Laserfiche WebLink
7A <br /> Page 30 <br /> Finger Avenue,Redwaod City,CA <br /> Documenf Review <br /> May 15�20fi}9 <br /> Farmhouse and Iat,the immediafie neighborhood on the 10�block af Finger Avenue <br /> - and the larger Arlington nei.ghborhood.The Arlington neighborhood v�as�oured by cax <br /> - . .� °and the �.00 bl.ack of Finge�r was#oured on foat and recorded with photog�raphs.This <br /> aiso included viewing the existing pianned development at 300-340 Oakdal�. <br /> ` -°OHSERVATIQNS AND T�ECOMMENDATIONS <br /> After review of the above docu.ments,Garavaglia Archifiecture,Inc.finds there are <br /> several ajreas that wa�rrant further investigation with regard to culiuxal resources.These <br /> areas a�e as follows: <br /> Definition of impacted neighborhovd <br /> Issue:There seems to be cliffering internretations of�he"neighborhood"in ques�ion. In <br /> some reports,the unpac�ed area is interpreted as only fihe Iots assembled for i�he PUD. <br /> In other reports,the neighbarhood i�described as the entire Arlingfion District.This <br /> �ack of defiini.#ion has led to a series o�reports that do not adequately address the <br /> impacted area. <br /> Co�nces:Without a clear and consistent study boundary,often referred to as an <br /> APE ar�rea of Pafential Effect,it is diffzcu�t far aII parties tv adc�ress issues effec�.vely. <br /> A Iack of co�.sistency in project boundaries makes it very difficult to determine impacks <br /> on all the environmental and cuitural resources in question because the extent of these <br /> �esources is not known.For cui�ural resources related to the Finger Avenue pro�ect, <br /> discussion of the entixe Arlington neighborhood i.s needed but only as background to a <br /> more focused discussion of the more im�nediate pxoject area.Evaivations of the impac�s <br /> o�develapment of three(3}Io�s vn�h.e surrounding 500�-Iats ase aimost meaningiess <br /> because�i.e proj�ct area�i,s sra small relaiive to such a wide geographi.ca�scope. <br /> However,evaluatians of impac�s of those same three(3}Iats on#he surrounding 50 or <br /> so lots is a much di�fez�en.t discussion because of the relative scale of the deveiopment. � <br /> Recvmm�ndations:It is our professionai�recommenda�ion�hat the analysis of unpacts <br /> on cultuxal resources include the historical boundaries of the Finger Tract and those lofis <br /> that fvrm the facing block�ronts.This is a much smallex neighborhood,bu�contains a <br /> distinct historical development tract whose context�an be more fully developed(Finger <br /> Tract)and contrast�ed with that prepared for the Wellesley Park Tzact faoing fihis block. <br /> Cvntext�ox�te impac�ed nei.ghborh�vr� <br /> Issue:50,SO and 88 Finger Avenue were evaluated for hxstorical sig�.c�nce wi#hui the <br /> Cultu.ara�.Resour�es Evatuation for�he Finger Farmhouse:'iYhe i.nformation in this report <br /> is speczfic ta the farmhouse and does not provide a context for eval.uati.on of�he <br /> buildings in question.The historical info�nation in this report ends around 1920. <br /> According to�a.e inform�.tivn provided fox the building�,all were b�t at or a.ft�r this <br /> poi.nt in tune. � <br /> The hisfiary provi.ded for�he Arlingt�on Neighbvrhood in the Iatest�ulfixra,l.Resources <br /> Evaluation does not include the Finge,r Tract,nor does it cvnsider a more modest <br /> bou.xtdary for a pofien�ial historic district.It is rare that an early subdiv�sion,surh as <br /> WeIlesley Park,would retain enough integrity fo qualify in z�s entire�y as a histo�ric <br /> district.However,smaller partions of the a.�ea ma�retain enough integri�y to be u.sed as <br /> , Page 3 0€b <br />