Agenda packet, first session — Berkeley City Council, May 23, 2023 (part 4 of 6)

Page 468 ends

Artists Affordable Housing Certification Process CONSENT CALENDAR May 23, 2023

CITY MANAGER
The City Manager takes no position on the content and recommendations of the Commission’s Report.

CONTACT PERSON
Jennifer Lovvorn, Secretary to the Civic Arts Commission, (510) 981-7533 Attachments:

1. Civic Arts Commission, Affordable Housing for Artists in Berkeley, December 2021.

2. Berkeley City Council, Referral: Affordable Housing for Artists Inclusion in Housing Element, January 25, 2022.

3. Artist Certification Process (Approved), Berkeley Civic Arts Commission, May 24, 2022.

Page 3 of 63 ends

Page 469 ends

affordable housing for artists in Berkeley
a baseline survey

Anh Thang Dao-Shah, ph.d.& Asif Majid, ph.d
creative equity research partners
December 2021

Page 4 of 63 ends

Page 470 ends

affordable housing for artists in berkeley
a baseline survey

1 contents

2 | executive summary

3 | introduction

6 | survey results

8 | key findings

13 | recommendations

15 | further research

16 | appendices
a : community advisory group members
b : survey questions

Page 5 of 63 ends

Page 471 ends

affordable housing for artists in berkeley
a baseline survey

2 executive summary

This project aims to respond to concerns around housing and art space affordability among artists and arts organizations in Berkeley by answering two key questions:

1) What are the trends around local affordability issues that can be addressed through targeted resources and policy solutions?
2) What pre-existing housing disparities impact what artists seek in possible affordable housing solutions?

As in other parts of the Bay Area, narratives of concern around affordability in the arts ecosystem in the past decade are often anecdotal. The sector lacks comprehensive data that could inform system change solutions. To that end, this report is based on a survey and focus groups with a diverse group of artists and cultural workers in Berkeley to provide systematic data around the unique housing and space needs of artists. It seeks to better position Berkeley’s arts community to participate in the City’s current affordable housing efforts and help improve the safety of local arts spaces, without causing further artist displacement.

key findings
Artists are highly educated, yet have low income
Berkeley’s artists and artists/cultural workers who responded to the survey are highly educated (88% have a Bachelor’s degree or higher). Yet, 60% of that same group has lower, very low, or extremely low income.

Artists and cultural workers have multiple forms of employment Only 32% of all respondents reported that they are employed full time. Others indicated that they cobble together different types of part-time and short-term contract work, as well as self-employment, in order to make ends meet.

Artists are rent burdened
Artists and artists/cultural workers disproportionately rent their living space (71%).

Of those who rent, 77% are rent burdened or severely rent burdened, based on the California’s Department of Housing and Community Development definitions.

Artists have a unique need for flexible live/work spaces Responding artists and artists/cultural workers indicated, at a rate of 82%, that they do their creative work in their living space. Of those respondents, over half (56%) practice artistic disciplines that require extra ventilation.

recommendations
• create policies that prioritize artists for new affordable housing • designate some of Berkeley’s upcoming affordable housing funding from measure O for units specific to artists
• consult artists when designing new policies for live/work spaces • develop artist-specific resources and technical assistance to bring artists into the existing affordable housing pipeline
• pilot a guaranteed basic income program for qualifying artists

Page 6 of 63 ends

Page 472 ends

affordable housing for artists in berkeley
a baseline survey

3 introduction

why this project?

This project was initially conceptualized in 2019 in response to concerns around housing and art space affordability among artists and arts organizations in Berkeley. It was motivated by two events.

First, the 2018 Arts and Culture Plan Update for the City of Berkeley identified -- as a primary goal -- the need to increase access to affordable housing and spaces for artists, cultural workers, and arts organizations. The cultural plan specified a number of action steps towards this goal, including undertaking a data-informed assessment of current art space affordability challenges and displacement risks in Berkeley, as well as the development of strategies to protect and create affordable spaces for Berkeley artists, cultural workers, and arts organizations based on the assessment’s findings.

Second, in November 2018, the voters of Berkeley approved two bond measures totaling $135 million to fund affordable housing in Berkeley. Berkeley City Council subsequently began the development of an affordable housing framework ( Housing for
a Diverse, Equitable and Creative Berkeley) to guide Berkeley’s affordable housing policies, programs, and projects through 2030.This framework explored wide array of affordable housing for artists and other creative workers. In July 2019, the Council referred this policy document to various Commissions for further development.

However, the pandemic caused this work to be temporarily put on hold.

As elsewhere in t
he Bay Area, concerns around the
arts ecosystem’s affordability over
the past decade are mostly anecdotal, arising when a major artist or arts organization imminently faces the loss of their living and work space. These stories, while important, inadequately inform systems change solutions aimed at addressing structural concerns.

To that end, this project’s goal is to develop an assessment that provides systematic data around the unique housing and space needs of artists and cultural workers. This will better position the arts community to participate in Berkeley’s ongoing affordable housing efforts and help improve art space safety in Berkeley without causing further displacement of artists. Two key questions guided this project from the beginning:

1) What are the trends around local affordability issues that can be addressed through targeted resources and policy solutions? 2) What pre-existing disparities could impact possible affordable housing solutions for artists?

This second question is key to ensure the solutions we suggest do not unintentionally impact some groups more than others.

In April 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic brought a pause to the assessment project and

Page 7 of 63 ends

Page 473 ends

introduction affordable housing for artists in berkeley a baseline survey

4 raised new affordability questions, as the arts community dealt with the consequences of regular lockdowns. While some local, state, and federal measures -- such as the eviction moratorium and extension of unemployment benefits to independent contractors -- helped prevent widespread displacement during the pandemic’s height, the new normal brought new concerns as artists and cultural organizations continue to struggle with canceled events, lower venue capacity, and overall uncertainty.

These questions brought new urgency to the project, as well as the need to methodologically pivot and narrow the project’s focus. Instead of focusing on both housing needs of artists and space needs of arts organizations as originally envisioned, this project focused on understanding the affordable housing and workspace needs of individual artists and cultural workers to ensure timely recommendations that would allow for participation in ongoing affordable housing efforts. This shift also allowed for the inclusion of additional questions that sought to understand both the short-term impact of the pandemic and the ongoing challenges that would inform long-term strategies to address affordability issues in Berkeley.

methodology and data limitations
In order to collect data directly from artists and cultural workers during the ongoing pandemic, an online survey was issued in September 2021 through the Berkeley Civic Arts Program. The survey was open for four weeks and was accompanied by a robust outreach strategy, including outreach and reminder emails through the Civic Arts Program’s and City of Berkeley’s mailing lists and social media channels, the direct networks of a number of arts organizations represented by members of an ad-hoc advisory group, and posting on other community-serving digital platforms like Nextdoor. A list of all survey questions is found in Appendix B.

In addition to quantitative data, this project relies on the insights of artists, cultural leaders, and the City’s affordable housing experts to provide context to the affordability crisis and housing needs. Research staff conducted three focus group meetings with 21 community stakeholders, who formed an ad-hoc community advisory group.

Members of the advisory group were selected to provide different perspectives on the historic and current landscape of arts and culture in Berkeley with a specific focus on housing needs for artists and cultural workers. With research staff, the advisory group helped design survey questions, reviewed preliminary findings, and brainstormed potential solutions. A list of the advisory group participants is provided in Appendix A.

Any survey of artists must contend with the fact that there is no baseline dataset regarding the number of artists in a given community, due to the various ways artists can be defined. The most common way to define a professional group is to use IRS data that classifies someone’s profession based on the income they earn from their main profession. Artists’ main sources of income, however, often do not come from artwork; income sources are diverse and cross-sectoral. The same can be said for cultural workers. Plus, an artist’s level of engagement with an art practice is not limited to paid opportunities. Income is thus an inadequate defining criterion. Through this survey’s

Page 8 of 63 ends

Page 474 ends

introduction affordable housing for artists in berkeley a baseline survey

5 grassroots and community-centered approach, this project provides a snapshot of the needs of the arts and culture sector and should be understood as baseline data that should be supplemented with ongoing and long-term data collection and analysis.

Page 9 of 63 ends

Page 475 ends

affordable housing for artists in berkeley
a baseline survey

6 31%of respondents identified as LGBTQIA+

62%of respondents identified as female
survey results

who responded?

A total of 163 artists and cultural workers responded to the survey. This constitutes

0.14% of Berkeley’s population, based on data from the 2020 census. For comparison, in a similar study in 2015 in San Francisco, which involved a six-week survey and multiple in-person outreach events, 560 artists and cultural workers responded to the survey. That constituted 0.07% of San Francisco’s population, based on 2010 census data. In other words, the Berkeley survey had double the response rate.

Of the Berkeley survey respondents, 48% identified as artists, 15% identified as cultural workers, and 37% identified as both artists and cultural workers. In total, 32% of respondents do not currently reside in Berkeley, while 39% have lived in Berkeley for more than 10 years.

2D
17%
Theater and
Performance
14%
Dance
7%
3D
9%Craft
7%
Film, Video,
Media Arts
10%
Literary Arts
15%
Music
12%
Social
Practice
9%

Page 10 of 63 ends

Page 476 ends

survey results affordable housing for artists in berkeley a baseline survey

7 Figure 2: Race and ethnicity of survey respondents

Figure 3: Race and ethnicity of City of Berkeley residents

Page 11 of 63 ends

Page 477 ends

affordable housing for artists in berkeley
a baseline survey

8 key findings

Artist respondents are highly educated, yet have low income

Of those respondents who identified as artists or as both artists and cultural workers, 88% reported having a Bachelor’s degree or higher. Of that same group, 60% reported an annual household income of $69,000 or less. According to the California Department of Housing and Community Development, in Alameda County for a single individual in 2019 (when this project and survey were first developed), annual household income of $26,050 or below constitutes extremely low income, between $26,051-$43,400 is defined as very low income, and between $43,401-$69,000 is defined as lower income. Per these categories, 60% of those who identified as artists or both artists and cultural workers have lower, very low, or extremely low income. In 2021, the upper threshold for the lower income category has risen to $76,750, meaning that artists are now even further behind financially than they were two years ago.

While low income is prevalent across the group, this rate is significantly higher among BIPOC respondents. Of respondents who identified as non-White, 72%, reported having lower, very low, or extremely low income, compared to 55% among those who identified as White or Caucasian. Due to the small number of participants, we are unable to make comparison between different groups who identify as non-White.

Figure 4a: Income categories for all artist respondents

Income Category Income Range Percentage of Artist Respondents Extremely Low ≤ $26,050 21%
Very Low $26,051-$43,400 16%
Low $43,401-$69,000 23%

Page 12 of 63 ends

Page 478 ends

key findings affordable housing for artists in berkeley a baseline survey

9 Median $69,001-$78,200 17%
Moderate $78,201-$93,850 18%
Decline to State n/a 5%
Figure 4b: Income ranges for artist respondents

Artists and cultural workers have multiple forms of employment

Only 32% of all respondents reported that they are employed full-time. Others indicate that they engage in a patchwork of different types of part-time and short-term contract work, as well as self-employment, in order to make ends meet. Examples of employment that respondents are undertaking include: being a self-employed artist for one’s own or another’s art practice, being employed part time/doing regular work for pay as either a cultural worker or otherwise, doing contract work as a cultural worker or something other than a cultural worker, and undertaking unreported work for cash.

Artist respondents report being rent burdened, but are not immediately concerned with losing their housing

Among respondents who identify as artists and as both artists and cultural workers, 71% of respondents rent. Of those who rent, 77% are rent burdened or severely rent burdened. According to the US Department of Housing and Urban Development , a
household or individual that spends more than 30% of their monthly household income on rent is rent burdened. Severely rent burdened households or individuals spend more than 50% of their monthly household income on rent.

Figure 5: Respondents’ percentage of monthly household income spent on rent

While studies have shown that rent burden and extremely low income decrease the health and overall wellbeing of all those impacted, for artists this burden can

Page 13 of 63 ends

Page 479 ends

key findings affordable housing for artists in berkeley a baseline survey

10 fundamentally change the way they engage with their artistic practice. Qualitative comments provided by the respondents highlighted having to scale back on their practice in order to earn the income they need to pay rent. This means they are unable to focus on developing their creative practice. As one respondent, a musician, explained:

The cost of living in the Bay Area fundamentally changes how I am able to grow in my craft. Since we are all hustling to pay rent at this level, rehearsals must be paid, limited and without a "post gig hang" - something I find central to collaborating with others. This limits how much performing I can do with others, which limits how much I can grow, experiment and contribute in my craft.

Over the long term, the lack of opportunities for artists to devote time and energy to their practice can lead to the abandonment of artistic practice altogether.

Despite respondents’ high rent burden and low income, those identifying as artists and as artists/cultural workers do not indicate concerns around losing their housing in the near future.

Only 9% of respondents reported that they were evicted due to no-fault causes in the last 2 years. No-fault eviction is defined as evictions that take place when leases are not renewed without the tenant having violated any regulations as long as a notice to move out is sent to the tenant within the required time period. Landlords might choose to evict tenants who are paying rent on time and complying with regulations due to owner move in or the need to retrofit a building. In the last decade, as the affordability crisis has intensified throughout the Bay Area, no-fault eviction has often been used to let go of long-term tenants who are protected from rent increases to bring in new tenants who are charged at market rate. In the survey issued to San Francisco artists, about 30% of respondents reported that their leases were not going to be renewed due to no fault of their own.

Only 6% of respondents had to rely on the eviction moratorium during the pandemic. In total, only 9% of respondents are uncertain or very uncertain that they will be able to retain housing after the moratorium ends (20% were neither certain nor uncertain).

Though seemingly at odds with other findings, this sentiment could be attributed to three factors.

First, Berkeley has strong renter protection policies. Qualitative survey responses show that many respondents who rent are aware of and rely on rent control, which helps keep their rent affordable. This is especially true with respondents who have resided in Berkeley for more than five years. Not concerned with immediate loss of housing does not mean that existing housing needs are met, however. As one respondent explained:

The only reason I am able to remain in the Bay Area is because I have been in the same unit for a decade and we have rent control - the other apartments in my building go for over twice what we're paying. […] If I ever wanted to leave this apartment (and I do), I would have to leave the area entirely, because I can't afford anything else.

Page 14 of 63 ends

Page 480 ends

key findings affordable housing for artists in berkeley a baseline survey

11 The gap between existing housing and respondents’ needs is especially acute for those working in artistic disciplines that have specific space requirements like extra ventilation.

Second, the fact that the majority of respondents engage in multiple forms of employment means that they have multiple sources of income beyond their artistic practices to rely on for rental needs. However, as discussed above, in the long-term, the high burden of rent and reliance on other means of employment to make ends meet will impact artists’ abilities to sustain their art. As one artist wrote:

My housing is over 2/3 of my income, leaving little to nothing for anything over basic living expenses.

Lastly, the timing of the survey suggests that those who are currently still residing in Berkeley are the ones who managed to weather the wave of displacement that took place in the last decade through the two factors described above and we have not captured the concerns of those who already had to leave as displacement was taking place. According to the Urban Displacement Project, by 2018, almost all of Berkeley, except the immediate area surrounding University of California, Berkeley was experiencing ongoing and advanced gentrification, with a few areas already becoming exclusive and three areas in North Berkeley marked as low income and susceptible to displacement. South Berkeley area between Ashby Avenue and Emeryville border was in an advance gentrification stage with displacement having taken place between 2000 and 2018.

For comparison, the study in San Francisco took place in 2015, in the middle of the biggest wave of gentrification in the broader Bay Area. In that study, more than 1/3 of respondents expressed immediate concerns about loss of housing due to rent increase, end of lease term or fear of no-fault eviction.

Notably, South Berkeley also had high percentage of BIPOC population (between 50% and 70%). This data confirms that, like in the rest of the Bay Area, BIPOC communities are more susceptible to early displacement and the survey respondents’ demographic reflects these changes in the population.

Page 15 of 63 ends

Page 481 ends

key findings affordable housing for artists in berkeley a baseline survey

12 Artists have a unique need for flexible, live/work space

Of responding artists and artists/cultural workers, 82% reported that they make their art where they live, with 56% of this group requiring extra ventilation for their art.

This finding reflects the way that affordability challenges can fundamentally change an artist’s practice. For artists needing extra ventilation, this could mean a choice between maintaining their own health and practicing their art, particularly if there is no adequate separation between where artists sleep, cook, and eat and where artworks are being stored, produced, or left to dry. The need for flexible and affordable live/work space has pushed artists to make choices to live in dangerous conditions that can have fatal consequences. As one artist respondent explained:

It’s really hard to find space to train that is affordable. I need at least 20’ ceilings, ideally 30’. There were many affordable live/work warehouse conversions with this kind of ceiling height pre-Ghostship but many of these affordable spaces were affordable due to slumlord and very DIY situations, which often meant common housing needs like sealed roofs, consistent mail/package delivery, heating, bedroom windows/egress, were not guaranteed. The tragedy at Ghostship has led cities around the Bay Area to tighten up their policies around DIY spaces to prevent similar situations. However, without intentional creation of spaces that meet the needs of practicing artists, such policies do not solve the root cause problem that have caused artists to seek out those spaces in the first place.

Page 16 of 63 ends

Page 482 ends

affordable housing for artists in berkeley
a baseline survey

13 recommendations

Create policies that prioritize artists for new affordable housing

Artists are an important part of the fabric of Berkeley as a city. As such, they should be part of ongoing conversations about Berkeley’s housing plan. The survey results demonstrate that artists -- as a group -- have low income, a high rent burden, and have traditionally been left out of ongoing affordable housing. In order to mitigate further displacement and allow artists to continue to work and thrive in Berkeley, the City could consider creating a priority category for artists who meet income qualification to access affordable housing. Such a priority category would require working with the arts community to create an inclusive definition of what it means to be an artist. It should also take into consideration and center artists from Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) communities, as well as LGBTQ+ communities who have already been displaced. In doing so, artists will have an opportunity to return to Berkeley and enrich the city’s social and artistic fabric.

Designate some of Berkeley’s upcoming affordable housing funding from measure o for units specific to artists

On July 24, 2019, Berkeley’s Civic Arts Commission approved an amendment recommendation for Measure O that called for “significantly increas[ing] the supply of affordable housing and live/work housing for artists, artisans, and cultural workers” through adding to the zoning ordinance, incentivizing developers to build market-rate housing that includes affordable live/work units for creative workers, and incorporate live/work spaces for artists and cultural workers into large-scale affordable housing projects. Other proposals included the development of a community land trust and transforming underused retail spaces and City-owned buildings into artist live/work spaces. These recommendations should be revisited and implemented, as they align with the range of qualitative responses that came through the survey. Respondents also suggesting the development of: 1) co-ops; 2) a separate affordable housing lottery specifically for those artists and cultural workers from BIPOC and other underserved communities; and 3) relationships between the City and land trusts to purchase buildings that serve as artist housing. These suggestions point to the importance of re- evaluating how zoning and other policies further disenfranchise artists and cultural workers.

Consult artists when designing new policies for live/work spaces

Across the Bay Area, responses to the Ghostship fire emphasized increased attention to artist DIY live/work spaces. These spaces were often the only options for artists to access live/work spaces that met their needs. Yet, artists have always worked to transform neighborhoods through their work and creative use of space. As Berkeley works to address affordability issues for all of its residents, consulting and involving

Page 17 of 63 ends

Page 483 ends

affordable housing for artists in berkeley
a baseline survey

14 artists in the planning process can help bring about a much-needed, new, and fresh perspective on issues such as rezoning, repurposing ground floor spaces, and requiring community benefit proposals for new development.

Develop artist-specific resources and technical assistance to bring artists into the existing affordable housing pipeline

Due to the nature of their work, artists often have a unique income structure that makes applying for affordable housing more difficult. In addition, the survey shows that artists have needs for certain types of spaces that might be difficult to identify. Funding technical assistance to support artists to translate their needs and apply for the existing affordable housing pipeline could be an important step in helping artists leave inadequate living situations. The advisory group also recommended creating a one-stop shop that features affordable housing for artists (perhaps akin to a specialized version of San Francisco’s DAHLIA housing portal
),which would create a platform where
artists could share information about available housing and get connected to resources like financial technical assistance. A space geared towards artists’ housing needs might be especially beneficial for artists who are looking for affinity housing along the lines of race and sexual identity, which allows them to stay more connected with their own communities.

Pilot a guaranteed basic income program for qualifying artists

Acknowledging the disproportionate impact of the pandemic on a community that was already struggling due to ongoing affordability challenges, multiple cities such as San
Francisco and Minneapolis have launched pilot programs providing artists from marginalized communities who meet income requirements with a monthly stipend that would help cover their basic needs. Stipends are unrestricted, so they can be spent on rent and food while artists continue their artistic practice. Due to the existing racial wealth gap, which was reflected in the survey results, such a pilot should prioritize BIPOC artists. These types of programs are gaining national attention because the arts and culture are often cited as key strategies for economic recovery. Practicing artists are essential for such recovery. The advisory group agreed that a basic income program would address two key findings in this report -- respondents’ extremely low income and high rent burden -- both of which have already forced artists to significantly modify or abandon their art practices.

Page 18 of 63 ends

Page 484 ends

affordable housing for artists in berkeley
a baseline survey

15 further research

While the survey and focus groups discussed in this report have provided a much- needed snapshot into the space needs of artists in Berkeley, limited data does not allow us to paint a comprehensive picture. The following research and data collection is recommended, in order to complement this report.

Work with arts organizations to understand the income levels and housing needs of cultural workers

Only 15% of the respondents to the survey identified exclusively as cultural workers, meaning that there was not a statistically significant sample from which to draw conclusions about the needs of cultural workers. Further research, specifically on the housing needs and income levels of cultural workers, is needed.

Conduct a disparity study

Currently, Berkeley does not have comprehensive race and ethnicity data for seekers of affordable housing. Therefore, it is impossible to determine whether or not the artists who responded to this survey are demographically representative of the population that qualifies for affordable housing. A disparity study will ensure that changes in policy will not disproportionately impact certain groups.

Continue to collect data on artists

The lack of baseline data on artists -- even as simple as the total number of artists and disciplines practiced in a given community -- prevents us from understanding the extent of the issues that artists face. More long-term data collection and analysis of artists in Berkeley will allow the city to identify trends, as well as possible challenges that can be mitigated by timely policy changes.

Page 19 of 63 ends

Page 485 ends

affordable housing for artists in berkeley
a baseline survey

16 appendices

a: community advisory group members

Kim Anno, Berkeley Civic Arts Commission
Delores Nochi Cooper, Berkeley Juneteenth Festival
Bruce Coughran, Indra’s Net Theater
Hadley Dynak, Berkeley Cultural Trust
Misty Garrett, City of Berkeley
Ashlee George, Capoeira Arts Foundation and BrasArte
Mayumi Hamanaka, Kala Art Institute
Archana Horsting, Kala Art Institute
Mildred Howard, Independent Artist
Beatriz Leyva-Cutler, BAHIA
Amanda Montez, City of Berkeley
Mirah Moriarty & Rodrigo Esteva, Dance Monks
PC Muñoz, Freight & Salvage and BCT E&I Committee
Natalia Neira, La Pena Cultural Center and BCT E&I Committee Daniel Nevers, Berkeley Art Center
Nancy Ng, Luna Dance Institute
Kathryn Reasoner, Vital Arts
Leigh Rondon, Shotgun Theater
Irene Sazer, Independent Artist (Civic Arts Grantee)
Sean Vaughn Scott, Black Repertory Group Theater
Rebecca Selin, Gamelan Sekar Jaya
Terry Taplin, Berkeley City Council and former Berkeley Civic Arts Commissioner Rory Terrell, Local Artists Berkeley
Tyese Wortham, CAST
Chingchi Yu, Independent Artist (Civic Arts Grantee)

Page 20 of 63 ends

Page 486 ends

affordable housing for artists in berkeley
a baseline survey

17 b: survey questions

Messaging

Are you an artist or cultural worker struggling to find affordable housing for you and your family?

Artists and cultural workers in Berkeley and throughout the Bay Area are facing an affordability crisis that prevents them from focusing on their creative work. Through the recently completed cultural planning process, the City of Berkeley identified as a primary goal the need to protect and increase access to affordable housing for artists and cultural workers.

Currently, there is little to no data on the affordable housing concerns of Berkeley artists and cultural workers. Your responses to this survey will help the City of Berkeley create programs and policies tailored to the housing needs that are specific to Berkeley’s arts sector, including affordable housing and live-work spaces.

Thank you for helping keep Berkeley affordable for artists and cultural workers.

Survey Questions

1. Are you an artist or cultural worker?
a. Artist [proceed to question 2]
b. Cultural Worker (staff member at an arts culture organization) [Proceed to Question 4]
c. Both

2. If you are an artist, how would you describe your artistic practice/artwork? Select all that apply:
a. 2D (Painting, Printmaking, Drawing, Photography, etc.) b. 3D (Sculpture, Installation)
c. Theater/Performance
d. Dance
e. Craft
f. Film, Video, and/or Media Arts
g. Literary (Creative Writing, Poetry, etc.)
h. Music
i. Social Practice
j. Write in_____

3. Do you work with a medium that requires extra space and/or ventilation? This may include metal welding, spray paint, etc.
a. Yes
b. No

Page 21 of 63 ends

Page 487 ends

appendices affordable housing for artists in berkeley b: survey questions a baseline survey

18 4. If you are a cultural worker, do you work at a Berkeley-based arts and culture nonprofit organization?
a. Yes
b. No

5. What is your primary language?
a. English
b. Spanish
c. Chinese (Mandarin and Cantonese)
d. Tagalog
e. Vietnamese
f. Persian
g. Portuguese
h. Punjabi
i. Swahili
j. Write In:_______________________
k. Decline to State

6. What is your race/ethnicity?
a. African-American or Black
b. American Indian or Alaska Native or Indigenous or First Nations c. Arab or Middle Eastern
d. Asian or Asian American
e. Hispanic or Latina/Latino/Latinx
f. Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander
g. White or Caucasian or European American
h. Multi-racial or multi- ethnic (2+ races/ethnicities) i. Write In____________________________________
j. Decline to State

7. What best describes your gender identity?
a. Female (cisgender)
b. Female (transgender)
c. Male (cisgender)
d. Male (transgender)
e. Gender-fluid/Genderqueer/Gender-expansive/Non-binary f. Write In_________________________
g. Decline to State

8. How do you describe your sexual orientation or sexual identity? a. LGBTQ+
b. Heterosexual/straight
c. Write in__________________
d. Decline to State

9. Do you identify as a person with a disability?

Page 22 of 63 ends

Page 488 ends

appendices affordable housing for artists in berkeley b: survey questions a baseline survey

19 a. Yes
b. No

10. Please select the highest degree or level of school you have COMPLETED. If currently enrolled, mark the previous grade or highest degree already received. a. Less than high school
b. High school diploma/GED
c. Associate's degree
d. Bachelor's degree
e. Master's degree
f. Doctorate degree

11. How many people live in your household, including yourself? a. One [Proceed to Question 14]
b. Two
c. Three
d. Four
e. Five
f. More than five: Write In ___________________

12. Do you have any children under the age of 18?
a. Yes
b. No [Proceed to Question 14]

13. If yes, how many children currently live with you? a. One
b. Two
c. Three
d. More than three
e. Write in:______________________

14. What is your total household income?
a. Less than $26,050
b. $26,051-$43,400
c. $43,401-$69,000
d. $69,001-$98,549
e. More than $98,550
f. Decline to state

15. If you are an artist, do you make 50% or more of your income from your artistic practice?
a. Yes
b. No
c. I don’t know
d. I am not an artist

Page 23 of 63 ends

Page 489 ends

appendices affordable housing for artists in berkeley b: survey questions a baseline survey

20 16. What is your current employment status? Check all that apply:
a. Self employed artist for your own art practice
b. Self-employed, but not for your own art practice
c. Employed full time as a cultural worker
d. Employed full time as something other than a cultural worker e. Employed part time/doing regular work for pay as a cultural worker f. Employed part time/doing regular work for pay as something other than a cultural worker
g. Contract work as a cultural worker (for example: I receive a 1099 from a nonprofit arts organization organization)
h. Contract work as something other than a cultural worker (for example: I receive a 1099 from a separate non-arts organization or business) i. Unreported work for cash
j. Not employed

17. How easy is it to predict your total income from month to month? a. Very easy
b. Moderately easy
c. Neither easy nor difficult
d. Moderately difficult
e. Very difficult

18. How certain are you that your total income will return to pre-pandemic levels, over the next 6 months?
a. Very certain
b. Moderately certain
c. Neither certain or uncertain
d. Moderately uncertain
e. Very uncertain

19. What percentage of your average monthly income do you spend on housing costs? a. Less than 20%
b. 20%-30%
c. 30%-40%
d. 40%-50%
e. More than 50%
f. I don’t know

20. What is the zip code where you work?

21. What is the zip code where you live?

22. How long have you lived in Berkeley?
a. I do not live in Berkeley
b. Less than a year

Page 24 of 63 ends

Page 490 ends

appendices affordable housing for artists in berkeley b: survey questions a baseline survey

21 c. 1 - 3 years
d. 3 - 5 years
e. 5 - 10 years
f. More than 10 years
g. How long? ______________

23. How long do you expect to remain in Berkeley?
a. I do not live in Berkeley
b. Less than a year
c. 1 - 3 years
d. 3 - 5 years
e. 5 - 10 years
f. More than 10 years
g. How long? ______________

24. Do you own or lease your living space?
a. Lease [proceed to question 25]
b. Own [proceed to question 28]

25. What is your lease term?
a. Month to month
b. 1 year
c. 2-3 years
d. More than 3 years

26. How many square feet is your space?

27. How much do you pay in rent per month?

28. Have you been displaced due to a “no-fault” or "no-cause" eviction in the past 2 years? (A “no-fault” or “no-cause” eviction is an eviction that is no fault of the tenant, but is allowed under the law.)
a. Yes
b. No
c. I don't know

29. If you were displaced, did you have to move away from Berkeley? a. Yes
b. No

30. If you were not displaced, did you have to rely on the eviction moratorium that Berkeley has implemented over the past 12 months?
a. Yes
b. No
c. I didn’t know that evictions had been halted over the past 12 months.

Page 25 of 63 ends

Page 491 ends

appendices affordable housing for artists in berkeley b: survey questions a baseline survey

22 31. How certain are you that you will be able to retain your housing when the eviction moratorium ends?
a. Very certain
b. Moderately certain
c. Neither certain or uncertain
d. Moderately uncertain
e. Very uncertain

32. Do you use your living space for housing and your creative practice? a. Yes [proceed to question 37]
b. No [proceed to question 32]

33. If you have a work space that is separate from your living space, do you own or lease your work space?
a. Lease [proceed to question 34]
b. Own [proceed to question 36]

34. What is the lease term for your work space?
a. Month to month
b. 1 year
c. 2-3 years
d. More than 3 years

35. How much do you pay in rent per month for your work space? Write in_____________________________

36. How many square feet is your work space?
Write In________________________

37. Have you been displaced from your work space due to a “no-fault” or "no-cause" eviction in the past 2 years? (A “no-fault” or “no-cause” eviction is an eviction that is no fault of the tenant, but is allowed under the law.)
a. Yes
b. No
c. I don't know

38. If you were displaced, did you have to move your work space away from Berkeley?
a. Yes
b. No

39. Do you share your work space?
a. Yes
b. No

Page 26 of 63 ends

Page 492 ends

appendices affordable housing for artists in berkeley b: survey questions a baseline survey

23 40. What are some challenges you’ve faced in the past when trying to access or find affordable housing?

41. Please share any ideas you have on how to ensure equitable participation of BIPOC artists and cultural producers from other historically underserved communities, as well as recommendations for local organizations that should be consulted.

42. Do you have anything else to share with us?

-----------------END OF SURVEY---------------

Page 27 of 63 ends

Page 493 ends

1 Sophie Hahn
City Council District 5
510-981-7140
[email protected]
o

CONSENT CALENDAR
January 25, 2022
To: Honorable Members of the City Council
From: Councilmember Hahn (Author), Councilmember Taplin (Co-Sponsor), Councilmember Harrison (Co-Sponsor), Councilmember Wengraf (Co- Sponsor)
Subject: Referring the Civic Arts Commission’s affordable housing for artists in Berkeley Report and other Artist Live, Work and Live-Work opportunities to the Housing Element Update

RECOMMENDATION

1. Refer the Civic Arts Commission’s report entitled affordable housing for artists in berkeley to the City Manager, Planning Commission, and Housing Advisory Commission to review, consider, and incorporate recommendations, to the greatest extent possible, into the Housing Element update and related planning and zoning processes.

2. Refer to the City Manager, Planning Commission, and Housing Advisory Commission consideration of the feasibility and impacts of allowing ground floor affordable live, work, and live-work space for artists in certain commercial, manufacturing, and mixed-use buildings/areas, both new-build and existing, and exploration of other opportunities for living, work and live-work space for artists.

SUMMARY/CURRENT SITUATION:

Affordable living and work-space for artists is a pressing issue for our community, with artists increasingly priced out and unable to live and work in Berkeley. Affordable housing for artists has been identified in numerous planning documents as a key need. Most recently, the Civic Arts Commission generated a report entitled affordable housing for artists in berkeley that reported data about the unique housing and space needs of artists, based on a survey and focus groups with diverse artists and cultural workers. (See Attachment 1: affordable housing for artists in berkeley). The report was presented at the December 8, 2021 Civic Arts Commission meeting, and generated important discussion around housing and work-space affordability for artists.

Page 1 of 31 ends

Page 494 ends

2 Berkeley is currently engaged in an in-depth process to update the City’s Housing Element.

The results of the update will shape the development of housing in Berkeley for much of the next decade. A key component of the Housing Element is to identify sites that can accommodate future housing needs across income levels and other demographic factors.

The Housing Element also involves the development of a variety of approaches to meet community housing and affordability needs such as zoning updates and new affordable housing requirements and programs.

With the Housing Element update process already in progress, it is important for the recently completed affordable housing for artists in berkeley report to be referred and the report's findings and recommendations to be incorporated into the Housing Element Update, as feasible.

In addition to the findings and recommendations of the affordable housing for artists report, an informal group of artists has been discussing the possibility of allowing ground-floor commercial space to be substituted for affordable artist work- or live-work space in new- buildings, or in existing buildings via conversions in some locations or building types.

Because there are many elements to consider, including impacts to the retail environment, feasibility and costs, quality of work- and living-space for artists, relationship to affordable housing and community benefit requirements in new-build, locations and buildings types where artist ground floor live-, work- and live-work space may be feasible, and more, this idea is referred more generally to the City Manager, Planning Commission, and Housing Advisory Commission (HAC).

Exploration of other potential means to create, convert and/or reserve affordable living, work, and live-work space for artists is also referred, allowing the City Manager, Planning Commission, and HAC to broaden their analysis and consultation to consider all opportunities to create affordable living and work-spaces for artists.

To the extent feasible opportunities for affordable artist living and live-work space may be identified from the affordable housing for artists in berkeley report or through additional exploration, concepts should be incorporated into the Housing Element Update.

BACKGROUND:

The City’s 2018-2027 Arts and Culture Plan Update identifies affordable artist housing as the first of five strategic goals:

Page 2 of 31 ends

Page 495 ends

3 Goal 1 Increase Access to Affordable Housing and Affordable Spaces for Artists and Arts Organizations
Support the long-term sustainability of the arts and culture sector by expanding the availability of affordable housing and spaces for both artists and arts organizations.

The Plan Update also includes the following introductory remarks:
“Berkeley is home to a vibrant and diverse community that strongly values its rich cultural fabric. Characterized by its collective nature, the city is famous for its distinguished university, beautiful natural setting, and its remarkable history as a home for progressive movements. Arts and culture permeate civic life in Berkeley through numerous acclaimed theaters, performing arts spaces, as well as the city’s many artists. Over 150 arts and culture nonprofits operate in Berkeley and together they contribute to a dynamic, continually evolving arts and culture community that interacts closely with other sectors of the city’s economy. The nonprofits that make up the arts community are particularly diverse in terms of their size and their creative disciplines.

Along with the cultural richness the arts infuse into the community, the arts sector is also a significant economic driver, generating an estimated $165 million in total economic activity.

In 2017, Berkeley Mayor Jesse Arreguin stated that “in addition to fostering civic pride, a flourishing arts scene [brings] new visitors to our city and more revenue to local businesses.” Currently, as the San Francisco Bay Area is experiencing substantial economic growth, rising real estate and living costs have created an especially challenging environment for the arts community in Berkeley. Some artists and arts organizations are leaving the city because they can no longer afford to live and work here.” Most recently, the Civic Arts Commission generated a report entitled affordable housing for artists in berkeley that reported data about the unique housing and space needs of artists, based on a survey and focus groups with diverse artists and cultural workers. (See Attachment 1: affordable housing for artists in berkeley). The report was presented at the December 8, 2021 Civic Arts Commission meeting, and generated important discussion around housing and work-space affordability for artists.

Discussions of affordability in the arts ecosystem are often anecdotal, with few studies to provide comprehensive data to inform potential solutions. To provide more comprehensive information, the Civic Arts Commission requested and received a report with findings based on a survey and focus groups. The study consulted a diverse group of Berkeley artists and cultural workers and provides systematic data around the unique housing and space needs of artists. The report explicitly seeks to position Berkeley’s arts community for inclusion in

Page 3 of 31 ends

Page 496 ends

4 the City’s affordable housing efforts and to help improve the safety of local arts spaces while avoiding further displacement.

The study was initially conceptualized in 2019 in response to concerns around housing and art space affordability among artists and arts organizations in Berkeley, and was motivated by two events.

Second, in November 2018, the voters of Berkeley approved two bond measures totaling $135 million to fund affordable housing in Berkeley. Berkeley City Council subsequently began the development of an affordable housing framework (Housing for a Diverse, Equitable and Creative Berkeley) to guide Berkeley’s affordable housing policies, programs, and projects through 2030. This framework explored a wide array of affordable housing for artists and other creative workers. In July 2019, the Council referred this policy document to various Commissions for further development.

However, the pandemic caused this work to be temporarily put on hold.

The survey and subsequent report on its findings was completed and released by the Civic Arts Commission in November 2021. It made several key findings and recommendations that relate to zoning and planning decisions which may potentially be made as part of the ongoing Housing Element Update.

Some key findings of the report include recommendations that the City of Berkeley:

1. Create policies that prioritize artists for new affordable housing Artists are an important part of the fabric of Berkeley as a city. As such, they should be part of ongoing conversations about Berkeley’s housing plan. The survey results demonstrate that artists -- as a group -- have low income, a high rent burden, and have traditionally been left out of ongoing affordable housing. In order to mitigate further displacement and allow artists to continue to work and thrive in Berkeley, the City could consider creating a priority category for artists who meet income qualification to access affordable housing.”

Page 4 of 31 ends

Page 497 ends

5 2. Designate some of Berkeley’s upcoming affordable housing funding from Measure O for units specific to artists
“On July 24, 2019, Berkeley’s Civic Arts Commission approved an amendment recommendation for Measure O that called for “significantly increas[ing] the supply of affordable housing and live/work housing for artists, artisans, and cultural workers” through adding to the zoning ordinance, incentivizing developers to build market-rate housing that includes affordable live/work units for creative workers, and incorporate live/work spaces for artists and cultural workers into large-scale affordable housing projects.”

3. Consult artists when designing new policies for live/work spaces Across the Bay Area, responses to the Ghostship fire emphasized increased attention to artist DIY live/work spaces. These spaces were often the only options for artists to access live/work spaces that met their needs. Yet, artists have always worked to transform neighborhoods through their work and creative use of space. As Berkeley works to address affordability issues for all of its residents, consulting and involving artists in the planning process can help bring about a much-needed, new, and fresh perspective on issues such as rezoning, repurposing ground floor spaces, and requiring community benefit proposals for new development.

4. Develop artist-specific resources and technical assistance to bring artists into the existing affordable housing pipeline
Due to the nature of their work, artists often have a unique income structure that makes applying for affordable housing more difficult. In addition, the survey shows that artists have needs for certain types of spaces that might be difficult to identify. Funding technical assistance to support artists to translate their needs and apply for the existing affordable housing pipeline could be an important step in helping artists leave inadequate living situations.

Because the report and findings include important information about the housing and space needs of artists, the affordable housing for artists in berkeley study is being referred to the Housing Element Update and to the Planning Commission and HAC for immediate consideration.

Page 5 of 31 ends

Page 498 ends

6 In addition to the findings and recommendations of the affordable housing for artists report, an informal task force of artists has been discussing the possibility of allowing ground-floor commercial space to be substituted for affordable artist work- or live-work space in new- buildings, or in existing buildings via conversions, in some locations or building types.

The presence of artists living and working around the clock has been documented as an important factor in creating more livable, animated urban areas. At the same time, retail vacancies have risen steadily in recent years as more purchasing has migrated online.

The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated this trend and led to even greater amounts of empty space, even in Berkeley's most popular commercial areas. Removing barriers to use or re-use of vacant retail/commercial spaces may be a means to provide affordable live/work spaces for artists while also activating storefronts.

To explore the possibilities of using retail/commercial space to house working artists, an informal task force including members of the Civic Arts Commission, affordable housing advocates, artists, and developers was convened. The goal of the group’s work was to increase active uses of often-vacant ground floor space and provide a new low-impact supply of affordable live/work spaces for artists.

Some of the ideas generated by this informal group include:

1. Allowing affordable live/work housing for artists in lieu of ground floor retail or commercial use in specific locations (for example, away from main commercial nodes, or on side-streets) or corridors, including the San Pablo and University Avenue corridors and/or in other appropriate locations.

2. Developing a clear set of allowable uses and criteria for tenant eligibility including the responsibility to maintain a lively street presence.

In addition to consulting with the arts community, including members of the informal task force, the City Manager, Planning Commission and HAC should consult with business and commercial property owners to fully understand the opportunities and challenges of allowing live-work in lieu of retail, and to identify the circumstances, requirements,

Page 6 of 31 ends

Page 499 ends

7 locations and other factors that could make affordable live-work ground floor uses work both for artists, and for the health and vitality of commercial districts.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
By referring the affordable housing for artists in berkeley report and its findings and other affordable living and work-space considerations to be developed simultaneous with and/or as part of the Housing Element, we can ensure that artists’ unique housing, work-space and affordability needs are considered during the Update process, and incorporated as feasible in the Housing Element and other zoning and planning processes.

FISCAL & STAFF IMPACTS
Staff and the Commissions are already engaged in in-depth discussion of housing needs, zoning changes, and programs to meet housing and affordability needs communitywide. Adding more explicit consideration of the specific needs of artists, drawing from studies already completed and with input from the Arts Commission and arts community, will add important information to existing discussions. Additional formal study or consulting help is not envisioned.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
This referral asks only for concepts to be studied and incorporated into a planning process already underway, and does not entail environmental or climate impacts.

CONTACT PERSON
Councilmember Sophie Hahn, [email protected]; 510-682-5905 Attachments

1. affordable housing for artists in berkeley

Page 7 of 31 ends

Page 500 ends

affordable housing for artists in Berkeley
a baseline survey

Anh Thang Dao-Shah, ph.d.& Asif Majid, ph.d
creative equity research partners
December 2021

Page 8 of 31 ends

Page 501 ends

affordable housing for artists in berkeley
a baseline survey

1 contents

2 | executive summary

3 | introduction

6 | survey results

8 | key findings

13 | recommendations

15 | further research

16 | appendices
a : community advisory group members
b : survey questions

Page 9 of 31 ends

Page 502 ends

affordable housing for artists in berkeley
a baseline survey

2 executive summary

This project aims to respond to concerns around housing and art space affordability among artists and arts organizations in Berkeley by answering two key questions:

Artists are rent burdened
Artists and artists/cultural workers disproportionately rent their living space (71%).

Of those who rent, 77% are rent burdened or severely rent burdened, based on the California’s Department of Housing and Community Development definitions.

Page 10 of 31 ends

Page 503 ends

affordable housing for artists in berkeley
a baseline survey

3 introduction

why this project?

This project was initially conceptualized in 2019 in response to concerns around housing and art space affordability among artists and arts organizations in Berkeley. It was motivated by two events.

However, the pandemic caused this work to be temporarily put on hold.

This second question is key to ensure the solutions we suggest do not unintentionally impact some groups more than others.

In April 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic brought a pause to the assessment project and

Page 11 of 31 ends

Page 504 ends

introduction affordable housing for artists in berkeley a baseline survey

Page 12 of 31 ends

Page 505 ends

introduction affordable housing for artists in berkeley a baseline survey

Page 13 of 31 ends

Page 506 ends

affordable housing for artists in berkeley
a baseline survey

6 31%of respondents identified as LGBTQIA+

62%of respondents identified as female
survey results

who responded?

A total of 163 artists and cultural workers responded to the survey. This constitutes

2D
17%
Theater and
Performance
14%
Dance
7%
3D
9%Craft
7%
Film, Video,
Media Arts
10%
Literary Arts
15%
Music
12%
Social
Practice
9%

Page 14 of 31 ends

Page 507 ends

survey results affordable housing for artists in berkeley a baseline survey

7 Figure 2: Race and ethnicity of survey respondents

Figure 3: Race and ethnicity of City of Berkeley residents

Page 15 of 31 ends

Page 508 ends

affordable housing for artists in berkeley
a baseline survey

8 key findings

Artist respondents are highly educated, yet have low income

Figure 4a: Income categories for all artist respondents

Income Category Income Range Percentage of Artist Respondents Extremely Low ≤ $26,050 21%
Very Low $26,051-$43,400 16%
Low $43,401-$69,000 23%

Page 16 of 31 ends

Page 509 ends

key findings affordable housing for artists in berkeley a baseline survey

9 Median $69,001-$78,200 17%
Moderate $78,201-$93,850 18%
Decline to State n/a 5%
Figure 4b: Income ranges for artist respondents

Artists and cultural workers have multiple forms of employment

Artist respondents report being rent burdened, but are not immediately concerned with losing their housing

Figure 5: Respondents’ percentage of monthly household income spent on rent

While studies have shown that rent burden and extremely low income decrease the health and overall wellbeing of all those impacted, for artists this burden can

Page 17 of 31 ends

Page 510 ends

key findings affordable housing for artists in berkeley a baseline survey

Over the long term, the lack of opportunities for artists to devote time and energy to their practice can lead to the abandonment of artistic practice altogether.

Despite respondents’ high rent burden and low income, those identifying as artists and as artists/cultural workers do not indicate concerns around losing their housing in the near future.

Though seemingly at odds with other findings, this sentiment could be attributed to three factors.

Page 18 of 31 ends

Page 511 ends

key findings affordable housing for artists in berkeley a baseline survey

11 The gap between existing housing and respondents’ needs is especially acute for those working in artistic disciplines that have specific space requirements like extra ventilation.

My housing is over 2/3 of my income, leaving little to nothing for anything over basic living expenses.

Page 19 of 31 ends

Page 512 ends

key findings affordable housing for artists in berkeley a baseline survey

12 Artists have a unique need for flexible, live/work space

Of responding artists and artists/cultural workers, 82% reported that they make their art where they live, with 56% of this group requiring extra ventilation for their art.

Page 20 of 31 ends

Page 513 ends

affordable housing for artists in berkeley
a baseline survey

13 recommendations

Create policies that prioritize artists for new affordable housing

Designate some of Berkeley’s upcoming affordable housing funding from measure o for units specific to artists

Consult artists when designing new policies for live/work spaces

Page 21 of 31 ends

Page 514 ends

affordable housing for artists in berkeley
a baseline survey

Develop artist-specific resources and technical assistance to bring artists into the existing affordable housing pipeline

Pilot a guaranteed basic income program for qualifying artists

Page 22 of 31 ends

Page 515 ends

affordable housing for artists in berkeley
a baseline survey

15 further research

Work with arts organizations to understand the income levels and housing needs of cultural workers

Conduct a disparity study

Continue to collect data on artists

Page 23 of 31 ends

Page 516 ends

affordable housing for artists in berkeley
a baseline survey

16 appendices

a: community advisory group members

Page 24 of 31 ends

Page 517 ends

affordable housing for artists in berkeley
a baseline survey

17 b: survey questions

Messaging

Are you an artist or cultural worker struggling to find affordable housing for you and your family?

Thank you for helping keep Berkeley affordable for artists and cultural workers.

Survey Questions

1. Are you an artist or cultural worker?
a. Artist [proceed to question 2]
b. Cultural Worker (staff member at an arts culture organization) [Proceed to Question 4]
c. Both

3. Do you work with a medium that requires extra space and/or ventilation? This may include metal welding, spray paint, etc.
a. Yes
b. No

Page 25 of 31 ends

Page 518 ends

appendices affordable housing for artists in berkeley b: survey questions a baseline survey

18 4. If you are a cultural worker, do you work at a Berkeley-based arts and culture nonprofit organization?
a. Yes
b. No

8. How do you describe your sexual orientation or sexual identity? a. LGBTQ+
b. Heterosexual/straight
c. Write in__________________
d. Decline to State

9. Do you identify as a person with a disability?

Page 26 of 31 ends

Page 519 ends

appendices affordable housing for artists in berkeley b: survey questions a baseline survey

19 a. Yes
b. No

11. How many people live in your household, including yourself? a. One [Proceed to Question 14]
b. Two
c. Three
d. Four
e. Five
f. More than five: Write In ___________________

12. Do you have any children under the age of 18?
a. Yes
b. No [Proceed to Question 14]

13. If yes, how many children currently live with you? a. One
b. Two
c. Three
d. More than three
e. Write in:______________________

14. What is your total household income?
a. Less than $26,050
b. $26,051-$43,400
c. $43,401-$69,000
d. $69,001-$98,549
e. More than $98,550
f. Decline to state

15. If you are an artist, do you make 50% or more of your income from your artistic practice?
a. Yes
b. No
c. I don’t know
d. I am not an artist

Page 27 of 31 ends

Page 520 ends

appendices affordable housing for artists in berkeley b: survey questions a baseline survey

17. How easy is it to predict your total income from month to month? a. Very easy
b. Moderately easy
c. Neither easy nor difficult
d. Moderately difficult
e. Very difficult

19. What percentage of your average monthly income do you spend on housing costs? a. Less than 20%
b. 20%-30%
c. 30%-40%
d. 40%-50%
e. More than 50%
f. I don’t know

20. What is the zip code where you work?

21. What is the zip code where you live?

22. How long have you lived in Berkeley?
a. I do not live in Berkeley
b. Less than a year

Page 28 of 31 ends

Page 521 ends

appendices affordable housing for artists in berkeley b: survey questions a baseline survey

21 c. 1 - 3 years
d. 3 - 5 years
e. 5 - 10 years
f. More than 10 years
g. How long? ______________

23. How long do you expect to remain in Berkeley?
a. I do not live in Berkeley
b. Less than a year
c. 1 - 3 years
d. 3 - 5 years
e. 5 - 10 years
f. More than 10 years
g. How long? ______________

24. Do you own or lease your living space?
a. Lease [proceed to question 25]
b. Own [proceed to question 28]

25. What is your lease term?
a. Month to month
b. 1 year
c. 2-3 years
d. More than 3 years

26. How many square feet is your space?

27. How much do you pay in rent per month?

29. If you were displaced, did you have to move away from Berkeley? a. Yes
b. No

Page 29 of 31 ends

Page 522 ends

appendices affordable housing for artists in berkeley b: survey questions a baseline survey

32. Do you use your living space for housing and your creative practice? a. Yes [proceed to question 37]
b. No [proceed to question 32]

33. If you have a work space that is separate from your living space, do you own or lease your work space?
a. Lease [proceed to question 34]
b. Own [proceed to question 36]

34. What is the lease term for your work space?
a. Month to month
b. 1 year
c. 2-3 years
d. More than 3 years

35. How much do you pay in rent per month for your work space? Write in_____________________________

36. How many square feet is your work space?
Write In________________________

38. If you were displaced, did you have to move your work space away from Berkeley?
a. Yes
b. No

39. Do you share your work space?
a. Yes
b. No

Page 30 of 31 ends

Page 523 ends

appendices affordable housing for artists in berkeley b: survey questions a baseline survey

23 40. What are some challenges you’ve faced in the past when trying to access or find affordable housing?

42. Do you have anything else to share with us?

-----------------END OF SURVEY---------------

Page 31 of 31 ends

Page 524 ends

Page 59 of 63 ends

Page 525 ends

Public

Page 1 ends

Artists Definition and Certification process for the City of Berkeley Approved by the Civic Arts Commission: May 25, 2022
Whereas: “Artists play a critical role in the well-being of our communities and in the economic, social, and cultural fabric of our cities. Artists bring unique talent and skill to fostering cohesion and belonging, building trust, activating civic engagement, addressing mental health, cultivating collective safety, and celebrating community identity.” From the City of San Francisco Guaranteed Income & Pilot, powered by Yerba Buena Center for the Arts: Learning and Insight from Design to Launch
The purpose of the following process is to identify artists who are eligible for inclusion in a pool of applicants specifically qualified for artist’s affordable live/work housing in the City of Berkeley. All artists must also qualify as low-income as set by the State of California.

The affordable live/work housing units available to this list of artists will be identified by the City of Berkeley. The Civic Arts Program will solicit applications from artists who reside in Berkeley or those who have been displaced from Berkeley within five years prior to their application for the affordable live/work housing eligible list.

Step One: Artists must apply for verification of low-income status per State of California guidelines before being considered for City of Berkeley artist certification.

Step Two: A rotating jury of arts professionals and artists will convene to review the following materials submitted by each applicant to certify artists for this program:

A. Artist statement
B. Submitted samples of artwork (online or PDF formats) C. Letter of interest and commitment to producing art and having a creative practice Step Three: When spaces become available, certified artists can apply to be in a lottery for spaces that may have specific space-use conditions (clean vs. messy, loud vs. quiet, need for ventilation, need for use of heavy equipment, etc.).

Page 60 of 63 ends

Page 526 ends

Public

Page 2 ends

Artists Affordable Housing Eligible List of Certified Artists

1. The City of Berkeley will maintain a list of eligible artists who are interested in obtaining Artists Affordable housing in a lottery as spaces become available. This list shall be kept in two locations within the City of Berkeley. Two locations will be identified as being independent of any city-wide technical catastrophe.

2. Civic Arts will advertise the twice annual artist certification process.

3. Available units will be advertised to certified artists.

4. Information about the program and types of housing will be available on the Civic Arts website.

5. Annually Civic Arts will post an invitation to encourage building owners and developers to list unit opportunities with the program.

6. City of Berkeley should adopt a policy to incentivize this program with a City tax/fees waiver to encourage qualified building owners to list unit opportunities.

Step Four: This pool will be renewed twice a year.

Requirement for Art Production:

All artists occupying artists affordable live/work housing must maintain arts production with an active creative practice in these spaces. The intent of the program is to create and maintain spaces for producing artists with consistent public presentations. If an artist ceases to produce work for two-years then the artist will be notified of non-compliance and will be evicted.

Artists eligibility using one or more of the following criteria:

1. An individual (or team member of an arts group) who is regularly engaged in the arts on a professional basis. These include but are not limited to those who practice:

Page 61 of 63 ends

Page 527 ends

Public

Page 3 ends

A. Fine Arts such as painting, mixed media works, sculpture, photography, papermaking, printmaking, filmmaking or videography, or interdisciplinary art practices
B. Performing Arts such as dance, dance theatre, acting, directing, set design, or members of theatre troupes
C. Musical Arts such as musicians, composers, singers, choir members, band members, or ensemble members
D. Literary Arts such as writers of prose, poetry, or plays E. Social Practice Arts including interdisciplinary modes of creative production with methods of public engagement
F. Craft Artisans who create such as fine woodworking, ceramics, glass blowing, textiles, jewelry, stained glass, metal works, fashion, blacksmithing, basketry, etc.

G. Artists who have culturally specific creative practices (folk arts, traditional arts, tradition bearers)
H. Self-taught and “outsider” artists

2. Creative production may be documented and renewed biennially on a CV or resume including one or more of the following:

A. History of creating a body of public or publicly-displayed artwork, including public performances
B. Record of exhibitions and/or artwork sales or performances C. History of temporary or permanent public art works
D. Education, apprenticeships or study
This definition does not include architectural and landscape services, industrial or graphic design services, computer systems design services, and other commercial activities normally conducted in an office environment.

Page 62 of 63 ends

Page 528 ends

Public

Page 4 ends

Art/Craft Studio shall be defined as:

1. A live and work establishment in which the creation of art or crafts as defined above takes place. Such an establishment may be used to host periodic open studios, but otherwise is subject to the applicable district’s requirements for incidental sales of goods made on site.

2. Art/Craft Studios may also include rehearsal spaces, small gathering places designed to include possible classes, readings, micro performances, exhibitions, or presentations.

These are not required but available.

3. Art/Craft studios typically have larger spaces where the artist is in production. The living portion of the spaces must include kitchen, bathroom, and sleeping area. All construction is subject to building code that requires two entrances to the units. All spaces must include at least one operable window.

Requirement for Street Activation:

Street presence is of value to the life and sustainability of the City of Berkeley. Towards this end, recipients of artists affordable housing also make a commitment to participating in a visual display in street facing windows. The display is a visual phenomenon occupying the windows in relationship to artists’ creative practice.

1. Artists have the routine responsibility to maintain a current lively rotating street presence in the windows of their spaces that face the street where they reside. The form for this is determined by the artist and the medium they are working in. The window displays can be two or three dimensional, in a tandem relationship to their art(s) practice. The scale of the visual presence will be conceived to respect the scale of the windows. Media may be presented in compliance with sound and light regulations in the City of Berkeley.

2. Windows facing the interior yards, or back yards do not need to be activated.

Page 63 of 63 ends

Page 529 ends

Page 530 ends

Energy Commission
2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7000 ● TDD: (510) 981-6903 ● Fax: (510) 981-7099 E-mail: [email protected] Website: http://www.CityofBerkeley.info/Manager

ACTION CALENDAR
May 23, 2023
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Energy Commission
Submitted by: Bentham Paulos, Chairperson, Energy Commission Subject: Recommendation on Climate, Building Electrification, and Sustainable Transportation Budget Priorities for Fiscal Year 2023 and 2024

RECOMMENDATION
The Energy Commission recommends that the Berkeley City Council prioritize and include in the City’s budget for the Fiscal Years Ending (FYE) 2023 and 2024 several staff positions, pilot projects, investments in electric vehicles and charging infrastructure, and other measures to ensure that the City’s budget is aligned with and provides adequate and needed funding to implement the City’s adopted Climate Action Plan, Electric Mobility Roadmap, Building Emissions Saving Ordinance, 2019 ban on gas in new construction, and the Existing Buildings Electrification Strategy.

POLICY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
No action was taken by the Budget & Finance Committee. Item is automatically returning to the Council agenda pursuant to the 120-day time limit for items referred to policy committees.

SUMMARY
In this memo, the Energy Commission (which disbanded March 31, 2022, and was merged with the Community Environmental Advisory Commission in April 2022) provides details on specific budget and funding priorities for: staffing an Electric Mobility Coordinator and the Green Buildings Program Manager; fully funding the Building Electrification and Just Transition pilot project (especially to avoid risking loss of state funding); accelerate funding for the City’s delayed fleet replacement with electric vehicles, residential electric vehicle charging infrastructure, and electric bike parking infrastructure; expanding public engagement and outreach; leveraging street maintenance budgets to incorporate and promote low-carbon mobility; and adopting policies and creating incentive programs to advance transportation and building electrification such as using the Transportation Network Company (TNC) User Tax General Fund revenue to fund bike and pedestrian projects and using a portion of the Transfer Tax to create an incentive program for residential building electrification.

Page 1 of 12 ends

Page 531 ends

Energy Commission Recommendation FYE 23 and 24 Budget Priorities Action Calendar May 23, 2023

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
The specific fiscal impacts are detailed in the budget recommendations below. At least one of our priority budget recommendations – to fully fund the Building Electrification and Just Transition pilot – is urgent and time-sensitive and cannot wait until the June budget process. Any delay risks Berkeley losing access to substantial state funding that could support this pilot.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
Berkeley has been a world leader on climate change and building electrification, as well as on zero waste. The City has already adopted an ambitious climate action plan and greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction goals.1 Between our Building Emissions Savings Ordinance2, 2019 ban on gas in new construction, the 100% renewable option with East Bay Community Energy, and the Existing Buildings Electrification Strategy3 (BEBES), approved by the Council last year4, we continue to lead the world with our thoughtfulness and action.

However, the task in front of us is daunting. With 60% of the City’s emissions coming from the transportation sector and 36% from the building sector,5 we must redouble our efforts to reduce climate emissions from transportation and buildings through electrification of buildings and transportation, sustainable low- and zero-carbon transportation modes, and other efforts. With the upcoming budget processes, we have ample opportunity to take necessary next steps to reach our zero emissions goals. 1 In 2006, voters overwhelmingly passed ballot Measure G and established Berkeley’s goal to Reduce our entire community’s greenhouse gas emissions by 80% below 2000 levels by 2050. Since then, the City has adopted a Climate Action Plan (2009).

On June 12, 2018, the Council passed item 30 which adopted a resolution establishing the goal of becoming a Fossil Fuel-Free City. Of the recommendations in the resolution, one was that “All future City government procurements of vehicles should minimize emissions and set a goal of transitioning the city’s vehicle fleet to all electric vehicles.”
Also, on June 12, 2018, the Council passed item 49 “Declaration of a Climate Emergency” which refers “to the Energy Commission to study and report back to Council on a path for Berkeley to become a “Carbon Sink” as quickly as possible, and to propose a deadline for Berkeley to achieve this goal” ideally by 2030.
2 https://www.cityofberkeley.info/BESO/
3 https://www.cityofberkeley.info/uploadedFiles/Planning_and_Development/Level_3_- _Energy_and_Sustainable_Development/Berkeley%20Existing%20Bldg%20Elect%20Strategy_Final_102021.pdf 4 https://www.cityofberkeley.info/Clerk/City_Council/2021/12_Dec/Documents/2021-12- 14_Item_06_Minutes_for_Approval.aspx
5 https://www.cityofberkeley.info/Clerk/City_Council/2022/02_Feb/Documents/2022-02- 08_Presentations_Item_17_Pres_Planning_pdf.aspx

Page 2 of 12 ends

Page 532 ends

Energy Commission Recommendation FYE 23 and 24 Budget Priorities Action Calendar May 23, 2023
The Energy Commission has identified the following priority items related to climate, buildings, and transportation in the City’s Fiscal Year (FY) 2023 budget to ensure that the budget aligns with the City’s adopted climate action plan and greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction goals.

At least one of our priority budget recommendations – to fully fund the Building Electrification and Just Transition pilot – is urgent and time-sensitive and cannot wait until the June budget process. Any delay risks Berkeley losing access to substantial state funding that could support this pilot.

At its meeting of February 23, 2022, the Energy Commission voted to send this recommendation to the City Council by a vote of 6-0-0-1 [Moved Tahara, Second Paulos. Ayes: Paulos, Wolf, Tahara, Moore, Guliasi, Zuckerman. Noes: None. Abstain:

None. Absent: de Tournay Birkhahn].

Budget Priorities Recommended by the Energy Commission
I. Budget Priorities to Increase Staff Capacity to Implement the City’s Established Climate, Transportation, and Clean Energy Policies and Priorities

1. Fund and Hire Staff to Implement the Electric Mobility Roadmap. The City had previously approved the hiring of an Electric Mobility Coordinator within the Public Works Department6 to assist with implementation of the Berkeley Electric Mobility Roadmap adopted in July 20207; but, at the time of writing, no position has been posted, now a year and a half after approval of the Roadmap.

The Council has been a leader in adopting resolutions acknowledging the need for a prompt transition away from fossil fuels and strategies for how to do so.8 But, without additional staff capacity, and exacerbated by recent staff departures and necessary pandemic re-assignments, the City has not been able to make adequate progress on implementing initiatives to reduce global warming pollution from the transportation sector, which is the largest emitter of global warming pollution in Berkeley.9 Existing staff’s capacity is simply inadequate to lead implementation of the groundbreaking, 6 Budget Referral from Councilwoman Harrison, March 30, 2021. The Energy Commission’s understanding is that this position was included in the FY21-22 Budget to commence half-way through the fiscal year or as an “unfunded council referral,” which was supposed to be funded via savings from other cuts or delayed expenses.
https://www.cityofberkeley.info/Clerk/City_Council/2021/03_Mar/Documents/2021-03- 30_Item_25_Budget_Referral_Allocate_Funding.aspx
7 On July 21, 2020, the Council passed item 1, adopting the Berkeley Electric Mobility Roadmap. 8 Ibid.
9 59% of GHG emissions in Berkeley come from transportation, followed by 39% from buildings.. https://www.cityofberkeley.info/Clerk/City_Council/2020/07_Jul/ Documents/2020-07-21_Special_Item_05_Climate_Action_Plan_pdf.aspx (July 21, 2020).

Page 3 of 12 ends

Page 533 ends

Energy Commission Recommendation FYE 23 and 24 Budget Priorities Action Calendar May 23, 2023
transformative Roadmap in addition to their current responsibilities, and relying only on existing staff to implement will continue to cause unacceptable delays. To implement the Electric Mobility Roadmap, it is critical that the City fund and hire additional staff beginning in the FY 2023 budget.10

2. Increase Staff Necessary to Implement the Berkeley Existing Buildings Electrification Strategy, and Ensure Durable Funding for Critical Staff Positions. In addition to the Electric Mobility Coordinator position, the Energy Commission believes it should also be a priority for the City to enhance staff capacity for implementing other climate and clean energy initiatives, such as, but not limited, to the Berkeley Existing Building Electrification Strategy11 and Climate Equity Action Fund.12
City staff has and continues to do impressive work with limited staff. However, the scope of the task ahead of us is massive. As laid out by the BEBES, there are no fewer than 57 policy actions (Table 3-5, BEBES) that the City should take in order to decarbonize the building sector by 2045, let alone by 2030, which the science demands of comparatively wealthy municipalities such as ours. Many of these actions involve substantial education and regulatory initiatives, which can only be achieved with the addition of dedicated, skilled staff.

Although we defer to staff with respect to the specifics of what additional positions might be most useful, some critical actions include:
● Ensuring durable, long-term funding for the Green Buildings Program Manager.

Although hiring has only recently begun, this role was approved as part of the 10 This single staff person will have an outsized impact, as they will be responsible for establishing and coordinating the Electric Mobility Roadmap Implementation Working Group as called for in the Roadmap.

This Working Group was supposed to be convened within six months of the Roadmap’s approval, but in the absence of staff capacity, it still has not been done. The Working Group’s mandate includes tracking and evaluating Roadmap implementation progress. Without the Working Group, there is no accountability for the City to deliver against its stated electric mobility plans. 11 On November 30, 2021, the Council passed item 13, adopting the Berkeley Existing Building Electrification Strategy. Phase 1 (2021-2025) actions for the Berkeley Existing Building Electrification Strategy will lay the groundwork to support wide-spread transition to electrified buildings in Berkeley.

Policies included in Phase 1 will involve continued community engagement, pilot projects, education campaigns to demonstrate the benefits and feasibility of electrification, collaboration with labor and workforce organizations to advance inclusive high road jobs, alignment of existing programs and incentives, and the development of additional incentive programs as well as larger scale funding and financing programs such as tariffed on-bill financing. The City of Berkeley will work with partners such as East Bay Community Energy and Pacific Gas & Electric to develop larger scale Phase 2 projects. There will also be a need to collaborate with regional and State partners to align State policies to support Phase 2 actions. (Berkeley Existing Building Electrification Strategy, p. 95.) 12 The City recently issued an RFP for the Climate Equity Action Fund. but existing staff do not have the capacity to maximize program impact and collect lessons learned from this innovative fund.

Page 4 of 12 ends

Page 534 ends

Energy Commission Recommendation FYE 23 and 24 Budget Priorities Action Calendar May 23, 2023
2019 gas ban,13 and its extension will be critical in helping to develop future code amendments and help to reduce permitting overhead, improve compliance, and address the myriad other regulatory questions identified in the BEBES. ● Supporting and expanding staffing across the City for programs related to tenant protections and anti-displacement, such as those listed in Appendix C of the BEBES. As we electrify our existing building stock, we will need to evolve and augment our existing policies to protect marginalized communities at risk of displacement (CC-9, BEBES). We cannot afford for these policies to lag behind the pace and scale of electrification measures in the city. ● Supporting and expanding OESD staff to facilitate updates to the 2009 Climate Action Plan as appropriate and programs to facilitate Berkeley's ambitious new greenhouse gas limit goals. For example, last year the Council passed a Resolution establishing a 2030 emission reduction target that reflects Berkeley’s fair share of the 50% global reduction in CO2e – 60.5% from 2018 levels by 2030.14 Council is also actively considering more stringent and binding targets across its sector-based and consumption inventories. These new initiatives will have significant implications for the City’s approach to building decarbonization.

While we fully support these ambitious targets, efforts to implement them have been largely unfunded and understaffed. Achieving these targets will require a significant expansion of the City's climate staff capacity.

II. Budget Priorities to Advance Clean Transportation in Berkeley

1. Fund City Fleet Electrification and Charging. On June 29, 2021, the City adopted item 25 approving the recommendations in the City Auditor’s report “Fleet Replacement Fund Short Millions”15, which directed staff to adjust the fleet replacement funding model and budget, ensuring that the City’s transition to electric vehicles (EVs) aligns with its adopted GHG emissions goals. On September 14, 2021, the Council adopted the recommendation from item 27 “Recommendations for Fleet Electrification Policy and Financing”,16 made by the Energy Commission, which referred to the City Manager to update the Municipal Fleet Electrification Assessment and EV charging funding priorities to respond to the City Auditor’s Report and align with the objectives stated in the Electric Mobility Roadmap and 13 https://www.cityofberkeley.info/Clerk/City_Council/2019/12_Dec/Documents/2019-12- 03_Supp_2_Reports_Item_24_Supp_Arreguin_pdf.aspx
14https://www.cityofberkeley.info/Clerk/City_Council/2021/11_Nov/Documents/2021-11- 30_Item_14_Cities_Race_to_Zero_Campaign__2030_emission_reduction_target.aspx 15 Fleet Replacement Fund Short Millions, Berkeley City Auditor, June 29, 2021. https://www.cityofberkeley.info/Clerk/City_Council/2021/06_June/Documents/2021-06- 29_Supp_2_Reports_Item_25_Supp_Auditor_pdf.aspx.
16 Recommendations for Fleet Electrification Policy and Financing, From Energy Commission, Sept 14, 2021. https://www.cityofberkeley.info/Clerk/City_Council/2021/09_Sep/City_Council__09-14-2021_- _Regular_Meeting_Agenda.aspx - Item 27

Page 5 of 12 ends

Page 535 ends

Energy Commission Recommendation FYE 23 and 24 Budget Priorities Action Calendar May 23, 2023
prioritize municipal fleet modal shift to electric bicycles and other forms of zero- emissions mobility where feasible.

The Fleet EV Plan identified 32 vehicles to replace with EVs in FY 2021, requiring an estimated $1.16 million; but, as of June 2021, Public Works had only $747,000 to replace 29 vehicles scheduled to be replaced with EVs in FY 2021. The Energy Commission’s recommendation noted that delaying replacement of these vehicles in 2021 would result in greater GHG emissions:
“For example, per the Fleet EV Plan, if the City does not replace light-duty internal combustion cars with EVs as scheduled in 2021, it will produce an estimated additional 10.6 MT of GHG emissions in 2021; if not replaced as planned in 2022 an additional 19.5 MT of GHGs would be emitted in 2022; and so on.” (page 4).

It is the Energy Commission’s understanding that East Bay Community Energy (EBCE) has offered to provide substantial investments in the City of Berkeley for EV charging infrastructure, which would support progress on the City’s fleet electrification and free up City funds that would otherwise have been spent on EV charging infrastructure. The Energy Commission urges the Council to resolve the budget gaps identified in the Auditor’s report and explore additional funding sources so that the City can accelerate its purchases of EVs and the associated EV charging infrastructure in FY 2023.

A global microchip shortage resulting in prolonged supply chain delays and long wait times for the delivery of EVs is compounding the necessity for the City to take immediate action on fleet replacement. These delays are being exacerbated by the recent surge in demand for EVs. As more municipalities similarly pass electrification plans, Berkeley will see increasing competition for the same vehicles. The City must thus plan and order ahead if it wants to have a smooth fleet transition. The City should also commence its purchase of e-bikes for the years ahead, as replacements to existing City vehicles where appropriate. E-bikes are both highly cost effective and may not face the same supply chain delays as electric cars and trucks. The Energy Commission recommends that the Council prioritize these municipal fleet EV replacements, along with the associated EV charging infrastructure, in the FY 2023 budget.

2. Expand Infrastructure for Residential EV Charging and E-Bike Parking. The City should prioritize funds to address solutions for residential curbside EV charging.

The City’s Residential Curbside EV Charging Pilot Program17 sunset in 2020. The development model the pilot used – private ownership of a charger on the side of a 17 https://www.cityofberkeley.info/uploadedFiles/Planning_and_Development/Level_3_- _Energy_and_Sustainable_Development/Manual%20with%20attachments%2012-1-14.pdf

Page 6 of 12 ends

Page 536 ends

Energy Commission Recommendation FYE 23 and 24 Budget Priorities Action Calendar May 23, 2023
public street – was not successful. While 62 residents applied for the program, only four on-site and seven curbside chargers were installed - high permitting fees, restrictive engineering requirements, lack of control of the parking space adjacent to the charger, and poor access to electrical supply resulted in high costs.18 Given the number of Berkeley residents who do not have access to a driveway or garage, the Electric Mobility Roadmap identified as a high priority the need to deploy curbside charging for electric cars, particularly in neighborhoods with high rates of multifamily and rental housing. The next phase of curbside charging will incorporate lessons learned from the Pilot, investigate alternative strategies, identify state and federal funding sources, and explore partnerships with EBCE and EV charging companies.

The City should also investigate the potential to provide public secure parking for other types of fossil fuel-free vehicles, namely e-bikes and cargo bikes, for apartment dwellers. E-bikes and cargo bikes tend to be larger and heavier than regular bicycles, making them difficult to carry up steps. A paid, public parking system, such as the BikeLink lockers at BART stations, may be adapted to street parking near apartment buildings.

The Council should allocate funds in the budget for an electric mobility staff person who would oversee new projects — research other cities’ approaches, evaluate Berkeley's codes, standards, and permitting processes, and conduct feasibility studies — along with funds for the pilot projects themselves.

3. Incorporate Low-Carbon Mobility into Street Maintenance Budget. While Council is considering a bond measure that would make capital investments in our transportation system, the City should also revisit how the maintenance budget can be used to promote low-carbon mobility.

The Council has approved multiple plans to promote safe, equitable, and low-carbon mobility for all. These “complete streets” concepts are captured in the Bicycle Plan, Pedestrian Plan, Vision Zero Action Plan, and analysis of Safe Routes to School.19 But many of the measures in these plans have been implemented slowly, if at all.

The Council should direct the Public Works Department to follow these plans to the letter, and integrate all low-cost and rapidly deployable concepts from the plans into their ongoing maintenance. The timing of deploying higher cost measures may necessarily depend on funding.20
18 https://www.cityofberkeley.info/Clerk/City_Council/2018/02_Feb/Documents/2018-02- 27_Item_16_Residential_Curbside_Electric.aspx
19 See Bicycle Plan, Pedestrian Plan, Vision Zero Action Plan, Safe Routes to School. 20 A related concept is that the Council should consider giving a more formal policy status to Bicycle Boulevards. While the Boulevards serve as a useful wayfinding tool for cyclists, their designation does not give the streets a meaningful status, and no prioritization when it comes to City planning or operations.

For example, places where Bicycle Boulevards cross busy streets, such as at California/Dwight or Channing/San Pablo, face years of delay before safe crossing solutions can be implemented. Numerous

Page 7 of 12 ends

Page 537 ends

Energy Commission Recommendation FYE 23 and 24 Budget Priorities Action Calendar May 23, 2023
On January 18, 2022, the Council adopted item 19, referring a budget item to use Transportation Network Company (TNC) User Tax General Fund revenue to build and maintain protected bicycle lanes and crossings, pedestrian street crossings, and quick-build public transit projects under the Street Repair Program. The Energy Commission recommends that the Council follow through on its plan to use this revenue to benefit transportation projects in Berkeley.

III. Budget Priorities and Financial Incentives to Advance Building Decarbonization in Berkeley

1. Fully Fund the Building Electrification and Just Transition Pilot Project. In the December 2021 Annual Adjustment Ordinance (AAO) budget process, the Mayor declared, and the Council approved, that the Building Electrification and Just Transition pilot (“the pilot”)21 be a first priority to be funded in the May 2022 AAO.22 Consistent with the City’s “targeted universalism” approach to building electrification,23 the pilot intends to kick-start electrification among affordable housing and low income (LMI) communities through incentives, and develop high-road jobs through labor standards and contractor prequalification.

Funding for this item in the May AAO is critical, and cannot wait until the June budget process. Any delay risks losing access to substantial state funding that could multiply the reach and impact of the pilot. The California TECH initiative, an $120 million initiative established by SB 1477, recently began offering incentives for heat pump space and water heating that can defray nearly $10,000 of cost per home,24 including the cost of an electric panel upgrade. These incentives are accessible to contractors via the BayREN Home+ programs, which will simplify administration of the pilot due to its use of pre-qualified contractors.

There is additional urgency as well. The Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) is looking at phasing out the sale of NOx-emitting appliances by the end Bicycle Boulevards suffer from extremely poor pavement condition. Stop signs often favor cars instead of the Boulevards, and lighting can often be sub-standard. All of these factors undermine achievement of City plans, threaten public safety, and lock in carbon pollution. Direction from the Council to staff could take the form of a formal designation of the Boulevards as a category of street, just as Public Works delineates “arterials” and “collectors” when it comes to planning and operations. 21 https://www.cityofberkeley.info/Clerk/City_Council/2021/11_Nov/City_Council__11-30-2021_- _Regular_Meeting_Agenda.aspx
22 https://www.cityofberkeley.info/Clerk/City_Council/2021/12_Dec/Documents/2021-12- 14_Supp_2_Reports_Item_44_Supp_Mayor_pdf.aspx
23 According to the BEBES: “Targeted Universalism is the practice of setting a universal policy goal...while identifying targeted strategies and actions specifically for marginalized communities to ensure that those communities can benefit from the policy goal.”
24 For single-family homes (up to 4 units), including “enhanced” incentives for HPWH. See: https://energy- solution.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/TECH-Single-and-Multifamily-Incentives.pdf

Page 8 of 12 ends

Page 538 ends

Energy Commission Recommendation FYE 23 and 24 Budget Priorities Action Calendar May 23, 2023
of the decade,25 which will significantly affect the availability of non-electric space and water heating. However, BAAQMD recognizes that such a rule can only be effective if there is sufficient financial support for disadvantaged communities and a robust installer network (things the BEBES also calls out) so that everyone can reap the benefits of zero-pollution appliances without facing substantial costs. These costs cannot be borne by cities alone, but Berkeley can lay the groundwork to leverage state and federal money with its pilot and thus significantly contribute to the regional effort to improve air quality and GHG emissions.

2. Use Transfer Tax Revenues to Provide Incentives for Electrification. With soaring home prices, the transfer tax represents a durable source of funds that the City should leverage to accelerate our building electrification goals. There are two potential models to consider.

First, would be to model a rebate program after the Seismic Retrofit Refund Program26 that would rebate a percentage of the transfer tax with a value up to the cost of a typical electrification package for electrification measures completed within one year of transfer. This would incentivize electrification at a time when there is large access to capital, and could lay the groundwork for an ultimate requirement to retrofit at time of sale. OESD staff have already provided Council with a draft ordinance and indicate that each year on average 800 units would qualify through this mechanism.27
The Energy Commission recommends that Council move forward with this ordinance but with a cap on the amount of eligible homeowner rebates per year. These rebates are critical to the City’s long-term strategy of phasing in potential electrification mandates as feasible.

At the same time, as a diverse and majority renter city, it is critical that electrification subsidies are also available for units occupied by rent controlled or below market rate tenants. As a second model option, a percentage of the transfer tax refund program (for example, the difference between the reserved and actual rebate amounts) might be simultaneously allocated to expand electrification work among those LMI and minority communities most affected by inequality, pollution, climate change, or at risk of displacement. This could come in the form of expanding the Building Electrification and Just Transition pilot and Climate Equity Fund to reach more households, or other incentive programs targeted at those same communities. 25 https://www.baaqmd.gov/rules-and-compliance/rule-development/building-appliances 26 https://www.cityofberkeley.info/Finance/Home/Real_Property__Transfer_Tax_Seismic_Refunds.aspx 27 https://www.cityofberkeley.info/Clerk/City_Council/2020/07_Jul/Documents/2020-07- 21_Special_Item_03_Referral_Response_Ordinance_pdf.aspx

Page 9 of 12 ends

Page 539 ends

Energy Commission Recommendation FYE 23 and 24 Budget Priorities Action Calendar May 23, 2023

3. Adopt Policies to Promote Implementation of Low-cost, Partial Electrification measures. In addition to enacting full retrofit programs, we recommend that the Council consider low-cost, partial electrification measures to maximize the immediate climate and health impacts of electrification measures. For example, a requirement that any AC installation instead be a heat pump (TR-7, BEBES) could be coupled with a subsidy for LMI communities to pay for the cost difference between an AC and an equivalent heat pump model, which is estimated to be between just $200 and $500 wholesale.28 An installer subsidy of $676 alone could be enough to nearly double heat pump market share even absent a mandate29.

Other low-cost measures might include the purchasing and distribution of portable heat pumps to provide cooling to households on our increasing number of hot days (newer inverter models offer substantial energy savings over traditional portable ACs30), portable induction units as both a gateway into electric cooking and a mechanism to reduce indoor NOx pollution that has been demonstrated to cause asthma in small children,31 as well as weatherization work to make homes safer, more comfortable, and to reduce energy use. Council might also consider rebates for electrification at time of replacement, or provide access to equipment purchased under bulk purchasing agreements as part of the Building Electrification and Just Transition pilot program.

IV. Budget Priorities to Educate and Engage Berkeley Residents in Implementing Transportation and Building Electrification

1. Expand Sustainability Outreach Events. In conjunction with implementation of the Electric Mobility Roadmap and Existing Building Electrification Strategy, it is appropriate for the City to continue and expand public engagement on alternative transportation and green building solutions.

Increasing electric mobility awareness and education is a key strategy in the Electric Mobility Roadmap for achieving the City’s zero net carbon goals. Berkeley has already organized four highly successful annual Ride Electric events, which brought the public together to learn about and, in certain cases, test drive EVs and e-bikes.

The City has also partnered successfully with other local groups to organize in- person and virtual green building tours that feature clean energy, energy and water conservation, gray water, electric appliances, and garden features.

As technologies and incentives evolve, more members of the public consider adopting electric mobility and building electrification technologies, and as the City 28 https://www.clasp.ngo/research/all/3h-hybrid-heat-homes-an-incentive-program-to-electrify-space-heating-and- reduce-energy-bills-in-american-homes/
29 ibid
30 https://www.midea.com/us/air-conditioners/portable-air-conditioners/midea-duo-smart-inverter-portable-air- conditioner-map12s1tbl
31 https://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/isa/recordisplay.cfm?deid=310879

Page 10 of 12 ends

Page 540 ends

Energy Commission Recommendation FYE 23 and 24 Budget Priorities Action Calendar May 23, 2023
increases its e-mobility expertise through additional staffing, these events can and should continue to play an important role in getting Berkeley residents to transition away from fossil fuels. The Roadmap states that the City will expand electric mobility education and outreach activities, with a goal of increasing awareness of electric mobility options and incentives.32 To deliver on this commitment, the City must allocate funds for these events in its next budget.

With its recent adoption of the Existing Building Electrification Strategy, the Council must expand funding for sustainability outreach events to also address needs identified in the Strategy. For example, the Strategy identified a need for education to address the steep learning curve and cultural sensitivity around cooking with electric stoves, as cooking is a cultural asset and many feel strongly about cooking with gas stoves.33 While the City has hosted building electrification events, including loan programs for residents to try out electric induction cooktops, it will need to do more to engage residents in adopting electric heat pumps, induction stoves, and other technologies.

BACKGROUND
The City has existing mandated climate goals and emissions reductions commitments, and already-adopted strategies, such as the Electric Mobility Roadmap and the Existing Buildings Electrification Strategy. Furthermore, the City has already approved certain staff positions and investments, such as an Electric Mobility Coordinator position and commitments to replace the City’s vehicle fleet with electric vehicles on a schedule. The City is falling behind in hiring and filling needed positions and in executing on needed investments. The budget recommendations proposed by the Energy Commission in this memo seek to ensure the City stays on track to meet its goals.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
If the Council further delays investments or doesn’t include our recommended priorities in the upcoming budget, it puts at risk the health and safety of Berkeley’s residents, the City’s achievement of its adopted and mandated climate, clean energy, and transportation goals, and its national and global leadership on addressing climate change in innovative ways.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
The Energy Commission commends the Council for its many years of leadership to reduce Berkeley’s global warming pollution and to advance clean energy solutions for the transportation and building sectors. Our budget is a declaration of our values. We have a tremendous opportunity to accelerate building decarbonization while improving equity through targeted universalism, and we must seize the moment to secure a safer, healthier, more resilient future.
32 Berkeley Electric Mobility Roadmap, p. 43.
33 Berkeley Existing Building Electrification Strategy, p. 42.

Page 11 of 12 ends

Page 541 ends

Energy Commission Recommendation FYE 23 and 24 Budget Priorities Action Calendar May 23, 2023
However, if the Council further delays investments in staffing, fleet electrification and electric vehicle charging infrastructure, building maintenance and retrofits, and public education in the FYE 2023 and 2024 budget, it puts at risk the health and safety of Berkeley’s residents, the City’s achievement of its adopted and mandated climate, clean energy, and transportation goals, and its national and global leadership on addressing climate change in innovative ways. The Energy Commission thus urges the City Council to incorporate the above stated priorities into its FYE 2023 and 2024 budget.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
We did not consider excluding these items from the budget.

CITY MANAGER
The City Manager recommends that the content and recommendations of the Commission’s Report be referred to the budget process.

CONTACT PERSON
Billi Romain, Energy Commission Secretary, 510-981-7432

Page 12 of 12 ends

Page 542 ends

Item Removed From
Agenda

This item has been removed from the agenda by the
submitting office.

If you have questions regarding this report, please
contact the person noted on the agenda.

City Clerk Department
2180 Milvia Street
Berkeley, CA 94704
(510) 981-6900

The City of Berkeley, City Council’s Website
https://berkeleyca.gov/your-government/city-council

Page 1 of 1 ends

Page 543 ends

Page 544 ends

Office of the Mayor
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
May 23, 2023
To: Members of the City Council
From: Mayor Jesse Arreguín
Subject: Resolution to Support SB 532

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution in support of Senate Bill 532, introduced by Senator Scott Weiner and coauthored by Assembly Member Phil Ting, and send a copy of the Resolution to Governor Gavin Newsom, State Senators Nancy Skinner and Scott Weiner, and Assembly Members Buffy Wicks and Phil Ting.

SUMMARY
Current law stipulates ballots used when voting on a measure proposed by a local governing body or submitted by the voters as an initiative or referendum measure must include a printed statement detailing the amount of money to be raised annually and the rate and duration of a local tax to be levied. If adopted, Assembly Bill 532 would amend Section 13119 of the Elections Code, allowing for an exemption to this requirement when a local measure imposes or increases a tax with more than one rate or authorizes the issuance of bonds. Instead, these types of measures would require the ballot to include an estimate of the amount of money to be raised annually and the rate and duration of the tax to be levied. Also, if adopted, there would be no word limit and statements could be provided in bullet point format. In addition, this bill would create a state-mandated local program that oversees the new duties on local elections officials conducting these estimates. If costs associated with mandating this bill are accrued and identified by the Commission on Sate Mandates, these costs will be reimbursed pursuant to existing statutory provisions included in the California Constitution.

BACKGROUND
For ballot measures that relate to new or increasing taxes, voters in California are provided with statements to educate them on the budgets to be raised throughout the duration of the tax. Local jurisdictions that submit a ballot measure that include more than one tax to be levied may find it difficult to precisely measure the amount that will be raised as one tax may influence the other and vice versa. In addition, the tax rate for bonds issued in multiple series under one voter approval may fluctuate significantly over time. Given the nuance of some of these local measures, voters can also benefit from a word limit being lifted. The current 75-word threshold may not be enough space for voter education to explain complex financial matters. This bill would ideally create greater voter transparency into the financial implications of ballot measure and leave

Page 1 of 10 ends

Page 545 ends

CONSENT CALENDAR
May 23, 2023

Page 2 ends

room for authors to also describe the benefit or non-financial impacts when raising these funds.

In 2015, the legislature enacted a law requiring a measure that imposes or increases a tax to include in the ballot label language “the amount of money raised annually and the rate and duration of the tax to be levied” to be limited to 75 words. In 2017, the legislature passed further amendments applying the requirement to the issuance of bonds. However, transit agencies, school districts, cities, counties, hospitals, libraries, and other public entities that are legally required to rely on ballot measures to raise critical funds were found to be limited in their ability to describe complex tax and bond measures when written to fit a 75-word ballot label. In addition, whittling down a description to less than 75 words may cause voters to become misled or fill gaps of knowledge with their own assumptions, moving them away from understanding the full extent of the measure and its impacts. According to a statement from Senator Weiner’s office, many agencies had seen a decrease of 5 to 15 percentage points in their polling as a result of the aforementioned legislative changes.1 SB 532 had originally been authored with language to allow for local jurisdictions to choose between pursuing the current word-limit or print the following in the ballot label:
“See voter guide for measure information statement.” Furthermore, SB 532 would have required a local jurisdiction to describe to add further descriptions of the ballot measure in the voter guide depending on the type of financial measure. The Senate Governance And Finance and Senate Elections and Constitutional Committees provided amendments which removed these portions of the bill. The bill has since been re- referred to the Senate Appropriations Committee. The spirit of the bill is still maintained with its current amendments, and allows for the intended impact to be achieved by removing the word limit in the description of these related measures.

SB 532 is sponsored by the Nonprofit Housing Association of Northern California and the Coalition for Adequate School Housing. It is supported by San Diego Housing Federation, the California State Council of SEIU, and Urban Counties of California.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
No environmental impact.

CONTACT PERSON
Mayor Jesse Arreguín, 510-981-7100
Anthony Rodriguez, Senior Legislative Assistant

ATACHMENTS
1: Resolution (SUPPORT OF CALIFORNIA SENATE BILL 532)
2: Text of SB 532 (as of April 25, 2023)
1 https://sd11.senate.ca.gov/news/20230215-senator-wiener-introduces-legislation-improve-transparency- financial-impacts-critical

Page 2 of 10 ends

Page 546 ends

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

SUPPORTING SENATE BILL 441
WHEREAS, for ballot measures that relate to new or increasing taxes, voters in California are provided with statements to educate them on the budgets to be raised throughout the duration of the tax limited to 75-words; and
WHEREAS, the current 75-word limit requirements reduce the amount of space on the ballot label available to describe what the revenues raised by a measure would be used for; and
WHEREAS, these ballot label requirements can be confusing and misleading to voters; and

WHEREAS, the tax rate for bonds issued in multiple series under one voter approval may fluctuate significantly over time, thus making it difficult to predict; and WHEREAS, SB 532 would amend Section 13119 of the Elections Code, allowing for an exemption to current requirements when a local measure imposes or increases a tax with more than one rate or authorizes the issuance of bonds, and allows for estimates in funds raised when more than one tax is increased or added as part of a ballot measure; and WHEREAS, SB 532 would address a serious problem in current law that inhibits local tax mechanisms that cannot be accurately explained in the 75-word ballot label; and WHEREAS, SB 532 expands transparency for local tax measures by providing the option to include key financial measures in the voter information guide, while amending ballot label requirements that have proven problematic or even impossible for tiered tax rates and bond issuances; and
WHEREAS, the City of Berkeley believes SB 532 is in-line with its commitment, to providing fair, impartial, and knowledgeable elections to all its residents; and NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that it hereby supports SB 532.

BE IT FRUTHER RESOLVED that copies of the Resolution be sent to Governor Gavin Newsom, State Senators Nancy Skinner and Scott Weiner, and Assembly Members Buffy Wicks and Phil Ting.

Page 3 of 10 ends

Page 547 ends

AMENDED IN SENATE APRIL 25, 2023
AMENDED IN SENATE APRIL 13, 2023
AMENDED IN SENATE MARCH 30, 2023
SENATE BILL No. 532
Introduced by Senator Wiener
(Coauthor: Assembly Member Ting)
February 14, 2023
An act to amend Sections 9401, 9403, 9405, and Section 13119 of, to amend the heading of Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 9400) of Division 9 of, to add Section 9406 to, and to repeal and add Section 9400 of, of the Elections Code, relating to elections.
legislative counsel’s digest
SB 532, as amended, Wiener. Ballot measures: local taxes.

Existing law requires that the ballots used when voting upon a measure proposed by a local governing body or submitted to the voters as an initiative or referendum measure, including a measure authorizing the issuance of bonds or the incurrence of debt, have printed on them a true and impartial statement describing the purpose of the measure. If the proposed measure imposes a tax or raises the rate of a tax, existing law requires the ballot to include in the statement of the measure the amount of money to be raised annually and the rate and duration of the tax to be levied.

This bill would exempt from this requirement a measure that imposes or increases a tax with more than one rate or authorizes the issuance of bonds.

The bill would instead permit for these types of measures the statement of the measure to include the w ords “See v oter guide for measure information statement and an explanation of how this measure

Page 4 of 10 ends

Page 548 ends

could impact local property taxes.” The bill would exclude these words from any word count limit that applies to the statement of the measure.

The bill would require an elections official to ensure that each polling place has voter information guides, as specified. If the proposed measure imposes or increases a tax with more than one rate, or authorizes the issuance of bonds, this bill would require that the ballot include in the statement of the measure to be voted on an estimate of the amount of money to be raised annually and the rate and the duration of the tax to be levied. This statement, which may contain bullet points, would not count toward any word limit that applies to the statement of the measure.

Existing law requires local governments, when submitting for voter approval a bond measure that will be secured by an ad valorem tax, to provide the voters with a statement that includes estimates of the tax rates required to fund the measure.

This bill w ould additionally require for a measure that imposes or increases a tax with more than one rate or authorizes the issuance of bonds, that voters be provided with a statement that includes specified information relating to the tax that will be imposed or increased as a result of the measure.

By imposing new duties on local elections officials, the bill would create a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state.

Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

V ote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes. State-mandated local program: yes.
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
line 1 SECTION 1. Section 9400 of the Elections Code is repealed. line 2 SEC. 2. The heading of Chapter 5 (commencing with Section line 3 9400) of Di vision 9 of the Elections Code is amended to read:
line 4
line 5 Chapter 5. Local Tax or Bond Measures
line 6
line 7 SEC. 3. Section 9400 is added to the Elections Code, to read:
96 — 2 — SB 532

Page 5 of 10 ends

Page 549 ends

line 1 9400. (a)  For each tax measure specified in paragraph (3) of line 2 subdivision (b) of Section 13119, a measure information statement line 3 shall be mailed to the v oters, or electronically submitted to the line 4 v oters pursuant to Section 13300.7, with the sample ballot for the line 5 election to authorize the tax. The measure information statement line 6 required by this section shall be filed with the elections official line 7 conducting the election not later than the 88th day before the line 8 election, and it shall include all of the follo wing:
line 9 (1)   A concise description of the purpose of the tax proposed, line 10 including ho w the bond proceeds or tax re venue will be spent to line 11 benefit the community .
line 12 (2)   If the measure imposes a tax e xpected to ha ve more than line 13 one tax rate, a list of all the tax rates that are e xpected to apply and line 14 a description of ho w the tax will be imposed.
line 15 (3)   A plain language description of any mechanism that would line 16 cause the tax rate or rates to v ary over time. line 17 (4)   An explanation of the duration of the tax stating whether line 18 the tax e xpires on a specific date, e xpires upon final payment of line 19 indebtedness, does not e xpire until further action by the voters or line 20 the local go verning body, or e xpires as the result of some other line 21 action or occurrence.
line 22 (5)   Except if the information specified in paragraph (6) of this line 23 subdi vision is included, the best estimate from official sources of line 24 the a verage annual dollar amount of taxes that would be collected line 25 during the ten-year period follo wing the initial levy. line 26 (6)   If the tax measure w ould authorize the issuance of bonds, line 27 the security for which constitutes a lien on the property for ad line 28 v alorem taxes within the jurisdiction, all the disclosures required line 29 by Section 9401.
line 30 (b)   For purposes of an election to appro ve a tax under the line 31 Mello-Roos Community F acilities Act of 1982, Chapter 2.5 line 32 (commencing with Section 53311) of P art 1 of Division 2 of Title line 33 5 of the Go vernment Code, or a charter city’ s authority under line 34 Section 5 of Article XI of the California Constitution, the statement line 35 required by subdi vision (a) may consist entirely of a complete line 36 copy of the report and resolution of formation described in Sections line 37 53321.5 and 53325.1 of the Go vernment Code, or, in the case of line 38 a charter city , the applicable charter or ordinance provision. line 39 SEC. 4. Section 9401 of the Elections Code is amended to read:
96 SB 532 — 3 —

Page 6 of 10 ends

Page 550 ends

line 1 9401. (a)  In connection with each bond issue proposed by a line 2 county , city and county, city, school district, community colle ge line 3 district, or special district, or by an y agency, department, or board line 4 thereof, the security for which constitutes a lien on the property line 5 for ad v alorem taxes within the jurisdiction and the proposal for line 6 which is required to be submitted to the v oters for appro val, a line 7 measure information statement, which shall be combined with any line 8 measure information statement required by Section 9400, shall be line 9 mailed to the v oters, or electronically transmitted to the v oters line 10 pursuant to Section 13300.7, with the sample ballot for the bond line 11 election. The measure information statement required by this line 12 section shall be filed with the elections official conducting the line 13 election not later than the 88th day before the election, and shall line 14 include all of the follo wing:
line 15 (1)  The best estimate from official sources of the average annual line 16 tax rate that w ould be required to be levied to fund that bond issue line 17 over the entire duration of the bond debt service, based on assessed line 18 valuations available at the time of the election or a projection based line 19 on e xperience within the same jurisdiction or other demonstrable line 20 f actors. The estimate shall also identify the final fiscal year in line 21 which the tax is anticipated to be collected.
line 22 (2)   The best estimate from official sources of the highest tax line 23 rate that w ould be required to be le vied to fund that bond issue, line 24 and an estimate of the year in which that rate will apply , based on line 25 assessed v aluations a vailable at the time of the election or a line 26 projection based on e xperience within the same jurisdiction or line 27 other demonstrable f actors.
line 28 (3)   The best estimate from official sources of the total debt line 29 service, including the principal and interest, that would be required line 30 to be repaid if all the bonds are issued and sold. The estimate may line 31 include information about the assumptions used to determine the line 32 estimate.
line 33 (b)  In addition, the statement may contain a declaration of policy line 34 of the le gislative or governing body of the applicable jurisdiction, line 35 proposing to use re venues other than ad valorem taxes to fund the line 36 bond issue, and the best estimate from official sources of these line 37 re venues and the reduction in the tax rate levied to fund the bond line 38 issue resulting from the substitution of re venue. 96 — 4 — SB 532

Page 7 of 10 ends

Page 551 ends

line 1 (c)   The words “tax rate” as used in this chapter means tax rate line 2 per one hundred dollars ($100) of assessed valuation on all property line 3 to be tax ed to fund a bond issue described in Section 9400. line 4 SEC. 5. Section 9403 of the Elections Code is amended to read:
line 5 9403. Failure to comply with this chapter does not af fect the line 6 v alidity of either of the following:
line 7 (a)   A bond issue following the sale and delivery of the bonds. line 8 (b)   A tax following its initial imposition.
line 9 SEC. 6. Section 9405 of the Elections Code is amended to read:
line 10 9405. (a)  If the elections official is required to mail a measure line 11 information statement, as pro vided in Section 9400 or 9401, only line 12 one cop y of the measure information statement shall be mailed to line 13 a postal address where two or more registered voters have the same line 14 surname and the same postal address, or the measure information line 15 statement may be transmitted electronically pursuant to Section line 16 13300.7.
line 17 (b)   This section only applies if the legislative body adopts this line 18 section and the election official conducting the election appro ves line 19 of the procedure.
line 20 SEC. 7. Section 9406 is added to the Elections Code, to read:
line 21 9406. An estimate or projection made in the measure line 22 information statement required pursuant to Section 9400 or 9401 line 23 shall not restrict or limit the tax imposed in accordance with the line 24 measure.
line 25 SEC. 8.
line 26 SECTION 1. Section 13119 of the Elections Code is amended line 27 to read:
line 28 13119. (a)   The ballots used when voting upon a measure line 29 proposed by a local governing body or submitted to the voters as line 30 an initiative or referendum measure pursuant to Division 9 line 31 (commencing with Section 9000) shall have printed on them the line 32 words “Shall the measure (stating the nature thereof) be adopted?” line 33 To the right or below the statement of the measure to be voted on, line 34 the words “Yes” and “No” shall be printed on separate lines, with line 35 voting targets. If a voter marks the voting target next to the printed line 36 word “Yes,” the voter’s vote shall be counted in favor of the line 37 adoption of the measure. If a voter marks the voting target next to line 38 the printed word “No,” the voter’s vote shall be counted against line 39 its adoption.
96 SB 532 — 5 —

Page 8 of 10 ends

Page 552 ends

line 1 (b)   (1)  Except for a measure described in paragraph (2), if the line 2 proposed measure imposes a tax or raises the rate of a tax, the line 3 ballot shall include in the statement of the measure to be voted on line 4 an estimate of the amount of money to be raised annually and the line 5 rate and duration of the tax to be levied.
line 6 (2)  If the proposed measure imposes or increases a tax with line 7 more than one rate, or authorizes the issuance of bonds, the ballot line 8 shall include in the statement of the measure to be voted on a fiscal line 9 disclosure that includes an estimate of the amount of money to be line 10 raised annually and the rate and duration of the tax to be levied. line 11 (3)  This fiscal disclosure in paragraph (2), which may contain line 12 bullet points, does not count toward any word limit that applies line 13 to the statement of the measure.
line 14 (2)  If the proposed measure imposes or increases a tax with line 15 more than one rate, or authorizes the issuance of bonds, the line 16 jurisdiction submitting the measure to the v oters, or, in the case line 17 of an initiati ve measure, the proponents, shall, not later than 88 line 18 days before the election, inform the elections official conducting line 19 the election which of the follo wing shall be included in or line 20 immediately following, as applicable, the statement of the measure:
line 21 (A)  The estimate, rate, and duration information described in line 22 paragraph (1).
line 23 (B)  The phrase “See v oter guide for measure information line 24 statement and an e xplanation of how this measure could impact line 25 local property tax es.”
line 26 (3)  If the statement of the measure is to include the phrase line 27 pro vided for in subparagraph (B) of paragraph (2), the line 28 specifications of the election order for the measure, or , in the case line 29 of an initiati ve measure, the full te xt of the measure itself, shall line 30 include a statement of the reasons for selecting the inclusion of line 31 the phrase pro vided for in subparagraph (B) of paragraph (2). line 32 (4)  If the elections official is informed that the statement of the line 33 measure shall include the phrase contained in subparagraph (B) line 34 of paragraph (2), the requirements of Section 9400 apply to the line 35 measure, and the 19 w ords of the phrase shall not count to ward line 36 an y word limit that applies to the statement of the measure. line 37 (c)   The statement of the measure shall be a true and impartial line 38 synopsis of the purpose of the proposed measure, and shall be in line 39 language that is neither argumentative nor likely to create prejudice line 40 for or against the measure.
96 — 6 — SB 532

Page 9 of 10 ends

Page 553 ends

line 1 (d)   Any estimate or projection included in the statement of the line 2 measure pursuant to this section, or included in the statements line 3 statement required pursuant to Section 9400 or 9401, shall not line 4 restrict or limit the tax imposed in accordance with the measure. line 5 (e)  For purposes of this section, the following definitions apply:
line 6 (1)  “Local governing body” means the governing body of a city, line 7 county, city and county, including a charter city or charter county, line 8 or district, including a school district.
line 9 (2)   “Target” means an object designated as the aim for a voter line 10 to make a vote selection.
line 11 (f)  The elections official shall ensure that each polling place line 12 has v oter information guides as required by Section 19323. line 13 SEC. 9.
line 14 SEC. 2. If the Commission on State Mandates determines that line 15 this act contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement to line 16 local agencies and school districts for those costs shall be made line 17 pursuant to Part 7 (commencing with Section 17500) of Division line 18 4 of Title 2 of the Government Code.
line 19 SEC. 10.
line 20 SEC. 3. It is the intent of the Legislature that elections officials line 21 prepare ballot materials for the March 5, 2024, primary election line 22 in compliance with this act.

O
96 SB 532 — 7 —

Page 10 of 10 ends

Page 554 ends

Internal
Office of the Mayor
2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7100 ● TDD: (510) 981-6903 ● Fax: (510) 981-7199 E-Mail: [email protected]

CONSENT CALENDAR
May 23, 2023
To: Honorable Members of the City Council
From: Mayor Jesse Arreguín
Subject: Addressing Hyundai and Kia Car Thefts

RECOMMENDATION
1) Adopt a Resolution calling on Hyundai and Kia to take immediate action to fix the flaw in their vehicles that make them easy targets of car thefts. 2) Direct the City Attorney to explore taking legal action against Hyundai and Kia.

BACKGROUND
In recent months, the number of thefts of Hyundai and Kia vehicles manufactured between 2011 and 2022 have skyrocketed throughout the country. Before December 2022, thefts of such cars in Berkeley accounted for 1-2% of all vehicle thefts in Berkeley, but recently it has risen to 38%. The cause of this is a flaw in design in these models that make it easy to bypass ignition switches and do not include an engine immobilizer, making them extremely vulnerable to theft. However, these anti-theft devices were included in the same models sold in other countries. This flaw was highlighted last year in viral videos shared on social media platforms that demonstrated how to steal such vehicles using basic tools. The Berkeley Police Department issued a bulletin in March 2023 informing the public of this trend.

On April 20, State Attorney General Rob Bonta held a press conference in Berkeley with Interim Police Chief Jen Louis to announce that he is leading a coalition of 18 states in calling for a federal recall of Hyundai and Kia vehicles after the companies failed to take adequate steps to address the surge in thefts. This comes after the Attorneys General of 23 states wrote a letter to Hyundai and Kia in March urging them to accelerate their response to providing a software update and other actions to resolve the flaw. At the press conference, the Chief warned that such thefts are being used to perpetrate further crimes. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), the thefts have resulted in at least 14 crashes and eight fatalities across the country as of February 2023. Multiple cities throughout the country have filed lawsuits against the automakers.

Hyundai and Kia have responded to the surge in thefts by offering a software upgrade.

However, this upgrade will not be available for many of the vehicles until June, and the upgrade is incompatible with some models. Owners of those models have been offered

Page 1 of 4 ends

Page 555 ends

Internal
Hyundai and Kia Car Thefts CONSENT CALENDAR
May 23, 2023

Page 2 ends

a free steering wheel lock, which places additional burdens on the owner while failing to address the underlying flaw.

As of April 26, 2023, there have been 377 stolen vehicles in Berkley, a 51% increase from this point last year. Much of this can be attributed to the surge in thefts of Hyundai and Kia vehicles. In addition to the trauma experienced by victims, car thefts take up valuable time and resources from the Police Department. These thefts could have been avoided if this preventable flaw did not exist. Until these issues are resolved, owners of these vehicles will remain at a higher risk of becoming the victim of a car theft.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
None.

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

CONTACT PERSON
Mayor Jesse Arreguín 510-981-7100
Attachments:
1: Resolution

Page 2 of 4 ends

Page 556 ends

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

CALLING ON HYUNDAI AND KIA TO RESOLVE SURGE IN CAR THEFTS WHEREAS, the number of Hyundai and Kia car thefts have skyrocketed in recent months due to a flaw in design in these models that make it easy to bypass ignition switches and do not include an engine immobilizer, making them extremely vulnerable to theft; and WHEREAS, in Berkeley car thefts are up 51% compared to this point last year, and the Police Department issued a bulletin to inform that public that Hyundai and Kia car thefts have skyrocketed to account for 38% of all car thefts in the City in recent months, when historically these vehicles typically account for 1-2% of all car thefts; and WHEREAS, in addition to the trauma experienced by victims, car thefts take up valuable time and resources from the Police Department; and
WHEREAS, viral videos shared on social media platforms show how easy it is to steal such vehicles with simple tools, an issue that has become known to the manufacturers; and
WHEREAS, some of these thefts are being used to perpetrate further crimes, and according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), the thefts have resulted in at least 14 crashes and eight fatalities across the country as of February 2023; and
WHEREAS, in March 2023, State Attorney General cosigned a letter with 23 Attorneys General to Hyundai and Kia in March urging them to accelerate their response to providing a software update and other actions to resolve the flaw; and WHEREAS, Hyundai and Kia have offered a software upgrade to address the flaw, but this upgrade will not be available for many of the vehicles until June, and the upgrade is incompatible with some models, who will instead be offered a free steering wheel lock, which places additional burdens on the owner while failing to address the underlying flaw; and
WHEREAS, On April 20, the State Attorney General led a coalition of 18 states in calling for the NHTSA to recall Hyundai and Kia vehicles after the companies; and WHEREAS, until these issues are resolved, owners of these vehicles will remain at a higher risk of becoming the victim of a car theft.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that it hereby calls upon Hyundai and Kia to immediately act to resolve the flaw in vehicles

Page 3 of 4 ends

Page 557 ends

Internal
Hyundai and Kia Car Thefts CONSENT CALENDAR
May 23, 2023

Page 4 ends

manufactured between 2011 and 2022 that have ignition switches that are easily bypassed and do not include an engine immobilizer.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council supports the actions being taken by State Attorney General Rob Bonta in calling for a recall of Hyundai and Kia vehicles that are susceptible to this flaw.

BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that copies of this Resolution be sent to Hyundai Motor America and Kia Motors America.

Page 4 of 4 ends

Page 558 ends

Office of the Mayor
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
May 23, 2023
To: Members of the City Council
From: Mayor Jesse Arreguin
Submitted by: Henry Oyekanmi, Director, Finance
Subject: Contract: Badawi & Associates, Certified Public Accountants for Professional Auditing Services

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution ratifying the Mayor’s decision to select Badawi & Associates as the auditing firm to perform annual financial audits of the City’s financial statements and perform annual compliance audits required by the Single Audit Act of 1984 (as amended in 1996), for the period of May 22, 2023 through June 30, 2026, in the amount of $432,525 plus a contingency of $50,000 for a total of $482,525; and to authorize the execution of a three-year contract with Badawi & Associates, with an option to extend the contract for two additional years.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
This three-year contract will cost a total of $432,525 plus a contingency of $50,000 for a total not to exceed $482,525 for all funds. If the City decides to extend the contract for the two additional option years, the total cost for the five-year period will be $743,065 plus a contingency of $80,000 for a not to exceed $823,065 (FY 2023, FY 2024, FY 2025, FY 2026 and FY 2027).

Contract funding for the full 3-year term is as follows:

All Fund total cost of $432,525:
 $139,900 in FY 2023
 $144,210 in FY 2024
 $148,415 in FY 2025
General Fund total budget of $358,653 (011-99-900-900-0000-000-412-612210):
 $119,551 in FY 2023
 $119,551 in FY 2024
 $119,551 in FY 2025
Other Revenue Funds total cost and budget of $73,872:
 Business Economic Development Fund (142-21-208-253-0000-000-446- 612210): $6,124 in FY 2023; $6,124 in FY 2024; and $6,124 in FY 2025;

Page 1 of 4 ends

Page 559 ends

Contract: Badawi & Associates, Certified Public Accountants CONSENT CALENDAR for Professional Auditing Services May 23, 2023
2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7100 ● TDD: (510) 981-6903 ● Fax: (510) 981-7199 E-Mail: [email protected]

Page 2 ends

and
 Community Block Grant Development (CDBG) Fund (128-51-504-530- 0000-000-444-612210): $16,000 in FY 2023; $16,000 in FY 2024; and $16,000 in FY 2025
 Measure F Alameda County Vehicle Registration Fee Fund (133-99-900- 900-0000-000-412-612210): $2,500 in FY 2023; $2,500 in FY 2024; and $2,500 in FY 2025; and

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
Article VI, Section 24 of the City Charter requires the City of Berkeley to have an annual audit performed, and gives the Mayor sole authority to select the firm that will perform the audit. In addition, the City is required to perform an audit in conformance with the Federal Single Audit Act of 1984, as amended in 1996.

The Finance Selection Panel recommended, and the Mayor selected, the proposal of Badawi & Associates as the most favorable to the City based on the evaluation criteria identified in the RFP.

BACKGROUND
On January 10, 2023, the City published Request for Proposals 23-11559-C for External Audit Services. Potential bidders submitted twenty-five clarification questions, which were subsequently answered on February 2, 2023. Responses were due on February 16, 2023, and the City received and opened submissions from two firms. The two firms were (1) Badawi & Associates and (2) Eide Bailly
The proposal was for qualified Certified Public Accountants to audit the City’s financial statements for the three fiscal years ending June 30, 2023, 2024, and 2025, with an option for two additional years. These audits are to be performed in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards, the standards set forth for financial audits in the U. S.

General Accounting Office’s Government Auditing Standards (December 2011 edition), the provisions of the Federal Single Audit Act of 1984, as amended in 1996, and U. S.

Office of Management (OMB) Circular A-133, Audits of State, Local Governments, and Non-Profit Organizations.

The two proposals were reviewed and evaluated by the Finance Selection Panel, based on the following evaluation criteria:
 Expertise and Experience

1. Partner, supervisory and management staff to be assigned to the engagement; the numbers of hours to be spent on the engagement; and their experience;

Page 2 of 4 ends

Page 560 ends

Page 3 ends

2. Experience of the individual performing the review of the City’s information system operations;

3. Qualifications, experience and training of staff to be assigned to the engagement; and

4. Similar engagements with governmental entities
 Audit Approach

1. Understanding of the major tasks and subtasks to be performed;

2. Approach to be taken to gain and document an understanding of the City’s internal control structure;

3. Approach used to assess control risk;

4. Approach to be taken in determining laws and regulations that will be subject to audit test work;

5. The extent to which statistical sampling is to be used on the engagement;

6. The approach to information systems on the engagement; and

7. Type and extent of analytical procedures to be used in the engagement

8. Planned hours and level of staff to be used for each major task

9. Value added to the engagement, in the form of free training to City staff and other free services

10. Maximum fee for the engagement

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
There are no identifiable environmental effects or opportunities associated with the action requested in this report.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
The two firms that provided proposals were determined to be sufficiently qualified and experienced to timely performed the engagement. Badawi & Associate’s proposal received the panel’s highest score based on the evaluation criteria outlined in the RFP.

CONTACT PERSON
Henry Oyekanmi, Director, Finance (510) 981-7326
Attachments:
1: Resolution

Page 3 of 4 ends

Page 561 ends

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

RATIFYING THE MAYOR’S EXECUTION OF A CONTRACT WITH BADAWI &

ASSOCIATES TO PROVIDE COMPREHENSIVE PROFESSIONAL AUDITING SERVICES WHEREAS, a Request for Proposal (Specification No. 23-11559-C) was distributed and posted on the City’s Website on January 10, 2023; and
WHEREAS, two proposals were received by the February 16, 2023 deadline; and WHEREAS, all two proposals were considered responsive to the City’s Request for Proposal requirements; and their proposals were reviewed and analyzed by the Finance Selection Panel, based on the evaluation criteria outlined in the Request for Proposal; and their references were checked; and
WHEREAS, the City Charter gives the Mayor sole authority to select the firm to perform the City’s annual audit; and
WHEREAS, the Mayor selected the proposal of Badawi & Associates as the most favorable to the City, based on the recommendation of the Finance Selection Panel.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the City of Berkeley ratifies the Mayor’s selection of Badawi & Associates as the auditing firm to provide professional auditing services for the City for the period May 23, 2023 through June 30, 2026 in the amount of $432,525 plus a contingency of $50,000 for a total not to exceed $482,525 to be paid from budget codes 010-9701- 410-3033, 480-8705-465-3033, and 370-7903-463- 3033; and authorizes the execution of a three-year contract with Badawi & Associates, with an option to extend the contract for two additional years for a total not to exceed amount of $823,065 which includes a $80,000 contingency for the entire five-year period.

Page 4 of 4 ends

Page 562 ends

CONSENT CALENDAR
May 23, 2023
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Councilmember Taplin
Subject: Budget Referral: Vision Zero Improvements at 6th & Addison Intersection

RECOMMENDATION
Refer $600,000 to the budget process for HAWK (High-intensity Activated crossWalk) beacons and a median refuge island at 6th and Addison Streets.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
At the March 9th, 2021 Regular Session of the Berkeley City Council, Councilmember Taplin’s budget referral for the funding of Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFB) at the intersection of Sixth & Addison Street was referred for funding consideration under the FY 21-22 budget process.1 However, this budget referral was not prioritized in light of limited resources, which lack is compounded by the failure of Measure L in 2022.

The funding and eventual construction of traffic calming projects at these intersections would be an important improvement for pedestrian and cyclist safety along this heavily trafficked street in West Berkeley.

On June 23, 2022, the Zoning Adjustments Board (ZAB) approved two Use Permits at 2213 Fourth Street and 747 (787) Bancroft Way, directly adjacent to this intersection:
#ZP2021-0043 “to demolish three existing non-residential buildings and one existing duplex and construct a new 128,143-square-foot, four and one-half level parking garage containing 412 off-street automobile parking spaces and one loading space to serve uses in the vicinity of the project site”; and #ZP2021-0096 “to demolish six existing buildings and construct a 159,143-square-foot, three-story building containing 124,539 square feet of research and development space and 34,604 square feet of light manufacturing space, and a surface parking lot containing 76 off-street parking spaces and five loading spaces.”
To mitigate concerns of increased traffic impacts, the project applicant offered to provide $40,000 for the installation of traffic safety infrastructure at 6th and Addison.

However, this does not cover the full costs of needed improvements. 1https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2021-03- 09%20Item%2015%20Budget%20Referral%20Funding%20Rectangular.pdf

Page 1 of 12 ends

Page 563 ends

As neighbors have noted, this intersection “is a primary pedestrian and bicycle access point for The Lab, Berkeley Commons, Aquatic Park, Berkeley Marina, McLaughlin Eastshore State Park, the San Francisco Bay Trail/Pedestrian Bridge, and the 4th Street business district.”
Neighbors’ petition requesting HAWK beacons at 6th & Addison, signed by residents as well as nearby schools and businesses, is included in Attachment 1.

BACKGROUND
Sixth Street remains classified as a “High-Injury Street” as well as an “Equity Priority Area” under the City’s Vision Zero Action Plan.2 The fact that Sixth Street falls under both of these categories indicates that not only is Sixth among the most dangerous streets in Berkeley where traffic injuries are a regular occurrence, but that its current condition and perpetual disinvestment is a symptom of the historic discrimination against West Berkeley’s African-American community.

As data from UC Berkeley’s Transportation Injury Mapping System (TIMS)3 shows, Sixth Street has continued to see significant collisions between motor vehicles and other road users, particularly between Cedar Street and Dwight Way. For example, on February 21, 2020, the Berkeley Police Department reported a collision between an automobile and a motorcycle on 6th St, 117 feet north of the intersection with Addison at 12:10pm. The Primary Collision Factor (PCF) in the report is listed as “Improper Turning” by the driver of the automobile. This indicates that the lack of visibility and unimpeded speeds of vehicles at this intersection may pose an increased safety risk for road users. Fortunately, the two victims on the motorcycle sustained only minor injuries. 2https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/2022-02/Berkeley-Vision-Zero-Action-Plan.pdf 3 https://tims.berkeley.edu/

Page 2 of 12 ends

Page 564 ends

Fig. 1: Traffic collision heat map, 2020-2022. UC Berkeley Transportation Injury Mapping System (TIMS), using data from California Highway Patrol’s Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS).

RRFB and medians at both Sixth & Addison and Sixth & Channing are also specifically called for under the City’s Bicycle Plan due to the street having “one lane in each direction and high traffic volumes” which indicate a need for pedestrian warning improvements and physical pedestrian refuge infrastructure.4

FISCAL IMPACTS
The City of Berkeley’s 2017 Bicycle Plan estimated $3,500-40,000 for one median refuge island.5 In 2021, the City of Oakland estimated a cost of $300,000 per unit for HAWK beacons, and $52,000 for a median refuge. Given significant escalation in construction costs over the previous years, $600,000 is the high end of estimated costs for this project.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Establishing a network of safe streets for pedestrians and bicycles, promoting bicycle literacy, and distributing bicycles to those in need incentivize nonautomobile travel, reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The City estimates that transportation-related emissions accounts for approximately 60% of our community’s total annual greenhouse gas emissions.6 By encouraging alternatives to car transportation by making pedestrian and cyclist infrastructure safer and more accessible, these improvements stand to lower the emissions from our community’s dominant source of carbon emissions.

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

ATTACHMENTS

1. Petition: “WEST BERKELEY NEIGHBORS DEMAND ACTION ON 6TH AND ADDISON CROSSWALK”
4https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/2022-01/Berkeley-Bicycle-Plan-2017_Ch5_ProposedBikewayNetwork.pdf 5 https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/2022-01/Berkeley-Bicycle-Plan- 2017_AppendixF_Facility%20Design%20Toolbox.pdf
6https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/2022-04/2022-02- 08%20Item%2017%20Greenhouse%20Gas%20Emissions%20Inventory.pdf

Page 3 of 12 ends

Page 565 ends

1 Taplin, Terry
From: Eric Wiesner <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, April 24, 2023 10:59 AM
To: Berkeley Mayor's Office; Manager, C; Javandel, Farid; All Council; Kesarwani, Rashi; Taplin, Terry; Bartlett, Ben; Harrison, Kate; Hahn, Sophie; Wengraf, Susan; Robinson, Rigel; Humbert, Mark
Cc:

Nathan Sullivan
Subject: WEST BERKELEY NEIGHBORS DEMAND ACTION ON 6TH AND ADDISON CROSSWALK WARNING: This is not a City of Berkeley email. Do not click links or attachments unless you trust the sender and know the content is safe.

April 24, 2023

To:

Jesse Arreguin, Mayor
Dee Williams-Ridley, City Manager
Farid Javandel, Deputy Director of Public Works
Berkeley City Council

We the undersigned are West Berkeley neighbors, businesses, and non-profit organizations who are concerned with traffic safety in our community and are asking the City of Berkeley to take immediate action to address the dangerous crosswalk at 6th and Addison Streets. Sixth Street is already one of the busiest thoroughfares in the City, especially as it approaches University Avenue and the freeway entrance, yet the pedestrian crosswalk at 6th and Addison does not have any stop lights or stop signs to protect the many neighbors who cross on foot or bicycle each day. This intersection has been the site of several serious car accidents in the past several years, and vehicles frequently do not stop or slow down even when pedestrians are waiting to cross.

The uncontrolled 6th and Addison Street crossing is a primary pedestrian and bicycle access point for The Lab, Berkeley Commons, Aquatic Park, Berkeley Marina, McLaughlin Eastshore State Park, the San Francisco Bay Trail/Pedestrian Bridge, and the 4th Street business district. The intersection is frequented by populations of all ages, including Lifelong Medical Care health center, Black Pine Circle and Rosa Parks schools, and Build House, “an innovative community-based home in Berkeley for individuals with significant developmental disabilities.” Families from all over Berkeley and beyond, including many young children, utilize the crosswalk on a daily basis.

In the next year, West Berkeley will see the addition of two research and development and life sciences developments: Berkeley Commons and The Lab. We are excited for their openings because they will bring beautification, jobs and energy to our enclave. The projects will also add more than 1500 vehicle parking spaces, not to mention shipping and receiving, services, and short-term visitors in multiple transit modes.

There is no doubt that the 6th Street Corridor will see a substantial increase in vehicle traffic, which will make the Addison Street intersection even more dangerous for pedestrians. The time for the City to take action is now before these projects are completed and traffic in the neighborhood spikes.

At the June 23, 2022 Zoning Adjustment Board meeting, Steelwave, the developer of “The Lab,” a major project on 5th Street nearby, agreed to pay the City for pedestrian improvements along Sixth Street, and specifically a pedestrian beacon signal at the Addison Street intersection. Since, Steelwave has attempted to pay the City to complete the project, but the City has not delivered. The Lab is now open and Berkeley Commons construction continues, with no measures taken to address the impending impact to the intersection

Page 4 of 12 ends

Page 566 ends

2 and neighborhood. We sincerely hope that it will not take a neighbor getting severely hurt or worse by a speeding vehicle for the City to take this issue seriously and take action.

We write to request that the City take immediate concrete steps to accept the funding that Steelwave agreed to provide nearly a year ago and begin installation of a HAWK beacon for the 6th and Addison crosswalk. We further request a written response from the City within 30 days to update us as to the current status of this project with a projected timeline as to its completion. We greatly appreciate your time and attention to this critical safety issue for our community.

Signed By,

Local Businesses

Black Pine Circle School
John Carlstroem, Head of School

BuILD House
Racquel Robinson, MPA, Executive Director

Franklin Brothers Market
Jennifer Freese, Owner

Kids “N” Clay Pottery Studio
Chelsea and Matthew Duke, Owners

LifeLong Medical Care
David B. Vliet, Chief Executive Officer

Nia House Learning Center
Eve Uberman, Executive Director
Residents

1. 2.

3. Hans Moore, District 2

4. 5.

6. 7. Ashley McClure, District 2

8. 9.

10. 11. Sharla Sullivan, District 2

12. 13.

Page 5 of 12 ends

Page 567 ends

3 14.

15. Nathan Hood, District 2

16. 17.

18. 19. Elijah Medina, District 2

20. 21.

22. 23. Noelle Hood, District 2

24. 25.

26. 27. Jonah Hood, District 2

28. 29.

30. 31. Monica Campbell, District 2

32. 33.

34. 35. Eric Wiesner, District 2

36. 37.

38. 39. Gabriel Wiesner, District 2

40. 41.

42. 43. Heather Mulhall, District 2

44. 45.

46. 47. Eric Savoia, District 2

48. 49.

50. 51. Ana Savoia, District 2

52. 53.

54. 55. Steven Grind, District 1

56. 57.

58. 59. Sheridan Pauker, District 1

60. 61.

62. 63. Jane Ellis, District 2

64. 65.

66. 67. Jack Litewka, District 2

68. 69.

Page 6 of 12 ends

Page 568 ends

4 70.

71. Michele Guide, District 2

72. 73.

74. 75. Alex Sharenko, District 2

76. 77.

78. 79. Margo Schueler, District 1

80. 81.

82. 83. Paul Cox, District 1

84. 85.

86. 87. Tam Crane, District 2

88. 89.

90. 91. Joshua Paul, District 2

92. 93.

94. 95. Madeleine Emodi, District 1

96. 97.

98. 99. Nathaniel Emodi, District 1
100.
101.
102.
103. Jenny Lederer, District 2
104.
105.
106.
107. Nick Lederer, District 2
108.
109.
110.
111. Andy Davis, District 2
112.
113.
114.
115. Mila Matos, District 2
116.
117.
118.
119. Remi Matos, District 2
120.
121.
122.
123. Dorian Matos, District 2
124.
125.

Page 7 of 12 ends

Page 569 ends

5 126.
127. Stacey Lewis, District 2
128.
129.
130.
131. Brandon Baunach, District 2
132.
133.
134.
135. Lawrence Baunach, District 2
136.
137.
138.
139. Leon Baunach, District 2
140.
141.
142.
143. Carol Baunach, District 2
144.
145.
146.
147. Renaye Brown, District 2
148.
149.
150.
151. Susan Springborg, District 2
152.
153.
154.
155. Greg Martin, District 2
156.
157.
158.
159. Cancion Soto, District 2
160.
161.
162.
163. Matthew Rosen, District 2
164.
165.
166.
167. Dan Sobel, District 2
168.
169.
170.
171. Lisa Wehmeier, District 2
172.
173.
174.
175. David Skolnick, District 2
176.
177.
178.
179. Celia Jackson, District 2
180.
181.

Page 8 of 12 ends

Page 570 ends

6 182.
183. Chilezie Nnadi, District 2
184.
185.
186.
187. Katherine Nnadi, District 2
188.
189.
190.
191. David Nicholls, District 2
192.
193.
194.
195. Anna Nicholls, District 2
196.
197.
198.
199. Tawny Reynolds, District 1
200.
201.
202.
203. Megan Bates, District 2
204.
205.
206.
207. Joey Gottbrath, District 2
208.
209.
210.
211. Sara Pierre, District 2
212.
213.
214.
215. Brie Fulton, District 2
216.
217.
218.
219. Orion Fulton, District 2
220.
221.
222.
223. Sarah Roggero, District 2
224.
225.
226.
227. Brian Price, District 2
228.
229.
230.
231. Amy Campos, District 2
232.
233.
234.
235. Olivia Price, District 2
236.
237.

Page 9 of 12 ends

Page 571 ends

7 238.
239. Casper Price, District 2
240.
241.
242.
243. Sarah Abigail Ejigu, District 2
244.
245.
246.
247. Keith Berry, District 2
248.
249.
250.
251. Sika Gasinu, District 2
252.
253.
254.
255. Sam Kronick, District 2
256.
257.
258.
259. Manya Sheps, District 2
260.
261.
262.
263. Hong Ly, District 2
264.
265.
266.
267. Arun Chawan, District 2
268.
269.
270.
271. Deborah Sommers, District 1
272.
273.
274.
275. Andrew Gilbert, District 2
276.
277.
278.
279. Gabriela Quiros,District 2
280.
281.
282.
283. Becca Schonberg, District 2
284.
285.
286.
287. Julia Goodman, District 2
288.
289.
290.
291. Michael Hall, District 2
292.
293.

Page 10 of 12 ends

Page 572 ends

8 294.
295. Dale Goodman, District 2
296.
297.
298.
299. Michael Rodriguez, District 2
300.
301.
302.
303. Bonnie Rauscher, District 2
304.
305.
306.
307. Eric Rauscher, District 2
308.
309.
310.
311. Rebecca Herman, District 2
312.
313.
314.
315. Zena Barakat, District 2
316.
317.
318.
319. Terry Betts, District 2
320.
321.
322.
323. Ilata Barakat, District 2
324.
325.
326.
327. Albert Brown, District 2
328.
329.
330.
331. Toni Mester, District 2
332.
333.
334.
335. Thomas Paul, District 2
336.
337.
338.
339. Michael Hall, District 2
340.
341.
342.
343. Amy Hill, District 2
344.
345.
346.
347. Joshua Paul, District 2
348.
349.

Page 11 of 12 ends

Page 573 ends

9 350.
351. Adam Whyte, District 2
352.
353.
354.
355. Maureen Clearfield, District 2
356.
357.
358.
359. Sophia C. Whyte, District 2
360.
361.
362.
363. Marcy Rein, District 2
364.
365.
366.
367. Sherline Long, District 2
368.
369.
370.
371. Jeanette Wagner, District 2
372.
373.
374.
375. David Wagner, District 2
376.

Page 12 of 12 ends

Page 574 ends

Kate Harrison
Councilmember, District 4
2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7140 ● TDD: (510) 981-6903 ● Fax: (510) 644-1174 E-Mail: [email protected]

CONSENT CALENDAR
May 23, 2023
TO: Honorable Members of the City Council
FROM: Councilmember Harrison
SUBJECT: Relinquishment of Council Office Budget Funds to the Berkeley Rotary Endowment and Co-Sponsorship of 2023 Taste of Downtown Berkeley Event Serving a Municipal Public Purpose

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution approving the expenditure to grant Berkeley Rotary Endowment, a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization, $500 for and co-sponsorship of the 2023 Taste of Downtown Berkeley Event Serving a Municipal Public Purpose, with funds relinquished to the City’s general fund for this purpose from Councilmember Harrison’s discretionary Council Office Budget Fund, and from any other Councilmembers who would like to contribute.

BACKGROUND
The mission of Rotary is to provide service to others, promote integrity, and advance world understanding, goodwill, and peace through its fellowship of business, professional, and community leaders.

Berkeley Rotary is one of 34,282 Rotary clubs worldwide with over 1.2 million members who are neighbors, community leaders, and global citizens uniting for the common good. Rotary International brings together leaders from all continents, cultures and occupations who step forward to take on some of the toughest challenges around the world. Currently Berkeley Rotary Club has approximately 120 members and growing.

Chartered in 1916, Berkeley is one of the oldest Rotary Clubs in the world.

The Berkeley Rotary and Downtown Berkeley Association will be hosting the first Annual Taste of Downtown Berkeley, celebrating the exciting culinary scene in Downtown Berkeley, on Sunday, June 11 from 2 to 6 pm, and fundraising for important community needs.

Proceeds from the event will support the Berkeley Rotary’s community programs, including their RotaCare health clinic providing critical care to uninsured individuals, their scholarship program helping to support education of 15 low-income students, and their supportive housing services which provide hygiene kits and food to people in need in the Berkeley community.

Page 1 of 4 ends

Page 575 ends

Relinquishment of Council Office Budget Funds to Grant Downtown Berkeley Association (DBA) $500 for 2274 Shattuck Avenue Mural Project serving a Municipal Public Purpose.

CONSENT CALENDAR
April 11, 2023
As a sponsor of Taste of Downtown Berkeley, the City will receive recognition at the event, on their website, and promotional materials. The event will also help showcase local restaurants.

Event planners expect 200-300 people from Berkeley and the East Bay to stroll and enjoy gourmet bites and drinks from local chefs across 15-20 restaurants in the Downtown. Tickets will be $60.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
No General Fund impact. $500 is available from Councilmember Harrison’s office account.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
Not applicable.

CONTACT PERSON
Councilmember Kate Harrison, (510) 981-7140

ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution Co-sponsoring the Event

2. Resolution Granting Office Funds for a Municipal Purpose

Page 2 of 4 ends

Page 576 ends

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

CITY SPONSORSHIP OF THE FIRST ANNUAL TASTE OF

DOWNTOWN BERKELEY EVENT AND FUNDRAISER
WHEREAS, the mission of Berkeley Rotary, and 501(c)(3) non-profit, is to provide service to others, promote integrity, and advance world understanding, goodwill, and peace through its fellowship of business, professional, and community leaders; and WHEREAS, the Berkeley Rotary and Downtown Berkeley Association will be hosting the first annual Taste of Downtown Berkeley, celebrating the exciting culinary scene in Downtown Berkeley, on Sunday, June 11, and fundraising for important community needs; and
WHEREAS, proceeds from the event will support the Berkeley Rotary’s community programs, including their RotaCare health clinic providing critical care to uninsured individuals, their scholarship program helping to support education of 15 low-income students, and their supportive housing services which provide hygiene kits and food to people in need in the Berkeley community; and
WHEREAS, the provision of such services would provide critical services for vulnerable populations and the event supports the City’s and Downtown Berkeley’s commitment to small businesses and restaurants, serving a municipal public purpose.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that the City of Berkeley hereby co-sponsors the first annual Taste of Downtown Berkeley event, and the event organizers have permission to use the City’s name and logo in the event’s promotional materials and signage naming the City of Berkeley as a co-sponsor solely for the purpose of the City indicating its endorsement of the event.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this co-sponsorship does not: (1) authorize financial support, whether in the form of fee waivers, a grant or provision of City services for free; (2) constitute the acceptance of any liability, management, or control on the part of the City for or over the Taste of Downtown Berkeley event; or (3) constitute regulatory approval of the event.

Page 3 of 4 ends

Page 577 ends

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

AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF SURPLUS FUNDS FROM THE

OFFICE EXPENSE ACCOUNT OF COUNCILMEMBER HARRISON AND

OTHER OFFICES FOR A GRANT TO THE BERKELEY ROTARY ENDOWMENT

TO PROVIDE PUBLIC SERVICES FOR A MUNICIPAL PUBLIC PURPOSE WHEREAS, Councilmember Harrison has surplus funds in her office expenditure account; and
WHEREAS, the mission of Berkeley Rotary, and 501(c)(3) non-profit, is to provide service to others, promote integrity, and advance world understanding, goodwill, and peace through its fellowship of business, professional, and community leaders; and WHEREAS, the Berkeley Rotary and Downtown Berkeley Association will be hosting the first Annual Taste of Downtown Berkeley, celebrating the exciting culinary scene in Downtown Berkeley, on Sunday, June 11, and fundraising for important community needs; and
WHEREAS, proceeds from the event will support the Berkeley Rotary’s community programs, including their RotaCare health clinic providing critical care to uninsured individuals, their scholarship program helping to support education of 15 low-income students, and their supportive housing services which provide hygiene kits and food to people in need in the Berkeley community; and
WHEREAS, the provision of such services would provide critical services for vulnerable populations and the event supports the City’s and Downtown Berkeley’s commitment to small businesses and restaurants, serving a municipal public purpose.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that funds relinquished by Councilmember Harrison from her Council Office Budget up to $500 and Councilmembers from their office budgets of an amount to be determined by each Councilmember, shall be granted to the Berkeley Rotary Endowment towards first Annual Taste of Downtown Berkeley event and fundraiser with proceeds serving a municipal public purpose.

Page 4 of 4 ends

Page 578 ends

CONSENT CALENDAR
May 23, 2023
Councilmember Sophie Hahn
City of Berkeley, District 5
1 To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Councilmember Sophie Hahn (Author); Councilmembers Kate Harrison and Terry Taplin (Co-Sponsors)
Subject: FY 24 Budget Referral: Study to support Housing Element commitment to increase housing and enhance economic vitality on all commercial corridors, with particular attention to the higher-resourced commercial avenues identified in Program 27 of the Housing Element, Solano Avenue, North Shattuck, and College Avenue.

RECOMMENDATION
Refer $250,000 to the FY 2024 budget process to study and develop options for all commercial corridors, with particular attention to the higher-resourced commercial avenues identified in Program 27 of the Housing Element, Solano Avenue, North Shattuck, and College Avenue, including but not limited to changes to zoning, incentives/programs/financing mechanisms, and objective design standards to:

1. Increase housing opportunities for people of all incomes, with an emphasis on housing affordable to households at or below 120% of Area Median Income (AMI);

2. Provide preferences to households previously excluded from residential areas served by these commercial corridors via discriminatory deed restrictions and/or discriminatory lending practices;

3. Provide housing with amenities for seniors, households with children, individuals with disabilities, artists, and other populations with specialized housing needs;

4. Ensure recommendations for zoning and design standards consider unique characteristics of each commercial area, including lot sizes and depths, availability of rear-access to parcels, abutting/neighboring residential zoning standards, and any other unique characteristics of each commercial district and its surroundings;

5. Enhance the viability and avoid displacement of locally-owned and neighborhood- serving commercial uses both during construction and over the long term, including but not limited to studying potential temporary relocation of businesses during construction, ”right to return” for existing establishments, appropriately-sized commercial spaces for locally owned businesses, and the potential for new commercial spaces to be offered at lower rents as a community benefit. Examples of neighborhood serving commercial uses may change as retail trends develop, but could include: grocery/food stores, banks, dry

Page 1 of 4 ends

Page 579 ends

2 cleaning and shoe repair, hardware stores, wellness and hair salons, restaurants and cafes, fitness centers, and clothing and gift shops.

6. More generally, study potential ground floor uses to support locally-owned commerce, housing, and other potential uses, so long as they do not break necessary continuity of retail.

POLICY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
On May 1, 2023, the Land Use, Housing, & Economic Development Committee adopted the following action: M/S/C (Robinson/Bartlett) to forward the item to Council with a positive recommendation that the City Council approve the item with the Author’s updated subject line and recommendations as follows:

SUBJECT LINE
FY24 Budget Referral: Study to support Housing Element commitment to increase housing and enhance economic vitality on all commercial corridors, with particular attention to the higher-resourced commercial avenues identified in Program 27 of the Housing Element, Solano Avenue, North Shattuck, and College Avenue.

RECOMMENDATION
Refer $250,000 to the FY 2024 budget process to study and develop options for all commercial corridors, with particular attention to the higher-resourced commercial avenues identified in Program 27 of the Housing Element, Solano Avenue, North Shattuck, and College Avenue, including but not limited to changes to zoning, incentives/programs/ financing mechanisms, and objective design standards to:

1. Increase housing opportunities for people of all incomes, with an emphasis on housing affordable to households at or below 120% of Area Median Income (AMI);

2. Provide preferences to households previously excluded from residential areas served by these commercial corridors via discriminatory deed restrictions and/or discriminatory lending practices;

3. Provide housing with amenities for seniors, households with children, individuals with disabilities, artists, and other populations with specialized housing needs;

5. Enhance the viability and avoid displacement of locally-owned and neighborhood- serving commercial uses both during construction and over the long term, including but not limited to studying potential temporary relocation of businesses during construction, “right to return” for existing establishments, appropriately-sized commercial spaces for locally owned businesses, and the potential for new commercial spaces to be offered at lower rents as a community benefit. Examples of neighborhood serving commercial uses may change as retail trends develop, but could include: grocery/food stores, banks, dry cleaning and shoe repair, hardware stores, wellness and hair salons, restaurants and cafes, fitness centers, and clothing and gift shops.

Page 2 of 4 ends

Page 580 ends

3 6. More generally, study potential ground floor uses to support locally-owned commerce, housing, and other potential uses, so long as they do not break necessary continuity of retail.

Vote: All Ayes.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
$250,000 from the City’s General Fund

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
Program 27 of Berkeley’s approved 2023 Housing Element identifies transportation and commercial corridors as priority development areas. This program specifically identifies Solano Avenue, North Shattuck and College Avenue commercial districts as areas for increased housing.

As Part of the Land Use, Safety, and Environmental Justice Element Update, the City of Berkeley has committed to:
“update zoning map and development standards to accommodate housing capacity and growth on transit and commercial corridors, particularly in the highest resource and higher income neighborhoods pursuant to the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing requirement.

These updates will increase allowed densities and/or development capacity with the goal of achieving consistency among all transit and commercial corridors, especially between formerly red-lined areas and higher-resource areas of Solano Avenue, north Shattuck Avenue, and College Avenue.”1
Funds are required to study opportunities to increase housing capacity on Solano Avenue, North Shattuck and College Avenue. This study and options developed, including potential programs, changes to zoning, and other measures as outlined in the Recommendation or further developed through study should be presented to the City Council prior to referring any zoning changes to the Planning Commission.

The goal of the study is to enhance housing opportunities in higher resourced neighborhoods, increase access for formerly excluded communities, and ensure opportunities for vibrant, locally-owned, neighborhood-serving commercial uses along the corridors to continue and/or expand.

BACKGROUND
The Housing Element Update will serve as the City of Berkeley’s housing plan for the next eight years (2023-2031). It is an important opportunity for Berkeley’s residents and community 1 https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Berkeley_2023-2031%20Housing%20Element_02- 17-2023v2_0.pdf

Page 3 of 4 ends

Page 581 ends

4 members to come together to assess housing needs, identify policy and resource priorities, and find solutions to implement a wide range of housing choices. The plan contains goals, policies, and programs that will guide the City’s decision-making around the development and rehabilitation of housing.

The Housing Element serves as a comprehensive document for everyone in the Berkeley community. Racial and social equity, and protections for vulnerable and historically impacted communities, are key factors in this update to the City’s housing plan.

The Housing Element is mandated by State law to be updated every eight years and certified by California’s Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). Each jurisdiction in California receives a target number of homes to plan for called the Regional Housing Needs Allocation, or RHNA. On December 16, 2021, Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) Executive Board conducted a public hearing and adopted the Final RHNA Plan. The total Regional Housing Needs Determination (RHND) for the Bay Area in the 2023-2031 period is 441,176 units. Berkeley’s RHNA for the 2023-2031 period is 8,934 residential units.2 Beyond the requirements outlined in the Housing element itself, it is overdue for additional housing – particularly affordable housing – to be constructed along these key, higher resourced corridors to advance our City’s commitment to equity. As many other neighborhoods are already doing their fair share to provide additional housing, it is time for us to ensure additional affordable housing is constructed in higher resource neighborhoods as well.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
Housing near transit can reduce greenhouse gas impacts and local commerce reduces the need to travel for everyday needs.

CONTACT PERSON
Councilmember Sophie Hahn, (510) 981-7150
2 https://berkeleyca.gov/construction-development/land-use-development/general-plan-and-area- plans/housing-element-update

Page 4 of 4 ends

Page 582 ends

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

CONSENT CALENDAR
May 23, 2023
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Councilmember Wengraf (Author), Mayor Arreguín (Co-Sponsor), Councilmember Taplin (Co-Sponsor), Councilmember Hahn (Co-Sponsor) Subject: Support for H.R.603 - HEAL Act

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution in support of H.R.603 (Gottheimer) - Holocaust Education and Antisemitism Lessons Act or the HEAL Act and send it to the author, Rep. Josh Gottheimer, with copies to Rep. Kathy Manning, Rep. Barbara Lee and Senator Dianne Feinstein.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
None.

BACKGROUND
H.R. 603, a bipartisan bill with over 100 co-sponsors would direct the Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, D.C. to conduct a study on Holocaust education efforts in public schools nationwide. The study would determine which states and school districts require or do not require Holocaust education in their curriculum and which offer optional Holocaust education. The study would identify standards and requirements schools mandate on Holocaust education, the types and quality of instructional materials used to teach, and the approaches used by schools to assess what students learn. The Holocaust Memorial Museum would report the results of the study to Congress.

There is mounting evidence that knowledge about the Holocaust is beginning to fade.

A 2020 survey1 measuring Holocaust awareness in the U.S. found that roughly two- thirds of those asked did not know how many Jewish people died. The survey of Americans between 18 and 40 also found that 48% could not name one concentration camp or ghetto.

According to recent analysis2, a majority of U.S. states do not have laws requiring public school students to learn about the horrors of the Holocaust. 1 Most states lack laws requiring Holocaust and genocide education (axios.com) 2 Ibid.

Page 1 of 10 ends

Page 583 ends

Support for H.R.603 - HEAL Act CONSENT CALENDAR
May 23, 2023

Page 2 ends

Congressmember and lead sponsor, Josh Gottheimer (NJ-5) said of the bill, “We all have an obligation to teach future generations about this evil. We have an obligation to try to heal our communities. We have an obligation to teach about this stain of hatred, so that it never happens ever again.”
Congressmember Bonnie Watson Coleman (NJ-12) stated, "At a time when the teaching of history is under attack, the lessons of the Holocaust are more urgent now than ever before.” She added that, “Antisemitism is experiencing a frightening resurgence in the United States and across the globe. Recent remarks by well-known public figures threaten to stoke the same fires of hate that brought the Nazi Party to power and resulted in genocide.”
Congressmember Kathy Manning (NC-6) proclaimed, “It is vitally important to teach students about the history of the Holocaust and antisemitism and to empower them to recognize and confront hate whenever they see it. As we face rising antisemitism, it is critical to expand education nationwide about the history and unique nature of antisemitism, the conspiracy theories and scapegoating that have incited hatred and violence for centuries, and led to the Holocaust. Education and understanding are a critical antidote to the spreading of misinformation and hate,” The City of Berkeley has a deep commitment to recognizing and understanding the importance of Holocaust history and education in efforts to combat rising antisemitism.

For the past twenty years the City has supported an annual Holocaust Remembrance Day Program for community members. Berkeley was also instrumental in the United Against Hate Campaign, initiated in 2017, in response to white supremacist rallies in the region.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
No direct impact on environmental sustainability.

CONTACT PERSON
Councilmember Wengraf Council District 6 510-981-7160
Attachments:
1: Resolution
2: H.R.603 - HEAL Act

Page 2 of 10 ends

Page 584 ends

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

SUPPORT FOR H.R. 603 - HEAL ACT
WHEREAS, there is mounting evidence that knowledge about the Holocaust is beginning to fade; and
WHEREAS, the Anti-Defamation League found Antisemitic Incidents in the U.S. at their highest number in 2021 since they started tracking in 1979; and WHEREAS, the majority of states in the U.S. do not have laws requiring public school students to learn about the horrors of the Holocaust; and WHEREAS, Congresswoman Kathie Manning (NC-6) eloquently stated, “As we face rising antisemitism, it is critical to expand education nationwide about the history and unique nature of antisemitism, the conspiracy theories and scapegoating that have incited hatred and violence for centuries, and led to the Holocaust”; and WHEREAS, the HEAL Act will direct the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum to conduct a study on current Holocaust education efforts in the U.S and provide the report to Congress as a first step.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that it unanimously supports H.R. 603 – Holocaust Education and Antisemitism Lessons Act (HEAL Act).

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Berkeley held its 20 th Annual Holocaust Remembrance Day Program on April 16, 2023 to honor survivors, remember those who perished and remind us all to never forget the atrocities nor let them happen again.

Exhibits
A: City of Berkeley's 20th Annual Holocaust Remembrance Day Program:
https://youtu.be/texUkWVoHIc

Page 3 of 10 ends

Page 585 ends

Support for H.R.603 - HEAL Act

CONSENT CALENDAR
May 23, 2023

Page 4 ends

Page 4 of 10 ends

Page 586 ends

Support for H.R.603 - HEAL Act

CONSENT CALENDAR
May 23, 2023

Page 5 ends

Page 5 of 10 ends

Page 587 ends

Support for H.R.603 - HEAL Act

CONSENT CALENDAR
May 23, 2023

Page 6 ends

Page 6 of 10 ends

Page 588 ends

Support for H.R.603 - HEAL Act

CONSENT CALENDAR
May 23, 2023

Page 7 ends

Page 7 of 10 ends

Page 589 ends

Support for H.R.603 - HEAL Act

CONSENT CALENDAR
May 23, 2023

Page 8 ends

Page 8 of 10 ends

Page 590 ends

Support for H.R.603 - HEAL Act

CONSENT CALENDAR
May 23, 2023

Page 9 ends

Page 9 of 10 ends

Page 591 ends

Support for H.R.603 - HEAL Act

CONSENT CALENDAR
May 23, 2023

Page 10 ends

Page 10 of 10 ends

Page 592 ends

Page 1 ends

CONSENT CALENDAR
May 23, 2023
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Councilmember Rigel Robinson (Author), Mayor Jesse Arreguin (Co- Sponsor), Councilmember Terry Taplin (Co-Sponsor)
Subject: Relinquishment of Council Office Budget Funds to the General Fund and Grant of Such Funds for Pacific Center for Human Growth Fiftieth Anniversary Gala

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution approving the expenditure of an amount not to exceed $1,000 per Councilmember, including $1,000 from Councilmember Robinson, $500 from Mayor Arreguin, and $500 from Councilmember Taplin, to Pacific Center for Human Growth in recognition of its fiftieth anniversary celebration on June 3, 2023.

BACKGROUND
Pacific Center for Human Growth was founded in 1973 and is the oldest LGBTQIA+ center in the Bay Area. The Center provides mental health services on a sliding scale with a focus on social justice and cultural responsiveness for LGBTQIA+ individuals, QTBIPOC individuals, and their families.

Pacific Center has nearly 200 volunteers and 11 staff members and serves over 3,000 people each year as the only sliding-scale LGBTQIA+ mental health clinic in Alameda County.1 Their services include peer-to-peer support groups, community outreach, and facilitated workshops.

Pacific Center is celebrating its fiftieth anniversary with a gala event on June 3, 2023 and is fundraising from the community to increase their capacity to provide vital services to LGBTQIA+ and QTBIPOC communities.
1 About Us | Pacific Center

Page 1 of 3 ends

Page 593 ends

Page 2 ends

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
No General Fund impact; $1,000 is available from Councilmember Robinson’s discretionary account, $500 from Mayor Arreguin’s discretionary account, and $500 from Councilmember Taplin’s discretionary account.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
None.

CONTACT PERSON
Councilmember Rigel Robinson, (510) 981-7170
Sam Greenberg, Legislative Assistant
Attachments:
1: Resolution

Page 2 of 3 ends

Page 594 ends

Page 3 ends

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

AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF SURPLUS FUNDS FROM THE OFFICE

EXPENSE ACCOUNTS OF THE MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS FOR A GRANT

TO PROVIDE PUBLIC SERVICES FOR A MUNICIPAL PUBLIC PURPOSE WHEREAS, Councilmember Rigel Robinson, Mayor Jesse Arreguin, and Councilmember Terry Taplin have surplus funds in their office expenditure accounts; and WHEREAS, a California non-profit tax exempt corporation, Pacific Center for Human Growth, is hosting its 50th Anniversary Celebration on June 3, 2023; and WHEREAS, Pacific Center for Human Growth would benefit from funding from the community to support its essential programs, ongoing operations, and increased costs associated with its recent relocation to Downtown Berkeley; and WHEREAS, the provision of such funding would fulfill the municipal public purpose of supporting the Bay Area’s oldest LGBTQIA+ center, which has for fifty years served as a mental health service provider for LGBTQ+ community members, providing services on a sliding scale.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that the $1,000 relinquished by Councilmember Robinson, $500 by Mayor Arreguin, and $500 by Councilmember Taplin from their Council Office Budgets and any other Councilmember who wishes to contribute shall be granted to Pacific Center for Human Growth.

Page 3 of 3 ends

Page 595 ends

Page 596 ends

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

PUBLIC HEARING
May 23, 2023
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Dee Williams-Ridley, City Manager
Submitted by: Jordan Klein, Director, Planning & Development Department Subject: ZAB Appeal: 469 Kentucky Avenue, Use Permit #ZP2022-0087

RECOMMENDATION
Conduct a public hearing and, upon conclusion, adopt a Resolution affirming the Zoning Adjustments Board (ZAB) decision to approve Use Permit # ZP2022-0087 to demolish a single-family dwelling and construct a three-story, 3,310 square foot single-family dwelling with a two-car garage, and dismiss the appeal.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
None.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
On July 8, 2022, Maurice Levitch submitted an application on behalf of property owner Aidan Keefe to demolish an existing single-family dwelling at 469 Kentucky Avenue and construct in its place a three-story, 3,310 square foot single-family dwelling with an Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU)1, and a two-car garage (see Attachments 1A and 1B).

On November 8, 2022 the application was deemed complete.

On January 12, 2023, the ZAB conducted a public hearing for the use permit application (#ZP2022-0087). After hearing public comments and holding discussion, the ZAB approved the use permit by a vote of 8-0-0-0 (Ayes: Tregub, Duff, Gaffney, Thompson, Lunaparra, O’Keefe, Kahn and Sanderson; Noes (none), Abstain (none), Absent (none)), with added conditions for staff review of privacy screening, protection of a shared pergola, notice and limits on road closures, and outdoor screens on windows for bird safety.
1 Per BMC 23.306.030, ADU’s are permitted with a Zoning Certificate. They are not part of ZAB’s discretionary review.

The ADU is only mentioned here for purposes of context.

Page 1 of 111 ends

Page 597 ends

ZAB Appeal: 469 Kentucky Avenue, Use Permit #ZP2022-0087 PUBLIC HEARING May 23, 2023

Page 2 ends

On January 31, 2023, staff issued a Notice of Decision of the ZAB approval.

On February 9, 2023, the City Clerk received an appeal filing from Stephen B. Bedrick.

On or before May 9, 2023, staff posted the public hearing notice at the site and three nearby locations, and notices were mailed to property owners and occupants within 300 feet of the project site, and to all interested neighborhood organizations. The Council must conduct a public hearing to resolve the appeal.

BACKGROUND
The project site is located at 469 Kentucky Avenue in the Berkeley Hills, within the Hillside Overlay Zone, on steep terrain in a residential area that includes a mix of one-, two-, and three-story single-family dwellings, with areas of open space in excess of that required, and mature vegetation. This section of Kentucky Avenue is narrow and the road is divided, with the northbound lane at a higher elevation than the southbound lane. The site is developed with a three-story, 1,773 square-foot single-family dwelling, and a single-car garage located in the front setback. The applicant proposes to demolish the existing structures and construct a three-story 3,310 square-foot single- family dwelling with an attached ADU, and a two-car garage. The proposed two-car garage would be located in the front setback, similar to the existing structure. The project also includes a detached shed at the rear of the property, and an uncovered garbage and recycling enclosure at the front of the property. The roof of the proposed dwelling unit would have a maximum height of 31 feet, 8.5 inches and an average height of 29 feet, 4 inches. The applicant team shared that the proposed dwelling was designed to minimally expand the footprint beyond that of the existing dwelling, and avoid increasing the height of the structure by excavating the ground floor to gain additional floor area.

The proposed ground floor level would consist of a TV room, a laundry room, and a studio-style ADU with entry access via an exterior staircase and landing over the garage roof. The second floor would consist of four bedrooms and two bathrooms, with access to a front balcony. The top floor would contain the kitchen, dining room, family room, and a study. This floor would provide access to the front and rear balconies. Pursuant to Berkeley Municipal Code (BMC) 23.502.020(B), the TV room and the study meet the definition of a bedroom;2 accordingly, the proposed dwelling would include a total of six bedrooms. The ADU is not included in the bedroom count because ADUs are not subject to discretionary review. However, if the proposed ADU is not developed concurrently with the proposed project, a Use Permit Modification would be required for 2 Bedroom. Any habitable space in a dwelling unit or habitable accessory structure other than a kitchen or living room that is intended for or capable of being used for sleeping with a door that closes the room off from other common space such as living and kitchen areas that is at least 70 square feet in area, exclusive of closets and other appurtenant space, and meets Building Code standards for egress, light and ventilation. A room identified as a den, library, study, loft, dining room, or other extra room that satisfies this definition will be considered a bedroom for the purposes of applying this requirement. Bathrooms, toilet rooms, closets, halls, storage or utility spaces and similar areas are not considered habitable spaces.

Page 2 of 111 ends

Page 598 ends

ZAB Appeal: 469 Kentucky Avenue, Use Permit #ZP2022-0087 PUBLIC HEARING May 23, 2023

Page 3 ends

any additional rooms that meet the BMC criteria for a bedroom. The red maple in the back yard would be retained, the small lemon tree and a yucca in the front would be removed during construction. Replacement trees and other plantings would be incorporated into the landscaping for the property.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
The issues raised in the appellant’s letter and staff responses are provided below. For the sake of brevity, the appeal issues are not restated in their entirety. Please refer to the appeal letter and its attachments (Attachment 3) for the full text.

Issue:

The appellants assert that the demolition process, including dumpsters and dump trucks, is likely to totally block their narrow, one-lane, one-way street for hours at a time. This will prevent residents from being able to come and go from their house, and will obstruct emergency vehicles and delivery trucks.

Response:

The appellant’s objections are not to the proposed removal of the old home and construction of a new one, per se. Rather, they are concerned with a perceived detriment to the access route to and from their home during demolition and construction activities. However, it is a standard condition on permits of this type, and is specifically a condition of approval on the permit in question, that the applicant prepare a Transportation Construction Plan (TCP) for all phases of construction. Specifically, the TCP is required to address site activities that would require alterations, closures, blockages to sidewalks, pedestrian paths, or vehicle travel lanes; storage of building materials, dumpsters, debris anywhere in the public right-of-way; provision of exclusive contractor parking on-street; or significant truck activity. The TCP is also required to include the locations of material and equipment storage, trailers, worker parking, a schedule of site operations that may block traffic, and provisions for traffic control. The applicant is required to secure the City Traffic Engineer’s approval of the TCP prior to initiating construction activities.

Construction and demolition activities occur under a variety of challenging situations within the Hillside Overlay Zone, and accordingly the City requires applicants to prepare TCPs specifically to mitigate concerns such as those expressed by the appellant. As directed by the City’s condition of approval, the Traffic Engineer will review the applicant’s prepared TCP to ensure that appropriate measures are included to address street access during construction, a schedule for site operations that may block traffic, and traffic control measures along Kentucky Avenue. Therefore, the appellant’s concerns regarding street access during construction would be addressed by implementation of the required TCP.

Page 3 of 111 ends

Page 599 ends

ZAB Appeal: 469 Kentucky Avenue, Use Permit #ZP2022-0087 PUBLIC HEARING May 23, 2023

Page 4 ends

Issue:

The appellant asserts that they were unable to properly present their objections to the ZAB because staff did not provide their January 4, 2023 objection letter to ZAB commissioners prior to the hearing, and they were not granted the opportunity to speak during the January 12, 2023 virtual hearing.

Response:

All supplemental communications received from members of the public and interested parties regarding the projects listed on the January 12, 2023 ZAB hearing agenda were shared with ZAB commissioners via email on January 11, 2023. The supplemental communication was also posted on the ZAB webpage here: https://berkeleyca.gov/your- government/boards-commissions/zoning-adjustments-board
The communications specific to the 469 Kentucky Avenue project included two letters from the appellant dated January 4, 2023 and January 9, 2023. Both letters included the appellant’s concerns regarding street access during construction, among other topics.

During the January 12, 2023 ZAB hearing, a total of four individuals requested to speak on the item. Three of the four individuals expressed concerns regarding traffic along Kentucky Avenue during demolition and construction activities, road closures, hazardous materials, dust control, privacy, and the inclusion of bird safe glass. The fourth individual, self-identified as Kathryn Sullivan, was provided with the opportunity to speak on the item but appeared to experience audio issues, and as a result the ZAB could not hear the individual’s comments.

Prior to making a decision on the item, ZAB considered the whole of the record including the two letters received from the appellant. In addition, members of the public raised similar concerns regarding street access along Kentucky Avenue. During deliberation, the ZAB noted that the City’s conditions of approval require the applicant to prepare a TCP to mitigate issues related to street access during demolition and construction. Further, the ZAB conditioned the project to require that the applicant notify neighbors 48 hours in advance of any potential road closures, and avoid road closures during routine waste collection services. ZAB was made aware of the appellant’s concerns and considered those concerns as part of the decision-making process.

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

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

Page 4 of 111 ends

Page 600 ends

ZAB Appeal: 469 Kentucky Avenue, Use Permit #ZP2022-0087 PUBLIC HEARING May 23, 2023

Page 5 ends

the ZAB.

Action Deadline:

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

CONTACT PERSON
Jordan Klein, Director, Planning & Development Department, (510) 981-7534 Steven Buckley, Land Use Planning Manager, Planning & Development Department (510) 981-7411
Russell Roe, Associate Planner, Planning & Development Department, (510) 981-7548

ATTACHMENTS
1: Resolution
Exhibit A: January 12, 2023 ZAB hearing Findings and Conditions Exhibit B: Project Plans
2: January 12, 2023 ZAB hearing staff report
3: Appeal letter, dated received February 9, 2023
4: Public Comments received prior to January 12, 2023 ZAB hearing

5. Index to Administrative Record

6. Administrative Record
7: Public Hearing Notice

Page 5 of 111 ends

Page 601 ends

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

AFFIRMING THE ZONING ADJUSTMENTS BOARD DECISION TO APPROVE USE PERMIT #ZP2022-0087 TO DEMOLISH A SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING AND CONSTRUCT A 3,310 SQUARE FOOT THREE-STORY SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE

AND TWO-CAR GARAGE, AND DISMISS THE APPEAL
WHEREAS, on July 8, 2022, Maurice Levitch submitted an application for Use Permit #ZP2022-0087 to demolish a single-family dwelling and construct a 3,310 square foot three-story single-family residence and two-car garage; and WHEREAS, on November 8, 2022 staff deemed this application complete; and WHEREAS, on December 22, 2022, staff mailed public hearing notices to property owners and occupants within 300 feet of the project site, and to interested neighborhood organizations, and posted notices within the neighborhood at three locations; and WHEREAS, on January 12, 2023 the Zoning Adjustments Board (ZAB) conducted a public hearing for the Use Permit. After hearing public comments and holding discussion, the ZAB approved the Use Permit by a vote of 8-0-0-0, with added conditions for staff review of privacy screening, protection of a shared pergola, notice and limits on road closures, and outdoor screens on windows for bird safety; and WHEREAS, on January 31, 2023, staff issued the notice of the ZAB decision; and WHEREAS, on February 9, 2023, the City Clerk receive an appeal filing from Stephen B.

Bedrick; and
WHEREAS, on or before May 9, 2023, staff posted public hearing notices near the site and mailed notices to property owners and occupants within 300 feet of the project site and to all registered neighborhood groups that cover this area; and WHEREAS, on May 23, 2023, the Council held a public hearing to consider the ZAB’s decision, and in the opinion of this Council, the facts stated in, or ascertainable from, the public record, including the staff report and comments made at the public hearing, warrant approving the project.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that the City Council hereby adopts the findings made by the ZAB in Exhibit A to affirm the decision of the ZAB to approve Use Permit #ZP2022-0087, adopts the conditions of approval in Exhibit A; adopts the project plans in Exhibit B; and dismisses the appeal.

Page 6 of 111 ends

Page 602 ends

Page 7 ends

Exhibits
Exhibit A: Findings and Conditions, date January 12, 2023 Exhibit B: Project Plans, received July 8, 2022

Page 7 of 111 ends

Page 603 ends

A t t a c h m e n t 1, Exhibit A
F i n d i n g s a n d C o n d i t i o n s
JANUARY 12, 2022
1947 Center Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 Tel: 510.981.7410 TDD: 510.981.7474 Fax: 510.981.7420 E-mail: [email protected]
469 Kentucky Avenue
Use Permit #ZP2022-0087 to demolish a single-family dwelling and construct a 3,310 square foot three-story single-family residence and two-car garage.

PERMITS REQUIRED
 Use Permit to demolish a dwelling unit, per Berkeley Municipal Code (BMC) Section

23.326.030
 Use Permit to construct a new single-family dwelling, per BMC Section 23.202.020(A)  Use Permit for a sixth bedroom on a parcel, per BMC Section 23.202.030  Administrative Use Permit for exceeding 28-feet in average height, per BMC Sections

23.202.050(D) and 23.210.020(C)(2)
 Administrative Use Permit for a reduced front setback in the Hillside Overlay, per BMC Section 23.210.020(C)(4)
 Administrative Use Permit for a new accessory building, per BMC 23.304.060(A)  Administrative Use Permit for an unenclosed accessory structure within a required setback, per BMC 23.304.070(C)(1)
I. CEQA FINDINGS

1. This project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, Public Resources Code §21000, et seq. and California Code of Regulations, §15000, et seq.) pursuant to Sections 15303 (“New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures”)

2. Furthermore, none of the exceptions in CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 apply, as follows:
(a) the site is not located in an environmentally sensitive area, (b) there are no cumulative impacts, (c) there are no significant effects, (d) the project is not located near a scenic highway, (e) the project site is not located on a hazardous waste site pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5, and (f) the project would not affect any historical resource.

II. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL

1. As required by BMC Section 23.326.020-030 of the BMC, the demolition phase of the project would not be materially detrimental to the housing needs and public interest of the affected neighborhood and Berkeley. It does not eliminate two or more units constructed before June 1980. The building was not removed from the rental market under the Ellis Act during the preceding five years, and there have not been any verified cases of harassment or threatened or actual illegal eviction during the immediately preceding three years.

Page 8 of 111 ends

Page 604 ends

469 KENTUCKY AVENUE - USE PERMIT #ZP2022-0087 FINDINGS & CONDITIONS January 12, 2023 Page 2 of 16

2. As required by Section 23.406.040(E)(1) of the BMC, the project, under the circumstances of this particular case existing at the time at which the application is granted, would not be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, and general welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed use or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements of the adjacent properties, the surrounding area or neighborhood, or to the general welfare of the City because:

A. Consistency with Development Standards: The proposed project conforms to the applicable Development Standards for the R-1(H) District (BMC Sections 23.202.050(D) &

23.210.020(C)(2), with the exception of the front setback. The proposal to construct one dwelling unit at this site is permissible because: (1) the proposed construction of a dwelling on the subject property conforms to the R-1(H) District standards for Uses Permitted; (2) the proposed side and rear setbacks meet or exceed the R-1(H) District requirements; (3) the proposed three-stories and 31.687 foot maximum height will not exceed the R-1 District limit of 35 feet; (4) the proposed average height is 29.3 feet, which is approvable with an AUP; (5 )the proposed lot coverage is 39.7 percent where 40 percent is allowed, and (6) the project includes 1,308 square feet of usable open space where 400 square feet is required.

B. Shadows: The new dwelling will cast slight new shadows on neighboring yards and buildings at certain times of year and times of day. However, impacts would be limited in duration and effect and would not substantially diminish sunlight for the affected residences.

C. Views: Substantial southwestward views are available from the area surrounding the project site, including from Kentucky Avenue, neighboring residences, and the residences uphill to the northeast of the project site. Sightlines available from these residences occur mostly over and beyond the proposed residence, and views of the San Francisco Bay will be substantially maintained. Thus, given existing conditions, including existing trees that obstruct views and the existing slope in the neighborhood, and the proposed height of the new dwelling, the proposed project will not unreasonably obstruct views.

D. Privacy and Air: The proposed single-family dwelling unit exceeds side and rear setback requirements in the R-1(H) Zoning District, and is consistent with the existing development and building-to-building separation pattern in this neighborhood.

E. Accessory Building and Unenclosed Accessory Structure. The proposed eighty-five square foot accessory building at the rear of the lot is under ten feet in average height and is more than seventy-five feet from the front lot line, and meets the applicable development standards. The garbage enclosure within the front setback will provide screening of solid waste containers.

F. Number of Bedrooms. The sixth bedroom will provide additional living area for the residents of the single-family dwelling and will not increase the density on the lot.

G. General Non-Detriment: The proposed project will have minimal impact on the neighborhood.

New shading will be limited on nearby residential uses, and privacy impacts have been kept minimal. In addition, the project approval is subject to the City’s standard conditions of approval regarding construction noise and air quality, waste diversion, toxics, and stormwater

Page 9 of 111 ends

Page 605 ends

469 KENTUCKY AVENUE - USE PERMIT #ZP2022-0087 FINDINGS & CONDITIONS January 12, 2023 Page 3 of 16
requirements, thereby ensuring the project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort or general welfare of persons residing or working in the area or neighborhood of such proposed use or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements of the adjacent properties, the surrounding area or neighborhood or to the general welfare of the City.

3. Per BMC 23.210.020(A), the project will meet the purpose of the Hillside Overlay Zone because:

A. The proposed two-car garage in the front setback is necessary due to the steep upward slope of the lot and is consistent with neighboring properties, which also have garages at the fronts of their lots. It will provide two off-street parking spaces on a narrow street in a location that is vulnerable to wildfire.

B. The additional height responds to the topography of the site while giving reasonable protection to views.

Page 10 of 111 ends

Page 606 ends

469 KENTUCKY AVENUE - USE PERMIT #ZP2022-0087 FINDINGS & CONDITIONS January 12, 2023 Page 4 of 16
III. STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR ALL PROJECTS
The following conditions, as well as all other applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, apply to this Permit:

1. Conditions Shall be Printed on Plans
The conditions of this Permit shall be printed on the second sheet of each plan set submitted for a building permit pursuant to this Use Permit, under the title ‘Use Permit Conditions.’ Additional sheets may also be used if the second sheet is not of sufficient size to list all of the conditions.

The sheet(s) containing the conditions shall be of the same size as those sheets containing the construction drawings; 8-1/2” by 11” sheets are not acceptable.

2. Compliance Required (BMC Section 23.102.050)
All land uses and structures in Berkeley must comply with the Zoning Ordinance and all applicable City ordinances and regulations. Compliance with the Zoning Ordinance does not relieve an applicant from requirements to comply with other federal, state, and City regulations that also apply to the property.

3. Approval Limited to Proposed Project and Replacement of Existing Uses (BMC Sections

23.404.060.B.1 and 2)
A. This Permit authorizes only the proposed project described in the application. In no way does an approval authorize other uses, structures or activities not included in the project description.

B. When the City approves a new use that replaces an existing use, any prior approval of the existing use becomes null and void when permits for the new use are exercised (e.g., building permit or business license issued). To reestablish the previously existing use, an applicant must obtain all permits required by the Zoning Ordinance for the use.

4. Conformance to Approved Plans (BMC Section 23.404.060.B.4) All work performed under an approved permit shall comply with the approved plans and any conditions of approval.

5. Exercise and Expiration of Permits (BMC Section 23.404.060.C) A. A permit authorizing a land use is exercised when both a valid City business license is issued (if required) and the land use is established on the property.

B. A permit authorizing construction is exercised when both a valid City building permit (if required) is issued and construction has lawfully begun.

C. The Zoning Officer may declare a permit lapsed if it is not exercised within one year of its issuance, except if the applicant has applied for a building permit or has made a substantial good faith effort to obtain a building permit and begin construction. The Zoning Officer may declare a permit lapsed only after 14 days written notice to the applicant. A determination that a permit has lapsed may be appealed to the ZAB in accordance with Chapter 23.410 (Appeals and Certification).

D. A permit declared lapsed shall be void and of no further force and effect. To establish the use or structure authorized by the lapsed permit, an applicant must apply for and receive City approval of a new permit.

Page 11 of 111 ends

Page 607 ends

469 KENTUCKY AVENUE - USE PERMIT #ZP2022-0087 FINDINGS & CONDITIONS January 12, 2023 Page 5 of 16

6. Permit Remains Effective for Vacant Property (BMC Section 23.404.060.D) Once a Permit for a use is exercised and the use is established, the permit authorizing the use remains effective even if the property becomes vacant. The same use as allowed by the original permit may be re-established without obtaining a new permit, except as set forth in Standard Condition #5 above.

7. Permit Modifications (BMC Section 23.404.070)
No change in the use or structure for which this Permit is issued is permitted unless the Permit is modified by the Board. The Zoning Officer may approve changes to plans approved by the Board, consistent with the Board’s policy adopted on May 24, 1978, which reduce the size of the project.

8. Permit Revocation (BMC Section 23.404.080)
The City may revoke or modify a discretionary permit for completed projects due to: 1) violations of permit requirements; 2) Changes to the approved project; and/or 3) Vacancy for one year or more. However, no lawful residential use can lapse, regardless of the length of time of the vacancy. Proceedings to revoke or modify a permit may be initiated by the Zoning Officer, Zoning Adjustments Board (ZAB), or City Council referral.

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

IV. ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS IMPOSED BY THE ZONING ADJUSTMENTS BOARD Pursuant to BMC 23.404.050(H), the Zoning Adjustments Board attaches the following additional conditions to this Permit:

Prior to Submittal of Any Building Permit:

Page 12 of 111 ends

Page 608 ends

469 KENTUCKY AVENUE - USE PERMIT #ZP2022-0087 FINDINGS & CONDITIONS January 12, 2023 Page 6 of 16

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

11. Roof Color. To avoid glare towards above grade residents, the roof shall be a shade of gray, green, brown or blue. The roof shall not be white or a similarly bright color, and shall not be of reflective material. Prior to issuance of a Building Permit, the applicant shall provide a sample and/or information regarding roof material and color for review and approval by the Zoning Officer.

12. Address Assignment. The applicant shall file an “Address Assignment Request Application” with the Permit Service Center (1947 Center Street) for any address change or new address associated with this Use Permit. The new address(es) shall be assigned and entered into the City’s database prior to the applicant’s submittal of a building permit application.

13. Pergola: The applicant shall submit a detailed plan, signed by both parties, showing how the shared pergola between 467 and 469 Kentucky Avenues will be protected and/or modified during and after construction.

14. Privacy Screening: The applicant shall submit a detailed plan, signed by both parties, showing the agreed-upon method of protecting privacy at 467 Kentucky Avenue from views from the front deck of the proposed house.

Prior to Issuance of A Building Permit

15. Per the Supplemental Geotechnical Peer Review prepared by Cotton, Shires and Associates, Inc., and dated November 8, 2022:

Geotechnical Plan Review - The applicant’s geotechnical consultant should review and approve all geotechnical aspects of the final project building and grading plans (i.e., site preparation and grading, shoring design, site surface and subsurface drainage improvements including site runoff discharge, and design parameters for foundations and retaining walls) to ensure that their recommendations have been properly incorporated.

The results of the plan review should be summarized by the Geotechnical Consultant in a letter and submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits.

Page 13 of 111 ends

Page 609 ends

469 KENTUCKY AVENUE - USE PERMIT #ZP2022-0087 FINDINGS & CONDITIONS January 12, 2023 Page 7 of 16

16. Number of Bedrooms / Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU): If the proposed ADU is not developed concurrently with the project, the applicant shall obtain a Use Permit Modification if the additional rooms that meet the definition of a bedroom bring the total number of bedrooms over six.

17. Construction and Demolition Diversion. Applicant shall submit a Construction Waste Management Plan that meets the requirements of BMC Chapter 19.37 including 100% diversion of asphalt, concrete, excavated soil and land-clearing debris and a minimum of 65% diversion of other nonhazardous construction and demolition waste.

18. Toxics. The applicant shall contact the Toxics Management Division (TMD) at 1947 Center Street or (510) 981-7470 to determine which of the following documents are required and timing for their submittal:

A. Environmental Site Assessments:
1) Phase I & Phase II Environmental Site Assessments (latest ASTM 1527-13). A recent Phase I ESA (less than 2 years old*) shall be submitted to TMD for developments for:
 All new commercial, industrial and mixed use developments and all large improvement projects.
 All new residential buildings with 5 or more dwelling units located in the Environmental Management Area (or EMA).
 EMA is available online
at: http://www.cityofberkeley.info/uploadedFiles/IT/Level_3_-_General/ema.pdf 2) Phase II ESA is required to evaluate Recognized Environmental Conditions (REC) identified in the Phase I or other RECs identified by TMD staff. The TMD may require a third-party toxicologist to review human or ecological health risks that may be identified.

The applicant may apply to the appropriate state, regional or county cleanup agency to evaluate the risks.
3) If the Phase I is over 2 years old, it will require a new site reconnaissance and interviews.

If the facility was subject to regulation under Title 15 of the Berkeley Municipal Code since the last Phase I was conducted, a new records review must be performed.

B. Soil and Groundwater Management Plan:
1) A Soil and Groundwater Management Plan (SGMP) shall be submitted to TMD for all non- residential projects, and residential or mixed-use projects with five or more dwelling units, that: (1) are in the Environmental Management Area (EMA) and (2) propose any excavations deeper than 5 feet below grade. The SGMP shall be site specific and identify procedures for soil and groundwater management including identification of pollutants and disposal methods. The SGMP will identify permits required and comply with all applicable local, state and regional requirements.
2) The SGMP shall require notification to TMD of any hazardous materials found in soils and groundwater during development. The SGMP will provide guidance on managing odors during excavation. The SGMP will provide the name and phone number of the individual responsible for implementing the SGMP and post the name and phone number for the person responding to community questions and complaints. 3) TMD may impose additional conditions as deemed necessary. All requirements of the approved SGMP shall be deemed conditions of approval of this Use Permit.

C. Building Materials Survey:
1) Prior to approving any permit for partial or complete demolition and renovation activities involving the removal of 20 square or lineal feet of interior or exterior walls, a building

Page 14 of 111 ends

Page 610 ends

469 KENTUCKY AVENUE - USE PERMIT #ZP2022-0087 FINDINGS & CONDITIONS January 12, 2023 Page 8 of 16
materials survey shall be conducted by a qualified professional. The survey shall include, but not be limited to, identification of any lead-based paint, asbestos, polychlorinated biphenyl (PBC) containing equipment, hydraulic fluids in elevators or lifts, refrigeration systems, treated wood and mercury containing devices (including fluorescent light bulbs and mercury switches). The Survey shall include plans on hazardous waste or hazardous materials removal, reuse or disposal procedures to be implemented that fully comply state hazardous waste generator requirements (22 California Code of Regulations 66260 et seq). The Survey becomes a condition of any building or demolition permit for the project.

Documentation evidencing disposal of hazardous waste in compliance with the survey shall be submitted to TMD within 30 days of the completion of the demolition. If asbestos is identified, Bay Area Air Quality Management District Regulation 11-2-401.3 a notification must be made and the J number must be made available to the City of Berkeley Permit Service Center.

D. Hazardous Materials Business Plan:
1) A Hazardous Materials Business Plan (HMBP) in compliance with BMC Section

15.12.040 shall be submitted electronically at http://cers.calepa.ca.gov/ within 30 days if on-site hazardous materials exceed BMC 15.20.040. HMBP requirement can be found at http://ci.berkeley.ca.us/hmr/
Prior to Issuance of Any Building (Construction) Permit

19. HVAC Noise Reduction. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project applicant shall submit plans that show the location, type, and design of proposed heating, ventilation, and cooling (HVAC) equipment. In addition, the applicant shall provide product specification sheets or a report from a qualified acoustical consultant showing that operation of the proposed HVAC equipment will meet the City’s exterior noise requirements in BMC Section 13.40.050. The City’s Planning and Development Department shall review the submitted plans, including the selected HVAC equipment, to verify compliance with exterior noise standards.

20. Electric Vehicle (EV) Charging. Each dwelling unit shall install a listed raceway, wiring, and power to allow for future Level 2 (240 Volt/40 amp) plug-in electric vehicle (EV) charging system installation as specified by the Berkeley Green Code (BMC Section 19.37.040). Readiness for EV charging and EV charging station installations shall be noted on the construction plans.

21. Water Efficient Landscaping. Landscaping, totaling 500 square feet of more of new landscaping or 2,500 square feet or more of renovated irrigated area, shall comply with the State’s Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO). MWELO-compliant landscape documentation including a planting, grading, and irrigation plan shall be included in site plans. Water budget calculations are also required for landscapes of 2,500 square feet or more and shall be included in site plans. The reference evapotranspiration rate (ETo) for Berkeley is 41.8.

22. Prohibition of Natural Gas Infrastructure in New Buildings. The project shall comply with the City of Berkeley Prohibition of Natural Gas Infrastructure in New Buildings (BMC Chapter 12.80).

23. Recycling and Organics Collection. Applicant shall provide recycling and organics collection areas for occupants, clearly marked on site plans, which comply with the Alameda County Mandatory Recycling Ordinance (ACWMA Ordinance 2012-01).

Page 15 of 111 ends

Page 611 ends

469 KENTUCKY AVENUE - USE PERMIT #ZP2022-0087 FINDINGS & CONDITIONS January 12, 2023 Page 9 of 16

24. Public Works ADA. Plans submitted for building permit shall include replacement of sidewalk, curb, gutter, and other streetscape improvements, as necessary to comply with current City of Berkeley standards for accessibility.

During Construction:

25. Construction Hours. Construction activity shall be limited to between the hours of 8:00 AM and 6:00 PM on Monday through Friday, and between 9:00 AM and Noon on Saturday. No construction-related activity shall occur on Sunday or any Federal Holiday.

26. The height and location of the proposed structure, property lines and spot elevations shall be verified by a licensed surveyor or engineer on site after foundation forms are placed, but before pouring concrete or placing construction material in its permanent position. This verification shall be to the satisfaction of the Zoning Officer.

27. Per the Supplemental Geotechnical Peer Review prepared by Cotton, Shires and Associates, Inc., and dated November 8, 2022:

Geotechnical Construction Inspections - The Geotechnical Consultant should inspect, test (as needed), and approve all geotechnical aspects of the project construction. The inspections should include, but not necessarily be limited to: site preparation and grading, site surface and subsurface drainage improvements, and excavations for foundations and other improvements prior to the placement of steel and concrete.

The results of these inspections and the as-built conditions of the project should be described by the geotechnical consultant in a letter and submitted to the City Engineer for review prior to final (granting of occupancy) project approval.

28. Public Works - Implement BAAQMD-Recommended Measures during Construction. For all proposed projects, BAAQMD recommends implementing all the Basic Construction Mitigation Measures, listed below to meet the best management practices threshold for fugitive dust:

A. All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day.

B. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered.

C. All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited.

D. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 mph.

E. All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible.

Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used.

F. Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to 5 minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points.

G. All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified visible emissions evaluator.

Page 16 of 111 ends

Page 612 ends

469 KENTUCKY AVENUE - USE PERMIT #ZP2022-0087 FINDINGS & CONDITIONS January 12, 2023 Page 10 of 16
H. Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the lead agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District‘s phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.

29. Construction and Demolition Diversion. Divert debris according to your plan and collect required documentation. Get construction debris receipts from sorting facilities in order to verify diversion requirements. Upload recycling and disposal receipts if using Green Halo and submit online for City review and approval prior to final inspection. Alternatively, complete the second page of the original Construction Waste Management Plan and present it, along with your construction debris receipts, to the Building Inspector by the final inspection to demonstrate diversion rate compliance. The Zoning Officer may request summary reports at more frequent intervals, as necessary to ensure compliance with this requirement.

30. Low-Carbon Concrete. The project shall maintain compliance with the Berkeley Green Code (BMC Chapter 19.37) including use of concrete mix design with a cement reduction of at least 25%. Documentation on concrete mix design shall be available at all times at the construction site for review by City Staff.

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

The applicant shall secure the City Traffic Engineer’s approval of a TCP. Please contact the Office of Transportation at 981-7010, or 1947 Center Street, and ask to speak to a traffic engineer. In addition to other requirements of the Traffic Engineer, this plan shall include the locations of material and equipment storage, trailers, worker parking, a schedule of site operations that may block traffic, and provisions for traffic control. The TCP shall be consistent with any other requirements of the construction phase.

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

32. Road Closures: Occupants of all homes on Kentucky Avenue between Michigan Avenue and Maryland Avenue shall be notified of all road closures at least 48 hours in advance. Roads shall not be closed on garbage and recycling collection days.

Page 17 of 111 ends

Page 613 ends

469 KENTUCKY AVENUE - USE PERMIT #ZP2022-0087 FINDINGS & CONDITIONS January 12, 2023 Page 11 of 16

33. Avoid Disturbance of Nesting Birds. Initial site disturbance activities, including vegetation and concrete removal, shall be prohibited during the general avian nesting season (February 1 to August 30), if feasible. If nesting season avoidance is not feasible, the applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to conduct a preconstruction nesting bird survey to determine the presence/absence, location, and activity status of any active nests on or adjacent to the project site. The extent of the survey buffer area surrounding the site shall be established by the qualified biologist to ensure that direct and indirect effects to nesting birds are avoided. To avoid the destruction of active nests and to protect the reproductive success of birds protected by the MBTA and CFGC, nesting bird surveys shall be performed not more than 14 days prior to scheduled vegetation and concrete removal. In the event that active nests are discovered, a suitable buffer (typically a minimum buffer of 50 feet for passerines and a minimum buffer of 250 feet for raptors) shall be established around such active nests and no construction shall be allowed inside the buffer areas until a qualified biologist has determined that the nest is no longer active (e.g., the nestlings have fledged and are no longer reliant on the nest). No ground- disturbing activities shall occur within this buffer until the qualified biologist has confirmed that breeding/nesting is completed and the young have fledged the nest. Nesting bird surveys are not required for construction activities occurring between August 31 and January 31.

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

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

Therefore:

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

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

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

D. If avoidance is unnecessary or infeasible, other appropriate measures (e.g., data recovery) shall be instituted. Work may proceed on other parts of the project site while mitigation measures for cultural resources is carried out.

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

35. Human Remains (Ongoing throughout demolition, grading, and/or construction). In the event that human skeletal remains are uncovered at the project site during ground-disturbing activities, all work shall immediately halt and the Alameda County Coroner shall be contacted to evaluate the remains, and following the procedures and protocols pursuant to Section 15064.5 (e)(1) of the CEQA Guidelines. If the County Coroner determines that the remains are Native American, the City shall contact the California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code, and all excavation and site

Page 18 of 111 ends

Page 614 ends

469 KENTUCKY AVENUE - USE PERMIT #ZP2022-0087 FINDINGS & CONDITIONS January 12, 2023 Page 12 of 16
preparation activities shall cease within a 50-foot radius of the find until appropriate arrangements are made. If the agencies determine that avoidance is not feasible, then an alternative plan shall be prepared with specific steps and timeframe required to resume construction activities. Monitoring, data recovery, determination of significance and avoidance measures (if applicable) shall be completed expeditiously.

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

The plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval.

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

A. Qualified Paleontologist. The project applicant shall retain a Qualified Paleontologist prior to excavations or ground disturbance that will exceed three feet in depth. The Qualified Paleontologist shall direct all mitigation measures related to paleontological resources. A qualified professional paleontologist is defined by the SVP standards as an individual preferably with an M.S. or Ph.D. in paleontology or geology who is experienced with paleontological procedures and techniques, who is knowledgeable in the geology of California, and who has worked as a paleontological mitigation project supervisor for a least two years (SVP 2010).

B. Paleontological Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP). Prior to ground disturbance, the applicant shall incorporate information on paleontological resources into the Project’s Worker Environmental Awareness Training (WEAP) materials, or a stand-alone Paleontological Resources WEAP shall be submitted to the Department of Planning and Development at the City of Berkeley. The Qualified Paleontologist or his or her designee shall conduct training for construction personnel regarding the appearance of fossils and the procedures for notifying paleontological staff should fossils be discovered by construction staff. The Paleontological WEAP training shall be fulfilled simultaneously with the overall WEAP training, or at the first preconstruction meeting at which a Qualified Paleontologist attends prior to ground disturbance. Printed literature (handouts) shall accompany the initial training. Following the initial WEAP training, all new workers and contractors must be trained prior to conducting ground disturbance work.

C. Paleontological Monitoring. The extent of required paleontological monitoring for the project shall be determined by the Qualified Paleontologist based on an evaluation of the previously undisturbed geologic units exposed during ground disturbing activity. The Qualified Paleontologist shall conduct and initial spot check and evaluation of geologic conditions for ground disturbing activity for excavations between 5-10 feet below ground surface (BGS).

The evaluation shall be based on field evidence including lithology of geologic units and results of micro-screening or other inspections for fossil resources. If the paleontologist determines that geologic units exposed between 5-10 feet BGS have high paleontological sensitivity, then full-time monitoring shall be conducted for the duration of ground disturbing

Page 19 of 111 ends

Page 615 ends

469 KENTUCKY AVENUE - USE PERMIT #ZP2022-0087 FINDINGS & CONDITIONS January 12, 2023 Page 13 of 16
activity. If sediments between 5-10 feet BGS are determined to not be paleontological sensitive, spot checks should be conducted again for ground disturbance between 10-15 feet BGS and again for ground disturbance between 15-20 feet BGS, and again to the full depth of ground disturbance. If spot checks indicate low or no paleontological sensitivity, or if full time monitoring results in no fossil discoveries once the full depth of ground disturbance has been reached, paleontological monitoring can be discontinued for the remainder of project activity. Monitoring shall be reinstated if any new ground disturbances are required to depths exceeding previous depths of previous work, and reduction or suspension shall be reconsidered by the Qualified Paleontologist at that time.

D. In the event of a fossil discovery by the paleontological monitor or construction personnel, all work in the immediate vicinity of the find shall cease. A Qualified Paleontologist shall evaluate the find before restarting construction activity in the area. If it is determined that the fossil(s) is (are) scientifically significant, the Qualified Paleontologist shall complete the following conditions to mitigate impacts to significant fossil resources:
1) Salvage of Fossils. If fossils are discovered, the paleontological monitor shall have the authority to halt or temporarily divert construction equipment within 50 feet of the find until the monitor and/or lead paleontologist evaluate the discovery and determine if the fossil may be considered significant. Typically, fossils can be safely salvaged quickly by a single paleontologist and not disrupt construction activity. In some cases, larger fossils (such as complete skeletons or large mammal fossils) require more extensive excavation and longer salvage periods. In this case, the Construction Contractor may be requested to supply heavy equipment and an operator to assist in the rapid removal of a large fossil specimen(s) or sediment sample(s). Bulk matrix sampling may be necessary to recover small invertebrates or microvertebrates from within paleontologically- sensitive Quaternary old alluvial deposits.
2) Preparation and Curation of Recovered Fossils. Once salvaged, significant fossils shall be identified to the lowest possible taxonomic level, prepared to a curation-ready condition, and curated in a scientific institution with a permanent paleontological collection (such as the UCMP), along with all pertinent field notes, photos, data, and maps. Fossils of undetermined significance at the time of collection may also warrant curation at the discretion of the Qualified Paleontologist.

E. Final Paleontological Mitigation Report. Upon completion of ground disturbing activity (and curation of fossils if necessary) the Qualified Paleontologist shall prepare a final report describing the results of the paleontological monitoring efforts associated with the project.

The report shall include a summary of the field and laboratory methods, an overview of the project geology and paleontology, a list of taxa recovered (if any), an analysis of fossils recovered (if any) and their scientific significance, and recommendations. The report shall be submitted to the Department of Planning and Development at the City of Berkeley. If the monitoring efforts produced fossils, then a copy of the report shall also be submitted to the designated museum repository.

38. Halt Work/Unanticipated Discovery of Tribal Cultural Resources. In the event that cultural resources of Native American origin are identified during construction, all work within 50 feet of the discovery shall be redirected. The project applicant and project construction contractor shall notify the City Planning Department within 24 hours. The City will again contact any tribes who have requested consultation under AB 52, as well as contact a qualified archaeologist, to

Page 20 of 111 ends

Page 616 ends

469 KENTUCKY AVENUE - USE PERMIT #ZP2022-0087 FINDINGS & CONDITIONS January 12, 2023 Page 14 of 16
evaluate the resources and situation and provide recommendations. If it is determined that the resource is a tribal cultural resource and thus significant under CEQA, a mitigation plan shall be prepared and implemented in accordance with State guidelines and in consultation with Native American groups. If the resource cannot be avoided, additional measures to avoid or reduce impacts to the resource and to address tribal concerns may be required.

39. Stormwater Requirements. The applicant shall demonstrate compliance with the requirements of the City’s National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit as described in BMC Section 17.20. The following conditions apply:

A. The project plans shall identify and show site-specific Best Management Practices (BMPs) appropriate to activities conducted on-site to limit to the maximum extent practicable the discharge of pollutants to the City's storm drainage system, regardless of season or weather conditions.

B. Trash enclosures and/or recycling area(s) shall be covered; no other area shall drain onto this area. Drains in any wash or process area shall not discharge to the storm drain system; these drains should connect to the sanitary sewer. Applicant shall contact the City of Berkeley and EBMUD for specific connection and discharge requirements. Discharges to the sanitary sewer are subject to the review, approval and conditions of the City of Berkeley and EBMUD.

C. Landscaping shall be designed with efficient irrigation to reduce runoff, promote surface infiltration and minimize the use of fertilizers and pesticides that contribute to stormwater pollution. Where feasible, landscaping should be designed and operated to treat runoff.

When and where possible, xeriscape and drought tolerant plants shall be incorporated into new development plans.

D. Design, location and maintenance requirements and schedules for any stormwater quality treatment structural controls shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review with respect to reasonable adequacy of the controls. The review does not relieve the property owner of the responsibility for complying with BMC Chapter 17.20 and future revisions to the City's overall stormwater quality ordinances. This review shall be shall be conducted prior to the issuance of a Building Permit.

E. All paved outdoor storage areas must be designed to reduce/limit the potential for runoff to contact pollutants.

F. All on-site storm drain inlets/catch basins must be cleaned at least once a year immediately prior to the rainy season. The property owner shall be responsible for all costs associated with proper operation and maintenance of all storm drainage facilities (pipelines, inlets, catch basins, outlets, etc.) associated with the project, unless the City accepts such facilities by Council action. Additional cleaning may be required by City of Berkeley Public Works Engineering Dept.

G. All on-site storm drain inlets must be labeled “No Dumping – Drains to Bay” or equivalent using methods approved by the City.

H. Most washing and/or steam cleaning must be done at an appropriately equipped facility that drains to the sanitary sewer. Any outdoor washing or pressure washing must be managed in such a way that there is no discharge or soaps or other pollutants to the storm drain.

Sanitary connections are subject to the review, approval and conditions of the sanitary district with jurisdiction for receiving the discharge.

I. Sidewalks and parking lots shall be swept regularly to prevent the accumulation of litter and debris. If pressure washed, debris must be trapped and collected to prevent entry to the storm drain system. If any cleaning agent or degreaser is used, wash water shall not

Page 21 of 111 ends

Page 617 ends

469 KENTUCKY AVENUE - USE PERMIT #ZP2022-0087 FINDINGS & CONDITIONS January 12, 2023 Page 15 of 16
discharge to the storm drains; wash waters should be collected and discharged to the sanitary sewer. Discharges to the sanitary sewer are subject to the review, approval and conditions of the sanitary district with jurisdiction for receiving the discharge.

J. The applicant is responsible for ensuring that all contractors and sub-contractors are aware of and implement all stormwater quality control measures. Failure to comply with the approved construction BMPs shall result in the issuance of correction notices, citations, or a project stop work order.

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

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

42. Public Works. The project sponsor shall maintain sandbags or other devices around the site perimeter during the rainy season to prevent on-site soils from being washed off-site and into the storm drain system. The project sponsor shall comply with all City ordinances regarding construction and grading.

43. Public Works. Prior to any excavation, grading, clearing, or other activities involving soil disturbance during the rainy season the applicant shall obtain approval of an erosion prevention plan by the Building and Safety Division and the Public Works Department. The applicant shall be responsible for following these and any other measures required by the Building and Safety Division and the Public Works Department.

44. Public Works. The removal or obstruction of any fire hydrant shall require the submission of a plan to the City’s Public Works Department for the relocation of the fire hydrant during construction.

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

Prior to Final Inspection or Issuance of Occupancy Permit:

46. Compliance with Conditions. The project shall conform to the plans and statements in the Use Permit. The developer is responsible for providing sufficient evidence to demonstrate compliance with the requirements throughout the implementation of this Use Permit.

47. Compliance with Approved Plan. The project shall conform to the plans and statements in the Use Permit. All landscape, site and architectural improvements shall be completed per the attached approved drawings dated December 19, 2022, except as modified by conditions of approval.

At All Times:

Page 22 of 111 ends

Berkeley City CouncilMay 23, 2023

Berkeley City Council
May 23, 2023