Alameda Historical Advisory Board Study Session – September 8, 2026

The Historical Advisory Board (HAB) of Alameda, California, held a study session on the evening of September 8, 2026, to discuss the future of the historic buildings at 2320-2322 Lincoln Avenue. The board also approved prior meeting minutes and heard public comments on non-agenda items.

Consent Calendar

• Minutes Approval: The board unanimously approved the draft meeting minutes from June 4, 2026, and February 5, 2026, with Board Members Bevan, Brito, Lee, and Chair Hernandez all present and voting.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Non-Agenda Comment – Mark Douglas Minor (Fernside District advocate, fourth-generation Alamedan): Mr. Minor submitted a formal nomination dossier to designate the Gibbons Dry Sweet Gum Tree Canopy as a protected tree corridor. He argued that the canopy, originating from the Cohen estate's Fernside subdivision in 1925, meets the same preservation standards as other designated tree corridors in Alameda.
• Agenda Item Comment – Woody Minor (historic preservation advocate): Mr. Minor stated that the building at 2320 Lincoln is likely the oldest commercial building in Alameda, possibly constructed in the 1860s and moved from the nearby train station. He urged the board to require a historic expert (e.g., an architectural historian or preservation architect) to evaluate the building's fabric and significance, rather than relying on the developer's structural analysis. He also criticized the presentation as overly pro-development.
• Agenda Item Comment – Bernie (self-described tenured resident): Mr. Bernie argued that the building is a neglected treasure and that the board should avoid excessive bureaucracy, allowing the applicants to move forward with a preservation-minded redevelopment that would make the building a known community asset.

Discussion Items

• Study Session: 2320-2322 Lincoln Avenue Certificate of Approval – Staff member Tristan Swear presented updated structural information and five redevelopment options for the two buildings (Building A: historic saloon/residential, Building B: Gims Chinese restaurant). The options ranged from full demolition with interpretive signage to complete rehabilitation with minor exterior modifications. The board reviewed interior and exterior photographs, a structural analysis by RISE Design Group, and the building official's assessment that any work would require a Certificate of Approval (due to demolition of ≥30% of structure value).
• Board Discussion:
  • Board Member Bevan noted the building's severe disrepair and raised the philosophical question of when reconstruction ceases to preserve a historic building's 'soul.'
  • Board Member Brito (newly appointed) emphasized the need for a comprehensive historic evaluation of both buildings, not just structural analysis. He requested a materials condition assessment, an updated historical significance report that considers the building's associations (e.g., early Chinatown), and clarity on zoning compatibility (e.g., residential next to gas station).
  • Board Member Lee expressed concern about further delays and suggested relocation as a potential option, noting the building has likely been moved before. He urged expediting a solution to avoid the building's eventual loss due to neglect.
  • Chair Hernandez supported the call for a professional historic evaluation and a concrete design proposal, emphasizing that the board is open to a balanced approach between preservation and adaptive reuse.
• Staff Clarification: Swear confirmed that the applicant is open to feedback and intends to develop a more specific proposal informed by the board's expectations.

Key Outcomes

• No Formal Decision: The study session was held to gather board input; no vote on a Certificate of Approval was taken. The applicant will incorporate the board's guidance into a revised proposal.
• Direction to Applicant: The board unanimously expects the applicant to commission an updated historic evaluation and materials assessment by a qualified preservation architect or architectural historian. This analysis should identify character-defining features of both buildings, including their association with Alameda's pioneer and Chinese-American history, and provide clear guidance on which elements can be preserved, rehabilitated, or reconstructed.
• Board's Position on Options: Board members expressed openness to significant modifications of Building B (heavily altered) and to the removal of non-original rear additions. However, they emphasized that the Lincoln Avenue facades of Building A and any character-defining features of Building B should be retained or faithfully reconstructed to maintain the building's visual connection to its past.
• Staff Announcement: Staff member Stephen announced his retirement at the end of September. Chair Hernandez thanked him for his service.
• Next Steps: The applicant will work with a historic preservation expert and return to the HAB with a detailed design proposal for further review. Staff will assist in preparing the necessary environmental review and Certificate of Approval application.