United States Postal Service v. City of Berkeley

Filing 49

REQUEST FOR INFORMATION FOLLOWING VIEWING. Signed by Judge Alsup on 3/9/2017. Responses due by 3/23/2017. (whalc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/9/2017)

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9
UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE,

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12
13

No. C 16-04815 WHA

Plaintiff,
v.
REQUEST FOR INFORMATION
FOLLOWING VIEWING

CITY OF BERKELEY,

14

Defendant.
/

15
16

The Court thanks both sides in this matter for facilitating the viewing yesterday so the

17

undersigned judge could see the post office building and surrounding historic district at issue.

18

As follow-up on the viewing, this order asks the following questions of both sides:

19

1.

The Court understands that the United States Postal Service intends
to secure a perpetual covenant to maintain as-is the front portion of
the building, including the facade, retail windows, and service areas
currently used by the public, as well as the relief on the wall outside
and the mural on the wall inside. Is this understanding correct?

2.

Would the aforementioned covenant include the vacant office
spaces on the second floor above the retail area? If not, what would
become of those spaces?

3.

What other measures, if any, would the USPS take to ensure that
any future use of the building would continue to preserve the
historical nature of the building as a whole? For example, would
any potential buyer of the building be free to erect large, tall, or
even ugly facilities that might overpower the aesthetics of the
building’s historical features? Or would any potential buyer instead
be restricted to essentially remodeling the existing shell of the
building without enlargement or significant modification thereof?

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1

4.

Since much of the building has fallen into disuse and seems to be in
a state of near-disrepair, if the situation is left as-is, and time goes
on, is there any risk that the vacant structure will become a hazard
or blight to the City?

5.

Would the Civic Center District Overlay challenged by the USPS in
this action in any way prevent the federal government itself from
remodeling unused portions of the building for some other purpose
(e.g., a federal prison or detention facility, or a Drug Enforcement
Administration facility)? If so, please discuss the legality of such
interference under the Supremacy Clause.

2
3
4
5
6
7

Both sides shall please submit their answers to the foregoing questions, not to exceed 12 PAGES

8

IN LENGTH,

by MARCH 23 AT NOON.

9
IT IS SO ORDERED.

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12

Dated: March 9, 2017.

WILLIAM ALSUP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2