Click this link to optimize Berkeley Considers for screen readers Skip to Content
Berkeley Considers
Open Town Hall

Subscribe to Registered Statements From Forum Participants

Info Hide

Get registered statements in your RSS reader or emailed to you as a daily digest.

A statement is registered if it is claimed, verified and civil:

  1. It is claimed if its author has claimed the statement by signing in before or shortly after submitting the statement.
  2. It is verified if it is claimed and its author has provided their street address in their registration and verified their email address by clicking the verification link emailed by Open Town Hall.
  3. It is civil if it is verified and it meets the guidelines for civility.

If any of these conditions are not met, then the statement is unregistered.

Statements are emailed at most once per day (in the morning).

Subscribe

Manage your subscription in your RSS feed reader

Check out some recent Registered Statements from forum participants

Name not shown inside District 3 September 29, 2020, 11:07 PM

On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree) for Division 1: General Provisions, do you think the BZO:
Please share any specific thoughts on Division 1: General Provisions It would be helpful if the annotation on the example FAR diagram followed the format of the formula to calculate FAR, or presented the example as a calculation. Right now it says "Maximum Floor Area for a FAR of 0.2 = 8,712 Sq. Ft. on a 43,560 Sq. Ft. Lot (1 acre)." It would be easier to understand if the example was formatted how people will use it: "8,712 Sq. Ft. ÷ 43,560 Sq. Ft. Lot (1 acre) = FAR of 0.2" and/or "Maximum Floor Area for a FAR of 0.2 on a 43,560 Sq. Ft. Lot = 0.2 x 43,560 Sq. Ft. = 8,712 Sq. Ft."
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree) for Division 2. Chapter 23.204: Commercial Districts, do you think the BZO:
Please share any specific thoughts on Division 2. Chapter 23.204: Commercial Districts. The Key on "Figure 23.204-2: C-SA BUILDING HEIGHT" says Subarea Three is "South of Ward, North of Dwight," but Dwight Way is North of Ward Street. Comparing "TABLE 23.204-1: ALLOWED LAND USES IN THE COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS" with the current "Table 23E.52.030," are Mixed Use Developments under 5,000 SF in the C-SA no longer permitted with a ZC, or is this information missing? Currently, Mixed Use Commercial/Residential uses under 5,000 SF require a ZC and all those over 5,000 SF require a UP/PH. (Requiring a UP/PH rather than ZC disincentivizes smaller existing commercial buildings from converting to mixed use residential!)
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree), for Division 4: Permits and Administration, do you think the BZO:

Name not available inside District 5 September 25, 2020, 6:27 PM

On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree) for Division 1: General Provisions, do you think the BZO:
Please share any specific thoughts on Division 1: General Provisions Including rules of measurement here is an improvement.
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree) for Division 2. Chapter 23.202: Residential Districts, do you think the BZO:
Please share any specific thoughts on Division 2. Chapter 23.202: Residential Districts. The odd items that trigger the requirement for an AUP or UP are still hidden in other sections of the ordinance including the definition section. These items are non-intuitive and strangely worded so would still be impossible to know without experience. The additional permit requirements section should at least refer people to the other portions of the code that might trigger discretionary permits. Some examples:
Bedroom: definition does not match what a homeowner or architect would expect to be considered a bedroom so the 5 bedroom requirement is difficult to understand. If the odd definition is still maintained then it should be explicitly referenced here.
Lot coverage: Again definition of lot coverage does not match common understanding or definition which other cities use so many items that would not be considered as contributing to lot coverage are counted by the City of Berkeley based on staff precedent/decisions rather than the language of the ordinance.
Changes to openings within non-conforming setbacks: Again, not spelled out in this chapter or elsewhere in ordinance except by staff precedent to take a stricter than written interpretation. Would be impossible to know this or where to look without prior experience. This in particular should be addressed as a very large majority of houses in Berkeley are built within the front setback since zoning ordinance intentionally made front setbacks that do not match the already constructed homes.

Seems like a number of the provisions in General Developmental Standards should either be in the residential section or at least referenced within this section to make the information less difficult to find and figure out which section applies.

On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree) for Division 3. Chapter 23.302: Supplemental Use Regulations, do you think the BZO:
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree), for Division 3. Chapter 23.304: General Development Standards, do you think the BZO:
Please share any specific thoughts on Division 3. Chapter 23.304: General Development Standards Shouldn't this section come before zone specific section?

On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree), for Division 3. Chapters 23.306- 332: Citywide Standards, do you think the BZO:
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree), for Division 4: Permits and Administration, do you think the BZO:
Please share any specific thoughts on Division 4: Permits and Administration Note: Zoning ordinance still does not include language that allows for the department's practice of determining an application incomplete as a method to delay required timely review. Comments about an application do not mean an application was incomplete. This should be added to the zoning ordinance or the practice should be stopped.
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree), for Division 5: Glossary, do you think the BZO:
Please share any specific thoughts on Division 5: Glossary The glossary itself is ok but it is still used as a way to add or reinterpret zoning ordinances. See definition for Addition as an example. This information should be included in the residential provisions rather than hidden in the glossary. If a person does not know to look in the glossary for a term that seems self evident, they would not be aware of how many provisions are applied.

Name not available inside District 3 September 23, 2020, 6:15 PM

On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree) for Division 1: General Provisions, do you think the BZO:
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree) for Division 2. Chapter 23.202: Residential Districts, do you think the BZO:

Name not available inside District 3 September 23, 2020, 6:32 AM

On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree) for Division 1: General Provisions, do you think the BZO:
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree) for Division 2. Chapter 23.202: Residential Districts, do you think the BZO:
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree) for Division 2. Chapter 23.204: Commercial Districts, do you think the BZO:
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree) for Division 2. Chapters 23.206 -210: Manufacturing Districts, Special Purpose Districts and Overlay Zones, do you think the BZO:
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree) for Division 3. Chapter 23.302: Supplemental Use Regulations, do you think the BZO:
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree), for Division 3. Chapter 23.304: General Development Standards, do you think the BZO:
Please share any specific thoughts on Division 3. Chapters 23.306 - 332: Citywide Standards Most city wide standards are extremely regressive and do represent the need for equity. For example, Accessory Dwelling Unit standards are very hard to find and they do not reflect the diversity of lot types and sizes.
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree), for Division 4: Permits and Administration, do you think the BZO:
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree), for Division 5: Glossary, do you think the BZO:

Name not available inside District 8 September 22, 2020, 3:18 PM

On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree) for Division 1: General Provisions, do you think the BZO:
Please share any specific thoughts on Division 1: General Provisions It should be searchable and not just a flat document
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree) for Division 2. Chapter 23.202: Residential Districts, do you think the BZO:
Please share any specific thoughts on Division 2. Chapter 23.202: Residential Districts. Should be searchable. Should have examples ie if you do x it triggers y etc.
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree) for Division 2. Chapter 23.204: Commercial Districts, do you think the BZO:
Please share any specific thoughts on Division 2. Chapter 23.204: Commercial Districts. It a miracle anyone does business in the City of Berkeley after reading that section
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree) for Division 2. Chapters 23.206 -210: Manufacturing Districts, Special Purpose Districts and Overlay Zones, do you think the BZO:
Please share any specific thoughts on Division 2. Chapters 23.206 - 210: Manufacturing Districts, Special Purpose Districts and Overlay Zones. Again should be searchable and have direct examples
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree) for Division 3. Chapter 23.302: Supplemental Use Regulations, do you think the BZO:
Please share any specific thoughts on Division 3. Chapter 23.302: Supplemental Use Regulations Should be searchable and have examples
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree), for Division 3. Chapter 23.304: General Development Standards, do you think the BZO:
Please share any specific thoughts on Division 3. Chapter 23.304: General Development Standards Should be searchable and have examples
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree), for Division 3. Chapters 23.306- 332: Citywide Standards, do you think the BZO:
Please share any specific thoughts on Division 3. Chapters 23.306 - 332: Citywide Standards Should be searchable and have examples
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree), for Division 4: Permits and Administration, do you think the BZO:
Please share any specific thoughts on Division 4: Permits and Administration Should be searchable and have examples
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree), for Division 5: Glossary, do you think the BZO:
Please share any specific thoughts on Division 5: Glossary Should be searchable and have examples

Name not available inside District 2 September 22, 2020, 1:49 PM

On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree) for Division 1: General Provisions, do you think the BZO:
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree) for Division 2. Chapter 23.202: Residential Districts, do you think the BZO:
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree) for Division 2. Chapter 23.204: Commercial Districts, do you think the BZO:
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree) for Division 2. Chapters 23.206 -210: Manufacturing Districts, Special Purpose Districts and Overlay Zones, do you think the BZO:
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree) for Division 3. Chapter 23.302: Supplemental Use Regulations, do you think the BZO:
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree), for Division 3. Chapter 23.304: General Development Standards, do you think the BZO:
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree), for Division 3. Chapters 23.306- 332: Citywide Standards, do you think the BZO:
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree), for Division 4: Permits and Administration, do you think the BZO:
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree), for Division 5: Glossary, do you think the BZO:

Name not available inside District 4 September 21, 2020, 11:59 AM

On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree) for Division 2. Chapter 23.202: Residential Districts, do you think the BZO:
Please share any specific thoughts on Division 2. Chapter 23.202: Residential Districts. There are too many specific rules. The document goes to great lengths to cover every conceivable instance of building, nothing is left up to the owner, neighborhood or builder. If you want it to be understandable, back off the details. Trust the owners and builders more, and shorten the document by removing specific details and rules. The zoning laws will create a city that is extremely bland by not trusting the residents of that city to be innovative, empathetic to neighbors and safe. I urge our city to back off on the rules and trust the adults of Berkeley.
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree) for Division 2. Chapter 23.204: Commercial Districts, do you think the BZO:
Please share any specific thoughts on Division 2. Chapters 23.206 - 210: Manufacturing Districts, Special Purpose Districts and Overlay Zones. Same as above. Create room for commercial innovation!
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree) for Division 3. Chapter 23.302: Supplemental Use Regulations, do you think the BZO:
Please share any specific thoughts on Division 3. Chapter 23.304: General Development Standards Same as above.
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree), for Division 3. Chapters 23.306- 332: Citywide Standards, do you think the BZO:
Please share any specific thoughts on Division 5: Glossary See above.

Name not available inside District 2 September 20, 2020, 7:57 PM

On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree) for Division 2. Chapter 23.202: Residential Districts, do you think the BZO:

Name not available inside District 5 September 20, 2020, 4:52 PM

On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree) for Division 1: General Provisions, do you think the BZO:
Please share any specific thoughts on Division 1: General Provisions Improve accessibility by includding hyperlinks from the table to contents to each section, and to the applicable section when one section references another. The interaction with state law is not written in a manner that is understandable by a layperson. If you are going to cite the Neighborhood Preservation Ordinance you should include a footnote about where this ordinance can be accessed.
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree) for Division 2. Chapter 23.202: Residential Districts, do you think the BZO:
Please share any specific thoughts on Division 2. Chapter 23.202: Residential Districts. Whether or not accessory dwelling units are allowed should be included in the table. The revised zoning ordinance be revised to allow for missing middle housing (a range of clustered or multi-unit housing types compatible in scale with single family homes/ housing types naturally affordable to those earning between 80-120% of the area median income.)
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree) for Division 2. Chapter 23.204: Commercial Districts, do you think the BZO:
Please share any specific thoughts on Division 2. Chapter 23.204: Commercial Districts. There are too many commercial zoning types that appear to be nearly identical. Can this be simplified?
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree) for Division 2. Chapters 23.206 -210: Manufacturing Districts, Special Purpose Districts and Overlay Zones, do you think the BZO:
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree) for Division 3. Chapter 23.302: Supplemental Use Regulations, do you think the BZO:
Please share any specific thoughts on Division 3. Chapter 23.302: Supplemental Use Regulations There are too many sequential tables covering the different uses. This makes is confusing and difficult to track.
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree), for Division 3. Chapter 23.304: General Development Standards, do you think the BZO:
Please share any specific thoughts on Division 3. Chapter 23.304: General Development Standards Language is technical and difficult to parse
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree), for Division 3. Chapters 23.306- 332: Citywide Standards, do you think the BZO:
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree), for Division 4: Permits and Administration, do you think the BZO:
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree), for Division 5: Glossary, do you think the BZO:

Name not available inside District 5 September 20, 2020, 4:29 PM

On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree) for Division 1: General Provisions, do you think the BZO:
Please share any specific thoughts on Division 1: General Provisions I checked "1" in all the boxes in this survey except for Division 5 because I really lack the expertise to know if this re-writing has or hasn't lost something in translation. Even then, I'd need some specific question I needed answered, some specific concern I wanted addressed in order to meaningfully assess the ease at which I could find the required info.. From the point of view of a layman, the document appears well organized, but what do I know? On top of this, the document is a few hundreds pages long.

I think the comments you garner here could prove useful, but the vast majority of the citizenry are in the same position as me and the survey is anonymous, it's all but impossible to tell from the check boxes who is giving a knowledgable response and who is blowing smoke. The end result is that you are likely to end up with nothing more than a referendum on the stated goals and intentions of rewriting the ordinance (the opening page - it takes a fair amount of navigating to find the actual text of the ordinance!) rather than its organization and content. That is, the unstated question "do you think ordinances like this should be more clearly written?" is what many people will be subliminally responding to. Anybody in her or his or their right mind would answer yes. What good is the data except to prove that point?
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree) for Division 2. Chapter 23.202: Residential Districts, do you think the BZO:
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree) for Division 2. Chapter 23.204: Commercial Districts, do you think the BZO:
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree) for Division 2. Chapters 23.206 -210: Manufacturing Districts, Special Purpose Districts and Overlay Zones, do you think the BZO:
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree) for Division 3. Chapter 23.302: Supplemental Use Regulations, do you think the BZO:
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree), for Division 3. Chapter 23.304: General Development Standards, do you think the BZO:
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree), for Division 3. Chapters 23.306- 332: Citywide Standards, do you think the BZO:
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree), for Division 4: Permits and Administration, do you think the BZO:
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree), for Division 5: Glossary, do you think the BZO: