socaliganbear;842248685 said:

---

Center street is going to be pedestrian only.

---

There hasn't been any indication from the city that closing the street to pedestrians only is a done deal?

HoopDreams;842248687 said:

---

...if Berkeley was smart, they'd take advantage of the trend for young professionals and engineers wanting to live in SF, but not being able to afford it. They are therefore moving to north Oakland and other areas (e.g. Rockridge)

Downtown Berkeley could be developed as a cool place to live and hang out. Certainly has more cool vibe potential than places like Hayward or Richmond, etc.

---

Amen! Berkeley has loads of potential for young professionals. But realizing that potential takes vision and forward thinking leadership on the part of the political leadership of the city, qualities the incumbents sorely lack.

HoopDreams;842248687 said:

---

Downtown Berkeley could be developed as a cool place to live and hang out for rich assistant football coaches. Certainly has more cool vibe potential than places like Hayward or Richmond, etc.

---

Golden One;842248699 said:

---

Amen! Berkeley has loads of potential for young professionals. But realizing that potential takes vision and forward thinking leadership on the part of the political leadership of the city, qualities the incumbents sorely lack.

---

One floor of the proposed hotel will be reserved for the university for start-ups and incubators for emerging companies, Kabam!

Maybe because it's not on City property. Maybe better police work at night, I don't know. Same reason there is no graffiti on campus, at least not nearly as much.

OneTopOneChickenApple;842248672 said:

---

I agree about that. The ground floor is key. If it is just a bar and a hotel lobby, that would stink.
As far as sunlight, even the north side of buildings get some light. What might happen is some wind being funneled down to street level.

---

....though from way back there.
You and Socaligan have made some good comments. The general mass does seem to integrate well enough on Center and the ground floor components will enhance street life.
As in so much commercial development, the pragmatics of the zoning envelope and accommodation of a sufficiently cash flow rich program have resulted in a building that is neither vertical nor horizontal. My problem with this is that the facade is trying resolve these issues by employing super scaled vertical and horizontal extrusions, sectioning off parts seemingly arbitrarily. The result is an odd and confusing decorative form of modernism. Well anyway, if they get the planning right, at least the streets will benefit.

MiZery;842248586 said:

---

I forget, what is there right now?

---

Forget the bank..........Arnell's Pizza

OneTopOneChickenApple;842248645 said:

---

I'm fine with a hotel and museum there but that looks way out of scale. Successful downtowns don't have to be made up of high-rises.

---

You are correct sir!

Berkeley needs more building density, badly. It would increase housing supply and foot traffic along the main urban arteries, whose potential has been neglected for decades. University Ave, Shattuck south of downtown (esp. around Ashby), south Telegraph all have a lot of suburban-style lowrise commercial buildings or unassuming low-rise residentials which could be converted to highrise housing with commercial-oriented ground floors. Unfortunately a lot of residents are too nimbyish for this and most city politicians will reflect that attitude.

Cal88;842248828 said:

---

Berkeley needs more building density, badly. It would increase housing supply and foot traffic along the main urban arteries, whose potential has been neglected for decades. University Ave, Shattuck south of downtown (esp. around Ashby), south Telegraph all have a lot of suburban-style lowrise commercial buildings or unassuming low-rise residentials which could be converted to highrise housing with commercial-oriented ground floors. Unfortunately a lot of residents are too nimbyish for this and most city politicians will reflect that attitude.

---

I guess I've never read the meaning of the term NIMBY. Is it an acronym for Not In My BackYard?


Nevermind, I just Googled NIMBY. I got it right.

Golden One;842248584 said:

---

That would be a great addition to downtown Berkeley! But it's not approved yet, and Berkeley being Berkeley, it will probably end up being a two-story structure with 25 rooms and space for the homeless people of People's Park to "socialize" in a weather-protected environment. And it will, naturally, have no parking, but it will have space for 50 bicycles.

---

This. But perhaps not, because I think the COB is starting to realize that it needs the sales tax revenue.

jy1988;842248644 said:

---

How would you feel if someone decided to put a 20 story building on Bancroft high enough to block the view of the Bay from many parts of Memorial Stadium? Not saying I am for or against the hotel downtown, but you can see how some might be upset at ruining any balance between existing structures/skyline and new small towers going up.

---

The city of Berkeley needs revenue. I prefer they get it from hotel revenue instead hiking parking and traffic tickets to $1,000. Have you recently had a parking ticket? It is getting very pricey.

oskirules;842248668 said:

---

The view looking west on Center St. The building will bring more energy on the north side of Center since there's hardly any pedestrian traffic on that side.

---

I'm for anything that blocks the view of the disgusting wells fargo and power bar buildings. This is a prime location near a major public transit stop. Berkeley needs high density there. Just as long as the architects of the new hotel go with something that will be more timeless and not some of these fads that do not age well, I think it will be a great addition.

Bears2thDoc;842248746 said:

---

Forget the bank..........Arnell's Pizza

---

That's what I was thinking as well. Will Arinell's still be there post-construction? I used to grab a slice from there while waiting for the night safety shuttle.

OneTopOneChickenApple;842248645 said:

---

I'm fine with a hotel and museum there but that looks way out of scale.

---

I'm not suggesting that downtown shouldn't be updated to include mixed-use high-rise complexes, but from the pictures, it looks like the neighboring buildings will still be one-story or two-story complexes. As a result, the new hotel may stick out a bit.*

*Like a middle finger? :p

01Bear;842249253 said:

---

That's what I was thinking as well. Will Arinell's still be there post-construction? I used to grab a slice from there while waiting for the night safety shuttle.

---

This is a photo of the Arinell building.





This is a photo of the same building in 1923.

(It was actually built in 1909.)
http://www.berkeleyplaques.org/index.php?page=chase-building


You think the city of Berkeley is going to allow the destruction of a 105-year-old building for some brand new hotels? Nope, it's not part of the project.



Oh, and see that building up the street? That's still standing, too.

There used to be a tall-ish building at that location back in the day.

okaydo;842249266 said:

---

This is a photo of the Arinell building.





This is a photo of the same building in 1923.

(It was actually built in 1909.)
http://www.berkeleyplaques.org/index.php?page=chase-building


You think the city of Berkeley is going to allow the destruction of a 105-year-old building for some brand new hotels? Nope, it's not part of the project.



Oh, and see that building up the street? That's still standing, too.

---

Thanks for the research and photos Okaydo!

I never realized that the Arinell building was so tall--I guess I just ignored everything aside from the actual pizza parlor.

As for Saigon Express , I think I stopped by there once or twice--but the food was pretty unremarkable (I really don't remember what I ate there). But IMHO, the building is gorgeous on the outside (I have no idea how it looks on the inside).

jy1988;842248644 said:

---

How would you feel if someone decided to put a 20 story building on Bancroft high enough to block the view of the Bay from many parts of Memorial Stadium? Not saying I am for or against the hotel downtown, but you can see how some might be upset at ruining any balance between existing structures/skyline and new small towers going up.

---

OneTopOneChickenApple;842248645 said:

---

I'm fine with a hotel and museum there but that looks way out of scale. Successful downtowns don't have to be made up of high-rises.

---

I am in support of development, but not out of control development and question whether high rises and the ensuring density improve quality of life. Aesthetically, John Galen Howard's plan was for the campus to have vistas with unobstructed views of the Bay from the base of the Campanile, Memorial Glade, Hearst Mining Circle, and the hillside (between a planned observatory at the top and a planned auditorium that was to be built near the Hearst Greek Theater). George Kelham continued this concept when he built I-House at the intersection of Piedmont and Bancroft.

16 stories is out of scale compared with neighboring buildings and the campus. When you look toward the campus from San Francisco, you can spot the Campanile but also hideous Evans Hall (which doesn't detract from the Campanile as much since they gave Evans a paint job to change the color from white to blue green). It appears this hotel will have an even larger footprint than Evans while being almost twice as tall (and being in the foreground when looking toward the campus), and thus may dominate the view.

Great buildings with great details.

southseasbear;842249347 said:

---

I am in support of development, but not out of control development and question whether high rises and the ensuring density improve quality of life. Aesthetically, John Galen Howard's plan was for the campus to have vistas with unobstructed views of the Bay from the base of the Campanile, Memorial Glade, Hearst Mining Circle, and the hillside (between a planned observatory at the top and a planned auditorium that was to be built near the Hearst Greek Theater). George Kelham continued this concept when he built I-House at the intersection of Piedmont and Bancroft.

16 stories is out of scale compared with neighboring buildings and the campus. When you look toward the campus from San Francisco, you can spot the Campanile but also hideous Evans Hall (which doesn't detract from the Campanile as much since they gave Evans a paint job to change the color from white to blue green). It appears this hotel will have an even larger footprint than Evans while being almost twice as tall (and being in the foreground when looking toward the campus), and thus may dominate the view.

---

And I'd rather be conservative in building something as it's better to have a sold-out facility than continuous vacancies. We over-built Haas Pavilion, Mt Davis in Oakland speaks for itself, and I'm glad CMS reduced seating capacity.

That won't be an issue, there is a severe shortage of hotel rooms near campus, that's why average to crap hotels in the area are way overpriced. The campus community needs more hotel space, yearround. The football team for instance could use this instead of the Marina or Claremont.

The western views from campus are not going to be obstructed, most of the buildings with western views on campus being well east of Center street, which itself is obscured from view by the Eucalyptus in the Grove.

southseasbear;842249347 said:

---

16 stories is out of scale compared with neighboring buildings and the campus. When you look toward the campus from San Francisco, you can spot the Campanile but also hideous Evans Hall (which doesn't detract from the Campanile as much since they gave Evans a paint job to change the color from white to blue green). It appears this hotel will have an even larger footprint than Evans while being almost twice as tall (and being in the foreground when looking toward the campus), and thus may dominate the view.

---

I think it was really stupid to spend a lot of money painting Evans. The more time passes from the 1970s, the more people are starting to re-evaluate and appreciate the much-maligned Brutalist architectural style, most of which was specifically designed with raw grey concrete exteriors. It would be like covering a nice vintage wood panelling with faux marble paint.


I'm really pissed at the new Berkeley museum plans, which were saddled by the requirement to preserve that very pedestrian non-descript 1930s buiding on Oxford. We could have had something a lot more interesting in that space if it weren't for that. This is a typical example of preservationism going too far.