In many years of researching and writing this column, one of the consistent themes I’ve seen from the past involves repeated enthusiastic pushes to establish some new trendy thing in Berkeley that, if it had happened, would have had unforeseen repercussions far into the future. An Oct. 23, 1925, Berkeley Daily Gazette front-page story a century ago offers just such an example.
“Berkeley’s sanitary fill on the waterfront may be utilized as an aviation landing field,” the Gazette reported. “Captain Stanford E. Moses, commander of the air force of the Twelfth Naval District, has arranged to inspect the fill next week with City Manager John N. Edy.
“At a recent Chamber of Commerce dinner the captain urged Berkeley to install a landing field, pointing out that cities which did not encourage aviation would, in the near future, wish they had. The field location is directly opposite the Golden Gate and could serve as a landing field for Navy planes as well as Army planes. It might be developed as a landing place for commercial planes being handy to automobile and rail transportation.”
The article noted that Capt. Moses had lived in Berkeley for six years but was being reassigned to the East Coast. He intended his suggestion as “one more attempt to have the city obtain a landing field as Oakland and Richmond have done.”
The next day, City Manager Edy said he would ask the Berkeley council to authorize an attempt to buy 13 acres of fill land on the waterfront for $2,000 each, with the prospect of developing an airport there. Capt. Moses said he would bring officers of the USS Langley to look at the suitability of the fill for airplane use.
The Gazette then chimed in with an editorial saying, “We venture the prediction, that unless Berkeley does acquire an aviation field at an early date the city will regret its failure to keep in the vanguard of progress before ten years have passed.”
“We are informed that Berkeley is desirably located for aviation; that its position on San Francisco Bay is favorable for the landing and taking off of airplanes, and the absence of a field is all that stands in the way of making this city a most desirable airport.”
Would Berkeley have been better off today if the waterfront had been developed into an airport a century ago? My view on this would be no. In 1925 they had no idea of the ultimate size, complexity, complications and impacts of airports. Berkeley would face huge challenges today if a regional airport was operating on the waterfront.
Tower totaled: A century ago, UC Berkeley officials decided the tower of Bacon Hall on campus should be removed “because it is not in ‘architectural conformity’ with the rest of the buildings.” The Gazette also noted that the tower had cracks and was believed to be an earthquake hazard. The demolition order to the superintendent of grounds and buildings was issued Oct. 26, 1925.
Readers may not realize that the campus had a prominent bell and clock tower in Bacon Hall, starting in 1878, a quarter-century before the current Campanile was conceived. When the Campanile was completed in 1915, it stood directly in front of Bacon Hall, oriented to the western view axis down what is now Campanile Way.
For a decade, from 1915 to 1925, the campus had two adjacent bell and clock towers. After the old brick tower was truncated, Bacon Hall (originally the university library building) would remain for nearly another half-century until the whole building was torn down to construct the present-day Birge Hall.
Bay Area native and Berkeley community historian Steven Finacom holds this column’s copyright.