<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<oembed>
	<type>rich</type>
	<version>1.0</version>
	<provider_name>Action Network</provider_name>
	<provider_url>https://actionnetwork.org</provider_url>
	
	<html>&amp;lt;link href=&amp;#39;https://actionnetwork.org/css/style-embed-v3.css&amp;#39; rel=&amp;#39;stylesheet&amp;#39; type=&amp;#39;text/css&amp;#39; /&amp;gt;&amp;lt;script src=&amp;#39;https://actionnetwork.org/widgets/v6/letter/no-burdensome-adu-restrictions-in-berkeley?format=js&amp;amp;source=widget&amp;#39;&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/script&amp;gt;&amp;lt;div id=&amp;#39;can-letter-area-no-burdensome-adu-restrictions-in-berkeley&amp;#39; style=&amp;#39;width: 100%&amp;#39;&amp;gt;&amp;lt;!-- this div is the target for our HTML insertion --&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/div&amp;gt;</html>
	<author_name>East Bay YIMBY</author_name>
	<author_url>https://actionnetwork.org/groups/yimbyeastbay</author_url>
	<title>No burdensome ADU restrictions in Berkeley</title>
	<thumbnail_url>https://actionnetwork.org//images/generic_facebook.jpg</thumbnail_url>
	<description>More ADU restrictions have been proposed for the Berkeley hills, including an off-street parking requirement – which may even violate state law! The proposal will be heard at Berkeley City Council tomorrow as item #17 on the agenda, which is the first item on the action calendar. Sorry for the lack of warning, but we need to speak up against these anti-housing changes! One might ask, Are any of these changes about fire safety? Well, if the Berkeley hills truly faced such a fire risk, why is it still legal to build new single-family homes there or to expand existing residences? Thankfully, Councilmember Rashi Kesarwani has put forward a supplemental that will fix the issues in the original proposal. Let&#x27;s let city council know that we want Rashi&#x27;s pro-housing supplemental, not the original, restrictive proposal.</description>
	<url>https://actionnetwork.org/letters/no-burdensome-adu-restrictions-in-berkeley</url>
</oembed>