This is nuts that Cal has to resort to this. But finally.....hopefully....we'll start to see some movement on the construction of new student housing.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/uc-berkeley-erects-massive-barricade-of-160-shipping-containers-around-people-s-park/ar-AA1mt0tH?cvid=72db8fdf86e84a87b271d0e57ff41ae9&ocid=winp2fptaskbarhoverent&ei=8&sc=shoreline

RighteousGoldenBear said:

---

This is nuts that Cal has to resort to this. But finally.....hopefully....we'll start to see some movement on the construction of new student housing.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/uc-berkeley-erects-massive-barricade-of-160-shipping-containers-around-people-s-park/ar-AA1mt0tH?cvid=72db8fdf86e84a87b271d0e57ff41ae9&ocid=winp2fptaskbarhoverent&ei=8&sc=shoreline

---

And people wonder why construction costs in California are so high, it's because dip****s have too much power to interfere.

I graduated in '73 and lived one block away from People's Park. It was a mess then and I avoided it if possible. In a cliched Berkeley way it's 50 years later and some things never change. Have the tree-sitters moved in?

Hard to believe that anyone could refer to that dump as "an attractive green space".

This is similar but also a bit different than the Oak Grove.

The Oak Grove was beautiful. It was a lovely place to walk when traveling North-South through campus. Grabbing a coffee at international house or Strada and then walking through the oak grove on the way to class at any building on the East side of campus was a wonderful and peaceful break from the frantic craziness of Sproul Plaza.

Yes, it needed to be destroyed to make room for the SAHPC. But that doesn't mean it was beautiful and lovely while it lasted.

People's Park is neither beautiful nor lovely. But what it lacks in those categories it makes up for in history and present-day danger.

Cal Strong played hoops at People's Park once before he got his RSF card. It was okay.

If the beauty of the Oak Grove wasn't enough to save it, the history and knife crime at People's Park really shouldn't be enough to save it.

That being said, it did add something to the Berkeley experience. That something wasn't particularly good. But it added a sort of grit to an already gritty sink or swim undergrad experience. Cal Strong will miss it a little, but is ultimately glad it is going away.

Cal Strong's biggest complaint is that we are getting so few dorm rooms out of such a large space. Given that the neighborhood associations, environmentalists, and CoB decided to go to war on such a modest design, Cal Strong would have preferred if Chancellor Christ went all in and fought fire with fire.

"You are going to make our lives miserable for 1,100 dorm beds, a memorial to PP and housing for the homeless?"

"Okay, then we are scrapping that plan. No housing for the homeless. And no green area. Instead we are building a 12,000 bed dorm there."

With the candlelight vigils and protests you would think they were opposing a genocide instead of blocking student housing on land the University owns.

bear2034 said:

---

Live updates: Protesters gather at People’s Park to reject wall of shipping containers https://t.co/2cuiROBpeE

— Berkeleyside (@berkeleyside) January 4, 2024

They've already started protesting.

---

They truly have nothing better to do.

I love protesting building homes for the homeless as a protest against homelessness.

Cal Strong! said:

---

Cal Strong's biggest complaint is that we are getting so few dorm rooms out of such a large space. Given that the neighborhood associations, environmentalists, and CoB decided to go to war on such a modest design, Cal Strong would have preferred if Chancellor Christ went all in and fought fire with fire.

"You are going to make our lives miserable for 1,100 dorm beds, a memorial to PP and housing for the homeless?"

"Okay, then we are scrapping that plan. No housing for the homeless. And no green area. Instead we are building a 12,000 bed dorm there."

---

Amen! The need for additional student housing is acute, and the available space for additional housing on or close to the campus is virtually non-existent. The university should have converted every square foot of people's park to student housing.

Golden One said:

---

Cal Strong! said:

---

Cal Strong's biggest complaint is that we are getting so few dorm rooms out of such a large space. Given that the neighborhood associations, environmentalists, and CoB decided to go to war on such a modest design, Cal Strong would have preferred if Chancellor Christ went all in and fought fire with fire.

"You are going to make our lives miserable for 1,100 dorm beds, a memorial to PP and housing for the homeless?"

"Okay, then we are scrapping that plan. No housing for the homeless. And no green area. Instead we are building a 12,000 bed dorm there."

---

Amen! The need for additional student housing is acute, and the available space for additional housing on or close to the campus is virtually non-existent. The university should have converted every square foot of people's park to student housing.

---

For decades, chancellor after chancellor has made the same mistake on this issue: you don't tiptoe into a street fight.

calumnus said:

---

The University should swap the land for a parcel controlled by the City. Let the City maintain it as a park and memorial. Then the University can build student housing somewhere less controversial.

---

Great outside the box thinking there, but is there such a city lot close to campus? Would the neighbors of that lot agree to that?

golden sloth said:

---

RighteousGoldenBear said:

---

This is nuts that Cal has to resort to this. But finally.....hopefully....we'll start to see some movement on the construction of new student housing.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/uc-berkeley-erects-massive-barricade-of-160-shipping-containers-around-people-s-park/ar-AA1mt0tH?cvid=72db8fdf86e84a87b271d0e57ff41ae9&ocid=winp2fptaskbarhoverent&ei=8&sc=shoreline

---

And people wonder why construction costs in California are so high, it's because dip****s have too much power to interfere.

---

+1,000,000 about building in CA.

bear2034 said:

---

Cal Strong! said:

---

For decades, chancellor after chancellor has made the same mistake on this issue: you don't tiptoe into a street fight.

---

Maybe Christ was too busy thinking about shipping containers to pay attention to our athletic programs.

---

In all fairness, that IS what she should have been focused on and is far more important to the long term health of the university than our athletic departments.

Our AD is the one who should have been paying attention to our athletic programs. The incompetence of our AD, and the decision to extend them was the problem.

For every tree removed in the stadium project, three new trees were planted. Check out the area around Goldman Plaza next time you visit Memorial Stadium. That was in the original plans for the stadium. The Oaks that were removed were planted by UC as part of the original landscaping of the stadium when it was first built. I remember reading at the time that there are 800 Oak trees on the UC Berkeley campus.

Fighting "the man" no matter what is a way of life for many.

GoCal80 said:

---

For every tree removed in the stadium project, three new trees were planted. Check out the area around Goldman Plaza next time you visit Memorial Stadium. That was in the original plans for the stadium. The Oaks that were removed were planted by UC as part of the original landscaping of the stadium when it was first built. I remember reading at the time that there are 800 Oak trees on the UC Berkeley campus.

---

Cal Strong remember this, GoCal80. He lives overseas now and has not been able to visit the new trees in Goldman Plaza. Next time you are there, maybe GoCal80 can send Cal Strong a photo?

But Cal Strong has to think they aren't anywhere near as grand as those in the old Oak Grove. Of course it started as a landscaping project. But it was a very old landscaping project and a beautiful place to walk in an otherwise hectic urban campus.

Cal Strong glad the SAHPC was built and understands the need to chop down the Oak Grove. But that doesn't mean we didn't lose something lovely and beautiful.

The same cannot be said about Peoples Park. It is a monument to free speech, homelessness, and knife crime. And only one of those things is worthy of memorializing.

calumnus said:

---

The University should swap the land for a parcel controlled by the City. Let the City maintain it as a park and memorial. Then the University can build student housing somewhere less controversial.

---

Don't negotiate with terrorists!

calumnus said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

The University should swap the land for a parcel controlled by the City. Let the City maintain it as a park and memorial. Then the University can build student housing somewhere less controversial.

---

Great outside the box thinking there, but is there such a city lot close to campus? Would the neighbors of that lot agree to that?

---

Check out this list:
https://berkeley.municipal.codes/BMC/PropertyInventory

Plenty of City owned vacant lots, parking lots etc around campus. Even retail and office buildings. Just swap it for a win-win.

---

Bless your heart.

Which of those vacant city lots: (i) accommodates 1100 students; (ii) provides reasonably equivalent proximity to the Cal campus; and, most importantly, (iii) could be developed without NIMBY interference?

You're also ignoring: (i) that if Cal switches to a new project, it needs to start over with its EIR, CEQA and other processing which takes years and is incredibly expensive; and (ii) I highly doubt the City wants to assume financial and legal responsibility for People's Park - it is just an expense with no upside

The reality is that given the shortage of housing (student and non-student ), to the extent possible, city owned vacant lots should be developed in addition to, and not in lieu of, People Park.

bear2034 said:

---

Cal Strong! said:

---

For decades, chancellor after chancellor has made the same mistake on this issue: you don't tiptoe into a street fight.

---

Maybe Christ was too busy thinking about shipping containers to pay attention to our athletic programs.

---

Or she was focused on raising 7 billion for the university? Or she was focused on both but isn't a god who can bend every aspect of the universe to her will? Don't make stupid comments. Unless you want to be called out for said dumbass comments.

If you had not been by it lately, it was a drug-infested, crime-infested trash heap that you would not want your kids to go near. Hard to believe that anyone would see historical value in that,

calumnus said:

---

The University should swap the land for a parcel controlled by the City. Let the City maintain it as a park and memorial. Then the University can build student housing somewhere less controversial.

---

Disagree. It isn't just about housing. The land has been a blight on the community for 50 years and that needed to end decades ago. We can pretend that we give it to the City and it is then their problem, but doing so will leave it a blight in perpetuity and that impacts our student community.

90% + of the people that make a stink about this have zero understanding of the actual history of People's Park. Building student housing on it is a win/win. It will wipe out the issue, make the neighborhood a better place, and add much needed student housing. Once built, you might get a protest when they open it and then no one will care anymore. This should have been done long ago except that previous chancellors preferred to pass the problem on then deal with it.

There is nothing special about the plot of land that merits more than a small monument and a stop on a Berkeley City walking tour if such a thing exists. Frankly, the People's Park protest wasn't even that important to all the liberal causes of the day and has been greatly exaggerated. In any case, no one was protesting for drug infested, crime ridden blight. It was more the opposite really. I think half a century is long enough.