Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Public Notice topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident says Albanys 300-foot notice rule hampered review of controversial 1600 Solano project
Summary
At public comment Oct. 20, a resident urged the council to expand the citys public-notification radius for new construction, saying only 73 properties were notified before early hearings on the 1600 Solano project and that concerns were overlooked during staff and commission review.
A long public comment on Oct. 20 urged Albanys City Council to broaden its notification rules for proposed construction, arguing the current requirement to notify property owners within 300 feet limits community awareness and participation.
Dr. Steven Alpert, speaking during the public-comment period, said his wife and more than a dozen other residents had requested the council consider expanding notification beyond the 300-foot, 10-day postcard rule the city follows for initial hearings. Alpert said the notification practice limited public discourse and contributed to what he described as inadequate review of the five-story mixed-use project proposed for 1600 Solano Avenue.
"Alerting only those within 300 feet limits public discourse, allowing the Planning and Zoning Commission propose, and the council then push through new projects no matter how inappropriate with minimal awareness and input from the community," Alpert said. He described the structure proposed for 1600 Solano as "not functionally appropriate for the site" and asserted it violated the citys planning mission statement and conflicted with surrounding Craftsman-era buildings.
Alpert recounted portions of the projects earlier study-session record, including objections raised by attorneys and residents about the city's application of density-bonus law and whether Solano Avenue qualifies as a transit corridor. He said only 73 properties were alerted before the initial planning and zoning study session on Jan. 26, 2022, and told council he believed the Planning and Zoning Commission and staff "ignored or downplayed" community concerns during subsequent meetings.
Alpert also said the city did not conduct a traffic study for the project and questioned statements by Community Development staff that the project would not increase congestion. He said, in his view, the council had approved the project in a single meeting rather than using available continuances and negotiations with the applicant. Alpert urged council to put a notice-radius expansion on an agenda so the community could debate the rule.
The speaker named several officials and bodies in his remarks; Alpert noted Vice Mayor McQuade opposed the later approval of 1600 Solano and said Councilmember Jordan had said he felt compelled to vote for approval because he feared a lawsuit. The council did not take action on the matter during the Oct. 20 meeting; staff did not offer a response during the public-comment segment beyond noting public comment had concluded.
Other residents at the meeting raised related land-use concerns elsewhere on the agenda and asked the council to revisit public-notice practices and planning-process timelines.
The topic of notification practices will likely resurface in future meetings, supporters of broader notice said, because the standard governs who receives early information about large developments and what neighbors can reasonably expect to learn before study sessions and hearings.
