Slim council majority for changing West Berkeley zoning

Workers at Artwork Foundry on Heinz fill casts with molten bronze/Photo: John Osborn

After three marathon public hearings, a narrow majority of the Berkeley City Council supports lifting protections on zoning in West Berkeley.

The council voted 5-4 Tuesday night to have staff report back on impacts within 30 days once 100,000 sq. ft. of protected warehouse and manufacturing space have been converted to new uses. Four members — Jesse Arreguin, Max Anderson, Kriss Worthington and Linda Maio — opposed the measure, seeking instead a plan that would set a cap of 100,000 sq. ft. for changes to currently protected properties. The impact study — supported by Mayor Tom Bates, Darryl Moore, Gordon Wozniak, Laurie Capitelli and Susan Wengraf — was an attempt to answer concerns about changes.

The vote last night is the first of many stages that will lead to a council vote on a final ordinance.

The council has been hearing testimony on whether to modify the West Berkeley Plan to allow a greater number of uses on protected industrial spaces, most controversially research and development, and to change rules on Master Use Permits (MUP), including allowing buildings to be up to 75 feet high, increasing limits on floor area ratio and relaxing parking restrictions in return for community benefits. A number of artisans and manufacturers in the district have opposed the changes, concerned that potentially rising rents could push them out. Business interests want to allow for broader development and less regulation, particularly encouraging emerging technology start-ups.

One of the empty industrial sites in West Berkeley/Photo: John Osborn

The councilmembers representing West Berkeley are divided on the issue. Darryl Moore, who represents District 2 which covers Southwest Berkeley, said he couldn’t support an arbitrary cap on how much protected space should be opened. He wants to reach the 100,000 sq. ft. “milestone” and evaluate what effects lifting protections has on the district.

“We can see whether the bogeyman has chased all the businesses out of West Berkeley,” Moore said.

In contrast, Maio, who represents District 1 in Northwest Berkeley, said she was not a fan of opening all of the protected zoning, particularly when key data on the district is missing from the debate.

“How do we get to making a rational decision about moving ahead without all the data?” Maio asked.

The data in question pertain to how many square feet of protected zoning there is in Berkeley, and how much industrial zoning is actually warehouse space. There is confusion over records the city maintains and data supplied by property brokers.

The move by the council falls short of what one vocal stakeholder group — West Berkeley Artisan and Industrial Companies (WEBAIC) — have been pushing for: only lifting a quarter of the protected zoning as a way to safeguard their small businesses from potential consequences of R&D entering the district.

Rick Auerbach, who represents WEBAIC, said that there is plenty of space available for R&D without lifting any protections in what is called the six Legacy MUP sites, which include the American Soil Products site along Aquatic Park and the Zaentz Media Center on Carleton and 10th Streets. He is also concerned about expanding MUPs.

“Opening up all protected warehouse and wholesale trade space and vastly expanding the MUPs beyond what is agreed to is unnecessary and destructive,” Auerbach said.

Councilmember Laurie Capitelli said although he respects WEBAIC, its call for compromise ignores the years of debate and negotiation in the Planning Commission over the proposed changes.

“There have been many compromises along the way,” Capitelli said. “There aren’t these two extremes.”

Dan Banker of Poly Seal Industries, a company that makes molded rubber products, argued that the protections proved successful for his business, which had its best year in 2010 and has market presence in 12 countries. He’s concerned about the effects of lifting those protections.

“[West Berkeley] will lose economic diversity,” Banker said, “and the opportunity to participate in innovation.”

Deborah Oropallo, a West Berkeley resident and artist, criticized what she calls “stonewalling” by WEBAIC, recalling the years-long battle over Berkeley Bowl West, which is now a fixture in the community. She supported the proposed changes.

“There’s clearly two groups here,” Oropallo said. “There are the ones that represent the past, and the ones that represent the future.”

There are a number of issues still before the council, including Aquatic Park, residential units in MUPs and how to approach community benefits from MUPs. The council returns on March 22 to begin the long process of hashing out the specifics, and figuring out what language will be drafted into an ordinance that could ultimately change the landscape of West Berkeley.

But the task before the council is complex, and many councilmembers expressed their interest in striking a balance between the businesses there now, and the businesses that could be there tomorrow.

“How do we preserve what we have that is working,” councilmember Max Anderson said, “and how do we lay the groundwork for innovation and entrepreneurship? How do we do it without doing violence to [businesses] in West Berkeley?”

Print Friendly
Tagged , , , , , ,
  • Name Withheld

    I’m a bit disappointed with Linda Maio’s stance on this issue.
    I fail to see the harm in doing an impact study. Just because the study is done does not mean that the plan will go forward. For all we know the results of the study may be horrible, and the plan will be abandoned once the study is made public.

    The fact that WEBAIC was against the construction of Berkeley Bowl West, which is already a true Berkeley treasure and a magnet that draws in money from all over the Bay Area, really makes me question anything they say.

  • Tor

    Particularly given that both the infamous Flint Ink site, pictured above, and Pacific Steel are in her district. I’m pleased to see that this is at least a small step forward for Peerless Greens in District 2, but if I lived in the post-industrial wasteland of District 1, I’d be calling my councilwoman every day to see what the city is doing to rehab these sites.

  • Bruce Love

    @Name, it’s realpolitik and Maio is (slightly unusually) feeling the pretty brutal way that, under Bates, parliamentary tactics are used. Maio and Moore are, I think, the real swing votes here. I’m actually disappointed in Moore but then I don’t have all that clear a sense of who has got his ear and campaign support on the line here. Without the further study – if they had just gone straight to an up or down vote – I think that there’s some chance Moore would have chickened out (for good reason – many in his district are opposed). It would have gone down 4-5. He’s been more reticent about the plan in other comments in recent months. Even in the comments quoted here, he’s trying to hedge.

    “Further study” (by the very same people who made the plan in the first place and aren’t likely to find fault with their own work) can afford political cover. If staff is ready to give up and come back with bad news, a swing voter can say “at least I tried”. If staff doubles down with a positive report (likely), a swing voter can say “yeah, it has problems, but it’s the result of a long public process and we’ve already spent so much time and resources I had to say yes to it to make progress. We can try to fix it later.”. Either way, the compromise offer backed by WEBAIC is effectively dead. That was the major accomplishment.

    Maio is signaling, with her vote and her comment, that she thinks the real questions are going unanswered here – even with the study. She won’t, it is implied, feel pressured to plug her nose and bow to the “long public process” canard. Good for her.

    Me, I’d like to see a study of rents, availability, and regulatory differences for R&D (including lab and ready-to-convert-to-lab) space in a 10 mile, 20 mile, 30 mile, and 40 mile radius. I don’t think that Berkeley has any serious competitive prospects there. This is all about ghost-town new-urbanism disaster development after an initial short-term, ultimately doomed flashy commercial play or two. It’s about a land grab, not economic development. And its about a landgrab that can really trash existing businesses and unique resources.

  • deb

    I was taken aback that the council wants to open up all of West Berkeley for this open zoning. I’ve been told by Moore’s office that ‘only’ the five areas specified (I had to email the office to get the specifications) are being considered for major development.
    However, watching the council meeting last night, it became obvious that it is not ‘only these 5 discrete areas’ being considered. The plan at this point is to open up 100% of West Berkeley warehouse space for buildings up to 75 ft in height, and few rules about anything else.
    After speaking with the office, I’d relaxed my opposition to the plan. However, after last nights meeting, I’m again questioning the plan’s wisdom, while simultaneously questioning the veracity of information coming from the West Berkeley city council member specifically, and other council members who voted against any limitations in the plan.
    Oh well, it was fun to trust them for a minute or two.

  • Name Withheld

    So if the report is positive, it must be biased? Sheesh.

    WEBIAC was 100% wrong about Berkeley Bowl West.

    What makes everyone so sure they know what they’re talking about on this issue, given their track record?

  • Tor

    Deb, the “controversial” aspects (building height, FAR, parking) of the zoning changes apply to Master Use Permits (MUPs).

    In order to qualify for a MUP, a project must be at least 4 acres or a full city block.

    MUPs are limited to six over the 8 years following approval of the plan.

    So, only the six sites are large enough to be issued MUPs, and no additional MUPs will be issued until 2019 at the earliest.

  • deb

    I’m pretty sure that WEBIAC negotiated changes in the Berkeley Bowl plan that were instrumental in how well the finished product ended up.
    I’m glad we can drive back down 9th St. again. What happened with that, I wonder.

  • http://www.510families.com RookieMom Heather

    @Deb I think 9th street was a short-term compromise until the traffic light could be installed on San Pablo.

    As a resident of SW Berkeley, I fully embrace the Berkeley Bowl and any business that encourages a lively sidewalk full of people. I am concerned about enormous warehouses, parking lots, tow yards, and needlessly large apartment towers in an area of town with weak public transit.

    But I do love the Berkeley Bowl.

  • Bruce Love

    @Name wrote “WEBIAC was 100% wrong about Berkeley Bowl West.”

    How do you figure, Name? Cite’s please? I looked briefly and casually for evidence of their record on Berkeley Bowl West and they looked pretty right in what I found. So, what are you talking about?

  • http://kateandsarahklise.com Sarah Klise

    ahh. anonymous posters are very good at rewriting history!

    i live within spitting distance of the new bowl (i know, not a pretty picture, but you get the point) and we all, including WEBAIC wanted a parking and traffic plan OR a neighborhood-friendly bowl – meaning, a tad smaller. remember, no employee parking required on this project? THAT’S WHAT WE WANTED. and, once bowl architect kava bought the hustead’s lot across the street and rented it to the bowl for extra parking, we are fine. no more streets filled with employees. all. day. long.

    try to prove me wrong. i was at every meeting. for years.

    no name withheld,
    sarah klise

  • Name Not Withheld

    I also live near the new Berkeley Bowl. WEBAIC was the main opposition to the bowl. I’m pretty sure the fact that it took the new Berkeley Bowl 7+ years to come to fruition it was merely an expansion of a popular local business proves that there was some obstructionist ideas coming from WEBAIC.

  • http://kateandsarahklise.com Sarah Klise

    uhh . . another name withheld? you guys are certainly cute. :)

    PROVE IT. the internet was alive and well back then. show us the links.

    don’t buy into NAMES WITHHELD. there is a reason print media does not support *NAMES WITHHELD.* (why do you here, folks?) semi-annoying. my last post in response to people who can’t sign a post.

    able to write my name,
    sarah klise

  • http://www.preservenet.com Charles Siegel

    “Berkeley Bowl West, which is already a true Berkeley treasure and a magnet that draws in money from all over the Bay Area”

    When you say that Berkeley Bowl West draws in money from all over the Bay Area, you are saying that it is a major regional draw, similar to a Wal-Mart. Supermarkets used to be local draws located in the neighborhoods they served, now they are changing to regional draws located near freeway exits. Berkeley Bowl West is part of this shift.

    Freeway-oriented regional shopping means more energy consumption and more greenhouse gas emissions. Berkeley Bowl West is contrary to the city’s goal of reducing GHG emissions 80% by the year 2050.

    It also means that many people who cannot drive (for example, because they are too old or because they cannot afford cars) have nowhere to buy food.

    You can mitigate the effect on the local neighborhood by providing more parking, but it is much harder to mitigate increased CO2 emissions, the increased dependency on imported oil, and the increased auto-dependency that hurts people who do not drive.

    Berkeley residents should learn to think globally when they deal with local land use issues. Judging from the comments here about Berkeley Bowl West, we have a long way to go. Would you people also back a Wal-Mart in west Berkeley?

    PS: This does not mean that I am against more development in West Berkeley. As I said in an earlier post, there is plenty of room walkable development in the blocks near San Pablo Ave, which is a major transit corridor.

    I am just against freeway-oriented, auto-dependent development. (I know I will probably get one response from someone who says “I bicycle to Berkeley Bowl West.” But tell me what percent of the customers bicycle and how far the average customer drives.

    The new Trader Joe’s is just the opposite model: most customers come from a short distance away, and many of them walk. It is a good example of environmentally sound urban development.

  • Name Withheld

    @ Charles ––– If you don’t like people driving all that way to get to Berkeley Bowl West, then why don’t you start your own chain of corner stores that offer similar qualities & quantities of goods at equally competitive prices?

    I’d much rather walk to a store than drive, but there’s nothing in my area that comes even remotely close to offering what Berkeley Bowl West does.

  • Name Withheld

    @ Sarah ––– Here’s an article that mentions an aside about the WEBIAC chair whining and complaining about Berkeley Bowl West.

    http://www.berkeleydailyplanet.com/issue/2009-04-30/article/32798?headline=Zoning-Board-Allows-West-Berkeley-Bowl-to-Skip-Traffic-Fixes

    It’s hard to find much else. Before Berkeleyside came into the picture Berkeley’s City Council meetings weren’t exactly front page news at most papers, even on the internet.

  • Name Withheld

    Oh, and Sarah, here’s an article from the Berkeley Daily Planet where you’re called out by name for being a vehemently opposed to Berkeley Bowl West.

    http://www.berkeleydailyplanet.com/issue/2007-08-10/article/27746?headline=Commentary-West-Berkeley-Improvements-Benefits-for-Everyone&status=301

    I’m glad you feel strongly about using your “real” name here, but I wonder why you care one way or the other? If I wrote my name as “Don Peterson” what difference would it make? Would you use it to try to stalk me online, figure out where I live, what I did for a living, what district I lived in?

    Bully for you that you want to use your name here, but I can’t think of a single compelling reason why *I* should do the same.

  • http://www.preservenet.com Charles Siegel

    @Name Withheld:
    We already have one: Trader Joes is a chain of stores that serve local markets: there is one in Emeryville, one in Berkeley, one in Oakland, one in El Cerrito. Those five stores combined have less square footage than the Berkeley Bowl West.

    Berkeley Bowl began as a small store in a former bowling alley. When it started to expand, it could have followed either of two models: the Trader Joes model, with a number of moderate sized stores scattered through the region or the Wal-Mart model with a megastore near the freeway. Unfortunately, it followed the Wal-Mart model.

    “I’d much rather walk to a store than drive, but there’s nothing in my area that comes even remotely close to offering what Berkeley Bowl West does.”

    If it had followed the Trader Joes model, you would have a Berkeley Bowl closer to you – maybe walking distance or at least a shorter drive.

    “@ Charles ––– If you don’t like people driving all that way to get to Berkeley Bowl West, then why don’t you start your own chain of corner stores that offer similar qualities & quantities of goods at equally competitive prices?”

    I must say that this is mindless comment. People obviously have a right to criticize businesses that operate in an environmentally destructive manner and to suggest more responsible ways for them to operate. And I used the example of Trader Joes, which is chain of modern supermarkets, not of corner stores.

    To get you thinking about making more intelligent and more civil comments in the future, let me respond with a comment that is on the same low level as yours:

    “If you don’t like the comments I post on Berkeleyside, why don’t you start your own Berkeley news web site and block my comments?”

    If you think this statement is a mindless expression of hostility rather than a useful comment, then you should consider it when you make your own comments in the future.

  • Bruce Love

    http://www.berkeleydailyplanet.com/issue/2006-04-11/article/23877?headline=Commentary-Supporting-the-Bowl-…-with-Reservations

    “Supporting the Bowl, with Reservations” a 2006 commentary in the Daily Planet signed by, among others, Sarah Klise.

    As I understand the history of the project, the long string of design compromises are part of what led to a pretty fabulous outcome. The process, though long, worked well.

  • Name Withheld

    Charles Siegel says: “[1.] I must say that this is mindless comment. [2.] People obviously have a right to criticize businesses that operate in an environmentally destructive manner and to suggest more responsible ways for them to operate. [3.] And I used the example of Trader Joes, which is chain of modern supermarkets, not of corner stores. ”

    1.) Mindless? Hardly. It’s a lot easier to sit on the sidelines and bitch and complain and try to prevent things than actually do something. If you think you have an idea that can be just as successful as Berkeley Bowl, why not get funding and do it instead of just whining about what other people are doing?

    2.) Berkeley Bowl had success and experience as a large grocery store. Why should they have to change their business model to something they weren’t experienced with just to make you happy?

    3.) Trader Joe’s is an awful example. Their selection of fresh produce is ridiculously small compared to Berkeley Bowl, their prices are lousy in comparison, and they are able to remain successful because they have an extremely limited selection, compared to Berkeley Bowl’s vast array of items. When’s the last time you saw dragon fruit at Trader Joe’s? How about a simple bulk foods section?

    Charles Siegel says: “If you don’t like the comments I post on Berkeleyside, why don’t you start your own Berkeley news web site and block my comments?”

    When did I ever say anything indicating that I thought you should be barred from posting, or not allowed to express your opinions? Looks like you’re pulling a bit of a “Bruce Love” there in your hurry to get off a jab, and putting words in people’s mouths.

  • Name Withheld

    @ Bruce ––– Fair enough. But 7+ years is too damn long, and the fact that some members of WEBIAC still whine about the way Berkeley Bowl is now shows that at least some of them are not going to be happy with any outcome.

  • Bruce Love

    @Charles, I’m going to be slightly devil’s advocate here but I do think there is something to this:

    I think Berkeley Bowl West is probably pretty darn green – and its going to get better. Here’s why:

    1. A heck of a lot of the people who shop there buy huge car loads of groceries all once. That’s not necessarily all that inefficient. At the very least, to be convincing that the Berkeley Bowl model is not green, you’d really have to find a way to compare all the shipping to idealized corner groceries and so forth to the actual use patterns of Berkeley Bowl. It’s not so clear cut as you make it out to be. It’s a hard comparison. It’s not just cars. Think about the differences in refrigeration efficiencies you are implying. In lighting. So forth.

    2. To a significant extent, the store (including the retail floor) appears to also be a commercial wholesale place. People aren’t going to stock their restaurant from the corner green grocer. They do from BB. It’s hard to say what is environmentally optimal for that “last mile”. You have to account for the full range of uses when giving it an environmental grade.

    3. Geeze, look at Trader Joe’s emphasis on heavy packaging and processed foods. Compare that to BB where a lot of space is given over to basically taking pallets of stuff of the truck and dropping them on the floor for sale. How do you want to break this down — carbon emmisions per calorie, say?

    4. BB manages to largely co-locate the warehouse that receives directly from producers and the retail floor that sells to consumers. What’s the situation with, say, Trader Joe’s?

    5. BB has huge mad buying power thanks to the volume of their trade. With a careful deal and approach, I wonder if you couldn’t get them to be the wholesaler to your idealized corner store.

  • Name Withheld

    Interesting article on the front page of the Berkeley Daily Planet today.
    Fairly rambling, and grossly biased. Seems a lot more like a personal blog than what most folks would consider “journalism” even in this day and age.

    http://www.berkeleydailyplanet.com/issue/2011-02-23/article/37373?headline=The-Council-Majority-Builds-Fantasyland-in-West-Berkeley

  • Tor

    Yeah, I think it would be difficult to make the case that Berkeley Bowl West represents a net increase in local emissions. There was no supermarket in West Berkeley before the Bowl opened. Maybe there are some people who are skipping their local supermarket and driving into Berkeley now that BB West is there, but there are also a bunch of us in West Berkeley who no longer have to drive across town to Monterey Market or Safeway and can now just walk or bicycle for our groceries.

  • http://www.preservenet.com Charles Siegel

    @Name and Tor:
    Berkeley Bowl initially had success as a small grocery store. They could have continued that model by opening a number of moderate-sized stores instead of one megastore. With a number There could have been convenient Berkeley Bowl shopping for the people in that part of southwest Berkley – and also convenient shopping for people in El Cerrito, San Francisco, etc who now drive long distances to get there.

    @Bruce:
    “1. A heck of a lot of the people who shop there buy huge car loads of groceries all once. ”
    You could say exactly the same thing about Wal-Mart. Look at all the people there with full carts. There have been many studies showing that this sort of development increases auto-dependency and emissions.

    Berkeley Bowl was known for its good produce back when it was a small store in a former bowling alley. I am not comparing all the practices of Trader Joes and Berkeley Bowl. Just their choices of store size and location. Berkeley Bowl could have followed the Trader Joes model of size and location, rather than the Wal-Mart model.

    If they were a wholesaler to smaller stores, that would be great. My objection is to all the people driving long distances there to buy their personal groceries.

    @Name:
    Before you post, take a couple of deep breaths and try to tune down your chronic anger and hostility.

  • Bruce Love

    @Charles: re “There have been many studies showing that this sort of development increases auto-dependency and emissions.” I’d welcome some cites (links, preferably) if you have some handy. By BS detector is going off (not that I doubt you that studies exist! but that I doubt the quality or applicability here of said studies).

  • http://www.preservenet.com Charles Siegel

    “It’s a lot easier to sit on the sidelines and bitch and complain and try to prevent things than actually do something.”

    Incidentally, Name Withheld seems to think I am a NIMBY who always opposes development. I actually have a long record of backing environmentally sound development. One developer even put a plaque with my name on his building, because he was grateful that I gave it so much support that I was instrumental in getting it approved despite the opposition of literally hundreds of NIMBYs who came to Zoning Board meetings opposing it.

    I get mad at NIMBYs too. If you are being so hostile because you think I am a NIMBY who is against everything, then I can sympathize.

  • http://www.preservenet.com Charles Siegel

    Bruce, I am afraid I don’t have time to do the research and come up with citations. I am sure you could find them if you look around at the sites of environmental groups that deal with city planning issues. All those groups support pedestrian and transit-oriented development, not freeway oriented development.

  • Bruce Love

    @Charles, no sweat (and, incidentally, thanks for beating the civility drum). I think a lot of that stuff you refer to is pretty casual with facts but without a specific cite to look at we’re not really talking about anything objective. FWIW: From my engineering perspective, and economics perspective, BB West has some huge economies of scale that I think you can’t so casually dismiss. Details matter a lot. It would be interesting to study and quantify, though not easy. By eye, it doesn’t look so crazy to me – quite the opposite. Shrug.

    Also, “Freeway oriented development” is a pretty vague term you used there. It means one thing in, say, L.A. or Boston and quite another around here.

  • Name Withheld

    @ Charles ––– Berkeley Bowl is able to offer their prices and their selection because of the scale of their operation. If they were a fleet of smaller stores they wouldn’t be able to keep the same stock, and offer the same discounts, that they do currently. It’s naive to think they could offer what they do now if they had to deal with staffing, rent, overhead, and distribution for a chain of stores.

    Personally speaking I put far more value on a single large store that allows individuals of all economic backgrounds to be able to buy fresh, wholesome produce at extremely reasonable prices than I do in a small chain of walkable Whole-Foods-esque stores.

    I think some of my responses to you got caught up in the NIMBYish attitudes from certain elements of the WEBAIC crowd, but your first reply to me was far, far more hostile than my first response to you. I asked a simple and polite question with which you apparently took umbrage (probably because you’ve been asked it before) and you responded with hostility.

  • DC

    I think Berkeley Bowl’s scale isn’t nearly as large as a big box store, they are locally owned, SUPER cheap, and the new building at least is architecturally very pleasing. I don’t understand all the hostility to it. I think it’s a huge asset to our city. I used to drive from San Francisco just to shop there. Now I bike, but have the same loyalty.

  • Eric Gellerman

    @ Bruce. What is wrong with the Berkeley Bowl? Those guys (WEBAIC) did lobby against it. Big time.

  • Bruce Love

    @Eric, my understanding of the Berkeley Bowl West we got is that its very different in scale and nature than the proposals that met with the strongest outright condemnation from opponents. I think the current store is pretty fabulous. The traffic situation could be better but at least the (WEBAIC-lobbied-for) traffic lights at San Pablo and Heinz have been a big improvement.

    WEBAIC prophesied, if you will, that once Berkeley Bowl West was in – pressure would increase to de-industrialize more of West Berkeley. I would say that that is a bad outcome and that they were correct in that prophecy.

  • Annie Nahmaus

    This West Berkeley Resident is V-E-R-Y
    concerned about the 75 foot buildings that will create a “Great Wall of Berkeley” barrier for the good West Berkeley Residents from seeing beautiful sunsets above the Bay.

    This West Berkeley Resident is V-E-R-Y
    concerned about where these R&D employees are going to park their CO2 emitting (we West Berkeley Residents already breath the air that drifts off of 80 Eastshore and the air that comes out of the big steam spigot at the Iron Foundry) transporters.

    concerned about / whether the council will make the area favored for Pedestrians and Bicyclists — (don’t think that West Berkeley Residents don’t know that zoning must comply with health safety well being and general welfare . . . and I think that increasing traffic and thus CO2 emissions and bringing R&D bio labs to the area might not have some impact on those )

    Fourth Street is N-O-T Broadway Plaza in Walnut Creek or the Stanford Shopping Mall — or for that matter, Fitzgerald Drive in Richmond / Pinole where Target and Best Buy and Kmart are —

    Why an Apple store on Fourth Street? W-H-Y? I was completely content to go to E-vill for that stuff — Emeryville — where the buildings are high and the stores “big box.” WTF?! Berkeley City Council?

    Make sure that the character of the area is not changed into MountainView or Emeryville or Hilltop Mall in Richmond. The Fourth Street / West Berkeley area is quaint and quirky — the last thing I want to see is StripMall Land San Jose in my backyard. West Berkeley residents (ok, i’ll speak for myself) are not asleep or uninvolved —

    I like what’s been done to fourth street (sans the APPLE store) — maybe we can then focus on the 250 SARI stores one next to the other and the potholes on University Avenue. I just think it’s weird how on S-T-E-R-O-I-D-S growth is spurting at Fourth STreet and the planned Aquatic Great Corporate Wall of Berkeley aka cheap stripmall Emeryville Northwest – and how beautiful North Berkeley / Claremont is and how uncompromisingly B-A-D you guys on City Council have let University AVenue get — (i’ll talk about that later) because I know I’m voicing my opinion about the R&D development of Aquatic Park.

    R&D — people, that’s like BIO pharma chemical bio scariness in your backyard. WTF?! Berkeley — People “l-i-v-e” here. So, I’m looking to see you take care of parking, CO2 congestion, BIO emergencies (yes – think Richmond and Rodeo), the audacity of pharma and bio research companies to take up the best real estate that money can buy — right along the bay, to “usurp” the sun and skyline from the poor residents of West Berkeley whose only redeeming quality is that it has the small estuary where residents can go to find some peace — but breathe the foul air coming off of the Freeway —- you want to build 75 Ft buildings to top it all off — insult to injury.

    There actually “A-R-E” better places for you to build in Berkeley —- but you choose the waterfront. THINK about it people — make your voices heard before these buildlings start to rise up and you think, “wow – there could have been better uses for what’s here now.”

    Make wise decisions -

  • Toni Mester

    There is a compelling ethical reason for people to use their real names in discussions of public policy, disclosure of economic interest. This is especially true of zoning which affects land values. However, in writing about other issues involving sexuality, medical condition or victim status one might assume an anonymous ID or pseudonym to protect one’s privacy. The exercise of free speech and press in a democracy assumes and develops individual responsibility and character. The use of flip alter-egos degrades public discourse. I urge Berkeleyside to adopt a more stringent and responsible policy of writer ID.

  • Compelled to comment

    The unconstructive and unnecessarily antagonistic comments left on nearly every Berkeleyside story take the joy out of reading this website. While the tone and content of the comments are disheartening, they’re not surprising. I find them to be largely representative of the Berkeley population.

  • Bruce Love

    Amen.

    -t