Berkeley’s latest growth spurt just cleared a big political hurdle, and labor leaders are not happy about it.
At a special Berkeley City Council meeting on Monday, councilmembers rejected appeals and let two major apartment projects move ahead while claiming exemptions from the city’s HARD HATS labor rules. By upholding earlier approvals, the council effectively allowed developers to bypass local requirements tied to health coverage, apprenticeship training and prevailing wages on large construction sites, a move that drew sharp criticism from building-trades unions. The split votes and abstentions showed how boxed in city leaders felt between defending worker standards and avoiding expensive lawsuits.
What the approvals cover
According to Berkeleyside, the council’s actions maintained approvals for a 169-unit tower proposed by Collab Home at 2425 Durant Avenue and a Laconia Development project at 2029 University Avenue, submitted in two versions. The University Avenue options carry different unit counts and mixes, and the amount of affordable housing shifts depending on which version is built.
Projects, permits and the concessions they sought
City records list the Durant proposal as Use Permit #ZP2024-0162, a 20-story building that would replace several older residential structures, and the University Avenue applications as Use Permits #ZP2024-0181 and #ZP2024-0182. The permits and staff reports show that both projects invoked California’s state density bonus program to request waivers from several local development standards.
Developers and their consultants told city officials that following Berkeley’s HARD HATS mandates and prevailing-wage rules would add millions to construction costs, with presentations to planners placing the extra expense in the multi-million-dollar range. As outlined in documents from the City of Berkeley and in reporting on the hearings, those cost estimates became a key part of the legal case for granting concessions under state law.
How the council voted
The council ultimately affirmed the Zoning Adjustments Board approvals. The Durant Avenue tower was upheld on a 5-vote majority. For the University Avenue project, multiple councilmembers abstained, which left the zoning board’s decision in place, according to Berkeleyside. Throughout the process, city staff and several councilmembers repeatedly warned that denying the requested concessions could spark litigation under the state density bonus statute.
Unions push back
Construction unions had appealed the zoning board approvals and urged the council to reject the concessions, arguing that the density bonus law is being used to work around local worker protections. Labor advocates say the waivers cut into safeguards meant to ensure wages, training and health benefits for workers on large building sites.
Legal stakes
Under California’s density bonus statute (Cal. Gov. Code § 65915), cities and counties generally must grant requested incentives or concessions for qualifying affordable housing projects unless they can make a written finding, backed by substantial evidence, that a concession would cause a specific, adverse impact on public health or safety, or on certain historic resources. The same law allows developers to sue if a local government improperly denies an eligible concession, and courts can award attorneys’ fees, which helps explain why Berkeley officials treaded carefully. The full statute text is posted on the California Legislative Information site.
What’s next
With the zoning board approvals left intact, the projects can continue through the city’s permitting pipeline unless the council reopens the issue or a court steps in. State Sen. Jesse Arreguín has been involved in the local debate and submitted comments to the council during the appeals, and local advocates say the conflict could spur action beyond Berkeley, including potential state-level changes, as reflected in the city’s appeal filings and meeting record. Any fallout is likely to play out both in Sacramento and in Berkeley’s planning files as the two developments move forward.
