Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Telephone Hill topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Juneau residents urge Assembly to pause Telephone Hill demolition as leaders defend site-prep plan
Summary
Hundreds of residents pressed the Juneau City and Borough Assembly to delay evictions and demolition on Telephone Hill at the Sept. 22 meeting, while the city manager and attorney said federal historic-preservation rules do not automatically require additional review and city staff described a $5.5 million site-prep plan and timeline.
Hundreds of residents and advocates pressed the Juneau City and Borough Assembly on Sept. 22 to halt planned evictions and demolition on Telephone Hill until engineering, developer interest and a formal redevelopment plan are in hand.
At the meeting, many speakers described Telephone Hill as a historic, intergenerational neighborhood and asked the city to delay clearing homes so residents — many of them seniors — have more time and alternatives. "Please do not rush," said Catherine Fritz, a resident and former CBJ project manager. Joshua Adams, who described himself as a rescuer of endangered historic homes, told the assembly, "Our government is broken and plumbers fix things," and urged officeholders to reverse course.
The appeals occurred during an extended public-comment block that drew more than two dozen individual testimonies. Speakers cited conflicting cost figures, worries about historic-resources reviews and the absence of a signed development contract. Multiple speakers repeated a $9 million figure for demolition and related costs; city staff said that number is not the option the Assembly selected.
City Manager Katie Kester told the Assembly that staff and consultants have moved through a multi-year public process — including a community design guide and surveys — and that the Assembly has directed a site-preparation approach to make the property more attractive to developers. "The option that they chose was $5.5 million," Kester said, describing that sum as covering demolition, site preparation and basic blasting to address unknowns that deter developers. Kester outlined a timeline: testing of materials and hazardous substances, advertising demolition bids in October–November, and potential demolition beginning in December, weather permitting; concurrently, staff would re-engage developers with a more detailed RFP.
City Attorney Emily Wright responded to public requests for a federal Section 106 review of historic resources. Wright told the Assembly that Section 106 and the related Section 110(k) of the National Historic Preservation Act apply only when a federal or state agency is taking an action or when federal or state funding is involved. "CBJ does not — we are not bound by Section 106 or Section 110(k)," she said, adding that CBJ nonetheless had performed a cultural-resource desktop review and shared documents publicly.
Assembly members acknowledged both the emotional case for preserving the existing homes and the scope of Juneau's housing shortage. Deputy Mayor Greg Smith summarized that the Assembly's role is to weigh citywide needs: "We need housing," he said, adding that the city must consider the best use of a publicly owned downtown parcel. Assemblymember Euskandes said developers will not commit without greater certainty and called the site-preparation funds a tool to attract proposals.
Several residents and local preservationists pushed for additional engineering studies before any demolition. Susan Clark said she had been told geotechnical work would not begin until after houses are demolished; Kester disputed the characterization and said core sampling and lab analysis must happen before blasting and that engineering work is planned once properties are cleared.
The meeting did not record a final legislative vote to demolish or to appropriate the site-preparation money in this session. Kester described the $5.5 million option as the Assembly's choice to enable future development but said additional Assembly decisions will follow as staff return with bidding and development proposals.
Why it matters: Telephone Hill is a small, centrally located parcel where the city hopes to create higher-density housing to address a longstanding shortage in Juneau. The debate highlights tensions common in small cities: the tradeoff between preserving historic neighborhoods and creating more homes near downtown. The public record shows strong neighborhood attachment and sharp concern about process, testing and alternatives.
What’s next: Kester said demolition bids would be advertised in October and November and, if procured, demolition could begin in December. Staff will continue developer outreach and plan to return to the Assembly with detailed procurement and development options.
