Culture Change e-Letter
A David Brower Memorial
Parking Garage for Berkeley?
by Jan Lundberg
On May 18, 2004 the Berkeley,
California City Council moved towards
approving a seductive, eco-groovy proposal to build a $47 million complex called
the David Brower Center. The
developers are working with interested groups that include collaborators of the
late David Brower, who was the first executive director of the Sierra Club and
founder of Friends of the Earth.
Practically everyone is for this two-building
complex, including Browers son Kenneth Brower, author of The Starship and
the Canoe. Environmental
organizations such as Earth Island Institute (co-developer and David Brower's last
organization), with $5 million in assets, and the Rainforest Action Network,
with a $2 million annual budget, want to be new
tenants in the Brower Center. Low income
housing would be featured. However,
there is a major fly in the ointment: a parking garage would be built underneath,
and the implications are troubling.
Another problem is
that Strawberry Creek, running down from the University of California under the
street, is so close to the construction site and poison run-off. And theres a
major earthquake fault nearby; a buildings structural integrity is
compromised by putting it on top of a parking garage (housing a hundred gasoline
tanks called cars). And there may be Indian artifacts in the soil to be
disturbed and desecrated.
If the parking garage
is built, before it is contaminated with cars its use could be changed to a cold
storage spot for food and wine. Or growing mushrooms. What a pity if
the garage were utilized for just enough time to pollute it thoroughly before
the oil supply-crash hits after which people must walk, bike and use urban
The City of Berkeley, besides its willingness to
honor Brower and have a fancy building to attract visitors, is banking on
parking revenue from the Brower Center. So
the city is giving the land away for free to the developers, representing a $5
million gift. I told the Council
before its vote that the parking revenue would be blood money, because we
stand against war for oil and believe there should be No Blood for Oil.
land is already a huge, ugly parking lot, filled mostly with commuter vehicles
whose owners dont bicycle or utilize the buses and Bay Area Rapid Transit
trains. Developing such a place for a green-certified building complex is
laudable, but the Brower Center would still be attracting about the same number
of polluting cars that consume oil. In addition to many nonprofit groups at the
Brower Center, there would be green commercial tenants as anchors.
"As we are in an age of global warming caused mostly by
fossil-fuel burning," I said to the City, this illustrious Council can do
better. A parking garage for this
center is not green, as David Brower would agree.
Allowed only two minutes, I also said David Brower was an Advisor to
the Alliance for a Paving Moratorium, a project of the Sustainable Energy
Institute which I head. Berkeley is
choked with cars and guzzles petroleum. Just
as adding to the cars infrastructure creates more traffic congestion,
disaccommodating cars decreases traffic congestion, as has been found in
European cities where car-free centers have been created.
One of the environmentalist principals supporting the
Brower Center development and its parking garage told me afterwards It was a
show-stopper for you to give those comments.
He was apparently worried my comments would be taken seriously and that
the development could thus be delayed or modified so as to derail it.
He was disturbed that I had not taken into account the many mitigations
he said were undertaken to lessen the car and oil factor.
I told him and Earth Islands executive director that somebody (me) had
to say those things. The planet is
being killed and war for oil is out of control.
The head of Earth Island told me that David Brower had used a car almost
every day and, as if it was an indulgence that Brower supported a paving
moratorium, Brower supported many causes. But I'm told that one of his
causes was his walking around Berkeley a lot.
We can nevertheless
be sure David Brower would not want a parking garage
constructed under a building to honor him, nor would he want the creek ordinance
waived as suggested by a Council member. In these times of ecocide and denial over the effects of the
car, David Brower would call for instead a rewriting of the city zoning laws
requiring parking. He certainly
would not want to feed the citys coffers with drivers' parking fees when
greener alternatives for travel are available.
There could be parking for disabled people only.
My main purpose in attending the Council
meeting was to give my two cents worth of advice in pointing out that the
global peak in oil extraction is occurring now, and because of the
ramifications, the world is going to experience its final petroleum crisis soon. I would have also mentioned transportation alternatives, but
this was covered by the Gray Panthers representative and by Council member Linda
Maio who recognized the need for car-free living.
The sidewalks at the Brower Center would be of
minimum width, which means little of natures greenery would be present.
However, after the oil crash and the drop off in car use, the roadway
would be available for pedestrian use as it should be now.
The problem we are
facing, when we witness environmental groups compromising and spinning (even if
only so very rarely) while they certainly maintain their funding, is that the
world is out of time. We cant pretend the car-oriented infrastructure and the
oil economy will go on and on. We have to address the problems and stand on our
principles today. For without vision and clarity of our message and mission,
the true alternative to this destructive culture will not be demonstrated
until the system collapses. A sustainable future has no place for a parking
garage, even if the building is the most progressively green ever devised
("platinum certified," in this case). When an extremely rare,
visionary warrior for the Earth David Brower is being honored, who is
really qualified to represent his vision and stature in a business deal? Are his
equals present, at the ready, and objective, in all matters possible?
scrapping the parking requirement as would befit a truly progressive city, an alternative Brower Center concept could be for todays $5 million parking lot to be turned into a community organic garden on half the space, and on the other half there could be some Earth-friendly structures serving the environmental movement and housing its workers.
If the tenants and workers pledged to be car free, the City of Berkeley might allow no parking places.
And the depaving activists are ready!
However, the City is already getting blood money from the parking lot,
and without a strong protest movement to cease this and declare war on the
car, such revenue will not be denied until the oil virtually dries up or the Earth is
burned up in climate change.
The David Brower Center development
makes headway, and the final plan will probably be
approved this summer. The vote on
May 18 was 7-1 resolving to authorize negotiating for the Development and
Disposition Agreement, but a public hearing in July 2004 has been added as part of
the scrutiny of the contract whose drafting has just been approved.
shorter version of the above article was printed in the San Francisco
Chronicle on June 2, 2004, and can be viewed at the Chron's
comment to the City of Berkeley (email: email@example.com,
fax (510) 981-6901) and tell the Council
Members that, for example, you would more likely visit a David Brower Center and
the fair city of Berkeley if they did not represent the same old oil, fumes
& road hog paradigm.
green city/building design expertise see www.ecocitybuilders.org
of Oakland and Berkeley, California - Richard Register, President, author and
illustrator. Readis recent response to the public debate over the David
Brower Center, Design
flaws of David Brower Center plan
Lundberg publishes Culture Change for
the nonprofit Sustainable Energy Institute which was founded upon his petroleum
industry experience at Lundberg Survey Corporation.
James Doherty, Culture Change's Bike Warrior
THE BERKELEY CITY COUNCIL /
publisher and former Editor of the Earth Island Journal
Brower's comments on automobiles
Jan, here are some of David Brower's comments on
automobiles. I think Ken Brower
would agree that if Dave wanted any kind of transportation in the bottom of the
Dave Brower Building, it would have been a rail and mass transit station.
From an obituary on Dave's death:
As a man who disliked cars, Mr. Brower added, "We can, upright people that
we are, rediscover the foot; we can save a place to walk in, and an antelope,
"Brower," Mr. McPhee wrote, "has computed that we are driving
through the earth's resources at a rate comparable to a man's driving an
automobile a 128 miles per hour, and he says that we are accelerating. He
reminds his audiences that buffalo were shot for their tongues alone, and he
says that we still have a buffalo-tongue economy. " `We're hooked on
growth. We're addicted to it. In my lifetime, man has used more
resources than in all previous history.'
from Restoring Hetch Hetchy
By David Brower
Excerpted by permission from For Earth's Sake: The Life And Times of David
Brower (Salt Lake City, Gibbs-Smith 1990)
George Bell, when he was working at Los Alamos and heard people joking about
taking down Glen Canyon Dam, said, "Oh, I think we have something on the
shelf at Los Alamos that can do that." His solution, alas, would
result in excessive radioactivity. What else? I would suggest that we
turn it over to the freeway builders. They make a practice of moving, or
rather, removing mountains whenever mountains are in the way of
automobiles. A concrete mountain should present no insuperable
XXII. THE HORACE
M. ALBRIGHT CONSERVATION LECTURESHIP
November 11, 1981 University of California, College of Natural Resources
Department of Forestry and Resource Management Conservation and National
Security David Brower
In 1910 Charles Richard Van Hise wrote in The Conservation of Natural Resources
in the United States, " . . . the period in which individualism was
patriotism in this country has passed by; and the time has come when
individualism must become subordinate to responsibility to the
He realized that "we cannot hope that we shall be able to reverse the
great law that energy is run down in transformation, or that we can reuse
indefinitely the resources of nature without loss."
He wondered what changes in social structure would result "when people
begin to feel pinched by meager soil and the lack of coal." (He had
already concluded that the greatest use of petroleum would be as a lubricant,
and he had not contemplated that automobiles would use any.) And his text ended
with a familiar line:
"Conservation means 'the greatest good to the greatest number -- and that
for the longest time.'"
Earth and the Great Weather: THE BROOKS RANGE
by Kenneth Brower foreword by David Brower
Berkeley, California March 25, 1971
The least we can do, if morality and ethics are still in our fiber, is to plan
a thousand years of amenities for our progeny while they mind our nuclear
So a thousand good years, and an aim. Mere survival is not enough in the world
we seek. Our institutions need to accommodate an optimistic vision of man's
future, to believe that if the golden rule is all right in religions, it should
not be avoided in life.
A thousand year plan for oil, with particular respect for the immediate
foreground in Alaska, would recognize the contribution of those who discovered
the North Slope oil resource, appropriately cover the costs they cannot cover,
reward them, pay the state for storage underground, then record the oil reserve
as part of the inventory to be budgeted to last a thousand years. The Plan
would contemplate that oil may one day serve a more important purpose than
fueling automobiles and supersonic transports. Precipitate exploitation would
be discouraged and extravagant use would be prohibited. Study of potential
dangers of removing and transporting the oil in and across fragile ecosystems
would be exhaustive and not an exercise in salvage ecology. The costs of
perfecting spill-proof transportation would be met and development would await
the meeting, the oil remaining safely stored underground until then, in situ.
Whatever the costs were would be passed on to the user, who has always paid the
costs anyway although he has not always known it. I f this materially raises
the price, that increase in itself would make economically feasible the
development of more efficient oil using devices. We would pollute far less
because pollution would be too wasteful and too expensive. This would be a
residual advantage and a welcome one, since the Plan would not expect oil to be
available for a millennium, but also would expect the air to remain breathable
for the duration. Applied to pace, the Plan would encourage people to slow down
and live, to take time to look for the real show, heeding Robinson
But look how noble the world is.
The lonely-flowing waters, the secret keeping stones,
The flowing sky.
Dave's pitch for rail and mass-transit
Not Just an Extraordinary Marriage of Convenience
By David Brower - From the Alliance for Sustainable Jobs and the Environment -
Isaiah, usually one of my favorite biblical prophets, had little use for the
bar, ("If wine is mockery, strong drink is raging"). Over the years,
I have found bars to be quite useful; in fact, I would not be writing this
article today if not for a fateful encounter at a bar in Eugene, Oregon with
several members of the United Steelworkers of America. These locked out
"road warriors" from Kaiser Aluminum had come to the environmental
law conference last March to meet the longer haired members of the Maxxam Fan
Club, but I think we all came away from the bar that night with visions even
bigger than joining forces against the worst corporate villain in recent
memory. If we succeed in our mission to tear down the corporate-driven myth
that you can't have quality jobs and a healthy environment, we will have
Charles Hurwitz to thank for bringing us together.
It is up to us to prove wrong people like the Maxxam spokesman who called our
Alliance "an extraordinary marriage of convenience," questioning why
Steelworkers would work with "radical eco-terrorists whose mission is to
destroy jobs, not preserve them." This is the wedge that large wealthy
corporations have successfully driven between labor unions and
environmentalists for too long. This has allowed corporations and their friends
in government to divide and conquer, shipping jobs overseas and blaming the
environmentalists. This Alliance will put an end to this, getting workers and
environmentalists on the same page, working toward our common goals. This
Alliance allows this old man to dream again, of a world where we do more than
slow the rate at which unions crumble and species vanish forever.
We have allowed ourselves to be divided because we lacked the vision to have it
all: meaningful, well-paying jobs and a beautiful, healthy planet to live on. I
accept USWA Region 11 Director David Foster's challenge to "make
sustainable jobs a product of environmental protection," and I have a few
ideas for how to make this happen. Pay attention and steal my ideas freely if
you like them, because at 87, I shouldn't count on being around long enough to
make sure they get done. Remember the words of the Johann von Goethe:
"Whatever you can do, or dream, you can begin it. Boldness has genius,
power, and magic in it."
Boldness has been my calling card since my days as a world class mountain
climber, back when it didn't take much class. It takes boldness to challenge
the largest corporations in the world and their law-making body, the World
Trade Organization, to include democracy, human rights, and environmental
protection in trade negotiations, and that is exactly what this Alliance is up
to. We can make sure Seattle is the last gasp for the old thinking of profit
and free trade at any cost to workers and the planet, and begin some new
A guidebook to the necessary new thinking on jobs and the environment has just
been put out by Paul Hawken and Amory and Hunter Lovins entitled, "Natural
Capitalism: Creating the Next Industrial Revolution." The first Industrial
Revolution brought us the notion of labor productivity, the goal being to get
more and more work out of fewer and fewer people. This led to many innovations,
including labor unions to protect these workers who noticed that they were
doing more and more work with less and less pay. Since then we have seen about
a 200-fold increase in labor productivity and the nation has prospered often at
the expense of workers and the natural world. Isaiah may have been talking
about this kind of economic growth when he wrote, "Thou hast multiplied
the nation, but not increased the joy."
What "Natural Capitalism" recognizes is that labor is no longer what
we are short of, at six billion people and counting; and that the Industrial
Revolution we need is in resource productivity, the goal now being to get more
and more value out of fewer and fewer natural resources. In other words, we can
stop downsizing our workforce and start downsizing our impact on the planet
(and still make a profit, if you like that sort of thing). The book is not so
much urging old-style corporations to change as it is telling them they are
being left behind by hundreds of 2 businesses that are now making profit and
making sense. By strengthening our Alliance, we can help hasten this shift and
create the sustainable jobs of the future.
A specific place the Alliance can make a difference is in ending our war
against the atmosphere. In the early part part of this century, the automobile
industry, specifically General Motors, Standard Oil, and Firestone Tires, set
about buying up railroads and dismantling them to eliminate competition, for
which they were fined a collective $5,000. With no remaining transportation
alternatives in so many areas, Americans began to use automobiles, gasoline,
and tires as never before. The dismantling of the U.S. rail system as an
alternative to building more superhighways and sprawl development has also
given us modern marvels like the Tracy [California] tireyard fire, where
millions of old tires have been burning since August 1998 with no hope of
putting them out.
Giving people the opportunity to rediscover rail can spare us from sprawl,
gridlock, and return us to the days I am old enough to recall when air was
still worth breathing.
Several generations have been needlessly denied the opportunity I had in 1915
at the Panama Pacific Exposition to fall in love with trains. Today train
technology in Europe and Japan can do amazing things with speed and
versatility, but the essential train experience of being able to write, sleep,
drink, talk, and walk while traveling remains the best yet invented and we in
the United States are now largely deprived of it. What will it take to rebuild
rail? A lot of steel and a lot of steelworkers for one thing. We must move in
the direction of creating these jobs that actually help make the world a more
livable place for our children at the end of the day. If the corporate mindset
does not allow for such thinking, our first job will be to change some
Railroads are just one example of where the environmental movement can advocate
for restoration and redesign, rather than just bitching about what is being
done wrong (which we are all quite good at). Paul Hawken and others have said
that we need to "redesign everything" in light of what we know about
the threats to the natural world and human health. This will take a lot of
work, and will create meaningful, sustainable jobs for many years to come. It
will also be fun. What are you ready to redesign? I think the world may be
ready for an operable car seat belt for starters. What's next? Wise cartoon
strip hero Pogo once said, "We are confronted by insurmountable
opportunities." In my mountain climbing days, any peak declared
"insurmountable" was climbed within the year. Onward to [the Winter
1999] Seattle [protests against the WTO]!
flaws of David Brower Center plan
by Richard Register
it as ironic largely by accident, that the large number of parking places
proposed for this building is due to the fact that it is essentially built upon
an existing parking lot. This is largely true in the case of Library
Gardens too. But in this case, the Dave Brower Center, the whole thing is
on top of a previously existing parking lot. Parking lite is better than
what would be the traditional number of parking spaces for the planned new
uses, but still, the planners of the David Brower center had plenty of time and
people like myself and others, who they approached, who suggested car-free by
contract for the new housing and office space. Then they ignored
us. The other element regarding parking they could have gone for: make
whatever parking is a holdover into "convertible parking", that is,
make it with high ceilings for eventual remodel to accommodate housing or
So in sum, the Earth Island Institute planners of this project chose to ignore
the following ecological features:
1. Car-free by contract new units and office spaces,
2. Convertible parking for the transition times,
3. More variety in building height, including a portion higher than they are
proposing in the present version, so that solar passive accessibility would be
possible (terracing toward the sun),
4. More variety in building height so that a view to the big redwood tree on
Haste that Dave Brower planted as a child would be celebrated (it's kinda odd
they completely ignored that one too - I have a small tree I offered to donate
that is from a seed from the Dave Brower tree itself; it's about two feet tall
and two 1/2 years old now),
5. Shops on the roof or terraces so that there would be rooftop accessibility
for the public.
All in all I'd hoped the Dave Brower Center would be part of an overall
movement toward the ecological city. In this it falls way short. Being
lEED certified, it makes it only a small step toward that status; to say the
least, that's been done before! Way before! We need some real progress
Setting aside the parking that's already there is something the city staff
planners will consider as rigidly as their tradition is. I believe parking
stimulates disastrous dependence on cars and oil at a time when oil is about to
peak and suddenly grow very expensive, then unavailable. But given the panic
business people feel in Berkeley about existing parking disappearing, I'd
accept replacement convertible parking with a time table for transformation of
the space to other uses tied to, say, the rising price of gasoline: as gas gets
more expensive, 25 cents, by 25 cents, more parking spaces have to be
retired. At some point people will begin catching on, even business
people with their worries about losing money on risky change. Oil
shortage change will put all of us at risk in dozens of ways, some unforeseen
and some exceedingly nasty. But then, at best, even with convertible parking,
the project would still be strictly car lite and far from car-free.
It seems to me that Dave Brower, who I knew a little and brainstormed with
periodically every couple years since I met him in 1972 at the United Nations
environmental conference in Stockholm, was extremely imaginative and hence, the
real disappointment with this project is that there is so little imagination in
it. As far as lower income housing goes - hooray! But it really should
have been car-free - and with those other ecological features.
In a word, this project is just plain too lame to be built as a celebration of
Dave Brower and his formidable contribution to conservation and ecological
consciousness in this country and around the planet. Maybe the building
can be changed. I hope so.
James Doherty, Culture Change's Bike Warrior Blogger:
TO THE BERKELEY CITY COUNCIL - and the greater Berkeley Community:
Please reconsider the submitted design of the new David Brower Center (DBC)
and postpone the Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA until the
Berkeley community has had a chance to review the plans and consider alternative
Parking for up to 120 automobiles underneath the proposed David Brower
Environmental Center (DBC) will severely exacerbate:
1. Construction costs, yet this is a center for affordable, sustainable
housing, as well as nonprofit ecology work;
2. Earthquake risks, including risk of collapse of the entire structure onto
the parked cars as happens routinely in California earthquakes, such as Loma
Prieta, Northridge, and Paso Robles;
3. Noise pollution to offices and workers and residents in the DBC;
4. Toxic fumes pollution to offices, workers and residents in the DBC;
5. Lifelong Heating, Ventilating, Air Conditioning, and Maintenance expenses
in attempting to cope with 2 & 3, above;
6. Lifelong liability and fire insurance costs, which skyrocket after each
new earthquake in California exposes the risks, including fire risk, of
having cars and gasoline tanks driving in, out, under and around the support
structures of the lower levels of such buildings; (The city of Hayward lost
its city hall to this; more recently, the city of Paso Robles lost almost
all its civic buildings to this risk.)
7. Risks of Terrorism and Saboteurs, with car bombs of various types having
already been used by anti-environmental extremists.
I. Whereas, The requirement that such parking be installed from the ground
up in an Environmental Center is a travesty of the principles of living and
working lightly and sustainably on the Planet Earth;
II. Whereas, This proposed Center is in memory and honor of David Ross
Brower, considered the Archdruid and founder of the modern environmental
movement, a man who fought roads, paving, and the impacts of automobiles for
three generations, including his opposition to the construction of the Golden Gate
III. Whereas, A design mandating cars to be driven in, out, under and around
the David Brower Center is thereby an insult to the memory of this Distinguished
Citizen of Berkeley and the Planet Earth;
IV. Whereas, The planning and design process for this environmental
parking lot has been largely closed, secretive, and poorly noticed to the
community to date, yet Berkeley wants a reputation for democracy and
openness in its planning process;
V. Whereas, The City of Berkeley has built a progressive reputation for
restricting and limiting automobiles, with innovative programs to do that as
well as to encourage bicycling and other transportation alternatives; yet
mandating automobile parking at the David Brower Center pushes in the
opposite, stale, and embarrassing direction of encouraging automobiles;
VI. Whereas, The City of Berkeley and the University of California have
begun planning for a large scale hotel/convention/museum arts district
Complex to be added to downtown Berkeley in the near future, with a better
designed, more secure and centralized parking facility to be built within a
very short distance of the David Brower Center; and
VII. Whereas, The Developer of the Library Gardens announced on February 10,
2004 that 120 parking stalls will be added to that development, effectively
replacing the 112 stalls now at the Oxford site just two blocks away from
the proposed David Brower Center,
I respectfully suggest a public review and revision of the David Brower
Center Parking mandate, given the changes in century, city administration,
and overall planning for downtown that have taken place since the Shirley
Dean era mandatory parking preservation ordinance was passed.
One of David Browers favorite maxims was drawn from Walt Kelleys Pogo
cartoon strip: WE HAVE MET THE ENEMY AND HE IS US.
This seems utterly applicable to the situation with the proposed dumb design
of Berkeleys DAVID BROWER CENTER, with respect to the ridiculous mandate of
bulldozing parking for 120 private commuter cars underneath the center.
To do so would insult and squander one of Berkeleys greatest resources, the
memory and legacy of its perhaps most famous, globally renowned and
respected citizens, David Ross Brower.
With approximately 2,000 new car parking stalls already in early stages of
planning for the vicinity of Downtown Berkeley/UCB, the current plan of cars
underneath and surrounding on all four sides the car-free affordable
housing proposed at the David Brower Center, is absurd on its face.
Attempting to bulldoze an ultra-expensive underground cement parking garage
for commuters underneath this site adjacent to the Berkeley BART station is
unaffordable, unwise, undoable, insulting, unnecessary, expensive,
polluting, obsolete, ugly, noisy, dangerous. This plan will produce only
the result of encouraging cars and surrounding the site with a gridlocked
mess by the year 2010 a year this complicated, controversial, impractical
center might actually get around to being built by.
It is a 1980s era BONFIRE OF THE VANITIES type plan that will only delay
and deadlock the planning, and it is important to note Berkeley, like the
rest of the world, has actually crossed over the turn of the spigot, er turn
of the century, and it is no longer 1980 with dollar a gallon gasoline.
With environmental heavies like Randy Hayes, and many other fabulous and
wonderful individuals lining up to beg the Berkeley City Council to just do
it, the phrase from Walt Kelleys POGO that Brower loved to recite so much,
seems to be in full force on this project:
WE HAVE MET THE ENEMY AND HE IS US!
I realize people will propose idiotic compromises in the name of getting this done,
such as mandating the only cars to be parked under the center should be green
cars like Buy-Ol Diesel and Hype-for-Cars; but in honor of the Arch Druid,
I vehemently oppose such absurd compromises in honor of a man who regretted
compromising and in his later years became dead set against killing the cause
and the planet, just more slowly, with such compromises.
And in fact, in honor of the man who so much regretted being reasonable
with such compromises, I am proposing closure of the easternmost blocks of
Kittredge and Allston, just ONE lousy block on each side of this site being
closed to any traffic except that of existing uses, which do not mandate
that these blocks accommodate through traffic, since each street ALREADY
ENDS at Oxford Way. This would cost the city yet another 50 or so parallel
parking spots, but thats a drop in the bucket with 2,000 more new parking
stalls proposed nearby.
And the joy of creating Berkelelys first CAR FREE ZONE where citizens could
WALK AND ROLL without fear of being turned into roadkill, would give
Berkeley the cutting edge it SAYS it wants in such arenas as Street
Reclaiming and Strawberry Creek Daylighting.
YES, AND an automated bike locker could be added to the site, see
www.fujitech.com/2ringpark . Doing so would create a major tourist
attraction for Berkeley as this sophisticated automated elevator driven
bicycle/scooter secure storage system would be the first of its kind in the
US, if Berkeley acts quickly; they have already been built in Fuji, Japan
and elsewhere overseas. Why has this option been ignored? Will it take a
lawsuit to get the city to consider it?
Will it take a lawsuit to get anyone (besides savvy councilmember Wozniak)
to notice or care that the current plans for the site violate Berkeleys own
general plan, in addition to violating the Strawberry Creek Conservation,
Daylighting, and Protection ordinance?
James G. Doherty
May 22, 2004