Contains revised material)
From: Commission on Labor
Recommendation: Adopt first reading of the proposed Fair Workweek Ordinance, adding Berkeley Municipal Code Chapter 13.110.

Policy Committee Recommendation: To forward the Commission on Labor’s item to Council with a positive recommendation to adopt the version of the ordinance dated “7/7/22” that was presented to the Health, Life Enrichment, Equity & Community Committee at the July 11, 2022 meeting.

Financial Implications: See report
Contact: Margot Ernst, Commission Secretary, (510) 981-5400

Action Calendar
Tuesday, October 11, 2022 AGENDA Page 10
22b. Companion Report: Fair Workweek Ordinance; Adding Berkeley Municipal Code Chapter 13.110 (Reviewed by the Health, Life Enrichment, Equity & Community Committee)
From: City Manager
Recommendation: Direct this item to the Health, Life Enrichment, Equity, and Community Policy Committee for the following: Review and evaluate the proposed policy; and Evaluate resources needed to conduct the necessary analysis of impacts and costs associated with implementing the proposed policy.

Policy Committee Recommendation: To forward the Commission on Labor’s item to Council with a positive recommendation to adopt the version of the ordinance dated “7/7/22” that was presented to the Health, Life Enrichment, Equity & Community Committee at the July 11, 2022 meeting.

Financial Implications: See report
Contact: Lisa Warhuus, Health, Housing, and Community Services, (510) 981-5400

23. Reconsideration of Hopkins Corridor Plan in Light of Newly Available Material Information
From: Councilmember Hahn (Author), Councilmember Wengraf (Co-Sponsor) Recommendation:

1. Proceed with Paving of Hopkins Street from Sutter Street to San Pablo Avenue as currently scheduled for 2023.

2. Proceed with implementation of the approved facilities from Sutter to McGee Avenue (including the four-way stop sign at McGee) in accordance with the Supplemental 3 recommendations approved by the City Council on May 10, 2022, including but not limited to the requirement that Community Building/Placemaking elements be developed and implemented simultaneously with Complete Streets/Traffic elements, to the greatest extent feasible.

3. Apply up to the full $300,000 allocated between the FY 23 and FY 24 budgets towards the Community Building/Placemaking elements on the nine-block segment of Hopkins from Sutter to McGee to support their full and simultaneous implementation, as designed by a Landscape Architect.

4. Place on hold work towards implementing the changes for the three blocks of Hopkins from McGee to Gilman Street approved on May 10, 2022 pending further study of the alternatives, consideration of the specifications listed below under Alternatives to be Considered and Independent Study Specifications and additional City Council action, after the required study and community input, to either affirm the Council’s actions of May 10, 2022 or to implement a substitute or modified program.

5. Refer $400,000 to the FY 2024 budget process to fund a comprehensive, independent study of the McGee to Gilman portion of Hopkins Street, as specified below under Alternatives to be Considered and Independent Study Specifications.

Financial Implications: See report
Contact: Sophie Hahn, Councilmember, District 5, (510) 981-7150

Action Calendar
Tuesday, October 11, 2022 AGENDA Page 11

24. Harriet Tubman Terrace Tenant Support
From: Housing Advisory Commission
Recommendation: Recommend City Council take the following actions:
-Review the video created by tenants about conditions at Harriet Tubman Terrace that was shown at the July 7, 2022 Housing Advisory Commission meeting; -Direct the City Manager to investigate health and safety violations and other grievances identified by tenants at Harriet Tubman Terrace; and -City Council request Harriet Tubman Terrace provide tenants with a dedicated tenant advocate to assist with relocation and other needs.

Financial Implications: See report.

Contact: Mike Uberti, Commission Secretary, (510) 981-7400

Information Reports

25. Commission on Disability Fiscal Year 2022-2023 Work Plan From: Commission on Disability
Contact: Andrew Brozyna, Commission Secretary, (510) 981-6300

Public Comment – Items Not Listed on the Agenda
Adjournment
NOTICE CONCERNING YOUR LEGAL RIGHTS : If you object to a decision by the City Council to approve or deny a use permit or variance for a project the following requirements and restrictions apply:
1) No lawsuit challenging a City decision to deny (Code Civ. Proc. §1094.6(b)) or approve (Gov. Code 65009(c)(5)) a use permit or variance 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 use permit or variance, 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.

Archived indexed video streams are available at:
https://berkeleyca.gov/your-government/city-council/city-council-agendas.

Channel 33 rebroadcasts the following Wednesday at 9:00 a.m. and Sunday at 9:00 a.m.

Communications to the 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 to the City Clerk Department at 2180 Milvia Street. 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 Department for further information.

Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the City Council regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection at the public counter at the City Clerk Department located on the first floor of City Hall located at 2180 Milvia Street as well as posted on the City's website at

https://berkeleyca.gov/.

Agendas and agenda reports may be accessed via the Internet at:
https://berkeleyca.gov/your-government/city-council/city-council-agendas and may be read at reference desks at the following locations:

Tuesday, October 11, 2022 AGENDA Page 12
City Clerk Department - 2180 Milvia Street, First Floor Tel: 510-981-6900, TDD: 510-981-6903, Fax: 510-981-6901 Email: [email protected]

Libraries: Main – 2090 Kittredge Street,
Claremont Branch – 2940 Benvenue, West Branch – 1125 University, North Branch – 1170 The Alameda, South Branch – 1901 Russell

COMMUNICATION ACCESS INFORMATION:

To request a disability-related accommodation(s) to participate in the meeting, including auxiliary aids or services, please contact the Disability Services specialist at (510) 981-6418 (V) or (510) 981-6347 (TDD) at least three business days before the meeting date.

Captioning services are provided at the meeting, on B-TV, and on the Internet. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I hereby certify that the agenda for this meeting of the Berkeley City Council was posted at the display case located near the walkway in front of the Maudelle Shirek Building , 2134 Martin Luther King Jr. Way, as well as on the City’s website, on September 29, 2022.

Mark Numainville, City Clerk

Communications
Council rules limit action on Communications to referral to the City Manager and/or Boards and Commissions for investigation and/or recommendations. All communications submitted to Council are public record. Copies of individual communications are available for viewing at the City Clerk Department and through Records Online.

COVID-19 Moratorium Eviction Abuse

1. Thelma Tajirian

Dominguez Lawsuit and House Cars

2. Eric Friedman

Wildfire Prevention

3. Bruce Feingold

Wildlife Crossing Under University Avenue

4. Mike Vanderman

Preserving City Hall and the Veterans Building

5. Leila Moncharsh

Tuesday, October 11, 2022 AGENDA Page 13
Russian Sister Cities

6. Phil Allen

Use of Measure G Funds for Leasing Options

7. Cielo Rios (2)

2136-2154 San Pablo Draft EIR

8. Kelly Hammargren

9. Sharon Gong, Planning and Development, Land Use Division

Trash Along Berkeley Roads

10. Alleen Manning

COVID Mask Policy for the City of Berkeley

11. Kristie Lavelle

12. Sofia Pavlova

Only One Active Member on the Elmwood Business Improvement Advisory Board

13. Kieron Slaughter, on behalf of the Office of Economic Development

Enforce Zero Waste Policing and Education

14. Chrise de Tournay Birkhahn (2)

Concerts at Greek Theaters – Noise Issue and Drivers Leaving

15. Hunter Schiff-Welsh

More Moderate-Income Housing

16. Lani Allen

Bug Infested Library Books

17. Barbara Gilbert

Berkeley 2022 Cannabis Policy Scoreboard

18. Getting It Right from the Start

Council Meetings and Religious Holidays

19. Barbara Gilbert

Violation of the Fair Campaign Practices by the 2022 School Board Candidates

20. Berkeley Parents Union

New Zoning Rules

21. Robert Lauriston

22. Susan Taylor

23. Avram Gur Arye

24. Benjamin Lehman

Tuesday, October 11, 2022 AGENDA Page 14
Market and Low-Income Housing

25. Patrick Sheahan, on behalf of Claremont-Elmwood Neighborhood Association

British Home Secretary and Police Symbolic Gestures

26. Pamela Michaud

Berkeley Police Departments Budget

27. Nancy Becker

Leaders with Integrity Needed in Berkeley

28. Elana Auerbach

Serving the Public

29. Ako2account@

30. Al Dolgosh

31. Jami Page

32. Doug

33. Public Citizen

34. Ronnie C.

35. Donny Cash

36. Scott Jackson

Bond Measure L

37. David Lerman

38. Joel Libove

Existing Building Carbonization Code

39. Christopher La Combe
Supplemental Communications and Reports
Items received by the deadlines for submission will be compiled and distributed as follows. If no items are received by the deadline, no supplemental packet will be compiled for said deadline.

• Supplemental Communications and Reports 1
Available by 5:00 p.m. five days prior to the meeting.

• Supplemental Communications and Reports 2
Available by 5:00 p.m. the day before the meeting.

• Supplemental Communications and Reports 3
Available by 5:00 p.m. two days following the meeting.

Ordinance No. 7,834-N.S. Page 1 of 1
ORDINANCE NO. 7,834-N.S.

IMPOSING A GENERAL TAX ON USERS OF TRANSPORATION NETWORK COMPANIES AT A RATE OF 53.775 CENTS FOR PRIVATE TRIPS AND 26.249 CENTS

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

Section 1. The 2023 Tax Rate, effective January 1, 2023, to fund general municipal services is set at 53.775 cents for private trips and 26.249 for pooled trips.

Section 2. This tax rate will result in estimated total collections of $978,705.

Section 3. Copies of this Ordinance shall be posted for two days prior to adoption in the display case located near the walkway in front of the Maudelle Shirek Building, 2134 Martin Luther King Jr. Way. Within 15 days of adoption, copies of this Ordinance shall be filed at each branch of the Berkeley Public Library and the title shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation.

At a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Berkeley held on September 20, 2022, this Ordinance was passed to print and ordered published by posting by the following vote:

Ayes: Bartlett, Droste, Hahn, Harrison, Kesarwani, Robinson, Taplin, Wengraf, and Arreguin.

Noes: None.

Absent: None.

01

Ordinance No. 7,835-N.S. Page 1 of 8
ORDINANCE NO. 7,835-N.S.

AMENDING TITLE 23 OF THE BERKELEY MUNICIPAL CODE TO CORRECT ERRORS

AND MAKE NON-SUBSTANTIVE, TECHNICAL EDITS TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Berkeley as follows:

Section 1. That Berkeley Municipal Code Section 23.204.050.D Table 23.204-8 is amended as follows:

Table 23.204-8. C-C DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS

PROJECT LAND USE
NON-

RESIDENTIAL
MIXED

USE RESIDENTIAL ONLY

SUPPLEMENTAL

STANDARDS
Lot Area Minimum
New Lots No minimum 5,000 sq. ft
Per Group Living Accommodation
Resident 350 sq. ft. [1]

23.304.020
Usable Open Space, Minimum
Per Dwelling Unit 200 sq. ft. 200 sq. ft.
[2]
200 sq. ft.

Per Group Living Accommodation
Resident 90 sq. ft.

23.304.090
Floor Area Ratio, Maximum 3.0 No maximum
Main Building Height, Minimum No minimum
Main Building Height, Maximum
40 ft. and 2
stories
40 ft. and 3
stories [3]
[4]
35 ft. and 3 stories

23.304.050
Lot Line Setbacks, Minimum 23.304.030--Setbacks
Abutting/Confronting a Non-residential
District No minimum See Table 23.204-9
Abutting/Confronting a Residential District See 23.304.030.C Building Separation, Minimum No minimum

23.304.040--Building
Separation in
Residential Districts
Lot Coverage, Maximum 100% See Table 23.204-10 23.304.120--Lot Coverage
Notes:
[1] One additional resident is allowed for remaining lot area between 200 and 350 square feet. [2] Minimum open space for mixed use projects can be reduced with a UP(PH). See 23.204.050.D.3. [3] In mixed use buildings, the third and higher stories must be used for residential purposes. [4] The maximum height of a mixed use project can be increased to 50 ft and 4 stories with the issuance of a UP(PH).

02

2 Ordinance No. 7,835-N.S. Page 2 of 8
Section 2. That Berkeley Municipal Code Section 23.204.080.D Table 23.204-21 is amended as follows:

Table 23.204-21. C-E DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Project Land Use
Non-Residential and
Mixed Use Residential Only
Supplemental
Standards
Lot Area, Minimum No minimum 5,000 sq. ft.

New Lots No minimum 5,000 sq. ft.

Per Group Living Accommodation
Resident
350 sq. ft. [1]

23.304.020--Lot
Requirements
Usable Open Space
Per Dwelling Unit 200 sq. ft. [2]
Per Group Living Accommodation
Resident
90 sq. ft.[2]

23.304.090--Usable
Open Space
Floor Area Ratio, Maximum
Corner Lot 1.0
All Other Lot 0.8 No maximum
Main Building Height, Minimum No minimum No minimum
Main Building Height, Maximum 28 ft. and 2 stories [3] 35 ft. and 3 stories Lot Line Setbacks, Minimum
Abutting/Confronting a Non-residential
District
No minimum
Abutting/Confronting a Residential District See Table 23.304-3 See Table 23.204-22 23.304.030--Setbacks
Building Separation, Minimum No minimum See Table 23.204-22 Lot Coverage, Maximum 100% See Table 23.204-23 23.304.120--Lot Coverage
Notes:
[1] One additional resident is allowed for remaining lot area between 200 and 350 square feet. [2] Open space requirements for mixed use projects may be modified by the ZAB. See 23.204.080.D.3 [3] A basement level devoted exclusively to parking is not counted as a story.

3 Ordinance No. 7,835-N.S. Page 3 of 8
Section 3. That Berkeley Municipal Code 23.204.090.D Table 23.204-24 is amended as follows:

Table 23.204-24. C-NS DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Project Land Use
Non-Residential and
Mixed Use Residential Only
Supplemental
Standards
Lot Area, Minimum
New Lots 4,000 sq. ft. 5,000 sq. ft.

Per Group Living Accommodation
Resident 350 sq. ft. [1]

23.304.020
Usable Open Space, Minimum
Per Dwelling Unit 40 sq. ft. [2] 200 sq. ft.

Per Group Living Accommodation
Resident No minimum 90 sq. ft.

23.304.090--Usable
Open Space
Floor Area Ratio, Maximum 1.0 No maximum
Main Building Height [3]
Minimum 2 stories No minimum
Maximum 35 ft. and 3 stories 28 ft. and 2 stories
Lot Line Setbacks, Minimum
Abutting/Confronting a Non-
residential District No minimum
Abutting/Confronting a Residential
District
See 23.304.030.C.2 See Table 23.204-25

23.304.030
Building Separation, Minimum No minimum [4] See Table 23.204-25 23.304.040 Lot Coverage, Maximum 100% See Table 23.204-26 23.304.120 Notes:
[1] One additional resident is allowed for remaining lot area between 200 and 350 square feet. [2] For mixed use projects, usable open space dimensions may be smaller than required in 23.304.090.B.3, but no dimension may be less than 6 feet.
[3] Basement levels devoted exclusively to parking are not counted as a story. [4] For mixed use projects, minimum building separation shall be as required for residential-only projects. See Table 23.204-25

4 Ordinance No. 7,835-N.S. Page 4 of 8
Section 4. That the Berkeley Municipal Code 23.204.130.E.4 Table 23.204-40 is amended as follows:

Table 23.204-40. C-DMU USABLE OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS

MINIMUM USABLE OPEN SPACE SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARDS
Residential Uses 80 sq. ft./unit [1] 23.304.090—Usable Open Space Non-Residential
Uses 1 sq. ft. of privately-owned public open space per 50 sq. ft. of commercial floor area.

Notes:
[1] Each square foot of usable open space provided as privately-owned public open space is counted as two square feet of required on-site open space.

Section 5. That Berkeley Municipal Code 23.206.050.A.7.(d) is amended as follows:
(d)  MU-LI Lots Under Common Ownerships. Protected industrial uses in the MU-LI district may be changed to a non-protected use if:
i.  The protected industrial use is on a lot or group of abutting and confronting lots under single ownership and with more than one building; and ii.  25 percent or less of the total gross floor area in all buildings on the lot(s) remains as a protected industrial use.

Section 6. That Berkeley Municipal Code Section 23.304.030.B Table 23.304-1 is amended as follows:

Table 23.304-1. ALLOWED SETBACK REDUCTIONS IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS

DISTRICT WHERE

ALLOWED WHEN ALLOWED

MINIMUM

SETBACK WITH

REDUCTION

REQUIRED
PERMIT

REQUIRED ADDITIONAL
FINDINGS [1]
Front Setback Reductions
ES-R
On any lot No minimum. UP(PH) [2] The reduced setback is: 1) necessary to allow economic use
of property due to the size, shape
of the lot or the topography of the
site; and 2) consistent with the ES-
R district purpose.

R-S; R-SMU
On any lot No minimum AUP The reduced setback is
appropriate given the setbacks
and architectural design of
surrounding buildings

5 Ordinance No. 7,835-N.S. Page 5 of 8
R-SMU
For either: 1) a
main building with
dwelling units or
group living
accommodations;
or 2) any building
north of Durant
Avenue
No minimum AUP The reduced setback is
appropriate given the setbacks
and architectural design of
surrounding buildings
Rear Setback Reductions
ES-R [3]
On any lot No minimum UP(PH) [2] The reduced setback is: 1) necessary to allow economic use
of property due to the size, shape
of the lot or the topography of the
site; and 2) consistent with the ES-
R district purpose.

R-1, R-1A On a lot less than
100 ft. deep
20% of lot depth ZC None
R-1A
To construct a
dwelling unit
12 ft. AUP The unit would not cause a
detrimental impact on emergency
access; or on light, air or privacy
for neighboring properties.

R-2, R-2A, R-3, R-
4, R-5, R-S, R-
SMU
On a lot with two or
more main
buildings with
dwelling units
No minimum AUP No additional findings
R-SMU
For either: 1) a
main building with
dwelling units or
group living
accommodations;
or 2) any building
north of Durant
Avenue
No minimum AUP The reduction is appropriate given
the setbacks and architectural
design of surrounding buildings
Side Setback Reductions
ES-R [3]
Any lot No minimum UP(PH) [2] The reduced setback is: 1) necessary to allow economic use
of property due to the size, shape
of the lot or the topography of the
site; and 2) consistent with the ES-
R district purpose.

R-1, R-1A
Lot width less than
40 ft. [4]
10% of lot width or
3 ft., whichever is
greater
ZC None
R-2, R-2A
Lot width less than
40 ft.

First and second
stories: 10% of lot
width or 3 ft.,
ZC None

6 Ordinance No. 7,835-N.S. Page 6 of 8
whichever is
greater; Third story:
5 ft.

R-SMU
For either: 1) a
main building with
dwelling units or
group living
accommodations;
or 2) any building
north of Durant
Avenue
No minimum AUP The reduced setback is
appropriate given the setbacks
and architectural design of
surrounding buildings
Notes:
[1] Findings are in addition to any AUP or Use Permit findings required in 23.406--Specific Permit Requirements.
[2] Fire Department must review and approve reduced setbacks in respect to fire safety. [3] For lots less than 5,000 square feet, reductions are not allowed for property lines abutting a property under different ownership.
[4] Not permitted for rear main buildings in the R-1A district.

Section 7. That Berkeley Municipal Code Section 23.304.090.A is amended as follows:

A. Applicability. The standards in this section apply to areas used to satisfy minimum usable open space requirements.

Section 8. That Berkeley Municipal Code Section 23.304.030.B.7 is amended as follows:

7.  Solar Energy Equipment. The Zoning Officer may approve an AUP for solar energy equipment to project into a required setback upon finding that:
(a)  The projection is necessary to install the solar energy equipment; (b)  The proposed structures and equipment are installed with the primary purpose to collect, store, and use solar energy; and
Section 9. That Berkeley Municipal Code Section 23.322.030.C.2 Table 23.322-4 is amended as follows:

7 Ordinance No. 7,835-N.S. Page 7 of 8
Table 23.322-4. REQUIRED OFF-STREET PARKING IN MANUFACTURING DISTRICTS Land Use Required Parking Spaces
Residential Uses
Accessory Dwelling Unit See Chapter 23.306
Dwellings None required
Group Living Accommodation None required
Non-Residential Uses
All non-residential uses except
uses listed below
2 per 1,000 sq. ft.

Art/Craft Studio 1 per 1,000 sq. ft.

Community Care Facility 1 per 2 non-resident employees
Food Service Establishment 1 per 300 sq. ft.

Library 1 per 500 sq. ft. of publicly accessible floor area Laboratories 1 per 650 sq. ft.

Nursing Home 1 per 5 residents, plus 1 per 3 employees
Medical Practitioners One per 300 sq. ft.

Large Vehicle Sales and Rental
MU-LI District: 1.5 per 1,000 sq. ft.

All Other Districts: 1 per 1,000 sq. ft. of display floor area plus 1 per 500 sq. ft. of other floor area; 2 per service bay
Manufacturing
MU-R District: 1.0 per 1,000 sq. ft.

All Other Districts: 1 per 1,000 sq. ft. for spaces less than 10,000 sq. ft.; 1 per 1,500 sq. ft. for spaces 10,000 sq. ft. or more
Storage, warehousing, and
wholesale trade
1 per 1,000 sq. ft. for spaces of less than 10,000 sq. ft.; 1 per 1,500 sq. ft. for spaces 10,000 sq. ft. or more
Live/Work
MU-LI District: 1 per 1,000 sq. ft. of work area where workers/clients are permitted MU-R District: if workers/clients are permitted in work area, 1 per first 1,000 sq. ft. of work area and 1 per each additional 750 sq. ft. of work area Notes:
[1] For multiple dwellings where the occupancy will be exclusively for persons over the age of 62, the number of required off-street parking spaces may be reduced to 25% of what would otherwise be required for multiple-family dwelling use, subject to obtaining a Use Permit.

Section 10. That Berkeley Municipal Code Section 23.406.070.A is amended as follows:

A. Purpose. Design Review is a discretionary process to ensure that exterior changes to buildings comply with the City of Berkeley Design Guidelines and other applicable City design standards and guidelines.

8 Ordinance No. 7,835-N.S. Page 8 of 8
Section 11: Copies of this Ordinance shall be posted for two days prior to adoption in the display case located near the walkway in front of the Maudelle Shirek Building, 2134 Martin Luther King Jr. Way. Within 15 days of adoption, copies of this Ordinance shall be filed at each branch of the Berkeley Public Library and the title shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation.

At a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Berkeley held on September 20, 2022, this Ordinance was passed to print and ordered published by posting by the following vote:

Ayes: Bartlett, Droste, Hahn, Harrison, Kesarwani, Robinson, Taplin, Wengraf, and Arreguin.

Noes: None.

Absent: None.

Office of the City Attorney

CONSENT CALENDAR
October 11, 2022
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
Madame City Manager
From: Farimah Faiz Brown, City Attorney
Subject: Resolution Making Required Findings Pursuant to the Government Code and Directing City Legislative Bodies to Continue to Meet Via Videoconference and Teleconference

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution making the required findings pursuant to Government Code Section 54953(e)(3) and determining that as a result of the continued threat to public health and safety posed by the spread of COVID-19, City legislative bodies shall continue to meet via videoconference and teleconference, initially ratified by the City Council on September 28, 2021, and subsequently reviewed and ratified on October 26, 2021, November 16, 2021, December 14, 2021, January 10, 2022, February 8, 2022, March 8, 2022, March 22, 2022, April 12, 2022, May 10, 2022, May 31, 2022, June 28, 2022, July 26, 2022, August 23, 2022, and September 20, 2022.

FISCAL IMPACT OF RECOMMENDATION
To be determined.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
The City Council made the initial findings required under the Government Code on September 28, 2021. The Council must make the findings every thirty days in order to continue to meet exclusively through video conference or teleconference.

Pursuant to California Government Code section 8630 and Berkeley Municipal Code Chapter 2.88.040, on March 3, 2020, the City Manager, in her capacity as Director of Emergency Services, proclaimed a local emergency due to conditions of extreme peril to the safety of persons and property within the City as a consequence of the global spread of a severe acute respiratory illness caused by a novel (new) coronavirus (COVID-19), including a confirmed case in the City of Berkeley. As a result of multiple confirmed and presumed cases in Alameda County, the County has declared a local health emergency. On March 4, 2020, Governor Gavin Newsom issued a Proclamation of a State of Emergency due to the spread of COVID-19. On March 10, 2020, the City

03

Council ratified the Proclamation of Local Emergency with the passage of Resolution No. 69-312.

On March 17, 2020, Governor Newsom signed Executive Order N-29-20, which suspended certain portions of the Ralph M. Brown Act (Cal. Gov. Code § 54950 et seq.) related to the holding of teleconferenced meetings by City legislative bodies. Among other things, Executive Order N-29-20 suspended requirements that each location from which an official accesses a teleconferenced meeting be accessible to the public.

These changes were necessary to allow teleconferencing to be used as a tool for ensuring social distancing. City legislative bodies have held public meetings via videoconference and teleconference pursuant to these provisions since March 2020.

These provisions of Executive Order N-29-20 will expire on September 30, 2021.

COVID-19 continues to pose a serious threat to public health and safety. There are now over 4,700 confirmed cases of COVID-19 and at least 55 deaths in the City of Berkeley.

Additionally, the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.617.2 (“Delta”) variant of COVID-19 that is currently circulating nationally and within the City is contributing to a substantial increase in transmissibility and more severe disease.

As a result of the continued threat to public health posed by the spread of COVID-19, state and local officials continue to impose or recommend measures to promote social distancing, mask wearing and vaccination. Holding meetings of City legislative bodies in person would present imminent risks to the health and safety of the public and members of legislative bodies, and therefore public meetings cannot safely be held in person at this time
Assembly Bill 361 (Rivas), signed into law by Governor Newsom on September 16, 2021, amended a portion of the Brown Act (Government Code Section 54953) to authorize the City Council, during the state of emergency, to determine that, due to the spread of COVID-19, holding in-person public meetings would present an imminent risk to the health or safety of attendees, and therefore City legislative bodies must continue to meet via videoconference and teleconference. Assembly Bill 361 requires that the City Council must review and ratify such a determination every thirty (30) days.

Therefore, if the Council passes this resolution on October 11, 2022, the Council will need to review and ratify the resolution by November 10, 2022.

This item requests that the Council review the circumstances of the continued state of emergency posed by the spread of COVID-19, and find that the state of emergency continues to directly impact the ability of the public and members of City legislative bodies to meet safely in person, that holding public meetings of City legislative bodies in person would present imminent risks to the health and safety of attendees, and that state and local officials continue to promote social distancing, mask wearing and vaccination. This item further requests that the Council determine that City legislative bodies, including but not limited to the City Council and its committees, and all commissions and boards, shall continue to hold public meetings via videoconference

and teleconference, and that City legislative bodies shall continue to comply with all provisions of the Brown Act, as amended by SB 361.

BACKGROUND
On March 1, 2020, Alameda County Public Health Department and Solano County Public Health Department reported two presumptive cases of COVID-19, pending confirmatory testing by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), prompting Alameda County to declare a local health emergency.

On March 3, 2020, the City’s Director of Emergency Services proclaimed a local emergency due to the spread of COVID-19, including a confirmed case in the City of Berkeley and multiple confirmed and presumed cases in Alameda County.

On March 4, 2020, Governor Gavin Newsom issued a Proclamation of a State of Emergency due to the spread of COVID-19.

On March 10, 2020, the City Council ratified the Proclamation of Local Emergency.

Since that date, there have been over 4,700 confirmed cases of COVID-19 and at least 57 deaths in the City of Berkeley.

On March 17, 2020, Governor Newsom signed Executive Order N-29-20 which suspended certain portions of the Ralph M. Brown Act (Cal. Gov. Code § 54950 et seq.) to allow teleconferencing of public meetings to be used as a tool for ensuring social distancing. As a result, City legislative bodies have held public meetings via teleconference throughout the pandemic. The provisions of Executive Order N-29-20 allowing teleconferencing to be used as a tool for social distancing will expire on September 30, 2021.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
Not applicable.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
The Resolution would enable the City Council and its committees, and City boards and commissions to continue to hold public meetings via videoconference and teleconference in order to continue to socially distance and limit the spread of COVID-

19. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
None.

CONTACT PERSON
Farimah Brown, City Attorney, City Attorney’s Office (510) 981-6998 Mark Numainville, City Clerk, (510) 981-6908
Attachments:1: Resolution Directing City Legislative Bodies to Continue to Meet Via Videoconference and Teleconference

RESOLUTION NO. –N.S.

RESOLUTION MAKING THE REQUIRED FINDINGS PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54953(E)(3) AND DIRECTING CITY LEGISLATIVE BODIES TO

CONTINUE TO MEET VIA VIDEOCONFERENCE AND TELECONFERENCE WHEREAS, in accordance with Berkeley Municipal Code section 2.88.040 and sections 8558(c) and 8630 of the Government Code, which authorize the proclamation of a local emergency when conditions of disaster or extreme peril to the safety of persons and property within the territorial limits of a City exist, the City Manager, serving as the Director of Emergency Services, beginning on March 3, 2020, did proclaim the existence of a local emergency caused by epidemic in the form of the global spread of a severe acute respiratory illness caused by a novel (new) coronavirus (“COVID-19”), including confirmed cases in California and the San Francisco Bay Area, and presumed cases in Alameda County prompting the County to declare a local health emergency; and WHEREAS, on March 10, 2020, the City Council ratified the Proclamation of Local Emergency with the passage of Resolution No. 69-312; and WHEREAS, on March 4, 2020, Governor Gavin Newsom issued a Proclamation of a State of Emergency pursuant to the California Emergency Services Act, in particular, Government Code section 8625; and
WHEREAS, the Proclamation of a State of Emergency issued by Governor Newsom on March 4, 2020 continues to be in effect; and
WHEREAS, on September 16, 2021, Governor Newsom signed into law AB 361, which authorizes the City Council to determine that, due to the continued threat to public health and safety posed by the spread of COVID-19, City legislative bodies shall continue to meet via videoconference and teleconference; and
WHEREAS, the City Council does find that the aforesaid conditions of extreme peril continue to exist, and now include over 4,700 confirmed cases of COVID-19 and at least 55 deaths in the City of Berkeley; and
WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes that the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.617.2 (“Delta”) variant of COVID-19 that is currently circulating nationally and within the City is contributing to a substantial increase in transmissibility and more severe disease; and WHEREAS, as a result of the continued threat to public health posed by the spread of COVID-19, state and local officials continue to impose or recommend measures to promote social distancing, mask wearing and vaccination; and

WHEREAS, holding meetings of City legislative bodies in person would present imminent risks to the health and safety of the public and members of legislative bodies, and therefore public meetings cannot safely be held in person at this time; and WHEREAS, the City Council made the initial findings required by the Government Code on September 28, 2021; and
WHEREAS, the City Council made subsequent findings required by the Government Code on October 26, 2021, November 16, 2021, December 14, 2021, January 10, 2022, February 8, 2022, March 8, 2022, March 22, 2022, April 12, 2022, May 10, 2022, May 31, 2022, June 28, 2022, July 26, 2022, August 23, 2022, and September 20, 2022; and WHEREAS, the City Council will need to again review the need for the continuing necessity of holding City legislative body meetings via videoconference and teleconference by November 10, 2022.

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that, pursuant to Government Code section 54953, the City Council has reviewed the circumstances of the continued state of emergency posed by the spread of COVID-19, and finds that the state of emergency continues to directly impact the ability of the public and members of City legislative bodies to meet safely in person, that holding public meetings of City legislative bodies in person would present imminent risks to the health and safety of attendees, and that state and local officials continue to promote social distancing, mask wearing and vaccination.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that City legislative bodies, including but not limited to the City Council and its committees, and all commissions and boards, shall continue to hold public meetings via videoconference and teleconference.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that all City legislative bodies shall comply with the requirements of Government Code section 54953(e)(2) and all applicable laws, regulations and rules when conducting public meetings pursuant to this resolution.

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: www.cityofberkeley.info/manager

CONSENT CALENDAR
OCTOBER 11, 2022
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Dee Williams Ridley, City Manager
Submitted by: Peter Radu, Assistant to the City Manager Subject: Contract No. 117596-1 Amendment: Animal Fix Clinic (formerly Fix Our Ferals) for Spay and Neuter Services

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to increase the total Spay Neuter Your Pet (SNYP) allocation from $23,812 to $35,000 and execute a contract and any necessary amendments with Animal Fix Clinic (formerly Fix Our Ferals) to provide no- cost spay and neuter surgeries to eligible pet owners for FY 2023, increasing the contract amount by $17,500 for a new total contract amount not to exceed $67,218 and extending the terms of the contract to September 14, 2023.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
The “Spay Neuter Your Pet” (SNYP) grant comes from the General Fund and is a community agency allocation that is given by Animal Services each year. The SNYP program provided $23,812 to Animal Fix Clinic (formerly Fix Our Ferals) for FY 2018, $11,906 for FY 2021, $14,000 for FY 2022, for a total of $49,718. Staff propose to award the amount of $17,500 to Animal Fix Clinic in FY 2023, for a total amount not to exceed $67,218.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
The current contract between the City of Berkeley and Animal Fix Clinic expired on July, 31, 2023. Animal Fix Clinic has contracted with the City of Berkeley to provide no-cost spay and neuter surgeries to eligible pet owners since FY 2018. By providing no-cost spay and neuter surgeries, Animal Fix Clinic decreases the number of unwanted pet offspring and reduces the number of homeless animals entering the Dona Spring Animal Shelter.

A second contractor, Paw Fund has contracted with the City of Berkeley to provide no- cost spay neuter and surgeries to eligible pet owners since 2016. The FY 2023 SNYP grant will be divided between these two community-based organizations.

04

Animal Services Contract with the Animal Fix Clinic Consent Calendar October 11, 2022

BACKGROUND
Many low-income pet owners would like to access spay and neuter services for their pets but are unable to afford the cost of surgery through local veterinary clinics. Animal Fix Clinic consistently works with low-income pet owners and is able to reach out to eligible pet owners whose animals need spay and neuter surgeries. The SNYP program provides for 175 free spay or neuter surgeries each year which decreases unwanted litters of pets and decreases the number of unwanted pets entering the Dona Spring Animal Shelter.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
Animal Fix Clinic is well equipped and capable of providing the services under the SNYP program. If this funding is not authorized, it would prevent 60 animals belonging to low income pet owners from being spay or neutered at no cost to the owner.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
The alternative to providing free spay and neuter surgeries to low income residents it to refer them to low cost spay and neuter clinics in the surrounding area. Prices in these clinics range from $150 to $500 and waiting lists for appointments are four months which is prohibitive to many pet owners

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
There are no identifiable environmental effects or climate impacts associated with the subject of this report.

CONTACT PERSON
Amelia Funghi, Animal Services Manager, (510) 981-6603
Attachments:

1. Resolution

RESOLUTION NO.

CONTRACT NO. 117569-1 AMENDMENT: ANIMAL FIX CLINIC (FORMERLY FIX

OUR FERALS) TO PROVIDE NO-COST SPAY AND NEUTER SURGERIES TO ELIGIBLE PET OWNERS FOR FY 2023, WITH A TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $67,218
WHEREAS, The City of Berkeley SNYP program funds no-cost spay and neuter surgeries to eligible low-income pet owners; and
WHEREAS, The Animal Fix Clinic is able to reach eligible low-income pet owners, and to provide no-cost spay and neuter services; and
WHEREAS, The ‘Spay Neuter Your Pet’ (SNYP) grant comes from the General Fund and is a community agency allocation that is given by Animal Services each year.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that the City Manager is authorized to increase the general fund allocation of SNYP from $23,812 to $35,000 and execute Contract No. 117569-1, and any necessary amendments, with Animal Fix Clinic for spay and neuter services for FY2023, increasing the amount of the contract by $17,500 for a new total not-to-exceed total of $67,218, and extending the terms of the contract to September 14, 2023.

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: www.cityofberkeley.info/manager

CONSENT CALENDAR
OCTOBER 11, 2022
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Dee Williams Ridley, City Manager
Submitted by: Peter Radu, Assistant to the City Manager Subject: Amendment to Contract No. 108-410-1: Paw Fund for Spay and Neuter Services

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to increase the total Spay Neuter Your Pet (SNYP) allocation from $23,812 to $35,000 and to execute a contract and amendments with Paw Fund to provide no-cost spay and neuter surgeries to eligible pet owners for FY 2023, increasing the contract amount by $17,500, for a new total contract amount not to exceed $134,466 and extending the terms of the contract to September 14, 2023.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
The “Spay Neuter Your Pet” (SNYP) grant comes from the General Fund and is a community agency allocation that is given by Animal Services each year. The SNYP program provided $23,812 to Paw Fund for FY 2016, $23,812 for FY 2017, $23,812 for FY 2019 and $23,812 for FY 2020, $11,906 for FY 2021, $9,812 for FY 2022 for a total of $116,966. Staff propose to award the amount of $17,500 in FY23 to Paw Fund, for a total amount not to exceed $134,466.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
The current contract between the City of Berkeley and Paw Fund expired on June 30, 2022. Paw Fund has contracted with the City of Berkeley to provide no-cost spay and neuter surgeries to eligible pet owners since FY 2016. By providing no-cost spay and neuter surgeries, Paw Fund decreases the number of unwanted pet offspring and reduces the number of homeless animals entering the Dona Spring Animal Shelter.

A second contractor, Animal Fix Clinic (formerly Fix Our Ferals), has contracted with the City of Berkeley to provide no-cost spay neuter and surgeries to eligible pet owners since 2017. The FY 2023 SNYP grant will be divided between these two community- based organizations.

05

Animal Services Contract with the Paw Fund Consent Calendar October 11, 2022

BACKGROUND
Many low-income pet owners would like to access spay and neuter services for their pets but are unable to afford the cost of surgery through local veterinary clinics. Paw Fund consistently works with low-income pet owners and is able to reach out to eligible pet owners whose animals need spay and neuter surgeries. The SNYP program provides for 175 free spay or neuter surgeries each year which decreases unwanted litters of pets and decreases the number of unwanted pets entering the Dona Spring Animal Shelter.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
Paw Fund is well equipped and capable of providing the services under the SNYP program. If this funding is not authorized, it would prevent 60 animals belonging to low income pet owners from being spay or neutered at no cost to the owner.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
The alternative to providing free spay and neuter surgeries to low income residents it to refer them to low cost spay and neuter clinics in the surrounding area. Prices in these clinics range from $150 to $500 and waiting lists for appointments are four months which is prohibitive to many pet owners

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
There are no identifiable environmental effects or climate impacts associated with the subject of this report.

CONTACT PERSON
Amelia Funghi, Animal Services Manager, (510) 981-6603
Attachments:

1. Resolution

RESOLUTION NO.

CONTRACT NO. 108-410-1 AMENDMENT: PAW FUND TO PROVIDE NO-COST SPAY AND NEUTER SURGERIES TO ELIGIBLE PET OWNERS FOR FY 2023, WITH A TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $134,466
WHEREAS, The City of Berkeley SNYP program funds no-cost spay and neuter surgeries to eligible low-income pet owners; and
WHEREAS, The Paw Fund is able to reach eligible low-income pet owners, and to provide no-cost spay and neuter services; and
WHEREAS, The ‘Spay Neuter Your Pet’ (SNYP) grant comes from the General Fund and is a community agency allocation that is given by Animal Services each year, NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that the City Manager is authorized increase the general fund allocation of SNYP from $23,812 to $35,000 and to execute Contract No. 108-410-1, and any necessary amendments, with Paw Fund for spay and neuter services FY2023, increasing the amount of the contract by $17,500 for a new total not to exceed $134,466 and extending the terms of the contract to September 14, 2023.

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

CONSENT CALENDAR
October 11, 2022
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Dee Williams-Ridley, City Manager
Submitted by: Henry Oyekanmi, Director, Finance
Subject: Formal Bid Solicitations and Request for Proposals Scheduled for Possible Issuance After Council Approval on October 11, 2022

RECOMMENDATION
Approve the request for proposals or invitation for bids (attached to staff report) that will be, or are planned to be, issued upon final approval by the requesting department or division. All contracts over the City Manager’s threshold will be returned to Council for final approval.

Total estimated cost of items included in this report is $2,968,600.

PROJECT Fund Source Amount
State Tobacco Prevention
Program External
Evaluator
n/a n/a $93,600
Consultant Services for
Citywide Residential
Objective Design Standards
621 Permit Service
Center $350,000
Toxics and Environmental
Health Management System
Solution
622
011
Unified Program
(CUPA)
GF - Discretionary
$115,000
Staffing Assessment 011 GF - Discretionary $70,000
Restroom in the ROW 511 Measure T1 $1,000,000
Martin Luther King Jr. 306 State Capital Grant $1,340,000

06

Formal Bid Solicitations and Request for Proposals CONSENT CALENDAR Scheduled for Possible Issuance After Council October 11, 2022 Approval on October 11, 2022

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
On May, 6, 2008, Council adopted Ordinance No. 7,035-N.S. effective June 6, 2008, which increased the City Manager’s purchasing authority for services to $50,000. As a result, this required report submitted by the City Manager to Council is now for those purchases in excess of $100,000 for goods; and $200,000 for playgrounds and construction; and $50,000 for services. If Council does not object to these items being sent out for bid or proposal within one week of them appearing on the agenda, and upon final notice to proceed from the requesting department, the IFB (Invitation for Bid) or RFP (Request for Proposal) may be released to the public and notices sent to the potential bidder/respondent list.

BACKGROUND
On May 6, 2008, Council adopted Ordinance No. 7,035-N.S., amending the City Manager’s purchasing authority for services.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
The Finance Department reviews all formal bid and proposal solicitations to ensure that they include provisions for compliance with the City’s environmental policies. For each contract that is subject to City Council authorization, staff will address environmental sustainability considerations in the associated staff report to City Council.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
Need for the services.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
Way Vision Zero Quick
Build Project (Dwight Way
to Russell Street)
City Project No.:

PWTRBP2201
134
135
142
501
Measure BB local
Streets & Roads
Measure BB local
Streets & Road
Measure BB
Bicycle &
Pedestrian
Program
Capital
Improvements
Total: $2,968,600

Formal Bid Solicitations and Request for Proposals CONSENT CALENDAR Scheduled for Possible Issuance After Council October 11, 2022 Approval on October 11, 2022
None.

CONTACT PERSON
Darryl Sweet, General Services Manager, Finance, 510-981-7329 Attachments:
1: Formal Bid Solicitations and Request for Proposals Scheduled for Possible Issuance After Council Approval on October 11, 2022
a. State Tobacco Prevention Program External Evaluator
b. Consultant Services for Citywide Residential Objective Design Standards c. Toxics and Environmental Health Management System Solution d. Staffing Assessment
e. Restroom in the ROW
f. Martin Luther King Jr Way Vision Zero Quick Build Project (Dwight Way to Russell Street)
Note: Original of this attachment with live signature of authorizing personnel is on file in General Services.

NEXT 30 DAYS
DATE SUBMITTED: October 11, 2022
Attachment 1
1 of  4

SPECIFICATI
ON NO.

DESCRIPTION

OF GOODS /

SERVICES
BEING

PURCHASED
APPROX.

RELEASE
DATE
APPROX.

BID

OPENING
DATE

INTENDED USE ESTIMATED COST BUDGET CODE TO BE

CHARGED
DEPT. / DIVISION CONTACT
NAME &
PHONE
23-11549-C State Tobacco
Prevention
Program External
Evaluator
10/12/2022 11/7/2022 In partnership with the
California Department of
Public Health as Local
Lead Agency, the City of
Berkeley is required to hire
an External Evaluator (EE)
from outside of the agency
who fulfills the
requirements of the Local
Program Evaluator (LPE).

The EE is generally
implementing activities
such as development of
data collection instruments,
data collection training and
protocols, sampling
methodology, data
analysis, and report writing.

Duties may also include
assisting with data
translation and
dissemination.
$93,600 HHPLLA2301/

NONPERSONNEL/

CONTRSERVI/

CNSLTNTS
HHCS/PH Rebecca Day-
Rodriguez
981-5337
Dept TOTAL $93,600
23-11550-C Consultant
Services for
Citywide
Residential
Objective
Design
Standards
12/7/2022 1/5/2023 Consultant services to
analyze and develop
residential objective design
standards, which will
require research, analysis,
community engagement,
and graphics production.
$350,000 621-53-584-622-0000-
000-472-612990
Planning and
Development
Department / Land
Use Planning
Division
Grace Wu
981-7484

NEXT 30 DAYS
DATE SUBMITTED: October 11, 2022
Attachment 1
2 of  4
23-11553-C Toxics and
Environmental
Health
Management
System
Solution
11/4/2022 11/29/2022 Fully integrated Toxics
and Environmental
Health Management
System/Solution EHMS
for the Toxics and
Environmental Health
divisions.
$115,000 Planning: 622-53-582-
601-0000-000-472-
613130
HHCS: 011-51-501-
501-0000-000-451-
612990
Planning / Toxics
HHCS /
Environmental
Health
Eryn
Blackwelder /
Planning
981-7498
Ann Song /
HHCS
926-0639
Dept TOTAL $465,000
23-11551-C Staffing
Assessment
10/31/2022 11/28/2022 Comprehensive staffing
assessment for all sworn
staff of the Police
Department.
$70,000 011-71-701-801-0000-
000-421-612990
Police /
Operations
Division
Lieutenant
Melanie Turner
mturner@cityof
berkeley.info
Dept TOTAL $70,000
23-11552-C Restroom in
the ROW
3/29/2023 5/1/2023 Installation of new
prefabricated restroom for
public use 24/7. The scope
includes design of the
foundation and all
associated utilities.
$1,000,000 511-54-623-677-0000-
000-444-663110-
PWT1CB2202
PW Engineering Uriel Gonzalez
981-6627

SPECIFICATI
ON NO.

DESCRIPTION

OF GOODS /

SERVICES
BEING

PURCHASED
APPROX.

RELEASE
DATE
APPROX.

BID

OPENING
DATE

INTENDED USE ESTIMATED COST BUDGET CODE TO BE

CHARGED
DEPT. / DIVISION CONTACT
NAME &
PHONE

NEXT 30 DAYS
DATE SUBMITTED: October 11, 2022
Attachment 1
3 of  4
23-11555-C Martin Luther
King Jr. Way
Vision Zero
Quick Build
Project (Dwight
Way to Russell
Street)
10/17/2022 11/15/2022 Contractor to provide
construction services for
installation of Quick Build
pedestrian refuge islands,
hardened centerlines, high-
visibility crosswalks,
advanced yield markings
and signage, Rectangular
Rapid Flashing Beacons
(RRFB), crosswalk lighting,
and improvement of
intersection sightlines
through red curbing the
approaches at crosswalks.

Scope of work also
includes pavement
rehabilitation, associated
curb ramp improvements,
and striping.
$1,340,000 Funds anticipated to be
charged in the first year
include:
306 State Capital
Grants:
306-54-622-668-0000-
000-431-665110-
($470,000)
134 Measure BB Local
Streets & Roads:
134-54-622-668-0000-
000-431-665110-
($180,000)
135 Measure BB Local
Streets & Roads:
135-54-622-668-0000-
000-431-665110-
($100,000)
142 Measure BB
Bicycle & Pedestrian
Program:
142-54-622-668-0000-
000-431-665110-
($220,000)
501 Capital
Improvements:
501-54-623-673-0000-
000-431-665110-
($370,000)
Public Works -
Transportation
Ian Bronswick
981-6399
Dept TOTAL $2,340,000
TOTAL $2,968,600.00

SPECIFICATI
ON NO.

DESCRIPTION

OF GOODS /

SERVICES
BEING

PURCHASED
APPROX.

RELEASE
DATE
APPROX.

BID

OPENING
DATE

INTENDED USE ESTIMATED COST BUDGET CODE TO BE

CHARGED
DEPT. / DIVISION CONTACT
NAME &
PHONE

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

CONSENT CALENDAR
October 11, 2022
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Dee Williams-Ridley, City Manager
Submitted by: Lisa Warhuus, Director, Health, Housing, and Community Services Subject: Contract No. 3220192 Amendment: Alameda County Network of Mental Health Clients

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to amend Contract No. 3220192 with Alameda County Network of Mental Health Clients, Berkeley Drop-In Center (BDIC) Community Crisis Response Services to add $100,000 to hire one additional homeless outreach staff member, increasing the not-to-exceed amount to $490,000, and extending the contract by one year to December 31, 2023.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
This added $100,000 of General Fund to BDIC’s Community Crisis Response Services contract will increase the not-to-exceed amount to $490,000. Funds are available in budget code 011-51-504-535-0000-000-444-636110-, drawn from the approval of FY22 AAO #1 in November 2021.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
Amending the BDIC Community Crisis Response Services contract is a Strategic Plan Priority Project, advancing our goal to champion and demonstrate social and racial equity. The $100,000 from the budget referral in Annual Appropriations Ordinance (AAO) is to fund additional homeless outreach for Shattuck Avenue at Dwight Way to Adeline Street at 62nd Street, allowing the BDIC team to provide expanded outreach to underserved populations. As a part of BDIC’s current contract for the Community Crisis Response Services, the Berkeley Drop-In Center has been providing outreach in a five- block radius of their drop-in location at 3234 Adeline Street as well as post-crisis counseling groups for individuals who have experienced a crisis. This additional outreach worker will be expected to participate in applicable coordination meetings with other homeless outreach providers in Berkeley, including the City of Berkeley’s Homeless Response Team to coordinate around specific health and safety concerns that may arise.

BACKGROUND
As part of the Re-Imagining Public Safety process, the City has been engaged in planning for a Specialized Care Unit (SCU) that will ultimately become a 24/7 mobile

07

Contract Amendment for Alameda County Network of Mental Health Clients CONSENT CALENDAR October 11, 2022

unit designed to respond to and support people who are experiencing a mental health or substance abuse crisis without direct involvement with the police. This in-depth design process for the SCU continued throughout FY22 and into FY23.

To address the urgent need for non-police crisis support, on June 29, 2021, Berkeley City Council allocated up to $1,200,000 in the FY 2022 budget from the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) in support of community crisis response services to meet the immediate needs to strengthen supports on the ground for individuals on the verge of crisis. As a result of the competitive bidding process, the Alameda County Network of Mental Health Clients, Berkeley Drop-In Center was awarded $390,000 of ARPA funds to provide these crisis and post-crisis support services. The City and BDIC entered into contract #3220192 on January 1, 2022 and BDIC has performed well under the contract to date.

Hiring an additional outreach worker will promote health and safety in South Berkeley by providing a focused and dedicated service to the homeless population in this neighborhood.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
There are no identifiable environmental effects, climate impacts or sustainability opportunities associated with the subject of this report.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
The Berkeley Drop-In Center is the most qualified organization to receive these funds because of their implementation of the Community Crisis Response Services, a contract which was awarded after a competitive RFP process was completed in FY22. Through these crisis response services, BDIC has established an infrastructure to provide outreach, crisis support services, and post-crisis care to members of the Berkeley community. Adding this outreach worker will increase their capacity and the ability to provide additional services to the homeless population in these crucial areas in South Berkeley.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
None.

CONTACT PERSON
Katherine Hawn, Senior Management Analyst, Health, Housing, and Community Services, 510-847-8532

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

CONTRACT NO. 3220192 AMENDMENT: ALAMEDA COUNTY NETWORK OF

MENTAL HEALTH CLIENTS
WHEREAS, Contract No. 3220192 was awarded to the Alameda County Network of Mental Health Clients, Berkeley Drop-In Center (BDIC) to provide community crisis response services after a competitive solicitation process in FY22, and WHEREAS, through Contract No. 3220192 BDIC is providing crisis and post-crisis support as well as outreach within a five-block radius of the Berkeley Drop-In Center location at 3234 Adeline Street; and
WHEREAS, $100,000 was allocated in AAO#1 in FY22 to additional homeless outreach for the South Shattuck Avenue at Dwight Way to Adeline Street at 62 nd Street and the immediately adjacent neighborhoods; and
WHEREAS, BDIC is the most qualified organization to receive this funding given their existing infrastructure.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley to amend Contract No. 3220192 for Alameda County Network of Mental Health Clients to add $100,000 to hire one additional homeless outreach staff member, increasing the not-to- exceed amount to $490,000, to provide outreach and additional services at South Shattuck Avenue at Dwight Way to Adeline Street at 62 nd Street and the immediately adjacent neighborhoods and extend the contract by one year to December 31, 2023.

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

CONSENT CALENDAR
October 11, 2022
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Dee Williams-Ridley, City Manager
Submitted by: Lisa Warhuus, Director, Health, Housing, and Community Services Subject: Revenue Grant Agreement: Funding Support from the State of California Women, Infant, Children Program

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager or her designee to submit a grant agreement to the State of California, to accept the grants, and execute any resultant revenue agreements and amendments to conduct public health promotion, protection, and prevention services for the Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) program in the projected total amount of $1,810,197 for Federal Fiscal Years (FFY) 2023 through 2025.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
The City of Berkeley will receive funds in the estimated amount of $1,810,197 from the State of California, Women, Infants and Children (WIC) program for FFY 2023 through FFY 2025. The contract will be assigned a contract number. The grant funding will be deposited in the Health (General) Grant Fund 312 (Revenue Budget Code is 312-51- 506-562-2061-000-000-432110-). There is no match required and this contract is expected to be for $603,399 each year for Federal Fiscal Years 2023 through 2025.

Spending of these grant funds is subject to Council approval of the budget and the Annual Appropriations Ordinances each fiscal year. Depending on the timing of when grants are officially awarded and the amounts are determined, the grant budget will be adjusted as part of a future amendment to the FY 2023 Annual Appropriations Ordinance.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
The State of California-funded WIC program is a Strategic Plan Priority Project, advancing our goal to create a resilient, safe, connected, and prepared city, champion and demonstrate social and racial equity and be a customer-focused organization that provides excellent, timely, easily-accessible service and information to the community.

The Health, Housing and Community Services Department (HHCS) provides a broad range of public health and community health services in Berkeley; with the goals of achieving health equity, promoting healthy environments and behaviors, protecting residents from disease, and preventing illness, disability, and premature death.

08

Revenue Grant Agreement: Funding Support CONSENT CALENDAR from the State of California Women, Infant, Children Program October 11, 2022

BACKGROUND
The City of Berkeley receives funding from many sources annually to complete activities to improve the health of the community. As a local health jurisdiction, the City is entitled to specific State funding to meet core public health objectives. HHCS’ Public Health Division (HHCS/PHD) is committed to providing essential services to the community to prevent the spread of disease and to promote healthy environments.

The State of California WIC grant contributes to the Department’s work towards improving the health of our community by mitigating the negative health effects of poor nutrition among low income women, infants and children by providing nutritious foods to supplement diets, information on healthy eating, breastfeeding support and referrals to health care services.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
There are no identifiable environmental effects or opportunities associated with the subject of this report.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
These funds support vital services related to our mandates as a public health jurisdiction and local initiatives designed to address health inequities in Berkeley and improve the health of Berkeley residents. This grant supports the Department’s mission and provides the City with funding to continue working to protect and improve the health of the community.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
This funding is essential for HHCS/PHD’s mission and goals. The alternative action of not seeking any of these funding sources would result in a significant reduction in public health services to the community

CONTACT PERSON
Janice Chin, Manager, Public Health Division, HHCS, (510) 981-5121 Attachments:

1. Resolution

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

GRANT AGREEMENT: STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE WOMEN, INFANTS AND

CHILDREN PROGRAM
WHEREAS, the City of Berkeley Department of Health, Housing & Community Services, Public Health Division (HHCS/PHD), is committed to providing nutritious foods to supplement inadequate diets, nutrition education, and referrals to health care for pregnant, breastfeeding, and non-breastfeeding postpartum women, infants and children up to age five who are found to be at nutritional risk; and WHEREAS, HHCS provides a broad range of needed public health program services to the community; and
WHEREAS, HHCS works to promote healthy environments and behaviors, protect residents from disease, and prevent illness, disability, and premature death; and WHEREAS, HHCS seeks to achieve health equity; and
WHEREAS, the City of Berkeley should seek outside funding wherever possible to fund vital health services.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that the City Manager or her designee is hereby authorized to accept State of California funding for federal fiscal years 2023 through 2025 for the Women, Infants and Children program:
to provide nutritious foods to supplement inadequate diets, nutrition education, and referrals to health care for pregnant, breastfeeding, and non-breastfeeding postpartum women, infants and children up to age five who are found to be at nutritional risk; execute any resultant revenue agreements and amendments; and implement the projects and appropriation of funding in the estimated amount of $1,810,197 for related expenses.

Budget Codes (Revenue): 312-51-506-562-2061-000-000-432110-; (Expenditure) 312- 51-506-562-2061-000-451-various; A record signature copy of said agreements and any amendments shall be on file in the office of the City Clerk.

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.ci.berkeley.ca.us/manager

CONSENT CALENDAR
October 11, 2022
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Dee Williams-Ridley, City Manager
Submitted by: Donald Ellison, Interim Director of Human Resources Subject: Expand the Program Manager Series by Establishing the Principal Program Manager Classification and Salary Range

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution to expand the Program Manager Series by establishing the Principal Program Manager classification with a monthly stepped salary range of $12,651.60 to $15,309.90 effective October 7, 2022.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
There is no significant fiscal impact of the recommendation. The monthly stepped salary range for the existing Program Manager I and II classification is $9,515 to $13,478. The recommended monthly salary range for the new classification of Principal Program Manager is $12,651.60 to $15,309.90.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
The Human Resources Department is proposing the establishment of a new classification of Principal Program Manager.

The Program Manager series is a city-wide classification. The Principal Program Manager was created to expand the Program Manager series to create a promotional opportunity in the various city departments.

The Human Resources Department contracted with Bryce Consulting to develop a base salary recommendation. Bryce Consulting is an agency that provides a variety of human resource services to non-profit and public-sector clients. The staff is recommending a monthly salary range of $12,651.60 - $15,309.90.

Principal Program Manager Salary (Monthly)
Classification Step 1 $12,651.60
Classification Step 5 $15,309.90

09

New Classification – Principal Program Manager CONSENT CALENDAR October 11, 2022

BACKGROUND
The Personnel Board discussed and voted unanimously to send this classification to the City Council for approval at its September 6, 2022 meeting. (Vote: Ayes: Dixon, Gilbert, Karpinski, Lacey, Wenk, Noes: None Abstains: None).

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
There are no identifiable environmental effects, climate impacts, or sustainability opportunities associated with the subject of this report.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
It has been the policy of the City to create the necessary classification and salary schedule to accommodate new duties and responsibilities, reflect programmatic changes, maintain competitive salaries and, when applicable, comply with regulatory requirements.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
None.

CONTACT PERSON
Donald E. Ellison, Human Resources, Human Resources, (510) 981-6807.

Attachments:

1. Resolution
Exhibit A: Classification Specification and Salary Schedule

RESOLUTION NO. -N.S.

CLASSIFICATION: PRINCIPAL PROGRAM MANAGER
WHEREAS, the Human Resources Department maintains the Classification and Compensation plan for the City of Berkeley; and
WHEREAS, the Human Resources Department has completed a classification review and recommended establishing the Principal Program Manager classification to create a promotional opportunity in various city departments;
WHEREAS, the series will lead to wider outreach and a more diverse pool of potential qualified candidates, and create a professional path for dedicated employees by allowing the division to retain and develop top talent that directly benefits our city’s stakeholders; WHEREAS, this classification also responds to Human Resource’s request to develop such a classification in the last contract cycle, and supports the City’s Strategic Plan goals to “Foster a dynamic, sustainable, and locally-based economy” and “Attract and retain a talented and diverse City government workforce.”
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that Classification for Principal Program Manager is established, with a salary range and classification specification as shown on Exhibit A, effective October 7, 2022.

Exhibit A: Principal Program Manager, Classification Specification and Salary Schedule

Exhibit A
Principal Program Manager
Bargaining Unit: Public Employees Union Local One
Class Code:
28990

CITY OF BERKELEY
Established Date: XXXX

SALARY RANGE
$72.99 - $88.33 Hourly
$5,839.20 - $7,066.11 Biweekly
$12,651.60 - $15,309.90 Monthly
$151,89.22 - $183,718.85 Annually
DESCRIPTION:

DEFINITION
Plans, organizes, directs and supervises one or more major City programs or projects that have a high degree of visibility and are of substantial impact including the development and implementation of program goals and elements; performs a variety of technical tasks relative to assigned program or project; and develops procedures, programs and methodologies.

CLASS CHARACTERISTICS
This management level classification may be populated with multiple incumbents who mission. The Principal Program Manager is a supervisory level with responsibility for directing one or more major City programs or projects of a complex nature. Incumbents are expected to demonstrate skills and knowledge particular to their assignment. Under general direction, the Principal Program Manager organizes, coordinates and directs various staff and activities associated with the development and implementation for programs and projects.

Principal Program Manager is distinguished from the Program Manager II in that it has full supervisory responsibilities, including completing performance evaluations and counseling for performance improvement.

EXAMPLES OF DUTIES:

Cl
assifications: Creation of Communications Specialist Classification

The following list of duties is intended only to describe the various types of work that may be performed and the level of technical complexity of the assignment(s) and is not intended to be an all- inclusive list of duties. The omission of a specific duty statement does not exclude it from the position if the work is consistent with the concept of the classification, or is similar or closely related to another duty statement.

1. Recommends and assists in the implementation of goals and objectives; establishes schedules and methods for the performance of project or program implementation; implements policies and procedures;

2. Plans, prioritizes, assigns, supervises and reviews the work of staff involved in the performance of project or program implementation as well as the activities of professional, paraprofessional and support staff;

3. Evaluates operations and activities of assigned responsibilities; recommends improvements and modifications; prepares various reports on operations and activities;

4. Participates in budget preparation and administration; prepares cost estimates for budget recommendations; submits justifications for staff, equipment, and supplies; monitors and controls expenditures;

5. Participates in the selection of staff; provides or coordinators staff training; works with employees to correct deficiencies; implements discipline procedures;

6. Organizes, coordinates, and manages one or more major programs or projects with high visibility and impact;

7. Supervises administrative functions associated with program management including budget preparation, financial management, and grant application preparation and administration; manages the procurement process including the development of RFP/RFQs; negotiates terms, conditions and administers contracts;

8. Represents the department in a variety of meetings and forums involving program coordination and implementation;

9. Conducts complex analyses and makes technical investigations and research on a variety of issues impacting the City;

10. Plans, develops and supervises complex studies and prepares and presents findings and recommendations;

11. Serves as liaison with representatives from federal, state, local, private and community organizations in the implementation of assigned program(s);

12. Reviews the effectiveness of service delivery and work flow; develops and supervises the implementation of recommendations regarding program elements;

13. Analyzes laws and regulations and their impact to assigned program(s);

14. Develops and maintains informational and statistical reports regarding program performance, goal attainment, and service levels;

15. Maintains regular contact with public, including internal and external meetings and/or site visits to ensure compliance with program requirements;

16. Performs related duties as assigned.

KNOWLEDGE AND ABILITIES:

Cl
assifications: Creation of Communications Specialist Classification

Note: The level and scope of the knowledges and skills listed below are related to job duties as defined under Class Characteristics.

Knowledge of:

1. Advanced principles and practices of project/program development, management and administration in the assigned program area;

2. Management and administrative principles and practices;

3. Principles of budget development and administration;

4. Principles and practices of supervision, training and performance evaluations;

5. Advanced principles and practices of research, analysis, and report writing;

6. Principles and practices of effective employee supervision, including selection, training, work evaluation and discipline;

7. Pertinent Federal, State, and local statutes, ordinances, and regulations, as needed for area of assignment;

8. Regulatory and programmatic requirements and services as they relate to assigned program;

9. Principles and practices of grant administration, public procurement, contract law and negotiations.

Ability to:

1. Organize, implement and direct program or project operations and activities;

2. Effectively plan, develop, implement and supervise comprehensive programs with a broad impact and high degree of complexity;

3. Assist in the development and monitoring of an assigned program budget;

4. Collect and analyze large volumes of data and reach a sound conclusion;

5. Supervise, train and evaluate assigned staff;

6. Use, at a highly proficient level, computers, computer applications, and software including Word, Excel, and other software relevant to the assigned program area;

7. Prepare and present clear and concise technical or analytical reports and visually engaging presentations for City Council and community;

8. Interpret and apply program requirements and/or regulatory practices, rules, and policies to actual situations;

9. Meet deadlines in a highly political environment;

10. Communicate effectively, both orally and in writing;

11. Effectively analyze legislation and/or regulatory changes and their impact to City services;

12. Establish and maintain productive working relationships with those contacted in the course of the work;

13. Use English effectively to communicate in person, over the telephone, and in writing;

Cl
assifications: Creation of Communications Specialist Classification

14. Use tact, initiative, prudence, and independent judgment within general policy, procedural, and legal guidelines; and

15. Manage and supervise support staff.

MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS:

A TYPICAL WAY OF GAINING THE KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS OUTLINED ABOVE IS:

Equivalent to graduation from a four (4) year college or university with major coursework in business or public administration, or a related field and five (5) years in the development and implementation of programs, including two (2) years in a lead capacity. Experience in a public agency setting is desirable. Additional professional-level experience as outlined above may be substituted for the college education on a year-for-year basis.

OTHER REQUIREMENTS:

Must be able to travel to various locations within and outside the City of Berkeley to meet program needs and to fulfill the job responsibilities. When driving on City business, the incumbent is required to maintain a valid California driver's license as well as a satisfactory driving record. Must be able to attend evening and weekend meetings.

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.ci.berkeley.ca.us/manager

CONSENT CALENDAR
October 11, 2022
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Dee Williams-Ridley, City Manager
Submitted by: Donald Ellison, Interim Director of Human Resources Subject: Classification and Salary: Establishing the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Officer Classification and Salary Range

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution to expand the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Officer classification with a monthly stepped salary range of $11,497.20 - $15,107.73 effective October 7, 2022.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
None. The Fiscal Year 2023-2024 Adopted Biennial Budget includes funding for this position.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
On June 9, 2020, Councilmember Kesarwani and co-sponsors Councilmembers Wengraf, Droste, and Bartlett, submitted an urgency item requesting consideration in the budget process of an $150,000 one-time allocation to establish an Office of Racial Equity.

The request described the Office as consisting of a Racial Equity Officer and a supporting specialist. However, the continuation of the COVID-19 pandemic throughout 2020 and 2021, and the associated dampening effects on the economy led to some new initiatives being deferred, including the creation of an Office of Racial Equity. While the item was considered during the November 2020 Annual Appropriations Ordinance, it was not funded at that time.

A number of jurisdictions have created some form of Office of Racial Equity or Officer.

These classifications have reported to the City/County Manager’s Office to underscore the importance of the work and to centralize and manage the often cross- departmental/cross-sector work more effectively and collaboratively.

The creation of this single-position executive management classification will coordinate activities with City departments and outside agencies and provide support to the City Manager and City Council. This will be the anchor position within the newly created Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Division within the City Manager’s Office and will be an

10

New Classification – Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Officer CONSENT CALENDAR October 11, 2022

internal alignment with Assistant to the City Manager. Additionally, an Office Specialist II will also support this Division after it is established.

Therefore, staff recommends that the Personnel Board establish the Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Officer classification to enable the City Manager’s Office to function more efficiently and provide adequate services to the community.

The Human Resources Department contracted with Bryce Consulting to develop a base salary recommendation based on similar public agencies within the area with similar job classifications. Bryce Consulting is an agency that provides a variety of human resource services to non-profit and public-sector clients. To align with the Assistant to the City Manager classification, staff is recommending a monthly salary range of $11,497.20- $15,107.73.

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Officer Salary (Monthly) Classification Step 1 $11,497.20
Classification Step 5 $15,107.73

BACKGROUND
The Personnel Board discussed and voted unanimously to send this classification to the City Council for approval at its September 6, 2022 meeting. (Vote: Ayes: Dixon, Gilbert, Karpinski, Lacey, Wenk, Noes: None Abstains: None).

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
There are no identifiable environmental effects, climate impacts, or sustainability opportunities associated with the subject of this report.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
It has been the policy of the City to create the necessary classification and salary schedule to accommodate new duties and responsibilities, reflect programmatic changes, maintain competitive salaries and, when applicable, comply with regulatory requirements.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
None.

CONTACT PERSON
Donald E. Ellison, Human Resources, Human Resources, (510) 981-6807.

Attachments:

1. Resolution
Exhibit A: Classification Specification

RESOLUTION NO. -N.S.

CLASSIFICATION: DIVERSITY, EQUITY, AND INCLUSION OFFICER WHEREAS, the Human Resources Department maintains the Classification and Compensation plan for the City of Berkeley; and
WHEREAS, the Human Resources Department has completed a classification review and recommended establishing the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Officer classification in the City Manager’s Office;
WHEREAS, this classification will ensure the City continues to accomplish its social and equity goals and initiatives in a timely and effective manner.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that Classification for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Officer is established, with a salary range and classification specification as shown on Exhibit A, effective September 7, 2022.

Exhibit A: Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Officer Classification Specification

DIVERSITY, EQUITY AND INCLUSION OFFICER
DEFINITION:

Under direction, to plan organize, direct and review the activities and operations of the Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Division within the City Manager’s Office; to coordinate activities with City departments and outside agencies; and to provide highly responsible and complex support to the City Manager and City Council.

CLASS CHARACTERISTICS:

This is a single-position executive management classification. The Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Officer’s duties are administrative/managerial and highly complex in nature, involving highly technical functions.

The incumbent has broad management authority for the day-to-day operations of the Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Division.

EXAMPLES OF DUTIES:

The following list of duties is intended only to describe the various types of work that may be performed and the level of technical complexity of the assignment(s) and is not intended to be an all-inclusive list of duties. The omission of a specific duty statement does not exclude it from the position if the work is consistent with the concept of the classification or is similar or closely related to another duty statement.

1. Develop, plan and implement division goals and objectives; recommend and administer policies and procedures;

2. Coordinate division activities with those of other departments and outside agencies and organizations; provide staff assistance to the City Manager; prepare and present staff reports and other necessary correspondence;

3. Direct, oversee and participate in the development of the division’s work plan; assign work activities, projects and programs; monitor work flow; review and evaluate work products, methods and procedures;

4. Supervise and participate in the development and administration of the division budget; direct the forecast of additional funds needed for staffing, equipment, materials and supplies; monitor and approve expenditures; implement mid-year adjustments;

5. Select, train, motivate and evaluate personnel; provide or coordinate staff training; conduct performance evaluations; implement discipline procedures; maintain discipline and high standards necessary for the efficient and professional operation of the division;

6. Represent the division to outside groups and organizations; participate in outside community and professional groups and committees; provide technical assistance as necessary;

7. Prepare and make presentations to City officials, community members and others as required;

8. Provide vision and leadership to effectively integrate inclusion into the organization, working closely with City and community leadership and diversity point people to shape and implement plans and strategies aligned with City goals and create a welcoming environment for all;

9. Facilitate and coordinate strategic planning and prioritization in the areas of diversity and inclusion; conduct periodic climate surveys; and work collaboratively to develop and

implement strategies and initiatives that advance a climate of diversity and inclusion and support the City’s mission, vision and goals;

10. Collaborate with senior management to integrate diversity best practices into City workplace practices, including business practices and programming;

11. Engage appropriate stakeholders to develop, implement, operationalize and measure the City’s strategic diversity and inclusion plan, vision and related goals;

12. Collaborate with Human Resources to develop strategic hiring and retention efforts to attract and retain a highly talented, diverse workforce;

13. Propose citywide policy and administrative changes that impact equity in city government and the delivery of services to the community;

14. Coordinate a wide variety of diversity programming at the City and community level addressing all dimensions of diversity and inclusion;

15. Create and implement communication strategies and content management for training, web resources, social media and print materials to support diversity inclusion and related initiatives;

16. Provide leadership and oversight of programs and activities that promote workplace diversity; serve as an expert advisor on matters of equity and disparities; assist as needed on special assignments and projects involving City-wide equity issues;

17. Serve as a spokesperson for the City on matters related to diversity and inclusion;

18. Participate on committees, boards, task forces, and in community activities as assigned; attend meetings, conferences, and workshops as assigned;

19. Build and maintain positive working relationships with co-workers, other employees and the public using principles of good customer service;

20. Perform related duties as assigned.

KNOWLEDGE AND ABILITIES:

Note: The level and scope of the knowledges and skills listed below are related to job duties as defined under Class Characteristics.

Knowledge of:

1. Cultural awareness and methods to build trust, credibility and navigate a complex landscape as it relates to diversity and inclusion;

2. Social, political and environmental issues influencing equity program development and implementation;

3. Effective institutional change management principles and practices;

4. Best practices for building diversity and inclusion;

5. Methods for developing and implementing recruitment and retention strategies focused on building a diverse workforce;

6. Principles and practices of leadership, motivation, team building and conflict resolution;

7. Pertinent local, State and Federal laws, rules and regulations;

8. Organizational and management practices as applied to the analysis and evaluation of programs, policies and operational needs;

9. Principles and practices of organization, administration and personnel management;

10. Principles and practices of budget preparation and administration;

11. Principles of supervision, training and performance evaluation;

12. Investigative principles, methods, and practices;

13. Public relations practices and techniques; public speaking;

14. Research methods; report writing techniques; statistical concepts and methods; principles and techniques of project management.

Ability to:

1. Plan, direct and control the administration and operations of the Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Division;

2. Exercise tact and diplomacy in dealing with highly sensitive, complex and confidential issues and situations with broad effects on City policies and issues;

3. Develop and implement division policies;

4. Gain cooperation through discussion and collaboration;

5. Successfully develop, control and administer division budget and expenditures;

6. Interpret and apply City policies, procedures, rules and regulations;

7. Supervise, train and evaluate assigned staff;

8. Meet critical deadlines; make decisions under pressure;

9. Prepare and give effective public presentations;

10. Prepare and present complex narrative and statistical reports, correspondence, and other documents;

11. Communicate clearly and concisely, both orally and in writing;

12. Operate and use modern office equipment including computers and applicable software;

13. Establish and maintain effective working relationships with those contacted in the course of work.

MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS:

A TYPICAL WAY OF GAINING THE KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS OUTLINED ABOVE IS:

Equivalent to a Bachelor's degree from an accredited college or university with major coursework in sociology, education, public administration, ethnic studies, community, or a related field and five years of experience administering community, educational or social justice programs.

OTHER REQUIREMENTS:

Must be able to travel to various locations within and outside the City of Berkeley to meet program needs and to fulfill the job responsibilities. When driving on City business, the incumbent is required to maintain a valid California driver's license as well as a satisfactory driving record.

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.ci.berkeley.ca.us/manager

CONSENT CALENDAR
October 11, 2022
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Dee Williams-Ridley, City Manager
Submitted by: Donald Ellison, Interim Director of Human Resources Subject: Classification and Salary: Assistant to the City Attorney

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution to establish the Assistant to the City Attorney classification with a monthly stepped salary range of $11,497.20- $15,107.73 effective October 11, 2022.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
None.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
The City Attorney has identified the need for a non-attorney classification that can perform sensitive, complex and difficult analytical work. Policy proposals and referrals from the City Council and City Departments often require monitoring and research that falls outside the scope of legal analysis, including providing analytical support on issues that have significant City or community implications.

There is a need for monitoring, research, and writing related to a wide range of City projects that have significant City or community implications. Currently these functions are being performed by attorneys, but they do not always require legal expertise. A highly organized and analytical person with policy expertise and strong writing skills could perform these tasks for the City Attorney’s Office at less expense to the City, thereby freeing up attorney time to be used for exclusively for tasks that require legal expertise.

The City Attorney's Office provides legal advice and support to the entire City, including the City Council, City Manager, all City Departments, as well as appointed City Boards and Commissions. Legal advice and support includes litigating on behalf of the City, drafting or reviewing contracts, leases, ordinances, and resolutions, advising on ballot measures, acting as the Risk Manager for the City, and providing legal advice to staff engaged in affordable housing, homelessness response work, pandemic response work, land-use and zoning, infrastructure projects, economic development efforts and major policy initiatives such as the Re-Imagining Public Safety Task Force and other multi departmental projects that may have legal implications.

11

New Classification – Assist. to the City Attorney CONSENT CALENDAR October 11, 2022

The Human Resources Department contracted with Bryce Consulting to create the Assistant to the City Attorney. The City Attorney would like the salary to be comparable to the Assistant to the City Manager. This job is very similar to the Assistant to the City Manager classification, and therefore the proposed salary range is identical. Staff is recommending a monthly salary range of $11,497.20- $15,107.73.

Assistant to the City Attorney Salary (Monthly)
Classification Step 1 $11,497.20
Classification Step 5 $15,107.73

BACKGROUND
The Personnel Board discussed and voted unanimously to send this classification to the City Council for approval at its September 6, 2022 meeting (Vote: Ayes: Bartlow, Dixon, Lacey, Wenk, Karpinski, Gilbert, Noes: None Abstains: None).

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
There are no identifiable environmental effects, climate impacts, or sustainability opportunities associated with the subject of this report.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
It has been the policy of the City to create the necessary classification and salary schedule to accommodate new duties and responsibilities, reflect programmatic changes, maintain competitive salaries and, when applicable, comply with regulatory requirements.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
None.

CONTACT PERSON
Donald E. Ellison, Human Resources, Human Resources, (510) 981-6807.

Attachments:

1. Resolution
Exhibit A: Classification Specification and Salary Schedule

2. Organizational Chart

RESOLUTION NO. -N.S.

CLASSIFICATION: ASSISTANT TO THE CITY ATTORNEY UNREPRESENTED WHEREAS, the Human Resources Department maintains the Classification and Compensation plan for the City of Berkeley; and
WHEREAS, the Human Resources Department has completed a classification review and recommended establishing the Assistant to the City Attorney.

WHEREAS, the City Attorney has identified the need for a non-attorney classification that can perform sensitive, complex and difficult analytical work. Policy proposals and referrals from the City Council and City Departments often require monitoring and research that falls outside the scope of legal analysis, including providing analytical support on issues that have significant City or community implications.

WHEREAS, the Personnel Board recommended on September 6, 2022 to establish the classification and salary range of Assistant to the City Attorney exempt from the overtime provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and Unrepresented, effective October 11, 2022
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that Classification for Assistant to the City Attorney is established, with a salary range and classification specification as shown on Exhibit A, effective October 11, 2022.

Exhibit A: Assistant to the City Attorney, Classification Specification and Salary Schedule

Attachment A
Assistant to the City Attorney
Bargaining Unit: Unrepresented Classifications
Class Code:
xxxxx

CITY OF BERKELEY
Established Date: XXXX

SALARY RANGE
$66.3251- $87.1592 Hourly
$5,306.40- $6,972.80 Biweekly
$11,497.20- $15,107.73 Monthly
$137,966.40 - $181,292.80 Annually
DESCRIPTION:

DEFINITION
Under direction, provides highly responsible and specialized administrative and analytical and support within the City Attorney’s Office and performs related work as assigned.

CLASS CHARACTERISTICS
The Assistant to the City Attorney is a single level classification within the City Attorney’s Office. This class performs sensitive, complex and difficult analytical work as a member of the City Attorney’s staff, including providing analytical support on issues that have significant City or community implications.

Incumbents have considerable latitude for the exercise of independent judgment, particularly when representing the City Attorney’s Office in meetings with other agencies, boards and commissions and community groups.

EXAMPLES OF DUTIES:

The following list of duties is intended only to describe the various types of work that may be performed and the level of technical complexity of the assignment(s) and is not intended to be an all- inclusive list of duties. The omission of a specific duty statement does not exclude it from the position if the work is consistent with the concept of the classification, or is similar or closely related to another duty statement.

1. Represents and supports the City Attorney’s Office with employee and citizen group discussions, and meetings; monitors pending items and keeps the City Attorney informed about matters of importance; provides the City Attorney with accurate and timely information to support decision-making and policy direction;

2. Assists in the preparation, development, and administration of the department operating budget;

3. Collects, compiles and analyzes information from various sources on a variety of specialized topics related to the operations of the City Attorney’s Office;

4. Researches, evaluates, and prepares statistical, financial, and demographic data used in reports, studies, surveys and analyses; analyzes and makes recommendations in the development and administration of assigned program area;

5. Investigates, analyzes, develops and prepares special studies or projects and corresponding documentation and technical reports;

6. Negotiates and administers contracts; ensures compliance with department procedures, City policies, and pertinent laws, regulations and ordinances;

7. Assists in the development and analysis of departmental policies, procedures and systems;

8. Receives, researches, and responds to questions from outside agencies, other City departments and the general public;

9. Prepares and presents staff reports and presentations at various City Council, commission/board, and other governmental meetings; drafts City Council documents; serves on various committees and task forces;

10. Conducts research, administers special projects and assures implementation of programs developed and initiated by the City Attorney;

11. Consults with the City Attorney and Deputy City Attorneys in solving administrative issues.

12. Represent the City Attorney’s Office to outside agencies and organizations; participates in outside community and professional groups and committees; provides technical assistance as necessary;

13. Builds and maintains positive working relationships with co-workers, other City employees and the public using principles of good customer service.

14. Performs related work as assigned.

KNOWLEDGE AND ABILITIES:

Note: The level and scope of the knowledges and skills listed below are related to job duties as defined under Class Characteristics.

Knowledge of:

1. Principles, practices and techniques of project management;

2. Principles and practices of public administration, including principles of organization, budgeting, fiscal analysis, long-range financial planning, and the functions and activities of a municipal government;

3. Pertinent local, state and federal rules, regulations and laws;

4. Modern office procedures and computer equipment;

5. Principles and practices of organizational analysis and management;

6. Methods of complex research and technical report writing.

Ability to:

1. Effectively represent the City in contacts with governmental agencies, community groups, and various business and professional organizations;

2. Conduct analytical, management, and operational studies, evaluating alternatives, and making sound, effective recommendations;

3. Gain cooperation through discussion and persuasion;

4. Interpret and apply City and department policies, procedures, rules and regulations;

5. Evaluate programs and services from an operational and productivity standpoint;

6. Prepare clear, concise and competent reports, correspondence and other written materials;

7. Communicate clearly and concisely, both orally and in writing;

8. Establish and maintain effective working relationships with those contacted in the course of work.

MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS:

A TYPICAL WAY OF GAINING THE KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS OUTLINED ABOVE IS:

Equivalent to graduation from an accredited college or university with major course work in business administration, public administration, or related field and four (4) years of increasingly responsible analytical experience in a municipal government environment that included the development and administration of programs.

OTHER REQUIREMENTS:

Specified positions may require possession of a valid California driver's license and have a satisfactory driving record. Must be a current member of the California State Bar Association. Must be willing and able to attend evening meetings.

City Attorney
Assistant City
Attorney
Paralegal (2) Senior Legal
Secretary (3)
Deputy City
Attorney (8)
Assistant to the
City Attorney
Legal Office
Supervisor

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-[XXXX] ● TDD: (510) 981-6903 ● Fax: (510) 981-[XXXX] E-Mail: [e-mail address]

CONSENT CALENDAR
October 11, 2022
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Dee Williams-Ridley, City Manager
Submitted by: Tess Mayer, Director of Library Services
Subject: Revision of the Tool Lending Specialist Classification to Reflect an Accurate Scope of Duties with a Four Percent (4%) Salary Increase

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution amending Resolution No. 62,558-N.S. to approve the revision of the Tool Lending Specialist job specification to accurately reflect the scope of duties and to increase the current salary schedule by four percent (4%) effective March 16, 2021, or the employee’s start date, if more recent.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
The Library’s personnel budget is funded by the Library Tax Fund. The current salary range for this position is $6,132.89 - $6,795.44 monthly. The proposed adjusted monthly salary range would be $6,378.23 - $7,067.26, reflecting the 4% increase. There are three full-time Tool Lending Specialist positions on the team. These team members would also be receiving retroactive back pay dating back to 3/16/21 or their date of hire if more recent, for the difference between their current pay rate and this proposed adjusted rate.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
The Tool Lending Library’s collection expanded to include the lending of culinary tools in March 2021. Prior to that, the emphasis of the collection had been on gardening, home maintenance and repair and the tools and equipment used in the building trades.

Because the culinary tools represent a distinct and significant body of knowledge, this increase in scope needs to be reflected in both the classification language and compensation of the position.

BACKGROUND
The Tool Lending Library has provided Berkeley residents with access to free home repair tools for over 40 years. It is a beloved institution in Berkeley and beyond and has served as a model for other such libraries nationally. The Tool Lending Specialist is a unique classification to the Library within the City of Berkeley, as well as unique in its kind amongst other public library systems. Although a few other library systems have tool lending libraries, such as Oakland Public Library, the staffing model for those entities is different and does not feature specialists who offer subject matter expertise

12

Revision of the Tool Lending Specialist Classification CONSENT CALENDAR October 11, 2022

that is shared with residents as a critical aspect of the service. The Tool Lending Specialist classification was established in 1988 and was revised once in 2004.

Changes to this City classification must be reviewed by the Personnel Board and the Board of Library Trustees for adoption.

The Personnel Board approved this change on May 9, 2022. Action:

Motion/Second/Carry): Gilbert/Wenk to approve the Recommendation to Revise the Tool Lending Specialist Job Duties and Compensation. Vote: Ayes: Bartlow, Dixon, Gilbert, Karpinski, Lacey, Wenk, Noes: None, Absent: None, Abstentions: None.

Board of Library Trustees approved this change on June 1, 2022. Action:

Motion/Second/Carry: Trustee Davenport / Trustee Selawsky to adopt resolution #R22- 030. Vote: Ayes: Trustees Davenport, Greene, Hahn, Roth and Selawsky. Noes: None.

Absent: None. Abstentions: None.

The City Council is charged with establishing job classifications and the compensation of all employees (Sections 31 and 32 of the City Charter) thus these changes need to be reviewed by the City Council for final approval.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
There are no environmental impacts associated with the recommendations in this report.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
The Tool Lending Specialist classification has not been updated for 18 years. It is important to ensure that the classification and compensation accurately reflect the full scope of work that is being supported by this team, particularly since a significant change occurred.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
The City Council could refrain from approving this classification and compensation change, although the Personnel Board and the Board of Library Trustees have. This would require Library staff to renegotiate Tool Lending Specialist duties with SEIU 1021 Maintenance and Clerical and potentially find alternatives to the current service model.

CONTACT PERSON
Tess Mayer, Director of Library Services, Library, 510-981-6195 Attachments

1. Resolution

2. City of Berkeley Tool Lending Specialist Classification (showing changes)

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

CLASSIFICATION AND SALARY RESOLUTION FOR SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION LOCAL 1021 MAINTENANCE AND CLERICAL CHAPTERS AND AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 62,558-N.S.

WHEREAS, the Tool Lending Specialist classification, which is represented by Service Employees International Union, Local 1021 Maintenance and Clerical, and a classification unique to the Library; and
WHEREAS, this position was established upon Board of Library Trustees recommendation in 1988, with no major revisions since 2004; and WHEREAS, the addition of culinary tools represents a distinct and significant body of knowledge that is shared with Berkeley residents as an aspect of service; and WHEREAS, the Board of Library Trustees may recommend to the Personnel Board and the City Council revisions to this classification so that the specifications meet Library needs; and
WHEREAS, the Human Resources Department maintains the Classification and Compensation plan for the City of Berkeley; and
WHEREAS, an updated salary structure to reflect a four percent (4%) increase will better reflect the scope of responsibility and make the position more desirable and competitive in future recruitments.

WHEREAS, the Personnel Board recommended on May 9, 2022, and the Board of Library Trustees approved on June 1, 2022, to increase the Salary Schedule for Tool Lending Specialists to an hourly 5-step salary range of Step 1 (n/a), Step 2 (n/a), Step 3: $34.3516 Step 4: $36.1594, and Step 5: $38.0626, reflecting an increase of four percent (4%) to each step effective March 16, 2021.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that Resolution No. 62,558-N.S., Classification and Salary Resolution for Service Employees International Union Local 1021 Maintenance and Clerical Chapters is amended to increase the salary range for Tool Lending Specialists effective March 16, 2021, with 4% increase with subsequent annual COLA increase to an hourly salary structure shown below.

TOOL LENDING SPECIALIST Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 March 2021 Rates n/a n/a 33.0304 34.7687 36.5987
With 4% Increase n/a n/a 34.3516 36.1594 38.0626
With 2021 4% COLA 7/25/21 n/a n/a 35.7257 37.6058 39.5852 With 2022 3% COLA 7/10/22 n/a n/a 36.7975 38.734 40.7727

Attachment 2

TOOL LENDING SPECIALIST

DEFINITION
Under supervision, provides tools, equipment, instructional manuals, and basic reference service regarding home maintenance and repair to patrons of the Berkeley Tool Lending Library; orders, maintains, and repairs tools and equipment; performs related work as assigned.

CLASS CHARACTERISTICS
The Tool Lending Specialist is a skilled library support class assigned to the Berkeley Tool Lending Library.

The duties require a sound working knowledge of home improvement and culinary arts used by the do-it- yourself community. This class is distinguished from other library support classes in that the duties specifically apply to basic home improvement, culinary arts-related reference service, and the circulation of tools and home improvement equipment. home maintenance and repair and the tools and equipment used in the building trades (carpentry, plumbing, electrical, and painting). This class is distinguished from other library support classes in that the duties specifically apply to basic home improvement and building construction relatedrelated construction-related reference service service. and the circulation of tools and building construction equipment.

EXAMPLES OF DUTIES

1. Selects and lends a variety of culinary tools, building trade, and gardening tools, and equipment to residents of the City;

2. Recommends to the Library the purchase of tools and equipment; advises on the purchase of instructional manuals for the Tool Lending Library collection;

3. Maintains tools and equipment in an operable condition, including making necessary repairs; sends tools out to private tool repair companies when a more difficult repair is required;

4. Processes lending requests and answers patron questions in person or by phone;

5. Maintains the reserve and waiting list, retrieves overdue materials, and collects fines;

6. Advises patrons on the correct and safe use of tools and equipment; answers basic patron reference questions regarding home maintenance and repair;

7. Collects and maintains records and prepares reports regarding tools and equipment borrowed, patron demographics, telephone inquiries, and the amount of fees and fines collected;

8. Monitors expenditures related to tool repair and purchase;

9. Attends community meetings and public hearings to explain functions of the Tool Lending Library;

10. Maintains library in a clean and orderly condition;

11. Monitors developments related to tools, equipment, and instructional material on home maintenance and repair;

12. Maintains inventory records;

13. May instruct staff or volunteers on job duties; and

14. Performs related work as assigned.

QUALIFICATIONS
Note: The level and scope of the knowledge, skills, and abilities listed below are related to job duties as defined under Class Characteristics.

Knowledge of:

1. Tools, equipment, and instructional manuals used in culinary tools, building repair, and construction trades;

2. Standard culinary and building maintenance repair and maintenance procedures and terminology;

3. Basic stock and inventory control methods, including requisitioning, receiving, storing, and lending;

4. Record keeping, report preparation, and filing methods and techniques;

5. Basic business arithmetic;

6. Standard safety practices and techniques in the building trades;

7. Basic tool and equipment repair, and repair resources; and

8. Operation of standard office equipment.

Skill in and ability to:

1. Provide sound information and appropriate tools and equipment to patrons;

2. Develop and implement lending and inventory control procedures;

3. Understand and follow oral and written instructions;

4. Organize work, set priorities, and exercise sound independent judgment;

5. Prepare and maintain accurate records and reports;

6. Establish and maintain effective working relationships with those contacted in the course of the work;

7. Gather and evaluate data and make logical recommendations; and

8. Instruct others in work procedures.

OTHER REQUIREMENTS:

Must be able to work evenings, weekends and irregular shifts.

A TYPICAL WAY OF GAINING THE KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS OUTLINED ABOVE IS: Equivalent to graduation from high school and two years of experience which has provided a working knowledge of the tools and equipment used in the building construction trades (carpentry, plumbing, painting, masonry , and electrical).

Established: 12/1988
Revised: 04/2004; 03/2022

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

CONSENT CALENDAR
OCTOBER 11, 2022
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Dee Williams-Ridley, City Manager
Submitted by: Liam Garland, Director, Public Works
Subject: Contract Award: Abbe & Associates LLC for the Integrated Zero Waste Management Strategic Plan

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a contract and any amendments with Abbe & Associates LLC for the development of a draft and final Integrated Zero Waste Management Strategic Plan for a not-to-exceed amount of $500,000 for the contract term of October 31, 2022 through June 30, 2025.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
Funding for this contract is available in the Zero Waste Fund, Budget Codes: 601-54- 627-732-3019-000-472-612990 ($200,000), 601-54-627-733-3019-000-472-612990 ($200,000), 601-54-627-734-3023-000-472-612990 ($100,000).

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
On April 28, 2022, the City released a Request for Proposal (RFP), Specification No. 22-11477-C, seeking qualified firms for the development and completion of an Integrated Zero Waste Management Strategic Plan (Plan) to provide methodologies and guidance for the City’s Zero Waste Division’s operation, personnel, program and financial requirements to meet the City’s Climate Action Plan and Zero Waste goals.

The Plan’s development will include robust public participation and outreach, plus City Council and staff input on both the draft and final Plan.

On June 23, 2022, the City received two proposals from professional consulting firms, which were evaluated by a panel of City staff using a set of RFP criteria that included the City of Berkeley’s local vendor preference policy and the Alameda CTC Local Business Contract Equity (LBCE) program. Both firms demonstrated extensive relevant capabilities and experience in their proposals. The selection panel determined Abbe & Associates LLC to be the highest-ranking firm based on their proposal.

The development and adoption of a City Council approved Integrated Zero Waste Management Strategic Plan is a Strategic Plan Priority Project, advancing our goal to be a global leader in addressing climate change, advancing environmental justice, and protecting the environment.

13

Contract Award: Abbe & Associates LLC for the CONSENT CALENDAR Integrated Zero Waste Management Strategic Plan October 11, 2022

BACKGROUND
The City’s Solid Waste Management Plan (1995 and 2000), the Source Reduction and Recycling Element (1992) and the Climate Action Plan (2009) are the most recent documents guiding the City’s efforts toward eliminating Berkeley's materials sent to landfills to achieve its goal of zero waste. Although proposed, the City’s most recent Solid Waste Management Plan Update (2005) was not formerly adopted by the City.

The 2005 update was designed to achieve a 2010 goal of reaching 75% diversion of all materials being disposed.

This plan will establish how this City will reach zero waste and provide guidance on the City’s solid waste management system. It will highlight the approaches taken to date by the City, Zero Waste Division, Zero Waste Commission, and community members, and propose an integrated and coordinated approach moving forward.

The City Auditor’s Report, Underfunded Mandate: Resources, Strategic Plan, and Communication Needed to Continue Progress Toward the Year 2020 Zero Waste Goal, and the City’s Zero Waste Commission both concluded that a comprehensive, written strategic plan that clearly defines roles and responsibilities and assigns sufficient resources is needed to guide the City and its Zero Waste Division towards the goal of achieving zero waste. Important components to developing an Integrated Zero Waste Management Strategic Plan will be the identification of a target percentage for a Zero Waste Goal, determining the potential costs to achieving a set goal, and reevaluating and proposing a revised target year.

On July 24, 2017, the Zero Waste Commission passed a motion recommending the City move forward immediately to: 1) redefine the City’s Zero Waste Goal and 2) issue the RFP for a Zero Waste Management Strategic Plan.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
An Integrated Zero Waste Management Strategic Plan will enhance the environmental sustainability of our community through waste reduction, material reuse and recycling, and composting of all organics as well as conserve natural resources. An approved Plan and its defined Zero Waste guidelines and approaches will also reduce air and water pollution, and greenhouse gas emissions, protect human health, and create local jobs.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
An Integrated Zero Waste Management Strategic Plan that incorporates and reflects public, City staff, and City Council input and recommendations is necessary to ensure the City has the committed resources, staffing, and guidelines to meet its Zero Waste Goal.

Contract Award: Abbe & Associates LLC for the CONSENT CALENDAR Integrated Zero Waste Management Strategic Plan October 11, 2022

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
No feasible alternatives were identified.

CONTACT PERSON
Greg Apa, Solid Waste & Recycling Manager, Public Works, (510) 981-6359 Andrew Brozyna, Deputy Director of Operations, Public Works, (510) 981-6396 Attachments:
1: Resolution

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

CONTRACT AWARD: ABBE & ASSOCIATES LLC FOR THE INTEGRATED ZERO

WASTE MANAGEMENT STRATEGIC PLAN
WHEREAS, the City’s Solid Waste Management Plan (1995 and 2000), the Source Reduction and Recycling Element (1992), and the Climate Action Plan (2009) are the most recent documents guiding the City’s efforts toward eliminating Berkeley's materials sent to landfills to achieve its goal of zero waste; and WHEREAS, the City’s most recent Solid Waste Management Plan Update (2005) was designed to achieve a 2010 goal of reaching 75% diversion of all materials being disposed, it was not formerly adopted by the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City agrees that compliance with statewide goals of: 1) AB 75, Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan; 2) AB 341, 75% of solid waste generated by a source to be reduced, recycled, or composted by the year 2020; 3) AB 1826, implementing an organic waste recycling program to divert organic waste generated by businesses; and 4) SB1383, Short-Lived Climate Pollutants: Organic Waste Emissions Regulations, targets a 50% reduction from the 2014 level of disposed organic waste by 2020 and 75% reduction by 2025; promotes the City’s Zero Waste Goal; and WHEREAS, funding for this contract is available in the Zero Waste Fund; and WHEREAS, the City recognizes the need for a publicly vetted and approved Integrated Zero Waste Management Strategic Plan that will provide guidelines, pathways, and identify resources required to meet the City’s Climate Action Plan and Zero Waste goals, and State legislative mandates.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that the City Manager is authorized to execute a contract and any amendments with Abbe & Associates LLC for the development of a draft and final Integrated Zero Waste Management Strategic Plan, for an amount not to exceed $500,000 for the contract term of October 31, 2022 through June 30, 2025. A record signature copy of the said contract and any amendments is to be on file in the City Clerk Department.

Rashi Kesarwani
Councilmember, District 1

CONSENT CALENDAR
OCTOBER 11, 2022
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Councilmember Rashi Kesarwani (Author), Councilmember Terry Taplin (Co-Sponsor)
SUBJECT: Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) Program Expansion for West Berkeley Neighborhoods Within Two Blocks of Commercial Corridors

RECOMMENDATION
Referral to the City Manager to expand the scope of the Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) program as originally proposed by staff during the May 14, 2019 City Council Public Hearing1 as a way to allow more residents to opt-in to this program.

Expansion of this program should consider:
● Raising permit fees for cost neutrality of the program while increasing both parking enforcement staff and equipment to enable expanded RPP enforcement;
● Adopting a graduated fee increase as recommended by Councilmember Kesarwani in 2019 and presented to Council during the September 10, 2019 City Council meeting2 whereby each additional permitted vehicle associated with a particular address pays a higher fee–up to three permits (see Table 1); ● Conducting an analysis of Fiscal Year (FY) 2022 Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) Program costs and revenues and returning to Council with an updated fee increase proposal to be effective in the new fiscal permit year for the program.
1 May 14, 2019 City Council Meeting Public Hearing: Residential Preferential Parking Program Reform & Expansion Phase II: Recommendations for Increased Enforcement Staffing, Enhanced Football Game Day Enforcement Operations, and Expansion (attached) 2 September 10, 2019 City Council Meeting: Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) Program:

Summer 2019 Update, p. 5 (attached)

14

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7110 ● Fax: (510) 981-7111 E-Mail: [email protected]
2 Table 1. Proposed alternate fee structure conceptually suggested by Councilmember Kesarwani in 2019
Table taken from the September 10, 2019 City Council Agenda: RPP Summer 2019 Update, p. 5 Eligibility areas to be considered for expansion should also follow the guidelines established in the May 14, 2019 Public Hearing on recommended changes to the RPP program. Specifically, neighbors and neighborhoods would need to satisfy the below requirements in order to opt-in to this program:
● Petitioners obtaining agreement of +51 percent of all housing units in the area; ● Staff verifying limited parking availability in the mid-morning and mid- afternoon;
● Parcel location within two blocks of a major commercial corridor, or adjacent to existing RPP boundaries; and
● In residentially-zoned areas, at least one full block (both sides of a street) must be included in the petition.3

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
The City’s parking enforcement team is under-resourced and unable to meet the growing demand for services. According to the staff Information Report presented to Council on May 14, 2019, while demands on parking enforcement have increased over the years, staffing levels have remained static. The result has been 3 May 14, 2019 CIty Council Meeting Public Hearing: Residential Preferential Parking Program Reform & Expansion Phase II: Recommendations for Increased Enforcement Staffing, Enhanced Football Game Day Enforcement Operations, and Expansion, p. 8

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7110 ● Fax: (510) 981-7111 E-Mail: [email protected]
3 parking enforcement officers (PEOs) being unable to enforce parking restrictions in any given area more than once daily rendering our parking enforcement mechanism weak, at best.4 The report notes that 18 PEOs patrol geographic areas that include both parking meters and RPP time-limited parking areas, enforcing parking restrictions on more than 1,000 blockfaces with two-hour time limit restrictions, 460 blockfaces with meters of varying time limits, in addition to all other time-limited parking areas throughout the city. Roughly half of parking enforcement time is spent conducting RPP time-limited patrols while the rest is spent enforcing time meters, other time-limited areas, school zones, travel time and dealing with emergencies, such as traffic collisions. Staff do not have the capacity to make multiple visits to a given area on a daily basis. Any new block opting into the RPP program–either in the existing zone or in the possible expanded zone–further reduces the capacity for enforcement.

Current areas of eligibility for RPP permits exclude most of West Berkeley. The current RPP eligibility map on the City of Berkeley’s website (below) shows that the RPP eligibility areas are mostly concentrated east of Sacramento Street, surrounding the University of California, Berkeley. The RPP program was instituted in 1980 to protect Berkeley residential neighborhoods from an influx of non-resident vehicles and related traffic, presumably from students at the university and employees associated with both neighborhood and student-oriented businesses. 4 May 14, 2019 Information Report to Berkeley City Council: Residential Preferential Parking Program:

Spring 2019 Update (attached).

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7110 ● Fax: (510) 981-7111 E-Mail: [email protected]
4 Current RPP Eligibility Map, taken from the City of Berkeley website, August, 2022. Areas outlined in bold indicate boundary lines.

Residents in close proximity to any commercial corridor, however, feel the impacts of non-resident-related traffic and difficulties parking close to one’s residence.

University and San Pablo Avenues, for instance, host establishments drawing high customer volumes, such as Acme Bread, Thai Table, and Casa de Cultura whose popularity compels people to drive in from various parts of the City and beyond, resulting in parking impacts on residential streets. The District 1 office has also received numerous complaints over the years from residents living within a couple blocks of San Pablo Avenue regarding parking impacts from some of the many automotive businesses that use residential street parking for both employees and customer cars, despite prohibitions against doing so. Residents in these areas are unable to opt-in to the RPP program and have no recourse to combat some of the parking and traffic issues.

Parking demands in residential areas adjacent to San Pablo Avenue are likely to increase as development along the corridor increases. In the District 1 portion

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7110 ● Fax: (510) 981-7111 E-Mail: [email protected]
5 of San Pablo Avenue, north of University Avenue, the below developments are already well underway in the planning and entitlement stages:
● 1740 San Pablo Avenue: 54 units
● 1701 San Pablo Avenue: 110 units
● 1201-1205 San Pablo Avenue: 66 units
The above numbers constitute a total of 230 additional housing units that will be built within a 10 block stretch of San Pablo Avenue and added to the area within the next couple of years. Two additional locations, 1835 and 1200 San Pablo Avenue, have at times had project proposals, though the projects have since stalled. The neighborhood blocks around San Pablo Avenue are currently ineligible to opt-in to the RPP program, and this item seeks to give these blocks an opportunity to opt-in to RPP if they so choose. We note that it is current City policy for residents of new developments to be ineligible for the RPP program.

BACKGROUND
The RPP program, established in 1980, was intended to 1) protect Berkeley residential neighborhoods from an influx of non-resident vehicles and related traffic; 2) help maintain the quality of life in residential areas; and 3) to provide neighborhood parking for residents living on that street. The program limits most non-permit holders to parking for up to two hours, thus keeping more daytime spaces available for residents on a given block, between 9 a.m. and 7 p.m. Monday through Friday, and on some blocks Saturday.

On March 11, 2014, City Council directed staff to evaluate expansion of the RPP program beyond its then-current boundaries.5 During a September 19, 2017 City Council Worksession, staff discussed some challenges with the RPP program, notably that it was operating at a deficit, and proposed some solutions to be implemented over the next several years.6 On February 27, 2018, staff returned to Council with suggested policy reforms that were all passed:
● Increase permit fees for program cost neutrality;
● Limit annual permits to three per address;
● Expand RPP eligibility to two new zones in West Berkeley7 5 March 11, 2014 City Council Agenda:Expansion of Permit Parking to Impacted Areas (attached) 6 September 19, 2017 City Council Agenda: Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) Program Recommendations (attached)
7 February 27, 2018 City Council Agenda: Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) Program Reform and Expansion (attached)

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7110 ● Fax: (510) 981-7111 E-Mail: [email protected]
6 On May 14, 2019, staff recommended an Ordinance amendment to Berkeley Municipal Code Chapter 14.72 to allow RPP in areas zoned Mixed Use-Light Industrial; adoption of a resolution to expand and enhance the RPP program by raising permit fees for cost neutrality while increasing parking enforcement staff and equipment to augment enforcement and improve UC Berkeley home football gameday parking enforcement; adoption of a resolution modifying parking restrictions in specified RPP zones on UC Berkeley home football game days; and adoption of a resolution establishing a new Parking Fine Schedule. That same day, staff also presented an information report updating the Council about the effects of the 2018 RPP Program adjustments. Notably, while the fee adjustment did help reduce the operational deficit, it did not eliminate it. The Ordinance amendment as well as the two resolutions were passed during the May 14, 2019 meeting, while Council recommended the fee increase be referred to the Agenda and Rules Committee for future scheduling and discussion. It was scheduled for the July 23, 2019 City Council Agenda, held over again, and rescheduled for the September 10, 2019 City Council Agenda. During the September 10, 2019 meeting, staff recommended conducting an analysis of Fiscal Year (FY) 2020 Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) Program costs and revenues and returning to Council in early 2020 with updated fee increase proposal(s) to be effective the following fiscal year for program enhancement and expansion. Due to the pandemic, this issue never returned to a Council agenda. This current recommendation simply re-establishes a staff process that had already been set into motion but was abruptly halted due to the pandemic and its effects.

FISCAL IMPACT
There will be costs associated with the RPP Program expansion as well as offsets to those costs. According to the May 14, 2019 Public Hearing, those costs were projected as follows:

Annual cost of $909,972 from the general fund for:
● Six (6) Parking Enforcement Officers ($124,818 per FTE; total $748,907/year) ● One (1) Parking Enforcement Supervisor ($138,065/year); ● New RPP sign installation, including labor and materials, at $23,000/year And, one time costs of $680,178 for:
● Six (6) parking enforcement vehicles ($210,000 total) ● Six (6) automated license plate recognition (ALPR) systems ($78,363 each, $470,178 total)
These fees would be offset by permit fee increases as well as an increase of revenue from citations. The May 14, 2019 proposed fee increase is shown in Table 2 below:

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7110 ● Fax: (510) 981-7111 E-Mail: [email protected]
7 Table 2. Proposed Permit Fee Increase as presented during the May 14, 2019 Public Hearing, p. 4
Considerable time has elapsed between that meeting and today which is why an updated fiscal analysis is part of the current recommendation. These numbers and table above have been provided to give an approximation of costs for the RPP program expansion.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
The RPP program two-hour time limits and other enforced timed-parking restrictions may encourage some drivers to use alternate modes of travel resulting in reduced parking demand and congestion.

CONTACT
Councilmember Rashi Kesarwani, District 1 (510) 981-7110 Attachments:
1) September 10, 2019 City Council Agenda: Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) Program: Summer 2019 Update
2) May 14, 2019 CIty Council Agenda, item #50: Residential Preferential Parking Program Reform and Expansion Phase II: Recommendations for Increased Staffing, Enhanced Football Game Day Enforcement, and Expansion 3) May 14, 2019 City Council Agenda, item #61: Residential Preferential Parking:

Spring 2019 Update

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7110 ● Fax: (510) 981-7111 E-Mail: [email protected]
8 4) February 27, 2018 City Council Agenda: Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) Program Reform and Expansion
5) September 19, 2017 City Council Agenda: Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) Program Recommendations
6) March 11, 2014 City Council Agenda: Expansion of Permit Parking to Impacted Areas

CONSENT CALENDAR
October 11th, 2022
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Councilmember Terry Taplin, Councilmember Kate Harrison, and Councilmember Rigel Robinson
Subject: Regulation of Autonomous Vehicles

RECOMMENDATION
Refer to the City Attorney the assessment of the legal abilities and opportunities for the City Council to regulate the operation, sale, and testing of autonomous vehicles (AVs) within the City of Berkeley and report to the Facilities, Infrastructure, Transportation, Environment and Sustainability Committee (FITES) on all findings.

POLICY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
On July 20, 2022, the Facilities, Infrastructure, Transportation, Environment & Sustainability Policy Committee took the following action: M/S/C (Robinson/Harrison) to approve the item with a positive recommendation.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
Autonomous vehicles, better known as driverless cars, are an emerging technology with such potential to transform our transportation system that it inspires great optimism as well as an equal amount of trepidation. Advocates and opponents of the technology agree that the full automation of personal automobiles will have enormous ripple effects throughout our society, impacting the job market, public safety, energy consumption, and our every understanding of how we design our cities and transportation systems.

Those pursuing AV technology view removing the variable of human error from personal vehicle transportation as the solution to congestion, fuel efficiency, and traffic accidents themselves. Proponents of AVs also see driverless cars as a valuable resource for persons with disabilities who cannot currently drive personal vehicles, expanding the mobility options for millions.1 Others are more suspicious of driverless cars.

Some studies suggest any gains made by AVs in reducing congestion and traffic accidents could very well be neutralized by an induced demand for this exciting new transportation method.2 Furthermore, the introduction of truly autonomous vehicles into 1 Faisal, Asif, et al. "Understanding autonomous vehicles." Journal of transport and land use 12.1 (2019): 45-72. 2 Medina-Tapia, Marcos, and Francesc Robusté. "Implementation of connected and autonomous vehicles in cities could have neutral effects on the total travel time costs: modeling and analysis for a circular city." Sustainability 11.2 (2019): 482.

15

the market at a time when environmental and street safety advocates are pushing for a decline in all kinds of personal vehicle mode-shares could undo decades of work to reduce car dependency. Of particular concern to the City of Berkeley will be the impact that AVs have on greenhouse gas emissions. On one hand, reduced driving time searching for parking, the potential for autonomous driving to be more fuel-efficient, reduced congestion, and disruptions to the decision-making systems that encourage the unnecessary growth in size of modern personal vehicles could very well reduce emissions. On the other hand, easier and faster travel and the widening of accessibility that fully autonomous vehicles will bring may boost car mode-share beyond levels consistent with our climate needs.3 While difficult to know for certain, “it is quite possible that AVs could be more energy-efficient, thereby reducing the GHG by functional unit- basis as per-passenger-mile (ppm); however, the overall gain related to transportation GHG emissions could be swamped by a surge in increased vehicle miles traveled (VMT)”4. Whether driverless cars revolutionize transportation for better or worse, policymakers must be prepared for an influx of these new vehicles.

Potential impacts of autonomous vehicles on greenhouse gas emissions.5 3 Massar, Moneim, et al. "Impacts of autonomous vehicles on greenhouse gas emissions—positive or negative?." International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18.11 (2021): 5567. 4 Massar, Moneim, et al.
5 Massar, Moneim, et al.

According to recent data provided by the California Department of Motor Vehicles, 2021 was a record-setting year for miles driven by test-autonomous vehicles (AVs) in California.6 Despite the sudden growth in AVs on public roads in recent years, municipal governments have limited control over the regulation of AV testing and little access to basic information on the testing itself. This will pose a growing concern to local policymakers in the coming years as AV testing continues to spread. In California, AV testing oversight belongs to the DMV and the California Public Utilities Commission.

This concentration of regulatory power at the state level makes it difficult to even determine the number of AV tests that have been conducted on Berkeley’s streets, particularly because the DMV and CPUC do not require that AV companies report the whereabouts of their vehicles.7 In order for the City to plan for the introduction of AVs onto public roads, use what limited regulatory abilities may be available, and lobby the state government to expand its oversight power, the Berkeley City Council must be made aware of all legal options for setting both AV testing rules and rules for functional AVs in a future where testing is complete and AVs are commercially available.

Beyond the testing of AVs that is expected to continue for many years, Berkeley must be prepared for a scenario where AVs are widely sold and threaten many of the City’s transportation and climate goals. For the sake of safer streets and a reduction of fossil fuel emissions, the City of Berkeley is pursuing a growth in non-car transportation mode shares in its transportation, infrastructure, and planning policies. This pursuit may easily be threatened by the sudden availability of self-driving cars. The option for drivers to choose a vehicle that offers the present day convenience of an automobile with an added reduction in the actual requirement to drive the vehicle carries the possibility of undoing any progress made if no preemptive regulatory policies are made. While it will be many years before self-driving cars are available or even common on Berkeley’s streets, the City must proceed with transportation planning that is cautious with AVs and committed to a future where cars are not the largest mode-share.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
It is important for the City of Berkeley to have a clear understanding of its exact responsibilities when it comes to autonomous vehicles and where state and federal bodies hold most power. With that knowledge, the City Council can lobby the state government and federal agencies both for more power over the regulation of driverless cars as well as for specific policies that Council determines should be enacted but lacks the power to do alone.

FISCAL IMPACTS
Staff time for the referral response.
6https://techcrunch.com/2022/02/10/fewer-autonomous-vehicle-companies-in-california-drive-millions-more-miles-in- testing/
7 https://www.sfexaminer.com/findings/how-san-francisco-became-an-autonomous-vehicle-test-course/

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Reducing the use of automobiles on Berkeley’s streets is a critical task for the reduction of the City’s fossil fuel emissions, an immense share of which come from private vehicle emissions.8

CONTACT
Terry Taplin, Councilmember, District 2, (510) 981-7120

ATTACHMENTS

1. Understanding Autonomous Vehicles

2. Impacts of Autonomous Vehicles on Greenhouse Gas Emissions—Positive or Negative?
8https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/2022-01/Berkeley-Climate-Action-Plan.pdf

Understanding autonomous vehicles
Author(s): Asif Faisal, Md Kamruzzaman, Tan Yigitcanlar and Graham Currie Source:

Journal of Transport and Land Use , Vol. 12, No. 1 (2019), pp. 45-72 Published by: Journal of Transport and Land Use
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/26911258

REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/26911258?seq=1&cid=pdf- reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at https://about.jstor.org/terms
Journal of Transport and Land Use is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Transport and Land Use
This content downloaded from
73.66.184.251 on Mon, 27 Jun 2022 18:46:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

Abstract: Advancement in automated driving technology has created opportunities for smart urban mobility. Automated vehicles are now a popular topic with the rise of the smart city agenda. However, legisla- tors, urban administrators, policymakers, and planners are unprepared to deal with the possible disruption of autonomous vehicles, which potentially could replace conventional transport. There is a lack of knowledge on how the new capabilities will disrupt and which policy strategies are needed to address such disruption. This paper aims to determine where we are, where we are headed, what the likely impacts of a wider uptake could be, and what needs to be done to generate desired smart urban mobility outcomes. The methodology includes a systematic review of the existing evidence base to understand capabil- ity, impact, planning, and policy issues associated with autonomous vehicles. The review reveals the trajectories of technological develop- ment, disruptive effects caused by such development, strategies to ad- dress the disruptions, and possible gaps in the literature. The paper develops a framework outlining the inter-links among driving forces, uptake factors, impacts and possible interventions. It concludes by ad- vocating the necessity of preparing our cities for autonomous vehicles, although a wider uptake may take quite some time.

Understanding autonomous vehicles: A systematic literature re- view on capability, impact, planning and policy
Article history:

Received: March 28, 2018
Received in revised form:

November 6, 2018
Accepted: November 6, 2018
Available online: January 28,
2019
Copyright 2019 Asif Faisal, Tan Yigitcanlar, Md Kamruzzaman & Graham Currie http://dx.doi.org/10.5198/jtlu.2019.1405
ISSN: 1938-7849 | Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution – Noncommercial License 4.0 The Journal of Transport and Land Use is the official journal of the World Society for T ransport and Land Use (WSTLUR) and is published and sponsored by the University of Minnesota Center for T ransportation Studies.

T J  T  L U http://jtlu.org V . 12 N. 1 [2019] pp. 45–72
Asif Faisal
Queensland University of Technology
[email protected]
Md Kamruzzaman
Monash University
[email protected]
Tan Yigitcanlar
Queensland University of Technology
[email protected]
Graham Currie
Monash University
[email protected]
1 Introduction
The convergence of technology and the city is seen as a possible remedy to overcome the challenges of urbanization such as climate change, congestion, and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (Yigitcanlar, 2016). T ransport, as an integral part of the city, is responsible for about a quarter to one-third of GHG emissions (Kamruzzaman, Hine, & Yigicanlar, 2015; Arbolino, Carlucci, Cira, Loppolo, & Yigicanlar, 2017; Yigitcanlar, Foth, & Kamruzzaman, 2018). T echnology in the name of smart urban mobility is This content downloaded from
73.66.184.251 on Mon, 27 Jun 2022 18:46:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

46 JOURNAL OF TRANSPORT AND LAND USE 12.1
becoming a key concept of the contemporary urban policy agenda to address the undesirable effects of transport (Creutzig et al., 2015; Perveen, Yigicanlar, Kamruzzaman, & Hayes, 2017; Perveen, Kamruz- zaman, & Yigicanlar, 2017, 2018; Yigitcanlar & Kamruzzaman, 2018b).

As originally conceived within the smart cities agenda (Yigitcanlar, 2015; Lara, Costa Furlani, & Yiticanlaar, 2016; T rindade et al., 2017; Chang, Sabatini-Marques, da Costa, Selig, & Yigicanlar, 2018; Yigitcanlar et al., 2018a), the smart urban mobility concept is characterized by an integration of sustainable and smart vehicular technologies, and cooperative intelligent transport systems (ITS) through cloud-servers and big-data-based vehicular networks (Kim, Moom, & Suh, 2015). In other words, smart urban mobility is conceptualized as urban traffic services combined with smart technolo- gies (Chun & Lee, 2015). Undoubtedly one of the most advanced applications that utilizes numerous ITS tools as a part of the smart urban transport system is autonomous vehicle (AV)—a.k.a. automated car, self-driving car or driverless car (Spyropoulou, Penttinen, Karlaftis, Vaa, & Golias, 2008; Chong et al., 2013; Olaverri-Monreal, 2016).

The basic concept of road vehicle automation refers to the replacement of some or all of the human labor of driving by electronic and/or mechanical devices (Shladover, 2018). Origins of the automated driving technology can be traced back to the early 20th century. At that time, the technology was con- centrated on autonomous speed, break, lane control, and other basic cruise control aspects (Shladover, Su, & Lu, 2012; Anderson et al., 2014; Arnaout & Arnaout, 2014; Pendleton et al., 2017). However, only during the last decade or so, incubating conditions of the Digital and 4th Industrial Revolutions gave birth to rapid technological advancements in the field; resulting in numerous prototype AVs being trailed on the roads (Christie, Koymans, Chanard, Lasgouttes, & Kaufmann, 2016).

Many research articles have been published in the academic literature describing the technological advancement of AVs (Denaro, Zmud, Shladover, Smith, & Lappin, 2014). However, academic litera- ture outlining the AV induced disruptions (both positive and negative) in cities and how policies are be- ing introduced to promote or address various disruptive effects is fairly limited (Bagloee, Tavana, Asadi, & Oliver, 2016; Gruel & Stanford, 2016; T ruong, De Gruyter, Currie, & Delbosc, 2017), despite a recent prediction suggests that by 2045, AVs would account for up to half of all road travel (Bansal & Kockelman, 2017; Litman, 2017). Even more so, there is no study, to our knowledge, in the academic literature that critically scrutinizes the state of AVs from a combined perspective focusing on its capabil- ity, impact and existing/potential policy interventions to reduce/foster the disruptive effects.

Against this backdrop, this paper aims to determine where we are at, where we are headed to, what the likely impacts of wider AV uptake could be, and what needs to be done for AVs to generate desired smart urban mobility outcomes—with a particular focus on the capability, impact and policy. In order to achieve this aim, the study undertakes a systematic review of the literature on AVs published in peer- reviewed journals. The review concentrates on the following research objectives: (a) Highlighting the main findings and contributions of the reviewed literature; (b) Mapping out the relationships among the capability, impact, planning interventions, and pre-deployment policy to accommodate AVs as well as to reduce the undesirable effects of AVs; (c) Determining the gaps in the literature and pointing out directions for prospective research. A key outcome of this research is the development of an AV driving forces, uptake factors, impacts and interventions framework.

This content downloaded from
73.66.184.251 on Mon, 27 Jun 2022 18:46:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

47 Understanding autonomous vehicles: A systematic literature review 2 Autonomous vehicles in a nutshell

2.1 Historical background
Vehicle automation was originally envisioned as early as in 1918 (Pendleton et al., 2017), and the first concept of automated vehicle was exhibited by General Motors in 1939 (Shladover, 2018). The initial phase of research and development (R&D) was jointly initiated by General Motors and Radio Corpora- tion of America Sarnoff Laboratory in the 1950s (Shladover, 2018). From 1964 to 2003, several other R&D programs were operational in the US, Europe, and Japan under individual and joint initiatives of different government institutes and academia to develop automated bus and truck platoons, super- smart vehicle systems, and video image processing of driving scene recognition (Shladover, 2018). AV research was accelerated through the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency’s (DARPA) Grand Challenges Program in the US in 2004. The challenges resulted in AVs capable of traversing dessert ter- rain in 2005, and in 2007. Researchers also managed to place AVs on urban roads through the DARPA’s Urban Challenge Program (Pendleton et al., 2017; Shladover, 2018). Since then, R&D continued at a fast pace in both academia and industrial settings.

Volvo, for instance, started its journey to autonomous driving in 2006, introduced its full autono- mous test vehicle in 2017, and has plans to bring its unsupervised AV to the market by 2021. T ech giant Google started its journey towards full AVs in 2009, and by 2017 Google’s AV fleet, WAYMO, has completed three million miles driving within four US states. In 2014, TESLA announced that its car will be capable of self-driving about 90% of the time. T oday, all TESLA models are equipped with self-driving capability. By 2020, Audi, BMW , Mercedes-Benz and Nissan are expecting to have their AVs in the market.

Bloomberg (2017) provides an inventory of how cities around the globe are preparing for the tran- sition to a world with AVs. According to this study, 36 cities were hosting AV tests, or have committed to doing so in the near future; where 18 other cities are undertaking long-range surveys of the regulatory, planning, and governance issues associated with AVs, but have not yet started piloting. The inventory considers of those piloting cities that were partnering on tests of a variety of AV products, including retrofitted autos and brand-new vehicles like conveyors (small, cart-sized AVs that travel on sidewalks).

T estbed locations are generally isolated places from the rest of the city, such as technology parks, college campuses, urban renewal districts, highways, and former international mega-event sites. Therefore, as stated by Bloomberg (2017), while these trials are happening, they are not yet tackling the full challenges of navigating through complex urban environments. Table 1 lists the cities that are piloting (hosting AV tests or have committed to doing so in the near future) or preparing (undertaking long-range surveys of the regulatory, planning, and governance issues raised by AVs, but have not yet started piloting) them- selves for an AV uptake.

This content downloaded from
73.66.184.251 on Mon, 27 Jun 2022 18:46:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

48 JOURNAL OF TRANSPORT AND LAND USE 12.1
Table 1. List of cities testing or in preparation for AVs (Bloomberg, 2017)

2.2 Autonomous technology
In line with the automation concept, a taxonomy of 4-level of vehicle automation was developed by the National Highway T raffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) in 2013 (Wadud, MaKenzie, & Leiby, 2016), and a 5-level automation was introduced by the Society of Automotive Engineers International (SAE) in 2014—later on updated in 2016 (Coppola & Morisio, 2016; SAE, 2016a, 2016b; Snyder, 2016; Milakis, van Arem, & van Wee, 2017). In 2016, NHTSA adopted SAE’s taxonomy and automa- tion levels (NHTSA, 2016). SAE’s taxonomy and automation levels have become an industry standard, and also frequently referred in the academic literature (Rubin, 2016; Scheltes & de Almeida Correia, 2017; Walker & Marchau, 2017; Shladover, 2018). Table 2 describes the operational functions included in automated driving system (ADS), and the role of human driver at each level of vehicle automation.

Piloting cities Piloting cities (continued) Preparing cities Adelaide, AU Melbourne, AU Auckland, NZ
Amsterdam, NL Oslo, NO Buenos Aires, AR
Austin, US Paris, FR Cambridge, US
Boston, US Pittsburgh, US Columbus, US
Bristol, UK Reno, US Denver, US
Chandler, US Rotterdam, NL Dublin, US
Chiba City, JP San Antonio, US Los Angeles, US
Detroit, US San Francisco, US Montréal, CA
Dubai, UAE San Jose, US Nashville, US
Edmonton, CA Seongnam, KR Orlando, US
Eindhoven, NL Singapore Palo Alto, US
Gothenburg, SE T oronto, CA Portland, US
Haarlem, NL Wageningen, NL Rionegro, CO
Helsinki, FI Washington, DC, US Sacramento, US
Las Vegas, US West Midlands, UK Santa Monica, US
London, UK Wuhan, CN Seattle, US
Lyon, FR Wuhu, CN São Paulo, BR
Milton Keynes, UK Zhuzhou, CN T el Aviv, IL
This content downloaded from
73.66.184.251 on Mon, 27 Jun 2022 18:46:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

49 Understanding autonomous vehicles: A systematic literature review Table 2. Taxonomy of road vehicle automation derived from SAE (2016a) In theory, an automated vehicle system can only be termed as an “autonomous” system, when all the dynamic driving tasks, at all driving environment, can be performed by the vehicle’s automated system. According to the Federal Automated Vehicles Policy of the US Department of T ransportation, a vehicle is denoted as AV if it has levels 3-5 automated systems (DoT , 2016). However, these levels of autonomy are not strictly maintained in the literature and any level of autonomy is referred to as au- tonomous (Shladover, 2018). Throughout this paper, the term AV will refer to the levels 3-5 automated systems only.

Driving requires a variety of functions, including localization, perception, planning, control, and management (Coppola & Morisio, 2016). Information acquisition is a prerequisite to localization, and perception. If all of these functions, including information acquisition, are available in a vehicle, it could definitely be termed as an AV . If any AV has to communicate with other infrastructures to collect infor- mation, or to negotiate its maneuvers, it is termed as connected autonomous vehicle (CAV) (Shladover, 2018), and when any manually driven vehicle, whether manual or automated, has to communicate with other infrastructures to collect information, or to negotiate its maneuvers, it is termed as connected vehicle (CV) (Hendrickson, Biehler, & Mashayekh, 2014; Coppola & Morisio, 2016). Therefore, CV technology is complimentary or has synergistic effect on the implementation of AV to some extent (Shladover, 2018), though connectivity is not a mandatory feature of AVs (Hendrickson et al., 2014).

Level of automation Automated driving system Human driver Operational function Capability Operational
function
Capability
Level 1
(most functions are
controlled by driver)
Control: lateral and longi-
tudinal
In some driving modes Localisation
Perception
Planning
Management
In all driving modes
Level 2
(at least one driver
assistance system is
automated)
Control: lateral and longi-
tudinal
In some driving modes Localisation
Perception
Planning
Management
In all driving modes
Level 3
(driver is able to shift
safety-critical functions
to vehicle)
Control: lateral and longi-
tudinal
Localisation
Perception
Planning
In some driving modes Management In all driving modes
Level 4
(fully-autonomous,
but not in every driv-
ing scenario)
Control: lateral and longi-
tudinal
Localisation
Perception
Planning
Management
In some driving modes n/a n/a
Level 5
(fully-autonomous,
vehicle’s performance
is equal that of human
driver in every driving
scenario)
Control: lateral and longi-
tudinal
Localisation
Perception
Planning
Management
In all driving modes n/a n/a
This content downloaded from
73.66.184.251 on Mon, 27 Jun 2022 18:46:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

50 JOURNAL OF TRANSPORT AND LAND USE 12.1

2.3 Perceived benefits
AVs are expected to be operational both as private and as commercial vehicle (Heinrichs, 2016; Colling- wood, 2017; Wadud, 2017). One of the perceived advantages and flexibility of autonomous private car over the conventional private car is that it can simultaneously be used among all members in a family.

Commercial AVs could be operated as taxi, bus, and freight services. AV taxis can provide service as a combination of conventional car-sharing and taxi services, which is referred to as shared AV (SAV) or driverless taxi (Fagnant & Kockelman, 2014; Krueger, Rashidi, & Rose, 2016).

Perception prevails that driverless taxi is likely to complement/supplement traditional public transit service, and it can potentially replace the private car and conventional taxis because SAVs are expected to be relatively inexpensive and facilitating opportunity for multitasking during a ride (Malokin, Circella, & Mokhtarian, 2015; Krueger et al., 2016; Milakis, Snelder, van Arem, Homem, & van Wee, 2017). In spite of having cooperation within the fleet, conventional taxi drivers seek to maximize individual profit, overruling minimum wait time and less passenger kilometers travelled (PKT), as identified by the fleet cooperation (Boesch, Ciari, & Axhausen, 2016).

Some transport network companies (TNC), such as Uber and Lyft, have been trying to develop a model similar to SAVs in their operations. However, in this model, human drivers are still responsible for routing, relocation, operation times, and many other decision-making factors. On the contrary, 100% central control system of SAV can overcome the limitations of conventional taxi services. Thus, SAV can ensure more system-optimal and overall profit-maximizing network with a higher service level and lower empty travel cost with respect to conventional taxi services, and TNCs (Fagnant, Kockelman, & Bansal, 2015). With a comprehensive ICT integration, SAV could facilitate dynamic ridesharing (DRS). Hence, SAV can either provide service with DRS or without DRS facility (Krueger et al., 2016).

The barriers to traditional ridesharing service could be overcome through the introduction of DRS (Krueger et al., 2016) or driverless taxi (Martinez & Viegas, 2017). The concept of “mobility-as-a- service” (MaaS) can also be accommodated with the introduction of SAV and DRS. Commercial opera- tions like taxi, bus and freight service can benefit from automation through the postponement of driver costs (Wadud, 2017). Deployment of autonomous private car or taxi may reduce parking demand at urban core locations, repurposing those spaces for the use of other economic activity and in turn, it may act to increase urban density in central business district (CBD) locations (Bagloee et al., 2016; Levine, Segev, & Thode, 2017).

In contrast, reliability, comfort, and reduced perceived value of time may encourage long commute distances, contributing to urban sprawl and influencing real-estate values in ex-urban areas (Heinrichs, 2016; Rubin, 2016; Snyder, 2016). Integration of platooning features in freight and bus services, with the help of autonomous and cooperative technology, can play a vital role in increasing road capacity.

These are few prominent and divergent examples of AV , considering its diversity in use.

The technological advancement and potential benefits of AVs, as discussed above, are linked together (Heinrichs, 2016). How are these benefits likely to be translated in the form and structure of urban systems? This research compiles evidence from published literature to address this question. 3 Methodology
This research applies a systematic review of the literature to achieve the research aim and objectives. A systematic literature review follows an explicit protocol for higher data reliability and for shaping the diversity of knowledge in a specific research field (Rowley & Slack, 2004; Brereton, Kitchenham, Bud- gen, T urner, & Khalil, 2007; Bask & Rajahonka, 2017). It aims at abating bias through comprehensive literature searches and delivers an evaluation trajectory for the reviewer verdicts, procedures and infer- ences (Burgess, Singh, & Koroglu, 2006; Bask & Rajahonka, 2017). The review involves three major This content downloaded from
73.66.184.251 on Mon, 27 Jun 2022 18:46:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

51 Understanding autonomous vehicles: A systematic literature review activities: (a) Planning; (b) Realization or review; (c) Reporting and presentation (T ranfield, Denyer, & Smart, 2003; Bask & Rajahonka, 2017; Oliveira et al., 2017).

The above three activities were undertaken according to the methodological principles recom- mended by Oliveira, Márcio de Almeida et al. (2016) and Oliveria, Albergaria De Mello Bandeira et al. (2017): (a) Planning activity consists of identifying the need for revision (why), purpose of the review (what), and developing the protocol of the review (how, when and where); (b) Review activity including identification, selection, and inclusion of papers, evaluation of the selected papers, extraction of data and information, and synthesis of data; (c) Reporting and presentation includes preparing reports, and presenting results.

Firstly, a research plan involving the research aim and objectives, keywords, and a set of inclusion and exclusion criteria was developed. Research objectives were framed, to explore links among various aspects of AVs and thus to recognize promising areas for future research. As the keyword, we decided to use “autonomous vehicle” OR “automated vehicle” OR “driverless car” OR “self-driving car”. T o focus on the research objectives, we identified the inclusion criteria—peer-reviewed research articles in English language. An online search was conducted using a university library search engine that connects to 393 different databases including ScienceDirect, Scopus, Web of Science, Wiley online library, directory of open access journals (DOAJ), and so on. Edited or authored books, articles published in other lan- guages, grey literature such as government or industry reports and non-academic research, and editorial papers were not included in the review. The search included only peer-reviewed and full text journal articles available online—procedia papers are considered as journal articles, due to relatively limited numbers of journal articles published on the topic.

Secondly, the search was conducted in January 2018 for journal articles published between January 2000 and January 2018. The review focused on the post-2000 articles due to limited studies focused on AVs prior to this date—particularly on the impact, planning and policy issues. Several thematic searches were specified through a combination of multiple keywords. The keywords used in all thematic searches were divided into two parts: The first part (specified by first parentheses) was directed to the title of the articles, and the second part was directed to the abstract. The resultant search items were initially checked by reading the abstract and then by reading the full-text in order to verify their scope against the research objectives.

The first thematic search was conducted using the search tag of (“autonomous vehicle” OR “au- tomated vehicle” OR “driverless car” OR “self-driving car”) AND (“control” OR “management” OR “localization” OR “lane change” OR “maneuver” OR “platooning” OR “merging” OR “crash avoid- ance” OR “cruise control” OR “navigation” OR “car-sharing” OR “multitasking” OR “valet parking” OR “capabilities” OR “features”) to identify studies that focus on the AV capabilities. The search resulted in 616 papers, which were reduced to 49 articles after checking the abstract and further reduced to 16 articles after reading the full-text.

The next thematic search was conducted using the search tag of (“autonomous vehicle” OR “au- tomated vehicle” OR “driverless car” OR “self-driving car”) AND (“influence” OR “impact” OR “im- plication” OR “effect” OR “planning”) keywords to identify articles that focus on the AV impacts.

The search resulted in 154 papers. We have gone through the abstracts of these papers and limited the selection to 51 articles. After reading the full papers to make sure that they actually fit into our scope of interest, the selection was limited to 33 journal articles.

We conducted next search in the database using the search tag of (“autonomous vehicle” OR “au- tomated vehicle” OR “driverless car” OR “self-driving car”) AND (“policy” OR “law” OR “legislation” OR “legal”) to identify papers that focus on the AV policies. The search resulted in 159 papers in total, which were screened through by reading the abstract (resulted in 29 articles) and full-text (resulted in 12 articles).

This content downloaded from
73.66.184.251 on Mon, 27 Jun 2022 18:46:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

52 JOURNAL OF TRANSPORT AND LAND USE 12.1
In total, 61 journal articles (peer-reviewed and full text available online) fulfilled our selection cri- teria, and these papers were then read again and reviewed. Following the selection, we categorized the reviewed papers according to subthemes. Then, we extracted data from the reviewed papers in tables, formulated according to the three subthemes (Appendix Tables A-C). Each table contained the follow- ing information against each of the selected article: name of authors, year of publication, title of the article, name of the journal, research aim/objectives, theoretical perspective/framework, method, and main findings.

Then, we discussed and linked up the individual findings of each subtheme into one. Some re- viewed papers were discarded at this stage that did not match directly with the subthemes. This helped us to understand where we are at, where we are headed to, what the likely impacts of wider AV uptake are, and what needs to be done for AV to generate desired smart urban mobility outcomes.

The final stage of the review process was to write up and present our findings in the format of a lit- erature review paper. In this process, some relevant literature, although not meeting the pre-determined selection criteria, are included as supporting material to better appreciate the background context and discuss the findings—e.g., books, book chapters, government policies, and online reports. With these, the total number of the reviewed and cited references is increased to over 150. 4 Results

4.1 General observations
In reviewing the literature, technological advancement, policy and legislation analysis, transport model- ling and simulation, surveys and interviews, scenario analysis, and case study investigations were found to be the main techniques for qualitative and quantitative analyses in the reviewed 61 papers. These studies are assembled under three broad categories, namely: (a) AV capability—containing 16 studies; (b) AV impact and planning interventions—containing 33 papers; (c) AV policy—containing 12 ar- ticles. Review efforts found only 1 paper (peer-reviewed journal article) in the area of planning interven- tions. This indicates that there exists a gap in the literature in the planning area.

Papers in the AV capability category mainly discussed: (a) How AV operates on public roads; (b) What type of AV capabilities are currently available; (c) What sort of hardware and software are respon- sible for AV operation; (d) Barriers against the uptake of AV technology; (e) What type of benefits are offered by the AV capabilities.

Articles in the AV impact and planning interventions category mainly elaborated: (a) How per- ceived value of travel time changes; (b) What type of capacity implications might evolve; (c) How AVs will contribute to reduce road traffic accidents; (d) How AVs might increase or decrease congestion and delay; (e) Whether AVs will enhance or reduce GHG emissions; (f) How employment sector will be affected; (g) How public health can be benefited from AV deployment; (h) How SAVs can contribute in changing car ownership model; (i) How urban land use might be affected due to changes in parking demand, changes in travel time, changes in travel distance; (j) How capital investment decision will be affected. (k) What sort of planning interventions might be required to accommodate disruptions or to control disruptions. The impacts typically cover economic, societal, environmental, and political and governance aspects.

Papers in the AV policy category mainly examined: (a) How conflict can be avoided in between national/federal and state governments in formulating laws; (b) What the jurisdiction of national/federal and state governments should be; (c) How governments, industries, scholars, and professionals can ne- gotiate and agree on formulating laws on liability and privacy; (d) Which organization should standard- ize or certify technology; (e) Which vehicle should get priority on the road; (f) What should be the new pricing mechanism to manage vehicle kilometers travelled (VKT).

This content downloaded from
73.66.184.251 on Mon, 27 Jun 2022 18:46:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

53 Understanding autonomous vehicles: A systematic literature review The reviewed literature, in all categories, illustrate that research on AV is mainly limited to de- veloped countries such as the US, the Netherlands, the UK, Canada, Australia, Israel, Germany, Italy, Singapore, Russia, Poland. This finding shows parallels with the AV piloting and preparing cities listed in Table 1. The oldest article reviewed in this study dates back to 2012 (Smith, 2012). Although there were other articles published prior to 2012, Smith’s (2012) paper was the earliest published article that satisfied the selection criteria of this research. The majority of papers were published in 2016 onwards (84%)—indicating an exponential growth trend of research on this topic.

4.2 Capabilities
According to many, since the invention of the automobile technology about a century ago, the biggest change to personal mobility is happening right now with AVs (Volvo, 2017). In the presence of autono- mous driving technology and capabilities, mobility is predicted to be safer, sustainable, and more conve- nient, as ADS of an AV will replace the human driver for all sort of dynamic driving tasks in some or all roadway and environmental conditions (Shladover, 2018). When AVs attain the capability of replacing human driver, it actually can perform five basic operational functions through its ADS—localization, perception, planning, control, and management (Coppola & Morisio, 2016; Pendleton et al., 2017). In doing so, AVs will possess certain technological features, advantages or capabilities over a conventional or human driven vehicle. These include platooning, fuel efficiency, eco-driving, adaptive cruise control with queue assist, crash avoidance, lane keeping, lane changing, valet parking or park assist pilot, traffic sign and signal identification, cyclist and pedestrian detection, and safe maneuvering at intersections (Anderson et al., 2014).

At a particular time, the predicted benefit offered by individual AV feature will largely depend on the AV price, acceptance, operational mode (private or shared), AV share in the traffic mix, level of automation in the traffic mix, and fuel efficiency (Diakaki, Papageorgiou, Papar]michail, & Nikolos, 2015; Davidson & Spinoulas, 2016; Daziano, Sarrias, & Leard, 2017; Piao et al., 2016; Chen, Gonder, Young, & Wood, 2017). These are seen as the influencing parameters of an AV scenario (Correia, & van Arem, 2016; Davidson & Spinoulas, 2016). AVs, however, might present a future full of nightmares resulting from different combinations within these parameters, especially if there do not exist adequate planning interventions.

A summary of the literature in this area is presented in Appendix Table A and discussed below. •
Platooning: Highly random and fluctuating car-following behaviors of hu- man drivers ar
e one of the main factors to prompt accidents, oscillations, and traf- fic congestion. This results in low efficiency in traffic flows and severe environmen- tal impact in many urban regions (Hoogendoorn, van Arem, & Hoogendorn, 2014).

T o overcome these
issues, Gong, Shen and Du (2016) developed a novel platoon car- following control scheme that modelled an interconnected dynamic platoon system of CAVs and AVs. Their proposed scheme effectively reduces disturbance transmission of speed errors and relative spacing from the leading vehicle to following vehicles along the platoon. This means that this scheme accomplishes the “string stability” of the platoon. In some other studies, it is also shown that the performance of the conventional coopera- tive adaptive cruise control (CACC) scheme is outperformed by the developed car-follow- ing control scheme in the capacity of achieving stable and smoother traffic flows and traf- fic oscillations reduction (van Arem, van Driel, & Visser, 2006; Gong et al., 2016).

With the help of multi-platooning
of AVs, Fernandes & Nunes (2012) performed another
study to address the urban traffic congestion issue. In this study, they conceptualized design of a multi-platoon communicant AVs to travel along a dedicated lane, where AVs can exit from platoons to offline station and merge back into platoons along the main track following novel This content downloaded from
73.66.184.251 on Mon, 27 Jun 2022 18:46:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

54 JOURNAL OF TRANSPORT AND LAND USE 12.1
algorithms. According to the algorithms, inter-platoon leaders’ constant spacing are ensured and offline station vehicles are allowed to leave and join the platoon on main track coopera- tively. Simulation results of several scenarios confirmed that proposed algorithms guarantee high traffic capacity and vehicle density and reduce traffic congestion. Validation results of these features also proved that the proposed algorithms enable a clear benefit of a platooning system in comparison to bus- and light-rail-based transit systems (Fernandes & Nunes, 2012).

It is observed from the simulation models of Gong et al. (2016) and F ernandes & Nunes
(2012), connectivity among the AVs within a platoon is a prerequisite to form a stable platoon string.
•
Merging or Mandatory Lane Change: Most free
way congestion results from traffic oscilla-
tions (or stop-and-go) near freeway ramps, caused by merging activities (Zhou et al., 2017).

Freeway sections near ramps are considered as the bottlenecks of the freeway system. In a merging situation, if different ratios of AVs equipped with longitudinal and lateral detecting technology, and advance cruise control (ACC) are penetrated on freeway with human driv- en vehicles, cooperative intelligent driver model (CIDM) of AVs could practically improve the freeway performance (Xiao & Gao, 2010; Zhou et al., 2017). The results from an ex- periment show that with an increased AV penetration on freeways, standard deviation of speed dispersion or oscillation caused by merged-in vehicle could be reduced progressively, i.e., road safety could be improved. It also shows that when the safe time gap is less than 1.0 sec- ond, AVs can improve travel efficiency by minimizing travel time (Zhou, Qu, & Jin, 2017).

Altche, Qian, and de la Fortelle (2017) assumed a nearer plausible traffic scenar- io, wher
e all vehicles have semi-autonomous features (ACC, automated braking and ac- celerating, lane keeping assistance), and are driven by human drivers. In such a scenar- io, a supervised coordination framework can remove the risk of collision or deadlocks with vehicles arriving from sides, either at intersections or roundabouts, or when merg- ing on freeways (Dresner & Stone, 2008; Zohdy & Rakha, 2016). This framework main- ly overrides human control inputs when they would become unsafe and create blocked situation in the defined supervisory area at intersections, roundabout, or merging points.

Xie, Zhang, Gartner, & Arsava (2017) performed an optimization-based ramp contr ol
strategy in a CAV and AV environment to evaluate the performance of freeway due to presence of merging vehicle. Results of nine different combination of freeway and ramp vehicle inputs (veh/h) under three ramp control cases demonstrate that “optimal ramp control model” out- performs two other control cases: “gradual speed limit” and “do nothing” with regards to per- formance measurement indicators—average delay time, vehicle throughput and average speed (Xie et al., 2017). It is observed that all the three types of freeway merging algorithms, men- tioned above can improve speed dispersion on freeway, road safety, travel efficiency, congestion level, average delay time, vehicle throughput, and average speed in a merging situation with the help of different level of autonomous features of AVs with or without V2V and V2I connectiv- ity.
•
Lane Changing: T o progress towar
ds a fully automated highway driving, the riskiest com- ponent added to the advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS) of an AV is lane changing maneuver. This maneuver is the riskiest and challenging in the sense that it involves ego ve- hicle’s (vehicle under consideration, i.e., AV in this case) path change in the presence of other moving vehicles all around it as well as it has to consider changes in both the longi- tudinal and lateral velocity of the ego vehicle (Nilsson, Brannstrom, Coelingh, & Fredriks- son, 2017). During the lane change attempt by a human driver, there are possibilities of collision with at least four vehicles—front and rear vehicles in the same lane, and front and following vehicles in the target lane (Bai, Quan, Fu, Gan, & Wang, 2017; Nilsson et This content downloaded from
73.66.184.251 on Mon, 27 Jun 2022 18:46:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

55 Understanding autonomous vehicles: A systematic literature review al., 2017). This sort of collisions can be avoided by selecting an inter-vehicle traffic gap and time instance to perform the lane change maneuver by executing a novel lane change ma- neuver algorithm in a mixed highway traffic environment with both human drivers and AVs with or without V2V and V2I communication (Nilsson et al., 2017), or in an AV only en- vironment through vehicle to vehicle communication among the vehicles (Bai et al., 2017).

The collisions lead to probable consequences of loss of lives and traffic congestion. In ad- dition to that, due to lack of determining a safe inter-vehicle gap and time instance to per form
the maneuver, there exists oscillation, travel delay and capacity reduction in traffic flow (Nilsson et al., 2017). Automated lane changes can address about 4-10% of all accidents that are caused by human error (Luo, Xiang, Cao, & Li, 2015). Uncoordinated lane-changing and exiting behaviors by AVs can also considerably interrupt traffic flow by slowing down other vehicles, or even in worse scenario, by inviting accidents (Meissner, Chantem, & Heaslip, 2016; Talebpour & Mahmassani, 2016). Cooperative lane-changing of AV can ensure improvement of traffic stability, homogeneity, and efficiency, and reduction in traffic congestion (Nie et al., 2016). •
Valet Parking: Autonomous or valet par
king is an obvious component of driver assistance
technologies (Brookhuis, de Waard, & Janssen, 2001; Li & Shao, 2015). Three sequen- tial steps- circumstance recognition, open-loop (when controller does not require verifica- tion of system output or modification of command to the system) motion planning and, closed-loop (information flows around a feedback loop) control execution, are respon- sible for successful autonomous parking (Lee et al., 2009; Li & Shao, 2015). AVs will not be capable of delivering its full benefits without having this feature as every trip has to be started from and end at a parking place. Relevant products have already been made avail- able in the market by many of the original equipment manufacturers such as T esla, Volvo, Audi, BMW , Ford, Land Rover, Mercedes-Benz, Nissan, and T oyota (Li & Shao, 2015).

Valet or auto-pilot parking features of
AVs are expected to find cheap or free parking spaces
after dropping off the passenger. This in turn saves travel time or cost for commuters or passen- gers because the passengers do not require: (a) Cruising for a parking space; (b) Walking to the vehicle to pick up; (c) Paying for costly parking (Zhang, Guhathakurta, Fang, & Zhang, 2015).

Valet parking has also a number of technical advantages over traditional human-driven park- ing. It is capable of: (a) Avoiding dynamic obstacles; (b) Moving in the narrow passage parking areas; (c) Parking in a narrower space; (d) Ensuring optimization of gear changes; (e) Avoiding crash occurrence; (f) Finding fastest and shortest parking path; (g) Minimizing search time for parking spot (Fagnant & Kockelman, 2015).

The abovementioned significant AV capabilities have the capacity to induce or affect certain trans- port system variables (TSV) and as a consequence these variables will disrupt environment, investment, health, employment, infrastructure design, and land-use options. Some of the effects may contribute to the society in a better way, while society may be worse off in others. Timely control of TSV through adoption of short-, mid-, and long-term planning and policy options by concerned national, state and local governments can help in materializing wider AV deployment if this is considered appropriate (Coppola & Morisio, 2016).

4.3 Impact and planning interventions
The extent of AVs’ impacts to the society largely depends on their share in the total vehicle fleet (Pinjari & Menon, 2013; Litman, 2017) and level of the AV uptake and usage differentiated by—(a) Light use: private or shared (Gruel & Stanford, 2016; Heinrichs, 2016; Dia, & Javanshour, 2017); (b) Heavy use: bus (Smolnicki & Sołtys, 2016) or freight (Wadud, 2017). Impacts begin with a shift in transport demand and supply variables equilibrium (Childress, Nicholos, Charlton, & Coe, 2015; Rubin, 2016), necessitating obvious adjustments in planning with new ideas, and innovations (Zakharenko, 2016).

This content downloaded from
73.66.184.251 on Mon, 27 Jun 2022 18:46:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

56 JOURNAL OF TRANSPORT AND LAND USE 12.1
The impacts, from a system level to societal level may have ripple effect on each other at multiple levels (Milakis, van Arem, & van Wee, 2017).

The probable areas of influence at a transport system level (either on supply side or demand side), include VKT , PKT , vehicle hours travelled (VHT), value of time (VOT), speed, capacity, headway, traf- fic flow, delay, travel cost, vehicle operating cost (VOC). These will further affect planning parameters in general such as infrastructure design, transport modelling, capital investment, car ownership, land use, employment, energy consumption, traffic safety and public health, environment (Dixit, Chand, & Nair, 2016). Planning authorities at local and state levels have to cope with the expected disruption in certain cases and impose planning and policy measures to control rest of the disruptions.

A summary of the literature in this area is presented in Appendix Table B and discussed below. •
Infrastructure Design: Road infrastr
ucture will require new design criteria as lateral and lon- gitudinal capacity of the roadway might be changed due to lane keeping and platooning re- spectively. Lane width might be reclaimed due to more accuracy in maintaining lateral align- ment (Smith, 2012). T o improve network performance and vehicle throughput, AVs might require dedicated road network in certain areas (Chen, He, Yin, & Du, 2017). Considering the impacts on infrastructure design, literature suggests the following planning recommendations (Hendrickson et al., 2014): (a) Pavement marking may require repainting; (b) No changes are expected in the design of clear zone; (c) Radio advisories and ITS message signs may or may not be obsolete depending on the presence of connectivity in automation; (d) Dedicated short range communications (DSRC) locations for traffic signals have to be identified and prioritized in case of automation with connectivity.
•
Car Ownership: Flexibility of SAV and its operation would reduce operational and fixed cost and ther
eby reduce car ownership (Milakis, van Arem, & van Wee, 2017). The results of an agent-based modelling of different SAV scenarios indicate that each SAV can replace around eleven conventional cars (Fagnant & Kockelman, 2014). Due to exclusion of driver’s talent and time, driverless taxi or autonomous car sharing program paves the way to be a cheaper travel option and may discourage traditional car ownership (Bagloee et al., 2016). Though this may be highly unlikely, some visions of pooled/shared ownership of AVs suggest that there could be no need to own private motor vehicles at all in the future (Levin & Boyles, 2015)—also see Ma, Zheng, and Wolfson (2015) for a model on real-time city-scale ridesharing. Planners may replace numbers of conventional on-street and off-street parking facilities by ensuring provision of few suburban multistory garages. They may also execute pickup and drop off points for AVs near transport hubs by eliminating existing paid and unpaid parking lots. This will promote tech- and transit-oriented developments (TTOD).
•
Employment: Reduction of
traffic congestion, travel time savings, and lower transportation costs of goods could be achieved at the expense of individuals, currently employed in building, driving, and maintenance of automobiles (Crayton & Meier, 2017). Spilling effects in labor market might be a reality due to falloffs in certain related jobs, like diver licensing, traffic polic- ing, and insurance sales (Crayton & Meier, 2017). Moreover, a future with fewer vehicles would also lead to fewer jobs in the automotive industry as a whole (Snyder, 2016). In contrast, Gill, Kirk, Godsmark, & Flemming (2015) predicted potential employment gains in three sectors up to 15%—conversion of parking facilities related construction, roads and highways modifi- cation, and IT product and services. State or federal governments might declare rehabilitation package, especially for the abundant drivers of taxi, bus and commercial vehicles. Governments might also arrange specific training depending on the eligibility of drivers so that they can find a job in new sectors. Currently employed automobile technicians and mechanics can be trained up for new technology and this will help them to be remain in the same track without losing job. Automobile industries can also support government’s novel initiatives with financial con- tribution.

This content downloaded from
73.66.184.251 on Mon, 27 Jun 2022 18:46:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

57 Understanding autonomous vehicles: A systematic literature review • Energy Consumption and Emissions: Practically, fuel/energy consumption of any transport mode depends on travel activity performed by that mode and energy intensity (consumption per
kilometer) of that particular mode, and emission is the product of energy consumption and fuel carbon content (Wadud et al., 2016). Automation might plausibly reduce road transport energy consumption and GHG emissions by approximately half—or nearly double them depending on automation level, AV features, use type, and policy intervention (Wadud et al., 2016).

Litman (2017) predicts that a major share of AVs in road transport will contribute to en -
ergy conservation by 2040-2060. Chen, He et al. (2017) indicate that vehicle automation may contribute 45% savings on fuel consumption in optimistic scenario and 30% fuel consumption in pessimistic scenario. Another study shows a 37% of energy savings is possible when AVs are used in conjunction with public transport in lieu of personal car (Moorthy, De Kleine, Ke- oleian, Good, & Lewis, 2017). On the other hand, large share of SAV fleet could improve fuel efficiency by abandoning highspeed and rapid acceleration of car (Milakis, van Arem, & van Wee, 2017). Liu, Kockelman, Boesch, & Ciari (2017) show that introduction of SAV systems can save 22.4% of total distance-based fuel consumption and this savings cannot be negated by extra VKT .

Large share of SAV fleet could also limit emissions by abandoning highspeed and rapid acceleration of car (Milakis, v
an Arem, & van Wee, 2017). Possibility of total distance-based (lifecycle and driving cycle) savings of GHG emissions is 16.8-42.7% due to introduction of SAV systems, and this savings cannot be negated by extra VKT due to AV’s advancement, eco-technologies, and change in energy source (Liu et al., 2017). Another study in Lisbon city shows that replacement of conventional private car, taxi and bus by self-driving shared taxi and taxi-bus, keeping existing metro service could contribute in reducing carbon emissions (Martinez et al., 2017). It is also estimated that electric driven autonomous taxis could signifi- cantly reduce GHG emissions in 2030 with respect to current conventional and hybrid vehicles (Greenblatt & Saxena, 2015). Smith (2012) predicted reduction of emissions per VKT with an overall increase in total emissions.

It can be summarized that automation related road transport energy consumption and

emission figures are still uncertain in their magnitude. This is because energy consumption and emissions are generally not a direct consequence of automation, rather it is affected by changes in vehicle operations, vehicle design, choice of energy, policy intervention, or transportation system design, which are more indirectly facilitated by automation (Wadud et al., 2016). Poli- cymakers probably have to consider VKT based pricing to substitute earlier fuel tax, if energy source is shifted from fossil fuel to electricity. This is a step toward safeguarding government’s financial revenue on the eve of electric vehicle. Government can also promote green vehicle operation by allowing less tax on vehicle purchase price and by reducing vehicle registration fee. •
T raffic Safety and Public Health: Until no
w, no empirical proof is established about the overall
safety advantages of AVs (Winkle, 2016). Most of the investigation related to AVs’ potential for crash protection was performed considering assumed AV deployment and market penetration scenarios. These assumptions were based on expert estimates, third-party forecasts and relevant database.

The German In-Depth A
ccident Study (GIDAS) and NHTSA crash databases show ap- proximately 93% of road crashes happen due to human error, and it has been speculated that this figure might be completely ruled out in case of full automation of vehicles. Even level 0, and level 1 features of AVs have the potential to minimize one third of the traffic accidents (Bagolee et al., 2016). Daimler, manufacturer of Mercedes-Benz, published a forecasting mod- els on vehicle-safety and crash research in 2010, which suggests increased automation can result in a reduction of crashes by 10% by 2020, 50% by 2050, 71% by 2060, and a total reduction by 2070 (Winkle, 2016). A US study projected that conversion of 10% and 90% of US vehicle This content downloaded from
73.66.184.251 on Mon, 27 Jun 2022 18:46:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

58 JOURNAL OF TRANSPORT AND LAND USE 12.1
fleet to AV would respectively act to reduce annual crashes by 0.2 and 4.2 million, and it could respectively save 1,100 and 21,700 human lives annually (Collingwoood, 2017).

Yet, adjustments of driving behavior in relation to levels 1-3 automation features may invite accidents in many cases (M
ilakis, van Arem, & van Wee, 2017). However, new crash
risks may emerge due to automated system failures in certain cases, and road users may favor additional risk-taking behavior assuming the AV system’s perceived and actual competencies (Litman, 2017). By assuring road safety through higher level of AVs, ripple effect of accident related tangible and intangible costs like medical costs, legal costs, insurance and administra- tive costs, emergency service costs, workplace losses, and property damages can be minimized (Bagolee et al., 2016). This will help federal or state governments to reconsider their budgets in the near future.
•
Capital Investment: AVs might act to reduce proposed existing r oad expansion investment as
platooning might significantly increase road capacity—as much as five times by one source (Fernandes & Nunes, 2012). That is why, the literature recommends re-evaluating planned road system capacity enhancement projects before making final investment decision. It has also been suggested that ITS and level of service (LOS) investment projects are assessed for compat- ibility with CAV fleets (Hendrickson et al., 2014).
•
Land Use: AVs will either promote urbanization or promote suburbanization. I n reality, trans-
port network will tend to flow in between these two scenarios, depending on transport and urban planning policy, prevailing local conditions, and dissemination of different driverless mobility solutions (Smolnicki & Sołtys, 2016).

At the regional level, accessibility improv
ements through lower generalized cost of trans-
port due to vehicle automation will result in ex-urbanization to remote areas of former inner city, leading to attractive green urban sprawl surrounding metropolitan regions (Bagolee et al., 2016; Crayton et al., 2017; Milakis, van Arem, & van Wee, 2017) with lower house prices (Heinrichs, 2016), and decline in rent outside CBD (Zakharenko, 2016). AVs’ favor towards urban sprawl may prove transit service superfluous except for dense urban areas (Meyer, Becker, Bösch, & Axhausen, 2017). Urban sprawl is also subject to availability of land and land-use policies (Yigitcanlar & Kamruzzaman, 2014; Milakis, van Arem, & van Wee, 2017).

At the urban/local level, presence of commuting AVs and SAVs (with or without dynamic

ride sharing) may free up daytime downtown on-street and off-street parking spaces (Bagolee et al., 2016; Heinrichs, 2016; Zakharenko, 2016; Milakis, van Arem, & van Wee, 2017). Differ- ent spatial distribution of urban parking demand will be evolved against different SAV opera- tion strategies and client’s preferences (Zhang et al., 2015). The results of an agent-based model show that the clients adopting SAV system in lieu of conventional private car can eliminate up to 90% of parking demand at a low market penetration rate of 2% (Zhang et al., 2015). On the other hand, SAVs have the potential to tackle the transport related-social exclusion (Duvarci, Yigitcanlar, & MizoKami, 2015; Kamruzzaman, Yigitcanlar, Yang, & Mohamed, 2016; Yigit- canlar, Mohamed, Kamruzzaman, & Piracha, 2018).

Driving robots’ capability of v
alet parking may promote neighborhood parking zones or
collective garages in the inner-city districts. The presence of auto-valet garages will allow more vehicles to be parked and creates the possibility of increasing density of urban core areas by repurposing released parking spaces due to less demand for parking in CBD areas (Heinrichs, 2016). The saved off-street parking spaces could be repurposed for infill residential and com- mercial development, allowing increase in economic activity to contribute to the further CBD density (Bagolee et al., 2016; Milakis, van Arem, & van Wee, 2017), and the saved on-street spaces could be transformed into HOV lanes, bus lanes, cycle lanes, or new public spaces (Mi- lakis, van Arem, & van Wee, 2017).

Possibility of significant increase in road capacity through platooning—as much as five

times (Fernandes & Nunes, 2012) could save road spaces that might be reallocated to other This content downloaded from
73.66.184.251 on Mon, 27 Jun 2022 18:46:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

59 Understanding autonomous vehicles: A systematic literature review travel modes—like buses, cycling and walking. In an ideal condition, where all the vehicles in roads are fully autonomous, highway capacity might increase around 100% (Farmer, 2016).

Regulatory body may think about limiting the projected increased AV traffic. B ecause
in presence of public transit, under certain conditions AVs will connect to the transit without entering CBD (Zakharenko, 2016). Local and state government authorities have to decide whether they will allow or limit urban sprawl. It should be exclusively bounded by city’s land- use policy. Moreover, most of the state and local authorities should decide reallocation of city’s road space and parking spaces depending on nature of travel pattern and traffic behavior in a new form of traffic mix.

Considering too many aspects of AV impacts, Isaac (2016) recommended generalized medium- to long-term planning activities. Medium- and long-term planning activities include: (a) Updating trans- port model with new assumptions; (b) Forecasting financial revenues; (c) Designating traffic lanes for si- multaneous operation of AV and/or conventional automobile; (d) Updating traffic signs and markings; (e) Reducing lane widths; (f) Adjusting speed limits, traffic signal locations and timing; (g) Eliminating or reducing parking spaces and add more drop off/pick up locations; (h) Reclaiming city center surface parking lots for potential future developments; (i) Reclaiming right-of-way for people and other mode of transport; (j) Doubling use of the suburb on-street parking areas as charging stations; (k) Developing new predictive models for pavement maintenance.

4.4 Pre-deployment policy
Higher level of vehicle automation poses regulatory challenges for the AV manufacturing countries (Nowakowski, Shladover, Chan, & Tan 2015). The uptake of a new technology like AV should be regulated through federal and state governments’ pre-deployment policy. Major regulating policies are revolving around testing and deployment, cybersecurity and privacy, liabilities and insurance, ethics, and repair/maintenance and calibration. Proactive actions in this regard may ensure rapid AV uptake in some jurisdictions and reactive or inert actions may delay the whole uptake process in some other juris- dictions. As an example, AV legislation and policies in the US, the Netherlands, the UK and Sweden are paving the way for other countries (Nowakowski et al., 2015, Vellinga, 2017). However, the first fatal crash by a self-driving UBER involving pedestrian in the US proves that more research, development, legislation and planning are needed for a safer and wider AV uptake.

A summary of the literature in this area is presented in Appendix Table C and discussed below. •
T esting and Deployment: T wo main aspects in r
elation to AV operation, to be bounded by
regulation, are testing and deployment. These two main challenges are linked with devising regulations in this particular area to ensure safety without hindering innovation, and defin- ing meaningful requirements or standards without having such technical standards for ADS in place (Nowakowski et al., 2015). Another significant concern focuses on how to maintain legal consistency in different jurisdictions to avoid confrontation with AV manufacturers and to encourage innovation (Vellinga, 2017). Around the globe, policymakers are yet to establish such a consistent legal ground for AV design, testing and deployment. Regulating bodies and practiced legal instruments used by these bodies are also different from each other. Some au- thorities follow “binding regulation,” some follow “non-binding regulation,” and some other follow “granting exemption” (Vellinga, 2017).

In the US, technology aspects of vehicle safety are regulated by federal go vernment agency,
and other safety aspects related to vehicle registration and driver’s training, evaluation, and licensing are the functions of state government (Nowakowski, Shladover, & Chan, 2016; Vel- linga, 2017), but in the UK and the Netherlands, federal government agencies regulate all aspects of vehicle safety for testing and deployment (Vellinga, 2017). Currently, the US federal This content downloaded from
73.66.184.251 on Mon, 27 Jun 2022 18:46:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

60 JOURNAL OF TRANSPORT AND LAND USE 12.1
government agency NHTSA and the UK Department of T ransport (DoT) is in favor of non- binding test and deployment regulations for AV under the cover of national policy and code of practice respectively. On the contrary, one of the US states, California has binding legislations in place to regulate the testing and deployment of AVs. Against the backdrop of binding and non-binding regulations and policy, Dutch Vehicle Authority (RDW) granted exemptions to AV from certain laws under certain conditions.

NHTSA provides guidance for both manufacturers and states, though these are not man -
datory to abide by. Manufactures involved in designing, developing, testing and selling should follow the NHTSA policy and guidance to ensure safe testing and deployment of AVs on public roads, and states should follow the policy to prevent inconsistencies in AV laws and regula- tions among the states. The main exception of the UK Code of Practice over NHTSA policy is that it also addresses the requirements about the test driver. RDW grants the exemption to AV testing on public roads with test specific conditions once all the functionalities to be tested are passed on test track. Both the “binding regulations” and “exemption under conditions” are legally binding for manufacturers to ensure safety during testing (Vellinga, 2017). Though “exemption under conditions” poses legal uncertainty for manufacturers, it flourishes technical developments. On the other hand, non-binding regulation can guide manufacturers or testing organizations to adjust with continuous changes in regulation with advancement in technology (Maurer, Gerdes, Lenz, & Winner, 2016).
•
Privacy and Cybersecurity: AV will essentially be equipped with tracing technology to recog -
nize accident causing factors and consequently to mitigate product liability (Bruin, 2016). At the same time, AV equipped with such technology might have serious impact on information privacy of the persons in side or around such vehicles. Manufacturers should be held respon- sible if AV fails to comply with laws associated with protection of personal data (Bruin, 2016).

Privacy mainly relates to control over autonomy, information, and surveillance when it comes to AV (Glancy, 2012). Personal autonomy is one’s ability to make choices independently about oneself. Use of AV inherently affect autonomy by taking over human control in the way people move one place to another (Collingwood, 2017). Personal information privacy can be violated as AV will collect, store, use, own, transfer, or destroy data/information due to improper or non- existent disclosure control (Collingwood, 2017).

As an example, transmission of present location, past travel pattern, and future travel plan could compr
omise privacy of AV user. Personal information collection through comprehensive legal and illegal AV tracking will affect privacy associated with surveillance. T o protect the priva- cy associated with AV , generated data ownership pattern and limit of onward data transmission and its usage have to be finalized in the upcoming data privacy act of different countries. T o pro- tect the different privacy interests, legislators and regulators should have answers of following questions—Why it is collected, what will be the uses of personal data. How long data should be preserved. Who can and cannot have access to it. Glancy (2012) argued that, without suitable legal safeguards for privacy, AV could face challenges of “market resistance” from prospective users who recognize AV as threats to their privacy.

On the other hand, at the advent of increased computerization and networking, AVs ar e
accumulating autonomous capabilities and are inviting cyber-threats as permanent allies (Yag- dereli, Gemci, & Aktas, 2015). One of the main cause of ADS failure is cyber-attacks and software and hardware defects. Hence, this system should be equipped with such defensive system that can respond automatically and dynamically to deliberate and inadvertent attacks and defects (Yagdereli et al., 2015). A cybersecurity system should primarily safeguard on-board data storage, data sharing (Lee, 2017). Cybersecurity concerns should be bounded by regu- latory action to protect consumer interests and promote future growth against autonomous unmanned system vulnerabilities. Considering rapid growth and interstate nature of AV tech- This content downloaded from
73.66.184.251 on Mon, 27 Jun 2022 18:46:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

61 Understanding autonomous vehicles: A systematic literature review nology, Lee (2017) emphasizes federal government to take charge of formulating nationwide regulatory framework for communications, privacy, and cybersecurity pertaining to this tech- nology. Within the federal framework, states and industry should conduct experiment and de- velop self-regulation. In line with formulated regulations AV cybersecurity requirements should be determined and documented in the systems’ requirements documents and it should be done before the design of the system (Yagdereli et al., 2015). •
Liability and Insurance: Data obtained through on-board vehicular systems and sensors of ADS

can provide sufficient details of an accident to determine many liability decisions with high degree of precision (Dhar, 2016). This will help to identify “at-fault” driver or vehicle and en- sure quick processing of insurance payment to victim. This accurate identification of accident related physical factors to environmental factors to human factors would eventually quash de- lays and litigation costs linked with tort laws and also exclude necessity for no-fault insurance, which is alive at dozens of US states at the moment.

Though emergence of AV makes fault identification accurate and smoother than before, it also raises a big question: who will be held responsible for the accident: driver (till SAE lev el
3), owner, operator, or manufacturer. ADS of AVs serve generally a robotic function and raises novel issues in criminal law as robot can malfunction and cause serious harm to people and property. As robotic systems are inappropriate for criminal punishment, humans who produce, program, and deploy robots should be subject to criminal punishment if the robots are inten- tionally used to cause harm to others (Gless, Silverman, & Weigend, 2016). However, Gless et al. (2016) advocates in favor of limiting the liability of vehicle operators, if they undermine to initiate reasonable measures to control the risk originated from ADS.

In the US, states are responsible for liability regimes and insurance (V ellinga, 2017). The
Californian draft AV Express T erms suggested that the manufacturer should be held responsible in case of collision or accidents caused by AV and that has to be covered by proper insurance.

The Dutch law intended to hold the possessor of AV liable for development risks as they can- not invoke the defense that can be called on by the manufacturer (Vellinga, 2017). The UK proposal discussed first party insurance option for the victim but it did not suggest any other substantial changes in liability rules (UK Parliament, 2016). In this case, victim, regardless of liability, can claim from his insurer and later, insurer can recover the amount from the manu- facturer—if manufacturer is found liable. Sweden is practicing first party insurance model since 1975 (Schellekens, 2015).

If the liability of human driver or owner of the car would shift to manufacturer in case of collision, this might slo
w down the progress of AV development (Vellinga, 2017). In addition to this, insurance companies may become less interested to insure the high risk of AVs. This issue can be addressed by limiting the amount of damages one can claim due to the fault of AV .

In parallel government could be a reinsurer to encourage the insurance companies to insure AVs (Vellinga, 2017).
5 Discussion and conclusion
Within the contemporary smart city debate, AVs represent a way to create an ideal city form and de- velopments in the autonomous driving technology have the potential to bring smart mobility to our rapidly urbanizing world; but for others AV is a branding hoax (Yigitcanlar & Lee, 2014; Yigitcanlar & Kamruzzaman, 2018a). Despite a large body of recent literature on AV’s, only a limited number of studies have outlined the disruptive effects that AV might bring on city planning and society in general.

This paper, through a systematic review of the literature, aimed to determine the current state of research literature on AV technology, the future direction that this technology is leading to, how the changes are This content downloaded from
73.66.184.251 on Mon, 27 Jun 2022 18:46:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

62 JOURNAL OF TRANSPORT AND LAND USE 12.1
likely to affect our day-to-day travel behavior and long-term changes in the structure of our cities, and what would be the likely policy tools for a smooth transitioning of the technology.

As the literature suggests, AVs’ major disruptions in our cities will be in urban transport, land use, employment, parking, car ownership, infrastructure design, capital investment decisions, sustainability, mobility, and traffic safety. It is clear from this study that preparing our cities for AVs through progressive planning is critical to achieving the benefits and to address the resulting disruption. On the eve of ris- ing AV demand, local and state governments should be equipped with better policy and planning tools to accommodate AV technology and its impacts. In parallel, timely interventions from international, national/federal and state levels in terms of regulating, standardizing and certifying this technology and approval of appropriate legislative measures to ensure testing, deployment, privacy, security, and liability issues are addressed. These are discussed in the following sub-sections in detail.

5.1 Driving forces, uptake factors, impacts and interventions framework This paper has investigated the AV phenomenon from the perspectives of AV capability, impact and planning interventions, and pre-deployment policy. Research area covered under this study is only a small part of a broader framework. Based on the findings of the reviewed papers, the study synthesized a broader framework—for AV driving forces, uptake factors, impacts and interventions—illustrated in Figure 1 and discussed below.

Any new innovation demands external thrust or driving forces from social, political, economic, en- vironmental, and technological sectors that might push forward or pull back the key factors responsible for uptake of that very new innovation. With the help of a force matrix, by awarding score against un- certainty and impact of each force, most influential forces behind the key uptake factors can be ranked.

Future plausible scenarios of any new technological innovation uptake are the product of multiple com- binations of the highly ranked influential driving forces. In the case of AV uptake, relevant driving forces are technological advancements, economic conditions, customer attitudes, environmental conditions, and government policies. Plausible AV scenarios emerged through any two high ranked influential forc- es might be termed as AVs in boom, in demand, in standby, or in doubt. The prominent uptake factors under any plausible AV scenario that might lead to changes in values of transport system level variables are AV type, AV growth trend, AV automation level, AV fuel type, AV capabilities, and so on.

Each future plausible AV scenario generally owns a set of AV supply parameters that can act as input parameters for transport modelling. Inclusion of these new modelling input parameters in exist- ing transport modelling exercise can signify impact of AV uptake patterns through expected changes in output parameters. From the modelling output one can identify the changes in demand parameters from scenario to scenario at transport system level. The demand parameters value might roam around VKT , individual driving speed, per capita distance travelled, per capita generalized cost, per capita travel item, parking demand, per capita travel cost, and mode share by trips. This will dictate the quantitative and qualitative changes in societal parameters—see societal impact box in Figure 1.

Finally, decision-makers and planners have to counteract with intervening planning and policy ini- tiatives in the necessary disruptive areas so that optimum benefits from AV can be realized for a city. In this case, the framework highlights some of the prospective areas of planning and policy interest. These are congestion pricing, lane width reduction, new modelling assumptions, on-street charging points, reduction in on- and off-street parking spaces, introduction of zonal parking garages, adjusting signal location and timings, adjusting speed limits, and optimizing AV share.

As the paper investigated the AV phenomenon from the perspectives of capability, impact, planning interventions, and pre-deployment policies, it focused on few of the selective parameters from each block of the described framework. In relation to the framework, this paper mainly researched one of the This content downloaded from
73.66.184.251 on Mon, 27 Jun 2022 18:46:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

63 Understanding autonomous vehicles: A systematic literature review driving forces vigorously—pre-deployment government policy. The reviewed pre-deployment govern- ment policies are—testing and deployment, privacy and cybersecurity, and liability and insurance. Out of the mentioned uptake and penetration factors, we elaborated the capabilities of AV . The reviewed areas of capabilities are platooning, merging, lane changing, and valet parking. In the area of AV’s soci- etal impacts and counter measure to negotiate those impacts, the paper reviewed infrastructure design, car ownership, employment, energy consumption and emission, traffic safety and public health, capital investment, and land use.

By analyzing our research area, it is understood that pre-deployment government policy and AV capabilities have lot of contributions in assuming or estimating transport model input parameters. On the other hand, changes in model output parameters can be directly or indirectly translated into societal impact or disruptions. This will ultimately lead to short-, medium-, and, long-term planning and policy interventions at the local, regional, and state levels to address various disruptions or the impacts of AVs.

Figure 1. AV driving forces, uptake factors, impacts and interventions framework

5.2 Research implications
The review of the literature suggests that most studies to date are optimistic about the potential benefits that AVs might bring to cities. Rarely have these assumptions been critically examined. In many cases the potential benefits as being advocated are more theory than practice. For example, almost all stud- ies accepted the crash reduction rate (by 90%) with AVs because human error is responsible for most crashes. They assume that when humans are not in charge of driving, crashes would not happen; a rather heroic assumption. These studies do not consider a myriad of issues that can might cause an AV to be involved in a crash such as software failure, factors that are not included within the AVs’ artificial intel- ligence, failure to recognize a new street layout pattern, and so on.

Additionally, frequently claimed benefits of AVs in the literature are that they will reduce conges- tion through optimum use of road spaces using the platooning technology. These studies rarely consider This content downloaded from
73.66.184.251 on Mon, 27 Jun 2022 18:46:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

64 JOURNAL OF TRANSPORT AND LAND USE 12.1
the scenario that an effective platooning will only work if all AVs are travelling from a defined origin to a defined destination in a dedicated lane. However, trip origins and destinations vary from person to person which implies that AVs will have to frequently change lanes for entry and exit. Moreover, if a non-AV enters into a platoon, the efficiency of platooning will reduce. More importantly, the saved road spaces are likely to be occupied by the induced trips expected to be generated by less mobile people today. Furthermore, the passenger multitasking benefits within AVs may act to increase suburbanization and urban sprawl resulting in additional VKT , and ultimately consume more road space. The prevailing implication that AV’s will increase sharing including higher car occupancy also seem weak and should be explored using research on human factors and by investigating AV trial outcomes.

The findings of the review also suggest that effective policy can: (a) Reduce the reliance on tradi- tional vehicles (including AVs); (b) Foster the use of autonomous public transport vehicles (AVPT); (c) Discourage and reduce sprawling development. These are elaborated below:
•
In terms of policy to reduce traditional low occupancy private motor vehicle dependency ther e
is a significant supporting literature (Banister, 1997; Newman & Kenworthy, 1999; Yigitcanlar, Fabian, & Coiacetto, 2008; Kamruzzaman, Yigitcanlar, Washington, & Currie, 2014). The policy and planning aspects discussed in the urban and transport planning and urban studies literatures without a specific focus on AVs are also relevant to the AV context (Firnkorn & Mül- ler, 2015; Newman & Kenworthy, 2015). This indicates that there is still a need for further con- ceptual and empirical explorations for figuring out how to develop and implement AV-related policies and plans to obtain desired outcomes.
•
As for the policy to increase the patronage of AVPTs, there is limited r esearch and knowledge.

Will the factors (both pull and push) influencing public transport patronage be valid for AVPTs with the widespread deployment of personal AVs or SAVs? The common logic suggests that AVPTs patronage would increase only in the case of convenience of private motor vehicle or private AV is offered. The convenience factors include access to public transport stops (Mur- ray, Davis, Stimson, & Ferreira, 1998; Yigitcanlar, Sipe, Evens, & Pitot, 2007), weather and climatic conditions to access and use public transport (Kashfi, Bunker, & Yigitcanlar, 2015a, 2015b), travel time, cost and in-vehicle conditions (Beirão & Cabral, 2007). Owczarzak and Zak (2015) built a decision model based on the concept of public transportation on demand based on AVs. They find reliability and safety of AVPTs (unlike traditional determinants such as fare, and travel time) will be the key determinants of user acceptance and thus increased pa- tronage (Lamondia, Fagnant, Qu, Barrett, & Kockelman, 2016; Becker & Axhausen, 2017).

Similarly, Payre, Cestac, and Delhomme (2014) highlight the importance of acceptance of the technology in its wider roll out. This calls for further empirical investigations both on user con- fidence and policy formulation aspects of AVPTs.
•
In terms of policy to discourage and reduce the sprawling urban development, there is not much r
esearch besides some warnings and speculations. For instance, Lari, Douma, and Onyiah (2015) warned us that the decreased travel costs in terms of time and energy (as may be generat- ed by AVs) could result in people living further from urban centers, which would likely to create urban sprawl. The sprawl issue seems to be the biggest challenge for urban policy and planning, hence, there is an urgent need for empirical studies to model the impacts of AVs on our cities, and then develop competent planning policies and actions to address these challenges. Urban policy makers should take this issue seriously.

5.3 Limitations and research directions
The following research limitations should be considered: (a) Exclusion of literature outside the peer- reviewed full text articles available online, might limit the spectrum of the review as a relatively new field AV research has been mostly published in conference proceedings, book chapters, and white papers; (b) This content downloaded from
73.66.184.251 on Mon, 27 Junn Thu, 01 Jan 1976 12:34:56 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

65 Understanding autonomous vehicles: A systematic literature review Selection of the search keywords might omit inclusion of some relevant literature; (c) The authors’ un- conscious bias might have an impact on the execution of the review, and interpretation of the findings; (d) The methodological approach is limited to a manually handled literature review technique; further analytical techniques could have been considered—such as scientometrics, content analysis, cognitive mapping, and concept clustering—to generate a clearer picture of the investigated topic.

As indicated by Yigitcanlar, Currie, and Kamruzzaman. (2017), through the convergence of auto- mation, electrification and ride-sharing technologies, AVs could significantly reshape real estate, urban development and city planning—as the automobile did in the last century. This transformation creates an opportunity for planners to make our cities more citizen-centered by bringing back the human-scale and walkable city practices that motor vehicle domination removed. How well prepared are urban plan- ners, however, to mitigate the disruptive impacts on our cities? Do we yet even understand what these disruptions and their implications are? This review of the literature reveals that presently, urban planning as a profession is largely unprepared for AVs. Urban and transport planners need to be aware, smart and proactive about the potential impacts, particularly in terms of the potential for renewed urban sprawl.

A future involving widespread use of AVs presents both land-use opportunities and challenges. Progres- sive outcomes will require an objective assessment of their complex land-use, economic and community influences on our evolving cities. We, hence, advocate the necessity of preparing our cities for AVs and generating desired smart urban mobility outcomes—through appropriate policies, timely legislations, and accurate planning standards and guidelines—even a wider uptake might take quite some time.

Acknowledgements
This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors. The authors thank the Editor-in-Chief Prof. David M. Levinson and anonymous referees for their invaluable comments on an earlier version of the manuscript.

This content downloaded from
73.66.184.251 on Mon, 27 Jun 2022 18:46:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

66 JOURNAL OF TRANSPORT AND LAND USE 12.1
References
Altche, F ., Qian, X., & De La Fortelle, A. (2017). An algorithm for supervised driving of cooperative semi-autonomous vehicles. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 18, 3527–3539.

Anderson, J. M., Nidhi, K., Stanley, K. D., Sorensen, P ., Samaras, C., & Oluwatola, O. A. (2014). Au- tonomous vehicle technology. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corp.

Arbolino, R., Carlucci, F ., Cira, A., Ioppolo, G., & Yigitcanlar, T . (2017). Efficiency of the EU regula- tion on greenhouse gas emissions in Italy. Ecological Indicators, 81, 115–123.

Arnaout, G., & Arnaout, J. P . (2014). Exploring the effects of cooperative adaptive cruise control on highway traffic flow using microscopic traffic simulation. Transportation Planning and T echnology, 37, 186–199.

Bagloee, S. A., Tavana, M., Asadi, M., & Oliver, T . (2016). Autonomous vehicles. Journal of Modern Transportation, 24, 284–303.

Bai, W ., Quan, J., Fu, L., Gan, X., & Wang, X. (2017). Online fair allocation in autonomous vehicle sharing. In GLOBECOM 2017-2017 IEEE Global Communications Conference (pp. 1-6), Singapore.

Banister, D. (1997). Reducing the need to travel. Environment and Planning B, 24, 437–449.

Bansal, P ., & Kockelman, K. M. (2017). Forecasting Americans’ long-term adoption of connected and autonomous vehicle technologies. Transportation Research Part A, 95, 49–63.

Bask, A., & Rajahonka, M. (2017). The role of environmental sustainability in the freight transport mode choice: A systematic literature review with focus on the EU. International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management, 47, 560–602.

Becker, F ., & Axhausen, K. W . (2017). Literature review on surveys investigating the acceptance of au- tomated vehicles. Transportation, 44, 1293–1306.

Beirão, G., & Cabral, J. S. (2007). Understanding attitudes towards public transport and private car.

Transport Policy, 14, 478–489.

Bloomberg. (2017). Is your city getting ready for AVs? Retrieved from http://avsincities.bloomberg.org/ global-atlas
Boesch, P . M., Ciari, F ., & Axhausen, K. W . (2016). Autonomous vehicle fleet sizes required to serve different levels of demand. Transportation Research Record, 2542, 111–119.

Brereton, P ., Kitchenham, B. A., Budgen, D., T urner, M., & Khalil, M. (2007). Lessons from applying the systematic literature review process within the software engineering domain. Journal of Systems and Software, 80, 571–583.

Brookhuis, K., de Waard, D., & Janssen, W . (2001). Behavioral impacts of advanced driver assistance systems: An overview. European Journal of Transport and Infrastructure Research, 1, 245–253.

Bruin, R. D. (2016). Autonomous intelligent cars on the European intersection of liability and privacy.

European Journal of Risk Regulation, 7, 485.

Burgess, K., Singh, P . J., & Koroglu, R. (2006). Supply chain management. International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 26, 703–729.

Chang, D. L., Sabatini-Marques, J., da Costa, E. M., Selig, P . M., & Yigitcanlar, T . (2018). Knowledge- based, smart and sustainable cities. Journal of Open Innovation, 4, 5.

Chen, Y., Gonder, J., Young, S., & Wood, E. (2017). Quantifying autonomous vehicles national fuel consumption impacts. Transportation Research Part A. doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2017.10.012 Chen, Z. B., He, F ., Yin, Y. F ., & Du, Y. C. (2017). Optimal design of autonomous vehicle zones in transportation networks. Transportation Research Part B, 99, 44–61.

Childress, S., Nichols, B., Charlton, B., & Coe, S. (2015). Using an activity-based model to explore the potential impacts of automated vehicles. Transportation Research Record, 2493, 99–106.

Chong, Z. J., Qin, B., Bandyopadhyay, T ., Wongpiromsarn, T ., Rebsamen, B., Dai, P ., & Ang Jr, M. H.

This content downloaded from
73.66.184.251 on Mon, 27 Jun 2022 18:46:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

67 Understanding autonomous vehicles: A systematic literature review (2013). Autonomy for mobility on demand. In S. Lee, H. Cho, K. J. Yoon, & J. Lee (Eds.), Intel- ligent autonomous systems 12, (pp. 671–682). Berlin: Springer, Berlin.

Christie, D., Koymans, A., Chanard, T ., Lasgouttes, J. M., & Kaufmann, V . (2016). Pioneering driver- less electric vehicles in Europe. Transportation Research Procedia, 13, 30–39.

Chun, B. T ., & Lee, S. H. (2015). Review on ITS in smart city. Advanced Science and T echnology Letters, 98, 52–54.

Collingwood, L. (2017). Privacy implications and liability issues of autonomous vehicles. Information and Communications T echnology Law, 26, 32–45.

Coppola, R., & Morisio, M. (2016). Connected car. ACM Computing Surveys, 49, 46.

Correia, G. H. de A., & van Arem, B. (2016). Solving the user optimum privately-owned automated vehicles assignment problem UO-POAVAP: A model to explore the impacts of self-driving vehicles on urban mobility. Transportation Research Part B, 87, 64–88.

Crayton, T . J., & Meier, B. M. (2017). Autonomous vehicles. Journal of Transport and Health, 6, 245– 252.

Creutzig, F ., Jochem, P ., Edelenbosch, O. Y., Mattauch, L., van Vuuren, D. P ., McCollum, D., & Minx, J. (2015). Transport. Science, 350, 911–912.

Davidson, P ., & Spinoulas, A. (2016). Driving alone versus riding together. Road and Transport Research, 253, 51–66.

Daziano, R. A., Sarrias, M., & Leard, B. (2017). Are consumers willing to pay to let cars drive for them? Transportation Research Part C, 78, 150–164.

Denaro, R. P ., Zmud, J., Shladover, S., Smith, B. W ., & Lappin, J. (2014). Automated vehicle technol- ogy. King Coal Highway, 292, 19–24.

Dhar, V . (2016). Equity, safety, and privacy in the autonomous vehicle era. Computer, 49, 80–83.

Dia, H., & Javanshour, F . (2017). Autonomous shared mobility-on-demand. Transportation Research Procedia, 22, 285–296.

Diakaki, C., Papageorgiou, M., Papamichail, I., & Nikolos, I. (2015). Overview and analysis of vehicle automation and communication systems from a motorway traffic management perspective. Trans- portation Research Part A, 75, 147–165.

Dixit, V . V , Chand, S., & Nair, D. J. (2016). Autonomous vehicles: Disengagements, accidents and reac- tion times. PLoS One, 11, e0168054.

DoT . (2016). Federal automated vehicles policy: Accelerating the next revolution in roadway safety. Washing- ton, DC: US Department of T ransport (DoT).

Dresner, K., & Stone, P . (2008). A multiagent approach to autonomous intersection management.

Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 31, 591–656.

Duvarci, Y., Yigitcanlar, T ., & Mizokami, S. (2015). T ransportation disadvantage impedance indexing.

Journal of Transport Geography, 48, 61–75.

Fagnant, D. J., & Kockelman, K. M. (2014). The travel and environmental implications of shared autonomous vehicles, using agent-based model scenarios. Transportation Research Part C, 40, 1–13.

Fagnant, D. J., & Kockelman, K. (2015). Preparing a nation for autonomous vehicles: Opportunities, barriers and policy recommendations for capitalizing on self-driven vehicles. Transportation Research Part A, 77, 167–181.

Fagnant, D. J., Kockelman, K. M., & Bansal, P . (2015). Operations of shared autonomous vehicle fleet for Austin, T exas, market. Transportation Research Record, 2536, 98–106.

Farmer, D. L. (2016). Autonomous vehicles: The implications on urban transportation and traffic flow theory. Institute of Transportation Engineers Journal, 86, 34–37.

Fernandes, P ., & Nunes, U. (2012). Platooning with IVC-enabled autonomous vehicles: Strategies to This content downloaded from
73.66.184.251 on Mon, 27 Jun 2022 18:46:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

68 JOURNAL OF TRANSPORT AND LAND USE 12.1
mitigate communication delays, improve safety and traffic flow. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 13, 91–106.

Firnkorn, J., & Müller, M. (2015). Free-floating electric carsharing-fleets in smart cities. Environmental Science and Policy, 45, 30–40.

Gill, V ., Kirk, B., Godsmark, P ., & Flemming, B. (2015). Automated vehicles. Ottawa: The Conference Board of Canada.

Glancy, D. J. (2012). Privacy in autonomous vehicles. Santa Clara Law Review, 52, 1171–1239.

Gless, S., Silverman, E., & Weigend, T . (2016). If robots cause harm, who is to blame? New Criminal Law Review, 19, 412–436.

Gong, S., Shen, J., & Du, L. (2016). Constrained optimization and distributed computation-based car following control of a connected and autonomous vehicle platoon. Transportation Research Part B, 94, 314–334.

Greenblatt, J. B., & Saxena, S. (2015). Autonomous taxis could greatly reduce greenhouse-gas emissions of US light-duty vehicles. Nature Climate Change, 5, 860–863.

Gruel, W ., & Stanford, J. M. (2016). Assessing the long-term effects of autonomous vehicles. Transpor- tation Research Procedia, 13, 18–29.

Heinrichs, D. (2016). Autonomous driving and urban land use. In: M. Maurer, J. C. Gerdes, B. Lenz, & H. Winner. (Eds.), Autonomous driving: T echnical, legal and social aspects (pp. 213–231). Berlin:

Springer.

Hendrickson, C., Biehler, A., & Mashayekh, Y. (2014). Connected and autonomous vehicles 2040 vision.

Harrisburg, PA: Pennsylvania Department of T ransportation.

Hoogendoorn, R., van Arem, B., & Hoogendoorn, S. (2014). Automated driving, traffic flow efficiency and human factors: A literature review. Transportation Research Record, 2422, 113–120.

Isaac, L. (2016). How local governments can plan for autonomous vehicles. In G. Meyer & S. Beiker (Eds.), Road vehicle automation 3, (pp. 59-70). Berlin: Springer.

Kamruzzaman, M., Yigitcanlar, T ., Washington, S., & Currie, G. (2014). Australian baby boomers switched to more environmentally friendly modes of transport during the global financial crisis.

International Journal of Environmental Science and T echnology, 11, 2133–2144.

Kamruzzaman, M., Hine, J., & Yigitcanlar, T . (2015). Investigating the link between carbon dioxide emissions and transport related social exclusion in rural Northern Ireland. International Journal of Environmental Science and T echnology, 12, 3463–3478.

Kamruzzaman, M., Yigitcanlar, T ., Yang, J., & Mohamed, A. (2016). Measures of transport-related social exclusion. Sustainability, 8, 696.

Kashfi, S., Bunker, J., & Yigitcanlar, T . (2015a). Effects of transit quality of service characteristics on daily bus ridership. Transportation Research Record, 2535, 55–64.

Kashfi, S., Bunker, J., & Yigitcanlar, T . (2015b). Understanding the effects of complex seasonality on suburban daily transit ridership. Journal of Transport Geography, 46, 67–80.

Kim, J., Moon, Y. J., & Suh, I. S. (2015). Smart mobility strategy in Korea on sustainability, safety and efficiency toward 2025. IEEE Intelligent Transportation Systems Magazine, 7, 58–67.

Krueger, R., Rashidi, T . H., & Rose, J. M. (2016). Preferences for shared autonomous vehicles. Trans- portation Research Part C, 69, 343–355.

Lamondia, J. J., Fagnant, D. J., Qu, H., Barrett, J., & Kockelman, K. (2016). Shifts in long-distance travel mode due to automated vehicles and travel survey analysis. Transportation Research Record, 2566, 1–11.

Lara, A., Costa, E., Furlani, T ., & Yigitcanlar, T . (2016). Smartness that matters: Comprehensive and human-centered characterization of smart cities. Journal of Open Innovation, 2, 8.

Lari, A., Douma, F ., & Onyiah, I. (2015). Self-driving vehicles and policy implications. Minnesota Jour- This content downloaded from
73.66.184.251 on Mon, 27 Jun 2022 18:46:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

69 Understanding autonomous vehicles: A systematic literature review nal of Law Science and T echnology, 16, 735.

Lee, C. (2017). Grabbing the wheel early: Moving forward on cybersecurity and privacy protections for driverless cars. Federal Communications Law Journal, 69, 25–52.

Lee, C. K., Lin, C. L., & Shiu, B. M. (2009). Autonomous vehicle parking using hybrid artificial intel- ligent approach. Journal of Intelligent and Robotic Systems, 56, 319-343.

Levin, M. W ., & Boyles, S. D. (2015). Effects of autonomous vehicle ownership on trip, mode, and route choice. Transportation Research Record, 2493, 29–38.

Levine, M. L., Segev, L. L., & Thode, S. F . (2017). A largely unnoticed impact on real estate. Appraisal Journal, 85, 51–59.

Li, B., & Shao, Z. (2015). A unified motion planning method for parking an autonomous vehicle in the presence of irregularly placed obstacles. Knowledge-Based Systems, 86, 11–20.

Litman, T . (2017). Autonomous vehicle implementation predictions. Victoria, BC: Victoria T ransport Policy Institute.

Liu, J., Kockelman, K. M., Boesch, P . M., & Ciari, F . (2017). T racking a system of shared autono- mous vehicles across the Austin, T exas, network using agent-based simulation. Transportation, 44, 1261–1278.

Luo, Y., Xiang, Y., Cao, K., & Li, K. (2016). A dynamic automated lane change maneuver based on vehicle-to-vehicle communication. Transportation Research Part C, 62, 87–102.

Ma, S., Zheng, Y., & Wolfson, O. (2015). Real-time city-scale taxi ridesharing. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 27, 1782–1795.

Malokin, A., Circella, G., & Mokhtarian, P . L. (2015). How do activities conducted while commuting influence mode choice? T esting public transportation advantage and autonomous vehicle scenarios.

In 94th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington DC, January 11–15.

Martinez, L. M., & Viegas, J. M. (2017). Assessing the impacts of deploying a shared self-driving urban mobility system: An agent-based model applied to the city of Lisbon, Portugal. International Journal of Transportation Science and T echnology, 6, 13–27.

Maurer, M., Gerdes, J. C., Lenz, B., & Winner, H. (Eds.). (2016). Autonomous driving: T echnical, legal and social aspects. Berlin: Springer.

Meissner, E., Chantem, T ., & Heaslip, K. (2016). Optimizing departures of automated vehicles from highways while maintaining mainline capacity. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Sys- tems, 17, 3498–3511.

Meyer, J., Becker, H., Bösch, P . M., & Axhausen, K. W . (2017). Autonomous vehicles. Research in Transportation Economics, 62, 80–91.

Milakis, D., van Arem, B., & van Wee, G. (2017). Policy and society related implications of automated driving: A review of literature and directions for future research. Journal of Intelligent Transportation Systems, 21, 324–348.

Milakis, D., Snelder, M., van Arem, B., Homem, G., & van Wee, G. (2017). Development and trans- port implications of automated vehicles in the Netherlands. European Journal of Transport and Infra- structure Research, 17, 63–85.

Moorthy, A., De Kleine, R., Keoleian, G., Good, J., & Lewis, G. (2017). Shared autonomous vehicles as a sustainable solution to the last mile problem. SAE International Journal of Passenger Cars-Electronic and Electrical Systems, 10, 328–336.

Murray, A. T ., Davis, R., Stimson, R. J., & Ferreira, L. (1998). Public transportation access. Transporta- tion Research Part D, 3, 319–328.

Newman, P ., & Kenworthy, J. (1999). Sustainability and cities. New York: Island Press.

Newman, P ., & Kenworthy, J. (Eds.) (2015). The end of automobile dependence. New York: Island Press.

NHTSA. (2016). Federal automated vehicles policy. Retrieved from https://www.transportation.gov/ This content downloaded from
73.66.184.251 on Mon, 27 Jun 2022 18:46:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

70 JOURNAL OF TRANSPORT AND LAND USE 12.1
AV/federal-automated-vehicles-policy-september-2016
Nie, J., Zhang, J., Ding, W ., Wan, X., Chen, X., & Ran, B. (2016). Decentralized cooperative lane- changing decision-making for connected autonomous vehicles. IEEE Access, 4, 9413–9420.

Nilsson, J., Brannstrom, M., Coelingh, E., & Fredriksson, J. (2017). Lane change maneuvers for auto- mated vehicles. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 18, 1087–1096.

Nowakowski, C., Shladover, S. E., Chan, C. Y., & Tan, H. S. (2015). Development of California regula- tions to govern testing and operation of automated driving systems. Transportation Research Record, 2489, 137–144.

Nowakowski, C., Shladover, S. E., & Chan, C. Y. (2016). Determining the readiness of automated driv- ing systems for public operation development of behavioral competency requirements. Transporta- tion Research Record, 2559, 65–72.

Olaverri-Monreal, C. (2016). Autonomous vehicles and smart mobility related technologies. Infocom- munications Journal, 8, 17–24.

Oliveira, C. M., Márcio de Almeida, D. A., de Mello, A. L., do Couto Assumpção, F ., Dos Santos Gon- çalves, F ., & Gonçalves, D. N. (2016). Identificando os desafios e as boas práticas para o transporte urbano de cargas, por meio de uma revisão bibliográfica sistemática. Transportes, 24, 9–19.

Oliveira, C. M., Albergaria De Mello Bandeira, R., Vasconcelos Goes, G., Schmitz Gonçalves, D. N., & D’Agosto, M. D. (2017). Sustainable vehicles-based alternatives in last mile distribution of urban freight transport: A systematic literature review. Sustainability, 9, 1324.

Owczarzak, Ł., & Żak, J. (2015). Design of passenger public transportation solutions based on autono- mous vehicles and their multiple criteria comparison with traditional forms of passenger transporta- tion. Transportation Research Procedia, 10, 472–482.

Payre, W ., Cestac, J., & Delhomme, P . (2014). Intention to use a fully automated car. Transportation Research Part F , 27, 252–263.

Pendleton, S. D., Andersen, H., Du, X., Shen, X., Meghjani, M., Eng, Y. H., & Ang, M. H. (2017).

Perception, planning, control, and coordination for autonomous vehicles. Machines, 5, 6.

Perveen, S., Yigitcanlar, T ., Kamruzzaman, M., & Hayes, J. (2017). Evaluating transport externalities of urban growth. International Journal of Environmental Science and T echnology, 14, 663–678.

Perveen, S., Kamruzzaman, M., & Yigitcanlar, T . (2017). Developing policy scenarios for sustainable urban growth management. Sustainability, 9, 1787.

Perveen, S., Kamruzzaman, M., & Yigitcanlar, T . (2018). What to assess to model the transport impacts of urban growth? A Delphi approach to review the space-time suitability of transport indicators.

International Journal of Sustainable Transportation. doi.org/10.1080/15568318.2018.1491077 Piao, J., McDonald, M., Hounsell, N., Graindorge, M., Graindorge, T ., & Malhene, N. (2016). Public views towards implementation of automated vehicles in urban areas. Transportation Research Proce- dia, 14, 2168–2177.

Pinjari, A. R., & Menon, N. (2013). Highway capacity impacts of autonomous vehicles. Tampa, FL: Cen- ter for Urban T ransportation Research.

Rowley, J., & Slack, F . (2004). Conducting a literature review. Management Research News, 27, 31–39.

Rubin, J. (2016). Connected autonomous vehicles: T ravel behavior and energy use. In G. Meyer & S.

Beiker (Eds.), Road vehicle automation 3, (pp. 151–162). Berlin: Springer.

SAE. (2016a). Automated driving. Retrieved from https://www.sae.org/misc/pdfs/automated_driving. pdf
SAE. (2016b). Taxonomy and definitions for terms related to driving automation systems for on-road motor vehicles. Retrieved from http://standards.sae.org/j3016_201609 Schellekens, M. (2015). Self-driving cars and the chilling effect of liability law. Computer Law and Secu- This content downloaded from
73.66.184.251 on Mon, 27 Jun 2022 18:46:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms