Title
PLN25-0114 - 1711 Arbor Street - Applicant: Jason Phoen. Public hearing to consider: (1) removing the property from the Historical Buildings Study List; and (2) a Certificate of Approval to allow the demolition of an existing 1,341 square foot two-story residential building built prior to 1942, and included in the historical buildings study list, to construct a 2,700 square foot, two-story building. General Plan: Medium-Density Residential. Zoning: R-4 Residential District. CEQA Determination: This project is exempt from further environmental review as a Class 1 categorical exemption pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15301(l)(1) - Existing facilities - demolition and removal of individual small structures listed in 15301(l), including one single-family residence, and on a separate and independent basis, as a Class 32 categorical exemption pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 - In-Fill Development Project consistent with the applicable general plan designation and zoning regulations. No exceptions to the exemptions apply because the building is determined to not be a historic resource. (This was continued from the September 4, 2025, Historical Advisory Board Meeting)
Body
To: Honorable Chair and Members of the Historical Advisory Board
From: Steven Buckley, Historical Advisory Board Secretary
BACKGROUND
The project site at 1711 Arbor Street is an irregular quadrilateral interior lot measuring about 50 feet wide by 94 and 72 feet deep on each respective side, developed with a two-story 1,341 square foot, two-story single-family residential building., The site is located on the west side of Arbor Street just north of the intersection with Pacific Avenue. The property is neighbored by single-family residential buildings on all sides. The building was originally built in 1889 and has been substantially modified since then, including major changes such as the addition of a story, and minor changes, such as roof improvements and front stair replacement.
In addition to the modifications described, some portions of the front façade were recently removed after being damaged by a failing tree. The applicant now proposes to redevelop the site with a two-story residential duplex through demolition and reconstruction that emulates some of the original architectural features of the existing building.
The property is not a City Historical Monument; however, a Certificate of Approval is required in order for it to be demolished under the City’s Historical Preservation Ordinance (Alameda Municipal Code (AMC) Section 13-21) because it was built prior to 1942. Under the AMC Section 13-21, “demolition” means the removal of more than 30% of the value of a structure within a five (5) year period. While the project does intend to retain the original frame of the structure, the investigation into the condition of the site has evidenced that substantial portions of the building will need to be removed and replaced to restore the building to a habitable condition, therefore a Certificate of Approval is required to facilitate any kind of restoration, addition, or substantial alteration due to the poor existing conditions.
In 1979, the City completed a survey and established the Historical Buildings Study List, which identified buildings with historical character that warranted further study. Many properties on the Study List were assigned designations to identify potential eligibility. An “H” designation refers to a resource which may have historical importance because of its apparent age or location or may have architectural importance because of its similarity to other buildings done by important architects and/or builders. The “H” designation implies a need for further research, and is not, alone, sufficient to indicate eligibility for the State or National Register. Due to the significant dilapidation over time, a substantial portion of the building’s potentially historic elements and integrity have been lost, including the front porch elements, as detailed in the revised September 2025 Garavaglia Historic Resource Evaluation and Condition Assessment Memorandum hereafter referred to as the historic evaluation (Exhibit 2).
On July 10, 2025, the applicants submitted a historic evaluation to support the assertion that the extant building is unable to convey any historic importance, is not eligible for inclusion in any Statewide or National historic register and does not maintain sufficient structural integrity to justify restoration. The historic evaluation concludes that “the building is not historically significant and does not maintain historic integrity” and does not warrant further research.
On September 4, 2025, the Historical Advisory Board (HAB) held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the application for a Certificate of Approval to demolish the subject building and remove the property from the Historical Building Study List. Upon review of the staff report and supporting exhibits, and consideration of public comment, the HAB requested further research into the non-structural aspects of the site, including the designer / builder, owners / residents, and events at the site that could impact historical significance. The item was continued to the following meeting on October 2, 2025.
On September 22, 2025, the applicant submitted the revised historical evaluation memo, as well as a California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) form, which provides the additional information requested by the HAB.
If the Historical Advisory Board (HAB) issues a Certificate of Approval for demolition, the proposed development will require Design Review approval from Design Review staff designated by the Planning Director, which will be considered at a later date.
DISCUSSION
Historical Buildings Study List
The building at 1711 Arbor Street was constructed by 1889 as a Queen Anne Cottage, and resembled close to its current form by 1897, including a building with a front facing gable roof, a south-shed-roofed addition, a west (rear) shed-roofed addition, and the rear porch. The “H” designation on the study list was likely due to the structure’s unique appearance, and the defining two-story front porch. By 1897 the building included a front facing gable, rear shed-roofed addition, and a rear porch. A permit history of work on the building shows a foundation replacement and repairs to the porch in 1965 as well as several re-roofing projects in 1930, 1949, 1967, plus replacement of the front steps in 1970. The only other permit associated with the subject property is for an encroachment permit for a POD temporary storage container in spring of 2022. It does not appear that permit applications were received by the City for cleanup work that appears to have taken place on the site between 2023 and 2024, including removal of a large, unprotected tree in the front yard area, the rear staircase, and the heavily damaged two-story front porch.
In December of 1979, the City conducted a photographic survey of pre-1942 buildings, which included the project site. Based on these photos, the building’s front elevation in 1979 does not reflect the current condition of the front elevation largely due to the removal of the heavily damaged front porch. The City also did not prepare a DPR form at the time of the survey, as the building did not appear to be eligible for inclusion in the State Historic Resources Inventory.
Given the age of the structure and its inclusion on the study list, the applicants hired Garavaglia Architecture to prepare a historic evaluation for the subject property, completed in July 2025, and revised to include information specifically requested by the HAB in September 2025. The evaluation describes the extant structure as “currently uninhabitable,” noting that “the building is not historically significant and does not maintain historic integrity”. Prior to the current application to demolish, the City had not received any applications to repair or reconstruct the building. The features identified in the historic evaluation as exterior, character defining features, including the wood casement windows with stained glass and full width 2nd story porch or front façade, are described as “very few, damaged, or no longer present”, and ultimately the evaluation finds that “the sum of the building’s components does not yield a significantly unique and distinguishable entity.” Staff agrees that the substantially altered state and “overall lack of architectural cohesion” of any original architectural features diminishes any architectural interest of the building that originally supported its inclusion on the City’s Historical Building Study List. The historic evaluation recommends, with regard to the Historic Building Study List designation, that since “1711 Arbor Street exhibits no historic architectural significance, there is no need for the “H” designation to remain”, and further that “there would be no impact to a historic resource resulting from demolition of 1711 Arbor Street.” The evaluation also notes that if the building were to be re-used, then it would not need to meet the Secretary’s Standards as the building was found to have no historic significance or integrity.
Builder
City records are consistent with the conclusions of the historic evaluation, which attributes the construction of the original subject property to Charles A. Mitchell, a local carpenter.
The Garavaglia evaluation describes Charles A. Mitchell as both the builder of the home and original resident with his wife, Mary, for the seven years after the building was first erected. Charles is described as “a local carpenter whose name is mostly absent from the historical record.” The evaluation determined that the builder is not eligible to be considered a historically significant person, nor can the building be said to be built by a master architect.
Findings
Based on these facts, staff finds that the structure at 1711 Arbor Street cannot convey historical significance based on defining features and is not historic due to its lack of association with persons important to local, state, or national history. Staff offers the following findings for consideration of a Certificate of Approval pursuant to Alameda Municipal Code section 13-21 and to support a CEQA exemption determination on the basis that the property is not a Historical Resource based on a preponderance of the evidence per CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 and Public Resources Code 21084.1.
Findings
1. The structure to be demolished does not embody distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, nor does it represent the work of an important creative individual.
The building at 1711 Arbor Street originally featured distinctive elements of both Queen Anne cottage and vernacular Italianate styles. However, those elements have little to no remaining integrity due to the substantially altered condition of the building and lack of architectural cohesion. While many of the alterations to the original building took place prior to the 1979 survey, further damage has resulted in the loss of additional features including the front porch since the survey. The builder is Charles A. Mitchell, who has no known association with any designated historical monuments, and is not identified as a builder of merit in the updated historical evaluation. Overall, the building lacks representation of any distinctive characteristics of potential architectural significance.
2. There are no events associated with this property that make a significant contribution to the history or cultural heritage of local or regional history.
The property was developed in the late 1880s as an individual building and no significant events are associated with the property nor are there significant contributions to history. The historical evaluation does acknowledge that the building could potentially be tied to some kind of Portuguese Historic District, however goes on to state that this building does not have any individual significance to display a connection to that or any other cultural heritage of Alameda associated with this individual property.
3. The property is not associated with persons important to local, state, or national history.
Staff was unable to find any records that define the property as containing historical and cultural merit in association with the lives of important individuals. Two potentially meritorious people or groups were in significant association with the subject property. The first, the original builder and first resident, is Charles A. Mitchell, who is not eligible as a historically significant person. The other is longtime residents between roughly 1925 and 1975, the Miranda family. While the historic evaluation does identify the Miranda family as having represented a part of the larger Portuguese diaspora, their significance, if any, would be tied to that broader community in general, and not tied specifically to the house. Other residents had been identified, but none of which were primarily associated with the building in such a way that the person’s productive life could be tied to the building. Therefore, no person could be identified in association with the subject property after researching the residents going back to the original owner/builder. No persons of importance to local, state, or national history are identified in the historical evaluation.
4. The property does not yield any information important in prehistory or history.
While the property was developed in the late 1800s, it is not likely to yield more information about prehistory or history of the local community than what is already known.
5. The project no longer meets the criteria for a Historical Monument, or has become a detriment to the community and that the condition making it a detriment cannot readily be cured.
The subject property has not been designated a Historical Monument, and a Certificate of Approval is required for demolition under Alameda Municipal Code Section 13-21.7(a), by virtue of it having been constructed prior to 1942. The determination that the building does not meet the criteria for a Historical Monument is consistent with the Secretary of Interior standards insofar as the building has lost most of its integrity due to modifications over time and the dilapidation of the structure. The extant building is a detriment to the community because the dilapidation has made it structurally unsound and visually displeasing. The damage is structurally significant enough that the building has been determined uninhabitable and has remained vacant in recent years. The majority of the public-facing façade has been damaged, and the structural deficits cannot be readily cured through restoration. Demolition is necessary to remedy the existing conditions.
PUBLIC NOTICE AND COMMENTS
Property owners and residents within 300 feet of the project boundaries were notified of the public hearing and given the opportunity to review and comment on the proposal.
DESIGN REVIEW
Upon action by the HAB on the Certificate of Approval, the City will conduct separate public review to consider Design Review to build a new 3,066 square foot residential two-story duplex on the project site. Staff will review the proposed design to ensure that it is consistent with the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance and the Citywide Design Review Manual. The proposed building is a two-story duplex that expands the existing footprint area and will be reviewed to ensure consistent architectural style with the surrounding neighborhood.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The project is Categorically Exempt from additional environmental review pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Section 15301(l) - Existing Facilities - Demolition and removal of individual small structures including one single-family residence. On a separate and independent basis, the proposed replacement project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15332 - In-Fill Development Project consistent with the applicable general plan designation and zoning regulations. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 (a)(2), the HAB may determine that the preponderance of the evidence demonstrates that the subject property lacks historic significance or has lost sufficient integrity to be considered a historical resource. As detailed in the 2025 Garavaglia Historic Resource Evaluation and Condition Assessment Memorandum (Exhibit 2), the building has no architectural significance and is therefore not individually eligible for listing in the National or California Register under any criteria. Further, this action includes the removal of the property from the City’s local historic register, the Historical Building Study List. Accordingly, there are no exceptions to the categorical exemptions under CEQA Guidelines apply, including Section 15300.2, because the building is not historically significant and does not maintain historic integrity.
CLIMATE IMPACT
There are no identifiable climate impacts or climate action opportunities associated with the subject of this report. The project will submit a Waste Management Plan for the handling of Construction and Demolition Debris pursuant to AMC, Chapter 21-24.
RECOMMENDATION
Conduct a public hearing and approve the draft resolution removing the property from the Historic Building Study List and issuing a Certificate of Approval to allow the demolition of a structure built prior to 1942 at 1711 Arbor Street (Exhibit 6).
Respectfully Submitted,
Steven Buckley, Secretary to the Historical Advisory Board
By,
Tristan Suire, Planner II
Exhibits:
1. Project Plans
2. 2025 Updated Historic Evaluation
3. 2025 DPR Form
4. 1711 Arbor Street Permit History
5. 1979 Survey Photo
6. Draft Resolution