1
00:00:20,940 --> 00:00:36,760
Are we there? Officially time, isn't it, seven? Well, with that, let's go ahead and call our meeting to order. Start, roll call, roll call. Good evening, board member, Evan,

2
00:00:37,800 --> 00:00:46,780
President, board member Brito, President, board member Lee, President, and chair Hernandez, President. Okay, we have a quorum,

3
00:00:46,780 --> 00:00:48,900
board member Crottie is out tonight.

4
00:00:50,920 --> 00:00:53,840
Let's start off with non agenda public comments.

5
00:00:54,060 --> 00:00:56,960
I'm not sure if we have anybody joining us via Zoom today.

6
00:00:57,460 --> 00:01:02,940
Or in the audience, but anyone may speak for three minutes on anything not on the agenda.

7
00:01:04,640 --> 00:01:06,920
We do have a non-genderized public comment.

8
00:01:07,980 --> 00:01:09,540
Mark Douglas minor.

9
00:01:10,460 --> 00:01:10,800
Good evening.

10
00:01:11,720 --> 00:01:12,680
Thank you.

11
00:01:12,680 --> 00:01:16,860
I have some handouts, which was just said I could hand out, but given to you where you can make

12
00:01:16,860 --> 00:01:18,000
give them to them.

13
00:01:18,500 --> 00:01:18,790
Thank you.

14
00:01:35,040 --> 00:01:36,200
Is this thing a reasonable?

15
00:01:36,880 --> 00:01:37,340
No.

16
00:01:37,520 --> 00:01:38,380
I'm going to have to.

17
00:01:38,460 --> 00:01:38,760
It's a strength.

18
00:01:39,120 --> 00:01:40,800
We can reset the timer here, too.

19
00:01:41,820 --> 00:01:42,000
Okay.

20
00:01:42,460 --> 00:01:42,980
Well, thank you.

21
00:01:43,100 --> 00:01:44,060
Good evening, Chairperson.

22
00:01:44,640 --> 00:01:50,020
And members of the Historical Advisory Board as a, as a Tristan mentioned, my name is Mark

23
00:01:50,020 --> 00:01:55,300
Douglas Miner, for presenting a preservation-minded members of the Ferencite District.

24
00:01:55,300 --> 00:01:57,700
And I'm proud to see that I'm a fourth-generation

25
00:01:57,700 --> 00:02:02,840
Allem Eden, deeply appreciates our city's history.

26
00:02:03,420 --> 00:02:06,300
And I commend this board for a legacy of protecting

27
00:02:06,300 --> 00:02:08,720
Allemidas living cultural landscapes.

28
00:02:09,300 --> 00:02:11,600
Today I submit a formal, a nomination

29
00:02:11,600 --> 00:02:13,840
does he aid to designate the given's drive.

30
00:02:13,860 --> 00:02:17,240
Sweetcome tree, it can't be as he protected tree corridor.

31
00:02:17,680 --> 00:02:21,080
I'm operating into the local code authorities,

32
00:02:21,720 --> 00:02:24,440
preservation, ordinance, and public resources code.

33
00:02:25,720 --> 00:02:29,940
By request follows established, municipal precedent,

34
00:02:29,960 --> 00:02:32,240
which residents, including the island-wide protection

35
00:02:32,240 --> 00:02:34,380
of close to light those over ten inches,

36
00:02:35,220 --> 00:02:38,260
the historic fan poms on Burbank Street,

37
00:02:38,820 --> 00:02:42,680
the Thompson Avenue, median trees, Christmas tree lane,

38
00:02:43,440 --> 00:02:46,440
in central Avenue, sick of moors between fur and side and fifth.

39
00:02:47,900 --> 00:02:51,840
And I assert that the majestic and historic defense drive

40
00:02:52,540 --> 00:02:55,860
canopy deserves the same tier of preservation.

41
00:03:02,280 --> 00:03:06,320
The historical significance of this corridor is deeply tied to the narrative of

42
00:03:06,320 --> 00:03:07,340
a valamida itself.

43
00:03:08,060 --> 00:03:13,140
The landscape was born from the 100 acre Cohen estate, as you all know, called

44
00:03:13,140 --> 00:03:13,840
Fernside.

45
00:03:14,500 --> 00:03:21,460
Elamida's premier estate established in the 1850s by Alfred A. Cohen, the pioneer

46
00:03:21,460 --> 00:03:23,240
who built Elamida's first railroad.

47
00:03:23,240 --> 00:03:30,880
When the estate was subdivided in 1925, prominent developer Fred T. Wood designed a grand

48
00:03:30,880 --> 00:03:36,920
curving boulevard through the former estate. He named it given Zidraev to honor the maternal

49
00:03:36,920 --> 00:03:45,500
line of the co-in family. This is not a random collection of trees. In 1928 at the behest of the

50
00:03:45,500 --> 00:03:50,580
neighborhood of homeowner's association, the city of Alameda uniformly planted these rows of

51
00:03:50,580 --> 00:03:58,900
as we sit here in 2026 over 100 trees are reaching their centennial milestone.

52
00:03:59,780 --> 00:04:02,260
For nearly 100 years, they have stood as a living,

53
00:04:02,260 --> 00:04:08,360
breathing monument to the early 20th century city, beautiful movement.

54
00:04:09,380 --> 00:04:12,960
The interlocking limbs created cathedral-like archway,

55
00:04:13,160 --> 00:04:16,480
that serves as element as most elegant iconic gateway

56
00:04:16,480 --> 00:04:18,700
because it early planners smartly routed.

57
00:04:18,700 --> 00:04:24,660
utility lines along the back, property lines, these trees are grown entirely wire-free,

58
00:04:24,960 --> 00:04:29,640
allowing for under an uninterrupted canopy. The extraordinary seasonal variation,

59
00:04:30,860 --> 00:04:36,280
reds, greens, golds, is a foundation to the visual identity of the East End.

60
00:04:37,840 --> 00:04:42,600
We've also had the word science partly consulting, indicate that the

61
00:04:42,600 --> 00:04:45,300
The best majority, you're in good health.

62
00:04:45,620 --> 00:04:46,260
I have to stop.

63
00:04:46,960 --> 00:04:47,640
Thank you.

64
00:04:47,980 --> 00:04:49,880
We appreciate your comments.

65
00:04:50,620 --> 00:04:54,040
And we'll take time to read this as well.

66
00:04:54,220 --> 00:04:55,060
Yeah, please do.

67
00:04:55,500 --> 00:04:56,920
Thank you for your time today.

68
00:04:57,160 --> 00:04:57,720
Thank you.

69
00:05:00,000 --> 00:05:07,080
Do we have any other comments? If any online attendees wish to speak please raise your hand now?

70
00:05:10,160 --> 00:05:11,620
I do not see any further speakers.

71
00:05:12,360 --> 00:05:14,140
Okay, great. Thank you.

72
00:05:22,130 --> 00:05:22,850
Okay, great.

73
00:05:24,950 --> 00:05:38,870
On to item three, draft meeting minutes, we have two meeting minutes to look at the meeting minutes from June 4th, and the meeting minutes from February 5th.

74
00:05:39,710 --> 00:05:51,330
And then just to remind ourselves, you can vote on those minutes if you were either attending those meetings or read those minutes.

75
00:05:51,870 --> 00:05:55,670
Right. And in this case, the three of you were at both of those meetings.

76
00:05:56,830 --> 00:06:01,730
And if you had watched the video or read the minutes, then you can also vote.

77
00:06:02,110 --> 00:06:03,750
Okay. I watched the video and read the minutes.

78
00:06:05,350 --> 00:06:18,030
Okay, so let's start with item three A. This is the meeting minutes from our June 4th 2020 26 meeting. Are there any additions, subtractions, corrections to those.

79
00:06:20,630 --> 00:06:22,850
Do we have a motion to approve seven minutes.

80
00:06:24,930 --> 00:06:32,600
I'll move to approve the minutes from June 4th. Do we have a second. A second. All in favor. Hi. Hi, it's have it.

81
00:06:32,600 --> 00:06:40,120
Item 3B, meeting minutes from February 5th, and he changes to those

82
00:06:44,190 --> 00:06:47,210
motions to

83
00:06:49,480 --> 00:06:52,940
approve the meeting minutes from February 5th, 26th.

84
00:06:54,640 --> 00:06:55,220
All in favour?

85
00:06:56,000 --> 00:06:56,360
Hi.

86
00:06:56,760 --> 00:06:56,780
Hi.

87
00:06:56,780 --> 00:06:57,660
The eyes have it.

88
00:06:57,700 --> 00:06:57,860
Okay.

89
00:06:58,120 --> 00:06:58,380
Great.

90
00:06:58,420 --> 00:07:00,820
And that brings us to regular agenda.

91
00:07:01,980 --> 00:07:04,180
Starting with item 4A.

92
00:07:04,540 --> 00:07:07,460
This is 2320 Lincoln Avenue.

93
00:07:07,460 --> 00:07:19,460
something that's come before us previously, it looks like we have some updated analysis of the property and my assuming correctly that there's a presentation on this.

94
00:07:20,180 --> 00:07:20,960
That is correct.

95
00:07:21,660 --> 00:07:23,040
Okay, great. We'll take it away.

96
00:07:32,340 --> 00:07:33,780
Not quite so tall.

97
00:07:35,400 --> 00:07:39,160
Seemed board members, chair. Thank you very much this evening for joining me.

98
00:07:39,640 --> 00:07:43,700
For those of you who don't know me, my name is Tristan Sphere. I'm a staff member here at City of Alameda Planning Division.

99
00:07:43,700 --> 00:08:08,480
And the item before the board tonight is a study session to consider some of the additional information that's been provided by the applicant regarding the proposal to pursue a certificate of approval for the properties located at 2320 and 2322 Lincoln just around the corner from where we are here behind the library across the street from the goodwill.

100
00:08:10,020 --> 00:08:17,460
So I'm going to take a little bit of time this evening to cover some of the background information that we discussed previously on this item.

101
00:08:17,740 --> 00:08:34,740
And part because we have a new board member who I think deserves that context, but also because it's important for us to remind ourselves when it's been a little bit of time since we've last kind of discuss this and refresh ourselves on the actual material changes here. Now I'm having a little trouble with my remote. So I think I'm going to do here.

102
00:08:52,250 --> 00:08:56,870
Let me try this one. Thanks, Dealing. Oh, nevermind. I'm sorry. I think I've got it now.

103
00:08:57,030 --> 00:09:01,430
Reboot. Yeah. Here we go. Appreciate everybody's patience. A little bit of technical difficulties.

104
00:09:03,650 --> 00:09:06,890
So the subject property as noted is

105
00:09:09,030 --> 00:09:15,930
fronting onto Lincoln on the south side. It is two buildings located on the same property.

106
00:09:16,530 --> 00:09:42,630
both constructed in the late 1800s, although there is a little bit of a discrepancy between the two existing historical valuations as to when exactly the western most building was constructed and also point out that the subject property at 2320 Lincoln is included on our historical building study list with an S designation, which is one of the more significant designations therein.

107
00:09:43,910 --> 00:09:58,710
Just in the interest of getting a really important point down first, there's nice historical photo here, but this is the point I want to make, which is going forward and this discussion will be referring to these buildings is building a and building B, just for the sake of clarity and not making me repeat the address many times.

108
00:10:00,000 --> 00:10:06,960
The building A refers to the sort of residential appearance building pictured on top there. One and a half

109
00:10:06,960 --> 00:10:14,520
story, end-gable dwelling, recess front entry. It was originally constructed as the Ensemble Slune. Although

110
00:10:14,520 --> 00:10:21,020
residential upstairs was sort of always the uses as far as we can gather from the Sandborn maps

111
00:10:21,020 --> 00:10:26,520
and historical evaluations provided. Building B, of course, pictured on the bottom there, often referred

112
00:10:26,520 --> 00:10:34,240
as Kim's Chinese is a restaurant that's still in operation today and seems to have a long history

113
00:10:34,240 --> 00:10:39,420
of commercial uses, including references on the same board maps to a historical,

114
00:10:39,420 --> 00:10:47,960
quote unquote Chinese store. So while it is substantially modified as identified by several

115
00:10:47,960 --> 00:10:54,140
of the changes in the building permit history and this local valuation, it still maintains a similar

116
00:10:54,140 --> 00:11:00,580
used to what it once had, and many of the sort of features, including the alterations made over

117
00:11:00,580 --> 00:11:07,860
time to the front-to-side pair of pet. The recess front entry remain very much in their current

118
00:11:07,860 --> 00:11:14,800
state, permanent reflects the state of the time of the 79 windshield survey that was conducted

119
00:11:14,800 --> 00:11:19,780
to identify which buildings ought to be incorporated into the historical building study list. So

120
00:11:19,780 --> 00:11:26,820
While the, on both buildings are somewhat worse for where these days, they are more or less in the same,

121
00:11:27,820 --> 00:11:31,460
they haven't been substantially modified since that time.

122
00:11:32,540 --> 00:11:34,600
Just a brief note on the floor plans here.

123
00:11:34,720 --> 00:11:39,720
This is the floor plan for 2320 Lincoln, which is going to be the focus of tonight's conversation,

124
00:11:40,200 --> 00:11:44,440
because we have so much more information about it regarding its structural integrity.

125
00:11:45,360 --> 00:11:48,480
I just want to point out that there is actually internal connectivity

126
00:11:49,020 --> 00:11:55,200
between the rear edition on the first floor and the main building, which was sort of the original construction.

127
00:11:55,560 --> 00:11:58,780
It's not shown there to have a doorway, but it does in fact have one.

128
00:11:59,280 --> 00:12:01,480
And I can attest to this because I was there earlier today.

129
00:12:03,120 --> 00:12:10,340
The 2024 backyard fire is something that we can still see extent damage from on the buildings.

130
00:12:10,980 --> 00:12:15,560
Fortunately, the structures themselves were mostly unharmed.

131
00:12:15,560 --> 00:12:23,300
And although the burn damage is still very evident, this is really the only substantial

132
00:12:23,300 --> 00:12:27,400
change that has occurred to the buildings since the historical evaluations conducted in

133
00:12:28,000 --> 00:12:32,980
0304 as part of the library project, which had considered removal of the buildings as

134
00:12:32,980 --> 00:12:33,940
part of it.

135
00:12:33,940 --> 00:12:40,420
However, at that time determined building A to be a historic resource and eventually backed

136
00:12:40,420 --> 00:12:44,080
off the intent of demolish that constructed the parking lot sort of around it instead.

137
00:12:46,580 --> 00:12:51,000
So that brings us to our existing conditions. And this is really the focus of tonight's conversation.

138
00:12:52,380 --> 00:12:58,440
As noted, the applicant provided a structural analysis conducted by Steve Fedwa,

139
00:12:59,080 --> 00:13:05,600
a rice design group to identify what elements of the structure might be suitable for rehabilitation,

140
00:13:06,160 --> 00:13:15,600
what elements might be retained and what is in such poor condition that it will need to be rebuilt as part of any scope of work necessary to

141
00:13:16,200 --> 00:13:21,200
get the building up to current building code compliance, which is very much the ultimate goal of the applicants.

142
00:13:21,780 --> 00:13:26,680
I guess I want to mention to that there is a bit of flexibility as far as their intent is concerned.

143
00:13:26,820 --> 00:13:34,220
I think they're much more interested in getting feedback from you tonight on what exactly the desired outcomes are

144
00:13:34,220 --> 00:13:36,820
for a project that you folks would entertain,

145
00:13:36,820 --> 00:13:38,720
a certificate of approval for,

146
00:13:39,260 --> 00:13:42,920
because ultimately their goal is to have a structure

147
00:13:42,920 --> 00:13:46,000
that is habitable, usable ideally,

148
00:13:46,220 --> 00:13:48,560
we can operate a business out of there like we do games now.

149
00:13:50,280 --> 00:13:55,600
So they're coming to the board with not necessarily new designs,

150
00:13:55,980 --> 00:13:59,040
but new information, new pictures to sort of explain

151
00:13:59,040 --> 00:14:00,640
these existing conditions.

152
00:14:00,640 --> 00:14:16,880
And we took the new structural information, the evaluation provided to us, and discussed with our building official, they are sort of assessment of that structural evaluation to get their take.

153
00:14:17,280 --> 00:14:26,100
The reason this is important is because ultimately the trigger for a certificate of approval, which is what we're talking about here and we talk about demolition of a historic structure.

154
00:14:27,600 --> 00:14:56,080
That determination is made by the building official, so in our municipal code it's defined as 30% or more of the removal of the value of the structure as a term by the building official and their direction after reviewing the structural evaluation provided was that any scope of work be it full rehabilitation or full demolition would necessitate a certificate of approval because the condition of the building would mean that no matter what you're doing you're going to remove 30% or more.

155
00:14:56,100 --> 00:14:58,260
of the value of the structure and the process.

156
00:15:00,000 --> 00:15:12,580
Understanding that the only way for a project to move forward here is with a certificate of approval. The applicants wanted to better understand what range of modifications might be acceptable.

157
00:15:13,740 --> 00:15:19,540
And what might actually, what range of modifications actually might better constitute a rehabilitation of the structure.

158
00:15:20,900 --> 00:15:29,980
And what might be just off the table, because ultimately in order to come before the board for an action item that is to ask you to make a decision on the certificate of approval.

159
00:15:29,980 --> 00:15:35,840
approval. The applicant is expected to go through some level environmental review, and before

160
00:15:35,840 --> 00:15:40,480
they submit their final designs that that environmental review will be conducted on, it's nice

161
00:15:40,480 --> 00:15:48,200
to have a little bit of feedback direction on the expectations of the board. So to that end, we're

162
00:15:48,200 --> 00:15:54,560
going to dive in here a little bit more into this existing conditions. The photos here are actually

163
00:15:54,560 --> 00:15:56,120
taken back in 2024.

164
00:15:58,540 --> 00:16:02,700
So you'll see here that this is actually before some of the windows in front door

165
00:16:02,700 --> 00:16:10,500
were damaged. But also before they put a fresh cone of paint and made games current store front

166
00:16:10,500 --> 00:16:17,580
look a little bit nicer, which was done much more recently. This is just sort of to give you a street

167
00:16:17,580 --> 00:16:21,580
view context. These buildings are on the same lot. They're very close together and they do actually

168
00:16:21,580 --> 00:16:25,640
have improvements that span across the two buildings.

169
00:16:25,940 --> 00:16:29,620
So they're effectively attached, although they aren't sort of

170
00:16:29,620 --> 00:16:31,140
sharing a wall, so to speak.

171
00:16:32,660 --> 00:16:34,240
This is three pictures here.

172
00:16:34,500 --> 00:16:38,240
Really just intended to show a little bit more of the back area.

173
00:16:38,260 --> 00:16:41,300
That's much more hard to see even if you're in the parking lot.

174
00:16:41,700 --> 00:16:44,380
The back yard area is sort of fence-dough.

175
00:16:45,320 --> 00:16:48,780
In the upper left hand corner, you're seeing the vegetation growth.

176
00:16:48,780 --> 00:16:52,560
This is part of what had contributed to the 2024 fire.

177
00:16:53,780 --> 00:17:01,060
On the bottom left hand side, you'll see the rear non-original attachment to GIMS.

178
00:17:01,680 --> 00:17:10,060
There are several rear additions or accessories structures that were constructed in the rear yard area of these structures over time.

179
00:17:10,080 --> 00:17:14,320
Many of them are identified on the Sandboard maps. Others are identified in the historic evaluations.

180
00:17:14,320 --> 00:17:21,340
few actually remain today and those that do remain have mostly actually been incorporated into the building.

181
00:17:22,620 --> 00:17:28,140
Some are in some portions of either rear edition or in better conditions than others,

182
00:17:28,860 --> 00:17:34,320
but generally speaking, without foundations and just in very poor shape,

183
00:17:34,600 --> 00:17:36,380
even compared to the main structures.

184
00:17:37,260 --> 00:17:42,760
And then on the right side, this is the rear view of the space between the two buildings,

185
00:17:42,760 --> 00:17:47,600
I'm just to emphasize their proximity and give you an idea of what that space looks like

186
00:17:47,600 --> 00:17:49,160
because it's a little hard to see from the street.

187
00:17:51,300 --> 00:17:57,510
Again, these are pictures from 2024 showing some of the replacement sighting that has been put on.

188
00:17:58,620 --> 00:18:04,600
It's also worth noting that some of these windows have actually been boarded up from the inside

189
00:18:04,600 --> 00:18:10,520
instead of the outside. So, while some of them sort of look like they are relatively intact,

190
00:18:10,520 --> 00:18:15,840
the interior appearance is not so great. This is just a close-up of the front step,

191
00:18:16,360 --> 00:18:22,170
give you an idea of the condition of that there, and you can see even the threshold and where the

192
00:18:23,400 --> 00:18:29,320
floor of the finished floor meets that is pretty uneven because of the damage to the foundation.

193
00:18:29,740 --> 00:18:38,740
This is in 2320 Building A. Again, this is 24 before the front door was broken down in that front window,

194
00:18:39,240 --> 00:18:43,660
some of its pains have been smashed out since, but giving you an idea of what those looked

195
00:18:43,660 --> 00:18:48,280
like before that damage was done. Now we're getting into the interior of the buildings. This

196
00:18:48,280 --> 00:18:54,200
is immediately as you walk inside, you're sort of looking down the main hallway here. You can

197
00:18:54,200 --> 00:19:00,680
see that because some of those windows are board up, it's quite dark inside. If we were to look over

198
00:19:00,680 --> 00:19:06,340
to your left, you can see in the structural evaluation there's a picture of the foundation that's

199
00:19:06,340 --> 00:19:11,360
the tractor that gives us the view to it there. And there, of course, is also the street-facing window.

200
00:19:11,680 --> 00:19:13,480
I'm the left-hand side of that picture.

201
00:19:15,700 --> 00:19:17,740
It's also worth noting sort of to the right here.

202
00:19:18,140 --> 00:19:23,560
That's the bar space from the time that we believe from the time that this was the slun although it

203
00:19:23,560 --> 00:19:26,800
does look like it was maybe converted into dining room kitchen at space.

204
00:19:29,800 --> 00:19:32,000
This is the kitchen, which is actually

205
00:19:32,000 --> 00:19:38,160
at non-original rear addition. So this is all the way straight back from that front door and shows

206
00:19:39,400 --> 00:19:45,760
you the condition that it's been in for quite some time. The rear door there has actually been

207
00:19:45,760 --> 00:19:48,280
boarded up since from the inside.

208
00:19:51,060 --> 00:19:53,760
And sort of halfway through the building, you'll see this staircase.

209
00:19:54,240 --> 00:19:58,500
Now there's three pictures here. On the far left is the hallway that leads to the staircase,

210
00:19:58,500 --> 00:19:59,980
the middle is the staircase itself

211
00:20:00,000 --> 00:20:08,720
And then the right-hand side is actually the view as you get to the top of the staircase and are now looking out of the middle window on the street facing side.

212
00:20:09,300 --> 00:20:27,740
I want to point out that the picture really does not do stairs justice. These are some of the most narrow steep and, you know, insufficient run stairs you've ever seen. These things were warped and I would not recommend going up them.

213
00:20:27,740 --> 00:20:34,800
that being said at the time, you know, narrow staircases weren't terribly uncommon. So we have different rules about that today.

214
00:20:36,840 --> 00:20:43,240
As you get into the upper floor to your immediate right is a very small bathroom really more of a powder room.

215
00:20:45,900 --> 00:20:56,040
And the sort of wall partitions that you see there delineate the two bedrooms on either side and then that middle hallway all leading to those three street facing windows.

216
00:20:56,040 --> 00:21:01,860
And then if we were to turn around, follow the hallway, we get to the two back bedrooms.

217
00:21:03,680 --> 00:21:10,740
I chose to omit some of the pictures of the floor area here because they were strewn with human feces.

218
00:21:12,380 --> 00:21:17,500
But the walls and ceiling give a good impression of the condition of the building.

219
00:21:18,600 --> 00:21:26,340
And you can see here too that the windows in the rear are intact and that appears to be the case to this day.

220
00:21:28,260 --> 00:21:35,000
That's a good overview of what the interior of the building looks like and there are some more pictures we can go into.

221
00:21:36,520 --> 00:21:47,160
But ultimately I think what's relevant to the applicant's ability to prepare a more complete design for the project is to understand what kind of interior your modifications would be.

222
00:21:47,160 --> 00:21:53,180
hypothetically acceptable to the board. And again, I want to emphasize that while we're not making any decisions tonight,

223
00:21:53,860 --> 00:21:58,300
this is the sort of information that's used to inform the architect and designer,

224
00:21:59,460 --> 00:22:04,340
when they're considering whether or not to try to retain the appearance of a particular feature.

225
00:22:04,820 --> 00:22:09,400
Ultimately, I think we're acknowledging based on the structural evaluation provided

226
00:22:11,180 --> 00:22:15,600
and the sort of concurring opinion of our building official that

227
00:22:17,260 --> 00:22:26,160
Those elements that are intended to be restored as part of the project are rehabilitated would still likely need to be demolished and rebuilt.

228
00:22:26,840 --> 00:22:40,680
And so the question for us becomes to what extent would the have prefer to see new construction be distinguished from any original construction, so it's not to give the impression of being part of the original building.

229
00:22:40,680 --> 00:22:53,700
But also to understand from your opinion, which features really need to be maintained, such that the buildings can continue to convey their remaining integrity to the extent that they still have it.

230
00:22:54,860 --> 00:23:03,840
So with that, I just want to kind of go through the various options that I see being viable here.

231
00:23:03,840 --> 00:23:09,640
And I've listed them sort of starting with what would probably be the biggest ask, right?

232
00:23:09,640 --> 00:23:15,800
Sort of a full demolition, potentially new buildings, and all the way down to sort

233
00:23:15,800 --> 00:23:21,800
of a complete rehabilitation with only those minor modifications to the exterior that are necessary.

234
00:23:23,260 --> 00:23:25,960
And there's a couple of different iterations between this.

235
00:23:26,040 --> 00:23:30,940
And I think it's important to acknowledge that the applicants have actually proposed a really wide range

236
00:23:30,940 --> 00:23:35,380
of creative use cases for any given range of modifications

237
00:23:35,380 --> 00:23:38,400
at the boards willing to, excuse me, willing to propose.

238
00:23:39,400 --> 00:23:45,180
And so, while there are ideas for what portions should

239
00:23:45,180 --> 00:23:48,920
be residential or commercial and what sort of uses

240
00:23:48,920 --> 00:23:51,100
might be most suitable for this area,

241
00:23:51,780 --> 00:23:54,880
I would like to focus on sort of the exterior appearance

242
00:23:54,880 --> 00:23:58,040
and the design of the building rather than these specific use

243
00:23:58,040 --> 00:24:04,400
cases because, again, I think that's more sort of materially information that the designer is going

244
00:24:04,400 --> 00:24:08,560
to need for their proposals to be submitted for environmental review.

245
00:24:09,120 --> 00:24:10,800
So I'm just going to run through these really quickly.

246
00:24:10,880 --> 00:24:14,640
I'm not expecting an answer from you on any of them now, but what I'd like to do is have

247
00:24:14,640 --> 00:24:19,760
these fresh in your mind as we go through the images at the end of the slideshow for each

248
00:24:19,760 --> 00:24:26,040
building facades that we can kind of explore whether certain facades are thought about differently

249
00:24:26,040 --> 00:24:28,500
in the terms of each of these sort of options.

250
00:24:29,360 --> 00:24:30,680
So the first, of course, as I mentioned,

251
00:24:31,520 --> 00:24:32,380
is proper demolition.

252
00:24:32,540 --> 00:24:34,860
This would mean effectively scraping the site.

253
00:24:36,140 --> 00:24:38,920
Certainly, if possible, retaining some,

254
00:24:38,920 --> 00:24:41,800
it may occasionally be possible to retain a window

255
00:24:41,800 --> 00:24:44,220
or some feature like that and reinstall it.

256
00:24:44,760 --> 00:24:47,840
But ultimately, the only thing that would remain in this first scenario

257
00:24:47,840 --> 00:24:50,740
would be any kind of interpretive signage that

258
00:24:50,740 --> 00:24:54,100
would be explaining the historical context, its significance.

259
00:24:55,520 --> 00:24:59,820
as well as, you know, only those most important and most intact features.

260
00:25:00,000 --> 00:25:02,820
That are identified and needing to be reused.

261
00:25:04,880 --> 00:25:11,540
I think we're operating under the assumption at this point just based on our previous conversations that this is not likely to be the outcome of this project.

262
00:25:12,680 --> 00:25:20,320
So with that in mind, we thought it might be useful to distinguish building a from building b in terms of their significance.

263
00:25:20,320 --> 00:25:28,360
And part because the previous historic evaluations conducted acknowledged that building V has much less integrity than building A.

264
00:25:29,360 --> 00:25:34,400
It is substantially modified by comparison, especially along the front facade.

265
00:25:35,580 --> 00:25:46,300
And so the next sort of most intense option would be to demolish any of the reconstruct building V or construct a new building in its stead.

266
00:25:46,300 --> 00:25:57,540
restoration of the facade of building a and then minor alterations throughout the building and new rear additions to maximize the building build the area on the site.

267
00:25:58,780 --> 00:26:04,200
Which is obviously important to just sort of the feasibility of the project from the Africans perspective.

268
00:26:05,720 --> 00:26:13,020
So this would obviously involve significant new construction in the form of rear additions of some kind.

269
00:26:13,640 --> 00:26:17,060
And would also involve the demolition more or less

270
00:26:17,060 --> 00:26:18,900
completely of building B.

271
00:26:20,380 --> 00:26:22,920
We acknowledge that the historical evaluations

272
00:26:22,920 --> 00:26:26,440
do still state that building B has some integrity.

273
00:26:27,180 --> 00:26:30,600
And so I think the expectation here would be that

274
00:26:30,600 --> 00:26:33,060
any full demolition would need to, you know,

275
00:26:33,120 --> 00:26:35,300
still meet the secretary of interior standards

276
00:26:35,300 --> 00:26:39,320
and we need to conduct kind of analysis on.

277
00:26:39,840 --> 00:26:41,380
It's kind of significant in whether or not

278
00:26:41,380 --> 00:26:49,440
anything salvageable there as well. So the third potential option here is arguably maybe the

279
00:26:49,440 --> 00:26:58,180
most creative solution and I actually think it compares a lot to option four. So option three

280
00:26:58,180 --> 00:27:07,720
would mean significant demolition of portions of either building. Primarily along their walls that are

281
00:27:07,720 --> 00:27:12,820
of interior facing each other, such that the floor area could be expanded between them and the

282
00:27:12,820 --> 00:27:18,420
buildings could become one. In this situation, I think the applicant would likely intend to

283
00:27:18,420 --> 00:27:23,220
rehabilitate the front facade of both buildings, so as to retain sort of their overall appearance

284
00:27:23,220 --> 00:27:32,100
and character, as well as perhaps the sort of building face or almost a facade that aligns with

285
00:27:32,100 --> 00:27:37,400
the library there facing the parking lot. It's very visible from Lincoln and so, you know,

286
00:27:37,400 --> 00:27:39,660
as staff has had discussions internally about this,

287
00:27:40,160 --> 00:27:42,380
we've acknowledged that that's probably an important building

288
00:27:42,380 --> 00:27:47,280
face as well, but it does allow them to increase the floor area.

289
00:27:47,700 --> 00:27:52,560
It would likely involve a similar rear addition to some of the earlier

290
00:27:52,560 --> 00:27:57,660
proposals to expand the floor area, but it does allow them to explore

291
00:27:57,660 --> 00:27:59,420
a more creative range of the use cases.

292
00:28:00,300 --> 00:28:04,540
So there's some impetus on the part of the applicant to pursue that

293
00:28:04,540 --> 00:28:10,040
particular method just because it allows for some more interesting use options.

294
00:28:10,960 --> 00:28:17,600
Moving on to four, it's noted in both historical evaluations and it's pretty evident

295
00:28:17,600 --> 00:28:22,300
when you're on site that the extent rear additions are not part of the original structure.

296
00:28:24,100 --> 00:28:29,260
They have different finished floor heights, different foundations, different interior

297
00:28:29,260 --> 00:28:35,280
appearance. And so there was a suggestion that may be demolition of those portions of the

298
00:28:35,280 --> 00:28:40,660
buildings may not be as significant as far as compromising the integrity of the original structures.

299
00:28:41,560 --> 00:28:47,000
And it would allow a much more generous area in the rear to be built upon to kind of maximize

300
00:28:47,640 --> 00:28:53,830
the usable floor area in this space. And there was also a question sort of going along with this about

301
00:28:53,830 --> 00:29:22,870
So if such an improvement were to occur where you're removing these old rear additions and putting new rear additions in, if it would be more favorable to the have to have, you know, detached structures sort of independent from these, either operating independent they are operating in conjunction with whatever gets rehabilitated in the front, or would the have prefer to see sort of an attached continuation of the style.

302
00:29:23,830 --> 00:29:28,810
even though it would be a modern wing of the building.

303
00:29:29,850 --> 00:29:32,390
And so I think there's some unanswered questions there.

304
00:29:33,190 --> 00:29:37,090
And then finally, if none of the previous sort of expectation,

305
00:29:37,330 --> 00:29:39,470
none of the previous options meet the expectations

306
00:29:39,470 --> 00:29:44,610
of the habits, as far as the manner in which we would like

307
00:29:44,610 --> 00:29:47,270
to see the buildings handled, we acknowledge

308
00:29:47,270 --> 00:29:49,570
that rehabilitation would effectively constitute

309
00:29:49,570 --> 00:29:51,170
reconstruction of the buildings,

310
00:29:53,190 --> 00:29:56,610
but if that were to be the case, our hope is that the

311
00:29:56,610 --> 00:29:59,970
have would maybe entertain minor exterior modifications to accommodate things.

312
00:30:00,000 --> 00:30:07,960
And that's necessary for building code compliance. In example, would be the applicant's afloat of the idea of converting the upper story into residential units.

313
00:30:08,600 --> 00:30:17,220
And bedrooms obviously need egress windows, egress windows cannot easily be met oftentimes with the shape, size and operative type of historic windows.

314
00:30:17,440 --> 00:30:29,100
And so it's possible that either the operative type would need to be modified or the size of the window would need to be modified or a new opening would need to be put into the building to accommodate something like

315
00:30:29,100 --> 00:30:36,080
new residential units and so our hope would be that even if the board's intention is to

316
00:30:37,160 --> 00:30:42,460
expect complete rehabilitation of the structures that there may be some understanding around

317
00:30:43,280 --> 00:30:48,780
modifications to achieve building code compliance even if those modifications impact the exterior.

318
00:30:51,040 --> 00:30:55,980
So with that, I'm just going to give a very brief overview of

319
00:30:55,980 --> 00:30:59,560
of the structural evaluation provided.

320
00:30:59,740 --> 00:31:03,060
And then I'm going to get into each of the building faces.

321
00:31:03,480 --> 00:31:07,380
And I'd love to get some feedback from the board

322
00:31:07,380 --> 00:31:10,100
on whether there are particular aspects of those

323
00:31:10,100 --> 00:31:12,600
that we feel are more important than others

324
00:31:13,260 --> 00:31:17,320
or have significance beyond sort of already identified

325
00:31:17,320 --> 00:31:18,020
in our evaluation.

326
00:31:19,160 --> 00:31:20,460
So just a quick acknowledgement,

327
00:31:20,460 --> 00:31:24,060
our structural evaluation kind of separates

328
00:31:24,060 --> 00:31:34,900
the structure into five sort of building components regarding the foundation. Their recommendation

329
00:31:34,900 --> 00:31:42,640
is essentially a complete new foundation. It's very clear from the uneven floors and the

330
00:31:42,640 --> 00:31:47,400
frankly lack of foundation entirely on the rear additions that that that will need to be

331
00:31:47,400 --> 00:31:55,500
just completely new, it acknowledges that the upper floor frame, excuse me, is overspannous,

332
00:31:55,660 --> 00:31:59,820
so we'll need some retrofitting for interior support and because of some of the deflection,

333
00:31:59,980 --> 00:32:05,400
they need to, like they do some engineering there to make sure that the connection with the exterior

334
00:32:05,400 --> 00:32:07,020
walls is sufficient.

335
00:32:09,420 --> 00:32:14,260
The exterior wall framing is actually arguably in the best condition of anything else.

336
00:32:15,340 --> 00:32:21,720
They say that some may need to be replaced, although some may be in good enough condition to potentially be repaired.

337
00:32:22,400 --> 00:32:25,360
I suspect that would require more exploratory work.

338
00:32:27,400 --> 00:32:38,760
The roof framing is in very poor condition, but may be retrofitted, though they do offer an alternative to simply replace it and reframe.

339
00:32:38,760 --> 00:32:42,880
So that again has some uncertainty associated with it.

340
00:32:42,940 --> 00:32:44,560
And then again, finally, the rear additions,

341
00:32:45,200 --> 00:32:46,640
the recommendation of the structural engineers

342
00:32:46,640 --> 00:32:48,520
is simply that they need to be removed entirely

343
00:32:48,520 --> 00:32:49,120
and rebuilt.

344
00:32:50,820 --> 00:32:54,920
I would offer that not being original portions of the structure.

345
00:32:55,740 --> 00:32:58,680
The most important thing is that they cannot be maintained

346
00:32:58,680 --> 00:32:59,660
at their current condition.

347
00:33:02,420 --> 00:33:05,740
And with that, I'm just going to remind you folks

348
00:33:05,740 --> 00:33:07,540
about some of the aspects of the building

349
00:33:07,540 --> 00:33:09,480
that we might be interested in.

350
00:33:09,480 --> 00:33:11,460
Obviously, this is not an exhaustive list.

351
00:33:11,640 --> 00:33:14,280
If you see something that's not on this list and you care about it, let me know.

352
00:33:14,660 --> 00:33:19,240
But this is just a way to jog your memory and think about some of the things that we typically care about.

353
00:33:19,500 --> 00:33:24,420
When we're looking at, you know, especially the facades of these historic buildings and trying to understand,

354
00:33:25,980 --> 00:33:29,340
you know, what is important to conveying the integrity of the building.

355
00:33:31,260 --> 00:33:35,720
So just a kind of a reminder there of what we often look for.

356
00:33:36,580 --> 00:33:44,080
And now, kind of into the meat of it, I'm not going to expect that you folks give me feedback immediately as we pan through these.

357
00:33:44,480 --> 00:33:51,660
But what I ask is that you spend some time with each of these photos and maybe make some notes and then as we kind of get back into the discussion.

358
00:33:52,040 --> 00:33:58,580
We can go through each of the building faces as the board discusses them and provide feedback to staff that way.

359
00:33:58,580 --> 00:34:00,520
So this is the front facade.

360
00:34:01,080 --> 00:34:03,980
I'm going to point out the two by two windows.

361
00:34:05,220 --> 00:34:07,600
I'm going to point out the recessed front entry

362
00:34:07,600 --> 00:34:10,120
and I'm going to point out the overall very simple design.

363
00:34:10,600 --> 00:34:16,040
We've got sort of your typical narrow horizontal sighting,

364
00:34:16,160 --> 00:34:18,240
very simple corner trim.

365
00:34:19,800 --> 00:34:22,440
Its simplicity is what imparts its character, right?

366
00:34:23,480 --> 00:34:28,560
Our expectation of this would never be to rebuild it in an

367
00:34:28,560 --> 00:34:33,800
I mean, the design of these pioneer buildings was simple, right?

368
00:34:33,860 --> 00:34:34,980
They were highly functional.

369
00:34:35,060 --> 00:34:37,440
That was their purpose, not necessarily decorative.

370
00:34:39,100 --> 00:34:45,100
I also just want to point out that the condition has deteriorated a little bit from the

371
00:34:45,100 --> 00:34:50,600
photo you saw earlier, as you can see, the upper middle window has had a pain knocked out

372
00:34:50,600 --> 00:34:56,740
and the lower middle window has had two pains knocked out and the panels on the front door

373
00:34:56,740 --> 00:34:59,980
have been knocked out, so while the frame of the front door still exists.

374
00:35:00,660 --> 00:35:06,420
It is just a frame. So that's sort of the existing condition there.

375
00:35:09,120 --> 00:35:25,060
It's move on to the, but I would argue is probably the second most important facade of the building. This is approaching from the west sort of behind the library viewed from the parking lot of the library.

376
00:35:25,740 --> 00:35:30,780
And you can really see here how different the addition is compared to the primary structure.

377
00:35:31,820 --> 00:35:35,140
You can also see how much worse the shape of the addition is.

378
00:35:36,220 --> 00:35:44,220
I'd also point out that you have what we have assumed to be a previous either door or window,

379
00:35:44,820 --> 00:35:47,320
sort of near the front of the building along this side.

380
00:35:47,980 --> 00:35:53,040
It's since been infilled and it's not entirely clear to us whether this was a door or window.

381
00:35:53,040 --> 00:36:02,440
I think probably more likely a door, but there was some sort of an original feature there, or modification that was made in the interim.

382
00:36:04,530 --> 00:36:09,990
I think that's all I want to cover with this building face. This is the rear.

383
00:36:11,190 --> 00:36:13,050
And it's worth noting all these photos are from today.

384
00:36:14,810 --> 00:36:21,270
The fire damage is very evident here, although you can see that it didn't actually

385
00:36:22,530 --> 00:36:28,150
really engulf the structure itself, it was it was really a fire of the the brush in the rear yard,

386
00:36:28,810 --> 00:36:31,130
which was especially ill-maintained at the time.

387
00:36:32,130 --> 00:36:41,450
You can also see sort of the haphazard approach to the rear additions on GIMS there, although we have a better photo of that in a little bit.

388
00:36:41,450 --> 00:36:53,730
I'd also point out that you can see how some of the previous openings or there in the rear and some of the windows on the edition have since been boarded up.

389
00:36:54,110 --> 00:37:06,630
Interestingly, the windows here on the rear don't actually match the windows on the front. Still single-hung I believe although very well maybe double-hung I need to investigate that a bit more.

390
00:37:06,630 --> 00:37:09,990
But you'll notice, one has agreed the other doesn't.

391
00:37:10,910 --> 00:37:13,830
This may lend itself to the idea that these replacement windows,

392
00:37:14,530 --> 00:37:16,030
just because they're just seemed from one another.

393
00:37:17,090 --> 00:37:20,290
But ultimately, I think there's a question here about,

394
00:37:20,290 --> 00:37:25,570
to what extent the rear still conveys the historic significance of the building,

395
00:37:26,550 --> 00:37:30,630
and whether or not the modifications to the rear have the same impact

396
00:37:30,630 --> 00:37:34,290
by virtue of the fact that they sort of front towards a parking lot.

397
00:37:34,290 --> 00:37:49,270
This parking lot is sort of ordered on two-ish sides by buildings, and so it's not readily visible from the public right of way, although certainly the one-way corridor

398
00:37:50,910 --> 00:37:59,090
sort of between Park and Oak there does allow you to sort of catch a glimpse of this face of the building.

399
00:38:03,030 --> 00:38:10,050
The front of GIMS, as I mentioned, is recently had a fresh coat of paint, which makes

400
00:38:10,050 --> 00:38:16,450
a bit of difference for sure, but it's still a substantially modified front facade, although

401
00:38:16,450 --> 00:38:29,070
I think you'll see from the side view, the parapets are pretty interesting, it used to be a front

402
00:38:29,070 --> 00:38:39,590
You did to ventilate the commercial kitchen is pretty impactful to sort of the appearance of the building, especially from this perspective.

403
00:38:41,290 --> 00:38:44,950
Again, you can really see the difference between the rear additions and the primary building.

404
00:38:45,970 --> 00:38:51,710
It's worth noting here that the building is built up more or less right to the side guard property line.

405
00:38:51,710 --> 00:38:55,710
So there's really not a lot of additional buildable area to be had here.

406
00:38:56,190 --> 00:39:01,110
This is taken from the parking lot of the gas station there, in case that was unclear at all.

407
00:39:01,550 --> 00:39:09,410
And then, of course, the rear of the GIMS building is described it as eclectic.

408
00:39:10,090 --> 00:39:13,650
It has clearly evolved over time.

409
00:39:14,030 --> 00:39:18,730
This is also evidenced by the sort of evolution of the Sanborn maps where you can see

410
00:39:18,730 --> 00:39:29,670
Detached accessories structures, sort of becoming additions, additions being removed and rebuilt in this whole rear area kind of being reconfigured over time.

411
00:39:30,750 --> 00:39:36,150
So you notice though that it does seem to keep consistency with the other rear addition, right?

412
00:39:36,270 --> 00:39:43,210
It's like the wider horizontal sighting used there still have the substantial sales.

413
00:39:43,210 --> 00:39:47,350
So it's not that it's necessarily new construction.

414
00:39:47,850 --> 00:39:49,750
It's just that it is in remarkably

415
00:39:49,750 --> 00:39:52,950
where shape has compared to the primary sort

416
00:39:52,950 --> 00:39:54,390
of original structures.

417
00:39:57,710 --> 00:39:59,870
That is all the photos I have for you.

418
00:40:00,500 --> 00:40:08,540
We definitely can go back to any of these as needed and what I think I'd like to do is maybe start from the beginning here.

419
00:40:09,700 --> 00:40:17,500
But unless there's any specific questions per staff, I think I'd like to turn it over to board discussion and maybe start getting some feedback from you.

420
00:40:18,380 --> 00:40:25,500
I do have a couple of questions because I was here back in March of 24 when we talked about this the first time.

421
00:40:25,980 --> 00:40:35,860
released the first time that I remember it being talked about and at that time they had a couple of proposed building facades in the presentation or those off the table now.

422
00:40:37,020 --> 00:40:41,120
The impression that the applicant's got and I will clarify, I think that was March of 25.

423
00:40:42,460 --> 00:40:49,340
the impression that the applicants got was that the very conceptual designs that they provided

424
00:40:50,320 --> 00:40:56,780
didn't really meet the expectations of the board and so before designing new conceptual

425
00:40:56,780 --> 00:41:04,180
facades they really wanted to hear more from you folks about what might be tolerable. I mean again

426
00:41:04,180 --> 00:41:09,660
certainly this isn't any kind of a commitment on the part of the board but it does help them

427
00:41:10,900 --> 00:41:14,860
sort of understand what is within the realm of possibility.

428
00:41:15,060 --> 00:41:16,120
Okay, got it.

429
00:41:16,340 --> 00:41:22,220
So not that they're saying, we don't want to develop two brand new buildings anymore.

430
00:41:23,160 --> 00:41:27,400
I think they would like to develop two brand new buildings if that were on the table.

431
00:41:27,480 --> 00:41:28,460
Got it.

432
00:41:28,640 --> 00:41:33,380
I think this is more of a taking a step back, taking a listening session.

433
00:41:33,880 --> 00:41:39,400
To hear more about your expectations and use that to come back with a design that

434
00:41:39,400 --> 00:41:46,540
better meets those. Okay. Got it. Thank you. If I could just real quickly, I just want to clarify,

435
00:41:47,140 --> 00:41:53,880
Tristan is presenting this material both for staff and but also representing the applicant. The applicant

436
00:41:53,880 --> 00:42:00,760
is joining us online, I believe, but doesn't have a presentation. And so I think Tristan is trying to

437
00:42:00,760 --> 00:42:06,960
present their questions as much as our questions. So it may be a little confusing in terms of

438
00:42:07,640 --> 00:42:18,140
Why were the only people speaking, but I wanted to clarify that he's tried to digest their questions into something for you to discuss, and I think we can just turn it over to you.

439
00:42:18,500 --> 00:42:18,580
Okay.

440
00:42:18,920 --> 00:42:19,840
Thank you.

441
00:42:20,060 --> 00:42:20,960
Thank you.

442
00:42:24,120 --> 00:42:24,600
Discussion.

443
00:42:25,480 --> 00:42:26,940
I guess we'd be the next work.

444
00:42:28,360 --> 00:42:28,840
Oh, yeah.

445
00:42:28,840 --> 00:42:29,960
You have a question of.

446
00:42:30,960 --> 00:42:33,620
And you may want to ask for a comment at some point.

447
00:42:33,860 --> 00:42:37,860
But if anybody else has questions of Tristan before we transition,

448
00:42:44,730 --> 00:42:54,570
so next I would say, let's hear any public comments on this agenda item either in person or if there's folks online.

449
00:42:57,320 --> 00:42:59,600
We do have a in person public comment.

450
00:42:59,980 --> 00:43:01,760
What do you mind or if you'd like to speak?

451
00:43:01,760 --> 00:43:02,300
So,

452
00:43:06,740 --> 00:43:08,140
it's working hard to hear you.

453
00:43:08,340 --> 00:43:09,380
Oh no, I'm sorry.

454
00:43:09,380 --> 00:43:09,900
I'm sorry.

455
00:43:10,960 --> 00:43:14,320
Yeah, it's like an air noise, kind of like a fan.

456
00:43:16,290 --> 00:43:17,910
Sorry about that.

457
00:43:20,130 --> 00:43:20,950
Why is this thing sticking?

458
00:43:21,050 --> 00:43:22,310
I think this is a projection.

459
00:43:25,320 --> 00:43:25,660
But yeah.

460
00:43:25,900 --> 00:43:26,160
It's a lecture now.

461
00:43:26,220 --> 00:43:27,140
It's not functional, right?

462
00:43:27,200 --> 00:43:28,760
I do hear the noise as well.

463
00:43:29,000 --> 00:43:30,080
I'll say about that.

464
00:43:30,480 --> 00:43:35,160
So I'm glad to comment about that you were speaking for the applicant as well.

465
00:43:35,160 --> 00:43:37,240
I was wondering why the applicant was not here.

466
00:43:39,540 --> 00:43:46,980
And the report does not seem to be seems a little biased towards pro development in my regard.

467
00:43:47,740 --> 00:43:55,300
Sort of downplaying the potential significance of the building, saying constructed by 1885 possibly earlier.

468
00:43:55,520 --> 00:44:04,520
The sense of report that I believe you have that Kevin Frederick did, the research makes it highly likely that it was moved from the corner right by the train station.

469
00:44:04,520 --> 00:44:11,600
And if you look at old photographs of Alameda from the early years, 1870s, showing like

470
00:44:11,600 --> 00:44:19,260
an 1860s, streetscape, or even an 1850s, the form of the building, the feeling of the building

471
00:44:19,260 --> 00:44:21,440
is 1860s.

472
00:44:22,500 --> 00:44:24,540
Simple, cable, pioneer structure.

473
00:44:24,880 --> 00:44:32,680
It's very evocative of the early era of development in Gold Rush, California.

474
00:44:32,680 --> 00:44:47,340
Okay, it looks nothing like in 1870s commercial building or in 1880s commercial building and I just felt that the white was presented here is to downplay the potential significance and to emphasize the development potential.

475
00:44:48,480 --> 00:44:59,440
So, it's likely that it was moved to the site from the corner of Lincoln and Park where the train station was.

476
00:45:00,000 --> 00:45:05,060
It's even possible that it was moved from the historic Gold Rush town of Alameda in the East End because

477
00:45:05,060 --> 00:45:12,120
there, it was kind of like an Oklahoma land rush. They pulled buildings from the old town to the new town near the station.

478
00:45:12,560 --> 00:45:17,260
This has a feeling, it's a very important building, a very important building.

479
00:45:18,060 --> 00:45:26,480
And don't let the language suggest that, oh well, it was built by 1885, but it may have been built earlier.

480
00:45:26,480 --> 00:45:31,560
I think the cases that made very strongly was felt earlier, and I also want to say that's a

481
00:45:31,560 --> 00:45:37,340
property owner really needs to have a historic expert on board when they're making these decisions

482
00:45:37,340 --> 00:45:45,020
of a historic architects like ARG or Page of Terrible who knows these things instead of people out there

483
00:45:45,020 --> 00:45:51,080
making comments and suggestions that we need to have experts weighing in on how much of the fabric can

484
00:45:51,080 --> 00:46:00,880
be saved. You know, what can be done with this? We, I would highly suggest that. And so it has

485
00:46:00,880 --> 00:46:05,500
great significance. It's a landmark, almost certainly the oldest commercial, but you didn't

486
00:46:05,500 --> 00:46:10,240
all meet it. This is what landmark ordinances are all about. This is worth fighting for and saving.

487
00:46:11,060 --> 00:46:15,500
One last question if I may, can I have a question about the treating or is that off topic?

488
00:46:16,220 --> 00:46:19,380
It's a topic for this comment.

489
00:46:19,800 --> 00:46:23,060
We were looking for comments on this agenda item right now.

490
00:46:23,060 --> 00:46:24,400
Well, that's about it.

491
00:46:24,640 --> 00:46:24,860
Thank you.

492
00:46:25,320 --> 00:46:25,580
Thanks.

493
00:46:25,720 --> 00:46:28,000
We really appreciate it.

494
00:46:28,640 --> 00:46:31,360
Other comments either in person or online.

495
00:46:32,600 --> 00:46:34,040
Hope you have another in person comment.

496
00:46:36,860 --> 00:46:37,080
Bernie.

497
00:46:37,340 --> 00:46:38,060
Excuse me.

498
00:46:40,620 --> 00:46:40,960
Thank you.

499
00:46:41,080 --> 00:46:42,340
Welcome board member Lee.

500
00:46:42,700 --> 00:46:43,920
I think it's just your first meeting.

501
00:46:43,920 --> 00:46:44,460
Congratulations.

502
00:46:45,020 --> 00:46:45,360
This is great.

503
00:46:45,360 --> 00:46:50,740
Um, I will say, you know, I didn't know we're going to have the honor of what are you here tonight.

504
00:46:50,980 --> 00:46:52,900
I think I've read a lot of your work and whatnot.

505
00:46:53,280 --> 00:46:56,060
So I mean, that's great that you're, you're, and I just want to echo somebody.

506
00:46:56,320 --> 00:47:02,020
He said that this truly appears to be a landmark in town, if arguably the oldest building, I think,

507
00:47:02,160 --> 00:47:04,400
from I've been doing a little research following along.

508
00:47:04,540 --> 00:47:10,680
I know you all maybe recognize me as a recent student of the have and I've been kind of following your work.

509
00:47:11,040 --> 00:47:14,520
And this is incredible that it's a, it's arguably the oldest building.

510
00:47:14,520 --> 00:47:19,680
and, you know, the saloon and whatnot, I guess, as a kind of ten-year-d resident of Alameda,

511
00:47:20,000 --> 00:47:24,080
at this point, nobody has any idea about that, right? Which is that's the true tragedy,

512
00:47:24,080 --> 00:47:29,900
I think, from a historical perspective, that when I drop off donations to the salvation,

513
00:47:29,940 --> 00:47:35,120
or I'm sorry, goodwill, I see, unfortunately, a derelict building across the street,

514
00:47:35,580 --> 00:47:40,440
which is an ice ore. And, you know, I'm raising my three daughters a few blocks away,

515
00:47:40,440 --> 00:47:44,260
And this is a part of town we avoid, right?

516
00:47:44,980 --> 00:47:46,620
That's a problem, right?

517
00:47:46,620 --> 00:47:50,180
So the idea that we have such a historical treasure

518
00:47:50,180 --> 00:47:54,580
that no one knows about and people are, in fact, a verse two,

519
00:47:54,880 --> 00:47:57,620
I think that in every respect is why we need

520
00:47:57,620 --> 00:48:00,940
to give these applicants a chance to do something with it.

521
00:48:01,080 --> 00:48:05,440
And not to necessarily incredibly, you know,

522
00:48:06,120 --> 00:48:08,340
to dogmatic about what it is we're preserving.

523
00:48:08,340 --> 00:48:14,680
And you know, the Woody and everybody else have done all the research to understand what the history is.

524
00:48:14,980 --> 00:48:20,300
And we have an opportunity to preserve it really and actually shed light on what a treasure we have here.

525
00:48:20,300 --> 00:48:25,420
And I think we're getting bogged down in a little bit of too much bureaucracy based on what I understand of the history of this applicant.

526
00:48:26,060 --> 00:48:27,500
So that's all I have to say.

527
00:48:27,620 --> 00:48:28,640
Thank you.

528
00:48:31,210 --> 00:48:32,030
Anyone online?

529
00:48:32,830 --> 00:48:35,710
If anybody online would like to speak, please raise your hand now.

530
00:48:41,040 --> 00:48:43,080
It does not appear that we have any more public speakers.

531
00:48:44,120 --> 00:48:44,360
Great.

532
00:48:45,080 --> 00:48:48,000
So let's open it up to discussion.

533
00:48:49,000 --> 00:48:54,500
The question is, before us, what do we think about this new material?

534
00:48:55,700 --> 00:49:01,140
Do we have, if you could pull up that slide with your different points?

535
00:49:01,540 --> 00:49:03,060
Yeah, there it is.

536
00:49:03,580 --> 00:49:11,860
You know, as far as offering options or thoughts on how we could advise both staff,

537
00:49:11,860 --> 00:49:17,060
and therefore the applicants on what might be a way in which to move forward

538
00:49:17,060 --> 00:49:22,980
and make something more of the building than it is currently either through redevelopment,

539
00:49:23,280 --> 00:49:30,830
rehabilitation, or reconstruction. I'll open it up. Anybody want to jump in?

540
00:49:31,770 --> 00:49:39,510
I can I can start. I have to say I'm I was here for the first meeting back in in 2025.

541
00:49:39,510 --> 00:49:43,310
So when the agenda came in my email and I saw the address, I was like,

542
00:49:43,350 --> 00:49:48,250
oh, this can be good news and then the report, yeah,

543
00:49:48,370 --> 00:49:53,330
made it shows that the building was kind of in the condition, the interior,

544
00:49:53,410 --> 00:49:56,550
because we didn't really get into the interior discussion about the interior last time,

545
00:49:56,790 --> 00:49:59,970
but that the kind of the bones were in rough shape.

546
00:50:00,000 --> 00:50:01,680
As we were fearing.

547
00:50:05,340 --> 00:50:06,680
So that was disappointing.

548
00:50:09,100 --> 00:50:29,240
But I was, I made me also think of a school field trip I went on. I grew up in Sacramento and one of the big attractions in Sacramento is Old Sacramento and they managed to preserve a lot of those buildings, a lot of them ended up being moved further away from the river to preserve them.

549
00:50:30,000 --> 00:50:33,000
but then a lot of them that were in terrible condition

550
00:50:33,000 --> 00:50:39,200
and just weren't feasible to save were demolished

551
00:50:39,200 --> 00:50:44,580
and then for the most part pretty faithfully reconstructed

552
00:50:44,580 --> 00:50:48,380
brought up to code made so that they could be,

553
00:50:48,740 --> 00:50:52,340
so they could have a new present day use.

554
00:50:54,500 --> 00:50:55,940
And so a lot of those buildings were really,

555
00:50:56,060 --> 00:50:58,180
a lot of them were rebuilt in kind.

556
00:50:58,180 --> 00:51:27,780
Um, so that gave me some hope for this building because when I was looking at the report, yeah, it was pretty, pretty terrible. Yeah, when you're going to receive, uh, like wood members sitting on on soil, that's that's just not, that's not going to last. Um, so the, yeah, the question is kind of how feasible would it be to, or are we talking about like lifting the building up. And then doing a new concrete foundation, you know,

557
00:51:27,780 --> 00:51:30,480
How does that, how does it does that make sense,

558
00:51:33,200 --> 00:51:57,700
and then it starts, I start getting to more of like the, the philosophical question both with this and then when I was thinking about old Sacramento and not to like personify an inanimate object like a building but like it at what at what point the question becomes at what point is it still that historic building if we're taking half to take so much out of it and replace so much

559
00:51:57,780 --> 00:52:05,020
of it, is it, are we taking, it's quote-unquote soul out of it?

560
00:52:05,160 --> 00:52:08,840
That's the part where I was saying that's personifying a building, but it is kind of like,

561
00:52:09,060 --> 00:52:13,640
it is that something special about that building.

562
00:52:13,880 --> 00:52:19,160
I do remember Mr. Miner's comments the first time when we discussed this about how,

563
00:52:19,880 --> 00:52:22,780
it's really the only commercial building from this era left,

564
00:52:22,780 --> 00:52:49,130
This old pioneer style and it's tied to Palamita's railroad history and I think that, yeah, it kind of brings the question, is it, are we able to acknowledge and honor that history by doing a complete rebuild?

565
00:52:50,550 --> 00:53:00,390
or like Tristan was saying, are there going to be some materials that we can reuse, so you are still putting a little bit of the soul, the original soul, the building in place.

566
00:53:01,150 --> 00:53:03,190
So people can see those those old materials.

567
00:53:06,070 --> 00:53:11,770
Yeah, that was kind of my thought that there is that philosophical question.

568
00:53:13,610 --> 00:53:20,090
But I also don't believe that complete demolition is a dishonoring of the past.

569
00:53:20,230 --> 00:53:27,530
You could still be very honorable to the past by doing a new building in this place.

570
00:53:35,080 --> 00:53:40,420
I don't know, I guess I wasn't here, so I don't have some of the context, but do we know

571
00:53:40,420 --> 00:53:47,100
what the intended use of this is in terms of the reason for purchase and are they continuing

572
00:53:47,100 --> 00:53:54,800
to use the restaurant space as a restaurant. And this space as something new and different, like

573
00:53:54,800 --> 00:54:01,660
where what is the end product? It doesn't sound like this is intended to be a single family home

574
00:54:01,660 --> 00:54:09,460
for the current owners of the space. So it sounds like they have purchased real estate with

575
00:54:09,460 --> 00:54:15,360
something in mind that they want to do with it. I assume leverage this asset in some way. Is that

576
00:54:15,360 --> 00:54:19,780
I think that's fair to say, I think their primary goal is to have a usable structure.

577
00:54:20,420 --> 00:54:24,820
I think they've floated many ideas ranging from all commercial, commercial office,

578
00:54:24,840 --> 00:54:31,460
commercial mixed use with residential on the upper story, that they've come to us with a pretty wide range of proposals.

579
00:54:32,200 --> 00:54:41,180
In the event that it were commercial mixed use, let's say, any of them obviously residentially you've got codes that you've got to get people out, et cetera.

580
00:54:41,180 --> 00:54:58,180
But if it weren't any of these others, in terms of the codes and how it looks now and the structure and layout of the inside is any of it up to code in such a way that it could be used for those with its current blueprint.

581
00:55:00,110 --> 00:55:06,030
Or is it required if this is going to be a functional space, does all of that have to change?

582
00:55:06,470 --> 00:55:10,790
Because based on what you said, it sounds like it's not going to support its upper floors.

583
00:55:10,930 --> 00:55:14,490
It needs a new roof structure in addition to a new roof.

584
00:55:14,790 --> 00:55:18,870
All of this is already going to have to be done just to be livable or you know, feasible.

585
00:55:20,050 --> 00:55:26,150
Certain elements identified in the structural analysis did have the ability to be retrofitted.

586
00:55:26,150 --> 00:55:39,090
So, it is not the case that all of those elements necessarily needed to be removed, but I think it's fair to say that the majority, especially of the exterior elements, would likely need to be replaced.

587
00:55:40,270 --> 00:55:43,790
Now, they could likely maintain, for example, their current footprint.

588
00:55:45,310 --> 00:55:51,790
But, you know, the stairs are a good example where modern stairs have to meet a particular rise and run, right? They have to have a particular width.

589
00:55:51,790 --> 00:56:08,330
And so, the current configuration isn't going to meet that at all, so there will be, you know, interior changes for sure, and as a part of that, it's likely to result in, you know, maybe minor modifications to things like the layout.

590
00:56:13,210 --> 00:56:18,150
Yeah, without the owners here to speak to their intention, we don't know.

591
00:56:18,150 --> 00:56:23,210
we did have a presentation where they had presented a couple of different building

592
00:56:24,190 --> 00:56:31,390
facades, the building that is the old saloon looked, you know, roughly speaking,

593
00:56:31,990 --> 00:56:37,390
like the old saloon, but I think they had intended to be like a coffee house with

594
00:56:37,390 --> 00:56:40,110
maybe some residential above something like that.

595
00:56:40,110 --> 00:56:48,670
and then a more of a storefront facade for the building that is the restaurant now.

596
00:56:49,030 --> 00:56:53,730
But again, this is, you know, a couple of your old presentation and they're not here to say what,

597
00:56:56,850 --> 00:56:58,830
but that's my recollection.

598
00:57:00,630 --> 00:57:10,010
Like it. Yeah. Okay. Sorry. I have a few comments and I will apologize

599
00:57:10,010 --> 00:57:17,650
in advance for not focusing specifically on these options for view of them right away, but I feel

600
00:57:17,650 --> 00:57:24,570
like I'm not in a position to confidently do that. So I'm going to communicate what I can

601
00:57:26,390 --> 00:57:32,530
about what would enable me to feel that way in making an important decision like this.

602
00:57:34,150 --> 00:57:38,350
Because it's been about a year and a half maybe a little longer since we had the last

603
00:57:38,350 --> 00:57:47,310
site session, which was the first. I did go back to the first meeting and listen to the commentary

604
00:57:47,310 --> 00:57:55,870
from Hab, three of the four of us here today were present there. And there was discussion about

605
00:57:57,950 --> 00:58:05,330
what information would help us better understand the history of the building, what features of

606
00:58:05,330 --> 00:58:10,930
building our significant to its history, and might be the most precious for retaining when you

607
00:58:10,930 --> 00:58:13,870
think about these different developments in areas.

608
00:58:16,530 --> 00:58:20,190
And we also heard from a public speaker

609
00:58:20,190 --> 00:58:32,010
who was the grandson of Gok Kim Wang, who was one of the founders of Kim's Chinese. And

610
00:58:32,010 --> 00:58:40,850
he offered to give information to the applicant about the history of the building and also

611
00:58:40,850 --> 00:58:47,550
suggested that his family did live in building age, which is 2320. I think I have that right.

612
00:58:47,770 --> 00:58:56,610
I have a dress system. I had versus letters. But I will say I look that up and they were there in

613
00:58:56,610 --> 00:58:59,950
the 40s and 50s, 1940s census, 1950s census,

614
00:59:00,330 --> 00:59:03,690
the long-family was residing in building A.

615
00:59:07,240 --> 00:59:09,280
So, the questions I have,

616
00:59:09,860 --> 00:59:12,080
I appreciate that a structural evaluation

617
00:59:12,080 --> 00:59:14,900
was completed, because that was one thing

618
00:59:14,900 --> 00:59:15,840
that was requested.

619
00:59:18,120 --> 00:59:20,280
What I feel was missing from that evaluation,

620
00:59:21,520 --> 00:59:23,320
and it did have a structural focus

621
00:59:23,320 --> 00:59:25,480
was more of a materials focus.

622
00:59:26,340 --> 00:59:38,740
Do we know, for sure, if this while the building can be saved or deciding, what are the conditions of the windows, what are the conditions of some of the trim?

623
00:59:39,480 --> 00:59:55,120
And I'll say at the interior, I would be very open to allowing some extensive modification of the interior, because the exterior is what the public views.

624
00:59:55,120 --> 00:59:59,900
And that's part of the public room and the environment that we're trying to consider.

625
01:00:00,000 --> 01:00:07,720
You're a potentially significant impact too. But without that information, I have a really hard time making a sound

626
01:00:07,720 --> 01:00:15,360
judgment about, with demolition B. OK, reconstruction, doing an addition, removing an addition,

627
01:00:16,200 --> 01:00:24,680
things like that. I think it's paramount that there will be some sort of consultation with an

628
01:00:24,680 --> 01:00:40,740
Architect, a historic building materials expert, architectural historian, and I, ideally, what that would be is a report not unlike what we saw at 802.1 of VISTA when that building was being studied.

629
01:00:41,460 --> 01:00:46,780
There was an updated assessment of its historical significance.

630
01:00:47,860 --> 01:00:49,480
includes both buildings,

631
01:00:51,720 --> 01:00:55,820
they're integrity because integrity is only able to be analyzed

632
01:00:55,820 --> 01:00:59,760
when you understand building significant or lack thereof.

633
01:01:00,480 --> 01:01:05,960
There is a lot of talk tonight about the integrity of building B and its facade,

634
01:01:06,820 --> 01:01:15,000
but we don't have any information from past evaluations that says or doesn't say

635
01:01:15,000 --> 01:01:24,820
The building is there is not significant for it's association to people it just says potential eligible for association the Chinatown, so

636
01:01:24,820 --> 01:01:31,220
Integrity would rely on understanding from what period to that building have significant

637
01:01:31,800 --> 01:01:35,840
Who was residing there or they sing a pickin that

638
01:01:35,840 --> 01:01:41,430
Mid-century storefront could be equally as contributing to that building significant as

639
01:01:42,700 --> 01:01:44,720
The original one may have been it

640
01:01:45,000 --> 01:01:46,220
there's so many variables.

641
01:01:48,340 --> 01:01:57,740
So that's my major point is three out of the four habits and members said,

642
01:01:57,740 --> 01:02:03,060
yes, we had an updated historical evaluation. It's been a year and a half and we don't have

643
01:02:03,060 --> 01:02:03,880
additional information.

644
01:02:15,340 --> 01:02:19,860
I also see from the structural evaluation, there is really not much discussion

645
01:02:19,860 --> 01:02:22,160
of building V at all.

646
01:02:22,520 --> 01:02:24,260
So I would presume that building is in good shape

647
01:02:24,260 --> 01:02:26,700
because it's still occupied.

648
01:02:27,460 --> 01:02:28,760
The business is continuing.

649
01:02:29,100 --> 01:02:31,400
I don't have any evidence that says otherwise.

650
01:02:41,340 --> 01:02:42,780
And then I'm also curious.

651
01:02:43,400 --> 01:02:46,880
It seems based upon these five scenarios

652
01:02:46,880 --> 01:02:51,300
that we have here that the applicant has some flexibility

653
01:02:51,300 --> 01:02:53,640
and what they may be capable of achieving.

654
01:02:53,640 --> 01:03:05,960
And I want to make sure that they understand that as part of this process, my understanding

655
01:03:05,960 --> 01:03:12,120
is the project path would be a focused EIR based upon the previous hearing.

656
01:03:14,040 --> 01:03:24,970
And I think maybe it's not the most likely outcome that the project could achieve standards

657
01:03:24,970 --> 01:03:31,510
compliance, complying with the standards for rehabilitation, can reduce impacts to a less

658
01:03:31,510 --> 01:03:39,670
incentive level. So that could potentially shift your project path from a focus

659
01:03:39,670 --> 01:03:47,530
DIR to, I don't know, if a category of Oracle exemptions possible, but something,

660
01:03:51,410 --> 01:03:52,590
something

661
01:03:52,590 --> 01:03:53,290
like mitigation.

662
01:03:55,450 --> 01:04:01,550
So you may be looking at things like historic building documentation or

663
01:04:02,830 --> 01:04:11,250
interpretive displays that those would be likely requirements, not just nice options,

664
01:04:11,330 --> 01:04:17,470
which I will say are great things to include and I totally appreciate that the applicant's thinking

665
01:04:17,470 --> 01:04:18,470
that way.

666
01:04:21,250 --> 01:04:30,250
Yeah, I'll end my comments by saying that I want to be flexible. I just want to

667
01:04:30,250 --> 01:04:38,890
understand what is really salvageable from these buildings, and I want to make sure that they

668
01:04:38,890 --> 01:04:46,610
can continue. If that means that it's more of a reconstruction and while retaining true historic

669
01:04:46,610 --> 01:04:54,470
fabric I think that's okay but I would I would also not be opposed to a project that if it's

670
01:04:54,470 --> 01:04:59,970
if it's clearly demonstrated that it's just not

671
01:05:00,000 --> 01:05:11,740
feasible to retain sufficient fabric. Maybe it is more appropriate to consider what's the best new

672
01:05:11,740 --> 01:05:13,940
construction that can build here.

673
01:05:16,640 --> 01:05:21,140
I'm also curious on a project path perspective.

674
01:05:30,460 --> 01:05:31,260
If there

675
01:05:31,260 --> 01:05:34,860
are we supposed to put residences right next to a gas station?

676
01:05:35,320 --> 01:05:40,740
I don't know how that all works, but those could be things that factor into future approvals

677
01:05:40,740 --> 01:05:41,560
project costs.

678
01:05:44,480 --> 01:05:49,020
So yeah, I have some concerns with the amount of information we have.

679
01:05:50,180 --> 01:05:51,360
Thank you. Thanks, chef.

680
01:05:52,960 --> 01:05:56,520
So a couple of comments from me.

681
01:05:57,360 --> 01:06:03,360
I did some digging and understand that this building was actually

682
01:06:05,780 --> 01:06:11,600
vocally supported for maintenance or maintaining its

683
01:06:11,600 --> 01:06:15,400
location and structure back when the main library was being

684
01:06:15,400 --> 01:06:18,820
rehabilitated. This was 20 years ago now.

685
01:06:18,820 --> 01:06:21,240
And I wasn't part of that discussion.

686
01:06:21,680 --> 01:06:24,400
I just know this building was part of that discussion.

687
01:06:25,520 --> 01:06:27,640
And part of the reason why the main library

688
01:06:27,640 --> 01:06:30,280
doesn't have a bigger parking lot

689
01:06:30,280 --> 01:06:32,480
that maybe it could have or should have had

690
01:06:32,480 --> 01:06:35,200
was because of this exact property.

691
01:06:36,100 --> 01:06:39,020
So I'm wondering if there's information

692
01:06:39,640 --> 01:06:41,840
that may be relevant to these discussions

693
01:06:41,840 --> 01:06:44,700
that came up during those meetings,

694
01:06:44,700 --> 01:06:55,320
That might be also able to inform us of things like the significance or reports that were generated at that time.

695
01:06:55,980 --> 01:07:05,700
Because obviously it was a big enough deal that the library parking lot wasn't expanded to take over what would have been, you know,

696
01:07:05,700 --> 01:07:14,800
these specific sites that being said when I look at the options for redevelopment you know I'm

697
01:07:14,800 --> 01:07:20,560
I'm seeing them one through five just listed here we might want to be thinking about them five to

698
01:07:20,560 --> 01:07:27,940
one as far as you know prioritizing the building and the significance you know with that assumption

699
01:07:29,060 --> 01:07:40,380
One of the things we talked about at that meeting the back in March of 25 or whenever it was was also the possibility of relocation.

700
01:07:40,640 --> 01:07:54,560
I don't see that listed here. So if it were to be that the highest and best use of this property could move forward with some kind of development that doesn't necessarily mean that building needs to come down.

701
01:07:54,560 --> 01:08:03,700
it could just be put somewhere else. So I would very much like to see their reaction to that

702
01:08:04,460 --> 01:08:10,900
as a possibility. Maybe somewhere else in Alameda, you know, so we were retaining it as a community

703
01:08:10,900 --> 01:08:17,780
as a valuable resource if this building's moved once or maybe twice before, maybe third times

704
01:08:17,780 --> 01:08:27,900
the charm who knows. In looking at the presentation today, as a general contractor,

705
01:08:29,840 --> 01:08:36,840
my answer is always, it's only time and money, anything's saveable. We can fix anything. That

706
01:08:36,840 --> 01:08:44,760
doesn't necessarily mean these owners have whatever time and money is required. And I think back

707
01:08:44,760 --> 01:08:52,980
to a very disheartening conversation we had to have about a building on the base that had essentially

708
01:08:52,980 --> 01:08:59,440
been neglected to the point where it was condemned. The fire department wouldn't go in if there

709
01:08:59,440 --> 01:09:08,260
were a fire. So we were here talking about that so that it could be demolished. And what I don't

710
01:09:08,260 --> 01:09:23,020
want to see happen is that kicking around the decision and the death by paper cuts of something

711
01:09:23,020 --> 01:09:32,280
happening that would produce a better resource for our community. It's not in our interest collectively

712
01:09:32,280 --> 01:09:42,140
to see, yes, the oldest building in Elameda die slowly and then catch fire and create danger

713
01:09:42,140 --> 01:09:49,420
for us in our community. Not to say that's going to happen, but like something like that will

714
01:09:49,420 --> 01:09:56,080
eventually happen if we do nothing. Now, it's been 20 years since the last time this building

715
01:09:56,080 --> 01:09:59,980
something happened when you used to go with the library maybe.

716
01:10:00,000 --> 01:10:05,420
It's going to be another 20 years, you know, and some other group of people will be talking about it.

717
01:10:05,680 --> 01:10:11,440
It was obviously built well to begin with, because it's still there. I should look so good at that age, right?

718
01:10:12,580 --> 01:10:23,140
But I think we, you know, we, we can collectively, as people who care about historic structures in Alameda, obviously, or you wouldn't be on this board.

719
01:10:24,200 --> 01:10:37,180
try to lend our hands into helping it become something other than what it is now and put on a path to something other than what it's on the path to now.

720
01:10:37,940 --> 01:10:45,120
Which is, you know, all I can see is like, eh, we'll be back here in five years and it'll have caught fire and then it's done.

721
01:10:45,120 --> 01:10:49,620
Um, so I mean, that's that's my personal reaction to it.

722
01:10:49,640 --> 01:10:53,440
I want to see something happen with the building.

723
01:10:53,720 --> 01:11:01,000
I'd love for the owner to have the time in the money to restore it and make it a museum that people can

724
01:11:01,000 --> 01:11:05,600
come visit and maybe it's, you know, restored to its original saloon glory.

725
01:11:06,460 --> 01:11:09,620
That's not going to be the highest and best use of the building.

726
01:11:09,620 --> 01:11:19,060
I get that, but really, in my view, building A just from what I've seen so far and what I can

727
01:11:19,060 --> 01:11:26,420
see with my own eyes, that would be the building I'm personally most concerned about having

728
01:11:26,420 --> 01:11:36,500
something happen along the preservation track, building B. Again, just based on the evidence that

729
01:11:37,540 --> 01:11:51,220
I'm less inclined because I can see it's been so clearly overly redone and redone to the point where we're like, well, why don't we even know what it was to begin with looking at the roof lines.

730
01:11:52,140 --> 01:12:05,880
When I look at the property itself and I think about if those buildings were to be demolished or partially demolished, you know, we're talking about like a 55 by 80 foot lot with

731
01:12:05,880 --> 01:12:12,160
zoning issues. It's going to have setback issues. What can it really be? You know,

732
01:12:12,240 --> 01:12:20,400
those are questions obviously for the staff and owners to tease through. What's the

733
01:12:20,400 --> 01:12:25,420
highest in best use from a density housing point of view would be an obvious question.

734
01:12:25,660 --> 01:12:31,080
Like can we put housing there if so how much or what's an appropriate business use for

735
01:12:31,080 --> 01:12:39,620
those buildings, give it, you know, it's place in downtown, parking availability, walkability, etc.

736
01:12:40,960 --> 01:12:44,420
So, you know, there's a lot of challenges to the property anyway.

737
01:12:45,220 --> 01:12:49,980
If those buildings go away as to what they'll become.

738
01:12:51,820 --> 01:12:55,640
But my hope is that they can just, something can happen.

739
01:12:55,640 --> 01:13:04,640
It can get out of being stuck in, let's just come back to the lab in another year, and talk a little bit more about it.

740
01:13:06,740 --> 01:13:07,840
Those are my thoughts.

741
01:13:08,560 --> 01:13:15,000
I'll just say, I was a little surprised we had a study session.

742
01:13:15,420 --> 01:13:23,080
I was thinking we would be moving towards some sort of, here's the updated design concept,

743
01:13:23,080 --> 01:13:26,420
because I would love to see something happen with this building.

744
01:13:27,540 --> 01:13:33,440
We have apparently a pretty rainy winter ahead of us.

745
01:13:33,820 --> 01:13:39,080
And that makes me think there is probably a few more months of potential damage.

746
01:13:41,960 --> 01:13:51,120
I think it's really important to get that additional information because if we don't have it now,

747
01:13:51,120 --> 01:14:01,160
It's going to have to be put into something later and that will be, that will be something that mitigates something going away versus something that informs

748
01:14:01,160 --> 01:14:03,020
how it's designed.

749
01:14:03,300 --> 01:14:05,800
Even there's just a little bit of preservation.

750
01:14:06,780 --> 01:14:11,860
And when I see preservation, I mean, rehabilitation, the rehabilitation standards, not.

751
01:14:12,520 --> 01:14:16,100
We're going to save that piece of trim of every single thing.

752
01:14:18,380 --> 01:14:21,860
And I think most of those scenarios that were presented

753
01:14:22,700 --> 01:14:24,880
rely on that kind of deduction.

754
01:14:25,880 --> 01:14:26,380
Right.

755
01:14:27,620 --> 01:14:27,980
Yeah.

756
01:14:28,240 --> 01:14:28,980
I would echo that.

757
01:14:29,280 --> 01:14:30,780
I was surprised.

758
01:14:31,100 --> 01:14:34,140
This was a steady session when it came in the agenda.

759
01:14:34,300 --> 01:14:35,440
It was like, wait a minute.

760
01:14:38,840 --> 01:14:41,660
Well, we wanted to get your impression before,

761
01:14:43,040 --> 01:14:44,080
you know, again, the applicant.

762
01:14:44,280 --> 01:14:45,560
I think has lots of ideas.

763
01:14:46,380 --> 01:14:47,940
They're not, they wanted to understand

764
01:14:47,940 --> 01:14:59,060
as was just stated, like, how receptive the board is to more or less extreme restoration or

765
01:15:00,000 --> 01:15:08,080
Reconstruction, renovation, you know, all the, all the rewards, you know, what, what level of preservation

766
01:15:08,080 --> 01:15:15,280
are you really expecting? Given the structural evaluation, especially I think Tristan might

767
01:15:15,280 --> 01:15:23,040
have underplayed, the degree of, you know, failure in the structural system of the building

768
01:15:23,040 --> 01:15:28,040
that it's, it really sounds like it's in pretty bad shape.

769
01:15:30,700 --> 01:15:32,840
So what is the path forward?

770
01:15:34,500 --> 01:15:36,820
So they we've done the study, we've looked at it,

771
01:15:36,820 --> 01:15:39,700
we've said the state that it's incrementally

772
01:15:39,700 --> 01:15:41,460
is not sustainable long term,

773
01:15:41,660 --> 01:15:43,960
it's not getting any better with age.

774
01:15:45,400 --> 01:15:47,540
These people obviously want to use it for something.

775
01:15:47,880 --> 01:15:50,200
What is the next step beyond assessing

776
01:15:50,200 --> 01:15:54,860
whether or not we are open to allowing potential changes?

777
01:15:55,540 --> 01:15:59,680
Right, well, the certificate of approval

778
01:15:59,680 --> 01:16:02,020
is the permit that you need to grant.

779
01:16:02,680 --> 01:16:07,540
And so the question, so the applicant needs to go talk

780
01:16:07,540 --> 01:16:11,780
with just architectural historian or preservation

781
01:16:11,780 --> 01:16:13,800
architect or someone who's qualified

782
01:16:14,320 --> 01:16:21,720
to help them craft a proposal that incorporates

783
01:16:21,720 --> 01:16:26,300
those elements that are most important and salvageable,

784
01:16:26,300 --> 01:16:28,660
I guess, or reproducible.

785
01:16:30,020 --> 01:16:33,720
And come up with a economically viable proposal.

786
01:16:33,920 --> 01:16:35,880
I think part of our question really is,

787
01:16:35,980 --> 01:16:37,960
well, what about that backyard area?

788
01:16:38,500 --> 01:16:41,640
What about connecting the buildings or building up behind?

789
01:16:42,740 --> 01:16:45,520
What's your expectation in terms of that part too?

790
01:16:45,620 --> 01:16:49,940
I think they might be able to recreate the street facade,

791
01:16:50,760 --> 01:16:52,960
but that probably doesn't give them the floor area

792
01:16:52,960 --> 01:16:57,120
and economic return that they need, given it's a tight lot,

793
01:16:57,120 --> 01:17:15,180
But they could fill the lot with building, if they, you know, so chose, but they need to probably, again, get that professional guidance of how far they could go with that concept as well. So assuming that you're open to those proposals, that's what they need to go prepare, I think, and then come back.

794
01:17:15,180 --> 01:17:26,540
Yeah, and with that same kind of documentation that we received, you know, in other similar types

795
01:17:26,540 --> 01:17:32,160
of instances where we're getting information about both buildings, we're obviously got the

796
01:17:32,160 --> 01:17:39,320
structural look into one building, but we don't know anything about the other building. And if that's

797
01:17:39,320 --> 01:17:46,620
part of this discussion. So, you know, a more comprehensive, here's what we want to do, here's

798
01:17:46,620 --> 01:17:55,420
the homework we've done, you know, and what we're saying, I believe, is we're open.

799
01:18:10,720 --> 01:18:10,720
We

800
01:18:10,720 --> 01:18:17,420
still need the information, you know? Like the analysis. Yeah, and then I think that the next part

801
01:18:17,420 --> 01:18:23,120
would be the sequo analysis of that proposal and the permit that you would be issuing. So is it

802
01:18:23,120 --> 01:18:27,720
is there a possibility that is consistent with the Secretary of Interior standards and that it

803
01:18:27,720 --> 01:18:40,700
could be tiered from the General Plan AIR or some other framework or is this a different kind of

804
01:18:42,750 --> 01:18:44,070
Does that answer your question?

805
01:18:46,510 --> 01:18:48,290
Well, I think that's what we're looking for, right?

806
01:18:48,530 --> 01:18:51,570
We would like to be able to take the next step.

807
01:18:51,750 --> 01:18:54,770
We want something that's actually actionable.

808
01:18:55,810 --> 01:18:57,030
I can't speak for everyone else here,

809
01:18:57,370 --> 01:18:59,930
but it seems to me when we're looking at the backyard area

810
01:18:59,930 --> 01:19:02,930
and these bolted on kind of mismatched puzzle pieces.

811
01:19:03,090 --> 01:19:05,910
I don't think anyone here would be like,

812
01:19:06,170 --> 01:19:07,710
oh, we've got to keep those.

813
01:19:08,150 --> 01:19:10,750
I think if we had something that was,

814
01:19:11,250 --> 01:19:29,690
You know, cohesive and made sense, but what that is in our minds may be very different than what the the owners want. So again, I think we need to see something concrete. Here is our plan of action so that we can make an informed decision on on a plan of action.

815
01:19:29,690 --> 01:19:53,610
Yeah. Yeah, I think it's not uncommon to see additions go away. One of the, sorry, if not close enough. One of the interesting aspects of this building is that it's public realm is multifaceted. You can say there's the Lincoln side. There is the library parking lot side.

816
01:19:54,390 --> 01:19:59,970
And there is the back portions of what you can see from that alley kind of secondary street.

817
01:20:00,000 --> 01:20:29,660
That runs behind it. But if you can identify the, the, the character defining features of the building, the ones that are primary, most important to its significance, I think there's often reasonable arguments to say, yeah, that can go away and we can keep enough of this, or you know, kind of, bring back that mass and keep keep some materials that way. That way, like to me, the ultimate goal is.

818
01:20:30,700 --> 01:20:39,980
If somebody who either lived here 50 years ago and remembers that building, comes back and says oh yeah that thinks so there.

819
01:20:40,500 --> 01:20:41,160
I remember that.

820
01:20:41,160 --> 01:20:47,080
That is where Chinatown and Pioneer Era element of Met.

821
01:20:47,600 --> 01:20:56,440
So we have this really interesting collision and adaption of those two aspects of history.

822
01:20:56,440 --> 01:21:06,460
If you have a brand new building there, it's not going to have the same kind of value to memory,

823
01:21:06,820 --> 01:21:14,380
and I think that's really important to places like Alameda. People know when the places

824
01:21:14,380 --> 01:21:21,480
they live change and sometimes that change is very jarring. So I think part of what we're being so critical about

825
01:21:21,480 --> 01:21:25,100
is trying to really just be careful about that

826
01:21:25,100 --> 01:21:26,340
and make sure it's a good project.

827
01:21:32,920 --> 01:21:33,820
Are there thoughts?

828
01:21:36,280 --> 01:21:36,440
OK.

829
01:21:39,280 --> 01:21:40,200
Thank you very much.

830
01:21:40,560 --> 01:21:41,440
Do we have enough?

831
01:21:41,440 --> 01:21:43,280
Yeah, I think we have there there.

832
01:21:43,700 --> 01:21:44,120
Yep, yep.

833
01:21:44,640 --> 01:21:47,080
And again, the applicant was at least listening.

834
01:21:48,880 --> 01:21:51,860
And we'll continue to work with them.

835
01:21:52,280 --> 01:21:53,460
OK, so well.

836
01:21:54,900 --> 01:21:58,520
Well, seeing no other discussion on this item,

837
01:21:58,520 --> 01:22:03,960
I say we close for A and move into item five board communications.

838
01:22:07,140 --> 01:22:08,680
Are there any board communications?

839
01:22:09,340 --> 01:22:15,520
And this might be the way we have an announcement to make about how happy you are to be.

840
01:22:17,300 --> 01:22:21,800
Absolutely. Yeah, I would like to say thank you so much for welcoming me to this board.

841
01:22:21,920 --> 01:22:26,860
And I'm thrilled to be appointed and I look forward to working with each and every one of you.

842
01:22:26,860 --> 01:22:30,900
I don't know if you know about my background, but I'm an executive director of the California Historical

843
01:22:30,900 --> 01:22:36,220
Radio Society, which is located on Central Avenue, and we recently completed a massive

844
01:22:36,980 --> 01:22:41,400
job where we re-did the facade of that building and the interior. That building was built in

845
01:22:41,400 --> 01:22:48,540
1900. It was the original Alameda Telephonic Exchange, and so it's significant. And I think we did

846
01:22:48,540 --> 01:22:55,720
something very true to its original roots and left it and better shaped them when we found it. So

847
01:22:55,720 --> 01:22:58,860
Anyway, as that relates to this, they're excited to be here.

848
01:22:59,840 --> 01:23:02,420
Thank you. Any other board communications?

849
01:23:08,480 --> 01:23:09,700
Okay, staff communications.

850
01:23:10,840 --> 01:23:17,580
Well, we have an incoming new board member and I am out going. I will be retiring at the

851
01:23:17,580 --> 01:23:21,560
end of the month and so it's been a pleasure being with you for three years.

852
01:23:22,900 --> 01:23:30,820
And never a dull moment, really, working in Alameda with lots of different angles on every

853
01:23:30,820 --> 01:23:41,640
story. So it's been a pleasure and I hope to do more historic exploration, perhaps in European

854
01:23:41,640 --> 01:23:50,100
countries to begin with. Congratulations against Stephen. We've very much valued your guidance

855
01:23:50,100 --> 01:23:56,400
and stewardship over our agenda, so we wish you the best. Thank you.

856
01:23:59,490 --> 01:24:00,470
Other staff communication?

857
01:24:00,470 --> 01:24:01,410
I

858
01:24:04,580 --> 01:24:08,780
guess without wordjourned. Thank you very much. Thank you.