Opinionator

Berkeley’s main Post Office: Wake up to what we’re losing

July 15, 2012 9:52 pm by Guest contributor

By Gray Brechin

Dr. Gray Brechin is an architectural historian, geographer, and long-time Berkeley resident. He is the Vice President of the National New Deal Preservation Association and author of "Imperial San Francisco: Urban Power, Earthly Ruin."

Even given the generally high quality of U.S. post offices, Berkeley’s downtown one is a standout. The building has got charisma to spare. And that’s why I was shocked when I read Steve Finacom’s Daily Planet article on June 25 that the U.S. Postal Service had put it up for sale.

I shouldn’t have been surprised, since I’ve been watching the USPS’s accelerating fire sale of historic and architecturally distinguished post offices on the indispensable Save the Post Office website for over a year, giving special attention to the large number of public buildings thrown onto the market in California.

In addition, the USPS Properties for Sale website, displaying some of our property pending for sale, makes no distinction between large and hideous mail-sorting facilities and downtown gems even if — like Berkeley’s — they are designated landmarks and listed on the National Register of Historic Places. For the USPS, and its designated real estate agent, it’s all just real estate as the Postal Service progressively liquidates itself.

Nearly a century ago, the Supervising Architect of the Treasury gave Berkeley something special, a colonnaded building modeled on Brunelleschi’s famous Foundling Hospital in Florence. Built in 1914 at the same time as the Campanile, the post office was intended to harmonize with the stately neoclassical buildings that John Galen Howard was designing for the State University just a block away, as well as with San Francisco’s Panama-Pacific International Exposition then nearing completion across the Bay.

Over the years, it has managed to escape the tacky remodelings that the USPS has inflicted on its other historic properties. Its high-ceilinged lobby, marble, oak, and brass fittings, and its two New Deal artworks are a far cry from the vestigial retail outlet that the USPS has said will replace it in unspecified leased space once our post office is off its hands.

As with elsewhere in the U.S., the announcement that the public’s property would soon be up for grabs was made by fiat with virtually no public notice and no consultation with the community that depends upon the services that the building provides.

Berkeley has begun to wake up to what it is about to lose and is asking why and for whom. Two events will inform the community. On Sunday, July 15, a meeting was held at the Berkeley Arts Festival Gallery. And on Friday, July 20 at 7:30 pm, the city is invited to learn more about what is at stake here and elsewhere at the Hillside Club and to prepare for the July 24 City Council meeting when the Council will consider a measure asking the USPS to rescind its sale of what we all own.

Berkeleyside welcomes submissions of op-ed articles of 500 to 800 words. We ask that we are given first refusal to publish. Topics should be Berkeley-related and local authors are preferred. Please email submissions to us. Berkeleyside will publish op-ed pieces at its discretion.

22 Comments

Print Friendly
  • EricPanzer

    This piece seems to conflate two different concerns: the loss of the building itself and the loss of its use as a post office. As I argued previously, there are much better ways we could make use of this building. Given Berkeley’s robust landmark protections, I don’t think we much need to worry about the structure itself, even if the building is bought by a private interest. The Mangalam Center right next door is a perfect example of a handsome historic building that has been lovingly cared for by a private, in this case spiritual organization. As far as the Postal Service itself, that issue has already been discussed at length, as well. People are perfectly willing to use UPS and FedEx, neither of which are housed in ornate structures. I would argue that service is much more important than setting; and in that respect, not even the beauty of the Berkeley Post Office can outweigh the sub-par service received within.

    Let’s stop wringing our hands over this and instead roll up our sleeves to make sure that whatever moves in is an asset to Downtown Berkeley and to the community at large.

  • http://www.omnivorousfox.com/ Mfox327

    Your opinion mainly seems to be concerned with the loss of a beautiful historic structure. I highly doubt any new owner would significantly alter the building’s aesthetic. The Postal Service is dying, that’s just a fact of the times. Why not embrace a potentially new and great use for the property?

  • TizziLish

    The two comments already here seem to miss the main point of this opinion piece. This is a publicly-owned asset. It doesn’t really matter that a private buyer will be prevented from altering the building’s structure very much. What matters is that the public will no longer gather in the building, the building will no longer be a part of our publicly-owned — and shared — commons. It matters that a community intersects in majestic spaces that remind us of our higher aspirations. It matters that we have public spaces to be a community together, in common. A private owner can do all kinds of great things with the space but once it stops belonging to the public, that is a huge loss, greater than the architecture.

  • serkes

    I also want the Post Office’s public interior space (main lobby floor; I’ve not been upstairs) preserved.  

    I think someone wrote that only the exterior is landmarked; what would it take to have the interior public places creatively re-used too?

    Ira

  • pchazzz

    Ummmm…no.  There is nothing inherently great or ennobling about standing in line at the post office. 

  • S. Marty Pantz

    What loss?  What public gathering ever took place in this  post office except a bunch of disgruntled partons waiting endlessly in utter frustration to buy a stamp.  People gathering? yeah, and ignoring each other.  Almost any new use  — public or private — would be more communal than sourpuss postal emplyees doing the most mundane of tasks (and all of these activites will continue elsewhere in downtown Berkeley) ,  Why is public ownership — limited to the relatively few activities public in nature — better than creative reuse of this property by private interests? This building could shine under private ownership and possibly even under alternative public ownership.   Example of the former: Ghiridelli Square; the latter: the Fery Building.  What happens is important.  Who does it is not.  Almost any use of this spectacular piece of architecture would be better than the gloom the place exudes as a post office.   

  • GeorgeDorn

    Not sure about the restrictions on remodeling the interior vs. exterior. But one thing that the opinion piece fails to mention is that only the front portion of the post office is original. The rear section, though built in a similar style, was added in the 1930s. The whole thing has landmark status, of course, but I think that the greater effort should go into preserving the century-old portion along with the New Deal artwork.

    Also note: who’s to say that the new retail space will have any better service than the existing post office?

    Maybe the front section could stay a post office, while the rear is repurposed, with or without remodeling.

  • TN

    I can understand the concern for the future of this very attractive building. I would love to see the facade and the lobby preserved.

    But I find it ironic that the second part of the discussion bemoaning the fading of the postal service is taking place on the ‘net instead of via letters to editor sent in envelopes with a stamp on it.

    By our actions, we implicitly acknowledge that the role of snail mail in our lives and in our public discussions has shrunk and will continue to do so. And we are better off for it.

  • serkes

    I don’t see it as a public-vs-private issue, but more of a use issue.  Though I might reconsider, my initial reaction that what makes the building wonderful is what I’d love to see preserved and made accessible to the public.  Who owns the building is less important to me.

    The main post office in downtown Richmond is an attractive Art Deco building.  And if you go inside, this publicly owned asset is dreadful.I still lament the destruction of the late, great Penn Station in NYC.  Its destruction led to preservation of Grand Central Terminal.  Penn Station was privately owned … I believe GCT was privately owned and is now owned/leased by a combination of public/private entities.

    Ira

  • S. Marty Pantz

    Unlike the PO, the market would put any business offering poor service out of business.  The Berkeley mindset seems to believe  that the government should inhibit, if not outright prohibit certain businesses deemed anti-social by an activist citizenry.  And yet the market works.  Evil, corporate Strarbucks at Shattuck and Cedar got insufficient support and was closed.  Ditto the Barnes & Noble (or was it Borders) at Shattuck and Durant.  Every dollar spent is a vote.  How bloody democratic can you get? 

  • GeorgeDorn

    Huh? No matter what, there’s going to be a post office downtown for “retail services”, which I believe includes stuff like PO boxes, buying stamps, and shipping packages.

    I’m just saying that the people who support the move into a new space, on grounds that it’ll improve service, may be mistaken. Believe me, I’m not crazy about the service at Berkeley Main. But if there’s going to be a post office downtown, why not keep it in the front of the post office? The rest of the building is where the mail sorting is done. Barring a radical change of heart by the USPS, that activity is going to another location entirely, so that part of the building definitely needs some sort of plan instead of being left to rot.

  • Susan Ives

    Think about it, folks.  Who benefits when the public domain is privatized?  It’s not the public. It’s corporate real estate interests. It’s no coincidence that many of the POs for sale in California are in most expensive real estate markets. So millions in public dollars will be paid in commissions to the real estate agency–in this case, owned by billionaire Richard Blum; downtown Berkeley will have high-rent offices for dot coms; the public will do our business in a rented storefront in a strip mall instead of in an artful, centrally located historic building. Postal workers will lose their jobs. Unions will be further quashed. How much does it cost to send a letter via Fed Ex or UPS?  The US Postal Service charges 42 cents to send a letter anywhere in the country.

  • EarlyMorningCoffee

    Look, what you don’t realize is that if you take the building that houses the post office now and split it down the middle with a dollar store on one side and a Walgreens on the other, you will be bringing value and convenience to Berkley. Geez. Get over it.

  • guest

    As far as the building is concerned, S.F.’s Ferry Building is good example of adaptive re-use.

    As mentioned earlier, you can send a letter anywhere in the U.S. for 42 cents. And that’s the problem. 

    The actual cost of delivering that letter is several multiples of the price, the difference being subsidized by taxes spent on an increasingly obsolete system. Electronic billing/payment, e-mail have made junk mailers the USPS’s  biggest customers. The success of FedEx and UPS speaks for itself.

    When cities converted their street lighting from gas to electricity, newspaper editors lamented the loss of the soft glow of gas over the harsh electric lamp.

  • guest

    “It matters that we have public spaces to be a community together, in common.”

    Save that pitch for the sit/lie ordinance!

  • Harvey

    Are we a nation of sheep?  When will we take a stand?  Do we need to wait until there’s a corporate logo carved into UC Berkeley’s Founder Rock to realize that the increasing privatization of our society does not benefit most of us?  The argument that the post office is inefficient is specious.  Its deficit was purposely created by Congress.  Every postal workers I’ve spoken to has a lots of ideas as to how to make the p.o. run more smoothly.  Could it be that management does not share that agenda?  Despite the drop in use due to the use of email, it still moves many millions of pieces of mail that many are very dependent upon.  Not everyone is as wired as the people of Berkeley.  Our military, prison system, public electronic airways and education system have become increasingly privatized.  This is opportunism at our expense.  The legacy of the public domain is what those before us have paid for.  My grandparents’ tax money help pay for the post office.  How can we justify giving it away to profiteers?  This is beyond just our downtown post office.  It is systemic and is happening across the country.  Many of these comments reflect the us and them dichotomy created by Reagan.  Folks, the government is “us.”  The only way it becomes “them” is by our increasing cynicism, lack of involvement, and resignation that we can’t do anything.  Stand up.

  • Chrisjuricich

    It’s a pretty building, looking at it from the outside. Cool lobby, too. In fifty years there probably won’t be a public need for mail, and packages only will be the exception, probably held by private companies. The typewriter is history, buggy whips are history, and so is mail service…or eventually.

    I hope that whoever purchases the building will maintain its appearance, even if they use it to sell groceries.

  • Biker 94703

    I agree.  Retain the Post Office in the front where it exists now.  Lease the rest.

  • Me

    It is easy for tha 1% to take over public assets. This isn’t the first time CB Richard Ellis has tried to dismantle california assets:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/26/us/26bcbuildings.html?pagewanted=all

    Go to the city council meeting on the 24th and asked the mayor and council to consult the state controller and treasurers office. Public property in Berkeley doesn’t belong to the city and a handful of university administrators.
    . The state stopped a similar attempt to sell and lease back 11 state buildings. CB Richard Ellis were in on the deal:

  • Biker 94703

    I feel the same way about Berkeley High School.  Run by an unaccountable institution perpetually in fiscal crisis.  Rather than approaching the long-suffering tax payers for yet another bailout, we should sell Berkeley High once and for all!

    I would argue that service is much more
    important than setting; and in that respect, not even the beauty of the
    Berkeley High School can outweigh the sub-par service received within.

  • Susan Ives

    Great idea!  While we’re at it, let’s sell our roads, libraries, city halls, state capitols, parks, playgrounds, schools, museums, concert halls, and public art, too.  After all, nobody’s making any money on it and as long as we aren’t willing to demand a fair tax system, our only option is to cut budgets for public services.

  • Joseph Lough

    The question Berkeleyans are rightly asking is whether the selling off of public property portends a much larger and more significant sale: the selling off of res publica, the Republic, as such to the highest bidder (see “Commonwealth: or Why Democrats are Republicans and Republicans are Neither” on Amazon.com). Nor should we assume that the sale of the Post Office only indicates a shift from post, paper, and stamps to internet, email, and twitter. As all of us know the US postal service had a public obligation to promote the dissemination of information, which was believed to be a public good. To my knowledge, no private internet provider or courier service has a similar obligation. If the sleet is too dense, the snow too deep, the rain too daunting, or the distance too far, the private courier can always say “No,” or can charge so exorbitant a fee as to effectively limit mail service to only the most wealthy.