Board members and public press for closer oversight of pedestrian footbridge; two-member subcommittee proposed

Public comment at the July 22 Historic Design Review Board meeting included criticism of the process used to approve a pedestrian bridge, and board members proposed closer board oversight through a two-member subcommittee to monitor design and construction.

During matters from the public, Stephanie Benanato criticized a recent decision on a pedestrian bridge, saying staff had not demonstrated that replacement work recreated the bridge "exactly as it is now" and calling the timeline and consultant layers "incompetency being exemplified in a city process." She asked that staff bring such projects back to the board when doubt exists.

Later in matters from the board, a member proposed forming a two-member subcommittee to "overlook the footbridge" design and suggested including Chair Rios and another board member. Staff responded, "Yes, madam chair. We'll make sure to include you on that," indicating the city would keep the chair and the proposed subcommittee informed of progress.

Board members did not at that time take a formal, recorded vote establishing the subcommittee; the discussion resulted in a volunteer offer and staff commitment to include the chair and the suggested member in project communications. Public commenter Benanato urged the board to seek greater transparency and review when primary facades or public-public structures are involved.

This item reflects public concern about staff-led project timelines and the board’s interest in direct oversight for an active public-infrastructure project. No design changes were approved at this meeting as a result of the discussion; the action was staff agreement to include board members in project updates and to form an informal monitoring arrangement.