Del Monte Warehouse

Last chance to attend meetings and speak up on this topic, people.

Here’s our city’s April 2014 DEL MONTE WAREHOUSE PROJECT Initial Study / Subsequent Mitigated Negative Declaration, prepared by ESA.

Those that have followed this tell me there are inconsistencies. Most neighbors are thrilled for the Del Monte site to be cleaned up and developed, but are very rightly upset about the plan’s inadequate provisions for traffic and parking management that, as currently designed, will negatively impact the neighborhood.

25,000 square-feet of retail with no provisions for patron off-street parking (!) + 503 parking spaces for 414 housing units (!!) (read: 503 spaces for 800+ cars) just across the street from Little John Park (an active park that fills up the street parking most evenings and weekends) . . . what could go wrong?!

On May 1st, the Alameda Sun had this excellent/informative article: Former Del Monte Warehouse Redevelopment Plans Revealed.


7:30 PM – 830 PM, THURSDAY, JUNE 19 (yep, exactly one hour)

Presentation by Tim Lewis Communities (the developer)

Mastick Senior Center, 1155 Santa Clara Avenue



City of Alameda Planning Board Meeting

City Hall, 2263 Santa Clara Avenue


About Denise Lai

Alive. Swim (fly is the best). Walking with my dog (weims are the best). Life is good. Would prefer people understood negative externalities and prevented themselves from creating them. Feeling the love anyway. View all posts by Denise Lai

4 responses to “Del Monte Warehouse

  • greenefree

    Great post Denise. One small correction: that article perpetuates the “retail square footage mystery.” Plans say 25,000 SQFT. The notice of the June 23 Planning Board hearing and June 12 deadline for comments sent to the legally-minimum proximity neighbors (all 7 of us) states “up to 44,000 SQFT.” The developer said 9800 SQFT at the April 23 tour. Finally, the number on the actual application states 9100SQFT.

    Aside from the standard smoke & mirrors, why should we care? Because 9100 SQFT of retail is NOT enough to bring in the types of retail businesses needed to truly reduce personal car use. 1,2 & 3 bedroom homes hold a lot of people, but those who would have just one car for essential trips (or none) need essential daily retail within walking distance (which is NOT .25 miles in the rain, with kids in tow, less able-bodied or the .9 mile from Lucky’s or CVS as a City Planning staffer told me). There needs to be enough retail for small grocery, drugstore, daycare center, coffee shop, restaurant, convenience store, etc. to attract people. And those businesses will not survive on building residents alone – neighbors will come, but some will need cars – where will they park?

    Keep the pressure on, folks!

  • Denise Lai

    Greenefree: thank you for the correction and the additional information. And none of this even includes the added housing currently being built at the old Chipman site. It will be, IMO, municipal negligence for the City of Alameda to move forward with these plans. The *unnecessary* harm any of us might suffer from emergency services that won’t be able to transport us to one of the several off-island and world-class stroke or cardiac or trauma centers in time (within EMS time standards per event) is a very serious issue here. The planned spike in residences (= cars) in the West End can only lead to harm suffered by residents and/or visitors to the West End from obstructions to timely EMS transport. And that will be a horrible and avoidable thing for the victims who may be any one of us or our loved ones or total strangers. It will also be legally actionable.

  • Trixie

    Thanks for another informative article, Denise. The CC seems determined to destroy the quality of life here. I have to say I’m not especially committed to Alameda on any level – living here long-term, participating in politics, trying to out-fox the stunningly corrupt political machine behind the CC, helping my fellow Alamedans, who seem not to notice their town is being turned into a hellhole of over-development. Soon those who brag that they won’t be “leaving the island” this weekend aren’t going to be able to due to gridlock. That’s when I’ll be selling and moving. Until then, it’s “whatevs.”

    I do have moments of real pain when I think about what could be done with that beautiful warehouse – something along the lines of the stunning Chelsea Market in NYC, which has remained beautiful and reminiscent of its original use (an Oreo factory) while becoming a home to many retail and food businesses as well the tech hub of NYC and a destination in it’s own right. But, the machine here has no taste, no sensitivity and absolutely no understanding of the role of beauty in public life, or the solid tax base that thriving businesses can provide. They just want houses they can tax and so they can keep growing the already bloated fire department who launders campaign money for CC and other elections through their PAC. Everything they touch, they blight. This is merely the most painful example.

  • Denise Lai

    Thank you, Trixie, for taking the time to comment. Sadly, nothing you say is untrue, nor are your sentiments irrational.

%d bloggers like this: