mtgNotes20050712

Meeting Notes from LOCCNA-Beth El Neighborhood Meeting of July 12, 2005

July 14, 2005

By E-Mail and U.S. Mail

Wendy Cosin

City of Berkeley

Assistant Planning Director

2180 Milvia Street

Berkeley, California 94704

Re: Meeting Notes - Beth El and LOCCNA Neighborhood Meeting,

July 12, 2005

Dear Ms. Cosin:

Thank you for your phone call and interest in the proceedings of the neighborhood meeting with Beth El on Tuesday, July 12. We are sending you a summary of our meeting notes below.

As you know, Congregation Beth El invited neighbors of its new site to a meeting Tuesday evening to discuss the revised parking plan it will submit to you. We're pleased to note that some 55 to 60 neighborhood residents attended, in addition to four representatives of the synagogue. A spirited discussion ensued.

Beth El began with a brief reference to its original parking study, which reported that there generally are enough parking spots available in the neighborhood. It also was claimed that the neighborhood is demanding the satisfying of two inherently opposed goals: the preservation of the open space represented by Codornices Creek and the retention of available parking, since that open space corridor reduced the number of parking spaces possible on the site.

The spokeswoman then discussed the synagogue's efforts to identify suitable satellite parking, reporting that it believed sufficient off-site and off-street spaces will be available for all religious events except High Holy Days. Spaces have been identified at First American Title, the Berkeley-Richmond Jewish Community Center, St. Mary Magdalen and Second Church of Christ. CBE is working on the underground Safeway lot, but Safeway has not agreed to let it use it yet.

LOCCNA responded that while parking and the preservation and ultimate daylighting of the creek do clash, the determining factor in shaping both issues was Beth El's decision to construct the massive building complex it has placed on this constrained space. The current parking plan is not acceptable in that it does not meet the conditions of approval contained in the Agreement and CUP, and it does not contain sufficient satellite parking for all events of 150 or more. In addition, the availability of the lots that are currently in the plan is not assured. LOCCNA reminded CBE that it has been warning for almost four years now that the synagogue needed to do the work to come up with an effective parking plan. Now, one year after the first draft parking plan and one month before they would like to move in, they have developed a plan that relies heavily on St Mary Magdalen, but they have not yet bothered to ascertain the actual, not hypothetical, availability of the Magdalen. Beth El has failed to do the necessary work, has now presented to the neighborhood an imprecise and flawed plan that fails to meet the requirements of the agreement and now has run out of time. This is the synagogue's problem, which it must solve.

Neighbors noted that while the events schedule appended to the CBE parking plan cites some specific events, Bar and Bat Mitzvahs are not on the chart; neither are weddings or memorial services. We note that since all of these events are included by definition in the plan itself, they should not necessarily have to be on the charts. However, the failure to include them in the charts has obviously created some ambiguity, and future drafts of the plan should be clarified. It was repeatedly noted (see above) that CBE has failed to establish firm data on which satellite parking spaces will be available on which dates, and to correlate that with events known or likely to be held at the new facility.

CBE was questioned about what methods for accountability and the monitoring of parking impacts on the neighborhood will be included in the plan. "We don't know how to make people accountable" was the reply. Synagogue representatives and neighbors differed on what an acceptable parking threshold impact might be - would it be full use of the curb-frontage spaces adjacent to the site, or some percentage occupancy of available neighborhood spaces beyond that? Neighbors asked what verification will be in place to determine if 150 or more people are in attendance, and what will constitute the measure of success of the parking plan? One point that kept coming up, though, was that the current plan fails because it is imprecise and does not adequately guide the synagogue in its mandated responsibility of minimizing impacts on the neighborhood. CBE representatives responded by appealing for neighborhood help, saying they were engaged in the art of the possible and that CBE would do the best it could.

Neighbors voiced a number of suggestions. Several recommended that parking management professionals be involved in developing a more adequate plan. CBE was advised to consider active parking management during events to direct attendees to available lots. Rather than having several satellite lots that may or may not be available (attendees would have to circulate from lot to lot), CBE should consider setting up a more reliable plan with a larger available lot (e.g., UC) combined with a shuttle service. This could be more easily monitored, verified, and attendees would know what to expect.

Beth El responded that its congregants would not like to have to drive as far as UC and take a shuttle. Several neighbors reminded Beth El that the parking plan is to be developed based on the Agreement it signed, not solely based on its acceptability to their congregation. One neighbor reminded Beth El that if it did not live up to its responsibility to come up with a good and workable parking plan, it would not only lose respect with the neighborhood, but would also likely lose respect with some of its congregation due to frustration over parking issues.

There was much discussion of who has what right to available on-street parking spaces. It was pointed out that available spaces have a different meaning to attendees of Beth El events than to neighbors. Parking and walking one to two blocks to a service is completely different than parking one to two blocks from your house while carrying groceries and children.

Several newcomers, after observing the exchange between Beth El and LOCCNA at this meeting, advised Beth El to seriously consider delaying the submission of its plan to the City until it does more work on it in response to the obvious deficiencies pointed out during this meeting. One, attending her first meeting on this issue, warned that CBE is "heading for a train wreck" if it submits the current plan on July 15th. This would only increase conflict with the neighborhood.

A phrase that was used on several occasions by one of the Beth El spokespersons was the admission that "we disagree" with some of the neighborhood positions about how much parking is actually needed. In our opinion Beth El is trying to resurrect the traffic study contained in the EIR to reargue whether satellite parking is necessary. Regardless of what Beth El or LOCCNA thinks of that study, it is not relevant; the requirements of the Agreement and the CUP are relevant. Satellite parking is required for all events of more than 150.

Perhaps the most striking pattern at the meeting was CBE representatives' repeated inabilities to answer neighbors' questions about details of the parking plan and repeated declarations, four years after the agreement was signed and one month before they plan to occupy the new building, that they did not know many of the answer sought, that they were looking for neighbors' opinions and that "they are open to listening."

Toward the end of the evening, one neighbor commented, "Because of the intensification of use, the builder must mitigate the impacts, otherwise you erode the trust of neighbors. Come up with a more comprehensive plan before moving forward. If the plan is insufficient, there are plenty of experts out there who think about parking strategies."

CBE declared it plans an August occupancy with a Sept. 9 th opening. It said it will submit the parking plan on or about July 15 th . [Note: As you know, the day following the meeting, Steve Garber informed us that Beth El intends to delay the submission of their final plan by about one week, until July 22 nd .]

Sincerely,

LOCCNA Neighborhood Committee

David Dempster

Alan Gould

Nancy Levin

Carole Norris

By: Fred Bauman

Cc: Mayor Tom Bates

Councilmember Linda Maio

Councilmember Darryl Moore

Councilmember Max Anderson

Councilmember Dona Spring

Councilmember Laurie Capitelli

Councilmember Betty Olds

Councilmember Kriss Worthington

Councilmember Gordon Wozniak