Planning Commission

2120 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 Tel: 510.981.7410 TDD: 510.981-6903 Fax: 510.981.7490 E-mail: planning@cityofberkeley.info

AGENDA REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION

This meeting is held in a wheelchair accessible location.

Janauary 15, 2014 North Berkeley Senior Center 7:00 PM 1901 Hearst Ave. / MLK Jr. Way

See “MEETING PROCEDURES” below.

All written materials identified on this agenda are available on the Planning Commission webpage: http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/ContentDisplay.aspx?id=13072

PRELIMINARY MATTERS

1. Roll Call.

2. Order of Agenda: The Commission may rearrange the agenda or place additional agendized items on the Consent Calendar.

3. Public Comment: Comments on subjects not included on the agenda. Speakers may comment on agenda items when the Commission hears those items. See “Public Testimony Guidelines” below.

4. Planning Staff Report: In addition to the items below, additional matters may be reported at the meeting.

5. Chairperson’s Report: Report by Planning Commission Chair.

6. Committee Reports: Reports by Commission committees or liaisons. In addition to the items below, additional matters may be reported at the meeting.

7. Approval of Minutes: Approval of draft minutes of December 18, 2013.

8. CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS See “Consent Calendar Guidelines” below: None.

AGENDA ITEMS: All agenda items are for discussion and possible action. Public Hearing items require hearing prior to Commission action. 9. Public Hearing: General Plan Amendment Regarding Floor Area Ratio

Increases in the Telegraph Avenue Commercial (C-T) District

Recommendation/Action: Hold a Public Hearing, then recommend to the City Council a General Plan Amendment to modify the Avenue Commercial section of the Land Use chapter by increasing the Telegraph Avenue Commercial (C-T) District FAR maximum from 3.0 and 3.5 up to a maximum of 5.0.

Written Materials: Attached. Web Information: None. Continued From: None.

Page 2 of 3

10. Discussion/Action: City Council Referral: Distance Between Drugstores

Recommendation/Action: Consider and provide direction to staff on the scope of zoning amendments to control the distance between drugstores, as requested by the City Council.

Written Materials: Attached. Web Information: None. Continued From: None.

ADDITIONAL AGENDA ITEMS: In compliance with Brown Act regulations, no action may be taken on these items. However, discussion may occur at this meeting upon Commissioner request.

Information Item:

New Environmental Sustainability Section in Council Reports: memo and supporting documentation from City Clerk.

Communications in Packet:

2013-12-19 - Carolyn Corbelli, Letter re: Distance Between Drug Stores

2013-12-20 - Bobbi and Larry Steinhart, Letter re: Distance Between Drug Stores

Late Communications (received after Agenda deadline - distributed at meeting on December 18, 2013):

Gene Poschman, Re: Future Agenda Item – Planning Commission - take up April 26, 2013, Council Referral on Drugstore Concentration, as soon as possible.

Roland Peterson, Telegraph Business Improvement District, Re: Floor Area Ratios.

Joann Sullivan, Seniors Resource Committee of the Berkeley Association of Realtors, Re: Recommendations regarding Accessory Dwelling units (ADUs)

ADJOURNMENT Meeting Procedures Public Testimony Guidelines: Speakers are customarily allotted up to three minutes each. The Commission Chair may limit the number of speakers and the length of time allowed to each speaker to ensure adequate time for all items on the Agenda. To speak during Public Comment or during a Public Hearing, please line up behind the microphone. Customarily speakers are asked to address agenda items when the items are before the Commission rather than during the general public comment period. Speakers are encouraged to submit comments in writing. See “Procedures for correspondence to the Commissioners” below. Consent Calendar Guidelines: The Consent Calendar allows the Commission to take action with no discussion on projects to which no one objects. The Commission may place items on the Consent Calendar if no one present wishes to testify on an item. Anyone present who wishes to speak on an item should submit a speaker card prior to the start of the meeting, or raise his or her hand and advise the Chairperson, and the item will be pulled from the consent calendar for public comment and discussion prior to action.

Page 3 of 3

Procedures for correspondence to the Commissioners: To distribute correspondence to Commissioners prior to the meeting date, submit comments by 12:00 noon, eight (8) days before the meeting day (Tuesday) (email preferred).

If correspondence is more than twenty (20) pages, requires printing of color pages, or includes pages larger than 8.5x11 inches, please provide 15 copies.

Any correspondence received after this deadline will be given to Commissioners on the meeting date just prior to the meeting.

Staff will not deliver to Commissioners any additional written (or email) materials received after 12:00 noon on the day of the meeting.

Members of the public may submit written comments themselves early in the meeting. To distribute correspondence at the meeting, please provide 15 copies and submit to the Planning Commission Secretary just before or at the beginning of the meeting.

Written comments should be directed to the Planning Commission Secretary at the Land Use Planning Division (Attn: Planning Commission Secretary).

Communications are Public Records: Communications to Berkeley boards, commissions, or committees are public records and will become part of the City’s electronic records, which are accessible through the City’s website. Please note: e-mail addresses, names, addresses, and other contact information are not required, but if included in any communication to a City board, commission, or committee, will become part of the public record. If you do not want your e-mail address or any other contact information to be made public, you may deliver communications via U.S. Postal Service, or in person, to the secretary of the relevant board, commission, or committee. If you do not want your contact information included in the public record, please do not include that information in your communication. Please contact the secretary to the relevant board, commission, or committee for further information. Written material may be viewed in advance of the meeting at the Planning and Development Department, 2118 Milvia Street, First Floor, during working hours, or at the Main Branch Library, Shattuck/Kittredge Streets, during regular library hours, at the Reference Desk. Accommodations Provided Upon Request: To request a disability-related accommoda-tion(s) to participate in the meeting, including auxiliary aids or services, please contact the Disability Services Specialist at 981-6342(V), or 981-7075 (TDD), and/or the Commission Secretary at least three (3) business days before the meeting date. Five (5) business days are needed to request a sign language or oral interpreter. Note: If you object to a project or to any City action or procedure relating to the project application, any lawsuit which you may later file may be limited to those issues raised by you or someone else in the public hearing on the project, or in written communication delivered at or prior to the public hearing. The time limit within which to commence any lawsuit or legal challenge related to these applications is governed by Section 1094.6, of the Code of Civil Procedure, unless a shorter limitations period is specified by any other provision. Under Section 1094.6, any lawsuit or legal challenge to any quasi-adjudicative decision made by the City must be filed no later than the 90th day following the date on which such decision becomes final. Any lawsuit or legal challenge, which is not filed within that 90-day period, will be barred. Please refrain from wearing scented products to public meetings.

Item 7 January 15, 2014

Planning Commission

1

DRAFT MINUTES OF THE REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2

DECEMBER 18, 2013 3

4

Time: The meeting was called to order by Chair Novosel, at 7:02 p.m. 5

Location: North Berkeley Senior Center, 1901 Hearst Ave., Berkeley, CA. 6

7

ROLL CALL 8

Commissioners Present: Harry Pollack, Jim Novosel, Teresa Clarke, Tracy Davis, Dan 9

Lindheim, Elizabeth Lam, Patrick Sheahan, David Stoloff (left at 8:54 pm), Gene Poschman 10

(left at 9:31 pm). 11

Commissioners Absent: Stephen Murphy (replaced by David Stoloff) 12

Staff Present: Alex Amoroso, Elizabeth Greene, Jordan Harrison, Julian Bobilev 13

ORDER OF AGENDA: No change. 14

PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD: 9 speakers. 15

The first speaker was a property owner in the MU-LI district, across from the new Whole 16

Foods, who is trying to lease out his empty building. He expressed his desire to have his 17

property (1310 Ninth Street) considered for rezone to C-W under the umbrella of the West 18

Berkeley rezone Council referral. 19

The remainder of the speakers spoke in opposition to the proposed Walgreens on Solano 20

Avenue and urged the Planning Commission to consider the 2011 City Council referral 21

regarding a 1000 foot buffer between drugstores. 22

23

PLANNING STAFF REPORT: The next Planning Commission meeting will be on January 24

15, 2013. The Civic Center Historic District overlay will be considered by the Council at the 25

end of January. Debbie Sanderson, who has been with the City of Berkeley for many years, 26

is retiring this week. 27

28

LATE COMMUNICATIONS (received after Agenda deadline): 29

1. Gene Poschman, Re: Future Agenda item – Planning Commission take up April 26,30

2013, Council referral on Drugstore concentration as soon as possible31

2. Roland Peterson rep. Telegraph Business Improvement District, Floor Area Ratios32

3. Joann Sullivan rep. Seniors Resource Committee of the Berkeley Association of33

Realtors, Recommendations regarding Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs)34

35

Draft Minutes of December 18, 2013 Item 7 Page 2 of 4 January 15, 2013

CHAIR REPORT: None. 36

COMMISSION REPORT: None. 37

38

APPROVAL OF MINUTES: 39

Motion/Second/Carried ( TC/EL) to approve the draft minutes of the regular meeting of 40

November 20, 2013. Ayes: Jim Novosel, Teresa Clarke, Tracy Davis, Dan Lindheim, 41

Elizabeth Lam, Patrick Sheahan. Noes: None. Abstain: Harry Pollack, Gene Poschman, 42

David Stoloff. 43

CONSENT CALENDAR: None. 44

FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS and OTHER PLANNING-RELATED EVENTS: Staff and Chair 45

Novosel will discuss putting the 1000 foot drugstore buffer Council Referral on the Planning 46

Commission agenda in the immediate future, possibly in mid-January. The Staff Report on 47

this item may have to be less extensive due to the urgent time window. 48

AGENDA ITEMS: 49

Item 10 Public Hearing: Telegraph Avenue FAR Increase 50

51

52

53

54

55

Roland Peterson, Executive Director of the Telegraph Business Improvement District, stated 56

his organization’s support for the highest possible FAR (5.0), or even better, its abolition 57

altogether. A representative of Panoramic Interests opined that increased density would be 58

beneficial in reviving the struggling Telegraph Ave. commercial district. 59

60

Two homeowners living on Chilton Way (on the west side of Telegraph between Blake and 61

Parker) stated their opposition to an increase in FARs and brought up concerns regarding 62

noise pollution and shadowing. 63

64

Mary Lee stated that the shadowing created by the taller buildings as well as the “dead 65

spaces” created by office uses above the ground floor would create an unpleasant 66

pedestrian environment. 67

68

The Commissioners made several comments regarding this item. Commissioner Poschman 69

expressed his opposition to a change in the FAR. He had concerns that density bonuses 70

could be used on top of the larger ‘base project’ to create a very tall building. He was also 71

concerned regarding the impacts on sunlight of the adjacent residential properties and 72

suggested leaving the FAR the same below Dwight Way due the increased residential 73

component. 74

75

Motion/Second/Carried (GP/TC) to open the Public Hearing. Ayes: David Stoloff, Teresa Clarke, Tracy Davis, Jim Novosel, Elizabeth Lam, Patrick Sheahan, Dan Lindheim, Gene Poschman, Harry Pollack. Noes: None. Abstain: None.

Draft Minutes of December 18, 2013 Item 7 Page 3 of 4 January 15, 2013

Commissioner Sheahan was also opposed to changing FARs and brought up several 76

examples of buildings in other parts of the city which were quite large despite having 77

relatively low FARs. 78

79

Commissioners Pollack and Clarke were in favor of removing FAR standards entirely since 80

there are already multiple other standards (shadowing, setbacks, stepbacks, height limits, 81

lot coverage, etc.) regulating the final size of a building in the C-T. 82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100

101

102

103

104

105

106

Public Comment: 5 speakers. 107

108

Item 11 Discussion / Action: Accessory Dwelling Units Referral Discussion 109

110

Commissioners provided feedback on several of the items in the table of City Council 111

Recommendations. On Item #3 (height limit), they wanted to consider allowing a maximum 112

height taller than 12’ in the by-right area of the zoning envelope. On Item #7 (maximum 113

floor area), they wanted to consider allowing ADUs up to 800 sq ft with an AUP. 114

115

The Commission also asked staff to provide additional information at the next meeting, 116

including lot size distribution data, number of ADUs since 2003, lot coverage data, and 117

suggestions for standard requirements based on typical conditions used for ADUs approved 118

with an AUP in the past. 119

120

Public Comment: 1 speaker. 121

122

Motion/Second/Carried (HP/JN) to close the Public Hearing. Ayes: David Stoloff, Teresa Clarke, Tracy Davis, Jim Novosel, Elizabeth Lam, Patrick Sheahan, Dan Lindheim, Gene Poschman, Harry Pollack. Noes: None. Abstain: None.

Motion/Second/Carried (HP/TC) to change the FAR in the C-T District to 4.5 while allowing the 4.5 FAR to be exceeded to a maximum of 5.0 with a Use Permit.

Friendly Amendment (JN) to keep the FAR in the portion of C-T that is to the west of Telegraph Avenue between Blake Street and Parker Street the same as before (3.0 with a 3.5 FAR permitted for buildings which have 100 percent residential uses above the ground floor).

Ayes: Jim Novosel, Harry Pollack, Teresa Clarke, Tracy Davis, David Stoloff, Dan Lindheim. Noes: Gene Poschman. Abstain: Patrick Sheahan, Elizabeth Lam.

Substitute Motion/Second/Failed (GP/PS) to change the FAR in the C-T District to 4.5 while allowing the 4.5 FAR to be exceeded to a maximum of 5.0 with a Use Permit, except south of Dwight Way, where the FAR will remain the same as before (3.0 with a 3.5 FAR permitted for buildings which have 100 percent residential uses above the ground floor).

Ayes: Gene Poschman, Patrick Sheahan, Elizabeth Lam, Dan Lindheim. Noes: David Stoloff, Teresa Clarke, Harry Pollack, Jim Novosel. Abstain: Tracy Davis.

Draft Minutes of December 18, 2013 Item 7 Page 4 of 4 January 15, 2013

The meeting was adjourned at 9:40 p.m. 123

Commissioners in attendance: 9 of 9 124

Members of the public in attendance: 20 125

Public Speakers: 15 126

Item 9 January 15, 2014

Planning and Development Department Land Use Planning Division

STAFF REPORT

DATE: January 15, 2014

TO: Members of the Planning Commission

FROM: Elizabeth Greene, Senior Planner

SUBJECT: General Plan Amendment Regarding Floor Area Ratio Increases in the Telegraph Avenue Commercial (C-T) District

RECOMMENDATION

Recommend to the City Council a General Plan Amendment which would modify the Avenue Commercial section of the Land Use chapter by increasing the Telegraph Avenue Commercial (C-T) District FAR maximum from 3.0 and 3.5 up to a maximum of 5.0. Note: This recommendation would bring the General Plan into alignment with the FAR recommendation made previously by the Commission.

BACKGROUND

At the October 16th and December 18th meetings, the Planning Commission reviewed a Council referral to consider increasing the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) on Telegraph Avenue within the Southside Plan area. The Commission recommended increasing the FAR in the Telegraph Avenue Commercial District (C-T) from 3.0/3.5 to 4.5/5.0. The Commission recommended leaving out a portion of the C-T District along the western side of Telegraph between Blake Street and Parker Street, which will keep the existing standards. See Attachment A for a map of the proposed FAR standards in the C-T District.

The General Plan identifies the maximum FAR in the Telegraph Avenue Commercial GP designation (page LU-24 and 25) as 3.0 – 3.5. An increase in FAR in the Zoning Ordinance requires a concurrent General Plan amendment of the identified Avenue Commercial FARs.

DISCUSSION

At the December 19, 2013, meeting, the Planning Commission voted to modify the FAR in the C-T district. The Commission voted to recommend changes to the FAR in most of the C-T district from 3.0/3.5 to 4.5, and up to a maximum of 5.0 with a Use Permit. One portion of the District, the area on the west side of Telegraph Avenue between Blake

General Plan Amendment Item 9 January 15, 2014

Page 2 of 2

Street and Parker, would keep the existing FAR standards. See Attachment B for the proposed Zoning Ordinance changes.

Staff determined that a General Plan amendment to pages LU-24 and 25 is also necessary. These pages include an Avenue Commercial description which includes specific FAR allowances for the C-T District.

The draft changes to the General Plan are included in Attachment C. These changes match the Planning Commission Zoning Ordinance recommendation. In particular, the General Plan amendment would change the range from 3.0 – 3.5 to 3.0 – 5.0, reflecting both and the allowance of a 4.5 FAR up to 5.0 with a Use Permit, and the unchanged FAR in the southwest corner of the District. Approving the General Plan Amendment now will allow the Council to consider it concurrently with the recommended Zoning Ordinance amendments.

Environmental Review

The environmental impacts of the FAR changes in the C-T District, from a CEQA standpoint, are inconsequential. CEQA is used to evaluate physical impacts resulting from the change in the use and activity, such as increased development or traffic, on the identified site. The proposed change to the FAR would allow buildings in the C-T District to have more floor area, possibly resulting in more units and/or commercial space.

The existing height and setbacks in the C-T District already allow for buildings that have four (4) stories and are 50 feet tall with minimal setbacks. Any projects proposed in the C-T District would require Zoning Adjustment Board review and are subject to shadow reduction requirements and set backs from existing adjacent residential.

Therefore, the project can be considered “exempt” from CEQA, per Section 15601.b.3, which states:

"...CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA."

CONCLUSION

Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend amending the General Plan so that it is consistent with the proposed Zoning Ordinance changes to the FAR in the C-T District.

Attachments: A. Map of FAR standards in C-T District B. Proposed Zoning Ordinance Language C. Proposed General Plan Language D. Public Hearing Notice

8

76

54

3

2

1

DWIGHT WAY

TELE

GRAP

H AV

E

BANCROFT WAY

HASTE ST

DANA ST

DURANT AVE

CHANNING WAY

PARKER ST

BLAKE ST

BOWDITCH ST

REGENT ST

BENVENUE AVE

HILLEGASS AVE

COLLEGE AVE

CHILT

ON W

AY

CHILT

ON AL

LEY

UNNAMED

C-T DistrictProposed FARs

This map is for reference purposes only.Care was taken in the creation of this map, but it is provided "AS IS". Please contact the City of Berkeley to verify map information or to report any errors.January 7, 2013

³

Information Technology 2180 Milvia StreetBerkeley CA 94704

CITY OF BERKELEY

C-T DistrictNew FARUp to 4.5 FAR, 5.0 with UPOld FAR3-3.5 FAR withoutpossibility of UPto exceedFAR Example locations

NOTE: The numeration of Telegraph FAR examples

corresponds to their order inthe FAR Picture Attachment

Item 9 - A

ttachment A

Planning Com

mission

January 15, 2014

Proposed changes to C-T FAR language

23E.56.070 Development Standards*

A. A. The Floor Area Ratio (FAR) within the District shall not exceed the following limits:

1. The Telegraph/Channing Parking Garage shall not have an FAR;

2. Properties within the District located on the west side of Telegraph Avenue

between Blake Street and Parker Street shall not exceed an FAR of three; except

where 100% of the floor area above the second floor is for Residential Use, in

which case the FAR shall not exceed three and one-half; and excepting the

Telegraph/Channing Parking Garage.

3. All other properties within the District shall not exceed an FAR of four and one-

half.

a. The Zoning Board may approve a Use Permit to increase a project’s FAR

from 4.5 to 5.0, subject to the finding required under Section 23E.56.090.G.

B. The height for a Main Building shall satisfy the following requirements:

1. The minimum height shall be three stories and 35 feet.

2. The maximum height shall be four stories and 50 feet.

3. The Zoning Board may approve a Use Permit to increase a project’s maximum

height to five stories and 65 feet if at least 50% of the total building floor area is

designed for residential use, subject to the finding required under Section

23E.56.090.G.it makes both of the following findings:

a. At least 50% of the total building floor area is designed for residential use; and

b. The project will not result in a significant reduction in sunlight on Telegraph

Avenue sidewalks.

4. The maximum height of the Telegraph/Channing Garage shall be seven

stories and 85 feet.

Section 23E.56.090 Findings

G. To approve a Permit for increased FAR, height, or stories, the Zoning Board must find that

the project will not result in a significant reduction in sunlight on Telegraph Avenue

sidewalks.

Item 9 - Attachment BPlanning Commission

January 15, 2014

Item 9 – Attachment C Planning Commission

January 15, 2014

Recommended changes to Land Use Section of General Plan

Avenue Commercial (Pages LU 24-25)

These areas of Berkeley are characterized by pedestrian-oriented commercial development and multi-family residential structures. These areas are typically located on wide, multi-lane avenues served by transit or BART. Appropriate uses for these areas include: local-serving and regional-serving commercial, residential, office, community service, and institutional. Building intensity will generally range from a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of less than 1 to an FAR of 45. Population density will generally range from 44 to 88 persons per acre.

For information purposes, the compatible zoning districts for this classification are shown below with accompanying development standards.

Zoning District Maximum FAR Maximum Height

South Area Commercial (C-SA): 4 24-60 ft

General Commercial (C-1)9: 3 35-50 ft

Telegraph Avenue Commercial (C-T) : 3-3.55 50-65 ft

West Berkeley Commercial (C-W)10: 3 40-50 ft

Item 9 – Attachment D Planning Commission

January 15, 2014

PL ANNING

C O M M I S S I O N

N o t i c e o f P u b l i c H e a r i n g

January 15, 2014

2120 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 Tel: 510.981.7410 TDD: 510.981.7474 Fax: 510.981.7490 E-mail: planning@ci.berkeley.ca.us

Amendments to the City of Berkeley’s General Plan related to Floor Area Ratio (FAR) In the Telegraph Avenue Commercial (C-T)

District

The Planning Commission, of the City of Berkeley, will hold a Public Hearing on the above matter, on Wednesday, January 15, 2014, at the North Berkeley Senior Center, 1901 Hearst Ave. (at Martin Luther King, Jr. Way), Berkeley, California (wheelchair accessible). The meeting starts at 7:00 p.m.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Amend the Avenue Commercial section of the Land Use chapter of the General Plan to increase the maximum FAR from 4 to 5 and to change the maximum FAR in the Telegraph Avenue Commercial (C-T) district from 3-3.5 to 3-5, to ensure consistency with the Zoning Ordinance. This hearing is a follow-up to zoning actions taken by the Commission on 12/18/13 and intended to align the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance changes regarding Floor Area Ratio.

LOCATION: C-T Telegraph Avenue Commercial District.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW STATUS: The proposed changes would be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Guidelines Section 15061(b) (3) because it can be seen with certainty that the proposed amendments to increase the Floor Area Ratio would not have a significant effect on the environment. No new uses are proposed to be

established or eliminated. Changes to existing development standards are proposed, and these changes will not have a significant impact on the development potential of the Southside or the environment.

PUBLIC COMMENT & FURTHER INFORMATION

Comments may be made verbally at the Public Hearing, and in writing before the hearing. Those wishing to speak at the hearing must submit a speaker card. Written comments or questions concerning this project should be directed to:

General Plan Amendments related to C-T FAR NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGPage 2 of 2 January 15, 2014

Alex Amoroso Planning Commission Secretary E-mail: aamoroso@CityofBerkeley.info City of Berkeley Telephone: (510) 981-7520 Land Use Planning Division 2120 Milvia Street, 2nd Floor Berkeley, CA 94704

To assure distribution to Commission members prior to the meeting, correspondence must be received by 12:00 noon, seven (7) days before the meeting. For items with more than ten (10) pages, fifteen (15) copies must be submitted to the Secretary by this deadline. For any item submitted less than seven (7) days before the meeting, fifteen (15) copies must be submitted to the Secretary prior to the meeting date.

COMMUNICATION ACCESS

To request a meeting agenda in large print, Braille, or on audiocassette, or to request a sign language interpreter for the meeting, call (510) 981-7410 (voice) or 981-6903 (TDD). Notice of at least five (5) business days will ensure availability. Agendas are also available on the Internet at: www.ci.berkeley.ca.us.

FURTHER INFORMATION

Questions should be directed to Alex Amoroso, at 981-7520, or aamoroso@CityofBerkeley.info.

Item 10 January 15, 2014

Planning and Development Department Land Use Planning Division

2120 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 Tel: 510.981.7410 TDD: 510.981.6903 Fax: 510.981.7420 E-mail: planning@ci.berkeley.ca.us

STAFF REPORT

DATE: January 15, 2014

TO: Members of the Planning Commission

FROM: Alex Amoroso, Principal Planner

SUBJECT: City Council Referral: Distance Between Drugstores

Recommendation Consider and provide direction to staff on the scope of zoning amendments to control the distance between drugstores as requested by the City Council. Recommend that staff set a Public Hearing for consideration of draft zoning language.

Introduction On April 6, 2011, the City Council referred to the Planning Commission a request to draft a Zoning Ordinance amendment that limits the location of new or expanded drugstores to a minimum of 1000 feet from an existing “similar use” (Attachment 1).

Background The Referral - The goal of the CC referral is to discourage a proliferation of drugstores in close proximity to each other. The following quote explains the Council concerns directly from the referral:

“Drugstores serve an important purpose by offering pharmaceutical products and general merchandise to our community. Unfortunately, an important part of their product mix is the sale of alcoholic beverages, leading to a proliferation of off- sale alcohol permit applications.

There has also been a trend for competing drugstores to locate in very close proximity to each other offering redundant services and products in small localized areas. This trend ignores other neighborhoods in the city which could benefit from the services. Concentrating such uses contributes to a lack of commercial diversity and does not serve the needs of the greater community.”

General Plan - General Plan Policy ED-3, Action E of the Economic Development chapter states:

Council Referral: distance between drug stores Item 10 January 15, 2014

Page 2 of 3

“Develop and implement planning and zoning mechanisms that promote community-serving commercial diversity and that limit development of undesirable chain stores, formula businesses, and big-box developments without limiting the ability of local businesses to grow and expand and, when needed, to establish additional outlets in various parts of the city.”

Potential Walgreens - An anticipated application for a Walgreens on Solano Avenue has renewed interest in the referral. The Walgreens would be within the Solano Avenue Commercial District (C-SO), where retail is allowed with a Zoning Certificate, assuming there is no request for alcohol sales, and located in a building which previously contained retail use. The C-SO District also requires a Use Permit process for the creation of new gross floor area (23E.60.050).

Discussion Overview of Referral The Council identifies several areas of concern including: alcohol sales, oversaturation of the drug store market, and an interest in limiting the development of undesirable chain stores, as stated in the General Plan Policy ED-3, Action E. The focus of the referral is to control distance between the drug stores.

Issues Definitions – The City of Berkeley does not currently have a definition of drug store.” As a matter of practice, the use is defined as “retail” and is considered through the discretionary review appropriate to the particular district where application is made. If Alcoholic Beverage Retail Sales are part of the application, then a Use Permit with Public Hearing is required for that component of the retail use.

The Commission would have to recommend a definition of “drug store,” which would be added to each commercial district use list, so that the referral could be implemented. Staff provides the following statements and questions for consideration, to guide the Commission in defining “drug store”:

Does a drug store include/require a pharmacy and filling of prescriptions as an

onsite service?

Should the definition of drug store include other terms for sale items such as

sundries, off-site alcohol, supplies, house wares, etc?

Can the drug store use also happen within a supermarket, or other mixed retail

environment, but as an ancillary use?

Is the definition of drug store determined by the presence and/or size of a

particular use on premises?

Should there be size of business thresholds to consider, and should they relate

to distance between stores, levels of discretion (ZC, AUP, UP (PH))?

Council Referral: distance between drug stores Item 10 January 15, 2014

Page 3 of 3

Distance Control Measures – The referral requests the Commission consider “a Zoning Ordinance amendment that limits the location of new or expanded drugstores to a minimum of 1000 feet of an existing drugstore…” Commission consideration must include a discussion of how the 1000 feet is measured. Staff provides the following statements and questions to guide the Commission in defining the distance regulation:

Is the distance (1000 feet) appropriate, or should a larger or smaller distance be

considered?

How is the distance measured: linear from the edge of property line, “as the

crow flies”; 1000 feet distance along public rights of way; other?

If the drug stores are on two different streets (University and San Pablo, or San

Pablo and Gilman, for examples) is a different distance appropriate?

Is the distance also considered from a “drug store” in an adjacent community?

Attachment 2 is a map identifying pharmacies and related businesses on Solano Avenue.

Conclusion and Next Steps Staff requests direction on the referral, based on the above questions and any other insights provided by the Commission. Staff will take the input and develop a definition of drug store and distance regulations for consideration at a Public Hearing. This is the most expeditious path to return to the Council.

If the Commission desires, staff can do further research on the subject: evaluate how other jurisdictions control for similar situations. This would require additional time and further discussion with the Commission.

Attachments: 1. City Council Referral2. Map: Solano Ave Pharmacies

Office of the Mayor

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7100 ● TDD: (510) 981-6903 ● Fax: (510) 981-7199 E-Mail: mayor@ci.berkeley.ca.us Website: http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/mayor

CONSENT CALENDAR April 26, 2011

TO: Members of the City Council

FROM: Mayor Tom Bates Council Members Laurie Capitelli and Susan Wengraf

SUBJECT: Restrict Location of Drug Stores

RECOMMENDATION: Request the Planning Commission draft a Zoning Ordinance amendment that limits the location of new or expanded drugstores to a minimum of 1000 feet of an existing drugstore, and return to Council with proposed language as soon as possible.

BACKGROUND: Drugstores serve an important purpose by offering pharmaceutical products and general merchandise to our community. Unfortunately an important part of their product mix is the sale of alcoholic beverages, leading to a proliferation of off sale alcohol permit applications.

There has also been a trend for competing drugstores to locate in very close proximity to each other offering redundant services and products in small localized areas. This trend ignores other neighborhoods in the city which could benefit from the services. Concentrating such uses contributes to a lack of commercial diversity and does not serve the needs of the greater community.

General Plan Policy ED-3 (e) of the Economic Development chapter states, “Develop and implement planning and zoning mechanisms that promote community-serving commercial diversity and that limit development of undesirable chain stores, formula businesses, and big-box developments without limiting the ability of local businesses to grow and expand and, when needed, to establish additional outlets in various parts of the city.”

To implement this policy, we request the Planning Commission consider a zoning amendment to restrict the location or relocation of any drugstore use to a minimum of 1000 feet from an existing similar use. We further request the Planning Commission return to City Council with the proposed zoning amendment as soon as possible.

Item 10 - Attachment 1Planning Commission

January 15, 2014

- 2 -

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Unknown

CONTACT PERSON: Tom Bates Mayor 981-7100 Laurie Capitelli Council Member District 5 981-7150 Susan Wengraf Council Member District 6 981-7160

!.Safe

way Pharmaca

Andronico's

Sticks F

raming

Safeway

Pharmacy

Payn's S

tationery

SOLANO AV

MARIN AV

THE ALAMEDA

CURT

IS ST

SOLANO AVE

NEILS

ON S

T

MARIN AVE

COLUSA AVE

SANTA FE AVE

PERA

LTA A

VE

CARM

EL AV

E

TACOMA AVE

THOUSAND OAKS BLVD

ENSENADA AVE

SAN

CARL

OS AV

E

PORTLAND AVE

CAPISTRANO AVE

VINCENTE AVE

SAN LORENZO AVE

YOSEMITE RD

VISALIA AVE

WARD AVE

TULARE AVE

FRESNO AVE

MENLO PL

CATALINA AVE

SAN PEDRO AVE

SANTA ROSA AVE

WASHINGTON AVE

SAN JUAN AVE

ORDWAY ST

VENTURA AVE

MODOC ST

ROMONA AVE

SAN F

ERNA

NDO AV

E

THE ALAMEDA

SAN RAMON AVE

MIRA

MAR A

VE

SAN MIGUEL AVE

STATION PL

COLUSA AVECARMEL AVE

SANTA ROSA AVE

CVS

Sal's Pharm

acy

ALBANY

SOLANOPHARMACIES

This map is for reference purposes only. Care was taken in the creation of this map, but it is provided "AS IS". Please contact the City of Berkeley to verify map information or to report any errors.January 7, 2013

³Information Technology 2180 Milvia StreetBerkeley CA 94704

CITY OF BERKELEY

!. Proposed Walgreenspharmacysimilar retailer

Zoning DistrictsC-SOR-1R-3

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000250 Feet

NOTE: 'Similar retailers'are businesses that sell goods similar to those found at a Walgreens.

Item 10 - A

ttachment 2

Planning Com

mission

January 15, 2014

City Clerk Department

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-6900 ● TDD: (510) 981-6903 ● Fax: (510) 981-6901

E-Mail: clerk@cityofberkeley.info Website: http://www.cityofberkeley.info/clerk

January 8, 2014

To: Commission Secretaries

From: Mark Numainville, City Clerk

Subject: New “Environmental Sustainability” Section in Reports to City Council

Starting with the March 11, 2014 City Council meeting, all reports to the City Council from City staff will include an “Environmental Sustainability” section. The report templates for City Commissions and City Councilmembers have been updated to include the new section as well. The purpose of the new section is to identify environmental considerations associated with the item being addressed in the report, thereby allowing the City Council to include those considerations in making decisions.

Commissions should use the new report section to summarize considerations of how their recommendation to the City Council affects the City’s environmental sustainability goals and meets City environmental requirements. These goals and requirements are identified in the attached “Additional Guidance for Completing the ‘Environmental Sustainability’ Section of City Council Reports.” This document is designed to assist staff with completing the new report section quickly and effectively. Your commission may find it helpful in completing the new section as well.

City Council report templates have been updated to include the “Environmental Sustainability” section. Commission Secretaries will provide those templates to commissioners as needed. Please direct any questions regarding the new report section to the Commission Secretary.

cc: Ann-Marie Hogan, City Auditor Christine Daniel, City Manager William Rogers, Deputy City Manager Zach Cowan, City Attorney Department Directors Rose Thomsen, Deputy City Clerk Timothy Burroughs, Office of Energy & Sustainable Development

Information ItemPlanning Commission

January 15, 2014

Additional Guidance for Completing

“Environmental Sustainability” Section of City Council Report

The purpose of this document is to assist staff to quickly and effectively complete the

“Environmental Sustainability” section of all staff reports to City Council. The “Environmental

Sustainability” section does not replace any environmental review necessary under

CEQA. For questions, please contact the City Clerk Department.

HOW TO USE THIS DOCUMENT

1. Using table 1 below, click on the link that most closely matches the issue being addressed

in your report

2. Quickly scan the guidance questions provided and answer the 2 or 3 most relevant

questions. To assist you, links to summaries of relevant ordinances and policies are

embedded in the guiding questions. You do not need to address all questions. Information

provided should be brief, but meaningful. One to two sentences per question is typically

sufficient. You can use the guiding questions as subheadings, use content-specific

subheadings, or use no subheadings.

TABLE 1 – Common types of issues addressed in reports to City Council

A. Capital Projects - Construction, demolition, and renovations (including professional services for engineering and design)

B. Purchasing – Selecting vendors, products, and/or services C. Programs and Professional Services (excluding design and engineering services) –

Selecting providers, making funding recommendations, leasing D. Public Events – Organizing or sponsoring an event E. Geographic or Strategic Plans – Consideration or adoption F. Economic and Business Development – Attraction, retention, and/or expansion G. Policy and Legislation – Establishing a City policy and/or goals H. Other – General guidance questions for reports that do not fit into the above categories

A. Guiding Questions for Capital Projects Reports

If a municipal project, does the project meet the City’s requirements, as applicable:

o Achieving a LEED Silver rating for new City-sponsored construction projects

(including renovation) of over 5,000 gross square feet or more of occupied space

and that have a construction estimate of over $200,000

o Environmentally Preferable Purchasing Policy

For municipal or private projects, does the project meet the following requirements, as

applicable:

2

o Commercial Energy Conservation Ordinance – Applies to commercial buildings

undergoing renovations of more than $50,000 or additions which will increase the

conditioned area of the property by more than 10%

Does the project provide an opportunity to promote clean transportation options such as

cycling, walking, transit, carsharing and/or electric vehicles?

What elements did the design team include in the project to achieve energy and water

efficiency and to minimize solid waste disposal, including construction and demolition

debris (consistent with the City’s Zero Waste Goal1)?

Does the project minimize the need for irrigation and, when irrigation is necessary, utilize

water-efficient irrigation systems?

What considerations were given to mitigating storm water runoff?

What considerations were given to how the project could be affected by the impacts of

climate change, such as sea-level rise, water resource constraints, and extreme heat

events?

How does the project minimize effects on natural habitat?

If the project involves leased space (i.e., the City is either a lessee/tenant or a landlord),

how are the tenants and landlord encouraged or required to increase energy and water

efficiency and solid waste diversion?

SAMPLE CONTENT FOR A REPORT REGARDING PHYSICAL DEVELOPMENT

The Veteran’s Memorial Building renovation project is designed to meet or exceed LEED

Platinum and achieve Zero Net energy (ZNE) consumption. The design and construction

contracts include requirements to comply with the City’s Environmentally Preferable

Purchasing Policy, Commercial Energy Conservation Ordinance, Bay Friendly Landscaping

Ordinance and to achieve 95% construction and demolition waste diversion. The project

includes advanced features such as a living roof, solar thermal and photovoltaic panels, high

efficiency heat pumps, natural daylighting, passive cooling, premium efficiency equipment,

bicycle parking and employee showers. Leases will require transit passes for all tenant

employees and pass through all environmental policies to tenants, janitorial and maintenance

staff. As a restoration of an existing urban site, the project will not negatively affect natural

habitat and the living roof will serve to provide new habitat, including a bee hive and food

garden.

B. Guiding Questions for Purchasing Reports

Are the specifications for the purchase consistent with the City’s Environmentally

Preferable Purchasing Policy?

Are the specifications for the purchase designed to reduce unnecessary packaging?

1 http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/uploadedFiles/Planning_and_Development/Level_3_-

_Energy_and_Sustainable_Development/Zero%20Waste%20Goal.pdf

3

Does the vendor(s) use environmentally sound practices?

C. Guiding Questions for Programs and Professional Services Reports

Is the program or service consistent with the City’s goals to increase energy and water

efficiency, reduce transportation fuel use, and minimize solid waste disposal?

Is the program or service consistent with the City’s Food and Nutrition Policy,2 which

promotes access to local, healthy, affordable, and culturally appropriate food?

Does the program or service affect local natural habitat or create air or water pollution?

D. Guiding Questions for Public Events Reports

Is the location of the event accessible by transit, bicycle, and walking?

Will bike valet or other forms of secure bicycle storage be provided?

What measures have been taken to minimize solid waste, such as provision of recycling

and composting bins and providing food, beverages and other goods in compostable,

recyclable or reusable packaging?

Are food purchases consistent with the City’s Food and Nutrition Policy,3 which promotes

access to local, healthy, affordable, and culturally appropriate food?

If non-grid power is required (e.g., generators), what measures have been taken to

minimize greenhouse gas emissions and local air pollutants?

E. Guiding Questions for Geographic or Strategic Plans Reports

Are there opportunities within the plan to advance the City’s environmental sustainability

goals?

Does the plan facilitate non-motor vehicle forms of transportation, such as transit, cycling

and walking?

What considerations were given to how the plan could be affected by the impacts of climate

change, such as sea-level rise, water resource constraints, and extreme heat events?

F. Guiding Questions for Economic and Business Development Reports

Does the issue being addressed in the report provide an opportunity to promote and

provide resources regarding opportunities for businesses to demonstrate environmental

leadership?

If the issue being addressed is related to business attraction, does the business (or

businesses) operate and provide a product or service that is consistent with the City’s

environmental sustainability goals? Please provide examples.

2 http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/uploadedFiles/Health_Human_Services/Level_3_-_General/food-policy-exhibit-a925.pdf

3 http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/uploadedFiles/Health_Human_Services/Level_3_-_General/food-policy-exhibit-a925.pdf

4

G. Guiding Questions for Policy and Legislation Reports

What considerations were given to how the proposed policy, legislation, or goal affects the

City’s environmental sustainability goals?

H. Guiding Questions for Other Reports

Does the issue being addressed in the report provide environmental benefits, i.e., is it

consistent with the City’s environmental sustainability goals? Please describe.

Is the issue being addressed in the report significantly inconsistent with the City’s

environmental sustainability goals? If so, are there opportunities to minimize any negative

environmental effects?

5

Appendix 1

The City of Berkeley’s environmental sustainability goals include:

Reduce energy consumption in buildings and transportation

Reduce water consumption in buildings and landscaping

Achieve zero waste sent to landfills by 2020

Increase access to healthy, affordable food produced locally

Maintain an environmentally-sound information technology infrastructure

Prepare for the impacts of climate change, including sea-level rise,

increased temperatures, and water resource deficiencies

Preserve natural habitats and minimize air and water pollution

Reduce global warming emissions to 33% below 2000 levels by 2020

6

APPENDIX 2

Summaries of City of Berkeley Environmental Policies and Ordinances

1. LEED Silver Rating Requirement for City-Sponsored Construction Projects

2. Environmental Preferable Purchasing Policy

3. Commercial Energy Conservation Ordinance

LEED Silver Rating Requirement for City-Sponsored Construction Projects - Resolution 622844

Overview: The City requires all new City-sponsored construction projects (including

renovation) of 5,000 gross square feet or more of occupied space and that have a construction

estimate over $200,000 to achieve a minimum of a LEED Silver green building rating. Green

buildings use recycled-content building materials, consume less energy and water, have better

indoor air quality, and use fewer natural resources than conventional buildings. LEED, or

Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design, is a third party certification program for the

design, construction and operation of green buildings.

Requirements & Application:

The resolution covers new construction or renovation projects funded by the City or located

on City-owned land

Applies to projects of 5,000 square feet or more of occupied space and which have a

construction estimate of $200,000 or more (in 2003 dollars)

An exception is made for buildings deemed historic under any federal, state or local law,

though they are encouraged to achieve as many LEED points as feasible.

The City can also grant exemptions from the resolution for building projects which

demonstrate through life-cycle cost analysis that achieving LEED Silver would defeat the

purpose of the resolution, or create an unreasonable burden on the construction project or

the City Department

Registration of LEED certification through the United States Green Building Council

(USGBC) is encouraged but not required.

For more information – Contact Billi Romain at x7432

4 http://www.cityofberkeley.info/uploadedFiles/Planning_and_Development/Level_3_-

_Energy_and_Sustainable_Development/Green%20Building(3).pdf

7

Environmental Preferable Purchasing Policy- Resolution 626935

Overview: The Environmentally Preferable Purchasing (EPP) Policy requires purchase of

products that minimize environmental and health impacts, toxics, pollution, and hazards to

worker and community safety and to the larger global community to the greatest extent

practicable. It is not the intent of the policy to require purchases that do not perform adequately

or are not available at a reasonable price or in a reasonable amount of time.

Requirements & Application: The Environmental Preferable Purchasing policy was adopted

to minimize the environmental impact of City purchases. The policy should be applied to all

City purchases. Whenever possible, the City must use eco-labels and standards to make

purchasing decisions, specific standards include:

Office Supplies and Equipment – For paper, procure highest postconsumer content

practicable, but no less than the minimum recycled content standards established by the

U.S. EPA (current standard is 30% postconsumer content), with a desired goal of 100%

recycled content; paper must be chlorine-free ; polyvinyl chloride (PVC)-free office

products; ENERGY STAR® labeled appliances; printer defaults set to duplex; Suppliers of

electronic equipment shall be required to take back equipment for reuse or environmentally

safe recycling when the City of Berkeley discards or replaces such equipment, whenever

possible

Janitorial Supplies and Services – Green Seal Certified products for City operations and

contract janitorial services

Building Maintenance and Supplies – LEED-Existing Building Operation and Maintenance

Standards and LEED Silver New Construction for City buildings

Automotive – Fuel efficient vehicles; Use re-refined oil for vehicles.

Road Maintenance and Infrastructure – LED lighting; recycled content materials and

permeable surfaces for construction.

Landscape – Bay Friendly Landscape standards; integrated pest management and water

efficiency.

For more information – Contact Henry Oyekanmi at x7326

5 http://www.cityofberkeley.info/uploadedFiles/Planning_and_Development/Level_3_-

_Energy_and_Sustainable_Development/Environmental%20Preferable%20Puchasing%20Resolution.pdf

8

Commercial Energy Conservation Ordinance (CECO)-Berkeley Municipal Code Ch.19.726

Overview: The Commercial Energy Conservation Ordinance (CECO) requires commercial

property owners selling or renovating their property to install energy efficiency measures, with

certain expenditure limits.

Requirements & Application:

Requires commercial buildings (including municipal buildings) to complete an audit to

determine the applicability, cost and benefits of various energy conservation improvements

and the implementation of conservation improvements related to a building’s HVAC,

furnaces, water heaters and boilers for space heating or domestic hot water, refrigeration,

lighting, control systems, and building envelope

It is triggered by either sale of the building or by major renovations that either increases

conditioned area by more than 10 percent or cost more than $50,000

When selling a commercial property, all conservation and efficiency measures must be

installed prior to title transfer

The seller must implement upgrades with a cost ceiling of 1 percent of the sale price or

assessed value, not to exceed $150,000

Compliance can be transferred to the buyer

The maximum cost for measures installed upon a major renovation is the lesser of five

percent of the total construction cost or one percent of the assessed value of the entire

building prior to the renovation

For more information – Contact Neal DeSnoo at x7439

6 http://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Berkeley/html/pdfs/Berkeley19.pdf

CommunicationsPlanning Commission

January 15, 2014

Late Communications Planning Commission

January 15, 2014