Blogging Bayport Alameda

July 10, 2009

Delay Monte

Filed under: Alameda, Business, City Council, Development, Northern Waterfront — Tags: — Lauren Do @ 6:45 am

I think someone asked what the status of the redevelopment of the Del Monte site is currently.   According to a Planning Board agenda item, not a whole lot.

The Planning Board has been asked to consider three requests concerning the Del Monte property.   The first is a request from the current tenant ConGlobal.  Apparently their use permit has run out and while they were prepared for the move  they thought that their use permit expired in August 2010.   Turns out, their use permit expires at the end of September of this year.  Uh oh.

So while they were all prepared to move next year, they certainly weren’t prepared to move this year by any stretch of the imagination so they are asking for a 10 month extension on the use permit.   City staff is recommending granting the extension on the use permit, but with some key concessions in order to lessen the impact on the neighborhood which was supposed to be industry free when this use permit ended per the amended General Plan regarding this area.

  • As of September 1, 2009, ConGlobal will stop receiving any new containers at the site. All container receipts will occur at the new Oakland site. This will reduce truck traffic by approximately 50%.
  • As of August 3, 2010, all containers will be removed from the site, and ConGlobal will cease all operations at the site. To minimize trucking impacts on the neighborhood, containers will be removed gradually over the course of the next 10 months. Specifically, at least 30% of the containers will be removed by January 1, 2010; 50% removed by April 1, 2010; 90% by July 1, 2010 and 100% by August 3, 2010.
  • The hours of operation for the structural division will be reduced from 6:00 a.m. to midnight to 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m Monday through Saturday. Sunday operations for the structural division shall be reduced from 10 per year under the current use permit to two Sundays for the balance of 2009 and two Sundays in 2010.
  • The hours of operation for the refrigeration division will be reduced from 24-hours seven days per week to 24 hours five days per week Monday through Friday, and 6:00 am to 7:00 pm on Saturday and Sunday.
  • The maximum number of employees per shift shall be reduced from 75 to 50, 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday. Shifts running from 6:00 p.m. to 6 a.m. shall be reduced from 30 to ten in the structural division, and from ten to five for the refrigeration division.
  • The use of top loader vehicles Monday through Saturday will be reduced from 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., to 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. with no use on Sundays.

I know that this has been a hardship on the neighborhood which has anticipated the redevelopment of that area for a long time (see neighbor letters), but on the other hand, you sort of have to feel sorry for the business who anticipated that they would have to move and using the timeline given by their landlord prepared for that only to be notified by the City that their timeline was pushed up by no fault of their own.   I say, cut the business a break, it doesn’t appear that Peter Wang (owner of the property) has any plans to do anything soon. 

The second request is from the owner of the property, Peter Wang, who wants an extension on the same use permit for five more years.   Not only that he wants to expand the scope of the use permit to include:

…outdoor storage, warehousing, handling and repair of boats, watercraft, automobiles, RV’s, chassis, trailers, automotive equipment, vehicles, buses, trucks, mobile homes, containers, construction equipment and materials for businesses, homes, commercial and/or household goods, as well as container storage activities similar to the current use.

Mr. Wang appears to be waiting out the economic downturn before putting his plans into motion.  So this basically is the answer to the question, what’s going on with the Del Monte property.   The answer: nothing.  

The third request is submitted by staff to rezone the area from M-2 General Industrial to M-X Mixed Use in order to conform with the amended General Plan.    Although in conjunction with this site getting rezoned, four other sites in close proximity are under consideration for rezoning as well.   Including the storage facility adjacent to the Belt line.   Good timing.



  1. That is a great building …

    Comment by Jeff R. Thomason — July 10, 2009 @ 10:26 am

  2. What? No Asian supermarket where I can swing by for dim sum for lunch? Next, I suppose they’ll tell us Orchard Supply isn’t opening either. Or that Target is no longer interested in Alameda Landing.

    Though, not all news is bad news. Closing the two bridges at night, say between the hours of 11pm-4:45am, really sounds like a good idea to me, deficit or no deficit in the budget. Let’s face it, Oakland is ranked as the 4th most violent and dangerous city in the United States (according to Oakland’s own city website). How it got there is up for debate. But that it is, isn’t.

    Closing off majority access to the 4th most violent and dangerous city in the United States from midnight to just before dawn sounds good to a lot of people. I have friends in the City who say they’ll move to Alameda if the they close the bridges at night.

    I’ll keep them posted.

    Comment by james — July 10, 2009 @ 9:46 pm

  3. 2. New motto for attracting people to move here: Xenaphobes R Us. How about your kid gets an asthma attack at 3 a.m., are you going to swim to Childrens’ Hospital? Perhaps we should have a ballot initiative to buy our own fully staffed emergency helicopter. They upgraded Obama’s Marine 1, maybe we can get a deal on a used one.

    Comment by M.I. — July 13, 2009 @ 8:28 am

  4. Childrens’ Hospital in Oakland is a disgusting dump … I’ll take my kid to Alameda Hospital ANY day of the week.

    Comment by Jeff R. Thomason — July 13, 2009 @ 10:43 am

  5. #2, perhaps Alameda could follow Tiburon — rather than closing the bridges (which is a rather impractical option, IMO).

    Comment by alameda — July 13, 2009 @ 11:59 am

  6. Xenophobia: (From Webster’s Dictionary) an unreasonable fear or hatred of foreigners or strangers or of that which is foreign or strange.

    Keyword being ‘unreasonable.’

    Is fearing the 4th most violent and dangerous city in the United States (self-admitted on Oakland’s own city website) unreasonable? Is wanting to close off majority access to such a crime-ridden city from the hours of, say 11pm-4:45am, unreasonable?

    This isn’t xenophobia. This is common sense. This is self-preservation.

    Again, how Oakland got that way, we can debate over till we’re all blue in the face. But the fact remains, regardless of how it got that way, it IS that way. Oakland IS a city that is ranked in the top five most dangerous cities in all of the United States.

    In 2008, Oakland, according to the city of Oakland’s website, had 124 homicides. This year, 2009, as of July 9th, Oakland has 51 homicides.

    And as far as emergency services go, yes, that is a drawback. Is the drawback worth being mostly disengaged from the 4th most dangerous city in America (bridges closed) at night?

    I know my answer.

    Comment by james — July 13, 2009 @ 9:14 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Blog at