Berkeley council overturns two LPC landmark designations, affirms large Shattuck housing project

The Berkeley City Council on July 23 voted to reverse two landmark designations and to affirm a Zoning Adjustment Board approval for a mixed‑use housing project after lengthy public comment and council debate.

Staff presentation and recommendation Jordan Klein, the city’s director of planning and development, and senior planner Robert Rivera told the council the two landmark decisions were made after developers had submitted SB 330 preliminary applications and been deemed complete, establishing vesting protection under state law. Riverasaid staff concluded the designations ‘‘cannot be applied to the proposed project under state law’’ and recommended the council reverse the Landmarks Preservation Commission (LPC) decisions for 2421 Durant Avenue and 2138 Kittredge Street.

Appellants, applicants and preservation advocates Representatives for the projects and their opponents gave competing accounts. An attorney for the applicant in the Durant appeal argued the LPC designation chilled financing for the project and had delayed approvals by months, saying lenders and insurers ‘‘look very, very carefully’’ at deed restrictions and landmarking. Bill Schrader, who said he owns the Austin Group and the Studio 1 property at Kittredge, told the council the appeals had produced substantial costs and urged reversal of the designations.

Opposing speakers, including members of the Berkeley Architectural Heritage Association (Baja) and neighbors, argued the houses at issue—particularly 2421 Durant—have cultural or educational value and that the city should pursue a citywide historic context statement and survey rather than ad‑hoc landmarking after development proposals surface. Isaac Warshauer, who identified himself as a Baja board member and Berkeley resident, said designations are ‘‘an educational force’’ that can preserve the city’s history.

Council discussion and legal framing Council members repeatedly asked staff and the city attorney whether designation after vesting had legal effect on a project. The city attorney and planning staff said the designations were effectively symbolic as applied to projects already vested under SB 330, meaning the land‑use standards associated with landmark status could not legally be imposed on the pending housing applications. Council members who voted to reverse the LPC actions framed their votes around the combination of state vesting law and the potential financial and procedural burden that designation could create for housing projects.

Votes - Durant Avenue (LMIN 202008): Council voted to uphold the property owner’s appeal and reverse the LPC decision to designate 2421 Durant Avenue as a city landmark. The motion carried on roll call with a majority in favor and absences noted. - Kittredge Street (LMIN 202046): After public comment and council discussion, council adopted staff’s recommendation and reversed the LPC decision to designate 2138 Kittredge Street as a city landmark.

Shattuck Avenue housing project affirmed The council also heard an appeal of a Zoning Adjustments Board (ZAB) approval for 2655 Shattuck Avenue, an 8‑story, roughly 84,399 square‑foot mixed‑use building with about 97 dwelling units (including 10 very‑low‑income units), roughly 2,000 square feet of ground‑floor commercial space and 41 parking spaces. Neighbors and appellants urged moving the project driveway from Derby Street to Shattuck Avenue for safety reasons (they cited a long‑standing recommendation to keep driveway access on Shattuck), raised concerns about daily shade impacts to adjacent homes and questioned notice and process.

Developer and staff response Buddy Williams of Studio KDA Architects said the project site and the Adeline Corridor Specific Plan guided driveway location and massing; he and staff said the proposal complied with the objective standards in place when the application was vested and that the project sits within the density bonus calculations allowed under state law.

Final action and implementation details Council voted to deny the appeal and affirm the ZAB decision to approve the 2655 Shattuck use permit. Staff and transportation colleagues said post‑entitlement mitigation and design work (for example, Transportation Demand Management measures and possible traffic conditions such as right‑turn‑only restrictions) would be considered during final permitting and construction phases to address neighbor safety concerns.

Why it matters Council members and public speakers framed the votes as an intersection of historic preservation goals, state housing vesting law (SB 330), and urgent housing needs. Several council members said the city needs a funded, citywide historic context statement and survey to identify which resources merit protection proactively rather than reacting after development proposals arrive. The decisions produce near‑term clarity for the three projects and underscore ongoing tensions in Berkeley over preservation, housing production and neighborhood safety.

What’s next The council’s resolutions will be memorialized in formal actions. Staff said they will continue outreach about implementation steps for the Shattuck project and pursue funding paths for a citywide preservation context study that city planners have repeatedly identified as outstanding.