Note: In this Section, BNC publishes articles that are written either by a neighborhood representative without editing or is summarized from material that has been submitted to us.
In this issue, BNC has received two important submissions, both of which have been written by representatives of neighborhood groups.
The Manhattan Project: The Destruction of Telegraph Avenue and Surrounding Neighborhoods
Telegraph Avenue is caught in a planning “perfect storm” that will determine not only its future but that of the surrounding residential neighborhoods as well. Very high rents, a planning department that is funded by fees from developers, wealthy out-of-town developers, and the misuse of smart growth and density bonuses combine to create proposed projects that resemble prisons more than housing.
Several six- and seven-story buildings on the 2500 block of Telegraph, with little or no green space, built to property lines, and towering over surrounding neighborhoods are in the proposal stage. And this is the tip of the icebergmore are coming down the pipeline.
With an enormous amount of money to be made, these dorms on steroids will back up on or be in residential neighborhoods.
Perhaps the most egregious project is the one proposed by Patrick Kennedy on the former Center for Independent Living (CIL) site at 2539 Telegraph Avenue. Six stories high, it will span an entire block, from Telegraph to Regent Street. Instead of ground-level green space, a roof deck is proposed. It is ironic to think that on an historic site where a worldwide movement began, there has been no discussion of building accessible housing.
Directly across the street, at the current site of the Village Court, an even taller, seven-story building is proposed. Right behind this building are single-family homes. Again, minimal green space is planned; instead a roof deck is proposed.
Also on the 2500 block of Telegraph, behind the Gorman Building, is another project with no green space but three-story units with five and six bedrooms each.
The South of Dwight area has its issues. The densest area in Berkeley, it is the City’s back yard. As rents have steadily climbed ever higher, landlords have carved up apartments, adding more bedrooms. Students are living two and three to a bedroom. With the added density comes more noise, more cars, and more pollution, leading to a marked deterioration in our quality of life.
Given lax property management (or, at times, its total absence) and the City’s indifferent enforcement of noise and alcohol ordinances, it would seem that public nuisances are being proposed.
The majority demographic here is 18-22 year-olds in a very social period of their lives. They do not keep nine-to-five hours. The proposed roof decks as a substitute green space could not be less appropriate for these neighborhoods. In a college area where partying is the norm, putting a roof deck on top of seven stories will ensure that the noise travels much farther. These buildings won’t just affect their direct neighbors but many streets over.
Ironically these giant buildings are being proposed as the historic nature of Telegraph Avenue and surrounding streets is enhanced by the restoration of older, two-and three-story buildings. The Telegraph area has one of the highest concentrations of historic landmarks in Berkeley.
It goes without saying that Telegraph needs improvement, and more housing is needed in the campus area. However, if left uncontrolled, this gold rush will produce poor housing and ruined neighborhoods while enriching a few absentee landlords.
And remember: this is not a done deal. The City does not have to approve these projects. Berkeley, a city that purports to stand up against wealthy interests in favor of the little guy, has the opportunity to design a world-class avenue leading to a world-class university. Telegraph Avenue will change, and that change will be permanent. It is up to the City and community to decide what Telegraph will look like. Will it be a well-thought-out, livable avenue or a Manhattan Project with a street lined by tall prisons?
There is a viable alternative: a task force that devises a plan for Telegraph which takes into account its historic value; need for viable businesses; and high-density housing that is attractive and livable for tenants without destroying surrounding neighborhoods. There are several examples on Telegraph of well-designed, attractive four-story buildings that do just that.
The South of Dwight Neighbors would like to see the Council set up such a task force. These projects will be built in Districts 7 and 8, represented by Councilmembers Lori Droste and Kriss Worthington. As in the past, with the Chancellor’s Student/Neighbor Task Force and Community Partnership Fund, there needs to be broad public participation. And importantly, there should be a moratorium on building on Telegraph until this task force is in place and has completed its report.
— South of Dwight Neighbors
BNC’s Response
For those of our readers who want more detail regarding development on Telegraph Avenue, see:
- BNC Issue 6, Neighborhood News, Round And About and Issue 11, Neighborhood News, Round And About regarding the Patrick Kennedy proposal for 2539 Telegraph Avenue (former CIL Building).
- BNC Issue 12, Neighborhood News, Round And About, to find out about historic houses being moved in the area.
- BNC Issue 9, Neighborhood News, Round And About, May 2014 to find out about how residential neighborhoods near Telegraph Avenue, south of Dwight Way were thrown under the bus at a public hearing held on April 29, 2014 in the rush to increase density on Telegraph north of Dwight Way to Bancroft. At that hearing, BNC submitted a letter to the Council requesting that the FAR issue be delayed citing problems with the public hearing notice and pointing out how difficult it is for people to understand the FAR concept. BNC urged that since properties south of Dwight Way on both sides of Telegraph are abutted by residential uses, they should have a lower FAR than those properties north of Dwight Way which are abutted by commercial. The City Council acted by making only a slight difference between the density of development north and south of Dwight Way.
BNC agrees entirely with our South of Dwight Neighbors — Telegraph Avenue needs improvement. Many long-time residents still remember the Avenue as a world-class shopping area that would rival today’s Fourth Street.
Neighborhoods need to support the South of Telegraph group in their call for a plan that takes into account its historic value, and the creation of viable neighborhood serving businesses and housing that is attractive and livable for tenants without destroying existing surrounding neighborhoods. It’s time to do this and one more reason for all neighborhoods to join together to help save our neighborhoods. It can be done, and our April 8th Forum is an excellent place to begin this important work!
Our Second Post was a real shocker!
Alta Bates Hospital to Close by 2030
Recently, rumors have been flying about the possible closure of Alta Bates Hospital. Unfortunately, they are not just rumors. According to Stacey Wells, Alta Bates Summit Medical Center’s (ABSMC’s) Director of Public Affairs, Sutter Health has decided to close Alta Bates Hospital by January 1, 2030. The 2030 date is driven by State law, which sets out strict seismic standards for medical facilities that all hospitals in California must meet by 1/1/20301. Alta Bates currently does not meet the 2030 standards, and Sutter has decided not to incur the enormous expense of retrofitting to those standards.
Alta Bates Hospital is one of three local hospitals owned by Sutter Health, an umbrella not-for-profit health system that operates 24 acute care hospitals across Northern California. The three local hospitals — Alta Bates, Herrick, and Summit — are operated as “campuses” of the ABSMC, an entity created by Sutter in 2000. According to Wells, the Alta Bates campus has been running large operating deficits, in the many tens of millions of dollars, over the past several years. Retrofitting the hospital to meet the seismic standards would be extremely disruptive and costly.
Sutter has instead invested in the construction of Summit Pavilion, a large high rise inpatient facility on Oakland’s Pill Hill that complies with the 2030 standards, and has the capacity to absorb most of Alta Bates’ inpatient load. Sutter’s plan is to gradually move most of its Alta Bates programs to the Summit campus. In fact, it has already begun this process, having recently moved the Alta Bates cardiac care unit to Summit. The next program to be moved will be Alta Bates’ stroke center. Wells stressed that Alta Bates will continue to be able to serve emergency cardiac and stroke patients who come to its emergency room, but once stabilized, those patients will be moved to Summit for further care.
Wells could not comment on the future of the Alta Bates facility once it has been vacated by Sutter. Presumably, the property will be sold. While it is currently zoned for medical use, the City of Berkeley could change the zoning to attract a desirable buyer, who will have to develop the property into something other than an inpatient care facility. Clearly, the stakes are exceedingly high for both the City, as the property could become a significant tax revenue source, and for the neighborhoods immediately surrounding the hospital. Alta Bates lies within the Bateman neighborhood, with Willard immediately to the north, LeConte and Halcyon to the west, and CENA to the east. Traffic and parking along the Ashby corridor affect all bordering neighborhoods from the Bayshore Freeway to Tunnel Road, so those neighborhoods will also be impacted by the fate of the Alta Bates site.
The year 2030 sounds like a long time off, but is less than 15 years away. According to Wells, it is possible that Sutter will accomplish the transition to Summit earlier than 2030. Therefore, it is not too soon for the neighborhood associations and the city to begin considering how the community could best be served by a new use of the Alta Bates property, and for the neighborhoods to begin discussing the issue with each other and with their council representatives. Wells reports that ABSMC would like to get input from neighborhood groups by holding a neighborhood meeting or forum at some point to hear what residents would like to see, and what we would not want to see, happen to the property.
There is the equally important issue of how Berkeley residents, not to mention residents of communities to the north of Berkeley, who are not patients of Children’s Hospital or Kaiser will be able to access timely emergency medical care services when their closest ER is in Oakland on the other side of the 80/580 maze. While Sutter will soon open an Urgent Care center at the Herrick campus, and most emergency room visits are more appropriately handled by such centers, the issue remains critical for true emergency patients.
— Lucy Smallsfield, President, Bateman Neighborhood Association
1 California’s hospital seismic safety law, SB 1953, was passed in 1994 and requires every hospital building to comply with two deadlines. By Jan. 1, 2008 (or no later than Jan. 1, 2013 if an extension has been granted), every hospital building must meet specific construction standards established to keep these structures standing after a major earthquake. By Jan. 1, 2030, the law requires all hospital buildings to comply with standards intended to keep these buildings operational following a severe quake. www.suttersantarosa.org/newhospital/about/seismicsafety.html
BNC’s Response
Every resident, every student, every visitor will be affected if Berkeley is left without a fully functional hospital and possibly even one with an inadequate urgent care or emergency facility. BNC urges all Berkeley residents to become involved in responding to this closure. The first step is to inform your community group and work together with other groups. ABSMC has said they want to get input from neighborhood groups, so it is vitally important to begin organizing to provide a unified voice to their request. BNC can’t say exactly what that response will be at this time, but an early scheduling of this issue in our upcoming Forum on April 8th should be the beginning of the discussion to formulate what that response should be. We urge all of you to join us!