Public Comment

Harold Way: Time for Our Elected Officials to Take Another Look

Christopher Adams
Thursday January 16, 2020 - 09:02:00 PM

The current developer (i.e., the most recent owner of the development rights) of the 18-story project at 2211 Harold Way may be able to get yet another administrative extension to the planning approval to go forward with this project by January 20. The project was brought before the Landmarks Preservation Commission in December 2019, but the LPC did not take any action because it was incomplete. At that time a newly hired architect presented some cosmetic changes to the building facades that allegedly made it more in keeping with historic buildings in downtown. His presentation was not convincing for many reasons, not least because he failed to show any of the adjacent landmarked buildings in his drawings. But the bigger issues, which were brought up in public comments, had nothing to do with things that the LPC has control over.

It appears that the developer now wants to reduce the number of movie theaters promised at the time of approval from ten to six and to make other changes to the program. Downtown Berkeley is thriving, especially in the evening, with many new restaurants and bars. It was even hopping when I went downtown for dinner with my family right after Christmas when the University was completely closed. This activity certainly benefits from the number of cinema choices in downtown. I don’t know of anywhere else where this synergy is so apparent, except maybe in the Westwood area adjacent to UCLA. Reducing the number of movie theaters by 40% is a significant change that directly affects the benefits that this project was promised to bring to the city. This is sufficient reason to bring this project back for further public review. 

I don’t know whether our elected city council has the power to step in at this point in the administrative process, but if they do, it should be done. At the least the Zoning Adjustments Board should be asked to review the project again, and its Design Review Committee, and possibly the Landmarks Preservation Commission, should weigh in as well. Too much time has passed, too much is at stake, to allow these changes to slip past without a second look. 

 


Christopher Adams is a member of the Landmarks Preservation Commission, but these comments represent his personal views, not those of the LPC.