DEIR COMMENTS, part 1 DATE FIRST NAME LAST NAME ORGANIZATION 11/23/2016 Angela Guerrero 11/23/2016 Suzannah Sosman 11/23/2016 Yiann Chou 11/24/2016 Anna Frontiero 11/27/2016 Lauren Gonzalez 11/26/2016 Lorraine Lerman 11/26/2016 Pepper Luboff 11/26/2016 Terry Fletcher 11/30/2016 Betsy Schulz 11/30/2016 John Fordice 12/1/2016 Rhiannon 12/5/2016 David Kessler 12/7/2016 Anne-Lise Francois 12/7/2016 Denny Abrams Fourth Street Shops 12/7/2016 Rhiannon 12/7/2016 Stephanie Collins 12/8/2016 Jeannie Pham 12/8/2016 Catherine Montgomery 12/8/2016 Stephanie Thomas 12/8/2016 PHA Transportation Consultants 12/9/2016 Rhiannon 12/10/2016 Eva Pettersson 12/10/2016 Micah Bazant 12/10/2016 Richard Schwartz 12/11/2016 Cassandra Hall 12/11/2016 Jacqs Nevarez 12/11/2016 Michelle Steinberg 12/11/2016 Vivian White
12/11/2016 Sherri Norris CIEA California Indian Environmental Alliance 12/12/2016 Chad Carlson 12/12/2016 Laura Atkins 12/13/2016 George Cammarota 12/13/2016 Stephanie Collins 12/13/2016 Kirra Swenerton 12/13/2016 Lila Frisher 12/13/2016 Megan Calpin 12/12/2016 Mary Ratcliff 12/13/2016 Niels Teunis 12/13/2016 Daniel Woolridge 12/14/2016 Angela White 12/14/2016 Andi Gentile 12/14/2016 signature 12/14/2016 Chad Carlson 12/14/2016 Elizabeth Gould 12/14/2016 Joan Hamilton 12/14/2016 Kayko Tamaki 12/14/2016 Lauren Hotchkiss
Index Page 1 of 5 DEIR COMMENTS, part 1 DATE FIRST NAME LAST NAME ORGANIZATION 12/14/2016 Marissa Hernandez-Evans 12/14/2016 Michelle Steinberg 12/14/2016 Robert Peach 12/14/2016 Rae Strozzo 12/14/2016 Sara Hayes 12/14/2016 Suzi, Rev. Spaugenberg 12/15/2016 Marcia Lovelace 12/15/2016 Michelle Puckett 12/16/2016 Amelea Canaris 12/16/2016 Joan Kresich 12/19/2016 Billy Trice 12/19/2016 Michael Cross 12/20/2016 Anna Henry 12/20/2016 Christian Burchard 12/20/2016 Dr. Hilary Lorraine 12/20/2016 Helen Toy 12/20/2016 J. Daniel 12/20/2016 Kathleen Berrigan 12/20/2016 Marin Casassa 12/20/2016 Sally Arney 12/20/2016 Salman Khan 12/20/2016 Shoshana Perrey 12/20/2016 Julia Casillas 12/20/2016 Paul Moss 12/21/2016 Megan Clark 12/26/2016 Katherine Schoellenbach 1/2/2017 Lindsey Mulcahy 1/2/2017 Sonia Decker 1/3/2017 Annie Banks 1/3/2017 Bruce Hamilton 1/3/2017 Donna Willmott 1/3/2017 Monika Fischer 1/3/2017 David Rehnstrom EBMUD 1/3/2017 Ellie Lobovits 1/3/2017 Juliet Lee 1/3/2017 Katherine Schoellenbach 1/3/2017 Michael Cross 1/3/2017 Nicola Torbett 1/3/2017 Tamie Weinstein 1/4/2017 Lisa Carboni Dept of Transportation 1/5/2017 Barry Barkan Live Oak Institute
1/5/2017 Carla Zendejas CIEL Center for International Environmental Law 1/5/2017 Jane Perry West Berkeley Alliance for Clean Air and Safe 1/5/2017 Janice Schroeder Jobs 1/5/2017 Toni Mester 1/6/2017 Sandra Cobb
Index Page 2 of 5 DEIR COMMENTS, part 1 DATE FIRST NAME LAST NAME ORGANIZATION 1/6/2017 Thalia Drori 1/8/2017 Alison Ehara-Brown 1/8/2017 Cindy McPherson 1/8/2017 David Jaber 1/8/2017 Lindley Mease 1/8/2017 Monique Sonoquie 1/9/2017 Alex Werth 1/9/2017 Bradley Heinz 1/9/2017 Becky Mer 1/9/2017 Beverly Shalom 1/9/2017 John Fordice 1/9/2017 Kathleen McLean 1/9/2017 Margot Cunningham 1/9/2017 Natasha Shawver 1/10/2017 signature 1/10/2017 signature 1/10/2017 Barbara Littleford 1/10/2017 Dale Anania 1/10/2017 David Haupert 1/10/2017 Daian Hennington 1/10/2017 Debbie Lloyd 1/10/2017 Jenny Mulholland-Beahrs 1/10/2017 Joshua Olsen 1/10/2017 Molly Jane Hammond 1/10/2017 Milina Jovanovic 1/10/2017 Michael Makgulis 1/10/2017 Dr. Melinda Micco 1/10/2017 Rebekah Edwards 1/10/2017 Stephanie Dodaro 1/10/2017 Tao Matthews 1/10/2017 signature 1/10/2017 Scott Morgan State Clearinghouse and Planning Unit 1/10/2017 Jessie Gwen Riddle 1/11/2017 Adelita Gonzales 1/11/2017 Amy Hutto Ohlone Land 1/11/2017 Carl Patrick 1/11/2017 Elizabeth Meza 1/11/2017 Lee Pono 1/11/2017 Stephan Crawford 1/11/2017 Tierra Allen 1/12/2017 Jeff Lipton 1/12/2017 Meagen Grundberg 1/12/2017 Chris Tittle Sustainable Economies Law Center 1/12/2017 Alison Ehara-Brown 1/12/2017 Asano Fertig 1/12/2017 Christopher Cook 1/12/2017 Catherine Petru 1/12/2017 Deseree Fontenot
Index Page 3 of 5 DEIR COMMENTS, part 1 DATE FIRST NAME LAST NAME ORGANIZATION 1/12/2017 Erica Etelson 1/12/2017 Joyous Bey 1/12/2017 Joshua Finn 1/12/2017 Jun Hamamoto 1/12/2017 Juliana Morris 1/12/2017 Julia Rose Golomb 1/12/2017 Katie Lonoke 1/12/2017 Leon Fridman 1/12/2017 Megan Micco 1/12/2017 Dr. Melinda Micco 1/12/2017 Megan Thompson 1/12/2017 Paul Ehara 1/12/2017 Sara Davis 1/12/2017 Sue Lopez 1/12/2017 Vivien Cook 1/12/2017 Vanessa Roditz 1/13/2017 Teresa Clarke ZAB Commissioner 1/17/2017 Cynthia Fong 1/17/2017 Sophia Lipton 1/17/2017 Elena Gardella 1/17/2017 Melanie Green 1/18/2017 Charlie Stephens 1/18/2007 photo Comparing Columbus Stories 1/18/2017 photo West Berkeley Shellmound 1/18/2017 Caroline Carr 1/18/2017 Christine Carr 1/18/2017 Steven Carr 2/3/2017 Dorothy Klein 1/19/2017 Sean Burns 1/20/2017 Jaqueline Murphy UC Riverside 1/22/2017 Glen Hauer 1/22/2017 Hilary Buffum 1/22/2017 Hannah Cantor 1/22/2017 Mykel Mogg 1/22/2017 Sheila Marien 1/22/2017 David Chavez 1/23/2017 Brian Karvelas 1/23/2017 Dr. Isa Gucciardi 1/23/2017 Mica Jarmel-Schneider 1/23/2017 Maya Litauer Chan 1/23/2017 Dafna Finkler 1/24/2017 Don Gates 1/24/2017 Dee Keller 1/24/2017 Laura Diamondstone 1/24/2017 Caleen Sisk Winnemem Wintu Tribe 1/26/2017 Sherri Norris 1/26/2017 Kathy Sweeney 1/27/2017 Rose Thater Braan-Imai The Native American Academy
Index Page 4 of 5 DEIR COMMENTS, part 1 DATE FIRST NAME LAST NAME ORGANIZATION 1/27/2017 Sandhya Hermon 1/27/2017 Walter Wood 1/27/2017 Barbara Memby 1/27/2017 Brittany Schmitt 1/27/2017 Denise Schiller 1/27/2017 Farhana Jahan 1/27/2017 Livia Houston 1/27/2017 Nicole Liner-Jigamian 1/27/2017 Richard Schwartz 1/28/2017 Abigail Taubman 1/28/2017 Denny Abrams 1/28/2017 Megan de Matteo 1/29/2017 Rebekah Erev 1/28/2017 Richard Schwartz 1/28/2017 Sandy Simon 1/10/2017 William Berland Ferguson & Berland 12/30/2016 Pang Ho PHA Transportation Consultants 1/10/2017 Denny Abrams Fourth Street Shops 1/29/2017 Rebekah Erev 1/29/2017 Cherie Newell 1/30/2017 Juliet Belle UC San Diego 1/30/2017 Katherine Whitney 1/30/2017 Stephanie Manning 1/31/2017 signatures various 1/31/2017 Abigail Taubman 1/31/2017 Miriam Simos CCRPA California Cultural Resource Preservation 1/30/2017 Patricia Martz Alliance, Inc. 1/31/2017 Tracey Brieger 1/31/2017 signatures various 1/31/2017 Kiki Munez 1/31/2017 Lisa Stephens 1/31/2017 signature 1/31/2017 Lakat Eastman 1/31/2017 signatures various 1/31/2016 Denny Abrams Abrams/Millikan 1/31/2017 Jim Mullins & Joan Baylie 1/31/2017 Ariann Sahagun 1/31/2017 signatures 1/31/2017 Hilary Buffum 1/31/2017 Molly Jane McGettigan Arthur 1/31/2017 unsigned letter 1/31/2017 Robin Fink 1/31/2017 Rebecca Tinsley 1/31/2017 signature
Index Page 5 of 5 Allen, Shannon
From: Angela Mictlanxochitl Anderson Guerrero
Dear Shannon Allen,
As a Bay Area resident, I write to strongly oppose the project construction at the West Berkeley Shellmound (City Landmark #227). The Draft Environmental Impact Report indicates the site would be disturbed and its preservation not guaranteed. The West Berkeley Shellmound is not just the oldest of 425 fun weary sites of the Chochenyo Ohlone. Its also the oldest place ever lived at in the Bay Area and we need to preserve this Sacred Site as a heritage site of humanity.
Kindly,
Angela Anderson 1766 30th Avenue San Francisco, CA 94122
Allen, Shannon
From: Suzannah Sosman
Hello Shannon,
I am writing as a current Berkeley resident at 1399 Delaware Street. I have been following the planning process around the current proposed development at 1900 Fourth Street in Berkeley and am vehemently opposed to the construction of a residential and commercial building development there.
There has been much development happening in Berkeley over the last 5 years, and while it may bring increased resources and housing opportunities for the city, it also runs the risk of completely destroying the ancient cultural and natural history of the region. The current proposed development site is one of the last remaining shell mounds of the Chochenyo Ohlone peoples in the world. It is the burial place of oldest human inhabited site in the entire Bay area. This site is extremely sacred to the Ohlone peoples. Their ancestors are buried there.
Even with the current proposed mitigation measures what still remains of this sacred site could be destroyed or, in the chance that it was dug up without being destroyed, it would be uprooted and essentially trucked off to a paleontological repository.
After all that has already been done against these original inhabitants, I make a clear plea to please consider a different choice this time. Please refrain from desecrating this sacred site and instead consider creating something that honors these original inhabitants and their descendants.
Thank you for your real considerations, Suzannah Sosman
Allen, Shannon
From: YIANN REBEKAH CHOU
Hello Shannon Allen,
I hope this email finds you well. I am writing to voice my opposition to the development and any construction on City Landmark #227. I know that I and other residents of Berkeley see this as harmful and disrespectful to our Ohlone community members. Please respect their sacred burial grounds and halt construction on it.
Thank you,
Yiann
Allen, Shannon
From: Anna Frontiero
Hi Ms. Allen,
I am writing in support and solidarity with the Ohlone people. I am against the construction of the luxury condo and mall development proposal on the West Berkeley Shellmound. The proposal would destroy Ohlone people's sacred burial grounds.
Thank you for reading.
Best, Anna Frontiero
Allen, Shannon
From: Lauren Gonzalez, LMFT
Hi Shannon,
I'm a Berkeley Hills resident, and fully in support of the Fourth Street retail/residential project. This might be a shot in the dark, but I thought I'd reach out to you because I've been tracking commercial real estate in the Fourth Street area, in search of a reasonably-sized (500-800 sq ft) office space for my psychotherapy/coaching and editorial business. I work with high-end clientele in the arts and business, and find many therapy offices too unprofessional for my usage. I'm quite taken the by design and functionality of this development, and hopeful for the kind of space I visualize. Thought it wouldn't hurt to reach out. I'm currently on Piedmont Avenue in Oakland.
Many thanks,
Lauren
Lauren Gonzalez, MA, MFA, LMFT
http://www.laurengonzalez.com / Office: (415) 685-3894
Licensed Marriage and Family Therapist
Oakland DBT and Mindfulness Center (http://www.oaklanddbtcenter.com).
Confidential Information Enclosed: This message is intended for the use for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged and confidential, the disclosure of which is governed by applicable law. If you have received this message by error, please notify the sender immediately and destroy this email and all its attachments. Thank you.
Allen, Shannon
From: Lorraine Lerman
Dear Planner Allen, Please note my comment on the Draft EIR on the west Berkeley Shell mound. This is a clear violation of a cultural resource and it is your job to uphold the law and its intent.Sincerely, Lorraine Lerman Berkeley CA
Allen, Shannon
From: Pepper Luboff
Dear City of Berkeley Planning Department,
I'm writing to express my concern that your draft Environmental Impact Report on the West Berkeley Shellmound does not sufficiently address the cultural and historical (let alone personal) damage that would be done by excavating the site to construct an underground parking structure for new condos and a mall. I attended a prayer gathering led by Ohlone people and their allies yesterday at the Bay Street Mall, and I learned that the West Berkeley Shellmound is part of one of the oldest inhabited areas in the SF Bay Area. As you know, the shellmounds were the burial sites of the Ohlone tribe's ancestors, and, as such, they are sacred sites to their people.
I try to imagine what it would be like if someone dug up the graves of my ancestors or desecrated a place I consider sacred, like a church or a temple or a meditation hall, and even then I am probably nowhere near to conceiving the pain and humiliation and indignation of these indigenous people. I cannot conceive of their pain, because it is informed by their particular history as indigenous people. First they were systematically uprooted and killed and "acculturated," then they were unable to gain recognition from the federal government as a tribe because the United States' colonial policies demolished most, if not all, of the conditions that need to be in place for them to claim federal tribal status. Now, without federal recognition, the Ohlone people are unable to defend any land claims they might have on the basis of historical treaties. And their sacred sites are sold and developed, usually for profit alone, without consideration of the tribe's cultural and spiritual life.
This story is so familiar to so many of us by now that we have become numb to it. We have become insensible to its moral implications and to the damage this behavior does to indigenous people and, ultimately, to settlers as well. I hope the City of Berkeley Planning Department will be able to step outside this pattern of desensitization and recognize the cultural significance of the West Berkeley Shellmound not only for its archaeological interest—as something to pick through to fill up a museum—but also for its meaning to living, breathing Ohlone people.
Thank you!
Regards, Pepper Luboff
Allen, Shannon
From: terry fletcher
ĞĂƌDƐ͘ůůĞŶ͕ WůĞĂƐĞƉƌŽƚĞĐƚƚŚĞtĞƐƚĞƌŬĞůĞLJ^ŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚ͘ŽŶŽĂƉƉƌŽǀĞďƵŝůĚŝŶŐŽŶƚŚĂƚƐŝƚĞ͖ŝƚŝƐĂƐĂĐƌĞĚƐŝƚĞĂŶĚƐŚŽƵůĚďĞ ƉƌŽƚĞĐƚĞĚ͘ ĞƐƚ͕ dĞƌƌLJ&ůĞƚĐŚĞƌ ϭϰϭϳĂƌůĞƚŽŶ^ƚ͘ ĞƌŬĞůĞLJ
Allen, Shannon
From: Betsy Schulz
Attn: Shannon Allen, Principal Planner
The West Berkeley Shellmound was designated City Landmark #227, a significant historical , archeological, and cultural resource. It is threatened by the 1900 4th Street Luxury Condos/ Mall Project. Construction of the project would effectively remove a portion of the landmark, and the partial or total destruction of previously unidentified intact archaelogical deposits by the project would impair athe ability of such resources to convey important and scientific information. It is critical that this landmark be preserved. The condo/mall project should not be approved until it can be guaranteed that there will be no destruction of archeologcial deposits. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, Betsy Schulz
Allen, Shannon
From: john fordice
Ms Shannon Allen, AICP , Berkeley Landmarks Commission c/o Fatema Crane, Secretary Berkeley Zoning Adjustments Board, and Interested Parties,
Regarding 1900 Fourth Street / Use Permit #ZP2015-0068 / City Landmark #227, West Berkeley Shellmound
In review of the 1900 Fourth Street Draft ERI I have discovered an issue which apparently has been ignored in the EIR. This is the issue of Aesthetics in the form of publicly accessible Open Space. The ERI page 5, Project Under Review, states:
EXISTING, The project site is 2.21 acres. This equals 96,267 square feet of open space which is freely and visibly accessible to the public.
PROPOSED, The proposed developed project will include 13,032 square feet of open space as Ground Floor, Second Floor, and Roof Top. Per Item #3 on page 55 of the EIR, this open space will consist of: Private Second Floor and Roof Top = 6450 square feet with NO PUBLIC ACCESS Public Ground Floor = 6852 square feet with public access
Please note that the proposed development project will cause a 86.5% (83,235.6 s.f.) loss of freely accessible visible open space. It is important to realize that the current Spenger’s Parking lot is entirely open to the sky and allows open distance views in all directions. While the proposed project’s severely reduced open space consists only of six small areas (1 public & 5 private) with adjacent walls of one to four stories in height which will provide almost zero open distance views to the public, and very restricted private open distance views to project residents.
The current open to the sky quality of the Spenger’s parking lot is a valuable aesthetic asset of the area. To fill this site with the proposed building will rob Spenger’s, Fourth Street, the surrounding area, and all who use it and pass through it of the visual freedom which the site now provides. Open space which allows all people, ( public and private ) to see and enjoy wide views of the distance and the sky is precious and deserves to be preserved. This is a valuable Aesthetic issue and needs to be added to the EIR. This open area and the sky it contains deserves to be preserved. Based on the Aesthetic damage it will cause to the Fourth Street Area, the proposed development project is unacceptable and should not be approved!
Thank you, john fordice 1828 fifth street
From: Rhiannon To: Crane, Fatema Cc: Beth Montano; Meryl Siegal; L. & T. Pop Account; Pamela Deering; Stephanie Manning; Kathryn Stepanski Subject: Landmarks Commission: 1900 Fourth St Date: Thursday, December 01, 2016 11:35:38 AM
Re: 1900 Fourth St.
This DEIR completely ignores the impacts of this project in addition to the 550 new units on the other side of the overpass that have been permitted since 2010 on the Sisterna Historic district, the Delaware Historic district, or the low income residents in the surrounding neighborhoods. Allowing new luxury units in an area where housing has not been considered or permitted will open all of the properties in the 4th St. shopping district and nearby residential areas to speculation and skyrocketing land/housing prices. Our neighborhood is historically low income people of color, and over 61% rentals. When absentee landlords are offered over market prices by developers looking to build high rent projects, the low income locals are quickly displaced. Since the City will bend any rule to guarantee a good profit, the developers are willing to pay any price up front for land.
In order to qualify as an infill project, a site has to be first zoned for residential. In both the West Berkeley Plan and the University Avenue Plan, this site has been designated as a small scale commercial site with no residential, to mirror, enhance, and protect the 4th St. Shopping district. The WBP includes Truitt & White, West Berkeley's third highest sales tax generator, as part of this 4th St. District, even though it's zoned MU/LI. Both Plans and the West Berkeley Circulation Master Plan and all their EIR's anticipated 10,000 sq. feet of retail for this site, with parking and no residential. Both Plans promised that a 4th St Strategic Plan was in the works. The West Berkeley Project with provisions that would have allowed a project like this in the C-W zone: an average height of 50' up to 75' maximum by right, was voted down by the electorate in 2012 as Measure T.
It's nearly impossible to determine the environmental effects of this project, since the descriptions, drawings and specifications seem to vary widely from page to page. There's not a straight line or right angle in any of the illustrations, and the industrial nature of the area is masked in a golden glow. The buildings will have to be set back at least another 10' along 4th St. in order to make room for parallel parking, sidewalks and bulbouts if there's to be room for travel lanes. The proposed 14 foot sidewalks along Hearst and University will also impede the traffic lanes. The current sidewalk at the corner of 4th and Hearst is only 3 feet wide, so the bulb-out on that corner will nearly eliminate the southbound lane of 4th St. The 'survey' diagrams seem to have added anywhere from 10 to 14 feet to the existing roadways. There are currently 9 parking spaces on Hearst that will be eliminated, and no space for parallel parking on 4th St. When determining traffic impacts, the loss of the existing 350 car parking lot needs to be mitigated in addition to the other impacts. The folks that park there now will have to be accommodated.
In considering the impact of any development on this site, it will be necessary to also include the cumulative effect of the well over 500 new residences already permitted and/or under construction, and their combined effect on transit, traffic, schools, open space, air, water, etc. ABAG/Plan Bay Area's Sustainable Communities Strategy has calculated the total amount of housing needed along the entire University Ave "PDA" from 2010-2040 as 550 units. We've produced nearly that already just in the four blocks bounded by University, Addison, 6th and 2nd Streets, without providing the jobs required to support these new residents (the other half of a PDA requirement). With the loss of Grocery Outlet, a major employer which hired many low income neighbors, we have a net loss of good paying jobs for untrained workers in the area.
The West Berkeley Plan DEIR names University Ave from San Pablo to 3rd St. as a significant public view corridor. The applicant for any building taller than 30' which is higher than surrounding buildings must provide a wire frame model or photo simulation to accurately display the building in relation to its surroundings. The Dr. Suessian fish eye drawings provided are not suitable for any such determination. rhiannon
My apologies for any repetition, there are so many different documents with vastly different descriptions of the same thing that it's hard to decide which to respond to. I will try to go page by page in my comments for next week. Allen, Shannon
From: David Kessler
0V$OOHQ -- :DULV7HUURULVP%HUNHOH\EXPSHUVWLFNHU Allen, Shannon From: Anne-Lise FRANCOIS Dear Principal Planner Shannon Allen and other members of the Berkeley City Council: I'm writing to express opposition to the planned 1900 4th St. Luxury Condos and Mall. From what I understand, construction of the project would destroy or limit access to intact archaeological deposits that belong to the Ohlone West Berkeley Shellmound (City Landmark #227). Now is not a time for Berkeley to be interfering with or further destroying Ohlone sacred sites. Nor is it a time for it to building malls or luxury condos. We need community gardens, affordable housing, and infrastructure that promotes city cycling, public transit, and other forms of carless circulation. But we also need a richer and more textured understanding of the history of this area and of the many different people who have lived here and continue to do so, so that we can find a better and different way to live in relation to one another and to this place. with thanks for your atention. Sincerely yours, Anne-Lise François Associate Professor, English and Comparative Literature University of California, Berkeley Allen, Shannon From: Rhiannon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·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·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ttn: Shannon Allen City of Berkeley City Planning 1947 Center Street, 2nd Floor Berkeley, CA 94704 Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Commission. It was also listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, as well as determined to be eligible for the National Registry of Historic places. Advantages of having a site registered by the National Park Service include, but are not limited to: • Eligibility for federal preservation grants for planning and rehabilitation Federal investment tax credits • Preservation easements to nonprofit organizations • International Building Code fire and life safety code alternatives • Possible State tax benefit and grant opportunities. • Network with other historic property owners, tour historic areas, or chat with preservationists through Conferences, Workshops, and Preservation Organizations. (resource: https://www.nps.gov/nr/ national_register_fundamentals.htm#start) The West Berkeley Shellmound site, completely encompassing the proposed 1900 Fourth Street site, is known to be the oldest bayside settlement in the San Francisco Bay Area, approximately 5700 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone people today. The draft EIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by massive community opposition voiced at the Dec 1st meeting of the Berkeley Landmark Preservation Committee. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to establish the archaeological reports and there has not been adequate peer review of the data in the draft EIR. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology of the 1900 Fourth Street EIR. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the EIR’s preparation. The primary consultant had multiple conflicts of interest, while a second Ohlone person repeatedly requesting inclusion was not consulted for the EIR. This manner of consultation with Ohlone people seems like a mere token gesture given the importance of this site to members of the Ohlone community. Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley "Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People" states in part: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site.” On page 67, the Draft Environmental Impact Report states, "Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous people of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear weather or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound site is the series of murals and the small plaque in the parking lot under the freeway. Certainly the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone people to develop a major memorial and educational site at 1900 4th Street. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the five thousand years of history. Reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative! Sincerely, Stephanie M. Collins Allen, Shannon From: Jeannie Pham Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I'm a fairly long-time resident of the East Bay, attended Cal, and work in Berkeley at the Ecology Center. My hope is that our city treats and respects historically significant Native American sites, and that we are a model city!! I am writing to express my deep concerns about the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Commission. It was also listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, as well as determined to be eligible for the National Registry of Historic places. The West Berkeley Shellmound site, completely encompassing the proposed 1900 Fourth Street site, is known to be the oldest bayside settlement in the San Francisco Bay Area, approximately 5700 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone people today. The draft EIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by massive community opposition voiced at the Dec 1st meeting of the Berkeley Landmark Preservation Committee. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to establish the archaeological reports and there has not been adequate peer review of the data in the draft EIR. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology of the 1900 Fourth Street EIR. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the EIR’s preparation. The primary consultant had multiple conflicts of interest, while a second Ohlone person repeatedly requesting inclusion was not consulted for the EIR. This manner of consultation with Ohlone people seems like a mere token gesture given the importance of this site to members of the Ohlone community. Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley "Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People" states in part: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site." On page 67, the Draft Environmental Impact Report states, "Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous people of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear weather or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound site is the series of murals and the small plaque in the parking lot under the freeway. Certainly the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone people to develop a major memorial and educational site at 1900 4th Street. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the five thousand years of history. Reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative! Sincerely, Jeannie Pham Allen, Shannon From: Catherine Montgomery Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Completed ƚƚŶ͗^ŚĂŶŶŽŶůůĞŶ ŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJŝƚLJWůĂŶŶŝŶŐ ϭϵϰϳĞŶƚĞƌ^ƚƌĞĞƚ͕ϮŶĚ&ůŽŽƌ ĞƌŬĞůĞLJ͕ϵϰϳϬϰ ĞĂƌDƐ͘ůůĞŶĂŶĚĞƌŬĞůĞLJŝƚLJWůĂŶŶĞƌƐ͗ /ĂŵǁƌŝƚŝŶŐƚŽĞdžƉƌĞƐƐŵLJĚĞĞƉĐŽŶĐĞƌŶƐĂďŽƵƚƚŚĞĚƌĂĨƚ ŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂů/ŵƉĂĐƚZĞƉŽƌƚ; /ZͿƌĞŐĂƌĚŝŶŐϭϵϬϬ&ŽƵƌƚŚ ^ƚƌĞĞƚ͘dŚĞƐŝƚĞǁĂƐĚĞƐŝŐŶĂƚĞĚĂƐĂŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJ>ĂŶĚŵĂƌŬηϮϮϳďLJƚŚĞ>ĂŶĚŵĂƌŬƐŽŵŵŝƐƐŝŽŶ͘/ƚǁĂƐĂůƐŽůŝƐƚĞĚŝŶ ƚŚĞĂůŝĨŽƌŶŝĂ^ƚĂƚĞZĞŐŝƐƚƌLJŽĨ,ŝƐƚŽƌŝĐWůĂĐĞƐ͕ĂƐǁĞůůĂƐĚĞƚĞƌŵŝŶĞĚƚŽďĞĞůŝŐŝďůĞĨŽƌƚŚĞEĂƚŝŽŶĂůZĞŐŝƐƚƌLJŽĨ,ŝƐƚŽƌŝĐ ƉůĂĐĞƐ͘dŚĞtĞƐƚĞƌŬĞůĞLJ^ŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚƐŝƚĞ͕ĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞůLJĞŶĐŽŵƉĂƐƐŝŶŐƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚϭϵϬϬ&ŽƵƌƚŚ^ƚƌĞĞƚƐŝƚĞ͕ŝƐŬŶŽǁŶƚŽ ďĞƚŚĞŽůĚĞƐƚďĂLJƐŝĚĞƐĞƚƚůĞŵĞŶƚŝŶƚŚĞ^ĂŶ&ƌĂŶĐŝƐĐŽĂLJƌĞĂ͕ĂƉƉƌŽdžŝŵĂƚĞůLJϱϳϬϬLJĞĂƌƐŽůĚ͘/ƚŝƐƚŚĞƚƌƵĞďŝƌƚŚƉůĂĐĞŽĨ ĞƌŬĞůĞLJ͘/ƚĐŽŶƚŝŶƵĞƐƚŽďĞŽĨƵƚŵŽƐƚƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶĐĞĂƐĂĐĞƌĞŵŽŶŝĂůĐĞŶƚĞƌƚŽƚŚĞKŚůŽŶĞƉĞŽƉůĞƚŽĚĂLJ͘ dŚĞĚƌĂĨƚ /ZŝƐŚĞĂǀŝůLJĚŝƐƉƵƚĞĚ͕ĂƐƌĞǀĞĂůĞĚďLJŵĂƐƐŝǀĞĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJŽƉƉŽƐŝƚŝŽŶǀŽŝĐĞĚĂƚƚŚĞĞĐϭƐƚŵĞĞƚŝŶŐŽĨƚŚĞ ĞƌŬĞůĞLJ>ĂŶĚŵĂƌŬWƌĞƐĞƌǀĂƚŝŽŶŽŵŵŝƚƚĞĞ͘dŚĞƌĞŝƐƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶƚĐŽŶƚƌŽǀĞƌƐLJƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐƚŚĞŵĞƚŚŽĚŽůŽŐLJƵƐĞĚƚŽ ĞƐƚĂďůŝƐŚƚŚĞĂƌĐŚĂĞŽůŽŐŝĐĂůƌĞƉŽƌƚƐĂŶĚƚŚĞƌĞŚĂƐŶŽƚďĞĞŶĂĚĞƋƵĂƚĞƉĞĞƌƌĞǀŝĞǁŽĨƚŚĞĚĂƚĂŝŶƚŚĞĚƌĂĨƚ /Z͘WĂƐƚ ĞdžĐĂǀĂƚŝŽŶƐŝŶĂŶĚĂƌŽƵŶĚƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚƐŝƚĞŚĂǀĞƵŶĐŽǀĞƌĞĚŚƵŵĂŶďƵƌŝĂůƐĂŶĚƵŶĚŝƐƚƵƌďĞĚĐƵůƚƵƌĂůƌĞŵĂŝŶƐ͘dŚĞ ƌĞƉŽƌƚĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞůLJĨĂŝůƐƚŽĂĚĚƌĞƐƐƌĞŵĂŝŶƐƐƉĞĐŝĨŝĐĂůůLJĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚĞĚŝŶƚŚĞ /ZĨŽƌƚŚĞĂĚũĂĐĞŶƚ'ƌŽĐĞƌLJKƵƚůĞƚƐŝƚĞƚŚĂƚŝƐ ƉĂƌƚŽĨƚŚĞƐĂŵĞ>ĂŶĚŵĂƌŬ^ŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚƐŝƚĞ͘dŚŝƐĐŽŶƐƚŝƚƵƚĞƐĂƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶƚŽǀĞƌƐŝŐŚƚĂŶĚŝŶĂĐĐƵƌĂĐLJŝŶƚŚĞŵĞƚŚŽĚŽůŽŐLJ ŽĨƚŚĞϭϵϬϬ&ŽƵƌƚŚ^ƚƌĞĞƚ /Z͘ &ƵƌƚŚĞƌŵŽƌĞ͕ƚŚĞƌĞŚĂƐŶŽƚďĞĞŶĂĚĞƋƵĂƚĞƚƌŝďĂůĐŽŶƐƵůƚĂƚŝŽŶŝŶƚŚĞ /Z͛ƐƉƌĞƉĂƌĂƚŝŽŶ͘dŚĞƉƌŝŵĂƌLJĐŽŶƐƵůƚĂŶƚŚĂĚ ŵƵůƚŝƉůĞĐŽŶĨůŝĐƚƐŽĨŝŶƚĞƌĞƐƚ͕ǁŚŝůĞĂƐĞĐŽŶĚKŚůŽŶĞƉĞƌƐŽŶƌĞƉĞĂƚĞĚůLJƌĞƋƵĞƐƚŝŶŐŝŶĐůƵƐŝŽŶǁĂƐŶŽƚĐŽŶƐƵůƚĞĚĨŽƌƚŚĞ /Z͘dŚŝƐŵĂŶŶĞƌŽĨĐŽŶƐƵůƚĂƚŝŽŶǁŝƚŚKŚůŽŶĞƉĞŽƉůĞƐĞĞŵƐůŝŬĞĂŵĞƌĞƚŽŬĞŶŐĞƐƚƵƌĞŐŝǀĞŶƚŚĞŝŵƉŽƌƚĂŶĐĞŽĨƚŚŝƐƐŝƚĞ ƚŽŵĞŵďĞƌƐŽĨƚŚĞKŚůŽŶĞĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJ͘ ZĞƐŽůƵƚŝŽŶEŽ͘ϲϳ͕ϯϱϯͲE^ŽĨƚŚĞŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJΗ,ŽŶŽƌĞƌŬĞůĞLJ^ŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚ/ŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐ^ĂĐƌĞĚ^ŝƚĞ͕hĞƌŬĞůĞLJ ZĞƚƵƌŶŶĐĞƐƚƌĂůZĞŵĂŝŶƐƚŽKŚůŽŶĞWĞŽƉůĞΗƐƚĂƚĞƐŝŶƉĂƌƚ͗Η /d&hZd, ZZ ^K>s ƚŚĂƚĨƌĞĞ͕ƉƌŝŽƌ͕ĂŶĚŝŶĨŽƌŵĞĚ ĐŽŶƐĞŶƚŽĨƚŚĞKŚůŽŶĞĂŶĚŽƚŚĞƌŝŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐƉĞŽƉůĞƐŽĨƚŚĞƌĞŐŝŽŶďĞŝŶƚĞŐƌĂůƚŽĂŶLJĂůƚĞƌĂƚŝŽŶƉůĂŶŶŝŶŐĨŽƌƚŚĞĞƌŬĞůĞLJ ^ŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚƐĂĐƌĞĚƐŝƚĞ͕ŝŶĂĐĐŽƌĚĂŶĐĞǁŝƚŚƚŚĞƉƌŽǀŝƐŝŽŶƐŽĨƚŚĞhŶŝƚĞĚEĂƚŝŽŶƐĞĐůĂƌĂƚŝŽŶŽŶƚŚĞZŝŐŚƚƐŽĨ/ŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐ WĞŽƉůĞ͕ĂŶĚĐĂůůƐƵƉŽŶĂůůƉĂƌƚŝĞƐƚŽĨŽůůŽǁƚŚĞƉƌŝŶĐŝƉůĞƐŽĨƚŚĞĞĐůĂƌĂƚŝŽŶǁŝƚŚƌĞƐƉĞĐƚƚŽƚŚĞtĞƐƚĞƌŬĞůĞLJ ^ŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚƐŝƚĞ͘Η KŶƉĂŐĞϲϳ͕ƚŚĞƌĂĨƚ ŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂů/ŵƉĂĐƚZĞƉŽƌƚƐƚĂƚĞƐ͕ΗŽŶƐƵůƚĂƚŝŽŶǁŝƚŚƚŚĞKŚůŽŶĞ/ŶĚŝĂŶdƌŝďĞ͕ĐŽŶĚƵĐƚĞĚ ƉƵƌƐƵĂŶƚƚŽϱϮ͕ǁĂƐĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚĨŽƌƚŚĞWƌŽũĞĐƚĂŶĚŵŝƚŝŐĂƚŝŽŶŵĞĂƐƵƌĞƐĂƌĞƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĞĚ͕ĂƐĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞ͘͟ hŶĨŽƌƚƵŶĂƚĞůLJ͕ƚŚŝƐŝƐŽŶůLJŽŶĞƚƌŝďĂůĞŶƚŝƚLJĂŶĚƚŚĞƌĞƐŽůƵƚŝŽŶǀĞƌLJĐůĞĂƌůLJƐƚĂƚĞƐƚŚĂƚŝƚƐŚŽƵůĚĂůƐŽŝŶĐůƵĚĞŽƚŚĞƌ ŝŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐƉĞŽƉůĞŽĨƚŚĞƌĞŐŝŽŶ͖ƚŚĞŽŶĨĞĚĞƌĂƚĞĚsŝůůĂŐĞƐŽĨ>ŝƐũĂŶ͕ĨŽƌĞdžĂŵƉůĞ͕ƐŚŽƵůĚďĞŐŝǀĞŶƚŚĞƐĂŵĞĨŽƌŵĂů ĐŽŶƐƵůƚĂƚŝŽŶƉƌŽĐĞƐƐĂƐKŚůŽŶĞdƌŝďĞ/ŶĐ͘/ƚŝƐĂůƐŽƵŶĐůĞĂƌǁĞĂƚŚĞƌŽƌŶŽƚƚŚĞŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJĨŽůůŽǁĞĚ^ϭϴǁŚŝĐŚ ƐƚĂƚĞƐƚŚĂƚǁŚĞŶĂĐŝƚLJŽƌĐŽƵŶƚLJĂĚŽƉƚƐŽƌĂŵĞŶĚƐƚŚĞŝƌŐĞŶĞƌĂůƉůĂŶƚŚĞdƌŝďĞƐĨƌŽŵƚŚĞĂƌĞĂŵƵƐƚďĞĐŽŶƐƵůƚĞĚ͕ ǁŚĞƚŚĞƌĨĞĚĞƌĂůůLJƌĞĐŽŐŶŝnjĞĚŽƌŶŽƚ͘dŚĞŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJŚĂƐĂŵĞŶĚĞĚƚŚĞŝƌŚŽƵƐŝŶŐĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƉůĂŶŶƵŵĞƌŽƵƐƚŝŵĞƐ ƐŝŶĐĞƚŚĞůĂǁǁĂƐƉƵƚŝŶƚŽĂĨĨĞĐƚŝŶϮϬϬϱ͕ĂŶĚƚŚĞƌĞŝƐŶŽƉƌŽŽĨƚŚĂƚdƌŝďĞƐǁĞƌĞŝŶĐůƵĚĞĚŝŶĐŽŶƐƵůƚĂƚŝŽŶƉƌŝŽƌƚŽ ĂŵĞŶĚŝŶŐƚŚŝƐƉĂƌƚŽĨƚŚĞŐĞŶĞƌĂůƉůĂŶ͘ ƚƚŚŝƐƉŽŝŶƚ͕ƚŚĞŽŶůLJŽĨĨŝĐŝĂůƌĞĐŽŐŶŝƚŝŽŶŽĨƚŚŝƐƐĂĐƌĞĚƐŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚƐŝƚĞŝƐƚŚĞƐĞƌŝĞƐŽĨŵƵƌĂůƐĂŶĚƚŚĞƐŵĂůůƉůĂƋƵĞŝŶ ƚŚĞƉĂƌŬŝŶŐůŽƚƵŶĚĞƌƚŚĞĨƌĞĞǁĂLJ͘ĞƌƚĂŝŶůLJƚŚĞŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJǁŽƵůĚďĞŶĞĨŝƚĨƌŽŵƚƌƵůLJŵĞĂŶŝŶŐĨƵůƉƵďůŝĐ ĂĐŬŶŽǁůĞĚŐĞŵĞŶƚŽĨŝƚƐKŚůŽŶĞƉĂƐƚ͕ƉƌĞƐĞŶƚ͕ĂŶĚĨƵƚƵƌĞďLJǁŽƌŬŝŶŐǁŝƚŚůŽĐĂůKŚůŽŶĞƉĞŽƉůĞƚŽĚĞǀĞůŽƉĂŵĂũŽƌ ŵĞŵŽƌŝĂůĂŶĚĞĚƵĐĂƚŝŽŶĂůƐŝƚĞĂƚϭϵϬϬϰƚŚ^ƚƌĞĞƚ͘ dŚŝƐŝƐĂĐůĞĂƌŽƉƉŽƌƚƵŶŝƚLJĨŽƌƚŚĞŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJƚŽĨŽůůŽǁƚŚƌŽƵŐŚŽŶŝƚƐƌĞƐŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐƚŽŚŽŶŽƌĂŶĚƉƌŽƚĞĐƚƐĂĐƌĞĚƐŝƚĞƐ ĂŶĚƚŚĞƌŝŐŚƚƐŽĨ/ŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐƉĞŽƉůĞƐ͘/ŝŵƉůŽƌĞĞƌŬĞůĞLJƚŽƚĂŬĞĂƐƚĂŶĚĂŐĂŝŶƐƚƚŚŝƐĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶƚŚĂƚǁŝůůďĞŶĞĨŝƚ ǁĞĂůƚŚLJĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞƌƐĂƚƚŚĞĞdžƉĞŶƐĞŽĨƚŚĞĨŝǀĞƚŚŽƵƐĂŶĚLJĞĂƌƐŽĨŚŝƐƚŽƌLJ͘ZĞũĞĐƚƚŚĞ /ZĂŶĚĞŵďƌĂĐĞƚŚĞEŽWůĂŶ ůƚĞƌŶĂƚŝǀĞ͊ ^ŝŶĐĞƌĞůLJ͕ <ĂƚĞDŽŶƚŐŽŵĞƌLJ ^ĞŶƚĨƌŽŵŵLJŝWŚŽŶĞ Allen, Shannon From: Stephanie Thomas Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Completed Dear Zoning board, I have just learned about the proposed project on the shell mound area on 4th street. I understand that this is a landmark area and also I hold this as sacred space. I think it is a place for the Ohlone people to help plan for- not for another commercial area Thanks Stephanie Thomas Berkeley CA Allen, Shannon From: Rhiannon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llen, Shannon From: Eva Attn: Shannon Allen City of Berkeley City Planning 1947 Center Street, 2nd Floor Berkeley, CA 94704 Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Commission. It was also listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, as well as determined to be eligible for the National Registry of Historic places. The West Berkeley Shellmound site, completely encompassing the proposed 1900 Fourth Street site, is known to be the oldest bayside settlement in the San Francisco Bay Area, approximately 5700 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone people today. The draft EIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by massive community opposition voiced at the Dec 1st meeting of the Berkeley Landmark Preservation Committee. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to establish the archaeological reports and there has not been adequate peer review of the data in the draft EIR. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology of the 1900 Fourth Street EIR. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the EIR’s preparation. The primary consultant had multiple conflicts of interest, while a second Ohlone person repeatedly requesting inclusion was not consulted for the EIR. This manner of consultation with Ohlone people seems like a mere token gesture given the importance of this site to members of the Ohlone community. Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley "Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People" states in part: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site." On page 67, the Draft Environmental Impact Report states, "Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous people of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear weather or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound site is the series of murals and the small plaque in the parking lot under the freeway. Certainly the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone people to develop a major memorial and educational site at 1900 4th Street. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the five thousand years of history. Reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative! Sincerely, Eva Pettersson “Justice is what love looks like in public.” -Dr. Cornel West Allen, Shannon From: micah bazant Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I'd like to express my deep concerns about the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Commission. It was also listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, as well as determined to be eligible for the National Registry of Historic places. The West Berkeley Shellmound site, completely encompassing the proposed 1900 Fourth Street site, is known to be the oldest bayside settlement in the San Francisco Bay Area, approximately 5700 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone people today. The draft EIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by massive community opposition voiced at the Dec 1st meeting of the Berkeley Landmark Preservation Committee. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to establish the archaeological reports and there has not been adequate peer review of the data in the draft EIR. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology of the 1900 Fourth Street EIR. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the EIR’s preparation. The primary consultant had multiple conflicts of interest, while a second Ohlone person repeatedly requesting inclusion was not consulted for the EIR. This manner of consultation with Ohlone people seems like a mere token gesture given the importance of this site to members of the Ohlone community. Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley "Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People" states in part: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site." On page 67, the Draft Environmental Impact Report states, "Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous people of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear weather or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound site is the series of murals and the small plaque in the parking lot under the freeway. Certainly the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone people to develop a major memorial and educational site at 1900 4th Street. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the five thousand years of history. Reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative! Sincerely, Micah Bazant Allen, Shannon From: Richard Schwartz WůĞĂƐĞƐƵďŵŝƚƚŚĞƐĞĂƚƚĂĐŚĞĚϯϱůĞƚƚĞƌƐĨƌŽŵĞƌŬĞůĞLJƐĐŚŽŽůĐŚŝůĚƌĞŶĂŶĚƚŚĞĨŽůůŽǁŝŶŐƌĞŵĂƌŬƐĂƐĂŶŽĨĨŝĐŝĂůƌĞƐƉŽŶƐĞ ƚŽƚŚĞ /ZŽŶϭϵϬϬ&ŽƵƌƚŚ^ƚ͘ĂŶĚƉůĞĂƐĞĚŝƐƚƌŝďƵƚĞƚŽDĂLJŽƌƌƌĞŐƵŝŶ͕ƚŚĞŝƚLJŽƵŶĐŝůĂŶĚĂůůŽŵŵŝƐƐŝŽŶĞƌƐ͘ dŚĂŶŬLJŽƵǀĞƌLJŵƵĐŚ͘/ĂƉƉƌĞĐŝĂƚĞƚŚĞĐŚĂŶĐĞƚŽƉĂƌƚŝĐŝƉĂƚĞŝŶƚŚŝƐƉƌŽĐĞƐƐ͘ /ǁŽƵůĚĂůƐŽůŝŬĞƚŽƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĞdžͲDĂLJŽƌĂƚĞƐΖǀĞƌLJĨĂĐƚƵĂůůLJŵŝƐŝŶĨŽƌŵĞĚϱͬϮϰͬϮϬϭϲƌĞƐƉŽŶƐĞƚŽƚŚĞƐĞƌĞĐĞŶƚƐƚƵĚĞŶƚ ůĞƚƚĞƌƐĂƐǁĞůů͘;'ĂƌĐŝĂĂŶĚƐƐŽĐŝĂƚĞƐǁĂƐŚŝƌĞĚďLJƚŚĞŝƚLJƚŽƉƌĞƉĂƌĞĂƐƚƵĚLJŽŶ>ͲϯϬϳΖƐůŽĐĂƚŝŽŶŝŶϮϬϬϮĂŶĚ ƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĚŝƚǁŝƚŚƌĞƐƵůƚƐŽĨĐŽƌŝŶŐƐŝŶĐŝƚLJƐƚƌĞĞƚƐƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐƚŚĞ^ƉĞŶŐĞƌΖƐƉĂƌŬŝŶŐůŽƚĂŶĚďĞLJŽŶĚ͘dŚĞƌĞƉŽƌƚƌĞǀĞĂůĞĚ ŵƵĐŚƉŚLJƐŝĐĂůĞǀŝĚĞŶĐĞŝŶŵĂŶLJůŽĐĂƚŝŽŶƐǁŚĞƌĞƵŶĚŝƐƚƵƌďĞĚĐƵůƚƵƌĂůƌĞŵĂŝŶƐĨƌŽŵ>ͲϯϬϳƌĞŵĂŝŶƵŶĚĞƌƚŚĞƐƚƌĞĞƚ ĂŶĚƐŽŝůŽĨƚŚĞĂƌĞĂͿ͘ ǀĞŶƚŚĞƌĞĐĞŶƚƵŶĐŽǀĞƌŝŶŐŽĨĂƚůĞĂƐƚĨŝǀĞŚƵŵĂŶƌĞŵĂŝŶƐƌŝŐŚƚƵŶĚĞƌƚŚĞƐŝĚĞǁĂůŬŝŶĨƌŽŶƚŽĨϭϵϭϵ &ŽƵƌƚŚ^ƚ͘ĂƚƚĞƐƚƐƚŽƚŚŽƐĞĨĂĐƚƐ͘ ΗĞĂƌDƐ͘ĂƌƐŽŶ͕ dŚĂŶŬLJŽƵĨŽƌĨŽƌǁĂƌĚŝŶŐƚŚĞůĞƚƚĞƌƐĨƌŽŵƚŚĞƐƚƵĚĞŶƚƐƌĞŐĂƌĚŝŶŐƚŚĞtĞƐƚĞƌŬĞůĞLJƐŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚ͘WůĞĂƐĞƌĞůĂLJŵLJ ĂƉƉƌĞĐŝĂƚŝŽŶƚŽƚŚĞŵĨŽƌƚŚĞŝƌƐƚƌŽŶŐŝŶƚĞƌĞƐƚŝŶƚŚŝƐŝƐƐƵĞĂŶĚĨŽƌƌĞĂĐŚŝŶŐŽƵƚƚŽƚŚĞŝƚLJŽƵŶĐŝů͘ŶĚƉůĞĂƐĞƚĞůůƚŚĞŵ/ ƐŚĂƌĞƚŚĞŝƌǁŝƐŚƚŽŚŽŶŽƌƚŚĞEĂƚŝǀĞŵĞƌŝĐĂŶƉĞŽƉůĞǁŚŽůŝǀĞĚŚĞƌĞďĞĨŽƌĞƵƐ͘ DLJƵŶĚĞƌƐƚĂŶĚŝŶŐŝƐƚŚĂƚƚŚĞĞƌŬĞůĞLJƐŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚƵŶĨŽƌƚƵŶĂƚĞůLJǁĂƐŽŶĞŽĨŵĂŶLJƐŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚƐ͕ƌĞĂĐŚŝŶŐϯϬͲϰϬĨĞĞƚƚĂůů͕ ƚŚĂƚǁĞƌĞůĞǀĞůĞĚĂŶĚƌĞŵŽǀĞĚĚƵƌŝŶŐƚŚĞĞĂƌůLJϭϵϬϬƐƚŽŵĂŬĞǁĂLJĨŽƌƚŚĞƌĂŝůƌŽĂĚŽƌĨŽƌŽƚŚĞƌƉƵƌƉŽƐĞƐ͘tĞ͛ƌĞŶŽƚ ƐƵƌĞ͕ďƵƚŝƚĂƉƉĞĂƌƐƚŚĂƚƚŚĞƚǁŽƐĞƚƐŽĨƌĞŵĂŝŶƐƌĞĐĞŶƚůLJĨŽƵŶĚŝŶƚŚĂƚǀŝĐŝŶŝƚLJŵĂLJŚĂǀĞďĞĞŶƐĞĐŽŶĚďƵƌŝĂůƐʹŝŶŽƚŚĞƌ ǁŽƌĚƐ͕ƚŚĞďƵƌŝĂůƐŵĂLJŽƌŝŐŝŶĂůůLJŚĂǀĞďĞĞŶĞůƐĞǁŚĞƌĞĂŶĚƚŚĞŶƌĞůŽĐĂƚĞĚĂĨƚĞƌƚŚĞƐŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚǁĂƐ ƌĞŵŽǀĞĚ͘EĞǀĞƌƚŚĞůĞƐƐ͕ƚŚĞǁŽƌŬĞƌƐŝŶƚŚĂƚĂƌĞĂŚĂǀĞƌĞĐĞŝǀĞĚƐƉĞĐŝĂůŝŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶƐŽŶŚŽǁƚŽĚĞĂůǁŝƚŚĂŶLJƌĞŵĂŝŶƐ ƚŚĂƚŵĂLJďĞĨŽƵŶĚ͕ĂŶĚƚŚĞLJŬŶŽǁ͕ǁŚĞŶĂŶLJƌĞŵĂŝŶƐĂƌĞĨŽƵŶĚ͕ƚŽŝŵŵĞĚŝĂƚĞůLJŚĂůƚĂůůǁŽƌŬƵŶƚŝůĂƉƌŽƉĞƌĂƐƐĞƐƐŵĞŶƚ ŽĨŚŽǁƚŽƉƌŽĐĞĞĚĐĂŶďĞĚŽŶĞ͘ hŶĚĞƌƚŚĞĐŝƌĐƵŵƐƚĂŶĐĞƐ͕/ƚŚŝŶŬǁĞ͛ƌĞƉƌŽďĂďůLJĚŽŝŶŐƚŚĞďĞƐƚǁĞĐĂŶ͘/ƚ͛ƐƵŶĨŽƌƚƵŶĂƚĞƚŚĂƚǁĞĚŽŶ͛ƚŚĂǀĞƚŚĞŽƌŝŐŝŶĂů ƐŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚƐ͕ďƵƚǁĞƐƚŝůůŶĞĞĚƚŽƌĞŵĞŵďĞƌƚŽŚŽŶŽƌƚŚĞƉĂƐƚĐƵůƚƵƌĞƐĂŶĚƚƌŝďĞƐƚŚĂƚǁĞƌĞŚĞƌĞ͘ ^ŝŶĐĞƌĞůLJ͕ dŽŵĂƚĞƐ DĂLJŽƌΗ /ǁŝůůďĞƐƵďŵŝƚƚŝŶŐĂŶƵŵďĞƌŽĨĞŵĂŝůƐƚŽƚŚĞĂďŽǀĞƉĞŽƉůĞͬĞŶƚŝƚŝĞƐŽǀĞƌƚŚĞĐŽŵŝŶŐĚĂLJƐŝŶƌĞŐĂƌĚƐƚŽ>ͲϯϬϳ͕ƚŚŝƐ ƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚŽŶϭϵϬϬ&ŽƵƌƚŚ^ƚ͘ĂŶĚŝƚƐ /ZƌĞƉŽƌƚ͘dŚĂŶŬLJŽƵǀĞƌLJŵƵĐŚĨŽƌLJŽƵƌƚŝŵĞĂŶĚĂƚƚĞŶƚŝŽŶŝŶƚŚŝƐ ŵĂƚƚĞƌ͘/ĂŵŝŶĚĞĞƉŐƌĂƚŝƚƵĚĞĨŽƌƚŚĂƚ͘ DLJĞƐƚ͕ ZŝĐŚĂƌĚ^ĐŚǁĂƌƚnj ͲͲ ZŝĐŚĂƌĚ^ĐŚǁĂƌƚnj ŚƚƚƉ͗ͬͬǁǁǁ͘ZŝĐŚĂƌĚ^ĐŚǁĂƌƚnj͘ŝŶĨŽ ^ƵďƐĐƌŝďĞƚŽŵLJĞǀĞŶƚƐĞŵĂŝůůŝƐƚ͕ ŚƚƚƉ͗ͬͬĞĞƉƵƌů͘ĐŽŵͬŽϰůƚĨ Allen, Shannon From: Hall, Cassandra Leigh Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Commission. It was also listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, as well as determined to be eligible for the National Registry of Historic places. The West Berkeley Shellmound site, completely encompassing the proposed 1900 Fourth Street site, is known to be the oldest bayside settlement in the San Francisco Bay Area, approximately 5700 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone people today. The draft EIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by massive community opposition voiced at the Dec 1st meeting of the Berkeley Landmark Preservation Committee. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to establish the archaeological reports and there has not been adequate peer review of the data in the draft EIR. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology of the 1900 Fourth Street EIR. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the EIR’s preparation. The primary consultant had multiple conflicts of interest, while a second Ohlone person repeatedly requesting inclusion was not consulted for the EIR. This manner of consultation with Ohlone people seems like a mere token gesture given the importance of this site to members of the Ohlone community. Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley "Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People" states in part: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site." On page 67, the Draft Environmental Impact Report states, "Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous people of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear weather or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound site is the series of murals and the small plaque in the parking lot under the freeway. Certainly the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone people to develop a major memorial and educational site at 1900 4th Street. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the five thousand years of history. Reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative! Sincerely, -- &DVVDQGUD+DOO 6KH7KH\3URQRXQV *UDGXDWH7HDFKLQJ$VVLVWDQW :RPHQ*HQGHU6H[XDOLW\6WXGLHV KDOOFDVV#RUHJRQVWDWHHGX Allen, Shannon From: Jacqs Nevarez Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Commission. It was also listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, as well as determined to be eligible for the National Registry of Historic places. The West Berkeley Shellmound site, completely encompassing the proposed 1900 Fourth Street site, is known to be the oldest bayside settlement in the San Francisco Bay Area, approximately 5700 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone people today. The draft EIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by massive community opposition voiced at the Dec 1st meeting of the Berkeley Landmark Preservation Committee. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to establish the archaeological reports and there has not been adequate peer review of the data in the draft EIR. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology of the 1900 Fourth Street EIR. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the EIR’s preparation. The primary consultant had multiple conflicts of interest, while a second Ohlone person repeatedly requesting inclusion was not consulted for the EIR. This manner of consultation with Ohlone people seems like a mere token gesture given the importance of this site to members of the Ohlone community. Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley "Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People" states in part: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site." On page 67, the Draft Environmental Impact Report states, "Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous people of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear weather or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound site is the series of murals and the small plaque in the parking lot under the freeway. Certainly the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone people to develop a major memorial and educational site at 1900 4th Street. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the five thousand years of history. Reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative! Sincerely, Jacqs Aspensong Nevarez Allen, Shannon From: Michelle Grace Steinberg Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am local filmmaker who had the privilege to make a film about the struggles of Ohlone people several years ago for PBS. It saddens me to see that despite a rising tide of awareness around the importance of protecting sacred sites and despite the City of Berkeley’s own adoption of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People (UNDRIP), you are still poised to permit further desecration of a designated landmark know to be a 5700 year old Shellmound site that is still a place of profound cultural and religious significance to the Ohlone people today. I am deeply concerned about the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to establish the archaeological reports and there has not been adequate peer review of the data in the draft EIR. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology of the 1900 Fourth Street EIR. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the EIR’s preparation. The primary consultant had multiple conflicts of interest, while a second Ohlone person repeatedly requesting inclusion was not consulted for the EIR. This manner of consultation with Ohlone people seems like a mere token gesture given the importance of this site to members of the Ohlone community. On page 67, the Draft Environmental Impact Report states, "Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the City Council resolution in relation to UNDRIP very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous people of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear weather or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound site is the series of murals and the small plaque in the parking lot under the freeway. Certainly the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone people to develop a major memorial and educational site at 1900 4th Street. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the five thousand years of history. Reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative! Sincerely, Michelle Steinberg 0LFKHOOH*UDFH6WHLQEHUJ06 'RFXPHQWDU\)LOPPDNHU &RPPXQLW\1XWULWLRQLVW 8QGHUH[SRVHG)LOPV 2DNODQG&$ ZZZXQGHUH[SRVHGILOPVFRP ZZZEH\RQGUHFRJQLWLRQILOPFRP Allen, Shannon From: Viv ĞĂƌDƐůůĞŶ͕ ƐĂƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚŽĨKĂŬůĂŶĚĂŶĚƐŽŽŶĞƌŬĞůĞLJ͕/ĂŵǁƌŝƚŝŶŐƚŽĞdžƉƌĞƐƐŵLJĐŽŶĐĞƌŶĂďŽƵƚƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚƉůĂŶƐƚŽĚŝƐƚƵƌď ĞƌŬĞůĞLJůĂŶĚŵĂƌŬηϮϮϳ͕ƚŚĞƐĂĐƌĞĚKŚůŽŶĞƐŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚƐŝƚĞĂƚϰƚŚ^ƚ͘WůĞĂƐĞƌĞƐƉĞĐƚƚŚĞǁŝƐŚĞƐŽĨƚŚĞŝŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐ ƉĞŽƉůĞǁŚŽĂƌĞƚŚĞŽŶĞƐǁŚŽƐŚŽƵůĚŚĂǀĞƐĂLJŽǀĞƌƚŚŝƐƐŝƚĞƐĂĐƌĞĚƚŽƚŚĞŵ͘zŽƵǁŽƵůĚŶΖƚƉƵƚĂŵĂůůŽŶƚŚĞDŽƵŶƚĂŝŶ sŝĞǁĐĞŵĞƚĞƌLJĂŶĚƚŚŝƐŝƐŽŶůLJŽůĚĞƌ͘/ƵƌŐĞLJŽƵƚŽƌĞĐŽŶƐŝĚĞƌƚŚŝƐƉůĂŶĂŶĚŝŶƐƚĞĂĚůŝƐƚĞŶƚŽƚŚĞǁŝƐĚŽŵŽĨƚŚĞƉĞŽƉůĞ ǁŚŽĂƌĞĨƌŽŵŚĞƌĞŽƌŝŐŝŶĂůůLJ͘dŚĂŶŬLJŽƵ͘ sŝǀŝĂŶtŚŝƚĞ ͞ĞŐůĂĚŽĨůŝĨĞďĞĐĂƵƐĞŝƚŐŝǀĞƐLJŽƵƚŚĞĐŚĂŶĐĞƚŽůŽǀĞ͕ƚŽǁŽƌŬ͕ƚŽƉůĂLJ͕ĂŶĚƚŽůŽŽŬƵƉĂƚƚŚĞƐƚĂƌƐ͘͟ ,ĞŶƌLJsĂŶLJŬĞ DZȱȱȱ ¢ȱȱ¢ȱ¢ȱȱ ŗşŚŝȱȱǰȱŘȱȱ ¢ǰȱȱşŚŝŖŚȱ ȱ ȱǯȱȱȱ¢ȱ¢ȱDZȱ ȱ ȱȱ ȱȱ¡ȱ¢ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱ ǻ ǼȱȱŗşŖŖȱȱǯȱȱȱ ȱȱȱȱ¢ȱȱ¢ȱȱǛŘŘŝȱ¢ȱ ȱȱǯȱ ȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ¢ȱȱ ȱǰȱȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ¢ȱȱ ȱǯȱȱȱ¢ȱ ȱǰȱ¢ȱȱȱȱŗşŖŖȱȱȱǰȱȱ ȱȱȱȱ ȱ¢ȱȱȱȱȱȱ¢ȱǰȱ¡¢ȱśŝŖŖȱ¢ȱǯȱ ȱȱȱȱ ȱȱ¢ǯȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱ¢ǯȱ ȱȱ ȱȱ¢ȱǰȱȱȱ¢ȱȱ¢ȱȱȱȱ ȱȱŗȱȱȱȱ¢ȱȱȱǯȱȱȱȱ ¢ȱȱȱ¢ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ǯȱȱ¡ȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱǯȱȱȱ ¢ȱȱȱȱȱ¢ȱȱȱȱ ȱȱȱȱ ¢ȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱǯȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱ¢ȱȱȱ¢ȱȱȱŗşŖŖȱȱȱ ǯȱ ǰȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ Ȃȱǯȱȱ ¢ȱȱȱȱȱȱǰȱ ȱȱȱȱȱ¢ȱ ȱȱ ȱȱȱȱȱ ǯȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ¢ǯȱ ȱǯȱŜŝǰřśřȬȱȱȱ¢ȱȱ¢ȱȈ ȱ¢ȱȱ ȱ ȱǰȱȱ¢ȱȱȱȱȱȱȈȱȱȱDZȱȈȱ ȱ ȱȱȱǰȱǰȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ¢ȱȱȱȱȱ¢ȱȱȱǰȱ ȱȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱ ǰȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱȱȱȱ ¢ȱȱǯȈȱ ȱȱŜŝǰȱȱȱȱ ȱȱǰȱȈȱ ȱȱȱ ȱǰȱȱȱȱśŘǰȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱǰȱȱǯȄȱ¢ǰȱȱȱ¢ȱȱȱ¢ȱȱȱȱ &DOLIRUQLD,QGLDQ(QYLURQPHQWDO$OOLDQFH•32%R[%HUNHOH\&$ • •ZZZFLHDZHERUJ ¢ȱ¢ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱDzȱȱ ȱȱȱǰȱȱ¡ǰȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱȱ ǯȱ ȱȱȱȱ ȱȱȱȱ¢ȱȱ¢ȱ ȱŗŞȱ ȱ ȱȱ ȱȱ¢ȱȱ¢ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱǰȱ ȱ¢ȱ£ȱȱǯȱȱ¢ȱȱ¢ȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱ ȱȱȱȱȱŘŖŖśǰȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱǯȱ ȱȱǰȱȱ¢ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ¢ǯȱ¢ȱȱ¢ȱȱ¢ȱ ȱȱȱ¢ȱȱȱ ȱȱȱȱǰȱǰȱȱ ȱ¢ȱ ȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ŗşŖŖȱŚȱǯȱ ȱ ȱȱȂȱ¢ȱȱ¢ȱȱȱȱ¢ȱ ȱȱȱśŖȱ¢ǯȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱ ȱǰȱ ȱ£ȱ¢ȱǰȱȱȱȱȱȱȬ£ǯȱȱȱ £ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱȬȱȱ ȱȱȱȱǰȱ ǰȱȱȱȦȱȱȱȱǯȱ ȱ ȱȱȱȱ ȱȱȱŞǰȱŘŖŗŜȱȱȱȱȱ¢ȇȱ ȱ¢ȱȱ ȱ¢ȱ¢ȱřȱƙȱǯȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱ¡ȱȱ ȱȱȱŗŖDZřŖȱȱȱȱȱǰȱȱ¡ȱȱȱ £ȱ ȱ ȱȱȱǯȱȱȱ¡ȱȱȱȱ¢ȱȱ¢ȱȱȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ¢ȱȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱ ¢ȱȱ ȱȱǯȱȱȱȱȱǰȱ¢ȱ ȱȱȱ¢ȱ ȱ ȱȱȱ¢ȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱǯȱȱȱȱȱ ȱǰȱȱ¢ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱȱ ¡ȱȱȱȱȱǯȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱ ȱ ȱ¢ȱȱȱȱ ȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱǯȱ ȱȱȱȱ¢ȱȱȱ¢ȱȱ¢ȱȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱǯȱ ȱȱ¢ȱȱȱ ȱ¢ȱȱȱ ȱȱ¢ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱ ȱ ¢ȱȱȱȱ¡ȱȱȱȱȱ¢ȱȱ¢ǯȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱǷȱ ȱ ȱ¢ǯȱ ȱ ¢ǰȱ ȱ ȱȱ ¡ȱȱ ȱ ȱȱ &DOLIRUQLD,QGLDQ(QYLURQPHQWDO$OOLDQFH•32%R[%HUNHOH\&$ • •ZZZFLHDZHERUJ Allen, Shannon From: Chad Carlson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¶VSUHSDUDWLRQ7KH SULPDU\FRQVXOWDQWKDGPXOWLSOHFRQIOLFWVRILQWHUHVWZKLOHDVHFRQG2KORQHSHUVRQ UHSHDWHGO\UHTXHVWLQJLQFOXVLRQZDVQRWFRQVXOWHGIRUWKH(,57KLVPDQQHURIFRQVXOWDWLRQ ZLWK2KORQHSHRSOHVHHPVOLNHDPHUHWRNHQJHVWXUHJLYHQWKHLPSRUWDQFHRIWKLVVLWHWR PHPEHUVRIWKH2KORQHFRPPXQLW\ 5HVROXWLRQ1R16RIWKH&LW\RI%HUNHOH\³+RQRU%HUNHOH\6KHOOPRXQG,QGLJHQRXV 6DFUHG6LWH8&%HUNHOH\5HWXUQ$QFHVWUDO5HPDLQVWR2KORQH3HRSOH´VWDWHVLQSDUW ³%(,7 )857+(55(62/9('WKDWIUHHSULRUDQGLQIRUPHGFRQVHQWRIWKH2KORQHDQGRWKHU LQGLJHQRXVSHRSOHVRIWKHUHJLRQEHLQWHJUDOWRDQ\DOWHUDWLRQSODQQLQJIRUWKH%HUNHOH\ 6KHOOPRXQGVDFUHGVLWHLQDFFRUGDQFHZLWKWKHSURYLVLRQVRIWKH8QLWHG1DWLRQV'HFODUDWLRQ RQWKH5LJKWVRI,QGLJHQRXV3HRSOHDQGFDOOVXSRQDOOSDUWLHVWRIROORZWKHSULQFLSOHVRIWKH 'HFODUDWLRQZLWKUHVSHFWWRWKH:HVW%HUNHOH\6KHOOPRXQGVLWH´ 2QSDJHWKH'UDIW(QYLURQPHQWDO,PSDFW5HSRUWVWDWHV³&RQVXOWDWLRQZLWKWKH2KORQH ,QGLDQ7ULEHFRQGXFWHGSXUVXDQWWR$%ZDVFRPSOHWHGIRUWKH3URMHFWDQGPLWLJDWLRQ PHDVXUHVDUHUHFRPPHQGHGDVDSSURSULDWH´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“Simplicity, patience, compassion. These three are your greatest treasures" - Lao Tzu Attn: Shannon Allen City of Berkeley City Planning 1947 Center Street, 2nd Floor Berkeley, CA 94704 Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Commission. It was also listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, as well as determined to be eligible for the National Registry of Historic places. The West Berkeley Shellmound site, completely encompassing the proposed 1900 Fourth Street site, is known to be the oldest bayside settlement in the San Francisco Bay Area, approximately 5700 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone people today. The draft EIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by massive community opposition voiced at the Dec 1st meeting of the Berkeley Landmark Preservation Committee. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to establish the archaeological reports and there has not been adequate peer review of the data in the draft EIR. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology of the 1900 Fourth Street EIR. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the EIR’s preparation. The primary consultant had multiple conflicts of interest, while a second Ohlone person repeatedly requesting inclusion was not consulted for the EIR. This manner of consultation with Ohlone people seems like a mere token gesture given the importance of this site to members of the Ohlone community. Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley "Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People" states in part: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site." On page 67, the Draft Environmental Impact Report states, "Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous people of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear weather or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound site is the series of murals and the small plaque in the parking lot under the freeway. Certainly the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone people to develop a major memorial and educational site at 1900 4th Street. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the five thousand years of history. Reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative! Sincerely, Laura Atkins * * * * * * * * * Laura Atkins Children’s Book Author and Editor w: www.lauraatkins.com e: [email protected] Author of Sled Dog Dachshund, Minted Prose, October 2016 Co-author of Fred Korematsu Speaks Up, first in the Fighting for Justice series, Heyday Books, January 30, 2017, available to pre-order now. Allen, Shannon From: Lila Rose Frisher Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Commission. It was also listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, as well as determined to be eligible for the National Registry of Historic places. The West Berkeley Shellmound site, completely encompassing the proposed 1900 Fourth Street site, is known to be the oldest bayside settlement in the San Francisco Bay Area, approximately 5700 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone people today. The draft EIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by massive community opposition voiced at the Dec 1st meeting of the Berkeley Landmark Preservation Committee. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to establish the archaeological reports and there has not been adequate peer review of the data in the draft EIR. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology of the 1900 Fourth Street EIR. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the EIR’s preparation. The primary consultant had multiple conflicts of interest, while a second Ohlone person repeatedly requesting inclusion was not consulted for the EIR. This manner of consultation with Ohlone people seems like a mere token gesture given the importance of this site to members of the Ohlone community. Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley "Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People" states in part: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site." On page 67, the Draft Environmental Impact Report states, "Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous people of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear weather or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound site is the series of murals and the small plaque in the parking lot under the freeway. Certainly the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone people to develop a major memorial and educational site at 1900 4th Street. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the five thousand years of history. Reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative! Sincerely, Lila Frisher Concerned Berkeley Resident Allen, Shannon From: Megan Calpin Attn: Shannon Allen City of Berkeley City Planning 1947 Center Street, 2nd Floor Berkeley, CA 94704 Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: As a resident of Berkeley and recent graduate of the Master of City Planning program at UC Berkeley, I am appalled at the proposal to develop at the West Berkeley Shellmound site. As those who must think about how to shape a city in a respectful way, city planners hold great responsibility in promoting the good of the people in the community - not corporate or business interests. Yes - planning is about economic development. Yes - planning can promote both business and population interests. However, the history of land use in this country has often sided with corporate interests and has stripped land and rights away from Indigenous and marginalized peoples. You have an opportunity to stop this history and trend. Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley "Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People" states in part: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site." This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the five thousand years of history. Reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative! Sincerely, -- Megan Calpin 503.705.6485 Allen, Shannon From: Mary Curtis Ratcliff Dear Shannon Allen, I write to protest the idea of a developer proposing to build a five story building on the last remaining sacred site of the West Berkeley Shellmound at 1900 4th Street in Berkeley. This project needs to be stopped. I expect the government of the City of Berkeley to protect the site and stop inflicting more wounds on the Ohlone people who have endured enough examples of greedy developers devastating their burial grounds in the same neighborhood. How would the developers like it if bulldozers went into the graveyard of their grandparents and parents and dug it up just to build an oversized condo? A better use of this land would be to turn it into a park honoring the Ohlone culture and traditions and to make sure it became a National Historic Landmark. Respectfully, Mary Curtis Ratcliff 510.684.0436 cell 510.526.8472 home 510.649.7960 studio www.marycurtisratcliff.com Allen, Shannon From: Niels Teunis 5LJKWFOLFN KHUHWR GRZQORDG SLFWXUHV7R KHOSSURWHFW \RXUSULYDF\ 2XWOR RN SUHYHQWHG DXWR PDWLF GRZQORDGRI WKLVSLFWXUH IU R PWK H ,Q WHUQHW Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Commission. It was also listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, as well as determined to be eligible for the National Registry of Historic places. The West Berkeley Shellmound site, completely encompassing the proposed 1900 Fourth Street site, is known to be the oldest bayside settlement in the San Francisco Bay Area, approximately 5700 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone people today. The draft EIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by massive community opposition voiced at the Dec 1st meeting of the Berkeley Landmark Preservation Committee. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to establish the archaeological reports and there has not been adequate peer review of the data in the draft EIR. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology of the 1900 Fourth Street EIR. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the EIR’s preparation. The primary consultant had multiple conflicts of interest, while a second Ohlone person repeatedly requesting inclusion was not consulted for the EIR. This manner of consultation with Ohlone people seems like a mere token gesture given the importance of this site to members of the Ohlone community. Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley "Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People" states in part: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site." On page 67, the Draft Environmental Impact Report states, "Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous people of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear weather or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound site is the series of murals and the small plaque in the parking lot under the freeway. Certainly the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone people to develop a major memorial and educational site at 1900 4th Street. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the five thousand years of history. Reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative! Sincerely, ȱ Niels Mediator for Parents with Young Children http://endconflictnow.com Allen, Shannon From: DANIEL WOOLRIDGE Good Afternoon Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I hope this email finds you well. My name is Daniel Woolridge and I am a medical student concurrently pursuing my public health degree from UC Berkeley. I am writing to express my deep concerns about the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Commission. It was also listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, as well as determined to be eligible for the National Registry of Historic places. The West Berkeley Shellmound site, completely encompassing the proposed 1900 Fourth Street site, is known to be the oldest bayside settlement in the San Francisco Bay Area, approximately 5700 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone people today. The draft EIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by massive community opposition voiced at the Dec 1st meeting of the Berkeley Landmark Preservation Committee. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to establish the archaeological reports and there has not been adequate peer review of the data in the draft EIR. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology of the 1900 Fourth Street EIR. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the EIR’s preparation. The primary consultant had multiple conflicts of interest, while a second Ohlone person repeatedly requesting inclusion was not consulted for the EIR. This manner of consultation with Ohlone people seems like a mere token gesture given the importance of this site to members of the Ohlone community. Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley "Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People" states in part: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site." On page 67, the Draft Environmental Impact Report states, "Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous people of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear weather or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound site is the series of murals and the small plaque in the parking lot under the freeway. Certainly the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone people to develop a major memorial and educational site at 1900 4th Street. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the five thousand years of history. Reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative! Best Regards, Daniel Woolridge -- Daniel Woolridge, MS 03+&DQGLGDWH 8QLYHUVLW\RI&DOLIRUQLD%HUNHOH\ MD Candidate University of California San Diego GZRROULG#EHUNHOH\HGX F 6FLHQFHZLWKRXWFRQVFLHQFHLVWKHVRXO VSHUGLWLRQ -Francois Rabelais, The Life of Gargantua and of Pantagruel Allen, Shannon From: Andi Gentile Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I attended the Zoning Advisory Board meeting last week, and am deeply troubled that the City of Berkeley is considering plans to develop a shopping mall on an historic Ohlone shellmound, and based on a flawed process. This should be a simple decision in a place like Berkeley, that prides itself on its progressive politics - we do not bulldoze indigenous burial sites to build shopping malls. Instead, Berkeley has the opportunity to lead the way on indigenous land rights, and collaborate with the Ohlone people to preserve and protect indigenous heritage in Berkeley. I have deep concerns about the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Commission. It was also listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, as well as determined to be eligible for the National Registry of Historic places. These designations alone should prohibit such development on the site. The West Berkeley Shellmound site, completely encompassing the proposed 1900 Fourth Street site, is known to be the oldest bayside settlement in the San Francisco Bay Area, approximately 5700 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone people today. The draft EIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by massive community opposition voiced at the Dec 1st meeting of the Berkeley Landmark Preservation Committee and last week's Berkeley Zoning Advisory Board meeting. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to establish the archaeological reports and there has not been adequate peer review of the data in the draft EIR. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology of the 1900 Fourth Street EIR. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the EIR’s preparation. The primary consultant had multiple conflicts of interest, while a second Ohlone person repeatedly requesting inclusion was not consulted for the EIR. This manner of consultation with Ohlone people seems like a mere token gesture given the importance of this site to members of the Ohlone community. Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley "Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People" states in part: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site." On page 67, the Draft Environmental Impact Report states, "Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous people of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear weather or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound site is the series of murals and the small plaque in the parking lot under the freeway. Certainly the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone people to develop a major memorial and educational site at 1900 4th Street. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the five thousand years of history. Reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative! Warmly, Andi Gentile 646-642-3281 Allen, Shannon From: Lauren Renee Hotchkiss Attn: Shannon Allen City of Berkeley City Planning 1947 Center Street, 2nd Floor Berkeley, CA 94704 Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Commission. It was also listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, as well as determined to be eligible for the National Registry of Historic places. The West Berkeley Shellmound site, completely encompassing the proposed 1900 Fourth Street site, is known to be the oldest bayside settlement in the San Francisco Bay Area, approximately 5700 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone people today. The draft EIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by massive community opposition voiced at the Dec 1st meeting of the Berkeley Landmark Preservation Committee. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to establish the archaeological reports and there has not been adequate peer review of the data in the draft EIR. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology of the 1900 Fourth Street EIR. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the EIR’s preparation. The primary consultant had multiple conflicts of interest, while a second Ohlone person repeatedly requesting inclusion was not consulted for the EIR. This manner of consultation with Ohlone people seems like a mere token gesture given the importance of this site to members of the Ohlone community. Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley "Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People" states in part: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site." On page 67, the Draft Environmental Impact Report states, "Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous people of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear weather or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound site is the series of murals and the small plaque in the parking lot under the freeway. Certainly the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone people to develop a major memorial and educational site at 1900 4th Street. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the five thousand years of history. Reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative! Sincerely, /DXUHQ5HQpH+RWFKNLVV0$ 0DVWHURI'LYLQLW\3URJUDP3DFLILF6FKRRORI5HOLJLRQ 3DVWRUDO DQG0XVLFDO ,QWHUQ,VODQG8QLWHG&KXUFK)RVWHU&LW\ 0XVLFLDQ 0HPEHULQ'LVFHUQPHQW *UDFH1RUWK&KXUFK%HUNHOH\ ODXUKRW#JPDLOFRP Allen, Shannon From: Marissa Hernandez-Evans Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Commission. It was also listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, as well as determined to be eligible for the National Registry of Historic places. The West Berkeley Shellmound site, completely encompassing the proposed 1900 Fourth Street site, is known to be the oldest bayside settlement in the San Francisco Bay Area, approximately 5700 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone people today. The draft EIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by massive community opposition voiced at the Dec 1st meeting of the Berkeley Landmark Preservation Committee. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to establish the archaeological reports and there has not been adequate peer review of the data in the draft EIR. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology of the 1900 Fourth Street EIR. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the EIR’s preparation. The primary consultant had multiple conflicts of interest, while a second Ohlone person repeatedly requesting inclusion was not consulted for the EIR. This manner of consultation with Ohlone people seems like a mere token gesture given the importance of this site to members of the Ohlone community. Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley "Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People" states in part: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site." On page 67, the Draft Environmental Impact Report states, "Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous people of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear weather or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound site is the series of murals and the small plaque in the parking lot under the freeway. Certainly the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone people to develop a major memorial and educational site at 1900 4th Street. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the five thousand years of history. Reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative! Sincerely, Marissa Hernandez-Evans Graduate Student at Pacific School of Religion Small Business owner in Berkeley (of Light Hands Healing) Allen, Shannon From: Robert Peach Attn: Shannon Allen City of Berkeley City Planning 1947 Center Street, 2nd Floor Berkeley, CA 94704 Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Commission. It was also listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, as well as determined to be eligible for the National Registry of Historic places. The West Berkeley Shellmound site, completely encompassing the proposed 1900 Fourth Street site, is known to be the oldest bayside settlement in the San Francisco Bay Area, approximately 5700 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone people today. The draft EIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by massive community opposition voiced at the Dec 1st meeting of the Berkeley Landmark Preservation Committee. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to establish the archaeological reports and there has not been adequate peer review of the data in the draft EIR. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology of the 1900 Fourth Street EIR. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the EIR’s preparation. The primary consultant had multiple conflicts of interest, while a second Ohlone person repeatedly requesting inclusion was not consulted for the EIR. This manner of consultation with Ohlone people seems like a mere token gesture given the importance of this site to members of the Ohlone community. Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley "Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People" states in part: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site." On page 67, the Draft Environmental Impact Report states, "Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous people of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear weather or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound site is the series of murals and the small plaque in the parking lot under the freeway. Certainly the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone people to develop a major memorial and educational site at 1900 4th Street. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the five thousand years of history. Reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative! Sincerely, Rob Peach Doctoral Student Interdisciplinary Studies Graduate Theological Union https://gtu.academia.edu/RobPeach hiphopmatrix.wordpress.com theneoabolitionist.wordpress.com reflectblack.wordpress.com Allen, Shannon From: [email protected] Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2016 5:10 PM To: Allen, Shannon; Allen, Shannon Subject: Protect the Ohlone Shell Mounds ƚƚŶ͗^ŚĂŶŶŽŶůůĞŶ ŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJŝƚLJWůĂŶŶŝŶŐ ϭϵϰϳĞŶƚĞƌ^ƚƌĞĞƚ͕ϮŶĚ&ůŽŽƌ ĞƌŬĞůĞLJ͕ϵϰϳϬϰ ĞĂƌDƐ͘ůůĞŶĂŶĚĞƌŬĞůĞLJŝƚLJWůĂŶŶĞƌƐ͗ /ŶůŝŐŚƚŽĨĂůůƚŚĂƚŝƐŚĂƉƉĞŶŝŶŐŝŶŽƵƌĐŽƵŶƚƌLJĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůLJĂŶĚƚŚĞŚŝƐƚŽƌLJŽƵƌĐŽƵŶƚƌLJŝƐďƵŝůƚŽŶ͕/ĂŵǁƌŝƚŝŶŐƚŽĂƐŬƚŚĂƚ ĞƌŬĞůĞLJůĞĂĚƚŚĞǁĂLJŝŶƌĞĐŽŐŶŝnjŝŶŐƚŚĞƐĂĐƌĞĚƐƉĂĐĞƐŽĨŶĂƚŝǀĞƉĞŽƉůĞƐĂŶĚŚŽŶŽƌƚŚĞKŚůŽŶĞEĂƚŝŽŶŚĞƌĞŝŶƚŚĞĂLJ͘ /ĂŵǁƌŝƚŝŶŐƚŽĞdžƉƌĞƐƐŵLJĚĞĞƉĐŽŶĐĞƌŶƐĂďŽƵƚƚŚĞĚƌĂĨƚ ŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂů/ŵƉĂĐƚZĞƉŽƌƚ; /ZͿƌĞŐĂƌĚŝŶŐϭϵϬϬ&ŽƵƌƚŚ ^ƚƌĞĞƚ͘dŚĞƐŝƚĞǁĂƐĚĞƐŝŐŶĂƚĞĚĂƐĂŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJ>ĂŶĚŵĂƌŬηϮϮϳďLJƚŚĞ>ĂŶĚŵĂƌŬƐŽŵŵŝƐƐŝŽŶ͘/ƚǁĂƐĂůƐŽůŝƐƚĞĚŝŶ ƚŚĞĂůŝĨŽƌŶŝĂ^ƚĂƚĞZĞŐŝƐƚƌLJŽĨ,ŝƐƚŽƌŝĐWůĂĐĞƐ͕ĂƐǁĞůůĂƐĚĞƚĞƌŵŝŶĞĚƚŽďĞĞůŝŐŝďůĞĨŽƌƚŚĞEĂƚŝŽŶĂůZĞŐŝƐƚƌLJŽĨ,ŝƐƚŽƌŝĐ ƉůĂĐĞƐ͘dŚĞtĞƐƚĞƌŬĞůĞLJ^ŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚƐŝƚĞ͕ĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞůLJĞŶĐŽŵƉĂƐƐŝŶŐƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚϭϵϬϬ&ŽƵƌƚŚ^ƚƌĞĞƚƐŝƚĞ͕ŝƐŬŶŽǁŶƚŽ ďĞƚŚĞŽůĚĞƐƚďĂLJƐŝĚĞƐĞƚƚůĞŵĞŶƚŝŶƚŚĞ^ĂŶ&ƌĂŶĐŝƐĐŽĂLJƌĞĂ͕ĂƉƉƌŽdžŝŵĂƚĞůLJϱϳϬϬLJĞĂƌƐŽůĚ͘/ƚŝƐƚŚĞƚƌƵĞďŝƌƚŚƉůĂĐĞŽĨ ĞƌŬĞůĞLJ͘/ƚĐŽŶƚŝŶƵĞƐƚŽďĞŽĨƵƚŵŽƐƚƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶĐĞĂƐĂĐĞƌĞŵŽŶŝĂůĐĞŶƚĞƌƚŽƚŚĞKŚůŽŶĞƉĞŽƉůĞƚŽĚĂLJ͘ dŚĞĚƌĂĨƚ /ZŝƐŚĞĂǀŝůLJĚŝƐƉƵƚĞĚ͕ĂƐƌĞǀĞĂůĞĚďLJŵĂƐƐŝǀĞĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJŽƉƉŽƐŝƚŝŽŶǀŽŝĐĞĚĂƚƚŚĞĞĐϭƐƚŵĞĞƚŝŶŐŽĨƚŚĞ ĞƌŬĞůĞLJ>ĂŶĚŵĂƌŬWƌĞƐĞƌǀĂƚŝŽŶŽŵŵŝƚƚĞĞ͘dŚĞƌĞŝƐƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶƚĐŽŶƚƌŽǀĞƌƐLJƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐƚŚĞŵĞƚŚŽĚŽůŽŐLJƵƐĞĚƚŽ ĞƐƚĂďůŝƐŚƚŚĞĂƌĐŚĂĞŽůŽŐŝĐĂůƌĞƉŽƌƚƐĂŶĚƚŚĞƌĞŚĂƐŶŽƚďĞĞŶĂĚĞƋƵĂƚĞƉĞĞƌƌĞǀŝĞǁŽĨƚŚĞĚĂƚĂŝŶƚŚĞĚƌĂĨƚ /Z͘WĂƐƚ ĞdžĐĂǀĂƚŝŽŶƐŝŶĂŶĚĂƌŽƵŶĚƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚƐŝƚĞŚĂǀĞƵŶĐŽǀĞƌĞĚŚƵŵĂŶďƵƌŝĂůƐĂŶĚƵŶĚŝƐƚƵƌďĞĚĐƵůƚƵƌĂůƌĞŵĂŝŶƐ͘dŚĞ ƌĞƉŽƌƚĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞůLJĨĂŝůƐƚŽĂĚĚƌĞƐƐƌĞŵĂŝŶƐƐƉĞĐŝĨŝĐĂůůLJĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚĞĚŝŶƚŚĞ /ZĨŽƌƚŚĞĂĚũĂĐĞŶƚ'ƌŽĐĞƌLJKƵƚůĞƚƐŝƚĞƚŚĂƚŝƐ ƉĂƌƚŽĨƚŚĞƐĂŵĞ>ĂŶĚŵĂƌŬ^ŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚƐŝƚĞ͘dŚŝƐĐŽŶƐƚŝƚƵƚĞƐĂƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶƚŽǀĞƌƐŝŐŚƚĂŶĚŝŶĂĐĐƵƌĂĐLJŝŶƚŚĞŵĞƚŚŽĚŽůŽŐLJ ŽĨƚŚĞϭϵϬϬ&ŽƵƌƚŚ^ƚƌĞĞƚ /Z͘ &ƵƌƚŚĞƌŵŽƌĞ͕ƚŚĞƌĞŚĂƐŶŽƚďĞĞŶĂĚĞƋƵĂƚĞƚƌŝďĂůĐŽŶƐƵůƚĂƚŝŽŶŝŶƚŚĞ /Z͛ƐƉƌĞƉĂƌĂƚŝŽŶ͘dŚĞƉƌŝŵĂƌLJĐŽŶƐƵůƚĂŶƚŚĂĚ ŵƵůƚŝƉůĞĐŽŶĨůŝĐƚƐŽĨŝŶƚĞƌĞƐƚ͕ǁŚŝůĞĂƐĞĐŽŶĚKŚůŽŶĞƉĞƌƐŽŶƌĞƉĞĂƚĞĚůLJƌĞƋƵĞƐƚŝŶŐŝŶĐůƵƐŝŽŶǁĂƐŶŽƚĐŽŶƐƵůƚĞĚĨŽƌƚŚĞ /Z͘dŚŝƐŵĂŶŶĞƌŽĨĐŽŶƐƵůƚĂƚŝŽŶǁŝƚŚKŚůŽŶĞƉĞŽƉůĞƐĞĞŵƐůŝŬĞĂŵĞƌĞƚŽŬĞŶŐĞƐƚƵƌĞŐŝǀĞŶƚŚĞŝŵƉŽƌƚĂŶĐĞŽĨƚŚŝƐƐŝƚĞ ƚŽŵĞŵďĞƌƐŽĨƚŚĞKŚůŽŶĞĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJ͘ ZĞƐŽůƵƚŝŽŶEŽ͘ϲϳ͕ϯϱϯͲE^ŽĨƚŚĞŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJΗ,ŽŶŽƌĞƌŬĞůĞLJ^ŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚ/ŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐ^ĂĐƌĞĚ^ŝƚĞ͕hĞƌŬĞůĞLJ ZĞƚƵƌŶŶĐĞƐƚƌĂůZĞŵĂŝŶƐƚŽKŚůŽŶĞWĞŽƉůĞΗƐƚĂƚĞƐŝŶƉĂƌƚ͗Η /d&hZd, ZZ ^K>s ƚŚĂƚĨƌĞĞ͕ƉƌŝŽƌ͕ĂŶĚŝŶĨŽƌŵĞĚ ĐŽŶƐĞŶƚŽĨƚŚĞKŚůŽŶĞĂŶĚŽƚŚĞƌŝŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐƉĞŽƉůĞƐŽĨƚŚĞƌĞŐŝŽŶďĞŝŶƚĞŐƌĂůƚŽĂŶLJĂůƚĞƌĂƚŝŽŶƉůĂŶŶŝŶŐĨŽƌƚŚĞĞƌŬĞůĞLJ ^ŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚƐĂĐƌĞĚƐŝƚĞ͕ŝŶĂĐĐŽƌĚĂŶĐĞǁŝƚŚƚŚĞƉƌŽǀŝƐŝŽŶƐŽĨƚŚĞhŶŝƚĞĚEĂƚŝŽŶƐĞĐůĂƌĂƚŝŽŶŽŶƚŚĞZŝŐŚƚƐŽĨ/ŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐ WĞŽƉůĞ͕ĂŶĚĐĂůůƐƵƉŽŶĂůůƉĂƌƚŝĞƐƚŽĨŽůůŽǁƚŚĞƉƌŝŶĐŝƉůĞƐŽĨƚŚĞĞĐůĂƌĂƚŝŽŶǁŝƚŚƌĞƐƉĞĐƚƚŽƚŚĞtĞƐƚĞƌŬĞůĞLJ ^ŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚƐŝƚĞ͘Η KŶƉĂŐĞϲϳ͕ƚŚĞƌĂĨƚ ŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂů/ŵƉĂĐƚZĞƉŽƌƚƐƚĂƚĞƐ͕ΗŽŶƐƵůƚĂƚŝŽŶǁŝƚŚƚŚĞKŚůŽŶĞ/ŶĚŝĂŶdƌŝďĞ͕ĐŽŶĚƵĐƚĞĚ ƉƵƌƐƵĂŶƚƚŽϱϮ͕ǁĂƐĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚĨŽƌƚŚĞWƌŽũĞĐƚĂŶĚŵŝƚŝŐĂƚŝŽŶŵĞĂƐƵƌĞƐĂƌĞƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĞĚ͕ĂƐĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞ͘͟ hŶĨŽƌƚƵŶĂƚĞůLJ͕ƚŚŝƐŝƐŽŶůLJŽŶĞƚƌŝďĂůĞŶƚŝƚLJĂŶĚƚŚĞƌĞƐŽůƵƚŝŽŶǀĞƌLJĐůĞĂƌůLJƐƚĂƚĞƐƚŚĂƚŝƚƐŚŽƵůĚĂůƐŽŝŶĐůƵĚĞŽƚŚĞƌ ŝŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐƉĞŽƉůĞŽĨƚŚĞƌĞŐŝŽŶ͖ƚŚĞŽŶĨĞĚĞƌĂƚĞĚsŝůůĂŐĞƐŽĨ>ŝƐũĂŶ͕ĨŽƌĞdžĂŵƉůĞ͕ƐŚŽƵůĚďĞŐŝǀĞŶƚŚĞƐĂŵĞĨŽƌŵĂů ĐŽŶƐƵůƚĂƚŝŽŶƉƌŽĐĞƐƐĂƐKŚůŽŶĞdƌŝďĞ/ŶĐ͘/ƚŝƐĂůƐŽƵŶĐůĞĂƌǁĞĂƚŚĞƌŽƌŶŽƚƚŚĞŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJĨŽůůŽǁĞĚ^ϭϴǁŚŝĐŚ ƐƚĂƚĞƐƚŚĂƚǁŚĞŶĂĐŝƚLJŽƌĐŽƵŶƚLJĂĚŽƉƚƐŽƌĂŵĞŶĚƐƚŚĞŝƌŐĞŶĞƌĂůƉůĂŶƚŚĞdƌŝďĞƐĨƌŽŵƚŚĞĂƌĞĂŵƵƐƚďĞĐŽŶƐƵůƚĞĚ͕ ǁŚĞƚŚĞƌĨĞĚĞƌĂůůLJƌĞĐŽŐŶŝnjĞĚŽƌŶŽƚ͘dŚĞŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJŚĂƐĂŵĞŶĚĞĚƚŚĞŝƌŚŽƵƐŝŶŐĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƉůĂŶŶƵŵĞƌŽƵƐƚŝŵĞƐ ƐŝŶĐĞƚŚĞůĂǁǁĂƐƉƵƚŝŶƚŽĂĨĨĞĐƚŝŶϮϬϬϱ͕ĂŶĚƚŚĞƌĞŝƐŶŽƉƌŽŽĨƚŚĂƚdƌŝďĞƐǁĞƌĞŝŶĐůƵĚĞĚŝŶĐŽŶƐƵůƚĂƚŝŽŶƉƌŝŽƌƚŽ ĂŵĞŶĚŝŶŐƚŚŝƐƉĂƌƚŽĨƚŚĞŐĞŶĞƌĂůƉůĂŶ͘ ƚƚŚŝƐƉŽŝŶƚ͕ƚŚĞŽŶůLJŽĨĨŝĐŝĂůƌĞĐŽŐŶŝƚŝŽŶŽĨƚŚŝƐƐĂĐƌĞĚƐŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚƐŝƚĞŝƐƚŚĞƐĞƌŝĞƐŽĨŵƵƌĂůƐĂŶĚƚŚĞƐŵĂůůƉůĂƋƵĞŝŶ ƚŚĞƉĂƌŬŝŶŐůŽƚƵŶĚĞƌƚŚĞĨƌĞĞǁĂLJ͘ĞƌƚĂŝŶůLJƚŚĞŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJǁŽƵůĚďĞŶĞĨŝƚĨƌŽŵƚƌƵůLJŵĞĂŶŝŶŐĨƵůƉƵďůŝĐ ĂĐŬŶŽǁůĞĚŐĞŵĞŶƚŽĨŝƚƐKŚůŽŶĞƉĂƐƚ͕ƉƌĞƐĞŶƚ͕ĂŶĚĨƵƚƵƌĞďLJǁŽƌŬŝŶŐǁŝƚŚůŽĐĂůKŚůŽŶĞƉĞŽƉůĞƚŽĚĞǀĞůŽƉĂŵĂũŽƌ ŵĞŵŽƌŝĂůĂŶĚĞĚƵĐĂƚŝŽŶĂůƐŝƚĞĂƚϭϵϬϬϰƚŚ^ƚƌĞĞƚ͘ dŚŝƐŝƐĂĐůĞĂƌŽƉƉŽƌƚƵŶŝƚLJĨŽƌƚŚĞŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJƚŽĨŽůůŽǁƚŚƌŽƵŐŚŽŶŝƚƐƌĞƐŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐƚŽŚŽŶŽƌĂŶĚƉƌŽƚĞĐƚƐĂĐƌĞĚƐŝƚĞƐ ĂŶĚƚŚĞƌŝŐŚƚƐŽĨ/ŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐƉĞŽƉůĞƐ͘/ŝŵƉůŽƌĞĞƌŬĞůĞLJƚŽƚĂŬĞĂƐƚĂŶĚĂŐĂŝŶƐƚƚŚŝƐĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶƚŚĂƚǁŝůůďĞŶĞĨŝƚ ǁĞĂůƚŚLJĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞƌƐĂƚƚŚĞĞdžƉĞŶƐĞŽĨƚŚĞĨŝǀĞƚŚŽƵƐĂŶĚLJĞĂƌƐŽĨŚŝƐƚŽƌLJ͘ZĞũĞĐƚƚŚĞ /ZĂŶĚĞŵďƌĂĐĞƚŚĞEŽWůĂŶ ůƚĞƌŶĂƚŝǀĞ͊ ^ŝŶĐĞƌĞůLJ͕ ZĂĞ^ƚƌŽnjnjŽ͕D& ƵƌƌĞŶƚůLJĂƐƚƵĚĞŶƚĂƚƚŚĞWĂĐŝĨŝĐ^ĐŚŽŽůŽĨZĞůŝŐŝŽŶ ^ĞŶƚĨƌŽŵŵLJŝWŚŽŶĞ Allen, Shannon From: Marcia Lovelace Attn: Shannon Allen City of Berkeley City Planning 1947 Center Street, 2nd Floor Berkeley, CA 94704 Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Commission. It was also listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, as well as determined to be eligible for the National Registry of Historic places. The West Berkeley Shellmound site, completely encompassing the proposed 1900 Fourth Street site, is known to be the oldest bayside settlement in the San Francisco Bay Area, approximately 5700 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone people today. The draft EIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by massive community opposition voiced at the Dec 1st meeting of the Berkeley Landmark Preservation Committee. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to establish the archaeological reports and there has not been adequate peer review of the data in the draft EIR. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology of the 1900 Fourth Street EIR. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the EIR’s preparation. The primary consultant had multiple conflicts of interest, while a second Ohlone person repeatedly requesting inclusion was not consulted for the EIR. This manner of consultation with Ohlone people seems like a mere token gesture given the importance of this site to members of the Ohlone community. Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley "Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People" states in part: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site." On page 67, the Draft Environmental Impact Report states, "Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous people of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear weather or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound site is the series of murals and the small plaque in the parking lot under the freeway. Certainly the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone people to develop a major memorial and educational site at 1900 4th Street. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the five thousand years of history. Reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative! Sincerely, Marcia Lovelace Allen, Shannon From: Michelle Puckett Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Commission. It was also listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, as well as determined to be eligible for the National Registry of Historic places. The West Berkeley Shellmound site, completely encompassing the proposed 1900 Fourth Street site, is known to be the oldest bayside settlement in the San Francisco Bay Area, approximately 5700 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone people today. The draft EIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by massive community opposition voiced at the Dec 1st meeting of the Berkeley Landmark Preservation Committee. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to establish the archaeological reports and there has not been adequate peer review of the data in the draft EIR. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology of the 1900 Fourth Street EIR. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the EIR’s preparation. The primary consultant had multiple conflicts of interest, while a second Ohlone person repeatedly requesting inclusion was not consulted for the EIR. This manner of consultation with Ohlone people seems like a mere token gesture given the importance of this site to members of the Ohlone community. Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley "Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People" states in part: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site." On page 67, the Draft Environmental Impact Report states, "Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous people of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear weather or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound site is the series of murals and the small plaque in the parking lot under the freeway. Certainly the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone people to develop a major memorial and educational site at 1900 4th Street. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the five thousand years of history. Reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative! Sincerely, Michelle Puckett Birth Doula & Writer Richmond, CA Allen, Shannon From: Amelea Canaris Attn: Shannon Allen City of Berkeley City Planning 1947 Center Street, 2nd Floor Berkeley, CA 94704 Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Commission. It was also listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, as well as determined to be eligible for the National Registry of Historic places. The West Berkeley Shellmound site, completely encompassing the proposed 1900 Fourth Street site, is known to be the oldest bayside settlement in the San Francisco Bay Area, approximately 5700 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone people today. The draft EIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by massive community opposition voiced at the Dec 1st meeting of the Berkeley Landmark Preservation Committee. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to establish the archaeological reports and there has not been adequate peer review of the data in the draft EIR. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology of the 1900 Fourth Street EIR. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the EIR’s preparation. The primary consultant had multiple conflicts of interest, while a second Ohlone person repeatedly requesting inclusion was not consulted for the EIR. This manner of consultation with Ohlone people seems like a mere token gesture given the importance of this site to members of the Ohlone community. Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley "Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People" states in part: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site." On page 67, the Draft Environmental Impact Report states, "Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous people of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear weather or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound site is the series of murals and the small plaque in the parking lot under the freeway. Certainly the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone people to develop a major memorial and educational site at 1900 4th Street. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the five thousand years of history. Reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative! Sincerely, Amelea Canaris Allen, Shannon From: Joan Kresich Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Commission. It was also listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, as well as determined to be eligible for the National Registry of Historic places. The West Berkeley Shellmound site, completely encompassing the proposed 1900 Fourth Street site, is known to be the oldest bayside settlement in the San Francisco Bay Area, approximately 5700 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone people today. The draft EIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by massive community opposition voiced at the Dec 1st meeting of the Berkeley Landmark Preservation Committee. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to establish the archaeological reports and there has not been adequate peer review of the data in the draft EIR. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology of the 1900 Fourth Street EIR. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the EIR’s preparation. This is a glaring lack, and represents a continuation of a history of genocide and marginalization! The primary consultant had multiple conflicts of interest, while a second Ohlone person repeatedly requesting inclusion was not consulted for the EIR. This manner of consultation with Ohlone people seems like a mere token gesture given the importance of this site to members of the Ohlone community. Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley "Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People" states in part: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site." On page 67, the Draft Environmental Impact Report states, "Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous people of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear weather or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound site is the series of murals and the small plaque in the parking lot under the freeway. Certainly the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone people to develop a major memorial and educational site at 1900 4th Street. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the five thousand years of history. Reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative! Sincerely, Joan Kresich Allen, Shannon From: Billy Trice City of Berkeley Planning and Development Department 1947 Center St., 2nd Floor Berkeley, Calif. 94704 Dear People: I am urging you to not give a permit to developers who want to build condos and mall on top of a Ohlone Shellmound site on Fourth St. The burial site is a resting place in which the Ohlone People are bury as far as 5,800 years and it should had been off-limit. It the human remains were Christians, Jewishs, or Mormons, I don't think it will be any plan to built condos and a mall on it. I urge you to reject a proposal that will desecrate the Ohlone Shellmound site in the name of development. Sincerely Billy Trice Jr. Allen, Shannon From: Michael Cross Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Commission. It was also listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, as well as determined to be eligible for the National Registry of Historic places. The West Berkeley Shellmound site, completely encompassing the proposed 1900 Fourth Street site, is known to be the oldest bayside settlement in the San Francisco Bay Area, approximately 5700 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone people today. The draft EIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by massive community opposition voiced at the Dec 1st meeting of the Berkeley Landmark Preservation Committee. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to establish the archaeological reports and there has not been adequate peer review of the data in the draft EIR. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology of the 1900 Fourth Street EIR. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the EIR’s preparation. The primary consultant had multiple conflicts of interest, while a second Ohlone person repeatedly requesting inclusion was not consulted for the EIR. This manner of consultation with Ohlone people seems like a mere token gesture given the importance of this site to members of the Ohlone community. Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley "Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People" states in part: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site." On page 67, the Draft Environmental Impact Report states, "Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous people of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear whether or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into effect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound site is the series of murals and the small plaque in the parking lot under the freeway. Certainly the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone people to develop a major memorial and educational site at 1900 4th Street. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the five thousand years of history. Reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative! Sincerely, Michael Cross Oakland, CA Allen, Shannon From: [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2016 2:55 AM To: Allen, Shannon Subject: Comments: 1900 Fourth Street Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Shannon Allen City of Berkeley City Planning 1947 Center Street, 2nd Floor Berkeley, CA 94704 Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: Please consider these comments on the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. I am very concerned about this EIR. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Commission. It was also listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, as well as determined to be eligible for the National Registry of Historic places. The West Berkeley Shellmound site, completely encompassing the proposed 1900 Fourth Street site, is known to be the oldest bayside settlement in the San Francisco Bay Area, approximately 5,700 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone people today. The draft EIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by massive community opposition voiced at the Dec 1, 2016 meeting of the Berkeley Landmark Preservation Committee. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to establish the archaeological reports and there has not been adequate peer review of the data in the draft EIR. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology of the 1900 Fourth Street EIR. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the EIR’s preparation. The primary consultant had multiple conflicts of interest, while a second Ohlone person repeatedly requesting inclusion was not consulted for the EIR. This manner of consultation with Ohlone people seems like a mere token gesture given the importance of this site to members of the Ohlone community. Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley "Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People" states in part: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site." On page 67, the Draft Environmental Impact Report states, "Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous people of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear weather or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound site is the series of murals and the small plaque in the parking lot under the freeway. Certainly the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone people to develop a major memorial and educational site at 1900 Fourth Street. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the 5,000 years of history. Please reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative. Thank you for your consideration of these comments. Sincerely, Paul Moss 1849 Whitaker St. White Bear Lake, MN 55110 Allen, Shannon From: Megan Clark Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners:2I am writing to express my deep concerns about the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Commission. It was also listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, as well as determined to be eligible for the National Registry of Historic places. The West Berkeley Shellmound site, completely encompassing the proposed 1900 Fourth Street site, is known to be the oldest bayside settlement in the San Francisco Bay Area, approximately 5700 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone people today. The draft EIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by massive community opposition voiced at the Dec 1st meeting of the Berkeley Landmark Preservation Committee. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to establish the archaeological reports and there has not been adequate peer review of the data in the draft EIR. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology of the 1900 Fourth Street EIR. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the EIR’s preparation. The primary consultant had multiple conflicts of interest, while a second Ohlone person repeatedly requesting inclusion was not consulted for the EIR. This manner of consultation with Ohlone people seems like a mere token gesture given the importance of this site to members of the Ohlone community.2Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley "Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People" states in part: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site." On page 67, the Draft Environmental Impact Report states, "Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous people of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear weather or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound site is the series of murals and the small plaque in the parking lot under the freeway. Certainly the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone people to develop a major memorial and educational site at 1900 4th Street.2This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the five thousand years of history. Reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative!2Sincerely, Megan Clark 1814 63rd Street, Berkeley, CA Allen, Shannon From: Katherine Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: As a non-native person born and raised on Ohlone land, I am writing to express my deep concerns about the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Commission. It was also listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, as well as determined to be eligible for the National Registry of Historic places. The West Berkeley Shellmound site, completely encompassing the proposed 1900 Fourth Street site, is known to be the oldest bayside settlement in the San Francisco Bay Area, approximately 5700 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone people today. The draft EIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by massive community opposition voiced at the Dec 1st meeting of the Berkeley Landmark Preservation Committee. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to establish the archaeological reports and there has not been adequate peer review of the data in the draft EIR. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology of the 1900 Fourth Street EIR. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the EIR’s preparation. The primary consultant had multiple conflicts of interest, while a second Ohlone person repeatedly requesting inclusion was not consulted for the EIR. This manner of consultation with Ohlone people seems like a mere token gesture given the importance of this site to members of the Ohlone community. Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley "Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People" states in part: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site." On page 67, the Draft Environmental Impact Report states, "Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous people of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear whether or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound site is the series of murals and the small plaque in the parking lot under the freeway. Certainly the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone people to develop a major memorial and educational site at 1900 4th Street. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the five thousand years of history. Reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative! Sincerely, Katherine Schoellenbach Allen, Shannon From: Lindsay Mulcahy Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express concerns about the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site has proven cultural and historic value, as demonstrated by institutions such the State of California and Ohlone Tribes. I ask that the EIR be rejected based on its methodology and that Ohlone tribal members be fully represented in this process. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Commission. It was also listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, as well as determined to be eligible for the National Registry of Historic places. The West Berkeley Shellmound site, completely encompassing the proposed 1900 Fourth Street site, is known to be the oldest bayside settlement in the San Francisco Bay Area, approximately 5700 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone people today. The draft EIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by massive community opposition voiced at the Dec 1st meeting of the Berkeley Landmark Preservation Committee. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to establish the archaeological reports and there has not been adequate peer review of the data in the draft EIR. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology of the 1900 Fourth Street EIR. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the EIR’s preparation. The primary consultant had multiple conflicts of interest, while a second Ohlone person repeatedly requesting inclusion was not consulted for the EIR. This manner of consultation with Ohlone people seems like a mere token gesture given the importance of this site to members of the Ohlone community. Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley "Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People" states in part: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site." On page 67, the Draft Environmental Impact Report states, "Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous people of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear weather or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound site is the series of murals and the small plaque in the parking lot under the freeway. Certainly the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone people to develop a major memorial and educational site at 1900 4th Street. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the five thousand years of history. Reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative! Sincerely, Lindsay Mulcahy Allen, Shannon From: Sonia Decker Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Commission. It was also listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, as well as determined to be eligible for the National Registry of Historic places. The West Berkeley Shellmound site, completely encompassing the proposed 1900 Fourth Street site, is known to be the oldest bayside settlement in the San Francisco Bay Area, approximately 5700 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone people today. The draft EIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by massive community opposition voiced at the Dec 1st meeting of the Berkeley Landmark Preservation Committee. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to establish the archaeological reports and there has not been adequate peer review of the data in the draft EIR. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology of the 1900 Fourth Street EIR. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the EIR’s preparation. The primary consultant had multiple conflicts of interest, while a second Ohlone person repeatedly requesting inclusion was not consulted for the EIR. This manner of consultation with Ohlone people seems like a mere token gesture given the importance of this site to members of the Ohlone community. Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley "Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People" states in part: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site." On page 67, the Draft Environmental Impact Report states, "Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous people of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear weather or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound site is the series of murals and the small plaque in the parking lot under the freeway. Certainly the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone people to develop a major memorial and educational site at 1900 4th Street. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the five thousand years of history. Reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative! Please do the right thing and respect Indigenous rights and sacred sites. Sincerely, Sonia Decker East Bay Resident -- Sonia Decker The Bonfire Makers www.thebonfiremakers.com 510-697-1268 [email protected] Allen, Shannon From: Juliet Lee ĞĂƌDƐ͘ůůĞŶĂŶĚĞƌŬĞůĞLJŝƚLJWůĂŶŶĞƌƐ͗ /ĂŵĂtĞƐƚĞƌŬĞůĞLJƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚĂŶĚŚĂǀĞďĞĞŶĂƚĂdžƉĂLJŝŶŐŚŽŵĞŽǁŶĞƌŚĞƌĞƐŝŶĐĞϮϬϬϭ͘/ĂŵǁƌŝƚŝŶŐƚŽĞdžƉƌĞƐƐŵLJĚĞĞƉ ĐŽŶĐĞƌŶƐĂďŽƵƚƚŚĞĚƌĂĨƚ ŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂů/ŵƉĂĐƚZĞƉŽƌƚ; /ZͿƌĞŐĂƌĚŝŶŐϭϵϬϬ&ŽƵƌƚŚ^ƚƌĞĞƚ͘dŚĞƐŝƚĞǁĂƐĚĞƐŝŐŶĂƚĞĚĂƐĂ ŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJ>ĂŶĚŵĂƌŬηϮϮϳďLJƚŚĞ>ĂŶĚŵĂƌŬƐŽŵŵŝƐƐŝŽŶ͘/ƚǁĂƐĂůƐŽůŝƐƚĞĚŝŶƚŚĞĂůŝĨŽƌŶŝĂ^ƚĂƚĞZĞŐŝƐƚƌLJŽĨ ,ŝƐƚŽƌŝĐWůĂĐĞƐ͕ĂƐǁĞůůĂƐĚĞƚĞƌŵŝŶĞĚƚŽďĞĞůŝŐŝďůĞĨŽƌƚŚĞEĂƚŝŽŶĂůZĞŐŝƐƚƌLJŽĨ,ŝƐƚŽƌŝĐƉůĂĐĞƐ͘dŚĞtĞƐƚĞƌŬĞůĞLJ ^ŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚƐŝƚĞ͕ĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞůLJĞŶĐŽŵƉĂƐƐŝŶŐƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚϭϵϬϬ&ŽƵƌƚŚ^ƚƌĞĞƚƐŝƚĞ͕ŝƐŬŶŽǁŶƚŽďĞƚŚĞŽůĚĞƐƚďĂLJƐŝĚĞ ƐĞƚƚůĞŵĞŶƚŝŶƚŚĞ^ĂŶ&ƌĂŶĐŝƐĐŽĂLJƌĞĂ͕ĂƉƉƌŽdžŝŵĂƚĞůLJϱϳϬϬLJĞĂƌƐŽůĚ͘/ƚŝƐƚŚĞƚƌƵĞďŝƌƚŚƉůĂĐĞŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJ͘/ƚĐŽŶƚŝŶƵĞƐ ƚŽďĞŽĨƵƚŵŽƐƚƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶĐĞĂƐĂĐĞƌĞŵŽŶŝĂůĐĞŶƚĞƌƚŽƚŚĞKŚůŽŶĞƉĞŽƉůĞƚŽĚĂLJ͘ /ĂŵĂƉƌŽĨĞƐƐŝŽŶĂůĂŶƚŚƌŽƉŽůŽŐŝƐƚ͖ŝŶŵLJǁŽƌŬ/ĨƌĞƋƵĞŶƚůLJĐŽůůĂďŽƌĂƚĞǁŝƚŚ/ŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐƉĞŽƉůĞĂŶĚƚƌŝďĞƐŝŶƚŚĞĂLJ ƌĞĂ͕ƚŚƌŽƵŐŚŽƵƚĂůŝĨŽƌŶŝĂ͕ĂŶĚŝŶŽƚŚĞƌƉĂƌƚƐŽĨƚŚĞh^͘ůƚŚŽƵŐŚ/ĂŵŶŽĞdžƉĞƌƚŽŶƚŚĞKŚůŽŶĞƉĞŽƉůĞ͕/ŬŶŽǁƚŚĂƚƚŚĞ ŐĞŶŽĐŝĚĞĂŶĚĚŝƐƉŽƐƐĞƐƐŝŽŶŽĨĂůŝĨŽƌŶŝĂΖƐ/ŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐƉĞŽƉůĞŝƐĂƉĂƌƚŝĐƵůĂƌůLJďƌƵƚĂůĂŶĚƐŚĂŵĞĨƵůƉĂƌƚŽĨŽƵƌŚŝƐƚŽƌLJĂƐĂ ŶĂƚŝŽŶ͕ƐƚĂƚĞ͕ĂŶĚĐŝƚLJ͘/ĂŵƉƌŽƵĚŽĨŵLJĐŝƚLJΖƐĨŝŶĞŚŝƐƚŽƌLJĂŶĚƚƌĂĚŝƚŝŽŶŽĨƉƌŽŐƌĞƐƐŝǀĞƉŽůŝƚŝĐƐ͕ŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐůĞĂĚĞƌƐŚŝƉŝŶ ĐĞůĞďƌĂƚŝŶŐ/ŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐWĞŽƉůĞΖƐĂLJ͕ǁŚŝĐŚŝƐŶŽǁďĞŝŶŐƌĞƉĞĂƚĞĚŝŶŵĂŶLJĐŝƚŝĞƐ͘/ƚŝƐƐĂĚĂŶĚƐŚĂŵĞĨƵů͕ŚŽǁĞǀĞƌ͕ƚŚĂƚ ǁĞĂƐĂĐŝƚLJĚŽŶΖƚĚŽŵŽƌĞƚŽĂĐŬŶŽǁůĞĚŐĞĂŶĚĂŶĚƌĞƐƉĞĐƚƚŚĞƉĞŽƉůĞǁŚŽǁĞƌĞĂŶĚĂƌĞEĂƚŝǀĞƚŽƚŚĞƐĞůĂŶĚƐ͘ DŝƌĂĐƵůŽƵƐůLJƐŽŵĞKŚůŽŶĞƉĞŽƉůĞŚĂǀĞƐƵƌǀŝǀĞĚ͕ĂŶĚƐƚƌƵŐŐůĞƚŽŵĂŝŶƚĂŝŶĂƐĞŶƐĞŽĨŝĚĞŶƚŝƚLJ͘ŵƵƌĂůŽŶĂĨƌĞĞǁĂLJ ƵŶĚĞƌƉĂƐƐŝƐĂƉƌĞƚƚLJƉĂƚŚĞƚŝĐƚŽŬĞŶŽĨƚŚĞŝƌŚĞƌŝƚĂŐĞ͘ /ƵŶĚĞƌƐƚĂŶĚƚŚĞƌĞŝƐŽŶĞKŚůŽŶĞƉĞƌƐŽŶĐŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐǁŝƚŚƚŚĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞƌƐ͘/ĂůƐŽƵŶĚĞƌƐƚĂŶĚƚŚĂƚĂůůKŚůŽŶĞƉĞŽƉůĞŵĂLJ ŶŽƚĂŐƌĞĞǁŝƚŚƚŚŝƐƉĞƌƐŽŶ͘/ŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐƚƌĂĚŝƚŝŽŶƐĚŽŶŽƚŐŝǀĞĂƵƚŚŽƌŝƚLJƚŽŽŶĞƐŝŶŐůĞƉĞƌƐŽŶƚŽŵĂŬĞĚĞĐŝƐŝŽŶƐĂƐŝŶ ƵƌŽŵĞƌŝĐĂŶƐŽĐŝĞƚLJ͘/ƚŝƐŝŵƉŽƌƚĂŶƚĨŽƌƚŚĞĐŝƚLJƚŽƐƵƉƉŽƌƚƚŚĞKŚůŽŶĞƉĞŽƉůĞΖƐĂďŝůŝƚLJƚŽƉƌŽĐĞƐƐĂŶĚŵĂŬĞĚĞĐŝƐŝŽŶƐŝŶ ƚŚĞŝƌŽǁŶǁĂLJ͘ dŚŝƐŝƐĂĐůĞĂƌŽƉƉŽƌƚƵŶŝƚLJĨŽƌƚŚĞŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJƚŽĨŽůůŽǁƚŚƌŽƵŐŚŽŶŝƚƐƌĞƐŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐƚŽŚŽŶŽƌĂŶĚƉƌŽƚĞĐƚƐĂĐƌĞĚƐŝƚĞƐ ĂŶĚƚŚĞƌŝŐŚƚƐŽĨ/ŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐƉĞŽƉůĞƐ͘/ŝŵƉůŽƌĞĞƌŬĞůĞLJƚŽƚĂŬĞĂƐƚĂŶĚĂŐĂŝŶƐƚƚŚŝƐĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶƚŚĂƚǁŝůůďĞŶĞĨŝƚ ǁĞĂůƚŚLJĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞƌƐĂƚƚŚĞĞdžƉĞŶƐĞŽĨƚŚĞĨŝǀĞƚŚŽƵƐĂŶĚLJĞĂƌƐŽĨŚŝƐƚŽƌLJ͘ZĞũĞĐƚƚŚĞ /ZĂŶĚĞŵďƌĂĐĞƚŚĞEŽWůĂŶ ůƚĞƌŶĂƚŝǀĞ͊ ^ŝŶĐĞƌĞůLJ͕ :ƵůŝĞƚW͘>ĞĞ͕WŚ ϮϮϮϬ^ĂĐƌĂŵĞŶƚŽ^ƚƌĞĞƚ͕ĞƌŬĞůĞLJϵϰϳϬϮ ^ĞŶƚĨƌŽŵŵLJŝWĂĚ Washington, DC, January 5, 2017. Attn: Shannon Allen City of Berkeley Planning and Development Department 1947 Center Street, 2nd Floor Berkeley, CA 94704 Dear Ms. Allen, We appreciate this opportunity to submit comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. Since 1989, the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) has used the power of law to protect the environment, promote human rights, and ensure a just and sustainable society. CIEL seeks a world where the law reflects the interconnection between humans and the environment, respects the limits of the planet, protects the dignity and equality of each person, and encourages all of earth’s inhabitants to live in balance with each other. One of the main goals of CIEL's work is to enable communities to advocate for their rights by engaging directly with decision-makers in projects that may affect them. We have become aware of the community concern and opposition that has arisen regarding the 1900 Fourth Street Project, its draft EIR and the process by which tribal leaders were made eligible to consult under AB 52. We would remind the City of Berkeley Planning and Development Department that on May 19, 2009 the Berkeley City Council passed a resolution recognizing and endorsing the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) which encompasses international standards for the recognition, promotion and protection of the rights and freedoms of indigenous peoples. Surely this decision stemmed from the recognition that indigenous and tribal peoples require special protection resulting from their greater vulnerability and their historical conditions of marginalization and discrimination. Among these indigenous and tribal rights we would highlight the critical importance of proper, meaningful and inclusive consultations as set forth in article 32.2 of the declaration: "States shall consult and cooperate in good faith with the indigenous peoples concerned through their own representative institutions in order to obtain their free and informed consent prior to approval of any project affecting their lands or territories and other resources, particularly in connection with the development, utilization of exploitation of mineral, water or other resources". 1350 Connecticut Avenue NW, Suite #1100, Washington, DC 20036 USA Tel: 1-202-785-8700 | Fax: 1-202-785-8701 | [email protected] 15 rue des Savoises, 1205 Geneva, Switzerland Tel: 41-22-789-0500 | Fax 41-22-789-0739 | [email protected] www.ciel.org Additionally, the City Council took steps to implement UNDRIP as Municipal Policy and even gave further recognition of the declaration by endorsing the call to upgrade the UNDRIP to a Convention in December of 20151. While we applaud the City of Berkeley's steps toward recognition of the rights of indigenous peoples, we are well aware of the complexities regarding full implementation of these rights, mainly as it pertains to the process by which proper and meaningful consultation of indigenous peoples should occur. With that in mind we would question the process by which the City of Berkeley carried out its due diligence regarding the identification of tribes eligible to consult with the City pursuant to AB 52 and the UNDRIP regarding this project, as well as, the process by which individuals were notified and included in any type of consultation. As stated in the draft Environmental Impact Report: "(3) California Assembly Bill 52 - Tribal Cultural Resources and Consultation. Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52), which became law on January 1, 2015, provides for consultation with California Native American tribes during the CEQA process, and equates significant impacts to “tribal cultural resources” with significant environmental impacts." Further AB 52 specifically states: SECTION 1. (b) In recognition of California Native American tribal sovereignty and the unique relationship of California local governments and public agencies with California Native American tribal governments, and respecting the interests and roles of project proponents, it is the intent of the Legislature, in enacting this act, to accomplish all of the following: (7) Ensure that local and tribal governments, public agencies, and project proponents have information available, early in the California Environmental Quality Act environmental review process, for purposes of identifying and addressing potential adverse impacts to tribal cultural resources and to reduce the potential for delay and conflicts in the environmental review process." In implementing the right to consultation of indigenous peoples, there is full agreement that consultation is by no means a single act, "but a process of dialogue and negotiation that implies both parties’ good faith and the objective of achieving a mutual agreement. Consultation procedures, as a form of guaranteeing indigenous and tribal peoples’ right to participate in matters which can affect them, “must be designed to secure the free and informed consent of these peoples, and must not be limited to notification or quantification of damages.” The consultation procedure may not be limited to compliance with a series of formal requirements. Even in instances in which indigenous peoples’ consent is not a necessary requirement, States have the duty to give due regard to the results of the consultation or provide objective and reasonable motives for not having taken them into consideration."2 1 City of Berkeley resolutions in support the rights of indigenous peoples, including the adoption of the UNDRIP as municipal practice: https://www.cityofberkeley.info/Clerk/City_Council/2016/01_Jan/Documents/2016-01- 19_Item_31_Support_of_Indigenous_Peoples.aspx 2 IACHR, Report Indigenous and Tribal Peoples' Rights Over Their Ancestral Lands and Natural Resources, Norms and Jurisprudence of the Inter-American Human Rights System, at p. 106-107. http://www.oas.org/en/iachr/indigenous/docs/pdf/AncestralLands.pdf As included in A. Cultural Resources (3) Native American Consultation of the EIR, a list of five individuals were found eligible to consult under AB 52, and only one individual from the Ohlone Indian Tribe met with the City of Berkeley. According to the guidelines for implementation of the rights of indigenous peoples, this does not meet the standards of a free, prior, informed consultation. The EIR gives little indication as to the process by which these five individuals were identified and apparently relies on the delivery of one letter of correspondence. This limited effort to reach out to tribal peoples in the area has not only excluded them from learning about and participating in the recognition and identification of what has been defined as tribal cultural resources, but also from the decision regarding conservation of these resources for future generations. We are concerned about the obvious limitations of a consultation process carried out with a single individual and a single tribe. Furthermore, the project applicant's proposed measures to donate money to the Ohlone Indian Tribe and for the creation of a GIS database designating areas of archeological sensitivity for use in future planning purposes within the City of Berkeley, could constitute potential compensation which other tribal peoples would not consent to. One of the fundamental beliefs and vision which indigenous and tribal peoples have defended and is now recognized by treaties and conventions such as UNDRIP is their collective rights. The collective rights of indigenous peoples cannot be asserted to the exclusion of the participation of individual members in a consultation process. By limiting the consultation process within this project to a sole individual, the City of Berkeley has failed to provide for the conditions needed for prior and timely access to information that would allow for free and informed participation by indigenous tribal peoples in a meaningful consultation. We would request that the current draft EIR be rejected in favor of carrying out a proper and meaningful consultation process that enforces the City of Berkeley's adopted Municipal Policy to respect and protect the rights of indigenous peoples according to the UNDRIP and AB 52. As in the past, the City of Berkeley has shown its leadership in adopting international legal standards, we would hope that it would also follow the guidance and standards for its implementation to afford special protection to all indigenous and tribal peoples who may be affected by this project. Respectfully, Carla García Zendejas Director, People, Land & Resources Center for International Environmental Law 1350 Connecticut Avenue NW, Suite #1100, Washington, DC 20036 USA Tel: 1-202-785-8700 | Fax: 1-202-785-8701 | [email protected] 15 rue des Savoises, 1205 Geneva, Switzerland Tel: 41-22-789-0500 | Fax 41-22-789-0739 | [email protected] www.ciel.org Allen, Shannon From: Jane P. PERRY *Please circulate this email in place of my previous email sent earlier in the day.* December 8, 2016/January 5, 2017 City of Berkeley Planning and Development Department, Principal Planner Shannon Allen at [email protected] SUBJECT: Public comment on Draft EIR 1900 Fourth Street Project Dear Ms. Allen, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the adequacy of the Draft EIR 1900 Fourth Street Project on City of Berkeley Landmark #228 “Berkeley Shellmound” (Chronological #227). I am Educator, however I did receive Landmark status #316 for my work site, the Harold E. Jones Child Study Center, with several other co- authors including Susan Cerny. I am heartbroken to hear of her loss. I benefited from her tutelage. I appreciate all the available documentation provided by your department to help me get up to speed. I reviewed on your website, the NOD to Approve the Landmark designation to the West Berkeley Shellmound, listed under the LPC scoping documents as Attachment 3 NOD, the DEIR for 1900 Fourth Street, App B: the Initial Study, and App A: the NOP Comment Letters. Additionally I reviewed the 2016 CEQA Statutes and Guidelines (http://resources.ca.gov/ceqa/docs/2016_CEQA_Statutes_and_Guidelines.pdf), The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties, 1995 via your Planning and Development page “What is the Landmark Alteration Permit Process?,” the Berkeley Municipal Code Chapter 3.24. Section 260 Permit application--Review standards and criteria, and California Assembly Bill AB52, the Native American Historic Resource Protection Act (http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201320140AB52 ). I respectfully submit the following comments on the integrity of the West Berkeley Shellmound Landmark site: Historic Resource I NOTE that the Shellmound qualifies as a “historical resource” per CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(a)(1): “A resource listed in, or determined to be eligible by the State Historical Resources Commission, for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources (Pub. Res. Code § 5024.1, Title 14 CCR, Section 4850 et seq.).” Further, I NOTE on page 38 of the Initial Study that “The Shellmound is also designated by the State as archaeological site P-01-000084/CA-ALA-307. The West Berkeley Shellmound was assigned a historical resource status code of “2S2” by the California Office of Historic Preservation, indicating that it has been determined individually eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places by a consensus through the Section 106 process; is also listed in the California Register of Historical Resources. This property qualifies as a historical resource under CEQA (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(a)(2)).” I OBJECT to the DEIR designation as Section 15064.5(a)(2) when CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(a)(1) is sufficient and the City therefore need not address CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(a)(2) stipulation that “Public agencies must treat any such resource as significant unless the preponderance of evidence demonstrates that it is not historically or culturally significant.” Nevertheless, CEQA and CEQA Guidelines under Section 15126.4 (b) Mitigation Measures Related to Impacts on Historical Resources. (1) states that: “maintenance, repair, stabilization, rehabilitation, restoration, preservation, conservation or reconstruction of the historical resource will be conducted in a manner consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings (1995), Weeks and Grimmer, the project’s impact on the historical resource shall generally be considered mitigated below a level of significance and thus is not significant.” This tells me that the DEIR needs to address how 1900 Fourth, ZP2015-0068 handles the historical resource West Berkeley Shellmound #228 (Chron #227) in a manner consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties, 1995 “Standards for Preservation” defines “preservation” as it relates to a property as [my inserted italics]: “the act or process of applying measures necessary to sustain the existing form, integrity, and materials of an historic property. Work, including preliminary measures to protect and stabilize the property, generally focuses upon the ongoing maintenance and repair of historic materials and features rather than extensive replacement and new construction. 1. A property will be used as it was historically, or be given a new use that maximizes the retention of distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships. Where a treatment and use have not been identified, a property will be protected and, if necessary, stabilized until additional work may be undertaken.” I NOTE in the NOD to Landmark that the West Berkeley Shellmound is “most highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial ground.” 2. The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The replacement of intact or repairable historic materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided. I NOTE in the NOD to Landmark that the West Berkeley Shellmound “plays an important role in the history of the changing shoreline and the change in attitude towards the use of natural resources.” 3. Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Work needed to stabilize, consolidate, and conserve existing historic materials and features will be physically and visually compatible, identifiable upon close inspection, and properly documented for future research. I NOTE that in the NOD to Landmark, that the West Berkeley Shellmound’s “cultural resource lies in its age, the fact that it is the oldest and one of the largest mounds established around the bay, that it represents ancient culture, that it was built by the earliest humans in the area.” The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties, 1995 “Standards for Rehabilitation” as defined as [my italics] “the act or process of making possible a compatible use for a property through repair, alterations, and additions while preserving those portions or features which convey its historical, cultural, or architectural values,” I NOTE no instance in the DEIR of compatibility with the historic nature of the West Berkeley Shellmound NOD as noted above in the preservation standards. The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties, 1995 “Standards for Restoration” is defined as [my italics] “the act or process of accurately depicting the form, features, and character of a property as it appeared at a particular period of time by means of the removal of features from other periods in its history and reconstruction of missing features from the restoration period. I NOTE no instance in the DEIR where reconstruction is described for “the oldest and one of the largest mounds established around the bay, … built by the earliest humans in the area” (West Berkeley Shellmound NOD). I respectfully OBJECT to the certification of the EIR because I can find no instance in the DEIR that addresses how 1900 Fourth, ZP2015-0068 handles the historical resource West Berkeley Shellmound in a manner consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties, 1995, pursuant to CEQA and CEQA Guidelines under Section 15126.4 (b) (1). Mitigation can therefore not be below a level of significance and thus is NOT not significant. Cultural (Archaeological) Resource On page 38 of the Initial Study, I NOTE the following acknowledgement: “The Project site is located within the boundary of the City Landmark #227 and, as such, the Project could have a potentially significant impact on the historic archaeological resource.” I NOTE findings reported in a March 3, 2016 Memorandum from the Rhoades Planning Group to the City of Berkeley Landmarks Preservation Commission RE: 1900 Fourth Street (Listed under LPC’s March 3, 2016 EIR Scoping Session as Attachment 2: 2016-03-03_LPC_ATT2_1900 Fourth_Memo Re Archaeological Work.pdf) describing their paid consultant, Archeo-Tec’s archival research, field investigation and laboratory analysis on the Project site is within but not inclusive of the integrity of the boundaries of Berkeley Shellmound Landmark as delineated in the West Berkeley Shellmound NOD. On page 48 of the DEIR, I NOTE that “Although no human remains were encountered at the Project site during archaeological testing conducted in 1999, 2000, and 2014, over 95 human burials have been reported in earlier excavations and topographical modification of the West Berkeley Shellmound. Disarticulated human bone has also been identified during archaeological monitoring adjacent to the Project site along University Avenue.” I NOTE facts in the 2004 Dore, Byrne, McFaul, and Running 2004 archaeologist report in the Proceedings of the Society of California Archaeology, “Why Here? Settlement, Geoarchaeological and Paleoenvironment at the West Berkeley Site (CA-ALA-307)” (found in App A-NOP Public Comments) of coring around the Spenger’s parking lot, of 33 separate areas of cultural deposits, 16 of which were intact and undisturbed. On page 79 of the DEIR, I NOTE the fact that “in March and April 2016, Ohlone remains were identified during trenching activity for the 1919 Fourth Street Project along Fourth Street.” A December 1 2016 East Bay Times article notes that the Ohlone remains are human bones from at least five Native American individuals (http://www.eastbaytimes.com/2016/11/29/berkeley-remains-of-at-least-five-individuals-found-at-project-site- report-says/ ). The two aforementioned disinterment incidents, have occurred within the integrity of the Berkeley Shellmound Landmark site boundaries as established in the 2000 landmarking. Regarding research on City Landmark “West Berkeley Shellmound,” while the Rhoades Group Memorandum states that “The methodology, findings, and conclusions were reviewed by Berkeley writer and historian Richard Schwartz,” Mr. Schwartz, in Appendix A: NOP Comment Letters of the DEIR writes; “I did not, as the developer both verbally stated and printed on their website, review Archeo-Tec’s work.” He continues, “none of my research appears to be used in the report.” I therefore OBJECT to the DEIR qualification of Project site non-identified remains as irrelevant when considering the West Berkeley Shellmound Landmark boundaries as a whole and the CEQA and CEQA Guidelines under Section 15126.4 (b) Mitigation Measures Related to Impacts on Historical Resources. (3)(A), which state: “Preservation in place is the preferred manner of mitigating impacts to archaeological sites. Preservation in place maintains the relationship between artifacts and the archaeological context. Preservation may also avoid conflict with religious or cultural values of groups associated with the site.” Tribal Cultural Resources I NOTE that the Draft EIR omits the AB52 directive as it pertains to CEQA to “(2) Establish a new category of resources in the California Environmental Quality Act called “tribal cultural resources” that considers the tribal cultural values in addition to the scientific and archaeological values when determining impacts and mitigation.” As the West Berkeley Shellmound Landmark establishes the boundaries of the Shellmound as “most highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial ground” and that the “Shellmound’s cultural resource lies in its age, the fact that it is the oldest and one of the largest mounds established around the bay, that it represents ancient culture, that it was built by the earliest humans in the area,” I OBJECT to approval of Structural Alteration Permit #LMSAP2015-00005 pursuant to AB52, SECTION 1. (3) to [my italics] “Establish examples of mitigation measures for tribal cultural resources that uphold the existing mitigation preference for historical and archaeological resources of preservation in place, if feasible.” I OBJECT to approval of Structural Alteration Permit #LMSAP2015-00005 pursuant to AB52, where “Existing law, the Native American Historic Resource Protection Act, establishes a misdemeanor for unlawfully and maliciously excavating upon, removing, destroying, injuring, or defacing a Native American historic, cultural, or sacred site, that is listed or may be eligible for listing in the California Register of Historic Resources.” I OBJECT to approval of Structural Alteration Permit #LMSAP2015-00005 pursuant to AB52, SECTION 1. (a) (1) as it reads [my italics]: Current state law provides a limited measure of protection for sites, features, places, objects, and landscapes with cultural value to California Native American tribes. (2) Existing law provides limited protection for Native American sacred places, including, but not limited to, places of worship, religious or ceremonial sites, and sacred shrines. (3) The California Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code) does not readily or directly include California Native American tribes’ knowledge and concerns. This has resulted in significant environmental impacts to tribal cultural resources and sacred places, including cumulative impacts, to the detriment of California Native American tribes and California’s environment. (4) As California Native Americans have used, and continue to use, natural settings in the conduct of religious observances, ceremonies, and cultural practices and beliefs, these resources reflect the tribes’ continuing cultural ties to the land and their traditional heritages. I OBJECT to approval of Structural Alteration Permit #LMSAP2015-00005 pursuant to AB52, SECTION 1, where the City of Berkeley shall “(1) Recognize that California Native American prehistoric, historic, archaeological, cultural, and sacred places are essential elements in tribal cultural traditions, heritages, and identities” as this pertains to the Berkeley Shellmound and the 1900 Fourth Street Project site within the Shellmound. Finally, I NOTE BMC 3.24.260 Permit application--Review standards and criteria.1. For permit applications for construction, alteration or repair states [my italics] a. “ For applications relating to landmark sites, the proposed work shall not adversely affect the exterior architectural features of the landmark; nor shall the proposed work adversely affect the special character or special historical, architectural or aesthetic interest or value of the landmark and its site, as viewed both in themselves and in their setting.” I OBJECT to the DEIR for adversely affecting the special character or special historical, architectural or aesthetic interest or value of the West Berkeley Shellmound landmark site, as viewed both in itself and in its setting pursuant to BMC 3.24.260. I respectfully request that you do not certify the EIR and not approve the SAP for the 1900 Fourth Street Project for all the objections I have enumerated in this letter. Thank you, Jane Perry, a concerned community member 5814 Margarido Drive, Oakland 94618 cc: Landmarks Preservation Commission Zoning Adjustments Board Land Use Planning Division ATT: Shannon Allen, Secretary 2120 Milvia Street Berkeley, CA 94704 [email protected] Dear ZAB Commissioners, On behalf of the West Berkeley Alliance for Clean Air and Safe Jobs (Alliance) I am submitting public comment regarding the Environmental Impact Report for the West Berkeley Shellmound/ Village site (1900 Fourth St.). This site once held at least one shellmound/funerary site of the Ohlone people and is the oldest inhabited site in the entire Bay Area. The site has been declared eligible for the National Registry of Historic Places, suggesting that its significance goes beyond just local interest. In a series of proclamations passed earlier in 2016 the Berkeley City Council affirmed the rights of Native Americans and called upon the elected officials to consult with the Native community on issues affecting their well-being, cultural sovereignty, and spiritual practice. The Alliance advocates for the protection of the West Berkeley Shellmound/Village site as an historic place and urges it be preserved as an open space. The Alliance further asserts that the proposed development of this site would put shop employees, shoppers and new housing residents at risk of exposure to toxic emissions emanating from Pacific Steel Casting Company (PSC), Berkeley Asphalt and other nearby sources of pollution. Please see: (http:// westberkeleyalliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/PSC-Emissions.pdf showing the increases in levels of CO, SO2, PM, PM 10, PM 2.5 according the the California Air Resources Board (CARB) for PSC and Berkeley Asphalt. Also see: http://westberkeleyalliance.org/wp- content/uploads/2012/10/toxics_and_your_health.pdf This diagram shows potential health impacts from Chemicals Of Potential Concern (COPC) in Pacific Steel’s Emissions Inventory Report. The Alliance urges the ZAB to reject the application for commercial development of this site based on the importance of the site to the Ohlone people, as a landmark historical site, and the potential harm to people, especially sensitive receptors, living, shopping or working in a commercial development in this space due to nearby stationary sources of pollution. Sincerely, Janice Schroeder Core Member West Berkeley Alliance for Clean Air and Safe Jobs ǣ ǣ ͷǡʹͲͳ ǣ ͳͻͲͲ ǡ Ǥ ǡ Ȁ ǡ ǯ ǡǡ ǡ Ǥ ͳͻͲͲ ǡ Ǥȋ ǤǦͳͲȌͳ͵ͳ ͳͺΨ Ǥ ǡ ǡǡǡǤ ǡͳͻͲͲ Ǥ ͷ ʹͲͲͻǡ Ǥ ȋͳǤǦȌͳʹͺ ͵ͷΨǤ ǫ ǣͲͺ͵ͲͳͲͺͲʹǡ ǡ ǣͶʹʹͲǡͶʹʹͳ ǦͳǡͶʹ͵ʹǦͳǤǡ Ǥ ʹͲͳͳǦʹͲͳͷ ͷ Ȁǣ ͳǣ͵ͺͷͲȀͻͶʹ ǡ ǣͳͺʹͺȀͶͲȋͶͺΨȀͷͲΨȌ ǣͷͷȀͳͶͷȋͳΨȀͳͷΨȌ ǣ͵ͶͲȀͲȋͻΨȀΨȌ ǣͶͲͲȀͺȋͳͲΨȀͻΨȌ ǣͷͶ͵ȀͳͶʹȋͳͶΨȀͳͷΨȌ ǡ ǡ ǡ Ǧǣ ǡ Ǥǡǡ ǡ Ǥ ǡ ǡǡ Ǥ ǡ ǫ Ǥ ǡ ǯ Ǥ Ǥ Ǥǡǯǡ Ǥ ǡ ǡ ǯͳͻ Ǥ ǡ ǡ ǡ ǡ Ǥ ǡ Ǥ ǤǦ Ǥ ǯ Ǥ ǡ ǡ ǡ Ǥǯǯ Ǥ Ǥ ǡ ǡǤ Allen, Shannon From: Planning Dept. Mailbox Sent: Monday, January 09, 2017 9:31 AM To: Allen, Shannon Subject: FW: 1900 Fourth Street &ƌŽŵ͗^ĂŶĚƌĂDŽďďŵĂŝůƚŽ͗ƐŵĐŽďďΛďĞĞĐŚŵĞƌĞ͘ĐŽŵ ^ĞŶƚ͗&ƌŝĚĂLJ͕:ĂŶƵĂƌLJϬϲ͕ϮϬϭϳϭ͗ϱϰWD dŽ͗WůĂŶŶŝŶŐĞƉƚ͘DĂŝůďŽdžфWůĂŶŶŝŶŐΛĐŝ͘ďĞƌŬĞůĞLJ͘ĐĂ͘ƵƐх ^ƵďũĞĐƚ͗ϭϵϬϬ&ŽƵƌƚŚ^ƚƌĞĞƚ Attn: Shannon Allen City of Berkeley City Planning 1947 Center Street, 2nd Floor Berkeley, CA 94704 RE: 1900 Fourth Street Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: Americans have persecuted Native Americans since 1492. We must respect their sacred places as we would expect other to value ours. This is American history, of importance to all of us. Don't sacrifice this land for ANOTHER apartment building. I am writing to express my deep concerns about the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Commission. It was also listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, as well as determined to be eligible for the National Registry of Historic places. The West Berkeley Shellmound site, completely encompassing the proposed 1900 Fourth Street site, is known to be the oldest bayside settlement in the San Francisco Bay Area, approximately 5,700 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone people today. The draft EIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by massive community opposition voiced at the Dec 1st meeting of the Berkeley Landmark Preservation Committee. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to establish the archaeological reports and there has not been adequate peer review of the data in the draft EIR. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology of the 1900 Fourth Street EIR. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the EIR’s preparation. The primary consultant had multiple conflicts of interest, while a second Ohlone person repeatedly requesting inclusion was not consulted for the EIR. This manner of consultation with Ohlone people seems like a mere token gesture given the importance of this site to members of the Ohlone community. Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley "Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People" states in part: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site." On page 67, the Draft Environmental Impact Report states, "Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous people of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear weather or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound site is the series of murals and the small plaque in the parking lot under the freeway. Certainly the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone people to develop a major memorial and educational site at 1900 Fourth Street. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the 5,000 years of history. Reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative! Sincerely, Sandra Cobb 3880 Ellendale Rd Moreland Hills, OH 44022 dŚŝƐĞŵĂŝůŚĂƐďĞĞŶĐŚĞĐŬĞĚĨŽƌǀŝƌƵƐĞƐďLJǀĂƐƚĂŶƚŝǀŝƌƵƐƐŽĨƚǁĂƌĞ͘ ǁǁǁ͘ĂǀĂƐƚ͘ĐŽŵ !"# $%&' ((" )")(*) # $"((""(*)#$&"()&&""'(( "()$ "(('++ " ""# )+"" " +("#,""")&"&(& " "") -""") &#" '"(*)&+' #,")") "" "' ((&+- )) "()+ . )"&"&# $+ /$0 +')&&"1 ,"" ""))"'2((#$ " '3+'" " ")"#$&"'".( " " "+("+ )")(*)"#,".)"'2(( $)&"(#$ "'3 2 ".& ((''""#" +.)" "(*) "'"#,""" " #$' .+. ("" '#$).+ .)"+ . """ ' ..# ) & " &/$0 "" "-"") &# , &&"') 4"5 .& /$0 ""$&"" #$ "&")) &&"" "&"" /$0"")#$( +"6()'+"". #& )"'". "&' "((&'".(&7 8) "&(19+'( $""))+ ." 2((# "(+") &&$ " ((+ )"+ 2((&")" )&." ") &# $"((2(()" " (.& ". ' ') " . ) ")""+ ')")#(" +.()" & +(&") ")""" #'((""(*)" +"&"& " ")""#,()"".)&"' + +(# " ""().")&& ()) #$" (" ") " . '"()# ) , Allen, Shannon From: Alison Ehara-Brown Alison Ehara-Brown, LCSW 1715 B Solano Avenue Berkeley, CA 94804 Shannon Allen City of Berkeley City Planning 1947 Center Street, 2nd Floor Berkeley, CA 94704 Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns, as a small business owner and taxpayer in Berkeley - about the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Commission. It was also listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, as well as determined to be eligible for the National Registry of Historic places. The West Berkeley Shellmound site, completely encompassing the proposed 1900 Fourth Street site, is known to be the oldest bayside settlement in the San Francisco Bay Area, approximately 5700 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone people today. The draft EIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by massive community opposition voiced at the Dec 1st meeting of the Berkeley Landmark Preservation Committee. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to establish the archaeological reports and there has not been adequate peer review of the data in the draft EIR. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology of the 1900 Fourth Street EIR. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the EIR’s preparation. The primary consultant had multiple conflicts of interest, while a second Ohlone person repeatedly requesting inclusion was not consulted for the EIR. This manner of consultation with Ohlone people seems like a mere token gesture given the importance of this site to members of the Ohlone community. As a therapist who works with members of the Native American community in the East Bay, I am deeply aware of how deeply traumatizing it is when sacred sites are desacrated or destroyed and how deeply intergenerational trauma is triggered when the treatment of our Ohlone citizens by the cities, developers and park district officials in the greater Bay Area is less that completely respectful. I always hope and pray that Berkeley will be an example to other cities of an honorable, respectful relationship to the first peoples of our beautiful Bay Area. Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley "Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People" states in part: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site." On page 67, the Draft Environmental Impact Report states, "Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous people of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear weather or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound site is the series of murals and the small plaque in the parking lot under the freeway. Certainly the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone people to develop a major memorial and educational site at 1900 4th Street. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the five thousand years of history. Reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative! Sincerely, Alison Ehara-Brown -- Allen, Shannon From: Cindy McPherson Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Commission. It was also listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, as well as determined to be eligible for the National Registry of Historic places. The West Berkeley Shellmound site, completely encompassing the proposed 1900 Fourth Street site, is known to be the oldest bayside settlement in the San Francisco Bay Area, approximately 5700 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone people today. The draft EIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by massive community opposition voiced at the Dec 1st meeting of the Berkeley Landmark Preservation Committee. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to establish the archaeological reports and there has not been adequate peer review of the data in the draft EIR. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology of the 1900 Fourth Street EIR. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the EIR’s preparation. The primary consultant had multiple conflicts of interest, while a second Ohlone person repeatedly requesting inclusion was not consulted for the EIR. This manner of consultation with Ohlone people seems like a mere token gesture given the importance of this site to members of the Ohlone community. Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley "Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People" states in part: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site." On page 67, the Draft Environmental Impact Report states, "Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous people of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear weather or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound site is the series of murals and the small plaque in the parking lot under the freeway. Certainly the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone people to develop a major memorial and educational site at 1900 4th Street. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the five thousand years of history. Reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative! Sincerely, Cynthia McPherson Allen, Shannon From: David Jaber Hello, Shannon, I am writing you in regards to the proposed development in West Berkeley at Fourth Street and Hearst, between Spenger’s, University Ave, and the Union Pacific rail line. I have seen a great deal of concern from the local Ohlone community and their allies about the proposed development at Fourth and Hearst in West Berkeley. Before moving forward to construction, the City and the developer should hold further discussions with Ohlone representatives to understand the acceptable options and design alternatives. This is within the spirit and the requirements of CEQA. I understand the site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Commission, and listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, due to the presence of The West Berkeley Shellmound site, which has rich archaeological significance. Please again engage local indigenous people before moving forward. The City has a proud history of honoring and protecting sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. —— 'DYLG-DEHU %HUNHOH\UHVLGHQW GMDEHU#LQQDWLYHQHW Allen, Shannon From: Lindley Mease Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Commission. It was also listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, as well as determined to be eligible for the National Registry of Historic places. The West Berkeley Shellmound site, completely encompassing the proposed 1900 Fourth Street site, is known to be the oldest bayside settlement in the San Francisco Bay Area, approximately 5700 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone people today. The draft EIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by massive community opposition voiced at the Dec 1st meeting of the Berkeley Landmark Preservation Committee. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to establish the archaeological reports and there has not been adequate peer review of the data in the draft EIR. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology of the 1900 Fourth Street EIR. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the EIR’s preparation. The primary consultant had multiple conflicts of interest, while a second Ohlone person repeatedly requesting inclusion was not consulted for the EIR. This manner of consultation with Ohlone people seems like a mere token gesture given the importance of this site to members of the Ohlone community. Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley "Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People" states in part: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site." On page 67, the Draft Environmental Impact Report states, "Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous people of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear weather or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound site is the series of murals and the small plaque in the parking lot under the freeway. Certainly the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone people to develop a major memorial and educational site at 1900 4th Street. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the five thousand years of history. Reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative! Sincerely, Lindley Mease -- /LQGOH\0HDVH &R)RXQGHU%OXH+HDUW KWWS EOXHKHDUWDFWLRQRUJ _/LQNHG,Q Allen, Shannon From: monique sonoquie Attn: Shannon Allen City of Berkeley City Planning 1947 Center Street, 2nd Floor Berkeley, CA 94704 RE: 1900 Fourth Street Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Commission. It was also listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, as well as determined to be eligible for the National Registry of Historic places. The West Berkeley Shellmound site, completely encompassing the proposed 1900 Fourth Street site, is known to be the oldest bayside settlement in the San Francisco Bay Area, approximately 5,700 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone people today. The draft EIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by massive community opposition voiced at the Dec 1st meeting of the Berkeley Landmark Preservation Committee. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to establish the archaeological reports and there has not been adequate peer review of the data in the draft EIR. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology of the 1900 Fourth Street EIR. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the EIR’s preparation. The primary consultant had multiple conflicts of interest, while a second Ohlone person repeatedly requesting inclusion was not consulted for the EIR. This manner of consultation with Ohlone people seems like a mere token gesture given the importance of this site to members of the Ohlone community. Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley "Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People" states in part: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site." On page 67, the Draft Environmental Impact Report states, "Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous people of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear weather or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound site is the series of murals and the small plaque in the parking lot under the freeway. Certainly the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone people to develop a major memorial and educational site at 1900 Fourth Street. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the 5,000 years of history. Reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative! Sincerely, Monique Sonoquie Allen, Shannon From: [email protected] on behalf of Alex Werth Dear Ms. Allen, I am writing to express my deep concerns about the City of Berkeley's support to date of the development project on the sacred grounds of Indigenous remains in Ohlone ancestral lands - also known as the 1900 Fourth Street. Given that Berkeley openly identifies itself as a bastion of human rights, and a contrast to the resurgent racist and anti-democratic tendencies visible across the U.S., I am deeply disturbed that the City would insist upon pursuing this project despite the vocal concerns of Indigenous people and their allies about the dispossessive nature of both the development site and process. As confounding as it may be from a municipal standpoint, the future of Berkeley must embrace the fact historically dispossessed Ohlone and other Native American peoples live in our midst and are historically and morally entitled to an exceptional consideration of not only their human and land rights, but also forms of reparations. Without making reparations to the living ancestors of these lands, the City of Berkeley simply cannot make claim to being on the "right side of history." I am writing to express my concerns about certain technicalities of the process, in particular the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark #227 by the Landmarks Commission. It was also listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, as well as determined to be eligible for the National Registry of Historic places. The West Berkeley Shellmound site, completely encompassing the proposed 1900 Fourth Street site, is known to be the oldest bayside settlement in the San Francisco Bay Area, approximately 5700 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone people today. The draft EIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by massive community opposition voiced at the Dec 1st meeting of the Berkeley Landmark Preservation Committee. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to establish the archaeological reports and there has not been adequate peer review of the data in the draft EIR. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology of the 1900 Fourth Street EIR. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the EIR’s preparation. The primary consultant had multiple conflicts of interest, while a second Ohlone person repeatedly requesting inclusion was not consulted for the EIR. This manner of consultation with Ohlone people seems like a mere token gesture given the importance of this site to members of the Ohlone community. Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley "Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People" states in part: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site." On page 67, the Draft Environmental Impact Report states, "Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous people of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear weather or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound site is the series of murals and the small plaque in the parking lot under the freeway. Certainly the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone people to develop a major memorial and educational site at 1900 4th Street. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the five thousand years of history. Reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative! Sincerely, Alex Werth Department of Geography, UC Berkeley Allen, Shannon From: Bradley Heinz Attn: Shannon Allen City of Berkeley City Planning 1947 Center Street, 2nd Floor Berkeley, CA 94704 Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Commission. It was also listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, as well as determined to be eligible for the National Registry of Historic places. The West Berkeley Shellmound site, completely encompassing the proposed 1900 Fourth Street site, is known to be the oldest bayside settlement in the San Francisco Bay Area, approximately 5700 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone people today. The draft EIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by massive community opposition voiced at the Dec 1st meeting of the Berkeley Landmark Preservation Committee. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to establish the archaeological reports and there has not been adequate peer review of the data in the draft EIR. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology of the 1900 Fourth Street EIR. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the EIR’s preparation. The primary consultant had multiple conflicts of interest, while a second Ohlone person repeatedly requesting inclusion was not consulted for the EIR. This manner of consultation with Ohlone people seems like a mere token gesture given the importance of this site to members of the Ohlone community. Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley "Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People" states in part: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site." On page 67, the Draft Environmental Impact Report states, "Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous people of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear weather or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound site is the series of murals and the small plaque in the parking lot under the freeway. Certainly the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone people to develop a major memorial and educational site at 1900 4th Street. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the five thousand years of history. Reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative! Sincerely, Bradley Allen, Shannon From: Becky Mer Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am a Berkeley resident, and I am writing to express my deep concerns about the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Commission. It was also listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, as well as determined to be eligible for the National Registry of Historic places. The West Berkeley Shellmound site, completely encompassing the proposed 1900 Fourth Street site, is known to be the oldest bayside settlement in the San Francisco Bay Area, approximately 5700 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone people today. The draft EIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by massive community opposition voiced at the Dec 1st meeting of the Berkeley Landmark Preservation Committee. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to establish the archaeological reports and there has not been adequate peer review of the data in the draft EIR. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology of the 1900 Fourth Street EIR. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the EIR’s preparation. The primary consultant had multiple conflicts of interest, while a second Ohlone person repeatedly requesting inclusion was not consulted for the EIR. This manner of consultation with Ohlone people seems like a mere token gesture given the importance of this site to members of the Ohlone community. Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley "Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People" states in part: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site." On page 67, the Draft Environmental Impact Report states, "Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous people of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear weather or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound site is the series of murals and the small plaque in the parking lot under the freeway. Certainly the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone people to develop a major memorial and educational site at 1900 4th Street. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the five thousand years of history. Reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative! Sincerely, Becky Mer Berkeley resident My name is Beverly Shalom and I have worked with Native youth at American Indian Child Resource Center for almost 17 years. I would like to voice my opposition to the building of a luxury condo/mall development on the oldest known Ohlone shellmound, located in West Berkeley at 1900 4th Street. This is land that has profound historic, cultural and spiritual significance to the Ohlone people, being the oldest bayside settlement in the San Francisco Bay Area. I understand that the bones of several Ohlone ancestors were found at the West Berkeley Shellmound location. People of all faiths have beliefs and practices that honor and protect the remains of their ancestors. I believe that anyone would react similarly to the desecration of their burial sites. As a Jew, I certainly know that my people have suffered this pain. Just because we can't see gravestones, doesn't mean that it doesn't have the same devastating impact. (And incidentally, under Jewish tradition, moving the remains of our ancestors after burial is prohibited, with only a few exceptions...... none of which includes the building of a mall or condos.) But in addition to the bones discovered in this area, this particular site has profound historic, cultural and spiritual significance because it is the first area settled in the Bay Area. The site is about 5700 years old, more ancient than the Egyptian pyramids! It was listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, as well as determined to be eligible for the National Registry of Historic places. It also was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Commission. The West Berkeley Shellmound continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone people today and is truly, the birthplace of Berkeley. I ask that you please respect the rights of Ohlone people and honor the preservation of their sacred sites. In addition to this being the right thing to do, there are City of Berkeley, State of California and federal laws and rights that protect Native American sacred sites - such as the National Historic Preservation Act, the UN declaration of the rights of Indigenous people, Religious Freedom Restoration Act and the Free Exercise clause of the constitution. Please respect these rights and safe this shellmound. Thank you. Respectfully, Beverly Shalom 2944 Eastman Avenue Oakland, CA 94619 Allen, Shannon From: Planning Dept. Mailbox Sent: Monday, January 09, 2017 2:17 PM To: Allen, Shannon Subject: FW: Late mailing of 1900 fourth street project NOA Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged &ƌŽŵ͗ũŽŚŶĨŽƌĚŝĐĞŵĂŝůƚŽ͗ŽƚŚĞƌĨŝƐŚΛĐŽŵĐĂƐƚ͘ŶĞƚ ^ĞŶƚ͗DŽŶĚĂLJ͕:ĂŶƵĂƌLJϬϵ͕ϮϬϭϳϮ͗ϬϯWD dŽ͗WůĂŶŶŝŶŐĞƉƚ͘DĂŝůďŽdžфWůĂŶŶŝŶŐΛĐŝ͘ďĞƌŬĞůĞLJ͘ĐĂ͘ƵƐх Đ͗ĞƌŬĞůĞLJDĂLJŽƌΖƐKĨĨŝĐĞфDĂLJŽƌΛĐŝ͘ďĞƌŬĞůĞLJ͘ĐĂ͘ƵƐх͖DĂŝŽ͕>ŝŶĚĂф>DĂŝŽΛĐŝ͘ďĞƌŬĞůĞLJ͘ĐĂ͘ƵƐх͖<d,> ED> E фŬŵĐůĞĂŶΛŝŶĚͲdž͘ŽƌŐх ^ƵďũĞĐƚ͗>ĂƚĞŵĂŝůŝŶŐŽĨϭϵϬϬĨŽƵƌƚŚƐƚƌĞĞƚƉƌŽũĞĐƚEK Dear Planning Dept I am writing to complain that the NOA for the January 5th LPC Public Hearing for the 1900 4th Street Project was mailed too late for concerned citizens to know about and attend the meeting . The subject NOA was mailed on January 4th, one day prior to the meeting, and not received until January 6th, one day AFTER the meeting. If the purpose of the NOA is to in fact notify the public about the subject PUBLIC HEARING, then it should be mailed in ample time for the public to know about the Hearing BEFORE it is held! This did not happen. In the future please take the necessary action to mail any NOA with sufficient time for it to be received well in advance of the item / event. Thank you, John Fordice 1828 Fifth Street Berkeley, CA 94710 Allen, Shannon From: Planning Dept. Mailbox Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2017 9:29 AM To: Allen, Shannon Subject: FW: REVISED NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY OF DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT 1900 Fourth Street Project and NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS State Clearinghouse #2016022038 Attachments: Electronic Signature.pdf &ƌŽŵ͗<d,> ED> EŵĂŝůƚŽ͗ŬŵĐůĞĂŶΛŝŶĚͲdž͘ŽƌŐ ^ĞŶƚ͗DŽŶĚĂLJ͕:ĂŶƵĂƌLJϬϵ͕ϮϬϭϳϯ͗ϱϲWD dŽ͗ĞƌŬĞůĞLJDĂLJŽƌΖƐKĨĨŝĐĞфDĂLJŽƌΛĐŝ͘ďĞƌŬĞůĞLJ͘ĐĂ͘ƵƐх͖DĂŝŽ͕>ŝŶĚĂф>DĂŝŽΛĐŝ͘ďĞƌŬĞůĞLJ͘ĐĂ͘ƵƐх͖WůĂŶŶŝŶŐĞƉƚ͘ DĂŝůďŽdžфWůĂŶŶŝŶŐΛĐŝ͘ďĞƌŬĞůĞLJ͘ĐĂ͘ƵƐх͖ŝƚLJůĞƌŬфĐůĞƌŬΛĐŝ͘ďĞƌŬĞůĞLJ͘ĐĂ͘ƵƐх͖ƌĂŶĞ͕&ĂƚĞŵĂф&ƌĂŶĞΛĐŝ͘ďĞƌŬĞůĞLJ͘ĐĂ͘ƵƐх Đ͗^ĂŶĚLJ^ŝŵŽŶфƐĂŶĚLJΛƚƌĂdžŐĂůůĞƌLJ͘ĐŽŵх͖ ůůŝŽƚƚďƌĂŵƐфĞůůŝŽƚƚĂďƌĂŵƐΛĨŽƵƌƚŚƐƚƌĞĞƚ͘ĐŽŵх͖>ĂůĞŚ>ĂƚŝŶŝͬͬ^Kh фůĂůĞŚΛƐŽďƵƐŽďƵ͘ĐŽŵх͖ůĞƐƐĂŶĚƌŽ>ĂƚŝŶŝфĂůĞƐƐĂŶĚƌŽΛƐŽďƵƐŽďƵ͘ĐŽŵх͖ďŽďΛƚƌĂdžŐĂůůĞƌLJ͘ĐŽŵ͖ũŽŚŶĨŽƌĚŝĐĞ фŽƚŚĞƌĨŝƐŚΛĐŽŵĐĂƐƚ͘ŶĞƚх͖ŚĂƌůĞƐdƵƌǀĞLJфƚƵƌǀĞLJͺĐΛŵƐŶ͘ĐŽŵх ^ƵďũĞĐƚ͗Z s/^ EKd/ K&s/>/>/dzK&Z&d Es/ZKED Ed>/DWdZ WKZdϭϵϬϬ&ŽƵƌƚŚ^ƚƌĞĞƚWƌŽũĞĐƚĂŶĚ EKd/ K&Wh>/, Z/E'^^ƚĂƚĞůĞĂƌŝŶŐŚŽƵƐĞηϮϬϭϲϬϮϮϬϯϴ TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: I live at 1824 5th Street, and have attended all public meetings regarding the 1900 Fourth Street Project that I have been aware of. I live about 200 yards from the proposed project site. I was NOT aware the Landmarks Preservation Commission meeting on January 5, 2017 to receive and discuss public comments on the Draft EIR because the City of Berkeley Planning and Development Department did not send out the notices in time for me to receive them by mail. The notices were sent out on January 4, the meeting was on January 5, and I received the notices on Saturday January 7. Similarly, at the December 1, 2016 Landmarks Preservation Commission meeting to review the Draft EIR, several commissioners said that they had only received the full Draft EIR Report one day before the meeting, and had not had a chance to even read the document. This is one of the most serious and problematic projects in the City of Berkeley’s recent history, and the review and comment process must be respected if we are to come to a mutually agreeable solution and refrain from legal and civil actions. PLEASE make sure that you keep us informed in a timely manner. Kathleen McLean Independent Exhibitions 1824 Fifth Street, Berkeley, CA 94710 (510) 649-8837 cell (510) 290-9238 [email protected] http://www.ind-x.org/ Allen, Shannon From: Margot Cunningham Dear Principal Planner Allen, I am writing to oppose the development at 1900 4th St in Berkeley. The Draft EIR states that the project would occur within the boundary of the historic West Berkeley Shellmound, which is a designated City Landmark. The EIR states, “Project implementation would affect a designated City Landmark, and Project excavation could potentially unearth previously unidentified intact Shellmound deposits that contribute to the resource’s significance under the National Register and California Register. These impacts would have a substantial adverse change on a historical resource due to the destruction of those critical aspects of integrity that qualify it as a City Landmark and for listing in the National Register and California Register.” The EIR goes on to state that these potential impacts would be reduced to a “less-than-significant level” by mitigation measures for the project. But the EIR is unclear on how the mitigation measures would affect the listing of the Shellmound site on the National Register and California Register. The EIR says that the materials in the project site itself were disturbed so don’t qualify for listing in the National or California Registers, although the greater area is listed in the National and California Register. Yet the materials in the project site were intact at one time, as were materials in the entire area. Also the Draft EIR is inadequate in its reporting of archaeological findings. It does not list, for instance, the remains documented in the EIR for the adjacent site at the Grocery Outlet, which is also part of the Shellmound site. Not all Ohlone people agree on how to deal with developments in the Shellmound site, and those who wanted to be included in preparation of the Draft EIR were not consulted. The city should err on the side of caution and see that the project site and surrounding areas are disturbed no more to not only preserve the area for listing on the National and California Register but also out of respect to the Ohlone people. If the Pyramids in Egypt were to be destroyed for a development, but mitigation measures were enacted to reduce the impact, would the development still be approved? Why is and has the city of Berkeley over the years said its okay to destroy this sacred area as long as the impacts are mitigated? The entire Shellmound site is a significant place to the Ohlone people and of historical significance for the Bay Area. The whole area should be given back to the Ohlone people, or at the least, it should be made into a historical monument, just as we have monuments for veterans of wars, forts, early settlers, Cesar Chavez, Manzanar, burial grounds for free and enslaved Africans and other people, and numerous monuments to Native people. Sincerely, Margot Cunningham 1727 Santa Clara St Richmond, CA 94804 Allen, Shannon From: natasha shawver Attn: Shannon Allen City of Berkeley City Planning 1947 Center Street, 2nd Floor Berkeley, CA 94704 Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Commission. It was also listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, as well as determined to be eligible for the National Registry of Historic places. The West Berkeley Shellmound site, completely encompassing the proposed 1900 Fourth Street site, is known to be the oldest bayside settlement in the San Francisco Bay Area, approximately 5700 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone people today. The draft EIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by massive community opposition voiced at the Dec 1st meeting of the Berkeley Landmark Preservation Committee. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to establish the archaeological reports and there has not been adequate peer review of the data in the draft EIR. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology of the 1900 Fourth Street EIR. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the EIR’s preparation. The primary consultant had multiple conflicts of interest, while a second Ohlone person repeatedly requesting inclusion was not consulted for the EIR. This manner of consultation with Ohlone people seems like a mere token gesture given the importance of this site to members of the Ohlone community. Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley "Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People" states in part: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site." On page 67, the Draft Environmental Impact Report states, "Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous people of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear weather or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound site is the series of murals and the small plaque in the parking lot under the freeway. Certainly the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone people to develop a major memorial and educational site at 1900 4th Street. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the five thousand years of history. Reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative! Sincerely, Natasha Shawver ͵ͻʹͺǤ ǡͻͶͲͷ Ǥ ͳͻͶǤ ǡͻͶͲͶ Ǥǣ ͳͻͲͲͶǤǤ ȋ Ȍ Ǥ ǡ ǡ Ǥ Ǥ ǡ ȋ͓ʹʹȌ ǡ Ǥ ǡ Ǩ ǡ ǡ Ǥ ǡ Ǥ ǡ ʹͲ ǡ Ǥ ǡ Ǥ ǡ ǤͷǡͲͲͲǡ ǤDz dzǡ Ǥ ʹͲͳ ǤʹͲͳ ǡ Ǥ ǡ Allen, Shannon From: David Haupert Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Commission. It was also listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, as well as determined to be eligible for the National Registry of Historic places. The West Berkeley Shellmound site, completely encompassing the proposed 1900 Fourth Street site, is known to be the oldest bayside settlement in the San Francisco Bay Area, approximately 5700 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone people today. The draft EIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by massive community opposition voiced at the Dec 1st meeting of the Berkeley Landmark Preservation Committee. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to establish the archaeological reports and there has not been adequate peer review of the data in the draft EIR. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology of the 1900 Fourth Street EIR. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the EIR’s preparation. The primary consultant had multiple conflicts of interest, while a second Ohlone person repeatedly requesting inclusion was not consulted for the EIR. This manner of consultation with Ohlone people seems like a mere token gesture given the importance of this site to members of the Ohlone community. Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley "Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People" states in part: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site." On page 67, the Draft Environmental Impact Report states, "Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous people of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear weather or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound site is the series of murals and the small plaque in the parking lot under the freeway. Certainly the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone people to develop a major memorial and educational site at 1900 4th Street. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the five thousand years of history. Reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative! Sincerely, David Haupert Allen, Shannon From: Jenny Mulholland-Beahrs Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Commission. It was also listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, as well as determined to be eligible for the National Registry of Historic places. The West Berkeley Shellmound site, completely encompassing the proposed 1900 Fourth Street site, is known to be the oldest bayside settlement in the San Francisco Bay Area, approximately 5,700 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone people today. The draft EIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by massive community opposition voiced at the Dec 1st meeting of the Berkeley Landmark Preservation Committee. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to establish the archaeological reports and there has not been adequate peer review of the data in the draft EIR. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology of the 1900 Fourth Street EIR. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the EIR’s preparation. The primary consultant had multiple conflicts of interest, while a second Ohlone person repeatedly requesting inclusion was not consulted for the EIR. This manner of consultation with Ohlone people seems like a mere token gesture given the importance of this site to members of the Ohlone community. Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley "Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People" states in part: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site." On page 67, the Draft Environmental Impact Report states, "Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous people of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear weather or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound site is the series of murals and the small plaque in the parking lot under the freeway. Certainly the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone people to develop a major memorial and educational site at 1900 Fourth Street. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the 5,000 years of history. Reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative! Sincerely, Jenny Mulholland-Beahrs 1635 San Lorenzo Ave Berkeley, CA 94707 Allen, Shannon From: Milina Jovanovic RESPONSE TO THE BERKELEY SHELLMOUND PROPOSED PROJECT DRAFT EIR January 10, 2017 To: Berkeley City Manager's Office Dear All, I am writing in response to the Environmental Impact Report regarding the Proposed West Berkeley 1900 Fourth Street Project.This project would create such significant impacts on so many residents and practically erase a significant part of California's history. There is evidence that the Berkeley Shellmound represents the oldest recognized Bay Area human settlement. Berkeley Shellmound grounds should not be further disturbed under any circumstances and this project should not be allowed to move forward. The proposed mitigating strategies included in the EIR do not guarantee cultural preservation nor do they address impacts on West Berkeley neighborhoods in terms of air quality, traffic and noise levels in a satisfactory manner. Below are my major concerns regarding the Draft EIR: a) As described in the Draft EIR, the proposed construction could unearth previously unidentified intact Shellmound deposits that contribute to the resource's significance under the National Register and California Register. Even the Draft EIR recognizes that these impacts would have a substantial adverse change on the integrity of the historical resource. But the Draft EIR doesn't recognize that the Berkley Shellmound is a sacred site for the Ohlone people. In fact, it should be everyone's sacred site. Sacred sites and burial grounds should be left undisturbed. As the oldest known human settlement in the Bay Area, this should be a place that all of us proudly visit and cherish. Putting more cement on top of the Ohlone ancestors' burial grounds should not be a viable option. No multi-part mitigation measures could address these issues adequately. The proposed mitigation measures mentioned in the EIR draft do not work, even though they list possible participation of the Ohlone representatives. The Ohlone community members want this site to be left as is, so they could gather there undisturbed and visit their ancestral land. b) The traffic impact would be enormous. A new shopping center and a number of other objects would definitely slow down the traffic in these neighborhoods and create traffic jams. It has been recognized that the proposed Project would increase vehicle trips and intersection level of delay at the intersections of Fourth Street/Hearst Avenue (Intersection #2); Sixth Street/Hearst Avenue (Intersection #3); Sixth Street/University Avenue (Intersection #6); and San Pablo Avenue/University Avenue (Intersection #7). Installation of traffic lights is not an adequate remedy for these already busy streets and the Draft EIR is not convincing when it comes to addressing traffic congestion issues. My extended family members live in West Berkeley and this would make their commute to work at least 30 minutes longer each day. I also visit my daughter often and this would make my trips to West Berkeley much longer. c) The noise levels and traffic delays during construction would make the lives of residents and those who work in the vicinity very difficult for months. From reading the EIR I do not see how this could be truly mitigated. "Notification to neighbors and posting contacts for noise complaints on-site, DO NOT really reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level." They only give people a venue for voicing their complaints. I hope to receive a written response to my concerns listed above. While I am not a resident of Berkeley, my daughter is. This project would create great impacts on both of us, since I visit regularly. In fact, my daughter's whole family could be significantly impacted if this project moves forward as proposed. Thank you very much for your consideration. Milina Jovanovic, 107 Brahms Way Sunnyvale, CA Allen, Shannon From: Melinda Micco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¶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´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llen, Shannon From: Stephanie Dodaro ĞĂƌDƐ͘ůůĞŶĂŶĚĞƌŬĞůĞLJŝƚLJWůĂŶŶĞƌƐ͕ ƐƐŽŵĞŽŶĞǁŚŽǁĂƐďŽƌŶĂŶĚƌĂŝƐĞĚŝŶ^ĂŶ&ƌĂŶĐŝƐĐŽĂŶĚĂƚƚĞŶĚĞĚhĞƌŬĞůĞLJ͕/ĐĂƌĞĚĞĞƉůLJĂďŽƵƚƚŚĞƉĞŽƉůĞ͕ůĂŶĚ͕ ĂŶĚŚŝƐƚŽƌLJŽĨƚŚŝƐƌĞŐŝŽŶ͘/ƚΖƐŚĞĂƌƚďƌĞĂŬŝŶŐƚŚĂƚĞƌŬĞůĞLJ͕ĞƐƉĞĐŝĂůůLJǁŝƚŚŝƚƐĐŽŵŵŝƚŵĞŶƚƚŽŝŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐƉĞŽƉůĞƐ͕ǁŽƵůĚ ĐŽŶƐŝĚĞƌĚĞƐƚƌŽLJŝŶŐLJĞƚĂŶŽƚŚĞƌƐĂĐƌĞĚƐŝƚĞŽĨĨŝƌƐƚƉĞŽƉůĞƐ͘ƚϱ͕ϳϬϬLJĞĂƌƐŽůĚ͕ƚŚĞƐŝƚĞĂƚ ϭϵϬϬ&ŽƵƌƚŚ^ƚƌĞĞƚŝƐƉĞƌŚĂƉƐƚŚĞŽůĚĞƐƚŝŶƚŚĞǁŚŽůĞĂLJƌĞĂ͘/ƚΖƐ ϱ͕ϰϲϬLJĞĂƌƐŽůĚĞƌƚŚĂŶƚŚŝƐĐŽƵŶƚƌLJ͘ƌĞǁĞŐŽŝŶŐƚŽƚŚƌŽǁĂǁĂLJƚŚŝƐŝŶĐƌĞĚŝďůĞŚŝƐƚŽƌLJĨŽƌLJĞƚĂŶŽƚŚĞƌƚŚƌŽǁĂǁĂLJ ůŝǀĞͬǁŽƌŬĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ͕ĞƌĂƐĞŵŽƌĞůĞŐĂĐLJŽĨůŽĐĂůƚƌŝďĞƐ͍KŶ^ĞƉƚĞŵďĞƌϮϳ͕ϮϬϭϲ͕ƚŚĞŝƚLJŽƵŶĐŝůŝƐƐƵĞĚZĞƐŽůƵƚŝŽŶ EŽ͘ϲϳ͕ϲϵϰʹE͘^͘Η^ƵƉƉŽƌƚŝŶŐ^ƚĂŶĚŝŶŐZŽĐŬ^ŝŽƵdžWƌŽƚĞƐƚƐŐĂŝŶƐƚƚŚĞEŽƌƚŚĂŬŽƚĂĐĐĞƐƐWŝƉĞůŝŶĞ͕ΗĂĨŝŐŚƚƚŚĂƚǁĂƐ ďƌŽƵŐŚƚƚŽŝŶƚĞƌŶĂƚŝŽŶĂůĂƚƚĞŶƚŝŽŶďĞĐĂƵƐĞŽĨŵĞĚŝĂĐŽǀĞƌĂŐĞŽĨW>ŝŶƚĞŶƚŝŽŶĂůůLJĚĞƐƚƌŽLJĞĚƐĂĐƌĞĚƐŝƚĞƐŝŶĞĂƌůLJ ^ĞƉƚĞŵďĞƌ͘,ŽǁŝƐƚŚĂƚĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚϭϵϬϬ&ŽƵƌƚŚ^ƚƌĞĞƚƚŚĂƚĚŝĨĨĞƌĞŶƚĨƌŽŵW>ΖƐĞĨĨŽƌƚƐ͍tĞĂƌĞƐĞĂƌĐŚŝŶŐĨŽƌũƵƐƚŝĐĞ ŝŶƚŚŝƐĐŽƵŶƚƌLJΖƐŚŝŐŚĞƐƚŽĨĨŝĐĞƐ͕ďƵƚũƵƐƚŝĐĞďĞŐŝŶƐĂƚŚŽŵĞ͘dŚĞƐŝƚĞĂƚϭϵϬϬ&ŽƵƌƚŚǀĞŶƵĞƉƌĞƐĞŶƚƐĂŐƌĞĂƚŽƉƉŽƌƚƵŶŝƚLJ ƚŽĨŝŐŚƚĨŽƌũƵƐƚŝĐĞ͕ĂŶŝŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐͲůĞĚĞĨĨŽƌƚƚŽĐƌĞĂƚĞĂĐĞŶƚĞƌŽƌŵŽŶƵŵĞŶƚ͘dŚĞƉĞŽƉůĞŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJĐŽƵůĚƐƚĂŶĚƉƌŽƵĚ ŬŶŽǁŝŶŐƚŚĂƚƚŚĞLJĂƌĞŽŶĐĞĂŐĂŝŶŶĂƚŝŽŶĂůƚŚŽƵŐŚƚůĞĂĚĞƌƐ͕ƚĂŬŝŶŐƚƌƵĞƐƚĞƉƐƚŽŚŽŶŽƌƚŚĞŽŶŐŽŝŶŐůĞŐĂĐLJĂŶĚ ŬŶŽǁůĞĚŐĞŽĨůŽĐĂůƚƌŝďĞƐ͘ /ŚĂǀĞĚĞĞƉĐŽŶĐĞƌŶƐĂďŽƵƚƚŚĞĚƌĂĨƚ ŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂů/ŵƉĂĐƚZĞƉŽƌƚ; /ZͿĂŶĚƐƚƌŽŶŐůLJƵƌŐĞLJŽƵƚŽƌĞǀŝĞǁƚŚĞ /ZĂŶĚ ƉƌŽĐĞĚƵƌĞƐ͘dŚĞƐŝƚĞǁĂƐĚĞƐŝŐŶĂƚĞĚĂƐĂŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJ>ĂŶĚŵĂƌŬηϮϮϳďLJƚŚĞ>ĂŶĚŵĂƌŬƐŽŵŵŝƐƐŝŽŶ͘/ƚǁĂƐĂůƐŽ ůŝƐƚĞĚŝŶƚŚĞĂůŝĨŽƌŶŝĂ^ƚĂƚĞZĞŐŝƐƚƌLJŽĨ,ŝƐƚŽƌŝĐWůĂĐĞƐ͕ĂƐǁĞůůĂƐĚĞƚĞƌŵŝŶĞĚƚŽďĞĞůŝŐŝďůĞĨŽƌƚŚĞEĂƚŝŽŶĂůZĞŐŝƐƚƌLJŽĨ ,ŝƐƚŽƌŝĐƉůĂĐĞƐ͘dŚĞtĞƐƚĞƌŬĞůĞLJ^ŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚƐŝƚĞ͕ĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞůLJĞŶĐŽŵƉĂƐƐŝŶŐƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚϭϵϬϬ&ŽƵƌƚŚ^ƚƌĞĞƚƐŝƚĞ͕ŝƐ ŬŶŽǁŶƚŽďĞƚŚĞŽůĚĞƐƚďĂLJƐŝĚĞƐĞƚƚůĞŵĞŶƚŝŶƚŚĞ^ĂŶ&ƌĂŶĐŝƐĐŽĂLJƌĞĂ͕ĂƉƉƌŽdžŝŵĂƚĞůLJϱϳϬϬLJĞĂƌƐŽůĚ͘/ƚŝƐƚŚĞƚƌƵĞ ďŝƌƚŚƉůĂĐĞŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJ͘ /ƚĐŽŶƚŝŶƵĞƐƚŽďĞŽĨƵƚŵŽƐƚƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶĐĞĂƐĂĐĞƌĞŵŽŶŝĂůĐĞŶƚĞƌƚŽƚŚĞKŚůŽŶĞƉĞŽƉůĞƚŽĚĂLJ͘ dŚĞĚƌĂĨƚ /ZŝƐŚĞĂǀŝůLJĚŝƐƉƵƚĞĚ͕ĂƐƌĞǀĞĂůĞĚďLJŵĂƐƐŝǀĞĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJŽƉƉŽƐŝƚŝŽŶǀŽŝĐĞĚĂƚƚŚĞĞĐϭƐƚŵĞĞƚŝŶŐŽĨƚŚĞ ĞƌŬĞůĞLJ>ĂŶĚŵĂƌŬWƌĞƐĞƌǀĂƚŝŽŶŽŵŵŝƚƚĞĞ͘dŚĞƌĞŝƐƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶƚĐŽŶƚƌŽǀĞƌƐLJƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐƚŚĞŵĞƚŚŽĚŽůŽŐLJƵƐĞĚƚŽ ĞƐƚĂďůŝƐŚƚŚĞĂƌĐŚĂĞŽůŽŐŝĐĂůƌĞƉŽƌƚƐĂŶĚƚŚĞƌĞŚĂƐŶŽƚďĞĞŶĂĚĞƋƵĂƚĞƉĞĞƌƌĞǀŝĞǁŽĨƚŚĞĚĂƚĂŝŶƚŚĞĚƌĂĨƚ /Z͘WĂƐƚ ĞdžĐĂǀĂƚŝŽŶƐŝŶĂŶĚĂƌŽƵŶĚƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚƐŝƚĞŚĂǀĞƵŶĐŽǀĞƌĞĚŚƵŵĂŶďƵƌŝĂůƐĂŶĚƵŶĚŝƐƚƵƌďĞĚĐƵůƚƵƌĂůƌĞŵĂŝŶƐ͘dŚĞ ƌĞƉŽƌƚĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞůLJĨĂŝůƐƚŽĂĚĚƌĞƐƐƌĞŵĂŝŶƐƐƉĞĐŝĨŝĐĂůůLJĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚĞĚŝŶƚŚĞ /ZĨŽƌƚŚĞĂĚũĂĐĞŶƚ'ƌŽĐĞƌLJKƵƚůĞƚƐŝƚĞƚŚĂƚŝƐ ƉĂƌƚŽĨƚŚĞƐĂŵĞ>ĂŶĚŵĂƌŬ^ŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚƐŝƚĞ͘ dŚŝƐĐŽŶƐƚŝƚƵƚĞƐĂƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶƚŽǀĞƌƐŝŐŚƚĂŶĚŝŶĂĐĐƵƌĂĐLJŝŶƚŚĞŵĞƚŚŽĚŽůŽŐLJŽĨƚŚĞϭϵϬϬ&ŽƵƌƚŚ^ƚƌĞĞƚ /Z͘ &ƵƌƚŚĞƌŵŽƌĞ͕ƚŚĞƌĞŚĂƐŶŽƚďĞĞŶĂĚĞƋƵĂƚĞƚƌŝďĂůĐŽŶƐƵůƚĂƚŝŽŶŝŶƚŚĞ /Z͛ƐƉƌĞƉĂƌĂƚŝŽŶ͘dŚĞƉƌŝŵĂƌLJĐŽŶƐƵůƚĂŶƚŚĂĚ ŵƵůƚŝƉůĞĐŽŶĨůŝĐƚƐŽĨŝŶƚĞƌĞƐƚ͕ǁŚŝůĞĂƐĞĐŽŶĚKŚůŽŶĞƉĞƌƐŽŶƌĞƉĞĂƚĞĚůLJƌĞƋƵĞƐƚŝŶŐŝŶĐůƵƐŝŽŶǁĂƐŶŽƚĐŽŶƐƵůƚĞĚĨŽƌƚŚĞ /Z͘dŚŝƐŵĂŶŶĞƌŽĨĐŽŶƐƵůƚĂƚŝŽŶǁŝƚŚKŚůŽŶĞƉĞŽƉůĞƐĞĞŵƐůŝŬĞĂŵĞƌĞƚŽŬĞŶŐĞƐƚƵƌĞŐŝǀĞŶƚŚĞŝŵƉŽƌƚĂŶĐĞŽĨƚŚŝƐƐŝƚĞ ƚŽŵĞŵďĞƌƐŽĨƚŚĞKŚůŽŶĞĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJ͘ ZĞƐŽůƵƚŝŽŶEŽ͘ϲϳ͕ϯϱϯͲE^ŽĨƚŚĞŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJΗ,ŽŶŽƌĞƌŬĞůĞLJ^ŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚ/ŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐ^ĂĐƌĞĚ^ŝƚĞ͕hĞƌŬĞůĞLJ ZĞƚƵƌŶŶĐĞƐƚƌĂůZĞŵĂŝŶƐƚŽKŚůŽŶĞWĞŽƉůĞΗƐƚĂƚĞƐŝŶƉĂƌƚ͗Η /d&hZd, ZZ ^K>s ƚŚĂƚĨƌĞĞ͕ƉƌŝŽƌ͕ĂŶĚŝŶĨŽƌŵĞĚ ĐŽŶƐĞŶƚŽĨƚŚĞKŚůŽŶĞĂŶĚŽƚŚĞƌŝŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐƉĞŽƉůĞƐŽĨƚŚĞƌĞŐŝŽŶďĞŝŶƚĞŐƌĂůƚŽĂŶLJĂůƚĞƌĂƚŝŽŶƉůĂŶŶŝŶŐĨŽƌƚŚĞĞƌŬĞůĞLJ ^ŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚƐĂĐƌĞĚƐŝƚĞ͕ŝŶĂĐĐŽƌĚĂŶĐĞǁŝƚŚƚŚĞƉƌŽǀŝƐŝŽŶƐŽĨƚŚĞhŶŝƚĞĚEĂƚŝŽŶƐĞĐůĂƌĂƚŝŽŶŽŶƚŚĞZŝŐŚƚƐŽĨ/ŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐ WĞŽƉůĞ͕ĂŶĚĐĂůůƐƵƉŽŶĂůůƉĂƌƚŝĞƐƚŽĨŽůůŽǁƚŚĞƉƌŝŶĐŝƉůĞƐŽĨƚŚĞĞĐůĂƌĂƚŝŽŶǁŝƚŚƌĞƐƉĞĐƚƚŽƚŚĞtĞƐƚĞƌŬĞůĞLJ ^ŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚƐŝƚĞ͘Η KŶƉĂŐĞϲϳ͕ƚŚĞƌĂĨƚ ŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂů/ŵƉĂĐƚZĞƉŽƌƚƐƚĂƚĞƐ͕ΗŽŶƐƵůƚĂƚŝŽŶǁŝƚŚƚŚĞKŚůŽŶĞ/ŶĚŝĂŶdƌŝďĞ͕ĐŽŶĚƵĐƚĞĚ ƉƵƌƐƵĂŶƚƚŽϱϮ͕ǁĂƐĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚĨŽƌƚŚĞWƌŽũĞĐƚĂŶĚŵŝƚŝŐĂƚŝŽŶŵĞĂƐƵƌĞƐĂƌĞƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĞĚ͕ĂƐĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞ͘͟ hŶĨŽƌƚƵŶĂƚĞůLJ͕ƚŚŝƐŝƐŽŶůLJŽŶĞƚƌŝďĂůĞŶƚŝƚLJĂŶĚƚŚĞƌĞƐŽůƵƚŝŽŶǀĞƌLJĐůĞĂƌůLJƐƚĂƚĞƐƚŚĂƚŝƚƐŚŽƵůĚĂůƐŽŝŶĐůƵĚĞŽƚŚĞƌ ŝŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐƉĞŽƉůĞŽĨƚŚĞƌĞŐŝŽŶ͖ƚŚĞŽŶĨĞĚĞƌĂƚĞĚsŝůůĂŐĞƐŽĨ>ŝƐũĂŶ͕ĨŽƌĞdžĂŵƉůĞ͕ƐŚŽƵůĚďĞŐŝǀĞŶƚŚĞƐĂŵĞĨŽƌŵĂů ĐŽŶƐƵůƚĂƚŝŽŶƉƌŽĐĞƐƐĂƐKŚůŽŶĞdƌŝďĞ/ŶĐ͘/ƚŝƐĂůƐŽƵŶĐůĞĂƌǁĞĂƚŚĞƌŽƌŶŽƚƚŚĞŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJĨŽůůŽǁĞĚ^ϭϴǁŚŝĐŚ ƐƚĂƚĞƐƚŚĂƚǁŚĞŶĂĐŝƚLJŽƌĐŽƵŶƚLJĂĚŽƉƚƐŽƌĂŵĞŶĚƐƚŚĞŝƌŐĞŶĞƌĂůƉůĂŶƚŚĞdƌŝďĞƐĨƌŽŵƚŚĞĂƌĞĂŵƵƐƚďĞĐŽŶƐƵůƚĞĚ͕ ǁŚĞƚŚĞƌĨĞĚĞƌĂůůLJƌĞĐŽŐŶŝnjĞĚŽƌŶŽƚ͘dŚĞŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJŚĂƐĂŵĞŶĚĞĚƚŚĞŝƌŚŽƵƐŝŶŐĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƉůĂŶŶƵŵĞƌŽƵƐƚŝŵĞƐ ƐŝŶĐĞƚŚĞůĂǁǁĂƐƉƵƚŝŶƚŽĂĨĨĞĐƚŝŶϮϬϬϱ͕ĂŶĚƚŚĞƌĞŝƐŶŽƉƌŽŽĨƚŚĂƚdƌŝďĞƐǁĞƌĞŝŶĐůƵĚĞĚŝŶĐŽŶƐƵůƚĂƚŝŽŶƉƌŝŽƌƚŽ ĂŵĞŶĚŝŶŐƚŚŝƐƉĂƌƚŽĨƚŚĞŐĞŶĞƌĂůƉůĂŶ͘ ƚƚŚŝƐƉŽŝŶƚ͕ƚŚĞŽŶůLJŽĨĨŝĐŝĂůƌĞĐŽŐŶŝƚŝŽŶŽĨƚŚŝƐƐĂĐƌĞĚƐŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚƐŝƚĞŝƐƚŚĞƐĞƌŝĞƐŽĨŵƵƌĂůƐĂŶĚƚŚĞƐŵĂůůƉůĂƋƵĞŝŶ ƚŚĞƉĂƌŬŝŶŐůŽƚƵŶĚĞƌƚŚĞĨƌĞĞǁĂLJ͘ĞƌƚĂŝŶůLJƚŚĞŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJǁŽƵůĚďĞŶĞĨŝƚĨƌŽŵƚƌƵůLJŵĞĂŶŝŶŐĨƵůƉƵďůŝĐ ĂĐŬŶŽǁůĞĚŐĞŵĞŶƚŽĨŝƚƐKŚůŽŶĞƉĂƐƚ͕ƉƌĞƐĞŶƚ͕ĂŶĚĨƵƚƵƌĞďLJǁŽƌŬŝŶŐǁŝƚŚůŽĐĂůKŚůŽŶĞƉĞŽƉůĞƚŽĚĞǀĞůŽƉĂŵĂũŽƌ ŵĞŵŽƌŝĂůĂŶĚĞĚƵĐĂƚŝŽŶĂůƐŝƚĞĂƚϭϵϬϬϰƚŚ^ƚƌĞĞƚ͘ dŚŝƐŝƐĂĐůĞĂƌŽƉƉŽƌƚƵŶŝƚLJĨŽƌƚŚĞŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJƚŽĨŽůůŽǁƚŚƌŽƵŐŚŽŶŝƚƐƌĞƐŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐƚŽŚŽŶŽƌĂŶĚƉƌŽƚĞĐƚƐĂĐƌĞĚƐŝƚĞƐ ĂŶĚƚŚĞƌŝŐŚƚƐŽĨ/ŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐƉĞŽƉůĞƐ͘/ŝŵƉůŽƌĞĞƌŬĞůĞLJƚŽƚĂŬĞĂƐƚĂŶĚĂŐĂŝŶƐƚƚŚŝƐĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶƚŚĂƚǁŝůůďĞŶĞĨŝƚ ǁĞĂůƚŚLJĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞƌƐĂƚƚŚĞĞdžƉĞŶƐĞŽĨƚŚĞĨŝǀĞƚŚŽƵƐĂŶĚLJĞĂƌƐŽĨŚŝƐƚŽƌLJ͘ZĞũĞĐƚƚŚĞ /ZĂŶĚĞŵďƌĂĐĞƚŚĞEŽWůĂŶ ůƚĞƌŶĂƚŝǀĞ͊ dŚĂŶŬLJŽƵǀĞƌLJŵƵĐŚĨŽƌLJŽƵƌƚŝŵĞĂŶĚĂƚƚĞŶƚŝŽŶ͘ ^ŝŶĐĞƌĞůLJ͕ ^ƚĞƉŚĂŶŝĞŽĚĂƌŽ Allen, Shannon From: T. Matthews Yes...Tao here / Cherokee Nation...standing with Shellmound Group to oppose "development" on these Sacred Grounds. Thank You for your support -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP DGHOLWDJRQ]DOHV DGHOLWDJRQ]DOHV#JPDLOFRP! 6HQW :HGQHVGD\-DQXDU\ 30 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW 'HVWUXFWLRQRIVDFUHG2KORQHVLJKWV Attn: Shannon Allen City of Berkeley City Planning 1947 Center Street, 2nd Floor Berkeley, CA 94704 Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Commission. It was also listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, as well as determined to be eligible for the National Registry of Historic places. The West Berkeley Shellmound site, completely encompassing the proposed 1900 Fourth Street site, is known to be the oldest bayside settlement in the San Francisco Bay Area, approximately 5700 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone people today. The draft EIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by massive community opposition voiced at the Dec 1st meeting of the Berkeley Landmark Preservation Committee. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to establish the archaeological reports and there has not been adequate peer review of the data in the draft EIR. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology of the 1900 Fourth Street EIR. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the EIR’s preparation. The primary consultant had multiple conflicts of interest, while a second Ohlone person repeatedly requesting inclusion was not consulted for the EIR. This manner of consultation with Ohlone people seems like a mere token gesture given the importance of this site to members of the Ohlone community. Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley "Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People" states in part: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site." On page 67, the Draft Environmental Impact Report states, "Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous people of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear weather or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound site is the series of murals and the small plaque in the parking lot under the freeway. Certainly the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone people to develop a major memorial and educational site at 1900 4th Street. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the five thousand years of history. Reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative! Sincerely, Adelita Gonzales -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP HOL]DEHWKPH]D PH]DHOL]DEHWK#JPDLOFRP! 6HQW :HGQHVGD\-DQXDU\ 30 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW 2KORQHEXULDOVLWH Please save the ohlone burial site! Do not develop on sacred land!! Allen, Shannon From: Planning Dept. Mailbox Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2017 10:33 AM To: Allen, Shannon Subject: FW: Attn: Shannon Allen City of Berkeley Planning Commission ͲͲͲͲͲKƌŝŐŝŶĂůDĞƐƐĂŐĞͲͲͲͲͲ &ƌŽŵ͗>ĞĞWŽŶŽŵĂŝůƚŽ͗ůĂŝůĂϴϵϴϵΛŝĐůŽƵĚ͘ĐŽŵ ^ĞŶƚ͗tĞĚŶĞƐĚĂLJ͕:ĂŶƵĂƌLJϭϭ͕ϮϬϭϳϳ͗ϬϭD dŽ͗WůĂŶŶŝŶŐĞƉƚ͘DĂŝůďŽdžфWůĂŶŶŝŶŐΛĐŝ͘ďĞƌŬĞůĞLJ͘ĐĂ͘ƵƐх ^ƵďũĞĐƚ͗ƚƚŶ͗^ŚĂŶŶŽŶůůĞŶŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJWůĂŶŶŝŶŐŽŵŵŝƐƐŝŽŶ /ĂŵǁƌŝƚŝŶŐƚŽĞdžƉƌĞƐƐŵLJƐƵƉƉŽƌƚƚŽŚĂǀĞƚŚĞtĞƐƚĞƌŬĞůĞLJ^ŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚŽŶϭϵϬϬϰƚŚƐƚƌĞĞƚďĞƉƌĞǀĞŶƚĞĚĨƌŽŵ ĨƵƌƚŚĞƌĐŽŵŵĞƌĐŝĂůĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ͘/ĂƐŬƚŚĂƚƚŚĂƚƚŚĞ^ŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚǁŚŝĐŚǁĂƐĚĞƐŝŐŶĂƚĞĚĂƐĂŚŝƐƚŽƌŝĐƐŝƚĞŶŽƚŽŶůLJďLJƚŚĞ ŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJĂƐǁĞůůĂƐďLJƚŚĞ^ƚĂƚĞŽĨĂůŝĨŽƌŶŝĂďĞƉƌŽƚĞĐƚĞĚ͘ dŚŝƐ^ŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚŝƐŶŽƚŽŶůLJŝŵƉŽƌƚĂŶƚĨŽƌƚŚĞKŚůŽŶĞƚƌŝďĞƐďƵƚdŽůůKĨhƐĂƐǁĞůůĂŶĚĨŽƌĨƵƚƵƌĞŐĞŶĞƌĂƚŝŽŶƐ͘ ^ŝŶĐĞƌĞůLJ͕ DƐ͘>ĞĞWŽŶŽ ^ĞŶƚĨƌŽŵŵLJŝWŚŽŶĞ -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP 6WHSKDQ&UDZIRUG VFUDZIRUG#PDLOER[RUJ! 6HQW :HGQHVGD\-DQXDU\ 30 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW 6KHOOPRXQGVLWH ƚƚŶ͗^ŚĂŶŶŽŶůůĞŶ ŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJŝƚLJWůĂŶŶŝŶŐ ϭϵϰϳĞŶƚĞƌ^ƚƌĞĞƚ͕ϮŶĚ&ůŽŽƌ ĞƌŬĞůĞLJ͕ϵϰϳϬϰ ĞĂƌDƐ͘ůůĞŶĂŶĚĞƌŬĞůĞLJŝƚLJWůĂŶŶĞƌƐ͗ /ĂŵǁƌŝƚŝŶŐƚŽĞdžƉƌĞƐƐŵLJĚĞĞƉĐŽŶĐĞƌŶƐĂďŽƵƚƚŚĞĚƌĂĨƚ ŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂů/ŵƉĂĐƚZĞƉŽƌƚ; /ZͿƌĞŐĂƌĚŝŶŐϭϵϬϬ&ŽƵƌƚŚ ^ƚƌĞĞƚ͘dŚĞƐŝƚĞǁĂƐĚĞƐŝŐŶĂƚĞĚĂƐĂŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJ>ĂŶĚŵĂƌŬηϮϮϳďLJƚŚĞ>ĂŶĚŵĂƌŬƐŽŵŵŝƐƐŝŽŶ͘/ƚǁĂƐĂůƐŽůŝƐƚĞĚŝŶ ƚŚĞĂůŝĨŽƌŶŝĂ^ƚĂƚĞZĞŐŝƐƚƌLJŽĨ,ŝƐƚŽƌŝĐWůĂĐĞƐ͕ĂƐǁĞůůĂƐĚĞƚĞƌŵŝŶĞĚƚŽďĞĞůŝŐŝďůĞĨŽƌƚŚĞEĂƚŝŽŶĂůZĞŐŝƐƚƌLJŽĨ,ŝƐƚŽƌŝĐ ƉůĂĐĞƐ͘dŚĞtĞƐƚĞƌŬĞůĞLJ^ŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚƐŝƚĞ͕ĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞůLJĞŶĐŽŵƉĂƐƐŝŶŐƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚϭϵϬϬ&ŽƵƌƚŚ^ƚƌĞĞƚƐŝƚĞ͕ŝƐŬŶŽǁŶƚŽ ďĞƚŚĞŽůĚĞƐƚďĂLJƐŝĚĞƐĞƚƚůĞŵĞŶƚŝŶƚŚĞ^ĂŶ&ƌĂŶĐŝƐĐŽĂLJƌĞĂ͕ĂƉƉƌŽdžŝŵĂƚĞůLJϱϳϬϬLJĞĂƌƐŽůĚ͘/ƚŝƐƚŚĞƚƌƵĞďŝƌƚŚƉůĂĐĞŽĨ ĞƌŬĞůĞLJ͘ /ƚĐŽŶƚŝŶƵĞƐƚŽďĞŽĨƵƚŵŽƐƚƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶĐĞĂƐĂĐĞƌĞŵŽŶŝĂůĐĞŶƚĞƌƚŽƚŚĞKŚůŽŶĞƉĞŽƉůĞƚŽĚĂLJ͘ dŚĞĚƌĂĨƚ /ZŝƐŚĞĂǀŝůLJĚŝƐƉƵƚĞĚ͕ĂƐƌĞǀĞĂůĞĚďLJŵĂƐƐŝǀĞĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJŽƉƉŽƐŝƚŝŽŶǀŽŝĐĞĚĂƚƚŚĞĞĐϭƐƚŵĞĞƚŝŶŐŽĨƚŚĞ ĞƌŬĞůĞLJ>ĂŶĚŵĂƌŬWƌĞƐĞƌǀĂƚŝŽŶŽŵŵŝƚƚĞĞ͘dŚĞƌĞŝƐƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶƚĐŽŶƚƌŽǀĞƌƐLJƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐƚŚĞŵĞƚŚŽĚŽůŽŐLJƵƐĞĚƚŽ ĞƐƚĂďůŝƐŚƚŚĞĂƌĐŚĂĞŽůŽŐŝĐĂůƌĞƉŽƌƚƐĂŶĚƚŚĞƌĞŚĂƐŶŽƚďĞĞŶĂĚĞƋƵĂƚĞƉĞĞƌƌĞǀŝĞǁŽĨƚŚĞĚĂƚĂŝŶƚŚĞĚƌĂĨƚ /Z͘WĂƐƚ ĞdžĐĂǀĂƚŝŽŶƐŝŶĂŶĚĂƌŽƵŶĚƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚƐŝƚĞŚĂǀĞƵŶĐŽǀĞƌĞĚŚƵŵĂŶďƵƌŝĂůƐĂŶĚƵŶĚŝƐƚƵƌďĞĚĐƵůƚƵƌĂůƌĞŵĂŝŶƐ͘dŚĞ ƌĞƉŽƌƚĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞůLJĨĂŝůƐƚŽĂĚĚƌĞƐƐƌĞŵĂŝŶƐƐƉĞĐŝĨŝĐĂůůLJĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚĞĚŝŶƚŚĞ /ZĨŽƌƚŚĞĂĚũĂĐĞŶƚ'ƌŽĐĞƌLJKƵƚůĞƚƐŝƚĞƚŚĂƚŝƐ ƉĂƌƚŽĨƚŚĞƐĂŵĞ>ĂŶĚŵĂƌŬ^ŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚƐŝƚĞ͘ dŚŝƐĐŽŶƐƚŝƚƵƚĞƐĂƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶƚŽǀĞƌƐŝŐŚƚĂŶĚŝŶĂĐĐƵƌĂĐLJŝŶƚŚĞŵĞƚŚŽĚŽůŽŐLJŽĨƚŚĞϭϵϬϬ&ŽƵƌƚŚ^ƚƌĞĞƚ /Z͘ &ƵƌƚŚĞƌŵŽƌĞ͕ƚŚĞƌĞŚĂƐŶŽƚďĞĞŶĂĚĞƋƵĂƚĞƚƌŝďĂůĐŽŶƐƵůƚĂƚŝŽŶŝŶƚŚĞ /Z͛ƐƉƌĞƉĂƌĂƚŝŽŶ͘dŚĞƉƌŝŵĂƌLJĐŽŶƐƵůƚĂŶƚŚĂĚ ŵƵůƚŝƉůĞĐŽŶĨůŝĐƚƐŽĨŝŶƚĞƌĞƐƚ͕ǁŚŝůĞĂƐĞĐŽŶĚKŚůŽŶĞƉĞƌƐŽŶƌĞƉĞĂƚĞĚůLJƌĞƋƵĞƐƚŝŶŐŝŶĐůƵƐŝŽŶǁĂƐŶŽƚĐŽŶƐƵůƚĞĚĨŽƌƚŚĞ /Z͘dŚŝƐŵĂŶŶĞƌŽĨĐŽŶƐƵůƚĂƚŝŽŶǁŝƚŚKŚůŽŶĞƉĞŽƉůĞƐĞĞŵƐůŝŬĞĂŵĞƌĞƚŽŬĞŶŐĞƐƚƵƌĞŐŝǀĞŶƚŚĞŝŵƉŽƌƚĂŶĐĞŽĨƚŚŝƐƐŝƚĞ ƚŽŵĞŵďĞƌƐŽĨƚŚĞKŚůŽŶĞĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJ͘ ZĞƐŽůƵƚŝŽŶEŽ͘ϲϳ͕ϯϱϯͲE^ŽĨƚŚĞŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJΗ,ŽŶŽƌĞƌŬĞůĞLJ^ŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚ/ŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐ^ĂĐƌĞĚ^ŝƚĞ͕hĞƌŬĞůĞLJ ZĞƚƵƌŶŶĐĞƐƚƌĂůZĞŵĂŝŶƐƚŽKŚůŽŶĞWĞŽƉůĞΗƐƚĂƚĞƐŝŶƉĂƌƚ͗Η /d&hZd, ZZ ^K>s ƚŚĂƚĨƌĞĞ͕ƉƌŝŽƌ͕ĂŶĚŝŶĨŽƌŵĞĚ ĐŽŶƐĞŶƚŽĨƚŚĞKŚůŽŶĞĂŶĚŽƚŚĞƌŝŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐƉĞŽƉůĞƐŽĨƚŚĞƌĞŐŝŽŶďĞŝŶƚĞŐƌĂůƚŽĂŶLJĂůƚĞƌĂƚŝŽŶƉůĂŶŶŝŶŐĨŽƌƚŚĞĞƌŬĞůĞLJ ^ŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚƐĂĐƌĞĚƐŝƚĞ͕ŝŶĂĐĐŽƌĚĂŶĐĞǁŝƚŚƚŚĞƉƌŽǀŝƐŝŽŶƐŽĨƚŚĞhŶŝƚĞĚEĂƚŝŽŶƐĞĐůĂƌĂƚŝŽŶŽŶƚŚĞZŝŐŚƚƐŽĨ/ŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐ WĞŽƉůĞ͕ĂŶĚĐĂůůƐƵƉŽŶĂůůƉĂƌƚŝĞƐƚŽĨŽůůŽǁƚŚĞƉƌŝŶĐŝƉůĞƐŽĨƚŚĞĞĐůĂƌĂƚŝŽŶǁŝƚŚƌĞƐƉĞĐƚƚŽƚŚĞtĞƐƚĞƌŬĞůĞLJ ^ŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚƐŝƚĞ͘Η KŶƉĂŐĞϲϳ͕ƚŚĞƌĂĨƚ ŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂů/ŵƉĂĐƚZĞƉŽƌƚƐƚĂƚĞƐ͕ΗŽŶƐƵůƚĂƚŝŽŶǁŝƚŚƚŚĞKŚůŽŶĞ/ŶĚŝĂŶdƌŝďĞ͕ĐŽŶĚƵĐƚĞĚ ƉƵƌƐƵĂŶƚƚŽϱϮ͕ǁĂƐĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚĨŽƌƚŚĞWƌŽũĞĐƚĂŶĚŵŝƚŝŐĂƚŝŽŶŵĞĂƐƵƌĞƐĂƌĞƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĞĚ͕ĂƐĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞ͘͟ hŶĨŽƌƚƵŶĂƚĞůLJ͕ƚŚŝƐŝƐŽŶůLJŽŶĞƚƌŝďĂůĞŶƚŝƚLJĂŶĚƚŚĞƌĞƐŽůƵƚŝŽŶǀĞƌLJĐůĞĂƌůLJƐƚĂƚĞƐƚŚĂƚŝƚƐŚŽƵůĚĂůƐŽŝŶĐůƵĚĞŽƚŚĞƌ ŝŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐƉĞŽƉůĞŽĨƚŚĞƌĞŐŝŽŶ͖ƚŚĞŽŶĨĞĚĞƌĂƚĞĚsŝůůĂŐĞƐŽĨ>ŝƐũĂŶ͕ĨŽƌĞdžĂŵƉůĞ͕ƐŚŽƵůĚďĞŐŝǀĞŶƚŚĞƐĂŵĞĨŽƌŵĂů ĐŽŶƐƵůƚĂƚŝŽŶƉƌŽĐĞƐƐĂƐKŚůŽŶĞdƌŝďĞ/ŶĐ͘/ƚŝƐĂůƐŽƵŶĐůĞĂƌǁĞĂƚŚĞƌŽƌŶŽƚƚŚĞŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJĨŽůůŽǁĞĚ^ϭϴǁŚŝĐŚ ƐƚĂƚĞƐƚŚĂƚǁŚĞŶĂĐŝƚLJŽƌĐŽƵŶƚLJĂĚŽƉƚƐŽƌĂŵĞŶĚƐƚŚĞŝƌŐĞŶĞƌĂůƉůĂŶƚŚĞdƌŝďĞƐĨƌŽŵƚŚĞĂƌĞĂŵƵƐƚďĞĐŽŶƐƵůƚĞĚ͕ ǁŚĞƚŚĞƌĨĞĚĞƌĂůůLJƌĞĐŽŐŶŝnjĞĚŽƌŶŽƚ͘dŚĞŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJŚĂƐĂŵĞŶĚĞĚƚŚĞŝƌŚŽƵƐŝŶŐĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƉůĂŶŶƵŵĞƌŽƵƐƚŝŵĞƐ ƐŝŶĐĞƚŚĞůĂǁǁĂƐƉƵƚŝŶƚŽĂĨĨĞĐƚŝŶϮϬϬϱ͕ĂŶĚƚŚĞƌĞŝƐŶŽƉƌŽŽĨƚŚĂƚdƌŝďĞƐǁĞƌĞŝŶĐůƵĚĞĚŝŶĐŽŶƐƵůƚĂƚŝŽŶƉƌŝŽƌƚŽ ĂŵĞŶĚŝŶŐƚŚŝƐƉĂƌƚŽĨƚŚĞŐĞŶĞƌĂůƉůĂŶ͘ ƚƚŚŝƐƉŽŝŶƚ͕ƚŚĞŽŶůLJŽĨĨŝĐŝĂůƌĞĐŽŐŶŝƚŝŽŶŽĨƚŚŝƐƐĂĐƌĞĚƐŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚƐŝƚĞŝƐƚŚĞƐĞƌŝĞƐŽĨŵƵƌĂůƐĂŶĚƚŚĞƐŵĂůůƉůĂƋƵĞŝŶ ƚŚĞƉĂƌŬŝŶŐůŽƚƵŶĚĞƌƚŚĞĨƌĞĞǁĂLJ͘ĞƌƚĂŝŶůLJƚŚĞŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJǁŽƵůĚďĞŶĞĨŝƚĨƌŽŵƚƌƵůLJŵĞĂŶŝŶŐĨƵůƉƵďůŝĐ ĂĐŬŶŽǁůĞĚŐĞŵĞŶƚŽĨŝƚƐKŚůŽŶĞƉĂƐƚ͕ƉƌĞƐĞŶƚ͕ĂŶĚĨƵƚƵƌĞďLJǁŽƌŬŝŶŐǁŝƚŚůŽĐĂůKŚůŽŶĞƉĞŽƉůĞƚŽĚĞǀĞůŽƉĂŵĂũŽƌ ŵĞŵŽƌŝĂůĂŶĚĞĚƵĐĂƚŝŽŶĂůƐŝƚĞĂƚϭϵϬϬϰƚŚ^ƚƌĞĞƚ͘ dŚŝƐŝƐĂĐůĞĂƌŽƉƉŽƌƚƵŶŝƚLJĨŽƌƚŚĞŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJƚŽĨŽůůŽǁƚŚƌŽƵŐŚŽŶŝƚƐƌĞƐŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐƚŽŚŽŶŽƌĂŶĚƉƌŽƚĞĐƚƐĂĐƌĞĚƐŝƚĞƐ ĂŶĚƚŚĞƌŝŐŚƚƐŽĨ/ŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐƉĞŽƉůĞƐ͘/ŝŵƉůŽƌĞĞƌŬĞůĞLJƚŽƚĂŬĞĂƐƚĂŶĚĂŐĂŝŶƐƚƚŚŝƐĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶƚŚĂƚǁŝůůďĞŶĞĨŝƚ ǁĞĂůƚŚLJĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞƌƐĂƚƚŚĞĞdžƉĞŶƐĞŽĨƚŚĞĨŝǀĞƚŚŽƵƐĂŶĚLJĞĂƌƐŽĨŚŝƐƚŽƌLJ͘ZĞũĞĐƚƚŚĞ /ZĂŶĚĞŵďƌĂĐĞƚŚĞEŽWůĂŶ ůƚĞƌŶĂƚŝǀĞ͊ ^ŝŶĐĞƌĞůLJ͕ ^ƚĞƉŚĂŶƌĂǁĨŽƌĚ Allen, Shannon From: Tierra Allen Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Commission. It was also listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, as well as determined to be eligible for the National Registry of Historic places. The West Berkeley Shellmound site, completely encompassing the proposed 1900 Fourth Street site, is known to be the oldest bayside settlement in the San Francisco Bay Area, approximately 5700 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone people today. The draft EIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by massive community opposition voiced at the Dec 1st meeting of the Berkeley Landmark Preservation Committee. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to establish the archaeological reports and there has not been adequate peer review of the data in the draft EIR. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology of the 1900 Fourth Street EIR. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the EIR’s preparation. The primary consultant had multiple conflicts of interest, while a second Ohlone person repeatedly requesting inclusion was not consulted for the EIR. This manner of consultation with Ohlone people seems like a mere token gesture given the importance of this site to members of the Ohlone community. Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley "Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People" states in part: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site.” On page 67, the Draft Environmental Impact Report states, "Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous people of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear weather or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound site is the series of murals and the small plaque in the parking lot under the freeway. Certainly the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone people to develop a major memorial and educational site at 1900 4th Street. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the five thousand years of history. Reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative! Sincerely, Tierra Allem Sustainable Economies Law Center Executive Director January 12, 2017 Janelle Orsi Attn: Shannon Allen Director of Organizational City of Berkeley City Planning Resilience 1947 Center Street, 2nd Floor Chris Tittle Berkeley, CA 94704 Re: 1900 Fourth Street Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Board of Directors Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: President: Chris Tittle On behalf of the Sustainable Economies Law Center, I write to express my sincere concerns about the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding Secretary 1900 Fourth Street, and urge you to see this as a historic opportunity to protect Sushil Jacob and promote a living Native American sacred site. Particularly given the national and international attention to issues of Native American rights, Treasurer: honoring the sacred West Berkeley Shellmound and burial site of the First Linda Barrera Nations people of Berkeley could set a compelling example for other cities. Members at Large: The West Berkeley Shellmound, known to be the oldest bayside settlement in Farzana Serang the San Francisco Bay Area, was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # Adrien Salazar 227 by the Landmarks Commission. It was also listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, as well as determined to be eligible for the National Registry of Historic places. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone people today. Advisory Board The draft EIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by massive community Greg Jackson opposition voiced at the Dec 1st meeting of the Berkeley Landmark Stacey Sullivan Preservation Committee. There is significant controversy surrounding the Gopal Dayaneni methodology used to establish the archaeological reports and there has not Jenny Kassan been adequate peer review of the data in the draft EIR. Past excavations in and Linda Sheehan around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed John Farrell cultural remains. The report completely fails to address remains specifically Michael Shuman documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the David Bollier same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and Hank Herrera inaccuracy in the methodology of the 1900 Fourth Street EIR. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the EIR’s preparation. The primary consultant had multiple conflicts of interest, while a second Ohlone person repeatedly requesting inclusion was not consulted for the EIR. We are concerned that this does not meet the standards for free, prior, and informed consent established in international treaty, state law, and local resolution. Sustainable Economies Law Center Legal education, research, advice, & advocacy for just & resilient economies 2323 Broadway Oakland CA 94612 [email protected] 510.398.6219 www.theselc.org Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley "Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People" states in part: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site." On page 67, the Draft Environmental Impact Report states, "Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous people of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear whether or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18, which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into effect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. Berkeley has the fortuitous opportunity to model respect and protection for Native American sacred sites. The City of Berkeley would benefit from meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone people to develop a major memorial and educational site at 1900 4th Street. If destroyed, we will have permanently lost this opportunity. With the eyes of the world now on our relationship with the first peoples of this continent, we urge Berkeley to set a positive and replicable example by preventing the destruction of this sacred site and honoring the five thousand years of history this site represents. Please reject this EIR. Sincerely, Chris Tittle Sustainable Economies Law Center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s a nearby resident and regular patron of the shops and restaurants at Berkeley’s Fourth Street, I wish to record my strong objection to the proposed redevelopment on a Native American indigenous sacred site at 1900 Fourth Street that is a listed City Landmark. That Landmark status was conferred in 2000 as part of an effort to preserve the area as an important Ohlone living and burial place, according to the draft EIR, produced by LSA Associates Inc. There is ample evidence of its cultural and historic importance to the Ohlone, and archeologists have traced its occupation back more than 5,000 years, making the West Berkeley Shellmound site not just the last and probably oldest of its kind, but the oldest human settlement in entire the Bay Area. There are also traffic concerns that appear to have been insufficiently addressed. This is a heavily trafficked area, yet the proposed development will result in a 10-fold increase in the current level of 250 ‘drives.’ This will negatively impact traffic flow for the entire area, and increase the risk of high- speed accidents on the already crowded I-80 freeway, which is served by a nearby ramp clearly designed for an earlier age. One might expect these obvious contradictions on a matter of such significance to at the very least provoke a rigorous examination of the issues. Yet it seems the planning process involving this development has proceeded unimpeded, despite a questionable lack of transparency and emergence of deeply troubling conflicts of interest (East Bay Times, Dec. 7, 2016). As this is a matter of great public interest, I respectfully ask that this development proposal be delayed until the planning committee has had an opportunity to give full, open and honest consideration to these and any other relevant concerns. Sincerely, Christopher Cook 5125, Proctor Avenue, Oakland, CA 94618 -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP &DWKHULQH3HWUX FDWKHULQHSHWUX#JPDLOFRP! 6HQW 7KXUVGD\-DQXDU\ $0 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW 5HMHFWWKH(,5DQGHPEUDFHWKH1R3ODQ$OWHUQDWLYH Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Commission. It was also listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, as well as determined to be eligible for the National Registry of Historic places. The West Berkeley Shellmound site, completely encompassing the proposed 1900 Fourth Street site, is known to be the oldest bayside settlement in the San Francisco Bay Area, approximately 5700 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone people today. The draft EIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by massive community opposition voiced at the Dec 1st meeting of the Berkeley Landmark Preservation Committee. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to establish the archaeological reports and there has not been adequate peer review of the data in the draft EIR. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology of the 1900 Fourth Street EIR. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the EIR’s preparation. The primary consultant had multiple conflicts of interest, while a second Ohlone person repeatedly requesting inclusion was not consulted for the EIR. This manner of consultation with Ohlone people seems like a mere token gesture given the importance of this site to members of the Ohlone community. Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley "Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People" states in part: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site.” On page 67, the Draft Environmental Impact Report states, "Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous people of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear weather or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound site is the series of murals and the small plaque in the parking lot under the freeway. Certainly the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone people to develop a major memorial and educational site at 1900 4th Street. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the five thousand years of history. Reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative. Sincerely, Catherine Petru [email protected] (510) 499-4742 Freedom School Liberation Spring Cultural Production We Rise Radio Apprenticeship First Voice at KPFA Dance Hipline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rica Etelson | tweeting @iluvsolar connect on LinkedIn | visit Facebook.com/sugarcrashers -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP -XOLDQD0RUULV MXOLDQDHPRUULV#JPDLOFRP! 6HQW 7KXUVGD\-DQXDU\ 30 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ &F $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW 3URWHFW6DFUHG6SDFHV 5HMHFWWKH(,5 Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Commission. It was also listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, as well as determined to be eligible for the National Registry of Historic places. The West Berkeley Shellmound site, completely encompassing the proposed 1900 Fourth Street site, is known to be the oldest bayside settlement in the San Francisco Bay Area, approximately 5700 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone people today. The draft EIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by massive community opposition voiced at the Dec 1st meeting of the Berkeley Landmark Preservation Committee. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to establish the archaeological reports and there has not been adequate peer review of the data in the draft EIR. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology of the 1900 Fourth Street EIR. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the EIR’s preparation. The primary consultant had multiple conflicts of interest, while a second Ohlone person repeatedly requesting inclusion was not consulted for the EIR. This manner of consultation with Ohlone people seems like a mere token gesture given the importance of this site to members of the Ohlone community. Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley "Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People" states in part: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site." On page 67, the Draft Environmental Impact Report states, "Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous people of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear weather or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound site is the series of murals and the small plaque in the parking lot under the freeway. Certainly the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone people to develop a major memorial and educational site at 1900 4th Street. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the five thousand years of history. Reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative! Sincerely, Juliana Morris, MD Resident Physician at Alta Bates Ashby Campus, Berkeley -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP PMWLVPH PMWLVPH#JPDLOFRP! 6HQW 7KXUVGD\-DQXDU\ $0 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW 6KHOOPRXQG(,5 'HDU0V$OOHQDQG%HUNHOH\&LW\3ODQQHUV ,DPGHHSO\WURXEOHGDERXWWKHSRWHQWLDOGHVHFUDWLRQRIWKHVDFUHG6KHOOPRXQGDQG EXULDOVLWHRIRXU)LUVW1DWLRQVSHRSOHRI%HUNHOH\,DPZULWLQJWRH[SUHVVP\VLQFHUH FRQFHUQVDERXWWKHGUDIW(QYLURQPHQWDO,PSDFW5HSRUW (,5 UHJDUGLQJ )RXUWK 6WUHHW7KHVLWHZDVGHVLJQDWHGDVD&LW\RI%HUNHOH\/DQGPDUNE\WKH/DQGPDUNV &RPPLVVLRQ,WZDVDOVROLVWHGLQWKH&DOLIRUQLD6WDWH5HJLVWU\RI+LVWRULF3ODFHVDVZHOO DVGHWHUPLQHGWREHHOLJLEOHIRUWKH1DWLRQDO5HJLVWU\RI+LVWRULFSODFHV7KH:HVW %HUNHOH\6KHOOPRXQGVLWHFRPSOHWHO\HQFRPSDVVLQJWKHSURSRVHG )RXUWK6WUHHW VLWHLVNQRZQWREHWKHROGHVWED\VLGHVHWWOHPHQWLQWKH6DQ)UDQFLVFR%D\$UHD DSSUR[LPDWHO\\HDUVROG,WLVWKHWUXHELUWKSODFHRI%HUNHOH\,WFRQWLQXHVWREHRI XWPRVWVLJQLILFDQFHDVDFHUHPRQLDOFHQWHUWRWKH2KORQHSHRSOHWRGD\ 7KHGUDIW(,5LVKHDYLO\GLVSXWHGDVUHYHDOHGE\PDVVLYHFRPPXQLW\RSSRVLWLRQYRLFHG DWWKH'HFVWPHHWLQJRIWKH%HUNHOH\/DQGPDUN3UHVHUYDWLRQ&RPPLWWHH7KHUHLV VLJQLILFDQWFRQWURYHUV\VXUURXQGLQJWKHPHWKRGRORJ\XVHGWRHVWDEOLVKWKHDUFKDHRORJLFDO UHSRUWVDQGWKHUHKDVQRWEHHQDGHTXDWHSHHUUHYLHZRIWKHGDWDLQWKHGUDIW(,53DVW H[FDYDWLRQVLQDQGDURXQGWKHSURSRVHGVLWHKDYHXQFRYHUHGKXPDQEXULDOVDQG XQGLVWXUEHGFXOWXUDOUHPDLQV7KHUHSRUWFRPSOHWHO\IDLOVWRDGGUHVVUHPDLQVVSHFLILFDOO\ GRFXPHQWHGLQWKH(,5IRUWKHDGMDFHQW*URFHU\2XWOHWVLWHWKDWLVSDUWRIWKHVDPH /DQGPDUN6KHOOPRXQGVLWH7KLVFRQVWLWXWHVDVLJQLILFDQWRYHUVLJKWDQGLQDFFXUDF\LQWKH PHWKRGRORJ\RIWKH )RXUWK6WUHHW(,5 )XUWKHUPRUHWKHUHKDVQRWEHHQDGHTXDWHWULEDOFRQVXOWDWLRQLQWKH(,5¶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´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ƚƚŶ͗^ŚĂŶŶŽŶůůĞŶ ŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJŝƚLJWůĂŶŶŝŶŐ ϭϵϰϳĞŶƚĞƌ^ƚƌĞĞƚ͕ϮŶĚ&ůŽŽƌ ĞƌŬĞůĞLJ͕ϵϰϳϬϰ ĞĂƌDƐ͘ůůĞŶĂŶĚĞƌŬĞůĞLJŝƚLJWůĂŶŶĞƌƐ͗ /ĂŵǁƌŝƚŝŶŐƚŽĞdžƉƌĞƐƐŵLJĚĞĞƉĐŽŶĐĞƌŶƐĂďŽƵƚƚŚĞĚƌĂĨƚ ŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂů/ŵƉĂĐƚZĞƉŽƌƚ; /ZͿƌĞŐĂƌĚŝŶŐϭϵϬϬ&ŽƵƌƚŚ ^ƚƌĞĞƚ͘dŚĞƐŝƚĞǁĂƐĚĞƐŝŐŶĂƚĞĚĂƐĂŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJ>ĂŶĚŵĂƌŬηϮϮϳďLJƚŚĞ>ĂŶĚŵĂƌŬƐŽŵŵŝƐƐŝŽŶ͘/ƚǁĂƐĂůƐŽůŝƐƚĞĚŝŶ ƚŚĞĂůŝĨŽƌŶŝĂ^ƚĂƚĞZĞŐŝƐƚƌLJŽĨ,ŝƐƚŽƌŝĐWůĂĐĞƐ͕ĂƐǁĞůůĂƐĚĞƚĞƌŵŝŶĞĚƚŽďĞĞůŝŐŝďůĞĨŽƌƚŚĞEĂƚŝŽŶĂůZĞŐŝƐƚƌLJŽĨ,ŝƐƚŽƌŝĐ ƉůĂĐĞƐ͘dŚĞtĞƐƚĞƌŬĞůĞLJ^ŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚƐŝƚĞ͕ĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞůLJĞŶĐŽŵƉĂƐƐŝŶŐƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚϭϵϬϬ&ŽƵƌƚŚ^ƚƌĞĞƚƐŝƚĞ͕ŝƐŬŶŽǁŶƚŽ ďĞƚŚĞŽůĚĞƐƚďĂLJƐŝĚĞƐĞƚƚůĞŵĞŶƚŝŶƚŚĞ^ĂŶ&ƌĂŶĐŝƐĐŽĂLJƌĞĂ͕ĂƉƉƌŽdžŝŵĂƚĞůLJϱϳϬϬLJĞĂƌƐŽůĚ͘/ƚŝƐƚŚĞƚƌƵĞďŝƌƚŚƉůĂĐĞŽĨ ĞƌŬĞůĞLJ͘ /ƚĐŽŶƚŝŶƵĞƐƚŽďĞŽĨƵƚŵŽƐƚƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶĐĞĂƐĂĐĞƌĞŵŽŶŝĂůĐĞŶƚĞƌƚŽƚŚĞKŚůŽŶĞƉĞŽƉůĞƚŽĚĂLJ͘ dŚĞĚƌĂĨƚ /ZŝƐŚĞĂǀŝůLJĚŝƐƉƵƚĞĚ͕ĂƐƌĞǀĞĂůĞĚďLJŵĂƐƐŝǀĞĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJŽƉƉŽƐŝƚŝŽŶǀŽŝĐĞĚĂƚƚŚĞĞĐϭƐƚŵĞĞƚŝŶŐŽĨƚŚĞ ĞƌŬĞůĞLJ>ĂŶĚŵĂƌŬWƌĞƐĞƌǀĂƚŝŽŶŽŵŵŝƚƚĞĞ͘dŚĞƌĞŝƐƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶƚĐŽŶƚƌŽǀĞƌƐLJƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐƚŚĞŵĞƚŚŽĚŽůŽŐLJƵƐĞĚƚŽ ĞƐƚĂďůŝƐŚƚŚĞĂƌĐŚĂĞŽůŽŐŝĐĂůƌĞƉŽƌƚƐĂŶĚƚŚĞƌĞŚĂƐŶŽƚďĞĞŶĂĚĞƋƵĂƚĞƉĞĞƌƌĞǀŝĞǁŽĨƚŚĞĚĂƚĂŝŶƚŚĞĚƌĂĨƚ /Z͘WĂƐƚ ĞdžĐĂǀĂƚŝŽŶƐŝŶĂŶĚĂƌŽƵŶĚƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚƐŝƚĞŚĂǀĞƵŶĐŽǀĞƌĞĚŚƵŵĂŶďƵƌŝĂůƐĂŶĚƵŶĚŝƐƚƵƌďĞĚĐƵůƚƵƌĂůƌĞŵĂŝŶƐ͘dŚĞ ƌĞƉŽƌƚĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞůLJĨĂŝůƐƚŽĂĚĚƌĞƐƐƌĞŵĂŝŶƐƐƉĞĐŝĨŝĐĂůůLJĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚĞĚŝŶƚŚĞ /ZĨŽƌƚŚĞĂĚũĂĐĞŶƚ'ƌŽĐĞƌLJKƵƚůĞƚƐŝƚĞƚŚĂƚŝƐ ƉĂƌƚŽĨƚŚĞƐĂŵĞ>ĂŶĚŵĂƌŬ^ŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚƐŝƚĞ͘ dŚŝƐĐŽŶƐƚŝƚƵƚĞƐĂƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶƚŽǀĞƌƐŝŐŚƚĂŶĚŝŶĂĐĐƵƌĂĐLJŝŶƚŚĞŵĞƚŚŽĚŽůŽŐLJŽĨƚŚĞϭϵϬϬ&ŽƵƌƚŚ^ƚƌĞĞƚ /Z͘ &ƵƌƚŚĞƌŵŽƌĞ͕ƚŚĞƌĞŚĂƐŶŽƚďĞĞŶĂĚĞƋƵĂƚĞƚƌŝďĂůĐŽŶƐƵůƚĂƚŝŽŶŝŶƚŚĞ /Z͛ƐƉƌĞƉĂƌĂƚŝŽŶ͘dŚĞƉƌŝŵĂƌLJĐŽŶƐƵůƚĂŶƚŚĂĚ ŵƵůƚŝƉůĞĐŽŶĨůŝĐƚƐŽĨŝŶƚĞƌĞƐƚ͕ǁŚŝůĞĂƐĞĐŽŶĚKŚůŽŶĞƉĞƌƐŽŶƌĞƉĞĂƚĞĚůLJƌĞƋƵĞƐƚŝŶŐŝŶĐůƵƐŝŽŶǁĂƐŶŽƚĐŽŶƐƵůƚĞĚĨŽƌƚŚĞ /Z͘dŚŝƐŵĂŶŶĞƌŽĨĐŽŶƐƵůƚĂƚŝŽŶǁŝƚŚKŚůŽŶĞƉĞŽƉůĞƐĞĞŵƐůŝŬĞĂŵĞƌĞƚŽŬĞŶŐĞƐƚƵƌĞŐŝǀĞŶƚŚĞŝŵƉŽƌƚĂŶĐĞŽĨƚŚŝƐƐŝƚĞ ƚŽŵĞŵďĞƌƐŽĨƚŚĞKŚůŽŶĞĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJ͘ ZĞƐŽůƵƚŝŽŶEŽ͘ϲϳ͕ϯϱϯͲE^ŽĨƚŚĞŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJΗ,ŽŶŽƌĞƌŬĞůĞLJ^ŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚ/ŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐ^ĂĐƌĞĚ^ŝƚĞ͕hĞƌŬĞůĞLJ ZĞƚƵƌŶŶĐĞƐƚƌĂůZĞŵĂŝŶƐƚŽKŚůŽŶĞWĞŽƉůĞΗƐƚĂƚĞƐŝŶƉĂƌƚ͗Η /d&hZd, ZZ ^K>s ƚŚĂƚĨƌĞĞ͕ƉƌŝŽƌ͕ĂŶĚŝŶĨŽƌŵĞĚ ĐŽŶƐĞŶƚŽĨƚŚĞKŚůŽŶĞĂŶĚŽƚŚĞƌŝŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐƉĞŽƉůĞƐŽĨƚŚĞƌĞŐŝŽŶďĞŝŶƚĞŐƌĂůƚŽĂŶLJĂůƚĞƌĂƚŝŽŶƉůĂŶŶŝŶŐĨŽƌƚŚĞĞƌŬĞůĞLJ ^ŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚƐĂĐƌĞĚƐŝƚĞ͕ŝŶĂĐĐŽƌĚĂŶĐĞǁŝƚŚƚŚĞƉƌŽǀŝƐŝŽŶƐŽĨƚŚĞhŶŝƚĞĚEĂƚŝŽŶƐĞĐůĂƌĂƚŝŽŶŽŶƚŚĞZŝŐŚƚƐŽĨ/ŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐ WĞŽƉůĞ͕ĂŶĚĐĂůůƐƵƉŽŶĂůůƉĂƌƚŝĞƐƚŽĨŽůůŽǁƚŚĞƉƌŝŶĐŝƉůĞƐŽĨƚŚĞĞĐůĂƌĂƚŝŽŶǁŝƚŚƌĞƐƉĞĐƚƚŽƚŚĞtĞƐƚĞƌŬĞůĞLJ ^ŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚƐŝƚĞ͘Η KŶƉĂŐĞϲϳ͕ƚŚĞƌĂĨƚ ŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂů/ŵƉĂĐƚZĞƉŽƌƚƐƚĂƚĞƐ͕ΗŽŶƐƵůƚĂƚŝŽŶǁŝƚŚƚŚĞKŚůŽŶĞ/ŶĚŝĂŶdƌŝďĞ͕ĐŽŶĚƵĐƚĞĚ ƉƵƌƐƵĂŶƚƚŽϱϮ͕ǁĂƐĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚĨŽƌƚŚĞWƌŽũĞĐƚĂŶĚŵŝƚŝŐĂƚŝŽŶŵĞĂƐƵƌĞƐĂƌĞƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĞĚ͕ĂƐĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞ͘͟ hŶĨŽƌƚƵŶĂƚĞůLJ͕ƚŚŝƐŝƐŽŶůLJŽŶĞƚƌŝďĂůĞŶƚŝƚLJĂŶĚƚŚĞƌĞƐŽůƵƚŝŽŶǀĞƌLJĐůĞĂƌůLJƐƚĂƚĞƐƚŚĂƚŝƚƐŚŽƵůĚĂůƐŽŝŶĐůƵĚĞŽƚŚĞƌ ŝŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐƉĞŽƉůĞŽĨƚŚĞƌĞŐŝŽŶ͖ƚŚĞŽŶĨĞĚĞƌĂƚĞĚsŝůůĂŐĞƐŽĨ>ŝƐũĂŶ͕ĨŽƌĞdžĂŵƉůĞ͕ƐŚŽƵůĚďĞŐŝǀĞŶƚŚĞƐĂŵĞĨŽƌŵĂů ĐŽŶƐƵůƚĂƚŝŽŶƉƌŽĐĞƐƐĂƐKŚůŽŶĞdƌŝďĞ/ŶĐ͘/ƚŝƐĂůƐŽƵŶĐůĞĂƌǁĞĂƚŚĞƌŽƌŶŽƚƚŚĞŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJĨŽůůŽǁĞĚ^ϭϴǁŚŝĐŚ ƐƚĂƚĞƐƚŚĂƚǁŚĞŶĂĐŝƚLJŽƌĐŽƵŶƚLJĂĚŽƉƚƐŽƌĂŵĞŶĚƐƚŚĞŝƌŐĞŶĞƌĂůƉůĂŶƚŚĞdƌŝďĞƐĨƌŽŵƚŚĞĂƌĞĂŵƵƐƚďĞĐŽŶƐƵůƚĞĚ͕ ǁŚĞƚŚĞƌĨĞĚĞƌĂůůLJƌĞĐŽŐŶŝnjĞĚŽƌŶŽƚ͘dŚĞŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJŚĂƐĂŵĞŶĚĞĚƚŚĞŝƌŚŽƵƐŝŶŐĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƉůĂŶŶƵŵĞƌŽƵƐƚŝŵĞƐ ƐŝŶĐĞƚŚĞůĂǁǁĂƐƉƵƚŝŶƚŽĂĨĨĞĐƚŝŶϮϬϬϱ͕ĂŶĚƚŚĞƌĞŝƐŶŽƉƌŽŽĨƚŚĂƚdƌŝďĞƐǁĞƌĞŝŶĐůƵĚĞĚŝŶĐŽŶƐƵůƚĂƚŝŽŶƉƌŝŽƌƚŽ ĂŵĞŶĚŝŶŐƚŚŝƐƉĂƌƚŽĨƚŚĞŐĞŶĞƌĂůƉůĂŶ͘ ƚƚŚŝƐƉŽŝŶƚ͕ƚŚĞŽŶůLJŽĨĨŝĐŝĂůƌĞĐŽŐŶŝƚŝŽŶŽĨƚŚŝƐƐĂĐƌĞĚƐŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚƐŝƚĞŝƐƚŚĞƐĞƌŝĞƐŽĨŵƵƌĂůƐĂŶĚƚŚĞƐŵĂůůƉůĂƋƵĞŝŶ ƚŚĞƉĂƌŬŝŶŐůŽƚƵŶĚĞƌƚŚĞĨƌĞĞǁĂLJ͘ĞƌƚĂŝŶůLJƚŚĞŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJǁŽƵůĚďĞŶĞĨŝƚĨƌŽŵƚƌƵůLJŵĞĂŶŝŶŐĨƵůƉƵďůŝĐ ĂĐŬŶŽǁůĞĚŐĞŵĞŶƚŽĨŝƚƐKŚůŽŶĞƉĂƐƚ͕ƉƌĞƐĞŶƚ͕ĂŶĚĨƵƚƵƌĞďLJǁŽƌŬŝŶŐǁŝƚŚůŽĐĂůKŚůŽŶĞƉĞŽƉůĞƚŽĚĞǀĞůŽƉĂŵĂũŽƌ ŵĞŵŽƌŝĂůĂŶĚĞĚƵĐĂƚŝŽŶĂůƐŝƚĞĂƚϭϵϬϬϰƚŚ^ƚƌĞĞƚ͘ dŚŝƐŝƐĂĐůĞĂƌŽƉƉŽƌƚƵŶŝƚLJĨŽƌƚŚĞŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJƚŽĨŽůůŽǁƚŚƌŽƵŐŚŽŶŝƚƐƌĞƐŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐƚŽŚŽŶŽƌĂŶĚƉƌŽƚĞĐƚƐĂĐƌĞĚƐŝƚĞƐ ĂŶĚƚŚĞƌŝŐŚƚƐŽĨ/ŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐƉĞŽƉůĞƐ͘/ŝŵƉůŽƌĞĞƌŬĞůĞLJƚŽƚĂŬĞĂƐƚĂŶĚĂŐĂŝŶƐƚƚŚŝƐĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶƚŚĂƚǁŝůůďĞŶĞĨŝƚ ǁĞĂůƚŚLJĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞƌƐĂƚƚŚĞĞdžƉĞŶƐĞŽĨƚŚĞĨŝǀĞƚŚŽƵƐĂŶĚLJĞĂƌƐŽĨŚŝƐƚŽƌLJ͘ZĞũĞĐƚƚŚĞ /ZĂŶĚĞŵďƌĂĐĞƚŚĞEŽWůĂŶ ůƚĞƌŶĂƚŝǀĞ͊ ^ŝŶĐĞƌĞůLJ͕ ƐƵĞůŽƉĞnj ďĂLJĂƌĞĂƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚĨŽƌƚŚĞƉĂƐƚϮϳLJĞĂƌƐ -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP YLYLHQFRRN YLYLHQFRRN#JPDLOFRP! 6HQW 7KXUVGD\-DQXDU\ 30 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW 'HYHORSPHQW$SSURYDORI1DWLYH$PHULFDQ6DFUHG6LWHRQ)RXUWK6W My name is Vivien Cook and I live at 5125 Proctor Ave in Oakland, 94618. I am writing to request that the approval process does not go forward for the development of the Native American Indian sacred site on Fourth St. Respectfully, I'm not sure that I understand how this project has gotten this far. In reading the EIR there is ample evidence that this designated landmark has cultural and historic importance to the Ohlone who have occupied this site for over 5,000 years. Earlier excavations uncovered artifacts and even bodies. Please let this sacred place remain as it is, undisturbed and undeveloped. This is one of the last shell mounds left in the Bay Area and would also seem to be the oldest. Leaving aside the religious significance of this place and since development is a possibility, I read the EIR with interest and am left wondering whether it's sound to place apartments, shops and restaurants in an already busy area where 'traffic' will increase from 250 drives to almost 10 times that many. It's served by a freeway exit driving north off I 80.that is very awkward and dysfunctional. It's also adjacent to the railroad crossing and the main line for passengers and goods from north to south and from Reno in the west. Surely adding so much activity is an accident just waiting to happen. Thanks for reading my letter of support to preserve the site. Sincerely, Vivien Cook ¡ ¢ ¢ £ ¤ ¥ ¦ ¡ ¤ § ¨ © ¥ © ¨ £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¡ ¢ ¢ £ ¤ ¥ ¦ ¡ ¤ § ¨ © ¥ © ¨ £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ear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Commission. It was also listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, as well as determined to be eligible for the National Registry of Historic places. The West Berkeley Shellmound site, completely encompassing the proposed 1900 Fourth Street site, is known to be the oldest bayside settlement in the San Francisco Bay Area, approximately 5700 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone people today. As you are aware, there are many disputes about the EIR. I would like to say that as a Berkeley resident in these changing times, I would like us as a city to renew our commitment to honoring the people who originally occupied these lands, knowing that doing so is respectful to the land and all of its diverse residents. I am not interested in increased development. This original shellmound has already been ransacked and robbed; I don’t want to be part of a generation who continues the assault. Because the primary consultant for the EIR had multiple conflicts of interest which a second Ohlone person was not consulted though they repeatedly asked to be included in the process, is enough evidence that this project is not moving forward with integrity. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the five thousand years of history. Reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative! Sincerely, Elena Gardella 1256 Russell St. Berkeley, CA 94702 -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP 0HODQLH* PHO\RJD#KRWPDLOFRP! 6HQW 7XHVGD\-DQXDU\ 30 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW 2SSRVLWLRQWRWKH(QYLURQPHQWDO,PSDFW5HSRUW ƚƚŶ͗^ŚĂŶŶŽŶůůĞŶ ŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJŝƚLJWůĂŶŶŝŶŐ ϭϵϰϳĞŶƚĞƌ^ƚƌĞĞƚ͕ϮŶĚ&ůŽŽƌ ĞƌŬĞůĞLJ͕ϵϰϳϬϰ ĞĂƌDƐ͘ůůĞŶĂŶĚĞƌŬĞůĞLJŝƚLJWůĂŶŶĞƌƐ͗ /ĂŵǁƌŝƚŝŶŐƚŽĞdžƉƌĞƐƐŵLJĚĞĞƉĐŽŶĐĞƌŶƐĂďŽƵƚƚŚĞĚƌĂĨƚ ŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂů/ŵƉĂĐƚZĞƉŽƌƚ; /ZͿƌĞŐĂƌĚŝŶŐϭϵϬϬ &ŽƵƌƚŚ^ƚƌĞĞƚ͘dŚĞƐŝƚĞǁĂƐĚĞƐŝŐŶĂƚĞĚĂƐĂŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJ>ĂŶĚŵĂƌŬηϮϮϳďLJƚŚĞ>ĂŶĚŵĂƌŬƐŽŵŵŝƐƐŝŽŶ͘/ƚ ǁĂƐĂůƐŽůŝƐƚĞĚŝŶƚŚĞĂůŝĨŽƌŶŝĂ^ƚĂƚĞZĞŐŝƐƚƌLJŽĨ,ŝƐƚŽƌŝĐWůĂĐĞƐ͕ĂƐǁĞůůĂƐĚĞƚĞƌŵŝŶĞĚƚŽďĞĞůŝŐŝďůĞĨŽƌƚŚĞ EĂƚŝŽŶĂůZĞŐŝƐƚƌLJŽĨ,ŝƐƚŽƌŝĐƉůĂĐĞƐ͘dŚĞtĞƐƚĞƌŬĞůĞLJ^ŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚƐŝƚĞ͕ĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞůLJĞŶĐŽŵƉĂƐƐŝŶŐƚŚĞ ƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚϭϵϬϬ&ŽƵƌƚŚ^ƚƌĞĞƚƐŝƚĞ͕ŝƐŬŶŽǁŶƚŽďĞƚŚĞŽůĚĞƐƚĂLJƐŝĚĞƐĞƚƚůĞŵĞŶƚŝŶƚŚĞ^ĂŶ&ƌĂŶĐŝƐĐŽĂLJƌĞĂ͘ /ƚŝƐĂƉƉƌŽdžŝŵĂƚĞůLJϱϳϬϬLJĞĂƌƐŽůĚ͘/ƚŝƐƚŚĞƚƌƵĞďŝƌƚŚƉůĂĐĞŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJ͘/ƚĐŽŶƚŝŶƵĞƐƚŽďĞŽĨƵƚŵŽƐƚ ƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶĐĞĂƐĂĐĞƌĞŵŽŶŝĂůĐĞŶƚĞƌƚŽƚŚĞKŚůŽŶĞƉĞŽƉůĞƚŽĚĂLJ͘ dŚĞĚƌĂĨƚ /ZŝƐŚĞĂǀŝůLJĚŝƐƉƵƚĞĚ͕ĂƐƌĞǀĞĂůĞĚďLJŵĂƐƐŝǀĞĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJŽƉƉŽƐŝƚŝŽŶǀŽŝĐĞĚĂƚƚŚĞĞĐϭƐƚŵĞĞƚŝŶŐ ŽĨƚŚĞĞƌŬĞůĞLJ>ĂŶĚŵĂƌŬWƌĞƐĞƌǀĂƚŝŽŶŽŵŵŝƚƚĞĞ͘dŚĞƌĞŝƐƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶƚĐŽŶƚƌŽǀĞƌƐLJƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐƚŚĞ ŵĞƚŚŽĚŽůŽŐLJƵƐĞĚƚŽĞƐƚĂďůŝƐŚƚŚĞĂƌĐŚĂĞŽůŽŐŝĐĂůƌĞƉŽƌƚƐĂŶĚƚŚĞƌĞŚĂƐŶŽƚďĞĞŶĂĚĞƋƵĂƚĞƉĞĞƌƌĞǀŝĞǁŽĨƚŚĞ ĚĂƚĂŝŶƚŚĞĚƌĂĨƚ /Z͘WĂƐƚĞdžĐĂǀĂƚŝŽŶƐŝŶĂŶĚĂƌŽƵŶĚƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚƐŝƚĞŚĂǀĞƵŶĐŽǀĞƌĞĚŚƵŵĂŶďƵƌŝĂůƐĂŶĚ ƵŶĚŝƐƚƵƌďĞĚĐƵůƚƵƌĂůƌĞŵĂŝŶƐ͘dŚĞƌĞƉŽƌƚĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞůLJĨĂŝůƐƚŽĂĚĚƌĞƐƐƌĞŵĂŝŶƐƐƉĞĐŝĨŝĐĂůůLJĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚĞĚŝŶƚŚĞ /ZĨŽƌƚŚĞĂĚũĂĐĞŶƚ'ƌŽĐĞƌLJKƵƚůĞƚƐŝƚĞƚŚĂƚŝƐƉĂƌƚŽĨƚŚĞƐĂŵĞ>ĂŶĚŵĂƌŬ^ŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚƐŝƚĞ͘dŚŝƐĐŽŶƐƚŝƚƵƚĞƐĂ ƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶƚŽǀĞƌƐŝŐŚƚĂŶĚŝŶĂĐĐƵƌĂĐLJŝŶƚŚĞŵĞƚŚŽĚŽůŽŐLJŽĨƚŚĞϭϵϬϬ&ŽƵƌƚŚ^ƚƌĞĞƚ /Z͘ &ƵƌƚŚĞƌŵŽƌĞ͕ƚŚĞƌĞŚĂƐŶŽƚďĞĞŶĂĚĞƋƵĂƚĞǀŽŝĐĞƐŚĞĂƌĚŽƌƚƌŝďĂůĐŽŶƐƵůƚĂƚŝŽŶŝŶƚŚĞ /Z͛ƐƉƌĞƉĂƌĂƚŝŽŶ͘dŚĞ ƉƌŝŵĂƌLJĐŽŶƐƵůƚĂŶƚŚĂĚŵƵůƚŝƉůĞĐŽŶĨůŝĐƚƐŽĨŝŶƚĞƌĞƐƚ͕ǁŚŝůĞĂƐĞĐŽŶĚKŚůŽŶĞƉĞƌƐŽŶƌĞƉĞĂƚĞĚůLJƌĞƋƵĞƐƚŝŶŐ ŝŶĐůƵƐŝŽŶ͕ǁĂƐŶŽƚĐŽŶƐƵůƚĞĚĨŽƌƚŚĞ /Z͘dŚŝƐŵĂŶŶĞƌŽĨĐŽŶƐƵůƚĂƚŝŽŶǁŝƚŚKŚůŽŶĞƉĞŽƉůĞƐĞĞŵƐůŝŬĞĂŵĞƌĞ ƚŽŬĞŶŐĞƐƚƵƌĞŐŝǀĞŶƚŚĞŝŵƉŽƌƚĂŶĐĞŽĨƚŚŝƐƐŝƚĞƚŽŵĞŵďĞƌƐŽĨƚŚĞKŚůŽŶĞĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJ͘ZĞƐŽůƵƚŝŽŶEŽ͘ϲϳ͕ϯϱϯͲ E^ŽĨƚŚĞŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJΗ,ŽŶŽƌĞƌŬĞůĞLJ^ŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚ/ŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐ^ĂĐƌĞĚ^ŝƚĞ͕hĞƌŬĞůĞLJZĞƚƵƌŶŶĐĞƐƚƌĂů ZĞŵĂŝŶƐƚŽKŚůŽŶĞWĞŽƉůĞΗƐƚĂƚĞƐŝŶƉĂƌƚ͗Η /d&hZd, ZZ ^K>s ƚŚĂƚĨƌĞĞ͕ƉƌŝŽƌ͕ĂŶĚŝŶĨŽƌŵĞĚĐŽŶƐĞŶƚŽĨ ƚŚĞKŚůŽŶĞĂŶĚŽƚŚĞƌŝŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐƉĞŽƉůĞƐŽĨƚŚĞƌĞŐŝŽŶďĞŝŶƚĞŐƌĂůƚŽĂŶLJĂůƚĞƌĂƚŝŽŶƉůĂŶŶŝŶŐĨŽƌƚŚĞĞƌŬĞůĞLJ ^ŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚƐĂĐƌĞĚƐŝƚĞ͕ŝŶĂĐĐŽƌĚĂŶĐĞǁŝƚŚƚŚĞƉƌŽǀŝƐŝŽŶƐŽĨƚŚĞhŶŝƚĞĚEĂƚŝŽŶƐĞĐůĂƌĂƚŝŽŶŽŶƚŚĞZŝŐŚƚƐŽĨ /ŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐWĞŽƉůĞ͕ĂŶĚĐĂůůƐƵƉŽŶĂůůƉĂƌƚŝĞƐƚŽĨŽůůŽǁƚŚĞƉƌŝŶĐŝƉůĞƐŽĨƚŚĞĞĐůĂƌĂƚŝŽŶǁŝƚŚƌĞƐƉĞĐƚƚŽƚŚĞ tĞƐƚĞƌŬĞůĞLJ^ŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚƐŝƚĞ͘Η KŶƉĂŐĞϲϳ͕ƚŚĞƌĂĨƚ ŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂů/ŵƉĂĐƚZĞƉŽƌƚƐƚĂƚĞƐ͕ΗŽŶƐƵůƚĂƚŝŽŶǁŝƚŚƚŚĞKŚůŽŶĞ/ŶĚŝĂŶdƌŝďĞ͕ ĐŽŶĚƵĐƚĞĚƉƵƌƐƵĂŶƚƚŽϱϮ͕ǁĂƐĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚĨŽƌƚŚĞWƌŽũĞĐƚĂŶĚŵŝƚŝŐĂƚŝŽŶŵĞĂƐƵƌĞƐĂƌĞƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĞĚ͕ĂƐ ĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞ͘͟hŶĨŽƌƚƵŶĂƚĞůLJ͕ƚŚŝƐŝƐŽŶůLJŽŶĞƚƌŝďĂůĞŶƚŝƚLJĂŶĚƚŚĞƌĞƐŽůƵƚŝŽŶǀĞƌLJĐůĞĂƌůLJƐƚĂƚĞƐƚŚĂƚŝƚƐŚŽƵůĚ ĂůƐŽŝŶĐůƵĚĞŽƚŚĞƌŝŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐƉĞŽƉůĞŽĨƚŚĞƌĞŐŝŽŶ͖ƚŚĞŽŶĨĞĚĞƌĂƚĞĚsŝůůĂŐĞƐŽĨ>ŝƐũĂŶ͕ĨŽƌĞdžĂŵƉůĞ͕ƐŚŽƵůĚďĞ ŐŝǀĞŶƚŚĞƐĂŵĞĨŽƌŵĂůĐŽŶƐƵůƚĂƚŝŽŶƉƌŽĐĞƐƐĂƐKŚůŽŶĞdƌŝďĞ/ŶĐ͘/ƚŝƐĂůƐŽƵŶĐůĞĂƌǁĞĂƚŚĞƌŽƌŶŽƚƚŚĞŝƚLJŽĨ ĞƌŬĞůĞLJĨŽůůŽǁĞĚ^ϭϴǁŚŝĐŚƐƚĂƚĞƐƚŚĂƚǁŚĞŶĂĐŝƚLJŽƌĐŽƵŶƚLJĂĚŽƉƚƐŽƌĂŵĞŶĚƐƚŚĞŝƌŐĞŶĞƌĂůƉůĂŶƚŚĞdƌŝďĞƐ ĨƌŽŵƚŚĞĂƌĞĂŵƵƐƚďĞĐŽŶƐƵůƚĞĚ͕ǁŚĞƚŚĞƌĨĞĚĞƌĂůůLJƌĞĐŽŐŶŝnjĞĚŽƌŶŽƚ͘dŚĞŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJŚĂƐĂŵĞŶĚĞĚƚŚĞŝƌ ŚŽƵƐŝŶŐĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƉůĂŶŶƵŵĞƌŽƵƐƚŝŵĞƐƐŝŶĐĞƚŚĞůĂǁǁĂƐƉƵƚŝŶƚŽĂĨĨĞĐƚŝŶϮϬϬϱ͕ĂŶĚƚŚĞƌĞŝƐŶŽƉƌŽŽĨ ƚŚĂƚdƌŝďĞƐǁĞƌĞŝŶĐůƵĚĞĚŝŶĐŽŶƐƵůƚĂƚŝŽŶƉƌŝŽƌƚŽĂŵĞŶĚŝŶŐƚŚŝƐƉĂƌƚŽĨƚŚĞŐĞŶĞƌĂůƉůĂŶ͘ ƚƚŚŝƐƉŽŝŶƚ͕ƚŚĞŽŶůLJŽĨĨŝĐŝĂůƌĞĐŽŐŶŝƚŝŽŶŽĨƚŚŝƐƐĂĐƌĞĚƐŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚƐŝƚĞŝƐƚŚĞƐĞƌŝĞƐŽĨŵƵƌĂůƐĂŶĚƚŚĞƐŵĂůů ƉůĂƋƵĞŝŶƚŚĞƉĂƌŬŝŶŐůŽƚƵŶĚĞƌƚŚĞĨƌĞĞǁĂLJ͘ĞƌƚĂŝŶůLJƚŚĞŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJǁŽƵůĚďĞŶĞĨŝƚĨƌŽŵƚƌƵůLJŵĞĂŶŝŶŐĨƵů ƉƵďůŝĐĂĐŬŶŽǁůĞĚŐĞŵĞŶƚŽĨŝƚƐKŚůŽŶĞƉĂƐƚ͕ƉƌĞƐĞŶƚ͕ĂŶĚĨƵƚƵƌĞďLJǁŽƌŬŝŶŐǁŝƚŚůŽĐĂůKŚůŽŶĞƉĞŽƉůĞƚŽ ĚĞǀĞůŽƉĂŵĂũŽƌŵĞŵŽƌŝĂůĂŶĚĞĚƵĐĂƚŝŽŶĂůƐŝƚĞĂƚϭϵϬϬϰƚŚ^ƚƌĞĞƚ͘ dŚŝƐŝƐĂĐůĞĂƌŽƉƉŽƌƚƵŶŝƚLJĨŽƌƚŚĞŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJƚŽĨŽůůŽǁƚŚƌŽƵŐŚŽŶŝƚƐƌĞƐŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐƚŽŚŽŶŽƌĂŶĚƉƌŽƚĞĐƚ ƐĂĐƌĞĚƐŝƚĞƐĂŶĚƚŚĞƌŝŐŚƚƐŽĨ/ŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐƉĞŽƉůĞƐ͘/ŝŵƉůŽƌĞĞƌŬĞůĞLJƚŽƚĂŬĞĂƐƚĂŶĚĂŐĂŝŶƐƚƚŚŝƐĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶ ƚŚĂƚǁŝůůďĞŶĞĨŝƚǁĞĂůƚŚLJĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞƌƐĂƚƚŚĞĞdžƉĞŶƐĞŽĨƚŚĞĨŝǀĞƚŚŽƵƐĂŶĚLJĞĂƌƐŽĨŚŝƐƚŽƌLJ͘ /ĂƐŬLJŽƵƚŽƉůĞĂƐĞƌĞũĞĐƚƚŚĞ /ZĂŶĚĞŵďƌĂĐĞƚŚĞEŽWůĂŶůƚĞƌŶĂƚŝǀĞ͊ ^ŝŶĐĞƌĞůLJ͕ DĞůĂŶŝĞ'͘'ƌĞĞŶ ĞƌŬĞůĞLJƐŵĂůůďƵƐŝŶĞƐƐŽǁŶĞƌͬĞƌŬĞůĞLJƌĞŶƚĞƌͬĞƌŬĞůĞLJƉĂƌĞŶƚŽĨϮĐŚŝůĚƌĞŶŝŶh^ -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP &DUROLQH&DUU FDUROLQHIFDUU#JPDLOFRP! 6HQW :HGQHVGD\-DQXDU\ $0 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW :HVW%HUNHOH\6KHOOPRXQG $WWDFKPHQWV )LOHB MSHJ )LOHB MSHJ Attn: Shannon Allen City of Berkeley City Planning 1947 Center Street, 2nd Floor Berkeley, CA 94704 Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concern about the West Berkeley Ohlone Shellmound and planned development on the parking lot opposite Spengers on 1900 Fourth Street. My name is Caroline Carr. I am a proud Berkeley native, resident and San Francisco 3rd grade teacher. This year in 3rd grade, we studied Columbus, Tainos, Spanish Missionaries and the Ohlone from a social justice standpoint. Our goal for the unit was for the students to understand the dangers of a single story. They loved the unit and learning about the local native american tribes of the bay area. The students were particularly interested in the Ohlone homes and burial grounds, and we dug deeper into those aspects and learned a lot about the Shellmounds of the east bay and unmarked graves of Mission Dolores. At the end of the unit we visited the Oakland Museum, where Corina Gould, a local Ohlone tribal member, taught the students about her culture, traditions, and some of the challenges that the Ohlone still face today. The students and I were upset to find out about the Emeryville Shellmound, one of the largest in the world, and how it was destroyed to build a mall. The students didn't understand how something so old and sacred could be demolished and wondered if circumstances would be the same if it were an ancient Church or Pyramid. Then Corina explained that there is another Shellmound that is in danger of being lost, one in my hometown, Berkeley. I quickly grew embarrassed by my Berkeley pride, feeling like the city of Berkeley couldn't do a thing like this, don't they pride themselves in being politically correct and sensitive towards marginalized communities? Doesn't Berkeley Unified teach about the Ohlone in school and weren't we the first city in America to declare Columbus day, Indigenous People's Day? I am deeply upset about this proposed project on 4th street. The West Berkeley Shellmound is one of the oldest sacred burial sites in the world--older than the Pyramids at Giza. We should be proud of this history and highlight it for the community. Our values as a city: diversity, inclusivity, and historical preservation, lay with this Shellmound. If there is one ancient bone or artifact found in that space, that is cause enough for a historical landmark, park, community center, and affordable housing for Indigenous People to be constructed in place of a mall. This is a wonderful opportunity for the City of Berkeley to honor and uphold their values and protect the sacred sites of Indigenous Peoples. We are a city built on inclusion. I am deeply upset and hurt that the City of Berkeley is thinking about passing up such an opportunity to celebrate our diversity. I strongly encourage you to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the five thousand years of history. Please reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative! Sincerley, Caroline Carr 3rd Grade Associate Teacher 680 The Alameda Berkeley, CA 94707 (510) 229 7906 -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP &KULVWLQH&DUU FFDUU#VYEFRP! 6HQW :HGQHVGD\-DQXDU\ 30 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW 6KHOOPRXQGVLWH ƚƚŶ͗^ŚĂŶŶŽŶůůĞŶ ŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJŝƚLJWůĂŶŶŝŶŐ ϭϵϰϳĞŶƚĞƌ^ƚƌĞĞƚ͕ϮŶĚ&ůŽŽƌ ĞƌŬĞůĞLJ͕ϵϰϳϬϰ ĞĂƌDƐ͘ůůĞŶĂŶĚĞƌŬĞůĞLJŝƚLJWůĂŶŶĞƌƐ͗ /ĂŵǁƌŝƚŝŶŐƚŽĞdžƉƌĞƐƐŵLJĚĞĞƉĐŽŶĐĞƌŶĂďŽƵƚƚŚĞtĞƐƚĞƌŬĞůĞLJKŚůŽŶĞ^ŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚĂŶĚƉůĂŶŶĞĚ ĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚŽŶƚŚĞƉĂƌŬŝŶŐůŽƚŽƉƉŽƐŝƚĞ^ƉĞŶŐĞƌƐŽŶϭϵϬϬ&ŽƵƌƚŚ^ƚƌĞĞƚ͘DLJŶĂŵĞŝƐŚƌŝƐƚŝŶĞĂƌƌĂŶĚ/͛ǀĞ ďĞĞŶĂƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJƐŝŶĐĞϭϵϴϱ͘/ĂŵĚĞĞƉůLJƵƉƐĞƚĂďŽƵƚƚŚŝƐƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚƉƌŽũĞĐƚŽŶϰƚŚƐƚƌĞĞƚ͘dŚĞ tĞƐƚĞƌŬĞůĞLJ^ŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚŝƐŽŶĞŽĨƚŚĞŽůĚĞƐƚƐĂĐƌĞĚďƵƌŝĂůƐŝƚĞƐŝŶƚŚĞǁŽƌůĚͲͲŽůĚĞƌƚŚĂŶƚŚĞWLJƌĂŵŝĚƐĂƚ 'ŝnjĂ͘tĞƐŚŽƵůĚďĞƉƌŽƵĚŽĨƚŚŝƐŚŝƐƚŽƌLJĂŶĚŚŝŐŚůŝŐŚƚŝƚĨŽƌƚŚĞĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJ͘KƵƌǀĂůƵĞƐĂƐĂĐŝƚLJ͗ĚŝǀĞƌƐŝƚLJ͕ ŝŶĐůƵƐŝǀŝƚLJ͕ĂŶĚŚŝƐƚŽƌŝĐĂůƉƌĞƐĞƌǀĂƚŝŽŶ͕ůĂLJǁŝƚŚƚŚŝƐ^ŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚ͘/ĨƚŚĞƌĞŝƐŽŶĞĂŶĐŝĞŶƚďŽŶĞŽƌĂƌƚŝĨĂĐƚĨŽƵŶĚ ŝŶƚŚĂƚƐƉĂĐĞ͕ƚŚĂƚŝƐĐĂƵƐĞĞŶŽƵŐŚĨŽƌĂŚŝƐƚŽƌŝĐĂůůĂŶĚŵĂƌŬ͕ƉĂƌŬ͕ĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJĐĞŶƚĞƌ͕ĂŶĚĂĨĨŽƌĚĂďůĞŚŽƵƐŝŶŐ ĨŽƌ/ŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐWĞŽƉůĞƚŽďĞĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚĞĚŝŶƉůĂĐĞŽĨĂŵĂůů͘&ŽƵƌƚŚ^ƚ͘ĚŽĞƐŶŽƚŶĞĞĚŵŽƌĞƌĞƚĂŝů͊͊ dŚŝƐŝƐĂǁŽŶĚĞƌĨƵůŽƉƉŽƌƚƵŶŝƚLJĨŽƌƚŚĞŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJƚŽŚŽŶŽƌĂŶĚƵƉŚŽůĚƚŚĞŝƌǀĂůƵĞƐĂŶĚƉƌŽƚĞĐƚƚŚĞ ƐĂĐƌĞĚƐŝƚĞƐŽĨ/ŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐWĞŽƉůĞƐ͘tĞĂƌĞĂĐŝƚLJďƵŝůƚŽŶŝŶĐůƵƐŝŽŶ͘/ĂŵĚĞĞƉůLJƵƉƐĞƚĂŶĚŚƵƌƚƚŚĂƚƚŚĞŝƚLJŽĨ ĞƌŬĞůĞLJŝƐƚŚŝŶŬŝŶŐĂďŽƵƚƉĂƐƐŝŶŐƵƉƐƵĐŚĂŶŽƉƉŽƌƚƵŶŝƚLJƚŽĐĞůĞďƌĂƚĞŽƵƌĚŝǀĞƌƐŝƚLJ͘/ƐƚƌŽŶŐůLJĞŶĐŽƵƌĂŐĞLJŽƵ ƚŽƚĂŬĞĂƐƚĂŶĚĂŐĂŝŶƐƚƚŚŝƐĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶƚŚĂƚǁŝůůďĞŶĞĨŝƚǁĞĂůƚŚLJĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞƌƐĂƚƚŚĞĞdžƉĞŶƐĞŽĨƚŚĞĨŝǀĞ ƚŚŽƵƐĂŶĚLJĞĂƌƐŽĨŚŝƐƚŽƌLJ͘WůĞĂƐĞƌĞũĞĐƚƚŚĞ /ZĂŶĚĞŵďƌĂĐĞƚŚĞEŽWůĂŶůƚĞƌŶĂƚŝǀĞ͊ &KULVWLQH%&DUU )RXQGHU&RPPXQLW\'HYHORSPHQW)LQDQFH*URXS 6LOLFRQ9DOOH\%DQN 0LVVLRQ6W6XLWH 6DQ)UDQFLVFR&$ :RUN &HOO If you recently applied for credit or we are requesting additional information to process your credit request: Important disclosures for Equal Credit Opportunity Act and USA PATRIOT Act, please click here. -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP 6WHYHQ&DUU VWHYHQFDUUVI#\DKRRFRP! 6HQW :HGQHVGD\-DQXDU\ $0 7R &DUROLQH&DUU $OOHQ6KDQQRQ $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW 5H :HVW%HUNHOH\6KHOOPRXQG Dear Shannon : I wholeheartedly endorse my daughter's views on the Shellmound site. Regards Steven Carr 680 The Alameda Berkeley Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone On Wednesday, January 18, 2017, 11:20 AM, Caroline Carr Attn: Shannon Allen City of Berkeley City Planning 1947 Center Street, 2nd Floor Berkeley, CA 94704 Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concern about the West Berkeley Ohlone Shellmound and planned development on the parking lot opposite Spengers on 1900 Fourth Street. My name is Caroline Carr. I am a proud Berkeley native, resident and San Francisco 3rd grade teacher. This year in 3rd grade, we studied Columbus, Tainos, Spanish Missionaries and the Ohlone from a social justice standpoint. Our goal for the unit was for the students to understand the dangers of a single story. They loved the unit and learning about the local native american tribes of the bay area. The students were particularly interested in the Ohlone homes and burial grounds, and we dug deeper into those aspects and learned a lot about the Shellmounds of the east bay and unmarked graves of Mission Dolores. At the end of the unit we visited the Oakland Museum, where Corina Gould, a local Ohlone tribal member, taught the students about her culture, traditions, and some of the challenges that the Ohlone still face today. The students and I were upset to find out about the Emeryville Shellmound, one of the largest in the world, and how it was destroyed to build a mall. The students didn't understand how something so old and sacred could be demolished and wondered if circumstances would be the same if it were an ancient Church or Pyramid. Then Corina explained that there is another Shellmound that is in danger of being lost, one in my hometown, Berkeley. I quickly grew embarrassed by my Berkeley pride, feeling like the city of Berkeley couldn't do a thing like this, don't they pride themselves in being politically correct and sensitive towards marginalized communities? Doesn't Berkeley Unified teach about the Ohlone in school and weren't we the first city in America to declare Columbus day, Indigenous People's Day? I am deeply upset about this proposed project on 4th street. The West Berkeley Shellmound is one of the oldest sacred burial sites in the world--older than the Pyramids at Giza. We should be proud of this history and highlight it for the community. Our values as a city: diversity, inclusivity, and historical preservation, lay with this Shellmound. If there is one ancient bone or artifact found in that space, that is cause enough for a historical landmark, park, community center, and affordable housing for Indigenous People to be constructed in place of a mall. This is a wonderful opportunity for the City of Berkeley to honor and uphold their values and protect the sacred sites of Indigenous Peoples. We are a city built on inclusion. I am deeply upset and hurt that the City of Berkeley is thinking about passing up such an opportunity to celebrate our diversity. I strongly encourage experts , the article touches on several of the themes we discussed today to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the five thousand years of history. Please reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative! Sincerley, Caroline Carr 3rd Grade Associate Teacher 680 The Alameda Berkeley, CA 94707 (510) 229 7906 Attn: Shannon Allen [You may email comments to: [email protected]] City of Berkeley Planning Dept. 1947 Center Street, 2nd Floor Berkeley, CA 94704 February 3, 2017 Re: Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report on proposed 1900 4th Street Project Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Preservation Commission in 2000, noting the site is “most highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial ground.” The site was also listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, and determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The original West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site completely encompassed the proposed 1900 Fourth Street Project and blocks beyond. It is known to be the oldest bayside settlement and one of the largest shellmounds in the San Francisco Bay Area—more than 5,000 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone Peoples today—a fact not acknowledged in the DEIR. The content of the DEIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by widespread community opposition and concern voiced at the March 10, 2016, December 8, 2016 and January 12, 2017 Zoning Adjustment Board meetings and the December 1, 2016, and January 5, 2017 Landmark Preservation Commission meetings. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to create the archaeological report and there has not been adequate peer review of the limited data in the DEIR. The archaeological analysis is inadequate and misleading. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered many prehistoric human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address human remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is highly relevant to the landmarked Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology and conclusions of the 1900 Fourth Street Draft EIR. The likely disturbance of human remains is highly significant as defined by CEQA and cannot be mitigated. The DEIR does not address the issue of Richard Schwartz’s recording of over 400 burials in the vicinity of 1900 Fourth St. and fails to provide any context of the lot within the larger site, ALA- 307. The DEIR attempts to isolate and not analyze 1900 Fourth St. within the context of a larger site of cultural significance. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the DEIR’s preparation. The primary consultant has conflicts of interest, and does not represent the all of the Ohlone people indigenous to the Bay Area. Another Ohlone California Tribal group indigenous to Berkeley area and community has formally and repeatedly requested tribal consultation as required by CEQA. The City to date has not consulted with this group for purposes of preparing the DEIR, in violation of CEQA. The consultation that has occurred to date appears to be nothing more than a token gesture that fails to protect this important Ohlone site (the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site) and has resulted in payment of funds to an individual as mitigation for the destruction of this irreplaceable sacred place. The Ohlone comprise more than a dozen tribes and languages yet the DEIR consults only one individual. The DEIR also fails to assess the importance of this site as a “tribal cultural resource” separate from the category of “cultural resources – archaeological.” AB 52 established a new category of resources under the California Environmental Quality Act, “tribal cultural resources,” which considers the tribal cultural values in addition to the scientific and archaeological values when determining impacts and mitigation. This DEIR, rather than fully assessing the impacts to tribal cultural resources under a new category, merely incorporates a brief discussion under the cultural resources archaeological section that states the destruction of the site will be mitigated through: 1) payment to an individual of $75,000 to improve a cemetery located outside the bounds of the shellmound and outside of the city boundaries, and 2) that educational panels will be placed at or near the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site after further consultation with the Ohlone people, without identifying who will be consulted for this mitigation measure. Neither the discussion nor the proposed mitigation complies with CEQA requirements to consult with impacted Tribes and to include a new and separate category addressing “tribal cultural resources.” Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley, entitled “Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People” states in part: “BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site.” Please honor this promise. Honoring this promise requires consultation will additional Ohlone people who recognize this site as sacred, as a tribal cultural property and it requires consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region. To date, Berkeley has not honored this promise and has failed to seek the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous people of the region—and has failed to respect the indigenous peoples’ opposition to the proposed project. On page 67, the DEIR states, “Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous peoples of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear whether or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. Given that 1900 Fourth Street proposal includes 155-apartments, and given that there are numerous Tribal objections to the development, it seems clear that the step of meaningful Tribal consultation before amending the General Plan was not done. The Project also requires several discretionary approvals by the City for variances to the current general plan and zoning ordinances. These approvals would require consultation under both AB 52 and SB 18. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound and Ohlone village site is a series of murals and a small plaque in the parking lot under the nearby freeway. Certainly, the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone peoples to develop a major memorial and educational site in the form of a culturally-appropriate, green open space park at 1900 Fourth Street. The DEIR fails to analyze and offer meaningful alternatives. I strongly support the development of such a memorial and educational site in lieu of the proposed development as the preferred alternative. In addition to the unavoidable adverse impacts to this critical tribal resource the DEIR includes other fatal flaws that require the City of Berkeley to either disapprove the Project or at a minimum require a supplemental EIR before making any determinations on the Project. The Project will not fulfill the purposes set forth in the Project proposal—in fact the Project will actually exacerbate issues it claims to resolve. The DEIR does not adequately address traffic impacts in that it fails to include all approved and ongoing projects in the area. The failure to address these other projects means that the cumulative impacts analysis is fatally flawed. The DEIR fails to account for safety issues that will result from additional traffic in the area and the railroad crossing. The DEIR does not fully address potential air quality impacts nor does it adequately discuss studies regarding increased asthma and other respiratory problems for people living near freeways and industrial areas. The DEIR does not sufficiently address the potential for release of hazardous chemicals through ground disturbance. The DEIR does not include a sufficient discussion of potential impacts to water resources on site that could result from development on the site, nor does the document include an adequate alternatives analysis. It would be irresponsible for the City of Berkeley to consider approving this project without complete and accurate information regarding any and all impacts that may affect the health and safety of the community. This Project has the potential to increase already significant traffic congestion, harm the health of residents, and destroy irreplaceable cultural and historic sites that the City of Berkeley has pledged to protect. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of more than 5,000 years of history and a living culture. Reject the DEIR and embrace the No Plan / Create a Berkeley Gateway / Memorial Site Alternative! • This is our last opportunity to protect and preserve the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site. Almost all of the other shellmound and villages sites have been developed and buried under concrete. Please do not approve the destruction of this unique, historic, irreplaceable site. We should preserve and enhance the remaining sites and our collective efforts should start with this site. • This is the oldest sacred site in the Bay Area. It has to be protected. If destroyed by development it will be lost forever—and Berkeley will be responsible for a sacred place’s cultural, spiritual and ecological history being swept off the Earth. • Berkeley is on record supporting the rights of indigenous people. The Landmarks Commission noted that this site is “highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial site.” The city of Berkeley should not be approving and defending the destruction of a sacred site. The City of Berkeley has passed resolutions supporting the protection of sacred sites outside of Berkeley, such as the resolution passed supporting the Standing Rock Sioux opposition to the Dakota Access Pipeline. For the City to have credibility it must take action to protect the sacred sites within its boundaries that it has pledged to protect—including this important site. • The draft EIR language and archaeological analysis cleverly seeks to distract from the larger landmarked village site by claiming there are no shellmound remains within the 2.2 acre parking lot site. This is deceptive and inaccurate. We are concerned about the entire site, which is eligible for the National Register of Historic Places, and whose boundary is already determined. 1900 Fourth St. sits within this larger site. • CEQA requires that 1900 Fourth Street be respected in a manner consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (1995) whose “Standards for Preservation” states: “A property will be used as it was historically… The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The replacement of intact or repairable historic materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided.” The draft EIR fails to identify and address these state and federal protection requirements (as does the proposed project). Mitigation “below a level of significance” in thus impossible. The draft EIR is inadequate and should not be certified or approved even if revised. • CEQA Guidelines under Section 15126.4 (b) Mitigation Measures Related to Impacts on Historical Resources. (3)(A), states: “Preservation in place is the preferred manner of mitigating impacts to archaeological sites. Preservation in place maintains the relationship between artifacts and the archaeological context. Preservation may also avoid conflict with religious or cultural values of groups associated with the site.” Mitigation “below a level of significance” is impossible. The draft EIR is inadequate and should not be certified or approved even if revised. • There is no feasible way to mitigate the disturbance of burials. These impacts are unavoidable significant impacts and cannot be mitigated. • The alternatives analysis is inadequate and insufficient. The draft EIR does not adequately assess alternatives as required by CEQA. A reasonable range of alternatives should have been considered. A reasonable range of alternatives would have considered designating the entire site as culturally-significant, memorial, open space, as the site would be excellent for wetlands mitigation and state agencies are ready and willing to step in and assist in culturally-appropriate ecological restoration. There are few such properties available for wetlands mitigation. This site also has the potential for an urban creek restoration project that could provide restoration of a portion of what was the nature landscape of the area, enhancing water quality, promoting climate change mitigation, and allowing protection in perpetuity of this critical tribal cultural resource. The developer should have also analyzed an alternative location for this mega-development; a site that is not as close to the freeway, and not located within the boundaries of the West Berkeley Shellmound and Village Site. • The project proposes housing close to the freeway and train tracks, with 155 apartments and perhaps 3-500 new residents and 372 parking spaces: The The DEIR does not adequately address traffic impacts in that it fails to include all approved and ongoing projects in the area. The failure to address these other projects means that the cumulative impacts analysis is fatally flawed. The DEIR fails to account for safety issues that will result from additional traffic in the area and the railroad crossing. The DEIR does not fully address potential air quality impacts nor does it adequately discuss studies regarding increased asthma and other respiratory problems for people living near freeways and industrial areas. The DEIR does not sufficiently address the potential for release of hazardous chemicals through ground disturbance. The DEIR does include a sufficient discussion of potential impacts to water resources on site that could result from development on the site, nor does the document include an adequate alternatives analysis. • The EIR ignores the many hundreds of burials already known to have been removed from sanctified burial ceremonies that laid them there. Burials have been found from 2-13 feet below the surface in the site. They surround the site and are likely within the 2.2 acres from which 8- feet of subsurface soil would be excavated. The developer should not destroy this site, disturb burials and separate us all from ever knowing them and their world. • The city and the developer have not complied with AB52, having failed to consult with members of the Ohlone community. The Ohlone comprise more than a dozen tribes and languages yet the draft EIR consults only one individual. • The West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site is still used for prayer and ceremony by members of the Ohlone community. This will no longer be possible if the project is approved. These important facts are not mentioned in the draft EIR. • The draft EIR fails to mention or address the proposed project’s violation of Berkeley Municipal Code 3.24.260 “Permit application-—Review standards and criteria” which states (italics added): “Approval of permit applications pursuant to this section may be granted only upon determination that the proposal conforms to the criteria set forth in paragraph 1: For permit applications for construction, alteration or repair: For applications relating to landmark sites, the proposed work shall not adversely affect the exterior architectural features of the landmark and, where specified in the designation for a publicly owned landmark, its major interior architectural features; nor shall the proposed work adversely affect the special character or special historical, architectural or aesthetic interest or value of the landmark and its site, as viewed both in themselves and in their setting.” Hence, the 1900 Fourth Street’s Structural Alteration Permit #LMSAP2015-00005 application should be denied. • The 1900 Fourth Street draft EIR is fatally flawed, inadequate and defective. The city should review, reject, reissue and not certify this EIR, and never approve commercial development of the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site. I recently returned from a trip to Italy and Germany. In Ravenna, Italy I took two days to look at “old” mosaics that have been preserved. One of the sites, “House of Stone Carpets” (Domus dei Tappeti di Pietra), was discovered during beginning excavations for a parking garage in 1993. Construction was halted, and now thousands of visitors to the site walk over mosaic floors on transparent glass and contemplate the layers of life that have transpired since the 6th century AD. Our bay area shellmounds are much, much older than this. Please, let us show respect to the first inhabitants and their active descendants by not allowing any commercial development of the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site. It is a step in the right direction; our last chance. Thank you for your consideration. Dorothy Klein 1309 Walnut St. Berkeley, CA 94709 [email protected] Cell: 707 616 6737 Attn: Shannon Allen City of Berkeley Planning Dept. -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP 6HDQ%XUQV EXUQV#EHUNHOH\HGX! 6HQW 7KXUVGD\-DQXDU\ 30 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ =RQLQJ$GMXVWPHQWV%RDUG =$% 6XEMHFW SXEOLFFRPPHQWRQSURSRVHG )RXUWK6WGHYHORSPHQWSURMHFW To Whom It May Concern, As a City of Berkeley resident (723 Peralta Ave) and as a UC Berkeley faculty member and administrator, I wish to submit my opinion on the proposed development at 1900 Fourth Street and the accompanying public EIR. Enormous historical data points to the significance of this region for the indigenous people of this area. To honor this history and to honor the continued presence of Ohlone members in our community, I encourage the city to protect the land from development and, above and beyond that, begin planning for an appropriate cultural center to celebrate this living history. There are ample, former industrial areas in West Berkeley that could be explored for the proposed mix use development. I encourage finding another area for this building and to commence a community planning process to create a cultural center worthy of the Ohlone history and worthy of the historical vision and ethic of the City of Berkeley. What other city in Northern California is better suited to lead the way in restorative processes that recognize indigenous history and celebrate indigenous continuity? Let Berkeley be this leader rather than another name on a long list of cities that have no regard to indigenous history and current indigenous communities. Let Berkeley find a way to enable the Ohlone to determine the fate and direction of this lot. Sincerely, Sean Burns -- Sean Burns, Ph.D. Director, Office of Undergraduate Research & Scholarships University of California, Berkeley 2416 Dwinelle Hall, #2940 ph. 510-642-3795 81,9(56,7<2)&$/,)251,$5,9(56,'( BERKELEY • DAVIS • IRVINE • LOS ANGELES • MERCED • RIVERSIDE • SAN DIEGO • SAN FRANCISCO SANTA BARBARA • SANTA CRUZ January 20, 2017 Attn: Shannon Allen City of Berkeley City Planning 1947 Center Street, 2nd Floor Berkeley, CA 94704 Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing in regards to plans for 1900 Fourth Street, the West Berkeley Shellmound site. You may be receiving many letters concerning the disputed draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and the archeological reports surrounding this site. I share the deep concerns raised by Ohlone leaders regarding the oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology of those reports, and urge you to reconsider them. In what follows, I also wish to speak to this issue from other perspectives. I am a professor at the University of California, Riverside, currently the Graduate Advisor and formerly the Chair of the renowned UC Riverside Department of Dance, which houses the first Ph.D. in Critical Dance studies of its kind in the U.S. For nearly twenty years I have written about Indigenous dance as a vibrant, crucial, contemporary practice. What I see, in the current situation regarding this site, in an incredible opportunity for the City of Berkeley. We are at a crucial moment. Many in the U.S. have voted for leadership at the national level that will appoint a federal cabinet forwarding corporate greed at the expense of the earth. Many of us are heartsick at this turn, feeling incredulous and outraged, energized and paralyzed, hopeful and hopeless. We wonder what we can do to resist an agenda of hate and lies, and the destruction it fuels. We ask what we can do to instead create the world we want to live in and to see thrive. We talk about community, and about politics at the local level, and about caring for each other, as a way to model to the rest of the world (as Berkeley has often done) a better way to be in relation with each other and with the earth. We look for ways to build this better world. I’ve been thinking about this all as I’ve been reading through materials regarding the proposed development on the Shellmound site, including both those on the City of Berkeley’s Planning and Development site, and those posted by Ohlone leaders critiquing the methods of the 1900 Fourth street Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and archeological reports. What emerges for me is a clear dispute in the way development desires, and not concern for the cultural issues at stake, are fueling the current process. A central area of dispute lies with the project’s process of “tribal consultation” with Native peoples, which has clearly been vexed. It has relied on a single consultant in a region with a complex Native history and politics. Multiple Ohlone and other local Native leaders have loudly voiced their concerns over this proposal and its plans for this site. Multiple sources have also raised questions about the Ohlone consultant’s long-term relationship with the developers, and the promised benefits to projects that consultant is involved with by the developers. More voices need to be heard than just Mr. Andrew Galvan’s. Another major area of dispute lies in where and whether there are “significant” remains in the plot. There are, by many reports, multiple documents--dating from nearly a century and a half ago to a few years ago--that discuss bones in the West Berkeley Shellmound. (I am referring to the hundreds of skeletons found by Alphonse Pinart in the 1870s, referenced in the official record of state archaeological site CA-ALA-307; to references in that record to other burials found by a UC Berkeley professor in the 1950s of 2,700 year old artifacts found buried 13 feet deep during construction of the University Avenue overpass, which is just a block from the proposed site; and to the recent findings of remains of five bodies at a site at 1919 Fourth Street, across the street from the proposed site.) If indeed past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed cultural remains, it seems highly suspect that the archeological testing program this time determined there to be none in its “primary layer.” Indeed,Archeo-Tec's discussion clearly states that there is the possibility that intact deposits are still present within the project area (page 36). It also inadequately covers the concept of “significance” in the report. This aspect of the dispute, regarding where exactly “significant” remains are or aren’t, raises crucial insights into the different ways of understanding time and place at play in this dispute. The developers’ official report focuses on one plot of land, and draws on language of Western science to argue that its team used “the most cutting-edge and rigorous techniques” – boring, trenching, ground penetrating radar – to investigate the top layer of land in that block. It decries “the absence of real scientific evidence available in 2000,” when the site was designated Landmark #227 by the City of Berkeley’s Landmarks Preservation Commission, who noted that the site is “most highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial ground.” It argues that until the region was developed, “1900 Fourth parking lot was primarily under water near the original shoreline, covered with marshy land and willow trees.” It implies, in other words, that any remains there aren’t pervasive enough (they didn’t find them in their recent penetrations). Decades ago they were underwater; they were grown over by trees in the 1950s; they are too deeply buried and too old—too distanced in time and place -- to be found now, and brought into visibility according to the terms and techniques of “real scientific” approaches. First of all, again, this seems highly debatable and indeed inaccurate, given the number of remains that have been found and that are documented in the archives of U.S. institutions (the University of California, California state records). There are documented findings of human burials in areas immediately surrounding the site, and no one is disputing that this area includes an Ohlone Shellmound site. As the report itself notes, “The West Berkeley Shellmound is considered one of the oldest and largest shellmounds in the Bay Area.” Yet it continues – and herein lies its argument-- “Its true size, however, is not known.” The issue, thus, is the dimension of the Shellmound. They don’t know how far it extended. The developers imply this uncertainty (however debatable it may be) to be evidence that the Shellmound isn’t in the exact block under discussion. But -- the exact opposite conclusion could also be drawn: since the exact size of a large Shellmound isn’t known, it very well could be in that site, around which, in close proximity, human remains have been found. In short: the breadth of the site in West Berkeley needs to be considered as a whole rather than in individual, chopped-up project-by-project parcels. Indeed, the assumptions in this chopped-up approach (focusing on the most recent investigations in a blocked-out parcel of space only) make clear complex differences around understandings of time and place, and negate Ohlone and other Indigenous ways of understanding these. No one is denying there is an Ohlone Shellmound in this region—nor that the place is sacred. (The developers’ website states, “What remains of these sacred places are at once among the region’s most significant archaeological sites while at the same time largely hidden beneath foundations and pavement laid during the 19th and 20th centuries” (emphasis added).) What developers question is this sacred Shellmound’s relation to time, and its exact location in the earth. They state that it is now beneath the foundations and pavement that were imposed upon it decades ago. They suggest uncertainty in time and space: aren’t the Shellmound remains too buried under roadways built decades ago, too disturbed by waterways before that, too spread out? Are they too far back in history? The report implies that all that is “real” is what they find and can see now, in the top-most penetrable-by-cutting-edge-science visible layers, in this one delineated block of ground. Not what is in the layers underneath it (or for that matter above it, where the proposed six-level parking garage would be built). Not what is in the spaces just around it. Not time understood in longer periods than years or decades, extending into realms that the historical record doesn’t have a way of registering – or into the futurities that historical ways of thinking don’t see. And not what many Ohlone leaders are saying about this all. These approaches clearly foreground developers’ perspectives at the expense of Ohlone perspectives. How, developers imply, could this place as a sacred burial space really matter if we don’t find evidence that confirms this, right here in this primary layer of square block we are examining now, looking at time-frame of a century or two, unscathed by the institutions, foundations, and pavements laid in colonizing this land? Sure, Ohlone leaders are loudly and clearly stating its significance as a sacred site--and we agree that it’s sacred, or maybe that it was once, somewhere around here, though we raise questions about when and where. For we can’t see it anymore in this one small plot of land. And we want to build this commercial project. So if those understandings don’t register in our historical and scientific systems (even if—see above-- they actually do) how can they matter (implicitly, how can they matter to us) today? Though I’d like to argue that the benefit of Indigenous worldviews to all of us shouldn’t be driving this matter, in the hopes of effectively convincing those empowered with deciding this case, I’d like to suggest that, actually, they do. The developers’ suggested way of validating truth only as its seen by them, on this surface (or as can be extracted up to it), without attention to layers of land and waterways, and pasts and futures, to interconnections over space and across politically-drawn boundary lines, extends to a larger politics of the day (though admittedly with a different relation to Western science): if we from our high-rise luxury towers don’t see and aren’t bothered by the planetary effects of carbon emissions, can’t we just deny them as real? And keep on foregrounding commercial interests that will bring even greater wealth to some, over Indigenous perspectives and concerns? Regardless of how these processes and reports end up parsed, what is resoundingly clear is the deep dispute registering both in their findings and in the process used. And what this dispute raises is a clear opportunity: a chance for the City of Berkeley to step back, listen, and reevaluate the significance of this site not as real estate, but in all its layers and reverberations: for what it means to many Ohlone people in the region as a Tribal Cultural Resource, for what it could mean to the City of Berkeley—and perhaps, for what it could mean as a model to the world at this crucial time for our planet. Instead of the proposed commercial development on this site, Ohlone leaders have suggested supporting the site as a space for the active practice of Ohlone arts and culture. What could supporting this agenda mean? Rather than pushing through the controversial commercial development of stores and restaurants, a parking garage, and apartments at an Indigenous sacred site, could the City of Berkeley take this situation as an opportunity to slow down and envision the space used in other ways? How could this West Berkeley Shellmound site be nurtured and supported as a crucial location for Berkeley to register Ohlone past and present and future, and for Ohlone people to practice and strengthen their culture, to educate themselves, and to model ways of being in relation that sustain all of us? Could it be an open-air classroom or gathering space? A cultural and educational center? A site –not just a room in a commercial building, but a green open space park -- for a dance arbor or roundhouse, where local Native dance practices could be taught and learned? There are currently no locally-based Ohlone dance groups -- but there is interest, and there is support for one from tribal dance groups with Pomo, Maidu and Miwok dancers that have been successfully initiated and are growing. Could a Berkeley Shellmound Sacred Site cultural center support such an endeavor? There is, at present, no adequate site in Berkeley to register the significance of this Shellmound site as sacred to Ohlone people (the only official recognition of it is the series of murals and the small plaque in the parking lot under the freeway). Could this site slated for development instead be supported as a vibrant space both commemorating the historical significance of the region’s Ohlone deep and layered past, and also supporting its current and future vitality? Could this space be envisioned in a way that both recognizes its significance as a sacred site to Ohlone people, and provides an active, educational space for the learning, holding, and growing of Ohlone culture, at a time when Indigenous knowledge and practices are so crucial to the planet, and have so much to offer? Could it model to the world how, despite the agendas of U.S. federal leaders, localities can foreground not corporate development and profit, but community and solidarity? Could this City of Berkeley decision to move toward this vision, working with Ohlone people, contribute towards a better world? We are at an urgent moment not just in U.S. history, but also in Ohlone people’s history, with diverse cultural revitalization projects growing in inspiring and exciting ways. These include, to name just a few: storytelling and language revitalization projects at the Costanoan Ohlone Indian Canyon in Hollister; the Rumsen Ohlone basket making supported by the Oakland Museum; the Native and Ohlone cultural demonstrations held regularly at Coyote Hills Regional Park in Fremont; and multiple regular Big Time and other social and ceremonial gatherings in the Bay Area– to name only a handful of the Ohlone cultural activities taking place increasingly in the region. And there is growing interest in supporting more. Enabling the possibility for this space to be dedicated not to commerce and profit, but to the past, present, and future of Ohlone culture in the City of Berkeley, at a site known to be sacred and known to be the oldest bayside settlement in the San Francisco Bay Area, would be an inspiring act of vision and resistance. A movement recognizing the import of Indigenous knowledge and of Indigenous-led practices protecting the earth and water is growing not just here, but around the continent. Perhaps you have followed the No Dakota Access Pipeline #NODAPL groundswell of Native-led resistance to Energy Transfer Partners pipeline project, a project which threatens the Standing Rock Sioux’s water, burial grounds, and sacred sites. Perhaps, in your day to day moving about in Oakland and Berkeley, you have seen the medicine wheel colors painted onto bike paths and sidewalks, and been reminded that this is all Native land, and of the vibrant Native presence here. Perhaps, in large and small ways, you have been seeing the ways that Native leaders in many locations are (and have long been) calling out the import of protecting land and water for the future of our planet and all of its beings, and of how maintaining access to sacred sites for ceremonial practices is an integral part of this protection. Perhaps, as you review these reports, and take in their questionable methods and conclusions, and as you listen deeply to the concerns being shared, you can see a better way for the City of Berkeley to lead than by accepting the EIR. I, along with many others, urge you to reject it, and to let this process lead toward a better solution for us all. Sincerely, Jacqueline Shea Murphy Associate Professor and Graduate Adviser Department of Dance University of California, Riverside 1417 Carleton St. Berkeley, CA 94702 Glen Hauer Phone: (510) 859-4277 Fax: (510) 225-2089 [email protected] January 22, 2017 Shannon Allen City of Berkeley City Planning 1947 Center Street, 2nd Floor Berkeley, CA 94704 Dear Ms. Allen: I am a Berkeley homeowner and lifelong resident of Berkeley. I write to comment on the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report fails to address remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. The tribal consultation has been inadequate. (The primary consultant had multiple conflicts of interest, while a second Ohlone person repeatedly requesting inclusion was not consulted at all.) The draft EIR is in dispute. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to establish the archaeological reports. The data in the draft has not been adequately reviewed. Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley "Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People" resolves: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site." Other indigenous people of the region, such as the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be consulted but were not. For all of these reasons, you should reject the Draft EIR. Sincerely, Glen Hauer 2 Allen, Shannon From: Hilary Buffum Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Commission. It was also listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, as well as determined to be eligible for the National Registry of Historic places. The West Berkeley Shellmound site, completely encompassing the proposed 1900 Fourth Street site, is known to be the oldest bayside settlement in the San Francisco Bay Area, approximately 5700 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone people today. The draft EIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by massive community opposition voiced at the Dec 1st meeting of the Berkeley Landmark Preservation Committee. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to establish the archaeological reports and there has not been adequate peer review of the data in the draft EIR. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology of the 1900 Fourth Street EIR. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the EIR’s preparation. The primary consultant had multiple conflicts of interest, while a second Ohlone person repeatedly requesting inclusion was not consulted for the EIR. This manner of consultation with Ohlone people seems like a mere token gesture given the importance of this site to members of the Ohlone community. Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley "Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People" states in part: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site." On page 67, the Draft Environmental Impact Report states, "Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous people of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear weather or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound site is the series of murals and the small plaque in the parking lot under the freeway. Certainly the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone people to develop a major memorial and educational site at 1900 4th Street. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the five thousand years of history. Reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative! Sincerely, Hilary Buffum -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP +DQQDK&DQWRU KDQQDKUFDQWRU#JPDLOFRP! 6HQW 6XQGD\-DQXDU\ 30 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW )RXUWK6WUHHW Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners, I am writing to express my deep concerns about the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Commission. It was also listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, as well as determined to be eligible for the National Registry of Historic places. The West Berkeley Shellmound site, completely encompassing the proposed 1900 Fourth Street site, is known to be the oldest bayside settlement in the San Francisco Bay Area, approximately 5700 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone people today. The draft EIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by massive community opposition voiced at the Dec 1st meeting of the Berkeley Landmark Preservation Committee. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to establish the archaeological reports and there has not been adequate peer review of the data in the draft EIR. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology of the 1900 Fourth Street EIR. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the EIR’s preparation. The primary consultant had multiple conflicts of interest, while a second Ohlone person repeatedly requesting inclusion was not consulted for the EIR. This manner of consultation with Ohlone people seems like a mere token gesture given the importance of this site to members of the Ohlone community. Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley "Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People" states in part: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site." On page 67, the Draft Environmental Impact Report states, "Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous people of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear weather or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound site is the series of murals and the small plaque in the parking lot under the freeway. Certainly the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone people to develop a major memorial and educational site at 1900 4th Street. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the five thousand years of history. Reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative! Sincerely, Hannah Cantor -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP 0RJJ NLOOHUSHQJXLQ#JPDLOFRP! 6HQW 6XQGD\-DQXDU\ 30 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW 6KHOOPRXQG'HYHORSPHQW Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Commission. It was also listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, as well as determined to be eligible for the National Registry of Historic places. The West Berkeley Shellmound site, completely encompassing the proposed 1900 Fourth Street site, is known to be the oldest bayside settlement in the San Francisco Bay Area, approximately 5700 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone people today. The draft EIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by massive community opposition voiced at the Dec 1st meeting of the Berkeley Landmark Preservation Committee. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to establish the archaeological reports and there has not been adequate peer review of the data in the draft EIR. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology of the 1900 Fourth Street EIR. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the EIR’s preparation. The primary consultant had multiple conflicts of interest, while a second Ohlone person repeatedly requesting inclusion was not consulted for the EIR. This manner of consultation with Ohlone people seems like a mere token gesture given the importance of this site to members of the Ohlone community. Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley "Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People" states in part: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site." On page 67, the Draft Environmental Impact Report states, "Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous people of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear weather or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound site is the series of murals and the small plaque in the parking lot under the freeway. Certainly the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone people to develop a major memorial and educational site at 1900 4th Street. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the five thousand years of history. Reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative! Sincerely, Mykel Mogg -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP VP VKHLODPDULHQ#JPDLOFRP! 6HQW 6XQGD\-DQXDU\ 30 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW (,6 Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Preservation Commission in 2000, noting the site is “most highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial ground.” The site was also listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, and determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The original West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site completely encompassed the proposed 1900 Fourth Street Project and blocks beyond. It is known to be the oldest bayside settlement and one of the largest shellmounds in the San Francisco Bay Area—more than 5,000 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone Peoples today—a fact not acknowledged in the DEIR. The content of the DEIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by widespread community opposition and concern voiced at the March 10, 2016, December 8, 2016 and January 12, 2017 Zoning Adjustment Board meetings and the December 1, 2016, and January 5, 2017 Landmark Preservation Commission meetings. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to create the archaeological report and there has not been adequate peer review of the limited data in the DEIR. The archaeological analysis is inadequate and misleading. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered many prehistoric human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address human remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology and conclusions of the 1900 Fourth Street Draft EIR. The likely disturbance of human remains is highly significant as defined by CEQA and cannot be mitigated. The DEIR does not address the issue of Richard Schwartz’s recording of over 400 burials in the vicinity of 1900 Fourth St. and fails to provide any context of the lot within the larger site, ALA-307. The DEIR attempts to isolate and not analyze 1900 Fourth St. within the context of a larger site of cultural significance. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the DEIR’s preparation. The primary consultant has conflicts of interest, and does not represent the all of the Ohlone people indigenous to the Bay Area. Another Ohlone California Tribal group indigenous to Berkeley area and community has formally and repeatedly requested tribal consultation as required by CEQA. The City to date has not consulted with this group for purposes of preparing the DEIR, in violation of CEQA. The consultation that has occurred to date appears to be nothing more than a token gesture that fails to protect this important Ohlone site (the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site) and has resulted in payment of funds to an individual as mitigation for the destruction of this irreplaceable sacred place. The Ohlone comprise more than a dozen tribes and languages yet the DEIR consults only one individual. The DEIR also fails to assess the importance of this site as a “tribal cultural resource” separate from the category of “cultural resources – archaeological.” AB 52 established a new category of resources under the California Environmental Quality Act, “tribal cultural resources,” which considers the tribal cultural values in addition to the scientific and archaeological values when determining impacts and mitigation. This DEIR, rather than fully assessing the impacts to tribal cultural resources under a new category, merely incorporates a brief discussion under the cultural resources archaeological section that states the destruction of the site will be mitigated through: 1) payment to an individual of $75,000 to improve a cemetery located outside the bounds of the shellmound and outside of the city boundaries, and 2) that educational panels will be placed at or near the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site after further consultation with the Ohlone people, without identifying who will be consulted for this mitigation measure. Neither the discussion nor the proposed mitigation complies with CEQA requirements to consult with impacted Tribes and to include a new and separate category addressing “tribal cultural resources.” Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley, entitled “Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People” states in part: “BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site.” Please honor this promise. Honoring this promise requires consultation will additional Ohlone people who recognize this site as sacred, as a tribal cultural property and it requires consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region. To date, Berkeley has not honored this promise and has failed to seek the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous people of the region—and has failed to respect the indigenous peoples’ opposition to the proposed project. On page 67, the DEIR states, “Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous peoples of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear whether or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. Given that 1900 Fourth Street proposal includes 155-apartments, and given that there are numerous Tribal objections to the development, it seems clear that the step of meaningful Tribal consultation before amending the General Plan was not done. The Project also requires several discretionary approvals by the City for variances to the current general plan and zoning ordinances. These approvals would require consultation under both AB 52 and SB 18. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound and Ohlone village site is a series of murals and a small plaque in the parking lot under the nearby freeway. Certainly, the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone peoples to develop a major memorial and educational site in the form of a culturally-appropriate, green open space park at 1900 Fourth Street. The DEIR fails to analyze and offer meaningful alternatives. I strongly support the development of such a memorial and educational site in lieu of the proposed development as the preferred alternative. In addition to the unavoidable adverse impacts to this critical tribal resource the DEIR includes other fatal flaws that require the City of Berkeley to either disapprove the Project or at a minimum require a supplemental EIR before making any determinations on the Project. The Project will not fulfill the purposes set forth in the Project proposal—in fact the Project will actually exacerbate issues it claims to resolve. The DEIR does not adequately address traffic impacts in that it fails to include all approved and ongoing projects in the area. The failure to address these other projects means that the cumulative impacts analysis is fatally flawed. The DEIR fails to account for safety issues that will result from additional traffic in the area and the railroad crossing. The DEIR does not fully address potential air quality impacts nor does it adequately discuss studies regarding increased asthma and other respiratory problems for people living near freeways and industrial areas. The DEIR does not sufficiently address the potential for release of hazardous chemicals through ground disturbance. The DEIR does include a sufficient discussion of potential impacts to water resources on site that could result from development on the site, nor does the document include an adequate alternatives analysis. It would be irresponsible for the City of Berkeley to consider approving this project without complete and accurate information regarding any and all impacts that may affect the health and safety of the community. This Project has the potential to increase already significant traffic congestion, harm the health of residents, and destroy irreplaceable cultural and historic sites that the City of Berkeley has pledged to protect. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of more than 5,000 years of history and a living culture. Reject the DEIR and embrace the No Plan / Create a Berkeley Gateway / Memorial Site Alternative! Sincerely, Sheila M. Attn: Shannon Allen City of Berkeley Planning Dept. 1947 Center Street, 2nd Floor Berkeley, CA 94704 DATE: January 23, 2017 Re: Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report on proposed 1900 4th Street Project Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Preservation Commission in 2000, noting the site is “most highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial ground.” The site was also listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, and determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The original West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site completely encompassed the proposed 1900 Fourth Street Project and blocks beyond. It is known to be the oldest bayside settlement and one of the largest shellmounds in the San Francisco Bay Area—more than 5,000 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone Peoples today—a fact not acknowledged in the DEIR. The content of the DEIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by widespread community opposition and concern voiced at the March 10, 2016, December 8, 2016 and January 12, 2017 Zoning Adjustment Board meetings and the December 1, 2016, and January 5, 2017 Landmark Preservation Commission meetings. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to create the archaeological report and there has not been adequate peer review of the limited data in the DEIR. The archaeological analysis is inadequate and misleading. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered many prehistoric human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address human remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology and conclusions of the 1900 Fourth Street Draft EIR. The likely disturbance of human remains is highly significant as defined by CEQA and cannot be mitigated. The DEIR does not address the issue of Richard Schwartz’s recording of over 400 burials in the vicinity of 1900 Fourth St. and fails to provide any context of the lot within the larger site, ALA-307. The DEIR attempts to isolate and not analyze 1900 Fourth St. within the context of a larger site of cultural significance. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the DEIR’s preparation. The primary consultant has conflicts of interest, and does not represent the all of the Ohlone people indigenous to the Bay Area. Another Ohlone California Tribal group indigenous to Berkeley area and community has formally and repeatedly requested tribal consultation as required by CEQA. The City to date has not consulted with this group for purposes of preparing the DEIR, in violation of CEQA. The consultation that has occurred to date appears to be nothing more than a token gesture that fails to protect this important Ohlone site (the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site) and has resulted in payment of funds to an individual as mitigation for the destruction of this irreplaceable sacred place. The Ohlone comprise more than a dozen tribes and languages yet the DEIR consults only one individual. The DEIR also fails to assess the importance of this site as a “tribal cultural resource” separate from the category of “cultural resources – archaeological.” AB 52 established a new category of resources under the California Environmental Quality Act, “tribal cultural resources,” which considers the tribal cultural values in addition to the scientific and archaeological values when determining impacts and mitigation. This DEIR, rather than fully assessing the impacts to tribal cultural resources under a new category, merely incorporates a brief discussion under the cultural resources archaeological section that states the destruction of the site will be mitigated through: 1) payment to an individual of $75,000 to improve a cemetery located outside the bounds of the shellmound and outside of the city boundaries, and 2) that educational panels will be placed at or near the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site after further consultation with the Ohlone people, without identifying who will be consulted for this mitigation measure. Neither the discussion nor the proposed mitigation complies with CEQA requirements to consult with impacted Tribes and to include a new and separate category addressing “tribal cultural resources.” Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley, entitled “Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People” states in part: “BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site.” Please honor this promise. Honoring this promise requires consultation will additional Ohlone people who recognize this site as sacred, as a tribal cultural property and it requires consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region. To date, Berkeley has not honored this promise and has failed to seek the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous people of the region—and has failed to respect the indigenous peoples’ opposition to the proposed project. On page 67, the DEIR states, “Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous peoples of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear whether or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. Given that 1900 Fourth Street proposal includes 155-apartments, and given that there are numerous Tribal objections to the development, it seems clear that the step of meaningful Tribal consultation before amending the General Plan was not done. The Project also requires several discretionary approvals by the City for variances to the current general plan and zoning ordinances. These approvals would require consultation under both AB 52 and SB 18. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound and Ohlone village site is a series of murals and a small plaque in the parking lot under the nearby freeway. Certainly, the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone peoples to develop a major memorial and educational site in the form of a culturally-appropriate, green open space park at 1900 Fourth Street. The DEIR fails to analyze and offer meaningful alternatives. I strongly support the development of such a memorial and educational site in lieu of the proposed development as the preferred alternative. In addition to the unavoidable adverse impacts to this critical tribal resource the DEIR includes other fatal flaws that require the City of Berkeley to either disapprove the Project or at a minimum require a supplemental EIR before making any determinations on the Project. The Project will not fulfill the purposes set forth in the Project proposal—in fact the Project will actually exacerbate issues it claims to resolve. The DEIR does not adequately address traffic impacts in that it fails to include all approved and ongoing projects in the area. The failure to address these other projects means that the cumulative impacts analysis is fatally flawed. The DEIR fails to account for safety issues that will result from additional traffic in the area and the railroad crossing. The DEIR does not fully address potential air quality impacts nor does it adequately discuss studies regarding increased asthma and other respiratory problems for people living near freeways and industrial areas. The DEIR does not sufficiently address the potential for release of hazardous chemicals through ground disturbance. The DEIR does include a sufficient discussion of potential impacts to water resources on site that could result from development on the site, nor does the document include an adequate alternatives analysis. It would be irresponsible for the City of Berkeley to consider approving this project without complete and accurate information regarding any and all impacts that may affect the health and safety of the community. This Project has the potential to increase already significant traffic congestion, harm the health of residents, and destroy irreplaceable cultural and historic sites that the City of Berkeley has pledged to protect. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of more than 5,000 years of history and a living culture. Reject the DEIR and embrace the No Plan / Create a Berkeley Gateway / Memorial Site Alternative! Sincerely, David E. Chavez 304 1st Street Benicia, CA 94510 [email protected] -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP EULDQNDUYHODV NDUYHODV#\DKRRFRP! 6HQW 0RQGD\-DQXDU\ $0 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ &F $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW +DOW:HVW%HUNHOH\6KHOOPRXQG'HYHORSPHQW Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I live just two miles from the West Berkeley Shellmound, and as a community member here I have become aware of development proposal on this sacred Ohlone site and I am compelled to stand and speak in solidarity with the native people of this area to demand that the local government respect the living tradition of the Ohlone people. I am joining with many community members in Berkeley, throughout Alameda County, and across the nation and globe to express my deep concerns about the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Commission. It was also listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, as well as determined to be eligible for the National Registry of Historic places. The West Berkeley Shellmound site, completely encompassing the proposed 1900 Fourth Street site, is known to be the oldest bayside settlement in the San Francisco Bay Area, approximately 5700 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone people today. The draft EIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by massive community opposition voiced at the Dec 1st meeting of the Berkeley Landmark Preservation Committee. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to establish the archaeological reports and there has not been adequate peer review of the data in the draft EIR. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology of the 1900 Fourth Street EIR. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the EIR’s preparation. The primary consultant had multiple conflicts of interest, while a second Ohlone person repeatedly requesting inclusion was not consulted for the EIR. This manner of consultation with Ohlone people seems like a mere token gesture given the importance of this site to members of the Ohlone community. Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley "Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People" states in part: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site." On page 67, the Draft Environmental Impact Report states, "Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous people of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear weather or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound site is the series of murals and the small plaque in the parking lot under the freeway. Certainly the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone people to develop a major memorial and educational site at 1900 4th Street. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the five thousand years of history. Reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative! Sincerely, Brian Karvelas -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP ,VD*XFFLDUGL LVD#VDFUHGVWUHDPRUJ! 6HQW 0RQGD\-DQXDU\ $0 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW &RPPHQWVRQWKH'UDIW(QYLURQPHQWDO,PSDFW5HSRUWRQSURSRVHG WK6WUHHW 3URMHFW Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Preservation Commission in 2000, noting the site is “most highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial ground.” The site was also listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, and determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The original West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site completely encompassed the proposed 1900 Fourth Street Project and blocks beyond. It is known to be the oldest bayside settlement and one of the largest shellmounds in the San Francisco Bay Area—more than 5,000 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone Peoples today—a fact not acknowledged in the DEIR. The content of the DEIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by widespread community opposition and concern voiced at the March 10, 2016, December 8, 2016 and January 12, 2017 Zoning Adjustment Board meetings and the December 1, 2016, and January 5, 2017 Landmark Preservation Commission meetings. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to create the archaeological report and there has not been adequate peer review of the limited data in the DEIR. The archaeological analysis is inadequate and misleading. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered many prehistoric human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address human remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is highly relevant to the landmarked Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology and conclusions of the 1900 Fourth Street Draft EIR. The likely disturbance of human remains is highly significant as defined by CEQA and cannot be mitigated. The DEIR does not address the issue of Richard Schwartz’s recording of over 400 burials in the vicinity of 1900 Fourth St. and fails to provide any context of the lot within the larger site, ALA-307. The DEIR attempts to isolate and not analyze 1900 Fourth St. within the context of a larger site of cultural significance. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the DEIR’s preparation. The primary consultant has conflicts of interest, and does not represent the all of the Ohlone people indigenous to the Bay Area. Another Ohlone California Tribal group indigenous to Berkeley area and community has formally and repeatedly requested tribal consultation as required by CEQA. The City to date has not consulted with this group for purposes of preparing the DEIR, in violation of CEQA. The consultation that has occurred to date appears to be nothing more than a token gesture that fails to protect this important Ohlone site (the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site) and has resulted in payment of funds to an individual as mitigation for the destruction of this irreplaceable sacred place. The Ohlone comprise more than a dozen tribes and languages yet the DEIR consults only one individual. The DEIR also fails to assess the importance of this site as a “tribal cultural resource” separate from the category of “cultural resources – archaeological.” AB 52 established a new category of resources under the California Environmental Quality Act, “tribal cultural resources,” which considers the tribal cultural values in addition to the scientific and archaeological values when determining impacts and mitigation. This DEIR, rather than fully assessing the impacts to tribal cultural resources under a new category, merely incorporates a brief discussion under the cultural resources archaeological section that states the destruction of the site will be mitigated through: 1) payment to an individual of $75,000 to improve a cemetery located outside the bounds of the shellmound and outside of the city boundaries, and 2) that educational panels will be placed at or near the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site after further consultation with the Ohlone people, without identifying who will be consulted for this mitigation measure. Neither the discussion nor the proposed mitigation complies with CEQA requirements to consult with impacted Tribes and to include a new and separate category addressing “tribal cultural resources.” Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley, entitled “Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People” states in part: “BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site.” Please honor this promise. Honoring this promise requires consultation will additional Ohlone people who recognize this site as sacred, as a tribal cultural property and it requires consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region. To date, Berkeley has not honored this promise and has failed to seek the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous people of the region—and has failed to respect the indigenous peoples’ opposition to the proposed project. On page 67, the DEIR states, “Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous peoples of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear whether or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. Given that 1900 Fourth Street proposal includes 155-apartments, and given that there are numerous Tribal objections to the development, it seems clear that the step of meaningful Tribal consultation before amending the General Plan was not done. The Project also requires several discretionary approvals by the City for variances to the current general plan and zoning ordinances. These approvals would require consultation under both AB 52 and SB 18. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound and Ohlone village site is a series of murals and a small plaque in the parking lot under the nearby freeway. Certainly, the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone peoples to develop a major memorial and educational site in the form of a culturally-appropriate, green open space park at 1900 Fourth Street. The DEIR fails to analyze and offer meaningful alternatives. I strongly support the development of such a memorial and educational site in lieu of the proposed development as the preferred alternative. In addition to the unavoidable adverse impacts to this critical tribal resource the DEIR includes other fatal flaws that require the City of Berkeley to either disapprove the Project or at a minimum require a supplemental EIR before making any determinations on the Project. The Project will not fulfill the purposes set forth in the Project proposal—in fact the Project will actually exacerbate issues it claims to resolve. The DEIR does not adequately address traffic impacts in that it fails to include all approved and ongoing projects in the area. The failure to address these other projects means that the cumulative impacts analysis is fatally flawed. The DEIR fails to account for safety issues that will result from additional traffic in the area and the railroad crossing. The DEIR does not fully address potential air quality impacts nor does it adequately discuss studies regarding increased asthma and other respiratory problems for people living near freeways and industrial areas. The DEIR does not sufficiently address the potential for release of hazardous chemicals through ground disturbance. The DEIR does not include a sufficient discussion of potential impacts to water resources on site that could result from development on the site, nor does the document include an adequate alternatives analysis. It would be irresponsible for the City of Berkeley to consider approving this project without complete and accurate information regarding any and all impacts that may affect the health and safety of the community. This Project has the potential to increase already significant traffic congestion, harm the health of residents, and destroy irreplaceable cultural and historic sites that the City of Berkeley has pledged to protect. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of more than 5,000 years of history and a living culture. Reject the DEIR and embrace the No Plan / Create a Berkeley Gateway / Memorial Site Alternative! Sincerely, Dr. Isa Gucciardi -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP 0LFD-DUPHO6FKQHLGHU PRQVLHXUPLFD#JPDLOFRP! 6HQW 0RQGD\-DQXDU\ $0 &F $OOHQ6KDQQRQ $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW 6WRSFRQVWUXFWLRQRQVDFUHG2KORQHVLWHV Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Commission. It was also listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, as well as determined to be eligible for the National Registry of Historic places. The West Berkeley Shellmound site, completely encompassing the proposed 1900 Fourth Street site, is known to be the oldest bayside settlement in the San Francisco Bay Area, approximately 5700 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone people today. The draft EIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by massive community opposition voiced at the Dec 1st meeting of the Berkeley Landmark Preservation Committee. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to establish the archaeological reports and there has not been adequate peer review of the data in the draft EIR. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology of the 1900 Fourth Street EIR. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the EIR’s preparation. The primary consultant had multiple conflicts of interest, while a second Ohlone person repeatedly requesting inclusion was not consulted for the EIR. This manner of consultation with Ohlone people seems like a mere token gesture given the importance of this site to members of the Ohlone community. Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley "Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People" states in part: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site." On page 67, the Draft Environmental Impact Report states, "Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous people of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear weather or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound site is the series of murals and the small plaque in the parking lot under the freeway. Certainly the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone people to develop a major memorial and educational site at 1900 4th Street. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the five thousand years of history. Reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative! Sincerely, Mica -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP 0D\D/LWDXHU POLWDXHU#JPDLOFRP! 6HQW 0RQGD\-DQXDU\ 30 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW (QYLURQPHQWDO,PSDFW5HSRUW Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Commission. It was also listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, as well as determined to be eligible for the National Registry of Historic places. The West Berkeley Shellmound site, completely encompassing the proposed 1900 Fourth Street site, is known to be the oldest bayside settlement in the San Francisco Bay Area, approximately 5700 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone people today. The draft EIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by massive community opposition voiced at the Dec 1st meeting of the Berkeley Landmark Preservation Committee. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to establish the archaeological reports and there has not been adequate peer review of the data in the draft EIR. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology of the 1900 Fourth Street EIR. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the EIR’s preparation. The primary consultant had multiple conflicts of interest, while a second Ohlone person repeatedly requesting inclusion was not consulted for the EIR. This manner of consultation with Ohlone people seems like a mere token gesture given the importance of this site to members of the Ohlone community. Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley "Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People" states in part: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site." On page 67, the Draft Environmental Impact Report states, "Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous people of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear weather or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound site is the series of murals and the small plaque in the parking lot under the freeway. Certainly the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone people to develop a major memorial and educational site at 1900 4th Street. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of the five thousand years of history. Reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative! Sincerely, Maya Litauer Chan Allen, Shannon From: Dafna Finkler Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Preservation Commission in 2000, noting the site is “most highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial ground.” The site was also listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, and determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The original West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site completely encompassed the proposed 1900 Fourth Street Project and blocks beyond. It is known to be the oldest bayside settlement and one of the largest shellmounds in the San Francisco Bay Area—more than 5,000 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone Peoples today—a fact not acknowledged in the DEIR. The content of the DEIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by widespread community opposition and concern voiced at the March 10, 2016, December 8, 2016 and January 12, 2017 Zoning Adjustment Board meetings and the December 1, 2016, and January 5, 2017 Landmark Preservation Commission meetings. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to create the archaeological report and there has not been adequate peer review of the limited data in the DEIR. The archaeological analysis is inadequate and misleading. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered many prehistoric human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address human remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology and conclusions of the 1900 Fourth Street Draft EIR. The likely disturbance of human remains is highly significant as defined by CEQA and cannot be mitigated. The DEIR does not address the issue of Richard Schwartz’s recording of over 400 burials in the vicinity of 1900 Fourth St. and fails to provide any context of the lot within the larger site, ALA-307. The DEIR attempts to isolate and not analyze 1900 Fourth St. within the context of a larger site of cultural significance. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the DEIR’s preparation. The primary consultant has conflicts of interest, and does not represent the all of the Ohlone people indigenous to the Bay Area. Another Ohlone California Tribal group indigenous to Berkeley area and community has formally and repeatedly requested tribal consultation as required by CEQA. The City to date has not consulted with this group for purposes of preparing the DEIR, in violation of CEQA. The consultation that has occurred to date appears to be nothing more than a token gesture that fails to protect this important Ohlone site (the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site) and has resulted in payment of funds to an individual as mitigation for the destruction of this irreplaceable sacred place. The Ohlone comprise more than a dozen tribes and languages yet the DEIR consults only one individual. The DEIR also fails to assess the importance of this site as a “tribal cultural resource” separate from the category of “cultural resources – archaeological.” AB 52 established a new category of resources under the California Environmental Quality Act, “tribal cultural resources,” which considers the tribal cultural values in addition to the scientific and archaeological values when determining impacts and mitigation. This DEIR, rather than fully assessing the impacts to tribal cultural resources under a new category, merely incorporates a brief discussion under the cultural resources archaeological section that states the destruction of the site will be mitigated through: 1) payment to an individual of $75,000 to improve a cemetery located outside the bounds of the shellmound and outside of the city boundaries, and 2) that educational panels will be placed at or near the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site after further consultation with the Ohlone people, without identifying who will be consulted for this mitigation measure. Neither the discussion nor the proposed mitigation complies with CEQA requirements to consult with impacted Tribes and to include a new and separate category addressing “tribal cultural resources.” Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley, entitled “Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People” states in part: “BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site.” Please honor this promise. Honoring this promise requires consultation will additional Ohlone people who recognize this site as sacred, as a tribal cultural property and it requires consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region. To date, Berkeley has not honored this promise and has failed to seek the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous people of the region—and has failed to respect the indigenous peoples’ opposition to the proposed project. On page 67, the DEIR states, “Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous peoples of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear whether or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. Given that 1900 Fourth Street proposal includes 155-apartments, and given that there are numerous Tribal objections to the development, it seems clear that the step of meaningful Tribal consultation before amending the General Plan was not done. The Project also requires several discretionary approvals by the City for variances to the current general plan and zoning ordinances. These approvals would require consultation under both AB 52 and SB 18. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound and Ohlone village site is a series of murals and a small plaque in the parking lot under the nearby freeway. Certainly, the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone peoples to develop a major memorial and educational site in the form of a culturally-appropriate, green open space park at 1900 Fourth Street. The DEIR fails to analyze and offer meaningful alternatives. I strongly support the development of such a memorial and educational site in lieu of the proposed development as the preferred alternative. In addition to the unavoidable adverse impacts to this critical tribal resource the DEIR includes other fatal flaws that require the City of Berkeley to either disapprove the Project or at a minimum require a supplemental EIR before making any determinations on the Project. The Project will not fulfill the purposes set forth in the Project proposal—in fact the Project will actually exacerbate issues it claims to resolve. The DEIR does not adequately address traffic impacts in that it fails to include all approved and ongoing projects in the area. The failure to address these other projects means that the cumulative impacts analysis is fatally flawed. The DEIR fails to account for safety issues that will result from additional traffic in the area and the railroad crossing. The DEIR does not fully address potential air quality impacts nor does it adequately discuss studies regarding increased asthma and other respiratory problems for people living near freeways and industrial areas. The DEIR does not sufficiently address the potential for release of hazardous chemicals through ground disturbance. The DEIR does include a sufficient discussion of potential impacts to water resources on site that could result from development on the site, nor does the document include an adequate alternatives analysis. It would be irresponsible for the City of Berkeley to consider approving this project without complete and accurate information regarding any and all impacts that may affect the health and safety of the community. This Project has the potential to increase already significant traffic congestion, harm the health of residents, and destroy irreplaceable cultural and historic sites that the City of Berkeley has pledged to protect. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of more than 5,000 years of history and a living culture. Reject the DEIR and embrace the No Plan / Create a Berkeley Gateway / Memorial Site Alternative! Sincerely, Dafna Finkler West Berkeley Resident -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP 'RQ*DWHV GRQ#HDVWED\WFPFRP! 6HQW 7XHVGD\-DQXDU\ 30 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ &F VKHOOPRXQGZDON#\DKRRFRP 6XEMHFW :HVW%HUNHOH\6KHOOPRXQGDQG2KORQH9LOODJH6LWH Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners, I am writing to express my deep concerns about the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Preservation Commission in 2000, noting the site is “most highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial ground.” The site was also listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, and determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The original West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site completely encompassed the proposed 1900 Fourth Street Project and blocks beyond. It is known to be the oldest bayside settlement and one of the largest shellmounds in the San Francisco Bay Area—more than 5,000 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone Peoples today—a fact not acknowledged in the DEIR. The content of the DEIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by widespread community opposition and concern voiced at the March 10, 2016, December 8, 2016 and January 12, 2017 Zoning Adjustment Board meetings and the December 1, 2016, and January 5, 2017 Landmark Preservation Commission meetings. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to create the archaeological report and there has not been adequate peer review of the limited data in the DEIR. The archaeological analysis is inadequate and misleading. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered many prehistoric human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address human remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology and conclusions of the 1900 Fourth Street Draft EIR. The likely disturbance of human remains is highly significant as defined by CEQA and cannot be mitigated. The DEIR does not address the issue of Richard Schwartz’s recording of over 400 burials in the vicinity of 1900 Fourth St. and fails to provide any context of the lot within the larger site, ALA-307. The DEIR attempts to isolate and not analyze 1900 Fourth St. within the context of a larger site of cultural significance. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the DEIR’s preparation. The primary consultant has conflicts of interest, and does not represent the all of the Ohlone people indigenous to the Bay Area. Another Ohlone California Tribal group indigenous to Berkeley area and community has formally and repeatedly requested tribal consultation as required by CEQA. The City to date has not consulted with this group for purposes of preparing the DEIR, in violation of CEQA. The consultation that has occurred to date appears to be nothing more than a token gesture that fails to protect this important Ohlone site (the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site) and has resulted in payment of funds to an individual as mitigation for the destruction of this irreplaceable sacred place. The Ohlone comprise more than a dozen tribes and languages yet the DEIR consults only one individual. The DEIR also fails to assess the importance of this site as a “tribal cultural resource” separate from the category of “cultural resources – archaeological.” AB 52 established a new category of resources under the California Environmental Quality Act, “tribal cultural resources,” which considers the tribal cultural values in addition to the scientific and archaeological values when determining impacts and mitigation. This DEIR, rather than fully assessing the impacts to tribal cultural resources under a new category, merely incorporates a brief discussion under the cultural resources archaeological section that states the destruction of the site will be mitigated through: 1) payment to an individual of $75,000 to improve a cemetery located outside the bounds of the shellmound and outside of the city boundaries, and 2) that educational panels will be placed at or near the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site after further consultation with the Ohlone people, without identifying who will be consulted for this mitigation measure. Neither the discussion nor the proposed mitigation complies with CEQA requirements to consult with impacted Tribes and to include a new and separate category addressing “tribal cultural resources.” Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley, entitled “Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People” states in part: “BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site.” Please honor this promise. Honoring this promise requires consultation will additional Ohlone people who recognize this site as sacred, as a tribal cultural property and it requires consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region. To date, Berkeley has not honored this promise and has failed to seek the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous people of the region—and has failed to respect the indigenous peoples’ opposition to the proposed project. On page 67, the DEIR states, “Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous peoples of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear whether or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. Given that 1900 Fourth Street proposal includes 155-apartments, and given that there are numerous Tribal objections to the development, it seems clear that the step of meaningful Tribal consultation before amending the General Plan was not done. The Project also requires several discretionary approvals by the City for variances to the current general plan and zoning ordinances. These approvals would require consultation under both AB 52 and SB 18. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound and Ohlone village site is a series of murals and a small plaque in the parking lot under the nearby freeway. Certainly, the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone peoples to develop a major memorial and educational site in the form of a culturally-appropriate, green open space park at 1900 Fourth Street. The DEIR fails to analyze and offer meaningful alternatives. I strongly support the development of such a memorial and educational site in lieu of the proposed development as the preferred alternative. In addition to the unavoidable adverse impacts to this critical tribal resource the DEIR includes other fatal flaws that require the City of Berkeley to either disapprove the Project or at a minimum require a supplemental EIR before making any determinations on the Project. The Project will not fulfill the purposes set forth in the Project proposal—in fact the Project will actually exacerbate issues it claims to resolve. The DEIR does not adequately address traffic impacts in that it fails to include all approved and ongoing projects in the area. The failure to address these other projects means that the cumulative impacts analysis is fatally flawed. The DEIR fails to account for safety issues that will result from additional traffic in the area and the railroad crossing. The DEIR does not fully address potential air quality impacts nor does it adequately discuss studies regarding increased asthma and other respiratory problems for people living near freeways and industrial areas. The DEIR does not sufficiently address the potential for release of hazardous chemicals through ground disturbance. The DEIR does include a sufficient discussion of potential impacts to water resources on site that could result from development on the site, nor does the document include an adequate alternatives analysis. It would be irresponsible for the City of Berkeley to consider approving this project without complete and accurate information regarding any and all impacts that may affect the health and safety of the community. This Project has the potential to increase already significant traffic congestion, harm the health of residents, and destroy irreplaceable cultural and historic sites that the City of Berkeley has pledged to protect. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of more than 5,000 years of history and a living culture. Reject the DEIR and embrace the No Plan / Create a Berkeley Gateway / Memorial Site Alternative! Sincerely, Don Gates Oakland, CA -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP 'HH.HOOHU GHHNHOOHU#JPDLOFRP! 6HQW 7XHVGD\-DQXDU\ $0 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW 6+(//0281' Dear Ms. Allen, You need to do everything you can to save the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site. This is the oldest sacred site in the Bay Area. It has to be protected. If destroyed by development it will be lost forever—and Berkeley will be responsible for a sacred place’s cultural, spiritual and ecological history being swept off the Earth. I grew up in Berkeley and was a fourth generation Berkeley girl, my great grandfather re-settling our family here in the 1890s. But the sites we talk about are far older than that. Forget about the finances and do the right thing. Yours sincerely, Dee Keller -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP /'LDPRQGVWRQH OGLDPRQGVWRQH#\DKRRFRP! 6HQW 7XHVGD\-DQXDU\ 30 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW &RPPHQWVRQWKH'UDIW(QYLURQPHQWDO,PSDFW5HSRUWRQSURSRVHG WK6WUHHW 3URMHFW Attn: Shannon Allen [email protected] City of Berkeley Planning Dept. 1947 Center Street, 2nd Floor Berkeley, CA 94704 January 24, 2017 Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing regarding the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. If you are not aware: • The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Preservation Commission in 2000, noting the site is “most highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial ground.” • The site was also listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, and determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. • The original West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site completely encompassed the proposed 1900 Fourth Street Project and blocks beyond. • It is known to be the oldest bayside settlement and one of the largest shellmounds in the San Francisco Bay Area— more than 5,000 years old. • It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. • It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone Peoples today—a fact not acknowledged in the DEIR. This is also your reminder about Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley, entitled “Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People”. The resolution states in part: “BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site.” Please honor this promise. Honoring this promise requires consultation will additional Ohlone people who recognize this site as sacred, as a tribal cultural property and it requires consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region. To date, Berkeley has not honored this promise and has failed to seek the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous people of the region—and has failed to respect the indigenous peoples’ opposition to the proposed project. Sincerely, Laura Diamondstone Former Berkeley resident WINNEMEM WINTU TRIBE 14840 BEAR MOUNTAIN ROAD • REDDING, CA • 96003 [email protected] WWW.WINNEMEMWINTU.US Attn: Shannon Allen City of Berkeley Planning Dept. 1947 Center Street, 2nd Floor Berkeley, CA 94704 January 24, 2017 Re: Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report on proposed 1900 4th Street Project Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Preservation Commission in 2000, noting the site is “most highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial ground.” The site was also listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, and determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The original West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site completely encompassed the proposed 1900 Fourth Street Project and blocks beyond. It is known to be the oldest bayside settlement and one of the largest shellmounds in the San Francisco Bay Area—more than 5,000 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone Peoples today—a fact not acknowledged in the DEIR. The content of the DEIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by widespread community opposition and concern voiced at the March 10, 2016, December 8, 2016 and January 12, 2017 Zoning Adjustment Board meetings and the December 1, 2016, and January 5, 2017 Landmark Preservation Commission meetings. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to create the archaeological report and there has not been adequate peer review of the limited data in the DEIR. The archaeological analysis is inadequate and misleading. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered many prehistoric human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address human remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology and conclusions of the 1900 Fourth Street Draft EIR. The likely disturbance of human remains is highly significant as defined by CEQA and cannot be mitigated. The DEIR does not address the issue of Richard Schwartz’s recording of over 400 burials in the vicinity of 1900 Fourth St. and fails to provide any context of the lot within the larger site, ALA-307. The DEIR attempts to isolate and not analyze 1900 Fourth St. within the context of a larger site of cultural significance. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the DEIR’s preparation. The primary consultant has conflicts of interest, and does not represent the all of the Ohlone people indigenous to the Bay Area. Another Ohlone California Tribal group indigenous to Berkeley area and community has formally and repeatedly requested tribal consultation as required by CEQA. The City to date has not consulted with this group for purposes of preparing the DEIR, in violation of CEQA. The consultation that has occurred to date appears to be nothing more than a token gesture that fails to protect this important Ohlone site (the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site) and has resulted in payment of funds to an individual as mitigation for the destruction of this irreplaceable sacred place. The Ohlone comprise more than a dozen tribes and languages yet the DEIR consults only one individual. The DEIR also fails to assess the importance of this site as a “tribal cultural resource” separate from the category of “cultural resources – archaeological.” AB 52 established a new category of resources under the California Environmental Quality Act, “tribal cultural resources,” which considers the tribal cultural values in addition to the scientific and archaeological values when determining impacts and mitigation. This DEIR, rather than fully assessing the impacts to tribal cultural resources under a new category, merely incorporates a brief discussion under the cultural resources "If the Sacred Fires are not lit, how will our children learn?" Honor Your Traditional Lifeways – 2 – January 24, 2017 archaeological section that states the destruction of the site will be mitigated through: 1) payment to an individual of $75,000 to improve a cemetery located outside the bounds of the shellmound and outside of the city boundaries, and 2) that educational panels will be placed at or near the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site after further consultation with the Ohlone people, without identifying who will be consulted for this mitigation measure. Neither the discussion nor the proposed mitigation complies with CEQA requirements to consult with impacted Tribes and to include a new and separate category addressing “tribal cultural resources.” Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley, entitled “Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People” states in part: “BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site.” Please honor this promise. Honoring this promise requires consultation will additional Ohlone people who recognize this site as sacred, as a tribal cultural property and it requires consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region. To date, Berkeley has not honored this promise and has failed to seek the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous people of the region—and has failed to respect the indigenous peoples’ opposition to the proposed project. On page 67, the DEIR states, “Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous peoples of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear whether or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. Given that 1900 Fourth Street proposal includes 155-apartments, and given that there are numerous Tribal objections to the development, it seems clear that the step of meaningful Tribal consultation before amending the General Plan was not done. The Project also requires several discretionary approvals by the City for variances to the current general plan and zoning ordinances. These approvals would require consultation under both AB 52 and SB 18. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound and Ohlone village site is a series of murals and a small plaque in the parking lot under the nearby freeway. Certainly, the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone peoples to develop a major memorial and educational site in the form of a culturally-appropriate, green open space park at 1900 Fourth Street. The DEIR fails to analyze and offer meaningful alternatives. I strongly support the development of such a memorial and educational site in lieu of the proposed development as the preferred alternative. In addition to the unavoidable adverse impacts to this critical tribal resource the DEIR includes other fatal flaws that require the City of Berkeley to either disapprove the Project or at a minimum require a supplemental EIR before making any determinations on the Project. The Project will not fulfill the purposes set forth in the Project proposal—in fact the Project will actually exacerbate issues it claims to resolve. The DEIR does not adequately address traffic impacts in that it fails to include all approved and ongoing projects in the area. The failure to address these other projects means that the cumulative impacts analysis is fatally flawed. The DEIR fails to account for safety issues that will result from additional traffic in the area and the railroad crossing. The DEIR does not fully address potential air quality impacts nor does it adequately discuss studies regarding increased asthma and other respiratory problems for people living near freeways and industrial areas. The DEIR does not sufficiently address the potential for release of hazardous chemicals through ground disturbance. The DEIR does include a sufficient discussion of potential impacts to water resources on site that could result from development on the site, nor does the document include an adequate alternatives analysis. It would be irresponsible for the City of Berkeley to consider approving this project without complete and accurate information regarding any and all impacts that may affect the health and safety of the community. – 3 – January 24, 2017 This Project has the potential to increase already significant traffic congestion, harm the health of residents, and destroy irreplaceable cultural and historic sites that the City of Berkeley has pledged to protect. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of more than 5,000 years of history and a living culture. Reject the DEIR and embrace the No Plan / Create a Berkeley Gateway / Memorial Site Alternative! Under One Sky, Winnemem Wintu Chief and Spiritual Leader Attn: Shannon Allen City of Berkeley Planning Dept. 1947 Center Street, 2nd Floor Berkeley, CA 94704 DATE January 26, 2017 Re: Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report on proposed 1900 4th Street Project Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Preservation Commission in 2000, noting the site is “most highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial ground.” The site was also listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, and determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The original West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site completely encompassed the proposed 1900 Fourth Street Project and blocks beyond. It is known to be the oldest bayside settlement and one of the largest shellmounds in the San Francisco Bay Area—more than 5,000 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone Peoples today—a fact not acknowledged in the DEIR. The content of the DEIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by widespread community opposition and concern voiced at the March 10, 2016, December 8, 2016 and January 12, 2017 Zoning Adjustment Board meetings and the December 1, 2016, and January 5, 2017 Landmark Preservation Commission meetings. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to create the archaeological report and there has not been adequate peer review of the limited data in the DEIR. The archaeological analysis is inadequate and misleading. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered many prehistoric human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address human remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology and conclusions of the 1900 Fourth Street Draft EIR. The likely disturbance of human remains is highly significant as defined by CEQA and cannot be mitigated. The DEIR does not address the issue of Richard Schwartz’s recording of over 400 burials in the vicinity of 1900 Fourth St. and fails to provide any context of the lot within the larger site, ALA-307. The DEIR attempts to isolate and not analyze 1900 Fourth St. within the context of a larger site of cultural significance. The EIR ignores the many hundreds of burials already known to have been removed from sanctified burial ceremonies that laid them there. Burials have been found from 2- 13 feet below the surface in the site. They surround the site and are likely within the 2.2 acres from which 8-feet of subsurface soil would be excavated. The developer should not destroy this site, disturb burials and separate us all from ever knowing them and their world. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the DEIR’s preparation. The primary consultant has conflicts of interest, and does not represent the all of the Ohlone people indigenous to the Bay Area. Another Ohlone California Tribal group indigenous to Berkeley area and community has formally and repeatedly requested tribal consultation as required by CEQA. The City to date has not consulted with this group for purposes of preparing the DEIR, in violation of CEQA. The consultation that has occurred to date appears to be nothing more than a token gesture that fails to protect this important Ohlone site (the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site) and has resulted in payment of funds to an individual as mitigation for the destruction of this irreplaceable sacred place. The Ohlone comprise more than a dozen tribes and languages yet the DEIR consults only one individual. The DEIR also fails to assess the importance of this site as a “tribal cultural resource” separate from the category of “cultural resources – archaeological.” AB 52 established a new category of resources under the California Environmental Quality Act, “tribal cultural resources,” which considers the tribal cultural values in addition to the scientific and archaeological values when determining impacts and mitigation. This DEIR, rather than fully assessing the impacts to tribal cultural resources under a new category, merely incorporates a brief discussion under the cultural resources archaeological section that states the destruction of the site will be mitigated through: 1) payment to an individual of $75,000 to improve a cemetery located outside the bounds of the shellmound and outside of the city boundaries, and 2) that educational panels will be placed at or near the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site after further consultation with the Ohlone people, without identifying who will be consulted for this mitigation measure. Neither the discussion nor the proposed mitigation complies with CEQA requirements to consult with impacted Tribes and to include a new and separate category addressing “tribal cultural resources.” Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley, entitled “Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People” states in part: “BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site.” Please honor this promise. Honoring this promise requires consultation will additional Ohlone people who recognize this site as sacred, as a tribal cultural property and it requires consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region. To date, Berkeley has not honored this promise and has failed to seek the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous people of the region—and has failed to respect the indigenous peoples’ opposition to the proposed project. On page 67, the DEIR states, “Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous peoples of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. The Ohlone comprise more than a dozen tribes and languages yet the draft EIR consults only one individual. It is also unclear whether or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into effect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. Given that 1900 Fourth Street proposal includes 155-apartments, and given that there are numerous Tribal objections to the development, it seems clear that the step of meaningful Tribal consultation before amending the General Plan was not done. The Project also requires several discretionary approvals by the City for variances to the current general plan and zoning ordinances. These approvals would require consultation under both AB 52 and SB 18. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound and Ohlone village site is a series of murals and a small plaque in the parking lot under the nearby freeway. Certainly, the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone peoples to develop a major memorial and educational site in the form of a culturally-appropriate, green open space park at 1900 Fourth Street. The West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site is still used for prayer and ceremony by members of the Ohlone community. This will no longer be possible if the project is approved. These important facts are not mentioned in the draft EIR and it fails to analyze and offer meaningful alternatives. I strongly support the development of such a memorial and educational site in lieu of the proposed development as the preferred alternative. In addition to the unavoidable adverse impacts to this critical tribal resource the DEIR includes other fatal flaws that require the City of Berkeley to either disapprove the Project or at a minimum require a supplemental EIR before making any determinations on the Project. The Project will not fulfill the purposes set forth in the Project proposal—in fact the Project will actually exacerbate issues it claims to resolve. The DEIR does not adequately address traffic impacts in that it fails to include all approved and ongoing projects in the area. The failure to address these other projects means that the cumulative impacts analysis is fatally flawed. The DEIR fails to account for safety issues that will result from additional traffic in the area and the railroad crossing. The DEIR does not fully address potential air quality impacts nor does it adequately discuss studies regarding increased asthma and other respiratory problems for people living near freeways and industrial areas. The DEIR does not sufficiently address the potential for release of hazardous chemicals through ground disturbance. The DEIR does include a sufficient discussion of potential impacts to water resources on site that could result from development on the site, nor does the document include an adequate alternatives analysis. It would be irresponsible for the City of Berkeley to consider approving this project without complete and accurate information regarding any and all impacts that may affect the health and safety of the community. This Project has the potential to increase already significant traffic congestion, harm the health of residents, and destroy irreplaceable cultural and historic sites that the City of Berkeley has pledged to protect. Berkeley is on record supporting the rights of indigenous people. The Landmarks Commission noted that this site is “highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial site.” The city of Berkeley should not be approving and defending the destruction of a sacred site. The City of Berkeley has passed resolutions supporting the protection of sacred sites outside of Berkeley, such as the resolution passed supporting the Standing Rock Sioux opposition to the Dakota Access Pipeline. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of more than 5,000 years of history and a living culture. Reject the DEIR and embrace the No Plan / Create a Berkeley Gateway / Memorial Site Alternative! Sincerely, Sherri Norris -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP .DWK\9 PHNRNDW#JPDLOFRP! 6HQW 7KXUVGD\)HEUXDU\ 30 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW 7KH:HVW%HUNHOH\6KHOOPRXQG9LOODJHVLWH ƚƚŶ͗^ŚĂŶŶŽŶůůĞŶ ŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJWůĂŶŶŝŶŐĞƉƚ͘ ϭϵϰϳĞŶƚĞƌ^ƚƌĞĞƚ͕ϮŶĚ&ůŽŽƌ ĞƌŬĞůĞLJ͕ϵϰϳϬϰ:ĂŶƵĂƌLJϮϲ͕ϮϬϭϳ ZĞ͗ŽŵŵĞŶƚƐŽŶƚŚĞƌĂĨƚ ŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂů/ŵƉĂĐƚZĞƉŽƌƚŽŶƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚϭϵϬϬϰƚŚ^ƚ͘WƌŽũĞĐƚ ĞĂƌDƐ͘ůůĞŶĂŶĚĞƌŬĞůĞLJŝƚLJWůĂŶŶĞƌƐ͕ /ĂŵǁƌŝƚŝŶŐƚŽĞdžƉƌĞƐƐŵLJĚĞĞƉĐŽŶĐĞƌŶƐĂďŽƵƚƚŚĞƌĂĨƚ ŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂů/ŵƉĂĐƚZĞƉŽƌƚ; /ZͿƌĞŐĂƌĚŝŶŐϭϵϬϬ&ŽƵƌƚŚ ^ƚƌĞĞƚ͘dŚĞƐŝƚĞǁĂƐĚĞƐŝŐŶĂƚĞĚĂƐĂŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJ>ĂŶĚŵĂƌŬηϮϮϳďLJƚŚĞ>ĂŶĚŵĂƌŬƐWƌĞƐĞƌǀĂƚŝŽŶŽŵŵŝƐƐŝŽŶŝŶϮϬϬϬ͕ ŶŽƚŝŶŐƚŚĞƐŝƚĞŝƐ͞ŵŽƐƚŚŝŐŚůLJƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶƚƚŽŶĂƚŝǀĞĚĞƐĐĞŶĚĂŶƚƐĂƐĂƐĂĐƌĞĚďƵƌŝĂůŐƌŽƵŶĚ͘͟dŚĞƐŝƚĞǁĂƐĂůƐŽůŝƐƚĞĚŝŶƚŚĞ ĂůŝĨŽƌŶŝĂZĞŐŝƐƚĞƌŽĨ,ŝƐƚŽƌŝĐĂůZĞƐŽƵƌĐĞƐ͕ĂŶĚĚĞƚĞƌŵŝŶĞĚƚŽďĞĞůŝŐŝďůĞĨŽƌƚŚĞEĂƚŝŽŶĂůZĞŐŝƐƚĞƌŽĨ,ŝƐƚŽƌŝĐWůĂĐĞƐ͘/ƚŝƐ ŬŶŽǁŶƚŽďĞƚŚĞŽůĚĞƐƚďĂLJƐŝĚĞƐĞƚƚůĞŵĞŶƚĂŶĚŽŶĞŽĨƚŚĞůĂƌŐĞƐƚ^ŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚƐŝŶƚŚĞ^ĂŶ&ƌĂŶĐŝƐĐŽĂLJƌĞĂͶŵŽƌĞƚŚĂŶ ϱ͕ϬϬϬLJĞĂƌƐŽůĚ͘/ƚŝƐƚŚĞƚƌƵĞďŝƌƚŚƉůĂĐĞŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJ͘/ƚĐŽŶƚŝŶƵĞƐƚŽďĞŽĨƵƚŵŽƐƚƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶĐĞĂƐĂĐĞƌĞŵŽŶŝĂůĐĞŶƚĞƌƚŽƚŚ KŚůŽŶĞWĞŽƉůĞƐƚŽĚĂLJͶĂĨĂĐƚŶŽƚĂĐŬŶŽǁůĞĚŐĞĚŝŶƚŚĞ /Z͘ dŚĞĐŽŶƚĞŶƚŽĨƚŚĞ /ZŝƐŚĞĂǀŝůLJĚŝƐƉƵƚĞĚ͕ĂƐƌĞǀĞĂůĞĚďLJǁŝĚĞƐƉƌĞĂĚĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJŽƉƉŽƐŝƚŝŽŶĂƚŵƵůƚŝƉůĞŽŶŝŶŐ ĚũƵƐƚŵĞŶƚŽĂƌĚĂŶĚ>ĂŶĚŵĂƌŬWƌĞƐĞƌǀĂƚŝŽŶŽŵŵŝƐƐŝŽŶŵĞĞƚŝŶŐƐďĞŐŝŶŶŝŶŐDĂƌĐŚϮϬϭϲ͘dŚĞƌĞŝƐƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶƚ ĐŽŶƚƌŽǀĞƌƐLJƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐƚŚĞŵĞƚŚŽĚŽůŽŐLJƵƐĞĚƚŽĐƌĞĂƚĞƚŚĞĂƌĐŚĂĞŽůŽŐŝĐĂůƌĞƉŽƌƚ͕ĂŶĚƚŚĞĂƌĐŚĂĞŽůŽŐŝĐĂůĂŶĂůLJƐŝƐŝƐ ŝŶĂĚĞƋƵĂƚĞĂŶĚŵŝƐůĞĂĚŝŶŐ͘WĂƐƚĞdžĐĂǀĂƚŝŽŶƐŝŶĂŶĚĂƌŽƵŶĚƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚƐŝƚĞŚĂǀĞƵŶĐŽǀĞƌĞĚŵĂŶLJƉƌĞŚŝƐƚŽƌŝĐŚƵŵĂŶ ďƵƌŝĂůƐĂŶĚƵŶĚŝƐƚƵƌďĞĚĐƵůƚƵƌĂůƌĞŵĂŝŶƐ͘dŚĞƌĞƉŽƌƚĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞůLJĨĂŝůƐƚŽĂĚĚƌĞƐƐŚƵŵĂŶƌĞŵĂŝŶƐƵŶĐŽǀĞƌĞĚŝŶƉĂƐƚ ĞdžĐĂǀĂƚŝŽŶƐ͕ƐƉĞĐŝĨŝĐĂůůLJƚŚŽƐĞĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚĞĚŝŶƚŚĞ /ZĨŽƌƚŚĞĂĚũĂĐĞŶƚ'ƌŽĐĞƌLJKƵƚůĞƚƐŝƚĞƚŚĂƚŝƐƉĂƌƚŽĨƚŚĞƐĂŵĞ >ĂŶĚŵĂƌŬ^ŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚƐŝƚĞ͘dŚŝƐĐŽŶƐƚŝƚƵƚĞƐĂƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶƚŽǀĞƌƐŝŐŚƚĂŶĚŝŶĂĐĐƵƌĂĐLJŝŶƚŚĞŵĞƚŚŽĚŽůŽŐLJĂŶĚĐŽŶĐůƵƐŝŽŶƐŽĨ ƚŚĞϭϵϬϬ&ŽƵƌƚŚ^ƚƌĞĞƚ /Z͘ dŚĞKŚůŽŶĞƉĞŽƉůĞĐŽŵƉƌŝƐĞŵŽƌĞƚŚĂŶĂĚŽnjĞŶƚƌŝďĞƐĂŶĚůĂŶŐƵĂŐĞƐ͕LJĞƚƚŚĞ /ZĐŽŶƐƵůƚƐŽŶůLJŽŶĞŝŶĚŝǀŝĚƵĂů͘dŚŝƐ ĐŽŶƐƵůƚĂŶƚŚĂƐĂĐŽŶĨůŝĐƚŽĨŝŶƚĞƌĞƐƚĂŶĚĚŽĞƐŶŽƚƌĞƉƌĞƐĞŶƚĂůůŽĨƚŚĞKŚůŽŶĞƉĞŽƉůĞŝŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐƚŽƚŚĞĂLJƌĞĂ͘ŶŽƚŚĞƌ KŚůŽŶĞĂůŝĨŽƌŶŝĂdƌŝďĂůŐƌŽƵƉŝŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐƚŽĞƌŬĞůĞLJĂƌĞĂĂŶĚĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJŚĂƐĨŽƌŵĂůůLJĂŶĚƌĞƉĞĂƚĞĚůLJƌĞƋƵĞƐƚĞĚƚƌŝďĂů ĐŽŶƐƵůƚĂƚŝŽŶĂƐƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚďLJƚŚĞĂůŝĨŽƌŶŝĂ ŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂůYƵĂůŝƚLJĐƚ͘dŚĞŝƚLJƚŽĚĂƚĞŚĂƐŶŽƚĐŽŶƐƵůƚĞĚǁŝƚŚƚŚŝƐŐƌŽƵƉĨ ƉƵƌƉŽƐĞƐŽĨƉƌĞƉĂƌŝŶŐƚŚĞ /Z͘dŚĞ /ZĂůƐŽĨĂŝůƐƚŽĂƐƐĞƐƐƚŚĞŝŵƉŽƌƚĂŶĐĞŽĨƚŚŝƐƐŝƚĞĂƐĂ͞ƚƌŝďĂůĐƵůƚƵƌĂůƌĞƐŽƵƌĐĞ͕͟ ƐĞƉĂƌĂƚĞĨƌŽŵƚŚĞĐĂƚĞŐŽƌLJŽĨ͞ĐƵůƚƵƌĂůƌĞƐŽƵƌĐĞƐʹĂƌĐŚĂĞŽůŽŐŝĐĂů͕͟ĂŶĚƚŚƵƐĚŽĞƐŶŽƚĐŽŶƐŝĚĞƌƚŚĞƚƌŝďĂůĐƵůƚƵƌĂůǀĂůƵĞƐ ĂĚĚŝƚŝŽŶƚŽƚŚĞĂƌĐŚĂĞŽůŽŐŝĐĂůǀĂůƵĞƐǁŚĞŶĚĞƚĞƌŵŝŶŝŶŐŝŵƉĂĐƚƐ͘EĞŝƚŚĞƌƚŚĞĚŝƐĐƵƐƐŝŽŶŶŽƌƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚŵŝƚŝŐĂƚŝŽŶ ĐŽŵƉůŝĞƐǁŝƚŚ YƌĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐƚŽĐŽŶƐƵůƚǁŝƚŚŝŵƉĂĐƚĞĚdƌŝďĞƐĂŶĚƚŽŝŶĐůƵĚĞĂŶĞǁĂŶĚƐĞƉĂƌĂƚĞĐĂƚĞŐŽƌLJĂĚĚƌĞƐƐŝŶ ͞ƚƌŝďĂůĐƵůƚƵƌĂůƌĞƐŽƵƌĐĞƐ͘͟ ZĞƐŽůƵƚŝŽŶEŽ͘ϲϳ͕ϯϱϯͲE^ŽĨƚŚĞŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJƐƚĂƚĞƐ͗͞ /d&hZd, ZZ ^K>s ƚŚĂƚĨƌĞĞ͕ƉƌŝŽƌ͕ĂŶĚŝŶĨŽƌŵĞĚĐŽŶƐĞŶƚ ŽĨƚŚĞKŚůŽŶĞĂŶĚŽƚŚĞƌŝŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐƉĞŽƉůĞƐŽĨƚŚĞƌĞŐŝŽŶďĞŝŶƚĞŐƌĂůƚŽĂŶLJĂůƚĞƌĂƚŝŽŶƉůĂŶŶŝŶŐĨŽƌƚŚĞĞƌŬĞůĞLJ ^ŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚƐĂĐƌĞĚƐŝƚĞ͕ŝŶĂĐĐŽƌĚĂŶĐĞǁŝƚŚƚŚĞƉƌŽǀŝƐŝŽŶƐŽĨƚŚĞhŶŝƚĞĚEĂƚŝŽŶƐĞĐůĂƌĂƚŝŽŶŽŶƚŚĞZŝŐŚƚƐŽĨ/ŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐ WĞŽƉůĞƐ͕ĂŶĚĐĂůůƐƵƉŽŶĂůůƉĂƌƚŝĞƐƚŽĨŽůůŽǁƚŚĞƉƌŝŶĐŝƉůĞƐŽĨƚŚĞĞĐůĂƌĂƚŝŽŶǁŝƚŚƌĞƐƉĞĐƚƚŽƚŚĞtĞƐƚĞƌŬĞůĞLJ^ŚĞůůŵŽƵŶ ƐŝƚĞ͘͟,ŽŶŽƌŝŶŐƚŚŝƐƉƌŽŵŝƐĞƌĞƋƵŝƌĞƐĐŽŶƐƵůƚĂƚŝŽŶǁŝůůĂĚĚŝƚŝŽŶĂůKŚůŽŶĞƉĞŽƉůĞǁŚŽƌĞĐŽŐŶŝnjĞƚŚŝƐƐŝƚĞĂƐƐĂĐƌĞĚ͕ĂƐĂ ƚƌŝďĂůĐƵůƚƵƌĂůƉƌŽƉĞƌƚLJĂŶĚŝƚƌĞƋƵŝƌĞƐĐŽŶƐĞŶƚŽĨƚŚĞKŚůŽŶĞĂŶĚŽƚŚĞƌŝŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐƉĞŽƉůĞƐŽĨƚŚĞƌĞŐŝŽŶ͘dŽĚĂƚĞ͕ĞƌŬĞů ŚĂƐŶŽƚŚŽŶŽƌĞĚƚŚŝƐƉƌŽŵŝƐĞĂŶĚŚĂƐĨĂŝůĞĚƚŽƐĞĞŬƚŚĞĨƌĞĞ͕ƉƌŝŽƌĂŶĚŝŶĨŽƌŵĞĚĐŽŶƐĞŶƚŽĨƚŚĞŝŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐƉĞŽƉůĞŽĨƚŚĞ ƌĞŐŝŽŶͶĂŶĚŚĂƐĨĂŝůĞĚƚŽƌĞƐƉĞĐƚƚŚĞŝŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐƉĞŽƉůĞƐ͛ŽƉƉŽƐŝƚŝŽŶƚŽƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚƉƌŽũĞĐƚ͘ ƚƚŚŝƐƉŽŝŶƚ͕ƚŚĞŽŶůLJŽĨĨŝĐŝĂůƌĞĐŽŐŶŝƚŝŽŶŽĨƚŚŝƐƐĂĐƌĞĚ^ŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚĂŶĚKŚůŽŶĞsŝůůĂŐĞ^ŝƚĞŝƐĂƐĞƌŝĞƐŽĨŵƵƌĂůƐĂŶĚĂƐŵĂ ƉůĂƋƵĞŝŶƚŚĞƉĂƌŬŝŶŐůŽƚƵŶĚĞƌƚŚĞŶĞĂƌďLJĨƌĞĞǁĂLJ͘ĞƌƚĂŝŶůLJ͕ƚŚĞŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJǁŽƵůĚďĞŶĞĨŝƚĨƌŽŵƚƌƵůLJŵĞĂŶŝŶŐĨƵů ƉƵďůŝĐĂĐŬŶŽǁůĞĚŐĞŵĞŶƚŽĨŝƚƐKŚůŽŶĞƉĂƐƚ͕ƉƌĞƐĞŶƚ͕ĂŶĚĨƵƚƵƌĞďLJǁŽƌŬŝŶŐǁŝƚŚůŽĐĂůKŚůŽŶĞƉĞŽƉůĞƐƚŽĚĞǀĞůŽƉĂŵĂũŽƌ ŵĞŵŽƌŝĂůĂŶĚĞĚƵĐĂƚŝŽŶĂůƐŝƚĞŝŶƚŚĞĨŽƌŵŽĨĂĐƵůƚƵƌĂůůLJͲĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞ͕ŐƌĞĞŶŽƉĞŶƐƉĂĐĞƉĂƌŬĂƚϭϵϬϬ&ŽƵƌƚŚ^ƚƌĞĞƚ͘dŚĞ /ZĨĂŝůƐƚŽĂŶĂůLJnjĞĂŶĚŽĨĨĞƌŵĞĂŶŝŶŐĨƵůĂůƚĞƌŶĂƚŝǀĞƐ͘/ƐƚƌŽŶŐůLJƐƵƉƉŽƌƚƚŚĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚŽĨƐƵĐŚĂŵĞŵŽƌŝĂůĂŶĚ ĞĚƵĐĂƚŝŽŶĂůƐŝƚĞŝŶůŝĞƵŽĨƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ͘ dŚŝƐŝƐĂĐůĞĂƌŽƉƉŽƌƚƵŶŝƚLJĨŽƌƚŚĞŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJƚŽĨŽůůŽǁƚŚƌŽƵŐŚŽŶŝƚƐƌĞƐŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐƚŽŚŽŶŽƌĂŶĚƉƌŽƚĞĐƚƐĂĐƌĞĚƐŝƚĞƐĂŶ ƚŚĞƌŝŐŚƚƐŽĨŝŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐƉĞŽƉůĞƐ͘/ŝŵƉůŽƌĞĞƌŬĞůĞLJƚŽƚĂŬĞĂƐƚĂŶĚĂŐĂŝŶƐƚƚŚŝƐĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶƚŚĂƚǁŝůůďĞŶĞĨŝƚǁĞĂůƚŚLJ ĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞƌƐĂƚƚŚĞĞdžƉĞŶƐĞŽĨŵŽƌĞƚŚĂŶϱ͕ϬϬϬLJĞĂƌƐŽĨŚŝƐƚŽƌLJĂŶĚĂůŝǀŝŶŐĐƵůƚƵƌĞ͘ZĞũĞĐƚƚŚĞ /ZĂŶĚĞŵďƌĂĐĞƚŚĞEŽ WůĂŶͬƌĞĂƚĞĂĞƌŬĞůĞLJ'ĂƚĞǁĂLJͬDĞŵŽƌŝĂů^ŝƚĞůƚĞƌŶĂƚŝǀĞ͊ ^ŝŶĐĞƌĞůLJ͕ <<ĂƚŚLJ^ǁĞĞŶĞLJ ŬĚĚŝƚŝŽŶĂůĐŽŵŵĞŶƚƐ͗ ͻdŚĞĚƌĂĨƚ /ZĨĂŝůƐƚŽŵĞŶƚŝŽŶŽƌĂĚĚƌĞƐƐƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚƉƌŽũĞĐƚ͛ƐǀŝŽůĂƚŝŽŶŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJDƵŶŝĐŝƉĂůŽĚĞϯ͘Ϯϰ͘ϮϲϬ͞WĞƌŵŝƚ ĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶͲͶZĞǀŝĞǁƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚƐĂŶĚĐƌŝƚĞƌŝĂ͟ǁŚŝĐŚƐƚĂƚĞƐ;ŝƚĂůŝĐƐĂĚĚĞĚͿ͗͞ƉƉƌŽǀĂůŽĨƉĞƌŵŝƚĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƐƉƵƌƐƵĂŶƚƚŽ ƚŚŝƐƐĞĐƚŝŽŶŵĂLJďĞŐƌĂŶƚĞĚŽŶůLJƵƉŽŶĚĞƚĞƌŵŝŶĂƚŝŽŶƚŚĂƚƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĂůĐŽŶĨŽƌŵƐƚŽƚŚĞĐƌŝƚĞƌŝĂƐĞƚĨŽƌƚŚŝŶƉĂƌĂŐƌĂƉŚϭ͗ &ŽƌƉĞƌŵŝƚĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƐĨŽƌĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶ͕ĂůƚĞƌĂƚŝŽŶŽƌƌĞƉĂŝƌ͗&ŽƌĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƐƌĞůĂƚŝŶŐƚŽůĂŶĚŵĂƌŬƐŝƚĞƐ͕ƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚ ǁŽƌŬƐŚĂůůŶŽƚĂĚǀĞƌƐĞůLJĂĨĨĞĐƚƚŚĞĞdžƚĞƌŝŽƌĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĂůĨĞĂƚƵƌĞƐŽĨƚŚĞůĂŶĚŵĂƌŬĂŶĚ͕ǁŚĞƌĞƐƉĞĐŝĨŝĞĚŝŶƚŚĞ ĚĞƐŝŐŶĂƚŝŽŶĨŽƌĂƉƵďůŝĐůLJŽǁŶĞĚůĂŶĚŵĂƌŬ͕ŝƚƐŵĂũŽƌŝŶƚĞƌŝŽƌĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĂůĨĞĂƚƵƌĞƐ͖ŶŽƌƐŚĂůůƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚǁŽƌŬ ĂĚǀĞƌƐĞůLJĂĨĨĞĐƚƚŚĞƐƉĞĐŝĂůĐŚĂƌĂĐƚĞƌŽƌƐƉĞĐŝĂůŚŝƐƚŽƌŝĐĂů͕ĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĂůŽƌĂĞƐƚŚĞƚŝĐŝŶƚĞƌĞƐƚŽƌǀĂůƵĞŽĨƚŚĞůĂŶĚŵĂƌŬĂŶĚ ŝƚƐƐŝƚĞ͕ĂƐǀŝĞǁĞĚďŽƚŚŝŶƚŚĞŵƐĞůǀĞƐĂŶĚŝŶƚŚĞŝƌƐĞƚƚŝŶŐ͘͟,ĞŶĐĞ͕ƚŚĞϭϵϬϬ&ŽƵƌƚŚ^ƚƌĞĞƚ͛Ɛ^ƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĂůůƚĞƌĂƚŝŽŶWĞƌŵŝƚ η>D^WϮϬϭϱͲϬϬϬϬϱĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƐŚŽƵůĚďĞĚĞŶŝĞĚ͘ ͻdŚĞϭϵϬϬ&ŽƵƌƚŚ^ƚƌĞĞƚĚƌĂĨƚ /ZŝƐĨĂƚĂůůLJĨůĂǁĞĚ͕ŝŶĂĚĞƋƵĂƚĞĂŶĚĚĞĨĞĐƚŝǀĞ͘dŚĞĐŝƚLJƐŚŽƵůĚƌĞǀŝĞǁ͕ƌĞũĞĐƚ͕ƌĞŝƐƐƵĞĂŶĚ ŶŽƚĐĞƌƚŝĨLJƚŚŝƐ /Z͕ĂŶĚŶĞǀĞƌĂƉƉƌŽǀĞĐŽŵŵĞƌĐŝĂůĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚŽĨƚŚĞtĞƐƚĞƌŬĞůĞLJ^ŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚĂŶĚKŚůŽŶĞsŝůůĂŐĞ^ŝƚ )HOL[&DULQD )URP 5RVHYRQ7KDWHU,PDL YQWKDWHU#EHUNHOH\HGX! 6HQW )ULGD\-DQXDU\ 30 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW %HUNHOH\6KHOOPRXQG 7KH1DWLYH$PHULFDQ$FDGHP\ January 27, 2017 Attn: Shannon Allen City of Berkeley Planning Dept. 1947 Center Street, 2nd Floor Berkeley, CA 94704 I am writing to express my deep concerns about the Draft Environmental Impact Report regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark in 2000, noting the site is “most highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial ground.” It is also listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, and determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The original West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site completely encompassed the proposed 1900 Fourth Street Project and blocks beyond. It is known to be the oldest bayside settlement and one of the largest shellmounds in the San Francisco Bay Area—more than 5,000 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone Peoples today. The only official recognition of this sacred shellmound and Ohlone village site is a series of murals and a small plaque in the parking lot under the nearby freeway. Certainly, the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone peoples to develop a major memorial and educational site in the form of a culturally-appropriate, green open space park at 1900 Fourth Street. Of all the communities in California, it is reasonable to expect Berkeley to make choices that honor Indigenous Peoples and to be consistent with Berkeley’s reputation for promoting and honoring cultural diversity. Sincerely, Rose TB Imai Rose Thater Braan-Imai (Tuscarora) Director The Native American Academy www.silverbuffalo.org )HOL[&DULQD )URP 6DQGK\D+HUPRQ VDQGK\DUDRKHUPRQ#EHUNHOH\HGX! 6HQW )ULGD\-DQXDU\ $0 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW &RPPHQWVRQWKH'UDIW(QYLURQPHQWDO,PSDFW5HSRUWRQSURSRVHG WK6WUHHW 3URMHFW Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Preservation Commission in 2000, noting the site is “most highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial ground.” The site was also listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, and determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The original West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site completely encompassed the proposed 1900 Fourth Street Project and blocks beyond. It is known to be the oldest bayside settlement and one of the largest shellmounds in the San Francisco Bay Area—more than 5,000 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone Peoples today—a fact not acknowledged in the DEIR. The content of the DEIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by widespread community opposition and concern voiced at the March 10, 2016, December 8, 2016 and January 12, 2017 Zoning Adjustment Board meetings and the December 1, 2016, and January 5, 2017 Landmark Preservation Commission meetings. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to create the archaeological report and there has not been adequate peer review of the limited data in the DEIR. The archaeological analysis is inadequate and misleading. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered many prehistoric human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address human remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology and conclusions of the 1900 Fourth Street Draft EIR. The likely disturbance of human remains is highly significant as defined by CEQA and cannot be mitigated. The DEIR does not address the issue of Richard Schwartz’s recording of over 400 burials in the vicinity of 1900 Fourth St. and fails to provide any context of the lot within the larger site, ALA-307. The DEIR attempts to isolate and not analyze 1900 Fourth St. within the context of a larger site of cultural significance. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the DEIR’s preparation. The primary consultant has conflicts of interest, and does not represent the all of the Ohlone people indigenous to the Bay Area. Another Ohlone California Tribal group indigenous to Berkeley area and community has formally and repeatedly requested tribal consultation as required by CEQA. The City to date has not consulted with this group for purposes of preparing the DEIR, in violation of CEQA. The consultation that has occurred to date appears to be nothing more than a token gesture that fails to protect this important Ohlone site (the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site) and has resulted in payment of funds to an individual as mitigation for the destruction of this irreplaceable sacred place. The Ohlone comprise more than a dozen tribes and languages yet the DEIR consults only one individual. The DEIR also fails to assess the importance of this site as a “tribal cultural resource” separate from the category of “cultural resources – archaeological.” AB 52 established a new category of resources under the California Environmental Quality Act, “tribal cultural resources,” which considers the tribal cultural values in addition to the scientific and archaeological values when determining impacts and mitigation. This DEIR, rather than fully assessing the impacts to tribal cultural resources under a new category, merely incorporates a brief discussion under the cultural resources archaeological section that states the destruction of the site will be mitigated through: 1) payment to an individual of $75,000 to improve a cemetery located outside the bounds of the shellmound and outside of the city boundaries, and 2) that educational panels will be placed at or near the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site after further consultation with the Ohlone people, without identifying who will be consulted for this mitigation measure. Neither the discussion nor the proposed mitigation complies with CEQA requirements to consult with impacted Tribes and to include a new and separate category addressing “tribal cultural resources.” Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley, entitled “Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People” states in part: “BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site.” Please honor this promise. Honoring this promise requires consultation will additional Ohlone people who recognize this site as sacred, as a tribal cultural property and it requires consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region. To date, Berkeley has not honored this promise and has failed to seek the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous people of the region—and has failed to respect the indigenous peoples’ opposition to the proposed project. On page 67, the DEIR states, “Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous peoples of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear whether or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. Given that 1900 Fourth Street proposal includes 155-apartments, and given that there are numerous Tribal objections to the development, it seems clear that the step of meaningful Tribal consultation before amending the General Plan was not done. The Project also requires several discretionary approvals by the City for variances to the current general plan and zoning ordinances. These approvals would require consultation under both AB 52 and SB 18. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound and Ohlone village site is a series of murals and a small plaque in the parking lot under the nearby freeway. Certainly, the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone peoples to develop a major memorial and educational site in the form of a culturally-appropriate, green open space park at 1900 Fourth Street. The DEIR fails to analyze and offer meaningful alternatives. I strongly support the development of such a memorial and educational site in lieu of the proposed development as the preferred alternative. In addition to the unavoidable adverse impacts to this critical tribal resource the DEIR includes other fatal flaws that require the City of Berkeley to either disapprove the Project or at a minimum require a supplemental EIR before making any determinations on the Project. The Project will not fulfill the purposes set forth in the Project proposal—in fact the Project will actually exacerbate issues it claims to resolve. The DEIR does not adequately address traffic impacts in that it fails to include all approved and ongoing projects in the area. The failure to address these other projects means that the cumulative impacts analysis is fatally flawed. The DEIR fails to account for safety issues that will result from additional traffic in the area and the railroad crossing. The DEIR does not fully address potential air quality impacts nor does it adequately discuss studies regarding increased asthma and other respiratory problems for people living near freeways and industrial areas. The DEIR does not sufficiently address the potential for release of hazardous chemicals through ground disturbance. The DEIR does include a sufficient discussion of potential impacts to water resources on site that could result from development on the site, nor does the document include an adequate alternatives analysis. It would be irresponsible for the City of Berkeley to consider approving this project without complete and accurate information regarding any and all impacts that may affect the health and safety of the community. This Project has the potential to increase already significant traffic congestion, harm the health of residents, and destroy irreplaceable cultural and historic sites that the City of Berkeley has pledged to protect. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of more than 5,000 years of history and a living culture. Reject the DEIR and embrace the No Plan / Create a Berkeley Gateway / Memorial Site Alternative! Sincerely, Sandhya Rao Hermon ______Sandhya Rao Hermon, Ph.D. Director of Research & Evaluation California Social Work Education Center http://calswec.berkeley.edu/ 510-642-4480 (office) 510-323-3858 (cell) [email protected] Allen, Shannon From: Walter Wood Dear Berkeley City Staff: I am writing to urge you to protect and preserve the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site from developers who seek to convert this very important parking resouce into something horrible. Parking is becoming increasingly difficult in the City of Berkeley due to excessive approvals of high population density buildings, soon to be getting even worse due to poorly conceived and ill considered projects both downtown and along the major traffic arteries of Berkeley such as University Ave., Shattuck Ave., and San Pablo Ave. These developments all nauseate me and appear to be pandering to demands for "more affordable housing." City staff should review, reject, not certify, oppose, any EIR that would allow more people in already over crowded Berkeley. I say that not just for my neighborhood, or this particular site of the West Berkeley Shellmound, but for everywhere in Berkeley and for the Bay Area in general. Pull the draw bridges, Berkeley is full. While I personally do not care about sacred burial sites, if that status helps to defeat a completely outrageous "state density bonus law" that aids or abets high density development, use it. Excessive development is in a public menace to health, safety, the environment, and an expectation that Berkeley will be a medium density city with ample parking for its residents, who do not want to be forced into public transit, overcrowded BART, or similar unpleasantness. Walter Wood Berkeley Resident -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP %5,77$1<6&+0,77 VFKPLWWEULWW#EHUNHOH\HGX! 6HQW )ULGD\-DQXDU\ 30 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW &RPPHQWVRQWKH'UDIW(QYLURQPHQWDO,PSDFW5HSRUWRQSURSRVHG WK6WUHHW 3URMHFW Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Preservation Commission in 2000, noting the site is “most highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial ground.” The site was also listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, and determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The original West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site completely encompassed the proposed 1900 Fourth Street Project and blocks beyond. It is known to be the oldest bayside settlement and one of the largest shellmounds in the San Francisco Bay Area—more than 5,000 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone Peoples today—a fact not acknowledged in the DEIR. The content of the DEIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by widespread community opposition and concern voiced at the March 10, 2016, December 8, 2016 and January 12, 2017 Zoning Adjustment Board meetings and the December 1, 2016, and January 5, 2017 Landmark Preservation Commission meetings. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to create the archaeological report and there has not been adequate peer review of the limited data in the DEIR. The archaeological analysis is inadequate and misleading. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered many prehistoric human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address human remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology and conclusions of the 1900 Fourth Street Draft EIR. The likely disturbance of human remains is highly significant as defined by CEQA and cannot be mitigated. The DEIR does not address the issue of Richard Schwartz’s recording of over 400 burials in the vicinity of 1900 Fourth St. and fails to provide any context of the lot within the larger site, ALA-307. The DEIR attempts to isolate and not analyze 1900 Fourth St. within the context of a larger site of cultural significance. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the DEIR’s preparation. The primary consultant has conflicts of interest, and does not represent the all of the Ohlone people indigenous to the Bay Area. Another Ohlone California Tribal group indigenous to Berkeley area and community has formally and repeatedly requested tribal consultation as required by CEQA. The City to date has not consulted with this group for purposes of preparing the DEIR, in violation of CEQA. The consultation that has occurred to date appears to be nothing more than a token gesture that fails to protect this important Ohlone site (the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site) and has resulted in payment of funds to an individual as mitigation for the destruction of this irreplaceable sacred place. The Ohlone comprise more than a dozen tribes and languages yet the DEIR consults only one individual. The DEIR also fails to assess the importance of this site as a “tribal cultural resource” separate from the category of “cultural resources – archaeological.” AB 52 established a new category of resources under the California Environmental Quality Act, “tribal cultural resources,” which considers the tribal cultural values in addition to the scientific and archaeological values when determining impacts and mitigation. This DEIR, rather than fully assessing the impacts to tribal cultural resources under a new category, merely incorporates a brief discussion under the cultural resources archaeological section that states the destruction of the site will be mitigated through: 1) payment to an individual of $75,000 to improve a cemetery located outside the bounds of the shellmound and outside of the city boundaries, and 2) that educational panels will be placed at or near the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site after further consultation with the Ohlone people, without identifying who will be consulted for this mitigation measure. Neither the discussion nor the proposed mitigation complies with CEQA requirements to consult with impacted Tribes and to include a new and separate category addressing “tribal cultural resources.” Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley, entitled “Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People” states in part: “BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site.” Please honor this promise. Honoring this promise requires consultation will additional Ohlone people who recognize this site as sacred, as a tribal cultural property and it requires consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region. To date, Berkeley has not honored this promise and has failed to seek the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous people of the region—and has failed to respect the indigenous peoples’ opposition to the proposed project. On page 67, the DEIR states, “Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous peoples of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear whether or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. Given that 1900 Fourth Street proposal includes 155-apartments, and given that there are numerous Tribal objections to the development, it seems clear that the step of meaningful Tribal consultation before amending the General Plan was not done. The Project also requires several discretionary approvals by the City for variances to the current general plan and zoning ordinances. These approvals would require consultation under both AB 52 and SB 18. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound and Ohlone village site is a series of murals and a small plaque in the parking lot under the nearby freeway. Certainly, the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone peoples to develop a major memorial and educational site in the form of a culturally-appropriate, green open space park at 1900 Fourth Street. The DEIR fails to analyze and offer meaningful alternatives. I strongly support the development of such a memorial and educational site in lieu of the proposed development as the preferred alternative. In addition to the unavoidable adverse impacts to this critical tribal resource the DEIR includes other fatal flaws that require the City of Berkeley to either disapprove the Project or at a minimum require a supplemental EIR before making any determinations on the Project. The Project will not fulfill the purposes set forth in the Project proposal—in fact the Project will actually exacerbate issues it claims to resolve. The DEIR does not adequately address traffic impacts in that it fails to include all approved and ongoing projects in the area. The failure to address these other projects means that the cumulative impacts analysis is fatally flawed. The DEIR fails to account for safety issues that will result from additional traffic in the area and the railroad crossing. The DEIR does not fully address potential air quality impacts nor does it adequately discuss studies regarding increased asthma and other respiratory problems for people living near freeways and industrial areas. The DEIR does not sufficiently address the potential for release of hazardous chemicals through ground disturbance. The DEIR does include a sufficient discussion of potential impacts to water resources on site that could result from development on the site, nor does the document include an adequate alternatives analysis. It would be irresponsible for the City of Berkeley to consider approving this project without complete and accurate information regarding any and all impacts that may affect the health and safety of the community. This Project has the potential to increase already significant traffic congestion, harm the health of residents, and destroy irreplaceable cultural and historic sites that the City of Berkeley has pledged to protect. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of more than 5,000 years of history and a living culture. Reject the DEIR and embrace the No Plan / Create a Berkeley Gateway / Memorial Site Alternative! Sincerely, Brittany -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP 'HQLVH6FKLOOHU GKEVFKLOOHU#JPDLOFRP! 6HQW )ULGD\-DQXDU\ $0 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW 5H &RPPHQWVRQWKH'UDIW(QYLURQPHQWDO,PSDFW5HSRUWRQSURSRVHG WK6WUHHW 3URMHFW Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I implore Berkeley to take a stand against the 4th Street construction that will destroy more than 5,000 years of history and a living culture. Reject the DEIR and embrace the No Plan / Create a Berkeley Gateway / Memorial Site Alternative. Thank you! Denise Schiller, 94702 5LJKWFOLFN KHUHWR GRZQORDG SLFWXUHV7R KHOSSURWHFW \RXUSULYDF\ 2XWOR RN SUHYHQWHG DXWR PDWLF GRZQORDGRI WKLVSLFWXUH IU R PWK H ,Q WHUQHWŻ -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP )DUKDQD-DKDQ IDUKDQDMDKDQ#EHUNHOH\HGX! 6HQW )ULGD\-DQXDU\ $0 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW :HVW%HUNHOH\6KHOOPRXQGDQG2KORQH9LOODJH6LWH Attn: Shannon Allen City of Berkeley Planning Dept. 1947 Center Street, 2nd Floor Berkeley, CA 94704 January 27, 2017 Re: Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report on proposed 1900 4th Street Project Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Preservation Commission in 2000, noting the site is “most highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial ground.” The site was also listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, and determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The original West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site completely encompassed the proposed 1900 Fourth Street Project and blocks beyond. It is known to be the oldest bayside settlement and one of the largest shellmounds in the San Francisco Bay Area—more than 5,000 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone Peoples today—a fact not acknowledged in the DEIR. The content of the DEIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by widespread community opposition and concern voiced at the March 10, 2016, December 8, 2016 and January 12, 2017 Zoning Adjustment Board meetings and the December 1, 2016, and January 5, 2017 Landmark Preservation Commission meetings. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to create the archaeological report and there has not been adequate peer review of the limited data in the DEIR. The archaeological analysis is inadequate and misleading. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered many prehistoric human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address human remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology and conclusions of the 1900 Fourth Street Draft EIR. The likely disturbance of human remains is highly significant as defined by CEQA and cannot be mitigated. The DEIR does not address the issue of Richard Schwartz’s recording of over 400 burials in the vicinity of 1900 Fourth St. and fails to provide any context of the lot within the larger site, ALA-307. The DEIR attempts to isolate and not analyze 1900 Fourth St. within the context of a larger site of cultural significance. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the DEIR’s preparation. The primary consultant has conflicts of interest, and does not represent the all of the Ohlone people indigenous to the Bay Area. Another Ohlone California Tribal group indigenous to Berkeley area and community has formally and repeatedly requested tribal consultation as required by CEQA. The City to date has not consulted with this group for purposes of preparing the DEIR, in violation of CEQA. The consultation that has occurred to date appears to be nothing more than a token gesture that fails to protect this important Ohlone site (the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site) and has resulted in payment of funds to an individual as mitigation for the destruction of this irreplaceable sacred place. The Ohlone comprise more than a dozen tribes and languages yet the DEIR consults only one individual. The DEIR also fails to assess the importance of this site as a “tribal cultural resource” separate from the category of “cultural resources – archaeological.” AB 52 established a new category of resources under the California Environmental Quality Act, “tribal cultural resources,” which considers the tribal cultural values in addition to the scientific and archaeological values when determining impacts and mitigation. This DEIR, rather than fully assessing the impacts to tribal cultural resources under a new category, merely incorporates a brief discussion under the cultural resources archaeological section that states the destruction of the site will be mitigated through: 1) payment to an individual of $75,000 to improve a cemetery located outside the bounds of the shellmound and outside of the city boundaries, and 2) that educational panels will be placed at or near the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site after further consultation with the Ohlone people, without identifying who will be consulted for this mitigation measure. Neither the discussion nor the proposed mitigation complies with CEQA requirements to consult with impacted Tribes and to include a new and separate category addressing “tribal cultural resources.” Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley, entitled “Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People” states in part: “BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site.” Please honor this promise. Honoring this promise requires consultation will additional Ohlone people who recognize this site as sacred, as a tribal cultural property and it requires consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region. To date, Berkeley has not honored this promise and has failed to seek the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous people of the region—and has failed to respect the indigenous peoples’ opposition to the proposed project. On page 67, the DEIR states, “Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous peoples of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear whether or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. Given that 1900 Fourth Street proposal includes 155-apartments, and given that there are numerous Tribal objections to the development, it seems clear that the step of meaningful Tribal consultation before amending the General Plan was not done. The Project also requires several discretionary approvals by the City for variances to the current general plan and zoning ordinances. These approvals would require consultation under both AB 52 and SB 18. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound and Ohlone village site is a series of murals and a small plaque in the parking lot under the nearby freeway. Certainly, the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone peoples to develop a major memorial and educational site in the form of a culturally-appropriate, green open space park at 1900 Fourth Street. The DEIR fails to analyze and offer meaningful alternatives. I strongly support the development of such a memorial and educational site in lieu of the proposed development as the preferred alternative. In addition to the unavoidable adverse impacts to this critical tribal resource the DEIR includes other fatal flaws that require the City of Berkeley to either disapprove the Project or at a minimum require a supplemental EIR before making any determinations on the Project. The Project will not fulfill the purposes set forth in the Project proposal—in fact the Project will actually exacerbate issues it claims to resolve. The DEIR does not adequately address traffic impacts in that it fails to include all approved and ongoing projects in the area. The failure to address these other projects means that the cumulative impacts analysis is fatally flawed. The DEIR fails to account for safety issues that will result from additional traffic in the area and the railroad crossing. The DEIR does not fully address potential air quality impacts nor does it adequately discuss studies regarding increased asthma and other respiratory problems for people living near freeways and industrial areas. The DEIR does not sufficiently address the potential for release of hazardous chemicals through ground disturbance. The DEIR does include a sufficient discussion of potential impacts to water resources on site that could result from development on the site, nor does the document include an adequate alternatives analysis. It would be irresponsible for the City of Berkeley to consider approving this project without complete and accurate information regarding any and all impacts that may affect the health and safety of the community. This Project has the potential to increase already significant traffic congestion, harm the health of residents, and destroy irreplaceable cultural and historic sites that the City of Berkeley has pledged to protect. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of more than 5,000 years of history and a living culture. Reject the DEIR and embrace the No Plan / Create a Berkeley Gateway / Memorial Site Alternative! Sincerely, Farhana Jahan MSW Candidate UC Berkeley -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP /LYLD+RXVWRQ OLYLDNKRXVWRQ#JPDLOFRP! 6HQW )ULGD\-DQXDU\ 30 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW 'UDIW(QYLURQPHQWDO,PSDFW5HSRUWRQSURSRVHG WK6WUHHW3URMHFW Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Preservation Commission in 2000, noting the site is “most highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial ground.” The site was also listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, and determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The original West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site completely encompassed the proposed 1900 Fourth Street Project and blocks beyond. It is known to be the oldest bayside settlement and one of the largest shellmounds in the San Francisco Bay Area—more than 5,000 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone Peoples today—a fact not acknowledged in the DEIR. The content of the DEIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by widespread community opposition and concern voiced at the March 10, 2016, December 8, 2016 and January 12, 2017 Zoning Adjustment Board meetings and the December 1, 2016, and January 5, 2017 Landmark Preservation Commission meetings. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to create the archaeological report and there has not been adequate peer review of the limited data in the DEIR. The archaeological analysis is inadequate and misleading. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered many prehistoric human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address human remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology and conclusions of the 1900 Fourth Street Draft EIR. The likely disturbance of human remains is highly significant as defined by CEQA and cannot be mitigated. The DEIR does not address the issue of Richard Schwartz’s recording of over 400 burials in the vicinity of 1900 Fourth St. and fails to provide any context of the lot within the larger site, ALA-307. The DEIR attempts to isolate and not analyze 1900 Fourth St. within the context of a larger site of cultural significance. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the DEIR’s preparation. The primary consultant has conflicts of interest, and does not represent the all of the Ohlone people indigenous to the Bay Area. Another Ohlone California Tribal group indigenous to Berkeley area and community has formally and repeatedly requested tribal consultation as required by CEQA. The City to date has not consulted with this group for purposes of preparing the DEIR, in violation of CEQA. The consultation that has occurred to date appears to be nothing more than a token gesture that fails to protect this important Ohlone site (the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site) and has resulted in payment of funds to an individual as mitigation for the destruction of this irreplaceable sacred place. The Ohlone comprise more than a dozen tribes and languages yet the DEIR consults only one individual. The DEIR also fails to assess the importance of this site as a “tribal cultural resource” separate from the category of “cultural resources – archaeological.” AB 52 established a new category of resources under the California Environmental Quality Act, “tribal cultural resources,” which considers the tribal cultural values in addition to the scientific and archaeological values when determining impacts and mitigation. This DEIR, rather than fully assessing the impacts to tribal cultural resources under a new category, merely incorporates a brief discussion under the cultural resources archaeological section that states the destruction of the site will be mitigated through: 1) payment to an individual of $75,000 to improve a cemetery located outside the bounds of the shellmound and outside of the city boundaries, and 2) that educational panels will be placed at or near the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site after further consultation with the Ohlone people, without identifying who will be consulted for this mitigation measure. Neither the discussion nor the proposed mitigation complies with CEQA requirements to consult with impacted Tribes and to include a new and separate category addressing “tribal cultural resources.” Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley, entitled “Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People” states in part: “BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site.” Please honor this promise. Honoring this promise requires consultation will additional Ohlone people who recognize this site as sacred, as a tribal cultural property and it requires consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region. To date, Berkeley has not honored this promise and has failed to seek the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous people of the region—and has failed to respect the indigenous peoples’ opposition to the proposed project. On page 67, the DEIR states, “Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous peoples of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear whether or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. Given that 1900 Fourth Street proposal includes 155-apartments, and given that there are numerous Tribal objections to the development, it seems clear that the step of meaningful Tribal consultation before amending the General Plan was not done. The Project also requires several discretionary approvals by the City for variances to the current general plan and zoning ordinances. These approvals would require consultation under both AB 52 and SB 18. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound and Ohlone village site is a series of murals and a small plaque in the parking lot under the nearby freeway. Certainly, the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone peoples to develop a major memorial and educational site in the form of a culturally-appropriate, green open space park at 1900 Fourth Street. The DEIR fails to analyze and offer meaningful alternatives. I strongly support the development of such a memorial and educational site in lieu of the proposed development as the preferred alternative. In addition to the unavoidable adverse impacts to this critical tribal resource the DEIR includes other fatal flaws that require the City of Berkeley to either disapprove the Project or at a minimum require a supplemental EIR before making any determinations on the Project. The Project will not fulfill the purposes set forth in the Project proposal—in fact the Project will actually exacerbate issues it claims to resolve. The DEIR does not adequately address traffic impacts in that it fails to include all approved and ongoing projects in the area. The failure to address these other projects means that the cumulative impacts analysis is fatally flawed. The DEIR fails to account for safety issues that will result from additional traffic in the area and the railroad crossing. The DEIR does not fully address potential air quality impacts nor does it adequately discuss studies regarding increased asthma and other respiratory problems for people living near freeways and industrial areas. The DEIR does not sufficiently address the potential for release of hazardous chemicals through ground disturbance. The DEIR does include a sufficient discussion of potential impacts to water resources on site that could result from development on the site, nor does the document include an adequate alternatives analysis. It would be irresponsible for the City of Berkeley to consider approving this project without complete and accurate information regarding any and all impacts that may affect the health and safety of the community. This Project has the potential to increase already significant traffic congestion, harm the health of residents, and destroy irreplaceable cultural and historic sites that the City of Berkeley has pledged to protect. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of more than 5,000 years of history and a living culture. Reject the DEIR and embrace the No Plan / Create a Berkeley Gateway / Memorial Site Alternative! Sincerely, Livia Houston Berkeley Resident Allen, Shannon From: Nicole Liner-Jigamian Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners, I am writing to express my deep concerns about the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Preservation Commission in 2000, noting the site is “most highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial ground.” The site was also listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, and determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The original West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site completely encompassed the proposed 1900 Fourth Street Project and blocks beyond. It is known to be the oldest bayside settlement and one of the largest shellmounds in the San Francisco Bay Area—more than 5,000 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone Peoples today—a fact not acknowledged in the DEIR. The content of the DEIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by widespread community opposition and concern voiced at the March 10, 2016, December 8, 2016 and January 12, 2017 Zoning Adjustment Board meetings and the December 1, 2016, and January 5, 2017 Landmark Preservation Commission meetings. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to create the archaeological report and there has not been adequate peer review of the limited data in the DEIR. The archaeological analysis is inadequate and misleading. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered many prehistoric human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address human remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology and conclusions of the 1900 Fourth Street Draft EIR. The likely disturbance of human remains is highly significant as defined by CEQA and cannot be mitigated. The DEIR does not address the issue of Richard Schwartz’s recording of over 400 burials in the vicinity of 1900 Fourth St. and fails to provide any context of the lot within the larger site, ALA-307. The DEIR attempts to isolate and not analyze 1900 Fourth St. within the context of a larger site of cultural significance. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the DEIR’s preparation. The primary consultant has conflicts of interest, and does not represent the all of the Ohlone people indigenous to the Bay Area. Another Ohlone California Tribal group indigenous to Berkeley area and community has formally and repeatedly requested tribal consultation as required by CEQA. The City to date has not consulted with this group for purposes of preparing the DEIR, in violation of CEQA. The consultation that has occurred to date appears to be nothing more than a token gesture that fails to protect this important Ohlone site (the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site) and has resulted in payment of funds to an individual as mitigation for the destruction of this irreplaceable sacred place. The Ohlone comprise more than a dozen tribes and languages yet the DEIR consults only one individual. The DEIR also fails to assess the importance of this site as a “tribal cultural resource” separate from the category of “cultural resources – archaeological.” AB 52 established a new category of resources under the California Environmental Quality Act, “tribal cultural resources,” which considers the tribal cultural values in addition to the scientific and archaeological values when determining impacts and mitigation. This DEIR, rather than fully assessing the impacts to tribal cultural resources under a new category, merely incorporates a brief discussion under the cultural resources archaeological section that states the destruction of the site will be mitigated through: 1) payment to an individual of $75,000 to improve a cemetery located outside the bounds of the shellmound and outside of the city boundaries, and 2) that educational panels will be placed at or near the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site after further consultation with the Ohlone people, without identifying who will be consulted for this mitigation measure. Neither the discussion nor the proposed mitigation complies with CEQA requirements to consult with impacted Tribes and to include a new and separate category addressing “tribal cultural resources.” Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley, entitled “Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People” states in part: “BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site.” Please honor this promise. Honoring this promise requires consultation will additional Ohlone people who recognize this site as sacred, as a tribal cultural property and it requires consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region. To date, Berkeley has not honored this promise and has failed to seek the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous people of the region—and has failed to respect the indigenous peoples’ opposition to the proposed project. On page 67, the DEIR states, “Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous peoples of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear whether or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. Given that 1900 Fourth Street proposal includes 155-apartments, and given that there are numerous Tribal objections to the development, it seems clear that the step of meaningful Tribal consultation before amending the General Plan was not done. The Project also requires several discretionary approvals by the City for variances to the current general plan and zoning ordinances. These approvals would require consultation under both AB 52 and SB 18. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound and Ohlone village site is a series of murals and a small plaque in the parking lot under the nearby freeway. Certainly, the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone peoples to develop a major memorial and educational site in the form of a culturally-appropriate, green open space park at 1900 Fourth Street. The DEIR fails to analyze and offer meaningful alternatives. I strongly support the development of such a memorial and educational site in lieu of the proposed development as the preferred alternative. In addition to the unavoidable adverse impacts to this critical tribal resource the DEIR includes other fatal flaws that require the City of Berkeley to either disapprove the Project or at a minimum require a supplemental EIR before making any determinations on the Project. The Project will not fulfill the purposes set forth in the Project proposal—in fact the Project will actually exacerbate issues it claims to resolve. The DEIR does not adequately address traffic impacts in that it fails to include all approved and ongoing projects in the area. The failure to address these other projects means that the cumulative impacts analysis is fatally flawed. The DEIR fails to account for safety issues that will result from additional traffic in the area and the railroad crossing. The DEIR does not fully address potential air quality impacts nor does it adequately discuss studies regarding increased asthma and other respiratory problems for people living near freeways and industrial areas. The DEIR does not sufficiently address the potential for release of hazardous chemicals through ground disturbance. The DEIR does include a sufficient discussion of potential impacts to water resources on site that could result from development on the site, nor does the document include an adequate alternatives analysis. It would be irresponsible for the City of Berkeley to consider approving this project without complete and accurate information regarding any and all impacts that may affect the health and safety of the community. This Project has the potential to increase already significant traffic congestion, harm the health of residents, and destroy irreplaceable cultural and historic sites that the City of Berkeley has pledged to protect. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of more than 5,000 years of history and a living culture. Reject the DEIR and embrace the No Plan / Create a Berkeley Gateway / Memorial Site Alternative! Sincerely, Nicole Liner-Jigamian Master of Social Welfare Candidate, 2017 University of California, Berkeley [email protected] (310) 463-6138 Ȁ ȋǤ ǤǤ ǤǤ Ǧ ʹͲͳͶ ͳͻͲͲ ǤȌǦ ͵Ͳ ȏǣ Ǥ ǡ ǡ Ǧ͵ͲǤȐ ͳǤ ǡǤǡ DzǤdz ǡDz ͵ͲͲ ǡǤdz ǡ ǡǦ ǡǤ Dz Ǥdz DzǤdzȋǡͳͺȌ ʹǤǦ ǡǡǯ ǤDz Ǥdz ǤǤ Dz ǥ Ǥ ǡǤDz Ǥdz ǡ Ǥ ǤȋDz dzȌ Ǧ Ǥ Ǥ DzdzǤ ǡDz ǤDz ȏ Ȑ ǡ ȏ ȐǤ Ǥȏ Ȑ ͳ ͵Ǥǯǡ ͳͷͲǤ ͳͺͷͳͺǤ ǡ Ǥ ͶǤ ͳͺͲǡȋ ȌDz dzDzǡdzǡ Ǥ ǤȋǡͳͺȌ ͷǤ DzdzǤ ȋ ǡͳͺȌ Ǥ Dzdz Dz Ǥdzȋ ǡͳͺȌ Ǥ ͳͺͺǡ ʹǦ͵ȋ ǤȌDz Ǥdz Ǥȋ ͳͺͺȌ >6FKZDUW]1RWHV6FKZDUW]1RWHV 7KLVGRFXPHQWVWKDWWKHVKHOOPRXQGZDV6FKZDUW]1RWHV RULJLQDOO\FRYHULQJ+HDUVW6W7KHDUWLFOHGLGQRWVWDWHZLWK DQ\PRUHGHWDLOZKHUHRQQRUWKVLGHRI+HDUVW6W WKHQFDOOHG %ULVWRO WKHPRXQGWHUPLQDWHGRULIWKH\HYHQNQHZDVLWPLJKW KDYHVORSHGLQWRWKHJUDGHDQGFRQWLQXHGQRUWK2QHZRXOG ORJLFDOO\FRQFOXGHWKDWDVKHOOPRXQGZRXOGEHVKDSHGOLNHDQ XSVLGHGRZQFRQHDQGHQGLQDWKLQLQGHWHUPLQDWHOD\HUDQG WKDWWKHUHZRXOGPRVWOLNHO\DOPRVWLQHYLWDEO\FRQWLQXH XQGHUWKHPRGHUQVRLOOHYHOVEH\RQGWKHGLVWDQFHVHHQRQWKH VXUIDFHDWWKHWLPH@ ͺǤ ȋ Ȍ Dzdz Ǥȋ ǡͳͺͻȌ ͻǤ Dz dz ǤǡDz ǡǦ ǡǡǡ Ǥdzȋ ǡͳͺͻȌ ʹ ͳͲǤ ǡ ͳͻͲͲ Ǥ Ǥȋ ǡͷ;;ͺȌ >5LFKDUG6FKZDUW]QRWHV 7KHROG>5LFKDUG6FKZDUW]QRWHV 7KHROGKRWHOORFDWLRQ KRWHOORFDWLRQKRWHOORFDWLRQZKHUHWKH ZKHUHWKH UHPDLQVZHUHIRXQGUHPDLQVZHUHIRXQGZDVLQFORVHSUR[LPLW\WRWKHQRUWKZHVW ZDVLQFORVHSUR[LPLW\WRWKHQRUWKZHVW FRUQHURI )RXUWK6WRUSRVVLEO\RQWKH )RXUWK6W ORWDVDUFKHRORJLVWV:LOOLDP6HOIDQG$VVRFLDWHVQRWHLQWKHLU UHSRUWWLWOHG³UHSRUWWLWOHG³*HRDUFKDHRORJLFDO7HVWLQJ5HSRUWIRUUHSRUWWLWOHG³*HRDUFKDHRORJLFDO7HVWLQJ5HSRUWIRU WKHWKHWKHWKH 8QLYHUVLW\RI&DOLIRUQLD%HUNHOH\6WXGHQW$WKOHWH+LJK 3HUIRUPDQFH&HQWHU$ODPHGD&RXQW\&DOLIRUQLD´VWDWH ³)LQGVIURPWKHVLWHDUHILUVWQRWHGLQDQHZVSDSHUFOLSSLQJ³³³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´6LWH&DUG ´´´ ,I6HOIDQG$VVRFLDWHVDUHFRUUHFWWKLVILQGRI,I6HOIDQG$VVRFLDWHVDUHFRUUHFWWKLVILQGRIWHQKXPDQ WHQKXPDQ UHPDLQVZRXOGKDYHUHPDLQVZRXOGKDYHOLNHO\ OLNHO\OLNHO\OLNHO\EHHQRQWKH )RXUWK6WORW EHHQRQWKH )RXUWK6WORW 11. In the late nineteenth century, a skeleton of a male was discovered just west of the 1900 Fourth lot by its northern sector. The skeleton was uncovered by men digging to remove soil from the lot. “The skeleton is supposed to be that of an Indian many of which have been found in the neighborhood.” (Berkeley Herald, 1892)[article found by the late historian Jerry Sulliger and presented to Schwartz] ͳʹǤǦ ǡ ǡ Ǥȋ ǡͳͺͻʹȌȏ Ȑ ͳ͵Ǥ ǡ DzǡǦ Ǥdzȋ ͳͺͻ͵Ȍ ͳͶǤ ͳͺͻͷǡ Ǥǡ ǤǡǤ ǦǦǤ ǡ ͵ Ǥ Dzdz Ǥ ǯǡDz ǦǢ Ǥdz Dzdz Ǥ Dz ǦǦǤ ǡ Ǥǡ Ǥ ǤDzȋ ǡ ͳͺͻͷȌ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ͳͷǤ ǡ Ǥ ǤDzǥ ǡ Ǥdzȋ ǡͳͻͲͳȌ ͳǤ ǤǤ ǡ Dz Ǥǡ Ǥ Dz Ǥdzȋ ǡͳͻͲʹȌ ͳǤ Ǥ ͳͻͲʹǤ Dz Ǥdz Ǥ ʹͲDz Ǥdzȋǣ ǡ Ǥǡ Ǧ ǡͳͻ͵Ȍ Ͷ ͳͺǤ Dz dz Dz Ǥ Dz Ǥdz DzǦ ȏǫȐǡǡ ǡǡǡ ǡǤdzȋ ǡ ͳͻͲ͵Ȍ ͳͻǤ ǡ Dz dz>6FKZDUW]QRW>>>6FKZDUW]QRWHV 6FKZDUW]QRWHV QRWHHV HV QRWHXVHRIQRWHQRWHXVHRISOXUDOXVHRIXVHRISOXUDO SOXUDOSOXUDO ³PRXQGV´@ ³PRXQGV´@ DzdzDz dz ǤDzdzDz dz ǤȋǡͳͻͲ͵Ȍ ʹͲǤ Dz Ǥdz ǯǤ DzǤdz Dz Ǥdz Ǥ DzdzǤȋ ǡͳͻͲ͵Ȍ ʹͳǤDz dz Ǥ ǡ DzdzDz dz Ǥ Ǧ Ȁ Ǥȋ ǡͳͻͲ͵Ȍ ʹʹǤ Dzdz ǤDz dzǦ Ǧ ǤǤ>6FKZDUW]QRWHV 7KLVHYLGHQFHDVD>6FKZDUW]QRWHV 7KLVHYLGHQFHDVD ZKROHZKROHZKROHZKROHZLWKDOOWKHDUWLFOHV ZLWKDOOWKHDUWLFOHVZLWKDOOWKHDUWLFOHVSRLQWWRGDWDW SRLQWWRGDWDWRUHTXHVWDODUJHUSRLQWWRGDWDWRUHTXHVWDODUJHU ERXQGDU\IRU$ODERXQGDU\IRU$OD @@@@ ʹ͵ǤͳͻͲ͵ ǯ>QRZ7UXLWW DQG:KLWH/XPEHU\DUG@Dz Ǥdz ͷ ǡDz Ǥdz ǡDz ǤdzȋǡͳͻͲ͵Ȍ ʹͶǤ ͳͻͲ͵ǡDz dz Dzǯdz >WKLVLVZLWKLQWKHORWRIWKHFXUUHQWEXVLQHVV7UXLWWDQG:KLW>>>WKLVLVZLWKLQWKHORWRIWKHFXUUHQWEXVLQHVV7UXLWWDQG:KLWHH /XPEHU6HFRQG/XPEHU6HFRQG7KLUG 7KLUG6WVDQG+HDUVW6WVRXWKVLGH@7KLUG7KLUG6WVDQG+HDUVW6WVRXWKVLGH@ǡ ǡ Ǥ ʹͷǤ Dz ǡ Ǥ Ǥ ǡ ǦǤdz Dz dzDz ǤǤǤdzȋǡͳͻͲ͵ǡ ͳͻͲ͵Ȍ ʹǤ6DWHOOLWH0RXQGǤ ǡ Dz ǡ Ǥ ȋǦ͵ͲȌDzǤdzȋ ǡͳͻͲ͵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ʹǤ ʹ ǤDzdz Dzdz ǤDzdz Ǥdz ʹͺǤ ʹͷǡǡǡ Ǥ ʹͻǤ ͵ͲǤ Ǥ Dzdz Dz ǯǤ>WKH>WKH>WKH UHIHUHQFHZDVWR6LU)UDQFLV'UHIHUHQFHZDVWR6LU)UDQFLV'UDNHZKRYLVLWHGWKHDUHDLQUDNHZKRYLVLWHGWKHDUHDLQ Ȑ >QRZQDPHG+H>>>QRZQDPHG+HDUVW@QRZQDPHG+HDUVW@DUVW@DUVW@ DzǤdz DzǤdzȋǡͳͻͲȌ ͵ͳǤ ǦʹͲ ǡDzdz ͳͻͲͲ ǤǤ Ǥ ͵ʹǤ ͵͵Ǥ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͵ͶǤ ͳͻ͵ͲǡͳǦ ͳͳǡ Ǥ ǡ ǤǤ ͳǡͲͲͲǤDzdz Ǥ Ǥ Dz dzǤ Ǥ >ZKLFK>>>ZKLFKOLNHO\ZHUHZKLFKZKLFKOLNHO\ZHUHOLNHO\ZHUHXQGLVWXUEHGDQG XQGLVWXUEHGDQG LQWDFWLQWDFWLQWDFWLQWDFWDWVXFKDGHSWK DWVXFKDGHSWK@DWVXFKDGHSWK@@@ Ǥ Ǥ Ǥȋǡͳͻ͵ͳȌ >5LFKDUG6FKZDUW]>5LFKDUG6FKZDUW]QRWHV QRWHV 7KHLQIRUP7KHLQIRUPDWLRQ7KHLQIRUPDWLRQDWLRQVXEPLWWHGWR VXEPLWWHGWR &+5,6ZDVXWLOL]HGWRJHQHUDWHSULPDU\ 3RJHQHUDWHSULPDU\ 3 DQG DQG WULQRPLDOQXPEHU &$WULQRPLDOQXPEHU &$$/$ $/$$/$$/$ DVVWDWHKLVWRULFODQGPDUNV DVVWDWHKLVWRULFODQGPDUNV DVVWDWHKLVWRULFODQGPDUNVIRU IRUIRUIRU WKHVHILQGV¶ORFDWLRQ&+5,6LQFOXGLQJWKLVZLWKLQWKH&$WKHVHILQGV¶ORFDWLRQ&+5,6LQFOXGLQJWKLVZLWKLQWKH&$&+5,6LQFOXGLQJWKLVZLWKLQWKH&$ $/$$/$$/$$/$VLWH,EHOLHYHZRXOGRIILFLDO VLWH,EHOLHYHZRXOGRIILFLDOO\VLWH,EHOLHYHZRXOGRIILFLDOO\O\O\H[SDQG H[SDQGWKHERXQGDULHVH[SDQGH[SDQGWKHERXQGDULHV RIWKHVLWHWRWKHIRRWRI+HDUVW6WLQVWHDGRIDQ³XQNQRZQ´ ERXQGDU\E\6HFRQG6WERXQGDU\E\6HFRQG6WZKLFKLVZKDW1HOV1HOVRQZDVIRUFHG ZKLFKLVZKDW1HOV1HOVRQZDVIRUFHG WRQRWDWHGXHWRQRWDWHGXHHYLGHQWO\ HYLGHQWO\HYLGHQWO\WRQR WRQRWKDYLQJWRQRWRQRWKDYLQJWKDYLQJWKDYLQJDFFHVVWRWKH DFFHVVWRWKHSULYDWHDFFHVVWRWKHSULYDWHSULYDWHSULYDWH SURSHUW\ZHVWRI6HFRQG6W@SURSHUW\ZHVWRI6HFRQG6W@@@ ͵ͷǤ ǡ Dzǡdz ǡ ͳͻͲͲ ǤǤ Dz ǤDz Ǥ DzͷͲ ǯ ǡ Ǥdz Dz Ǥdz Ǥȋ ǡͳͻͶȌȏ Ȑ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͵Ǥ ͳͻͶ ȏ Ǥ ȐDz Ǥ ǡ ǡ Ǥdz ʹͷ Ǥǯ Dz Ǥdzȋ ǡͳͻͶȌȏ Ȑ ͺ ͵Ǥ ͳͻͶͺ Ǥ Ǥ Ǥȋ ǡͳͻͶͺȌ ȏ Ȑ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¶LQHDFKGLUHFWLRQ¶LQHDFKGLUHFWLRQ7KHDUHDLVZLWKLQWKHDUHDRI 7KHDUHDLVZLWKLQWKHDUHDRI 6WUDZEHUU\&UHHNDQGPD\KDYHDWRQHWLPHKDYHKDGULSDULDQ YHJHWDWLRQ0DSVIURPWKHVUHYHDOZLOORZJURYHVLQWKH DUHDDUHDDUHDDUHD%RWKEXULDOVDQGVKHOOVFDWWHUZHUHUHFRUGHGE\ %RWKEXULDOVDQGVKHOOVFDWWHUZHUHUHFRUGHGE\ 5LFK5L5L5LFKDUG6FKZDUW]ZLWK&+5,6LQ@FKFKDUG6FKZDUW]ZLWK&+5,6LQ@DUG6FKZDUW]ZLWK&+5,6LQ@ ͵ͺǤ ͳͻͷͲ Ǥ Ǥ ͳͺǦDz ǡ Ǥdz Dz Ͳǡ Ǥ Ǥdzǡǡǡ ǡǡǤ ͵ǡͲͲͲǤ ǡ Ǥ Ǥȋ ǡͳͻͷͲȌ ͵ͻǤͳͻͷͲǣ Ǥ ʹͲǯͳǡͲͲͲDz Ǥdz ʹǡͲͲͲ ʹǡͲͲͲǤ ͳͲͲǡ Dz Ǥdz Ǥ ǡǡǡ ǡ Ǥʹͷdz Ǧ ǡǤ ͶͲǤ ͳͻͷͲͲ Ǥǡǡ ͻ ǡǤ ǡ ǡ ǤǤ Ǥ Ǥȋ ǡͳͻͷͲȌ ͶͳǤͲ Ǥ Dz dz͵ǡͲͲͲ Ǥ ǤǤ ǤȋǡͳͻͷͲȌ ͶʹǤͳͻͷͶ ǡ Ǥ ǡ Ǥ ǡǤǡ Ǥ ǦͳͶ ǤDz ǥ ǡ ʹǡʹͲͲ ǦǡʹǡͲͲͳʹͳ͵ǤDz Ǧ ǤȋǡͳͻͷͶȌ Ͷ͵ǤͳͻͺͲǡǡǡ Ǥ ǡ ǡDzdz Ǥ Ǥ Dz Ǥdzȋ ǡͳͻͺͺǡ Ȍ ͶͶǤʹͲͲʹ ͳͻͲͲ ǤǤ ǡ ǤʹͷǯʹͷǯǤ ǤͲ͵dzǦǤ͵ͺdz ʹǤͷdzǤ͵ͺdzǤ Ǥȋ ǡ ǡʹͲͲʹȌ ͳͲ ͶͷǤʹͲͲ ͳͻͲͲ ǤǡȀ Ǥȋ ǡ ʹͲͲȌ>5LFKDUG6FKZDU>>>5LFKDUG6FKZDUW]QRWHV 7KHUH5LFKDUG6FKZDUW]QRWHV 7KHUHW]QRWHV 7KHUHDUHUHFRUGHGEXULDOV DUHUHFRUGHGEXULDOV DQGDQXPEHURIVKHOOPRXQGDQGVKHOOVFDWWHUVLWHVUHFRUGHGDQGDQXPEHURIVKHOOPRXQGDQGVKHOOVFDWWHUVLWHVUHFRUGHGUGHGUGHG E\5LFKDUG6FKZDUW]ZLWK&+E\5LFKDUG6FKZDUW]ZLWK&+5,6++5,65,65,6IXUWKHUHDVWRQ6WUDZEHUU\ IXUWKHUHDVWRQ6WUDZEHUU\ &UHHN&UHHN&UHHN&UHHNDVZHOO DVZHOO@DVZHOODVZHOO@@@ ͶǤ Ǥ ͳͻͲͲ Ǥ 47. Records and photographs of collections of shell beads perforated and various typologies of olliivetta beads and abalone pendants as well as a charmstone having been donated to the California Academy of Sciences from people removing these artifacts from the Berkeley Shellmound were found by Richard Schwartz. Records have the following numners: CAS 0146-0022 and CAS 0234-0037. (over 200 shell beads, Oliivetta, abalone, clam, and eight pendants and what appears to be a charmstone). Any other records or artifacts were lost in the great 1906 earthquake and fire, which destroyed much of their collections. (Surviving collection documented by Richard Schwartz with CHRIS). SUMMERY OF FINDINGS In this summery, I have tried to give some idea of the scope of burials in and around Ala-307, of which 1900 Fourth St. is a part of. I have tried to present the number of places they were found and the number in each place/site. The “Within 1 Block” and “Within 5 Blocks” refer to the approximate distance from the 1900 Fourth St. proposed project. Within 1 Block Within 5 blocks Number of Sites Reported 18 24 Number of Burials Reported 455 497 ǣ ͳͳ ͳǤ Ǥ ʹǤ ǡ ǡ ͵Ǧͺǡ Ǥ ͵Ǥ Ǥ ͶǤ ǡ Ǥ Ǥ ǡ ǡ ǡ ͳʹ )HOL[&DULQD )URP $%,*$,/&(/,$7$8%0$1 DEE\WDXEPDQ#EHUNHOH\HGX! 6HQW 6DWXUGD\-DQXDU\ $0 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW 5H &RPPHQWVRQWKH'UDIW(QYLURQPHQWDO,PSDFW5HSRUWRQSURSRVHG WK6WUHHW 3URMHFW Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Preservation Commission in 2000, noting the site is “most highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial ground.” The site was also listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, and determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The original West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site completely encompassed the proposed 1900 Fourth Street Project and blocks beyond. It is known to be the oldest bayside settlement and one of the largest shellmounds in the San Francisco Bay Area—more than 5,000 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone Peoples today—a fact not acknowledged in the DEIR. The content of the DEIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by widespread community opposition and concern voiced at the March 10, 2016, December 8, 2016 and January 12, 2017 Zoning Adjustment Board meetings and the December 1, 2016, and January 5, 2017 Landmark Preservation Commission meetings. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to create the archaeological report and there has not been adequate peer review of the limited data in the DEIR. The archaeological analysis is inadequate and misleading. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered many prehistoric human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address human remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology and conclusions of the 1900 Fourth Street Draft EIR. The likely disturbance of human remains is highly significant as defined by CEQA and cannot be mitigated. The DEIR does not address the issue of Richard Schwartz’s recording of over 400 burials in the vicinity of 1900 Fourth St. and fails to provide any context of the lot within the larger site, ALA-307. The DEIR attempts to isolate and not analyze 1900 Fourth St. within the context of a larger site of cultural significance. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the DEIR’s preparation. The primary consultant has conflicts of interest, and does not represent the all of the Ohlone people indigenous to the Bay Area. Another Ohlone California Tribal group indigenous to Berkeley area and community has formally and repeatedly requested tribal consultation as required by CEQA. The City to date has not consulted with this group for purposes of preparing the DEIR, in violation of CEQA. The consultation that has occurred to date appears to be nothing more than a token gesture that fails to protect this important Ohlone site (the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site) and has resulted in payment of funds to an individual as mitigation for the destruction of this irreplaceable sacred place. The Ohlone comprise more than a dozen tribes and languages yet the DEIR consults only one individual. The DEIR also fails to assess the importance of this site as a “tribal cultural resource” separate from the category of “cultural resources – archaeological.” AB 52 established a new category of resources under the California Environmental Quality Act, “tribal cultural resources,” which considers the tribal cultural values in addition to the scientific and archaeological values when determining impacts and mitigation. This DEIR, rather than fully assessing the impacts to tribal cultural resources under a new category, merely incorporates a brief discussion under the cultural resources archaeological section that states the destruction of the site will be mitigated through: 1) payment to an individual of $75,000 to improve a cemetery located outside the bounds of the shellmound and outside of the city boundaries, and 2) that educational panels will be placed at or near the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site after further consultation with the Ohlone people, without identifying who will be consulted for this mitigation measure. Neither the discussion nor the proposed mitigation complies with CEQA requirements to consult with impacted Tribes and to include a new and separate category addressing “tribal cultural resources.” Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley, entitled “Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People” states in part: “BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site.” Please honor this promise. Honoring this promise requires consultation will additional Ohlone people who recognize this site as sacred, as a tribal cultural property and it requires consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region. To date, Berkeley has not honored this promise and has failed to seek the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous people of the region—and has failed to respect the indigenous peoples’ opposition to the proposed project. On page 67, the DEIR states, “Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous peoples of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear whether or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. Given that 1900 Fourth Street proposal includes 155-apartments, and given that there are numerous Tribal objections to the development, it seems clear that the step of meaningful Tribal consultation before amending the General Plan was not done. The Project also requires several discretionary approvals by the City for variances to the current general plan and zoning ordinances. These approvals would require consultation under both AB 52 and SB 18. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound and Ohlone village site is a series of murals and a small plaque in the parking lot under the nearby freeway. Certainly, the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone peoples to develop a major memorial and educational site in the form of a culturally-appropriate, green open space park at 1900 Fourth Street. The DEIR fails to analyze and offer meaningful alternatives. I strongly support the development of such a memorial and educational site in lieu of the proposed development as the preferred alternative. In addition to the unavoidable adverse impacts to this critical tribal resource the DEIR includes other fatal flaws that require the City of Berkeley to either disapprove the Project or at a minimum require a supplemental EIR before making any determinations on the Project. The Project will not fulfill the purposes set forth in the Project proposal—in fact the Project will actually exacerbate issues it claims to resolve. The DEIR does not adequately address traffic impacts in that it fails to include all approved and ongoing projects in the area. The failure to address these other projects means that the cumulative impacts analysis is fatally flawed. The DEIR fails to account for safety issues that will result from additional traffic in the area and the railroad crossing. The DEIR does not fully address potential air quality impacts nor does it adequately discuss studies regarding increased asthma and other respiratory problems for people living near freeways and industrial areas. The DEIR does not sufficiently address the potential for release of hazardous chemicals through ground disturbance. The DEIR does include a sufficient discussion of potential impacts to water resources on site that could result from development on the site, nor does the document include an adequate alternatives analysis. It would be irresponsible for the City of Berkeley to consider approving this project without complete and accurate information regarding any and all impacts that may affect the health and safety of the community. This Project has the potential to increase already significant traffic congestion, harm the health of residents, and destroy irreplaceable cultural and historic sites that the City of Berkeley has pledged to protect. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of more than 5,000 years of history and a living culture. Reject the DEIR and embrace the No Plan / Create a Berkeley Gateway / Memorial Site Alternative! Sincerely, Abby -- Abigail Taubman MSW Candidate, 2017 School of Social Welfare University of California, Berkeley 818.720.7788 -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP GHQQ\DEU HGJHJX\#DROFRP! 6HQW 6DWXUGD\-DQXDU\ 30 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ &F %LOO#IHUJXVRQEHUODQGFRP 6XEMHFW )RXUWK6WUHHW $WWDFKPHQWV $EUDPV=DE6WDPSHGSGI =$%OWU%HUODQGSGI Hi Ms Allen, For the January 10 meeting I sent letter to the ZAB, and our attorney also sent letter to the board. A peer review of the EIR's traffic study was also sent. These documents were addressed to ZAB members and were hand delivered and time stamped by a City staff member. I apologize for not addressing these documents directly to your office. The documents are attached hereon. I know you are moving your offices this week things must be difficult. However, I am hoping you could find the time to mount these letters and reports on the City's 1900 project site. Thank you. Sincerely, Denny Abrams 1834 Fourth Street Berkeley, Ca 94710 cell: 510 435 4650 office: 510 644 3002 email: [email protected] -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP 0HJDQGH0DWWHR PHJDQGHPDWWHR#JPDLOFRP! 6HQW 6DWXUGD\-DQXDU\ 30 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW 5H &RPPHQWVRQWKH'UDIW(QYLURQPHQWDO,PSDFW5HSRUWRQSURSRVHG WK6WUHHW 3URMHFW Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Preservation Commission in 2000, noting the site is “most highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial ground.” This is our last opportunity to protect and preserve the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site. Almost all of the other shellmound and villages sites have been developed and buried under concrete. Please do not approve the destruction of this unique, historic, irreplaceable site. We should preserve and enhance the remaining sites and our collective efforts should start with this site. The site was listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, and determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The original West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site completely encompassed the proposed 1900 Fourth Street Project and blocks beyond. It is known to be the oldest bayside settlement and one of the largest shellmounds in the San Francisco Bay Area—more than 5,000 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone Peoples today—a fact not acknowledged in the DEIR. Berkeley is on record supporting the rights of indigenous people. The Landmarks Commission noted that this site is “highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial site.” The city of Berkeley should not be approving and defending the destruction of a sacred site. The City of Berkeley has passed resolutions supporting the protection of sacred sites outside of Berkeley, such as the resolution passed supporting the Standing Rock Sioux opposition to the Dakota Access Pipeline. For the City to have credibility it must take action to protect the sacred sites within its boundaries that it has pledged to protect—including this important site. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of more than 5,000 years of history and a living culture. Reject the DEIR and embrace the No Plan / Create a Berkeley Gateway / Memorial Site Alternative! Sincerely, Megan de Matteo -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP 5HEHNDK(UHY UHEHNDKHUHY#JPDLOFRP! 6HQW 6XQGD\-DQXDU\ $0 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW %HUNHOH\6KHOOPRXQG Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Preservation Commission in 2000, noting the site is “most highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial ground.” The site was also listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, and determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The original West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site completely encompassed the proposed 1900 Fourth Street Project and blocks beyond. It is known to be the oldest bayside settlement and one of the largest shellmounds in the San Francisco Bay Area—more than 5,000 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone Peoples today—a fact not acknowledged in the DEIR. The content of the DEIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by widespread community opposition and concern voiced at the March 10, 2016, December 8, 2016 and January 12, 2017 Zoning Adjustment Board meetings and the December 1, 2016, and January 5, 2017 Landmark Preservation Commission meetings. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to create the archaeological report and there has not been adequate peer review of the limited data in the DEIR. The archaeological analysis is inadequate and misleading. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered many prehistoric human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address human remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology and conclusions of the 1900 Fourth Street Draft EIR. The likely disturbance of human remains is highly significant as defined by CEQA and cannot be mitigated. The DEIR does not address the issue of Richard Schwartz’s recording of over 400 burials in the vicinity of 1900 Fourth St. and fails to provide any context of the lot within the larger site, ALA-307. The DEIR attempts to isolate and not analyze 1900 Fourth St. within the context of a larger site of cultural significance. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the DEIR’s preparation. The primary consultant has conflicts of interest, and does not represent the all of the Ohlone people indigenous to the Bay Area. Another Ohlone California Tribal group indigenous to Berkeley area and community has formally and repeatedly requested tribal consultation as required by CEQA. The City to date has not consulted with this group for purposes of preparing the DEIR, in violation of CEQA. The consultation that has occurred to date appears to be nothing more than a token gesture that fails to protect this important Ohlone site (the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site) and has resulted in payment of funds to an individual as mitigation for the destruction of this irreplaceable sacred place. The Ohlone comprise more than a dozen tribes and languages yet the DEIR consults only one individual. The DEIR also fails to assess the importance of this site as a “tribal cultural resource” separate from the category of “cultural resources – archaeological.” AB 52 established a new category of resources under the California Environmental Quality Act, “tribal cultural resources,” which considers the tribal cultural values in addition to the scientific and archaeological values when determining impacts and mitigation. This DEIR, rather than fully assessing the impacts to tribal cultural resources under a new category, merely incorporates a brief discussion under the cultural resources archaeological section that states the destruction of the site will be mitigated through: 1) payment to an individual of $75,000 to improve a cemetery located outside the bounds of the shellmound and outside of the city boundaries, and 2) that educational panels will be placed at or near the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site after further consultation with the Ohlone people, without identifying who will be consulted for this mitigation measure. Neither the discussion nor the proposed mitigation complies with CEQA requirements to consult with impacted Tribes and to include a new and separate category addressing “tribal cultural resources.” Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley, entitled “Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People” states in part: “BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site.” Please honor this promise. Honoring this promise requires consultation will additional Ohlone people who recognize this site as sacred, as a tribal cultural property and it requires consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region. To date, Berkeley has not honored this promise and has failed to seek the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous people of the region—and has failed to respect the indigenous peoples’ opposition to the proposed project. On page 67, the DEIR states, “Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous peoples of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear whether or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. Given that 1900 Fourth Street proposal includes 155-apartments, and given that there are numerous Tribal objections to the development, it seems clear that the step of meaningful Tribal consultation before amending the General Plan was not done. The Project also requires several discretionary approvals by the City for variances to the current general plan and zoning ordinances. These approvals would require consultation under both AB 52 and SB 18. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound and Ohlone village site is a series of murals and a small plaque in the parking lot under the nearby freeway. Certainly, the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone peoples to develop a major memorial and educational site in the form of a culturally-appropriate, green open space park at 1900 Fourth Street. The DEIR fails to analyze and offer meaningful alternatives. I strongly support the development of such a memorial and educational site in lieu of the proposed development as the preferred alternative. In addition to the unavoidable adverse impacts to this critical tribal resource the DEIR includes other fatal flaws that require the City of Berkeley to either disapprove the Project or at a minimum require a supplemental EIR before making any determinations on the Project. The Project will not fulfill the purposes set forth in the Project proposal—in fact the Project will actually exacerbate issues it claims to resolve. The DEIR does not adequately address traffic impacts in that it fails to include all approved and ongoing projects in the area. The failure to address these other projects means that the cumulative impacts analysis is fatally flawed. The DEIR fails to account for safety issues that will result from additional traffic in the area and the railroad crossing. The DEIR does not fully address potential air quality impacts nor does it adequately discuss studies regarding increased asthma and other respiratory problems for people living near freeways and industrial areas. The DEIR does not sufficiently address the potential for release of hazardous chemicals through ground disturbance. The DEIR does include a sufficient discussion of potential impacts to water resources on site that could result from development on the site, nor does the document include an adequate alternatives analysis. It would be irresponsible for the City of Berkeley to consider approving this project without complete and accurate information regarding any and all impacts that may affect the health and safety of the community. This Project has the potential to increase already significant traffic congestion, harm the health of residents, and destroy irreplaceable cultural and historic sites that the City of Berkeley has pledged to protect. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of more than 5,000 years of history and a living culture. Reject the DEIR and embrace the No Plan / Create a Berkeley Gateway / Memorial Site Alternative! Sincerely, Rebekah Erev -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP 5LFKDUG6FKZDUW] ULFKDUG#ULFKDUGVFKZDUW]LQIR! 6HQW 6DWXUGD\-DQXDU\ $0 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ =RQLQJ$GMXVWPHQWV%RDUG =$% %HUNHOH\0D\RU V2IILFH &UDQH )DWHPD 0DLR/LQGD 'DYLOD&KHU\O +DKQ6RSKLH :HQJUDI6XVDQ :RUWKLQJWRQ.ULVV 'URVWH/RUL 6XEMHFW 5HFRUGVRIVRI1DWLYH$PHULFDQEXULDOVDWWKH:HVW%HUNHOH\6KHOOPRXQG $WWDFKPHQWV 5LFKDUG6FKZDUW]$OD%HUNHOH\6LWHV),1$/GRF[ )ROORZ8S)ODJ )ROORZXS )ODJ6WDWXV &RPSOHWHG ĞĂƌDĂLJŽƌ͕ŝƚLJŽƵŶĐŝůŵĞŵďĞƌƐ͕ŽŶŝŶŐĚũƵƐƚŵĞŶƚŽĂƌĚŵĞŵďĞƌƐ͕>ĂŶĚŵĂƌŬŽŵŵŝƐƐŝŽŶĞƌƐ͕^ŚĂŶŶŽŶůůĞŶ͕ĂŶĚ ŽƚŚĞƌƐ͖ WůĞĂƐĞƐĞĞĂƚƚĂĐŚŵĞŶƚ͘ /ĂŵƌĞƐƉĞĐƚĨƵůůLJƐƵďŵŝƚƚŝŶŐƚŽLJŽƵƚŚĞƌĞĐŽƌĚƐŽĨĂůůƚŚĞEĂƚŝǀĞŵĞƌŝĐĂŶďƵƌŝĂůƐĂŶĚĐƵůƚƵƌĂůƌĞŵĂŝŶƐ;ĞƐƚŝŵĂƚĞĚƚŽďĞ ŽǀĞƌϰϬϬͿǁŝƚŚŝŶĂŶĚƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐƚŚĞtĞƐƚĞƌŬĞůĞLJ^ŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚƐŝƚĞ;ůĂͲϯϬϳͿƚŚĂƚ/ŚĂǀĞĚŝƐĐŽǀĞƌĞĚŝŶŚŝƐƚŽƌŝĐĚĂƚĂ ;ŵŽƐƚůLJŽůĚŶĞǁƐƉĂƉĞƌƐĨƌŽŵϭϴϳϲͲƚŚĞϭϵϴϬƐͿĂŶĚƚŚĂƚĂƌĞƌĞĐŽƌĚĞĚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞƐƚĂƚĞŚŝƐƚŽƌŝĐͬĂƌĐŚĞŽůŽŐŝĐĂůĂƌĐŚŝǀĞ ;,Z/^͕Et/ŶĨŽĞŶƚĞƌͿǁŝƚŚŝŶƚŚĞƐŝƚĞƌĞĐŽƌĚƐŽĨůĂͲϯϬϳ͕ƚŚĞtĞƐƚĞƌŬĞůĞLJ^ŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚ^ŝƚĞ͘ tŝƚŚƚŚĞƐĞƌĞĐŽƌĚƐLJŽƵĐĂŶĞǀĂůƵĂƚĞĨŝƌƐƚŚĂŶĚƚŚĞƌĞĂůŝƚLJŽĨƚŚĞƐĐŽƉĞŽĨĐƵůƚƵƌĂůƌĞƐŽƵƌĐĞƐŝŶƚŚĂƚĂƌĞĂĂŶĚĐŽŵƉĂƌĞƚŚĞ ƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶĐĞŽĨƚŚĂƚƐŝƚĞƌĞĐŽƌĚĞĚŝŶƚŚŝƐĂƚƚĂĐŚĞĚĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚƚŽƚŚĞ /ZĂŶĚϭϵϬϬ&ŽƵƌƚŚƉƌŽũĞĐƚĞǀĂůƵĂƚŝŽŶƐŽĨůĂͲϯϬϳ͕ ƚŚĞtĞƐƚĞƌŬĞůĞLJ^ŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚ^ŝƚĞĂŶĚƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚƉƌŽũĞĐƚŽĨϭϵϬϬ&ŽƵƌƚŚ^ƚ͕͘ǁŚŝĐŚƐŝƚƐǁŝƚŚŝŶƚŚĞůĂƌŐĞƌůĂͲϯϬϳ ƐŝƚĞ͘ WůĞĂƐĞĂůƐŽĐŽŶƐŝĚĞƌƚŚŝƐĂƐƵďŵŝƐƐŝŽŶƚŽƚŚĞƉƵďůŝĐĐŽŵŵĞŶƚƐƚŽƚŚĞ /ZĨŽƌƚŚĞϭϵϬϬ&ŽƵƌƚŚ^ƚ͘ƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚƉƌŽũĞĐƚĂƐ ǁĞůů͘/ǁŝůůďĞƐƵďŵŝƚƚŝŶŐĨƵƌƚŚĞƌƉƵďůŝĐĐŽŵŵĞŶƚƐďĞĨŽƌĞ&ĞďƌƵĂƌLJϵ͕ϮϬϭϳ͕ďƵƚ/ďĞůŝĞǀĞŐĞƚƚŝŶŐLJŽƵƚŚŝƐƌĞĐŽƌĚ͕ ƐƉĂŶŶŝŶŐŽǀĞƌϭϰϬLJĞĂƌƐ͕ŝƐĞƐƐĞŶƚŝĂůƚŽLJŽƵƌƚĂƐŬŽĨĞǀĂůƵĂƚŝŶŐƚŚĞƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶĐĞĂŶĚƌĞƐŽƵƌĐĞƐƚŚĂƚƚŚĞϭϵϬϬ&ŽƵƌƚŚƐŝƚĞ ŚĂƐŽƌŵĂLJŚĂǀĞ͘dŚĂŶŬLJŽƵĨŽƌĂůůŽǁŝŶŐŵĞƚŚŝƐĐŚĂŶĐĞƚŽĐŽŶƚƌŝďƵƚĞƚŽƚŚĞĐŝƚLJͲǁŝĚĞƌĞƐƉŽŶƐŝďŝůŝƚLJŽĨĞǀĂůƵĂƚŝŶŐƚŚĞƐĞ ƌĞƐŽƵƌĐĞƐĂŶĚ /ZƌĞƉŽƌƚ͘ WůĞĂƐĞĨŽƌǁĂƌĚƚŚŝƐĞŵĂŝůƚŽŽƵŶĐŝůŵĂŶĞŶĂƌƚůĞƚƚĂƐ/ĐŽƵůĚŶŽƚůŽĐĂƚĞŚŝƐĞŵĂŝůŽŶŚŝƐĐŝƚLJǁĞďƉĂŐĞ͘dŚĂŶŬLJŽƵĂůů ǀĞƌLJŵƵĐŚ͘ ZĞƐƉĞĐƚĨƵůůLJ͕ ZŝĐŚĂƌĚ^ĐŚǁĂƌƚnj͕,ŝƐƚŽƌŝĂŶ ĞƌŬĞůĞLJ͕ -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP 6DQG\6LPRQ VDQG\#WUD[JDOOHU\FRP! 6HQW 6DWXUGD\-DQXDU\ 30 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ &F 0DLR/LQGD 6XEMHFW WK6WUHHWSODQQHGSURMHFW12DQG12DQG12DJDLQ Dear Zab members, What is not considered by the plans for this huge development on 4th Street is the quality of life as we know it. Yes, there is a housing shortage, but Berkeley can’t supply housing for everyone who wants to live here. We are not against change or development, but this needs to happen with a conscience; a project this massive will greatly impact the quality of life we experience here in Berkeley. Get rid of Pacific Steel , that big polluter can go now, it’s time - they can put the 1900 4th street development in that spot. Sincerely, Sandy Simon Sandy Simon [email protected] Trax Gallery 1812 5th Steet Berkeley, CA 94710 510.540.8729 W - S 12 - 5:30 Allen, Shannon From: Rebekah Erev Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Completed Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Preservation Commission in 2000, noting the site is “most highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial ground.” The site was also listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, and determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The original West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site completely encompassed the proposed 1900 Fourth Street Project and blocks beyond. It is known to be the oldest bayside settlement and one of the largest shellmounds in the San Francisco Bay Area—more than 5,000 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone Peoples today—a fact not acknowledged in the DEIR. The content of the DEIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by widespread community opposition and concern voiced at the March 10, 2016, December 8, 2016 and January 12, 2017 Zoning Adjustment Board meetings and the December 1, 2016, and January 5, 2017 Landmark Preservation Commission meetings. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to create the archaeological report and there has not been adequate peer review of the limited data in the DEIR. The archaeological analysis is inadequate and misleading. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered many prehistoric human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address human remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology and conclusions of the 1900 Fourth Street Draft EIR. The likely disturbance of human remains is highly significant as defined by CEQA and cannot be mitigated. The DEIR does not address the issue of Richard Schwartz’s recording of over 400 burials in the vicinity of 1900 Fourth St. and fails to provide any context of the lot within the larger site, ALA-307. The DEIR attempts to isolate and not analyze 1900 Fourth St. within the context of a larger site of cultural significance. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the DEIR’s preparation. The primary consultant has conflicts of interest, and does not represent the all of the Ohlone people indigenous to the Bay Area. Another Ohlone California Tribal group indigenous to Berkeley area and community has formally and repeatedly requested tribal consultation as required by CEQA. The City to date has not consulted with this group for purposes of preparing the DEIR, in violation of CEQA. The consultation that has occurred to date appears to be nothing more than a token gesture that fails to protect this important Ohlone site (the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site) and has resulted in payment of funds to an individual as mitigation for the destruction of this irreplaceable sacred place. The Ohlone comprise more than a dozen tribes and languages yet the DEIR consults only one individual. The DEIR also fails to assess the importance of this site as a “tribal cultural resource” separate from the category of “cultural resources – archaeological.” AB 52 established a new category of resources under the California Environmental Quality Act, “tribal cultural resources,” which considers the tribal cultural values in addition to the scientific and archaeological values when determining impacts and mitigation. This DEIR, rather than fully assessing the impacts to tribal cultural resources under a new category, merely incorporates a brief discussion under the cultural resources archaeological section that states the destruction of the site will be mitigated through: 1) payment to an individual of $75,000 to improve a cemetery located outside the bounds of the shellmound and outside of the city boundaries, and 2) that educational panels will be placed at or near the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site after further consultation with the Ohlone people, without identifying who will be consulted for this mitigation measure. Neither the discussion nor the proposed mitigation complies with CEQA requirements to consult with impacted Tribes and to include a new and separate category addressing “tribal cultural resources.” Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley, entitled “Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People” states in part: “BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site.” Please honor this promise. Honoring this promise requires consultation will additional Ohlone people who recognize this site as sacred, as a tribal cultural property and it requires consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region. To date, Berkeley has not honored this promise and has failed to seek the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous people of the region—and has failed to respect the indigenous peoples’ opposition to the proposed project. On page 67, the DEIR states, “Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous peoples of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear whether or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. Given that 1900 Fourth Street proposal includes 155-apartments, and given that there are numerous Tribal objections to the development, it seems clear that the step of meaningful Tribal consultation before amending the General Plan was not done. The Project also requires several discretionary approvals by the City for variances to the current general plan and zoning ordinances. These approvals would require consultation under both AB 52 and SB 18. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound and Ohlone village site is a series of murals and a small plaque in the parking lot under the nearby freeway. Certainly, the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone peoples to develop a major memorial and educational site in the form of a culturally-appropriate, green open space park at 1900 Fourth Street. The DEIR fails to analyze and offer meaningful alternatives. I strongly support the development of such a memorial and educational site in lieu of the proposed development as the preferred alternative. In addition to the unavoidable adverse impacts to this critical tribal resource the DEIR includes other fatal flaws that require the City of Berkeley to either disapprove the Project or at a minimum require a supplemental EIR before making any determinations on the Project. The Project will not fulfill the purposes set forth in the Project proposal—in fact the Project will actually exacerbate issues it claims to resolve. The DEIR does not adequately address traffic impacts in that it fails to include all approved and ongoing projects in the area. The failure to address these other projects means that the cumulative impacts analysis is fatally flawed. The DEIR fails to account for safety issues that will result from additional traffic in the area and the railroad crossing. The DEIR does not fully address potential air quality impacts nor does it adequately discuss studies regarding increased asthma and other respiratory problems for people living near freeways and industrial areas. The DEIR does not sufficiently address the potential for release of hazardous chemicals through ground disturbance. The DEIR does include a sufficient discussion of potential impacts to water resources on site that could result from development on the site, nor does the document include an adequate alternatives analysis. It would be irresponsible for the City of Berkeley to consider approving this project without complete and accurate information regarding any and all impacts that may affect the health and safety of the community. This Project has the potential to increase already significant traffic congestion, harm the health of residents, and destroy irreplaceable cultural and historic sites that the City of Berkeley has pledged to protect. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of more than 5,000 years of history and a living culture. Reject the DEIR and embrace the No Plan / Create a Berkeley Gateway / Memorial Site Alternative! Sincerely, Rebekah Erev -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP &KHULH1HZHOO FKHULHQHZHOO#JPDLOFRP! 6HQW 6XQGD\-DQXDU\ $0 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW WK6WUHHW'HYHORSPHQW Dear Shannon Allen, I am writing to express my concern about the approval of the 1900 Fourth Street development project. Such a large, commercial construction at this site will overwhelm the neighborhood, desecrate the previously landmarked Ohlone sacred site, and make it impossible to ever reopen the mouth of Strawberry Creek—one of the most significant waterways in the Berkeley watershed—to daylight and restoration. The EIR traffic studies are inadequate, particularly considering the overpass traffic, and the impact on the surrounding neighborhoods on Hearst Street and 5th Street is ill-defined. As a frequent patron to the 4th Street businesses and surrounding neighborhoods, I believe that this multi-story structure will overshadow the existing shops and homes in the neighborhood, creating an ugly, unwelcoming entry to the City of Berkeley along the University Avenue overpass. Please, study this situation more carefully, require better design and planning for any construction on this site, and, most importantly, respect it's landmark status. Sincerely, Cherie Newell 1506 California Street Berkeley, CA 94703 PROFESSOR JULIE BURELLE DEPARTMENT OF THEATRE & DANCE PHONE: (858) 534-3791 9500 GILMAN DRIVE FAX: (858) 534-1080 LA JOLLA, CALIFORNIA 92093-0344 EMAIL: [email protected] -DQXDU\ $WWQ 6KDQQRQ$OOHQ &LW\RI%HUNHOH\&LW\3ODQQLQJ &HQWHU6WUHHWQG)ORRU %HUNHOH\&$ 'HDU0V$OOHQDQG%HUNHOH\&LW\3ODQQHUV ,DPZULWLQJLQUHJDUGVWRSODQVIRUWKH:HVW%HUNHOH\6KHOOPRXQGDQG2KORQH9LOODJH6LWH )RXUWK6WUHHW , VKDUHWKHGHHSFRQFHUQVUDLVHGE\2KORQHOHDGHUVUHJDUGLQJWKHRYHUVLJKWDQGLQDFFXUDF\LQWKHPHWKRGRORJ\RI WKH(,5DQGDUFKHRORJLFDOUHSRUWVUHJDUGLQJWKHVHVLWHVDQGXUJH\RXWRUHFRQVLGHUWKHP,DPDSURIHVVRUDWWKH 8QLYHUVLW\RI&DOLIRUQLD6DQ'LHJRZKHUHP\UHVHDUFKIRFXVHVRQ,QGLJHQRXVWKHDWUHDQGSHUIRUPDQFH$V\RX PD\NQRZP\RZQKRPHLQVWLWXWLRQVLWVDWRS.XPH\DD\WUDGLWLRQDOODQGDQGWKH&KDQFHOORU·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´PRVWKLJKO\VLJQLILFDQWWRQDWLYHGHVFHQGDQWVDVDVDFUHGEXULDOJURXQGµ7KHVLWHZDV DOVROLVWHGLQWKH&DOLIRUQLD5HJLVWHURI+LVWRULFDO5HVRXUFHVDQGGHWHUPLQHGWREHHOLJLEOHIRUWKH1DWLRQDO5HJLVWHU RI+LVWRULF3ODFHV7KHRULJLQDO:HVW%HUNHOH\6KHOOPRXQGDQG2KORQH9LOODJH6LWHFRPSOHWHO\HQFRPSDVVHGWKH SURSRVHG )RXUWK6WUHHW3URMHFWDQGEORFNVEH\RQG,WLVNQRZQWREHWKHROGHVWED\VLGHVHWWOHPHQWDQGRQHRI WKHODUJHVWVKHOOPRXQGVLQWKH6DQ)UDQFLVFR%D\$UHD³PRUHWKDQ\HDUVROG,WLVWKHWUXHELUWKSODFHRI %HUNHOH\,WFRQWLQXHVWREHRIXWPRVWVLJQLILFDQFHDVDFHUHPRQLDOFHQWHUWRWKH2KORQH3HRSOHVWRGD\³DIDFWQRW DFNQRZOHGJHGLQWKH'(,5 7KHFRQWHQWRIWKH'(,5LVKHDYLO\GLVSXWHGDVUHYHDOHGE\ZLGHVSUHDGFRPPXQLW\RSSRVLWLRQDQGFRQFHUQ YRLFHGDWWKH0DUFK'HFHPEHUDQG-DQXDU\=RQLQJ$GMXVWPHQW%RDUGPHHWLQJVDQG WKH'HFHPEHUDQG-DQXDU\/DQGPDUN3UHVHUYDWLRQ&RPPLVVLRQPHHWLQJV7KHUHLVVLJQLILFDQW FRQWURYHUV\VXUURXQGLQJWKHPHWKRGRORJ\XVHGWRFUHDWHWKHDUFKDHRORJLFDOUHSRUWDQGWKHUHKDVQRWEHHQ DGHTXDWHSHHUUHYLHZRIWKHOLPLWHGGDWDLQWKH'(,57KHDUFKDHRORJLFDODQDO\VLVLVLQDGHTXDWHDQGPLVOHDGLQJ 3DVWH[FDYDWLRQVLQDQGDURXQGWKHSURSRVHGVLWHKDYHXQFRYHUHGPDQ\SUHKLVWRULFKXPDQEXULDOVDQGXQGLVWXUEHG FXOWXUDOUHPDLQV7KHUHSRUWFRPSOHWHO\IDLOVWRDGGUHVVKXPDQUHPDLQVVSHFLILFDOO\GRFXPHQWHGLQWKH(,5IRUWKH DGMDFHQW*URFHU\2XWOHWVLWHWKDWLVSDUWRIWKHVDPH/DQGPDUN6KHOOPRXQGVLWH7KLVFRQVWLWXWHVDVLJQLILFDQW RYHUVLJKWDQGLQDFFXUDF\LQWKHPHWKRGRORJ\DQGFRQFOXVLRQVRIWKH )RXUWK6WUHHW'UDIW(,57KHOLNHO\ GLVWXUEDQFHRIKXPDQUHPDLQVLVKLJKO\VLJQLILFDQWDVGHILQHGE\&(4$DQGFDQQRWEHPLWLJDWHG7KH'(,5GRHV QRWDGGUHVVWKHLVVXHRI5LFKDUG6FKZDUW]·VUHFRUGLQJRIRYHUEXULDOVLQWKHYLFLQLW\RI )RXUWK6WDQG IDLOVWRSURYLGHDQ\FRQWH[WRIWKHORWZLWKLQWKHODUJHUVLWH$/$7KH'(,5DWWHPSWVWRLVRODWHDQGQRW DQDO\]H )RXUWK6WZLWKLQWKHFRQWH[WRIDODUJHUVLWHRIFXOWXUDOVLJQLILFDQFH )XUWKHUPRUHWKHUHKDVQRWEHHQDGHTXDWHWULEDOFRQVXOWDWLRQLQWKH'(,5·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´WULEDOFXOWXUDOUHVRXUFHµ VHSDUDWHIURPWKHFDWHJRU\RI´FXOWXUDOUHVRXUFHV²DUFKDHRORJLFDOµ$%HVWDEOLVKHGDQHZFDWHJRU\RIUHVRXUFHV XQGHUWKH&DOLIRUQLD(QYLURQPHQWDO4XDOLW\$FW´WULEDOFXOWXUDOUHVRXUFHVµ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´WULEDOFXOWXUDOUHVRXUFHVµ 5HVROXWLRQ1R16RIWKH&LW\RI%HUNHOH\HQWLWOHG´+RQRU%HUNHOH\6KHOOPRXQG,QGLJHQRXV6DFUHG6LWH 8&%HUNHOH\5HWXUQ$QFHVWUDO5HPDLQVWR2KORQH3HRSOHµVWDWHVLQSDUW ´%(,7)857+(55(62/9('WKDW IUHHSULRUDQGLQIRUPHGFRQVHQWRIWKH2KORQHDQGRWKHULQGLJHQRXVSHRSOHVRIWKHUHJLRQEHLQWHJUDOWRDQ\ DOWHUDWLRQSODQQLQJIRUWKH%HUNHOH\6KHOOPRXQGVDFUHGVLWHLQDFFRUGDQFHZLWKWKHSURYLVLRQVRIWKH8QLWHG 1DWLRQV'HFODUDWLRQRQWKH5LJKWVRI,QGLJHQRXV3HRSOHVDQGFDOOVXSRQDOOSDUWLHVWRIROORZWKHSULQFLSOHVRIWKH 'HFODUDWLRQZLWKUHVSHFWWRWKH:HVW%HUNHOH\6KHOOPRXQGVLWHµ3OHDVHKRQRUWKLVSURPLVH+RQRULQJWKLV SURPLVHUHTXLUHVFRQVXOWDWLRQZLOODGGLWLRQDO2KORQHSHRSOHZKRUHFRJQL]HWKLVVLWHDVVDFUHGDVDWULEDOFXOWXUDO SURSHUW\DQGLWUHTXLUHVFRQVHQWRIWKH2KORQHDQGRWKHULQGLJHQRXVSHRSOHVRIWKHUHJLRQ7RGDWH%HUNHOH\KDV QRWKRQRUHGWKLVSURPLVHDQGKDVIDLOHGWRVHHNWKHIUHHSULRUDQGLQIRUPHGFRQVHQWRIWKHLQGLJHQRXVSHRSOHRI WKHUHJLRQ³DQGKDVIDLOHGWRUHVSHFWWKHLQGLJHQRXVSHRSOHV·RSSRVLWLRQWRWKHSURSRVHGSURMHFW 2QSDJHWKH'(,5VWDWHV´&RQVXOWDWLRQZLWKWKH2KORQH,QGLDQ7ULEHFRQGXFWHGSXUVXDQWWR$%ZDV FRPSOHWHGIRUWKH3URMHFWDQGPLWLJDWLRQPHDVXUHVDUHUHFRPPHQGHGDVDSSURSULDWHµ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³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ƌŽŵ͗<d, Z/E t,/dE zŵĂŝůƚŽ͗ŬĂƚŚĞƌŝŶĞǁŚŝƚŶĞLJΛŵĞ͘ĐŽŵ ^ĞŶƚ͗DŽŶĚĂLJ͕:ĂŶƵĂƌLJϯϬ͕ϮϬϭϳϰ͗ϭϯWD dŽ͗WůĂŶŶŝŶŐĞƉƚ͘DĂŝůďŽdžфƉůĂŶŶŝŶŐΛĐŝƚLJŽĨďĞƌŬĞůĞLJ͘ŝŶĨŽх ^ƵďũĞĐƚ͗KEKdĂƉƉƌŽǀĞϭϵϬϬϰƚŚ^ƚƌĞĞƚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ To the Berkeley Planning Department, I am writing to you to voice my opposition to a new development at 1900 4th Street in Berkeley. This development is out of character with the area and would adversely affect the neighborhood. It is also acknowledged as a sacred site by the Ohlone people. Thank you for your consideration. Katherine Whitney ------Katherine Whitney & Associates 1510 Josephine Street Berkeley, CA 94703 www.kwhitney.net [email protected] -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP 6WHSKDQLH0DQQLQJ VIED\VKHOOPRXQGV#\DKRRFRP! 6HQW 0RQGD\-DQXDU\ 30 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW &RPPHQWVE\6WHSKDQLH0DQQLQJRQWKH'UDIW(,5RQ WK6WUHHW:HVW%HUNHOH\ ,QYHVWRUV 3URMHFW Stephanie Manning 2339 Oregon St., Apt.C Berkeley, California 94705 January 31, 2017 Shannon Allen, City of Berkeley Planner City of Berkeley Current Planning Dept. 1947 Center Street, 2nd Floor Berkeley, California 94704 Re: Comments on the Draft EIR on 1900-4th St. West Berkeley Investors' Project Dear Ms. Allen: I am writing this as part of the public response to the Draft EIR on the West Berkeley Investors, LLC Proposed Project for 1900-4th Street, aka Spenger's Parking Lot and part of the West Berkeley Ancient Native Shellmound site. My Background: I am a former member of the Landmarks Preservation Commission, a 38-year Boardmember of Berkeley Architectural Heritage Association, a co-founder and former President of Berkeley Historical Society, a resident of West Berkeley on 5th & Addison for 30 years from 1975 to 2005, I walked across the country with Dennis Banks and the American Indian Movement in 2005 and I have been a weekday Berkeley Amtrak commuter since 2006. I also wrote the landmarks application for the West Berkeley Shellmound site. The Draft EIR (DEIR) is inadequate in four ways: in its assumptions, methodologies, analysis and conclusions. Since I am most concerned with the Cultural Resources section, this will mostly address that section and only a bit of the other sections. Assumptions: The report makes a false statement, which is that the primary purpose of the project is to provide housing. However, the project is an investment opportunity. Its development LLC is called West Berkeley Investors, not West Berkeley Housing Providers. With a land purchase price over $12million, it is obviously a place where the investors hope to make money. And with prevailing monthly apartment rents exceeding $3,000/month, making money is the primary purpose of the project. Providing housing and jobs and also pollution, traffic and noise are secondary. The report goes on to lump the West Berkeley Ancient Native Shellmound site in the same category as all the other 425+ shellmounds around San Francisco Bay, thus contracting its level of significance and subjecting it to a test of its integrity. However, it is the oldest of all these other moundsites, over 5,000 years old according to UCB geophysicist B.Lynn Ingram, and was the only human tribal village site for 1,000 years. Thus it should not be held to the same standard of integrity as the average archaeological site. When all the bodies of fallen soldiers were removed from Gettysburg Battlefield in Pennsylvania and placed in a national cemetary, the integrity of the historic site was not called into question. Methodologies: Based on these false assumptions, the developer pursued a project in which archaeologist Allen Pastron and Ohlone monitor Andrew Galvan conducted the digging of discreet trenches in order to ascertain that no tribal cultural remains were still present in the site under Spenger's parking lot. A permit for these trenches was not reviewed by the Landmarks Preservation Commission as required by the Landmarks Preservation Ordinance in the case of altering designated landmarks. Furthermore SB18 had been ignored for years and the City failed to consult with tribal people when it revised its Master Plan and this was not included in the DEIR. Neither did the DEIR cover the City's adoption of the UNDeclaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples in any meaningful way nor how it would be effected by the Investors project. Also, AB52 had been passed in July 2015 as an amendment to CEQA but was not observed by the City of Berkeley until the remains of 5 ancient people were discovered at the Spenger's restaurant project at 1901 4th Street and Andy Galvan made the first consultation request. The DEIR did not cover the effect of the project on this process nor on the project across the street nor at Grocery Outlet nor at the very intersections most closely associated with these projects. Neither did the DEIR take into account the cumulative effects that this proposed added project would have on all aspects of the environment: air, water, traffic, noise and cultural resources. Analysis: On page 83, the DEIR has the wrong age of the shellmound site. It states that the site began prior to 2000 years ago and was occupied for 1300-1500 years. But the 1997 Ingram report states that the mound is 5700 years old and was occupied for 4500 years! Archaeologist Kent Lightfoot recently stated that the site is over 5,000 years old. That makes it the oldest known habitation site in the entire Bay Area from San Jose to Vallejo. This raises the level of significance to outstanding significance, even without tribal remains found by Pastron and Galvan. The accuracy of their use of ground penetrating radar may also have been effected by the shallow watertable and the presence of brackish salty water from the Bay. Their analysis seeks to distract from the greater village site whose boundary is already determined. 1900-4th is within this larger site. There still may be remains on the site. The older the site, the deeper the remains. Recently an ancient skeleton was found at the 60 foot level under construction for the new Transbay Terminal in San Francisco. But Pastron only dug to the 8 foot level. At the Shellmound Conference entitled “Beneath our Feet,” at the Oakland Museum, organized by Malcolm Margolin, myself, the Archaeological Research Facility and East Bay Regional Parks, the archaeologist Jeff Myer described a site in the Kellogg Valley where he could not find remains until his team used a backhoe and found the entire ancient cemetary below the 20 foot level. Therefore it is possible that burials still remain deeper than Pastron excavated. Indeed, 95 people were uncovered under Truitt and White in 1950 and 1954. And five people were found in the restaurant block. The mound spanned this entire area and was described by Nelson as one of the biggest of the shellmounds. Robert Heizer also described it as one of the ten submerged moundsites which means that over the millenia of its actual use, the bay water rose several feet and innundated the westernmost part of the site. The EIR ignores the many hundreds of burials already known to have been removed from sanctified burial ceremonies that laid them there. Burials have been found from 11 inches deep to 13 feet below the surface in the site. They surround the site and are likely within the 2.2 acres from which 8 feet of subsurface soil would be excavated for foundations with a depth ranging from 4 to 12 feet. The DEIR pg.60 states that 2,300 tons of demolition waste would be hauled off and 17,000 cubic yards of cut excavated and hauled away, to be replaced by 17,000 cubic yards of fill. This would destroy whatever tribal cultural remains may be in the site. The developer should not destroy this site, disturb burials and separate us all from ever knowing them and their world. There is no feasible way to mitigate the disturbance of burials. These impacts are unavoidable significant impacts and cannot be mitigated. If remains were found, their discovery would be very important. However, even without remains found, the site is considered sacred by Ohlones and many other people. It should be considered as important as other archaeological sites throughout the world. Indeed, even after all the men killed on the battlefield at Gettysburg were moved to the Gettysburg Cemetary, the site continued to be revered and remains to this day a National Military Park open for all to visit and learn about the site and the Civil War. Has Gettysburg Battlefield lost its integrity? It appears not. Conclusion: In the last section on pg.238, the DEIR concludes that “based on the above analysis, the No Project alternative would have the fewest impacts and would be the environmentally superior alternative.” But it says that the developers' housing goal will not be met. However, their primary purpose is to make money for their investors. Perhaps if the report stated this in its analysis, it would have come to the logical conclusion that this project is too large, too noisy, will generate too much traffic, will solve none of the areas parking problems and worst of all, it will destroy an important sacred site of world heritage importance which is a landmark at the city, state and national levels. If it had made the logical conclusion, it could further have detailed how the site could be handled in a way that is respectful to the neighbors, to surrounding businesses and to the Ohlone people and will not make Berkeley ashamed of its treatment of native people and their property and the politics of erasure. Sincerely, Stephanie Manning Allen, Shannon From: ABIGAIL CELIA TAUBMAN Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Completed Dear Ms. Shannon Allen, When I think about what is occurring at Standing Rock, I am both moved and extremely disturbed. I am moved by the intention of Native folks and non-Native folks to resist the unlawful destruction of sacred land and water; to put their bodies on the line to protect these sacred sites so that their children and children’s children will be able to have access to these sites that are at the core of their identity. Then I think about the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village site and I am struck that even in the Bay Area, specifically Berkeley, a place that claims an identity of inclusivity, respect, and diversity- we have already covered up so many sacred sites of Native Folks that live and work in Berkeley. We have an opportunity to resist and change our pattern of behavior in order to act on the values of respect, inclusivity, and diversity that we claim to uphold. The Shellmound is the oldest sacred site in the Bay Area. If it is destroyed in will be lost forever and Berkeley will be responsible. I say this not to point fingers or induce guilt, but to invite you and your colleagues to slow down and truly reflect on what this would mean. If you are both moved and disturbed like I am with what is happening at Standing Rock, know, that we have an opportunity to prevent that from occurring in our own community. Shannon, I know you are getting many emails with a laundry list of why development on the Shellmound is a disgrace to our native community members, their ancestors, and history. So I will spare you with another list. Imagine if the burial sites of those you have lost and loved were at risk of being destroyed so that an apartment could be built instead. How would you feel? What would you do? I know that when I buried my grandparents this year I did not worry that one day their burial site would be destroyed for the sake of a development. This has already occurred countless times for Native people all over the United States. Please, help me in finding a way to stress to the City of Berkeley how detrimental this would be and what it would say about Berkeley, a city that has claimed to be so progressive, liberal, and accepting since its foundation. Thank you for taking the time to read this. With hope, Abigail Taubman -- Abigail Taubman MSW Candidate, 2017 School of Social Welfare University of California, Berkeley 818.720.7788 Jackson, Camille From: Starhawk Attn: Shannon Allen [You may email comments to: [email protected] ] City of Berkeley Planning Dept. 1947 Center Street, 2nd Floor Berkeley, CA 94704 DATE January 30, 2017 Re: Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report on proposed 1900 4th Street Project Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my opposition to development planes at 1900 Fourth Street. This site is sacred to the Ohlone people and is the oldest inhabited shell mound site in the Bay Area. It should be protected. There are many serious flaws and concerns with the Draft Environmental Impact Report, and the City of Berkeley should not allow this project to go forward against the opposition of the original peoples of this land. Thank you for listening, Sincerely, Starhawk (Miriam Simos) 1 CCRPA California Cultural Resource Preservation Alliance, Inc. P.O. Box 54132 An alliance of American Indian and scientific communities working for Irvine, CA 92619-4132 the preservation of archaeological sites and other cultural resources. January 30, 2017 Ms. Shannon Allen City of Berkeley Planning Department 1947 Center Street 2nd Floor Berkeley, CA 94704 Re: West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village and Burial Site Dear Ms. Allen: We are writing to register the objection of the California Cultural Resource Preservation Alliance (CCRPA) to the proposed 1900 Fourth St. housing project that will result in the destruction of one of the last remaining shellmounds and Ohlone village sites in the region. We respectfully request that the City recognize the significance of this unique, historic, irreplaceable site and continue to support the rights of indigenous people. My colleagues and I believe that there is sufficient evidence to support the contention that intact cultural deposits and human remains are buried beneath the parking lot and a building to be demolished that did not have an underground construction. The site is eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places and the California Register of Historical Resources. The registers were established in recognition that archaeological and historic sites are an important part of our national heritage, give a sense of orientation to the American people, and should be preserved for the benefit and inspiration of the public. Most important, the site contains burials and is considered sacred by Native American descendants who feel called to protect the graves and places of their ancestors. We believe that the draft EIR language and archaeological analysis is deceptive in the claim that there are no shellmound remains within the 2.2-acre parking lot site and is deficient about other environmental, cultural, and procedural concerns, such as compliance with AB 52. Most important, the site qualifies as a Traditional Cultural Property and sacred site and the project has the potential to disturb and desecrate human remains. The history of treatment of California Indians is shameful and includes forced missionization, broken treaties, removal of their children to boarding schools, and state policies of extermination. We can’t go back and undo these injustices, but we can respect and protect the few remaining places and graves of their ancestors. Please do not certify or approve this draft EIR. A prehistoric cemetery and village site is the wrong place for a housing development. In the event, that the development of some kind is inevitable, please revise the EIR mitigation measures from data recovery excavations and reburial to preservation in place. As CCRPA California Cultural Resource Preservation Alliance, Inc. P.O. Box 54132 An alliance of American Indian and scientific communities working for Irvine, CA 92619-4132 the preservation of archaeological sites and other cultural resources. indicated in CEQA guidance and regulations, preferred treatment for intact cultural deposits and human remains is preservation through protective site burial and incorporation into a park, open space, or even a parking lot. Sincerely, Patricia Martz, Ph.D. President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