pages: HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2021-03-04.pdf, 7
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
HistoricalAdvisoryBoard | 2021-03-04 | 7 | Margaret Hall, a property owner on Central Ave, spoke of her family's history with the military and Alameda and as a General Contractor, she was at first very excited about the repurposing of the buildings. She was very disappointed to learn that the plan now was to demolish the buildings and urged the board to look into the matter more before they made any decision. Chair Saxby closed the public comments and opened the board's discussion. Board Member Jones said this was obviously a difficult decision since the information was not clear. She believed that the applicant had made some very good factual comments that were making her decision harder. She understood and believed that the staff had done their due diligence in regards to researching this site. Board Member Witt agreed with what Board Member Jones said. She believed in order to get the go-ahead for this project it would be great to find the Page & Turnbull letters to make things more clear cut. She was very much on the fence for this project. Board Member Sanchez said there was an abundance of information to go over in order to reach a decision. He spoke again that the board's only concern at the moment was to decide if the property belongs on the Historic Study List, not what the applicant intends to do with the property. He said even though he trusts the staff he would like to see the original document used to place the site on the list, the Page & Turnbull Report, and a better understanding of the site as it was now. He wanted to defer any decision until more information was brought forward. Board Member Lau agreed with his fellow board members that it was very difficult to make a decision now. He wanted the staff to gather more information and documentation before he and the board made a decision. Chair Saxby agreed that they lacked information about this property. He acknowledged that the difficult part was knowing that their decision to delist the property would result in the buildings being demolished. He added that the presentation did give him a better understanding of the property, even if it was historically significant it had lost a lot of integrity. He too wanted to see the original 1996 Page & Turnbull evaluation. Board Member Jones asked the staff what other documentation (Page & Turnbull letters) was available that could be gathered. Staff Member Tai said first he wanted clarification on what documentation the board would like. He knew that there were many references to the 1996 Page & Turnbull Report, but that document had never been available to the city. He said that even the applicant had reached out to Page & Turnbull and that document had never been made available. He wanted to know what other specific information the staff could gather that would compel the board to make a conclusive decision. Historical Advisory Board Approved Minutes 7 March 4, 2021 | HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2021-03-04.pdf |