We're ready to uh start the meeting.

Yeah, I think we're ready.

It's seven, right?

Okay.

All right, we'll start with roll call.

Uh board member Bevan.

Here.

Board member Brito.

Present.

Chair Hernandez.

Present.

We have a quorum and uh board member Crody is not here.

Let's start off with non-agenda public comments.

Are there any online or in-person non-agenda comments?

Not seeing any uh anybody online.

No one here?

Yeah, no, no, no non-agenda public comments.

Okay, great.

Uh item three, uh minutes.

Looks like we have two sets of meeting minutes to approve.

The first one is from September 4th, and the second one was from October 2nd.

Let's take the September 4th meeting minutes, which were continued from last meeting.

Right.

So the September 4th minutes, uh the three of you were at that meeting, and so you can vote to approve those minutes.

Um, the October 2nd meeting looks like we don't have the same members here that were at that meeting.

Right.

So we can uh uh assuming you you as a board member watched those uh video uh recordings, then in theory we could also uh so that would be board member Breto.

Had a chance to look at the videos.

If not, that's fine, we'll carry it over.

I'm ashamed to say I did not watch it.

That's quite a apologize.

Okay, so let's let's look at item 3a.

Uh our meeting minutes from September 4th.

Are there any uh comments on those meeting minutes?

They looked good to me.

Yeah, look good to me.

Uh motion to approve minutes.

This is from September for the September 4th meeting.

I move to approve the minutes from the September 4th meeting.

The second.

A second.

All in favor, aye.

Aye.

And we've approved those.

If uh assuming you're also voting aye.

Yes, I voted I.

Okay, great.

Uh so the 3B item will just continue uh until next time.

Yes, thank you.

Okay.

And that brings us to the regular agenda.

So this one is the 1319 Clinton Avenue.

Yes, and um Henry Dong will be giving the staff presentation, and I believe the applicant is also represented.

Super.

Take it away, Henry.

Good evening, uh Chair Hernandez, members of the board.

Henry Dong with the planning building and transportation department.

Um tonight I'm uh joined by um the applicant and their design team, and then we're expecting the um historic preservation uh consultant to join us as well.

Super.

So I'm gonna give a brief overview of the project, and then the applicant would like to um address the board, and then uh we can open up for discussion and questions at that.

Great, thank you.

So let's see here.

Okay.

So the request of the board tonight is a certificate of approval to uh demolish a pre-1942 structure as required by the Alameda Municipal Code.

Um this is uh this is a single family home located at 1319 Clinton Avenue.

Um if the board approves the certificate just certificate of approval tonight, then staff will move forward with a separate process uh to review the design review application at a later date.

Um but so the action tonight for the board is um focused on the certificate of approval.

So let's mentioned the uh project's located at 1319 Clinton Avenue.

Um the site is zoned.

Uh, R1 residential district, all the surrounding neighborhood is also R1 residential, and uh the surrounding properties include single-family homes and a fourplex located uh to the west of the site.

The property is uh not listed on any local, state or national uh historic registry, and um the property is not listed on the city's uh historic building study list.

This is the site plan for the project site.

Uh, the site is roughly 9,000 square feet and approximately 150 feet deep.

It contains the single-family home and a detached uh garage to the rear of the site.

This is uh image of the front elevation.

As you can see, the house has a deep front yard, stuckle siding, an arched entryway, um, and it has a roof that's in the process of being replaced, and um the uh windows on the front elevation are have been switched out to vinyl windows.

This is a close-up of the uncovered porch on the front elevation, and then you can see uh there's also um some brick skirt skirting along the bottom of the building.

This is an image of the side of the building, and there's an alternate uh entrance into the kitchen.

This is the image of the rear of the building.

Uh, you can see there's a back porch, and there are some older windows with kind of an arch configuration to them.

And then here we have an image of the uh detached garage.

So the building was built in 1924 by Arthur E.

Forder, he was also the owner of the building.

Um, let's see here, and the architect for the um for the design of the building is unknown.

Um as you can see, the building was modified over the years, and had an addition in 1926.

The detached garage was replaced in 1981.

There was a re-roofing in 2002, and then uh in 2022, the building um suffered a fire, which damaged the roof of the home.

So the applicant um hired uh Garabaglia architecture to um perform a historic evaluation of the site.

Their evaluation determined that the property uh does not qualify to be included on any local state or national historic register or on the City of Alameda Historic Building study list due to the following findings.

The owner or tenants of the building are not eligible to be considered historically significant persons.

Um the building does not represent the work of a master builder or architect, nor does it embody uh distinctive characteristics characteristics of a particular type, period, or method of construction.

Um the style and design of the building is not architecture architecturally significant, and uh there are many other um better examples of 1920 architecture within the city, and then there's no historical events that occurred at the site, and the home is not a source of important historical information.

Based on the uh conclusion of the evaluation, staff um determined that the board is able to make the findings for a certificate of approval, and so those findings have been uh outlined in detail in our draft uh resolution.

This is um uh image of the new design of the uh replacement building um as mentioned um if the board approves the certificate approval tonight staff will move forward with a separate review of the design review application uh preliminarily we feel that the project uh is um compliant with the general plan the zoning ordinance and our city's uh design review manual um we feel the mission um revival design is similar to the um neighboring building to the west of the site and um the project um provides um decorative features and elements that are compatible with the surrounding neighborhood with that um our recommendation to the board tonight is to hold a public hearing and adopt the draft resolution approving the uh certificate of approval that's my presentation um thank you Henry thank you thanks Henry uh good evening chairman and board member uh my name is Danny Budiman uh I'm one of the design designer for the house for the project um so just to add to what Henry said that um we started off this project uh sorry modeling uh project but after a while it we quickly realized that it's probably better to just demolish the existing house knowing that the house was having a fire incident and then a contractor pick up the work to repair but never finish the job and at some point it was left open they open open up the roof the second floor and went through like a uh I believe it's 24 winter season with the rain and everything and then they just put the plywood seating and a tarp like you what you see there is a blue tarp on top and when we designing the house SD model the client wanted to have the house move forward to be aligned with the neighbors on the eastern side so uh knowing the condition of the existing house we we're not very confident that we can maintain the structural integrity of the house the framing and everything so we thought this this will probably be better served as a new house that we can start it off as a clean slate and design the house that we believe will improve the value and also make the neighborhood looks nicer with a new house as a redesign so that that is basically the background while we request to demolish the existing structure and the garage right now it's just basically an ISO to the neighborhood it's just unfinished faking and just not overall a good thing to see.

So yeah that's basically it.

That's right thank you for the uh additional insights thank you appreciate it.

Um are there any other presentations as part of the that's it um okay two we just wanted to make sure there was no one else from the their team um very great uh the um are there any uh public comments uh from online that we got one letter, but not seeing any uh public commenters.

Okay, great.

Alright, as you mentioned, we we didn't receive one letter from a neighbor in support.

Got it.

Discussion questions for staff or I have any questions.

I can save comments for general discussion.

Arthur?

No question.

Yeah, just a couple comments.

Okay.

Yeah, if you guys want to start off with comments then or you want to uh sure.

Um I and I'm so I'm sorry I didn't catch your name.

Uh you you'd mentioned trying to get the house to fit in better with the neighborhood.

When I drove by, yeah, it does kind of jump out at you.

It was not really not really fitting in.

And I didn't know if it was not just the scale of it, it seemed it seems quite quite smaller than than the uh than a lot of the homes around there.

Um do we know if the was it it was called originally, or in there it said that the previous owner had taken down the second story, was it everyone?

So the second story was just an attic.

Oh, an attic, okay.

With dormers on both sides.

Okay.

And the the contractor that was in effort to put together because of the damage there, they took the dormers and uh second story.

So right now is what's left is just an attic.

Okay.

Yeah.

Um and stylistically, yeah.

Just reviewing the plans, it looked like they were bringing it more towards a mission style as opposed to the existing, which was a little bit of this, a little bit of that.

Um, yeah.

So I use it has been through several uh modifications to the house.

Yeah.

And the last one they actually replaced the wood uh frame window to final.

Okay, which is yeah.

Out of the character, yeah.

Yeah.

Okay.

Alright, thank you.

All right.

Yeah.

Okay.

All right.

Yeah, thank you for your presentation.

Um, I'm I just have a couple comments on the historical evaluation.

Um I will say that I I like the level of research that went into this, very thorough.

Um, and for the most part, I think the findings are sound.

My only uh real concern is with the discussion under criterion one, which involves events and how that's set up in the evaluation.

Um as it's currently written, criterion one primarily discusses the past owners and their potential significance, which is usually reserved for criterion two dealing with persons.

Um what I feel is missing from criterion one is actually explaining uh not just singular historic events but patterns of history that were occurring in this part of Alameda, i.e.

this residential area, um, that this property is or is not significantly associated with.

Yeah, and what when we take a look at the the background that was included here from the historic preservation element, it's a very broad um paints a very broad picture of Alameda's history, talking about different landmarks that were built, um, different types of industry and commerce, and I I think that's really uh it's nice to have, but uh it actually it ends right where this building is is started and doesn't really talk about what was going on when this building existed.

It also doesn't analyze uh, you know, what was this property's role in this neighborhood or in in terms of residential development in Alameda?

Was it uh part of an ongoing trend?

Did it start a trend, or or was it uh infill, you could call it kind of built into a neighborhood that was already for the most part developed?

Um so maybe it didn't play an important role.

And I think I think in this evaluation there are uh bits and pieces that you know we could look at and say, okay, it kind of gets us there, but I I think to kind of round out the discussion, this this needs to put that on paper and explain it accurately under criterion one.

Uh that way, whatever the final record is here, that kind of soundly navigates all of that.

Um right now, I feel like it it kind of leaves a hole under criterion one.

So that's really my only uh kind of technical comment.

I I think there's uh there's an opportunity to you know go back through the report, catch a couple typos, um, for example, there's two figure nines um minor things like that that really don't affect the the merit of the evaluation.

They they're just uh kind of little errors that you could typos.

Correct.

Exactly.

So um yeah, I think that's all I have.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um my comments uh I would say uh based on recent other evaluations that we've looked at, it seems like this is more robust, you know, or they're they're trending in the right uh robustness direction, and I guess it's very helpful that uh it's actually the same entity that's done previous evaluations that have come before this uh this board.

So I guess that we're all learning the ropes around the evaluations.

Um, so we we very much appreciate the effort that goes into it and the cost obviously that goes into you know creating a document uh or a set of documents like these.

Um to uh Josh's point about criterion one, um I think it's a valid point, and I would say uh given our experience with previous memos being in the 95% draft state, uh I feel pretty comfortable about where we're what we're looking at as far as a complete set of documentation that would make me feel comfortable with the decision.

Uh and we can always pass along to staff, you know, direction to as the final version gets ready to be submitted, you know, when this goes from 95 to that 100%, maybe some of those typos can be, you know, figure nines can be figured out and and or other um you know bits of specificity might be able to be inserted at that point, um, and staff can obviously, you know, confirm all that for us.

Um but um yeah, I mean, in in general, I would say this is uh it's a uh a solid evaluation.

I agree fundamentally with all the conclusions about yeah, it's it's time for this building to be something else, and um, you know, uh thank you for uh you as a member to the design team and to the owners as well to go through the process and the cost uh to make an improvement like this, uh, which will obviously benefit Alameda generally speaking in this this street and neighborhood uh specifically.

So yeah, and I I'll add I think um you know, one thing I learned from this evaluation that I think uh it helps showcase the value of this work that gets done is if you look at the sandboard maps that were included, um back to actually 18 1897 the property to the immediate northwest of this uh what's that 1415, I think, was the address.

By 1948, that was either replaced or carved up into apartments.

So we've had multifamily housing in an otherwise or heavily single family area for three quarters of a century, yeah.

Um, which I think is an it's a nice uh find to have uh yeah, so there's there's a lot of interesting bits that we can learn from these.

Yeah, and and to take back to to the design team and the owners, part of the point of the process of creating this historical record is as these buildings are demolished that we're leaving a very careful historical trail for, you know, future generations, you know, a hundred years down the line they're gonna be like what's this house?

How did this get here?

What was here before?

So it's part of our legacy you know for the community so we really appreciate it.

Sure.

Um I don't have any further questions for the design team there.

I I I just have one um yeah given that the the vinyl windows were put in I guess fairly recently is is there an opportunity to potentially if not reuse them uh to donate them or something like that.

Is there any potential for that or yeah versus just discarding there's uh an opportunity for that uh usually when we demolish we we have to solvage uh a few uh uh some percentage of the material so definitely the windows can be solving reused for some other projects is not in waste yeah yeah and and I can speak to that Josh there are uh specific uh deconstruction contractors that work in our area and you can actually have the building taken apart versus demolished uh any construction project in Alameda will go through a green halo system where the waste management you know stream is looked at for certain levels of uh recycling um but to really get to reuse you have to deconstruct you know yeah you know like with this window has to be uninstalled and transported somewhere uh oftentimes interior doors can be very valuable you know because they're constructed you know not of hollow board you know big box door it's like wow that's a real door you know uh it can be stripped and and yeah repurposed um and to the degree that you and the owners uh care to partake in that um there's definitely great local resources for deconstruction contractors yeah I think that's one of the requirements when you uh do the demolition that you have to uh fill up all this green green halo um requirement to meet the green halo requirement yeah and part of it is it's actually a a separate process correct yes that you could you could go through to deconstruct the building so that more of the material could be reused yes so good good suggestion new new windows gone to waste um any other uh discussion questions um so we have a draft resolution I guess then in front of us um any uh thoughts on the wording of of this area I'm a little behind here and Steven just a question for you just um process-wise on the ninety-five percent complete you knowness of the the evaluation um for things like those mislabeled you know number nines etc um that's something we could ask staff to confirm is corrected before it actually gets filed.

Sure.

Yeah, I I think I I'm aware there's a couple of typos, a couple mislabeled things, maybe a sentence that's a little errant.

Um I will just point out the resolution is based on our local ordinance, which has these four findings.

They're very similar to what was in the evaluation, but they're actually a little different.

And I think the content might be more to your liking in terms of how it's structured.

It it talks about people in one place, events in another, architecture in another.

So I think this resolution as your action is good, and then we'll just clean up the evaluation a little bit separately.

Yeah, yeah.

Okay.

That's thank you.

Um and what's the uh preferred language for having the revisioning go to the board secretary?

Is it just that for final approval?

Yeah, I think it's not really so much part of your resolution as much as just direction to staff to as part of the final record.

Yeah, before it gets filed that those things are correct.

Okay.

Well, do we have a motion to accept the resolution or adopt the resolution?

Are you okay with your own?

Yeah.

My motion that we adopt the resolution uh as laid out here, exhibit five four A.

Uh to approve the certificate for certificate for approval.

For demolition.

Second?

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

The eyes have it.

Motion carries.

Motion carries.

Uh and further direct staff to please confirm those.

Some edits before the evaluation is finalized.

Yeah, the hanging chads are.

Okay.

Great.

Um next item business for B, our calendar for next year.

Um so uh just to confirm we're officially adopting our next meeting count or next year's meeting calendar, or is this more just informational?

Like, do we need to do we need to move to adopt the calendar?

It would be good to go ahead and adopt it as your meeting calendar.

It's already established in your bylaws that you meet on the first Thursday of the month.

Right.

This is just confirming that there are no unusual months where we have a holiday or something else that would disrupt that schedule.

Got it.

And that way we're all on the same page.

Beautiful.

Any questions about the calendar, gentlemen?

Um I think if I'm correct, maybe this past year we may have shifted the July meeting to the week after the July 4th holiday.

Um, did happen in July, I just don't remember.

Yeah, there was something there.

Um I would like to consider that just because it's a fairly popular holiday for vacations, and there could be predictable disruptions.

Um, yeah, I you know, I'll just say I I considered that, and this is the Thursday before, and I wasn't sure.

I mean, uh if you want to, that's fine.

This is your opportunity because it's your time to set your irregular calendar if the if you so choose.

So the actual holiday falls on a Saturday.

Right.

I'm just pulling up, I didn't know what so.

Okay.

So if you're taking a long weekend, I don't know if you would leave on Thursday before your meeting or Thursday after your meeting or Friday.

Yeah, I think.

See, I thought about it.

Yeah, I like how there is a Friday before the actual holiday.

And I I think for the benefit of staff in this case, it would be good to get it out of the way, so to speak, before the holiday, and then have to come back and shuffle the deck before the following Thursday.

Um 4th of July.

So I I guess if it's on the second or if it's on the 16th, I think either of those would be on the second.

Uh reasonable, yeah, maybe.

But uh, I'm okay with it like it is okay I I actually we're just conferring we actually don't know what our schedule is for the holiday because we get Friday off as a as a rule so we'll probably we might get the fourth of July on that Monday who knows yeah who knows okay maybe we can we'll figure it out when we get there.

Yeah there's opportunity to revisit and renotice correct yeah or just cancel the meeting.

Yes sometimes meetings don't happen I think we've had this meeting not happen before just because there was nothing on the schedule so that is always a possibility as well.

So is there a motion to adopt the calendar?

Yeah I will move to adopt the calendar as currently written on 2026.

All in favor aye aye aye thank you the motion carries uh next item board communication is there any board communication um oh you know what I wanted to ask do do we anticipate having a December meeting this year or is this kind of the last 2025?

Um yes we do anticipate having a meeting okay okay um I I would like to at that meeting try to recognize a couple adaptive for use projects or something of that ilk if if other board members have uh examples to share I think that would be nice to kind of round out the year and kind of highlight a few yeah well it's it's for sure part of our uh mandate or in our you know in our realm of uh responsibilities that we can uh highlight certain projects so yeah um in order to do that staff question would like let's say um one of the board members drafted you know a list that we would consider you know or um you know maybe a draft resolution that they could work with staff on so that's something we could consider as a bo a body when we meet sure I can agenda as a a general item um of recognition of local um uh rehab is that what you're thinking yeah just something like I I mean I don't have a formal list in my head but just from walking around town you see a new business opens up and they're in they're continuing the use of a building um maybe it was one that passed over these desk but maybe it didn't um maybe there are you know things from previous meetings that we've approved that have then come to fruition um I don't know that we ever get any real you know whatever happened to that one you know kind of information but sort of a annual look back exactly yeah kind of a retrospective end of the year yeah yeah sure reminiscence yeah I like the idea yeah great um other board communication I think not uh so moving on staff communications I don't think I have anything for you this month very good that brings us to number seven adjournment shall we adjourn we shall yeah we shall thank you for the