In this Section, BNC publishes articles that are written either by a neighborhood representative without editing or is summarized from material which has been submitted to us. We will tell you when an article has been written by a representative or when it has been summarized.
The following information regarding the now-under-construction replacement of Maxwell Family Field and the parking structure under the Field is summarized from a variety of sources, mostly UC Berkeley. This article is in this section because it is the second follow-up to two previous articles. To re-cap the previous articles:
- The article that started it all was written by Michael Kelly, Panoramic Hill Association (PHA) regarding the legal settlement between PHA and the University over the Maxwell Family Field Parking Replacement construction. (BNC’s March eNEWS).
- A follow-up article that summarized information about plans to create Sproul Hall East at Cal’s Memorial Stadium and the Maxwell Family Field and its Parking Replacement project. (BNC’s April eNEWS).
More About What’s Happening In and Near Memorial Stadium: Maxwell Family Field and the Parking Structure Underneath
In the 264-page October 2013 Addendum to the Southeast Campus Integrated Projects (SCIP)* Environmental Impact Report, the Maxwell Family Field Parking Structure and Replacement Field is described as a UC facility to be owned and managed by a private group with a private operator on a 65-year ground lease from UC Berkeley. In 2013, parking rates were projected to be around $3-$5 per hour, $8 to $15 per day.
*Note: The SCIP projects are:
- Memorial Stadium
- Law and Business Connection Building
- Southeast Campus Piedmont Avenue Landscape Improvements
- School of Law Program Improvements
- Haas School of Business Program Improvements
- Renovation of houses at 2222 — 2240 Piedmont
- Maxwell Family Field and Parking
The original parking structure was to be underground. However, the Addendum states that the parking structure will now be about 16 feet higher than the existing field and the existing 30 foot fencing would be replaced with a fence of the same height so that the top of the fence would increase by the height of the new field level. The top of the fence would then be 60 feet from Gayley Road at Stadium Rim Way and 50 feet above Gayley Road at the south-west corner. Photos of the construction seem to confirm this.
The SCIP EIR admits that the above ground Maxwell Family Field Parking Structure would have a “significant and unavoidable” impact on the visual character of Gayley Road. Note: “Significant and unavoidable” impact is EIR language that says the planners recognize the problem but don’t plan to do anything about it, and those legislative bodies who are tasked with approving EIRs that contain such impacts must specifically vote to acknowledge the impact and say it is o.k. to go ahead regardless. BNC agrees about the impact on Gayley Road, and we add to that impact, that it’s just not on Gayley Road but also on one of the campus’ iconic landmarks, Bowles Hall. This isn’t mentioned. Could it be that Bowles wasn’t mentioned because that would have caused a glitch in building the parking structure? Because the height increase is a “substantial increase in severity of (a) previously identified significant effect(s),” UC should not have issued an Addendum, but a subsequent EIR, which, unlike the Addendum, would have been subject to public comment.
It also isn’t clear why there even is a private owner/operator when all other campus parking facilities are operated by UC itself while only the Maxwell Family Field Parking structure will be operated and owned by a subsidiary of Urban Pacific Properties, Inc. of San Francisco. Could it be that UC Berkeley can’t pay for the Stadium construction, let alone the garage? Bonds were issued to cover the Stadium construction costs, but to date, none of the proposals to repay the bonds is producing enough money to pay down that indebtedness.
Per the campus, the UC drive-alone rate for faculty is said to be around 44.2%, and 5.2% for students. UC’s 2020 Long Range Development Plan (LRDP), certified by the Regents in January 2005 and agreed to by the City Council in a closed session, allowed for the development of up to 2,300 net new parking spaces on the campus (for a total of around 8,724) . The Addendum states that studies have shown that parking facilities particularly on campus or in downtown Berkeley operate mostly at capacity during peak hours. So, UC decided to reverse an earlier decision to indefinitely defer the Maxwell Family Field Replacement Parking plan and instead go ahead and build parking there to allow more convenient access to game-day and non-game day activities at the Stadium, Greek Theater, Optometry Clinic, Haas School of Business and the Law School.
The changes from the LRDP and the 2006 SCIP EIR which had originally included parking underneath the Maxwell Family Field would be a reduction in the number of spaces from 911 striped spaces to 450 spaces plus an additional 75 valet spaces, reducing the number of net new spaces to 0.** (Note: the no-net-new parking spaces constructed here stipulation is part of the legal settlement between the Panoramic Hill Association and the campus. The date of the judge’s order regarding this settlement is March 26, 2010.)
**Note: We understand that this reduction of spaces and the settlement applies to the SCIP planning area and not necessarily to parking spaces in other campus areas.
Further changes from the original SCIP EIR concerning this issue were:
- The University would avoid relocation of what is termed the Big Inch culvert under the Maxwell Family Field and Parking structure, and
- A “traffic control plan” is to be developed by the University of California Police Department and the Berkeley Police Department and that such a plan could (not “shall” include):
- “Limiting non-local traffic” through PHA
- “Delineated travel” between Hearst and Stadium Rim Way and along Piedmont between Durant and Stadium Rim Way.
- “Traffic control officers”
- “Signage at Oxford/Hearst, Fulton/Durant, University to alert drivers to travel restrictions and/or congestion on roadways leading to campus.”
- “Incentives to permit holders to arrive several hours before the game and to remain at the Stadium until after the initial surge of pedestrians is over.”
The SCIP EIR concluded that the Integrated Projects would increase traffic and produce additional CO emissions, but below levels analyzed in the 2020 LRDP EIR because parking associated with the Maxwell Family Field Parking Structure would not exceed parking anticipated in the 2020 LRDP . An additional factor was that the reduced size of the Maxwell Family Field Parking Structure based on the PHA agreement, would further reduce emissions associated with the Integrated Projects. Further, UC would also continue alternative transportation strategies at the same current level, and strive to improve “mode split” as it relates to single-occupant trips and continue programs in place for Memorial Stadium game dates. Thus, the conclusion is that the existing LRDP EIR analysis is “comprehensive and sufficient” and nothing further needs to be done.
However, the SCIP EIR and the Addendum acknowledged significant traffic impacts from construction of the garage which required mitigating measures. Some of these involved changes to public roads controlled by the City. BNC is not aware of any agreement between the City and UC Berkeley to implement these measures, so it is unclear a) whether they will happen, and b) who will pay for them.
To BNC’s reading this is an admission that CO emissions would increase, but that since they don’t rise to a certain figure, UC has concluded that’s OK. BNC doesn’t see any evidence of how this fits into the City’s or the University’s Climate Action Plan for an overall reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, nor do we see any information of how successful in-place programs have been, nor how the City’s neighborhoods to the north, south and west are being impacted by the influx of traffic to this area. Our guess is that since the City’s Climate Action Plan doesn’t include UC figures, the City doesn’t think it matters and it’s been almost 40 years since the City has done a comprehensive traffic plan.
There is certainly more to come on this issue.
Yet More News About THE Big Event Being Planned for Memorial Stadium this July
The University is scheduled to host one of the games of the Guinness International Champions Cup, Inter Milan vs Real Madrid, on July 25 and 26, 2014 at Memorial Stadium. For those who don’t know, this is a soccer game between 2 of the world’s biggest clubs.
Some consider the Real Madrid team to be the top soccer team in the world today. In what seems to those of us not knowledgeable about soccer to be something like the World Series, the Real Madrid team is slated to play Atletico Madrid on May 24th of this year in the Champion’s League Final. Real Madrid’s top player is Cristiano Ronaldo who is often described as “the face of soccer” and said to be in France Football the second highest paid footballer in the world counting salary, bonuses and off field income. He’s made a number of sponsorship deals with such companies as Coca-Cola, KFC, Castrol, Motorola, Nike, and Fly Emirates and has designed a line of clothing and underwear. He earned his accolades from being a “dramatic” player who consistently makes spectacular plays. Ronaldo has an enormous fan base not only because of his play, but also because of his rags-to-riches background — growing up in a tin-roofed shack in Portugal, the son of an alcoholic father (who introduced him to soccer as a small child) and a hard-working cleaning-woman mother and becoming a $131 million dollar soccer forward at a very young age. It’s everyone’s dream. There is a lot of speculation about whether, he or another highly-rated Real Madrid player (Gareth Bale) will actually be on the field because both have missed recent games (Ronaldo has competed in just 2 of the last 9 games), the Berkeley game is less that 2 weeks after the Worlds Cup finals in Brazil and the Real Madrid vs Atletico Madrid event coming up on the 24th.
The Guinness International Champions Cup involves 8 of the world’s best and most recognized soccer clubs plus clubs from the US professional league. There will be 12 games held around the country — New York, Chicago, Philadelphia, Washington DC, Charlotte, Denver, Berkeley, Pittsburg, Minneapolis, Dallas and Ann Arbor. The UC website says that tickets for the Berkeley game will run from $51 to $315 a seat including fees. However, the lower price seats are sold out, so Stubhub is already offering tickets in the 4 figure price range. Whatever the price, Cal football season ticket holders, faculty, staff and students had first crack at the tickets before they went on sale to the general public.
July 25, 2014 will be a practice day at Maxwell Field which is supposed to end by 10:00 pm and involve no more than 10,000 spectators. The game will be held on July 26 and is expected to be a Memorial Stadium “capacity” event with 62,500 spectators. Maintenance activities will be done between 6:30 am and 11:00 am. The game will start at 3:00 pm and end while it is still daylight. Existing sound and video equipment will be used which the campus says will be equal to or less than that for a regular Cal football game. In fact, there may well be noise equal to or greater than a Cal game. The game will be broadcast to 150 countries and carried nationally in the US. An emergency vehicle will be required to be stationed on the Oakland side of Panoramic Hill during the match.
The campus prepared a California Environmental Quality Act Determination in connection with this event and concluded that this project is categorically exempt from any further evaluation or requirement that hasn’t already been put in place. However, BNC is frankly confused by some of this as the information in the Determination doesn’t seem to quite match the information found in the SCIP Addendum dated October 2013 on the following points:
- The 2014 description of the Project (ie., the practice and game, says it also includes installation and removal of a natural grass playing field. We are assuming this means the field in Memorial Stadium which is artificial grass. Since this will be for one game, where will this material be dumped? How many large trucks will be running on what streets“? Can the artificial turf be put back or will new turf have to be installed?
Flash: BNC has just confirmed that the natural grass will be placed in Memorial Stadium on top of the artificial turf. Still no information as to what this will do to the artificial turf, if anything, and how the sod will be disposed of after the game. - The 2014 Determination states there will be 10,000 spectators at Maxwell Field. The 2013 SCIP EIR says that there will be bleachers for 300 spectators. Where will the other 9,700 people sit or stand?
Flash: BNC has just been informed that the practice game will be shifted to the Stadium, not held on the Maxwell Family Field. There is no information whether tickets will be sold for the practice game, whether the practice game will be limited to 10,000 spectators, or whether the Stadium will be allowed to fill up to capacity. - The 2013 SCIP Addendum states that there will be a ”traffic control plan“ to be developed by the University of California Police Department and the Berkeley Police Department and while it says that such a plan ”could“ (not ”shall“) include the various item described above, BNC could find no evidence that such a plan was ever discussed, developed or approved.
What all of this — the increased usage that will come with the creation of Sproul Plaza East at the Stadium, and the big sports events — boils down to is that the question BNC posed in April
…has anyone looked at the traffic impacts of all those cars coming either from the Tunnel Road corridor from the south, or University from the west, or the Arlington/Marin to Spruce, Euclid or Martin Luther King Jr. Way corridor from the north, 365 days a year.
will most likely be answered, ”NO“ and further, no one will look into it.
BNC is reminded of the words of Berkeley’s Deputy Fire Chief David Orth who said in a sworn statement made on December 18, 2006 regarding football games at Memorial Stadium:
The expectation that crowds of thousands of people can be safely and quickly egressed from this area whether on foot or in cars, which is worse, by City Public Safety agencies based on the planning and capacity in place, makes no sense.
BNC will keep trying to find out what safety and traffic control plans are in effect and let you know.
More News About Drug Stores in Neighborhood Commercial Districts
BNC eNEWS readers will recall that the issue of proliferating drug stores came up in 2011 when the Council asked the Planning Commission to consider how this should be regulated. The two large chain stores, CVS and Walgreens have been undergoing a competitive battle for locations in Berkeley as well as in other cities. There were also concerns that the nature of these new drugstores has significantly changed, making them a mixture of pharmacy, grocery, liquor and general merchandise stores.
The issue came to a head when Walgreens proposed to construct a new store on the site of a gas station on the corner of Solano and Colusa (see BNC’s March and April eNEWS), a short distance from a CVS store and very close to small, locally owned existing pharmacies. For more details on the Solano Avenue proposal contact Chris Gilbert, www.NoWalgreens.com.
We reported that possibly the Planning Commission response to the Council’s 2011 request would be on the Council Agenda for May 20, 2014. It turns out that didn’t happen.
- Instead, it is scheduled as item #28 for the Council meeting of June 3, 2014. The staff and Planning Commission agree on recommendations that the Council approve the first reading of an ordinance to establish:The definition of a drugstore:A retail establishment where the profession of pharmacy is practiced and/or where licensed prescription drugs and general merchandise are offered for sale. A Food Products Store with a Pharmacy is not a Drugstore.
- A Drugstore size that the ordinance regulates, and the distance between Drugstores and how that distance is measured:New or expanded Drugstores over 5,000 square feet in Gross Floor Area and within 1000 feet of any property containing an existing Drugstore as measured by a straight line from the nearest point of the property line of the parcel on which is Drugstore is proposed to the nearest point of the property line of the point on the nearest Drugstore is located.
- The commercial areas where the ordinance will be in effect:The regulation part of the ordinance will apply only to Neighborhood Commercial Districts, the Elmwood, North Shattuck, and Solano Avenue.The definition of a Drugstore, however, will apply to all Commercial Districts.
The proposed ordinance is NOT about the specific Walgreens proposal on Solano Avenue. It is about regulating the location of large, chain stores in what are designated Neighborhood Commercial Districts, not in areas like the Downtown. BNC has decided to send a letter to the Council in support of the proposed ordinance. It is important that neighborhoods concerned with development in the Elmwood, North Shattuck, and Solano Avenue commercial areas also write the Council, telephone their representatives and attend the Council meeting on June 3rd. The meeting starts at 7:00 p.m., in Council Chambers in Old City Hall, 2180 Martin Luther King Jr. Way. We’ve said it before, and we will keep on saying it. It is important that we unite in order to have an effective voice in preserving our neighborhoods.