1900 Fourth Street Mixed-Use Apartments

Ask a question to begin.

Blake Griggs Properties first proposes an apartment complex at 1900 Fourth Street through Berkeley's normal development process. The proposal is controversial from the start due to the site's association with the West Berkeley Shellmound. No permit is issued over the following years.

California SB 35 (Wiener, 2017) takes effect, requiring cities not meeting regional housing goals to provide ministerial approval for projects with at least 50% affordable units. Berkeley has not met its regional housing obligations. Blake Griggs begins restructuring its proposal to qualify.

West Berkeley Investors (Blake Griggs subsidiary) submits an SB 35 application for 260 units: 130 market-rate apartments and 130 affordable (80% AMI), plus ground-floor retail. The project is redesigned larger than the earlier proposal specifically to meet SB 35's 50% affordable threshold. Architect: TCA Architects.

Berkeley denies the SB 35 application, asserting the site is within the West Berkeley Shellmound historic landmark, that mixed-use projects don't qualify for SB 35, and that Berkeley's very low-income unit requirements aren't met.

West Berkeley Investments sends a 400-page rebuttal to Berkeley's denial letter, charging the city is "trying to undermine a new state law." Developer threatens to sue unless Berkeley approves the project under SB 35.

West Berkeley Investors and Blake Griggs Properties notify Ruegg & Ellsworth that they are withdrawing from the project and returning all development rights. Spokesperson Ron Heckmann confirms the withdrawal but declines to give a reason.

On the same day Blake Griggs drops the project, Berkeley sends a letter to property owner Dana Ellsworth issuing a final denial of the SB 35 application, stating SB 35 "cannot be applied to the property without violating the state constitution" because the site is a city-designated historical landmark.

Ruegg & Ellsworth and Frank Spenger Company file a petition for writ of mandate against the City of Berkeley, represented by Holland & Knight (Jennifer Hernandez and Daniel Golub). The lawsuit argues Berkeley's SB 35 denial violates state law and the HAA.

Alameda County Superior Court Judge Frank Roesch rules in favor of Berkeley, finding the city was within its rights to deny the SB 35 application. Roesch: "Whatever the case is, I don't make decisions about whether projects are approved, ever." Developers appeal to the First District Court of Appeal.

The Campaign to Save the West Berkeley Ohlone Shellmound holds a gathering on Fourth Street to protest a fence erected around the parking lot — a signal the developer was preparing to move forward following the pending appellate ruling.

The California First District Court of Appeal issues Ruegg & Ellsworth v. City of Berkeley — the first published California appellate opinion interpreting SB 35. The court reverses the trial court. Key holdings: mixed-use projects with ground-floor retail qualify for SB 35; historic landmark designations cannot override SB 35 ministerial review. The ruling establishes binding statewide precedent.

The California Supreme Court declines to hear Berkeley's appeal of the Court of Appeal decision, clearing the way for construction under SB 35.

The Campaign to Save the West Berkeley Ohlone Shellmound reports that the city has issued the SB 35 zoning permit. Berkeley renews the permit for three years in September 2022.

After Judge Frank Roesch rules in February 2022 that Berkeley violated the Housing Accountability Act, the city appeals in March 2022, and Berkeleyside later reports that the Court of Appeal and the state Supreme Court both found the violation. Roesch also orders the city and the Confederated Villages of Lisjan to post a $15 million bond against the developer's damages; the appeal courts find the order is not appealable, and the city still has not posted it in February 2024.

Judge Roesch imposes a $2.6 million HAA fine on Berkeley (developer had sought $39 million); the fine is directed into Berkeley's Housing Trust Fund for affordable housing construction. Berkeley also pays $1.4 million to reimburse the developer's attorney fees under a settlement. Total city cost: $4 million. Housing was never built.

The Sogorea Te' Land Trust — funded primarily by a $20M donation from the Kataly Foundation (Regan Pritzker, Hyatt family) — offers $25.5M to purchase 1900 Fourth Street. Combined with $1.5M from Berkeley and $5.5M from two other donors, the $27M total settles all outstanding litigation. Ruegg & Ellsworth agrees.

Berkeley City Council votes unanimously to purchase 1900 Fourth Street for $27M and immediately transfer title to the Sogorea Te' Land Trust. Berkeley becomes among the first cities in the US to formally return land to Indigenous people. The vote ends eight years of legal disputes. 260 apartments were never built.

Escrow closes on the $27M purchase. Title transfers immediately to the Sogorea Te' Land Trust — the largest known urban Indigenous land return in US history. All legal claims settled. The site remains a surface parking lot, with Sogorea Te' conducting cultural assessments and planning a commemorative park and cultural center.

The Sogorea Te' Land Trust announces that "the removal of the pavement at West Berkeley Shellmound is beginning."

"Extensive archeological and historical investigations at the parking lot site revealed no evidence of any intact cultural resources, nor even remnants recognizable as part of a structure. While there were shellmounds in the area, the overwhelming evidence is that no shellmound was ever present at the parking lot/development site." (Jeffrey Anhalt, risk manager, after April 2021 appellate victory)

Berkeley is "trying to undermine a new state law that fast-tracks certain kinds of construction." The SB 35 application meets all legal requirements. Berkeley's denial based on historic landmark status is an improper use of preservation law to override a state housing statute.

Argued at a 2019 court hearing that SB 35 "usurped" Berkeley's authority over its landmarks — the legal argument the Court of Appeal later rejected. Subsequently secured the appellate victory and the $1.4M attorney fee award.

The West Berkeley Shellmound is a city-designated historic landmark; applying SB 35 would unconstitutionally strip the city of authority over its own landmarks. SB 35 only applies to housing-only projects; a mixed-use building with ground-floor retail is ineligible. Project does not meet Berkeley's very low-income unit requirements. Traffic standards are not met.

"In 2018, a developer announced plans for a massive new project that would upturn and destroy what was left of the site. A new fast-track housing law allowed the developers to bypass environmental review and Tribal cultural consultation and proceed with their plans, bringing imminent destruction of the remaining cultural landscape." After the land return: "To have this place saved forever, I am beyond words."

The West Berkeley Shellmound is a 2,700-year-old Ohlone burial and village site — the oldest and most significant such site on the San Francisco Bay. The parking lot at 1900 Fourth Street covers the last undeveloped portion of this sacred landscape. Construction here would be permanent, irreversible desecration.

"Removing the concrete and daylighting Strawberry Creek furthers our vision for cultural revitalization, securing a sacred space for the Lisjan people in perpetuity." (April 28, 2026)

Berkeley improperly denied the SB 35 application. Mixed-use projects with ground-floor retail qualify for SB 35. Historic landmark designations cannot override SB 35 ministerial review rights. (Ruegg & Ellsworth v. City of Berkeley, April 20, 2021)

November 2019: ruled for Berkeley. February 2024 (after appellate reversal): imposed $2.6M HAA fine directed to Housing Trust Fund and $1.4M attorney fee award. At 2019 hearing: "Whatever the case is, I don't make decisions about whether projects are approved, ever."

Declined on July 28, 2021 to hear the city's appeal of the Court of Appeal decision for the project.

Berkeley invoked the site's designation within the West Berkeley Shellmound historic landmark district as the primary basis for denying the SB 35 application, arguing the state constitution prohibits SB 35 from overriding a city landmark designation. The First District Court of Appeal definitively rejected this argument in 2021 — the first published SB 35 opinion. Berkeley was fined $2.6M and paid $1.4M attorney fees. However, the six-year legal delay gave time for a $27M philanthropic land purchase to occur, preventing the housing from ever being built. NOTE: city lost in court but housing was not built — this is analytically the most contested was_successful flag in the database.

Berkeley denied the SB 35 ministerial application on two additional grounds: mixed-use projects with ground-floor retail are excluded from SB 35 (city argued it covers housing-only projects), and the project didn't meet Berkeley's very low-income unit requirements. The Court of Appeal rejected the mixed-use argument. Both denials together created a six-year litigation delay that allowed a philanthropic intervention to prevent construction.

Official Sogorea Te' Land Trust account of the history and 2024 land return. Primary source for Land Trust's voice and post-settlement site status.

April 30, 2024 escrow close summary. Confirms $27M total, $20M Kataly, $5.5M from two other donors, title transfer details. Best source for final settlement figures.

Primary source for the March 2024 settlement. Confirms $27M purchase, Kataly Foundation $20M donation, city's $1.5M, unanimous council vote, and land transfer to Sogorea Te'.

Primary source for $2.6M HAA fine and $1.4M attorney fees. Confirms developer sought $39M; judge imposed $2.6M to Housing Trust Fund.

Coverage of the landmark First District Court of Appeal ruling. Contains Jeffrey Anhalt quote on absence of intact cultural resources.

Pre-trial-court-ruling coverage. Contains Judge Roesch's quote; best source for Jennifer Hernandez's "usurped" framing.

Coverage of November 28, 2018 lawsuit. Confirms Holland & Knight representation and city's stated denial reasons.

Opposition coalition site. Contains Corrina Gould quote after denial. Primary source for opposition perspective.

Best source for SB 35 application details (260 units, 130 affordable at 80% AMI, ground-floor retail), developer's 400-page rebuttal, and Blake Griggs development history.