Planning and Development Department Land Use Planning Division 1947 Center Street Berkeley CA 94704 Community Advisory Group (CAG) Meeting #2 Summary Ashby + North Berkeley BART Zoning and Development Parameters Date + Time: August 3, 2020 at 6 pm Location: Online via Zoom Webinar virtual meeting Agenda 1. Welcome and Introductions 2. CAG Roles and Responsibilities 3. Planning Process 4. Zoning/AB2923, Project Parameters and Community Goals 5. Preliminary Site Concepts 6. Next Steps 7. Public Comment Attendance There were 13 out of 15 Community Advisory Group (CAG) members in attendance as well as over 70 members from the public. The following members of the project team (City, BART and consultants) made presentations or helped answer questions during the meeting: City ● Alisa Shen - Principal Planner BART ● Abby Thorne-Lyman - Transit-Oriented Design (TOD) Director ● Rachel Factor – Principal Planner Consultants ● Karen Murray - Van Meter Williams Pollack (VMWP) ● Dave Javid - Plan to Place ● Laurence Lewis - Kittleson & Associates Ashby + North Berkeley BART Zoning and Development Parameters | CAG #2 Summary 1 Planning and Development Department Land Use Planning Division 1947 Center Street Berkeley CA 94704 Meeting Summary The purpose of the second CAG meeting was to clarify the roles, responsibilities, and process for the advisory group, share and gather input on project goals and development parameters for each site, illustrate and understand AB2923 requirements for zoning as applied to each station site, and discuss big-picture physical design ideas for each site. The following notes summarize the main agenda items, presentation and discussion. CAG Introduction, Purpose, Roles and Responsibilities Following up on the discussion at the first CAG meeting, the project team provided a brief overview of the CAG roles and responsibilities. Below are the key themes from the CAG discussion that followed: ● Incorporate equity, which has been previously missing in planning decisions, in this process ● Present hard numbers in addition to percentages to better acknowledge public comprehension of the subject ● Acknowledge the context within Berkeley including the roots of the housing crisis and redlining ● Facilitated CAG conversations and discussions will lead to a better outcome and recommendation to the Planning Commission. Get CAG more involved. ● Provide an overview and objectives for the Community Workshop ● Share documents and meeting materials well in advance of the CAG meetings ● Acknowledge that BART ridership is the number one priority for BART’s role in this process Planning Process Alisa Shen provided an overview of the project objectives and timeline of outreach activities (visit the project website for more information: https://www.cityofberkeley.info/bartplanning/). Laurence Lewis, from Kittleson + Associates who are leading the transportation analysis, provided an overview of the transportation analysis parameters, expectations for future transit, and the implications it has on site concepts. The CAG had an opportunity to comment, and below are the key themes from the CAG discussion that followed: ● Consider the impact of COVID-19 in the analysis and interpretation of future transportation patterns. ● Study the surrounding circulation systems ● Rethink the necessity of cars and the implications of electric vehicles ● Share the analysis findings, including any historical data ● Consider the mobility challenges for the disabled and plan accordingly Ashby + North Berkeley BART Zoning and Development Parameters | CAG #2 Summary 2 Planning and Development Department Land Use Planning Division 1947 Center Street Berkeley CA 94704 ● Share the expectation for Transit Oriented Development to increase ridership ● Consider affordability in transportation analysis Zoning/AB2923, Project Parameters, and Community Goals The project team provided a brief overview on zoning and AB2923, including the goals and objectives from existing planning efforts including Adeline Corridor Specific Plan Vision and North Berkeley Goals and Development Objectives. From the analysis of the related planning efforts, the project team provided a summary of the “knowns” and “unknowns” related the project goals for each station, in the following categories: Housing, Community Uses/Amenities, Building Form/Character, Station Access and Transportation, Public Spaces, and Sustainability. The CAG participated in a live poll to share their top three priorities, which resulted in following: Housing (85%), Station Access and Transportation (65%), and Uses and Community Amenities (40%) (for complete poll results, please refer to the Appendix). Below is a summary of the key themes that came out of the CAG conversation about this topic ● Consider whether Equity and Inclusion should be called out as a stand-alone project Goal or be integrated/highlighted within the other goals ● Determine if Sustainability should be pulled out as a stand-alone Goal or an underlying theme among all Goals ● Review the feasibility of affordable housing at a range of levels and the inherent affordable housing in surrounding areas ● Encourage diversity of developers in the RFP process and break down parcels to allow for multiple projects ● Present studies on the relationship between sustainability and equity on ridership ● Ensure a reduction in accidents on bike/pedestrian pathways Preliminary Site Concepts The project team introduced preliminary site concepts for each station with an overview of considerations and a range of elements that make up each concept including: Economic Conditions, Funding + Resources, Technology (buildings + mobility), Laws + Regulations, and Policy. Ashby BART Three preliminary concepts were presented for the Ashby BART station: Option A “Minimal Change” (split into two options: Option A1+A2), Option B “Road Diet/Flea Market”, and Option C “Central Plaza/Flea Market”. Ashby + North Berkeley BART Zoning and Development Parameters | CAG #2 Summary 3 Planning and Development Department Land Use Planning Division 1947 Center Street Berkeley CA 94704 After the presentation the CAG participated in the following live poll. The first question asked if the Ashby concepts encompassed the priorities from the “Community Goals” section, the following is the results: 46% were Neutral, 31% Agreed, 15% Strongly Agreed, and 8% Strongly Disagreed. The second question asked which proposed circulation pattern best serves the community, the station, and the open space/flea market: 38% preferred Option C, 31% Option B, and 15% for Option A. The last question asked about the balance of housing and the flea market in the following priorities: Maximize site area for housing (46%), Equally balance flea market and housing (38%), and lastly, Maximize area for flea market (15%). For complete poll results, please refer to the Appendix. Ashby BART Station Preliminary Concepts - snapshot of notes recorded on the virtual whiteboard A summary of the key themes that came out of the CAG conversation that followed the poll are included below: ● Option A1: o Consider a community recreation center on this site, regional sports center, supportive housing ● Option A2: o Desire for buildings to address Adeline directly, and not be set back so far and down low where the parking lot Ashby + North Berkeley BART Zoning and Development Parameters | CAG #2 Summary 4 Planning and Development Department Land Use Planning Division 1947 Center Street Berkeley CA 94704 ● Option B o Reduce lanes on Adeline, road diet has potential o Reconsider substation access, drop-off zones, and sidewalk width for better circulation and opportunity for a better use of the area o Explain how parking will work for residents and BART patrons in the next round o Review the community’s initial input into the option from previous efforts ● Option C o Review Adeline’s circulation, in particular the number of lanes o Consider overhead tunnel decking for the substation, even if it is more expensive o Like the potential for community amenities ● General Comments o When preparing the RFP, consider who is included in the process and who isn’t, whether intentional or not, and how much we ask of them o Consider which of these concepts would be most suitable for various community goals, such as accessibility, affordable housing, the ability to partner with neighborhood partners for development o The flea market and housing should not be looked at in opposition o Following up on an earlier point, provide documents for CAG review well in advance of the meetings so CAG can take them out to community members o Consider how the CAG and City might weigh input depending on the participants interest and location relative to either station o Discuss the financial tradeoffs and benefits of balancing affordability concerns at both stations o Expand the maps to show the context and circulation flow in the surrounding areas o Consider pushing the envelope with the concepts. There’s only one shot to get this right. o Consider how we can encourage community benefits now, not in 5-10 years when the project is complete o Emphasize the power and impact of good design North Berkeley BART Two preliminary site concepts were presented for the North Berkeley station: Option A “Maintain Street Grid” and Option B “Minimal Streets”. After the presentation, the CAG participated in a similar live poll about the North Berkeley BART station concept. Ashby + North Berkeley BART Zoning and Development Parameters | CAG #2 Summary 5 Planning and Development Department