City of Berkeley Downto W N Area Plan

City of Berkeley Downtown Area Plan

Historic Resource Evaluation 5 November 2008

prepared for Lamphier-Gregory Urban Planning & Environmental Analysis Oakland, CA

prepared by Architectural Resources Group Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc. San Francisco, CA

Historic Resources Evaluation City of Berkeley, Downtown Area Plan 5 November 2008

I. OVERVIEW/INTRODUCTION At the request of Lamphier‐Gregory, Architectural Resources Group (ARG) has prepared this historic resource evaluation of the Draft Berkeley Downtown Area Plan. The Downtown Area Plan (DAP) is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because it is a discretionary project that may impact potential historic resources in the plan area. Public Resource Code Section 21084.1 states “a project that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment.” CEQA defines substantial adverse change in the significance of a resource as the physical demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of the resource or its immediate surroundings such that the significance of the resource is materially impaired (CEQA Guidelines 15064.5(b)). The significance of a historic resource is considered to be materially impaired when a project demolishes, or materially alters in an adverse manner, those characteristics that convey its historic significance and/or account for its inclusion on a historic resource list.

ARG’s review is based on the Downtown Area Plan (DAP) as adopted by the Downtown Area Plan Advisory Committee (DAPAC), a memorandum from the Berkeley Planning & Development on “DAP Height and Bulk Assumptions” dated 8 September 2008, which updated Policy LU‐1.4.1— LU‐1.4.3 and the following maps or graphics:

• EIR Building Height Assumptions (DRAFT), no date.

• Potential Streetscapes & Open Space Network, no date.

• Historic Resources and Potential Development Opportunity Sites, revised 24 April 2008.

The assessment of impact of the DAP on archaeological resources was not part of the scope of this report.

METHODOLOGY ARG evaluated the DAP which was adopted by the Downtown Area Plan Advisory Committee (DAPAC) at the end of November 2007. ARG also reviewed the DAP Appendices “Recommendations on ‘City Interests in University Properties’” and “Recommendations on Center Street.”

In order to evaluate the impact of the DAP on historic resources, the resources first need to be identified. Although there have been numerous historic resource survey efforts that have encompassed parts of Downtown Berkeley, none comprehensively surveyed the area covered by the current DAP. In preparation for the DAP, at the request of Lamphier‐Gregory, in 2006 and 2007 ARG conducted a reconnaissance survey of and prepared a historic context statement for the Downtown area. At the request of the LPC‐DAPAC Subcommittee, in lieu of California Department of Parks and Recreation 523 (DPR) forms as part of an intensive‐level survey, efforts were directed toward the creation of a reconnaissance survey list incorporating a more extensive set of attributes and conditions than had initially been conceived. As part of the evaluation, ARG

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.

Historic Resources Evaluation City of Berkeley, Downtown Area Plan 5 November 2008 2

gave a preliminary evaluation of the integrity of the resources (high, good, fair, or poor), and verified assessor’s estimated year of construction. An intensive level survey was not conducted, and therefore evaluations of individual significance or eligibility were not made. ARG identified 178 properties that were over 45 years of age, retained a high, good, or fair level of integrity, and had not been documented in past surveys.

For the purposes of this report, historic resources will be those noted on the “Historic Resources and Potential Development Opportunity Sites” map included in the “Historic Preservation & Urban Design” chapter and any of the 178 properties identified by ARG as potential resources needing further evaluation. It is unlikely that all of these 178 properties would be historic resources per CEQA , however, without completing an intensive‐level survey, the list cannot be narrowed. For more information on past survey efforts as well as ARG’s 2007 Berkeley Downtown Survey, see “IV. Historic Resources.”

II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION For the Project Description, see Draft Environmental Impact Report, Chapter 3: Project Description of the Draft Environmental Impact Report.

III. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND Located within Alameda County, California, the development of the City of Berkeley was heavily influenced by East Bay transportation routes and the establishment of the University of California, Berkeley. The principal commercial center for Berkeley began to take shape in 1876 when Francis Kittredge Shattuck and J. L. Barker persuaded the stockholders of the Central Pacific Railroad (later Southern Pacific) to run a spur line through Shattuck’s property. Rail access provided the impetus for new commercial growth in what became Downtown Berkeley. Further, the relocation of the University to lands just east of downtown in 1873 also provided opportunity for commercial growth to support the University community. When the Town of Berkeley was incorporated in 1878, Shattuck Avenue was already established as the city’s “Main Street.” By the 1890s a fully operational rail line with steam trains ran along Shattuck Avenue terminating at what is now Berkeley Square and Shattuck Square. Additional commercial centers established during Berkeley’s early history were West Berkeley (Ocean View), North Berkeley (Berryman’s) and the Telegraph Avenue area, south of the University of California campus. Others which came later were the Elmwood area along College near Ashby, San Pablo Avenue, South Berkeley (formerly the Lorin District), and Thousand Oaks along Solano Avenue.

The 1906 Earthquake resulted in an influx of new residents to Berkeley, and businesses in the downtown quickly began to accommodate the expanded population. Downtown Berkeley became a bustling business, commercial, and light industrial center in the 1920s and continued to grow and expand into the 1940s. As with many commercial downtowns in California, post‐ World War II suburban expansion resulted in the creation of new residential and commercial areas away from the historic commercial core.

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.

Historic Resources Evaluation City of Berkeley, Downtown Area Plan 5 November 2008 3

Today, Berkeley’s commercial downtown is eclectic, with numerous businesses, government agencies, and educational institutions reflective of Berkeley’s wealth of ethnic diversity established after World War II. Close proximity to the University of California, Berkeley campus and access to public transportation has enabled Berkeley to expand, grow and thrive. Throughout the downtown there is a mix of older commercial buildings, post‐war development and more recent modern additions to the commercial core. The historic resources present in downtown reflect a wide range of themes and historic contexts including: residential and commercial development; civic, government and educational institutions; transportation; recreation; and cultural groups.

For a more detailed history of Berkeley’s Downtown, see the Context Statements in Downtown Berkeley Historic Resources Reconnaissance Survey report by ARG dated August 2007.

IV. HISTORIC RESOURCES LISTED PROPERTIES There are many resources that relate to the identified historic contexts associated with Downtown Berkeley. Within the survey area there are 16 resources currently listed on the National Register. These same 16 resources are listed on the California Register; National Register‐listed resources are automatically entered into the California Register (California Code of Regulations Title 14, Chapter 11.5, Section 4851.3). There are 76 resources designated as Berkeley Landmarks and 2 resources designated as Berkeley Structures of Merit. There is 1 historic district present: the Downtown Berkeley Civic Center District (local and National Register designated). There are 66 resources that are on the State Historic Resources Inventory.

PREVIOUS SURVEYS CONSULTED There have been numerous historic resource survey efforts that have encompassed parts of Downtown Berkeley. While there is general agreement across previous surveys, many inconsistencies exist, and none comprehensively surveyed the area covered by the current DAP boundaries. Previous surveys include:

• 1978 State Historic Resources Inventory (SHRI)

• 1987 Berkeley Architectural Heritage Association (BAHA) Survey

• 1990 Downtown Plan with BAHA Contributing and Significant buildings identified

• 1990 Downtown Plan and EIR

• State Historic Preservation Office Cultural Heritage Resource Information System Historic Property Data File for Alameda County, City of Berkeley – printed by State on June 16, 2006

• City of Berkeley Staff Survey ‐ Preliminary staff survey in early efforts for the 2006 Downtown Plan revision

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.

Historic Resources Evaluation City of Berkeley, Downtown Area Plan 5 November 2008 4

• AC Transit Survey (2006) ‐ AC Transit environmental review for the Rapid Transit project

2007 RECONNAISSANCE SURVEY In preparation for the DAP, in 2006 and 2007 ARG conducted a reconnaissance survey of the Downtown area and prepared a historic context statement. A Council‐appointed subcommittee provided guidance to the survey effort and the types of mapped analysis that might inform the Downtown Area Plan Advisory Committee’s (DAPAC’s) policy discussions. ARG and City staff worked closely with subcommittee members and interested citizens to include and verify available information to the extent made possible by available resources. The Subcommittee included members of both DAPAC and the Landmarks Preservation Commission (LPC).

At the request of the LPC‐DAPAC Subcommittee, efforts were directed toward the creation of a reconnaissance survey list incorporating a more extensive set of attributes and conditions than had initially been conceived. As a result, an intensive‐level survey was not conducted. No State of California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) forms were completed for this project.

ARG staff members conducted the fieldwork for the reconnaissance survey during August 2006. This included walking the entire survey area and photographing all potential historic resources. The survey team focused on buildings and resources that appeared to be 45 years in age or older.

A matrix of survey information was developed as the primary work product for the reconnaissance survey. Over 500 properties/structures within the plan area were evaluated with an additional 100 evaluated along the plan area’s edges. Generally, as the survey team was undertaking the reconnaissance survey, the criteria of the National Register, the California Register and the City of Berkeley Landmarks Preservation Ordinance were consulted. However, as this survey was only a reconnaissance‐level survey, no formal determinations of eligibility under any of these criteria were made. The survey did include a preliminary assessment of integrity, and identified resources that ARG recommended for further documentation and evaluation using the State of California DPR survey forms.1

More intensive survey efforts should be undertaken to gain a more detailed understanding of some of the potential individual historic resources and historic districts present in Downtown Berkeley. The criteria of the National and California Registers and the City of Berkeley Landmarks Preservation Ordinance should be applied during intensive documentation using the State of California DPR survey forms.

1 A revised preservation ordinance for Berkeley is on the ballot in November 2008. If the ordinance is not passed, the identifiecation of historic resources within the DAP will need to be reevaluated.

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.

Historic Resources Evaluation City of Berkeley, Downtown Area Plan 5 November 2008 5

A Context Statement was formulated during the course of this project identifying historical themes relevant to Downtown Berkeley such as commercial development, residential development, transportation, education, government, and others.

CLUSTERS OF HISTORIC RESOURCES Based on the reconnaissance survey, the survey team identified several clusters of historic resources or distinct streetscapes that might suggest special recognition within DAP policies. For example, with additional future evaluation, some of the clusters might qualify as potential historic districts at the local, state, or national levels. It should be noted that it is unlikely that the entire Downtown Area Plan boundaries would be considered a single historic district. Instead, several sub‐areas of Downtown may qualify as historic districts upon further evaluation. Some apparent clusters of resources are discussed below.

• The Civic Center is already designated as a historic district under the City of Berkeley’s Landmarks Preservation Ordinance. It is also a National Register‐listed historic district. It is recommended that both of these designations be updated to expand the boundaries to include the 1959 John Hudspeth designed Alameda County Court House as a contributor. While this building was constructed at a later date than the majority of the historic district contributors and is constructed in a different style of architecture, it was constructed in the heart of Berkeley’s Civic Center, and it shares the government and civic historic context for which the district is significant.

• The Shattuck Avenue Commercial Corridor runs along Shattuck Avenue from about Durant to University Avenue (maybe as far as Hearst Avenue) and includes a cluster of historic commercial buildings that share historic contexts, themes, physical attributes, and characteristics. This cluster of historic buildings includes some commercial buildings that face intersecting streets just off Shattuck Avenue including Bancroft Way, Kittredge Street, Allston Way, Center Street, and Addison Street. With further study, the potential historic district may also include several blocks along University Avenue to form an overall L or T shape depending on the potential district boundary.

• Residential areas on the periphery of the Downtown Area Plan boundary are generally part of larger residential neighborhoods. The DAP boundaries overlap these residential areas but do not encompass them fully. Further study of these residential neighborhoods should be undertaken at some point to determine the relevant contexts, boundaries and historical associations.

• The cluster of historic commercial resources around what was once the Dwight Station area (Shattuck Avenue at Dwight Way) should be further studied to determine if a potential historic district is present in this part of the Downtown area.

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.

Historic Resources Evaluation City of Berkeley, Downtown Area Plan 5 November 2008 6

V. IMPACT ANALYSIS SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 defines a “historical resource” as one that is listed in, or determined eligible for listing in, the California Register of Historical Resources (California Register). A resource that is officially designated or recognized as significant in a local register of historic resources or one that is identified as significant in a historic resource survey meeting the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1(g) is presumed to be significant under CEQA “unless the preponderance of the evidence demonstrates that the resource is not historically or culturally significant.” Historic resources on or eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (National Register) are by default eligible for the California Register. CEQA also contains additional guidelines for defining a historic resource:

• California properties formally determined eligible for, or listed on the National Register of Historic Places (Section 5024.1.d.1)

• those resources included in a local register of historic resources, as defined in Section 5020.1(k) of the Public Resources Code, or identified as significant in a historic resources survey meeting the requirements of Section 5024.1(g) of the Public Resources Code

• those resources that a lead agency determines to be historically significant (generally, if it meets criteria for listing on the California Register), provided the determination is supported by substantial evidence

• those resources a local agency believes are historic for more broadly defined reasons than identified in the preceding criteria

The California Register is the State’s authoritative guide to California’s significant historic and archeological resources. The State Historical Resources Commission (SHRC) has designed this program for use by state and local agencies, private groups and citizens to identify, evaluate, register and protect California's historic resources.

The California Register program encourages public recognition and protection of resources of architectural, historical, archeological and cultural significance, identifies historic resources for state and local planning purposes, determines eligibility for state historical preservation grant funding, and affords certain protections under the CEQA.

Types of resources eligible for nomination for listing in the California Register are buildings, sites, structures, objects, or historic districts. A historic resource must be significant at the local, state, or national level under one or more of the criteria below for listing:

1. It is associated with events or patterns of events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local or regional history, or the cultural heritage of California or the United States

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.

Historic Resources Evaluation City of Berkeley, Downtown Area Plan 5 November 2008 7

2. It is associated with the lives of persons important to local, California, or national history

3. It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of a master, or possesses high artistic values

4. It has yielded, or has the potential to yield, information important to the prehistory or history of the local area, state or the nation

Per CEQA Section 15064.5, when historic resources are treated in a manner consistent with The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings or The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for the Treatment of Cultural Landscapes, (The Standards) the impact is generally considered to be mitigated to a less than significant impact.

PROJECT IMPACTS The following table notes policies and, in some cases, introduction sections, where there is potential (negative or positive) to impact historic resources. Policies with potential to impact historic resources are further discussed after the table. Policies are often mentioned in multiple chapters, and in order to avoid redundant impact discussions, similar policies are addressed in only one chapter and cross‐referenced in the table. The third column of the table, “Addressed in Report,” notes where the impacts of that policy are discussed.

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.

Historic Resources Evaluation City of Berkeley, Downtown Area Plan 5 November 2008 8

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY

P OLICY POTENTIAL TO ADDRESSED IN IMPACT H ISTORIC R EPORT R ESOURCES Strategic Statement “Retrofitting existing Yes ES Introduction buildings with new windows . . .” Strategic Statement “Generating Yes ES Introduction renewable energy using photovoltaic . . .” Strategic Statement “Encouraging the Yes ES Introduction retention of historic resources and resource‐intensive buildings.” Policy ES‐1.1—ES‐1.4 No Policy ES‐2.1 Yes LU‐1.1 Policy ES‐2.2 No Policy ES‐2.3 Yes ES Introduction Policy ES‐2.4—ES‐3.3 No Policy ES‐3.4 Yes ES Introduction Policy ES‐3.5—ES‐3.16 No Policy ES‐3.17 Yes HD‐1.4 Policy ES‐3.18—ES‐5.1 No Policy ES‐5.2 Yes OS‐1.2 Policy ES‐5.3 (street trees and lighting) Yes OS‐1.2 Policy ES‐5.4 (Center Street Plaza) Yes OS‐1.2.1 Policy ES‐5.5—ES‐6.1 No Policy ES‐6.2 Yes ES Intro. paragraph Policy ES‐6.3—ES‐9.3 No

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.

Historic Resources Evaluation City of Berkeley, Downtown Area Plan 5 November 2008 9

LAND USE

P OLICY POTENTIAL TO ADDRESSED IN IMPACT H ISTORIC R EPORT R ESOURCES Policy LU‐1.1 Yes LU‐1.1 Policy LU‐1.2 No Policy LU‐1.3 Yes LU‐1.3 Policy LU‐1.4.1 Yes LU‐1.4.1 Policy LU‐1.4.2 Yes LU‐1.4.2 Policy LU‐1.4.3 Yes LU‐1.4.3 Policy LU‐1.4.4 No Policy LU‐1.5 (FAR) Yes LU‐1.5 Policy LU‐1.6 Yes LU‐1.6 Policy LU‐1.7 No Policy LU‐1.8 Yes LU Introduction Policy LU‐1.9 No Policy LU‐2.1—LU‐3.1 No Policy LU‐3.2 Yes LU‐3.2 Policy LU‐3.3 Yes LU Introduction Policy LU‐3.4—LU‐3.8 No Policy LU‐4.1 Yes LU‐4.1 Policy LU‐4.2 No Policy LU‐4.3 Yes LU‐4.3 Policy LU‐5.1—LU‐5.7 No Policy LU‐6.1 Yes LU‐6.1 Policy LU‐6.2 Yes LU‐6.2 Policy LU‐7.1—LU‐7.4 No Policy LU‐7.5 Yes LU‐7.5 Policy LU‐7.6 Yes LU‐7.6 Policy LU‐7.7—LU‐10.1 No Policy LU‐10.2 Yes LU Introduction

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.

Historic Resources Evaluation City of Berkeley, Downtown Area Plan 5 November 2008 10

ACCESS

P OLICY POTENTIAL TO ADDRESSED IN IMPACT H ISTORIC R EPORT R ESOURCES Policy AC‐1.1a—AC‐2.3 No Policy AC‐2.4 (street features and furniture) Yes OS‐1.2

Policy AC‐2.5e—AC‐2.6 No Policy AC‐2.7 Yes OS‐1.1—OS‐1.7 Policy AC‐2.8—AC‐2.12 No

Policy AC‐2.13 Yes AC‐2.13 Policy AC‐2.14—4.1d No Policy AC‐4.1e Yes AC‐4.1e

Policy AC‐4.1f—AC‐5k No

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.

Historic Resources Evaluation City of Berkeley, Downtown Area Plan 5 November 2008 11

PRESERVATION & URBAN DESIGN

P OLICY POTENTIAL TO ADDRESSED IN IMPACT H ISTORIC R EPORT R ESOURCES Policy HD‐1.1 Yes HD Introduction Policy HD‐1.2 Yes HD Introduction Policy HD‐1.3 Yes HD‐1.3 Policy HD‐1.4 Yes HD‐1.5 Policy HD‐1.5 Yes HD‐1.5 Policy HD‐1.6 Yes HD Introduction Policy HD‐1.7 Yes HD‐1.7, LU‐6.1 Policy HD‐1.8 Yes HD Introduction Policy HD‐2.1 Yes HD Introduction Policy HD‐2.2 Yes HD Introduction Policy HD‐2.3 Yes HD Introduction Policy HD‐2.4 Yes HD Introduction Policy HD‐2.5 Yes HD Introduction Policy HD‐3.1 Yes HD Introduction Policy HD‐3.2 Yes HD Introduction Policy HD‐3.3 Yes HD Introduction Policy HD‐4.1 Yes HD‐4.1 Policy HD‐4.2 Yes HD‐4.2 Policy HD‐4.3—HD‐4.5 No Policy HD‐4.6 Yes HD Introduction Policy HD‐4.7 Yes HD Introduction Policy HD‐5.1 Yes HD‐5.1 Policy HD‐5.2 Yes HD Introduction Policy HD‐5.3 Yes OS‐1.2.1 Policy HD‐5.4 Yes HD Introduction Policy HD‐5.5 Yes HD‐5.5 Policy HD‐6.1 No Policy HD‐6.2 Yes OS‐1.2.9(a) Policy HD‐6.3 No Policy HD‐6.4 Yes HD‐6.4 Policy HD‐6.5 No Policy HD‐6.6 Yes HD Introduction Policy HD‐6.7 No

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.

Historic Resources Evaluation City of Berkeley, Downtown Area Plan 5 November 2008 12

OPEN SPACE CHAPTER

P OLICY POTENTIAL TO ADDRESSED IN IMPACT H ISTORIC R EPORT R ESOURCES Policy OS‐1.1 Yes HD‐5.2 Policy OS‐1.2 Yes OS‐1.2

Policy OS‐1.2.1 (Center Street) Yes OS‐1.2.1 Policy OS‐1.2.2 (Oxford/Fulton) Yes OS‐1.2.2 Policy OS‐1.2.3 Yes OS‐1.2.3

Policy OS‐1.2.4 Yes OS‐1.2.4 Policy OS‐1.2.5 Yes OS‐1.2.5 Policy OS‐1.2.6 Yes OS‐1.2.6

Policy OS‐1.2.7 Yes OS‐1.2.7 Policy OS‐1.2.8 Yes OS‐1.2.8 Policy OS‐1.2.9 Yes OS‐1.2.9

Policy OS‐1.2.10 Yes OS‐1.2.10 Policy OS‐1.2.11 Yes OS‐1.2.11 Policy OS‐1.3—OS‐1.4 No

Policy OS‐1.5 Yes OS‐1.5 Policy OS‐1.6—OS‐2.6 No Policy OS‐3.1 Yes OS‐3.1

Policy OS‐3.2 Yes OS‐3.1 Policy OS‐3.3 Yes HD‐5.5 Policy OS‐3.4—OS‐3.5 No

Policy OS‐4.1 Yes OS‐1.2 Policy OS‐4.2—OS‐5.3 No

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.

Historic Resources Evaluation City of Berkeley, Downtown Area Plan 5 November 2008 13

HOUSING AND COMMUNITY HEALTH & SERVICES

P OLICY POTENTIAL TO ADDRESSED IN IMPACT H ISTORIC R EPORT R ESOURCES Policy HC‐1.1—HC‐4.1 No Policy HC‐4.2 Yes HC‐4.2

Policy HC‐4.3—HC‐4.6 No Policy HC‐4.7 Yes HC‐4.7 Policy HC‐4.8—HC‐7.4 No

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

P OLICY POTENTIAL TO ADDRESSED IN IMPACT H ISTORIC R EPORT R ESOURCES Policy ED‐1.1 No Policy ED‐1.2 Yes ED‐1.2

Policy ED‐1.3—ED‐1.8 No Policy ED‐1.9 Yes OS‐1.2 Policy ED‐1.10—ED‐2.3 No

Policy ED‐3.1 Yes ED Introduction Policy ED‐4.1—ED‐4.5 No Policy ED‐4.6 Yes LU‐7.5

Policy ED‐4.7 Yes LU‐7.5 Policy ED‐4.8 Yes LU‐7.5 Policy ED‐4.9—ED‐4.11 No

Policy ED‐4.12 Yes LU‐7.6 Policy ED‐4.13—ED‐13.1 No

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.

Historic Resources Evaluation City of Berkeley, Downtown Area Plan 5 November 2008 14

APPENDICES Appendix: Recommendations for Center Yes Recommendations Street for Center Street and LU‐1.4.1 Appendix: Recommendations for City Yes Recommendations Interests in UC Properties for City Interests in UC Properties

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.

Historic Resources Evaluation City of Berkeley, Downtown Area Plan 5 November 2008 15

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY This chapter includes policies that positively impact historic resources by protecting them and the character of the surrounding neighborhoods; requiring the comparison of embodied energy lost from demolishing existing buildings and new construction; and demolition avoidance. Policies that have the potential to positively impact historic resources are: ES‐2.3, ES‐3.4, and ES‐ 6.2.

Specific Environmental Sustainability policies that have the potential to negatively impact historic resources are addressed within other chapters (see Environmental Sustainability table). This chapter includes goals and actions in addition to policies. The following goals and actions are from the section “A More Sustainable Downtown.”

• Prior to the policies in Environmental Sustainability chapter, the section “A More Sustainable Downtown” states that the “specific goals and actions to achieve a sustainable downtown must include . . . Retrofitting existing buildings with new windows and insulation, and energy efficient appliances.”

The plan does not provide exception for historic resources, and windows are frequently one of the most significant character‐defining features of buildings. Their removal is likely to represent a negative impact on the resources.

In addition, windows, like buildings, represent embodied energy and replacing them is a loss of that energy. That loss of energy should be weighed against any potential savings as evaluated in ES‐3.4, which describes a comparison of energy loss from demolition to potential savings from new construction. As mentioned in line 111 of this chapter, Berkeley’s climate is very temperate allowing occupants to use less energy to heat and cool their buildings than in other parts of the county. Because of the minimal heating and cooling requirements, replacing windows may not represent significant energy savings, and their replacement should be evaluated.

• “Generating renewable energy using photovoltaic panels, wind turbines, and other emerging technologies. “45, 151.

Issue such as location, attachment mechanism, color and visibility from the right‐of‐way, should be carefully considered and addressed in the revised Design Guidelines for the Downtown Area.

LAND USE Some policies within the Land Use chapter have the potential to positively impact historic resources by ensuring new projects respect the scale, character and setbacks of the Downtown and coordinate historic preservation with other efforts. Policies that have the potential to positively impact historic resources are: LU‐1.8, LU‐3.3, and LU‐10.2. In addition, the chapter

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.

Historic Resources Evaluation City of Berkeley, Downtown Area Plan 5 November 2008 16

discusses revising the Downtown Design Guidelines. If developed to be compatible with The Standards in respect to historic resources (individual properties as well as districts), the revised Downtown Design Guidelines could positively impact historic resources and potentially help to mitigate the impact of other policies.

The following are policies examined for potential negative impacts to historic resources.

Policy LU‐1.1. “Allow higher‐intensity development for housing and for limited commercial/office uses in Downtown’s Core Area.”

Historically, along Shattuck Avenue buildings were typically 1 to 4 stories. The surrounding residential areas were predominantly filled with single‐family houses. Encouraging density has the potential to negatively impact historic resources. Pressures for increased density can encourage the demolition of historic buildings, particularly single‐family residences and smaller‐scale or single‐story commercial blocks for larger structures.

Policy LU‐1.3. “In the Core Area allow a mix of appropriate uses (see “Summary of Land Use Provisions” and buildings up to 85 feet in height (typically 6‐stories residential mixed‐use or 6‐stories office mixed‐use. In Corridor/Buffer areas, allow a mix of appropriate urban uses and buildings up to 65 feet in height. All buildings in the Core Area and Corridor/Buffer mixed‐use areas should have a minimum height of 45’ (3‐stories mixed‐use) . . . Maximum allowable building heights should be considered as absolute maximums, measured to the top of the parapet or midpoint of the roof and inclusive of the State Density Bonus or any other provision. Through its development standards, the City should define “base projects” maximums so that height maximums are not exceeded.”

The 2007 DAP Core would expand the area of the 1990 DAP Core. According to the 1990 DAP, the Core area had a Maximum Bonus Height Limit of 87 feet/7 stories. In the areas where the 1990 Core area and the redefined 2007 Core area overlap, the maximum height (inclusive of all bonuses) would change from 87 to 85 feet, representing a negligible decrease. However, the area added to the core in the 2007 DAP was generally zoned C‐1 and C‐2 in the 1990 DAP and has been upzoned to increase allowable heights. For example, the Oxford Edge and the South areas would be increased from the maximum height of 60 ft/5 stories to 85 ft. At the north end of the 2007 core area, most of the blocks bounded by Shattuck, University, Oxford, and Hearst (part of the DAP 1990 North 1 Area) would be increased from 35‐50 feet/2‐4 stories (depending on use and permit) to 85 feet. This represents a substantial increase in height and has the potential to negatively impact the setting of the historic resources in the immediate area, many of which are 1 and 2 stories.

In the 2007 DAP, Corridor/Buffer areas have a maximum allowable height of 65 feet. In some areas of the Corridor/Buffer this represents an increase in

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.

Historic Resources Evaluation City of Berkeley, Downtown Area Plan 5 November 2008 17

allowable height. For example, Shattuck north of University is zoned C‐1 with a maximum height of 35‐50 ft/2‐4 stories in the 1990 DAP. On Berkeley Way, between Shattuck and Milvia a pocket would be upzoned from R ‐2A 35 ft/3 stories. Similarly, on Shattuck from above Channing on the north to Dwight on the south, it would be upzoned from C‐SA 24‐36 ft/2‐3 stories. In areas such as these, a maximum height limit of 65 feet represents a substantial increase in height and has the potential to negatively impact the setting of the historic resources in the immediate area and encourage replacement of historic resources.

Policy LU‐1.4.1. Allow up to two (2) hotels to be built up to 225 feet exclusive of mechanicals (which is greater than the maximum allowable height for the Core Area).”2 For additional information see “Recommendations for Center Street” analysis.

Project Location Address/Name of Historic Resources Historic Resources Map Northeast corner of None None Shattuck and Center Street Behind Shattuck Hotel Shattuck Hotel Designated between Allston Way Landmark or and Kittredge Structure of Merit

Although the site at the northeast corner of Shattuck and Center Street does not contain a historic resource, the location is in the heart of the Shattuck commercial subarea and there are “Designated Landmark or Structure of Merit” properties to the north, east, and south ranging in height from 1 to 5 stories. Assuming 12 to 15 foot per story, the hotel would range from 15 to 18 stories. This is significantly taller than the surrounding historic resources and 2 to 6 stories taller than the tallest buildings in downtown, the 12‐story Wells Fargo Building and the 13‐story Great Western building. The construction has the potential to negatively impact historic resources and should be evaluated in a project‐level environmental review process.

The Shattuck Hotel is a 5 ‐story hotel, which is a City of Berkeley Landmark. The plan does not specify if whether the 225 story hotel project would demolish or serve as an addition to the current hotel. In either scenario, a 15 to 18 story building would likely represent a negative impact to the Shattuck Hotel. If the hotel tower becomes a project, a qualified professional should be hired to review the project. If they determine the project meets “The Standards” it would be considered mitigated to a less than a significant level and would be possible for the City of Berkeley to issue a mitigated negative declaration. If it is

2 Based on 8 September 2008 memorandum on the DAP Height Assumptions.

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.

Historic Resources Evaluation City of Berkeley, Downtown Area Plan 5 November 2008 18

determined that the project does not meet “The Standards”, a project‐level environmental impact report may be required, including analysis of project alternatives and mitigation measures.

Policy LU‐1.4.2. In the Core Area and in addition to the aforementioned hotels, allow a maximum number of taller buildings as specified below.

a. Allow up to four (4) non‐hotel buildings to have a maximum height of 180 feet.

Project Location Address/Name of Historic Resources Historic Resources Map Northwest corner of Ross approx 2156 Other Building called Shattuck Ave. and Shattuck Contributing . . . Allston Way Southeast corner of 2208 Shattuck Building on SHRI Shattuck Ave. and Allston Way Parking Garage between None None Addison St. and Center St. Mid‐block north side of 2121 Allston Way Significant per both Allston Way between 1993 LPC . . . Shattuck and Oxford St.

Three of the sites are identified on the “Historic Resources and Potential Development Opportunity Sites.” Demolishing these resources or building additions that are 180 feet in height would represent a significant negative impact to these resources. The fourth site on Center Street has two one‐ story buildings that are “Significant per both the 1993 LPC List and 1994 Design Guidelines.” Constructing a 180‐foot high building (approximately 12 to 15 stories) would negatively impact the setting of those surrounding small‐scale historic resources.

If any of the projects develops and involves construction adjacent to or rehabilitation of the historic resource, a qualified professional should be hired to review the project. If they determine the project meets “The Standards” it would be considered mitigated to a less than a significant level, and it would be possible for the City of Berkeley to issue a mitigated negative declaration. If it is determined that the project does not meet “The Standards”, a project‐level environmental impact report may be required, including analysis of project alternatives and mitigation measures. Demolition of a historic resource is a significant and unavoidable impact per CEQA and cannot be mitigated to a less than significant level.

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.

Historic Resources Evaluation City of Berkeley, Downtown Area Plan 5 November 2008 19

b. In addition to a) allow up to four (6) buildings to have a maximum height of 120 feet (typically 10‐story residential mixed‐use or 8‐story office mixed use).3

Location Address/Name of Historic Resources . . Historic Resources that . Map appears to be on site Southeast corner of None None Hearst and Oxford Northwest corner of 1988 Shattuck Other Building called University and Shattuck Contributing . . . Northwest corner of None None University and Oxford Southwest corner of None None University and Milvia Southwest corner of None None Kittredge and Fulton Southwest corner of None None Durant and Shattuck

Of the proposed project locations, only the northwest corner of University and Shattuck has been identified as a potential historic resource, although the building has integrity issues. If the project develops and involves construction adjacent to or rehabilitation of the historic resource, a qualified professional should be hired to review the project. If they determine the project meets “The Standards” it would be considered mitigated to a less than a significant level, and it would be possible for the City of Berkeley to issue a mitigated negative declaration. If it is determined that the project does not meet “The Standards”, a project‐level environmental impact report may be required, including analysis of project alternatives and mitigation measures. Demolition of a historic resource is a significant and unavoidable impact per CEQA and cannot be mitigated to a less than significant level.

For the other five other locations, the only possible impact on historic resources would be on their setting. With the exception of the southwest corner of Hearst and Oxford, all of these locations are in close proximity to historic resources. The surrounding historic resources range in height from 1 to 4 stories. The introduction of an 8 to 10 story building is likely to

3 Based on 8 September 2008 memorandum on the DAP Height Assumptions.

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.

Historic Resources Evaluation City of Berkeley, Downtown Area Plan 5 November 2008 20

negatively impact the setting of the historic resources, and the projects should be evaluated in a project‐level environmental review process.

Policy LU‐1.4.3. “On University properties in the Core area as of November 30 2007, building heights up to 100 feet are allowed, except for along the Hearst Avenue frontage west of Walnut Street, where maximum allowable building heights should not exceed 65 feet. Doing so recognizes that the University may need to rely on taller buildings to accommodate growth without additional property acquisitions.”4

According to the Land Use Map, there are a significant number of University properties on the blocks between Shattuck and Oxford, Hearst and Center. In addition, a single property is located on the north side of Bancroft between Shattuck and Folsom.

North of University, the historic resources are between 1 and 4 stories. Buildings between 65 and 100 feet in height have the potential to negatively impact the setting of the historic resources in the area.

Between University and Center, the buildings are generally taller than those north of University. Historic resources are between 1 to 5 stories. While historically and currently this area was characterized by denser development than the area immediately to the north, depending on its location and overall massing, a building 100 feet in height (7 to 8 stories) has the potential to negatively impact the setting of historic resources in the area. If the project develops and involves construction adjacent to or rehabilitation of the historic resource, a qualified professional should be hired to review the project. If they determine the project meets “The Standards” it would be considered mitigated to a less than a significant level, and it would be possible for the City of Berkeley to issue a mitigated negative declaration. If it is determined that the project does not meet “The Standards”, a project‐level environmental impact report may be required, including analysis of project alternatives and mitigation measures.

Policy LU‐1.5. “Establish maximum groundfloor lot coverage requirements for all non‐ residential zones. The intention is to dramatically increase the presence of midblock open space and landscaped setbacks throughout Downtown. Maximum lot coverage requirements would vary by building height:

4 The 8 September 2008 memorandum on the DAP Height Assumptions includes 120’ buildings for the UC properties at the southwest corner of Hearts and Oxford and the northwest corner of University and Oxford.

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.

Historic Resources Evaluation City of Berkeley, Downtown Area Plan 5 November 2008 21

65 feet and less –90% maximum with in‐lieu fee option for small lots & historic preservation.”

ARG is unclear on the meaning of this policy. City of Berkeley staff reviewing.

Policy LU‐1.6 “The volume or ‘bulk' of buildings should be controlled to encourage appropriate setbacks and stepbacks, solar access, and slender upper floors. The City should limit the bulk of buildings in all nonresidential zones by adopting the following maximums for ‘floor area ratios’ (FAR), which is the ratio of a building’s total floor area (on all above‐grade floors) over the site area. . . .”

All sections of the Downtown (commercial, civic, and residential) have established patterns of setbacks. Stepbacks and slender upper floors are not part of the historic form of the buildings of the Downtown area. Decisions regarding the use of setbacks, stepbacks, solar access, and slender upper floors have the potential, to negatively impact the historic character of the Downtown area. These issues should be carefully considered and addressed in the revised Design Guidelines for the Downtown Area.

Policy LU‐3.2. “To enliven streets within the Core Area and other mixed‐use areas, require that ground floors contain retail, restaurants, personal services, community space, cultural space, and/or art space.”

Most historic resources within the Core Area and other mixed‐use areas have the active uses described above. However, for any historic resources (listed or potentially eligible) changing to an incompatible use, has the potential to negatively impact the historic resource.

Policy LU‐‐4.1. “The City must retain and enhance the Civic Center area’s historic and community‐serving character by maintaining the present assemblage of civic buildings (including the High School) and require new buildings to face Civic Center Park and streets with active, community‐serving uses near street level. Retrofit the Veterans Building to resist earthquakes and recruit an active, community use for its main floor.”

Maintaining the buildings of the Civic Center and orienting new buildings toward the Civic Center Park and streets is a potentially positive impact on the Civic Center Historic District. If the retrofit of the Veterans Building becomes a project, a qualified professional should be hired to review the project. If they determine the project meets “The Standards” it would be considered mitigated to a less than a significant level and would be possible for the City of Berkeley to issue a mitigated negative declaration.

Policy LU‐4.3. “Maintain and enhance Martin Luther King Jr. Civic Center Park with improvements such as restoration of the fountain, enhanced ongoing

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.

Historic Resources Evaluation City of Berkeley, Downtown Area Plan 5 November 2008 22

maintenance, and consideration of daylighting Strawberry Creek within or alongside the Park.”

The MLK Civic Center Park is within the Civic Center Historic District. O.S.‐ 1.2.3.g calls for the completion of a master plan for MLK Civic Center Park. If the master plan is written to be consistent with “The Secretary of the Interior’s Guidelines for the Treatment of Cultural Landscapes” the impacts to the cultural landscape of the MLK Civic Center Park could be mitigated.

Policy LU‐6.1. “To reduce development pressures in residential‐only areas, promote the rehabilitation of older structures, help conserve the scale of their historic fabric, and preserve the many remaining historic buildings. Maintain the R‐2A designation and downzone R‐4 areas to R‐3, where shown on the Land Use Map.”

Promoting rehabilitation, conserving the scale of the historic fabric, and preserving historic buildings are all potentially positive impacts on historic resources in the residential areas.

Although downzoning from R‐4 to R‐3 reduces the developmental pressures, many of the historic resources in the southwest corner of the plan area are single‐family residences and R‐3, according to the City of Berkeley Zoning, encourages the “development of relatively high density residential areas.” This zoning designation allows for development denser than single‐family residential development and thereby pressure for the demolition of historic resource for larger structures or major additions to historic resources which may compromise their integrity.

Policy LU‐6.2. “For projects in Corridor/Buffer mixed‐use areas that immediately abut the residentially zoned property with an existing residential building, the building height of the Corridor/Buffer project shall be stepped down where adjacent to the residential property. The height of the stepped‐down portion of the building shall be similar to the height of the existing residential building, or 45 feet, whichever is greater.”

Stepping down portions of buildings can help to mitigate the impact on nearby residences and historic resources and in most areas of the Downtown this seems sufficient. However, for a one‐story residence, 45 feet could still represent a negative impact and should be reviewed at the project level.

Policy LU‐7.5. “To provide a new sense of arrival and gateway at the east end of University Avenue and to help transform Oxford Street, the City recommends development on the University Hall site and the adjacent UC property just to the west. The City also recommends development of UC properties on the

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.

Historic Resources Evaluation City of Berkeley, Downtown Area Plan 5 November 2008 23

block bounded by Oxford, Walnut, Berkeley Way, and University (including the Purcell Paint site).” See also ED‐4.2, ED‐4.6, ED‐4.7, ED‐4.8, and OS‐1.2.4.

Based on the Land Use Map, it appears the “adjacent UC property just to the west” refers to 2154 University Avenue, a “Designated Landmark or Structure of Merit” according to the Historic Resources and Potential Development Opportunity Sites map. Development on or adjacent to this site has the potential to impact historic resources. If the project develops and involves construction adjacent to or rehabilitation of the historic resource, a qualified professional should be hired to review the project. If they determine the project meets “The Standards” it would be considered mitigated to a less than a significant level, and it would be possible for the City of Berkeley to issue a mitigated negative declaration. If it is determined that the project does not meet “The Standards”, a project‐level environmental impact report may be required, including analysis of project alternatives and mitigation measures. Demolition of a historic resource is a significant and unavoidable impact per CEQA and cannot be mitigated to a less than significant level.

c. “Possible Implementation Measure: The University is encouraged to seek unified development of the Oxford/Walnut/Berkeley Way/University block through the acquisition of non‐UC properties – with the exception of the apartment building at Berkeley Way and Walnut Street, and with the integration and preservation of a meaningful portion of the landmark garage building.”

The landmark garage building at the southwest corner of Oxford and Berkeley Way is a “Designated Landmark or Structure of Merit” according to the Historic Resources and Potential Development Opportunity Sites map. In addition, the apartment building at Berkeley Way and the residence to the south at 1930 Walnut Street are “Significant per both 1993 LPC List and 1994 Design Guidelines” according to the Historic Resources and Potential Development Opportunity Sites map. If the University develops the block (even excluding the apartment building) there is a high potential to negatively materially impact the landmark garage building and the residence and negatively impact the setting of the apartment building. If this project develops, and involves construction adjacent to or rehabilitation of the historic resource, a qualified professional should be hired to review the project. If they determine the project meets “The Standards”, it would be considered mitigated to a less than a significant level, and it would be possible for the City of Berkeley to issue a mitigated negative declaration. If it is determined that the project does not meet “The Standards”, a project‐level environmental impact report may be

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.

Historic Resources Evaluation City of Berkeley, Downtown Area Plan 5 November 2008 24

required, including analysis of project alternatives and mitigation measures.

Policy LU‐7.6. “Support the relocation of the Berkeley Art Museum/Pacific Film Archive to the UC Printing Press site (bounded by Center, Oxford, and Addison).”

Because the UC Printing Press is a designated Landmark, the project has the potential to impact a historic resource. If the project develops and involves construction adjacent to or rehabilitation of the historic resource, a qualified professional should be hired to review the project. If they determine the project meets “The Standards”, it would be considered mitigated to a less than a significant level, and it would be possible for the City of Berkeley to issue a mitigated negative declaration. If it is determined that the project does not meet “The Standards”, a project‐level environmental impact report may be required, including analysis of project alternatives and mitigation measures. Demolition of a historic resource is a significant and unavoidable impact per CEQA and cannot be mitigated to a less than significant level.

ACCESS Policy AC‐2.13. “Enforce and strengthen provisions for active street frontages through entry patterns, fenestration, and pedestrian‐oriented building design consistent with the Downtown Design Guidelines.”

Historic buildings were usually designed to be pedestrian oriented. Design Guidelines on entry patterns and fenestration should emphasize compatible with the historic character or the Downtown’s buildings. If the revised Downtown Design Guidelines are designed to be consistent with The Standards impacts to historic resources would be mitigated to a less than significant level.

Policy AC‐4.1e. “Develop a system of way finding signage for pedestrians to find transit facilities and other destinations in the Downtown.”

Policy OS‐1.2 develops a Public Improvements Plan. If this plan addresses signage and is compatible with the character of the Downtown, historic resources, and “The Standards” it could help mitigate changes to the streetscape including signage.

HISTORIC PRESERVATION & URBAN DESIGN The Historic Preservation & Urban Design chapter includes a number of policies and goals that represent potentially positive impacts on historic resources, including: retaining Landmarks and Structures of Merit; identifying and designating historic resources; communicating Downtown’s unique historic development; considering various preservation incentives; and stating that the University should respect historically significant buildings and strive to integrate them into new development.

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.

Historic Resources Evaluation City of Berkeley, Downtown Area Plan 5 November 2008 25

Particular attention is paid to subareas of historic resources through policies such as: employing programs to protect subareas; designating subareas as historic districts where appropriate, ensuring new design is compatible with the historic resources in these areas; and using the streetscape and open space improvements to reinforce subarea character by complementing the scale and architectural quality of Downtown architecture.

The policies also address new construction through: ensuring that new construction complements Downtown’s historic character and new buildings complement their historic context; revising the Downtown Design Guidelines to strengthen provisions for contextual design in areas where historic resources are concentrated; and generally maintaining the urban tradition of no setbacks from the street in commercial areas. Policies with the potential to positively impact historic resources are: HD‐1.1, HD‐1.2, HD‐1.6, HD‐1.8, HD‐2.1., HD‐2.2, HD‐2.3, HD‐2.4, HD‐2.5, HD‐3.1, HD‐3.2, HD‐3.3, HD‐4.6, HD‐4.7, HD‐5.2, HD‐5.4, and HD‐6.6. The following are policies examined for potential negative impacts to historic resources.

Policy HD‐1.3. “When substantial alterations are proposed for buildings over 40 years old, the City will encourage the restoration and repair of lost or damaged historic features whenever feasible and appropriate.”

This policy has the potential to restore historic resources with compromised integrity. However, in order to meet “The Standards” and avoid creating conjectural historic features and a false sense of historicism, the new features should be based on physical or documentary evidence.

Policy HD‐1.4. & “Encourage adaptive reuse of older buildings by promoting their rehabilitation, Policy HD‐1.5. and allow intensification, where appropriate.” and “Ensure that in any intensification of historic buildings, the historic facades are maintained/rehabilitated, the character and scale of the addition are compatible with the historic building, and The Standards for rehabilitation are met. As one way to help achieve compatibility, require that upper‐story additions be set back in cases where this would be appropriate. The historic building with its addition(s) should contribute to the spatial definition of streets and public open spaces, as is typical of traditional urban places.”

Additions, sensitively designed, are possible on historic resources; however there is high potential for impact to the historic structure. Ensuring that the additions meet “The Standards”, as mentioned above, is one way to mitigate the impact.

Policy HD‐1.7. “To reduce development pressures in residential‐only areas, promote the rehabilitation of older structures, help conserve the scale of their historic fabric, and preserve the many remaining historic buildings, implement maintain the R‐2A designation and downzone R‐4 areas to R‐3, where shown on the Land Use map. Strengthen zoning standards to assure visible entrances, porches and stoops, street‐facing windows, and landscaped yards on residential streets.”

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.

Historic Resources Evaluation City of Berkeley, Downtown Area Plan 5 November 2008 26

Downzoning is addressed under LU‐6.1. Strengthening zoning standards as described above is appropriate only for new infill.

Policy HD‐4.1. “Support, where appropriate, new development on non‐noteworthy properties to contribute to Berkeley’s tradition of architectural excellence.”

“Non‐noteworthy” should be defined. Although numerous studies have conducted surveys in the Downtown, the area covered by the Downtown Area Plan has never been comprehensively surveyed at the intensive level, the degree necessary to make assessments of historic resource eligibility. Without this level of survey effort, it is not possible to know all of the Downtown Area’s historic resources and what is “non‐noteworthy.”

Policy HD‐4.2. “Recognize that Downtown’s commercial cityscape is not homogeneous in building height, massing, or scale, allow for continued variety that respects the context of Berkeley’s Downtown.”

While typical building heights in DAP subareas differ, and there are some tall buildings, overall the building heights are relatively consistent; according to the ARG survey of the properties within the DAP and facing streets, over ninety percent were 1 to 4 stories in height . If, as mentioned above, new buildings respect their context, specifically the surrounding buildings, this policy will not have a negative impact on historic resources. However, if the height, massing, and scale of the buildings in one subarea are used as justification for building height, massing and scale in a subarea of a different character, this could represent a negative impact. If developed to be compatible with The Standards, the revised Downtown Design Guidelines could address the issue and help to mitigate the impact of this and other policies on historic resources.

Policy HD‐5.1. “Improve the pedestrian experience and the aesthetic quality of the Downtown environment. Street trees and greenery should be added throughout Downtown.”

In most aspects, this policy chapter does not appear to impact historic resources. Street trees should be of a suitable species that at maturity will grow to an appropriate height and will not obscure views to or from historic resources. Policy OS‐1.2 calls for the creation of a Public Improvements Plan. A Public Improvements Plan that is compatible with the character of the Downtown, historic resources, and “The Standards”, in this case “The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties + Guidelines for the Treatment of Cultural Landscapes” could mitigate changes to the streetscape. Similarly, the revised Downtown Design Guidelines should address streetscapes.

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.

Historic Resources Evaluation City of Berkeley, Downtown Area Plan 5 November 2008 27

Policy HD‐5.5. Enhance the quality of the pedestrian environment by encouraging north‐to‐ south midblock walkways and midblock landscaped open spaces across the long blocks that flank Shattuck Avenue.”

The introduction of midblock walkways and midblock landscaped open spaces represents a change in the historic development pattern of downtown. However, they are not likely to represent a significant negative impact unless historic resources are demolished or altered to accommodate the walkways and open spaces.

Policy HD‐6.4. “Encourage midblock pedestrian connections between University Avenue and Center Street, as part of future UC development.”

STREETSCAPE & OPEN SPACE Most of the policies of the Streetscape & Open Space chapter are considerably longer than those in the other chapters. As a result, the full text of Streetscape & Open Space policies is not included in this discussion. The following are policies examined for potential negative impacts to historic resources.

Policy OS‐1.2 “Develop and adopt a Public Improvements Plan to guide the design and implementation of alterations and additions in a comprehensive way. . . .” (See DAP for full policy.)

In areas where historic resources are concentrated or in the Civic Center District, street trees, furnishings, sidewalk configuration, lighting, and signage all have the potential to impact the historic character. If the Public Improvements Plan proposed in policy OS‐1.2 is compatible with the character of the Downtown, historic resources, and “The Standards”, it could mitigate changes to the streetscape.

Policy OS‐1.2.1. “Center Street Plaza.” (See DAP for full policy.)

The closure of Center Street between Shattuck Avenue and Oxford to traffic in order to create a pedestrian plaza will represent a change to the historic street configuration of the Downtown. In addition, historic resources line most of the south side of the block and a large portion of the north side of the block, and converting the street to a plaza will impact their setting.

The conversion of this one block stretch does not appear to represent a significant negative impact; the overall grid‐based street configuration of the

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.

Historic Resources Evaluation City of Berkeley, Downtown Area Plan 5 November 2008 28

Downtown will be retained. In addition, if retained, the setback of buildings along this block would continue to define the plaza as a former street (details for the proposed projects along the north side of the street are not yet available). Impacts resulting from the conversion may be mitigated by ensuring plaza developments are compatible with the adjacent historic resources and if the view corridor is maintained by restricting new buildings from locating within the current street right of way. The project has the potential to impact historic resources, and it should be evaluated in a project‐level environmental review process.

Policy OS‐1.2.2. Oxford‐Fulton & Abutting Open Spaces.” (See DAP for full policy.)

b) “Redesign the Oxford‐Fulton right‐of‐way to create a green boulevard, designed to greatly increase vegetation along this corridor, and facilitate pedestrian crossing and programmatic connections between the UC campus and Downtown. . . .”

e) “Support the University in its plans to create a new publicly accessible open space between Edwards Field and Fulton, and at the end of Kittredge (referred to in this Plan as “Kittredge Green”).” (See DAP for full policy.)

According to the Historic Resources and Potential Development Opportunity Sites map, the UC building 2223 Fulton is a “Building on SHRI.” If the project develops and involves construction adjacent to or rehabilitation of the historic resource, a qualified professional should be hired to review the project. If they determine the project meets “The Standards” it could be considered mitigated to a less than a significant level. If it is determined that the project does not meet “The Standards”, a project‐level environmental impact report may be required, including analysis of project alternatives and mitigation measures. Demolition of a historic resource is a significant and unavoidable impact per CEQA and cannot be mitigated to a less than significant level.

Policy OS‐1.2.3. Center Street Greenway and Martin Luther King Jr. Civic Center Park.” (See DAP for full policy.)

The impact of a Center Street Greenway on historic resources including the Civic Center District could be mitigated through the Public Improvement Plan (OS‐

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.

Historic Resources Evaluation City of Berkeley, Downtown Area Plan 5 November 2008 29

1.2) if the plan is designed to be sympathetic to and compatible with historic resources and “The Standards”.

Policy OS‐1.2.4. University Avenue Gateway” (See DAP for full policy.)

According to the Historic Resources and Potential Development Opportunity Sites map, there are four Designated Landmarks or Structures of Merit and one property that is Significant per both the 1993 LPC List and 1994 Design Guidelines along the proposed University Avenue Gateway. Introduction of pedestrian amenities and landscaping and the removal of travel lanes changes the setting of these historic resources. However, if the design is coordinated with historic resources as stated in OC‐1.2.4 (c), the impact could be mitigated. Appropriate street trees, landscaping, lighting etc. should be identified in the Public Improvement Plan (OS‐1.2) if the plan is designed to be sympathetic to and compatible with historic resources and “The Standards”.

Policy OS‐1.2.5. “Shattuck Avenue: General.” (See DAP for full policy.)

This policy includes increasing landscaping along the corridor, pedestrian comfort, ecologically beneficial features, parking changes, and reducing travel lanes. The impact on historic resources including the Civic Center District could be mitigated through the Public Improvement Plan (OS‐1.2) if the plan is designed to be sympathetic to and compatible with historic resources and “The Standards”.

Policy OS‐1.2.6. “Shattuck Avenue: Constitution Square (also known as BART Plaza) and Shattuck/Berkeley Square.” (See DAP for full policy.)

This policy includes a variety of alterations to public spaces at Constitution Square and Shattuck/Berkeley Square including enhancing pedestrian and bicycle accessibility, enhancing wayfinding, and multimodal transit, street features and furnishings and creation of a new BART entrance. OS‐1.2.6 states that street features and furnishings should support ground‐floor uses that complement the historic resources. The impact on historic resources including the Civic Center District could be mitigated through the Public Improvement Plan (OS‐1.2) if the plan is designed to be sympathetic to and compatible with historic resources and “The Standards”.

Policy OS‐1.2.7. “Shattuck Avenue: North of University.” (See DAP for full policy.)

This policy would continue the concept of a boulevard, by exploring eliminating travel lanes and increasing street trees. The impact on historic resources could be mitigated through the Public Improvement Plan (OS‐1.2) if the plan is designed to be sympathetic to and compatible with historic resources and “The Standards”.

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.

Historic Resources Evaluation City of Berkeley, Downtown Area Plan 5 November 2008 30

Policy OS‐1.2.8. “Shattuck Avenue ‘Park Blocks’: South of Durant” (See DAP for full policy.)

This policy describes creating Park Blocks between the north and south traffic lanes. The street is unusually wide because historically, the Central Pacific Railroad tracks ran along the center of the street with space for carts, and pedestrians and later automobiles on either side. The removal of the tracks compromised the integrity of the original configuration. Creating park blocks would not further compromise the integrity and would not have an negative impact on the historic resources lining the street.

Policy OS‐1.2.9: “Ohlone Greenway Extension” (See DAP for full policy.)

This policy includes the Ohlone Greenway on Hearst Way between MLK and Oxford by maintaining only two travel lanes and designing “greenway” through the use of street trees and other vegetation. The impact on historic resources could be mitigated through the Public Improvement Plan (OS‐1.2) if the plan is designed to be sympathetic to and compatible with historic resources and “The Standards”.

Policy OS‐1.2.10: “Harold Way” (See DAP for full policy.)

This policy considers whether Harold Way should be closed to traffic or if sidewalks should be widened for seating. The Shattuck Hotel, Armstrong College, BPOE Lodge/Elks Club, and Berkeley Central Public Library either face the street or are located nearby. If the project develops, a qualified professional should be hired to review the project. If they determine the project meets “The Standards” it would be considered mitigated to a less than a significant level, and it would be possible for the City of Berkeley to issue a mitigated negative declaration.

Policy OS‐1.2.11: “Allston Way as a Special Civic Street” (See DAP for full policy.)

This policy proposes using special light standards paving, street furnishings and banners celebrate Allston Way as the connection between the civic center and the UC Campus. The impact on historic on the street could be mitigated through the Public Improvement Plan (OS‐1.2) if the plan is designed to be sympathetic to and compatible with historic resources and “The Standards”.

Policy OS‐1.5. “Develop standards and guidelines for lighting and signage in public rights‐of‐ way to make them more human‐scaled, to reduce visual clutter, to provide greater energy efficiency, to minimize instruction (glare) in the upper stories of adjacent buildings, and to help visitors navigate the Downtown. Remove existing ‘cobrahead’ light fixtures.”

The impact on historic resources and the area’s character could be mitigated if the standards and guidelines (whether as a separate standard’s and guidelines

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.

Historic Resources Evaluation City of Berkeley, Downtown Area Plan 5 November 2008 31

document, part of the Public Improvement Plan, or included in the revised Downtown Design Guidelines) are sympathetic to and compatible with historic resources and “The Standards”.

Policy OS‐3.1 & “Enhance and amend standards and guidelines for open space associated with Policy OS‐3.2 private development. Standards and guidelines could address, but are not limited to, midblock walkway, mid‐block courtyards, street‐facing courtyards, or roof gardens. . . .” Policy OS‐3.2. continues, describing the private development would be required to contribute to street‐level open space through contributions to “landscaping in public streets and open spaces, landscaped setbacks, vegetated street‐facing courtyards, and vegetated midblock walkways. . . . Standards should respect historical context and setback patterns, as well as retail needs – but should also incorporate the greatest level of open space and greenery within those constraints. Preserve existing building setbacks, where feasible and appropriate.”

The impact on historic resources and subareas could be mitigated if the amended standards and guidelines for open space are designed to be sympathetic to and compatible with historic resources and “The Standards”.

HOUSING & COMMUNITY HEALTH SERVICES The following are policies examined for potential negative impacts to historic resources.

Policy HC‐4.2. “Create incentives, such as modifying development standards and providing financial subsidies (such as Housing Trust Fund revenue), for the acquisition and rehabilitation of existing buildings, in order to maintain their affordability and provide more affordable housing for low‐income residents in the Downtown.”

The rehabilitation of existing buildings would likely include historic resources. Providing incentive for their acquisition and rehabilitation could be a positive impact on the historic resources if consistent with “The Standards”. The revised Design Guidelines should address this issue.

Policy HC‐4.7. “Develop strategies for rehabilitating and maintaining the existing supply of Single Room Occupancy Housing (SRO) in Downtown.”

The rehabilitation of existing SROs would likely include historic resources. Rehabilitating and maintaining these resources as SROs could be a positive impact on the historic resources if consistent with “The Standards”. The revised Design Guidelines should address this issue.

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.

Historic Resources Evaluation City of Berkeley, Downtown Area Plan 5 November 2008 32

As one of its goals (ED‐3) this chapter encourages place‐making through the preservation of historic buildings and their integration with streetscapes and plazas and high‐quality new construction. This goal and the following Policy (ED‐3.1) have the potential to positively impact historic resources. The following are policies examined for potential negative impacts to historic resources.

Policy ED‐1.2. “Encourage the rehabilitation and reuse of existing buildings. Possible Implementation Measure: Consider modifications to Zoning Ordinance and Design Guideline provisions that would allow administrative review and approval of limited exterior modifications to existing buildings (not including designated historic resources) consistent with adopted guidelines.”

Currently, there is no comprehensive survey of historic resources in the Downtown area. As a result, allowing administrative review and approval of limited exterior modifications of historic resources that have not been designated could lead to changes to historic resources that have not yet been identified. This potential impact could be mitigated by comprehensively surveying the Downtown area at the intensive level, thereby providing Planning staff with a full list of historic resources to use in their reviews.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CENTER STREET • On the north side of Center Street, where the hotel and museum will be located, the maximum height at the street wall should be approximately 80 feet.

The UC Printing Press, located on the north side of Center Street, is a designated Landmark, and the project has the potential to impact a historic resource. If the project develops and involves construction adjacent to or rehabilitation of the historic resource, a qualified professional should be hired to review the project. If they determine the project, including the building height meets “The Standards”, it would be considered mitigated to a less than a significant level, and it would be possible for the City of Berkeley to issue a mitigated negative declaration. If it is determined that the project does not meet “The Standards”, a project‐level environmental impact report may be required, including analysis of project alternatives and mitigation measures. Demolition of a historic resource is a significant and unavoidable impact per CEQA and cannot be mitigated to a less than significant level.

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.

Historic Resources Evaluation City of Berkeley, Downtown Area Plan 5 November 2008 33

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CITY INTERESTS IN UC PROPERTIES 6.1 Current University plans for Department of Health Services include the development of 400‐450,000 sq ft of buildings. Most buildings would be 5 stories.

Many historic resources in the area are 1 to 2 stories. Large‐scale development has the potential to negatively impact the setting of the historic resources. The project has the potential to impact historic resources, and it should be evaluated in a project‐level environmental review process.

6.4 DAPAC recommends that the University be allowed to build taller buildings at the corners of Oxford/Hearst and/or Shattuck/Berkeley Way in exchange for allowing at least 100 foot depth of the frontage along the Shattuck Avenue to be used for tax generating retail development, with the understanding that uses that complement the Downtown will be brought to this location.

The intersection of Oxford and Hearst are surrounded by new development and this is potentially a good location for a new taller structure. However, according to the “Historic Resources and Potential Development Opportunity Sites” map, at the intersection of Shattuck and Berkeley Way, there are historic buildings on three corners that are small‐scale, one‐ and two‐story buildings. A tall building here would be an abrupt break, and there is the potential for a negative impact on the setting of the historic resources. If the projects develops and involves construction adjacent to or rehabilitation of the historic resource, a qualified professional should be hired to review the project. If they determine the project meets “The Standards” it would be considered mitigated to a less than a significant level, and it would be possible for the City of Berkeley to issue a mitigated negative declaration. If it is determined that the project does not meet “The Standards”, a project‐level environmental impact report may be required, including analysis of project alternatives and mitigation measures.

10.1 “The Shattuck and University intersection is the key cross roads intersection in Downtown. Most of the 1 or 2 story buildings on Shattuck and on University around this intersection should be developed in scale with this important location a short distance from BART, on the primary avenue with freeway access, and at the gateway to Downtown and to the campus. This scale should be at least comparable to the scale of University development on their adjacent sites.”

At the intersection of Shattuck and University the one‐story building at the northeast corner (1987 Shattuck), and the two‐story building at the southeast corner (46 Shattuck Sq.) are City of Berkeley Landmarks. The one‐story building at the northwest corner (McDonald’s, 1988 Shattuck), was shown as a

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.

Historic Resources Evaluation City of Berkeley, Downtown Area Plan 5 November 2008 34

“contributor” on the 1990 Downtown Plan and the 1987 BAHA Report, although it appears to have integrity issues.

Additions to these buildings have the potential impact the historic resources, especially because additions would be highly visible as a result of their corner locations. The project has the potential to impact historic resources, and it should be evaluated in a project‐level environmental review process.

If projects develop and involve construction adjacent to or rehabilitation of the historic resource, a qualified professional should be hired to review the project. If they determine the project meets “The Standards” it would be considered mitigated to a less than a significant level, and it would be possible for the City of Berkeley to issue a mitigated negative declaration. If it is determined that the project does not meet “The Standards”, a project‐level environmental impact report may be required, including analysis of project alternatives and mitigation measures. Demolition of a historic resource is a significant and unavoidable impact per CEQA and cannot be mitigated to a less than significant level.

VI. IMPACT ANALYSIS Section 15065 of the CEQA Guidelines mandates a finding of a significant impact if a project would eliminate important examples of major periods of California history or prehistory. In addition, pursuant to Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines, a project could have a significant effect on the environment if it “may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource.” A “substantial adverse change” means “physical demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of the resource or its immediate surroundings such that the significance of an historical resource is impaired.” Material impairment means altering “in an adverse manner those characteristics of an historical resource that convey its historical significance and its eligibility for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources.”

Impacts to historical resources not determined to be significant according to any of the significance criteria described above are not considered significant for the purposes of CEQA. Generally, under CEQA, a project that follows The Standards is considered to have mitigated impacts to a historical resource to a less‐than‐significant level (CEQA Guidelines 15064.5). Section 15126.4 (b) (2) of the CEQA Guidelines notes that in some circumstances, documentation of a historical resource may not mitigate the effects to a less‐than‐significant level.

Area plans are conceptual in nature. If and when the policies become projects, some may be mitigated to a less than significant level, and others may require further environmental review at the project level. However, there are a number of policies in the DAP that if they become projects have a high potential to significantly and directly impact historic resources. These include,

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.

Historic Resources Evaluation City of Berkeley, Downtown Area Plan 5 November 2008 35

E NVIRONMENTAL S USTAINABILITY • Prior to the policies in Environmental Sustainability chapter, the section “A More Sustainable Downtown” states that the “specific goals and actions to achieve a sustainable downtown must include . . . Retrofitting existing buildings with new windows and insulation, and energy efficient appliances.”

L AND U SE Policy LU‐1.4.1. Allow up to two (2) hotels to be built up to 225 feet exclusive of mechanicals (which is greater than the maximum allowable height for the Core Area).5

Policy LU‐1.4.2. In the Core Area and in addition to the aforementioned hotels, allow a maximum number of taller buildings . . .

Policy LU‐7.5. To provide a new sense of arrival and gateway at the east end of University Avenue and to help transform Oxford Street, the City recommends development on the University Hall site and the adjacent UC property just to the west. The City also recommends development of UC properties on the block bounded by Oxford, Walnut, Berkeley Way, and University (including the Purcell Paint site).” See also ED‐4.2, ED‐4.6, ED‐4.7, ED‐4.8, and OS‐1.2.4.

c) “Possible Implementation Measure: The University is encouraged to seek unified development of the Oxford/Walnut/Berkeley Way/University block through the acquisition of non‐UC properties – with the exception of the apartment building at Berkeley Way and Walnut Street, and with the integration and preservation of a meaningful portion of the landmark garage building.”

Policy LU‐7.6. “Support the relocation of the Berkeley Art Museum/Pacific Film Archive to the UC Printing Press site (bounded by Center, Oxford, and Addison).”

S TREETSCAPE & O PEN S PACE Policy OS‐1.2.2. “Oxford‐Fulton & Abutting Open Spaces.”

R ECOMMENDATIONS FOR C ITY I NTERESTS IN UC P ROPERTIES 10.2 “The Shattuck and University intersection is the key cross roads intersection in Downtown. Most of the 1 or 2 story buildings on Shattuck and on University around this intersection should be developed in scale with this important location a short distance from BART, on the primary avenue with freeway access, and at the gateway to Downtown and to the campus. This scale should

5 Based on 8 September 2008 memorandum on the DAP Height Assumptions.

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.

Historic Resources Evaluation City of Berkeley, Downtown Area Plan 5 November 2008 36

be at least comparable to the scale of University development on their adjacent sites.”

If every project discussed in the DAP were developed, including buildings constructed to the proposed zoning maximums, the character of the downtown would be significantly changed. The following policies have a high potential to have a cumulative impact on the character of the downtown and the setting of historic resources.

L AND U SE Policy LU‐1.1. “Allow higher‐intensity development for housing and for limited commercial/office uses in Downtown’s core Area.”

R ECOMMENDATIONS FOR C ITY I NTERESTS IN UC P ROPERTIES 6.1 Current University plans for Department of Health Services include the development of 400‐450,000 sq ft of buildings. Most buildings would be 5 stories.

6 The 8 September 2008 memorandum on the DAP Height Assumptions includes 120’ buildings for the UC properties at the southwest corner of Hearts and Oxford and the northwest corner of University and Oxford.

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.

Historic Resources Evaluation City of Berkeley, Downtown Area Plan 5 November 2008 37

The City of Berkeley Downtown Area Plan may cause substantial adverse changes in the significance of one or more identified potential historic resources if future individual development projects do not incorporate measures that ensure project‐related changes to historic resources are in accordance with either of the following publications:

• Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings; or

• Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings.

Substantial adverse changes that may occur include demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of one or more resources, such that the resource is “materially impaired.” The significance of a historic resource is considered to be “materially impaired” when a project demolishes or materially alters the physical characteristics that justify the determination of a historic resource’s significance (CEQA Guideline section 15064.5[b]). Such an adverse change to a CEQA‐defined historical resource would constitute a potentially significant impact. Because DAP policies could result in the demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of historic resources and would have a cumulative impact on historic resources of the downtown through increased density and height, it is ARG’s opinion that the DAP contains policies that potentially cause significant adverse change, a significant impact per CEQA.

VII. POTENTIAL MITIGATION MEASURES The following comments concern mitigation measures for various impacts identified above. Some of the following measures, such as the Design Guidelines, may mitigate some of the impacts of the policies to a less than significant level. While implementation of these measures would reduce impacts on historic resources, the impact would remain significant and unavoidable.

• Historic Resource Survey Fund and prepare a comprehensive Intensive‐Level Survey of the entire downtown area according to the National Register Bulletin 24: Guidelines for Local Surveys A Basis for Preservation Planning. Use California Department of Parks and Recreation 523 (DPR) forms and follow survey recommendations from California State Office of Historic Preservation, including use of new status codes. Update the context statements in Downtown Berkeley Historic Resources Reconnaissance Survey report, 2007, if new information is identified as part of an Intensive‐Level Survey.

• Designate Historic Resources Fund the nomination and designation of individual resources or historic districts identified as potentially eligible for City of Berkeley landmark, the California Register or the National Register.

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.

Historic Resources Evaluation City of Berkeley, Downtown Area Plan 5 November 2008 38

• Revise Design Guidelines for the Downtown Area. Fund and develop Revised Design Guidelines for the Downtown Area consistent with The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings or The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for the Treatment of Cultural Landscapes. The treatments in the Revised Design Guidelines should not be uniform for the entire DAP area; they should include overall Area‐Wide Design Guidelines as well as Subarea Design Guidelines that address the character of specific subareas. For example, guidelines that address the large Classical style buildings of the Civic Center would not be appropriate for residential buildings or small commercial buildings.

Area‐Wide design guidelines

The goal is to present and illustrate area‐wide guidelines for appropriate treatments in conformance with The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation. General recommendations that are applicable to the entire study area may include but would not be limited to:

o exterior rehabilitation o materials conservation and appropriate cleaning of buildings o window rehabilitation o general recommendations for storefront improvements o general signage guidelines o design issues with regard to residential conversion of upper stories of commercial structures o major interior public spaces such as lobby areas o compatible design enhancements for non‐contributing buildings o recommendations for stabilization and long‐term maintenance measures to curb further deterioration o priority of work to be performed, phasing treatments to manage cost o general recommendations for development of vacant properties

Sub‐area description and design guidelines This section of the document would define, differentiate, and illustrate each sub‐area. Treatments and options for each sub‐area could include the following:

o streetscape treatments o prototype storefronts o detailed signage treatments

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.

Historic Resources Evaluation City of Berkeley, Downtown Area Plan 5 November 2008 39

o in‐fill construction for new commercial buildings and parking structures including siting, bulk, height, width, scale, rhythm, setback, massing, fenestration patterns, and materials o building additions including bulk, height, width, scale, rhythm, setback, massing, fenestration patterns, and materials o evaluation of opportunities for pedestrian links to other areas of downtown and parking o locations for new parking structures

• Public Improvements Plan Fund and create Public Improvement Plan to guide the design and implementation of alterations and additions in a comprehensive way . Prepare The Public Improvement Plan should be consistent with The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings or The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for the Treatment of Cultural Landscapes.

• Master Plan for MLK Civic Center Park Fund and develop a Master Plan for the MLK Civic Center Park consistent with The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings or The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for the Treatment of Cultural Landscapes.

• Standards and Guidelines for Open Space Fund and prepare Standards and Guidelines for Open Space consistent with The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings and The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for the Treatment of Cultural Landscapes.

• Preservation Fund Establish a historic preservation fund, supported by development projects, to be applied to future historic preservation activities, including survey work, research and evaluation, and rehabilitation of historic resources with Berkeley’s Downtown ahead in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards.

• Interpretation Fund creation of an integrated and consistent interpretation program that communicates the significance and differences of the downtown subareas. The program could include walking tours, interpretive panels, signage, plaques, and exhibits prepared by preservation technical specialists or other professionals experienced in creating historical exhibits. Similar programs include San Francisco’s Barbary Coast Trail and Monterey’s Path of History.

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.

Historic Resources Evaluation City of Berkeley, Downtown Area Plan 5 November 2008 40

• Mitigation Monitoring Plan Hire a preservation consultant to create a mitigation‐monitoring plan that will ensure mitigation is completed.

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.

Historic Resources Evaluation City of Berkeley, Downtown Area Plan 5 November 2008 41

REFERENCES Bancroft, Hubert Howe. History of California. Santa Barbara: Wallace Hobbard (reprint), 1963‐1970. The Berkeley Architectural Heritage Association. Historic Survey of Downtown. [Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Architectural Heritage Association, 1987). Berkeley Chamber of Commerce. Berkeley Tourist and Business Survey. Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Chamber of Commerce, 1924. Bernhardi, Robert. The Buildings of Berkeley. Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Architectural Heritage Association: Oakland, CA: Forest Hill Press, 1971. Bernhardi, Robert. The Buildings of Berkeley. Oakland, CA: Forest Hill Press, 1991. The Berkeley Book, 1967‐1968 Edition. Berkeley, CA: Bancroft House, 1968. Berkeley Downtown Plan. Berkeley, CA: City of Berkeley Planning Department, 1990. Berkeley Tourist and Business Survey: A Survey of the City of Berkeley, Its Attractions and Its Businesses. Berkeley, CA: H.B. Knowles, 1924. California State Office of Historic Preservation. Instructions for Recording Historical Resources. Sacramento: OHP, n.d. Cerny, Susan. Berkeley Daily Planet: Berkeley Observed, Looking Back, Seeing Ahead. [Berkeley, CA: s.n., 2002]. Cerny, Susan. “Berkeley Civic Center District National Register Nomination.” 1998. Cerny, Susan Dinkelspiel. Berkeley Landmarks. Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Architectural Heritage Association, 1994. “’City Beautiful’: A 1914 Vision of the Civic Center.” The Independent and Gazette, 26 September 1979—3. “Downtown Community Profile.” Manuscript, Berkeley Planning Department, Master Plan Revision Program, November, 1974. Ferrier, William Warren. Berkeley, California: The Story of the Evolution of a Hamlet Into a City of Culture and Commerce. Berkeley, CA: the author, 1933. Ferrier, William Warner. “The Naming of Berkeley.” [Berkeley, CA?: the Author, 1927]. Finacom, Steve, correspondence with, 15 November 2006. Finacom, Steve. “Landmark Application Supplement Description, History, and Significance, Berkeley’s Civic Center Park.” Draft for Commission, 27 August 1997. Gebhard, David. Architecture in San Francisco and Northern California. Salt Lake City: Peregrine Smith, 1985. Goss, Gary A. Index to the Architect and Engineer Volumes 1‐95: 1905‐1928. San Francisco: California Historical Society, 1982. Handlin, David P. American Architecture. New York: Thames and Hudson, 1985. Historic Survey of Downtown. Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Architectural Heritage Association, 1987. A History of Berkeley: An Exhibit Commemorating the Centennial of the City of Berkeley. Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Art Center, 1978. Johnson, Mary. “The City of Berkeley: A History from the First American Settlers to the Present Date.” Manuscript on file at the History Room of the Central Berkeley Public Library. Jorgensen‐Esmaili, Karen, coordinator. The History of Berkeley’s Downtown. Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Historical Society, 1983.

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.

Historic Resources Evaluation City of Berkeley, Downtown Area Plan 5 November 2008 42

Kent, T.J. Jr., “Berkeley’s First Liberal Democratic Regime: 1961‐70: A Political Essay on the Postwar Awakening of Berkeley’s Liberal Conscience.” [Berkeley, CA:] Institute of Governmental Studies, Berkeley Project [University of California, Berkeley], 1976. Kirker, Harold. California’s Architectural Frontier: Style and Tradition in the Nineteenth Century. Salt Lake City: Peregrine Smith, 1973. Longstreth, Richard. The Buildings of Main Street: A Guide to American Commercial Architecture. Washington, D.C.: Preservation Press, 1987. Looking Back at Berkeley. Berkeley, CA: Berkeley History Book Committee of the Berkeley Historical Society, 1984. Lowell, Waverly B. Architectural Records in the San Francisco Bay Area: A Guide to Research. New York: Garland Publishing, Inc., 1988. McAlester, Virginia and Lee. A Field Guide to American Houses. New York: Knopf, 1984. McArdle, Phil. Exactly Opposite the Golden Gate: Essays on Berkeley’s History. Berkeley, CA: The Berkeley Historical Society, 1983. Meyer, Alfred. The Berkeley Almanac: Deep in the Heart of the Athens of the West. Berkeley, CA: Cranberry Press, 1976. Page and Turnbull, Inc. David Bower Center/Oxford Plaza: Section 106 & CEQA Historical Resources Analysis. Berkeley, California July 2005. Perala, John. Berkeley, California Finns: as excerpted from 1894‐1924 Berkeley Gazette. Portland, OR: Finnish‐American Historical Society of the West, 1989. Pettitt, George A. A History of Berkeley. Berkeley, CA: Alameda County Historical Society, [1976?]. Pettitt, George A. Berkeley: the Town and Gown of It. Berkeley, CA: Howell‐North Books, 1973.

Poppeliers, John. What Style Is It? Washington, DC: National Trust for Historic Preservation, 1977. Rifkind, Carole. A Field Guide to American Architecture. New York: The New American Library, 1980. Schwartz, Richard. Berkeley 1900: Daily Life at the Turn of the Century. [Berkeley, CA:] RSB Books, 2000. “Shattuck Avenue, Berkeley, Street Scape, 1878‐1978.” [Berkeley, CA: Berkley Architectural Heritage Association, 1978]. Starr, Kevin. Endangered Dreams: The Great Depression in California. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996. Starr, Kevin. Inventing the Dream: California Through the Progressive Era. New York: Oxford University Press, 1985. United States Department of the Interior. National Register of Historic Places. National Register Bulletin 15: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation. Revised 1995. United States Department of the Interior. National Register of Historic Places. National Register Bulletin 24: Guidelines for Local Surveys: A Basis for Preservation Planning. Revised, 1985. United States Department of the Interior. National Register of Historic Places. National Register Bulletin 29: Guidelines for Restricting Information about Historic and Prehistoric Resources. No Date. United States Department of the Interior. National Register of Historic Places. National Register Bulletin 30: Guidelines for Evaluating and Documenting Rural Historic Landscapes. No Date. United States Department of the Interior. National Register of Historic Places. National Register Bulletin 36: Guidelines for Evaluating and Registering Historical Archaeological Sites and Districts. 1993. United States Department of the Interior. National Register of Historic Places. National Register Bulletin 39: Researching A Historic Property. 1991. United States Department of the Interior. National Register of Historic Places. National Register Bulletin 41: Guidelines for Evaluating and Registering Cemeteries and Burial Places. 1992.

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.

Historic Resources Evaluation City of Berkeley, Downtown Area Plan 5 November 2008 43

Whiffen, Marcus. American Architecture Since 1780: A Guide to the Styles. Cambridge: The MIT Press, 1969. Woodbridge, Sally. California Architecture: Historic American Buildings Survey. San Francisco: Chronicle Books, 1988. Works Progress Administration. Federal Writers’ Project. Guide to 1930s California: the WPA Guide to California. 1938.

M APS “95040, Berkeley, Alameda County, California.” Map. [S.I., s.n., 1948]. “Auction Sale of Berkeley Real Estate . . .” Map. Woodward & Taggart, real estate auctioneers, 1878. [Berkeley Aerial Photograph. S.I., s.n.], 1956. “Berkeley, Alameda County, California.” Map. [Berkeley, CA: City of Berkeley, Dept. of Public Works, Engineering Div., 1956] “Berkeley, Alameda Co., Cal.” Map. Berkeley, CA: Chas. A. Bailey, [no date]. Berkeley (Calif.) Department of Public Works, Engineering Division. “Berkeley, Alameda County, California.” Map. [Berkeley, CA: Engineering Division, 1970.] “City of Berkeley Zone Map.” Map. [Berkeley, CA?: s.n.], 1920. “City of Berkeley Zone Map.” Map. [Berkeley, CA?: s.n.], Revised 1940. Cram, George F. “Map of the City of Oakland, Berkeley, and Alameda.” Map. Chicago, [no date]. Lederer, Street & Zeus Co. “Berkeley and Vicinity.” Berkeley, CA: 1914. “Map of the Central Portion of Berkeley Showing the Location of the Daley Scenic Park.” Map. San Francisco, CA: C.H. Street & Co., [no date]. “Map of the City of Berkeley.” Map. [S.I., s.n.], 1959. “Map of the City of Berkeley and Adjacent Municipalities Showing Water Front and Tide Lands.” Map. Berkeley, CA: City of Berkeley Department of Public Works, Engineering Division, 1951. “Map of the City of Berkeley, Alameda County, California.” Map. [Berkeley?, s.n.], 1934. “Map of the City of Oakland: Berkeley, Oakland & Brooklyn Townships and Alameda.” Oakland, CA: Gaskill and Vandercook, real estate agents, [1888]. McClure, Wilbur F. “Berkeley, California, 1909.” Map. [Berkeley, CA:] W.F. McClure, 1909. Moore, E.S. “Birdseye View of Berkeley, Cal. 1891.” Map. Irwin and Johnson, real estate agents, 1891. Raymond, William G. “Map of Berkeley: Oakland Township, Alameda County, California.” Map. San Francisco, CA: Britton & Rey, 1900. Realty Union. “Map of Oakland and Vicinity.” Map. San Francisco, CA: The Realty Union, 1911. Sanborn Map Company. Insurance Maps of Berkeley, 1894, 1911, 1929, and 1950. “Street Index Map of Oakland: Albany, Berkeley, Emeryville, Piedmont, Alameda, San Leandro, California.” Map. Alameda Co., CA: Oakland Title Insurance and Guaranty Company, 1927.

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc. Historic Resources, Noteworthy Buildings and Potential Development Opportunity Sites Civic Center Historic District and Designated Landmark or Structure of Merit Buildings not in other categories but appearing Berkeley High School Campus to have High, Good or Fair Integrity (ARG) Significant per both 1993 LPC List and For site specific information see DAP 1994 Design Guidelines Development Opportunity Site apparently Reconnaisance Survey Matrix containing no Historic Resource Building on SHRI Revised January 23, 2009. For site specific Other Building called Contributing or Significant by BAHA Report, information see DAP Reconnaisance Survey Matrix Downtown Plan, LPC List, Design Guidelines, or School EIR

T E

U C

N U

W S HEARST Y

L E

E N

K A

L R

R E

A B

Y C

R A

N D M

E E

H M

I T

V N

M B BERKELEY

BERKELEY

N L

D A

R W O

UNIVERSITY

G K

I C

H U

H L NT S CE A CRES

T T N

N A ADDISON

S Y E E

L W

CENTER

US AMP SS C CRO

ALLSTON D

L N

O O

R T L A U

H F

KITTREDGE

BANCROFT BANCROFT A

L U

J F

L E

N H

I DURANT

L C

M N

CHANNING

HASTE

O T

DWIGHT L

L L .E DOWNTOWN AREA RECONNAISSANCE SURVEY MATRIX, BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA ID NUMBERS ADDRESS ARCHITECTURE YEAR INTEGRITY REGISTERED/DESIGNATED DOWNTOWN PLAN INVENTORIES OTHER SURVEYS OPPORTUNITY SITE SOURCE NOTES YEAR SUB NATL DIST LOCAL LOCAL LOCAL DESIGN DPR DPR SHPO BAHA BDA STAFF AC PRIMARY_D SANBO APN - ASSESSORS STR_N ADDRESS DETAIL / ARCHITECTURAL MAJOR YEAR ENGLS RECNT COMMIT INDIV INDIV /CAL CONT LANDMA STRUC HIST DTN PLAN DTN PLAN LPC DTN GUIDELIN EXISTS PRIORITY CHRI LMK/SIG CONTR RATING SURV TRAN ATA_SOUR RN STOR U_ID PARCEL NUMBER UMBER STR_NAME SUFFX MULTIPLE APNs HISTORIC NAME ARCHITECT STYLE ALTERATIONS ARG H DEMO ARG TEE NATL CAL DIST R RK MERIT DISTR MAP 1990 EIR 1990 LIST 1993 1994 SHRI (DATE) (ARG) INVEN BAHA 87 1987 1980s 2006 DPR STAFF JE CE PAGE IES Corner window City 300 057 202201304 1900 ADDISON ST corner MLK Framat Lodge S. G. Jackson Neo Classical add 1927 1926 Good Yes Yes Signif Yes 2 Landmar 69 3 Midcent. 324 057 202201401 1912 ADDISON ST Modern 1954 1954 Good Low BAHA/JE 69 2

311 057 202401200 1913 ADDISON ST 1909-1913 1968 1968 Yes BAHA/JE 69 2

312 057 202401100A 1915 ADDISON ST Rear 1895 1962 Contrib Contrib Yes Yes 69 2 1894 553 057 202401100B 1915 ADDISON ST Front Queen Anne 1895 1895 High High 3 Sanborn 69 2

326 057 202201500 1916 ADDISON ST Pkg Pkg Yes Yes 69 0

313 057 202401002 1917 ADDISON ST 1993 69 3 Yes 589 057 202401801A 1919 ADDISON ST 1940-4 University Bonita Apts George Mohr 1905 1905 High Yes Landmrk Landmrk Yes Landmrk Yes 1978 Yes 1 69 3

314 057 202401801B 1919 ADDISON ST Adjoins Addison 1985 1979 3 Commercial / 339 057 202400700 1931 ADDISON ST Decorative Brick 1931 1931 High Signif High Yes Yes BAHA/JE 69 1

342 057 202400501A 1933 ADDISON ST West; 1933-35 1928 1928 Good Good Contrib Contrib Signif Yes Yes 69 1 Commercial / 552 057 202400501B 1935 ADDISON ST East; 1933-35 Art Deco 1928 1925 Good Contrib Contrib Signif High Yes Yes BAHA/JE 69 1 Commercial / Windows 343 057 202400400 1939 ADDISON ST Decorative Brick changed 1925 1925 Good Signif High 3 69 1 Nat'l Guard Commercial Major Yes 328 057 202201900 1950 ADDISON ST Armory Style alterations 1982 1915 1910 High Good Signif Signif Yes Signif Yes 1979 6X Yes 3 CHRIS 69 2 Yes 348 057 202501001 2001 ADDISON ST 1983 1983 Yes Yes 1977 3S Yes Yes BAHA/JE 70 3 Commercial Façade alt'd 1929 349 057 202502300 2009 ADDISON ST Style 1946 1940 1925 Poor Low Yes Yes 1950 70 1

232 057 202502400 2015 ADDISON ST 2000 2000 70 3 Stadium Garag + B. Reed Commercial / Yes 21 057 202302103 2020 ADDISON ST 2020-2026 Body Shop Harman Moderne 1925 1928 Good Signif Signif Yes Signif Yes 1978 Yes CHRIS 70 1 Berkeley Rep 350 057 202500800 2025 ADDISON ST Theater 2000 1979 Contrib Contrib Yes 70 2 Stadium Garag + Commercial Yes 22 057 202302102 2026 ADDISON ST Body Shop Style 1923 1923 High Signif Signif Yes Signif Yes 1978 Yes BAHA/JE 70 1

193 057 202302300 2030 ADDISON ST 1986 1986 Yes BAHA/JE 70 7 Am. Railway Storefront Yes 330 057 202302400 2040 ADDISON ST 2040-2070 Express Moderne Alteration 1895 1895 Good Yes Yes 1979 3S Yes CHRIS 70 2 Golden Sheaf Victorian 346 057 202500503 2071 ADDISON ST Bakery Clinton Day Italianate 1905 1905 High Yes Yes Yes Landmrk Landmrk Yes Landmrk Lndmrk 1S Yes 1 CHRIS 70 2 Commercial 331 057 202302500 2072 ADDISON ST Style 1923 1923 Poor Contrib Contrib Low Yes Yes BAHA/JE 70 1 Yes 338 057 203201200 2110 ADDISON ST Underwood Bldg. F. E Armstrong Colonial Revival 1905 1905 Good Yes Signif Signif Yes Landmrk Yes 1978 3S Yes 2 CHRIS 74 3 Unknown / Major Yes 375 057 203400500 2119 ADDISON ST Heywood Apt's Plachek Chicago Style alterations 1917 1906 1906 High Yes Signif Signif Yes Signif Yes 1978 3S Yes 2 CHRIS 73 3

377 057 203400400 2123 ADDISON ST UC Pkg Pkg Pkg Yes Yes 73 0

340 057 203201300 2124 ADDISON ST UC Pkg Garage 1990 1961 6Z Yes Yes Yes UC 74 2

341 057 203201400 2130 ADDISON ST UC Pkg Garage 1940 1961 High 6Z Yes Yes Yes UC 74 2

345 057 203200100A 2150 ADDISON ST North UC Pkg Gar 1961 1961 6Z Yes Yes Yes 74 1

484 057 203200100B 2150 ADDISON ST South; faces Center UC Press Building Masten & Hurd Moderne 1939 1939 High Yes Signif Signif Yes Yes Yes Yes 2 Yes Yes 74 1 Southeast; faces 594 057 203200100C 2150 ADDISON ST Oxford UC Press Building Masten & Hurd Moderne 1939 1939 High Yes Signif Signif Yes Signif Yes Yes Yes 2 Yes 74 3

380 057 203400300 2153 ADDISON ST UC Parking Pkg Pkg Yes Yes 0 0 Welton Becket X bracing added 393 057 203401403A 2199 ADDISON ST University Hall & Associat Modern in 1991 1959 1958 Good High Yes Yes UC 73 7

587 057 203401403B 2199 ADDISON ST UC Parking Pkg Pkg Yes Yes UC 73 0

500 057 202000503A 1920 ALLSTON WAY Building H Art Deco 1939 1939 High High Yes Yes Yes Yes Landmrk NR liste 1D Yes 2 CHRIS 71 3 Memorial Courtyard 603 057 202000503B 1920 ALLSTON WAY (part) Yes 71 0 Memorial Courtyard 602 057 202000503C 1920 ALLSTON WAY (part) 1936 1936 Fair Good Yes Yes 71 0

510 057 202000503D 1920 ALLSTON WAY Community Theater Art Deco 1939 1939 HIgh High Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 2 71 3

502 057 202000503E 1920 ALLSTON WAY Building D 2003 2003 Yes Yes Yes Yes 2 71 2

503 057 202000503F 1920 ALLSTON WAY Building E 2003 2003 Yes 2 71 2 William C. Italian 259 057 202000503G 1920 ALLSTON WAY Building C Hays Renaissance High Yes Yes Yes 2 71 4

604 057 202000503H 1920 ALLSTON WAY Campus Green Yes 71 0

508 057 202000503I 1920 ALLSTON WAY Donahue Gym 1978 1978 Yes 71 2 Old Gym (North Major alteration 600 057 202000503J 1920 ALLSTON WAY Portion) 1936 1922 1929 Fair Good Yes Yes Yes 71 2 Old Gym (Include Major alteration 501 057 202000503K 1920 ALLSTON WAY North Pool) 1936 1936 1922 Fair Good Yes Yes Yes 71 2 Old Gym (South Major alteration 599 057 202000503L 1920 ALLSTON WAY Portion) 1936 1929 1929 Fair Good Yes Yes Yes 71 2

505 057 202000503M 1920 ALLSTON WAY Softball Field Yes 71 0

605 057 202000503N 1920 ALLSTON WAY Parking Pkg Pkg Yes Yes NR liste CHRIS 71 0

507 057 202000503O 1920 ALLSTON WAY East Bleachers Yes 71 0

506 057 202000503P 1920 ALLSTON WAY Althetic Field Yes Yes 71 0

HistoricMatrixRevised-81007-Letter.xls Page 1 ID NUMBERS ADDRESS ARCHITECTURE YEAR INTEGRITY REGISTERED/DESIGNATED DOWNTOWN PLAN INVENTORIES OTHER SURVEYS OPPORTUNITY SITE SOURCE NOTES YEAR SUB NATL DIST LOCAL LOCAL LOCAL DESIGN DPR DPR SHPO BAHA BDA STAFF AC PRIMARY_D SANBO APN - ASSESSORS STR_N ADDRESS DETAIL / ARCHITECTURAL MAJOR YEAR ENGLS RECNT COMMIT INDIV INDIV /CAL CONT LANDMA STRUC HIST DTN PLAN DTN PLAN LPC DTN GUIDELIN EXISTS PRIORITY CHRI LMK/SIG CONTR RATING SURV TRAN ATA_SOUR RN STOR U_ID PARCEL NUMBER UMBER STR_NAME SUFFX MULTIPLE APNs HISTORIC NAME ARCHITECT STYLE ALTERATIONS ARG H DEMO ARG TEE NATL CAL DIST R RK MERIT DISTR MAP 1990 EIR 1990 LIST 1993 1994 SHRI (DATE) (ARG) INVEN BAHA 87 1987 1980s 2006 DPR STAFF JE CE PAGE IES

509 057 202000503Q 1920 ALLSTON WAY West Bleachers Yes Yes 71 0

504 057 202000503R 1920 ALLSTON WAY Building G Art Deco 1939 1939 High Good Yes Yes Yes Yes Landmrk Yes 2 71 3 North; Public Berkeley Post Oscar Italian Yes 519 057 202700500A 2000 ALLSTON WAY Entrance Office Wenderoth Renaissance 1914 1914 High Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Landmrk Landmrk Yes Landmrk Yes 1977 1D Yes 1 CHRIS 72 2 South; Faces Berkeley Post Oscar Italian Yes 270 057 202700500B 2000 ALLSTON WAY Kittredge Office Wenderoth Renaissance 1931 1931 High Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Landmrk Landmrk Yes Landmrk Yes 1977 1D Yes 1 CHRIS 72 2 Benjamin 520 057 202601500A 2001 ALLSTON WAY West Berkeley YMCA McDougall Colonial Revival 1910 1910 High Yes Yes Yes Yes Signif Signif Yes Landmrk 1D Yes 2 CHRIS 72 4

521 057 202601500B 2001 ALLSTON WAY East YMCA Addition 1990 1990 Yes Yes Yes 72 3

569 057 202601500C 2001 ALLSTON WAY In front of A YMCA Addition 1910 1960 High Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 1D 2 CHRIS 72 4 BPOE Lodge/Elks Walter H. Yes 271 057 202700203 2016 ALLSTON WAY 2016-2018 Club Ratcliff Beaux Arts 1913 1913 High Yes Signif Signif Yes Landmrk Yes 1979 3S Yes 3 CHRIS 72 3

283 057 202600501 2043 ALLSTON WAY Also 2052 Center 1970 1970 72 4

290 057 203100500 2115 ALLSTON WAY 1995 1980 ? Signif Signif Yes Yes 74 1 Gaia Building; Site Demolished Yes 279 057 203000200 2116 ALLSTON WAY 2116-2132 of Brk. Farms 1999; made 2001 2000 Yes Signif Signif Yes Signif Yes 1978 Yes 3 75 8 Lederer St. /Zeus Yes 293 057 203100400 2121 ALLSTON WAY Bldg Masten & Hurd Moderne 1938 1938 High Signif Signif Yes Signif Yes 1978 7N Yes CHRIS 74 2 Edwin Lewis Spanish Yes 280 057 203000300 2134 ALLSTON WAY Berkeley YWCA Snyder Colonial Revival 1930 1930 Good Yes Yes Landmrk Yes 1978 3S Yes 2 CHRIS 75 2 Site of First Yes 295 057 203100300 2161 ALLSTON WAY Baptist Ch. 2002 2003 Yes Yes 1978 7N Yes CHRIS 74 6

494 057 203100200 2171 ALLSTON WAY George Mohr 1906 1906 High High Yes Landmrk Landmrk Yes Landmrk Yes 1 Yes 0 3 Pkg for phone Buttress wall 213 55189302000 0 BANCROFT WAY company added in 1995 Pkg Pkg Yes 75 0

186 055 189400702 2000 BANCROFT WAY Pkg Pkg Yes Yes 130 0

217 057 202801100 2001 BANCROFT WAY 2006 2006 72 3

208 055 189401401 2020 BANCROFT WAY 1966 130 5

188 055 189401500 2028 BANCROFT WAY Shingle Style 1905 High High Contr 130 3

242 057 202800500 2031 BANCROFT WAY 1998 2000 72 3

190 055 189401600A 2032 BANCROFT WAY Front Cassical Revival 1915 High High Contr 130 3

528 055 189401600B 2032 BANCROFT WAY Rear Stick Style 1895 High High Contr 130 2 Commercial Store windows Yes 191 055 189401703 2036 BANCROFT WAY Style changed 1925 1946 Good Yes Yes Yes Signif Signif Yes Yes 1978 Lndmrk Yes 2 BAHA/JE 130 3 Classical Storefront Yes 243 057 202900900 2105 BANCROFT WAY Masonic Temple William Wharff Revival remodel 1930 1905 1905 High Yes Yes Yes Landmrk Landmrk Yes Landmrk Yes 1978 1S Yes 2 Yes CHRIS 75 4 Berkeley Career BAHA 254 057 202900702 2113 BANCROFT WAY Center 1959 1959 High High Yes (SE) 75 5 Pacific Teleph & 212 055 189301900A 2116 BANCROFT WAY North Telegraph Neo-Classical 1925 1924 Good High 2S2 Yes CHRIS 75 4 Pacific Teleph & 599 055 189301900B 2116 BANCROFT WAY South Telegraph 1948 Good High Yes 75 4 Pacific Teleph & 198 055 189301900C 2116 BANCROFT WAY North Telegraph Parking Judge Wm. Walter H. Yes 215 055 189301800 2126 BANCROFT WAY Waste & Clark Ratcliff Mission Revival 1913 1913 High Yes Signif Signif Yes Landmrk Yes 1979 3S Yes 2 Yes CHRIS 75 3

216 055 189301702 2136 BANCROFT WAY Pkg Pkg Yes 75 0

216 055 189300100 2190 BANCROFT WAY 1990 1953 Poor 75 1

493 055 188601703 2200 BANCROFT Way Hibernia Bank 1962 Yes Yes 0 1 campu 472 057 204200408 2301 BANCROFT WAY UC Campus s 0 0 Hohn Hudspeth Yes 336 057 203201500 100 BERKELEY SQ same as 115 BrkSq Greyhound / Dean S Moderne 1940 1940 Good Signif Signif Yes Signif Yes 1978 7N Yes 2 Yes CHRIS 74 2 Hohn Hudspeth storefront Yes 332 057 203201600 115 BERKELEY SQ same as 100 BrkSq Greyhound / Dean S Moderne remodeled 1940 1940 Fair Good Signif Signif Yes Signif Yes 1978 7N Yes 2 Yes CHRIS 74 2 Southern Pacific Hertzka & Yes 19 057 203201700 125 BERKELEY SQ SHRI addres is 134 Off. Knowles Moderne 1938 1938 Fair Signif Signif Yes Yes 1978 3S Yes Yes Yes CHRIS 74 1 Southern Pacific Hertzka & Yes 17 057 203201800 133 BERKELEY SQ SHRI addres is 134 Off. Knowles Moderne 1955 remodel 1938 1938 Good Signif Signif Yes Yes 1978 3S Yes Yes Yes CHRIS 74 1

323 057 203201900 150 BERKELEY SQ Kaplan Building 2000 2000 Yes Yes Yes 4S 74 3 1841-1847, Also 426 057 206300601 1841 BERKELEY WAY Faces MLK 0 1980 36 2 add'n/alter'n pre- 563 057 205801100A 1903 BERKELEY WAY Rear Neo-Classical c1980 1905 1962 Poor Low Signif 67 2

412 057 205801100B 1905 BERKELEY WAY Front Neo-Classical 1905 1905 High High Signif 67 2

564 057 205801000A 1909 BERKELEY WAY Rear 1905 67 1

565 057 205801000B 1909 BERKELEY WAY Front Tudor Revival 1905 1905 Good High Signif 67 2

229 057 205900200 1910 BERKELEY WAY 1910-1912 Spanish Revival 1918 Good High Contr 67 2

413 057 205800900A 1911 BERKELEY WAY Rear; 1911-1913 1958 1958 Signif 67 2 1929 566 057 205800900B 1911 BERKELEY WAY Front; 1911-1913 Neo-Classical 1905 1905 High High Signif Sanborn 67 2

423 057 205800602A 1915 BERKELEY WAY Rear; 1915-1917 Queen Anne 1905 High High Signif 67 2

562 057 205800602B 1915 BERKELEY WAY Front; 1915-1917 Queen Anne 1905 1905 High High Signif 67 2

560 057 205102700A 2003 BERKELEY WAY Rear; 2003-2005 1960 High Low 68 1

442 057 205102700B 2003 BERKELEY WAY Front; 2003-2005 1960 1960 High Low 68 2 Windows 401 057 205301500A 2008 BERKELEY WAY Front changed 1960 1960 Good Low 68 2

HistoricMatrixRevised-81007-Letter.xls Page 2 ID NUMBERS ADDRESS ARCHITECTURE YEAR INTEGRITY REGISTERED/DESIGNATED DOWNTOWN PLAN INVENTORIES OTHER SURVEYS OPPORTUNITY SITE SOURCE NOTES YEAR SUB NATL DIST LOCAL LOCAL LOCAL DESIGN DPR DPR SHPO BAHA BDA STAFF AC PRIMARY_D SANBO APN - ASSESSORS STR_N ADDRESS DETAIL / ARCHITECTURAL MAJOR YEAR ENGLS RECNT COMMIT INDIV INDIV /CAL CONT LANDMA STRUC HIST DTN PLAN DTN PLAN LPC DTN GUIDELIN EXISTS PRIORITY CHRI LMK/SIG CONTR RATING SURV TRAN ATA_SOUR RN STOR U_ID PARCEL NUMBER UMBER STR_NAME SUFFX MULTIPLE APNs HISTORIC NAME ARCHITECT STYLE ALTERATIONS ARG H DEMO ARG TEE NATL CAL DIST R RK MERIT DISTR MAP 1990 EIR 1990 LIST 1993 1994 SHRI (DATE) (ARG) INVEN BAHA 87 1987 1980s 2006 DPR STAFF JE CE PAGE IES Windows 554 057 205301500B 2008 BERKELEY WAY Rear changed 1960 1960 Good Low 68 2 Dick Moore's, Ira A. Boynton Yes 443 057 205102800 2009 BERKELEY WAY Morning Glory ? Gothic Revival 1880 1886 High Yes Yes 1979 3S Yes Signif CHRIS 68 2

445 057 205102900 2011 BERKELEY WAY Parking Pkg Pkg Yes 68 0

449 057 205103000 2017 BERKELEY WAY 1970 68 3

456 057 205100901 2029 BERKELEY WAY 2029-2035 1965 Plaque 68 2 A. Dodge Yes City 435 057 205100700 2053 BERKELEY WAY Also faces Shattuck Morgan Bldg. Coplin Colonial Revival 1904 1904 Good Yes Yes Yes 1979 3S Yes Signif Landmar 68 2

415 057 205302201 2056 BERKELEY WAY City Parking Pkg Pkg Yes Yes 68 0 Faces Shattuck Renaissance 427 057 204600100A 2112 BERKELEY WAY (1951-65) Revival 1922 1922 Good Contrib Contrib Signif High Yes Yes BAHA/JE 73 1

596 057 204600100B 2112 BERKELEY WAY Structure at rear 1920 1969 Good High 73 2 Faces Shattuck Storefront 555 057 204600100C 2112 BERKELEY WAY (1971-75) alterations 1922 1922 Good Contrib Contrib High Yes Yes BAHA/JE 73 1 Redesign ELS Commercial / 431 057 204600200 2120 BERKELEY WAY University Press Architecture Art Deco Remodel 1980s 1919 1919 Poor Contrib Contrib Low Yes Yes BAHA/JE 73 3

233 057 204600300 2130 BERKELEY WAY Ace Hrdw Pkg Pkg Pkg Yes Yes 73 0 West Parking Dept Health 557 057 204700302A 2151 BERKELEY WAY "Front" Services Pkg Pkg Pkg Yes Yes 73 0 Rear; middle of Dept Health 464 057 204700302B 2151 BERKELEY WAY block Services Bldg 1965 1955 Yes Yes 73 8 Anton A. Fink Yes 422 057 205601800 1901 BONITA AVE House F. M. Cramer Queen Anne 1891 High Yes 1979 3S Yes Signif CHRIS 67 3 205603300- Balcony/Windo 477 057 205603300 1903 BONITA AVE 205603600 Colonial Revival w changes 1900 Fair Low Contr 67 2

561 057 205800500A 1904 BONITA AVE Rear; 1904-1906 Colonial Revival Asbestos siding 1900 Good High 67 1 Porch FilledIn? 439 057 205602000 1905 BONITA AVE 1905-1907 Queen Anne WindowChange 1895 Good High Contr 67 2

447 057 205800500B 1906 BONITA AVE Front; 1904-1906 Colonial Revival Asbestos siding 1900 1900 Good High 67 2

572 057 205800604A 1908 BONITA AVE Rear Colonial Revival 1935 1935 High High Signif JE 67 1

236 057 205800604B 1908 BONITA AVE Front Colonial Revival 1895 1895 High High Signif 67 2

430 057 205602100 1915 BONITA AVE Art Deco 1930 High High Signif 67 3 William Black Yes 425 057 205800605 1918 BONITA AVE 1918-1920? Bay Commons & C. Mayhews Colonial Revival 1905 1905 High Yes Yes 1977 3S Yes 2 Signif CHRIS 67 2 Yes 230 057 205900300 1920 BONITA AVE 1920-22? Stick / Eastlake 1890 1890 High Yes 1978 3S Yes Signif CHRIS 67 2

418 057 205602200 1921 BONITA AVE Art Deco 1930 High High Signif 67 3

397 057 205900400 1930 BONITA AVE 1930-1936 Colonial Revival 1910 High High Signif 67 2 Commercial / Windows 394 057 205900500 1938 BONITA AVE 1938-1942 Second Empire changed? 1905 Good High Signif 67 2 Window 307 057 202200800 1907 CENTER ST Neo-Classical change. Trim 1925 1925 Good High BAHA/JE 69 2 Veterans Henry H. Classical 286 057 202202000 1931 CENTER ST Memorial Bldg. Meyers Revival 1928 1928 High Yes Yes Yes Yes Landmrk Landmrk Yes Landmrk Lndmrk 1D Yes 1 CHRIS 69 2 State Farm James W. New Formalism Yes 308 057 202200600 1947 CENTER ST Insurance Bldg. Plachek / Moderne 1947 1946 High Yes Yes Yes Signif Signif Yes Signif Yes 1978 1D Yes CHRIS 69 6

287 057 202301300 2001 CENTER ST 2001-2125 1983 1983 BAHA/JE 70 7

226 057 202301200 2015 CENTER ST remodel c1958? 1970 1938 Poor 70 2

294 057 202601000 2016 CENTER ST same as 2048 Ctr Brk City College Ratcliff Arch. Modern 2006 2006 72 5

20 057 202302003 2025 CENTER ST 2025-2033 Center Str Garage 1957 1957 Good High Yes BAHA/JE 70 4

319 057 202300700 2041 CENTER ST Vac Yes Yes 70 0

261 057 202601400 2048 CENTER ST same as 2016 Ctr Brk City College Ratcliff Arch. 2006 2006 69 5

296 057 202601203 2052 CENTER ST also 2043 Allston 1970 1970 BAHA/JE 72 5

320 057 202300603 2055 CENTER ST Vacant (Arpeggio) Vac Yes Yes 70 0

321 057 202300601 2061 CENTER ST 2061-2063 Vac Yes Yes 70 0

299 057 202300500 2065 CENTER ST 2065-2069 Vac Yes Yes 70 0 Commercial 297 057 202600412 2068 CENTER ST Style 1960 1960 Poor Low Yes BAHA/JE 72 1 West; faces 8 057 203200503A 2119 CENTER ST Shattuck 1974 1974 Yes Yes BAHA/JE 74 1 parkin 548 057 203200503B 2119 CENTER ST East; Parking Pkg g Yes Yes 74 0 Mikkelsen & Berry Stone and Yes 284 057 203101000 2124 CENTER ST 2124-2126 Bldg.. Smith Mission Revival 1902 1902 Good Yes Landmrk Landmrk Yes Landmrk Yes 1978 Yes 1 BAHA/JE 74 2 James W. Commercial First floor Yes 285 057 203101100 2128 CENTER ST 2128-2130 Ennor's / Act 1-2 Plachek Style/ Colonial modified 1923 1923 Good Yes Signif Signif Yes Signif Yes 1977 7N Yes BAHA/JE 74 2 Thomas Black Wharff / Yes 278 057 203100102A 2132 CENTER ST 2132-2154 Bldg. / Laloma McWethy Mediterranean 1904 1904 Good Signif Signif Yes Signif Yes 1978 3S Yes CHRIS 74 2

593 057 203100102B 2132 CENTER ST Parking in rear Pkg Pkg Yes 74 0

26 055 189901800 1900 CHANNING WAY Shingle Style 1909 High High Contr 129 2

132 055 189901900 1908 CHANNING WAY Gothic Revival 1906 High High Signif 129 2 Historic roof 134 055 189902000 1912 CHANNING WAY Queen Anne addition 1895 Good High Signif 129 2

136 055 189902100 1914 CHANNING WAY Spanish Revival 1920 High High 129 2

141 055 189902200 1918 CHANNING WAY 1970 129 2

HistoricMatrixRevised-81007-Letter.xls Page 3 ID NUMBERS ADDRESS ARCHITECTURE YEAR INTEGRITY REGISTERED/DESIGNATED DOWNTOWN PLAN INVENTORIES OTHER SURVEYS OPPORTUNITY SITE SOURCE NOTES YEAR SUB NATL DIST LOCAL LOCAL LOCAL DESIGN DPR DPR SHPO BAHA BDA STAFF AC PRIMARY_D SANBO APN - ASSESSORS STR_N ADDRESS DETAIL / ARCHITECTURAL MAJOR YEAR ENGLS RECNT COMMIT INDIV INDIV /CAL CONT LANDMA STRUC HIST DTN PLAN DTN PLAN LPC DTN GUIDELIN EXISTS PRIORITY CHRI LMK/SIG CONTR RATING SURV TRAN ATA_SOUR RN STOR U_ID PARCEL NUMBER UMBER STR_NAME SUFFX MULTIPLE APNs HISTORIC NAME ARCHITECT STYLE ALTERATIONS ARG H DEMO ARG TEE NATL CAL DIST R RK MERIT DISTR MAP 1990 EIR 1990 LIST 1993 1994 SHRI (DATE) (ARG) INVEN BAHA 87 1987 1980s 2006 DPR STAFF JE CE PAGE IES

143 055 189902300A 1924 CHANNING WAY Front; 1924-1926 Shingle Style 1905 High High 129 2 Rear/west; 1924- 539 055 189902300B 1924 CHANNING WAY 1926 1905 High High 129 1 Rear/east; 1924- 540 055 189902300C 1924 CHANNING WAY 1926 1905 High High 129 1

93 055 189902501 1930 CHANNING WAY 1965 129 3

29 055 189902600 1936 CHANNING WAY 1936-1938 Queen Anne 1915 1900 High High Signif 129 2 Yes 24 055 189902700 1940 CHANNING WAY Avansino House Queen Anne 1893 High Yes 1979 3S Signif CHRIS 129 2 Mediterranean Windows on 117 055 189900100 1942 CHANNING WAY Revival Milvia changed 1925 Good High Signif 129 3 Minimal 122 055 189601900 2000 CHANNING WAY 2000-2006 Traditional 1943 Good High 130 2

45 055 189501400 2001 CHANNING WAY Colonial Revival 1900 High High Contr 130 2

163 055 189501300 2005 CHANNING WAY Shingle Style 1904 High High Contr 130 2

164 055 189501200 2009 CHANNING WAY 2009-2011 Gothic Revival 1903 Good High Contr 130 2 Major front 123 055 189602000 2010 CHANNING WAY Colonial Revival addition c. 1940 1897 Fair Low 130 2 Front addition 543 055 189602100A 2012 CHANNING WAY Front Spanish Revival c1940? 1925 Good High Signif 130 3

144 055 189602100B 2012 CHANNING WAY Rear Spanish Revival 1925 1940 Fair High 130 2

145 055 189602201 2014 CHANNING WAY Queen Anne 1895 High Low Signif 130 3

165 055 189501100 2015 CHANNING WAY Colonial Revival 1905 High High Contr 130 2

544 055 189602400A 2016 CHANNING WAY Front; 2016-2018 Stick / Eastlake 1903 Fair High Contr 130 2

148 055 189602400B 2016 CHANNING WAY Rear; 2016-2018 1903 130 2

166 055 189501000A 2019 CHANNING WAY Rear 1921 1900 Good High Contr 130 2 Windows and 524 055 189501000B 2019 CHANNING WAY Front Mission Revival doors changed 1921 Good High Contr 130 1

149 055 189602501 2020 CHANNING WAY 2020-2024 1985 130 4 Italianate Window 167 055 189500900 2021 CHANNING WAY Revival change. Stucco 1915 Fair Low 130 3

170 055 189500800 2023 CHANNING WAY Queen Anne Boarded 1905 Fair Yes 130 2

171 055 189501900 2025 CHANNING WAY Vacant Lot Vac Yes Yes 130 0 189502000- 172 055 189504000 2029 CHANNING WAY 189504000 1995 130 5 Classical 175 055 189500500 2035 CHANNING WAY Revival 1910 High High 2 Signif 130 3 Commercial 150 055 189602700 2036 CHANNING WAY Style 1925 High High Contr Yes 130 1

153 055 189602800 2038 CHANNING WAY Rear Parking Pkg Yes Yes 130 0

155 055 189101401 2100 CHANNING WAY 1995 81 4

15 055 189201102 2111 CHANNING WAY Rear Parking Pkg Yes Yes 81 0 Storefront 156 055 189101700 2116 CHANNING WAY Shingle Style addition c. 1970 1905 Poor Low Yes 81 2

157 055 189101800 2118 CHANNING WAY 1965 81 3

159 055 189101900 2120 CHANNING WAY Colonial Revival 1905 High High Signif 81 3 Colonial Revival Window 526 055 189200902A 2121 CHANNING WAY Rear (altered) change, stucco 1905 1905 Poor Low 81 2 Micentury 178 055 189200902B 2121 CHANNING WAY Front Modern 1955 1955 High High 3 Signif 81 2 Window 161 055 189102000 2124 CHANNING WAY 2124-2126 Colonial Revival change, 1905 Fair Low 81 2 Window 12 055 189200800 2125 CHANNING WAY Colonial Revival change, stucco 1905 Good High Contr 81 2

173 055 189200701 2127 CHANNING WAY 2127-2129 Shingle Style 1906 Good High Signif 81 2 Windows 174 055 189200500 2131 CHANNING WAY Colonial Revival changed. 1910 Fair Low Contr 81 2

162 055 189102101 2150 CHANNING WAY faces Fulton 1965 81 3 Windows 11 055 188701200 2201 CHANNING WAY Mission Revival changed 1925 Good High 82 3 Windows 491 055 188802400 2204 CHANNING Way Spanish Revival changed 1920 Good High 0 2

179 055 189501501 2000 DURANT AVE 1975 130 5 post- 200 055 189400600A 2017 DURANT AVE Rear 1911 62 130 2 Windows 527 055 189400600B 2017 DURANT AVE Front Stick / Eastlake changed 1911 Good High Contr 130 3

180 055 189501801 2020 DURANT AVE 1970 130 5 Modern / 1950 183 055 189501804 2024 DURANT AVE International 1950 High High Sanborn 130 2 Boone's Univ. Yes 46 055 189400301 2029 DURANT AVE Sch. Italianate 1880 1880 High Yes Yes Yes Landmrk Landmrk Yes Landmrk Yes 1979 Yes 2 Contr 130 3 Moderne / Windows 201 055 189400200 2037 DURANT AVE Husteads Tow Streamline changed 1949 1949 Good High Yes Yes BAHA/JE 130 1

205 055 189301100 2107 DURANT AVE Rear Parking Pkg Yes Yes 75 0 Commercial / 196 055 189201801 2110 DURANT AVE Classical Reviva 1940 High High Yes Yes 81 1

187 055 189300700 2121 DURANT AVE 2121-2123 Colonial Revival 1906 1904 High Yes High Yes 75 3

HistoricMatrixRevised-81007-Letter.xls Page 4 ID NUMBERS ADDRESS ARCHITECTURE YEAR INTEGRITY REGISTERED/DESIGNATED DOWNTOWN PLAN INVENTORIES OTHER SURVEYS OPPORTUNITY SITE SOURCE NOTES YEAR SUB NATL DIST LOCAL LOCAL LOCAL DESIGN DPR DPR SHPO BAHA BDA STAFF AC PRIMARY_D SANBO APN - ASSESSORS STR_N ADDRESS DETAIL / ARCHITECTURAL MAJOR YEAR ENGLS RECNT COMMIT INDIV INDIV /CAL CONT LANDMA STRUC HIST DTN PLAN DTN PLAN LPC DTN GUIDELIN EXISTS PRIORITY CHRI LMK/SIG CONTR RATING SURV TRAN ATA_SOUR RN STOR U_ID PARCEL NUMBER UMBER STR_NAME SUFFX MULTIPLE APNs HISTORIC NAME ARCHITECT STYLE ALTERATIONS ARG H DEMO ARG TEE NATL CAL DIST R RK MERIT DISTR MAP 1990 EIR 1990 LIST 1993 1994 SHRI (DATE) (ARG) INVEN BAHA 87 1987 1980s 2006 DPR STAFF JE CE PAGE IES Bishop City 202 055 189300601 2125 DURANT AVE PhotoStudio Carl Fox Tudor Revival 1939 1939 High Yes Landmrk Landmrk Yes Landmrk Lndmrk Yes 3 Landmar 75 2

197 055 189200101A 2140 DURANT AVE West; Parking Pkg Pkg Yes 81 0 East; also faces Maggini Chevrolet Frederick H. Window alt's; Yes 525 055 189200101B 2140 DURANT AVE Fulton / Howard Auto Reimers Art Deco addition c2005 1930 1930 Good Yes Yes Yes 1977 3S Yes 1 CHRIS 81 3

492 055 188701501 2200 DURANT AVE 1980 Yes 0 1

75 055 189801400 1909 DWIGHT WAY 1974 139 2

76 055 189801300 1919 DWIGHT WAY 1980 139 4 Windows/door 78 055 189801200 1921 DWIGHT WAY Colonial Revival changed. 1906 Fair Low 139 2 Windows 80 055 189801100 1923 DWIGHT WAY Shingle Style changed 1906 Good High 139 2

84 055 189800801 1927 DWIGHT WAY 1980 140 4

86 055 189800700 1931 DWIGHT WAY 1965 140 3

58 055 189800501 1937 DWIGHT WAY 1937-1947 1965 140 3 Mediterranean 61 055 182201800 2000 DWIGHT WAY Revival 1920 High High 140 2 Herrick Memorial 532 055 189700501A 2001 DWIGHT WAY North Wing Hospital 1965 1960 Low 140 5 Herrick Hospital 114 055 189700501B 2001 DWIGHT WAY East Wing East Wing 1980 1980 High 140 5 Herrick Hospital, International 487 055 189700501C 2001 DWIGHT WAY South Wing South Wing Style 1945 1945 High High 140 3 West; in between A Herrick Hospital, Classical 488 055 189700501D 2001 DWIGHT WAY & C 1920s Revival 1920 1920 High High 140 2

62 055 182201901 2006 DWIGHT WAY 1960 High High 140 3

56 055 182202100 2012 DWIGHT WAY Stick / Eastlake 1895 High High 140 2

57 055 182202200 2016 DWIGHT WAY Parking Pkg Yes 140 0

69 055 182202300 2020 DWIGHT WAY Stick / Eastlake 1900 High High 140 2

70 055 182202400 2022 DWIGHT WAY 2022-2024 Queen Anne 1895 High High 140 2

71 055 182202500 2028 DWIGHT WAY 1965 140 3 Mediterranean 72 055 182202600 2030 DWIGHT WAY Revival 1925 High High 140 3

490 055 182200301 2032 DWIGHT Way Rear Parking Pkg Yes 0 0 Front; faces 95 055 189001201A 2101 DWIGHT WAY Shattuck 2000 2000 81 3 Rear; faces Windows 531 055 189001201B 2101 DWIGHT WAY Shattuck; surrounds altered 1960 1960 Fair Poor Low JE 81 2

77 055 182301101 2104 DWIGHT WAY Herrick Parking Pkg Yes 141 0 George L. Yes 79 055 182301300 2120 DWIGHT WAY 2120-2124 Williamson Bldg. Mohr Italianate 1905 High Yes Yes 1979 Lndmk 3S 3 CHRIS 141 3 Mohr and Classical City 82 055 182301400 2126 DWIGHT WAY 2126-2128 Williams Bldg. Seidel Revival 1902 Good Yes Lndmrk 2 Landmar 141 2 Minimal Windows 96 055 189001000 2127 DWIGHT WAY 2127-2133 Traditional changed 1944 Fair Low 81 2 Commercial / 83 055 182301500 2132 DWIGHT WAY 2030-2032 Decorative Brick 1922 High High 6Y2 3 CHRIS 141 1 Davis / Byrne George L. Classical 85 055 182301600A 2136 DWIGHT WAY Front Bldg. Mohr Revival 1895 1895 High Yes Lndmrk 2S2 2 CHRIS 141 2 Davis / Byrne 581 055 182301600B 2136 DWIGHT WAY Rear Addition 1895 2000 Yes Lndmrk 2S2 CHRIS 141 3 Minimal Window 105 055 189000900 2137 DWIGHT WAY 2137-2143 Traditional change. Stucco 1944 Fair Low 81 2 Minimal Window 106 055 189000800 2145 DWIGHT WAY 2145-2151 Traditional change. Stucco 1944 Fair Low 81 2 Commercial Garage door 87 055 182301700 2150 DWIGHT WAY Style infilled 1948 Fair Low 6Y2 Yes CHRIS 141 1 Minimal 103 055 189000700 2153 DWIGHT WAY 2153-2159 Traditional Stucco added. 1944 Fair Low 81 2 Commercial 89 055 182301800 2160 DWIGHT WAY Style 1950 High High Yes 141 1 International 112 055 189000600 2161 DWIGHT WAY Style 1956 High High Yes 81 1 same as 2180 Commercial / Store window 54 055 182301900 2170 DWIGHT WAY Dwight Classical Reviva change 1923 Good High 3 141 1

113 055 189000502 2175 DWIGHT WAY 2003 2003 81 2 same as 2170 55 055 182300100 2180 DWIGHT WAY Dwight 1923 3 140 1

514 055 189000503 2183 DWIGHT Way 2003 2003 0 2 Italian 1st floor window 32 055 183001500 2200 DWIGHT WAY Renaissance change 1920 High 142 3 Moderne / Exterior 1 055 188901400 2201 DWIGHT WAY Streamline remodel 1925 Fair Yes 82 1

281 057 203500302 2200 FULTON ST Brower Center Solomon ETC Modern 2008 2008 Yes 75 6 Federal Land Orig Plachek Modern; once major addition & Yes 592 UC Campus 2233 FULTON ST Bank c1922 Classical Rev remodel 1949 1922 Yes Yes 1979 6Z Yes Yes 75 6 James W. Classical Yes City 498 057 202900400 2288 FULTON ST IOOF Hall Plachek Revival 1926 High Yes Landmrk Landmrk Yes Landmrk Yes 1978 Lndmrk Yes 3 Yes Landmrk 75 3

209 055 189300503 2308 FULTON ST 2308-2312 2006 2005 75 5

181 055 189200201 2328 FULTON ST 2328-2330 Queen Anne 1893 Good High Contr 81 3

16 055 189200300 2332 FULTON ST 2332-2344 Queen Anne 1895 High High Signif 81 3

168 055 188701400 2333 FULTON ST Queen Anne 1890 High High 82 2

HistoricMatrixRevised-81007-Letter.xls Page 5 ID NUMBERS ADDRESS ARCHITECTURE YEAR INTEGRITY REGISTERED/DESIGNATED DOWNTOWN PLAN INVENTORIES OTHER SURVEYS OPPORTUNITY SITE SOURCE NOTES YEAR SUB NATL DIST LOCAL LOCAL LOCAL DESIGN DPR DPR SHPO BAHA BDA STAFF AC PRIMARY_D SANBO APN - ASSESSORS STR_N ADDRESS DETAIL / ARCHITECTURAL MAJOR YEAR ENGLS RECNT COMMIT INDIV INDIV /CAL CONT LANDMA STRUC HIST DTN PLAN DTN PLAN LPC DTN GUIDELIN EXISTS PRIORITY CHRI LMK/SIG CONTR RATING SURV TRAN ATA_SOUR RN STOR U_ID PARCEL NUMBER UMBER STR_NAME SUFFX MULTIPLE APNs HISTORIC NAME ARCHITECT STYLE ALTERATIONS ARG H DEMO ARG TEE NATL CAL DIST R RK MERIT DISTR MAP 1990 EIR 1990 LIST 1993 1994 SHRI (DATE) (ARG) INVEN BAHA 87 1987 1980s 2006 DPR STAFF JE CE PAGE IES Minimal Window/Door 176 055 189200400 2344 FULTON ST Traditional change. Stucco 1912 Poor Low 81 1 Classical 177 055 188701300 2345 FULTON ST Revival Window change 1915 Good High 82 2

137 055 189100201 2404 FULTON ST 1970 81 3

160 055 188802301 2405 FULTON ST 1975 82 4

120 055 189100400 2412 FULTON ST 2412-2416 Queen Anne 1904 High High Contr 81 3

151 055 188802100 2413 FULTON ST Shingle Style 1906 High High 82 2 Basement 147 055 188802000 2415 FULTON ST Queen Anne window change 1895 High High 82 2

23 055 189100500 2418 FULTON ST 2418-2420 Tudor Revival 1925 High High Signif 81 3

25 055 188801900 2421 FULTON ST Stick / Eastlake Door changed 1898 High High 82 3 Bertha Bosse Vietch & Moved on lot Yes 513 055 189000100 2424 FULTON ST Cottage Knowles Queen Anne c1905; altered 1903 1884 Good Yes Yes 1979 3S Contr 0 2

92 055 188901500 2425 FULTON ST Mission Revival Window change 1925 Good High 82 3 Bertha Bosse Vietch & Yes 5 055 189000200 2426 FULTON ST southern Cottage Knowles Queen Anne Raised 1884 High Yes Yes 1979 3S Signif CHRIS 81 2

28 055 189000300 2430 FULTON ST Kueffer House 1891 High Yes Landmrk Signif Lndmrk 81 3 International 220 057 202700202 2210 HAROLD WAY Style 1964 remodel 1938 1938 Poor Contrib Contrib Low Yes Yes BAHA/JE 72 1 Walter H. Spanish City 169 057 202700400 2222 HAROLD WAY Also faces Kittredge Armstrong College Ratcliff Colonial Revival 1923 1923 High Yes Signif Signif Yes Signif Lndmrk Yes 3 Landmar 72 2

50 055 189901400 1903 HASTE ST 1906 High High 129 2

51 055 189901300 1907 HASTE ST 1975 129 3

101 055 189802100 1908 HASTE ST 1908-1910 Shingle Style 1900 High High Contr 129 3

40 055 189901200A 1909 HASTE ST Rear Colonial Revival Stucco added? 1900 Fair High Contr 129 2

534 055 189901200B 1909 HASTE ST Front Colonial Revival Stucco added? 1900 Good High 129 2 Minimal 102 055 189802200A 1912 HASTE ST Front Traditional 1950 High High 129 1 Minimal 537 055 189802200B 1912 HASTE ST Rear Traditional 1950 High High 129 2 Foundation 2 055 189901100 1915 HASTE ST Stick / Eastlake veneer added 1895 Good High Contr 129 2

535 055 189802300A 1916 HASTE ST Front Stick / Eastlake 1895 High High Signif 129 2

94 055 189802300B 1916 HASTE ST Rear Stick / Eastlake 1895 Good High Signif 129 2

4 055 189901000 1919 HASTE ST Colonial Revival Alterations? 1905 Good High 129 2 Monroe C. Hamlin Yes 536 055 189802400A 1920 HASTE ST Front Hse Stick / Eastlake 1892 1892 High Yes 1979 3s Contr CHRIS 129 3 Yes 63 055 189802400B 1920 HASTE ST Rear 1892 1909 Yes 1979 3s Contr 129 2 Colonial Revival Signif alt's and 476 055 189902800 1921 HASTE ST (altered) additions 1905 Poor Low 129 2

64 055 189802500 1924 HASTE ST 1924-1926 Colonial Revival 1931 Fair Low 130 2 Major alt's-- 10 055 189900800A 1925 HASTE ST Rear Stick / Eastlake windows & 1895 Poor Low 130 2 Major alt's-- 538 055 189900800B 1925 HASTE ST Front Stick / Eastlake windows & 1895 Poor Low 130 2

65 055 189802600 1930 HASTE ST Colonial Revival 1930 Poor Low 130 2

38 055 189900700 1931 HASTE ST Stick / Eastlake 1900 High High Contr 130 1

67 055 189802700 1932 HASTE ST 1965 130 2

68 055 189802800 1934 HASTE ST 1934-1936 Queen Anne 1895 High High Contr 130 2

42 055 189900600 1935 HASTE ST 1970 130 2 Classical 104 055 189900500 1937 HASTE ST 1937-1939 Revival (Highly 1925 High High 130 2

36 055 189802900 1940 HASTE ST Rear Parking Pkg Yes Yes 130 0

109 055 189900400 1941 HASTE ST 1941-1943 Queen Anne 1900 High High Contr 130 1

7 055 189900300 1945 HASTE ST Queen Anne Window alt's 1905 Good High Contr 130 2

41 055 189601500 2001 HASTE ST Queen Anne 1900 Good High Contr 130 2

125 055 189601400 2007 HASTE ST 1970 130 3 Colonial Revival Major 541 055 189601300A 2009 HASTE ST Rear (Highly alte alterations 1940 Poor Low 130 3 Colonial Revival Major 127 055 189601300B 2009 HASTE ST Front (Highly alte alterations 1940 1940 Poor Low 130 3

128 055 189601200 2015 HASTE ST 2011-2015 1965 130 3

131 055 189601100A 2019 HASTE ST Rear 1940 Good Low Contr 130 1 Classical 542 055 189601100B 2019 HASTE ST Front Revival window change 1940 1940 Good Low 130 3

133 055 189600701 2033 HASTE ST 1980 130 3

139 055 189600600 2041 HASTE ST Rear Parking Pkg Yes Yes 130 0

115 055 189700700 2044 HASTE ST 2006 Pkg 130 0

119 055 189101000 2115 HASTE ST 1965 81 3

HistoricMatrixRevised-81007-Letter.xls Page 6 ID NUMBERS ADDRESS ARCHITECTURE YEAR INTEGRITY REGISTERED/DESIGNATED DOWNTOWN PLAN INVENTORIES OTHER SURVEYS OPPORTUNITY SITE SOURCE NOTES YEAR SUB NATL DIST LOCAL LOCAL LOCAL DESIGN DPR DPR SHPO BAHA BDA STAFF AC PRIMARY_D SANBO APN - ASSESSORS STR_N ADDRESS DETAIL / ARCHITECTURAL MAJOR YEAR ENGLS RECNT COMMIT INDIV INDIV /CAL CONT LANDMA STRUC HIST DTN PLAN DTN PLAN LPC DTN GUIDELIN EXISTS PRIORITY CHRI LMK/SIG CONTR RATING SURV TRAN ATA_SOUR RN STOR U_ID PARCEL NUMBER UMBER STR_NAME SUFFX MULTIPLE APNs HISTORIC NAME ARCHITECT STYLE ALTERATIONS ARG H DEMO ARG TEE NATL CAL DIST R RK MERIT DISTR MAP 1990 EIR 1990 LIST 1993 1994 SHRI (DATE) (ARG) INVEN BAHA 87 1987 1980s 2006 DPR STAFF JE CE PAGE IES

135 055 189101101 2115 HASTE ST Rear Parking Pkg Yes Yes 81 0

124 055 189100901 2117 HASTE ST 1965 81 4

530 055 189001702A 2120 HASTE ST West 1920 1920 Poor Fair Contr Yes JE 81 1

39 055 189001702B 2120 HASTE ST East 1985 1985 ? Yes Yes 81 1

31 055 189100600 2127 HASTE ST Stick / Eastlake 1900 High High Contr 81 2

43 055 189001900 2130 HASTE ST Gothic Revival 1905 High High Signif 81 2

107 055 189002000 2132 HASTE ST Gothic Revival 1905 High High Signif 81 2

395 057 206400702 1825 HEARST AVE Ohlone Park Park 36 0

466 057 205701202 1901 HEARST AVE 1975 37 2

421 057 205800101 1910 HEARST AVE faces Bonita 1990 67 2

453 057 205602900 1930 HEARST AVE 1960 High Low 67 2

499 057 205602800 1932 HEARST AVE 0 1960 High 0 2

467 057 205601501 1933 HEARST AVE Ohlone Park Park 37 0 1929 567 057 205602700A 1934 HEARST AVE Front Shingle Style 1905 1895 High High Contr Sanborn 67 2

455 057 205602700B 1934 HEARST AVE Rear 1935 1935 Contr 67 2

457 057 205602600 1940 HEARST AVE Shingle Style 1902 High High Contr 67 3

410 057 205102300 2000 HEARST AVE 1961 High High 68 4 Shingle Style New skylights, 465 057 205001702 2001 HEARST AVE (altered) window change 1915 Fair Low 37 2 Shingle siding 468 057 205001602 2005 HEARST AVE Shingle Style added 1910 Fair Low 37 3

478 057 205004400 2009 HEARST AVE Queen Anne 1895 High 37 2

558 057 205103600A 2010 HEARST AVE West 1992 1992 68 2

481 057 205103600B 2010 HEARST AVE Center 1992 1992 68 2

559 057 205103600C 2010 HEARST AVE East 1992 1992 68 2

221 057 205001402A 2011 HEARST AVE Front Shingle Style 1913 1913 High High 37 2

573 057 205001402B 2011 HEARST AVE Rear Shingle Style 1913 High High 37 2

432 057 205001302 2015 HEARST AVE 1975 37 3

406 057 205001202 2019 HEARST AVE Queen Anne 1890 High High 37 2

480 057 205003700A 2021 HEARST AVE Front 1992 1992 37 3

570 057 205003700B 2023 HEARST AVE Rear 1992 1992 37 3

407 057 205001103 2025 HEARST AVE Mission Revival Porch replaced 1925 Good High 37 2 Window 433 057 205001002 2027 HEARST AVE Queen Anne change, 1895 Good High 38 2 Changes to ext. 434 057 205000902 2029 HEARST AVE Queen Anne stairway. 1899 Good High 38 2 Minimal WindowChange 461 057 205101702 2032 HEARST AVE 2032-2034 Traditional ? 1945 1940 Fair Low 68 2

237 057 205000802 2033 HEARST AVE Queen Anne 1898 High High 38 2

238 057 205000702 2035 HEARST AVE Queen Anne 1898 High High 38 2 Queen Anne 469 057 205000602 2037 HEARST AVE (altered) 1912 High High 38 2 Minimal WindowChange 462 057 205101804 2038 HEARST AVE Traditional ? Stucco 1945 Fair Low 68 3 Minimal Window 463 057 205101904 2040 HEARST AVE 2040-2042 Traditional change. 1945 Good High 68 2 Stucco added to 251 057 204901000 2107 HEARST AVE 2107-2113 Colonial Revival porch. Other 1924 Good High 38 2

223 057 204900900 2119 HEARST AVE Colonial Revival 1925 Good High 38 2 Mediterranean Windows 470 057 204900800 2125 HEARST AVE Revival changed 1925 Fair High 38 3 Eclectic Mixed 471 057 204900700 2131 HEARST AVE Stripped Reviv 1925 High High 38 2

516 057 205101602 1901 HENRY ST Vacant Lot Vac 0 0

459 057 205102000 1902 HENRY ST 1965 Yes 68 2

409 057 205101601 1905 HENRY ST Shingle Style 1903 Good High Signif 68 2

450 057 205103200 1912 HENRY ST 1898 High High Signif 68 1

436 057 205103100 1918 HENRY ST Mission Revival 1921 High High Contr 68 2 Doesn't match 253 057 202801300 2000 KITTREDGE ST Fmr Gas Stat Sanborn; not 1972 ? Yes Yes 72 1 2020-2022, also 257 057 202801402 2020 KITTREDGE ST faces Bancroft Library Gardens 2006 2006 72 5 New awning, Yes 517 057 202700900B 2065 KITTREDGE ST North; faces Allston Shattuck Hotel windows painted 1912 1912 Good Yes Landmrk Landmrk Yes Landmrk Yes 1979 Landmrk Yes 1 Yes 72 1 South; faces Shattuck Hotel / Yes 272 057 202700900D 2065 KITTREDGE ST Shattuck Hinks 1913 1913 Good Yes Landmrk Landmrk Yes Landmrk Yes 1979 Landmrk Yes 1 Yes 72 5 c2000 addition 547 057 202801701A 2090 KITTREDGE ST West Central Library SMWM Art Deco replaced 1968 1998 2000 Yes 72 4

HistoricMatrixRevised-81007-Letter.xls Page 7 ID NUMBERS ADDRESS ARCHITECTURE YEAR INTEGRITY REGISTERED/DESIGNATED DOWNTOWN PLAN INVENTORIES OTHER SURVEYS OPPORTUNITY SITE SOURCE NOTES YEAR SUB NATL DIST LOCAL LOCAL LOCAL DESIGN DPR DPR SHPO BAHA BDA STAFF AC PRIMARY_D SANBO APN - ASSESSORS STR_N ADDRESS DETAIL / ARCHITECTURAL MAJOR YEAR ENGLS RECNT COMMIT INDIV INDIV /CAL CONT LANDMA STRUC HIST DTN PLAN DTN PLAN LPC DTN GUIDELIN EXISTS PRIORITY CHRI LMK/SIG CONTR RATING SURV TRAN ATA_SOUR RN STOR U_ID PARCEL NUMBER UMBER STR_NAME SUFFX MULTIPLE APNs HISTORIC NAME ARCHITECT STYLE ALTERATIONS ARG H DEMO ARG TEE NATL CAL DIST R RK MERIT DISTR MAP 1990 EIR 1990 LIST 1993 1994 SHRI (DATE) (ARG) INVEN BAHA 87 1987 1980s 2006 DPR STAFF JE CE PAGE IES James W. 1968 southern Yes Plaque on 529 057 202801701B 2090 KITTREDGE ST East Central Library Plachek Art Deco wing replaced 1930 1930 High Yes Yes Yes Landmrk Landmrk Yes Landmrk Yes 1977 Landmrk 1S Yes 1 Yes bu 72 4 Fox Theatre/ Calif. Balch & Yes 258 057 203000900 2113 KITTREDGE ST 2113-2115 Theat. Stanbery Moderne remodeled 1929 1914 1913 High Signif Signif Yes Signif Yes 1978 3S Yes 3 CHRIS 75 2 Shingle Style in c1925 storefront Yes 269 057 203000800 2117 KITTREDGE ST 2117-2119 A.H. Broad House A.H. Broad rear / Comme addition 1895 1895 High Yes Landmrk Signif Yes Signif Yes 1977 3S Yes CHRIS 75 2 Robert Elder E. F. Shingle Style in storefront add'n Yes 265 057 202901400 2124 KITTREDGE ST 2124-2126 House Henderson rear / Comme c1925; window 1895 1895 Good Signif Signif Yes Signif Yes 1979 3S Yes CHRIS 75 2 John C. Fitzpatrick W. Wharff / V. major remodel Yes 266 057 202901500 2138 KITTREDGE ST Hse Carlson builder Colonial Revival 1935 1904 1904 Good Signif Signif Yes Signif Yes 1979 3S Yes CHRIS 75 2 Site of Herb's Yes 267 057 202901600 2150 KITTREDGE ST Hamburgers 1995 1982 Yes Yes 1979 3S CHRIS 75 4 Touchless Car remodel/additio 268 057 202900204 2176 KITTREDGE ST Wash n c1995 1995 1959 Yes Yes 75 1

448 057 206300101 1900 M L KING WAY 1975 Yes 36 1 Charles H. Spear William H. 444 057 205801400 1905 M L KING WAY Hse Wharff Colonial Revival 1906 1906 High 3S Yes 2 Signif BAHA/JE 67 2 Colonial Revival 234 057 205801300 1911 M L KING WAY (altered) 1908 High Contr 67 2 Classical Some 411 057 205801200 1917 M L KING WAY 1917-1919 Revival alterations 1908 Fair Low Signif 67 2 Kragen Auto 386 057 206000100A 1920 M L KING WAY Front Parking Pkg Pkg Pkg Yes 36 0

571 057 206000100B 1920 M L KING WAY Rear Kragen Auto Store 1952 1952 Yes 36 1 Classical Pre- 400 057 205900101 1921 M L KING WAY 1921-1951 Revival 1992 1941 Good High Contr 67 1

227 057 205901301 1929 M L KING WAY 1992 67 2 Commercial 392 057 205901200 1933 M L KING WAY 1933-1945 Style 1955 High High Yes Yes 67 1 Windows 335 057 201600200 2054 M L KING WAY 2054-2058 Spanish Revival changed 1917 Good High 54 2 Commercial 194 057 201600300 2060 M L KING WAY 2060-2080 Bail Bond Style c1970 alts 1940 Poor Good Low 54 1 Commercial Complete 310 057 202401300A 2099 M L KING WAY Goodyear building Style Remodel 1937 1937 Poor Low Yes Yes BAHA/JE 69 1

598 057 202401300B 2099 M L KING WAY Parking Pkg Pkg Yes Yes BAHA/JE 69 0 North; adjoins Public Safety 318 057 201701601A 2100 M L KING WAY Addison Building 2005 2000 Yes Yes 54 2 Alameda Cty Midcentury NR 576 057 201701601B 2100 M L KING WAY East Court Hse John Hudspeth Modern 1958 High Yes Yes 6X District 54 2 Southwest; listed as James W. NR 579 057 201701601D 2100 M L KING WAY 1835 Allston City Hall Annex Plachek Beaux-Arts 1925 1925 High Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 1D Yes District 54 1 West; along City parking; old parkin 578 057 201701601E 2100 M L KING WAY McKinley police bldg site Pkg g Yes Yes Yes Yes 54 0 West; faces Pre- 577 057 201701601F 2100 M L KING WAY McKinley McKinley House 2005 1950 Yes Yes 6X 54 3 If 1956 structure 224 057 202200902 2105 M L KING WAY remains, 1980 1956 69 2

590 057 202201800A 2109 M L KING WAY Former PG&E bldg 1964 1964 Yes BAHA/JE 69 2

306 057 202201800B 2109 M L KING WAY Parking Pkg Yes Yes 69 1 Southeast; also John Bakewell NR 580 057 201701601C 2134 M L KING WAY adjoins Allston Old City Hall & Arthur Brown Beaux-Arts 1908 1908 High Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 1D Yes 1 District 54 3 Civic Center Park 1938 1938 288 057 202100200 2135 M L KING WAY 2135-2151 / Fountain Moderne Park Park Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes NR liste 1D Yes CHRIS 71 0 Entrance and 249 057 201800400 2200 M L KING WAY Mission Revival window change 1925 Fair Low 66 1 Asbestos siding 192 057 201800500 2206 M L KING WAY Colonial Revival added. Window 1908 Good High 66 2 Stripped 264 057 201800600 2208 M L KING WAY Moderne Window change 1925 Good High 66 2 Window 262 057 201800700 2210 M L KING WAY 2210-2212 Shingle Style change. 1912 Fair Low 66 2 Commercial Siding added 256 057 201800800 2214 M L KING WAY Style above storefront 1900 Good High Yes 66 1

252 057 201800900 2216 M L KING WAY 2216-2218 Colonial Revival 1910 High High 66 2 Clapboard 244 057 201801000 2222 M L KING WAY 2222-2224 Colonial Revival alteration? 1905 High High 66 2

241 057 201801100 2226 M L KING WAY Shingle Style 1908 High High 66 2 Shingle Style / 218 057 201801200 2232 M L KING WAY Queen Anne (a Signif. Alt's 1901 Poor Low 66 2

214 057 201801300 2236 M L KING WAY Colonial Revival 1902 High High 66 2 Window 34 057 201801400 2240 M L KING WAY Colonial Revival change. Porch 1905 Good High 66 2 Window 189 057 201801500 2242 M L KING WAY Shingle Style change. Porch 1904 Fair Low 66 2 Stripped Stucco added. 206 057 201801600 2246 M L KING WAY Colonial Revival New windows. 1909 Fair Low 66 2 Washington Sch International 591 055 190100401A 2300 M L KING WAY Bldg Style 1955 High High 129 2 Washington Sch Camp 199 055 190100401B 2300 M L KING WAY Yard us High High 129 0

158 055 190100500 2332 M L KING WAY Colonial Revival Stucco added. 1905 Good Low 129 2

154 055 190100600 2336 M L KING WAY Colonial Revival 1910 High High 129 1

152 055 190100700 2338 M L KING WAY Colonial Revival Window change 1910 Good High 129 1 Asbestos 146 055 190100800 2340 M L KING WAY Colonial Revival added, door 1913 Fair Low 129 1 Minimal Windows 118 055 190100900 2360 M L KING WAY also faces Channing Traditional altered 1910 Good 129 2 Asbestos 129 055 190200400 2400 M L KING WAY 2400-2402 Colonial Revival added. Window 1905 Fair Low 129 2

108 055 190200500 2404 M L KING WAY Colonial Revival 1904 High High 129 2

HistoricMatrixRevised-81007-Letter.xls Page 8 ID NUMBERS ADDRESS ARCHITECTURE YEAR INTEGRITY REGISTERED/DESIGNATED DOWNTOWN PLAN INVENTORIES OTHER SURVEYS OPPORTUNITY SITE SOURCE NOTES YEAR SUB NATL DIST LOCAL LOCAL LOCAL DESIGN DPR DPR SHPO BAHA BDA STAFF AC PRIMARY_D SANBO APN - ASSESSORS STR_N ADDRESS DETAIL / ARCHITECTURAL MAJOR YEAR ENGLS RECNT COMMIT INDIV INDIV /CAL CONT LANDMA STRUC HIST DTN PLAN DTN PLAN LPC DTN GUIDELIN EXISTS PRIORITY CHRI LMK/SIG CONTR RATING SURV TRAN ATA_SOUR RN STOR U_ID PARCEL NUMBER UMBER STR_NAME SUFFX MULTIPLE APNs HISTORIC NAME ARCHITECT STYLE ALTERATIONS ARG H DEMO ARG TEE NATL CAL DIST R RK MERIT DISTR MAP 1990 EIR 1990 LIST 1993 1994 SHRI (DATE) (ARG) INVEN BAHA 87 1987 1980s 2006 DPR STAFF JE CE PAGE IES

3 055 190200600 2408 M L KING WAY Colonial Revival 1904 High High 129 2

126 055 189901700 2409 M L KING WAY Queen Anne 1890 High High Signif 129 2

110 055 189901600 2411 M L KING WAY Queen Anne 1890 High High Signif 129 2

27 055 190200700 2412 M L KING WAY Colonial Revival 1904 High High 129 3

9 055 189901500 2413 M L KING WAY 1970 129 2 Major addition 90 055 190200801 2414 M L KING WAY Colonial Revival and 1910 1910 Poor Low 129 2

66 055 190201000 2422 M L KING WAY Parking Pkg 129 0 c. 1920 100 055 190201100 2424 M L KING WAY 2424-2426 Spanish Revival alterations 1912 Good High 129 2 Spanish / 48 055 190201201 2428 M L KING WAY 2428-2430 Colonial Revival 1910 High High 129 2

98 055 189802000 2429 M L KING WAY Queen Anne 1895 High High Signif 129 2 Colonial Revival 47 055 189801900 2433 M L KING WAY (altered) Window alt's 1915 Fair Low Contr 129 1 Colonial Revival Stairway and 81 055 190201400 2434 M L KING WAY 2434-2438 (altered) door added 1905 1905 Good High 139 2 Shingle Style Window 88 055 189801800 2435 M L KING WAY (altered) change. 1906 Fair Low Contr 129 2 Colonial Revival 73 055 189801700A 2439 M L KING WAY North; 2439-2441 (altered) Stucco added. 1905 1905 Poor Low Contr 139 2

533 055 189801700B 2439 M L KING WAY South; 2439-2441 1962 1962 Fair Low JE 139 2 Windows 53 055 190201500 2450 M L KING WAY changed 1960 Fair Low 139 2 2486-2488, 055 Commercial Window 475 055 190203600 2486 M L KING WAY 19020360 Style (altered) change. Siding 2004 139 3

74 055 189801601 2489 M L KING WAY Recycle Ctr Vac Yes Yes 139 0

59 054 181400102 2500 M L KING WAY 1995 139 3 new siding, pre- 458 057 205603200 1904 MILVIA ST South windows, porch 1900 1900 Fair Low Contr 67 1 North; also faces Window 479 057 205603100 1906 MILVIA ST HEARST Colonial Revival change. Siding 1905 1900 Fair Contr 67 1 Colonial Revival 446 057 205602400 1910 MILVIA ST (altered) 1908 Fair Low 67 1

451 057 205102400 1911 MILVIA ST Queen Anne 1902 68 1 Also faces Berkeley 437 057 205602300 1912 MILVIA ST Way 1975 67 4

440 057 205102500 1915 MILVIA ST Shingle Style 1916 Good High 68 1

474 057 205103300 1919 MILVIA ST 1985 68 2

302 057 205301403 1945 MILVIA ST 1970 68 4 Classical 396 057 205301200 1947 MILVIA ST 1947-1949 Revival 1923 1923 Good Contrib Contrib Signif High Yes BAHA/JE 68 2 Shingle Style Storefront 1929 353 057 202501200 2001 MILVIA ST 2001-2007 rear / Spanish addition c1937? 1925 1890s Good High Sanborn 70 2 Edwin J. International 344 057 202400202 2020 MILVIA ST 2020-2030 Tioga Building Schruers Style 1954 1954 High Contrib Contrib High Yes Yes BAHA/JE 69 5 Substantial 18 057 202201701 2100 MILVIA ST Barra Software remodel 2000 1958 Poor 69 3

582 057 202301701 2101 MILVIA ST Also faces Addison 2003 2002 70 5

322 057 202200301 2108 MILVIA ST Parking Pkg Pkg Yes Yes 69 0

329 057 202301601 2109 MILVIA ST Parking Pkg Yes Yes 70 0 Site of Wheeler Yes 225 057 202301400 2115 MILVIA ST 215-2119 Manuf Co 1994 Yes Yes 1977 3S Yes CHRIS 70 4

317 057 202200501 2118 MILVIA ST 2118-2122 1966 1966 BAHA/JE 69 3

292 057 202600702 2175 MILVIA ST 1969 1969 BAHA/JE 72 4 Federal Land James W. Yes 276 057 202100100 2180 MILVIA ST Bank Plachek Moderne 1938 1938 Fair Yes Yes Yes Yes Landmrk Landmrk Yes Landmrk Yes 1977 1D Yes 3 CHRIS 71 6 Complete 1929 545 057 202801200A 2237 MILVIA ST South Mission Revival remodel 1930 1929 Fair High Yes Yes Sanborn 72 1 Complete 239 057 202801200B 2237 MILVIA ST North remodel 1929 1929 Fair High Yes Yes BAHA/JE 72 1

512 055 189601800 2407 MILVIA St 0 1943 0 2 Shingle over 44 055 189601700 2409 MILVIA ST Spanish Revival siding? 1921 Good High 130 1

111 055 189900200 2412 MILVIA ST 1966 Contr 130 2

91 055 189601600 2413 MILVIA ST Shingle Style 1905 Fair Low 130 2

37 055 189800100 2428 MILVIA ST Colonial Revival 1910 High High Contr 130 2 Classical Windows 99 055 189800200 2432 MILVIA ST Revival changed 1909 Good High Contr 130 2 Classical 49 055 189800300 2434 MILVIA ST Revival 1909 High High Contr 130 2 Northeast corner; 60 055 181501702A 2500 MILVIA ST also faces Dwight 1980 140 2

586 055 181501702B 2500 MILVIA ST Herrick Parking Pkg Yes Yes 140 0 UC calls it 2195 473 058 218000102 1828 OXFORD ST HEARST 2006 UC 73 3

405 058 218101905 1899 OXFORD ST Vacant Lot Vac Yes 39 0

496 057 204700105 1900 OXFORD St UC Parking Pkg Yes Yes 0 0

HistoricMatrixRevised-81007-Letter.xls Page 9 ID NUMBERS ADDRESS ARCHITECTURE YEAR INTEGRITY REGISTERED/DESIGNATED DOWNTOWN PLAN INVENTORIES OTHER SURVEYS OPPORTUNITY SITE SOURCE NOTES YEAR SUB NATL DIST LOCAL LOCAL LOCAL DESIGN DPR DPR SHPO BAHA BDA STAFF AC PRIMARY_D SANBO APN - ASSESSORS STR_N ADDRESS DETAIL / ARCHITECTURAL MAJOR YEAR ENGLS RECNT COMMIT INDIV INDIV /CAL CONT LANDMA STRUC HIST DTN PLAN DTN PLAN LPC DTN GUIDELIN EXISTS PRIORITY CHRI LMK/SIG CONTR RATING SURV TRAN ATA_SOUR RN STOR U_ID PARCEL NUMBER UMBER STR_NAME SUFFX MULTIPLE APNs HISTORIC NAME ARCHITECT STYLE ALTERATIONS ARG H DEMO ARG TEE NATL CAL DIST R RK MERIT DISTR MAP 1990 EIR 1990 LIST 1993 1994 SHRI (DATE) (ARG) INVEN BAHA 87 1987 1980s 2006 DPR STAFF JE CE PAGE IES

460 057 204700201 1910 OXFORD ST 1910-1920 1998 73 5 Richfield Oil Co, Walter H. Yes 441 057 204500200 1952 OXFORD ST Univ Garage Ratcliff Mission Revival 1930 1930 High Yes Landmrk Landmrk Yes Landmrk Yes 1979 3S Yes 2 Yes CHRIS 73 1

497 057 204500300 1990 OXFORD St UC Parking Pkg Yes Yes 0 0 Site of Eastman Yes 309 057 203100101 2128 OXFORD ST 2128-2168 Block & Hse 1996 Yes Yes 1978 7N Yes Yes Yes Yes CHRIS 74 1 2, 21, 46 + 48 Miller and Ecclectic Yes 195 057 203300101 48 SHATTUCK SQ Shattuck Pflueger Revival 1926 1926 Good Yes Landmrk Landmrk Yes Landmrk Yes 1978 3S Yes 2 CHRIS 73 2 Miller and Neoclassical Storefront Yes 378 057 203300300 64 SHATTUCK SQ 61 and 64 Shattuck Roos Brothers Pfllueger Revival alteration 1926 1926 Good Yes Landmrk Landmrk Yes Landmrk Yes 1978 3S Yes 2 CHRIS 73 2 Miller and Ecclectic Yes 352 057 203300400 81 SHATTUCK SQ Shattuck Sq Bldg. Pfllueger Revival 1926 1926 Good Yes Landmrk Landmrk Yes Landmrk Yes 1978 3S Yes 2 CHRIS 73 2

222 057 205000500 1848 SHATTUCK AVE 1848-1890 1964 Yes 38 1 204901300- 482 057 204901300 1849 SHATTUCK AVE 204903900 1996 38 4

515 057 205100201 1900 SHATTUCK AVE 0 1990s 0 3

408 057 205100300 1908 SHATTUCK AVE Vacant Lot Vac Yes 3 Yes Yes 68 0 Commercial 454 057 205100400 1920 SHATTUCK AVE Style / 1920 Good High 3 Signif 68 1 Commercial 452 057 205100500 1926 SHATTUCK AVE 1926-1928 Style 1990 Yes 68 1

420 057 205100601 1930 SHATTUCK AVE 1930-1936 1961 High High 68 2 Commercial Shattuck façade 1929 416 057 205300100 1950 SHATTUCK AVE 1950-1958 Style heavily remodel 1922 1922 Fair Contrib Contrib High Yes Yes Sanborn 68 1 Complete c. 368 057 205300200 1974 SHATTUCK AVE 1970 remodel 1921 1921 Poor Contrib Contrib Yes Yes BAHA/JE 73 1 Commercial New building or 365 057 205300302 1984 SHATTUCK AVE 1984-1986 Style compl. remodel 2000 1924 Poor Contrib Contrib Low Yes Yes 68 1 Commercial Major remodel 364 057 205300301 1986 SHATTUCK AVE 1986-1998 Style 1977 1950 1950 Poor Contrib Contrib Low Yes Yes 68 1 US Realty Commercial Storefronts Yes City 367 057 204601100 1987 SHATTUCK AVE 1979-1987 Company Earle Bertz Style altered 1925 1925 Good Yes Landmrk Landmrk Yes Landmrk Yes 1978 3S Yes 3 Yes Landmar 73 1 New or major 1950 383 057 202500100 2000 SHATTUCK AVE Citibank Modern remodel c1965 1965 1927 Poor Yes Yes Sanborn 70 1 James W. Commercial 358 057 202500200 2008 SHATTUCK AVE 2008-2012 Hotel Central Plachek Style / Colonial 1917 1917 Good Signif Signif Yes Signif High Yes 3 BAHA/JE 70 3 2011-2015, also Univ & Shattuck Classical / Yes 385 057 203401000 2011 SHATTUCK AVE faces U Store Bldg Mediterranean 1979 1979 Yes Signif Landmrk Yes Yes 1977 3S Yes Yes BAHA/JE 73 7 James L. Late Gothic Yes 372 057 202502200 2014 SHATTUCK AVE 2014-2016 Heywood Bldg. Plachek Revival 1917 1917 High Yes Signif Signif Landmrk Yes 1978 3S Yes 2 CHRIS 70 2 Commercial Façade 359 057 203400900 2017 SHATTUCK AVE Style complete 1910 1910s Poor Contrib Contrib Low Yes BAHA/JE 73 1 Commercial Façade 369 057 202500400 2018 SHATTUCK AVE 2018-2020 Style / Classical completely 1910 Poor Contrib Contrib Yes Yes 70 1 John Hobson Italian Storefront 373 057 203400800 2023 SHATTUCK AVE 2023-2025 Thomas? Renaissance completely 1915 1915 Fair Fair Contrib Contrib Yes Low Yes 73 1 Classical Façade 354 057 202500502 2024 SHATTUCK AVE 2024-2026 Revival complete remod 1917 1917 Poor Contrib Contrib Low Yes BAHA/JE 70 1 Commercial Façade 315 057 203400700 2033 SHATTUCK AVE Style completely 1915 1915 Poor Fair Contrib Contrib Low Yes 73 1 S.H. Kress & Edward F. Yes 347 057 202500600 2036 SHATTUCK AVE Company Sibbert Art Deco 1933 1933 High Yes Landmrk Landmrk Yes Landmrk Yes 1978 3S Yes 1 CHRIS 70 2 Yes 351 057 203400600 2037 SHATTUCK AVE 2037-2045 Studio Building F.H. Dakin Second Empire 1905 1905 High Yes Yes Yes Landmrk Landmrk Yes Landmrk Yes 1978 1S Yes 1 CHRIS 73 5 Francis Shattuck Louis Stone / Classical 4th Fl Added Yes 333 057 202300100 2100 SHATTUCK AVE 2100-2114 Bldg. Henry Smit Revival c2000 1901 1901 Good Yes Signif Signif Yes Signif Yes 1978 3S Yes Yes CHRIS 70 4 Mason-McDuffie Walter H. Classical / Windows Yes 337 057 203201100 2101 SHATTUCK AVE Bldg Ratcliff Mediterranean changed 1928 1928 Good Yes Landmrk Landmrk Yes Landmrk Yes 1979 3S Yes 1 Yes CHRIS 74 2 Commercial Bay windows Yes 334 057 203201000 2109 SHATTUCK AVE 2109-2119 Chase Building William Wharff Style / Classical added 1909 1909 High Yes Signif Signif Yes Signif Yes 1978 3S Yes Yes CHRIS 74 5 Commercial Complete 1929 327 057 202300200 2116 SHATTUCK AVE 2116-2118 Style Façade 1915 1938 Poor Low 6Z Yes Yes Yes Yes Sanborn 70 1 Roy O Long Co; Edwin Lewis "Mother Goose Storefront Yes 298 057 202300300 2120 SHATTUCK AVE 2120-2122 Morse-Brock Bldg. Snyder Renaissance" / Remodel 1927 1927 Good Yes Signif Yes 1978 3S Yes Yes CHRIS 70 2 Chamber of Walter H. Classical 1925- Yes LPC List 325 057 202300400 2140 SHATTUCK AVE 2140-2144 Commerce Ratcliff Revival 1925 1927 High Yes Yes Yes Landmrk Landmrk Yes Landmrk Yes 1978 1S Yes 1 Yes (JE) 70 12 1st Savings David H. International Yes 305 057 202600201 2150 SHATTUCK AVE /Powerbar Termohlen & Style 1969 1969 Signif Signif Yes 1979 3S Yes Yes CHRIS 70 13 William Classical Some storefront Yes 277 057 203100900 2151 SHATTUCK AVE 2151-2165 Wright Block Knowles Revival alterations 1906 1906 Good Yes Signif Signif Yes Signif Yes 1977 7N Yes Yes CHRIS 74 3 Constitution Commercial Major remodel Yes 291 057 202601300 2168 SHATTUCK AVE 2170-2180 Square A. H. Broad Style (altered) 1984 1906 1906 Poor Landmrk Contrib Yes Yes 1978 7N Yes Yes Yes CHRIS 72 3 Major remodel 260 057 203100800 2171 SHATTUCK AVE 2171-2175 1969 1980 1905 Poor 6Z Yes 74 2 FW Foss Co, F. W. Foss Co. Commercial Major remodel Yes 289 057 203100700 2177 SHATTUCK AVE 2177-2181 Martino's Rest &/or Will Style 1982 1895 1895 Fair ? Signif Signif Yes Signif Yes 1979 3S Yes 3 Yes CHRIS 74 2 Major remodel Yes 511 057 203100600 2187 SHATTUCK AVE Walgreens 1987 1990 1922 Poor Signif Signif Yes Yes 1978 6Z Yes Yes Yes Yes 1

282 057 202600405 2190 SHATTUCK AVE 1980s remodel 1955 1955 Fair Signif Contrib Yes Yes BAHA/JE 72 2 Northwest; Harold & Shattuck Hotel / Yes 483 057 202700800A 2200 SHATTUCK AVE Allston Hinks 1957 1957 High Yes Yes Landmrk Yes 1979 Yes 1 Yes 72 2 Northeast; also Benjamin Mediterranean Yes 486 057 202700800C 2200 SHATTUCK AVE along Allston Shattuck Hotel McDougall Revival 1909 1909 High Yes Landmrk Landmrk Yes Landmrk Yes 1979 Yes 1 Yes 72 6 Southwest; Shattuck Hotel / Mediterranean Yes 518 057 202700800E 2200 SHATTUCK AVE Harold+Kittredge; Hinks Revival 1927 1927 High Yes Yes Landmrk Yes 1979 Yes 1 Yes 72 3 Hinkel Block; Frm Streamline Remodel 1941 Yes 275 057 203000100 2201 SHATTUCK AVE 2201-2213 Edys William Koenig Moderne & 1990s 1895 1895 Fair Poor Signif Signif Yes Yes 1978 3S Yes Yes CHRIS 75 2 Koenig / Bliss Commercial 274 057 203001200 2219 SHATTUCK AVE 2219-2223 & Fairwea Style 1940 1959 Fair Poor Signif Signif High 6Z Yes Yes 75 2 Classical Yes 273 057 203001100 2225 SHATTUCK AVE Alko Stationery William Porter Revival 1913 1913 High Signif Signif Yes Signif Yes 1979 3S Yes Yes CHRIS 75 2 Brooks Apts, Meyers and Classical Storefront Yes 219 057 203001000 2231 SHATTUCK AVE 2231-2237 Amherst Hotel Ward Revival altered 1906 1906 Good Yes Signif Signif Yes Signif Yes 1978 3S Yes 3 Yes CHRIS 75 3 W. Wharff / H. Commercial Façade Yes 263 057 202901300 2255 SHATTUCK AVE 2255-2263 Wanger Block Ostwald Style complete 1903 1903 Poor Yes Yes 1978 7N Yes Yes CHRIS 75 3 Homestead Loan C. W. Dickey / Façade Yes 247 057 202800200 2270 SHATTUCK AVE 2270-2272 Assoc Bldg F. J. Wal Moderne complete 1905 1905 Poor Yes Yes 1978 3S Yes Yes CHRIS 72 2

HistoricMatrixRevised-81007-Letter.xls Page 10 ID NUMBERS ADDRESS ARCHITECTURE YEAR INTEGRITY REGISTERED/DESIGNATED DOWNTOWN PLAN INVENTORIES OTHER SURVEYS OPPORTUNITY SITE SOURCE NOTES YEAR SUB NATL DIST LOCAL LOCAL LOCAL DESIGN DPR DPR SHPO BAHA BDA STAFF AC PRIMARY_D SANBO APN - ASSESSORS STR_N ADDRESS DETAIL / ARCHITECTURAL MAJOR YEAR ENGLS RECNT COMMIT INDIV INDIV /CAL CONT LANDMA STRUC HIST DTN PLAN DTN PLAN LPC DTN GUIDELIN EXISTS PRIORITY CHRI LMK/SIG CONTR RATING SURV TRAN ATA_SOUR RN STOR U_ID PARCEL NUMBER UMBER STR_NAME SUFFX MULTIPLE APNs HISTORIC NAME ARCHITECT STYLE ALTERATIONS ARG H DEMO ARG TEE NATL CAL DIST R RK MERIT DISTR MAP 1990 EIR 1990 LIST 1993 1994 SHRI (DATE) (ARG) INVEN BAHA 87 1987 1980s 2006 DPR STAFF JE CE PAGE IES Tupper & Reed / William R. "Mother Goose Yes Plaque on 255 057 202901200 2271 SHATTUCK AVE 2271-2275 Metropol Yelland Renaissance 1925 1925 High Yes Yes Yes Landmrk Landmrk Yes Landmrk Yes 1977 Yes 1 Yes bu 75 2 United Artists Windows&entra Yes 246 057 202800300 2274 SHATTUCK AVE Thter C. A. Balch Art Deco nce alts; 1932 1932 Good Signif Signif Yes Signif Yes 1978 3S Yes 3 Yes CHRIS 72 2 MorseBlock, Dickey and Classical Yes 240 057 202800400 2276 SHATTUCK AVE 2276-2286 DonoghArms Reed Revival 1906 1906 High Yes Yes Yes Landmrk Landmrk Yes Landmrk Yes 1978 3S Yes 2 Yes CHRIS 72 3 Tupper&Reed Mediterranean Yes 248 057 202901100 2277 SHATTUCK AVE /Hezletts Masten & Hurd Revival 1925 1925 High Yes Yes Signif Yes 1977 1S Yes 2 Yes CHRIS 75 2 2281-83; Paul's Cardevilles Univ Joseph Storefront Yes 245 057 202901002 2281 SHATTUCK AVE Shoe Repair; French Laundry Leonard Moderne remodel 1947 1904 1904 High High Signif Signif Yes Signif Yes 1977 7N Yes Yes CHRIS 75 1 James L. Classical Storefronts Yes 210 055 189401702 2300 SHATTUCK AVE 2300-2350 Corder Bldg. Plachek Revival altered; 3 upper 1921 Good Yes Yes Yes Landmrk Landmrk Yes Landmrk Yes 1978 1S Yes 2 Yes CHRIS 130 4

211 055 189301600 2301 SHATTUCK AVE 1978 1978 Yes Yes BAHA/JE 75 1 FidelityGuarantyBl Michael Yes 207 055 189301501A 2323 SHATTUCK AVE North dg. & LoanAssoc Goodman 1965 1965 Yes Yes Yes 1979 Yes 2 Yes 75 3 FidelityGuarantyBl Walter H. Mediterranean Windows Yes 546 055 189301501B 2323 SHATTUCK AVE South dg. & LoanAssoc Ratcliff Revival altered 1926 1926 Good Yes Landmrk Landmrk Yes Landmrk Yes 1979 3S Yes 2 Yes CHRIS 75 2 Commercial Storefront 203 055 189301300 2327 SHATTUCK AVE Style / remodel 1957 & 1905 1905? Good High 6Z Yes Yes Yes 75 1

204 055 189301200 2333 SHATTUCK AVE 1965 1965 Yes Yes BAHA/JE 75 1 Commercial Windows 185 055 189201600 2349 SHATTUCK AVE Style altered 1928 Good High 6Z Contr Yes Yes 81 1 Pkg; West; faces 184 055 189501805A 2352 SHATTUCK AVE Durant Pkg Pkg Yes Yes 130 0 Northeast corner; 522 055 189501805B 2352 SHATTUCK AVE also faces Durant Staples 1993 Yes Poor 2 Yes Yes 130 1

523 055 189501805C 2352 SHATTUCK AVE South of B Blockbuster 1993 Yes Poor 2 Yes Yes 130 1 Commercial Complete 182 055 189201500 2367 SHATTUCK AVE Style (altered) Remodel 1914 Poor Low Yes Yes 81 1 Wallace W. Clark Wallace W. False Front Yes 13 055 189201400 2375 SHATTUCK AVE 2375-2377 Bldg Clark, builde Victorian 1894 1895 High Yes Yes 1979 3S Yes 1 Signif Lndmrk 81 2

14 055 189201301 2389 SHATTUCK AVE 2389-2399 1990 81 2

138 055 189600100A 2400 SHATTUCK AVE North portion New constr ?? 1980 1960 Good Yes Yes 130 1

600 055 189600100B 2400 SHATTUCK AVE South portion Remodel c1960 1980 1940 Poor Yes Yes 130 1 Fujikawa&ChunO Streamline Yes 116 055 189600200 2414 SHATTUCK AVE ptometry Moderne 1946 High Yes 1977 High 7N 2 Signif Yes CHRIS 130 1 Yes 121 055 189101301 2415 SHATTUCK AVE 2415-2427 1998 Yes 1978 3S 3 81 4 Classical Façade 30 055 189600300 2420 SHATTUCK AVE Revival Remodel 1915 Poor Low Yes Yes 130 1 Commercial Windows 140 055 189600400 2428 SHATTUCK AVE 2428-2430 Style altered 1920 Fair Low Yes Yes 130 1 Mediterranean Storefronts Yes 142 055 189101200 2429 SHATTUCK AVE 2429-2449 Morrill Apts George F. King Revival altered 1905 1911 Good Yes Yes 1978 2S2 Yes 1 Signif BAHA/JE 81 4

130 055 189600500 2440 SHATTUCK AVE Moderne 1940 Fair Low Yes Yes 130 1 Commercial 33 055 189700600 2450 SHATTUCK AVE 2450-2468 Style (altered) Façade altered 1918 Poor Low Signif Yes 130 1

6 055 189001302 2451 SHATTUCK AVE 2451-2471 2005 2004 81 5 Classical Storefront 35 055 189700103 2474 SHATTUCK AVE 2474-2480 Revival alterations 1915 Fair Good High Contr Yes 130 1 1990 Yes 97 055 189700200 2484 SHATTUCK AVE 2484-2486 Barker Bldg. A. W. Smith Mission Revival rehabilitation 1905 1905 High Yes Yes 1977 3S Yes 1 Signif CHRIS 140 3 Classical windows 52 055 182200100 2500 SHATTUCK AVE 2500-2508 Revival boarded over 1920 Good High 140 2

595 Public R.O.W. TERMINAL PL Terminal Place 1906 Yes Yes 4S Yes 73 0

250 057 201602702 1840 UNIVERSITY AVE 1840-1898 Gas Station 1984 High Yes 54 1 1911 355 057 202401400 1900 UNIVERSITY AVE 1900-1908 Mission Revival Major remodel 1920 1910 Fair Good Contrib Contrib Yes Signif Low Yes 1929 69 2 Classical 303 057 205901100 1901 UNIVERSITY AVE 1901-1903 Revival 1924 1924 High Contrib Contrib Yes Signif High Yes BAHA/JE 67 2 Commercial 304 057 205901000 1909 UNIVERSITY AVE 1909-1911 Style 1951 1951 High High Yes Yes 67 1

384 057 205900900 1915 UNIVERSITY AVE 1978 1978 Yes Yes BAHA/JE 67 1

356 057 202401503 1916 UNIVERSITY AVE 1916-1918 1984 1984 BAHA/JE 69 4 Commercial Storefront 387 057 205900800 1921 UNIVERSITY AVE 1921-1925 Style / alterations 1924 1924 Fair Contrib Contrib Signif High Yes Yes BAHA/JE 67 1 Colonial Revival 357 057 202401602 1924 UNIVERSITY AVE 1924-1926 rear / Comme Historic addition 1915 1915 Fair Good Contrib Contrib High Yes 69 2

389 057 205900700 1929 UNIVERSITY AVE 1962 1962 Yes Yes BAHA/JE 67 1 Commercial 390 057 205900600 1941 UNIVERSITY AVE Style / 1921 1921 Good Contrib Contrib Signif High Yes Yes BAHA/JE 67 1 Major remodel 495 057 202400801 1950 UNIVERSITY AVE 1975 0 1962 Yes 0 3 City 370 057 202402000A 1952 UNIVERSITY AVE Rear Bertin Properties 1922 Fair Yes Lndmrk Landmar 69 1 City 574 057 202402000B 1952 UNIVERSITY AVE Middle Bertin Properties 1922 Fair Yes Lndmrk Landmar 69 1 John Bartlett Commercial City 575 057 202402000C 1952 UNIVERSITY AVE Front Bertin Properties builder Style / Classical 1990 remodel 1922 1922 High Yes Contrib Contrib Lndmrk Yes Landmar 69 2 Harry C. Smith Colonial Revival pre 1950 1st City 550 057 202402100A 1960 UNIVERSITY AVE Front Bertin Properties builder (altered) floor addition 1923 1923 Good Yes Contrib Contrib Lndmrk Yes 3 Landmar 69 2 Colonial Revival City 551 057 202402100B 1960 UNIVERSITY AVE Rear-west Bertin Properties (altered) 1923 Good Yes Lndmrk Landmar 69 0 Colonial Revival City 371 057 202402100C 1960 UNIVERSITY AVE Rear-east Bertin Properties (altered) 1923 Good Yes Lndmrk Landmar 69 1 Commercial / 588 057 202400102A 1974 UNIVERSITY AVE Firestone Intern'l Style 1948 1948 Poor High Yes Yes BAHA/JE 69 1

374 057 202400102B 1974 UNIVERSITY AVE Parking Pkg Pkg Yes Yes 69 0 North; faces Golden Bear 366 057 205401201A 1995 UNIVERSITY AVE Berkeley Way Parking Pkg Pkg Yes Yes 67 0

HistoricMatrixRevised-81007-Letter.xls Page 11 ID NUMBERS ADDRESS ARCHITECTURE YEAR INTEGRITY REGISTERED/DESIGNATED DOWNTOWN PLAN INVENTORIES OTHER SURVEYS OPPORTUNITY SITE SOURCE NOTES YEAR SUB NATL DIST LOCAL LOCAL LOCAL DESIGN DPR DPR SHPO BAHA BDA STAFF AC PRIMARY_D SANBO APN - ASSESSORS STR_N ADDRESS DETAIL / ARCHITECTURAL MAJOR YEAR ENGLS RECNT COMMIT INDIV INDIV /CAL CONT LANDMA STRUC HIST DTN PLAN DTN PLAN LPC DTN GUIDELIN EXISTS PRIORITY CHRI LMK/SIG CONTR RATING SURV TRAN ATA_SOUR RN STOR U_ID PARCEL NUMBER UMBER STR_NAME SUFFX MULTIPLE APNs HISTORIC NAME ARCHITECT STYLE ALTERATIONS ARG H DEMO ARG TEE NATL CAL DIST R RK MERIT DISTR MAP 1990 EIR 1990 LIST 1993 1994 SHRI (DATE) (ARG) INVEN BAHA 87 1987 1980s 2006 DPR STAFF JE CE PAGE IES Golden Bear 485 057 205401201B 1995 UNIVERSITY AVE South Building 1985 1985 67 5 Commercial Storefront 376 057 202501300 2000 UNIVERSITY AVE Style alteration 1912 1912 Fair Contrib Contrib Yes Low Yes Yes BAHA/JE 70 1

379 057 202501400 2004 UNIVERSITY AVE 2004-2008 2004 2004 Yes Contrib Contrib BAHA/JE 70 5

398 057 205301402 2011 UNIVERSITY AVE 1976 1976 Yes Yes BAHA/JE 68 1 3 altered 402 057 205301100A 2013 UNIVERSITY AVE 2013-2017 storefronts 1926 1926 Poor Contrib Contrib Low Yes BAHA/JE 68 1 James L. Classical Storefront Yes 360 057 202501500 2018 UNIVERSITY AVE 2018-2036 Fox UC Theater Plachek Revival altered 1916 1916 Good Yes Contrib Contrib Yes Signif Yes 1978 7J Yes Yes 2 CHRIS 70 2 1 storefront 597 057 205301100B 2019 UNIVERSITY AVE 2019 intact 1926 1926 Poor Contrib Contrib Signif Low Yes BAHA/JE 68 1

399 057 205300801 2029 UNIVERSITY AVE 2029-2039 1950 1950 Good Contrib Contrib High Yes BAHA/JE 68 2 August Storefront Yes 228 057 205300700 2041 UNIVERSITY AVE 2041-2051 Nash Hotel Headman Spanish Revival altered 1923 1923 Good Signif Signif Yes Signif Yes 1979 3S Yes 2 CHRIS 68 3 Joseph Davis J. E. Bigelow Classical Storefront Yes 361 057 202501600 2042 UNIVERSITY AVE 2042-2044 Bldg. (builder) Revival altered 1980 1905 1905 Good Contrib Contrib Yes Signif Yes 1979 3S Yes Yes CHRIS 70 2 Koerber Bldg., Berkeley Bldg. Classical Storefront Yes 362 057 202501702 2054 UNIVERSITY AVE State Farm Bldg. Co. Revival altered 1923 1923 High Contrib Contrib Yes Signif Yes 1979 3S Yes Yes 2 CHRIS 70 6 Classical Major remodel 231 057 205300600 2057 UNIVERSITY AVE 2057-2059 Revival (altered) 1946 1909 1909 Poor Contrib Contrib Low Yes BAHA/JE 68 3 Commercial Major remodel 381 057 202501900 2058 UNIVERSITY AVE Style 1954 1917 Poor Poor Contrib Contrib Low Yes 70 1 Art Deco Major remodel 382 057 202502100A 2066 UNIVERSITY AVE Front Campanile Hotel (altered) 1946 & 1990s 1912 1905 Fair Poor High 6Y CHRIS 70 3

549 057 202502100B 2066 UNIVERSITY AVE Rear 1990 1990 High 6Y CHRIS 70 3 Complete 316 057 205300500 2067 UNIVERSITY AVE remodel 1947 1921 1921 Poor Good Contrib Contrib Yes Yes 68 1 Commercial Major remodel 363 057 205300402 2071 UNIVERSITY AVE 2071-2079 Style / Classical 1949 1910 1910 Poor Fair Contrib Contrib Low Yes Yes 68 1 Commercial Storefront 301 057 204601000 2111 UNIVERSITY AVE 2111-2113 Style / Classical details 1910 1911 Good Contrib Contrib Yes Signif High Yes 3 Yes 73 1

428 057 204600900 2119 UNIVERSITY AVE 2119-2123 2000 2004 Yes Contrib Contrib Yes 73 5 James W. Commercial Yes 556 057 204600803A 2125 UNIVERSITY AVE West Plachek Style / 1921 1921 Good Yes Signif Yes 1979 Yes 73 1 George L. Commercial Storefront/Seis Yes City 404 057 204600803B 2125 UNIVERSITY AVE East; 2127-2135 Acheson Bldg. Mohr Style / mic Alterations 1908 1908 Good Yes Landmrk Landmrk Yes Landmrk Yes 1978 3S Yes 3 Landmar 73 4 Ernest Alvah Classical Storefront City 388 057 203401100 2136 UNIVERSITY AVE 2136-2140 Heron Bldg Revival alterations 1915 1915 Good Yes Contrib Contrib Signif Landmrk Yes 3 Yes Landmar 73 1 Sills, Berk. James W. Classical Storefront Yes 403 057 204600802 2145 UNIVERSITY AVE Hardware Plachek Revival alterations 1915 1915 Good Yes Signif Signif Yes Signif Yes 1979 3S Yes 3 CHRIS 73 1 Classical Storefront 391 057 203401200 2154 UNIVERSITY AVE 2154-2160 Revival remodel 1911 1911 Poor Fair Yes Contrib Contrib Yes Signif Yes Yes BAHA/JE 73 1 Commercial Storefront 414 057 204500400 2161 UNIVERSITY AVE Style alterations 1939 1939 Fair Low Yes Yes 73 1

417 057 204600600 1900 WALNUT ST Ace Hrdw Pkg Pkg Yes Yes 73 0 Classical Yes 438 057 204500100 1921 WALNUT ST George Mohr Revival 1909 1909 High Contrib Contrib Yes Signif Yes 1978 Yes Yes 3 BAHA/JE 73 4 Baldwin / Yes 235 057 204600400 1922 WALNUT ST 1922-1924 AchesonHse Shingle Style 1905 1905 High Contrib Contrib Yes Signif Yes 1978 3S Yes Yes 3 CHRIS 73 2 Yes 429 057 204500600 1925 WALNUT ST AchesonHse Shingle Style 1905 1905 High Contrib Contrib Yes Signif Yes 1978 3S Yes Yes 3 CHRIS 73 3 Moore / Yes 424 057 204600500 1930 WALNUT ST AchesonHse Shingle Style 1905 1905 High Contrib Contrib Yes Signif Yes 1978 3S Yes Yes 3 CHRIS 73 2

419 057 204500500 1933 WALNUT ST Parking Lot Pkg Yes 73 0

583 CampusBuildingA Barker Hall ? 6 New Building Under 584 CampusBuildingB Warren Hall Construction 2009 2009 Yes ? 0

HistoricMatrixRevised-81007-Letter.xls Page 12