Differences Can Be Settled

On Jan. 20, the UC Board of Regents unanimously approved UC Berkeley's 2020 Long Range Development Plan, a comprehensive land-use plan to accommodate teaching and research needs from 2005 to 2020. The Berkeley City Council has announced its opposition to the LRDP and threatened to sue to overturn the Regents' approval.

While Mayor Tom Bates has said he does not oppose the campus's need to expand, he continues to attack the LRDP as overly broad and unspecific, saying it would give UC Berkeley a "blank check" to build whatever it wants wherever it wants, without further city review. This is simply not true.

Like a city's general plan, the 2020 LRDP establishes baseline standards for land use, design and protection of environmental and architectural resources and requires all future campus projects meet those standards. This approach is used by most UC campuses and is recommended by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). It is designed to give the public a broad view of campus growth and potential development over the next 15 years.

But the university does not and cannot know every possible project to be built between 2005 and 2020. Projects must be funded and sufficiently detailed to undergo environmental analysis. When defined, campus staff must not only ensure they adhere to the LRDP's environmental standards but also conduct additional project-specific environmental review.

The 2020 LRDP and EIR contain commitments to include city staff in campus review of off-campus projects, present them to the Berkeley Planning Commission, follow the city's Southside Plan when finalized, and respect the Berkeley General Plan for projects located outside the core campus.

Plans to upgrade and retrofit Memorial Stadium are a good example of how this planning process works. Campus representatives have publicly discussed the need to renovate the stadium for several years. It has been mentioned repeatedly in the press and discussed at community meetings. Mayor Bates has, until now, been supportive. On Thursday, the campus moved one step closer when it announced plans to renovate the stadium, develop a new academic commons building in the southeast quadrant of the campus, and improve landscaping and the pedestrian experience along Piedmont Avenue/Gayley Road.

These are exciting ideas. They integrate academic and athletic goals and will help the university raise private funds for these projects. They preserve historic buildings and improve the public spaces around the stadium. However, they do not constitute detailed plans ready for environmental review. CEQA requires that a project be sufficiently detailed before an assessment can be made of its environmental impacts. Prudent fiscal planning requires that a substantial amount of funding be in place before a project moves from concept to reality. As more specific plans for the stadium, the academic commons building, and the landscaping are developed, there will be many opportunities for community involvement.

Another issue between city and campus is the question of fiscal contribution by the university to Berkeley. While not legal grounds to challenge the 2020 LRDP or EIR, the city's threatened lawsuit is at least in part meant to leverage higher fiscal payments from campus.

The UC Berkeley campus, which makes up 5 percent of Berkeley's land area, is a city within a city operating its own police services, fire prevention, emergency preparedness programs, transportation system, health services, recreational programs, and infrastructure to serve the campus and, to some extent the community around it.

UC Berkeley is a major purchaser of local goods and services, spending approximately $70 million per year in the city alone. Berkeley receives millions more in sales and hotel tax revenues stemming from expenditures made by students, faculty, staff, visitors and vendors. The campus not only makes direct payments to the city; it also provides funding and support for many community service programs.

So the question remains: After factoring in all direct payments, in-kind support, public resources, economic benefits and social benefits the campus provides, what additional dollars should be paid? The campus has expressed its willingness to work this out with the city, within the parameters of state law and sound public policy.

Like other town-gown issues, this can be resolved by persons of goodwill and open mind who appreciate the mutual interests and respect the differing needs of UC Berkeley and the city. A lawsuit will simply waste our scarce public resources.

Tags: