Berkeley weighs major housing changes
Berkeley is considering ending singlefamily zoning by December 2022 — an effort to right the wrongs of the past and address the region’s housing crisis, city leaders say.
On Tuesday, the City Council will vote on a symbolic resolution that calls for an end to singlefamily zoning in the city. But the controversial proposal has already upset some residents who’ve expressed concern that the change could ruin their neighborhoods.
Berkeley is the latest city looking at opening up these exclusive neighborhoods to more housing as the region struggles with exorbitant rents and home prices and increasing homelessness. Sacramento recently took a big step in allowing fourplexes in these neighborhoods and one San Francisco politician is pushing a similar plan.
Berkeley may also allow fourplexes in city neighborhoods. Next month, the council will consider that proposal, which will likely spark pushback from tenants groups fearful it could fuel displacement if more protections aren’t included.
For Berkeley, which has his
torically been antidevelopment, the moves are the latest shift as the city slowly embraces more density, including plans to add housing around the North Berkeley and Ashby stations.
Councilwoman Lori Droste, who is introducing the resolution, said she’s trying to undo the legacy of racism that created singlefamily neighborhoods, which cover 50% of the city.
In 1916, singlefamily zoning was born in Berkeley’s Elmwood neighborhood, forbidding the construction of anything other than one home on each lot. At the time, an ordinance stated that its intent was to protect “the home against the intrusion of the less desirable and floating renter class.”
“I live in the Elmwood area where it is sort of the birthplace of singlefamily zoning,” Droste said. “I thought it was incumbent upon me as representing this neighborhood to say that I want to change something that I think is detrimental to the community.”
Dean Metzger, the founder of the Berkeley Neighborhoods Council, a collective of nearly 40 neighborhoods, said he wants the opportunity to give more input before the city changes any zoning laws. He said he worries that if a developer builds a multistory building next to a singlefamily home, it could obstruct views, block solar panels and clog available parking.
Metzger said it’s hard to specify what kind of design would be most appropriate for Berkeley’s singlefamily neighborhoods. He said he wants developers to be required to seek input from neighbors before building.
“They’ve labeled us antigrowth; it’s really not true,” he said. “We are trying to find ways to accommodate the development and make our neighborhoods livable. (The council) just wants to build whatever they want to build.”
After a year of racial reckoning, the same criticism of law enforcement practices should be applied to housing policies, said Councilman Terry Taplin, one of the authors of the resolution.
“This is really a historical moment for us in Berkeley because now the racial justice reckoning really has come home,” Taplin said.
As the state grapples with a housing crisis, many housing advocates say city leaders have to undo decades’ worth of antidensity housing policies. They
“This is really a historical moment for us in Berkeley because now the racial justice reckoning really has come home.”
Terry Taplin, Councilman for Berkeley District Two
say Berkeley’s efforts are a necessary step in addressing the region’s crisis even if it takes time. If the resolution passes, it will take years before the city sees a change in its housing stock.
“It will take time,” said Grover WehmanBrown, a spokesperson for East Bay Housing Organizations, which represents nonprofit builders. “It’s many, many decades and centuries in the making. Building housing takes time, especially in areas like ours where there are not just wide open lots that you can drive large equipment
up to and start digging to build one house.”
David Garcia, the policy director at UC Berkeley’s Terner Center for Housing Innovation, said the proposal was a “big deal.”
“It wasn’t that long ago when Berkeley wasn’t considered the most forwardthinking on housing,” he said.
But he added that it’s crucial these policies don’t jeopardize existing housing. Outreach to residents is key, he said.
“It’s important to be thoughtful about these decisions because they cannot be easily reversed,” Garcia said. “Creating such a significant change of land use in such a large part of the city is going to involve a lot of planning and critical thinking on how to ensure the best policy outcome. You’re going to want to make sure the policy itself does result in the kind of housing city leadership wants to see.”
Eliminating singlefamily zoning is changing a status quo that has long favored wealthy, white property owners, and opposition can often stall change, said Jassmin Poyaoan, the director of the Community Economic Justice Clinic at East Bay Community Law Center.
She said local, state and federal officials have to focus on shifting a culture and mindset around housing policies that focuses on “housing is a human right.” She emphasized that policy changes must focus on creating housing for very lowincome residents, protecting rentcontrolled units and fortifying tenant protections. This includes Berkeley’s future efforts to allow fourplexes.
But change is coming. Recently, the Berkeley council approved rezoning the Adeline Street corridor and even added an extra floor of height to what builders could do there. The plan allows 1,450 new housing units, about half for lowincome families in an area that was once a thriving Black, workingclass community, but has become increasingly white as the high cost of housing has driven out many families. Officials are now trying to undo that.
“I think it’s really easy to look at racism and injustice in other cities and other places, but it takes a lot more courage, introspection and vulnerability to look at the mistakes that we’ve made in these areas,” Taplin said. “We have to really take an honest look at our shortcomings and be open to changes that might make us uncomfortable.”