RHNA to AB 27 To Corridors Capsule History

On December 16, 2021, Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) Executive Board conducted a public hearing and adopted the Final RHNA Plan. The total Regional Housing Needs Determination (RHND) for the Bay Area in the 2023-2031 period is 441,176 units. Berkeley’s RHNA for the 2023-2031 period is 8,934 residential units.

Berkeley’s RHNA for the 2015-2023 period is 2,959 residential units.
Berkeley’s RHNA for the 2023-2031 period is 8,934 residential units.

On a parallel track state bills SB 79 and AB 893 have evolved over years and been passed by the state legislature. SB 79 takes effect on July 1, ABS 893 took effect January 1, 2026. SB 79 mandates greatly increased densities and height limits within .5 miles of BART stations. Local governments are not permitted to deny permits to such development. In my neighborhood within .45 miles of Ashby BART for example, any of my neighbors may erect a 5-story tower if their parcel is sufficiently large or they can acquire and adjacent parcel. Larger parcels (such as 2330 Prince St) are particularly valuable prizes.

City planning staff have recently testified before the planning commission that state government expects an onslaught of development applications on July 1 and thereafter. The quantity will create a backlog which will require years for government to whittle down. In effect this will load a very large number of dwelling units into the permit and build pipeline.

Presumably alarmed by the RHNA mandate the Berkeley City Council has birthed the "Corridors" up-zoning initiative to be applied to three vigorous low-rise commercial districts which lie outside the Circles of Density managed by SB 79 and ABS 893. Upon passage by council these would immediately change zoning of The Elmwood, Solano and North Berkeley to allow 7 to 14 story residential buildings. Presently these narrow commercial strips are zoned for single story. This would of course instantly change the real estate value of these parcels. This would in turn change decision-making regarding leasing and development in these vicinities. Property owners will of course yield to the prospect of enormous profits offered by these changes.

It is not clear that the Council has considered the overlap of "Corridors" and the consequence of SB 79. The combination of these - the state and the local measures - will enable the permitting of high rise residential development nearly everywhere in Berkeley except The Uplands, the Clark Kerr neighborhood, The Hills and Thousand Oaks.

The merits of replacing a strip of fine-grained one-story commercial buildings with large-footprint residential high-rises - 7 or 14 stories - do not immediately come to mind. The Elmwood, for example, is poorly served by auto access and about a mile from a BART station.

Plunking high rises all over Berkeley will cancel an urban asset Berkeley currently enjoys. Much of Berkeley is quite dense. Open space in the dense areas is scarce to non-existent. There is zero prospect of creating more open space. What makes Berkeley nonetheless an urban environment enjoyable on foot are its density gradients. The existing old commercial districts are remnants of a past in which people walked. Time has made them more exceptional. They remain magnets for residents and visitors seeking the enjoyment of strolling in pleasant human-scaled urban space. Developers spend hundreds of millions building faux versions of such places (witness Fourth Street, "Bay Street" and an infinite number across the U.S.) These tiny neighborhoods exert a multiplier effect on nearby real estate and other urban uses. My neighborhood, a 20 minutes walk from The Elmwood, it touted by realtors as "Lower Elmwood," for example. We contemplate burying these golden geese beneath large-footprint high rises.

The hysteria of local government to fulfill the RHNA 8934 unit mandate has more unfortunate consequences. It bends government decision-making to approve nearly any project containing a bunch of units. Shown is a nearly-completed building, 3030 Telegraph, 200' from my house. It is the view from my sidewalk. In a city which prides itself on its taste and erudition, is home to a renowned school of architecture and urban planning, this was permitted. Knowing the above I understand how it happened. We can expect worse.

We do not oppose high rise development. I oppose the near-random deployment of large-footprint high rises without consideration of the opportunity cost of what they replace or the consequence of suddenly multiplied patterns of density in their vicinity.

AB 79 and ABS 893 are just getting rolling. City planning staff expect them to have huge consequence. "Corridors" is a local initiative subject to local decision-making. With the consequence of the state bills yet known, why hastily commit to another huge and irrevocable zoning change?