Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council narrows Holiday Bowl changes and bars demolition until tenant is found
Summary
After heated debate, the council rejected a short continuance and instead approved an amendment requiring that demolition of the Holiday Bowl site not be permitted until a tenant with a signed contract is identified; the vote balanced preservation concerns and the site's economic viability.
The City Council on Nov. 28 debated whether to accept a partial or full historic designation for the Holiday Bowl property and how to balance preservation with redevelopment possibilities.
Planning staff presented two options: option A would limit designation to the restaurant, facade and patio; option B would uphold the Cultural Heritage Commission'9s designation of the entire property. Councilmember Feuer proposed a short continuance to allow a prospective developer who says he can preserve bowling to present; that motion was seconded but failed (continuance vote 7–5). Councilmember Holden and others argued the developer had had prior chances and did not appear.
Instead, an amended motion (Hernandez and Miskowski) that would preserve the facade while prohibiting demolition unless a tenant has been identified with a signed contract passed (12 ayes). The council then approved item 22a with the amendment (9 ayes, 3 noes). Councilmembers emphasized the need to consider economic viability and to avoid permanently foreclosing community uses if there is a realistic tenant ready to operate the site.
What happens next: The council sent the modified designation back to the Cultural Heritage Commission for review under the council'9s amended direction; demolition permits are to be denied unless a tenant with a contract is presented.
