Page One

Not many attended the studio Open House held recently (May 8) by the University’s “New Century Plan” staff. In fact, in the hour I was there, only one other non-staff person was present. 

Exhibited on the wall were architectural renderings of low-rise structures not more than four stories high, depicting interestingly articulated buildings for student housing. All other structures shown were said to be non-residential, multi-story buildings that needed retrofitting. 

When questioning the staff as to whether the University was pressuring Berkeley planners to increase density and scale in the south of campus area, the answer was denial, saying that it was the city’s domain. No new residential structures were portrayed over four stories in the exhibit. One staff member said that students didn’t want to live above four stories. 

It was perhaps wishful thinking that “the big U” had come to their senses and had decided not to endanger hundreds of more students by housing them in dense, high-rises adjacent to the Hayward fault. 

Some days following the Open Studio event, I closely questioned the exhibit’s presentation, and learned that only Phase One (the low-rise structures) was shown. Not on exhibit was Phase Two, consisting of structures up to seven stories high intermingled with existing high-rise dorms. I was not told about these seven-story residences since they were not considered high-rises because they were lower than the nine-floor dorms on the same site. “The big U” has been known to use deceptive techniques when pursuing their development goals... and the list is long! 

In another obvious omission, the University planners had ignored their own recent, seismic warnings about the earthquake fault running through the campus. In fact, neither the Hayward Fault nor the Alquist-Priolo Zone was shown on a map in the exhibit (or in the Draft Underhill Environmental Impact Report). When this significant fact was brought to their attention, the Public Relations staff dutifully drew in the location of the fault. The Underhill EIR Draft had been written before the newest seismic information was published forecasting a disastrous impact on the campus and its surrounding community. 

These situations make it all the more important that the City of Berkeley’s maximum building height not be increased, as some are urging in the south of campus area. (A proposal to regulate building height was submitted to the Planning Commission on May l0 spelling out the existing height limits for each part of the city.) 

Future planning could be sorted out more successfully if the commissioners support at least a five-year moratorium on exceeding current zoning heights. There are real problems to incorporating 4,000 new Cal students, their faculty and staff not to mention retrofitting 640 existing apartment buildings because of weak first stories likely to collapse in the next quake. 

Martha Nicoloff is a former member of the Planning Commission and was co-author of the Neighborhood