The stories behind a single postcard are fascinating. I never dreamed it would have a link to a past U.S. President and General of the Union Army during the Civil War.
What a great bit of research and a shame the building was not preserved. It must have been a beautiful place in its glory days. And who knew President Grant was in the leather business ! Thanks!
So sad to see landmarks lost like that. It takes a great deal of money to keep them going, though such a loss. It reminds me of the Claremont Hotel here in the hills in Oakland, California. In 1991 it was quite intentionally saved from the East Bay Hills Fire, at the expense of nearby homes, for its historic and emotional value to the community.
I believe it was spared because of the unabashed wealth of the area, tax-base potential (it's a Fairmont hotel now) and its recent renovation with a fire retardant roof. While I'm generally not in favor of supporting corporate interests over individual homeowners, in that case, it was probably the right answer. The whole neighborhood was (and is) very affluent and the homes were quickly replaced with insurance money.
Preserving the 19th century legacy of this resort has been important — even if many of us can't afford to join its club. 😉 alamedainfo.com/berkeley-claremont-hotel
Cynthia,
That is really interesting.
I was hoping to find even one photo of the inside, but didn't.
A most interesting read
The stories behind a single postcard are fascinating. I never dreamed it would have a link to a past U.S. President and General of the Union Army during the Civil War.
What a great bit of research and a shame the building was not preserved. It must have been a beautiful place in its glory days. And who knew President Grant was in the leather business ! Thanks!
So sad to see landmarks lost like that. It takes a great deal of money to keep them going, though such a loss. It reminds me of the Claremont Hotel here in the hills in Oakland, California. In 1991 it was quite intentionally saved from the East Bay Hills Fire, at the expense of nearby homes, for its historic and emotional value to the community.
I believe it was spared because of the unabashed wealth of the area, tax-base potential (it's a Fairmont hotel now) and its recent renovation with a fire retardant roof. While I'm generally not in favor of supporting corporate interests over individual homeowners, in that case, it was probably the right answer. The whole neighborhood was (and is) very affluent and the homes were quickly replaced with insurance money.
Preserving the 19th century legacy of this resort has been important — even if many of us can't afford to join its club. 😉 alamedainfo.com/berkeley-claremont-hotel