PARKS AND WATERFRONT COMMISSION
Regular Meeting Wednesday, October 10, 2018, 7:00 P.M. Frances Albrier Community Center 2800 Park Street, Berkeley, CA Parks and Waterfront Commission Agenda The Commissions may discuss any items listed on the agenda, but may take action only on items identified as Action. Preliminary Matters 1. Call to Order (Chair). 2. Roll Call (Secretary). 3. Announcements (Chair). 4. Approval of Agenda (Chair). 5. Approval Minutes for September 12, 2018 * (Chair). 6. Public Comment 7. Director’s Report (Ferris): Parks CIP Project List; Special Events; Waterfront Leases; 7:30 Berkeley Marina Area Specific Plan (BMASP); Parks Division; Waterfront Division.
Discussion 8. Discussion Item: East Bay Regional Park District – presentation on the upcoming 7:45 November 6, 2018 general election Measure FF to extend the existing Measure CC $12 per year parcel tax to fund parks projects within the Measure CC zone which includes Berkeley * (EBRPD staff). 9. Discussion item: Update on the Parking Study at the Marina – next steps * (Ferris). 8:00
Action 10. Action Item: Update on marina fiscal issues, and send a communication to Council 8:15 in support of a one-time funding request for the Berkeley Waterfront * (Ferris/Lee). 11. Action Item: Update from Urban Pollinator Habitat subcommittee and authorize the 8:45 chair to share update at next Community Environmental Advisory Commission (CEAC) meeting (Diehm). Discussion 12. Discussion Item: Update on Traffic Circle Vegetation Policy * (Diehm). 9:00 13. Discussion Item: Presentation on existing City Tree Planting Program and existing 9:10 Parks Donation Policy (Ferris). 14. Future Agenda Items: Commemorative Tree Donation Policy; Marina Parking Study and 9:30 Community feedback, public meetings on Oct 9 and Oct 23, 2018; Traffic Circle Vegetation Maintenance Policy. Information Items 15. Recent Council Reports. * 16. Next Commission meeting: Wednesday, November 14, 2018. 17. Communications. * Golden Gate Audubon Annual Reports – Burrowing Owl Program (2015-16; 2017-18). Ltr to Zero Waste Commission from Parks & Waterfront Commission, 9/12/2018. 18. Adjournment. * document is attached to agenda packet and on the commission website. ** document will be provided at the meeting.
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 1 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 ADA Disclaimer: This meeting is being held in a wheelchair accessible location. To request disability-related accommodations to participate in the meeting, including auxiliary aids or services, please contact the Disability Services specialist at 981-6418 (V) or 981-6347 (TDD) at least three business days before the meeting date. Please refrain from wearing scented products to this meeting.
SB343 DisclaimerAny writings or documents provided to a majority of the Commission regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection at Parks Recreation & Waterfront Department Office at 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA.
Communications Disclaimer: Communications to Berkeley boards, commissions or committees are public record and will become part of the City’s electronic records, which are accessible through the City’s website. Please note: e-mail addresses, names, addresses, and other contact information are not required, but if included in any communication to a City board, commission or committee, will become part of the public record. All communications to the Commission should be received at least 10 days before the meeting date. If you do not want your e-mail address or any other contact information to be made public, you may deliver communications via U.S. Postal Service or in person to the secretary of the relevant board, commission or committee. If you do not want your contact information included in the public record, please do not include that information in your communication. Please contact the secretary to the commission or committee for further information.
Commission Information: The agenda packets for the Parks and Recreation Commission and the Waterfront Commission are available for review at www.cityofberkeley.info/commissions; the Berkeley Main Library and the Parks Recreation & Waterfront Department Office at 2180 Milvia Street –3rd Floor, during their normal business hours. If you have questions, call Commission Secretary, Roger Miller at 981-6704 at 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 or by email at [email protected].
MISSION STATEMENT – PARKS AND WATERFRONT: The Parks and Waterfront Commission shall be an advisory board and shall review the policies, projects, programs, planning efforts, activities, funding, and the physical condition of parks, pools, camps, recreation centers, the Marina, and public greenery, and shall advise the City Council on these matters.
COMMISSION MEMBERS Mayor - District 3 - Jim McGrath District 6 - Paul Kamen District 1 - Cathy Fogel District 4 - Erin Diehm District 7 - Taylor Lee District 2 - Claudia Kawczynska District 5 - Susan McKay District 8 - Caitlin Brostrom
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 2 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 2018 Commission Meeting Dates
Name of Commission: Parks and Waterfront Commission
Commission Secretary: Roger Miller
Location: Frances Albrier Community Center, 2800 Park St
Meeting Day and Date Month Time Notes (2nd Wednesday per month)
2018 January Wednesday, January 10 7:00 p.m. Regular Mtg
February Wednesday, February 14 7:00 p.m. Regular Mtg
March Wednesday, March 14 7:00 p.m. Regular Mtg
April Wednesday, April 11 7:00 p.m. Regular Mtg
May Wednesday, May 9 7:00 p.m. Regular Mtg
June Wednesday, June 13 7:00 p.m. Regular Mtg
July No meeting
August Wednesday, August 8 7:00 p.m. Regular Mtg
September Wednesday, September 12 7:00 p.m. Regular Mtg
October Wednesday, October 10 7:00 p.m. Regular Mtg
November Wednesday, November 14 7:00 p.m. Regular Mtg
December No Meeting
2019 January Wednesday, January 9 7:00 p.m. Regular Mtg
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 3 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Agenda Item 5. Minutes - Draft
Parks and Waterfront Commission Regular Meeting Wednesday, September 12, 2018, 7:00pm, Frances Albrier Community Center, 2800 Park St., Berkeley
Minutes - DRAFT The Commissions may discuss any items listed on the agenda, but may take action only on items identified as Action. Preliminary Matters 1. Call to Order (Chair).7:05pm. 2. Roll Call (Secretary). Present: Brostrom; Diehm; Fogel; Kamen; Kaeczynska; Lee; McGrath; McKay. Absent: None. 3. Announcements (Chair). Commissioner de León resigned (Diehm); The Community Safety Meeting at the Albrier Center on August 18, 2018 (Diehm/McKay/Kamen); Becky Temko Park Re-opening (McGrath); Public Works Commission meeting on Codornices Creek (McGrath). 4. Approval of Agenda (Chair) to move Item 11 (Zero Waste) before Item 16 (Bench) and move Item 13 (Update on marina fiscal subcomm to before Item 12 (BMASP). (M/S/C: Fogel/Lee/U)): Ayes: Brostrom; Diehm, Fogel, Kamen; Kawczynska, Lee; McGrath; McKay; Noes: None; Abstain: None; Absent: None. 5. Approval Minutes for August 8, 2018 * (Chair). (M/S/C: McGrath/Kawczynska): Ayes: Diehm, Fogel, Kawczynska, Lee; McGrath; McKay; Noes: None; Abstain: Brostrom; Kamen; Absent: None. 6. Public Comment: Brenden Kallaby, Marina Parking (impact of possible fees on Cal Sailing participants/students); Terry Latham, Marina Parking (need for ferry parking); Rick Kosarchuk, Marina Parking (impact of ferry service on parking); Robert Ofsevit, Marina Parking (impact of proposed time limit in boat launch area); David Fraser, Marina Parking (structural issues impacting Cal Sailing); Mariya Ryazants, Marina Parking (impact of proposed time limit in boat launch area); Mara Melandry, Book history of Berkeley’s camps (announce publication of new book on Berkeley’s Family Camps). 7. Director’s Report (Erickson): Parks CIP Project List; Special Events; Parks; Waterfront. Report provided. Discussion 8. Update on the existing Art Installation fencing at the Burrowing Owl area at the northeast point at Cesar Chavez Park (Miller). Update provided. 9. Update on setting commission agenda items (Diehm).
Action 10. Receive staff presentation and conduct a public hearing on the City’s Notice of Intent for Council to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the rebuild of Berkeley Tuolumne Camp * (McNulty). Chair Diehm opened the public hearing and the following speakers provided comments which were recorded by Liza McNulty, Project Manager, Berkeley Tuolumene Camp Project, for the CEQA public record: a. Phil Coffin, City Echo Lake Camp Manager, 1993-2001. The study is a well researched, completed document. Friends of Berkeley Tuolumene Camp (FOBTC) supports the project. The Nature Center staff at BTC has done reforestation projects there in the past. In the MND, see Forest Restoration, p. 113 – BMPs: Can the project water during the summer to protect existing trees that provide shade?; Can the project buffer around re-sprouted oaks, dogwoods, etc.?; During construction, can the dust mitigation watering activity be expanded to water new/protected areas?
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 4 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Agenda Item 5. Minutes - Draft
b. Richard Thomason, Board Member, FOBTC. We support the adoption of the MND. c. Cameron Woo. I won’t speak to the environmental impact. Rather, I am concerned about the use after construction. Page 12 of the report - Priority per USFS Table summary shows three types of users: (1) At-risk / disabled; (2) Yth and Education programs; and (3) Private groups or family campers. In the Table of Usage, Group 1 used camp 4.5% per year; Group 2 used camp 4.5% per year; Group 3 used camp 90.6% per year. Camp produces a surplus, where does it go? 59% of users have been there 6+ years. City not reached out to priority groups? d. Cathy Brown, long-time user of camp. In favor of ND of BTC. In the study, most mitigation measures are for construction. The mitigation measures for operations will be good. I found a discrepancy: p. 81 – water tank shown as 240,000 gallons whereas on p. 90 the water tank is shown as 280,000 gallons. e. Commissioner Diehm closed the public hearing.
11. Update on parking study at the Marina (Ferris). The commission heard public comment from the following speakers: Sheldon Coad, Dan Hernandez. After public comment, an update on the parking study was provided by Scott Ferris. 12. Update from subcommittee on marina fiscal issues (Ferris/Erickson). An update was provided. 13. Action: Send a communication to Council in support of a one-time funding request for the Berkeley Marina Area Specific Plan * (Lee). Commissioner Lee tabled this item for the next meeting. 14. Action: Send a communication to the Zero Waste Commission in support of the proposed ordinance regarding Single Use Foodware and Litter Reduction Ordinance * (M/S/C: McGrath/Lee/U): Ayes: Brostrom; Diehm, Fogel, Kamen; Kawczynska, Lee; McGrath; McKay; Noes: None; Abstain: None; Absent: None.
Discussion 15. Update on Waterfront leases (Ferris). Held over. 16. Bench Donation Policy fee increase (Ferris). Held over.
Information Items 17. Recent Council Reports. * 18. Upcoming Items: Commemorative Tree Donation Policy. 19. Next Commission meeting: Wednesday, October 10, 2018. 20. Communications. * 08-26-2018 - J McGrath (photos and ltr). 08-17-2018 - M. Nicolaus (3 files re fencing at burrowing owl area at Cesar Chavez Park). 08-08-2018 - Parks & Waterfront Commiss communication to Council re: Traffic Circles. 1. Adjournment. (M/S/C: Lee/Fogel/U): Ayes: Brostrom; Diehm, Fogel, Kamen; Kawczynska, Lee; McGrath; McKay; Noes: None; Abstain: None; Absent: None.
*Note: For handouts distributed at the meeting, please see the Draft Minutes for Sept 12, 2018, at the following link online: http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/Clerk/Commissions/Commissions__Parks_and_Waterfront_ Commission.aspx (Remember to scroll to the bottom of the online page and click on the Minutes for 09-12- 2018).
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 5 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Agenda ITem 8. EBRPD Measure FF Measure FF NO-TAX-INCREASE EXTENSION MEASURE
On June 5, 2018, the East Bay Regional Park District Board of Directors voted unanimously to place Measure FF on the November 2018 ballot to extend existing, voter-approved funding for Regional Parks in western Alameda and Contra Costa counties. Measure FF does not increase tax rate. Measure FF Priorities Wildfire Protection and Healthy Forests Measure FF will provide continued funding for fire hazard reduction, firefighters, and sustainable forest management, consistent with the Park District’s approved and fully permitted Wildfire Hazard Reduction and Resource Management Plan. Voter-approved funding currently supports the thinning or removal of hazardous vegetation on over 500 acres annually. Fire hazard reduction and sustainable forest management is the top spending priority of Measure FF. Public Access, Trails, and Visitor Use Facilities Measure FF will provide continued funding for trail maintenance and expansion of trails for increased public access, including closing gaps Thinned and Healthy Forest in the Bay Trail which will improve regional Crumpler Marc Photo: connectivity for commuters and safe routes to school for children. Measure FF will also provide funding to keep the Crab Cove Visitor Center in Alameda open year-round and for new interpretive/educational programs at Point Pinole and MLK Jr. Shorelines. Natural Habitat, Urban Creeks, and Shorelines Measure FF will provide funding for ongoing erosion control, watershed protection, redwood conservation, and preservation/restoration of natural habitat, including urban creeks, marshes, and shorelines for endangered species and to prepare parklands for the future impacts of climate change.
BPARKS • ebparks.org 94605 • 1-888-E kland, CA 81 • Oa . Box 53 t • P.O s Cour a Oak Peralt 2950
Martin Luther King Jr. Regional Shoreline, Oakland
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 6 of 64 Short Michael Photo: Commission October 10, 2018 Photo: Mitchell Yee State Beach, Alameda State Beach, Memorial W. Crown Robert Shoreline, Richmond Shoreline, Regional Pinole Point Oakland Park, Redwood Regional Crab Cove Center Visitor &Albany Emeryville Berkeley, Park, State Eastshore McLaughlin Measure FF Commitments FF Measure Commission Parks and Waterfront Wildfire Protection/Forests Management Management Protection/Forests Wildfire Manage forests consistent with Wildfire Wildfire with consistent forests –Manage Hills) Bay (East Hazard Reduction and Resource Management Plan. Develop a redwood aredwood Develop Plan. Management Resource and Reduction Hazard forest management plan. plan. management forest Enhance interpretation of East Bay redwood redwood Bay East of interpretation –Enhance (Oakland) Park Regional Redwood tree history. Provide for creek restoration and erosion control for watershed health and visitor visitor and health watershed for control erosion and restoration creek for Provide history. tree safety. Expand partnership with Save the Redwoods League. League. Redwoods Save the with partnership Expand safety.
Plan improvements to visitor use facilities such as the the as such facilities use visitor to improvements –Plan (Berkeley) Park Regional Tilden Environmental Education Center, Little Farm and Botanical Garden Visitor Center. Increase Center. Visitor Increase Garden Botanical and Farm Center, Little Education Environmental stewardship. Improve access and pedestrian safety at the Brazilian Room and Botanical Botanical and Room Brazilian at the safety pedestrian and access Improve stewardship. Garden Visitor Center. Visitor Garden Miller/Knox Regional Shoreline (Richmond)– Shoreline Regional Miller/Knox level rise. Increase park staffing and upgrade Keller Beach visitor experience. Enhance Enhance experience. visitor Beach Keller upgrade and staffing park Increase level rise. drought tolerant landscapes. drought tolerant Improve visitor use use visitor –Improve (Alameda) Beach State W. Memorial Crown Robert facilities. Develop sea level rise interpretation and educational programming. Enhance Enhance programming. educational and interpretation level rise sea Develop facilities. Bay health by upgrading storm water drainage system. Continue year-round Visitor Visitor year-round Continue system. drainage water storm by upgrading health Bay Center services. McLaughlin Eastshore State Park (Berkeley, Emeryville, and Albany) – Albany) and Emeryville, (Berkeley, Park State Eastshore McLaughlin Provide for shoreline and natural habitat protection. Improve visitor use facilities. facilities. use visitor Improve protection. habitat natural and shoreline for Provide Expand park personnel. Protect, enhance, and monitor wildlife habitat. habitat. wildlife monitor and enhance, Protect, personnel. park Expand Improve visitor facilities and and facilities visitor –Improve (Oakland) Jr. King Shoreline Luther Martin personnel. Provide for educational and expanded recreational programming. Photo: Sukirat Kuar level rise. sea from facilities park and shoreline Protect habitat. marsh Improve Point Pinole – Regional (Richmond) Shoreline Dotson Family Marsh. Improve visitor use facilities and Bay access. Increase Increase access. Bay and facilities use visitor Improve Marsh. Family Dotson educational and recreational programming. Enhance wildlife habitat. Improve water water –Improve (Oakland) Area Recreational Temescal Regional quality, habitat and recreational swimming. Provide erosion control for for control erosion Provide swimming. recreational and habitat quality, watershed health and recreational trail safety. safety. trail recreational and health watershed Convert –Convert (Oakland) Shoreline Regional Gateway Bay East existing paved lands to natural landscape. Provide public access to Bay Bay to access public Provide landscape. natural to paved lands existing Trail and Bay Bridge bike path. Enhance tidal and intertidal habitat. habitat. intertidal and tidal Enhance bike path. Trail Bridge Bay and Expand park and public safety safety public and park –Expand Point (Alameda) Alameda parcel tax. Measure CC is set to expire soon. expire to set is CC Measure tax. parcel sea level rise. level sea for by preparing facilities park and shoreline, Beach Breakwater wetlands, seasonal Protect park. regional new for personnel Pablo. Measure CC is an existing $12/year ($1/month) $12/year existing an is CC Measure Pablo. San and Richmond, Piedmont, Oakland, Kensington, Emeryville, Sobrante, El Cerrito, El Berkeley, Albany, Alameda, of communities the in 2004 in by voters passed was which CC Measure of extension an is FF Measure Partial For list. full list visit ebparks.org/MeasureFF. October 10, 2018 Regular Meeting Regular
Agenda Protect shoreline by preparing for sea sea for by preparing shoreline Protect ITem 8. Protect the shoreline at shoreline the Protect EBRPD Page 7 of64 Measure FF
V091718 Agenda ITem 8. EBRPD Measure FF MEASURE FF NO-TAX-INCREASE EXTENSION MEASURE
Wildfire Protection. Safe Parks and Trails. Public Access. Natural Habitat.
Parks and Waterfront (NovemberRegular 2018 Meeting Ballot) Page 8 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 What is Measure FF? Agenda ITem 8. EBRPD Measure FF
• Measure FF is on the November 2018 ballot to extend existing, voter-approved local funding. • In 2004, voters in western Alameda and Contra Costa counties approved Measure CC to provide additional local funds for regional park and open space needs. • Measure CC is set to expire soon. • Measure CC is a $1/month parcel tax. • Measure FF Does Not Increase Tax Rate
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 9 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 What Communities Benefit? Agenda ITem 8. EBRPD Measure FF
Regional Parks Alameda Point • Measure FF includes the Anthony Chabot Crown Beach/Crab Cove communities of: Gateway Kennedy Grove • Alameda • Kensington Lake Chabot Leona Canyon Martin Luther • Albany • Oakland King, Jr. McLaughlin Eastshore • Berkeley • Piedmont Miller-Knox Point Isabel • El Cerrito • Richmond Point Molate Point Pinole • • Redwood El Sobrante San Pablo Roberts Sobrante Ridge • Emeryville Sibley Huckleberry Claremont Canyon Temescal Tilden Wildcat Canyon
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 10 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Measure FF Community EngagementAgenda ITem 8. EBRPD Measure FF
• Conducted public outreach to engage the community about local park and open space needs. • Three community meetings, 4 public board meetings, and engaged key, long-time stakeholders.
• The proposed list of services and projects were available to the public for six months before Board action. • The East Bay Park District Board of Directors unanimously placed Measure FF on the ballot.
November 8, 2017 Public Meeting, Parks and Waterfront Oakland Regular Meeting Page 11 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Why Is Local Funding Needed? Agenda ITem 8. EBRPD Measure FF
• Since 2004, voter-approved local funding has helped maintain and improve public access, natural habitat, and visitor use facilities. • Measure FF extends existing funding. • Measure FF Does Not Increase Tax Rate
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 12 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Wildfire Protection & Public SafetyAgenda ITem 8. EBRPD Measure FF
• Measure FF will continue funding for fire hazard reduction, firefighters, and sustainable forest management. • Voter-approved funding currently supports thinning or removing hazardous vegetation on over 500 acres annually. • Wildfire protection is the top
Park District’s Eagle 6 spending priority in Measure FF. Dropping Water on Fire, July Parks and Waterfront 2018 Regular Meeting Page 13 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Maintaining & Improving Public Access Agenda ITem 8. EBRPD Measure FF
• Measure FF will provide funding to improve visitor use facilities such as restrooms and picnic areas, and for continued trail maintenance and expansion. • Continued year-round operations/ open hours at Crab Cove Visitor Center in Alameda.
Crab Cove Visitor Center, Robert W. Crown Memorial State Beach, Parks and Waterfront Alameda Regular Meeting Page 14 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Protecting & Restoring Natural HabitatAgenda ITem 8. EBRPD Measure FF
•Measure FF will provide funding for: • Redwood conservation • Watershed protection • Preservation/Restoration of natural habitat, including urban creeks, marshes, and shorelines. • Ongoing erosion control
Redwood Regional Park, Oakland Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 15 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Fiscally Accountable, Taxpayer SafeguardsAgenda ITem 8. EBRPD Measure FF
• As a public agency, the East Bay Regional Park District has been very responsible in managing its resources. • Measure FF includes the same fiscal accountability and transparency requirements included in Measure CC and regularly practiced by the Park District. • For every $1 invested by local taxpayers the Park District has secured $2 from external sources.
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 16 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Agenda ITem 8. EBRPD Measure FF MEASURE FF NO-TAX-INCREASE EXTENSION MEASURE
Wildfire Protection. Safe Parks and Trails. Public Access. Natural Habitat.
Parks and Waterfront (NovemberRegular 2018 Meeting Ballot) Page 17 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Agenda Item 9. Update on Parking Study - DRAFT
Miller, Roger
From: Miller, Roger Sent: Friday, October 05, 2018 2:07 PM Subject: Waterfront Parking Study - Upcoming Meetings in October 2018 Attachments: 2018 Waterfront Parking Study - DRAFT.pdf
To the Parks and Waterfront Commission:
As part of the Waterfront Parking Study process, we plan to hold two community meetings in October 2018 to hear feedback on the draft Waterfront Parking Study, as follows:
Tenant Meeting: This meeting is for tenants and commercial operations at the Berkeley Waterfront, including charter boats, restaurants, and clubs. Date: Tuesday, October 9, 2018 Time: 10:00 am Location: Berkeley Waterfront Conference Room across from the Marina Office, 201 University Avenue, 94710 Contact: Ali Endress 981‐6737 | [email protected]
Public Meeting: This meeting is for slip holders, individual users of the Waterfront/Waterfront amenities, and the general public. There will be a link for members of the public to submit comments via email as well.
Date: Tuesday, October 23, 2018, 6:00pm Tuesday, October 9, 2018 Time: 6:00 pm Location: Doubletree Hotel, Berkeley Marina | 200 Marina Blvd, Berkeley, CA 94710 Contact: Ali Endress 981‐6737 | [email protected]
Waterfront Parking Study Website: https://www.cityofberkeley.info/Parks_Rec_Waterfront/Marina/Public_Meeting‐ _Waterfront_Parking_Study_Review.aspx
Thank you,
Roger Miller Secretary, Parks and Waterfront Commission
1 Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 18 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Agenda Item 9. Update on Parking Study - DRAFT
M E M O R A N D U M To: City of Berkeley Department of Parks, Recreation and Waterfront (PRW) From: Nelson\Nygaard Project Team Date: September 11, 2018 Subject: Revised Short-Term Recommendations for Waterfront Parking Management - DRAFT INTRODUCTION The purpose of this memo is to identify a clear path forward over the next two years for the City of Berkeley’s Waterfront with regards to managing their public parking supply. Based on a number of solutions currently employed and recommended for the Waterfront, this path will help achieve a better balance between the existing supply of parking, and the extreme peaks of parking demand during the busiest seasons, days, and times of the year at the Berkeley Waterfront by various user groups. Context The Berkeley Waterfront is three miles west of downtown Berkeley between the San Francisco Bay and the Eastshore Freeway (Interstate 80/580) and accessible by vehicle via University Avenue, the pedestrian overcrossing bridge, and the Bay Trail for people walking and riding bikes. The Waterfront surrounds the Berkeley Marina, and essentially comprises three distinct sections (North, South, and Central). Each section of the Waterfront evaluated by this study (excluding the University Avenue Approach) is accessible by a single two-lane road. Parking lots are well distributed throughout the Waterfront, combining to approximately 1,700 spaces across 14 off- street facilities. Figure 1 on the following page illustrates the existing parking inventory. Our team reviewed satellite data, which indicated peak parking demand met or exceeded 85% in the Central Parking Lots during days when the Waterfront is especially popular with a variety of visitors (such as Sunday afternoons in August and September). During weekdays, centrally- located lots, particularly the J&K Lot and L&M Lot, experience as much as 89% and 93% occupancy, respectively1. These findings were corroborated by City of Berkeley Parks Recreation and Waterfront (PRW) Staff.
1 See Appendix of Satellite Parking Utilization Counts
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 19 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Agenda Item 9. Update on Parking Study - DRAFT
Figure 1 Existing Parking Inventory
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 20 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Agenda Item 9. Update on Parking Study - DRAFT
KEY ISSUES AND RECOMMENDED STRATEGIES Summary of Waterfront Parking Issues and Needs As expected in a dynamic recreation area containing a variety of amenities, parks, services, and destinations, the Berkeley Waterfront has several distinct users, each with unique needs. 1. Overcrowding at South Cove lots due to mixed uses/user groups. The South Cove lots have multiple users that come to the Waterfront at similar or overlapping times, resulting in a peak period in which the lots are full. Users of South Cove include Adventure Playground patrons, ferry passengers, and employees who work on the Waterfront. 2. All-day parking (charter and ferry customers) occupy spaces for relatively long periods of time in order to seek access to central docks and locations. Ferry and charter boat customers tend to arrive early and utilize the highest demand spots closest to the K-Dock. Their vehicles remain in the prime spots in excess of eight hours per day and leave no room for turnover. This creates an issue for those making quicker trips to the South Cove, Adventure Playground, Nature Center, Summer Camp drop off, and customers of the marina office, Berkeley Sportsman’s Center, and the 125- 127 University Avenue office buildings. Many ferry and charter boat customers show a preference for the newly paved South Cove East Lot over the unpaved South Cove West Lot, in addition to J&K and J&M Lots. Ferry customers have not heeded recent signage (placed on South Cove, J&K, and L&M Lots) to park on Marina Boulevard instead. 3. Locations needed for watersports community to park. Many recreational watersports activities (such as windsurfing) require the use of the new green turf area on the northern edge of the South Cove East lot (to prepare and rig their large equipment), the adjacent parking stalls (for convenient loading and unloading), and the adjacent wide path of travel (to access the launching docks in the South Sailing Basin). The parking spaces adjacent to the green space are also desirably located spaces for ferry and charter customers because of their proximity to K-Dock and attractive appearance. Over the summer, many watersports users reported that they were unable to find parking next to the green space on weekday afternoons. Several complaints by watersports users seeking safe and convenient access to the rigging area from their vehicles were filed with PRW Staff in the months of June, July, and August of 2018. A-Frame signs placed in August 2018, have since been moderately effective at reserving the parking stalls adjacent to the green space for watersports users. 4. Importance of maintaining adequate slipholder parking close to docks. Every dock at the Marina has a nearby shared parking lot. Some shared lots fill with the vehicles of other park users, limiting access for slipholders at peak times. 5. Importance of maintaining parking for Hana Japan customers in lot. Hana Japan is only open for dinner when other Waterfront users tend to be leaving. However, in the summer, parking for Hana Japan customers often overflows to the unlit South Cove lots across University Avenue. This is an issue, as stakeholders have reported multiple vehicle break-ins over the course of an average week at the Marina.2
2 See Appendix of Stakeholder Survey Results
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 21 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Agenda Item 9. Update on Parking Study - DRAFT
6. Minimize overnight parking/camping, long-term parking, and vehicles as storage. Although overnight parking is permitted only for slipholders and their guests, there are people are staying overnight in RVs and other vehicles.3 Overall, there is a consistent need to optimize and facilitate convenient parking for Waterfront user groups. Solutions Currently Employed Efforts to date to remedy current imbalances between parking supply and demand include a permit program for slipholders and guests. This pilot permit program became effective on June 4, 2018 for four of the North Lots (B&C, D&E, F&G, H&I Lots)4. For slip-holders at those locations, hangtags are distributed to slipholders by Marina staff, and guest permits are granted by request. Waterfront staff have issued citations at the aforementioned locations as well as the Paid Launch Ramp to vehicles parked without a permit in B through I Lots, or without payment in the Launch Ramp lot. Plans are being made to roll out a similar program for J&K lot, L&M lot, and N&O Lot.. Since the implementation of the pilot permit program, vehicle counts have indicated: - a 60% reduction of illegitimately parked vehicles in B through I Lots.5 - a reduction of up to 20% for all vehicles parked in B&C, D&E, F&G, and H&I Lots on summer weekend afternoons.6 Additional solutions were employed with the initiation of Small Scale Ferry Service.7 With as many as 91 passengers8 using Prop SF services and 129 passengers using Tideline services9, the ferry has increased demand for all-day parking at the Waterfront, particularly surrounding K- Dock, where ferries depart. During the reconstruction of South Cove East Lot (from November 20th, 2017 to May 31st, 2018), all ferry passengers and charter boat users were directed to the J&K and L&M Lots, which have a combined capacity of 229 cars. However, during summer month weekdays, office staff, Adventure Playground patrons, and summer camp staff could not access these lots because they were usually full. For example, aerial images on Thursday, May 10th, 2018 showed J&K Lot to be 88% occupied, despite the two-hour time limit in effect in half of that lot. Meanwhile, on the same day, the 200-space Marina Boulevard Lot (the southern end of which is approximately 1,000 feet walking distance from K-Dock) was only 31% occupied. 10 During this timeframe, several complaints were made by slipholders about congestion in J&K and L&M Lots. In June, upon the reopening of the South Cove Lot in June, ferry passengers were directed to park in the South Cove Lots to reduce the burden on J&K and L&M Lots from all day parkers. This
3 Overnight parking is permitted for up to three consecutive nights (72 hours) in parking lots at the Waterfront (BMC 6.20.250). Overnight camping, however, and vehicles used as storage, are not permitted by the Berkeley Municipal Code (BMC 6.20.260). 4 The Parking Permit Program does not apply to the paid launch ramp lot. 5 Counts were conducted by PRW Staff 6 See Appendix of Satellite Parking Utilization Counts 7 Small Scale Ferry Service began in November 2016 with the introduction of Tideline. 8 One-way ridership count from Tuesday, July 24, 2018 9 One-way ridership count from Tuesday, February 6, 2018 10 See Appendix of Aerial Parking Utilization Counts
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 22 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Agenda Item 9. Update on Parking Study - DRAFT
coincided with the busiest months at the Waterfront for the South Cove Lots and resulted in substantial congestion, and limited access for watersports and recreational users at South Cove. Since re-opening, South Cove East Lot experiences as much as 90% occupancy (Figure 2). Since August 29th, 2018, ferry passengers have been directed to park in the Marina Boulevard Lot with signage and communication by PropSF and Tideline to their customers. However, very few users, if any, have heeded this request. Ferry customers continue to park in South Cove East, J&K, and L&M Lots due to a lack of enforcement. Since re-opening, South Cove East Lot experiences as much as 90% occupancy (Figure 2). Figure 2 Aerial of South Cove East Lot after Reconstruction (July 7th, 2018)11
Lastly, signage was recently placed on many facilities (including South Cove Lots) stating applicable parking regulations. However, this signage should be improved with larger fonts and less information. In Figure 3, the new sign can be seen on the light pole above the old sign and in Figure 4, the new sign is the only one on the light pole.
11 Source: Nearmap
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 23 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Agenda Item 9. Update on Parking Study - DRAFT
Figure 3 Photo of South Cove East Lot with New Sign
Figure 4 Photo of South Cove West Lot with New Sign
Proposed Policies The policies in this memo are proposed to be employed over the next two years.
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 24 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Agenda Item 9. Update on Parking Study - DRAFT
Progressive Pricing When employed in any context, pricing should be seen as a means to encourage safe and legal use of parking facilities, as well to promote sufficient turnover to ensure adequate access to a location across the course of a day. The primary goal of pricing parking should not be a source of revenue, as the price needed to cover program expenses vs. that to promote turnover are not always aligned. In the case of the Berkeley Waterfront, the key need is to reduce overcrowding in centrally-located facilities and encourage all-day users to park their car at slightly more distant facilities, thus opening up more central access to short-term parkers. Fees There are precedents for user fees in Berkeley, on the Berkeley Waterfront, and nearby East Bay marinas. For example, the City Council has approved a $1 entry fee for Adventure Playground (although it has yet to be implemented). There is also a gate-controlled parking and launch ramp area on the northern side of the Waterfront, charging $15 per entry, along with Doubletree Hotel parking charging $20 per day for self-parking and $9 for the first three hours12. Nearby marinas, including Richmond and Emeryville, charge $10 for 24-hour access to the launch and central slips. To that end, a $10 fee is proposed for users that need all-day parking at the South Cove Lot, a centrally-located, high-demand, and recently paved facility on the Waterfront. Users who desire to park for fewer than four hours would not have to pay a fee, thus ensure that casual visitors to Hana Japan and the Adventure Playground are not deterred from visiting those destinations. Payment Methods The most advantageous payment method is a pay-by-phone mobile app service, because it bears the lowest capital and implementation costs. Payments should be linked to a registered vehicle and license plate, and should produce no physical receipts, reducing the risk of additional trash on the Waterfront. Visitors without a smartphone or credit card should have the option of paying in cash at the Waterfront offices. In the immediate implementation timeline (Phase 1), an attendant/ambassador should be stationed at the South Cove Lots from 5 am to 9 am, accepting flat fee payments in cash. Perhaps in the future (Phase 2), a shared automatic pay station could be installed to serve the South Cove Lots and Adventure Playground.
12 http://doubletree3.hilton.com/en/hotels/california/doubletree-by-hilton-hotel-berkeley-marina- JBKCADT/about/policies.html
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 25 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Agenda Item 9. Update on Parking Study - DRAFT
Figure 5 Example Mobile Payment Signage
Increased Enforcement
Parking Compliance Violations of existing codes may be cited by PRW staff. However, from an efficiency standpoint, after Phase 1, staff should look into City of Berkeley Parking Enforcement playing a broader role. If the City’s budget limits the ability of Parking Enforcement to incorporate the Waterfront, PRW should consider having a third-party conduct enforcement, which the City of Berkeley is empowered to do as a Charter City in California. The enforcement of parking elsewhere in the City of Berkeley is currently performed by parking enforcement officers using mobile license plate recognition (mLPR) and handheld ticketing equipment. These technologies recently replaced the use of chalk markings, a low-tech method, of tracking compliance with a time limits. This approach is easy to defeat and can cause repetitive strain injuries (RSI) in enforcement personnel.13 The Berkeley Waterfront staff has been conducting parking enforcement at the Waterfront, however, in doing so, this team bears the opportunity cost of staff not tending to other important work. The amount of time spent on enforcement will also increase if Waterfront staff continue using outdated technologies, such as handwritten triplicate tickets and chalk markings (with colored chalk corresponding to specific days and times). To the extent that the City can furnish
13 http://losgatos.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=2&clip_id=1137&meta_id=123143
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 26 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Agenda Item 9. Update on Parking Study - DRAFT
PRW staff with handheld devices with LPR capability, implementation will be much smoother and cost-effective over the long run. In the immediate implementation timeline (Phase 1) PRW staff should continue to enforce regulations. In doing so, PRW may be able to more-cost-effectively cover parking enforcement on bicycles and document violations with a camera or handheld device. To optimize use of staffing time, we recommend that the PRW staff establish a random enforcement schedule that minimizes staff time, and prevents users from predicting enforcement patterns and thus avoiding payment/time limits. From the standpoint of continuing to increase efficiency during and after Phase 1, PRW should look into the City of Berkeley’s Parking Enforcement playing a broader role in enforcing parking on the Waterfront, as it will continue to be a location of significant public parking demand within City Limits. If the City’s budget limits the ability of Parking Enforcement to incorporate the Waterfront into their routes, PRW should consider having a third party conduct parking enforcement, which the City of Berkeley is empowered to do as a Charter City in California.
Parking Security Simultaneous with all other short-term policies, the Waterfront must improve the perception of safety for people parking and/or walking greater distances from their parking spot to their final destination. Simply placing signs which expect people to call the police to report suspicious activity places a reactive burden on visitors and may encourage unnecessary confrontations, while placing cameras may invite vandalism and visitor discomfort. To that end, the following tactics are proposed: - Consistent pedestrian-scaled lighting and regular trimming of all overgrowth and berms, particularly along the walkways between:
o South Cove Lots and Hana Japan Restaurant o 199 Seawall Drive Lot and South Cove o Skates / N Lot and J&K Lot o Marina Boulevard and J&K Lot - Establishing the placement of parking lot security personnel as part of future restaurant operational agreements and contracts Improved Parking Information As PRW communicates parking regulations to the public, it is important to ensure that information is updated, aesthetically consistent (using a limited palette of colors, and a maximum of two typefaces), and also available online. The following examples of signage and pamphlets are just two components of a larger conceptual design plan for the entire Waterfront which extends beyond the phasing of the initial parking regulations. Nevertheless, good practice in information design and communications should be utilized at any phase, including on temporary signage.
Wayfinding and Signage Clear and concise signage is a key piece of any parking communications plan. Signage should serve two primary functions. The first is to complement wayfinding, in providing essential details on parking options for drivers arriving with little or no information. By complementing effective
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 27 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Agenda Item 9. Update on Parking Study - DRAFT
wayfinding elements, this information should be visually discrete and textually concise, while effectively guiding parking searches. The second function is to confirm to each driver that the space she/he has found is indeed priced and regulated as expected. Preferably, this happens without the drivers having to leave their cars. As the most prominent component of a wayfinding system, signage must take advantage of its prominence while accounting for the limited amount of time one can safely and reasonably devote to reading a sign. Different types of signage should be thoughtfully placed at each decision point of the process in which somebody arrives at a location until they finish the parking transaction. At gateways to facilities, a general sign with hours and the most important regulations (capped at just two or three) may be displayed as shown in Sedona (Figure 6 below). Text must be at a size to be easily read by a driver in a moving vehicle without causing distraction. Figure 6 Example Parking Gateway Signage
Upon entering a facility, a sign at the entrance should contain the most important regulations specific to the facility, including a “P” icon conveying that public parking is available, as well as the price, payment process, and primary destination served (Figure 7). Entrance signage to each facility should include the name of the lot to ensure parkers successfully navigate to a directed location, as well as remember the location where they parked.
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 28 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Agenda Item 9. Update on Parking Study - DRAFT
Figure 7 Example Facility Entrance Sign
Icons should also be used to convey the availability of overnight parking along with other regulations, as shown in Figure 8. Figure 8 Example Icon Signage for Overnight Parking
Increasing the prominence and visibility of signage within parking lots to concise statements when spaces are available to the public – rather than just where members of the public cannot park – will increase the public’s awareness of available supply/location. In locations where there may be two regulations applicable to two different types of users (e.g., visitors and slipholders), the leading information should always be targeted towards irregular and
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 29 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Agenda Item 9. Update on Parking Study - DRAFT
first-time users of the Waterfront are less familiar with the Waterfront’s parking regulations. The placement of permit information should be secondary to short-term, visitor-oriented information, because visitors may be unfamiliar with their parking options; most permit users should already be familiar with their options. In Figure 9 below, the regulations for public users are posted above the regulations specific to permit holders. Because of the volume of information and complexity regarding permit options, it may be more useful to direct interested parties to a phone number or website for permit-related information. Figure 9 Example Sign Showing Parking For Two User Types
To encourage the use of more remote parking facilities, wayfinding signage with estimated walking times to important Waterfront destinations and other land uses should be provided at the sidewalk/pedestrian exits of parking facilities (Figure 10). Approximate walking times (e.g., “Five minutes”) are generally more relatable than walking distances, which are fixed to a specific amount (e.g., “0.3 miles”).
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 30 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Agenda Item 9. Update on Parking Study - DRAFT
Figure 10 Example Directional Signage
Pamphlets All-day parkers, including ferry patrons, will need to be informed of upcoming changes to parking regulations. The message should be positive and progressive. Although a notice that citations will be provided for noncompliance, a map should also be provided showing future parking options for people who are parking all day. Additionally, these pamphlets should be provided for all first- time violations as part of a “grace period” or “one-time exemption” for each vehicle. Redwood City engages in this practice for people parking in its downtown (Figure 11 and Figure 12).
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 31 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Agenda Item 9. Update on Parking Study - DRAFT
Figure 11 Example Informative Parking Warning Pamphlet (Obverse)
Figure 12 Example Informative Parking Warning Pamphlet (Reverse)
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 32 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Agenda Item 9. Update on Parking Study - DRAFT
Summary of Proposed Policies (By Lot) Figure 13 Summary of Proposed Policies
Proposed Policy Future Considerations Facility Existing Policy (Phase 1) (After Phase 1 Evaluation) South/Central Facilities North of University Avenue O Lot Slipholder & Public Parking Slipholder Permit Parking & Yacht Club Member/Staff Parking Only Increased enforcement (in the form of citations and warnings) as needed. Skates / N Lot Primarily Skates Customers N/A Increase security through pruning and lighting. Incorporate parking management and security into future restaurant leases. and Slipholders Possible designation for ferry passengers. Increased enforcement (in the form of citations and warnings) as needed. L&M Lot Public Parking Allowed Daytime: 4-Hour Public Parking Increased enforcement (in the form of citations and warnings) as needed. Overnight: Slipholders Only J&K/Hana Japan Lot Public Parking Allowed (2-Hour Daytime: 4-Hour Public Parking Increased enforcement (in the form of citations and warnings) as needed. Parking in Selected Spaces). Overnight: Slipholders Only South/Central Facilities South of University Avenue South Cove East and Public Parking Allowed Free parking up to 4 hours (Northern row adjacent to rigging area 9 am-9 am weekdays, Entire lot 9 Increased enforcement (in the form of citations and warnings) as needed. Implementation of automated pay system as warranted. West Lots am-10 pm weekdays and 5 am-10 pm weekends) $10 for 4 hours and above, charged 5 am-9 am weekdays.
South Cove East Lot Public Parking Allowed 30-minute loading for recreational watersports users in selected spaces adjacent to rigging area and Increased enforcement (in the form of citations and warnings) as needed. Implementation of automated pay system as warranted. Rigging Area crosswalk along northernmost rows, 4-hour maximum at all times Small Boat Launch Public Parking Allowed 30-minute loading for recreational watersports users Increased enforcement (in the form of citations and warnings) as needed. Seawall Drive Public Parking Allowed Street Parking Increase security through pruning and lighting. Post “No Parking 2 am to 6 am” signs per current regulations. Increased enforcement (in the form of citations and warnings) as needed. 199 Seawall Drive Lot Temporarily Closed N/A Increase security through pruning and lighting. Incorporate parking management and security into future restaurant leases. Changes may be affected by master plan process. Increased enforcement (in the form of citations and warnings) as needed. North Facilities off Marina Boulevard F&G Lot Slipholder Parking Only Slipholder Permit Parking Increased enforcement (in the form of citations and warnings) as needed. H&I Lot Slipholder Parking Only Slipholder Permit Parking Increased enforcement (in the form of citations and warnings) as needed. Marina Boulevard Public Parking Allowed Street Parking (Direct ferry and commuter passengers here) Post “No Parking 2 am to 6 am” signs per current regulations. Increased enforcement (in the form of citations and warnings) as needed. North Facilities off Spinnaker Way Launch Ramp (Public) Public Parking Allowed N/A Increase security through pruning and lighting. Increased enforcement (in the form of citations and warnings) as needed. Launch Ramp (Paid) $15 / day (Vehicles with trailers N/A Continued enforcement (in the form of citations and warnings) as needed. only) B&C Lot Slipholder Permit Parking and Slipholder Permit Parking Continued enforcement (in the form of citations and warnings) as needed. Paid Access to Public Ramp D&E Lot Slipholder Permit Parking Slipholder Permit Parking Continued enforcement (in the form of citations and warnings) as needed. Spinnaker Way and Vista Public Parking Allowed Street Parking Increased enforcement (in the form of citations and warnings) as needed.
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 33 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Agenda Item 9. Update on Parking Study - DRAFT
Figure 14 Proposed Parking Regulations (Phase 1)
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 34 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Agenda Item 9. Update on Parking Study - DRAFT
Conclusion Going forward, there will continue to be an ongoing need to calibrate the correct balance between existing supply and seasonal demand, but it is important that Phase 1 lasts at least a half year , and ideally a full year (to include the peak season at the Waterfront between May and October). People parking on the Waterfront should be given ample opportunity to adjust their choices in parking location based on the information they have received and their preferences based on convenience, price sensitivity, and willingness/ability to walk to their destination. Parking occupancy data collected in those locations (ideally during a “peak” period) will help inform which adjustments need to be made afterwards. By the time the master planning process enters a new stage, restaurant leases make progress, and stakeholders have registered their feedback on the adjusted parking regulations, it will be appropriate to consider future regulatory adjustments beyond Phase 1.
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 35 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Agenda Item 9. Update on Parking Study - DRAFT
Appendix of Aerial Parking Utilization Counts
Weekend Utilization Counts Weekday Utilization Counts Date 7/7/18 10/22/17 9/24/17 8/31/14 5/10/18 3/9/17 8/8/16 10/30/15 9/9/15 Supply Day of Week Saturday Sunday Sunday Sunday Thursday Thursday Monday Friday Wednesday
Source Nearmap Nearmap Nearmap Nearmap Google Earth Nearmap Nearmap Nearmap Nearmap Time of Day Afternoon Afternoon Near Early Near Noon Late Near Afternoon Late Morning Noon Afternoon Morning Noon Central Facilities L&M 135 99 87 66 105 91 126 73 62 62 J&K 94 84 43 90 86 83 25 42 26 51 South Cove 98 75 74 108 115 55 37 24 7 16 West South Cove 96 86 18 84 73 -- 17 55 8 3 East Small Boat 10 11 11 12 11 6 11 11 7 2 Launch South Facilities Skates N Lot 100 59 60 78 84 39 20 22 37 32 O Lot 70 49 59 48 66 21 55 33 28 34 199 Seawall 320 90 174 170 170 313 52 21 30 30 Drive Lot Seawall 168 43 28 46 67 82 21 37 24 19 Drive North Facilities H&I Lot 52 32 33 36 26 34 32 24 29 23 F&G Lot 47 30 30 40 39 46 30 13 24 22 Marina Blvd 200 130 50 49 21 61 52 19 24 11 D&E Lot 138 51 53 65 66 53 59 30 40 38 Launch 112 69 50 69 72 52 36 13 21 36 Ramp Spinnaker 25 29 15 24 25 48 22 19 21 11 Vista Spinnaker 108 105 66 81 67 18 55 24 35 23 Way University 25 0 1 0 1 5 0 3 2 1 Ave
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 36 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Agenda Item 9. Update on Parking Study - DRAFT
Appendix of Stakeholder Survey Results
The following pages contain a complete export of ten responses to a survey electronically distributed (via SurveyMonkey) to Waterfront stakeholders in March and April of 2018. Note: Survey results to be omitted from public drafts to maintain confidentiality as promised in the survey prompt.
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 37 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Agenda Item 10. One-time request - Berkeley Waterfront
Date: October 10
To: Mayor and Members of the Berkeley City Council
From: Parks & Waterfront Commission
Subject: Draft – Communication to Council regarding Staff Request for One-Time Funding
Dear Mayor and Council Members,
Berkeley Marina faces a crisis. Years of underfunding have left the marina with a long list of damaged facilities which are now beginning to threaten the very continuance of the marina as a recreational facility. Your staff have identified a list of $100 million in in unfunded capital repairs, and a shorter list of about $4 million in short term needs. Because the council has not taken strong action to restore the Marina’s economic health, despite nearly twenty years of warnings, the marina now faces a structural deficit of $500,00, which is expected to increase to $800,000 in FY 2020 as the marina fund is exhausted. The poor state of infrastructure and delays in repairs have begun to affect the marketability of the marina, as those who rent slips have begun leaving and the occupancy rate has fallen from 88% to 79%, adding an additional $150,000 or more to the structural deficit.
The Parks and Waterfront Commission is writing to ask the Council to allocate funds from the transfer tax fees at their meeting in November. We support Staff’s recent request for immediate one-time funding for the Berkeley Marina, as presented at the Special Council Meeting on May 8, 2018. As you may recall, Item 3, “Parks, Recreation & Waterfront Department Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) Update” detailed current financial challenges (including a $500-800K structural deficit, lack of a sinking fund, and a $100M unfunded capital need), steps that have been taken so far, and recommendations for further action by Council. The Parks & Waterfront Commission supports Staff’s requests because they address urgent infrastructure needs (which will promote retaining current and attracting new tenants) and support a broader planning effort to ensure the future financial stability of the Marina.
Based on current projections, the Marina Enterprise Fund will be insolvent by 2022. The period between now and then provides a window during which the Council, Commission, and City Staff can engage with all Marina stakeholders to envision a path that is both financially and environmentally sustainable. Creating a new Master Plan will be critical in that process, and the one-time investments we are asking you to support are important steps on the path to fiscal sustainability.
The Parks & Waterfront Commission has formed a Subcommittee to further review the fiscal issues at the Marina. The larger Commission is also prepared to work closely with staff to initiate a Marina Master Plan process and ensure it is robust and visionary. The planning process should include a variety of possible scenarios and give the public a chance to weigh in and express their preferences. The staff Has developed an initial scope of work to solicit interest from planning firms, but as yet there is no guarantee of funding to develop and implement that plan.
The Parks and Waterfront Commission has adopted the following resolution to the Council:
Whereas, the Berkeley marina is a recreational facility worth more than $200 million that provides recreational facilities for thousands of residents of Berkeley and nearby cities; and
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 38 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Agenda Item 10. One-time request - Berkeley Waterfront
Whereas, that marina faces serious shortcomings in maintenance funding and in improvements necessary to retain existing tenants, resulting in a falling occupancy and reduced revenues; and
Whereas, the marina fund currently provides a broad array of recreational programs for youth funded out of the marina fund rather than the general fund; and
Whereas, failure to act to stabilize the marina’s financial condition may lead to termination of recreation programs and special events; and
Whereas, long term changes to the marina to increase leasehold revenues sufficient to offset increasing costs cannot be done under the exiting Master Plan, but requires modifications to that plan.
Therefore, the Parks and Waterfront Commission recommends that the Council allocate sufficient funds, approximately $4.3 million, to fund the most urgent repairs and complete a revised Master Plan, as outlined on page 10 of the April 12, 2018 report of the City Manager.
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 39 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Page 1 of 2 Agenda Item 12. Traffic Circle Vegetation
Lori Droste Berkeley City Council District 8 CONSENT CALENDAR September 25, 2018
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Councilmembers Lori Droste, Ben Bartlett, Cheryl Davila, and Mayor Arreguin
Subject: Traffic Circle Vegetation Maintenance Policy
RECOMMENDATION Refer to Parks and Waterfront Commission and the Transportation Commission to establish a city/community task force to: a) Evaluate the City’s current traffic circle vegetation policy and b) Conduct a community led process to update that policy to ensure pedestrian/bicycle/ vehicle safety and preserve community efforts to beautify traffic circles.
Task force activities may include, but are not limited to: ● Conducting a survey of current traffic circles and their vegetation ● Conducting a survey of neighborhood associations, neighborhood captains, community and community groups such as Berkeley Partners for Parks to determine which traffic circles are being maintained by community members ● Examining the City of Oakland’s ‘Adopt a Spot’ initiative to encourage community involvement in the maintenance of public spaces by loaning tools, supplies, and technical assistance to committed members of the community ● Hosting a presentation from City staff to better understand concerns with the current traffic circle policy and any safety concerns that should be taken into consideration ● Developing a clear set of guidelines/criteria to allow for community maintenance of traffic circles ● Outlining the appropriate community outreach strategy and process to share the updated policy for managing vegetation in traffic circles ● Developing a replanting strategy, with emphasis on drought-resistant plants.
FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION Staff time
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 40 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Page 2 of 2 Agenda Item 12. Traffic Circle Vegetation
ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY Supports the City’s Climate Emergency Declaration, the City’s Climate Action Plan and commitment to Vision Zero.
CONTACT PERSON Lori Droste, Berkeley City Council, District 8, 510-981-7180
Adopt a Spot, City of Oakland: http://www2.oaklandnet.com/Government/o/PWA/s/SO/OAK024605
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 41 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Agenda Item 15. Recent Council Rpts
PARKS AND WATERFRONT COMMISSION
RECENT COUNCIL REPORTS The following council reports are available for review at the Parks Recreation & Waterfront Department administrative desk, 2180 Milvia Street, 3rd floor, or can be accessed from the City Council Website by using the following URL’s:
October 2, 2018 – Regular Meeting
C. Donation: Memorial Bench at the South Cove in memory of Judith Scherr
URL: https://www.cityofberkeley.info/Clerk/City_Council/2018/10_Oct/Documents/2018-10- 02_Item_C_Donation_Memorial_Bench.aspx
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 42 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Agenda Item 17. Communications - Burrowing Owl Rpts
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 43 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Agenda Item 17. Communications - Burrowing Owl Rpts
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 44 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Agenda Item 17. Communications - Burrowing Owl Rpts
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 45 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Agenda Item 17. Communications - Burrowing Owl Rpts
Overview The Burrowing Owl (Athene cunicularia) was once a common resident of the San Francisco Bay Area. Today, it is a California Species of Special Concern, having been extirpated from much of its former habitat throughout the State, including the Bay Area. Currently, the only remaining breeding Burrowing Owls in the Bay Area reside in the Mountain View Shoreline Park in the South Bay.
For many years, Burrowing Owls have overwintered in the East Shore State Park and Cesar Chavez Park in Berkeley, CA.
In 2008, an off-leash dog dug up the den of one of the owls and the owl disappeared. Concerned that disturbances would result in the extirpation of the owls from Cesar Chavez Park, Golden Gate Audubon volunteers worked with the City of Berkeley to erect a temporary fence along the northeast portion of the park, which GGAS refers to as a Wildlife Protection Area (WPA). Subsequently, with input from GGAS volunteers, the City of Berkeley commissioned and constructed an art project that included a stylized fence that separates the WPA from the walkway. Volunteers also organized visits to the park to record observations of the owls and provide educational materials and other information to park visitors.
In the fall of 2016, the temporary fencing was vandalized twice at Cesar Chavez Park and there was increased human activity where the owls formerly over wintered. While the fence was down many people fished in the area formerly occupied by the over wintering owls. In November that same year, a dead burrowing owl was photographed at Cesar Chavez Park and reported anonymously to GGAS.
About a dozen years ago, the Albany Bulb mitigation area was established by the City of Berkeley as mitigation for the Tom Bates Sports Complex along the waterfront. It is managed by the East Bay Regional Park District (EBRPD). It should be noted that while the Albany Bulb mitigation site has been monitored since its inception, no owls were ever reportedly seen there until a first owl was observed in the fall of 2016. It is presumed that this owl then moved to Cesar Chavez Park as no further sightings were recorded at the Albany Bulb for that year.
During the 2017-18 over-wintering season, there were no Burrowing Owls reported at Cesar Chavez Park. However, three Burrowing Owls were reported at the Albany Bulb within the enclosed (fenced) mitigation area. It has been suggested that this may be due to the fact that the fencing at Cesar Chavez Park was inadvertently installed after the owls arrived in October 2017.
Additional Burrowing Owls have been reported overwintering at the Martin Luther King, Jr. Regional Shoreline in Oakland, California. However, those owls are not documented by this group of Burrowing Owl Docents, thus that data is not included in this report.
Occasionally during the winter, people have reported Burrowing Owls in San Francisco, and photographers and the public have subsequently flushed these owls. To prevent further disturbances to the burrowing owls, the locations are not widely shared. Volunteers are monitoring these areas.
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 46 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Agenda Item 17. Communications - Burrowing Owl Rpts
Year Number of Burrowing Owls Reported Along the Berkeley/Albany/Richmond Shoreline 2007 5 2008 4 2009 3 2010 4 2011 5 2012 6 2013 3 2014 2 2015 2 2016 5 2017 3
2017-2018 Program For the tenth year in a row, Golden Gate Audubon coordinated with the City of Berkeley’s Shorebird Nature Center at the Berkeley Marina to recruit more volunteers and arrange a workday and docent training seminar. New and returning volunteers attending a full day training on the natural history of the site and this species of owl, interacting with the public and recording data, data forms, and online resources for data entry, communication and scheduling. Docents set their own schedule for visiting the park. Visits generally lasted one hour.
The Golden Gate Audubon Society’s Burrowing Owl Docent Program would not exist without the dedicated work of its volunteer coordinator, Della Dash, and the many volunteers that monitor the owls, record their observations, and interact with the public.
The 2017-2018 Docents: Doug Donaldson Pat Olney Mary Malec Karen Rosenbaum Ben Mc Clinton Joyce Stanek
For the 2016-2017 Burrowing Owl overwintering season, there were four observation locations: Cesar Chavez Park, Albany Plateau and two locations in San Francisco. In 2017-2018 while docents monitored the Albany Bulb, Cesar Chavez Park and San Francisco sites, owls were only observed at the Albany Plateau.
Results to Date During the 2017-2018 Burrowing Owl over-wintering season, owls were observed at the Tom Bates Sports Complex mitigation area also known as the Albany Plateau. Six docents visited the park on at least 56 days from the months of October 2017 to March 2018, conducting observations for a total of approximately 64 observation hours. Since the owls were not observed at the Cesar Chavez Park, the
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 47 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Agenda Item 17. Communications - Burrowing Owl Rpts
docents did not monitor as often as prior years. There were no reports at either of the San Francisco locations. During these visits, docents recorded the location of up to three Burrowing Owls in the mitigation area at the same time. At the Albany Plateau, the first sighting was on October 4, 2017 and the last recorded observation occurred on March 6, 2018. The first observation of the second sighting at the Albany location was on October 19, 2017 and the last sighting of the second owl was on March 24, 2018. There were no Burrowing Owls observed at the Cesar Chavez Park locations during the course of this winter season. Docents also counted park visitors, dogs (both on- and off-leash), and persons that stopped to express an interest in the owls.
Burrowing Owl Observations Highlights of the Burrowing Owl observations by location include: Albany Plateau: 10/4/17 first sighting of an owl at Albany Bulb for the season (last year: 10/6/16) 10/17/17 first sighting of two burrowing owls at Albany Bulb in 2017-2018 11/7/17 first sighting of three burrowing owls at Albany Bulb in 2017-2018
Cesar Chavez Park: . No sighting of an owl at CCP for the season (last year: 10/6/16) . No sighting of two burrowing owls at CCP in 2016-2017 (prior year: None) . No sightings of three burrowing owls at CCP in 2016-2017 (last year: None) . – last sighting of a burrowing owl at CCP for the season (last year: 3/19/16) . – last sighting of two burrowing owls at CCP for the season (last year: 3/13/16)
San Francisco Location # 1: . – first sighting of an owl at San Francisco location #1 for the season (last year: 11/3/15) . sightings of two burrowing owls at San Francisco location #1 in 2015-2016 . sightings of three burrowing owls at San Francisco location #1 in 2015-2016 . – last sighting of a burrowing owl at San Francisco location #1 for the season (last year: 2/21/16)
San Francisco Location # 2 (New in 2015-2016. Note: One session recorded at this new location): . 2/23/16 – first sighting of an owl at San Francisco location #2 for the season . No sightings of two burrowing owls at San Francisco location #2 in 2015-2016 . No sightings of three burrowing owls at San Francisco location #2 in 2015-2016 . 2/23/16 – last sighting of a burrowing owl at San Francisco location #2 for the season
Park Visitors The monitoring protocol asked observers to record all park visitors that pass by the observation area during the survey. During the survey, observers recorded 524 people or an average of approximately 8 people per survey hours. The Berkeley location had an average of 12.7 people per hour, the Albany location had an average of 7.3 people per hour and the SF locations were not recorded. Popular activities at the park include walking, biking, and dog walking, but observers were not asked to distinguish between different activities. Almost 85% of the observation hours were spent at Albany Plateau and 15% at Cesar Chavez Park.
Interactions with Park Visitors During the park visits, the docents interacted with at least 187, approximately 2.9 people per survey hour. Observers at Albany Plateau recorded an average of 7.3 people interactions per survey hour and Cesar Chavez Park recorded an average of 12.7 people interactions per survey hour. Visitors stopped to express an interest in the owls. In Berkeley, observers talked to 31.4% of park visitors on average while observers at Albany Plateau talked to 37% of park visitors. Observers at the San Francisco locations did
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 48 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Agenda Item 17. Communications - Burrowing Owl Rpts
not talk with the park visitors. According to notes recorded by the docents, many of the visitors asked questions about the owls and the art installation/fence. Many used the spotting scope or binoculars provided by the docents to get a better view of the owls.
Dog Activities in Cesar Chavez Park and two San Francisco locations The monitoring protocol asked observers to count all dogs observed during the survey period and to record whether the dog was leashed or unleashed and whether it was outside or within the Wildlife Protection Area. Observers recorded 151 dogs on leash during all surveys, an average of approximately 2.3 dogs on leash per survey hours (6.2 on leash in 2016-2017). More than 74.5% of dogs at Cesar Chavez Park were on leash (up from 63% last year) while 26.6% of dogs at Albany Plateau were on leash and no data was collected regarding the two San Francisco locations.
Observers recorded 325 dogs off-leash during all of the surveys, an average of approximately 5 off-leash dog per hour compared with 2 dogs off-leash in 2017-2018 overall. In Berkeley, an average of 4 dogs off leash per hour this year. In Albany, an average of 5.7 dog was off leash per hour this year. At the Albany Plateau which is fenced-in, off leash dogs entered the area where the owls were present. Dog walkers were throwing balls to dogs over the fence for the dogs to go under and retrieve the ball 11/2017. GGAS reported this disturbance to the EBRPD. The EBRPD secured the fence with wood to prevent access by dogs. Monitoring data was not submitted from San Francisco. Observers took notes and recorded disturbances to the owls because of off-leash dogs and actions of owners (if any). Observers also often asked people to leash their dogs.
Next Steps The Burrowing Owl docent program will continue during the 2018-2019 season at Cesar Chavez Park, the adjacent Berkeley Meadows, and the Albany Plateau area.
Golden Gate Audubon will continue to advocate for cats indoors and enforcement of leash laws to protect Burrowing Owls and other native birds and wildlife.
For more information, please contact Noreen Weeden, Volunteer Programs Director, at (510) 301-0570 or [email protected]
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 49 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Agenda Item 17. Communications - Ltr to Zero Waste Comm
M E M O R A N D U M
Date: 12 September 2018
To: The Zero Waste Commission
From: The Parks and Waterfront Commission
Subject: Responding to request for feedback on draft of the Single Use Foodware and Litter Reduction Ordinance
The Parks and Waterfront Commission would like to commend the Zero Waste Commission for its work in helping to develop a Single Use Foodware and Litter Reduction Ordinance (Attachment A). We support the Ordinance, which will reduce waste from single use food containers in Berkeley through the development of disposable foodware standards, fees of $0.25 per cup or container for disposable items and mandatory educational signage at the point of sale. We are pleased that extensive outreach was done to craft the legislation (including surveying 59 local businesses) and that several local case studies have demonstrated the economic benefits and feasibility of the ordinance1,2 We are also pleased that the Ordinance makes some accommodations, including fee exemptions for customers using WIC or SNAP and allowing biodegradable (paper) straws “on request”.
The Ordinance will help reduce waste in Berkeley’s parks and along the waterfront, which is badly needed. The 2017 Coastal Cleanup Day in Berkeley, Albany and Emeryville picked up 4,300 lbs of trash and recyclables, including 7,241 food wrappers, 2,217 foam packaging items, 2,505 straws and stirrers, 1,891 plastic bags and 1,577 plastic utensils.3,3a This waste detracts from residents’ enjoyment of the coast and harms bay-loving species. The Ocean Conservancy says that single-use packaging is the biggest source of trash found in or near oceans and bays, that over 600 species are threatened from the ingestion of plastics, and that 90 percent of seabirds are eating plastics on a regular basis.4 There will be a transition period and some push- back to the Ordinance at first, but the need to significantly reduce single-use packaging is real. Berkeley can help lead the way to a healthier future for our planet and local waterfront.
Footnotes: (1) http://reusablebagsac.org/news/successful-results-bag-ordinance (2) https://serc.berkeley.edu/paying-the-price-of-disposable-cups-at-caffe-strada/ (3) https://www.cityofberkeley.info/shorelinecleanup/. See also (3a) www.cleanwateraction.org/files/publications/ca/Curr_CA_12%2012%2011final.pdf; California Coastal Cleanup Results 1989- 2014 showing Food and Beverage packaging items are 7 out of the top 10 items collected and account for 34% of the total trash https://www.coastal.ca.gov/publiced/ccd/history.html#top10; BanList 2.0 shows food and beverage packaging items are 74% of top 20 littered items among 6 different beach cleanup datasets https://upstreampolicy.org/ban-list-20 (4) https://oceanconservancy.org/our-work/marine-debris/2015-data-release/2015-data-release-pdf.pdf)
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 50 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Page 1 of 14 Agenda Item 17. Communications - Ltr to Zero Waste Comm
Berkeley City Council 2180 Milvia Street, 5th Floor Berkeley, CA 94704 ACTION CALENDAR April 24, 2018
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Councilmember Sophie Hahn and Mayor Jesse Arreguin, and Councilmembers Linda Maio and Susan Wengraf
Subject: Referral to the Zero Waste Commission: Berkeley Single Use Foodware and Litter Reduction Ordinance
RECOMMENDATION 1. Refer the proposed Berkeley Single Use Foodware and Litter Reduction Ordinance to the Zero Waste Commission to invite input from key stakeholders, including restaurants and other food retailers and zero waste, plastics, oceans and other environmental experts, and hold public meetings to obtain input on the proposed Ordinance.
2. Refer to the Zero Waste Commission to report back to the City Council results of the Commission’s community outreach and analysis, and provide recommendations for improvements to the proposed Berkeley Single Use Foodware and Litter Reduction Ordinance.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The only added cost of the referral, beyond normal staff time to support the Zero Waste Commission’s review of the proposed ordinance, is potential staffing of one or more community meetings to obtain stakeholder and other public input.
Reducing use and disposal of products that make up the majority of Berkeley’s street and storm-drain litter has the potential to significantly lower City expenses including costs related to collection of debris from over 400 city trash receptacles, from clearing of clogged stormwater intakes city-wide, and from daily street sweeping and litter management.
BACKGROUND Single use disposable foodware and packaging (SUDs) - including plastic bottles, caps, lids, straws, cups, and containers - is a major contributor to street litter, ocean pollution, marine and other wildlife harm and greenhouse gas emissions. The use of disposable foodware has grown exponentially over the past few decades. The practice of providing
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 51 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Page 2 of 14 Agenda Item 17. Communications - Ltr to Zero Waste Comm
food and beverage packaging free of charge fails to incorporate the environmental and social costs of these products into the price of food and beverage service. As a result, customers and food business operators pay little attention to the quantity of single use packaging products consumed and quickly thrown away. Reducing the use of SUDs in the City of Berkeley is a key strategy to achieve the City’s Zero Waste and Climate Action goals, and to address the many environmental impacts and costs associated with the use and disposal of single-use foodware and packaging.
Environmental Impacts of Single-Use Disposables The production, consumption, and disposal of SUDs contributes significantly to the depletion of natural resources. It is a major component of litter on streets and in waterways, and of the plastic polluting our air, food, drinking water and oceans.
● Food and beverage SUDs make up approximately 25% of all waste produced in California1 ● Bay Area litter studies have found that food and beverage packaging comprises the majority of street litter, half of which comes from fast food and take-out food establishments2 ● Eighty percent of marine plastic pollution originates from trash in urban runoff3 ● In the year 2000, half of all plastic packaging in the UK was comprised of SUDs4 ● Nearly 700 species of marine wildlife are impacted by ingestion and entanglement of plastics, causing starvation, disease, and death5 ● Without dramatic systems change, by 2050, there will be more plastic in the ocean than fish6 ● Based on Berkeley’s population of approximately 120,000 people, it is estimated that almost 40 million single use cups are used in the City of Berkeley every year ● Paper cups alone generate 2.2 billion pounds of waste per year nationwide, consuming over 11 million trees, resulting in 4 billion pounds of carbon dioxide emissions, and requiring the consumption of 35 billion gallons of water to manufacture7
1 https://www.wastedive.com/news/are-the-packaging-wars-coming-to-california/508491/ 2 See Clean Water Action’s “Taking out the Trash” Bay Area Litter study (2011) http://www.cleanwateraction.org/files/publications/ca/Curr_CA_12%2012%2011final.pdf ; California Coastal Cleanup Results 1989- 2014 showing Food and Beverage packaging items are 7 out of the top 10 items collected and account for 34% of the total trash - https://www.coastal.ca.gov/publiced/ccd/history.html#top10 ; BanList 2.0 shows food and beverage packaging items are 74% of top 20 littered items among 6 different beach cleanup datasets- https://upstreampolicy.org/ban-list-20 3 80% from land based sources: U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA, Office of Public and Constituent Affairs, (1999) “Turning to the Sea: America’s Ocean Future,” p.5. Re: most of land-based ocean litter comes from trash in urban runoff: Trash TMDLs for the Los Angeles River Watershed, (September 19, 2001):17. 4 Hopewell, et Al. Royal Society Biological Sciences Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2009 Jul 27; 364(1526): 2115–2126. 5 Gall & Thompson, The Impact of Marine Debris on Marine Life, Marine Poll Bull, 2015 Mar 15:93(1-2);170-179 6 Ellen MacArthur Foundation (2016) 7 Clean Water Action Disposable vs. Reusable Cups Fact Sheet
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 52 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Page 3 of 14 Agenda Item 17. Communications - Ltr to Zero Waste Comm
Most SUDs are used for just a few minutes before becoming waste, while the plastics many are made of last for hundreds and even thousands of years, and have broad, long-lasting negative impacts. Plastics in waterways and oceans break down into smaller pieces (but do not biodegrade) and are present in most of the world’s oceans, at all levels (surface, water column, and bottom).8 Among other hazards, plastic debris attracts and concentrates ambient pollutants in seawater and freshwater9, which can transfer to fish, other seafood, and salt that is eventually sold for human consumption.10 Certain SUDs, including food contact papers and compostable paperboard containers, can also contain harmful fluorinated chemicals that are linked to serious health effects including kidney and testicular cancer, thyroid disruption, delayed puberty and obesity.11
Berkeley as a Zero Waste Leader The City of Berkeley has a long history of leadership in sustainability and environmental protections including the adoption of an ambitious Climate Action Plan in 2009, with a goal of achieving Zero Waste by 2020; the nation’s first curbside recycling program and styrofoam foodware ban; and one of the first commercial organics collection programs. 75% of the City’s discarded material is diverted from landfill, and there has been a 50% reduction in solid waste disposal between 2000 to 201312. Despite these achievements, Berkeley has not addressed the significant increase in takeout food packaging littering city streets, filling storm drains, requiring management in the waste stream, polluting our waterways, Bay and ocean, and threatening both human and animal health.
In addition, SUDs are particularly costly and challenging to divert from landfill. Non- recyclable food and beverage packaging is costly to remove from the waste stream and reduces the quality and value of recyclables, while non-compostable food packaging (some of which is advertised as “compostable”) contaminates compost, adding costs and reducing the quality of compost13. With China’s recent rejection of mixed recycled plastic imports, the value of recyclable plastics has dropped sharply and the final destination for these plastic SUDs is uncertain. This adds significant costs to the City’s collection, sorting, and processing of compostables and recyclables. To reach its Zero
8 D. Barnes et al, 2009, Accumulation and fragmentation of plastic debris in global environments, Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B., 364-1985- 98. 9 Rochman, C.M., et al,. 2013, Long-Term Field Measurement of Sorption of Organic Contaminants to Five Types of Plastic Pellets: Implications for Plastic Marine Debris. Environmental Science and Technology. 47, 1646−1654. 10 Rochman C Met al, 2015a Anthropogenic debris in seafood: plastic debris and fibers from textiles in fish and bivalves sold for human consumption Sci. Rep. 5 14340. 11 In 2015, the FDA barred from use three such fluorinated chemicals from food contact materials due to safety risks associated with cancer, toxicity, and other health effects; other fluorinated chemicals have similar chemical structures and pose similar risk. 12 Berkeley Climate Action Plan: Tracking our Progress Waste Reduction & Recycling – Total Landfilled, https://www.cityofberkeley.info/uploadedFiles/Planning_and_Development/Level_3_- _Energy_and_Sustainable_Development/PDF%20total%20landfilled%20final.pdf 13 Clean Water Action, What’s in the Package? 2016 https://www.cleanwateraction.org/features/what%E2%80%99s-package
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 53 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Page 4 of 14 Agenda Item 17. Communications - Ltr to Zero Waste Comm
Waste goals, the City must reduce use of unnecessary single-use food and beverage packaging.
Strategies to Regulate SUDs Alameda County implemented its reusable bag ordinance in January 2013, and has seen dramatic results. Countywide, bag purchases by affected retail stores have declined by 85 percent. The number of shoppers bringing a reusable bag to affected stores, or not using a bag at all, has more than doubled during this time14. Globally, a number of strategies have been implemented to reduce the use of SUDs. Charges for single-use plastic bags have proven to decrease plastic bag consumption. When Ireland instituted a “Plas-Tax” in 2002 equivalent to about 20 cents per bag, plastic bag use declined by 90% and litter from plastic bags declined by 40%15. Similar charges have been implemented in Taiwan, Washington D.C., and the United Kingdom, resulting in decreases in plastic bag use of up to 80%. A 2016 plastic bag ban in California reduced the number of plastic bags found on beaches by half.16 Studies have also shown that customers in areas with taxes on single use bags were more likely to use reusable bags.17
There appears to be growing support for reducing the use of other single use disposables. Ireland is considering banning single use coffee cups, with 50% of the population surveyed in support.18 The European Union announced in 2018 that it is implementing a policy for all plastic packaging to be recyclable or reusable by 2030.19 Taiwan will be imposing charges for straws, plastic shopping bags, disposable utensils, and beverage cups by 2025, and will impose a complete ban on single-use plastic items, including straws, cups, and shopping bags, by 2030.20
Economic Advantages for Businesses Businesses in the Bay Area spend between $0.25 and $0.85 per meal on disposable foodware.21 Reducing the use of SUDs can provide significant cost savings, even
14 “Successful Results from Bag Ordinance”, 2014, Alameda County Waste Management authority, http://reusablebagsac.org/news/successful-results-bag-ordinance 15 Mauro Anastasio and James Nix, Plastic Bag Levy in Ireland, Institute European Environmental Policy, 2016. https://ieep.eu/uploads/articles/attachments/7f91cb97-8cb7- 49c39cf0d34062a9192e/IE%20Plastic%20Bag%20Levy%20conference%20draft.pdf?v=63673818840 16 http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-plastic-bag-ban-anniversary-20171118-story.html 17 T. A. Homonoff, Can Small Incentives Have Large Effects? The Impact of Taxes versus Bonuses on Disposable Bag Use National Tax Association Proceedings, Princeton University- http://ntanet.org/wp-content/uploads/proceedings/2012/008-homonoff- can-small-incentives-2012-nta-proceedings.pdf 18 http://www.thejournal.ie/coffee-cups-poll-3642333-Oct2017/ 19 European Commission, EU Plastics Strategy-http://ec.europa.eu/environment/waste/plastic_waste.htm 20 “Taiwan to ban disposable plastic items by 2030,” February 22, 2108- https://phys.org/news/2018-02-taiwan-disposable-plastic- items.html 21 Id.
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 54 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Page 5 of 14 Agenda Item 17. Communications - Ltr to Zero Waste Comm
considering the costs associated with making the transition to reusables. The Rethink Disposable program of the Clean Water Fund, in partnership with STOP WASTE in Alameda County, has conducted a number of case studies showcasing businesses that have voluntarily minimized SUDs and incorporated reusables22. These businesses saw annual net cost savings (after accounting for costs of reusables, dishwashing, etc.) from $1,000 - $22,000 per year.23
In addition, recent surveys completed by the City of Berkeley’s Office of Economic Development found that neighborhood cleanliness, including trash collection, was a major concern of business owners interviewed. Business Improvement Districts (BIDs) and the Clean Cities Program work to keep Berkeley’s business districts clean, but at great expense. The Telegraph Business Improvement District (TBID), for example, reported collecting over 22 tons of street litter in one year.
Reducing SUDs in the City of Berkeley Through the leadership of Berkeley’s Ecology Center, working closely with UpStream, Clean Water Action, the Clean Water Fund, Story of Stuff, Surfrider Foundation, GAIA (Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives), the Green Science Policy Institute, Excellent Packaging, and numerous active residents and volunteers, a proposed Berkeley Single Use Foodware and Litter Reduction Ordinance has been drafted. This visionary Ordinance combines proven strategies for reducing SUDs including promotion of reusable foodware, fees when SUDs are used, and creation of a list of approved, truly compostable or recyclable SUDs for use City-wide.
The Ecology Center and Clean Water Action also undertook an extensive research and public outreach process, including surveys of local food businesses, discussions with business owners and environmental experts, and assessment of a charge-based cup reduction pilot project completed by Telegraph Green and Cafe Strada24. This level of research, outreach and field testing represents study and consultation of an intensity and duration rarely undertaken in conjunction with new proposals in Berkeley, and has resulted in a proposed ordinance incorporating extensive expert, community and real- world data.
The survey, conducted in 2017-2018 by Clean Water Action, the Ecology Center, and other partners, covers 59 Berkeley food businesses (about 10% of affected food businesses) of various sizes and service styles, and includes respondents from all of
22 https://cleanwater.org/publications/participating-business-testimonials 23 Data provided by Clean Water Action’s ReThink Disposable program, March 2018. See attached fact sheet. 24 https://serc.berkeley.edu/paying-the-price-of-disposable-cups-at-caffe-strada/
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 55 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Page 6 of 14 Agenda Item 17. Communications - Ltr to Zero Waste Comm
the City’s commercial districts. Of these businesses, 58% would support a customer charge for cups, and 67% would support a charge for disposable food containers.
These and other findings inform the proposed ordinance, which was written to be both aspirational and achievable. More complex proposals and bans were rejected in favor of a simplified set of recommendations that offer cost savings for restaurants and small businesses, a stream of revenue for the City to implement and enforce the ordinance, and a major step forward in reducing pollution and litter, and in meeting the City’s Zero Waste and Climate Action Goals.
Proposed Ordinance Elements The purpose of the proposed Ordinance is to reduce litter and waste associated with single use food and beverage packaging in the City of Berkeley. The proposal requires that food consumed on-site be served in reusable, durable dishes, cups, and utensils. Foil, wrappers, and tray liners are still allowed, and provision is made for waivers under specific circumstances.
The ordinance also provides that food businesses charge customers for take-out cups, clamshells and other take-out foodware, similar to the charge for paper bags associated with California’s plastic bag ban (SB 270). Charges for disposables will encourage customers to bring their own reusable cups and containers. $0.25 will be charged for disposable cups, and $0.25 for food containers. Food establishments will keep the proceeds from these charges, and the City will collect an “at cost” fee for administration of the program. As with charges for bags, customers using SNAP & WIC will be excluded from paying these fees. The ordinance also provides that single use straws, utensils, and stirrers (which will have to be compostable) be provided only “by request”.
Finally, the policy will require that all disposable foodware be free of certain highly toxic chemicals known to migrate into food and beverages, and be recyclable or compostable in the City’s waste management programs.
The City will be responsible for creating and updating an accessible list of approved foodware so that food retailers can easily identify products that conform to requirements. This will protect public health and the environment from some of the most toxic and persistent chemicals used in food and beverage packaging, and ensure that “compostables” furnished in Berkeley are actually compostable within the City’s program. The City will be responsible for administration and enforcement.
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 56 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Page 7 of 14 Agenda Item 17. Communications - Ltr to Zero Waste Comm
ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY The production, consumption and disposal of single use food and beverage packaging is a major contributor to litter in our streets, plastic in landfills, pollution in waterways and oceans, GHG emissions, and harm to wildlife. This environmental ordinance represent a huge step forward in reducing the use of disposable foodware in Berkeley, fulfilling Berkeley’s Zero Waste and Climate Action Goals, reducing greenhouse gas emissions 80% by 2050, and meeting State trash load level mandates.
CONTACT Councilmember Sophie Hahn, District 5 | (510) 981-7150 | [email protected] Mayor Jesse Arreguin | (510) 981-7100 | [email protected]
ATTACHMENTS 1. Draft Berkeley Single Use Foodware and Litter Reduction Ordinance 2. CaseStudy: Caravaggio Gelateria Italiana 3. Clean Water Action Disposable vs Reusable Cups Fact Sheet
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 57 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Page 8 of 14 Agenda Item 17. Communications - Ltr to Zero Waste Comm
Single Use Foodware and Litter Reduction Ordinance
ORDINANCE AMENDING THE XXXX CITY CODE BY ADOPTING CHAPTER XXXX SECTIONS XXXX TO REDUCE SINGLE USE DISPOSABLE FOODWARE
Findings and Purpose The council finds and declares as follows: [ ]
Section 1. Definitions
A. "Prepared Food" means foods or beverages which are prepared on the vendor’s premises by cooking, chopping, slicing, mixing, freezing, squeezing, or other processing and which require no further preparation to be consumed. "Prepared Food" does not include raw uncooked whole fruits or vegetables which are not chopped, squeezed, or mixed or raw uncooked meat products. B. "Takeout Food" means Prepared Food requiring no further preparation which is purchased to be consumed off a Prepared Food Vendor’s premises. Takeout Food includes Prepared Food delivered by a Prepared Food Vendor or by a third party delivery service. C. “Takeout Meal” means Takeout Food consisting of an entree, or a full size salad, or a breakfast, lunch or dinner item (such as a sandwich, burrito, pizza, soup) served in up to three Disposable Food Containers.
D. "Prepared Food Vendor" means any establishment located within the City of Berkeley, including a Bakery, Cafeteria, Drive In, Food Products Store, Food Service Establishment (Carry Out, Quick Service, Full Service), Drugstore or Theater, as defined in BMC 23F.04, Mobile Food Facility, Temporary Food Facility (CA Health and Safety Code Sections 113831 and 113920), bar and other similar establishment, selling Prepared Food to be consumed on and/or off its premises.
E. "Disposable Foodware" means all bags, sacks, wrappers, paper or foil liners, containers, bowls, plates, trays, cartons, boxes, pizza boxes, cups, utensils, straws, lids and any other food contact items used to hold, serve, eat, or drink Prepared Food, which are designed for single use and in which Prepared Food is placed or packaged on a Prepared Food Vendor’s premises.
F. “Disposable Food Container” is a container designed for single use that holds 16 oz. or more (for containers with lids) or is 62 cubic inches or larger (for boxes and clamshells).
G. “Disposable Cup” is a beverage cup designed for single use to serve beverages, such as water, cold drinks, hot drinks, alcoholic beverages and other drinks.
1 Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 58 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Page 9 of 14 Agenda Item 17. Communications - Ltr to Zero Waste Comm
H. “Reusable Foodware” shall mean all foodware, including plates, bowls, cups, trays, glasses, straws, stirrers, and utensils, that is manufactured of durable materials and that is specifically designed and manufactured to be washed and sanitized and to be used repeatedly over an extended period of time, and is safe for washing and sanitizing according to applicable regulations.
I. “Plastic” means a synthetic material made from fossil fuel based polymers such as polyethylene, polystyrene, polypropylene, and polycarbonate that can be molded or blown into shape while soft and then set into a rigid or slightly elastic form. J. “Fluorinated Chemicals” means perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances or fluorinated chemicals, which for the purposes of food packaging are a class of fluorinated organic chemicals containing at least one fully fluorinated carbon atom.
Section 2. Reusable Foodware for Dining on the Premises (i.e. “Eating-in”) This section applies to Prepared Food served for consumption on the premises of a Prepared Food Vendor.
A. As of [Effective Date], Prepared Food Vendors shall only sell or provide food and beverages for consumption on the premises using Reusable Foodware, except as provided in Section 2(C).
B. Prepared Food Vendors offering Takeout Food shall ask customers whether they will consume their purchased food or beverage on the premises (i.e. “for here”) or off the premises (i.e. “to go”). If the purchased food or beverage is intended for consumption on the premises, the Prepared Food Vendor shall serve such food or beverage in Reusable Foodware.
C. Prepared Food Vendors that do not have on-site or off-site dishwashing capacity to wash, rinse and sanitize Reusable Foodware in compliance with the California Health Code may request a full or partial waiver from the requirements of Section 2(A) if they can demonstrate inability to comply due to space constraints and financial hardship, such as investments and costs that take more than a year to be paid for through savings. Waivers may be granted for up to three years, during which time the Prepared Food Vendor shall make every effort to become complaint. If a waiver is granted, all Disposable Foodware used for eating on the premises must conform to the Disposable Food Packaging Standards in Section 3.
D. As of [Date - 1 year after Effective Date?], new zoning permits and business licenses for Prepared Food Vendors shall only be granted to Prepared Food Vendors that have adequate onsite or offsite dishwashing capacity to comply with section 2(A).
2 Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 59 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Page 10 of 14 Agenda Item 17. Communications - Ltr to Zero Waste Comm
E. Disposable food wrappers, foil sheets, napkins and paper or foil basket and tray liners shall be allowed for dining on the premises so long as they meet the Disposable Food Packaging Standards in Section 3.
Section 3. Disposable Foodware Standards This section provides standards for the types of Disposable Foodware that may be used for Takeout Food, or for Prepared Food eaten on the premises of a Prepared Food Vendor with a valid waiver, as provided for in Section 2(C).
A. The City shall maintain a list of approved Disposable Foodware sources and types that shall be available at [physical location] and on the City’s website. The City shall update annually the list of approved Disposable Foodware types and sources. No other Disposable Foodware may be used by any Prepared Food Vendor.
B. Disposable Foodware approved by the City shall meet the following standards: a. Beginning [Date], all Disposable Foodware used to serve or package Prepared Foods that are prepared in the City of Berkeley: i. Must be accepted by City of Berkeley composting or recycling municipal collection programs, and ii. If compostable, must be certified compostable by the Biodegradable Product Institute or another independent third party certifying organization or agency recognized by the City. b. Beginning [Date - one year from Effective Date], compostable Disposable Foodware containing paper or other natural fiber material shall be free of all intentionally added Fluorinated Chemicals as certified by the Biodegradable Product Institute or other third party certifying organization or agency recognized by the City. c. The City may adopt regulations that require Disposable Foodware to have minimum post-consumer recycled content, and any other Disposable Foodware specifications that support the goals of this Ordinance.
Section 4. Disposable Foodware Charges Customers shall be charged for Disposable Foodware used for dining off the premises.
A. Beginning [Effective Date] , Prepared Food Vendors selling Takeout Food shall charge a customer twenty five cents ($0.25) for every Disposable Cup provided. B. Beginning [Effective Date], Prepared Food Vendors selling Takeout Food shall charge a customer twenty five cents ($0.25) per Disposable Food Container and no more than twenty-five-cents ($0.25) per Takeout Meal. C. Income from charges for Disposable Cups and Disposable Food Containers shall be retained by the Prepared Food Vendor. D. The charges set forth in A and B apply to all Takeout Food and Takeout Meals prepared and sold in the City of Berkeley and served in Disposable Food Containers and Disposable Cups, except for Prepared Food Vendors providing Disposable Food
3 Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 60 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Page 11 of 14 Agenda Item 17. Communications - Ltr to Zero Waste Comm
Containers and Disposable Cups for carry-out of leftovers from Prepared Food eaten on the premises (i.e. “doggie bags”). E. All customers demonstrating, at the point of sale, a payment card or voucher issued by the California Special Supplemental Food Program for Women, Infants, and Children pursuant to Article 2 (commencing with Section 123275) of Chapter 1 of Part 2 of Division 106 of the California Health and Safety Code, or an electronic benefit transfer card issued pursuant to Section 10072 of the California Welfare and Institutions Code, shall be exempt from the charges specified in this Section. F. Charges for Disposable Cups, Disposable Food Containers and Takeout Meals shall be identified separately on any receipt provided to the customer. G. Disposable straws, stirrers, cup spill plugs, napkins, condiment packets, utensils and other similar Disposable Foodware accompanying Disposable Cups, Disposable Food Containers and Takeout Meals shall be provided free of charge, and only upon request by the customer or at self-serve stations.
Section 5. Signage Requirements for Takeout Food Vendors
A. The City shall provide text explaining Disposable Foodware Charges and specifications for signage that Takeout Food Vendors must post in plain view of customers at the point of sale. B. Takeout Food Vendors shall also include Disposable Foodware Charges on their printed and electronically available menus. C. Takeout Food Vendors shall inform customers of Disposable Foodware Charges for orders taken by telephone. D. Third-party delivery services shall include on their electronic platforms text pursuant to subsection A explaining Disposable Foodware Charges and include Disposable Foodware Charges on their menus and billing interfaces.
Section 6. Duties, Responsibilities and Authority of the City of Berkeley
A. The City Manager is hereby charged with the enforcement of this Chapter, except as otherwise provided herein, and shall prescribe, adopt, and enforce rules and regulations relating to the administration and enforcement of this Chapter. B. The Master Fee Schedule shall be amended to include a fee to cover City expenses of inspection and enforcement of this ordinance. C. It shall be the duty of the City Manager to collect and receive all fees imposed by this Section, and to keep an accurate record thereof. D. Within three years of the effective date of this Ordinance, the City shall evaluate and report to City Council on the effectiveness of this ordinance.
4 Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 61 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Page 12 of 14 Agenda Item 17. Communications - Ltr to Zero Waste Comm CASE STUDY: T Caravaggio Gelateria Italiana STOP WASTE BEFORE IT STARTS
BUSINESS PROFILE Packaging Practices prior to Rethink Disposable: ccAll gelato and beverages served in disposable packaging Name: Caravaggio Gelateria ccDisposable tasting spoons used for samples Italiana Business Type: Gelato Shop ccIndividually wrapped sugar packets used for coffee service Location: Berkeley, CA Emiliano, the owner of Caravaggio, is from Italy On-site dining: 22 seats Take-out: Yes and strove to replicate many practices in his Ware washing: Dishwasher shop that one can find in his home country — purchased during everything except for the disposable products implementation he was using, like the 91,250 disposable spoons Employees: 4 used every year for tastings and the 24,333 individually wrapped sugar Caravaggio Gelateria is an packets to cater to the “to-go” coffee service culture. The owner authentic Italian Gelateria believes that the taste of the handmade gelato is much improved by located in North Berkeley that eating it with a real spoon from a real glass bowl. makes all of their Gelatos in house and also serves Italian Recommendations Implemented: Panini sandwiches, coffee ccReusable water cups, gelato bowls and spoons for on-site dining and espresso. About 50% of their orders are dine-in. They ccReusable spoons utilized for gelato tastings employ four staff and do ccNapkin dispensers and bulk sugar for coffee service anywhere between 100 and cc 200 transactions per day. Purchased and installed a dishwasher to save water and reduce labor costs
Implementing ReThink Disposable recommendations helped significantly reduce waste and achieved Emiliano’s goal to elevate the experience of eating handmade gelato and the ambiance in the shop. Emiliano purchased an efficient ware washing machine that provided energy and water savings, reduced labor time, and created a sanitary work environment. The Four efficient napkin dispensers new dishwasher and set-up cost replaced the old dispensers. $2,100, which made the full set- up cost to implement the program $2,411. The high up-front cost of the dishwasher made the payback period for each item longer, yet there is Reusable spoons for tastings and on-site dining replaced 75% of still a significant annual cost savings of $2,301 after the payback period disposable spoons that were used. was met to cover and exceed the set-up costs in the future.
Emiliano Cecchetti, owner: “Eating our gelato from a paper cup is like drinking champagne from a paper cup! The idea to change to reusables started with a ReThink Disposable visit.”
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 62 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Page 13 of 14 Results: Agenda Item 17. Communications - Ltr to Zero Waste Comm
Recommendation Product % Disposable Payback Payback Annual Annual Replaced or Reduction Period Period Savings Waste Minimized (including (excluding (after payback Reduction dishwasher) dishwasher) period)
Implement a reusable 6 oz Gelato 67% 7.6 months 3 months $608 73 lbs. gelato cup for dine-in paper cup customers
Implement a reusable Plastic tasting 75% 4.1 months 21 days $821 137 lbs. spoon for tasting and for spoons dine-in customers
Implement an efficient Napkins 50% 2.7 months $183 146 lbs. napkin dispenser
Implement a bulk sugar Sugar packets 75% 12 days $365 218 lbs. dispenser
Replace disposable water 7 oz Water 100% 9.2 months 18 days $324 91 lbs. cups with a reusable glass cups
TOTAL $2,301 665 lbs. THE BOTTOM LINE
151,577 disposable items reduced per year $2,301 annual savings after payback period 655 pounds of annual waste reduction Improved presentation Increased customer satisfaction No additional labor required
Disposable spoons and paper cups were replaced by metal spoons and glass bowls for on-site dining.
ReThink Disposable is a Clean Water Fund program conducted in partnership with local businesses and government agencies. Generous support for the program is provided by a changing list of public and private funders. To learn more about the program, its partners, and funders, visit: www.rethinkdisposable.org.
T Tel. 415.369.9174 [email protected] STOP WASTE BEFORE IT STARTS www.rethinkdisposable.org
Parks and Waterfront © Copyright by Clean WaterRegular Action and Meeting Clean Water Fund. All rights reserved. Page 63 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018 Page 14 of 14 Agenda Item 17. Communications - Ltr to Zero Waste Comm
Placed end to end these could circle 108,000,000,000 the equator almost disposable cups are used by Americans each year 300 times!
THE COMBINED GENERATES WEIGHT OF 108 EVERYONE IN BILLION = 3.5 = HOUSTON, BILLION LBS TEXAS! OF WASTE
Annually the American disposable cup habit uses:
CO2
22 Billion Gallons 26 billion pounds of CO2 20+ Million Trees! enough to fill more than 33,000 equal to the emissions from Olympic swimming pools! 2.5 million cars annually!
MOST CUPS AREN’T RECYCLED: almost all disposable cups are made of non-recyclable materials like plastic-coated paper or foam food ware
By replacing one disposable cup LET’S COMPARE every day for one year you prevent: What happens if you replace one disposable CO2 87.6 lbs cup a day with a reusable mug for one year? greenhouse gas emissions 76 gallons water usage 126 trees vs. from being chopped down 12 lbs of solid waste $ $ and Save 36 *assumes 10¢ discount per use
ReThink Disposable is a project of Clean Water Action and Clean Water Fund in coordination with City of Cupertino Department of Public Works, City of Oakland Department of Public Works, City of Sunnyvale Environmental Services Department, County of San Mateo Department of Public Works, San Francisco Department of the Environment, San Jose Department of Environmental Services, South San Francisco Department of SUPPORTED BY
Public Works, and StopWaste. Support for ReThink Disposable has been provided by the Altamont Education Advisory Board, Klean Kanteen, WHALE TAIL the LIsa and Douglas Goldman Fund, the Santa Clara Valley Water District, STOP WASTE, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. PROGRAMS
CALIFORNIA COSTAL COMMISSION http://www.internationalpaper.com/documents/EN/Foodservice/ecotainer_FAQ_Brochu.pdf www.rethinkdisposable.org http://www.epa.gov/region9/psa/psa-usecups.html http://www.thebetacup.com/about/
Parks and Waterfront Regular Meeting Page 64 of 64 Commission October 10, 2018