DEIR COMMENTS, part 2 Date Submitted FIRST NAME LAST NAME ORGANIZATION 1/31/2017 Tim Johnston 1/31/2017 signatures various 2/1/2017 Lena Bilik 2/1/2017 Marie Cartier 2/1/2017 Olympia Beltran 2/1/2017 Roslyn Braun 2/1/2017 Alberto Saldamando 2/1/2017 Chani Bockwinkel 2/1/2017 Denny Abrams Abrams/Millikan 2/1/2017 Geraldine Slevin 2/1/2017 Julie Pittman 2/1/2017 Laura Redmond 2/1/2017 Lisa Tracy 2/1/2017 Margot Treisner CCRPA California Cultural Resource Preservation 2/1/2017 Patricia Martz Alliance, Inc. 2/1/2017 Sarah Rose Haughn 2/1/2017 Sydney Lea 2/2/2017 Cedar Ranney 2/2/2017 Rev. Deborah Lee 2/2/2017 Jacquelyn Marie 2/2/2017 Kim DeOcampo 2/2/2017 Michael Glassow UC Santa Barbara Professor 2/2/2017 Patricia Long 2/2/2017 Rayna Matthews 2/2/2017 Suzan Goodman UCSF, Associate Clinical Professor 2/2/2017 Stephen Most 2/2/2017 Yael Schonzeit 2/2/2017 Abby Krumbein 2/2/2017 Elsa Asher 2/2/2017 Deborah Pulido 2/2/2017 Renna Khuner-Haber West Berkeley Shellmound - Ohlone'Lisjan 2/2/2017 settlement 2/3/2017 Annie Danis 2/3/2017 Alessandro Latini 2/3/2017 Doroty Klein 2/3/2017 Diane Solomon 2/3/2017 Hallie Wells 2/3/2017 James Scott Lyons 2/3/2017 Julia Sizek 2/3/2017 Jo Anne Yada 2/3/2017 Maria Dominguez 2/3/2017 Mary Passey 2/3/2017 Max Ventura 2/3/2017 Penny Lee Brogden 3/13/2017 signatures various 2/4/2017 J. Miakoda Taylor
Index Page 1 of 2 DEIR COMMENTS, part 2 Date Submitted FIRST NAME LAST NAME ORGANIZATION 2/4/2017 Kaily Heitz 2/4/2017 Drew Fenton 2/4/2017 Suzanne Yada 2/5/2017 John S. English 2/5/2017 Pennie Opal Plant 2/5/2017 Stephanie Manning 2/6/2017 Lisa Wymore UCB 2/6/2017 Arthur Jacobs 2/6/2017 Holly Calica 2/6/2017 Louise Dunlap, PhD 2/6/2017 Rhonda Robles 2/6/2017 Shawna Sanchagrin 2/6/2017 Sylvie Rousseau 2/6/2017 Lis Addison 2/6/2017 Misa Joo 2/7/2017 Ash Wynette 2/7/2017 Ashley Kelly 2/7/2017 Ashley Malyszka 2/7/2017 Alison Mertz 2/7/2017 Andres Rosario 2/7/2017 Bruce Campbell 2/7/2017 Brian Cheung 2/7/2017 Brendan C. 2/7/2017 Bruce Leininger 2/7/2017 Britney Ann Makena Silva 2/7/2017 Daniel Dumovich 2/7/2017 Dvora Gordon 2/7/2017 Daisy Meyer 2/7/2017 Deborah Pulido 2/7/2017 Elizabeth Wilmerding 2/7/2017 Heather Pugh 2/7/2017 Justine Blanchet 2/7/2017 Jessica Burleigh 2/7/2017 Jessica Chitwood 2/7/2017 signature 2/7/2017 Jenna Hackman 2/7/2017 Joyce Lee 2/7/2017 Jessica Silverstein 2/7/2017 Kylin Navarro 2/7/2017 Liz Collentine-Cole
Index Page 2 of 2
Allen, Shannon
From: Lena Bilik
Attn: Shannon Allen
City of Berkeley Planning Dept.
1947 Center Street, 2nd Floor
Berkeley, CA 94704 February 1, 2017
Re: Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report on proposed 1900 4th Street Project
Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners:
I am writing to express my deep concerns about the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Preservation Commission in 2000, noting the site is “most highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial ground.” The site was also listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, and determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The original West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site completely encompassed the proposed 1900 Fourth Street Project and blocks beyond. It is known to be the oldest bayside settlement and one of the largest shellmounds in the San Francisco Bay Area—more than 5,000 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone Peoples today—a fact not acknowledged in the DEIR.
The content of the DEIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by widespread community opposition and concern voiced at the March 10, 2016, December 8, 2016 and January 12, 2017 Zoning Adjustment Board meetings and the December 1, 2016, and January 5, 2017 Landmark Preservation Commission meetings. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to create the archaeological report and there has not been adequate peer review of the limited data in the DEIR. The archaeological analysis is inadequate and misleading. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered many prehistoric human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address human remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology and conclusions of the 1900 Fourth Street Draft EIR. The likely disturbance of human remains is highly significant as defined by CEQA and cannot be mitigated. The DEIR does not address the issue of Richard Schwartz’s recording of over 400 burials in the vicinity of 1900 Fourth St. and fails to provide any context of the lot within the larger site, ALA-307. The DEIR attempts to isolate and not analyze 1900 Fourth St. within the context of a larger site of cultural significance.
Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the DEIR’s preparation. The primary consultant has conflicts of interest, and does not represent the all of the Ohlone people indigenous to the Bay Area. Another Ohlone California Tribal group indigenous to Berkeley area and community has formally and repeatedly requested tribal consultation as required by CEQA. The City to date has not consulted with this group for purposes of preparing the DEIR, in violation of CEQA. The consultation that has occurred to date appears to be nothing more than a token gesture that fails to protect this important Ohlone site (the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site) and has resulted in payment of funds to an individual as mitigation for the destruction of this irreplaceable sacred place. The Ohlone comprise more than a dozen tribes and languages yet the DEIR consults only one individual. The DEIR also fails to assess the importance of this site as a “tribal cultural resource” separate from the category of “cultural resources – archaeological.” AB 52 established a new category of resources under the California Environmental Quality Act, “tribal cultural resources,” which considers the tribal cultural values in addition to the scientific and archaeological values when determining impacts and mitigation. This DEIR, rather than fully assessing the impacts to tribal cultural resources under a new category, merely incorporates a brief discussion under the cultural resources archaeological section that states the destruction of the site will be mitigated through: 1) payment to an individual of $75,000 to improve a cemetery located outside the bounds of the shellmound and outside of the city boundaries, and 2) that educational panels will be placed at or near the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site after further consultation with the Ohlone people, without identifying who will be consulted for this mitigation measure. Neither the discussion nor the proposed mitigation complies with CEQA requirements to consult with impacted Tribes and to include a new and separate category addressing “tribal cultural resources.”
Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley, entitled “Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People” states in part: “BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site.” Please honor this promise. Honoring this promise requires consultation will additional Ohlone people who recognize this site as sacred, as a tribal cultural property and it requires consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region. To date, Berkeley has not honored this promise and has failed to seek the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous people of the region—and has failed to respect the indigenous peoples’ opposition to the proposed project.
On page 67, the DEIR states, “Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous peoples of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear whether or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. Given that 1900 Fourth Street proposal includes 155-apartments, and given that there are numerous Tribal objections to the development, it seems clear that the step of meaningful Tribal consultation before amending the General Plan was not done. The Project also requires several discretionary approvals by the City for variances to the current general plan and zoning ordinances. These approvals would require consultation under both AB 52 and SB 18.
At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound and Ohlone village site is a series of murals and a small plaque in the parking lot under the nearby freeway. Certainly, the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone peoples to develop a major memorial and educational site in the form of a culturally-appropriate, green open space park at 1900 Fourth Street. The DEIR fails to analyze and offer meaningful alternatives. I strongly support the development of such a memorial and educational site in lieu of the proposed development as the preferred alternative.
In addition to the unavoidable adverse impacts to this critical tribal resource the DEIR includes other fatal flaws that require the City of Berkeley to either disapprove the Project or at a minimum require a supplemental EIR before making any determinations on the Project. The Project will not fulfill the purposes set forth in the Project proposal—in fact the Project will actually exacerbate issues it claims to resolve. The DEIR does not adequately address traffic impacts in that it fails to include all approved and ongoing projects in the area. The failure to address these other projects means that the cumulative impacts analysis is fatally flawed. The DEIR fails to account for safety issues that will result from additional traffic in the area and the railroad crossing. The DEIR does not fully address potential air quality impacts nor does it adequately discuss studies regarding increased asthma and other respiratory problems for people living near freeways and industrial areas. The DEIR does not sufficiently address the potential for release of hazardous chemicals through ground disturbance. The DEIR does NOT include a sufficient discussion of potential impacts to water resources on site that could result from development on the site, nor does the document include an adequate alternatives analysis. It would be irresponsible for the City of Berkeley to consider approving this project without complete and accurate information regarding any and all impacts that may affect the health and safety of the community. This Project has the potential to increase already significant traffic congestion, harm the health of residents, and destroy irreplaceable cultural and historic sites that the City of Berkeley has pledged to protect.
This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of more than 5,000 years of history and a living culture. Reject the DEIR and embrace the No Plan / Create a Berkeley Gateway / Memorial Site Alternative!
Sincerely,
Lena Bilik
Community Member
)HOL[&DULQD
)URP 0DULH&DUWLHU PDULHHSFDUWLHU#JPDLOFRP! 6HQW :HGQHVGD\)HEUXDU\ $0 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW &RPPHQWVRQ )RXUWK6WUHHW
Hello,
I write as a concerned to citizen to urge you to preserve Ohlone land instead of destroying it. It is essential for generations to come of all backgrounds to understand the history of this land and the people who come from it. Preserving Native American history and heritage is a more urgent issue now than ever.
Thank you, Marie Cartier
-DFNVRQ&DPLOOH
)URP 2O\PSLD%HOWUDQ WHPLTXLDQL#JPDLOFRP! 6HQW :HGQHVGD\)HEUXDU\ 30 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW 2KORQH6DFUHG6LWH
Attn: Shannon Allen City of Berkeley Planning Dept. 1947 Center Street, 2nd Floor Berkeley, CA 94704 February 1, 2017
Re: Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report on proposed 1900 4th Street Project
Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners:
I am writing to express my deep concerns about the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Preservation Commission in 2000, noting the site is “most highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial ground.” The site was also listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, and determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The original West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site completely encompassed the proposed 1900 Fourth Street Project and blocks beyond. It is known to be the oldest bayside settlement and one of the largest shellmounds in the San Francisco Bay Area—more than 5,000 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone Peoples today—a fact not acknowledged in the DEIR.
The content of the DEIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by widespread community opposition and concern voiced at the March 10, 2016, December 8, 2016 and January 12, 2017 Zoning Adjustment Board meetings and the December 1, 2016,and January 5, 2017 Landmark Preservation Commissionmeetings. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to create the archaeological report and there has not been adequate peer review of the limited data in the DEIR. The archaeological analysis is inadequate and misleading. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered many prehistoric human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address human remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacentGrocery Outlet site that is highly relevant to the landmarkedShellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology and conclusions of the 1900 Fourth Street Draft EIR. The likely disturbance of human remains is highly significant as defined by CEQA and cannot be mitigated. The DEIR does not address the issue of Richard Schwartz’s recording of over 400 burials in the vicinity of 1900 Fourth St. and fails to provide any context of the lot within the larger site, ALA-307. The DEIR attempts to isolate and not analyze 1900 Fourth St. within the context of a larger site of cultural significance.
Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the DEIR’s preparation. The primary consultant has conflicts of interest, and does not represent the all of the Ohlone people indigenous to the Bay Area. Another Ohlone California Tribal group indigenous to Berkeley area and community has formally and repeatedly requested tribal consultation as required by CEQA. The City to date has not consulted with this group for purposes of preparing the DEIR, in violation of CEQA. The consultation that has occurred to date appears to be nothing more than a token gesture that fails to protect this important Ohlone site (the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site) and has resulted in payment of funds to an individual as mitigation for the destruction of this irreplaceable sacred place. The Ohlone comprise more than a dozen tribes and languages yet the DEIR consults only one individual. The DEIR also fails to assess the importance of this site as a “tribal cultural resource” separate from the category of “cultural resources – archaeological.” AB 52 established a new category of resources under the California Environmental Quality Act, “tribal cultural resources,” which considers the tribal cultural values in addition to the scientific and archaeological values when determining impacts and mitigation. This DEIR, rather than fully assessing the impacts to tribal cultural resources under a new category, merely incorporates a brief discussion under the cultural resources archaeological section that states the destruction of the site will be mitigated through: 1) payment to an individual of $75,000 to improve a cemetery located outside the bounds of the shellmound and outside of the city boundaries, and 2) that educational panels will be placed at or near the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site after further consultation with the Ohlone people, without identifying who will be consulted for this mitigation measure. Neither the discussion nor the proposed mitigation complies with CEQA requirements to consult with impacted Tribes and to include a new and separate category addressing “tribal cultural resources.”
Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley, entitled“Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People” states inpart: “BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site.”Please honor this promise. Honoring this promise requires consultation will additional Ohlone people who recognize this site as sacred, as a tribal cultural property and it requires consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region. To date, Berkeley has not honored this promise and has failed to seek the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous people of the region—and has failed to respect the indigenous peoples’ opposition to the proposed project.
On page 67, the DEIR states, “Consultation with the OhloneIndian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous peoples of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear whether or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. Given that 1900 Fourth
Street proposal includes155-apartments, and given that there are numerous Tribal objections to the development, it seems clear that the step of meaningful Tribal consultation before amending the General Plan was not done. The Project also requires several discretionary approvals by the City for variances to the current general plan and zoning ordinances. These approvals would require consultation under both AB 52 and SB 18.
At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound and Ohlone village site is a series of murals and a small plaque in the parking lot under the nearby freeway. Certainly, the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone peoples to develop a major memorial and educational site in the form of a culturally-appropriate, green open space park at 1900 Fourth Street. The DEIR fails to analyze and offer meaningful alternatives. I strongly support the development of such a memorial and educational site in lieu of the proposed development as the preferred alternative.
In addition to the unavoidable adverse impacts to this critical tribal resource the DEIR includes other fatal flaws that require the City of Berkeley to either disapprove the Project or at a minimum require a supplemental EIR before making any determinations on the Project. The Project will not fulfill the purposes set forth in the Project proposal—in fact the Project will actually exacerbate issues it claims to resolve. The DEIR does not adequately address traffic impacts in that it fails to include all approved and ongoing projects in the area. The failure to address these other projects means that the cumulative impacts analysis is fatally flawed. The DEIR fails to account for safety issues that will result from additional traffic in the area and the railroad crossing. The DEIR does not fully address potential air quality impacts nor does it adequately discuss studies regarding increased asthma and other respiratory problems for people living near freeways and industrial areas. The DEIR does not sufficiently address the potential for release of hazardous chemicals through ground disturbance. The DEIR does not include a sufficient discussion of potential impacts to water resources on site that could result from development on the site, nor does the document include an adequate alternatives analysis. It would be irresponsible for the City of Berkeley to consider approving this project without complete and accurate information regarding any and all impacts that may affect the health and safety of the community. This Project has the potential to increase already significant traffic congestion, harm the health of residents, and destroy irreplaceable cultural and historic sites that the City of Berkeley has pledged to protect.
This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of more than 5,000 years of historyand a living culture. Reject the DEIR and embrace the No Plan / Create a Berkeley Gateway / Memorial Site Alternative!
Sincerely,
-Olympia Temiquiani Andrade Beltrán
Allen, Shannon
From: Roslyn Braun
Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners,
I am writing to express my deep concerns about the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Preservation Commission in 2000, noting the site is “most highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial ground.” The site was also listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, and determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The original West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site completely encompassed the proposed 1900 Fourth Street Project and blocks beyond. It is known to be the oldest bayside settlement and one of the largest shellmounds in the San Francisco Bay Area—more than 5,000 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone Peoples today—a fact not acknowledged in the DEIR.
The content of the DEIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by widespread community opposition and concern voiced at the March 10, 2016, December 8, 2016 and January 12, 2017 Zoning Adjustment Board meetings and the December 1, 2016, and January 5, 2017 Landmark Preservation Commission meetings. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to create the archaeological report and there has not been adequate peer review of the limited data in the DEIR. The archaeological analysis is inadequate and misleading. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered many prehistoric human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address human remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology and conclusions of the 1900 Fourth Street Draft EIR. The likely disturbance of human remains is highly significant as defined by CEQA and cannot be mitigated. The DEIR does not address the issue of Richard Schwartz’s recording of over 400 burials in the vicinity of 1900 Fourth St. and fails to provide any context of the lot within the larger site, ALA-307. The DEIR attempts to isolate and not analyze 1900 Fourth St. within the context of a larger site of cultural significance.
Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the DEIR’s preparation. The primary consultant has conflicts of interest, and does not represent the all of the Ohlone people indigenous to the Bay Area. Another Ohlone California Tribal group indigenous to Berkeley area and community has formally and repeatedly requested tribal consultation as required by CEQA. The City to date has not consulted with this group for purposes of preparing the DEIR, in violation of CEQA. The consultation that has occurred to date appears to be nothing more than a token gesture that fails to protect this important Ohlone site (the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site) and has resulted in payment of funds to an individual as mitigation for the destruction of this irreplaceable sacred place. The Ohlone comprise more than a dozen tribes and languages yet the DEIR consults only one individual. The DEIR also fails to assess the importance of this site as a “tribal cultural resource” separate from the category of “cultural resources – archaeological.” AB 52 established a new category of resources under the California Environmental Quality Act, “tribal cultural
resources,” which considers the tribal cultural values in addition to the scientific and archaeological values when determining impacts and mitigation. This DEIR, rather than fully assessing the impacts to tribal cultural resources under a new category, merely incorporates a brief discussion under the cultural resources archaeological section that states the destruction of the site will be mitigated through: 1) payment to an individual of $75,000 to improve a cemetery located outside the bounds of the shellmound and outside of the city boundaries, and 2) that educational panels will be placed at or near the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site after further consultation with the Ohlone people, without identifying who will be consulted for this mitigation measure. Neither the discussion nor the proposed mitigation complies with CEQA requirements to consult with impacted Tribes and to include a new and separate category addressing “tribal cultural resources.”
Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley, entitled “Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People” states in part: “BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site.” Please honor this promise. Honoring this promise requires consultation will additional Ohlone people who recognize this site as sacred, as a tribal cultural property and it requires consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region. To date, Berkeley has not honored this promise and has failed to seek the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous people of the region—and has failed to respect the indigenous peoples’ opposition to the proposed project.
On page 67, the DEIR states, “Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous peoples of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear whether or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. Given that 1900 Fourth Street proposal includes 155-apartments, and given that there are numerous Tribal objections to the development, it seems clear that the step of meaningful Tribal consultation before amending the General Plan was not done. The Project also requires several discretionary approvals by the City for variances to the current general plan and zoning ordinances. These approvals would require consultation under both AB 52 and SB 18.
At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound and Ohlone village site is a series of murals and a small plaque in the parking lot under the nearby freeway. Certainly, the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone peoples to develop a major memorial and educational site in the form of a culturally-appropriate, green open space park at 1900 Fourth Street. The DEIR fails to analyze and offer meaningful alternatives. I strongly support the development of such a memorial and educational site in lieu of the proposed development as the preferred alternative.
In addition to the unavoidable adverse impacts to this critical tribal resource the DEIR includes other fatal flaws that require the City of Berkeley to either disapprove the Project or at a minimum require a supplemental EIR before making any determinations on the Project. The Project will not fulfill the purposes set forth in the Project proposal—in fact the Project will actually exacerbate issues it claims to resolve. The DEIR does not adequately address traffic impacts in that it fails to include all approved and ongoing projects in the area. The failure to address these other projects means that the cumulative impacts analysis is fatally flawed. The DEIR fails to account for safety issues that will result from additional traffic in the area and the railroad crossing. The DEIR does not fully address potential air quality impacts nor does it adequately discuss studies regarding increased asthma and other respiratory problems for people living near freeways and industrial areas. The DEIR does not sufficiently address the potential for release of hazardous chemicals through ground disturbance. The DEIR does NOT include a sufficient discussion of potential impacts to water resources on site that could result from development on the site, nor does the document include an adequate alternatives analysis. It would be irresponsible for the City of Berkeley to consider approving this project without complete and accurate information regarding any and all impacts that may affect the health and safety of the community. This Project has the potential to increase already significant traffic congestion, harm the health of residents, and destroy irreplaceable cultural and historic sites that the City of Berkeley has pledged to protect.
This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of more than 5,000 years of history and a living culture. Reject the DEIR and embrace the No Plan / Create a Berkeley Gateway / Memorial Site Alternative!
Sincerely,
Roslyn Braun
(Mountain View, CA, 94043)
-DFNVRQ&DPLOOH
)URP VDOGDPDQGR VDOGDPDQGR#VEFJOREDOQHW! 6HQW :HGQHVGD\)HEUXDU\ 30 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ &F %HUNHOH\0D\RU V2IILFH LHQ#LJFRUJ 6XEMHFW 3URSRVHG WK6WUHHW3URMHFW $WWDFKPHQWV %HUNHOH\6KHOOPRXQGV'HYHORSPHQW&RPPHQWVGRF
ƚƚŶ͗^ŚĂŶŶŽŶůůĞŶ ŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJWůĂŶŶŝŶŐĞƉƚ͘ ϭϵϰϳĞŶƚĞƌ^ƚƌĞĞƚ͕ϮŶĚ&ůŽŽƌ ĞƌŬĞůĞLJ͕ϵϰϳϬϰ sŝĂĞŵĂŝů͗^ŚůůĞŶΛĐŝƚLJŽĨďĞƌŬĞůĞLJ͘ŝŶĨŽ tĞĚŶĞƐĚĂLJ͕&ĞďƌƵĂƌLJϬϭ͕ϮϬϭϳ Z ͗ŽŵŵĞŶƚƐŽŶƚŚĞƌĂĨƚ ŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂů/ŵƉĂĐƚZĞƉŽƌƚŽŶƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚϭϵϬϬϰƚŚ^ƚƌĞĞƚWƌŽũĞĐƚ
ĞĂƌD͘ůůĞŶ͕
WůĞĂƐĞƌĞĐĞŝǀĞŵLJƌĞƐƉĞĐƚĨƵůŐƌĞĞƚŝŶŐƐ
/ĂŵĂŶŝŶƚĞƌŶĂƚŝŽŶĂůŚƵŵĂŶƌŝŐŚƚƐůĂǁLJĞƌ͕ǁŽƌŬŝŶŐŽƵƚŽĨ^ĂŶ&ƌĂŶĐŝƐĐŽĨŽƌƐĞǀĞƌĂůĚĞĐĂĚĞƐ͘/ŚĂǀĞďĞĞŶǁŽƌŬŝŶŐǁŝƚŚ /ŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐWĞŽƉůĞƐŶŽǁĨŽƌŽǀĞƌϮϱLJĞĂƌƐ͕ĂŶĚĂŵƉƌĞƐĞŶƚůLJǁŽƌŬŝŶŐǁŝƚŚƚŚĞ/ŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐ ŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂůEĞƚǁŽƌŬ;/ EͿ͕ ĂŶŽƚĨŽƌƉƌŽĨŝƚEŽŶͲ'ŽǀĞƌŶŵĞŶƚĂůKƌŐĂŶŝnjĂƚŝŽŶŚĞĂĚƋƵĂƌƚĞƌĞĚŝŶĞŵŝĚũŝ͕DŝŶŶĞƐŽƚĂ͘/ǁƌŝƚĞƚŚĞƐĞĐŽŵŵĞŶƚƐŽŶŵLJ ƉĞƌƐŽŶĂůďĞŚĂůĨĂƐǁĞůůĂƐŽŶďĞŚĂůĨŽĨ/ E͘
^ĞǀĞƌĂůLJĞĂƌƐĂŐŽƚŚĞ'ƌĞĂƚ^ƚĂƚĞŽĨĂůŝĨŽƌŶŝĂĐĞůĞďƌĂƚĞĚƚŚĞϭϱϬƚŚĂŶŶŝǀĞƌƐĂƌLJŽĨƚŚĞ'ŽůĚZƵƐŚ͘DĂŶLJŽĨƵƐƉƌŽƚĞƐƚĞĚ ĂƐƚŚĞŐŽůĚƌƵƐŚůĞĚƚŽƚŚĞƐƚĂƚĞƐƉŽŶƐŽƌĞĚŐĞŶŽĐŝĚĞŽĨEĂƚŝǀĞĂůŝĨŽƌŶŝĂŶƐ͘zŽƵŵĂLJďĞĂǁĂƌĞƚŚĂƚĂŵŽŶŐŽƚŚĞƌůĂǁƐ ĂŶĚƉƌĂĐƚŝĐĞƐƉƌŽŵŽƚĞĚďLJƚŚĞ^ƚĂƚĞĂƚƚŚĞƚŝŵĞ͕ǁĞƌĞƚǁŽďŽŶĚŝƐƐƵĞƐ͕ĞĂĐŚŽĨĂŵŝůůŝŽŶĚŽůůĂƌƐƚŚĂƚƉĂŝĚΨϱĚŽůůĂƌƐĨŽƌ ƚŚĞŚĞĂĚŽĨĂŶ/ŶĚŝĂŶŵĂŶ͕ΨϮ͘ϱϬĨŽƌƚŚĞŚĞĂĚŽĨĂŶ/ŶĚŝĂŶǁŽŵĂŶ͕ĂŶĚϱϬĐĞŶƚƐĨŽƌƚŚĞŚĞĂĚŽĨĂŶ/ŶĚŝĂŶĐŚŝůĚ͘/ŶŽƚĞ ƚŚĂƚEŽƌƚŚĞƌŶĂůŝĨŽƌŶŝĂ͛ƐƌŝǀĞƌƐĂŶĚƐƚƌĞĂŵƐǁĞƌĞƉŽŝƐŽŶĞĚďLJŵĞƌĐƵƌLJĨƌŽŵƚŚĞŵŝŶŝŶŐŽĨŐŽůĚ͘dŚĞƌƵŶŽĨĨĐŽŶƚŝŶƵĞƐƚŽ ƉŽůůƵƚĞ^ĂŶ&ƌĂŶĐŝƐĐŽĂLJƚŽƚŚŝƐĚĂLJ͘EŽĚŽƵďƚLJŽƵŚĂǀĞƐĞĞŶƚŚĞƐŝŐŶƐĂƚƚŚĞƉŝĞƌ͘
dŚĞƌĞĂƌĞŵĂŶLJŐŽŽĚĂŶĚƐƵĨĨŝĐŝĞŶƚƌĞĂƐŽŶƐƚŽƐƚŽƉƚŚĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚŽĨƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚϭϵϬϬϰƚŚ^ƚƌĞĞƚƉƌŽũĞĐƚ͘ƐŚĂƐ ďĞĞŶƉŽŝŶƚĞĚŽƵƚƚŽƚŚĞWůĂŶŶŝŶŐĞƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚ͕
͞dŚĞƌĞŝƐƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶƚĐŽŶƚƌŽǀĞƌƐLJƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐƚŚĞŵĞƚŚŽĚŽůŽŐLJƵƐĞĚƚŽĐƌĞĂƚĞƚŚĞĂƌĐŚĂĞŽůŽŐŝĐĂůƌĞƉŽƌƚĂŶĚ ƚŚĞƌĞŚĂƐŶŽƚďĞĞŶĂĚĞƋƵĂƚĞƉĞĞƌƌĞǀŝĞǁŽĨƚŚĞůŝŵŝƚĞĚĚĂƚĂŝŶƚŚĞ /Z͘dŚĞĂƌĐŚĂĞŽůŽŐŝĐĂůĂŶĂůLJƐŝƐŝƐ ŝŶĂĚĞƋƵĂƚĞĂŶĚŵŝƐůĞĂĚŝŶŐ͘WĂƐƚĞdžĐĂǀĂƚŝŽŶƐŝŶĂŶĚĂƌŽƵŶĚƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚƐŝƚĞŚĂǀĞƵŶĐŽǀĞƌĞĚŵĂŶLJƉƌĞŚŝƐƚŽƌŝĐ ŚƵŵĂŶďƵƌŝĂůƐĂŶĚƵŶĚŝƐƚƵƌďĞĚĐƵůƚƵƌĂůƌĞŵĂŝŶƐ͘dŚĞƌĞƉŽƌƚĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞůLJĨĂŝůƐƚŽĂĚĚƌĞƐƐŚƵŵĂŶƌĞŵĂŝŶƐ ƐƉĞĐŝĨŝĐĂůůLJĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚĞĚŝŶƚŚĞ /ZĨŽƌƚŚĞĂĚũĂĐĞŶƚ'ƌŽĐĞƌLJKƵƚůĞƚƐŝƚĞƚŚĂƚŝƐƉĂƌƚŽĨƚŚĞƐĂŵĞ>ĂŶĚŵĂƌŬ ^ŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚƐŝƚĞ͘dŚŝƐĐŽŶƐƚŝƚƵƚĞƐĂƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶƚŽǀĞƌƐŝŐŚƚĂŶĚŝŶĂĐĐƵƌĂĐLJŝŶƚŚĞŵĞƚŚŽĚŽůŽŐLJĂŶĚĐŽŶĐůƵƐŝŽŶƐŽĨ ƚŚĞϭϵϬϬ&ŽƵƌƚŚ^ƚƌĞĞƚƌĂĨƚ /Z͘dŚĞůŝŬĞůLJĚŝƐƚƵƌďĂŶĐĞŽĨŚƵŵĂŶƌĞŵĂŝŶƐŝƐŚŝŐŚůLJƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶƚĂƐĚĞĨŝŶĞĚďLJ YĂŶĚĐĂŶŶŽƚďĞŵŝƚŝŐĂƚĞĚ͘dŚĞ /ZĚŽĞƐŶŽƚĂĚĚƌĞƐƐƚŚĞŝƐƐƵĞŽĨZŝĐŚĂƌĚ^ĐŚǁĂƌƚnj͛ƐƌĞĐŽƌĚŝŶŐŽĨŽǀĞƌϰϬϬ ďƵƌŝĂůƐŝŶƚŚĞǀŝĐŝŶŝƚLJŽĨϭϵϬϬ&ŽƵƌƚŚ^ƚ͘ĂŶĚĨĂŝůƐƚŽƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĂŶLJĐŽŶƚĞdžƚŽĨƚŚĞůŽƚǁŝƚŚŝŶƚŚĞůĂƌŐĞƌƐŝƚĞ͕>ͲϯϬϳ͘ dŚĞ /ZĂƚƚĞŵƉƚƐƚŽŝƐŽůĂƚĞĂŶĚŶŽƚĂŶĂůLJnjĞϭϵϬϬ&ŽƵƌƚŚ^ƚ͘ǁŝƚŚŝŶƚŚĞĐŽŶƚĞdžƚŽĨĂůĂƌŐĞƌƐŝƚĞŽĨĐƵůƚƵƌĂů ƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶĐĞ͘͟
Ƶƚ/ĐŝƚĞƚŚĞŚŝƐƚŽƌLJŽĨĂůŝĨŽƌŶŝĂĂŶĚŝƚƐƉƵƌƉŽƐĞĨƵůŐĞŶŽĐŝĚĞŽĨEĂƚŝǀĞWĞŽƉůĞƐďĞĐĂƵƐĞƚŚĞŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJƚŚƌĞĂƚĞŶƐ ƚŽďĞĐŽŵĞĐŽŵƉůŝĐŝƚŝŶƚŚĞĞƌĂƐŝŶŐŽĨEĂƚŝǀĞŵĞƌŝĐĂŶƐ͕ŶŽƚũƵƐƚƉŚLJƐŝĐĂůůLJǁŝƚŚƚŚĞĚĞƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶŽĨƚŚŝƐŚŝŐŚůLJƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶƚ ƐŝƚĞ͕ďƵƚĨƌŽŵŚŝƐƚŽƌLJŝƚƐĞůĨ͘
/ƚŝƐĨŝŶĂůůLJƚŝŵĞĨŽƌĂůŝĨŽƌŶŝĂŶƐ͕ŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐƚŚĞĐŝƚŝnjĞŶƐĂŶĚƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚƐŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJ͕ƚŽĂĐŬŶŽǁůĞĚŐĞƚŚĞƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶƚ ƉŽƉƵůĂƚŝŽŶŽĨEĂƚŝǀĞŵĞƌŝĐĂŶƐůŝǀŝŶŐǁŝƚŚŝŶƚŚĞŝƌŵŝĚƐƚ͘tĞĂƌĞŶŽƚŝŶǀŝƐŝďůĞďƵƚĞdžŝƐƚƐŝĚĞďLJƐŝĚĞǁŝƚŚŽƚŚĞƌƐŽĨ ĚŝĨĨĞƌĞŶƚƌĂĐĞƐĂŶĚĐƌĞĞĚƐƚŚĂƚŵĂŬĞĞƌŬĞůĞLJĂĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJ͘ŝǀŝůŝƚLJĂŶĚĐŽŵŝƚLJĂƌĞŵŽƌĞƚŚĂƚǁŽƌĚŝŶƚŚĞŵĂŝŶƚĞŶĂŶĐĞ ŽĨƚŚĂƚĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJ͘WƵƌƉŽƐĞĨƵůŝŶĚŝĨĨĞƌĞŶĐĞƚŽƚŚĞƐƉŝƌŝƚƵĂůǀĂůƵĞƐĂŶĚĂŶĐĞƐƚƌĂůƌĞŵĂŝŶƐŽĨƚŚĞĨŝƌƐƚĂůŝĨŽƌŶŝĂŶƐĐĂŶŽŶůLJ ƐĞƌǀĞƚŽĚĞĞƉĞŶƚŚĞĂůŝĞŶĂƚŝŽŶĂŶĚŵĂƌŐŝŶĂůŝnjĂƚŝŽŶŽĨĂŶŝŵƉŽƌƚĂŶƚƐĞŐŵĞŶƚŽĨƚŚĞĞƌŬĞůĞLJĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJ͘
/ǁĂƐŝŶƚŚĞĂƵĚŝĞŶĐĞǁŚĞŶƚŚĞŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJĂĚŽƉƚĞĚƚŚĞhEĞĐůĂƌĂƚŝŽŶŽŶƚŚĞƌŝŐŚƚƐŽĨ/ŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐWĞŽƉůĞƐĂƐƚŚĞ ƉŽůŝĐLJŽĨƚŚĞŝƚLJ͘Ɛ/ƐƚĂƚĞĚĂƚƚŚĞƚŝŵĞ͕ŝƚŝƐĂďŽƵƚƚŝŵĞƚŚĂƚƉĞŽƉůĞĂĐŬŶŽǁůĞĚŐĞƚŚĂƚEĂƚŝǀĞŵĞƌŝĐĂŶƐŚĂǀĞƌŝŐŚƚƐ͘Ɛ ƚŚĞhŶŝƚĞĚEĂƚŝŽŶƐhŶŝǀĞƌƐĂůĞĐůĂƌĂƚŝŽŶŽĨ,ƵŵĂŶZŝŐŚƚƐƐƚĂƚĞƐ͕͞ůůŚƵŵĂŶďĞŝŶŐƐĂƌĞďŽƌŶĨƌĞĞĂŶĚĞƋƵĂůŝŶĚŝŐŶŝƚLJ ĂŶĚƌŝŐŚƚƐ͙͟dŚŝƐŝŶĐůƵĚĞƐ/ŶĚŝĂŶƐĂƐǁĞůůĂƐĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞƌƐ͘
/ƵƌŐĞƚŚĞĞƌŬĞůĞLJWůĂŶŶŝŶŐĞƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚĂŶĚƚŚĞŝƚLJŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJƚŽƌĞũĞĐƚƚŚĞ /ZĂŶĚƚŽĂĨĨŝƌŵŵŽƌĞƚŚĂŶϱ͕ϬϬϬLJĞĂƌƐ ŽĨŚŝƐƚŽƌLJĂŶĚƚŚĞĐŽŶƚŝŶƵĞĚƉƌĞƐĞŶĐĞŽĨ/ŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐWĞŽƉůĞƐƐŝŶĐĞƚŚĂƚƚŝŵĞ͘
ZĞƐƉĞĐƚĨƵůůLJ͕
ůďĞƌƚŽ^ĂůĚĂŵĂŶĚŽ ŽƵŶƐĞů͕/ŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐ ŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂůEĞƚǁŽƌŬ ZĞƐŝĚĞŶĐĞ͗ϭϯϲϯůĂďĂŵĂ^ƚ͕͘ ^ĂŶ&ƌĂŶĐŝƐĐŽϵϰϭϭϬ ŵĂŝů͗ƐĂůĚĂŵĂŶĚŽΛƐďĐŐůŽďĂů͘ŶĞƚ WŚŽŶĞ͗;ϰϭϱͿϲϱϲͲϵϭϵϴ ĐĐ͗ ,ŽŶ͘:ĞƐƐĞƌƌĞŐƵŝŶ͕DĂLJŽƌŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJ ŵĂLJŽƌΛĐŝƚLJŽĨďĞƌŬĞůĞLJ͘ŝŶĨŽ Dƌ͘dŽŵ'ŽůĚƚŽŽƚŚ͕ŝƌĞĐƚŽƌ͕/ E ŝĞŶΛŝŐĐ͘ŽƌŐ
Allen, Shannon
From: Chani Bockwinkel
Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners:
I am writing to express my deep concerns about the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Preservation Commission in 2000, noting the site is “most highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial ground.” The site was also listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, and determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The original West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site completely encompassed the proposed 1900 Fourth Street Project and blocks beyond. It is known to be the oldest bayside settlement and one of the largest shellmounds in the San Francisco Bay Area—more than 5,000 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone Peoples today—a fact not acknowledged in the DEIR.
Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the DEIR’s preparation. The primary consultant has conflicts of interest, and does not represent the all of the Ohlone people indigenous to the Bay Area. Another Ohlone California Tribal group indigenous to Berkeley area and community has formally and repeatedly requested tribal consultation as required by CEQA. The City to date has not consulted with this group for purposes of preparing the DEIR, in violation of CEQA. The consultation that has occurred to date appears to be nothing more than a token gesture that fails to protect this important Ohlone site (the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site) and has resulted in payment of funds to an individual as mitigation for the destruction of this irreplaceable sacred place. The Ohlone comprise more than a dozen tribes and languages yet the DEIR consults only one individual.
Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley, entitled “Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People” states in part: “BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site.” Please honor this promise. Honoring this promise requires consultation will additional Ohlone people who recognize this site as sacred, as a tribal cultural property and it requires consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region. To date, Berkeley has not honored this promise and has failed to seek the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous people of the region—and has failed to respect the indigenous peoples’ opposition to the proposed project.
On page 67, the DEIR states, “Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous peoples of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear whether or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. Given that 1900 Fourth Street proposal includes 155- apartments, and given that there are numerous Tribal objections to the development, it seems clear that the step of meaningful Tribal consultation before amending the General Plan was not done. The Project also requires several discretionary approvals by the City for variances to the current general plan and zoning ordinances. These approvals would require consultation under both AB 52 and SB 18.
This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of more than 5,000 years of history and a living culture. Reject the DEIR and embrace the No Plan / Create a Berkeley Gateway / Memorial Site Alternative!
Warmly,
Chani Bockwinkel
)HOL[&DULQD
)URP -XOLH3LWWPDQ MXOLHBSLWWPDQ#EHUNHOH\HGX! 6HQW :HGQHVGD\)HEUXDU\ 30 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW 3OHDVHSURWHFWWKH:HVW%HUNHOH\6KHOOPRXQG
Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners:
I am writing to express my deep concerns about the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Preservation Commission in 2000, noting the site is “most highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial ground.” The site was also listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, and determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The original West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site completely encompassed the proposed 1900 Fourth Street Project and blocks beyond. It is known to be the oldest bayside settlement and one of the largest shellmounds in the San Francisco Bay Area—more than 5,000 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone Peoples today—a fact not acknowledged in the DEIR.
The content of the DEIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by widespread community opposition and concern voiced at the March 10, 2016, December 8, 2016 and January 12, 2017 Zoning Adjustment Board meetings and the December 1, 2016, and January 5, 2017 Landmark Preservation Commission meetings. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to create the archaeological report and there has not been adequate peer review of the limited data in the DEIR. The archaeological analysis is inadequate and misleading. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered many prehistoric human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address human remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology and conclusions of the 1900 Fourth Street Draft EIR. The likely disturbance of human remains is highly significant as defined by CEQA and cannot be mitigated. The DEIR does not address the issue of Richard Schwartz’s recording of over 400 burials in the vicinity of 1900 Fourth St. and fails to provide any context of the lot within the larger site, ALA-307. The DEIR attempts to isolate and not analyze 1900 Fourth St. within the context of a larger site of cultural significance.
Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the DEIR’s preparation. The primary consultant has conflicts of interest, and does not represent all of the Ohlone people indigenous to the Bay Area. Another Ohlone California Tribal group indigenous to Berkeley area and community has formally and repeatedly requested tribal consultation as required by CEQA. The City to date has not consulted with this group for purposes of preparing the DEIR, in violation of CEQA. The consultation that has occurred to date appears to be nothing more than a token gesture that fails to protect this important Ohlone site (the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site) and has resulted in payment of funds to an individual as mitigation for the destruction of this irreplaceable sacred place. The Ohlone comprise more than a dozen tribes and languages yet the DEIR consults only one individual. The DEIR also fails to assess the importance of this site as a “tribal cultural resource” separate from the category of “cultural resources – archaeological.” AB 52 established a new
category of resources under the California Environmental Quality Act, “tribal cultural resources,” which considers the tribal cultural values in addition to the scientific and archaeological values when determining impacts and mitigation. This DEIR, rather than fully assessing the impacts to tribal cultural resources under a new category, merely incorporates a brief discussion under the cultural resources archaeological section that states the destruction of the site will be mitigated through: 1) payment to an individual of $75,000 to improve a cemetery located outside the bounds of the shellmound and outside of the city boundaries, and 2) that educational panels will be placed at or near the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site after further consultation with the Ohlone people, without identifying who will be consulted for this mitigation measure. Neither the discussion nor the proposed mitigation complies with CEQA requirements to consult with impacted Tribes and to include a new and separate category addressing “tribal cultural resources.”
Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley, entitled “Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People” states in part: “BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site.” Please honor this promise. Honoring this promise requires consultation will additional Ohlone people who recognize this site as sacred, as a tribal cultural property and it requires consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region. To date, Berkeley has not honored this promise and has failed to seek the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous people of the region—and has failed to respect the indigenous peoples’ opposition to the proposed project.
On page 67, the DEIR states, “Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous peoples of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear whether or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. Given that 1900 Fourth Street proposal includes 155-apartments, and given that there are numerous Tribal objections to the development, it seems clear that the step of meaningful Tribal consultation before amending the General Plan was not done. The Project also requires several discretionary approvals by the City for variances to the current general plan and zoning ordinances. These approvals would require consultation under both AB 52 and SB 18.
At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound and Ohlone village site is a series of murals and a small plaque in the parking lot under the nearby freeway. Certainly, the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone peoples to develop a major memorial and educational site in the form of a culturally-appropriate, green open space park at 1900 Fourth Street. The DEIR fails to analyze and offer meaningful alternatives. I strongly support the development of such a memorial and educational site in lieu of the proposed development as the preferred alternative.
In addition to the unavoidable adverse impacts to this critical tribal resource the DEIR includes other fatal flaws that require the City of Berkeley to either disapprove the Project or at a minimum require a supplemental EIR before making any determinations on the Project. The Project will not fulfill the purposes set forth in the Project proposal—in fact the Project will actually exacerbate issues it claims to resolve. The DEIR does not adequately address traffic impacts in that it fails to include all approved and ongoing projects in the area. The failure to address these other projects means that the cumulative impacts analysis is fatally flawed. The DEIR fails to account for safety issues that will result from additional traffic in the area and the railroad crossing. The DEIR does not fully address potential air quality impacts nor does it adequately discuss studies regarding increased asthma and other respiratory problems for people living near freeways and industrial areas. The DEIR does not sufficiently address the potential for release of hazardous chemicals through ground disturbance. The DEIR does NOT include a sufficient discussion of potential impacts to water resources on site that could result from development on the site, nor does the document include an adequate alternatives analysis. It would be irresponsible for the City of Berkeley to consider approving this project without complete and accurate information regarding any and all impacts that may affect the health and safety of the community. This Project has the potential to increase already significant traffic congestion, harm the health of residents, and destroy irreplaceable cultural and historic sites that the City of Berkeley has pledged to protect.
This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of more than 5,000 years of history and a living culture. Reject the DEIR and embrace the No Plan / Create a Berkeley Gateway / Memorial Site Alternative!
Sincerely,
Julie Pittman
)HOL[&DULQD
)URP 0DUJRW5 PDUJRWUHLVQHU#JPDLOFRP! 6HQW :HGQHVGD\)HEUXDU\ $0 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW &RPPHQWVRQWKH'UDIW(QYLURQPHQWDO,PSDFW5HSRUWRQSURSRVHG WK6WUHHW 3URMHFW
Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners:
I am writing to express my deep concerns about the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Preservation Commission in 2000, noting the site is “most highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial ground.” The site was also listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, and determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The original West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site completely encompassed the proposed 1900 Fourth Street Project and blocks beyond. It is known to be the oldest bayside settlement and one of the largest shellmounds in the San Francisco Bay Area—more than 5,000 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone Peoples today—a fact not acknowledged in the DEIR.
The content of the DEIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by widespread community opposition and concern voiced at the March 10, 2016, December 8, 2016 and January 12, 2017 Zoning Adjustment Board meetings and the December 1, 2016, and January 5, 2017 Landmark Preservation Commission meetings. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to create the archaeological report and there has not been adequate peer review of the limited data in the DEIR. The archaeological analysis is inadequate and misleading. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered many prehistoric human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address human remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology and conclusions of the 1900 Fourth Street Draft EIR. The likely disturbance of human remains is highly significant as defined by CEQA and cannot be mitigated. The DEIR does not address the issue of Richard Schwartz’s recording of over 400 burials in the vicinity of 1900 Fourth St. and fails to provide any context of the lot within the larger site, ALA-307. The DEIR attempts to isolate and not analyze 1900 Fourth St. within the context of a larger site of cultural significance.
Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the DEIR’s preparation. The primary consultant has conflicts of interest, and does not represent the all of the Ohlone people indigenous to the Bay Area. Another Ohlone California Tribal group indigenous to Berkeley area and community has formally and repeatedly requested tribal consultation as required by CEQA. The City to date has not consulted with this group for purposes of preparing the DEIR, in violation of CEQA. The consultation that has occurred to date appears to be nothing more than a token gesture that fails to protect this important Ohlone site (the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site) and has resulted in payment of funds to an individual as mitigation for the destruction of this irreplaceable sacred place. The Ohlone comprise more than a dozen tribes and languages yet the DEIR consults only one individual. The DEIR also fails to assess the importance of this site as a “tribal cultural resource” separate from the category of “cultural resources – archaeological.” AB 52 established a new category of resources under the California Environmental Quality Act, “tribal cultural resources,” which considers the tribal cultural values in addition to the scientific and archaeological values when determining impacts and mitigation. This DEIR, rather than fully assessing the impacts to tribal cultural resources under a new category, merely incorporates a brief discussion under the cultural resources archaeological section that states the destruction of the site will be mitigated through: 1) payment to an
individual of $75,000 to improve a cemetery located outside the bounds of the shellmound and outside of the city boundaries, and 2) that educational panels will be placed at or near the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site after further consultation with the Ohlone people, without identifying who will be consulted for this mitigation measure. Neither the discussion nor the proposed mitigation complies with CEQA requirements to consult with impacted Tribes and to include a new and separate category addressing “tribal cultural resources.”
Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley, entitled “Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People” states in part: “BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site.” Please honor this promise. Honoring this promise requires consultation will additional Ohlone people who recognize this site as sacred, as a tribal cultural property and it requires consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region. To date, Berkeley has not honored this promise and has failed to seek the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous people of the region—and has failed to respect the indigenous peoples’ opposition to the proposed project.
On page 67, the DEIR states, “Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous peoples of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear whether or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. Given that 1900 Fourth Street proposal includes 155-apartments, and given that there are numerous Tribal objections to the development, it seems clear that the step of meaningful Tribal consultation before amending the General Plan was not done. The Project also requires several discretionary approvals by the City for variances to the current general plan and zoning ordinances. These approvals would require consultation under both AB 52 and SB 18.
At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound and Ohlone village site is a series of murals and a small plaque in the parking lot under the nearby freeway. Certainly, the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone peoples to develop a major memorial and educational site in the form of a culturally-appropriate, green open space park at 1900 Fourth Street. The DEIR fails to analyze and offer meaningful alternatives. I strongly support the development of such a memorial and educational site in lieu of the proposed development as the preferred alternative.
In addition to the unavoidable adverse impacts to this critical tribal resource the DEIR includes other fatal flaws that require the City of Berkeley to either disapprove the Project or at a minimum require a supplemental EIR before making any determinations on the Project. The Project will not fulfill the purposes set forth in the Project proposal—in fact the Project will actually exacerbate issues it claims to resolve. The DEIR does not adequately address traffic impacts in that it fails to include all approved and ongoing projects in the area. The failure to address these other projects means that the cumulative impacts analysis is fatally flawed. The DEIR fails to account for safety issues that will result from additional traffic in the area and the railroad crossing. The DEIR does not fully address potential air quality impacts nor does it adequately discuss studies regarding increased asthma and other respiratory problems for people living near freeways and industrial areas. The DEIR does not sufficiently address the potential for release of hazardous chemicals through ground disturbance. The DEIR
does NOT include a sufficient discussion of potential impacts to water resources on site that could result from development on the site, nor does the document include an adequate alternatives analysis. It would be irresponsible for the City of Berkeley to consider approving this project without complete and accurate information regarding any and all impacts that may affect the health and safety of the community. This Project has the potential to increase already significant traffic congestion, harm the health of residents, and destroy irreplaceable cultural and historic sites that the City of Berkeley has pledged to protect.
This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of more than 5,000 years of history and a living culture. Reject the DEIR and embrace the No Plan / Create a Berkeley Gateway / Memorial Site Alternative!
Sincerely,
Allen, Shannon
From: Sydney Lea
Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners:
I am writing to express my deep concerns about the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Preservation Commission in 2000, noting the site is “most highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial ground.” The site was also listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, and determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The original West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site completely encompassed the proposed 1900 Fourth Street Project and blocks beyond. It is known to be the oldest bayside settlement and one of the largest shellmounds in the San Francisco Bay Area—more than 5,000 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone Peoples today—a fact not acknowledged in the DEIR.
The content of the DEIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by widespread community opposition and concern voiced at the March 10, 2016, December 8, 2016 and January 12, 2017 Zoning Adjustment Board meetings and the December 1, 2016, and January 5, 2017 Landmark Preservation Commission meetings. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to create the archaeological report and there has not been adequate peer review of the limited data in the DEIR. The archaeological analysis is inadequate and misleading. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered many prehistoric human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address human remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology and conclusions of the 1900 Fourth Street Draft EIR. The likely disturbance of human remains is highly significant as defined by CEQA and cannot be mitigated. The DEIR does not address the issue of Richard Schwartz’s recording of over 400 burials in the vicinity of 1900 Fourth St. and fails to provide any context of the lot within the larger site, ALA-307. The DEIR attempts to isolate and not analyze 1900 Fourth St. within the context of a larger site of cultural significance.
Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the DEIR’s preparation. The primary consultant has conflicts of interest, and does not represent the all of the Ohlone people indigenous to the Bay Area. Another Ohlone California Tribal group indigenous to Berkeley area and community has formally and repeatedly requested tribal consultation as required by CEQA. The City to date has not consulted with this group for purposes of preparing the DEIR, in violation of CEQA. The consultation that has occurred to date appears to be nothing more than a token gesture that fails to protect this important Ohlone site (the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site) and has resulted in payment of funds to an individual as mitigation for the destruction of this irreplaceable sacred place. The Ohlone comprise more than a dozen tribes and languages yet the DEIR consults only one individual. The DEIR also fails to assess the importance of this site as a “tribal cultural resource” separate from the category of “cultural resources – archaeological.” AB 52
established a new category of resources under the California Environmental Quality Act, “tribal cultural resources,” which considers the tribal cultural values in addition to the scientific and archaeological values when determining impacts and mitigation. This DEIR, rather than fully assessing the impacts to tribal cultural resources under a new category, merely incorporates a brief discussion under the cultural resources archaeological section that states the destruction of the site will be mitigated through: 1) payment to an individual of $75,000 to improve a cemetery located outside the bounds of the shellmound and outside of the city boundaries, and 2) that educational panels will be placed at or near the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site after further consultation with the Ohlone people, without identifying who will be consulted for this mitigation measure. Neither the discussion nor the proposed mitigation complies with CEQA requirements to consult with impacted Tribes and to include a new and separate category addressing “tribal cultural resources.”
Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley, entitled “Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People” states in part: “BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site.” Please honor this promise. Honoring this promise requires consultation will additional Ohlone people who recognize this site as sacred, as a tribal cultural property and it requires consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region. To date, Berkeley has not honored this promise and has failed to seek the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous people of the region—and has failed to respect the indigenous peoples’ opposition to the proposed project.
On page 67, the DEIR states, “Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous peoples of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear whether or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. Given that 1900 Fourth Street proposal includes 155-apartments, and given that there are numerous Tribal objections to the development, it seems clear that the step of meaningful Tribal consultation before amending the General Plan was not done. The Project also requires several discretionary approvals by the City for variances to the current general plan and zoning ordinances. These approvals would require consultation under both AB 52 and SB 18.
At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound and Ohlone village site is a series of murals and a small plaque in the parking lot under the nearby freeway. Certainly, the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone peoples to develop a major memorial and educational site in the form of a culturally-appropriate, green open space park at 1900 Fourth Street. The DEIR fails to analyze and offer meaningful alternatives. I strongly support the development of such a memorial and educational site in lieu of the proposed development as the preferred alternative.
In addition to the unavoidable adverse impacts to this critical tribal resource the DEIR includes other fatal flaws that require the City of Berkeley to either disapprove the Project or at a minimum require a supplemental EIR before making any determinations on the Project. The Project will not fulfill the purposes set forth in the Project proposal—in fact the Project will actually exacerbate issues it claims to resolve. The DEIR does not adequately address traffic impacts in that it fails to include all approved and ongoing projects in the area. The failure to address these other projects means that the cumulative impacts analysis is fatally flawed. The DEIR fails to account for safety issues that will result from additional traffic in the area and the railroad crossing. The DEIR does not fully address potential air quality impacts nor does it adequately discuss studies regarding increased asthma and other respiratory problems for people living near freeways and industrial areas. The DEIR does not sufficiently address the potential for release of hazardous chemicals through ground disturbance. The DEIR does NOT include a sufficient discussion of potential impacts to water resources on site that could result from development on the site, nor does the document include an adequate alternatives analysis. It would be irresponsible for the City of Berkeley to consider approving this project without complete and accurate information regarding any and all impacts that may affect the health and safety of the community. This Project has the potential to increase already significant traffic congestion, harm the health of residents, and destroy irreplaceable cultural and historic sites that the City of Berkeley has pledged to protect.
This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of more than 5,000 years of history and a living culture. Reject the DEIR and embrace the No Plan / Create a Berkeley Gateway / Memorial Site Alternative!
Sincerely,
Sydney Lea
Allen, Shannon
From: Cedar Ranney
Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners:
I am writing to express my deep concerns about the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Preservation Commission in 2000, noting the site is “most highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial ground.” The site was also listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, and determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The original West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site completely encompassed the proposed 1900 Fourth Street Project and blocks beyond. It is known to be the oldest bayside settlement and one of the largest shellmounds in the San Francisco Bay Area—more than 5,000 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone Peoples today—a fact not acknowledged in the DEIR.
The content of the DEIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by widespread community opposition and concern voiced at the March 10, 2016, December 8, 2016 and January 12, 2017 Zoning Adjustment Board meetings and the December 1, 2016, and January 5, 2017 Landmark Preservation Commission meetings. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to create the archaeological report and there has not been adequate peer review of the limited data in the DEIR. The archaeological analysis is inadequate and misleading. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered many prehistoric human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address human remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology and conclusions of the 1900 Fourth Street Draft EIR. The likely disturbance of human remains is highly significant as defined by CEQA and cannot be mitigated. The DEIR does not address the issue of Richard Schwartz’s recording of over 400 burials in the vicinity of 1900 Fourth St. and fails to provide any context of the lot within the larger site, ALA-307. The DEIR attempts to isolate and not analyze 1900 Fourth St. within the context of a larger site of cultural significance.
Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the DEIR’s preparation. The primary consultant has conflicts of interest, and does not represent the all of the Ohlone people indigenous to the Bay Area. Another Ohlone California Tribal group indigenous to Berkeley area and community has formally and repeatedly requested tribal consultation as required by CEQA. The City to date has not consulted with this group for purposes of preparing the DEIR, in violation of CEQA. The consultation that has occurred to date appears to be nothing more than a token gesture that fails to protect this important Ohlone site (the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site) and has resulted in payment of funds to an individual as
mitigation for the destruction of this irreplaceable sacred place. The Ohlone comprise more than a dozen tribes and languages yet the DEIR consults only one individual. The DEIR also fails to assess the importance of this site as a “tribal cultural resource” separate from the category of “cultural resources – archaeological.” AB 52 established a new category of resources under the California Environmental Quality Act, “tribal cultural resources,” which considers the tribal cultural values in addition to the scientific and archaeological values when determining impacts and mitigation. This DEIR, rather than fully assessing the impacts to tribal cultural resources under a new category, merely incorporates a brief discussion under the cultural resources archaeological section that states the destruction of the site will be mitigated through: 1) payment to an individual of $75,000 to improve a cemetery located outside the bounds of the shellmound and outside of the city boundaries, and 2) that educational panels will be placed at or near the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site after further consultation with the Ohlone people, without identifying who will be consulted for this mitigation measure. Neither the discussion nor the proposed mitigation complies with CEQA requirements to consult with impacted Tribes and to include a new and separate category addressing “tribal cultural resources.”
Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley, entitled “Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People” states in part: “BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site.” Please honor this promise. Honoring this promise requires consultation will additional Ohlone people who recognize this site as sacred, as a tribal cultural property and it requires consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region. To date, Berkeley has not honored this promise and has failed to seek the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous people of the region—and has failed to respect the indigenous peoples’ opposition to the proposed project.
On page 67, the DEIR states, “Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous peoples of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear whether or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. Given that 1900 Fourth Street proposal includes 155-apartments, and given that there are numerous Tribal objections to the development, it seems clear that the step of meaningful Tribal consultation before amending the General Plan was not done. The Project also requires several discretionary approvals by the City for variances to the current general plan and zoning ordinances. These approvals would require consultation under both AB 52 and SB 18.
At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound and Ohlone village site is a series of murals and a small plaque in the parking lot under the nearby freeway. Certainly, the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone peoples to develop a major memorial and educational site in the form of a culturally-appropriate, green open space park at 1900 Fourth Street. The DEIR fails to analyze and offer meaningful alternatives. I strongly support the development of such a memorial and educational site in lieu of the proposed development as the preferred alternative.
In addition to the unavoidable adverse impacts to this critical tribal resource the DEIR includes other fatal flaws that require the City of Berkeley to either disapprove the Project or at a minimum require a supplemental EIR before making any determinations on the Project. The Project will not fulfill the purposes set forth in the Project proposal—in fact the Project will actually exacerbate issues it claims to resolve. The DEIR does not adequately address traffic impacts in that it fails to include all approved and ongoing projects in the area. The failure to address these other projects means that the cumulative impacts analysis is fatally flawed. The DEIR fails to account for safety issues that will result from additional traffic in the area and the railroad crossing. The DEIR does not fully address potential air quality impacts nor does it adequately discuss studies regarding increased asthma and other respiratory problems for people living near freeways and industrial areas. The DEIR does not sufficiently address the potential for release of hazardous chemicals through ground disturbance. The DEIR does include a sufficient discussion of potential impacts to water resources on site that could result from development on the site, nor does the document include an adequate alternatives analysis. It would be irresponsible for the City of Berkeley to consider approving this project without complete and accurate information regarding any and all impacts that may affect the health and safety of the community. This Project has the potential to increase already significant traffic congestion, harm the health of residents, and destroy irreplaceable cultural and historic sites that the City of Berkeley has pledged to protect.
This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of more than 5,000 years of history and a living culture. Reject the DEIR and embrace the No Plan / Create a Berkeley Gateway / Memorial Site Alternative!
Sincerely,
Cedar Ranney
Yes you, bless you!
-DFNVRQ&DPLOOH
)URP 5HY'HE/HH UHYGHEOHH#JPDLOFRP! 6HQW 7KXUVGD\)HEUXDU\ 30 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW '(,5&RPPHQW6XEPLVVLRQ:%HUNHOH\6KHOOPRXQ
Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners,
My name is Rev. Deborah Lee. I am an ordained minister with the United Church of Christ, Northern California Nevada Conference and the Program Director of the Interfaith Movement for Human Integrity.
Since 2006, as a pastor, theological educator, and community organizer on interfaith issues, I have been deepening my own understanding of the native people's of the Bay Area, and the Ohlone Shellmounds. I have led classes of graduate students and international conference attendees to participate in Shellmound walks and other activities sponsored by the Ohlone elders.
The shellmounds are a symbol of Ohlone religious sacred site, important California cultural history, and the racial and religious diversity of California. California has had a terrible and violent history towards native peoples and there is very little that has been done to acknowledge the harm and suffering that was done. Destruction of the shellmounds and to continue to build on top of the West Berkeley Shellmound would be a continued insult and injury to Bay Area native peoples as well as all Bay Area residents who respect and value the voice and ancestors of indigenous persons.
The discovery of sacred burials in the West Berkeley Shellmound raises the possibility that the Shellmounds could become a landmark and truly honored. Continuing the development project slated there is not in line with the required extensive and thorough Ohlone consultation that is required under Berkeley and International law. The EIR must acknowledge the rights of indigenous communities to practice their cultural rites and traditions and to have free, prior and informed consent in any development projects impacting their land, burial sites and resources.
This West Berkeley site should be preserved and honored inline with the fullest consultation with the Ohlone/Chochenyo speaking language groups. I am thrilled to hear of the alternate proposal to protect and honor this site put forward by Corrina Gould. This is a beautiful plan and we seek your collaboration and cooperation to bring it forth.
Aside from the respect for religious and racial rights of indigenous peoples, there are other issues and concerns with the DEIR. The 4th Street area is already highly congested with traffic and congestion, numerous condos, and retail shops. There is a valuable opportunity to do something different with this space- not to increase the profits of developers who could do so anywhere else, but to honor a sacred site, to lift up Berkeley's indigenous history and honor their sacred burial grounds- something priceless and valuable to us now and to future generations to come.
Sincerely,
Rev. Deborah Lee
-DFNVRQ&DPLOOH
)URP -DFTXHO\Q0DULH MDFTXHO\QPDULH#\PDLOFRP! 6HQW 7KXUVGD\)HEUXDU\ 30 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW 2KORQHVDFUHGVLWHLQ%HUNHOH\
Dear Ms Allen and Berkeley city planners,
,DPZULWLQJWRH[SUHVVP\GHHSFRQFHUQVDERXWWKH'UDIW(QYLURQPHQWDO,PSDFW5HSRUW '(,5 UHJDUGLQJ )RXUWK6WUHHW7KH VLWHZDVGHVLJQDWHGDVD&LW\RI%HUNHOH\/DQGPDUNE\WKH/DQGPDUNV3UHVHUYDWLRQ&RPPLVVLRQLQQRWLQJWKHVLWH LV´PRVWKLJKO\VLJQLILFDQWWRQDWLYHGHVFHQGDQWVDVDVDFUHGEXULDOJURXQGµ7KHVLWHZDVDOVROLVWHGLQWKH&DOLIRUQLD5HJLVWHURI +LVWRULFDO5HVRXUFHVDQGGHWHUPLQHGWREHHOLJLEOHIRUWKH1DWLRQDO5HJLVWHURI+LVWRULF3ODFHV7KHRULJLQDO:HVW%HUNHOH\ 6KHOOPRXQGDQG2KORQH9LOODJH6LWHFRPSOHWHO\HQFRPSDVVHGWKHSURSRVHG )RXUWK6WUHHW3URMHFWDQGEORFNVEH\RQG,WLV NQRZQWREHWKHROGHVWED\VLGHVHWWOHPHQWDQGRQHRIWKHODUJHVWVKHOOPRXQGVLQWKH6DQ)UDQFLVFR%D\$UHD³PRUHWKDQ \HDUVROG,WLVWKHWUXHELUWKSODFHRI%HUNHOH\,WFRQWLQXHVWREHRIXWPRVWVLJQLILFDQFHDVDFHUHPRQLDOFHQWHUWRWKH2KORQH 3HRSOHVWRGD\³DIDFWQRWDFNQRZOHGJHGLQWKH'(,5 ,QDFODVVRQ6DFUHG/DQGVDW8&%2OOL,OHDUQHGDERXWWKLVYHU\LPSRUWDQWVDFUHGVLWHULJKWKHUHLQ%HUNHOH\:HDOVRKHDUG &RULQQD*RXOGVSHDNDERXWWKLVLQDYHU\SDVVLRQDWHDQGFRPSHOOLQJZD\,WLVWLPH SDVWWLPH WRKRQRURXULQGLJHQRXVSHRSOH LQDQ\ZD\ZHFDQ7KH\KDYHEHHQRYHUORRNHGIRUWRRORQJ:HGRQ WQHHGDQRWKHUSDUNLQJORWHWFZHQHHGDPDUNHGVLWH WKDWWKH2KORQHFDQXVHIRUFHUHPRQLHVDQGZHFDQDOOOHDUQDERXWWKLVDQFLHQWVLWHDQGWKH2KORQHWUDGLWLRQV 7KDQN\RXIRUUHDGLQJWKLV-DFTXHO\Q0DULH
-DFNVRQ&DPLOOH
)URP .LP'H2FDPSR NGHRFDPSR#FWWSQHW! 6HQW 7KXUVGD\)HEUXDU\ 30 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW '(,5RQSURSRVHGWK6W3URMHFW
/ĂŵǁƌŝƚŝŶŐƚŽĞdžƉƌĞƐƐŵLJĐŽŶĐĞƌŶƐĂďŽƵƚƚŚĞ /ZƌĞŐĂƌĚŝŶŐƚŚĞϭϵϬϬ&ŽƵƌƚŚ^ƚƌĞĞƚWƌŽũĞĐƚ͘DLJEĂŵĞŝƐ<ŝŵ ĞKĐĂŵƉŽ͕/ĂŵĂĞŶƌŽůůĞĚŵĞŵďĞƌŽĨƚŚĞdƵŽůƵŵŶĞDĞǁƵŬdƌŝďĞŽĨĂůŝĨŽƌŶŝĂ͘/ƌĞƐŝĚĞŝŶƚŚĞŝƚLJŽĨsĂůůĞũŽ͕ŚŽǁĞǀĞƌ͕ /ƚŽŽŽĐĐƵƉLJŽƌŝŐŝŶĂůKŚůŽŶĞdĞƌƌŝƚŽƌLJĂƐǁĞůů͘ dŚĞKŚůŽŶĞWĞŽƉůĞŚĂǀĞďĞĞŶĂƉĂƌƚŽĨƚŚŝƐůĂŶĚƐĐĂƉĞƐŝŶĐĞƚŝŵĞŵĞŵŽƌŝĂů͕ĂƐǁŝƚŚƐŽŵĂŶLJĂůŝĨŽƌŶŝĂEĂƚŝǀĞWĞŽƉůĞ͕ ŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐŵLJŽǁŶƚƌŝďĞƚŚĞƌĞŝƐĂůŽŶŐŚŝƐƚŽƌLJŽĨŐĞŶŽĐŝĚĞĂŶĚĚŝƐƉůĂĐĞŵĞŶƚ͕ďƵƚŶŽŽŶĞŚĂƐƐƵĨĨĞƌĞĚƐŽŵƵĐŚĂƐƚŚĞ KŚůŽŶĞWĞŽƉůĞ͕ŶŽƚŽŶůLJŚĂǀĞƚŚĞLJďĞĞŶďƵƌŝĞĚƵŶĚĞƌďƵƌĞĂƵĐƌĂĐLJ͕ƚŚĞLJĂƌĞŶŽƚĨĞĚĞƌĂůůLJƌĞĐŽŐŶŝnjĞĚďLJƚŚĞh͘^͘ 'ŽǀĞƌŶŵĞŶƚĂƐĂůĞŐŝƚŝŵĂƚĞƚƌŝďĂůŶĂƚŝŽŶĂŶĚǁŝƚŚƚŚĂƚƚŚĞƚƌŝďĞŚĂƐůŝƚƚůĞƉƌŽƚĞĐƚŝŽŶŝŶƉƌŽƚĞĐƚŝŶŐĂŶĚ ƉƌĞƐĞƌǀŝŶŐƐĂĐƌĞĚƉůĂĐĞƐĂŶĚĂŶĐŝĞŶƚďƵƌŝĂůŐƌŽƵŶĚƐ͘ dŚĞKŚůŽŶĞWĞŽƉůĞŚĂǀĞďĞĐŽŵĞŽŶĞŽĨƚŚĞŵŽƐƚĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞĚ͕ŽǀĞƌĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞĚĂŶĚŝŶƚŚĞƉƌŽĐĞƐƐŽĨďĞŝŶŐĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞĚ /ŶĚŝĂŶEĂƚŝŽŶƐʹƚŚĞLJŚĂǀĞŶŽƚŚŝŶŐƚŚĂƚƚŚĞLJĐĂŶĐĂůůƚŚĞŝƌŽǁŶ͘tŽƵůĚŝƚďĞƚŽŽŵƵĐŚƚŽĂƐŬĨŽƌƐŽŵĞƚŚŝŶŐƚŽƌĞŵĂŝŶ ƐĂĐƌĞĚ͍>ĞĂǀŝŶŐƐŽŵĞƚŚŝŶŐƵŶƚŽƵĐŚĞĚďLJ/ŶĚƵƐƚƌLJ͍tŝƚŚƚŚĞƌĞĐĞŶƚĞǀĞŶƚƐƚĂŬŝŶŐƉůĂĐĞŝŶ^ƚĂŶĚŝŶŐZŽĐŬǁŚŝĐŚŚĂƐ ŐĂůǀĂŶŝnjĞĚƚƌŝďĂůŶĂƚŝŽŶƐ͕ƚŚŝƐƚŽŽǁĂƐŶŽƚũƵƐƚĂďŽƵƚƉƌŽƚĞĐƚŝŶŐƚŚĞǁĂƚĞƌ͕ďƵƚĂůƐŽĂǀŝŽůĂƚŝŽŶŽĨƚŚĞƚƌŝďĞƐĂŶĐŝĞŶƚďƵƌŝĂů ŐƌŽƵŶĚƐ͘tĞĂƌĞĂƐŬŝŶŐLJŽƵƚŽƚĂŬĞĂƐƚĂŶĚĂŐĂŝŶƐƚƵŶŶĞĐĞƐƐĂƌLJƌĞĂůĞƐƚĂƚĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ͘ WůĞĂƐĞƌĞĐŽŶƐŝĚĞƌƚŚŝƐƉƌŽũĞĐƚ͕ƚŚĞƌĞĂƌĞŚƵŵĂŶďĞŝŶŐďƵƌŝĞĚŚĞƌĞ͘ dŚĂŶŬzŽƵ .LP'H2FDPSR Kim DeOcampo – Caseworker California Tribal TANF Partnership 1001 Texas St, Suite B Fairfield, CA 94533 (707) 421-8379 ;ϳϬϳͿϰϮϭͲϴϯϵϱĨĂdž
DEPARTMENT OF ANTHROPOLOGY SANTA BARBARA, CALIFORNIA 93106-3210 Internet: [email protected] Phone: (805) 705-2842, FAX 893-8707
2 February 2017
Shannon Allen Planning Department City of Berkeley 1947 Center Street Berkeley, CA
Dear Ms. Allen:
I’m writing with regard to the West Berkeley Shellmound, arguably the most famous of the prehistoric shellmound sites that once bordered the San Francisco Bay. Colleagues have informed me that a land development is proposed for the property containing what is left of the shellmound, the upper portions of which were removed many decades ago. The lowermost deposits of the shellmound are the oldest discovered among the San Francisco Bay shellmounds. Consequently, they have special significance in that their contents can yield information about the earliest period of occupation around the bay.
As is the case at other bay shellmound sites, deposits dating before about 2000 years ago extend below the current water table and surface of the bay waters, due to sea level having risen at least a meter over the last few thousand years. Even though deposits just below the current ground surface may be disturbed to varying degrees, deeper deposits undoubtedly remain intact.
Prehistoric human burials, and even cemeteries, have been discovered during archaeological excavation at virtually every bay shellmound, and I’m aware that burials recently have been discovered within the remaining deposits of the West Berkeley Shellmound. I’m also aware that the Ohlone people, whose ancestors occupied the shellmound, would like the burials to remain undisturbed. I strongly support their wishes.
Given the unique significance of the site, and the presence of burials within the remaining archaeological deposits, it seems that the best outcome would be to dedicate the property containing the deposits to open space. Ideally, some sort of memorial could be established within the open space that would inform the public about the spectacular shellmound that once existed on the property and the significance of what remains to the Ohlone people.
Sincerely,
Michael A. Glassow Professor Emeritus and Research Professor -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH
)URP SDWW\ORQJ#DROFRP 6HQW 7KXUVGD\)HEUXDU\ 30 7R %HUNHOH\0D\RU V2IILFH 0DLR/LQGD 3ODQQLQJ'HSW0DLOER[ &LW\&OHUN &UDQH)DWHPD $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW &RPPHQWVRQSURSRVHGSURMHFW )RXUWK6WUHHW
To Those of You Reviewing this Proposal,
I would like to request that you do NOT approve the development project at 1900 Fourth Street. Others have written you with detailed reasons why the project should not be approved: the design has not been well thought out, nor have the views of the neighboring communities been seriously considered.
I have one comment specifically for Linda Maio. I have heard you at block parties and at planning meetings mention, sometimes with derision, people who come up to you to complain about such large projects—saying “not in my backyard” or “it’s too big.” There’s a name for these people, Linda: they’re called your constituents. And for once it’d be nice if you and the city would give our views as much attention as those of developers and realtors.
Thank you, Patricia Long 903 Cedar Street
-DFNVRQ&DPLOOH
)URP 5D\QD OHVZHHWPHDW#JPDLOFRP! 6HQW 7KXUVGD\)HEUXDU\ 30 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ
Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners:
I am writing to express my deep concerns about the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Preservation Commission in 2000, noting the site is “most highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial ground.” The site was also listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, and determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The original West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site completely encompassed the proposed 1900 Fourth Street Project and blocks beyond. It is known to be the oldest bayside settlement and one of the largest shellmounds in the San Francisco Bay Area—more than 5,000 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone Peoples today—a fact not acknowledged in the DEIR.
The content of the DEIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by widespread community opposition and concern voiced at the March 10, 2016, December 8, 2016 and January 12, 2017 Zoning Adjustment Board meetings and the December 1, 2016, and January 5, 2017 Landmark Preservation Commission meetings. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to create the archaeological report and there has not been adequate peer review of the limited data in the DEIR. The archaeological analysis is inadequate and misleading. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered many prehistoric human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address human remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology and conclusions of the 1900 Fourth Street Draft EIR. The likely disturbance of human remains is highly significant as defined by CEQA and cannot be mitigated. The DEIR does not address the issue of Richard Schwartz’s recording of over 400 burials in the vicinity of 1900 Fourth St. and fails to provide any context of the lot within the larger site, ALA-307. The DEIR attempts to isolate and not analyze 1900 Fourth St. within the context of a larger site of cultural significance.
Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the DEIR’s preparation. The primary consultant has conflicts of interest, and does not represent the all of the Ohlone people indigenous to the Bay Area. Another Ohlone California Tribal group indigenous to Berkeley area and community has formally and repeatedly requested tribal consultation as required by CEQA. The City to date has not consulted with this group for purposes of preparing the DEIR, in violation of CEQA. The consultation that has occurred to date appears to be nothing more than a token gesture that fails to protect this important Ohlone site (the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site) and has resulted in payment of funds to an individual as mitigation for the destruction of this irreplaceable sacred place. The Ohlone comprise more than a dozen tribes and languages yet the DEIR consults only one individual. The DEIR also fails to assess the importance of this site as a “tribal cultural resource” separate from the category of “cultural resources – archaeological.” AB 52 established a new category of resources under the California Environmental Quality Act, “tribal cultural resources,” which considers the tribal cultural values in addition to the scientific and archaeological values when determining impacts and mitigation. This DEIR, rather than fully assessing the impacts to tribal cultural resources under a new category, merely incorporates a brief discussion under the cultural resources archaeological section that states the destruction of the site will be mitigated through: 1) payment to an individual of $75,000 to improve a cemetery located outside the bounds of the shellmound and outside of the city boundaries, and 2) that educational panels will be placed at or near the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site after further consultation with the Ohlone people, without identifying who will be consulted for this mitigation measure. Neither the discussion nor the proposed mitigation complies with CEQA requirements to consult with impacted Tribes and to include a new and separate category addressing “tribal cultural resources.”
Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley, entitled “Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People” states in part: “BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site.” Please honor this promise. Honoring this promise requires consultation will
additional Ohlone people who recognize this site as sacred, as a tribal cultural property and it requires consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region. To date, Berkeley has not honored this promise and has failed to seek the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous people of the region—and has failed to respect the indigenous peoples’ opposition to the proposed project.
On page 67, the DEIR states, “Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous peoples of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear whether or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. Given that 1900 Fourth Street proposal includes 155- apartments, and given that there are numerous Tribal objections to the development, it seems clear that the step of meaningful Tribal consultation before amending the General Plan was not done. The Project also requires several discretionary approvals by the City for variances to the current general plan and zoning ordinances. These approvals would require consultation under both AB 52 and SB 18.
At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound and Ohlone village site is a series of murals and a small plaque in the parking lot under the nearby freeway. Certainly, the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone peoples to develop a major memorial and educational site in the form of a culturally-appropriate, green open space park at 1900 Fourth Street. The DEIR fails to analyze and offer meaningful alternatives. I strongly support the development of such a memorial and educational site in lieu of the proposed development as the preferred alternative.
In addition to the unavoidable adverse impacts to this critical tribal resource the DEIR includes other fatal flaws that require the City of Berkeley to either disapprove the Project or at a minimum require a supplemental EIR before making any determinations on the Project. The Project will not fulfill the purposes set forth in the Project proposal—in fact the Project will actually exacerbate issues it claims to resolve. The DEIR does not adequately address traffic impacts in that it fails to include all approved and ongoing projects in the area. The failure to address these other projects means that the cumulative impacts analysis is fatally flawed. The DEIR fails to account for safety issues that will result from additional traffic in the area and the railroad crossing. The DEIR does not fully address potential air quality impacts nor does it adequately discuss studies regarding increased asthma and other respiratory problems for people living near freeways and industrial areas. The DEIR does not sufficiently address the potential for release of hazardous chemicals through ground disturbance. The DEIR does include a sufficient discussion of potential impacts to water resources on site that could result from development on the site, nor does the document include an adequate alternatives analysis. It would be irresponsible for the City of Berkeley to consider approving this project without complete and accurate information regarding any and all impacts that may affect the health and safety of the community. This Project has the potential to increase already significant traffic congestion, harm the health of residents, and destroy irreplaceable cultural and historic sites that the City of Berkeley has pledged to protect.
This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of more than 5,000 years of history and a living culture. Reject the DEIR and embrace the No Plan / Create a Berkeley Gateway / Memorial Site Alternative!
Sincerely,
Rayna Matthews
2754 Harrison St
San Francisco CA
94110
-DFNVRQ&DPLOOH
)URP VX]DQJRRGPDQ#JPDLOFRP 6HQW 7KXUVGD\)HEUXDU\ $0 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW '(,5)RXUWK6WUHHW
Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners:
I am writing to express my deep concerns about the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Preservation Commission in 2000, noting the site is “most highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial ground.” The site was also listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, and determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The original West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site completely encompassed the proposed 1900 Fourth Street Project and blocks beyond. It is known to be the oldest bayside settlement and one of the largest shellmounds in the San Francisco Bay Area—more than 5,000 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone Peoples today—a fact not acknowledged in the DEIR.
The content of the DEIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by widespread community opposition and concern voiced at the March 10, 2016, December 8, 2016 and January 12, 2017 Zoning Adjustment Board meetings and the December 1, 2016, and January 5, 2017 Landmark Preservation Commission meetings. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to create the archaeological report and there has not been adequate peer review of the limited data in the DEIR. The archaeological analysis is inadequate and misleading. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered many prehistoric human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address human remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology and conclusions of the 1900 Fourth Street Draft EIR. The likely disturbance of human remains is highly significant as defined by CEQA and cannot be mitigated. The DEIR does not address the issue of Richard Schwartz’s recording of over 400 burials in the vicinity of 1900 Fourth St. and fails to provide any context of the lot within the larger site, ALA-307. The DEIR attempts to isolate and not analyze 1900 Fourth St. within the context of a larger site of cultural significance.
Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the DEIR’s preparation. The primary consultant has conflicts of interest, and does not represent the all of the Ohlone people indigenous to the Bay Area. Another Ohlone California Tribal group indigenous to Berkeley area and community has formally and repeatedly requested tribal consultation as required by CEQA. The City to date has not consulted with this group for purposes of preparing the DEIR, in violation of CEQA. The consultation that has occurred to date appears to be nothing more than a token gesture that fails to protect this important Ohlone site (the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site) and has resulted in payment of funds to an individual as mitigation for the destruction of this irreplaceable sacred place. The Ohlone comprise more than a dozen tribes and languages yet the DEIR consults only one individual. The DEIR also fails to assess the importance of this site as a “tribal cultural resource” separate from the category of “cultural resources – archaeological.” AB 52 established a new category of resources under the California Environmental Quality Act, “tribal cultural resources,” which considers the tribal cultural values in addition to the scientific and archaeological values when determining impacts and mitigation. This DEIR, rather than fully assessing the impacts to tribal cultural resources under a new category, merely incorporates a brief discussion under the cultural resources archaeological section that states the destruction of the site will be mitigated through: 1) payment to an individual of $75,000 to improve a cemetery located outside the bounds of the shellmound and outside of the city boundaries, and 2) that educational panels will be placed at or near the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site after further consultation with the Ohlone people, without identifying who will be consulted for this mitigation measure. Neither the discussion nor the proposed mitigation complies with CEQA requirements to consult with impacted Tribes and to include a new and separate category addressing “tribal cultural resources.”
Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley, entitled “Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People” states in part: “BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site.” Please honor this promise. Honoring this promise requires consultation will additional Ohlone people who recognize this site as sacred, as a tribal cultural property and it requires consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region. To date, Berkeley has not honored this promise and has failed to seek the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous people of the region—and has failed to respect the indigenous peoples’ opposition to the proposed project.
On page 67, the DEIR states, “Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous peoples of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear whether or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. Given that 1900 Fourth Street proposal includes 155- apartments, and given that there are numerous Tribal objections to the development, it seems clear that the step of meaningful Tribal consultation before amending the General Plan was not done. The Project also requires several discretionary approvals by the City for variances to the current general plan and zoning ordinances. These approvals would require consultation under both AB 52 and SB 18.
At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound and Ohlone village site is a series of murals and a small plaque in the parking lot under the nearby freeway. Certainly, the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone peoples to develop a major memorial and educational site in the form of a culturally-appropriate, green open space park at 1900 Fourth Street. The DEIR fails to analyze and offer meaningful alternatives. I strongly support the development of such a memorial and educational site in lieu of the proposed development as the preferred alternative.
In addition to the unavoidable adverse impacts to this critical tribal resource the DEIR includes other fatal flaws that require the City of Berkeley to either disapprove the Project or at a minimum require a supplemental EIR before making any determinations on the Project. The Project will not fulfill the purposes set forth in the Project proposal—in fact the Project will actually exacerbate issues it claims to resolve. The DEIR does not adequately address traffic impacts in that it fails to include all approved and ongoing projects in the area. The failure to address these other projects means that the cumulative impacts analysis is fatally flawed. The DEIR fails to account for safety issues that will result from additional traffic in the area and the railroad crossing. The DEIR does not fully address potential air quality impacts nor does it adequately discuss studies regarding increased asthma and other respiratory problems for people living near freeways and industrial areas. The DEIR does not sufficiently address the potential for release of hazardous chemicals through ground disturbance. The DEIR does include a sufficient discussion of potential impacts to water resources on site that could result from development on the site, nor does the document include an adequate alternatives analysis. It would be irresponsible for the City of Berkeley to consider approving this project without complete and accurate information regarding any and all impacts that may affect the health and safety of the community. This Project has the potential to increase already significant traffic congestion, harm the health of residents, and destroy irreplaceable cultural and historic sites that the City of Berkeley has pledged to protect.
This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of more than 5,000 years of history and a living culture. Reject the DEIR and embrace the No Plan / Create a Berkeley Gateway / Memorial Site Alternative!
Sincerely,
Suzan Goodman MD, MPH Associate Clinical Professor, UCSF Oakland Resident Cell 510-206-0927
Allen, Shannon
From: Stephen Most
Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners,
I am writing to oppose the City's potential approval of a building at 1900 Fourth Street based on the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR). Others who have written you addressed the history of the shellmound site, including the fact that this was the original village site in the Bay Area; the failure to adequately consult with members of the Ohlone and other local tribes in developing the DEIR; detrimental effects the proposed building is likely to have on people and the land; and the benefits other uses of that site, including an open-air memorial that honors Berkeley's indigenous people and their ancestors, have to offer. In this note, I will sketch previous landmarks in Berkeley's relationship with Native people, California Indians in particular.
Berkeley was the home of the anthropologist A.L. Kroeber, who did important research into California Indians. Ishi, a Yahi who displayed arrow-making and other indigenous crafts in the Phoebe Hearst Museum, became a symbol of the last "wild Indian" in California. An extensive collection of basketry and other works by California Indians is warehoused by the Phoebe Hearst Museum.
A signal event in the renewal of indigenous nations across the continent was the occupation of Alcatraz in 1969, which was the subject of KPFA broadcasts and other forms of support by Berkeley residents.
Berkeley played another important role in the revival of indigenous culture thanks to the work of Malcolm Margolin, a Berkeley resident who recently retired as publisher of Heyday Books. In the 1970s, Margolin began publishing News from Native California. This invaluable periodical is a forum through which California Indians share their work as artists and writers and keep each other informed about their cultural events.
In 1992, Berkeley began to celebrate Indigenous Peoples Day instead of Columbus Day, holding annual Indian dances in the Civic Center.
The City also established a Sister City relationship with the Yurok Reservation. This included an exchange of high school students, with Yuroks attending Berkeley High and Berkeley students attending school near the Yurok Reservation. In addition, the City of Berkeley sponsored the production of my play Watershed, which is based on oral histories of Yurok gillnetting family members. Yuroks from the reservation held a salmon bake at the Julia Morgan Theatre to celebrate its premiere.
In 1993, the late City Councilmember Dona Spring asked me to find a California Indian artist who would create a mural honoring the Ohlone in Ohlone Park. Painted by Jean LaMarr, the four-sided mural at Milvia and Hearst was completed in 1995 with the support of Friends of Ohlone Park and City funds. It has been repaired and maintained by the Parks Department ever since.
And ever since, Berkeley's awareness of and solidarity with Native people has continued.
Last year, many members of the Berkeley community, including veterans and indigenous people, traveled to North Dakota to oppose the completion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. The support Berkeley residents gave
Lakota who are concerned about water pollution as well as climate change and respect for their sovereign rights is an important harbinger of the alliance between non-Indians and native people that will be needed in the years to come.
Finally, last December, Friends of Ohlone Park sponsored an event, Native Berkeley, which Malcolm Margolin hosted, in which Ohlone tribal members and experts on Ohlone history and archaeology spoke. At that event, which both the Mayor and Vice Mayor attended, panelists emphasized the importance of preserving and memorializing the Berkeley shellmound.
Berkeley's decision regarding the Fourth Street site will demonstrate the character of our City, which has been an example for our country as a whole. As the scriptwriter of the documentary Berkeley in the Sixties, I know well how influential actions by Berkeley citizens and our government can be. The decision on whether to honor or obliterate Berkeley's original village site will affect everyone's understanding of who were are and what we stand for at this crucial moment in the history of our City and our country. I urge you and other Berkeley officials to reject the DEIR and instead respect the West Berkeley shellmound as a sacred site in a way that honors indigenous people and the best traditions of our great City.
Stephen Most
Allen, Shannon
From: Yael Schonzeit
Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners:
I am writing to express my deep concerns about the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Preservation Commission in 2000, noting the site is “most highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial ground.” The site was also listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, and determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The original West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site completely encompassed the proposed 1900 Fourth Street Project and blocks beyond. It is known to be the oldest bayside settlement and one of the largest shellmounds in the San Francisco Bay Area—more than 5,000 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone Peoples today—a fact not acknowledged in the DEIR.
The content of the DEIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by widespread community opposition and concern voiced at the March 10, 2016, December 8, 2016 and January 12, 2017 Zoning Adjustment Board meetings and the December 1, 2016, and January 5, 2017 Landmark Preservation Commission meetings. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to create the archaeological report and there has not been adequate peer review of the limited data in the DEIR. The archaeological analysis is inadequate and misleading. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered many prehistoric human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address human remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology and conclusions of the 1900 Fourth Street Draft EIR. The likely disturbance of human remains is highly significant as defined by CEQA and cannot be mitigated. The DEIR does not address the issue of Richard Schwartz’s recording of over 400 burials in the vicinity of 1900 Fourth St. and fails to provide any context of the lot within the larger site, ALA-307. The DEIR attempts to isolate and not analyze 1900 Fourth St. within the context of a larger site of cultural significance.
Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the DEIR’s preparation. The primary consultant has conflicts of interest, and does not represent the all of the Ohlone people indigenous to the Bay Area. Another Ohlone California Tribal group indigenous to Berkeley area and community has formally and repeatedly requested tribal consultation as required by CEQA. The City to date has not consulted with this group for purposes of preparing the DEIR, in violation of CEQA. The consultation that has occurred to date appears to be nothing more than a token gesture that fails to protect this important Ohlone site (the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site) and has resulted in payment of funds to an individual as mitigation for the destruction of this irreplaceable
sacred place. The Ohlone comprise more than a dozen tribes and languages yet the DEIR consults only one individual. The DEIR also fails to assess the importance of this site as a “tribal cultural resource” separate from the category of “cultural resources – archaeological.” AB 52 established a new category of resources under the California Environmental Quality Act, “tribal cultural resources,” which considers the tribal cultural values in addition to the scientific and archaeological values when determining impacts and mitigation. This DEIR, rather than fully assessing the impacts to tribal cultural resources under a new category, merely incorporates a brief discussion under the cultural resources archaeological section that states the destruction of the site will be mitigated through: 1) payment to an individual of $75,000 to improve a cemetery located outside the bounds of the shellmound and outside of the city boundaries, and 2) that educational panels will be placed at or near the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site after further consultation with the Ohlone people, without identifying who will be consulted for this mitigation measure. Neither the discussion nor the proposed mitigation complies with CEQA requirements to consult with impacted Tribes and to include a new and separate category addressing “tribal cultural resources.”
Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley, entitled “Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People” states in part: “BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site.” Please honor this promise. Honoring this promise requires consultation will additional Ohlone people who recognize this site as sacred, as a tribal cultural property and it requires consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region. To date, Berkeley has not honored this promise and has failed to seek the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous people of the region—and has failed to respect the indigenous peoples’ opposition to the proposed project.
On page 67, the DEIR states, “Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous peoples of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear whether or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. Given that 1900 Fourth Street proposal includes 155- apartments, and given that there are numerous Tribal objections to the development, it seems clear that the step of meaningful Tribal consultation before amending the General Plan was not done. The Project also requires several discretionary approvals by the City for variances to the current general plan and zoning ordinances. These approvals would require consultation under both AB 52 and SB 18.
At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound and Ohlone village site is a series of murals and a small plaque in the parking lot under the nearby freeway. Certainly, the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone peoples to develop a major memorial and educational site in the form of a culturally-appropriate, green open space park at 1900 Fourth Street. The DEIR fails to analyze and offer meaningful alternatives. I strongly support the development of such a memorial and educational site in lieu of the proposed development as the preferred alternative.
In addition to the unavoidable adverse impacts to this critical tribal resource the DEIR includes other fatal flaws that require the City of Berkeley to either disapprove the Project or at a minimum require a supplemental EIR before making any determinations on the Project. The Project will not fulfill the purposes set forth in the Project proposal—in fact the Project will actually exacerbate issues it claims to resolve. The DEIR does not adequately address traffic impacts in that it fails to include all approved and ongoing projects in the area. The failure to address these other projects means that the cumulative impacts analysis is fatally flawed. The DEIR fails to account for safety issues that will result from additional traffic in the area and the railroad crossing. The DEIR does not fully address potential air quality impacts nor does it adequately discuss studies regarding increased asthma and other respiratory problems for people living near freeways and industrial areas. The DEIR does not sufficiently address the potential for release of hazardous chemicals through ground disturbance. The DEIR does include a sufficient discussion of potential impacts to water resources on site that could result from development on the site, nor does the document include an adequate alternatives analysis. It would be irresponsible for the City of Berkeley to consider approving this project without complete and accurate information regarding any and all impacts that may affect the health and safety of the community. This Project has the potential to increase already significant traffic congestion, harm the health of residents, and destroy irreplaceable cultural and historic sites that the City of Berkeley has pledged to protect.
This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of more than 5,000 years of history and a living culture. Reject the DEIR and embrace the No Plan / Create a Berkeley Gateway / Memorial Site Alternative!
Sincerely,
Yael Schonzeit
Allen, Shannon
From: Abby Krumbein
Attn: Shannon Allen
City of Berkeley Planning Dept.
1947 Center Street, 2nd Floor
Berkeley, CA 94704 DATE January 30, 2017
Re: Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report on proposed 1900 4th Street Project
Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners:
I am writing to express my deep concerns about the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Preservation Commission in 2000, noting the site is “most highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial ground.” The site was also listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, and determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The original West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site completely encompassed the proposed 1900 Fourth Street Project and blocks beyond. It is known to be the oldest bayside settlement and one of the largest shellmounds in the San Francisco Bay Area—more than 5,000 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone Peoples today—a fact not acknowledged in the DEIR.
The content of the DEIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by widespread community opposition and concern voiced at the March 10, 2016, December 8, 2016 and January 12, 2017 Zoning Adjustment Board meetings and the December 1, 2016, and January 5, 2017 Landmark Preservation Commission meetings. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to create the archaeological report and there has not been adequate peer review of the limited data in the DEIR. The archaeological analysis is inadequate and misleading. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered many prehistoric human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address human remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology and conclusions of the 1900 Fourth Street Draft EIR. The likely disturbance of human remains is highly significant as defined by CEQA and cannot be mitigated. The DEIR does not address the issue of Richard Schwartz’s recording of over 400 burials in the vicinity of 1900 Fourth St. and fails to provide any context of the lot within the larger site, ALA-307. The DEIR attempts to isolate and not analyze 1900 Fourth St. within the context of a larger site of cultural significance.
Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the DEIR’s preparation. The primary consultant has conflicts of interest, and does not represent the all of the Ohlone people indigenous to the Bay Area. Another Ohlone California Tribal group indigenous to Berkeley area and community has formally and repeatedly requested tribal consultation as required by CEQA. The City to date has not consulted with this group for purposes of preparing the DEIR, in violation of CEQA. The consultation that has occurred to date appears to be nothing more than a token gesture that fails to protect this important Ohlone site (the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site) and has resulted in payment of funds to an individual as mitigation for the destruction of this irreplaceable sacred place. The Ohlone comprise more than a dozen tribes and languages yet the DEIR consults only one individual. The DEIR also fails to assess the importance of this site as a “tribal cultural resource” separate from the category of “cultural resources – archaeological.” AB 52 established a new category of resources under the California Environmental Quality Act, “tribal cultural resources,” which considers the tribal cultural values in addition to the scientific and archaeological values when determining impacts and mitigation. This DEIR, rather than fully assessing the impacts to tribal cultural resources under a new category, merely incorporates a brief discussion under the cultural resources archaeological section that states the destruction of the site will be mitigated through: 1) payment to an individual of $75,000 to improve a cemetery located outside the bounds of the shellmound and outside of the city boundaries, and 2) that educational panels will be placed at or near the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site after further consultation with the Ohlone people, without identifying who will be consulted for this mitigation measure. Neither the discussion nor the proposed mitigation complies with CEQA requirements to consult with impacted Tribes and to include a new and separate category addressing “tribal cultural resources.”
Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley, entitled “Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People” states in part: “BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site.” Please honor this promise. Honoring this promise requires consultation will additional Ohlone people who recognize this site as sacred, as a tribal cultural property and it requires consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region. To date, Berkeley has not honored this promise and has failed to seek the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous people of the region—and has failed to respect the indigenous peoples’ opposition to the proposed project.
On page 67, the DEIR states, “Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous peoples of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear whether or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. Given that 1900 Fourth Street proposal includes 155- apartments, and given that there are numerous Tribal objections to the development, it seems clear that the step of meaningful Tribal consultation before amending the General Plan was not done. The Project also requires several discretionary approvals by the City for variances to the current general plan and zoning ordinances. These approvals would require consultation under both AB 52 and SB 18.
At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound and Ohlone village site is a series of murals and a small plaque in the parking lot under the nearby freeway. Certainly, the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone peoples to develop a major memorial and educational site in the form of a culturally-appropriate, green open space park at 1900 Fourth Street. The DEIR fails to analyze and offer meaningful alternatives. I strongly support the development of such a memorial and educational site in lieu of the proposed development as the preferred alternative.
In addition to the unavoidable adverse impacts to this critical tribal resource the DEIR includes other fatal flaws that require the City of Berkeley to either disapprove the Project or at a minimum require a supplemental EIR before making any determinations on the Project. The Project will not fulfill the purposes set forth in the Project proposal—in fact the Project will actually exacerbate issues it claims to resolve. The DEIR does not adequately address traffic impacts in that it fails to include all approved and ongoing projects in the area. The failure to address these other projects means that the cumulative impacts analysis is fatally flawed. The DEIR fails to account for safety issues that will result from additional traffic in the area and the railroad crossing. The DEIR does not fully address potential air quality impacts nor does it adequately discuss studies regarding increased asthma and other respiratory problems for people living near freeways and industrial areas. The DEIR does not sufficiently address the potential for release of hazardous chemicals through ground disturbance. The DEIR does include a sufficient discussion of potential impacts to water resources on site that could result from development on the site, nor does the document include an adequate alternatives analysis. It would be irresponsible for the City of Berkeley to consider approving this project without complete and accurate information regarding any and all impacts that may affect the health and safety of the community. This Project has the potential to increase already significant traffic congestion, harm the health of residents, and destroy irreplaceable cultural and historic sites that the City of Berkeley has pledged to protect.
This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of more than 5,000 years of history and a living culture. Reject the DEIR and embrace the No Plan / Create a Berkeley Gateway / Memorial Site Alternative!
Sincerely,
Abby Krumbein
-- Abby Krumbein Sacred Dawn Doula Care www.sacreddawndoulacare.com 847.212.1835
Allen, Shannon
From: Elsa Asher
Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners:
I am writing to express my deep concerns about the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Preservation Commission in 2000, noting the site is “most highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial ground.” The site was also listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, and determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The original West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site completely encompassed the proposed 1900 Fourth Street Project and blocks beyond. It is known to be the oldest bayside settlement and one of the largest shellmounds in the San Francisco Bay Area—more than 5,000 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone Peoples today—a fact not acknowledged in the DEIR.
The content of the DEIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by widespread community opposition and concern voiced at the March 10, 2016, December 8, 2016 and January 12, 2017 Zoning Adjustment Board meetings and the December 1, 2016, and January 5, 2017 Landmark Preservation Commission meetings. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to create the archaeological report and there has not been adequate peer review of the limited data in the DEIR. The archaeological analysis is inadequate and misleading. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered many prehistoric human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address human remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology and conclusions of the 1900 Fourth Street Draft EIR. The likely disturbance of human remains is highly significant as defined by CEQA and cannot be mitigated. The DEIR does not address the issue of Richard Schwartz’s recording of over 400 burials in the vicinity of 1900 Fourth St. and fails to provide any context of the lot within the larger site, ALA-307. The DEIR attempts to isolate and not analyze 1900 Fourth St. within the context of a larger site of cultural significance.
Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the DEIR’s preparation. The primary consultant has conflicts of interest, and does not represent the all of the Ohlone people indigenous to the Bay Area. Another Ohlone California Tribal group indigenous to Berkeley area and community has formally and repeatedly requested tribal consultation as required by CEQA. The City to date has not consulted with this group for purposes of preparing the DEIR, in violation of CEQA. The consultation that has occurred to date appears to be nothing more than a token gesture that fails to protect this important Ohlone site (the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site) and has resulted in payment of funds to an individual as mitigation for the destruction of this irreplaceable sacred place. The Ohlone comprise more than a dozen tribes and languages yet the DEIR consults only one individual. The DEIR also fails to assess the importance of this site as a “tribal cultural resource” separate from the category of “cultural resources – archaeological.” AB 52 established a new category of resources under the California Environmental Quality Act, “tribal cultural resources,” which considers the tribal cultural values in addition to the scientific and archaeological values when determining impacts and mitigation. This DEIR, rather than fully assessing the impacts to tribal cultural resources under a new category, merely incorporates a brief discussion under the cultural resources archaeological section that states the destruction of the site will be mitigated through: 1) payment to an individual of $75,000 to improve a cemetery located outside the bounds of the shellmound and outside of the city boundaries, and 2) that educational panels will be placed at or near the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site after further consultation with the Ohlone people, without identifying who will be consulted for this mitigation measure. Neither the discussion nor the proposed mitigation complies with CEQA requirements to consult with impacted Tribes and to include a new and separate category addressing “tribal cultural resources.”
Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley, entitled “Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People” states in part: “BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site.” Please honor this promise. Honoring this promise requires consultation will additional Ohlone people who recognize this site as sacred, as a tribal cultural property and it requires consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region. To date, Berkeley has not honored this promise and has failed to seek the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous people of the region—and has failed to respect the indigenous peoples’ opposition to the proposed project.
On page 67, the DEIR states, “Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous peoples of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear whether or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The
City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. Given that 1900 Fourth Street proposal includes 155- apartments, and given that there are numerous Tribal objections to the development, it seems clear that the step of meaningful Tribal consultation before amending the General Plan was not done. The Project also requires several discretionary approvals by the City for variances to the current general plan and zoning ordinances. These approvals would require consultation under both AB 52 and SB 18.
At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound and Ohlone village site is a series of murals and a small plaque in the parking lot under the nearby freeway. Certainly, the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone peoples to develop a major memorial and educational site in the form of a culturally-appropriate, green open space park at 1900 Fourth Street. The DEIR fails to analyze and offer meaningful alternatives. I strongly support the development of such a memorial and educational site in lieu of the proposed development as the preferred alternative.
In addition to the unavoidable adverse impacts to this critical tribal resource the DEIR includes other fatal flaws that require the City of Berkeley to either disapprove the Project or at a minimum require a supplemental EIR before making any determinations on the Project. The Project will not fulfill the purposes set forth in the Project proposal—in fact the Project will actually exacerbate issues it claims to resolve. The DEIR does not adequately address traffic impacts in that it fails to include all approved and ongoing projects in the area. The failure to address these other projects means that the cumulative impacts analysis is fatally flawed. The DEIR fails to account for safety issues that will result from additional traffic in the area and the railroad crossing. The DEIR does not fully address potential air quality impacts nor does it adequately discuss studies regarding increased asthma and other respiratory problems for people living near freeways and industrial areas. The DEIR does not sufficiently address the potential for release of hazardous chemicals through ground disturbance. The DEIR does include a sufficient discussion of potential impacts to water resources on site that could result from development on the site, nor does the document include an adequate alternatives analysis. It would be irresponsible for the City of Berkeley to consider approving this project without complete and accurate information regarding any and all impacts that may affect the health and safety of the community. This Project has the potential to increase already significant traffic congestion, harm the health of residents, and destroy irreplaceable cultural and historic sites that the City of Berkeley has pledged to protect.
This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of more than 5,000 years of history and a living culture. Reject the DEIR and embrace the No Plan / Create a Berkeley Gateway / Memorial Site Alternative!
Sincerely,
Elsa Asher
Elsa Asher, MS, CD(DONA) narrative medicine // somatic practitioner // full-spectrum doula // web design elsaasher.com 210.413.5029
Allen, Shannon
From: Renna Khuner-Haber
Attn: Shannon Allen
City of Berkeley Planning Dept. 1947 Center Street, 2nd Floor Berkeley, CA 94704
Re: Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report on proposed 1900 4th Street Project
Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners:
I am writing to express my deep concerns about the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Preservation Commission in 2000, noting the site is “most highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial ground.” The site was also listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, and determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The original West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site completely encompassed the proposed 1900 Fourth Street Project and blocks beyond. It is known to be the oldest bayside settlement and one of the largest shellmounds in the San Francisco Bay Area—more than 5,000 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone Peoples today—a fact not acknowledged in the DEIR.
The content of the DEIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by widespread community opposition and concern voiced at the March 10, 2016, December 8, 2016 and January 12, 2017 Zoning Adjustment Board meetings and the December 1, 2016, and January 5, 2017 Landmark Preservation Commission meetings. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to create the archaeological report and there has not been adequate peer review of the limited data in the DEIR. The archaeological analysis is inadequate and misleading. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered many prehistoric human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address human remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology and conclusions of the 1900 Fourth Street Draft EIR. The likely disturbance of human remains is highly significant as defined by CEQA and cannot be mitigated. The DEIR does not address the issue of Richard Schwartz’s recording of over 400 burials in the vicinity of 1900 Fourth St. and fails to provide any context of the lot within the larger site, ALA-307. The DEIR attempts to isolate and not analyze 1900 Fourth St. within the context of a larger site of cultural significance.
Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the DEIR’s preparation. The primary consultant has conflicts of interest, and does not represent the all of the Ohlone people indigenous to the Bay Area. Another Ohlone California Tribal group indigenous to Berkeley area and community has formally and repeatedly requested tribal consultation as required by CEQA. The City to date has not consulted with this group for purposes of preparing the DEIR, in violation of CEQA. The consultation that has occurred to date appears to be nothing more than a token gesture that fails to protect this important Ohlone site (the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site) and has resulted in payment of funds to an individual as mitigation for the destruction of this irreplaceable sacred place. The Ohlone comprise more than a dozen tribes
and languages yet the DEIR consults only one individual. The DEIR also fails to assess the importance of this site as a “tribal cultural resource” separate from the category of “cultural resources – archaeological.” AB 52 established a new category of resources under the California Environmental Quality Act, “tribal cultural resources,” which considers the tribal cultural values in addition to the scientific and archaeological values when determining impacts and mitigation. This DEIR, rather than fully assessing the impacts to tribal cultural resources under a new category, merely incorporates a brief discussion under the cultural resources archaeological section that states the destruction of the site will be mitigated through: 1) payment to an individual of $75,000 to improve a cemetery located outside the bounds of the shellmound and outside of the city boundaries, and 2) that educational panels will be placed at or near the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site after further consultation with the Ohlone people, without identifying who will be consulted for this mitigation measure. Neither the discussion nor the proposed mitigation complies with CEQA requirements to consult with impacted Tribes and to include a new and separate category addressing “tribal cultural resources.”
Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley, entitled “Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People” states in part: “BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site.” Please honor this promise. Honoring this promise requires consultation will additional Ohlone people who recognize this site as sacred, as a tribal cultural property and it requires consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region. To date, Berkeley has not honored this promise and has failed to seek the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous people of the region—and has failed to respect the indigenous peoples’ opposition to the proposed project.
On page 67, the DEIR states, “Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous peoples of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear whether or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. Given that 1900 Fourth Street proposal includes 155-apartments, and given that there are numerous Tribal objections to the development, it seems clear that the step of meaningful Tribal consultation before amending the General Plan was not done. The Project also requires several discretionary approvals by the City for variances to the current general plan and zoning ordinances. These approvals would require consultation under both AB 52 and SB 18.
At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound and Ohlone village site is a series of murals and a small plaque in the parking lot under the nearby freeway. Certainly, the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone peoples to develop a major memorial and educational site in the form of a culturally-appropriate, green open space park at 1900 Fourth Street. The DEIR fails to analyze and offer meaningful alternatives. I strongly support the development of such a memorial and educational site in lieu of the proposed development as the preferred alternative.
In addition to the unavoidable adverse impacts to this critical tribal resource the DEIR includes other fatal flaws that require the City of Berkeley to either disapprove the Project or at a minimum require a supplemental EIR before making any determinations on the Project. The Project will not fulfill the purposes set forth in the Project
proposal—in fact the Project will actually exacerbate issues it claims to resolve. The DEIR does not adequately address traffic impacts in that it fails to include all approved and ongoing projects in the area. The failure to address these other projects means that the cumulative impacts analysis is fatally flawed. The DEIR fails to account for safety issues that will result from additional traffic in the area and the railroad crossing. The DEIR does not fully address potential air quality impacts nor does it adequately discuss studies regarding increased asthma and other respiratory problems for people living near freeways and industrial areas. The DEIR does not sufficiently address the potential for release of hazardous chemicals through ground disturbance. The DEIR does include a sufficient discussion of potential impacts to water resources on site that could result from development on the site, nor does the document include an adequate alternatives analysis. It would be irresponsible for the City of Berkeley to consider approving this project without complete and accurate information regarding any and all impacts that may affect the health and safety of the community. This Project has the potential to increase already significant traffic congestion, harm the health of residents, and destroy irreplaceable cultural and historic sites that the City of Berkeley has pledged to protect.
This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of more than 5,000 years of history and a living culture. Reject the DEIR and embrace the No Plan / Create a Berkeley Gateway / Memorial Site Alternative!
Sincerely, Renna Khuner-Haber Resident of Berkeley, CA 94707
*+0 )#$/0 $$&(,'00 $('!*"'0*++$&'+0 '&)#*0)*)-+!('0(&&!**!('0 0 2-!*0P)00(&&'+*0
:h}(%%%}u]P}IPqt}1PnaPbP{}D]Pcb}gjvhO}yJq}OPq^\hJtPO}Jq}J}2^t{}jX}1PnaPcP{}cJhOgJna}E]P}PztPht}jT}u]P} bJhOgJna}^hNcvOPq}t]P}lnjlPnt{}Jt}&-%%}8jvnt]}DtnPPt }Xjn}y]^N]}J}OPxPdjlgPht}lnjljqJc}^q}vhOPn} Njhq^OPnJt^jh}
F]P}>jt^NP}jV}5PN^q^jh}L{}t]P}2^t{}2jvhN^b }OJtPO}8PLnwJn{}, }(%%%}qlPN^U^NJbc{}ijtPO} ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! F]^q}Ln^h\q}t]P}'.%%}8jvnt]}DunPPt}r^uP}JhO}Jcb}^uq}rvLqvnTJNP}N]JnJNtPn}vhOPn}t]P}lfnx^Py}jX}t]P} G]P} 00!'*0'0)(&&'* 0 F]P}56:C}^q}qPn^jvrb{}OPV^N^Pht}^h}NjhtPht}qNjlP}JhO}X^hO^h\q}IP}nPNjggPhO}t]P}2vctvnJb}CPqjvnNPq} qPNt^jh}jT}t]P}OjNvgPht}^h}lJnt^NvdJn}LQ}y^t]OnJyh }nPyn^ttPh}JhO}nPN^nNvdJtPO} 0}nPN^nNvbJuPO}56:C}q]jvbO}tJaP}t]QqP}^qrvQq}^htj}JNNjvht/} JOPmvJN{}JhO}PztQht}jX}NjhrvdtJt^jh}y^t]}=jrt}<^aQb{}5PqNQhOJhtq}=<5 }JhO}gPgLPnq}jW}t]P} @]bjhQ$<^q`Jh}Njggvh^t^Pr}E]^q}^qqvQ}q]jvdO}LP}Njhq^OPnPO}hjt}jhd{}vhOPn}t]P}lnjx^q^jhq}jX} 01*(}nPmv^n^h\}=<: }NjhqvdtJt^jh }Lvt}vhOPn}t]P}2^t{}jX}1QnaPcP{r}Njgg^tgPht}PzlnPqrPO}^h} 2^t{}2jvhN^b}CPqjdvt^jh}+,)*)?D}t]Ju}VnPP}ln^jn}JhO}^hTjngPO}NjhqPht}jX}t]P}@]bjhP}JhO} jt]Pn}^hO^\Phjvq}lPjlbQq}jT}t]P}nP\^jh}LP}^htP\nJc}uj}Jh{}JdtPnJt^jh}lbJhh^h\}Xjn}u]P}1PnaPbP{} D]Pbd}gjvhO}qJNnPO}q^tQ }^h}JNNjnOJhNP}y^t]}t]P}lnjx^q^jhq}jX}t]P}Hh^tPO}?Jt^jhq}5PNbJnJu^jh}jh} u]P}C^\]us}jX}:hO^\Phjvq}BPjlbQ}!}t]P}2jvhN^b }"}NJbdq} vljh}Jbd}lJnt^Pq}tj}Xjcbjy}t]P}ln^hN^lbPq}jX} t]P}5PNcJnJt^jh}y^t]}nPqlQNt}tj}t]P}IPqt}1PnaPbP{}D]PbdgjvhO}q^tQ} t]P}Tvbb}PzuPht}jX}]^qtjn^N}OjNvgPhtJt^jh}jX}t]P}IPqt}1RnaPcP{}D]Pbd}gjvhO}t]Jt}]Jq}LQPh}qvLg^ttPO} jn}nPVPnQhNPO}^h}lvLc^N}tPrt^gjh{} :h}nP\JnO}tj}g^t^\Ju^jhq}t]P} DlPN^X^NJbd{}yP}mvPqt^jh}t]Q}lnkljqJc}^h}=^t^\Jt^jh} 0t]Jt}J},*%%%}lJ{gPht}LP}gJOP}L{}t]P} OPxPdjlPn}uj}J}hjhlnjT^u}jn\Jh^|Jt^jh}^h}8nPgjht}:h}lJnt^NvcJn}yP}Jqa}t]Ju}t]P}2^t{}nPmv^nP}lnjjV}jV}JNt^xP} hjhlnjX^t}qtJtvq}Xjn}t]P}Pht^t{}t]Ju}jyhq}t]P}@]}bjhP}2SgPtPn{} !*0&!+! +!('0* (,$0!+ )00 )+ )0 $)! 0/0*+ 0'0('*,$+'+*0()0.!+ ).'0 0OO^t^jhJdb{}O^qtvnL^h\}Jh{}>Jt^xP}0gQn^NJh}Lvn^Jbq}Jt}t]P}&.%%}8jvnt]}DtnPPu}lnjlPnt{}JhO}nPgjx^h\} t]Pg}uj}Jhjt]Pn}q^tQ }ljqq^Md{}^h}8nQgjht}^q}hjt}J}OPq^nJLcP}g^t^\Jt^jh } >GZZ|ddR|RQQxgpdeR7HpGx# "'8<-Qg|L||gqpqZeR016=eGLqp|xLgqpqZG46?mGRxgp .gQGGJH|R|xRLqooRpQRQH| ) ) #", ,qmQLq|' q! ,&#!!",) ), ) , "" " , $&)!"),&%*(),*" " ,&,) ),$&# ),'#!,) , )+, #*" , "$""),#,) (, $&) * &,$&# ),AeRLxRHgqpqXeR46?mGRx|eqmQpqQRvRpQqpZpQgpdZxqoHvxqiRLeGqmQ |J|HpgHmmQGoHdR+RxlRmR|oq||gdpgXgLGpGxLeGRqmqdgLGm|gR ",& &,)#, ) ) #", ,) ,&) #",#,, ()#& , ($ +, (,", "%*),! ) ) #",&, ()*&",",$#(( ,()&*) #",#,) , ()#& ,&(#*&, )( , 6pGQQggqp eR8<.|ddR||HoqQgZgLGgqpqeRvxqiRLGmRxpGgR| pGoRmeGeR:q AeRqeRxxR|qxGgqpGmRxpGgR|vxqvq|RQGxRpqGvvxqvxgGRqxxRmRHpqeRg||RqXvxR|RxgpdeR >eRmmoqpQ|gR EegmRGmRxgpdeReRgdeqx|wGxRZqqHdRqZeRvxqjRLoHGmTxqxxRQLR|qoR govGL|gQqR|pq|vRGlqeRZpQGoRpGmg}|RqZLqp|gQRxHgqpJRctxReg|.qoog||gqpvxR|RxGgqp qZeR>eRmmoqpQ|gRg|RmZ 3gpGmm egmRgovGL|xRmGRQqxG][gLLgxLmHgqpHpQqeUxg||R|GxRpqeRQgxRLLqpLRxpqZeR8<. eR8<.pqR|eG|gdpgZgLGpLxggwR|qZeRvxqvq|RQvxqjRL|govGL|eGRJRRpxGg|RQGpQ|eqmQJR GlRpgpqGLLqpJeRRpgxqpoRpGmxRgRLqp|mGp|.g|GaZGpQeRFqpgpd*Qk|oRp|+qGxQ %% ! % $% %!%! %!%! % % % % ! " % % $% % %% %# !! % " !!%!%! % % $ %! % %! % % AeRER|+RxlRmR?eRmmoqpQ6?H|GLxRQ|gR AeRRxo|GLxRQ|gRg|vGxqXeRmGpQoGxl QR|gdpGgqpmHpdGdR AeRER|,RxlRmR@eRmmoqpQeH|qpmqpR|xggpdvHxLRmqZqvRp|vHLR lpqpG|eR >vRpdRx|vHxlgpdmq AeRER|+RxlRmR>eRmmoqpQg||gmm|RQbqx;emqpRLRxRoqpgGmvyvq|R| AeR/gqZ+RxlRmR.g-qpLgmvH||RQGxR|qmgqpgp# !& xRLqdpggpdeR;emqpRvRqvmRG| eRqxgdgpGmgpeHKgGp|qZ+RxlRmR eGeR;emqpReGR|GLxRQ|gR|gp+RxlRmRGpQeRLggmm uxlgpdqqQ[GgegeeRxRvxR|RpHgR|qZeR;emqpR AeR# mGpQoHxlQR|gdpGgqpGpQeR# $.Gmg`qxpgG=Rdg|RxQR|gdpGgqpJqeGLlpqmRQdRQ eRvxR|RpLRqZxR|qxMR|fRmqeRdxqpQ AeR|gReG|pqmq|gpRdxg|gpLReRQR|gdpHgqp 5pQxRQ|qZqeRxfxgGm|eGRfRNpZqpQgppRGxJ|gR| B:01=eRXnG|x`GLRqXeR dxupQ *JqRdxqpQ|xLxR|GxRpqLmxGmxR|qxLR|vRxeRmHpQoGxlQR|gdpHgqp AeRmHpQoHxlQR|gdpGgqp|RRl|qvxqRLRRxegpdpQRxeR|x`ILR xRdHxQmR||qZeRvRxgqQqZ g|qxgdgp 6ZeR|qgmg|xRoqRQ^xqoeR|gRGpQxVvmGLRQge_hmmeR|GLxRQ|gWg|QR|RLxGRQ +qpQGxgR|qZeR|gRGxOpqgpQg|vRAeRHxRgpeRmGpQoGxlGpQ.GmgZqxpgG=Rdg|Rx QR|gdpGgqp| CpvRxogPQLqxgpdqZ# !%eqGvvxqRQeqGpQeRxRGxReRGxgZIL|xRLqRxRQ .qpLR{GJqqpRvRx|qpvRxZqxogpd9DLGvHLgZsxGmmvxqLR||R|qZQRRmqvoRp *LLxGReg|qxgLHmLxRRlgp`sxoGgqppRRQRQ gpLmQgpdm( LRpxoGv| *LLxGRQGR~qZeGJgGgqppRRQRQ *LLxGRfxgGmgp[qxoGgqppRRQRQgpLmQgpdqHmpoJRxqZxR|gQRp|JxgGm| JxgGmxgGm|GpQ vmGLRoRpgegp eRoqpQ 2pQqx|RvJmgLLqooRp|qvvq|RQq016= -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP $QQLH'DQLV DQQLHGDQLV#JPDLOFRP! 6HQW )ULGD\)HEUXDU\ 30 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ =RQLQJ$GMXVWPHQWV%RDUG =$% 6XEMHFW )RXUWK6WUHHW Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Preservation Commission in 2000, noting the site is “most highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial ground.” The site was also listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, and determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The original West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site completely encompassed the proposed 1900 Fourth Street Project and blocks beyond. It is known to be the oldest bayside settlement and one of the largest shellmounds in the San Francisco Bay Area—more than 5,000 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone Peoples today—a fact not acknowledged in the DEIR. The content of the DEIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by widespread community opposition and concern voiced at the March 10, 2016, December 8, 2016 and January 12, 2017 Zoning Adjustment Board meetings and the December 1, 2016, and January 5, 2017 Landmark Preservation Commission meetings. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to create the archaeological report and there has not been adequate peer review of the limited data in the DEIR. The archaeological analysis is inadequate and misleading. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered many prehistoric human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address human remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is highly relevant to the landmarked Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology and conclusions of the 1900 Fourth Street Draft EIR. The likely disturbance of human remains is highly significant as defined by CEQA and cannot be mitigated. The DEIR does not address the issue of Richard Schwartz’s recording of over 400 burials in the vicinity of 1900 Fourth St. and fails to provide any context of the lot within the larger site, ALA-307. The DEIR attempts to isolate and not analyze 1900 Fourth St. within the context of a larger site of cultural significance. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the DEIR’s preparation. The primary consultant has conflicts of interest, and does not represent the all of the Ohlone people indigenous to the Bay Area. Another Ohlone California Tribal group indigenous to Berkeley area and community has formally and repeatedly requested tribal consultation as required by CEQA. The City to date has not consulted with this group for purposes of preparing the DEIR, in violation of CEQA. The consultation that has occurred to date appears to be nothing more than a token gesture that fails to protect this important Ohlone site (the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site) and has resulted in payment of funds to an individual as mitigation for the destruction of this irreplaceable sacred place. The Ohlone comprise more than a dozen tribes and languages yet the DEIR consults only one individual. The DEIR also fails to assess the importance of this site as a “tribal cultural resource” separate from the category of “cultural resources – archaeological.” AB 52 established a new category of resources under the California Environmental Quality Act, “tribal cultural resources,” which considers the tribal cultural values in addition to the scientific and archaeological values when determining impacts and mitigation. This DEIR, rather than fully assessing the impacts to tribal cultural resources under a new category, merely incorporates a brief discussion under the cultural resources archaeological section that states the destruction of the site will be mitigated through: 1) payment to an individual of $75,000 to improve a cemetery located outside the bounds of the shellmound and outside of the city boundaries, and 2) that educational panels will be placed at or near the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site after further consultation with the Ohlone people, without identifying who will be consulted for this mitigation measure. Neither the discussion nor the proposed mitigation complies with CEQA requirements to consult with impacted Tribes and to include a new and separate category addressing “tribal cultural resources.” Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley, entitled “Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People” states in part: “BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site.” Please honor this promise. Honoring this promise requires consultation will additional Ohlone people who recognize this site as sacred, as a tribal cultural property and it requires consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region. To date, Berkeley has not honored this promise and has failed to seek the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous people of the region—and has failed to respect the indigenous peoples’ opposition to the proposed project. On page 67, the DEIR states, “Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous peoples of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear whether or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. Given that 1900 Fourth Street proposal includes 155-apartments, and given that there are numerous Tribal objections to the development, it seems clear that the step of meaningful Tribal consultation before amending the General Plan was not done. The Project also requires several discretionary approvals by the City for variances to the current general plan and zoning ordinances. These approvals would require consultation under both AB 52 and SB 18. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound and Ohlone village site is a series of murals and a small plaque in the parking lot under the nearby freeway. Certainly, the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone peoples to develop a major memorial and educational site in the form of a culturally-appropriate, green open space park at 1900 Fourth Street. The DEIR fails to analyze and offer meaningful alternatives. I strongly support the development of such a memorial and educational site in lieu of the proposed development as the preferred alternative. In addition to the unavoidable adverse impacts to this critical tribal resource the DEIR includes other fatal flaws that require the City of Berkeley to either disapprove the Project or at a minimum require a supplemental EIR before making any determinations on the Project. The Project will not fulfill the purposes set forth in the Project proposal—in fact the Project will actually exacerbate issues it claims to resolve. The DEIR does not adequately address traffic impacts in that it fails to include all approved and ongoing projects in the area. The failure to address these other projects means that the cumulative impacts analysis is fatally flawed. The DEIR fails to account for safety issues that will result from additional traffic in the area and the railroad crossing. The DEIR does not fully address potential air quality impacts nor does it adequately discuss studies regarding increased asthma and other respiratory problems for people living near freeways and industrial areas. The DEIR does not sufficiently address the potential for release of hazardous chemicals through ground disturbance. The DEIR does not include a sufficient discussion of potential impacts to water resources on site that could result from development on the site, nor does the document include an adequate alternatives analysis. It would be irresponsible for the City of Berkeley to consider approving this project without complete and accurate information regarding any and all impacts that may affect the health and safety of the community. This Project has the potential to increase already significant traffic congestion, harm the health of residents, and destroy irreplaceable cultural and historic sites that the City of Berkeley has pledged to protect. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of more than 5,000 years of history and a living culture. Reject the DEIR and embrace the No Plan / Create a Berkeley Gateway / Memorial Site Alternative! Sincerely, Annie Danis 94704 -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP $OHVVDQGUR/DWLQL62%8 DOHVVDQGUR#VREXVREXFRP! 6HQW )ULGD\)HEUXDU\ $0 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW 3XEOLF&RPPHQWRQSURSRVHGGHYHORSPHQWDW )RXUWK6WUHHW Dear Shannon Allen, I am writing re. the proposed project at 1900 Fourth Street in Berkeley. I am a local resident living in the vicinity of this proposed project. After studying the proposal on the City of Berkeley's website I am in strong opposition to this project and ask that YOU reject it. It is my belief that the project is unsuitable for the following reasons; 1. Most importantly - this site should be made into a National Heritage Site in tribute to the Ohlone people and it's religious importance for over 4000 years. The city of Berkeley should proudly support a park and local history museum here unlike other local cities such as Emeryville which have chosen to turn these sacred sites into strip malls. 2. The proposed project has the following unacceptable issues; o Proposed living units are all studio and one-bedroom apartments not suitable for families o Large retail and restaurant spaces that will require large corporate chain stores - leave these stores to Emeryville - we do not want more chain stores in Berkeley. o Proposed building height is completely out of scale with existing city fabric. o Traffic studies have been incomplete and inadequate. Thank you! ALESSANDRO LATINI 1820 5TH STREET BERKELEY, CA 94618 EMAIL: [email protected] Attn: Shannon Allen [You may email comments to: [email protected]] City of Berkeley Planning Dept. 1947 Center Street, 2nd Floor Berkeley, CA 94704 February 3, 2017 Re: Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report on proposed 1900 4th Street Project Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Preservation Commission in 2000, noting the site is “most highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial ground.” The site was also listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, and determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The original West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site completely encompassed the proposed 1900 Fourth Street Project and blocks beyond. It is known to be the oldest bayside settlement and one of the largest shellmounds in the San Francisco Bay Area—more than 5,000 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone Peoples today—a fact not acknowledged in the DEIR. The content of the DEIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by widespread community opposition and concern voiced at the March 10, 2016, December 8, 2016 and January 12, 2017 Zoning Adjustment Board meetings and the December 1, 2016, and January 5, 2017 Landmark Preservation Commission meetings. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to create the archaeological report and there has not been adequate peer review of the limited data in the DEIR. The archaeological analysis is inadequate and misleading. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered many prehistoric human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address human remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is highly relevant to the landmarked Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology and conclusions of the 1900 Fourth Street Draft EIR. The likely disturbance of human remains is highly significant as defined by CEQA and cannot be mitigated. The DEIR does not address the issue of Richard Schwartz’s recording of over 400 burials in the vicinity of 1900 Fourth St. and fails to provide any context of the lot within the larger site, ALA- 307. The DEIR attempts to isolate and not analyze 1900 Fourth St. within the context of a larger site of cultural significance. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the DEIR’s preparation. The primary consultant has conflicts of interest, and does not represent the all of the Ohlone people indigenous to the Bay Area. Another Ohlone California Tribal group indigenous to Berkeley area and community has formally and repeatedly requested tribal consultation as required by CEQA. The City to date has not consulted with this group for purposes of preparing the DEIR, in violation of CEQA. The consultation that has occurred to date appears to be nothing more than a token gesture that fails to protect this important Ohlone site (the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site) and has resulted in payment of funds to an individual as mitigation for the destruction of this irreplaceable sacred place. The Ohlone comprise more than a dozen tribes and languages yet the DEIR consults only one individual. The DEIR also fails to assess the importance of this site as a “tribal cultural resource” separate from the category of “cultural resources – archaeological.” AB 52 established a new category of resources under the California Environmental Quality Act, “tribal cultural resources,” which considers the tribal cultural values in addition to the scientific and archaeological values when determining impacts and mitigation. This DEIR, rather than fully assessing the impacts to tribal cultural resources under a new category, merely incorporates a brief discussion under the cultural resources archaeological section that states the destruction of the site will be mitigated through: 1) payment to an individual of $75,000 to improve a cemetery located outside the bounds of the shellmound and outside of the city boundaries, and 2) that educational panels will be placed at or near the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site after further consultation with the Ohlone people, without identifying who will be consulted for this mitigation measure. Neither the discussion nor the proposed mitigation complies with CEQA requirements to consult with impacted Tribes and to include a new and separate category addressing “tribal cultural resources.” Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley, entitled “Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People” states in part: “BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site.” Please honor this promise. Honoring this promise requires consultation will additional Ohlone people who recognize this site as sacred, as a tribal cultural property and it requires consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region. To date, Berkeley has not honored this promise and has failed to seek the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous people of the region—and has failed to respect the indigenous peoples’ opposition to the proposed project. On page 67, the DEIR states, “Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous peoples of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear whether or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. Given that 1900 Fourth Street proposal includes 155-apartments, and given that there are numerous Tribal objections to the development, it seems clear that the step of meaningful Tribal consultation before amending the General Plan was not done. The Project also requires several discretionary approvals by the City for variances to the current general plan and zoning ordinances. These approvals would require consultation under both AB 52 and SB 18. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound and Ohlone village site is a series of murals and a small plaque in the parking lot under the nearby freeway. Certainly, the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone peoples to develop a major memorial and educational site in the form of a culturally-appropriate, green open space park at 1900 Fourth Street. The DEIR fails to analyze and offer meaningful alternatives. I strongly support the development of such a memorial and educational site in lieu of the proposed development as the preferred alternative. In addition to the unavoidable adverse impacts to this critical tribal resource the DEIR includes other fatal flaws that require the City of Berkeley to either disapprove the Project or at a minimum require a supplemental EIR before making any determinations on the Project. The Project will not fulfill the purposes set forth in the Project proposal—in fact the Project will actually exacerbate issues it claims to resolve. The DEIR does not adequately address traffic impacts in that it fails to include all approved and ongoing projects in the area. The failure to address these other projects means that the cumulative impacts analysis is fatally flawed. The DEIR fails to account for safety issues that will result from additional traffic in the area and the railroad crossing. The DEIR does not fully address potential air quality impacts nor does it adequately discuss studies regarding increased asthma and other respiratory problems for people living near freeways and industrial areas. The DEIR does not sufficiently address the potential for release of hazardous chemicals through ground disturbance. The DEIR does not include a sufficient discussion of potential impacts to water resources on site that could result from development on the site, nor does the document include an adequate alternatives analysis. It would be irresponsible for the City of Berkeley to consider approving this project without complete and accurate information regarding any and all impacts that may affect the health and safety of the community. This Project has the potential to increase already significant traffic congestion, harm the health of residents, and destroy irreplaceable cultural and historic sites that the City of Berkeley has pledged to protect. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of more than 5,000 years of history and a living culture. Reject the DEIR and embrace the No Plan / Create a Berkeley Gateway / Memorial Site Alternative! • This is our last opportunity to protect and preserve the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site. Almost all of the other shellmound and villages sites have been developed and buried under concrete. Please do not approve the destruction of this unique, historic, irreplaceable site. We should preserve and enhance the remaining sites and our collective efforts should start with this site. • This is the oldest sacred site in the Bay Area. It has to be protected. If destroyed by development it will be lost forever—and Berkeley will be responsible for a sacred place’s cultural, spiritual and ecological history being swept off the Earth. • Berkeley is on record supporting the rights of indigenous people. The Landmarks Commission noted that this site is “highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial site.” The city of Berkeley should not be approving and defending the destruction of a sacred site. The City of Berkeley has passed resolutions supporting the protection of sacred sites outside of Berkeley, such as the resolution passed supporting the Standing Rock Sioux opposition to the Dakota Access Pipeline. For the City to have credibility it must take action to protect the sacred sites within its boundaries that it has pledged to protect—including this important site. • The draft EIR language and archaeological analysis cleverly seeks to distract from the larger landmarked village site by claiming there are no shellmound remains within the 2.2 acre parking lot site. This is deceptive and inaccurate. We are concerned about the entire site, which is eligible for the National Register of Historic Places, and whose boundary is already determined. 1900 Fourth St. sits within this larger site. • CEQA requires that 1900 Fourth Street be respected in a manner consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (1995) whose “Standards for Preservation” states: “A property will be used as it was historically… The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The replacement of intact or repairable historic materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided.” The draft EIR fails to identify and address these state and federal protection requirements (as does the proposed project). Mitigation “below a level of significance” in thus impossible. The draft EIR is inadequate and should not be certified or approved even if revised. • CEQA Guidelines under Section 15126.4 (b) Mitigation Measures Related to Impacts on Historical Resources. (3)(A), states: “Preservation in place is the preferred manner of mitigating impacts to archaeological sites. Preservation in place maintains the relationship between artifacts and the archaeological context. Preservation may also avoid conflict with religious or cultural values of groups associated with the site.” Mitigation “below a level of significance” is impossible. The draft EIR is inadequate and should not be certified or approved even if revised. • There is no feasible way to mitigate the disturbance of burials. These impacts are unavoidable significant impacts and cannot be mitigated. • The alternatives analysis is inadequate and insufficient. The draft EIR does not adequately assess alternatives as required by CEQA. A reasonable range of alternatives should have been considered. A reasonable range of alternatives would have considered designating the entire site as culturally-significant, memorial, open space, as the site would be excellent for wetlands mitigation and state agencies are ready and willing to step in and assist in culturally-appropriate ecological restoration. There are few such properties available for wetlands mitigation. This site also has the potential for an urban creek restoration project that could provide restoration of a portion of what was the nature landscape of the area, enhancing water quality, promoting climate change mitigation, and allowing protection in perpetuity of this critical tribal cultural resource. The developer should have also analyzed an alternative location for this mega-development; a site that is not as close to the freeway, and not located within the boundaries of the West Berkeley Shellmound and Village Site. • The project proposes housing close to the freeway and train tracks, with 155 apartments and perhaps 3-500 new residents and 372 parking spaces: The The DEIR does not adequately address traffic impacts in that it fails to include all approved and ongoing projects in the area. The failure to address these other projects means that the cumulative impacts analysis is fatally flawed. The DEIR fails to account for safety issues that will result from additional traffic in the area and the railroad crossing. The DEIR does not fully address potential air quality impacts nor does it adequately discuss studies regarding increased asthma and other respiratory problems for people living near freeways and industrial areas. The DEIR does not sufficiently address the potential for release of hazardous chemicals through ground disturbance. The DEIR does include a sufficient discussion of potential impacts to water resources on site that could result from development on the site, nor does the document include an adequate alternatives analysis. • The EIR ignores the many hundreds of burials already known to have been removed from sanctified burial ceremonies that laid them there. Burials have been found from 2-13 feet below the surface in the site. They surround the site and are likely within the 2.2 acres from which 8- feet of subsurface soil would be excavated. The developer should not destroy this site, disturb burials and separate us all from ever knowing them and their world. • The city and the developer have not complied with AB52, having failed to consult with members of the Ohlone community. The Ohlone comprise more than a dozen tribes and languages yet the draft EIR consults only one individual. • The West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site is still used for prayer and ceremony by members of the Ohlone community. This will no longer be possible if the project is approved. These important facts are not mentioned in the draft EIR. • The draft EIR fails to mention or address the proposed project’s violation of Berkeley Municipal Code 3.24.260 “Permit application-—Review standards and criteria” which states (italics added): “Approval of permit applications pursuant to this section may be granted only upon determination that the proposal conforms to the criteria set forth in paragraph 1: For permit applications for construction, alteration or repair: For applications relating to landmark sites, the proposed work shall not adversely affect the exterior architectural features of the landmark and, where specified in the designation for a publicly owned landmark, its major interior architectural features; nor shall the proposed work adversely affect the special character or special historical, architectural or aesthetic interest or value of the landmark and its site, as viewed both in themselves and in their setting.” Hence, the 1900 Fourth Street’s Structural Alteration Permit #LMSAP2015-00005 application should be denied. • The 1900 Fourth Street draft EIR is fatally flawed, inadequate and defective. The city should review, reject, reissue and not certify this EIR, and never approve commercial development of the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site. I recently returned from a trip to Italy and Germany. In Ravenna, Italy I took two days to look at “old” mosaics that have been preserved. One of the sites, “House of Stone Carpets” (Domus dei Tappeti di Pietra), was discovered during beginning excavations for a parking garage in 1993. Construction was halted, and now thousands of visitors to the site walk over mosaic floors on transparent glass and contemplate the layers of life that have transpired since the 6th century AD. Our bay area shellmounds are much, much older than this. Please, let us show respect to the first inhabitants and their active descendants by not allowing any commercial development of the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site. It is a step in the right direction; our last chance. Thank you for your consideration. Dorothy Klein 1309 Walnut St. Berkeley, CA 94709 [email protected] Cell: 707 616 6737 Attn: Shannon Allen City of Berkeley Planning Dept. Allen, Shannon From: [email protected] Sent: Friday, February 03, 2017 1:45 PM To: Allen, Shannon Subject: Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report on proposed 1900 4th Street Project 'HDU0V$OOHQDQG%HUNHOH\&LW\3ODQQHUV ,DPZULWLQJWRH[SUHVVP\GHHSFRQFHUQVDERXWWKH'UDIW(QYLURQPHQWDO,PSDFW5HSRUW '(,5 UHJDUGLQJ )RXUWK6WUHHW ,LPSORUH%HUNHOH\WRWDNHDVWDQGDJDLQVWWKLVFRQVWUXFWLRQWKDWZLOOEHQHILWZHDOWK\ GHYHORSHUVDWWKHH[SHQVHRIPRUHWKDQ\HDUVRIKLVWRU\DQGDOLYLQJFXOWXUH 3OHDVHUHMHFWWKH'(,5DQGHPEUDFHWKH1R3ODQ&UHDWHD%HUNHOH\*DWHZD\0HPRULDO 6LWH$OWHUQDWLYH 7KLVLVWKHROGHVWVDFUHGVLWHLQWKH%D\$UHD,WKDVWREHSURWHFWHG,IGHVWUR\HGE\ GHYHORSPHQWLWZLOOEHORVWIRUHYHU³DQG%HUNHOH\ZLOOEHUHVSRQVLEOHIRUDVDFUHGSODFH·V FXOWXUDOVSLULWXDODQGHFRORJLFDOKLVWRU\EHLQJVZHSWRIIWKH(DUWK %HUNHOH\LVRQUHFRUGVXSSRUWLQJWKHULJKWVRILQGLJHQRXVSHRSOH7KH/DQGPDUNV &RPPLVVLRQQRWHGWKDWWKLVVLWHLV´KLJKO\VLJQLILFDQWWRQDWLYHGHVFHQGDQWVDVDVDFUHG EXULDOVLWHµ7KHFLW\RI%HUNHOH\VKRXOGQRWEHDSSURYLQJDQGGHIHQGLQJWKHGHVWUXFWLRQRID VDFUHGVLWH7KH&LW\RI%HUNHOH\KDVSDVVHGUHVROXWLRQVVXSSRUWLQJWKHSURWHFWLRQRIVDFUHG VLWHVRXWVLGHRI%HUNHOH\VXFKDVWKHUHVROXWLRQSDVVHGVXSSRUWLQJWKH6WDQGLQJ5RFN 6LRX[RSSRVLWLRQWRWKH'DNRWD$FFHVV3LSHOLQH)RUWKH&LW\WRKDYHFUHGLELOLW\LWPXVWWDNH DFWLRQWRSURWHFWWKHVDFUHGVLWHVZLWKLQLWVERXQGDULHVWKDWLWKDVSOHGJHGWRSURWHFW³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ello, My name is Hallie Wells and I am a Berkeley resident. I’m writing to voice my opposition to the proposed development on the West Berkeley Shellmound site. This is a sacred site for indigenous members of our community and it is unconscionable that we would desecrate this site for commercial ends. Thank you, Hallie Wells 347-615-1516 zip code 94705 -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP -DPHV6FRWW/\RQV MVFRWWO\RQV#JPDLOFRP! 6HQW )ULGD\)HEUXDU\ 30 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW )RXUWK3URMHFW ,ĞůůŽ͕ DLJŶĂŵĞŝƐ^ĐŽƚƚ>LJŽŶƐ͕ĂŶĚ/ĂŵĂŐƌĂĚƵĂƚĞƐƚƵĚĞŶƚĂƚhĞƌŬĞůĞLJ͘/͛ŵǁƌŝƚŝŶŐƚŽĚĂLJŝŶŽƉƉŽƐŝƚŝŽŶƚŽƚŚĞϭϵϬϬ&ŽƵƌƚŚ ƉƌŽũĞĐƚ͘dŚŝƐƉƌŽũĞĐƚ͕ǁŚŝĐŚƉƌŽƉŽƐĞƐƚŽƌĞŵŽǀĞĞŝŐŚƚĨĞĞƚŽĨƐŽŝůĂŶĚĚƌŝǀĞƉŝůĞƐŽǀĞƌϭϬϬĨĞĞƚĚĞĞƉ͕ƐƚĂŶĚƐƚŽ ŝƌƌĞǀŽĐĂďůLJĚĂŵĂŐĞƚŚĞůĂͲϯϬϳĂƌĐŚĂĞŽůŽŐŝĐĂůƐŝƚĞ͘dŚŝƐƐŝƚĞŝƐƚŚĞŽůĚĞƐƚďĂLJƐŝĚĞƐŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚƐŝƚĞŝŶƚŚĞ^ĂŶ&ƌĂŶĐŝƐĐŽ ĂLJƌĞĂďLJĂŵĂƌŐŝŶŽĨϭϬϬϬLJĞĂƌƐ͘dŚĞĐƵůƚƵƌĂůĂŶĚƐĐŝĞŶƚŝĨŝĐǀĂůƵĞŽĨƚŚŝƐƐŝƚĞ͕ŶŽƚƚŽŵĞŶƚŝŽŶŝƚƐƐĂĐƌĞĚŶĂƚƵƌĞ ĚĞŵĂŶĚƚŚĂƚƐƚĞƉƐďĞƚĂŬĞŶƚŽƉƌĞƐĞƌǀĞŝƚŝŶƉůĂĐĞ͕ƌĂƚŚĞƌƚŚĂŶƌĞƉůĂĐĞŝƚǁŝƚŚĂƉĂƌŬŝŶŐŐĂƌĂŐĞ͘ dŚĂŶŬLJŽƵĨŽƌLJŽƵƌƚŝŵĞ͕ ^ĐŽƚƚ>LJŽŶƐ -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP MPDUKRXVHVL]H#JPDLOFRPRQEHKDOIRI-XOLD6L]HN MVL]HN#JPDLOFRP! 6HQW )ULGD\)HEUXDU\ 30 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ =RQLQJ$GMXVWPHQWV%RDUG =$% 6XEMHFW 3XEOLF&RPPHQW5H :HVW%HUNHOH\ To whom it may concern, This email is to recommend against continuing the West Berkeley project. Historically, since other projects have uncovered human remains, it is vitally important that the project is either prevented or that the no development alternative is considered. Additionally, it is quite important that Native American monitors are in place during the entirety of any proposed development, and that development can be stopped in the case that human remains are found during the course of process. As an anthropologist who frequently works on CEQA processes in Southeastern California, I urge you to follow not only the letter, but the spirit of the law in Native American consultation processes. Sincerely, Julia Sizek 94704 -- Julia M. H. Sizek PhD Student | UC-Berkeley Anthropology Dept. 937-681-4230 | [email protected] -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP -R$QQH Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Preservation Commission in 2000, noting the site is “most highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial ground.” The site was also listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, and determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The original West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site completely encompassed the proposed 1900 Fourth Street Project and blocks beyond. It is known to be the oldest bayside settlement and one of the largest shellmounds in the San Francisco Bay Area—more than 5,000 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone Peoples today—a fact not acknowledged in the DEIR. The content of the DEIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by widespread community opposition and concern voiced at the March 10, 2016, December 8, 2016 and January 12, 2017 Zoning Adjustment Board meetings and the December 1, 2016, and January 5, 2017 Landmark Preservation Commission meetings. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to create the archaeological report and there has not been adequate peer review of the limited data in the DEIR. The archaeological analysis is inadequate and misleading. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered many prehistoric human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address human remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is highly relevant to the landmarked Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology and conclusions of the 1900 Fourth Street Draft EIR. The likely disturbance of human remains is highly significant as defined by CEQA and cannot be mitigated. The DEIR does not address the issue of Richard Schwartz’s recording of over 400 burials in the vicinity of 1900 Fourth St. and fails to provide any context of the lot within the larger site, ALA-307. The DEIR attempts to isolate and not analyze 1900 Fourth St. within the context of a larger site of cultural significance. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the DEIR’s preparation. The primary consultant has conflicts of interest, and does not represent the all of the Ohlone people indigenous to the Bay Area. Another Ohlone California Tribal group indigenous to Berkeley area and community has formally and repeatedly requested tribal consultation as required by CEQA. The City to date has not consulted with this group for purposes of preparing the DEIR, in violation of CEQA. The consultation that has occurred to date appears to be nothing more than a token gesture that fails to protect this important Ohlone site (the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site) and has resulted in payment of funds to an individual as mitigation for the destruction of this irreplaceable sacred place. The Ohlone comprise more than a dozen tribes and languages yet the DEIR consults only one individual. The DEIR also fails to assess the importance of this site as a “tribal cultural resource” separate from the category of “cultural resources – archaeological.” AB 52 established a new category of resources under the California Environmental Quality Act, “tribal cultural resources,” which considers the tribal cultural values in addition to the scientific and archaeological values when determining impacts and mitigation. This DEIR, rather than fully assessing the impacts to tribal cultural resources under a new category, merely incorporates a brief discussion under the cultural resources archaeological section that states the destruction of the site will be mitigated through: 1) payment to an individual of $75,000 to improve a cemetery located outside the bounds of the shellmound and outside of the city boundaries, and 2) that educational panels will be placed at or near the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site after further consultation with the Ohlone people, without identifying who will be consulted for this mitigation measure. Neither the discussion nor the proposed mitigation complies with CEQA requirements to consult with impacted Tribes and to include a new and separate category addressing “tribal cultural resources.” Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley, entitled “Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People” states in part: “BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site.” Please honor this promise. Honoring this promise requires consultation will additional Ohlone people who recognize this site as sacred, as a tribal cultural property and it requires consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region. To date, Berkeley has not honored this promise and has failed to seek the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous people of the region—and has failed to respect the indigenous peoples’ opposition to the proposed project. On page 67, the DEIR states, “Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous peoples of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear whether or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. Given that 1900 Fourth Street proposal includes 155-apartments, and given that there are numerous Tribal objections to the development, it seems clear that the step of meaningful Tribal consultation before amending the General Plan was not done. The Project also requires several discretionary approvals by the City for variances to the current general plan and zoning ordinances. These approvals would require consultation under both AB 52 and SB 18. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound and Ohlone village site is a series of murals and a small plaque in the parking lot under the nearby freeway. Certainly, the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone peoples to develop a major memorial and educational site in the form of a culturally-appropriate, green open space park at 1900 Fourth Street. The DEIR fails to analyze and offer meaningful alternatives. I strongly support the development of such a memorial and educational site in lieu of the proposed development as the preferred alternative. In addition to the unavoidable adverse impacts to this critical tribal resource the DEIR includes other fatal flaws that require the City of Berkeley to either disapprove the Project or at a minimum require a supplemental EIR before making any determinations on the Project. The Project will not fulfill the purposes set forth in the Project proposal—in fact the Project will actually exacerbate issues it claims to resolve. The DEIR does not adequately address traffic impacts in that it fails to include all approved and ongoing projects in the area. The failure to address these other projects means that the cumulative impacts analysis is fatally flawed. The DEIR fails to account for safety issues that will result from additional traffic in the area and the railroad crossing. The DEIR does not fully address potential air quality impacts nor does it adequately discuss studies regarding increased asthma and other respiratory problems for people living near freeways and industrial areas. The DEIR does not sufficiently address the potential for release of hazardous chemicals through ground disturbance. The DEIR does not include a sufficient discussion of potential impacts to water resources on site that could result from development on the site, nor does the document include an adequate alternatives analysis. It would be irresponsible for the City of Berkeley to consider approving this project without complete and accurate information regarding any and all impacts that may affect the health and safety of the community. This Project has the potential to increase already significant traffic congestion, harm the health of residents, and destroy irreplaceable cultural and historic sites that the City of Berkeley has pledged to protect. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of more than 5,000 years of history and a living culture. Reject the DEIR and embrace the No Plan / Create a Berkeley Gateway / Memorial Site Alternative! Sincerely, Jo Anne Yada February 3, 2017 Attn: Shannon Allen City of Berkeley Planning Department 1947 Center Street, 2nd Floor Berkeley, CA 94704 RE: Comments on Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) on Proposed 1900 Fourth Street Project Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: As a 30+ years Bay Area resident who works and shops in Berkeley, I am writing to express my deep concerns about the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) regarding the 1900 Fourth Street Project. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Preservation Commission in 2000, noting the site is “most highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial ground.” The site was also listed in the California Register of Historical Resources and determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. At more than 5,000 years old, it is known to be the oldest Bayside settlements and one of the largest Shellmounds in the San Francisco Bay Area. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley and continues to be of utmost significance to the Ohlone Peoples today as a ceremonial center — a fact not acknowledged in the DEIR. The content of the DEIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by widespread community opposition at multiple Zoning Adjustment Board and Landmark Preservation Commission meetings beginning March 2016. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to create the archaeological report, and the archaeological analysis is inadequate and misleading. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered many prehistoric human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address human remains uncovered in past excavations, specifically those documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology and conclusions of the 1900 Fourth Street DEIR. The Ohlone people comprise more than a dozen tribes and languages, yet the DEIR consults only one individual. This consultant has a conflict of interest and does not represent all of the Ohlone people indigenous to the Bay Area. Another Ohlone California Tribal group indigenous to Berkeley area and community has formally, and repeatedly, requested tribal consultation as required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The City to date has not consulted with this group for purposes of preparing the DEIR. The DEIR also fails to assess the importance of this site as a “tribal cultural resource” separate from the category of “cultural resources – archaeological,” and thus does not consider the tribal cultural values in addition to the archaeological values when determining impacts. Neither the discussion nor the proposed mitigation complies with CEQA requirements to consult with impacted Tribes and to include a new and separate category addressing “tribal cultural resources.” Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley states: “BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations 1 Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site.” Honoring this promise requires consultation will additional Ohlone people who recognize this site as sacred, as a tribal cultural property and it requires consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region. To date, Berkeley has not honored this promise and has failed to seek the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous people of the region—and has failed to respect the indigenous peoples’ opposition to the proposed project. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site is a series of murals and a small plaque in the parking lot under the nearby freeway. Certainly, the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone peoples to develop a major memorial and educational site in the form of a culturally-appropriate, green open space park at 1900 Fourth Street. The DEIR fails to analyze and offer meaningful alternatives. I strongly support the development of such a memorial and educational site in lieu of the proposed development. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of indigenous peoples. I implore the City of Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will mostly benefit wealthy developers at the expense of more than 5,000 years of history and a living culture. Please reject the DEIR and embrace the No Plan / Create a Berkeley Gateway / Memorial Site Alternative. Sincerely, María D. Domínguez, J.D. Program Administrator, Berkeley Youth Alternatives (title for identification purposes) 754 Haight Avenue #A Alameda, CA 94501 cc: Jesse Arreguín, City of Berkeley Mayor 2 )HOL[&DULQD )URP 0DU\(3DVVH\ SDVVPH#EHUNHOH\HGX! 6HQW )ULGD\)HEUXDU\ 30 7R =RQLQJ$GMXVWPHQWV%RDUG =$% 6XEMHFW 3UHVHUYDWLRQ:HVW%HUNHOH\6KHOOPRXQGV &DWHJRULHV *UHHQ&DWHJRU\ I believe that construction on the West Berkeley Shellmound at 1900 4th street in Berkeley, CA. This is a violation of indigenous trust and NAGPRA as well as promoting the use of fossil fuels and the destruction of the past which is a non-renewable resource. Thank you for your consideration, Mary Passey -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP EHQHILFLDOEXJ#VRQLFQHW 6HQW )ULGD\)HEUXDU\ 30 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW %HUNHOH\6KHOOPRXQG To all concerned: I write to you as a longtime Berkeley person, not Native American, but recognizing that, we all have our place together in the region. This includes recognizing that, yes, more housing is needed, but there are many places to build that are not on the Shellmound. If we do not respect our archeological and cultural histories, we all lose. I'm glad to see my young adult daughter getting involved in gatherings at the Shellmound, learning the ancient history of the site and environs. This is a place to treasure, and wouldn't it be wonderful to develop it as a true memorial to our regional ancestors, and to do that with Ohlone descendants leading the way? Please recognize that there always is another piece of land which can be used, but once you cover up the Shellmound it would be like wiping out important history of the SF Bay Area. We need collectively to claim this site, and others around the bay, as symbols of ancient times and the present melding together. Children could be brought to the site and others like it, and could learn that, they are part of something larger than themselves. In this crazy time period, we need that more than ever. Sincerely, Max Ventura 94703 -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP 3HQQ\%URJGHQ SOEURJGHQ#VRQLFQHW! 6HQW )ULGD\)HEUXDU\ $0 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW :HVW%HUNHOH\6KHOOPRXQGDQG2KORQH9LOODJH6LWH Attn: Shannon Allen ShAllen@city of berkeley.info City of Berkeley Planning Department 1947 Center Street 2nd Floor Berkeley, CA 94704 2017 Dear Shannon Allen, I am writing to you concerning the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site. As a Berkeley resident, I would like to remind you that this is our heritage from the first inhabitants of this area and we need to honor this history . I ask you to consider the following: • This is our last opportunity to protect and preserve the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site. Almost all of the other shellmound and villages sites have been developed and buried under concrete. Please do not approve the destruction of this unique, historic, irreplaceable site. We should preserve and enhance the remaining sites and our collective efforts should start with this site. • This is the oldest sacred site in the Bay Area. It has to be protected. If destroyed by development it will be lost forever—and Berkeley will be responsible for a sacred place’s cultural, spiritual and ecological history being swept off the Earth. • Berkeley is on record supporting the rights of indigenous people. The Landmarks Commission noted that this site is “highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial site.” The city of Berkeley should not be approving and defending the destruction of a sacred site. The City of Berkeley has passed resolutions supporting the protection of sacred sites outside of Berkeley, such as the resolution passed supporting the Standing Rock Sioux opposition to the Dakota Access Pipeline. For the City to have credibility it must take action to protect the sacred sites within its boundaries that it has pledged to protect—including this important site. • The draft EIR language and archaeological analysis cleverly seeks to distract from the larger land marked village site by claiming there are no shellmound remains within the 2.2 acre parking lot site. This is deceptive and inaccurate. We are concerned about the entire site, which is eligible for the National Register of Historic Places, and whose boundary is already determined. 1900 Fourth St. sits within this larger site. • CEQA requires that 1900 Fourth Street be respected in a manner consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (1995) whose “Standards for Preservation” states: “A property will be used as it was historically… The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The replacement of intact or repairable historic materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided.” The draft EIR fails to identify and address these state and federal protection requirements (as does the proposed project). Mitigation “below a level of significance” in thus impossible. The draft EIR is inadequate and should not be certified or approved even if revised. • CEQA Guidelines under Section 15126.4 (b) Mitigation Measures Related to Impacts on Historical Resources. (3)(A), states: “Preservation in place is the preferred manner of mitigating impacts to archaeological sites. Preservation in place maintains the relationship between artifacts and the archaeological context. Preservation may also avoid conflict with religious or cultural values of groups associated with the site.” Mitigation “below a level of significance” is impossible. The draft EIR is inadequate and should not be certified or approved even if revised. • There is no feasible way to mitigate the disturbance of burials. These impacts are unavoidable significant impacts and cannot be mitigated. • The alternatives analysis is inadequate and insufficient. The draft EIR does not adequately assess alternatives as required by CEQA. A reasonable range of alternatives should have been considered. A reasonable range of alternatives would have considered designating the entire site as culturally-significant, memorial, open space, as the site would be excellent for wetlands mitigation and state agencies are ready and willing to step in and assist in culturally-appropriate ecological restoration. There are few such properties available for wetlands mitigation. This site also has the potential for an urban creek restoration project that could provide restoration of a portion of what was the nature landscape of the area, enhancing water quality, promoting climate change mitigation, and allowing protection in perpetuity of this critical tribal cultural resource. The developer should have also analyzed an alternative location for this mega-development; a site that is not as close to the freeway, and not located within the boundaries of the West Berkeley Shellmound and Village Site. • The project proposes housing close to the freeway and train tracks, with 155 apartments and perhaps 3-500 new residents and 372 parking spaces: The The DEIR does not adequately address traffic impacts in that it fails to include all approved and ongoing projects in the area. The failure to address these other projects means that the cumulative impacts analysis is fatally flawed. The DEIR fails to account for safety issues that will result from additional traffic in the area and the railroad crossing. The DEIR does not fully address potential air quality impacts nor does it adequately discuss studies regarding increased asthma and other respiratory problems for people living near freeways and industrial areas. The DEIR does not sufficiently address the potential for release of hazardous chemicals through ground disturbance. The DEIR does include a sufficient discussion of potential impacts to water resources on site that could result from development on the site, nor does the document include an adequate alternatives analysis. • The EIR ignores the many hundreds of burials already known to have been removed from sanctified burial ceremonies that laid them there. Burials have been found from 2-13 feet below the surface in the site. They surround the site and are likely within the 2.2 acres from which 8-feet of subsurface soil would be excavated. The developer should not destroy this site, disturb burials and separate us all from ever knowing them and their world. • The city and the developer have not complied with AB52, having failed to consult with members of the Ohlone community. The Ohlone comprise more than a dozen tribes and languages yet the draft EIR consults only one individual. • The West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site is still used for prayer and ceremony by members of the Ohlone community. This will no longer be possible if the project is approved. These important facts are not mentioned in the draft EIR. • The draft EIR fails to mention or address the proposed project’s violation of Berkeley Municipal Code 3.24.260 “Permit application-—Review standards and criteria” which states (italics added): “Approval of permit applications pursuant to this section may be granted only upon determination that the proposal conforms to the criteria set forth in paragraph 1: For permit applications for construction, alteration or repair: For applications relating to landmark sites, the proposed work shall not adversely affect the exterior architectural features of the landmark and, where specified in the designation for a publicly owned landmark, its major interior architectural features; nor shall the proposed work adversely affect the special character or special historical, architectural or aesthetic interest or value of the landmark and its site, as viewed both in themselves and in their setting.” Hence, the 1900 Fourth Street’s Structural Alteration Permit #LMSAP2015-00005 application should be denied. • The 1900 Fourth Street draft EIR is fatally flawed, inadequate and defective. The city should review, reject, reissue and not certify this EIR, and never approve commercial development of the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site. Descendants of these people live among us today, and we should respect them and learn about what their ancestors have given to us. Please do not approve the destruction of this precious site. Thank you, Penny Lee Brogden 1309 Walnut Street Berkeley, CA 94709 5LJKWFOLFN KHUHWR GRZQORDG SLFWXUHV7R dŚŝƐĞŵĂŝůŚĂƐďĞĞŶĐŚĞĐŬĞĚĨŽƌǀŝƌƵƐĞƐďLJǀĂƐƚĂŶƚŝǀŝƌƵƐƐŽĨƚǁĂƌĞ͘ KHOSSURWHFW \RXUSULYDF\ 2XWOR RN SUHYHQWHG DXWR PDWLF GRZQORDGRI WKLVSLFWXUH IU R PWK H ,Q WHUQHW $YDVWORJR ǁǁǁ͘ĂǀĂƐƚ͘ĐŽŵ -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP VZHHWORWXV#JPDLOFRPRQEHKDOIRI-0LDNRGD7D\ORU PLDNRGD#ILHUFHDOOLHVFRP! 6HQW 6DWXUGD\)HEUXDU\ 30 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW &RPPHQWVRQWKH'UDIW(QYLURQPHQWDO,PSDFW5HSRUWRQSURSRVHG WK6W3URMHFW $WWDFKPHQWV 6KHOOPRXQGOHWWHU*RRJOH'RFVSGI Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners, My Name is J. Miakoda Taylor, I am a resident of and business owner in Berkeley California, and a settler on Ohlone land. In a commitment to restore right relationships with the indigenous people of the stolen land we call Berkeley, land that provides my personal wealth and the wealth of the our great city, I am writing to express my concerns the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. My concerns include: 1) The methodology used to create the archaeological report, and the inadequate and misleading archaeological analysis. Specifically, past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered many prehistoric human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to acknowledge the human remains uncovered in past excavations, specifically those documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology and conclusions of the 1900 Fourth Street DEIR. 2) This site is one of the largest Shellmounds in the San Francisco Bay Area. It is also the oldest known bayside settlement and one of the most significant ceremonial centers to the Ohlone people. The Landmarks Preservation Commission designated this site in 2000, as City of Berkeley Landmark # 227, noting it as a” highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial ground.” The site was also listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, and determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. However, the great significance of this land is a fact not acknowledged in the DEIR. 3) The DEIR also fails to assess the importance of this site as a “tribal cultural resource”, separate from the category of “cultural resources – archaeological,” and thus does not consider the tribal cultural values in addition to the archaeological values when determining impacts. Neither the discussion nor the proposed mitigation complies with CEQA requirements to consult with impacted Tribes and to include a new and separate category addressing “tribal cultural resources.” 4) Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley states: “BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site.” Honoring this promise requires consultation. The Ohlone people comprise more than a dozen tribes and languages, yet the DEIR consults only one individual. This consultant has a conflict of interest and does not represent all of the Ohlone people indigenous to the Bay Area. Another Ohlone California Tribal group indigenous to Berkeley area and community has formally and repeatedly requested tribal consultation as required by the California Environmental Quality Act. To date, the city has not consulted with this group, and their perspective is not reflected in the DEIR. To date, Berkeley has not honored the commitment of this resolution. It has failed to seek the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous people of the region. It has failed to respect the indigenous peoples’ opposition to the proposed project 5) The DEIR fails to analyze and offer alternative development ideas for this land, as required by CEQA. As a settler on Ohlone land and proud resident of Berkeley (proud of our consistent ability to set an example of what justice and equity can look like in an urban center), I believe we would all benefit from a truly meaningful public acknowledgement of the past, present, and future relationship of our city to the Ohlone people (the only official recognition of this sacred Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site is a series of murals and a small plaque in the parking lot under the nearby freeway, which are significantly inadequate). As such I wholeheartedly support the vision of converting the 1900 Fourth Street site into a green open space park, that is designed in partnership with local Ohlone peoples and serves as a culturally appropriate memorial and educational resource to all residents, past, present and future. Other alternatives to consider include developing the site as a culturally-appropriate wetland mitigation project or urban creek restoration project, both of which could restore a portion of the nature landscape of the area, enhance water quality, promote climate change mitigation, and allow protection in perpetuity of this critical tribal cultural resource. 6) The developers also failed to consider alternative location for the development . 7) The DEIR does not adequately address the impacts of this development in relationship to all the other approved and ongoing projects in the area on: traffic, air quality, health of residents (i.e. increased asthma and other respiratory problems for people living near freeways and industrial areas, health of land (i.e. the potential release of hazardous chemicals and ground disturbance), and water resources. As you know, there is widespread community opposition to the content of the DEIR, including serious disputes related to its accuracy, adequate representation of this lands significance to the Ohlone people, impacts on residents, and reflection of the concerns of citizens committed to being in right relationship to them as the Indigenous people of the land we occupy. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of more than 5,000 years of history and a living culture. Reject the DEIR and embrace the No Plan / Create a Berkeley Gateway / Memorial Site Alternative! Sincerely, J. Miakoda Taylor Director, Fierce Allies 510-666-0839 www.fierceallies.com Fierce Allies is an intensive training, facilitation and consulting program that fosters deep partnerships across divides of power and privilege. FIERCE ALLIES RESOURCES: 5LJKWFOLFNKHUHWRGRZQORDGSLFWXUHV7RKHOSSURWHFW\RXUSULYDF\2XWORRNSUHYHQWHGDXWRPDWLFGRZQORDGRIWKLVSLFWXUHIURPWKH,QWHUQHW See J. Miakoda Taylor share the personal story that inspired the creation of Fierce Allies in this video: Confronting Betrayal at the Gates of San Quentin. 5LJKWFOLFNKHUHWRGRZQORDGSLFWXUHV7RKHOSSURWHFW\RXUSULYDF\2XWORRNSUHYHQWHGDXWRPDWLFGRZQORDGRIWKLVSLFWXUHIURPWKH,QWHUQHW Enrollment is open for the February 2017 Wisdom Intensive. click here to find out more information. 5LJKWFOLFNKHUHWRGRZQORDGSLFWXUHV7RKHOSSURWHFW\RXUSULYDF\2XWORRNSUHYHQWHGDXWRPDWLFGRZQORDGRIWKLVSLFWXUHIURPWKH,QWHUQHW The May 2016 Wisdom Intensive was a huge success. See the evaluation report to read more. 5LJKWFOLFNKHUHWRGRZQORDGSLFWXUHV7RKHOSSURWHFW\RXUSULYDF\2XWORRNSUHYHQWHGDXWRPDWLFGRZQORDGRIWKLVSLFWXUHIURPWKH,QWHUQHW See video of J. Miakoda Taylor: Called In by the Dis-Invited Keynote **$3 $$%$""$ */% (!"/"$$ $ &*4 AHDG$*(*(*2B$"%%( (!"/2HDG@D(+(/D2B@AG 3" !'&"!'%'!) %"! !' #'#"%'"!#%"#"&5<448''/ %" ' ( )4""$$(!"/ */"$$()2 # (+*)*+$* $* &(*#$*% % (& /** $ ,() */% " %($ 2(!"/2$ -)&"/ )&&% $**%"($% * */% (!"/5)&"$*%""%-&( ,*,"%&#$*% * "%$ ""#%+$*AH@@%+(* *(*4" %($ 2$)& ""/(!"/2) %+"$.#&"% %-)% " +)* $%&(*#+$ &""/2&(* +"("/ ,$* %$ % $ **!)%$$ )( ( %( * ,#( $*(( *%( "( *);(3* !%*)) &" $<2)-"") (%)) )( ( %( $, (%$#$*"8+"*+("&(%** %$&(%)))** $* %$"","4 %&/%+- ""(9%$) (* *%%$) ( *)"( (&%" * "#)) $* "%-%$($)= %&)* *#/)" $%* () $#/%##+$ */ ,3 "!'%")%& & ! (. 52 '"" ",(&'"%''%" " %#"%'-!' !$('! & ! %" " ! ,& &4& ""/2&)*.,* %$) $$(%+$* &(%&%)) * , +$%,(#$/&( )*%( +#$+( ")$+$ )*+(+"*+("(# $)4%#"%' " # ' , &'" !"* '( !% !&(!")% !#&'+)' "!&-&# , '"&"( !' !' "%' !'%"%, (' '& '*' &#%'"'& ! % "(!& '4 )%$)* *+*)) $ $*%,() *$ $+(/ $* #* %%"% /$%$"+) %$)% * AH@@%+(* *(* 4 62 )) * )%$% * "( )* ""#%+$) $* $($ )%/(4 * )")%'" &' !"*! ,& &'' !'!"!"' "&'& ! !'% "! !'%&'"' "!#"# 4 $#(!)()(,* %$%## )) %$) $** )) * $B@@@2) */% (!"/ $#(! >BBG2$%* $ *) ) * -)")%" )* $* " %($ )*(% )*%( ")%+()2$*(# $*%" " %( * * %$" )*(% )*%( ")4 %-,(2* (*) $ $% * )"$ ) *$%* !$%-" $* 4 72 ")% ")*%))))* #&%(*$% * )) *)6*( "+"*+("()%+(72)&(* (%#* * %(/% 6+"*+("()%+():( %"% "27$* +)%)$%*%$) (* *( " +"*+(","+) $ * %$*%* ( %"% ","+)- $*(# $ $ #&*)4 * (* )+)) %$$%(* &(%&%)# * * %$%#&" )- * ('+ (#$*)*%%$)+"*- * #&* ( )$*% $"+$-$)&(** %(/()) $ 6*( "+"*+("()%+()47 82 )%"+* %$%4FG2CEC9% * ',"% ,&''&.0 ''%- #% "%-! !"% "!&!'"' "!!"'% ! !"(&#"# &"'% "! !'% '"!, '%' "!# !! !"%'% , "(!&%& '- !"%!* '' #%") & "!&"'! ' ' "!& %' "!"!' '&" ! !"(& "# &-! &(#"! #%' &'"" "*'#% ! # &"' %' "!* '%&#''"'&'% , "(!& '/1 %$%( $ * )&(%# )('+ ()%$)+"** %$4 "%$&%&"%#&( )#%( * $%0$*( )$"$ + )2/** %$)+"*)%$"/%$ $ , +"4 )%$)+"*$* ) %$ " *% $*()*$%)$%*(&()$*""% * "%$&%&" $ $%+)*%* /(4 $%* ( "%$" %($ ( " (%+& $ $%+)*%(!"/($%##+$ */ ) %(#""/ $(&*"/('+)**( "%$)+"** %$)('+ (/* " %($ $, (%$#$*"+" */ *4%*2* */ )$%*%$)+"*- * * ) (%+&2$* (&()&* , )$%*( "* $* 4%*2(!"/ )$%* %$%(* %## *#$*% * )()%"+* %$4 * ) "*%)! * (2&( %($ $ %(#%$)$*% * $ $%+)&%&"% * ( %$4 * ) "*%()&* * $ $%+)&%&")5%&&%) * %$*%* &(%&%)&(% * 92 ")*%$"/0$% ("*($* ,,"%&#$* ) %(* )"$2)('+ (/ 4))**"(%$ "%$"$$&(%+() $*% (!"/;&(%+% %+(%$) )*$* " */*% )*$.#&"% - * +)* $'+ */$"%%!" ! $$+($$*(<2 " ,--%+""" $ * (%#*(+"/#$ $ +"&+" !$%-" #$*% * &)*2&()$*2$ +*+( ("* %$) &% %+( */*%* "%$&%&";* %$"/% "(% $ * %$% * ))( ""#%+$ $ "%$ "" * ))( )% #+(")$)#""&"'+ $* &(! $ "%*+$(* $(/ (-/2- () $ $*"/ $'+*<4))+ - %" (*"/)+&&%(** , ) %$% %$,(* $ * AH@@%+(* *(*) * $*% ($%&$)&&(!2* * )) $ $&(*$() & - * "%" "%$&%&")$)(,))+"*+(""/&&(%&( *##%( "$+* %$" ()%+(*%""() $*)2&)*2&()$*$ +*+(4* ("*($* ,)*%%$) ( $"+ ,"%& $ * ) *)+"*+(""/9&&(%&( *-*"$# * * %$&(% *%(+($(! ()*%(* %$&(% *2%* % - %+"()*%(&%(* %$% * $*+("$)&% * (2 $ $-*('+" */2&(%#%*" #* $ # * * %$2$""%-&(%** %$ $&(&*+ */% * )( * "*( "+"*+("()%+(4 :2 ,"%&()")% "*%%$) ("*($* ,"%* %$ %(* ,"%&#$*4 ;2 %)$%*'+*"/())* #&*)% * ),"%&#$* $("* %$) &*%""* %* (&&(%,$%$ % $ &(% *) $* (%$3*( 2 ('+" */2 "* % () $*); 44 $())* #$%* (()& (*%(/&(%"#) %(&%&"" , $ $( (-/)$ $+)*( " ()2 "* % "$; 44* &%*$* "(")% 0(%+) # ")$ (%+$ )*+($<2 $-*(()%+()4 )/%+!$%-2* ( )- )&(%##+$ */%&&%) * %$*%* %$*$*% * 2 $"+ $ )( %+) )&+*)("**% *)+(/2'+*(&()$** %$% * )"$)) $ $*%* "%$ &%&"2 #&*)%$() $*)2$( "* %$% * %$($)% * 0$)%## ***% $ $( * ("* %$) &*%* #)* $ $%+)&%&"% * "$-%+&/4 ) )"(%&&%(*+$ */ %(* */% (!"/*% %""%-* (%+ %$ *)()%"+* %$)*% %$%($&(%**)() *)$* ( *)% $ $%+)&%&")4 #&"%((!"/*%*!)*$ $)** )%$)*(+* %$* *- ""$ * -"* /,"%&()** .&$)% #%(* $E2@@@/()% )*%(/$" , $ +"*+(4 ** $#(* %"$8(*(!"/*-/8 #%( " *"*($* ,1 $("/2 "/4 *0 Allen, Shannon From: N.D. Fenton Attn: Shannon Allen City of Berkeley Planning Dept. 1947 Center Street, 2nd Floor Berkeley, CA 94704 DATE Feb 4, 2017 Re: Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report on proposed 1900 4th Street Project Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: My college archeology class taught me about Native American shellmounds ( over 425 shellmounds that surrounded San Francisco Bay). I thought what a shame that in 1900 the largest shellmound located in Emeryville was made into a racetrack, bulldozing ancient burial site over 60 feet tall was destroyed. I wish it had been preserved. BUT, there IS another site that is the oldest sacred site in the Bay Area (West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site) and has to be protected. If destroyed by development it will be lost forever—and Berkeley will be responsible for a sacred place’s cultural, spiritual and ecological history being swept off the Earth. Please deny the 1900 Fourth Street’s Structural Alteration Permit #LMSAP2015-00005 application.. I am writing to express my deep concerns about the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Preservation Commission in 2000, noting the site is “most highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial ground.” The site was also listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, and determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The original West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site completely encompassed the proposed 1900 Fourth Street Project and blocks beyond. It is known to be the oldest bayside settlement and one of the largest shellmounds in the San Francisco Bay Area—more than 5,000 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone Peoples today—a fact not acknowledged in the DEIR. The content of the DEIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by widespread community opposition and concern voiced at the March 10, 2016, December 8, 2016 and January 12, 2017 Zoning Adjustment Board meetings and the December 1, 2016, and January 5, 2017 Landmark Preservation Commission meetings. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to create the archaeological report and there has not been adequate peer review of the limited data in the DEIR. The archaeological analysis is inadequate and misleading. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered many prehistoric human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address human remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology and conclusions of the 1900 Fourth Street Draft EIR. The likely disturbance of human remains is highly significant as defined by CEQA and cannot be mitigated. The DEIR does not address the issue of Richard Schwartz’s recording of over 400 burials in the vicinity of 1900 Fourth St. and fails to provide any context of the lot within the larger site, ALA-307. The DEIR attempts to isolate and not analyze 1900 Fourth St. within the context of a larger site of cultural significance. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the DEIR’s preparation. The primary consultant has conflicts of interest, and does not represent the all of the Ohlone people indigenous to the Bay Area. Another Ohlone California Tribal group indigenous to Berkeley area and community has formally and repeatedly requested tribal consultation as required by CEQA. The City to date has not consulted with this group for purposes of preparing the DEIR, in violation of CEQA. The consultation that has occurred to date appears to be nothing more than a token gesture that fails to protect this important Ohlone site (the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site) and has resulted in payment of funds to an individual as mitigation for the destruction of this irreplaceable sacred place. The Ohlone comprise more than a dozen tribes and languages yet the DEIR consults only one individual. The DEIR also fails to assess the importance of this site as a “tribal cultural resource” separate from the category of “cultural resources – archaeological.” AB 52 established a new category of resources under the California Environmental Quality Act, “tribal cultural resources,” which considers the tribal cultural values in addition to the scientific and archaeological values when determining impacts and mitigation. This DEIR, rather than fully assessing the impacts to tribal cultural resources under a new category, merely incorporates a brief discussion under the cultural resources archaeological section that states the destruction of the site will be mitigated through: 1) payment to an individual of $75,000 to improve a cemetery located outside the bounds of the shellmound and outside of the city boundaries, and 2) that educational panels will be placed at or near the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site after further consultation with the Ohlone people, without identifying who will be consulted for this mitigation measure. Neither the discussion nor the proposed mitigation complies with CEQA requirements to consult with impacted Tribes and to include a new and separate category addressing “tribal cultural resources.” Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley, entitled “Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People” states in part: “BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site.” Please honor this promise. Honoring this promise requires consultation will additional Ohlone people who recognize this site as sacred, as a tribal cultural property and it requires consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region. To date, Berkeley has not honored this promise and has failed to seek the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous people of the region—and has failed to respect the indigenous peoples’ opposition to the proposed project. On page 67, the DEIR states, “Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous peoples of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear whether or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. Given that 1900 Fourth Street proposal includes 155-apartments, and given that there are numerous Tribal objections to the development, it seems clear that the step of meaningful Tribal consultation before amending the General Plan was not done. The Project also requires several discretionary approvals by the City for variances to the current general plan and zoning ordinances. These approvals would require consultation under both AB 52 and SB 18. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound and Ohlone village site is a series of murals and a small plaque in the parking lot under the nearby freeway. Certainly, the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone peoples to develop a major memorial and educational site in the form of a culturally-appropriate, green open space park at 1900 Fourth Street. The DEIR fails to analyze and offer meaningful alternatives. I strongly support the development of such a memorial and educational site in lieu of the proposed development as the preferred alternative. In addition to the unavoidable adverse impacts to this critical tribal resource the DEIR includes other fatal flaws that require the City of Berkeley to either disapprove the Project or at a minimum require a supplemental EIR before making any determinations on the Project. The Project will not fulfill the purposes set forth in the Project proposal—in fact the Project will actually exacerbate issues it claims to resolve. The DEIR does not adequately address traffic impacts in that it fails to include all approved and ongoing projects in the area. The failure to address these other projects means that the cumulative impacts analysis is fatally flawed. The DEIR fails to account for safety issues that will result from additional traffic in the area and the railroad crossing. The DEIR does not fully address potential air quality impacts nor does it adequately discuss studies regarding increased asthma and other respiratory problems for people living near freeways and industrial areas. The DEIR does not sufficiently address the potential for release of hazardous chemicals through ground disturbance. The DEIR does include a sufficient discussion of potential impacts to water resources on site that could result from development on the site, nor does the document include an adequate alternatives analysis. It would be irresponsible for the City of Berkeley to consider approving this project without complete and accurate information regarding any and all impacts that may affect the health and safety of the community. This Project has the potential to increase already significant traffic congestion, harm the health of residents, and destroy irreplaceable cultural and historic sites that the City of Berkeley has pledged to protect. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of more than 5,000 years of history and a living culture. Reject the DEIR and embrace the No Plan / Create a Berkeley Gateway / Memorial Site Alternative! Sincerely, Drew Fenton Boulder Creek, CA -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP 6X]DQQH Dear Shannon Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I'm deeply concerned about the project at 1900 Fourth Street. I do not want to lose the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site to more development. This is important cultural heritage and one of the oldest sacred sites in the Bay Area. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley landmark as a sacred burial ground to the native peoples. The site was also listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, and determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The DEIR is deeply flawed and needs further review. I don't see enough peer review of the limited data in the DEIR. Plus, the report fails to address human remains documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site. There also hasn't been proper tribal consultation in the DEIR’s preparation. The primary consultant has conflicts of interest, and does not represent all Ohlone people. This is an opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of indigenous peoples. Please, city of Berkeley, please take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of more than 5,000 years of history. Do not make the same mistake Emeryville made when they built a giant shopping mall on ancient Indian burial grounds. Reject the DEIR and embrace the No Plan / Create a Berkeley Gateway / Memorial Site Alternative! Sincerely, -Suzanne Yada Concerned citizen -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP -RKQ(QJOLVK MRKQHQJOLVK #JPDLOFRP! 6HQW 6XQGD\)HEUXDU\ 30 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW '5$)7(,521 )2857+675((7352-(&7 ĞĂƌDƐ͘ůůĞŶ͗ dŚŝƐŝƐƚŽĐŽŵŵĞŶƚŽŶƚŚĞƌĂĨƚ ŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂů/ŵƉĂĐƚZĞƉŽƌƚĂďŽƵƚƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚŽŶƚŚĞƐŝƚĞĂƚϭϵϬϬ &ŽƵƌƚŚ^ƚƌĞĞƚ͘/ŵĂŬĞƚŚĞƐĞƌĞŵĂƌŬƐĂƐĂŶŝŶĚŝǀŝĚƵĂůĞƌŬĞůĞLJĐŝƚŝnjĞŶ;ĂŶĚƚŚĞƌĞďLJĚŽŶŽƚƉƵƌƉŽƌƚƚŽƌĞƉƌĞƐĞŶƚĂŶLJ ŽƌŐĂŶŝnjĂƚŝŽŶŽĨǁŚŝĐŚ/ŚĂƉƉĞŶƚŽďĞĂŵĞŵďĞƌͿ͘ h>dhZ>Z ^KhZ ^ dŚŽƵŐŚƚŚŝƐƐŝƚĞŚĂƐŚĂĚŝƚƐƉƌĞŚŝƐƚŽƌŝĐƚŽƉƐƵƌĨĂĐĞƐĐƌĂƉĞĚŽĨĨĂŶĚŝƐŶŽǁƉĂǀĞĚŽǀĞƌĨŽƌĂƵƚŽŵŽďŝůĞƉĂƌŬŝŶŐ͕ŝƚƌĞŵĂŝŶƐ ĂĐƵůƚƵƌĂůƌĞƐŽƵƌĐĞŽĨŐƌĞĂƚƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶĐĞ͘KĨƚŚĞŽƌŝŐŝŶĂů͕ůĂƌŐĞƌĞƌŬĞůĞLJƐŚĞůůŵŽƵŶĚ͕ƚŚŝƐƉĂƌƚŝĐƵůĂƌďůŽĐŬŶŽǁŝƐƚŚĞŽŶůLJ ƉĂƌƚƚŚĂƚƌĞŵĂŝŶƐĞƐƐĞŶƚŝĂůůLJƵŶĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞĚĂŶĚŽƉĞŶ͘ƐŵĂŶLJƐƉĞĂŬĞƌƐŚĂǀĞĞůŽƋƵĞŶƚůLJƐĂŝĚĂƚƌĞĐĞŶƚ>WĂŶĚ ŚĞĂƌŝŶŐƐ͕ƚŚŝƐƐƚŝůůͲŽƉĞŶƐŝƚĞǀŝƚĂůůLJƌĞŵŝŶĚƐƵƐĂďŽƵƚŵŝůůĞŶŶŝĂŽĨŚƵŵĂŶƉƌĞƐĞŶĐĞ͘ŶĚŝƚƐǀĞƌLJŽƉĞŶŶĞƐƐĐŽŶƐĞƌǀĞƐƚŚĞ ƉŽƚĞŶƚŝĂůĨŽƌŵĂŬŝŶŐƚŚĞƐŝƚĞŝŶƚŽĂŶĂĐƚƵĂůĂŶĚǀĞƌLJǀĂůƵĂďůĞƉĂƌŬƚŚĂƚǁŽƵůĚĐĞůĞďƌĂƚĞĂŶĚŚĞůƉĞdžƉůĂŝŶƚŚĂƚĂǁĞƐŽŵĞ ƐƚŽƌLJ͘ /ŶĞdžĐŚĂŶŐĞĨŽƌůŽƐŝŶŐƚŚĂƚƌĞŵŝŶĚĞƌĂŶĚƚŚĂƚƉŽƚĞŶƚŝĂů͕ƚŚĞƌĂĨƚ /ZŽĨĨĞƌƐǀĞƌLJŝŶƐƵĨĨŝĐŝĞŶƚŵŝƚŝŐĂƚŝŽŶŵĞĂƐƵƌĞƐ͘ŶĚ ŝƚƐĐůĂŝŵƚŚĂƚƚŚŽƐĞŵĞĂƐƵƌĞƐǁŽƵůĚƌĞĚƵĐĞĐƵůƚƵƌĂůͲƌĞƐŽƵƌĐĞƐŝŵƉĂĐƚƚŽŝŶƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶĐĞŝƐƋƵŝƚĞƵŶũƵƐƚŝĨŝĞĚ͘ EK/^ dŚĞƌĂĨƚ /ZΖƐĐůĂŝŵŽĨŶŽƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶƚŶŽŝƐĞͲƌĞůĂƚĞĚŝŵƉĂĐƚŝƐďĂƐĞĚŽŶůLJŽŶĂŶĞƐƚŝŵĂƚĞŽĨǁŚĂƚƉƌŽũĞĐƚŽĐĐƵƉĂŶƚƐǁŽƵůĚ ĞdžƉĞƌŝĞŶĐĞǁŚŝůĞŝŶĚŽŽƌƐͲͲĂŶĚǁŝƚŚǁŝŶĚŽǁƐĐůŽƐĞĚ͘dŚĞĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚĨĂŝůƐƚŽĂŶĂůLJnjĞŶŽŝƐĞůĞǀĞůƐƚŚĂƚǁŽƵůĚďĞ ĞdžƉĞƌŝĞŶĐĞĚǁŝƚŚŝŶŽŶͲƐŝƚĞƵƐĂďůĞŽƉĞŶƐƉĂĐĞ͘ dŚĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚǁŽƵůĚŝŶĐůƵĚĞĂƚůĞĂƐƚŽŶĞƵƐĂďůĞƚĞƌƌĂĐĞƚŚĂƚǁŽƵůĚĐůŽƐĞůLJĂĚũŽŝŶŶŽƚŽŶůLJƚŚĞďƵƐLJƌĂŝůƌŽĂĚƚƌĂĐŬƐďƵƚĂůƐŽ ƚŚĞhŶŝǀĞƌƐŝƚLJǀĞŶƵĞŽǀĞƌƉĂƐƐ͘dŚŽƵŐŚŵŽƐƚŽĨƚŚĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚΖƐƵƐĂďůĞŽƉĞŶƐƉĂĐĞǁŽƵůĚĨĂĐĞĞĂƐƚǁĂƌĚ͕ĂƚůĞĂƐƚ ŵƵĐŚŽĨƚŚĂƚĐŽƵůĚĂůƐŽďĞƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶƚůLJŝŵƉĂĐƚĞĚďLJŶŽŝƐĞ͕ĞƐƉĞĐŝĂůůLJĨƌŽŵŚĞĂǀLJƚƌĂĨĨŝĐŽŶƚŚĂƚƐĂŵĞŽǀĞƌƉĂƐƐ͘ ,Z^ dŚĞƌĂĨƚ /ZΖƐĐůĂŝŵŽĨŶŽƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶƚĞĨĨĞĐƚƌĞŐĂƌĚŝŶŐŚĂnjĂƌĚƐƌĞůŝĞƐŽŶƚŚĞ/ŶŝƚŝĂů^ƚƵĚLJ;ƉƉĞŶĚŝdžͿ͘dŚĂƚĂƉƉĞŶĚŝdžΖƐ ƉĂŐĞϲϭĂĚŵŝƚƐƚŚĂƚƉƌŽũĞĐƚƵƐĞƌƐǁŽƵůĚďĞĞdžƉŽƐĞĚƚŽŚĂnjĂƌĚƐƌĞŐĂƌĚŝŶŐĐĂƌŐŽĂŶĚƉĂƐƐĞŶŐĞƌƚƌĂŝŶƐŽŶƚŚĞĂĚũĂĐĞŶƚ ƌŝŐŚƚͲŽĨͲǁĂLJĂŶĚƌĞŐĂƌĚŝŶŐƚŚĞƌĂƚŚĞƌͲŵLJƐƚĞƌŝŽƵƐΗŚĂnjĂƌĚŽƵƐůŝƋƵŝĚƉŝƉĞůŝŶĞΗǁŝƚŚŝŶƚŚĂƚƌŝŐŚƚͲŽĨͲǁĂLJ͘dŚĞŶŝƚďůŝƚŚĞůLJ ĐŽŶĐůƵĚĞƐďLJƐĂLJŝŶŐ͕ΗEĞŝƚŚĞƌĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶŶŽƌŽƉĞƌĂƚŝŽŶŽĨƚŚĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚǁŽƵůĚĞdžĂĐĞƌďĂƚĞƚŚĞŚĂnjĂƌĚƐĂƐƐŽĐŝĂƚĞĚǁŝƚŚ ƚŚĞƌĂŝůĂůŝŐŶŵĞŶƚŽƌƚŚĞƉŝƉĞůŝŶĞ͘Η ƵƚƚŚĂƚĐŽŶĐůƵƐŝŽŶďůŝƚŚĞůLJŝŐŶŽƌĞƐŚŽǁƚŚĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚǁŽƵůĚƌĞƐƵůƚŝŶŵĂŶLJŵŽƌĞƉĞŽƉůĞ͕ƚŚĂŶŶŽǁ͕ůŝǀŝŶŐĂŶĚͬŽƌ ŽƚŚĞƌǁŝƐĞďĞŝŶŐǀĞƌLJĐůŽƐĞƚŽƚŚŽƐĞŚĂnjĂƌĚƐ͘ ^ŝŶĐĞƌĞůLJ͕ :ŽŚŶ^͘ ŶŐůŝƐŚ ϮϱϬϬ,ŝůůĞŐĂƐƐǀĞŶƵĞ͕Ɖƚ͘ϯ ĞƌŬĞůĞLJ͕ϵϰϳϬϰͲϮϵϯϳ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³PRVWKLJKO\VLJQLILFDQWWRQDWLYH GHVFHQGDQWVDVDVDFUHGEXULDOJURXQG´7KHVLWHZDVDOVROLVWHGLQWKH&DOLIRUQLD5HJLVWHURI+LVWRULFDO5HVRXUFHVDQGGHWHUPLQHGWREHHOLJLEOHIRU WKH1DWLRQDO5HJLVWHURI+LVWRULF3ODFHV7KHRULJLQDO:HVW%HUNHOH\6KHOOPRXQGDQG2KORQH9LOODJH6LWHFRPSOHWHO\HQFRPSDVVHGWKHSURSRVHG )RXUWK6WUHHW3URMHFWDQGEORFNVEH\RQG,WLVNQRZQWREHWKHROGHVWED\VLGHVHWWOHPHQWDQGRQHRIWKHODUJHVWVKHOOPRXQGVLQWKH6DQ)UDQFLVFR%D\ $UHD²PRUHWKDQ\HDUVROG,WLVWKHWUXHELUWKSODFHRI%HUNHOH\,WFRQWLQXHVWREHRIXWPRVWVLJQLILFDQFHDVDFHUHPRQLDOFHQWHUWRWKH2KORQH 3HRSOHVWRGD\²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¶V UHFRUGLQJRIRYHUEXULDOVLQWKHYLFLQLW\RI )RXUWK6WDQGIDLOVWRSURYLGHDQ\FRQWH[WRIWKHORWZLWKLQWKHODUJHUVLWH$/$7KH'(,5 DWWHPSWVWRLVRODWHDQGQRWDQDO\]H )RXUWK6WZLWKLQWKHFRQWH[WRIDODUJHUVLWHRIFXOWXUDOVLJQLILFDQFH )XUWKHUPRUHWKHUHKDVQRWEHHQDGHTXDWHWULEDOFRQVXOWDWLRQLQWKH'(,5¶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³WULEDOFXOWXUDOUHVRXUFH´VHSDUDWHIURPWKHFDWHJRU\ RI³FXOWXUDOUHVRXUFHV±DUFKDHRORJLFDO´$%HVWDEOLVKHGDQHZFDWHJRU\RIUHVRXUFHVXQGHUWKH&DOLIRUQLD(QYLURQPHQWDO4XDOLW\$FW³WULEDO FXOWXUDOUHVRXUFHV´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³WULEDOFXOWXUDOUHVRXUFHV´ 5HVROXWLRQ1R16RIWKH&LW\RI%HUNHOH\HQWLWOHG³+RQRU%HUNHOH\6KHOOPRXQG,QGLJHQRXV6DFUHG6LWH8&%HUNHOH\5HWXUQ$QFHVWUDO 5HPDLQVWR2KORQH3HRSOH´VWDWHVLQSDUW ³%(,7)857+(55(62/9('WKDWIUHHSULRUDQGLQIRUPHGFRQVHQWRIWKH2KORQHDQGRWKHULQGLJHQRXV SHRSOHVRIWKHUHJLRQEHLQWHJUDOWRDQ\DOWHUDWLRQSODQQLQJIRUWKH%HUNHOH\6KHOOPRXQGVDFUHGVLWHLQDFFRUGDQFHZLWKWKHSURYLVLRQVRIWKH8QLWHG 1DWLRQV'HFODUDWLRQRQWKH5LJKWVRI,QGLJHQRXV3HRSOHVDQGFDOOVXSRQDOOSDUWLHVWRIROORZWKHSULQFLSOHVRIWKH'HFODUDWLRQZLWKUHVSHFWWRWKH:HVW %HUNHOH\6KHOOPRXQGVLWH´3OHDVHKRQRUWKLVSURPLVH+RQRULQJWKLVSURPLVHUHTXLUHVFRQVXOWDWLRQZLWKDGGLWLRQDO2KORQHSHRSOHZKRUHFRJQL]HWKLV VLWHDVVDFUHGDVDWULEDOFXOWXUDOSURSHUW\DQGLWUHTXLUHVFRQVHQWRIWKH2KORQHDQGRWKHULQGLJHQRXVSHRSOHVRIWKHUHJLRQ7RGDWH%HUNHOH\KDV QRWKRQRUHGWKLVSURPLVHDQGKDVIDLOHGWRVHHNWKHIUHHSULRUDQGLQIRUPHGFRQVHQWRIWKHLQGLJHQRXVSHRSOHRIWKHUHJLRQ²DQGKDVIDLOHGWR UHVSHFWWKHLQGLJHQRXVSHRSOHV¶RSSRVLWLRQWRWKHSURSRVHGSURMHFW 2QSDJHWKH'(,5VWDWHV³&RQVXOWDWLRQZLWKWKH2KORQH,QGLDQ7ULEHFRQGXFWHGSXUVXDQWWR$%ZDVFRPSOHWHGIRUWKH3URMHFWDQGPLWLJDWLRQ PHDVXUHVDUHUHFRPPHQGHGDVDSSURSULDWH´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²LQIDFWWKH3URMHFWZLOOH[DFHUEDWHLVVXHVLWFODLPVWRUHVROYH7KH'(,5GRHVQRWDGHTXDWHO\DGGUHVV WUDIILFLPSDFWVLQWKDWLWIDLOVWRLQFOXGHDOODSSURYHGDQGRQJRLQJSURMHFWVLQWKHDUHD7KHIDLOXUHWRDGGUHVVWKHVHRWKHUSURMHFWVPHDQVWKDWWKH FXPXODWLYHLPSDFWVDQDO\VLVLVIDWDOO\IODZHG7KH'(,5IDLOVWRDFFRXQWIRUVDIHW\LVVXHVWKDWZLOOUHVXOWIURPDGGLWLRQDOWUDIILFLQWKHDUHDDQGWKH UDLOURDGFURVVLQJ7KH'(,5GRHVQRWIXOO\DGGUHVVSRWHQWLDODLUTXDOLW\LPSDFWVQRUGRHVLWDGHTXDWHO\GLVFXVVVWXGLHVUHJDUGLQJLQFUHDVHGDVWKPD DQGRWKHUUHVSLUDWRU\SUREOHPVIRUSHRSOHOLYLQJQHDUIUHHZD\VDQGLQGXVWULDODUHDV7KH'(,5GRHVQRWVXIILFLHQWO\DGGUHVVWKHSRWHQWLDOIRUUHOHDVH RIKD]DUGRXVFKHPLFDOVWKURXJKJURXQGGLVWXUEDQFH7KH'(,5GRHV127LQFOXGHDVXIILFLHQWGLVFXVVLRQRISRWHQWLDOLPSDFWVWRZDWHUUHVRXUFHVRQ VLWHWKDWFRXOGUHVXOWIURPGHYHORSPHQWRQWKHVLWHQRUGRHVWKHGRFXPHQWLQFOXGHDQDGHTXDWHDOWHUQDWLYHVDQDO\VLV,WZRXOGEHLUUHVSRQVLEOHIRU WKH&LW\RI%HUNHOH\WRFRQVLGHUDSSURYLQJWKLVSURMHFWZLWKRXWFRPSOHWHDQGDFFXUDWHLQIRUPDWLRQUHJDUGLQJDQ\DQGDOOLPSDFWVWKDWPD\DIIHFWWKH KHDOWKDQGVDIHW\RIWKHFRPPXQLW\7KLV3URMHFWKDVWKHSRWHQWLDOWRLQFUHDVHDOUHDG\VLJQLILFDQWWUDIILFFRQJHVWLRQKDUPWKHKHDOWKRIUHVLGHQWVDQG GHVWUR\LUUHSODFHDEOHFXOWXUDODQGKLVWRULFVLWHVWKDWWKH&LW\RI%HUNHOH\KDVSOHGJHGWRSURWHFW 7KLVLVDFOHDURSSRUWXQLW\IRUWKH&LW\RI%HUNHOH\WRIROORZWKURXJKRQLWVUHVROXWLRQVWRKRQRUDQGSURWHFWVDFUHGVLWHVDQGWKHULJKWVRILQGLJHQRXV SHRSOHV,LPSORUH%HUNHOH\WRWDNHDVWDQGDJDLQVWWKLVFRQVWUXFWLRQWKDWZLOOEHQHILWZHDOWK\GHYHORSHUVDWWKHH[SHQVHRIPRUHWKDQ\HDUVRI KLVWRU\DQGDOLYLQJFXOWXUH5HMHFWWKH'(,5DQGHPEUDFHWKH1R3ODQ&UHDWHD%HUNHOH\*DWHZD\0HPRULDO6LWH$OWHUQDWLYH ,FORVLQJ,ZDQWWRUHTXHVWWKDWWKH&LW\YLHZWKHSODQVWKDW2KORQHOHDGHU&RUULQD*RXOGKDVGUDZQXSIRUDFXOWXUDOFHQWHUWKDWZRXOGQRWRQO\ EHQHILW,QGLJHQRXV3HRSOHVEXWDOVRORFDOSHRSOHZDQWLQJWRXQGHUVWDQGWKHKLVWRU\RI2KORQHSHRSOHDQG%HUNHOH\DVZHOODVWRXULVWVZKRFRPHWR %HUNHOH\IURPDURXQGWKHZRUOG3OHDVHGRQRWGLVDSSHDURXUEHORYHG2KORQHUHODWLYHV 6LQFHUHO\ 3HQQLH2SDO3ODQW ,GOH1R0RUH6)%D\&RIRXQGHU *DWKHULQJ7ULEHV2ZQHU Allen, Shannon From: Stephanie Manning To: Shannon Allen, Senior Planner Planning Department 1947 Center Street, 2nd flooor Berkeley, CA 94704 February 6, 2017 Dear Ms. Allen, This is an additional comment from me, Stephanie Manning, on the Draft EIR on 1900-4th Street Investors'project. One very important study is currently being conducted on the shellmounds of the Bay Area that was not mentioned by the DEIR nor in the report by Allen Pastron and should have been included in the DEIR's analysis of how the project would effect Cultural Resources. This is an analysis by the Archaeological Research Facility at U.C.Berkeley of the U.S.Coastal Survey records from 1850 to 1895. All scientific studies of the moundsites until now have failed to consult with the Coast Survey whose records are detailed from the Gold Rush until its director, George Davidson, retired in 1895. Furthermore, about 200 boxes of Davidson's personal papers have been donated to the Bancroft Library and are part of this study by ARF. The study is detailed in a book entitled "Triangulating Archaeological Landscapes: The U.S.Coast Survey in California, 1850-1895" by R. Scott Byram. As you may know from the landmark documentation (not consulted by Pastron & Galvan), both Emeryville and West Berkeley Shellmounds appear on the U.S.Coastal Survey map of 1852. This is a tribute to the precision with which the coast of California was being surveyed for accurate map drawing in those early days. The field workers sailed along the bayshore and docked wherever they could in order to survey the coastal landscape. They noticed these shellmounds and asked their director, George Davidson, for permission to study the mound heaps and to speak to any native people they encountered. Davidson said no, that they should focus on their work, for which they were grudgingly paid $25-35 per month. However, they kept records of everything they saw. These field notes are of the utmost importance to anthopologists and are only now being studied for indications of native life present in the Bay Area. Also, the moundsites were so distinct that in order to create the most accurate maps of the coast, including the bay shoreline, lines were triangulated from shellmound to hill to island to shellmound. Indeed, the maps that were produced were the most accurate of their day. And this is another way in which the West Berkeley Shellmound played a significant role. This mound had been there since time immemorial, the oldest of them all. If one uses the West Berkeley mound as a focal point, directly opposite the Golden Gate, all the other mounds were created around it. Also missing from the DEIR is any mention of the archaeo-astronomy of the site and the solstices, equinoxes, seasonal positioning of sunrises and sunsets which were so important to the ancient people. It also fails to reference work being done by others on this particular site, especially at ARF and by scientists like Kent Lightfoot, Ed Luby, Lynn Ingram and others. The DEIR, a developer-funded report, seeks to minimize the importance of the site by referring to the failure to find any remains within a limited area and depth. However, even if no remains are ever found, that fact is a testimony to the unfettered industrial development of the East Bay shoreline following the Gold rush and to racism against native people. The site retains major importance in the history and pre-history of the area and especially of native America. I had forgotten to include these points in my earlier letter to you and am glad that the period for public comment has been extended. Thank you for that. The site has a long and rich history, much of which is still being studied. If destroyed, we will lose access to this very intriguing history, much of which is only being uncovered at the present time. Thank you, Stephanie Manning Department of Theater, Dance and Performance Studies 15 Dwinelle Hall, MC 2560 Berkeley, CA 94720-2560 510.642.1677 510.643.9956 fax Attn: Shannon Allen City of Berkeley City Planning 1947 Center Street 2nd Floor Berkeley, CA 94704 February 6, 2017 Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing this letter in response to plans for the 1900 Fourth Street proposal to build on the West Berkeley Shellmound site. I share deep concerns raised by the Ohlone leaders and my colleague Professor Jacqueline Shea Murphy regarding the oversight and accuracy of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR). I am a professor at UC Berkeley who works on issues related to Indigenous dance, and I strongly urge you to reconsider the plans to develop this area. As we consider the important role that Indigenous activists currently have in defending the natural resources of this country, I hope that you reconsider the development of this project towards commercial ends and instead reimagine a new purpose for this sacred land. As Professor Murphy suggests, this site could be used to create a rich cultural heritage center, a teaching space, a place to create reciprocity, and an educational center for Native American values and principles. This type of application will allow us to model a new way of working with the Ohlone people, one that will position the City of Berkeley as a leader in supporting essential sacred lands over commercial development. One can imagine that creating such a place would, in the long-term, become an epicenter for visitors and Native people alike - drawing more commercial success to the surrounding areas. Beneath the layers of asphalt and soil lie valuable cultural artifacts for our community and our future. There is currently no adequate site in Berkeley recognizing the significance of the Shellmound and the people who created it. Please take a moment to reflect - then notice that this is an important moment not only for Berkeley, but for California, the Nation, and beyond. Commercial developments are a common occurrence in modern cities. Instead, this is an incredible opportunity to honor an ancient and significant Ohlone cultural site; doing so will be remembered well beyond the lifespan of a commercial development. Sincerely, Lisa Wymore Lisa Wymore Associate Professor of Dance Chair, Theater, Dance and Performance Studies -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP DUWKXUGMDFREV#JPDLOFRPRQEHKDOIRI$UWKXU-DFREV VWDU#VRQLFQHW! 6HQW 0RQGD\)HEUXDU\ 30 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ &F $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW :HVW%HUNHOH\6KHOOPRXQG 'HDU0V$OOHQDQG%HUNHOH\&LW\3ODQQHUV ,KDYHEHHQWRVHYHUDOFLW\FRXQFLOPHHWLQJVDQGRQH/DQGPDUN3UHVHUYDWLRQ&RPPLWWHH $UWKXU-DFREVVWDU#VRQLFQHW&KULVWLH$YH(PHU\YLOOH&D -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP SLQD\PXMHU SLQD\PXMHU#JPDLOFRP! 6HQW 0RQGD\)HEUXDU\ 30 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ $OOHQ6KDQQRQ &F +$& VKHOOPRXQGZDON#\DKRRFRP 6XEMHFW 5( 'UDIW(,5 )RXUWK6WUHHW Attn: Shannon Allen City of Berkeley City Planning 1947 Center Street, 2nd Floor Berkeley, CA 94704 Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I was born and raised in Berkeley, California, but due to the high costs of living, have since moved away. I continue to have close family and friends in Berkeley and I am appalled to learn that there is consideration of further desecration of yet another Sacred Site of the Ohlone people. 1900 Fourth Street is a part of the oldest bayside settlement in the San Francisco Bay Area, approximately 5700 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone people today. I request you to keep this in mind and suggest that this land be gifted to the Ohlone people for pertpetuity so that proper ceremonial and historical reverence can begin in the City of Berkeley and continue into the future. Apparently, the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street, was completed with inadequate methodology regarding archaeological reports and a lack of adequate peer review of the data. While past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered human burials and undisturbed cultural remains, the report completely fails to address this issue. This oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology must be corrected, especially since the site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Commission, listed in the California State Registry of Historic Places, and may be determined to be eligible for the National Registry of Historic places. Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley “Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People” states in part: “BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site.” This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of Indigenous peoples. As a retired educator from San Francisco (also Ohlone territory), I fully support the City of Berkeley in working collaboratively with the entire Ohlone community to develop a major memorial and educational site at 1900 4th Street. Such an endeavor would truly honor our first inhabitants of Berkeley, their ancestors, and all the future generations to come. It would be a wonderful example that could be valued not only by the Ohlone people, but the children and students of the Berkeley public schools and the students at the University of California, Berkeley. I would be thrilled if the City of Berkeley would be the first of the San Francisco Bay Area to gift land back to the Ohlone people and be at the forefront of supporting Indigenous rights locally. Thank you for taking my thoughts and feelings into consideration. I hope you too will value our Original Peoples and make a stand for creating a better Berkeley... and a better SF Bay Area. Please reject the EIR and embrace the No Plan Alternative! Sincerely, Holly Calica 3838 Chanate Road Santa Rosa, CA 95404 Louise Dunlap, Ph.D. 483 43rd St, Apt 2 Oakland, CA 94609 February 6, 2017 Attn: Shannon Allen City of Berkeley Planning Department. 1947 Center Street, 2nd Floor Berkeley, CA 94704 Re: Comments on Draft Environmental Impact Report for 1900 4th Street Project As mentioned in public comment (January 12, 2017), I grew up and went to school in Berkeley in the 1940s, 50s, and 60s, a period when there was no acknowledgment of the Ohlone culture which had preceded the city-scape we knew and loved. When M. Margolin’s book opened our eyes in the 1970s, many Berkeleyans began to learn about the Ohlone and to value their culture and the natural world they had tended. Since then, understanding and respecting the Ohlone presence on this land has been a major theme for me. In the 2000s I joined four annual Shellmound Walks, led by Ohlone people to bring attention to early settlement sites in the Bay Area. Each year we revisited the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site and learned more about the kind of village and sacred place it had once been. It’s heartening that so much has now been learned and so many are now dedicated to protecting the story of what came before us on this land. Especially given the City’s having designated the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village site as a landmark (with potential for state and national recognition), I find it surprising that Berkeley is now considering commercial development for the one remaining un-built piece of that site. The DEIR seems inadequate on several parameters that are meant to assure balanced attention to Native and Tribal concerns. • Was there adequate consultation with tribes? As is now well known, one individual consultant, especially one descended from one set of Ohlone people in a different part of the region cannot represent the entire cluster of Ohlone peoples. The DEIR has not recognized the input of other Ohlone impacted by the project and must do so. • Was there full consideration of “tribal cultural resources”? These are now defined to go beyond mere archeological resources, and their loss has not been studied. • Is mitigation adequate? Educational panels (in consultation with whom?) and donations to an Ohlone cemetery two days walk from the West Berkeley site can not make up for the loss of a sacred site and a potentially profound memorial that the City of Berkeley could offer to the Ohlone people. From my professional work, I’m familiar enough with the EIR process to know that when it works the way it was meant to work, the outcome makes use of new ideas that come from the public’s comments. As I’ve followed this one over the months, it seems that a very beautiful idea has emerged from the public, which I hope the Planning Department is taking seriously. Rather than building another high-rise on this site—with questionable effects on traffic and air quality—the City should devote this land to open space, creek- side restoration and a cultural center, in consultation with the wide spectrum of Ohlone people for whom the site is significant. Such a site would preserve what is sacred about the site to Ohlone people still living in the area and to others. It would also help modern citizens to see what the original village in the surrounding blocks was like and would educate the public about a history that too few understand even today. This would be an outcome the City of Berkeley could be proud of. -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP 5KRQGD5REOHV UKRQGDUREOHV#Z\RERDUGVJRY! 6HQW 0RQGD\)HEUXDU\ 30 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW &RPPHQWVRQWKH'UDIW(QYLURQPHQWDO,PSDFW5HSRUWRQSURSRVHG WK6WUHHW 3URMHFW Attn: Shannon Allen, City of Berkeley Planning Dept. 1947 Center Street, 2nd Floor, Berkeley, CA 94704 The West Berkeley Ohlone Shellmound, Village and Burial Site, is considered to be the oldest inhabited site in the entire San Francisco Bay Area. The site was the home to a thriving Ohlone Indian village roughly 5,000 years ago. Archaeological evidence supports the view that this site supported a population who lived a sophisticated maritime-based life. The Ohlone people would launch tule reed boats on the bay to fish and to hunt for waterfowl and sea mammals. They would transport people and carry goods to other villages for trading. Archaeologists have found evidence of a large ceremonial center that was a sacred center for those who lived there and for the descendants today. In addition, there were ceremonial animal burials, including a condor burial. Additionally, charmstones, quartz crystals and bird-bone whistles have been found there as well, all of which have spiritual significance to Native people today. The site was also a cemetery, and past excavations have uncovered scores of human burials. Disturbing burials is a sacrilege and causes significant pain and a deep sense of further loss and insult to Native people. There is no feasible way to mitigate the disturbance of burials. These impacts are extremely significant and cannot be mitigated. Please deny this permit and show respect for the unique Ohlone culture. Thank you Rhonda Robles Box 864 E-Mail to and from me, in connection with the transaction of public business, is subject to the Wyoming Public Records Act and may be disclosed to third parties. Allen, Shannon From: shawna leona Attn: Shannon Allen City of Berkeley Planning Dept. 1947 Center Street, 2nd Floor Berkeley, CA 94704 January 30, 2017 Re: Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report on proposed 1900 4th Street Project Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street and the city’s plans for development on that site. Until recently, I was not aware that this area is a sacred site to Ohlone people. I was invited to a prayer circle held at 1900 Fourth Street on January 22nd, which is how I learned of the cultural and spiritual importance of the area from Ohlone leaders. One thing that has stuck with me was hearing that Ohlone people still gather at the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone village site, which is now an asphalt parking lot across from Spenger’s Fish Grotto. I tried to imagine what it might feel like for me, wanting to visit the place I knew my relatives were buried and having to stand in a parking lot surrounded by people there to shop, totally unaware of my ancestors under their feet. It hurt to think of my family being dug up, my people’s sacred ground being built on for the sake of stores and apartments and parking. It hurt to feel how much we have lost by failing to honor indigenous burial and cultural sites like the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village. The potential money to be made from the development of this site does not begin to compare to the cultural and spiritual value it has to Ohlone people. Every other inch of the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village area has been built on. I believe that not only should the planned development be stopped but the land at 1900 Fourth Street should be returned to the Ohlone people to whom it rightfully belongs. Please consider the long term impacts of what this huge development would be. Consider all that has been lost already and the chance to stop the further exploitation of Ohlone sacred sites. Below I am including comments from the West Berkeley Shellmound coalition on the Environmental Impact Report for you and Berkeley City Planners to keep in mind. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Shawna Sanchagrin 1090 61st Street Oakland, CA 94608 The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Preservation Commission in 2000, noting the site is “most highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial ground.” The site was also listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, and determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The original West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site completely encompassed the proposed 1900 Fourth Street Project and blocks beyond. It is known to be the oldest bayside settlement and one of the largest shellmounds in the San Francisco Bay Area—more than 5,000 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone Peoples today—a fact not acknowledged in the DEIR. The content of the DEIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by widespread community opposition and concern voiced at the March 10, 2016, December 8, 2016 and January 12, 2017 Zoning Adjustment Board meetings and the December 1, 2016, and January 5, 2017 Landmark Preservation Commission meetings. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to create the archaeological report and there has not been adequate peer review of the limited data in the DEIR. The archaeological analysis is inadequate and misleading. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered many prehistoric human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address human remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology and conclusions of the 1900 Fourth Street Draft EIR. The likely disturbance of human remains is highly significant as defined by CEQA and cannot be mitigated. The DEIR does not address the issue of Richard Schwartz’s recording of over 400 burials in the vicinity of 1900 Fourth St. and fails to provide any context of the lot within the larger site, ALA-307. The DEIR attempts to isolate and not analyze 1900 Fourth St. within the context of a larger site of cultural significance. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the DEIR’s preparation. The primary consultant has conflicts of interest, and does not represent the all of the Ohlone people indigenous to the Bay Area. Another Ohlone California Tribal group indigenous to Berkeley area and community has formally and repeatedly requested tribal consultation as required by CEQA. The City to date has not consulted with this group for purposes of preparing the DEIR, in violation of CEQA. The consultation that has occurred to date appears to be nothing more than a token gesture that fails to protect this important Ohlone site (the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site) and has resulted in payment of funds to an individual as mitigation for the destruction of this irreplaceable sacred place. The Ohlone comprise more than a dozen tribes and languages yet the DEIR consults only one individual. The DEIR also fails to assess the importance of this site as a “tribal cultural resource” separate from the category of “cultural resources – archaeological.” AB 52 established a new category of resources under the California Environmental Quality Act, “tribal cultural resources,” which considers the tribal cultural values in addition to the scientific and archaeological values when determining impacts and mitigation. This DEIR, rather than fully assessing the impacts to tribal cultural resources under a new category, merely incorporates a brief discussion under the cultural resources archaeological section that states the destruction of the site will be mitigated through: 1) payment to an individual of $75,000 to improve a cemetery located outside the bounds of the shellmound and outside of the city boundaries, and 2) that educational panels will be placed at or near the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site after further consultation with the Ohlone people, without identifying who will be consulted for this mitigation measure. Neither the discussion nor the proposed mitigation complies with CEQA requirements to consult with impacted Tribes and to include a new and separate category addressing “tribal cultural resources.” Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley, entitled “Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People” states in part: “BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site.” Please honor this promise. Honoring this promise requires consultation will additional Ohlone people who recognize this site as sacred, as a tribal cultural property and it requires consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region. To date, Berkeley has not honored this promise and has failed to seek the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous people of the region—and has failed to respect the indigenous peoples’ opposition to the proposed project. On page 67, the DEIR states, “Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous peoples of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear whether or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. Given that 1900 Fourth Street proposal includes 155-apartments, and given that there are numerous Tribal objections to the development, it seems clear that the step of meaningful Tribal consultation before amending the General Plan was not done. The Project also requires several discretionary approvals by the City for variances to the current general plan and zoning ordinances. These approvals would require consultation under both AB 52 and SB 18. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound and Ohlone village site is a series of murals and a small plaque in the parking lot under the nearby freeway. Certainly, the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone peoples to develop a major memorial and educational site in the form of a culturally-appropriate, green open space park at 1900 Fourth Street. The DEIR fails to analyze and offer meaningful alternatives. I strongly support the development of such a memorial and educational site in lieu of the proposed development as the preferred alternative. In addition to the unavoidable adverse impacts to this critical tribal resource the DEIR includes other fatal flaws that require the City of Berkeley to either disapprove the Project or at a minimum require a supplemental EIR before making any determinations on the Project. The Project will not fulfill the purposes set forth in the Project proposal—in fact the Project will actually exacerbate issues it claims to resolve. The DEIR does not adequately address traffic impacts in that it fails to include all approved and ongoing projects in the area. The failure to address these other projects means that the cumulative impacts analysis is fatally flawed. The DEIR fails to account for safety issues that will result from additional traffic in the area and the railroad crossing. The DEIR does not fully address potential air quality impacts nor does it adequately discuss studies regarding increased asthma and other respiratory problems for people living near freeways and industrial areas. The DEIR does not sufficiently address the potential for release of hazardous chemicals through ground disturbance. The DEIR does include a sufficient discussion of potential impacts to water resources on site that could result from development on the site, nor does the document include an adequate alternatives analysis. It would be irresponsible for the City of Berkeley to consider approving this project without complete and accurate information regarding any and all impacts that may affect the health and safety of the community. This Project has the potential to increase already significant traffic congestion, harm the health of residents, and destroy irreplaceable cultural and historic sites that the City of Berkeley has pledged to protect. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of more than 5,000 years of history and a living culture. Reject the DEIR and embrace the No Plan / Create a Berkeley Gateway / Memorial Site Alternative! • This is our last opportunity to protect and preserve the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site. Almost all of the other shellmound and villages sites have been developed and buried under concrete. Please do not approve the destruction of this unique, historic, irreplaceable site. We should preserve and enhance the remaining sites and our collective efforts should start with this site. • This is the oldest sacred site in the Bay Area. It has to be protected. If destroyed by development it will be lost forever—and Berkeley will be responsible for a sacred place’s cultural, spiritual and ecological history being swept off the Earth. • Berkeley is on record supporting the rights of indigenous people. The Landmarks Commission noted that this site is “highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial site.” The city of Berkeley should not be approving and defending the destruction of a sacred site. The City of Berkeley has passed resolutions supporting the protection of sacred sites outside of Berkeley, such as the resolution passed supporting the Standing Rock Sioux opposition to the Dakota Access Pipeline. For the City to have credibility it must take action to protect the sacred sites within its boundaries that it has pledged to protect—including this important site. • The draft EIR language and archaeological analysis cleverly seeks to distract from the larger landmarked village site by claiming there are no shellmound remains within the 2.2 acre parking lot site. This is deceptive and inaccurate. We are concerned about the entire site, which is eligible for the National Register of Historic Places, and whose boundary is already determined. 1900 Fourth St. sits within this larger site. • CEQA requires that 1900 Fourth Street be respected in a manner consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (1995) whose “Standards for Preservation” states: “A property will be used as it was historically… The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The replacement of intact or repairable historic materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided.” The draft EIR fails to identify and address these state and federal protection requirements (as does the proposed project). Mitigation “below a level of significance” in thus impossible. The draft EIR is inadequate and should not be certified or approved even if revised. • CEQA Guidelines under Section 15126.4 (b) Mitigation Measures Related to Impacts on Historical Resources. (3)(A), states: “Preservation in place is the preferred manner of mitigating impacts to archaeological sites. Preservation in place maintains the relationship between artifacts and the archaeological context. Preservation may also avoid conflict with religious or cultural values of groups associated with the site.” Mitigation “below a level of significance” is impossible. The draft EIR is inadequate and should not be certified or approved even if revised. • There is no feasible way to mitigate the disturbance of burials. These impacts are unavoidable significant impacts and cannot be mitigated. • The alternatives analysis is inadequate and insufficient. The draft EIR does not adequately assess alternatives as required by CEQA. A reasonable range of alternatives should have been considered. A reasonable range of alternatives would have considered designating the entire site as culturally-significant, memorial, open space, as the site would be excellent for wetlands mitigation and state agencies are ready and willing to step in and assist in culturally-appropriate ecological restoration. There are few such properties available for wetlands mitigation. This site also has the potential for an urban creek restoration project that could provide restoration of a portion of what was the nature landscape of the area, enhancing water quality, promoting climate change mitigation, and allowing protection in perpetuity of this critical tribal cultural resource. The developer should have also analyzed an alternative location for this mega-development; a site that is not as close to the freeway, and not located within the boundaries of the West Berkeley Shellmound and Village Site. • The project proposes housing close to the freeway and train tracks, with 155 apartments and perhaps 3-500 new residents and 372 parking spaces: The The DEIR does not adequately address traffic impacts in that it fails to include all approved and ongoing projects in the area. The failure to address these other projects means that the cumulative impacts analysis is fatally flawed. The DEIR fails to account for safety issues that will result from additional traffic in the area and the railroad crossing. The DEIR does not fully address potential air quality impacts nor does it adequately discuss studies regarding increased asthma and other respiratory problems for people living near freeways and industrial areas. The DEIR does not sufficiently address the potential for release of hazardous chemicals through ground disturbance. The DEIR does include a sufficient discussion of potential impacts to water resources on site that could result from development on the site, nor does the document include an adequate alternatives analysis. • The EIR ignores the many hundreds of burials already known to have been removed from sanctified burial ceremonies that laid them there. Burials have been found from 2-13 feet below the surface in the site. They surround the site and are likely within the 2.2 acres from which 8-feet of subsurface soil would be excavated. The developer should not destroy this site, disturb burials and separate us all from ever knowing them and their world. • The city and the developer have not complied with AB52, having failed to consult with members of the Ohlone community. The Ohlone comprise more than a dozen tribes and languages yet the draft EIR consults only one individual. • The West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site is still used for prayer and ceremony by members of the Ohlone community. This will no longer be possible if the project is approved. These important facts are not mentioned in the draft EIR. • The draft EIR fails to mention or address the proposed project’s violation of Berkeley Municipal Code 3.24.260 “Permit application-—Review standards and criteria” which states (italics added): “Approval of permit applications pursuant to this section may be granted only upon determination that the proposal conforms to the criteria set forth in paragraph 1: For permit applications for construction, alteration or repair: For applications relating to landmark sites, the proposed work shall not adversely affect the exterior architectural features of the landmark and, where specified in the designation for a publicly owned landmark, its major interior architectural features; nor shall the proposed work adversely affect the special character or special historical, architectural or aesthetic interest or value of the landmark and its site, as viewed both in themselves and in their setting.” Hence, the 1900 Fourth Street’s Structural Alteration Permit #LMSAP2015-00005 application should be denied. • The 1900 Fourth Street draft EIR is fatally flawed, inadequate and defective. The city should review, reject, reissue and not certify this EIR, and never approve commercial development of the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 1:21 PM, Delivery has failed to these recipients or groups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eceived: from mx2.ci.berkeley.ca.us (10.1.90.89) by CobEXCASV1.berkeley.root (10.1.70.83) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.294.0; Mon, 30 Jan 2017 13:21:35 -0800 Received: from pps.filterd (mx2.ci.berkeley.ca.us [127.0.0.1]) by mx2.ci.berkeley.ca.us (8.16.0.20/8.16.0.20) with SMTP id v0ULLZO1027060 for Final-Recipient: rfc822;[email protected] Action: failed Status: 5.2.2 Diagnostic-Code: smtp;554-5.2.2 mailbox full 554 5.2.2 STOREDRV.Deliver.Exception:QuotaExceededException.MapiExceptionShutoffQuotaExceeded; Failed to process message due to a permanent exception with message Cannot open mailbox /o=Berkeley/ou=Exchange Administrative Group (FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/cn=Configuration/cn=Servers/cn=CobExMBV2/cn=Microsoft System Attendant. 16.55847:C0000000, 17.43559:0000000020010000000000000F00000000000000, 255.23226:90220000, 255.27962:FE000000, 255.17082:DD040000, 0.26937:00000000, 4.21921:DD040000, 255.27962:FA000000, 255.1494:00000000, 255.26426:FE000000, 0.22086:0F010480, 0.25876:0F010480, 4.7588:0F010480, 0.25840:02119810, 4.6564:0F010480, 0.56333:0F010480, 4.6372:05000780, 0.24916:0F010480, 4.6276:05000780, 4.5721:DD040000, 4.6489:DD040000, 0.34743:0F010480, 4.2199:DD040000, 0.56415:0F010480, 4.48223:DD040000, 4.17097:DD040000, 4.8620:DD040000, 255.1750:0F010480, 0.26849:0F010480, 255.21817:DD040000, 0.26297:2C000000, 4.16585:DD040000, 0.32441:0F010480, 4.1706:DD040000, 0.24761:0F010480, 4.20665:DD 040000, 0.25785:00000000, 4.29881:DD040000 ------Forwarded message ------From: shawna leona January 30, 2017 Re: Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report on proposed 1900 4th Street Project Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing to express my deep concerns about the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street and the city’s plans for development on that site. Until recently, I was not aware that this area is a sacred site to Ohlone people. I was invited to a prayer circle held at 1900 Fourth Street on January 22nd, which is how I learned of the cultural and spiritual importance of the area from Ohlone leaders. One thing that has stuck with me was hearing that Ohlone people still gather at the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone village site, which is now an asphalt parking lot across from Spenger’s Fish Grotto. I tried to imagine what it might feel like for me, wanting to visit the place I knew my relatives were buried and having to stand in a parking lot surrounded by people there to shop, totally unaware of my ancestors under their feet. It hurt to think of my family being dug up, my people’s sacred ground being built on for the sake of stores and apartments and parking. It hurt to feel how much we have lost by failing to honor indigenous burial and cultural sites like the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village. The potential money to be made from the development of this site does not begin to compare to the cultural and spiritual value it has to Ohlone people. Every other inch of the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village area has been built on. I believe that not only should the planned development be stopped but the land at 1900 Fourth Street should be returned to the Ohlone people to whom it rightfully belongs. Please consider the long term impacts of what this huge development would be. Consider all that has been lost already and the chance to stop the further exploitation of Ohlone sacred sites. Below I am including comments from the West Berkeley Shellmound coalition on the Environmental Impact Report for you and Berkeley City Planners to keep in mind. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Shawna Sanchagrin 1090 61st Street Oakland, CA 94608 The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Preservation Commission in 2000, noting the site is “most highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial ground.” The site was also listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, and determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The original West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site completely encompassed the proposed 1900 Fourth Street Project and blocks beyond. It is known to be the oldest bayside settlement and one of the largest shellmounds in the San Francisco Bay Area—more than 5,000 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone Peoples today—a fact not acknowledged in the DEIR. The content of the DEIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by widespread community opposition and concern voiced at the March 10, 2016, December 8, 2016 and January 12, 2017 Zoning Adjustment Board meetings and the December 1, 2016, and January 5, 2017 Landmark Preservation Commission meetings. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to create the archaeological report and there has not been adequate peer review of the limited data in the DEIR. The archaeological analysis is inadequate and misleading. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered many prehistoric human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address human remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology and conclusions of the 1900 Fourth Street Draft EIR. The likely disturbance of human remains is highly significant as defined by CEQA and cannot be mitigated. The DEIR does not address the issue of Richard Schwartz’s recording of over 400 burials in the vicinity of 1900 Fourth St. and fails to provide any context of the lot within the larger site, ALA-307. The DEIR attempts to isolate and not analyze 1900 Fourth St. within the context of a larger site of cultural significance. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the DEIR’s preparation. The primary consultant has conflicts of interest, and does not represent the all of the Ohlone people indigenous to the Bay Area. Another Ohlone California Tribal group indigenous to Berkeley area and community has formally and repeatedly requested tribal consultation as required by CEQA. The City to date has not consulted with this group for purposes of preparing the DEIR, in violation of CEQA. The consultation that has occurred to date appears to be nothing more than a token gesture that fails to protect this important Ohlone site (the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site) and has resulted in payment of funds to an individual as mitigation for the destruction of this irreplaceable sacred place. The Ohlone comprise more than a dozen tribes and languages yet the DEIR consults only one individual. The DEIR also fails to assess the importance of this site as a “tribal cultural resource” separate from the category of “cultural resources – archaeological.” AB 52 established a new category of resources under the California Environmental Quality Act, “tribal cultural resources,” which considers the tribal cultural values in addition to the scientific and archaeological values when determining impacts and mitigation. This DEIR, rather than fully assessing the impacts to tribal cultural resources under a new category, merely incorporates a brief discussion under the cultural resources archaeological section that states the destruction of the site will be mitigated through: 1) payment to an individual of $75,000 to improve a cemetery located outside the bounds of the shellmound and outside of the city boundaries, and 2) that educational panels will be placed at or near the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site after further consultation with the Ohlone people, without identifying who will be consulted for this mitigation measure. Neither the discussion nor the proposed mitigation complies with CEQA requirements to consult with impacted Tribes and to include a new and separate category addressing “tribal cultural resources.” Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley, entitled “Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People” states in part: “BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site.” Please honor this promise. Honoring this promise requires consultation will additional Ohlone people who recognize this site as sacred, as a tribal cultural property and it requires consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region. To date, Berkeley has not honored this promise and has failed to seek the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous people of the region—and has failed to respect the indigenous peoples’ opposition to the proposed project. On page 67, the DEIR states, “Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous peoples of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear whether or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. Given that 1900 Fourth Street proposal includes 155-apartments, and given that there are numerous Tribal objections to the development, it seems clear that the step of meaningful Tribal consultation before amending the General Plan was not done. The Project also requires several discretionary approvals by the City for variances to the current general plan and zoning ordinances. These approvals would require consultation under both AB 52 and SB 18. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound and Ohlone village site is a series of murals and a small plaque in the parking lot under the nearby freeway. Certainly, the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone peoples to develop a major memorial and educational site in the form of a culturally-appropriate, green open space park at 1900 Fourth Street. The DEIR fails to analyze and offer meaningful alternatives. I strongly support the development of such a memorial and educational site in lieu of the proposed development as the preferred alternative. In addition to the unavoidable adverse impacts to this critical tribal resource the DEIR includes other fatal flaws that require the City of Berkeley to either disapprove the Project or at a minimum require a supplemental EIR before making any determinations on the Project. The Project will not fulfill the purposes set forth in the Project proposal—in fact the Project will actually exacerbate issues it claims to resolve. The DEIR does not adequately address traffic impacts in that it fails to include all approved and ongoing projects in the area. The failure to address these other projects means that the cumulative impacts analysis is fatally flawed. The DEIR fails to account for safety issues that will result from additional traffic in the area and the railroad crossing. The DEIR does not fully address potential air quality impacts nor does it adequately discuss studies regarding increased asthma and other respiratory problems for people living near freeways and industrial areas. The DEIR does not sufficiently address the potential for release of hazardous chemicals through ground disturbance. The DEIR does include a sufficient discussion of potential impacts to water resources on site that could result from development on the site, nor does the document include an adequate alternatives analysis. It would be irresponsible for the City of Berkeley to consider approving this project without complete and accurate information regarding any and all impacts that may affect the health and safety of the community. This Project has the potential to increase already significant traffic congestion, harm the health of residents, and destroy irreplaceable cultural and historic sites that the City of Berkeley has pledged to protect. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of more than 5,000 years of history and a living culture. Reject the DEIR and embrace the No Plan / Create a Berkeley Gateway / Memorial Site Alternative! • This is our last opportunity to protect and preserve the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site. Almost all of the other shellmound and villages sites have been developed and buried under concrete. Please do not approve the destruction of this unique, historic, irreplaceable site. We should preserve and enhance the remaining sites and our collective efforts should start with this site. • This is the oldest sacred site in the Bay Area. It has to be protected. If destroyed by development it will be lost forever—and Berkeley will be responsible for a sacred place’s cultural, spiritual and ecological history being swept off the Earth. • Berkeley is on record supporting the rights of indigenous people. The Landmarks Commission noted that this site is “highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial site.” The city of Berkeley should not be approving and defending the destruction of a sacred site. The City of Berkeley has passed resolutions supporting the protection of sacred sites outside of Berkeley, such as the resolution passed supporting the Standing Rock Sioux opposition to the Dakota Access Pipeline. For the City to have credibility it must take action to protect the sacred sites within its boundaries that it has pledged to protect—including this important site. • The draft EIR language and archaeological analysis cleverly seeks to distract from the larger landmarked village site by claiming there are no shellmound remains within the 2.2 acre parking lot site. This is deceptive and inaccurate. We are concerned about the entire site, which is eligible for the National Register of Historic Places, and whose boundary is already determined. 1900 Fourth St. sits within this larger site. • CEQA requires that 1900 Fourth Street be respected in a manner consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (1995) whose “Standards for Preservation” states: “A property will be used as it was historically… The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The replacement of intact or repairable historic materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided.” The draft EIR fails to identify and address these state and federal protection requirements (as does the proposed project). Mitigation “below a level of significance” in thus impossible. The draft EIR is inadequate and should not be certified or approved even if revised. • CEQA Guidelines under Section 15126.4 (b) Mitigation Measures Related to Impacts on Historical Resources. (3)(A), states: “Preservation in place is the preferred manner of mitigating impacts to archaeological sites. Preservation in place maintains the relationship between artifacts and the archaeological context. Preservation may also avoid conflict with religious or cultural values of groups associated with the site.” Mitigation “below a level of significance” is impossible. The draft EIR is inadequate and should not be certified or approved even if revised. • There is no feasible way to mitigate the disturbance of burials. These impacts are unavoidable significant impacts and cannot be mitigated. • The alternatives analysis is inadequate and insufficient. The draft EIR does not adequately assess alternatives as required by CEQA. A reasonable range of alternatives should have been considered. A reasonable range of alternatives would have considered designating the entire site as culturally-significant, memorial, open space, as the site would be excellent for wetlands mitigation and state agencies are ready and willing to step in and assist in culturally-appropriate ecological restoration. There are few such properties available for wetlands mitigation. This site also has the potential for an urban creek restoration project that could provide restoration of a portion of what was the nature landscape of the area, enhancing water quality, promoting climate change mitigation, and allowing protection in perpetuity of this critical tribal cultural resource. The developer should have also analyzed an alternative location for this mega-development; a site that is not as close to the freeway, and not located within the boundaries of the West Berkeley Shellmound and Village Site. • The project proposes housing close to the freeway and train tracks, with 155 apartments and perhaps 3-500 new residents and 372 parking spaces: The The DEIR does not adequately address traffic impacts in that it fails to include all approved and ongoing projects in the area. The failure to address these other projects means that the cumulative impacts analysis is fatally flawed. The DEIR fails to account for safety issues that will result from additional traffic in the area and the railroad crossing. The DEIR does not fully address potential air quality impacts nor does it adequately discuss studies regarding increased asthma and other respiratory problems for people living near freeways and industrial areas. The DEIR does not sufficiently address the potential for release of hazardous chemicals through ground disturbance. The DEIR does include a sufficient discussion of potential impacts to water resources on site that could result from development on the site, nor does the document include an adequate alternatives analysis. • The EIR ignores the many hundreds of burials already known to have been removed from sanctified burial ceremonies that laid them there. Burials have been found from 2-13 feet below the surface in the site. They surround the site and are likely within the 2.2 acres from which 8-feet of subsurface soil would be excavated. The developer should not destroy this site, disturb burials and separate us all from ever knowing them and their world. • The city and the developer have not complied with AB52, having failed to consult with members of the Ohlone community. The Ohlone comprise more than a dozen tribes and languages yet the draft EIR consults only one individual. • The West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site is still used for prayer and ceremony by members of the Ohlone community. This will no longer be possible if the project is approved. These important facts are not mentioned in the draft EIR. • The draft EIR fails to mention or address the proposed project’s violation of Berkeley Municipal Code 3.24.260 “Permit application-—Review standards and criteria” which states (italics added): “Approval of permit applications pursuant to this section may be granted only upon determination that the proposal conforms to the criteria set forth in paragraph 1: For permit applications for construction, alteration or repair: For applications relating to landmark sites, the proposed work shall not adversely affect the exterior architectural features of the landmark and, where specified in the designation for a publicly owned landmark, its major interior architectural features; nor shall the proposed work adversely affect the special character or special historical, architectural or aesthetic interest or value of the landmark and its site, as viewed both in themselves and in their setting.” Hence, the 1900 Fourth Street’s Structural Alteration Permit #LMSAP2015- 00005 application should be denied. • The 1900 Fourth Street draft EIR is fatally flawed, inadequate and defective. The city should review, reject, reissue and not certify this EIR, and never approve commercial development of the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site. Allen, Shannon From: Sylvie Rousseau Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Completed Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am a resident of the Bay Area for over 10 years, a regular voter, and I am writing to express my deep concerns about the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Preservation Commission in 2000, noting the site is “most highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial ground.” The site was also listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, and determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The original West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site completely encompassed the proposed 1900 Fourth Street Project and blocks beyond. It is known to be the oldest bayside settlement and one of the largest shellmounds in the San Francisco Bay Area—more than 5,000 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone Peoples today—a fact not acknowledged in the DEIR. The content of the DEIR is heavily disputed, as revealed by widespread community opposition and concern voiced at the March 10, 2016, December 8, 2016 and January 12, 2017 Zoning Adjustment Board meetings and the December 1, 2016, and January 5, 2017 Landmark Preservation Commission meetings. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to create the archaeological report and there has not been adequate peer review of the limited data in the DEIR. The archaeological analysis is inadequate and misleading. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered many prehistoric human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address human remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology and conclusions of the 1900 Fourth Street Draft EIR. The likely disturbance of human remains is highly significant as defined by CEQA and cannot be mitigated. The DEIR does not address the issue of Richard Schwartz’s recording of over 400 burials in the vicinity of 1900 Fourth St. and fails to provide any context of the lot within the larger site, ALA-307. The DEIR attempts to isolate and not analyze 1900 Fourth St. within the context of a larger site of cultural significance. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the DEIR’s preparation. The primary consultant has conflicts of interest, and does not represent the all of the Ohlone people indigenous to the Bay Area. Another Ohlone California Tribal group indigenous to Berkeley area and community has formally and repeatedly requested tribal consultation as required by CEQA. The City to date has not consulted with this group for purposes of preparing the DEIR, in violation of CEQA. The consultation that has occurred to date appears to be nothing more than a token gesture that fails to protect this important Ohlone site (the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site) and has resulted in payment of funds to an individual as mitigation for the destruction of this irreplaceable sacred place. The Ohlone comprise more than a dozen tribes and languages yet the DEIR consults only one individual. The DEIR also fails to assess the importance of this site as a “tribal cultural resource” separate from the category of “cultural resources – archaeological.” AB 52 established a new category of resources under the California Environmental Quality Act, “tribal cultural resources,” which considers the tribal cultural values in addition to the scientific and archaeological values when determining impacts and mitigation. This DEIR, rather than fully assessing the impacts to tribal cultural resources under a new category, merely incorporates a brief discussion under the cultural resources archaeological section that states the destruction of the site will be mitigated through: 1) payment to an individual of $75,000 to improve a cemetery located outside the bounds of the shellmound and outside of the city boundaries, and 2) that educational panels will be placed at or near the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site after further consultation with the Ohlone people, without identifying who will be consulted for this mitigation measure. Neither the discussion nor the proposed mitigation complies with CEQA requirements to consult with impacted Tribes and to include a new and separate category addressing “tribal cultural resources.” Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley, entitled “Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People” states in part: “BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site.” Please honor this promise. Honoring this promise requires consultation will additional Ohlone people who recognize this site as sacred, as a tribal cultural property and it requires consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region. To date, Berkeley has not honored this promise and has failed to seek the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous people of the region—and has failed to respect the indigenous peoples’ opposition to the proposed project. On page 67, the DEIR states, “Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous peoples of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear whether or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. Given that 1900 Fourth Street proposal includes 155-apartments, and given that there are numerous Tribal objections to the development, it seems clear that the step of meaningful Tribal consultation before amending the General Plan was not done. The Project also requires several discretionary approvals by the City for variances to the current general plan and zoning ordinances. These approvals would require consultation under both AB 52 and SB 18. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound and Ohlone village site is a series of murals and a small plaque in the parking lot under the nearby freeway. Certainly, the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone peoples to develop a major memorial and educational site in the form of a culturally-appropriate, green open space park at 1900 Fourth Street. The DEIR fails to analyze and offer meaningful alternatives. I strongly support the development of such a memorial and educational site in lieu of the proposed development as the preferred alternative. In addition to the unavoidable adverse impacts to this critical tribal resource the DEIR includes other fatal flaws that require the City of Berkeley to either disapprove the Project or at a minimum require a supplemental EIR before making any determinations on the Project. The Project will not fulfill the purposes set forth in the Project proposal—in fact the Project will actually exacerbate issues it claims to resolve. The DEIR does not adequately address traffic impacts in that it fails to include all approved and ongoing projects in the area. The failure to address these other projects means that the cumulative impacts analysis is fatally flawed. The DEIR fails to account for safety issues that will result from additional traffic in the area and the railroad crossing. The DEIR does not fully address potential air quality impacts nor does it adequately discuss studies regarding increased asthma and other respiratory problems for people living near freeways and industrial areas. The DEIR does not sufficiently address the potential for release of hazardous chemicals through ground disturbance. The DEIR does NOT include a sufficient discussion of potential impacts to water resources on site that could result from development on the site, nor does the document include an adequate alternatives analysis. It would be irresponsible for the City of Berkeley to consider approving this project without complete and accurate information regarding any and all impacts that may affect the health and safety of the community. This Project has the potential to increase already significant traffic congestion, harm the health of residents, and destroy irreplaceable cultural and historic sites that the City of Berkeley has pledged to protect. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of more than 5,000 years of history and a living culture. Reject the DEIR and embrace the No Plan / Create a Berkeley Gateway / Memorial Site Alternative! Sincerely, Sylvie Rousseau -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP /LV$GGLVRQ OLV#OLVDGGLVRQFRP! 6HQW 0RQGD\)HEUXDU\ 30 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW 3URSRVHG WK6WUHHW3URMHFW Attn: Shannon Allen City of Berkeley Planning Dept. 1947 Center Street, 2nd Floor Berkeley, CA 94704 Re: Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report on proposed 1900 4th Street Project Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: I am writing about the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. Noting that the site is “most highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial ground” and was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Preservation Commission in 2000, was also listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, and determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places it is a shame to see it under threat of destruction. The original West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site completely encompassed the proposed 1900 Fourth Street Project and blocks beyond. It is known to be the oldest bayside settlement and one of the largest Shellmounds in the San Francisco Bay Area—more than 5,000 years old. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone Peoples today—a fact not acknowledged in the DEIR. The content of the DEIR is heavily disputed, and there is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to create the archaeological report. There has not been adequate peer review of the limited data in the DEIR. The archaeological analysis is inadequate and misleading. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered many prehistoric human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address human remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is part of the same Landmark Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology and conclusions of the 1900 Fourth Street Draft EIR. The likely disturbance of human remains is highly significant as defined by CEQA and cannot be mitigated. The DEIR does not address the issue of Richard Schwartz’s recording of over 400 burials in the vicinity of 1900 Fourth St. and fails to provide any context of the lot within the larger site, ALA-307. The DEIR attempts to isolate and not analyze 1900 Fourth St. within the context of a larger site of cultural significance. Furthermore, there has not been adequate tribal consultation in the DEIR’s preparation. The primary consultant has conflicts of interest, and does not represent the all of the Ohlone people indigenous to the Bay Area. Another Ohlone California Tribal group indigenous to Berkeley area and community has formally and repeatedly requested tribal consultation as required by CEQA. The City to date has not consulted with this group for purposes of preparing the DEIR, in violation of CEQA. The consultation that has occurred to date appears to be nothing more than a token gesture that fails to protect this important Ohlone site (the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site) and has resulted in payment of funds to an individual as mitigation for the destruction of this irreplaceable sacred place. The Ohlone comprise more than a dozen tribes and languages yet the DEIR consults only one individual. The DEIR also fails to assess the importance of this site as a “tribal cultural resource” separate from the category of “cultural resources – archaeological.” AB 52 established a new category of resources under the California Environmental Quality Act, “tribal cultural resources,” which considers the tribal cultural values in addition to the scientific and archaeological values when determining impacts and mitigation. This DEIR, rather than fully assessing the impacts to tribal cultural resources under a new category, merely incorporates a brief discussion under the cultural resources archaeological section that states the destruction of the site will be mitigated through: 1) payment to an individual of $75,000 to improve a cemetery located outside the bounds of the shellmound and outside of the city boundaries, and 2) that educational panels will be placed at or near the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site after further consultation with the Ohlone people, without identifying who will be consulted for this mitigation measure. Neither the discussion nor the proposed mitigation complies with CEQA requirements to consult with impacted Tribes and to include a new and separate category addressing “tribal cultural resources.” Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley, entitled “Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People” states in part: “BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site.” Please honor this promise. Honoring this promise requires consultation will additional Ohlone people who recognize this site as sacred, as a tribal cultural property and it requires consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region. To date, Berkeley has not honored this promise and has failed to seek the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous people of the region—and has failed to respect the indigenous peoples’ opposition to the proposed project. On page 67, the DEIR states, “Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous peoples of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear whether or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. Given that 1900 Fourth Street proposal includes 155-apartments, and given that there are numerous Tribal objections to the development, it seems clear that the step of meaningful Tribal consultation before amending the General Plan was not done. The Project also requires several discretionary approvals by the City for variances to the current general plan and zoning ordinances. These approvals would require consultation under both AB 52 and SB 18. At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound and Ohlone village site is a series of murals and a small plaque in the parking lot under the nearby freeway. Certainly, the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone peoples to develop a major memorial and educational site in the form of a culturally-appropriate, green open space park at 1900 Fourth Street. The DEIR fails to analyze and offer meaningful alternatives. I strongly support the development of such a memorial and educational site in lieu of the proposed development as the preferred alternative. In addition to the unavoidable adverse impacts to this critical tribal resource the DEIR includes other fatal flaws that require the City of Berkeley to either disapprove the Project or at a minimum require a supplemental EIR before making any determinations on the Project. The Project will not fulfill the purposes set forth in the Project proposal—in fact the Project will actually exacerbate issues it claims to resolve. The DEIR does not adequately address traffic impacts in that it fails to include all approved and ongoing projects in the area. The failure to address these other projects means that the cumulative impacts analysis is fatally flawed. The DEIR fails to account for safety issues that will result from additional traffic in the area and the railroad crossing. The DEIR does not fully address potential air quality impacts nor does it adequately discuss studies regarding increased asthma and other respiratory problems for people living near freeways and industrial areas. The DEIR does not sufficiently address the potential for release of hazardous chemicals through ground disturbance. The DEIR does include a sufficient discussion of potential impacts to water resources on site that could result from development on the site, nor does the document include an adequate alternatives analysis. It would be irresponsible for the City of Berkeley to consider approving this project without complete and accurate information regarding any and all impacts that may affect the health and safety of the community. This Project has the potential to increase already significant traffic congestion, harm the health of residents, and destroy irreplaceable cultural and historic sites that the City of Berkeley has pledged to protect. This is a clear opportunity for the City of Berkeley to follow through on its resolutions to honor and protect sacred sites and the rights of indigenous peoples. I implore Berkeley to take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of more than 5,000 years of history and a living culture. Reject the DEIR and embrace the No Plan / Create a Berkeley Gateway / Memorial Site Alternative! Sincerely, Lis Addison, BA, MFA Composer, Vocalist, Dancer Founder KiVo (Kinetic Voice) facebook.com/LisAddison lisaddison.com kivokineticvoice.com 415.847-8136 iTunes: http://apple.co/1QYZF8e -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP 0LVD-RR PLVD#PLVDMRRFRP! 6HQW 0RQGD\)HEUXDU\ $0 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ &F &RUULQD*RXOG 7RE\0F/HRG 6XEMHFW 2SSRVHGWRWKH'(,5 OLIWLQJXSWKH:HVW%HUNHOH\6KHOOPRXQGDQG2KORQH9LOODJH6LWH Attn: Shannon Allen City of Berkeley Planning Dept. 1947 Center Street, 2nd Floor Berkeley, CA 94704 January 18, 2017 Re: Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report on proposed 1900 4th Street Project Dear Ms. Allen and Berkeley City Planners: California is my second home and that is why I’m emailing this. Please understand that the Bay Area is an area which is held dear by people who live in other states, even other countries. I was heartbroken to learn that yet another shell mound was being considered for destruction with development. I am writing this regarding the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) regarding 1900 Fourth Street. The site was designated as a City of Berkeley Landmark # 227 by the Landmarks Preservation Commission in 2000, noting the site is “most highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial ground.” The site was also listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, and determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The original West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site completely encompassed the proposed 1900 Fourth Street Project and blocks beyond. It is known to be the oldest bayside settlement and one of the largest shellmounds in the San Francisco Bay Area—more than 5,000 years old. It is the true birthplace of Berkeley. It continues to be of utmost significance as a ceremonial center to the Ohlone Peoples today—a fact not acknowledged in the DEIR. I am heartened that the DEIR is opposed by growing community opposition and concern and I would like to add my voice. I am making you to listen to the voices and knowledge of the Ohlone people and not depend upon a controversial study done by the archeologists. It is the respectful and also the smart thing to do during these times where the indigenous peoples are the front line of protecting Earth and Water. It is important to follow protection regulations when considering development projects more than ever before. There is significant controversy surrounding the methodology used to create the archaeological report and there has not been adequate peer review of the limited data in the DEIR. The archaeological analysis is inadequate and misleading. Past excavations in and around the proposed site have uncovered many prehistoric human burials and undisturbed cultural remains. The report completely fails to address human remains specifically documented in the EIR for the adjacent Grocery Outlet site that is highly relevant to the landmarked Shellmound site. This constitutes a significant oversight and inaccuracy in the methodology and conclusions of the 1900 Fourth Street Draft EIR. The likely disturbance of human remains is highly significant as defined by CEQA and cannot be mitigated. The DEIR does not address the issue of Richard Schwartz’s recording of over 400 burials in the vicinity of 1900 Fourth St. and fails to provide any context of the lot within the larger site, ALA-307. The DEIR attempts to isolate and not analyze 1900 Fourth St. within the context of a larger site of cultural significance. I agree with the Ohlone people and those who bring the issue of saving the shell mound and ask you to read this and to give it the greatest most respectful consideration. "There needs to be adequate tribal consultation in the DEIR’s preparation. The primary consultant has conflicts of interest, and does not represent the all of the Ohlone people indigenous to the Bay Area. Another Ohlone California Tribal group indigenous to Berkeley area and community has formally and repeatedly requested tribal consultation as required by CEQA. The City to date has not consulted with this group for purposes of preparing the DEIR, in violation of CEQA. The consultation that has occurred to date appears to be nothing more than a token gesture that fails to protect this important Ohlone site (the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site) and has resulted in payment of funds to an individual as mitigation for the destruction of this irreplaceable sacred place. The Ohlone comprise more than a dozen tribes and languages yet the DEIR consults only one individual. The DEIR also fails to assess the importance of this site as a “tribal cultural resource” separate from the category of “cultural resources – archaeological.” AB 52 established a new category of resources under the California Environmental Quality Act, “tribal cultural resources,” which considers the tribal cultural values in addition to the scientific and archaeological values when determining impacts and mitigation. This DEIR, rather than fully assessing the impacts to tribal cultural resources under a new category, merely incorporates a brief discussion under the cultural resources archaeological section that states the destruction of the site will be mitigated through: 1) payment to an individual of $75,000 to improve a cemetery located outside the bounds of the shellmound and outside of the city boundaries, and 2) that educational panels will be placed at or near the West Berkeley Shellmound and Ohlone Village Site after further consultation with the Ohlone people, without identifying who will be consulted for this mitigation measure. Neither the discussion nor the proposed mitigation complies with CEQA requirements to consult with impacted Tribes and to include a new and separate category addressing ‘tribal cultural resources.’" "Resolution No. 67,353-NS of the City of Berkeley, entitled 'Honor Berkeley Shellmound Indigenous Sacred Site, UC Berkeley Return Ancestral Remains to Ohlone People' states in part: 'BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that free, prior, and informed consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region be integral to any alteration planning for the Berkeley Shellmound sacred site, in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and calls upon all parties to follow the principles of the Declaration with respect to the West Berkeley Shellmound site.’ Please honor this promise. Honoring this promise requires consultation will additional Ohlone people who recognize this site as sacred, as a tribal cultural property and it requires consent of the Ohlone and other indigenous peoples of the region. To date, Berkeley has not honored this promise and has failed to seek the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous people of the region—and has failed to respect the indigenous peoples’ opposition to the proposed project." " On page 67, the DEIR states, “Consultation with the Ohlone Indian Tribe, conducted pursuant to AB52, was completed for the Project and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate.” Unfortunately, this is only one tribal entity and the resolution very clearly states that it should also include other indigenous peoples of the region; the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, for example, should be given the same formal consultation process as Ohlone Tribe Inc. It is also unclear whether or not the City of Berkeley followed SB18 which states that when a city or county adopts or amends their general plan the Tribes from the area must be consulted, whether federally recognized or not. The City of Berkeley has amended their housing development plan numerous times since the law was put into affect in 2005, and there is no proof that Tribes were included in consultation prior to amending this part of the general plan. Given that 1900 Fourth Street proposal includes 155-apartments, and given that there are numerous Tribal objections to the development, it seems clear that the step of meaningful Tribal consultation before amending the General Plan was not done. The Project also requires several discretionary approvals by the City for variances to the current general plan and zoning ordinances. These approvals would require consultation under both AB 52 and SB 18." "At this point, the only official recognition of this sacred shellmound and Ohlone village site is a series of murals and a small plaque in the parking lot under the nearby freeway. Certainly, the City of Berkeley would benefit from truly meaningful public acknowledgement of its Ohlone past, present, and future by working with local Ohlone peoples to develop a major memorial and educational site in the form of a culturally-appropriate, green open space park at 1900 Fourth Street. The DEIR fails to analyze and offer meaningful alternatives. I strongly support the development of such a memorial and educational site in lieu of the proposed development as the preferred alternative." "In addition to the unavoidable adverse impacts to this critical tribal resource the DEIR includes other fatal flaws that require the City of Berkeley to either disapprove the Project or at a minimum require a supplemental EIR before making any determinations on the Project. The Project will not fulfill the purposes set forth in the Project proposal—in fact the Project will actually exacerbate issues it claims to resolve. The DEIR does not adequately address traffic impacts in that it fails to include all approved and ongoing projects in the area. The failure to address these other projects means that the cumulative impacts analysis is fatally flawed. The DEIR fails to account for safety issues that will result from additional traffic in the area and the railroad crossing. The DEIR does not fully address potential air quality impacts nor does it adequately discuss studies regarding increased asthma and other respiratory problems for people living near freeways and industrial areas. The DEIR does not sufficiently address the potential for release of hazardous chemicals through ground disturbance. The DEIR does not include a sufficient discussion of potential impacts to water resources on site that could result from development on the site, nor does the document include an adequate alternatives analysis. It would be irresponsible for the City of Berkeley to consider approving this project without complete and accurate information regarding any and all impacts that may affect the health and safety of the community. This Project has the potential to increase already significant traffic congestion, harm the health of residents, and destroy irreplaceable cultural and historic sites that the City of Berkeley has pledged to protect." The State of California has the most diverse Indigenous population in the country. The population, despite labels of federal recognition is notable. Indigenous presence is as rich if not richer than the Southwest and Oklahoma. It is a travesty that this is covered up and politically buried when the indigenous presence and historical significance and present significance is not allowed to shine. To me it is the gold rush mentality which drives the state and Berkeley does not have to be in collusion in any shape or form. Here is an opportunity to honor, to protect Sacred Ohlone sites. Here is an opportunity to be on the right side of a history that extracts from indigenous peoples to instead lift up as valuable and valued by a decision that lifts up the earth valued by the tribe as valued by the city also. This one bit of land of all the land already desecrated for development. I join to say " Please take a stand against this construction that will benefit wealthy developers at the expense of more than 5,000 years of history and a living culture. Reject the DEIR and embrace the No Plan / Create a Berkeley Gateway / Memorial Site Alternative!" Sincerely, Misa Joo 2327 Jefferson Street Eugene OR 97405 -DFNVRQ&DPLOOH )URP %UXFH&DPSEHOO PDGURQHZHE#DROFRP! 6HQW 7XHVGD\)HEUXDU\ $0 7R $OOHQ6KDQQRQ 6XEMHFW WKHSURSRVHGSURMHFWDW6KHOOPRXQGPRXWKRI6WUDZEHUU\&UHHN &ĞďƌƵĂƌLJϳ͕ϮϬϭϳ dŽƚŚĞŽŶŝŶŐŽĂƌĚŽĨĞƌŬĞůĞLJ͕͕ĂŶĚƚŽǁŚŽŵŝƚŵĂLJĐŽŶĐĞƌŶ͗ /ĂŵĚĞĞƉůLJĐŽŶĐĞƌŶĞĚĂďŽƵƚƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚƉƌŽũĞĐƚŝŶƚŚĞĂƌĞĂŽĨƚŚĞŽůĚĞƐƚŬŶŽǁŶŝŶŚĂďŝƚĞĚůĂŶĚŝŶƚŚĞ^ĂŶ&ƌĂŶĐŝƐĐŽ ĂLJƌĞĂ͘KĨĐŽƵƌƐĞ͕ŝŶŵŽƐƚůŽĐĂƚŝŽŶƐ͕ǁŚĂƚŝƐƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚǁŽƵůĚŶŽƚďĞĞǀŝůŝŶƚŚĞůĞĂƐƚ͘ /ŚĂǀĞǁŽƌŬĞĚŽŶŝƐƐƵĞƐƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐƚŚĞĂůůŽŶĂtĞƚůĂŶĚƐĂƌĞĂŽĨǁĞƐƚĞƌŶ>ŽƐŶŐĞůĞƐǁŚĞƌĞƚŚĞLJĞdžĐĂǀĂƚĞĚ ƚŚŽƵƐĂŶĚƐŽĨŝŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐƌĞŵĂŝŶƐŝŶŽƌĚĞƌƚŽƌĞͲƌŽƵƚĞĂƌƵŶͲŽĨĨďĂƐŝŶĨŽƌǁĂƚĞƌĨƌŽŵƚŚĞWůĂLJĂsŝƐƚĂĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ͘ƵĞ ƚŽƚŚĞĨĂŝƌůLJĚĞĞƉƉĂƌŬŝŶŐŐĂƌĂŐĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚĂƐƉĂƌƚŽĨƚŚŝƐĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ͕/ŚĂǀĞĐŽŶĐĞƌŶƐŶŽƚŽŶůLJƚŚĂƚĚŽnjĞŶƐŽƌĞǀĞŶ ŚƵŶĚƌĞĚƐŽĨŝŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐƌĞŵĂŝŶƐŵĂLJǁĞůůďĞĨŽƵŶĚŝŶƚŚŝƐƉŚĂƐĞŝĨƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĂůŵŽǀĞƐĨŽƌǁĂƌĚ͘ ŶĚƐŝŶĐĞƚŚĞĂƌĞĂŝƐŶĞĂƌƚŚĞŵŽƵƚŚŽĨ^ƚƌĂǁďĞƌƌLJƌĞĞŬ͕/ĂŵĐŽŶĐĞƌŶĞĚĂďŽƵƚƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ͛Ɛ ŝŶƚĞƌĨĞƌĞŶĐĞǁŝƚŚƚŚĞŶĂƚƵƌĂůŚLJĚƌŽůŽŐLJŽĨƚŚĞǀŝĐŝŶŝƚLJʹŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐŽŶĐĞĂŐĂŝŶ͕ĐŽŶĐĞƌŶĂďŽƵƚƚŚĞĚĞƉƚŚŽĨƚŚĞƉĂƌŬŝŶŐ ŐĂƌĂŐĞĂŶĚǁŚĂƚƐƵĐŚǁŽƌŬǁŽƵůĚůŝŬĞůLJĚŝƐƚƵƌďŝŶƚĞƌŵƐŽĨŝŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐƌĞŵĂŝŶƐ͕ĂƐƐŽĐŝĂƚĞĚƐĂĐƌĞĚŽďũĞĐƚƐ͕ĂŶĚƚŚĞ ŶĂƚƵƌĂůƉůƵŵďŝŶŐƐLJƐƚĞŵŽĨƚŚĞĂƌĞĂ͘ /ďĞůŝĞǀĞƚŚĂƚƐŚŽǁŝŶŐďĂƐŝĐƌĞƐƉĞĐƚĨŽƌƚŚĞKŚůŽŶĞƉĞŽƉůĞǁŽƵůĚĐĂůůĨŽƌƌĞũĞĐƚŝŽŶŽĨƚŚŝƐĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ͘/ĂůƐŽďĞůŝĞǀĞ ƚŚĂƚŵƵĐŚŽĨƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚĂƌĞĂƐŚŽƵůĚďĞĂǀĂŝůĂďůĞĨŽƌŝŶĚŝŐĞŶŽƵƐĐĞƌĞŵŽŶŝĂůƉƵƌƉŽƐĞƐ͘/ƚĂůƐŽƐĞĞŵƐ ǁƌŽŶŐƚŽŚĂǀĞĐƌĂƐƐĐŽŵŵĞƌĐŝĂůĚŽŵŝŶƚŚŝƐƉĂƌƚŝĐƵůĂƌůLJƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶƚĂŶĚƐĂĐƌĞĚĂƌĞĂ͘ dŚĂŶŬƐĨŽƌLJŽƵƌĐŽŶƐŝĚĞƌĂƚŝŽŶĨŽƌƚŚŝƐƐƉĞĐŝĂůƐŝƚĞĂŶĚĨŽƌƚŚĞĨŝƌƐƚƉĞŽƉůĞƐŽĨƚŚŝƐůĂŶĚ͘ ^ŝŶĐĞƌĞůLJLJŽƵƌƐ͕ ƌƵĐĞĂŵƉďĞůů ϯϱϮϬKǀĞƌůĂŶĚǀĞ͘ηϭϰϵ >ŽƐŶŐĞůĞƐ͕ϵϬϬϯϰ